20–50s of the 19th century.
Traits of an extra person
The main features of the “superfluous person” include alienation from the official life of Nicholas Russia, withdrawal from their native social environment (almost always noble), awareness of their significant abilities, intellectual and moral superiority, in comparison with other representatives of their class.
Also, the “Brief Literary Encyclopedia” in its article about the “superfluous person” notes such qualities as “mental fatigue, deep skepticism, discord between word and deed, and, as a rule, social passivity.”
Unable to find fulfillment of his talents in high circles, the hero spends his life in idle hobbies or tries to overcome boredom with duels, love affairs, gambling, adventurous adventures, participation in hostilities, and so on.
Representatives in literature
The term “extra person” itself became widespread after the release of “The Diary of an Extra Person” by I.S. Turgenev in 1850, but the formation of this type has been happening since the beginning of the 19th century.
The first and most prominent representatives of “superfluous people” are considered to be Eugene Onegin from the novel in verse by A.S. Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin” (1823–1831) and Grigory Pechorin from the novel “A Hero of Our Time” by M.Yu. Lermontov (1839–1840). They were replaced by Beltov (“Who is to blame?” by A.I. Herzen, 1841–1846), then Agarin (“Sasha” by N.A. Nekrasov, 1856) and a whole string of Turgenev’s heroes: Chulkaturin (“Diary of an Extra Man,” 1850), Rudin (“Rudin”, 1856), Lavretsky (“ Noble Nest", 1859) and others. It is also customary to classify I.I. as a “superfluous person” type. Oblomov (“Oblomov” by I.A. Goncharov, 1859), but this point of view does not find unanimity in literary works, and therefore is still controversial. Goncharov Ivan Alexandrovich
"The extra person" in the literary process
It is no coincidence that the theme of the “superfluous man” appeared and became widespread in Russian literature. The “superfluous man” was not a “fiction” of the authors, it was a type that really existed and acted in society at the beginning of the 19th century, the “superfluous man” was a “hero of his time.” A.S. Pushkin noted: “...Indifference to life and its pleasures,... premature old age of the soul... became the distinctive features of the youth of the 19th century.” A.I. also spoke about the modern generation. Herzen: “...We are all, to a greater or lesser extent, Onegin, but we do not prefer to be officials or landowners.”
As noted by A. Lavretsky in the “Literary Encyclopedia”, the appearance of “superfluous people” was associated with the discrepancy between the Western European education they received and the realities of life in Russia, as well as the oppression of the Nikolaev reaction after the defeat of the Decembrists. The oppression of despotism, serfdom, underdevelopment public life brought the theme of the “superfluous man” to a more prominent place in comparison with Western European literature. Its significance also increased because it reflected the awakening of the personal principle, moral self-awareness and independence of the individual. Hence the increased dramatism of the theme of the “superfluous man” in Russian literature, the increasing intensity of the hero’s moral and ideological quest.
The historical and literary role of the theme of the “superfluous man” was also great. Having emerged as a rethinking of the romantic hero, the type of “superfluous person” developed under the sign of realistic typification, identifying the “difference” (Pushkin) between the hero and his creator. Significant in this topic was also the rejection of educational, moralizing attitudes in the name of the most complete and impartial analysis, reflection of the dialectics of life (this explained the rejection by many romantics of the images of the “superfluous man”, in particular the Decembrists’ rejection of Eugene Onegin). Finally, it was important in the theme of the “superfluous person” and the affirmation of the value of the individual person, personality, interest in the “history of the human soul” (Lermontov; from the preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”), which created the basis for a fruitful psychological analysis and prepared the future achievements of Russian realism .
Extra person - literary type, characteristic of the works of Russian writers of the 1840s and 1850s. Usually this is a person of significant abilities who cannot realize his talents in the official field of Nikolaev Russia.
Belonging to the upper classes of society, the superfluous person is alienated from the noble class, despises bureaucracy, but, having no prospect of other self-realization, mostly spends his time in idle entertainment. This lifestyle fails to relieve his boredom, leading to dueling, gambling, and other self-destructive behavior. Typical traits of a superfluous person include “mental fatigue, deep skepticism, discord between word and deed, and, as a rule, social passivity.”
The name “superfluous man” was assigned to the type of disappointed Russian nobleman after the publication of Turgenev’s story “The Diary of an Extra Man” in 1850. The earliest and classic examples are Eugene Onegin A. S. Pushkin, Chatsky from “Woe from Wit”, Pechorin M. Lermontov - go back to the Byronic hero of the era of romanticism, to Rene Chateaubriand and Adolphe Constant. Further evolution of the type is represented by Herzen's Beltov (“Who is to blame?”) and heroes early works Turgenev (Rudin, Lavretsky, Chulkaturin).
Extra people often bring trouble not only to themselves, but also female characters who have the misfortune of loving them. The negative side of extra people, associated with their displacement outside the socio-functional structure of society, comes to the fore in the works of literary officials A.F. Pisemsky and I.A. Goncharov. The latter contrasts the idlers “hovering in the skies” with practical businessmen: Aduev Jr. with Aduev Sr., and Oblomov with Stolz.
Who is the “extra person”? This is a well-educated, intelligent, talented and extremely gifted hero (man), who, for various reasons (both external and internal), was unable to realize himself and his capabilities. The “superfluous person” is looking for the meaning of life, a goal, but does not find it. Therefore, he wastes himself on the little things in life, on entertainment, on passions, but does not feel satisfaction from this. Often the life of an “extra person” ends tragically: he dies or dies in the prime of his life.
Examples of “extra people”:
The ancestor of the type of “extra people” in Russian literature is considered Evgeny Onegin from novel of the same name A.S. Pushkin. In terms of his potential, Onegin is one of the best people of his time. He has a sharp and insightful mind, broad erudition (he was interested in philosophy, astronomy, medicine, history, etc.) Onegin argues with Lensky about religion, science, morality. This hero even strives to do something real. For example, he tried to make the lot of his peasants easier (“He replaced the ancient corvée with an easy rent”). But all this was wasted for a long time. Onegin was just wasting his life, but he very soon got bored with it. The bad influence of secular Petersburg, where the hero was born and raised, did not allow Onegin to open up. He did nothing useful not only for society, but also for himself. The hero was unhappy: he did not know how to love and, by and large, nothing could interest him. But throughout the novel Onegin changes. It seems to me that this is the only case when the author leaves hope to the “extra person”. Like everything in Pushkin, open ending the novel is optimistic. The writer leaves his hero hope for revival.
The next representative of the “extra people” type is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time". This hero reflected a characteristic feature of the life of society in the 30s of the 19th century - the development of social and personal self-awareness. Therefore, the hero, the first in Russian literature, himself tries to understand the reasons for his misfortune, his difference from others. Of course, Pechorin has enormous personal powers. He is gifted and even talented in many ways. But he also finds no use for his powers. Like Onegin, Pechorin in his youth indulged in all sorts of bad things: social revelry, passions, novels. But as a non-empty person, the hero very soon got bored with all this. Pechorin understands that secular society destroys, dries up, and kills the soul and heart in a person.
What is the reason for this hero’s restlessness in life? He does not see the meaning of his life, he has no goal. Pechorin does not know how to love, because he is afraid of real feelings, afraid of responsibility. What remains for the hero? Only cynicism, criticism and boredom. As a result, Pechorin dies. Lermontov shows us that in a world of disharmony there is no place for a person who with all his soul, albeit unconsciously, strives for harmony.
Next in the line of “extra people” are the heroes of I.S. Turgenev. First of all, this Rudin- the main character of the novel of the same name. His worldview was formed under the influence of philosophical circles of the 30s of the 19th century. Rudin sees the meaning of his life in serving high ideals. This hero is a magnificent speaker, he is able to lead and ignite the hearts of people. But the author constantly tests Rudin “for strength”, for viability. The hero cannot stand these tests. It turns out that Rudin is only able to talk; he cannot put his thoughts and ideals into practice. The hero doesn't know real life, cannot assess the circumstances and his own strengths. Therefore, he also finds himself “out of work.”
