Roman Oblomov in Russian criticism presentation. Novel "Oblomov". Social and moral issues. Comparison Questions

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

The presentation on the topic “Russian criticism of the 19th century about I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”” can be downloaded absolutely free on our website. Subject of the project: Literature. Colorful slides and illustrations will help you engage your classmates or audience. To view the content, use the player, or if you want to download the report, click on the corresponding text under the player. The presentation contains 12 slide(s).

Presentation slides

Slide 1

Russian criticism of the 19th century about I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”

A literature lesson in the 11th grade was prepared by the teacher of Russian language and literature of Municipal Educational Institution Secondary School No. 46 of Belgorod Zakharova L.N.

Slide 2

The purpose of the lesson

Analyze the inconsistency of the novel’s assessments Compare the critics’ assessments with your perception of the work

Slide 3

Slide 4

Comparison Questions

How do critics estimate the time it took to create the novel? How do critics determine the specific issues of Goncharov’s novel? How is the image of Oblomov interpreted in the articles? What are the differences in the interpretation of the image of Andrei Stolz?

Slide 5

Critics' assessment of the specifics of the novel's problems

N.A. Dobrolyubov: in the novel “Russian life is reflected”, “a living, modern Russian type appears before us, minted with merciless rigor and correctness”, “a new word has been spoken of our social development.” A.V. Druzhinin: Goncharov “puts before our eyes the whole life of a given sphere, a given era and a given society... in order to... remain forever in the history of art and illuminate with bright light the moments of reality he captured.” D.I. Pisarev: in the novel “a vast, universal task... is resolved in purely Russian, national phenomena.”

Slide 6

The image of Oblomov in Russian criticism

N.A. Dobrolyubov: “Oblomov is not a stupid apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person who is also looking for something in his life, thinking about something. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed in him apathetic immobility and plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery. He is not averse to activity - as long as it has the appearance of a ghost and is far from real implementation.”

Slide 7

A.V. Druzhinin: “Oblomov is dear to all of us and is worth boundless love... Now you can laugh at Oblomovism, but this laughter is full of pure love and honest tears; one can regret its victims, but such regret will be poetic and bright, not humiliating for anyone, but for many a high and wise regret.”

Slide 8

D.I. Pisarev: Oblomov “personifies in himself that mental apathy to which Mr. Goncharov gave the name Oblomovism... His whole personality attracts him with his honesty, purity of thoughts and “depth,” as the author himself puts it, tenderness of feelings; but in this attractive personality there is no masculinity and strength, no initiative... Such personalities should, in our opinion, be looked at as pitiful but inevitable phenomena of a transitional era; they stand at the borderline of two lives: Old Russian and European, and cannot decisively step from one to the other.”

Slide 9

Russian criticism about Andrei Stolts

A.N. Dobrolyubov: “Stolz is an active person, he is always busy about something, runs around, acquires things, says that to live means to work, etc. but what does he do, and how does he manage to do something decent where others cannot do anything - this remains a secret for us... he is not the person who will be able, in a language understandable to the Russian soul, to tell us this almighty word: “forward!”

Slide 10

Slide 11

D.I. Pisarev: “Development of convictions, strength of will, a critical look at people and at life, and next to this critical look, faith in truth and goodness, respect for everything beautiful and sublime - these are the main character traits of Stolz. He does not give free rein to passions, distinguishing them from feelings; he observes himself and realizes that man is a thinking being and that reason must govern his actions,” this is “the type of the future, which is now rare, but to which the modern movement of ideas, which has manifested itself with such force in our society, leads.”

There is no need to overload the slides of your project with text blocks; more illustrations and a minimum of text will better convey information and attract attention. The slide should contain only key information; the rest is best told to the audience orally.

The text must be well readable, otherwise the audience will not be able to see the information being presented, will be greatly distracted from the story, trying to at least make out something, or will completely lose all interest. To do this, you need to choose the right font, taking into account where and how the presentation will be broadcast, and also choose the right combination of background and text.

It is important to rehearse your report, think about how you will greet the audience, what you will say first, and how you will end the presentation. All comes with experience.

Choose the right outfit, because... The speaker's clothing also plays a big role in the perception of his speech.

Try to speak confidently, smoothly and coherently.

Try to enjoy the performance, then you will be more at ease and less nervous.

Subject. I. A. Goncharov. The novel “Oblomov” in Russian criticism. “What is Oblomovism? »

Target: teach students to analyze the inconsistency of literary critics’ assessments of the novel “Oblomov”,

compare critics’ assessments with your perception of the novel, construct an answer to a question about a work of art based on theoretical and literary knowledge; improve the ability to draw conclusions and generalizations based on working with one or several sources of information;

aesthetically and morally educate, form an active life position of students.

Equipment: handouts, texts of critical articles, illustrative material.

Lesson type: mastering new knowledge and developing skills and abilities.

Predicted results: students analyze conflicting assessments of literary critics of the novel “Oblomov”; compare critics' ratings with their perception of the novel; construct an answer to a question about a work of art based on theoretical and literary knowledge; draw conclusions and generalizations based on working with one or several sources of information; take part in the conversation.

DURING THE CLASSES

1.Organizational stage

2.Updating basic knowledge

Listening to several creative works

(homework from previous lesson)

3.Motivation for educational activities. Communicating the topic and purpose of the lesson

Teacher's word: The novel "Oblomov", which the author wrote for more than ten years, deeply
and fully illuminates the social and moral problems of the time. Both the theme, the idea, and the main conflict of this work are connected with the image of the main character, whose surname gives the title to the novel. In Russian magazine criticism, I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” was interpreted in different ways. First of all, this assessment concerned the image of the main character. In May 1859, following the novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov, an article by N. A. Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism?” appeared in Sovremennik, and in December an article by A. V. Druzhinin ““Oblomov” was published . Roman by I. A. Goncharova.” The titles of the articles are typical. The title of the druzhina article simply repeats the title of the book. This is generally characteristic of Druzhinin the critic. He never and nowhere gives his articles their titles; they all only emphatically objectively follow the title of the subject of analysis: ““Letters about Spain” by V. P. Botkin,” ““Works” by V. G. Belinsky,” etc. Dobrolyubov already in the titles of his articles he reveals their main content, gives an ideological impulse, directs the reader’s thought: “The Dark Kingdom”, “What is Oblomovism?”

However, if Druzhinin seems to follow Goncharov’s novel already in the title, then Dobrolyubov, in essence, does the same, reveals something inherent in the novel itself, and not imposed on it from the outside: as you know, the word “Oblomovism” is created by Goncharov and used its sixteen times! Moreover, Goncharov himself hesitated in choosing the name: “Oblomov” or “Oblomovshchina”. Druzhinin, in essence, writes an article “What is Oblomov?”, Dobrolyubov - “What is Oblomovism?” And both of them are based on the novel.

4.Work on the topic of the lesson

1.1.Teacher's explanation

It is interesting that both critics at first undertake to define the writer’s artistic style, and both see it in an extremely objective image, essentially repeating Belinsky, who, more than twenty years earlier, saw in artistry as such a distinctive feature of Goncharov, the writer.

“The author of Oblomov,” wrote Druzhinin, “is a pure and independent artist, an artist by vocation and by the integrity of what he has done.” Likewise, Dobrolyubov saw the secret of the novel’s success “directly in the strength of the author’s artistic talent,” which does not give and, apparently, does not want to give any conclusions. “The life he portrays serves for him not as a means to abstract philosophy, but as a direct goal in itself.” “Goncharov appears to us, first of all, as an artist... his objective creativity is not confused by any prejudices and given ideas, does not succumb to any exceptional sympathies. It is calm, sober, dispassionate,” writes Dobrolyubov.

Both critics, showing great artistic flair, accurately defined the artistic essence and talents of Goncharov in general, and his novel in particular. But, having started with seemingly the same assessment, both diverged in many respects. And here the public position of the critics came into play, which forced their write not so much in different ways, but about different things.

Dobrolyubov examined the social roots of Oblomovism, that is, first of all, serfdom, and pointed to the type of Oblomov and Oblomovism as a new word of social development, “a sign of the times.” Naturally, the master Oblomov himself received a rather harsh assessment from him. Although one should not think that the meaning of Dobrolyubov’s article comes down to understanding Oblomov’s lordship. No wonder he writes: “This is our indigenous, folk type.” And in another place: “Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings.”

Druzhinin considered Oblomovism as a phenomenon, “the roots of which the novelist firmly linked to the soil of folk life and poetry.” “Oblomov and Oblomovism: it was not for nothing that these words spread throughout Russia and became words forever rooted in our speech. They explained to us a whole range of phenomena; our modern society, they presented us with a whole world of ideas, images and details, which until recently were not fully conscious to us, appearing to us as if in a fog,” writes Druzhinin. The critic writes about the great skill of Goncharov, who so fully and so deeply examined “Oblomovism” not only in its negative features, but also in its sad, funny and sweet ones. “Now you can laugh at Oblomovism, but this laughter is full of pure love and honest tears; one can regret its victims, but such regret will be poetic and bright, not humiliating for anyone, but for many a high and wise regret,”

Comparative analysis of critical assessments of the novel “Oblomov”

I. A. Goncharova “Critics about the novel “Oblomov” and the work of I. A. Goncharov”

(work in pairs with handouts)

Exercise

How do literary critics determine the specifics of the novel's problems?

How is the image of Oblomov interpreted in the articles?

What is the essence of the disagreement between N. A. Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev and A. V. Druzhinin in assessing the novel “Oblomov”?

Do you agree with Dobrolyubov in your assessment of the novel?

Card No. 1

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, the hero of the novel, personifies that mental apathy to which Mr. Goncharov gave the name Oblomovism. The word Oblomovism will not die in our literature: it is composed so successfully, it so tangibly characterizes one of the significant vices of our Russian life that, in all likelihood, it will penetrate from literature into the language and come into general use. Let's see what this Oblomovism consists of.

Ilya Ilyich stands at the borderline of two mutually opposite directions:
he was brought up under the influence of the atmosphere of old Russian life, accustomed to lordship, to inaction and to complete satisfaction of his physical needs and even whims; he spent his childhood under the loving but thoughtless supervision of completely undeveloped parents, who enjoyed complete mental slumber for several decades... He is pampered and spoiled, weakened physically and morally... (B.I. Pisarev “Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Oblomovshchina")

The sleepy, routine atmosphere of rural, provincial life complemented what the efforts of parents and nannies did not manage to accomplish...

The vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own habits, but from others, developed in him apathetic immobility and plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery. This slavery is so intertwined with Oblomov’s lordship, so they mutually penetrate each other and one is determined by the other, that it seems there is not the slightest possibility of drawing any boundary between them(N. A. Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism?»).

Card No. 2

Oblomov is the only person in the novel, the only one whose existence is not limited to the role he has assumed. What frightens him most about the upcoming wedding is that he, Oblomov, will turn into a “groom” and acquire a specific, definite status... The smooth, “marble” Oblomov has nothing to catch on with others. He is not able to split his personality into the role of husband, landowner, official. He's just a man(P. Weil, A. Genis “Oblomov and “Others””).

Card 3

Oblomov’s tender, loving nature is entirely illuminated through love - and can-
Could it be otherwise, with a pure, childishly affectionate Russian soul, from which even its laziness drove away corruption with tempting thoughts. Ilya Ilyich spoke out entirely through his love, and Olga, a keen-sighted girl, did not remain blind to the treasures that opened before her...(A. V. Druzhinin “Oblomov.” Novel by I. A. Goncharova»)

“Oblomov” is the most important thing, the kind that hasn’t happened for a long, long time... But what
what’s more pleasant... is that “Oblomov” is a success not accidental, not miserably, but healthy, thorough and non-temporary in the real public(L.N. Tolstoy. From a letter to A.V. Druzhinin on April 16, 1859).

Card 4

This novel resolves a vast universal psychological problem; this task is resolved in purely Russian, national phenomena, possible only under our way of life, under those historical circumstances that shaped the national character, under the conditions under the influence of which our younger generation developed and is partly still developing. This novel also touches on vital, modern issues to the extent that these issues are of universal human interest; it also exposes the shortcomings of society, but they are exposed not for a polemical purpose, but for the fidelity and completeness of the picture, for the artistic depiction of life as it is, and of man with his feelings, thoughts and passions

(D.I. Pisarev. “The novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov””).

Teamwork to compile a summary table

“Oblomovism as the leading theme of the novel” (write on the board and in notebooks)

Oblomovism as the leading theme of the novel

What is Oblomovism?	The drama of the mental and moral development of the hero, An image of how his best inclinations “sink and fade away”; Through what internal compromises does the hero gradually come to justify his apathy and spinelessness, to his capitulation to them?
The origins of Oblomovism	The author is looking for the reasons for the Oblomovism of the main character, starting from childhood
Oblomovism as a method of typification	The author creates typical concrete historical characters, embodying the features of a certain social environment, expands the narrow time frame of the novel, revealing Oblomov’s features not only in the era, environment, but also in the depths of the Russian national character.
Oblomovism as a sign of the times, its main features	“Oblomovism” is not a problem of one person, but a sign time, generated by the patriarchal-noble life: apathy and laziness; cowardice and selfishness, as a result of exaggerated guardianship of elders, limited aspirations, detachment; closedness from real life; desire to protect, protect from possible problems

Conclusion . Ilya Ilyich’s guilt is that he extinguished the divine spark given to him from above. Ilya Ilyich could not realize that good, bright beginning that lay “like gold” in the depths of his sensitive and kind soul. Oblomov did not understand himself, did not give way to the light that he believed was locked inside him. Goncharov's hero remained a fragment of that imperfect world that tried to subjugate him. But is this Oblomov’s fault alone? “Our name is legion,” the hero will say to Stoltz, and he will be right. How many people were unable to throw off the robe of Oblomovism, drowned out their will, strength of spirit for the sake of tranquility, their own well-being?

“Wise Men and Wits”: setting and solution
"literary puzzles"

a) D.I. Pisarev said that the content and plot of the novel “Oblomov” can be told in two or three lines. Convey the plot of the novel in a few sentences.

b) Some critics believe that there are two plots in the novel: Oblomov - Olga, Stolz - Olga. Others talked about a single plot - the transformation of Oblomov into a “living corpse.” What's your point of view?

c) What does Oblomov have in common with “superfluous people” (Onegin, Pechorin)?

d) M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin wrote: “I read Oblomov and, to tell the truth, destroyed all my mental abilities about him. How much maca he put in there! It’s scary to even remember that this is only one day and that in this way you can sleep for 365 days...”

What are your impressions from reading the first day of Oblomov’s life.

How can one explain such a drawn-out narrative about the hero’s first day?

Reflection. Summing up the lesson

1. General conversation

• What do you see as the historical and philosophical meaning of the novel?
• How are the problems posed in Oblomov solved in Obryv?
• How are the thoughts and anxieties of Goncharov the writer close to us?

Teacher's final words

So, the novel “Oblomov” was the pinnacle of I. A. Goncharov’s creativity!
With great artistic force, the writer condemned serfdom, which, in his opinion, was heading towards its collapse. He denounced the inertia and conservatism of the local nobility and showed “Oblomovism” as evil and the scourge of Russian life!
The material for the novel was Russian life, which the writer observed from childhood.

Homework

Write an essay-discussion (miniature) on one of the topics: “Reverie and activity in the understanding of I. A. Goncharov (based on the novel “Oblomov”)”;

“Oblomov and Stolz: comparison or opposition?”;

“What is the tragedy of Ilya Oblomov’s life? "

Advanced creative task (2-3 students)

Prepare “Literary business cards”: “The life and work of A. N. Ostrovsky”, “This is interesting!” (about the theater of A. N. Ostrovsky).

Literature lesson. Grade 10.

Subject: The novel “Oblomov” in Russian criticism.

Goal: get acquainted with critical articles by N.A. Dobrolyubova “What is Oblomovism?”, D.I. Pisareva “Oblomov”; analyze their assessment of the above-mentioned novel; compare articles by Pisarev D.I. and Dobrolyubova N.A.; develop critical thinking skills; foster a culture of mental work.
Lesson equipment:

portraits of Pisarev D.I. and Dobrolyubova N.A.; texts of critical articles; Handout; cards for group work.

Basic forms and methods of the lesson:

independent analysis of articles by groups of students based on questions proposed as homework;

messages;

analytical conversation;

expressive reading.

Lesson type: mastering and applying new knowledge.

During the classes.

I. Org moment.

II.Motivation for learning activities.

1. The teacher's word.

The novel “Oblomov” is the pinnacle of I. A. Goncharov’s creativity. It became epoch-making in the history of national self-awareness: it revealed and exposed the phenomena of Russian reality.
The publication of the novel created a storm of criticism. The most striking presentations were articles by N.A. Dobrolyubova “What is Oblomovism?”, A.V. Druzhinin "Oblomov". Roman I. A. Goncharova”, D.I. Pisarev "Oblomov". Despite the disagreements, they talked about the typicality of Oblomov’s image, about such a social phenomenon as Oblomovism. This phenomenon comes to the fore in the novel. We believe that it is still relevant today, since each of us has Oblomov’s traits: laziness, daydreaming, sometimes fear of change, and others. After reading the novel, we formed an idea about the main character. But have we noticed everything, have we missed anything, or are we underestimating the heroes? Therefore, we need to study critical articles about the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov". The most interesting to us are the assessments given by I.A.’s contemporaries. Goncharov - N.A. Dobrolyubov and D.I. Pisarev.
III. Work on the topic of the lesson.

1. Messages from prepared students:

About the history of the creation of the article by N.A. Dobrolyubova “What is Oblomovism?”;

The outline of the article by N.A. Dobrolyubova “What is Oblomovism?”

2. Work in notebooks (students write down the outline of the article).

3. Work in groups (according to the drawn up plan).

1 group. Dobrolyubov in his article reveals the features of the creative method of Goncharov the artist. Goncharov, according to the author of the article “What is Oblomovism?” is, first of all, an artist who knows how to express the fullness of the phenomena of life.
2nd group. Dobrolyubov notes that the main character of the novel is similar to the heroes of other literary works, his image is typical and natural, but he has never been depicted so simply as Goncharov did. This type was noticed by A.S. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, I.S. Turgenev and others, but only this image changed over time.

3rd group. Identifying patterns, Dobrolyubov derives the concept of “Oblomovism” - idleness, parasites and complete uselessness in the world, a fruitless desire for activity, the consciousness of the heroes that a lot could come of them, but nothing will come of them...”

4th group. Dobrolyubov evaluates all the heroes of the novel from the height of his socio-political views, finding out which of them could force other people to shake off their sleepy state and lead people behind them.
IV. Continuation of work on the topic of the lesson.

1. The teacher's word.

The novel “Oblomov” in the assessment of Pisarev D.I.
Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev, reflecting on what a true poet is, gradually moves on to the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov". According to Pisarev, “a true poet looks deeply at life and in every phenomenon he sees a universal human side that will touch every heart and will be understandable to every time.” A true poet brings reality out of the depths of his own spirit and puts into the living images he creates the thought that animates him. Emphasizing that everything said about a true poet is characteristic of the author of the novel “Oblomov,” Pisarev D.I. notes the distinctive features of his talent: complete objectivity, calm, dispassionate creativity, the absence of narrow temporary goals that profane art, the absence of lyrical impulses that violate the clarity and distinctness of the epic narrative.
DI. Pisarev believes that the novel is relevant in any era and therefore belongs to all centuries and peoples, but is of particular importance for Russian society. “The author decided to trace the deadening, destructive influence that mental apathy and sleep have on a person, which little by little takes possession of all the forces of the soul, embracing and fettering all the best, human, rational movements and feelings. This apathy is a universal human phenomenon; it is expressed in the most diverse forms and is generated by the most diverse causes.”
The critic gives a detailed description of the three main characters, explaining how and why certain qualities appeared and developed in them.

2. Work in groups. Compilation of quotation characteristics of the heroes of the novel based on the article by D.I. Pisarev “Oblomov”

1 group. Quoted description of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.

2nd group. Quoted description of Andrei Stolts.

3rd group. Quoted description of Olga Ilyinskaya.

V. Consolidation of lesson material.

1. Analytical conversation “Comparison of two points of view on the novel “Oblomov.”

How did critics evaluate Goncharov's talent?

What is Oblomov like according to Dobrolyubov?

What is Oblomov like according to Pisarev?

Which critic defined “Oblomovism”?

What do critics write about the other main characters?

2. Compiling a table “General and distinctive features of articles by N.A. Dobrolyubova and D.I. Pisarev"

Common features	Distinctive features
Both literary critics highly appreciated Goncharov’s talent as an artist, a master of words, and noted the completeness of the narrative, elegance and morality.	Article by N.A. Dobrolyubova “What is Oblomovism?” is not only literary in nature, but also socio-political. Pisarev D.I. acts only as a literary critic, deeply analyzing the characters of the main characters.
Both Pisarev and Dobrolyubov explain the concept of “Oblomovism” as apathy, inertia, lack of will and inaction. They draw parallels with other literary works.	They differ in their assessment of the heroes of these works: Dobrolyubov calls them “Oblomov brothers”, pointing out many similarities, while Pisarev distinguishes between the apathy of the heroes, identifying two different types of apathy - Byronism and Oblomovism.
Like Dobrolyubov, Pisarev notes the beauty and attractiveness of Olga Ilyinskaya’s character and talks about her future social and political destiny.	Critics have different approaches to assessing the main characters. Dobrolyubov evaluates them from the height of socio-political views, finding out which of them could force other people to shake off their sleepy state and lead people behind them. He sees such abilities in Olga Ilyinskaya. He evaluates Oblomov himself rather harshly, seeing in him only one positive quality. Pisarev gives a deep analysis of the characters of the three main characters, but Oblomov, from his point of view, is endowed with a large number of positive qualities, although he is pitiful.

VI. Lesson summary.

“Oblomov and Oblomovism: it was not for nothing that these words spread throughout Russia and became words forever rooted in our speech. They explained to us a whole range of phenomena of our contemporary society, they presented us with a whole world of ideas, images and details, which until recently were not fully conscious to us, appearing to us as if in a fog...”

A.V. Druzhinin “Oblomov”. Roman by I. A. Goncharova.”

VII. Reflection.

Did you like the lesson?

What was difficult?

IX. Homework.

1. Prepare to write a test essay on the following topics:

“Now or never!”: Oblomov and Stolz.

The role of female characters in I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”

“What ruined you?... There is no name for this evil...” Oblomov and Oblomovism.

Slide 2

The first controversy surrounding the novel

A heated controversy surrounding Goncharov's new novel broke out long before it appeared in print. The reason was the publication in one of Nekrasov’s almanacs of one of the most important episodes of “Oblomov” - a passage called “Oblomov’s Dream” (1849). The passion with which critics responded to the appearance of this passage testified to the vital significance of the theme of “breakdown.” Characteristic was the desire of Slavophil criticism to take under protection the patriarchal way of noble society. According to Moskvityanin, the author describes “the stagnation of life in the best possible way.” But the author was immediately reproached for his critical portrayal of the vulgarities of life, because “they cannot be mocked, like children in diapers, who, despite their foolishness, are very cute, as Oblomov’s Dream proves.” The critical struggle around Oblomov was determined by the ideological division between revolutionaries and liberals. During the years of the revolutionary situation, the “peasant question,” the question of “land and freedom,” arose with particular urgency. Under the influence of the ever-increasing revolutionary protest of the masses, the liberal-noble group calls on literature to renounce the topic of the day, momentary interests in the name of depicting the “eternal ideas” of beauty, goodness and truth; revises Belinsky’s legacy, promotes “artistry” in poetry and rejects the “didactic direction” of the Gogol school. Thus, the noble liberals almost completely united with the noble reaction.

Slide 3

Criticism of Dobrolyubova

Dobrolyubov’s article “What is Oblomovism?”, which is rightfully a valuable asset in the development of aesthetic thought, has become a generally recognized classic for readers of many generations. In his critical analysis of Oblomov, he expressed an angry condemnation of social passivity, inactivity, liberal idle talk, and with all the power of his talent he proclaimed a rallying cry for active struggle in the name of social justice. The famous word “Oblomovism” was taken by the critic from the text of Goncharov’s novel. His reading of “Oblomov” was original and so flawless in its argumentation that it did not raise a single objection from Goncharov. All his life he remembered this article with gratitude, although its author declared his disagreement with the novelist: it was too early to talk about the end of Oblomovism. Here is a truly revolutionary “cry” - from the “analysis” itself. Dobrolyubov sees in the novel “Oblomov” the key to unraveling many phenomena of Russian life, a new word for social development, a sign of the times. The new word, as we know, acquired the status of a broad symbol of old Russia: Oblomovism, and in it - the solution to these phenomena. In the critic's mind, the novel acted as a sign of the times. But the same can be said about Dobrolyubov’s article itself. The historical insight of its author was confirmed by the entire development of Russian life in subsequent decades, as well as in the twentieth century. He did not agree with the novelist, who decided that Oblomovism could be buried forever. “You can’t flatter the living like that,” the critic noted, there are still many Oblomovs alive. Dobrolyubov’s typology of the latter is truly comprehensive: a landowner talking about human rights, liberal journalists, educated people talking about bribe-takers, etc.

Slide 4

Criticism of Druzhinin

Features of Druzhinin’s literary-critical view of the novel “Oblomov” In December 1859, following the novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov”, Druzhinin’s article “Oblomov” was published. The title of Druzhinin’s article simply repeats the title of the book: “Oblomov,” a novel by I. A. Goncharov.” This is generally characteristic of Druzhinin the critic. Druzhinin considered Oblomovism as a phenomenon, “the roots of which the novelist firmly linked to the soil of folk life and poetry.” “Oblomov and Oblomovism: it was not for nothing that these words spread throughout Russia and became words forever rooted in our speech. They explained to us a whole range of phenomena of our contemporary society, they put before us a whole world of ideas, images and details, which until recently were not fully conscious to us, which appeared to us as if in a fog,” writes Druzhinin. Oblomov is dear to him as a type, just as he is dear to any Russian person. “Oblomov was studied and recognized by a whole people, mostly rich in Oblomovism, and not only did they recognize him, but they loved him with all their hearts, because it is impossible to know Oblomov and not love him deeply.” Druzhinin writes about the great skill of Goncharov, who so fully and so deeply examined “Oblomovism” not only in its negative features, but also in its sad, funny and sweet ones. “Now you can laugh at Oblomovism, but this laughter is full of pure love and honest tears, you can regret its victims, but such regret will be poetic and bright, not humiliating for anyone, but for many a high and wise regret.” Druzhinin is completely far from following Dobrolyubov in calling Oblomov a “superfluous person”; the critic says that comparing the hero of the novel with “superfluous people” was not part of Goncharov’s tasks.

Slide 5

Criticism of Pisarev

DI. Pisarev in his article gives a detailed description not only of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, but also of two no less interesting characters: Andrei Stolts and Olga Ilyinskaya. In the image of Stolz, the critic notes such features as: well-developed convictions, firmness of will, a critical look at people and at life, and next to this critical look, faith in truth and goodness, respect for everything beautiful and sublime. Pisarev explains Stolz’s friendship with Oblomov as the need of Oblomov, a man with a weak character, for moral support. In the personality of Olga Ilyinskaya, Pisarev saw the type of future woman in whom he notes two properties that cast an original flavor on all her actions, words and movements: naturalness and the presence of consciousness, they are what distinguish Olga from ordinary women. Olga’s whole life and personality constitute a living protest against a woman’s dependence. This protest, of course, was not the main goal of the author, because true creativity does not impose practical goals on itself; but the more naturally this protest arose, the less prepared it was, the more artistic truth it contained, the stronger its effect on public consciousness. Pisarev highly appreciated the novel by I.A. Goncharov. “Oblomov”: without reading it, it is difficult to get acquainted with the current situation in Russian literature. Pisarev also named the main motives of the novel: the depiction of a pure, conscious feeling, the determination of its influence on a person’s personality and actions, the reproduction of the dominant disease of our time, Oblomovism. Considering Oblomov’s novel a truly elegant work, the critic calls it moral, because it correctly and simply depicts real life. The critic gives a detailed description of the three main characters, explaining how and why certain qualities appeared and developed in them. Despite the fact that Oblomov, from his point of view, is pathetic, he names many positive qualities.

Slide 6

Criticism of Belinsky and Chekhov

Belinsky In Goncharov’s talent, the main role is played by “elegance and subtlety of the brush”, “fidelity of the drawing”, the predominance of the artistic image over the direct author’s thought and verdict. Chekhov “...and why did I still consider Goncharov a first-class writer? His Oblomov is not at all an important thing. Ilya Ilyich himself, an exaggerated figure, is not so large that it would be worth writing a whole book about him. (...) And the main problem is that the whole novel is cold, cold, cold...” “Stolz does not inspire me with any confidence. The author says that he is a magnificent fellow, but I don’t believe him. This is a clever beast who thinks very well of herself and is pleased with herself...”

Slide 7

Questions:

Who is the author of the article “What is Oblomovism?” Who was written about in the article “What is Oblomovism”? “It is clear that... not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings, but a person looking for something, thinking about something. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed in him apathetic immobility and plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery? How did Chekhov feel about Stolz?

View all slides

Slide 1

Slide 2

Nikolai Aleksandrovich Dobrolyubov (January 24 (February 5), 1836, Nizhny Novgorod - November 17 (November 30), 1861, St. Petersburg Russian literary critic of the turn of the 1850s and 1860s, publicist, revolutionary democrat. The most famous pseudonyms -bov and N. Laibov, did not sign with his full real name. His articles “What is Oblomovism?” about Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” and “A Ray of Light in the Dark Kingdom” about Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm” became a model of democratic-realistic interpretation of literature

Slide 3

There is almost no action in the novel. Oblomov's laziness and apathy are the only spring of action in his entire story. Goncharov does not give and, apparently, does not want to give any conclusions. Dobrolyubov N.A. The article “What is Oblomovism?” (May 1859)

Slide 4

Russian life is reflected, a living, modern Russian type appears before us, minted with merciless severity and correctness. “This is our indigenous, folk type.” Oblomov is not a being, by nature completely devoid of the ability of voluntary movement. His laziness and apathy are the creation of his upbringing and surrounding circumstances. The main thing here is not Oblomov, but Oblomovism. This word - Oblomovism - serves as the key to unraveling many phenomena of Russian life. Yu. S. Gershkovich. Oblomov on the sofa.

Slide 5

“Oblomov is not a stupid, apathetic nature, without aspirations and feelings.” Dobrolyubov first of all saw and accurately showed Oblomov’s incapacity for positive good. N.V. Shcheglov. Oblomov and Olga

Slide 6

“Oblomovka is our direct homeland, its owners are our educators, its three hundred Zakharovs are always ready for our services. There is a significant part of Oblomov in each of us, and it is too early to write a funeral eulogy for us.” Oblomov and Zakhar. Artist T. Shishmareva. 1955

Slide 7

“Paying tribute to his time, Mr. Goncharov also brought out the antidote to Oblomov - Stolz. But the Stoltsevs, people with an integral, active character, in which every thought immediately becomes an aspiration and turns into action, are not yet in the life of our society.” Yu. S. Gershkovich. Stolz.

Slide 8

“Olga Ilyinskaya is more capable than Stolz of this feat; it is closer to our young life.” “Olga, in her development, represents the highest ideal that a Russian artist can now evoke; from modern Russian life. She amazes us with the extraordinary clarity and simplicity of her logic and the amazing harmony of her heart and will. T. V. Shishmareva. Olga

Slide 9

Group portrait of Russian writers - members of the editorial board of the Sovremennik magazine. Top row: L. N. Tolstoy, D. V. Grigorovich; bottom row: I. A. Goncharov, I. S. Turgenev, A. V. Druzhinin, A. N. Ostrovsky (1856)

Slide 10

Alexa ndr Vasilyevich Druzhinin (October 8 (20), 1824, St. Petersburg - January 19 (31, 1864, ibid.) - Russian writer, literary critic Druzhinin’s article “Oblomov” (Sovremennik magazine, December 1859 ) I saw the secret of the novel’s success “directly in the strength of the author’s artistic talent,” who does not give and, apparently, does not want to give any conclusions.”

Slide 11

“Oblomov and Oblomovism: it was not for nothing that these words spread throughout Russia and became words forever rooted in our speech. They explained to us a whole range of phenomena of our contemporary society, they put before us a whole world of ideas, images and details, which until recently were not fully conscious to us, which appeared to us as if in a fog,” writes Druzhinin. Oblomov's dream. In the living room before dinner. Artist S. Shore. 1936

Slide 12

Oblomov is dear to criticism as a type, just as he is dear to any Russian person. “It is not for the comic aspects, not for the pitiful life, not for the manifestations of the weaknesses common to all of us that we love Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. He is dear to us as a man of his region and his time, as a kind and gentle child, capable, under different circumstances of life and different development, of deeds of true love and mercy.” Yu. S. Gershkovich. Oblomov.

Slide 13

Druzhinin speaks of Oblomovism not as a social evil, but about the peculiarities of human nature, about the common things that unite people and nations. “Oblomovism, so fully outlined by Mr. Goncharov, covers a huge number of aspects of Russian life, but from the fact that it has developed and lives with us with extraordinary force, one should not yet think that Oblomovism belongs to Russia alone. When the novel we are examining is translated into foreign languages, its success will show to what extent the types that fill it are general and universal!” A. V. Druzhinin

Slide 14

The critic is far from branding Oblomovism as an unconditional evil and vice: “Oblomovism is disgusting if it comes from rottenness, hopelessness, corruption and evil stubbornness, but if its root lies simply in the immaturity of society and the skeptical hesitation of pure-hearted people before practical disorder, which happens in all young countries, then being angry with it means the same as being angry with a child whose eyes are sticking together in the middle of an evening noisy conversation between adults.” Druzhinin first of all saw and correctly assessed Oblomov’s positive incapacity for evil. “Russian Oblomovism, since it was captured by Mr. Goncharov, in many ways arouses our indignation, but we do not recognize its rottenness or decay... Oblomov is a child, and not a trashy libertine, he is a sleepyhead, and not an immoral egoist or an epicurean.” Defending Oblomov, so dear to his heart, Druzhinin turns his angry gaze to “the shortcomings of modern practical sages,” to which he no doubt counts Olga and Stolz.

Slide 15

DMITRY IVANOVICH PISAREV (1840-1868) OBLOMOV. Novel by I. A. Goncharov The author decided to trace the deadening, destructive influence that mental apathy and sleep have on a person, which little by little takes over all the forces of the soul, embracing and fettering all the best, human, rational movements and feelings. This apathy is a universal human phenomenon, it is expressed in the most diverse forms and is generated by the most diverse causes; but everywhere in it the main role is played by the terrible question: “Why live? Why work?” - a question to which a person often cannot find a satisfactory answer.

Slide 16

Oblomovism, as Mr. Goncharov called it, is a disease whose development is promoted by both Slavic nature and the life of our society. Mr. Goncharov traced this development of the disease in his novel. The entire plan of the novel is built on this idea, constructed so deliberately that there is not a single accident, not a single introductory person, not a single unnecessary detail. In Mr. Goncharov's novel, the inner life of the characters is open before the reader's eyes. Pisarev about Stolts Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, Oblomov’s friend, is quite a man, the kind of person who is still very few in modern society. Stolz has a healthy and strong nature; he is aware of his strength, does not weaken in the face of unfavorable circumstances and, without forcing himself into a fight, never retreats from it when his convictions require it; vital forces flow through him with a living spring, and he uses them for useful activities, lives with his mind, restraining impulses of imagination, but cultivating in himself the correct aesthetic feeling. Yu. S. Gershkovich. Oblomov and Stolz From these two qualities flow truthfulness in words and deeds, the absence of coquetry, the desire for development, the ability to love simply and seriously, without tricks and tricks, the ability to sacrifice oneself to one’s feelings as much as is allowed not by the laws of etiquette, but by the voice of conscience and reason. Olga's character is shown in development. Yu. S. Gershkovich. Olga.