Turgenev Fathers and Sons). Bazarov's disputes with Pavel Petrovich: who is right? (Roman I

The novel "Fathers and Sons", as defined by the Russian writer Vladimir Nabokov, - it's not only best novel
Turgenev, but also one of the most brilliant works of the XIX century." Central location it takes a long time here
disputes between the young commoner, nihilist Yevgeny Bazarov, and the aging aristocrat Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.
These characters differ from each other in everything: age, social status, beliefs, appearance. Here
portrait of Bazarov: “tall in a long robe with tassels,” his face “long and thin with a wide forehead, upward
flat, pointed nose, large greenish eyes and drooping sand-colored sideburns, it
enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence"; the hero has thin lips, and "his dark blond
hair, long and thick, did not hide the large bulges of the spacious skull." And here is the portrait of the main
Bazarov's opponent: "...a man of average height entered the living room, dressed in a dark English suit, fashionable
low tie and patent leather ankle boots, Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. He looked about forty-five years old; it's short
shorn White hair shone with a dark shine, like new silver; his face, bilious, but without wrinkles,
unusually regular and clean, as if carved with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of beauty
wonderful; The light, black, oblong eyes were especially beautiful. The whole appearance... graceful and thoroughbred,
retained youthful harmony and that desire upward, away from the earth, which for the most part disappears after
twenties."
Pavel Petrovich is about twenty years old older than Bazarov, but perhaps even in to a greater extent than he, saves in
in his appearance the signs of youth. Senior Kirsanov is a man who is extremely concerned about his appearance,
to look as young as possible for your age. So befits a socialite, an old heartthrob. Bazarov,
on the contrary, about appearance doesn't care at all. In the portrait of Pavel Petrovich, the writer highlights the correct
features and strict order, sophistication of the costume and a desire for light, unearthly materials. This hero will be
to defend order in a dispute against Bazarov’s transformative pathos. And everything is in his appearance
indicates adherence to the norm. Even Pavel Petrovich’s height is average, so to speak, normal, then
How high growth Bazarov symbolizes his superiority over others. And Evgeniy’s facial features
his hair is distinctly irregular, his hair is unkempt, and instead of Pavel Petrovich’s expensive English suit, he has
some strange robe, a red, rough hand, whereas Kirsanov’s - beautiful hand"with long pink
nails." But broad forehead and Bazarov’s convex skull betray his intelligence and self-confidence. And Pavel
Petrovich's face is bilious, and increased attention to the toilet betrays in him a carefully hidden uncertainty about
own strength. We can say that this is Pushkin’s Onegin, twenty years older, living in a different era,
in which this type of people will soon no longer have a place.
What position does Bazarov defend in the dispute? He claims that “nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man
there is a worker in it." Evgeniy is deeply convinced that achievements modern natural science in the future they will allow
solve all problems public life. He denies beauty - art, poetry - in love he sees only
physiological, but does not see spiritual origin. Bazarov “treats everything from a critical point of view,” “does not
accepts not a single principle on faith, no matter how much respect this principle is surrounded." Pavel Petrovich
proclaims that “aristocratism is a principle, and in our time only immoral or
empty people." However, the impression of an inspired ode to principles is noticeably weakened by the fact that
Bazarov’s opponent puts in first place the “principle” of aristocracy that is closest to himself. Pavel Petrovich,
brought up in the atmosphere of a comfortable estate existence and accustomed to the St. Petersburg secular
society, it is no coincidence that poetry, music, and love are given first place. He had never worked out in his life
no practical activities, excluding short and easy service in the guards regiment, never
was not interested in the natural sciences and knew little about them. Bazarov, the son of a poor military doctor, with
accustomed to work and not idleness from childhood, graduated from university, interested in natural sciences,
experienced knowledge, very little in its short life dealt with poetry or music, maybe even Pushkin
I didn’t really read it. Hence the harsh and unfair judgment of Evgeniy Vasilyevich about the great Russian poet: “...He,
must be in military service served... on every page: To the battle, to the battle! for the honor of Russia!", by the way,
almost verbatim repeating the opinion about Pushkin expressed in a conversation with Turgenev by the common writer N.V.
Uspensky (the author of Fathers and Sons called him a “hater of men”).
Bazarov does not have as much experience in love as Pavel Petrovich, and therefore is inclined to oversimplify
relate to this feeling. The elder Kirsanov had already experienced love suffering, namely unsuccessful
an affair with Princess R. prompted him to long years settle down in the village with his brother, and the death of his beloved is even stronger
made it worse state of mind. Bazarov has love pangs - an equally unsuccessful romance with Anna Sergeevna
Odintsova is still ahead. That is why, at the beginning of the novel, he so confidently reduces love to known
physiological relationships, and calls the spiritual in love “romantic nonsense.”
Bazarov is a realist, and Pavel Petrovich is a romantic, focused on cultural values romanticism
first thirds of the XIX century, on the cult of beauty. And he, of course, is offended by Bazarov’s statements about the fact that
“a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet” or that “Raphael is not worth a penny.” Here
Turgenev from Bazarovskaya point of view I definitely disagree. However, it does not give victory on this point of the dispute and
Pavel Petrovich. The trouble is that the refined aristocrat-anglomaniac does not have the abilities
Raphael, but not at all creative abilities. His discussions about art and poetry, as well as about
society - empty and trivial, often comical. Pavel Petrovich is by no means a worthy opponent for Bazarov.
May be. And when they parted, the eldest of the Kirsanov brothers “was a dead man,” of course, figuratively
sense. Disputes with a nihilist at least somehow justified the meaning of his existence, introduced a certain “fermentation”
beginning," awakened thoughts. Now Pavel Petrovich is doomed to a stagnant existence. This is how we see him for
border at the end of the novel.
Turgenev's plan was fully consistent with Bazarov's victory over the aristocrat Kirsanov. In 1862 in one of
letters regarding “Fathers and Sons,” Ivan Sergeevich especially emphasized that “my whole story is directed against
nobility, as an advanced class... An aesthetic feeling forced me to take precisely the good representatives
nobility, in order to further prove my theme: if cream is bad, what about milk?.. if the reader doesn’t like it
Bazarov with all his rudeness,

Pavel Petrovich is a significant component of the plot of Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”.

The first embodies a generation of children sensitive to progress, the second - conservative parents. Ivan Sergeevich brought together in controversy life positions representatives of two different generations. It is not for nothing that the classic’s attention was attracted by the growing confrontation within society. He perspicaciously, almost decades before the Russian revolutions, pointed out, using the example of those arguing, the main opposing forces of the nascent movement: revolutionary democrats and conservative liberals.

Brief description of the characters

Let us note the paradox of the novel: characteristic of its plot-forming confrontation is the convincing dominance of the positions of the representative of the younger generation. And this, despite the fact that the landowner Turgenev himself should be classified as a bourgeois liberal!

Bourgeois literary criticism gave the book derogatory reviews in the press. In particular, Mr. M. Antonovich summarized the author’s bias, that he undeservedly humiliated the younger generation. They tried to “harass” the classic for his views. That is, he could seriously suffer for the truth set out in the work. Fortunately, engaged literary scholars, including D. Pisarev and N. Strakhov, cast their voices in his defense.

The dispute between Bazarov and Pavel Kirsanov is shown by the classic as an ideological confrontation between two non-ideal people - types taken directly from Russian reality.

Yesterday's medical student is a convinced nihilist. The existing way of life does not suit him at all. For him, both the sybarite nobles and the downtrodden, powerless peasants are not a decree. According to Evgeniy, new Russia it should be built, discarding the traditions and foundations of both the first and the second, despising feelings, treating nature as a workshop. In his opinion, revolution corresponds to progress. For only by changing the state can its people be changed. The ideological disputes between Bazarov and Kirsanov convincingly demonstrate the correctness of the first. Is this why the author of the novel is on his side?

The subject of the dispute: how should the peasantry be treated?

Pavel Petrovich always talks very beautifully and respectfully about the people. Sometimes, in purely lordly fashion, he gives the peasants a penny financial assistance. However, he does this not from the heart, but rather for the sake of force. In reality, Kirsanov shuns the peasants. He can’t even stand their smell, and when communicating, he brings a bottle of cologne to his nose. The servants also feel the abyss separating them from the master. For them he is a foreigner.

Bazarov’s attitude towards the people is deformed by the radical theory: he looks at ordinary people patronizingly, making careless statements. However, his inner mentality is akin to that of a peasant. Although Evgeny is rude and mocking towards the servants, they understand and respect him.

attitude towards God and religion

The lines of dispute between Kirsanov and Bazarov about God are ephemeral - this is a confrontation between an insincere believer and a fighter against God. The first one, naturally, loses. Pavel Petrovich is true to himself in matters of freedom of conscience. It is a complete imitation. His pretense. By initiating a duel, he not only shows his pride, but also attempts to kill his neighbor (First Commandment). What else can I say?

Bazarov is an atheist. He considers the mind to be the main thing driving force of the universe. Arithmetic and chemistry for him are not only more important than poetry and art, but are also commensurate with them. This is, of course, a fallacy. However, Evgeniy believed in him so fervently, his position is so emotional, that Kirsanova wins in this dispute too.

Dispute about the right position in life

The principles of Pavel Petrovich's life come down to the external side of aristocracy. For him, this means being dressed to the nines and showing courtesy in communication. He reads the English press and follows the British style. Inner side aristocracy - a genetic connection with the Motherland, which was possessed by Pushkin, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Tereshchenko, Stolypin. However, this is too difficult for Kirsanov.

Bazarov (although he denies the existence of such), perhaps, still exists. Let us venture to formulate it. Most likely this is “to be, not to seem”! The sybaritism of the nobility is alien to him. He is constantly busy with work, while believing that best reward for a person - these are tangible, significant results of his work.

