Remember how long ago you read Turgenev's wonderful novel "Fathers and Sons"? I think in school, right? What year was it written, do you remember? Hardly. But I will remind you, my friends - in 1861.
However, the concepts that this novel brought into our lives go far beyond the framework of any time, perhaps even an entire era. And of course, like many others, she wondered - what is Bazarov's worldview? What does his worldview mean for us?
“What is Bazarov? Arkady chuckled. “Do you want, uncle, I’ll tell you what he actually is?” "Do me a favor, nephew." "He's a nihilist." This is how Arkady Kirsanov introduced him in the novel to Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.
What is nihilism in the view of Bazarov? Everywhere they write the same definition for us - a person who absolutely does not recognize anything, denies. And I remember in school essays we wrote that "Bazarov does not recognize authorities, love, autocracy, religion." And then I also agreed with this generally accepted opinion and wrote exactly the same way. But now, having re-read this novel, having read Turgenev's views on his hero, I understood much more.
So why didn't he admit anything? Indeed, at the time when the novel was written, the nihilists by no means denied "everything" and were not deprived of certain "ideals". Didn't science become headed by Bazarov? But this is also a kind of "ideal". And the love he felt for Odintsova? Yes, he did not want to admit it openly, but he loved it, and this is a fact. Friendship also took place for him, no matter who and how would not deny it.
Turgenev himself writes that in Bazarov's concept "nihilism" is in fact a synonym for the word "revolutionary". In other words, Bazarov is not a complete nonentity who does not recognize absolutely anything in this life, he is just a person who defends his views, opposing the conservatism of the society of that time.
Of course, many of his views are quite radical: for example, his attitude to works of art, to literature, to painting, to religion, etc. I do not agree with this side of his judgments, namely that they do not give development to a person and society as a whole. On the contrary, they give a lot. Take even this novel. After all, without reading it, I would hardly have bothered to find out what "nihilism" is.
Or for example. Bazarov says that he despises the Russian people for their ignorance and superstition. But be that as it may, "his grandfather plowed the land" and with these words alone, he is to the same people, letignorant and religious, much closer than Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov - "rubbish aristocrat".
And the main theme of the novel is their disputes, as if representatives of "fathers" and "children". I don’t see anything reprehensible in the fact that Bazarov just wanted changes for the people, for Russia. And yes, in many ways one can disagree with him, but undoubtedly he is much more useful than Pavel Kirsanov, who, hiding behind his spiritual religiosity, simply did not want to accept changes, supported the monarchy. He always only reasoned, while Bazarov did.
And although at the end of his life Yevgeny Bazarov pronounced a strict sentence on himself, speaking of his uselessness in Russia, I personally believe that changes in our society, in Russia, are impossible without people like him. Even in our XXI century! And so it will always be.
Marina Voznesenskaya,
10th grade
School at the Embassy of the Russian Federation
in the Republic of Cyprus
(literature teacher -
Evgeny Vasilyevich Vasilenko)
Philosophical views of Bazarov and their test of life
Turgenev in the novel "Fathers and Sons" wanted to understand and show the image of a new man of his time.
Bazarov, the protagonist of the novel, is a nihilist. Resolutely and mercilessly, he denies everything: the social structure, idle talk, love of the people, as well as art and love. The subject of his "worship" is practical use.
Bazarov differs from the Kirsanovs in his energy, masculinity, firmness of character and independence. Turgenev wrote: “I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, vicious, honest - and yet doomed to death, because it still stands on the eve of the future, I dreamed of some strange pendant with Pugachev”.
It should be noted that the novel does not show Bazarov's childhood. But it is known that the character of a person is laid in the first years of his life. Perhaps Turgenev had no idea at all how such characters were formed? Bazarov is fond of natural sciences. Every day he is filled with work, new searches. “Bazarov got up very early and went two or three miles away, not to walk - he couldn’t stand walking without a goal, but to collect herbs.” He confessed to Arkady that the passion for work made him a man. “You only need to achieve your goal with your own work.” Accustomed to relying only on his own mind and energy, Bazarov developed a calm self-confidence. He doesn't care at all what others think of him: “A real person shouldn't care about that; a real person is one about whom there is nothing to think about, but whom one must obey or hate.
