Biography of Stolz. Essay “Characteristics of the image of Andrei Ivanovich Stolz
Work:
Stolts Andrey Ivanovich is a friend of Oblomov, a business man.
Sh. received a unique upbringing. The Russian mother wanted to see him as a well-mannered, noble, romantic young man. The father raised his son as strong man able to stand up for himself and cope with all difficulties.
From this combination, Sh.’s character was formed: “Suddenly, out of his father’s 40 thousand, he made 300 thousand capital, and in the service he became a servant, and a scientist... now he’s still traveling!” - this is how Tarantiev, who does not love him, speaks of Sh.
Indeed, Sh. is very active person, the complete opposite of Oblomov. Sh. is independent, independent, self-confident. It seems that he manages to do everything: earn money, keep abreast of all the news, do charity work. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse.”
But despite everything positive traits, Sh. very much lacks spiritual softness, warmth, and subtlety of nature. “The dream, the enigmatic, the mysterious had no place in his soul... He had no idols...”
It is symbolic that the hero is half-German by origin. Hence all his pedantry, some callousness, mechanicalness: “above all else he put persistence in achieving the goal” by any means.
Sh. introduces Oblomov to Olga Ilyinskaya with the best intentions in order to awaken activity in his friend. When their relationship falls apart, Sh. himself marries Olga, perceiving her not only as his beloved woman, but also as his student. On it, Sh. tests his philosophical and life theories. But even he is not able to fully understand Olga’s aspirations for a different life, full of exploits and stormy excitement. He tells her: “You and I are not Titans... let us bow our heads and humbly endure Hard time, and again then life will smile...” Sh. comes to terms with Oblomov’s life after several unsuccessful attempts to help his friend change. The only thing he can do is to take in his son and put things in order in Oblomovka in order to ensure the future of Oblomov, the youngest.
In the first chapters of the second part of the story, we learn a lot about Stolz’s childhood and upbringing. His mother was Russian, his father was German. He professed the Orthodox faith and his native language was Russian. His unusual character was brought up in him by a tough, demanding father and a kind, gentle mother towards Stolz. From Stolz the elder he receives a “practical education”, and from his mother the love of art, which she so diligently invested in him. Thanks to all these qualities, such as love for work, independence, perseverance in goals and German habits, Stolz achieves a lot in adult life. In St. Petersburg he “served, retired...”, made himself a house and money, as he promised his father. Traveled a lot around the world, studied Russia and Europe.
Stolz was afraid to dream; his happiness lay in constancy. He became an ideal in Oblomov, everything about him was perfect. Stolz is the absolute opposite of the lazy, boring, worthless Oblomov. This is absolutely different people, living their own lives.
STOLTZ - central character novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov” (1848-1859). Literary sources images of Sh. - Gogol's Konstanjonglo and the merchant Murazov (second volume " Dead souls"), Pyotr Aduev (" An ordinary story"). Later, Sh. Goncharov developed the type in the image of Tushin (“Cliff”).
Sh. is the antipode of Oblomov, a positive type of practical figure. In the image of Sh., according to Goncharov’s plan, such opposite qualities, as, on the one hand, sobriety, prudence, efficiency, knowledge of people, a practical materialist; on the other hand, spiritual subtlety, aesthetic sensitivity, high spiritual aspirations, poetry. The image of Sh. is thus created by these two mutually exclusive elements: the first comes from his father, a pedantic, stern, rude German (“his father put him on a spring cart, gave him the reins and ordered him to be taken to the factory, then to the fields, then to the city , to merchants, to public places"); the second - from her mother, a Russian, poetic and sentimental nature (“she rushed to cut Andryusha’s nails, curl his curls, sew graceful collars and shirtfronts, sang to him about flowers, dreamed of a high role with him about the poetry of life...”). The mother was afraid that Sh., under the influence of his father, would become a rude burgher, but Sh.’s Russian entourage prevented him (“Oblomovka was nearby: there is an eternal holiday!”), as well as the princely castle in Verkhlev with portraits of pampered and proud nobles “in brocade, velvet and lace." “On one side is Oblomovka, on the other there is a princely castle, with a wide expanse lordly life, met with the German element, and Andrei did not turn out to be a good bursh, or even a philistine.”
