Pechorin as a Realistic Hero in the Fatalist Chapter. An essay on the topic: Pechorin is a fatalist (based on the novel by M.Yu

The chapter "Fatalist" ends Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time". At the same time, it is also the last in the "Pechorin Journal". Chronologically, the events of this chapter take place after Pechorin visited Taman, Pyatigorsk and Kislovodsk, after the episode with Bela, but before the hero's meeting with Maxim Maksimovich in Vladikavkaz. Why does Lermontov put the chapter "Fatalist" at the end of the novel, and why exactly her?

A kind of core of the episode being analyzed is the bet between Lieutenant Vulich and Pechorin. The main character served in one Cossack village, "the officers gathered at each other's place in turn, in the evenings they played cards." On one of these evenings, the bet took place. After sitting over a long game of card games, the officers talked about fate and predestination. Suddenly, Lieutenant Vulich proposes to check whether a person can arbitrarily dispose of his life, or everyone ... a fateful moment has been assigned in advance.
Nobody, except Pechorin, enters into a bet. Vulich loaded his pistol, pulled the trigger and shot himself in the forehead. The pistol misfired. So the lieutenant proved that the already predetermined fate still exists.

Prior to Lermontov, the theme of predestination and the player who tests fate was developed by Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin (Shot and The Queen of Spades). And in the novel "A Hero of Our Time" before the chapter "Fatalist" the theme of fate arose repeatedly. Maksim Maksimovich says about Pechorin in Bela: “After all, there are, really, such people who have it written in their own family, various extraordinary things must happen to them”. In the chapter "Taman" Pechorin asks himself: "And why was fate to throw me into a peaceful circle of honest smugglers?" In "Princess Mary": "... fate has always led me to the denouement of other people's dramas ... what purpose did fate have for this?"

The main philosophical aspect of the novel is the struggle between personality and fate. In the chapter "The Fatalist" Lermontov asks the most important, pressing question: how much is a person himself the builder of his life? The answer to this question will be able to explain to Pechorin his own soul and destiny, and also reveal the most important moment - the author's decision of the image. We will understand who, according to Lermontov, Pechorin: the victim or the winner?

The whole story is divided into three episodes: a bet with Vulich, Pechorin's reasoning about predestination and Vulich's death, as well as a scene of capture. Let's see how Pechorin changes as the episodes follow. In the beginning, we learn that he does not believe in fate at all, and therefore agrees to a bet. But why does he allow himself to play with such impunity not with his own life, but with someone else's?
Grigory Aleksandrovich manifests himself as a hopeless cynic: "Everyone dispersed, accusing me of selfishness, as if I was betting with a man who wanted to shoot himself, and without me he seemed unable to find a convenient opportunity!" Despite the fact that Vulich provided Pechorin with evidence of the existence of fate, the latter continues to doubt: “... it made me laugh when I remembered that there were once wise people who thought that the heavenly bodies were taking part in our insignificant disputes for a piece of land or for some some fictitious rights! .. "
Another proof of the existence of fate for the hero should have been the death of Vulich. Indeed, during the bet, it seemed to Pechorin that he was "reading the seal of death on the pale face" of the lieutenant, and at four o'clock in the morning the officers brought the news that Vulich had been killed under strange circumstances: he had been hacked to death by a drunken Cossack. But even this circumstance did not convince Pechorin, he says that instinct prompted him "on ... a changed face the stamp of imminent death" Vulich.
Then Pechorin decides to try fate himself and helps to capture the killer Vulich, who locked himself in an empty hut. He successfully captures the criminal, but is never convinced that his fate is foreordained from above: "After all this, it seems, how not to become a fatalist? ... how often do we mistake a deception of the senses or a mistake of reason for persuasion."

It is amazing how subtly and accurately another facet of his spiritual tragedy is revealed in Pechorin's last confession. The hero admits to himself of a terrible vice: disbelief. And it's not even just a matter of religious faith, no. The hero does not believe in anything: neither in death, nor in love, nor in truth, nor in lies: “And we ... who wander the earth without convictions and pride, without pleasure and fear ... we are no longer capable of great sacrifices, neither for the good of mankind , not even for our own happiness, because we know its impossibility, and we indifferently pass from doubt to doubt, as our ancestors rushed from one error to another, having, like them, neither hope, nor even that indefinite, although true, pleasure, which the soul meets in any struggle with people and fate. "
The worst thing is that Pechorin does not believe in life, and, therefore, does not love it: “In my first youth I was a dreamer: I loved to caress alternately gloomy and iridescent images that my restless and greedy imagination drew to me. But what is left of this? - only fatigue ... I have exhausted both the heat of the soul and the constancy of will, which is necessary for real life; I entered this life, having experienced it already mentally, and I felt bored and disgusted, as someone who reads a bad imitation of a book known to him for a long time. "