Evgeny Vasilievich Bazarov stands out from this orderly row of heroes. He is not a nobleman, but a commoner. He had, unlike all previous heroes, to fight for his life, for his education. Bazarov knows reality very well, the everyday side of life. He has his own “idea” and implements it as best he can. In addition, of course, Bazarov is a very powerful person intellectually; he has great potential. But the point is that the very idea that the hero serves is erroneous and destructive. Turgenev shows that it is impossible to destroy everything without building something in its place. In addition, this hero, like all other “superfluous people,” does not live the life of the heart. He devotes all his potential to mental activity.
But man is an emotional being, a being with a soul. If a person knows how to love, then there is a high probability that he will be happy. Not a single hero from the gallery of “extra people” is happy in love. This says a lot. They are all afraid to love, afraid or cannot come to terms with the surrounding reality. All this is very sad because it makes these people unhappy. The enormous spiritual strength of these heroes and their intellectual potential are wasted. The unviability of “superfluous people” is evidenced by the fact that they often die untimely (Pechorin, Bazarov) or vegetate, wasting themselves (Beltov, Rudin). Only Pushkin gives his hero hope for revival. And this gives us optimism. This means there is a way out, there is a path to salvation. I think that it is always within the individual, you just need to find the strength within yourself.
The image of the “little man” in Russian literature of the 19th century
"Small man"- a type of literary hero that arose in Russian literature with the advent of realism, that is, in the 20-30s of the 19th century.
The theme of the “little man” is one of the cross-cutting themes of Russian literature, to which writers of the 19th century constantly turned. A.S. Pushkin was the first to touch upon it in the story “ Stationmaster" This theme was continued by N.V. Gogol, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.P. Chekhov and many others.
This person is small precisely in social terms, since he occupies one of the lower steps of the hierarchical ladder. His place in society is small or completely unnoticeable. A person is considered “small” also because the world of his spiritual life and aspirations is also extremely narrow, impoverished, filled with all kinds of prohibitions. For him there are no historical and philosophical problems. He remains in a narrow and closed circle of his life interests.
The best humanistic traditions are associated with the theme of the “little man” in Russian literature. Writers invite people to think about the fact that every person has the right to happiness, to their own view of life.
Examples of “little people”:
1) Yes, Gogol in the story “The Overcoat” characterizes the main character as a poor, ordinary, insignificant and unnoticed person. In life, he was assigned an insignificant role as a copyist of departmental documents. Brought up in the field of subordination and execution of orders from superiors, Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin I’m not used to thinking about the meaning of my work. That is why, when he is offered a task that requires the manifestation of elementary intelligence, he begins to worry, worry and ultimately comes to the conclusion: “No, it’s better to let me rewrite something.”
Bashmachkin's spiritual life is in tune with his inner aspirations. Accumulating money to buy a new overcoat becomes the goal and meaning of life for him. The theft of a long-awaited new thing, which was acquired through hardship and suffering, becomes a disaster for him.
And yet Akaki Akakievich does not look like an empty, uninteresting person in the reader’s mind. We imagine that there were a great many such small, humiliated people. Gogol called on society to look at them with understanding and pity.
This is indirectly demonstrated by the name of the main character: diminutive suffix -chk-(Bashmachkin) gives it the appropriate shade. “Mother, save your poor son!” - the author will write.
Calling for justice the author raises the question of the need to punish the inhumanity of society. As compensation for the humiliations and insults suffered during his life, Akaki Akakievich, who rose from the grave in the epilogue, appears and takes away their overcoats and fur coats. He calms down only when he takes away the outer clothing from the “significant person” who played a tragic role in the life of the “little man.”
2) In the story Chekhov's "Death of an Official" we see the slave soul of an official whose understanding of the world is completely distorted. There is no need to talk about human dignity here. The author gives his hero a wonderful surname: Chervyakov. Describing the small, insignificant events of his life, Chekhov seems to look at the world through the eyes of a worm, and these events become huge.
So, Chervyakov was at the performance and “felt at the height of bliss. But suddenly... he sneezed.” Looking around like a “polite man,” the hero discovered with horror that he had sprayed a civilian general. Chervyakov begins to apologize, but this seemed not enough to him, and the hero asks for forgiveness again and again, day after day...
There are a lot of such little officials who know only their own little world, and it is not surprising that their experiences consist of such small situations. The author conveys the entire essence of the official’s soul, as if examining it under a microscope. Unable to bear the scream in response to the apology, Chervyakov goes home and dies. This terrible catastrophe of his life is the catastrophe of his limitations.
3) In addition to these writers, Dostoevsky also addressed the theme of the “little man” in his work. The main characters of the novel “Poor People” - Makar Devushkin- a semi-impoverished official, oppressed by grief, poverty and social lack of rights, and Varenka– a girl who became a victim of social disadvantage. Like Gogol in The Overcoat, Dostoevsky turned to the theme of the powerless, immensely humiliated “little man” living his inner life in conditions that violate human dignity. The author sympathizes with his poor heroes, shows the beauty of their soul.
4) Theme "poor people"
develops by the writer and in the novel "Crime and Punishment". One after another, the writer reveals to us pictures of terrible poverty that degrades human dignity. The setting of the work is St. Petersburg, and the poorest district of the city. Dostoevsky creates a canvas of immeasurable human torment, suffering and grief, keenly peers into the soul of the “little man”, discovers in him deposits of enormous spiritual wealth.
Family life unfolds before us Marmeladovs. These are people crushed by reality. The official Marmeladov, who has “nowhere else to go,” drinks himself to death out of grief and loses his human appearance. Exhausted by poverty, his wife Ekaterina Ivanovna dies of consumption. Sonya is released onto the streets to sell her body in order to save her family from starvation.
The fate of the Raskolnikov family is also difficult. His sister Dunya, wanting to help her brother, is ready to sacrifice herself and marry the rich Luzhin, whom she feels disgusted with. Raskolnikov himself is conceiving a crime, the roots of which, in part, lie in the sphere social relations in society. The images of “little people” created by Dostoevsky are imbued with the spirit of protest against social injustice, against the humiliation of man and faith in his high calling. The souls of the “poor” can be beautiful, full of spiritual generosity and beauty, but broken by the most difficult living conditions.
6. Russian world in prose of the 19th century.
By lectures:
Image of reality in Russian XIX literature century.
1. Landscape. Functions and types.
2. Interior: problem of detailing.
3. Depiction of time in a literary text.
4. The road motif as a form of artistic development of the national picture of the world.
Scenery - not necessarily an image of nature; in literature it can involve a description of any open space. This definition corresponds to the semantics of the term. From French - country, locality. In French art theory, landscape description includes both the image of wild nature and the image of objects created by man.
The well-known typology of landscapes is based on the specific functioning of this text component.
Firstly, the landscapes that form the background of the story stand out. These landscapes usually indicate the place and time against which the events depicted take place.
Second type of landscape- landscape creating a lyrical background. Most often, when creating such a landscape, the artist pays attention to meteorological conditions, because this landscape should first of all influence the emotional state of the reader.
Third type- a landscape that creates/becomes the psychological background of existence and becomes one of the means of revealing the psychology of the character.
Fourth type- a landscape that becomes a symbolic background, a means of symbolically reflecting the reality depicted in an artistic text.
Landscape can be used as a means of depicting a special artistic time or as a form of the author’s presence.
This typology is not the only one. The landscape can be expositional, dual, etc. Modern critics isolate Goncharov’s landscapes; it is believed that Goncharov used the landscape for perfect performance about the world. For a person who writes, the evolution of the landscape skills of Russian writers is fundamentally important. There are two main periods:
· Dopushkinsky, during this period landscapes were characterized by the completeness and concreteness of the surrounding nature;
· post-Pushkin period, the idea of an ideal landscape changed. It assumes a parsimony of details, economy of image and precision in the selection of parts. Accuracy, according to Pushkin, involves identifying the most significant feature perceived in a certain way of feelings. This Pushkin idea will later be used by Bunin.
Second level. Interior - image of the interior. The main unit of an interior image is a detail (detail), attention to which was first demonstrated by Pushkin. Literary test The 19th century did not demonstrate a clear boundary between interior and landscape.
