home › Tires and wheels › Is it possible to justify all the actions of Dubrovsky? Dubrovsky's noble deed What bad deeds did Dubrovsky commit.

Is it possible to justify all the actions of Dubrovsky? Dubrovsky's noble deed What bad deeds did Dubrovsky commit.

Answer left Guest

The plot of the story revolves around the conflict between two landowners - Kirila Petrovich Troekurov and Andrey Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, but other nobles are involuntarily involved in it. All, in fact, divided into two camps. In one - Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky and his son Vladimir, the other is much more numerous - Troekurov and all the other landowners, regulars in his house.
As for Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, “an old Russian gentleman”, the very first pages of the work make us understand what an imperious, mercenary person he was, a despot, whose wealth and ancient origin “gave him great weight in the provinces where his estate was located. The neighbors were glad to cater to his slightest whims; provincial officials trembled at his name; Kirila Petrovich accepted signs of servility as a proper tribute ... In domestic life, Kirila Petrovich showed all the vices of an uneducated person. Spoiled by everything that only surrounded him, he was used to giving full rein to all the impulses of his ardent disposition and all the undertakings of a rather limited mind. Troekurov had two children: Masha, a seventeen-year-old daughter, and a son, "a black-eyed boy, a naughty boy of about nine."
Kirila Petrovich was only engaged in that he traveled around his vast possessions, arranged noisy feasts with leprosy. Hunting occupied almost the main place in the life of Troekurov. For this reason, his kennel was the envy of everyone, there "more than five hundred hounds and greyhounds lived in contentment and warmth, glorifying the generosity of Kirila Petrovich in their dog language."
It was the kennel that caused discord between Troekurov and his closest neighbor Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, whom Kirila Petrovich alone respected, "despite his humble state", and to whom he could easily call on a visit. Troekurov's respectful attitude towards Dubrovsky arose in his youth; “Once they were comrades in the service, and Troekurov knew from experience the impatience and determination of his character.” Andrei Gavrilovich was offended by the remark of one of the neighbor's psars about his supposedly poor condition and humiliating way of life. Moreover, Dubrovsky was not so offended by the remark itself, but rather by the fact that Troekurov “laughed loudly” at the same time and did not take any measures to punish the impudent serf.
The offended Dubrovsky left the dinner, and Troekurov's order to return was ignored. Kirila Petrovich could not forgive such a thing even to Dubrovsky, and as punishment he decided to sue a friend's estate, which he did.
This act shows the spiritual depravity of Troekurov, for whom nothing is sacred, and who is ready to sell friendship. True, the author emphasizes that at some moments the landowner's conscience wakes up, he begins to feel sorry for Dubrovsky and is ready to forgive him, but a sense of false pride and his superiority does not allow him to apologize.
Unlike these characters, Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky is a liberal landowner. Idleness and debauchery are not his way of life. Having seventy peasants, Dubrovsky treats them differently than the tyrant neighbor. Therefore, the peasants respond to him with respect and love, and therefore they are ready to die, just not to fall into bondage to Troekurov. The abolition of serfdom would certainly not have frightened Andrei Gavrilovich, and he would hardly have interfered with it. Neither in the first years of his life on the estate, nor later did Andrei Gavrilovich agree to take advantage of the gifts that Troekurov offered him. Moreover, unlike other landowners, Dubrovsky was never afraid to express his thoughts in the presence of an arrogant neighbor. This speaks of the pride of this man, and real pride, not Troekurov's.

Dubrovsky tells the servant to drive away Troekurov, who has come to put up with Andrei Gavrilovich.(The arrival of the landowner hastened the death of Dubrovsky Sr. Therefore, in this case, Vladimir is most likely right: he had nothing to talk about with Troekurov.) Dubrovsky sets fire to his father's estate.(He could not come to terms with the fact that strangers would be in charge of his native walls. One can understand the actions of Dubrovsky, who did not want the most sacred thing for him to be desecrated by enemies. But it is his fault that people die in the fire, even if they cause hatred in Vladimir and his peasants.) Vladimir Dubrovsky becomes the head of the robbers.(Dubrovsky vowed to take revenge on Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, but ... "they robbed the landowners' houses and set them on fire, there was no safety either on the roads or in the villages." As a result, people suffered who had nothing to do with his ruin and who probably themselves are quite a few suffered from Troekurov.) Vladimir Dubrovsky acquires documents in the name of the Frenchman Deforge.(Dubrovsky did this in order to get into Troekurov's house. His main goal is revenge. However, this revenge is stopped by a flare-up of love for Masha Troekurova. We see Dubrovsky's nobility, sympathize with him and regret it.) Dubrovsky robs Spitsyn at Troekurov's house.(Spitsyn is guilty: he helped Troekurov take away Andrei Gavrilovich’s estate. Now Dubrovsky is taking away Spitsyn’s savings. On the one hand, he seems to be taking his own: he got what he deserved. On the other hand, why is Dubrovsky better than the same Spitsyn? True, Dubrovsky will probably use this money is for something good.) Dubrovsky opens up to Masha.(He acts like an honest, courageous and noble person.) Dubrovsky promises Masha help in a difficult moment of her life.(Dubrovsky is sincere in his intention. But Vladimir was late. He shows generosity - he does not harm Prince Vereisky, although he loses Masha.) Conclusions.(A. S. Pushkin draws the image of Vladimir Dubrovsky truthfully. If Dubrovsky became a robber, it was not his fault. Love for Masha turned him from a formidable leader of robbers into a suffering person with whom you sympathize.)

Composition on the topic: "The nobility of souls is indestructible" to the novel by A. S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky" Thank you in advance

Answer:

A. S. Pushkin in his novel "Dubrovsky" brought to the fore one of the representatives of the provincial nobility - the ambitious and noble Dubrovsky. In this image, the writer managed to display the full breadth and richness of the Russian soul. The protagonist of the novel is the embodiment of Pushkin's ideal idea of a person. Dubrovsky is endowed with the features of a typical romantic hero: smart, educated, noble, brave, kind, handsome. The young nobleman wins the favor of the people around him, despite their social position, titles and wealth. Even his voice sounded unusual: “The speech of the young Dubrovsky, his sonorous voice and majestic appearance produced the desired effect.” The conflict between Troekurov and the old man Dubrovsky leads to a popular revolt. The peasants become robbers, they rob and burn the estates of the landowners. The leader of a gang of noble robbers, Vladimir Dubrovsky, acts as a fighter for freedom and justice. But he refuses to take revenge on his enemy Troekurov, as he is in love with his daughter Masha. The conflict is aggravated by the wedding of the girl and the elderly Prince Vereisky, which took place at the behest of her father. The hero is desperately trying to win back his love, but is too late. Masha is married, Dubrovsky is wounded. The author has invested in the character of Dubrovsky those qualities that will never lose their value and relevance. I think that Pushkin sincerely wanted a representative of every young generation to strive to be at least a little like the hero of this novel.

Similar questions

Nobility against meanness (based on the novel by A. S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky") A. S. Pushkin, who all his life hated the injustice, emptiness and "wildness" of the nobility, in the novel "Dubrovsky" brought to the fore one of the representatives of the provincial nobility - an ambitious, noble rebel who suffered from his own estate, young Dubrovsky. The tyranny and despotism of the noble boyar Troekurov leads to the fact that the old gentleman Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky dies. His estate is illegally awarded to Troekurov. From that moment on, a conflict develops, a rebellion is brewing in the souls of Dubrovsky's peasants. Young Vladimir Dubrovsky is idealized by Pushkin. This is how he sees the hero-liberator, a fighter for truth and justice. The young nobleman is endowed with the features of a typical romantic hero: smart, educated, noble, brave, kind, stately, handsome.

His relationship with the peasants is built on loyalty and trust. The protest of the peasants against the tyranny of Troekurov resonates in the heart of Dubrovsky. They are driven by a sense of revenge for the death of Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, they hate state officials, who are able to work only for rich, dishonest local "idols". Rebellion in the soul of the people almost always turns into a real struggle. Therefore, according to the laws of the adventurous-adventure genre, folk the uprising takes on an underground character, an unknown gang of noble robbers plunders and burns the landowners' estates.Vladimir Dubrovsky is in love with the daughter of his enemy, therefore he refuses revenge on Troekurov.

Pushkin exacerbates the conflict with the wedding of Masha Troekurova and the elderly Prince Vereisky and the support of this marriage by the girl's father. Dubrovsky is desperately trying to win back his love, but is too late. Masha is married, Dubrovsky is wounded. The last detail serves as a plot justification for the rebel war to take on a massive character. A. S. Pushkin depicted the life and customs of the provincial nobility with the idealized moral and moral foundations of the ancient nobility. He contrasted honesty with meanness, generosity with greed, love with hate, restraint with revelry.

How to download a free essay? . And a link to this essay; Composition on the theme of nobility against meanness (based on Pushkin's novel "Dubrovsky") already in your bookmarks.

Additional essays on the topic

Vladimir Dubrovsky is presented as a noble defender of the rights of the individual, an independent person, capable of feeling deeply. The tone in which Pushkin writes about Vladimir Dubrovsky is always full of sympathy, but never ironic. Pushkin approves of all his actions and claims that all offended people should rob, steal, or even go out onto the main road. So, my version: this is a novel about nobility. About nobility in the meaning indicated by V.I.Dal. “Nobility is a quality, this state, noble origin; actions, behavior, concepts and feelings, decent to this title, consonant with true honor and morality. Dal directly connects the nobility with the nobility, of course, and Pushkin did not share them, so the topic is broader: the fate and purpose of the nobility or the honor of a nobleman. Surely Pushkin was very worried about this topic. “Take care of honor from a young age” is the epigraph of his next work “The Captain's Daughter”, in which it is written again about this topic.
So, a novel about nobility, the hero of the novel is a nobleman, "who became a victim of injustice." There is no doubt about the nobility of the hero, but still sometimes he betrays the nobility. When does this happen for the first time? In chapter 4 we read: “Tell Kirill Petrovich to get out as soon as possible before I order him to be driven out of the yard ... Let's go! The servant happily ran. The author did not condemn the ardor of the young Dubrovsky in a word. And we can fully understand his feelings - he is amazed at the state of his father: "The patient pointed to the yard with an air of horror and anger." But Dubrovsky's hasty order to drive Troekurov out of the court bears bad consequences, and the most important of them is not Troekurov's offense, but the fact that the servants were allowed to behave insolently. “The servant happily ran. In this "joyfully" some revelry of servile insolence. It is possible to understand and justify Dubrovsky, but judge for yourself, is Dubrovsky right?
Dubrovsky became a robber, a noble robber: “he attacks not everyone, but famous rich people, but even here he shares with them, and does not rob him completely, and no one accuses him of murders ..”
But Dubrovsky himself is well aware of the path he has taken. “A villainy will never be committed in your name. You must be pure even in my crimes.” Pushkin nowhere gives any assessments of Dubrovsky's actions (in contrast, by the way, to the actions of Troekurov; what is worth the only remark “Such were the noble amusements of the Russian master!”). The reader himself will guess that evil deeds and crimes are incompatible with high honor. At the first explanation with Masha, Dubrovsky said: “I understood that the house where you live is sacred, that not a single creature connected with you by blood ties is subject to my curse. I have given up vengeance as madness." But he did not give up revenge at all, continuing to remember other offenders.
“Sleeping in the same room with a man whom he could consider his personal enemy and one of the main culprits of his disaster, Dubrovsky could not resist the temptation. He knew about the existence of the bag and decided to take possession of it. And our moral sense is indignant at the fact that Dubrovsky succumbed to temptation, once again betraying his nobility. And again, we can both understand and justify Dubrovsky, and the author again does not give any assessments, but we cannot agree that this act does not correspond to the concept of true honor.
Let us now turn to the heroine of the novel. Marya Kirillovna is also a victim of injustice. Forced to marry a "hated man", she too is looking for a way out. "Marriage scared her like a scaffold, like a grave." “No, no,” she repeated in despair, “it’s better to die, it’s better to go to a monastery, I’d rather go after Dubrovsky.” But she does not cross the line beyond which pure morality ends. The priest spoke "irrevocable words." The contemporary Pushkin reader knew these words: "Lord our God, crown them with glory and honor."
It is interesting that Pushkin ends this novel almost on the same note: "But I am given to another." This is the pinnacle of nobility. Any other act will cause many misfortunes. “I don't want to be the cause of some horror,” Masha says to Dubrovsky. For such an act of strength, much more is needed than for protest and revenge. Neither Onegin nor Dubrovsky can rise to such a height.
Hence, I have an assumption that this is precisely why Pushkin parted with his hero "in a moment of evil for him." He doesn't seem to have anything else to do with him. And so he takes on another novel, and gives it a title that surprises me.
ogih, "The Captain's Daughter", and in this novel the heroine's name is again Masha for some reason, and the main question is about honor, nobility and loyalty. And Pyotr Grinev brilliantly resolves it.
So, this is my understanding of A.S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky" and his main character Dubrovsky.What is the nobility of Dubrovsky in the novel

LOVI) Nobility is a compound word consisting of good and kind, probably a person who brings the good of his kind. Nobility is something positive that sits inside a person, that is, his honesty, the ability to help the needy, who is waiting for this help. Noble - a person with self-respect, with a willingness to sacrifice himself, in the name of someone else.A. S. Pushkin, who all his life hated the injustice, emptiness and "savagery" of the nobility, in the novel "Dubrovsky" brought to the fore one of the representatives of the provincial nobility - an ambitious, noble rebel who suffered from his own class, young Dubrovsky. The tyranny and despotism of the noble master Troekurov leads to the fact that the old gentleman Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky dies. His estate is illegally awarded to Troekurov. From that moment on, a conflict develops, a rebellion is brewing in the souls of Dubrovsky's peasants. Young Vladimir Dubrovsky is idealized by Pushkin. This is how he sees the hero-liberator, a fighter for truth and justice. The young nobleman is endowed with the features of a typical romantic hero: smart, educated, noble, brave, kind, stately, handsome. His relationship with the peasants is built on loyalty and trust. The protest of the peasants against the tyranny of Troekurov resonates in the heart of Dubrovsky. They are driven by a sense of revenge for the death of Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, they hate government officials who can only work for rich, dishonest local "idols." Rebellion in the soul of the people almost always "results in a real struggle. Therefore, according to the laws of the adventurous genre, the popular uprising takes on an underground character, an unknown gang of noble robbers plunders and burns the landowners' estates. Vladimir Dubrovsky is in love with the daughter of his enemy, so he refuses to take revenge on Troekurov. Pushkin exacerbates the conflict with the wedding of Masha Troekurova and the elderly Prince Vereisky and the support of this marriage by the girl's father. Dubrovsky is desperately trying to win back his love, but is too late. Masha is married, Dubrovsky is wounded. The last detail serves as a plot justification for the rebel war to take on a massive character. Vladimir fulfills his plan, taking the serfs with him, he becomes a robber, because not finding help from the law, he decided to live by his own rules - to be cruel, ruthless. But even being a robber, he did not change his moral principles. And, having fallen in love with Masha, the daughter of his enemy Troekurov, he did not burn Pokrovskoye, the Troekurov estate, showing his nobility. And he is a noble robber because he robbed exclusively the rich, and distributed the loot to the poor, he respected his peasants, was attached to them from childhood, did not want them to starve, he felt responsible for them. I met noble people, and more than once. Yes, a simple example: An old man slipped, fell, a man ran up, picked him up, it turned out that his grandfather had a broken arm, the man called an ambulance. Or here. We rested on vacation in the Krasnodar Territory. We rested on the beach. It started to rain sharply, and even with hail. the remaining children, covering them with his cloak, himself remaining unprotected. Yes, there are many such cases in life.

Average rating: 4.4

During his short but vibrant creative life, A.S. Pushkin presented us with many images of noble romantic heroes. One of them is Vladimir Dubrovsky, a character in the story of the same name, published in 1841.

Vladimir is a young hereditary nobleman, the only son of Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky, known for his integrity, honesty and incorruptible character. By the will of the author, Vladimir has to endure two heavy losses: the death of his beloved father and the loss of the family estate. Having learned that the culprit of all troubles is the landowner Kirila Petrovich Troekurov, young Dubrovsky decides to take revenge on him at any cost. The first thing he does is take his serfs, who, according to a corrupt court, went to Troekurov, into the forest and becomes the leader of a gang of robbers.

The first impression of Dubrovsky may not seem very attractive: “he allowed himself luxurious whims, played cards and entered into debt, not caring about the future and foreseeing sooner or later a rich bride, the dream of poor youth.” He was characterized by behavior characteristic of most young people of his age and class. However, as the plot develops, the author reveals such traits of Dubrovsky's character that allow us to talk about his nobility, decency, responsibility and honor.

For the first time, Dubrovsky shows these qualities, driving up to his parents' house: "he looked around him with indescribable excitement." The depth of Vladimir's feelings is revealed in the description of Vladimir's meeting with his father and nanny Yegorovna. Having learned about the cause of his father's illness and the meanness of Troekurov, young Dubrovsky decides to take revenge on the offender. But resentment did not blind Vladimir: having led a detachment of robbers, he robs only those people who, in his opinion, have lost their human qualities because of money and power. In turn, Dubrovsky, by his actions, constantly confirms that for him the concepts of honor, dignity, nobility are not an empty phrase. Having caught a clerk on the road with money for a guards officer, he did not take away these finances, but returned them back. Later, when meeting with the mother of this officer, he will say: "... Dubrovsky himself was a guards officer, he will not want to offend a comrade."

The positive qualities of the young Dubrovsky are also evidenced by the fact that all the serfs of his father were ready to lay down their heads for him. But, feeling responsible for the fate of the people entrusted to him and realizing the doom of his position, at the end of the story Dubrovsky orders the peasants to disperse and reconcile. Under the circumstances, there was hardly a better solution he could offer his men.

In all the actions of Dubrovsky, strength, courage and fearlessness are visible. And only when meeting with his beloved girl, Masha Troekurova, does the formidable robber become timid and reserved. Love for him is a pure, sublime feeling. The fact that deceit and love are incompatible things for Dubrovsky once again confirms his nobility. To resolve this contradiction, Vladimir confesses to Masha who he really is, leaving the girl the right to choose. Moreover, in his desire to make the girl happy, not to overshadow her life with the loss of her relatives, Vladimir is ready to abandon his original intention.

And although the author leaves the readers the opportunity to "add" the fate of Vladimir themselves, the image of the "noble robber" Dubrovsky can be put on a par with such fictional and real people as Robin Hood, Zorro, Oleksa Dovbush and Emelyan Pugachev.

The story of A. S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky" is based on a historical plot about the rebellion of the peasants of the Pskov landowner Dubrovsky. The author created a work that very realistically merged into his modernity. But the initially conceived image of the protagonist turned out to be contradictory: Vladimir Dubrovsky from the novel "Dubrovsky" is a noble robber, whose image does not at all fit with the mores of serf Russia.

The characterization of Dubrovsky from the novel "Dubrovsky", which the author introduces us to at the beginning of the work, suggests that in the future he will turn into an egoist and a reveler, stupidly living life. Vladimir is no different from other young people: he lives on his father's means and does not care at all about where they come from. He is young and can afford a luxurious life, playing cards, debts and entertainment. He is not interested in the future, because, like his friends, he dreams of a rich bride, marriage to which will solve all problems.

But very quickly you can understand that all this recklessness, careless behavior is explained only by his youth. Learning that his father was very ill, he dropped everything and went to him without a moment's hesitation. Thus, the personality of Dubrovsky is revealed from a completely different side.

The coachman who met him spoke about the events taking place in the house of Dubrovsky Sr., about the lawsuit that the neighbor started. But all this is of little interest to the young man. For him, the state of his father is much more important. Approaching his native estate, he experiences tender and kind feelings. His heart is overflowing with memories, and the nanny who met him caused tenderness and pity in Vladimir. In his arms, he put all the undisguised love and care for his loved ones.

First meeting with Vladimir

The life of Dubrovsky Jr. changed a lot after the death of his father. He did not become like other landowners in the district and did not bow before the petty tyrant Troekurov. It was more important for him to preserve the honor of an officer, and the young man began to look for ways to take revenge. Thoughts of revenge made him a robber, a noble robber. After all, how else can one explain such actions as robbing only the rich, distributing money to the needy.

The image of Vladimir Dubrovsky is a kind of authorial protest against injustice. Of course, it is very difficult to call a robber honest and noble. The concept of honor is incompatible with such matters. But this is exactly how A. S. Pushkin is trying to convey to people that the culprit in such a situation is not one person, but the entire political system of the country. The young son of Dubrovsky does not know how to protest, and therefore takes the path of robbery. As a result, he understands the groundlessness of his actions, but he is no longer able to change the situation. He only asks his accomplices to surrender and change their lifestyle.

The image of Vladimir Dubrovsky

Such qualities of Dubrovsky as intelligence, education, speak volumes. He teaches his son Kirila Petrovich grammar and geography, teaches Masha music and singing. If he were stupid, it would not have been possible to reincarnate as a teacher.
His courage was envied by many. One of his deeds, the killing of a bear belonging to the master, commands respect. He was not afraid, but drew attention to himself, which forced himself to be respected.
Such character traits of Dubrovsky as sincerity, tenderness and nobility are revealed in scenes with Masha Troekurova. His love is stronger than vengeance, because of it he refuses to harm his enemy. With his decision, Vladimir leads the reader to the idea that sounds in the biblical commandment: do not answer evil with evil.

The story of Vladimir Dubrovsky is instructive. The author is trying to show that the lawlessness of the landowners cannot go unpunished. Where nobility and justice meet on the path of untruth and dishonor, the landowners receive a worthy rebuff. Vladimir became a robber by coincidence, and the death of Dubrovsky Sr. only strengthened them. However, the path he chose did not bring satisfaction and Dubrovsky disappears from the life of his peasants.

The peasants not only follow him, they believe him. And to achieve this from the common people is very difficult. According to the description, Dubrovsky is noble and kind, he cannot give up his peasants for reprisal, therefore he invites them to surrender and start living right.

Artwork test

So, a novel about nobility, the hero of the novel is a nobleman, "who became a victim of injustice." There is no doubt about the nobility of the hero, but still sometimes he betrays the nobility. When does this happen for the first time? In chapter 4 we read: "Tell Kirill Petrovich to get out as soon as possible before I tell him to be driven out of the yard ... Let's go!" - The servant happily ran. The author did not condemn the ardor of the young Dubrovsky in a word. And we can fully understand his feelings - he is amazed at the state of his father: "The patient pointed to the yard with an air of horror and anger." But Dubrovsky's hasty order to drive Troekurov out of the court bears bad consequences, and the most important of them is not Troekurov's offense, but the fact that the servants were allowed to behave insolently. "The servant happily ran. In this "joyfully" some revelry of servile insolence. It is possible to understand and justify Dubrovsky, but judge for yourself, is Dubrovsky right?

Dubrovsky became a robber, a noble robber: “he attacks not everyone, but famous rich people, but even here he shares with them, and does not rob him completely, and no one accuses him of murders ... "

But Dubrovsky himself is well aware of the path he has taken. "Never villainy will be committed in your name. You must be pure even in my crimes." Pushkin nowhere gives any assessment of Dubrovsky's actions (in contrast, by the way, to Troekurov's actions; what is the only remark "Such were the noble amusements of the Russian master!"). The reader himself will guess that evil deeds and crimes are incompatible with high honor. At the first explanation with Masha, Dubrovsky said: "I realized that the house where you live is sacred, that not a single creature connected with you by blood ties is subject to my curse. I refused revenge as madness." But he did not give up revenge at all, continuing to remember other offenders.

"Sleeping in the same room with a man whom he could consider his personal enemy and one of the main culprits of his disaster, Dubrovsky could not resist the temptation. He knew about the existence of the bag and decided to take it." And our moral sense is indignant at the fact that Dubrovsky succumbed to temptation, once again betraying his nobility. And again, we can both understand and justify Dubrovsky, and the author again does not give any assessments, but we cannot agree that this act does not correspond to the concept of true honor.

Let us now turn to the heroine of the novel. Marya Kirillovna is also a victim of injustice. Forced to marry a "hated man", she is also looking for a way out. "Marriage scared her like a scaffold, like a grave." "No, no," she repeated in despair, "it's better to die, better to go to a monastery, I'd better go after Dubrovsky." But she does not cross the line beyond which pure morality ends. The priest spoke the "irrevocable words". The contemporary Pushkin reader knew these words: "Lord our God, crown them with glory and honor."

It is interesting that Pushkin ends this novel almost on the same note: "But I am given to another." This is the pinnacle of nobility. Any other act will cause many misfortunes. "I don't want to be the cause of some horror," Masha says to Dubrovsky. For such an act of strength, much more is needed than for protest and revenge. Neither Onegin nor Dubrovsky can rise to such a height.

Hence, I have an assumption that this is precisely why Pushkin parted with his hero "in a moment of evil for him." He doesn't seem to have anything else to do with him. And so he takes on another novel, and gives it a name that surprises many, "The Captain's Daughter", and in this novel the heroine is again called Masha for some reason, and the main question is about honor, nobility and loyalty. And Pyotr Grinev brilliantly resolves it.

So, this is my understanding of the novel by A. S. Pushkin "Dubrovsky" and its main character Dubrovsky.

Popular in category: