Internal conflict of Evgeny Bazarov. Internal conflict in Bazarov's soul

I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” gave rise to many articles, poetic and prose parodies, epigrams, and caricatures. The main object of controversy was the image of the central hero of the novel, Yevgeny Bazarov. Disagreements reached extremes. The disputes continued for many years, and their passion did not weaken. Obviously, the problems of the novel remained topical for subsequent generations.

The novel showed with exceptional poignancy a characteristic feature of Turgenev’s talent, who, according to his contemporaries, had a special instinct for guessing the emerging movement in society. The topicality of the novel lay not only in the depiction of a new person, but also in the fact that Turgenev captured pictures of the acute, irreconcilable struggle of social camps hostile to each other - “fathers” and “children”. In fact, it was a struggle between liberals and revolutionary democrats.

The breath of the era, its typical features are palpable in the central images of the novel and in the historical background against which the action unfolds. The period of preparation for the peasant reform, the deep social contradictions of that time, the struggle of social forces in the era of the 60s - this is what was reflected in the images of the novel, constituted its historical background and the essence of its main conflict.

The amazing laconicism of Turgenev’s style is striking: all this enormous material fits into the framework of a very small novel. The writer does not provide detailed canvases, broad pictures, or introduce a large number of characters. He selects only the most characteristic, the most essential.

The image of Bazarov occupies a central place in the novel. Of the 28 chapters, Bazarov does not appear in only two; in the rest he is the main character. All the main characters of the novel are grouped around him, revealed in their relationships with him, and highlight certain features of his appearance more sharply and more clearly. At the same time, the novel does not highlight the hero’s life story. Only one period of this history is taken, only its turning points are shown.

Artistic detail - precise, impressive - helps the writer to briefly and convincingly tell about the people, about the life of the country in one of the turning points in its history.

With precise strokes, using significant details, Turgenev depicts the crisis of the serfdom economy. Having introduced us to his heroes, the writer sketches a picture of the life of the people. We see “villages with low huts under dark, often half-swept roofs” (“villages”, “huts” - the very form of these words speaks of a meager, beggarly life). It can be assumed that hungry cattle have to be fed straw from the roofs. This comparison also says a lot: “like beggars in rags, roadside willows stood with stripped bark and broken branches.” Peasant cows, “emaciated, rough, as if gnawed,” greedily nibble the first grass. And here are the men themselves - “worn out, on bad nags.” Their economy is meager, miserable - “crooked threshing sheds”, “empty threshing floors”...

Turgenev will no longer depict the poverty of the people, but the picture of the hungry pre-reform village that appeared before us at the beginning of the novel makes such a strong impression that there is nothing to add to it. And immediately a bitter thought arises: “No... this poor region, it does not amaze you with either contentment or hard work; it’s impossible, he can’t stay like this, transformations are necessary... but how to carry them out, how to start?..”

This question worries the heroes of the novel. Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov talks “about upcoming government measures, about committees, about deputies, about the need to start cars...”. Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov places his hopes on the wisdom of the government and the patriarchal morals of the people's community.

But we feel: the people themselves do not trust the landowners, are hostile to them, rebellious forces are accumulating within them, and the gulf between serfs and serf owners is deepening. How typical are Nikolai Petrovich’s complaints about hired workers, about freed employees, about peasants who do not want to pay quitrent; and how alienated and unfriendly they greet the young master in Maryino (“the crowd of servants did not pour out onto the porch”).

The picture of pre-reform Russia is completed by the author’s bitter, as if inadvertently dropped remark: “Nowhere does time fly as fast as in Russia; in prison, they say, it runs even faster.”

And against the background of this poverty, slave, unsettled life, the mighty figure of Bazarov emerges. This is a man of the new generation, which has replaced the “fathers” who were unable to solve the main problems of the era.

The conflict of generations, the problem of mutual understanding between fathers and children, complex relationships and disagreements that arise between them - all these problems have always existed and have always attracted the attention of writers of different eras.

In the composition of Turgenev's novels, the ideological disputes of the heroes, their painful reflections, and passionate speeches always play a huge role. Usually, in a dispute, either the beginning of a romance is formed, or the struggle of the parties reaches a climactic intensity. Turgenev begins the novel “Fathers and Sons” with a depiction of a family conflict between father and son Kirsanov and goes further to clashes of a social and political nature. The stability and strength of society is always tested by family and family relationships. Father-son relations are not limited only to blood kinship, but extend further to the “son’s” attitude to the past, present and future of their country, to the historical and moral values that children inherit. “Fatherhood” also presupposes the love of the older generation for the youth who are replacing them, tolerance and wisdom, reasonable advice and condescension. But often misunderstandings arise between the older and younger generations, and the “fundamentals” of existence are violated—“nepotism” in connections between people. The essence of the conflict between fathers and children lies in the very nature of things, the nature of human consciousness. The drama is that human progress occurs through a succession of mutually exclusive generations. But nature softens this drama with the power of filial and parental love. The conflict between father and son Kirsanov at the beginning of the novel is cleared of political and social complications; its generic essence is presented in it. It seems that there is an insurmountable gulf between father and son, which means that there is the same gulf between “fathers” and “children” in the broad sense.

The conflict in the novel “Fathers and Sons” is not limited to family spheres, of course. The entire action of the novel is a chain of conflicts, in the center of which stands the main character, Bazarov. Turgenev knew how to guess emerging phenomena in his contemporary society. He was able to notice the emergence of people with new views on life - commoners, and portrayed in his work a hero of his time - a representative of the younger generation of commoners, Evgeniy Bazarov. The writer wanted to realistically portray Russian reality, the eternal struggle between old and new. And he succeeded in this largely thanks to the composition of the novel. Turgenev showed the best representatives of the nobility and commoners, depicted a person in diverse and complex connections with other people, with society, touching on both social and moral conflicts.

In the novel, not only representatives of different social groups, but also different generations collide. The dispute is between liberals, who were Turgenev and his closest friends, and revolutionary democrats like Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov (Dobrolyubov partly served as the prototype for the main character Yevgeny Bazarov). The central place in the novel is occupied by the conflict of ideological opponents: Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, a representative of the “fathers,” and Evgeny Bazarov, a representative of the “children,” a new type of people. Their disputes reveal the ossification and selfishness of Pavel Petrovich and the intolerance and arrogance of Bazarov. The position of the educated liberal Pavel Petrovich is in many ways close to the author.

His “principles” (“principles” in the French manner) and “authorities” are a sign of respect and trust in the experience of past generations. But he is not able to pay paternal attention to the mental demands and concerns of the “children.” For Turgenev, one of the decisive criteria in determining a personality was how this personality relates to modernity, to the life around him. Representatives of the “fathers” - Pavel Petrovich and Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov - do not understand and do not accept what is happening around them. Pavel Petrovich, obsessed with class arrogance and pride, stubbornly clings to the principles he learned in his youth, reveres the old authorities, and Nikolai Petrovich understands in modern times only that which threatens his peace. Bazarov is an extreme individualist. He mercilessly denies morality, love, poetry, all feelings. In the novel he is characterized as a nihilist: “From the Latin nihil, nothing... therefore, this word means a person who... recognizes nothing.” The figure of Yevgeny Bazarov appears in the novel against the backdrop of a wide panorama of village life, a world on the verge of social catastrophe, shown in the first chapters of the novel. This technique helps to connect nihilism with popular discontent and social ill-being. His nihilism feeds on the underlying ferment of popular discontent and is therefore strong.

Bazarov is right to a certain extent: any truths and authorities must be tested by doubt, but at the same time one must have a filial attitude towards the culture of the past. Bazarov falls into a nihilistic denial of all historical values. He is strong in criticizing the conservatism of Pavel Petrovich and the idle talk of Russian liberals. But the hero goes too far in his hatred of the “damned barchuks.” The denial of “your” art develops into the denial of all art, the denial of “your” love - into the assertion that love is a “feigned feeling”, that everything in it is easily explained by physiological attraction, the denial of “your” class principles - into the destruction of any principles and authorities, the denial of sentimental-noble love for the people - in disdain for the peasant in general. By breaking with the “Barchuks,” Bazarov challenges the enduring values of culture, putting himself in a tragic situation.

As the action progresses, the circle of people Bazarov encounters expands. But all conflict situations that arise are aimed at testing the strength of Bazarov’s character and his views. Turgenev does not criticize the actions of the hero, but simply tells about his life. A democrat-commoner with a new materialistic worldview and new practical demands for life - Bazarov is shown by Turgenev in contact with an environment alien to him. This situation, constantly and acutely aware of Bazarov, serves as a psychological motivation for revealing certain sides in the character of the hero: his gloomy restraint, hostile distrust, contemptuous mockery, callousness, dryness and rudeness. Bazarov contemptuously calls nobles who have never worked anywhere “barchuks.” He keeps to himself, humbles his impulses, constantly suppresses attempts at rapprochement and mutual understanding on the part of Odintsova and the Kirsanov brothers. The author, with seemingly inconspicuous strokes, inserts, and remarks, emphasizes the monotonous “wolf” in Bazarov’s moods.

Turgenev created a complete and internally independent character. Bazarov is a young, poor man, the son of a doctor who received nobility through his service. This is a strong personality, not susceptible to other people’s influence, who defends his views on life. His character is characterized by strength, independence, energy, and great potential for revolutionary work. Bazarov is an adherent of a new trend - nihilism, that is, he is “... a person who does not bow to any authorities, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respectful this principle may be.” Bazarov denies nature as a source of aesthetic pleasure, as an object of delight.

“Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it,” says the hero. He studies nature, knows it down to the smallest detail, even loves it in his own way, but recognizes it only from the practical side of life. Bazarov also denies art, believing that it is a “pale copy of reality.” He disdains the classics, for example, Pushkin, and says about the great artist that “Raphael is not worth a penny.” And this is due to his excessive passion for the natural sciences. At the same time, Bazarov denies science, but only contemplative science. He is an enemy of abstract concepts, but believes in real, concrete science that can benefit society. Pisarev wrote: “He will do it either in order to give his brain work, or in order to squeeze out of it direct benefit for himself and for others.” It seems to Bazarov that with the help of natural sciences one can easily resolve all questions concerning complex problems of social life and unravel all the mysteries of existence. He considers the spiritual sophistication of a love feeling to be romantic nonsense, and the feeling of compassion as a weakness, an anomaly, denied by the “natural” laws of nature.

