For its very long creative life Ivan Andreevich Krylov wrote over 200 fables. He not only revived the interest of Russian society in this rather rare genre, but also turned the fable itself into a subtle tool for influencing the minds, heart, and conscience of a person. For more than one century, the fables of the great Russian fabulist have been included in school curriculum Russian literature, playing a very important teaching and educational role.
Not all fables are equally popular, however, “The Mirror and the Monkey” is just the case when the text of the work is literally “torn apart” into quotes, and almost every adult, even from school, can quote it.
Surprisingly, history has preserved for certain the date of creation of the work - on January 2, 1816, Krylov finished the fable and soon published it in the magazine Son of the Fatherland.
Once Monkey got hold of a mirror somewhere and began to gaze intently at her reflection. With indignation, the Monkey noticed, turning to the Bear, how ugly the “face” was in the mirror, what disgusting jumps and antics she had. And she concluded that if she herself looked like this “stranger” in the mirror, she would simply hang herself out of longing. Although among her gossips there really are such antics.
But the Bear replied with a grin to the stupid Monkey that before discussing her gossips, it would be better if she looked at herself. But the Monkey, as you might guess, did not understand the advice of the Bear.
A rare case: Krylov at the end of the fable, that is, in its moralizing part, introduces two more common characters - Klimych and Peter. The author remembers them as his friends. Like, he recently saw Klimych and everyone knows about him that he takes bribes, but the impudent Klimych, dishonest, stealthily points at Peter.
Analysis of the moral of the work
The two heroes of the fable represent two different types people: Monkey - stupid, envious, boastful, loving gossip, and the Bear, which can be described as wise, calm, smart.
In his work, Krylov refers specifically to personal shortcomings, and not to social vices. The poet Khemnitzer noted that, unfortunately, everyone is involved in this shortcoming in one way or another - the unwillingness to see bad traits in oneself, and it is great to notice even minor mistakes in others. A wise Russian proverb immediately comes to mind: “I can see a mote in someone else’s eye, but I don’t see a log in my own.”
The author vividly shows the comedy of the situation that the Monkey herself created. Not realizing that in the reflection of the mirror it is she, the Monkey herself, the heroine begins to discuss her gossips, noticing that they are not beautiful and grimacing.
As we know, Krylov, choosing animals as the main characters, always implies a person with a characteristic set of qualities. And here he even emphasizes his allegory by introducing human characters at the end of the work. It is not known whether this message was addressed to some specific people (which happened more than once in the poet's fables) or is it just a collective image of vile people who do not see the "skeleton in the closet", but like to point out the shortcomings of others.
The fable "The Mirror and the Monkey" is one of the original works. Although similar plots with similar morals were developed by others, early fabulists. For example, Aesop said that every person has two bags from birth. In front hangs one in which a person wears other people's shortcomings, and behind a bag with his weaknesses and sins. That's why other people's cons are visible better.
And one more instructive message can be caught in the fable - this is the unwillingness and inability to accept criticism, advice, a lesson. After listening to the wise word of the Bear, the Monkey did not understand anything. So it is in life...
About how the stupid Monkey expressed contempt for her own reflection in the mirror, the fable “The Mirror and the Monkey” by Krylov will tell.
Read the text of the fable:
Monkey, seeing in the Mirror your image,
Quietly Bear's foot:
“Look,” he says, “my dear godfather!
What kind of a face is that?
What antics and jumps she has!
I would choke myself with longing,
If only she looked a little like her.
But, admit it, there is
Of my gossips, there are five or six such wimps:
I can even count them on my fingers."
Isn't it better to turn on yourself, godfather?" -
Mishka answered her.
But Mishen'kin's advice just disappeared in vain.
There are many such examples in the world:
Nobody likes to recognize himself in satire.
I even saw this yesterday:
That Klimych is unclean at hand, everyone knows this;
They read about bribes to Klimych.
And he furtively nods at Peter.
Moral of the fable Mirror and Monkey:
Moral of the fable: no one wants to see himself in satire and denunciation. The fabulist shows that the one who hears the denunciation first of all thinks that it is addressed to another. I. A. Krylov liked to make fun of human shortcomings using the images of animals. He made a monkey the main character of the fable for a reason. She ridicules her own antics, like the ignorant who notice "a beam in another's eye." Few people notice their shortcomings and are engaged in correcting them. Everyone is willing to condemn others.
The Monkey and the Bear have a casual conversation in Krylov's fable The Mirror and the Monkey. Children love to read Krylov's fable by roles or memorize it - it is short and not at all complicated.
Fable Mirror and monkey read
Monkey, in the Mirror seeing his image,
Quietly Bear's foot:
“Look,” he says, “my dear godfather!