Time in a literary text in the 19th century becomes discrete and intermittent. The characters easily retreat into memories and their fantasies rush into the future. A selectivity of attitude towards time appears, which is explained by dynamics. Time in a literary text in the 19th century is conventional. Time in a lyrical work is as conventional as possible, with the predominance of present tense grammar; lyricism is especially characterized by the interaction of different time layers. Artistic time not necessarily concrete, it is abstract. In the 19th century, the depiction of historical color became a special means of concretizing artistic time.
One of the most effective means of depicting reality in the 19th century was the road motif, which became part of the plot formula, a narrative unit. Initially, this motif dominated the travel genre. In the 11th-18th centuries, in the travel genre, the road motif was used primarily to expand ideas about the surrounding space (cognitive function). In sentimentalist prose, the cognitive function of this motive is complicated by evaluativeness. Gogol uses travel to explore the surrounding space. The update of the functions of the road motif is associated with the name of Nikolai Alekseevich Nekrasov. "Silence" 1858
With our tickets:
The 19th century is called the “Golden Age” of Russian poetry and the century of Russian literature on a global scale. We should not forget that the literary leap that took place in the 19th century was prepared by the entire course of the literary process of the 17th and 18th centuries. The 19th century is the time of formation of the Russian literary language, which took shape largely thanks to A.S. Pushkin.
But the 19th century began with the heyday of sentimentalism and the emergence of romanticism. These literary trends found expression primarily in poetry. The poetic works of poets E.A. come to the fore. Baratynsky, K.N. Batyushkova, V.A. Zhukovsky, A.A. Feta, D.V. Davydova, N.M. Yazykova. The creativity of F.I. Tyutchev's "Golden Age" of Russian poetry was completed. However, the central figure of this time was Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin.
A.S. Pushkin began his ascent to the literary Olympus with the poem “Ruslan and Lyudmila” in 1920. And his novel in verse “Eugene Onegin” was called an encyclopedia of Russian life. Romantic poems by A.S. Pushkin’s “The Bronze Horseman” (1833), “The Bakhchisarai Fountain”, and “The Gypsies” ushered in the era of Russian romanticism. Many poets and writers considered A. S. Pushkin their teacher and continued the traditions of creating literary works. One of these poets was M.Yu. Lermontov. His romantic poem “Mtsyri” is well known. poetic story “Demon”, set romantic poems. Interestingly, Russian poetry of the 19th century was closely related with the social and political life of the country. Poets tried to comprehend the idea of their special purpose. The poet in Russia was considered a conductor of divine truth, a prophet. The poets called on the authorities to listen to their words. Vivid examples of understanding the role of the poet and influence on political life countries are poems by A.S. Pushkin “Prophet”, ode “Liberty”, “Poet and the Crowd”, poem by M.Yu. Lermontov “On the Death of a Poet” and many others.
Prose writers of the beginning of the century were influenced by English historical novels V. Scott, whose translations were extremely popular. The development of Russian prose of the 19th century began with prose works A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol. Pushkin, under the influence of English historical novels, creates story "The Captain's Daughter" where the action takes place against the backdrop of grandiose historical events: during the Pugachev rebellion. A.S. Pushkin produced a colossal work, exploring this historical period
. This work was largely political in nature and was aimed at those in power.
A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol outlined the main art types
, which would be developed by writers throughout the 19th century. This artistic type“superfluous man”, the example of which is Eugene Onegin in the novel by A.S. Pushkin, and the so-called “little man” type, which is shown by N.V. Gogol in his story “The Overcoat”, as well as A.S. Pushkin in the story “The Station Agent”.
Literature inherited its journalistic and satirical character from the 18th century. In a prose poem N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" the writer, in a sharp satirical manner, shows a swindler who buys up dead souls, various types of landowners who are the embodiment of various human vices(the influence of classicism is evident). The comedy is based on the same plan "Inspector". The works of A. S. Pushkin are also full of satirical images. Literature continues to satirically depict Russian reality. The tendency to depict vices and shortcomings Russian society- a characteristic feature of all Russian classical literature
. It can be traced in the works of almost all writers of the 19th century. At the same time, many writers implement the satirical tendency in a grotesque form. Examples of grotesque satire are the works of N.V. Gogol “The Nose”, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin “Gentlemen Golovlevs”, “The History of a City”.
Since the middle of the 19th century, the formation of Russian realistic literature has been taking place, which was created against the backdrop of the tense socio-political situation that developed in Russia during the reign of Nicholas I. A crisis is brewing in the feudal system; there are strong contradictions between the authorities and common people. There is an urgent need to create realistic literature that is acutely responsive to the socio-political situation in the country.
Literary critic V.G. Belinsky denotes a new realistic direction in literature. His position is developed by N.A. Dobrolyubov, N.G. Chernyshevsky. A dispute arises between Westerners and Slavophiles about the paths of historical development of Russia.
Writers appeal to the socio-political problems of Russian reality.
The genre of the realistic novel is developing. His works are created by I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, I.A. Goncharov. The socio-political, philosophical issues. Literature is distinguished by a special psychologism.
people.
The literary process of the late 19th century revealed the names of N.S. Leskov, A.N. Ostrovsky A.P. Chekhov. The latter proved himself to be a master of small things literary genre- a storyteller, as well as an excellent playwright. Competitor A.P. Chekhov was Maxim Gorky.
The end of the 19th century was marked by the emergence of pre-revolutionary sentiments. The realistic tradition began to fade away. It was replaced by the so-called decadent literature, the distinctive features of which were mysticism, religiosity, as well as a premonition of changes in the socio-political life of the country. Subsequently, decadence developed into symbolism. This opens new page in the history of Russian literature.
7. Literary situation at the end of the 19th century.
Realism
The 2nd half of the 19th century is characterized by the undivided dominance of the realistic trend in Russian literature. Basis realism as an artistic method is socio-historical and psychological determinism. The personality and fate of the person depicted appears as the result of the interaction of his character (or, more deeply, universal human nature) with the circumstances and laws of social life (or, more broadly, history, culture - as can be observed in the works of A.S. Pushkin).
Realism of the 2nd half of the 19th century. often call critical, or socially accusatory. IN Lately V modern literary criticism Attempts to abandon such a definition are increasingly being observed. It is both too broad and too narrow; it neutralizes the individual characteristics of writers’ creativity. Founder critical realism often called N.V. Gogol, however, in Gogol’s works, social life, the history of the human soul is often correlated with such categories as eternity, highest justice, the providential mission of Russia, the kingdom of God on earth. Gogolian tradition to one degree or another in the 2nd half of the 19th century. picked up by L. Tolstoy, F. Dostoevsky, and partly N.S. Leskov - it is no coincidence that in their work (especially late) a craving for such pre-realistic forms of comprehension of reality as preaching, religious and philosophical utopia, myth, and hagiography is revealed. No wonder M. Gorky expressed the idea of the synthetic nature of Russian classical realism, about its non-delimitation from the romantic direction. At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. the realism of Russian literature not only opposes, but also interacts in its own way with the emerging symbolism. The realism of Russian classics is universal, it is not limited to the reproduction of empirical reality, it includes universal human content, a “mysterious plan”, which brings realists closer to the quests of romantics and symbolists.
Socially accusatory pathos in its pure form appears most in the works of second-line writers - F.M. Reshetnikova, V.A. Sleptsova, G.I. Uspensky; even N.A. Nekrasov and M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, despite their closeness to the aesthetics of revolutionary democracy, are not limited in their creativity posing purely social, topical issues. Nevertheless, a critical orientation towards any form of social and spiritual enslavement of a person unites all realist writers of the 2nd half of the 19th century.
The 19th century revealed the main aesthetic principles and typological properties of realism. In Russian literature of the 2nd half of the 19th century. Conditionally, several directions can be distinguished within the framework of realism.
1. The work of realist writers who strive for the artistic recreation of life in the “forms of life itself.” The image often acquires such a degree of authenticity that literary heroes are spoken of as living people. I.S. belong to this direction. Turgenev, I.A. Goncharov, partly N.A. Nekrasov, A.N. Ostrovsky, partly L.N. Tolstoy, A.P. Chekhov.
2. The 60s and 70s are bright the philosophical-religious, ethical-psychological direction in Russian literature is outlined(L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky). Dostoevsky and Tolstoy have stunning pictures of social reality, depicted in the “forms of life itself.” But at the same time, writers always start from certain religious and philosophical doctrines.
3. Satirical, grotesque realism(in the 1st half of the 19th century it was partly represented in the works of N.V. Gogol, in the 60-70s it unfolded with all its might in the prose of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin). The grotesque does not appear as hyperbole or fantasy, it characterizes the writer’s method; he combines in images, types, plots what is unnatural and absent in life, but is possible in the world created by the creative imagination of the artist; similar grotesque, hyperbolic images emphasize certain patterns that dominate life.
4. Completely unique realism, “heartened” (Belinsky’s word) with humanistic thought, represented in creativity A.I. Herzen. Belinsky noted the “Voltairean” nature of his talent: “the talent went into the mind,” which turns out to be a generator of images, details, plots, and personal biographies.
Along with the dominant realistic trend in Russian literature of the 2nd half of the 19th century. The direction of so-called “pure art” also developed - it is both romantic and realistic. Its representatives avoided “damned questions” (What to do? Who is to blame?), but not real reality, by which they meant the world of nature and the subjective feelings of man, the life of his heart. They were excited by the beauty of existence itself, the fate of the world. A.A. Fet and F.I. Tyutchev can be directly comparable to I.S. Turgenev, L.N. Tolstoy and F.M. Dostoevsky. The poetry of Fet and Tyutchev had a direct influence on Tolstoy’s work during the Anna Karenina era. It is no coincidence that Nekrasov revealed F.I. Tyutchev to the Russian public as a great poet in 1850.
IN early XIX centuries, works appear in Russian literature, the central problem of which is the conflict between the hero and society, the person and the environment that raised him. And, as a result, it is created new image- the image of a “superfluous” person, a stranger among his own, rejected by his environment. The heroes of these works are people of inquisitive minds, gifted, talented, who had the opportunity to become real “heroes of their time” - writers, artists, scientists - and who, in Belinsky’s words, became “smart useless people”, “suffering egoists”, “reluctant egoists” . The image of the “superfluous person” changed as society developed, acquiring new qualities, until, finally, it reached full expression in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov".
The first in the gallery of “extra” people are Onegin and Pechorin - heroes who are characterized by cold matter-of-factness, an independent character, a “sharp, chilled mind”, where irony borders on sarcasm. These are extraordinary people, and therefore, rarely satisfied with themselves, dissatisfied with an easy, carefree existence. They are not satisfied with the monotonous life of the “golden youth”. It’s easy for heroes to answer with certainty what doesn’t suit them, but it’s much more difficult to answer what they need from life. Onegin and Pechorin are unhappy, “lost interest in life”; they move in a vicious circle, where every action implies further disappointment. Dreamy romantics in their youth, they turned into cold cynics, cruel egoists, as soon as they saw the “light.” Who or what is the reason that smart, educated people have turned into “superfluous” people who have not found their place in life? It would seem that everything was in their hands, so this means that this is the heroes’ own fault? We can say that they themselves are to blame for how their fate turned out, but I am still inclined to believe that no one and nothing can change a person as much as society, the social environment, the conditions in which this or that person finds himself. It was the “light” that turned Onegin and Pechorin into “moral cripples.” Pechorin admits in his diary: “...My soul is spoiled by light, my imagination is restless, my heart is insatiable...” But if the rebellious nature of Pechorin, a man of the 30s of the 19th century, thirsts for activity, seeks food for the mind, painfully reflects on the meaning of life, about one’s role in society, then Onegin’s nature of the 20s was, to one degree or another, characterized by mental apathy and indifference to the world around him. The main difference between Pushkin's Onegin and Lermontov's Pechorin is the final result to which both heroes arrive: if Pechorin managed to defend his convictions, denied secular conventions, did not exchange himself for petty aspirations, that is, he completely retained his moral integrity, despite internal contradictions, Then Onegin squandered the spiritual strength that prompted him to act. He lost the ability to actively fight and, “having lived without a goal, without work until he was twenty-six years old ... he did not know how to do anything.” Lermontov portrays to us more a strong character, rather than Pushkin, but together they show how the surrounding reality and secular society destroy a gifted person.
In Goncharov's novel we have the story of a man who does not have the makings of a determined fighter, but has all the data to be a good, decent person. “Oblomov” is a kind of “book of results” of the interaction between the individual and society, moral beliefs and social conditions in which a person is placed. And if from the works of Lermontov and Pushkin we can study the anatomy of one human soul, with all its contradictions, then in Goncharov’s novel we can trace a whole phenomenon of social life - Oblomovism, which collected the vices of one of the types of noble youth of the 50s of the 19th century. In his work, Goncharov “wanted to ensure that the random image that flashed before us was elevated to a type, giving it a generic and permanent meaning,” wrote N.A. Dobrolyubov. Oblomov is not a new face in Russian literature, “but before he was not presented to us as simply and naturally as in Goncharov’s novel.”
Unlike Onegin and Pechorin, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a weak-willed, lethargic nature, divorced from real life. "Lying... was his normal state." Oblomov's life is a pink nirvana on a soft sofa: slippers and a robe are integral companions of Oblomov's existence. Living in a narrow world of his own creation, fenced off from the bustling real life by dusty curtains, the hero loved to make unrealistic plans. He never brought anything to completion; any of his undertakings suffered the fate of a book that Oblomov had been reading for several years on one page. However, Oblomov’s inaction was not raised to such an extreme degree as, for example, Manilov from “ Dead souls“, and Dobrolyubov was right when he wrote that “...Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person who is looking for something in his life, thinking about something...” Like Onegin with Pechorin, Goncharov’s hero in his youth was a romantic, thirsting for an ideal, burning with the desire for activity, but, like previous heroes, “the flower of life blossomed and did not bear fruit.” Oblomov became disillusioned with life, lost interest in knowledge, realized the futility of his existence and lay down on the sofa, believing that in this way he could preserve his moral integrity. So he “laid through” his life, “slept through” love and, as his friend Stolz said, “his troubles began with the inability to put on stockings and ended with the inability to live.” So the main difference
I see Oblomov from Onegin and Pechorin in the fact that if the last two heroes denied social vices in the struggle, in action, then the first “protested” on the sofa, believing that this best image life. Therefore, it can be argued that the “smart useless people” Onegin and Pechorin and the “superfluous” person Oblomov are completely different people. The first two heroes are “moral cripples” due to the fault of society, and the third is due to the fault of their own nature, their own inaction.
Based on the characteristics of life Russia XIX century, we can say that if “extra” people were found everywhere, regardless of country and political system, then Oblomovism is a purely Russian phenomenon, generated by the Russian reality of that time. It is no coincidence that Pushkin in his novel uses the expression “Russian blues,” and Dobrolyubov sees in Oblomov “our indigenous folk type.”
Many critics of that time, and even the author of the novel himself, saw in the image of Oblomov a “sign of the times,” arguing that the image of a “superfluous” person is typical only for feudal Russia of the 19th century. They saw the root of all evil in state structure countries. But I cannot agree that the “suffering egoist” Pechorin, the “smart uselessness” Onegin, the apathetic dreamer Oblomov are the product of the autocratic-serf system. Our time, the 20th century, can serve as proof of this. And now there is a large group of “superfluous” people, and in the 90s of the 20th century, many find themselves out of place and do not find the meaning of life. Some at the same time turn into mocking cynics, like Onegin or Pechorin, others, like Oblomov, kill best years life, lying on the sofa. So Pechorin is a “hero” of our time, and Oblomovism is a phenomenon not only of the 19th century, but also of the 20th century. The evolution of the image of the “superfluous” person continues, and more than one will say with bitterness: “My soul is spoiled by light...” Therefore, I believe that it is not the fault of the “unnecessary” people. serfdom, and that society in which true values, and vices often wear a mask of virtue, where the individual can be trampled underfoot by a gray, silent crowd.
