Dynamics of the Point of View in B. Pasternak's Novel "Doctor Zhivago"

Molodtsov Aleksey Borisovich ORCID: 0000-0003-1332-1041 Assistant of Department on Russian and World Literature, Lugansk State Pedagogical University 91011, Russia, Luhansk People's Republic, Lugansk, Oboronnaya str., 2 homosapien34@mail.ru

B. Pasternak's novel "Doctor Zhivago", which became available to the Russian-speaking reader not so long ago, still causes controversy among researchers, critics and readers. The work is either denied consistency as prose, or such originality is recognized, which puts the novel not only in an exceptional, but also in a separate position. Meanwhile, the development of world literature shows that "Doctor Zhivago", for all its originality, was a step on the way to more complex and modern forms of prose. So, perhaps the leading problem of studying the novel by B. Pasternak is the nature of its genre, which causes a number of related problems: the relationship of the author and the hero, the composition of the work, the point of view in the novel, the style, the speech of the characters and their typology, etc.

Researchers recognize the syncretic genre basis of "Doctor Zhivago", pointing out that it is equally shaped by epic and lyrical beginnings (D. Likhachev, I. Sukhoi, E. Bondarchuk, S. Ilyev, I. Smirnov, V. Tyupa, A. Vlasov, R. Yakobson, etc.). We cannot disagree with this thesis, but note that this definition does not exhaustively explain the genre specifics of the work. Thus, S. Ilyev, due to the characteristic functioning of the symbol in Doctor Zhivago, defines the novel as symbolic ^[4]; E. Bondarchuk, logically following the thesis about the lyrical basis of the novel, calls "Doctor Zhivago" a lyrical novel, and Yuri Andreevich himself – B. Pasternak's alter ego, i.e. a lyrical hero ^[1]; I. Smirnov, tracing the poetics of mystery (really present in the novel), gives his own formulation – "a novel of secrets" ^[9]. Analogies can be continued. Nevertheless, with a more thorough and direct examination, the dramatic twists and turns of the plot, the relationship of the author and the characters, the composition, etc. remain problematic.

Yuri Zhivago, for all his exclusivity, is not the lyrical hero of the novel. He is not a narrator, the story is told not only from his point of view, and often even without his actual participation. We see a more subtle approach in L. Rzhevsky, who speaks about the expression of the author in a whole group of autogenous characters, who are united by almost the same language and portrait impersonality (Zhivago, Lara, Vedenyapin, Sima Tuntseva, Gordon, Dudorov) ^[8]. But even here a contradiction arises: even if the language of these heroes is really the same, but in terms of content, by nature, we cannot confuse the passive, intelligent, closed, remaining ideologically almost monolithic Zhivago with the active Lara, open Dudorov, the wise Tuntseva and Vedenyapin changing his views. So, there is a question of the author's attitude to all these heroes and even more – to all the heroes of the novel, who can equally express the author's position and into whose spiritual world the author penetrates with no less frequency and interest than into the soul of Zhivago.

The above relations are formally expressed in the peculiarities of the point of view, more broadly, following B. Ouspensky, composition ^[11].

The plot of "Doctor Zhivago" is given not in the form of a systematically developing chain of events in a cause-and-effect sequence, but in the form of separate, symbolic episodes of hero collisions. It is made up of the whole set of episodes, which, taken separately, are more lyrical or dramatic in content than epic. Moreover, with the development of the action, many episodes intersect with other sets and complement and refine each other.

The plot is based mainly on the relationship of the four characters (Lara, Zhivago, Antipov, Komarovsky). They constitute the primary sequence of motives that will subsequently vary, repeat and develop (according to B. Griftsov ^[3]). In essence, they are connected by love, love vicissitudes, and in order to convey the dramatic intensity and inconsistency, ambiguity and exclusivity of this love embodied in Lara, B. Pasternak introduces an element of drama into the epic form – an ever-changing point of view on what is happening. In drama as a kind and genre, changing points of view are expressed by the direct speech of the actors themselves, and mainly from this speech we have to guess about their inner life. In Doctor Zhivago, B. Pasternak expresses the underlying spiritual layer of many heroes by leading the narrative on their behalf, in the perception of one of them, taking into account his character, awareness, motives, etc., i.e. a number of forms.

Such a technique, of course, was not invented by B. Pasternak, he is known in the history of literature, but the construction of the work is entirely based on a changing point of view, as a result of which the author's narrative is completely excluded from the text, began to be used only in the twentieth century, in particular, in such a work by the English writer O. Huxley as "Counterpoint" – an intellectual sarcastic novel about the London intelligentsia of the 1920s. Its peculiarity, as in the case of "Doctor Zhivago", is that among the many heroes who intersect and interact, none is the main one, and the twists and turns of the plot are presented in different refractions of each of the main characters. Actually, this is the essence of the musical counterpoint technique: a lot of musical themes, developing independently, intersect in one time interval, in order to disperse again later. The genre difference between "Counterpoint" and "Doctor Zhivago" is that O. Huxley's novel is deliberately created as a kaleidoscopically collapsing set, in it the points of view are separated, and nothing connects the random "Brownian motion" of the characters. In B. Pasternak's novel, the fragmentarity and randomness of the "fates of crosses" only reveals a common unified existence in history ("lyrical truth", according to B. Pasternak), and therefore the novel "Doctor Zhivago" cannot be called entirely polyphonic (from Greek. "polyphonic") by analogy with the novels of F. Dostoevsky. On the contrary, it is a symphonic novel (from Greek. "consonant"), in which Pasternak's worldview is equal to the laws of the universe, which some heroes can adhere to, others can distort, others ignore, etc. A. Pyatigorsky, for example, notes: "Pasternak was perfect in his monologue" ^{[7, p. 227]}. The same is written by Edith W. Clowes in the collection "Doctor Zhivago: A Critical Companion": "Unlike most "realist" novels which are "dialogical" and show the emerging and often conflicting world views of several characters, the lyric novel is distinctive for its "monologism". Here is a single authorial worldview predominates and the narrative is generally structured as an allegory, a dramatization in social space and historical time [italics – A.M.] of inner, private, spiritual experience"^{[1] [13, p. 22]}.

This is a very valuable observation, which we recognize and share, from our point of view, not so much puts "Doctor Zhivago" in a special position, but, on the contrary, emphasizes its inherently romantic nature, which B. Griftsov characterized as follows: "Of all kinds of verbal art, it would be most difficult to distinguish between the areas of the novel and drama. It may even seem that the novel is the last stage in the development of drama, that it differs from drama only technically, and not according to the principles of its structure" ^{[3, p. 27]}. In other words, the peculiarity interpreted in a lyrical way not only of the novel "Doctor Zhivago", but also of the entire work of B. Pasternak is formally manifested lyrically-dramatically, and sometimes dramatically.

Indeed, in the novel "Doctor Zhivago", the author narrates mainly from the point of view of one or another character, which is discussed in a particular episode. These episodes, in turn, are emphatically not epic and little dynamic, there is little actual action in them. On the contrary, they emphasize the inconsistency of the inner world of the characters and their contradictory relationships, painted in lyrical and dramatic tones, since the disclosure of the feelings and thoughts of the character in connection with the narrative (lyrics) goes hand in hand with the assessment or consequences of these feelings and thoughts, their reflection in someone else's inner world and new consequences; the inner is expressed in the external and vice versa (drama). Moreover, drama implies a musical structure, a certain sequence of ups and downs of action, the necessary unity of all elements of the work. Due to the influence of the musical form on all of B. Pasternak's work and the novel "Doctor Zhivago" in particular, we understand his musicality and "symphonicity" as an expression not only of a single content hidden under different disguises, but also of a single picture of the world hidden behind its visible contradictions. A. Livingston writes about the same ^[14].

B. Gasparov draws attention to a special trend highlighted by O. Huxley and named by him "musicalization of prose" in world literature, manifested in the works of O. Huxley himself, T. Mann, M. Proust, on the one hand, and M. Bulgakov, A. Bely, B. Pasternak, on the other: "It is also no coincidence that the greatest epic writers of this century, who turned to the intense "search for lost time", experienced the strongest impact of music on their artistic world - an impact that manifested itself not only and not so much in direct references to musical impressions, as in orientation to the musical form (symphony, fugue, oratorio) and on the principles of musical composition as a whole in the development of new foundations for the construction of an epic form" ^{[2, p. 244]}. 

The forms of "musicalization" can be different: the nature of imagery (detail-symbol), composition (the predominance of lyrical and dramatic episodes, while epic ones are placed "in parentheses"), the relationships of the characters that make up the dramatic counter-analysis of the work. The latter especially depend on the chosen point of view in which they are expressed. Consider how the point of view is used in the novel "Doctor Zhivago".

All the storylines in the novel begin with the childhood of the characters. If the first 5 chapters are written mainly from the point of view of little Yura Zhivago or with the fixation of his characteristic impressions, then, for example, already in chapter 7 of the first part, the point of view of Misha Gordon prevails, who, having witnessed the death of his future friend's father, is annoyed that his father stopped the train. The motive of the father, not directly developed by the author, is given completely indirectly – in the perception of Misha, as a result of action, in motion. In the same chapter, we get acquainted with the disgusting Komarovsky in these scenes and the mother of the future revolutionary Tiverzin. As always with B. Pasternak, everyone was united by the railway, an image familiar to researchers and critics. It is important to clarify that B. Pasternak uses a stop on the way as a visible point of movement on the railway (and movement in general), which allows him to perceive what is happening holistically: after all, while the train was moving and death did not stop it, neither Gordon, nor Komarovsky, nor Tiverzina met, moreover (what was earlier in the text), at the end of chapter 5, Vedenyapin and Voskoboynikov, from whose point of view the incident was given, while at Kologrivov's estate, would not have seen the train stop suddenly. Thus, the same phenomenon (the suicide of Zhivago's father) is given from different points of view, in different intervals of a single period of time and in different places of a single space. In fact, it is a Cubist decomposition of space and time.

Moreover, in these related chapters (and each part of Doctor Zhivago is a single set of related episodes), B. Pasternak uses the technique of clarifying the meaning. The meaning of the same event, image, etc. is inherent in the stadium development: if in Chapter 5 the train stop was only stated from the outside, then in Chapter 7 this event is explained from the inside, and implicitly Chapter 6 adds another – symbolic – reason for what happened: little Yura Zhivago forgot to pray for his father ("Will suffer") – and at this time, the father commits suicide. And this is only one of the first episodes that testify to the dramatic interconnectedness of events in Doctor Zhivago. Chapter 8 is given mainly from the point of view of Niki Dudorov, who is "tired of being small."

Already the second part of the "Girl from another circle" is devoted entirely to Lara, i.e. the dotted motifs of the first part are generally left by B. Pasternak. And at the same time, as always, the second chapter is indirectly connected with the first: Madame Guichard and the children were helped to settle in Moscow by the lawyer Komarovsky, a friend of her husband, who was already familiar with the unpleasant side (note that Komarovsky's friends commit suicide). Further, little Lara was sent to study at a women's gymnasium, "by chance", the same one where Nadia Kologrivova, the daughter of a major industrialist sympathizing with the revolution, is studying, familiar to us from the first part.

In short, the second part is mainly devoted to the story of the awakening of "Eternal Femininity" in Lara, her growing up, suffering and struggle. In the demonstration of examples, it is difficult to stop and single out one – it would have to rewrite the entire chapter or text, so the motives of the plot are connected with each other. Nevertheless, in the second chapter there is a counterpoint of fate: in the days of Presnya, when the uprisings continued, two storylines developed in parallel: Lara, who studies and lives with her mother in hotel rooms "Montenegro", and Zhivago, who lives in Gromeko's house, where he, again in the wrong hands, was left by Vedenyapin, who left abroad. This is also practiced in the theater: for example, the simultaneous dialogue of different characters on stage (for example, A. Vampilov).

The counterpoint event is the attempted poisoning of Amalia Karlovna Guichard, Lara's mother. As in the case of the suicide of Zhivago's father, the poisoning incident is presented indirectly and with the same mosaic distribution in time and space. In chapter 20 of part 2, they came to Gromeko's house for medical help: in "Montenegro" "theirs end" ^{[6, p. 59]}. The news interferes with the established course of events: Alexander Alexandrovich Gromeko has to leave in the middle of a musical evening, which they arranged at home, without even waiting for a delicious dinner after it to accompany the doctor. Gromeko's point of view on this event is still unclear, slightly mocking ("They are already ending. I imagine" ^{[6, p. 59]}). Together with the adults, young Yura and Misha were asked.

Chapter 21 – counterpoint, where Komarovsky, Lara, Madame Guichard, Yura, Misha meet, is also a stop in the well-established course of events in "Montenegro" and is given from the point of view of the employees of the rooms. For nixx, this is a fuss, a mess that everyone is used to and that surprises no one: "The incident in the twenty-fourth was a trifle in the usual everyday anger of the servants. Every minute the bells rattled and numbers flew out in a long glass box on the wall, pointing out where and under what number they go crazy and, not knowing what they want, they do not give the bellhops rest" ^{[6, p. 60]}. As we can see, the ambivalent, reduced attitude to poisoning extends to chapter 21, it is given in a dual perception: not as a catastrophe, but as a whim of the well-off, which interferes with normal work. This, by the way, is strikingly different from the suicide of Zhivago's father, when the catastrophe was really shaded by the idle and vulgar talk of passengers about what happened, from whose point of view the action was filed; in Montenegro, no significance is attached to the incident.

B. Pasternak introduces a false motive, a new refraction of the event, with the help of direct speech, a dialogue between the waiter Sysoy and the scullery maid Matryona Stepanovna on a completely different, from their point of view, significant incident (in contrast to poisoning-"dummy"). The scullery maid says: "It would be good to have something worthwhile, for the sake of which the noise and the dishes to beat, otherwise what an unprecedented, madam, I will sell, a touchy tabloid, from good deeds I had enough arsenic, retired innocence. They lived in Montenegrin rooms, did not see shiloh-tails and males" ^{[6, p. 61]}. Poisoning is overshadowed by another point of view, a new refraction in the words of the bellboy, allowing the boys to enter "to auntie": "You come in, don't be able to. They're nothing, rest assured. They are now in complete wholeness. And you can't stand here. There was a misfortune here today, expensive dishes were knocked off (our italics. – A.M.). You see, we serve, we run, the tightness" ^{[6, pp. 61-62]}. B. Pasternak, thus, conducts a double clarification of the meaning: it turns out that everything is all right with Madame Guichard, and what the waiter and the scullery maid are talking about.

It turned out that "they were poisoned with iodine, not arsenic, as the scullery maid mistakenly sarcastically" ^{[6, p. 62]}. And further: "Their arrival was nonsense, their further stay here is inappropriate" ^{[6, p. 63]}. Outwardly, this was the case. The empirical reason that provoked the counterpoint was exhausted, and the reason itself consisted entirely of distorted information, which was supplemented in parts from different points of view.

But there was also an "internal", lyrical reason for the counterpoint: this true catastrophe is again given in the incoherent words of Amalia Karlovna, recovering from poisoning (just as A. Bely gives dialogues in his novels): "Ah, I suffered such a horror! I had such suspicions! Fadey Kazimirovich… I imagined it... but, fortunately, it turned out that it was all nonsense, my disordered imagination. Fadei Kazimirovich, think what a relief! And as a result… And so… And now I'm alive" ^{[6, p. 62]}. The incoherence of these words is only apparent, it arises only because the words are disconnected from the context, from the systematically developing plot motifs given in indirect refraction. Amalia Karlovna means that she almost exposed the vicious relationship of Komarovsky, whom she considered her lover, with her daughter Lara (what they were so afraid of, wanted to open up and did not open up).

The apogee, the true force that started this "nonsense", was the power of love, the experience of which first appeared to Yura as a revelation, as an alarming meaning of life, which for everyone else, in fact, remained undiscovered, secret. «The very evident climaxes that do occur are not linear. Rather, they are really moments of revelation that happens when out of this "mess and chaos" one finds a pattern, a series of images, and an "immediate perception" that leads to the effect of transcendence, of self-overcoming^[2]" ^{[13, p. 26-27]}, – writes E.W. Clowes.

What is characteristic of B. Pasternak, the scene was mute, young Yura looked at it as if it were a painting: "Meanwhile, a silent scene was taking place between the girl and the man. They didn't say a word to each other and only exchanged glances. But their mutual understanding was frighteningly magical, as if he was a puppeteer, and she was a puppet obedient to the movements of his hand" ^{[6, p. 63]}. Further, B. Pasternak literally conveys a verbally dramatic scene woven from untold hints, seen from the point of view of Yura, who is trying to unravel the mystery connecting these people: "The smile of fatigue that appeared on her face made the girl half-close her eyes and half-open her lips. But she responded to the man's mocking glances with a sly wink of her accomplice. Both were pleased that everything went so well, the secret was not revealed and the victim remained alive" ^{[6, p. 63]}.

