Lesson topic: Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts: antipodes or doubles?
(Based on the novel “Oblomov” by I.A. Goncharov)
The purpose of the lesson: identify features author's position through a comparison of heroes (Oblomov and Stolz); develop characterization skills literary characters, research skills, logical thinking; to educate thoughtful readers and enrich students’ speech.
Lesson equipment: portrait of I.A. Goncharov, texts of I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”, technical teaching aids (TV); notebooks for works on literature, illustrations.
Students should know:
The main idea of the work;
Main images.
Students should be able to:
- correctly answer questions posed by the teacher;
Summarize and systematize educational material;
Improve your skills in working with text;
Draw conclusions and connect them into a monologue.
During the classes.
I . Organizational moment(message of topic and purpose).
II. Preparation for perception.
Teacher: Good afternoon guys! I wish that your day today is truly good and brings some success in your studies. When you wake up, greet every morning with a smile and good mood. Enjoy every day of your life and try to live it to the benefit of yourself and the people around you. Remember “the one who walks masters the road.” Studying the novel by I.A. Goncharov makes us talk about the meaning of life, about the purpose of man... Pay attention to the topic of the lesson (write down the topic in notebooks). Today we will consider one of the problematic issues of the work: Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts... who are they - doubles or antipodes? You need to compare these heroes, find out how they are similar and how they differ from each other.
Let's define the lexical meaning of words antipode And double
- vocabulary work
Antipode- (Greek antipodes - feet facing feet). 1. plural only Inhabitants of two opposite points of the earth, two opposite ends of one of the diameters of the globe (geographical). 2. to someone or something. A person of opposite properties, tastes or beliefs (book). He is the perfect antipode of him or he is the perfect antipode of him.
Double- a person who has complete similarities with another (both a man and a woman).
Teacher: Our acquaintance with Oblomov already took place in previous lessons. We found out that our hero is slow, lazy, and unfocused. Let's give it a more detailed description. (students' answers)
Teacher: How does the author introduce us to Andrei Stolts? The same as with Oblomov, or differently? (We learn about Stolz in the first part of the novel, before he appears before the readers, that is, in absentia:
In connection with Oblomov’s guests, whom Ilya Ilyich “didn’t like,” unlike his childhood friend, Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, whom he “loved sincerely”;
In connection with the dreams of the main character, where Stolz, who knew and appreciated best qualities Ilya Ilyich, was an integral part of the paintings happy life in an estate full of love, poetry, friendly feelings and peace;
Stolz also appears in “Oblomov’s Dream”, fits into the idyllic, sweet and at the same time mysterious atmosphere of childhood that shaped the hero.
Teacher: The hero's unexpected appearance at the end of the first part. And chapters 1 – 2 of the second part talk about Stolz.
(meeting between Oblomov and Stolz).
Teacher: We see that these two people are true friends. But these heroes are different, dissimilar. Together with the author, we will use a method of characterizing a hero known in literature - comparative characteristics. In front of you is a worksheet that contains the criteria for education, the purpose of life, the content of activities, attitude towards women, their family life and life position. In the conclusion column, we will make notes ourselves when we consider all these criteria, comparing the main characters.
Teacher: Let's consider all the features of the heroes.
Student answers:
Oblomov
Stolz
Appearance (when they appeared before the reader)
“... about thirty-two or three years old, of average height, pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence of any definite idea, ... an even light of carelessness glowed throughout his face.”
the same age as Oblomov, “thin, he has almost no cheeks at all,... his complexion is even, dark and no blush; the eyes, although a little greenish, are expressive"
origin
from rich noble family with patriarchal traditions. his parents, like grandfathers, did nothing: serfs worked for them. A truly Russian man, a nobleman.
a native of the philistine class (his father left Germany, traveled around Switzerland and settled in Russia, becoming the manager of an estate). Sh. graduates brilliantly from the university, successfully serves, retires to take care of his own business; makes a house and money. He is a member of a trading company that ships goods abroad; as an agent of the company, Sh. travels to Belgium, England, and throughout Russia. Sh.'s image is built on the basis of the idea of balance, harmonious correspondence between the physical and spiritual, mind and feeling, suffering and pleasure. The ideal of Sh. is measure and harmony in work, life, rest, love.( or... from a poor family: the father (Russified German) was the manager of a rich estate, the mother was an impoverished Russian noblewoman. Half Russian, not a nobleman.
upbringing
His parents wanted to present Ilyusha with all the benefits “somehow cheaper, with various tricks.” His parents taught him to be idle and quiet (they didn’t let him pick up a dropped item, get dressed, or pour water for himself). the stigma of slavery. the family had a cult of food, and after eating there was a sound sleep.
his father gave him the education he received from his father: he taught him all the practical sciences, forced him to work early and sent away his son, who had graduated from the university. his father taught him that the main things in life are money, rigor and accuracy.
Oblomov was not even allowed out into the street. “What about servants?” Soon Ilya himself realized that it was calmer and more convenient to give orders. The dexterous, active child is constantly stopped by his parents and nanny for fear that the boy will “fall, hurt himself” or catch a cold; he was cherished like a hothouse flower. “Those seeking manifestations of power turned inward and sank, withering away.”
Teacher: Name episodes, scenes that clearly illustrate how Stolz’s childhood went and how the process of his upbringing went.
Stills from the film “A few days in the life of I.I. Oblomov”
(Stolz’s farewell to his father).
Goncharov creates Stolz, involuntarily starting from Oblomov, as the antipode to the main character; with Stolz everything is different.
His upbringing is laborious, practical, he was raised by life itself (cf.: “If Oblomov’s son had disappeared...”).
A special discussion is required: the mother’s attitude; mother and father; Oblomovka, the prince's castle, as a result of which “the bursha did not work out,” which replaced the “narrow German track” with a “wide road.”
Stolz - Stolz (“proud”). Does he live up to his name?
Teacher:- Worksheet (at the bottom of the column: “Education”, indicate the antipode).
education
studied in a small boarding school located five miles from Oblomovka, in the village of Verkhleve. Both graduated from the university in Moscow
From the age of eight he sat with his father geographical map, sorted through the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of the peasants, townspeople and factory workers, and with his mother he read sacred history, learned Krylov’s fables and sorted through the warehouses of Telemachus.”
Based on upbringing and education, a certain program was laid down. What is it like for Oblomov?
Teacher:
laid down program
Dream. Vegetation and sleep - the passive principle found solace in his favorite “conciliatory and soothing” words “maybe”, “maybe” and “somehow” and protected himself with them from misfortunes. He was ready to shift the matter to anyone, without caring about its outcome or the integrity of the chosen person (this is how he trusted the scammers who robbed his estate)..
“For Ilya Ilych, lying down was neither a necessity, like that of a sick person or like a person who wants to sleep, nor an accident, like that of someone who is tired, nor a pleasure, like that of a lazy person: it was his normal state.”
Teacher: What was Stolz most afraid of?
Substantiating their answers with text, students say that dreams, imagination (“ optical illusion”, as Stolz said) were his enemies. He controlled his life and had a “real outlook on life” (cf. Oblomov).
laid down program
Stolz was afraid to dream, his happiness was in constancy, energy and vigorous activity were an active beginning
“He is constantly on the move: if society needs to send an agent to Belgium or England, they send him; need to write some project or adapt new idea to the point - they choose him. Meanwhile, he goes out into the world and reads: when he has time, God knows.”
Teacher: What does life mean and what is the purpose of a person, according to Stolz?
Students:“To live through the four seasons, that is, four ages, without leaps and bring the vessel of life to last day, without spilling a single drop in vain...” (cf. Oblomov, whose ideal is... in peace and pleasure; see about Oblomov’s dreams in the 8th chapter of the first part, pp. 76 - 77).
Teacher: Chapters 3–4 of the second part. The role of these chapters in the novel. A conversation-argument where the views and positions of the heroes collided.
The essence of the dispute is HOW TO LIVE?!
- How does a dispute arise?(Oblomov’s dissatisfaction with the empty life of society.)
With. 157-159 Teacher: p. 163
With. 161-162 - This is not life!
Teacher:- When does a turning point in a dispute occur? (Labor path: Stolz’s disagreement with his friend’s ideal, because this is “Oblomovism”; the ideal of the lost paradise depicted by Oblomov, and work as “the image, content, element and purpose of life.”)
Students:+ second monologue. Confession of Oblomov, p. 166. “Do you know, Andrey...”
Teacher: How did each of the heroes emerge in the dispute?
Outlook on life
“Life: life is good!” says Oblomov, “What to look for there? interests of the mind, heart? Look where the center is around which all this revolves: it is not there, there is nothing deep that touches the living. All these are dead people, sleeping people, worse than me, these members of the world and society!... Don’t they sleep sitting all their lives? Why am I more guilty than them, lying at home and not infecting my head with threes and jacks?
Stolz experiences life and asks her: “What should I do? Where to go next? "And it goes! Without Oblomov...
The purpose of life
Live life happily; so that she “doesn’t touch.”
“Work is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine.”
Perception of life
Fluctuating - from “a pleasant gift for enjoyment” to “sticks like bullies: it will pinch you on the sly, then suddenly it will come right from the forehead and sprinkle you with sand... there is no urine!”
Life is happiness in work; life without work is not life; “...“life touches!” "And thank God!" - said Stolz.
Oblomov wants to do what his soul and heart desire, even if his mind is against it; never bother.
Stolz wants to have a “simple, that is, direct, real view of life - that was his constant task...”, “Above all he put persistence in achieving goals...”, “... will measure an abyss or a wall, and if there is no sure way to overcome, he will go away.”
Teacher: Which character and at what stage of the argument are you ready to agree with?
Teacher: Is there one answer to this question?
(During the argument, the guys come to the conclusion that both principles have a right to exist.)
Teacher:- Worksheet (at the bottom of the column: “The purpose of life, the content of activity” - we indicate the double + the double to a greater extent).
Teacher: In conversations (disputes) often the last word the author gives Stoltz, but one gets the feeling that he cannot argue with Oblomov. Why? He can’t even when he has the last word. Internally, we feel and understand that Stolz cannot break Oblomov’s resistance (remember the episode of the night dinner when Stolz gives up and sits down with Oblomov and Zakhar to eat).
? The antithesis of the heroes' life ideals:
“...Life is poetry. Freely “Labor – image, content,
people to distort it... “the element, the purpose of life.”