“Superfluous people” in literature are images characteristic of Russian prose of the mid-nineteenth century. Examples of such characters in works of fiction are the topic of the article.
Who coined this term?
“Extra people” in literature are characters that appeared at the beginning of the nineteenth century. It is unknown who exactly introduced this term. Perhaps Herzen. According to some information - Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. After all, the great Russian poet once said that his Onegin is “an extra man.” One way or another, this image was firmly established in the works of other writers.
Every schoolchild, even if he has not read Goncharov’s novel, knows about someone like Oblomov. This character is a representative of the outdated landowner world, and therefore cannot adapt to the new one.
General signs
“Superfluous people” are found in the works of such classics as I. S. Turgenev, M. Yu. Lermontov. Before considering each of the characters that can be classified in this category, it is worth highlighting the common features. “Extra people” in literature are contradictory heroes who are in conflict with the society to which they belong. As a rule, they are deprived of both fame and wealth.
Examples
“Extra people” in literature are characters introduced by the author into an environment alien to them. They are moderately educated, but their knowledge is unsystematic. The “superfluous man” cannot be a deep thinker or scientist, but he has the “ability of judgment”, the gift of eloquence. And the main sign of this literary character- disdainful attitude towards others. As an example, we can recall Pushkin’s Onegin, who avoids communication with his neighbors.
“Superfluous people” in Russian literature of the 19th century were heroes who were able to see vices modern society, but do not know how to resist them. They are aware of the problems of the world around them. But, alas, they are too passive to change anything.
Causes
The characters discussed in this article began to appear on the pages of the works of Russian writers in the Nicholas era. In 1825 there was a Decembrist uprising. For the next decades, the government was in fear, but it was at this time that a spirit of freedom and a desire for change emerged in society. The policy of Nicholas I was quite contradictory.
The tsar introduced reforms designed to make life easier for the peasants, but at the same time did everything to strengthen the autocracy. Various circles began to appear, whose participants discussed and criticized the current government. Landowner image life for many educated people caused contempt. But the trouble is that the participants in various political associations belonged to the society towards which they suddenly became inflamed with hatred.
The reasons for the appearance of “extra people” in Russian literature lie in the emergence in society of a new type of person who was not accepted by society and did not accept it. Such a person stands out from the crowd, and therefore causes bewilderment and irritation.
As already mentioned, the concept of “superfluous person” was first introduced into literature by Pushkin. However, this term is somewhat vague. Characters in conflict with the social environment have been encountered in literature before. Main character Griboyedov's comedy has features inherent in this type of character. Can we say that Chatsky is an example of a “superfluous person”? To answer this question, you should do brief analysis comedies.
Chatsky
Griboyedov's hero rejects the inert foundations of Famus society. He denounces veneration for rank and blind imitation. This does not go unnoticed by representatives of Famus society - the Khlestovs, the Khryumins, the Zagoretskys. As a result, Chatsky is considered strange, if not crazy.
Griboyedov's hero is a representative of an advanced society, which includes people who do not want to put up with reactionary orders and remnants of the past. Thus, we can say that the theme of the “superfluous person” was first raised by the author of “Woe from Wit.”
Eugene Onegin
But most literary scholars believe that this particular hero is the first “extra person” in the prose and poetry of Russian authors. Onegin is a nobleman, “heir to all his relatives.” He received a very passable education, but does not have any deep knowledge. Writing and speaking French, behaving at ease in society, reciting a few quotes from the works of ancient authors - this is enough to create a favorable impression in the world.
Onegin is a typical representative of aristocratic society. He is not able to “work hard”, but he knows how to shine in society. He leads an aimless, idle existence, but this is not his fault. Evgeniy became like his father, who gave three balls every year. He lives the way most representatives of the Russian nobility exist. However, unlike them, at a certain moment he begins to feel tired and disappointed.
Loneliness
Onegin is an “extra person.” He is languishing from idleness, trying to occupy himself with useful work. In the society to which he belongs, idleness is the main component of life. Hardly anyone from Onegin’s circle is familiar with his experiences.
Evgeniy tries to compose at first. But he is not a writer. Then he begins to read enthusiastically. However, Onegin does not find moral satisfaction in books either. Then he retires to the house of his deceased uncle, who bequeathed his village to him. Here the young nobleman seemingly finds something to do. He makes life easier for the peasants: he replaces the yoke with a light quitrent. However, even these good initiatives lead nowhere.
The type of “superfluous person” appeared in Russian literature in the first third of the nineteenth century. But by the middle of the century this character acquired new features. Pushkin's Onegin is rather passive. He treats others with contempt, is depressed and cannot get rid of conventions and prejudices, which he himself criticizes. Let's look at other examples of the “extra person” in literature.
Pechorin
Lermontov’s work “Hero of Our Time” is dedicated to the problems of a rejected person, spiritually not accepted by society. Pechorin, like Pushkin’s character, belongs to high society. But he is tired of the mores of aristocratic society. Pechorin does not enjoy attending balls, dinners, or festive evenings. He is depressed by the tedious and meaningless conversations that are customary to have at such events.
Using the examples of Onegin and Pechorin, we can complement the concept of “superfluous person” in Russian literature. This is a character who, due to some alienation from society, acquires such traits as isolation, selfishness, cynicism and even cruelty.
"Notes of an Extra Man"
And yet, most likely, the author of the concept of “extra people” is I. S. Turgenev. Many literary scholars believe that it was he who introduced this term. According to their opinion, Onegin and Pechorin were subsequently classified as “superfluous people,” although they have little in common with the image created by Turgenev. The writer has a story called “Notes of an Extra Man.” The hero of this work feels alien in society. This character calls himself such.
Whether the hero of the novel “Fathers and Sons” is a “superfluous person” is a controversial issue.
Bazarov
Fathers and Sons depicts society in the mid-nineteenth century. Violent political disputes had reached their climax by this time. In these disputes, on one side stood the liberal democrats, and on the other, the revolutionary commoner democrats. Both of them understood that changes were needed. Revolutionary-minded democrats, unlike their opponents, were committed to rather radical measures.
Political disputes have penetrated into all spheres of life. And, of course, they became the theme of artistic and journalistic works. But there was another phenomenon at that time that interested the writer Turgenev. Namely, nihilism. Adherents of this movement rejected everything related to the spiritual.
Bazarov, like Onegin, is a deeply lonely person. This trait is also characteristic of all characters whom literary scholars classify as “superfluous people.” But, unlike Pushkin’s hero, Bazarov does not spend his time in idleness: he is engaged in the natural sciences.
The hero of the novel “Fathers and Sons” has successors. He is not considered crazy. On the contrary, some heroes try to adopt Bazarov’s oddities and skepticism. Nevertheless, Bazarov is lonely, despite the fact that his parents love and idolize him. He dies, and only at the end of his life does he realize that his ideas were false. There are simple joys in life. There is love and romantic feelings. And all this has a right to exist.
Rudin
It’s not uncommon to encounter “extra people.” The action of the novel "Rudin" takes place in the forties. Daria Lasunskaya, one of the heroines of the novel, lives in Moscow, but in the summer she travels out of town, where she organizes musical evenings. Her guests are exclusively educated people.
One day, a certain Rudin appears at Lasunskaya’s house. This person is prone to polemics, extremely passionate, and captivates listeners with his wit. The guests and the hostess of the house are enchanted by Rudin’s amazing eloquence. Lasunskaya invites him to live in her house.
In order to give a clear description of Rudin, Turgenev talks about facts from his life. This man was born into a poor family, but never had the desire to earn money or get out of poverty. At first he lived on the pennies his mother sent him. Then he lived at the expense of rich friends. Even in his youth, Rudin was distinguished by his extraordinary oratory skills. He was a fairly educated man, because he spent all his leisure time reading books. But the trouble is that nothing followed his words. By the time he met Lasunskaya, he had already become a man fairly battered by life’s hardships. In addition, he became painfully proud and even vain.
