Bazarov's main ideological opponent is Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. Essay Turgenev I.S.

Bazarov and his imaginary associates. (Based on the novel by I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons.”)

I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” and its main character, commoner-democrat Bazarov, were, according to the author’s own definition, “an expression modern times"

The novel was created during the preparation and implementation of the peasant reform, in the context of an intensification of the struggle between the two forces of society - liberals and revolutionary democrats. The clash of these two forces was reflected in Turgenev’s work

All those problems around which disagreements arose between liberals and democrats (attitudes towards reform, issues of science, art, philosophy, history, etc.) were the subject of heated debate in the novel Turgenev sought to show not only the struggle between the main trends social thought 60s of the XIX century, but also characteristics her expressions

Main character novel - a democrat commoner, acting as a principled opponent of the entire nobility, all concepts noble society, especially liberal, romantic idealism. It seemed to the Writer that people who deny these concepts thereby recognize nothing and deserve the name “nihilists.” But such an idea of ​​​​the worldview of democrats did not prevent Turgenev from very thoroughly and thoughtfully comprehending the character of his main character. He wanted to find something attractive in him, so the writer emphasized the sobriety, utilitarian orientation of thinking and the peculiar skepticism of Bazarov - the skepticism of a practical figure who trusts only his work.

Portraying Bazarov, Turgenev made a slight hint at some revolutionary possibilities hidden in people of his type: “Moscow burned down from a penny candle,” “there are not as few of us as you think.” But no hints active work the hero himself is still not in the novel.

Political Views Bazarov boil down to sharp criticism of the existing situation in the country. He is sure that liberal denouncers are “no good”, that aristocrats are “rubbish”, that the reform “will hardly benefit us”, that the people are full of gross superstitions, that Russian men are prone to drunkenness. Not seeing creative power either in the government or in the nobility, he does not see it in the people, peasant environment. In a word, Bazarov does not have a consistent socio-political theory or clearly expressed ideals. He seeks to crush the stronghold of noble idealism with the help of a utilitarian, materialistic worldview, and therefore does not recognize any authorities, any principles taken for granted. He does not believe in anything except practical experience and scientific experiment, which is why he is so calm, cold, sober, sometimes even cynical.

Bazarov's materialistic views are revealed very clearly in the novel. His materialism is natural scientific, physiological, experimental, seeking in its own way to explain even that which goes far beyond the limits of physiology. But Bazarov’s materialism is not armchair, not academic. He has a very active social orientation: materialistic beliefs force Bazarov to declare himself the sworn enemy of all noble culture and a champion of democratic culture. It is here that he acts as an active preacher of a new democratic ideology, which is based on natural scientific knowledge. Its meaning is the ideological and moral emancipation of Russian society.

With caustic irony, Bazarov exposes the illusions of noble society. He denies admiration for the beauty of nature and does not want to see a “temple” in it; he does not recognize art as a service to beauty and belittles brilliant artists and poets. Above romantic love who deifies a woman, he directly mocks. But in his denial, Bazarov is not a skeptic, not a “nihilist.” He contrasts real knowledge and scientific experiment with eternal principles taken on faith. He understands nature as a “workshop” in which man is a “worker”.

Seeing in the common democrat a representative of a world alien to himself, Turgenev nevertheless showed in him such sobriety and conviction of thought, directness of feelings, collected will, which made him an extraordinary phenomenon in the depicted social environment.

Condemning the utilitarian beliefs of a democrat in the novel and contrasting them with the romantic-idealistic beliefs of liberals, Turgenev still did not find anyone among them who could confidently and successfully argue with the “nihilist” and defeat him in ideological clashes. In the Kirsanov family, Bazarov immediately finds his fans and ideological opponents. But these are unstable fans and weak opponents.

The eldest of the Kirsanovs was essentially a loser and was getting along. Turgenev emphasized the comic nature of his aristocratic manners and pretensions. But nevertheless, it was him who the writer made Bazarov’s main opponent in quarrels, and then in duels.

Nikolai Kirsanov is also unable to seriously resist Bazarov. He is a liberal landowner who started a “farm” on his land, an economy based on free, hired labor. He demands agronomic improvements, for this he studies and tries to “get up to date with modern requirements.” However, in reality, Nikolai Petrovich turns out to be a narrow-minded person. The most that can be expected from him is that the farm will not go bankrupt and will begin to generate income. Otherwise, he is quite content with Pushkin, the cello and Fenechka.

Such are the “fathers” of the nobility of the 60s, but the “children” are in no way stronger than them. Young nobleman The author portrayed Arkady as a timid student of a militant democrat commoner, a man as narrow-minded as his father, capable of exchanging his progressive ideas for love for a girl and a happy existence in the family circle. And Bazarov treats Arkady condescendingly, ironically. Thus, among the nobles, Bazarov has neither worthy opponents nor real like-minded people. The latter, undoubtedly, should have been among the democratic youth of various ranks. The author, of course, understood this possibility, but did not consider it necessary to reveal it in the plot of the novel. He wanted to show Bazarov alone. After all, even when arriving in provincial town, he does not meet people of his level and circle. Here people fawn on him, distorting the progressive ideas of the era, trying to cover up their spiritual emptiness the latest concepts, fashionable words. And Bazarov turns away from them with contempt. By comparing Bazarov with Sitnikov and Kukshina, the writer thereby highlighted the full significance of his character, the seriousness of his ideological demands. But with the subsequent development of the plot, Turgenev tried to prove the inconsistency of the materialistic views of his hero. The test of his character and his beliefs was his relationship with Odintsova, thanks to which he had to be convinced from his own experience that romantic feelings exist and that they can be very deep and strong.

However, a heroine who was unlike Turgenev’s previous heroines, young girls with naivety and spontaneity of experiences, could bring Bazarov on a love date. The writer portrayed Odintsova as an extraordinary, intelligent, inquisitive person and at the same time as an attractive, beautiful woman with aristocratic manners. Such a woman turned out to be capable of captivating the “nihilist”, arousing previously unknown feelings in his soul, which is why Anna Sergeevna’s refusal was so painful and tragic for him. The culmination of this storyline is Bazarov's declaration of love. But there is no authorial irony here, since for Turgenev love has always been a manifestation highest qualities a person, the criterion of his morality, honor, virtue. Bazarov not only suffers from love failure, not only loses his former optimism and confidence, but also thinks in a new way, has a new attitude towards life. He tells Arkady that the human personality now seems to him like something insignificant in infinite space and time. Bazarov mopes for a long time in his parents’ house, then frivolously flirts with Fenechka and accepts Pavel Petrovich’s challenge to a duel, the absurdity of which he himself well understands. Soon, gloomy skepticism and depression lead to negligence during the autopsy of the corpse, he gets blood poisoning and dies in the prime of his life, calling himself before his death a person unnecessary for Russia.

This end of the main character is deeply symbolic. The writer did not connect the renovation of Russia with people like Bazarov, but how wonderful artist anticipated the emergence of people capable of great things and noble deeds. In the duel, Bazarov's moral superiority over Kirsanov was revealed even more clearly than in their disputes. And Bazarov accepted his accidental and absurd death with such fortitude that his ideological opponents were not capable of and which turned the death of the hero into his apotheosis.

Kirsanov disliked him for his views on life inherent in nihilists. All of Pavel Petrovich’s thoughts boiled down to preserving the old order. The main character sought to destroy this order. constantly argues with Bazarov about science, the autocratic-serf system, and peasants, “though, when talking to them, he frowns and sniffs cologne.” “Hairy” - that’s what Pavel Petrovich said about Arkady’s friend. He is clearly offended by the appearance of a nihilist: and long hair, and a robe with tassels, and red unkempt hands, contrasting with the panache of an aristocrat. His aristocracy in the English style boils down to blind worship of everything English - from parliament to washstands.

Turgenev emphasizes that Pavel Petrovich adhered to his liberal-aristocratic principles and was firm and consistent in the struggle for their implementation. However, its principles themselves are dead, doomed by history. At the end of the novel, Pavel Petrovich leaves his homeland, moves to Dresden, stops reading Russian books, and only “the silver ashtray in the shape of a peasant’s bast shoe on his desk reminds him of Russia.

But the moderate liberal Nikolai Petrovich also looks helpless and pitiful (it’s not for nothing that he says that “it’s time to order a coffin and fold your hands in a cross on your chest”), and his game of democracy and maneuvering between old and new sometimes becomes funny. Turgenev, with all the realistic ruthlessness, shows the results of the activities of the liberal nobility: the complete collapse of the economy (men do not pay quitrent, hired workers spoil the harness), the impoverishment of the serfs.

Arkady Kirsanov also belongs to the political camp of the “fathers” in his views on life. True, he really likes Bazarov’s theories and tries to imitate the main character, posing as a nihilist.

But, often forgetting about your new role, Arkady stands up for his relatives, trying to convince Bazarov that Nikolai Petrovich is a “golden man.” Arkady discovers his blood and ideological similarities with the liberals, frees himself from the alien influence of his friend and finds his peace of mind with Katya Odintsova. He turns from a random fellow traveler of a nihilist into a calm, balanced husband, a liberal landowner, who does not even dare to loudly propose a toast to his former comrade. D.I. Pisarev was right when he compared Arkady to a piece of pure and soft wax: “You can make of it whatever you want, but after you, anyone else can do with it whatever they want.”

Using the example of the Kirsanovs, Turgenev showed the best nobles of that time. But even these best couldn't change the course events XIX century. Power was in the hands of the nobility for a very long time, and little good remained after it. There was hunger and poverty among the peasants in the country; Russia lagged behind other foreign countries in development.

With the help of disputes in the novel, Turgenev showed who will own the future: Bazarov wins. “This is the triumph of democracy over aristocracy,” writes Ivan Sergeevich in his letters. This means that the next step will be up to the revolutionary democrats.

Essay on the topic “Bazarov and his opponents (Based on the novel by I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”)” 5.00 /5 (100.00%) 1 vote

Collision different generations always interested Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. In the title of the novel “Fathers and Sons” we see the opposition and clash of two sides, Bazarov is the main opponent of the “fathers,” the older generation, represented in the novel by the elder Bazarovs and the Kirsanov brothers.
At the beginning of the novel we note unusual appearance Evgenia Bazarova, his robe and sideburns, swagger. As soon as he appears, he arouses the Kirsanovs’ distrust, then it turns out that, to top it all off, he is also a nihilist. This alarms everyone around us even more. What is “nihilism” in the understanding of the heroes of the novel? Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov understands it in an exact translation from Latin: “This word means a person who does not recognize anything.” Pavel Petrovich corrects his brother: “Say: who doesn’t respect anything.” Arkady notes: “Who approaches everything from a critical point of view.”

Bazarov and his imaginary like-minded people(Based on the novel by I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”).
The novel “Fathers and Sons” is the pinnacle artistic creativity Turgenev. He was one of the first Russian writers who realized “the need for consciously heroic natures in order for things to move forward,” and artistically recreated these natures in the image of the commoner - democrat Yevgeny Bazarov. This, a man strong in mind and character, forms the center of the entire novel. Turgenev endowed Bazarov with outwardly not very attractive features: “long and thin face With wide forehead“, his dark-blond hair, long and thick, did not hide the large protuberances of his spacious skull,” the author wrote with admiration that “his whole appearance shone with intelligence and spiritual strength.”
Bazarov was distinguished by a remarkable mind, he has a strong analytical and critical mind, somewhat dry and cold, not alien to irony and skepticism. If not in all spheres, then at least in the field of ideas, ideals, social aspirations, such a mind will always protect a person from narrowness, one-sidedness, fanaticism, and will not allow him to become a slave to an idea, a monomaniac.
In Bazarov's relationship with to the common people One must notice first of all the absence of any pretentiousness and any sweetness. The people like it, and therefore the servants love Bazarov, the children love him, despite the fact that he does not make almonds with them and does not cajole them with money or gingerbread. The men have a heart for Bazarov, because they see him as simple and smart person, but at the same time this person is a stranger to them, because he does not know their way of life, their needs, their hopes and fears, their concepts, beliefs and prejudices.
Bazarov is an internally free person, and it is this internal freedom that he so jealously guards, and for the sake of it he so rebels against his feelings for Odintsova. But, however, Bazarov - as we see him throughout the novel - these actions, all his words, serious or playful, are equally a true expression of his personality.
Bazarov is a nihilist, denier, destroyer. He stops at nothing in his denial. But what has been verified by experience, the practice of life, Bazarov does not deny. Thus, he is firmly convinced that work is the basis of life and a person’s calling, that chemistry is a useful science, that the main thing in a person’s worldview is a natural-scientific approach to everything. Bazarov does not at all intend to limit his life to pure empiricism, not inspired by any goal. He says that he is preparing himself to do “a lot of things,” but what kind of things these are and what specific Bazarov is striving for remains unclear. He doesn’t even think about it, the time hasn’t come. “At the present time, the most useful thing is to deny - we deny,” says Bazarov.
The main character alone expresses new social forces, the rest of the characters are either his enemies or unworthy imitators. The “imaginary” followers of Bazarov include Sitnikov and Kukshina. These individuals represent a superbly executed caricature of a “brainless progressive and a Russian-style emancipated woman.” To call Sitnikov and Kukshina creatures of time would be high degree ridiculous. Both of them borrowed only the upper drapery from their era, and this drapery is still better than the rest of their mental property. Sitnikov and Kukshina will always remain funny personalities. Bazarov treats Sitnikov with disdainful irony; his merchant's rollickingness is just as disgusting to him as the sloppiness of the "emancipe" Kukshina.
Bazarov, at Sitnikov’s invitation, comes to Kukshina to see people, has breakfast, drinks champagne, does not pay any attention to Sitnikov’s efforts to show off his boldness of thought and to Kukshina’s efforts to provoke him into an intelligent conversation, and finally leaves without even saying goodbye to the hostess.
“Sitnikov jumped up after them.
- Well, so what? - he asked, obsequiously running first to the right, then to the left. – After all, I told you: a wonderful person. We wish we had more women! She's kind of high moral phenomenon!
- - Is this establishment of your father also a moral phenomenon? - said Bazarov, pointing his finger at the tavern, past which they were passing at that moment.
- Sitnikov laughed again with a squeal. He was very ashamed of his origin and did not know whether to feel flattered or offended by Bazarov’s unexpected ticking!
There are countless people like Sitnikov, who can easily and profitably pick up other people’s phrases, distort someone else’s thought and dress up as a progressive. There are few true progressives, that is, people who are truly smart, educated and conscientious; there are even fewer decent and developed women, but there are many sycophants who meddle in advanced people, amuse themselves with progressions of phrases like a fashionable thing, or drape themselves in them to cover up their vile deeds.
Against the background of Sitnikov and Kukshina, certain traits of Bazarov’s personality are more sharply and vividly pushed aside, his superiority, intelligence, mental strength, which indicate his loneliness among the district aristocrats. He differs from them in his heroism, self-confidence, in his rightness of “nihilism,” the power of analysis and social temperament, and the indomitability of protest. Bazarov's end is tragic; he dies alone, leaving no followers.