home-Children's fashion-The main problems of the hero of our time. What philosophical problems does M.Yu. Lermontov pose in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”

The main problems of the hero of our time. What philosophical problems does M.Yu. Lermontov pose in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”

"Hero of Our Time" - the most famous novel Russian prose writer and poet Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov. The writer began working on the novel after an exile to the Caucasus that left many impressions. The work raises various moral problems, but, unlike “Eugene Onegin,” in Lermontov’s novel the main attention is aimed at revealing the inner world of a person, exploring all aspects of the human soul.

Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin - main character works, which often attract mortal dangers, rush headlong into madness and adventure. Using the example of this character throughout the novel, the reader becomes aware of what exactly Lermontov wanted to convey. Observing the formation of Grigory Aleksandrovich’s personality, delving into his conclusions, assessing his behavior and statements, unique answers to questions about the meaning of life, the power of love, conscience, morality and predestination in an inevitable fate are revealed.

The story “Princess Mary,” part of the novel, includes a vivid and moralizing episode of the duel between Pechorin and his colleague Grushnitsky. The comparison of these two characters, one of whom is only an absurd, evil “caricature” of the second, serves as the basis for the moral component of the work. This situation, like others, pushed Pechorin into endless introspection, from which he furiously tried to escape, because this forced him even more, despite decisive character, question everything.

Pechorin, reflecting the problem of the entire generation, is constantly in search of his recognition, afraid of a stupid and absurd death, and thinks about happiness. All this leads to the fact that the hero, starting from the first chapter, interferes in the lives of strangers, disrupting the entire sequence of their days. “...I alarmed their calm, and like a stone I almost sank to the bottom!” - this is what Grigory Alexandrovich spoke about himself after meeting with the smugglers. And in every chapter the same pattern occurs. The hero is attracted by passion for a mysterious girl, his feelings are very captivating, then introspection turns on again, and everything collapses. Pechorin's "impulses", such as interest in love relationships with a savage, led to the death of innocent people.

Since the work is based mainly on personal diaries Pechorin, they contain the very confession of a character who, having an innate passion to contradict, comes to the conclusion that two people live in him. One is able to feel and act, while the other judges and observes him. The hero considers himself a person of a time that has not yet come, and therefore is in his society, which has made him selfish and capable of hating, superfluous.

Several interesting essays

  • An essay about Proclus and his image with characteristics in the story Moroz, Nekrasov’s red nose

    This man was an honest, faithful, responsible peasant. He always paid his dues and taxes on time; there were never any problems or misunderstandings with him.

  • Mtsyri as a romantic hero in Lermontov's poem 8th grade essay

    In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, romanticism was developing in full swing in Russia, which replaced the classical traditions. If before that literary works were aimed at developing the social side, and I wanted to show a certain ideal of the structure

  • Analysis of the story Shukshina Kalina red

    The work is one of the most colorful in the writer’s work and tells about the life of ordinary village people with their original and incredibly complex destinies.

    • Perhaps everyone Russian writer is a person with capital letters Moreover, everyone has their own unique, inimitable and genuine life and destiny. The famous Russian writer was no exception

  • What are family relationships based on? composition

    As I wrote famous classic, every family is unhappy in a special way. If we develop this idea, then it is likely that relationships in families are to some extent built on unhappiness or unsettled existence.

Moral issues. Every society had its own unchanging moral laws. The person who violated them was already considered an incomplete member of this society. Pechorin violated these principles many times.

In general, Pechorin is by no means a clear-cut personality. Lermontov himself insists that Pechorin is no longer the romantic hero that the public wanted him to be.

Possessing a completely romantic appearance - “of average height; His slender, slender figure and broad shoulders proved a strong build, capable of enduring all the difficulties of nomadic life and climate change. There was something childish in his smile. His skin had a certain feminine tenderness; blond hair”, etc. - he lives a very complex spiritual life - this is also a romantic trait.

Lermontov several times draws our attention to the fact that Pechorin is a very real hero. His selfishness, outward contempt for everything around him, cruel and, worst of all, well-thought-out, calculating actions are not the hero’s strengths, as was the case in the era of romanticism, but also not his weaknesses. Lermontov is trying to reveal to the reader what influenced Pechorin. This is his main difference from Pushkin, who is trying to break the myth of romantic hero in his poem "Gypsies".

Everything that Pechorin undertakes turns into misfortune for the people next to him.

In the story “Bela” he destroys the life of Bela herself, her father and Kazbich.

In the story “Maksim Maksimych” Pechorin undermined the old man’s faith in the younger generation.

In the story “Taman” his actions lead to an unpleasant change in the lives of the smugglers.

In the story “Princess Mary” he kills Grushnitsky and ruins the life of Princess Mary and her mother.

In the story “Fatalist” Pechorin predicts the death of Vulich, which then actually happens.

Moral problems also arise in Pechorin’s relationships with women.

For example, he acted meanly with Princess Mary from the very beginning. Pechorin never loved her, but simply used her gullibility and love to fight Grushnitsky.

The savage beauty was just another experiment, Pechorin’s whim. He thought that this new wild and exotic love would help him overcome his boredom. But this did not happen, because treatment with love was a completed stage for Pechorin.

In his relationship with the smuggler Ondine, Pechorin’s generally rather strange position towards a woman can be traced. Forgetting that in front of him is a creature that is much weaker than him, Pechorin enters into a real physical struggle with the woman. Even already married woman- Vera could not save Pechorin from satiety with life.

Women played the role of a kind of indicator in Pechorin’s life.

At the moments when he was full of strength and energy, there were no women in his life, and only in moments of boredom or impending tragedy (as in the chapter “Fatalist”, when Pechorin, after a conversation with Vulich, met another girl in the courtyard of the house, which was a bad sign), at such moments women appear in Pechorin’s life one after another.

And what is characteristic is that each woman opened some new pages in Pechorin’s character. He did not exhaust himself at all with his ostentatious selfishness and coldness of actions. There was something different about Pechorin that could attract a truly Russian person to him - Maxim Maksimovich, who in theory should have hated the arrogant young fellow. But this does not happen, because Maxim Maksimovich sees in Pechorin, first of all, his personal qualities. Therefore, the insult inflicted on the old man hurt him especially strongly.

The relationship between Pechorin and Grushnitsky is also interesting.