Dispute about the benefits of art

The aesthetic level of Pavel Petrovich is obviously at the level primary classes gymnasium. However, he shows snobbery, declaring his love for art, raising his eyes dramatically to the sky. However, his gaze is empty. The dispute between Kirsanov and Bazarov (the table reflects this) ends with the victory of the latter’s erroneous views. Pavel Petrovich, indifferent to high manifestation human spirit cannot argue that “beauty will save the world.”

Evgeny Bazarov is a convinced nihilist and materialist. Speaking modern language, he “trolls” representatives of art, even Pushkin. Readers are only encouraged by his naivety, because he does not really know the work of the genius.

Dispute about love and attitude towards a woman

Pavel Kirsanov, judging by his speeches, is a real gentleman and the last romantic. He always speaks respectfully and passionately about ladies. However, his biography testifies only to brilliant love affairs in his youth. Having met Princess R, a hunter of passions like himself, he does not recognize in her a consumer interest in himself, and his personal life is a fiasco.

Kirsanov, to please his ego, is only able to indicate his attitude towards a woman (a duel over Fenechka), but this internally devastated person can no longer fall in love.

Young Evgeniy Vasilyevich, having listened to enough nihilist nonsense, first declares his detachment from feelings, love, etc. However, this is nothing more than childishness. His love for Anna Sergeevna Odintsova still awakens a deep feeling in him. Real, unostentatious, natural nobility manifests itself in him when, while simultaneously dying, he says goodbye and declares his love to Odintsova. The dispute between Kirsanov and Bazarov (the table clearly compares the internal nature of the opponents) was lost by both. True, with a slight amendment. Let's be clear: a woman's love is not a panacea for a man, it is only a magnifying glass for his shortcomings or advantages.

Bazarov's love morally elevated him, but Kirsanova's love destroyed him.

Conclusion

Bazarov and Kirsanov show diametrically opposed views. The table of disputes, grouped by sections, clearly demonstrates this. Why does Turgenev show such a confrontation in such detail? Yes, because this is a panorama of the ideological clash of political forces within Russia: old, decaying, obsolete and new, imperfect, but dynamic.

At the same time, we must recognize the depth of mind of the classic who chose these particular topics of debate between Bazarov and Kirsanov. After all, if you try to extrapolate them to our modern society, then we also get diametrically different interpretations from representatives of different segments of the population. The generational debate will continue forever.

In conclusion, we summarize: the health of any society depends on the balance of opinions, on the ability to find a compromise and the right way development. Figuratively speaking, the unfinished, “hanging in the air” dispute between Bazarov and Kirsanov, heating up over time, grew into a revolutionary situation. How sad it is that the classics are not heard on time!

Bazarov's dispute with Pavel Petrovich - who is right?

The novel "Fathers and Sons", according to the Russian writer Vladimir Nabokov, is "not only Turgenev's best novel, but also one of the most brilliant works of the 19th century." The central place here is occupied by long disputes between the young raznochinsky nihilist Yevgeny Bazarov and the aging aristocrat Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. " "

These heroes differ from each other in everything: age, social status, beliefs, appearance. Here is a portrait of Bazarov: “tall in a long robe with tassels,” his face “long and thin with a wide forehead, a flat upward, pointed nose downward, large greenish eyes and hanging sand-colored sideburns, it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence”; the hero has thin lips, and “his dark-blond hair, long and thick, did not hide the large bulges of his spacious skull.” And here is a portrait of Bazarov’s main opponent: “... a man of average height, dressed in a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots, Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, entered the living room. He looked about forty-five years old; his short-cropped gray hair had a dark tint shine, like new silver; his face, bilious, but without wrinkles, unusually regular and clean, as if carved with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty; his light, black, elongated eyes were especially beautiful. The whole appearance... elegant and thoroughbred , retained youthful harmony and that desire upward, away from the earth, which for the most part disappears after the twenties."

Pavel Petrovich is twenty years older than Bazarov, but, perhaps even more than he, retains the signs of youth in his appearance. The elder Kirsanov is a man who is extremely concerned about his appearance in order to look as young as possible for his age. So befits a socialite, an old heartthrob. Bazarov, on the contrary, does not care at all about appearance. In the portrait of Pavel Petrovich, the writer highlights the correct features

and strict order, sophistication of costume and a desire for light, unearthly materials. This hero will defend order in the dispute against Bazarov’s transformative pathos. And everything in his appearance indicates adherence to the norm. Even Pavel Petrovich’s height is average, so to speak, normal, while Bazarov’s tall height symbolizes his superiority over those around him. And Evgeniy’s facial features are emphatically non-. regular, unkempt hair, instead of Pavel Petrovich’s expensive English suit, he has some kind of strange robe, his hand is red, rough, while Kirsanov has a beautiful hand “with long pink nails.” But Bazarov’s wide forehead and convex skull reveal his intelligence and self-confidence. But Pavel Petrovich has a bilious face, and increased attention to the toilet reveals in him a carefully hidden lack of confidence in his own abilities. We can say that this is Pushkin’s Onegin, twenty years older, living in a different era, in which there will soon be no place for this type of people

What position does Bazarov defend in the dispute? He claims that “nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it.” Evgeniy is deeply convinced that the achievements of modern natural science will in the future make it possible to solve all the problems of social life. He denies beauty - art, poetry - in love he sees only the physiological, but does not see the spiritual principle. Bazarov “approaches everything from a critical point of view”, “does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how much respect this principle is surrounded.” Pavel Petrovich proclaims that “aristocratism is a principle, and in our time only immoral or empty people can live without principles.” However, the impression of an inspired ode to principles is noticeably weakened by the fact that Bazarov’s opponent puts in first place the “principle” of aristocracy that is closest to himself. Pavel Petrovich, brought up in a comfortable estate existence and accustomed to the St. Petersburg secular society It is no coincidence that he puts poetry, music, and love in first place. He had never been involved in any practical activity in his life, with the exception of a short and easy service in the guards regiment, he was never interested in the natural sciences and understood little about them. Bazarov, the son of a poor military doctor, accustomed from childhood to work and not to idleness, graduated from university, interested in natural sciences, experimental knowledge, had very little to do with poetry or music in his short life, maybe even Pushkin really do not read. Hence Evgeniy Vasilyevich’s harsh and unfair judgment about the great Russian poet: “...He must have served in military service... on every page he has: To battle, to battle! for the honor of Russia!”, by the way, almost verbatim repeating the opinion about Pushkin expressed in a conversation with Turgenev by the common writer N.V. Uspensky (the author of Fathers and Sons called him a “hater of men”).

Bazarov does not have as much experience in love as Pavel Petrovich, and therefore is inclined to treat this feeling too simplistically. The elder Kirsanov had already experienced love suffering; it was an unsuccessful romance with Princess R. that prompted him to settle in the village with his brother for many years, and the death of his beloved further aggravated his state of mind. Bazarov's love pangs - an equally unsuccessful romance with Anna Sergeevna Odintsova is yet to come. That is why, at the beginning of the novel, he so confidently reduces love to certain physiological relationships, and calls the spiritual in love “romantic nonsense.”

Bazarov is a realist, and Pavel Petrovich is a romantic, focused on the cultural values of romanticism of the first third of the 19th century, on the cult of beauty. And he, of course, is offended by Bazarov’s statements about the fact that “a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet” or that “Raphael is not worth a penny.” Here Turgenev certainly disagrees with Bazarov’s point of view. However, he does not give victory on this point of the dispute to Pavel Petrovich. The trouble is that the refined Anglomaniac aristocrat does not have not only Raphael’s abilities, but no creative abilities at all. His discussions about art and poetry, as well as about society, are empty and trivial, often comical. Pavel Petrovich cannot possibly be a worthy opponent for Bazarov. And when they parted, the eldest of the Kirsanov brothers “was dead,” of course, in figuratively. Arguments with a nihilist somehow justified the meaning of his existence, introduced a certain “fermentation”, awakened thoughts. Now Pavel Petrovich is doomed to a stagnant existence. This is how we see him abroad at the end of the novel.

Turgenev's plan was fully consistent with Bazarov's victory over the aristocrat Kirsanov. In 1862, in one of his letters regarding “Fathers and Sons,” Ivan Sergeevich especially emphasized that “my whole story is directed against the nobility, as an advanced class... An aesthetic feeling forced me to take precisely good representatives of the nobility, in order to more accurately prove my theme: if cream is bad, what about milk?.. if the reader does not fall in love with Bazarov with all his rudeness, heartlessness, ruthless dryness and harshness - if he does not fall in love, I repeat, - I am guilty and have not achieved my goal. But “to crumble” ", in his words, I did not want to, although through this I would probably immediately have young people on my side. I did not want to buy into popularity with this kind of concessions. It is better to lose a battle ... than to win it by a trick. I dreamed of a gloomy figure , wild, big, half grown out of the soil, strong, evil, honest - and yet doomed to death - because

that she still stands on the threshold of the future..." Turgenev himself was a representative of the same generation as Pavel Petrovich, but from the heroes of his novel greatest sympathies felt towards to the young nihilist Bazarov. In 1869, in a special article dedicated to “Fathers and Sons,” the writer directly stated: “I honestly, and not only without prejudice, but even with sympathy, reacted to the type I had drawn... While drawing the figure of Bazarov, I excluded him from the circle liking everything artistic, I gave it a harsh and unceremonious tone - not out of an absurd desire to offend the younger generation (!!!)... “This life turned out this way,” experience again told me, perhaps erroneous, but, I repeat, conscientious... My personal inclinations mean nothing here, but probably many of my readers will be surprised if I tell them that, with the exception of Bazarov’s views on art, I share almost all of his beliefs. on the side of the “Fathers”... I, who in the figure of Pavel Kirsanov even sinned against artistic truth and over-salted, brought his shortcomings to the point of caricature, made him funny!” Turgenev was honest as an artist to the same extent that the character created by his imagination was honest as a person. The writer did not want to idealize Bazarov and endowed his hero with all those shortcomings that his prototypes from the radical heterodox youth possessed in abundance. However, Turgenev did not deprive Eugene of his Russian roots, emphasizing that half the hero grows from Russian soil, the fundamental conditions of Russian life, and half is formed under the influence of new ideas brought from Europe. And in a dispute with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov, according to the conviction of the writer, and any thoughtful reader, is right in his main positions: the need to question established dogmas, work tirelessly for the good of society, and be critical of the surrounding reality. Where Bazarov is wrong, in utilitarian views on the nature of beauty, on literature, on art, victory still does not remain on the side of Pavel Petrovich. Arkady and Bazarov

After its publication in 1862, Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” caused a literal flurry of critical articles. None of the public camps accepted Turgenev’s new creation. Liberal criticism I could not forgive the writer for the fact that representatives of the aristocracy, hereditary nobles, are depicted ironically, that the “plebeian” Bazarov constantly mocks them and turns out to be morally superior to them. Democrats perceived the novel's protagonist as an evil parody. The critic Antonovich, who collaborated in the Sovremennik magazine, called Bazarov “the astronomer of our time.”

But all these facts, it seems to me, speak in favor of I. S. Turgenev. How a real artist, creator, he managed to guess the trends of the era,

the emergence of a new type, the type of commoner democrat, who replaced the progressive nobility.

the main problem, set by the writer in the novel, is already heard in its title: “Fathers and Sons.” This name has double meaning. On the one hand, this is a generational problem - eternal problem classical literature, on the other hand, is the conflict between two socio-political forces operating in Russia in the 60s: liberals and democrats.

Characters novels are grouped depending on which of the socio-political camps we can attribute them to.

But the point is that main character Evgeny Bazarov turns out to be the only representative of the “children” camp, the camp of commoner democrats. All other heroes are in the hostile camp.

The central place in the novel is occupied by the figure of a new man - Evgeny Bazarov. He is presented as one of those young figures who “want to fight.” Others are people of the older generation who do not share Bazarov’s revolutionary democratic beliefs. They are depicted as small weak-willed people, with narrow, limited interests. The novel presents nobles and commoners of 2 generations - “fathers” and “children”. Turgenev shows how a commoner democrat acts in an environment alien to him.

In Maryino, Bazarov is a guest who differs in his democratic appearance from his landowner hosts. And he disagrees with Arkady in the main thing - in his idea of life, although at first they are considered friends. But their relationship still cannot be called friendship, because friendship is impossible without mutual understanding, friendship cannot be based on the subordination of one to the other. Throughout the entire novel, the subordination of a weak nature to a stronger one is observed: Arkady to Bazarov. But still, Arkady gradually acquired his own opinion and no longer blindly repeated Bazarov’s judgments and opinions of the nihilist. In disputes, he cannot stand it; I express my thoughts. One day their argument almost led to a fight. The difference between the heroes is visible in their behavior in Kirsanov’s “empire”. Bazarov is busy with work, studying nature, and Arkady is sybaritic and does nothing. The fact that Bazarov is a man of action can be seen immediately from his red bare hand. Yes, indeed, in any environment, in any home, he tries to get busy. His main business is the natural sciences, the study of nature and testing theoretical discoveries in practice. Passion for science is a typical feature cultural life Russia in the 60s, which means Bazarov keeps up with the times. Arkady is the complete opposite. He doesn’t do anything; none of the serious matters really captivates him. For him, the main thing is comfort and peace, and for Bazarov - not to sit idly by, to work, to move.

They form completely different judgments in relation to art. Bazarov denies Pushkin, and unfoundedly. Arkady is trying to prove to him the greatness of the poet. Arkady is always neat, tidy, well dressed, and has aristocratic manners. Bazarov does not consider it necessary to observe the rules of good manners, so important in the life of a nobleman. This is reflected in all his actions, habits, manners, speeches, and appearance. A major disagreement arose between “friends” in a conversation about the role of nature in human life. Here Arkady’s resistance to Bazarov’s views is already visible; gradually the “student” emerges from the power of the “teacher.” Bazarov hates many, but Arkady has no enemies. "You, gentle soul, a weakling," says Bazarov, realizing that Arkady can no longer be his associate. The "disciple" cannot live without principles. In this way he is very close to his liberal father and Pavel Petrovich. But Bazarov appears before us as a man of a new generation, which replaced the “fathers” who were unable to solve the main problems of the era.Arkady is a person belonging to the old generation, the generation of “fathers”.

Pisarev very accurately assesses the reasons for the disagreements between the “student” and the “teacher”, between Arkady and Bazarov: “Bazarov’s attitude towards his friend casts a bright streak of light on his character; Bazarov has no friend, because he has not yet met a person who would not gave up in front of him. Bazarov's personality closes in on itself, because outside of it and around it there are almost no elements related to it."

Arkady wants to be the son of his age and puts on himself Bazarov's ideas who absolutely cannot grow together with him. He belongs to the category of people who are always looked after and always do not notice that they are being looked after. Bazarov treats him patronizingly and almost always mockingly; he understands that their paths will diverge.

: Turgenev I. S.

Ideological disputes between “fathers” and “sons”. Who is right?

Describing the social hostility that flares up between the heroes, the author reveals the destructive sides of Kirsanov's aristocracy and Bazarov's nihilism. The central place in the novel is occupied by the long disputes of the young commoner E.V. Bazarov and the aging aristocrat P.P. Kirsanov, revealing the essence of the work - the problem of “fathers and sons”. It is they who give special poignancy to the plot, serve as a characteristic of each hero, show the superiority of new, progressive ideas over old ones, and the eternal movement towards progress.

These heroes differ from each other in everything: age, social status, beliefs, appearance. “Tall in a long robe with tassels,” his face was “long and thin with a wide forehead, a flat upward, pointed nose downward, large greenish eyes and hanging sand-colored sideburns, it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence,” and “his dark - blond hair, long and thick, did not hide the large bulges of the spacious skull.” This is the portrait of E.V. Bazarova. P.P. Kirsanov is “a man of average height, dressed in a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots,” “he looks about forty-five years old,” “his face, bilious, but without wrinkles, unusually regular and clean, as if drawn by a thin and with a light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty.” His whole appearance is “elegant and thoroughbred, retaining youthful harmony and that desire upward, away from the earth, which for the most part disappears after the twenties.”

Pavel Petrovich is precisely twenty years older than Bazarov, but even to a greater extent retains the signs of youth in his appearance. The elder Kirsanov is a man who is extremely concerned about his appearance in order to look as young as possible for his age. So befits a socialite, an old heartthrob. Bazarov, on the contrary, does not care at all about appearance. In the portrait of Pavel Petrovich, the writer highlights the correct features and strict order, the sophistication of the costume and the desire for light, unearthly materials. This hero will defend order in the dispute against Bazarov’s transformative pathos. And everything in his appearance indicates adherence to the norm.

Even Pavel Petrovich’s height is average, so to speak, normal, while Bazarov’s tall height symbolizes his superiority over those around him. And Evgeniy’s facial features are distinctly irregular, his hair is unkempt, instead of Pavel Petrovich’s expensive English suit, he has some kind of strange robe, his hand is red, rough, while Kirsanov has a beautiful hand “with long pink nails.” But Bazarov’s wide forehead and convex skull reveal his intelligence and self-confidence. But Pavel Petrovich has a bilious face, and increased attention to the toilet reveals in him a carefully hidden lack of confidence in his own abilities. You could say he's aged twenty years. Pushkinsky Evgeniy Onegin, living in a different era, in which this type of people will soon have no place.

It is no coincidence that Pavel Petrovich, brought up in an atmosphere of comfortable estate existence and accustomed to the St. Petersburg secular society, puts poetry, music, and love in first place. He had never been involved in any practical activity in his life, with the exception of a short and easy service in the guards regiment, he was never interested in the natural sciences and understood little about them. Bazarov, the son of a poor military doctor, accustomed from childhood to work and not to idleness, graduated from university, interested in natural sciences, experimental knowledge, had very little to do with poetry or music in his short life, perhaps not even Pushkin read. Hence Evgeniy Vasilyevich’s harsh and unfair judgment about the great Russian poet: “...He must have served in military service... on every page he has: To the battle, to the battle! for the honor of Russia!

Bazarov does not have as much experience in love as Pavel Petrovich, and therefore is too simplistic about this feeling. The elder Kirsanov had already experienced love suffering, namely an unsuccessful romance with Princess R. and the death of his beloved, which aggravated his state of mind. Evgeny Vasilyevich's love pangs - an equally unsuccessful romance with Anna Sergeevna Odintsova - are still ahead. That is why, at the beginning of the novel, he so confidently reduces love to certain physiological relationships, and calls everything spiritual in love “romantic nonsense.” Bazarov is a realist, and Pavel Petrovich is a romantic, focused on the cultural values of romanticism of the first third of the century, on the cult of beauty.

And he, of course, is offended by Bazarov’s statements about the fact that “a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet” or that “Raphael is not worth a penny.” Here Turgenev certainly disagrees with Bazarov’s point of view. However, he does not give victory on this point of the dispute to Pavel Petrovich. The trouble is that the refined Anglomaniac aristocrat does not have not only Raphael’s abilities, but no creative abilities at all. His discussions about art and poetry, as well as about society, are empty and trivial, often comical. Pavel Petrovich cannot possibly be a worthy opponent for Bazarov. And when they part, the eldest of the Kirsanov brothers “was dead,” of course, in a figurative sense. Disputes with a nihilist at least somehow justified the meaning of his existence, introduced a certain “fermentation”, awakened thoughts. Now Pavel Petrovich is doomed to a stagnant existence.

Based on all of the above, I think that Bazarov’s real opponent is Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, although he does not enter into verbal disputes. He understands perfectly well that his arguments will not be convincing either for Bazarov or for his brother. Nikolai Petrovich simply lives according to his heart and conscience. Having broken his leg in his youth, what prevented him from doing military career, he does not become despondent, does not become embittered at the whole world, but studies at the university, then gets married, lives with his wife for ten years in love and harmony, which passed “like a dream.” After the death of his wife, he devotes himself to raising and educating his son. Then life sends him love for a simple girl, Fenechka, for a newborn child.

The hard-won knowledge that Nikolai Petrovich possesses - about harmonious existence, about unity with nature, about poetry, about love - can only be understood by a developed soul, which neither the “district aristocrat” nor the “leader of the nihilists” has. Only the son is able to understand this, who, in the end, comes to the conclusion that Bazarov’s ideas are untenable. Life itself puts everything in its place, sweeps away everything unnatural: Bazarov dies, having known love, softening his skepticism, Pavel Petrovich went abroad; Arkady marries Katya, lives on his father's estate, raises it from desolation and poverty; Nikolai Petrovich - marries Fenechka, becomes a peace mediator and works hard.

However, in 1862, in one of his letters regarding “Fathers and Sons,” Ivan Sergeevich especially emphasized that the entire “story is directed against the nobility, as an advanced class... An aesthetic feeling forced me to take precisely good representatives of the nobility, in order to more accurately prove my theme: if cream is bad, what about milk?.. if the reader does not fall in love with Bazarov with all his rudeness, heartlessness, ruthless dryness and harshness - if he does not fall in love, I repeat, - I am guilty and have not achieved my goal. But I didn’t want to “get upset,” to use his words, although through this I would probably immediately have young people on my side. I didn’t want to buy into popularity with this kind of concession. It's better to lose a battle... than to win it with a trick." 11 .

I.S. himself Turgenev was a representative of the same generation as P.P. Kirsanov, but of the heroes of his novel he felt the greatest sympathy for the young nihilist Bazarov. In 1869, in a special article “Regarding “Fathers and Sons,” the writer directly stated: “Drawing the figure of Bazarov, I excluded everything artistic from the circle of his sympathies, I gave him a harshness and unceremonious tone - not out of an absurd desire to offend the younger generation. .. With the exception of Bazarov’s views on art, I share almost all of his beliefs. And they assure me that I am on the side of the “fathers”... I, who in the figure of Pavel Kirsanov even sinned against artistic truth and overdid it, brought his shortcomings to the point of caricature, made him funny!” 12

The writer did not want to idealize Bazarov and endowed his hero with all those shortcomings that his prototypes from the radical heterodox youth possessed in abundance. However, Turgenev did not deprive Eugene of his Russian roots, emphasizing that half the hero grows from Russian soil, the fundamental conditions of Russian life, and half is formed under the influence of new ideas brought from Europe. And in a dispute with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov, according to the conviction of the writer, and any thoughtful reader, is right in his main positions: the need to question established dogmas, work tirelessly for the good of society, and be critical of the surrounding reality. Where Bazarov is wrong, in utilitarian views on the nature of beauty, on literature, on art, victory still does not remain on the side of Pavel Petrovich.

In disputes, Bazarov has not only the advantages of youth and the novelty of his position. Turgenev sees that nihilism is deeply connected with social disorder, popular discontent, that this is a natural expression of the spirit of the times, when in Russia everything is overestimated and turned upside down. The author admits that the role of the “advanced class” is moving from noble intelligentsia to the commoners.

In the novel “Fathers and Sons” by I.S. Turgenev overcomes the political limitations of his own views. He tried to rise and rose above the fray, showing the extremes in the position of both "fathers" and "sons". However, this is precisely why his affair not only did not reconcile, but even more aggravated social struggle. And the writer himself found himself in dramatic situation. With bewilderment and bitterness, he stopped, giving up, before the chaos of contradictory judgments: the novel did not satisfy either the “fathers” or the “children.” “The question that has arisen,” wrote I.S. Turgenev, many years later, was more important than artistic truth - and I should have known this in advance.”

noble nihilist bazaar children

“Fathers and Sons,” according to the Russian writer Vladimir Nabokov, is “not only Turgenev’s best novel, but also one of the most brilliant works of the 19th century.” The central place here is occupied by long disputes between the young raznochinsky nihilist Yevgeny Bazarov and the aging aristocrat Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. " "

These heroes differ from each other in everything: age, social status, beliefs, appearance. Here is a portrait of Bazarov: “tall in a long robe with tassels,” his face “long and thin with a wide forehead, a flat upward, pointed nose downward, large greenish eyes and hanging sand-colored sideburns, it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence”; the hero has thin lips, and “his dark-blond hair, long and thick, did not hide the large bulges of his spacious skull.” And here is a portrait of Bazarov’s main opponent: “...a man of average height, dressed in a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots, Kirsanov, entered the living room. He looked about forty-five years old; his short-cropped gray hair shone with a dark shine, like new silver; his face, bilious, but without wrinkles, unusually regular and clean, as if carved with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty; The light, black, oblong eyes were especially beautiful. The whole appearance... graceful and thoroughbred, retained youthful harmony and that desire upward, away from the earth, which for the most part disappears after the twenties.”

And strict order, sophistication of the costume and a desire for light, unearthly materials. This hero will defend order in the dispute against Bazarov’s transformative pathos. And everything in his appearance indicates adherence to the norm. Even Pavel Petrovich’s height is average, so to speak, normal, while Bazarov’s tall height symbolizes his superiority over those around him. And Evgeniy’s facial features are emphatically not - . regular, unkempt hair, instead of Pavel Petrovich’s expensive English suit, he has some kind of strange robe, his hand is red, rough, while Kirsanov has a beautiful hand “with long pink nails.” But Bazarov’s wide forehead and convex skull reveal his intelligence and self-confidence. But Pavel Petrovich has a bilious face, and increased attention to the toilet reveals in him a carefully hidden lack of confidence in his own abilities. We can say that this is Pushkin’s Onegin, twenty years older, living in a different era, in which there will soon be no place for this type of people

What position does Bazarov defend in the dispute? He claims that “nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it.” Evgeniy is deeply convinced that the achievements of modern natural science will in the future make it possible to solve all the problems of social life. He denies beauty - art, poetry - in love he sees only the physiological, but does not see the spiritual principle. Bazarov “approaches everything from a critical point of view”, “does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how much respect this principle is surrounded.” Pavel Petrovich proclaims that “aristocratism is a principle, and in our time only immoral or empty people can live without principles.” However, the impression of an inspired ode to principles is noticeably weakened by the fact that Bazarov’s opponent puts in first place the “principle” of aristocracy that is closest to himself. It is no coincidence that Pavel Petrovich, brought up in an atmosphere of comfortable estate existence and accustomed to the St. Petersburg secular society, puts poetry, music, and love in first place. He had never been involved in any practical activity in his life, with the exception of a short and easy service in the guards regiment, he was never interested in the natural sciences and understood little about them. Bazarov, the son of a poor military doctor, accustomed from childhood to work and not to idleness, graduated from university, interested in natural sciences, experimental knowledge, had very little to do with poetry or music in his short life, maybe even Pushkin really do not read. Hence Evgeniy Vasilyevich’s harsh and unfair judgment about the great Russian poet: “...He must have served in military service... on every page he has: To the battle, to the battle! for the honor of Russia!”, by the way, almost verbatim repeating the opinion about Pushkin expressed in a conversation with Turgenev by the raznochinsky writer N.V. Uspensky (the author of “Fathers and Sons” called him a “hater of men”).

Bazarov is a realist, and Pavel Petrovich is a romantic, focused on the cultural values of romanticism of the first third of the 19th century, on the cult of beauty. And he, of course, is offended by Bazarov’s statements about the fact that “a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet” or that “Raphael is not worth a penny.” Here Turgenev certainly disagrees with Bazarov’s point of view. However, he does not give victory on this point of the dispute to Pavel Petrovich. The trouble is that the refined Anglomaniac aristocrat does not have not only Raphael’s abilities, but no creative abilities at all. His discussions about art and poetry, as well as about society, are empty and trivial, often comical. Pavel Petrovich cannot possibly be a worthy opponent for Bazarov. And when they part, the eldest of the Kirsanov brothers “was dead,” of course, in a figurative sense. Disputes with a nihilist at least somehow justified the meaning of his existence, introduced a certain “fermentation”, awakened thoughts. Now Pavel Petrovich is doomed to a stagnant existence. This is how we see him abroad at the end of the novel.

Turgenev's plan was fully consistent with Bazarov's victory over the aristocrat Kirsanov. In 1862, in one of his letters regarding “Fathers and Sons,” Ivan Sergeevich especially emphasized that “my whole story is directed against the nobility, as an advanced class... An aesthetic feeling forced me to take precisely good representatives of the nobility, in order to more accurately prove my theme: if cream is bad, what about milk?.. if the reader does not fall in love with Bazarov with all his rudeness, heartlessness, ruthless dryness and harshness - if he does not fall in love, I repeat, - I am guilty and have not achieved my goal. But I didn’t want to “become scattered,” to use his words, although through this I would probably immediately have young people on my side. I didn’t want to buy into popularity with this kind of concession. It's better to lose a battle... than to win it with a trick. I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, evil, honest - and yet doomed to death - because