Famous critics about the novel fathers and sons. Fathers and sons in Russian criticism
Barely published, the novel caused a flurry of critical articles. None of the public camps accepted Turgenev's new creation.
The editor of the conservative Russkiy Vestnik, M. N. Katkov, in the articles “Turgenev’s Roman and His Critics” and “On Our Nihilism (Regarding Turgenev’s Novel),” argued that nihilism is a social disease that must be combated by strengthening protective conservative principles; and "Fathers and Sons" is no different from a whole series of anti-nihilistic novels by other writers. F. M. Dostoevsky took a peculiar position in assessing Turgenev's novel and the image of its protagonist.
According to Dostoevsky, Bazarov is a "theorist" who is at odds with "life", he is a victim of his own, dry and abstract theory. In other words, this is a hero close to Raskolnikov. However, Dostoevsky avoids a specific consideration of Bazarov's theory. He correctly asserts that any abstract, rational theory is shattered by life and brings suffering and torment to a person. According to Soviet critics, Dostoevsky reduced the entire range of the novel's problems to an ethical-psychological complex, obscuring the social with the universal, instead of revealing the specifics of both.
Liberal criticism, on the other hand, has been too carried away by the social aspect. She could not forgive the writer for ridicule of representatives of the aristocracy, hereditary nobles, his irony in relation to the "moderate noble liberalism" of the 1840s. The unsympathetic, rude "plebeian" Bazarov constantly mocks his ideological opponents and turns out to be morally superior to them.
In contrast to the conservative-liberal camp, democratic journals differed in their assessment of the problems of Turgenev's novel: Sovremennik and Iskra saw in it a slander on raznochintsev democrats, whose aspirations are deeply alien and incomprehensible to the author; Russian Word and Delo took the opposite position.
The critic of Sovremennik A. Antonovich in an article with the expressive title "Asmodeus of our time" (that is, "the devil of our time") noted that Turgenev "despises and hates the main character and his friends with all his heart." Antonovich's article is full of sharp attacks and unsubstantiated accusations against the author of Fathers and Sons. The critic suspected Turgenev of colluding with the reactionaries, who allegedly "ordered" the writer a deliberately slanderous, accusatory novel, accused him of departing from realism, pointed to the rough sketchiness, even the caricature of the images of the main characters. However, Antonovich's article is quite consistent with the general tone that was taken by the Sovremennik staff after a number of leading writers left the editorial office. To personally scold Turgenev and his works became almost the duty of the Nekrasov magazine.
DI. Pisarev, the editor of the Russian Word, on the contrary, saw the truth of life in the novel Fathers and Sons, taking the position of a consistent apologist for the image of Bazarov. In the article "Bazarov" he wrote: "Turgenev does not like merciless denial, but meanwhile the personality of a merciless denier comes out as a strong personality and inspires respect in the reader"; "... No one in the novel can compare with Bazarov either in strength of mind or in strength of character."
Pisarev was one of the first to remove from Bazarov the charge of caricature raised against him by Antonovich, explained the positive meaning of the protagonist of Fathers and Sons, emphasizing the vital importance and innovation of such a character. As a representative of the generation of "children", he accepted everything in Bazarov: both a dismissive attitude towards art, and a simplified view of a person's spiritual life, and an attempt to comprehend love through the prism of natural science views. The negative features of Bazarov, under the pen of criticism, unexpectedly for readers (and for the author of the novel himself) acquired a positive assessment: frank rudeness towards the inhabitants of Maryin was presented as an independent position, ignorance and shortcomings in education - for a critical view of things, excessive conceit - for manifestations of a strong nature and etc.
For Pisarev, Bazarov is a man of action, a natural scientist, a materialist, an experimenter. He "recognizes only what can be felt with the hands, seen with the eyes, put on the tongue, in a word, only what can be witnessed by one of the five senses." Experience became for Bazarov the only source of knowledge. It was in this that Pisarev saw the difference between the new man Bazarov and the "superfluous people" Rudins, Onegins, Pechorins. He wrote: “... the Pechorins have a will without knowledge, the Rudins have knowledge without a will; the Bazarovs have both knowledge and will, thought and deed merge into one solid whole. Such an interpretation of the image of the protagonist was to the taste of the revolutionary democratic youth, who made their idol the “new man” with his reasonable egoism, contempt for authorities, traditions, and the established world order.
... Turgenev now looks at the present from the height of the past. He doesn't follow us; he calmly looks after us, describes our gait, tells us how we quicken our steps, how we jump over potholes, how we sometimes stumble on uneven parts of the road.
There is no irritation in the tone of his description; he was just tired of walking; the development of his personal worldview ended, but the ability to observe the movement of someone else's thought, to understand and reproduce all its curves remained in all its freshness and fullness. Turgenev himself will never be Bazarov, but he thought about this type and understood him as truly as none of our young realists will understand ...
N.N. Strakhov, in his article on "Fathers and Sons," continues Pisarev's thought, arguing about the realism and even "typicalness" of Bazarov as a hero of his time, a man of the 1860s:
“Bazarov does not in the least arouse disgust in us and does not seem to us either mal eleve or mauvais ton. All the characters in the novel seem to agree with us. The simplicity of treatment and the figures of Bazarov do not arouse disgust in them, but rather inspire respect for him. He was warmly received in Anna Sergeevna's drawing room, where even some poor princess sat ... "
Pisarev's judgments about the novel "Fathers and Sons" were shared by Herzen. About the Bazarov article, he wrote: “This article confirms my point of view. In its one-sidedness, it is truer and more remarkable than its opponents thought of it. Here, Herzen notes that Pisarev “in Bazarov recognized himself and his own people and added what was missing in the book”, that Bazarov “for Pisarev is more than his own”, that the critic “knows the heart of his Bazarov to the ground, he confesses for him”.
Roman Turgenev stirred up all layers of Russian society. The controversy about nihilism, about the image of the naturalist, the democrat Bazarov, continued for a whole decade on the pages of almost all the magazines of that time. And if in the 19th century there were still opponents of apologetic assessments of this image, then by the 20th century there were none left at all. Bazarov was raised to the shield as a harbinger of the coming storm, as the banner of all who wish to destroy, without giving anything in return. (“... it’s none of our business anymore… First we need to clear the place.”)