In general, Grushnitsky is a completely successful parody of Pechorin. With his pitiful behavior, on the one hand, he emphasizes the nobility of Pechorin, and on the other, he seems to erase any differences between them. After all, Pechorin himself spied on him and Princess Mary, which, of course, was not a noble act. In addition, it is necessary to pay Special attention to the scene of their duel. Since ancient times, a duel has been a defense of honor, but in no case a murder, which is what the duel of Grushnitsky and Pechorin actually was. In his diary, Pechorin mentioned that he specifically chose such a place so that one of them would not return from the duel.

Not only can this act be called premeditated murder, it is also not worthy moral person. At the beginning of this chapter, Grushnitsky, with his behavior, as already mentioned, emphasizes the grace of Pechorin, but closer to the end of the chapter, this myth is dispelled by Grushnitsky himself.

Thus, we can say that Pechorin is to some extent an immoral person, especially since he himself talks about this, calling himself a “moral cripple.” Pechorin understands that all the people he meets end up as toys in his hands.

Pechorin does not even think about changing his line of behavior, although he is well aware that during his life he has only caused evil to people, but this self-criticism does not bring any relief to him or the people who encounter him.

1. The novel “Hero of Our Time” was written by Lermontov in last period life, it reflected all the main motives of the creative poet.
2. The motives of freedom and will are central in Lermontov’s Lyrics. Poetic freedom and inner personal freedom in the poem “Farewell, unwashed Russia!”, escape lyrical hero“beyond the wall of the Caucasus.” The novel also takes place in the Caucasus. Pechorin leaves Central Russia in search of personal independence and spiritual freedom.
3. The motif of loneliness, which permeates all of Lermontov’s lyrics, sounds especially clearly in the novel. Pechorin is lonely - this is the loneliness of the lyrical hero of the poem “Both boring and sad...”. Pechorin's individualism. What is the hero’s fault and what is his misfortune?
4. Pechorin’s loneliness, spiritual emptiness, and his reflection do not allow him to find himself in intimate human connections. He is doomed to a tragic ending to Love and friendship. Lermontov’s lyrics also contain bitter words about the “poison of a kiss”, about “slander of friends” (“Gratitude”, “Clouds”).
5. The meaning of the novel's title. The origins of the tragedy of a generation. Analysis of the short story “Fatalist”. Analysis of the poem “Duma”.
6. One of the most important philosophical aspects of Lermontov’s lyrics is the understanding of the artist’s mission. Analysis of the poems “Prophet”, “Poet”, the author’s preface to the novel “Hero of Our Time” and the preface to the chapter “Pechorin’s Journal”. For Lermontov, the task of an artist and writer is to study the “history of the human soul,” the goal of which is to make people look deeper into themselves, reevaluate themselves and the world, and return to true and spiritual values.
FOR THE CURIOUS
I. About what hero we're talking about?
1. But I did no harm to people, And therefore my deeds It is of little use to you to know, But can I tell my soul?
2. ...the hand of fate
She led me in a different way... But now I am sure that I could have been in the land of my fathers Not one of the last daredevils.
3. He met death face to face, As a fighter should in battle.
4. Walks smoothly - like a swan; He looks sweet - like a darling; Says a word - the nightingale sings...
5. ... She herself is pale, bare-haired, her blond braids unbraided with snow and frost sprinkled with her; The cloudy eyes look like crazy; The lips whisper incomprehensible words.
6. ...He swayed and fell dead; He fell onto the cold snow. On the cold snow, like a pine tree, Like a pine tree in a damp forest, under the resinous root, chopped off.
7. Now she raises her black eyebrow, now she suddenly bends over a little, and Her divine foot glides and floats across the carpet; And she smiles, full of childish fun.
8. He was wearing an officer’s frock coat without epaulettes and a Circassian shaggy hat. He seemed to be about fifty years old; his dark complexion showed that he had long been familiar with the Transcaucasian sun, and his prematurely gray mustache did not match his firm gait and cheerful appearance.
9. He was so thin, white, his uniform was so new that I immediately guessed that he had recently arrived in the Caucasus.
10. He was a nice guy, I dare to assure you; just a little strange. After all, for example, in the rain, in the cold all day, while hunting; everyone will be cold and tired - but nothing to him. And another time he sits in his room, smells the wind, assures him that he has a cold.
11. And what a thug he was, agile at whatever you want: whether to raise his hat at full gallop, or shoot from a gun. There was one bad thing about him: he was terribly hungry for money.
12. He had the most robber’s face: small, dry, broad-shouldered... And he was as clever as a devil! The beshmet is always torn, in patches, and the weapon is in silver.
13. His appearance was one of those that at first glance strikes unpleasantly, but which you like later, when the eye learns to read in the irregular features the imprint of a tried and high soul.
14. She has respect for the intelligence and knowledge of her daughter, who read Byron in English and knows algebra. (What was your daughter's name?)
15. ...She is of average height, blonde, with regular features, her complexion is consumptive, and there is a black mole on her right cheek.
16. High growth and a dark complexion, black hair, black penetrating eyes, a large but correct nose, belonging to his nation, a sad and cold smile.
17. He was of average height; His slender, slender figure and broad shoulders proved his strong build, capable of withstanding all the difficulties of nomadic life and climate change...
18. Despite light color his hair, his mustache and eyebrows were black - a sign of the breed in a person, just like the black mane and black tail of a white horse.
19. The extraordinary flexibility of her figure, the special, only characteristic tilt of her head, long Brown hair, some kind of golden tint of her slightly tanned skin on her neck and shoulders, and especially her correct nose - all this was charming for me.
II. Who said that?
1. This proud nobility looks at us army men as wild. And what does it matter to them whether there is a mind under a numbered cap and a heart under a thick overcoat.
2. My dear, I hate people so as not to despise them, because otherwise life would be too disgusting a farce.
