What is the main conflict of the novel Oblolov. Goncharov "Oblomov", conflict and system of images

In the novel "Oblomov" Goncharov reflected part of contemporary reality, showed the types and images characteristic of that time, explored the origins and essence of contradictions in Russian society. mid-nineteenth V. The author used a number of artistic techniques that contributed to a more complete disclosure of the images, themes and ideas of the work.
Building literary work plays an important role, and Goncharov used the composition as an artistic device. The novel is in four parts; in the first, the author describes Oblomov's day in detail, without omitting a single detail, so that the reader gets a complete and detailed picture whole life the main character, because all the days in Oblomov's life are about the same. The image of Oblomov himself is carefully outlined, and when the way of life, the features of the hero’s inner world are revealed and become clear to the reader, the author introduces into the fabric of the work “Oblomov’s Dream”, in which he shows the reasons for the appearance of such a worldview in Oblomov, the social conditioning of his psychology. Falling asleep, Oblomov asks himself: “Why am I like this?” - and in a dream he receives an answer to his question. “Oblomov's Dream” is an exposition of the novel, located not at the beginning, but inside the work; using such an artistic technique, showing first the character of the hero, and then the origins and conditions of his formation, Goncharov showed the foundations and depths of the soul, consciousness, psychology of the protagonist.
To reveal the characters of the characters, the author also uses the method of antithesis, which is the basis for constructing a system of images. The main antithesis is the passive, weak-willed, dreamy Oblomov and the active, energetic Stolz. They are opposed to each other in everything, down to the details: in appearance, in upbringing, attitude to education, lifestyle. If Oblomov as a child lived in an atmosphere of general moral and intellectual hibernation, drowning out the slightest attempt to take the initiative, then Stolz's father, on the contrary, encouraged his son's risky antics, saying that he would become a "good gentleman." If Oblomov's life is monotonous, filled with conversations with uninteresting people, altercations with Zakhar, abundant sleep and food, endless lying on the couch, then Stolz is always on the move, always busy, constantly in a hurry somewhere, full of energy.

If Oblomov's life is monotonous, filled with conversations with uninteresting people, squabbles with Zakhar, abundant sleep and food, endless lying on the couch, then Stolz is always on the move, always busy, constantly in a hurry somewhere, full of energy. Actually, the life of Stolz, in his words, is a stormy, rushing river, while the life of Oblomov is a “swamp”. These are two completely opposite characters; Goncharov uses the antithesis to more fully reveal the images of Oblomov and Stolz. In general, there are many oppositions in the novel, the main ones are Oblomov and Stolz, Oblomov and Olga, Olga and Pshenitssha. The antithesis of Oblomov - Olga is similar to the antithesis of Oblomov - Stolz, only here the lethargy and indifference of Ilya Ilyich are opposed to Olga's liveliness and insatiable mind, which constantly requires new food for thought. Such curiosity and breadth of thinking, in turn, is opposed to Pshenitsyna's narrow-mindedness and indifference. In order to show Olga's loftiness and Agafya Matveevna's earthiness, Goncharov uses the following technique in describing the heroines: speaking of Olga, he pays little attention to her appearance, dwelling in more detail on the inner world; in the description of Pshenitsyna, elbows, shoulders, neck are always mentioned - details appearance; thus showing the insignificance and narrowness of her inner world and thinking. In comparison, the most typical and significant character traits are revealed; this creates a bright and embossed image.
The psychologism of the novel lies in the fact that the author explores inner world all heroes. To do this, he introduces internal monologues - the hero's reasoning, which he does not say aloud. It is like a dialogue of a person with himself; So, Oblomov before “Sleep ...” thinks about his behavior, about how another would behave in his place. The monologues show the hero's attitude to himself and others, to life, love, death - to everything; thus, again, psychology is being explored.
Artistic techniques used by Goncharov are very diverse. Throughout the novel, there is a reception of artistic detail, detailed and accurate description human appearance, nature, interior decoration rooms, that is, everything that helps the reader to create a complete picture of what is happening

Throughout the novel, there is a technique of artistic detail, a detailed and accurate description of human appearance, nature, interior decoration of rooms, that is, everything that helps to create a complete picture of what is happening in the reader. As a literary device, a symbol is also important in a work. Many items have symbolic meaning, for example, Oblomov's robe is a symbol of his everyday habitual life. At the beginning of the novel, the protagonist does not part with his robe; when Olga temporarily “pulls Oblomov out of the swamp” and he comes to life, the dressing gown is forgotten; at the end, "in the house of Pshenitsyna, he again finds use, already until the end of Oblomov's life. Other symbols - a branch of lilac (Olga's love), Oblomov's slippers (almost like a bathrobe) and others also have great importance in the novel.
“Oblomov” is not only a socio-historical work, but also deeply psychological: the author set himself the goal of not just describing and considering, but exploring the origins, reasons for the formation, features, and influence on others of the psychology of a certain social type. I. A. Goncharov achieved this by using a variety of artistic means, creating with their help the most suitable form for the content - composition, system of images, genre, style and language of the work.

TWO PERCEPTIONS OF THE WORLD (based on the novel by I. A. Goncharov "Oblomov")
I. A. Goncharov worked on the novel "Oblomov" for ten years. In this (best!) work, the author expressed his convictions and hopes; he displayed those problems of contemporary life that worried him and deeply hurt him, revealed the causes of these problems. Therefore, the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrei "Ivanovich Stolz" acquired typical features, and the word "Oblomovism" itself began to express a quite definite, almost philosophical concept. One cannot exclude the image of Olga Sergeevna Ilyinskaya, without which the characters of men would not have been fully illuminated.
To understand the character of a person, the motives of his actions, one must turn to the origins of personality formation: childhood, upbringing, environment, and finally, to the education received.
In Ilyusha, it seems, the strength of all the generations of his ancestors was concentrated; he felt the makings of a man of the new time, capable of fruitful activity. But Ilya's aspirations to explore the world on his own were stopped by the nanny who kept her eyes on him, from whose supervision he escaped only during the afternoon nap, when all living things in the house, except for Ilya, fell asleep. "It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death."
An attentive child observes everything that is done in the house, “saturates the soft mind with living examples and unconsciously draws a program of his life for the life around him”, the “main concern of life” of which is good food, and then - sound sleep.
The quiet flow of life was disturbed only occasionally by "diseases, losses, quarrels and, among other things, labor." Labor was the main enemy of the inhabitants of Oblomovka, a punishment imposed "on our forefathers." In Oblomovka, they always got rid of work at the opportunity, "finding it possible and proper." Such an attitude to work was brought up in Ilya Ilyich, who adopted a ready-made standard of life, passed down from generation to generation without changes.

Such an attitude to work was brought up in Ilya Ilyich, who adopted a ready-made standard of life, passed down from generation to generation without changes. The ideal of inaction was reinforced in the child's imagination by nurse's tales about "Emel the Fool" receiving various gifts from a magic pike, and undeserved ones at that. Fairy tales penetrate deeply into Ilya's consciousness, and, being already an adult, he "unconsciously sad sometimes, why a fairy tale is not life, and life is not a fairy tale."
The desire for independence, young energy was stopped by the friendly cries of the parents: "What about the servants?" Soon, Ilya himself realized that ordering was calmer and more convenient. A dexterous, mobile child is constantly stopped by his parents and a nanny for fear that the boy will "fall, hurt himself" or catch a cold, he was cherished like a hothouse flower. "Seeking manifestations of power turned inward and drooped, withering."
In such conditions, an apathetic, lazy, difficult to rise nature of Ilya Ilyich developed. He was surrounded by the excessive cares of his mother, who made sure that the child ate well, did not overwork on learning from Stolz, and was ready, under any, even the most insignificant pretext, not to let Ilyushenka go to the German. She believed that education was not such an important thing, for which you need to lose weight, lose your blush and skip the holidays. But still, Oblomov's parents understood the need for education, but they saw in it only a means for promotion:
ranks, awards began to receive at that time "no other way than through learning." Parents wanted to give Ilyusha all the benefits "somehow cheaper, with various tricks."
The cares of the mother had a detrimental effect on Ilya: he did not get used to systematic studies, he never wanted to learn more than the teacher asked.
A peer and friend of Oblomov, Andrei Ivanovich Stolz, loved Ilya, tried to stir him up, instill an interest in self-education, set him up for activities that he himself was passionate about, to which he was disposed, because he was brought up in completely different conditions.
Andrei's father, a German, gave him the upbringing that he received from his father, that is, he taught him all the practical sciences, forced him to work early and sent his son who had graduated from the university away from him, as his father had done with him in his time.

Andrei's father, a German, gave him the upbringing that he received from his father, that is, he taught him all the practical sciences, forced him to work early and sent his son who had graduated from the university away from him, as his father had done with him in his time. But the rough burgher upbringing of the father constantly came into contact with the tender, affectionate love of the mother, a Russian noblewoman, who did not contradict her husband, but quietly raised her son in her own way: "... taught him to listen to the thoughtful sounds of Hertz, sang to him about flowers, about the poetry of life , whispered about the brilliant vocation of either a warrior or a writer ... "The neighborhood of Oblomovka with its" primitive laziness, simplicity of morals, silence and immobility "and princely" with a wide expanse of aristocratic life "also prevented Ivan Bogdanovich Stolz from being the son of the same burgher, what he was. The breath of Russian life "takes Andrey away from the straight track outlined by his father." But still Andrei adopted from his father a serious outlook on life (even on all its little things) and pragmatism, which he tried to balance "with the subtle needs of the spirit."
Stoltz kept all emotions, deeds and actions under the "never dormant control" of the mind and spent strictly "according to the budget." He considered himself the cause of all his misfortunes and suffering, he “did not hang guilt and responsibility, like a caftan, on someone else’s nail”, unlike Oblomov, who did not find the strength to plead guilty to his troubles, to the worthlessness of his barren life: ". .. burning reproaches of conscience stung him, and he tried with all his might. to find the guilty one outside of himself and turn their sting on him, but on whom?
The search turned out to be useless, because the reason for the ruined life of Oblomov is himself. It was very painful for him to realize this, since he "painfully felt that in him, as in a grave, some good, bright beginning, perhaps now dead ...". Oblomov was tormented by doubts about the correctness and necessity of his life. However, over the years, excitement and remorse appeared less often, and he quietly and gradually fit into the simple and wide coffin of the rest of his existence, made with his own hands.

However, over the years, excitement and repentance appeared less frequently, and he quietly and gradually fit into the simple and wide coffin of the rest of his existence, made with his own hands ... ".
The attitude of Stolz and Oblomov to the imagination, which has two opposite incarnations, is different: "... a friend - the less you believe him, and an enemy - when you fall asleep trustingly under his sweet whisper." The latter happened to Oblomov. Imagination was a favorite companion of his life, only in his dreams did he embody the rich, deeply buried abilities of his "golden" soul.
Stolz did not give free rein to the imagination and was afraid of any dream, she "had no place in his soul"; he rejected everything that "was not subjected to the analysis of experience, practical truth", or took it for "a fact to which the turn of experience has not yet reached." Andrei Ivanovich persistently "went towards his goal", he put such persistence above all else: "... it was a sign of character in his eyes." He only retreated "from the task when a wall arose in his way or an impenetrable abyss opened up." He soberly assessed his strength and departed, not paying attention to the opinions of others.
Oblomov was afraid of any difficulties, he was too lazy to make even the slightest effort to solve not great, but the most pressing problems. He found consolation in his favorite "conciliatory and soothing" words "perhaps", "maybe" and "somehow" and protected himself from misfortunes with them. He was ready to shift the case to anyone, not caring about its outcome and the decency of the chosen person (this is how he trusted the swindlers who robbed his estate). Like a pure, naive child, Ilya Ilyich did not even allow the thought of the possibility of deception; elementary prudence, not to mention practicality, was completely absent in Oblomov's nature.
Ilya Ilyich's attitude to work has already been discussed. He, like his parents, in every possible way avoided labor, which in his mind was synonymous with boredom, and all the efforts of Stolz, for whom "labor is the image, content, element and purpose of life," to move Ilya Ilyich to any activity were in vain, the matter went no further than words.

He, like his parents, in every possible way avoided work, which in his view was synonymous with boredom, and all the efforts of Stolz, for whom "labor is the image, content, element and purpose of life", to move Ilya Ilyich to any activity were in vain, the matter did not go beyond words. Figuratively speaking, the cart stood on square wheels. She needed constant pushes of a fair amount of force to move. Stolz quickly got tired ("you're messing around like a drunkard"), this occupation was also disappointing for Olga Ilyinskaya, through love for which many aspects of the characters of Oblomov and Stolz are revealed.
Introducing Ilya Ilyich to Olga, Stoltz wanted to "introduce the presence of a young, pretty, intelligent, lively and somewhat mocking woman into Oblomov's sleepy life," who could awaken Ilya to life, illuminate his dim existence. But Stolz "did not foresee that he was bringing in fireworks, Olga and Oblomov - and even more so."
Love for Olga changed Ilya Ilyich. At Olga's request, he gave up many of his habits: he did not lie on the couch, did not overeat, he traveled from the dacha to the city to fulfill her instructions. But finally enter into new life couldn't. “To go forward means to suddenly throw off a wide robe not only from the shoulders, but from the soul, from the mind; together with dust and cobwebs from the walls, sweep the cobwebs from the eyes and see clearly!” But Oblomov was afraid of storms and changes, he absorbed the fear of the new with his mother’s milk, in comparison with which, however, he went ahead (Ilya Ilyich already rejected “the only use of capital is to keep them in a chest”, realizing that “the duty of every citizen is to be honest work to maintain the general welfare"), but achieved little, given his ability.
He was tired of Olga's restless, active nature, and therefore Oblomov dreamed that she would calm down and quietly, sleepily vegetate with him, "crawling from one day to another." Realizing that Olga would never agree to this, Ilya decides to part with her. The break with Olga meant for Oblomov a return to old habits, a final spiritual fall. In life with Pshenitsyna, Ilya Ilyich found a pale reflection of his dreams and “decided that the ideal of his life had come true, although without poetry.
Having put a lot of effort into awakening in Oblomov a craving for activity, Olga soon becomes convinced, in the words of Dobrolyubov, "in his decisive rubbishness", that is, in his inability to spiritual transformation, and leaves him.

Having put a lot of effort into awakening in Oblomov a craving for activity, Olga soon becomes convinced, in the words of Dobrolyubov, "in his decisive rubbishness", that is, in his inability to spiritual transformation, and leaves him.
After going through love and disappointment, Olga began to take her feelings more seriously, she grew so morally that Stoltz did not recognize her when they met a year later, and suffered for a long time, trying to unravel the cause of the dramatic changes in Olga. It was so difficult for Stoltz to understand her heart that "arrogant self-confidence fell a little from him." After listening to Olga's confession about "walks, about the park, about her hopes, about the enlightenment and fall of Oblomov" and having received her consent to marriage, Andrei says to himself: "Everything has been found, there is nothing to look for, nowhere else to go!" However, this does not mean at all that he is plunging into something similar to Oblomov's apathy. Stolz's family life contributed to the harmonious, mutually enriching development of both spouses. However, now Andrey has calmed down, he is happy with everything, and Olga is tormented by doubts: what's next? Is the circle of life closed? Stolz tells her: "We will not go ... to a daring fight against rebellious issues, we will not accept their challenge, we will bow our heads and humbly survive Hard time". He understood that Olga had outgrown him, "he saw that the former ideal of his woman and wife was unattainable, but he was happy" and became only a pale reflection of Olga, in which, according to Dobrolyubov, "more than in Stolz, you can see a hint of a new Russian life."
Oblomov and Stolz are people with different worldviews, and therefore different destinies. Their main difference is that the active, energetic Stoltz managed to properly manage his life and natural talents, trying to "bring the vessel of life to last day without spilling a single drop in vain. "And the soft, trusting Oblomov did not have enough willpower to resist the difficulties of life and defend his right to existence and self-realization.

Natural school - the conventional name for the initial stage of development critical realism in Russian literature of the 1840s, which arose under the influence of the work of Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol.

Turgenev and Dostoevsky, Grigorovich, Herzen, Goncharov, Nekrasov, Panaev, Dal, Chernyshevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin and others were ranked as the "natural school".

The term "Natural School" was first used by Faddey Bulgarin as a disparaging description of the work of young followers of Nikolai Gogol in the "Northern Bee" dated January 26, 1846, but was polemically rethought by Vissarion Belinsky in the article "A Look at Russian Literature of 1847": "natural", that is, an artless, strictly truthful depiction of reality.

The most common features on the basis of which the writer was considered to belong to the Natural School were the following: socially significant topics that captured a wider circle than even the circle of social observations (often in the "low" strata of society), a critical attitude to social reality, the realism of artistic expressions, who fought against the embellishment of reality, aestheticism in itself, romantic rhetoric.

2. Dialogical conflict in the novel by I.A. Goncharova "Ordinary story"

In terms of the depth of disclosure of historical trends in the development of Russian society, in terms of artistic skill, "Ordinary History" has become one of the most significant works of the "natural school". Social analysis was successfully combined with elements of psychologism. The ideological disputes between the uncle and nephew of the Aduevs constitute the most important constructive element. "Ordinary History". The “dialogical conflict” becomes the basis of the structure of the novel. There is no winner in the dispute between the Aduevs. Uncle strictly logically defends the ideas of historical progress associated with capitalist development. In the nephew, the writer cherishes lyrical pathos, faith in the power of human feelings, a lively movement of the heart. But Alexander Aduev betrays his youthful, lofty dreams. He justifies himself with references to time: “What to do…! such a century. I am on a par with the century.

3. Problems of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov"

The novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is a socio-psychological work that describes a person's life from all sides. The main character of the novel is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. This is a middle-class landowner who has his own family estate. From an early age, he got used to being a gentleman due to the fact that he had someone to give and do, which is why in his later life he became a loafer. The author showed all the vices of his character and even exaggerated them somewhere. In his novel, Goncharov gives a broad generalization of "Oblomovism" and explores the psychology of a fading person. Goncharov touches on the problem of "superfluous people", continuing the works of Pushkin and Lermontov on this topic. Like Onegin and Pechorin, Oblomov did not find any use for his strength and turned out to be unclaimed.

His laziness and apathy are the creation of upbringing and surrounding circumstances. The main thing here is not Oblomov, but “Oblomovism”.

The problem raised by Goncharov is the reflection in Oblomov of the Russian national character. Dobrolyubov wrote about Oblomov: "The root type of Russian life." The serf way of life shaped them both (Zakhar and Oblomov), deprived them of respect for work, brought up idleness and idleness. The main thing in Oblomov's life is case and laziness. With Oblomovism, as a deeply alien and harmful phenomenon, we must tirelessly fight, destroying the very soil on which it can grow, because Oblomov lives in each of us. Oblomovism is the scourge and evil of Russia, a characteristic feature of our life. The material for the work was Russian life, which the writer observed from childhood.

Often referred to as a mystery writer, Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov, extravagant and inaccessible to many contemporaries, went to his zenith for almost twelve years. "Oblomov" was printed in parts, crumpled, added and changed "slowly and heavily," as the author wrote, whose creative hand, however, approached the creation of the novel responsibly and scrupulously. The novel was published in 1859 in the St. Petersburg magazine " Domestic notes” and was met with clear interest from the side, as literary circles, and philistine.

The history of writing the novel prancing in parallel with the tarantas of the events of that time, namely with the Gloomy Seven Years of 1848-1855, when not only Russian literature was silent, but everything Russian society. It was an era of increased censorship, which was the reaction of the authorities to the activity of the liberal-minded intelligentsia. A wave of democratic upheavals took place across Europe, so politicians in Russia decided to secure the regime with repressive measures against the press. There was no news, and writers were faced with the caustic and helpless problem of having nothing to write about. What, perhaps, they wanted, the censors ruthlessly pulled out. It is this situation that is the result of that hypnosis and that lethargy that wraps the whole work, like Oblomov's favorite dressing gown. The best people countries in such a suffocating atmosphere felt unnecessary, and values ​​​​encouraged from above - petty and unworthy of a nobleman.

“I wrote my life and what grew to it,” Goncharov briefly commented on the history of the novel after finishing touches on his creation. These words are an honest recognition and confirmation of the autobiographical nature of the greatest collection eternal questions and answers to them.

Composition

The composition of the novel is circular. Four parts, four seasons, four states of Oblomov, four stages in the life of each of us. The action in the book is a cycle: sleep turns into awakening, awakening into sleep.

• Exposure. In the first part of the novel, there is almost no action, except perhaps only in Oblomov's head. Ilya Ilyich lies, he receives visitors, he shouts at Zakhar, and Zakhar shouts at him. Characters of different colors appear here, but basically they are all the same ... Like Volkov, for example, to whom the hero sympathizes and rejoices for himself that he does not fragment and does not crumble into ten places in one day, does not loom around, but retains his human dignity in his chambers . The next “out of the cold”, Sudbinsky, Ilya Ilyich also sincerely regrets and concludes that his unfortunate friend is bogged down in the service, and that now much will not move in him for a century ... There was a journalist Penkin, and colorless Alekseev, and heavy-browed Tarantiev, and all he was equally sorry, sympathized with everyone, retorted with everyone, recited ideas and thought ... An important part is the chapter "Oblomov's Dream", in which the root of "Oblomovism" is exposed. The composition is equal to the idea: Goncharov describes and shows the reasons for the formation of laziness, apathy, infantilism, and in the end, a dead soul. It is the first part that is the exposition of the novel, since here the reader is presented with all the conditions in which the personality of the hero was formed.
• Tie. The first part is also the starting point for the subsequent degradation of the personality of Ilya Ilyich, because even the leaps of passion for Olga and devoted love for Stolz in the second part of the novel do not make the hero a better person, but only gradually squeeze Oblomov out of Oblomov. Here the hero meets Ilyinskaya, which in the third part develops into a climax.
• Climax. The third part, first of all, is fateful and significant for the protagonist himself, since here all his dreams suddenly become real: he performs feats, he makes a marriage proposal to Olga, he decides to love without fear, he decides to take risks, to duel with himself... Only people like Oblomov don't wear holsters, don't swordsman, don't sweat during battle, they doze off and only imagine how heroically beautiful it is. Oblomov can’t do everything - he cannot fulfill Olga’s request and go to his village, since this village is a fiction. The hero breaks up with the woman of his dreams, choosing to preserve his own way of life, rather than striving for the best and eternal struggle with myself. At the same time, his financial affairs are hopelessly deteriorating, and he is forced to leave a comfortable apartment and prefer a budget option.
• Interchange. The fourth and final part, "Vyborg Oblomovism", consists of marriage to Agafya Pshenitsyna and the subsequent death of the protagonist. It is also possible that it was marriage that contributed to Oblomov’s stupefaction and imminent death, because, as he himself put it: “There are such donkeys that get married!”.

It can be summarized that the plot itself is extremely simple, despite the fact that it is stretched over six hundred pages. A lazy, kind middle-aged man (Oblomov) is deceived by his vulture friends (by the way, they are vultures each in their own area), but a kind man comes to the rescue. loving friend(Stoltz), who saves him, but takes away the object of his love (Olga), and therefore the main nourishment of his rich spiritual life.

Features of the composition lie in parallel storylines at different levels of perception.

• There is only one main storyline here and it is love, romantic ... The relationship between Olga Ilyinskaya and her main beau is shown in a new, bold, passionate, psychologically detailed way. That is why the novel claims to be a love story, being a kind of model and manual for building relationships between a man and a woman.
• The secondary storyline is based on the principle of opposing two destinies: Oblomov and Stolz, and the intersection of these very destinies at the point of love for one passion. But in this case, Olga is not a turning point, no, the look falls only on a strong male friendship, for a pat on the back, for broad smiles and for mutual envy (I want to live the way the other lives).

What is the novel about?

This novel is, first of all, about a vice of social significance. Often the reader can notice the similarity of Oblomov not only with his creator, but also with the majority of people who live and have ever lived. Which of the readers, as they got closer to Oblomov, did not recognize themselves lying on the sofa and reflecting on the meaning of life, on the futility of being, on the power of love, on happiness? Which reader has not crushed his heart with the question: “To be or not to be?”?

Ultimately, the writer's property is such that, trying to expose another human flaw, he falls in love with it in the process and gives the reader a flaw with such an appetizing aroma that the reader eagerly wants to feast on it. After all, Oblomov is lazy, untidy, infantile, but the public loves him only because the hero has a soul and is not ashamed to reveal this soul to us. “Do you think that a thought does not need a heart? No, it is fertilized by love" - ​​this is one of the most important postulates of the work, laying the essence of the novel "Oblomov".

The sofa itself and Oblomov, lying on it, keep the world in balance. His philosophy, promiscuity, confusion, throwing run the lever of movement and the axis of the globe. In the novel, in this case, not only the justification of inaction takes place, but also the desecration of action. The vanity of the vanities of Tarantiev or Sudbinsky does not bring any sense, Stolz is successfully making a career, but what one is unknown ... Goncharov dares to slightly ridicule work, that is, work in the service, to which he hated, which, therefore, was not surprising to notice in the character of the protagonist . “But how upset he was when he saw that there must be at least an earthquake in order not to come to the service of a healthy official, and earthquakes, as a sin, do not happen in St. Petersburg; a flood, of course, could also serve as a barrier, but even that rarely happens. - the writer conveys all the meaninglessness state activity, about which Oblomov thought and waved his hand in the end, referring to Hypertrophia cordis cum dilatatione ejus ventriculi sinistri. So what is Oblomov talking about? This is a novel about the fact that if you are lying on the couch, you are probably more right than those who walk somewhere or sit somewhere every day. Oblomovism is a diagnosis of humanity, where any activity can lead either to the loss of one's own soul, or to the stupid crumbling of time.

Main characters and their characteristics

It should be noted that the surnames of the speakers are typical for the novel. For example, they are worn by all minor characters. Tarantiev comes from the word "tarantula", journalist Penkin - from the word "foam", which hints at the surface and cheapness of his occupation. With their help, the author completes the description of the characters: the name of Stolz is translated from German as “proud”, Olga is Ilyinskaya because it belongs to Ilya, and Pshenitsyna is a hint at the vileness of her petty-bourgeois lifestyle. However, all this, in fact, does not fully characterize the heroes, this is done by Goncharov himself, describing the actions and thoughts of each of them, revealing their potential or lack thereof.

1. Oblomov- the main character, which is not surprising, but the hero is not the only one. It is through the prism of the life of Ilya Ilyich that a different life is visible, only here, what is interesting, Oblomovskaya seems to readers more entertaining and original, despite the fact that he does not have the characteristics of a leader and is even unsympathetic. Oblomov, a lazy and overweight middle-aged man, can confidently become the face of melancholy, depression and melancholy propaganda, but this man is so unhypocritical and pure in soul that his gloomy and stale flair is almost invisible. He is kind, subtle in love matters, sincere with people. He asks himself: “When will we live?” - and does not live, but only dreams and waits for the right moment for the utopian life that comes into his dreams and slumbers. He also asks the great Hamlet question: “To be or not to be,” when he decides to get up from the sofa or confess his feelings to Olga. He, just like Cervantes' Don Quixote, wants to accomplish a feat, but does not, and therefore blames his Sancho Panza - Zakhar for this. Oblomov is naive, like a child, and so sweet to the reader that an overwhelming feeling arises to protect Ilya Ilyich and quickly send him to an ideal village, where he can, holding his wife by the waist, walk with her and look at the cook in the process of cooking. We have discussed this in detail in our essay.
2. The opposite of Oblomov is Stolz. The person from whom the narration and the story of "Oblomovism" is conducted. He is German by father and Russian by mother, therefore a man who has inherited the virtues of both cultures. Andrei Ivanovich from childhood read both Herder and Krylov, he was well versed in "hard-working money-making, vulgar order and boring correctness of life." For Stolz, the philosophic nature of Oblomov is equal to antiquity and the past fashion for thought. He travels, works, builds, reads avidly and envies the free soul of a friend, because he himself does not dare to claim a free soul, or maybe he is simply afraid. We have discussed this in detail in our essay.
3. The turning point in Oblomov's life can be called in one name - Olga Ilyinskaya. She is interesting, she is special, she is smart, she is educated, she sings amazingly and she falls in love with Oblomov. Unfortunately, her love is like a list of certain tasks, and the beloved for her is nothing more than a project. Having learned from Stolz the peculiarities of the thinking of her future betrothed, the girl is eager to make a “man” out of Oblomov and considers her limitless and quivering love him to her. In part, Olga is cruel, proud and dependent on public opinion, but to say that her love is not real means to spit on all the ups and downs in relations between the sexes, no, rather, her love is special, but genuine. also became a topic for our essay.
4. Agafya Pshenitsyna is a 30-year-old woman, the mistress of the house where Oblomov moved. The heroine is an economic, simple and kind person who found in Ilya Ilyich the love of her life, but did not seek to change him. It is characterized by silence, calmness, a certain limited outlook. Agafya does not think about something high, beyond the scope of everyday life, but she is caring, hardworking and capable of self-sacrifice for the sake of her beloved. More detailed in the essay.

Subject

Dmitry Bykov says:

Heroes of Goncharov do not shoot duels, like Onegin, Pechorin or Bazarov, do not participate, like Prince Bolkonsky, in historical battles and writing Russian laws, do not commit crimes and transgression through the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" as in Dostoevsky's novels. Everything they do fits into the framework of everyday life, but this is only one facet

Indeed, one facet of Russian life cannot encompass the whole novel: the novel is also divided into social relations, and on friendly relations, and for love ... Exactly last topic is the main and highly acclaimed by critics.

1. Love Theme embodied in Oblomov's relationship with two women: Olga and Agafya. So Goncharov depicts several varieties of the same feeling. Ilyinskaya's emotions are saturated with narcissism: in them she sees herself, and only then her chosen one, although she loves him with all her heart. However, she values ​​her brainchild, her project, that is, the non-existent Oblomov. Ilya's relationship with Agafya is different: the woman fully supported his desire for peace and laziness, idolized him and lived by taking care of him and their son Andryusha. The tenant gave her a new life, a family, a long-awaited happiness. Her love is adoration to the point of blindness, because indulging her husband's whims led him to an early death. The main theme of the work is described in more detail in the essay "".
2. Friendship Theme. Stolz and Oblomov, although they survived falling in love with the same woman, did not unleash a conflict and did not betray friendship. They always complemented each other, talked about the most important and intimate in the lives of both. This relationship has been ingrained in their hearts since childhood. The boys were different, but got along well with each other. Andrei found peace and good-heartedness visiting a friend, and Ilya gladly accepted his help in everyday affairs. You can read more about this in the essay "Friendship of Oblomov and Stolz".
3. Finding the meaning of life. All heroes are looking for their own way, looking for the answer to the eternal question about the destiny of man. Ilya found it in reflection and finding spiritual harmony, in dreams and the very process of existence. Stolz found himself in the eternal movement forward. Detailed in the essay.

Problems

The main problem of Oblomov is the lack of motivation to move. The whole society of that time really wants, but cannot wake up and get out of that terrible depressing state. Many people have become and are still becoming Oblomov victims. A living hell is to live life as a dead man and not see any purpose. It was this human pain that Goncharov wanted to show, resorting to the concept of conflict for help: here there is a conflict between a person and society, and between a man and a woman, and between friendship and love, and between loneliness and an idle life in society, and between work and hedonism and between walking and lying down and so on and so forth.

• The problem of love. This feeling can change a person for the better, this transformation is not an end in itself. For Goncharov's heroine, this was not obvious, and she put all the strength of her love into the re-education of Ilya Ilyich, not seeing how painful it was for him. Remaking her lover, Olga did not notice that she was squeezing out of him not only bad character traits, but also good ones. In fear of losing himself, Oblomov could not save his beloved girl. He had a problem moral choice: either remain yourself, but alone, or play the whole life of another person, but for the good of the spouse. He chose his individuality, and in this decision you can see selfishness or honesty - to each his own.
• Friendship issue. Stolz and Oblomov passed the test of one love for two, but could not snatch a single minute from family life to keep the partnership. Time (and not a quarrel) separated them, the routine of days tore the former strong friendly ties. From separation, they both lost: Ilya Ilyich finally launched himself, and his friend was mired in petty worries and troubles.
• The problem of education. Ilya Ilyich became a victim of a sleepy atmosphere in Oblomovka, where servants did everything for him. The boy's vivacity was dulled by endless feasts and slumbers, the dull stupor of the wilderness left its mark on his addictions. becomes clearer in the episode "Oblomov's Dream", which we analyzed in a separate article.

Idea

Goncharov's task is to show and tell what "Oblomovism" is, opening its wings and pointing out both its positive and negative sides and enabling the reader to choose and decide what is paramount for him - Oblomovism or real life with all its injustice, materiality and activity. the main idea in the novel "Oblomov" - a description of a global phenomenon modern life which has become part of the Russian mentality. Now the name of Ilya Ilyich has become a household name and denotes not so much a quality as a whole portrait of the person in question.

Since no one forced the nobles to work, and the serfs did everything for them, phenomenal laziness flourished in Rus', engulfing the upper class. The backbone of the country was rotten from idleness, in no way contributing to its development. This phenomenon could not but arouse concern among the creative intelligentsia, therefore, in the image of Ilya Ilyich, we see not only a rich inner world, but also inaction that is disastrous for Russia. However, the meaning of the kingdom of laziness in the novel "Oblomov" has a political connotation. No wonder we mentioned that the book was written during a period of stricter censorship. It has a hidden, but, nevertheless, the main idea that the authoritarian regime of government is to blame for this general idleness. In it, a person does not find any use for himself, stumbling only on restrictions and fear of punishment. The absurdity of subservience reigns around, people do not serve, but are served, therefore a self-respecting hero ignores the vicious system and, as a sign of silent protest, does not play an official who still does not decide anything and cannot change. The country under the gendarmerie's boot is doomed to regress, both at the level of the state machine, and at the level of spirituality and morality.

How did the novel end?

The life of the hero was cut short by obesity of the heart. He lost Olga, he lost himself, he even lost his talent - the ability to think. Living with Pshenitsyna did not do him any good: he was mired in a kulebyak, in a tripe pie, which swallowed and sucked poor Ilya Ilyich. Fat ate his soul. His soul was eaten by Pshenitsyna's repaired dressing gown, the sofa, from which he swiftly slid down into the abyss of innards, into the abyss of offal. This is the finale of the novel Oblomov - a gloomy, uncompromising verdict on Oblomovism.

What does it teach?

The novel is cheeky. Oblomov holds the reader's attention and places this very attention on the whole part of the novel in a dusty room where the main character does not get out of bed and shouts: "Zakhar, Zakhar!". Well, isn't that nonsense?! And the reader doesn’t leave… and can even lie down next to him, and even wrap himself in an “oriental robe, without the slightest hint of Europe”, and not even decide anything about the “two misfortunes”, but think about them all… Goncharov’s psychedelic novel loves to lull reader and pushes him to fend off the fine line between reality and dream.

Oblomov is not just a character, it is a lifestyle, it is a culture, it is any contemporary, it is every third inhabitant of Russia, every third inhabitant of the whole world.

Goncharov wrote a novel about the universal worldly laziness to live in order to overcome it himself and help people cope with this disease, but it turned out that he justified this laziness only because he lovingly described every step, every weighty idea of ​​the bearer of this laziness. It is not surprising, because Oblomov's "crystal soul" still lives in the memories of his friend Stolz, his beloved Olga, his wife Pshenitsyna, and, finally, in the tearful eyes of Zakhar, who continues to go to the grave of his master. Thus, Goncharov's conclusion- to find the golden mean between the "crystal world" and the real world, finding a calling in creativity, love, development.

Criticism

Readers of the 21st century rarely read a novel, and if they do, they do not read it to the end. It is easy for some fans of Russian classics to agree that the novel is somewhat boring, but boring on purpose, forcing. However, this does not frighten reviewers, and many critics were happy to disassemble and still analyze the novel by psychological bones.

One popular example is the work of Nikolai Aleksandrovich Dobrolyubov. In his article “What is Oblomovism?” critic gave excellent characterization to each of the heroes. The reviewer sees the reasons for laziness and inability to arrange Oblomov's life in education and in the initial conditions where the personality was formed, or rather was not.

He writes that Oblomov is “not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person who is also looking for something in his life, thinking about something. But the vile habit of getting the satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed in him an apathetic immobility and plunged him into a miserable state of moral slavery.

Vissarion Grigoryevich Belinsky saw the origins of apathy in the influence of the whole society, since he believed that a person was originally a blank canvas created by nature, therefore, some development or degradation of a particular person is on the scales that belong directly to society.

Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev, for example, looked at the word "Oblomovism" as an eternal and necessary organ for the body of literature. "Oblomovism" according to him is a vice of Russian life.

The sleepy, routine atmosphere of a rural, provincial life added to what the labors of parents and nannies did not have time to do. The greenhouse plant, which in childhood had not become acquainted not only with the excitement of real life, but even with childish sorrows and joys, smelled of a stream of fresh, lively air. Ilya Ilyich began to study and developed so much that he understood what life is, what the duties of a person are. He understood this intellectually, but could not sympathize with the accepted ideas about duty, about work and activity. The fatal question: why live and work? - the question that usually arises after numerous disappointments and deceived hopes, directly, by itself, without any preparation, presented itself in all its clarity to the mind of Ilya Ilyich, - the critic wrote in his well-known article.

Alexander Vasilievich Druzhinin looked at Oblomovism and its main representative in more detail. The critic singled out 2 main aspects of the novel - external and internal. One lies in the life and practice of the daily routine, while the other occupies the area of ​​​​the heart and head of any person, which does not cease to collect crowds of destructive thoughts and feelings about the rationality of the existing reality. If you believe the critics, then Oblomov became dead because he preferred to die, and not live in eternal incomprehensible fuss, betrayal, self-interest, monetary imprisonment and absolute indifference to beauty. However, Druzhinin did not consider "Oblomovism" an indicator of attenuation or decay, he saw sincerity and conscience in it, and believed that Goncharov himself was responsible for this positive assessment of "Oblomovism".

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

The novel was conceived in 1847 and was written for 10 years. In 1849, in the almanac "Literary Collection with Illustrations" at the "Sovremennik" the chapter "Oblomov's Dream" was published as an independent work. Published in 1859, the novel was hailed as a major social event.

Like any system, the character sphere of the work is characterized through its constituent elements(characters) and structure -"a relatively stable way (law) of the connection of elements." This or that image receives the status of a character precisely as an element of the system, part of the whole, which is especially clearly seen when comparing the images of animals, plants, and things in various works.

In the novel Oblomov, Goncharov reflected a part of contemporary reality, showed the types and images characteristic of that time, explored the origins and essence of contradictions in Russian society in the mid-19th century. The author used a number of artistic techniques that contributed to a more complete disclosure of the images, themes and ideas of the work.
The construction of a literary work plays an important role, and Goncharov used composition as an artistic device. The novel is in four parts; in the first, the author describes Oblomov's day in detail, without omitting a single detail, so that the reader gets a complete and detailed picture of the main character's whole life, because all the days in Oblomov's life are approximately the same. The image of Oblomov himself is carefully outlined, and when the way of life, the features of the hero’s inner world are revealed and become clear to the reader, the author introduces into the fabric of the work “Oblomov’s Dream”, in which he shows the reasons for the appearance of such a worldview in Oblomov, the social conditioning of his psychology. Falling asleep, Oblomov asks himself: “Why am I like this?” - and in a dream he receives an answer to his question. “Oblomov's Dream” is an exposition of the novel, located not at the beginning, but inside the work; using such an artistic technique, showing first the character of the hero, and then the origins and conditions of his formation, Goncharov showed the foundations and depths of the soul, consciousness, psychology of the protagonist.
To reveal the characters of the characters, the author also uses the method of antithesis, which is the basis for constructing a system of images. The main antithesis is the passive, weak-willed, dreamy Oblomov and the active, energetic Stolz. They are opposed to each other in everything, down to the details: in appearance, in upbringing, attitude to education, lifestyle. If Oblomov as a child lived in an atmosphere of general moral and intellectual hibernation, drowning out the slightest attempt to take the initiative, then Stolz's father, on the contrary, encouraged his son's risky antics, saying that he would become a "good gentleman." If Oblomov's life is monotonous, filled with conversations with uninteresting people, squabbles with Zakhar, abundant sleep and food, endless lying on the couch, then Stolz is always on the move, always busy, constantly in a hurry somewhere, full of energy. Actually, the life of Stolz, in his words, is a stormy, rushing river, while the life of Oblomov is a “swamp”. These are two completely opposite characters; Goncharov uses the antithesis to more fully reveal the images of Oblomov and Stolz. In general, there are many oppositions in the novel, the main ones are Oblomov and Stolz, Oblomov and Olga, Olga and Pshenitsyna. The antithesis of Oblomov - Olga is similar to the antithesis of Oblomov - Stolz, only here the lethargy and indifference of Ilya Ilyich are opposed to Olga's liveliness and insatiable mind, which requires new food for thought all the time. Such curiosity and breadth of thinking, in turn, is opposed to Pshenitsyna's narrow-mindedness and indifference. In order to show Olga's loftiness and Agafya Matveevna's earthiness, Goncharov uses the following technique in describing the heroines: speaking of Olga, he pays little attention to her appearance, dwelling in more detail on the inner world; in the description of Pshenitsyna, elbows, shoulders, and neck are always mentioned - details of the external appearance; thus showing the insignificance and narrowness of her inner world and thinking. In comparison, the most typical and significant character traits are revealed; this creates a bright and embossed image.
The psychologism of the novel lies in the fact that the author explores the inner world of all the characters. To do this, he introduces internal monologues - the reasoning of the hero, which he does not say aloud. It is like a dialogue of a person with himself; So, Oblomov before “Sleep ...” thinks about his behavior, about how another would behave in his place. The monologues show the hero's attitude to himself and others, to life, love, death - to everything; thus, again, psychology is being explored.
The artistic techniques used by Goncharov are very diverse. Throughout the novel, there is a technique of artistic detail, a detailed and accurate description of human appearance, nature, interior decoration of rooms, that is, everything that helps to create a complete picture of what is happening in the reader. As a literary device, a symbol is also important in a work. Many items have a symbolic meaning, for example, Oblomov's robe is a symbol of his everyday habitual life. At the beginning of the novel, the protagonist does not part with his robe; when Olga temporarily “pulls Oblomov out of the swamp” and he comes to life, the dressing gown is forgotten; at the end, "in Pshenitsyna's house, he again finds use, already until the end of Oblomov's life. Other symbols - a lilac branch (Olga's love), Oblomov's slippers (almost like a bathrobe) and others are also of great importance in the novel.
“Oblomov” is not only a socio-historical work, but also deeply psychological: the author set himself the goal not only to describe and consider, but to explore the origins, reasons for the formation, features, and influence on others of the psychology of a certain social type. I. A. Goncharov achieved this by using a variety of artistic means, creating with their help the most suitable form for the content - composition, system of images, genre, style and language of the work.

Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" was published in 1859, but the chapter "Oblomov's Dream" was published ten years earlier in the "Illustrated Collection" at Sovremennik. In his novel, Goncharov described the master's life "from line to line", showed how Oblomov becomes morally "dead", gradually cools to life. Both the author himself and his hero think about why Ilya Ilyich is like that. At the end of the eighth chapter of the first part of the novel, Oblomov is tormented by this question, asking himself: "Why am I like this?" So and without answering the question posed by himself, the hero falls asleep and has a dream. It is this dream that helps us understand how Oblomov's character was formed.

In "Dream ...", three parts can be conventionally distinguished. In the first, Goncharov tells us about Ilyusha's childhood, when the boy is only seven years old. everywhere only under the supervision of a nanny. Ilyusha is observant, nothing "eludes the child's inquisitive attention; the picture of domestic life indelibly cuts into his soul; the soft mind is saturated with living examples and unconsciously draws a program of his life for the life surrounding him." Although little Oblomov likes such a life, it is not so good to serve as an example to follow. It has many shortcomings: everything in Oblomov happens the same way from day to day, and there are no changes in the life of its inhabitants, it is boring and monotonous. The most important part of it is food : Oblomovites pay a lot of attention to her, carefully choose dishes for lunch. Eating is a ritual for them. Serfs are engaged in cooking, and Ilya's parents only advise which products are best used call and what to cook.

The author sneers at them, says: "they are also not without work." Like their parents of their parents, they do nothing, live off the labor of their serfs and rejoice in every passing day that they lived safely.

An important ritual in Oblomovka is a dream after dinner, at this time life stops, everyone is asleep.

In the second part, Goncharov describes another time for us: in a long winter evening in the evening the nanny tells Ilya Ilyich fairy tales. The child is very impressionable and takes all the nanny's stories for reality, plunging into the world of fantasy. Later, when he becomes an adult, he learns that there are no "good sorceresses", honey and milk rivers, "but But Oblomov, secretly from others, understands that "his fairy tale is mixed with life, and he unconsciously feels sad sometimes, why shouldn't the fairy tale life and life not a fairy tale." Ilya Ilyich forever remains a big child, dreaming of Militris Kirbityevna. Also his father and grandfather and great-grandfather, who listened to the same fairy tales in childhood, remained children for life, unable to build their own lives.

In the third part of "Sleep ..." we see Oblomov, a boy of thirteen or fourteen years old, when he was already studying in the village of Verkhlev, located not far from Oblomovka. His teacher is a strict and reasonable German Stolz, and Ilya is engaged with his son, Andrei Perhaps Ilyusha would have learned something in a boarding school, but Verkhlevo was only five miles from Oblomovka, and there, except for Stolz's house, "everything breathed the same primitive laziness, simplicity of morals, silence and immobility." Oblomovism reigned and there, it had a corrupting effect on the teenager. He had a vivid idea of ​​​​how to live: the way "adults live around him." You, of course, ask how they live. I will answer: knowing neither worries nor worries, without thinking about the meaning of life; "enduring work as a punishment", looking for an excuse to get rid of it. Nothing breaks the monotony of their life, they are not burdened by it, and they could not live otherwise. "They did not want another life, and they wouldn’t love.” The formation of the character of Ilya Ilyich was also influenced by how his parents went to study. Alas, for the father and mother, the main thing was to obtain a certificate, and not knowledge.

It is impossible not to pay attention to Goncharov's ambivalent attitude to what he describes. On the one hand, the author sharply condemns the Oblomovites for laziness and nobility, he often describes with irony describes to us their characters, for example, the pastime of the protagonist's parents. Ivan Alexandrovich does not like that that Oblomov is enveloped in love and affection, which is too much. The author understands that the constant guardianship of parents, nannies, aunts did not allow the child to fully develop. All attempts at independent activity were refuted by the argument: "Why? What?" Will Ilya Ilyich want something, when immediately the servants rush to fulfill his slightest whim. "Seeking manifestations of strength turned inwards, fading," the author noted.

On the other hand, Goncharov is attracted to many things in the life of Oblomovites. Here, no one slanders others, everything is calm and quiet. The author admires what he describes, because his childhood is similar to Oblomov’s, he grew up in the same environment, was brought up in those the same traditions as his hero. But the subsequent stages of Oblomov's life are not similar to the life of Goncharov.

Goncharov was not lazy, weak-willed, inactive, indifferent to life, passive, apathetic, incapable of work. Oblomov became so under the influence of the environment in which he was brought up as a child. All life in Oblomovka contributed to the degradation of his personality. At the age of seven, Ilya was inquisitive , an energetic, mobile boy, but every year he became more and more lazy, apathy arose in him, in addition, he was not interested in studying, improving himself, he considered work a boredom, did not know how and did not like to work. Oblomov was familiar with the labor of the soul, from he would have made a wonderful poet or writer if he had not been so lazy.

The source of life on the sofa, which Ilya Ilyich spent, was development in an environment where he was not lived, cherished, and did not allow him to develop independently.

“In this novel, the hero, a lazy and uninterested Russian gentleman, is opposed to the German Stolz. This is a mobile, active, reasonable person. He, who received a strict, labor and practical upbringing from a German father, is ambitious, purposeful and energetic. For him ... a rational approach to life is important, passions are alien to him .. The German in the novel is organized, hardworking, economical, serious about his work, pedantic ... ”Oblomov and Stolz are antipodes in the novel. We can say that each of them is a universal type. Ilya Ilyich is the embodiment of the Russian national character, and Stolz is the embodiment of the generalized features of the German. But both of these heroes are not stereotyped people, they are real. Heroes are endowed with only the most essential features of the national character. In Oblomov, this is passivity, laziness, immersion in sleep, in Stolz - activity, decisiveness. The heroes seem to complement each other, they are necessary for each other to reveal not only national types, but also ideas and approaches to solving universal human issues of being.

A.P. Chekhov wrote about Stolz: “Stolz does not inspire any confidence in me. The author says that this is a great-stucco fellow. But I don't believe. This is a blowing beast, thinking very well of himself and pleased with himself ... ”Oblomov’s entourage for the most part perceives Andrei ... as a German, and the word“ German ”in their concept is close to abusive. According to the Russians, the Germans are stingy, prudent people who care only about their own benefit and are even ready to betray in the name of it. But we see in Stolz an enterprising, hard-working person, for him the meaning of life is in work. His seething energy can be envied: he traveled Russia along and across, doing business with foreign countries, in a jiffy set up business on the Oblomov estate. He possessed such an indefatigable character from childhood: “From the age of eight he sat with his father at geographical map, sorted out the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, petty bourgeois and factory workers, and with his mother he read sacred history, taught Krylov's fables and disassembled the same "Telemak" in warehouses.

Breaking away from the pointer, he ran to destroy bird nests with the boys ... "The father brought up independence and responsibility in his son, accustoming Andrei to work from an early age:" When he grew up, his father put him with him on a spring cart, gave the reins and ordered to take to the factory, then to the fields, then to the city, to merchants, to government offices, then to look at some clay, which he takes on his finger, sniffs, sometimes licks and gives his son a sniff, and explains what it is, what good. Otherwise, he will go to see how potash or tar is mined, lard is heated.

Fourteen, fifteen years old, the boy often went alone, in a cart, or on horseback, with a bag at the saddle, with instructions from his father to the city, and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, did not see it, made a mistake.

Ilyusha Oblomov was brought up quite differently. Natural children's curiosity and liveliness were "killed" by parental care from day to day. After abundant feeding of the child with “buns, crackers, cream”, Ilyusha was allowed to take a walk “in the garden, around the yard. In the meadow, with strict confirmations to the nanny, do not leave the child alone, do not allow him to horses, dogs, goats, do not go far from home, and most importantly, do not let him into the ravine, as the most terrible place in the neighborhood ... " In teaching, Ilyusha also did not overwork. Now, in connection with the upcoming holidays, the boy is not released, then the mother suddenly discovers just before her departure that her son’s “eyes are not fresh today” (and “the crafty boy is healthy, but is silent”), then “everyone in the house is imbued with the conviction that learning and parent saturday should not coincide in any way, or that the holiday on Thursday is an insurmountable barrier to learning throughout the week ”; “And for three weeks Ilyusha stays at home, and there, you see, it’s not far to Holy Week, and there is a holiday, and there someone in the family for some reason decides that they don’t study on St. Thomas’s week; there are two weeks left until the summer - it’s not worth driving, and in the summer the German himself is resting, so postpone it until the fall.

It was hard for the elder Stolz to resist such an Oblomov approach to learning, although he did not give his son a descent. Upon learning that his son did not have the translation of Cornelius Nepos ready for German, “his father took him by the collar with one hand, led him out of the gate, put his cap on his head and kicked him from behind so that he knocked him down,” punishing him not to appear in the house until he had translated two instead of one given chapter.

As a result, Stolz, having reached the age of thirty, “served, retired, went about his business and ... made a house and money ... He is constantly on the move: if society needs to send an agent to Belgium or England - they send him; need to write some project or adapt new idea to the point - choose it. Meanwhile, he travels to the world and reads: when he has time - God knows.

And Oblomov, having entered the service and once sent the case “instead of Astrakhan to Arkhangelsk, he was so frightened that he first sent a medical certificate about “thickening of the heart with enlargement of the left ventricle”, which developed “from daily going to office”, and then completely resigned and began to live on the income that Oblomovka brought. What did Ilya Ilyich do while at home? “Yes, everyone continued to draw a pattern own life... Having betrayed the service and society, he began to solve the problem of his existence in a different way, thought about his purpose and, finally, discovered that the horizon of his activity and life lies in himself,” the author writes.

But he began his life like any other young man: "he was full of various aspirations, he kept hoping for something, he expected a lot from fate and from himself ...". But “days after days passed, years turned into years, the fluff turned into a stiff beard, the rays of the eyes were replaced by two dull dots, the waist became round, the hair began to climb mercilessly .., but he did not move a single step in any field and still stood at the threshold of his arena ... ". Idle existence, laziness, laid down since childhood in Oblomovka, turns Ilya Ilyich into a man flabby beyond his years in a stale dressing gown, constantly lying on a sofa in a cluttered room. And his peer Stolz was “all made up of bones, muscles and nerve, like blood English horse. He is thin; he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, there is bone and muscle, but no sign of fatty roundness; the complexion is even, swarthy and no blush; eyes, although a little greenish, but expressive.

But it cannot be assumed that Stolz - perfect hero, and Oblomov is all made up of flaws. Both heroes are personalities, their inner world cannot be considered, guided only by the differences in their worldview. Both heroes are united by bright memories of childhood, affection for their mother. But are they capable of deep, sincere feelings? Stolz is a man who “... both sorrows and joys ... controlled both the movement of the hands, like the steps of the legs .., was afraid of the imagination .., was afraid of any dream .., was not blinded by beauty and therefore did not forget, did not humiliated the dignity of a man, was not a slave, "did not lie at the feet" of beauties ... ". There was no poetry, dreams in Andrei, he is a bourgeois businessman striving for personal independence.

Oblomov also "... never surrendered to beauties, he was never their slave, even a very diligent admirer .., more often he limited himself to worshiping them from afar, at a venerable distance," and the reason for this was again laziness, since "to rapprochement women are in a lot of trouble." Of course, Oblomov dreamed of family happiness(“... he suddenly felt a vague desire for love, quiet happiness, he suddenly longed for the fields and hills of his homeland, his home, wife and children ...”), but his wife seems to him more as a friend than a lover.

And now Olga appears in the life of Ilya Ilyich, for the sake of whom (and under her influence) he changed his way of life. We see that the hero is capable of strong, sincere feelings, but the fear of living, of solving domestic problems, ruins the hero here too. Olga, disappointed in Oblomov (“The stone would come to life from what I did ...”), ends the relationship.

But in Stolz, despite all his German restraint and prudence, he was capable of strong feelings: “It seems that in these six months all the torments and tortures of love gathered and played out over him at once ... “Does she love or not,” he said with excruciating excitement, almost to bloody sweat, almost to tears. This question flared up in him more and more, engulfed him like a flame, fettered intentions: it was one main question no longer love, but life.

By introducing the image of Olga Ilyinskaya into the novel, the author conveys to the reader the idea that each of the characters has positive features: in Oblomov it is spiritual depth and sensitivity, sincerity and immediacy, in Stolz - will, composure, purposefulness.

Human nature is imperfect - this is what I. Goncharov shows with the finale of the novel. The final is the result of the fate of a man who dreamed of a beautiful and harmonious life hoping for a miracle. The author completely dispels the illusion of the possibility of a miracle and argues that the contemplative lifestyle inherent in the Russian national character leads to deplorable results. His idea is to show the ideal person, the type of personality that would be obtained if it were possible to combine the best qualities of both heroes. But man is what he is. Of course, it is sad that Oblomov could not live up to Olga's hopes, did not take on the upbringing of his son, entrusted him to Stolz, could not save him from ruin parental home, failed to prolong the quiet happiness of Agafya Matveevna, but nevertheless he spiritually enriched Olga and the pragmatic Stolz.