Bazarov's worldview. Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov

The novel by I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons” was published in 1862, and the events described in it date back to 1859, on the eve of the peasant reform, in relation to which the progressive public was divided into two main groups. These are the liberals, who welcomed the reforms of Alexander II, and the democratic revolutionaries, who carried out the idea of ​​a "peasant revolution".

In the novel, Yevgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov belongs to the second camp. It's educated clever man, a strong theorist. Bazarov calls himself a nihilist, a subverter of all obsolete, from his point of view, authorities, social laws, moral standards. Eugene believes that nothing can be taken on faith, everything must be verified experimentally.

Nihilism is based on the philosophy of vulgar materialism. Everything is sacrificed for the benefit of the moment. The nihilist proclaims a consumer attitude towards nature. Bazarov on this occasion gives a sharp judgment: "Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it." Eugene denies the spiritual sphere of human activity: "Rafael is not worth a penny", "A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." Art, philosophy, according to Bazarov, is a human whim. The hero presumptuously declares: “I look at the sky only when I want to sneeze!” The young man denies culture, reduces the norms of human behavior to sensation. A person acts honestly or dishonestly by virtue of feeling. One likes to be honest, the other vice versa. Bazarov's views are also reflected in his scientific activity. He believes that all people are the same, like birches in the forest, thereby rejecting the highest nervous activity and not taking into account the mental characteristics of a person's personality.

Life turned out to be more complicated than Bazarov's theoretical calculations. In the novel, the author shows the collapse of his one-sided vulgar materialistic views. It turns out that the demands of living human nature are incompatible with nihilism.

So, Bazarov, denying beauty, nevertheless deeply loves nature. He is interested in a rare specimen of a beetle; he is glad that he has grown Birch Grove, he says lovingly: "Acacia and lilac - good guys." Feeling for Odintsova revealed in the hero the ability to perceive beauty. The background on which his explanation with Anna Sergeevna takes place is a poetic picture of a summer night. Nature is drawn in Bazarov’s perception: “A dark soft night looked into the room with its almost black sky, faintly rustling trees and the fresh smell of the free, clean air". In that romantic landscape the key word is "free". Bazarov seems to be freed from false beliefs that nature, love is nonsense.

Gradually, Turgenev shows that many of the hero's declarations do not correspond to reality. Already at the first meeting with Odintsova, he blushes. Life refutes his assertion that love is romanticism, unforgivable nonsense. Bazarov, meeting with Anna Sergeevna, "indignantly recognized the romance in himself." One of the principles of the hero: "Do you like a woman, - try to get a sense, but you can’t - well, don’t, turn away - the earth hasn’t converged like a wedge," - in the first part it has outlived its usefulness. turn away - the earth did not converge like a wedge, ”- in the first part it has outlived its usefulness. No matter how hard it was to realize Bazarov, but after their explanation, he had nothing to do with Odintsova. But he violated this principle: he knew that Odintsova would not achieve “usefulness”, but anyway he went to her again. He loved her deeply, so he hoped he could be deceived by her coldness.

Bazarov had a one-sided, cynical view of a woman: "such a rich body", "it is said - the first grade." Having met Odintsova, he began to appreciate the spiritualized feminine beauty. A deeper understanding of human relationships comes to him. He acknowledged the existence of love. His heart is torn to pieces, he feels that he is "rather worthy of regret" who loves truly, selflessly.

In relations with Fenechka, Bazarov's theory also does not work. Following his “feelings”, which, according to Bazarov, determine the essence of human actions, he violates elementary morality without the slightest hesitation and kisses Fenechka. This act of Bazarov deeply offends the young woman, in her words one can hear a moral reproach: “It’s a sin for you, Evgeny Vasilyevich!”

The hero is used to disregarding the people around him, because his theory denied culture, moral traditions. Having violated all the laws of hospitality in the Kirsanovs' house, Bazarov begins to suffer from this, he "felt ashamed and ... annoyed." Because of him, a duel took place, Fenechka "lost weight from incessant anxiety." Bazarov caused grief to everyone. And although in his hearts he calls the Kirsanovs "damned barchuks", he can no longer get rid of his inner excitement. There was a breakdown in his soul. So, in relations with people, Bazarov's beliefs are tested for strength, and it turns out that they are imperfect, cannot be accepted as absolute.