3. I began to read, study - I was also tired of science; I saw that neither fame nor happiness depended on them at all, because the most happy people- ignoramuses, and fame is luck, and to achieve it, you just need to be dexterous.
4. ...This has been my lot since childhood. Everyone read on my face signs of bad qualities that were not there; but they were anticipated - and they were born. I was modest - I was accused of guile: I became secretive.
5. I remember - this time, more than ever before, I loved nature. How curiously I peered at every dewdrop fluttering on a wide grape leaf and reflecting millions of rainbow rays!
6. ...Running through the past in my thoughts, I ask myself: why didn’t I want to take this path, opened to me by fate, where quiet joys and peace of mind awaited me? No, I wouldn’t get along with this lot! I, like a sailor, born and raised on the deck of a robber brig...
7. In my early youth I was a dreamer; I loved to caress the alternately gloomy and rosy images that my restless and greedy imagination painted for me.
8. Yes, I always knew that he was a flighty person who could not be relied upon... But really, it’s a pity that he would end badly... and it’s impossible otherwise! I have always said that there is no use in those who forget old friends!
III. Miscellaneous
1. What is the full title of “Songs about the merchant Kalashnikov”?
2. Indicate the location of the monastery in which Mtsyri languished.
3. Lermontov’s hero, like Pushkin’s hero, was gold fish. In which work by Lermontov and to whom?
4. What was it called school essay Lermontov on Russian literature?
5. What was the name of Stepan Kalashnikov’s father?
6. How did Pechorin feel about music?
7. What poetic meters preferred Lermontov?
8. Name a landmark in Pyatigorsk, where - each at one time - the heroes of Lermontov and Ilf and Petrov visited. Who are these heroes? Say their names.
9. Find the inconsistency in the verses:
And the Terek is jumping like a lioness”
With a shaggy mane on the ridge, ”
Roared - both the mountain beast and the bird, ”
Whirling in the azure heights, ”
They listened to the verb of the waters...
10. Who did Lermontov write about? Since the world lost paradise, ”
I swear, she’s such a beauty.”
It did not bloom under the southern sun.
11. Who are these words of the poet about?
Nature was not aroused by brilliance.”
In the barren breast of an exile"
No new feelings, no new strengths;”
And everything that he saw before him,”
He despised or hated.
12. With whom from A.S. Pushkin’s inner circle was Lermontov friendly?
13. Name literary places associated with the name of Lermontov.
14. Which work by Lermontov had more than 7 editions?
15. Which lines were written by Pushkin and which by Lermontov?
I'm coming to you. I am writing by accident; right,
I don’t know how or why.
I've lost this right.
And what will I tell you? - Nothing!
What do I remember about you? - but, good God,
You have known this for a long time;
And of course you don't care.
I’m writing to you - what more?”
What more can I say?
Now I know it's in your will
Punish me with contempt.
16. What was Pechorin’s name?
17. Who is the author of poems about Moscow?
Moscow... There is so much in this sound”
For the Russian heart it has merged!”
How much resonated with him!
Moscow, Moscow! I love you like a son,”
Like a Russian - strong, fiery and tender.
18. Which poems by Lermontov were set to music?
19. Which of the poets silver age wrote about Lermontov?
20. What works of Lermontov were written in historical topic? 21. Whose song? From which story?
As if by free will -”
Along the green sea"
All ships are sailing"
Bicycle sailers.
22. It is known that Lermontov’s work is closely connected with the Caucasus. When did he visit there for the first time?
23. Where, according to Lermontov, did his paternal ancestors come from?
24. What ancient noble family did Lermontov belong to on his mother’s side?
25. Did Lermontov and Pushkin know each other?
26. “The terrible fate of a father and son to live separately and die in separation...” What facts from Lermontov’s biography are these lines inspired by?
27. Name the artists who wrote the most famous portraits Lermontov.
28. What are the reasons for Lermontov’s first and second exile to the Caucasus?
29. In which educational institutions did Lermontov study?
30. What does it feel like modern name Shat-mountain, mentioned by Lermontov in the poem “Dispute”?
31. Many outstanding figures of Russian culture studied at the Noble boarding school. Who are they?
32. Did N.V. Gogol and M.Yu. Lermontov know each other?
33. Where is Lermontov buried?
ANSWERS
I. What hero are we talking about?
1. Mtsyri. 2. Mtsyri. 3. Leopard. 4. Alena Dmitrievna. 5. Alena Dmitrievna. 6. Kiribeevich. 7. Tamara. 8. Maxim Maksimych. 9. Pechorin. 10. Pechorin. 11. Azamat. 12. Kazbich. 13. Dr. Werner. 14. Princess, mother of Princess Mary. 15. Faith. 16. Vulich. 17. Pechorin. 18. Pechorin. 19. Smuggler girl.
II. Who said that?
1. Grushnitsky. 2. Grushnitsky. 3. Pechorin. 4. Pechorin. 5. Pechorin before the duel. 6. Pechorin. 7. Pechorin. 8. Maxim Maksimych about Pechorin.
III. Miscellaneous
1. “Song about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, a young guardsman and swashbuckling merchant Kalashnikov."
2. Where, merging, they make noise, Embracing like two sisters, The jets of Aragva and Kura.
3. Mtsyri. 4. Panorama of Moscow. 5. Paramon. 6. “...I love music in a medical sense.” 7. Iambic, trochee. 8. Failure. 9. The lioness has no mane. 10. Tamara. 11. Demon. 12. L. S. Pushkin, E. A. Karamzina, S. N. Karamzina, N. N. Pushkina. 13. Moscow, St. Petersburg, Pyatigorsk, Kislovodsk, Tarkhany Penza province. 14. Demon. 15. Lermontov, Pushkin. 16. Grigory Alexandrovich. 17. Pushkin, Lermontov. 18. “I go out alone on the road”, “No, it’s not you that I love so passionately”, “Masquerade”. 19. Dmitry Merezhkovsky, Vladimir Solovyov, Vladislav Khodasevich. 20. “Borodino”, “Two Giants”, “Song about the merchant Kalashnikov”. 21. Smuggler girl (“Taman”). 22. In 1820 with my grandmother. 23. From the Scottish family of Lermontov. 24. Arsenyevs - Stolypins. 25. No. 26. In March 1817, Lermontov’s father left Tarkhan, leaving his son in the care of his grandmother. 27. F. O. Budkin, K. A. Gorbunov, T. E. Zabolotsky, L. I. Klyunder and Lermontov himself. 28. The reason for the first exile was the poem “The Death of a Poet,” the second was a duel with Barant. 29. Noble boarding school at Moscow University, Moscow University, School of Guards Ensigns in St. Petersburg. 30. Elbrus. 31. V. A. Zhukovsky, A. S. Griboyedov, V. F. Odoevsky, V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, N. P. Ogarev. 32. Yes. 33. First in Pyatigorsk, then his ashes were transported to Tarkhany, Penza province.

