Evgeny Bazarov - a new hero or a tragic personality? (Turgenev I. S.)

The novel by I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons” reflects a typical conflict of the 60s of the XIX century: the state of society after the abolition of serfdom, the clash of generations, the struggle of “fathers” and “children”. It raises a large number of problems, including the question of the role and appointment of the "new man" of that time.

Such a “new man” was Yevgeny Bazarov, a raznochinets of the 60s, opposed in the novel to the liberal nobility.

I share the opinion of the critic, who said: "Be that as it may, Bazarov is still defeated." I. S. Turgenev himself does not directly state what point of view he adheres to, but we read the author’s position “between the lines”. Closer to I. S. Turgenev, most likely, is the worldview of Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, and not Evgeny Bazarov.

The defeat of Bazarov is evidenced, first of all, by the denouement of the novel. The main conflict - internal - remains unchanged. The hero cannot renounce his ideology, his principles, but he is also unable to reject the laws of life. For example, Bazarov's confidence and the correctness of his nihilistic theory were greatly weakened by the hero's love for Anna Sergeevna Odintsova. “I love you stupidly, madly ...” - this feeling defies Bazarov's logic. There is no way out of Bazarov's internal conflict, which is why the hero dies, seemingly by accident. But, I think, there could be no other way out.

Also, the fact that Bazarov was still defeated is evidenced by the fact that his student and follower Arkady Kirsanov eventually accepts the ideology of the "fathers". He moves away from nihilism, convinced of the fidelity of the views of Nikolai and Pavel Kirsanov. Arkady marries Katya, begins to live a quiet family life, realizing the value of spiritual ideals, the indisputability of moral principles and the aimlessness of destruction.

In the end, Bazarov was left alone, the hero was defeated. In the gallery of "superfluous" people after Onegin A. S. Pushkin, Pechorin M. Yu. Lermontov stands Turgenev's Bazarov. A strong, promising personality does not find application in life, the surrounding society does not accept his views and ideology. Precisely because Yevgeny Bazarov is an “extra person” for his time, he, despite the strength of his character and the struggle he wages, is defeated.

Updated: 2018-01-28

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

.

Useful material on the topic

Elena ROMANICHEVA

Getting ready to write

Common words, or Roman I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" at repetition lessons

“The topic is formulated according to Russian literature of the 19th century (the work is indicated)” - this is how one of the examination topics sounds in the most general formulation. I emphasize: in general. And this means not only that it can be any, but also that the “general words” in which it will be given are applicable to any work. And if so, then maybe then you shouldn't be afraid. If the student knows what and how to analyze in a literary text, then in principle it does not matter to him which text to work with. However, unfortunately, I am sure: after the publication of the list, one of the most popular pre-exam games “Guessing Game” began with the participation of students, parents and tutors, which largely consists in coming up with as many topics as possible for all the works of Russian classical literature included in “Required minimum...”, and repeat them for the last 2-3 months. The work, frankly, is unattractive, because it is unbearable: “You can’t grasp the immensity.” Therefore, we will not be included in it. After all, the time allotted for repetition should and should be used more productively, and for this, first of all, it is necessary to answer the question of how to repeat. Work with a specific literary text should be organized in such a way that the student not only remembers the key problems of a particular work, but also masters the algorithm of repetition itself, that is, he can independently work with another work for which there was simply “not enough” time in the lesson.

In order to master the algorithm of such work, it is necessary to realize very clearly that during preparation it requires re-thinking, on what you need to focus your attention. Such components in the school practice of studying a work traditionally include the following: the subject, problems of the work; conflict and genre; system of artistic images; plot and composition; author's position and ways of expressing it. Of course, such a division of the artistic whole into “elements” is very arbitrary, and one can argue about their hierarchy, but the very method of “defining elements” is methodologically justified, because, on the one hand, it is universal and applicable to any work of art, on the other - the repetition of each specific text becomes aspectual: the lesson does not prepare for each specific topic, but for a whole group of topics. If we carefully analyze even a very wide list of them for any work, we will be convinced that all the formulations can be grouped around the concentrations we have indicated. But so that our “general words” do not remain only words, let us try, following the proposed scheme, to show how it is possible to organize the repetition of the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".

But first, one more preliminary note. Why did we choose this literary text for repetition? Firstly, and “most importantly”, because in recent years interest in this novel has noticeably fallen. And the reason here is the narrow focus of the study of the work (due to objective and subjective reasons), when the conflict of “fathers and children” is considered only as a reflection of the struggle of two social forces that have developed in the pre-reform decade, that is, in essence, the novel is studied precisely in that aspect , in which his contemporaries perceived him and which was most fully embodied in the articles of D.I. Pisarev. It is this level of themes and problems of the novel that is mastered at school in sufficient detail, therefore in our article we will touch on it only in passing, indicating only the most difficult “points”. Also, we will not dwell in such detail on the eternal conflict of generations, a conflict in the literal, and not figurative sense, and focus our attention on what makes “Fathers and Sons” a “permanent” novel (N.N. Strakhov), interesting to today's reader , which is comparable in this work with the inner world of modern man. In dry methodical language, this is called the actualization of the classics. And in order for it to happen, at repetition lessons, students should also be interested in a new appeal to a literary text, which is called “mentally useful”.

