Oblomov is an extra person or a gentle child. Essay: Oblomov and “extra people.” What does Oblomov have in common with “extra people”

Plan.

Gallery of extra people

Attributes of “superfluous people” The origins of “Oblomovism”

Real-fairy-tale life

Possible happiness and Olga Ilyinskaya

Conclusion. Who is to blame for “Oblomovism”?

Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” continues the gallery of works that describe heroes who are superfluous to the whole world and to themselves, but not superfluous to the passions boiling in their souls. Oblomov, the main character of the novel, following Onegin and Pechorin, goes through the same thorny path of life's disappointments, tries to change something in the world, tries to love, make friends, maintain relationships with acquaintances, but he does not succeed in all this. Just like life didn’t work out for Lermontov’s and Pushkin’s heroes. And the main heroines of all these three works, “Eugene Onegin”, “Hero of Our Time” and “Oblomov”, are also similar - pure and bright creatures who were never able to stay with their lovers. Perhaps a certain type of man attracts a certain type of woman? But why then do such worthless men attract such beautiful women? And, in general, what are the reasons for their worthlessness, were they really born this way, or is it a noble upbringing, or is time to blame? Using Oblomov’s example, we will try to understand the essence of the “extra people” problem and try to answer the questions posed.

With the development of the history of “extra people” in literature, a kind of paraphernalia, or things, objects, which must be present for each such “extra” character, was developed. Oblomov has all these accessories: a dressing gown, a dusty sofa and an old servant, without whose help it seemed he would die. Maybe that’s why Oblomov doesn’t go abroad, because there are only “girls” as servants who don’t know how to properly remove the master’s boots. But where did all this come from? It seems that the reason must first of all be sought in the childhood of Ilya Ilyich, in the pampered life that the landowners of that time led and in the inertia that was instilled from childhood: “the mother, after petting him, let him walk in the garden, around the yard, in the meadow , with strict confirmation to the nanny not to leave the child alone, not to allow him near horses, dogs, goats, not to go far from the house, and most importantly, not to let him into the ravine, as the most terrible place in the area, which had a bad reputation.” And, having become an adult, Oblomov also does not allow himself to be near horses, or to people, or to the whole world. Why it is in childhood that it is necessary to look for the roots of such a phenomenon as “Oblomovism” is clearly visible when comparing Oblomov with his childhood friend, Andrei Stolts. They are the same age and the same social status, but like two different planets colliding in space. Of course, all this can only be explained by Stolz’s German origin, however, what then to do with Olga Ilyinskaya, a Russian young lady who, at twenty years old, was much more purposeful than Oblomov. And it’s not even about age (Oblomov was about 30 years old at the time of the events), but again about upbringing. Olga grew up in her aunt’s house, not restrained by the strict orders of her elders or constant affection, and learned everything herself. That's why she has such an inquisitive mind and desire to live and act. After all, in childhood there was no one who would take care of her, hence the sense of responsibility and the inner core that does not allow her to deviate from her principles and way of life. Oblomov was raised by the women of his family, and this is not his fault, but somewhere the fault of his mother, her so-called selfishness towards her child, a life filled with illusions, goblins and brownies, and maybe that was all society in these pre-Moscow times. “Although the adult Ilya Ilyich later learns that there are no honey and milk rivers, no good sorceresses, although he jokes with a smile at his nanny’s stories, this smile is not sincere, it is accompanied by a secret sigh: his fairy tale is mixed with life, and he sometimes unconsciously sad, why is a fairy tale not life, and why is life not a fairy tale?

Oblomov remained living in fairy tales told by his nanny, and was never able to plunge into real life, because real life, for the most part, is black and vulgar, and people living in fairy tales have no place in it, because in In real life, everything happens not by the wave of a magic wand, but only thanks to human will. Stolz says the same thing to Oblomov, but he is so blind and deaf, so captured by the petty passions raging in his soul, that sometimes he doesn’t even understand his best friend: “Well, brother Andrei, you are the same! There was one smart man, and he went crazy. Who goes to America and Egypt! The English: that’s how God made them; and they have nowhere to live at home. Who will go with us? Is it some desperate person who doesn’t care about life?” But Oblomov himself doesn’t care about life. And he’s too lazy to live. And it seems that only love, a big and bright feeling, can revive him. But we know that this did not happen, although Oblomov tried very hard.

At the beginning of the emergence of the relationship between Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya, the hope that “happiness is possible” also arises in us, and, indeed, Ilya Ilyich is simply transformed. We see him in the lap of nature, in the country, far from the dusty bustle of the capital, and from the dusty sofa. He is almost like a child, and this village reminds us so much of Oblomovka, when Ilya Ilyich’s mind was still childish and inquisitive, and when the infection of Russian spleen had not yet had time to take root in his body and soul. Probably, in Olga he found his early deceased mother and just as unquestioningly began to obey her, and was also happy that she took patronage over him, because he never learned to manage his life himself. But love for Olga is another fairy tale, a truth invented this time by himself, although he wholeheartedly believes in it. The “superfluous person” is not able to grow this feeling, because it is also superfluous for him, just as he is superfluous for the whole world. However, Oblomov does not lie when he confesses his love to Olga, for Olga is indeed a “fairy-tale” character, because only a fairy from a fairy tale can fall in love with a person like him. How many wrong things Oblomov does - this is the letter he invented at night, this is the constant fear that people will gossip about them, this is the endlessly drawn-out matter with arranging the wedding. Circumstances are always higher than Oblomov, and a person who is unable to control them will certainly slide into the abyss of misunderstanding, despondency and blues. But Olga patiently waits for him, one can only envy her patience, and, finally, Oblomov himself decides to break off the relationship. The reason is very stupid and not worthwhile, but that’s Oblomov. And this is probably the only action in his life that he could decide to do, but the action is stupid and absurd: “Who cursed you, Ilya? What did you do? You are kind, smart, gentle, noble... and... you are dying! What ruined you? There is no name for this evil... “There is,” he said barely audibly. She looked at him questioningly, her eyes full of tears. - Oblomovism!” This is how one phenomenon ruined a person’s entire life! However, we should not forget that it was he, this man, who gave birth to this phenomenon. It did not grow out of nowhere, it was not brought in like a disease, it was carefully nurtured, groomed and cherished in the soul of our hero, and took such strong roots that it is no longer possible to pull it out. And when, instead of a person, we see only this phenomenon, wrapped in an outer shell, then such a person really becomes “superfluous” or ceases to exist altogether. This is how Oblomov dies quietly in the house of the widow Pshenitsyna, the same phenomenon instead of a person.

I would like to think that society is still to blame for such a weak-willed existence of Oblomov, because he lives in a quiet and calm time, free from shocks, uprisings and wars. Maybe his soul is simply at peace, because he doesn’t have to fight, worry about the fate of the people, his safety, the safety of his family. At such a time, many people are simply born, live and die, just like in Oblomovka, because time does not require heroic deeds from them. But we can say with confidence that even if danger arose, Oblomov would not, under any circumstances, go to the barricades. This is his tragedy. And what then to do with Stolz, he is also a contemporary of Oblomov and lives with him in the same country and in the same city, however, his whole life is like a small feat. No, Oblomov himself is to blame, and this makes it even worse, because in essence he is a good person.

But such is the fate of all “extra” people. Unfortunately, it is not enough to just be a good person, you also need to fight and prove it, which Oblomov, unfortunately, was unable to do. But he became an example for people then and today, an example of what you can become if you are not able not only to control the events of life, but also yourself. They are “superfluous”, these people, they have no place in life, because it is cruel and merciless, first of all, to the weak and infirm, and because one must always fight for a place in this life!

At the beginning of the 19th century, works appeared in Russian literature whose central problem was the conflict between the hero and society, the person and the environment that raised him. And, as a result, a new image is created - the image of an “extra” person, a stranger among his own, rejected by his environment. The heroes of these works are people of inquisitive minds, gifted, talented, who had the opportunity to become writers, artists, scientists, and who became, in Belinsky’s words, “smart useless people,” “suffering egoists,” “reluctant egoists.” The image of the “superfluous person” changed as society developed, acquiring new qualities, until, finally, it reached full expression in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov".

In Goncharov’s novel we have the story of a man who does not have the makings of a determined fighter, but has all the potential to be a good, decent person. “Oblomov” is a kind of “book of results” of the interaction between the individual and society, moral beliefs and social conditions in which a person is placed. Goncharov’s novel traces a whole phenomenon of social life - Oblomovism, which collected the vices of one of the types of noble youth of the 50s of the 19th century. In his work, Goncharov “wanted to ensure that the random image that flashed before us was elevated to a type, giving it a generic and permanent meaning,” wrote N.A. Dobrolyubov. Oblomov is not a new face in Russian literature, “but before it was not presented to us as simply and naturally as in Goncharov’s novel.”

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a weak-willed, lethargic nature, divorced from real life. "Lying... was his normal state." Oblomov's life is a pink nirvana on a soft sofa: slippers and a robe are integral companions of Oblomov's existence. Living in a narrow world of his own creation, fenced off from the bustling real life by dusty curtains, the hero loved to make unrealistic plans. He never brought anything to completion; any of his undertakings suffered the fate of a book that Oblomov had been reading for several years on one page. However, Oblomov’s inaction was not elevated to the extreme and Dobrolyubov was right when he wrote that “... Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person also looking for something in his life, about something thinking..." Goncharov's hero in his youth was a romantic, thirsting for an ideal, burning with the desire for activity, but "the flower of life blossomed and did not bear fruit." Oblomov became disillusioned with life, lost interest in knowledge, realized the futility of his existence and lay down on the sofa, believing that in this way he could preserve his moral integrity. So he “laid away” his life, “slept through” love and, as his friend Stolz said, “his troubles began with the inability to put on stockings and ended with the inability to live.” The originality of Oblomov’s image is that he “protested” on the sofa, believing that this is the best way of life, but not through the fault of society, but because of his own nature, his own inaction.

Based on the peculiarities of life in Russia in the 19th century, we can say that if “extra” people were found everywhere, regardless of the country and political system, then Oblomovism is a purely Russian phenomenon, generated by the Russian reality of that time. It is no coincidence that Dobrolyubov sees in Oblomov “our indigenous folk type.”

Many critics of that time, and even the author of the novel himself, saw the image of Oblomov as a “sign of the times,” arguing that the image of a “superfluous” person is typical only for feudal Russia of the 19th century. They saw the root of all evil in the country's state structure. But I cannot agree that the apathetic dreamer Oblomov is a product of the autocratic-serf system. Our time can serve as proof of this, where many find themselves out of place, do not find the meaning of life and, like Oblomov, kill the best years of their life lying on the sofa. So Oblomovism is a phenomenon not only of the 19th century, but also of the 21st century. Therefore, I believe that the tragedy of the “unnecessary” is not to blame for serfdom, in particular, but for that society in which true values ​​are distorted, and vices often wear the mask of virtue, where an individual can be trampled by a gray, silent crowd.

Goncharov I. A.

Essay on a work on the topic: Oblomov and the “extra person”

The main character of the novel by I. A. Goncharov is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov - a kind, gentle, kind-hearted person, capable of experiencing feelings of love and friendship, but unable to step over himself - get up from the couch, engage in any activity and even settle his own affairs. But if at the beginning of the novel Oblomov appears before us as a couch potato, then with each new page we penetrate more and more into the hero’s soul - bright and pure.
In the first chapter we meet insignificant people - acquaintances of Ilya Ilyich, surrounding him in St. Petersburg, busy with fruitless bustle, creating the appearance of action. In contact with these people, Oblomov’s essence is revealed more and more. We see that Ilya Ilyich has such an important quality that few people have, like conscience. With each line, the reader gets to know Oblomov’s wonderful soul, and this is precisely why Ilya Ilyich stands out from the crowd of worthless, calculating, heartless people, concerned only with their own person: “The soul shone so openly and easily in his eyes, in his smile, in every movement of his head and hands.” .
Having excellent internal qualities, Oblomov is also educated and smart. He knows what constitutes the true values ​​of life - not money, not wealth, but high spiritual qualities, a flight of feelings.
So why does such an intelligent and educated person not want to work? The answer is simple: Ilya Ilyich, just like Onegin and Pechorin, does not see the meaning and purpose of such work, such life. He doesn't want to work like that. “This unresolved question, this unsatisfied doubt depletes strength, ruins activity; a person gives up and gives up work, not seeing a goal for it,” wrote Pisarev.
Goncharov does not introduce a single extra person into the novel - all the heroes reveal Oblomov to us more and more with every step. The author introduces us to Stolz - at first glance, an ideal hero. He is hardworking, prudent, practical, punctual, he managed to make his way in life, made capital, earned respect and recognition in society. Why does he need all this? What good did his work bring? What is their purpose?
Stolz's task is to get settled in life, that is, to gain sufficient means of subsistence, family status, rank, and, having achieved all this, he stops, the hero does not continue his development, he is content with what he already has. Can such a person be called ideal? Oblomov cannot live for the sake of material well-being, he must constantly develop and improve his inner world, and in this one cannot reach the limit, because the soul knows no boundaries in its development. It is in this that Oblomov surpasses Stolz.
But the main storyline in the novel is the relationship between Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. It is here that the hero reveals himself to us from the best side, his most cherished corners of his soul are revealed. Olga awakens the best qualities in the soul of Ilya Ilyich, but they do not live in Oblomov for long: Olga Ilyinskaya and Ilya Ilyich Oblomov were too different. She is characterized by harmony of mind and heart, will, which the hero is not able to understand and accept. Olga is full of vital energy, she strives for high art and awakens the same feelings in Ilya Ilyich, but he is so far from her way of life that he soon again exchanges romantic walks for a soft sofa and a warm robe. It would seem that what Oblomov is missing, why doesn’t he marry Olga, who accepted his proposal. But no. He doesn't act like everyone else. Oblomov decides to break off relations with Olga for her own good; he acts like many characters we know: Pechorin, Onegin, Rudin. They all leave their beloved women, not wanting to hurt them. “In relation to women, all Oblomovites behave in the same shameful manner. They don’t know how to love at all and don’t know what to look for in love, just like in life in general,” writes Dobrolyubov in his article “What is Oblomovism?”
Ilya Ilyich decides to stay with Agafya Matveevna, for whom he also has feelings, but completely different than for Olga. For him, Agafya Matveevna was closer, “in her ever-moving elbows, in her caring eyes stopping at everyone, in her eternal walk from the kitchen to the pantry.” Ilya Ilyich lives in a cozy, comfortable house, where everyday life always comes first, and the woman he loves is a continuation of the hero himself. It would seem that the hero would live happily ever after. No, such a life in Pshenitsyna’s house was not normal, long, healthy, on the contrary, it accelerated Oblomov’s transition from sleeping on the sofa to eternal sleep - death.
Reading the novel, you involuntarily ask the question: why is everyone so drawn to Oblomov? It is obvious that each of the heroes finds in him a piece of goodness, purity, revelation - everything that people so lack. Everyone, starting with Volkov and ending with Agafya Matveevna, searched and, most importantly, found what they needed for themselves, for their hearts, souls. But Oblomov did not belong anywhere, there was no such person who would truly make the hero happy. And the problem lies not in the people around him, but in himself.
Goncharov in his novel showed different types of people, all of them passed before Oblomov. The author showed us that Ilya Ilyich has no place in this life, just like Onegin and Pechorin.
http://www.

Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" is a socio-psychological novel written in the 19th century. In the work, the author touches on a number of social and philosophical problems, including issues of human interaction with society. The main character of the novel, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, is an “extra person” who does not know how to adapt to a new, rapidly changing world, to change himself and his views for the sake of a bright future. That is why one of the most acute conflicts in the work is the opposition to the passive, inert hero of an active society, in which Oblomov cannot find a worthy place for himself.

What does Oblomov have in common with “extra people”?

In Russian literature, this type of hero as an “extra person” appeared in the early 20s of the 19th century. This character was characterized by alienation from the usual noble environment and, in general, the entire official life of Russian society, since he felt boredom and his superiority (both intellectual and moral) over the others. The “superfluous person” is filled with mental fatigue, can talk a lot but do nothing, and is very skeptical. Moreover, the hero is always the heir to a good fortune, which he, however, does not try to increase.
And indeed, Oblomov, having inherited a larger estate from his parents, could easily have settled matters there long ago so that he could live in complete prosperity with the money he received from the farm. However, mental fatigue and boredom overwhelming the hero prevented him from starting any business - from the banal need to get out of bed to writing a letter to the headman.

Ilya Ilyich does not associate himself with society, which Goncharov vividly depicted at the beginning of the work, when visitors come to Oblomov. Each guest for the hero is like a cardboard decoration with which he practically does not interact, putting a kind of barrier between others and himself, covering himself with a blanket. Oblomov does not want to go on visits like others, to communicate with hypocritical and uninteresting people who disappointed him even during his service - when he came to work, Ilya Ilyich hoped that everyone there would be the same friendly family as in Oblomovka, but he encountered with a situation where every person is “for himself.” Discomfort, the inability to find one’s social calling, the feeling of uselessness in the “neo-Oblomov” world leads to the hero’s escapism, immersion in illusions and memories of Oblomov’s wonderful past.

In addition, the “extra” person always does not fit into his time, rejecting it and acting contrary to the rules and values ​​dictating to him the system. In contrast to Pechorin and Onegin, who gravitate towards the romantic tradition, always striving forward, ahead of their time, or the character of enlightenment Chatsky, rising above a society mired in ignorance, Oblomov is an image of the realistic tradition, a hero striving not in front, for transformations and new discoveries (in society or in his soul), to a wonderful distant future, but focused on the past that is close and important to him, “Oblomovism.”

Love of the "extra person"

If in the matter of time orientation Oblomov differs from the “extra heroes” who preceded him, then in matters of love their fates are very similar. Like Pechorin or Onegin, Oblomov is afraid of love, afraid of what may change and become different or negatively influence his beloved - even to the point of degradation of her personality. On the one hand, parting with lovers is always a noble step on the part of the “superfluous hero”, on the other hand, it is a manifestation of infantilism - for Oblomov it was an appeal to Oblomov’s childhood, where everything was decided for him, they took care of him and everything was allowed.

The “superfluous man” is not ready for fundamental, sensual love for a woman; for him, it is not so much the real beloved that is important, but a self-created, inaccessible image - we see this both in Onegin’s feelings for Tatyana that flared up years later, and in illusory, “spring” feelings Oblomov to Olga. The “superfluous person” needs a muse - beautiful, unusual and inspiring (for example, like Pechorin’s Bella). However, not finding such a woman, the hero goes to the other extreme - he finds a woman who would replace his mother and create the atmosphere of distant childhood.
Oblomov and Onegin, who are different at first glance, equally suffer from loneliness in the crowd, but if Evgeny does not give up social life, then for Oblomov the only way out is to immerse himself in himself.

Is Oblomov a superfluous person?

The “superfluous man” in Oblomov is perceived by other characters differently than similar heroes in previous works. Oblomov is a kind, simple, honest person who sincerely wants quiet, calm happiness. He is attractive not only to the reader, but also to the people around him - it’s not for nothing that his friendship with Stolz has not stopped since his school years and Zakhar continues to serve the master. Moreover, Olga and Agafya sincerely fell in love with Oblomov precisely for his spiritual beauty, dying under the pressure of apathy and inertia.

What is the reason that from the very appearance of the novel in print, critics defined Oblomov as a “superfluous person,” because the hero of realism, unlike the characters of romanticism, is a typified image that combines the features of an entire group of people? By portraying Oblomov in the novel, Goncharov wanted to show not just one “extra” person, but an entire social stratum of educated, wealthy, intelligent, sincere people who could not find themselves in the rapidly changing, new Russian society. The author emphasizes the tragedy of the situation when, unable to change with circumstances, such “Oblomovs” slowly die, continuing to hold tightly to long-gone, but still important and soul-warming memories of the past.

It will be especially useful for 10th graders to familiarize themselves with the above arguments before writing an essay on the topic “Oblomov and the “extra people”.”

Work test

1. What things have become a symbol of “Oblomovism”?

The symbols of “Oblomovism” were a robe, slippers, and a sofa.

2. What turned Oblomov into an apathetic couch potato?

Laziness, fear of movement and life, inability to carry out practical activities, and the replacement of life with vague daydreaming turned Oblomov from a man into an appendage of a dressing gown and a sofa.

3. What is the function of Oblomov’s sleep in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov"?

The chapter “Oblomov’s Dream” paints an idyll of a patriarchal serf village, in which only such an Oblomov could grow up. The Oblomovites are shown as sleeping heroes, and Oblomovka is shown as a sleepy kingdom. The dream shows the conditions of Russian life that gave rise to “Oblomovism.”

4. Can Oblomov be called a “superfluous person”?

ON THE. Dobrolyubov noted in the article “What is Oblomovism?” that the features of Oblomovism were to some extent characteristic of both Onegin and Pechorin, that is, “superfluous people.” But the “superfluous people” of previous literature were surrounded by a certain romantic aura; they seemed to be strong people, distorted by reality. Oblomov is also “superfluous,” but “reduced from a beautiful pedestal to a soft sofa.” A.I. Herzen said that the Onegins and Pechorins relate to Oblomov like fathers to their children.

5. What is the peculiarity of the composition of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov"?

Composition of the novel by I.A. Goncharov's "Oblomov" is characterized by the presence of a double storyline - Oblomov's novel and Stolz's novel. Unity is achieved with the help of the image of Olga Ilyinskaya, which connects both lines. The novel is built on the contrast of images: Oblomov - Stolz, Olga - Pshenitsyna, Zakhar - Anisya. The entire first part of the novel is an extensive exposition, introducing the hero already in adulthood.

6. What role does I.A. play in the novel? Goncharov's "Oblomov" epilogue?

The epilogue tells about Oblomov's death, which made it possible to trace the hero's entire life from birth to the end.

7. Why does the morally pure, honest Oblomov die morally?

The habit of receiving everything from life without putting any effort into it developed apathy and inertia in Oblomov, making him a slave to his own laziness. Ultimately, the feudal system and the home education it generated are to blame for this.

8. As in the novel by I.A. Goncharov’s “Oblomov” shows the complex relationship between slavery and nobility?

Serfdom corrupts not only masters, but also slaves. An example of this is the fate of Zakhar. He is as lazy as Oblomov. During the life of the master, he is content with his position. After Oblomov's death, Zakhar has nowhere to go - he becomes a beggar.

9. What is “Oblomovism”?

“Oblomovism” is a social phenomenon consisting of laziness, apathy, inertia, contempt for work and an all-consuming desire for peace.

10. Why was Olga Ilyinskaya’s attempt to revive Oblomov unsuccessful?

Having fallen in love with Oblomov, Olga tries to re-educate him and break his laziness. But his apathy deprives her of faith in the future Oblomov. Oblomov's laziness was higher and stronger than love.

Stolz is hardly a positive hero. Although, at first glance, this is a new, progressive person, active and active, there is something of a machine in him, always dispassionate, rational. He is a schematic, unnatural person.

12. Describe Stolz from the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Ob-lomov".

Stolz is the antipode of Oblomov. He is an active, active person, a bourgeois businessman. He is enterprising and always strives for something. The outlook on life is characterized by the words: “Work is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine.” But Stolz is incapable of experiencing strong feelings; he smacks of calculatedness in every step. The image of Stolz is artistically more schematic and declarative than the image of Oblomov.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page there is material on the following topics:

• questions about Oblomov with answers
• questions and answers about Oblomov
• test questions on Oblomov's sleep
• how many storylines are bummers
• How is the exposition of Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” constructed?