Plyushkin in Gogol's poem dead souls. Relationships with people

Gogol calls his character a hole in all of humanity, and having become acquainted with the image of Plyushkin, the reader understands this characteristic. The landowner, his philosophy, lifestyle, moral portrait cannot leave a person indifferent. Everything about him outrages him - his refusal to care for his children, his narrow-mindedness, his moral ugliness, his vulgar, humiliating habits.

Appearance

We first meet Plyushkin when he quarrels with the driver in the yard own home. Chichikov takes this man for a “woman”, only an old housekeeper can look like that. After learning that the creature in long, holey, greasy clothes is the owner of the estate, Chichikov freezes for a while, trying to come to his senses and find the right tone. The landowner lost his human appearance, lost the remnants of his male appearance - the “dress” that peeked out from under his outer robe was clearly female, some piece of clothing was wrapped around his neck, and a cap was on his head.

Gogol describes the eyes of our character in an extremely allegorical way: they were like two mice visible from under the eyebrows, watching the interlocutor vigilantly and incessantly. In a painful struggle with everyone around him, Plyushkin got used to not relaxing for a second: servants, neighbors, guests - everyone, in his opinion, was trying to steal something, “steal”, rob the owner’s yard. It was this conviction that made his gaze unpleasantly suspicious and repulsive. Greed for himself affected the figure, appearance, and health of the landowner: a thin, even dry, stooped, unkempt, toothless old man who had gone to an unhealthy extreme in his frugality. He does not evoke pity, only disgust and understanding of boundless human stupidity, terrifying madness.

Life and habits

Plyushkin is not famous for his hospitality; it is extremely important for him that the guest leaves the house as soon as possible. Having huge reserves of food, fabrics, leather, furs, dishes and much more, the landowner brings his house to the extreme degree of desolation, degrades himself and forces his peasants to vegetate in poverty. He is a master of abuse, slander and deception. Every day humiliating his servants with suspicions of theft and embezzlement, he humiliates himself and emphasizes his own tyranny and stupidity.

The character’s speech and mannerisms indicate his reluctance to put up with the presence of other people in his environment; perhaps complete recluse would be a salvation for this type. The difficult disposition and the impossibility of living with such a master is confirmed by the fact that Plyushkin’s peasants not only die like flies, but also run away from the landowner.

He sold more than seventy runaway souls (in addition to the dead) to Chichikov. Even the skilled swindler and chameleon Pavel Ivanovich cannot find the necessary manner of communication, since in front of him is a man who is clearly degraded (if he met him at the church, he would definitely give alms to such a creature), with a sharp, absurd character. What was the cost of Plyushkin’s offer to treat the guest to stale gingerbread or an old tincture in which insects swam. The picture is completed by the landowner’s disgusting habit of collecting all sorts of garbage and things forgotten by the peasants around the village. “The fisherman went hunting” - this is what they said in the village when he moved along the street in search of “profit”.

This quote suggests that the peasants were accustomed to the disgusting manner of “gathering” of the landowner, mocked him and openly despised him. The habit of bringing into your home what others have thrown away or lost (garbage, rubbish, rags) characterizes the character as a person who has achieved highest degree degradation that defies understanding and justification. Whether it’s an attempt to fill an inner emptiness or a mental illness – is there any difference if other people suffer from it?!

Plyushkin's past

Oddly enough, just a few years ago Plyushkin was a completely adequate person: a father of three children, a husband, an economical and competent owner. Neighbors came to visit him, learned the art of managing the estate, and respected the authority of the owner. The landowner's wife was hospitable and smart, she helped run the huge farm, kept the house in order, and the peasants respected her. After the death of his wife, the widower became stingy, quarreled with everyone in the area, and merchants stopped visiting him. One of the daughters died, the other ran away with an officer, and the son, in defiance of his father, went to the city not for civil service, but for the regiment. These events became a reason to deny children any financial assistance, their father became a miser, a liar and a misanthrope.

Our article briefly describes the image of Plyushkin in the poem “Dead Souls”, reveals the characteristics appearance character and his inner world. The material may be useful when writing an essay on this topic.

Work test

Short essay: Dead Souls, image of Plyushkin for 9th grade

According to Gogol's plan, the poem was conceived in three parts in the manner of “ Divine Comedy» Dante. “Dead Souls” is “Hell”, where all the heroes, including the main one, are vicious in their own way. First of all, of course, these are the same notorious landowners who are hierarchically built from mild vices to some of the worst. “My heroes follow one after another, one more vulgar than the other,” the author himself confirms this idea. And the most lost of them, according to Gogol, is Stepan Plyushkin, a self-interested miser, “a hole in the body of humanity,” one of the most vivid and memorable images in the poem, described by the author with scrupulous accuracy.

Like other landowners, the description of the hero’s character begins with his estate. In the case of Plyushkin, this is doubly important, since Gogol paints his portrait through interior details. This technique operates on the principle “what’s on the outside, so’s on the inside,” since, for example, a neat person will look decent and maintain his household in the same way. But with Plyushkin it’s exactly the opposite. Chichikov, approaching his village, immediately noticed “some kind of special disrepair in all the village buildings,” and later saw the manor’s house itself, which up close “now seemed even sadder.” Such a landscape already suggests the character and social status landowner: careless, disorderly and poor. But Plyushkin had a lot of money, souls and reserves; all his poverty comes from within. This is the most stingy miser in all Russian literature, whose name has become a household name. As soon as Chichikov enters the “sad” house, we only become more firmly established in these thoughts. “He entered a dark, wide vestibule, from which a cold breath blew, as if from a cellar,” the comparison is very significant, because for a long time a cellar has been called a place where various utensils are stored, which are brought into the house as needed. Plyushkin sees the need for everything: “It seemed as if the floors were being washed in the house and all the furniture had been piled here for a while. On one table there was even a broken chair, and next to it a clock with a stopped pendulum, to which the spider had already attached a web.”

Later, Gogol explains that this accumulation of unnecessary things in the house is caused by the manic collecting of the landowner. Many people have the habit of not throwing away old things or purchasing unnecessary ones in case they “suddenly come in handy,” but here this trait is elevated by the author to a grotesque form. This is not even an attempt to get rich, but a habit of accumulation. The farm became unprofitable precisely because of this character trait of Plyushkin: the hay and bread were not used anywhere, which is why they rotted in the barns, the flour in the basements had long ago turned to stone. The landowner did not use what he had accumulated, he simply saved, this became his meaning of life.

But before, he lived completely differently: he was married, had children, and had a profitable farm. This “wise stinginess” was ordinary frugality. Plyushkin was simply created for business, he knew exactly how to increase wealth, and he liked to do it: “Mills and fulling mills were moving, cloth factories, carpentry machines, spinning mills were working; everywhere the keen eye of the owner entered into everything and, like a hardworking spider, ran busily, but efficiently, along all ends of his economic web.”

While Plyushkin was “alive,” his farm “lived.” His wife died and “Plyushkin became more restless and, like all widowers, more suspicious and stingy.” Everything began to fall apart, he began to waste away. Many people break down in the face of difficult circumstances, and not everyone gets the opportunity to start over. And Plyushkin’s whole guilt lies in the fact that he had a chance to re-educate, which he neglected. His runaway daughter came to her father, introduced her to her grandchildren, even gave him a new robe, but he rejected her, wrapping himself even more tightly in his spider cocoon. He drags out his miserable existence: he only annoys his peasants with large quitrents and does not allow them to live in peace. Such people do not think about their neighbors, subordinates and other people who depend on them. The Plyushkins are indifferent, stingy, stupid people whose existence is absolutely meaningless. This is probably why Gogol places him on the last step in his hierarchy of vices. All other landowners, with their “vulgarity,” do not do so much harm, but this “hole” gapes in the body of humanity and only becomes larger over time.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Gallery « dead souls"ends in the poem with Plyushkin. Origins this image we find it in the comedies of Plautus, Moliere, and in the prose of Balzac. However, at the same time, Gogol’s hero is a product of Russian life. “In an environment of general extravagance and ruin... in the society of the Petukhovs, Khlobuevs, Chichikovs and Manilovs... a suspicious and intelligent person... should involuntarily be seized by fear for his well-being. And so stinginess naturally becomes the mania into which his frightened suspiciousness develops... Plyushkin is a Russian miser, a miser out of fear for the future, in the organization of which the Russian man is so helpless,” notes the pre-revolutionary critic.

Plyushkin's main traits are stinginess, greed, thirst for accumulation and enrichment, wariness and suspicion. These features are masterfully conveyed in the portrait of the hero, in the landscape, in the description of the situation and in the dialogues.