In the late 1950s, in the wake of Khrushchev's "thaw", a discussion unexpectedly unfolded, caused by the article by V. A. Arkhipov "On the creative history of the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". In this article, the author tried to develop the previously criticized point of view of M. Antonovich. V.A. Arkhipov wrote that the novel appeared as a result of Turgenev’s conspiracy with Katkov, the editor of the Russky Vestnik (“the conspiracy was evident”) and the same Katkov’s deal with Turgenev’s adviser P.V. , a deal was made between the liberal and the reactionary).
Against such a vulgar and unfair interpretation of the history of the novel "Fathers and Sons" as early as 1869, Turgenev himself strongly objected in his essay "On the "Fathers and Sons": “I remember that one critic (Turgenev meant M. Antonovich) in strong and eloquent terms, addressed directly to me, presented me together with Mr. Katkov in the form of two conspirators, in the silence of a secluded office plotting their vile cove, their young Russian forces ... The picture came out spectacular!
An attempt by V.A. Arkhipov to revive the point of view, ridiculed and refuted by Turgenev himself, caused a lively discussion, which included the journals "Russian Literature", "Questions of Literature", "New World", "Rise", "Neva", "Literature at School", as well as "Literary Newspaper". The results of the discussion were summed up in G. Friedländer's article "On the Disputes about Fathers and Sons" and in the editorial "Literary Studies and Modernity" in Voprosy Literatury. They note the universal significance of the novel and its protagonist.
Of course, there could be no "conspiracy" between the liberal Turgenev and the guards. In the novel Fathers and Sons, the writer expressed what he thought. It so happened that at that moment his point of view partly coincided with the position of the conservative camp. So you can't please everyone! But by what "collusion" Pisarev and other zealous apologists of Bazarov started a campaign to exalt this quite unambiguous "hero" - it is still unclear ...
Many people, reading an article by a critic about a particular work, expect to hear negative statements about the plot of the work, its characters and the author. But after all, criticism itself implies not only negative judgments and indications of shortcomings, but also an analysis of the work itself, its discussion in order to evaluate it. So the work of I. S. Turgenev was subjected to literary criticism. The novel "Fathers and Sons" appeared in the "Russian Bulletin" in March 1862, after which heated discussions of this work began in the press. Opinions were different
One of the most critical points of view was put forward by M.A. Antonovich, who published his article "Asmodeus of Our Time" in the March issue of Sovremennik. In it, the critic denied "Fathers and Sons" any artistic merit. He was very dissatisfied with Turgenev's novel. The critic accused the author of slandering the younger generation, said that the novel was written to reproach and instruct the younger generation, and also rejoiced that the writer had finally revealed his true face - the face of an opponent of progress. As N. N. Strakhov wrote, “the whole article reveals only one thing - that the critic is very dissatisfied with Turgenev and considers it his sacred duty and every citizen not to find anything good in his new work, or in all the previous ones.”
N. N. Strakhov himself treats the novel “Fathers and Sons” on the positive side. He says that "the novel is read with greed and arouses such interest, which, one can safely say, has not been aroused by any other work of Turgenev." The critic also notes that "the novel is so good that pure poetry, and not extraneous thoughts, victoriously comes to the fore, and precisely because it remains poetry, it can actively serve society." In assessing the author himself, Strakhov notes: “I. S. Turgenev is an example of a writer gifted with perfect mobility and, at the same time, with deep sensitivity, deep love for contemporary life. Turgenev remained true to his artistic gift: he does not invent, but creates, does not distort, but only illuminates his figures, he gave flesh and blood to that which obviously already existed in the form of thought and belief. He gave an outward appearance to that which already existed as an inward foundation. The critic sees the change of generations as the outward change of the novel. He says, "if Turgenev did not depict all fathers and children, or not those fathers and children that others would like, then he portrayed fathers and children in general and the relationship between these two generations excellently."
Another of the critics who gave their assessment of Turgenev's novel was N. M. Katkov. He published his opinion in the May issue of the Russky Vestnik magazine in an article entitled "Roman Turgenev and his critics." Noting the "ripe strength of the first-class talent" of Ivan Sergeevich, he sees the special merit of the novel in the fact that the author managed to "catch the current moment", the modern phase of Russian educated society.
The most positive assessment of the novel was given by D. I. Pisarev. His article was one of the first critical reviews of the novel "Fathers and Sons" and appeared after its publication in the journal "Russian Messenger". The critic wrote: "Reading Turgenev's novel, we see in it the types of the present minute and at the same time we are aware of the changes that the phenomena of reality have experienced, passing through the mind of the artist." Pisarev notes: “In addition to its artistic beauty, the novel is also remarkable in that it stirs the mind, leads to reflection, although in itself it does not resolve any issue and even illuminates with bright light not so much the output phenomena as the author’s attitude to these very phenomena” he says that the whole work is permeated through and through with the fullest, most touching sincerity.
In turn, the author of the novel “Fathers and Sons”, Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, in the article “About Fathers and Children” notes: “By the grace of this story, the favorable disposition towards me of the Russian young generation has ceased - and, it seems, forever.” Having read in critical articles that in his works he "starts from an idea" or "carries out an idea", Turgenev, for his part, admits "that he never attempted to 'create an image' if he did not have as a starting point not an idea, but a living a face to which suitable elements were gradually mixed and applied. Throughout the article, Ivan Sergeevich communicates only with his reader - his listener. And at the end of the story, he gives them very practical advice: “My friends, never make excuses, no matter how much slander is thrown at you; do not try to clarify misunderstandings, do not want to either say or hear the "last word". Do your job - otherwise everything will be crushed.
But the discussion did not end with just a discussion of the novel as a whole. Each of the critics in his article considered one very significant part of the work, without which there would be no point in writing the socio-psychological novel "Fathers and Sons". And this part was and still remains the main character of the work, Evgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov.
D. I. Pisarev characterized him as a man of strong mind and character, which is the center of the whole novel. “Bazarov is a representative of our young generation; in his personality are grouped those properties that are scattered in small shares in the masses; and the image of this person is vividly and distinctly looming before the imagination of the reader,” wrote the critic. Pisarev believes that Bazarov, as an empiricist, recognizes only what can be felt with his hands, seen with his eyes, put on the tongue, in a word, only what can be witnessed by one of the five senses. The critic claims that "Bazarov does not need anyone, is not afraid of anyone, does not love anyone and, as a result, spares no one." Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev speaks of Yevgeny Bazarov as a person who mercilessly and with complete conviction denies everything that others recognize as high and beautiful.
