What genre does Goncharov's breakdowns belong to? Literary and historical notes of a young technician

Oblomov is a novel by the Russian writer I.A. Goncharov, which was written from 1848 to 1859. It was first published in full in 1859 in the journal Otechestvennye zapiski. The novel is included in a trilogy with other works by IA Goncharov: "An Ordinary History" and "Break".

The novel "Oblomov" appeared at the junction of two eras, and contemporaries, preoccupied with criticism of the reality around them, saw nothing in this work except the author's attempt to satirically denounce the eternal Russian laziness, serfdom, patriarchal order, etc. etc. Leading literary critics of that time (Dobrolyubov, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Pisarev, etc.) burst out with devastating articles about "Oblomovism" as a phenomenon. The voices of other, perhaps less fashionable, but more attentive critics of the novel (Druzhinin) were never heard by the wide literary community.

Subsequently, it was Dobrolyubov's "accusatory" note in the interpretation of the novel by I.A. Goncharova firmly established herself in Russian, and later in Soviet literary criticism. "Oblomov" was included in the school curriculum, and the image of Ilya Ilyich for many years acted as a visual "horror story" for incorrigible lazy people and poor students.

Meanwhile, the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is one of the wisest, deepest, most ambiguous and completely incomprehensible works of the Russian Literature XIX century. In our opinion, on the example of the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, the author made a quite successful attempt to philosophically comprehend eternal problems facing humanity. This is the problem of the relationship between society and the individual, and the meaning of human existence, and the problem of good and evil.

Today it must be admitted that many of the thoughts expressed by the writer Goncharov a century and a half ago are still relevant and interesting not only in the context of understanding Russian national character, but also in the general humanitarian aspect. One of the main occupations of mankind is still the search for answers to the very "Eternal" questions and solution "Eternal" problems of interaction between everyday life and Of being…

The history of the creation of the novel

In 1838 I.A. Goncharov wrote a humorous story called "Dashing Sick", which dealt with a strange epidemic that originated in Western Europe and ended up in St. Petersburg: empty dreams, castles in the air, "blues". Many critics considered this "dashing ache" - a prototype of "Oblomovism". But in the novel, Goncharov interprets this phenomenon in a completely different way. He sees in "Oblomovism" not just an introduced evil. Its roots go deep into Russian soil, into the national character, way of thinking, historical conditions, and the author himself is very far from being able to unequivocally call "Oblomovism" evil.

In 1849, Sovremennik published one of the central chapters of Oblomov - Oblomov's Dream. Goncharov himself called this chapter "the overture of the whole novel." And already in the "overture" the author asks the question: what is "Oblomovism" - the "golden age" or death? There is no answer in the entire subsequent text of the novel.

In "Dream ..." motives of static and immobility, stagnation prevail, but at the same time one can feel the author's deep sympathy, good-natured humor, and not at all the satirical denial inherent in "Dashing Sickness."

As Goncharov later argued, in 1849 the plan for the novel "Oblomov" was ready and a draft version of its first part was completed. “Soon,” wrote Goncharov, “after the publication of“ Ordinary History ”in Sovremennik in 1847, Oblomov’s plan was already in my mind.” In the summer of 1849, when Oblomov's Dream was ready, Goncharov made a trip to his homeland, to Simbirsk, whose life retained the imprint of patriarchal antiquity. In this small town, the writer saw many examples of the "dream" with which the inhabitants of Oblomovka, fictional by him, slept.

Work on the novel was interrupted due to Goncharov's voyage around the world aboard the frigate Pallada. Only in the summer of 1857, after the travel essays "Pallas Frigate" were published, Goncharov continued to work on "Oblomov". In the summer of 1857, he left for the resort of Marienbad, where he completed three parts of the novel within a few weeks. In August of the same year, Goncharov began working on the last, fourth, part of the novel, the final chapters of which were written in 1858.

“It will seem unnatural,” Goncharov wrote to one of his friends, “how can a person finish in a month what he could not finish in a year? To this I will answer that if there were no years, nothing would have been written in a month. The fact of the matter is that the novel was taken out all the way down to the smallest scenes and details, and all that remained was to write it down. "

Goncharov recalled this in his article "An Unusual Story": "In my head the whole novel had already been processed completely - and I transferred it to paper, as if under dictation ..."

However, preparing the novel for publication, I.A. Goncharov in 1858 rewrote "Oblomov", supplementing it with new scenes, and made some reductions.

Heroes and prototypes

Oblomov

According to eyewitnesses, I.A. Goncharov belonged to writing work very seriously. He worked hard and for a long time on each of his works. Of course, the author of "Oblomov" did not live literary work... V different periods his life he served in the civil service, and official duties took a lot of time. In addition, by his nature, Goncharov was a sybarite, he loved serene peace, for only during hours of such peace did a literary muse visit him.

Illustration by K. Tikhomirov

In the travel diary "Frigate" Pallada "" Goncharov admitted that during the trip most spent time in the cabin, lying on the sofa, not to mention the difficulty with which it was generally decided to circumnavigation... In the friendly circle of the Maykovs, who belonged to the writer with great love, Goncharov was given a polysemantic nickname - "Prince de Laz"

Therefore, the researchers of the work of I.A. Goncharov had every reason to believe that many of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov's features are partly autobiographical. The author himself treats his hero with great sympathy and deep understanding, although he often sneers at him.

The question of whether real prototypes of the characters of "Oblomov" existed, and whether Oblomovka is a cast of a certain area, did not arise immediately among the researchers of Goncharov's work.

B.M. Engelgardt in his monograph "Travel around the world of I. Oblomov" pointed out that the identification of the writer and his hero began after the general public got acquainted with the book "Frigate" Pallas "", when, taking "at face value his story about the voyage, the reader and criticism took the “literary mask” given in this story for a reliable portrayal of the author. It was from this time that references to the specific personality of the writer began to be widely used in criticism in the analysis of Goncharov's works, and the traditional legendary image of Goncharov as a man appeared.

Goncharov himself emphasized many times (and this idea moved from personal conversations and private correspondence to An Unusual Story) that Oblomov is not a portrait of a specific person. When studying Oblomov's manuscripts, it turned out that at the initial stage of work on the novel, Goncharov used observations on specific people, wrote down these observations, intending to give the novel characters the appropriate features, but later deliberately refused this. In his article "Better Late Than Never" (1879), he declared that Oblomov "was a solid, undiluted expression of mass"; in a letter to F.M. Dostoevsky on February 11, 1874 explained that he used the method of typification, according to which phenomena and persons are made up of “long and many repetitions or layers<...>where the similarities of the one and the other become more frequent in the course of time and finally establish, freeze and become familiar to the observer. "

Despite these author's confessions, contemporary researchers to Goncharov have devoted many pages to the novel Oblomov, either identifying or dissolving the author's personality with the image he created. In his correspondence, Goncharov was often forced to make excuses for "Oblomovism" in front of friends and acquaintances, pointing out the inadmissibility of the fusion of a literary mask with the image of the author. But contemporaries, alas, never heard him.

The topic of identification of the personality of I.A. Goncharova with his hero famous novel smoothly migrated to Soviet literary criticism.

The conclusion of Yu.M. Loshchitsa, who noted in the image of Oblomov “an unusually high degree of increments to the personality of the writer ”, but immediately added that Goncharov was by no means identical with his hero:

“… Oblomov is not a self-portrait of a writer, much less an auto-charm. But in Oblomov, a lot of the personality and life fate of Goncharov was creatively refracted - a fact from which we cannot escape<...>... This, perhaps, is the main personal background of the “Oblomov phenomenon” - that Goncharov, “without sparing his belly,” laid in his hero a huge part of his autobiographical material. But, having understood this fact for ourselves, we are thereby gradually moving towards understanding the root features of Goncharov's realism, towards understanding his writing ethics. Goncharov's realism is characterized by a high concentration of confessionality.<...>Goncharov suffers from the illnesses of his Oblomov, and if here we have critical realism, then self-critical at the same time. "

(Loshits Yu.M. Hearing the earth. M., 1988. S.214)

IF Annensky, SA Vengerov and other biographers of the writer, on the contrary, believed that, not Oblomov, but “maybe Aduev-uncle and Stolz were some kind of mental pain of Goncharov himself. They reflected the desires of narrow philistinism, to which our poet paid tribute: he experienced them in departments, in bureaucratic circles, in taking care of the arrangement of his lonely corner, in pursuit of security, for comfort, in some callousness, perhaps, of an old and economic bachelor " ("Oblomov" in criticism. P. 228).

Foreign researcher M. Ere traced how in the opinion of his contemporaries, including critics, the image of “two Goncharovs” (like Oblomov and like Peter Aduev) arose: “Scientists of previous generations, who identified critical research with the study of biography, tried to determine who Goncharov - whether he belonged to the Oblomov type or the Pyotr Aduev type. The opinions of his contemporaries were divided. The writer's obesity, the slowness and the detached look that sometimes appeared to him reminded only Oblomov; others, and those were in the majority, thought they saw Peter Aduyev in his elegance, ironic restraint, sometimes didactism, prosaic prudence, which destroyed the image of the artist, who owned more idealistic compatriots ... ”(See Ehre M. Oblomov and his Creator: The life and Art of Ivan Goncharov. P. 37.)

Stolz

Stolz - Oblomov's antagonist, according to Goncharov, was not written off by him from any particular person. Just as observations on the characters of Russian people merged in Oblomov, so Stolz, according to the writer, “turned up for a reason<...>arm in arm. " Goncharov drew attention to "the role that both the German element and the Germans have played and are still playing in Russian life", as well as the type of "born here and Russified German and the German system of lifeless, vigorous and practical education" ("Better late than never ”).

AB Muratov believed that when creating the image of Stolz, the author of "Oblomov" was helped by the impressions received while working in the Department of Foreign Trade, and the nature of the hero's activities could be prompted by the content of the cases that passed through the hands of Goncharov.

Only once was an attempt made to link the images of Stolz-father and Stolz-son with real face... Local history researcher Yu.M. Alekseeva in her article "Was Andrey Karl?" ( People's newspaper, Ulyanovsk, 1992. No. 69 (162). June 17) argued that the name Karl did not appear accidentally in the draft manuscript of the novel. The writer's brother, Nikolai Alexandrovich, was married to the daughter of the Simbirsk physician Karl Friedrich Rudolf Elizaveta. Using archival materials, the researcher reconstructed the main stages of Rudolph's biography. The son of a medical official, he studied in Germany, in 1812 he joined the Ryazan militia, took part in campaigns and battles, in 1817 he was assigned to the Simbirsk Alexander hospital, in 1831 he was awarded the Order of St. Anna for the fight against cholera, which gave the right to hereditary nobility ... In the city, according to the memoirs of A.N. Goncharov and Rudolph were rightfully called the “local doctor Haas”. Rudolph received a significant estate for his wife. The only thing that coincides with the biography of Stolz the father is that the hero gets from Saxony to Russia, and with the biography of Stolz the son - the acquisition of wealth and high social status: "The dream of Andrei Stolz's mother came true: a German from Saxony became a rich Russian nobleman."

The opinion has been repeatedly expressed that Stolz inherited the traits of the writer himself. Those researchers who adhered to this opinion were based on the official diligence of Goncharov, his rather successful career, on accuracy and secrecy (until the publication of letters began, it was believed that flip side these qualities could be prudence).

It was already mentioned above that I.F. Annensky called Stolz "a certain heartache of Goncharov himself." E.A. Lyatsky found that, creating Stolz, like Pyotr Aduev and Ayanov, Goncharov analyzed his own romantic youthful impulses and abandoned them in favor of practical approaches necessary in privacy and in service.

Olga Ilyinskaya

The image of Olga Ilyinskaya is largely collective. To create it, Goncharov undoubtedly used the freshest impressions of life. Subsequently, readers and critics put forward three main prototypes of Olga Ilyinskaya: E.P. Maikova, E.V. Tolstaya and A.A. Kolzakov.

In the diary of E.A. Shtakenschneider - a common acquaintance of Goncharov and the Maikovs - has been repeatedly noted: the author of "Oblomov" directly told his friends that he wrote Olga from Ekaterina Pavlovna, the wife of Vl.N. Maykov, with whom he was in love.

Goncharov's acquaintance with Ekaterina Pavlovna happened just before her marriage in 1852, and just before Goncharov's departure for sailing on the Pallada.

Judging by the words of those who knew Maikova during this period, she was an extremely outstanding person: “Katerina Pavlovna is an absolutely exceptional creature. She's not beautiful at all short stature, thin and weak, but she is better than any beauties with some elusive grace and intelligence. The main thing is, not being a coquette, not paying special attention to appearance, outfits, she has a supremely secret to attract people and inspire them with some kind of careful worship of herself<...>holiday, bright holiday ". (Stackenschneider E.A. Diary and notes. (1854-1886)

In a letter to I.I. Lkhovsky on August 1 (13), 1858, Goncharov wrote: “The old woman (Maikova’s nickname in a friendly circle) seemed to me cheerful, playful, so I called her cadet: she was angry, considering it an attempt to throw a stone at her feminine beauty. And in fact, she is lovely!<...>If I were 30 years old and if she didn’t have the vile habit of loving the Old Man (nickname V. N. Maikov), I would have fallen on my knees in front of her and said: “Olga Ilyinskaya, it's you!”.

Stackenschneider also wrote about the cult of the family hearth, professed by Maikova:<...>... The main thing is Volodya, he is above everything ... ".

The version about E.V. Tolstaya as a prototype of Olga Ilyinskaya arose after the publication of P.N. Sakulin, a series of letters from I.A. Goncharov addressed to this woman. The researcher believed that the relationship between Tolstoy and Goncharov (down to some nuances) was completely duplicated in the relationship between Ilyinskaya and Stolz. A pair of Oblomov - Ilyinskaya appears in creative imagination writer, and Goncharov have to act simultaneously in two, directly opposite to each other images. Sakulin singled out in his article those features of EV Tolstoy's appearance and character that bring her closer to Olga Ilyinskaya, and the main of these features are beauty and the ability to illuminate "the dull existence of a decrepit bachelor."

As for Avgusta (Avdotya) Andreevna Kolzakova, whom IA Goncharov was also fascinated by in 1850-1852, their romance ended quite quickly, by the time Goncharov left Pallada, a break had taken place. Subsequently, Goncharov spoke very ironically about his love for Kolzakova in letters to friends. According to some researchers, the writer used the motive of the break with Augusta in the scene of Oblomov's break with Olga Ilyinskaya.

Critics about the novel "Oblomov"

The emergence of the novel Oblomov, unfortunately, coincided with the time of the most acute social and political crisis in the late 1850s and early 1860s. A revolutionary situation was brewing in the country. The famous "split" took place in the editorial board of Sovremennik. None of the leading literary men already remembered that the novel Oblomov was started by the author back in the 1840s, that he was created outside the political differences of modern Russia and by no means on the "spite of the day."

Goncharov wrote about his hero in the following way: "I had one artistic ideal: this is an image of an honest and kind, pretty nature, an extremely idealist, struggling all his life, seeking truth, meeting lies at every step, deceiving and falling into apathy and powerlessness." ...

The author did not at all set himself the goal of denouncing or scourging the shortcomings of the landowner Oblomov. On the contrary, he created a certain perfect ideal, which is too good to adapt, change, abandon himself for the sake of the orders of an imperfect and alien society. And if Alexander Aduev (the hero of The Ordinary Story) ultimately cheats on himself, obeying the circumstances, then Oblomov simply falls into suspended animation - a natural state for the absolute ideal. By definition, he is not capable of evil, and he, like any ideal substance, is not supposed to create active good. After all, neither Ilya Ilyich, nor Goncharov himself, nor anyone living in the world can predict how his "good" deed may turn out to be around.

After the appearance of the novel Oblomov, young, socially active critics of serfdom immediately grasped the image of an apathetic landowner incapable of activity, who had grown up and brought up in the patriarchal atmosphere of a lordly estate. They decided that Goncharov's work was nothing more than a burning call for the elimination of the old landlord system, the fight against inertia and stagnation.

Leading critic of Sovremennik N.A. Dobrolyubov in his article "What is Oblomovism?" (1859), giving a high assessment to the novel, unequivocally characterized "Oblomovism" as a purely negative phenomenon. Actually, the critic was not interested in the image of the protagonist at all. Dobrolyubov saw in him only another "superfluous person" born of a vicious landlord-noble environment and imperfection of society:

“The vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own habits, but from others - developed in him an apathetic immobility and plunged into a miserable state of moral slavery. This slavery is so intertwined with Oblomov's lordship, so they mutually penetrate each other and one is conditioned by the other, that it seems that there is not the slightest possibility of drawing any border between them. This moral slavery of Oblomov is perhaps the most curious side of his personality ... He is the slave of every woman, everyone he meets ... "

(N.A. Dobrolyubov. "What is Oblomovism?")

Then still quite young, novice critic D.I. Pisarev in his rather confused article “Oblomov. Roman I.A. Goncharova "tried to consider" Oblomovism "not only as a social phenomenon, but also as a national and even psychological phenomenon:

“The thought of Mr. Goncharov, carried out in his novel, belongs to all centuries and peoples, but has special meaning in our time, for our Russian society. The author decided to trace the deadening, destructive influence exerted on a person by mental apathy, lulling, seizing little by little all the forces of the soul, embracing and holding down all the best, human, rational movements and feelings. This apathy is a universal human phenomenon, it is expressed in the most varied forms and is generated by the most varied reasons; but plays in it everywhere the main role the terrible question: “why live? what to work for ”is a question to which a person often cannot find a satisfactory answer. This unresolved question, this unsatisfied doubt depletes one's strength, ruins one's activity; a person gives up, and he quits work, not seeing his goal ... "

It should be noted here that the actively cited Soviet time Pisarev's article was first published in the journal of sciences, arts and literature for adult girls "Dawn" (№10, 1859). It would be somewhat naive to expect from a novice author a deeper understanding of the text of the novel and its detailed criticism in a magazine for adult girls. In subsequent years, Pisarev did not return to the analysis of Oblomov.

Also known is the epistolary response of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin for the journal publication of the first part of the novel. In a letter to P.V. Annenkov on January 29, 1859, he said with irritation that he did not like the novel itself or his the main character: “... I read Oblomov and, to tell the truth, broke off all my mental capacity... How much poppy he put in there! It's even scary to remember that this is only the first day! and that in this way you can sleep for 365 days! There is no doubt that "Sleep" is an extraordinary thing, but it is already a known thing, but all the rest is what rubbish! what an unnecessary development of Zagoskin! What a hackneyed form and technique! But if it is difficult for us, the readers, to spend two hours with Oblomov, then what was it like for the author to fail with him for 9 years! And sleep with Oblomov, and eat with Oblomov, and all see this sleepy image in front of you, all swollen, all in folds, as if the Antichrist was sitting on it! After all, Oblomov could not have seen a dream, why was such a lovely thing inserted into such an ocean of stench? ".

Very rudely Shchedrin also ridiculed the attempt to present Oblomov as a kind of Russian Hamlet: "It's wonderful that Goncharov is trying to psychologically explain Oblomov and make him something like Hamlet, but he did not make Hamlet, but Hamlet's ass.".

The extremely irritated nature of the satirist's judgments was caused by a literary dispute between Oblomov and a supporter of the "real trend in literature" Penkin, masterfully conveyed by the author with the ironic subtext of this scene. Later, polemic attacks were forgotten, the "irritation" passed, but Shchedrin still did not have a great affection for the novel. Shchedrin perceived the novel through the prism of the ideas of N.A. Dobrolyubov's literary and political manifesto.

Approximately the same opinion was shared by D.V. who was clearly not disposed to Goncharov. Grigorovich, who believed that “out of everything written by Goncharov,“ Oblomov's Dream ”remains - a truly beautiful literary work... "(Grigorovich DV Literary memoirs. M., 1987. P.106).

Of the contemporary critics, perhaps only A. Druzhinin considered Goncharov's novel outside the socio-political and accusatory satirical context. It is no coincidence that the title of his critical article does not contain the word "Oblomovism" at all (by the way, in the original text of the novel this word was used by the author only 16 times). Druzhinin views Oblomov as a novel about Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, and not about an abstract social, psychological, or even psychopathic phenomenon. The now completely forgotten A. Druzhinin, as you know, was also a leading critic of Nekrasov's Sovremennik (before its "split") and a personal friend of A.I. Goncharova. He was opposed to the dominance of satirical realism in fiction the second half of the 19th century, did not agree with representatives of contemporary "progressive" movements, who denied the significance of the work of Pushkin and Lermontov. Druzhinin compares Goncharov's poetic literary talent with Pushkin's talent; in Oblomov sees almost poetic national hero, and in "Oblomovism" - the spiritual heritage of the Russian people:

“Oblomov was studied and recognized by a whole people, predominantly rich in Oblomovism, and not only did he learn, but loved him with all his heart, because it is impossible to recognize Oblomov and not love him deeply. It is in vain to this day that many gentle ladies look at Ilya Ilyich as a creature worthy of ridicule. it is in vain that many people with overly practical aspirations are trying to despise Oblomov and even call him a snail: all this strict trial of the hero shows one, superficial and transient pickiness. Oblomov is kind to all of us and is worth boundless love - this is a fact, and it is impossible to argue against him. His creator himself is infinitely loyal to Oblomov, and this is the whole reason for the depth of his creation ... "

Druzhinin notes that a person like Ilya Ilyich Oblomov can reveal his best qualities only in love for another person:

"Delicate, loving nature Oblomova is all illuminated through love - and could it be otherwise, with a pure, childishly affectionate Russian soul, from which even her laziness drove away corruption with tempting thoughts. Ilya Ilyich spoke completely through his love, and Olga, a keen-sighted girl, did not remain blind before the treasures that opened before her ... "(AV Druzhinin." Oblomov. Roman IA Goncharova ")

Druzhinin gives great importance the image of Olga Ilyinskaya, and how masterfully the author conveyed all the nuances of her touching love story with Oblomov. Against this background, Stolz, as the opposite of Oblomov, loses in many ways and seems to be an "extra" character. In communication with him, Oblomov is not disclosed. On the contrary, using the example of Stolz, the author shows the reader only negative traits the so-called "business people" of their time: from the persistent desire to "comb everyone under one brush" to the all-consuming egoism, indifference to someone else's fate.

Soviet literary scholars often viewed Druzhinin's article as a brilliant, even poetic apology for Oblomov's personality, contrary to the traditional view of this hero.

However, IA Goncharov himself was quite satisfied with Dobrolyubov's article about “Oblomov”. He wrote to P. Annenkov:

“Take a look, please, Dobrolyubov's article about Oblomov; It seems to me about Oblomovism - that is, about what it is, nothing more can be said. He must have foreseen this and hastened to publish it before anyone else. After that, the criticism remains, so as not to repeat itself - or to give in to censure, or, leaving Oblomovism itself aside, to talk about women. "

The rest of the criticism, also satisfied with Dobrolyubov's article, did not notice Oblomov at all. The progressive public of that time was more interested in the answers to the eternal Russian questions "what to do?" and "who is to blame?" Goncharov did not offer ready-made recipes for social reorganization. Before thinking about the happiness of all mankind, he called on every person to look into himself, to understand the motives and origins of his desires, actions, aspirations, to comprehend all the ambiguity of human nature, to think about its true purpose.

Analysis of the work

The central place in the novel "Oblomov" is occupied by the image of its protagonist Ilya Ilyich. All the author's attention is focused exclusively on this image. The rest of the characters only complement him, allowing the hero to reveal himself in a particular life situation, in communication or, more typical for Oblomov, "contact" with the world around him.

The image of Oblomov is to some extent the author's development of the image of Alexander Aduev, the hero of "An Ordinary History". A provincial romantic young man, like Oblomov, comes to St. Petersburg in order to realize his talents in a worthy field. At the beginning, young Aduev finds the strength to resist the imperfect and deeply alien to him social order, but after experiencing several deep disappointments, he gives up, adapts, changes and becomes "like everyone else."

Illustration by N. Shcheglov

Oblomov is just as beautiful-hearted, kind, open to the world an idealist, in a similar situation, finds another way out for himself. Without entering into any open conflicts with the external, hostile world, he remains as he was. At the same time, he does not try to change or correct something in others, to impose his views or ideals on them. Oblomov completely withdraws into himself. Ilya Ilyich prefers lonely reflections, beautiful dreams, sleep on his own sofa to senseless vanity, opportunism, insincere fun and stupidity of those around him. Oblomov feels comfortable and free in the world of his own dreams and does not need more. What's wrong with that? It would seem that a person has almost reached perfection, having reduced all his desires and needs to an absolute minimum, gone into his deeply intimate, wonderful world of memories, dreams, reflections. When people leave for such a purpose in some distant monastery or settle in a lonely cell in a deep forest - this is considered a feat of hermitism. At any oriental culture such behavior commands respect, because the way of knowing oneself is one of the most worthy for a thinking person.

But in the center of St. Petersburg it is almost considered a crime!

Oblomov rejects the external world he does not need, internally protesting against his absurdity. He is rapidly losing touch with this world. The hero does not need anyone, but he, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, lying on the sofa in his dressing gown, for some reason is needed by everyone.

In the first part of the novel, visitors walk into Oblomov's apartment in a slender line. Each of them, in his own way, is trying to destroy the ideal state of peace, which, for one reason or another, is completely inaccessible to them. Oddly enough, all the variety of images of Oblomov's visitors resembles a crowd of pilgrims going to venerate the holy relics or some other artifact that arouses their curiosity, surprises, perhaps calms, gives hope. Among them there are also outright money-grubbingers - Tarantiev. But even such people go to church exactly when they need to ask for something for themselves. And it happens that they are not deceived in their expectations ...

Stolz is also one of the "pilgrims", but he returns to Oblomov, rather out of habit. The author repeatedly talks about how Stolz loves and appreciates Ilya Ilyich, but the nature of their relationship has nothing to do with friendly understanding or an alliance of spiritually close people. Oblomov for Stolz is a living embodiment of his childhood memory, oh parental home, about the good that has long passed and is now completely unattainable. Oblomov himself to Stolz is incomprehensible and uninteresting. They are not just antipodes. These are people from different planets. Like any rationally thinking, non-believing and non-believing "business" person, Stolz considers Oblomov's path to be wrong and disastrous. Moreover, he sincerely believes that he can “save” Ilya Ilyich by imposing on him his ideas about life, about happiness, even about good and evil. Stolz considers Oblomov's state a sound sleep of the soul, tries to stir up, wake him up, bringing him out of his torpor. It is with the aim of "stirring up" the emotional impulses that Stolz introduces his friend to a clever, outstanding girl - Olga Ilyinskaya. However, to the cunning Stolz, who is used to calculating his every step in advance, it does not even occur to Oblomov that Oblomov is capable of instantly, almost at first sight, falling in love with Olga. For a person with a sleeping soul, such an act is unnatural. Consequently, Oblomov's soul did not sleep. Ilya Ilyich fell in love with Olga as if he had long been ready to love: sincerely, tenderly, selflessly. His love very soon evokes in the soul of the girl an equally sincere reciprocal feeling.

At first glance, Olga is trying her best to "wake up" and call Oblomov to active life... In fact, it was Ilya Ilyich who awakened in Ilyinsky's soul the ability for the first, real feeling. None of her former admirers, including Stolz, could do this.

Love and at the same time taking responsibility for the feelings of another person take Oblomov out of his usual balance. Soul and body lose their ideal state of rest. Deprived of inner harmony, self-sufficiency, he painfully perceives contact with the world around him. Olga, as a part of this world, requires constant activity, fuss, arrangement of life (a trip to the estate, putting financial affairs in order), not realizing that thereby destroys the Being of a loved one. She is not able to understand that for Oblomov, love for her, like the very possibility of further relationships, is identical with death and a new birth. Only as a result of this birth, not Ilya Ilyich Oblomov will be born, but some other person who, perhaps, she will not like.

Indicative is the moment that Olga Ilyinskaya is getting married to Stolz, but she cannot forget Oblomov. She understands: a short communication with this person in spiritually gave her much more than a measured, "business" marriage with Stolz is capable of giving for the rest of her life. Oblomov disturbed the sleep of her soul, indicated the path to follow, and, like an actor who played his role, left the stage. Olga was left alone and gave up. Having surrendered to the mercy of everyday worries, fruitless vanity, everything that makes up the everyday life of the absolute majority of people, she took for granted the "norms" of behavior determined by society. Only the memory of the first feeling for Oblomov sometimes disturbed the sleep of her soul, causing causeless anxiety, melancholy, regret ...

Stolz and Ilyinskaya believed that Oblomov died irrevocably, getting bogged down in a relationship with an unworthy, uneducated woman. It did not even occur to them that Agafya Matveyevna Pshenitsyna could have been a completely conscious choice of Ilya Ilyich and a more than worthy choice. If Olga Ilyinskaya demanded decisive changes from Oblomov, abandoning herself, then Agafya Matveyevna sincerely loved Oblomov as he is, demanding no change, no rebirth, no action, no money, not even his love. Oblomov became for her an absolute ideal, the embodiment of her personal God in a cramped apartment on the Vyborg side. And the "deity" fully rewarded the sincerely believing adept, even left her offspring - Andryushenka, revered and forever separated by the mother from her other children.

Oblomov is perhaps the only hero in all Russian literature whose existence is never limited to the role he has assumed. He, like any ideal substance, has nothing and, most importantly, there is no need to cling to others. He is not able to split his perfect personality into the role of husband, father, landowner, official. Ilya Ilyich does not agree with any definition that others can give him. Let us remember how Oblomov is outraged that he will be called "the groom" if he marries Ilyinskaya. He does not want to serve, because the position he holds negates the personality of a person, replacing it with a social status. Oblomov says about himself: "I am a master." In the conditions of contemporary Russia, such a definition is akin to the concept of a simply free person who possesses all rights, but is not bound by any obligations either with society, or with the state, or with the existing government. Oblomov is free and free to do whatever he wants, but he is also free and free to do nothing if he wants to do just that.

Oblomov's phenomenon bewitches those around him, attracts, makes him serve. After all, it is not out of pity or personal gain that the prudent machine gun Stolz undertakes to fix things in Oblomovka, and then takes the orphaned Andryusha under his patronage. Not out of pity, Pshenitsyn's widow, in difficult times for Oblomov, brings her last values ​​to the pawnshop. The unlucky Zakhar faithfully serves his master not only out of slavish obedience. They all love Oblomov, not expecting anything in return, feeling in him, and only in him is the spiritual ideal unattainable for them. Even Tarantyev and Mukhoyarov are deeply negative characters, and they do their evil towards Ilya Ilyich not at all from disgust or rejection of his personality. On the contrary, they envy Oblomov, subconsciously feeling in him the presence of what they themselves are deprived of. The goal of Mukhoyarov and Tarantiev was not just to ruin Ilya Ilyich so that he would die in poverty. The greatest satisfaction to ill-wishers would bring Oblomov's deprivation of his inner freedom... If the beautiful-minded Ilya Ilyich got up from his sofa, went to serve, take bribes, fuss, lie, that is, he became like all the Tarantievs and Mukhoyarovs in the world - this was the best revenge, proof of their innocence.

Being just a free person in an imperfect world is not easy. And in this case, it is not the world that rejects Oblomov, but he rejects this world from himself, deliberately refusing any contacts and "contacts" with his past, with what once mattered to him.

The last meeting with Oblomov in Pshenitsyna's house once again proves how much Ilya Ilyich's paths now diverged with Stolts and Olga. Stolz makes decisions for Olga. She comes to Pshenitsyna's house to see a person dear to her. But her husband decided that there was no need, and Olga, once decisive, independent in her actions, obeyed, did not leave the carriage. However, neither Olga nor Stolz ever succeeded in making decisions for Oblomov, nor did it even now.

Having completed his earthly existence, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov dies quietly in his sleep, free and beloved. Isn't that what every person ultimately wants? ..

Shirokova Elena

Materials used:

Druzhinin A. V. "Oblomov". Roman I.A. Goncharova // Literary criticism- M ..: Sov. Russia, 1983. (B-ka Russian criticism).

Goncharov's novel Oblomov is a significant work of the Russian classic. This is the book that you come to a true comprehension of already in adulthood, gradually understanding its meaning and characters. The main character of the work is the young landowner Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Some call Oblomov a brooding poet, others a philosopher, others just a lazy person. However, there is no single view of the image of Oblomov, which would fully and holistically characterize him as a person. Any reader who knows how to think and think will make up his own individual opinion about him.

The history of the creation of the novel "Oblomov"

Ivan Goncharov created "Oblomov" under the influence of special impressions and thoughts. The novel did not appear suddenly, not suddenly, but became a response to the author's own views. The history of the creation of the novel "Oblomov", no doubt, leaves a significant imprint on the general atmosphere of the work, against the background of which the course of the narrative takes place. The idea was born gradually, like the bricks of a large house are being built. Shortly before "Oblomov" Goncharov wrote the story "Dashing sick", which served as the basis for the creation of the novel.

The creation of the Oblomov novel coincides with the socio-political crisis in Russia. For that time, the image of an apathetic landowner who could not independently take responsibility for his own life and make responsible decisions turned out to be very relevant. The main idea of ​​the work was formed under the influence of the views of the critic Belinsky, who was deeply impressed by Goncharov's first novel, An Ordinary History. Belinsky noted that in Russian literature the image of a "superfluous person" has already appeared, which cannot adapt to the surrounding reality, is useless for society. This person is a free-thinker, a fine-feeling dreamer, poet and philosopher. Romanticism in his nature is associated with extreme inactivity, laziness and apathy. So, the history of the novel "Oblomov" is associated with and reflects the life of the nobility of the second half of the XIX century.

Ideological and compositional component

The novel consists of four parts, each of which fully reveals the state of the protagonist and reflects the changes taking place in his soul: a weak-willed, lazy existence; transformation of the heart, spiritual, moral struggle and, finally, dying. Physical death is the result that Ilya Ilyich comes to. The history of the creation of the novel "Oblomov" emphasizes the hero's impossibility to go beyond the bounds of his indecision and unwillingness to any activity.

Situation in Oblomov's house

As soon as I entered the room where Ilya Ilyich was lying on the sofa, one could find in the interior, in the arrangement of things, an incredible resemblance to the owner himself: dust could be seen everywhere, plates uncleaned after dinner. The role of Oblomov in the novel Oblomov is characteristic, defining. She sets an example of an existence that leads to spiritual death.

Oblomov is not adapted to life, his whole appearance and habits express the desire to hide, to hide from the oppressive reality: his shoes were wide and stood next to the sofa, so that “he always immediately fell into them”; the robe was so wide and loose that "Oblomov could have wrapped himself in it twice." Servant Zakhar is like his master: once again getting up off the couch is a feat for him, cleaning the rooms is an unimaginable anxiety and fuss. Zakhar is immersed in his thoughts, knows the "master" from infancy, which is why sometimes he allows himself to argue with him.

What is the main character?

Characteristics of Oblomov in the novel "Oblomov" are shown to the reader literally from the first pages. Ilya Ilyich is a finely feeling nature, apathetic, emotional, but disgusting to any activity. Movement was a difficult task for him, he did not want and did not strive to change something in his life. Lying down with him was a normal, familiar state, and in order to get Oblomov off the couch, an extraordinary event had to happen. The need to fill out business papers tired him, the thought of the need to move out of the apartment worried and made him sad. However, instead of straining the will, the mind and doing what is required of it, it continues to be inactive.

"Why am I like this?"

Oblomov's characterization in the novel "Oblomov" reflects the main idea of ​​the work - the wreck moral ideals hero and gradual dying. demonstrates to the reader the origins of the weak-willed character of Ilya Ilyich. In a dream, the hero sees himself small, his native village Oblomovka, in which he was born and raised. As a child, they tried in every possible way to protect him from real life: they did not allow him to leave the house in the cold and frost, climb fences, he studied only on those days when there were no holidays, but they happened so often that "it was not worth driving." Food was a cult, they loved the holidays and laid big tables.

Oblomov absorbed the beliefs of his native village, became part of the existence that its inhabitants led. "Oblomovism" is a consequence of such a perception of the world: to go with the flow, only occasionally waking up from a disturbing, restless sleep. The role of Oblomov in the novel Oblomov is great and significant: to outline the problem of the spiritual oblivion of the personality, its dissolution in everyday details and the unwillingness to live.

Oblomov and Stolz

The closest and only friend of Ilya Ilyich throughout his life was and remains Andrei Ivanovich Stolts. Despite the difference in characters, they were bound by a strong friendship from childhood. Stolz is active, energetic, constantly in business, on the road. He cannot sit in one place for a minute: movement is the essence of his nature. He achieved a lot in life thanks to the external efforts made, but deep poetic experiences are inaccessible to him. Stolz prefers not to dream, but to act.

Oblomov is apathetic, he does not have enough energy even to finish reading the book he has begun (it often lay on the table for several weeks). Poets excited his imagination, awakened movements of thought and feelings in his soul, but he never went beyond these thoughts and feelings. It was his nature to be absorbed in thought, but he did nothing to develop it further. With their opposite characters, these two people complemented each other, constituted a single harmonious whole.

Love test

The main characters of the novel have a significant influence on the state of Ilya Ilyich. Oblomov was inspired by a great feeling for Olga Ilyinskaya, made him leave his cozy world for a while and go out into the outer life, filled with colors and sounds. Despite the fact that Olga often made fun of Oblomov, considered him too lazy and apathetic, this man was dear and close to her.

Their beautiful and painfully Touching story love shakes, gives rise to a feeling of regret, indelible bitterness in the soul. Oblomov considers himself unworthy of love, which is why he writes to Olga a painful and at the same time exciting letter. It can be assumed that he foresees their imminent breakup, but this circumstance rather indicates Ilya Ilyich's unwillingness to accept feelings towards himself, doubts that he is worthy of the young lady's love. The hero is afraid of being rejected and hesitates for a long time to propose to Olga. In a letter he writes that her love is a preparation for a future feeling, but not love itself. As a result, the hero turns out to be right: later Olga confesses to him that she loved "the future Oblomov" in him, cherished in her feeling for him the possibility of a new love.

Why didn't love for Olga Ilyinskaya save Oblomov?

With the appearance of Olga and Oblomov, it seems, he got up from the sofa, but only for a while, in order to be able to express to the young lady his admiration for her beauty and youth. His feelings are sincere and strong, but they lack dynamics, determination.

Instead of solving pressing issues related to the apartment and preparations for the wedding, Oblomov continues to close himself out of life. During the day, he sleeps or reads books, rarely goes to his bride, shifts the responsibility for his happiness to strangers: he asks others to bother about an apartment, to solve cases with rent in Oblomovka.

Why is this book still relevant today?

The history of the creation of the novel "Oblomov" is closely connected with historical events 50-60 years old and is a wonderful monument noble society XIX century. For modern readers, the book may be interesting for questions that have an eternal character. This is a choice of life direction love line, philosophical views and thoughts. The heroes of the Oblomov novel are different, but they are all living people with individual character traits. Each of them has its own advantages and disadvantages, its own beliefs, views of the world. For example, Andrei Stolts is quite ambitious, demanding of himself and those around him, Olga Ilyinskaya is a romantic nature, which is not alien to poetry and music, Zakhar is absent-minded and lazy.

The characterization of the novel leads the reader to an understanding of a simple truth. Oblomov was ruined not by a blow, from which his earthly existence was interrupted, but by an inactive, apathetic attitude to life, to oneself. It is important not to oversleep life, not to waste in vain, but to realize one's essence through its various manifestations, such as activity, culture, art, personal happiness.

Goncharov's novel Oblomov was written in 1858 and published in Otechestvennye zapiski in 1859. However, the first part of the work - "Oblomov's Dream" was published back in 1849 " Literary collection", Becoming a symbolic element of the plot and ideological structure of the novel. "Oblomov" is one of the works of Goncharov's novel trilogy, which also includes "An Ordinary History" and "Break". In the book, the author touches on how many acute social issues for his era - the formation of a new Russian society and opposition to the primordially Russian mentality European principles and "eternal" problems of the meaning of life, love and human happiness. A detailed analysis of "Oblomov" by Goncharov will allow a more similar disclosure of the author's idea and a better understanding of the brilliant work of Russian literature of the 19th century.

Genre and literary direction

The novel "Oblomov" is written in the tradition literary direction realism, as evidenced by the following signs: the central conflict of the work, developing between the main character and a society that does not share his way of life; a realistic depiction of reality, reflecting many everyday historical facts; the presence of characters typical for that era - officials, entrepreneurs, bourgeois, servants, etc., who interact with each other, and in the process of narration, the development (or degradation) of the personality of the main characters is clearly traced.

The genre specificity of the work allows us to interpret it, first of all, as a social and everyday novel, revealing the problem of "Oblomovism" in the contemporary author's era, its harmful effect on the bourgeoisie. In addition, the work should be considered as a philosophical one, touching upon many important "eternal questions", and a psychological novel - Goncharov subtly reveals the inner world and character of each hero, analyzing in detail the reasons for their actions and further fate.

Composition

An analysis of the novel "Oblomov" would not be complete without considering the compositional features of the work. The book is divided into four parts. The first part and chapters 1-4 of the second represent a description of one day of Oblomov's life, including the events in the hero's apartment, his description by the author, as well as a chapter important for the whole plot - "Oblomov's Dream". This part of the work is the exhibition of the book.

Chapters 5-11 and the third part represent the main action of the novel, describing the relationship between Oblomov and Olga. The culmination of the work is the separation of the beloved, leading to the fact that Ilya Ilyich again falls into the old state of "Oblomovism".

The fourth part is the epilogue of the novel, which tells about later life heroes. The denouement of the book is Oblomov's death in a kind of "Oblomovka" created by him and Pshenitsyna.
The novel is divided into three conventional parts - 1) the hero strives for an illusory ideal, the distant "Oblomovka"; 2) Stolz and Olga take Oblomov out of the state of laziness and apathy, forcing him to live and act; 3) Ilya Ilyich again returns to the previous state of degradation, having found "Oblomovka" at Pshenitsyna. Despite the fact that the main plot point was the love story of Olga and Oblomov, from a psychological point of view, the leitmotif of the novel is the depiction of the degradation of Ilya Ilyich's personality, its gradual disintegration until the actual death.

Character system

The central core of the characters is represented by two opposed male and female images - Oblomov and Stolz, as well as Ilyinskaya and Pshenitsyna. Apathetic, calm, interested more in everyday life, home warmth and a rich table, Oblomov and Pshenitsyna act as carriers of the outdated, archaic ideas of the Russian philistine. For both of them, "breaking off" as a state of calmness, detachment from the world and spiritual inactivity is the primary goal. This is contrasted with the activity, activity, practicality of Stolz and Olga - they are carriers of new, European ideas and norms, a renewed Russian-European mentality.

Male characters

The analysis of Oblomov and Stolz as mirror characters presupposes their consideration as heroes of different time projections. So, Ilya Ilyich is a representative of the past tense, for him the present does not exist, and the ephemeral "Oblomovka of the future" does not exist for him either. Oblomov lives only in the past tense, for him all the best was already long ago in childhood, that is, he strove back, not appreciating the experience and knowledge gained over the years. That is why the return to "Oblomovism" in Pshenitsyna's apartment was accompanied by a complete degradation of the hero's personality - he seemed to be returning to a deep, feeble childhood, which he had dreamed of for many years.

For Stolz, there is no past or present, he is directed only towards the future. Unlike Oblomov, who realizes the goal and outcome of his life - the achievement of the distant "paradise" Oblomovka, Andrei Ivanovich does not see the goal, for him it becomes a means of achieving goals - constant work. Many researchers compare Stolz to an automated, expertly tuned mechanism, devoid of the inner spirituality that he finds when communicating with Oblomov. Andrei Ivanovich appears in the novel as a practical character who has no time to think while it is necessary to create and build something new, including himself. However, if Oblomov was fixated on the past and was afraid to look into the future, then Stolz did not have time to stop, look back and understand where and where he was going. Perhaps, it is precisely because of the lack of precise landmarks at the end of the novel that Stolz himself falls into the "traps of chippings", finding peace in his own estate.

Both male characters are far from the ideal of Goncharov, who wanted to show that remembering your past and honoring your roots is just as important as constant personal development, learning something new and continuous movement. Only such a harmonious personality, living in the present tense, combining the poetry and good nature of the Russian mentality with the activity and diligence of the European, is worthy, according to the author, to become the basis for a new Russian society... Perhaps Andrei, Oblomov's son, could become such a person.

Female characters

If, when portraying male characters, it was important for the author to understand their orientation and the meaning of life, then female images are associated, first of all, with issues of love and family happiness. Agafya and Olga not only have different origins, upbringing and education, but also have different characters. Meek, weak-willed, quiet and economic Pshenitsyna perceives her husband as a more important and significant person, her love borders on adoration and deification of her husband, which is normal within the old, archaic traditions of house building. For Olga, a lover is, first of all, a person equal to her, a friend and a teacher. Ilyinskaya sees all the shortcomings of Oblomov and until the very end is trying to change her beloved - despite the fact that Olga is depicted as emotional, creative, the girl approaches any question practically and logically. The romance of Olga and Oblomov was doomed from the very beginning - in order to complement each other, someone would have to change, but none of them wanted to give up their usual views and the heroes continued to unconsciously confront each other.

Oblomovka symbolism

Oblomovka appears before the reader as a kind of fabulous, unattainable place, where not only Oblomov aspires, but also Stolz, constantly settling his friend's affairs there and trying at the end of the work to take back to himself the last thing left of that old Oblomovka - Zakhara. However, if for Andrei Ivanovich the village is devoid of its mythical qualities and attracts rather on an intuitive, unclear level for the hero, connecting Stolz with the traditions of his ancestors, then for Ilya Ilyich it becomes the center of his entire illusory universe in which a man exists. Oblomovka is a symbol of everything old, dilapidated, leaving, for which Oblomov is still trying to grab onto, which leads to the degradation of the hero - he himself becomes decrepit and dies.

In Ilya Ilyich's dream, Oblomovka is closely connected with rituals, fairy tales, legends, which makes her a part of herself. ancient myth about the village-paradise. Oblomov, associating himself with the heroes of the fairy tales told by the nanny, seems to find himself in this ancient, parallel to the real world. However, the hero does not realize where dreams end and illusions begin, replacing the meaning of life. The distant, unattainable Oblomovka never becomes closer for the hero - it only seems to him that he found her at Pshenitsyna's, while he slowly turned into a “plant”, ceasing to think and live a full life, completely immersing himself in the world of his own dreams.

Problematic

Goncharov in his work "Oblomov" touched upon many historical, social and philosophical issues, many of which do not lose their relevance to this day. The central problem of the work is the problem of "Oblomovism" as a historical and social phenomenon among Russian philistines who do not want to adopt new social foundations and change. Goncharov shows how "Oblomovism" is becoming not only a problem for society, but also for the person himself, who is gradually degrading, fencing off his own memories, illusions and dreams from the real world.
Of particular importance for understanding the Russian national mentality is the portrayal of classical Russian types in the novel - both on the example of the main characters (landowner, entrepreneur, young bride, wife) and secondary characters (servants, crooks, officials, writers, etc.), and also disclosure of the Russian national character in opposition to European mentality on the example of the interaction between Oblomov and Stolz.

An important place in the novel is occupied by questions of the meaning of the hero's life, his personal happiness, place in society and the world in general. Oblomov is typical an extra person”, For whom the world striving for the future was inaccessible and far away, while the ephemeral, existing in fact only in dreams, the ideal Oblomovka was something close and more real than even Oblomov's feelings for Olga. Goncharov did not depict all-encompassing, true love between the heroes - in each of the cases it was based on other, prevailing feelings - on dreams and illusions between Olga and Oblomov; on the friendship between Olga and Stolz; respect from Oblomov and adoration from Agafia.

Theme and idea

In the novel Oblomov, Goncharov, examining the historical theme of the change in society in the 19th century through the prism of such a social phenomenon as Oblomovism, reveals its destructive effect not only for the new society, but also for the personality of each individual, tracing the influence of Oblomovism on fate Ilya Ilyich. At the end of the work, the author does not lead the reader to a single thought, who was more right - Stolz or Oblomov, however, an analysis of the work of "Oblomov" by Goncharov shows that a harmonious personality, like a decent society, is possible only with full acceptance of one's past, drawing spiritual foundations, with a constant striving forward and continuous work on oneself.

Conclusion

In his novel Oblomov, Goncharov was the first to introduce the concept of “Oblomovism”, which remains a common noun today to denote apathetic, lazy people stuck in the illusions and dreams of the past. In the work, the author touches on a number of social and philosophical issues that are important and relevant in any era, allowing the modern reader to take a fresh look at his own life.

Product test

Often referred to as a mystery writer, Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov, extravagant and inaccessible to many contemporaries, went to his zenith for almost twelve years. "Oblomov" was published in parts, crumpled, completed and changed "slowly and hard," as the author wrote, whose creative hand, however, approached the creation of the novel responsibly and scrupulously. The novel was published in 1859 in the St. Petersburg journal Otechestvennye zapiski and was met with a clear interest from both literary circles and the philistine.

The history of writing the novel in parallel pranced with the tarantass of the events of that time, namely with the Gloomy Seven Years of 1848-1855, when not only Russian literature was silent, but everything Russian society... This was the era of increased censorship, which became the reaction of the authorities to the activity of the liberal-minded intelligentsia. A wave of democratic upheavals took place throughout Europe, so politicians in Russia decided to secure the regime with repressive measures against the press. There was no news, and the writers were faced with a caustic and helpless problem - there was nothing to write about. What the censors might have wanted was mercilessly pulled out by the censors. It is this situation that is a consequence of that hypnosis and that lethargy, in which the whole work is shrouded, as if in Oblomov's favorite dressing gown. The best people countries in such a stifling atmosphere felt unnecessary, and values ​​encouraged from above - petty and unworthy of a nobleman.

“I wrote my life and what grew to it,” Goncharov briefly commented on the history of the novel after the final touches on his creation. These words are an honest recognition and confirmation of the autobiographical nature of the greatest collection of eternal questions and answers to them.

Composition

The composition of the novel is circular. Four parts, four seasons, four states of Oblomov, four stages in the life of each of us. The action in the book is a cycle: sleep turns into awakening, awakening - into sleep.

• Exposition. In the first part of the novel, there is almost no action, except perhaps only in Oblomov's head. Ilya Ilyich lies, he receives visitors, he shouts at Zakhar, and Zakhar shouts at him. Here, characters of different colors appear, but basically all the same ... Like Volkov, for example, to whom the hero sympathizes and rejoices for himself that he does not split up and crumble into ten places in one day, does not stick around, but keeps his human dignity in their chambers. The next "from the cold", Sudbinsky, Ilya Ilyich also sincerely regrets and concludes that his unfortunate friend got stuck in the service, and that now much in him will not move in the century ... There was also journalist Penkin, and colorless Alekseev, and heavy-browed Tarantiev, and all he equally pitied, sympathized with everyone, parried with everyone, recited ideas and thought ... An important part is the chapter "Oblomov's Dream", in which the root of "Oblomovism" is exposed. The composition is equal to the idea: Goncharov describes and shows the reasons for the formation of laziness, apathy, infantilism, and in the end a dead soul. It is the first part - the exposition of the novel, since here the reader is presented with all the conditions in which the hero's personality was formed.
• The tie. The first part is also the starting point for the subsequent degradation of Ilya Ilyich's personality, for even the leaps of passion for Olga and devoted love for Stolz in the second part of the novel do not make the hero a better person, but only gradually squeeze Oblomov out of Oblomov. Here the hero meets Ilyinskaya, which in the third part develops into a climax.
• The climax. The third part, first of all, is fateful and significant for the protagonist himself, since here all his dreams suddenly become real: he performs feats, he proposes to Olga, he decides to love without fear, decides to take risks, to a duel with oneself ... Only people like Oblomov do not wear holsters, do not fence, do not cover themselves with sweat during the battle, they doze and only imagine how heroically beautiful it is. Oblomov is not capable of everything - he cannot fulfill Olga's request and go to his village, since this village is a fiction. The hero breaks up with the woman of his dreams, choosing to preserve his own way of life, rather than striving for the best and an eternal struggle with himself. At the same time, his financial affairs are hopelessly deteriorating, and he is forced to leave a cozy apartment and prefer a budget option.
• Interchange. The fourth final part, "Vyborg Oblomovism", is made up of a marriage with Agafya Pshenitsyna and the subsequent death of the protagonist. It is also possible that it was the marriage that contributed to the dullness and imminent death of Oblomov, because, as he himself put it: "There are such donkeys that get married!"

It can be summed up that the plot itself is extremely simple, despite the fact that it stretches over six hundred pages. A lazy kind middle-aged man (Oblomov) is deceived by his vulture friends (by the way, they are vultures, each in their own area), but a kind loving friend (Stolz) comes to the rescue, who saves him, but takes away the object of his love (Olga), and therefore and the main nourishment of his rich spiritual life.

The peculiarities of the composition are in parallel storylines at different levels of perception.

• The main story line there is only one here, and she is loving, romantic ... The relationship between Olga Ilyinskaya and her main gentleman is shown in a new, bold, passionate, psychologically detailed way. That is why the novel claims to be a love novel, being a kind of sample and manual for building relationships between a man and a woman.
• The secondary storyline is based on the principle of opposing two fates: Oblomov and Stolz, and the intersection of these very fates at the point of love for one passion. But in this case, Olga is not a turning-point character, no, her gaze falls only on strong male friendship, on a pat on the back, on wide smiles and on mutual envy (I want to live the way the other lives).

What is the novel about?

This novel is, first of all, about a vice of social significance. Often the reader can notice the similarities between Oblomov not only with his creator, but also with most people who live and have ever lived. Which of the readers, as they got closer to Oblomov, did not recognize themselves, lying on the couch and reflecting on the meaning of life, on the futility of being, on love power, on happiness? Who among the readers has not crushed his heart with the question: "To be or not to be?"

The quality of a writer, in the end, is such that, trying to expose another human flaw, he falls in love with it in the process and gives the reader a flaw with such an appetizing aroma that the reader eagerly wants to feast on. After all, Oblomov is lazy, unkempt, childish, but the public loves him only because the hero has a soul and this soul is not ashamed to reveal to us. “Do you think that a heart is not needed for thought? No, it is fertilized by love ”- this is one of the most important postulates of the work, laying the essence of the novel“ Oblomov ”.

The sofa itself and Oblomov lying on it keep the world in balance. His philosophy, promiscuity, confusion, throwing control the lever of movement and the axis of the globe. In the novel, in this case, there is not only an excuse for inaction, but also a desecration of action. The vanity of Tarantiev or Sudbinsky does not bring any sense, Stolz is successfully making a career, but what is unknown ... Goncharov dares to slightly ridicule work, that is, work in the service, which he hated, which, therefore, it was not surprising to notice in the character of the protagonist ... “But how upset he was when he saw that at least there had to be an earthquake so that a healthy official didn’t come to work, and earthquakes, as if it were a sin, do not happen in St. Petersburg; a flood, of course, could also serve as a barrier, but even that rarely happens. " - the writer conveys all the senselessness of state activity, which Oblomov thought about and gave up in the end, referring to Hypertrophia cordis cum dilatatione ejus ventriculi sinistri. So what is Oblomov talking about? This is a novel about how if you are lying on the couch, you are probably more right than those who go somewhere or sit every day. Oblomovism is a diagnosis of humanity, where any activity can lead either to the loss of one's own soul, or to a stupid crumbling of time.

The main characters and their characteristics

It should be noted that speaking surnames are characteristic of the novel. For example, all minor characters wear them. Tarantiev comes from the word "tarantula", journalist Penkin - from the word "foam", which hints at the surface and cheapness of his occupation. With their help, the author complements the description of the heroes: Stolz's surname is translated from German as "proud", Olga is Ilyinskaya because she belongs to Ilya, and Pshenitsyna is an allusion to the meanness of her bourgeois way of life. However, all this, in fact, does not fully characterize the heroes, this is done by Goncharov himself, describing the actions and thoughts of each of them, revealing their potential or lack thereof.

1. Oblomov- the main character, which is not surprising, but the hero is not the only one. It is through the prism of the life of Ilya Ilyich that a different life is visible, only what is interesting is that Oblomovskaya seems to readers to be more entertaining and original, despite the fact that he does not have the characteristics of a leader and is even unsympathetic. Oblomov, a lazy and overweight middle-aged man, can confidently become the face of propaganda of melancholy, depression and blues, but this man is so unhypocritical and pure in soul that his gloomy and stale flair is almost invisible. He is kind, subtle in love matters, sincere with people. He asks himself the question: "When to live?" - and does not live, but only dreams and waits for the right moment for a utopian life, which comes in his dreams and dreams. He also asks the great Hamlet question: "To be or not to be" - when he decides to get off the couch or confess his feelings to Olga. He, like Don Quixote Cervantes, wants to accomplish the feat, but does not, and therefore blames his Sancho Pansa - Zakhar for this. Oblomov is naive, like a child, and so sweet to the reader that an irresistible feeling arises to protect Ilya Ilyich and quickly send him to an ideal village, where he can, holding his wife by the waist, walk with her and look at the chef while cooking. we have analyzed in detail in the essay on this topic.
2. Oblomov's opposite is Stolz. The man from whom the narration and the story of the "Oblomovism" are being conducted. He is German by his father and Russian by his mother, therefore, a person who inherited the virtues of both cultures. From childhood, Andrei Ivanovich read both Herder and Krylov, was well versed in "hard-working money making, vulgar order and boring regularity of life." For Stolz, the philosophical nature of Oblomov is equal to antiquity and the past fashion for thought. He travels, works, builds, reads avidly and envies the free soul of a friend, because he himself does not dare to claim a free soul, but maybe he is simply afraid. we have analyzed in detail in the essay on this topic.
3. The turning point in Oblomov's life can be called by one name - Olga Ilyinskaya. She is interesting, she is special, she is smart, she is well-mannered, she sings amazingly and she falls in love with Oblomov. Unfortunately, her love is like a list of certain tasks, and the beloved himself is nothing more than a project for her. Having learned from Stolz the peculiarities of the thinking of her future betrothed, the girl fired up with the desire to make Oblomov a "man" and considers his boundless and quivering love for her as her leash. In part, Olga is cruel, proud and dependent on public opinion, but to say that her love is not real means to spit on all the vicissitudes in gender relations, no, rather, her love is special, but genuine. also became the theme for our composition.
4. Agafya Pshenitsyna is a 30-year-old woman, mistress of the house where Oblomov moved. The heroine is an economic, simple and kind person who found in Ilya Ilyich the love of her life, but did not seek to change him. She is characterized by silence, calmness, a kind of limited outlook. Agafya does not think about something high that goes beyond the boundaries of everyday life, but she is caring, hardworking and capable of self-sacrifice for the sake of her beloved. More detailed in the essay.

Theme

As Dmitry Bykov says:

Goncharov's heroes do not shoot in a duel, like Onegin, Pechorin or Bazarov, do not participate, like Prince Bolkonsky, in historical battles and writing Russian laws, do not commit, as in Dostoevsky's novels, crimes and overstepping the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Everything they do fits into the framework of everyday life, but this is only one facet

Indeed, one facet of Russian life cannot embrace the whole novel: the novel is divided into social relations, and on friendly relations, and on love ... Exactly last topic is major and critically acclaimed.

1. Love theme is embodied in Oblomov's relationship with two women: Olga and Agafya. So Goncharov depicts several varieties of the same feeling. Ilyinskaya's emotions are saturated with narcissism: in them she sees herself, and only then her chosen one, although she loves him with all her heart. However, she values ​​her brainchild, her project, that is, the non-existent Oblomov. Ilya's relationship with Agafya is different: the woman fully supported his desire for peace and laziness, idolized him and lived by taking care of him and their son Andryusha. The tenant gave her new life, family, long-awaited happiness. Her love is adoration to the point of blindness, because indulging her husband's whims led him to early death... The main theme of the work is described in more detail in the essay "".
2. Friendship theme... Stolz and Oblomov, although they experienced falling in love with the same woman, did not unleash a conflict and did not betray friendship. They always complemented each other, talked about the most important and intimate in the life of both. This relationship has taken root in their hearts since childhood. The boys were different, but got along well with each other. Andrei found peace and kind-heartedness when visiting a comrade, and Ilya gladly accepted his help in everyday matters. You can read more about this in the essay "Friendship of Oblomov and Stolz".
3. Searching for the meaning of life... All heroes are looking for their own way, looking for the answer to the eternal question about the purpose of man. Ilya found him in thinking and finding spiritual harmony, in dreams and in the very process of existence. Stolz found himself in a perpetual movement forward. Expanded in detail in the essay.

Problems

Oblomov's main problem is the lack of motivation to move. The whole society of that time really wants, but cannot wake up and get out of that terrible depressing state. Many people have become and are becoming Oblomov victims to this day. Living hell is living life as a dead person and not seeing any purpose. It was this human pain that Goncharov wanted to show, resorting to the concept of conflict for help: there is also a conflict between a person and society, and between a man and a woman, and between friendship and love, and between loneliness and an idle life in society, and between work and hedonism and between walking and lying and things and things.

• Love problem... This feeling can change a person for the better, this transformation is not an end in itself. For the heroine of Goncharov, this was not obvious, and she put all the strength of her love into the re-education of Ilya Ilyich, not seeing how painful it was for him. While remaking her lover, Olga did not notice that she was squeezing out of him not only bad features character, but also good. In fear of losing himself, Oblomov could not save his beloved girl. He was faced with the problem of a moral choice: either to remain himself, but alone, or to play the whole life of another person, but for the good of his wife. He chose his individuality, and in this decision one can see selfishness or honesty - to each his own.
• Friendship problem. Stolz and Oblomov passed the test of one love for two, but could not snatch a minute from family life to preserve the partnership. Time (and not a quarrel) separated them, the routine of days broke the bonds of friendship that had been strong. They both lost from parting: Ilya Ilyich completely neglected himself, and his friend was mired in petty worries and troubles.
• The problem of education. Ilya Ilyich fell victim to the sleepy atmosphere in Oblomovka, where the servants did everything for him. The boy's liveliness was dulled by endless feasts and naps, the dull numbness of the wilderness left an imprint on his addictions. becomes clearer in the episode "Oblomov's Dream", which we analyzed in a separate article.

Idea

Goncharov's task is to show and tell what “Oblomovism” is, opening its doors and pointing out both its positive and negative sides and giving the reader the opportunity to choose and decide what is paramount for him - Oblomovism or real life with with all his injustice, materiality and activity. The main idea in the novel "Oblomov" is a description of a global phenomenon modern life, which has become part of the Russian mentality. Now the surname of Ilya Ilyich has become a household name and denotes not so much a quality as a whole portrait of the person in question.

Since no one forced the nobles to work, and serfs did everything for them, phenomenal laziness flourished in Russia, which engulfed the upper class. The country's support was rotting from idleness, not contributing in any way to its development. This phenomenon could not but cause fear among the creative intelligentsia, therefore, in the image of Ilya Ilyich, we see not only a rich inner world, but also a destructive inaction for Russia. However, the meaning of the reign of laziness in Oblomov's novel has a political connotation. It was not without reason that we mentioned that the book was written during the period of tightening of censorship. There is a hidden, but, nevertheless, basic idea in it that the authoritarian regime of government is to blame for this general indolence. In it, the personality does not find application for itself, bumping into only restrictions and the fear of punishment. The absurdity of servility reigns around, people do not serve, but serve, therefore a self-respecting hero ignores the vicious system and, as a sign of silent protest, does not play at an official who still does not decide anything and cannot change. The country under the gendarme's boot is doomed to regression, both at the level of the state machine and at the level of spirituality and morality.

How did the novel end?

The hero's life was cut short by heart obesity. He lost Olga, he lost himself, he even lost his talent - the ability to think. Living with Pshenitsyna did not do him good: he was mired in a kulebyak, in a pie with entrails, which swallowed and sucked poor Ilya Ilyich. His soul was eaten by fat. His soul was eaten by the robe repaired by Wheatsyna, the sofa, from which he was rapidly sliding into the abyss of entrails, into the abyss of entrails. This is the finale of Oblomov, a dark, uncompromising sentence to Oblomovism.

What does it teach?

The novel is arrogant. Oblomov keeps the reader's attention and puts this very attention on the whole part of the novel in a dusty room, where the main character does not get out of bed and all shouts: "Zakhar, Zakhar!" Isn't that nonsense ?! And the reader doesn’t leave ... and can even lie down next to him, and even wrap himself up in “an oriental robe, without the slightest hint of Europe”, and not even decide anything about “two misfortunes”, but think about them all ... Goncharov's psychedelic novel is very fond of lulling the reader and pushes him to parry on the fine line between reality and dream.

Oblomov is not just a character, it is a lifestyle, it is a culture, it is any contemporary, it is every third inhabitant of Russia, every third inhabitant of the whole world.

Goncharov wrote a novel about universal worldly laziness to live in order to overcome it and help people cope with this disease, but it turned out that he justified this laziness only because he lovingly described every step, every weighty idea of ​​the bearer of this laziness. It is not surprising, because Oblomov's "crystal soul" still lives in the memories of his friend Stolz, his beloved Olga, his wife Pshenitsyna and, finally, in the tear-stained eyes of Zakhar, who continues to go to the grave of his master. Thus, conclusion of Goncharov- to find a middle ground between the "crystal world" and the real world, finding a vocation for yourself in creativity, love, development.

Criticism

Readers of the 21st century rarely read the novel, and if they do, then not to the end. Some lovers of Russian classics can easily agree that the novel is partly boring, but boring on purpose, overwhelmingly. However, this does not scare the reviewers, and many critics gladly analyzed and are still dismantling the novel by its psychological bones.

One of the popular examples is the work of Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov. In his article "What is Oblomovism?" the critic gave an excellent description of each of the heroes. The reviewer sees the reasons for laziness and inability to arrange Oblomov's life in upbringing and in the initial conditions, where the personality was formed, or, rather, was not.

He writes that Oblomov is “not a dull, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person who is also looking for something in his life, 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 miserable state of moral slavery. "

Vissarion Grigorievich Belinsky saw the origins of apathy in the influence of the whole society, since he believed that a person was originally a blank canvas created by nature, therefore, a certain development or degradation of a person is on the scales that belong directly to society.

Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev, for example, looked at the word "Oblomovism" as an eternal and necessary organ for the body of literature. According to him, "Oblomovism" is a vice of Russian life.

The sleepy, routine atmosphere of rural, provincial life supplemented what the works of parents and nannies did not manage to do. The greenhouse plant, which had not become familiar in childhood not only with the excitements of real life, but even with children's sorrows and joys, smelled of a stream of fresh, living air. Ilya Ilyich began to study and developed so much that he understood what life is, what are the responsibilities of a person. He understood this intellectually, but he could not sympathize with the perceived ideas about duty, about work and activity. The fatal question: why live and work? - the question that usually arises after numerous disappointments and disappointed hopes, directly, by itself, without any preparation, in all its clarity presented itself to the mind of Ilya Ilyich - the critic wrote in his famous article.

Alexander Vasilyevich Druzhinin examined the Oblomovism and its main representative in more detail. The critic singled out 2 main aspects of the novel - external and internal. One consists in the way of life and practice of the daily routine, while the other occupies the area of ​​the heart and head of any person, which never ceases to gather crowds of destructive thoughts and feelings about the rationality of existing reality. If you believe the criticism, then Oblomov died because he chose to die, and not live in eternal incomprehensible vanity, betrayal, self-interest, financial confinement and absolute indifference to beauty. However, Druzhinin did not consider “Oblomovism” to be an indicator of decay or decay, he saw sincerity and conscience in it, and believed that this positive assessment of “Oblomovism” was the merit of Goncharov himself.

Interesting? Keep it on your wall!

An important place in literature lessons at school is occupied by a critical analysis of Oblomov. Goncharov is the largest prose writer of the mid-19th century. His novels had a significant impact on the development domestic literature the specified century. The writer's books are distinguished by deep psychologism, drama, as well as the posing of topical problems of his time, which, incidentally, are significant today.

The first part of the book

The study of the composition of the novel primarily involves the analysis of Oblomov. At the beginning of his work, Goncharov describes in detail the way of life that his hero led. From the beginning of the work, readers get to know this character through the eyes of his visitors. But the author also conveys the inner state of Ilya Ilyich, who, after the departure of each of the guests, embarks on long arguments that reveal him as an extraordinary person. Spending the whole day at home, not working and hiding from life, Oblomov nevertheless asks difficult philosophical questions about the meaning of existence, the purpose and prospects of a public career.

He is trying to understand the reason for his own inactivity, inactivity and complete indifference to everything that happens. The emphasis on the character's state of mind should include an analysis of Oblomov. Goncharov - master of creation psychological portraits their heroes. He shows that Ilya Ilyich is a philosophical person, which prevents him from leading a lifestyle that his best childhood friend Stolz is trying to instill in him.

Description of the village

Goncharov attached great importance to describing the formation of his hero. Oblomov (Oblomov's dream, the analysis of which is traditionally the main part of the school lesson, explains the character of Ilya Ilyich) is a key work in the writer's work, since in it he revealed the most important problems of Russian reality of his time. This dream shows the village in which the hero was born and raised. In this place, the inhabitants were distinguished by their extraordinary gentleness of character, docility, and friendliness.

They didn't care about anything, didn't care about their careers or education. All these people lived today, their main value was home comfort, warmth, caring for each other. Therefore, little Oblomov was completely under the care of a loving mother, relatives, his nannies, nurses. This explains his inaction in adulthood.

Tie

Stolz eventually somehow manages to keep his friend busy. He takes him out of the house, introduces him to new faces. Meeting with a young, beautiful, smart girl Olga Ilyinskaya radically changes Oblomov's life. He falls in love with her, and this love inspires him. The hero begins to lead an active lifestyle: he studies, reads a lot, takes frequent and long walks. Ilyinskaya, following the instructions of Stolz, in every possible way encourages his new acquaintance to various activities.

The characterization of their relationship is an integral part of Oblomov's analysis. Goncharov describes how their mutual attraction to each other subsequently grew into a strong and deep feeling. After a while, they explained themselves and decided to get married.

Climax

This was an important event in the character's life. However, he was scared of how far their relationship had gone. He liked communication with Olga, however, being by nature quiet, shy and indecisive, he felt that he was not able to take on the marriage bond. He described in detail the psychological evolution of his character I.A. Goncharov. Oblomov (the analysis of the novel assumes a detailed analysis of the reasons for the gap between Olga and the main character) is a novel that is primarily devoted to the author's subtle observations of state of mind characters.

Ilyinskaya felt the indecision and hesitation of her fiancé. She did not doubt his love, but her active, ebullient nature demanded an active and fulfilling life. The most tense moment in the work is the moment when the characters explain each other, when it becomes clear how far they are from each other, despite their love. An analysis of Goncharov's novel Oblomov explains the difference in their characters. Olga was very demanding of herself and those around her. And Ilya Ilyich turned out to be incapable of complete transformation of his personality and habitual way of life. He changed a lot under the influence of love, but deep down he remained the same. It is in this last conversation with his beloved that the hero calls his vice "Oblomovism" - a concept that has come into use in everyday speech.

Interchange

One of the best prose writers of the middle of the nineteenth century is I.A. Goncharov. Oblomov (the analysis of the work should include a description of the last period of the hero's life) is a novel that shows the development of the protagonist from a psychological point of view. After breaking up with Olga, Ilya Ilyich marries his landlady Anisya. This woman fully corresponded to his ideas about a housewife and a wife. In her house, Ilya Ilyich again fell into his former, even worse, inaction, which greatly upset his friend Stolz and Olga. However, the author reveals the internal reasons for such a transformation of the character.

He explains this with disappointment at the loss of his girlfriend. This state of the hero turned into complete apathy and indifference to everything around him, which actually led him to death later. The writer fully shows the reader that the physical death of the hero was the result of his mental devastation, which could not be filled with cares and sincere and simple love Anisya.

Heroes

Oblomov is opposed by Stolz and Olga Ilyinskaya. The first was a Russified German. He worked hard, took care of his career, but at the same time did not lose his soulfulness and kindness, for which Ilya Ilyich fell in love with him. Stolz genuinely cared about his best friend, tried to keep him occupied and carried away with something. At the end of the work, he married Olga, with whom he was similar in character. The latter is perhaps the ideal for the writer. She is active, purposeful, but at the same time smart and reserved.

Exploring the first scene

To consolidate the material covered, schoolchildren can be offered to analyze an episode of Goncharov's novel Oblomov. As an example, the scenes of guests' visits to the hero at the very beginning of the book are usually chosen, since their dialogues give the first idea of ​​the main character of the novel. Readers see that Ilya Ilyich refuses to participate in various affairs of his comrades.

All of them are busy with something and in every possible way try to captivate him, but to no avail. After their departure, Ilya Ilyich discusses the uselessness of their vanity, occupation, work. He asks the main question of the whole work: where is the person in all this vanity? The author's sympathies in this case are clearly on the side of Ilya Ilyich, although he does not approve of his way of life.