Comparative characteristics of Onegin and Pechorin. Comparison of Onegin and Pechorin

"A Hero of Our Time" is a portrait made up of the vices of an entire generation, in their full development. M.Yu. Lermontov.

A Hero of Our Time is the first Russian realistic novel in prose. Both Pushkin in "Eugene Onegin" and Lermontov in "A Hero of Our Time" set themselves the task of revealing the "history of the human soul", showing typical heroes in typical situations. "Onegin's younger brother."

What is the similarity between Onegin and Pechorin?

Both heroes are representatives of high secular society.

They had much in common in how they spent their youth: at first, the heroes madly pursued secular pleasures, then they were disappointed in them. Both tried to engage in science, reading literature, but both of them also lost interest in them. Both Pechorin and Onegin were quickly overcome by boredom.

Just like Onegin, Pechorin stands out in terms of intellectual development from the noble environment surrounding him. Both heroes are typical representatives of sane people of that time, who were quite critical of life and people.

Belinsky drew the attention of readers to the difference between the characters. Onegin "is a man in the novel", "who took a good look at everything, liked everything." Onegin is bored. “Pechorin is not like that. This person is not indifferent, but apathetically bears his suffering, ”the critic writes. And indeed: he is madly chasing after life, looking for it; blames himself for his mistakes and delusions. He is worried about internal issues, and he is looking for their solutions.

Pechorin is an egoist. But Onegin A.S. Belinsky called Pushkin "a suffering egoist" and "an unwilling egoist." The same could be said about Pechorin. About Onegin, Belinsky wrote: "... the forces of this rich nature were left without application, life without meaning, and the romance without end ...".

Pechorin is a different person in his spiritual make-up, and he lives in different social and political conditions.

Onegin lived in the 20s of the 19th century, even before the Decembrist uprising of 1825, during the social and political upsurge. Pechorin is a man of the 30s. This is the time of reaction, when the Decembrists were executed or exiled to Siberia, and the revolutionary democracy has not yet declared itself as a social force.

Onegin, perhaps, could join the Decembrists, but Pechorin was completely deprived of such an opportunity. That is why Belinsky wrote that "Onegin is bored, Pechorin suffers deeply." Pechorin's position was more tragic, because by nature he was more gifted and deeper than Onegin.

From the foregoing, we can conclude that both Lermontov and Pushkin turned out to be somewhat similar, somewhat different, but typical of their time characters.

They were able to capture in life and embody in literary images the most essential features of a young man of his time, to give a typical character with all its negative and positive features. In the preface to the novel A Hero of Our Time, Lermontov himself speaks of the typicality of his hero: “... This is a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their full development.” Pushkin also mentions the typicality of his own, saying: "Onegin is a good fellow, like you and me, like the whole world." Both authors write images of their characters in development.

The social background of the characters is the same. Both of them were brought up in a secular society and received the appropriate education. Pushkin shows that Onegin's mind and erudition are broad, although superficial: he seeks to make up for the shortcomings of his education by independent reading.

Onegin reads books by famous writers and contemporary almanacs to Pushkin. But over time, he left the books, “pulled mourning taffeta”, because he did not find answers to his questions in them. Pechorin's memory is also saturated with information from literature and history.

In his diary we find quotes from Griboyedov and Pushkin. Onegin's mind is manifested in understanding the psychology of people. So, in a conversation with Lensky about the Larins, Onegin says that if he were a poet, he would choose his older sister: “Olga has no life in features,” her face is “Like this stupid moon in this stupid sky.” He was also a subtle psychologist.

This proves his statement about Werner: “His appearance was one of those that at first glance strike unpleasantly, but which one likes later, when the eye learns to read in the wrong features the imprint of a tried and high soul.” The ability to understand people certainly contributed to the accurate depiction of the characters, the transfer of their deceit and hypocrisy. Dissatisfied with life in the "high society", the heroes are looking for the use of their strengths and knowledge. Onegin is trying to find himself, doing housekeeping, managing the estate.

Even “he replaced the corvée with an old quitrent with a light yoke” under the influence of the ideas of the Decembrists. But, not accustomed to systematic WORK, he quickly leaves this occupation. Pechorin, in turn, is trying to find himself in a new environment. He is happy about the transfer to the Caucasus.