How to get started? I always tell my students: if you don't know how to start an analysis, look at the title. The fact is that in almost all classical works it is significant. In the title of the novel, I.S. Turgenev is an antithesis, and it is this artistic technique that determines the subject matter, the problematics of the work, the system of images, the conflict, and the composition as a whole.

Let's start with the main thing, that is, with themes and problems. What is the novel about? About the situation in Russia that developed at the turn of the 50s and 60s of the century before last, when one social force - the liberal nobility - was replaced by another - raznochintsy-democrats, and about the unconditional victory of democracy over the aristocracy. Is it in the work? Undoubtedly. But if we confine ourselves to such a definition, then the novel is hopelessly outdated: a modern person can get more information about this period of Russian history from historical reference books and encyclopedias. And we are still following with interest the disputes between Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov. And by the way, what are these disputes about? About aristocratism and the public good, about useful activity and the “foundations” of society, about art and science? But the skirmish over tea in the tenth chapter is only one of the manifestations of an internal dispute. This was pointed out in one of his articles by Yu.M. Lotman: “By opposing Bazarov to Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, “seating” them at the same table and “forcing” them to argue, Turgenev created creative dialogues, because objectively, historically, the dispute between Kirsanov and Bazarov is in the nature of a search for truth. Indeed, in this dispute, as in the novel as a whole, the eternal problems of civilization and nature, culture, love, and the place of man in the world are raised. And the clash itself seems to arise not at the will of Pavel Petrovich - it seems to be dictated by history: after all, Kirsanov starts a dispute for the sake of those very foundations that personally give him nothing but “self-respect”. Therefore, Pavel Petrovich “trembled”, and therefore it is “terrible to say”, that is, to designate what Bazarov denies. And the young are not afraid of anything, hence the “condescending” attitude of the younger generation to the older, which in many ways infects all the heroes: here Arkady approvingly agrees with Bazarov’s proposal to give Nikolai Petrovich Byukhnerov “Matter and Force” to read instead of his beloved Pushkin, and Kirsanov Sr., involuntarily He who heard the conversation of his friends will bitterly tell his brother that they have fallen into the “retired people”, and he will exclaim indignantly: “But why did he go ahead? And how is he so different from us?” Let us note by the way: for some reason, the author notes in the figure of Pavel Petrovich a “youthful aspiration to rise”, the ardor with which he rushes to defend his principles is truly youthful. But really, if you think about it: after all, fathers were once also children and also began their lives questioning the values ​​​​of the previous generation, but they matured, wised up. The rebellion was replaced by "shameful prudence" - and a new generation of "children" has grown up, who in due time will also become fathers, and everything will repeat itself. Let's pay attention: in the title of the novel there is a third word - the union and, to ignore which - to ignore the author's concept of the work: in the title of Turgenev's novel, as well as in the title of "Crime and Punishment" by Dostoevsky, "War and Peace" by Tolstoy, its role is connecting, and not separating. And although the superiority of Bazarov, who most fully embodied the views of the “children”, over all the characters in the novel is undeniable, the “fathers” have their own truth: one cannot deny love, art, nature, beauty, as the main character does. Therefore, it is impossible to deny the connection of generations - after all, in spite of everything, it exists, it, according to Turgenev, is determined by nature itself. Bazarov appeared as if in order to break this connection, hence his merciless and universal denial, which knows no bounds. But the eternal cycle of human life turned out to be stronger than his selfish desires and “pushed” Bazarov first into loneliness, then into non-existence: “No matter how passionate, sinful, rebellious heart hides in the grave, the flowers growing on it serenely look at us with their innocent eyes : they tell us not only about eternal tranquility, about that great tranquility of “indifferent” nature; they also speak of eternal reconciliation and endless life.”

Since the pores that permeate the entire work, one of the levels of the conflict of the novel is also revealed, which, of course, can be defined as ideological. His resolution comes in the 24th chapter, which tells about the duel between Bazarov and Kirsanov. This episode is not an accident, but a natural consequence of the entire course of events in the novel. “The duel ... to some extent is explained only by the constant antagonism of your mutual views” - this is how Nikolai Petrovich will determine the cause of the duel. However, we will not be interested in the duel itself, but in its consequences. Consider the conversation between the two brothers at the end of the chapter:

“- Marry Fenechka... She loves you, she is the mother of your son.

Nikolai Petrovich took a step back and clasped his hands.

Is that what you say, Pavel? You, whom I always considered the most adamant opponent of such marriages! You say it! But don't you know that it was only out of respect for you that I did not fulfill what you so rightly called your duty!

- In vain did you respect me in this case ... I begin to think that Bazarov was right when he reproached me for aristocracy. No, dear brother, it’s enough for us to break down and think about the light: we are already old and meek people; it’s time for us to put aside all the fuss.”

It is quite obvious: Kirsanov Jr. admitted his defeat and “lowered the flag in front of the radical”. However, the narration is not finished - the author's voice also sounds in the finale: “Pavel Petrovich wet his forehead with cologne and closed his eyes. Illuminated by bright daylight, his beautiful, emaciated head lay on a white pillow, like the head of a dead man ... Yes, he was a dead man. The last sentence is the last point in the dispute between the characters, and it was put by the author, who openly declared his position, as if he suddenly abandoned the objective manner of narration and openly “intruded” into the text.

It has since been completed, but the novel continues. Only the external conflict was exhausted. In the last chapters, Turgenev focuses the reader's attention on a different conflict - an internal one. There have been echoes of it before. Let us recall the figure of a peasant, who was mentioned twice, flashed in the duel scene. Or a conversation with Arkady under a haystack (chapter 21): “... you said today, passing by the hut of our elder Philip, it is so nice, white, - so, you said, Russia will then reach perfection when the latter there will be such a place for a peasant, and each of us should contribute to this ... And I began to hate this last peasant, Philip or Sidor, for whom I have to climb out of my skin and who won’t even thank me ... why should I thank him? Well, he will live in a white hut, and burdock will grow out of me; well, what next?” Let's think about these words of the protagonist: after all, they open up a new level of conflict in the work. We see: Bazarov is trying at all costs to subordinate his actions to his convictions. And they seem to be extremely clear: it is necessary to do business, to liberate the people. But if “the freedom itself, about which the government is fussing, is unlikely to benefit us, because our peasant is happy to rob himself just to get drunk on dope in a tavern,” and even the peasant himself, in the end, does not recognize in Bazarov “his own”: “ It is known, master; does he understand?” – what then? And then it turns out: in order to do it, you need to know why, what the goal is, how to achieve it. And these are all words not from the Bazarov dictionary. Do not argue, but do the deed. But why? For what? It turns out that the hero falls into a vicious circle of doubts and denials. And then there's love...

So the contradictions that ripen in the soul of the protagonist gradually come to the fore. This is a conflict between Bazarov's beliefs and his human nature. Bazarov is trying to follow his convictions, but the further events develop, the more strained it gets. And, in fact, there are no events. The hero returns to his native nest, but "the fever of work has jumped off him." Before us... another Bazarov. He suddenly gradually begins to realize that a person needs not only what brings concrete, material benefits, that there are not only “sensations” in life, but continues to struggle ... with himself. Great, in the words of Dostoevsky, Bazarov's heart struggles with his "reasonable" theory. So on the pages of the novel there is an image of a man who, according to the critic Nikolai Strakhov, tried to overcome the contradiction between the forces of life that gave birth to him and dominated him, and the desire to subjugate these forces. And the author “showed us how these forces are embodied in Bazarov, in the same Bazarov who denies them; he showed us, if not more powerful, then more open, more distinct incarnation of them in those ordinary people who surround Bazarov. Bazarov is a titan who rebelled against mother earth; no matter how great his power, it only testifies to the greatness of the power that gave birth to him and nourishes him, but does not equal the mother's power. Be that as it may, Bazarov is still defeated; defeated not by the faces and accidents of life, but by the very idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthis life, ”writes N.N. Strakhov.

Life has defeated theory, and Bazarov's death is not an accident, but a consequence of the artistic logic of the novel. Death seems to elevate the hero. “To die the way Bazarov died,” D.I. Pisarev, it’s like doing a feat.” Indeed, the image of the last days of the hero’s life reveals the heroic and tragic beginnings in his character: “I imagined a gloomy, wild figure, and yet doomed to death, because it stands on the eve of the future” (Turgenev). And the future is a negation of the present, which means that the onset of any new era will give birth to the Bazarovs - people whose nihilism will be the most complete and merciless. Therefore, disputes about nihilism are not only and so much disputes about the future of Russia, but reflections on whether there is a limit to denial and what will happen to a person if he “crosses” this border.

“Ochinno they are already at risk” - this is how Father Alexei will assess the game of the protagonist. “Napoleonic rule, father, Napoleonic,” Father Bazarov will develop the idea. So gradually, almost dotted, one of the key themes of the era will be indicated in the novel.

The conflict of the novel largely determined not only its genre (in "Fathers and Sons" one can find features of both a social and moral-philosophical, psychological novel), but also a system of artistic images. It is built on the principle of "Bazarov and ...": Bazarov and "fathers", Bazarov and parents, Bazarov and "comrades-in-arms", Bazarov and Odintsova ... The contrasts are obvious, but let's not forget that in general all the characters on the pages of the novel compared to each other.

Here is Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov - a gentleman "about forty years old", and his brother - Pavel Petrovich - is called an "aristocrat". Is it by chance? It is enough to compare their biographies to make sure: not at all. But here is one more detail (in Turgenev’s “laconic” novels it is especially significant): in the story about the life of both brothers, the year 1848 is mentioned. After the death of his wife, Nikolai Petrovich “was about to go abroad in order to at least disperse a little ... but then the 48th year came. He reluctantly returned to the village.” At first
On the 48th year, the elder brother receives news of the death of Princess R. and accepts his brother's invitation to live in Maryino. Let us pay attention to the words of Turgenev: “The difference in the position of both brothers was too great. In 1948, this difference decreased: Nikolai Petrovich lost his wife, Pavel Petrovich lost his memories, after the death of the princess, he tried not to think about her. But after all, this date is significant not only for the novel, it is significant for the context of Turgenev's work as a whole. Let us recall the finale of “Rudin”: “On the sultry afternoon of June 26, 1848, in Paris, when the uprising of the“ national workshops ”was almost suppressed, in one of the cramped alleys of the suburb of St. Anthony, the battalion of the line troops took the barricade ... ”And on the same day, the protagonist of the novel,“ a man of the 40s ”, Dmitry Rudin, died. And the heroes of another novel - the Kirsanov brothers, who also consider themselves people of the 40s, leave for the village. On the one hand, this is certainly an act: many self-respecting noble intellectuals did this. And on the other: “... you respect yourself and sit back; what is the use of this for the bien public? You would disrespect yourself and do the same.” Isn't the sentence "fathers" clearly heard in these words of Bazarov? There are two phrases in the novel, and their simple comparison allows us to comprehend the law of constructing a literary text as an integral unity, in which every detail is significant, in which the detail opens the way to the whole, and the whole can be comprehended through the detail. And we apply this law not only to Turgenev's novel, but to a literary text in general.

But let's get back to the "fathers" and ... "children." Here is the first of them: “A servant in whom everything: a turquoise earring in his ear, and oiled multi-colored hair, and courteous gestures, in a word, everything exposed a person of the latest, improved generation, looked condescendingly along the road ...” And here is another, too of the young, dressed in a "Slavophile Hungarian" and leaving for Bazarov a visiting card "with turned-down corners and with the name of Sitnikov, on one side in French, on the other in Slavic script." The author's attitude towards these "young" is quite obvious. And although these two, in general, episodic heroes will never meet on the pages of the novel, they clearly highlight the commonality: both want to “correspond” to the new time, to keep up with it, but for both it is not inner convictions that are important, but form, appearance. Maybe that's why they are drawn to Bazarov in order to fill their spiritual emptiness.

Through comparison of the protagonist with the “disciples”, it is as if the authenticity, the truth of his convictions, is revealed. It is clear how the author refers to the “nihilists”. And his hero? “We need the Sitnikovs. Me, you understand this, I need such boobies. It’s not for the gods, in fact, to burn the pots!” – here is the reaction to the appearance of these people next to him. And the words following this: “Ege, ge! ..” thought Arkady to himself, and only then the whole bottomless abyss of Bazarov's pride opened up to him for a moment. - We, therefore, are gods with you? that is, you are a god, but am I not an idiot?” - help us take a different look at the relationship between Bazarov and his “comrades-in-arms” and understand his attitude towards people in general, coming from the head, and not from the heart. And how not to recall here another hero of the “idea” - Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov! And then how to understand another remark of Bazarov: “I want to mess with people, at least scold them, but mess with them”? Only two phrases, but behind them is “the abyss of space”.

In essence, we are striving to repeat the novel, following the author's logic of constructing the text, which is largely based on the “rapprochement of the distant”. Here are two more heroes, more precisely, two heroines who will never meet on the pages of the novel: Fenechka and Odintsova. It is amazing that the simple Fenichka attracts people to herself like a magnet: Nikolai Petrovich finds his happiness with her, Pavel Petrovich finds in her the features of the mysterious Princess R., and not only finds: “Oh, how I love this empty creature,” moaned Pavel Petrovich, wistfully throwing his hands behind his head. “I will not tolerate any insolent dare to touch ...” Bazarov’s unspent feeling also falls on her. Why? Yes, because she has something that Anna Sergeevna Odintsova does not have - spiritual warmth. Hence the difference even in their rooms. The neatness of Fenechka's room is somehow cozy, homely, and Odintsova's is cold.

Thus, we have come to one of the key problems of the novel - the problem of testing the protagonist with love. The plot and composition of the novel are largely subordinated to its disclosure. The story of Bazarov's relationship with Odintsova occupies a central place in the novel (chapters 14–18). First of all, this indicates how important it was for the author to show Bazarov in such a situation. And love failure is not a consequence of his spiritual inferiority. Bazarov's mind struggles with the feeling that gripped him, but it turned out to be stronger than the head theory. “In my opinion, it’s better to beat stones on the pavement than to let a woman take possession of at least the tip of her finger,” Bazarov will say to Arkady, and Fenechka will admit a little later: “But I know a hand that wants to, and it will knock me down with a finger.” For the first time, Bazarov's words contradict words. Life has won: “... I didn’t break myself, so the little woman won’t break me. Amen! It's over!" - proclaim Bazarov and ... go to the estate of Odintsova. But the mind of Odintsova turned out to be stronger than the nascent feeling, she “did not have enough” just life. Evidence of this is the scene in Odintsova's room.

This episode seems to divide the novel into two parts, which help us to better understand the personality of the hero, to see how his spiritual appearance changes. The action begins in the spring and ends six months later, counting the events of the epilogue. This story about a short segment of the hero's life is organized as two circles of his journey. However, as the plot develops, the very concept of “path” acquires metaphorical content in the novel. The author will tell us about the life path of the Kirsanov brothers, the author will tell us the story of Odintsova, Fenechka and the mysterious Princess R. We will find out how and why the paths of Arkady and Bazarov will diverge, about the trials that will fall to the lot of the hero, about the trials of friendship, love, loneliness and death. However, this episode will not end the novel. Like all the works of Turgenev, it will be completed by an epilogue, the role of which is destined for the 28th chapter. It will complete all the storylines of the novel, it will tell about the fate of all its characters.

Interestingly, the chapter is framed by two landscapes that set the overall emotional tone of the story, allowing you to take your thoughts about the characters to another level. It has already been set by the finale of the previous chapter: “But the midday heat passes, and evening and night come, and then return to a quiet refuge, where the exhausted and tired sleep sweetly.” However, this lyricism and sadness, which permeate the story of the later life of Pavel Petrovich, in the last chapter give way to irony when it comes to Sitnikov, Kukshina and ... Odintsova (“Anna Sergeevna recently married not for love, but for conviction .. for a person who is still young, kind and cold as ice. They live in great harmony with each other and will live, perhaps, to happiness ... perhaps to love"), and reach high pathos in the finale, where again open, strongly and the author's voice will sound powerfully: “Is love, holy, devoted love, not omnipotent? Oh no!" Love - and this is the author's innermost thought - is not only a human feeling, it is a great law of nature, obeying which "life is kept and moves." It is love, according to the author, that saves the world.

Thus, in the finale, the author's position is openly declared, but in the novel there are other, including indirect, forms of its expression. These include the choice of the name and name of the hero (Eugene means “noble”, but how does this name fit with the surname Bazarov?), his portrait, the selection and placement of characters due to the conflict and the way it was resolved, the landscape and interior, the rejection of open intrusion into the thoughts and feelings of the character, details. We have already talked about some of them, how much detail it is necessary to discuss others - the teacher decides.

Of course, our consultation does not pretend to be an exhaustive interpretation of the novel, and much, probably, remained outside our field of vision. So, we practically didn’t say anything about Bazarov’s parents, or about Matvey Ilyich Kolyazin, a figure that flashed more than once on the pages of Fathers and Sons; they only briefly mentioned Arcadia, completely "forgetting" about Katya, and ignored some side storylines... In a word, the list can be continued indefinitely... Our task was somewhat different: to show the teacher the possible "universal ways" of repetition, and the students - to help comprehend the "strange rapprochements" that permeate the novel.

And in conclusion, we will offer two topics, the work on which, in our opinion, will be of interest to students: “Two circles of Bazarov’s trips” and ““Fathers and Sons” by I.S. Turgenev - a novel "always"". The last definition was not invented by us, but taken from an article by N.N. Strakhova: “Turgenev ... had a proud goal - to point to the eternal in the temporal - and wrote a novel that was not progressive, not retrograde, but, so to speak, always ... Gogol said about his “Inspector General” that there was one honest face in it - laughter, in exactly the same way about "Fathers and Sons" one can say that they have a face that stands above all faces and even above Bazarov - life. It seems to us that it would be appropriate to end the conversation about the novel with this quote.

Yevgeny Bazarov is the protagonist of I. S. Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", the "Russian Hamlet", the spokesman for the new and very strong convictions of the intelligentsia of Russia in the middle of the 19th century - a nihilist. He denies a high spiritual principle, and with it poetry, music, love, but preaches knowledge and, on its basis, the reorganization of the world. Bazarov is a raznochinets, a medical student, although he is already about 30 years old. He is the so-called. "an eternal student" who studies for years, all preparing for real activity, but does not start it in any way.

Eugene came on vacation with his friend Arkady Kirsanov to his estate. The first meeting with Eugene takes place at the station, where Arkady's father meets the young men. The portrait of Bazarov at this moment is eloquent and immediately gives the attentive reader some idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe hero: red hands - he conducts a lot of biological experiments, is intensively engaged in practice; a hoodie with tassels - everyday freedom and neglect of the outside, besides poverty, alas. Bazarov speaks a little arrogantly ("lazy"), on his face is an ironic smile of superiority and indulgence towards everyone.

The first impression does not deceive: Bazarov really considers everyone he meets with us on the pages of the novel below himself. They are sentimental - he is a practical and rationalist, they love beautiful words and grandiloquent statements, they give loftiness to everything - he speaks the truth and everywhere he sees the true reason, often low and "physiological".

All this is especially evident in disputes with Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, the "Russian Englishman", Arkady's uncle. Pavel Petrovich speaks of the high spirit of the Russian people, Evgeny retorts with a reminder of daughter-in-law, drunkenness, laziness. For Kirsanov, art is divine, but for Bazarov, “Rafael is not worth a penny,” because it is useless in a world where some have hunger and infection, while others have snow-white cuffs and morning coffee. His summary of art: "A decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet."

But the hero's convictions are literally ruined by life itself. At the provincial ball, Bazarov meets Anna Odintsova, a rich and beautiful widow, whom he first characterizes in his own manner: “She doesn’t look like other women.” It seems to him (Eugene wants it to be so) that he has an exclusively carnal attraction to Odintsova, "the call of nature." But it turns out that a smart and beautiful woman has become a necessity for Bazarov: she wants not only to kiss, but to talk to her, look at her ...

Bazarov turns out to be "infected" with romanticism - something that he vehemently denied. Alas, for Odintsova, Evgeny became something like those frogs, which he himself cut for experiments.

Running away from feelings, from himself, Bazarov leaves for his parents in a village where he treats peasants. Opening a typhoid corpse, he injures himself with a scalpel, but does not cauterize the cut and becomes infected. Soon Bazarov dies.

Characteristics of the hero

The death of a hero is the death of his ideas, beliefs, the death of everything that gave him superiority over others, in which he so believed. Life gave Yevgeny, as if in a fairy tale, three trials to increase the complexity - a duel, love, death ... He - more precisely, his convictions (and this is he, because he "made himself") - do not withstand a single one.

What is a duel if not a product of romanticism, and certainly not a healthy life? And yet Bazarov agrees to it - why? After all, this is sheer stupidity. But something prevents Evgeny from refusing to call Pavel Petrovich. Probably an honor that he mocks as much as he does art.

("Bazarov and Odintsova", artist Ratnikov)

The second defeat is love. She dominates Bazarov, and the chemist, biologist and nihilist cannot do anything with her: “His blood caught fire as soon as he remembered her ... something else moved into him, which he did not allow ... "

The third defeat is death. After all, she did not come by the will of old age, chance, but almost intentionally: Bazarov knew perfectly well what a cut in a typhoid corpse threatened. But - did not cauterize the wound. Why? Because he was controlled at that moment by the lowest of the "romantic" desires - to end everything at once, to surrender, to admit defeat. Eugene suffered so much from mental anguish that reason and critical calculation were powerless.

Bazarov's victory is that he has the intelligence and strength to admit the collapse of his convictions. This is the greatness of the hero, the tragedy of the image.

The image of the hero in the work

At the end of the novel, we see all the characters somehow arranged: Odintsova married by calculation, Arkady is happy in a petty-bourgeois way, Pavel Petrovich leaves for Dresden. And only Bazarov's "passionate, sinful, rebellious heart" hid under the cold earth, in a rural cemetery overgrown with grass ...

But he was the most honest of them, the most sincere and strong. Its “scale” is many times larger, its possibilities are greater, its forces are immeasurable. But such people do not live long. Or a lot, if they shrink to the size of Arcadia.

(V. Perov illustration for Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons")

Bazarov's death is also a consequence of his false beliefs: he was simply not ready for a “hit” with love and romance. He did not have the strength to resist what he considered fiction.

Turgenev creates a portrait of another "hero of time", over whose death many readers cry. But the "heroes of the time" - Onegin, Pechorin, others - are always superfluous and heroes only because they express the imperfection of this time. Bazarov, according to Turgenev, "stands on the eve of the future", his time has not come. But it seems that it has not come for such people even now and it is not known whether it will be ...

The novel by I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons” was written in 1860, during the abolition of serfdom, at the junction of two eras: the era of liberal nobles and the era of democrats-raznochintsy. These changes led to the emergence of a "new" hero in Russian society and literature in the second half of the 19th century.

In Turgenev's novel, such a hero is Yevgeny Bazarov.

For the first time we meet Bazarov at the Kirsanovs' estate. “Eugene,” says Arkady about Bazarov, “a nihilist is a person who does not bow to any authorities and does not take a single principle on faith.” Bazarov really believes that only the natural sciences can lead to progress, and art and human feelings only hinder the development of society. In my opinion, Bazarov at first glance does not cause sympathy.

As for love, Bazarov says that this is unforgivable nonsense and rubbish. He treats women with cynicism, therefore, when he first meets Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, Bazarov says about her: “What a figure! She doesn't look like other women!" However, gradually, unexpectedly for the hero himself, in his soul tender feelings, still unknown to him, towards this woman begin to wake up. Love breaks Bazarov, who is confident in his convictions, but even Odintsova's non-reciprocity does not deprive the hero of pride. “... I won’t beg for alms,” he says to Anna Sergeevna.

As a result of these events, Bazarov has an internal conflict. His life ceases to succumb to his own theory, love contradicts the views of Bazarov, but he does not betray his theory, even feeling the approach of death.

I. S. Turgenev does not accept the concept of his hero, but respects the strength of his spirit and striving for the goal.

Thus, Bazarov is actually a vulnerable and loving nature, which is corroded by realism and cynicism. The author does not show us the life of Bazarov, however, he very vividly describes how he dies, and this is enough to understand what power the hero possessed. “To die the way Bazarov died is already a feat,” critic Pisarev said about the hero.

Updated: 2018-06-27

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

Question

How did you react to the last pages of the novel? What feelings did Bazarov's death cause in you?

Answer

The main feeling that the last pages of the novel evoke in readers is a feeling of deep human pity that such a person is dying. The emotional impact of these scenes is great. A.P. Chekhov wrote: "My God! What a luxury “Fathers and Sons”! Just at least shout the guard. Bazarov's illness was made so strong that I became weak and there was a feeling as if I had contracted it from him. And the end of Bazarov?.. The devil knows how it's done. It's just brilliant."

Question

How did Bazarov die? (Ch. XXVII)

“Bazarov was getting worse every hour; the disease took on a rapid course, which usually happens with surgical poisons. He had not yet lost his memory and understood what was said to him; he was still fighting.

“I don’t want to rave,” he whispered, clenching his fists, “what nonsense!” And then he said: “Well, subtract ten from eight, how much will it come out?” Vasily Ivanovich walked around like a madman, offering one remedy, then another, and doing nothing but covering his son's legs. “Wrap in cold sheets... vomit... mustard plasters to the stomach... bloodletting,” he said with tension. The doctor, whom he begged to stay, agreed with him, gave the patient lemonade to drink, and for himself he asked for tubes, then “strengthening-warming”, that is, vodka. Arina Vlasyevna sat on a low stool near the door, and only from time to time went out to pray; a few days ago the dressing-mirror slipped out of her hands and broke, which she always considered a bad omen; Anfisushka herself could not tell her anything. Timofeich went to Odintsova.

“The night was not good for Bazarov ... The cruel fever tormented him. By morning he felt better. He asked Arina Vlasyevna to comb his hair, kissed her hand and drank two sips of tea.

“The change for the better did not last long. The attacks of the disease have resumed.

“It's over with me. Got hit by a wheel. And it turns out that there was nothing to think about the future. The old thing is death, but new for everyone. Until now, I'm not afraid ... and then unconsciousness will come, and fuit! (He waved his hand weakly.)

“Bazarov was no longer destined to wake up. By evening, he fell into complete unconsciousness, and the next day he died.

Question

Why D.I. Pisarev said: “To die the way Bazarov died is the same as doing a great feat ...”?

Answer

Bazarov's fatal illness is his last test. In the face of the inevitable force of nature, courage, strength, will, nobility, humanity are fully manifested. This is the death of a hero, and a heroic death.

Not wanting to die, Bazarov struggles with illness, with unconsciousness, with pain. Until the last minute, he does not lose his clarity of mind. He shows willpower and courage. He made himself an accurate diagnosis and calculated the course of the disease almost by the hour. Feeling the inevitability of the end, he did not get scared, did not try to deceive himself and, most importantly, remained true to himself and his convictions.

“... now, for real, and the hellish stone is not needed. If I've been infected, it's too late now."

“Old man,” Bazarov began in a hoarse and slow voice, “my business is lousy. I am infected, and in a few days you will bury me.”

“I didn't expect to die so soon; this is an accident, very, to tell the truth, unpleasant.

“Strength, strength,” he said, “all is still here, but you have to die! .. The old man, at least, managed to wean himself from life, and I ... Yes, go and try to deny death. She denies you, and that's it!

Question

According to the ideas of believers, those who took communion were forgiven all their sins, and those who did not take communion fell into eternal torment in hell. Does Bazarov agree or not to take communion before his death?

Answer

In order not to offend his father, Bazarov "finally said": "I do not refuse, if this can console you." And then he adds: “... but it seems to me that there is still nothing to rush. You yourself say that I'm better." This phrase is nothing but a polite refusal to confess, because if a person is better, then there is no need to send for a priest.

Question

Does Bazarov himself believe that he is better off?

Answer

We know that Bazarov himself accurately calculated the course of the disease. The day before, he tells his father that “tomorrow or the day after tomorrow his brain will resign.” “Tomorrow” has already arrived, there is still a maximum of a day left, and if you wait longer, the priest will not have time (Bazarov is accurate: on that day “by evening he fell into complete unconsciousness, and the next day he died”). It cannot be understood otherwise than as a clever and delicate refusal. And when the father insists on “doing the duty of a Christian,” he becomes harsh:
"No, I'll wait," Bazarov interrupted. - I agree with you that the crisis has come. And if you and I are wrong, well! after all, even the memoryless are communed.
- Have mercy, Eugene ...
- I'll wait. And now I want to sleep. Do not disturb me".

And in the face of death, Bazarov rejects religious beliefs. It would be convenient for a weak person to accept them, to believe that after death he can go to "paradise", Bazarov is not deceived by this. And if he is still communed, then he is unconscious, as he foresaw. Here his will is not: this is an act of parents who find consolation in this.

Answering the question why Bazarov's death should be considered heroic, D.I. Pisarev wrote: “But to look into the eyes of death, to foresee its approach, not trying to deceive yourself, to remain true to yourself until the last minute, not to weaken and not be afraid - this is a matter of a strong character ... such a person who knows how to die calmly and firmly, will not retreat in front of an obstacle and will not afraid of danger".

Question

Did Bazarov change before his death? Why did he become closer to us before his death?

Answer

The dying Bazarov is simple and human: there is no need to hide his "romanticism". He thinks not of himself, but of his parents, preparing them for a terrible end. Almost like Pushkin, the hero says goodbye to his beloved and speaks in the language of a poet: “Blow on the dying lamp, and let it go out.”

He finally uttered “other words” that he had been afraid of before: “... I loved you! .. Goodbye ... Listen ... I didn’t kiss you then ...” “And caress your mother. After all, people like them cannot be found in your big world during the day with fire ... ". Love for a woman, filial love for father and mother merge in the mind of the dying Bazarov with love for the motherland, for mysterious Russia, which remained an unsolved riddle for Bazarov: “There is a forest here.”

Bazarov became better before his death, more humane, softer.

Question

In life, Bazarov dies from an accidental cut on his finger, but is the death of the hero in the composition of the novel accidental?

Why, after all, does Turgenev end his novel with the scene of the death of the protagonist, despite his superiority over other characters?

Answer

About his departure, Bazarov says: “Russia needs me ... No, apparently not needed. And who is needed?

Any plot-compositional device reveals the ideological intent of the writer. The death of Bazarov, from the author's point of view, is natural in the novel. Turgenev defined Bazarov as a tragic figure, "doomed to perish."

There are two reasons for the hero's death - his loneliness and internal conflict. Both of these interrelated reasons were part of the author's intention.

Question

How does Turgenev show the hero's loneliness?

Answer

Consistently, in all Bazarov's meetings with people, Turgenev shows the impossibility of relying on them. The Kirsanovs are the first to fall away, then Odintsova, then the parents, then Fenechka, he has no true students, Arkady leaves him, and, finally, the last and most important clash occurs with Bazarov before his death - a clash with the people.

“Sometimes Bazarov went to the village and, bantering as usual, entered into a conversation with some peasant.
- What were you talking about?
- It is known, master; does he understand?
- Where to understand! - answered the other peasant, and, shaking their hats and pulling down their sashes, they both began to talk about their affairs and needs. Alas! Bazarov, who contemptuously shrugged his shoulders and knew how to talk to the peasants (as he boasted in an argument with Pavel Petrovich), this self-confident Bazarov did not even suspect that in their eyes he was still something like a pea jester ...

The new people look lonely compared to the vast mass of the rest of society. Of course, there are few of them, especially since these are the first new people. Turgenev is right, showing their loneliness in the local and urban noble environment, right, showing that here they will not find helpers for themselves.

The main reason for the death of Turgenev's hero can be called socio-historical. The circumstances of Russian life in the 1960s did not yet provide an opportunity for fundamental democratic changes, for the implementation of the plans of Bazarov and others like him.

"Fathers and Sons" caused a fierce controversy throughout the history of Russian literature of the XIX century. Yes, and the author himself, with bewilderment and bitterness, stops before the chaos of contradictory judgments: greetings from enemies and slaps from friends.

Turgenev believed that his novel would serve to rally the social forces of Russia, that Russian society would heed his warnings. But his dreams did not come true.

“I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, vicious, pure, but still doomed to death, because it still stands on the eve of the future.” I.S. Turgenev.

Exercise

1. Share your feelings about the novel.
2. Did the hero cause you sympathy or antipathy?
3. Do such assessments and definitions coexist in your idea of ​​him: clever, cynic, revolutionary, nihilist, victim of circumstances, “genius nature”?
4. Why does Turgenev lead Bazarov to death?
5. Read your thumbnails.