An amazing episode that reveals to us Lermontov's attitude to the fate of Pechorin is a capture scene. In fact, only here, in the finale of the story and the whole novel, does Grigory Aleksandrovich perform an act that benefits people. This act, as the last ray of hope that Pechorin will again feel the taste for life, will find his happiness in helping others, will use his composure in situations when an ordinary person cannot pull himself together: “I like to doubt everything: this disposition of character - on the contrary, as for me, I always go forward more boldly when I do not know what awaits me. "
But we learn all this only at the end of the novel, when we already understand that there is no hope left, that Pechorin died without revealing his mighty talents. Here is the author's answer. Man is the master of his own destiny. And there is always a chance to take the reins into our own hands.
The answer to Pechorin's image is simple. Surprisingly, he, who does not believe in fate, always imagined himself and his lack of demand in this life as the tricks of evil Fortune. But this is not the case. Lermontov, in the last chapter of his novel, answers us that Pechorin himself is to blame for his fate and that this is a disease of time. It is this theme and this lesson that the classic taught us that makes the novel A Hero of Our Time a book for all ages and for all times.

Pechorin and Bela

The author named one of the stories of his novel after the Circassian girl Bela. This name seems to predetermine the touchingness and some drama of the plot. Indeed, in the course of the narration, which is conducted on behalf of the captain Maxim Maksimych, we get acquainted with bright, unusual characters.
The protagonist of the story is an officer Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin, who arrived in the Caucasus for military service.
He immediately appears before us as an unusual person: carried away, courageous, intelligent: “He was a nice fellow, only a little strange. After all, for example, in the rain, in the cold all day long hunting; everyone is chilled, tired - but he has nothing ... I went to the wild boar one-on-one ... "- this is how Maxim Maksimych characterizes him.
Pechorin's character is complex and contradictory. Along with his positive qualities, we soon become convinced of his ambition, selfishness, and spiritual callousness.
For his own pleasure, out of a thirst for new experiences, he colludes with the reckless Circassian Azamat, who raved about good horses. In exchange for Kazbich's horse, Pechorin secretly decides to get his sister, the young girl Bela, from the Circassian, without even thinking about her consent.
To the objections of Maksim Maksimych that this is "a bad thing", Pechorin replies: "A wild Circassian woman should be happy, having such a sweet husband as he is ...".
And this incredible exchange of a girl for a horse took place. Officer Pechorin became the owner of Bela and tried to accustom her to the idea "that she will not belong to anyone except him ...".
With attention, gifts, persuasion, Pechorin managed to achieve the love of the proud and mistrustful Bela. But this love could not have a happy ending. In the words of the author: “What began in an extraordinary way must end in the same way.
Very soon Pechorin's attitude towards the "poor girl changed." Bela quickly bored him, and he began to look for every reason to leave her, at least for a while.
Bela is the complete opposite of Pechorin. If he is a nobleman, a secular aristocrat and a heartthrob, then Bela is a girl who lives by the laws of the mountains, in accordance with her national traditions and customs. She is ready to love one man all her life, to be completely devoted to him and faithful.
And how much pride and independence there was in this young Chechen woman, although she understood that she had become a prisoner of Pechorin. As a real resident of the mountains, she is ready to accept any turn of fate: "If they stop loving her, she will leave, because she is a prince's daughter ...".
In fact, Bela loved Pechorin so much that, despite his coldness, she thought only of him.
Her great unrequited feeling for this officer was the reason for her death at the hands of Kazbich.
Bela's death was accepted calmly, speaking only of her sincere love for Pechorin. She probably deserved a better fate, but she fell in love with an indifferent and cold person and sacrificed her life for this.
What was Pechorin's reaction to her death? He sat quietly with a face that "didn't express anything special." And in response to the words of consolation Maksim Maksimych, "he raised his head and laughed."
Wherever Pechorin appeared, he brought people suffering and misery. Bela, torn from her family and abandoned by him, died. But her love and death were just simple episodes in Pechorin's life.

Speaking about the work of Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov, one cannot ignore his famous philosophical novel "A Hero of Our Time". In his work, the writer tried to investigate the psychological image of Grigory Pechorin, but it was not possible to get by with the Pechorins alone, since the main character captures many destinies, after the touch of which they either die or lose their meaning, interest and love for life.
Lermontov draws the life stages of the protagonist in his novel, starting with a chapter called Bella, ending with an absolutely philosophical and thoughtful chapter, which contains in its title the main meaning of all content. "Fatalist" is the last section of Pechorin's diary. According to one of the critics, the absence of the last chapter of the novel would make the image of Pechorin incomplete. Why would the inner portrait of the protagonist be incomplete without this chapter?
Reading the novel by Mikhail Lermontov, we observe the life cycle of Grigory Pechorin. During his life, Pechorin left only suffering in the memory of people, however, he himself was a terribly unhappy person. The contradictions and loneliness that were born in his soul swallowed him up, not giving life to sincere emotions and feelings. That is how, chapter by chapter, we recognized the main character, revealing new portions of human vices in his soul. But the main point of the whole novel is the chapter "The Fatalist". It shows Pechorin's attitude to fate, it is in her that the phenomenon of predetermination is questioned. Thus, the author does not relieve the hero of responsibility for all the actions he has committed. The writer, varying life situations, only guides Pechorin through them, exploring new facets of his soul. It is this chapter that confirms the truth of Pechorin's statements and the author's thoughts that the significance of a person's activity in his own destiny is very, very important. So, going against the fate of events and fate, Pechorin enters the hut, where a Cossack assassin is raging, whom he quickly and skillfully disarmed. At this moment, the best qualities of the hero's nature appeared.
The final chapter of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" "Fatalist" brings the main idea of ​​the novel to its logical conclusion and full disclosure of the protagonist. The collective image, which contains both good qualities and completely unforgivable ones, asserts its position in the last part of the work. The writer leaves open the question of fatalism, ending Pechorin's life on the way to Persia. It is in this chapter that the image of Grigory Pechorin is exhausted to the very end, completely absorbed in philosophical reflections on fate, the meaning of life and that a person's struggle for his own life is possible and necessary.
Undoubtedly, the final chapter of the novel is the most important section of Pechorin's diary. Only in it do we reveal the last nooks of the soul of the protagonist, finding in him reflections on predestination, which will certainly find their refuge in the soul of the writer himself.

The chapter The Fatalist is the final and final part of the novel. The action begins with a heated argument, the ending of which is a bet between Pechorin and Vulich. The theme is predetermination of fate. Vulich believed in this, but Gregory did not agree with him. He used to deny everything, to question everything. Vulich's proofs are not essential to him. He must make sure of everything personally. An analysis of the chapter "Fatalist" from the novel "A Hero of Our Time" will reveal the author's position in relation to Pechorin and help to understand who Pechorin is, a victim in the current circumstances or a winner.

Gregory foresaw his death and was surprised when, firing from a loaded pistol, he remains alive. Was it really wrong? How could this have happened, because he clearly saw the stamp of death on his face. Pechorin returned home in deep thought. Outside the house, reflections were interrupted by officers who appeared suddenly and reported the news of Vulich's death. Here it is, predestination. He knew that Vulich was not a tenant and now he was convinced that he was right.

Deciding to test his own fate, Pechorin goes to the killer's house, relying on cold calculation, courage and clear sequential actions that helped him out more than once in difficult situations. Gregory immediately assessed the situation. I noticed the slightest nuances of the further development of events. Seeing the murderer Cossack, he noted his unhealthy appearance, madness in his eyes, panic at the sight of blood. He is a madman ready to die, but not surrender to the police. Then he decides to single-handedly grab the killer. A great opportunity to play roulette with destiny.

He managed to grab the killer and remain intact. He was lucky again. He remains alive again. So, is there fate or everything depends on the person. Returning to the fortress, he shares his thoughts with Maxim Maksimych. Another in his place would definitely become a fatalist, but not Pechorin. Reflecting on this topic, Gregory come to the final conclusion that a person

"He always goes boldly forward when he does not know what awaits him."

This chapter is Pechorin's thoughts about himself and his actions. His character requires him to act decisively, to fight, but he is not ready to rebel against reality. There is nothing real in the society to which he belongs. His fight against him has no meaning and no future. In this fight, he squandered all his mental strength. Morally devastated, he realizes that he has no strength left for real life.

In his notes, Pechorin admits:

“Why did I live? For what purpose was I born? And surely, it existed, and, it is true, it was a high assignment for me, because I feel immense strength in my soul; but I have not guessed this appointment. I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions; I came out of their furnace, hard and cold as iron, but I have lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations for a better color of life ... ”.

Restless, aimlessly existing, spiritually devastated, he became superfluous in this society at this time.

The novel is structured in such a way that the essence of the protagonist and the idea are revealed gradually, each chapter (story) complements the impressions of the previous ones, suggesting answers to questions that arise in the reader, directing the work of his thoughts. Therefore, we can assume that the answers to the questions that remained with us after reading the chapter "Princess Mary" should be sought further - in "Fatalist".

And indeed: if you read this chapter carefully, not as an additional action-packed novella, but as a natural continuation, or rather the completion and generalization of the line associated with the image of the protagonist, then finally the true motives of Pechorin's behavior and actions will be revealed, and most importantly - the artistic idea the whole novel.

A feature of the "Hero of Our Time" is the fact that all parts of the work, with the exception of the chapter "Maksim Maksimych", are action-packed and adventurous. The chapter "Fatalist" is no exception: it is based on events rapidly developing during one night: a card game - a dispute about predestination, a bet - Vulich's shot - a misfire - Vulich's "accidental" death - Pechorin's heroic act.

All this "pulls" the attention of not only students, but also more attentive and sophisticated readers. After all, Belinsky was able to discern only the tip of the “iceberg” in Fatalist, without trying to look into the depths: “Pechorin himself is the protagonist here, and almost more in the foreground than the hero of the story himself.

The quality of his participation in the course of the story, as well as his desperate, fatalistic courage in capturing an enraged Cossack, if it does not add anything new to the data about his character, then nevertheless adds what is already known to us and thereby aggravates the unity of the gloomy and soul-tormenting impression of the whole a novel that is the biography of one soul. "

Here, in the very definition of the role of "Fatalist" in comprehending the idea of ​​the work, there is an obvious contradiction: why should the writer further exacerbate the already gloomy impression made on the reader by the events of the previous chapters and by Pechorin's confession?

Lermontov is a thinker, his author's intention was hardly the task of "horrifying" the reader with the depiction of sharp and bloody scenes. In addition, Belinsky still considers Vulich to be the main character of the chapter - however, the novel, by his own definition, is "the biography of one soul." And in our opinion, Pechorin remains the main character of this novel, and a very important conceptual Lermontov idea is woven into the plot outline.

As you know, the arrangement of chapters in the novel does not correspond to the chronology of the events depicted. It also does not correspond to the sequence of creation of the work: the chapter "Fatalist" was written earlier than the chapter "Princess Mary".

This fact is of fundamental importance in the interpretation of the idea of ​​the novel: it is not “Fatalist” that supplements the revelatory chapter about Pechorin, but, apparently, some ideas of “Fatalist” should have found their concrete expression in the hero's confession.

Studying the history of the creation of the novel, we turn with the students to the comment: “Perhaps in the fall of 1837, rough sketches were made for“ Taman ”and then for“ Fatalist ”- probably, even without regard to the general idea of ​​the novel, which took shape a little later ...

"Bela", "Fatalist" and "Taman" became known to the reader before the publication of a separate edition of the novel - through a journal publication in Otechestvennye zapiski (1839). And after the chapter "Fatalist" was published, the novel "A Hero of Our Time" was published as a separate book.

All these reflections on the composition of the novel, the history of its creation and the role of the chapter "Fatalist" in disclosing the author's intention led me to a methodological idea: to start studying the novel from the chapter "Fatalist" (provided that the students had read the novel in full beforehand).

Students who have just finished reading the book discuss and retell the plot of the chapter with interest. A strange bet, the mysterious behavior of its participants, an unexpected turn of events, the courage of Pechorin - all this arouses children's curiosity. But the plot in a brilliant work of fiction, I remind them, is not an end in itself: there is something very important for the author behind the fascinating events, and he wants the reader to understand this.

At what point in the narrative do you think the author expresses this problem, which is offered for discussion to the reader?

In the process of searching for an answer to this question, we come to the idea that this is a moment of controversy: here the theme of fate and fatalism is indicated. One of the participants in the dispute (Vulich) is a fatalist: he believes in predestination.

Who is Vulich? Are there any details in his characterization, portrait that define his essence, the nature of his beliefs? - Yes, there are two very important points in Vulich's appearance and characteristics: firstly, he is endowed with a pronounced "oriental" appearance; secondly, he is a player. - What can these signs say?

Both of these details underscore Vulich's fatalistic beliefs. "Fatalism is a feature of the culture of the East ...". And it is no coincidence that the dispute about fatalism and free consciousness comes up precisely during a card game: “Gambling Pharaoh, bank or shtoss are games with simplified rules, and they make the winnings completely dependent on chance.

This made it possible to associate the issues of winning or losing with “fortune” - the philosophy of success and to see in it more broadly as a model of the world in which chance reigns ”.

