« History of the human soul »

(based on the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”)

Educational and research work

Knowing well and deeply understanding the historical essence of the reality surrounding him, twenty-five-year-old Lermontov created the image of a hero of his time, in which he summarized a large amount of life material, the features of an entire generation living in the era of the Nicholas reaction.

Belinsky was the first to reveal the typical features of Pechorin - “a man with a strong will, courageous, inviting storms and anxiety.” The great critic explained the reasons for Pechorin’s duality and confidently stated that in this novel Lermontov is “the decider of important modern issues.”

Following the first preliminary review of Lermontov’s novel, Belinsky in the second half of May 1840 made a detailed analysis of “A Hero of Our Time,” which revealed wide circles Russian readers ideological and artistic value Lermontov's novel in Russian history public life and in the history of Russian literature. Ardently defending Pechorin from preachers of hypocritical official morality, Belinsky saw in the image of Pechorin the embodiment of the critical spirit of his time.

At the same time as Belinsky, shortly after Lermontov’s death, Gogol rated “A Hero of Our Time” even higher than his poetry: “No one has ever written such correct, beautiful and fragrant prose among us. Here you can see more depth into the reality of life - the future was being prepared great painter Russian life..."

Recreational-protective criticism, on the contrary, condemned Pechorin’s “immorality”. She condemned him and contrasted him with the image of Maxim Maksimych, which corresponded to her ideals. However, progressive youth, in solidarity with Belinsky, perfectly understood the meaning of the images of Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych, and Lermontov’s attitude towards them.

Creative history Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time" can be restored only in the most general terms. Such meager materials have been preserved that it is not possible to trace in detail how this most significant work of our poet was created. The novel was created during a period when one of most important tasks both in Western European and Russian literature the task was to create a hero of his time, an advanced young man, talk about the attitude of this hero to the society that gave birth to him. Thus, from the ahistorical, abstract hero of early poems and poems, expressing the anxieties and impulses of the young poet, Lermontov moves on to the creation of living, concrete historical images, to the creation of “typical characters in typical circumstances” in his most significant creation, in the novel “Hero of Our Time” "

Psychological portraits in the novel

Women's images

It is surprising that Lermontov was able to so accurately and completely show in the novel all the diversity of characters and characteristics of people so different from each other. Not only men's, but also female images in the novel are very realistic. Among the women's ones the following can be distinguished: vivid images: Vera, Princess Mary and Bela.

The image of Bela is especially poetic in the novel. You can tell a lot about her even by her appearance. Bela’s grace and agility are often shown in dancing: “She grabbed her tambourine, began to sing, dance and jump...” “How she dances!” - Azamat praises her. Beautiful, tall, slender, Bela was attractive to many young people. But it was not only her exquisite beauty that attracted Pechorin’s attention. A proud and strong-willed nature, rebellious and strong - this is how Bela differed from all the girls Pechorin met. Even when Pechorin kidnapped her, she does not consider herself a captive, she did not submit to him, but fell in love with him as a free princely daughter: “And if this continues like this, then I myself will leave: I am not his slave, I am a princely daughter.” Passion, courage and pride merge in her character with touching femininity. Bitterly, passionately and devotedly loves Bela Pechorin. The story of Bela’s short life and tragic death, told by Maxim Maksimych, leaves us with a feeling of sadness and deep regret for a long time.

Of all the women depicted in the novel, the most complex, diverse and interesting character is Vera. Her spiritual richness and complexity of nature distinguish her from the rest. Vera represents an original type of woman who can rightfully be called a martyr of her feelings. It cannot be said, however, that she loves blindly, slavishly, unconsciously. No, she knows how to distinguish Pechorin from other secular, outwardly cultured men; she knows how to understand and appreciate his subtle, artistic nature, the peculiar charm of his strong demonic character, his disappointment and charm... The image of Vera does not have everyday “illumination” or certainty. Her appearance is conveyed by the most general features, in Werner’s impersonal “passport” description of her it is impossible to catch anything clearly individualized, except perhaps for the consumptive complexion, and the most characteristic detail is

a black mole on the right cheek does not define anything in Vera’s personality. From her entire external appearance, only one or two features remain, noted by Pechorin himself, but they do not so much show Vera as convey a psychological impression: “sweet voice”, “deep and calm eyes”... There are only three colors in the depiction of her inner world : love, jealousy, suffering, and, in fact, the last two are only shades of the all-consuming first. The situations in which she is shown are only meetings with Pechorin or a silent presence in the Ligovskys’ living room when he is there. We do not know anything about her lifestyle, nor about relationships with people (except for Mary, of whom she is jealous), nor about her mental horizons, we do not hear her conversations with anyone except Pechorin. Indeed, it seems that she exists outside the environment, almost outside of everyday life; everyday life is just a light decoration for her meetings with Pechorin. But all this is not a lack of attention of the author, not a weakness of Lermontov, but strictly justified by the design of artistic expediency. Faith should be like this, for it is the image of love itself, selfless, selfless, knowing no boundaries, crossing the prohibitions of the environment, losing nothing from the awareness of the shortcomings and vices of the beloved. Only such love can reveal the bitter and thirsty heart of Pechorin, who turns away from women “with character.” Lermontov almost completely expels any certainty of secular flavor from the image of Vera, and this is understandable: secularism and sincerity of feeling are hostile, mutually exclusive principles, and Vera is the feeling itself, which knows neither contradiction nor resistance. The line of relations between Pechorin and Vera is relegated to the background of the novel, while big, painful problems are in line - about activity, about goals, about society. She silently appears next to Pechorin, when loneliness, bitterness, and the meaninglessness of life push his thirsty soul towards his “native soul.” However, love for Vera cannot completely fill and subjugate Pechorin’s personality. She will not lead Pechorin to reconciliation with people and goodness: Pechorin does not look for revival in her. The novel of Pechorin and Vera is necessary in depicting the image of the “hero of our time” because here Lermontov allows us to see the depth and strength of Pechorin’s feelings under the guise of a cold egoist.

The image of Princess Mary is important in the novel. Her image is collective, summarizing the poet’s impressions received in different time from different persons. And if, painting Vera, Lermontov leaves in the shadows everything that concerns her psychological and cultural connections with her environment and society, then, painting Mary, on the contrary, Lermontov extremely clearly depicts her as a person of her time, social status and yours cultural environment... A young Moscow princess, whose mother, Princess Ligovskaya, is proud of the intelligence and knowledge of her daughter, “who read Byron in English and knows algebra,” attracts the attention of young people of that same “water society.” The pretty, young, sophisticated princess won the heart of cadet Grushnitsky, thereby attracting the interest of Pechorin, who speaks very cynically about her beauty: “She has velvet eyes - just velvet... the lower and upper eyelashes are so long that the rays of the sun are not reflected in her pupils. I love these eyes without shine: they are so soft, they seem to stroke... However, it seems that there is only good in her face..." Naive, kind and full of imagination, Mary helped Grushnitsky when he could not lift his glass, and, having learned he is better, she is inclined to perceive Grushnitsky in a romantic aura and idealizes him. However, it should be noted that if she knew that Grushnitsky was not demoted or exiled, that he had no dueling history, her interest in him and “his thick soldier’s overcoat” would have sharply decreased. The princess was most interested in Pechorin, although she feels that this is quite difficult and dark hero: “Mr., who has such an unpleasant, heavy look.” As for Pechorin, his meeting with Mary and the search for her love were rather the main method of his struggle with Grushnitsky, rather than a manifestation of the nascent, still unconscious feeling of love for her. Therefore, when Pechorin says to the princess: “I don’t love you,” he is telling the truth. Pechorin’s connection with Mary is not love, but one of those dangerous experiences in mastering a woman’s heart, of which he had so many in his life and which, in the end, became so boring to him. Mary was not prepared for life's trials and suffered deeply from Pechorin's games. “The princess, like a bird, fought in the nets placed by a skillful hand,” writes Belinsky. “She allowed herself to be deceived, but when she saw herself deceived, she, like a woman,

deeply felt her insult... The scene of her last meeting with Pechorin arouses strong sympathy for her and envelops her image with the brilliance of poetry.

