In any literary work there is a system of minor characters. As a rule, their role is to emphasize and highlight certain features of the main character. In the artistic world of the novel “Oblomov,” the most important function is performed by the so-called duality. Ilya Ilyich’s double is his servant, and if the main character is supposed to be a bearer of certain traits of national character, then Zakhar embodies certain qualities of people of his class.
This character appears already in the first chapter, filled with artistic details that allow us to judge Oblomov’s life and everyday life. We can say that the main character’s servant is one of these living details.
He seems to barely participate in the action and has very few lines. Meanwhile, Goncharov describes his appearance in extremely detail: face, figure, movements, and most importantly, clothes. Probably, Zakhara’s costume is in some way a means of personification: Oblomov’s servant cannot move away from the centuries-old habits of a forced person. The patriarchal system of lordship and slavery left its mark on both the master and his subject.
Sometimes Zakhar reminds the reader of Pushkin’s Savelich, especially with his readiness to “die, if necessary,” for his master. But, besides slavish devotion, there is another feature in Zakhara: he, like Gogol’s Selifan, allows himself liberties in relation to the master (by the way, not only in thoughts - in actions too). This property is acquired, it can be considered the spirit of the times. Friendship between Oblomov and Zakhar certainly exists, although not the same as between Grinev and Savelich. A certain spiritual kinship is caused by the fact that Ilya Ilyich’s moral illness infected his devoted companion. The diagnosis was made by Goncharov: Oblomovism. Its symptoms are obvious.
Zakhar is perhaps even more lazy and inert than his master, but he, like Oblomov, perfectly understands how destructive the consequences of the terrible Russian disease are; that is why he makes attempts to somehow cure his beloved master: sometimes he shames Ilya Ilyich, sometimes he complains about him to Stoltz. Each time his efforts turn out to be in vain, because Zakhar’s willpower remains less and less every day, in this he is strikingly different from Savelich.
A bad trait of a character in a Potter's novel is a tendency to lie. “He’s sleeping... he’s cut himself,” he says to the neighbor’s servants about his master. Oblomov has various shortcomings, but this one is alien to him. Why did Zakhar need to slander Ilya Ilyich? The fact is that the former serf is adopting a new tradition that has taken root in his class: now it is fashionable to criticize masters, this is the cost of freedom, which individuals like Zakhar cannot use for good.
However, the reader sees not only vices - he also notices virtues, which Goncharov skillfully emphasizes in Zakhara. Often in the novel, Stolz talks about Oblomov’s “gold of the soul.” It is also present in the master's servant. Behind the rough, rustic outer shell hides a kind heart. This simpleton is not without some insight: he unmistakably recognizes a scoundrel in Tarantiev, and considers Stolz and Olga to be sincere friends of the owner. Intuitively, he realizes that they are the ones who can save his master.
Sometimes Zakhar seems to us surprisingly stupid and stubborn, in other cases he seems quite smart, cunning and even ironic. So, for example, a servant who boasts about his master’s “important” friends is ridiculous. But both the reader and the author forgive him this small weakness, because the character’s words contain bitter irony: he very accurately notices that important people do not visit Ilya Ilyich out of friendship, their goal is to eat and drink at someone else’s expense.
There is a close spiritual connection between Zakhar and Oblomov. In the servant, as if in a distorting mirror, both the merits and shortcomings of the master are reflected, and this intensifies Oblomov’s mental anguish. The “umbilical cord” with which they are connected does not break even after the death of the main character. Left alone, Zakhar truly suffers. He becomes a lonely and dejected tramp. The final scenes of the novel are intended to prove: in Russia there is a connection and kinship between a slave owner and a slave. Oblomov is helpless without his faithful servant - Zakhar is not able to realize himself in anything other than the destiny given to him.
The ring composition of the work contributes to the realization of the author's plan both in relation to the main character and in relation to the secondary character. Zakhara’s lifestyle on the Vyborg side is the same as in Oblomovka or Gorokhovaya. His existence is a vicious circle. To change anything about this, it is necessary to “uproot the forest,” as Dobrolyubov put it, that is, it is necessary to change Russian reality itself, which gave rise to certain human types.
Goncharov’s creative method is objective realism; the writer avoids categorical assessments and does not consider it necessary to draw moralistic conclusions - he simply shows the phenomenon and its consequences. The talented word artist is convinced that in this way one can correct the shortcomings of life and people. And if the traits of the Oblomovs and Zakharovs still remain in us, then this is only our fault.
