Both in the East and in the West, there are many legends associated with snakes. It is known that the first image of this reptile appeared much earlier than the word itself was born. And all the legends contradict each other: somewhere the snake is a friend, and somewhere it is the worst enemy and killer. Many myths represent it as a symbol of death and rebirth at the same time. And in India there is a legend about a cobra that covered the sleeping Buddha from the sun with its hood. It is the sacred animal of the Hindus. In general, the snake is considered a symbol of wisdom, fertility and the feminine.
Meanings of snake tattoos
It is worth noting that this pattern is suitable for both girls and boys. And power in all its manifestations. By the way, it came from the West. It was there that the reptile was considered a symbol of female power and voluptuousness. That is why her tattoo is so popular in combination with the image of Adam and Eve. But why is this drawing so attractive? It's simple - a snake can be combined with absolutely any plot. And only this tattoo is able to emphasize all the curves of the figure in the most beneficial way. A snake tattoo on the arm has the same meaning as on any other part of the body. But how sexy and incredibly impressive she looks! Maybe that's why women so often prefer this particular type of drawing.
What are the meanings of tattoos: snakes
The drawing, which depicts a reptile, looks quite realistic. That is, a snake tattoo will reflect its entire essence. Quite often you can see a cobra intending to sink its teeth into the host's body. By the way, this drawing will look very impressive if the snake digs into the flesh. For a woman, the ideal image of a reptile will be her image along the spine - while moving or dancing, it will give the impression that the animal is bending and moving. But one thing is for sure: no matter what version the snake is depicted in, it will always be a symbol of wisdom, strength and passion.
Meaning of prison tattoos: snake
Among prisoners, tattoos depicting a variety of animals are quite popular. But those that belong to the so-called creeping reptiles stand apart.
Such drawings are depicted as an addition to the main tattoo. The meaning of snake tattoos in the ranks of criminals is also very ambiguous. For example, in thieves in law, a reptile most often crawls out of the eye sockets of the skull, or wraps around the blade. You can often see a tattoo depicting a snake in a crown and with an apple in its teeth, while it wraps around someone's skeleton. This means - you should not cooperate with the police, a thief cannot have a greater sin. But there are also such meanings of snake tattoos that do not bode well for the owner: neither behind bars, nor in civilian life. For example, a snake wrapping around the body of a beauty means that its owner not only belonged to the camp bottom, but also had not very pleasant connections.
Summing up
So, the meanings of snake tattoos are varied. But they all come down to one thing - despite its not very pleasant appearance, this is a wise and graceful animal that has great power over all living things. So the tattoo, the one who decides to depict a snake on his body, must have all its qualities, well, or at least part of them.
A dream about roses during their flowering season portends well-being.
To dream about them out of season portends the opposite.
Blooming roses in a dream predict pleasant events or good news. Sometimes such a dream predicts that you will soon find out the date of your engagement.
White roses in a dream portend good luck, health and well-being, and red ones are harbingers of joy or profit.
Yellow roses in a dream is a symbol of betrayal or betrayal of a loved one.
A pink wreath on the head predicts well-being and happiness in love, tenderness of feelings.
Feeling the suffocating smell of roses in a dream means that you will receive unpleasant news that some secret has been revealed.
If you like the smell of roses in a dream, then joy awaits you.
A rose bush in a dream portends a happy family happy life.
Picking roses in a dream means that you have to make an important decision that could affect your future.
It will take all your courage to make such a decision. Sometimes such a dream predicts an early marriage or marriage proposal.
Seeing a lot of roses in a dream or making bouquets of them is a harbinger of great happiness or a successful and happy marriage.
Rose thorns in a dream portend trouble, danger, fear.
To prick about them in a dream means that you will not be able to avoid danger due to a simple oversight. Sometimes such a dream indicates to you that your addiction to flirt will come back to you.
Rosebuds in a dream portend well-being, success in business that will bring you great benefits.
Withered roses in a dream remind you that your romanticism is inappropriate and you should not console yourself with vain hopes, no matter what it is about - love or business or creativity. Sometimes such a dream predicts loneliness or separation from your lover.
