Extra person- a literary type characteristic of the works of Russian writers of the 1840s and 1850s. Usually this is a person of considerable ability who cannot realize his talents in the official field of Nikolaev Russia.
Belonging to the upper classes of society, the superfluous person is alienated from the nobility, despises bureaucracy, but, having no other prospect of self-realization, mostly spends time in idle entertainment. This lifestyle fails to alleviate his boredom, leading to duels, gambling, and other self-destructive behaviors. Typical features of the superfluous person include "mental fatigue, deep skepticism, discord between word and deed, and, as a rule, social passivity."
The name "superfluous man" was assigned to the type of disillusioned Russian nobleman after the publication in 1850 of Turgenev's story The Diary of a Superfluous Man. The earliest and classic examples are Eugene Onegin A. S. Pushkin, Chatsky from "Woe from Wit", Pechorin M. Lermontov - go back to the Byronic hero of the era of romanticism, to Rene Chateaubriand and Adolphe Constant. The further evolution of the type is represented by Herzen Beltov (“Who is to blame?”) and the heroes of Turgenev's early works (Rudin, Lavretsky, Chulkaturin).
Superfluous people often bring trouble not only to themselves, but also female characters who have the misfortune to love them. The negative side of superfluous people, associated with their displacement outside the social and functional structure of society, comes to the fore in the works of literary officials A.F. Pisemsky and I.A. Goncharov. The latter opposes practical businessmen “hovering in the skies” to loafers: Aduev Jr. - Aduev Sr., and Oblomov - Stolz.
Who is this "extra person"? This is a well-educated, intelligent, talented and extremely gifted hero (man), who, for various reasons (both external and internal), could not realize himself, his capabilities. The "superfluous person" is looking for the meaning of life, the goal, but does not find it. Therefore, he wastes himself on life's trifles, on entertainment, on passions, but does not feel satisfaction from this. Often the life of an "extra person" ends tragically: he dies or dies in the prime of life.
Examples of "extra people":
The ancestor of the type of "superfluous people" in Russian literature is considered Eugene Onegin from the novel of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. In terms of his potential, Onegin is one of the best people of his time. He has a sharp and penetrating mind, broad erudition (he was interested in philosophy, astronomy, medicine, history, etc.) Onegin argues with Lensky about religion, science, morality. This hero even strives to do something real. For example, he tried to alleviate the fate of his peasants (“He replaced the corvee with an old dues with a light one with a yoke”). But all this was wasted for a long time. Onegin was just burning through his life, But he got bored very soon. The bad influence of secular Petersburg, where the hero was born and raised, did not allow Onegin to open up. He did nothing useful not only for society, but also for himself. The hero was unhappy: he did not know how to love and, by and large, nothing could interest him. But throughout the novel, Onegin changes. It seems to me that this is the only case when the author leaves hope to the “extra person”. Like everything in Pushkin, the novel's open ending is optimistic. The writer leaves his hero hope for a revival.
The next representative of the type of "superfluous people" is Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time". This hero reflected a characteristic feature of the life of society in the 30s of the 19th century - the development of social and personal self-consciousness. Therefore, the hero, the first in Russian literature, tries to understand the reasons for his misfortune, his difference from others. Of course, Pechorin has enormous personal powers. He is gifted and even talented in many ways. But he does not find the use of his forces. Like Onegin, Pechorin indulged in all serious things in his youth: secular revels, passions, novels. But as a non-empty person, the hero very soon got bored with all this. Pechorin understands that secular society destroys, dries up, kills the soul and heart in a person.
What is the reason for the life restlessness of this hero? He does not see the meaning of his life, he has no purpose. Pechorin does not know how to love, because he is afraid of real feelings, afraid of responsibility. What is left for the hero? Only cynicism, criticism and boredom. As a result, Pechorin dies. Lermontov shows us that in the world of disharmony there is no place for a person who, with all his soul, albeit unconsciously, strives for harmony.
The next in the line of "superfluous people" are the heroes of I.S. Turgenev. First of all, this Rudin- the main character of the novel of the same name. His worldview was formed under the influence of philosophical circles of the 30s of the 19th century. Rudin sees the meaning of his life in serving high ideals. This hero is a great orator, he is able to lead, ignite the hearts of people. But the author constantly checks Rudin "for strength", for viability. The hero of these checks does not stand up. It turns out that Rudin is only able to speak, he cannot put his thoughts and ideals into practice. The hero does not know real life, cannot assess the circumstances and his strength. Therefore, he is "out of business."
Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov stands out from this orderly line of heroes. He is not a nobleman, but a commoner. He had, unlike all previous heroes, to fight for his life, for his education. Bazarov is well aware of reality, the everyday side of life. He has his "idea" and implements it as best he can. In addition, of course, Bazarov is a very intellectually powerful person, he has great potential. But the point is that the very idea that the hero serves is erroneous and pernicious. Turgenev shows that it is impossible to destroy everything without building anything in return. In addition, this hero, like all other "superfluous people", does not live the life of the heart. He gives all his potential to mental activity.
But man is an emotional being, a being with a soul. If a person knows how to love, then there is a high probability that he will be happy. Not a single hero from the gallery of "superfluous people" is happy in love. This speaks volumes. All of them are afraid to love, afraid or cannot come to terms with the surrounding reality. All this is very sad, because it makes these people unhappy. The enormous spiritual strength of these heroes and their intellectual potential are being wasted. The unviability of "superfluous people" is evidenced by the fact that they often die untimely (Pechorin, Bazarov) or vegetate, wasting themselves in vain (Beltov, Rudin). Only Pushkin gives his hero hope for rebirth. And this inspires optimism. So, there is a way out, there is a way to salvation. I think that he is always inside the personality, you just need to find strength in yourself.
The image of the "little man" in Russian literature of the 19th century
"Small man"- a type of literary hero that arose in Russian literature with the advent of realism, that is, in the 20-30s of the XIX century.
The theme of the "little man" is one of the cross-cutting themes of Russian literature, which was constantly addressed by writers of the 19th century. A.S. Pushkin was the first to mention it in the story “The Stationmaster”. The successors of this theme were N.V. Gogol, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.P. Chekhov and many others.
This person is small precisely in social terms, since he occupies one of the lower rungs of the hierarchical ladder. His place in society is little or completely invisible. A person is considered “small” also because the world of his spiritual life and claims is also extremely narrow, impoverished, filled with all sorts of prohibitions. For him there are no historical and philosophical problems. He lives in a narrow and closed circle of his vital interests.
The best humanistic traditions are associated with the theme of the "little man" in Russian literature. Writers invite people to think about the fact that every person has the right to happiness, to their own outlook on life.
Examples of "little people":
1) Yes, Gogol in the story "The Overcoat" characterizes the protagonist as a poor, ordinary, insignificant and inconspicuous person. In life, he was assigned the insignificant role of a copyist of departmental documents. Brought up in the sphere of subordination and execution of orders of superiors, Akaky Akakievich Bashmachkin not accustomed to reflect on the meaning of his work. That is why, when he is offered a task that requires the manifestation of elementary ingenuity, he begins to worry, worry, and in the end comes to the conclusion: “No, it’s better to let me rewrite something.”
The spiritual life of Bashmachkin is in tune with his inner aspirations. The accumulation of money to buy a new overcoat becomes for him the goal and meaning of life. The theft of a long-awaited new thing, which was acquired through hardship and suffering, becomes a disaster for him.
And yet Akaky Akakievich does not look like an empty, uninteresting person in the mind of the reader. We imagine that there were a great many such small, humiliated people. Gogol urged society to look at them with understanding and pity.
This is indirectly demonstrated by the surname of the protagonist: diminutive suffix -chk-(Bashmachkin) gives it the appropriate shade. "Mother, save your poor son!" - the author will write.
Calling for justice the author raises the question of the need to punish the inhumanity of society. As compensation for the humiliation and insults suffered during his lifetime, Akaky Akakievich, who rose from the grave in the epilogue, comes through and takes away their overcoats and fur coats. He calms down only when he takes away the outer clothing of the "significant person" who played a tragic role in the life of the "little man".
2) In the story Chekhov "Death of an official" we see the slavish soul of an official whose understanding of the world is completely distorted. There is no need to talk about human dignity here. The author gives his hero a wonderful last name: Chervyakov. Describing the small, insignificant events of his life, Chekhov seems to look at the world with Chervyakov's eyes, and these events become huge.
So, Chervyakov was at the performance and “felt on top of bliss. But suddenly ... sneezed. Looking around like a "polite person", the hero was horrified to find that he had sprayed a civilian general. Chervyakov begins to apologize, but this seemed not enough to him, and the hero asks for forgiveness again and again, day after day ...
There are a lot of such little officials who know only their little world and it is not surprising that their experiences are made up of such small situations. The author conveys the whole essence of the official's soul, as if examining it under a microscope. Unable to bear the cry in response to the apology, Chervyakov goes home and dies. This terrible catastrophe of his life is the catastrophe of his limitations.
3) In addition to these writers, Dostoevsky also addressed the theme of the “little man” in his work. The main characters of the novel "Poor people" - Makar Devushkin- a half-impoverished official, crushed by grief, want and social lawlessness, and Varenka- a girl who has become a victim of social ill-being. Like Gogol in The Overcoat, Dostoevsky turned to the theme of the disenfranchised, immensely humiliated "little man" who lives his inner life in conditions that trample on the dignity of man. The author sympathizes with his poor heroes, shows the beauty of their soul.
4) Theme "poor people"
develops as a writer in the novel "Crime and Punishment". One by one, the writer reveals before us pictures of terrible poverty, which humiliates the dignity of a person. The scene of the work becomes Petersburg, and the poorest district of the city. Dostoevsky creates a canvas of immeasurable human torment, suffering and grief, peers penetratingly into the soul of the “little man”, discovers in him deposits of enormous spiritual wealth.
Family life unfolds before us Marmeladov. These are people crushed by reality. He drinks himself with grief and loses his human appearance official Marmeladov, who has "nowhere else to go." Exhausted by poverty, his wife Ekaterina Ivanovna dies of consumption. Sonya is released into the street to sell her body in order to save her family from starvation.
The fate of the Raskolnikov family is also difficult. His sister Dunya, wanting to help her brother, is ready to sacrifice herself and marry the rich Luzhin, whom she feels disgusted with. Raskolnikov himself conceives a crime, the roots of which, in part, lie in the sphere of social relations in society. The images of “little people” created by Dostoevsky are imbued with the spirit of protest against social injustice, against the humiliation of people and faith in their high calling. The souls of the "poor" can be beautiful, full of spiritual generosity and beauty, but broken by the hardest conditions of life.
6. The Russian world in the prose of the 19th century.
For lectures:
Depiction of Reality in Russian Literature of the 19th Century.
1. Landscape. Functions and types.
2. Interior: detail problem.
3. The image of time in a literary text.
4. Motif of the road as a form of artistic development of the national picture of the world.
Landscape - not necessarily an image of nature, in literature it may involve a description of any open space. This definition corresponds to the semantics of the term. From French - country, area. In French art theory, the landscape description includes both the depiction of wildlife and the depiction of man-made objects.
The well-known typology of landscapes is based on the specifics of the functioning of this text component.
First, landscapes stand out, which are the background of the story. These landscapes, as a rule, indicate the place and time against which the depicted events take place.
The second type of landscape is a landscape that creates a lyrical background. Most often, when creating such a landscape, the artist pays attention to meteorological conditions, because this landscape should first of all influence the emotional state of the reader.
