Problematics and poetics of Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” by I. Turgenev
Problems of the novel by I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”
“Fathers and Sons” can safely be called a new novel, since for the first time a new type of hero appears in it, a new person - the democrat commoner Yevgeny Bazarov.
In the title of the novel, the author sought to reflect not just the relationship between two generations, but the confrontation between two social camps. Showing the clash of two different social forces, Turgenev brought into the historical arena a new hero, a new force that marked the onset of a new era. In the face of social change, noble culture had to be tested.
All the acute social problems of Russian life in the 50s of the 19th century were reflected in the disputes between Bazarov and the Kirsanovs. Turgenev believed that “a poet should be a psychologist, but a secret one.” He must know and feel the roots of a phenomenon, but imagine only the phenomena themselves in their flourishing or fading. “To accurately and powerfully reproduce the truth, the reality of life is the highest happiness for a writer, even if this truth does not coincide with his own sympathies,” Turgenev wrote in his article “About Fathers and Sons,” setting this reproduction as his task. Therefore, he sought to comprehensively show his characters and their belief systems, without leaning towards any one point of view.
And he observes this principle throughout the novel. Turgenev shows the clash between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich, who fiercely oppose each other and do not agree on anything. Pavel Petrovich does not accept anything that is in Bazarov, and vice versa. When Arkady tries to explain to his father and uncle who the nihilists are, he says that nihilists are those who do not accept a single principle on faith, doubt everything, and deny love. His uncle responds to this that “before there were Hegelists, and now there are nihilists,” but in essence everything is the same. This moment is very indicative; it suggests that Pavel Petrovich does not want to come to terms with the fact that times and views are changing.
Turgenev is a master of detail. Through such a touch as a knife with butter, Turgenev shows Pavel Petrovich’s hostility towards Bazarov. The episode with the frogs plays exactly the same role.
Bazarov, with his characteristic youthful maximalism, denies everything: he understands a person like a frog. Bazarov believes that “first you need to clear the place,” and then build something; he believes only in science. Paul
Petrovich is indignant, and Nikolai Petrovich is ready to think, perhaps, indeed, he and his brother are backward people.
In Chapter X, Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich approach the most important thing - the question of who has the right to speak on behalf of the people, who knows the people better. The most interesting thing is that each of them thinks that their opponent has no idea how things really are. “I don’t want to believe that you, gentlemen, know the Russian people for sure, that you are representatives of their needs, their aspirations! No, the Russian people are not what you imagine them to be,” says Pavel Petrovich, who insisted that the Russian people are “patriarchal” and “cannot live without faith.” Bazarov, in turn, believed that “the freedom that the government is busy about will hardly benefit us, because our peasant is happy to rob himself just to get drunk on dope in a tavern.” Thus, it turns out that one embellishes, and the other denigrates, and in this contrast Turgenev seeks to show the farce and absurdity of the situation.
Bazarov is too pessimistic about the current state of the people: he talks about superstitions, about underdevelopment, about the lack of enlightenment of the people. He pompously declares: “My grandfather plowed the land,” thus trying to show his closeness to the people, to prove to Pavel Petrovich that he better understands the peasants and their needs. But in fact, this phrase is an exaggeration, since Bazarov’s father was poor, but still a landowner, and “was formerly a regimental doctor.” Turgenev writes that, despite the fact that Bazarov was a commoner and considered himself close to the people, he “did not even suspect that in their eyes he was still something of a fool.”
Pavel Petrovich's attitude towards the people is also described in the novel rather ironically. He idealized the people, believed that he loved and knew them, but at the same time, speaking to a peasant, he “wrinkled his face and sniffed the cologne.” At the end of the novel, Turgenev writes that Pavel Petrovich went to live in Germany, “he doesn’t read anything Russian, but on his desk there is a silver ashtray in the shape of a peasant’s bast shoe.”
The story of the relationship between these irreconcilable disputants ends with a duel. This happens after Pavel Petrovich sees Bazarov kissing Fenechka in the gazebo.
Turgenev approached the description of the duel scene very carefully, which is presented in the novel as if from the author’s point of view, but it is clear from everything that this episode is shown through the eyes of Bazarov. Before the duel, a verbal duel takes place, where there is one multi-valued symbolic detail: in response to the French phrase of Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov inserts an expression in Latin into his speech. Thus, Turgenev emphasizes that his heroes really speak different languages. Latin is the language of science, reason, logic, progress, but it is a dead language. French, in turn, is the language of the Russian aristocracy of the 18th-19th centuries; it implies a huge cultural layer. Two cultures stand on the historical arena, but together they have no place on it - and a duel takes place between them.
The whole pathos of the author’s position states with regret that the best people of Russia do not understand, do not hear each other. Their problem is that no one wants to make concessions. Turgenev laments that they speak different languages and cannot agree and understand each other.
The secret psychologism of the novel lies in the fact that the narration is told on behalf of the author, but it still seems that the author’s position is close to Bazarov’s position. Due to the fact that the description of the duel is given as if from the perspective of Bazarov, it has a mundane character. This noble tradition is not close to Bazarov, he is a man of a different culture, a physician, and for him this is doubly unnatural.
The duel produces a kind of revolution in Pavel Petrovich. He now looks differently at the civil marriage of Nikolai Petrovich and Fenechka - he blesses his brother to marry her.
Turgenev masterfully combines the comic and the serious. This is especially evident in the description of the duel, or more precisely of Commandant Peter, who first turned green, then turned pale, and after the shot generally hid somewhere. The wounded Pavel Petrovich, seeing Peter appear, says: “What a stupid face!”, which is also, of course, an element of the comic.
In Chapter XXIV, Turgenev allows himself a direct author’s word: “Yes, he was a dead man,” in relation to Pavel Petrovich. This should be understood as a statement that a “change” has already occurred: it is clear that the era of Pavel Petrovich is ending. But the author resorted to direct expression of his own views only once, and usually Turgenev used hidden or indirect ways to show his attitude, which, undoubtedly, is one of the types of Turgenev’s psychologism.
While working on the novel “Fathers and Sons,” Turgenev strives to be objective, so he is ambiguous in relation to his heroes. On the one hand, Turgenev shows the failure of the nobility, and on the other, he says about Bazarov that he cannot accurately answer the question of why he killed him. “I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, evil, honest - and yet doomed to death - because it still stands on the threshold of the future,” Turgenev wrote in a letter to K. K. Sluchevsky.
Searched here:
- fathers and sons problems
- problems in the novel fathers and sons
- the problem of fathers and children in the novel Fathers and Sons
That’s why it’s called that, because the value of each work included in its fund has been tested by time. The tragedies of Shakespeare, the paintings of da Vinci, the music of Schnittke, the sculptures of Rodin - one can list for a long time, because the list of achievements of mankind created during its existence and development is truly long and rich. And representatives of Russian culture can be proud that their great compatriot, Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, occupies one of the first places of honor among the recognized authors of the world and
Creator of the Russian novel
Yes exactly. Of course, even before Turgenev there were many talented novelists in Russian literature. “The Encyclopedia of Russian Life” in verse, written by Pushkin, an entire generation, created by Lermontov in his “Hero...”, and many other wonderful works gave food to the mind and heart of the Russian person, educated, developed, explained, contributed to the formation of spiritually mature individuals, patriots of their homeland. But it was Turgenev who brought the Russian novel to the expanses of world literature and introduced foreign readers to the uniqueness of our culture, way of life, and history. Brevity, extraordinary expressiveness of language, intensity of plot, reflection of the most important socio-political moments in the life of society, ideological struggle characteristic of Russian reality, deep psychologism and amazing skill of a true artist - these are the distinctive features of Turgenev the novelist and his best creations. Thanks to Ivan Sergeevich, the foreign public and criticism learned about this amazing phenomenon - “Russian literature”, “Russian novel”. The author’s most important and beloved creation was “Fathers and Sons.” The meaning of the work reflected not only the complexity of family, social, civil and generally human relations, but also Turgenev’s points of view on these issues.
Why fathers and sons
The author's position in the novel is not directly indicated. But it is quite easy to determine if you look closely at the composition of the work, analyze the language of the characters, the system of images, and identify the role of individual elements, such as landscape, in the novel. This, by the way, is what makes “Fathers and Sons” very interesting. The meaning of the work is already contained in the title, and the main artistic device of opposition, or antithesis, can be traced throughout the entire novel.
So why fathers and why children? Because the family is a small cross-section of the entire society, and in it, as in a mirror, those most complex, sometimes dramatic collisions are reflected that shake and fever. By the time the idea was born and the novel itself was written, life, in the words of the critic Belinsky, “scattered into depth and width" in the huge variety of its elements. This variety of forms allows us to see and understand “Fathers and Sons”. The meaning of the work is revealed in the conflict between generations, in views on politics, religion, science, art, social order and world order. No less glaring is the class conflict, which has intensified against the backdrop of harsh confrontation between social forces and problems. An attentive reader, moving from chapter to chapter, understands more and more clearly the metaphorical nature of the title “Fathers and Sons.” The meaning of the work is not only to show the continuity and divisions of generations (a universal human aspect), but also to reveal the confrontation between established views and opinions and new ones that replace the old ones.
Family thought
Let's first analyze the “family thought” in the novel. It is worth noting that the theme of family is generally characteristic of Turgenev. The writer lived his entire independent life “on the edge of someone else’s nest,” and he had a rather complicated relationship with his mother. That is probably why Ivan Sergeevich valued so much the warmth of the hearth and the harmony of relationships between the older and younger generations. The work “Fathers and Sons” affirms those eternal values, without which, in fact, progress cannot move forward. This is shown by the example of the Kirsanov family. Arkady, a representative of the young and advanced generation, although under the influence of Bazarov, is still closely connected with his family. Even upon arriving in his father’s land, he exclaims that here the air is sweeter and more expensive and closer than in the capital. Making an excursion into the past of his heroes, Turgenev says that Kirsanov the father constantly tried to get closer to his son, share his interests, live what Arkady lives, met his friends, tried to understand the new generation coming to replace his peers. The work “Fathers and Sons,” as already mentioned, is an antithesis novel. But, although Bazarov is an ardent opponent of the entire past, including “fathers,” although he is outwardly rude to his father and mother and openly ridicules and despises the “old Kirsanovs,” the feeling of kinship is not alien to him. Thus, bonds are sacred for Turgenev. Welcoming the new time, the writer believes that one cannot completely erase the achievements of past eras, including
New and old
The meaning of the novel “Fathers and Sons” is broader and deeper than the question outlined above. Yes, indeed, the younger generation, with its inherent maximalism, often considers itself smarter, more progressive, more talented, more capable of significant actions and useful for the country than those whose age is approaching decline. Alas, but by and large this is true. Both Nikolai Petrovich and Pyotr Petrovich Kirsanov, educated and modern-minded people, still in many ways lagged behind the age that was uncontrollably flying forward. New scientific thoughts, technical achievements, political ideas are difficult for them to understand and difficult to accept into their everyday life. But does this mean that the past should be completely destroyed, forgotten, abandoned, “cleared,” as Bazarov puts it? What then to build in a new place, on an empty one? The nihilist Eugene cannot paint a detailed picture - apparently, he himself does not know, does not imagine it. And the author himself rightly saw the meaning of the novel “Fathers and Sons” not only to criticize the ugliness of Russian reality, the rotten system of social and often human relations, but also to prove that one cannot completely abandon the past. Human civilizations replaced one another, and each was based on the achievements of the previous one.
Ideological and aesthetic concept of the novel
What else is the novel “Fathers and Sons” about? written in 3 stages. The first dates back to 1860-1861, when the main text was created, the plot and figurative system were formed. The second dates back to the autumn of 1861 - early winter of 1862. At this time, the writer is actively reworking the text, making plot and compositional amendments, expanding the range of issues covered in accordance with political changes in the country. And finally, in the period from February to September 1862, the final edits and the first edition of the work “Fathers and Sons” in the “Russian Bulletin” were made. The novel's problematic is a vivid picture of the rise of the movement of commoners, revolutionary democrats; showing a new, just emerging type of nihilist public figure, questioning all the foundations of the Russian state. On 238 sheets of Turgenev’s neat handwriting there is space for the life story of the rebel Bazarov, criticism of the immorality of nihilism, the conflict between conservative liberals and revolutionary progressives, the disclosure of philosophical, spiritual, religious, ethical and aesthetic, moral conflicts.
What did the author want to say and what affected him?
It is impossible to understand the meaning of the novel “Fathers and Sons” without revealing the image of the main character - the nihilist Evgeny Bazarov. The author himself noted that he saw a strong, evil, wild and indomitable figure, honest, coming from the people, but doomed to death, because the time of the bazaars had not yet come. He admitted that he did not know whether he loved or hated the image he created. After all, the writer sought first of all to criticize the nobility as a once advanced, but now moribund, conservative class, hindering the economic and political development of the country. But Bazarov came to the fore, and it was about this hero that the controversy unfolded in domestic criticism. Some considered the main character an evil caricature, a pamphlet on the younger generation. Others, picking up Turgenev’s word “nihilist”, began to call it all sorts of outrages, political unrest, produced by the students. And the name Bazarov became synonymous with one of the names of the devil - Asmodeus. Still others, having picked up revolutionary ideas, elevated Evgeny Vasilyevich to the rank of their spiritual leader. Turgenev did not share the ideas of either one, or the second, or the third. This was one of the reasons for the ideological split between the writer and the Sovremennik staff.
The victory of life over ideology
Yes, Ivan Sergeevich, with all his sincere sympathy for the nobility and compassion for Bazarov, condemned both one and the other. In the novel, he proved that life is more complex and diverse than all ideologies and political disputes, and it cannot be put into just one. Nature, love, sincere affection, the reviving and ennobling power of art, patriotism will triumph over any “passionate, sinful, rebellious heart.” And to this day, the fates of the heroes of the work interest and excite us, give rise to disputes, encourage us to try to understand as deeply as possible and teach everyone to be Human. And this is the main feature of great classical works.
Krasnogorsk municipal educational institution secondary school No. 8.
Subject: literature.
Topic: “Current problems of fathers and children”
(Based on the novel “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev I.S.)
10th grade student
Bulygin Dmitry.
Teacher
Khokhlova Zoya Grigorievna
2003-2004 academic year.
Introduction "Fathers and Sons".
Bazarov and Arkady.
Vasily Vasilyevich Golubkov about “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev.
G.A. Bely “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev is a modern novel.
“To accurately and powerfully reproduce the truth, the reality of life, is the highest happiness for a writer, even if this truth does not coincide with his own sympathies.”
Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev.
Fathers and Sons.
The writing of the novel "Fathers and Sons" coincided with the most important reforms of the 19th century, namely the abolition of serfdom. The century marked the development of industry and natural sciences. Connections with Europe have expanded. In Russia, the ideas of Westernism began to be accepted. The "fathers" adhered to the old views.
The younger generation welcomed the abolition of serfdom and reform. A series of episodes that begin I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” is the return of Arkady Nikolaevich Kirsanov to the estate of his father Maryino.
The very situation of “returning home after a long absence” predetermines the reader’s attitude to what is happening as a new stage in the life of a young man. Indeed, Arkady Nikolaevich completed his studies at the university and, like any young man, is faced with the choice of a future life path, understood very broadly: this is not only and not so much a choice of social activity, but a determination of his own life position, his attitude to the moral and aesthetic values of his elder generations.
The problem of the relationship between “fathers” and “children,” which is reflected in the title of the novel and constitutes its main conflict, is a timeless, vital problem.
Therefore, Turgenev notes the typicality of the “slight awkwardness” that he feels
Arkady at the first “family dinner” after separation and “which usually takes possession of a young man when he has just ceased to be a child and returned to a place where they are accustomed to seeing and considering him a child. He unnecessarily drew out his speech, avoided the word “father” and even once replaced it with the word “father”, pronounced, however, through clenched teeth...”
Bazarov, a nihilist, represents the “new people”; Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is opposed to him as his main opponent. Pavel Petrovich is the son of a military general in 1812. Graduated from the page corps. He had a nasty handsome face and youthful slimness. An aristocrat, an Anglomaniac, he was funny, self-confident, and indulged himself. Living in the village with his brother, he retained his aristocratic habits. Bazarov is the grandson of the sexton, the son of the district doctor.
Materialist, nihilist. He speaks in a “lazy but courageous voice” and his gait is “firm and swiftly bold.” Speaks clearly and simply. Important features of Bazarov's worldview are his atheism and materialism. He
“possessed a special ability to arouse confidence in himself in lower people, although he never indulged them and treated them carelessly.” Nihilist views and
Kirsanov were completely opposite.
What is the essence of Bazarov’s nihilism?
What is the essence of Bazarov's nihilism? The novel "Fathers and Sons" is directed against the nobility. This is not the only work of Turgenev written in this spirit (remember, at least, “Notes of a Hunter”), but it especially stands out because in it the writer exposed not individual nobles, but the entire class of landowners, proved his inability to lead Russia forward, and completed his ideological defeat Why exactly in the early 60s of the 19th century did this work appear? The defeat in the Crimean War and the predatory reform of 1861 confirmed the decline of the nobility and its inability to govern Russia.
In "Fathers and Sons" it is shown that the old, degenerating morality is giving way, albeit with difficulty, to a new, revolutionary, progressive one. The bearer of this new morality is the main character of the novel, Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov.
This young man from the commoners, seeing the decline of the ruling classes and the state, takes the path of nihilism, that is, denial. What does Bazarov deny? “Everything,” he says, and everything is what relates to the minimum needs of man and to the knowledge of nature through personal experience, through experiments. Bazarov looks at things from the point of view of their practical benefits. His motto: “Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it.” Eugene does not recognize authorities, conventions, love, religion, autocracy. But he does not seek followers and does not fight against what he denies. This, in my opinion, is a very important feature of Bazarov’s nihilism. This nihilism is directed inward; Eugene does not care whether he is understood and recognized or not. Bazarov does not hide his convictions, but he is not a preacher either. One of the features of nihilism in general is the denial of spiritual and material values.
Bazarov is very unpretentious. He cares little about the fashionability of his clothes, the beauty of his face and body, he does not strive to get money by any means.
What he has is enough for him. Society's opinion about his financial condition does not bother him. Bazarov's disdain for material values elevates him in my eyes. This trait is a sign of strong and smart people.
Evgeniy Vasilyevich’s denial of spiritual values is disappointing.
Calling spirituality “romanticism” and “nonsense,” he despises the people who bear it. “A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than a great poet,” says Bazarov. He mocks Arkady's father, who plays the cello and reads Pushkin, Arkady himself, who loves nature, and Pavel
Petrovich, who threw his life at the feet of his beloved woman. I think,
Bazarov denies music, poetry, love, beauty out of inertia, without really understanding these things. He reveals complete ignorance of literature (“Nature evokes the silence of sleep,” said Pushkin, and so on) and inexperience in love.
Love for Odintsova, most likely the first in his life, did not in any way agree with Evgeniy’s ideas, which infuriated him. But, despite what happened to him, Bazarov did not change his previous views on love and took up arms against it even more. This is proof of stubbornness
Evgeniy and his commitment to his ideas. So, values do not exist for Bazarov, and this is the reason for his cynicism. Bazarov likes to emphasize his indomitability before authorities. He believes only in what he saw and felt himself. Although Evgeniy says that he does not accept other people's opinions, he says that German scientists are his teachers. I don't think this is a contradiction. The Germans he is talking about and Bazarov himself are like-minded people, both of them do not recognize authorities, so why shouldn’t Evgeny trust these people? The fact that even a person like him has teachers is natural: it is impossible to know everything on your own; you need to rely on the knowledge already acquired by someone else. Bazarov's mentality, constantly searching, doubting, questioning, can be a model for a person striving for knowledge.
Bazarov is a nihilist, and this is also why we respect him. But in the words of the hero of another Turgenev novel, Rudin, “skepticism has always been characterized by sterility and impotence.” These words apply to Evgeniy Vasilyevich. - But you have to build it. - This is no longer our business... First we need to clear the place. Bazarov's weakness is that, while denying, he does not offer anything in return. Bazarov is a destroyer, not a creator. His nihilism is naive and maximalistic, but nevertheless it is valuable and necessary. It was generated by the noble ideal of Bazarov - the ideal of a strong, intelligent, courageous and moral person. Bazarov has such a peculiarity that he belongs to two different generations. The first is the generation of the time in which he lived. Eugene is typical of this generation, like any intelligent commoner, striving to understand the world and confident in the degeneration of the nobility. The second is the generation of the very distant future. Bazarov was a utopian: he called for living not according to principles, but according to feelings. This is an absolutely correct way of life, but then, in the 19th century, and even now it is impossible. Society is too corrupt to produce unspoiled people, that's all. “Fix society and there will be no diseases.”
Bazarov is absolutely right in this, but he did not think that it would not be so easy to do this. I am sure that a person who lives not according to rules invented by someone, but according to his natural feelings, according to his conscience, is a person of the future. That's why
Bazarov belongs to some extent to the generation of his distant descendants.
Bazarov gained fame among readers thanks to his unusual views on life and ideas of nihilism. This nihilism is immature, naive, even aggressive and stubborn, but it is still useful as a means of forcing society to wake up, look back, look forward and think about where it is going.
Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.
In order to understand the conflict of the novel in its entirety, one should understand all the shades of disagreement between Evgeniy Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. "Who is Bazarov?" - the Kirsanovs ask and hear Arkady’s answer: “Nihilist.”
According to Pavel Petrovich, nihilists simply do not recognize anything and do not respect anything. The views of the nihilist Bazarov can only be determined by finding out his position. The question of what to admit, on what, on what grounds to build one’s beliefs is extremely important for Pavel Petrovich. This is what the principles of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov represent: aristocrats won the right to a leading position in society not by origin, but by moral virtues and deeds (“The aristocracy gave freedom to England and supports it”), i.e. moral standards developed by aristocrats are the support of the human personality. Only immoral people can live without principles.
Having read Bazarov’s statements about the uselessness of big words, we see that
Pavel Petrovich’s “principles” do not in any way correlate with his activities for the benefit of society, and Bazarov accepts only what is useful (“They will tell me the case, I will agree.” “In the present time, denial is the most useful thing - we deny”). Eugene also denies the political system, which leads Pavel
Petrovich was confused (he “turned pale”). Attitude towards the people of Paul
Petrovich and Bazarov are different. To Pavel Petrovich, the religiosity of the people, life according to the rules established by their grandfathers seem to be primordial and valuable features of people's life, they touch him. Bazarov hates these qualities: “The people believe that when thunder roars, it is Elijah the prophet in a chariot driving around the sky. Well? Should I agree with him?” The same phenomenon is called differently, and its role in the life of the people is assessed differently. Pavel Petrovich: “They (the people) cannot live without faith.” Bazarov: “The grossest superstition is strangling him.”
The differences between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich in relation to art and nature are visible. From Bazarov’s point of view, “reading Pushkin is a waste of time, playing music is ridiculous, enjoying nature is absurd.” Paul
Petrovich, on the contrary, loves nature and music. Bazarov’s maximalism, which believes that one can and should rely in everything only on one’s own experience and one’s own feelings, leads to the denial of art, since art is precisely a generalization and artistic understanding of someone else’s experience. Art (and literature, painting, and music) softens the soul and distracts from business. All this is “romanticism”, “nonsense”. To Bazarov, for whom the main figure of the time was the Russian peasant, crushed by poverty and “gross superstitions,” it seemed blasphemous to “talk” about art,
"unconscious creativity" when "it's about our daily bread." So, in Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons,” two strong, vibrant characters collided. According to his views and convictions, Pavel Petrovich appeared before us as a representative of the “binding, chilling force of the past,” and Evgeny Bazarov - as part of the “destructive, liberating force of the present.”
Bazarov and Arkady.
After its publication in 1862, Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” caused
literally a barrage of critical articles. None of the public
the camps did not accept Turgenev’s new creation. Liberal criticism is not
could forgive the writer for the fact that representatives of the aristocracy,
hereditary nobles are depicted ironically that the “plebeian” Bazarov
mocks them all the time and is morally superior to them.