Pechorin communicates with people who are different in social status and views on. But everywhere, when the first impressions pass, he feels the same boredom and dissatisfaction with life. Pushkin shows his hero on the eve of the Decembrist uprising, as if thereby giving Onegin the opportunity to use his strength in a noble cause.

Despite the progressiveness of Onegin's views, he is a skeptic who does not believe in "perfection in the world", his mind is sharp, chilled. He is unlikely to become a Decembrist, because he does not know how to sacrifice his peace for the sake of a higher goal. Such people, according to Herzen, "never take the side of the government" and "never know how to take the side of the people."

The action of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" takes place after the Decembrist uprising, during the period of reaction. And the hero of this time does not have the opportunity to find a worthy use for his strength. Therefore, Belinsky says: "Onegin is bored, and Pechorin suffers deeply."

Both poets, trying to portray the characters of the characters as vividly as possible, put them in extreme situations. In the duel between Onegin and Lensky, the cold selfishness of the hero is manifested. He does not care about the fate of Lensky, but only the opinion of the world about his person. Lermontov, drawing Pechorin's duel with Grushnitsky, also shows his indifference to Grushnitsky's suffering.

Pechorin acts as a cold egoist in relation to the fate of Bela, Maxim Maksimovich, Vera. Pechorin himself admits his selfishness: “In truth, we are rather indifferent to everything, except ourselves”; "I look at the suffering and joy of others only in relation to myself." However, the main accusation is the lack of a life purpose, the futility of existence. The hero himself thinks about the purpose of his life. He wrote in the “journal”: “It’s true, she existed, and it’s true, I had a high appointment, because I feel immense strength in my soul ...

» Thinking about the meaning of life was characteristic of the younger generation copyright

Onegin and Pechorin as heroes of their time Plan

I. The problem of the hero of time in Russian literature.

II. Types of superfluous people in the novels of Pushkin and Lermontov

a) Onegin is a contemporary of Pushkin and the Decembrists.

- "suffering egoist", "egoist involuntarily"

Wealthy landowner

Person off duty

Schedule

b) Pechorin is a hero of his time.

Lack of high ideals

A truly tragic person

Nobleman

His "soul is corrupted by the light"

Active personality

Fullness of feelings and depth of thoughts

- "His powers are immeasurable"

His individualism

III. "Eugene Onegin" and "A Hero of Our Time" are the best artistic documents of their era.

Onegin is Russian, he is possible only in Russia, he is needed there and he is met at every step...

"Hero of our time" Lermontov - his younger brother.

A.I. Herzen

The problem of the hero of time has always excited, worried and will excite people. It was staged by classical writers, it is relevant, and until now this problem has interested and worried me ever since I first discovered the works of Pushkin and Lermontov. That is why I decided to address this topic in my abstract. Pushkin's novel in verse "Eugene Onegin" and Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time" are the pinnacles of Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century. In the center of these works are people who, in their development, are higher than the society around them, but who are not able to find application for their rich strengths and abilities. Therefore, such people are called "superfluous".

Onegin is a typical figure for the noble youth of the 20s of the 19th century. Even in the poem "Prisoner of the Caucasus" A.S. Pushkin set himself the task of showing in the hero "that premature old age of the soul, which has become the main feature of the younger generation." But the poet, in his own words, did not cope with this task. In the novel "Eugene Onegin" this goal was achieved. The poet created a deeply typical image.

Onegin is a contemporary of Pushkin and the Decembrists. The Onegins are not satisfied with secular life, the career of an official and a landowner. Belinsky points out that Onegin could not engage in useful activities "due to some inevitable circumstances beyond our will," that is, due to socio-political conditions. Onegin, the "suffering egoist", is nevertheless an outstanding personality. The poet notes such traits as "involuntary devotion to dreams, inimitable strangeness and a sharp, chilled mind." According to Belinsky, Onegin "was not from among ordinary people." Pushkin emphasizes that Onegin's boredom comes from the fact that he did not have a socially useful business. The Russian nobility of that time was an estate of land and soul owners. It was the possession of estates and serfs that was the measure of wealth, prestige and the height of social position. Onegin's father "gave three balls every year and finally squandered", and the hero of the novel, after receiving an inheritance from "all his relatives", became a rich landowner, he is now

Factories, waters, forests, lands

The owner is complete...