The most important thing, the most intimate and reverent B. Pasternak can give voice to the hero, but if we are talking about the development of action, it will never occupy a leading position, have a formative character. Just as the immortal miracle of life itself is enslaved, obscured by the turmoil of existence, so love in the novel is obscured by everyday confusion: "The spectacle of the girl's enslavement was inscrutably mysterious and shamelessly frank. Contradictory feelings (our italics. – A.M.) crowded into his chest. Yura's heart was squeezed by their untested strength" ^{[6, pp. 63-64]}. In research, Zhivago appears as a kind of carrier of knowledge about the epoch, personality, and art. Meanwhile, judging by the above, he is rather a carrier of the experience of cognition, rather than specific information. The very secret of knowledge remains unsolved, but at the same time convincing enough for readers to consider Yuri Andreevich its owner.

A significant dramatic counterpoint is the Christmas tree at the Sventitskys (Part 3). Different points of view allow us to see this episode almost stereoscopically.

The first 4 chapters are given from the point of view of Yura and the Gromeko family. Already chapter 5 is given from the point of view of Lara and moreover refers to the time 5-6 years earlier compared to the "zhivagovsky" chapters. This is exactly the "subsequent detailing" that B. Pasternak himself admitted to. In this case, the peculiarity of its application lies in the fact that it clarifies the past tense and events (1906, spring after Presnya), ignored in the last part as irrelevant to its central counterpoint – the poisoning attempt of Madame Guichard. Thus, the episodes that differ in time and place of action are combined by B. Pasternak not arbitrarily or impressionistically, but according to a certain semantic unity, as the terms of one sum. The overlap of thematic sets with components that are empirically close to each other, but formally belong to different groups, creates the impression of a self-developing life, which B. Pasternak sought to reproduce.

Chapters 4 to 8 are given from the point of view of Lara, 9 – from the point of view of Patuli Antipov. In 10-12– Zhivago's point of view prevails, in 13 – Lara, in 14 these two lines intersect and after the climax (Lara's shot at Komarovsky), the narrative declines, ending with chapters 15-17, which are set out from Zhivago's point of view. Moreover, the chapters after the climax are not arbitrary, they are a natural development of chapters 1-3, given from the point of view of Zhivago. The motif of the hearse closet and the threat of death hanging over Anna Ivanovna found completion in her funeral – the thematic multitude again closed into an integral unity. It is important that in each of the three parts we have considered, there is a central event-a counterpoint that is associated with death or the threat of death: in part 1, Zhivago's father committed suicide, in part 2, Madame Guichard, Lara's mother, tried to poison herself, in part 3, death was intended for Komarovsky, but chose Anna Ivanovna as a victim (B. Pasternak always plays with motives and tries to deceive the reader's expectation). In general, this pattern is characteristic of the entire First book of the novel "Doctor Zhivago".

It is in the 3rd part of the "Christmas Tree at the Sventitskys" that we find the mysterious "crossing of the fates": "They drove along the Chamberlain. Yura drew attention to a black hole that had thawed in the ice growth of one of the windows. A candle flame shone through this hole, penetrating the street almost with the consciousness of a glance, as if the flame was spying on those traveling and was waiting for someone.

“The candle was burning on the table. The candle was burning ...” – Yura whispered to himself the beginning of something vague, unformed, in the hope that the continuation would come by itself, without compulsion. It did not come" ^{[6, p. 82]}. The sequel will come, but later: the image of the candle is a link of an even more extensive unity in the scope of the plot action – it will be reflected in the fire of Zhivago's working candle in Varykin, when they will be there together with Lara and her daughter.

The candle is in the room where there is an explanation of Lara and Pavel Antipov, who lit a candle for Lara in chapter 9 (Lara loved candles – she will love Zhivago, she will call him "my ardent candle"). B. Pasternak again places events in the sequence that occur simultaneously, but at different points in the same space, from different points of view.

The Christmas tree at the Sventitskys, as a dramatic scene, gathered the main actors. In a certain place at a certain time, the following characters came together: Zhivago, Tonya, Lara, Komarovsky, Kornakov (associated with Kologrivov, with whom Lara lived and worked for 3 years). Lara was constantly invited to dance by the Cook Kornakov, the son of Kornakov Sr., a fellow prosecutor of the Moscow Judicial chamber, who accused a group of railway workers, including Tiverzin, who participated in the strike. Kologrivov tried to appease him, but nothing came of it.

Lara's shot has several motivations, but the main reason – the humiliation of beauty, "Eternal femininity" – is hidden under the guise of rational, pressing problems. The incident is given from Zhivago's point of view, Lara was held in front of him as a terrorist: "The one! And again under what extraordinary circumstances! <...> So it was she who shot? The prosecutor? Probably political. Poor. Now she will not be well" ^{[6, p. 87]}. In full accordance with the symbolism of B. Pasternak, the abused femininity – the main thing that bothered him – outwardly coincides with the revolutionary struggle in the public arena. But with all the coincidence, this is still a blunder: it was Komarovsky who should have been the victim of the reckoning, who himself knows this perfectly well, as can be seen from the words of the prosecutor's wife: "What did you say, Mr. Komarovsky? In you? Did she shoot you? No, I can't. I have a great grief, Mr. Komarovsky, come to your senses, I'm not joking right now" ^{[6, p. 87]}. Whatever Komarovsky was a scoundrel, but still even he showed honesty and sensitivity in this incident. Nevertheless, his words, which, we note, are given from a different point of view (and they are the most important!), are dismissed as a hoax, a prophecy. Once again, "unheard-of simplicity" (lyrical truth) is hidden by empirical external distortions.

In the composition of "Doctor Zhivago" an essential, though not so obvious, role is played by the point of view of an indefinite person, a conditional implied witness of events. In the novel, his point of view is characterized by impersonal verb forms and conditional introductory words. It co-exists with the points of view of other characters, accompanies them, and serves as an aid to the author's point of view throughout the novel.

Already in the first part, in the well-known episode of the funeral procession, we see this point of view: "When we stopped, it seemed that the legs, horses, and wind blows continued to sing it in a fixed way" ^{[6, p. 7]}. It is clear that we are talking about the marchers, but at the same time about no one in particular. This is the point of view of the faceless participant of the event, located inside it, as opposed to the hero or author, whose points of view are external to the event. This point of view is manifested further: "Only in a state of stupor and insensibility, usually coming to the end of a large funeral, it could seem that the boy wanted to say a word on his mother's grave" ^{[6, p. 7]}. Who could have imagined it? Who makes this remark? Could it have seemed or did it seem? It might seem only to an eyewitness of the events, who could interpret the internally unclear image of the boy in two ways, but such an eyewitness is clearly faceless and indefinite, only an expression of the impression of life. Further, this faceless point of view, replacing the point of view of Yura Zhivago and the author, declares itself once again: "One would think that the storm noticed Yura and, realizing how terrible she is, enjoys the impression she makes" ^{[6, p. 8]}. Yura as a character cannot rise to this realization, but this is not the author's point of view, external to the episode. On the contrary, it could only seem to a faceless observer of this scene, a certain "sister of my life". Of course, there is no purely factually this conditional person, but in terms of meaning, thanks to her, a special impression of co-experiencing the event is formed. Thus, the author removes the privilege of his word, objectifies the experience, wanting to show that this is not his association, but a very real pattern accessible to any person (reader).

The author's desire for self-removal is so great that he resorts to the technique of mounting points of vision not only at the macrocompositional, but also at the microcompositional level. An expressive example of editing is given in Chapter 7 of Part 1, as in the entire subsequent narrative. This chapter, as we noted, is given mainly from the point of view of Misha Gordon, who is traveling with his father on a train to Moscow. It is on this train that the acquaintance with Andrey Zhivago, Yura's father, first takes place, and then his suicide.

Compositionally, the chapter begins from Misha's point of view, then it is replaced by the author's point of view (however, also faceless), then the point of view of a conditional unknown observer and again the point of view of Misha, who witnessed the suicide of Andrei Zhivago. Suddenly, there is a change of perspective, the narrative seems to move to a more general level, rumors and misconceptions are stated: "No one really knew the reason for the delay. Some said that the sudden stop caused damage to the air brakes, others that the train was on a steep climb and the locomotive could not take it without acceleration. A third opinion was spread that since the victim was a prominent person, his lawyer, who was traveling with him on the train, demanded that witnesses be called from the nearest Kologrivovka station to draw up a protocol. That's why the driver's assistant climbed the telephone pole. The trolley is probably on its way" ^{[6, p. 18]}. In this passage, we see how the author, with the help of a montage of points of view and various motivations of the same incident, deprives the action of flat unambiguity and linear orientation. The effect of "here and now" is achieved, conditionally "correct" motivation has no advantages in the image compared to alternative ones. Moreover, it is in these seemingly "incorrect" alternative motivations, given from the point of view of unknown passengers, that new data is introduced, which the author does not interpret in any way, leaving this task to the reader.

Further, the author accompanies Tiverzina's point of view, makes an ironic observation of the passengers, which is replaced by the point of view of the passengers themselves, and then by a faceless observer who noticed the sun. Misha's point of view returns again: he retrospectively and confusingly recalls Andrei Zhivago. His characterization is completely given indirectly, and we conclude that this is Andrey Zhivago, the father of Yura, only post factum, he is not identified in the text. Misha could not understand why Zhivago Sr. often came to them and talked for hours with his father, among other things about bankruptcy, forgery, donations, etc., in the same way his words remained unexplained: "Oh, is that so?" he was surprised by Gordon's explanations. – You have some more gracious laws. My attorney has other information. He looks at these things much more gloomily" ^{[6, p. 19]}. Neither Misha nor the author explain this behavior, and the unflattering portrait of the "attorney" (Komarovsky) who appeared is completed by the point of view of a faceless observer: "It was impossible to get rid of the feeling that the constant excitement of his client in some respect was in his favor" ^{[6, p. 19]}. The author does not speak about it directly in the author's description, but it is unlikely that Misha could formulate it in this form. Rather, a certain person who saw them together from the outside would think so. Similarly, Misha only states, without understanding, "inexplicable, probably reflected and, perhaps, not intended for him tenderness" ^{[6, p. 20]}. The author only hints at a relationship that is inaccessible to Misha and to any of the characters. The memory ends: from Misha's point of view, we see how the body is taken out, and the train starts moving.

In general, the composition of this chapter, built on the installation of different points of view, testifies to the author's self-exclusion, B. Pasternak's many-times repeated desire to level his own "I" in favor of an objective description. The author of "Doctor Zhivago" avoids his activity by all means, tries to build a narrative indirectly, without his guiding intervention, as a result of which the reader should become more active. Moreover, the narrative is conducted with the help of all points of view at once, including from the points of view of secondary or even conditional persons, and all of them are equal and do not have the advantage of truth for the author. Always in one form or another fragmentary, limited evidence of different points of view make up a mosaic of motives. Thus, the author does not strive for the actual integrity of the narrative, observed, for example, in a classic realistic novel, but the integrity of the narrative is potentially present. The author hid it behind a kaleidoscope of fragmentary impressions. The motives themselves may remain secret, mysterious, like, for example, the story of the real bankruptcy of Andrei Zhivago, the insidious betrayal of Komarovsky, but the hints received about their relationship, capable of forming a plotline in a classic novel, are enough to get a holistic view of their meaning and significance for the overall development of the plot in the general context.

As you can see, the intertwining sets are connected to each other, like the fibers of a fabric, without a definite beginning and end, with a continuous cover. The text contains episodes-climaxes, episodes-counterpoints, which, in fact, are "an expanded theater in prose," according to B. Pasternak, because they bring together the main characters in a certain space in a certain time. These episodes are basically a stop in the development of the plot, its action slows down and unfolds to encompass the integrity, so we can say that they are characterized by a certain static, scenic. The installation of different points of view organizes the narration on the macrocompositional (the image of different spaces at the same time or the same place at different times) and microcompositional levels, as a result of which the author objectifies experiences in the form of not only heroes, but also a conditional faceless observer, as a result of which the narration is conducted indirectly, always in the refraction of that or another character. As a consequence of the montage of points of view, the author refuses not only the expressed function of the narrator, but also the criteria of reliability and completeness of information in order to achieve the effect of self-developing life and involve the reader in conjecturing the overall picture of the action.

^[1] Unlike most "realistic" novels, which are "dialogical" and reflect the emerging and often conflicting worldview of several characters, the lyrical novel is distinguished by its "monologism. Here, the only authoritative worldview prevails, and the narrative is mainly structured as an allegory, dramatization in public space and historical time [italics – A.M.] of internal, personal, spiritual experience" (our translation – A.M.).

^[2] "The obvious climaxes themselves are nonlinear. Rather, they really are a revelation that happens when in this "disorder and chaos" a person finds a pattern, a sequence of images and an "instant awareness" that leads to a transcendent effect, to overcoming oneself" (our translation. – A.M.).