Democrats perceived the novel's protagonist as an evil parody.
Critic Antonovich, who collaborated in the Sovremennik magazine, called
Bazarov "Asmodeus of our time."
But all these facts, it seems to me, speak in favor of
I.S. Turgeneva. Like a real artist, creator, he managed to guess
the trends of the era, the emergence of a new type, the type of commoner democrat,
who replaced the advanced nobility. The main problem,
set by the writer in the novel, already sounds in its title: “Fathers and
children." This name has a double meaning. On the one hand, it
the problem of generations is an eternal problem of classical literature, with
the other is a conflict between two socio-political forces operating in
Russia in the 60s: liberals and democrats.
The characters in the novel are grouped depending on their
which of the socio-political camps can we attribute them to?
But the fact is that the main character Evgeny Bazarov turns out to be
the only representative of the camp of “children”, the camp of democrats -
commoners. All other heroes are in the hostile camp.
The central place in the novel is occupied by the figure of the new man -
Evgenia Bazarova. He is presented as one of those young figures
who "want to fight". Others are older people who
do not share Bazarov’s revolutionary-democratic convictions.
They are depicted as petty, weak-willed people with narrow,
limited interests. The novel features nobles and
commoners of 2 generations - “fathers” and “children”. Turgenev shows how a commoner democrat acts in an environment alien to him.
In Maryino, Bazarov is a guest who is distinguished by his
democratic appearance from the landowners. And with Arkady he
differ in the main thing - in their ideas about life, although at first they
are considered friends. But their relationship still cannot be called
friendship, because friendship is impossible without mutual understanding, friendship
cannot be based on the subordination of one to the other. On
Throughout the novel, the submission of a weak nature is observed
stronger: Arkady - Bazarov. But still Arkady gradually
acquired his own opinion and stopped blindly repeating
Bazarov's judgments and opinions of a nihilist. He can't handle arguments
and expresses his thoughts. One day their argument almost came to the point of a fight.
The difference between the heroes is visible in their behavior in Kirsanov’s “empire”.
Bazarov is busy with work, studying nature, and Arkady
sybaritizes, does nothing. It is clear that Bazarov is a man of action.
immediately across his red bare arm. Yes, indeed, he is in any
environment, in any home, he tries to get busy. His main business
Natural sciences, study of nature and testing of theoretical
discoveries in practice. Passion for science is a typical feature
cultural life of Russia in the 60s, which means that Bazarov keeps pace with
time. Arkady is the complete opposite. He's nothing
he is busy, none of the serious matters really captivates him.
For him, the main thing is comfort and peace, and for Bazarov - not to sit idle,
work, move.
They form completely different judgments regarding
art. Bazarov denies Pushkin, and unfoundedly. Arkady
trying to prove to him the greatness of the poet. Arkady is always neat,
neat, well dressed, he has aristocratic manners. Bazarov is not
considers it necessary to observe the rules of good manners, so important in
noble life. This is reflected in all his actions, habits,
manners, speech, appearance.
A major disagreement arose between the "friends" in a conversation about the role
nature in human life. Arkady's resistance is already visible here
According to Bazarov, the “student” is gradually getting out of control
"teachers". Bazarov hates many, but Arkady has no enemies. "You,
a gentle soul, a slob,” says Bazarov, realizing that Arkady has already
cannot be his associate. The "disciple" cannot live without
principles. In this way he is very close to his liberal father and Paul
Petrovich. But Bazarov appears before us as a man of the new
generation that replaced the “fathers” who were unable to decide
main problems of the era. Arkady is a man belonging to the old
generation, the generation of "fathers".
Pisarev very accurately assesses the reasons for the disagreements between
"student" and "teacher", between Arkady and Bazarov: "Attitude
Bazarova to his comrade casts a bright streak of light on his character; at
Bazarov has no friend, because he has not yet met a person who
I wouldn't give up on him. Bazarov's personality closes in on itself,
because outside of her and around her there are almost no people related to her
elements".
Arkady wants to be the son of his age and puts ideas on himself
Bazarov, who absolutely cannot grow together with him. He
belongs to the category of people who are always looked after and never
noticing guardianship. Bazarov treats him patronizingly and
almost always mockingly, he understands that their paths will diverge.
The main problem in the novel by I.S. Turgenev becomes the problem of “fathers and sons”, which has always existed. Children cannot obey and indulge their parents in everything, because this is inherent in all of us. Each of us is an individual and each has his own point of view. We cannot copy anyone, including our parents. The most we can do to be more like them is to choose the same path in life as our ancestors. Some, for example, serve in the army because their father, grandfather, great-grandfather, etc. were military, and some treat people, just like their father and like Evgeny Bazarov. The problem of “father and children” in the novel is only a reason for conflict, and the reason is that fathers and children were representatives of different ideas. Already describing the heroes, Turgenev contrasts Bazarov’s dirty robe, which the owner himself calls “clothes,” with Pavel Petrovich’s fashionable tie and ankle boots. It is generally accepted that in communication between Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov, complete victory remains with the latter, and yet a very relative triumph falls to Bazarov’s lot. AND
Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich can be accused of loving to argue.
Kirsanov talks about the need to follow authorities and believe in them. A
Bazarov denies the rationality of both. Pavel Petrovich claims that only immoral and empty people can live without principles. But Evgeniy believes that principle is an empty and non-Russian word. Kirsanov reproaches
Bazarov is in contempt for the people, and he says that “the people deserve contempt.” And if you trace throughout the work, there are many areas in which they do not agree. So, for example, Bazarov believes: “A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet.”
Golubkov about “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev I.S.
The socio-political situation in which Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” was created and published was extremely difficult.
Only five years have passed since Turgenev published the novel
"Rudin", but these five years (1856-1861) were marked by very big changes in the life of Russian society. Over these years, the mute fermentation associated with the expectation of “freedom” increased enormously among the masses, cases of peasant uprisings became more frequent, and even the tsarist government, after the Crimean defeat, began to understand the need to eliminate the old, serf-dominated relations.
