Comparative table of Oblomov and Stolz lifestyle. Literature lesson on the topic: "Oblomov and Stolz. Comparative characteristics." Similarities and differences in the characters' lifestyles

In the novel “Oblomov” by Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov, the characters of two heroes are compared - Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrei Stolts. I can’t even believe that people of the same time, friends, can be so different. At first glance, it may seem that Ilya Ilyich does not know what to live for, but Stolz has already found the answer to this question. But this is not true at all! //Oblomov is a Russian landowner. “He was a man of about thirty-two or three years old, of average height, pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence of any definite idea... The thought walked like a free bird across his face, fluttered in his eyes... then completely disappeared.” He lives on the income received from the Oblomovka estate. Ilya Ilyich spends all his days in idleness, lying on the sofa in his favorite robe. "This was his normal state." Why exactly?! “An indifferent complexion, lazy movements, anxieties that fade into apathy or dormancy” convince even more that Oblomov is a person who has completely secluded himself from that deceitful and meaningless world in which all his acquaintances and friends live, among whom are and Stolz himself. Oblomov spends whole days at home, thinking about the necessary transformations on his estate. Things don't progress beyond dreams. // Andrei Stolts is the complete opposite of Oblomov. If Oblomov’s natural state is peace, then Stolz’s is movement, running through life. Unlike his friend, Andrei looks at life soberly. His main principle was “a simple, that is, direct, real view of life.” “He was afraid of every dream, or if he entered its area, he entered... knowing the hour and minute when he would leave there.” That is, Stolz did not succumb to illusions, unlike Oblomov. From early childhood he was brought up in the harshest conditions. The most important role in his upbringing was played by his father, who instilled in his son hard work, determination, and resistance to the difficulties and adversities of life. The father could not offer any other purpose in life to Andrei other than to “extend the track from his grandfather, like a ruler, to his future grandson.” Oblomov’s parents constantly instilled in him that he was a master, that in order to fulfill any of his desires, one only had to order Zakharka or Vanka, who existed to carry out his orders. // How is it possible that Andrei Stolz could be so close to Oblomov, “in whom every feature, every step, his entire existence was a blatant protest against Stolz’s life?” It is unlikely that childhood and school brought them closer together; this is not at all necessary. In my opinion, Stolz himself answers this question: “Oblomov will never bow to the idol of lies, his soul will always be pure, bright, honest... This is a crystal, transparent soul; such people are few; they are rare; these are pearls in the crowd! " // Throughout the entire novel, both heroes express their ideas about the ideal of life, the life positions that they adhere to. Goncharov shows that all of Oblomov’s dreams are doomed, because Ilya Ilyich did nothing to realize them. The chapter " plays a very important role in the novel. Oblomov's dream." This dream explains why the fate of the main character developed as it is described in the novel. If this chapter had not existed, then no one, in my opinion, would have understood why Ilya Oblomov spent whole days lying on the sofa, "with the absence of any definite idea, any concentration in his facial features." His upbringing left a very big imprint on his consciousness. His parents did not particularly care about Ilyusha’s spiritual world. Their main task was to protect the boy from the hustle and bustle of life. For the Oblomovites, work is punishment, which “was sent to them from above.” “Caring for food was the first and main concern of life in Oblomovka.” // Oblomov’s idea of ​​the world around him was formed from those fairy tales that his nanny told him. Many of these stories (about monsters, about the dead) horrified Ilyusha. They influenced Oblomov so much that “his imagination and mind, imbued with fiction, remained in his thrall until old age.” But not only Oblomov had such a strong belief in fairy-tale creatures, in fairy tales, but all the inhabitants of Oblomovka had the same idea of ​​​​life: “The life of the man of that time was terrible and wrong; it was dangerous for him to go beyond the threshold of the house: his, that and look, the beast will flog you, the robber will kill you..." But life is not at all what the Oblomovites believed it to be. Only in dreams could they live in their fairy-tale world. //The impact on Ilyusha of Oblomov’s environment was so strong and deep that it could no longer be eradicated. And when Oblomov nevertheless encountered the real world, he continued to spread Oblomovka to the world around him. For example, he had the impression (even before service) that the boss is “a second father who only breathes... to reward his subordinates and take care not only of their needs, but also of their pleasures.” The ideal of his entire life remained Oblomovka as a symbol of the lost paradise, to which, in his opinion, all people strive as a result of rushing through life. // Stolz lives “for work itself, for nothing else.” For him, work is “the image, content, element and purpose of life.” Even Andrei’s appearance clearly and vividly describes his lifestyle: “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse.” Stolz's life was like a "lace". It seemed to him that “it is tricky and difficult to live easily,” that you can easily untie any knot in the lace (of life). But a person is not able to control his destiny, which seemed possible to Stolz. Fate can tie such an insoluble “knot” in a person’s life that it is unlikely that anyone will be able to untie it. // Oblomov completely drove labor out of life. He lived only with dreams of a future life. The meeting of friends turned out to be a turning point for Oblomov. Stolz brought Ilya Ilyich face to face with reality, and Oblomov “was frightened when he recognized himself.” Andrei seemed to hold up a mirror to Oblomov when he said: “Look, you drove work out of life: what is it like? I’ll try to lift you up, maybe for the last time. If you continue to sit here after this... you’ll completely disappear, "You'll become a burden even to yourself. It's now or never!" // So what was Oblomov’s purpose in life? Ilya Ilyich could not and did not want to become a successful Stolz, despite the fact that he respected such people and appreciated their hard work. The main goal of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is not comfort or the pursuit of new benefits, but something more. He himself was unable to set a worthy goal for himself and decided to remain in the position in which nature and fate had placed him. In Stolz's eyes, this meant stopping and inevitably going down. Why does Ilya Ilyich wear a robe and treasure it? A robe is the freedom to be yourself, despite the lack of freedom of the surrounding world, dressed in tailcoats and uniforms. In his robe, Oblomov hopes to find refuge from social life. The poetic dreaminess of Ilya Ilyich does not recognize the shackles of prose. “And to this day,” notes Goncharov in the chapter “Oblomov’s Dream,” “Russian people, in the midst of the strict, devoid of fiction reality that surrounds him, loves to believe the seductive legends of antiquity, and it may be a long time before he renounces this faith.” Oblomov feels that there is something in origin that cannot be exchanged for benefit, something valuable, not like everyday happiness or Stoltsev’s progress. It is valuable in freedom. That’s why Oblomov values ​​peace so much and isolates himself from everyone with apathy. Dressed in a robe, in solitude, Ilya Ilyich “lives in the world he created.” He is a romantic dreamer, an artist. He draws the pattern of his life, “the performer and creator of his ideas.” // "Yes, you are a poet, Ilya!" - says Stolz, further calling Oblomov a philosopher and actor. Oblomov is generally serious and significant in his thoughts. His utopias are not trifles at all. All this is an expression of “the ideal of life, which nature has indicated as the goal of man.” The purpose of man is not to lose this ideal. // The world that Stolz is trying to drag Oblomov into does not recognize in man a higher principle, the value of the individual, which is why emptiness and boredom reign in this world. “Where is the man here? Where is his integrity?” asks Oblomov. “All these are dead people, sleeping people, worse than me, these are members of the world and society!” All the more reason does Ilya Ilyich have to hide from the world behind his robe and go into Oblomovism. // Oblomov confesses to Stoltz: “I don’t understand this life.” Although Oblomov, perhaps, understood life correctly, he did not understand himself, did not realize that he was a person in himself to live, and not to become numb to life. The omniscient Stolz came up with a strange word - “Oblomovism,” and Ilya Ilyich recognized the power of Oblomovism over himself. Oblomov died under the weight of someone else’s word because he could not develop his own word about himself. // It seems to me that Goncharov does not set himself the task of revealing the meaning of human life. He only shows two extremes: Oblomov and Stolz.

Goncharov Ivan Aleksandrovich is a wonderful Russian realist writer. His work has become firmly established in the classical literature of our country. The originality of his artistic world lies, according to N.A. Dobrolyubov, in that he was able to embrace in his work the full image of an object, sculpt, mint it.

The main idea of ​​Goncharov in the novel "Oblomov"

In his novel, Ivan Alexandrovich condemns noble inactivity. The characterization of Oblomov in the novel "Oblomov" proves this, and you will soon see this. The author welcomes the businesslike spirit of the entrepreneurial class that was emerging at that time. For Goncharov, what is essential in Oblomov’s character is his lordly spoiling, as well as the inactivity that follows from it, the powerlessness of will and mind. The image of this hero under the hand of such an eminent master resulted in a broad picture in which the reader is presented with the pre-reform life of the country's local nobility. The work was written more than 100 years ago, but it still attracts attention to this day. This novel is certainly a classic work written in the beautiful Russian language.

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

What is the characterization of Oblomov in the novel "Oblomov"? After reading it, everyone probably wants to understand who is closer to them in spirit: Stolz or Ilya Ilyich. Oblomov’s characterization, at first glance, lacks appeal. In the novel, this hero appears as a man no longer in his first youth. He tried to serve in the past, but withdrew from all activities and became unable to return to them. Not only does he not want to do anything, but he doesn’t even want to be in society, go for a walk, get dressed, or just get up from the couch. The serene state of this hero is disturbed only by visitors who come only to Oblomov for selfish purposes. For example, Tarantiev simply robs him, borrowing money and not returning it. Oblomov turns out to be a victim of his visitors in the work, since he cannot understand the true purpose of their visits. The only exception is Stolz, a friend of his youth, who comes to visit him in Oblomovka.

However, Oblomov’s characterization is not so unambiguously negative. We will return to it later.

Andrey Ivanovich Stolts

Stolz is the antipode of this hero in the novel. Goncharov portrayed him as a “new man.” From childhood, Stolz was brought up in harsh conditions, gradually getting used to the difficulties and hardships of life. This is a businessman alien to both official careerism and noble laziness, who is distinguished by a level of culture and such activity that at that time were not characteristic of the Russian merchants. Apparently, not knowing where to find such a person among Russian business people, Goncharov decided to make his hero the scion of a half-German family. Stolz, however, received his upbringing from a Russian mother, who was a noblewoman, and also studied at the capital’s university. This hero believes that through the construction of highways, fairs, piers, and schools, the patriarchal “broken areas” will turn into income-generating, comfortable estates.

Views on Oblomov's life

It’s not just apathy that marks Oblomov’s characterization. This hero is trying to “philosophize.” Ilya Ilyich contrasts the sincerity and kindness of patriarchal life with the moral depravity of representatives of the bureaucratic-noble society of the capital. He condemns him for his desire for careerism, lack of serious interests, and mutual hostility covered by ostentatious courtesy. In this regard, the author of the novel agrees with Ilya Ilyich. Oblomov’s characterization is complemented by the fact that he is a romantic. This hero dreams mainly of quiet family happiness.

Stolz's attitude to life

On the contrary, Stolz is the enemy of the “dream”, everything mysterious and enigmatic. However, by “dream” he means not only rose-colored romance, but also all kinds of idealism. The author, explaining the beliefs of this hero, writes that in his eyes, what is not subject to analysis of practical truth, experience, is an optical illusion or a fact to which the turn of experience has not yet reached.

The importance of love conflict in revealing the characters of the main characters

A comparative description of Oblomov and Stolz would be incomplete if we did not reveal the topic of the relationship between these heroes and Olga Ilyinskaya. Goncharov introduces his characters into a love conflict in order to test them with life itself, which will show what each of them is worth. Therefore, the heroine of “Oblomov” had to be an extraordinary person. In Olga Ilyinskaya we will not find any secular coquetry, no lordly quirks, nothing mannered, deliberately done for success in life. This girl is distinguished by her beauty, as well as her natural freedom of action, word and look.

Both main characters, created by Goncharov, fail in their love relationships with this woman, each in their own way. And this reveals the inconsistency of the author’s illusions in assessing both. Oblomov’s “honest and true” “golden” heart suddenly comes into question along with his decency. Let us note that this hero, who has a “heart as deep as a well,” shamefully dissembles in front of the girl, citing the fact that he “warned her” about his character. Olga understands that Ilya Ilyich “died a long time ago.”