Men's images

Among the male images, we will consider the following: Maxim Maksimych, Doctor Werner, Grushnitsky and Pechorin.

First male image who appears in the novel is Maxim Maksimych. A simple army officer, Captain Maxim Maksimych, an honest and good-natured man, became coarse and heavy, having served his entire life on the front line of the Caucasus. Belinsky highly valued his image, seeing in Maxim Maksimych the type of “an old Caucasian campaigner, seasoned in dangers, labors and battles, whose face is as tanned and stern, his manners are rustic and rude, but whose wonderful soul, Golden heart. This guy is purely Russian.” And, indeed, the ability to apply himself to the customs of the peoples among whom he happens to live is clearly visible in the statements of Maxim Maksimych, whose entire story allows Pechorin to draw the following general conclusion: “I was involuntarily struck by the ability of a Russian person to apply himself to the customs of those peoples among whom he happens to live.” to live..." In Maksim Maksimych, thus, finds its expression typical feature character and behavior of the Russian person, his national peculiarity. The same understanding of the psychology and customs of other peoples is also inherent in Pechorin. Maxim Maksimych’s appearance is also interesting: his pipe, his tanned face, his ironic smile, his sympathetic attitude towards the Kabardians, his cold courage, the very tone of his laconic conversations. In the novel we find him already an old servant, about fifty years old. We do not know his past, the story of his life is only guessed from individual hints. However, Maxim Maksimych has something to tell, and he, as his interlocutor managed to notice, is quite talkative, but speaks little and very modestly about himself, about his military life. The manner of Maxim Maksimych’s story is modest and restrained.

Doctor Werner is the only character in the story “Princess Mary” for whom a definite and indisputable prototype can be indicated. Many of Lermontov’s contemporaries claim that “Doctor Werner is based on Nikolai Vasilyevich Mayer,” who served on the staff of General A.A. Velyaminova. N.M. Satin, A.M. Miklashevsky, N.P. Ogarev, F.F. Tornau, A.E. Rosen, N.I. Lorer unanimously note the high portraiture skill with which Lermontov reproduced the features and character of N.V. in “A Hero of Our Time.” Mayer as Dr. Werner.

A skeptic and materialist, Dr. Werner was a man of very unusual appearance: “Werner was short, thin, and weak, like a child; one of his legs was shorter than the other, like Byron; in comparison with his body, his head seemed huge...” But what Lermontov pays special attention to are his eyes, “His small black eyes, always restless, tried to penetrate your thoughts.” Werner had excellent taste in clothes, but from the color range he chose only black. He was nicknamed Mephistopheles, which actually flattered him. Despite everything, Werner still enjoyed great success with women, “there were examples that women fell madly in love with such people and would not exchange their ugliness for the beauty of the freshest and pinkest endymions.” Thus, Werner was different from others, not only in his appearance, but also in his character and beliefs... Therefore, Pechorin immediately singled him out from the others, and in the end they became friends. You can notice some similarities between Pechorin and Werner; they understood each other perfectly: “Doctor! We absolutely cannot talk: we read each other’s souls.” By correct definition Durylin, “cadet Grushnitsky is the second contrasting figure placed by Lermontov next to Pechorin: just as Maxim Maksimych contrasts with him in “Bel” and “Maksim Maksimych,” so Grushnitsky contrasts Pechorin in “Princess Mary.” Maxim Maksimych’s “contrast” is based on his opposition to Pechorin in age, character, social status, education - and this contrast is well understood by both Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych - but does not prevent them both from having feelings of respect and friendship for each other.

The contrast between Pechorin and Grushnitsky, at first glance, seems much less significant: Grushnitsky is only five years younger than Pechorin, he lives apparently, in the circle of the same mental and moral interests in which Pechorin lives, he feels like a person of the same generation and the same cultural environment to which Pechorin himself belongs. In fact, the contrast between Grushnitsky and Pechorin, not being as direct and definite as between him and Maxim Maksimych, is sharper: the apparent proximity of their cultural and social positions is an imaginary proximity: a real psychological, cultural, social gap is soon revealed between them , putting them, as obvious opponents, against each other with weapons in their hands.

This contrast between Pechorin and Grushnitsky, revealed by Lermontov with all the completeness of its psychological and historical truth, brought by him to such a generalizing indicativeness that it gives the right to see in the contrast between Pechorin and Grushnitsky the opposition of personality and guise, individuality and imitation, free thought and following stencils.”

Among the “Moscow dandies” and fashionable “brilliant adjutants” whom the hero of the novel meets in Pyatigorsk mixed society, Grushnitsky stands out especially. This is the direct antipode of Pechorin, even a parody of him. If Pechorin attracts attention to himself without caring at all about it, then Grushnitsky tries with all his might to “produce an effect.” If Pechorin is truly deeply disappointed in life, then Grushnitsky plays at disappointment. He belongs to people whose passion is to pose and recite, without understanding or feeling the truly beautiful things in life. Such people “importantly drape themselves in extraordinary feelings, sublime passions and exceptional suffering.” Belinsky wrote: “Grushnitsky is an ideal young man who flaunts his ideality, as noted dandies flaunt their fashionable dress, and “lions” flaunt their donkey stupidity... to produce an effect - his passion. He speaks in fancy phrases." All of Grushnitsky’s actions are driven by petty pride. Belinsky emphasized that pride is the main weakness in Grushnitsky’s character: “Pride assured him of unprecedented love for the princess and the princess’s love for him; pride made him see Pechorin as his rival and enemy; his pride decided to conspire against Pechorin’s honor; pride did not allow him to obey the voice of his conscience and be carried away by a good beginning in order to confess to the conspiracy; pride forced him to shoot at an unarmed man: the same pride concentrated all the strength of his soul at such a decisive moment and forced him to prefer certain death to certain salvation through confession. This man is the apotheosis of petty pride and weakness of character..."

Psychological portrait of Pechorin in the novel

The main character of the novel, a hero about whom there were so many different opinions, so much criticism, a hero who is ambiguous, who touches hearts and minds, is Pechorin. In his diary we find his sincere confession, in which he reveals his thoughts and feelings, mercilessly castigating his inherent vices and weaknesses. Here is given both a clue to his character and an explanation of his actions. Pechorin is a victim of his time. But does Lermontov justify his actions, his mood? On a sleepless night, on the eve of a duel with Grushnitsky, the hero of the novel seems to sum up the results of his life. “I run through my entire past in my memory and involuntarily ask myself: why did I live? For what purpose was I born?..And, it’s true, it existed, and, it’s true, I had a high purpose, because I feel immense powers in my soul...But I didn’t guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions; I came out of their crucible

hard and cold as iron, but has lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations - best color life.” Sad and difficult confessions! But we can’t help but see that Pechorin is head and shoulders above

people around him that he is smart, educated, talented, brave, energetic. We are repulsed by Pechorin's indifference to people, his inability for true love and friendship, his individualism and selfishness. But Pechorin captivates us with a thirst for life, a desire for the best, and the ability to critically evaluate one’s actions. He is deeply unsympathetic to us because of his “pathetic actions,” the waste of his strength, and the actions by which he brings suffering to other people. But we see that he himself suffers deeply.