(No ratings yet)


Other writings:

  1. I look sadly at our generation! Its future is either empty or dark, Meanwhile, under the burden of knowledge or doubt, It will grow old in inaction. M. Yu. Lermontov V. G. Belinsky wrote: “It is obvious that Lermontov is a poet of a completely different era and that Read More ......
  2. I think that main theme There was a theme of loneliness in Lermontov's works. It went through all of his work and sounds in almost all of his works. The novel “A Hero of Our Time” is undoubtedly associated with the images of Lermontov’s lyrical works. This is the first philosophical novel in Read More......
  3. A kind of peak of Lermontov’s creativity, the end of a short creative path The poet was the publication of his novel “Hero of Our Time”. Many researchers note that Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin shows prominent features of the author himself. This is also evidenced by the closeness of some moments of this work to Read More......
  4. There is no consensus regarding the plot source of the novella. According to Lermontov’s biographer, P. A. Viskovatov (1842-1905), “Fatalist” was copied from an incident that took place in the village of Chernennaya with Akim Akimovich Khastatov, Lermontov’s uncle: “At least the episode where Pechorin rushes into the hut Read More ......
  5. Every society has its own moral laws. A person who violated them was no longer considered a full member of this society. Pechorin violated these principles many times. In general, Pechorin is by no means a clear-cut personality. Lermontov himself insists that Pechorin is no longer the romantic hero he was Read More ......
  6. “I don’t know the language better than Lermontov’s,” wrote Chekhov. “I would do this: I would take his story and analyze it the way they do it in schools, sentence by sentence, part by part of a sentence... That’s how I would learn to write.” The language of the novel is distinguished by its precise use Read More......
  7. V. G. Belinsky wrote: “It is obvious that Lermontov is a poet of a completely different era and that his poetry is a completely new link in the chain historical development our society." It seems to me that the main theme in Lermontov’s work was the theme of loneliness. She went through everything Read More......
  8. Lermontov's creativity fully reflects his philosophical understanding of life. Almost every lyrical work Lermontov raises this or that philosophical question. Already in early period The poet's creativity is concerned with the problem of freedom. His idea of ​​freedom changed throughout his life. So, Read More......
Problems of the novel “A Hero of Our Time”

As you know, the novel “A Hero of Our Time” consists of stories, each of which dates back to special genre varieties. The story “Bela” is a mixture of an essay and a romantic story about the love of a “secular” man for a savage woman or a savage woman for a civilized person, reminiscent of romantic poem with an inverted plot (the hero does not flee into a socio-cultural environment alien to him and does not return to his native bosom from an alien environment, but, on the contrary, a kidnapped savage is installed in the home of a civilized person); the story “Maksim Maksimych” is a mixture of a kind of “physiological” essay (cf. the essay “Caucasian”) with the “travel” genre. “Pechorin’s Journal” belongs to the epistolary genre and is nothing more than a confessional diary, a genre close to a confessional story or a confessional novel, common in French literature (“Confession” by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, “Confession of a Son of the Century” Alfred de Musset). However, instead of a holistic presentation, “Pechorin’s Journal” breaks up into a series of stories. Of these, “Taman” is a mixture of a romantic poem and a ballad (a clash of a civilized person with people who are conventionally natural and primitive in their social development, surrounded by an atmosphere of adventurous mystery), “Princess Mary” is a secular story, “Fatalist” is philosophical story, built on the material of military life.

Philosophy, plot and composition of the novel

The central philosophical problem facing Pechorin and occupying his consciousness is the problem of fatalism, predetermination: is his life destiny and the fate of a person in general predetermined or not, is a person initially free or is he deprived? free choice? Understanding the meaning of existence and human purpose depends on the resolution of this problem. Since Pechorin places the solution to the problem on himself, he participates in the search for the truth with his whole being, with his whole personality, mind and feelings. The personality of the hero with special, individual mental reactions to the world around him comes to the fore. The motivations for actions and actions come from the personality itself, already formed and internally unchanged. Historical and social determinism fades into the background. This does not mean that it does not exist at all, but the conditioning of character by circumstances is not emphasized. The author does not disclose why, due to what external reasons and the influence of the “environment” formed the character. Omitting backstory, he includes biographical insertions into the narrative that hint at the influence of external circumstances. In other words, the author needs a person who has already reached maturity in his spiritual development, but intellectually seeking, seeking truth, striving to solve the mysteries of existence. Only from a hero with an established spiritual and mental organization that has not stopped in its development can one expect a solution to philosophical and psychological problems. The process of forming Pechorin’s character under the influence of objective circumstances independent of the hero is a thing of the past. Now it is no longer circumstances that create Pechorin, but he creates at his own will the “subjective”, “secondary” circumstances he needs and, depending on them, determines his behavior. All other heroes are subject to the power of external circumstances. They are prisoners of the “environment”. Their attitude to reality is dominated by custom, habit, their own irresistible delusion or the opinion of the surrounding society. And therefore they have no choice. Choice, as we know, means freedom. Only Pechorin has a conscious choice of real everyday behavior, unlike whom the characters in the novel are not free. The structure of the novel presupposes contact between the internally free hero and the world of unfree people. However, Pechorin, who has gained inner freedom as a result of sad experiences that each time end in failure, cannot decide whether the tragic or dramatic results of his experiments are really a natural consequence of his free will or whether his fate is destined in heaven and in this sense is not free and dependent on higher, superpersonal forces , who for some reason chose him as an instrument of evil.

So, in real world Pechorin dominates circumstances, adapting them to his goals or creating them to please his desires. As a result, he feels free. But since as a result of his efforts the characters either die or are wrecked, and Pechorin had no intention of deliberately causing them harm, but only to make them fall in love with himself or laugh at their weaknesses, then, therefore, they are subject to some other circumstances that are not under the control of the hero and over which he has no power. From this, Pechorin concludes that perhaps there are forces more powerful than real everyday ones, on which both his fate and the fate of other characters depend. And then, free in the real everyday world, he turns out to be unfree in being. Free from the point of view of social ideas, he is not free in the philosophical sense. The problem of predestination appears as a problem of spiritual freedom and spiritual unfreedom. The hero solves the problem - whether he has free will or not. All the experiments carried out by Pechorin are attempts to resolve this contradiction.

In accordance with Pechorin’s aspiration (it is here that the hero’s greatest closeness to the author is observed, who is excited by the same problem; from this point of view, the hero’s self-knowledge is also the author’s self-knowledge), the entire plot-event plan of the novel was created, which found expression in the special organization of the narrative, in the composition "Hero of Our Time".

If we agree and mean by plot a set of events and incidents developing in chronological sequence in their mutual internal connection (here it is assumed that events follow in a work of art as they should follow in life), by plot - the same set of events, incidents and adventures, motives, impulses and stimuli of behavior in their compositional sequence (i.e., the way they are presented in a work of art), then it is absolutely clear that the composition of “A Hero of Our Time” organizes and builds a plot, not a plot.

The arrangement of the stories, according to the chronology of the novel, is as follows: “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”, “Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal”.

