Who is Stoltz? Goncharov does not force the reader to puzzle over this issue. In the first two chapters of the second part there is a detailed account of the life of Stolz, of the conditions in which his active character was formed. “Stolz was only half German, according to his father; his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian ... ". Goncharov first tries to show that Stolz is more Russian than German: after all, the most important thing is that his faith and language are the same as those of Russians. But the further, the more German qualities begin to appear in him: independence, perseverance in achieving his goals, thrift. The unique character of Stolz was formed under the influence of two forces - soft and hard, at the junction of two cultures - Russian and German. From his father, he received a “labor, practical education”, and his mother introduced him to the beautiful, tried to put love for art, for beauty into the soul of little Andrei. His mother "in her son ... dreamed of the ideal of a gentleman", and his father taught him to hard, not at all lordly work. Practical intelligence, love of life, courage helped Stoltz to succeed after he left at the insistence of his father to study in St. Petersburg ... As conceived by Goncharov, Stolz is a new type of Russian progressive figure. However, he does not portray the hero in a specific activity. The author only informs the reader about what Stoltz was, what he achieved. He "served, retired ... went about his business, ... made a house and money, ... learned Europe as his estate, ... saw Russia far and wide, ... travels into the world." If we talk about the ideological position of Stolz, then he "searched for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit." Stoltz could control his feelings and was "afraid of any dream". Happiness for him was constancy. According to Goncharov, he "knew the value of rare and expensive properties and spent them so sparingly that he was called an egoist, insensitive ...". In a word, Goncharov created such a hero that Russia has long lacked. For the author, Stolz is the force that is able to revive the Oblomovs and destroy the Oblomovs. In my opinion, Goncharov somewhat idealizes the image of Stolz, setting him as an example to the reader as an impeccable person. But by the end of the novel, it turns out that salvation did not come to Russia with the advent of Stolz. Dobrolyubov explains this by saying that "now there is no ground for them" in Russian society. For a more productive activity of the Stolts, it is necessary to reach some compromise with the Oblonovs. That is why Andrei Stoltz takes on the upbringing of the son of Ilya Ilyich. Stolz is, of course, the antipode of Oblomov. Each character trait of the first is a sharp protest against the qualities of the second. Stolz loves life - Oblomov often falls into apathy; Stolz has a thirst for activity, for Oblomov the best activity is relaxing on the couch. The origins of this opposition are in the education of heroes. Reading the description of the life of little Andrey, you involuntarily compare it with the life of Ilyusha. Thus, already at the very beginning of the novel, two completely different characters, two life paths appear before the reader ... 8 years ago

Who is Stoltz? Goncharov does not force the reader to puzzle over this issue. In the first two chapters of the second part there is a detailed account of the life of Stolz, of the conditions in which his active character was formed. “Stolz was only half German, according to his father; his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian ... ". Goncharov first tries to show that Stolz is more Russian than German: after all, the most important thing is that his faith and language are the same as those of Russians. But the further, the more German qualities begin to appear in him: independence, perseverance in achieving his goals, thrift.
The unique character of Stolz was formed under the influence of two forces - soft and hard, at the junction of two cultures - Russian and German. From his father, he received a “labor, practical education”, and his mother introduced him to the beautiful, tried to put love for art, for beauty into the soul of little Andrei. His mother "in her son ... dreamed of the ideal of a gentleman," and his father taught him to work hard, not at all lordly work.
Practical intelligence, love of life, courage helped Stoltz to succeed after he left at the insistence of his father to study in St. Petersburg ...
As conceived by Goncharov, Stolz is a new type of Russian progressive figure. However, he does not portray the hero in a specific activity. The author only informs the reader about what Stoltz was, what he achieved. He "served, retired ... went about his business, ... made a house and money, ... learned Europe as his estate, ... saw Russia far and wide, ... travels into the world."
If we talk about the ideological position of Stolz, then he "searched for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit." Stolz could control his feelings and was "afraid of every dream". Happiness for him was constancy. According to Goncharov, he "knew the value of rare and expensive properties and spent them so sparingly that he was called an egoist, insensitive ...". In a word, Goncharov created such a hero that Russia has long lacked. For the author, Stolz is the force that is able to revive the Oblomovs and destroy the Oblomovs. In my opinion, Goncharov somewhat idealizes the image of Stolz, setting him as an example to the reader as an impeccable person. But by the end of the novel, it turns out that salvation did not come to Russia with the advent of Stolz. Dobrolyubov explains this by saying that "now there is no ground for them" in Russian society. For a more productive activity of the Stolts, it is necessary to reach some compromise with the Oblonovs. That is why Andrei Stoltz takes on the upbringing of the son of Ilya Ilyich.
Stolz is, of course, the antipode of Oblomov. Each character trait of the first is a sharp protest against the qualities of the second. Stolz loves life - Oblomov often falls into apathy; Stolz has a thirst for activity, for Oblomov the best activity is relaxing on the couch. The origins of this opposition are in the education of heroes. Reading the description of the life of little Andrey, you involuntarily compare it with the life of Ilyusha. Thus, already at the very beginning of the novel, two completely different characters, two life paths appear before the reader ...

Vitalideals of Oblomov and Stolz

All his life, I. A. Goncharov dreamed of people finding harmony between feelings and reason. He thought about the strength and poverty of "a man oncemind", about the charm and weakness of the "man of the heart".In Oblomov, this idea became one of the leading ones,In this novel, two types of male characters are contrasted: passive and weak Oblomov, withhis heart of gold and pure soul, and energetic Stolz, able to overcome anystanding by the power of your mind and will. However, whatGoncharov's ideal of love is not personifiedvan in none of them. Stolz doesn't seema writer with a more complete personality than ObLomov, at whom he also looks "sobereyes." Impartially exposing "extremes"nature of both, Goncharov advocatedthe fullness of the spiritual world of man with all the diversity of its manifestations.

Each of the main characters in the novel had their own understanding the meaning of life, their life ideasalas that they dreamed of realizing. At firstnarration Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a little over thirty years old, he is a pillar nobleman, possessingbody of three hundred and fifty souls of serfsyang he inherited. Having served after graduating from Moscow University for threeyear in one of the metropolitan departments, heretired with the rank of collegiate secretary.Since then, he lived in St. Petersburg without a break. Novelbegins with a description of one of his days, his habits and character. Oblomov's life to thattime turned into a lazy 'cross crawlfrom day to day". Retiring from vigorous activity, he lay on the sofa and irritatedlyquarreled with Zakhar, a serf servant whoRoy took care of him. Revealing socialthe roots of Oblomovism, Goncharov shows that

“it all started with the inability to put on stockings, and it was an inability to live."

Raised in a patriarchal nobility family, Ilya Ilyich perceived life in Oblomovka, his family estate, with its peace and withoutaction as the ideal of a human beingniya. The norm of life was ready and taught oblomovtsam parents, and they took it from their parents. The three main acts of life were constantly played out before the eyes of little Ilyusha in childhood; home, weddings, funerals. Then next gave their divisions: christenings, name days,family holidays. It focuses on thisthe whole pathos of life. This included "shifatal expanse of aristocratic life "with her holidaysness, which has forever become the ideal of life for Ob lomov a.

All Oblomovites treated work as a punishment and did not like it, considering it something humiliating. nym. Therefore, life in the eyes of Ilya Ilyich oncewas divided into two halves. One consisted ofand boredom, and these were synonyms for him.The other is from peace and peaceful fun. V About Lomov ke Ilya Ilyich was also instilled with feelingssuperiority over other people. "Another"cleans his own boots, dresses himself, runs awayfor what you need. This "other" has towork tirelessly. Ilyusha is “brought up tenderlybut, neither cold nor hunger he endured, he did not needI knew I didn’t earn my own bread, it was a dirty businessdid not work." And he considered studying a punishment sent by heaven for sins, and he avoided schoolclasses whenever possible. After graduating from uni university, he was no longer engaged in his education, was not interested in science, art, politics.

When Oblomov was young, he expected a lot from fate, and from himself. Ready to serve fatherland, play a prominent role in public

life, dreamed of family happiness. But the days went by day by day, and he was still going to start life, everythingpictured my future in my mind. However, "the flower of life blossomed and did not bear fruit."

The future service seemed to him not in the form harsh activities, but in the form of some "familiesnogo occupation. It seemed to him that the officialsemployees together constitute a friendly and closea family, all members of which tirelessly care for mutual pleasure. However, his youthfulrepresentations were deceived. Not youpowers of difficulties, he resigned, servedalive only three years and having done nothing significant body.