Nikolai Nikolaevich Strakhov calls the main character "an apple of discord." "He is not a walking type, familiar to everyone and only captured by the artist and exposed by him "to the eyes of the people," the critic notes. "Bazarov is a type, an ideal, a phenomenon," elevated to the pearl of creation, "he stands above the actual phenomena of Bazarovism." And Bazarovism, in turn, is, as Pisarev said, a disease, a disease of our time, and one has to suffer through it, in spite of any palliatives and amputations. cholera". Continuing Strakhov's thought, we can say that "Bazarov is a realist, not a contemplator, but a figure who recognizes only real phenomena and denies ideals." He does not at all want to put up with life. As Nikolai Nikolaevich Strakhov wrote, "Bazarov represents the living embodiment of from the sides of the Russian spirit, he is “more Russian than all the other faces of the novel." "His speech is distinguished by simplicity, accuracy; mockery and a completely Russian warehouse," said the critic. Strakhov also noted that "Bazarov is the first strong person, the first solid a character that appeared in Russian literature from the environment of the so-called educated society.” At the end of the novel, “Bazarov dies a perfect hero, and his death makes a tremendous impression. Until the very end, until the last flash of consciousness, he does not change himself with a single word, not a single sign of cowardice. He is broken, but not defeated, ”says the critic.
But of course, it was not without accusations against Bazarov. Many critics condemned Turgenev for portraying the main character as a reproach to the younger generation. So Maxim Alekseevich Antonovich assures us that the poet exposed his hero as a glutton, a drunkard and a gambler.
The author himself claims that, drawing the figure of Bazarov, he excluded everything artistic from the circle of his sympathies, gave him a sharpness and unceremonious tone - not out of an absurd desire to offend the younger generation, but just because he had to draw his figure just like that. Turgenev himself was aware that the "trouble" was that the Bazarov type he reproduced did not have time to go through the gradual phases through which literary types usually go.
Another of the main issues in the discussion of the critics of the novel by I. S. Turgenev was the attitude of the author himself towards his hero.
Nikolai Nikolaevich Strakhov at first claimed that "Turgenev understands the Bazarovs at least as much as they understand themselves," but then he proved that Ivan Sergeevich "understands them much better than they understand themselves."
The editor of one of the magazines wrote: "He is in exactly the same relation to what has come out of his hands as everyone else; he may have a sympathetic or antipathetic feeling for a living person that arose in his fantasy, but he will have to commit exactly the same labor of analysis as any other, in order to convey in judgment the essence of one's feeling.
Katkov, on the other hand, accused Turgenev of trying to show Bazarov in the most favorable light. Mikhail Nikiforovich does not miss an opportunity to reproach the writer for his pronihilistic sympathies: “In Fathers and Sons, the author’s desire to give the main type the most favorable conditions is noticeable. The author, apparently, seemed to be afraid of appearing biased. He seemed to be strengthening himself to be impartial.<.>. It seems to us that if these efforts had not been made, then his work would have gained even more in its objectivity.
D. I. Pisarev, in turn, says that Turgenev, obviously, does not favor his hero. The critic notes: “Creating Bazarov, Turgenev wanted to smash him to dust and instead paid him full tribute of fair respect. He wanted to say: our young generation is on the wrong road, and he said: in our young generation, all our hope.
Turgenev, on the other hand, expresses his attitude towards the main character with the following words: “I share almost all of his convictions. And they assure me that I am on the side of the "Fathers". I, who in the figure of Pavel Kirsanov even sinned against artistic truth and overdid it, brought his shortcomings to a caricature, made him ridiculous! “At the very moment of the appearance of a new person - Bazarov - the author reacted critically to him. objectively". “The author himself does not know whether he loves or not the exposed character (as happened to me in relation to Bazarov),” Turgenev says about himself in the third person.
So, now we clearly understand that the opinions of all critics are very different from each other. Everyone has their own point of view. But, despite many negative statements about I. S. Turgenev and his works, the novel “Fathers and Sons” remains relevant for us to this day, because the problem of different generations has been and will be. As Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev already said, “this is a disease”, and it is incurable
Turgenev's work "Fathers and Sons" caused a wide resonance. Many articles were written, parodies in the form of poetry and prose, epigrams and caricatures. And of course, the main object of this criticism was the image of the main character - Yevgeny Bazarov. The appearance of the novel was a significant event in the cultural life of that time. But Turgenev's contemporaries were by no means unanimous in their assessment of his work.
Relevance
Criticism of "Fathers and Sons" contained a large number of disagreements that reached the most polar judgments. And this is not surprising, because in the central characters of this work the reader can feel the breath of an entire era. The preparation of the peasant reform, the deepest social contradictions of that time, the struggle of social forces - all this was reflected in the images of the work, made up its historical background.
The debates of critics around the novel "Fathers and Sons" lasted for many years, and at the same time, the fuse did not become weaker. It became obvious that the novel retained its problematics and topicality. The work reveals one of the most important characteristic features of Turgenev himself - this is the ability to see the trends that are emerging in society. The great Russian writer managed to capture in his work the struggle of two camps - "fathers" and "children". In fact, it was a confrontation between liberals and democrats.
Bazarov is the central character
The conciseness of Turgenev's style is also striking. After all, the writer was able to fit all this huge material into the framework of one novel. Bazarov is involved in 26 of the 28 chapters of the work. All other characters are grouped around him, revealed in relations with him, and also make the character traits of the main character even more prominent. The work does not cover the biography of Bazarov. Only one period from his life is taken, filled with turning events and moments.
Details in the work
A student who needs to prepare his own criticism of "Fathers and Sons" can note brief and accurate details in the work. They allow the writer to clearly draw the character of the characters, the events described in the novel. With the help of such strokes, Turgenev depicts the crisis of serfdom. The reader can see "villages with low huts under dark, often up to half-swept roofs." This indicates the poverty of life. Maybe the peasants have to feed hungry cattle with straw from the roofs. "Peasant cows" are also depicted as skinny, emaciated.
In the future, Turgenev no longer paints a picture of rural life, but at the beginning of the work it is described so vividly and revealingly that it is impossible to add anything to it. The heroes of the novel are worried about the question: this region does not impress with either wealth or hard work, and it needs reforms and transformations. However, how can they be fulfilled? Kirsanov says that the government should take some measures. All the hopes of this hero are on patriarchal customs, the people's community.
A brewing riot
However, the reader feels: if the people do not trust the landowners, treat them with hostility, this will inevitably result in a revolt. And the picture of Russia on the eve of reforms is completed by the bitter remark of the author, dropped as if by accident: “Nowhere does time run as fast as in Russia; in prison, they say, it runs even faster.
And against the background of all these events, the figure of Bazarov is looming by Turgenev. He is a person of a new generation, who should replace the "fathers" who are unable to solve the difficulties and problems of the era on their own.
Interpretation and criticism of D. Pisarev
After the release of the work "Fathers and Sons", its heated discussion began in the press. It almost immediately became polemical. For example, in a magazine called "Russian Word" in 1862, an article by D. Pisarev "Bazarov" appeared. The critic noted a bias in relation to the description of the image of Bazarov, saying that in many cases Turgenev does not show favor to his hero, because he feels antipathy to this line of thought.
However, Pisarev's general conclusion is not limited to this problem. He finds in the image of Bazarov a combination of the main aspects of the worldview of heterodox democracy, which Turgenev managed to portray quite truthfully. And the critical attitude of Turgenev himself to Bazarov in this regard is rather an advantage. After all, both advantages and disadvantages become more noticeable from the outside. According to Pisarev, the tragedy of Bazarov lies in the fact that he does not have suitable conditions for his activities. And since Turgenev does not have the opportunity to show how his main character lives, he shows the reader how he dies.
It should be noted that Pisarev rarely expressed his admiration for literary works. It just can be called a nihilist - a subversive of values. However, Pisarev emphasizes the aesthetic significance of the novel, Turgenev's artistic sensitivity. At the same time, the critic is convinced that a true nihilist, like Bazarov himself, must deny the value of art as such. Pisarev's interpretation is considered one of the most complete in the 60s.
Opinion of N. N. Strakhov
"Fathers and Sons" caused a wide resonance in Russian criticism. In 1862, an interesting article by N. N. Strakhov also appeared in the Vremya magazine, which was published under the publication of F. M. and M. M. Dostoevsky. Nikolai Nikolaevich was a state adviser, publicist, philosopher, so his opinion was considered weighty. The title of Strakhov's article was “I. S. Turgenev. "Fathers and Sons". The critic's opinion was quite positive. Strakhov was convinced that the work was one of Turgenev's best novels, in which the writer was able to show all his skill. The image of Bazarov Strakhov regards as extremely typical. What Pisarev considered to be completely accidental incomprehension (“He bluntly denies things that he does not know or does not understand”) Strakhov perceived as one of the most essential features of a real nihilist.
In general, N. N. Strakhov was pleased with the novel, wrote that the work is read with greed and is one of the most interesting creations of Turgenev. This critic also noted that "pure poetry" and not extraneous reflections come to the fore in it.
Criticism of the work "Fathers and Sons": Herzen's view
In Herzen's work entitled "Once again Bazarov" the main emphasis is not on Turgenev's hero, but on how he was understood by Pisarev. Herzen wrote that Pisarev was able to recognize himself in Bazarov, and also add what was missing in the book. In addition, Herzen compares Bazarov with the Decembrists and comes to the conclusion that they are "great fathers", while the "Bazarovs" are the "prodigal children" of the Decembrists. Nihilism in his article Herzen compares with logic without structures, or with scientific knowledge without theses.
Criticism of Antonovich
Some critics about the novel "Fathers and Sons" spoke quite negatively. One of the most critical points of view was put forward by M. A. Antonovich. In his journal, he published an article entitled "Asmodeus of our time", which was devoted to the work of Turgenev. In it, Antonovich completely denied the work "Fathers and Sons" any artistic merit. He was completely dissatisfied with the work of the great Russian writer. The critic accused Turgenev of slandering the new generation. He believed that the novel was written to reproach and instruct the youth. And also Antonovich was glad that Turgenev had finally revealed his true face, showing himself as an opponent of any progress.
Opinion of N. M. Katkov
The criticism of "Fathers and Sons" by Turgenev, written by N. M. Katkov, is also interesting. He published his opinion in the Russian Bulletin magazine. The literary critic noted the talent of the great Russian writer. Katkov saw one of the special merits of the work in the fact that Turgenev was able to "catch the current moment", the stage at which the writer's contemporary society was. Katkov considered nihilism a disease that should be combated by strengthening conservative principles in society.
The novel "Fathers and Sons" in Russian criticism: Dostoevsky's opinion
F. M. Dostoevsky also took a very peculiar position in relation to the main character. He considered Bazarov a "theorist" who was too far removed from real life. And that is precisely why, Dostoevsky believed, Bazarov was unhappy. In other words, he represented a hero close to Raskolnikov. At the same time, Dostoevsky does not strive for a detailed analysis of the theory of Turgenev's hero. He correctly notes that any abstract theory must inevitably break up against the realities of life, and therefore bring a person torment and suffering. Soviet critics believed that Dostoevsky reduced the problems of the novel to a complex of ethical and psychological nature.
General impression of contemporaries
In general, criticism of Turgenev's "Fathers and Sons" was largely negative. Many writers were dissatisfied with Turgenev's work. The Sovremennik magazine considered in it a libel on modern society. Adherents of conservatism were also not sufficiently satisfied, since it seemed to them that Turgenev did not fully reveal the image of Bazarov. D. Pisarev was one of the few who liked this work. In Bazarov, he saw a powerful personality who has serious potential. The critic wrote about such people that, seeing their dissimilarity with the general mass, they boldly move away from it. And they absolutely do not care whether society agrees to follow them. They are full of themselves and their own inner life.
The criticism of Fathers and Sons is by no means exhausted by the considered responses. Almost every Russian writer left his opinion about this novel, in which - one way or another - he expressed his opinion about the problems raised in it. This is what can be called a true sign of the relevance and significance of the work.
Processes taking place in the literary environment in the 1850s.
Roman I. S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". Criticism of the novel.
In the first half of the 1950s, a process of consolidation of the progressive intelligentsia took place. The best people united on the main question of serfdom for the revolution. At this time, Turgenev worked a lot in the Sovremennik magazine. It is believed that under the influence of V. G. Belinsky, Turgenev made the transition from poetry to prose, from romanticism to realism. After the death of Belinsky, N. A. Nekrasov became the editor of the journal. He also attracts Turgenev to cooperate, who, in turn, attracts L. N. Tolstoy and A. N. Ostrovsky. In the second half of the 1950s, a process of differentiation and stratification took place in progressively thinking circles. Raznochintsy appear - people who do not belong to any of the classes established at that time: neither to the nobility, nor to the merchant, nor to the petty-bourgeois, nor to the guild artisans, nor to the peasantry, and also who do not have personal nobility or spiritual dignity. Turgenev did not attach much importance to the origin of the person with whom he communicated. Nekrasov attracted N. G. Chernyshevsky to Sovremennik, then N. A. Dobrolyubov. As a revolutionary situation begins to take shape in Russia, Turgenev comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to abolish serfdom in a bloodless way. Nekrasov, on the other hand, advocated a revolution. So the paths of Nekrasov and Turgenev began to diverge. Chernyshevsky at this time published a dissertation on the aesthetic relationship of art to reality, which infuriated Turgenev. The dissertation sinned with the features of vulgar materialism:
Chernyshevsky put forward in it the idea that art is only an imitation of life, only a weak copy of reality. Chernyshevsky underestimated the role of art. Turgenev did not tolerate vulgar materialism and called Chernyshevsky's work "dead". He considered such an understanding of art disgusting, vulgar and stupid, which he repeatedly expressed in his letters to L. Tolstoy, N. Nekrasov, A. Druzhinin and D. Grigorovich.
In one of his letters to Nekrasov in 1855, Turgenev wrote about such an attitude towards art as follows: “This ill-concealed hostility to art is filth everywhere - and even more so in our country. Take away this enthusiasm from us - after that, at least run away from the world.
But Nekrasov, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov advocated the maximum convergence of art and life, they believed that art should have an exclusively didactic character. Turgenev quarreled with Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov, because he believed that they treated literature not as an artistic world that exists in parallel with ours, but as an auxiliary tool in the struggle. Turgenev was not a supporter of "pure" art (the theory of "art for art's sake"), but he still could not agree that Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov considered a work of art only as a critical article, not seeing anything more in it. Because of this, Dobrolyubov believed that Turgenev was not a comrade to the revolutionary-democratic wing of Sovremennik and that at the decisive moment Turgenev would retreat. In 1860, Dobrolyubov published in Sovremennik a critical analysis of Turgenev's novel "On the Eve" - the article "When will the real day come?" Turgenev completely disagreed with the key points in this publication and even asked Nekrasov not to print it on the pages of the magazine. But the article was still published. After this, Turgenev finally breaks with Sovremennik.
That is why Turgenev publishes his new novel Fathers and Sons in the conservative journal Russky Vestnik, which opposed Sovremennik. The editor of Russkiy Vestnik, M. N. Katkov, wanted to use Turgenev's hands to shoot at the revolutionary-democratic wing of Sovremennik, so he readily agreed to the publication of Fathers and Sons in Russkiy Vestnik. To make the blow more tangible, Katkov releases a novel with amendments that reduce the image of Bazarov.
At the end of 1862, the novel was published as a separate book with a dedication to the memory of Belinsky.
The novel was considered by Turgenev's contemporaries to be rather polemical. Until the end of the 60s of the XIX century, there were sharp disputes around it. The novel touched too much to the quick, too correlated with life itself, and the author's position was quite polemical. Turgenev was very upset by this situation, he had to explain himself about his work. In 1869, he published an article “On the occasion of Fathers and Sons”, where he writes: “I noticed coldness, reaching indignation, in many people close to me and sympathetic; I received congratulations, almost kisses, from people in the opposite camp, from enemies. It embarrassed me. grieved; but my conscience did not reproach me: I knew well that I was honest, and not only without prejudice, but even with sympathy, reacted to the type I had brought out. Turgenev believed that “the whole reason for the misunderstandings” lies in the fact that “the Bazarov type did not have time to go through the gradual phases through which literary types usually go through,” such as Onegin and Pechorin. The author says that “this has confused many [.] the reader is always embarrassed, he is easily seized with bewilderment, even annoyance, if the author treats the depicted character as a living being, that is, he sees and exposes his good and bad sides, and most importantly , if he does not show obvious sympathy or antipathy for his own offspring.
In the end, almost everyone was dissatisfied with the novel. "Sovremennik" saw in him a libel on progressive society, and the conservative wing remained dissatisfied, since it seemed to them that Turgenev had not completely debunked the image of Bazarov. One of the few who liked the image of the protagonist and the novel as a whole was D. I. Pisarev, who in his article “Bazarov” (1862) spoke very well about the novel: “Turgenev is one of the best people of the past generation; to determine how he looks at us and why he looks at us this way and not otherwise, means to find the cause of the discord that is noticed everywhere in our private family life; of that discord from which young lives often perish and from which old men and women constantly grunt and groan, not having time to process the concepts and actions of their sons and daughters into their stock. In the main character, Pisarev saw a deep personality with powerful strength and potential. About such people, he wrote: “They are aware of their dissimilarity with the masses and boldly move away from it by actions, habits, and the whole way of life. Whether society will follow them, they don't care. They are full of themselves, their inner life.
Searched here:
- criticism of the novel fathers and sons
- articles by critics about the novel fathers and sons
Subject:
Goals:
subject: to reveal the position of critics about the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons", about the image of Evgeny Bazarov;
metasubject: to form the ability to set goals, plan their actions, analyze the text of a critical article, compare the content of different components;
personal: consider an object or phenomenon from different angles, encourage students to express their own point of view through understanding the socio-political position, creating a problematic situation; develop tolerance.
Equipment :
articles: DI. Pisarev “Bazarov (“Fathers and Sons”, novel by I.S. Turgenev), 1862, M.A. Antonovich "Asmodeus of our time". 1862, A.I. Herzen "Once again Bazarov", 1868, M.N. Katkov "On our nihilism about Turgenev's novel", 1862;
presentation “The novel by I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons” in Russian criticism of the 19th century”; video clip from Avdotya Smirnova's film "Fathers and Sons";
Plates for press conference participants:"Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev", "Contemporary" (on the back - "Nihilist"), "Bell" (on the back - "Liberal"), "Russian Messenger" (on the back - "Conservative"), "Russian Word" (on the back - "Nihilist").
lesson application:working map of the lesson, excerpts from critical articles.
During the classes
- Call.
A) slide number 3. Lesson topic. The teacher announces the topic:"I.S. Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons" in Russian criticism of the 19th century."
Goal setting.
- Think about the topic of the lesson, try to set your own lesson goals, fix them in the worksheet.
B) Comparison of theme and epigraph.
- As an epigraph to our lesson, we will take a video clip from Avdotya Smirnova's film "Fathers and Sons".
Slide number 4. Video clip from Avdotya Smirnova's film Fathers and Sons.
- How do you think the epigraph relates to the topic of the lesson?
- To do this, complete the first Venn Diagram in pairs.
- State the general position between the topic and the epigraph.
- Adjust your lesson goals.
C) Slide number 5. The slide contains aphorisms from the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit":1. “And who are the judges?”; 2. "You, the current ones, well - wee!"; 3. "They scold here, but there they thank."
- In the lesson, work will take place in three stages, each of which is titled by an aphorism from A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". They are listed in random order on the slide.
Determine the order of understanding the topic of the lesson and, in accordance with the logic, arrange aphorisms in the worksheet.
Orally justify your point of view.
Slide number 6 "Stages of the lesson"
Re-adjust your lesson objectives.
II. Making sense.
A) "They scold here, but there they thank."Fragment of the press conference of the author of the novel "Fathers and Sons". (Participants of the press conference have signs on their chests: Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev, Sovremennik (on the back - "Nihilist"), "Bell" (on the back - "Liberal"), "Russian Messenger" (on the back - "Conservative" ), "Russian Word" (on the back - "Nihilist")).
- Contemporaries I.S. Turgenev saw the main significance of the novel "Fathers and Sons" in the fact that the writer tried to comprehend the type of Russian nihilist, first of all, in relation to the prevailing, generally accepted, dominant views. At the same time, representatives of various literary groups made a particularly careful delimitation of their personal and social programs. The split occurred not only between the main antagonists: between the Democrats and the conservative camp. Roman I.S. Turgenev served as a literary basis on which a split in the nihilist camp began, which ended two years later with a sharp controversy.
You will see a fragment of the press-conference of the author of the novel "Fathers and Sons" with representatives of periodicals.
Listen carefully to the discussion and write down the key concepts of each journalist's speech and decide whose point of view is closer to you.
Press conference:
I.S. Turgenev. In answering to the respected public, I want to immediately inform you that we did not set ourselves the task of criticizing anyone's political program, or, even more implausibly, anyone in particular. For me, all political parties are equal, my writing task is to paint a portrait of a Russian militant commoner, and at the same time I consciously give him the opportunity to triumph in disputes over aristocrats.
An employee of the Sovremennik magazine.Mr. Turgenev this time did not change the feeling of modernity: he managed to find and raise one of the most acute and urgent problems of Russian life. However, in our opinion, the respected writer did not live up to the expectations of readers in the disclosure of this problem. The character of Bazarov is anti-democratic, which dealt a blow to the advanced forces of Russia.
Employee of the magazine "Russian Word".Not at all, the merit of Mr. Turgenev lies in the fact that the writer managed to artistically authentically reproduce one of the representatives of the Russian democratic sixties. And it’s not at all worth seeing in Bazarov an exclusively copy of those who are called the “Sovremennik Party”.
3. "Russian Bulletin".The merit of Turgenev, of course, is that in the portrait of Bazarov, in his behavior, manners, opinions, an opponent of the existing world order is presented, which is a threat to society.
4. "Bell". Turgenev brought Bazarov out not to pat him on the head - that's clear. But in contact with such miserable and insignificant fathers as the Kirsanovs, the tough Bazarov carried away Turgenev, and instead of whipping his son, he flogged the fathers.
State the key concepts.
Say which opinion you support. (Plates are flipped)
See what ideology you support.
b) Who are the judges?
Now we must, working in the Zigzag strategy, name specific individuals who gave their assessment of the novel Fathers and Sons from one or another socio-political platform.
First, individually analyze extracts from critical articles using the TASK technique. Working time - 10 minutes. (Each student is given an excerpt from one critical article - see the appendix - and the TASK table - a lesson worksheet)
Group work (students who worked on one article are united in groups to develop a common position)
Unite in groups (6 people each) who worked with one source and work out a common position on the TASK table. Working time - 5 minutes.
Team up with 4 people so that each group has people working with different articles. Have an internal discussion about the correctness of the conclusions for each source. Working time - 7 minutes.
We return to groups of 6 people and choose the one who will present the conclusion on the analyzed passage from the critical article. Working time - 3 minutes.
Students present group findings. The performance time is 1 minute.
(Slides #7, 8, 9, 10, 11voiced by students - actors involved in the press conference).
- Reflection "You, the current ones, well - wee!".
A) conversation
It is no coincidence that in today's lesson we remembered the comedy of A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". What do you think the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" and comedies by A.S. Griboyedov.
- What did you find interesting about the lesson? Unusual?
- What caused the difficulty?
- What are your assumptions confirmed?
- What should you work on at home?
B) Homework (optional).
- According to the program, you need to get acquainted in detail with the article by D.I. Pisarev "Bazarov". Record the results of your observations in the form of a three-part diary (quote - comments - questions).
- Or write a letter to a contemporary, friend, teenager (other variants of addressees are possible), comparing the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" and the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" from the positions of conservatives, liberals, nihilists.
Preview:
DI. Pisarev
An excerpt from the article “Bazarov (“Fathers and Sons”, a novel by I.S. Turgenev), 1862
In the novel there is no plot, no denouement, no strictly considered plan; there are types and characters, there are scenes and pictures, through the fabric of the story the author's personal, deeply felt attitude to the derived phenomena of life shines through. And these phenomena are very close to us, so close that our entire young generation, with their aspirations and ideas, can recognize themselves in the protagonists of this novel. Turgenev refers to these ideas and aspirations from his personal point of view, and the old man and the young man almost never agree among themselves in convictions and sympathies. Reading Turgenev's novel, we see in it the types of the present moment and at the same time we are aware of the changes that the phenomena of reality have experienced, passing through the consciousness of the artist ...
Bazarov is a man of life, a man of action, but he will take up the matter only when he sees the opportunity to act not mechanically. He will not be bribed by deceptive forms; external improvements will not overcome his stubborn skepticism; he will not mistake an occasional thaw for the onset of spring, and will spend his whole life in his laboratory if no essential changes take place in the consciousness of our society. If, however, the desired changes take place in the consciousness, and consequently in the life of society, then people like Bazarov will be ready, because the constant labor of thought will not allow them to become lazy, stale and rusty, and constantly vigilant skepticism will not allow them to become fanatics of the specialty or sluggish followers of a one-sided doctrine.
Creating Bazarov, Turgenev wanted to smash him to dust and instead paid him full tribute of fair respect. He wanted to say: our young generation is on the wrong road, and he said: in our young generation, all our hope. Turgenev is not a dialectician, not a sophist, he cannot prove a preconceived idea with his images, no matter how this idea may seem to him abstractly true or practically useful. He is above all an artist, a man unconsciously, involuntarily sincere; his images live their own lives; he loves them, he is carried away by them, he becomes attached to them during the process of creation, and it becomes impossible for him to push them around at his whim and turn the picture of life into an allegory with a moral purpose and with a virtuous denouement. The honest, pure nature of the artist takes its toll, breaks down theoretical barriers, triumphs over the delusions of the mind and redeems everything with its instincts - both the inaccuracy of the main idea, and the one-sidedness of development, and the obsolescence of concepts. Looking at his Bazarov, Turgenev as a person and as an artist grows in his novel, grows before our eyes and grows to a correct understanding, to a fair assessment of the created type.
A.I. Herzen
An excerpt from the article "Once again Bazarov", 1868
I confess frankly, I personally find this throwing stones at my predecessors disgusting. “I would like to save the younger generation from historical ingratitude and even from historical error. It's time for the Saturn fathers not to eat their children, but it's time for the children not to follow the example of those Kamchadals who kill their old people.
Onegins and Pechorins have passed.
Rudins and Beltovs pass.
The Bazarovs will pass ... and even very soon. This is too strained, schoolboy, overwrought type to hold on for a long time. A type was already asking for his replacement, rotten in the spring of his days, the type of an Orthodox student,conservative and state-owned patriot, in which all the vile imperial Rus' burped out and who himself became embarrassed after the Iberian serenade and the prayer service to Katkov.
All the types that have arisen will pass away, and all with that inexhaustibility of once excited forces, which we have learned to recognize in the physical world, will remain and ascend, changing, into the future movement of Russia and into its future structure.
“If,” says Pisarev, “Bazarovism is a disease of our time, then it will have to be suffered.” Well, enough. This disease is to face only until the end of the university course; she, like teething, did not stick to adulthood.
The worst service that Turgenev rendered to Bazarov is that, not knowing how to deal with him, he executed him with typhus. If Bazarov had escaped typhus, he probably would have developed out of Bazarovism, at least into a science that he loved and appreciated in physiology and which does not change its methods, whether it is a frog, or a person, whether embryology, or history is in redistribution.
Science would save Bazarov, he would stop looking down on people, with deep and undisguised contempt.
But until the vestments are removed, Bazarov consistently demands from people who are crushed by everything in the world, insulted, exhausted, deprived of both sleep and the opportunity to do something in reality, so that they do not talk about pain; this is strongly strayed to Arakcheevism.
The Decembrists are our great fathers, the Bazarovs are our prodigal children.
We inherited from the Decembrists an excited sense of human dignity, a desire for independence, hatred of slavery, respect for the West and the revolution, faith in the possibility of a revolution in Russia, a passionate desire to participate in it, youth and lack of strength.
All this has been reworked, it has become different, but the foundations are intact. What did our generation bequeath to the new?
M.N. Katkov
Excerpt from the article "On our nihilism about Turgenev's novel", 1862
So, the spirit of research, clear and precise thought, positive knowledge has come into our wilderness. How by the way! We were missing him. ... Is not before us again the image of the same naturalist who was in such a hurry to cover the frogs by surprise in the swamp?
There is no doubt that science is not something serious here and that it must be put aside. If there is a real force in this Bazarov, then it is something else, and not science at all. With his science, he can only be of significance in the environment where he has found himself; with his science, he can only suppress his old father, young Arkady and Madame Kukshina. He is just a brisk schoolboy who confirmed the lesson better than others and who was put in auditors for that. 7 . However, he is so intelligent that he himself is aware of this, he himself expresses it, although not about himself personally, but about his compatriots in general in comparison with real researchers in those countries where this is a serious matter. He himself does not recognize the special significance of his scientific studies; for him they are only a point of support, only a means for a further goal, and his goal is of a completely different nature and has nothing in common with science.
He is already convinced in advance that the natural sciences lead to a negative solution of these questions, and he needs them as a tool for the destruction of prejudices and for enlightening people in the inspiring truth that there are no first causes and that man and frog are essentially one and the same.
The narrow and difficult path of the naturalist is not to our liking. We'll just take something from him, for force or for contenance, and let's go another, wider way; we are not researchers, not testers - let others pore over the facts and engage in science for knowledge - we are sages and teachers of faith. We preach a religion of nihilism, we we deny. . ... The religion of negation is directed against all authorities, and is itself based on the grossest worship of authority. She has her merciless idols. Everything that has a negative character is already eo ipso (As a result of this(lat.). ) an immutable dogma in the eyes of these sectarians. ... He needs only complete self-confidence and the ability to use all means for the purposes of denial. The less he disassembles the means, the better. In this respect, he completely agrees with the Jesuit Fathers and fully accepts their famous rule that the end sanctifies all means.
Is this negative dogmatism, this religion of nihilism, a phenomenon that characterizes the spirit of our age? ... No, our time is famous primarily for its freedom and tolerance, its science, the spirit of research and criticism, which does not neglect anything and does not condemn anything. Education, science, political and industrial life, the development and competition of various interests, freedom of conscience, the educational influence of the environment, the living power of tradition - these are the obstacles that this phenomenon encounters in the educated societies of our time. But if in this phenomenon it is impossible to see a common feature of our time, then we undoubtedly recognize in it a characteristic feature of mental life in our country for the current moment. In no other social environment could the Bazarovs have a wide range of activities and appear strong men or giants; in any other environment, at every step, the deniers themselves would be continually subjected to negation; at each meeting they would have to repeat to themselves what Bazarov said before his death: "Yes, go and try to deny death: it denies me, and that's it." But in our civilization, which does not have any independent power in itself, in our small mental world, where there is nothing standing firmly, where there is not a single interest that would not be ashamed and embarrassed of itself and somehow believe in its existence - - the spirit of nihilism could develop and acquire significance. This mental milieu itself falls under nihilism and finds its truest expression in it.
M.A. Antonovich
Extract from the article "Asmodeus of our time", 1862
Almost every page shows the author's desire to humiliate the hero at all costs, whom he considered his opponent and therefore heaped on him all sorts of absurdities and mocked him in every possible way, scattering in witticisms and barbs. All this is permissible, appropriate, perhaps even good in some polemical article; but in the novel it is a flagrant injustice that destroys its poetic action. In the novel, the hero, the opponent of the author, is a defenseless and unanswerable creature, he is completely in the hands of the author and is silently forced to listen to all sorts of fables that are raised against him; he is in the same position in which the opponents were in learned treatises written in the form of conversations. In them, the author orates, always speaks intelligently and reasonably, while his opponents appear to be pitiful and narrow-minded fools who do not know how to say words decently, and not even to present any sensible objection; whatever they say, the author refutes everything in the most victorious manner. From various places in Mr. Turgenev's novel it is clear that the main character of his man is not stupid, - on the contrary, he is very capable and gifted, inquisitive, diligently studying and knowing a lot; meanwhile, in disputes, he is completely lost, expresses nonsense and preaches absurdities that are unforgivable to the most limited mind. Therefore, as soon as Mr. Turgenev begins to joke and mock his hero, it seems that if the hero were a living person, if he could free himself from silence and speak independently of himself, then he would immediately strike down Mr. Turgenev, laugh would have been much wittier and more thorough with him, so that Mr. Turgenev himself would then have to play the pitiful role of silence and unanswerability. Mr. Turgenev, through one of his favorites, asks the hero: "You deny everything? not only art, poetry ... but also ... it is terrible to say ... - Everything, the hero answered with inexpressible calm" (p. 517).
Apparently, Mr. Turgenev wanted to depict in his hero, as they say, a demonic or Byronic nature, something like Hamlet; but, on the other hand, he gave him features that make his nature seem the most ordinary and even vulgar, at least very far from demonism. And this, on the whole, does not produce a character, not a living personality, but a caricature, a monster with a tiny head and a giant mouth, a small face and a very large nose, and, moreover, the most malicious caricature.
Preview:
Lesson work card
Surname, name of the student ________________________________
- Lesson goals.
- _______________________________________________________________________
- _______________________________________________________________________
- _______________________________________________________________________
- _______________________________________________________________________
- _______________________________________________________________________
- _______________________________________________________________________
- Stages of comprehension.
Exercise: determine the order of understanding the topic of the lesson and arrange the aphorisms of A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" in accordance with this logic.
1.____________________________________________________________________________
2.____________________________________________________________________________
3.____________________________________________________________________________
- Key phrases of statements by representatives of periodicals about the novel "Fathers and Sons"
1. "Contemporary": _____________________________________________________________________
2. "Bell": _____________________________________________________________________________
3. "Russian Word": __________________________________________________________________________
4. "Russian Bulletin": _________________________________________________________________
V. TASK - "thesis-analysis-synthesis-key".
Question | Answer |
|
Article title. | ||
What topic is being discussed? | ||
What is the main statement on the topic? | ||
What supports the main statement? Can you list these reasons? | ||
Lesson done in technology developing critical thinking through reading and writing Developers: The team of teachers-practitioners: Samsonkina Tatyana Leonidovna, MBOU "Secondary School No. 4", Bogotol Maksimenko Irina Mikhailovna, MBOU "Gymnasium No. 1", Norilsk Tyurina Tatyana Anatolyevna, MBOU "Aginskaya secondary school No. 1", Sayansky district Lazko Yulia Mikhailovna, MKOU "Vladimirskaya secondary school", Bogotol district Krasnoyarsk, November 2013 Preview:http://go.mail.ru/search_video?q=%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%86%D1%8B+%D0%B8+%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B8+ %D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BC+%D1%81%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0 %BE%D0%B9+%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%8C%D0%B8#s=Zoomby&sig=eda2e0a1de&d=490604638 "Who are the judges?" “You are the current ones, come on!” "They scold here, but there they thank." 1. "They scold here, but there they thank." 2. “And who are the judges?” 3. "You are the current ones, come on!" D.I.Pisarev Turgenev's novel stirs the mind, leads to reflection, because everyone is imbued with the most complete, most touching sincerity. Bazarovism is a disease of our time, which sticks to people who, in terms of their mental strength, are above the general level. Pechorin has a will without knowledge, Rudin has knowledge without a will, Bazarov has both knowledge and will, thought and deed merge into one solid whole ... Russian critic, publicist, employee of the Russian Word magazine. Nihilist. Pisarev preached the need for socio-historical and cultural progress, conditioned by civil liberties and the socio-practical orientation of science, art and education. Turgenev's task turned out to be writing a panegyric to the "fathers" and denouncing the "children" whom he did not understand, instead of denunciation, slander turned out. - The younger generation is represented by corrupters of youth, sowers of discord and evil, hating good - in a word, Asmodeans. Russian publicist, literary critic, materialist philosopher. . An employee of the Sovremennik magazine. Nihilist. Antonovich's literary-critical works are characterized by an ideological approach to literary creativity, the desire to see in the content of a work of art a direct reflection of the "progressive" or "reactionary" tendencies of social thought. One of the most powerful and noble demons; the devil of lust, fornication, jealousy and at the same time revenge, hatred and destruction. Asmodeus M. N. Katkov "On our nihilism about Turgenev's novel" If there is a real force in this Bazarov, then it is something else, and not science at all. The narrow and difficult path of the naturalist is not to our liking. We will take only a little from him, for force or for contenance, and we will follow a different, wider path; we are not researchers, not testers - let others pore over the facts and engage in science for knowledge - we are sages and teachers of faith. Journalist, critic, conservative. In 1856, Katkov became the publisher and editor of the Russky Vestnik magazine, where he advocated the constitutional and monarchical principles of the state. devices, unconditionally supporting the reforms being prepared by the government. It is clear that Turgenev brought Bazarov out not to pat him on the head, he wanted to do something in favor of the fathers. But in contact with such miserable and insignificant fathers as the Kirsanovs, the cool Bazarov carried away Turgenev, and instead of whipping his son, he flogged the fathers. A.I. Herzen "Once again Bazarov" Herzen Alexander Ivanovich, pro-aik, thinker, publicist, politician. Publisher-editor of the Kolokol magazine. Liberal. He began his activities under the influence of the great utopian socialists. Subsequently, he becomes one of the leaders of the "Westerners" and fights against the Slavophiles. References 1. L.I. Abdulina, N.N. Budnikova, G.I. Poltorzhitskaya. Non-traditional literature lessons: grades 5-11. 2. 3. I. Zagashev. A course of lectures on technology RKMChP. 3. Website: www.proshkolu.ru The material was prepared by F.I.O. Place of work Samsonkina Tatyana Leonidovna MBOU secondary school No. 4 Bogotol Tyurina Tatyana Anatolyevna MBOU "Aginskaya secondary school No. 1", Sayansky district Maksimenko Irina Mikhailovna MBOU "Gymnasium No. 1" Norilsk Lazko Yulia Mikhailovna MKOU Vladimirovskaya secondary school, Bogotolsky district Popular in category:
© 2023 Automotive portal. Tires and wheels. Chassis. Light and glass. Cooling system
|