Plyushkin's appearance is very expressive. “His face was nothing special; it was almost the same as that of many thin old men, one chin only protruded very far forward, so that he had to cover it with a handkerchief every time so as not to spit; the small eyes had not yet gone out and ran from under their high eyebrows, like mice, when, sticking their sharp muzzles out of the dark holes, their ears alert and their noses blinking, they look out to see if the cat is hiding somewhere...” Plyushkin’s outfit is noteworthy - greasy and a torn robe, rags wrapped around the neck... S. Shevyrev admired this portrait. “We see Plyushkin so vividly, as if we remember him in a painting by Albert Durer in the Doria Gallery...”, the critic wrote.

Small running eyes, similar to mice, indicate Plyushkin’s wariness and suspicion, generated by fear for his property. His rags resemble the clothes of a beggar, but not of a landowner with more than a thousand souls.

The motif of poverty continues to develop in the description of the landowner's village. In all the village buildings, “some kind of special dilapidation” is noticeable; the huts are made of old and dark logs, the roofs look like a sieve, and there is no glass in the windows. Plyushkin’s own house looks like “some kind of decrepit invalid.” In some places it is one floor, in others it is two, there is green mold on the fence and gates, a “naked plaster lattice” can be seen through the decrepit walls, only two of the windows are open, the rest are closed or boarded up. The “beggarly appearance” here metaphorically conveys the spiritual poverty of the hero, the severe limitation of his worldview by a pathological passion for hoarding.

Behind the house stretches a garden, equally overgrown and decayed, which, however, is “quite picturesque in its picturesque desolation.” “The connected tops of trees growing in freedom lay on the celestial horizon like green clouds and irregular, flutter-leaved domes. A white colossal birch trunk... rose from this green thicket and rounded in the air, like... a sparkling marble column... In places, green thickets, illuminated by the sun, diverged...” A dazzling white marble birch trunk, green thickets, bright, sparkling sun - in the brightness of its colors and the presence of lighting effects, this landscape contrasts with the description interior decoration a landowner's house, recreating the atmosphere of lifelessness, death, and grave.

Entering Plyushkin's house, Chichikov immediately finds himself in darkness. “He stepped into the dark, wide hallway, from which a cold breath blew, as if from a cellar. From the hallway he found himself in a room, also dark, slightly illuminated by the light coming out from under a wide crack located at the bottom of the door.” Further, Gogol develops the motif of death and lifelessness outlined here. In another room of the landowner (where Chichikov ends up) there is a broken chair, “a clock with a stopped pendulum, to which the spider has already attached its web”; a chandelier in a canvas bag, thanks to the layer of dust, looking “like a silk cocoon in which a worm sits.” On the walls, Pavel Ivanovich notices several paintings, but their subjects are quite definite - a battle with screaming soldiers and drowning horses, a still life with a “duck hanging head down.”

In the corner of the room, a huge pile of old rubbish is piled on the floor; through a huge layer of dust, Chichikov notices a piece of a wooden shovel and an old boot sole. This picture is symbolic. According to I.P. Zolotussky, the Plyushkin pile is “a tombstone above the materialist ideal.” The researcher notes that every time Chichikov meets one of the landowners, he makes an “examination of his ideals.” Plyushkin in in this case“represents” state, wealth. In fact, this is the most important thing that Chichikov strives for. It is financial independence that opens the way for him to comfort, happiness, well-being, etc. All this is inextricably fused in Pavel Ivanovich’s mind with home, family, family ties, “heirs,” and respect in society.

Plyushkin does this in the poem Return trip. The hero seems to reveal to us reverse side Chichikov's ideal - we see that the landowner's house is completely neglected, he has no family, he has severed all friendly and family ties, and there is not a hint of respect in the reviews of other landowners about him.

But Plyushkin was once a thrifty owner, he was married, and “a neighbor stopped by to have lunch with him” and learn housekeeping from him. And everything was no worse with him than with others: a “friendly and talkative hostess”, famous for her hospitality, two pretty daughters, “blond and fresh as roses”, a son, a “broken boy”, and even a French teacher. But the “good mistress” of him and youngest daughter died, the eldest ran away with the headquarters captain, “the time has come for my son to serve,” and Plyushkin was left alone. Gogol carefully traces this process of disintegration of the human personality, the development of his pathological passion in the hero.

The lonely life of a landowner, widowhood, “gray hair in his coarse hair,” dryness and rationalism of character (“human feelings...were not deep in him”) - all this provided “well-fed food for stinginess.” Indulging in his vice, Plyushkin gradually ruined his entire household. Thus, his hay and bread rotted, flour in the cellars turned into stone, canvases and materials “turned to dust.”

Plyushkin's passion for hoarding became truly pathological: every day he walked the streets of his village and collected everything that came to hand: an old sole, a woman's rag, an iron nail, a clay shard. There was so much in the landowner’s yard: “barrels, crosses, tubs, lagoons, jugs with and without stigmas, twins, baskets...”. “If someone had looked into his work yard, where there was a stock of all kinds of wood and utensils that had never been used, he would have wondered if he had ended up in Moscow at the wood chip yard, where efficient mothers-in-law and mothers-in-law go every day. ..make your household supplies...,” writes Gogol.

Submitting to the thirst for profit and enrichment, the hero gradually lost all human feelings: he ceased to be interested in the lives of his children and grandchildren, quarreled with his neighbors, and drove away all the guests.

The character of the hero in the poem is entirely consistent with his speech. As V.V. Litvinov notes, Plyushkin’s speech is “one continuous grumbling”: complaints about others - about relatives, peasants and abuse with his servants.

In the scene buying and selling dead soul Plyushkin, like Sobakevich, begins to bargain with Chichikov. However, if Sobakevich, not caring about the moral side of the issue, probably guesses the essence of Chichikov’s scam, then Plyushkin does not even think about it. Having heard that he could make a “profit,” the landowner seemed to forget about everything: he “waited,” “his hands trembled,” he “took the money from Chichikov in both hands and carried it to the office with the same caution as if would be carrying some liquid, every minute afraid of spilling it.” Thus, the moral side of the issue leaves him by itself - it simply fades under the pressure of the hero’s “surging feelings.”

It is these “feelings” that take the landowner out of the category of “indifferent”. Belinsky considered Plyushkin a “comical person,” disgusting and disgusting, denying him the significance of his feelings. However, in the context creative idea author presented in the poem life story hero given character seems the most difficult among Gogol's landowners. It was Plyushkin (together with Chichikov), according to Gogol’s plan, who was supposed to appear morally reborn in the third volume of the poem.

Plyushkin is very stingy, he hides his wealth, acquired over the years, and over time it rots and disappears. If something was lying unattended on the street, he would pick it up and put it in a separate room, where a lot of various items: from nails to furniture. Trying to save money, taking care of unnecessary little things, he loses his fortune, as everything accumulated deteriorates and collapses.

And there was a time when Plyushkin was a wonderful owner and family man. He looked after his estate and had a smart wife and children. Despite his decency and thriftiness, he was a soulless person, every day his heart became more and more empty. Of course he had an unlucky family life: the wife died, the daughter left with her lover, and the son went to serve against his father’s will, but even when his daughter returned, hoping that dad would forgive her and take pity, Plyushkin “forgave” her, even gave her son “some kind of game” to play. then a button lying on the table.”

Human feelings were unknown to Plyushkin, everything was lost every day, he became soulless, because his soul had hardened, and nothing would help it to be reborn again...

Is it always fun for me to struggle with an insignificant load? petty passions, go hand in hand with mine strange heroes? Oh, how many times would I like to strike the lofty strings, to proudly captivate my admirers and triumphantly chain them to my victorious chariot.N. V. Gogol

The poem "Dead Souls" is one of the most wonderful works Russian literature. The great realist writer Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol showed all modern Russia, satirically depicting landed nobility and provincial bureaucracy. But if you look closely, the disgusting and pitiful features of Gogol’s characters have not yet been eliminated and are clearly manifested today, at the turn of the new century.

Gogol’s laughter also included a feeling of acute sorrow, born of pictures of spiritual extinction, the “death” of man, his humiliation and suppression, and phenomena of social stagnation. It is not for nothing that the writer said that he had to look at life “through the laughter visible to the world and the invisible, unknown to him tears.” And at the same time, Gogol’s laughter does not cause disappointment; it awakens the energy of resistance and protest, the energy of action.

Name Gogol's poem has at least two meanings. By “dead souls” we mean both dead peasants, whom the landowner Chichikov is buying up, and absolutely living heroes of the work - landowners and officials of the city of NN.

The great writer’s merit lies primarily in the fact that he skillfully portrayed in his work a wide variety of characters. Central location the poem is occupied by chapters telling about different types feudal landowners in Russia at that time. Pictures of economic decline, complete spiritual impoverishment, and personal degradation lead the reader to the idea that these “masters of life” are “dead souls.”