In the novel, however, the chronology is destroyed and the stories are arranged differently: “Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal”, “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”. The composition of the novel, as you might guess, is associated with a special artistic task.

The sequence of stories chosen by the author pursued several goals. One of them was to remove the tension from incidents and adventures, that is, from external events, and turn attention to the inner life of the hero. From the real-everyday, everyday and eventual plane, where the hero lives and acts, the problem is transferred to the metaphysical, philosophical, existential plane. Thanks to this, interest is focused on Pechorin’s inner world and his analysis. For example, the duel between Pechorin and Grushnitsky, if you follow the chronology, takes place before that, how the reader receives dull news of Pechorin’s death. In this case, the reader's attention would be directed to the duel, focusing on the event itself. The tension would be maintained by a natural question: what will happen to Pechorin, will Grushnitsky kill him or will the hero remain alive? In the novel, Lermontov relieves the tension by the fact that before the duel he already reports (in the “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal”) about the death of Pechorin, returning from Persia. The reader is informed in advance that Pechorin will not die in the duel, and the tension in this important episode in the hero’s life is reduced. But on the other hand, there is increased tension in the events of Pechorin’s inner life, in his thoughts, in the analysis of his own experiences. This attitude corresponds to the artistic intentions of the author, who revealed his goal in the “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal”: “The history of the human soul, albeit the smallest soul, is perhaps more curious and useful than the history of an entire people, especially when it is a consequence of observations a mature mind over itself and when it is written without a vain desire to arouse sympathy or surprise.”

After reading this confession, the reader has the right to assume that the author’s interest is focused on the hero, who has a mature mind, on his deep and subtle soul, and not on the events and adventures that happened to him. On the one hand, events and incidents are, to a certain extent, “works” of the soul of Pechorin, who creates them (the story of Bela and Princess Mary). On the other hand, existing independently of Pechorin, they are attracted to the extent that they evoke a response in him and help to comprehend his soul (the story with Vulich).

Image of Pechorin

Almost everyone who has written about Lermontov's novel mentions its special playful nature, which is associated with experiments conducted by Pechorin. The author (probably this is his own idea of ​​​​life) encourages the hero of the novel to perceive real life in its natural everyday flow in the form of a theatrical game, a stage, in the form of a performance. Pechorin, chasing funny adventures that should dispel boredom and amuse him, is the author of the play, a director who always stages comedies, but in the fifth acts they inevitably turn into tragedies. The world is built, from his point of view, like a drama - there is a beginning, a climax and a denouement. Unlike the author-playwright, Pechorin does not know how the play will end, just as the other participants in the play do not know this, unaware, however, that they are playing certain roles, that they are artists. In this sense, the characters in the novel (the novel involves the participation of many individualized persons) are not equal to the hero. The director fails to equate the main character and the involuntary “actors”, to open up equal opportunities for them while maintaining the purity of the experiment: the “artists” go on stage as mere extras, Pechorin turns out to be both the author, the director, and the actor of the play. He writes and plays it for himself. At the same time, with different people he behaves differently: with Maxim Maksimych - friendly and somewhat arrogantly, with Vera - lovingly and mockingly, with Princess Mary - appearing like a demon and condescendingly, with Grushnitsky - ironically, with Werner - coldly, rationally, friendly to a certain extent and quite tough, with “undine” – interested and wary.

His general attitude towards all characters is determined by two principles: firstly, no one should be allowed into the secret secrets, into his inner world, you can’t open your soul wide open to anyone; secondly, a person is interesting for Pechorin insofar as he acts as his antagonist or enemy. He devotes the fewest pages in his diary to the faith he loves. This happens because Vera loves the hero, and he knows about it. She will not change and will always be him. On this score, Pechorin is absolutely calm. People are interested in Pechorin (his soul is the soul of a disappointed romantic, no matter how much of a cynic and skeptic he presents himself) only when there is no peace between him and the characters, no agreement, when there is an external or internal struggle. Calmness brings death to the soul, unrest, anxiety, threats, intrigues give it life. This, of course, contains not only strength, but also weakness Pechorina. He knows harmony as a state of consciousness, as a state of spirit and as behavior in the world only speculatively, theoretically and dreamily, but not practically. In practice, harmony for him is synonymous with stagnation, although in his dreams he interprets the word “harmony” differently - as a moment of merging with nature, overcoming contradictions in life and in his soul. As soon as calm, harmony and peace sets in, everything becomes uninteresting to him. This also applies to himself: outside of the battle in the soul and in reality, he is ordinary. His destiny is to seek storms, to seek battles that feed the life of the soul and can never satisfy the insatiable thirst for thought and action.

Due to the fact that Pechorin is a director and actor on the stage of life, the question inevitably arises about the sincerity of his behavior and words about himself. The opinions of the researchers differed decisively. As for the recorded confessions to himself, the question is, why lie if Pechorin is the only reader and if his diary is not intended for publication? The narrator in the “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal” has no doubt at all that Pechorin wrote sincerely (“I was convinced of his sincerity”). The situation is different with Pechorin’s oral statements. Some believe, citing Pechorin’s words (“I thought for a minute and then said, looking deeply moved”), that in the famous monologue (“Yes! such has been my fate since childhood”) Pechorin is acting and pretending. Others believe that Pechorin is quite frank. Since Pechorin is an actor on the stage of life, he must put on a mask and must play sincerely and convincingly. The “deeply touched look” he adopted does not mean that Pechorin is lying. On the one hand, playing sincerely, the actor speaks not on his own behalf, but on behalf of the character, so he cannot be accused of lying. On the contrary, no one would believe the actor if he did not enter into his role. But the actor, as a rule, plays the role of a person alien to him and a fictitious person. Pechorin, wearing various masks, plays himself. Pechorin the actor plays Pechorin the man and Pechorin the officer. Under each of the masks he himself is hidden, but not a single mask exhausts him. Character and actor merge only partially. With Princess Mary, Pechorin plays a demonic personality, with Werner - a doctor, to whom he advises: “Try to look at me as a patient obsessed with a disease still unknown to you - then your curiosity will be aroused to the highest degree: you can now perform several important physiological tests on me.” observations... Isn’t the expectation of violent death already a real illness?” So he wants the doctor to see him as a patient and play the role of the doctor. But even before that, he put himself in the patient’s place and began to observe himself as a doctor. In other words, he plays two roles at once - the patient who is sick, and the doctor who observes the disease and analyzes the symptoms. However, playing the role of a patient, he pursues the goal of impressing Werner (“This thought struck the doctor, and he was amused”). Observation and analytical frankness when playing a patient and a doctor are combined with cunning and tricks that allow you to win over one or another character. At the same time, the hero sincerely admits this every time and does not try to hide his pretense. Pechorin's acting does not interfere with sincerity, but it shakes and deepens the meaning of his speeches and behavior.

It is easy to see that Pechorin is made of contradictions. He is a hero whose spiritual needs are limitless, limitless and absolute. His strength is immense, his thirst for life is insatiable, and so are his desires. And all these needs of nature are not Nozdryov’s bravado, not Manilov’s dreaminess and not Khlestakov’s vulgar boasting. Pechorin sets a goal for himself and achieves it, straining all the strength of his soul. Then he mercilessly analyzes his actions and fearlessly judges himself. Individuality is measured by immensity. The hero correlates his fate with infinity and wants to solve the fundamental mysteries of existence. Free thought leads him to knowledge of the world and self-knowledge. These properties are usually endowed with heroic natures, who do not stop in the face of obstacles and are eager to realize their innermost desires or plans. But the title “hero of our time” certainly contains an admixture of irony, as Lermontov himself hinted at. It turns out that a hero can and does look like an anti-hero. In the same way, he seems extraordinary and ordinary, an exceptional person and a simple army officer in the Caucasian service. Unlike the ordinary Onegin, a kind fellow who knows nothing about his rich inner potential forces, Pechorin feels and is aware of them, but lives his life, like Onegin, usually. The result and meaning of the adventures each time turn out to be below expectations and completely lose the aura of unusualness. Finally, he is nobly modest and “sometimes” feels sincere contempt for himself and always for “others,” for the “aristocratic herd” and for the human race in general. There is no doubt that Pechorin is a poetic, artistic and creative person, but in many episodes he is a cynic, an insolent person, and a snob. And it is impossible to decide what constitutes the grain of personality: the riches of the soul or its bad sides - cynicism and arrogance, what is a mask, whether it is deliberately put on the face and whether the mask has become a face.

To understand the origins of the disappointment, cynicism and contempt that Pechorin carries within himself as a curse of fate, hints scattered throughout the novel about the hero’s past help.

In the story “Bela,” Pechorin explains his character to Maxim Maksimych in response to his reproaches: “Listen, Maxim Maksimych,” he answered, “I have an unhappy character; Whether my upbringing made me this way, whether God created me this way, 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 little consolation for them - only the fact is that it is so.”

At first glance, Pechorin seems to be a worthless person, spoiled by the world. In fact, his disappointment in pleasures, in “ big world"and "secular" love, even in the sciences does him honor. Pechorin’s natural, natural soul, not yet processed by family and secular upbringing, contained high, pure, one might even assume, ideal romantic ideas about life. IN real life Pechorin's ideal romantic ideas were wrecked, and he was tired of everything and became bored. So, Pechorin admits, “my soul is spoiled by light, my imagination is restless, my heart is insatiable; It’s not enough for me: I get used to sadness just as easily as to pleasure, and my life becomes emptier day by day...” Pechorin did not expect that the rosy romantic hopes upon entering the social circle would be justified and come true, but his soul retained the purity of feelings, ardent imagination, and insatiable desires. There is no satisfaction for them. The precious impulses of the soul need to be embodied in noble actions and good deeds. This nourishes and restores the mental and spiritual strength spent on achieving them. However, the soul does not receive a positive answer, and it has nothing to eat. It fades away, becomes exhausted, becomes empty and dead. Here the contradiction characteristic of the Pechorin (and Lermontov) type begins to become clear: on the one hand, immense mental and spiritual forces, the thirst for boundless desires (“everything is not enough for me”), on the other, a feeling of complete emptiness of the same heart. D.S. Mirsky compared Pechorin’s devastated soul to an extinct volcano, but it should be added that inside the volcano everything is boiling and bubbling, on the surface it is truly deserted and dead.

Subsequently, Pechorin unfolds a similar picture of his upbringing to Princess Mary.

In the story “The Fatalist,” where he does not have to justify himself to Maxim Maksimych or evoke the compassion of Princess Mary, he thinks to himself: “... I have exhausted both the heat of the soul and the constancy of the will necessary for real life; I entered this life having already experienced it mentally, and I felt bored and disgusted, like someone who reads a bad imitation of a book he has long known.”

Every statement by Pechorin does not establish a strict relationship between upbringing, bad character traits, developed imagination, on the one hand, and life’s fate, on the other. The reasons determining Pechorin's fate still remain unclear. All three of Pechorin’s statements, interpreting these reasons differently, only complement each other, but do not line up in one logical line.

Romanticism, as is known, assumed dual worlds: a collision of the ideal and real worlds. The main reason for Pechorin’s disappointment lies, on the one hand, in the fact that the ideal content of romanticism is empty dreams. Hence the merciless criticism and cruel, even cynicism, persecution of any ideal idea or judgment (comparing a woman with a horse, mocking the romantic outfit and recitation of Grushnitsky, etc.). On the other hand, mental and spiritual impotence made Pechorin weak in front of an imperfect reality, as the romantics correctly argued. The perniciousness of romanticism, speculatively assimilated and abstractly experienced before its time, lies in the fact that the individual does not meet life fully armed, with the freshness and youth of his natural powers. It cannot fight on equal terms with hostile reality and is doomed to defeat in advance. When entering life, it is better not to know romantic ideas than to internalize and worship them in youth. A secondary encounter with life gives rise to a feeling of satiety, fatigue, melancholy and boredom.

So, romanticism is strongly questioned about its benefits for the individual and its development. The current generation, Pechorin reflects, has lost its point of support: it does not believe in predestination and considers it a delusion of the mind, but it is incapable of great sacrifices, feats for the glory of humanity and even for the sake of its own happiness, knowing about its impossibility. “And we...,” the hero continues, “indifferently move from doubt to doubt...” without any hope and without experiencing any pleasure. Doubt, which signifies and ensures the life of the soul, becomes the enemy of the soul and the enemy of life, destroying their completeness. But the opposite thesis is also valid: doubt arose when the soul awakened to independent and conscious life. Paradoxically, life has given birth to its enemy. No matter how much Pechorin wants to get rid of romanticism - ideal or demonic - he is forced in his reasoning to turn to it as the initial beginning of his thoughts.