The third type is the landscape, which creates/becomes the psychological background of existence and becomes one of the means of revealing the character's psychology.
The fourth type is the landscape, which becomes a symbolic background, a means of symbolic reflection of the reality depicted in a literary text.
The landscape can be used as a means of depicting a particular artistic time or as a form of presence of the author.
This typology is not the only one. The landscape can be expositional, dual, etc. Modern critics isolate Goncharov's landscapes; it is believed that Goncharov used the landscape for an ideal representation of the world. For a person who writes, the evolution of the landscape skill of Russian writers is fundamentally important. There are two main periods:
· pre-Pushkin, during this period the landscapes were characterized by the completeness and concreteness of the surrounding nature;
· post-Pushkin period, the idea of an ideal landscape has changed. It assumes the stinginess of details, the economy of the image and the accuracy of the selection of details. Accuracy, according to Pushkin, involves identifying the most significant feature perceived in a certain way by feelings. This idea of Pushkin, then will be used by Bunin.
Second level. Interior - image of the interior. The main unit of the interior image is a detail (detail), attention to which was first demonstrated by Pushkin. The literary test of the 19th century did not show a clear boundary between the interior and the landscape.
Time in a literary text in the 19th century becomes discrete, intermittent. Heroes easily go into memories and whose fantasies rush into the future. There is a selectivity of the attitude to time, which is explained by the dynamics. Time in a literary text in the 19th century has a convention. The most conditional time in a lyrical work, with the predominance of the grammar of the present tense, for lyrics, the interaction of different time layers is especially characteristic. Artistic time is not necessarily concrete, it is abstract. In the 19th century, the depiction of historical color became a special means of concretizing artistic time.
One of the most effective means of depicting reality in the 19th century was the motif of the road, becoming part of the plot formula, a narrative unit. Initially, this motif dominated the travel genre. In the 11th-18th centuries, in the genre of travel, the motif of the road was used, first of all, to expand ideas about the surrounding space (cognitive function). In sentimentalist prose, the cognitive function of this motif is complicated by evaluativeness. Gogol uses travel to explore the surrounding space. The renewal of the functions of the road motif is associated with the name of Nikolai Alekseevich Nekrasov. "Silence" 1858
For our tickets:
The 19th century is called the "Golden Age" of Russian poetry and the century of Russian literature on a global scale. It should not be forgotten that the literary leap that took place in the 19th century was prepared by the entire course of the literary process of the 17th and 18th centuries. The 19th century is the time of the formation of the Russian literary language, which took shape largely thanks to A.S. Pushkin.
But the 19th century began with the heyday of sentimentalism and the formation of romanticism. These literary trends found expression primarily in poetry. Poetic works of poets E.A. Baratynsky, K.N. Batyushkova, V.A. Zhukovsky, A.A. Feta, D.V. Davydova, N.M. Yazykov. Creativity F.I. Tyutchev's "Golden Age" of Russian poetry was completed. However, the central figure of this time was Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.
A.S. Pushkin began his ascent to the literary Olympus with the poem "Ruslan and Lyudmila" in 1920. And his novel in verse "Eugene Onegin" was called an encyclopedia of Russian life. Romantic poems by A.S. Pushkin's "The Bronze Horseman" (1833), "The Fountain of Bakhchisaray", "Gypsies" opened the era of Russian romanticism. Many poets and writers considered A. S. Pushkin their teacher and continued the traditions of creating literary works laid down by him. One of these poets was M.Yu. Lermontov. Known for his romantic poem "Mtsyri", poetic story "Demon", a lot of romantic poems. Interestingly, Russian poetry of the 19th century was closely connected with the social and political life of the country. Poets tried to comprehend the idea of their special purpose. The poet in Russia was considered a conductor of divine truth, a prophet. The poets urged the authorities to listen to their words. Vivid examples of understanding the role of the poet and influence on the political life of the country are the poems of A.S. Pushkin "Prophet", ode "Liberty", "The Poet and the Crowd", a poem by M.Yu. Lermontov "On the Death of a Poet" and many others.
The prose writers of the beginning of the century were influenced by the English historical novels of W. Scott, whose translations were very popular. The development of Russian prose of the 19th century began with the prose works of A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol. Pushkin, influenced by English historical novels, creates story "The Captain's Daughter" where the action takes place against the backdrop of grandiose historical events: during the Pugachev rebellion. A.S. Pushkin did an enormous job, exploring this historical period. This work was largely political in nature and was directed to those in power.
A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol identified the main artistic types
that would be developed by writers throughout the 19th century. This is the artistic type of the “superfluous person”, an example of which is Eugene Onegin in the novel by A.S. Pushkin, and the so-called type of "little man", which is shown by N.V. Gogol in his story "The Overcoat", as well as A.S. Pushkin in the story "The Stationmaster".
Literature inherited its publicism and satirical character from the 18th century. In a prose poem N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls" the writer in a sharp satirical manner shows a swindler who buys up dead souls, various types of landowners who are the embodiment of various human vices(the influence of classicism affects). Comedy is in the same vein. "Inspector". The works of A. S. Pushkin are also full of satirical images. Literature continues to satirically depict Russian reality. The tendency to portray the vices and shortcomings of Russian society is a characteristic feature of all Russian classical literature
. It can be traced in the works of almost all writers of the 19th century. At the same time, many writers implement the satirical trend in a grotesque form. Examples of grotesque satire are the works of N.V. Gogol "The Nose", M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin "Gentlemen Golovlevs", "History of one city".
Since the middle of the 19th century, Russian realistic literature has been developing, which is created against the background of the tense socio-political situation that developed in Russia during the reign of Nicholas I. The crisis of the feudal system is brewing, the contradictions between the authorities and the common people are strong. There is a need to create a realistic literature that sharply reacts to the socio-political situation in the country.
Literary critic V.G. Belinsky marks a new realistic trend in literature. His position is being developed by N.A. Dobrolyubov, N.G. Chernyshevsky. A dispute arises between Westernizers and Slavophiles about the paths of Russia's historical development.
Writers address to the socio-political problems of Russian reality.
The genre of the realistic novel is developing. Their works are created by I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, I.A. Goncharov. Socio-political and philosophical problems prevail. Literature is distinguished by a special psychologism.
people.
The literary process of the late 19th century discovered the names of N. S. Leskov, A.N. Ostrovsky A.P. Chekhov. The latter proved to be a master of a small literary genre - a story, as well as an excellent playwright. Competitor A.P. Chekhov was Maxim Gorky.
The end of the 19th century was marked by the formation of pre-revolutionary sentiments. The realist tradition was beginning to fade. It was replaced by the so-called decadent literature, the hallmarks of which were mysticism, religiosity, as well as a premonition of changes in the socio-political life of the country. Subsequently, decadence grew into symbolism. This opens a new page in the history of Russian literature.
7. Literary situation at the end of the 19th century.
Realism
The second half of the 19th century is characterized by the undivided dominance of the realistic trend in Russian literature. basis realism as an artistic method is socio-historical and psychological determinism. The personality and fate of the depicted person appear as the result of the interaction of his character (or, more deeply, universal human nature) with the circumstances and laws of social life (or, more broadly, history, culture - as can be seen in the work of A.S. Pushkin).
Realism of the 2nd half of the 19th century. often call critical, or socially accusatory. Recently, in modern literary criticism, there have been more and more attempts to abandon such a definition. It is both too wide and too narrow; it levels the individual characteristics of the writers' creativity. The founder of critical realism is often called N.V. Gogol, however, in Gogol's work, social life, the history of the human soul is often correlated with such categories as eternity, supreme justice, the providential mission of Russia, the kingdom of God on earth. Gogol's tradition to one degree or another in the second half of the 19th century. picked up by L. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky, partly N.S. Leskov - it is no coincidence that in their work (especially later) there is a craving for such pre-realistic forms of comprehension of reality as a sermon, a religious and philosophical utopia, a myth, a life. No wonder M. Gorky expressed the idea of the synthetic nature of Russian classical realism, about its non-delimitation from the romantic direction. At the end of XIX - beginning of XX century. the realism of Russian literature not only opposes, but also interacts in its own way with the emerging symbolism. The realism of the Russian classics is universal, it is not limited to the reproduction of empirical reality, it includes a universal content, a “mystical plan”, which brings realists closer to the search for romantics and symbolists.
Socially accusatory pathos in its purest form appears most in the work of writers of the second row - F.M. Reshetnikova, V.A. Sleptsova, G.I. Uspensky; even N.A. Nekrasov and M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, with all their closeness to the aesthetics of revolutionary democracy, are not limited in their work posing purely social, topical issues. Nevertheless, a critical orientation towards any form of social and spiritual enslavement of a person unites all realist writers of the second half of the 19th century.
XIX century revealed the main aesthetic principles and typological properties of realism. In Russian literature of the second half of the XIX century. It is conditionally possible to single out several directions within the framework of realism.
1. The work of realist writers who strive for the artistic recreation of life in the "forms of life itself." The image often acquires such a degree of reliability that literary heroes are spoken of as living people. I.S. belong to this direction. Turgenev, I.A. Goncharov, partly N.A. Nekrasov, A.N. Ostrovsky, partly L.N. Tolstoy, A.P. Chekhov.
2. Bright in the 60s and 70s the philosophical-religious, ethical-psychological direction in Russian literature is outlined(L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky). Dostoevsky and Tolstoy have amazing pictures of social reality, depicted in the "forms of life itself." But at the same time, writers always start from certain religious and philosophical doctrines.
3. Satirical, grotesque realism(in the 1st half of the 19th century, it was partly represented in the works of N.V. Gogol, in the 60-70s it unfolded in full force in the prose of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin). The grotesque does not appear as hyperbole or fantasy, it characterizes the method of the writer; he combines in images, types, plots what is unnatural, and is absent in life, but is possible in the world created by the creative imagination of the artist; similar grotesque, hyperbolic images emphasize certain patterns that prevail in life.
4. Completely unique realism, "hearted" (Belinsky's word) by humanistic thought, presented in art A.I. Herzen. Belinsky noted the “Voltaireian” warehouse of his talent: “talent went into the mind”, which turns out to be a generator of images, details, plots, biographies of a person.
Along with the dominant realistic trend in Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. the direction of the so-called "pure art" also developed - it is both romantic and realistic. Its representatives eschewed "damned questions" (What to do? Who is to blame?), but not reality, by which they meant the world of nature and the subjective feeling of a person, the life of his heart. They were excited by the beauty of life itself, the fate of the world. A.A. Fet and F.I. Tyutchev can be directly comparable with I.S. Turgenev, L.N. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky. The poetry of Fet and Tyutchev had a direct influence on the work of Tolstoy in the era of Anna Karenina. It is no coincidence that Nekrasov discovered F.I. Tyutchev to the Russian public as a great poet in 1850.
Problematics and Poetics
Russian prose, with all the flourishing of poetry and dramaturgy (A.N. Ostrovsky), occupies a central place in the literary process of the second half of the 19th century. It develops in line with the realistic trend, preparing in the variety of genre searches of Russian writers an artistic synthesis - the novel, the pinnacle of the world literary development of the 19th century.
The search for new artistic techniques images of a person in his connections with the world appeared not only in the genres story, story or novel (I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, A.F. Pisemsky, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, D. Grigorovich). Striving for an accurate recreation of life in the literature of the late 40s and 50s begins to look for a way out in memoir-autobiographical genres, with their installation on documentary. At this time, they begin to work on the creation of their autobiographical books. A.I. Herzen and S.T. Aksakov; the trilogy partly adjoins this genre tradition. L.N. Tolstoy ("Childhood", "Adolescence", "Youth").