Pechorin's character is complex and contradictory. The hero of the novel says about himself: “There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him...” What is the reason for this duality? “My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the light; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart: they died there. I told the truth - they didn’t believe me: I began to deceive; Having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life and saw how others were happy without art, freely enjoying the benefits that I so tirelessly sought. And then despair was born in my chest - not the despair that is treated with the barrel of a pistol, but cold, powerless despair, covered with courtesy and a good-natured smile. 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 - while the other moved and lived at the service of everyone, and no one noticed this, because no one knew about its existence the dead half; but now you have awakened in me the memory of her, and I read her epitaph to you,” Pechorin admits. He learned to be secretive, became vindictive, bilious, envious, and ambitious. There is a lot of “bitterness and anger” in Lermontov’s novel, as in his poems and poems. The hero of the novel, Pechorin, is characterized by disappointment in life and pessimism, which is aimed at secular society. Think about the caustic and very apt descriptions that Pechorin gives to representatives of the aristocratic secular society who have gathered in Pyatigorsk for the waters. Look into their faces, watch their behavior, listen to their conversations, and you will see and understand that “ water society"is a gathering of arrogant and false gentlemen, rich and titled loafers, all of whose interests boil down to gossip, card game, intrigue, the pursuit of money, rewards and entertainment. Pechorin calls himself and his generation “pathetic descendants”, wandering the earth without conviction and pride, without pleasure and fear... no longer capable of making great sacrifices, either for the good of humanity, or even for our own happiness...”

No matter how different the images in the novel may be, each of them amazes the reader with the depth of thought, each has its own philosophy of life. And as was said earlier, the ability to think is the first confirmation of a person’s mental development. As an example, let's take the main character of the novel, Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin. His journal, in which he describes episodes of his life, is his confession; from it we learn a lot about his character, and therefore about his soul. “Evil begets evil; the first suffering gives the concept of pleasure in tormenting another; the idea of ​​evil cannot enter a person’s head without him wanting to apply it to reality: ideas are organic creatures, someone said: their birth already gives them a form, and this form is an action; the one in whose head more ideas were born acts more than others...” - argues Pechorin. His thoughts are deeply philosophical, logical, interesting, not to mention the way Pechorin presents them. Every word, every sentence carries meaning, there is nothing superfluous, everything is interconnected. “...The fullness and depth of feelings and thoughts does not allow frantic impulses: the soul, suffering and enjoying, gives itself a strict account of everything and is convinced that it should be so; she gets into her own life, - cherishes and punishes himself like a beloved child...” writes Pechorin about the soul. Not only his notes, but also the actions he performs are thought out to the smallest detail. This can also be confirmed by the way he stole Bela: how he subtly felt and understood that he would influence Azamat, so that he would then agree to steal his sister; and how he sought the princess’s love by playing with her feelings. He reflects: “Women should wish that all men knew them as well as I do, because I love them a hundred times more since I am not afraid of them and have understood their petty weaknesses.”

Emotions and feelings of heroes

The novel also shows an amazing range of feelings, a whole storm of emotions and passions, diverse and unique. The love of a young princess, so pure and bright: “Either you despise me, or you love me very much! Maybe you want to laugh at me, outrage my soul and then leave me... That would be so mean, so low, that one assumption... Oh no! “Isn’t it true,” she added in a voice of tender confidence, “isn’t it true, there’s nothing in me that would exclude respect?” Vera’s love, so strong and forbidden: “A lot of time has passed since then: I penetrated into all the secrets of your soul... and became convinced that it was a vain hope. I was sad! But my love has grown together with my soul: it has darkened, but has not faded away...” Grushnitsky’s hatred and his pride: “I despise myself, but I hate you. If you don't kill me, I'll stab you at night from around the corner. There is no place for the two of us on earth...” Princess Mary’s compassion: “At that moment I met her eyes: tears were running in them; her hand, leaning on mine, trembled; cheeks were burning; she felt sorry for me! Compassion, a feeling that all women so easily submit to, has sunk its claws into her inexperienced heart.” Vera’s jealousy: “Today I saw Vera. She tormented me with her jealousy. The princess decided, it seems, to confide her heart’s secrets to her: I must admit, a good choice!” Dr. Werner’s friendly feelings, evidence of which can be at least the fact that he was worried about Pechorin before the duel, and Grigory Alexandrovich noticed this: “Why are you so sad, doctor? Haven’t you seen people off to the next world a hundred times with the greatest indifference?” The novel also talks about many feelings: despair, mistrust, suffering, contempt, pride, anger, resentment, joy, pleasure, tenderness. One thing follows another, as quickly and smoothly as in a raging stream.

Reflection of the inner world in the appearance of the heroes.

The reflection of a person’s inner world in his appearance is very important feature novel. Lermontov more than once focuses on the appearance of a person in order to most clearly show the reader the characteristics of each soul. For example, the image of Vera. As already mentioned, this is an image of love itself, selfless and selfless. There is no certainty of secular flavor in her image. From her entire appearance, only one or two features remain, which do not so much show Vera as convey a psychological impression: “sweet voice,” “deep and calm eyes.” What Vera says, what she does, is directly related to her feeling, to love. Jealousy, passion, emotions - these are what distinguishes Vera. It is these feelings that are the main thing that Lermontov wanted to show in this heroine; they are the ones that reflect her portrait.

Another example is Dr. Werner. A stunning portrait gives a surprisingly clear idea of ​​the peculiarities of his character. His actions, and especially his appearance, are surprising. Lermontov writes: “His appearance was one of those that at first glance strikes unpleasantly, but which you like later, when the eye learns to read in the irregular features the imprint of a proven and lofty soul.” And indeed the doctor’s appearance was extremely unusual: “Werner was short, thin and weak, like a child; one of his legs was shorter than the other, like Byron; in comparison with his body, his head seemed huge: he cut his hair into a comb, and the irregularities of his skull, exposed in this way, would strike a phrenologist with a strange interweaving of opposing inclinations.” What is even more striking is that even such a detail as the unevenness of the skull, a strange interweaving of opposing inclinations, so resonates with the description of Werner’s character: “He is a skeptic and a materialist, like almost all doctors, and at the same time a poet, and not joke - a poet in deed always and often in words, although he never wrote two poems in his life. He studied all the living strings of the human heart, as one studies the veins of a corpse, but he never knew how to use his knowledge... Usually Werner secretly mocked his patients, but I once saw him cry over a dying soldier... He was poor, dreamed of millions, but for money he wouldn’t take an extra step…” Lermontov writes: “His small black eyes, always restless, tried to penetrate your thoughts. In his clothes

both taste and neatness were noticeable; his thin hands were covered in light yellow gloves. His coat, tie and vest were always black. The youth nicknamed him Mephistopheles, he showed that he was angry for this nickname, but in fact it flattered his pride.” So, this amazing description is closely connected with the same amazing soul, and it was important in the novel, since it was Werner who became Pechorin’s friend, it was with him that Pechorin was able to find mutual language, because he found an amazing similarity of souls: “Look, there are two of us smart people; we know in advance that everything can be argued about endlessly, and therefore we do not argue; we know almost all of each other’s innermost thoughts; one word is a whole story for us; we see the grain of each of our feelings through a triple shell. Sad things are funny to us, funny things are sad, but in general, to be honest, we are quite indifferent to everything except ourselves.”

The influence of society on a person.