Great shifts also took place in the cultural strata of society: among the magazines, Sovremennik and Russkoe Slovo occupied a dominant place; the voices of Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, Pisarev,
Nekrasov, their influence on young people became wider and deeper. According to contemporaries, a revolutionary situation was being created in the country. Every year the social struggle intensified. Former like-minded people, who had recently stood side by side in the fight against serfdom, now, when it was necessary to decide the question of the future economic and political path of Russia, diverged in different directions and generally split into two camps: on one side stood the revolutionary democrats, and on the other - defenders of antiquity and liberals, supporters of moderate reforms.
Turgenev, who always reflected, in his own words, “the spirit and pressure of the time,” and this time faced the question of an artistic display of the brewing social conflict.
Turgenev approached this task not as an outside observer, but as a living participant in events who played an active role in public life.
All the main events of the novel take place within just two months:
Bazarov arrives at the Kirsanovs' estate at the end of May, and at the end of July he dies. Everything that happened to the heroes before or after these two months is told in biographical digressions (this is how we learn about the past of the Kirsanovs and Odintsova) and in the epilogue: this gives the reader the impression that he has become familiar with the hero’s entire life.
The main events are distributed evenly between three main centers of action: the estate of the Kirsanovs, Odintsova and the Bazarovs; the fourth location, the provincial town, is of secondary importance in the development of the plot.
In “Fathers and Sons” there are 30 characters (including in this number such third-rate ones as General Kirsanov, the father of Nikolai Petrovich), many of them are spoken of in just a few words, but the reader has a very clear idea about each of them. For example, Katya, Anna's sister
Sergeevna Odintsova does not belong to the main characters: she
Turgenev devotes only 5 pages: about a page in chapter 16 (the first day of Bazarov and Arkady’s stay at Odintsova’s estate) and several pages in chapter 25 (Arkady’s explanation with Katya)…
Using the same extremely spare, but expressive artistic means, Turgenev in “Fathers and Sons” draws the image of the modern Russian village, the peasantry. This collective image is created in the reader through a number of details scattered throughout the novel. In general, the village in the transition period of 1859-1860, on the eve of the abolition of serfdom, is characterized in the novel by three features. This is poverty, poverty, lack of culture of the peasants, as a terrible legacy of their centuries-old slavery. On the way Bazarov and Arkady to
Maryino came across “villages with low huts under dark, often half-swept roofs, and crooked threshing sheds with walls wicker from brushwood and gaping gates near empty barns...
A special feature of the peasantry shown in the novel is the complete alienation of the peasants from the masters and distrust of them, no matter in what guise the masters appear to them. This is the meaning of Bazarov’s conversation with the peasants in Chapter 27, which sometimes confused readers.
G.A. Byaly “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev.
It is difficult to name a literary work about which there would be as much and fierce debate as about “Fathers and Sons.” These disputes began even before the novel was published. As soon as a select circle of the first readers became acquainted with the manuscript of “Fathers and Sons,” heated battles immediately arose.
Editor of the magazine “Russian Herald” M.N. Katkov, a fierce enemy of the democratic movement, became indignant: “What a shame it was
Turgenev to lower the flag in front of the radical and salute him as before an honored warrior..."
One would think that romance would be met in the democratic camp
Turgenev with respect and gratitude, but this did not happen either. In any case, there was no unanimity there. M. Antonovich, a critic of Sovremennik, having read the novel, was no less angry than Katkov. “He despises and hates his main character and his friends with all his heart,” Antonovich wrote about
Turgenev.
DI. Pisarev, unlike Antonovich, on the pages of another democratic magazine, Russkoe Slovo, passionately argued that Bazarov was not only not a caricature, but, on the contrary, a correct and deep embodiment of the type of modern progressive youth. Under the influence of all these rumors and disputes, Turgenev himself was confused: “Did I want to scold Bazarov or extol him? I don’t know this myself, for I don’t know whether I love him or hate him.”
In the article “About “Fathers and Sons” (1869), explaining “what is happening in the author’s soul”, “what exactly are his joys and sorrows, his aspirations, successes and failures.”
It is not surprising that “Fathers and Sons” had a great influence both on literature and, more broadly, on the life of Russian society in different periods of its development.
The meaning of “Fathers and Sons” has not been lost to this day. Turgenev's novel lives a new life, excites, awakens thought, and generates controversy. Smart and courageous Bazarov cannot help but attract us with his stern, if somewhat gloomy, honesty, his impeccable straightforwardness, his ardent enthusiasm for science and work, his aversion to empty phrases, to all kinds of lies and falsehood, and the indomitable temperament of a fighter.
Turgenev’s novel arose in the midst of the “present”, in an atmosphere of political struggle, it was saturated with the living passions of its era and therefore became an undying past for our time.
"To the 150th anniversary of the birth of I.S. Turgenev."
“To accurately and powerfully reproduce the truth, the reality of life, is the highest happiness for a writer, even if this truth does not coincide with his own sympathies,” wrote Turgenev. In Bazarov, the most important, the most interesting thing was “real life,” although in this particular case it did not quite coincide with the writer’s sympathies. Some emphasis on the extremes and vulgar features of Bazarov’s materialism was caused by the fact that Turgenev disagreed with the revolutionary democrats, with Nekrasov,
Chernyshevsky and, as you know, with a group of other writers left
"Contemporary". And yet, even Bazarov’s extremes are not fabricated, but rather sharpened by the writer, perhaps too much in some places. Bazarov - strong, immeasurable, courageous, although straightforwardly linear thinking - was a typical and mostly positive figure, although Turgenev himself was critical of him and, of course, not by chance.
The democratic movement of the 60s was very broad and diverse.
Pisarev correctly noted that Bazarov was an early forerunner of the movement of the mixed democratic intelligentsia, when its revolutionary activity had not yet been completely clearly defined.
Throughout his character, Bazarov, as opposed to people, is an active person, striving for action. But due to censorship conditions and the fact that the events of the novel refer to the summer of 1859, Turgenev could not show his hero in revolutionary activities, in revolutionary connections.
Pisarev noted that Bazarov’s readiness for action, his fearlessness, the strength of his will, and his ability to sacrifice were clearly manifested in the scene of his tragic death. “Bazarov did not make a mistake and the meaning of the novel came out like this,” Pisarev pointed out, “today’s young people get carried away and go to extremes, but in their very desires fresh strength and an incorruptible mind are reflected; This strength and this mind, without any extraneous aids or influences, will lead young people onto a straight path and support them in life.
Anyone who has read this wonderful life in Turgenev’s novel cannot help but express deep and ardent gratitude to him as a great artist and an honest citizen of Russia.”
Bibliography.
1. “A Brief Guide for Schoolchildren”, publishing house “Olma Press”.
2. V.V Golubkov “Fathers and Sons” by Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev.
3. G.A. Byaly “Fathers and Sons”
4. To the 150th anniversary of the birth of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev.
Tutoring
Need help studying a topic?
Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
The novel “Fathers and Sons” was created by Turgenev at a difficult time for Russia. The growth of peasant uprisings and the crisis of the serfdom system forced the government to abolish serfdom in 1861. In Russia it was necessary to carry out peasant reform. Society split into two camps: in one there were revolutionary democrats , the ideologists of the peasant masses, in the other - the liberal nobility, who stood for the reformist path. The liberal nobility did not put up with serfdom, but feared the peasant revolution.
The great Russian writer shows in his novel the struggle between the worldviews of these two political directions. The plot of the novel is based on the contrast of the views of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov, who are prominent representatives of these directions. The novel also raises other questions: how to treat the people, work, science, art, what transformations are necessary in the Russian village.
The title already reflects one of these problems - the relationship between two generations, fathers and children. Disagreements on various issues have always existed between the youth and the older generation. So here, the representative of the younger generation Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov cannot, and does not want to understand the “fathers”, their life credo, principles. He is convinced that their views on the world, on life, on relationships between people are hopelessly outdated. “Yes, I will spoil them... After all, this is all pride, lionish habits, foppishness...” In his opinion, the main purpose of life is to work, to produce something material. That is why Bazarov disrespects art and sciences that do not have a practical basis; to "useless" nature. He believes that it is much more useful to deny what, from his point of view, deserves denial, than to watch indifferently from the outside, not daring to do anything. “At the present time, the most useful thing is denial - we deny,” says Bazarov.
For his part, Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is sure that there are things that cannot be doubted (“Aristocracy... liberalism, progress, principles... art..."). He values habits and traditions more and does not want to notice the changes taking place in society.
The disputes between Kirsanov and Bazarov reveal the ideological concept of the novel.
These heroes have a lot in common. Both Kirsanov and Bazarov have highly developed pride. Sometimes they cannot calmly argue. Both of them are not subject to the influence of others, and only what they themselves have experienced and felt makes the heroes change their views on certain issues. Both the democrat commoner Bazarov and the aristocrat Kirsanov have enormous influence on those around them, and strength of character cannot be denied to either one or the other. And yet, despite such similarities in nature, these people are very different, which is due to the difference in origin, upbringing and way of thinking.
Discrepancies already appear in the portraits of the heroes. The face of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is “unusually correct and clean, as if carved with a thin and light chisel.” And in general, the whole appearance of Uncle Arkady “...was elegant and thoroughbred, his hands were beautiful, with long pink nails.” Bazarov’s appearance is the complete opposite of Kirsanov. He is dressed in a long robe with tassels, he has red hands, his face is long and thin , with a wide forehead and not at all an aristocratic nose. The portrait of Pavel Petrovich is a portrait of a “secular lion”, whose manners match his appearance. The portrait of Bazarov undoubtedly belongs to a “democrat down to his fingernails,” which is confirmed by the behavior of the hero, independent and self-confident.
Evgeniy's life is full of intense activity; he devotes every free minute to natural science studies. In the second half of the 19th century, the natural sciences experienced a boom; materialist scientists appeared who, through numerous experiments and experiments, developed these sciences, for which there was a future. And Bazarov is the prototype of such a scientist. Pavel Petrovich, on the contrary, spends all his days in idleness and groundless, aimless thoughts and memories.
The views of those arguing about art and nature are opposite. Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov admires works of art. He is able to admire the starry sky, enjoy music, poetry, and painting. Bazarov denies art (“Raphael is not worth a penny”) and approaches nature with utilitarian standards (“Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it”). Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov also does not agree that art, music, nature are nonsense. Going out onto the porch, “...he looked around, as if wanting to understand how one could not sympathize with nature.” And here we can feel how Turgenev expresses his own thoughts through his hero. The beautiful evening landscape leads Nikolai Petrovich to a “sorrowful and joyful play of lonely thoughts,” brings back pleasant memories, and opens up to him a “magical world of dreams.” The author shows that by denying admiration for nature, Bazarov impoverishes his spiritual life.
But the main difference between a commoner-democrat who finds himself on the estate of a hereditary nobleman and a liberal lies in his views on society and the people. Kirsanov believes that aristocrats are the driving force of social development. Their ideal is “English freedom,” that is, a constitutional monarchy. The path to the ideal lies through reforms, openness, progress. Bazarov is confident that aristocrats are incapable of action and there is no benefit from them. He rejects liberalism, denies the ability of the nobility to lead Russia to the future.
Disagreements arise over nihilism and the role of nihilists in public life. Pavel Petrovich condemns nihilists for the fact that they “respect no one”, live without “principles”, considers them unnecessary and powerless: “There are only 4-5 of you.” To this Bazarov replies: “Moscow burned down from a penny candle.” Speaking about the denial of everything, Bazarov means religion, the autocratic-serf system, and generally accepted morality. What do nihilists want? First of all, revolutionary actions. And the criterion is the benefit for the people.
Pavel Petrovich glorifies the peasant community, family, religiosity, and patriarchy of the Russian peasant. He claims that “the Russian people cannot live without faith.” Bazarov says that the people do not understand their own interests, are dark and ignorant, that there are no honest people in the country, that “a man is happy to rob himself just to get drunk on dope in a tavern.” However, he considers it necessary to distinguish popular interests from popular prejudices; he claims that the people are revolutionary in spirit, therefore nihilism is a manifestation of the national spirit.
Turgenev shows that, despite his tenderness, Pavel Petrovich does not know how to talk with ordinary people, “he frowns and sniffs cologne.” In a word, he is a real gentleman. And Bazarov proudly declares: “My grandfather plowed the land.” And he can win over the peasants, although he makes fun of them. The servants feel “that he is still his brother, not a master.”
This is precisely because Bazarov had the ability and desire to work. In Maryino, on the Kirsanovs’ estate, Evgeniy worked because he could not sit idle, and “some kind of medical-surgical smell” was established in his room.
In contrast, representatives of the older generation did not differ in their ability to work. So, Nikolai Petrovich is trying to manage things in a new way, but nothing works out for him. He says about himself: “I am a soft, weak person, I spent my life in the wilderness.” But, according to Turgenev, this cannot serve as an excuse. If you can't work, don't do it. And the biggest thing Pavel Petrovich did was help his brother with money, not daring to give advice, and “not jokingly imagining himself to be a practical person.”
Of course, most of all a person manifests himself not in conversations, but in deeds and in his life. Therefore, Turgenev seems to lead his heroes through various trials. And the strongest of them is the test of love. After all, it is in love that a person’s soul reveals itself fully and sincerely.
And then Bazarov’s hot and passionate nature swept away all his theories. He fell in love, like a boy, with a woman whom he valued highly. “In conversations with Anna Sergeevna, he expressed his indifferent contempt for everything romantic even more than before, and when left alone, he was indignantly aware of the romanticism in himself.” The hero is experiencing severe mental discord. “... Something... took possession of him, which he never allowed, which he always mocked, which outraged all his pride.” Anna Sergeevna Odintsova rejected him. But Bazarov found the strength to accept defeat with honor, without losing his dignity.
And Pavel Petrovich, who also loved deeply, could not leave with dignity when he became convinced of the woman’s indifference to him: “.. he spent four years in foreign lands, now chasing after her, now with the intention of losing sight of her... and already I couldn’t get into the right groove.” And in general, the fact that he seriously fell in love with a frivolous and empty society lady says a lot.
Bazarov is a strong character, he is a new person in Russian society. And the writer carefully considers this type of character. The last test he offers his hero is death.
Anyone can pretend to be whoever they want. Some people do this their whole lives. But in any case, before death a person becomes what he really is. All pretense disappears, and the time comes to think, perhaps for the first and last time, about the meaning of life, about what good you have done, whether they will remember or forget as soon as they are buried. And this is natural, because in the face of the unknown, a person discovers something that he may not have seen during his lifetime.
It’s a pity, of course, that Turgenev “kills” Bazarov. Such a brave, strong man should live and live. But perhaps the writer, having shown that such people exist, did not know what to do with his hero next... The way Bazarov dies could be an honor to anyone. He feels sorry not for himself, but for his parents. He is sorry to leave life so early. Dying, Bazarov admits that he “fell under the wheel,” “but is still bristling.” And Odintsova says bitterly: “And now the giant’s whole task is to die decently, I won’t wag my tail.”
Bazarov is a tragic figure. It cannot be said that he defeats Kirsanov in an argument. Even when Pavel Petrovich is ready to admit defeat, Bazarov suddenly loses faith in his teaching and doubts his personal need for society. “Does Russia need me? No, apparently I don’t,” he reflects. Only the proximity of death restores Bazarov's self-confidence.
Whose side is the author of the novel on? This question cannot be answered unequivocally. Being a liberal by conviction, Turgenev felt the superiority of Bazarov, moreover, he asserted; “My whole story is directed against the nobility as an advanced class.” And further: “I wanted to show the cream of society, but if the cream is bad, then what about the milk?”
Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev loves his new hero and in the epilogue gives him high praise: “... a passionate, sinful, rebellious heart.” He says that it is not an ordinary person lying in the grave, but really a person that Russia needs, smart, strong, with non-stereotypical thinking.
It is known that I.S. Turgenev dedicated the novel to Belinsky and argued: “If the reader does not fall in love with Bazarov with all his rudeness, heartlessness, ruthless dryness and harshness, it is my fault that I did not achieve my goal. Bazarov is my favorite child.”
Turgenev wrote the novel “Fathers and Sons” in the last century, but the problems raised in it are still relevant in our time. What to choose: contemplation or action? How to relate to art, to love? Is the generation of fathers right? These issues have to be addressed by each new generation. And perhaps it is precisely the inability to solve them once and for all that drives life.
The story told by I.S. Turgenev in his grandiose novel “Fathers and Sons” was written in difficult times for Russia. On the eve of the peasant reform, the education of various segments of the population began to actively develop. All this led to the fact that the old noble intelligentsia was unable to give a worthy rebuff to the younger generation. And now, a struggle has developed between them, constant disputes and conflicts. This is exactly what Turgenev tried to talk about on the pages of his novel.
The main character was a representative of the democrats - commoners. He preached the power of natural sciences. He wanted to change the whole world, destroy everything old, acquired and accumulated over the years. His opponent was a representative of the aristocracy - Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. The men were radically different from each other. They were complete opposites.
Pavel Petrovich is always neatly and stylishly dressed. He gets his nails done, he takes care of his appearance. Bazarov, on the other hand, is only annoyed by what he sees. He is completely indifferent to his appearance.
Discussing the social status of the heroes, the author classifies Pavel Petrovich as a true, purebred aristocrats. And Bazarov came from a simple family and was very proud of his status.
From the very first minutes of their acquaintance, mutual hostility arises between Pavel Petrovich and Evgeniy. As their communication deepens, the conflict intensifies more and more. The heroes hate each other, despise every move, every action of their opponent. Bazarov disrespects not only his opponent, but also his brother, Nikolai Petrovich. For Evgeny there are no authorities. This is what his nihilistic conviction says in him.
In addition, the main character ironically ridicules Nikolai Petrovich’s hobbies for poetry, art, and the work of Pushkin.
I.S. Turgenev throughout the novel tried to show the conflict that flared up between the main characters. This story was not invented by the author, he took it from life, from the events that surrounded him every day.
Indeed, in the 60s of the 19th century, relations between different segments of the population became particularly strained in Russia, and this became an extraordinary problem that grew with more and more force. That is why Turgenev decided to reveal it to society, to expose the essence of the problem, which he would like to solve peacefully.