A dried rose bush in a dream portends a misfortune in the family that will happen to one of your relatives or relatives.
A bouquet of red roses, standing on the table in front of you, predicts a declaration of love for you, which will border on fawning. But whatever the recognition, it will still please you and make you a happy person.
A boutonniere of roses in a dream is a sign of deceit or betrayal. See interpretation: smell, aroma, suffocate, flowers.
Interpretation of dreams from the Family Dream BookSubscribe to the channel Dream Interpretation!
Blooming roses - joy, fidelity of a lover and friends.
Bouquet - you will receive a long-awaited marriage proposal from a loved one.
Red roses - hopes and dreams come true.
Cutting in a dream and making bouquets of them is a hobby, easy flirting.
Interpretation of dreams from Dream Interpretation for a bitchDream Interpretation - Snakes
If a woman dreams of a snake, this means that her loved one will turn out to be a deceiver and a traitor, and this will make her suffer and worry. If you see in a dream how snakes sting someone else, this means that in real life you will commit an offense that can offend your loved one. If a woman in a dream worries about her child, who is behind her, and hears a snake hiss, this means that she will have to give up the love of a person dear to her. Subsequently, she is likely to be drawn into a low intrigue, because of which she will lose the love and trust of her chosen one.
If your lover is standing on the path among menacingly hissing snakes, this means that you will be able to uncover a conspiracy against you and your chosen one. If a girl dreams that she was fascinated by a snake, this means that she will be harassed by low people. However, an influential and loving person will be able to help her cope with the misfortune.
Interpretation of dreams fromArtem Skvortsov
PETROV THE FIRST
review
PETROV THE FIRST
Vasily Petrov. Odes. Letters in verse. Various poems. The choice of Maxim Amelin. Introductory article by M. Amelin. M., "B.S.G.-PRESS", 2016, 384 pages.
An event of exceptional significance took place in Russian literature: after a break of more than two centuries, a separate edition of selected poems by Vasily Petrovich Petrov (1736-1799) appeared.
However, whether it will have a wide response from the literary community is an open question. It is difficult, perhaps, to find in our literature another similar figure, the scale of which blatantly does not correspond to its popularity among readers.
Back in 1927, G. Gukovsky stated: “Few people are interested in the poetry of the 18th century; no one reads the poets of this distant epoch. In the reading society, the most unfavorable opinion about these poets, about the whole era in general, is widespread. The century seems to be a dull desert of classicism or, even worse, of “false classicism”, where all poetic works are unoriginal, non-individual, similar to each other, hopelessly outdated.
Since then, not so much has changed in the reader's attitude to the era. As before, V. Trediakovsky, A. Sumarokov, A. Rzhevsky, M. Kheraskov, even G. Derzhavin, who was awarded universal formal recognition, and many others, underestimated, inattentively read and often not really published, are still of little interest, understandable and close to anyone. But even in this series of humiliated and insulted old Russian literature, Petrov takes the place of perhaps the most deprived of the attention of the public and slandered by tendentious criticism. “The court ode writer”, “the pocket poet of Catherine II”, “overcoat odes” - such is the set of constant abusive clichés in conversation about him. A softer definition, "the author of the Lomonosov school", common in Soviet times, also does not help the perception of his work, because it sets an inaccurate angle of view on the object.
The tradition of skeptically linking Petrov with the name of his predecessor comes from N. Novikov: “... although some people already call him the second Lomonosov; but for this comparison, one must expect some important work and after that finally say whether he will be the second Lomonosov or will remain only Petrov and will have the honor to be known as an imitator of Lomonosov.
Poet indeed only Petrov. If he is the author of some school, then - "Peter's". M. Amelin, in a conceptual introductory article to the one-volume book, with good reason raises his genealogy to the "dark" and complex Pindar, to the European baroque (J. Marino and L. de Gongora), to the English metaphysicians of the early 17th century and calls him a consistent mannerist.