What kind of a face is that?
What antics and jumps she has!
I would choke myself with longing,
If only she looked a little like her.
But, admit it, there is
Of my gossips, there are five or six such wimps:
I can even count them on my fingers."
"What gossips consider to work,
Isn't it better to turn on yourself, godfather?" -
Mishka answered her.
But Mishen'kin's advice just disappeared in vain.
There are many such examples in the world:
I even saw this yesterday:
That Klimych is unclean at hand, everyone knows this;
They read about bribes to Klimych.
And he furtively nods at Peter.
Moral of the fable The mirror and the monkey
Nobody likes to recognize himself in satire.
The moral of the fable The Mirror and the Monkey Krylov described at the end of the work according to all the rules of the fable genre. The Bear pointed out to the Monkey her ignorance, but she is ready to see the shortcomings of all her "girlfriends", but not her own.
Fable The Mirror and the Monkey - analysis
The Monkey from this fable is very similar to the Monkey from the fable “The Monkey and Glasses” in its ignorance, which Krylov loves to make fun of in people, considering this vice very unpleasant. People tend to see the shortcomings of others, but not to notice their own. So the Monkey sees in the mirror a real wimp - herself, but is not able to admit it. Advice of the Bear “What are gossips to consider working, isn’t it better to turn around for yourself, godfather?” she misses her ears.
Bugai from Russian Orthodox Church The Moscow Patriarchate, unsure representatives of other faiths on the one hand, and dystrophics from science and pedagogy, on the other hand, are unanimously and impudently shouting about the need to let the Law of God into the school under the name of “alternative points of view”. And all this under the slogans of either democracy, or pluralism, or scientific creationism, or the eternal incompleteness and defectiveness of scientific knowledge. From the polyphonic choir of defenders of ignorance and preachers of obscurantism, the public's ears were blocked, their heads were spinning, and common sense was dulled. Well, let's try to reason sensibly.
If we begin to put into the consciousness of schoolchildren not only the truths established by science, but also the content of those countless misconceptions about these truths that have existed in the scientific and near-scientific environment for at least two or three thousand years, then what will the matured students who graduate from such a school know? After all, thousands of erroneous truths were expressed by the same scientists on behalf of science on any modern scientific reliable truth. Dozens, hundreds and even thousands of assumptions, conjectures of hypotheses were expressed on the phenomenon being studied and still unknown to science, and only one of them later turned out to be true. Moreover, one and the same truth in content was expressed in dozens and hundreds of competing variants. So, several hundred proofs of the Pythagorean theorem have been recorded in the scientific world. But in order to know that the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the legs, one convincing proof is enough. A hundred other variants of proofs will add nothing to the knowledge of this theorem. On the contrary, if one more, second, proof strengthens the knowledge of the first version of the truth, then the third one will already leave the student indifferent, the fourth one will get bored, and the hundredth one can cause disgust for the theorem itself. And the presentation of alternative, even if essentially fair, points of view on the same truth will not leave a place in the mind of the student for this truth at all. And if the scientific truth of evolutionary doctrine is opposed to theological creationism, then the student will cease to believe not only in science, but also in creationism.
Of course, in science there have been and will be alternative points of view, alternative explanations of the same natural processes in nature, society and in spiritual world person. This is especially true of those problems that are still little accessible to practical and evidence-based comprehension of their essence. But these questions are meant to be solved by scientists. A student is not a scientist. He, in the words of the Boy from the movie "Cinderella": "I'm not a wizard / scientist yet. I'm still learning."
Consequently, even from a pedagogical point of view, creationism and other types of alternative anti-scientific concepts will bring undoubted harm to the immature minds of students.
ІІ.Protodeacon Andrey Kuraev, Archpriest Vsevodod Chaplin and Chief Priest Kirill Gundyaev himself persistently with numerous “arguments” prove the necessity and usefulness of teaching at school in parallel with the Law of God called “Orthodox Culture”, an alternative course of creationism to evolutionary teaching. The arguments of these God-bearing shepherds and their followers have stuck in their teeth and have long been known to everyone. I will not repeat them. Boring and useless. But in line with the speeches of the "guardians" about the school and the younger generation, I can share good advice with all the vocal attackers on the school.
Fathers, holy and not saints! Why are you so unseemly trying to put things in order in a school that is not yours, secular and state? Religion, according to the Constitution, is separated from the state, and the school is separated from the church. Why are you climbing over the fence separating you from the school with your "good advice"? Do you have little worries of your own? Do you have your own schools? There are plenty!
For the benefit of your own business, first read the fable of Ivan Andreevich Krylov “The Mirror and the Monkey. In the monkey mirror you will see yourself. See:
The monkey, seeing his image in the Mirror, Quietly Bear with his foot: “Look,” he says, “my dear godfather! What kind of mug is there? What antics and jumps she has! I was a little like. But, admit it, there are five or six such gossips of my gossips: I can even count them on my fingers. - "?" - Mishka answered her. But Mishen'kin's advice just disappeared in vain.
Than climbing over the fence into secular schools, wouldn't it be better for you, priests, to turn to your schools. In your schools, you all in groups and one by one teach listeners and students only your own creed. But the belief that you teach your own, in the world there are dozens and hundreds of more powerful beliefs to your belief. You interpret your own, for example, that the Bible is the only absolutely holy and absolutely infallible teaching of the Lord God Himself - Hosts/Jehovah. There is no evidence for your assertion. An objective, without any prejudice, analysis shows that the Bible is a contradictory, ignorant and inconsistent source. This, as they say, goes without saying. But besides this, the Bible has many alternative sources of doctrine. For Muslims, the Koran is no less than your Bible - the only absolutely holy and absolutely infallible teaching of the very Lord God - Allah. Compared to the Bible, the Qur'an has far fewer internal contradictions, although the absurdities there are to match the biblical. For Buddhists, the Tripitaka is infallible and absolutely true, for Hindus - the Vedas, for Mormons - the Book of Mormon ... All these sources of the "only true" religious teaching have three to four times more admirers than there are Bible admirers in the world. Why don't you introduce in your educational institutions the study of these alternative Bible sacred books? Ah, is that how?! You study the creeds of other religions and their holy books! Wonderful! But how do you study them? - Oh, that's how! - Critical. So, in our secular schools, your scriptures and the same creationism. And how many good words you say to your teachings about other religions, so many good things are said about creationism in schools. We do not mind what you say about other religions and about others that are not yours. holy books. So you do not oppose what we in our secular schools say about your creationism. Would you like to discuss with us publicly? Please invite us to your radio and TV shows. We, and I personally, agree to speak with you at least in your seminaries, even in your theological academies. Invite. If you want, I'll read you a course on atheism. From me, seminarians will hear what atheism says about itself, and not what you tell them about atheism. Doesn't it suit you? In that case, why should we accept the utter nonsense that you are trying to smuggle into our school?
"What gossips count to work, Isn't it better to turn on yourself, godfather?" -Each of us has our own shortcomings. This cannot be avoided - ideal people do not exist. But it is one thing to have and admit these shortcomings, and it is quite another to deny and blame another for them, as we do more and more often, as well as the monkey from the fable “The Mirror and the Monkey”.
Fable "Mirror and Monkey"
Monkey, in the Mirror seeing his image,
Quietly Bear's foot:
“Look,” he says, “my dear godfather!
What kind of a face is that?
What antics and jumps she has!
I would choke myself with longing,
If only she looked a little like her.
But, admit it, there is
Of my gossips, there are five or six such wimps:
I can even count them on my fingers.” -
“What are the gossips to consider working,
Isn't it better to turn on yourself, godfather? -
Mishka answered her.
But Mishen'kin's advice just disappeared in vain.
There are many such examples in the world:
Nobody likes to recognize himself in satire.
I even saw this yesterday:
That Klimych is unclean at hand, everyone knows this;
They read about bribes to Klimych.
And he furtively nods at Peter.
The moral of Krylov's fable "The Mirror and the Monkey"
According to the classics of the genre, Ivan Andreevich concluded the moral of the fable “The Mirror and the Monkey” in one of the last lines of his work - in a phrase that does not require explanation and has become since the publication instructive poem quote: "No one likes to recognize himself in satire." But in order not to do this, it is enough just to be able to admit your mistakes and shortcomings.
Analysis of the fable "The Mirror and the Monkey"
The fable "The Mirror and the Monkey" was based on Krylov's "favorite" human vice - ignorance. It is ridiculed literally in every line of the work: both where the monkey, having found a mirror, did not recognize itself in it, and where it is described with what disgust she looked at an unfamiliar reflection, and where the stupid animal compares the "grimacing" with its acquaintances , and, of course, where the monkey ignores the advice of the bear to look at himself.
It is to look at oneself from the outside that the author calls on all those who are used to judging the actions of others. Moreover, with the help of this fable, Krylov is trying to force a specific bribe-taker to do this, for which he inserts his last name into the text.
Winged expressions from the fable "The Mirror and the Monkey"
- “What are the gossips to consider working, isn’t it better to turn around for yourself, godfather?” - is used in the fable "The Mirror and the Monkey" as a reproach to those who look for flaws in others instead of objectively, with the proper degree of criticism, look at themselves before that.