Sh., in contrast to Oblomov, makes his own way in life. No wonder Sh. comes from bourgeois class(his father left Germany, wandered around Switzerland and settled in Russia, becoming the manager of the estate). Sh. graduates from the university with flying colors, successfully serves, retires to take care of his own business; makes a house and money. He is a member of a trading company that ships goods abroad; as an agent of the company, Sh. travels to Belgium, England, and throughout Russia. Sh.'s image is built on the basis of the idea of balance, harmonious correspondence between the physical and spiritual, mind and feeling, suffering and pleasure. The ideal of Sh. is measure and harmony in work, life, rest, love. The portrait of Sh. contrasts with the portrait of Oblomov: “He is entirely made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin, he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, bone and muscle, but no sign of fatty roundness...” Sh.’s ideal of life is constant and meaningful work, this is “the image, content, element and purpose of life.” Sh. defends this ideal in a dispute with Oblomov, calling the latter’s utopian ideal “Oblomovism” and considering it harmful in all spheres of life.
Unlike Oblomov, Sh. stands the test of love. It meets the ideal of Olga Ilyinskaya: Sh. combines masculinity, fidelity, moral purity, universal knowledge and practical acumen, allowing him to emerge victorious in all life trials. Sh. marries Olga Ilyinskaya, and Goncharov tries to represent ideal family, a true ideal that fails in Oblomov’s life: “they worked together, had lunch, went to the fields, played music as Oblomov also dreamed of... Only there was no drowsiness, no despondency in them, they spent their days without boredom and without apathy; there was no sluggish look, no words; their conversation never ended, it was often heated.” In his friendship with Oblomov, Sh. also rose to the occasion: he replaced the rogue manager, destroyed the machinations of Tarantiev and Mukhoyarov, who deceived Oblomov into signing a false loan letter.
The image of Sh., according to Goncharov, was supposed to embody a new positive type of Russian progressive figure (“How many Stoltsevs should appear under Russian names!”), combining both the best Westernizing tendencies and Russian breadth, scope, and spiritual depth. Type Sh. was supposed to turn Russia onto the path European civilization, to give it due dignity and weight among the European powers. Finally, Sh.’s efficiency does not conflict with morality; the latter, on the contrary, complements efficiency, gives it inner power and strength.
Contrary to Goncharov's plan, utopian features are noticeable in Sh.'s image. The rationality and rationalism inherent in the image of Sh. is detrimental to artistry. Goncharov himself was not entirely satisfied with the image, believing that Sh. was “weak, pale”, that “the idea is too bare from him.” Chekhov expressed himself more harshly: “Stolz does not inspire me with any confidence. The author says that he is a magnificent fellow, but I don’t believe him. This is a spirited beast who thinks very well of herself and is pleased with herself. It’s half composed, three-quarters stilted” (letter 1889). The failure of Sh.'s image may be explained by the fact that Sh. is not artistically shown in the large-scale activity in which he is successfully engaged.
Who is Stolz? Goncharov does not force the reader to puzzle over this question. In the first two chapters of the second part there is detailed story about the life of Stolz, about the conditions in which his active character was formed. “Stolz was only half German, on his father’s side; his mother was Russian; He professed the Orthodox faith, his native speech was Russian...” Goncharov first tries to show that Stolz is more Russian than German: after all, the most important thing is that his faith and language are the same as those of the Russians. But the further he goes, the more the qualities of a German begin to emerge in him: independence, perseverance in achieving his goals, frugality.
Stolz's unique character was formed under the influence of two forces - soft and hard, at the junction of two cultures - Russian and German. From his father he received a “labor, practical upbringing,” and his mother introduced him to beauty and tried to put it into his soul little Andrey love of art and beauty. His mother “seemed the ideal of a gentleman in her son,” and his father accustomed him to hard, not at all lordly, work.
Practical intelligence, love of life, and courage helped Stolz achieve success after he left at the insistence of his father to study in St. Petersburg...
According to Goncharov, Stolz - new type Russian progressive figure. However, he does not depict the hero in a specific activity. The author only informs the reader about what Stolz has been and what he has achieved. He “served, retired... went about his business,... made a house and money,... learned Europe as his estate,... saw Russia up and down,... travels into the world.”