The consistent characterization of Oblomov and Stolz reveals more and more interesting details. Andrei Ivanovich appears again in the novel. He reappears in the work in order to take the place that Oblomov previously occupied. The characterization of the hero Stolz in his relationship with Olga reveals some important features in his image. Goncharov, showing his Parisian life with Ilyinskaya, wants to show the reader the breadth of views of his hero. In fact, he reduces it, since being interested in everything means not being interested in anything systematically, deeply, or seriously. This means learning everything from other people’s words, taking it from someone else’s hands. Stolz could hardly keep up with Olga in her languid haste of will and thought. Contrary to the will of the author, the story of the life together of these two heroes, which was supposed to be praise for Stolz, ultimately turned out to be a means of exposing him. Stolz at the end of the novel seems to be only a self-confident reasoner. The reader no longer believes this hero, who could not save his friend or give his beloved woman happiness. Only the author's tendentiousness saves Stolz from complete collapse. After all, Goncharov (“Oblomov”) was on his side. The characterization of Oblomov, created by the writer, as well as the author’s voice in the novel, allow us to judge this.

The weakness of both heroes and the classes they represent

In addition to his own desire, Goncharov was able to show that not only the Russian nobility is degenerating. It’s not only Oblomov who is weak. The characterization of Stolz's hero is also not without this feature. Respectable entrepreneurs cannot historically become successors to the nobility, since they are weak, limited and unable to take responsibility for solving fundamental issues in the life of the country.

The meaning of the image of Olga Ilyinskaya in Russian literature

So, a comparative description of Oblomov and Stolz shows that neither one nor the other can, each in their own way, evoke sympathy. But the heroine of the work, Olga Ilyinskaya, will become the prototype of an enlightened Russian woman. This prototype will later be found in the works of many classics of the 19th century.

Often a comparison of Ilya Ilyich and Andrei Ivanovich is presented as a table. The characteristics of Oblomov and Stolz, presented visually, help to better remember the information. Therefore, a comparative table in literature lessons as a type of work is often used at school. When a deep analysis is required, it is better to abandon it. And this is precisely the task that faced us when creating this article.

Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" was highly appreciated by critics of the second half of the 19th century. In particular, Belinsky noted that the work was timely and reflected the socio-political thought of the 50-60s of the nineteenth century. Two lifestyles - Oblomov and Stolz - are discussed in this article in comparison.

Characteristics of Oblomov

Ilya Ilyich was distinguished by his desire for peace and inaction. Oblomov cannot be called interesting and varied: he is used to spending most of the day thinking, lying on the sofa. Immersed in these thoughts, he often did not rise from his bed all day, did not go outside, did not find out the latest news. He didn’t read newspapers on principle, so as not to bother himself with unnecessary, and most importantly, meaningless information. Oblomov can be called a philosopher; he is concerned with other questions: not everyday, not momentary, but eternal, spiritual. He looks for meaning in everything.

When you look at him, you get the impression that he is a happy freethinker, not burdened by the hardships and problems of external life. But life “touches, gets at” Ilya Ilyich everywhere, makes him suffer. Dreams remain just dreams, because he does not know how to translate them into real life. Even reading tires him: Oblomov has many books he has started, but all of them remain unread and misunderstood. The soul seems to be dormant in him: he avoids unnecessary worries, worries, worries. In addition, Oblomov often compares his calm, solitary existence with the lives of other people and finds that it is not suitable to live the way others live: “When to live?”

This is what Oblomov’s ambiguous image represents. “Oblomov” (I.A. Goncharov) was created with the aim of depicting the personality of this character - extraordinary and extraordinary in its own way. He is no stranger to impulses and deep emotional experiences. Oblomov is a true dreamer with a poetic, sensitive nature.

Characteristics of Stolz

Oblomov’s lifestyle cannot be compared with Stolz’s worldview. The reader first meets this character in the second part of the work. Andrei Stolts loves order in everything: his day is scheduled by hours and minutes, dozens of important things are planned that urgently need to be redone. Today he is in Russia, tomorrow, you see, he has unexpectedly left abroad. What Oblomov finds boring and meaningless is important and significant for him: trips to cities, villages, intentions to improve the quality of life of those around him.

He discovers such treasures in his soul that Oblomov cannot even guess about. Stolz's lifestyle consists entirely of activities that feed his entire being with the energy of vivacity. In addition, Stolz is a good friend: more than once he helped Ilya Ilyich in business matters. The lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz are different from each other.

What is “Oblomovism”?

As a social phenomenon, the concept denotes a focus on idle, monotonous, devoid of color and any changes in life. Andrei Stolts called “Oblomovism” Oblomov’s very way of life, his desire for endless peace and the absence of any activity. Despite the fact that his friend constantly pushed Oblomov to the possibility of changing his way of existence, he did not budge at all, as if he did not have enough energy to do it. At the same time, we see that Oblomov admits his mistake, uttering the following words: “I have long been ashamed to live in the world.” He feels useless, unnecessary and abandoned, and therefore he does not want to wipe the dust off the table, sort out books that have been lying around for a month, or leave the apartment once again.

Love in Oblomov's understanding

Oblomov’s lifestyle did not contribute in any way to finding real, rather than fictitious, happiness. He dreamed and made plans more than he actually lived. Amazingly, in his life there was a place for quiet rest, philosophical reflection on the essence of existence, but there was a lack of strength for decisive action and the implementation of intentions. Love for Olga Ilyinskaya temporarily pulls Oblomov out of his usual existence, forces him to try new things, and begin to take care of himself. He even forgets his old habits and sleeps only at night, and does business during the day. But still, love in Oblomov’s worldview is directly related to dreams, thoughts and poetry.

Oblomov considers himself unworthy of love: he doubts whether Olga can love him, whether he is suitable enough for her, whether he is capable of making her happy. Such thoughts lead him to sad thoughts about his useless life.

Love in Stolz's understanding

Stolz approaches the issue of love more rationally. He does not indulge in ephemeral dreams in vain, since he looks at life soberly, without fantasy, without the habit of analyzing. Stolz is a business man. He doesn’t need romantic walks in the moonlight, loud declarations of love and sighs on the bench, because he is not Oblomov. Stolz's lifestyle is very dynamic and pragmatic: he proposes to Olga at the moment when he realizes that she is ready to accept him.