Whose philosophy is positive and constructive?
Work plan:
The image of Stolz in the novel: family, upbringing, education, portrait features, lifestyle, values (part 2, chapters 1 – 4)
Build and record a chain keywords, revealing the character of Stolz, Oblomov (checking homework)
Compare the character of Stolz with the character of Oblomov:
Oblomov: Stolz:
Peace (apathy)
“...he is constantly on the move...”
Sleep (inactivity)
“balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit”
A dream is a “shell, self-deception”
“he was afraid of every dream, ... he wanted to see the ideal of human existence and aspirations in a strict understanding and direction of life”
Fear of circumstances
“attributed the cause of all suffering to yourself"
The aimlessness of existence
“I put persistence in achieving goals above all else”
Labor is punishment
“Labor is the image, element, content, purpose of life”
Draw a conclusion about at what levels, in what details it is revealed
antithesis between Oblomov and Stolz.
Antagonism of the heroes' life views.
(The dispute between Oblomov and Stolz - part 2, chapter 9).
"Provocative" questions:
Is Stolz too positive in his views?
Or maybe Oblomov is right: people looking for meaning in social life- dead people, such a life is a useless vanity. What's worse about him lying on the sofa?!
Is Oblomov’s poetic perception of life the sophistication of the hero’s soul, a “subtle poetic nature” or a way to hide from reality?
Strength and weakness of the characters of Oblomov and Stolz: hero and circumstances, false and positive meaning of existence?
Result:
Teacher: Critically evaluate the life perception of Oblomov/Stolz. Whose position do you consider acceptable to you? Give your reasons. Which values(which character) will you take into your life luggage?
Teacher:- How did our heroes turn out in love? Did you pass the test of love or not?
Student answers:
Oblomov
Stolz
Oblomov refused love. He chose peace. “Life is poetry. People are free to distort it.” I was afraid that I was unworthy of love. He needs not equal love, but maternal love (the kind that Agafya Pshenitsyna gave him).
Stolz loved not with his heart, but with his mind “he developed the conviction that love, with the power of Archimedes’ lever, moves the world; that there is so much universal, irrefutable truth and goodness in it, as much lies and ugliness in its misunderstanding and abuse.” He needs a woman equal in views and strength (Olga Ilyinskaya). I’m glad that I met her abroad, I’m glad that she listens to him and doesn’t even notice that sometimes she doesn’t understand Olga’s sadness.
Teacher: How do we observe our heroes in friendship and relationships with others?
Student answers:
Oblomov
Stolz
Friendship
There are acquaintances, but there is not a single real friend except Stolz.
Stolz always had many friends everywhere - people were drawn to him. But he felt closeness only to personal people, sincere and decent.
Relationship with others
He knows practically no one himself. However, he has acquaintances trying to get him out into the world.
Everyone knows him, he knows everyone. He leaves no one indifferent to himself - he is either respected and appreciated or feared and hated.
Teacher:- Worksheet (at the bottom of the column: “Attitude towards women, family life” - indicate the double).
Let's summarize the lesson:- Based on all that has been said, we will give a description of Oblomov and Stolz.
Students: Characteristics of the heroes:
Oblomov
Stolz
The kind, lazy person is most concerned about his own peace. For him, happiness is complete peace and good food. he spends his life on the sofa without taking off his comfortable robe. does nothing, is not interested in anything, loves to withdraw into himself and live in the world of dreams and dreams he created, the amazing childlike purity of his soul and introspection, the embodiment of gentleness and meekness worthy of a philosopher.
Strong and smart, he is constantly active and does not disdain the most menial work. Thanks to his hard work, willpower, patience and enterprise, he became rich and famous person. a real “iron” character was formed. but in some ways he resembles a machine, a robot, his whole life is so clearly programmed, verified and calculated before us, a rather dry rationalist.
Worksheet (last column: “Life position” - indicate the double).
Answer to the problematic question: Are Oblomov and Stolz twins or antipodes? (student's words).
The final part of the lesson.
Teacher:Yes, Goncharov wanted to contrast the inactive Oblomov with the practical and businesslike Stolz, who, in his opinion, was supposed to break the “Oblomovism” and revive the hero. But the novel has a different ending. It is at the end of the work that the author’s attitude towards the hero is revealed. Let's remember what the heroes of the novel come to?
Students:
Oblomov dies, leaving his son.
Pshenitsyna is ready to do everything for Oblomov’s sake and even gives her son to be raised by her brother, considering this a benefit for her son.
Olga feels very bad (missing Oblomov), there is no love, and without it life is meaningless.
Andrei Stolts is also devastated, he feels bad without a friend, Oblomov was a “heart of gold” for him.
Teacher: So, all the heroes ended up with the same “Oblomovism”!
Teacher: Guys! Prepare yourself now for further adulthood independent life. Take into your life baggage from Stolz energy, intelligence, determination, strength of character, prudence, will, but do not forget about the soul, taking kindness, honesty, tenderness, and romance from Ilya Oblomov. And remember the words of N.V. Gogol “Take it with you on the journey, coming out of the soft teenage years into stern, embittering courage, take away all human movements, do not leave them on the road, you will not pick them up later!”
III . Homework: Russian criticism in I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”: “Golden Heart” or “Russian Laziness”. Individual tasks.
IV. Ratings.
A dispute between friends broke out at the moment when Stolz Once again calls Oblomov to go somewhere, to do something, and they spend a whole week traveling around on all sorts of errands. “Oblomov protested, complained, argued, but was carried away and accompanied his friend everywhere,” writes the author. But the next evening, “returning from somewhere late,” Oblomov exploded: “I don’t like this St. Petersburg life of yours!” After Stolz’s question: “Which one do you like?” - Oblomov burst into a sharp, caustic and long monologue about meaningless vanity, in which there is no “integrity” and there is no person who “exchanged for every little thing.” Oblomov’s long satirical speeches expose the world, and society, and card games without the “task of life”, and the activities of young people, and the lack of a “clear, calm look”, and the “persistent sleep” in which the fussy and active, in fact, is immersed. first glance, society. In this monologue, only occasionally interrupted by Andrei with short, sharp objections or questions, Oblomov’s remarkable intelligence and satirical talent are revealed.
Ilya Ilyich’s monologue ends with the key phrase: “No, this is not life, but a distortion of the norm, the ideal of life, which nature has indicated as a goal for man...” To Andrei’s question, what is this ideal, Oblomov did not answer immediately, but only after a long dialogue with short remarks from both. In this dialogue, Stolz ironically makes fun of Oblomov’s awkward attempts to explain something to his friend, but then, apparently provoked by this irony, Ilya Ilyich begins to describe in detail how he would “spend his days.” This description is long, kind and poetic, even the rather dry Stolz remarks: “Yes, you are a poet, Ilya!” Inspired, Oblomov, who had seized the initiative at this time in the conversation, exclaims: “Yes, he is a poet in life, because life is poetry. People are free to distort it.” Oblomov’s ideal is not immobility, which he seems to have plunged into now; Ilya in this story, on the contrary, is very active and poetic, this ideal is that everything should be “to your liking,” sincerely, honestly, freely, measuredly, “what in eyes, in words, then in the heart.” And he, Oblomov, actively participates in this life: he composes and gives his wife a bouquet, conducts a conversation with sincere friends, fishes, takes a gun, although, of course, in this story Oblomov’s immobility and gluttony often slip through. "That's life!" - Oblomov sums up and immediately stumbles upon an alternative answer: “This is not life!” And it is at this moment that the word “Oblomovism” appears for the first time on the stage of the novel, which Stolz pronounces. Then, with each new objection from Oblomov, he repeats this word in various interpretations, without finding more convincing arguments against Oblomov’s logic that all of Stoltsev’s “running around in starts” is the same “manufacture of peace”, has the same goal: “Everything looking for rest and peace."
Here Stolz still manages to seize the initiative with a reminder of the joint dreams of his youth, after which Oblomov’s confidence disappears, he begins to speak unconvincingly, with numerous pauses (the author uses ellipses), hesitations. He still weakly resists: “So when to live?.. Why suffer for the whole century?” Stolz answers dryly and meaninglessly: “For the work itself.” Here, too, the author is not on Stolz’s side, because work as an end in itself is truly meaningless. In fact, the heroes at this moment remain in their positions. And here Stolz again uses the only winning technique - he once again reminds Ilya of his childhood, dreams, hopes, ending these reminders with the key phrase: “Now or never!” The reception works flawlessly. Oblomov is moved and begins his sincere and pure confession about the absence high goal, about the fading of life, about the loss of pride. “Either I didn’t understand this life, or it’s no good, and I didn’t know anything better...” Oblomov’s sincerity stirred Andrei’s soul, he seemed to swear to a friend, “I won’t leave you...” At the end of the 4th chapter, it seems that victory in the fight remained with Stolz, but at the beginning of the 5th there is a comic decline and, in fact, the destruction of this “victory”.
Stolz's alternative "Now or never!" for Oblomov turns into Hamlet’s question “To be or not to be?”, but first Oblomov wants to write something (to begin to act), he took a pen, but there was no ink in the inkwell, and there was no paper in the table, and then, when it seemed , decided to answer Hamlet’s question in the affirmative, “he rose from his chair, but did not immediately hit his shoe with his foot, and sat down again.” The lack of ink and paper and the missing shoe return Oblomov to his former life.
There will still be the whole story with Olga ahead, internal struggle in Oblomov’s soul it is still far from finished, but in the history of the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz, and in the possible fate of Oblomov after this scene, the emphasis has already been placed. Even I. Goncharov himself, who believed in the possibility of combining in a Russian person Oblomov’s soulfulness with Stoltsev’s businesslike efficiency and practicality, seems to understand at this moment in his narrative that the heroes will remain with their own: neither from Oblomov, nor from Stolts, as the author originally wanted , such an ideal will not work. One will be hindered by laziness, contemplation and poetry, which are incompatible with the everyday life of the heroes today, the other by lack of wings and a refusal to think about the meaning of life. The author and the reader are painfully aware after this dispute that the true ideal, which would combine purity and efficiency, is unattainable. That is why, despite the fact that many more trials await the heroes, this dispute about the ideal can be considered the key episode of the novel. This is what will happen later, when each of the heroes finds their “peace”: Oblomov - first the cozy and nourishing, but devoid of poetry, house of Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, and then death, and Stolz - a quiet haven with Olga, who is tormented by the loss of the meaning of life, who did not recognize in time for his possible happiness with Oblomov.
In the episode of the dispute between friends, the main question is about the purpose and meaning of a person’s life, and it is this question that is decisive for the entire novel. Like true great artist, I. Goncharov poses this eternal question, but leaves the answer open. Therefore, it is worth admitting that no one won the dispute between friends in the considered episode of the great novel.
Roman I.A. Goncharov’s “Oblomov” is permeated with pathos social criticism. The collision of two heroes (Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts), two opposing lifestyles can be viewed in a broad social sense.
Oblomov in this regard symbolizes the inert feudal lordship that has flourished everywhere in the vastness of the Russian land. He spends most of his time on the couch. Any work does not attract him: he cannot even finish reading a book he has started for years. The author constantly emphasizes the gentleness both in the character of the hero and in everything that surrounds him.
The image of the sleeping Oblomov symbolizes the ruined mind, inertia and inertia of the Russian nobility. The hero harbors some abstract plans for reform, but with his immaturity, these plans are never destined to come true. Oblomov seems to be “quietly and gradually settling into the coffin of the rest of his existence, made with his own hands, like desert elders who, turning away from life, dig their own grave.”
Andrey Stolts (this is evidenced by German origin hero) is an adherent of the active capitalist mentality that came to us from Europe. An active, economic rationalist breaks into the sluggish life of Oblomovka in order to shake up the existing way of life and revive Ilya Ilyich to a different existence. It is no coincidence that Stolz reminds Oblomov of his youthful dreams of going on a trip.
Andrey introduces Ilya Ilyich to Olga, hoping that love can change a friend. At some point, the heroine was able to awaken sparks of living life in her admirer. However, Oblomov and Olga - different people. And the heroine soon realized this. She exclaims: “I loved the future Oblomov! You are meek and honest, Ilya; you are gentle... like a dove; you hide your head under your wing - and don’t want anything more; you’re ready to coo under the roof all your life... but I’m not like that: this is not enough for me, I need something else, but I don’t know what!”
In the end, Olga chooses Stolz. This indicates that the future belongs to such active and enterprising people. “He was all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse,” writes I.A. Goncharov. Stolz's ideal is material wealth, comfort and well-being, which he achieves through his own labor: the hero lives by reason, and his inert friend lives by feelings and dreams.
Oblomov sees wonderful dreams, but this makes him real life nothing changes. Looking at this, Stolz derives his own term denoting landowner idleness and inertia, leading to death - “Oblomovism.”
Why didn’t A. Stolz manage to change Oblomov’s lifestyle? The fact is that Ilya Ilyich is not just afraid of change: he also protected himself from the living and diverse world with a special philosophy of life in order to justify his inaction and laziness. Oblomov is soaring in the clouds of his own illusions, claiming that he has no empty desires and thoughts. He despises vanity and is proud that he can afford not to engage in trade, not to go to the office with a report or papers - to be above all the base problems of everyday life. Oblomov is satisfied with himself, so he does not strive to change. The hero refuses to grow up and understand that no miracle that suddenly descends on him will solve all the pressing problems either in the household or in his personal life.
However, gradually a belated insight still comes to Ilya Ilyich. He confesses to Stolz: “From the first minute, when I became conscious of myself, I felt that I was already fading away... Either I didn’t understand this life, or it’s no good, and I didn’t know anything better, I didn’t see anything, no one showed it to me.” ..." Although Oblomov has not changed, he at least belatedly admitted his mistakes. The trouble is that he did not see a life ideal in front of him, and due to the nature of his soul, he could not become like Stolz.
Other works on the topic:
Love, the strongest human feeling, has played a big role in life. Oblomov. The love of two women, one smart, sophisticated, gentle, demanding, the other economical, simple-minded, accepting the hero as he is.
Oblomov’s image consists, as it were, of parts. There is Oblomov, a moldy, almost disgusting, greasy, awkward piece of meat. There is Oblomov, in love with Olga Oblomov, who is deeply touching and sympathetic in his sad comedy.
Appearing in 1859 in Otechestvennye zapiski, Goncharov’s novel Oblomov immediately attracted the attention of the reading public. Everyone recognized Oblomov as outstanding artistic phenomenon, however, in understanding the main pathos of the novel there is no unity of opinion to this day.
Autumn evening. There is no one at home, and I am reading Goncharov’s novel. Still a strange hero - Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. He patiently endures all the blows of fate, resigns himself to the constant shortages in the village and Zakhar’s laziness, to the fact that he is constantly deceived, robbed, and his inherent kindness is abused. He does not strive to achieve wealth, fame, position in society.
The main task In his novel “Oblomov”, Goncharov considered the search for a truly human “norm” of existence, lost in modern world, and a hero who meets this “norm”. But the peculiarity of the embodiment of this author’s plan is that the “artistic ideal” of the individual turns out to be unattainable. It seems to fall into two parts, two main images - Oblomov and Stolz, which are depicted on the basis of the principle of antithesis.
V. G. Belinsky’s statement that education “determines a person’s fate” can be attributed to Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, the main characters of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov". It would seem that these people, belonging to the same class, environment, time, should have the same aspirations, worldviews, and lifestyles.