If we talk about Stolz’s ideological position, he “sought for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit.” Stolz could control his feelings and was “afraid of every dream.” Happiness for him lay in consistency. According to Goncharov, he “knew the value of rare and expensive properties and spent them so sparingly that he was called an egoist, insensitive...”. In a word, Goncharov created the kind of hero that Russia has long lacked. For the author, Stolz is the force that is capable of reviving Oblomovism and destroying Oblomovism. In my opinion, Goncharov somewhat idealizes the image of Stolz, setting him up as an example to the reader as an impeccable person. But by the end of the novel it turns out that salvation did not come to Russia with the advent of Stolz. Dobrolyubov explains this by saying that “now there is no soil for them” in Russian society. For more productive activity the Stolts need to reach some compromise with the Oblomovs. This is why Andrei Stolts takes Ilya Ilyich’s son into custody.
Stolz is certainly the antipode of Oblomov. Every character trait of the first is a sharp protest against the qualities of the second. Stolz loves life - Oblomov often falls into apathy; Stolz has a thirst for activity, for Oblomov best activity- rest on the sofa. The origins of this opposition are in the education of heroes. Reading the description of the life of little Andrei, you involuntarily compare it with the life of Ilyusha. Thus, already at the very beginning of the novel, two absolutely different characters, two life path…
Actions, deeds
Stolz was German only on his father's side, his mother was Russian. He spoke Russian and professed the Orthodox faith. He learned Russian from his mother, from books, and in games with village boys. German he knew from his father and from books. Andrei Stolts grew up and was brought up in the village of Verkhleve, where his father was a manager.At the age of eight, he was already reading the works of German authors, biblical verses, learning Krylov’s fables and reading sacred history.
In free time from studyhe ran off with the boys to destroy birds' nests. It happened more than once that courtyard people brought Andrei home without boots, with a torn dress and a broken nose.
When he grew up,his father began to take him with him to the factory, then to the fields, and from the age of fourteen Andrei went to the city alone on errands for his father.Mother did not like this upbringing. She was afraid that her son would turn into the same German burgher that his father came from. In her son, she saw the ideal of a master - “a white, beautifully built boy..., with a clean face, with a clear and lively look...” Therefore, every time,when Andrei returned from factories and fields in dirty clothes and with a ravenous appetite, she rushed to wash him, change his clothes, told him about the poetry of life, sang about flowers, taught him to listen to the sounds of music.
Andrey studied well, andhis father made him a tutor in his small boarding house and, in a completely German manner, gave him a salary of ten rubles a month.
When Andrei graduated from the university and lived at home for three months, his father said that “he had nothing more to do in Verkhlev, that even Oblomov had been sent to St. Petersburg, that, therefore, it was time for him too.” The mother was no longer in the world, and there was no one to object to the father’s decision. On the day of departure, Stolz gave his son one hundred rubles.
– You will ride to provincial town, - he said. “There, receive three hundred and fifty rubles from Kalinnikov, and leave the horse with him.” If he is not there, sell the horse; There's a fair there soon:they will give you four hundred rublesand not for the hunter.It will cost you forty rubles to get to Moscow, and from there to St. Petersburg – seventy-five; enough will remain. Then - as you wish.You did business with me, so you know that I have some capital; but don’t count on him before my deathYou are well educated: all careers are open to you; you can serve, trade, even write,perhaps - I don’t know what you will choose, what you feel more eager for...
– “Yes, I’ll see if it’s possible for everyone,” Andrey said.
The father laughed with all his might and began to pat his son on the shoulder so hard that even a horse could not stand it. Andrey nothing.
– Well, if you don’t have the skill, you won’t be able to find your way on your own, you’ll need advice, ask - go to Reingold: he’ll teach you. He has a four-story house. I'll tell you the address...
– “Don’t, don’t talk,” Andrei objected, “I’ll go to him whenI will have a four-story house, but now I can do without it...
Again a tap on the shoulder.
Andrey jumped onto his horse. Two bags were tied to the saddle: in one there was an oilskin raincoat and thick, nailed boots and several shirts from Verkhlevsky linen were visible - things bought and taken at the insistence of the father; in the other lay an elegant tailcoat of fine cloth, a shaggy coat, a dozen thin shirts and boots, ordered in Moscow, in memory of his mother’s instructions...
Father and son looked at each other in silence, “as if they had pierced each other through", and said goodbye. The neighbors crowded nearby were surprised and indignantly discussing such a farewell; one woman could not stand it and began to cry: “Father, you little light! Poor little orphan! You don’t have a dear mother, there’s no one to bless you... At least let me rebaptize you, my handsome man!..” Andrei jumped off his horse, hugged the old woman, and then wanted to rideand suddenly began to cry - he heard his mother’s voice in her words.He hugged the woman tightly, jumped onto his horse and disappeared into the dust.
“He served, retired, went about his business and actually made a house and money” - he participated in some company that sent goods abroad.
Heconstantly on the move:If society needs to send an agent to Belgium or England, they send him; need to write some project or adapt new idea to the point - they choose him. Meanwhile, he goes out into the world and reads: when he has time, God knows.
He had no unnecessary movements.If he was sitting, he sat quietly, but if he acted, he used as many facial expressions as necessary...
He walked firmly, cheerfully;lived on a budget, trying to spend every day, like every ruble...It seems that he controlled both sorrows and joys, like hand movement, like the steps of your feet or how you dealt with bad and good weather...
Simple, that is a direct, real view of life - that was his constant task...
Hestubbornly walked along the chosen road, and no one saw him painfully thinking about anything or hurting his soul.For everything that he did not encounter, he found the right solution, andin achieving the goal he put persistence above all else. Myselfhe walked towards his goal, “bravely stepping over all obstacles,” and could abandon it only if a wall appeared ahead or an abyss opened up.
Stolts Andrei Ivanovich is one of the main characters, a friend of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, the son of Ivan Bogdanovich Stolts, a Russified German who manages an estate in the village of Verkhlev, which is five miles from Oblomovka. “Stolz was only half German, but to his father: his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith; his natural speech was Russian: he learned it from his mother and from books, in the university classroom and in games with village boys, in discussions with their fathers and in the Moscow bazaars. He inherited the German language from his father and from books."
Stolz received a specific education: “From the age of eight he sat with his father for geographical map, sorted through the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of the peasants, townspeople and factory workers, and with his mother he read sacred history, learned the fables of Krylov, sorted through the warehouses of Telemachus. "Upbringing, like education, was dual: dreaming of so that the son grows up to be “kind”! bursh", the father in every possible way encouraged boyish fights, without which the son could not do a day, the disappearance of the child for half a day or more for unknown purposes in unknown places. If Andrei appeared without a lesson prepared “by heart”, Ivan Bogdanovich sent his son back to where he came from , - and every time young Stolz returned with the lessons he had learned. Stolz’s mother, on the contrary, tried to educate a true gentleman, a decent, clean boy with curled curls - “in her son she saw the ideal of a gentleman, although an upstart, from a black body, from a burgher’s father, but still the son of a Russian noblewoman.” From this bizarre combination, the character of Andrei was formed, about whom not only the characters in the novel speak a lot and in different ways - a book has been written about him whole literature. Goncharov himself wrote in the article “Better late than never”: “...I silently listened to the reproaches then, completely agreeing that the image was pale, not real, not alive, but just an idea.” N.A. Dobrolyubov saw in the image of Stolz a type of bourgeois businessman-entrepreneur, focused only on the organization of personal happiness and well-being: “... how could Stolz in his activities calm down from all the aspirations and needs that overwhelmed even Oblomov, how could he be satisfied your position, to calm down in your lonely, separate, exceptional happiness..." ("What is Oblomovism?")
There was a lot of controversy about Stolz: soon after the release of the novel, he was assessed by critics and Goncharov’s contemporaries as an almost certainly positive figure, designed to awaken the sleepy kingdom of the Oblomovs and call on its inhabitants to useful activities. What was confusing was that it was not a Russian, but a German who was chosen as the hero. Stolz's "foreignness" causes rejection of his personality by some characters in the novel, in particular Tarantiev, who speaks of him with open hostility not only because Stolz debunks his machinations. “Good boy! Suddenly, out of his father’s forty thousand, he made three hundred thousand in capital, and in the service he became a servant, and the scientist... now he’s still traveling! The arrow has ripened everywhere! Would a real good Russian person begin to do everything? A Russian person will choose one thing, and even then slowly, little by little, somehow, otherwise, come on! It’s unclean! I would put such people on trial!”
Oblomov perceives his friend differently:
- New!
For all its stunning success, the play “Woe from Wit” did not fit into the usual ideas of comedy so much that even experienced writers misunderstood the originality of its concept, mistaking Griboyedov’s artistic discoveries for shortcomings in skill....
The image of Stolz was conceived by Goncharov as an antipode to the image of Oblomov. In the image of this hero, the writer wanted to present an integral, active, active person, to embody the new Russian type. However, Goncharov’s plan was not entirely successful, and, above all, because...
Ilya Ilyich Oblomov - main character Romana is a Russian landowner living in St. Petersburg on income received from a serf estate. “He was a man about thirty-two or three years old, of average height, pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence...
Oblomov’s image consists of two parts. There is Oblomov, “moldy, almost disgusting,” “a greasy, awkward piece of meat.” There is Oblomov, in love with Olga, Oblomov, who is “deeply touching and sympathetic in his sad comedy.” Between these Oblomovs...
In Goncharov, Stolz is fraught with a certain mystery. Our perception is apparently hampered by the fact that Oblomov and Stolz are not equivalent, so to speak, from the point of view of artistic fullness and persuasiveness. As soon as the novel starts talking about Stolz, a tongue twister appears. In a number of cases, Goncharov does not show Stolz, but talks about him. The image of Oblomov is given in self-development, and Stolz was completely in the power of the author. By the way, Goncharov himself later admitted that Stolz was “weak, pale - the idea is too bare of an idea.”
This is largely explained by the peculiarities of the writer’s talent. Goncharov argued that literature is called upon to depict, first of all, what has already been established, established, and clearly identified in life. But Stolz and others like him were just appearing in Russian reality; their life positions, their role in the development of Russian society was not yet clear. Hence, there is some uncertainty about the image of Stolz in the novel.
Stolz's aesthetic inferiority can lead to rejection of this hero or to a distorted perception of him. Meanwhile, it would be nice to show objectivity and take a closer look at it. We must not forget that the narration in the novel is to some extent conducted on behalf of Stolz. “Write it down: maybe it will be useful to someone,” Stolz says to the author at the end of the novel. “And he told him what was written here.”
It is Stolz who delivers a speech of praise to Oblomov, so enthusiastic that it is not even clear which Oblomov the novel was written about? "This is crystal, transparent soul; there are few such people; they are rare; these are pearls in the crowd!.. I knew many people from high qualities, but I have never met a heart purer, brighter and simpler...” - etc. Stolz alone understands what Oblomov is, is able to protect and appreciate him. “Reach out your hand to the man,” and that’s what he does. This is his purpose in the novel. To him, Stolz, the author entrusts some of his thoughts about Oblomov, ideas, views. For example: “It started with the inability to put on stockings, and ended with the inability to live.”
Who is Andrei Stolts? Businessman, pragmatist, rationalist. He destroys the old Oblomovka and actively creates his own, new one. When telling the story of Stolz, the author never strays into irony. But doesn’t Stolz’s “positivity” arouse some kind of suspicion in you? Stolz succeeds in everything! In Russia! In the pre-reform 50s! Is this possible? And in this regard, we will make a small digression.
Russian writers were not successful in portraying capitalists! So Goncharov wanted to create a positive Stolz - and it didn’t work out! And others did not even think of seeing some kind of creative principle in the representatives of the bourgeoisie. The destructive was seen, but the creative was not. Meanwhile, Russia became at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. one of the industrial developed countries peace. Who did this? In any case, not the Oblomovs.
In the western literary tradition we see something completely different. Balzac, partly Dickens, in the 20th century. Dreiser, without any disgust, described the joy and pleasure of getting rich, even a certain poetry of the stock exchange game... There was nothing like this in Russian literature.
Let us return, however, to the novel. Material from the site
Having learned sad story about the life of Ilya Ilyich, don’t you want to exclaim: Oblomov, become Stolz! Or in other words: if only we could add Stoltz’s practical rationalism to Oblomov’s sincerity and Stoltsev’s efficiency, to Oblomov’s sincerity and naivety... But nothing will come of it! Oblomov will not become Stolz, and not only because of his deep aversion to any action. Firstly, Oblomov considers his lifestyle completely normal. And secondly, isn’t all of Stolz’s activity also a “product of peace,” also a desire for the “lost paradise”?
Take a closer look at how persistently the writer notes in Stolz the so-called “natural” desire to live through the four seasons during his life, how Stolz himself builds a modernized Oblomovka together with Olga! This is what is written in the novel: “They got up, although not at dawn, but early; they loved to sit for a long time over tea, sometimes they even seemed to be lazily silent, then they went to their own corners or worked together, had lunch, went to the fields, played music...” Like everyone else, as Oblomov also dreamed... Isn’t it revealed some identity of the essential content of Oblomov and Stolz?
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page there is material on the following topics:
- Oblomov on the Vyborg side
- essays on Oblomov began with inability
- Goncharov's stolz
- Stolz's life story briefly
- tongue twister about I.A. Goncharova