Another documentary genre goes back to the aesthetics of the "natural school", it is - feature article. In its purest form, it is presented in the works of democratic writers N.V. Uspensky, V.A. Sleptsova, A.I. Levitova, N.G. Pomyalovsky (“Essays on Bursa”); revised and largely transformed - in Turgenev's Notes of a Hunter and Saltykov-Shchedrin's Provincial Essays, Dostoevsky's Notes from the House of the Dead. Here, a complex interpenetration of artistic and documentary elements is observed, fundamentally new forms of narrative prose are being created, combining the features of a novel, essay, and autobiographical notes.
The desire for epicness is a characteristic feature of the Russian literary process of the 1860s; it captures both poetry (N. Nekrasov) and dramaturgy (A.N. Ostrovsky).
The epic picture of the world as a deep subtext is felt in novels I.A. Goncharova(1812-1891) "Oblomov" and "Cliff". So, in the novel Oblomov, the depiction of typical character traits and way of life subtly turns into the depiction of the universal content of life, its eternal states, collisions, situations. Showing the perniciousness of the "All-Russian stagnation", that which has firmly entered the Russian public consciousness under the name "Oblomovism", Goncharov opposes to it the preaching of the deed (the image of the Russian German Andrei Stolz) - and at the same time shows the limitations of this sermon. Oblomov's inertia appears in unity with genuine humanity. The composition of the "Oblomovism" also includes the poetry of a noble estate, the generosity of Russian hospitality, the touchingness of Russian holidays, the beauty of Central Russian nature - Goncharov traces the primordial connection of noble culture, noble consciousness with folk soil. The very inertia of Oblomov's existence is rooted in the depths of centuries, in the distant corners of our national memory. Ilya Oblomov is somewhat akin to Ilya Muromets, who sat on the stove for 30 years, or the fabulous simpleton Emelya, who achieved his goals without applying his own efforts - "at the behest of the pike, at my will." "Oblomovism" is a phenomenon of not just noble, but Russian national culture, and as such it is not idealized by Goncharov at all - the artist explores both its strengths and weaknesses. In the same way, purely European pragmatism, opposed to Russian Oblomovism, reveals strong and weak features. In the novel, on a philosophical level, the inferiority, insufficiency of both opposites and the impossibility of their harmonious combination are revealed.
In the literature of the 1870s, the same prose genres dominate as in the literature of the previous century, but new trends appear in them. The epic tendencies in narrative literature are weakening, there is an outflow of literary forces from the novel, to small genres - a story, an essay, a story. Dissatisfaction with the traditional novel was a characteristic phenomenon in literature and criticism in the 1870s. It would be wrong, however, to assume that the genre of the novel entered a period of crisis during these years. The work of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin serves as an eloquent refutation of this opinion. However, in the 1970s, the novel underwent an internal restructuring: the tragic beginning sharply intensified; this trend is associated with a heightened interest in the spiritual problems of the individual and its internal collisions. Novelists pay special attention to a personality that has reached its full development, but is put face to face with the fundamental problems of being, deprived of support, experiencing deep discord with people and with itself (“Anna Karenina” by L. Tolstoy, “Demons” and “The Brothers Karamazov” by Dostoevsky ).
In the short prose of the 1870s, a craving for allegorical and parable forms is revealed. Particularly indicative in this regard is the prose of N.S. Leskov, the flowering of his work falls precisely on this decade. He acted as an innovative artist, combining the principles of realistic writing into a single whole with the conventions of traditional folk poetic techniques, with an appeal to the style and genres of ancient Russian literature. Leskov's skill was compared with icon painting and ancient architecture, the writer was called an "isographer" - and for good reason. Gorky called the gallery of original folk types painted by Leskov "the iconostasis of the righteous and saints" of Russia. Leskov introduced into the sphere of artistic representation such layers of folk life that had hardly been touched upon in Russian literature before him (the life of the clergy, the bourgeoisie, the Old Believers and other layers of the Russian provinces). In the depiction of various social strata, Leskov masterfully used the forms of a tale, whimsically mixing the author's and folk points of view.
To some extent, this theme is opposite to the depiction of the "little man": if there is a justification for the fate of everyone, then here - on the contrary, the categorical impulse "one of us is superfluous", which can both relate to the assessment of the hero, and come from the hero himself , and usually these two "directions" not only do not exclude each other, but also characterize one person: the accuser of his neighbors himself turns out to be "superfluous".
"An extra person" is also a certain literary type. Literary types (types of heroes) are a collection of characters who are close in their occupation, worldview and spiritual appearance. The spread of this or that literary type may be dictated by the very need of society to depict people with some kind of stable set of qualities. The interest and benevolent attitude towards them on the part of critics, the success of books in which such people are portrayed, stimulates writers to "repeat" or "variate" any literary types. Quite often, a new literary type arouses the interest of critics, who give it a name ("noble robber", "Turgenev's woman", "superfluous person", "little man", "nihilist", "tramp", "humiliated and insulted").
The main thematic signs of "superfluous people". This is, first of all, a person potentially capable of any social action. It does not accept the "rules of the game" proposed by society, and is characterized by disbelief in the possibility of changing anything. The "superfluous person" is a contradictory personality, often in conflict with society and its way of life. This is also a hero, of course, unsuccessful in relations with his parents, and unhappy in love. His position in society is unstable, contains contradictions: he is always at least somehow connected with the nobility, but - already in a period of decline, fame and fortune - rather a memory. He is placed in an environment that is somehow alien to him: a higher or lower environment, there is always a certain motive of alienation, which does not always immediately lie on the surface. The hero is moderately educated, but this education is rather incomplete, unsystematic; in a word, this is not a deep thinker, not a scientist, but a person with a "power of judgment" to make quick but immature conclusions. The crisis of religiosity is very important, often a struggle with churchness, but often internal emptiness, hidden uncertainty, habit to the name of God. Often - the gift of eloquence, skill in writing, keeping records or even writing poetry. There is always some pretension to be the judge of one's neighbors; a shade of hatred is required. In a word, the hero is a victim of the canons of life.
However, with all the seemingly apparent certainty and clarity of the above criteria for evaluating the "extra person", the framework that allows one to speak with absolute certainty about the belonging of a particular character to a given thematic line is very blurred. It follows from this that the "superfluous person" cannot be "superfluous" entirely, but it can be considered both in line with other topics, and merge with other characters belonging to other literary types. The material of the works does not allow assessing Onegin, Pechorin and others only from the point of view of their social "benefit", and the very type of "extra person" is rather the result of understanding the named characters from certain social and ideological positions.
This literary type, as it developed, acquired more and more new features and forms of display. This phenomenon is quite natural, since every writer saw the "superfluous person" as he was in his mind. All the masters of the artistic word who have ever touched on the topic of "extra man", not only added a certain "breath" of their era to this type, but also tried to combine all social phenomena contemporary to them, and most importantly the structure of life, in one image - the image of the hero of the time . All this makes the type of "superfluous person" universal in its own way. This is precisely what allows us to consider the images of Chatsky and Bazarov as heroes who had a direct impact on this type. These images, undoubtedly, do not belong to the type of "extra person", but at the same time they perform one important function: Griboedov's hero, in his confrontation with Famus's society, makes it impossible to peacefully resolve the conflict between an outstanding personality and an inert way of life, thereby pushing other writers to the coverage of this problem, and the image of Bazarov, completing (from my point of view) the type of "superfluous person", was no longer so much a "carrier" of time as its "side" phenomenon.
But before the hero himself could certify himself as a "superfluous person", a more hidden appearance of this type had to occur. The first signs of this type were embodied in the image of Chatsky, the protagonist of AS Griboedov's immortal comedy "Woe from Wit". "Griboyedov is a 'man of one book,'" VF Khodasevich once remarked. "If it weren't for Woe from Wit, Griboedov would have absolutely no place in Russian literature." And, indeed, although the history of dramaturgy speaks of Griboyedov as the author of several wonderful and funny comedies and vaudevilles in his own way, written in collaboration with the leading playwrights of those years (N.I. Khmelnitsky, A.A. Shakhovsky, P.A. Vyazemsky), but it was "Woe from Wit" that turned out to be a one-of-a-kind work. This comedy for the first time broadly and freely depicted modern life and thus opened a new, realistic era in Russian literature. The creative history of this play is exceptionally complex. Her idea dates back to 1818. It was completed in the autumn of 1824, the censorship did not allow this comedy to be printed or staged. Conservatives accused Griboedov of exaggerating satirical colors, which, in their opinion, was the result of the author's "squabbling patriotism", and in Chatsky they saw a clever "crazy man", the embodiment of "Figaro-Griboedov's" philosophy of life.
The above examples of critical interpretations of the play only confirm all the complexity and depth of its social and philosophical problems, indicated in the very title of the comedy: "Woe from Wit". The problems of mind and stupidity, insanity and insanity, tomfoolery and buffoonery, pretense and hypocrisy are posed and solved by Griboedov on a variety of everyday, social and psychological material. Essentially, all characters, including minor, episodic and off-stage ones, are drawn into the discussion of questions about attitudes towards the mind and various forms of stupidity and insanity. The main figure, around which all the diversity of opinions about comedy immediately concentrated, was the smart "madman" Chatsky. The general assessment of the author's intention, problems and artistic features of the comedy depended on the interpretation of his character and behavior, relationships with other characters. The main feature of the comedy is the interaction of two plot-forming conflicts: a love conflict, the main participants of which are Chatsky and Sophia, and a socio-ideological conflict, in which Chatsky faces conservatives who have gathered in Famusov's house. I want to note that for the hero himself, not a socio-ideological, but a love conflict is of paramount importance. After all, Chatsky came to Moscow with the sole purpose of seeing Sophia, finding confirmation of his former love and, possibly, getting married. It is interesting to trace how the hero's love experiences exacerbate Chatsky's ideological opposition to the Famus society. At first, the protagonist does not even notice the usual vices of the environment where he got, but sees only the comic side in it: "I'm a weirdo to another miracle / Once I laugh, then I'll forget ...".
But Chatsky is not "an extra person." He is only the forerunner of "superfluous people". First of all, this is confirmed by the optimistic sound of the comedy finale, where Chatsky remains with the right of historical choice given to him by the author. Consequently, Griboedov's hero can find (in the future) his place in life. Chatsky could have been among those who went to Senate Square on December 14, 1825, and then his life would have been sealed for 30 years ahead: those who took part in the uprising returned from exile only after the death of Nicholas I in 1856. But something else could have happened. An irresistible disgust for the "abominations" of Russian life would make Chatsky an eternal wanderer in a foreign land, a man without a homeland. And then - longing, despair, alienation, acrimony, and, what is most terrible for such a hero-fighter - forced idleness and inactivity. But this is just the guesswork of the readers.
Chatsky, rejected by society, has the potential to find a use for himself. Onegin will no longer have such an opportunity. He is an "extra person" who has not been able to realize himself, who "deafly suffers from a striking resemblance to the children of the present century." But before answering why, let's turn to the work itself. The novel "Eugene Onegin" is a product of an amazing creative destiny. It was created for more than seven years - from May 1823 to September 1830. The novel was not written "in one breath", but was formed - from stanzas and chapters created at different times, in different circumstances, in different periods of creativity. The work was interrupted not only by the turns of Pushkin's fate (exile to Mikhailovskoye, the Decembrist uprising), but also by new ideas, for the sake of which he more than once abandoned the text of "Eugene Onegin". It seemed that history itself was not very favorable to Pushkin's work: from a novel about a contemporary and modern life, as Pushkin conceived "Eugene Onegin", after 1825 he became a novel about a completely different historical era. And, if we take into account the fragmentation and discontinuity of Pushkin's work, then we can say the following: the novel was for the writer something like a huge "notebook" or a poetic "album". Over the course of more than seven years, these records were replenished with sad "notes" of the heart, "observations" of a cold mind. superfluous person image literature
But "Eugene Onegin" is not only "a poetic album of live impressions of a talent playing with its wealth", but also a "novel of life", which has absorbed a huge historical, literary, social and everyday material. This is the first innovation of this work. Secondly, it was fundamentally innovative that Pushkin, largely relying on the work of A.S. Griboedov "Woe from Wit", found a new type of problematic hero - the "hero of time". Eugene Onegin became such a hero. His fate, character, relationships with people are determined by the totality of the circumstances of modern reality, outstanding personal qualities and the range of "eternal", universal problems that he faces. It is necessary to make a reservation right away: Pushkin, in the process of working on the novel, set himself the task of demonstrating in the image of Onegin "that premature old age of the soul, which has become the main feature of the younger generation." And already in the first chapter, the writer notes the social factors that determined the character of the protagonist. The only thing in which Onegin "was a true genius," that "he knew more firmly than all sciences," as the Author remarks, not without irony, was "the science of tender passion," that is, the ability to love without loving, to imitate feelings, remaining cold and prudent. However, Pushkin is still interested in Onegin not as a representative of a widespread social and everyday type, the whole essence of which is exhausted by a positive description issued by secular rumors: "N.N. a wonderful person." It was important for the writer to show this image in motion, development, so that later each reader would draw the proper conclusions and give a fair assessment of this hero.
The first chapter is a turning point in the fate of the protagonist, who managed to abandon the stereotypes of secular behavior, from the noisy, but internally empty "ritual of life". Thus, Pushkin showed how a bright, outstanding personality suddenly appeared from a faceless, but demanding unconditional obedience crowd, capable of overthrowing the "burden" of secular conventions, "behind the hustle and bustle."
For writers who paid attention to the theme of the "extra person" in their work, it is typical to "test" their hero with friendship, love, a duel, death. Pushkin was no exception. The two tests that awaited Onegin in the countryside - the test of love and the test of friendship - showed that external freedom does not automatically entail liberation from false prejudices and opinions. In relations with Tatyana Onegin proved himself to be a noble and mentally subtle person. And you can’t blame the hero for not responding to Tatyana’s love: as you know, you can’t command the heart. Another thing is that Onegin listened not to the voice of his heart, but to the voice of reason. In confirmation of this, I will say that even in the first chapter, Pushkin noted in the main character a "sharp, chilled mind" and an inability to have strong feelings. And it was this spiritual disproportion that became the cause of the failed love of Onegin and Tatyana. Onegin also did not pass the test of friendship. And in this case, the cause of the tragedy was his inability to live a life of feeling. No wonder the author, commenting on the state of the hero before the duel, remarks: "He could show feelings, / And not bristle like a beast." Both at Tatyana's name day and before the duel with Lensky, Onegin showed himself to be a "ball of prejudice", "a hostage of secular canons", deaf to the voice of his own heart and to Lensky's feelings. His behavior at the name day is the usual "social anger", and the duel is a consequence of the indifference and fear of the evil-speaking of the inveterate bully Zaretsky and the landlord neighbors. Onegin himself did not notice how he became a prisoner of his old idol - "public opinion". After the murder of Lensky, Eugene changed dramatically. It is a pity that only tragedy could open to him a previously inaccessible world of feelings.
Thus, Eugene Onegin becomes "an extra person." Belonging to the light, he despises it. As Pisarev noted, the only thing left for him is "to give up on the boredom of secular life as a necessary evil." Onegin does not find his true purpose and place in life, he is burdened by his loneliness, lack of demand. In the words of Herzen, "Onegin ... is an extra person in the environment where he is, but, not possessing the necessary strength of character, he cannot escape from it in any way." But, according to the writer himself, the image of Onegin is not finished. After all, the novel in verse essentially ends with such a statement of the question: "What will Onegin be like in the future?" Pushkin himself leaves the character of his hero open, emphasizing by this the very ability of Onegin to a sharp change in value orientations and, I note, a certain readiness for action, for an act. True, Onegin has practically no opportunities for self-realization. But the novel does not answer the above question, it asks the reader.
So, the theme of the "superfluous person" comes to an end in a completely different capacity, having passed a difficult evolutionary path: from the romantic pathos of the rejection of life and society to the sharp rejection of the "superfluous person" itself. And the fact that this term can be applied to the heroes of the works of the 20th century does not change anything: the meaning of the term will be different and it will be possible to call it “superfluous” for completely different reasons. There will also be returns to this theme (for example, the image of the "superfluous person" Levushka Odoevtsev from A. Bitov's novel "Pushkin's House"), and proposals that there are no "extra" people, but only various variations of this theme. But the return is no longer a discovery: the 19th century discovered and exhausted the theme of the "superfluous man."
Bibliography:
- 1. Babaev E.G. Creativity of A.S. Pushkin. - M., 1988
- 2. Batyuto A.I. Turgenev the novelist. - L., 1972
- 3. Ilyin E.N. Russian literature: recommendations for schoolchildren and entrants, "SCHOOL-PRESS". M., 1994
- 4. Krasovsky V.E. History of Russian literature of the XIX century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 2001
- 5. Literature. Reference materials. Book for students. M., 1990
- 6. Makogonenko G.P. Lermontov and Pushkin. M., 1987
- 7. Monakhova O.P. Russian literature of the 19th century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 1999
- 8. Fomichev S.A. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit": Commentary. - M., 1983
- 9. Shamrey L.V., Rusova N.Yu. From allegory to iambic. Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on literary criticism. - N.Novgorod, 1993
Municipal educational institution
Kazachinskaya secondary school "
Literature abstract
"The type of" extra person "
Ivanova Daria
Work checked:
With. Kazachinskoe
1. Introduction.
2. The evolution of the image of the "superfluous person" in Russian literature of the 19th century.
2.1. Spiritual drama of a young Petersburger Eugene Onegin.
2.2. The tragedy of the "hero of our time" - Pechorin.
2.3. Wandering fate of Rudin.
3. List of used literature
In Russian literature of the early 19th century, the concept of "the type of superfluous person" appeared. An "extra person" is a person of considerable ability, moderately educated, but not having a certain good complete education. He is not able to realize his talents in the public service. Belonging to the upper classes of society, mostly spends time in idle entertainment. This lifestyle fails to alleviate his boredom, leading to duels, gambling, and other self-destructive behaviors. The appearance of such a literary type was associated with the rebellious situation in the country, since the 19th century was the time of the establishment of capitalism in Russia:
The nineteenth century is a rebellious, strict century -
He goes and says: “Poor man!
What are you thinking about? take a pen, write:
There is no creator in creations, there is no soul in nature ... ()
The topic of the “extra person” is still relevant today, since, firstly, it cannot be called fully studied. Literary critics have not yet come to a common opinion about the typical qualities inherent in the "superfluous person". Each writer endowed his hero with special qualities characteristic of his time.
It is not known exactly by whom and when the image of the “extra person” was created. Some believe that he created it. Others consider the author of the concept. In the draft version of Chapter VIII of Eugene Onegin, he himself calls his hero "superfluous": "Onegin stands as something superfluous." But there is also a version that the type of "superfluous person" introduced into Russian literature. Secondly, even today you can meet people who do not fit into the general way of life of society, recognizing other values.
The purpose of this work is to show the evolution of the “extra person” type using the example of works from the school curriculum: “Eugene Onegin” and “A Hero of Our Time”. The novel "Rudin" was studied independently.
The history of the creation of "Eugene Onegin" is amazing. worked on it for over eight years. The novel was composed of stanzas and chapters written at different times. Belinsky said about him that this is “Pushkin's most sincere work, the most beloved child of his imagination. Here is all life, all soul, all his love; here are his feelings, concepts, ideals.
Eugene Onegin - the protagonist of the work, a young man, fashionable, perfectly fitting into the social life of St. Petersburg, studied "something and somehow." He is not accustomed to serious consistent work. His appearance in the world happened quite early, so he was tired of high society. Eugene skillfully portrayed feelings in order to succeed in secular society. But, having become a virtuoso in this game, having reached the limit, he involuntarily left him and was disappointed. This happened because adaptation to almost any system of relations is accompanied by a certain reaction: “In short: the Russian melancholy / He has mastered little by little.”
Onegin's conflict has become a kind of protest against the laws of society that suppress a person's personality, which deprive him of the right to be himself. The emptyness of secular society made the soul of the protagonist empty:
No: early feelings in him cooled down;
He was tired of the light noise;
The beauties didn't last long
The subject of his habitual thoughts;
Treason managed to tire;
Friends and friendship are tired ...
He tries to find a job to his liking, but the search drags on for many years.
So, in search of Onegin, he ends up in the village. Here:
Onegin locked himself at home,
Yawning, took up the pen,
I wanted to write - but hard work
He was tired...
He set up a shelf with a detachment of books,
I read and read, but to no avail ...
Then Onegin takes over the management of his uncle's estate, but he quickly gets tired of it. Two trials awaited in Onegin's village. The test of friendship and the test of love showed that, with external freedom, the protagonist was never freed from false prejudices and opinions. In relations with Tatyana, on the one hand, Onegin acted nobly: “But he did not want to deceive / The gullibility of an innocent soul,” and he was able to adequately explain himself to the girl. You can’t blame the hero for not responding to Tatyana’s love, because everyone knows the saying: “You can’t command your heart.” Another is that he acted according to his sharp, chilled mind, and not feelings.
The quarrel with Lensky was invented by Yevgeny himself. He was well aware of this: “Having called himself to a secret court, / He accused himself of many things…”. For the fear of whispers and laughter behind his back, he paid with the life of a friend. Onegin himself did not notice how he again became a prisoner of public opinion. After the death of Lensky, much has changed in him, but it is a pity that only tragedy could open his eyes.
Thus, Eugene Onegin becomes "an extra person." Belonging to the light, he despises it. Onegin does not find his place in life. He is lonely and unclaimed. Tatyana, whom Eugene falls in love with, finding her a noble secular lady, will not reciprocate. Life brought Onegin to the logical conclusion of his youth - this is a complete collapse, which can be experienced only by rethinking the previous life. It is known that in the last, encrypted chapter, Pushkin brings his hero to the camp of the Decembrists.
After that, he showed the image of a new “extra person”. Pechorin became them. In his novel “A Hero of Our Time”, M. Yu. Lermontov depicted the 30s of the 19th century in Russia. These were difficult times in the life of the country. Having suppressed the Decembrist uprising, Nicholas I sought to turn the country into a barracks - all living things, the slightest manifestations of free thought, were mercilessly pursued and suppressed.
The novel "A Hero of Our Time" consists of five chapters, each of which has a complete plot and an independent system of characters. We learn about the character of Pechorin gradually from the words of different people. First, staff captain Maxim Maksimych talks about him, then the author, and, finally, the main character himself talks about himself.
The protagonist of the work is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin, an extraordinary, intelligent, strong-willed person. He has a broad outlook, high education, culture. He quickly and correctly judges people, life in general.
The complexity of the personality of the protagonist is the duality, the inconsistency of his character, which the ingenuous Maksim Maksimych notices: “... in the cold all day hunting; everyone will get cold, tired - but nothing to him. And another time he sits in his room, the wind smells, he assures that he has caught a cold; the shutter will knock, he will shudder and turn pale, and with me he went to the boar one on one ... ". This inconsistency is also manifested in the portrait of Pechorin:" Despite the light color of his hair, his mustache and eyebrows were black - a sign of breed in a man ";" his eyes did not laugh when he laughed." The author gives two explanations for this: "This is a sign - either of an evil disposition, or of deep sadness."
Pechorin himself summarizes with accuracy: “It’s like two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him.” It follows from this that Pechorin is a contradictory person, and he himself understands this: “... I have an innate passion to contradict; my whole life has been only a chain of sad and unfortunate contradictions of heart or mind.
In addition, he is distinguished by a constant desire for action. Pechorin cannot stay in one place, surrounded by the same people. Leaving the care of his relatives, he set off in pursuit of pleasures. But very quickly became disillusioned with all this. Then Pechorin tries to do science, to read books. But nothing brings him satisfaction, and in the hope that "boredom does not live under Chechen bullets," he goes to the Caucasus.
However, wherever Pechorin appears, he becomes "an ax in the hands of fate", "an instrument of execution." Breaks the life of "peaceful" smugglers, kidnaps Bela, thereby destroying the life of not only the girl herself, but also her father and Kazbich, achieves Mary's love and refuses her, kills Grushnitsky in a duel, predicts the fate of Vulich, undermines the faith of the old man Maxim Maksimych in younger generation. Why is Pechorin doing this?
Unlike "Eugene Onegin", the plot, which is built as a system of testing the hero with moral values: friendship, love, freedom, in "A Hero of Our Time" Pechorin himself tests all the main spiritual values, experimenting on himself and others.
We see that Pechorin does not consider the feelings of other people, practically does not pay attention to them. We can say that the actions of this person are deeply selfish. All the more selfish that he justifies himself, explaining himself to Mary: “... such was my fate from childhood! Everyone read on my face signs of bad qualities that were not there; but they were assumed - and they were born ... I became secretive ... I became vindictive ... I became envious ... I learned to hate ... I began to deceive ... I became a moral cripple ... "
But it seems to me that only Pechorin himself cannot be blamed for "becoming a moral cripple." Society is also to blame for this, in which there is no worthy application of the best qualities of the hero. The same society that interfered with Onegin. So Pechorin learned to hate, to lie, became secretive, he "buried his best feelings in the depths of his heart, where they died."
Thus, it can be said that a typical young man of the 30s of the XIX century, on the one hand, is not devoid of intelligence and talents, “immense forces” lurk in his soul, and on the other hand, he is an egoist who breaks hearts and destroys lives. Pechorin is both an "evil genius" and at the same time a victim of society.
In Pechorin's diary we read: “... My first pleasure is to subordinate everything that surrounds me to my will; arouse to oneself a feeling of love, devotion and fear - is not this the first sign and the greatest triumph of power. His attention to women, the desire to achieve their love is the need for his ambition, the thirst to subordinate others to his will.
This is evidenced by his love for Vera. After all, there was a barrier between Pechorin and Vera - Vera was married, and this attracted Pechorin, who sought to achieve his goal in spite of any circumstances.
But Pechorin's love is still more than just intrigue. He is really afraid of losing her: “Like crazy, I jumped out onto the porch, jumped on my Circassian, who was led around the yard, and set off at full speed on the road to Pyatigorsk. I mercilessly drove the exhausted horse, which, snoring and covered in foam, raced me along the rocky road. Vera was the only woman Pechorin truly loved. At the same time, only Vera knew and loved Pechorin, not fictional, but real, with all his advantages and disadvantages. “I should have hated you ... You gave me nothing but suffering,” she says to Pechorin. But, as we know, such was the fate of most of the people with whom Pechorin closely converged ...
In a moment of sadness, Pechorin argues: “Why did I live, for what purpose was I born? And, it’s true, it existed, and, it’s true, I had a high appointment, because I feel immense strength in my soul. But I did not guess my destination, I was carried away by the bait of empty and ignoble passions. And in fact, did Pechorin have a "high appointment"?
Firstly, Pechorin is a hero of his time, because the tragedy of his life reflected the tragedy of a whole generation of young talented people who did not find a worthy application for themselves. And secondly, the main character’s doubts about all the values \u200b\u200bthat are firmly defined for other people - this is what dooms Pechorin to loneliness, what makes him an “extra person”, “Onegin’s younger brother”. sees the similarity between Onegin and Pechorin in very many qualities. He says about Pechorin: “This is the Onegin of our time, the hero of our time. Their dissimilarity among themselves is much less than the distance between Onega and Pechora. But are there any differences between them?
Yes, and quite significant. Onegin, as Belinsky writes: “is in the novel a man who was killed by upbringing and social life, who got accustomed to everything, everything became boring. Pechorin is not like that. This person does not indifferently, does not automatically bear his suffering: he is madly chasing after life, looking for it everywhere; he bitterly blames himself for his delusions. Internal questions are incessantly heard in him, they disturb him, torment him, and in reflection he seeks their resolution: he watches every movement of his heart, examines his every thought. Thus, he sees the similarity of Onegin and Pechorin in their typicality for their time. But Onegin turns his search for himself into an escape from himself, while Pechorin wants to find himself, but his search is full of disappointments.
Indeed, time does not stand still, and the development of the “superfluous person theme” did not stand still either. She found her continuation in creativity. The main subject of the artistic image of this writer is "the rapidly changing physiognomy of Russian people of the cultural layer." The writer is attracted by the "Russian Hamlets" - a type of intellectual nobleman captured by the cult of philosophical knowledge of the 1830s - early 1840s. One such person appeared in the first novel, Rudin, written in 1855. The prototype of the protagonist Dmitry Rudin became.
Dmitry Rudin, appears in the estate of the rich lady Darya Mikhailovna Lasunskaya. Meeting with him becomes an event that attracted the most interested attention of the inhabitants and guests of the estate: “A man of about thirty-five, tall, somewhat round-shouldered, curly-haired, with an irregular face, but expressive and intelligent ... straight wide nose and beautifully defined lips. The dress on him was not new and narrow, as if he had grown out of it.
The character of Rudin is revealed in the word. He is a brilliant orator: “Rudin possessed almost the highest secret - the music of eloquence. He knew how, by striking one string of hearts, to make all others vaguely ring and tremble. Enlightenment, science, the meaning of life - that's what Rudin talks about with such enthusiasm, inspiration and poetry. The statements of the protagonist of the work inspire and call for the renewal of life, for heroic deeds. Everyone feels the power of Rudin's influence on listeners, his conviction with a word. Only Pigasov is embittered and does not recognize the merits of Rudin - out of envy and resentment for losing the dispute. However, behind the unusually beautiful speeches there is a hidden emptiness.
In relations with Natalia, one of the main contradictions of Rudin's character is revealed. Just the day before, he spoke with inspiration about the future, about the meaning of life, and suddenly we have before us a man who has completely lost faith in himself. Rudin's inability to take the last step manifested itself when Natalya was asked by Avdyukhin's pond: "What do we need to do now?" he replied: "Submit to fate ...".
Rudin's lofty thoughts are combined with practical unpreparedness. He takes on agronomic reforms, but, seeing the failure of his attempts, he leaves, losing his "daily piece of bread" in the process. The attempt to teach at the gymnasium and the service as a secretary to a dignitary ends in failure. “Rudin’s misfortune lies in the fact that he does not know Russia ...” Lezhnev, who was completely opposite to Rudin, once said. Indeed, it is the isolation from life that makes Rudin "an extra person." The hero lives only by impulses of the soul and dreams. So he wanders, not finding a case that he can bring to an end. And a few years later, meeting with Lezhnev, Rudin reproaches himself: “Yes, but I don’t deserve a shelter. I ruined my life and did not serve thought as it should. His wandering fate is echoed in the novel by a mournful and homeless landscape: “And the wind rose in the yard and howled with an ominous howl, hitting heavily and viciously against the ringing glass. The long autumn night has come. It’s good for someone who sits under the shelter of a house on such nights, who has a warm corner ... And may the Lord help all homeless wanderers!
The ending of the novel is tragic and heroic at the same time. Rudin dies on the barricades of Paris. All they will say about him is: "They killed the Pole."
Rudin reflects the tragic fate of a man of the Turgenev generation: He has enthusiasm; and this is the most precious quality in our time. We have all become unbearably reasonable, indifferent and lethargic; we fell asleep, we froze, and thanks to the one who, at least for a moment, stirs us up and warms us.
Rudin is a different type of "superfluous person" in comparison with Onegin and Pechorin. The heroes of the novels are both individualistic and "egoist involuntarily" in their life position, and Rudin is not only a hero of a different, later time, but also a different hero. Unlike his predecessors, Rudin strives for socially useful activities. He is not only alienated from the environment, but makes attempts to somehow change it. This essential difference between Rudin and Pechorin is pointed out: “One is an egoist who does not think about anything but his personal pleasures; the other is an enthusiast who completely forgets about himself and is completely absorbed in common questions; one lives for his passions, the other for his ideas These are people of different eras, different natures."
So, the theme of the "extra person" comes to an end. In the 20th century, some writers returned to it. But the return is no longer a discovery: the 19th century opened and exhausted the theme of the “superfluous person”.
Bibliography.
1. Eremina in literature. Grade 9: teaching aid. - M .: Publishing house "Exam", 2009.
2. Lermontov. Hero of our time. - M .: Publishing house of children's literature "VESELKA", Kyiv, 1975.
3. Pushkin Onegin. A novel in verse. Foreword, note. And he will explain. Articles by S. Bondi. - M .: "Children's literature", 1973.
4. Turgenev (Rudin. Noble nest. On the eve. Fathers and children.) Note. A. Tolstyakova. - M .: "Moskovsky worker", 1974.
5. Shalaeva reference book for high school students. – M.: Philol. o-vo "Slovo": OLMA-PRESS Education, 2005.
https://pandia.ru/text/78/016/images/image002_160.jpg" width="507" height="507 src=">
Pushkin on the manuscript of "Eugene Onegin".
https://pandia.ru/text/78/016/images/image004_117.jpg" width="618" height="768 src=">
Illustration for the novel "A Hero of Our Time".
https://pandia.ru/text/78/016/images/image006_91.jpg" width="607" height="828 src=">
Rudin at the Lasunskys.
Extra person
"Extra Man", a socio-psychological type captured in Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century; its main features: estrangement from official Russia, from its native environment (usually the nobility), a sense of intellectual and moral superiority over it, and at the same time, mental fatigue, deep skepticism, discord in word and deed. Name "L. h." came into general use after the "Diary of a Superfluous Man" (1850) by I. S. Turgenev; the type itself developed earlier: the first completed incarnation was Onegin (“Eugene Onegin” by A. S. Pushkin), then Pechorin (“A Hero of Our Time” by M. Yu. Lermontov), Beltov (“Who is to blame?” A. I. Herzen ), Turgenev’s characters: Rudin (“Rudin”), Lavretsky (“Noble Nest”), and others. Features of the spiritual appearance of “L. h." (sometimes in a complicated and modified form) can be traced in the literature of the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. (in the works of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, L. N. Tolstoy, A. P. Chekhov, up to A. I. Kuprin, V. V. Veresaev, M. Gorky). Typology "L. h." affected in the lyrics (Lermontov, N. P. Ogarev). In Western European literature "L. h." to a certain extent, the hero brought to life by a “prolonged hangover” (see K. Marx, in the book: K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, 2nd edition, volume 8, p. 122) after the bourgeois revolution of the 18th century is close to a certain extent. , disappointment in social progress (“Adolf” B. Constant, “Confession of the son of the century” by A. de Musset). However, the contradictions of Russian reality, the contrast of “civilization and slavery” (see A. I. Herzen, Collected Works, vol. 7, 1956, p. 205), the underdevelopment of social life put forward “L. h." to a more prominent place, led to increased drama and intensity of his experiences. At the turn of the 50-60s. revolutionary democrats N. G. Chernyshevsky and N. A. Dobrolyubov sharply criticized “L. h.", his indecision and passivity, at the same time unlawfully reducing the content of the problem "L. h." to the subject of liberalism. With a reappraisal of "L. h." F. M. Dostoevsky also spoke, condemning his individualism and isolation from the popular soil. Literary image "L. h. ”, which arose as a rethinking of the romantic hero (J. Byron, Pushkin), developed under the sign of realistic portraiture, revealing the difference between the character and the author. Essential in the topic "L. h." there was a rejection of educational guidelines in the name of an impartial analysis of the "history of the human soul" (Lermontov), which created the basis for deep psychologism and the subsequent conquests of realism.
Lit .: Chernyshevsky N. G., Russian man on rendez-vous, Poln. coll. soch., v. 5, M., 1950; Goncharov I. A., "A million torments." Sobr. soch., vol. 8, M., 1952.
Yu. V. Mann.
Wikipedia
Extra person
Extra person- a literary hero, characteristic of the works of Russian writers of the 1840s and 1850s. Usually this is a person of considerable ability who cannot realize his talents in the official field of Nikolaev Russia.
Belonging to the upper classes of society, the superfluous person is alienated from the nobility, despises bureaucracy, but, having no other prospect of self-realization, mostly spends time in idle entertainment. This lifestyle fails to alleviate his boredom, leading to duels, gambling, and other self-destructive behaviors. Typical traits of the superfluous person include "mental weariness, deep skepticism, discord between word and deed, and, as a rule, social passivity."
The name "superfluous man" was attached to the type of disillusioned Russian nobleman after the publication in 1850 of Turgenev's story "The Diary of a Superfluous Man". The earliest and classic examples - Evgeny Onegin by A. S. Pushkin, Chatsky from Woe from Wit, Pechorin M. Lermontov - date back to the Byronic hero of the era of romanticism, to Rene Chateaubriand and Adolphe Constant. The further evolution of the type is represented by Herzen's Beltov ("Who is to blame?") and the heroes of Turgenev's early works (Rudin, Lavretsky, Chulkaturin).
Extra people often bring trouble not only to themselves, but also to female characters who have the misfortune to love them. The negative side of superfluous people, associated with their displacement outside the social and functional structure of society, comes to the fore in the works of literary officials A.F. Pisemsky and I.A. Goncharov. The latter opposes practical businessmen “hovering in the skies” to loafers: Aduev Jr. - Aduev Sr., and Oblomov - Stolz. In "War and Peace" Pierre Bezukhov has been in the position of a superfluous person at the beginning of the century for a long time:
Pierre tested the unfortunate ability of many, especially Russian people, the ability to see and believe in the possibility of good and truth, and to see the evil and lies of life too clearly in order to be able to take a serious part in it. Every field of labor in his eyes was connected with evil and deceit. Whatever he tried to be, whatever he undertook, evil and falsehood repelled him and blocked all paths of activity for him. And meanwhile it was necessary to live, it was necessary to be busy. It was too terrible to be under the yoke of these insoluble questions of life, and he gave himself up to his first hobbies, only to forget them. He went to all sorts of societies, drank a lot, bought paintings and built, and most importantly read.
Literature. There is so much beauty and mystery in this seemingly simple word.
Many mistakenly believe that literature is not the most useful and interesting art form, others assume that just reading books and what literature teaches us are the same, but I cannot agree with this.
Literature is “food” for the soul, it helps a person to think about what is happening in the world, society, to correlate the past and the present, and, finally, it teaches a person to understand himself: in his feelings, thoughts and actions. Literature reflects the life of past generations, enriching our life experience.
This essay is only the first part of my research, and in it I tried to reflect on the images of superfluous people in the literature of the 19th century. Next year, I intend to continue my work and compare the “superfluous people” of different eras, or rather these images in the understanding of the writers of classical literature of the 19th century and the authors of postmodernist texts of the 20th-21st centuries.
I chose this topic because I think it is relevant in our time. After all, even now there are people who are similar to my heroes, they also do not agree with how society lives, some despise and hate it; There are people who feel like strangers and alone in this world. Many of them can also be called "superfluous people", since they do not fit into the general way of life, they recognize other values than the society in which they live. It seems to me that such people will always exist, since our world and our society are not ideal. We neglect each other's advice, we despise those who are not like us, and until we change, there will always be people like Oblomov, Pechorin and Rudin. After all, probably, we ourselves contribute to their appearance, and our inner world requires something unexpected, strange, and we find this in others who differ from us in at least something.
The purpose of my work on the essay was to identify the similarities and differences in the characters of the literature of the 19th century, called "superfluous people". Therefore, the tasks that I set for myself this year are formulated as follows:
1. Get to know in detail all three heroes of the works of M. Yu. Lermontov, I. A. Turgenev and I. A. Goncharov.
2. Compare all the characters according to certain criteria, such as: portrait, character, attitude towards friendship and love, self-esteem; find similarities and differences between them.
3. To generalize the image of the "superfluous person", in the understanding of the authors of the 19th century; and write an essay on the topic "The type of the superfluous person in the literature of the 19th century."
It is difficult to work on an essay on this topic, since you need to take into account not only your own opinion, but also the opinion of famous critics and literary publications. Therefore, for me, when doing the work, the main literature was the critical article by N. A. Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism”, which helped me understand the character of Oblomov, to fully look at his problems from all sides; the book M. Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time", which showed me the character and features of Pechorin's character; and the book by N. I. Yakushin “I. S. Turgenev in life and work”, she helped me rediscover the image of Rudin.
Definition of the type of "Superfluous Man" in Russian literature of the 19th century.
An “extra person” is a socio-psychological type that became widespread in Russian literature in the first half of the 19th century: it is, as a rule, a nobleman who received an appropriate education and upbringing, but did not find a place for himself in his environment. He is lonely, disappointed, feels his individual and moral superiority over the surrounding society and alienation from it, does not know how to do business, feels the gap between "immense forces" and "pity of actions." His life is fruitless, he usually fails in love.
Already from this description it is clear that such a hero could have originated in the romantic era and is associated with conflicts inherent in its hero.
The very concept of “extra person” entered literary use after I. S. Turgenev’s “Diary of an Extra Person” was published in 1850. Usually this term is used for the characters of novels by Pushkin and Lermontov.
The hero is in acute conflict with society. No one understands him, he feels alone. Surrounding people condemn him for arrogance (“All friendship was stopped with him. “Everything is yes yes no; he won’t say yes or no, sir.” That was the general voice”).
Disappointment is, on the one hand, a mask of a romantic hero, on the other hand, it is a real sense of self in the world.
For "superfluous people" is characterized by inactivity, the inability to change something in their own lives and in the lives of other people.
The collision of the “extra person” is, in a sense, hopeless. It is comprehended not only and not so much as cultural and political, but as historical and cultural existential.
Thus, having originated in the depths of romanticism, the figure of the “superfluous person” becomes realistic. The early plots of Russian literature, dedicated to the fate of the "superfluous person", first of all, opened up the possibility for the development of psychologism (the Russian psychological novel).
The originality of the composition of the novel by M. Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time
"A Hero of Our Time" is the first lyric-psychological novel in Russian prose. Therefore, the psychological richness of the novel lies, first of all, in the image of the "hero of time". Through the complexity and inconsistency of Pechorin, Lermontov affirms the idea that it is impossible to fully explain everything: in life there is always a high and secret, which is deeper than words, ideas.
Hence, one of the features of the composition is the increase in the disclosure of secrets. Lermontov leads the reader from Pechorin's actions (in the first three stories) to their motives (in stories 4 and 5), that is, from riddle to riddle. At the same time, we understand that the secret is not Pechorin's actions, but his inner world, psychology.
In the first three stories ("Bela", "Maxim Maksimych", "Taman") only the actions of the hero are presented. Lermontov demonstrates examples of Pechorin's indifference, cruelty to the people around him, shown either as victims of his passions (Bela), or as victims of his cold calculation (poor smugglers).
Why is the fate of the hero so tragic?
The answer to this question is the last story "The Fatalist". Here problems are already being solved not so much psychological as philosophical and moral.
The story begins with a philosophical dispute between Pechorin and Vulich about the predestination of human life. Vulich is a supporter of fatalism. Pechorin, on the other hand, asks the question: “If there are definitely predestinations, then why are we given the will, reason?” This dispute is verified by three examples, three deadly fights with fate. First, Vulich's attempt to kill himself with a shot to the temple, which ended in failure; secondly, the accidental murder of Vulich in the street by a drunken Cossack; thirdly, Pechorin's courageous throw at the Cossack killer. Without denying the very idea of fatalism, Lermontov leads to the idea that it is impossible to humble yourself, to be submissive to fate. With this turn of the philosophical theme, the author saved the novel from a gloomy ending. Pechorin, whose death is unexpectedly announced in the middle of the story, in this last story not only escapes from seemingly certain death, but also for the first time commits an act that benefits people. And instead of a mourning march at the end of the novel, congratulations are heard on the victory over death: "the officers congratulated me - and there was definitely something for it."
"He was a nice little guy, just a little strange"
One of the heroes of my work is an extraordinary and strange person - Pechorin. He has a very unusual fate, he is characterized by a critical attitude not only to the world around him, but also to himself.
Pechorin was a very strange person, and this strangeness, it seems to me, originated in the early stages of his life. Pechorin was formed as a personality in those circles of the noble intelligentsia, where it was in fashion to ridicule all sincere manifestations of disinterested humanity. And this left an imprint on the formation of his character. This crippled him morally, killed all the noble impulses in him: “My colorless youth passed in the struggle with myself and the light; my best feelings, fearing ridicule, I buried in the depths of my heart; they died there. I became a moral cripple: one half of my soul did not exist, it dried up, evaporated, died, I cut it off and threw it away.
Outwardly, in particular his face, Pechorin looks more like a dead man than a living person. The deadly-pale features of his face tell us about the fading, heaviness and routine of his life, and the white, delicate white hands say exactly the opposite: about the easy, calm and carefree life of the gentleman. His gait is lordly majestic, but at the same time timid, this can be seen from the hands of the hero: while walking, his hands are always pressed to the body and do not allow themselves to behave imposingly, and this is the first sign that the owner of this gait is hiding something, or he's just shy and timid. Pechorin always dressed with taste: everything in his outfit said that he was from a noble family, and this struck me very much, because Pechorin despises society, its foundations, and traditions, and on the contrary, he imitates him in clothes. But still, later, after analyzing the character of Pechorin, I came to the conclusion that the hero is afraid of society, afraid to be funny.
The outer world of Pechorin, to match the portrait, is very contradictory. On the one hand, he appears before us as an egoist, crushing the world under him. It seems to us that Pechorin can use someone else's life and love for his own pleasure. But, on the other hand, we see that the hero does not do this intentionally, he realizes that he brings only misfortunes to those around him, but he cannot be alone. It is difficult for him to experience loneliness, he is attracted to communication with people. For example, in the chapter "Taman" Pechorin wants to solve the mystery of "peaceful smugglers", not knowing what they are doing. He is drawn to the unknown. But an attempt at rapprochement turns out to be in vain for Pechorin: the smugglers cannot recognize him as their person, believe him, and the solution of their secret disappoints the hero.
From all this, Pechorin becomes furious and admits: “There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him.” After these words, we really feel sorry for him, we see him as a victim, and not the culprit of the circumstances.
The contradiction of desires and reality became the cause of bitterness and self-irony of Pechorin. He wants too much from the world, but the reality turns out to be much worse than the illusion. All the actions of the hero, all his impulses, admiration are wasted because of the inability to act. And all these incidents make Pechorin think, he is worried that his only purpose is to destroy other people's hopes and illusions. Even he is indifferent to his own life. Only curiosity, the expectation of something new excites him, only this makes him live and wait for the next day.
Ironically, Pechorin always gets into unpleasant and dangerous adventures. So, for example, in the chapter "Taman" he is settled in a house closely associated with smugglers, and Pechorin, oddly enough, finds out this, and he is attracted by acquaintance with these people. But they do not accept him, fearing for their lives, and swim away, leaving a helpless old woman and a blind boy alone.
Further, if you follow the plot, Pechorin ends up in Kislovodsk - it is a quiet provincial town, but even there Pechorin manages to find adventures. He meets his old acquaintance, whom he met in the active detachment, Grushnitsky. Grushnitsky is a very narcissistic person, he wants to look like a hero in the eyes of others, especially in the eyes of women. It is here that Pechorin finally meets a person who is interesting and close in opinions and views: Dr. Werner. Werner Pechorin reveals his whole soul, shares his opinion about society. The hero is interested in him, they have become real friends, because only with friends you can share the most precious things: your feelings, thoughts, your soul. But most importantly, Pechorin in this chapter regained his true love - Vera. You will probably ask; But what about Princess Mary and Bela? He perceived Princess Mary as the "material" that he needed in the experiment: to find out how strong his influence was on the hearts of girls inexperienced in love. Boredom for the sake of a started game led to tragic consequences. But the awakened feelings turned Mary into a kind, gentle, loving woman who meekly accepted her fate and resigned herself to the circumstances: “My love did not bring happiness to anyone,” says Pechorin. With Bela, everything is much more difficult. Having met Bela, Pechorin was no longer that naive youth who could be deceived by the girl from Taman, the very one from the camp of "peaceful smugglers" who liked Pechorin. He knew love, he foresaw all the pitfalls of this feeling, he assured himself that "he loved for himself, for his own pleasure he satisfied a strange
8 the need of the heart, greedily devouring their joys and sufferings.
Bela fell in love with a man for the first time. Pechorin's gifts softened Bela's frightened heart, and the news of his death did what no gifts were capable of: Bela threw herself on Pechorin's neck and sobbed: "he often dreamed of her in a dream and not a single man had ever made such an impression on her" . It seemed that happiness had been achieved: a loved one was nearby and Maxim Maksimych, who took care of her like a father. Four months flew by, and there was a discord in the relationship between the two heroes: Pechorin began to leave home, thought, was sad. Bela was ready for drastic measures: “If he doesn’t love me, then who’s stopping him from sending me home?” How was she to know what was going on in Pechorin’s soul: “I was mistaken again: the love of a savage is a little better than the love of a noble young lady, the ignorance and innocence of one is also annoying, like the coquetry of another.” How to explain to a girl in love that this metropolitan officer is bored with her. And perhaps death was the only solution in which the honor and dignity of the young savage could be preserved. The robbery blow of Kazbich not only deprived Bela of his life, but also deprived Pechorin of rest for the rest of his life. He loved her. But still, Vera is the only woman who loves and understands the hero, this is the woman whom, years later, Pechorin still loves and does not think of being left without her. She gives him strength and forgives everything. There is a big, pure feeling in her heart, which brings a lot of suffering; Pechorin, without her love, is very bitter. He is sure that Vera is and always will be, she is his guardian angel, his sun and fresh wind. Pechorin is jealous of Vera for her husband, not hiding his resentment. After a long separation from Vera, Pechorin, as before, heard the trembling of his heart: the sounds of her sweet voice revived feelings that had not cooled down over the years. And, having said goodbye to her, he realized that he had not forgotten anything: “My heart sank painfully, as after the first parting. Oh, how I rejoiced at this feeling! Pechorin hides his pain, and only in the diary does he admit to himself how dear this feeling is to him: “Doesn’t youth really want to come back to me again, or is it just her parting look, the last keepsake?” Faith is the only one who understands the whole tragedy of his alienation, forced loneliness. Vera's farewell letter killed hope in him, for a moment deprived him of his mind: "With the possibility of losing her forever, Vera became dearer to me than anything in the world, dearer than life, honor, happiness." Tears of despair raise Vera in the eyes of readers, a modest woman who managed to get to the heart of Pechorin, whose “soul was exhausted, her mind fell silent” after her departure.
Pechorin is the prototype of the "superfluous person" of his time. He was dissatisfied with society, or rather, he hated him because it made him a "moral cripple." He must live, no, rather, exist in this world, as he himself calls it: "Land of masters, country of slaves."
The hero of the novel through the eyes of an outsider, a wandering officer, is seen at a difficult moment for Pechorin: feelings seem to have left his face, he is tired of life, of eternal disappointments. And yet this portrait will not be the main one: everything important that was hidden from the people around him, who lived next to him, who loved him, was betrayed by Pechorin himself. How not to exclaim here:
why didn't the world understand
Great, and how he did not find
My friends, and how love hello
Didn't bring hope to him again?
He was worthy of her.
Many years will pass, and the unsolved Pechorin will excite the hearts of readers, awaken their dreams and force them to act.
Heroes of Turgenev's novel. time in the novel.
The center of the novels of I. S. Turgenev is a person belonging to the number of Russian people of the cultural layer - educated, enlightened nobles. Therefore, Turgenev's novel is also called personal. And since he was an artistic "portrait of the era", the hero of the novel, as part of this portrait, also embodied the most characteristic features of his time and his estate. Such a hero is Dmitry Rudin, who can be regarded as a type of "superfluous people".
In the writer's work, the problem of the "extra person" will take a fairly large place. No matter how harshly Turgenev wrote about the nature of the "superfluous person", the main pathos of the novel was to glorify Rudin's inextinguishable enthusiasm.
It is difficult to say which time dominates in the novels. In the end, everything described in Turgenev's novels was believed to be imperishable, eternal, everlasting, while historical time revealed the "urgent, necessary, urgent" in the mood of Russian life and made the writer's works acutely topical.
"The first obstacle and I crumbled"
The novels of I. S. Turgenev contain a peculiar half-century history of the Russian intelligentsia. The writer quickly guessed new needs, new ideas introduced into the public consciousness, and in his works he certainly drew (as circumstances allowed) attention to the question that was on the line and was already vaguely "beginning to excite society."
Turgenev's novels are full of facts of ideology, culture, art - with them the artist marked the movement of time. But the main thing for Turgenev was always a new type of person, a new character, which directly reflected the influence of the historical era on the human personality. The search for a hero is what guided the novelist in depicting different generations of the Russian intelligentsia.
The hero from Turgenev is taken in the most striking manifestations. Love, activity, struggle, the search for the meaning of life, in tragic cases, death - this is how the character of the hero is revealed at the most significant moments and his human value is determined.
Rudin produces from the very first time the impression of a "wonderful man", extraordinary. This cannot be attributed to his appearance: “A man of about thirty-five, tall, somewhat round-shouldered, curly-haired, swarthy, with an irregular face, but expressive and intelligent, with a liquid gleam in his quick dark blue eyes, with a straight wide nose and handsome lips, his dress was old and narrow, as if he had grown out of it." Nothing seemed to be in his favor. But very soon those present feel the sharp originality of this new personality for them.
For the first time introducing the reader to the hero, Turgenev presents him as an “experienced talker” who has “music of eloquence”. In his speeches, Rudin stigmatizes laziness, speaks of the high destiny of man, dreams of Russia becoming an enlightened country. Turgenev notes that his hero "did not look for words, but the words themselves obediently came to his lips, each word poured directly from the soul, burned with the heat of conviction." Rudin is not only an orator and improviser. Listeners are affected by his passion for exclusively higher interests. A person cannot, should not subordinate his life only to practical goals, concerns about existence, Rudin argues. Enlightenment, science, the meaning of life - that's what Rudin talks about with such enthusiasm, inspiration and poetry. All the characters in the novel feel the power of Rudin's influence on the listeners, the persuasion in a word. Rudin is occupied exclusively with the higher questions of existence, he very cleverly talks about self-sacrifice, but, in essence, he is focused only on his "I".
Rudin, like all Turgenev's heroes, goes through the test of love. This feeling in Turgenev is sometimes bright, sometimes tragic and destructive, but it is always a force that reveals the true nature of a person. It is here that the "head", far-fetched nature of Rudin's hobby is revealed, his lack of naturalness and freshness of feelings. Rudin does not know himself or Natalya, mistaking her at first for a girl. As very often with Turgenev, the heroine is placed above the hero in love - with the integrity of nature, immediacy of feeling, recklessness in decisions. Natalya, at eighteen years old, without any life experience, is ready to leave the house and, against her mother's desire, unite her fate with Rudin. But in answer to the question: "What do you think we should do now?" - she hears from Rudin: "Of course, to submit." Natalya Rudina throws many bitter words: she reproaches him for cowardice, cowardice, for the fact that his lofty words are far from deeds. "How pathetic and worthless I was in front of her!" - exclaims Rudin after an explanation with Natalia.
In the very first conversation between Rudin and Natalya, one of the main contradictions of his character is revealed. Just the day before, Rudin spoke with such inspiration about the future, about the meaning of life, and suddenly he appears before us as a tired man who does not believe in his own strength or in the sympathy of people. True, the objection of the surprised Natalya is enough - and Rudin reproaches himself for cowardice and again preaches the need to do the job. But the author has already planted in the soul of the reader a doubt that Rudin's words are consistent with the deed, intentions - with deeds.
The development of relations between Rudin and Natalia is preceded in the novel by the love story of Lezhnev, in which Rudin played an important role. Rudin's best intentions led to the opposite result: taking on the role of Lezhnev's mentor, he poisoned his joy of first love. After the story about this, the reader is also prepared for the final love of Natalia and Rudin. Rudin cannot be reproached for pretense - he is sincere in his passion just as he will be sincere in repentance and self-flagellation later. The trouble is that "with one head, no matter how strong it may be, it is difficult for a person to even know what is happening in himself." And so a story unfolds in which the hero of the novel temporarily loses his heroic traits.
The writer describes an episode from the hero's life when he wanted to make the river navigable. However, he did not succeed, as the owners of the mills failed his plan. Nothing happened with pedagogical activity, and with agronomic transformations in the countryside. And all Rudin's failures are due to the fact that at the most crucial moments he “passes in” and goes into the background, he is afraid to make any serious decisions, to act actively. He is lost, discouraged, and any obstacle makes him weak-willed, insecure, passive.
Rudin's especially pronounced feature is manifested in the episode of the last meeting with Natalia Lasunskaya, who, with all her fervor, loving hearts, hopes for understanding and support from her beloved, for his bold and desperate step, for the same response. But Rudin cannot truly appreciate her feelings, he is not able to justify her hopes, he is afraid of responsibility for someone else's life and advises "submit to fate." By his act, the hero once again confirms Lezhnev’s idea that in fact Rudin is “cold as ice” and, playing a dangerous game, “does not put a hair on the map - while others put the soul.” As for the fragile, eighteen-year-old Natalya, whom everyone considered still young, almost a child, and inexperienced, she turned out to be much stronger and more intelligent than Rudin, she managed to unravel his essence: “So this is how you apply your interpretations about freedom, about victims. ".
Turgenev portrayed in the novel a typical representative of the young noble intelligentsia, pointing out that they are talented, honest people with extraordinary abilities. However, according to the author, they are not yet able to solve complex historical problems, they do not have enough willpower and confidence to leave a significant mark on the revival of Russia.
The creative history of the novel "Oblomov"
According to Goncharov himself, the Oblomov plan was ready as early as 1847, that is, almost immediately after the publication of Ordinary History. Such is the peculiarity of Goncharov's creative psychology that all his novels seem to have grown simultaneously from a common artistic core, being variants of the same collisions, a similar system of characters, similar characters.
The longest - until 1857 - was written and finalized by Part I. At this stage of work, the novel was called Oblomovshchina. Indeed, both in terms of genre and style, Part I resembled an utterly stretched composition of a physiological essay: a description of one morning of a St. There is no plot action in it, a lot of everyday and moralistic material. In a word, “Oblomovism” is brought to the fore in it, Oblomov is left in the background.
The next three parts, introducing Oblomov's antagonist and friend Andrei Stolz into the plot, as well as a love collision, in the center of which is the captivating image of Olga Ilyinskaya, seem to bring the character of the title character out of hibernation, help him open up in dynamics and, thus, enliven and even idealize the satirical portrait of Oblomov drawn in Part I. Not without reason, only with the appearance of the images of Stolz and especially Olga in the draft manuscript, work on the novel went by leaps and bounds: Oblomov was completed in draft in just some 7 weeks during Goncharov's travel abroad in the summer - autumn of 1857.
"Good-natured man must be, simplicity"
The next hero of my work is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov from the novel of the same name by I. A. Goncharov.
Goncharov built his main novel as a slow, detailed development of Oblomov's character. One after another, they arise in it and then expand, the leading themes sound more and more insistent, absorbing more and more new motives and their variations. Famous for his picturesqueness and plasticity, Goncharov in the composition and semantic movement of novels surprisingly accurately follows the laws of musical construction. And if "An Ordinary Story" is like a sonata, and "Cliff" is like an oratorio, then "Oblomov" is a real instrumental concert, a concert of feelings.
That it develops at least two significant topics, Druzhinin also noted. The critic saw two Oblomovs. There is Oblomov "moldy, almost disgusting", "greasy, clumsy piece of meat." And there is Oblomov, in love with Olga and "he destroys the love of the woman he has chosen and weeps over the wreckage of his happiness", Oblomov, who is "deeply touching and sympathetic in his sad comedy." Between these Oblomovs there is an abyss and at the same time intense interaction, the struggle of "Oblomovism" with the "true active life of the heart", that is, with the real personality of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.
Well, first things first.
Oblomov was born in his family estate - Oblomovka. His parents loved him very much, even too much: his mother always took care of her son too much, did not let him take a single step without supervision, holding back all his youthful excitement inside. He was the only child in the family and he was spoiled, everything was forgiven him. But no matter how hard the parents tried, they could not give their son the necessary qualities that would be useful to him in adulthood, apparently they were so in love with their own son that they were afraid to overload, offend or upset their child. As a child, Oblomov heard only the orders given by his parents to the servants, he did not see their actions, and therefore the phrase hid in the head of little Oblomov: “Why do anything if others can do it for you.” And now our hero grows up, and this phrase still haunts him.
We meet Oblomov in his apartment on Gorokhovaya Street. Ilya Ilyich appears before us as a man of about thirty-two or three years old, lying on a sofa. There is a mess everywhere in his apartment: the books are scattered and everything is dusty, the plates, apparently, have not been washed for several days, there is dust everywhere. This does not interfere with Oblomov, for him the main thing is peace and serenity.
He lies on the couch in his shabby, beloved bathrobe and dreams. Goncharov took the image of this robe from real life: his friend, sing P. A. Vyazemsky, received a referral to Novosiltsev’s Warsaw office and, parting with his Moscow life, wrote a farewell ode to his robe. For Vyazemsky, this dressing gown personified personal independence, so valued by a freedom-loving poet, an aristocrat. Isn't that why Oblomov values his dressing gown? Doesn't he see in this attire a kind of half-erased symbol of inner freedom - in spite of the vanity and lack of freedom of the surrounding reality. Yes, for Oblomov this is a symbol of a certain freedom that reigned somewhere in his inner world, far from ideal, this is a kind of protest to society: “A robe made of Persian fabric, a real oriental robe, without the slightest hint of Europe, without tassels, without velvet, without waist, very roomy, so that Oblomov could wrap himself in it twice.
The dressing gown rather succinctly combined with the appearance of the hero: “He was a man of about thirty-two or three years old, of medium height, of pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence of any definite idea. disappeared, and then an even light of carelessness gleamed all over her face. The very image of Oblomov winds up the reader with boredom and serenity. The whole way of life of the hero is reflected on his face: he only thinks, but does not act. Inside Oblomov is a great man, a poet, a dreamer, but he is limited only by his inner world, he practically does nothing to realize his goals and ideas.
Oblomov does not understand society, does not understand these secular conversations, which do not bring anything useful except rumors, these parties, where everyone is in sight of each other and everyone strives to humiliate the other with something. But even so, this does not prevent Oblomov from communicating, not making friends, namely, communicating with secular people, such as Volkov, Sudbinsky or Alekseev. All these people are so different and so different from Oblomov that their acquaintance seems strange. For example, Volkov is a secular person who cannot imagine life without balls and secular dinners, and Sudbinsky is a man obsessed with the service, who has forgotten his personal life for the sake of a career, Oblomov, surprised at such an act, says that work is already hard work, but here you still need spend your time and energy on career growth, well, no. But Sudbinsky assures that the purpose of his life is work.
But still, there is a person who is truly close and dear to Oblomov - this is Stolz, a strange, ideal person, and because of this it seems that it is unreal. Critic N. D. Akhsharumov spoke of him like this: “There is something illusory in everything that concerns Stolz. To see from afar - how full his life seems!
Works and worries, vast undertakings and undertakings, but come closer and look more closely, and you will see that all this is poof, castles in the air, built on credit from the foam of an imaginary contradiction. the shadow of a material being?” Affirming the unreality of Stolz, Akhsharumov leads us to the idea that Stolz is not yet another dream of Oblomov. After all, Stolz combined in himself everything that Oblomov aspired to: a prudent, sober mind, universal love and admiration. Oblomov felt sympathy and admiration only for Stolz, and why, for example, not for Volkov, he also tried to “revive” Oblomov, called him into the “light”, but even so, Oblomov chose Stolz, doesn’t this confirm their connection, connection on some inner level?
The character of Oblomov helps us to understand the people with whom he communicates, each of them has his own requests, problems, and thanks to this we can observe Oblomov from different angles, which in turn gives us the most complete picture of the character of the protagonist. So, for example, Sudbinsky helps us understand what Oblomov's attitude to career and work is: Ilya Ilyich does not understand how one can sacrifice everything for the sake of career growth.
I consider “Oblomov's Dream” to be one of the most important parts of the novel, it is in it that the hero sees his real self, in it we understand the origins of Oblomov and “Oblomovism”. Ilya Ilyich falls asleep on the painful, insoluble question: "Why am I like this?" Reason and logic were powerless to answer it. In a dream, he is answered by memory and affection for the house that gave birth to him. Beneath all the layers of Oblomov's existence lies the source of the living and pure humanity of this world. From the source of this follow the main properties of Oblomov's nature. This source, the moral and emotional core of Oblomov's world, is Oblomov's mother. “Oblomov, seeing his long-dead mother, trembled in a dream with joy, with ardent love for her: from him, from a sleepy one, two warm tears slowly floated out from under his eyelashes and became motionless.” Now we have before us the best, purest, true Oblomov.
So he remains in his love for Olga Sergeevna. That is why he does not seek to bind Olga with any bonds, he just wants strong and pure love. That is why Oblomov writes a farewell letter to Olga, in which he says that her feelings for him are just a mistake of an inexperienced heart. But Olga is disingenuous. It is not as simple and naive as it seems to the hero at first. She interprets Oblomov’s letter in her own way, in a completely different way: “In this letter, as in a mirror, you can see your tenderness, your caution, concern for me, fear for my happiness, everything that Andrei Ivanovich pointed out to me in you, and that I fell in love with, for which I forget your laziness, apathy. You spoke out there involuntarily: you are not an egoist, Ilya Ilyich, you did not write at all in order to part - you did not want this, but because you were afraid to deceive me, this was honesty.
These words contain the truth that Olga hid in order to arouse the energy of feeling and activity in Oblomov. However, Oblomov's feeling for Olga is completely different than what the heroine expects and expects. Oblomov loved his mother above all and above all. He is faithful to this love and still unconsciously looking for his mother in Olga. It is no coincidence that in her feeling he catches and notes the shades of maternal tenderness for him. But he will find his ideal of a woman not in Olga, but in Agafya Matveevna, who is naturally endowed with the ability for maternal disinterestedness and all-forgiving love. Around her, Oblomov creates the whole atmosphere of his native home, where his mother reigned in the past. Thus, a new Oblomovka arises.
The main question of the novel is: “Go ahead or stay?” - a question that for Oblomov was "deeper than Hamlet's."
Comparison of all three heroes of the essay.
All the heroes of my work belong to the type of "superfluous people". That is what brings them together. They are very similar to each other. Their faces are always thoughtful, they show that there is a constant struggle inside the heroes, but they do not show it. Their eyes are always bottomless, looking at them, a person is drowning in an ocean of serenity and indifference, as they say: “The eyes are the mirror of the soul”, does that mean their souls, their outer world is also the same? They all suffer because of love, love for women with whom they are not destined to be due to fatal circumstances or by the will of evil fate.
All characters are critical of themselves, they see flaws in themselves, but cannot change them. They blame themselves for their weaknesses and want to overcome them, but this is impossible, because without these flaws they will lose their attractiveness to the reader, the ideological meaning of the work will be lost. They are not capable of any action, except for Pechorin, only he crosses this genre bar. All the heroes are looking for the meaning of life, but they never find it, because it does not exist, the world is not yet ready to accept such people, their role in society has not yet been determined, since they appeared too early.
They condemn and despise the society that gave birth to them, they do not accept it.
However, there are several differences between them. So, for example, Oblomov finds his love, even if he does not stand, which he dreamed of. And Pechorin, unlike other heroes, does not suffer from an inability to act, on the contrary, he tries to do as much as possible in life, his words do not diverge from his thoughts, but he has one character trait that distinguishes him from other characters: he is very curious , and this is what makes Pechorin act.
But still, the most important similarity between them is that they all end up dying prematurely, because no matter how hard they try, they cannot live in this world, in this society. The world is not ready to accept such fundamentally new people.