Petrov was perhaps the most humanitarianly educated poet of his time: he was fluent in several European languages, knew Latin, Ancient Greek and Hebrew, actively read and translated contemporary Western literature. General scholarship and natural philological talent allowed him not only to arrange one verbal fireworks after another in his poems, but to create poetic special effects, in terms of entertainment and richness of fantasy, quite comparable to the most daring experiments of cinema. Both supporters and opponents of the author paid almost all attention to his solemn odes, the sophisticated designs of which are grandiose in design and execution. They are written in a purely individual style, replete with linguistic rarities and quirks. But no less interesting are the messages and satires of Petrov, performed in a different key, "common" and burlesque. Such a contrast within one artistic world testifies: the author, if desired, could create as you wish, which nullifies the claims of his critics that he, in principle, could not write harmoniously and distinctly.
Petrov's book is the choice of a specific compiler. Under one cover are collected some odes, messages, a minimum of transcriptions and a literary "mixture". Outside the book, there remains a part of the original writings, letters and a voluminous corpus of translations. This approach to publication is, of course, debatable. But, firstly, a fair reproach for the absence of a complete Petrov should be addressed not to an enthusiast in his field, but to specialists in the 18th century. And secondly, there is an important cultural meaning in the chosen pocket format: the book is addressed to any interested reader. "BSG-PRESS" took into account the experience of recent introductions into circulation of other restored texts and authors. For example, several years ago Literary Monuments published a two-volume work by the outstanding "archaist" Semyon Bobrov with an excellent academic apparatus, and if the philological community somehow perceived it, then the reader's attention is almost imperceptible.
Not wanting a similar fate for his hero, Amelin made the book as popular as possible in form - as far as we can talk about future popularity in this case. "Bringing out" such an author is difficult, not so much because of the complex texts, but because of his inconsistent literary reputation, because Petrov began to cause bewilderment and rejection of many during his lifetime.
Let us recall V. Maikov's epigram, eloquent in this sense, to Petrov's translation of the Aeneid: “How great is the power of the Russian language! / Petrov only wanted to - Virgil became a stutterer. Admittedly, it's funny, but is it fair? Here, for example, is a fragment of the sixth song of the epic:
Yes, I will enjoy the sight of the parental sight,
Open for me the gates into the depths of the underground darkness.
Through arrows, fire, swords, through various evils, fear
On my own I took out ramen.
Sharing with me, he is the fate of Troy, the ill-fated,
Let the reader judge for himself whether the Roman classic "stutters" here in his translation in Russian or not.
The poet responded to Novikovsky's "Experience ..." with the message "K *** from London" (1772), the addressee of which was the empress. It ridicules with excellent wit the idea of a leveling lexicon, where an article is dedicated to every writer, regardless of the degree of his talent. Petrov's invectives are topical even today:
And it's a wonder that Piitas are so prolific with us,
As from the rain, mushrooms in a birch forest will be born.
However, I feel sorry for such Piit fate,
That their syllable is worth no more than a mushroom.
<…>
If you believe the dictionary: how many yards are there,
<…>
Leave the readers as judges of your thoughts,
There are Apollo's breastplates in them too;
Phoebus whispers in their ears, whose syllable is better, whose is worse,
Who drank in Hippocrene, who scooped in a muddy puddle.
An extremely narrow and unfair view of Petrov the poet was most categorically expressed by V. Belinsky: “Petrov was considered a loud lyricist and witty satirist. It is hard to imagine anything tougher, rougher and more pompous than the burly lyre of this seminary singer. By the end of the 19th century, such an assessment seemed to the classifiers for granted: “Petrov has the right to a very modest place in the history of Russian literature. He was not a poet<…>» .
The example is indicative. The trained populist critics did not, in principle, see the text artistic fabric, and, in fact, they did not know how to appreciate art itself in verbal art. The Frantic Vissarion is rightfully the classic of such a bad tradition, and it is worth saying a little more about this here.