Vulich's opponent in this dispute is Pechorin. “I affirm that there is no predestination,” he declares. What do these words mean?

This is a deep conviction that a person controls his own destiny, that there is no higher power over him that controls his life, everything is decided by will and reason. But the denial of Divine providence leads to the recognition of one's own self "as the only measure of all values, the only god who is worth serving and who thus becomes on the other side of good and evil."

- Why does Lermontov clash these two worldview positions? (This dispute helps to reveal Pechorin's beliefs, to understand the deep foundations of his character and personality.)

- What does Pechorin choose? How definite and meaningful is his choice? What becomes the ideological principle that justifies and explains all his actions, relations with society?

Pechorin denies predestination - thereby he asserts the right of free will, free consciousness: “Twenty times my life, I will put my honor at stake. But I won't sell my freedom. Why do I value her so much? what is in it to me? "

Pechorin asks himself a question, the answer to which is contained precisely in his way of thinking, in the foundations of his worldview. To understand their essence, one should pay attention to one important episode of "Fatalist", which is perceived by the reader, carried away by the plot, as a poetic, but insignificant fragment, a kind of transition from one plot moment to another, as a "common place" or lyrical digression.

In fact, this fragment is the key to understanding Pechorin's worldview, and with it - to comprehend the problematics of the work.

We are talking about the moment when Pechorin returns home through deserted lanes after a dispute with Vulich. “Pechorin's thoughts are calm, ironic; confident, distinct train of thought betrays their familiarity, endurance. "

We read this fragment and make sure that for Pechorin, thoughts about the fundamental issues of the universe are not unexpected, accidental, they did not arise under the influence of the situation, but constitute his philosophy: “a month, full and red, like a glow of a fire, began to appear from behind the jagged horizon of houses; the stars quietly shone on the dark blue vault, and I felt funny when I remembered that there were once wise people who thought that the heavenly bodies were taking part in our insignificant disputes for a piece of land or for some fictitious rights! So what then? these lamps, lit, in their opinion, only in order to illuminate their battles and celebrations, burn with the same brilliance, and their passions and hopes have long died out with them, like a light lit on the edge of the forest by a careless traveler "

Where did Pechorin get this ironic attitude towards "wise people" who believe in Divine protection and predetermination of fate?

(It was due to the fact that Pechorin himself has not believed in such things for a long time: “I like to doubt everything: this disposition of mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character - on the contrary, as far as I am concerned, I always go forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me ... ")

So, Pechorin rejects faith in divine predestination. What does it follow from this, how does it affect his life attitudes? The habit of not believing in anything, but finding answers to questions about the meaning of human existence, forms mind and will in Pechorin.

The only criterion in determining the moral foundations for Pechorin is his own pleasure: the satisfaction of his whims, his pride, the achievement of his own goals.

Determination of character, as we see, for the hero is the most important quality that he cultivates and cherishes in himself. In all his actions, deeds, thoughts, he follows the principle: to act decisively, for sure, to achieve what he wants at any cost and by any means - and this price and means become people who love him and sympathize with him.

Freedom of will dictates individualistic life attitudes to Pechorin: he never sacrifices anything, to those he loves, on the contrary, he demands sacrifices from them. Pechorin is not limited to reflections on the mysteries of the universe: he acts in accordance with his principles and beliefs. He constantly enters into confrontation with circumstances, with fate, believing that true pleasure "meets the soul in any struggle with people or with fate ..."

At this point, we stop the conversation about the chapter "Fatalist", suggesting to return to it after analyzing the previous chapters based on the conclusions that were made during the preliminary identification of the ideological and artistic basis of the last chapter of the novel: the hero's actions, the events taking place with him are determined by moral choice , which is embedded in Pechorin's worldview position - the denial of providence and the approval of the principle of free will and free consciousness.

Here it is useful to turn to the biblical commandments, which are the moral law that is given to man as the basic covenant of faith and Divine will.

It turns out that, following his selfish motives, professing individualism as his own moral law, Pechorin violates the most important commandments:
- "Do not create an idol for yourself" - Pechorin creates an idol for himself from his self;
- "Do not kill" - Pechorin kills already actually disarmed and defeated enemy - Grushnitsky; and is he really an enemy of Pechorin? After all, the whole dueling story was provoked by Pechorin himself from the very beginning: after all, he, a nobleman and an officer, a secular person, could not have known that such stories, where honor and dignity were hurt, usually end in a duel!

- "Do not steal" - Pechorin, of course, is not a thief and not a robber: but at his request and with his
with the help of Azamat "steals" for him his sister Bela and for himself - a horse from Kazbich, for which
the girl paid with her life.

- "Do not commit adultery" - women, weak and defenseless in front of the strong-willed character of Pechorin, find themselves trapped from the "nets" set by him; proud and beautiful Bela, touching and naive, romantic Princess Mary, devoted Vera sincerely love him, sacrificing their happiness, the opinion of society, loved ones, even their homeland. What do they get in return? - suffering and disappointment.

Everyone with whom Pechorin's life confronts becomes victims of his selfish nature. But Pechorin is not a bloodthirsty villain: he himself suffers deeply, realizing that he is causing the misfortune of others. He (and we together with him) is looking for the reasons for this suffering and the inner struggle that takes place in his soul.

After all, he is capable of sincere impulses, the manifestation of strong, devoted feelings: he feels guilty for Bela's death, regrets his uninvited intrusion into the life of "honest smugglers" loss, at the last meeting with Princess Mary, he is ready to fall at her feet, conquered by her defenselessness and weakness.

His diary is filled with sorrowful confessions to himself: “I sometimes despise myself ... isn't that why I despise others too? .. I have become incapable of noble impulses; I'm afraid to seem ridiculous to myself. " Why does Pechorin suffer? He gets what he wants. He sets himself goals and always gets what he strives for. His free consciousness and will lead him through life, determining actions and events in it.

What is the reason for Pechorin's melancholy, disappointment?

Pechorin, like all those whom he sacrifices to his individualism, is a slave to his will.

“I myself am no longer able to go mad under the influence of passion; my ambition is suppressed by circumstances, but it manifested itself in a different form, for ambition is nothing more than a thirst for power, and my first pleasure - to subordinate everything that surrounds me to my will, arouse feelings of love, devotion and fear to myself - is not the first sign and the greatest triumph of power?

The desire for power is also a passion, although Pechorin speaks of his inability to experience passion. His individualism is both his strength and his weakness: on the one hand - unlimited power over people, especially people who are weak and defenseless before the all-conquering force of Pechorin's egoism; on the other hand - loneliness and awareness of oneself outside the universal human principles of being, on the other side of good and evil.

With striking frankness before himself Pechorin confesses in the chapter "Princess Mary"; “Evil begets evil; the first suffering gives the concept of the pleasure of torturing another; the idea of ​​evil cannot enter a person's head without the fact that he does not want to apply it to reality: ideas are organic creatures, someone said: their birth already gives them a form, and this form is an action; the one in whose head more ideas were born, that one acts more than others ... "

While doing evil, Pechorin suffers from the consciousness of his role, but he himself is unable to resist his "free will", which controls his actions and thoughts.

- Why does Pechorin evoke deep sympathy in us, even when he commits in front of our eyes actions that run counter to the generally accepted ideas about good and evil? Because his individualism brings torment to himself. His suffering is much stronger than the suffering of those who become his "victims": it comes from a tragic discord with himself, and is not justified by external circumstances. The source of the evil that destroys the soul of the hero is in himself.

For a long time - starting with the famous article by Belinsky - the image of Pechorin was interpreted as a socio-historical type: "an extra person" in an era of timelessness and government reaction after the Decembrist uprising.

He is endowed with strong-willed qualities and the ability to act, but finds himself in an atmosphere of a vulgar way of life, lies and servility, limited interests, fully represented by the "water society". But the image of Pechorin is much broader and deeper than this socio-historical framework. In the chapters "Bela", "Taman" he is generally excluded from his noble-aristocratic circle.

In the chapter "Princess Mary", the main antipode of Pechorin is Grushnitsky, whose whole trouble and fault lies in the fact that he is weak and does not like Pechorin as his own parody: Grushnitsky is "draped" Into extraordinary passions and sufferings, which for Pechorin are the fruit of painful searches and thinking about the meaning of being.

“... Grushnitsky is also by no means one of those on whom the baseness and meanness of the Nikolaev society thrives and who flourishes, this whole corrupt and cruel world of the All-Russian barracks - the office, Grushnitsky is rather an echo, albeit a parody, of the same disease that Pechorin is afflicted , and therefore the conflict between them unfolds in a purely moral, in essence, aspect, but by no means in a social one. "

It is very important to pay attention to another image that constitutes opposition to Pechorin with Grushnitsky in the story of the duel - the dragoon captain: a man with vague moral principles, the initiator of a dastardly plan that was supposed to lead to the death of Pechorin. But this is the hero of the second plan, moreover, nameless, which speaks not only of his secondary role in the plot of the novel, but also of the contemptuous attitude of the author towards him: one in whom meanness is a natural state of life is not worthy to bear the name.

- What distinguishes Pechorin from people like the dragoon captain, Grushnitsky?

This is the realization that he does evil, and regret, deep remorse, compassion for his own "victims."

Each time starting a game or intrigue for the sake of his individualistic principles and needs, subjecting people and circumstances to his will, he ultimately experiences bitter disappointment, because instead of the expected satisfaction and saturation of his pride, he experiences cruel remorse and recognition of his miserable role of "executioner": doing people are unhappy, giving them mental suffering and pain, becoming the cause of their death, Pechorin sincerely admits his defeat and the collapse of his hopes for happiness, which he sees in "saturated pride."

“Listen, Maksim Maksimych ... I have an unhappy character: whether my upbringing made me so, whether God created me like that, I don't know; I only know that if I am the cause of the misfortune of others, then I myself am no less unhappy; of course, this is a bad consolation for them - the only thing is that it is so, ”we read Pechorin's confession in the chapter“ Bela ”.

Maxim Maksimych passes it down word for word, not understanding the deep meaning of what Pechorin is talking about. But the events of "Bela" were preceded by the events of "Princess Mary", and we are convinced that Pechorin is not portrayed, not draped in unusual passions in imitation of fashionable romantic characters, like Grushnitsky, but utters long-suffering and bitter words.

In the face of those to whom he brought misfortune and pain, he is sincere, feels human pity for them and is ready to somehow alleviate their suffering. “You see, I play the most miserable and disgusting role in your eyes, and even admit it; that's all I can do for you. Whatever bad opinion you may have of me, I submit to him ...

You see, I am low in front of you. Isn't it true that even if you loved me, you despise me from this moment on? " - this explanation with Princess Mary is not just given to Pechorin: he is ready to admit that he is a "low" person in order to help her stop loving him, so that she is disappointed in him, so that her pride and self-esteem are not hurt.

- Is there another way to reconcile Pechorin with the world and people?

This is love: to love another more than yourself.

But is this path possible for him?

No: for this you need to sacrifice your personal freedom, which is the principle of life for him, and even more - his worldview. He refuses love, from simple human happiness in order to preserve the highest value - freedom, remaining unhappy and lonely, with the burden of other people's misfortunes on his conscience.

Thus, closing the circle of our reflections on the novel and the image of the protagonist, here we again come to the chapter "The Fatalist", in which the worldview
the position of Pechorin.

From the interpretation of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" as a work of socio-historical and psychological, we come to the level of comprehension of the philosophical and moral problems contained in it. This is precisely the relevance of the sound of Lermontov's prose today.

The meaning of "Fatalist", its fundamental importance for understanding the image of Pechorin and the entire novel as a whole consists precisely in the fact that by turning us to these worldview sources of Pechorin individualism, forcing us to understand it as a certain concept of life, he makes us and to treat Pechorin's individualism precisely from this point of view, first of all - not just as a psychology, not just as a historically indicative feature of the generation of the thirties, but as a worldview, as a philosophy of life, as a principled attempt to answer the question of the meaning of life , about the purpose of a person, about basic values
of human existence ".

Lermontov's novel is a philosophical novel. It outlines those issues and directions that will find their artistic embodiment in the works of F.M. Dostoevsky - genuine "novels of ideas": if the need for good seems problematic, if there are no higher criteria in assessing human actions, then why not take the point of view that, in fact, "everything is allowed"?

Unbelief is the source of Pechorin's misfortune, it will also cause the spiritual death of Dostoevsky's heroes (Raskolnikov, Ivan and Dmitry Karamazov, their "doubles"). Seeing Lermontov's novel in the perspective of the development of Russian literature of the 19th century, its philosophical foundations, it is important to draw students' attention to the most important feature: Russian literature is not a literature of answers, it is a literature of questions. Lev Tolstoy, who became a brilliant successor of Lermontov, also spoke about this.

- Does Lermontov give an answer to the question of whether he makes a philosophically and artistically grounded choice: fatalism or individualism? Faith or Disbelief? Moral universal human law or free consciousness?

Lermontov does not answer the question.

Pechorin himself is experiencing moments of doubt, perhaps inclining towards accepting fatalism: “The occurrence of this evening made a rather deep impression on me and irritated my nerves; I don't know for sure whether I now believe in predestination or not, but that evening I firmly believed him: the proof was striking, and I, despite the fact that I laughed at our ancestors and their helpful astrology, involuntarily fell into their rut; but I stopped myself in time on this dangerous path and, having the right not to reject anything decisively and not to entrust to anything blindly, threw metaphysics aside and began to look at my feet. "

These are the most painful moments for his consciousness; the life principle to which he sacrificed too much is called into question.

