In his work “Fathers and Sons” I.S. Turgenev showed for the most part not the conflict of generations, but the opposition of liberals and democrats. Each of these movements sought to improve society. which runs through the entire novel, personify these two directions. The author very clearly depicts the confrontation between representatives of two different cultures.
Author about the novel “Fathers and Sons”
Turgenev himself says about the novel “Fathers and Sons” that it is directed against representatives of the nobility and aristocracy.
Bazarov and Kirsanov, whose dispute unfolds on the pages of the work, are characters with different views from each other. These are people of different backgrounds.
The main reason for the confrontation between the two heroes is the complete opposite of judgment on all issues: moral, political, spiritual.
used by the author
In order to emphasize the contrast of his characters, the author uses techniques that show their complete difference from each other. He achieves this by describing the appearance of the characters, manner of dressing, and behavioral characteristics. We can easily imagine Bazarov: impetuous, sharp, fast, rude, with red hands, dressed in a robe. He always says what he thinks.
Pavel Petrovich, on the contrary, is elegant, slender, “thoroughbred”. Kirsanov's gestures are full of nobility and imagery. His hands are beautiful, with pink nails.
The writer’s manner of behavior alone prepares us for the fact that disputes between Bazarov and Pavel Kirsanov will certainly take place.
The attitude of the heroes towards the aristocracy
So, the attitude of the two heroes to different moments of life is fundamentally different from each other.
Bazarov and Kirsanov, whose disputes form a significant part of the novel, certainly have different attitudes towards the nobility.
Pavel Petrovich defines the aristocracy as the main force contributing to the transformation of life, Kirsanov chooses liberal reforms.
Evgeny Bazarov sees the inability of the aristocracy to be active. In his eyes, nobles cannot bring any benefit to social development.
Heroes debate about nihilism
The dispute between Bazarov and Kirsanov certainly touches on the topic of nihilism. The characters see his role in the life of society differently. For Pavel Petrovich, nihilists are unprincipled impudents and cynics who do not respect social norms and values. Bazarov is a real nihilist. For him, only what is useful is important; he considers revolutionary changes necessary. There are no principles for Evgeniy.
Debates about the common people
Bazarov and Kirsanov, whose disputes permeate the entire novel, perceive the position of the people in society differently.
Pavel Petrovich, who has no idea how a simple peasant lives, is touched by his patriarchy. Bazarov finds the people ignorant, poorly informed about their own rights. For Kirsanov, the life of peasants, proceeding according to the same orders that were established by their distant ancestors, is completely natural and correct. Bazarov sees the darkness and ignorance of the common people.
It was not without reason that the heroes had such different opinions about the life of peasants. By his origin, Evgeny is a commoner, a hard worker, he understands the common people well. Pavel Petrovich comes from a noble family, completely far from peasant life. The folk faith that Kirsanov admires so much is defined by Bazarov as superstition.
The inability of the heroes to find a compromise and constant contradictions led to a duel between them.
Arguments about art and nature
Bazarov and Kirsanov, whose disputes do not bypass even art, define its place in human life in different ways. Bazarov sees no point in reading fiction; nature is a resource for him. Kirsanov, on the contrary, appreciates art and perceives nature as its unique component.
The origin of the disputes between Bazarov and Kirsanov
Bazarov and Kirsanov, whose disputes are an integral part of Turgenev’s immortal work, have a certain nature. Evgeniy considers Pavel Petrovich a worthless person leading a useless life. Kirsanov’s ambition was hurt by this attitude, because he always considered himself a noble, active person. For this, Pavel Petrovich hates Bazarov. Most likely, it is thanks to this strong feeling that the characters argue throughout the entire work. It is the awareness of the meaninglessness of his own existence that forces Kirsanov to enter into a dialogue with Evgeniy.
Disputes between Bazarov and Kirsanov were conducted on a variety of issues, they concerned education, public duty, and religion. Bazarov is an opponent of outdated foundations and culture. He advocates the destruction of previous ideals and active revolutionary actions. Kirsanov adheres to the “principles” he learned long ago.