Only the youthful glow of Stolz could still strike Oblomov, and in his dreams he sometimes burned fromthirst for work and a distant but attractive pricewhether. It happened, lying on the couch, it flared updesire to point out to mankind its vices.He will quickly change two or three poses, with shiningwith his eyes he will rise up on the bed and with inspirationlooks around. It seems that his high mustachewhich is about to turn into a feat and bring good consequences to mankind. Sometimes he imagineshimself an invincible commander: he will invent a war, arrange new crusades, perform feats of goodness and generosity. Or, representinghimself a thinker, an artist, he is in his imaginationreaps laurels in battle, everyone worships him,the crowd is chasing him. However, in reality he was notable to manage their ownestate and easily fell prey to such swindlers as Tarantyev and the bratets "his quarter fiendish hostess.

Over time, he developed remorse, which haunted him. He was in pain for his backwardness, for the heaviness that prevented himlive. He was gnawed by envy that others live like thisfull and wide, but something prevents him from walking boldly

for life. He painfully felt that neck and a bright beginning is buried in it, as in a grave. He tried to find the culprit outside himself and did not finddil. However, apathy and indifference are quickly replaced whether anxiety in his soul, and he again peacefullyslept on his sofa.

Even love for Olga did not revive him to work. tic life. Faced with the needability to act, overcoming those who stand in the waydifficulties, he got scared and retreated. having settledliving on the Vyborg side, he left himself entirely to the care of Agafya Pshenitsyna, windowswithdrawing from active life.

In addition to this inability brought up by the nobility, Many other things prevent Oblomov from being active.goe. He really feels objectively the existing disunity of the “poetic” and"practical" in life, and this is the cause of his bitter disappointment. He is outraged that the highest meaning of human existence in society is often replaced by a false, imaginarycontent "Although Oblomov has nothing to object toStolz's reproaches, some spiritual rightness for included in the confession of Ilya Ilyich that he failed to understand this life.

If at the beginning of the novel Goncharov speaks more rit about Oblomov’s laziness, then at the end the theme of Oblomov’s “golden heart” sounds more and more insistently,which he carried unscathed through life. NotOblomov's happiness is connected not only with socialenvironment, the influence of which he could not resistyat. It is also contained in the "disastrous excess of hearttsa". Softness, delicacy, vulnerability of the hero disarm his will and make him powerless before people and circumstances.

As opposed to passive and idle to Oblomov, Stolz was conceived by a carrum as a completely unusual figure, Houndmoat sought to make it attractive to

reader with his "deliberateness", rational practicality. These qualities have not beencharacteristic of the heroes of Russian literature.

The son of a German burgher and a Russian noblewoman, Andrey Stolts from childhood thanks to his fatherChil labor, practical education. It's incombined with the poetic influence of his mothermade him a special person. UnlikeOutwardly rounded Oblomov, Stolz was thin, all consisted of muscles and nerves. From himexuded some freshness and strength. there was nothing superfluous on his bottom, and in his likingimportant functions of his life, he soughtbalance of practical aspects with subtlethe needs of the spirit." “He walked steadily through life”cheerfully, lived on a budget, trying to spend everyday, like every ruble. He attributed the cause of any failure to himself, "and not toshawl, like a caftan, on someone else's nail. He aspiredto develop a simple and direct view oflife. What he feared most was the imagination,"this two-faced companion" and every dreamtherefore, everything mysterious and mysterious is notthere was a place in his soul. Everything that does not exposeanalysis of experience does not correspond to practicalwhat truth, he considered a deceit. Labor waszom, content, elements and purpose of his lifeneither. Above all, he put perseverance in dostargeting: it was a sign of characterin his eyes. According to the author, the personalitiespa Stolz should belong to the future:“How many Stoltsev should appear under the Russian our names!”

Emphasizing rationalism and strong-willed qualities his hero, Goncharov, however, was aware of thechildish callousness of Stolz. Apparently a man"budget", emotionally contained within rigid and narrow limits, is not the hero of Goncharov, the Writer speaks of "moral matters" personally

ty your hero as about the physiological work of the ganisma or on the departure of official dutiesnews. You can't "send" friendly feelings.However, in relation to Stolz Oblomov, thistint is present.

In the development of the action, Stolz little by little presents himself as "not a hero". For Goncharov, whory sang the holy recklessness of Chatsky andclearly understood the anxiety of great spiritualrequests, it was a sign of internal failure. Lack of a high goal, understandingunderstanding the meaning of human life is constantlythrashing about despite a lot of activityStolz in practice. He has nothing to saycall Oblomov in response to the recognition that hisfriend did not find meaning in the surrounding life. Having received Olga's consent to marriage, Stolz pronouncessits puzzling words: "Everything is found, nothinglook for, nowhere else to go." And later he will carefully try to persuade the alarmedOlga to come to terms with the "rebellious issuemi", excluding from his life the "Faustian" anxiety.

Staying objective with everyone to his characters, the writer explores the innerthe possibilities of various contemporary peopleski types, finding strength and weakness in each ofthem. However, Russian reality is not yetwaiting for her true hero. According to DoBrolyubov, a real historical case in Rosthis was not in the realm of practicality and business, butin the field of struggle for the renewal of social codefret. Active existence and new, asset new people were still only a prospect, alreadyvery close, but still not realstu. It has already become clear what kind of person is not neededRussia" but still elusive was that kind of deactivity and the type of agent that it requires yutsya.

Annex 1

Sudbinsky

Non-essential connections

Significant connections

Preview:

Annex 2

Worksheet #1

Preview:

Preview:

Summary of the lesson-research

"Oblomov and Stolz (based on the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov")"

1. Educational: check and evaluate the completion of homework; analyze the image of Oblomov; analyze the image of Stolz; select criteria for comparing characters; draw conclusions and formulate them in a short written work.

2. Developing: develop the skill of working with a literary text; develop the skill of analyzing the character of a work of art; improve the skill of pair and independent work; improve the logical and creative thinking of students; create a psychologically comfortable environment in the classroom.

3. Educational: continue to instill a sense of respect for Russian literature of the 19th century; to cultivate a careful attitude to the creative heritage of Russian literature; educate the ability to listen and hear each other.

Work form: lesson-research, conversation, analysis of a literary text.

Teaching methods: heuristic, explanatory and illustrative.

Lesson type: combined.

Literary concepts: main character, character, portrait, speech, interior, comparative characteristics.

Interdisciplinary connections: history, music.

Equipment: portrait of I.A. Goncharov, illustrations for the novel "Oblomov", projector, screen, handout, presentation in MS.ppt format.

During the classes:

1. Greeting. Goal setting.

Teacher's word: Our today's lesson will be devoted to two characters in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is Ilya Ilyich himself and his childhood friend Andrei Stoltz. Let's think together and decide what we have to explore during today's lesson. After all, it is declared as a lesson-research.

Student responses: We must analyze the images of Oblomov and Stolz, select criteria for their comparison, and draw a conclusion.

Teacher's word: Well done! In addition, at the end of our lesson, we will write down the resulting conclusions and try to supplement them on our own as part of a small independent work.

2. Motivation.

Teacher's word: One of the components of the characteristics of a literary hero is his relationship with other characters, which helps in many ways to understand this hero. We have already dealt with the characterization of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov in previous lessons, casually touching on the image of another character - Andrei Stolz. To continue work on compiling Oblomov's characterization, we must correlate the names of the characters in the novel with the philosophical concepts of "relationship", "essential connections", "insignificant connections". ( Annex 1. ) To do this, first recall what these concepts mean.

Student responses: Relationship - the mutual connection of objects, phenomena, etc. with each other, their dependence on each other.

Significant ties are those ties that are most significant in a relationship between someone or something.

Non-essential connections are those connections that do not play any role in revealing the character's character.

Teacher's word: Next, you will need to determine what connections between the characters in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov", will be significant, and which are not. We draw a diagram in our notebooks. Work is a pair. When answering, you will need to justify your opinion.

(Students work with the scheme, as a result they come to the conclusion that among the characters presented, only Olga and Andrey have a significant connection with Oblomov, since it was Ilyinskaya and Stolz who could change Oblomov's lifestyle.)

Teacher's word: Do you think Oblomov himself is ready to change his life? Prove it with text.

Students response: Yes, since there is a quote in the text: "Give me your will and mind and lead me wherever you want. Maybe I will follow you ..."

Teacher's word: In the lesson, we must analyze the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz. Let's formulate the problematic questions of the lesson.

Student responses : 1) Why didn't Andrey Stoltz manage to change Ilya Oblomov's lifestyle?

2) Is Andrey Stolz an antipode or a double of Ilya Oblomov?

If students formulate only the first (problem) question, the teacher helps with the formulation of the second question: this research question is more specific and helps to answer the problematic question of the lesson. Students write down the topic and questions of the lesson in their notebooks.

3. Learning new material. Study. Group work.

Teacher's word: To answer the question "Is Andrey Stoltz the antipode or double of Ilya Oblomov?" we need to formulate the criteria by which we will compare or contrast the characters, and give the meaning of the words "antipode" and "double". Let's start with the definition of terms. (Implementation of homework.)

Students' word: Antipode - (Greek antipodes - turned feet to feet). 1. only pl. Inhabitants of two opposite points of the earth, two opposite ends of one of the diameters of the globe (geographic). 2. someone or something. A person of opposite properties, tastes or beliefs (book). He is the perfect antipode of him, or he is the perfect antipode of him.

A double is a person who has a complete resemblance to another (both about a man and a woman).

Teacher's word: OK, thank you. Now let's turn to the criteria by which the writer characterizes Stolz and Oblomov, which you were able to highlight while reading the text.

Student responses: Appearance (when they appeared before the reader), origin, upbringing, education, programmed program, outlook on life, characteristics of the author, testing by love.

Teacher's word: It is by these criteria that we will characterize and compare the characters. Plus, I propose to add one more criterion to the table - "Two faces of Oblomov."

4. Work in groups (3 groups).

In accordance with these criteria for comparing heroes, students are given a task for research:

1) for each group, choose 2 criteria for comparing heroes (if the guys cannot do this themselves, then the teacher distributes the tasks himself);

3) find material for comparison according to this criterion (write out quotes);

4) give an answer to the research question "Andrey Stolz - the antipode or double of Ilya Oblomov?";

5) formulate an answer to the problematic question of the lesson "Why did Andrey Stoltz fail to change the lifestyle of Ilya Oblomov ?;

6) draw up a worksheet.

5. Exchange of information.

After the study, the guys exchange information using worksheets (Appendix 2, Appendix 3.)

6. Summing up.

Teacher's word: We see that Andrey Stolz is a double of Ilya Oblomov by most criteria. This will also be the reason why Andrei could not change the life of Ilya Oblomov.

7. Reflection. Evaluation.

8. Homework.

A written answer to the question "Why did Olga prefer Stolz to Oblom?"

Each person is individual. There are no absolutely identical people, coinciding both in worldview, and in thoughts, and in views on all aspects of life. In this respect, literary heroes are no different from real people.

Oblomov. Stolz. They seem to be completely different people. Oblomov - slow, lazy, not focused. Stolz is energetic, cheerful, purposeful. But these two people love and respect each other, they are true friends. This means that they are not so different, they also have something in common that holds them together. Is it true? Are Oblomov and Stolz really antipodes?

They had known each other since childhood, since Oblomovka and Verkhlevo, where friends lived, were nearby. But how different was the situation in these two parts! Oblomovka is a village of peace, blessings, sleep, laziness, illiteracy, stupidity. Everyone in it lived for his own pleasure, without experiencing any mental, moral and spiritual needs. The Oblomovites had no goals, no troubles; no one thought about why man, the world, was created. They lived their whole lives without much effort, like a flat river that flows quietly, sluggishly along a long-paved even channel, and there are no stones, mountains and other obstacles in its path, it never overflows more than usual, it never dries up; starts its way somewhere, flows very calmly, without making noise, and quietly flows into some lake. No one even notices that there is such a river. So everyone lived in Oblomovka, caring only about food and peace in their village. Few people passed through it, and there was no way for the Oblomovites to find out that someone lived differently, they also had no idea about the sciences, and they didn’t need all this ... Ilyusha lived among such people - beloved, protected by everyone. He was always surrounded by care and tenderness. He was not allowed to do anything himself and generally was not allowed to do everything that any child wants, thereby involving him in the essence of an Oblomovite. His attitude to education and science was also shaped by those around him: “study will not go away”, the main thing is a certificate “that Ilyusha has passed all the sciences and arts”, but the inner “light” of education was unknown to either the Oblomovites or Ilya himself.

In Verkhlevo, it was the other way around. The manager there was Andryusha's father, a German. Therefore, he undertook everything with the pedantry characteristic of this nation, including his son. From the very early childhood of Andryusha, Ivan Bogdanovich forced him to act independently, to look for a way out of all situations himself: from a street fight to carrying out assignments. But this does not mean that the father left Andrei to the mercy of fate - no! He only directed him at the right moments to independent development, the accumulation of experience; later, he simply gave Andrey "ground" on which he could grow without anyone's help (trips to the city, assignments). And the young Stoltz used this "soil", derived the maximum benefit from it. But Andryusha was raised not only by his father. The mother had completely different views on raising her son. She wanted him to grow up not as a "German burgher", but as a highly moral and spiritual, with excellent manners, with "white hands" master. Therefore, she played Hertz for him, sang about flowers, about the poetry of life, about her high calling. And this two-sided upbringing - on the one hand, labor, practical, tough, on the other - gentle, high, poetic - made Stolz an outstanding person, combining diligence, energy, will, practicality, intelligence, poetry and moderate romanticism.

Yes, these two people lived in different environments, but they met as children. Therefore, from childhood, Ilya and Andrei strongly influenced each other. Andryusha liked that calmness, tranquility that Ilya gave him, who received this from Oblomovka. Ilyusha, in turn, was attracted by Andrey's energy, ability to concentrate and do what was necessary. So it was when they grew up and left their native places ...

It's interesting to even compare how they did it. The Oblomovites said goodbye to Ilyusha with tears, bitterness, sadness. They provided him with a long, but very comfortable - otherwise Ilya could not - trip among servants, treats, featherbeds - as if part of Oblomovka separated and sailed away from the village. Andrey said goodbye to his father dryly and quickly - everything that they could say to each other was clear to them without words. And the son, having learned his route, quickly drove along it. Already at this stage in the life of friends, their divergence is visible.

What did they do when they were away from home? How did you study? How did you behave in the world? Oblomov in his youth, the goal of his life was peace, happiness; Stolz - work, spiritual and physical strength. Therefore, Ilya perceived education as another obstacle on the way to the goal, and Andrei - as the main, integral part of life. Ilya Oblomov wanted to serve peacefully, without worries and worries, “like, for example, lazy writing down receipts and expenditures in a notebook.” For Stolz, the service was a duty for which he was ready. This attitude two friends brought from childhood. But what about love? Ilya "never surrendered to beauties, he was never their slave, even a very diligent admirer, already because great troubles lead to rapprochement with women." Andrei "was not blinded by beauty and therefore did not forget, did not humiliate the dignity of a man, was not a slave, "did not lie at the feet" of beauties, although he did not experience fiery passions. Girls could only be his girlfriends. Because of this same rationalism, Stolz always had friends. At first, Oblomov also had them, but, over time, they began to tire him, and, slowly, he very much limited his social circle.

Time went on and on ... Stolz developed - Oblomov "withdrew into himself." And now they are over thirty years old. What are they?

Stolz is super-energetic, muscular, active, firmly on his feet, amassed a large capital, a scientist who travels a lot. He has friends everywhere, he is respected as a strong personality. He is one of the main representatives of the trading company. He is cheerful, cheerful, hardworking ... but he internally gets tired of such a rhythm of life. And then a childhood friend helps him - Ilya Oblomov, cordiality, calmness, peace of which allow Stoltz to relax. Well, what is the second friend himself?

Ilya does not travel, like Andrey, abroad, on business, in society. He rarely leaves the house at all. He is lazy and does not like fuss, noisy companies, he does not have a single true friend, except for Stolz. His main occupation is to lie on the sofa in his favorite dressing gown among dust and dirt, sometimes in the company of people "without bread, without craft, without hands for productivity and only with a stomach for consumption, but almost always with rank and rank." Such is his external existence. But the inner life of dreams and imagination was the main thing for Ilya Ilyich. Everything that he could do in real life, Oblomov does in dreams and dreams - only without physical costs and special mental efforts.

What is life for Oblomov? Obstacles, burden, worries that interfere with peace and blessings. And for Stolz? The enjoyment of any of its forms, and if one does not like it, then Stolz easily changes it.

For Andrei Ivanovich, the basis of everything is reason and labor. For Oblomov - happiness and tranquility. And in love they are the same ... Both friends fell in love with the same girl. In my opinion, Ilya Ilyich fell in love with Olga simply because his untouched heart had been waiting for love for a long time. Stolz fell in love with her not with his heart, but with his mind, he fell in love with Olga's experience, maturity, mind. The prospect of family life in Oblomov's understanding is to live life happily and cheerfully, without worries, without labor, "so that today is like yesterday." For Stolz, marriage to Olga Sergeevna brought mental happiness, and with it spiritual and physical happiness. So he lived the rest of his life - in harmony of mind, soul, heart with Olga. And Oblomov, having “decayed” completely, married a woman who can hardly be called a person. He exchanged Olga's mind, maturity, will for the round elbows of Agafya Matveevna, who had no idea about the existence of qualities due to which a Man can be called a man. I believe that this is the highest point of differences between Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrey Ivanovich Stolz.

These two people are childhood friends. At first, because of this, they were similar and united in many aspects of life. But, over time, when Ilya and Andrei grew up, Oblomovka and Verkhlevo - two opposites - had their effect on them, and friends began to differ more and more. Their relationship endured many blows, nevertheless, childhood friendship held them firmly. But already at the end of their life path, they became so different that further normal full-fledged maintenance of relations turned out to be impossible, and they had to be forgotten. Of course, throughout their lives, Oblomov and Stolz were antipodes, antipodes, which were held together by childhood friendship, and were torn apart by different upbringing.

Oblomov and Stolz

Stolz - Oblomov's antipode (Principle of antithesis)

The whole figurative system of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is aimed at revealing the character, essence of the protagonist. Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a bored gentleman lying on the couch, dreaming of transformations and a happy life with his family, but doing nothing to make dreams come true. The antipode of Oblomov in the novel is the image of Stolz. Andrei Ivanovich Stolz is one of the main characters, a friend of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, the son of Ivan Bogdanovich Stolz, a Russified German who manages an estate in the village of Verkhlev, five miles from Oblomovka. In the first two chapters of the second part there is a detailed account of the life of Stolz, of the conditions in which his active character was formed.

1. Common features:

a) age (“Stolz is the same age as Oblomov and he is already over thirty”);

b) religion;

c) studying at the boarding house of Ivan Stolz in Verkhlev;

d) service and quick retirement;

e) love for Olga Ilyinskaya;

e) kindness to each other.

2. Various features:

A ) portrait;

Oblomov . “He was a man of about thirty-two or three years of age, of medium height, of pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with absence: any definite idea, any concentration in facial features.

«… flabby beyond years: from lack of movement or air. In general, his body, judging by the matte, too white color of the neck, small plump hands, soft shoulders seemed too effeminate for a man. His movements, when he was even alarmed, were also restrained softness and laziness not devoid of a kind of grace.

Stolz- the same age as Oblomov, he is already over thirty. The portrait of Sh. contrasts with the portrait of Oblomov: “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin, he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, bone and muscle, but no sign of fat roundness ... "

Getting acquainted with the portrait characteristics of this hero, we understand that Stolz is a strong, energetic, purposeful person who is alien to daydreaming. But this almost ideal personality resembles a mechanism, not a living person, and this repels the reader.

b) parents, family;

Oblomov's parents are Russian, he grew up in a patriarchal family.

Stolz - a native of the bourgeois class (his father left Germany, wandered around Switzerland and settled in Russia, becoming the manager of the estate). “Stolz was only half German, according to his father; his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian ... ". The mother was afraid that Stolz, under the influence of his father, would become a rude burgher, but the Russian environment of Stolz interfered.

c) education;

Oblomov passed "from embraces to embraces of relatives and friends", his upbringing was of a patriarchal nature.

Ivan Bogdanovich raised his son strictly: “From the age of eight, he sat with his father at a geographical map, sorted out the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, burghers and factory workers, and read sacred history with his mother, taught Krylov’s fables and disassembled the warehouses of Telemachus.”

When Stolz grew up, his father began to take him to the field, to the market, forced him to work. Then Stoltz began to send his son to the city with instructions, "and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, overlooked it, made a mistake."

Upbringing, like education, was ambivalent: dreaming that a “good bursh” would grow out of his son, the father encouraged boyish fights in every possible way, without which his son could not do a day. If Andrei appeared without a lesson prepared “by heart”, Ivan Bogdanovich sent his son to where he came from - and every time the young Stlz returned with lessons learned.

From his father, he received a “labor, practical education”, and his mother introduced him to the beautiful, tried to put love for art, for beauty into the soul of little Andrei. His mother "in her son ... dreamed of the ideal of a gentleman," and his father taught him to work hard, not at all lordly work.

d) attitude towards studying in a boarding house;

Oblomov studied "out of necessity", "serious reading tired him", "but the poets touched ... to the quick"

Stolz always studied well, was interested in everything. And he was a tutor at his father's boarding school

e) further education;

Oblomov lived in Oblomovka until the age of twenty, then graduated from the university.

Stolz Brilliantly graduated from the university. Parting with his father, sending him from Verkhlev to St. Petersburg, Stolz. says that he will certainly fulfill his father's advice and go to an old friend of Ivan Bogdanovich Reingold - but only when he, Stolz, has a four-story house, like Reinhold. Such autonomy and independence, as well as self-confidence. - the basis of the character and worldview of the younger Stolz, which his father so ardently supports and which Oblomov so lacks.

f) lifestyle;

“Lying at Ilya Ilyich’s was his normal state”

Stolz has a thirst for action

g) housekeeping;

Oblomov did not do business in the village, received an insignificant income and lived in debt.

Stolz serves with success, retires to pursue his own business; makes a house and money. He is a member of a trading company that sends goods abroad; as an agent of the company, Sh. travels to Belgium, England, throughout Russia.

h) life aspirations;

Oblomov, in his youth, "prepared for the field", thought about his role in society, about family happiness, then he excluded social activities from his dreams, his ideal was a carefree life in unity with nature, family, friends.

Stoltz, chose an active beginning in his youth ... Stoltz's ideal of life is unceasing and meaningful work, it is "the image, content, element and purpose of life."

i) views on society;

Oblomov believes that all members of the world and society are “dead, sleeping people”, they are characterized by insincerity, envy, a desire to “get a high-profile rank” by any means, he is not a supporter of progressive forms of housekeeping.

According to Stolz, with the help of the construction of “schools”, “marinas”, “fairs”, “highways”, the old, patriarchal “fragments” should turn into well-maintained estates that generate income.

j) attitude towards Olga;

Oblomov wanted to see a loving woman who could create a serene family life.

Stolz marries Olga Ilyinskaya, and Goncharov tries in their active alliance, full of work and beauty, to imagine an ideal family, a true ideal that Oblomov fails to achieve: “We worked together, dined, went to the fields, studied music, as Oblomov also dreamed of ... Only there was no drowsiness, despondency with them, they spent their days without boredom and without apathy; there was no languid look, no word; the conversation did not end with them, it was often hot.

k) relationship and mutual influence;

Oblomov considered Stolz his only friend, able to understand and help, he listened to his advice, but Stoltz failed to break Oblomovism.

Stolz highly valued the kindness and sincerity of the soul of his friend Oblomov. Stolz is doing everything to awaken Oblomov to activity. In friendship with Oblomov Stolz. also turned out to be on top: he replaced the rogue manager, destroyed the intrigues of Tarantiev and Mukhoyarov, who tricked Oblomov into signing a fake loan letter.

Oblomov is accustomed to living at the behest of Stolz in the smallest matters, he needs the advice of a friend. Without Stolz, Ilya Ilyich cannot decide on anything, however, and Oblomov is in no hurry to follow the advice of Stolz: their concept of life, work, and application of forces is too different.

After the death of Ilya Ilyich, a friend takes on the upbringing of Oblomov's son, Andryusha, named after him.

m) self-esteem ;

Oblomov constantly doubted himself. Stolz never doubts himself.

m) character traits ;

Oblomov is inactive, dreamy, sloppy, indecisive, soft, lazy, apathetic, not devoid of subtle emotional experiences.

Stolz is active, sharp, practical, accurate, loves comfort, open in spiritual manifestations, reason prevails over feeling. Stolz could control his feelings and was "afraid of every dream". Happiness for him was constancy. According to Goncharov, he "knew the value of rare and expensive properties and spent them so sparingly that he was called an egoist, insensitive ...".

The meaning of the images of Oblomov and Stolz.

Goncharov reflected in Oblomov the typical features of the patriarchal nobility. Oblomov absorbed the contradictory features of the Russian national character.

Stolz in Goncharov's novel was assigned the role of a person who could break Oblomovism and revive the hero. According to critics, the vagueness of Goncharov's idea of ​​the role of "new people" in society led to the unconvincing image of Stolz. As conceived by Goncharov, Stolz is a new type of Russian progressive figure. However, he does not portray the hero in a specific activity. The author only informs the reader about what Stoltz was, what he achieved. Showing the Parisian life of Stolz with Olga, Goncharov wants to reveal the breadth of his views, but in fact reduces the hero

So, the image of Stolz in the novel not only clarifies the image of Oblomov, but is also interesting to readers for its originality and the complete opposite of the main character. Dobrolyubov says about him: “He is not the person who can, in a language understandable to the Russian soul, tell us this almighty word “forward!” Dobrolyubov, like all revolutionary democrats, saw the ideal of a "man of action" in serving the people, in the revolutionary struggle. Stoltz is far from this ideal. However, next to Oblomov and Oblomovism, Stolz was still a progressive phenomenon.

What are the life ideals of Stolz? (based on the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov")

In I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”, Andrey Stolz is the antipode of Oblomov. Every feature of Stolz is a blatant protest against the qualities of Oblomov. The first loves an active and interesting life, the second often falls into apathy, he is like a snail that is afraid to get out of its shell. The difference in the characters and life ideals of Oblomov and Stolz was laid in childhood. Stolz received a strict European upbringing. From childhood, he was instilled with good manners, taught to stay in society, forced to read different books, learn poems.

Upbringing had a great influence on Andrei, he is constantly on the move, travels to the world, reads smart books: “In the moral administration of his life, he was looking for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit.” Stolz lived according to an exact plan, according to a budget, there was nothing superfluous in his actions: "He had no extra movements." Most of all, he was afraid of imagination, of any dream, there was no place for this in his soul. What was not subjected to analysis, Stoltz perceived as an optical illusion. He had no idols, but he retained the strength of the soul.

This man lived in the name of the cause: "for labor itself." Stolz is shown as a "renovator" of Russian society, just such a person can change the world and life.

Auxiliary questions to the analysis of this episode:

· Under what circumstances did Oblomov rebel against “this Petersburg life of yours”?

· How are the already familiar symbolic images (sofa, bathrobe, shoes) played out throughout the scene?

· Why, at the beginning of the dispute, in his accusatory statements, Oblomov contrasts two concepts: “light” and “life”? Did Andrew understand?

· Why does Oblomov say long speeches for most of the “duel”, while Stolz only parries them with short, biting blows, adding fuel to the fire, and during the dialogue, the friends almost change places twice?

· What does each of the characters consider "life"?

· How does the ideal outlined by Oblomov differ from the life of Oblomovka and the subsequent stay of Ilya Ilyich in Pshenitsyna's house?

· What was Stoltz convinced of? How did he irritate Oblomov's soul?

· How did Oblomov, in turn, touch Andrei's soul at the end of the scene?

· Why is it important to look at the beginning of the next chapter, Chapter 5?

Episode Analysis (Part 2, Chapter 4)

A dispute between friends broke out at the moment when Stoltz once again calls Oblomov to go somewhere, to do something, and they travel for a whole week on all sorts of business. “Oblomov protested, complained, argued, but was carried away and accompanied his friend everywhere,” the author writes. But the next evening, “returning from somewhere late,” Oblomov exploded: “I don’t like this Petersburg life of yours!” After Stolz's question: "Which one do you like?" - Oblomov burst into a sharp, caustic and long monologue about the meaningless fuss, in which there is no "integrity" and there is no person who "exchanged for every little thing." Oblomov’s long satirical speeches expose both the world and society, and card games without the “task of life”, and the activities of youth, and the absence of a “clear, calm look”, and the “non-awakening dream”, in which the fussy and active, first glance, society. In this monologue, only occasionally interrupted by Andrey with short, sharp objections or questions, Oblomov's remarkable mind and satirical talent are revealed.

The monologue of Ilya Ilyich ends with the key phrase: “No, this is not life, but a distortion of the norm, the ideal of life, which nature has indicated as the goal of man ...” To Andrei’s question, what is this ideal, Oblomov did not find an answer immediately, but only after a long dialogue with short remarks of both. Stolz in this dialogue ironically teases Oblomov's awkward attempts to explain at least something to a friend, but then, apparently irritated by this irony, Ilya Ilyich begins to describe in detail how he would "spend his days." This description is long, kind and poetic, even the rather dry Stolz remarks: “Yes, you are a poet, Ilya!” Inspired, Oblomov, who seized the initiative at this time of the conversation, exclaims: “Yes, a poet in life, because life is poetry. It is free for people to distort it.” Oblomov's ideal is not in immobility, into which he seems to have plunged now, Ilya, on the contrary, is very mobile and poetic in this story, this ideal lies in the fact that everything should be "to your liking", sincerely, honestly, freely, measuredly, "what in eyes, in words, then in the heart. And he, Oblomov, actively participates in this life: he makes and gives his wife a bouquet, carries on a conversation with sincere friends, fishes, takes a gun, although, of course, Oblomov’s immobility and gluttony often slip through this story. "That's life!" - sums up Oblomov and immediately stumbles upon an alternative answer: “This is not life!” And it is at this moment that the word “Oblomovism” appears for the first time on the stage of the novel, which Stolz pronounces. Then, with each new objection by Oblomov, he repeats this word in various interpretations, while not finding more convincing arguments against Oblomov's logic that all Stoltsev's "running around" is the same "workout of peace", has the same goal: "Everything looking for rest and peace.

Here, Stoltz still manages to seize the initiative by reminding him of the joint dreams of youth, after which Oblomov’s confidence disappears, he begins to speak unconvincingly, with numerous pauses (the author uses ellipses), hesitations. He still languidly resists: “So when to live? .. Why suffer all the time?” Stolz dryly and meaninglessly answers: "For the work itself." Here, too, the author is not on the side of Stolz, because labor as an end in itself is really meaningless. In fact, the heroes at this moment remain in their positions. And here Stolz again uses the only winning technique - once again reminds Ilya of childhood, dreams, hopes, ending these reminders with the key phrase: “Now or never!” Reception works flawlessly. Oblomov is touched and begins his sincere and pure confession about the lack of a lofty goal, about the fading of life, about the loss of pride. “Either I didn’t understand this life, or it’s no good, but I didn’t know anything better ...” Oblomov’s sincerity unnerved Andrei’s soul, he seemed to swear to a friend “I won’t leave you ...” At the end of the 4th chapter, it seems that victory in the duel was left to Stolz, but at the beginning of the 5th there is a comic decline and, in fact, the destruction of this “victory”.

Stolz's alternative to "Now or never!" turns for Oblomov into the Hamlet question “To be or not to be?”, But at first Oblomov wants to write something (to start acting), he took a pen, but there was no ink in the inkwell, and paper in the table, and then, when it already seemed , decided to answer the Hamlet question in the affirmative, "he got up from his chair, but did not immediately hit his shoe with his foot, and sat down again." The lack of ink and paper and missing the shoe return Oblomov to his former life.

There will still be the whole story with Olga ahead, the internal struggle in Oblomov’s soul is far from over, but in the history of the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz, and in Oblomov’s possible fate after this scene, the accents have already been placed. Even I. Goncharov himself, who believed in the possibility of combining Oblomov's soulfulness with Stoltsev's efficiency and practicality in a Russian person, seems to understand at this moment of his story that the heroes will remain the same: neither from Oblomov, nor from Stolz, as the author originally wanted , such an ideal does not work. One will be prevented by laziness, contemplation and poetry, which are not compatible with the heroes of everyday life, the other - winglessness and the rejection of any reflection on the meaning of life. The author and the reader painfully realize after this dispute that the true ideal, which would combine purity and efficiency, is unattainable. That is why, despite the fact that the heroes still face many trials, this argument about the ideal can be considered the key episode of the novel. This will happen later, when each of the heroes finds his “peace”: Oblomov is at first the cozy and satisfying, but devoid of poetry house of Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, and then death, and Stolz is a safe haven with Olga, who is tormented by the loss of the meaning of life, who did not recognize in time for his possible happiness with Oblomov.

In the episode of the dispute between friends, the main question is about the purpose and meaning of human life, and it is this question that is decisive for the entire novel. As a true great artist, I. Goncharov raises this eternal question, but leaves the answer open. Therefore, it is worth recognizing that no one won the dispute between friends in the considered episode of the great novel.

Oblomov and Stolz

Stolz - Oblomov's antipode (Principle of antithesis)

The whole figurative system of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is aimed at revealing the character, essence of the protagonist. Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a bored gentleman lying on the couch, dreaming of transformations and a happy life with his family, but doing nothing to make dreams come true. The antipode of Oblomov in the novel is the image of Stolz. Andrei Ivanovich Stolz is one of the main characters, a friend of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, the son of Ivan Bogdanovich Stolz, a Russified German who manages an estate in the village of Verkhlev, five miles from Oblomovka. In the first two chapters of the second part there is a detailed account of the life of Stolz, of the conditions in which his active character was formed.

1. Common features:

a) age (“Stolz is the same age as Oblomov and he is already over thirty”);

b) religion;

c) studying at the boarding house of Ivan Stolz in Verkhlev;

d) service and quick retirement;

e) love for Olga Ilyinskaya;

e) kindness to each other.

2. Various features:

A ) portrait;

Oblomov . “He was a man of about thirty-two or three years of age, of medium height, of pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with absence: any definite idea, any concentration in facial features.

«… flabby beyond years: from lack of movement or air. In general, his body, judging by the matte, too white color of the neck, small plump hands, soft shoulders seemed too effeminate for a man. His movements, when he was even alarmed, were also restrained softness and laziness not devoid of a kind of grace.

Stolz- the same age as Oblomov, he is already over thirty. The portrait of Sh. contrasts with the portrait of Oblomov: “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin, he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, bone and muscle, but no sign of fat roundness ... "

Getting acquainted with the portrait characteristics of this hero, we understand that Stolz is a strong, energetic, purposeful person who is alien to daydreaming. But this almost ideal personality resembles a mechanism, not a living person, and this repels the reader.

b) parents, family;

Oblomov's parents are Russian, he grew up in a patriarchal family.

Stolz - a native of the bourgeois class (his father left Germany, wandered around Switzerland and settled in Russia, becoming the manager of the estate). “Stolz was only half German, according to his father; his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian ... ". The mother was afraid that Stolz, under the influence of his father, would become a rude burgher, but the Russian environment of Stolz interfered.

c) education;

Oblomov passed "from embraces to embraces of relatives and friends", his upbringing was of a patriarchal nature.

Ivan Bogdanovich raised his son strictly: “From the age of eight, he sat with his father at a geographical map, sorted out the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, burghers and factory workers, and read sacred history with his mother, taught Krylov’s fables and disassembled the warehouses of Telemachus.”

When Stolz grew up, his father began to take him to the field, to the market, forced him to work. Then Stoltz began to send his son to the city with instructions, "and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, overlooked it, made a mistake."

Upbringing, like education, was ambivalent: dreaming that a “good bursh” would grow out of his son, the father encouraged boyish fights in every possible way, without which his son could not do a day. If Andrei appeared without a lesson prepared “by heart”, Ivan Bogdanovich sent his son to where he came from - and every time the young Stlz returned with lessons learned.

From his father, he received a “labor, practical education”, and his mother introduced him to the beautiful, tried to put love for art, for beauty into the soul of little Andrei. His mother "in her son ... dreamed of the ideal of a gentleman," and his father taught him to work hard, not at all lordly work.

d) attitude towards studying in a boarding house;

Oblomov studied "out of necessity", "serious reading tired him", "but the poets touched ... to the quick"

Stolz always studied well, was interested in everything. And he was a tutor at his father's boarding school

e) further education;

Oblomov lived in Oblomovka until the age of twenty, then graduated from the university.

Stolz Brilliantly graduated from the university. Parting with his father, sending him from Verkhlev to St. Petersburg, Stolz. says that he will certainly fulfill his father's advice and go to an old friend of Ivan Bogdanovich Reingold - but only when he, Stolz, has a four-story house, like Reinhold. Such autonomy and independence, as well as self-confidence. - the basis of the character and worldview of the younger Stolz, which his father so ardently supports and which Oblomov so lacks.

f) lifestyle;

“Lying at Ilya Ilyich’s was his normal state”

Stolz has a thirst for action

g) housekeeping;

Oblomov did not do business in the village, received an insignificant income and lived in debt.

Stolz serves with success, retires to pursue his own business; makes a house and money. He is a member of a trading company that sends goods abroad; as an agent of the company, Sh. travels to Belgium, England, throughout Russia.

h) life aspirations;

Oblomov, in his youth, "prepared for the field", thought about his role in society, about family happiness, then he excluded social activities from his dreams, his ideal was a carefree life in unity with nature, family, friends.

Stoltz, chose an active beginning in his youth ... Stoltz's ideal of life is unceasing and meaningful work, it is "the image, content, element and purpose of life."

i) views on society;

Oblomov believes that all members of the world and society are “dead, sleeping people”, they are characterized by insincerity, envy, a desire to “get a high-profile rank” by any means, he is not a supporter of progressive forms of housekeeping.

According to Stolz, with the help of the construction of “schools”, “marinas”, “fairs”, “highways”, the old, patriarchal “fragments” should turn into well-maintained estates that generate income.

j) attitude towards Olga;

Oblomov wanted to see a loving woman who could create a serene family life.

Stolz marries Olga Ilyinskaya, and Goncharov tries in their active alliance, full of work and beauty, to imagine an ideal family, a true ideal that Oblomov fails to achieve: “We worked together, dined, went to the fields, studied music, as Oblomov also dreamed of ... Only there was no drowsiness, despondency with them, they spent their days without boredom and without apathy; there was no languid look, no word; the conversation did not end with them, it was often hot.

k) relationship and mutual influence;

Oblomov considered Stolz his only friend, able to understand and help, he listened to his advice, but Stoltz failed to break Oblomovism.

Stolz highly valued the kindness and sincerity of the soul of his friend Oblomov. Stolz is doing everything to awaken Oblomov to activity. In friendship with Oblomov Stolz. also turned out to be on top: he replaced the rogue manager, destroyed the intrigues of Tarantiev and Mukhoyarov, who tricked Oblomov into signing a fake loan letter.

Oblomov is accustomed to living at the behest of Stolz in the smallest matters, he needs the advice of a friend. Without Stolz, Ilya Ilyich cannot decide on anything, however, and Oblomov is in no hurry to follow the advice of Stolz: their concept of life, work, and application of forces is too different.

After the death of Ilya Ilyich, a friend takes on the upbringing of Oblomov's son, Andryusha, named after him.

m) self-esteem ;

Oblomov constantly doubted himself. Stolz never doubts himself.

m) character traits ;

Oblomov is inactive, dreamy, sloppy, indecisive, soft, lazy, apathetic, not devoid of subtle emotional experiences.

Stolz is active, sharp, practical, accurate, loves comfort, open in spiritual manifestations, reason prevails over feeling. Stolz could control his feelings and was "afraid of every dream". Happiness for him was constancy. According to Goncharov, he "knew the value of rare and expensive properties and spent them so sparingly that he was called an egoist, insensitive ...".

The meaning of the images of Oblomov and Stolz.

Goncharov reflected in Oblomov the typical features of the patriarchal nobility. Oblomov absorbed the contradictory features of the Russian national character.

Stolz in Goncharov's novel was assigned the role of a person who could break Oblomovism and revive the hero. According to critics, the vagueness of Goncharov's idea of ​​the role of "new people" in society led to the unconvincing image of Stolz. As conceived by Goncharov, Stolz is a new type of Russian progressive figure. However, he does not portray the hero in a specific activity. The author only informs the reader about what Stoltz was, what he achieved. Showing the Parisian life of Stolz with Olga, Goncharov wants to reveal the breadth of his views, but in fact reduces the hero

So, the image of Stolz in the novel not only clarifies the image of Oblomov, but is also interesting to readers for its originality and the complete opposite of the main character. Dobrolyubov says about him: “He is not the person who can, in a language understandable to the Russian soul, tell us this almighty word “forward!” Dobrolyubov, like all revolutionary democrats, saw the ideal of a "man of action" in serving the people, in the revolutionary struggle. Stoltz is far from this ideal. However, next to Oblomov and Oblomovism, Stolz was still a progressive phenomenon.

All his life, Goncharov dreamed of finding harmony between feelings and reason. He reflected on the strength and poverty of the "man of reason", on the charm and weakness of the "man of the heart". In Oblomov, this idea became one of the leading ones. In this novel, two types of male characters are contrasted: the passive and weak Oblomov, with his golden heart and pure soul, and the energetic Stolz, who overcomes any circumstances with the power of his mind and will. However, Goncharov's human ideal is not personified in either way. Stolz does not seem to the writer a more complete person than Oblomov, whom he also looks at with “sober eyes”. Impartially exposing the "extremes" of the nature of both, Goncharov advocated the completeness and integrity of the spiritual world of man with all the diversity of its manifestations.

At the beginning of the story, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a little over thirty years old, he is a pillar nobleman, the owner of three hundred and fifty souls of serfs, which he inherited. Having served after graduating from Moscow University for three years in one of the capital's departments, he retired with the rank of collegiate secretary. Since then, he lived in St. Petersburg without a break. The novel begins with a description of one of his days, his habits and character. By that time, Oblomov's life had turned into a lazy "crawling from day to day." Retiring from vigorous activity, he lay on the sofa and irritably argued with Zakhar, his serf servant, who was courting him. Revealing the social roots of Oblomovism, Goncharov shows that "it all started with the inability to put on stockings, and ended with the inability to live."

Brought up in a patriarchal noble family, Ilya Ilyich perceived life in Oblomovka, his family estate, with its peace and inactivity, as the ideal of human existence.
The three main acts of life were constantly played out before the eyes of little Ilyusha in childhood: homeland, weddings, funerals. Then their divisions followed: christenings, name days, family holidays. All life pathos is concentrated on this. This was the "wide expanse of aristocratic life" with its idleness, which forever became the ideal of life for Oblomov.

All Oblomovites treated work as a punishment and did not like it, considering it something humiliating. Therefore, life in the eyes of Ilya Ilyich was divided into two halves. One consisted of work and boredom, and these were synonymous for him. The other is from peace and peaceful fun. In Oblomovka, Ilya Ilyich was also instilled with a sense of superiority over other people. The “other” cleans his own boots, dresses himself, runs off for whatever he needs. This "other" has to work tirelessly. Ilyusha, on the other hand, “was brought up tenderly, he did not tolerate cold or hunger, he did not know the need, he did not earn bread for himself, he did not do dirty work.” And he considered studying a punishment sent by heaven for sins, and avoided schoolwork at every opportunity. After graduating from the university, he was no longer engaged in his education, was not interested in science, art, politics.

When Oblomov was young, he expected a lot from fate and from himself. He was preparing to serve the fatherland, play a prominent role in public life, dreamed of family happiness. But days passed after days, and he was still going to start life, he kept drawing his future in his mind. However, "the flower of life blossomed and did not bear fruit."

The future service seemed to him not in the form of a harsh activity, but in the form of some kind of “family activity”. It seemed to him that officials serving together constitute a close-knit and friendly family, all members of which tirelessly care for mutual pleasure. However, his youthful ideas were deceived. Unable to bear the difficulties, he resigned after serving only three years and accomplishing nothing significant.

It happened that, lying on the couch, he would inflame with a desire to point out to mankind its vices. He will quickly change two or three poses, with shining eyes, he will rise up on the bed and look around with inspiration. It seems that his high effort is about to turn into a feat and bring good consequences to mankind. Sometimes he imagines himself an invincible commander: he will invent a war, arrange new crusades, perform feats of kindness and generosity. Or, imagining himself as a thinker, an artist, he reaps laurels in his imagination, everyone worships him, the crowd chases after him. However, in reality, he was not able to understand the management of his own estate and easily became the prey of such scammers as Tarantiev and the "brother" of his landlady.

In addition to this inability brought up by the nobility, many other things prevent Oblomov from being active. He really feels the objectively existing separation of the "poetic" and the "practical" in life, and this is the reason for his bitter disappointment.

In contrast to the passive and inactive Oblomov, Stolz was conceived by the author as a completely unusual figure. Goncharov strove to make it attractive to the reader with his "deliberateness", rational skillful practicality. These qualities have not yet been characteristic of the heroes of Russian literature.

The son of a German burgher and a Russian noblewoman, Andrei Stoltz received a labor, practical education from childhood thanks to his father. It, combined with the poetic influence of his mother, made him a distinct personality. In contrast to the rounded Oblomov, he was thin, all consisted of muscles and nerves. There was some kind of freshness and strength from him. “Just as there was nothing superfluous in his body, so in the moral administration of his life he sought a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit.” “He walked through life firmly, cheerfully, lived on a budget, trying to spend every day, like every ruble.” He attributed the cause of any failure to himself, "and did not hang, like a caftan, on someone else's nail." He sought to develop a simple and direct outlook on life. Most of all, he was afraid of imagination, "this two-faced companion," and any dream, so everything mysterious and mysterious had no place in his soul. Everything that is not subjected to the analysis of experience does not correspond to practical truth, he considered a deception.

Although Oblomov has nothing to object to Stolz's reproaches, some spiritual rightness lies in Ilya Ilyich's confession that he failed to understand this life.

If at the beginning of the novel Goncharov speaks more about Oblomov's laziness, then at the end the theme of Oblomov's "golden heart" sounds more and more insistently, which he carried unscathed through life. Oblomov's misfortune is connected not only with the social environment, the influence of which he could not resist. It is also contained in the "disastrous excess of the heart." Softness, delicacy, vulnerability of the hero disarm his will and make him powerless before people and circumstances.

All his life, Goncharov dreamed of finding harmony between feelings and reason. He reflected on the strength and poverty of the "man of reason", on the charm and weakness of the "man of the heart". In "Oblomov" this idea has become one of the leading ones. In this novel, two types of male characters are contrasted: the passive and weak Oblomov, with his golden heart and pure soul, and the energetic Stolz, who overcomes any circumstances with the power of his mind and will. However, Goncharov's human ideal is not personified in either way. Stolz does not seem to the writer a more complete person than Oblomov, whom he also looks at with "sober eyes." Impartially exposing the "extremes" of the nature of both, Goncharov advocated the completeness and integrity of the spiritual world of man with all the diversity of its manifestations.

Each of the main characters of the novel had their own understanding of the meaning of life, their life ideals, which they dreamed of realizing.

At the beginning of the story, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a little over thirty years old, he is a pillar nobleman, the owner of three hundred and fifty souls of serfs, which he inherited. Having served after graduating from Moscow University for three years in one of the capital's departments, he retired with the rank of collegiate secretary. Since then, he lived in St. Petersburg without a break. The novel begins with a description of one of his days, his habits and character. By that time, Oblomov's life had turned into a lazy "crawling from day to day." Retiring from vigorous activity, he lay on the sofa and irritably argued with Zakhar, his serf servant, who was courting him. Revealing the social roots of Oblomovism, Goncharov shows that "everything began with the inability to put on stockings, and ended with the inability to live."

Brought up in a patriarchal noble family, Ilya Ilyich perceived life in Oblomovka, his family estate, with its peace and inactivity, as the ideal of human existence. The norm of life was ready and taught to the Oblomovites by their parents, and they took it from their parents. The three main acts of life were constantly played out before the eyes of little Ilyusha in childhood: homeland, weddings, funerals. Then their divisions followed: christenings, name days, family holidays. All life pathos is concentrated on this. This was the "wide expanse of aristocratic life" with its idleness, which forever became the ideal of life for Oblomov.

All Oblomovites treated work as a punishment and did not like it, considering it something humiliating. Therefore, life in the eyes of Ilya Ilyich was divided into two halves. One consisted of work and boredom, and these were synonymous for him. The other is from peace and peaceful fun. In Oblomovka, Ilya Ilyich was also instilled with a sense of superiority over other people. The “other” cleans his own boots, dresses himself, runs off for whatever he needs. This "other" has to work tirelessly. Ilyusha, on the other hand, "was brought up tenderly, he did not tolerate cold or hunger, he did not know the need, he did not earn bread for himself, he did not do dirty work." And he considered studying a punishment sent by heaven for sins, and avoided schoolwork at every opportunity. After graduating from the university, he was no longer engaged in his education, was not interested in science, art, politics.

When Oblomov was young, he expected a lot from fate and from himself. He was preparing to serve the fatherland, play a prominent role in public life, dreamed of family happiness. But days passed after days, and he was still going to start life, he kept drawing his future in his mind. However, "the flower of life blossomed and did not bear fruit."

The future service seemed to him not in the form of a harsh activity, but in the form of some kind of "family activity." It seemed to him that officials serving together constitute a close-knit and friendly family, all members of which tirelessly care for mutual pleasure. However, his youthful ideas were deceived. Unable to bear the difficulties, he resigned after serving only three years and accomplishing nothing significant.

Only the youthful glow of his friend Stolz could still infect Oblomov, and in his dreams he sometimes burned out of a thirst for work and a distant but attractive goal. It happened that, lying on the couch, he would inflame with a desire to point out to mankind its vices. He will quickly change two or three poses, with shining eyes, he will rise up on the bed and look around with inspiration. It seems that his high effort is about to turn into a feat and bring good consequences to mankind. Sometimes he imagines himself an invincible commander: he will invent a war, arrange new crusades, perform feats of kindness and generosity. Or, imagining himself as a thinker, an artist, he reaps laurels in his imagination, everyone worships him, the crowd chases after him. However, in reality, he was not able to understand the management of his own estate and easily became the prey of such swindlers as Tarantiev and the "brother" of his landlady.

Over time, he developed remorse, which haunted him. He was hurt for his underdevelopment, for the heaviness that prevented him from living. He was gnawed by envy that others live so fully and widely, but something prevents him from boldly going through life. He painfully felt that a good and bright beginning was buried in him, as in a grave. He tried to find the culprit outside himself and did not find. However, apathy and indifference quickly replaced anxiety in his soul, and he again slept peacefully on his sofa.

Even love for Olga did not revive him to practical life. Faced with the need to act, overcoming the difficulties that stood in the way, he became frightened and retreated. Having settled on the Vyborg side, he completely abandoned himself to the cares of Agafya Pshenitsyna, finally withdrawing from active life.

In addition to this inability brought up by the nobility, many other things prevent Oblomov from being active. He really feels the objectively existing separation of the "poetic" and the "practical" in life, and this is the reason for his bitter disappointment. He is outraged that the highest meaning of human existence in society is often replaced by a false, imaginary content. Although Oblomov has nothing to object to Stolz's reproaches, some spiritual rightness lies in Ilya Ilyich's confession that he failed to understand this life.

If at the beginning of the novel Goncharov speaks more about Oblomov's laziness, then at the end the theme of Oblomov's "golden heart" sounds more and more insistently, which he carried unscathed through life. Oblomov's misfortune is connected not only with the social environment, the influence of which he could not resist. It is also contained in the "disastrous excess of the heart." Softness, delicacy, vulnerability of the hero disarm his will and make him powerless before people and circumstances.

In contrast to the passive and inactive Oblomov, Stolz was conceived by the author as a completely unusual figure. Goncharov strove to make it attractive to the reader with his "deliberateness", rational skillful practicality. These qualities have not yet been characteristic of the heroes of Russian literature.

The son of a German burgher and a Russian noblewoman, Andrei Stoltz received a labor, practical education from childhood thanks to his father. It, combined with the poetic influence of his mother, made him a distinct personality. In contrast to the rounded Oblomov, he was thin, all consisted of muscles and nerves. There was some kind of freshness and strength from him. "Just as there was nothing superfluous in his body, so in the moral administrations of his life he was looking for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit." "He walked through life firmly, cheerfully, lived on a budget, trying to spend every day, like every ruble." He attributed the cause of any failure to himself, "and did not hang, like a caftan, on someone else's nail." He sought to develop a simple and direct outlook on life. Most of all, he was afraid of imagination, "this two-faced companion," and any dream, so everything mysterious and mysterious had no place in his soul. Everything that is not subjected to the analysis of experience does not correspond to practical truth, he considered a deception. Labor was the image, content, element and purpose of his life. Above all, he put perseverance in achieving goals: this was a sign of character in his eyes.

Emphasizing the rationalism and strong-willed qualities of his hero, Goncharov, however, was aware of Stolz's heartfelt callousness. Apparently, the man of the "budget", emotionally confined to rigid and narrow limits, is not Goncharov's hero. One mercantile comparison: Stoltz spends "every day" of his life like "every ruble" - removes him from the author's ideal. Goncharov also speaks of the "moral functions of the personality" of his hero as the physiological work of the body or the "execution of official duties." You can't "send" friendly feelings. But in relation to Stolz Oblomov, this shade is present.

In the development of the action, Stolz gradually manifests himself as "not a hero." For Goncharov, who sang the holy recklessness of Chatsky and perfectly understood the anxiety of great spiritual demands, this was a sign of inner insufficiency. The absence of a lofty goal, an understanding of the meaning of human life, is constantly revealed, despite Stolz's vigorous activity in the practical sphere. He has nothing to say to Oblomov in response to the recognition that his friend did not find meaning in the life around him. Having received Olga's consent to the marriage, Stolz utters puzzling words: "Everything is found, there is nothing to look for, there is nowhere else to go." And later he carefully tries to persuade the alarmed Olga to put up with "rebellious questions", excluding "Faustian" anxiety from his life.

Remaining objective in relation to all his characters, the writer explores the inner possibilities of various contemporary human types, finding strength and weakness in each of them. However, Russian reality has not yet waited for its true hero. According to Dobrolyubov, the real historical cause in Russia was not in the sphere of practicality and businesslikeness, but in the sphere of the struggle for the renewal of the social order. An active existence and new, active people were still only a prospect, already very close, but still not a reality. It has already become clear what kind of person Russia does not need, but the type of activity and the type of figure that it needs were still elusive.

"Oblomov" - Andrey Stolz (part 2, chapters 1 - 5). Lilac branch. Family happiness Oblomov. Portrait as a means of creating an image. I. A. Goncharov "Oblomov". M. Yu. Lermontov. Read chapter 1 and answer the question: Analysis of the episode "Oblomov's Dream" (chapter 9). Olga Ilinskaya and Ilya Oblomov. What is a portrait? Love story.

"Roman Oblomov" - The novel "An Ordinary Story" Ill. Roman I.A. Goncharova "Oblomov" Ill. Yu.S. Gershkovich 1981. Zakhar - A. Popov; Oblomov - O. Tabakov. A frame from the film A Few Days in the Life of I.I. Oblomov. Trilogy by Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov: Directed by N.S. Mikhalkov. 1980. In the living room before dinner. Frame from the film. Yu.Gershkovich 1982.

"Oblomov Goncharov" - Room (interior). Article "What is Oblomovism?". Ordinary history (1844 - 1846). I.A. Goncharov. The novel "Oblomov". Hero portrait. Oblomov in the system of author's reasoning. A. V. Druzhinin, liberal critic. Precipice (1868). From the history of the creation of the river. Contemporaries about the novel "Oblomov". Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.

"Oblomov in Goncharov's novel" - One day in the life of Oblomov. The chapter "Oblomov's Dream" shows the origins of the hero's character. Stolz. The second and third parts are devoted to the love story of Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. Oblomov's love story. On the face of no sleep, no fatigue, no boredom. Oblomov and Stolz. Oblomov's dream. Olga Ilinskaya. The image of Olga Ilyinskaya is the creative success of I.A. Goncharov.

"Goncharov Oblomov" - The role of details in I.A. Goncharov. Oblomov did not pass the test of love. The role of the detail in the work of I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov". Portrait of I.I. Oblomov. Sleepy interior. Portrait details. Interior. The robe is a symbol of immobility and laziness. The sofa is a symbol of inactivity, laziness and apathy. Plot details. Oblomov's interior is similar to Manilov's.

"Goncharov's novel Oblomov" - 1855-1857 – travel essays “Frigate “Pallada”. Restore the composition of the dream: highlight the main thematic parts. N.Mikhailovsky. Stolz. The circle of life of Ilya Ilyich. “Olga is a moderate, balanced missionary. Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov 1812 - 1891. Vyborg side. Why get up off the couch?

What are the life ideals of Stolz? (based on the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov")

In I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”, Andrey Stolz is the antipode of Oblomov. Every feature of Stolz is a blatant protest against the qualities of Oblomov. The first loves an active and interesting life, the second often falls into apathy, he is like a snail that is afraid to get out of its shell. The difference in the characters and life ideals of Oblomov and Stolz was laid in childhood. Stolz received a strict European upbringing. From childhood, he was instilled with good manners, taught to stay in society, forced to read different books, learn poems.
Upbringing had a great influence on Andrei, he is constantly on the move, travels to the world, reads smart books: “In the moral administration of his life, he was looking for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit.” Stolz lived according to an exact plan, according to a budget, there was nothing superfluous in his actions: "He had no extra movements." Most of all, he was afraid of imagination, of any dream, there was no place for this in his soul. What was not subjected to analysis, Stoltz perceived as an optical illusion. He had no idols, but he retained the strength of the soul.
This man lived in the name of the cause: "for labor itself." Stolz is shown as a "renovator" of Russian society, just such a person can change the world and life.