He reduces the relationship between a man and a woman to physiology, art to “the art of making money, or there is no more hemorrhoids”, that is, the whole world of beauty, which he calls “romanticism, nonsense, rottenness, art” is completely alien to him.
His philosophy of being originates from such an attitude to life and consists in the complete denial of all the foundations of society, all beliefs, ideals and norms of human life. “A nihilist is a person who does not bow to any authorities, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respected this principle is,” Arkady says in the novel, obviously in the words of his teacher (Bazarov). But to deny everything is also a principle.
In a dispute with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov's views are even more pronounced. All the principles of Pavel Petrovich boil down to preserving the old order in Russia. Bazarov seeks to destroy this order. “There is not a single civil decree in Russia that does not deserve criticism,” he said. However, Bazarov is not shown in any way in public activities, and we do not know if he has real plans to put his views into practice.
When the dispute touches on the issue of attitude towards the people, Pavel Petrovich says that the Russian people are “patriarchal”, “revere traditions sacredly” and “cannot live without faith”, and that therefore the nihilists do not express their needs and are completely alien to them. Bazarov agrees with the statement about patriarchy, but for him this is only evidence of the backwardness of the people (“The people believe that when thunder rumbles, this is Elijah the prophet in a chariot driving around the sky”), his failure as a social force (“... freedom itself , which the government is busy with, is unlikely to benefit us, because our peasant is happy to rob himself, just to get drunk on dope in a tavern”). Bazarov considers himself closer to the people than Pavel Kirsanov: “My grandfather plowed the land. Ask any of your own peasants, in which of us - in you or in me - he would rather recognize a compatriot, ”although this does not prevent him from despising the people,“ if he deserves contempt.
Bazarov does not recognize the spiritual principle either in nature (“Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it”), nor in man. He treats a person as a biological organism: “All people are similar to each other both in body and soul ... One human specimen is enough to judge all others. People are like trees in the forest, not a single botanist will deal with every single birch.
After Bazarov has sufficiently thoroughly stated his views, the test of their life begins.
When friends arrive in the city, they run into Kukshina and Sitnikov, who clearly appear as caricatures of Bazarov, the nihilists. Bazarov treats them ironically, but nevertheless he is forced to endure them so as not to lose his supporters. The words of Pavel Petrovich are very suitable for them: “Before, young people had to study; I did not want to pass for ignoramuses, so they involuntarily worked. And now they should say: everything in the world is nonsense! - and it's in the hat. And in fact, before they were just blockheads, and now they have suddenly become nihilists.
It becomes clear that the nihilist Bazarov is alone in the public arena, although he himself claimed: "We are not so few as you think."
Further in the novel comes the most, in my opinion, the most important test of the hero: Bazarov suddenly finds himself under the power of the “natural element”, which is called love. The nihilist claims that romanticism is nonsense, nonsense, but he himself is tested by a feeling of love and turns out to be powerless before this feeling. Turgenev is convinced that nihilism is doomed to death, if only because it is powerless before the nature of human feelings. According to the exact remark of G.B. Kurlyandskaya, “Turgenev deliberately presented Bazarov as a deeply emotional person, carrying the fullness of sensations, in order to put her in clear contradiction with false beliefs that eliminate romance and poetry from life.”
Bazarov at the beginning of the novel laughs at Pavel Petrovich, who was touched by the “mysterious look” of Princess R.: “And what kind of mysterious relationship between a man and a woman? We physiologists know what these relationships are. You study the anatomy of the eye: where does it come from, as you say, to a mysterious look? But a month later, he already says to Odintsova: “Perhaps you are right; maybe, for sure, every person is a mystery. Yes, although you, for example…”
Life turns out to be much more complicated than Bazarov's constructions. He sees that his feelings are not limited to "physiology", and with anger finds in himself the very "romanticism" that he so ridiculed in others, calling "nonsense" and weakness.