The destructive activity of the half-educated and poorly understanding poetry Belinsky in relation to many phenomena of Russian literature, especially the 18th century, has long deserved critical analysis and an adequate historical assessment. Few people have succeeded in inflicting such catastrophic harm on native literature from within literature itself. Authoritative balanced statements about Belinsky, unfortunately, are infrequent and dotted: “<…>the history of Russian literature - as it is taught in the Soviet Union and as it was taught in tsarist times - sins with gross errors - Gogol is the founder of the naturalistic school, Belinsky is a great critic, and so on - up to the ill-fated socialist realism.
The hypnotization of Russian social thought and partly of philology (not to mention the school tradition) with “Belinsky clichés” still affects. In general, an unfavorable opinion about Petrov was rooted in Russian culture for a long time. And this despite the fact that the creators themselves spoke sympathetically or even enthusiastically about him - Derzhavin, Dmitriev, Zhukovsky, Vyazemsky, Pushkin, Gogol ... But what do their assessments mean compared to the verdict of the same Belinsky!
The situation began to change extremely slowly only with the appearance of the pioneering works of G. Gukovsky on the literature of the 18th century. But even after serious recent publications, philologists have not yet reached a consensus on the figure of Petrov.
Particularly striking is the situation with the interpretation of the attitude towards Petrov of the sun of our poetry. The facts are inexorable: Petrov occupied Pushkin almost more than other poets of the 18th century. He is mentioned in the same row with Derzhavin already in Memoirs in Tsarskoye Selo (1814).
This was not a ritual formula - subsequently, Pushkin turned to Petrov repeatedly and on various occasions.
Gukovsky raised the question of the impact of Petrov's battle odes on the depiction of military scenes in Poltava: "<…>the ode to the capture of Ishmael - perhaps the best of Petrov's military odes - contains a detailed and, in some places, a strong image of the assault itself and the heroism of Russian soldiers; it is not for nothing that the responses of this ode are heard here and there in the description of the battle in Pushkin's Poltava (see, for example, in Petrov: Lermontov also reached her: “Horses, people mixed up in a bunch ...”
The impact of Peter's expressive style on the poem is not limited to the above case. It seems that it has not yet been noted that another no less famous place in Poltava goes back to his battle poems - to the ode “On the Capture of Jassy” (1769): “Who was there? say, Great Peter? / Amidst the land He and the water bowels / Such was terrible to the enemies. / He was! — if His appearance is beautiful!” It seems that later lines remember everything: “Peter comes out. His eyes / Shine. His face is terrible. / The movements are fast. He is beautiful, / He is all, like God's thunderstorm.
L. Pumpyansky established that the central image of The Bronze Horseman is not at all an original invention of Pushkin. The closest analogue to it is in Petrov’s ode “For the Triumph of the World” (1793), where not just the equestrian statue of Peter comes to life, but the Falcone monument:
He rivers, - and the banks shook;
Flashed in the mountainous fire of the country;
The river and the wind interrupted the run;
The rider on the horse shook.
He is alive! oh wonderful signs!
He is alive! or acts heavenly
In copper, the power of the age is locked.
Take a look! the horse tramples under him;
And wants to fly up to the clouds
Foaming at the mouth!
Nevertheless, the fundamentally important parallel discovered by the scientist did not become a common property and a reason for far-reaching conclusions.
Finally, in Pushkin's address to N. Mordvinov (1826), almost half of the text is devoted to Petrov:
Under the cold of old age gloomily faded away
One of the gray eagles of Catherine.
Heavier in his wings, he forgot the sky
And Pinda sharp peaks.
At that time you got up: your beam warmed him,
He raised to heaven both wings and pupils
And with noisy joy jumped and flew
At the meeting of your morning day.
Mordvinov, it was not in vain that Petrov loved you,
He is proud of you even on the banks of Cocytus:
You justified the lyre, you never changed
I hope prophetic piit.
The prophetic piit and gray-haired eagle of Catherine is Petrov: he wrote an ode to “His Excellency Nikolai Semenovich Mordvinov” (1796), the motives and partly the formal structure of which were reflected in Pushkin. However, there are intelligible explanations why, of all the poets of the 18th century, Pushkin awarded such a frankly high rating in poetry only Petrov, literary criticism does not.