Turgenev reveals the inner appearance of the main character through a portrait, through a description of appearance and behavior, using the techniques of secret psychology. Bazarov does not pay any attention to his appearance and is therefore dressed casually. Looking at his red hands, you can understand that he knows what work is. His broad forehead speaks of intelligence. The fact that he did not immediately shake hands when meeting Nikolai Petrovich speaks of his pride, self-esteem, and self-confidence. But when talking with people, he behaves rather rudely: he answers questions reluctantly and shows his disdain for his interlocutor. With this deliberate disregard in words and actions, the hero denies the rules accepted in secular society. By his actions, in particular, by presenting himself as Evgeny Vasiliev, Bazarov emphasizes his closeness to the people. He has “...a special ability to arouse trust in himself among lower people...”, although he was still far from the people.

Turgenev rewarded Bazarov with irony, which he uses in a very varied way: irony for Bazarov is a means of separating himself from a person whom he does not respect, or “correcting” a person whom he has not yet given up on. He is ironic about both his actions and his behavior. Bazarov’s character contains strength, independence, energy, and great potential abilities for revolutionary causes.

Bazarov has high moral qualities and a noble soul. So, in a duel with Kirsanov, instead of killing his opponent with the remaining bullet, Bazarov provides him with medical assistance. An anxious and vulnerable heart beats in the chest of a self-confident and sharp-looking hero. The extreme harshness of his attacks on poetry and love makes one doubt the complete sincerity of the denial. There is a certain duality in Bazarov’s behavior, which will turn into a breakdown by the end of the novel.

Bazarov denies feelings: “And what is this mysterious relationship between a man and a woman?.. This is all romanticism, nonsense, rottenness of the “arts.” According to Pisarev, Bazarov has “an ironic attitude towards feelings of all kinds, towards daydreaming, towards lyrical impulses, towards outpourings...”. And this is his tragedy. Bazarov believes that love is nonsense, unnecessary in a person’s life. But despite all his judgments, he falls in love with Odintsova and turns out to be capable of sincere, deep feelings. Significant changes are taking place in his soul, which even contradict some of his principles. The conflict of the work from the external (Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich) at this moment is transferred to the internal (“fatal duel” in Bazarov’s soul). Love for Odintsova is the beginning of tragic retribution for the arrogant Bazarov: it splits the hero’s soul into two halves. From now on, two people live and act in it. One of them is a convinced opponent of romantic feelings, denying the spiritual foundations of love. The other is a passionately and spiritually loving person. Odintsova wants, but cannot love Bazarov, not only because she is an aristocrat, a pampered lady, but also because this nihilist, having fallen in love, does not want love and runs away from it. He himself destroys this love. Their relationship doesn't work out. And Bazarov, seeing the futility of his hopes, retreats, maintaining his self-esteem. Turgenev, with this whole story, wants to show that in a person’s life the natural course of life wins, that love stands above any ideas. The writer shows the victory of this feeling over any person, over any fate.

Irreconcilable contradictions are revealed in the character of the hero. The questions that arose before him about the meaning of life, refuting his previous, simplified view of man and the world, are not trifles. This is how the hero’s deep crisis of faith in the unchanging essence of man begins. Love for Odintsova awakened disturbing doubts in Bazarov: maybe every person is a mystery? These questions make him spiritually richer, more generous and more humane, “romanticism” is manifested in him, which he is trying to get rid of, but which nevertheless appears before Bazarov’s death, when medicine and the natural sciences, idolized by him, could not help him, but were denied them, but the feelings stored at the bottom of the soul restored the integrity and fortitude of the spirit of the dying hero.

The scene of Bazarov's death is the most powerful scene in the novel. The hero dies in the prime of his creative and physical powers, without having lived even a third of his life. Before death, he does not fall into hysterics, does not lose self-esteem, but tries to maintain clarity of thought until the last minute, gathers his last strength to say goodbye to everyone he loved. He thinks not about himself, but about his parents, preparing them for a terrible end. Almost like Pushkin, he says goodbye to his beloved. Love for a woman, love for parents merge in the consciousness of the dying Bazarov with love for his homeland. He died firmly and calmly. Bazarov's death is tragic, since this intelligent and courageous man with noble goals lived his life meaninglessly. Turgenev does not find a creative creative force in nihilism. He forces the hero to die because he does not see the continuation of his activities. But the writer admitted that the last word remains with Bazarov, that his time will come.

I. S. Turgenev said about his work: “Bazarov is my favorite brainchild.” But still, the writer’s assessment is very contradictory. Throughout the novel, he argues compositionally with his hero. In disputes with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov turns out to be morally stronger, but the lack of independence of his nihilism is proven by the entire artistic construction of the novel. Bazarov turns away from nature - Turgenev creates the most beautiful poetic images of Russian nature, and ends his work with a description of nature in the cemetery where his hero is buried, thereby showing that, despite the death of Bazarov, nature is alive, beauty is eternal. Bazarov denies the close ties of parents with their children - the author describes scenes of parental love; Bazarov shuns life - the author shows life in all its glory; the hero renounces love and does not value friendship - Turgenev shows Arkady’s friendly feelings and his love for Katya. In a philosophical conversation between Bazarov and Odintsova, the hero said: “Correct society, and there will be no diseases.” Putting into Bazarov’s mouth words propagating one of the main theses of revolutionary-democratic enlightenment, Turgenev psychologically immediately reduces this preaching of advanced ideas by indicating the complete indifference with which Bazarov treats how they will understand what he says: “Bazarov said all this with such an appearance, as if at the same time he was thinking to himself: “Believe me or not, it’s all the same to me!”