One of the interpretations of this problem is offered by Lotman: “Lermontov believes that where people live according to the customs of their fathers and grandfathers, they become fatalists, where they undertake to decide everything themselves, an insatiable thirst for personal freedom, their own happiness develops in their views - egocentrism.

Fatalism is characteristic, according to Lermontov, of the people, selfishness - of the intellectual minority. And it is no coincidence that, perhaps, Pechorin turns to Maxim Maksimych for help in his searches, the man who in the novel personifies the folk principle: “Returning to the fortress, I told Maksim Maksimych everything that happened to me and what I was a witness to, and wished find out his opinion on predestination. At first he did not understand this word, but I explained it as best I could ... "

But Maksim Maksimych behaves strangely: at first he realistically explains to Pechorin the reason for the misfire during the shot: “However, these Asian hammers often cut off if they are badly oiled or if you do not press it firmly with your finger; I confess, I also don't like Circassian rifles ... ", but then utters a completely fatalistic judgment:" the devil pulled him at night to talk to a drunk! .. However, this is how it was written in his family! .. "" He does not like metaphysical debates at all, "- these words conclude the chapter" Fatalist "and the novel.

1 / 5. 1

The work of M. Yu. Lermontov is a novel about one hero. The image of Grigory Pechorin is collective, the author himself believed that the image includes all the shortcomings of a whole generation. The compositional features of the novel deserve special attention. The work consists of five parts, independent of each other.

The only thing that unites them is the main character himself. The author invites the reader to familiarize himself with these parts in the order that most fully reveals the character of the central character.

The main character in the chapter "Fatalist"

The final chapter "Fatalist" is a kind of finale of the work, shading and complementing the main features of Pechorin.

In the first four parts, the main character is presented as a person who has an extraordinary, analytical mindset, realizing his own shortcomings.

A contradictory, truly tragic person appears before us, disappointed in life. He does not know how to be happy himself and brings misfortune to others. At the same time, as a rule, there is no malicious intent in his actions, but he does not feel regret either. Pechorin could not understand the meaning of his existence, did not find a purpose in life.

The theme of predestination in the novel

In the story "Fatalist" the central character arrives in the Cossack village, where he while away the time playing card games with other officers. In one of the conversations, they talked about the predestination, the predetermination of fate. Vulich opposed this position and made a bet with Grigory Pechorin. The officer took the pistol, put it to his temple and pulled the trigger. But it turned out that the shot was blank, and the next one was already real. It might seem that the dispute is over, but Pechorin watched Vulich closely and noticed the "stamp of death" on his face. But Vulich did not believe the protagonist. And in vain: he accidentally died on the same day at the hands of a Cossack.

The theme of predestination is a recurrent theme in Mikhail Lermontov's novel. Pechorin is contradictory in this too.

On the one hand, the situation with Vulich, that is, we can say that he believes in fate. But on the other hand, Gregory makes fun of those who believe that the stars can influence a person's life. From his reasoning, we understand that the belief that heavenly bodies predetermine fate, he considers "convenient." It's easier for a person to live this way. And Pechorin himself is trying to sort out his thoughts, to form a single point of view on this issue.

The opinions of other officers about predestination also differ: some believe in fate, while others do not.

The most important is the final episode, in which the inhabitants of the village gather around the house of Yefimich, the very Cossack who killed Vulich. Pechorin believes that there is no determination in the gaze of the Cossack, but there is no one in the whole crowd who would dare to break the door and take Yefimich out.

The old esaul believes that it is possible to try to shoot the criminal through the cracks in the hut, leaving him no chance of repentance, but the situation is complicated by the fact that Yefimych's mother is also there. To avoid killing a Cossack in front of his mother, Pechorin dares to act bravely.

The main character sneaks into the house and captures the criminal alive, thereby saving his life. Such an act is like an attempt to check the fate. After all, nothing can save if it is destined to perish. But the main character remains alive.

From the first pages of the diary it becomes known that the hero died on the way to Persia. But by the end of the story, we perceive him differently: he is not just an ordinary representative of his generation, but a hero, a bright personality with his own vices and virtues.

This is a young man who is tired of the trials that befell him, but still believes in the best, that he can find the purpose and meaning of his own existence. He is critical of his thoughts and actions, does not create illusions about himself. And this earns the respect of the reader.

Such inconsistency in everything is the very essence of his personality. Such is Pechorin - a hero of his time.