These discussions end with considerations of ideas and passions. Ideas have content and form. Their form is action. Contents are passions, which are nothing more than ideas in their first development. Passions do not last long: they belong to youth and at this tender age they usually break out. In maturity they do not disappear, but gain fullness and go deep into the soul. All these thoughts are a theoretical justification for egocentrism, but without a demonic aftertaste. Pechorin’s conclusion is the following: only by immersing in the contemplation of itself and being imbued with itself, the soul can understand the justice of God, that is, the meaning of existence. One’s own soul is the only subject of interest for a mature and wise person who has achieved philosophical calm. Or in other words: one who has achieved maturity and wisdom understands that the only worthy subject of interest for a person is his own soul. Only this can provide him with philosophical peace of mind and establish harmony with the world. The assessment of the motives and actions of the soul, as well as of all existence, belongs exclusively to it. This is the act of self-knowledge, the highest triumph of the self-conscious subject. However, is this conclusion the final, last word of Pechorin the thinker?

In the story “Fatalist,” Pechorin argued that doubt dries up the soul, that the movement from doubt to doubt exhausts the will and is generally detrimental to a person of his time. But here he is, a few hours later, called to pacify the drunken Cossack who hacked Vulich to death. The prudent Pechorin, who took precautions so as not to become an accidental and futile victim of a raging Cossack, boldly rushes at him and, with the help of the bursting Cossacks, ties up the killer. Aware of his motives and actions, Pechorin cannot decide whether he believes in predestination or is an opponent of fatalism: “After all this, how can one not become a fatalist? But who knows for sure whether he is convinced of something or not?.. And how often do we mistake for belief a deception of feelings or a blunder of reason!..” The hero is at a crossroads - he cannot agree with the Muslim belief, “as if a person’s fate is written in heaven,” nor reject it.

Therefore, the disappointed and demonic Pechorin is not yet Pechorin in the full extent of his nature. Lermontov reveals other sides to us in his hero. Pechorin’s soul has not yet cooled down, faded or died: he is capable of perceiving nature poetically, without any cynicism, ideal or vulgar romanticism, enjoying beauty and loving. There are moments when Pechorin is characteristic and dear to the poetic in romanticism, purified from rhetoric and declarativeness, from vulgarity and naivety. This is how Pechorin describes his arrival in Pyatigorsk: “The view from three sides is wonderful. To the west, the five-headed Beshtu turns blue, like “the last cloud of a scattered storm,” to the north, Mashuk rises like a shaggy Persian cap, and covers this entire part of the sky; It’s more fun to look to the east: below me a clean, brand new town is colorful; healing springs are rustling, a multilingual crowd is noisy - and there, further, mountains are piled up like an amphitheater, increasingly blue and foggy, and on the edge of the horizon stretches a silver chain of snowy peaks, starting with Kazbek and ending with the double-headed Elbrus. - It's fun to live in such a land! Some kind of gratifying feeling flowed through all my veins. The air is clean and fresh, like a child's kiss; the sun is bright, the sky is blue– what would it seem like more? “Why are there passions, desires, regrets here?”

It’s hard to believe that this was written by a person who was disappointed in life, calculating in his experiments, and coldly ironic towards those around him. Pechorin settled on the highest place so that he, a romantic poet at heart, would be closer to heaven. It is not for nothing that thunder and clouds, to which his soul is related, are mentioned here. He chose an apartment to enjoy the entire vast kingdom of nature.

The description of his feelings before the duel with Grushnitsky is in the same vein, where Pechorin opens his soul and admits that he loves nature ardently and indestructibly: “I don’t remember a deeper and fresher morning! The sun barely appeared from behind the green peaks, and the merging of the first warmth of its rays with the dying coolness of the night brought a kind of sweet languor to all the senses. No joyful ray has yet penetrated the gorge young day: he only gilded the tops of the cliffs hanging on both sides above us; the densely leafed bushes growing in their deep cracks showered us with silver rain at the slightest breath of wind. I remember - this time, more than ever before, I loved nature. How curiously I peered at every dewdrop fluttering on a wide grape leaf and reflecting millions of rainbow rays! how greedily my gaze tried to penetrate into the smoky distance! There the path kept getting narrower, the cliffs were bluer and scarier, and finally they seemed to converge like an impenetrable wall.” In this description one can feel such a love for life, for every dewdrop, for every leaf, which seems to be anticipating merging with it and complete harmony.

There is, however, another indisputable proof that Pechorin, as others have painted him and as he sees himself in his reflections, cannot be reduced to either an anti-romanticist or a secular Demon.

Having received Vera’s letter informing him of his urgent departure, the hero “jumped out onto the porch like crazy, jumped on his Circassian, who was being led around the yard, and set off at full speed on the road to Pyatigorsk.” Now Pechorin was not chasing adventures, now there was no need for experiments, intrigues - then his heart spoke, and a clear understanding came that his only love was dying: “With the possibility of losing her forever, Faith became dearer to me than anything in the world, more valuable than life, honor, happiness! At these moments, thinking soberly and expressing his thoughts clearly, not without aphoristic grace, Pechorin is confused by the overwhelming emotions (“one minute, one more minute to see her, say goodbye, shake her hand...”) and unable to express them (“I prayed , cursed, cried, laughed... no, nothing will express my anxiety, despair!..”).

Here, a cold and skillful experimenter in the destinies of others found himself defenseless before his own sad fate - the hero was brought out crying bitterly, not trying to hold back his tears and sobs. Here the mask of an egocentrist was removed from him, and for a moment his other, perhaps real, true face was revealed. For the first time, Pechorin did not think about himself, but thought about Vera, for the first time he put someone else’s personality above his own. He was not ashamed of his tears (“However, I am pleased that I can cry!”), and this was his moral, spiritual victory over himself.

Born before term, he leaves before term, instantly living two lives - a speculative and a real one. The search for truth undertaken by Pechorin did not lead to success, but the path he followed became the main one - this is the path of a free thinking person who has hope in his own natural strengths and believes that doubt will lead him to the discovery of the true purpose of man and the meaning of existence. At the same time, Pechorin’s murderous individualism, fused with his face, according to Lermontov, had no life prospects. Lermontov makes it clear everywhere that Pechorin does not value life, that he is not averse to dying in order to get rid of the contradictions of consciousness that bring him suffering and torment. There is a secret hope in his soul that death is the only way out for him. The hero not only destroys the destinies of others, but - most importantly - kills himself. His life is wasted on nothing, disappears into emptiness. He wastes his vitality in vain, achieving nothing. The thirst for life does not cancel the desire for death, the desire for death does not destroy the feeling of life.

Considering the strengths and weaknesses, “light” and “dark sides” of Pechorin, one cannot say that they are balanced, but they are mutually conditioned, inseparable from each other and capable of flowing into one another.