Gogol gives a description of the landowners in a certain order, and step by step outlines the degree of moral decline of the entire landowner class. The images of landowners pass before us one after another, and with each new character the loss of everything human by these people becomes more and more visible. What is only guessed at in Manilov already receives its real embodiment in Plyushkin. “Dead Souls” is a poem about typical phenomena of Russian reality contemporary to Gogol, and in the images of serf owners the author satirically showed the destructive power of serfdom.

The gallery of landowners in the poem opens with the image of Manilov. At first glance, this owner does not seem like a “monster” at all, " dead soul". On the contrary: "in appearance he was a distinguished man; his facial features were not devoid of pleasantness..." A little sweet, "sugar", very amiable and extremely pleasant man, especially compared to the rest of the heroes of the poem. However, Gogol reveals all the emptiness and uselessness of Manilov. His farm is going bankrupt, the estate is desolate, " all the servants sleep mercilessly and hang out the rest of the time." In Manilov's house itself, one is struck by some feeling of the absence of the owner. Next to the beautiful furniture there are shabby armchairs, on the table there has been a book for two years already, with a bookmark on page 14. And Manilov is building meaningless projects, does not take care of the estate. He can only smile pleasantly and lavish courtesies. The only result of his “work” is “hills of ash knocked out of a pipe, arranged, not without effort, in very beautiful rows.” Out of a desire to show courtesy to Chichikov, whom he barely knew, Manilov did not simply gives him his dead peasants, but also takes on the costs of drawing up the deed of sale.At first, Chichikov’s strange request confuses the landowner, but Manilov is not able to think about the proposal and easily allows himself to be convinced. Thus, a kindly, kind person appears before us as a “dead soul”, which, however, has not lost any human traits.

Korobochka, which the author calls “club-headed,” is also represented as a parody of a person. Against the backdrop of a strong economy, a stupid, ignorant lady is shown. She is so stupid that she cannot even understand the wildness of Chichikov’s proposal. For her, selling the dead is as natural as selling food. The box is only afraid of “cheapening” when selling a new product. This is what it leads to human passion to profit.

Another image of the “living dead” is personified by Nozdryov. His life is reckless fun, constant revelry. He has all his friends with whom he drinks and plays cards, losing and drinking away the fruits of his peasants’ labor in a few days. Nozdryov is rude and unceremonious: “Eh, Chichikov, why should you have come. Really, you’re a pig for this, such a cattle breeder...” Gogol ironically calls Nozdryov “ historical person", emphasizing his typicality: “Nozdryov’s face is already somewhat familiar to the reader.” Only his kennel is in excellent condition. The image of Nozdryov clearly shows the corrupting nature of serfdom.

But here in front of us is Sobakevich, the owner of a good estate. “It seemed that there was no soul at all in this body...” writes Gogol. Sobakevich is only interested in food and further enrichment. He calmly accepts Chichikov's offer and begins to bargain with him. Human feelings in him have long since died; it is not for nothing that Gogol compares Sobakevich to a medium-sized bear. This misanthrope is a complete reactionary, a persecutor of science and enlightenment. The following description of the hero’s living room is interesting: “The table, armchairs, chairs - everything had a heavy and restless quality - in a word, every chair seemed to say: “And I, too, Sobakevich!” A frank comparison of Sobakevich with inanimate objects already speaks of his immobility and soullessness. But it is the soul that is the driving principle in a person; it is not for nothing that ancient people depicted it in the form of bird wings. It is the soul that inspires a person to move, develop, and create.

But these are not the characters in the poem. The “crown” of this pyramid turns out to be Plyushkin, “a hole in humanity,” a “dead soul.” The spiritual death of a person is shown in him with enormous accusatory force. The image of Plyushkin is prepared by a description of a poor village, hungry peasants. The master’s house seems like a “decrepit invalid” to the reader I can't help but feel as if he had wandered into a cemetery. Against this background, a strange figure appears: either a man or a woman, in “an indeterminate dress that looks like a woman’s hood.” However, it was not a beggar who stood in front of Chichikov, but the richest landowner in the area, in which greed has killed even the understanding of the value of things. Plyushkin's everything rots in his storerooms, he spends his days collecting all sorts of rubbish in the village, stealing from his own peasants. Things for him more expensive than people who “die like flies” or go on the run. “And a person could stoop to such insignificance, pettiness, and disgusting!” - exclaims Gogol. But before, Plyushkin was only a prudent, thrifty owner. Serfdom killed the person in him, turned him into a “living corpse”, causing nothing but disgust.

Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol is a talented satirist writer. His gift was especially vivid and original in the poem “Dead Souls” when creating images of landowners. The characteristics of the heroes are full of remarks and ridicule when Gogol describes the most worthless people, but vested with the right to dispose of the peasants.

There are writers who easily and freely come up with plots for their works. Gogol is not one of them. He was painfully uninventive with his plots. He always needed an external push to “give wings to his imagination.” As is known, Gogol owed the plot of “Dead Souls” to Pushkin, who had long instilled in him the idea of ​​writing a great epic work. The plot suggested by Pushkin was attractive to Gogol, as it gave him the opportunity, together with their hero, the future Chichikov, to “travel” throughout Russia and show “all of Rus'”

The sixth chapter of “Dead Souls” describes Plyushkin’s estate. The image of Plyushkin fully corresponds to the picture of his estate that appears before us. The same decay and decay, absolute loss human image: master noble estate looks like an old housekeeper. It starts with lyrical digression about travel. Here the author uses his favorite artistic device- characterization of a character through detail.
Let's consider how the writer uses this technique using the example of the landowner Plyushkin.
Plyushkin is a landowner who has completely lost his human appearance, and essentially his reason. Having entered Plyushkin’s estate, the author does not recognize him. The windows in the huts had no glass; some were covered with a rag or a zipun. The manor’s house looks like a huge grave crypt where a person is buried alive.. “He noticed a particular disrepair in all the village buildings: the logs on the huts were dark and old; many roofs were leaky like a sieve; on others there was only a ridge at the top and poles on the sides in the form of ribs.” Only a lushly growing garden reminds of life, of beauty, sharply contrasted with the ugly life of the landowner. It symbolizes Plyushkin's soul. “The old, vast garden stretching behind the house, overlooking the village and then disappearing into the field, overgrown and decayed, seemed to alone refresh this vast village and alone was quite picturesque in its picturesque desolation.” For a long time Chichikov cannot understand who is in front of him, “a woman or a man.” Finally, he concluded that it was true, housekeeper. “He noticed a particular disrepair in all the village buildings: the logs on the huts were dark and old; many roofs were leaky like a sieve; on others there was only a ridge at the top and poles on the sides in the form of ribs.” Chichikov saw manor house. “This strange, long castle looked like some kind of decrepit invalid. Exorbitantly long. In some places it was one floor, in others two: on a dark roof...” “The walls of the house were cracked in places by a bare plaster sieve.”

Plyushkin’s house struck Chichikov with its disorder: “It seemed as if the floors were being washed in the house and all the furniture had been piled here for a while. On one table there was even a broken chair, and next to it a clock with a stopped pendulum, to which the spider had already attached its web. There was also a cabinet with antique silver leaning sideways against the wall.” Everything was tattered, dirty, and shabby. His room is littered with all sorts of rubbish: leaky buckets, old soles, rusty nails. Saving an old sole, a clay shard, a nail or a horseshoe, he turns all his wealth into dust and ashes: thousands of pounds of bread rot, many canvases, cloth, sheepskins, wood, and dishes are lost.

The once rich landowner Stepan Plyushkin was an economical owner, to whom a neighbor stopped by to learn from him about farming and wise stinginess.” “But there was a time when he was just a thrifty owner!” During this period of its history, it seems to combine the most character traits other landowners: he was an exemplary family man, like Manilov, busy, like Korobochka. But already at this stage of his life, Plyushkin is compared to a spider: “... everywhere, everything included the keen gaze of the owner and, like a hardworking spider, ran... along all ends of his economic web.” Entangled in the networks of the “economic web,” Plyushkin completely forgets about his own soul and that of others.

The image of Plyushkin completes the gallery of provincial landowners. He represents the last stage of moral decline. Why is it not Manilov, not Sobakevich, not Korobochka who are called by the terrible Gogolian word “a hole in humanity”, but namely Plyushkin? On the one hand, Gogol considers Plyushkin as a unique phenomenon, exceptional in Russian life. On the other hand, he is similar to the heroes of the poem in his lack of spirituality, pettiness of interests, lack of deep feelings and sublimity of thoughts.

Tasks and tests on the topic "The role of artistic detail in the description of Plyushkin (Chapter 6)"

• The role of soft and hard signs - Spelling of vowels and consonants in significant parts of words, grade 4

  Lessons: 1 Assignments: 9 Tests: 1

• Nominative case of nouns. Role in the sentence of nouns in the nominative case - Noun 3rd grade