But the theme of wealth turns out to be connected with ruin, the words "debts", "pledge", "lenders" are already found in the first lines of the novel. Debts, re-mortgaging already mortgaged estates were not only the work of poor landowners, but also many "powerful ones" left huge debts to their descendants. One of the reasons for the general debt was the idea that developed during the reign of Catherine II that "truly noble" behavior consists not just in big expenses, but in spending beyond one's means.

It was at that time, thanks to the penetration of various educational literature from abroad, that people began to understand the perniciousness of serf farming. Among these people was Eugene, he "read Adam Smith and was a deep economy." But, unfortunately, there were few such people, and most of them belonged to the youth. And therefore, when Eugene "yoke ... corvee with an old quitrent replaced with a light one,"

Puffed up in my corner

Seeing in this terrible harm,

His prudent neighbor.

The reason for the formation of debts was not only the desire to "live like a nobleman", but also the need to have free money at your disposal. This money was obtained by mortgaging estates. To live on the funds received when mortgaging the estate was called living in debt. It was assumed that the nobleman would improve his position with the money received, but in most cases the nobles lived on this money, spending it on the purchase or construction of houses in the capital, on balls ("gave three balls annually"). It was on this, habitual, but leading to ruin, that Father Evgeny went. Not surprisingly, when Onegin's father died, it turned out that the inheritance was burdened with large debts.

Gathered before Onegin

Lenders greedy regiment.

In this case, the heir could accept the inheritance and, together with it, take on the father's debts or refuse it, leaving the creditors to settle accounts among themselves. The first decision was dictated by a sense of honor, the desire not to tarnish the good name of the father or to preserve the family estate. The frivolous Onegin went the second way. Receipt of the inheritance was not the last means to correct the frustrated affairs. Youth, the time of hopes for an inheritance, was, as it were, a legalized period of debts, from which in the second half of life one had to be freed by becoming the heir to "all one's relatives" or by marrying favorably.

Who at twenty was a dandy or a grip,

And at thirty profitably married;

Who got free at fifty

From private and other debts.

For the nobles of that time, the military field seemed so natural that the absence of this feature in the biography had to have a special explanation. The fact that Onegin, as is clear from the novel, never served anywhere at all, made the young man a black sheep among his contemporaries. This reflected a new tradition. If earlier refusal to serve was denounced as selfishness, now it has acquired the contours of a struggle for personal independence, upholding the right to live independently of state requirements. Onegin leads the life of a young man, free from official duties. At that time, only rare young people, whose service was purely fictitious, could afford such a life. Let's take this detail. The order established by Paul I, in which all officials, including the emperor himself, had to go to bed early and get up early, was also preserved under Alexander I. But the right to get up as late as possible was a kind of sign of aristocracy that separated the non-serving nobleman not only from the common people, but also from a village landowner. The fashion to get up as late as possible dates back to the French aristocracy of the "old pre-revolutionary regime" and was brought to Russia by emigrants.

Morning toilet and a cup of coffee or tea were replaced by two or three in the afternoon with a walk. The favorite places for the festivities of St. Petersburg dandies were Nevsky Prospekt and the English Embankment of the Neva, it was there that Onegin walked: "Having put on a wide bolivar, Onegin goes to the boulevard." About four o'clock in the afternoon it was time for dinner. The young man, leading a single life, rarely kept a cook and preferred to dine in a restaurant.

In the afternoon, the young dandy sought to "kill" by filling the gap between the restaurant and the ball. The theater provided such an opportunity, it was not only a place for artistic spectacles and a kind of club where secular meetings took place, but also a place of love affairs:

The theater is already full; lodges shine;

Parterre and chairs - everything is in full swing;

In heaven they splash impatiently,

And, having risen, the curtain rustles.

Everything is clapping. Onegin enters,

Walks between the chairs on the legs,

Double lorgnette slanting induces

To the lodges of unknown ladies.

The ball had a dual property. On the one hand, it was an area of ​​easy communication, secular recreation, a place where socio-economic differences were weakened. On the other hand, the ball was a place of representation of various social strata.

Tired of city life, Onegin settles in the countryside. An important event in his life was friendship with Lensky. Although Pushkin notes that they agreed "from doing nothing." This eventually led to a duel.

At that time, people looked at the duel in different ways. Some believed that a duel, in spite of everything, is a murder, which means barbarism, in which there is nothing chivalrous. Others - that a duel is a means of protecting human dignity, since in the face of a duel both a poor nobleman and a favorite of the court turned out to be equal.

This view was not alien to Pushkin, as his biography shows. The duel implied the strict observance of the rules, which was achieved by appealing to the authority of experts. Zaretsky plays such a role in the novel. He, "a classic and a pedant in duels", conducted his business with great omissions, or rather, deliberately ignoring everything that could eliminate the bloody outcome. Even at the first visit, he was obliged to discuss the possibility of reconciliation. This was part of his duties as a second, especially since no blood offense was inflicted and it was clear to everyone except 18-year-old Lensky that the matter was a misunderstanding. Onegin and Zaretsky break the duel rules. The first is to demonstrate his irritated contempt for the story, into which he fell against his will, the seriousness of which he still does not believe, and Zaretsky because he sees in a duel an amusing story, an object of gossip and practical jokes. Onegin's behavior in the duel irrefutably testifies that the author wanted to make him an unwilling killer. Onegin shoots from a long distance, taking only four steps, and the first, obviously not wanting to hit Lensky. However, the question arises: why, after all, did Onegin shoot at Lensky, and not past? The main mechanism by which the society, despised by Onegin, still powerfully controls his actions, is the fear of being ridiculous or becoming the subject of gossip. In the Onegen era, ineffective duels evoked an ironic attitude. A person who went to the barrier had to show an extraordinary spiritual will in order to maintain his behavior, and not accept the norms imposed on him. Onegin's behavior was determined by the fluctuations between the feelings that he had for Lensky and the fear of appearing ridiculous or cowardly, violating the rules of conduct in a duel. What won us, we know:

Poet, pensive dreamer

Killed by a friendly hand!

The novel "Eugene Onegin" is an inexhaustible source that tells about the customs and life of that time. Onegin himself is a true hero of his time, and in order to understand him and his actions, we study the time in which he lived.

M.Yu. Lermontov is a writer of "a completely different era", despite the fact that a decade separates them from Pushkin.

Years of brutal reaction have taken their toll. In his era it was impossible to overcome the alienation from time, or rather from the timelessness of the 1930s.

Lermontov saw the tragedy of his generation. This is already reflected in the poem "Duma":

Sadly, I look at our generation!

His future is either empty or dark,

Meanwhile, under the burden of knowledge and doubt,

It will grow old in inaction...

This theme was continued by M.Yu. Lermontov in the novel "A Hero of Our Time".

Pechorin is a hero of the transitional period, a representative of the noble youth, who entered life after the defeat of the Decembrists. The absence of high social ideals is a striking feature of this historical period. The image of Pechorin is one of the main artistic discoveries of Lermontov. The Pechorin type is truly epochal. In it, the fundamental features of the post-Decembrist era received their concentrated artistic expression, in which, according to Herzen, "only losses are visible on the surface", while inside "great work was being done .... deaf and silent, but active and uninterrupted." This striking discrepancy between the inner and the outer, and at the same time the conditionality of the intensive development of spiritual life, is captured in the image-type of Pechorin. However, his image is much broader than what is contained in him in the universal, national - in the world, socio-psychological in the moral and philosophical. Pechorin in his journal repeatedly speaks of his contradictory duality. Usually this duality is considered as a result of the secular education received by Pechorin, the destructive influence of the noble-aristocratic sphere on him, and the transitional nature of his era.

Explaining the purpose of creating the "Hero of Our Time", M.Yu. Lermontov, in the preface to it, quite clearly makes it clear what the image of the protagonist is for him: "The hero of our time, my dear sirs, is like a portrait, but not of one person: this is a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their full development" . The author has set himself an important and difficult task, wishing to display the hero of his time on the pages of his novel. And here we have Pechorin - a truly tragic person, a young man suffering from his restlessness, in despair asking himself a painful question: "Why did I live? For what purpose was I born?" In the image of Lermontov, Pechorin is a man of a very specific time, position, socio-cultural environment, with all the contradictions that follow from this, which are investigated by the author in full artistic objectivity. This is a nobleman - an intellectual of the Nikolaev era, its victim and hero in one person, whose "soul is corrupted by light." But there is something more in him, which makes him a representative of not only a certain era and social environment. The personality of Pechorin appears in Lermontov's novel as unique - an individual manifestation in it of the concrete historical and universal, specific and generic. Pechorin differs from his predecessor Onegin not only in temperament, depth of thought and feeling, willpower, but also in the degree of self-awareness, his attitude to the world. Pechorin, to a greater extent than Onegin, is a thinker, an ideologist. He is organically philosophical. And in this sense, he is the most characteristic phenomenon of his time, according to Belinsky, "the age of the philosophizing spirit." Pechorin's intense thoughts, his constant analysis and introspection in their meaning go beyond the era that gave birth to him, they also have universal significance as a necessary stage in the self-construction of a person, in the formation of an individual-generic, that is, personal, beginning in him.

In the indomitable effectiveness of Pechorin, another important side of Lermontov's concept of man was reflected - as a being not only rational, but also active.

Pechorin embodies such qualities as a developed consciousness and self-awareness, "fullness of feelings and depth of thoughts", the perception of oneself as a representative not only of the current society, but of the entire history of mankind, spiritual and moral freedom, active self-affirmation of an integral being, etc. But, being the son of his time and society, he bears on himself their indelible stamp, which is reflected in the specific, limited, and sometimes distorted manifestation of the generic in him. In Pechorin's personality, there is a contradiction, especially characteristic of a socially unsettled society, between his human essence and existence, "between the depth of nature and the pitiful actions of one and the same person." (Belinsky) However, Pechorin's life position and activities make more sense than it seems at first glance. The seal of masculinity, even heroism, marks his unstoppable denial of reality unacceptable to him; in protest against which he relies only on his own strength. He dies in nothing, without giving up his principles and convictions, although without doing what he could do in other conditions. Deprived of the possibility of direct public action, Pechorin strives, nevertheless, to resist circumstances, to assert his will, his "own need", contrary to the prevailing "state need". Lermontov, for the first time in Russian literature, brought to the pages of his novel a hero who directly set himself the most important, "last" questions of human existence - about the purpose and meaning of human life, about his purpose. On the night before the duel with Grushnitsky, he reflects: “I run through my memory of all my past and involuntarily ask myself: why did I live? For what purpose was I born? my strength is immense; but I did not guess this destination. I was carried away by the baits of empty and ungrateful passions; from their crucible I came out hard and cold as iron, but I lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations, the best color of life. Bela becomes a victim of Pechorin's self-will, forcibly torn from her environment, from the natural course of her life. Beautiful in its naturalness, but fragile and short-lived harmony of inexperience and ignorance, doomed to inevitable death in contact with reality, even if it is “natural” life, and even more so with the “civilization” invading it more and more powerfully, has been destroyed.

During the Renaissance, individualism was a historically progressive phenomenon. With the development of bourgeois relations, individualism loses its humanistic basis. In Russia, the deepening crisis of the feudal-serf system, the emergence in its depths of new, bourgeois relations, the victory in the Patriotic War of 1812 caused a truly renaissance upsurge in the feeling of the individual. But at the same time, all this is intertwined in the first third of the 19th century with the crisis of noble revolutionism (the events of December 14, 1825), with the fall in the authority of not only religious beliefs, but also educational ideas, which ultimately created a fertile ground for the development of individualistic ideology in Russian society. . In 1842, Belinsky stated: "Our century ... is a century ... of separation, individuality, an age of personal passions and interests (even mental ones) ...". Pechorin, with his total individualism, is an epoch-making figure in this regard. Pechorin's fundamental denial of the morality of his contemporary society, as well as his other foundations, was not only his personal merit. It has long matured in the public atmosphere, Pechorin was only its earliest and most vivid spokesman.

Another thing is also significant: Pechorin's individualism is far from pragmatic egoism adapting to life. In this sense, it is significant to compare the individualism of, say, Pushkin's Herman from The Queen of Spades with the individualism of Pechorin. Herman's individualism is based on the desire to win a place under the sun at all costs, that is, to climb to the top rungs of the social ladder. He rebels not against this unjust society, but against his humble position in it, which, as he believes, does not correspond to his inner significance, his intellectual and volitional capabilities. For the sake of winning a prestigious position in this unjust society, he is ready to do anything: step over, “transgress” not only through the fate of other people, but also through himself as an “inner” person. "Pechorin's individualism is not like that. The hero is full of truly rebellious rejection of all the foundations of society he is forced to live in. He is least of all concerned about his position in it. More than that, in fact, he has, and could easily have even more of what Herman is trying to achieve: he is rich, noble, all the doors of higher education are open to him. light, all roads on the way to a brilliant career, honors... He rejects all this as purely external tinsel, unworthy of the aspirations living in him for the true fullness of life, which he sees, in his words, in "the fullness and depth of feelings and thoughts", he considers his conscious individualism as something forced, since he has not yet found an alternative acceptable to him.

There is another feature in the character of Pechorin, which makes in many ways to take a fresh look at the individualism he professed. One of the dominant internal needs of the hero is his pronounced desire to communicate with people, which in itself contradicts individualistic worldviews. In Pechorin, the constant curiosity for life, for the world, and most importantly, for people, is striking.

Pechorin, it is said in the preface to the novel, is the type of "modern man" as the author "understands him" and as he has met him too often.

So, we have two heroes, both representatives of their difficult time. The remarkable critic V.G. Belinsky did not put an "equal" sign between them, but he did not see a big gap between them either.

Calling Pechorin the Onegin of his time, Belinsky paid tribute to the unsurpassed artistry of Pushkin's image and at the same time believed that "Pechorin is superior to Onegin in theory", although, as if muffling some categoricalness of this assessment, he added: "However, this advantage belongs to our time, and not Lermontov". Starting from the 2nd half of the 19th century, the definition of "an extra person" was strengthened for Pechorin.

The deep meaning and characterization of the type of "superfluous person" for Russian society and Russian literature of the Nikolaev era was probably most accurately defined by A.I. Herzen, although this definition still remains in the "repositories" of literary criticism. Speaking about the essence of Onegin and Pechorin as "superfluous people" of the 1820-30s, Herzen made a remarkably deep observation: "The sad type of superfluous ... person - only because he developed in a person, was then not only in poems and novels but in the streets and living rooms, in villages and cities.

And yet, with all his closeness to Onegin, Pechorin, as a hero of his time, marks a completely new stage in the development of Russian society and Russian literature. If Onegin reflects the painful, but in many ways semi-spontaneous process of turning an aristocrat, a "dandy" into a person, becoming a personality in him, then Pechorin captures the tragedy of an already established highly developed personality, doomed to live in a noble-serf society under an autocratic regime.

According to Belinsky, "A Hero of Our Time" is "a sad thought about our time," and Pechorin is "a hero of our time. Their dissimilarity among themselves is much less than the distance between Onega and Pechora."

"Eugene Onegin" and "A Hero of Our Time" are vivid artistic documents of their era, and their main characters personify for us all the futility of trying to live in society and be free from it.

Literature

1) N.A. Demin "Studying the work of A.S. Pushkin in the 8th grade", Moscow, "Enlightenment", 1971.

2) M.Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time", Moscow, "Soviet Russia", 1981.

3) M.Yu. Lermontov "Works", Moscow, publishing house "Pravda", 1988.

4) V.G. Marantsman "Fiction", "Enlightenment", 1991.

5) A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin", Moscow, "Artistic Literature", 1984.

6) B.T. Udodov "M.Yu. Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time", Moscow, "Enlightenment", 1989

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Onegin and Pechorin as heroes of their time

Pechorin - Onegin's younger brother.

A. I. Herzen

Pechorin - "this is the Onegin of our

Time, hero of our time.

Their dissimilarity is much

less than the distance between Onega and

Pechora".

V. G. Belinsky

Plan

IThe theme of "extra man" in the work of A. S. Pushkin and

M. Yu. Lermontov.

IIExtra people - Onegin and Pechorin - the heroes of their time.

Origin of heroes

Different eras that gave birth to them:

a) Onegin is a contemporary of Pushkin and the Decembrists;

b) Pechorin - the hero of the era of the 30sXIXcentury.

3. Their souls are "corrupted by the light."

4. Features that bring together "superfluous people":

a) lack of careerism and passion for inheritance;

b) extreme individualism;

c) "egoists involuntarily."

5. Qualities that distinguish these two heroes:

a) the first - a person free from official duties; the second is an officer;

b) Onegin, who has lost interest in everything, and the active personality of Pechorin;

c) hope for the revival of Onegin to life and its absence from Pechorin.

6. Duels are a step towards understanding these personalities.

IIIThe novels of A. Pushkin and M. Lermontov and their heroes are the best artistic documents of their era.

Quotes for essay.

“Nothing can more clearly testify to the change that has taken place in the minds since 1825 than the comparison of Pushkin with Lermontov. Pushkin, often dissatisfied and sad, offended and full of indignation, is nevertheless ready to make peace. He wants him, he does not lose hope in him: in his heart the string of memories of the times of Emperor Alexander did not stop sounding. Lermontov, on the other hand, was so used to despair and hostility that he not only did not look for a way out, but also did not see the possibility of a struggle or an agreement. Lermontov never knew hope: he did not sacrifice himself, because nothing required this self-sacrifice. He did not walk proudly carrying his head towards the executioner, like Pestel and Ryleev, because he could not believe in the effectiveness of the victim: he rushed to the side and died for nothing.

A. I. Herzen

2. “He (Lermontov) belongs entirely to our generation. We were all too young to take part in December 14th. Awakened by this great day, we saw only executions and exiles. Forced to be silent, holding back tears, we have learned, closing in on ourselves, to bear our thoughts - and what thoughts! These were no longer the ideas of enlightened liberalism, the ideas of progress - they were doubts, denials, thoughts full of rage. Getting used to these feelings, Lermontov ... dragged a heavy load of skepticism through all his dreams and pleasures.

A. I. Herzen

3. "Do not seek anything, protect your independence, do not look for a place - all this under a despotic regime is called being in opposition."

A. I. Herzen

A. S. Pushkin worked on the novel "Eugene Onegin" for many years, it was his favorite work. Belinsky called in
his article "Eugene Onegin" is a work of "an encyclopedia of Russian life." Indeed, in this novel a picture is given
all strata of Russian life: both the high society, and the small nobility, and the people - Pushkin studied the life of all strata well
society in the early nineteenth century. During the years of the creation of the novel, Pushkin had to go through a lot, lose many friends, experience bitterness from
death of the best people of Russia. The novel was for the poet, in his words, the fruit of "the mind of cold observations and the heart of sad remarks."

Against the broad background of Russian pictures of life, the dramatic fate of the best people, the advanced noble intelligentsia of the era, is shown.
Decembrists. Lermontov's "Hero of Our Time" would have been impossible without Onegin, because the realistic novel created by
Pushkin, opened the first page in the history of the great Russian novel of the XIX century. Pushkin embodied in the image of Onegin many of
those traits that are later deployed in individual characters of Lermontov, Turgenev, Herzen, Goncharov.

Exploring Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time", Be-

Linsky noticed that Pechorin in many ways resembles

Pushkin's Onegin. This gave reason for the critic to call Pecho-

Rin "younger brother of Onegin". Emphasizing the undoubted

the similarity of the heroes of two great poets, he said in his article

"Hero of our time": "Their difference is much less than

distance between Onega and Pechora".

The heroes of A. S. Pushkin and M. Yu. Lermontov share less than 10 years. They could meet in the same living room, at the same ball
or in the theater, in the box of one of the "beauties of the notebook." And yet, what was more - similarities or differences? Sometimes in them
divides people stronger and more mercilessly than a century.

In my opinion, Eugene Onegin and Pechorin are very similar in character, both of them are from a secular environment, received a good upbringing,
they stand on a higher stage of development, hence their melancholy, melancholy and dissatisfaction. All this is characteristic of souls more
thin and more developed.

Some readers assumed that Lermontov portrayed himself in the person of Pechorin. Of course, many thoughts and feelings

"a portrait composed of the vices and shortcomings of our whole

younger generation."

Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin, like Onegin, belonged to the aristocracy of St.

pleasures of life "when" three houses are calling for the evening. "He,

like Onegin, perhaps even to a large extent, he is rich, does not need funds at all, is generous and wasteful.
Apparently, like Eugene, he changed many occupations. "Hard work" was nauseated not only by Onegin, but by many brilliant
young nobles. Freed from the need that pushes them to activity, and devoid of ambition, they are negligent in the service and
any other matter. The modest rank of warrant officer does not bother Pechorin at all and testifies to his attitude to the service. Many

actions may permanently deprive him of the opportunity to serve.