Often, in order to understand a person, it is necessary to find out his area of ​​interests, friends and acquaintances. Each person is influenced by many various factors, but nothing changes a person more than the society in which he lives. This is how Princess Mary appears before us. It is her who Lermontov clearly depicts as a person of his time, social status, and cultural environment. An educated young princess, attracting the attention of young people of that very “water society” with her youth and beauty, a young, sophisticated coquette, breaking the hearts of her admirers and fluttering like a moth from ball to ball. Pechorin easily understood her and was able to win her heart. He had met such girls more than once, he himself grew up in this society, studied it and knew it to the smallest detail, so he was tired of it. Thus, Pechorin speaks about his life to Maxim Maksimych: “...I have an unhappy character: whether my upbringing made me like this, whether God created me like this, I don’t know; I only know that if I am the cause of the misfortune of others, then I myself am no less unhappy... In my early youth, from the minute I left the care of my relatives, I began to wildly enjoy all the pleasures that can be obtained for money, and, of course, These pleasures disgusted me. Then I went into big light, and soon I was also tired of society; I fell in love with secular beauties and was loved - but their love only irritated my imagination and pride, and my heart remained empty... I began to read, study - I was also tired of science; I saw that neither fame nor happiness depended on them at all... I was soon transferred to the Caucasus... I hoped that boredom did not live under Chechen bullets - in vain; after a month I became so accustomed to their buzzing and the proximity of death that I actually paid more attention to the mosquitoes, and I became more bored than before, because I had lost almost my last hope.” Pechorin was looking for answers to the questions of life, he was looking for meaning, he understood himself, he openly admitted his shortcomings and suffered greatly. Belinsky writes: “...There are two people in it: the first acts, the second looks at the actions of the first and talks about them, or better yet, condemns them, because they are really worthy of condemnation. The reasons for this split, this quarrel with oneself, are very deep, and they contain the contradiction between the depth of nature and the pitifulness of the actions of the same person ... "

Thus, the goal has been achieved. We have proven that M.Yu. Lermontov is a writer-psychologist.

Conclusion

“A Hero of Our Time” is a psychological novel. “The History of the Human Soul”, presented by Lermontov, gives the reader the opportunity to see and feel in himself what

at first glance it seems mysterious and incomprehensible. The story of Pechorin is reflected, as in a mirror, in the human heart... And it is very important to remember that human soul develops with the person. If you do not strive for its development, if you forget about its existence, it will perish, and with it will die hero and man will die: “My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the light; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart: they died there. I told the truth - they didn’t believe me: I began to deceive; Having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life and saw how others were happy without art, freely enjoying the benefits that I so tirelessly sought. And then despair was born in my chest - not the despair that is treated with the barrel of a pistol, but cold, powerless despair, covered with courtesy and a good-natured smile. 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 - while the other moved and lived at the service of everyone, and no one noticed this, because no one knew about its existence the dead half; but now you have awakened in me the memory of her, and I read her epitaph to you.”

“Am I a fool or a villain, I don’t know; but it is true that I am also worthy of pity... my soul is spoiled by light, my imagination is restless, my heart is insatiable; Everything is not enough for me: I get used to sadness just as easily as to pleasure, and my life becomes emptier day by day; I have only one means left to travel. As soon as I can, I’ll go – but not to Europe, God forbid! “I’ll go to America, to Arabia, to India, and maybe I’ll die somewhere along the way!” - says Pechorin.

List of used literature

Belinsky V.G. Complete collection works in thirteen volumes. M., Ed. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1953-1959, XI

Dobrolyubov N.A. What is Oblomovism? . Collected works in 9 volumes. T. 4. M. – L., Goslitizdat, 1963, pp. 307 – 343

Lermontov M.Yu. Collected works in four volumes. M., Ed. Pravda, 1969, volume 4, pp. 196 - 336

Manuilov V.A. Novel by M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”. A comment. M. - L., Ed. Enlightenment, 1966

Fogelson I.A. Literature teaches. M., Ed. Enlightenment, 1990

Encyclopedia for children. Human. Volume 18. Part two. M., Ed. Avanta plus, 2002

V.G. Belinsky. Complete works in thirteen volumes. M., Ed. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1953-1959, XI, p.508.

V.G. Belinsky. Complete works in thirteen volumes. M., Ed. USSR Academy of Sciences, 1953-1959, XI, p. 316

The history of the human soul in the novel “Hero of Our Time” is considered by Lermontov with greatest detail. The writer himself, offering his work to readers, indicated that he wanted to show them the modern man as he is.

The story of Pechorin's soul as a moral confession of a hero

Writer creates new genre psychologically oriented novel, which examines the history of the human soul. And first of all, Lermontov invites readers to consider the life story of the main character of his work.

The image of the main character of his novel, Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin, is attractive and at the same time deeply contradictory. Pechorin is smart and educated, he is not devoid of noble intentions, however, his soul is selfish and subject to vices. Pechorin is the cause of the misfortunes of the people around him: he kills Grushnitsky in a duel, facilitates the kidnapping of Bela, mocks the feelings of the young princess Mary Ligovskaya, agrees to a fatal bet with Vulich, which partly pushes the latter into the arms of death, refutes all higher human feelings. The hero himself calls himself “an ax in the hands of fate,” justifying his behavior.

Pechorin deprives all the people he meets of peace. He is a mysterious person who is impossible not to remember. Those around him see him as an extraordinary character, but when they come into contact with Pechorin, they experience either a feeling of regret for him (like Maxim Maksimovich), or a feeling of mourning unrequited love (like Bela), or a feeling of hatred (like Kazbich), or jealousy (like Grushnitsky), or a feeling of deepest humiliation (like Mary Ligovskaya).

In his diary, the hero confesses his secret aspirations and thoughts. Pechorin himself realizes that he has lived an “empty and worthless” life, but this awareness only increases his state of melancholy.
On the other hand, the writer emphasizes that Pechorin also has positive traits: for example, he experiences feelings of passionate love for the secular married lady Vera. The hero is ready to run to the ends of the world for his beloved, but she cannot share his fate with Pechorin because she is afraid of condemnation from the people in her circle. Pechorin has a keen sense of pristine beauty; in rare moments of his life, he admires the beautiful sunset, the grandeur of the Caucasus mountains, etc. Even when he goes to a duel with Grushnitsky, thoughts come to his mind about how beautiful the natural world around him is. Even at the moment of Bela’s death, the hero sincerely grieves over the loss of his proud and beautiful beloved.

The story of how the characters in the novel interact with each other

In the novel “A Hero of Our Time” the history of the human soul is shown from all sides. First of all, the author tells us about the internal experiences of his main character, but we see accurate psychological portraits of others characters novel. How genius artist, Lermontov paints portraits of his heroes in front of us. Here is the subtle, sensitive soul of the proud Bela, and the kind soul of the experienced officer Maxim Maksimovich, who fell in love with Pechorin as own son, and the passionate, strong nature of Princess Mera and the corrosive and disillusioned soul of Doctor Werner.

It should be noted that all the characters in the novel are in different positions in relation to each other, allowing us to see in more detail the features of their inner world and their characters.

The pair “Pechorin and Grushnitsky, who died from his bullet,” helps readers see the selfishness and pride of the first and the intemperance and passion of the second. Grushnitsky is generally a parody of Pechorin. He has the ambitions of the main character of the novel, but lacks his intelligence, will and spiritual depth.

The pair “Pechorin - Doctor Werner” emphasizes both the insight and intelligence of one and the other, as well as disappointment in life. Moreover, Dr. Werner, whose calling is to help people overcome their illnesses, is more tired of people and their society, but he is an example of a tired cynic and self-lover.