Andrei Stolts is Oblomov’s closest friend; they grew up together and carried their friendship through life. It remains a mystery how such dissimilar people, with such different views on life, could maintain deep affection.
Oblomov's personality is far from ordinary, although other characters treat him with slight disrespect. For some reason, they read him as almost inferior in comparison to them. This was precisely the task of Olga Ilyinskaya - to awaken Oblomov, to force him to show himself as an active person.
The image of Oblomov in Russian literature closes the series of “superfluous” people. An inactive contemplator, incapable of active action, at first glance really seems incapable of a great and bright feeling, but is this really so? There is no place for global and cardinal changes in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.
Author: Goncharov I.A. The scene takes place at the end of the work - the end of the fourth part. It sums up what happened in the novel. Oblomov lived long life: lived his childhood, lived his youth, lived his old age, never once deviating from his lifestyle, and this episode shows the results of his life, what his life led to, what such a life should have led to, who is to blame for what it such, and whether its end is fair.
The meaning of the Oblomov-Stolz opposition in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" Author: Goncharov I.A. I believe that the point of opposition in this novel is to most clearly, openly, and deeply characterize the main character.
The theme of love in I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” Author: I. A. Goncharov In the novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov, three love stories are shown: Oblomov and Olga, Oblomov and Agafya Matveevna, Olga and Stolz. They all have different attitudes towards love, they have different goals in life, different views on life itself, but they have something in common - the ability to love.
Mini-essay “Oblomov and his entourage” Author: Goncharov I.A. Oblomov is a backwardness that hinders historical progress. Oblomov is sincere, gentle, and has not lost his conscience; subjectively he is incapable of doing evil. Story line depicts the spiritual desolation of the hero, there is lordship and slavery in him - he is a slave to his sofa, laziness.
The image of Oblomov is greatest creation I. A. Goncharova. This type of hero, in general, is not new to Russian literature. We meet him both in the comedy "Lazy" by Fonvizin, and in Gogol's "Marriage". But its most complete and multifaceted embodiment was the image of Oblomov from novel of the same name Goncharova.
“Oblomov’s Dream” is a special chapter of the novel. “Oblomov’s Dream” tells the story of Ilya Ilyich’s childhood and his influence on Oblomov’s character. In "Oblomov's Dream" his home village Oblomovka, his family, the way of life according to which they lived on the Oblomov estate. Oblomovka is the name of two villages owned by the Oblomovs.
The reasons that prompted Oblomov to write a letter to Olga. How Oblomov appears to readers in his letter.
In the novel "Oblomov" Goncharov presented two types of life: life in motion and life in a state of rest, sleep.
Did Oblomov ever have a moment of clarity in his life? Yes, and not just once. Love brought him back to life. The love of two women - one: sophisticated, tender, graceful, and the other: economical, simple-minded, sincere. Who can understand Ilya Oblomov?
The image of Oblomov is the greatest artistic generalization, embodying typical character traits generated by Russian patriarchal landowner life.
“Oblomov’s Dream” is a magnificent episode from Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”. In my opinion, the dream is nothing more than an attempt by Goncharov himself to understand the essence of Oblomov and Oblomovism.
What are life ideals Stolz? (based on the novel “Oblomov” by I.A. Goncharov) Author: Goncharov I.A. In I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov,” Andrei Stolts is the antipode of Oblomov. Every feature of Stolz is a blatant protest against the qualities of Oblomov. The first one loves active and interesting life, the second often falls into apathy, he is like a snail that is afraid to get out of its shell.
Oblomov and Stolz (based on the novel “Oblomov” by I.A. Goncharov) Author: Goncharov I.A. Oblomov and Stolz In one thousand eight hundred and fifty-two, I.A. Goncharov wrote the novel “Oblomov”. main topic the novel is the fate of a generation searching for its place in society and history, but unable to find the right path.
Author: Goncharov I.A. Letter from Oblomov to Stolz Hello, dear Andrei Ivanovich! I will be very glad if you read my letter. I’ve been wanting to write to you for a long time, but I kept thinking that when you come now, I’ll tell you everything. But you still don’t go and don’t go... And the troubles grow and grow... The idea of the letter came to me two weeks ago: I told Zakhar: “Write a letter to Stolz: let him come as soon as possible!”, and he still refuses: “No,” he says “I don’t know how to write well, and anyway you will write better: I don’t know what you need to say in a letter.”
Problems of the novel by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov” Author: Goncharov I.A. “Oblomov” was published in “Otechestvennye zapiski” starting in January 1859, in parts, for four months and caused a stormy response from critics. In Dobrolyubov’s article “What is Oblomovism?” The problems of the novel were considered from a sociological perspective, Oblomov’s character was interpreted as the embodiment of all the class vices of the nobility, while the philosophical aspect of “Oblomov” was left without consideration.
Plot antitheses in the novel "Oblomov" Author: Goncharov I.A. 1. Oblomov - Stolz. 2. Oblomov - Olga Ilyinskaya Stolz - not positive hero novel, his activity sometimes resembles the activity of Sudbinsky from the despised Stolz of Oblomov’s St. Petersburg entourage: work, work, work again, like a machine, without rest, entertainment and hobbies.
Author: Goncharov I.A. Who is Stolz? Goncharov does not force the reader to puzzle over this question. In the first two chapters of the second part there is detailed story about the life of Stolz, about the conditions in which his active character was formed. “Stolz was only half German, on his father’s side; his mother was Russian; He professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian...”
An essay on the topic of whether Oblomov and Stolz, the main characters of Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov,” should be re-educated. The author comes to the conclusion that his lifestyle is a purely personal matter and re-educating Oblomov and Stolz is not only useless, but also inhumane.
Andrey Stolts as a “man of action”. (Based on the novel “Oblomov” by I.A. Goncharov In the late 50s of the 19th century, Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” was published.
Oblomov and Stolz are the main characters of the novel by I.A. Goncharova are people of the same class, society, time, they are friends. It would seem that, formed in the same environment, their characters and worldviews should be similar. In fact, these heroes are antipodes. Who is he, Stolz, who is not satisfied with Oblomov’s lifestyle and who is trying to change it?
Andrei's father, German by birth, was a manager on a rich estate, and his mother, an impoverished Russian noblewoman, once served as a governess in rich houses. Therefore, Stolz, having received a German upbringing, had great practical ingenuity and hard work, and inherited from his mother a love of music, poetry, and literature. All days in the family were spent at work. When Andrei grew up, his father began to take him to the field, to the market. The boy studied well, his father taught him sciences, German language and made me a tutor in his small boarding house, even paying a salary. Quite early, the father began sending his son to the city on errands, “and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, overlooked it, or made a mistake.” His father taught him to rely primarily on himself, explained that the main thing in life is money, rigor and accuracy.
For Stolz, work became not just a part of life, but a pleasure. By the age of thirty, he, an extremely purposeful and strong-willed man, retired, acquired a house and a fortune. Stolz is always busy with something: he works a lot, travels. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse.” Somewhat perfect hero. But “the dream, the mysterious, the mysterious had no place in his soul.” Stolz “didn’t feel sick at heart, never got lost in complex, difficult or new circumstances, but approached them as if he were former acquaintances, as if he was living a second time, passing through familiar places.” And one more thing - Stolz is calm all the time, he is happy with his life.
Any person usually manifests himself brightly in love. Stolz was barely disturbed by love. He acts rationally here too, “falling” Olga into love with himself. Family life Andrei and Olga, correct and boring, does not evoke any emotions when reading. The writer himself seemed to be bored with the life of this exemplary bourgeois family. And although both heroes diligently occupy themselves with different practical activities, traveling, reading and discussing books, playing music, their life, it must be admitted, acquires color only when it comes into contact with Oblomov’s life.
Why didn’t Stolz manage to change the lifestyle of his friend and antipode Oblomov? And who is he who resisted Stolz’s pressure? A Russian gentleman, who at the time of our acquaintance with him was about thirty-two or three years old, “of pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence of any definite idea, any concentration in his facial features.” Inertia, apathy, fear of any activity - this is the result of upbringing, when a boy is raised like an “exotic flower in a greenhouse”, is not allowed to take a step on his own, is pampered and pampered beyond measure. Studying makes him sad, and with his mother’s approval, he skips classes at every opportunity.
The favorite pastime of the matured Oblomov is lying on the sofa in empty dreams and sweet Dreams. Life for the weak-willed Ilya Ilyich was divided into two halves: one consisted of work and boredom - these were synonyms for him; the other - from peace and peaceful fun. The service was unpleasant to him, and he very quickly resigned. He can afford it: in addition to his servant Zakhar, he has at his disposal 350 souls of serfs who work for him. And if things go badly on the estate, it is only because of Oblomov’s reluctance and inability to manage the estate. He suffers from the consciousness that he has no strength and will, but he himself cannot, and does not really strive, to budge and asks his active childhood friend Stolz to help him: “Give me your will and mind and lead me.” wherever you want".
Having once pulled Oblomov out into the world, Stolz hears from a friend: “Boredom, boredom, boredom!.. Where is the man here? Where is his integrity? Where did he disappear, how did he exchange for all sorts of little things?” These words directly apply to Stolz. His ability to be everywhere is an almost inhuman ability. He “learned Europe as if it were his domain” and traveled Russia “the length and breadth of it.” His circle of acquaintances is varied: there are some barons, princes, bankers, gold miners. All enterprising people who consider “business” to be the goal of their life.
What should Oblomov do in this company? What is he for Stolz: a tribute to childhood friendship, or some kind of outlet, or just an object for listening to his moral teachings? And this, and another, and a third. A lazy but smart man, Oblomov does not at all want to become like Stolz.
Stolz introduces Oblomov to Olga Ilyinskaya, and when leaving abroad, “he bequeathed Oblomov to her, asked her to look after him, to prevent him from sitting at home.” This is how Olga enters the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Not a beauty, “but if she were turned into a statue, she would be a statue of grace and harmony.” She has the intelligence and determination to defend the right to her life position. And Oblomov, seeing in her the absence of artificiality, the beauty not frozen, but alive, perceived Olga as the embodiment of a dream.
What attracts Olga to Oblomov? She sees in him a lack of cynicism, a capacity for doubt and empathy. She appreciates his intelligence, simplicity, gullibility, the absence of those secular conventions that are alien to her. Olga wants to help this painfully incapable person. She dreams that she will “show him a goal, make him fall in love with everything that he has stopped loving...”. She likes to recognize herself as an “educator”: after all, she, a woman, leads a man! Love will become a duty for her. To love in order to re-educate, “for ideological reasons” - this has never happened in Russian literature. Olga's falling in love is a kind of experiment.
Olga Ilyinskaya is like that in her love, but what about Oblomov? The further the relationship between young people develops, the more sincere he becomes. The very way of his life changes: he happily goes to visit the Ilyinskys, listens spellbound to Olga’s singing, walks a lot and for a long time, he does not have dinner and has forgotten about his afternoon nap. He is ashamed of himself for not reading - he takes up books. Oblomov suddenly realizes the uselessness and purposelessness of his existence.
As with any lover, the image of his beloved is always with him. “And Oblomov, as soon as he wakes up in the morning, the first image in his imagination is the image of Olga, at full height, with a branch of lilac in her hands. He fell asleep thinking about her, went for a walk, read - she was here, here.” He now took care of his clothes. The carelessness left him the moment she sang for him for the first time. “He no longer lived the same life...” He concludes: “Love is a very difficult school of life.”
But young people are not destined to be happy, because Olga loves Oblomov not as he is, but as he wants to make him. The separation of heroes is painful. Why didn't their relationship work out? Because both expect the impossible from each other. So this approach of Stolz to Oblomov turned out to be ineffective.
It is known that Goncharov several times defined the genre of his novel as a fairy tale. If "Oblomov" - big fairy tale, then its core should be considered “Oblomov’s Dream” - a figurative and semantic key to understanding the character of the hero depicted by Goncharov, a story about the hero’s childhood in the fairy-tale-real Oblomovka.
In terms of its degree of closedness, Oblomovka can compete with any enchanted, bewitched kingdom. How many people come and visit it during Ilya Ilyich’s long sleep? We have almost nothing to remember, except perhaps a funny episode with a sleeping man, whom the children discover in a ditch and mistake for a werewolf. The appearance of this stranger shocked even the adult Oblomovites so much that they do not dare to wake him up to find out where he came from and why.
But if it is difficult to come or come to Oblomovka, then leaving its boundaries is an even more impossible action for its inhabitants. Where? Why? As one might expect, Oblomov’s ideas about the land are quite fabulous: “they heard that there are Moscow and St. Petersburg, that the French or Germans live beyond St. Petersburg, and then it began for them, as for the ancients, dark world, unknown countries inhabited by monsters, people with two heads, giants; there followed darkness - and, finally, everything ended with that fish that holds the earth on itself.”
But all this is somewhere far away. And Oblomovka slept and will continue to sleep peacefully. Goncharov describes how sweetly the Oblomovites know how to sleep: they sleep, doze, and dream in oblivion and unearthly bliss. Even the air is asleep, because it “hangs without moving,” even the sun is immersed in slumber, because it “stands motionless.” “It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death.” The magical kingdom of sleep, of course, is contraindicated in any kind of movement or action. Therefore, Oblomovka is a world of fundamental idleness. The only type of labor sanctified by tradition here is the preparation and consumption of food. It is no coincidence that the writer reproduces a picture of eating a huge pie, which lasts five days.
Such is this “sleepy kingdom,” where almost no one works or dies, where there are no shocks, where “thunderstorms are not terrible,” and “the stars twinkle in a friendly manner from the heavens,” where no one wants to be awakened to a different, even beautiful life .
To emphasize the impression of the fabulousness of the world he created, the writer introduces into “Oblomov’s Dream” the image of a nanny who winter evenings whispers to Ilyusha tales about “sleeping princesses”, petrified cities and people, about Emel the Fool and the hero Ilya Muromets. This Emelya is a kind of prototype of Oblomov in the novel. In a famous folk tale a good sorceress, appearing in the form of a pike, chooses her favorite, whom everyone offends, a quiet, harmless lazy person, and gifts him for no reason at all. And he eats, dresses up in a ready-made dress and marries some beauty.
In Oblomov’s life, fairy tales and reality seem to be mixed up. He will be fooled and deceived by all and sundry, and in the end fate will send him Agafya Matveevna as his wife - a new fairytale beauty, ready to do everything for him and for him.
The chapter “Oblomov’s Dream” essentially convinces us that the hero’s whole life was a dream, ending in an eternal sleep. “One morning Lgafya Matveevna brought him coffee, as usual, and found him resting as meekly on his deathbed as on his bed of sleep...”
So, just as reality cannot defeat a fairy tale, Stolz was unable to change Oblomov’s lifestyle. Moreover, what kind of Stoltz did he get from Goncharov? Still, it must be admitted that the author of the novel created Stolz as an unrealistic image of a noble friend and a successful businessman, whose character turned out to be not fully described, because to write him to the end would mean to expose him, which was not the writer’s intention. After all, the main theme of the novel is Oblomovism: a way of life characterized by apathy, passivity, isolation from reality, contemplation of life around oneself in the absence of work and practical activity.
That is why Goncharov’s work, contemporaries admitted, showing the typical character of Oblomovism for serfdom, was able to strike a blow at “ unnecessary people“-people are words, not deeds. Re-educating Oblomov and changing his lifestyle were not part of the writer’s plans.