Coming into conflict with others, Bazarov widens the gap between himself and the world. And now in his statements there are deep philosophical arguments on the topic of death and the place of man in the world. “The narrow place that I occupy is so tiny in comparison with the rest of the space where I am not, and the part of the time that I will be able to live is so insignificant before eternity, where I have not been and will not be ... And in this atom, in this mathematical point, the blood circulates, the brain works, it also wants something ... ”he says to Arkady. This position of the "grain of sand", "atom" in the power of the elements of nature does not satisfy Bazarov. The former nihilistic idea that people are like trees in a forest gave Bazarov the opportunity to look at the world more or less optimistically: there is no need to peer into the soul of everyone individual person, all people are the same, everyone has “the same spleen”, and differences between people are something like diseases. Now Bazarov looks at life tragically, because he is haunted by the thought of own death: “Yeah, go try denying death. She denies you."

In the last dialogue with Odintsova, the romantic foundations of Bazarov's nature are revealed. The hero retains the usual irony, but under the influence of live communication with people, he is able to reconsider his views and agree with the obvious. The usual irony, but under the influence of live communication with people, he is able to reconsider his views and agree with the obvious. His irony is directed not at others, but at himself: "Love is a form, and my own form is already decaying." Before his death, Bazarov appreciated his parents. He loved them like a son, but neglected to communicate with them, denied their simple way: "eat - drink." IN last hours the hero's life becomes simpler and softer. The atheist does not argue with his father, who wants his son to confess before his death, asks Odintsova to “caress” his parents.

The natural impulses of the heart deny the theoretical laws by which Bazarov tried to live. The internal conflict proved unresolvable. Bazarov redeemed the extremes of his worldview with his tragic fate.

Dueling test. Bazarov and his friend again pass through the same circle: Maryino - Nikolskoye - parental home. Outwardly, the situation almost literally reproduces the one on the first visit. Arkady enjoys summer vacation and, having barely found an excuse, returns to Nikolskoye, to Katya. Bazarov continues natural science experiments. True, this time the author expresses himself in a different way: "The fever of work came upon him." The new Bazarov abandoned intense ideological disputes with Pavel Petrovich. Only occasionally throws a fairly flat witticism that bears little resemblance to the former mental fireworks. He is confronted by his uncle's familiar "cold politeness". Both opponents, not confessing to each other and to themselves, were a little tired. Hostility was replaced by mutual interest. Pavel Petrovich “... once he even brought his scented<…>face to the microscope in order to see how a transparent ciliate swallowed a green speck of dust ... ". The word "even" is quite appropriate here. For the first time, he decided to inquire about what his opponent was building arguments on. And yet, this time the stay in the Kirsanovs' house ends with a duel for Bazarov. “I believe that it was impossible for you to avoid this duel, which ... to some extent is explained only by the constant antagonism of your mutual views,” Nikolai Petrovich, confused in words, says at the end of the duel. Involuntarily pronounces the most important thing. "Antagonism of views" involved "to some extent" and would hardly have led to a duel. If it weren't for... Fenechka.

“Fenechka liked Bazarov,” but he liked her too. He behaved with her "freer and more cheeky", they were brought together by the "absence of everything noble." Described at the beginning of the chapter visits, conversations, health care- evidence of ever-increasing mutual sympathy. Sympathy, which would inevitably develop into a feeling. If it were explained by objective reasons, and did not fall, sometimes to spite us, from the sky; "disease" from which there is no escape. So Fenechka sincerely fell in love with the middle-aged Nikolai Petrovich. And by chance she ended up at the meeting place in the garden, in the same gazebo where she once met a courteous, delicate guest. As a result of this meeting, Bazarov has reason to ironically congratulate himself "on formal admission to the Celadons." Now the hero behaves simply dishonestly, rudely, flirting like a lackey. IN magazine version novel, the restrained Turgenev directly said: “To him ( Bazarov) and it never occurred to him that he had violated all the rules of hospitality in this very house. Literary critics have revealed the psychological background here - having suffered a defeat with the aristocrat Odintsova, he wants to check whether it is not easier to win the feelings of poor, simple-minded Fenechka. It turns out that love simply does not happen. “It’s a sin for you, Yevgeny Vasilyich,” the woman says with “genuine reproach.”