Unrequited love leaves its mark on Bazarov: he falls into melancholy, cannot find a place for himself anywhere, reconsiders his views and finally realizes the hopelessness of his position in the world.
“I'm lying here under a haystack... the narrow place that I occupy is so tiny in comparison with the rest of the space where I'm not there and where I don't care; and the part of the time that I will be able to live is so insignificant before eternity, where I am not and will not be ... And in this atom, in this mathematical point, the blood circulates, the brain works, it also wants something. What a disgrace! What nonsense!”
Further, one can trace a certain vicious circle in Bazarov’s thoughts: “... you said today, passing by the hut of our elder Philip, - it is so nice, white, so, you said, Russia will then reach perfection when the last peasant will have the same premises , and each of us should contribute to this ... And I began to hate this last peasant, for whom I have to climb out of my skin and who won’t even thank me ... and why should I thank him? Well, he will live in a white hut, and burdock will grow out of me; well, what next?” So, from the point of view of Bazarov, his own theory becomes meaningless, since Russia will not achieve perfection if he and everyone is not going to do something for her good. “To understand the tragedy of Bazarov, one must remember that he is a maximalist, that he would be satisfied with the resolution of human issues<...>immediately and completely. Immediately and entirely - this means nowhere and never” (Yu. Mann).
Even in the last conversation with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov renounces his previous view of the people and admits that it is difficult to understand him: “The Russian peasant is the same mysterious stranger that Madame Radcliffe once talked so much about. Who will understand him? He doesn't understand himself." And we see that he still remains a stranger to the people: “Alas! Bazarov, contemptuously shrugging his shoulder, able to talk to peasants (as he boasted in a dispute with Pavel Petrovich), this self-confident Bazarov did not even suspect that in their eyes he was still something like a pea jester ... ”Left without supporters, having broken with Arkady without regret (“You are a nice fellow, but you are still a soft, liberal gentleman”), having been refused by the woman he loves and having lost faith in the correctness of his worldview, tested by life, Bazarov ceases to value his life. Therefore, his death can be regarded not only as an accident or suicide, but also as a logical consequence of his spiritual crisis.
A typical man of the 1860s, a prominent Russian pre-revolutionary critic Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky disputes this conventional wisdom:
Fathers and Sons. Feature film based on the novel by I. S. Turgenev. 1958
“There is no way to look at Bazarov as a type of our “nihilists” or “thinking realists” of the 60s. To this "movement", essentially harmless, Bazarov adjoins in a purely external way. The denial of art, mockery of Pushkin, the cult of the natural sciences, the materialistic worldview - all this only "mechanically" connects Bazarov with the well-known circles of youth of that time. But after all, Bazarov is interesting and so significant not at all by these “views”, not by “direction”, but by the inner content and complexity of nature, in fact, “gloomy”, “half grown out of the soil”, enormous fortitude, finally - under democracy “up to the end of nails" - such independence of thought and such inclinations of inner freedom, which God grant to a real philosopher. Are these features that can be called typical of the youth of the 60s, of the Pisarevka trend? In a letter to Sluchevsky, Turgenev says that instead of "nihilist" one should read "revolutionary." Let's accept such a "reading" and try to understand Bazarov - as a type of no longer a "nihilist" of the 60s, but a "revolutionary". Even if we have in mind not only the Russian revolutionaries of the 60s and subsequent years, but also Western European ones, then even in this case the typicality of Bazarov will be very doubtful. His nature, it is true, seems fundamentally "revolutionary", but at the same time there is too much inner freedom and skepticism in him for him to be recognized as a true, typical representative of the revolutionary spirit and mentality. Real revolutionaries are for the most part fanatics, that is, people who are not free inwardly. It is also not fitting for a revolutionary to be a skeptic. In a sense, he is a believer and confessor. Where is Bazarov's signs of fanaticism, faith, blind devotion to the idea?
If he says to Arkady: “You, for example, don’t fight—and you already imagine yourself doing well—but we want to fight... we have to break others,” etc. (Chapter XXVI), then this only testifies to the fact that that Bazarov's nature, as mentioned above, is basically "revolutionary", aggressive, prone to active protest. But these are only the beginnings, and they are still far from a real revolutionary way of thinking and feeling ... We must also add faith in people, in one's own business, blind devotion to the idea [which Bazarov does not have.]
Further, Bazarov does not even have that spirit of propaganda and proselytism, which is so characteristic of real revolutionaries. Developing his views on Odintsova, he "said all this with an air as if at the same time he was thinking to himself: believe me or not, it's all the same to me" (XVI). In conversations with Arkady, he is more like a materialist philosopher talking with his student than a propagandist recruiting an adept.
But what is especially characteristic of Bazarov and, at the same time, is a sign of a sharp difference between his inner world and real revolutionary natures and minds, is that eternal dissatisfaction and inability to find satisfaction, that lack of balance of spirit, which were especially evident in the following tirade: I think,” he says to Arkady, “it’s good for my parents to live in the world!” At the age of 60, my father is busy, talking about “palliative” means, treating people, being generous with the peasants ... They, my parents, that is, are busy and do not worry about their own insignificance, it does not stink them ... but I ... I feel only boredom and anger.
Of course, it is useful to reckon with this authoritative opinion, but one cannot but take into account the opinions of people of the 60s who recognized themselves in Bazarov. Such a contradiction can only be explained by the fact that Turgenev expanded the type of person of the 60s with some features that were unusual for this era. In the image of Bazarov, he introduced some features characteristic of the people of the 1840s - "hamletism", some abstraction from life, inability to reconcile the "word" with the "deed" ...
Bazarov, the protagonist of the novel, is a nihilist. Resolutely and mercilessly, he denies everything: the social structure, idle talk, love of the people, as well as art and love. The subject of his "worship" is practical use.
Bazarov differs from the Kirsanovs in his energy, masculinity, firmness of character and independence.
It should be noted that the novel does not show Bazarov's childhood. But it is known that the character of a person is laid in the first years of his life. Perhaps Turgenev had no idea at all how such characters were formed? Bazarov is fond of natural sciences. Every day he is filled with work, new searches. “Bazarov got up very early and went two or three miles away, not to walk - he couldn’t stand walking without a goal, but to collect herbs.” He confessed to Arkady that the passion for work made him a man. “You only need to achieve your goal with your own work.” Accustomed to relying only on his own mind and energy, Bazarov developed a calm self-confidence. He doesn't care at all what others think of him.
He reduces the relationship between a man and a woman to physiology, art to “the art of making money, or is there no more hemorrhoids”, that is, the whole world of beauty is completely alien to him, which he calls “romanticism, nonsense, rottenness, art”.
His philosophy of being originates from such an attitude to life and consists in the complete denial of all the foundations of society, all beliefs, ideals and norms of human life. “A nihilist is a person who does not bow to any authorities, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respected this principle is,” Arkady says in the novel, obviously in the words of his teacher (Bazarov). But to deny everything is also a principle.
In a dispute with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov's views are even more pronounced. All the principles of Pavel Petrovich boil down to preserving the old order in Russia. Bazarov seeks to destroy this order. However, Bazarov is not shown in any way in public activities, and we do not know if he has real plans to put his views into practice.
When the dispute touches on the issue of attitude towards the people, Pavel Petrovich says that the Russian people are “patriarchal”, “revere traditions sacredly” and “cannot live without faith”, and that therefore the nihilists do not express their needs and are completely alien to them. Bazarov agrees with the statement about patriarchy, but for him this is only evidence of the backwardness of the people, their failure as a social force. Bazarov considers himself closer to the people than Pavel Kirsanov: “My grandfather plowed the land.
Bazarov does not recognize the spiritual principle either in nature or in man. He treats a person as a biological organism: “All people are similar to each other both in body and soul ... One human specimen is enough to judge all others. People are like trees in the forest, not a single botanist will deal with every single birch.