What did Oblomov come to?

As a result of his protective and cautious behavior, Oblomov misses the opportunity to build a close relationship with Olga Ilyinskaya. His marriage was upset shortly before the wedding - Oblomov took too long to gather, explain, ask himself, compare, estimate, analyze. The characterization of the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov teaches not to repeat the mistakes of an idle, aimless existence, and raises the question of what love really is? Is she the object of lofty, poetic aspirations, or is she the calm joy and peace that Oblomov finds in the house of the widow Agafya Pshenitsyna?

Why did Oblomov’s physical death occur?

The result of Ilya Ilyich’s philosophical reflections is this: he chose to bury his former aspirations and even lofty dreams. with Olga his life focused on everyday existence. He knew no greater joy than to eat deliciously and sleep after dinner. Gradually, the engine of his life began to stop, to calm down: ailments and incidents became more frequent. Even his previous thoughts left him: there was no longer room for them in the quiet room, like a coffin, in all this sluggish life, which lulled Oblomov, increasingly removed him from reality. Mentally this man was already dead for a long time. Physical death was only a confirmation of the falsity of his ideals.

Stolz's achievements

Stolz, unlike Oblomov, did not miss his chance to become happy: he built family well-being with Olga Ilyinskaya. This marriage took place out of love, in which Stolz did not fly into the clouds, did not remain in destructive illusions, but acted more than reasonably and responsibly.

The lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz are diametrically opposed and opposed to each other. Both characters are unique, inimitable and significant in their own way. This may explain the strength of their friendship over the years.

Each of us is close to either the Stolz or Oblomov type. There is nothing wrong with this, and the coincidences will probably only be partial. Those who are deep, who love to think about the essence of life, will most likely understand Oblomov’s experiences, his restless mental tossing and searching. Business pragmatists who have left romance and poetry far behind will begin to personify themselves with Stolz.

Subject: “Oblomov and Stolz: comparative characteristics of the heroes (based on the novel

I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov")."

Tasks:

educational:

develop skills in characterizing literary characters;

help students comprehend the image of the main character from a social, universal, and moral point of view.

developing:

develop students’ speech, enrich their vocabulary; the ability to generalize and express one’s thoughts logically and correctly;

develop skills in working with literary text; skill of character analysis in a work of fiction;

improve the skills of pair and independent work;

promote the development of skills in creative perception and expressive reading of works;

promote the development of thinking, creativity and cognitive activity of students;

contribute to the improvement of independent work skills during research and search activities.

educational:

to cultivate reverence and respect for women, love for the Motherland;

to cultivate a caring attitude towards the creative heritage of Russian literature;

develop the ability to listen and hear each other;

to cultivate the spiritual and moral culture of students.

Form of work: lesson-research, conversation, analysis of literary text.

Teaching methods: heuristic, explanatory and illustrative.

Lesson type: combined.

Equipment: portrait of I.A. Goncharov, illustrations for the novel “Oblomov”, projector, screen, handouts, multimedia presentation, fragment of the feature film “A few days in the life of Oblomov” by N. Mikhalkov.

DURING THE CLASSES

Epigraph: “As long as there is at least one Russian left, Oblomov will be remembered until then” I.S. Turgenev.

Teacher's word: Oblomov and Stolz - in a broad sense - are, as it were, two extremes of the national Russian character, in which monstrous laziness, dreamy contemplation, efficiency, talent, and love for one's neighbor are strangely combined. Is this so? It is these two heroes that we will talk about.

I. Repetition of previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

d) the conditions of serf life left their mark: Oblomovites do not know how to be masters, they are impractical, do not like to work, and do not know how to overcome the difficulties that arise.

II. Learning new material.

1.Communication of the topic, purpose, lesson plan.

2. The teacher's word.

Teacher's word: Our lesson today will be dedicated to two characters from the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is Ilya Ilyich himself and his childhood friend Andrei Stolts. Let's think together and decide what we will explore during today's lesson. After all, it is stated as a lesson-research.

Student answers: We must analyze the images of Oblomov and Stolz, select criteria for comparing them, and draw a conclusion.

Teacher's word: Well done! In addition, at the end of our lesson, we will write down the resulting conclusions and try to supplement them ourselves as part of a little independent work.

Formulate a response to problematic lesson question: “Why didn’t Andrei Stolts manage to change Ilya Oblomov’s lifestyle?

Oblomov and Stolz are antipodal friends. Despite the difference in character, the friends were relentlessly attracted to each other. Next to Stolz - reasonable, pragmatic, standing firmly on the ground, Oblomov felt calmer and more confident. But Stolz himself needed Ilya Ilyich even more. “Often, taking a break from business or from the social crowd, from the evening, from the ball,” he “went to sit on Oblomov’s wide sofa,” in order “to take away and calm an anxious or tired soul in a lazy conversation.” And every time it was like a return to childhood, in which Oblomov’s parents loved the German boy and little Andrei spoiled Ilyusha, “either suggesting lessons to him, or doing translations for him,” it was each time a return to the “lost paradise” that he yearns for not only the dreamy Oblomov, but also the active Stolz.

Why did Goncharov and critics think that the author failed to portray Stolz? Do you agree with this?

(Attractive features: for Stolz, the meaning of life is work; he is unusually efficient and enterprising. Goncharov admires his ebullient energy (a member of a company doing business with foreign countries, has traveled the length and breadth of Russia). Strength, calm, energy in his face; he is against hibernation, for enlightenment. Weaknesses: Stolz has no poetry, no dreams, he does not have a program of public service. A certain tendency of Russian life is reflected in him - the desire for personal independence. Stolz is a bourgeois businessman. Stolz treats Oblomovism condescendingly, considering it temporary disease of society).

Comparison of heroes in the lesson is built according to the sequence proposed by the author himself.

Meet the Hero

We learn about Stolz in the first part of the novel, before he appears before the readers, that is, in absentia:

In connection with Oblomov’s guests, whom he (Oblomov) is “not to his heart,” unlike his childhood friend Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, whom he “loved sincerely”; and Tarantiev, who is unpleasant to the reader, does not like the German;

In connection with the dreams of the main character, where Stolz, who knew and appreciated the best qualities of Ilya Ilyich, was an integral part of the pictures of a happy life on the estate, full of love, poetry, friendly feelings and peace;

Stolz also appears in Oblomov’s dream, fitting into the idyllic, sweet and at the same time mysterious atmosphere of childhood that shaped the hero.

The unexpected appearance of the hero in the finale of the first part and chapters 1–2 of the second part, telling about Stolz.

Name episodes, scenes that clearly illustrate how Stolz’s childhood went and how the process of his upbringing went.

His upbringing is labor, practical, he was raised by life itself (cf.: “If Oblomov’s son disappeared...”).

A special discussion is required: the mother’s attitude; mother and father; Oblomovka, the prince's castle, as a result of which “the bursha did not work out,” which replaced the “narrow German track” with a “wide road.”

Stolz - Stolz (“proud”). Does he live up to his name?

Portrait of Stolz

What was Stolz most afraid of?

Substantiating their answers with text, the students say that dreams and imagination (“optical illusion,” as Stolz said) were his enemies. He controlled his life and had a “real outlook on life” (cf. Oblomov).

What does life mean and what is the purpose of man, according to Stolz?

in peace and pleasure ; see about Oblomov’s dreams in Chapter 8 of the first part).

So why are Oblomov and Stolz friends?

We find the answer in Goncharov in the second chapter of the second part: childhood, school and, in the words of the author himself, “a pure, bright and good beginning” that lies at the basis of Oblomov’s nature, “filled with deep sympathy for everything that is good...”

Chapters 3–4 of the second part. The role of these chapters in the novel. A conversation-argument where the views and positions of the heroes collided.

The essence of the dispute is HOW TO LIVE?! (we put the topic of the lesson in the title).

Watch the episode. After watching the episode, students are asked to clarify their observations by checking them with the text of the novel, then there is a discussion of the results of the work done.If there is enough time, you can analyze this episode in detail and discuss the following questions sequentially:

How does a dispute arise?(Oblomov’s dissatisfaction with the empty life of society.)

(Labor path: Stolz’s disagreement with his friend’s ideal, because this is “Oblomovism”; the ideal of the lost paradise depicted by Oblomov, and labor as “the image, content, element and purpose of life.”)

Approximate answer options:

• “I don’t like this life of yours in St. Petersburg!”

  “Where is the man here? Where is his integrity? Where did he disappear, how did he exchange for all sorts of little things?”

  “Underneath this comprehensiveness lies emptiness, a lack of sympathy for everything!”

  “I don’t touch them, I don’t look for anything; I just don’t see a normal life in this.”

  “Am I alone? Look: Mikhailov, Petrov, Semenov, Alekseev, Stepanov... you can’t count them: our name is legion!”

When Ilya Ilyich says that he does not like modern social life, Stolz does not find anything to object to. He interrupts Oblomov’s speech with evaluative statements (“This is all old, they’ve talked about it a thousand times”, “You argue like an ancient: in the old books everyone wrote like that”, “You are a philosopher, Ilya!”, etc.), saying them with obvious irony, but does not express a single argument against Oblomov’s beliefs.

• Oblomov about the St. Petersburg “Oblomovism” (Stolz does not take Oblomov’s words seriously, he makes fun of him)

  Oblomov about his life ideal (Stolz does not leave a “casually mocking tone”, does not accept Oblomov’s position)

  Confession of Oblomov (Stolz “listens and is gloomily silent”).

Why does Oblomov not accept the modern standard of living?

How do we, readers, react to the fact that Stolz cannot find anything to object to his friend’s statements?

At what point does the word “Oblomovism” appear on the pages of the novel? What significance does Stolz put into it? Oblomov? Reader?

At what point and why does Stolz’s mood change in the episode in question?

Why does Goncharov call Oblomov’s reasoning about lost hopes a confession? What does the writer emphasize with this name in Oblomov himself and in his relationship with Stolz?

What is the reason for Oblomov’s decline?

What new in Oblomov’s character does this episode reveal to the reader?

After discussing these questions, students are asked to draw a conclusion about the role of the episode in question in revealing the image of the main character of the novel. Next, the student’s answer is heard and adjusted accordingly by the teacher, the conclusion is written down by the students in a notebook independently.

Suggested answer/output: The conflict between the protagonist of the novel “Oblomov” and society is expressed in the hero’s internal disagreement with the “distortion of the norm.” In the “eternal running around, the eternal game of trashy passions” Oblomov does not see the main thing - “the person”. And the fact that Stolz does not object to him, does not find anything to object with, convinces the reader of the correctness of Oblomov’s judgments, revealing the other side of “Oblomovism”: the reasons for the protagonist’s isolation from the outside world, from social problems, turns out to be much deeper than lordship and habit to doing nothing. The lifestyle that Oblomov leads is a unique, perhaps not entirely conscious challenge to the lack of spirituality of modern Oblomov society. The hero does not see a goal to strive for. Summing up his consideration of his path in his “confession,” the hero does not consider himself an exception, seeing a “legion” of the same fading people who have not found themselves.

(In the process of a lively and interested debate, the guys come to the conclusion that both principles have a right to exist.)

Here, hearing the students’ opinions is especially interesting and important, because understanding the author’s position in a realistic work makes it possible to talk about the discrepancy between the socio-historical concept of the author and the artistic persuasiveness of the characters created by the writer, which will subsequently be very important when studying the work of I.S. Turgenev and L.N. Tolstoy.

3. The image of Andrei Ivanovich Stolts.

3.1. Origin of the hero. Viewing a fragment of N. Mikhalkov’s film “A few days in the life of Oblomov.”

Friend of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, son of Ivan Bogdanovich Stolz, a Russified German, manager of an estate in the village of Verkhlevo, which is five miles from Oblomovka. Stolz was only half German, according to his father: his mother was Russian: he professed the Orthodox faith; His natural speech was Russian: he learned it from his mother and from books, in games with village boys and in the university classroom. He inherited the German language from his father and from books.

3.2. Education and upbringing.

Stolz received a specific education: “From the age of eight, he sat with his father at the geographical map, sorted through the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, biblical verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, townspeople and factory workers, and with his mother he read sacred history, taught Krylov’s fables, analyzed the warehouses of Telemacus." Upbringing, like education, was dual: dreaming that his son would grow into a “good bursh,” the father in every possible way encouraged boyish fights, without which the son could not do a day, the child’s disappearance for half a day or more for unknown purposes in unknown places. If Andrei appeared without a lesson prepared by heart, Ivan Bogdanovich sent his son back to where he came from - and every time young Stolz returned with the lessons he had learned.

Stolz’s mother, on the contrary, sought to raise a true gentleman, a decent, clean boy with curled curls - “in her son she saw the ideal of a gentleman, albeit an upstart, from a black body, from a burgher’s father, but still the son of a Russian noblewoman.” From this bizarre combination the character of Stolz was formed.

3.3. Stolz's character.

From an early age, Stolz was taught by his father not to count on anyone for anything. He wants to do everything at the same time: he is equally interested in commerce, travel, writing, and public service. Parting with his father, who is sending him from Verkhlev to St. Petersburg, Stolz says that he will certainly follow his father’s advice and go to Ivan Bogdanovich’s old friend Reingold - but only when he, Stolz, has a four-story house, like Reingold. Such independence and independence, as well as self-confidence, are the basis of the character and worldview of the younger Stolz, which his father so ardently supports and which Oblomov so lacks.

Stolz's element is constant movement. At just over thirty years old, he feels good and at ease only when he feels needed in all parts of the world at once. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin; he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, bone and muscle, but no sign of fatty roundness; complexion is even, dark and no blush; the eyes, although a little greenish, are expressive.” The most important thing in Stolz’s character is that “just as he has nothing superfluous in his body, so in the moral aspects of his life he sought a balance between practical aspects and the subtle needs of the spirit.”

“... The dream, the enigmatic, the mysterious had no place in his soul... He had no idols, but he retained the strength of his soul, the strength of his body, but he was chastely proud, he exuded some kind of freshness and strength, before which they were involuntarily embarrassed and unshy women."

Such a human type, both in real life and in its literary incarnation, always carries within itself something dual: its positivity seems to be undoubted, but much makes one resist emerging sympathies, especially since one of the important components of Stolz’s philosophy is achieving a goal by any means, despite the obstacles (“he put perseverance in achieving goals above all else”).

4. Conclusions about Stolz.

Life.
Target: “work is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine.”
Perception: life is happiness in work; life without work is not life; “…“life touches!” "And thank God!" - said Stolz.
Principles: to have “a simple, that is, direct, real outlook on life - that was his constant task...” “Above all else he placed perseverance in achieving goals...”, “... he will measure an abyss or a wall, and if there is no sure way to overcome, he will move away.”

Love. Stolz loved not with his heart, but with his mind, in every movement of his soul and heart he looked for a rational explanation. Therefore, even in his youth, “in the midst of passion, I felt the ground under my feet,” since everywhere I looked for intelligence, and not passion. Nevertheless, he did not deny this feeling: “he developed the conviction that love, with the power of the Archimedean lever, moves the world; that there is so much universal, irrefutable truth and goodness in it, as well as lies and ugliness in its misunderstanding and abuse.”

Friendship. Stolz always had many friends everywhere - people were drawn to him. But he felt closeness only to personal people, sincere and decent. Indeed, he did not have many real friends, such as Ilya Ilyich and Olga Sergeevna.

Relationships with others. Everyone knows him, he knows everyone. He leaves no one indifferent to himself - he is either respected and appreciated or feared and hated.

Most afraid what is incomprehensible or inaccessible to him, and avoided it in every possible way: from passions to imagination; but at any suitable opportunity I tried to find the key to this, still incomprehensible.

5. Conclusions about Oblomov.

Life.
Target: live life happily; so that she “doesn’t touch.”
Perception: fluctuating - from “a pleasant gift for enjoyment” to “sticks like bullies: sometimes it will pinch you on the sly, sometimes it will suddenly come right from your forehead and sprinkle you with sand... there’s no way to resist!”
Principles: do what your soul and heart desires, even if your mind is against it; never bother.

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

Conclusion. So, guys, the plot basis of the novel “Oblomov” is a dramatic love story, and at the same time the fate of the main character, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.

Love. She was never the main one in his life, even in the story with Olga she quickly faded away.

Friendship. Even in his youth, he “coldly said goodbye to a crowd of friends.” There are acquaintances, but there is not a single real friend except Stolz.

Relationships with others. Few people know, he has a very narrow circle of friends. He knows practically no one himself. However, he has acquaintances trying to get him out into the world.

Most afraid everything difficult and elusive.

III. Consolidation of what has been learned. Now let's turn to the criteria by which the writer characterizes Stolz and Oblomov, which you were able to identify while reading the text.

Student answers: Appearance (when they appeared before the reader), origin, upbringing, education, laid down program, outlook on life, characteristics of the author, test of love.

He was afraid of every dream"

Answer (Stolz):

1.the meaning of life is in work; unusually efficient and enterprising

2.strength, calm, energy; desire for enlightenment

3.striving for personal independence

4. treats “Oblomovism” condescendingly, considering it a temporary disease of society.

IV. Summing up the lesson.

Oblomov’s dispute with Stolz is interesting both in historical, literary, and human terms (Target:help students see through the antithesis of the “idealist” hero and the “practical” heroRussia at the turn of two historical eras: patriarchal-serfdom and post-reform bourgeois. In this sense, this is an eternal pair, an eternal dispute between the doer and the contemplator. A.I. wrote about these two types of people, two types of life. Herzen in the article “On the development of revolutionary ideas in Russia.”

I.A. Goncharov was criticized for the fact that Stolz turned out to be “stilted” (what he does is unknown), declarative, artistically unconvincing, unlike Oblomov. But he (the author) needs this pairing, and Stolz is needed primarily as an opponent of Oblomov, as his antipode.

Life, time, historical conditions call to the stage a hero-doer, the creator of his own destiny. Thus, Goncharov’s novel, completed in 1858, prepares the appearance of the heroes of I.S. Turgeneva, N.G. Chernyshevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, that is, the 1860s.

V. Homework.

2.Draw up a plan for a comparative description of Oblomov and Stolz.

A.P. Chekhov (1889) wrote: “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...” Share your thoughts on Chekhov’s statement.

Name episodes, scenes that clearly illustrate how Stolz’s childhood went and how the process of his upbringing went.

Goncharov creates Stolz, involuntarily starting from Oblomov, as the antipode to the main character; with Stolz everything is different.

Stolz - Stolz (“proud”). Does he live up to his name?

Portrait of Stolz

Defining feature (cf. Oblomov).

A story about nature, character, attitude to life.

The main thing is rationalism and balance.

- What was Stolz most afraid of?

- What does life mean and what is the purpose of a person, according to Stolz?

“To live through the four seasons, that is, four ages, without leaps and to carry the vessel of life to the last day, without spilling a single drop in vain...” (compare with Oblomov, whose ideal is...in peace and pleasure ).

- So why are Oblomov and Stolz friends? What, who is the center of friendship?

The essence of the dispute is HOW TO LIVE?!

Episode Analysis .

How does a dispute arise?

When does a turning point in a dispute occur?

- How did each of the heroes emerge in the dispute?

Which character and at what stage of the argument are you ready to agree with?

Is there one answer to this question?

Comparison of Oblomov and Stolz.

He was afraid of every dream"

“The aspiration is about to come true, it will turn into a feat. But... the morning flashes by, the day is already approaching evening, and with it Oblomov’s weary forces tend to peace: storms and unrest are humbled in the soul..." to peace and Oblomov’s weary forces: storms and unrest are humbled in the soul..."

“Above all else he placed persistence in

achieving goals... he was moving towards his goal,

bravely walking through all obstacles..."

Bottom line. The conflict between the protagonist of the novel “Oblomov” and society is expressed in the hero’s internal disagreement with the “distortion of the norm.” In the “eternal running around, the eternal game of trashy passions” Oblomov does not see the main thing - “the person”. And the fact that Stolz does not object to him, does not find anything to object with, convinces the reader of the correctness of Oblomov’s judgments, revealing the other side of “Oblomovism”: the reasons for the protagonist’s isolation from the outside world, from social problems, turns out to be much deeper than lordship and habit to doing nothing. The lifestyle that Oblomov leads is a unique, perhaps not entirely conscious challenge to the lack of spirituality of modern Oblomov society. The hero does not see a goal to strive for. Summing up his consideration of his path in his “confession,” the hero does not consider himself an exception, seeing a “legion” of the same fading people who have not found themselves.

For me

Repetition of previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

a) this type of life determines immobility (peace). Motives of sleep, stagnation, stuffiness;

b) the interests of Oblomovites are focused on physiological needs, life corresponds to the natural cycle of the seasons, this determines the concerns of men and gentlemen;

c) Oblomovites lead a normal existence, there are no unpredictable events; Oblomovites are calm and indifferent to the rest of the world;

d) the conditions of serf life left their mark: Oblomovites do not know how to be masters, they are impractical, do not like to work, and do not know how to overcome the difficulties that arise.

2. The function of the second and third parts of the novel.

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

Teacher: What is love? Innokenty Annensky wrote: “Love is not peace, it must have a moral result, first of all for those who love.” In the novel “Oblomov,” love is the basis. This feeling reveals the characters' characters and shows them in development. Who does Oblomov love? (female characters in the novel. The story is about Olga Ilyinskaya and Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna)

Teacher: In Oblomov’s life, there was only one love that was spiritual, which tried to ignite life and action in him, that is, with a “moral spark.” And the other was physical love. This feeling did not advance his moral, spiritual development; it did not require anything. The writer believed in all-encompassing love and that only this force can move the world, control the human will and direct it to action.

Conclusion. So, guys, the plot basis of the novel “Oblomov” is a dramatic love story, and at the same time the fate of the main character, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. In addition to the main characters, the novel contains extra-plot characters. And one of them is Zakhar.

What role does Zakhar Trofimovich Trofimov play in the novel? What do we learn about him? (a story about Zakhara) (part one, chapter seven, part two, chapter three)

What are the roots of “Oblomovism”? What episode of the novel helps us answer this question?

Teacher: Oblomov’s dream is a picture of the hero’s childhood. In which N. Dobrolyubov saw the focus of the noble-landowner “Oblomovism” as life at the expense of the labor of serfs. The critic explained in his article all subsequent behavior and the very fate of I.I. Oblomov.

How many parts can Oblomov’s dream be divided into? (in three parts):

1. Blessed corner of the earth.

   Wonderful country.

   The roots of "Oblomovism"

Analytical conversation.

1. What is the meaning of life for Oblomovites? (food, sleep, procreation, not spiritual needs.

The cyclical nature of the circle of life in its main biological manifestations: homelands, weddings, funerals. The attachment of people to one place.

Closedness and indifference to the rest of the world)

1. What do you think is the main question Goncharov poses to readers (What ruined a man?)

   What ruined the man? (“Oblomovism”)

   Why couldn’t friendship or love overcome Oblomov’s apathy in life? (upbringing, social conditions, soulless society)

Teacher: The author showed Oblomov’s life from cradle to grave. Oblomov himself understands what is ruining him. He says to Stoltz: “My life began with fading, I began to fade over writing papers in the office; Then he died out, reading truths in books that he didn’t know what to do with in life, he died out with his friends, listening to talk. Gossip, mockery, angry and cold chatter, emptiness.”

What does Oblomov’s life and fate make you think about? (Oblomov’s life and fate make us think about complex issues: how to live, how life should be structured so that a person does not die, does not hide from her, does not shrink from her touch)

What is the place of the novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov” in the history of Russian literature? (the novel occupies a special place in the history of Russian literature. Goncharov created a work of colossal generalizing power. Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, Druzhinin gave the novel a high rating. Like no other novel, Russian pre-reform reality is fully and fully reflected here, the Russian national character is shown. Goncharova’s novel still remains among the outstanding achievements of Russian realistic art. Even L.N. Tolstoy said that the novel “Oblomov” is “... the most important thing, which has not been equal for a long time.”