To a large extent, under the influence of the same Belinsky, Pushkinocentrism strengthened in Russian culture. But it turns out that he is not quite consistent with us. If we raise to the shield everyone whom Pushkin valued, then Petrov should be in the first row of Russian poetic classics - and he is not even in the third. And it is not surprising that a century and a half after Pushkin's, the next poetic portrait of Petrov appeared. L. Losev presented him in the pitiful image of the rhyming parrot Ekaterina, already well known from the “Belinsky scheme”: “Riding on a piebald Pegasik / how sweetly in iambic verse / jump, then jump off to the ground, / with a bow hand the scroll to the Empress. //<…>// But the Empress deigned to tear. / Well, poet, spend the last ruble. / Tear your hair on a dusty wig / among professors in a cheap tavern" - and so on. This caricature least of all corresponds to the real relationship between the empress and the poet, but we have to be satisfied with it too - dedications to Petrov are rare. So, I. Falikov ironically pushed off, it seems, already from Losev: “Mediocre Petrov, Potemkin slander, / the tsarina’s sycophant, / wiped himself off from spitting, slander and slander, / and today they don’t spit.”
Oh yes, mediocre! Conventional ideas about the development of culture are usually superficial. Where, for example, is the "people's poet" Nekrasov - and where is the "court" Petrov? There is an obvious gap between them. But let us recall the textbook: “And the owner of luxurious chambers / Was still deeply embraced by a dream ... / You, who consider life enviable / Intoxication with shameless flattery, / Dragging, gluttony, game, / Wake up! ...” And what then? Ninety years earlier, Petrov had already performed in the same key: “You are sleeping, and you are surrounded around you, / The unfortunate sigh heavily, / Troubles torment the fatherland, / Vices trample on the sanctity of rights! / You sleep, we complain and ask, / We raise a mournful voice to you! / Extend your ears: from all sides / A deplorable cry and groan is heard, ”etc. Without a doubt, a careful reading of Petrov will give rise to many more amazing discoveries and consequences.
So, the book of the poet, extracted from under the bushel of centuries, is presented. What does it give us, living in the third millennium?
First of all, after such a literary resuscitation, it will be difficult to ignore Petrov. There is hope that philologists will finally be able to ask themselves not only about him and his place in Russian literature, but also about Peter's influence on surprisingly different authors. Of the most obvious cases: in the 19th century - on Vyazemsky, especially on the satires and messages of the prince, written in Alexandrian verse, and on the way he rhymed, in the 20th - on Mayakovsky, whose hyperbolic-grotesque metaphorical style reveals much more similarity with Petrov than with Derzhavin, with whom he was sometimes compared, and of our contemporaries - of course, to his apologist, also the "baroque" Amelin and to the "avant-garde" D. Beznosov. Before the reader, Vasily Petrovich appears as part of the Atlantis of Russian literature, a gigantic continent, once inhabited by giants, who had everything on a large scale - from the scale of historical, geopolitical and cultural thinking to verse constructions and language painting, and which seemed to have sunk into oblivion without a trace, but unexpectedly they begin to rise one after another in all their former might, striking with their majestic inconsistency with today's innovations and practices - too often toys.
Have fun, brave Russian: thanks to the efforts of one indifferent reader, we now have the first Petrov of Russian literature. We have become richer by one more found cultural resource. Let's congratulate ourselves.
Artem SKVORTSOV
Kazan
Gukovsky G. A. Early works on the history of Russian poetry of the XVIII century. M., "Languages of Russian culture", 2001, p. 37.
See, for example: Svyatopolk-Mirsky D.P. History of Russian literature from ancient times to 1925. Novosibirsk, Svinin and Sons, 2006, p. 97; Kvyatkovsky A.P. Poetic Dictionary. M., "Soviet Encyclopedia", 1966, p. 178. 6 10 . - Sat: Pushkin: Vremennik of the Pushkin Commission (AN USSR). Institute of Literature. M. - L., Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1939, [Issue] 4/5, pp. 109 - 112.
