The thirteenth chapter is one of the key episodes of the work "Fathers and Sons". It is in this chapter that the author introduces us to the followers of Bazarov - Kukshina and Sitnikov. This episode helps to reveal their characters and understand whether they are true followers of Bazarov.
The episode is preceded by a story about how Bazarov and Arkady arrived in the city ****. Here they meet Sitnikov, who warmly greets Bazarov and invites friends to Kukshina's house.
As soon as they enter Kukshina's house, the heroes meet a maid in a cap - "obvious signs of the mistress's progressive aspirations."
Kukshina's room is in disarray: cigarette butts, papers, letters, magazines ... From the appearance of the hostess of the room it also smells of staleness and untidiness: "disheveled", "in a completely untidy dress", "yellowed ermine fur on a fur coat."
In general, the appearance of Kukshina has an unpleasant effect on the reader. Let's remember the "forlornly blushing upturned tiny nose." The expression on her face is also unpleasant: “I involuntarily wanted to ask:“ Are you hungry? Or are you bored? Or are you shy? What are you up to?" All her actions are unnatural: “Everything came out of her, as the children say, on purpose, that is, unnaturally.” Her habit of calling men by their last names, "typical of many provincial and Moscow ladies," is also unpleasant.
Another, no less important hero of this part is Sitnikov. We will learn a little about him at the end of the 12th chapter. "A man in a Slavophil Hungarian coat", "in overly elegant gloves." And in his appearance, some unnaturalness, negligence is noticeable: shrill laughter, the habit of falling apart in an armchair and lifting up his leg.
The conversation of the actors can be considered as the development of the action. Kukshina constantly “drops” questions without waiting for an answer, which indicates her lack of culture. Her reviews of the city **** also speak of lack of culture, pride: “I finally settled here: an intolerable city, isn't it?”. According to Kukshina, people in the city have "small interests", "women are very badly brought up." It can be seen that Kukshina is accustomed to criticizing others, not paying attention to her upbringing and continuing to consider herself a "good-natured and simple creature."
Kukshina considers herself a follower of Bazarov, and at the same time she constantly mentions the names of famous people in conversation, although it is known that Bazarov does not accept any authorities.
The whole breakfast “Evdokia chatted incessantly; Sitnikov echoed her. In general, we see an unpleasant trait in Sitnikov: the absence of one's own opinion and the constant repetition of other people's thoughts. This also manifests itself in a dispute with Bazarov, when Sitnikov enthusiastically echoes him, shouting: “Down with!”. Let us also recall the scene of farewell to the guests, when "Sitnikov asks, obsequiously running from right to left." It is not surprising that, as Arkady noted, "it already looked like bedlam."
What can be the conclusion? Sitnikov and Kukshina are people who deserve little respect, who do not have their own opinions. And they can hardly be called true supporters of nihilism.
The 50-60s of the 19th century became an era of humiliating defeats for Russia and at the same time were marked by the flourishing of liberal-democratic and revolutionary movements and parties, an era of grandiose changes. At the end of the 1950s, the great empire was preparing to enter a new era of capitalist relations, preparing for promising changes. It is not surprising that this era gave rise to new people: strong, personalities, ambiguous heroes - who were predestined to fight for the future of Russia, for its well-being. They fought for the future that they considered the best, they fought for their sometimes controversial ideas, but they fought selflessly, to the point of exhaustion, sparing neither themselves nor others.
Turgenev's literary talent could not fail to note the appearance of such personalities, making Bazarov one of their representatives.
The man standing at the origins of the great, the one who is destined to be the first to realize and feel the main content of his era, being in the midst of mediocre inhabitants, is doomed to misunderstanding, doomed to loneliness. Turgenev's hero was no exception. Strong in spirit, well educated, striving for active work, philosopher and revolutionary, Bazarov is nevertheless lonely.
Yes, he has followers who revel in the game of "nihilistic views", but only a game that they, due to their development, are not able to fill with meaning. Can Kukshina's "emancipe" be understood by Bazarov, reputed to be a fully educated lady, with uncut magazines scattered all over the tables?
Sitnikov is also satirical, a stupid, empty person who directs all his few mental abilities to arouse interest in himself, to draw attention to himself, no matter how, - the main thing is that he will be noticed.