Lermontov created the first psychological novel in Russia in line with the emerging and victorious realism, in which the process of self-knowledge of the hero played a significant role. In the course of self-analysis, Pechorin tests the strength of all spiritual values ​​that are the inner property of a person. Love, friendship, nature, and beauty have always been considered such values ​​in literature.

Pechorin’s analysis and introspection concerns three types of love: for a girl who grew up in a relatively natural mountain environment (Bela), for a mysterious romantic “mermaid” living near the free sea elements (“undine”) and for a city girl of “light” (Princess Mary) . Every time love does not give true pleasure and ends dramatically or tragically. Pechorin becomes disappointed again and falls into boredom. A love game often creates danger for Pechorin that threatens his life. It grows beyond the framework of a love game and becomes a game with life and death. This happens in “Bel”, where Pechorin can expect an attack from both Azamat and Kazbich. In "Taman" the "undine" almost drowned the hero, in "Princess Mary" the hero fought with Grushnitsky. In the story "Fatalist" he tests his ability to act. It is easier for him to sacrifice his life than freedom, and in such a way that his sacrifice turns out to be optional, but perfect for the sake of satisfying pride and ambition.

Embarking on another love adventure, each time Pechorin thinks that it will be new and unusual, will refresh his feelings and enrich his mind. He sincerely surrenders to a new attraction, but at the same time includes reason, which destroys immediate feeling. Pechorin's skepticism sometimes becomes absolute: what is important is not love, not truth and authenticity of feeling, but power over a woman. Love for him is not an alliance or duel of equals, but the subordination of another person to his will. And therefore, from every love adventure the hero brings out the same feelings - boredom and melancholy, reality reveals itself to him with the same banal, trivial sides.

In the same way, he is incapable of friendship, because he cannot give up part of his freedom, which would mean for him to become a “slave.” He maintains a distance in his relationship with Werner. He also makes Maxim Maksimych feel his sideliness, avoiding friendly hugs.

The insignificance of the results and their repetition forms a spiritual circle in which the hero is locked, from here arises the idea of ​​death as the best outcome from a vicious and enchanted, as if predetermined, cycle. As a result, Pechorin feels infinitely unhappy and deceived by fate. He courageously bears his cross, without reconciling with it and making more and more attempts to change his fate, to give deep and serious meaning to his stay in the world. This irreconcilability of Pechorin with himself, with his share, testifies to the restlessness and significance of his personality.

The novel reports on the hero's new attempt to find food for the soul - he goes to the East. His developed critical consciousness was not completed and did not acquire harmonious integrity. Lermontov makes it clear that Pechorin, like the people of that time, from whose traits the portrait of the hero was compiled, is not yet able to overcome the state of spiritual crossroads. Traveling to exotic, unknown countries will not bring anything new, because the hero cannot escape from himself. In the history of the soul of a noble intellectual of the first half of the 19th century. initially there was duality: the consciousness of the individual felt free will as an immutable value, but took on painful forms. The personality opposed itself to the environment and was faced with such external circumstances that gave rise to a boring repetition of norms of behavior, similar situations and responses to them, which could lead to despair, make life meaningless, dry up the mind and feelings, and replace the direct perception of the world with a cold and rational one. To Pechorin’s credit, he looks for positive content in life, believes that it exists and only it has not been revealed to him, and resists negative life experiences.

Using the “by contradiction” method, it is possible to imagine the scale of Pechorin’s personality and guess the hidden and implied, but not manifested, positive content in him, which is equal to his frank thoughts and visible actions.

Every society had its own unchanging moral laws. The person who violated them was already considered an incomplete member of this society. Pechorin violated these principles many times.
In general, Pechorin is by no means a clear-cut personality. Lermontov himself insists that Pechorin is no longer the romantic hero that the public wanted him to be.
Possessing a completely romantic appearance - “of average height; His slender, slender figure and broad shoulders proved a strong build, capable of enduring all the difficulties of nomadic life and climate change. There was something childish in his smile. His skin had a certain feminine tenderness; blond hair”, etc. - he lives a very complex spiritual life - this is also a romantic trait.
Lermontov several times draws our attention to the fact that Pechorin is a very real hero. His selfishness, outward contempt for everything around him, cruel and, worst of all, well-thought-out, calculating actions are not the hero’s strengths, as was the case in the era of romanticism, but also not his weaknesses. Lermontov is trying to reveal to the reader what influenced Pechorin. This is his main difference from Pushkin, who is trying to break the myth of the romantic hero in his poem “Gypsies.”
Everything that Pechorin undertakes turns into misfortune for the people next to him.
In the story “Bela” he destroys the life of Bela herself, her father and Kazbich. In the story “Maksim Maksimych” Pechorin undermined the old man’s faith in the younger generation.
In the story “Taman” his actions lead to an unpleasant change in the life of the smugglers.
In the story “Princess Mary” he kills Grushnitsky and ruins the life of Princess Mary and her mother.
In the story “Fatalist” Pechorin predicts the death of Vulich, which then actually happens.
Moral problems also arise in Pechorin’s relationships with women.
For example, with Princess Mary he acted meanly from the very beginning. Pechorin never loved her, but simply used her gullibility and love to fight Grushnitsky.
The savage beauty was just another experiment, Pechorin’s whim. He thought that this new wild and exotic love would help him overcome his boredom. But this did not happen, because treatment with love was a completed stage for Pechorin.
In his relationship with the smuggler Ondine, Pechorin’s generally rather strange position towards a woman can be traced. Forgetting that in front of him is a creature that is much weaker than him, Pechorin enters into a real physical struggle with the woman. Even an already married woman, Vera, could not save Pechorin from satiety with life.
Women played the role of a kind of indicator in Pechorin’s life.
At the moments when he was full of strength and energy, there were no women in his life, and only in moments of boredom or impending tragedy (as in the chapter “Fatalist”, when Pechorin, after a conversation with Vulich, met another girl in the courtyard of the house, which was a bad sign), at such moments women appear in Pechorin’s life one after another.
And what is characteristic is that each woman opened some new pages in Pechorin’s character. He did not exhaust himself at all with his ostentatious selfishness and coldness of actions. There was something different in Pechorin that could

Tasks and tests on the topic "Moral issues in the novel "A Hero of Our Time""

  • Orthoepy - Important Topics to repeat the Unified State Exam in Russian

    Lessons: 1 Tasks: 7

  • Changing past tense verbs by gender and number

    Lessons: 1 Assignments: 9 Tests: 1

  • Basics of past tense verbs. Spelling the letter before the suffix -l - Verb as part of speech grade 4


Related publications: