home-Hats-The symbolic meaning of Bazarov's death. Reflections at the grave of Evgeny Bazarov Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave

The symbolic meaning of Bazarov's death. Reflections at the grave of Evgeny Bazarov Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave

It would seem that I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” could end with the scene of Bazarov’s departure from life. The author brought his hero to its logical conclusion - death. Living life destroys Eugene’s views. He tried not to notice the beauty of the world around him, not to succumb to the charm of music and art, but he could not help but fall in love. Love destroys all of Bazarov’s previous ideas; he indignantly notices the romantic in himself, but he can’t do anything about himself. It was also not possible to forget about work. Exhausted by an unrequited feeling, Bazarov does not resemble his former self, which is probably why Turgenev leads his hero to death. This is another test that befell Bazarov, because without thinking about death there is no understanding of the meaning of life.II. Analysis of the final episode of the novel “Fathers and Sons”. - Lying in the shadow of a haystack, Bazarov will say to Arkady: “Well, he (the man) will live in a white hut, and a burdock will grow out of me...” - What has the hero come to? Answer. Bazarov, exaggerating, very precisely expresses his thought: we fuss, strive for something, but man is insignificant in the face of eternity, in the face of endless life. It is this idea that is the main one in the episode describing the rural cemetery and Bazarov’s grave. Why didn’t Turgenev end the novel with the scene of the death of his hero? Answer. Because life goes on without this strong personality. - Where does Bazarov’s passionate, rebellious heart rest? What does the author say about this? Answer. “...in a small rural cemetery in one of the remote corners of Russia.” Why did you deliberately alienate your hero from the capital’s centers? Answer. Because here, in crowded conditions, in the bustle, only crazy theories can be born (Raskolnikov), where a person is “spoiled” by his upbringing (Onegin and Pechorin). One can argue about the role of cities, but Russian writers talked about their negative impact on people. -So, far from the bustle, in the depths of Russia, Bazarov now rests. The picture painted by Turgenev contrasts with the life that his hero led. What is the symbol of this life in the final episode? Answer. Sheep that “wander unchallenged through the graves...” Isn’t that how man, a lost sheep, wanders through the world, through life, tramples underfoot the past (the cemetery and the graves on it are the past), plucks trees (a symbol of life, knowledge)? Why do sheep pluck trees and not grass? Answer. Trees are a symbol of life, and leaves are knowledge. Man does not see the only path, the path to God, according to Turgenev, endless life. - The author says that Bazarov’s grave “is not touched by man. Why? Answer. Because “an iron fence surrounds it.” Clueless sheep can’t get to her, they won’t disturb Eugene’s peace. - What does the “iron fence” on the grave mean? Answer. Just as Bazarov lived his short life alone, so now he is alone. - Who goes to Evgeniy’s grave? - And only parents can touch the silent stone, and birds fly in, free, free, not knowing worries and sadness, feeding on what God sent, enjoying every minute of life. - What do the songs of birds mean? Answer. This is romanticism, which Bazarov denied, and part of the living life that defeated this hero.

The ideas of nihilism have no future;

It may be late, but the hero’s insight, awakening: human nature prevails over an erroneous idea;

Bazarov strives not to show his suffering, to console his parents, to prevent them from seeking solace in religion.

The mention of Sitnikov and Kukshina is a confirmation of the absurdity of the ideas of nihilism and its doom;

The life of Nikolai Petrovich and Arkady is an idyll of family happiness, far from public disputes (a variant of the noble path in the future Russia);

The fate of Pavel Petrovich – the result of a life ruined by empty love affairs (without family, without love, far from the Motherland);

Odintsova’s fate is a version of an accomplished life: the heroine marries a man who is one of the future public figures of Russia;

The description of Bazarov’s grave is a declaration of the eternity of nature and life, the temporality of empty social theories that claim eternity, the futility of the human desire to know and change the world, the greatness of nature in comparison with the vanity of human life.

Evgeny Vasilievich Bazarov- the main character of the novel. Initially, the reader only knows about him that he is a medical student who came to the village on vacation. First, Bazarov visits the family of his friend Arkady Kirsanov, then goes with him to the provincial town, where he meets Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, lives for some time in her estate, but after an unsuccessful declaration of love, he is forced to leave and finally ends up in his parents’ house, where I was headed from the very beginning. He doesn’t live long at his parents’ estate; longing drives him away and forces him to repeat the same route again. In the end it turns out that there is no place for him anywhere. Bazarov returns home again and soon dies.

The basis of the hero’s actions and behavior is his commitment to ideas nihilism. Bazarov calls himself a “nihilist” (from the Latin nihil, nothing), i.e. a person who “recognizes nothing, respects nothing, treats everything from a critical point of view, does not bow to any authorities, does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respected this principle may be.” He categorically denies the values ​​of the old world: its aesthetics, social structure, the laws of life of the aristocracy; love, poetry, music, the beauty of nature, family ties, such moral categories as duty, right, obligation. Bazarov acts as a merciless opponent of traditional humanism: in the eyes of the “nihilist,” humanistic culture turns out to be a refuge for the weak and timid, creating beautiful illusions that can serve as their justification. The “nihilist” opposes the humanistic ideals with the truths of natural science, which affirm the cruel logic of life-struggle.

Bazarov is shown outside the circle of like-minded people, outside the sphere of practical affairs. Turgenev speaks of Bazarov’s readiness to act in the spirit of his democratic convictions - that is, to destroy in order to clear a place for those who will build. But the author does not give him the opportunity to act, because, from his point of view, Russia does not yet need such actions.

Bazarov fights against old religious, aesthetic and patriarchal ideas, mercilessly ridicules the romantic deification of nature, art and love. He affirms positive values ​​only in relation to the natural sciences, based on the conviction that man is a “worker” in the workshop of nature. A person appears to Bazarov as a kind of bodily organism and nothing more. According to Bazarov, society is to blame for the moral shortcomings of individual people. With the correct structure of society, all moral diseases will disappear. Art for a hero is a perversion, nonsense.

Bazarov's test of love for Odintsova. Bazarov also considers the spiritual sophistication of love to be “romantic nonsense.” The story about Pavel Petrovich's love for Princess R. is not introduced into the novel as an inserted episode. He is a warning to the arrogant Bazarov

In a love conflict, Bazarov’s beliefs are tested for strength, and it turns out that they are imperfect and cannot be accepted as absolute. Now Bazarov’s soul is split into two halves - on the one hand, we see the denial of the spiritual foundations of love, on the other hand, the ability to love passionately and spiritually. Cynicism is being replaced by a deeper understanding of human relationships. A rationalist who denies the power of true love, Bazarov is overwhelmed by passion for a woman who is alien to him both in social status and in character, so overwhelmed that failure plunges him into a state of depression and melancholy. Rejected, he won a moral victory over a selfish woman from the noble circle. When he sees the complete hopelessness of his love, nothing causes him to make love complaints and requests. He painfully feels the loss, goes to his parents in the hope of being healed of love, but before his death he says goodbye to Odintsova as to the beauty of life itself, calling love the “form” of human existence.

The nihilist Bazarov is capable of truly great and selfless love; he amazes us with its depth and seriousness, passionate intensity, integrity and strength of heartfelt feeling. In a love conflict, he looks like a large, strong personality, capable of real feelings for a woman.

Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is an aristocrat, an Anglomaniac, and liberal. Essentially the same doctrinaire as Bazarov. The very first difficulty - unrequited love - made Pavel Petrovich incapable of anything. A brilliant career and social success are interrupted by tragic love, and then the hero finds a way out in abandoning hopes for happiness and in fulfilling his moral and civic duty. Pavel Petrovich moves to the village, where he tries to help his brother in his economic reforms and advocates for liberal government reforms. Aristocratism, according to the hero, is not a class privilege, but a high social mission of a certain circle of people, a duty to society. An aristocrat must be a natural supporter of freedom and humanity.

Pavel Petrovich appears in the novel as a convinced and honest man. but clearly limited. Turgenev shows that his ideals are hopelessly far from reality, and his life position does not even provide him with peace of mind. In the reader’s mind, the hero remains lonely and unhappy, a man of unfulfilled aspirations and unfulfilled destiny. This to a certain extent brings him closer to Bazarov. Bazarov is the product of the vices of the older generation, his philosophy is the denial of the life attitudes of the “fathers”. Turgenev shows that absolutely nothing can be built on negation, because the essence of life lies in affirmation, not negation.

Duel of Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich. For the insult inflicted on Fenechka, Pavel Petrovich challenged Bazarov to a duel. This is also the conflict point of the work. The duel completed and exhausted his social conflict, for after the duel Bazarov would forever part with both the Kirsanov brothers and Arkady. She, putting Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov in a situation of life and death, thereby revealed not the individual and external, but the essential qualities of both. The true reason for the duel was Fenechka, in whose features Kirsanov Sr. found similarities with his fatal beloved Princess R. and whom he also secretly loved. It is no coincidence that both antagonists have feelings for this young woman. Unable to tear true love out of their hearts, they try to find some kind of surrogate for this feeling. Both heroes are doomed people. Bazarov is destined to die physically. Pavel Petrovich, having settled Nikolai Petrovich’s marriage with Fenechka, also feels like a dead man. The moral death of Pavel Petrovich is the passing of the old, the doom of the obsolete.

Arkady Kirsanov. In Arkady Kirsanov, the unchanging and eternal signs of youth and youth with all the advantages and disadvantages of this age are most openly manifested. Arkady’s “nihilism” is a living play of young forces, a youthful feeling of complete freedom and independence, an ease of attitude towards traditions and authorities. The Kirsanovs are equally far from both the noble aristocracy and the commoners. Turgenev is interested in these heroes not from a political, but from a universal human point of view. The ingenuous souls of Nikolai Petrovich and Arkady maintain simplicity and everyday unpretentiousness in an era of social storms and catastrophes.

Pseudo-nihilists Kukshin and Sitnikov. Bazarov is lonely in the novel; he has no true followers. His imaginary comrades-in-arms cannot be considered as successors to the hero’s work: Arkady, who after his marriage completely forgets about his youthful passion for fashionable freethinking; or Sitnikova and Kukshina - grotesque images, completely devoid of the charm and conviction of the “teacher”.

Kukshina Avdotya Nikitishna is an emancipated landowner, a pseudo-nihilist, cheeky, vulgar, downright stupid. Sitnikov is a pseudo-nihilist, recommended to everyone as Bazarov’s “student”. He tries to demonstrate the same freedom and sharpness of judgment and actions as Bazarov. But the resemblance to the “teacher” turns out to be parodic. Next to the truly new man of his time, Turgenev placed his caricature “double”: Sitnikov’s “nihilism” is understood as a form of overcoming complexes (he is ashamed, for example, of his father, a tax farmer, who makes money by soldering the people, at the same time he is burdened by his human insignificance ).

Bazarov's worldview crisis. Denying art and poetry, neglecting the spiritual life of man, Bazarov falls into one-sidedness, without noticing it. Challenging the “damned barchuks,” the hero goes too far. His denial of “your” art develops into a denial of art in general; the denial of “your” love - into the assertion that love is a “feigned feeling”, explainable only by the physiology of the sexes; denial of sentimental noble love for the people - into contempt for the peasant. Thus, the nihilist breaks with the eternal, enduring values ​​of culture, putting himself in a tragic situation. Failure in love led to a crisis in his worldview. Two mysteries arose before Bazarov: the mystery of his own soul and the mystery of the world around him. The world, which seemed simple and understandable to Bazarov, becomes full of secrets.

So is this theory needed by society and is it necessary to him this type of hero like Bazarov? The dying Eugene tries to reflect on this with bitterness. “Is Russia necessary... no. apparently not needed,” and asks himself the question: “And who is needed?” The answer is unexpectedly simple: a shoemaker, a butcher, a tailor are needed, because each of these invisible people does their job, working for the good of society and without thinking about high goals. Bazarov comes to this understanding of the truth on the threshold of death.

The main conflict in the novel is not the dispute between “fathers” and “children”, but internal conflict As experienced by Bazarov, the demands of living human nature are incompatible with nihilism. Being a strong personality, Bazarov cannot renounce his convictions, but he is also unable to turn away from the demands of nature. The conflict is insoluble, and the hero is aware of this.

Death of Bazarov. Bazarov's beliefs come into tragic conflict with his human essence. He cannot renounce his convictions, but he cannot strangle the awakened person within himself. For him there is no way out of this situation, and that is why he dies. The death of Bazarov is the death of his doctrine. The hero's suffering, his untimely death is a necessary payment for his exclusivity, for his maximalism.

Bazarov dies young, without having time to begin the activity for which he was preparing, without completing his work, alone, without leaving behind children, friends, like-minded people, not understood by the people and distant from them. His enormous strength is wasted in vain. Bazarov's gigantic task remained unfulfilled.

The death of Bazarov revealed the author's political views. Turgenev, a true liberal, a supporter of the gradual, reformist transformation of Russia, an opponent of any revolutionary explosions, did not believe in the prospects of the revolutionary democrats, could not pin high hopes on them, perceived them as a great force, but transitory, believed that they would very soon fade away historical arena and will give way to new social forces - gradualist reformers. Therefore, the democratic revolutionaries, even if they were smart, attractive, honest, like Bazarov, seemed to the writer to be tragic loners, historically doomed.

The dying scene and the scene of Bazarov's death are the most difficult test for the right to be called a man and the most brilliant victory of the hero. “To die as Bazarov died is the same as to accomplish a great feat” (D. I. Pisarev). Such a person who knows how to die calmly and firmly will not retreat in the face of an obstacle and will not cower in the face of danger.

The dying Bazarov is simple and humane, there is no longer any need to hide his feelings, he thinks a lot about himself and his parents. Before his death, he calls Odintsova to tell her with sudden tenderness: “Listen, I didn’t kiss you then... Blow on the dying lamp and let it go out.” The very tone of the last lines, the poetic rhythmic speech, the solemnity of the words, sounding like a requiem, emphasize the author’s loving attitude towards Bazarov, the moral justification of the hero, regret for a wonderful person, the thought of the futility of his struggle and aspirations. Turgenev reconciles his hero with eternal existence. Only nature, which Bazarov wanted to turn into a workshop, and his parents, who gave him life, surround him.

The description of Bazarov’s grave is a statement of the eternity and greatness of nature and life in comparison with the vanity, temporality, futility of social theories, human aspirations to know and change the world, and human mortality. Turgenev is characterized by subtle lyricism, this is especially evident in his descriptions of nature. In landscape, Turgenev continues the traditions of the late Pushkin. For Turgenev, nature as such is important: aesthetic admiration of it.

Critics about the novel.“Did I want to scold Bazarov or praise him? I don’t know that myself, because I don’t know whether I love him or hate him!” “My whole story is directed against the nobility as an advanced class.” “The word “nihilist” I released was used then by many who were only waiting for an opportunity, a pretext to stop the movement that had taken over Russian society...” “I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, evil, honest - and yet doomed to destruction because it still stands on the threshold of the future” (Turgenev). Conclusion. Turgenev shows Bazarov in a contradictory way, but he does not seek to debunk him or destroy him.

In accordance with the vectors of the struggle of social movements in the 60s, points of view on Turgenev’s work were also built. Along with the positive assessments of the novel and the main character in Pisarev’s articles, negative criticism was also heard from the ranks of the democrats.

Position of M.A. Antonovich (article “Asmodeus of our time”). A very harsh position that denies the social significance and artistic value of the novel. In the novel “... there is not a single living person or living soul, but all are only abstract ideas and different directions, personified and called by proper names.” The author is not friendly towards the younger generation and “he gives complete preference to fathers and always tries to elevate them at the expense of the children.” Bazarov, in Antonovich’s opinion, is a glutton, a chatterbox, a cynic, a drunkard, a braggart, a pathetic caricature of youth, and the whole novel is slander against the younger generation.” Dobrolyubov had already died by this time, and Chernyshevsky was arrested, and Antonovich, who primitively understood the principles of “real criticism,” accepted the original author’s plan for the final artistic result.

The liberal and conservative part of society perceived the novel more deeply. Although there were some extreme judgments here too.

Position of M.N. Katkov, editor of the magazine “Russian Herald”.

“How ashamed Turgenev was to lower the flag in front of the radical and salute him as before an honored warrior.” “If Bazarov is not elevated to apotheosis, then one cannot help but admit that he somehow accidentally ended up on a very high pedestal. It really overwhelms everything around it. Everything in front of him is either rags or weak and green. Is this the kind of impression you should have wanted?” Katkov denies nihilism, considering it a social disease that must be fought by strengthening protective conservative principles, but notes that Turgenev puts Bazarov above everyone else.

The novel as assessed by D.I. Pisarev (article “Bazarov”). Pisarev gives the most detailed and thorough analysis of the novel. “Turgenev does not like merciless denial, and yet the personality of the merciless denier emerges as a strong personality and inspires involuntary respect in every reader. Turgenev is prone to idealism, and yet none of the idealists depicted in his novel can compare with Bazarov either in strength of mind or strength of character.”

Pisarev explains the positive meaning of the main character, emphasizes the vital importance of Bazarov; analyzes Bazarov’s relationships with other heroes, determines their attitude towards the camps of “fathers” and “sons”; proves that nihilism got its start precisely on Russian soil; determines the originality of the novel. D. Pisarev’s thoughts about the novel were shared by A. Herzen.

The most artistically adequate interpretation of the novel belongs to F. Dostoevsky and N. Strakhov (Time magazine). Views of F.M. Dostoevsky. Bazarov is a “theorist” who is at odds with “life”, a victim of his dry and abstract theory. This is a hero close to Raskolnikov. Without considering Bazarov's theory, Dostoevsky believes that any abstract, rational theory brings suffering to a person. Theory breaks down in reality. Dostoevsky does not talk about the reasons that give rise to these theories. N. Strakhov noted that I. S. Turgenev “wrote a novel that is neither progressive nor retrograde, but, so to speak, eternal.” The critic saw that the author “stands for the eternal principles of human life,” and Bazarov, who “shuns life,” meanwhile “lives deeply and strongly.”

The point of view of Dostoevsky and Strakhov is fully consistent with the judgments of Turgenev himself in his article “About “Fathers and Sons”,” where Bazarov is called a tragic person.

NOVEL "CRIME AND PUNISHMENT" (1866)

Genre originality. Dostoevsky's novel can be defined as both psychological and philosophical. All plots are depicted realistically, the social and everyday background is clearly indicated, the inner world of the characters and their psychological conflicts are recreated in detail. This polyphonic novel. The principle of “polyphonism” (polyphony) or “dialogue” is that each hero has his own independent inner world.

Issues. Dostoevsky's hero acts as a “man of ideas”; he is defenseless against the power of ideas. The idea is the central object of the author's image. The problem of “restoring a dead person” in the epilogue of the novel.

Controversy of ideas in the novel. Dostoevsky's novel is a “novel of ideas.”

1. Raskolnikov’s ideology is set out in the article “On Crime,” the content of which we learn from Raskolnikov’s dialogue with Porfiry Petrovich. The theory is hard-won, honest, it is merciless and true in its own way. The whole world is criminal, so there is no concept of crime. One class of people - “material”, others are the elite, heroes or geniuses, they lead the crowd, fulfilling a historical necessity. To the question of Porfiry Petrovich, which category he considers himself to be. Raskolnikov doesn’t want to answer. All the events that preceded the murder (a letter from his mother, Sonya’s story, thoughts about “senseless victims”, a conversation between a student and an officer overheard by Raskolnikov about an old money-lender, meetings on the streets) serve as confirmation for Raskolnikov of the correctness of his theory.

2. Svidrigailov's ideology. Svidrigailov preaches extreme individualism. Man is naturally cruel, he is predisposed to commit violence against other people to satisfy his desires. This is Raskolnikov’s ideology, but without the “humanistic” rhetoric (according to Raskolnikov, the mission of the “Napoleons” is to benefit humanity). It should not be forgotten that Svidrigailov’s crimes are reported only in the form of “rumors,” while he himself categorically denies most of them. The reader does not know for sure whether Svidrigailov committed them; this remains a mystery and gives the image of the hero a partly romantic (“demonic”) flavor. On the other hand, Svidrigailov performs almost more specific “good deeds” throughout the entire action of the novel than the other heroes. Thus, the author shows another facet of Svidrigailov’s character, in confirmation of the Christian idea that in any person there is both good and evil, and there is freedom of choice between good and evil.

3. Ideology of Porfiry Petrovich. Investigator Porfiry Petrovich acts as the main ideological antagonist and “provocateur” of Raskolnikov. He tries to refute the theory of the protagonist, but upon careful examination it turns out that Porfiry himself builds his relationship with Raskolnikov precisely according to the principles of this very theory: it is not for nothing that he became so interested in it. Porfiry seeks to psychologically destroy Raskolnikov and achieve complete power over his soul. He calls Raskolnikov his victim. In the novel, he is compared to a spider chasing a fly. Porfiry belongs to the type of “psychologist-provocateur” that is sometimes found in Dostoevsky’s novels.

4. Luzhin's ideology. Luzhin represents the type of “acquirer” in the novel. The sanctimonious bourgeois morality embodied in Luzhin seems misanthropic to Raskolnikov. The meeting with Luzhin in a certain way influences Raskolnikov’s internal psychological process; it gives another impetus to the hero’s metaphysical rebellion: “Should Luzhin live and do abominations, or should Katerina Ivanovna die?”

The ideological and compositional role of the image of Sonya. Sonya is perhaps the only non-ideological hero in the novel. She has no “theories” other than belief in God, but this is precisely faith, not ideology. Sonya never argues with Raskolnikov. Sonya suffers, but does not complain; suicide is impossible for her. At first she impresses Raskolnikov as “holy fool”, “strange”. Many researchers believe that Sonya is the embodiment of the author’s ideal of Christian love, sacrificial suffering and humility. By her example, she shows Raskolnikov the way to restore lost connections with people through the acquisition of faith and love.

Crime and punishment of Raskolnikov. The main character of Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment", a dropout student Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, commits a terrible crime - taking the life of another person - under the influence of theories popular among young people of the 60s of the 19th century. Dostoevsky in his novel depicts the clash of theories with the logic of life. You cannot live your life according to theory.

Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov is a kind person and sensitive to the suffering of other people, a sympathetic, kind person by nature, who painfully perceives the pain of others. Risking his life, he saves children from the flames, shares his meager pennies with the father of a deceased comrade, and gives his last money to the Marmeladov family. This is a gifted and honest young man, endowed with a sharp, inquisitive mind. But he is proud, uncommunicative, lonely, convinced of his exclusivity. His pride is wounded at every step - he hides from the landlady to whom he owes money for the room, eats scraps, appears on the street in rags, causing ridicule. Finding yourself “crushed by poverty” and unable to help loved ones. Raskolnikov is looking for a way out and “gets sick with the idea” of transforming the world and society. Under the low ceiling of a beggar's kennel, a monstrous theory of crime was born in the mind of a hungry man. The world seems imperfect to Raskolnikov, and the hero considers himself capable of correcting it. He dreams of protecting all the weak and disadvantaged, restoring the rights of the humiliated and powerless.

Thinking persistently about the reasons for the unjust structure of society, Raskolnikov creates a theory according to which all humanity is divided into two categories: on ordinary people, who make up the majority and are forced to submit to force (“a trembling creature” is a crowd unable to change its position), and on extraordinary people (such as Napoleon), who are called upon to command the rest, through their efforts the world and progress move . If it is necessary to remove interfering obstacles in order to achieve harmony, then a special person can allow himself to violate the moral law and “step over the corpse, over the blood.” Such people are “permitted to blood according to their conscience”; for them there are special criteria of good and evil. Dividing people into two categories, Raskolnikov classifies the old woman as a “trembling creature” who silently and resignedly accepts any order of things. To the second, “the mighty of this world”, for whom nothing is worth violating any moral norms, he includes not only Napoleon, Mohammed, but also himself. When committing a crime, he wanted to figure out what category of people he belonged to: “..Am I a louse like everyone else, or a human?” “Here’s what: I wanted to become Napoleon, that’s why I killed him,” Raskolnikov admits.

Vina Raskolnikova lies in the fact that he crosses those moral boundaries that a person, if he wants to remain human, cannot cross under any circumstances. Raskolnikov would be easily acquitted if he killed because of poverty. Poverty pushed him to commit a crime, as the hero himself admits. But Dostoevsky clearly showed Raskolnikov’s desire to rise above the crowd. Money is not important to him, the main thing is to prove to yourself that you, like Napoleon and Mohammed, are capable of rising above the crowd by killing. Rodion’s main mistake and guilt is that he forgot the most important thing: no one is given the right to take the life of others. You can’t solve your problems at the expense of others, it’s better to suffer yourself than to make others suffer - that’s the great moral meaning of the novel.

Rodion Raskolnikov is a man who, according to Christian concepts, is deeply sinful. This does not mean the sin of murder, but pride, dislike for people. The sin of murder, according to Dostoevsky, is secondary. Raskolnikov’s crime is ignoring Christian commandments, and a person who, in his pride, managed to transgress, according to religious concepts, is capable of anything. So, according to Dostoevsky, Raskolnikov commits the first, main crime before God, the second - murder - before people.

In the first part In the novel, Raskolnikov tests whether he can cross generally accepted human laws, in particular, whether he is able to step over someone else's life. Life facts would seem to confirm the correctness of his ideas (the fate of the Marmeladov family, the position of his mother and sister, street scenes, etc.). Raskolnikov commits a crime, by chance killing not only the “evil louse” - the old money-lender, but also the innocent Lizaveta, and himself, as he himself will later say.

Second part seems like a disaster. Of all the sensations Raskolnikov experienced after the murder (from animal joy that he didn’t get caught, to despair that he didn’t leave evidence, didn’t he spill the beans?), the most painfully strong, sudden and unexpected was the feeling of “endless solitude and alienation.” He experienced this feeling in the police office, on the Nikolaevsky Bridge, and was especially acute when meeting his mother and sister. Raskolnikov felt that with his crime he had “as if with scissors” cut himself off from everyone and everything. When meeting his family, an unbearable sudden consciousness hit him “like thunder.” He could not hug his mother and Dounia: “his hands did not rise.”

Scary Raskolnikov's dream about a horse being tortured by drunken men. This innocent creature, which he saw in a dream, beaten to death, personified Raskolnikov’s soul, trampled by himself, crippled by his own evil decisions. The mind, divorced from the heart, destroys a person. Waking up from a terrible dream, Raskolnikov felt that he had thrown off the dead burden of criminal fabrications. The dream of the horse only managed to bring Raskolnikov to his senses for a moment.

Raskolnikov’s human nature does not accept alienation from people. It turns out that a person cannot live without communication, the hero’s mental struggle becomes more and more intense. Raskolnikov still believes in the infallibility of his idea and despises himself for his weakness, every now and then calling him a scoundrel. Dostoevsky proves that the theory of “two categories” itself is criminal. This theory is not even a justification for the crime, but the crime itself, because from the very beginning it predetermines who should live and who should not live.

Plot and composition. The compositional relationship of the parts proves the secondary importance of the detective plot (one part is devoted to the commission of a crime, the rest are devoted to the search for truth and the problems of retribution).

First part– preparation and commission of a crime (ratio of parts: six chapters on the development of Raskolnikov’s theory, the last chapter is devoted to the murder itself):

life of a hero; social prerequisites for the emergence of Raskolnikov’s theory; Marmeladov's confession; drunk girl on the boulevard; conversation between student and officer; letter to mother; Raskolnikov's first dream is about killing a horse; commission of a crime: double murder of an old pawnbroker and her sister; the death of the innocent Lizaveta is the first “crack” in Raskolnikov’s theory.

Second part– analysis of the hero’s state after committing a crime, introduction to the main characters:

the hero’s painful state: fear, suspicion. Climax – visiting the office, fainting; acquaintance with the “double” - Luzhin. Luzhin's repulsive theory, elevated to a lifestyle; death of Marmeladov; first meeting with Sonya; the second dream - about beating the landlady - is a reflection of Raskolnikov’s state of mind.

The third part– discussions around Raskolnikov’s theory, its confirmation and refutation:

the story of Raskolnikov's mother and sister about Svidrigailov. The image of the second “double” is a vice elevated to the principle of life; the beginning of an intellectual duel with Porfiry Petrovich; the third dream is a reliving of the murder, the appearance of the victim; extreme strain on Raskolnikov’s mental strength.

Fourth part– meetings and conversations refuting the hero’s theory:

discussions with Svidrigailov (the confrontation between the devilish and divine principles); Luzhin's theory - the theory of the master of life; Sonya and Raskolnikov: closeness of destinies and polarity of worldviews; the significance of the biblical story “The Resurrection of Lazarus” in the evolution of the hero’s views; dialogue-fight with Porfiry Petrovich; Mikolka's confession is the formal release of the hero from suspicion.

Fifth part- life refutes Raskolnikov’s theory:

the tragedy of the situation and the spiritual strength of Sonya; the tragedy of the fate of Katerina Ivanovna and the children; Raskolnikov’s confession to Sonya (his soul could not stand it and is awaiting trial); Sonya is a judge and savior.

Sixth part– the last struggle of a living soul and a dead theory:

meeting with Porfiry Petrovich in Raskolnikov’s apartment. The investigator’s conviction of the suspect’s guilt, the hero’s refusal to confess; suicide of Svidrigailov: a soul given over to hell cannot live; Raskolnikov's confession, lack of repentance.

The meaning of the epilogue- the resurrection of Raskolnikov’s soul, the final victory of the divine over the devilish:

life in hard labor; the fourth dream is the worldwide implementation of the theory; rebirth to a new life, love for Sonya, return to people.

System of images in relation to Raskolnikov’s theory:

images of the humiliated and insulted, confirming the injustice of this world (Marmeladov, Katerina Ivanovna);

Raskolnikov's twin images - in practical life they are guided by the theory of “everything is permitted” (Svidrigailov, Luzhin);

images refuting Raskolnikov’s theory (Dunechka, Razumikhin, Porfiry Petrovich, Sonechka Marmeladova).

The significance of the image of Sonya Marmeladova in the fate of the hero and the conflict of the novel:

the closeness of the fate of Sonya and Raskolnikov (both crossed the line - a murderer and a harlot);

fundamental difference: ideological confrontation (Sonya, having become a prostitute, saved her soul, the basis of her fall is sacrifice; Raskolnikov, having killed the old woman and Lizaveta, “killed himself”, the basis of his crime is pride and spiritual decline);

Sonya's role in Raskolnikov's repentance: her attitude to life, dialogues with Raskolnikov help the hero see the world anew, understand that dividing people into two categories is immoral, criminal, and move the hero towards repentance and repentance.

Means of revealing the image:

portrait: “He was so poorly dressed that another, even a decent person, would be ashamed to go out into the street in such rags during the day”;

a telling first and last name (Rodion - clan and he, Raskolnikov - schism);

actions (helping other people, killing);

description of the hero’s psychological state (Raskolnikov’s illness, the feeling of being “cut off from the whole world,” the illogicality of his actions);

dreams Raskolnikov is a reflection of his inner life;

monologues and dialogues of the hero;

relationships with other characters.

The image of Raskolnikov is a prototype of all kinds of “anti-heroes” and ideas of the 20th century, which proclaimed the idea of ​​​​the opportunity for selected individuals to decide the fate of people and humanity.

  • Absolute value of optical density and chromaticity coordinates

    • It’s a pity for the lost, wasted power...
    I. S. Turgenev

    In 1874, Vasily Grigorievich Perov painted the painting “At a Rural Cemetery.” Anyone who has read Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” will recognize in it the tragic scene of the novel’s finale: “There is a small rural cemetery in one of the remote corners of Russia... An iron fence surrounds the grave; two young fir trees are planted at both ends: Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave... The flowers growing on it serenely look... at us with their innocent eyes... they talk... about the eternal

    Reconciliation and endless life..."

    The picture was painted 12 years after Turgenev’s novel, but it seems that it was inspired by the immediate, fresh impression of reading “Fathers and Sons.” The lonely figures of two old men, frozen at the grave of their son, seem to be copied from Bazarov’s parents - Vasily Ivanovich and Arina Vlasyevna. And the grave in the picture is so similar to the one that Turgenev described!

    Looking at this picture, I can’t help but think about the fate of Yevgeny Bazarov, about his such a short life and death...

    At the end of the novel, Bazarov speaks with pain about the brevity of human existence: “The narrow place that I occupy is so tiny in comparison with the main space... and the part of the time that I manage to live is so insignificant before eternity.” Bazarov has not yet uttered words about “eternal reconciliation,” but they are already felt in “Bazarov’s” melancholy, in his “strange fatigue,” and homelessness. Everything is directed towards one center - the revelation of Bazarov’s melancholy.

    Bazarov suddenly responds to his father’s offer to heal the peasants, to a speech about the “imminent liberation of the peasants.” The long-established critical view of the backward Russian village torments the former “denier.” Bazarov strives, although not without irony, to understand the men, their attitude to the “future of Russia”, to the “new era of history.”

    But to no avail: the men did not recognize him as one of their own.

    Not without reason, it seems that Bazarov is losing faith in the future that he saw. True, his reasoning is still a little, but similar to the speeches of the “maximalist Bazarov”: “... take yourself by the crest and pull yourself out, like a radish from a garden ...” And he pulls himself out of an environment alien to him, first internally disconnects, then leaves for his parents house. He has finally become disillusioned with the “soft” Arcadia; he is looking everywhere for “real people”, but does not find them. Loneliness leads Bazarov to tragic doubts.

    As a result, the hero’s judgment arises, whom they could not forgive for a long time to the author of the novel: “And I hated this last guy, for whom I have to bend over backwards and who won’t even say thank you to me... and why should I thank him?!” Each of Bazarov’s remarks is a bundle of mental suffering: “...Fell under a wheel. The old joke is death, but a new one for everyone... I was... thinking: I’ll screw up a lot of things, I won’t die, no matter what!

    There is a task, because I am a giant! And now the giant’s whole task is to die decently...”

    In the face of death, Bazarov's best qualities appear: courage, tenderness towards his parents, hidden under external severity; poetic love for Odintsova; thirst for life, work, achievement, willpower... D. I. Pisarev considered the scene of Bazarov’s death to be the most powerful in the novel. It seems to most clearly express the author’s attitude towards the hero: admiration for his mental fortitude, sorrowful feelings caused by the death of such a wonderful person.

    In the face of death, the supports that once supported Bazarov's self-confidence turned out to be weak. The dying Bazarov is simple and humane; he atones with death for the one-sidedness of his life program. Bazarov is a man whose destiny embodied all the costs of nihilistic theories.

    As D.I. Pisarev wrote: “Not having the opportunity to show us how Bazarov lives and acts, Turgenev showed how he dies...” This type of person was just taking shape and could only be completed with time. “To die the way Bazarov died is the same as accomplishing a great feat...” Pisarev rightly noted.

    Two great loves consecrate Bazarov’s grave - parental and national. The memory of the deceased Bazarov is, as it were, concentrated in an ever-living, “endless life.” A more refined form of farewell to Bazarov and bequeathing his experience to subsequent generations probably does not exist.

    Bazarov’s reconciliation with life did not come; at the end of the road, calm came, but the rebellious spirit continued to live in Bazarov until his last breath...


    (No Ratings Yet)


    Related posts:

    1. I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” immediately after its publication caused a large number of responses. Dostoevsky and Maikov sent “enthusiastic” letters to Turgenev in Paris, Pisemsky – “critical”, Annenkov – “moderate”. In St. Petersburg, a controversy broke out between the magazines “Russkoe Slovo” and “Sovremennik” around the new novel. The dispute arose over the image of Bazarov. D.I. Pisarev saw in […]...
    2. ONCE AGAIN ABOUT BAZAROV Whether Pisarev understood Turgenev’s Bazarov correctly, I don’t care about that. The important thing is that he recognized himself and his people in Bazarov and added what was missing in the book. The less Pisarev held on to the stocks into which the angry parent tried to pound his stubborn son, the more freely he transferred his ideal to him. This is not a personal ideal, [...]
    3. Russian literature lived for a long time in anticipation of a fundamentally new hero, figure, transformer, and in his novel “Fathers and Sons” I. S. Turgenev created the image of such a “new man” - a revolutionary and democrat. The image of Bazarov is a collective one, because Turgenev wanted to portray a genuine hero of modern times. Because the author honestly tried to understand this type of people and give how […]...
    4. What do I accept in Bazarov and what do I argue with? Bazarov is a holistic person, a role model for many people, but they are only a kind of parody of Bazarov himself. Reading the novel, you understand that you cannot be indifferent to Bazarov: he either delights, or irritates, or both. Bazarov is an ideal in a sense. This is exactly what [...]
    5. The meaning of the title of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” I. “Fathers and Sons” is the first ideological novel in Russian literature, a novel-dialogue about the social prospects of Russia. 1. Turgenev’s artistic and moral insight. 2. “The honor of our literature” (N. G. Chernyshevsky). II. A novel about the triumph of a democrat over aristocrats. 1. The plot of the novel is a chain of clashes between the nihilist Bazarov and the “fathers”. […]...
    6. In the novel “Fathers and Sons,” Bazarov is the main character. Right from the first pages of the novel, the hero attracts me with his appearance and unusual behavior. Tall bazaars. If you look closely at his face, “long and thin, with a wide forehead, a pointed nose at the top, flat at the bottom, large greenish eyes and hanging sand-colored sideburns, which were enlivened by a calm […]...
    7. What is dear to us in Bazarov and what we cannot agree with him on. I. S. Turgenev is one of the most popular writers of his time. Each of his new works, which touched on current issues, caused heated debate; awakened the thought. More than one generation of writers and revolutionary figures was brought up on the works of Turgenev. But none of the works of I. S. Turgenev [...]
    8. An analysis of the episode of Bazarov’s death in Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” cannot be done without an idea of ​​who Bazarov is, what his character is and his attitude towards what surrounds him. Let's start with the fact that Bazarov is the main character of this work. The author describes him as a cynical, self-confident man who denies any principles formed in society. This man is convinced of [...]
    9. The final episode of any work speaks volumes. This is a certain result that the author wanted to convey, and an instruction, a warning, and the author’s own opinion on this matter. Therefore, analysis of the episode when Bazarov is faced with death requires a more detailed study. Let's start with the fact that Bazarov is the main character of the novel “Fathers and Sons”. The work belongs to […]...
    10. Bazarov is undoubtedly a strong, strong-willed personality. He is a real person, one “about whom there is nothing to think, but whom one must obey or hate.” But, at the same time, he is a Russian person, that same, in his own words, a mysterious stranger whom no one, not even himself, will understand. And yet, in my essay I will try to understand it, of course, not […]...
    11. Its plot and composition are organized in accordance with the problematics and ideological and thematic uniqueness of the novel. In its center is the image of Bazarov, which unites the entire artistic canvas of the work. Its significance is obvious: out of the 28 chapters of the novel, it does not appear in only two. The plot, limited to a fairly narrow time frame, develops clearly and dynamically. With the arrival of Arkady and his friend in […]...
    12. Do you agree with the opinion of G. A. Byaly that “Bazarov’s strength in the face of death reaches the proportions of heroism”? When discussing the statement of G. A. Byaly, consider the social, political, philosophical views, and aesthetic views of the main character of the novel “Fathers and Sons.” Show in your reflection the collapse of Bazarov’s nihilistic worldview, who realized that “every person hangs by a thread,” the abyss [...]
    13. I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” reflected the social atmosphere that developed on the eve of the peasant reform of 1861, when a mixed class intelligentsia appeared in Russia. These were people who came from poorer strata of society: doctors, priests, minor officials. This generation of “children” was extremely critical of the experience and social activities of the liberal nobles of the 40s […]...
    14. Turgenev’s novel is based on the social conflict of “fathers and sons”: democratic revolutionaries entering the arena of social struggle in the 50-60s of the 21st century and liberal nobles giving way to them. Bazarov, one of the main characters of the novel, is a representative of the revolutionary democrats. By his social origin, Bazarov is a commoner. He, the grandson of a peasant, the son of a district doctor, speaks with pride; "My grandfather […]...
    15. In the novel “Fathers and Sons” I. S. Turgenev introduces us to the life of E. V. Bazarov, one of the representatives of the new social force emerging in Russia - the raznochinsky intelligentsia. His image is unusual, and therefore, getting to know him, his fate, we discover something new, interesting and entertaining. The image of Bazarov occupies a central place in the novel. WITH […]...
    16. 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 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 […]...
    17. Chapter XVII In this passage we see a description of the feelings that arose between the heroes of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” - Bazarov and Odintsova. This episode of the novel describes Bazarov’s feeling for Odintsova, which tormented and enraged him. We see the emotional experiences of Bazarov, who, having fallen in love with Odintsova, does not find a place for himself, tries to control his feelings, which infuriates and […]...
    18. The novel “Fathers and Sons” was written in the late 50s of the 19th century. At this time, a new type of people began to appear in Russia, nihilistic revolutionaries. But there were very few of them, they did not find understanding and support among the people. Turgenev in the novel clearly painted a portrait of a man of this new, progressive type, a portrait of Bazarov. But Ivan Sergeevich looked into the future, [...]
    19. The novel by I. S. Turgenev was written in 1861, and the action in it takes place from May 1859 to the winter of 1860. It was at this time that the crisis of the serfdom system became most obvious, the dispute between revolutionary democrats and liberals about the ways to save Russia intensified, A new type of progressive public figure, commoner, who “want to fight,” is being formed. Turgenev himself defined the plan this way […]...
    20. From the content of Ivan Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” it becomes clear that if we consider any of its characters “an extra person,” then only its main character, Yevgeny Bazarov. However, one can either agree or deny this statement, because Bazarov was a controversial person. People like him, of course, can be called an extra person, but definitely [...]
    21. How does Bazarov allegorically emphasize the difference between himself and Arkady Kirsanov (based on the novel by I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”)? To construct an argument on the proposed topic, refer to the researchers’ observations of the parallels between representatives of the feathered family and the heroes of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.” Note that Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov is associated with a “large motley chicken”, “a thick gray […]...
    22. “Are their prayers, their tears, fruitless? Isn’t love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent? Oh no! No matter what passionate, sinful, rebellious heart hides in the grave, the flowers growing on it serenely look at us with their innocent eyes: they tell us not only about eternal peace, about that great peace of “indifferent” nature; they also talk about eternal […]...
    23. If you use the word nihilism in a conversation, it will be little clear what a person means by this word. This term has been used since the 12th century, but received a truly new life in the second half of the 19th century in Russia. After the release of the novel “Fathers and Sons,” this word was picked up and all the “advanced” people of that time began to be called that. In […]...
    24. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” shows us a picture of Russian society in the 60s of the 19th century. Society is divided into two large camps – “fathers” and “children”. Mr. Pisarev in his article “Bazarov” considers the main character and the main link of the novel to be the representative of the children’s camp, Evgeniy Bazarov. Around him, according to the critic, the whole action, all the other characters, “revolve”. Of course, with [...]
    25. The image of Bazarov is contradictory and complex, he is torn by doubts, he experiences mental trauma, primarily due to the fact that he rejects the natural beginning. The theory of life of Bazarov, this extremely practical man, physician and nihilist, was very simple. There is no love in life - this is a physiological need, no beauty - this is just a combination of the properties of the body, no poetry - [...]
    26. Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov, the main character of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons,” a commoner by birth and a democrat by political convictions, having appeared in the estate of the Kirsanov brothers, aristocrats and supporters of the liberal nobility, immediately becomes the object of everyone’s attention in the house. The owner of the family nest, Nikolai Petrovich, a friendly and polite nobleman, received Bazarov warmly and cordially: at the meeting [...]
    27. He is honest, truthful and democratic to the end of his nails... If he is called a “nihilist”, then it should be read as a “revolutionary”. I. S. Turgenev The idea of ​​the novel, according to the writer himself, is to show “the triumph of democracy over aristocracy.” Turgenev, who always listened sensitively to new phenomena in social life, reflected in the novel “Fathers and Sons” a typical conflict of the era. He showed the struggle between the “fathers” and [...]
    28. The novel by I. S. Turgenev reflected the struggle between two socio-political camps that had developed in Russia by the 60s of the 19th century. The writer conveyed in the novel a typical conflict of the era and posed a number of topical problems, in particular the question of the character and role of the “new man”, a figure during the revolutionary situation in Europe in the 60s. The spokesman for the ideas of the revolutionary demo-[...]
    29. In 1862, Turgenev wrote the novel “Fathers and Sons,” in the center of which he placed Bazarov, a representative of the revolutionary democratic youth, expressing his attitude towards the hero. Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov caused mixed reviews among readers and critics. Thus, Antonovich emphasized that he saw in the work not a living person, but a caricature, and the most malicious caricature at that. But the critic Pisarev argued the opposite, [...]
    30. Evgeny Bazarov, the main character of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons,” is a man of the new generation, an exponent of the ideas of revolutionary democracy. His views are based on nihilism - the denial of everything. From the very beginning of the dispute, the culmination of ideological disagreements between representatives of the “children” and supporters of the “fathers,” E. Bazarov, who is in a foreign place for him, in a foreign environment of noble liberals, behaves naturally, [...]
    31. Bazarov and Arkady were returning from the governor when they were intercepted by Sitnikov, Bazarov’s “disciple,” and invited to visit Evdoksia Kukshina. The chapter begins, about the essence of which Pisarev spoke like this: “The young man Sitnikov and the young lady Kuk-shina present a superbly executed caricature of a brainless progressive and a Russian-style emancipated woman...” The satire begins from the first lines, already when describing a room that looks like an office. Turgenev uses […]...
    32. Turgenev considered the ability to deeply love to be a measure of a person’s value as an individual. The writer subjected many of his heroes to the test of love. This fate befell Evgeny Bazarov, who denied this feeling. He believed that love is just a physiological need. Poetry, in his opinion, is nonsense, reading Pushkin is a waste of time, playing music is ridiculous, enjoying nature is absurd. […]...
    33. Through the eyes of Bazarov, the author marvels at Kirsanov’s drawings, whose words characterize the godliness of nature, the incompetence of the owner, the ruin, the poverty of men: “the state creaked like an unoiled wheel,” “crackled like homespun furniture from raw wood,” worn out nie, skinned, greased, crooked, thin lahmetta, patches, etc. And one often mocks Mikoli Petrovich’s merciless-liberal-merciless method of “reminding the men” with these very words, bringing them […]...
    34. The Kirsanovs, especially Pavel Petrovich, disliked Bazarov from the first meeting. He didn't like his way of speaking, his clothes, his behavior. There was always a conflict between them, ranging from simple things to social problems. Pavel Petrovich was just waiting to start a dispute with Bazarov and humiliate him with the help of his aristocratic manners, but Bazarov remained the winner in all disputes. […]...
    35. For Turgenev, love was always a test for the hero. Is the hero capable of great, real feeling? Bazarov's love allows us to better understand his inner world. The Bazarov-Odintsov storyline is very important in the novel. Turgenev to some extent departs from his usual narrative style, when the superiority of a generous, capable of deep feelings, brave woman over the hero […]...
    36. Turgenev, as a great Russian artist, captured in the novel “Fathers and Sons” several striking episodes of the ideological struggle between the main social forces in Russia in the late 50s of the 19th century. The writer contrasted, on the one hand, the liberal nobles (Pavel Petrovich, Nikolai Petrovich and Arkady Kirsanov), and on the other, the democrat Yevgeny Bazarov. Through Bazarov’s clash with the liberal “fathers” he gave the reader […]...
    37. I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” is rightfully considered one of the writer’s best works. And not only for the artistic skill with which it was written. Turgenev spent his entire creative life in search of “his” hero. This search is the most important, but also the most difficult in a writer’s work. And we can admit that in the novel “Fathers and Sons” [...]
    38. The novel “Fathers and Sons” recreates the era that preceded the abolition of serfdom. In a climate of crisis, disputes between different generations about the people, the social system, art, religion sharply intensified... The image of Yevgeny Bazarov turned out to be very complex and contradictory, but, of course, very interesting. There is every reason to admire his intelligence, firmness, and ability to defend his ideals and achieve what he wants for as long as he likes. Life […]...
    39. The novel “Fathers and Sons” is about an acute, irreconcilable conflict between aristocrats and democrats, between liberals and commoner revolutionaries. Although I. S. Turgenev did not believe in the prospects of Bazarov’s case, he perfectly understood the superiority of the “children” over the liberal “fathers”. The liberals were class associates of I. S. Turgenev, and he exposed their flabbiness and helplessness with indisputable knowledge of this […]...
    40. Bazarov learns about the existence of Anna Odintsova from Kukshina, an acquaintance of his friend Sitnikov. The first time he sees her is at the governor’s ball, where he came with Arkady. “What kind of figure is this? - he said. “She’s not like other women.” There he meets her. She invites her and Arkady to her place. Visiting […]...
    Looking at V. Perov’s painting “At a Rural Cemetery,” I think about Turgenev’s hero Bazarov and his death

    The article is devoted to the problem of the resurrection of the dead in the religious culture of mankind. A religious view on the issue under consideration is presented.

    Many of the works of the school literature curriculum, re-read in adulthood, are assessed completely differently than in inexperienced youth. And those places in books where the authors in one way or another indicate their religious views are perceived differently. For example, Ivan Turgenev’s famous novel “Fathers and Sons” (1861) ends with the heartfelt words: “There is a small rural cemetery in one of the remote corners of Russia. Like almost all of our cemeteries, it has a sad appearance: the ditches surrounding it have long been overgrown; gray wooden crosses droop and rot under their once painted roofs; the stone slabs are all shifted, as if someone is pushing them from below; two or three plucked trees barely provide scant shade; sheep wander freely through the graves... But between them there is one, which is not touched by man, which is not trampled by animals: only birds sit on it and sing at dawn. An iron fence surrounds it; two young fir trees are planted at both ends: Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave. From a nearby village, two already decrepit old men often come to her - a husband and wife. Supporting each other, they walk with a heavy gait; they will approach the fence, fall down and kneel, and cry long and bitterly, and look long and carefully at the silent stone under which their son lies; they exchange a short word, brush away the dust from the stone and straighten the tree branch, and pray again, and cannot leave this place, from where they seem to be closer to their son, to the memories of him... Are their prayers, their tears, fruitless? Isn’t love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent? Oh no! No matter how passionate, sinful, rebellious the heart may be hidden in the grave, the flowers growing on it serenely look at us with their innocent eyes: they tell us not only about eternal peace, about that great peace of “indifferent” nature; they also talk about eternal reconciliation and endless life..."
    The question of the omnipotence of holy and devoted love, raised by the writer, seems to worry every person in the face of death.
    Dogma of the Resurrection of the Dead; this is the foundation of the Christian faith. The Doctrine of the General Resurrection; the solid teaching of the Holy Scriptures of both the New and Old Testaments. The entire fifth chapter of the Gospel of John in the Bible is devoted to the conversation of the Lord Jesus Christ with the Jews about the most important truths of the faith, of which the message of victory over death is the most important: “Marvel not at this; for the time is coming in which all who are in the tombs will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who have done good will come forth into the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil into the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-30). The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is also presented in the Old Testament. The Prophet of God Job says: “And I know that my Redeemer lives, and on the last day He will raise this decaying skin of mine from the dust, and I will see God in my flesh. I will see Him myself; my eyes, not the eyes of another, will see Him.” (Job 19:25-28). And the prophet Ezekiel was shown a field full of dead bones that were clothed with flesh (Ezek. 37).
    For believers, spring is an obvious reminder of the dogma of the resurrection from the dead. And for Evgeny Bazarov, death was associated with the burdock that grew out of him - nothing more. This explains the grief of the nihilist’s believing parents, crying for his all-denying soul. But Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov, in his article “The Garden in Winter,” wrote in 1843 in the Sergius Hermitage: “If it were possible to find a person who did not know the transformations produced by the changes of the seasons; if you were to bring this wanderer into the garden, majestically resting in the sleep of death during winter, show him the naked trees and tell him about the luxury in which they will be clothed in the spring, then, instead of answering, he would look at you and smile - such an impossible fable would seem your words to him! Likewise, the resurrection of the dead seems incredible to the wise, wandering in the darkness of earthly wisdom, who do not know that God is omnipotent, that His manifold wisdom can be contemplated, but not comprehended by the mind of creatures.” (Brianchaninov, 1993, P.178)
    In Judaism and Islam there is also a doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. Its signs can be found even in pagan cults. There is an opinion that the entire religious culture of Egypt is permeated by the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead; it is with this that the tradition of mummification of bodies that are supposed to be resurrected is connected. For example, Moscow professor Andrei Zubov argues that, if we summarize the Egyptian texts, they talk about victory over death and the bodily resurrection of a deceased person. Burials of the Early Paleolithic era show us graves filled with objects of earthly life and very labor-intensive stone tools to manufacture. Why part with these treasures, so necessary for the living, if there is nothing THERE? The deceased were generously showered with flowers, the pollen of which was found in the graves. These facts are; indirect confirmation of the religiosity of the very first people. And even the very position of their bodies - in the fetal position - suggests the thought: just as a person comes out of his mother’s womb, so he must come out of the womb of the earth in due time. This is what Novosibirsk professor Pavel Volkov thinks (Volkov, 2003, p. 165).
    However, modern humanity drives the thought of death far away from itself. It seems as if people don’t even think about dying. Just a few decades ago, the coffins of especially respected people were carried throughout the city during funerals. Now we see only closed hearses. An entire funeral industry has been created: the dead are dressed up beautifully, they wear copious amounts of cosmetics... A full range of funeral services is provided, as long as the living see less of the dead. And if they came into contact with them, it was for a very short time. For what? After all, it reminds us of death! The very practice of cremating the dead, of course, can be justified by a shortage of land. In Moscow, for example, the cost of burying the deceased in the city cemetery is already approaching the cost of an apartment. But the territory of Russia is still the largest in the world. Why destroy bodies?...
    Traditionally, Christians, Jews and Muslims try to bury their dead, as they see the basis of the tradition in the words spoken by God to Adam: “By the sweat of your face you will eat bread, until you return to the ground from which you were taken, for dust you are.” dust you will return." (Gen.3:19). In the legislation of many countries around the world, desecration of a burial is considered a criminal offense; trampling someone else’s grave underfoot is perceived as a great insult to the relatives of the deceased. Why is this so if there is nothing after death? In this feeling of protest we can see a deeply living faith in the resurrection of the dead. And Orthodox graves are decorated with the cross of Christ, because after Calvary comes Easter, and after the death of our loved ones, we believe in their resurrection on the day of judgment, when the cross appears from the edge of heaven to the edge.
    Thus, the last line of the novel by I.S. Turgenev is an obvious reminder of the words that are heard during the burial of the dead. They were well known to the writer’s Orthodox contemporaries and were forgotten in the 21st century. Over the coffin it is sung: “With the saints, rest, O Christ, the soul of your departed servant... where there is no sickness, no sorrow, no sighing, but endless life.” Death is defeated by the victory of Christ's Resurrection. God's love is omnipotent, because God is love.

    Literature:
    Turgenev I.S. Fathers and Sons. M., Astrel, 2005 - 240 p.
    Ignatius (Brianchaninov), saint. Ascetic experiences. Volume 1. Garden during winter. M., Orthodox publishing house, 1993 – 572 p.
    Volkov P.V. Descendants of Adam. - M.-SPb.-Novosibirsk: Society of St. Basil the Great, Orthodox Gymnasium in the name of St. Sergius of Radonezh, 2003.- 207.
    Zubov A.B. Lectures on the history of religions, given in Yekaterinburg. M.: Nikea, 2009. - 144 p.

    The novel “Fathers and Sons” by I.S. Turgenev ends with the death of the main character. Understanding the reasons why the author completes his work in this way is possible through an analysis of the episode “Bazarov’s death.” “Fathers and Sons” is a novel in which the death of the main character is certainly not accidental. Perhaps such an ending speaks to the inconsistency of this character’s beliefs. So, let's try to figure it out.

    Who is Bazarov?

    Analysis of the episode of Bazarov's death is impossible without understanding what this character is like. Thanks to what is told about Eugene in the novel, we imagine an intelligent, self-confident, cynical young man who denies generally accepted moral principles and ideals. He considers love to be “physiology”; in his opinion, a person should not depend on anyone.

    Subsequently, however, Turgenev reveals to us in his hero such qualities as sensitivity, kindness, and the ability for deep feelings.

    Bazarov is a nihilist, that is, a person who denies all generally accepted values, including that he does not share the enthusiasm of amateurs. In his opinion, only that which brings practical benefit is significant. He considers everything beautiful to be meaningless. Evgeniy’s main meaning is “work for the benefit of society.” His task is “to live for the great purpose of renewing the world.”

    Attitude towards others

    An analysis of the episode of Bazarov’s death in Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” cannot be carried out without understanding how the main character’s relationships with the people who made up his social circle were built. It should be noted that Bazarov treated others with contempt; he put others lower than himself. This was manifested, for example, in the things he told Arkady about himself and his relatives. Affection, sympathy, tenderness - Evgeniy considers all these feelings unacceptable.

    Lyubov Bazarova

    Analysis of the episode of Bazarov's death requires mentioning that for all his disdain for sublime feelings, he, ironically, falls in love. His love is unusually deep, as evidenced by his explanation with Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. Realizing that he is capable of such a feeling, Bazarov ceases to treat it as physiology. He begins to consider the existence of love possible. Such a change of views could not pass without a trace for Eugene, who lived by the ideas of nihilism. His old life is destroyed.

    Bazarov's declaration of love is not just words, it is an admission of his own defeat. Eugene's nihilistic theories are shattered.

    Turgenev considers it inappropriate to end the novel with a change in the views of the main character, but decides to end the work with his death.

    Is Bazarov's death an accident?

    So, in the finale of the novel, the main event is the death of Bazarov. Analysis of the episode requires remembering the reason why, according to the text of the work, the main character dies.

    His life becomes impossible due to an unfortunate accident - a small cut that Bazarov received during the autopsy of the body of a peasant who died of typhus. Ironically, he, a doctor doing a useful job, cannot do anything to save his life. Knowing that he would die gave the protagonist time to evaluate his achievements. Bazarov, knowing about the inevitability of his death, is calm and strong, although, of course, being a young and energetic man, he regrets that he has so little time left to live.

    Bazarov's attitude towards death and himself

    Analysis of the episode of Bazarov's death is impossible without a deeper understanding of how the hero relates to the proximity of his end and death in general.

    No person can calmly realize that the end of his life is approaching. Evgeniy, being a person who is certainly strong and self-confident, is no exception. He regrets that he did not complete his main task. He understands the power of death and speaks of the approaching final minutes with bitter irony: “Yes, go ahead, try to deny death. It denies you, and that’s it!”

    So, Bazarov’s death is approaching. Analysis of the episode, which is one of the key ones in the novel, requires an understanding of how the character of the main character has changed. Evgeniy becomes kinder and more sentimental. He wants to meet his beloved, once again tell about his feelings. Bazarov treats his parents more gently than before, now understanding their importance.

    Analysis of the episode of Bazarov's death shows how lonely the main character of the work is. He does not have a close person to whom he could convey his beliefs, therefore, his views have no future.

    Understanding True Values

    In the face of death they change. There comes an understanding of what is really important in life.

    Analysis of the episode “Bazarov’s death” based on the novel by I. S. Turgenev requires an understanding of what values ​​the main character now considers true.

    The most important thing for him now is his parents, their love for him, as well as his feelings for Odintsova. He wants to say goodbye to her, and Anna, not afraid of becoming infected, comes to Evgeniy. Bazarov shares his innermost thoughts with her. He comes to the understanding that Russia does not need him at all, she needs those who do ordinary work every day.

    It is harder for Bazarov to come to terms with his death than for any other person, because he is an atheist and does not believe in life after death.

    Turgenev ends his novel with the death of Bazarov. The principles by which the hero lived are destroyed. Bazarov did not have stronger, new ideals. Turgenev notes that the main character was ruined by his deep commitment to nihilism, which forced him to abandon the universal values ​​that allow him to live in this world.



    Related publications: