The spiritual life of Russian nobles in the works of L.N. Tolstoy and I. Turgenev. Reflections by I.S. Turgenev on the fate of the Russian nobility The role of the nobility in fathers and sons quotes

(the essay is divided into pages)

I. S. Turgenev began work on the novel “Fathers and Sons” in early August 1860, and finished it in early July 1861. The novel appeared in the February book of the Russian Messenger magazine. In the same year it was published as a separate edition with a dedication to V. G. Belinsky.

The novel takes place in the summer of 1859; the epilogue tells about the events that occurred after the fall of serfdom in 1861. Turgenev follows, one might say, on the heels of the events of Russian life. Never before had he created a work whose content almost coincided in time with the moment of work on it. With cursory but expressive strokes, on the very eve of the reform of 1861, Turgenev shows the crisis in the way of life of both the master and the peasant, the nationwide need to abolish serfdom. The theme of crisis appears at the very beginning of the novel and in the sad appearance of a devastated Russian village, and in the features of the collapse of the patriarchal foundations of a peasant family noticed by the writer, and in the lamentations of the landowner Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, and in the reflections of his son Arkady about the need for reforms.

The fate of Russia and the ways of its further progressive development deeply worried the writer. He is trying to show Russian society the tragic nature of the growing conflicts. The stupidity and helplessness of all classes threatens to develop into confusion and chaos. Against this background, heated debates unfold about the ways to save Russia, which are waged by the heroes of the novel, representing the two main parts of the Russian intelligentsia - the liberal nobility and the common democrats. These two groups represent socially different environments with directly opposing interests and views. On the one hand, these are “fathers” (Pavel Petrovich and Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov), on the other, “children” (Bazarov, Arkady).

The most striking, although not entirely typical, representative of the cultural provincial nobility is Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, Bazarov’s main opponent. Turgenev presents the life path of this hero in some detail. The father of both Kirsanov brothers was a military general in 1812, a semi-literate, rude, but not evil Russian man. All his life he pulled the burden, commanding first a brigade, then a division, and constantly lived in the provinces, where, due to his character, he played a rather significant role. Their mother, Agafya Kuzminshnina Kirsanova, belonged to the “commander mothers”, wore fluffy caps and loud dresses, was the first to approach the cross in church, spoke loudly and a lot, in a word, she lived for her own pleasure. Pavel Petrovich was born in the south of Russia and was raised at home, surrounded by cheap tutors, cheeky but obsequious adjutants and other regimental and staff personalities.

Pavel Petrovich entered military service: he graduated from the Corps of Pages, and a brilliant military career awaited him. Since childhood, Pavel Kirsanov was distinguished by his remarkable beauty; besides, he was self-confident, a little mocking, it was impossible not to like him. Having become an officer in the guards regiment, he began to appear in society. Women were crazy about him, and men were jealous of him. Kirsanov lived at that time in the same apartment with his brother Nikolai Petrovich, whom he loved sincerely. At the age of twenty-eight, Pavel Petrovich was already a captain. But his unhappy love for a woman with a mysterious look, Princess R., turned his whole life upside down. He retired, spent four years abroad, then returned to Russia and lived as a lonely bachelor. And so ten years passed, colorless, fruitless. When Nikolai Petrovich’s wife died, he invited his brother to his Maryino estate, and a year and a half later, Pavel Petrovich settled there and did not leave the village, even when Nikolai Petrovich left for St. Petersburg. Pavel Petrovich arranged his life in the English way, and began to read more and more in English. He rarely saw his neighbors, and only occasionally went out for elections. Pavel Petrovich was known among them as a proud man, but he was respected for his excellent aristocratic manners, for rumors about his victories, for the fact that he played vint masterfully and always won, and especially for his impeccable honesty.

“coincided with the most important reforms of the 19th century, namely the abolition of serfdom. The century marked the development of industry and natural sciences. Connections with Europe have expanded. In Russia, the ideas of Westernism began to be accepted. The “fathers” adhered to the old views. The younger generation welcomed the abolition of serfdom and reform.

Bazarov, a nihilist, represents the “new people”; Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is opposed to him as his main opponent. Pavel Petrovich is the son of a military general in 1812. Graduated from the page corps. He had a handsome face and youthful slimness. An aristocrat, an Anglomaniac, he was funny, self-confident, and indulged himself. Living in the village with his brother, he retained his aristocratic habits. Bazarov is the grandson of the sexton, the son of the district doctor. Materialist, nihilist. He speaks in a “lazy but courageous voice,” and his gait is “firm and swiftly bold.” Speaks clearly and simply. Important features of the worldview are its atheism and materialism. He “possessed a special ability to arouse confidence in himself in lower people, although he never showed it and treated them carelessly.” The views of the nihilist and Kirsanov were completely opposite. From the first meeting they felt each other as enemies. Pavel Petrovich, having learned that Evgeny would be visiting them, asked: “This hairy one.” And Bazarov remarked to Arkady in the evening: “Your uncle is a weird one.” There were always contradictions between them. “We will still have a fight with this doctor, I foresee it,” says Kirsanov. And it happened. The nihilist did not justifiably prove the need for denial as a way of life and naturally, due to his low philosophical culture, ran into the logically correct conclusions of his opponent. This was the basis of the heroes’ hostility. The youth came to destroy and expose, and someone else will do the building.”

You deny everything, or, to put it more correctly, you destroy everything. “But we need to build,” Kirsanov says to Evgeniy. “This is no longer our business. “First we need to clear the place,” answers Bazarov. Or when asked what you deny, a short answer followed: “Everything.” They argue about poetry, art, philosophy. Bazarov amazes and irritates Kirsanov with his cold-blooded thoughts about the denial of personality and everything spiritual. But still, no matter how correctly Pavel Petrovich thinks, to some extent his ideas are outdated. Moreover, his opponent has advantages: novelty of thoughts, he is closer to the people, because courtyard people are drawn to him. Of course, the principles and ideals of the fathers are becoming a thing of the past. This is especially clearly shown in the scene of the duel between Kirsanov and Evgeniy. “The duel,” he wrote, “was introduced to provide visual evidence of the emptiness of elegant noble chivalry, presented as exaggeratedly comic.” But we also cannot agree with the thoughts of a nihilist. Love for Odintsova caused the final defeat of his views and showed the inconsistency of his ideas. At the end of the novel, the hero dies from infection with cadaveric poison. Nature takes its toll. After these reflections, I would like to disagree with the remark

I. Repin: “From literature, two heroes - as role models - prevailed among students. Bazarov and Rakhmatov." In my opinion, not everyone would want to take a person like Bazarov as a model. The novel reveals the cruel and complex process of breaking down old social relations. This process appears in the novel as a destructive force that changes the usual course of life. Turgenev constructs the novel in such a way that the nihilist and Pavel Kirsanov are in the spotlight all the time. Contemporaries reacted sharply to the appearance of the work. The reactionary press accused the writer of currying favor with young people, while the democratic press reproached the author for slandering the younger generation. However, the novel “Fathers and Sons” was wildly successful in Russian literary circles

He treats very coldly the person who reveres him - Arkady Nikolaevich Kirsanov. In addition, his inattention causes a lot of suffering to his parents: Vasily Ivanovich and Arina Vlasyevna Bazarov. And all this is emphasized by an overly phlegmatic, at first glance, character. But the strength of Bazarov’s nature also changes the author. In the process of narration, one can note a change in the author’s attitude towards his hero. If at the beginning of the work I. S. Turgenev does not like him, then by the end he openly sympathizes with him. said: “Looking at his Bazarov, Turgenev, as a person and as an artist, grows in his novel, grows before our eyes and grows to a correct understanding, to a fair assessment of the created type.” The reader vaguely repeats the work done by the writer himself. He gradually, not immediately, realizes how beautiful and structured Bazarov’s inner world is. Of course, there are many obstacles to overcome.

Much of the information needed to properly evaluate any character can be gleaned from their conversations. Bazarov speaks very little, and hardly respects anyone enough that one can understand his character well enough from a conversation with him. We have to be content with omissions. Only two characters manage to force Bazarov to open up: Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, Arkady’s uncle, and Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, a young widow whom Arkady, Bazarov’s friend, met in the city at the governor’s ball. Moreover, the latter managed to get to know Bazarov much better, although only in a conversation with Pavel Petrovich Bazarov reveals his life positions. After Pavel Petrovich's first meeting with Bazarov, mutual hostility arises between them. Subsequently, it only intensifies and reaches “strong antipathy.” Pavel Petrovich can be called the head (or “pole”) of the “fathers” camp.

It contains most of the prejudices of a dying aristocracy. He does not accept, and probably cannot accept, Bazarov’s concepts. He notes the strengths of Bazarov’s character, but considers them to be shortcomings. “We (the old generation) do not have that daring arrogance,” says Pavel Petrovich, not realizing that for Bazarov, selfishness and arrogance have become almost the only driving forces. Pavel Petrovich is “a bilious and passionate man, gifted with a flexible mind and strong will,” who “could, under certain conditions, be a bright representative of the constraining, chilling power of the past.” He has a despotic nature: he tries to subjugate everyone around him, and he does this more out of habit than out of cold calculation. That is why he “shows off and gets angry, why doesn’t Bazarov, the only person he respects in his very hatred, admire him.” In turn, Bazarov “could be a representative of the destructive, liberating power of the present.”

Unlike Pavel Petrovich, in my opinion, he is not trying to subjugate anyone. He does not resist being loved or respected if it is beneficial or at least does not infringe on his personal interests, because “it’s not for the gods to burn pots.” In Bazarov, everything revolves around enormous egoism and conceit. It is to these qualities of his character that Bazarov owes everything. He lives “according to calculation”, based only on his interests and needs. He doesn’t need anyone, doesn’t have a high goal ahead, doesn’t strive for anything, and has more than enough strength and energy (this is the main argument for proving the tragedy of Bazarov’s nature). He understands that he is not like everyone else, but does not try to be like others. He is “full of himself, his inner life and does not constrain it for the sake of accepted customs and ceremonies. Here the individual achieves complete self-liberation, complete individuality and independence.” Of course, between such different, but at the same time similar people as Evgeny Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, according to all the laws of dialectics, heated debates should arise. And so it happens: Pavel Petrovich turns out to be the only person who manages to challenge Bazarov to an argument, often against the latter’s will. In these disputes, despite his laconicism, Bazarov tells a lot.

Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev was born into a noble noble family. He knew this class from the inside, which is why he wrote about it so often. His mother came from a wealthy landowner family, and his father from an old noble family. The future writer spent his childhood on his parents' estate Spassky-Lutovinovo. Here he first encountered the cruelty and arbitrariness of serfdom.

His mother was cruel with her peasants and often punished them with flogging for the most insignificant offenses. Even then, the future writer developed a hatred of serfdom, which he carried throughout his life. And it was she who pushed him to create such masterpieces of Russian literature as “Mumu”, “First Love”, “Notes of a Hunter” and “Fathers and Sons”. One of the leading themes of the latter is the confrontation between two political views: revolutionary democrats, ideologists of the peasant masses and the liberal nobility, which arose with the need to reform serfdom.

The novel takes place in the spring of 1859. Serfdom has not yet been formally abolished. But all of Russia lives in anticipation of imminent changes in the fate of the country and the entire people. And during the preparation of the reform, two opposing positions of liberal nobles and revolutionary democrats were formed. The former had high hopes for the reform, advocated a softening of the political regime and pinned their hopes on the new emperor, while the latter believed that not reforms were needed, but radical changes. In the novel, the writer contrasted, on the one hand, the liberal nobles - the Kirsanov brothers, and on the other hand, the nihilist Bazarov, who helps the reader see the other side of the nobility. The novel exhibits a critical attitude towards this layer. Reading the novel, you really understand that Russia needs changes that will be associated with abandoning the traditions that the older generation so defends. Their views, whatever one may say, are turned to the past, which means that this entire social stratum cannot be absolutely wealthy and cannot act as an “advanced class.” Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov is one of the representatives of the nobility. His views mixed Westernism and Slavophilism. He considers the nobility to be the force that preserves the norms and traditions of Russian society, that it is the basis. Pavel Petrovich sees in aristocrats a highly developed sense of self-worth and self-respect, and finds this very important, because society is built on the individual. But this opinion is opposed by Bazarov’s opinion. He claims that the nobles are slackers and can only talk without doing anything; they are simply of no use. “You respect yourself and sit back; What good is this for the bien public? You wouldn’t respect yourself and do the same thing.” One might even say that nobles are despised by a nihilist. “Aristocracy, liberalism, progress, principles,” he said meanwhile

Bazarov, just think, how many foreign... and useless words there are! Russian people don’t need them for nothing.”

What to do? The writer does not give an answer. The nobility is dead from the inside, incapable of action and change. It is frozen with its traditions and “principles”. But the younger generation with new views and revolutionary ideas cannot fully establish themselves. Both of these worldviews have no chance of success in their pure form. Therefore, we can assume that the author sees a solution in their merger.

Updated: 2018-01-16

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

Thank you for your attention.

“Fathers and Sons” is one of the best novels by I. S. Turgenev. In this work, the writer brought to the stage a new man of the era, the “Russian Insarov.” This is the main character of the novel, Yevgeny Bazarov, a commoner and a democrat by conviction.

Bazarov is contrasted with all the other characters, and above all the Kirsanov family. In the images of the Kirsanovs, the author truthfully depicted the life and customs of the Russian nobility.

An introduction to the life of the Kirsanovs begins with a description of Nikolai Petrovich’s estate. Villages with low huts, collapsing roofs, ruined cemeteries, rickety churches. Men in rags, looking like beggars, pitiful, stunted trees complete the picture of the decline of Maryino, where Nikolai Kirsanov and his brother Pavel live.

External signs only serve as confirmation of internal troubles. The owner of the estate, Nikolai Petrovich, is trying to keep up with the times, making changes in the farm, but he himself feels that his labors are in vain. He starts a farm, is proud that he is “called red in the province,” but cannot find a common language with the peasants. Nikolai Petrovich complains to his son Arkady: “It’s impossible to fight on your own, sending for the police officer is not allowed by principles, and without fear of punishment nothing can be done!”

A gentle and kind person by nature, Nikolai Petrovich is trying to reconcile the old with the new both in himself and in those around him. He tries to smooth out the contradictions between his brother and Bazarov; he does not know how to behave in a conversation with his son. But Nikolai Petrovich himself feels that he is “a retired man, his song is finished.” It pains him to realize this, he does not want to believe that Bazarov’s words are right, but he says to Pavel Petrovich: “It seems to me that they are further from the truth than we are, but at the same time I feel that behind them there is something that we We don’t have any advantage over us..."

Nikolai Petrovich is afraid to admit that he is a man of the past, but all his actions prove that he cannot keep up with the times. This simple Russian gentleman evokes a smile and a feeling of pity. Nikolai Petrovich’s attitude towards Fenechka, his love for music and literature confirm the kindness of this man, who is in many ways close and understandable to Turgenev.

His brother Pavel differs sharply from Nikolai Petrovich. He has no doubt that he lives with correct ideas about people and events. Pavel Petrovich considers himself an aristocrat and puts the rights of the nobility at the forefront. He lives in the village with his brother, but retains all his aristocratic habits.

Pavel Petrovich dresses in the English manner and reads only English newspapers. A sleek face, hands with “long pink nails,” and a fragrant mustache set him apart from the other heroes of the novel. Already from the first description of Pavel Petrovich it is clear that he is a gentleman who knows his worth. The impression created by appearance is strengthened after the story about the life of Pavel Petrovich in Maryino. He inspires fear in the servants and Fenechka. The man, according to Bazarov, does not see his “compatriot” in Pavel Petrovich, because he “doesn’t even know how to talk to him.”

Zealously protecting his life from external invasion, Pavel Petrovich immediately saw an enemy in Bazarov. Already when meeting with the “nihilist,” he does not shake hands with him, and then asks his brother: “Who is this?” Pavel Petrovich feels what opinion Bazarov has about him. This irritates the “district aristocrat.” Politeness betrays him; in disputes he becomes harsh and rude. Trying to defend my principles. Pavel Petrovich is constantly defeated. His “principles are crumbling under the influence of Bazarov’s words. Having failed to defeat Evgeny in an argument, Pavel Petrovich began to hate him even more.

The apotheosis of the clash of heroes is a duel, for which Pavel Petrovich chooses an insignificant reason and tries to hide the true reason. The duel shows the complete inconsistency of Pavel Petrovich’s noble “principles”. This honest, well-mannered man is a thing of the past. Turgenev, speaking about Pavel Petrovich lying in bed after a duel, writes: “...His beautiful, emaciated head lay on a white pillow, like the head of a dead man... Yes, he was a dead man.” I immediately remember the words of Bazarov, who calls it an “archaic phenomenon.” And if Nikolai Petrovich evokes a kind smile with a tinge of sadness, then his brother is worthy only of pity.

Pavel Petrovich's soul has long been devastated, he has no future, but only the past. You understand this especially acutely when reading the epilogue of the novel. Pavel Petrovich lives in Dresden, he is as respectable as before, neat and noble, does not read anything Russian. But “life is hard for him... harder than he himself suspects.” Bitterly gritting his teeth, Pavel Petrovich stands motionless in the Russian church, thoughtfully, “then he suddenly comes to his senses” and begins to pray. Only the Russian church in the center of Germany and an ashtray in the shape of a peasant's bast shoe remained with this man.

But the fate of Nikolai Petrovich is by no means cloudless. His views and the activities of the world mediator “do not completely satisfy either the educated or the uneducated nobles.” Nikolai Kirsanov also cannot get into the mainstream of fast-paced life.

The fate of the Kirsanov brothers is a reflection of the life of the Russian nobility of the post-reform era. I. S. Turgenev masterfully depicted the process of gradual destruction of the “nests of the nobility” and the death of the patriarchal way of life. A new, young force invaded the environment dear to the writer’s heart.

Russian nobility in the novel “Fathers and Sons and Children.”

Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev was a great playwright, an amazing publicist and a magnificent prose writer. He wrote one of his best works, the novel “Fathers and Sons,” in 1860-1861, that is, during the period of the peasant reform. A fierce struggle divided Russian society into 2 irreconcilable camps: on one side were the democrat-revolutionaries, who believed that Russia needed a radical change in the state structure, on the other, conservatives and liberals, according to whom, the foundations of Russian life should have remained unchanged: landowners - with their land holdings, peasants are more or less dependent on their masters. The novel reflects the ideological struggle between the liberal nobility and revolutionary democracy, and the author sympathizes with the latter. “My whole story is directed against the nobility, as the advanced class,” wrote I.S. Turgenev in a letter to K. Sluchevsky. The characteristic types of nobles of this period are represented in the Kirsanov family. “Look at the faces of Nikolai Petrovich, Pavel Petrovich, Arkady. Weakness and lethargy or limitation. An aesthetic feeling forced me to take specifically good representatives of the nobility in order to prove my theme all the more accurately: if cream is bad, what about milk? The author chooses far from the worst representatives of conservatism and liberalism in order to emphasize even more clearly that the discussion will then be about the fight not against bad people, but against outdated social views and phenomena.

Pavel Petrovich is an intelligent and strong-willed person who has certain personal merits: he is honest, noble in his own way, faithful to the beliefs he acquired in his youth. But at the same time, Pavel Kirsanov does not accept what is happening in the life around him. The strong principles that this man adheres to are in conflict with life: they are dead. Pavel Petrovich calls himself a man “who loves progress,” but by this word he means admiration for everything English. Having gone abroad, he “gets to know the British more”, does not read anything Russian, although on his table there is a silver ashtray in the shape of a bast shoe, which actually exhausts his “connection with the people.” This man has everything in the past, he has not yet aged, but he already takes for granted his death during his lifetime...

Outwardly, his brother is directly opposite to Pavel Petrovich. He is kind, gentle, sentimental. Unlike the idle Pavel, Nikolai tries to do housework, but in doing so he shows complete helplessness. His “economy creaked like an ungreased wheel, crackled like homemade furniture from damp wood.” Nikolai Petrovich cannot understand the reason for his failures. He also does not understand why Bazarov called him a “retired man.” “It seems,” he says to his brother, “I’m doing everything to keep up with the times: I organized peasants, started a farm... I read, I study, in general I try to keep up with modern requirements,” but they say that my song is finished. Why, brother, I myself am beginning to think that it is definitely sung.”

Despite all the efforts of Nikolai Petrovich to be modern, his entire figure gives the reader a feeling of something outdated. This is facilitated by the author’s description of his appearance: “chubby; sits with his legs tucked under him.” His good-natured patriarchal appearance sharply contrasts with the picture of peasant poverty: “... the peasants were met, all shabby, on bad nags...”

The Kirsanov brothers are people of a completely established type. Life has passed them by, and they are unable to change anything; they obediently, albeit with helpless despair, submit to the will of circumstances.

Arkady poses as a follower of Bazarov, whom he revered at the university. But in fact, he is only an imitator, that is, he is not an independent person. This is emphasized many times in the novel. The ostentatious desire to keep up with the times forces him to repeat Bazarov’s thoughts that are completely alien to him; the feelings and views of his father and uncle are much closer to him. On his native estate, Arkady gradually moves away from Evgeniy. Meeting Katya Lokteva finally alienates the two friends. Subsequently, the younger Kirsanov becomes a more practical master than his father, but his master's well-being means spiritual death.

The nobles Kirsanov are opposed by the nihilist Evgeniy Bazarov. He is the force that can break the old life. By exposing social antagonism in Bazarov's disputes with Pavel Petrovich, Turgenev shows that relations between generations here are wider and more complex than the confrontation of social groups. In the verbal battle between Kirsanov and Bazarov, the inconsistency of the noble foundations is exposed, but there is a certain correctness in the position of the “fathers” who defend their views in disputes with young people.

Pavel Petrovich is wrong when he clings to his class privileges, to his speculative idea of ​​​​people's life. But perhaps he is right in defending what should remain immutable in human society. Bazarov does not notice that Pavel Petrovich’s conservatism is not always and not in everything self-interested, that in his discussions about the house, about the principles born of a certain cultural and historical experience, there is some truth. In disputes, everyone resorts to using “opposite platitudes.” Kirsanov talks about the need to follow authorities and believe in them, insists on the need to follow principles, but Bazarov rejects all this. There is a lot of caustic truth in Bazarov’s ridicule of noble forms of progress. It’s funny when noble claims to progressiveness are limited to the acquisition of English washstands. Pavel Petrovich argues that life with its ready-made, historically established forms can be smarter than any person, more powerful than an individual, but this trust needs to be tested for compliance with an ever-renewing life. The emphatically aristocratic manners of Pavel Kirsanov are caused rather by internal weakness, a secret consciousness of his inferiority. The efforts of the Kirsanov father and son, trying to prevent the escalating conflict, only increase the drama of the situation.

Using the example of several bright characters, Turgenev managed to describe the entire noble world and show its problem of that time. In the middle of the 19th century, it stood at a crossroads, not knowing how to develop further, and Ivan Sergeevich very colorfully described this state.