To some extent, this theme is the opposite of the image " little man": if there is seen a justification for the fate of everyone, then here - on the contrary, there is a categorical impulse "one of us is superfluous", which can both relate to the assessment of the hero and come from the hero himself, and usually these two "directions" not only do not exclude each other, but also characterize one person: the accuser of his neighbors turns out to be “superfluous.”
"Extra person" is also a certain literary type. Literary types (types of heroes) are a collection of characters who are similar in their occupation, worldview and spiritual appearance. The spread of a particular literary type can be dictated by the very need of society to depict people with some a stable set of qualities. Interest and favorable attitude towards them on the part of critics, the success of books in which such people are depicted, stimulates writers to “repeat” or “variate” any literary types. Often a new literary type arouses the interest of critics, who give it. his name (“noble robber”, “Turgenev’s woman”, “superfluous person”, “little man”, “nihilist”, “tramp”, “humiliated and insulted”).
The main thematic features of "extra people". This is, first of all, a person potentially capable of any social action. She does not accept the “rules of the game” proposed by society, and is characterized by disbelief in the possibility of changing anything. An “extra person” is a contradictory personality, often in conflict with society and its way of life. This is also a hero who, of course, has a dysfunctional relationship with his parents, and is also unhappy in love. His position in society is unstable, contains contradictions: he is always at least in some way connected with the nobility, but - already in the period of decline, fame and wealth are rather a memory. He is placed in an environment that is somehow alien to him: a higher or lower environment, there is always a certain motive of alienation, which does not always immediately lie on the surface. The hero is moderately educated, but this education is rather incomplete, unsystematic; in a word, this is not a deep thinker, not a scientist, but a person with the “ability of judgment” to draw quick but immature conclusions. The crisis of religiosity is very important, often a struggle with churchliness, but often internal emptiness, hidden uncertainty, a habit of the name of God. Often - the gift of eloquence, writing skills, note-taking, or even writing poetry. There is always some pretension to be the judge of one's fellow men; a hint of hatred is required. In a word, the hero is a victim of life's canons.
However, despite all the seemingly apparent definiteness and clarity of the above criteria for assessing the “extra person,” the framework that allows us to speak with absolute certainty about the belonging of a particular character to a given thematic line is greatly blurred. It follows from this that the “superfluous person” cannot be “superfluous” entirely, but he can be considered both in line with other topics and merged with other characters belonging to other literary types. The material of the works does not allow us to evaluate Onegin, Pechorin and others only from the point of view of their social “benefit”, and the type of “superfluous person” itself is rather the result of understanding the named heroes from certain social and ideological positions.
This literary type, as it developed, acquired more and more new features and forms of display. This phenomenon is quite natural, since every writer saw the “extra person” as he was in his mind. All masters artistic word who ever touched upon the theme of the “superfluous man” not only added a certain “breath” of their era to this type, but also tried to unite all contemporary social phenomena, and most importantly the structure of life, in one image - the image of a hero of the time. All this makes the type of “extra person” universal in its own way. This is precisely what allows us to consider the images of Chatsky and Bazarov as heroes who had a direct impact on this type. These images, undoubtedly, do not belong to the type of “superfluous person,” but at the same time they perform one important function: Griboyedov’s hero, in his confrontation with Famusov’s society, makes it impossible to peacefully resolve the conflict between an extraordinary personality and an inert way of life, thereby pushing other writers to highlight this problem, and the image of Bazarov, the final (from my point of view) type of “superfluous person,” was no longer so much a “carrier” of time as its “side” phenomenon.
But before the hero himself could certify himself as an “extra person,” a more hidden appearance of this type had to occur. The first signs of this type were embodied in the image of Chatsky, the main character of the immortal comedy by A.S. Griboedov “Woe from Wit.” “Griboyedov is a “man of one book,” V.F. Khodasevich once remarked. “If it were not for Woe from Wit, Griboyedov would have no place at all in Russian literature.” And, indeed, although in the history of drama Griboyedov is spoken of as the author of several wonderful and funny comedies and vaudevilles in their own way, written in collaboration with the leading playwrights of those years (N.I. Khmelnitsky, A.A. Shakhovsky, P.A. Vyazemsky), but it was “Woe from Wit” that turned out to be a one-of-a-kind work. This comedy for the first time broadly and freely depicted modern life and thus opened a new, realistic era in Russian literature. Creative history This play is extremely complex. Her plan apparently dates back to 1818. It was finished in the fall of 1824; censorship did not allow this comedy to be published or staged. Conservatives accused Griboyedov of thickening his satirical colors, which, in their opinion, was a consequence of the author’s “squawking patriotism,” and in Chatsky they saw a clever “madman,” the embodiment of the “Figaro-Griboyedov” philosophy of life.
The above examples of critical interpretations of the play only confirm the complexity and depth of its social and philosophical problems, indicated in the very title of the comedy: “Woe from Wit.” The problems of intelligence and stupidity, insanity and insanity, tomfoolery and buffoonery, pretense and acting are posed and solved by Griboyedov using a variety of everyday, social and psychological material. Essentially, all the characters, including minor, episodic and off-stage ones, are drawn into a discussion of questions about the relationship to intelligence and various forms of stupidity and madness. The main figure around whom all the diversity of opinions about comedy was immediately concentrated was the smart “madman” Chatsky. The overall assessment of the author’s intention, issues and artistic features comedies. The main feature of the comedy is the interaction of two plot-shaping conflicts: a love conflict, the main participants of which are Chatsky and Sophia, and a socio-ideological conflict, in which Chatsky faces conservatives gathered in Famusov’s house. I would like to note that for the hero himself, the paramount importance is not socio-ideological, but love conflict. After all, Chatsky came to Moscow with the sole purpose of seeing Sophia, finding confirmation of his former love and, perhaps, getting married. It is interesting to trace how the hero’s love experiences exacerbate Chatsky’s ideological confrontation with Famus society. In the beginning main character doesn’t even notice the usual vices of the environment where he found himself, but sees only the comic aspects in it: “I’m an eccentric for another miracle / Once I laugh, then I forget...”.
But Chatsky is not an “extra person.” He is only the forerunner of "superfluous people." This is confirmed, first of all, by the optimistic sound of the comedy's finale, where Chatsky remains with the right of historical choice given to him by the author. Consequently, Griboyedov’s hero can find (in the future) his place in life. Chatsky could have been among those who came out to Senate Square on December 14, 1825, and then his life would have been predetermined for 30 years in advance: those who took part in the uprising returned from exile only after the death of Nicholas I in 1856. But something else could have happened. An irresistible disgust for the “abominations” of Russian life would have made Chatsky an eternal wanderer in a foreign land, a man without a homeland. And then - melancholy, despair, alienation, bile and, what is most terrible for such a hero-fighter - forced idleness and inactivity. But these are just readers’ guesses.
Chatsky, rejected by society, has the potential to find a use for himself. Onegin will no longer have such an opportunity. He is a “superfluous person” who failed to realize himself, who “silently suffers from the striking resemblance to the children of the present century.” But before we answer why, let's look at the work itself. The novel "Eugene Onegin" is a work of amazing creative destiny. It was created over seven years - from May 1823 to September 1830. The novel was not written “in one breath,” but was composed of stanzas and chapters created in different times, in different circumstances, during different periods of creativity. The work was interrupted not only by the twists of Pushkin’s fate (exile to Mikhailovskoye, the Decembrist uprising), but also by new plans, for the sake of which he more than once abandoned the text of “Eugene Onegin.” It seemed that history itself was not very kind to Pushkin’s work: from a novel about a contemporary and modern life, as Pushkin intended “Eugene Onegin”, after 1825 it became a novel about a completely different historical era. And, if we take into account the fragmentation and intermittency of Pushkin’s work, then we can say the following: the novel was something like a huge " notebook"or a poetic "album". For more than seven years, these records were replenished with sad "notes" of the heart, "observations" of a cold mind. extra person image literature
But “Eugene Onegin” is not only “a poetic album of living impressions of a talent playing with its wealth,” but also a “novel of life,” which has absorbed a huge amount of historical, literary, social and everyday material. This is the first innovation of this work. Secondly, what was fundamentally innovative was that Pushkin, largely relying on the work of A.S. Griboedov “Woe from Wit,” found a new type problematic hero- "hero of the times." Evgeny Onegin became such a hero. His fate, character, relationships with people are determined by the totality of the circumstances of modern reality, extraordinary personal qualities and the range of “eternal”, universal problems that he faces. It is necessary to immediately make a reservation: Pushkin, in the process of working on the novel, set himself the task of demonstrating in the image of Onegin “that premature old age of the soul, which became the main feature younger generation". And already in the first chapter, the writer notes the social factors that determined the character of the protagonist. The only thing in which Onegin “was a true genius,” that “he knew more firmly than all sciences,” as the Author notes, not without irony, was “the science of tender passion.” , that is, the ability to love without loving, to imitate feelings, while remaining cold and calculating. However, Onegin is still interesting to Pushkin not as a representative of a common social type, the whole essence of which is exhausted. positive characteristic, issued by secular rumor: “N.N. is a wonderful person.” It was important for the writer to show this image in movement and development, so that later every reader would draw the proper conclusions and give a fair assessment of this hero.
The first chapter is a turning point in the fate of the main character, who managed to abandon the stereotypes of secular behavior, the noisy, but internally empty “rite of life.” Thus, Pushkin showed how, from a faceless crowd that demanded unconditional obedience, a bright, extraordinary personality suddenly emerged, capable of overthrowing the “burden” of secular conventions and “getting behind the bustle.”
For writers who paid attention to the theme of the “superfluous man” in their work, it is typical to “test” their hero with friendship, love, a duel, and death. Pushkin was no exception. The two tests that awaited Onegin in the village - the test of love and the test of friendship - showed that external freedom does not automatically entail liberation from false prejudices and opinions. In his relationship with Tatyana, Onegin showed himself to be a noble and mentally sensitive person. And one cannot blame the hero for not responding to Tatiana’s love: as you know, you cannot command the heart. Another thing is that Onegin listened not to the voice of his heart, but to the voice of reason. To confirm this, I will say that even in the first chapter, Pushkin noted in the main character a “sharp, chilled mind” and an inability to strong feelings. And it was precisely this mental disproportion that became the reason failed love Onegin and Tatiana. Onegin also could not stand the test of friendship. And in this case, the cause of the tragedy was his inability to live a life of feeling. It is not without reason that the author, commenting on the hero’s state before the duel, notes: “He could have discovered his feelings, / Instead of bristling like an animal.” Both at Tatiana’s name day and before the duel with Lensky, Onegin showed himself to be a “ball of prejudice,” “a hostage to secular canons,” deaf to both the voice of his own heart and Lensky’s feelings. His behavior at the name day is the usual “secular anger”, and the duel is a consequence of the indifference and fear of the evil tongue of the inveterate philanderer Zaretsky and his neighboring landowners. Onegin himself did not notice how he became a prisoner of his old idol - “public opinion”. After the murder of Lensky, Evgeny changed simply radically. It is a pity that only tragedy was able to open to him a previously inaccessible world of feelings.
Thus, Eugene Onegin becomes a “superfluous man.” Belonging to the light, he despises it. All he can do, as Pisarev noted, is “to give up on the boredom of secular life as an inevitable evil.” Onegin does not find his true purpose and place in life; he is burdened by his loneliness and lack of demand. In the words of Herzen, “Onegin... is an extra person in the environment where he is, but, not possessing the necessary strength of character, he cannot break out of it.” But, according to the writer himself, the image of Onegin is not finished. After all, the novel in verse essentially ends with the following question: “What will Onegin be like in the future?” Pushkin himself leaves the character of his hero open, thereby emphasizing Onegin’s very ability to abruptly change value orientations and, I note, a certain readiness for action, for action. True, Onegin has practically no opportunities for realizing himself. But the novel does not answer the above question, it asks the reader it.
So, the theme of the “superfluous man” comes to its end in a completely different capacity, having gone through a difficult evolutionary path: from the romantic pathos of rejection of life and society to the acute rejection of the “superfluous man” himself. And the fact that this term can be applied to the heroes of works of the 20th century does not change anything: the meaning of the term will be different and it will be possible to call it “superfluous” for completely different reasons. There will be returns to this theme (for example, the image of the “superfluous person” Levushka Odoevtsev from A. Bitov’s novel “Pushkin’s House”), and proposals that there are no “superfluous” people, but only different variations of this theme. But returning is no longer a discovery: the 19th century discovered and exhausted the theme of the “superfluous man.”
Bibliography:
- 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. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit": Commentary. - M., 1983
- 9. Shamrey L.V., Rusova N.Yu. From allegory to iambic. Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on literary criticism. - N. Novgorod, 1993
Extra person- a 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, which leads to duels, gambling and other self-destructive behavior. TO typical features superfluous people 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 the heroes of Turgenev’s early works (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 Eugene Onegin from the novel of the same name by A.S. Pushkin. In terms of its potential, Onegin is one of the best people of its 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 characteristic feature 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
"Little 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. It was first touched upon by A.S. Pushkin in the story “The Station Warden.” 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. Saving money for purchases new overcoat becomes for him the goal and meaning of life. 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 of the same 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, comes through 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 conceives a crime, the roots of which, in part, lie in the sphere of 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 a person 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 are highlighted. These landscapes usually indicate the place and time against which the events depicted take place.
The second type of landscape is a landscape that creates 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.
The third type is landscape, which creates/becomes the psychological background of existence and becomes one of the means of revealing the psychology of the character.
The fourth type is landscape, which becomes a symbolic background, a means of symbolically reflecting the reality depicted in the 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 an ideal idea of 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 literary text in the 19th century it 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 has a convention. Maximum conditional time in lyrical work, with the predominance of present tense grammar, the lyrics are 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 in full swing literary process 17th-18th centuries. The 19th century is the time of the formation of 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. Specified 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. Known for it romantic poem"Mtsyri" the poetic story “The Demon”, many 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 understanding the role of the poet and influence on the political life of the country are the poems of A.S. Pushkin “The Prophet”, ode “Liberty”, “Poet and the Crowd”, poem by M.Yu. Lermontov “On the Death of a Poet” and many others.
Prose writers at the beginning of the century were influenced by the English historical novels of W. Scott, the translations of which 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 " 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 is the artistic type of “superfluous man”, an 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 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 the vices and shortcomings of Russian society is 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”.
WITH mid-19th century, the formation of Russian realistic literature takes place, which is 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, and 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 ways historical development Russia.
Writers appeal to the socio-political problems of Russian reality.
The genre is developing realistic novel. 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 the end of the 19th century.
Realism
The 2nd half of the 19th century is characterized by undivided dominance realistic direction in Russian literature. basis realism How 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 2nd half of the 19th century V. often called critical, or socially accusatory. IN lately In modern literary criticism, attempts are increasingly being made to abandon such a definition. It is both too broad and too narrow; it neutralizes the individual characteristics of writers’ creativity. The founder of critical realism is often called N.V. Gogol, however, in Gogol’s work social life, history human soul often correlates with such categories as eternity, supreme 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. IN late XIX- early 20th century 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 reproduction 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 within the framework of realism can be distinguished.
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.
Problematics and poetics
Russian prose, with all the flourishing of poetry and drama (A.N. Ostrovsky), occupies a central place in the literary process of the 2nd half of the 19th century. It develops in line with the realistic direction, preparing, in the diversity of genre quests of Russian writers, an artistic synthesis - the novel, the pinnacle of world literary development XIX V.
Searching for new artistic techniques images of man in his connections with the world appeared not only in the genres story, story or novel (I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, A.F. Pisemsky, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, D. Grigorovich). The quest for an accurate recreation of life in the literature of the late 40-50s begins to look for a way out memoir-autobiographical genres, with their focus on documentary. At this time they begin to work on creating their autobiographical books A.I. Herzen and S.T. Aksakov; The trilogy partly adheres to this genre tradition L.N. Tolstoy (“Childhood”, “Adolescence”, “Youth”).
Another documentary genre goes back to aesthetics " natural school", This - essay. In its purest form it is presented in the works of democratic writers N.V. Uspensky, V.A. Sleptsova, A.I. Levitova, N.G. Pomyalovsky (“Essays on the Bursa”); in revised and largely transformed - in “Notes of a Hunter” by Turgenev and “Provincial Sketches” by Saltykov-Shchedrin, “Notes from the House of the Dead” by Dostoevsky. Here there is a complex interpenetration of artistic and documentary elements, fundamentally new forms of narrative prose are created, combining the features of a novel, essay, and autobiographical notes.
The desire for epicness is a characteristic feature of the Russian literary process of the 1860s; it captures both poetry (N. Nekrasov) and drama (A.N. Ostrovsky).
The epic picture of the world is felt as a deep subtext in the novels I.A. Goncharova(1812-1891) “Oblomov” and “Cliff”. Thus, in the novel “Oblomov”, the depiction of typical character traits and way of life subtly transforms into an image of the universal content of life, its eternal states, collisions, and situations. Showing the destructiveness of the “all-Russian stagnation”, something that has become firmly entrenched in Russian public consciousness under the name “Oblomovism”, Goncharov contrasts him with the preaching of action (the image of the Russian German Andrei Stolz) - and at the same time shows the limitations of this preaching. Oblomov's inertia appears in unity with true humanity. “Oblomovism” also includes the poetry of a noble estate, the generosity of Russian hospitality, the touching nature of Russian holidays, the beauty of Central Russian nature - Goncharov traces the primordial connection of noble culture, noble consciousness with the people's soil. The very inertia of Oblomov’s existence is rooted in the depths of centuries, in the distant recesses of our national memory. Ilya Oblomov is in some ways akin to Ilya Muromets, who sat on the stove for 30 years, or to the fabulous simpleton Emelya, who achieved his goals without applying his own efforts - “by pike command, according to my desire." “Oblomovshchina” is a phenomenon not just of the nobility, but of the Russian national culture and as such she is not idealized by Goncharov at all - the artist explores both her strong and weak features. In the same way, strong and weak features are revealed by purely European pragmatism, opposed to Russian Oblomovism. The novel reveals on a philosophical level the inferiority, insufficiency of both opposites and the impossibility of their harmonious union.
The literature of the 1870s is dominated by the same prose genres as in the literature of the previous century, but new trends appear in them. Epic tendencies are weakening in narrative literature, there is an outflow of literary forces from the novel to small genres - stories, essays, short stories. Dissatisfaction with the traditional novel was a characteristic phenomenon in literature and criticism in the 1870s. It would be wrong, however, to consider that the genre of the novel entered a period of crisis during these years. The works of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin serve as an eloquent refutation of this opinion. However, in the 70s the novel experienced an internal restructuring: the tragic beginning sharply intensified; this trend is associated with a keen interest in the spiritual problems of the individual and its internal conflicts. Novelists pay special attention to the individual who has reached his full development, but is faced with the fundamental problems of existence, deprived of support, experiencing a deep discord with people and himself (“Anna Karenina” by L. Tolstoy, “Demons” and “The Brothers Karamazov” by Dostoevsky ).
In the short prose of the 1870s, a craving for allegorical and parable forms is revealed. Particularly indicative in this regard is the prose of N.S. Leskov, whose creativity flourished precisely in this decade. He acted as an innovative artist, combining into a single whole the principles of realistic writing with the conventions of traditional folk poetic techniques, with an appeal to the style and genres of ancient Russian books. Leskov’s skill was compared to icon painting and ancient architecture, the writer was called an “isographer” - and not without reason. Gorky called the gallery of original folk types painted by Leskov “the iconostasis of the righteous and saints” of Russia. Leskov introduced into the sphere artistic image such layers folk life, which before him were almost not touched upon in Russian literature (the life of the clergy, philistinism, Old Believers and other layers of the Russian province). In depicting various social strata, Leskov masterfully used skaz forms, intricately mixing the author’s and folk points of view.
An extra person... Who is this - the one who no one needs? The one who does not find a place for himself in his country, in his time? Someone who can't achieve anything?
These images, somewhat similar to each other and at the same time different, appeared in the texts of writers at the beginning of the 19th century. Onegin from the novel in verse by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, Pechorin from the novel by Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov, Chatsky from the comedy by Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov... Isn’t it true, there is something in common in these three images?
The first of them - in chronological order - is Chatsky. Let us remember: he returns to Famusov’s house after a long, many-year absence. Even before his appearance on stage, we already know about the sharp mind and evil tongue of this hero (Sophia speaks about this). And, appearing on stage, he justifies her words. During his absence, Chatsky changed and became wiser, but society did not change and did not become wiser! And a conflict is brewing: society and Chatsky do not accept each other. And seeing that he does not have the slightest opportunity to express (and find those who understand!) his thoughts, his feelings and ideals here, Chatsky breaks with society. He is declared crazy and, indeed, blinkered secular people should have perceived the trends of the new worldview in exactly this way. The true conflict of the play is not in faithful love, but in the clash of two different worldviews, where power is obviously on the side of the more inert and older.
The next character is Evgeny Onegin. Since childhood he has been poisoned by hypocrisy high society, he denies everything he can see. Unlike Chatsky, Onegin has neither aspirations nor lofty ideals. The ideal - love - comes to him only later, when everything has already been lost. But Onegin is an active person at his core. And if we sympathize with Chatsky, then Onegin at the end of the novel is capable of moral regeneration, the “late” Onegin is in some ways close to Griboyedov’s hero, it is no coincidence that Pushkin mentions this, comparing them as if in passing: “... and he ended up like Chatsky from the ship to the ball...,” he writes about Onegin. The last character from the gallery of “extra” people is Pechorin.
This image, in my opinion, is the most tragic. After all, if Chatsky initially strives for some ideals and believes in something, if Onegin comes to spiritual rebirth through suffering, then in Pechorin’s soul there is only emptiness and pain from unused potential. Pechorin sows evil, often deliberately (as in the case of the seduction of Princess Mary). In love he is incompetent (remember Vera), in creativity he is incapable of anything, although in his diaries he gives an unusually poetic description of nature...
So, the image of an extra person undergoes certain changes over time. If Chatsky is somewhere cheerful and cheerful, if Some kind of future can await Onegin, then Pechorin has no future...
The inability to use their powers is not the heroes' fault. This is the fault of time, the fault of the historical course of events... These images inevitably had to appear in Russian literature early XIX century.
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 budget 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 recognized all over 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” stands out, etc. But the most famous and interesting, provocative greatest number disputes, the group of heroes 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 19th century 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 " 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.
Evgeny 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." 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 out of place 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 the hero’s spiritual rebirth. 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 genuine 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. Evgeniy 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 He is not satisfied with her empty entertainments. 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 What 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 does not have the strength for strong emotions, experiences, or 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 at their core, 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 is he so smart and educated person doesn't 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, accurate artistic details, revealing the inner essence and external way of life of Oblomov. 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.
The main plot line in the novel is the relationship 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 of people, all of them passed before 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 "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 Russia is contrasted with condescending disdain, which demonstrates 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 the moral principles of the 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 and gifted with 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 hostility to free life is irreconcilable” allows us to believe that he knows 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, phrase-monger, 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 the early period of the Decembrist movement, when they believed that much could be achieved with words, and limited themselves to oral speeches.
"Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting on it, in turn, death blow 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 the “extra person” is practically equated with the “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 is not 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 are of noble origin and 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– this 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. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit": Commentary. – M., 1983
9. Shamrey L.V., Rusova N.Yu. From allegory to iambic. Terminological dictionary-thesaurus on 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/
How did the image of the “extra person” appear? The origin story is as follows: a romantic hero who is not accepted by society is placed in reality. Everyone stops admiring the romantic; no one is seduced by the torment that occurs in the soul of a loner. Writers understand this and show the true essence of the hero.
Who are considered “superfluous people”?
Who are the “extra people”? They have enormous capabilities, a talent that cannot be put to use. They cannot see the future, so they often go out to have fun to avoid boredom. It’s unlikely to get any simpler or easier. Idle entertainment will only destroy them. They lead to gambling and duels. Some people who have researched this problem, Alexander Chatsky is considered a pioneer in this regard. This character took place in the play “Woe from Wit,” written by Griboyedov. Remnants mean nothing to him, and in the play this nobleman talks a lot, but does little.
Onegin is the brightest representative
(Painting by Yu. M. Ignatiev based on the novel "Eugene Onegin")
The most prominent representative of the image of “superfluous people” is Eugene Onegin, about whom Pushkin wrote. The nobleman is young, educated. He's spinning in secular society, but has no specific goals. He started to do something, but could not finish it. Onegin is unhappy, he does not succeed either in friendship or in love. Belinsky compared Onegin with Russian society, which is described in poetry. Nicholas Russia was often represented by nobles who were disillusioned with life and tired of it.
Pechorin, Oblomov, Bazarov
(Grigory Pechorin)
Many may ask the question: “Have they really forgotten about Bazarov, Oblomov, Pechorin?” They also represent the “extra people,” each of whom has certain characteristics. As for Pechorin, he is distinguished by his penchant for reflection and presence of mind. However, this does not help him realize himself. This hero is self-destructing. But, if we compare Pechorin and Onegin, then the first is in search of the cause of his own suffering.
Oblomov, who is the hero of the novel written by Goncharov, is capable of making friends, loving, has kind heart. But he prefers to stay at home, he is apathetic and lethargic. Researchers say that this particular hero is the culmination of the era of “extra people.”
(Bazarov in disputes with Kirsanov Pavel Petrovich)
If we are talking about Evgeny Bazarov, the novel “Fathers and Sons,” then everything is different here. This hero is not of noble blood. He sets goals for himself and does science. However, Bazarov cannot find a place in society. He moves away from everything old, not realizing that it is necessary to create something instead. That is why he is classified as “superfluous people”.
The role of extra people in works
It should be noted that it is the “extra people” who are the heroes of Russian literature who are remembered most by readers. Why? The authors show an individual person, his soul, vices, motives. At the same time, there are no moralizing or educational attitudes. The work contains to some extent an analysis of the psychological direction.