Grigory Alexandrovich has a lot of attractive things. He is a well-read, developed, interesting and witty interlocutor.
It has a steel will, self-control, endurance. The writer endows him with physical strength. He is young, full of energy, has
success with women, involuntarily subordinates others to his influence. It would seem that such a person should be happy all around. But
No! Pechorin is dissatisfied with himself and those around him, every business, like love, soon tires and becomes boring.

What is only outlined in Onegin is developing in Pechorin

fully. Only three days were new for Yevgeny in the countryside. To him

the devotion of a simple village girl is uninteresting. But

he is ready to give everything in order to achieve the love of the already married Tatyana. And then, perhaps, he could leave her. Such is the nature of these

of people. Out of boredom, Onegin takes care of Olga, arouses Lensky's jealousy. And everything, as you know, ends tragically. AT

To a much stronger extent, the "ability" to bring only trouble to people who love him is shown by Lermontov in Pechorin. That and

he himself notices that from his actions to those around him there is no good.

Selfishness is a central part of the character of both heroes.

But these images, no doubt, reflected social phenomena associated with the timelessness that came after the Decembrist
movement, the Nikolaev reaction, that attitude to life of the higher nobility, which Lermontov so brilliantly described.

Pushkin writes about Onegin: "The blues was waiting for him on guard, and she ran after him, like a shadow or a faithful wife." secular society,
in which Onegin rotated, and later Pechorin, spoiled them. It did not require knowledge, it was enough superficial
education, more important was the knowledge of the French language and good manners. Eugene, like everyone else, "easily danced the mazurka and bowed
like most people of his circle, he spends his best years on balls, theaters and love interests.
Pechorin also leads a lifestyle. Very soon, both begin to understand that this life is empty, that behind the "external tinsel" is not worth
nothing, boredom, slander, envy reign in the world, people spend the inner forces of the soul on gossip and anger. little fuss,
empty talk of "necessary fools", spiritual emptiness make the life of these people monotonous, outwardly
dazzling, but devoid of inner content. Idleness, lack of high interests vulgarize their existence. Day
like a day, there is no need to work, there are few impressions, so the smartest and best fall ill with nostalgia. their homeland and
they don't really know the people. Onegin "wanted to write, but hard work was sickening to him ...", he also did not find an answer in books
to your questions. Onegin is smart and could benefit society, but the lack of need for labor is the reason why
that he does not find himself doing what he likes. He suffers from this, realizing that the upper stratum of society lives off slavery.
serf labor. Serfdom was a disgrace to tsarist Russia. Onegin in the village tried to alleviate the situation of his
serfs ("... with a yoke he replaced the old quitrent with a light dues ..."), for which he was condemned by his neighbors, who
considered him an eccentric and a dangerous "freethinker".

Pechorin is also not understood by many. In order to reveal the character of his hero more deeply, Lermontov places him in the most
various social spheres, collides with a wide variety of people. When a separate edition of "The Hero of Our
time", it became clear that before Lermontov there was no Russian realistic novel. Belinsky pointed out that "Princess Mary" -
one of the main stories in the novel. In this story, Pechorin talks about himself, reveals his soul. It's stronger here
most of all, the features of "A Hero of Our Time" as a psychological novel were manifested.

In conclusion, I would like to cite the words of Belinsky, who wrote that "Pechorin is the Onegin of our time." Novel "Hero"
of our time" is a bitter reflection on the "history of the human soul," the soul ruined by the "brilliance of the deceptive
capital", seeking and not finding friendship, love, happiness. Pechorin is a suffering egoist. Belinsky wrote about Onegin: "The forces
this rich nature was left without application: life without meaning, and the novel without end. "The same can be said about Pechorin.
Comparing the two heroes, he wrote: "... There is a difference in the roads, but the result is the same." Despite the difference in appearance and difference
characters and Onegin; both Pechorin and Chatsky belong to the gallery of "superfluous people for whom the surrounding society does not
there was no place, no business. The desire to find one's place in life, to understand the "great purpose" is the main meaning
novel of Lermontov's lyrics. Is it not these reflections that occupy Pechorin, lead him to a painful answer to the question: "Why should I
lived?" This question can be answered with the words of Lermontov, "Perhaps, by heavenly thought and fortitude, I am convinced that I would give the world
a wonderful gift, and for that - immortality for me ... "

I believe that in the works of Pushkin "Eugene Onegin" and Lermontov's "Hero of Our Time" the authors protest against
a reality that forces people to waste their energy in vain.