Reading the poem by heart by N. Zabolotsky “The soul must work”

Teacher. “Life and work itself are the purpose of life.” We will end our lesson on this optimistic note.

Homework

Preparation for testing on creativity I.A. Goncharova.

1. Childhood impressions and personality traits.
2. Central ideas in worldviews.
3. Debunking myths.

In the novel “Oblomov,” A. A. Goncharov created images of two people, each of whom is in many ways a typical representative of a certain circle of people, an exponent of ideas that were close to the corresponding strata of their contemporary society. Andrei Stolts and Ilya Oblomov, at first glance, seem to have nothing in common, except for memories of childhood games. And yet, no matter how these characters in Goncharov’s novel are assessed, it is impossible to deny that they are connected by sincere, selfless friendship. What's the matter? Do the dreamy lazy man Oblomov and the calculating businessman Stolz attach so much importance to the past so that it continues to unite them in the present, when their paths, in fact, diverged? After all, they both met many other people in their lives. But the old friendship, as is easy to see after reading the novel to the end, will survive even Oblomov’s early death: Stolz willingly takes upon himself the care of raising the son of his late friend.

Indeed, Oblomov and Stolz are strikingly different from each other in their lifestyles. In Stolz’s view, the essence of being lies in movement: “Labor is the image, content, element and goal of life, at least mine.” Oblomov, having not yet started any business, is already dreaming of peace, which he already has in abundance: “...Then, in honorable inactivity, enjoy a well-deserved rest...”.

For some time, Oblomov and Stolz were brought up together - in a school run by Andrei's father. But they came to this school, one might say, from different worlds: the undisturbed, once and for all established order of life in Oblomovka, similar to a long afternoon nap, and the active labor education of a German burgher, interspersed with lessons from a mother who tried her best to instill my son has a love and interest in art. Little Oblomov’s tender parents were afraid to let him go further than his native porch, in case something happened to their beloved child: the child was used to living like this, giving up on alluring, but painfully troublesome adventures. Stolz’s mother, it should be noted, would willingly follow the example of Ilya’s parents; fortunately, Andrei’s father turned out to be a much more practical person and gave his son the opportunity to show independence: “What kind of child is he if he has never broken his own or another’s nose?”

Both Oblomov’s parents and Stolz’s parents, of course, had certain ideas about how the lives of their children should develop in the future. However, the main difference is that Oblomov was not taught to set goals and go towards them, but Stolz perceives this need naturally and sensibly - he knows how not only to make a choice, but also to diligently achieve results: “Above all else he put persistence in achieving goals : this was a sign of character in his eyes, and he never refused to respect people with this persistence, no matter how unimportant their goals were.”

It is also important to note how Oblomov and Stolz approach life in general. According to Oblomov’s own feeling, his existence is becoming more and more like a fruitless wandering in the forest thicket: not a path, not a ray of sun... “It’s as if someone stole and buried in his own soul the treasures brought to him as a gift by peace and life.” This is one of Oblomov’s main miscalculations - he subconsciously seeks to place responsibility, his failures, his inactivity on someone else: on Zakhar, for example, or on fate. And Stolz “attributed the cause of all suffering to himself, and did not hang it, like a caftan, on someone else’s nail,” therefore “he enjoyed joy, like a flower plucked along the way, until it withered in his hands, never finishing the cup to that drop of bitterness which lies at the end of all pleasure." However, all of the above does not yet shed light on the foundations of strong friendship between people so different in their habits and aspirations. Apparently, their sincere, warm attitude towards each other is rooted in the fact that both Stolz and Oblomov are inherently worthy people, endowed with many high spiritual qualities. It would seem that Stolz is a business man, he should strive to benefit from everything, but his attitude towards Oblomov is devoid of any calculations. He sincerely tries to extract his friend from the swamp of apathy and inactivity, since Stolz is sincerely convinced that the existence that Oblomov leads is slowly but surely destroying him. As a man of action, Stolz always takes an active part in Oblomov’s fate: he introduces his friend to Olga, he stops the machinations of Tarantiev and Ivan Matveyevich, he puts Oblomov’s estate in order, and finally, he takes in the son of his early deceased friend to raise him. Stolz strives to do everything to the best of his ability to change Oblomov’s life for the better. Of course, for this to happen, Ilya Ilyich’s nature would first have to be changed, but only God can do this. And it is not Stolz’s fault that most of his efforts were in vain.

We can say that in Stolz everything that sleeps in Oblomov has reached a high degree of development: his implementation in business, his sensitivity to art and beauty, his personality. This, like Andrei’s sincere, benevolent attitude, of course, finds a response in the soul of Ilya, who, despite his laziness, has not lost his spiritual nobility. Of course, we see that Ilya Ilyich is ready to trust everyone who surrounds him: the scoundrel Tarantiev, the crook Ivan Matveevich Pshenitsyn. At the same time, he trusts Andrei, his childhood friend, incomparably more - Stolz is truly worthy of this trust.

However, in literary criticism and the minds of many readers there are still myths regarding the positive and negative in the images of Oblomov and Stolz. The ambiguity of such myths leads to the fact that Stolz is often interpreted as a negative hero, whose main interest lies in acquiring money, while Oblomov is almost proclaimed a national hero. If you read the novel carefully, it is easy to notice the flawed and unfair nature of this approach. The very fact of Stolz's friendship with Oblomov, the constant help that the supposedly heartless businessman tries to provide to his friend, should completely dispel the myth that Stolz is an anti-hero. At the same time, Oblomov’s kindness, “dovelike tenderness” and dreaminess, which, of course, evoke sympathy for this character, should not obscure from readers the unsightly aspects of his existence: the inability to organize himself, useless project-making and aimless apathy.

No matter how we feel about the heroes of Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov,” we must remember that the author created images of living people, whose characters, of course, contain various qualities, both worthy and those that may not seem so to us. And yet one should not turn a blind eye to the fact that it is Stolz, who is sometimes regarded as not a very noble person, who works, brings benefit to himself and others, while Oblomov is not only not satisfied with the life of the peasants who depend on him, but also for himself sometimes it's a burden.