The image of Zakhar was analyzed by Fyodor Korneychuk
Zakhar is the servant of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Goncharov dedicated a special essay to this type, entitled “Servants of the Old Century,” in which he recalls well-known representatives of this class, people of the old school, who had difficulty getting used to new living conditions. 3.’s literary pedigree comes from Pushkin’s Savelich (“The Captain’s Daughter”). Despite all the differences in the characters of the first, corrupted by life in St. Petersburg and the pathological laziness of his master, and the second, the eternal uncle, for whom the pet remains a small, unreasonable child almost for the rest of his life, they are brought together by their obsessive loyalty not only to their master, but to everything about him. family
3. - “an elderly man, in a gray frock coat, with a hole under the arm... in a gray vest, with copper buttons, with a skull as bare as a knee and with immensely wide and thick gray-blond sideburns, of which each would be three beards... The Oblomov house was once rich and famous in its own right, but then, God knows why, it grew poorer, smaller, and finally, imperceptibly lost among the older noble houses. Only the gray-haired servants of the house kept and passed on to each other the faithful memory of the past, cherishing it as if it were a shrine.”
Portrait 3., depicting a funny and absurd appearance, is complemented by a special voice: the hero does not speak, but grumbles like a dog, or wheezes. The voice given by God, according to Z., “he lost while hunting with dogs, when he was traveling with an old master and when it seemed like a strong wind blew into his throat.”
Complete indifference to litter, dust, and dirt distinguishes this servant from other servant characters in Russian literature. 3. on this score, I have drawn up my own philosophy, which does not allow me to fight either dirt or cockroaches and bedbugs, since they were invented by the Lord himself. When Oblomov gives his servant the example of the tuner’s family living opposite, Z. gives the following arguments in response, in which extraordinary observation is visible: “Where will the Germans take the rubbish? Look how they live! The whole family has been gnawing on the bone for a week. The coat passes from the father's shoulders to the son, and from the son again to the father. My wife and daughters are wearing short dresses: everyone tucks their legs under them like geese... Where can they get dirty laundry? They don’t have it like we do, so that in their closets there’s a bunch of old, worn-out clothes lying around over the years, or a whole corner of bread crusts accumulated over the winter... They don’t even have a crust lying around in vain: they’ll make some crackers and drink it with beer.”
Despite external looseness, 3., however, is quite collected. The eternal habit of servants of the old century does not allow him to squander the master's property - when Oblomov's fellow countryman, the swindler Tarantyev, asks Ilya Ilyich to give him a tailcoat for a while, 3. immediately refuses: until the shirt and vest are returned, Tarantyev will not receive anything else. And Oblomov is lost in front of his firmness.
Z.’s loyalty to his master and all the long-forgotten foundations of his native Oblomovka is embodied most clearly in the episode when Oblomov instructs his servant in the usual and most effective way - resorting to “pathetic words” and calling Z. “a poisonous man.” In a moment of irritation, Z. allowed himself to compare Oblomov with others who easily move from apartment to apartment and go abroad. This inspires Ilya Ilyich to make a formidable and proud rebuke about the impossibility of comparing him, Oblomov, with anyone else. And this penetrates 3. more than curses: he himself feels that he has crossed some forbidden boundary, likening his master to other people.
3. is not without its shortcomings. Goncharov defines his character as “a knight with fear and reproach” who “belonged to two eras, and both left their mark on him. From one he inherited boundless devotion to the Oblomov family, and from the other, later, sophistication and depravity of morals.” 3. loves to drink with friends, gossip in the courtyard with other servants, sometimes embellishing his master, sometimes presenting him as Oblomov never was. 3. On occasion, he can pocket some money - not large, copper ones, but he certainly keeps the change from his purchases. Everything that 3. touches breaks, breaks - by the beginning of the story in Oblomov’s house there are already very few intact things, be it a chair or a cup. 3. Serves food to the master, as a rule, dropping either the bun or the fork...
And another feature characteristic of the mixture of two eras, which Goncharov pointed out: “Zakhar would have died instead of the master, considering this his inevitable and natural duty, and not even considering it anything, but would simply rush to his death, just like a dog, who, when meeting a beast in the forest, rushes at him, without reasoning why she should rush, and not her master. But if it were necessary, for example, to sit all night next to the master’s bed, without closing his eyes, and the master’s health or even the life depended on it, 3. would certainly fall asleep.”
Over the years, the indissoluble connection between Ilya Ilyich and Z. emerges more and more clearly - as the last two representatives of Oblomovka, which is only a wonderful dream, they each in their own way sacredly keep in their souls those “legends of deep antiquity” that shaped their lives, characters and relationships. Even when Z. unexpectedly marries the cook Anisya in the middle of the novel, who is much more dexterous, skillful and clean, he tries, if possible, to prevent her from getting to Ilya Ilyich, doing the usual work himself, without which he cannot imagine life.
His life really ends with the death of Ilya Ilyich, turning into an unnecessary and bitter vegetation. After Oblomov’s death, Z.’s wife Anisya soon died, and housewife Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, who became the wife of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, could not keep Z. in the house with her stern “brother.” The only way Pshenitsyna Z. can help is to give him some warm clothes for the winter and occasionally feed him. In the final episode, Oblomov's friend Andrei Stolts meets Z., a beggar, almost blind, an old man begging for alms, near the church on the Vyborg side. But the offer to go to the village, where Stolz will take care of him, does not tempt Z.: he does not want to leave Ilya Ilyich’s grave unattended, near which, when he comes to remember his master, he only finds peace.
The novel “Oblomov” occupies a central place in Goncharov’s work. This work, in the words of M. Gorky, is one of “the best novels in our literature.” The novel is based on the life and unfulfilled plans of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. In essence, the composition of the novel is laconic: Oblomov lies; Oblomov remembers his childhood; the hero's love for Olga; Vyborg side.
The image of the hero has long become a household word, and the word “Oblomovism” means laziness, fantastic, global laziness and unwillingness to do anything. The image of Ilya Oblomov in the novel is described clearly and expressively, with an analysis of the reasons that led to the lifestyle characteristic of Ilya Ilyich. And the image of each of the characters is intended, in addition to its independent meaning, to further reveal the image of the main character.
Zakhar, Oblomov’s servant, is always next to him. From the first pages of the novel we see Ilya Ilyich lounging on the sofa and Zakhar on the stove. The role of the image of Zakhar in revealing the image of Ilya. Oblomov is difficult to overestimate. Zakhar is a product of the same life as Oblomov. To some extent, Zakhara can be called a copy of Ilya Ilyich, only from a different social class. Oblomov is lying on the sofa - Zakhar, in essence, is also a rather indifferent person. Oblomov justifies his inaction with poor health, the need to think, etc. Zakhar says that he doesn’t clean up because the master won’t let him do it.
At the beginning of the novel, Oblomov’s life is shown - the hero lies on the sofa and receives guests. Lying down is his way of life, Oblomov is inseparable from his robe and soft comfortable slippers. Oblomov doesn’t care at all about the condition of his home. He is not bothered by dust deposits. But Zakhar also pays attention to the interior in very rare cases: if he is told about it.
Zakhar and Oblomov are very similar in many ways. Both of them are from Oblomovka, both grew up in the same environment, received the same upbringing, with some adjustments for their social circle. That is, both Oblomov and Zakhar grew up in an atmosphere of bliss, slowness and inaction. A life consisting of food and sleep left its mark on Ilya Oblomov. But Zakhar also did not escape a similar fate. His concept of normal life boils down to a quiet and peaceful rural existence, when there is no need to rush anywhere, clean his master’s clothes, and especially often clean the apartment.
Everything is done for a long time and in detail, but nothing, in essence, is completed to the end. Zakhar in his own way shades and complements the image of Oblomov. Zakhar is the same Oblomov, only from a different social class. By including such a “double” of Oblomov in the novel, Goncharov achieved significant scale and generalization of the narrative. If Zakhar had not been, for example, Ilya Ilyich’s servant would have been an efficient fellow fulfilling his duties; in the person of Oblomov, the reader could first of all see a lazy lordship. But global laziness - Oblomovism - will not escape anyone who is unable to resist it.
Oblomovism is not only Oblomov, but also Zakhar with his slavish devotion to the master, and at the same time his reluctance to change the established way of life, to improve himself and the world around him.
Oblomov tends to dream and make obviously unrealistic plans. Unrealistic because Ilya Ilyich did not learn to act. It’s too hard for him; he has absolutely no desire to move or get up from the sofa. He comes up with ridiculous excuses for himself - ill health and so on, when at the beginning of the novel they try to take him to visit. Zakhar is the same dreamer; he also likes to do nothing. In my opinion, here the mutual dependence of the heroes on each other arises. Zakhar is devoted to the master in soul and body, he is accustomed to a measured existence and a traditional way of life. Oblomov, in essence, does not know how to do anything and is not able to accomplish anything on his own. As a result, Ilya Ilyich depends on his servant as much, if not more, than Zakhar on his master. Reading the pages of the novel, we understand that Zakhar is an even more independent, less dependent person. Ilya Oblomov cannot force Zakhar to do what he needs. Unless, of course, the servant himself wishes to fulfill the master’s will. As Dobrolyubov wrote, “what Zakhar doesn’t want, Ilya Ilyich cannot force him to do, and what Zakhar wants, he will do against the master’s will, and the master will submit.” Oblomov's dependence on Zakhar gives the latter a wonderful opportunity to sleep peacefully on his bed. Zakhar’s dependence on Oblomov allows Ilya Ilyich to rely on the servant’s actions, while he himself can calmly immerse himself in dreams.
So, let's summarize. The role of Zakhar’s image in revealing Oblomov’s character is extremely great. Zakhar is Ilya Ilyich's double. In essence, these two heroes cannot even be completely separated or differentiated. Oblomov and Zakhar are two sides of the same coin. Two heroes, brought up in almost identical conditions, they are equally incapable of living a full, real life.
In the novel “Oblomov” I.A. Goncharov presented to the readers completely new literary images, a new concept of the novel. As you know, everything in life is interconnected, this also applies to the two characters in the novel: Zakhar and Oblomov.
Zakhar is connected with Oblomov by inextricable ties; his life is unthinkable without the kind master. This image is quite significant in the novel. Zakhar is the servant of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, extremely conservative, wears the same suit that he wore in the village - a gray frock coat. “The Oblomov house was once rich and famous in its own right, but then, God knows why, it grew poorer, smaller, and finally, imperceptibly lost among the older noble houses. Only the gray-haired servants of the house kept and passed on to each other the faithful memory of the past, cherishing it as if it were a shrine.” Zakhar was “an elderly man, in a gray frock coat, with a hole under the arm... in a gray vest, with copper buttons... and thick, gray-blond sideburns, each of which would have been three beards long.” The portrait of Zakhar, depicting a funny and absurd appearance, is complemented by a special voice: the hero does not speak, but grumbles like a dog or wheezes. The voice given by God, according to Zakhar, “he lost while hunting with dogs, when he was traveling with an old master and when it seemed like a strong wind blew into his throat.” Goncharov dedicated a special essay to this type, entitled “Servants of the Old Century,” in which he recalls well-known representatives of this class, people of the old school, who had difficulty getting used to new living conditions. Zakhara’s literary pedigree comes from Pushkin’s Savelich (“The Captain’s Daughter”). Despite all the differences in the characters of the first, corrupted by life in St. Petersburg and the pathological laziness of his master, and the second, the eternal uncle, for whom the pet remains a small, unreasonable child almost for the rest of his life, they are brought together by their obsessive loyalty not only to their master, but to everything about him. family Zakhar’s loyalty to his master and all the long-forgotten foundations of his native Oblomovka is embodied most clearly in the episode when Oblomov instructs his servant in the usual and most effective way - resorting to “pathetic words” and calling Zakhar a “poisonous person.” In a moment of irritation, Zakhar allowed himself to compare Oblomov with others who easily move from apartment to apartment and go abroad. This inspires Ilya Ilyich to make a formidable and proud rebuke about the impossibility of comparing him, Oblomov, with anyone else. And this bothers Zakhara more than swearing: he himself feels that he has crossed some forbidden boundary, likening his master to other people. Zakhar is a parody of his master. He has the same habits as his owner, only taken to the point of absurdity, shown in a funny, comic light. From the very first pages of the novel, Zakhar cannot help but evoke smiles with his appearance, his laziness and untidiness. In some ways he even resembles Gogol’s characters: Osipa, Khlestakov’s servant, Selifan and Petrushka from Dead Souls. But Zakhar is only an ugly reflection of the lifestyle of the master Ilya Ilyich. Oblomov reproaches Zakhar for sloppiness and laziness, for not removing dust and dirt. Zakhar objects that “why remove it if it fills up again.” Complete indifference to dust, litter, and dirt distinguishes this servant from other servants - characters in Russian literature. Zakhar has drawn up his own philosophy on this matter, which does not allow him to fight either dirt or cockroaches and bedbugs, since they were invented by the Lord himself. When Oblomov gives his servant the example of the tuner’s family living opposite, Zakhar responds with the following arguments, in which his extraordinary powers of observation are visible: “Where will the Germans take the rubbish? Look how they live! The whole family has been gnawing on the bone for a week. The coat passes from the father's shoulders to the son, and from the son again to the father. My wife and daughters are wearing short dresses: everyone tucks their legs under them like geese... Where can they get dirty laundry? They don’t have this, like we do, so that in the closets there is a pile of old, worn-out clothes over the years, or a whole load of crusts of bread accumulated over the winter... They don’t even have a crust lying around in vain: they’ll make crackers and drink with beer!” Despite his outward looseness, Zakhar, however, is quite collected. The eternal habit of servants of the old century does not allow him to squander the master's property - when Oblomov's fellow countryman, the swindler Tarantyev, asks Ilya Ilyich to give him a tailcoat for a while, Zakhar immediately refuses: until the shirt and vest are returned, Tarantyev will not receive anything else. And Oblomov is lost in front of his firmness.
Zakhar is not without his shortcomings. Goncharov sees him as “a knight with fear and reproach” who “belonged to two eras, and both put their stamp on him. From one he inherited boundless devotion to the Oblomov family, and from the other, later, sophistication and corruption of morals.” And another feature characteristic of the mixture of two eras, which Goncharov pointed out: “Zakhar would have died instead of the master, considering this his inevitable and natural duty, and not even considering it anything, but would simply rush to his death, just like a dog, who, when meeting a beast in the forest, rushes at him, without reasoning why she should rush, and not her master. But if it were necessary, for example, to sit all night next to the master’s bed, without closing his eyes, and the master’s health or even his life depended on this, Zakhar would certainly fall asleep.” Over the years, the indissoluble connection between Ilya Ilyich and Zakhar, the last representatives of Oblomovka, which is just a wonderful dream, emerges more and more clearly. Each of them, in their own way, sacredly preserves in their souls those “legends of deep antiquity” that shaped their lives, characters and relationships. They had known each other for a long time and lived together for a long time. Zakhar nursed little Oblomov in his arms, and Oblomov remembers him as “a young, agile, gluttonous and crafty guy.” “Just as Ilya Ilyich could not get up, nor go to bed, nor be combed and put on shoes, nor have dinner without Zakhar’s help, so Zakhar could not imagine another master, besides Ilya Ilyich, another existence, how to dress him, feed him, be rude to him, to dissemble, lie and at the same time inwardly reverence him.” Even when Zakhar marries Anisya, Oblomov’s cook, in the middle of the novel, who is much more dexterous, skillful and clean, he tries, if possible, to prevent her from seeing Ilya Ilyich, doing the usual work himself, without which he cannot imagine life.
After Oblomov’s death, the connection between Zakhar and Obomov was broken, and his life turned into an unnecessary and bitter vegetation. Zakhar's end is not just tragic, it is terrible. As Nekrasov aptly said in the poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”:
The great chain broke...
One way for the master,
To others - man!..
Zakhar, Oblomov's servant, is necessary with him as a figure that complements the picture. He was assigned as a nanny to a young master after the latter turned fourteen years old, and since then they have lived together. They got used to each other, got used to it. Zakhara combined some positive traits of the servants of old times with negative traits. He is peculiarly devoted to his master, like all the old-time servants, but at the same time he constantly lies to him; In contrast to the old servants, who tried their best to preserve the master's property, he does not miss an opportunity not to use the master's money.
He is dirty, loves to quarrel with the master and scold him not only in private, but also in front of strangers - he constantly complains about his hard life with Oblomov, about the latter’s bad temper, about his stinginess, stinginess, etc. He does all this rather out of spite. habit rather than out of malice towards the master. One must think that he even loves Oblomov in his own way - his tears when remembering the latter speak eloquently about this.
N. Dyunkin, A. Novikov
Sources:
- We are writing essays based on the novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov. - M.: Gramotey, 2005.
Updated: 2012-02-10
Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefits to the project and other readers.Thank you for your attention.
.