Turgenev did not like people like Bazarov. The writer does not agree with the hero’s judgment about art, science, love - about eternal values, with his comprehensive skepticism. But the moral qualities that Bazarov possesses attract him; the writer understands that his hero has the future. The author put into his mouth some statements that were in tune with his own mood. He even admitted: “With the exception of Bazarov’s views on art, I share almost all of his beliefs.” It is no coincidence that Bazarov came out as a truly tragic figure. And the absurd death - from a cut finger - is accepted by Bazarov with the dignity of a victim of fate.

Turgenev began writing the novel from the perspective of “fathers,” but over time his plan undergoes changes, and the writer begins to look at what is happening from the point of view of “children.” As the writer himself said: “I wanted to flog the children, but I flogged the fathers.” He understood that the existence of representatives of the older generation - the Kirsanov brothers, Odintsova, Bazarov's parents - was meaningless. Their limited judgment, lethargy, reluctance to any changes, habit of internal comfort - all this does not bring any benefit to the state or the people. But Turgenev also does not see the continuation of Bazarov’s activities. This is the tragedy of the situation.

July 02 2012

Test of love. From the thirteenth chapter, a turn is brewing in the novel: irreconcilable contradictions are revealed with all their severity in the character. The conflict of the work from external (Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich) is translated into internal (“fatal duel” in Bazarov’s soul). These changes in the plot of the novel are preceded by parody-satirical (*117) chapters, which depict vulgar bureaucratic “aristocrats” and provincial “nihilists”. Comic decline is a constant companion of the tragic, starting with Shakespeare. Parody characters, highlighting with their baseness the significance of the characters of Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov, grotesquely sharpen and bring to the limit those contradictions that are inherent in them in a hidden form. From the comedic “bottom” the reader becomes more aware of both the tragic heights and the internal contradictions of the main characters. Let us recall the meeting of the plebeian Bazarov with the elegant and thoroughbred aristocrat Pavel Petrovich and compare it with the reception that the St. Petersburg dignitary Matvey Ilyich gives his guests: “He patted Arkady on the back and loudly called him “nephew,” honored Bazarov, dressed in an oldish tailcoat, absent-minded, but a condescending glance, casually, across the cheek, and a vague, but friendly moo, in which only one could make out that “...I” and “ssma”; gave his finger to Sitnikov and smiled at him, but already turning his head away.” Doesn’t all this, in parody form, resemble Kirsanov’s technique: “Pavel Petrovich slightly tilted his flexible figure and smiled slightly, but did not offer his hand and even put it back in his pocket”?

In a conversation with Bazarov, Pavel Petrovich likes to puzzle the commoner, unworthy of his aristocratic greatness, with an ironic and dismissive question: “Are the Germans talking all the time?” - said Pavel Petrovich, and his face took on such an indifferent, distant expression, as if he had completely disappeared into some transcendental heights.” Here, the aristocratic contempt for a lower-ranking person is somewhat reminiscent of the feigned deafness of Kolyazin with his subordinates: “The dignitary suddenly ceases to understand the simplest words, he assumes deafness on himself.” What is also striking about the provincial “nihilists” is the falsity and pretense of their denials. Behind the fashionable mask of an emancipated lady, Kukshina hides her feminine unluckiness. Her attempts to be modern are touching, and she is defenseless like a woman when her nihilistic friends do not pay attention to her at the governor’s ball. Sitnikov and Kukshina use nihilism to cover up their feelings of inferiority: for Sitnikov it is social (“he was very ashamed of his origin”), for Kukshina it is typically feminine (ugly, helpless, abandoned by her husband). Forced to play roles unusual for them, these people give the impression of unnaturalness, “self-delusion.” Yes, Kukshina’s external manners raise an involuntary question: “What, are you hungry? Or are you bored? Or are you timid? Why are you jumping?” The images of these unfortunate people, like jesters in a Shakespearean tragedy, have the task in the novel of parodying some of the qualities inherent in nihilism of the highest type. After all, throughout the novel, and the closer to the end, the more clearly, Bazarov hides his anxious, loving, rebellious heart in nihilism. After meeting Sitnikov and Kukshina, the traits of “self-delusion” begin to appear more sharply in Bazarov himself. The culprit turns out to be Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. “Here you go! the women were scared! - thought Bazarov and, lounging in a chair no worse than Sitnikov, spoke with exaggerated cheekiness.” Love for Odintsova is the beginning of tragic retribution for the arrogant Bazarov: it splits the hero’s soul into two halves. From now on, two people live and act in it. One of them is a convinced opponent of romantic feelings, denying the spiritual foundations of love. Another is a passionately and spiritually loving person, faced with the true mystery of this feeling: “... he could easily cope with his blood, but something else took possession of him, which he never allowed, which he always mocked, which outraged all his pride.” . Natural scientific beliefs dear to his mind turn into a principle, which he, a denier of all principles, now serves, secretly feeling that this service is blind, that it turned out to be more complicated than what “physiologists” know about it.

Usually, the origins of the tragedy of Bazarov’s love are sought in the character of Odintsova, a pampered lady, an aristocrat, unable to respond to Bazarov’s feelings, timid and giving in to him. However, Odintsova’s aristocracy, coming from old noble traditions, is combined in her with a different “aristocratism” bestowed on her by the Russian national ideal of female beauty. Anna Sergeevna is royally beautiful and restrainedly passionate, she has a typical Russian majesty. her feminine wayward and unyielding. She demands respect. Odintsova wants and cannot love Bazarov, not only because she is an aristocrat, but also because this nihilist, having fallen in love, does not want love and runs away from it. The “incomprehensible fear” that gripped the heroine at the moment of Bazarov’s love confession is humanly justified: where is the line that separates Bazarov’s declaration of love from hatred towards the woman he loves? “He was out of breath: (*119) his whole body was apparently trembling. But it was not the trembling of youthful timidity, it was not the sweet horror of the first confession that took possession of him: it was passion that beat within him, strong and heavy - a passion similar to malice and, perhaps, akin to it.” The element of a cruelly suppressed feeling finally broke through in him, but with a destructive force in relation to this feeling.

Parallel to the story of Bazarov and Odintsova, where deliberate alienation is unexpectedly resolved by a burst of crushing passion, the story of Arkady’s rapprochement with Katya unfolds in the novel, a story about friendship that gradually develops into calm and pure love. This parallel highlights the tragedy of the changes taking place in Bazarovo. with Katya softens the drama of Arkady’s unrequited youthful feelings for Odintsova. She is held together by common interests: with Katya, Arkady learns to be himself and gradually surrenders to hobbies that correspond to the nature of his soft, artistically receptive character. At the same time, mutual alienation is growing between Arkady and Bazarov, the culprit of which is partly Evgeny. The feeling of love that flared up in Bazarov makes his student ashamed and increasingly avoid communicating with him. “Both sides are right to a certain extent” - this principle of ancient tragedy runs through all the conflicts of the novel, and in its love story it ends with Turgenev bringing together the aristocrat Kirsanov and the democrat Bazarov in his heartfelt attraction to Fenechka and with her folk instinct he verifies the limitations of both heroes . Pavel Petrovich is attracted to Fenechka by his democratic spontaneity: he is suffocating in the rarefied, high-mountain air of his aristocratic intellect. But his love for Fenichka is too transcendental and ethereal. “So it will give you cold!” - Dunyasha complains about his “passionate” views. Bazarov intuitively looks for in Fenechka a vital confirmation of his view of love as simple and clear as a sensual attraction twice as many: “Eh, Fedosya Nikolaevna! believe me: all the smart ladies in the world are not worth your elbow.” But such “simplicity” turns out to be worse than theft: it deeply offends Fenechka, and a moral reproach, sincere, genuine, is heard from her lips. Bazarov explained the failure with Odintsova to himself by the lordly effeminacy of the heroine, but in relation to Fenechka, what kind of “lordship” can we talk about? Obviously, in feminine nature itself (peasant or noble - what's the difference!) lies the spirituality and moral beauty rejected by the hero.

From the thirteenth chapter, a turn is brewing in the novel: irreconcilable contradictions are revealed with all their severity in the character of the hero. The conflict of the work from the external (Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich) is translated into the internal plane (“the fatal duel” in Bazarov’s soul). These changes in the plot of the novel are preceded by parody-satirical chapters, which depict vulgar bureaucratic “aristocrats” and provincial “nihilists”. Comic decline is a constant companion of the tragic, starting with Shakespeare. Parody characters, highlighting with their baseness the significance of the characters of Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov, grotesquely sharpen and bring to the limit those contradictions that are inherent in them in a hidden form. From the comedic “bottom,” the reader becomes more aware of both the tragic heights and the internal contradictions of the main characters.

Let us recall the meeting of the plebeian Bazarov with the elegant and thoroughbred aristocrat Pavel Petrovich and compare it with the reception that the St. Petersburg dignitary Matvey Ilyich gives his guests: “He patted Arkady on the back and loudly called him “nephew”, honored Bazarov, dressed in an oldish tailcoat, absent-minded, but a condescending glance, casually, across the cheek, and a vague, but friendly moo, in which only one could make out that “...I” and “ssma”; gave his finger to Sitnikov and smiled at him, but already turning his head away.” Is thisnot a parody of a familiar technique: “Pavel Petrovich slightly tilted his flexible figure and smiled slightly, but did not offer his hand and even put it back in his pocket”?

What is striking about the provincial “nihilists” is the falsity and pretense of their denials. Behind the fashionable mask of an emancipated lady, Kukshina hides her feminine unluckiness. Her attempts to be modern are touching, and she is defenseless like a woman when her nihilistic friends do not pay attention to her at the governor’s ball. Sitnikov and Kukshina cover up their feelings of inferiority with nihilism: for Sitnikov it is social (“he was very ashamed of his origin”), for Kukshina it is typically feminine (ugly, helpless, abandoned by her husband). Forced to play roles unusual for them, these people leave the impression of unnaturalness, “self-brokenness.” Even Kukshina’s external manners raise an involuntary question: “Are you hungry? Or are you bored? Or are you timid? Why are you jumping?”

Like the jesters in a Shakespearean tragedy, they have the task in the novel of parodying certain qualities inherent in nihilism of the highest type. After all, throughout the novel, and the closer to the end, the more clearly, Bazarov hides his anxious, loving, rebellious heart in nihilism. After meeting Sitnikov and Kukshina, the traits of “self-brokenness” begin to appear more sharply in Bazarov himself.

The culprit turns out to be Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. “Here you go! Baba was scared! - thought Bazarov and, lounging in a chair no worse than Sitnikov, spoke with exaggerated cheekiness. Love for Odintsova is the beginning of tragic retribution for the arrogant Bazarov: it splits the hero’s soul into two halves.

From now on, two people live and act in it. One of them is a convinced opponent of romantic feelings, denying the spiritual foundations of love. The other is a passionately and spiritually loving person, faced with the true mystery of this feeling: “... he could easily cope with his blood, but something else took possession of him, which he did not allow, which he always mocked, which outraged all his pride." The natural scientific beliefs dear to his mind turn into a principle that he, a denier of all principles, now serves, secretly feeling that this service is blind, that life turned out to be more complicated than what the nihilistic “physiologists” know about it.

Usually, the origins of the tragedy of Bazarov’s love are sought in the character of Odintsova, a pampered lady, an aristocrat, unable to respond to Bazarov’s feelings, timid and giving in to him. However, Odintsova’s aristocracy,coming from the old noble traditions, it is combined with the Russian national ideal of female beauty. Anna Sergeevna is royally beautiful and restrainedly passionate, she has a typical Russian majesty. Her beauty is femininely capricious and unyielding. She demands respect. Odintsova wants and cannot love Bazarov, not only because she is an aristocrat, but also because this nihilist, having fallen in love, does not want love and runs away from it. The “incomprehensible fear” that gripped the heroine at the moment of Bazarov’s love confession is humanly justified: where is the line that separates Bazarov’s declaration of love from hatred towards the woman he loves? “He was out of breath: his whole body was apparently trembling. But it was not the trembling of youthful timidity, it was not the sweet horror of the first confession that took possession of him: it was passion that beat within him, strong and heavy - a passion similar to anger and, perhaps, akin to it.”

Parallel to the story of Bazarov and Odintsova, where deliberate alienation is unexpectedly resolved by a burst of crushing passion, the novel unfolds the story of Arkady’s rapprochement with Katya, a story of friendship that gradually develops into pure love. This parallel highlights the tragedy of Bazarov’s love conflict with Odintsova.

“Both sides are right to a certain extent” - this principle of ancient tragedy runs through all the conflicts of the novel, and in its love story it ends with Turgenev bringing together the aristocrat Kirsanov and the democrat Bazarov in a heartfelt attraction to Fenechka and her folk instinct verifies the limitations of both heroes. Pavel Petrovich is attracted to Fenechka by his democratic spontaneity: he is suffocating in the rarefied air of his aristocratic intellect. But his love for Fenichka is too transcendental and ethereal. “So it will give you cold!” - the heroine complains to Dunyasha about his “passionate” views.

Bazarov intuitively looks for in Fenechka vital confirmation of his view of love as a simple and clear sensual attraction: “Eh, Fedosya Nikolaevna! Believe me: all the smart ladies in the world are not worth your elbow.” But like this“simplicity” turns out to be worse than theft: it deeply offends Fenechka, and a moral reproach, sincere, genuine, is heard from her lips. Bazarov explained the failure with Odintsova to himself by the lordly effeminacy of the heroine, but in relation to Fenechka, what kind of “lordship” can we talk about? Obviously, in feminine nature itself lies the spirituality and moral beauty rejected by the hero.

The greatest creation of the master of psychology I.S. Turgenev. He created his novel at a turning point, when progressive people in society were interested in the future of Russia, and writers were interested in the search for a hero of the time. Bazarov (the characterization of this character clearly demonstrates what the most developed youth of that time was like) is the central character of the novel, all the threads of the narrative come down to him. He is the brightest representative of the new generation. Who is he?

General characteristics (appearance, occupation)

As a writer-psychologist, Turgenev thought through everything to the smallest detail. One of the ways to characterize a character is the hero's appearance. Bazarov has a high forehead, which is a sign of intelligence, and narrow lips, which speak of arrogance and arrogance. However, the hero’s clothing plays a big role. Firstly, it shows that Bazarov is a representative of the raznochintsy democrats (the younger generation opposed to the older generation of liberal aristocrats of the 40s). He is dressed in a long black robe with tassels. He is wearing loose trousers made of coarse fabric and a simple shirt - this is how Bazarov is dressed. The image turned out to be more than telling. He does not chase fashion trends; moreover, he despises the elegance of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, whose appearance is completely opposite. Simplicity in clothing is one of the principles of the nihilists, whose position the hero took, so he feels closer to the common people. As the novel shows, the hero really manages to get close to ordinary Russian people. Bazarov is loved by the peasants, and the children of the courtyards follow on his heels. By occupation, Bazarov (characteristics of the hero in terms of profession) is a doctor. And who else could he be? After all, all his judgments are based on German materialism, where a person is considered only as a system in which its own physical and physiological laws operate.

Bazarov's Nihilism

Bazarov, whose character is certainly one of the most striking in the literature of the 19th century, adhered to one of the most popular teachings of the time - nihilism, which means “nothing” in Latin. The hero does not recognize any authorities, does not bow to any life principles. The main thing for him is science and knowledge of the world through experience.

External conflict in the novel

As noted above, Turgenev’s novel is multifaceted; two levels of conflict can be distinguished in it: external and internal. At the external level, the conflict is represented by disputes between Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov.