The pair “Pechorin - Maxim Maksimovich” helps to see the qualities that Pechorin lacks to acquire peace of mind. Maxim Maksimovich is a simple and kind man, he is a faithful servant who gave his whole life to the Fatherland. He is modest and able to show sincere sympathy for people. He lacks excessive pride and selfishness. It is not for nothing that this hero is considered by many literary scholars as perhaps the only positive character in the novel. It is known that Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich really liked the image of Maxim Maksimovich, who, according to the recollections of his contemporaries, was sincerely surprised at why Mr. Lermontov portrayed the “neurasthenic Pechorin” as the main character of his novel, and not such a good officer as Maxim Maksimovich. However, Maxim Maksimovich does not have such abilities, such a breadth of perception of the world around him, like Pechorin, so the hero is content with his modest role in the world of people.

The pair “Pechorin - Vulich” shows how each of the heroes is a fatalist, that is, a person who believes in fate. Compared to Pechorin, Vulich is the type of fatalist who is ready to defeat the evil fate that pursues him, even at the cost of his life. Pechorin, on the other hand, represents a more terrible and refined type of fatalistic person: he strives to play with fate in order to win or die. As we know from the plot of the novel, Pechorin still fails to outwit fate.

The pair “Pechorin - Bela” allows you to see the differences that exist between the “artificial man” - Pechorin and the wild beauty of the Circassian Bela - the “natural person”. Despite the lack of education and knowledge of the life of the world, Bela is more honest and moral than Pechorin. Acquaintance with this hero leads the young girl to death, because Bela cannot fully immerse herself in the environment in which her lover lives.

The pair “Pechorin - Mary” makes it possible to discern the spiritual vices of the heroes: as for Pechorin, here we are talking about pride and the desire to possess the soul of the object of one’s attention (it is not without reason that literary scholars compare Pechorin in this love story with the hero of Lermontov’s poem “The Demon”); in Mary, her feeling of superiority over those around her is emphasized, which receives a cruel blow due to the fact that Pechorin, after Mary confesses her love to him, rejects the feeling of a brave girl.

Thus, the theme of the soul in “A Hero of Our Time” occupies key position. The author's deep attention to this topic allows us to reveal the emotional experiences of the heroes, which contributes to the creation of a new psychologically oriented genre of the Russian classical novel.

The arguments presented in this article will be relevant especially for 9th grade students when preparing an essay on the topic “The history of the human soul in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”.”

Work test

“The History of the Human Soul” in Lermontov’s novel “A Hero of Our Time”

The essay is also suitable for the topic “Features of romanticism and realism in the novel.” In his novel “Hero of Our Time,” M. Yu. Lermontov wanted to show “the history of the human soul.” Despite the fact that Pechorin’s vices reflect the vices of an entire generation of youth in the 30s of the 19th century, this image is very individual. This is a very smart, educated, subtle person, not devoid of concepts of honor and dignity. The author builds a narrative scheme in a unique way, violating the chronology of the events of the work. This technique helps the author reveal the image of his hero much more deeply. At first, Pechorin is seen through the eyes of other people. Staff Captain Maxim Maksimych tells the traveling officer about him. This is how we learn about Pechorin, are outraged by his attitude towards the young Circassian Bela, and experience her together with Maxim Maksimych. tragic death. But the staff captain only schematically outlines the image of Pechorin; from his words it is impossible to understand the full depth, complexity and inconsistency of this nature.

“he didn’t swing his arms when walking”), passion (wrinkles on his noble forehead, “which appeared much more clearly in moments of anger or mental anxiety”), an evil disposition or, rather, “deep constant sadness” (“his eyes did not laugh when he laughed "). External portrait the hero helps to better understand his character. Then Pechorin’s own diary appears on the pages of the novel. In it, the hero very accurately, deeply, truthfully describes his feelings and experiences. The reader is immersed in a complex inner world hero. “Taman”, “Princess Mary” and “Fatalist” are a vivid psychological self-portrait of Pechorin.

Despite the fact that Lermontov wrote “the history of the human soul,” neither the novel as a whole nor the “Journal” contains the history of Pechorin’s soul. Everything that would indicate the circumstances in which his character was formed and developed is omitted.

But in the story “Princess Mary” the hero’s inner world appears in especially detail. Lermontov uses all types of psychological introspection: the hero talks about the events of his life in the form of a chronicle diary.

"A Hero of Our Time" has features of both realism and romanticism. Realism mainly lies in the psychological nature of the novel. Pechorin is a typical representative of his time. The author deeply reveals his inner world, describes the experiences, thoughts, and feelings of the hero. Lermontov notes that Pechorin has “immense powers,” but he cannot fully realize them. This is due to the time and society in which the character of the main character was formed. The generation of the 30s saw a dark era of rejection of any ideals or aspirations.

At the same moment, the novel also contains features of romanticism. For example, in “Bel” a popular romantic plot was developed about the love of a European, brought up by civilization, for a “savage” who grew up among the “children of nature” and lives according to the laws of her tribe. But Lermontov does not idealize the highlanders; their morals are described quite realistically. The very image of Bela and her tragic death are romantic.

"Tamani" has a romantic image of "honest smugglers", especially the girl Ondine.

"The Fatalist" resembles a romantic novella based on philosophical theme. At the center of the heroes’ actions and thoughts was “predestination,” that is, fate, fate.

“A Hero of Our Time” combines realistic and romantic features.

It was M. Yu Lermontov who first posed the problem in Russian literature lost generation. The writer expressed in his novel “Hero of Our Time” the deep duality of man, his strength and weakness. Passive rejection of social changes gave rise to loneliness, fears, doubts, and spiritual bitterness.

floats with the flow. In his understanding of the era, in his senseless protest, Pechorin failed, but his thoughts are the painful thoughts of the best people of that time.

“water society”, social events, representatives of the nobility, Grushnitsky, Dr. Werner. The generation of the 30s saw a dark era of rejection of any ideals or aspirations. This is the reason for the author’s condemnation of his generation: it is withering in inaction, passivity, and indifference. Lermontov's generation lived in fear and submission to the authorities. That is why there is such a close connection between the ideological content of the entire novel and the poem “Sadly I look at our generation.”

based on excerpts from his diary. Pechorin was formed as a personality in those circles of the noble intelligentsia, where it was fashionable to ridicule all sincere manifestations of a person. This left an imprint on his character and crippled the hero morally: “My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the light; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart; they died there.” Lermontov depicted not just a portrait of a hero of the era, but “the story of the human soul.”

admits that he considers himself the cause of the misfortunes of others, he is tired of the pleasures of high society.

“became skilled in the science of life.” The hero is closed in on himself and suffers from loneliness. Pechorin expected a lot from the transfer to the Caucasus, but soon the danger became familiar to him. Bela's love did not bring spiritual renewal. But Pechorin cannot remain alone. He is constantly attracted to communication with people. He is attracted by danger, everything that excites the blood.

Lermontov compares favorably with his other contemporaries in that he is concerned with questions of awareness of human existence, purpose and meaning of life. He feels immense powers within himself, but does not know how to use them.

The world around Pechorin is built on spiritual slavery - people torture each other in order to gain pleasure from the suffering of others. The offended person, in turn, dreams of only one thing - to take revenge on the offender, to humiliate not only him, but the whole society, the whole world.

Left alone with himself, Pechorin is merciless not only to his opponents, but also to himself. For all failures, he blames himself, first of all. Pechorin constantly feels his moral inferiority. He constantly talks about the two halves of the soul, that best part the souls “dried up,” “evaporated, died.” The hero blames the world, people, time for his spiritual slavery, and is disappointed in everything that once pleased him. Starting from the second half of the 19th century century, Pechorin’s definition of “superfluous person” became firmly established. Lermontov sincerely regrets the bitter fate of his contemporaries, many of whom turned out to be superfluous people in their country. Arguing about whether there is predestination in life, Pechorin turns his life into a chain of experiments on himself and others. According to Lermontov, a generation that has lost faith in goodness and justice deprives itself of confidence in the future. Pechorin himself notes that his generation is no longer capable of sacrifice.

“water society” with their petty passions, on the other hand, the traits of the generation find their expression in the image of the main character, his suffering and search. The author calls on his generation not to go with the flow, not to adapt to evil and violence, not to wait, but to act, to resist meanness and passivity.

And we hate and we love by chance,
Without sacrificing anything, neither anger nor love,
And some secret cold reigns in the soul,
When fire boils in the blood.

M. Lermontov.

During the classes

1. Statement of the educational task.

How do you understand the meaning of the title of M. Yu. Lermontov’s work “Hero of Our Time”? Whose is “Our Time”?

- “A Hero of Our Time” is the first “personal” (according to the terminology adopted in French literature) or “analytical” novel in Russian prose: its ideological and plot center is not an external biography (life and adventures), but rather the personality of a person - his spiritual and mental life. And the soul is in Christian understanding immortal, she is timeless.

Pechorin is a person who embodied character traits social consciousness of people of the 30s: the intensity of moral and philosophical searches, exceptional willpower, analytical mind, extraordinary human abilities.

What task did Lermontov set for himself when he wrote “A Hero of Our Time”?

(The novel was conceived as artistic research the inner world of a person, his soul. Lermontov himself said this in the “Preface” to “Pechorin’s Journal”: “The history of the human soul, even the smallest soul, is perhaps more interesting and useful than the history of an entire people, especially when it is a consequence of the observation of a mature mind over itself...” )

The topic of our lesson: “The history of the human soul” in the novel by M. Yu. Lermontov “A Hero of Our Time”.

1. Did Pechorin pass the test of danger?
2. Is the hero capable of true love?
3. What is our hero’s life philosophy?

Today in class we will try to answer these and other questions.

We have already noted the unusual composition more than once. What is it?

(All elements of the composition of Lermontov’s novel are strictly subordinated to the main ideological and artistic task that the author set for himself: to write “the history of the human soul”, to write a socio-psychological novel. At the center of the composition is main character the novel Pechorin, whom the author calls – not without bitter irony – “a hero of our time.” All other characters, while representing artistic, historical and educational value in themselves, at the same time explain in one way or another the personality of the main character. The reader involuntarily compares him with these people and, by comparing, evaluates him in a new way and comprehends him more and more deeply.)

Was it by chance that Lermontov abandoned the chronological principle in the arrangement of the stories included in the novel, and the order of their initial publication?

(Belinsky wrote: “The parts of this novel are arranged in accordance with internal necessity.” And then he explained: “Despite its occasional fragmentation, it cannot be read in a manner other than the order in which the author himself arranged it: otherwise you will read two excellent stories and several excellent stories, but you won’t know the novel.”)

What is the reason for the change of narrators?

(There are three narrators in the novel: Maxim Maksimych, a traveling officer and Pechorin himself. Yu.M. Lotman writes: “Thus, Pechorin’s character is revealed to the reader gradually, as if reflected in many mirrors, and none of the reflections, taken separately, gives comprehensive characteristics of Pechorin. Only the totality of these voices arguing among themselves creates the complex and contradictory character of the hero."

2. Consideration of the image of the narrator from the point of view of Maxim Maksimych. The author subjects the hero to the test of love.

Let's consider the point of view of the first narrator - Maxim Maksimych. What surprises him about the character of the hero?

(“He was a nice guy, I can assure you; he was just a little strange...”)

How do you explain the meaning of the word "strange"?

(With this meager definition of “strange” in the mouth of Pechorin’s closest comrade, Lermontov shows how difficult the hero’s character was to understand, so the writer refuses to directly characterize him. The hero has a strong individuality, he is endowed with charm, but there is also something alarming about him reader. He is both strong and weak, hardened and pampered. He is able to fight for his love - and he quickly cools down, he does not know how to love for a long time. He quickly becomes cold and feels empty in his heart. When Bela is bored. dies, Pechorin is beside himself, and after burying her, he suddenly laughs and then gets sick for a long time.)

Reading Pechorin’s confession in the story “Bela,” what character traits of this hero can you highlight?

(Decision, deep intelligence, indomitable energy, the search for the use of one’s strengths, courage are the distinctive features of Pechorin.)

Why, having fallen in love with Bela, does he not find peace of mind?

(“I was wrong again: the love of a savage is little better than the love of a noble lady: the ignorance and vernacular of one are as annoying as the coquetry of the other...” In this love, Lermontov first reveals the duality of his hero, expressing it in one remark: “I will give for her ( Bel) life - only I’m bored with it.” A child’s rejection of boredom and a mature readiness to give up life confuses the reader.

Belinsky wrote: “The strong need for love is often mistaken for love itself if an object presents itself to which it can rush; obstacles turn it into passion, and satisfaction destroys it. Bela's love was for Pechorin a full glass of sweet drink, which he drank at once, without leaving a drop in it; and his soul demanded not a glass, but an ocean from which he could draw every minute without diminishing it...".)

What does he see as the reason for his inner emptiness?

(“...my soul is spoiled by light...”)

The reader finishes reading the first chapter and cannot say anything definite about the hero. But many questions arise.

3. Consideration of the character of the hero in the story “Princess Mary”.

We know that the trials of love do not end there. Let's break the sequence of presentation and turn to the story “Princess Mary”. Why do you think the hero so persistently seeks the love of a young girl, Princess Mary, whom he will never marry?

(Pechorin cannot always sort out his feelings. “But there is immense pleasure in possessing a young, barely blossoming soul! She is like a flower, whom best scent evaporates towards the first ray of the sun; you need to pick it up at this moment and, after breathing it to your heart’s content, throw it on the road: maybe someone will pick it up! I feel this insatiable greed within me, devouring everything that comes my way; I look at the sufferings and joys of others only in relation to myself, as food that supports my spiritual strength.” One can note the hero’s consumer attitude towards women, his selfishness, even cruelty. Pechorin does not take into account the simple truths that you need to think about other people, you cannot bring them suffering. After all, if everyone begins to violate moral laws, any cruelty will be possible. Pechorin loves himself too much to give up the pleasure of torturing others.)

But is his soul so callous? Isn't he able to appreciate the beauty of nature?

(“It’s fun to live in such a land! Some kind of joyful feeling is diffused in all my veins. The air is clean and fresh, like a child’s kiss; the sun is bright, the sky is blue - what, it seems, is more? Why are there passions, desires, regrets?. ."

A person who sees the harmony of nature cannot be soulless. Pechorin feels the beauty of nature and knows how to talk about it in the language of an artist. Thus, the hero is revealed to readers as a talented person.)

Do you think Pechorin is capable of love?

(“A long-forgotten thrill ran through my veins...” “His heart sank...” Pechorin’s feeling for Vera is exceptionally strong, sincere. This is the true love of his life. But for Vera, he also does not sacrifice anything, as for other women. On the contrary , inflames jealousy in her, dragging after Mary. The difference we see is that in his love for Vera, he not only satisfies his heart’s passionate need for love, not only takes, but also gives a part of himself. This quality of Pechorin emerges in particular. in an episode of a crazy, desperate chase on a wildly galloping horse for the irrevocably departed Vera. “I galloped, gasping with impatience. The thought of not catching her in Pyatigorsk struck like a hammer in my heart - one minute, one more minute to see her, say goodbye, shake her! hand... I prayed, cursed, cried, laughed... no, nothing could express my anxiety, despair!.. With the possibility of losing her forever, Faith became dearer to me than anything in the world - more valuable than life, honor, happiness! This episode is deep symbolic meaning. Pechorin forever lost not only Vera, his beloved woman, but also hope for the future and love for people, which, as L. Tolstoy showed in his autobiographical trilogy, is given by nature to every child in childhood.)

How does this characterize him?

(Pechorin is full of contradictions. We see that two worlds, two people are united in him. “There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him.” “I have an innate passion to contradict; my whole life has been just a chain of sad and unfortunate contradictions to the heart or mind.”)

Pay attention to the nobility of the hero, despite his consumerist attitude towards a woman, even selfishness, he stands up for her honor, does not allow himself a single low word addressed to them.

4. Psychological picture Pechorina. The hero in the assessment of the second narrator - a traveling officer.

Who introduces Pechorin to us in the chapter “Maxim Maksimych”?

(The narration is continued by the conditional author, the “publisher” of Pechorin’s diary.)

What did the traveling officer see in the guise of Pechorin?

(The hero’s appearance is woven from contradictions. His portrait explains Pechorin’s character, testifies to his fatigue and coldness, to his unspent strength. Observations convinced the narrator of the richness and complexity of this man’s character.

“...his slender, thin frame and broad shoulders proved a strong build, capable of enduring all the difficulties of nomadic life...”

“...he did not wave his arms - a sure sign of some secretiveness of character...”

“...he sat as Balzac’s thirty-year-old coquette sits on her downy chairs after a tiring ball...”

“...his skin had some kind of feminine tenderness...”

“...his mustache and eyebrows were black - a sign of the breed in a person...”

“...I must say a few more words about the eyes.

First of all, they didn't laugh when he laughed! Have you ever noticed such strangeness in some people?.. This is a sign of either an evil disposition or deep, constant sadness.”

“... had one of those original physiognomies that are especially popular with secular women...”)

Lermontov creates a detailed psychological portrait, the first in Russian literature. A psychological portrait is a characterization of a hero, where the author presents external details in a certain sequence and immediately gives them a psychological and social interpretation. A psychological portrait, in contrast to verbal drawing, gives us an idea of ​​the inner essence of the hero.

What is the role of the portrait of Pechorin?

(The portrait of a hero explains the character of the hero, his contradictions, testifies to the fatigue and coldness of Pechorin, the unspent strength of the hero. Observations convince the narrator of the richness and complexity of this man’s character. This immersion in the world of his thoughts, the depression of Pechorin’s spirit is the key to understanding his alienation when meeting with Maxim Maksimych.)

Can we talk about Pechorin’s cruel attitude towards Maxim Maksimych?

(“...he wanted to throw himself on Pechorin’s neck, but he rather coldly, although with a friendly smile, extended his hand to him.” But maybe he just didn’t want someone to invade his inner world? “Do you remember our life- being in a fortress? A glorious country for hunting!.. After all, you were a passionate hunter to shoot... And Bela?.. Pechorin turned slightly pale and turned away...” Pechorin is not running from Maxim Maksimych, he is running from his sad thoughts. what changed in the hero after leaving the fortress: his indifference to life increased, he became more withdrawn.)

Do we understand the hero, since we have considered the point of view of both Maxim Maksimych and the traveling officer?

(The hero is, of course, interesting. The more mysterious, the more interesting. Pechorin has a strong individuality, he is endowed with charm, but there is also something in him that alarms the reader. He is both strong and weak, hardened and pampered. He is able to fight for love - and he quickly cools down, he does not know how to love for a long time. After infatuation, he quickly becomes cold and feels empty in his heart.)

5. The character of Pechorin in the assessment of the hero himself. The hero is tested by danger.

Where is the hero’s inner essence most fully revealed?

(If the first two stories by genre are travel notes (the narrator noted: “I am writing not a story, but travel notes”), then the next stories are Pechorin’s diary.

A diary is a personal record in which a person, knowing that they will not become known to others, can describe not only external events, but also internal, hidden from everyone, movements of his soul. Pechorin was sure that he was writing “this magazine... for himself,” which is why he was so open in describing them.)

What parts does Pechorin's Journal consist of?

(Three chapters of the novel - “Taman”, “Princess Mary” and “Fatalist” - are parts of “Pechorin’s Diary”.)

Who represents our hero?

(The hero himself receives the floor, analyzing himself with the utmost degree of penetration and giving the reader the opportunity to look into his soul from the inside.)

What features of the hero’s character are revealed in the story “Taman”?

(Interest in a new circle of people, hope for a romantic adventure, adventurism.)

Why does he feel bitter disappointment?

(“And what do I care about human joys and misfortunes, me, a traveling officer, and even traveling for official reasons!..”)

Which story most fully reveals spiritual world Pechorina?

(Stories “Princess Mary.”)

What kind of society surrounds the hero this time? How is it different from the highlanders, the smugglers?

(The environment surrounding the hero is people equal to him in social origin.)

Then why was there a conflict between this society and Pechorin?

(Among the people of this society there were no people equal to him intellectually.)

What assessment does Pechorin give to Grushnitsky at the beginning of their acquaintance? Why is Pechorin so irreconcilable in his perception of this man?

(Pechorin is unpleasant about Grushnitsky’s manner of pronouncing “ready-made pompous phrases... to produce an effect...” “I don’t like him either, I feel that we will someday collide with him on a narrow road, and one of us will be in trouble.”)

What feature of Pechorin’s character can we highlight?

(The ability to understand the inner essence of a person.)

Why is a clash between Pechorin and Grushnitsky inevitable?

(Grushnitsky is a kind of “double” of Pechorin. Putting on a mask of disappointment and melancholy, he plays the role of an unusual person.

“He speaks quickly and pretentiously: he is one of those people who have ready-made pompous phrases for all occasions...”

“To make an effect is their pleasure.”

“...I could never argue with him. He doesn’t answer your objections, he doesn’t listen to you.”

“His goal is to become the hero of a novel.”

Grushnitsky’s behavior is not only harmless and funny. Under the mask of a hero seemingly disappointed in some cherished aspirations, hides a petty and selfish soul, selfish and evil, filled to the brim with complacency.)

How does Pechorin behave in the duel scene?

(During the duel, Pechorin behaves like a courageous man. Outwardly he is calm. Only after feeling his pulse, Werner noticed signs of excitement in him. The details of the description of nature that Pechorin wrote down in his diary also reveal his experiences: “... it seemed dark and cold down there, like in a coffin; mossy jagged rocks... awaited their prey.")

Does the hero experience the triumph of a winner?

(It’s hard for Pechorin: “I had a stone in my heart. The sun seemed dim to me, its rays did not warm me... The sight of a man was painful for me: I wanted to be alone...")

(Highlight the true depth and originality of the main character.)

6. Life philosophy of the hero.

We examined the image of Pechorin when meeting danger. Further, in the hero’s reasoning, his life philosophy emerges.

What does he consider to be perhaps the only pleasure in life?

(“...my first pleasure is to subordinate to my will everything that surrounds me; to arouse for myself a feeling of love, devotion and fear - isn’t this the first sign and the greatest triumph of power...")

What assessment does he give of himself in his diary?

(Pechorin does not spare himself, first of all it is honesty with himself, self-criticism, but at the same time he does not strive to change anything.)

Reflecting on the eternal question, what is happiness, what answer does the hero offer?

(“What is happiness? Saturated pride?”)

What does pride nurtured in a person lead to?

(There will be no real friends nearby who understand people.)

What is friendship in Pechorin’s understanding?

(“... I am not capable of friendship: of two friends, one is always the slave of the other; I cannot be a slave, and in this case, commanding is tedious work...” Pechorin has no real friends.)

What can pride and lack of friends lead to?

(Of course, to loneliness. Pechorin seems to us not just a hero of his time, but a tragic hero.")

A few days before the duel, the hero is occupied with the question of the meaning of life. What does he see as the purpose of his own existence?

(“... why did I live? For what purpose was I born? Oh, it’s true, it existed, and, it’s true, I had a high purpose, because I feel immense powers in my soul... But I didn’t guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of passions empty and ungrateful; from their crucible I emerged hard and cold as iron, but I have forever lost the ardor of noble aspirations - the best color of life."

Why can't Pechorin find meaning in life?

(“This man does not bear his suffering indifferently, not apathetically: he madly chases after life, looking for it everywhere; he bitterly accuses himself of his delusions. Internal questions are incessantly heard within him, they disturb him, torment him, and in reflection he seeks their resolution “: he spies every movement of his heart, examines his every thought,” notes V. G. Belinsky, an extraordinary person, endowed with intelligence and willpower, a desire for active activity, cannot manifest himself in the life around him and cannot be happy. can give happiness to anyone. This is his tragedy.)

What are such people called in literature?

(Pechorin can be called an “extra” person. He has a lot vital energy, the need for action, the desire to fight and win. Under favorable conditions, these qualities of his could have been socially useful, but life itself prevented this. Pechorin is a hero of the post-December, tragic era. Reality did not offer him real business; people like Pechorin were “seething in empty action.”)

This is a hero of that time, what would we take in our time? What character traits are necessary for a hero of our time?

7. Lesson summary.

Were we able to consider the history of Pechorin's soul?

Of course, we have touched only on some of the features of the hero’s soul. With the power of his talent, Lermontov created an image that still remains “a secret behind seven seals.”

As in the novel “Eugene Onegin” by A. S. Pushkin, in “Hero of Our Time” by M. Yu. Lermontov, approximately the same task is set - to draw a portrait of a person new era, a hero of new times.

Lermontov's novel is arranged in a very interesting way; it consists of five separate stories with independent plots, each of which gradually, step by step, reveals to us the image of the main character who unites all five stories.

Pechorin's name is first mentioned in the first story "Bela". Staff Captain Maxim Maksimych tells his interlocutor, the “wandering officer,” about Pechorin. The ingenuous and simple-minded old man tries his best to be objective and accurate, but there is still a lot that is incomprehensible in his story. He sincerely tries and cannot understand the character and inner experiences of Pechorin, and therefore he does not understand the motives of Pechorin’s actions, committed under the influence of painful reflection and mental contradictions to which the main character of the novel is subject. " A strange man“This is all the staff captain can say, defining the character of his former colleague.

The second story slightly lifts the veil of mystery over Pechorin, since here he is shown through the eyes of the author, a man whose intellectual level is closer to Pechorin than Maxim Maksimych. The “wandering officer” is very observant, he is a subtle psychologist, and therefore even his fleeting meeting with the main character gives the reader the opportunity to better examine this “strange man.”

In the following chapters, which are “Pechorin’s Journal”, his diary, the hero himself talks about himself, analyzing his actions and giving them an assessment. From the very first pages of these chapters, it becomes clear that before us is an extraordinary, restless person, constantly searching for the meaning of life.

For some reason, it turns out that Pechorin constantly brings misfortune to others and causes pain to those loved ones with whom fate brings him together. Bela dies, the kindest and simple-minded Maxim Maksimych is offended by Pechorin’s indifference in his best feelings, the romantic idyll of “honest smugglers” is disrupted, Princess Mary is deceived in her love. So who is in front of us? A villain worthy of condemnation alone? But villains are unlikely to suffer, causing misfortune to others, the way Pechorin suffers. Egoist? Yes, of course, but the egoist is “suffering”, worthy not only of condemnation, but also of sympathy. It is not for nothing that Belinsky wrote that “Pechorin’s soul is rocky soil, but the earth has dried up from the heat of a fiery life: let suffering loosen it and water it with blessed rain, and it will grow lush, luxurious flowers.”

Gradually revealing Pechorin's contradictory character, his complex inner life, full of tossing and searching, Lermontov strives to show “the history of the human soul.” His “Hero of Our Time” is a deeply psychological novel, as if through a prism, examining from all sides an extraordinary figure, a rebel, tirelessly searching for his place in life.

The hero's internal throwings are in complete harmony with his external throwings. It is no coincidence that Pechorin is always on the road. The author throws him either into a mountain village, or into a Caucasian fortress, or into a smugglers’ shack, or into the picturesque environment of a “water society.” It is symbolic that death overtakes him on the way.

Lermontov does not explain how and why his hero ended up in the Caucasus. Was he sent into exile? Perhaps, but another explanation seems more likely. Let’s reread what Pechorin himself recalls about his past: “My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the light; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart... I told the truth - they didn’t believe me: I began to deceive; Having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life... Despair was born in my chest... I became a moral cripple...”

In the light of these words, one can rather assume that Pechorin himself fled to the Caucasus, where military operations were constantly taking place in those days, hoping in numerous dangers and risks to find the meaning of life that he sought in vain in a world that had morally crippled him.

Probably, Pechorin can be called a hero of his time precisely because of his restlessness, state of constant search, and originality, which is especially noticeable against the background of other characters in the novel. Take, for example, Maxim Maksimych. He is deeply decent and kind, but very limited; many years of conscientious service taught him not to burden himself with unnecessary thoughts about the meaning of life. Grushnitsky, he’s just a poser without the slightest signs of sincerity, realness; everything in it is a game and falsehood. Dr. Wagner belongs to a completely different type of people, he is smart and well versed in life, he is insightful and knows the value of the people around him. But at the same time, Wagner is a passive observer, contemplating everything from the outside and analyzing the events taking place from a safe distance. The main feature in Pechorin’s nature is his irrepressible activity, a constant desire to do something, to participate in something.

Such a person will not submit to blind fate, will not go with the flow.

It seems quite natural that Lermontov ends his novel with the story “Fatalist”, posing an important philosophical problem in it. If a person’s fate is predetermined, then all his actions, all moral searches, attempts to change anything in this life lose all meaning.

This is what fatalists think. On the contrary, Pechorin argues with fate all the time, and always challenges it. In the person of Pechorin, Lermontov affirms the ideal of an active, active person who does not want to put up with circumstances.

Literary critics, starting with Belinsky, have repeatedly noted the similarities between Pechorin and Onegin. And indeed, they have a lot in common. They are both - extra people in the society in which they lived, they both did not find application for the inclinations of their extraordinary nature, both experienced disappointment in monotonous, strictly regulated social pleasures, both tried to find their place and their purpose in life. Onegin succeeds in this to some extent; at the end of the novel he appears as a renewed man, capable of ardent love; Lermontov acts differently with Pechorin. It is as if he initially deprives Pechorin of his future; we even learn about his death not at the end, but in the middle of the novel. Perhaps the explanation for this is that Onegin is a representative of the generation of Decembrists, whose fate had not yet been decided at that time, and Pechorin already belongs to another generation, the uprising had already been defeated at Senate Square, but a new perspective is not yet visible.

But nevertheless, after reading the novel there is no feeling of hopelessness. So the “hero of his time” stands before our eyes - a rebel and rebel, striving to change his destiny at any cost. This is how Lermontov portrayed Pechorin, this is how he himself was, who died in a duel at the twenty-seventh year of his life and managed to leave the deepest mark not only in the history of Russian literature, but also in the memory of the people who knew him.