Pavel Petrovich demanded a duel. He even grabbed a stick to make the duel inevitable by any means. By the very fact of the challenge, the elder Kirsanov had already departed from his aristocratic "principles." Turgenev conveys the remark of the old servant, who was "in his own way an aristocrat, no worse than Pavel Petrovich." It was not a bloody duel that struck Prokofich: he "interpreted that even in his time the noble gentlemen fought." The scrupulous guardian of the foundations did not like the choice of an opponent: "only noble gentlemen fought among themselves." A real aristocrat should not condescend to a commoner: “and such a rogue for rudeness<…>at the stable they ordered to tear it off.

“How beautiful and how stupid! What a comedy we broke off! - Bazarov is indignant after the door slammed behind his opponent. “... This is what it means to live with the feudal lords. You yourself will fall into the feudal lords and you will participate in knightly tournaments, ”he tries to explain himself in a conversation with Arkady. Irritation, as usual with the hero, masks inner bewilderment and confusion. He, in turn, had to be convinced of the limitations of his own "principles". It turns out that there are situations when you can defend your dignity only by a duel: “It was impossible to refuse; after all, he would have hit me even then (Bazarov turned pale at this very thought; all his pride reared up) ... "

In the middle of the century, the duel was already passing into the category of anachronisms, partly even ridiculous. Turgenev's pen draws many humorous details. The duel begins with an invitation to the second of Peter the valet, who is "certainly an honest fellow," but he has become a coward to the extreme. And it ends with a tragicomic wound “in the thigh” of Pavel Petrovich, who, as if on purpose, put on “white trousers”. Meanwhile, the episode of the duel is the most important in ideological development novel. The important thing is not that Bazarov was "not a coward," like Pavel Petrovich. Turgenev noted the strength of spirit inherent in both heroes earlier. The duel helps to overcome internal limitations. At the duel, when mutual rejection seemed to have reached the limit, simple human relations arise between the duelists. Bazarov addresses Pavel Petrovich as a good friend: “And you must admit, Pavel Petrovich, that our duel is unusual to the point of ridiculousness. Just look at the face of our second.” Kirsanov suddenly agrees: "You are right ... What a stupid face."

We remember how passionately they discussed the peasant question. Each of them was convinced that only he knew exactly what the Russian peasant needed and thought about. Before the duel begins, Bazarov notices a peasant who has passed him and Peter has not bowed. A moment after the duel, he returns. This time the peasant takes off his hat with an outwardly submissive look, confirming the idea of ​​his “patriarchy”. Formerly, Pavel Petrovich would have been satisfied with this. But now he suddenly asks his eternal opponent an interested question: “What do you think this person thinks about us now?” Bazarov’s answer sounds completely sincere bewilderment: “Who knows!” The young nihilist gives up his monopoly on truth, not only for himself. He is ready to admit that the “dark” man also has a complex spiritual world: “Who will understand him? He doesn't understand himself." "Understanding" is generally the key word of this episode: "Each of them was aware that the other understood him."

After the duel, the heroes seem to change places. Bazarov no longer wants to think about the fate of Fenechka. Seeing her upset face in the window, "perhaps it will disappear," he said to himself.<…>- Well, get out somehow! On the contrary, Pavel Petrovich shows a democratism alien to him before. “I am beginning to think that Bazarov was right when he reproached me for being aristocratic,” he declares to his brother, demanding that he finally legalize relations with Fenechka. “Is that what you say, Pavel? you who I thought<…>adamant opponent of such marriages!” - Nikolai Petrovich is amazed. He does not know that this request was preceded by a heartfelt scene between his brother and Fenechka, reminiscent of the chapter of a chivalric novel. "This is overcoming late love and the rejection of her: a rejection devoid of selfishness, raising a simple Fenechka to a height beautiful lady, which they believe without doubting, which they serve without hoping for reciprocity.

Turgenev's reflection of the relationship between generations in a special historical period - on the eve of the abolition of serfdom. Representatives of the warring camps. The discrepancy between the opinions of two generations regarding the aristocrats and the Russian people. Perspectives on art.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Ideological duel of Bazarov and Kirsanov.

The novel "Fathers and Sons" was written in 1861 by Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. This novel shows the relationship of generations in a special historical period- on the eve of the abolition of serfdom. At this time, Russia is divided into two ideological and political camps. The conflict of generations acquires a particularly acute character: “fathers” and “children” turn out to be irreconcilable ideological rivals. The main representatives of the warring camps in the novel are Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov (“fathers”) and Evgeny Vasilievich Bazarov (“children”).

In Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, an aristocrat is immediately guessed. He is always carefully shaved, perfumed, dressed. Even while living in the countryside, Pavel retains his secular habits. He comes out to meet guests dressed in “a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots.” Turgenev emphasizes the beauty of Pavel Petrovich's face: "His face ... unusually correct and clean, as if drawn with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty."

In Bazarov, one feels a man from the people. He does not look after his appearance, wears "dangling sand-coloured sideburns" and "a long robe with tassels." There is no particular beauty in his face, it is “long and thin, with a wide forehead, flat top, pointed nose, large greenish eyes ... it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence.”

Turgenev pays special attention to the hands of these characters. Bazarov arrives without gloves and holds out to Nikolai Petrovich a “naked red hand”, which speaks of a habit of hard work. And Pavel Petrovich holds out Arkady " beautiful hand with long pink nails." With Bazarov, the aristocrat avoids shaking hands, immediately feeling an ideological enemy in him.

Bazarov does not like Pavel Petrovich. He ridicules his aristocracy, secular habits: “Yes, I will spoil them, these county aristocrats! After all, this is all pride, lion's habits, fatness. Arkady is trying to somehow protect his uncle, telling Yevgeny the story of the unhappy love of Pavel and Princess R. But Bazarov scoffs at this too: “No, brother, this is all licentiousness, emptiness, romanticism ... rot, art.”

This mutual rejection of the characters develops into an ideological conflict.

Pavel Petrovich considers himself progressive man. He adheres to liberal views, supports the upcoming reforms. Therefore, he is very surprised when young people do not take his ideas seriously and call him an “archaic phenomenon”. As soon as Pavel learns that Arkady's friend is a nihilist, he has a desire to challenge this nihilist to a dispute. But, unfortunately for Pavel Petrovich, Evgeny does not like verbal debate and brushes them off like an annoying fly. For Bazarov, the main thing is to take actions that are beneficial, and everything else is a waste of time.

Still, Pavel Petrovich manages to challenge Bazarov twice. But for the first time, he is lost from the categoricalness of Bazarov. Kirsanov, trying to offend the nihilist, declares that he gives more preference to German scientists than Russian ones. But Bazarov retorts with the fact that it does not matter to him nationality, he does not recognize any authorities: “But why should I recognize them? … They will tell me the case, I will agree, that’s all.” Bazarov generally rejected all art: "A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." With this step of his, Evgeny Vasilyevich puzzled Pavel Petrovich.

The decisive “ideological duel” took place a few days later. Bazarov dismissively treated one of the neighboring landowners, calling him “rubbish, aristocratic,” which seriously offended the feelings of Pavel Petrovich, who considered himself an aristocrat. Kirsanov begins to prove that the aristocrats are the stronghold of world liberalism, they support the “principles” on which society is based. But Bazarov rejects all these judgments at once. He considers all aristocrats idlers: “... You respect yourself and sit back; what good is it for the bien public?” Pavel is trying to name some foundations of society: progress, liberalism. But Yevgeny Vasilyevich rudely denies everything: “At the present time, denial is most useful of all - we deny it.” “You deny everything, or, to be more precise, you destroy everything ... Why, you need to build,” Pavel Petrovich is surprised. But even to this, the nihilist has an answer that, they say, this is not his business, “first you need to clear the place.”

The opinions of two generations regarding the Russian people also do not coincide. Pavel Petrovich begins to prove that "the Russian people are not like that", "he honors traditions, he is patriarchal." Bazarov contemptuously declares that the people "deserve contempt."

A complete misunderstanding of the "fathers" and "children" is also manifested in their views on art. "Fathers" read Pushkin, play the cello. Yevgeny Vasilievich denies art itself: “Raphael is not worth a penny,” which irritates Kirsanov. The aristocrat believes that such "nihilists" are not needed at all.

This is where the “ideological duel” of “fathers” and “children” ends. And only in the second part of the novel, the ideological intransigence between the characters turns into a real duel.

I believe that in these “ideological” debates, Turgenev still gives his preference to the “fathers”. However, he sees that, unfortunately, the aristocrats do not go beyond empty talk. Despite the fact that the writer does not agree with the "denial" of Bazarov, he portrayed him as active, strong, intelligent and educated person seeking to benefit the Fatherland. The duel of heroes, although it is portrayed somewhat comically, as an anachronism, one can also see a prophecy in it: ideological conflicts can turn into bloodshed.

Similar Documents

The confrontation of generations and opinions in Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", the images of the work and their real prototypes. portrait description the main characters of the novel: Bazarov, Pavel Petrovich, Arkady, Sitnikov, Fenichka, reflecting the attitude of the author in it.

abstract, added 05/26/2009


Analysis historical fact new public figure- revolutionary democrat, his comparison with literary hero Turgenev. Bazarov's place in the democratic movement and privacy. Compositional-plot structure of the novel "Fathers and Sons".

abstract, added 07/01/2010


The idea and the beginning of the work of I.S. Turgenev on the novel "Fathers and Sons". The personality of a young provincial doctor as the basis of the main figure of the novel - Bazarov. The end of work on the work in the beloved Spassky. The novel "Fathers and Sons" is dedicated to V. Belinsky.

presentation, added 12/20/2010


Duel in Russian Literature. Duel as an act of aggression. The history of the duel and the dueling code. Duels at A.S. Pushkin in " Captain's daughter", "Eugene Onegin". The duel in the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time". The duel in the work of I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".

scientific work, added 02/25/2009


Studying storyline concerning the protagonist of the novel I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" - E.V. Bazarov, who dies at the end of the work. Analysis life position Eugene, which consists in the fact that he denies everything: views on life, a feeling of love.

abstract, added 12/07/2010


Yevgeny Bazarov as the main and only exponent of democratic ideology. Anti-noble line of conception of "Fathers and Sons". Characteristics of liberal landowners and radical raznochintsy in Turgenev's novel. Political Views Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.

abstract, added 03/03/2010


The worldview and ideals of the main character of the novel - Evgeny Bazarov. Image techniques I.S. Turgenev emotional experiences of his characters and the emergence and development of various feelings in them. The method of describing the entity by the author psychological states characters.

presentation, added 04/02/2015


The relationship between the characters in the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". love lines in the novel. Love and passion in the relationship of the main characters - Bazarov and Odintsova. Women's and male images in the novel. Conditions for harmonious relations between the characters of both sexes.

presentation, added 01/15/2010


Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, with his novel Fathers and Sons, wanted to reunite Russian society. But I got exactly the opposite result. Discussions began: is Bazarov bad, good? Insulted by these discussions, Turgenev left for Paris.

essay, added 11/25/2002


The study of I.S. Turgenev - works that reflect not only the features inherent in the aristocracy, but also with all the depth literary style show the simple peasant population of Russia in the nineteenth century. The personality of P.P. Kirsanov in the novel "Fathers and Sons".

Bazarov, the protagonist of the novel, is a nihilist. Resolutely and mercilessly, he denies everything: the social structure, idle talk, love of the people, as well as art and love. The subject of his "worship" is practical use.

Bazarov differs from the Kirsanovs in his energy, masculinity, firmness of character and independence.

It should be noted that the novel does not show Bazarov's childhood. But it is known that the character of a person is laid in the first years of his life. Perhaps Turgenev had no idea at all how such characters were formed? Bazarov is fond of natural sciences. Every day he is filled with work, new searches. “Bazarov got up very early and went two or three miles away, not to walk - he couldn’t stand walking without a goal, but to collect herbs.” He confessed to Arkady that the passion for work made him a man. “You only need to achieve your goal with your own work.” Accustomed to relying only on his own mind and energy, Bazarov developed a calm self-confidence. He doesn't care at all what others think of him.

He reduces the relationship between a man and a woman to physiology, art to “the art of making money, or is there no more hemorrhoids”, that is, the whole world of beauty is completely alien to him, which he calls “romanticism, nonsense, rottenness, art”.

His philosophy of being originates from a similar attitude to life and consists in the complete denial of all the foundations of society, all beliefs, ideals and norms. human life. “A nihilist is a person who does not bow to any authorities, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respected this principle is,” Arkady says in the novel, obviously in the words of his teacher (Bazarov). But to deny everything is also a principle.

In a dispute with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov's views are even more pronounced. All the principles of Pavel Petrovich boil down to preserving the old order in Russia. Bazarov seeks to destroy this order. However, Bazarov is not shown in any way in social activities and we don't know if he has real plans putting their views into practice.

When the dispute touches on the issue of attitude towards the people, Pavel Petrovich says that the Russian people are “patriarchal”, “revere traditions sacredly” and “cannot live without faith”, and that therefore the nihilists do not express their needs and are completely alien to them. Bazarov agrees with the statement about patriarchy, but for him this is only evidence of the backwardness of the people, their failure as public force Bazarov considers himself closer to the people than Pavel Kirsanov: “My grandfather plowed the land.

Bazarov does not recognize spirituality neither in nature nor in man. He treats people like biological organism: “All people are similar to each other both in body and soul ... One human specimen is enough to judge all others. People are like trees in the forest, not a single botanist will deal with every single birch.

After Bazarov has sufficiently thoroughly stated his views, the test of their life begins. It becomes clear that the nihilist Bazarov is alone in the public arena, although he himself claimed: "We are not so few as you think." Also in last conversation with Pavel Petrovich Bazarov abandons his previous view of the people and admits that it is difficult to understand him. And we see that he still remains a stranger to the people. Left without supporters, breaking with Arkady without regret, having been refused by his beloved woman and having lost faith in the correctness of his worldview, tested by life, Bazarov ceases to value his life. Therefore, his death can be regarded not only as an accident or suicide, but also as a logical consequence of his spiritual crisis.

A typical man of the 1860s, a prominent Russian pre-revolutionary critic Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky disputes this conventional wisdom:

Fathers and Sons. Feature Film based on the novel by I. S. Turgenev. 1958

“There is no way to look at Bazarov as a type of our “nihilists” or “thinking realists” of the 60s. To this "movement", essentially harmless, Bazarov adjoins purely outwardly. Denial of art, mockery of Pushkin, cult natural sciences, materialistic worldview - all this only "mechanically" connects Bazarov with the well-known circles of youth of that time. But after all, Bazarov is interesting and so significant not at all by these “views”, not by “direction”, but by the inner content and complexity of nature, in fact, “gloomy”, “half grown out of the soil”, enormous fortitude, finally - under democracy “up to the end of nails" - such independence of thought and such inclinations of inner freedom, which God grant to a real philosopher. Are these features that can be called typical of the youth of the 60s, of the Pisarevka trend? In a letter to Sluchevsky, Turgenev says that instead of "nihilist" one should read "revolutionary." Let's accept such a "reading" and try to understand Bazarov - as a type of no longer a "nihilist" of the 60s, but a "revolutionary". Even if we have in mind not only the Russian revolutionaries of the 60s and subsequent years, but also Western European ones, then even in this case the typicality of Bazarov will be very doubtful. His nature, it is true, is fundamentally "revolutionary", but at the same time there is too much inner freedom and skepticism in him to be recognized as true, a typical representative revolutionary spirit and mentality. Real revolutionaries for the most part fanatics, that is, people who are internally not free. It is also not fitting for a revolutionary to be a skeptic. IN in a certain sense he is a believer and a confessor. Where is Bazarov's signs of fanaticism, faith, blind devotion to the idea?

If he says to Arkady: “You, for example, don’t fight—and you already imagine yourself doing well—but we want to fight... we have to break others,” etc. (Chapter XXVI), then this only testifies to the fact that that Bazarov's nature, as mentioned above, is basically "revolutionary", aggressive, prone to active protest. But these are only the beginnings, and they are still far from a real revolutionary way of thinking and feeling ... We must also add faith in people, in one's own business, blind devotion to the idea [which Bazarov does not have.]

Further, Bazarov does not even have that spirit of propaganda and proselytism, which is so characteristic of real revolutionaries. Developing his views on Odintsova, he "said all this with an air as if at the same time he was thinking to himself: believe me or not, it's all the same to me" (XVI). In conversations with Arkady, he is more like a materialist philosopher talking with his student than a propagandist recruiting an adept.

But what is especially characteristic of Bazarov and at the same time is a sign of a sharp difference between his inner peace from truly revolutionary natures and minds—this is that eternal dissatisfaction and impossibility to find satisfaction, that lack of balance of spirit, which were especially evident in the following tirade: “I think,” he says to Arkady, “it’s good for my parents to live in the world! At the age of 60, my father is busy, talking about “palliative” means, treating people, being generous with the peasants ... They, my parents, that is, are busy and do not worry about their own insignificance, it does not stink them ... but I ... I feel only boredom and anger.

Of course, it is useful to reckon with this authoritative opinion, but one cannot but take into account the opinions of people of the 60s who recognized themselves in Bazarov. Such a contradiction can only be explained by the fact that Turgenev expanded the type of person of the 60s with some features that were unusual for this era. In the image of Bazarov, he introduced some features characteristic of the people of the 1840s - "hamletism", some abstraction from life, inability to reconcile the "word" with the "deed" ...