What are the similarities and differences between the characters of Kiril Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky? Mini-essay on literature, based on the novel “Dubrovsky”. Dubrovsky and Troekurov comparative characteristics essay What distinguished Troekurov and Dubrovsky senior

The collected works of our beloved poet and writer Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin total more than 10 volumes. “Dubrovsky” is a novel known to us from our school years. Wide in scope and deep in psychological content, it touches the soul of every reader. The main characters of the novel are Troekurov and Dubrovsky. We will study the main characters, as well as the main events of the work in more detail.

Russian gentleman

The action in the novel takes place in the 19th century. It is described in sufficient detail in the works of many classics of that time. As you know, serfdom existed in those days. The peasants, or souls as they were also called, were owned by the nobles.

The Russian master, the arrogant Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, was very much in awe of him. Not only his serf wards, but also many officials were in awe of him.

Troekurov's lifestyle left much to be desired: he spent his days idly, often drank and suffered from gluttony.

The peasants were in awe of him, and he, in turn, treated them rather capriciously, showing his complete dominance over them.

Troekurov's favorite pastime was mockery and ridicule of animals and people. Suffice it to recall the bear who rolled a barrel with protruding nails and was angry from the pain. This made the master laugh. Or the scene with the bear that was chained in a small room. Anyone who entered it was attacked by the poor animal. Troekurov took pleasure in the fury of the bear and human fear.

Humble Nobleman

Troekurov and Dubrovsky, whose comparative characteristics we will consider in detail, are very different people. Andrei Gavrilovich was honest, valiant, calm in character, he was strikingly different from his comrade. Once upon a time, the elder Dubrovsky and Troekurov were colleagues. But the careerist Kirila Petrovich, betraying his honor, sided with the new tsar, which earned himself a high rank. Andrei Gavrilovich, who remained devoted to his ruler, ended his service as a humble lieutenant. But nevertheless, the relationship between Troekurov and Dubrovsky was quite friendly and mutually respectful. They often met, visited each other's estates, and had conversations.

Both heroes had similar fates: they began serving together, were widowed early, and had a child to raise. But life took them in different directions.

Argument

There were no signs of trouble. But one day the relationship between Troekurov and Dubrovsky cracked. The phrase expressed by Kirila Petrovich’s clerk greatly offended Andrei Gavrilovich. The serf said that Troekurov’s slaves lived better than some nobles. This meant, of course, the modest Dubrovsky.

Immediately after this he left for his estate. Kirila Petrovich ordered to return it, but Andrei Gavrilovich did not want to come back. Such insolence offended the master, and he decided to achieve his goal at all costs.

A comparison of Dubrovsky and Troekurov will be incomplete without describing the method by which Kirila Petrovich decided to take revenge on his comrade.

Insidious plan

Having no influence on Dubrovsky, Troekurov conceived a terrible idea - to take away his friend’s estate. How dare he disobey him! Undoubtedly, this was very cruel to an old acquaintance.

Were Troekurov and Dubrovsky real friends? A comparative description of these heroes will help you figure this out.

Kirila Petrovich bribed officials indiscriminately and forged papers. Dubrovsky, having learned about the legal battle, remained quite calm, because he was confident of his absolute innocence.

Shabashkin, hired by Troyekurov, took care of all the dirty deeds, although he knew that the Kistenevka estate legally belonged to the Dubrovskys. But everything turned out differently.

Scene in court

And now that exciting hour has come. Having met at the courthouse, Troekurov and Dubrovsky (whose comparative assessment will be given by us later) behaved proudly and walked into the courtroom. Kirila Petrovich felt very at ease. He already felt the taste of victory. Dubrovsky, on the contrary, behaved very calmly, stood leaning against the wall and was not worried at all.

The judge began reading a long decision. When it was all over, there was silence. Dubrovsky was completely bewildered. At first he was silent for some time, and then he became furious and forcefully pushed away the secretary who invited him to sign the papers. He began to rave, shouting something loudly about kennels and dogs. With difficulty they sat him down and took him home on a sleigh.

The triumphant Troekurov did not expect such a turn of events. Seeing his former comrade in a terrible state, he became upset and even stopped celebrating his victory over him.

Andrei Gavrilovich was taken home, where he became ill. He spent more than one day under the supervision of a doctor.

Repentance

The comparison of Dubrovsky and Troekurov is based on the complete opposition of the heroes. Kirila Petrovich, so arrogant and domineering, and Andrei Gavrilovich, a kind and honest person, could not continue their communication for long. But still, after the court hearing, Troekurov’s heart thawed. He decided to go to his former friend and talk.

However, he had no idea that by that time Vladimir, his son, was already in the house of Dubrovsky Sr.

Seeing Kirila Petrovich arriving in the window, the shocked Andrei Gavrilovich could not bear it and died suddenly.

Troekurov was never able to explain the reason for his arrival, and he was never able to repent to his friend for the crime he had committed.

And here the novel changes its turn: Vladimir decides to take revenge on the enemy for his father.

The appearance of Vladimir

It is worth saying a few words about the personality of this young man. Left without a mother early, the boy was in the care of his father. At the age of twelve he was sent to the cadet corps, and then continued his military studies at a higher institution. The father spared no expense in raising his son and provided for him well. But the young man spent his time in carousing and card games, and had large debts. Now that he is left completely alone, and even practically homeless, he feels strong loneliness. He had to grow up quickly and change his life dramatically.

Troekurov and Vladimir Dubrovsky become fierce enemies. The son is thinking over a plan of revenge against his father's offender.

When the estate was taken away and came into the possession of Kirila Petrovich, Vladimir was left without a livelihood. He has to become a robber in order to earn a living. Beloved by his serfs, he was able to gather a whole team of like-minded people. They rob rich people, but avoid Troekurov's estate. He undoubtedly thinks that the young man is afraid of him, so he does not go to him with robbery.

Troekurov in the novel “Dubrovsky” showed himself to be a proud man, but at the same time he is afraid that Vladimir will one day come to take revenge on him.

Dubrovsky in Troekurov's house

But our young hero turned out to be not so simple. He unexpectedly appears at the estate of Kirila Petrovich. But no one knows him there - he has not been to his homeland for many years. After exchanging documents with the French teacher and paying him well, Vladimir introduces himself to the Troekurov family as teacher Deforge. He speaks French well, and no one can suspect Dubrovsky in him.

Perhaps the young man would be able to bring all his plans for revenge to life, but one circumstance prevents him - love. Unexpectedly for himself, Vladimir is fascinated by Masha, the daughter of his enemy Troekurov.

This love changes the lives of all the characters in the novel. Now Dubrovsky Jr. doesn’t want revenge at all. He renounces evil thoughts in the name of his beloved woman. But Masha still doesn’t know who this Deforge really is.

Troekurov himself began to respect the young Frenchman and was proud of his courage and modesty. But the time has come, and Vladimir confesses to Masha about his feelings and who he really is. The girl is confused - her father will never allow them to be together.

When Kirila Petrovich finds out the truth, he resolves the issue radically - he marries his daughter to the rich Prince Vereisky against her wishes.

Vladimir does not have time to arrive at the church during the wedding, and now she is no longer his Mashenka, but Princess Vereiskaya. Vladimir has no choice but to go far. Kirila Petrovich is more than satisfied with the current situation.

Conclusion

Troekurov and Dubrovsky, whose comparative characteristics are presented in detail by us, are completely different types of heroes. It cannot be said that Kirila Petrovich was a terrible person - he nevertheless repented of his vile act. But life did not give him a chance to be forgiven.

Both Andrei and Vladimir Dubrovsky are very ambitious. The serfs respect them, and they, in turn, do not oppress them in any way. However, Pushkin teaches us all: no circumstances should lead to extreme measures. Friendship is more than just communication, and you need to be able to value it.

About the novel. In the novel “Dubrovsky” by A.S. Pushkin showed many images typical of his time, as well as the inconsistency of the mechanism of action of the judicial state machine. The image and characterization of Kirill Petrovich Troekurov will help to identify the main vices of some landowners that Pushkin sought to show to the reader.

Who is Troekurov?

Troekurov lives in one of his estates, Pokrovsky, and is a type of “nobleman in the case.” With his behavior he instills fear in others, which forces them to grovel before him. Troekurov enjoys the effect he has on people. Feels like the master of life, to whom everything is subject. “The neighbors were happy to cater to his slightest whims; provincial officials trembled at his name; Kirila Petrovich accepted signs of servility as a proper tribute; his house was always full of guests, ready to entertain his lordly idleness, sharing his noisy and sometimes violent amusements.” Complete permissiveness revealed all of Kirilla Petrovich’s bad habits and increased them to incredible proportions. He constantly indulges in gluttony and is often drunk. Troekurov’s favorite pastime is cruel practical jokes, the victims of which could be any of his guests.

Troekurov and Dubrovsky

The only person whom Troekurov really respected was Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, his old comrade. The poor but proud landowner evokes great sympathy from the reckless and indomitable Kirill Petrovich. They are also related by the fact that both lost their wives, remaining guardians of their children. Comrade Troekurov has great privileges over his other guests: he is allowed to contradict the owner of the house and express his point of view in conversations.

The relationship between the friends changed when a worker at Troekurov's kennel made an insulting joke at Dubrovsky, saying that many nobles do not have the same living conditions as the local dogs. The humiliated Andrei Gavrilovich demanded that a huntsman be sent to him for punishment. Kirill Petrovich was angry with his friend for the master's treatment of his serfs and decided to take revenge. For this purpose, through the court, he takes away the house from his former friend. Seeing the effect this had, he begins to feel torment and wants to stop the quarrel. “Satisfied revenge and lust for power drowned out to some extent nobler feelings, but the latter finally triumphed. He decided to make peace with his old neighbor, to destroy the traces of the quarrel, returning his property to him.” Dubrovsky falls dead when Troekurov drives into the yard. And the young heir’s harsh statement addressed to him destroys the noble impulses of the latter.

Relationship with daughter

Maria was raised in front of her parents. He adored his daughter, but she too fell victim to the inconstancy of her father’s difficult character. Sometimes he showered her with favors and gifts, but more often he treated her strictly and demandingly. He deprived her of the female society a young girl needed, and Marya’s entire upbringing consisted of reading library books.

When the question of Masha’s marriage with the old prince arises, Troekurov gives his consent without hesitation, not paying attention to the girl’s protest. He is seduced by his own benefits, which he will receive by becoming related to a noble person. Masha's happy family life does not matter to him.

Stupidity and arrogance deprive Troekurov of his only true friend and the love of his daughter. Many human vices found refuge in Kirill Petrovich. The meaninglessness of such an existence is described by Pushkin in the following lines: “Vanity of vanities... and they will sing eternal memory to Kiril Petrovich... will the funeral be richer... but does God care!”

Dubrovsky and Troekurov are two personalities, two human destinies, who have much in common. For example, the fact that they belong to a noble family and the pre-revolutionary era of the nineteenth century.

Dubrovsky and Troekurov, when they were young, served with the tsar, after which they were awarded with honor, and as a result received an officer rank.

Andrei Gavrilovich and Kirill Petrovich married for love, but, unfortunately, quickly became widowers.
There were children from the marriages. Dubrovsky had a son whose name was Volodya. Troekurov had a daughter, Maria.
After serving the tsar, Dubrovsky and Troekurov resigned. They settled on their estates.

In Pushkin’s work, the main characters have the same powers, the right to dispose of rights and privileges, but due to their lifestyle and character, they use them in completely opposite ways.
The strong temperament of the two landowners helped not only create a position in society, but also make friends with each other.

The domineering, arrogant Troekurov loves to always be the center of attention. He is boastful in front of guests, showing off his rich mansions. He is especially demanding and strict with his subordinates. He keeps everything under control and does not allow familiar, impudent communication to outsiders, which he forgives Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky.
Dubrovsky himself is a closed, hidden person who does not like to be in society, in plain sight. Not so rich, but won the sympathy of his arrogant and arrogant friend Troekurov.

Kirill Petrovich saw in Dubrovsky: independence, determination, courage, straightforwardness of statements. These main features attracted Troekurov to Andrei Gavrilovich.

Friendship between neighbors cracks during another everyday conversation. In it, Andrei Dubrovsky touches the pride of his comrade, and he, as a hot-tempered person, cannot forgive him for this.
The provoked conflict on the part of Dubrovsky has an unpleasant turn of the situation.

Troekurov threatens to take revenge on his comrade for such insolence, promising to deprive him of everything he has.
Kirill Petrovich hoped to disgrace Dubrovsky so that he would come to him with an apology, and in the future, he would obey him.

An ordinary conflict worsens the life of Andrei Gavrilovich and destroys the friendship between the landowners.
The novel contains revenge and cruelty that influence the destinies of two people. Morality and morality, in the novel, fade into the background.

Comparison of Andrei Dubrovsky and Kirila Troekurov

We cannot imagine Russian literature without the poet and prose writer Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, the founder of the realistic movement. Every person, having familiarized himself with the writer’s work, does not remain indifferent to his creations. One of the classic masterpieces is the novel "Dubrovsky". When writing, Pushkin was guided by the truthful story of Pavel Voinovich Nashchokin, who was a close friend of the writer.

In this novel, Pushkin touched on topics that worried many in those years: the lack of rights of serfs, the permissiveness of rich landowners, the injustice of the royal court and robbery as a protest of the common people.

The essence of the plot of the novel is about how a conflict arises between two landowners Kirill Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky after many years of friendship. The wealthy landowner Troekurov allowed his huntsman to make a free statement, in which he offended the honor and dignity of his friend Dubrovsky. The matter comes to trial. Due to the false testimony of the legislator Spitsyn, the estate of Andrei Gavrilovich Kistenevka goes to Kirill Petrovich. Dubrovsky was already not living on a grand scale, leading a modest lifestyle compared to Troekurov. And then there’s this misfortune - his best friend takes all his property. Severe nervous shock affects Andrei Gavrilovich’s health. He is struck by an illness that leads to death. Vladimir, the son of Andrei Dubrovsky, leaves military service due to his father’s illness and returns home. Having learned all the circumstances that have developed with his father’s estate, he cannot stand it and sets his house on fire. In this case, the clerks die. He becomes a robber with one desire to take revenge on his father's former friend.

Kirill Troekurov is one of the main characters of the novel. Very rich. A strong, strong man. Despite his lack of education, he has great influence in secular circles, which allows him to do whatever he wants. To achieve his goals, he shamelessly allows himself to lie. He respects only wealthy people, and expresses clear disdain for the poor.

Andrei Dubrovsky is not a rich man, but with self-esteem. By origin he belongs to a noble family. Proud, independent. For him, having a thick wallet does not matter when communicating with people. Honest, direct. Not afraid to express his opinion. Believes that justice will always prevail. But, unfortunately, Russia at that time lived according to Troekurov’s laws. And all his positive qualities do not keep him alive.

6th grade. Characteristics and comparison

A friendship that ended never really began.

Pushkin A.S. - a person to be proud of. We should be grateful to him that we can enjoy the great works of this unique writer. He is the heritage of our Motherland. “Dubrovsky” is one of many novels by A.S. Pushkin. The plot of the novel is based on real events, which makes it more exciting and touching.

At the center of the work are two people, Kirila Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky. With the help of these heroes, A.S. Pushkin showed the problems of noble society and the human qualities characteristic of the noble class of that time.

Kirila Petrovich Troekurov and Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky are characters of the same age, belonging to the noble class, and therefore received the same upbringing. They had little similarity in character and inclinations. Fate, at the beginning of life’s journey, also turned out the same way. Both have a love marriage behind them, early widowhood and small children in their arms. But despite this, these characters are completely different in temperament and goals in life.

Troekurov is a character with a “rather limited mind.” A.S. Pushkin collected in one person all the terrible vices of humanity. Kirila Petrovich considers himself the center of the universe, he is used to everyone being afraid of him. He doesn't know what failure is. He has the power that can open all doors for him. His fiery personality spreads to everyone. He doesn't know who's in front of him. His name alone terrifies people. They experience insurmountable fear; people don’t even think about contradicting it. Everyone, on the contrary, tries to please him even if it goes against the law. He is the law itself. One word from him can destroy a person. Troyekurov is a tyrant. His cruel attitude extends to his servants, despite their devotion to him. His hobbies are primitive: gluttony and drunkenness. Kirila Petrovich does not spare her only daughter, she does not marry her out of love.

Troekurov respected only one person. It was Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky. They were once united by service in the guard. Then the friends' paths diverged and they met years later. Dubrovsky was ruined and forced to leave service. Andrei Gavrilovich settled not far from Kiril Petrovich, who “offered him his patronage.” But Dubrovsky chose to remain poor and independent. Pride prevailed over the fear of venturing out into the world.

Dubrovsky was the only one who could express his opinion under Troyekurov. This is what destroyed him. Andrei Gavrilovich could not stand the insult from the kennel worker towards him. Pride and temper took over. Andrei silently left the estate. Troekurov and did not return after a serf was sent for him. After another mistake was made, Dubrovsky demanded that Troekurov send him the employee who had insulted him. For which his now former friend decided to take away Dubrovsky’s estate. Troekurov wanted unconditional power over Dubrovsky.

The tragedy of this novel lies in the fact that Troekurov realized his mistake too late. He decides to make peace with his friend and return his estate, but it was already too late. Dubrovsky dies.

A.S. Pushkin showed with his novel how easy it is to destroy another person. To do this you need to have money and be a dishonest person. Unfortunately, nothing has changed and today you can meet a person with the same vices as the character in this novel.

Several interesting essays

• Heroes of the fairy tale Alice in Wonderland

  Despite the fact that “Alice in Wonderland” belongs to a number of children's works, this book contains a lot of charismatic characters with quite distinct characters. Who belongs to them?

  Since ancient times, people have tried to stick together to achieve their goals and solve common problems, in particular, in order to survive and feed themselves

Kirilla Petrovich Troekurov and Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky (based on the novel “Dubrovsky” by A. S. Pushkin)

A. S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky” is a work in the dramatic fate of a poor nobleman whose estate was illegally taken away. Imbued with compassion for the fate of a certain Ostrovsky, Pushkin in his own reproduced a true life story, without leaving it, of course, as the author’s fiction.

Hero of the novel,

He lives very modestly, but this does not prevent him from maintaining good neighborly relations with Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, a well-known gentleman throughout the area, a retired general-in-chief, a very rich and noble man with numerous connections and significant authority. Everyone who knows Troekurov and his character trembles at the mere mention of his name; they are ready to please his slightest whims. The eminent master himself takes such behavior for granted, because, in his opinion, this is exactly the attitude his face deserves.

Troekurov is arrogant and gets nasty even with people of the highest rank. No one and nothing is capable of laying him down and bowing his head. Kirilla Petrovich constantly surrounds himself with numerous guests, to whom he shows off his rich estate, kennel, and shocks them with crazy fun. This is a wayward, proud, vain, spoiled and perverted person.

The only one who enjoys Troekurov’s respect is Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky. Troekurov was able to discern in this poor nobleman a courageous and independent person, capable of ardently defending his self-esteem before anyone, able to freely and directly express his own point of view. Such behavior is rare in Kirila Petrovich’s circle, so his relationship with Sdubrovsky developed differently than with the latter.

True, Troekurov’s mercy quickly gave way to anger when Dubrovsky went against Kirill Petrovich

Who is to blame for the quarrel? Troekurov is power-hungry, and Dubrovsky is decisive and impatient. This is a hot-headed and imprudent person. Therefore, it would be unfair to place the blame only on Kirill Petrovich

Troekurov, of course, behaved incorrectly, not only allowing the huntsman to insult Andrei Gavrilovich, but also supporting the words of his servant with loud laughter. He was also wrong when he became angry at his neighbor’s demand to hand over Paramoshka for punishment. However, Dubrovsky is also to blame. Vaughn used rods to teach a lesson to the caught Pokrovsky men who were stealing loess from him, and took away their horses. Such behavior, as the author claims, contradicted “all the concepts of right-wing war, and the letter written somewhat earlier to Troekurov on the then concepts of etiquette was “very indecent.

The spleen found a stone. Kirilla Petrovich chooses the most terrible method of revenge: he intends to leave the roof over his neighbor’s head, even if in an unjust way, to humiliate him, crush him, and force him to obey. “This is the power,” Troekurov asserts, “to take away property without any right. A rich gentleman bribes the court, without thinking either about the moral side of the matter or the consequences of the lawlessness being committed. Willfulness and lust for power, ardor and ardent disposition in two counts destroy the friendship of neighbors and the life of Dubrovsky.

Kirill Petrovich is easy-going, after a while he decides to reconcile, because “by nature he is not selfish, but it turns out it’s too late.

Troekurov, according to the author, always “showed all the vices of an uneducated person and” was accustomed to giving full rein to all the impulses of his ardent disposition and all the ideas of his rather limited mind. Dubrovsky did not want to come to terms with this and suffered a heavy punishment, condemning not only himself, but also his own son to poverty. Heightened ambition and wounded pride did not allow him to take a sober look at the current situation and compromise, seeking reconciliation with his neighbor. Being a deeply decent person, Andrei Gavrilovich could not imagine how far Troekurov could go in his desire for revenge, how easily the court could be bribed, how he could be put out on the street without legal grounds. Vaughn measured those around him by his standards, was confident in his own rightness, “had neither the desire nor the opportunity to sprinkle money around himself, and therefore” he was worried about the case brought against him. This played into the hands of his ill-wishers.

Having outlined the conflict between Troyekurov and Dubrovsky the Elder, A.S. Pushkin exposed harshness and vindictiveness, showed the price of ardor, and sharply posed the moral questions of his time, which are very close to today’s reader.

Essay, Pushkin

Similarities between Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky Kirila Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky have many common qualities. The similarity of the characters lies in the fact that they: both are elderly men, both belong to the noble class, both live in the village, both are retired officers, both are widowers, both have children of the same age. To prove this, we quote from the novel: “...Being the same age, born in the same class, brought up the same way, they were somewhat similar in character and inclinations. In some respects, their fate was the same: both married for love, both were soon widowed, both had a child.” The heroes also have common bright character traits, such as: pride, ardor, ardor. Indeed, Kirila Troekurov and Andrei Dubrovsky are both proud men: “...on the road Troekurov overtook him. They looked at each other proudly, and Dubrovsky noticed an evil smile on his opponent’s face.” Andrei Dubrovsky is considered an ardent, impatient and decisive person: “...Troekurov knew from experience the impatience and determination of his character.” (about Dubrovsky) “... it will not be difficult to put a person so ardent and imprudent in the most unfavorable position.” (about Dubrovsky) It is also known about the character of Kirila Troekurov that he is a man of ardent disposition: “... to the impulses of his ardent disposition...” (about Troekurov) Unfortunately, it is the pride and ardor of the heroes that leads to the fact that a quarrel flares up between them, which has tragic consequences.

By comparing the heroes of works of art, we can understand their idea of ​​life, and perhaps themselves. In this essay we will compare the heroes of A. S. Pushkin’s unfinished historical novel “Dubrovsky,” namely Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky and Kirila Petrovich Troekurov. Both heroes have their similarities and differences. Let's consider the features of their destinies. These were peers who grew up in the same class, who married for love, but both were soon widowed, each having a child: Dubrovsky had a son, Troekurov had a daughter. Despite the difference in wealth, both parents try to provide their children with a good life. Dubrovsky, in order to give his son everything he needs for a carefree life in St. Petersburg, sells almost all the villages, leaving only one - Kistenevka. Troekurov’s daughter is growing up before her parent’s eyes. Spending a lot of money on her daughter, Kirila Petrovich loses nothing. At the moment when Catherine the Second overthrows Peter the Third from the throne, Troekurov and Dubrovsky make different decisions. Troekurov, realizing that all power is in the hands of the empress, takes her side, which brings him a lot of benefit. However, Dubrovsky remains faithful to Peter the Third, which negatively affects his well-being and position in society. But let’s ask ourselves a question: if Andrei Gavrilovich had also joined the supporters of Catherine the Second, would his life have become easier? We don't know this. They also had common interests - both were ardent hunters. Troekurov's kennel was famous for its qualities throughout the province and Dubrovsky was naturally envious - after all, his wealth allowed him to keep only a pack of greyhounds and hounds. This comparison once again highlights the difference in wealth. I can characterize Dubrovsky as an unbalanced and exalted person, and that is why I treat him better than Troekurov, a calm and measured businessman.