For the first time, I felt very uncomfortable when the lights came on and everyone began to disperse for the intermission. And I sat and did not understand why he was here? The performance is so emotional that it looks in one breath, and you want, in a fit, to jump up from your seat, and at least with this support the white guard (well, this is for the patriots). This is where the energy is felt, where youth is felt, incendiary and penetrating. It cannot be compared with any movie, especially the scene when Alexei dies in Nikolai's arms. The lights go out (oh, the play of light in the theater is generally a separate matter!). Then it lights up again. And you sit and feel that a tragedy has occurred, gradually returning to the real world.
To tears
Bravo
Art therapy
Excellent performance of the play
After "The Master and Margarita" in the original, unusual interpretation, I was happy to see a performance based on the work of Mikhail Afanasyevich, staged just perfectly, in my favorite Theater of M. Bulgakov. This is "Days of the Turbins" - a play written on the basis of the novel "The White Guard". I read the novel at school, but, to be honest, I didn’t get my hands on the play.
What is the life of a family of "white" intellectuals after the revolution, in the terrible year 1918, when the Civil War began? It was very strange to remember that Nikolka (T. Karataev / G. Osipov) is 18 years old, Elena (E. Kazarina / K. Romenkova) is 24, and Colonel Alexei Turbin (M. Martyanov) is only 30. Here they are, these people who seemed so grown-up, your peers. They are also played by young artists, and this is a plus.
The tension builds up in the course of the play: at the beginning we see the “military”, but still calm, habitual way of life of the Turbins (everything is overshadowed only by Elena’s late husband, Talberg (P. Grebennikov / A. Driven) - Nikolka sings, Alexei makes fun of him, Elena cooks dinner. But then events grow like a snowball. What will Elena do if her husband suddenly decides to run away from the besieged Kyiv to Germany? communication between the wife and lieutenant Shervinsky (A.Driven / E.Vakunov).When would the completely unadapted cousin Lariosik (D.Beroev) from Zhytomyr fall like snow on his head, and he also needs to be monitored? , and every time you don’t know whether Nikolka and Alexei will return alive or not.
It's fun to watch the characters develop as the story progresses. The acting is top notch. Alexey Turbin remains inflexibly true to his duty, no matter what. Elena, so Strong woman- despite the betrayal of her husband, she found the strength to live peacefully and build new happiness. But her cry, when she found out about the death of Alexei, is still in her ears: “Senior officers! Everyone came home .. and they killed the commander ?! Nikolka, such a cheerful joker at the beginning, after the tragedy becomes an invalid, in a couple of months he seems to have aged for many years, and he no longer wants to sing and have fun. Lariosik, funny, clumsy, quickly adapts to life in a besieged city, and now he is a faithful comrade, ready to bring a bandage and vodka, if necessary.
The secondary characters are great too. Shervinsky brings a touch of fun to the heavy plot - the general favorite of the public, judging by the reaction of the audience. Another colorful character is staff captain Vitya Myshlaevsky (M. Fomenko), a family friend. A lover of drink, seemingly frivolous and cheeky - in fact, he is a loyal military man and stands behind the Turbin family with a mountain. Myshlaevsky was so tired of the aimlessness of service, especially after the flight of the hetman, that the news of the surrender of Kyiv to the Bolsheviks does not frighten him - he is glad to serve the country, the Motherland, and it doesn’t matter who is “at the helm”. But the opposite opinion is held by Captain Studzinsky (D. Sidorenko). He wants to run for the Don, to continue fighting on the side of the whites. About the coming of the Bolsheviks, he says: “To whom - a prologue (to a new play), and to whom - an epilogue.” And, although the “Days of the Turbins” end on the stage of celebrating the New Year in the family circle, which inspires hope for a brighter future, you understand that the former cannot be returned, there will be a new life, but it is not known whether it is good or not.
The only negative thing I can attribute is a very strong closeness: I usually sat in the first half of the hall, where, apparently, it was cooler. But in the last rows it was terrible. One man even became ill and had to leave in the middle of the performance. Of course, constantly opening the door to the street and ventilating is not an option, so you should think about improving the air conditioning system by the summer, perhaps :)
The performance is unequivocally at the moment - the most beloved to me from the viewed repertoire of the Bulgakov Theatre. I definitely recommend watching it - 10 out of 10. By the way, there were a lot of guys aged 14-15 in the hall, they obviously brought them in whole groups. And the performance is really great for getting to know the work.
Just a miracle!
The pearl, which was born back in the institute's walls, not only found a wide audience, but also continues to gather full houses!
Of course, the full halls here are not without reason.
And the merit of such a success of the performance is not only the director, but the whole team. Young actors who play in such a way that I want to talk about everyone!
Laconic, but full of bright details and images, stage design - artist - Vera Nikolskaya.
Ah, that long coat rack with hooks! Overcoats, overcoats ... She is either like a door with curtains, then a curtain, then a wall, then like a gallows ...
And the costumes are chosen in such a way that they enhance the image of everyone as much as possible.
But the main value of the performance is that it is really about the days of the Turbins, it is about the revolution, and about the war, and about the catastrophe, but above all it is about people. So when you come to the performance, you will find yourself an invisible guest in this amazing family!
This amazing feeling of your own presence inside what is happening on the stage does not leave you throughout the performance.
As if you, too, were treated to tea with jam, and a crispy cucumber, and even gave you a sip from a glass.
And of course, you can’t help but feel your involvement in the fates of the heroes, live their joys and sorrows, try them on yourself, evaluate, think about how you yourself would act at one time or another.
And thinking about it, you suddenly realize that each of these people arouses admiration in you. Admiration, respect and great sympathy.
The unconditional success of the performance is precisely in this - there are no minor characters and gray images. Strong, bright, so different, but invariably wonderful people.
Well, about Mr. Thalberg, as the only negative character involved in this house, we will tactfully not mention ..)
How not to focus on Hetman, Fedor and others. Although these roles are well played.
Only about the Turbins, their relatives and friends.
Talberg Elena Vasilievna (Tatiana Timakova) - just a queen! The only woman in the play who easily copes with the role assigned to her as the mistress of the house, and the caring wife and sister, and the queen. Smart, beautiful, aristocratic. At the same time emotional and completely alive! Real! Bravo!
It is next to such women that men flourish!
Even Shervinsky - Oleg Rebrov, a handsome man, talent and joker is just a diamond setting next to her.
By the way, it was Shervinsky who amused the audience more often than others, taking the palm from Lariosik.
With what kind irony they treated this character in the performance! Shervinsky is multifaceted and very cute!
However, Lariosik (Ivan Makarevich) is also a miracle how good!
Together with Myshlaevsky, Yuri Tkhagalegov, they certainly add both pepper and colors to this performance.
And behind the scene with Talberg, just three times bravo to Myshlaevsky-Thagalegov. Very masculine. Sparingly. In a military way. But how cool!
"He left. He gives a divorce. We had a very nice talk."
Bravo!
Alexei Turbin (Alexander Bobrov), who made the whole audience hold their breath at the end of the first part.
Nikolai Turbin (Oleg Polyantsev), who has undergone, perhaps, the most striking change, crushed by life, but not crushed by it, and so similar to his brother. The cane in his hands is also not without reason (another brilliant find of the director, I think)
And of course, Studzinsky (Dmitry Varshavsky) Oh, what Studzinsky is here!
God! I just wanted to run out onto the stage in the finale, shake Elena Vasilievna by the shoulders and shout:
- Well, don't you see that you have to marry Studzinsky?!
I would have done the same in her place. Although ... to survive and adapt in the country that was then born, with Shervinsky, of course, she has more chances. Bulgakov is right.
Go to the theatre!
Great ensemble of actors
I continue to discover new theaters for myself (in this sense, Moscow is just a Klondike, here, no matter how hard you try, you still can’t reconsider everything). This time I was simply fabulously lucky - the new place turned out to be just excellent both in terms of entourage, content, and execution. And all this about the Theater. M.A. Bulgakov!
I sincerely liked everything, from the location, the interior, albeit cramped, but therefore more comfortable decoration, communication with the audience of the theater workers, to the very staging and acting of the actors, to the atmosphere of the auditorium and (halelujah!) The cultural behavior of everyone (no rustling of wrappers from chocolates, no chuckles and conversations along the way, no squabbles over places). I honestly tried to find fault with something so that the story would not turn out to be very unctuous, but I did not find it. But no, I found it! I sat on a side chair for 3 hours, it was hard, but I realized this only after leaving the theater, it didn’t bother me at all during the process.
A girl in a costume of the beginning of the 20th century makes her way through the narrow corridors of the theater through a crowd of visitors and joyfully calls everyone doves and doves, persuading them to go into the hall, not to crowd in the aisles and ... informs that the Lonely Hearts Club will work during the intermission, where every loner can find your happiness. And how, you can not lose a minute in this crazy world!
There was a flock of young people among the spectators (I think, the senior class of some school), they will definitely call each other doves and doves for a long time after the visit, because during the intermission and after the performance I heard only such an appeal from them)))
Now about the performance. "Days of the Turbins", if anyone does not know, is based on Bulgakov's novel "The White Guard". And here the story takes a turn - after all, the action takes place in Kyiv in troubled times- Hetman, Petlyura, Bolsheviks. As in the unforgettable "Wedding in Malinovka" - "Power is changing." And against this background, the history of a single family - meetings, partings, love and hate, betrayal and heroic deeds. Someone saves his own skin, and someone does not spare her for the sake of principles and ideals. In general, everything repeats itself, indeed, the wheel of history is spinning and falls into the same rake of a civil war. But I don't feel like retelling a play or a novel - it's better to watch or read it yourself, or better both.
The cast ... You know, there are performances where everyone works out, but does not play, it happens when some actors are beautiful, and the rest are just a background. In this performance, surprisingly, harmony is like a common choir, no false notes, otherwise it would stand out very much. Just not a game of the Turbin family, but the life of the family itself and their friends, interaction with the outside world. I don't want to single out anyone, I want to single out everyone at once. Excellent stay on stage.
I’ll just say that after reading the book, I didn’t really like Myshlaevsky, but after the performance I realized that this hero is one of my favorites. I have already mentioned the atmosphere in the hall, at the end of the performance the hall stood up and applauded standing.
Artists were called to bow more than once or twice.
Many thanks to the theater, actors, director Tatyana Marek, theater workers - for a wonderful evening and immersion in that era so easily and truly.
Reprinted according to the edition indicated.
Bulgakov's handwritten heritage of the 1920s turned out to be extremely scarce: most of his writings of this time have been preserved in printed or typewritten (plays) form. Apparently, the writer himself, being in difficult conditions, did not give of great importance his draft autographs, and E. S. Bulgakova, who reverently treated the writer’s manuscripts and tried to preserve his every line, was not next to him. Therefore, difficulties often arise when restoring the history of writing essays in the 1920s. The play "Days of the Turbins" ("White Guard") is no exception in this sense: draft autographs have not been preserved. But three of its typewritten editions have survived. It was about the three editions of the play that the author himself spoke in a conversation with P. S. Popov, who documented the content of this and other conversations. So, Bulgakov noted that “the play has three editions. The second edition is closest to the first; the third one is the most different” (OR RSL, f. 218, no. 1269, item 6, sheets 1, 3). Remember these author's instructions and move on to brief history writing a play.
Bulgakov excellently depicted how the idea of the play arose in Notes of a Dead Man. We will cite only a few lines from this text.
“A blizzard woke me up once. The blizzard was in March and raged, although it was already coming to an end. And again ... I woke up in tears! .. And again the same people, and again a distant city, and the side of the piano, and shots, and another one defeated in the snow.
These people were born in dreams, came out of dreams and firmly settled in my cell. It was clear that they could not be separated from each other. But what to do with them?
At first I simply talked with them, and yet I had to take the book of the novel out of the drawer. Then it began to seem to me in the evenings that something colored was coming out of the white page. Looking closely, squinting, I was convinced that this was a picture. Moreover, this picture is not flat, but three-dimensional. Like a box, and through the lines you can see in it: the light is on and the same figures that are described in the novel are moving in it. Oh what it was exciting game... One could play this game all one's life, stare at the page... And how would one fix these figures?.. And one night I decided to describe this magic camera... Therefore, I am writing: the first picture. .. For three nights I was busy playing with the first picture, and by the end of that night I realized that I was composing a play. In the month of April, when the snow disappeared from the yard, the first picture was developed ... At the end of April, Ilchin's letter arrived ... "
Perhaps everything was so in reality, but the surviving documents show that Bulgakov made the first draft of the play on January 19, 1925. This is clear from his own handwritten entry in the album on the history of The Days of the Turbins (IRLI, f. 362, No. 75 , sheet 1). And a letter from B. I. Vershilov (Studio of the Art Theater) dated April 3, 1925, Bulgakov received, apparently, not at the end of April, but earlier.
It so happened that two proposals were made to Bulgakov at once to stage the novel The White Guard: from the Art Theater and the Vakhtangov Theater (see: L. Yanovskaya, Mikhail Bulgakov's Creative Way. M., 1983. P. 141-142). To the chagrin of the Vakhtangovites, Bulgakov chose the Moscow Art Theater, but he consoled the former by writing Zoya's Apartment for them.
Bulgakov worked on the first edition of the play in June-August 1925, but with interruptions (from June 12 to July 7, the Bulgakovs visited the Voloshins in Koktebel). There are colorful author's sketches about this in the same "Notes of the Dead". For example, such: “I don’t remember how May ended. I erased my memory and June, but I remember July. It's been unusually hot. I sat naked, wrapped in a sheet, and composed a play. The further, the more difficult it became ... The heroes grew ... and they were not going to leave, and events developed, but they could not see the end ... Then the heat dropped ... It started to rain, August came. Then I received a letter from Misha Panin. He asked about the play. I plucked up courage and at night stopped the course of events. There were thirteen scenes in the play.
Lacking the necessary dramatic experience and striving to select as much of the most valuable material from the novel as possible, Bulgakov created a very large play, the content of which differed little from the novel. The most difficult moment came - the play had to be thoroughly cut. Let us turn again to the author's text: “... I realized that my play cannot be played in one evening. A night of torment over this issue led me to cross out one picture. This ... did not save the situation ... Something else had to be thrown out of the play, but what is unknown. Everything seemed important to me ... Then I drove one character out, which caused one picture to somehow squint, then completely flew out, and there were eleven paintings. Further ... I could not cut anything ... Having decided that nothing would come of it, I decided to leave the matter to its natural course ... "
On August 15, 1925, the play The White Guard (first edition) was presented to the theater, and in September the first reading took place. However, already in October the situation with the play became more complicated due to the negative feedback received from A. V. Lunacharsky. On October 12, in a letter to V.V. Luzhsky, one of the leading actors and directors of the theatre, he remarks: “I carefully re-read the play The White Guard.” personal opinion. I consider Bulgakov a very talented person, but this play of his is exceptionally mediocre, with the exception of the more or less lively scene of the hetman being taken away. Everything else is either military fuss, or unusually ordinary, dull, dull pictures of useless philistine. In the end, there is not a single type, not a single amusing situation, and the end directly outrages not only with its indeterminacy, but also with its complete inefficiency ... Not a single average theater would accept this play precisely because of its dullness, probably due to complete dramatic weakness or extreme author's inexperience.
This letter requires some explanation, since it played a big role in the further fate of the play. Extremely important is the first phrase of A. V. Lunacharsky that he does not see anything unacceptable in the play from the political point of view. Actually, this is the main thing that the theater required from him - whether the play passes according to political parameters or not. The negative opinion of the people's commissar on this issue immediately closed the way for the play to the stage. And what is important to note, A. V. Lunacharsky did not openly put forward political demands regarding the play, but at the last stage he showed integrity and supported the theater and Stanislavsky in resolving the issue of the play in higher instances.
It was not a formal act of courtesy and his statement that he considers Bulgakov a talented person. Obviously, he was already familiar with many stories and stories of the writer, among which " Fatal eggs”, a story that tested the reader’s attitude towards him. As for the “mediocrity” of the play and other harsh remarks by A. V. Lunacharsky, it must be borne in mind that the people’s commissar himself wrote quite a few plays that were staged by some theaters, but were not successful (even Demyan Bedny publicly called them mediocre) . Therefore, an element of predilection was undoubtedly present. But after all, the first edition of the play really suffered from many shortcomings, and above all by its lengthiness, which the author was well aware of.
The theater responded to the People's Commissar's remarks immediately. On October 14, an emergency meeting of the repertoire and art board of the Moscow Art Theater took place, which adopted the following resolution: “To recognize that in order to be staged on the Big Stage, the play must be radically altered. On the Small Stage, a play can go on after relatively minor alterations. Establish that if a play is staged on the Small Stage, it must be performed in the current season; the staging on the Big Stage may be postponed until next season. Discuss the stated resolutions with Bulgakov.
Bulgakov reacted sharply, emotionally and concretely to such a "revolutionary" decision of the theater. The next day, October 15, he wrote a letter to V. V. Luzhsky, which contained ultimatum demands on the theater. However, this letter is so “Bulgakovian” that it is expedient, in our opinion, to reproduce it:
“Dear Vasily Vasilyevich.
Yesterday's meeting, at which I had the honor to be, showed me that the situation with my play was complicated. The question arose about staging on the Small Stage, about the next season, and, finally, about the radical breaking of the play, which, in essence, bordered on the creation of a new play.
While willingly agreeing to some corrections in the process of working on the play together with the director, at the same time I do not feel able to write the play anew.
The deep and sharp criticism of the play at yesterday's meeting made me significantly disappointed in my play (I welcome criticism), but did not convince me that the play should be staged on the Small Stage.
And, finally, the question of the season can have only one solution for me: this season, not the next one.
Therefore, I ask you, dear Vasily Vasilyevich, to urgently put it on discussion in the directorate and give me a categorical answer to the question:
Does the 1st Art Theater agree to include the following unconditional clauses in the contract regarding the play:
1. Staging only on the Big Stage.
2. This season (March 1926).
3. Changes, but not a radical break in the core of the play.
In case these conditions are unacceptable for the Theatre, I take the liberty of asking for permission to consider a negative answer as a sign that the play The White Guard is free” (MXAT Museum, No. 17452).
The reaction of the theater was prompt, because both actors and directors liked the play. On October 16, the repertoire and art board of the Moscow Art Theater adopted next solution: “To recognize it as possible to agree to the author’s demand regarding the nature of the revision of the play and to ensure that it goes on the Big Stage” (see: Markov P. A. In the Art Theater. The book is filled. M., 1976. Section “Materials and Documents” ). This decision suited both the author and the theatre, because it was a reasonable compromise. In his memoirs, P. A. Markov successfully formulated the problems that arose with the first edition of the play The White Guard: “M. A. Bulgakov, who subsequently built plays with virtuosity, initially blindly followed the novel in the staging of The White Guard, and already in his work with the theater a harmonious and clear theatrical composition of The Days of the Turbins gradually arose ”(Markov L. A. S. 26) . On October 21, the initial distribution of roles took place ...
Bulgakov was well aware that the play must first of all be changed structurally, "shrink". Losses, of course, could not be avoided. In addition, it was required to remove direct attacks against the living leaders of the state from the text (the name of Trotsky was mentioned too often in the play). It took him more than two months to create a new version of the play - the second. Later, dictating fragmentary biographical notes to P. S. Popov, Bulgakov said something valuable about the work on the play The White Guard, in particular, this: “I merged the figure of Nai-Turs and Alexei in the play for greater clarity. Nai-Tours is a distant, abstract image. The ideal of Russian officers. What a Russian officer should have been like in my mind... I saw Skoropadsky once. This did not affect the creation of the image in the play. In Lariosika, the images of three faces merged. The element of "Chekhovism" was in one of the prototypes ... Dreams play an exceptional role for me ... The scene in the gymnasium (in the novel) was written by me in one night ... I visited the gymnasium building in 1918 more than once. streets of Kyiv. He experienced something close to what is in the novel...” (OR RSL, f. 218, no. 1269, item 6, fol. 3-5).
The intensity with which Bulgakov worked on the second edition of the play can be judged from his letter to the writer S. Fedorchenko dated November 24, 1925: “... I am buried under a play with a sonorous name. There is only one shadow left of me, which can be shown as a free supplement to the aforementioned play” (Moscow, 1987, no. 8, p. 53).
In January 1926, Bulgakov presented the second edition of the play to the Art Theater. The text was revised and significantly reduced, from a five-act play turned into a four-act one. But, as the author himself noted, the second edition was very close to the first in content. According to many experts, it is this edition that should be recognized as canonical, since it most of all corresponded to the author's intentions. But this issue remains quite controversial for many reasons, which are more appropriate to talk about in special studies.
A real theatrical work began with the play, which many of its participants recalled with admiration. M. Yanshin (Lariosik): “All participants in the performance felt the events and life that Bulgakov described so well with their own skin and nerves, the anxious and stormy time of the civil war was so close and vivid in their memory that the atmosphere of the performance, its rhythm, the well-being of each hero the plays were born as if by themselves, born from life itself” (Skill of the director. M., 1956, p. 170). P. Markov: “When you return to the Days of the Turbins and Bulgakov’s first appearance at the Art Theater, these memories remain among the best not only for me, but for all my comrades: it was the spring of the young Soviet Art Theater. To be honest, The Days of the Turbins became a kind of new The Seagull of the Art Theater... The Days of the Turbins were born from the novel The White Guard. This huge novel was filled with the same explosive power that Bulgakov himself was full of.. He not only attended rehearsals - he staged a play "(Memoirs of Mikhail Bulgakov. M., 1988. S. 239-240).
The performance was directed by I. Sudakov. Alexei Turbin was rehearsed by Nikolai Khmelev, whose game Stalin was so keen on later, the role of Myshlaevsky was prepared by B. Dobronravov. Young people were involved in rehearsals (M. Yanshin, E. Sokolova, M. Prudkin, I. Kudryavtsev and others), who later became a brilliant successor to the great generation of actors of the past.