Disputes with Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov concern different aspects of human life. Bazarov is most irreconcilable in relation to art, primarily poetry. He sees in her only empty and useless romanticism. The second thing the characters dialogue about is nature. For people like Nikolai Petrovich and Pavel Petrovich, nature is God’s temple in which a person rests; they admire its beauty. Bazarov (the character’s quotes confirm this) is categorically against such glorification; he believes that nature “is a workshop, and man is a worker in it.” In a conflict with Pavel Petrovich, the hero often behaves rather rudely. He speaks unflatteringly about him in the presence of his nephew, Arkady Kirsanov. All this does not show Bazarov from the best side. It is for this portrayal of the hero that Turgenev will subsequently suffer. Bazarov, whose characterization in many critical articles is not in favor of Turgenev, was undeservedly scolded by the author; some even believe that Turgenev is slandering the entire younger generation, undeservedly accusing them of all sins. However, we should not forget that the older generation is also not praised in the text.

Relationships with parents

Bazarov's nihilism clearly manifests itself at all moments of his life. Parents who have not seen their son for a long time are waiting for him with rapture. But they are slightly embarrassed by their serious and educated child. The mother pours out her feelings, and the father sheepishly apologizes for such incontinence. Bazarov himself strives to leave his parents’ home as quickly as possible, apparently because he is afraid to suddenly show warm feelings. According to German materialism, a person cannot have any spiritual attachments. On his second visit, Evgeniy also asks his parents not to disturb him, not to bother him with their care.

Internal conflict

The internal conflict in the novel is obvious. It lies in the fact that the hero begins to doubt his theory, he becomes dissuaded from it, but cannot come to terms with it. Bazarov’s first doubts about nihilism arise when he meets Sitnikov and Kukshina. These people call themselves nihilists, but they are too petty and insignificant.

Love line in the novel

The test of the hero by love is a classic for the novel genre, and the novel “Fathers and Sons” was no exception. Bazarov, an inveterate nihilist who denies any romantic feelings, falls in love with the young widow Odintsova. She captivates him at first sight when he sees her at the ball. She differs from other women in her beauty, majesty, her gait is graceful, every movement is royally graceful. But her most important trait is intelligence and prudence. It is prudence that will prevent her from staying with Bazarov. At first, their relationship seems friendly, but the reader immediately understands that a spark of love flashed between them. However, none of them is able to step over their principles. Evgeny Bazarov's confession looks ridiculous, because at the moment of revelation his eyes are more full of anger than love. Bazarov is a complex and contradictory image. What makes him angry? Of course, his theory collapsed. Man is and has always been a creature with a living heart, in which the strongest feelings glow. He, who denies love and romance, is conquered by a woman. Bazarov's ideas collapsed; they were refuted by life itself.

Friendship

Arkady Kirsanov is one of Bazarov's most devoted supporters. However, it is immediately noticeable how different they are. There is too much romanticism in Arcadia, as in his relatives. He wants to enjoy nature, he wants to start a family. Surprisingly, Bazarov, whose quotes addressed to Pavel Petrovich are harsh and unfriendly, does not despise him for this. He guides him on his path, realizing at the same time that Arkady will never be a true nihilist. At the moment of a quarrel, he insults Kirsanov, but his words are rather thoughtless than evil. Remarkable intelligence, strength of character, will, calmness and self-control - these are the qualities that Bazarov possesses. Arkady’s characterization looks weaker against his background, because he is not such an outstanding personality. But at the end of the novel, Arkady remains a happy family man, and Evgeny dies. Why?

The meaning of the novel's ending

Many critics reproached Turgenev for “killing” his hero. The ending of the novel is very symbolic. For heroes like Bazarov, the time has not come, and the author believes that it will never come at all. After all, humanity endures only because it has love, kindness, and respect for the traditions of its ancestors and culture. Bazarov is too categorical in his assessments, he does not take half measures, and his sayings sound blasphemous. He encroaches on the most valuable things - nature, faith and feelings. As a result, his theory crashes against the rocks of the natural order of life. He falls in love, cannot be happy only because of his beliefs, and in the end he dies altogether.

The epilogue of the novel emphasizes that Bazarov's ideas were unnatural. Parents come to their son's grave. He found peace in the midst of beautiful and eternal nature. Turgenev depicts the cemetery landscape in a pointedly romantic manner, once again conveying the idea that Bazarov was wrong. The “workshop” (as Bazarov called it) continues to bloom, live and delight everyone with its beauty, but the hero is no more.

Test of love. From the thirteenth chapter, a turn is brewing in the novel: irreconcilable contradictions are revealed with all their severity in the character of the hero. The conflict of the work from the external (Bazarov and) is translated into the internal plane (the “fatal duel” in Bazarov’s soul). These changes in the plot of the novel are preceded by parody-satirical chapters, which depict vulgar bureaucratic “aristocrats” and provincial “nihilists”. Comic decline is a constant companion of the tragic, starting with Shakespeare.

Parody characters, highlighting with their baseness the significance of the characters of Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov, grotesquely sharpen and bring to the limit those contradictions that are inherent in them in a hidden form. From the comedic “bottom” the reader becomes more aware of both the tragic heights and the internal contradictions of the main characters. Let us recall the meeting of the plebeian Bazarov with the elegant and thoroughbred aristocrat Pavel Petrovich and compare it with the reception that the St. Petersburg dignitary Matvey Ilyich gives his guests: “He patted Arkady on the back and loudly called him “nephew”, honored Bazarov, dressed in an oldish tailcoat, absent-minded, but a condescending glance, casually, across the cheek, and a vague but friendly moo, in which only one could make out that “...I” and “ssma”; he gave his finger to Sitnikov and smiled at him, but already turning his head away.” Doesn’t all this, in parody form, resemble Kirsanov’s technique: “Pavel Petrovich slightly tilted his flexible figure and smiled slightly, but did not offer his hand and even put it back in his pocket”?

What is also striking about the provincial “nihilists” is the falsity and pretense of their denials. Behind the fashionable mask of an emancipated lady, Kukshina hides her feminine unluckiness. Her attempts to be modern are touching, and she is defenseless like a woman when her nihilistic friends do not pay attention to her at the governor’s ball. Sitnikov and Kukshina cover up their feelings of inferiority with nihilism: for Sitnikov it is social (“he was very ashamed of his origin”), for Kukshina it is typically feminine (ugly, helpless, abandoned by her husband). Forced to play roles unusual for them, these people give the impression of unnaturalness, “self-delusion.”

Yes, (*118)Kukshina’s external manners raise an involuntary question: “Are you hungry? Or are you bored? Or are you timid? Why are you fussing?” The images of these unfortunate people, like jesters in a Shakespearean tragedy, have the task in the novel of parodying some of the qualities inherent in nihilism of the highest type. After all, throughout the novel, and the closer to the end, the more clearly, Bazarov hides his anxious, loving, rebellious heart in nihilism.

After meeting Sitnikov and Kukshina, the traits of “self-delusion” begin to appear more sharply in Bazarov himself. The culprit turns out to be Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. “Here you go! The women are scared!” thought Bazarov and, lounging in a chair no worse than Sitnikov, he spoke with exaggerated cheekiness. Love for Odintsova is the beginning of tragic retribution for the arrogant Bazarov: it splits the hero’s soul into two halves. From now on, two people live and act in it.

One of them is a convinced opponent of romantic feelings, denying the spiritual foundations of love. The other is a passionately and spiritually loving person, faced with the true mystery of this feeling: “... he could easily cope with his blood, but something else took possession of him, which he never allowed, which he always mocked, which outraged all his pride." Natural scientific beliefs dear to his mind turn into a principle, which he, a denier of all principles, now serves, secretly feeling that this service is blind, that life turned out to be more complicated than what “physiologists” know about it.

Anna Sergeevna is royally beautiful and restrainedly passionate, she has a typical Russian majesty. her feminine wayward and unyielding. She demands respect. Odintsova wants and cannot love Bazarov, not only because she is, but also because this nihilist, having fallen in love, does not want love and runs away from it. The “incomprehensible fear” that gripped the heroine at the moment of Bazarov’s love confession is humanly justified: where is the line that separates Bazarov’s declaration of love from hatred towards the woman he loves? “He was out of breath: (*119) his whole body was apparently trembling.

But it was not the trembling of youthful timidity, it was not the sweet horror of the first confession that took possession of him: it was passion that beat within him, strong and heavy - a passion similar to anger and, perhaps, akin to it." The element of cruelly suppressed feeling finally broke through in him, but with destructive force towards this feeling.

Parallel to the story of Bazarov and Odintsova, where deliberate alienation is unexpectedly resolved by a burst of crushing passion, the novel unfolds the story of Arkady’s rapprochement with Katya, a story that gradually develops into calm and pure love. This parallel highlights the tragedy of the changes taking place in Bazarovo. Friendship with Katya softens the drama of Arkady's unrequited youthful feelings for Odintsova.

She is held together by common interests: with Katya, Arkady learns to be himself and gradually surrenders to hobbies that correspond to the nature of his soft, artistically receptive character. At the same time, mutual alienation is growing between Arkady and Bazarov, the culprit of which is partly Evgeny. The feeling of love that flared up in Bazarov makes his student ashamed and increasingly avoid communicating with him. “Both sides are right to a certain extent” - this principle of ancient tragedy runs through all the conflicts of the novel, and in its love story it ends with Turgenev bringing together the aristocrat Kirsanov and the democrat Bazarov in his heartfelt attraction to Fenechka and with her folk instinct he verifies the limitations of both heroes .

Pavel Petrovich is attracted to Fenechka by his democratic spontaneity: he is suffocating in the rarefied, high-mountain air of his aristocratic intellect. But his love for Fenichka is too transcendental and ethereal. “So it will give you cold!” - the heroine complains to Dunyasha about his “passionate” views. Bazarov intuitively seeks in Fenechka a vital confirmation of his view of love as a simple and clear, like twice two sensual attraction: “Eh, Fedosya Nikolaevna! Believe me: all the smart ladies in the world are not worth your elbow.” But such “simplicity” turns out to be worse than theft: it deeply offends Fenechka, and a moral reproach, sincere, genuine, is heard from her lips. Bazarov explained the failure with Odintsova to himself by the lordly effeminacy of the heroine, but in relation to Fenechka, what kind of “lordship” can we talk about? Obviously, in feminine nature itself (peasant or noble - what's the difference!) lies the spirituality and moral beauty rejected by the hero.