Is a person like Bazarov worthy of these pseudo-followers, these Kukshins and Sitnikovs, no, but the appearance of such “personalities” is inevitable ... Yes, and Arkady, carried away by the denial of everyone and everything, does not understand Bazarov. From his phrases "breathes with romanticism"; in the depths of his soul, Arkady Kirsanov is a phrase-monger, a true barchuk nobleman, a real “father” liberal, to whom nihilistic “dust” will undoubtedly gouge out his eyes, who is pleased at least with what he denies and criticizes, but does not fight. In the novel, there are no like-minded people around Bazarov, no people who understand him, share his views; there are no personalities of his level, his strength, his mind. But Bazarov is not understood not only by the so-called “followers”, but also by his parents, who would seem to be the people closest to the hero.
The old Bazarovs dissolve in love for their child, they cannot imagine life without him. What do they care about nihilism and revolutionaries, what do they care about all these theories and beliefs - they love their Enyusha, they firmly, as far as their strength allows, hold on to the thin thread of parental love that connects them with their son. Of course, Bazarov will never alienate two old people who have put their whole lives on his upbringing and education, but, lagging behind him in their development, they finally lost the opportunity to get closer.
In love, Turgenev's hero is also alone. Having met for the first time a woman who understands him the way he does, who occupies him not only with her “first-class” beauty, but also with her mind, “brain”, who, finally, is interested in Bazarov himself, having met such a woman, he falls in love “stupidly, madly”, falls in love once and for all, loves and craves reciprocity. But his passion, "gloomy and wild", turned out to be powerless before the measured calm of silks and silver trays.
Bazarov is left alone, and this loneliness, full of tragedy, is all-consuming and destructive, it can only be sustained by an incredibly strong person, which was Bazarov. But the “test of love” not only ruled out the last opportunity for the hero to find a person who is able to fully understand and share his views, but also made the nihilist raznochintsy begin to doubt the correctness of his beliefs.
No, in the truest sense of the word, Bazarov has no doubts: it is still unshakably true for him that art, nature,
love, romanticism - all this is "nonsense" and rotten; but the passion he feels for Odintsova makes the hero act contrary to everything previously said. His feeling, no matter how hard Bazarov tries, does not resemble the cynical passion for a district coquette; he did not receive reciprocity from Odintsova, but his love did not disappear from this and the vaunted principle did not work.
Bazarov is looking for consolation in nature, which so recently was only a “workshop” for a person - a “worker”; it is no coincidence that when describing the feelings of his hero, Turgenev introduces a romantic landscape, so unusual for Bazarov the nihilist.
Bazarov runs away from his love, a romantic feeling, but does not find salvation; he is angry, furious, but he is powerless. The love affair becomes a kind of turning point in the novel, after which the hero's skepticism and cynicism lose their maximalism; his actions no longer fully correspond to his ideas; Bazarov is no longer so alien and ridiculous the knightly fuse of Pavel Petrovich, and the duel with him takes on a certain, albeit lengthy, meaning. After Bazarov's explanation with Odintsova, his whole life was marked by a tragic discrepancy between actions and sensations and ideological views and thoughts.
But Turgenev debunked only the maximalist assertions of nihilism, which are not characteristic of true democratic revolutionaries, those views that, perhaps, determined the ambiguity of the hero that caused so much controversy and discussion - Bazarov remains true to the nihilistic theory to the end even in the face of death.
Bazarov is clearly aware of the inevitability and proximity of death, the tragic outcome that became the result of his internal conflict, which once again emphasized the impossibility of an unequivocal choice in favor of nihilism for such a strong personality, emphasized its controversial and versatility. But even dying, Bazarov does not deviate from his theory. Turgenev puts the words into his mouth: “Russia needs me... No, apparently, it is not needed.” In the tragic awareness of his uselessness and lack of demand, in the feeling of incredible strength and yet the inexorability of death, Turgenev's hero remains firm in spirit. Indeed, the main meaning of the novel, according to Pisarev, is the death of Bazarov. If he were afraid or repented of his convictions, then the reader would have an image of a false phrase-monger, unworthy of respect, but he remained firm.
Bazarov dies, but still the ending of the novel is not so tragic: the last landscape in the work, dedicated to the description of the hero’s grave, is truly romantic and bright; despite the death of Bazarov, life goes on and all problems and ideas are nothing before the eternity of beauty and harmony.
Mood now - thinking
In a dispute with Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, Bazarov said that there were not so few of them. Who are they, like-minded people of Bazarov? What to expect from them, and why are they (the youth of the 19th century) better than their fathers?