But all this was ahead, in the spring of 1926, after intense rehearsals, the performance (the first two acts) was shown to Stanislavsky. Here are the dry but precise lines from the "Rehearsal Diary":
"TO. S., after watching two acts of the play, said that the play was on the right track: he really liked the "Gymnasium" and "Petlyurov's stage". He praised some performers and considers the work done important, successful and necessary ... K.S. inspired everyone to continue working at a fast, vigorous pace along the intended path ”(Moscow. 1987. No. 8. P. 55). And here is how it all seemed to the then head of the Moscow Art Theater Pavel Markov:
“Stanislavsky was one of the most direct spectators. At the show of the Turbins, he openly laughed, wept, closely followed the action, gnawed his hand as usual, threw off his pince-nez, wiping his tears with a handkerchief - in a word, he completely lived the performance ”(Markov P. A. S. 229).
It was a short happy time inside creative life Art Theatre. K. S. Stanislavsky enthusiastically took part in the rehearsals of the play, and some scenes of the play were staged on his advice (for example, the scene in the Turbinsky apartment, when the wounded Nikolka reports the death of Alexei). The great director remembered the time of joint work with Bulgakov for a long time and then often characterized him as an excellent director and potential actor. So, on September 4, 1930, he wrote to Bulgakov himself: “Dear and dear Mikhail Afanasyevich! You have no idea how happy I am for you to join our theatre! (This was after the massacre organized by the writer in 1928-1930! - V.L.). I had to work with you only at a few rehearsals of the Turbins, and then I felt in you - a director (or maybe an artist ?!) ”The same days Stanislavsky, pointing to Bulgakov, the then director of the Moscow Art Theater , prompted: "A director can come out of him. He is not only a writer, but he is also an actor. I judge by the way he showed the actors at the rehearsals of the Turbins." Actually - he staged them, at least gave those sparkles that sparkled and created a success for the performance. And a few years later, Stanislavsky, in a letter to the director V. G. Sakhnovsky, claimed that the entire “internal line” in the play “Days of the Turbins” belongs to Bulgakov (see: Bulgakov M. Diary. Letters. 1914-1940. M., 1997. P. 238; Yanovskaya L. Creative way of Mikhail Bulgakov. M., 1983. P. 167-168).
And it is impossible not to note one more extremely important fact in creative biography a writer about whom, for some reason, nothing has been written anywhere. In March 1926, the Art Theater entered into an agreement with Bulgakov to stage The Heart of a Dog! Thus, the Moscow Art Theater decided to stage two plays by Bulgakov at the same time, the content of which was the sharpest for that time. It can be assumed that it was this fact (an agreement to stage a banned unpublished story!) that attracted the attention of the political investigation and ideological control bodies, and from that moment they began to interfere in the process of creating the play "The White Guard" (the agreement to stage "Heart of a Dog" was canceled by mutual agreement of the author and the theater; that the reason for this was politically motivated - there is no doubt).
On May 7, 1926, the OGPU officers searched the Bulgakovs' apartment and seized the manuscripts of The Heart of a Dog (!) and the writer's diary, which was called Under the Heel. The search was preceded by extensive undercover work, as a result of which Bulgakov was recognized as an extremely dangerous figure from a political point of view.
In this regard, the task was set to prevent the staging of Bulgakov's plays in the theaters of Moscow and, above all, of course, his "White Guard" in the Art Theater (see: the volume "Diaries. Letters" present. Collected Works).
Pressure was exerted both on Bulgakov (search, surveillance, denunciations) and on the theater (demands by political detectives through the RepertCom to stop rehearsals of The White Guard). Meetings of the repertoire and art board of the Moscow Art Theater resumed again, at which questions about the title of the play, the need for new abbreviations, etc. began to be debated. the following content:
“I have the honor to inform you that I do not agree to the removal of the Petliura scene from my play The White Guard.
Motivation: The Petlyura scene is organically connected with the play.
Also, I do not agree that when the title is changed, the play should be called "Before the End".
I also do not agree with the transformation of a 4-act play into a 3-act one.
I agree, together with the Theater Council, to discuss a different title for the play The White Guard.
If the Theater does not agree with what is stated in this letter, I ask you to remove the play The White Guard as a matter of urgency” (Museum of the Moscow Art Theater, No. 17893).
Obviously, the leadership of the Art Theater was already aware of the political terror that had begun against Bulgakov (for now!) (the writer’s statement to the OGPU about the return of his manuscripts and diary to him remained unanswered, which was a bad omen) and such a harsh letter was taken rather calmly. V. V. Luzhsky answered the writer in detail and in a friendly tone (an undated letter):
“Dear Mikhail Afanasyevich!
What is it, what kind of fly, excuse me, has bitten you yet ?! Why, how? What happened after yesterday's conversation in front of K.S. and me ... After all, yesterday we said and we decided that no one throws out the "Petliura" scene yet. You yourself gave your consent to the marking of two scenes of Vasilisa, to the alteration and combination of two gymnasiums into one, too, to the parade parade of Petliurovsky (!) with Bolbotun, you did not raise any big objections!(highlighted by us. - V. L.) And suddenly come on! Your title remains “The Turbin Family” (in my opinion, it’s better than the Turbins ...). How will the play become three-act? - four!..
What are you, dear and our Moscow Art Theater Mikhail Afanasyevich? Who turned you on so much?..” (IRLI, f. 369, no. 48).
But soon the whole theater had to “wind up”, and first of all, all those who participated in the production of the play. On June 24, the first closed dress rehearsal took place. The head of the theatrical section of the Repert Committee, V. Blum, and the editor of this section, A. Orlinsky, who were present, expressed their dissatisfaction with the play and declared that it could be staged that way "in five years." The next day, at a “conversation” held at the Repert Committee with representatives of the Moscow Art Theater, art officials formulated their attitude towards the play as a work that “represents a continuous apology for the White Guards, starting from the scene in the gymnasium and up to the scene of Alexei’s death, inclusive,” and she “absolutely unacceptable, and in the interpretation given by the theater, it cannot go. The theater was required to make the scene in the gymnasium in such a way that it would discredit the White movement and that the play should contain more episodes that humiliate the White Guards (introduce servants, porters and officers acting as part of Petliura's army, etc.). Director I. Sudakov promised the Repert Committee to more clearly show the "turn to Bolshevism" that was emerging among the White Guards. Ultimately, the theater was asked to finalize the play (see: Bulgakov M.A. Plays of the 20s. Theatrical Heritage. L., 1989. P. 522).
Characteristically, Bulgakov responded to this clearly organized pressure on the theater from the Repert Committee (actually from the OGPU, where the "Bulgakov case" grew by leaps and bounds) with a repeated statement addressed to the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars (June 24) demanding that the diary and manuscripts seized be returned to him. employees of the OGPU (there was no answer).
The play and its author gradually began to attract more and more attention from both its opponents and supporters. On June 26, Bulgakov's friend N. N. Lyamin wrote an emotional letter to the playwright, in which he asked him not to concede anything else, since "the theater had already distorted the play enough", and begged him not to touch the stage in the gymnasium. “Do not agree to sacrifice her for any good of the world. It makes an amazing impression, it makes all the sense. The image of Alyosha cannot be modified in any way, it is blasphemous to touch it ... ”(Creativity of Mikhail Bulgakov. St. Petersburg, 1995. Book 3. P. 208).
Nevertheless, the theater understood perfectly well (and the author, too, with great irritation) that in order to save the play, alterations were necessary. In a letter to the director A. D. Popov (the director of Zoya's Apartment at the Vakhtangov Theatre), Bulgakov touched on the problems of the Moscow Art Theater in passing: “There really is overwork. In May, all sorts of surprises not related to the theater (the search was closely “connected with the theater.” - V.L.), in May, the Guards race at the 1st Moscow Art Theater (viewed by the authorities!), In June, continuous work ( perhaps Bulgakov shifts time somewhat due to forgetfulness. - V. L.) ... In August, everything at once ... "
On August 24, with the arrival of Stanislavsky, rehearsals of the play resumed. Was accepted new plan plays, insertions and alterations. On August 26, in the "Diary of rehearsals" it was written:, "M. A. Bulgakov wrote a new text for the gymnasium according to the plan approved by Konstantin Sergeevich. The play was called "Days of the Turbins". The scene with Vasilisa was removed, and two scenes in the gymnasium were combined into one. Other significant amendments were also made.
But the opponents of the play increased the pressure on the theater and on the author of the play. The situation became tense and became extremely nervous. After another rehearsal for the Repert Committee (September 17), its management stated that “the play cannot be released in this form. The issue of permission remains open. Even Stanislavsky could not stand it after that and, meeting with the actors of the future performance, said that if the play was banned, he would leave the theater.
On September 19, the dress rehearsal of the performance was canceled, new lines were introduced into the text of the play, and then, to please the Repert Committee and A. V. Lunacharsky, the scene of the torture of a Jew by the Petliurists was filmed ... with this decision for many years), and already on September 22 he was summoned for interrogation at the OGPU (interrogation protocol, see: present meeting, vol. 8). Of course, all these actions were coordinated: the OGPU and the Repertoire Committee insisted on removing the play. Bulgakov was intimidated during interrogation: after all, a dress rehearsal was scheduled for September 23.
The general rehearsal went well. In the "Diary of rehearsals" it was written: "A full general meeting with the public ... Representatives of the USSR, the press, representatives of the Glavrepertkom, Konstantin Sergeevich, the Supreme Council and the Director's Office are watching.
At today's performance, it is decided whether the play is going on or not.
The performance goes on with the latest blotches and without the "Jew" scene.
After this dress rehearsal, Lunacharsky declared that in this form the performance could be allowed to be shown to the audience.
But the ordeal with the play not only did not end there, but entered a decisive phase. On September 24, the play was allowed at the collegium of the People's Commissariat for Education. A day later, the GPU banned the play (here it is, the real Cabal!). Then A.V. Lunacharsky turned to A.I. Rykov with the following telegram:
“Dear Alexei Ivanovich.
At a meeting of the Collegium of the People's Commissariat of Education with the participation of the Repertoire Committee, including the GPU, it was decided to allow Bulgakov's play to only one Art Theater and only for this season. At the insistence of the Glavrepertkom, the collegium allowed him to produce some banknotes. On Saturday evening the GPU informed the People's Commissariat of Education that it was banning the play. It is necessary to consider this issue in the highest instance or confirm the decision of the board of the People's Commissariat for Education, which has already become known. The cancellation of the decision of the board of the People's Commissariat for Education of the GPU is extremely undesirable and even scandalous.
On September 30, this issue was decided at a meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. The following decision was made: "Do not cancel the decision of the collegium of the People's Commissariat of Education on Bulgakov's play." (Literary newspaper. 1999. July 14-20).
This was the first decision of the Politburo on Bulgakov's play, but by no means the last.
The then well-known German correspondent Paul Schaeffer wrote in the Riga newspaper Segodnya (November 18, 1926): “While members of the party majority (meaning Stalin, Voroshilov, Rykov. - V. L.) , the opposition acted as a resolute opponent of it.
Below we publish this particular version of the play (third edition), which went through so many trials, but was played by the brilliant troupe of the Art Theater from 1920 to 1941.
"Days of the Turbins"
1 History of the creation of the play
On April 3, 1925, at the Moscow Art Theater, Bulgakov was offered to write a play based on the novel The White Guard. Bulgakov began work on the first edition in July 1925. In the play, as in the novel, Bulgakov based himself on his own memories of Kyiv during civil war. The author read the first edition in the theater in early September of the same year, subsequently the play was repeatedly edited. The play was allowed to be staged on September 25, 1926.
Modern critics attribute the play to the pinnacle of Bulgakov's theatrical success, but her stage fate was thorny.
The play premiered at the Moscow Art Theater on October 5, 1926. The production, where the stars of the Moscow Art Theater were occupied, enjoyed great audience success, but received devastating reviews in the then Soviet press. In April 1929, The Days of the Turbins were withdrawn from the repertoire. The author was accused of petty-bourgeois and bourgeois mood, propaganda of the white movement.
But Bulgakov's patron turned out to be Stalin himself, who watched the play about twenty times. With his instructions, the performance was restored and entered the classical repertoire of the theater. For Mikhail Bulgakov, who was doing odd jobs, staging at the Moscow Art Theater was perhaps the only way to support his family.
On February 16, 1932, the production was resumed and continued on the stage of the Art Theater until June 1941. In total, in 1926-1941, the play ran 987 times.
Editions of the play : "Days of the Turbins" - a play by M. A. Bulgakov, written on the basis of the novel "The White Guard". At the beginning of September 1925, in the presence of Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky (Alekseev) (1863-1938), he read the first edition of the play in the theater. Here, almost all the plot lines of the novel were repeated and its main characters were preserved. Alexei Turbin was still a military doctor, and among actors Colonels Malyshev and Nai-Tours were present. This edition did not satisfy the Moscow Art Theater because of its length and the presence of characters and episodes duplicating each other. In the next edition, which Bulgakov read to the troupe of the Moscow Art Theater at the end of October 1925, Nai-Tours was already eliminated and his remarks were transferred to Colonel Malyshev. And by the end of January 1926, when the final distribution of roles in the future performance was made, Bulgakov also removed Malyshev, turning Alexei Turbin into a career artillery colonel, a true spokesman for the ideology of the white movement. Andrei Mikhailovich Zemsky (1892-1946), the husband of Bulgakov's sister Nadezhda, served as an artillery officer in 1917. Acquaintance with the son-in-law prompted the playwright to make the main characters of D.T. gunners.
Now the hero closest to the author - Colonel Turbin - gave the white idea a catharsis with his death. By this point, the play had basically taken shape. Later, under the influence of censorship, a scene was filmed at Petliura's headquarters, for Petliura's freemen in their cruel element very much resembled Red Army soldiers. In early editions, as in the novel, the "turnover" of the Petliurists in red was emphasized by the "red tails" (shanks) on their hats.
The name "White Guard" provoked an objection. K. S. Stanislavsky, under pressure from the Glavrepertkom, proposed replacing it with "Before the End", which Bulgakov categorically rejected. In August 1926, the parties agreed on the name "Days of the Turbins" (the "Turbin Family" appeared as an intermediate option). On September 25, 1926, D.T. were allowed by the Glavrepertkom only in the Moscow Art Theater. AT last days before the premiere, a number of changes had to be made, especially in the finale, where the growing sounds of the "Internationale" appeared, and Myshlaevsky was forced to pronounce the toast of the Red Army and express his readiness to serve in it: "At least I know that I will serve in the Russian army."
History of creation
On April 3, 1925, at the Moscow Art Theater, Bulgakov was offered to write a play based on the novel The White Guard. Bulgakov began work on the first edition in July 1925. In the play, as in the novel, Bulgakov based himself on his own memories of Kyiv during the Civil War. The author read the first edition at the theater in early September of the same year, on September 25, 1926, the play was allowed to be staged.
Since then, it has been revised several times. Three editions of the play are currently known; the first two have the same title as the novel, but due to censorship issues it had to be changed. There is no consensus among researchers as to which edition should be considered the last. Some point out that the third appeared as a result of the prohibition of the second and therefore cannot be considered the final manifestation of the author's will. Others argue that it is The Days of the Turbins that should be recognized as the main text, since performances have been staged on them for many decades. No manuscripts of the play have survived. The third edition was first published by E. S. Bulgakova in 1955. The second edition first saw the light in Munich. There is a publication "Days of the Turbins ( White Guard)", published in 1927 and 1929 in Paris by the Concorde publishing house, stored in the Lenin Library (Russian State Library).
Characters
- Turbin Aleksey Vasilievich - colonel-artilleryman, 30 years old.
- Turbin Nikolay - his brother, 18 years old.
- Talberg Elena Vasilievna - their sister, 24 years old.
- Talberg Vladimir Robertovich - Colonel of the General Staff, her husband, 31 years old.
- Myshlaevsky Viktor Viktorovich - staff captain, artilleryman, 38 years old.
- Shervinsky Leonid Yurievich - lieutenant, personal adjutant of the hetman.
- Studzinsky Alexander Bronislavovich - captain, 29 years old.
- Lariosik - Zhytomyr cousin, 21 years old.
- Hetman of All Ukraine (Pavel Skoropadsky).
- Bolbotun - commander of the 1st Petliura Cavalry Division (prototype - Bolbochan).
- Galanba is a Petliurist centurion, a former lancer captain.
- Hurricane.
- Kirpaty.
- Von Schratt is a German general.
- Von Doust is a German major.
- German army doctor.
- Deserter-Sich.
- Man with a basket.
- Camera lackey.
- Maxim - gymnasium pedel, 60 years old.
- Gaydamak is a telephonist.
- First officer.
- Second officer.
- Third officer.
- First Junker.
- Second Junker.
- Third Junker.
- Junkers and Haidamaks.
Plot
The events described in the play take place in late 1918 - early 1919 in Kyiv and cover the fall of the regime of Hetman Skoropadsky, the arrival of Petliura and his expulsion from the city by the Bolsheviks. Against the backdrop of a constant change of power, the personal tragedy of the Turbin family takes place, the foundations of the old life are broken.
The first and second editions had 4 acts each, the third - only 3.
Criticism
Modern critics consider "Days of the Turbins" the pinnacle of Bulgakov's theatrical success, but her stage fate was difficult. First left at the Moscow Art Theater, the play enjoyed great audience success, but received devastating reviews in the then Soviet press. In an article in the New Spectator magazine dated February 2, 1927, Bulgakov wrote out the following:
We are ready to agree with some of our friends that the "Days of the Turbins" is a cynical attempt to idealize the White Guard, but we have no doubt that it is the "Days of the Turbins" that is the aspen stake in its coffin. Why? Because for a healthy Soviet spectator, the most ideal slush cannot present a temptation, but for dying active enemies and for passive, flabby, indifferent townsfolk, the same slush cannot give either an emphasis or a charge against us. Just like a funeral hymn cannot serve as a military march.
In April 1929, The Days of the Turbins were withdrawn from the repertoire. The author was accused of petty-bourgeois and bourgeois mood, propaganda of the white movement. But Bulgakov's patron turned out to be Stalin himself, who watched the play about twenty times. On his instructions, the performance was restored and entered the classical repertoire of the theater. Stalin's love for the play was perceived by some as evidence of a change of views, a change in attitude towards the traditions of the Russian army (the introduction of insignia, shoulder straps and other attributes of the Russian Imperial Army into the Red Army was also associated with Stalin's personal attitude). However, Stalin himself, in a letter to the playwright V. Bill-Belotserkovsky, indicated that he liked the play on the contrary, due to the fact that it shows the defeat of the whites: “As for the play itself“ Turbin Days ”, it is not so bad, because it does more good than harm. Do not forget that the main impression left by the viewer from this play is an impression favorable to the Bolsheviks: “even if people like Turbins are forced to lay down their arms and submit to the will of the people, recognizing their cause as completely lost, then the Bolsheviks are invincible, nothing can be done about them, the Bolsheviks,” The Days of the Turbins is a demonstration of the all-destroying power of Bolshevism.” For Mikhail Bulgakov, who was doing odd jobs, staging at the Moscow Art Theater was perhaps the only way to support his family.
Productions
- - Moscow Art Theater. Director Ilya Sudakov, artist Nikolai Ulyanov, artistic director of the production K. S. Stanislavsky. Roles played: Alexey Turbin- Nikolai Khmelev, Nikolka- Ivan Kudryavtsev, Elena- Vera Sokolova, Shervinsky— Mark Prudkin, Studzinsky- Evgeny Kaluga, Myshlaevsky- Boris Dobronravov, Thalberg- Vsevolod Verbitsky, Lariosik- Mikhail Yanshin, Von Schratt- Viktor Stanitsyn, Hetman- Vladimir Ershov. The premiere took place on October 5, 1926. After being removed from the repertoire in 1929, the performance was resumed on February 16, 1932 and remained on the stage of the Art Theater until June 1941. In total, in 1926-1941, the play ran 987 times.
Screen adaptations
- - Days of the Turbins, director Vladimir Basov
Notes
Sources
Links
| Works by Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov | |
|---|---|
| Novels | The White Guard The Life of Monsieur de Molière The Master and Marguerite Theatrical Romance |
| Tale | Diaboliad Fatal Eggs Heart of a Dog Secret Friend Notes on Cuffs |
| plays, screenplays, libretto |
|
Director - Ilya Sudakov
Artist — Nikolai Ulyanov
Artistic director of the production - Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky
Nikolay Khmelev — Alexey Turbin
Mikhail Yanshin - Lariosik
Vera Sokolova - Elena
Mark Prudkin - Shervinsky
Viktor Stanitsyn - Von Schratt
Evgeny Kaluga - Studzinsky
Ivan Kudryavtsev - Nikolka
Boris Dobronravov - Myshlaevsky
Vsevolod Verbitsky - Talberg
Vladimir Ershov - Hetman
The performance enjoyed great audience success, but after devastating reviews in the then press in April 1929, The Days of the Turbins were removed from the repertoire. In February 1936, the Moscow Art Theater staged his new play “The Cabal of the Hypocrites” (“Molière”), but due to a sharply critical article in Pravda, the play was withdrawn in March, having managed to pass seven times with a constant full house.
But, despite the accusations against the author, who was convicted of a bourgeois mood, on Stalin's instructions, the play "Days of the Turbins" was restored and entered the classical repertoire of the theater. For the writer, staging at the Moscow Art Theater was perhaps the only way to support his family. In total, the play was played 987 times on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater in 1926-1941. It is known that Stalin watched this performance more than once. Subsequently, contemporaries even actively argued how many times the leader watched it. The writer Viktor Nekrasov wrote: “It is known that Stalin watched the play “Days of the Turbins” based on the play by M. Bulgakov ... 17 times! Not three, not five, not twelve, but seventeen! And he was a man, one must think, still busy, and the theaters did not spoil his attention so much, he loved cinema ... but something in the Turbins captured him and wanted to watch, hiding behind the curtain of the government box " (Nekrasov V. Notes of onlookers. M., 1991).
a small remark about Nekrasov's "loved cinema"))
- And how many times did Stalin visit the Bolshoi Theater, just go to performances? loved opera. And the last performance he watched - Swan Lake - was on February 27, 1953.
and in Small? he did not miss a single premiere.
and the music?