Rudin is an “extra person.” Many years of immersion in the philosophical sphere led to the fact that ordinary emotional experiences seemed to have died out. This Turgenev hero is a born orator, and the only thing he strived for was to conquer people. But he was too weak and spineless to become a political leader.
Oblomov
So, the “extra person” in Russian prose is a disillusioned nobleman. The hero of Goncharov's novel is sometimes classified as this type of literary hero. But can Oblomov be called a “superfluous person”? After all, he misses, yearns for his father’s house and everything that made up the landowner’s life. And he is in no way disappointed in the way of life and traditions characteristic of representatives of his society.
Who is Oblomov? This is a descendant of a landowner family who is bored with working in an office, and therefore does not leave his sofa for days. This is a generally accepted opinion, but it is not entirely correct. Oblomov could not get used to life in St. Petersburg, because the people around him were entirely calculating, heartless individuals. The main character of the novel, unlike them, is smart, educated and, most importantly, has high spiritual qualities. But why doesn’t he want to work then?
The fact is that Oblomov, like Onegin and Rudin, does not see the point in such work, such life. These people cannot work only for material well-being. Each of them requires a high spiritual goal. But it doesn’t exist or it turned out to be insolvent. And Onegin, and Rudin, and Oblomov become “superfluous”.
Goncharov contrasted Stolz, his childhood friend, with the main character of his novel. This character initially creates a positive impression on the reader. Stolz is hardworking, goal-oriented person. The writer endowed this hero German origin not by chance. Goncharov seems to be hinting that only Russian people can suffer from Oblomovism. And in last chapters it becomes clear that there is nothing behind Stolz’s hard work. This person has neither dreams nor high ideas. He acquires sufficient means of subsistence and stops, not continuing his development.
The influence of the “extra person” on others
It is also worth saying a few words about the heroes who surround the “extra person”. mentioned in this article are lonely and unhappy. Some of them end their lives too early. In addition, “extra people” cause grief to others. Especially women who had the imprudence to love them.
Pierre Bezukhov is sometimes counted among the “superfluous people.” In the first part of the novel, he is in continuous melancholy, searching for something. He spends a lot of time at parties, buys paintings, and reads a lot. Unlike the above-mentioned heroes, Bezukhov finds himself; he does not die either physically or morally.
Kostareva Valeria
The theme of the "superfluous man" in Russian literature... Who is the "superfluous man"? Is it appropriate to use this term? My student is trying to talk about this
Download:
Preview:
Municipal budgetary educational institution secondary school No. 27
Images of “superfluous people” in Russian literature
Completed by student: 10B class
Kostareva Lera
Head: teacher of Russian language and literature
Masieva M.M.
Surgut, 2016
1. Introduction. Who is the “extra person”?
2. Evgeny Onegin
3. Grigory Pechorin
4. Ilya Oblomov
5. Fyodor Lavretsky
6. Alexander Chatsky and Evgeny Bazarov
7. Conclusion
8. Literature
Introduction
Russian classical literature is recognized throughout the world. It is rich in many artistic discoveries. Many terms and concepts are unique to it and unknown to world literature.
In literary criticism, as in any other science, there are various classifications. Many of them relate to literary heroes. Thus, in Russian literature, for example, the “Turgenev type of girl”, etc. stands out. But the most famous and interesting group of heroes, causing the most controversy, are probably the “extra people”. This term is most often applied to literary heroes of the 19th century.
Who is the “extra person”? This is a well-educated, intelligent, talented and extremely gifted hero, who, for various reasons (both external and internal), was unable to realize himself and his capabilities. The “superfluous person” is looking for the meaning of life, a goal, but does not find it. Therefore, he wastes himself on the little things in life, on entertainment, on passions, but does not feel satisfaction from this. Often the life of an “extra person” ends tragically: he dies or dies in the prime of his life.
Lonely, rejected by society, or having rejected this society himself, the “superfluous man” was not a figment of the Russian imagination writers of the XIX century, it was seen by them as a painful phenomenon in the spiritual life of Russian society, caused by the crisis of the social system. The personal destinies of the heroes, who are usually called “superfluous people,” reflected the drama of the advanced nobility
The most famous “superfluous people” in Russian literature were Eugene Onegin from the novel by A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” and Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time". But the gallery of “extra people” is quite extensive. Here are Chatsky from Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”, and Fyodor Lavretsky from Turgenev’s novel “The Noble Nest” and many others.
The purpose of this study: to provide a rationale for the appropriateness or inappropriateness of using the term “extra people”
Tasks:
To trace the development of the image of the “superfluous man” in Russian literature of the 19th century;
Reveal the role of “extra people” in specific works;
Find out the significance of these characters for Russian literature;
In my work I sought to answer the questions:
Who is the "extra person"?
Is it necessary, is it useful to the world?
Subject of research: images of “extra people” in Russian literature
Object of study: works of Russian writers of the 19th century
I believe that the relevance of this topic is undeniable. The great works of Russian classics not only teach us about life. They make you think, feel, empathize. They help to understand the meaning and purpose of human life. They are not only relevant now, they are immortal. No matter how much has been written about authors and heroes, there are no answers. There are only eternal questions of existence. The so-called “superfluous people” have raised more than one generation of people, pushing them by their own example to the eternal search for truth, awareness of their place in life.
Eugene Onegin
The founder of the type of “extra people” in Russian literature is considered to be Evgeny Onegin from the novel of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. In terms of his potential, Onegin is one of the best people of his time.
He grew up and was brought up according to all the rules of “good manners”. Onegin shone in the light. He led a bohemian lifestyle: balls, walks along Nevsky Prospect, visiting theaters. His pastime was no different from the life of the “golden youth” of that time. But Onegin got tired of all this very quickly. He became bored both at the balls and in the theater: “No, the feelings in him cooled down early, He was bored with the noise of the world...”. This is the first touch to the portrait of the “extra person”. The hero began to feel superfluous in high society. He becomes alien to everything that has surrounded him for so long.
Onegin is trying to engage in some useful activity (“yawning, he took up his pen”). But the lordly perception and lack of habit of work played their role. The hero does not complete any of his undertakings. In the village, he tries to organize the life of the peasants. But, having carried out one reform, he happily gives up this occupation too. And here Onegin turns out to be superfluous, unadapted to life.
Evgeny Onegin is superfluous and in love. At the beginning of the novel he is unable to love, and at the end he is rejected, despite spiritual rebirth hero. Onegin himself admits that “in love he is disabled,” unable to experience deep feelings. When he finally realizes that Tatyana is his happiness, she cannot reciprocate the hero’s feelings.
After a duel with Lensky, Onegin, in a depressed state, leaves the village and begins to wander around Russia. In these travels, the hero overestimates his life, his actions, his attitude towards the surrounding reality. But the author does not tell us that Onegin began to engage in some useful activity and became happy. The ending of “Eugene Onegin” remains open. We can only guess about the fate of the hero.
V.G. Belinsky wrote that Pushkin was able to capture the “essence of life” in his novel. His hero is the first true national character. The work “Eugene Onegin” itself is deeply original and has an enduring hysterical and artistic value. His hero is a typical Russian character.
Onegin's main problem is his separation from life. He is smart, observant, unhypocritical, and has enormous potential. But his whole life is suffering. And society itself, the very structure of life, doomed him to this suffering. Evgeny is one of many typical representatives of his society, his time. A hero similar to him, Pechorin, is placed in the same conditions.
Grigory Pechorin
The next representative of the “extra people” type is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin from the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time".
Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin is a representative of his era, or rather, the best part of the noble intelligentsia of the 20s of the 19th century. But he also cannot find himself, his place in life. Initially, Grigory Alexandrovich was endowed with great abilities. He is smart, educated, talented. Throughout the entire novel we observe the life, thoughts, and feelings of this hero. He vaguely feels that social life with its empty entertainment does not suit him. But Pechorin does not realize what he wants from life, what he wants to do.
What prevents this hero from living most is boredom. He fights her as best he can. One of the main entertainments for Grigory Alexandrovich is love adventures. But not a single woman can give meaning to Pechorin’s life. The only woman the hero truly values is Vera. But Pechorin cannot be happy with her either, because he is afraid to love, he does not know how to do it (like Evgeny Onegin).
Grigory Alexandrovich is prone to introspection and reflection much more than Onegin. Pechorin analyzes his inner world. He is trying to find the reason for his unhappiness, the aimlessness of life. The hero fails to come to any comforting conclusion. He squandered all his strength, his soul, in empty amusements. Now he has no strength to powerful emotions, experiences, interest in life. In the end, the hero dies, following his own predictions.
He brings misfortune to all the people whom the hero’s fate encounters, violating the moral laws of society. He cannot find a place for himself anywhere, no use for his remarkable strengths and abilities, therefore Pechorin is superfluous wherever fate throws him.
In the image of Pechorin, Belinsky saw a truthful and fearless reflection of the tragedy of his generation, the generation of progressive people of the 40s. A man of extraordinary fortitude, proud and courageous, Pechorin wastes his energy in cruel games and petty intrigues. Pechorin is a victim of that social system that could only suppress and cripple everything that is best, advanced and strong.
V.G. Belinsky ardently defended the image of Pechorin from the attacks of reactionary criticism and argued that this image embodied the critical spirit of “our century.” Defending Pechorin, Belinsky emphasized that “our century” abhors “hypocrisy.” He speaks loudly about his sins, but is not proud of them; exposes his bloody wounds, and does not hide them under the beggarly rags of pretense. He realized that awareness of his sinfulness is the first step to salvation.
Belinsky writes that in their essence Onegin and Pechorin are the same person, but each chose a different path in their own case. Onegin chose the path of apathy, and Pechorin chose the path of action. But in the end, both lead to suffering.
Ilya Oblomov
The next link that continues the gallery of “extra people” is the hero of the novel by I. A. Goncharov, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov - a kind, gentle, kind-hearted person, capable of experiencing a feeling of love and friendship, but not able to step over himself - get up from the couch, do something activities and even settle their own affairs.
So why does such an intelligent and educated person not want to work? The answer is simple: Ilya Ilyich, just like Onegin and Pechorin, does not see the meaning and purpose of such work, such life. “This unresolved question, this unsatisfied doubt depletes strength, ruins activity; a person gives up and gives up work, not seeing a goal for it,” wrote Pisarev.
Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a weak-willed, lethargic, apathetic nature, divorced from real life: “Lying... was his normal state.” And this feature is the first thing that distinguishes him from Pushkin’s and, especially, Lermontov’s heroes.
The life of Goncharov's character is rosy dreams on a soft sofa. Slippers and a robe are integral companions of Oblomov's existence and bright, precise artistic details that reveal Oblomov's inner essence and outer lifestyle. Living in an imaginary world, fenced off by dusty curtains from real reality, the hero devotes his time to making unrealistic plans and does not bring anything to fruition. Any of his undertakings suffers the fate of a book that Oblomov has been reading for several years on one page.
Main storyline in the novel are the relationships between Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. It is here that the hero reveals himself to us the best side, his most cherished corners of his soul are revealed. But, alas, in the end he acts like the characters already familiar to us: Pechorin and Onegin. Oblomov decides to break off relations with Olga for her own good;
They all leave their beloved women, not wanting to hurt them.
Reading the novel, you involuntarily ask the question: why is everyone so drawn to Oblomov? It is obvious that each of the heroes finds in him a piece of goodness, purity, revelation - everything that people so lack.
Goncharov in his novel showed different types people, they all passed in front of Oblomov. The author showed us that Ilya Ilyich has no place in this life, just like Onegin and Pechorin.
The famous article by N. A. Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism?” (1859) appeared immediately after the novel and in the minds of many readers seemed to have merged with it. Ilya Ilyich, Dobrolyubov argued, is a victim of that common inability for noble intellectuals to be active, unity of word and deed, which is generated by their “external position” as landowners living off forced labor. “It is clear,” the critic wrote, “that Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person looking for something, thinking about something. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed in him an apathetic immobility and plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery.”
The main reason for the defeat of the hero of "Oblomov", according to Dobrolyubov, was not in himself and not in the tragic laws of love, but in "Oblomovism" as a moral and psychological consequence of serfdom, dooming noble hero to flabbiness and apostasy when trying to bring their ideals to life.
Fyodor Lavretsky
This hero of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “The Noble Nest” continues the gallery of “extra people”. Fyodor Ivanovich Lavretsky. - a deep, intelligent and truly decent person, driven by the desire for self-improvement, the search for useful work in which he could apply his mind and talent. Passionately loving Russia and aware of the need to get closer to the people, he dreams of useful activities. But his activity is limited only to some reconstructions on the estate, and he does not find use for his powers. All his activities are limited to words. He only talks about business without getting down to it. Therefore, “school” literary criticism usually classifies him as a “superfluous person” type. The uniqueness of Lavretsky’s nature is emphasized by comparison with other characters in the novel. His sincere love for Russia is contrasted with the condescending disdain shown by the socialite Panshin. Lavretsky's friend, Mikhalevich, calls him a bobak, who has been lying around all his life and is just getting ready to work. Here a parallel arises with another classical type of Russian literature - Oblomov by I.A. Goncharov.
The most important role in revealing the image of Lavretsky is played by his relationship with the heroine of the novel, Liza Kalitina. They feel the commonality of their views, understand that “they both love and dislike the same thing.” Lavretsky's love for Lisa is the moment of his spiritual rebirth, which occurred upon his return to Russia. The tragic outcome of love - the wife he thought was dead suddenly returns - does not turn out to be an accident. The hero sees in this retribution for his indifference to public duty, for the idle life of his grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Gradually, a moral turning point occurs in the hero: previously indifferent to religion, he comes to the idea of Christian humility. In the epilogue of the novel, the hero appears aged. Lavretsky is not ashamed of the past, but also does not expect anything from the future. “Hello, lonely old age! Burn out, useless life! - he says.
The ending of the novel is very important, which is a kind of conclusion life's quest Lavretsky. After all, his words of welcome at the end of the novel to unknown young forces mean not only the hero’s refusal of personal happiness (his union with Lisa is impossible) and its very possibility, but also sound like a blessing to people, faith in man. The ending also defines Lavretsky’s entire inconsistency, making him a “superfluous person.”
Alexander Chatsky and Evgeny Bazarov
The problem of “superfluous” people in society is reflected in the works of many Russian writers. Researchers are still scratching their heads about some heroes. Can Chatsky and Bazarov be considered “superfluous people”? And is it necessary to do this? Based on the definition of the term “extra people,” then probably yes. After all, these heroes are also rejected by society (Chatsky) and are not sure that society needs them (Bazarov).
In the comedy A.S. Griboedov’s “Woe from Wit” the image of the main character - Alexander Chatsky - is the image of a progressive person of the 10th - 20th years of the 19th century, who, in his beliefs and views, is close to the future Decembrists. In accordance with moral principles Decembrists, a person must perceive the problems of society as his own, have an active civic position, which is noted in Chatsky’s behavior. He expresses his opinion on various issues, coming into conflict with many representatives of the Moscow nobility.
First of all, Chatsky himself is noticeably different from all the other heroes of the comedy. This is an educated person with an analytical mind; he is eloquent, gifted imaginative thinking, which elevates him above the inertia and ignorance of the Moscow nobility. Chatsky’s clash with Moscow society occurs on many issues: this is the attitude to serfdom, to public service, To national science and culture, education, national traditions and language. For example, Chatsky says that “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” This means that he will not please, flatter his superiors, or humiliate himself for the sake of his career. He would like to serve “the cause, not persons” and does not want to look for entertainment if he is busy with business.
Let’s compare Chatsky, the hero of Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” with the image of an extra person.
Seeing the vices of Famus society, rejecting its inert foundations, mercilessly denouncing the veneration of rank, the patronage reigning in official circles, the stupid imitation of French fashion, the lack of real education, Chatsky turns out to be an outcast among the counts Khryumin, Khlestov and Zagoretsky. He is considered “strange”, and in the end he is even recognized as crazy. So Griboyedov’s hero, like extra people, comes into conflict with the imperfect world around him. But if the latter only suffer and are inactive, then “they are embittered; thoughts” of Chatsky “one can hear a healthy urge to action...”. “He feels what he is dissatisfied with,” because his ideal of life is completely defined: “freedom from all the chains of slavery that bind society.” Chatsky’s active opposition to those “whose enmity towards free life irreconcilable,” allows us to believe that he knows the ways to change life in society. In addition, Griboyedov’s hero, having gone through a long path of quest, traveling for three years, finds a goal in life - “to serve the cause,” “without demanding either places or promotion to rank,” “to focus his mind, hungry for knowledge, on science.” The hero’s desire is to benefit the fatherland, to serve for the benefit of society, which is what he strives for.
Thus, Chatsky is undoubtedly a representative of an advanced society, people who do not want to put up with relics, reactionary orders and are actively fighting against them. Superfluous people, unable to find a worthy occupation for themselves, to realize themselves, do not join either conservatives or revolutionary-minded circles, keeping in their souls disappointment in life and wasting unclaimed talents.
The image of Chatsky caused numerous controversy in criticism. I. A. Goncharov considered the hero Griboyedov a “sincere and ardent figure”, superior to Onegin and Pechorin.
Belinsky assessed Chatsky completely differently, considering this image almost farcical: “...What kind of a deep person is Chatsky? This is just a loudmouth, a phrase-monger, an ideal buffoon, profaning everything sacred he talks about. ...This is a new Don Quixote, a boy on a stick on horseback, who imagines that he is sitting on a horse... Chatsky’s drama is a storm in a teacup.” Pushkin assessed this image in approximately the same way.
Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared crazy. Old world fights Chatsky’s free speech using slander. Chatsky’s struggle with an accusatory word corresponds to that early period the Decembrist movement, when they believed that much could be achieved with words, and limited themselves to oral speeches.
“Chatsky was broken by the amount of old strength, inflicting a mortal blow on it in turn with the quality of fresh strength,” - this is how I. A. Goncharov defined the meaning of Chatsky.
Evgeny Bazarov
Can Bazarov be called an “extra” person?
Evgeny Bazarov, probably to a lesser extent than Onegin or Pechorin, belongs to the category of “superfluous people,” however, he cannot self-realize in this life. He is afraid to think about the future because he does not see himself in it.
Bazarov lives one day at a time, which makes even his scientific studies meaningless. Adhering to the ideas of nihilism, rejecting everything old, he nevertheless has no idea what will subsequently form in the cleared place, hoping for the manifestation of the will of other people. Naturally, scientific experiments Bazarov gets bored pretty soon, since activities devoid of purpose quickly come to naught. Returning home to his parents, Evgeniy stops doing research and falls into a deep depression.
His tragedy lies in the fact that he, who considers himself to some extent a superman, suddenly discovers that nothing human is alien to him. Nevertheless, Russia could not do without such people at all times. Despite his views, Bazarov cannot be accused of lacking education, intelligence or insight. He, while remaining a materialist, nevertheless, if he set the right goals, could bring many benefits to society, for example, treat people or discover new physical laws. In addition, by fiercely opposing prejudices, he encouraged the people around him to move forward in their development, to look at some things in a new way.
So, it is clear that the image of Bazarov in some places fits into the concept of “extra people”. Therefore, in part, Bazarov can be called this way, given that “an extra person” is practically equated with a “hero of his time.” But this is all a very controversial issue. We cannot say that he lived his life in vain.He knew where to use his strength. He lived for a high purpose. Therefore, it is difficult to say whether this Evgeniy is “superfluous”. Everyone has their own opinion on this matter.
DI. Pisarev notes some bias of the author towards Bazarov, says that in a number of cases Turgenev experiences involuntary antipathy towards his hero, towards the direction of his thoughts. But the general conclusion about the novel does not come down to this. The author's critical attitude towards Bazarov is perceived by Dmitry Ivanovich as an advantage, since from the outside the advantages and disadvantages are more visible and criticism will be more fruitful than servile adoration. The tragedy of Bazarov, according to Pisarev, is that there are actually no favorable conditions for the present case, and therefore the author, not being able to show how Bazarov lives and acts, showed how he dies.
Conclusion
All the heroes: Onegin, Pechorin, Oblomov, Lavretsky, and Chatsky are similar in many ways. They noble origin, are naturally endowed with remarkable abilities. They are brilliant gentlemen, social dandies who break women's hearts (Oblomov will probably be an exception). But for them this is more a matter of habit than a true need. In their hearts, the heroes feel that they don’t need this at all. They vaguely want something real, sincere. And they all want to find applications for their great capabilities. Each of the heroes strives for this in their own way. Onegin is more active (he tried writing, farming in the village, traveling). Pechorin is more inclined to reflection and introspection. Therefore o inner world We know much more about Grigory Alexandrovich than about Onegin’s psychology. But if we can still hope for the revival of Eugene Onegin, then Pechorin’s life ends tragically (he dies of illness along the way), however, Oblomov also does not give up hope.
Each hero, despite his success with women, does not find happiness in love. This is largely due to the fact that they are big egoists. Often the feelings of other people mean nothing to Onegin and Pechorin. For both heroes, it costs nothing to destroy the world of others, people who love them, to trample on their lives and destiny.
Pechorin, Onegin, Oblomov and Lavretsky are similar in many ways, but differ in many ways. But their main common feature is the inability of the heroes to realize themselves in their time. Therefore they are all unhappy. Having great internal strength, they were unable to benefit either themselves, the people around them, or their country. This is their fault, their misfortune, their tragedy...
Does the world need “extra people”? Are they useful? It is difficult to give an absolutely correct answer to this question; one can only speculate. On the one hand, it seems to me that no. At least that's what I thought at one time. If a person cannot find himself in life, then his life is meaningless. Then why waste space and consume oxygen? Give way to others. This is the first thing that comes to mind when you start thinking. It seems that the answer to the question lies on the surface, but it is not so. The more I worked on this topic. the more my views changed.
A person cannot be superfluous, because by his nature he is unique. Each of us comes into this world for a reason. Nothing happens for nothing; everything has a meaning and explanation. If you think about it, every person can make someone happy by his very existence, and if he brings happiness to this world, then he is no longer useless.
Such people balance the world. With their lack of composure, indecision, slowness (like Oblomov) or, conversely, their wandering, searching for themselves, searching for the meaning and purpose of their life (like Pechorin), they excite others, make them think, reconsider their view of their surroundings. After all, if everyone were confident in their desires and goals, then it is unknown what would happen to the world. No person comes into this world aimlessly. Everyone leaves their mark on someone's hearts and minds. There are no unnecessary lives.
The topic of “extra” people is still relevant today. There have always been people who have not found a place in the world, and our time is no exception. On the contrary, I believe that right now not everyone can decide on their goals and desires. Such people have been and will always be, and this is not bad, it just happened that way. Such people need to be helped; many of them could have become great if not for a combination of circumstances, sometimes tragic.
Thus, we can conclude that every person who comes into this world is needed, and the term “extra people” is not fair.
Literature
1. Babaev E.G. Works of A.S. Pushkin. – M., 1988
2. Batyuto A.I. Turgenev the novelist. – L., 1972
3. Ilyin E.N. Russian literature: recommendations for schoolchildren and applicants, "SCHOOL-PRESS". M., 1994
4. Krasovsky V.E. History of Russian literature of the 19th century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 2001
5. Literature. Reference materials. Book for students. M., 1990
6. Makogonenko G.P. Lermontov and Pushkin. M., 1987
7. Monakhova O.P. Russian literature of the 19th century, "OLMA-PRESS". M., 1999
8. Fomichev S.A. Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit": Commentary. – M., 1983
9. Shamrey L.V., Rusova N.Yu. From allegory to iambic. Terminological dictionary-thesaurus in literary criticism. – N. Novgorod, 1993
10. http://www.litra.ru/composition/download/coid/00380171214394190279
11.
http://lithelper.com/p_Lishnie_lyudi_v_romane_I__S__Turgeneva_Otci_i_deti
12. http://www.litra.ru/composition/get/coid/00039301184864115790/