After Bazarov has sufficiently thoroughly stated his views, the test of their life begins. It becomes clear that the nihilist Bazarov is alone in the public arena, although he himself claimed: "We are not so few as you think." Even in the last conversation with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov renounces his previous view of the people and admits that it is difficult to understand him. And we see that he still remains a stranger to the people. Left without supporters, breaking with Arkady without regret, having been refused by his beloved woman and having lost faith in the correctness of his worldview, tested by life, Bazarov ceases to value his life. Therefore, his death can be regarded not only as an accident or suicide, but also as a logical consequence of his spiritual crisis.
Turgenev's reflection of the relationship between generations in a special historical period - on the eve of the abolition of serfdom. Representatives of the warring camps. The discrepancy between the opinions of two generations regarding the aristocrats and the Russian people. Perspectives on art.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Ideological duel of Bazarov and Kirsanov.
The novel "Fathers and Sons" was written in 1861 by Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. This novel shows the relationship of generations in a special historical period - on the eve of the abolition of serfdom. At this time, Russia is divided into two ideological and political camps. The conflict of generations acquires a particularly acute character: “fathers” and “children” turn out to be irreconcilable ideological rivals. The main representatives of the warring camps in the novel are Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov (“fathers”) and Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov (“children”).
In Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, an aristocrat is immediately guessed. He is always carefully shaved, perfumed, dressed. Even while living in the countryside, Pavel retains his secular habits. He comes out to meet guests dressed in “a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots.” Turgenev emphasizes the beauty of Pavel Petrovich's face: "His face ... unusually correct and clean, as if drawn with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty."
In Bazarov, one feels a man from the people. He does not look after his appearance, wears "dangling sand-coloured sideburns" and "a long robe with tassels." There is no particular beauty in his face, it is “long and thin, with a wide forehead, flat top, pointed nose, large greenish eyes ... it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence.”
Turgenev pays special attention to the hands of these characters. Bazarov arrives without gloves and holds out to Nikolai Petrovich a “naked red hand”, which speaks of a habit of hard work. And Pavel Petrovich holds out to Arkady "a beautiful hand with long pink nails." With Bazarov, the aristocrat avoids shaking hands, immediately feeling an ideological enemy in him.
Bazarov does not like Pavel Petrovich. He ridicules his aristocracy, secular habits: “Yes, I will spoil them, these county aristocrats! After all, this is all pride, lion's habits, fatness. Arkady is trying to somehow protect his uncle, telling Yevgeny the story of the unhappy love of Pavel and Princess R. But Bazarov scoffs at this too: “No, brother, this is all licentiousness, emptiness, romanticism ... rot, art.”
This mutual rejection of the characters develops into an ideological conflict.
Pavel Petrovich considers himself an advanced person. He adheres to liberal views, supports the upcoming reforms. Therefore, he is very surprised when young people do not take his ideas seriously and call him an “archaic phenomenon”. As soon as Pavel learns that Arkady's friend is a nihilist, he has a desire to challenge this nihilist to a dispute. But, unfortunately for Pavel Petrovich, Evgeny does not like verbal debate and brushes them off like an annoying fly. For Bazarov, the main thing is to take actions that are beneficial, and everything else is a waste of time.
Still, Pavel Petrovich manages to challenge Bazarov twice. But for the first time, he is lost from the categorical nature of Bazarov. Kirsanov, trying to offend the nihilist, declares that he gives more preference to German scientists than Russian ones. But Bazarov retorts that nationality does not matter to him, he does not recognize any authorities: “But why should I recognize them? … They will tell me the case, I will agree, that’s all.” Bazarov generally rejected all art: "A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." With this step of his, Evgeny Vasilyevich puzzled Pavel Petrovich.
The decisive “ideological duel” took place a few days later. Bazarov dismissively treated one of the neighboring landowners, calling him “rubbish, aristocratic,” which seriously offended the feelings of Pavel Petrovich, who considered himself an aristocrat. Kirsanov begins to prove that the aristocrats are the stronghold of world liberalism, they support the “principles” on which society is based. But Bazarov rejects all these judgments at once. He considers all aristocrats idlers: “... You respect yourself and sit back; what good is it for the bien public?” Pavel is trying to name some foundations of society: progress, liberalism. But Yevgeny Vasilievich rudely denies everything: “At the present time, denial is the most useful of all - we deny it.” “You deny everything, or, to be more precise, you destroy everything ... Why, you need to build,” Pavel Petrovich is surprised. But even to this, the nihilist has an answer that, they say, this is not his business, “first you need to clear the place.”
The opinions of two generations regarding the Russian people also do not coincide. Pavel Petrovich begins to prove that "the Russian people are not like that", "he honors traditions, he is patriarchal." Bazarov contemptuously declares that the people "deserve contempt."
A complete misunderstanding of the "fathers" and "children" is also manifested in their views on art. "Fathers" read Pushkin, play the cello. Yevgeny Vasilievich denies art itself: “Raphael is not worth a penny,” which irritates Kirsanov. The aristocrat believes that such "nihilists" are not needed at all.
This is where the “ideological duel” of “fathers” and “children” ends. And only in the second part of the novel, the ideological intransigence between the characters turns into a real duel.
I believe that in these “ideological” debates, Turgenev still gives his preference to the “fathers”. However, he sees that, unfortunately, the aristocrats do not go beyond empty talk. Despite the fact that the writer does not agree with the "denial" of Bazarov, he portrayed him as an active, strong, intelligent and educated person who seeks to benefit the Fatherland. The duel of heroes, although it is portrayed somewhat comically, as an anachronism, one can also see a prophecy in it: ideological conflicts can turn into bloodshed.
Similar Documents
Confrontation of generations and opinions in Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", images of the work and their real prototypes. A portrait description of the main characters of the novel: Bazarov, Pavel Petrovich, Arkady, Sitnikov, Fenechka, a reflection of the author's attitude in it.
abstract, added 05/26/2009
Analysis of the historical fact of the emergence of a new public figure - a revolutionary democrat, his comparison with the literary hero Turgenev. Bazarov's place in the democratic movement and private life. Compositional-plot structure of the novel "Fathers and Sons".
abstract, added 07/01/2010
The idea and the beginning of the work of I.S. Turgenev on the novel "Fathers and Sons". The personality of a young provincial doctor as the basis of the main figure of the novel - Bazarov. The end of work on the work in the beloved Spassky. The novel "Fathers and Sons" is dedicated to V. Belinsky.
presentation, added 12/20/2010
Duel in Russian Literature. Duel as an act of aggression. The history of the duel and the dueling code. Duels at A.S. Pushkin in "The Captain's Daughter", "Eugene Onegin". The duel in the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time". The duel in the work of I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".
scientific work, added 02/25/2009
The study of the storyline concerning the protagonist of the novel I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" - E.V. Bazarov, who dies at the end of the work. Analysis of Eugene's life position, which consists in the fact that he denies everything: outlook on life, a feeling of love.
abstract, added 12/07/2010
Yevgeny Bazarov as the main and only exponent of democratic ideology. Anti-noble line of conception of "Fathers and Sons". Characteristics of liberal landowners and radical raznochintsy in Turgenev's novel. Political views of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.
abstract, added 03/03/2010
The worldview and ideals of the main character of the novel - Evgeny Bazarov. Image techniques I.S. Turgenev emotional experiences of his characters and the emergence and development of various feelings in them. The author's method of describing the essence of the characters' psychological states.
presentation, added 04/02/2015
The relationship between the characters in the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". Love lines in the novel. Love and passion in the relationship of the main characters - Bazarov and Odintsova. Female and male images in the novel. Conditions for harmonious relations between the characters of both sexes.
presentation, added 01/15/2010
Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev wanted to reunite Russian society with his novel Fathers and Sons. But I got exactly the opposite result. Discussions began: is Bazarov bad, good? Insulted by these discussions, Turgenev left for Paris.
essay, added 11/25/2002
The study of I.S. Turgenev - works that reflect not only the features inherent in the aristocracy, but also with all the depth of the literary style show the simple peasant population of Russia in the nineteenth century. The personality of P.P. Kirsanov in the novel "Fathers and Sons".