Bazarov, of course, is interesting. He is defiant in everything, starting with his manner of dressing and ending with his attitude towards his parents. Pavel Petrovich immediately took a dislike to "this hairy one," as he dubbed Bazarov. The elder Kirsanov was irritated by everything in Bazarov: the clothes, the red, overworked hands, and the swagger. “This doctor's son was not only not shy, he even answered curtly and reluctantly, and there was something rude, almost impudent in the sound of his voice.”
Bazarov is a nihilist. Nikolai Petrovich explains the meaning of this word as "a person who does not recognize anything." Pavel Petrovich is more harsh - "who respects nothing."
But is it good: to admit nothing, to believe nothing, to deny everything? Is it good to think that "a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet"? that the mysterious look of a woman is “all romanticism, nonsense, rot, art”? that "Rafael is not worth a penny"? that "nature is not a temple, but a workshop"?...
Although, of course, Bazarov has a number of thoughts with which I cannot disagree: “As for time, why will I depend on it? Let it better depend on me,” is the statement of a very strong person who, probably, has the right to say that “every person must educate himself.” Yes, Bazarov is the master of life. He does not adapt to anyone, does not look back at anyone, is independent in his thoughts and deeds. Bazarov believes that the natural sciences, such as physics and chemistry, will help Russia break out of the darkness of ignorance. He is a dedicated worker. In this he sees the meaning of his life. This is probably why the servants in Maryino became attached to him, "felt that he was still his brother, not a master." And his origin is not noble: his grandfather "plowed the land", and his father was a simple regimental doctor. Of course, in many ways he looks like a maximalist, but this, I think, is the cost of youth. It would pass. And then he would understand that a person is not as monotonous as it was thought at first, that morality or immorality are not only social, but also personal, family, even genetic fruits. Bazarov matures when his soul, which he denied, was struck by love, also rejected by the nihilist. This nascent feeling "tormented and infuriated" him.
But, it seems to me, Bazarov is not surrounded by worthy like-minded people. His thoughts are either distorted or understood superficially, so that in the end, having been ill with them, like a child's "rubella", to abandon them and forget.
Sitnikov calls himself a student of Bazarov, but what attracts him to Bazarov's teachings? That which "should not recognize authorities." Kukshina also liked it. And the first thing she did was to leave her husband. For her and for Sitnikov, everything turns out not naturally, not simply, but because of that it is disgusting. She picked up scientific terminology, having no idea about science. “I am also practical,” says Kukshina about herself. But what is its practicality? Is it that it screams out of place and out of place about the emancipation of women? Oh, how repulsive this woman is, when she, “all red from drunk wine and tapping with flat nails on the keys of an out-of-tune piano, began to sing in a hoarse voice”! Even Arkady, who is distinguished by tact, and he called it bedlam.
Speaking of Arcadia. After all, he also considers himself a student of Bazarov. But it is not at all. Despite the fact that with importance he declares himself a nihilist. That is why, having moved away from Bazarov, he quickly forgets his teaching, completely dissolving in his feeling for Katya.
Did Bazarov have followers in the future?
Vladimir Vladimirovich Mayakovsky
After all, in 1912, together with Burliuk, Kruchenykh and Khlebnikov, he created the famous manifesto “A Slap in the Face of Public Taste”, where young poets zealously declared: “Only we are the face of our Time. The horn of time blows us in verbal art. The past is tight. The Academy and Pushkin are more incomprehensible than hieroglyphs. Throw Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and so on. and so on. from the ship Modernity. Whoever does not forget his first love will not recognize his last. Who, gullible, will turn the last Love to the perfumery fornication of Balmont? Does it reflect the courageous soul of today? Who, cowardly, will be afraid to steal paper armor from the black tailcoat of Bryusov's warrior? Or are they the dawn of unknown beauties?
Wash your hands that have touched the filthy slime of the books written by those innumerable Leonid Andreevs. To all these Maxim Gorky, Kuprin, Blok, Sologub, Averchenko, Cherny, Kuzmin, Bunin and so on. and so on. - All you need is a cottage on the river. Such an award is given by fate to tailors. From the height of skyscrapers, we look at their insignificance!
Mayakovsky, of course, soon spoke differently about Pushkin and other luminaries of literature. From this youthful maximalism departed. And yet he had an impulse of denial.
Now, too, this protest against their fathers is felt among the youth: is this where the different emos, goths, skinheads, rappers come from?
Don't hide the music, it's opium
For no one, only for us.
Let's die merrily tonight
Shall we play Decadence?
How to understand these words? Rejection of music? Or maybe life in general?
How everything has shrunk! The Bazarovs were also crushed. And I would like to finish with lines from Denis Davydov's verse:
There was a stormy, wondrous age:
Loud, majestic;
There was a big man
Waste of glory.
That was the age of the heroes!
But checkers mixed up
And climbed out of the cracks
Midges and insects.
Every mother's boy
Picked up everyone
Fashionable nonsense fool,
Squirming liberal.
Well? - Maybe our hero
Tired your genius
And fighting care,
And the fire of battles? ..
No, he has not been in battles -
Shuffling through the living rooms
And performed along the parade ground
Crane step.
Well? - Maybe he's rich.
Happiness of a family man
Replacing the shine of armor
That citizen?
No, impudently akimbo
He prowls around the dachas
And, in theaters, lounging,
Everything hisses and whistles.
All that is - all dust and ashes!
All that flourishes
Root out! - Areopagus
It defines so.
And he buzzes, full of thunder,
Overthrowing kingdoms...
And Russia - my God! -
Taska ... yes what!
Very modern too.
And if he is called a nihilist, then it should be read: revolutionary.I.S. Turgenev.
Ivan Sergeevich's novel "Fathers and Sons" was published in 1862. He entered the treasury of Russian literature. In the novel there is no denouement, no plot, no strictly considered plan; there are only types and characters, scenes and pictures, and through the whole novel
through the personal attitude of the author to the phenomena of life. These phenomena are close to us, in them we seem to see ourselves as actors.
Turgenev managed to capture in Fathers and Sons the acuteness of the ideological struggle between the main social forces in Russia in the late fifties of the nineteenth century. On the one hand, the liberal nobles (Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich and Arkady Kirsanovs), on the other hand, the democrat Evgeny Bazarov, the representative of that new emerging force, which was soon destined to play a huge political role in the social development of Russia.
Turgenev endowed his hero with a materialistic outlook, great willpower, love for the exact sciences, respect for work, showed his hatred for fasting and routine. The writer took all these positive features of Bazarov from real life.
Eugene in the novel expresses thoughts about the structure of society, criticizes superstitions and prejudices, the slavish obedience of the people. All this gives reason to talk about Bazarov's true democracy.
However, Turgenev's hero does not remain so throughout the novel. The writer in the second half of "Fathers and Sons" changes the appearance of Bazarov, deprives him of faith in the people, in the future of Russia, that is, makes him unlike true revolutionary democrats.
Turgenev was a moderate liberal, he could not pin his hopes on the revolutionary democrats. He perceived them as a great force and believed that they would very soon leave the historical arena and give way to new social forces. Therefore, the revolutionary democrats seemed to the writer tragic loners. He made Bazarov a tragic hero and forced him to die from an accidental cut on his finger.
Turgenev is attracted by his hero with a passionate desire to fight against ignorance and superstition, for a true science built on experiment.
Therefore, creating the image of a democrat-raznochinets, he drew attention to such real and characteristic features of him as a passion for the natural sciences.
Bazarov stands up for applied science, for specific crafts that could be mastered by the people, he loves his profession, knows no other life than the homeless, laboring, sometimes wildly riotous life of a poor student.
Bazarov's haters are people who pay attention to Yevgeny's baggy, harshness, and these traits are reproached for the general type. Such people can be reminded of the words from the poem by A.S. Pushkin: “You can be a practical person and think about the beauty of your nails.” These words indicate that you can be an extreme materialist and at the same time take care of your toilet, be a kind conversationalist.
In the novel, Turgenev attaches great importance to love intrigue. He tests his hero in love, in relation to a woman.
The beginning of the relationship between Bazarov and Odintsova is preceded by scenes that are very important for clarifying the character of the hero: the hero's clash with his main antagonist Pavel Petrovich, with Kukshina and Sitnikov. Bazarov is a man of a sharp and strong mind, an outstanding, strong, strong-willed, honest nature. His hatred and love are sincere and deep. When a heavy and strong passion came to him, he managed to defeat her, and turned out to be higher and more humane than that woman for whom “calmness” is more precious.
From such people as Bazarov, under certain circumstances, great historical figures are developed, such people remain strong and fit for any work for a long time, they are always ready to exchange one sphere of activity for another, more entertaining and broader. Their life is connected with the life of the surrounding world. They engage in useful science in order to give work to their brains or in order to drink from it a direct benefit for themselves and others. Bazarov is a man of business, life, he has great strength, independence. Energy. He dies... But his death is an accident. And even in the moments of death, Yevgeny Bazarov remains true to his convictions, his ideals. He wants to live, it is a pity to say goodbye to self-consciousness, to his personality, but this pain of parting with a young life is expressed not in mild sadness, but in a contemptuous attitude towards himself, as towards a powerless creature, and towards this rude, absurd accident that crushed and crushed his. Love for a woman, sons love for a father and
mother merges with love in the mind of a dying person for the Motherland, for mysterious Russia, which has remained an unsolved mystery for Bazarov.
Pisarev said about Bazarov: "To die the way Bazarov died is the same as accomplishing a great feat."
Yevgeny Bazarov denied music and poetry, but modern readers are attracted to him by the fact that he was faithful to the people, principled, loved to work, mastered the exact sciences, was faithful to his ideals, beliefs, was courageous before death.
Having shown in his novel "Fathers and Sons" the type of a new hero - a commoner, democrat, materialist and nihilist Bazarov, I.S. Turgenev had to reflect in the work how this phenomenon in life is single, accidental or natural. To do this, it was necessary to show whether Bazarov had like-minded people. One of them, his friend Arkady Kirsanov, fully shares the hero's convictions, but, as it turns out, not for long. The noble origin and upbringing, the inability to give up family feelings, and then the influence of Katya force the hero to return to the traditional values of his circle. Are Sitnikov and Kukshin followers of Bazarov - people who consider themselves "progressives"? Sitnikov is the son of a wine farmer, a man who got rich on the maintenance of taverns. This is not respected in society, and Sitnikov is ashamed of his father. In his portrait, the author emphasizes the unnatural behavior of the hero: an anxious and restless expression on his face, “and he laughed uneasily: with some kind of short, wooden laugh.” He considers himself a “disciple” of Bazarov and says that he owes his “rebirth” to him, not noticing either the pomposity of his words or logical contradictions: after all, having heard from Bazarov that he “should not recognize authorities,” he felt “delight” in relation to Bazarov himself: “Finally I found a man!” Progressive views for Sitnikov are the way to self-affirmation at the expense of others, as well as for Mrs. Evdoxia Kukshina. She did not have a personal life, she parted with her husband, she is not outwardly beautiful, she has no children. In her behavior, too, everything was, as the author says, "not simple, not natural." In order to attract attention, she joined the progressive movement, but for her this is just an excuse to show herself, to demonstrate to others the breadth of her interests. She calls the world-famous writer George Sand a “backward woman” for her alleged ignorance of embryology, but Eliseevich, unknown to anyone, is a “brilliant” gentleman who wrote some article. Kukshina is interested in everything at once: chemistry, the women's issue, schools, but most of all she is concerned not with the problems themselves, but with the desire to demonstrate their knowledge to her interlocutors. She "drops" her questions one by one, without waiting for answers, and they have no place in Kukshina's self-satisfied monologue. She criticizes all women for being "badly brought up", and Odintsova for not having "any freedom of opinion", but, most likely, she simply envy her beauty, independence and wealth. This is especially noticeable at the ball, where Kukshina appeared “in dirty gloves, but with a bird of paradise in her hair”: she was “deeply wounded” that they did not pay attention to her. Of course, Bazarov does not take conversations over a bottle of another champagne seriously, and he treats such people purely consumeristically: “We need the Sitnikovs ... I need such boobies. It’s not for the gods to really burn the pots. ” Feeling neglected, Sitnikov discusses Bazarov and Kirsanov with Kukshina, considering them "Opposite proud and ignorant." However, after the death of Bazarov, Sitnikov in St. Petersburg continues, according to his assurances, Bazarov's "case". The author describes with irony how, together with the "great" Eliseevich, Sitnikov is also preparing to "be great." He was beaten, but "he did not remain in debt: in one dark article, embossed in one dark magazine, he hinted that the one who beat him was a coward." With the same irony, Turgenev says that Kukshina, who finally got to Heidelberg, is now studying architecture, "in which, according to her, she discovered new laws." Bazarov is dead, and militant, self-satisfied ignorance flourishes, vulgarizing progressive ideas for which genuine fighters were ready to give their lives.