These two characters are completely opposite to each other. When defending their ideas, they go to extremes.
Bazarov and Kirsanov argue, but forget about the truth, which can be revealed if you listen to your opponent even a little. The meaning of the dispute for them is in the dispute itself. It is symbolic that Bazarov, the personification of materialism, dies at the end of the novel. During his illness, Kirsanov reconsiders his own views on life.
Literature lesson in the technology of “critical thinking”.
General didactic goals: To create conditions for awareness and comprehension of the content of Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”, to promote understanding of the connection of new material with the life experience of students.
Type of training session: a lesson in “discovering” new knowledge - a lesson in learning new material and primary consolidation.
Technology: “critical thinking.”
Triune didactic goal:
- Educational aspect : create conditions for identifying the main “points” of the ideological dispute between the heroes of the novel.
- Developmental aspect : to promote the formation of analytical and creative thinking, intellectual skills, generalization, the ability to highlight the main thing, pose questions, the development of students’ research skills, the development of speech skills, and the skills of forming their own point of view.
- Educational aspect : promote familiarization with the cultural heritage and the process of spiritual development of students; fostering a culture of mental work; formation of personal communicative qualities (cooperation, ability to listen to the interlocutor, express one’s point of view).
A lesson in critical thinking technology consists of three stages:
- Call(insert). At this stage, the previous experience is updated and the problem is identified.
- Understanding. At this stage, contact with new information occurs and its comparison with existing experience. Attention is focused on finding answers to previously raised questions. Attention is drawn to the ambiguities that arise in the process of working on the material.
- Reflection. At this stage, there is a holistic comprehension and generalization of the information received, analysis of the entire process of studying the material, development of one’s own attitude to the material being studied, and possible re-problematization of it.
Predicted result.
Students will independently identify the main positions in the ideological dispute between “fathers” and “sons.” Based on the knowledge gained, they will deduce the main problem in the novel.
Forms of student work: steam room, group, frontal, individual.
Forms of control: listening, mutual control, self-control.
Equipment: computer, video projector, presentation, handouts (tables, diagrams).
Progress of the lesson.
- Challenge (slide 1) Teacher: Today we continue our acquaintance with I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.” Analyzing the first chapters of the novel, you came to the conclusion that the work is built on conflict.
Let's find synonyms for this word. (Duel, duel, clash) (slide 2) The problem of contradictions, conflicts between generations and various social groups of society was, is and will be relevant at all times. In the mid-19th century, on the eve of the abolition of serfdom in Russia, ideological disputes between liberals and revolutionary democrats, aristocrats and commoners sharply intensified. Turgenev talks about this in his novel.
Frontal survey
So which of the novel's heroes opposes each other? (Bazarov and P.P. Kirsanov)
What are these people called? (antipodes)
Define this term.
Slide No. 3
Antipode - a person who is opposite to someone in beliefs, properties, tastes (Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language by S.I. Ozhegov, p. 26)
Name the most famous antipodes in Russian literature (Chatsky and Molchalin from Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”, Grinev and Shvabrin from Pushkin’s novel “The Captain’s Daughter”, Oblomov and Stolz from Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”)
Teacher: Most often, learning the typology of such people, we conduct a comparative analysis of their images, i.e. We give them a comparative description. Let's remember how the comparative characteristics are constructed.
Slide No. 4 (comparative characteristics diagram)
Checking homework
Teacher: At home, you have already begun to compare two opponents in the novel - E. Bazarov and P. Kirsanov, working in four groups and filling out the proposed table.
Slide No. 5
Comparative characteristics of the heroes of the novel
E. Bazarov | P.P. Kirsanov |
|
1. Origin, social affiliation | ||
2. Portrait | ||
4. Philosophical, socio-political views, moral position | ||
5. Attitude towards love | ||
6. Lifestyle, interests | ||
7. Attitude towards each other |
The answer of the first group, which found common features among the heroes.
1.Strong personalities ( slide number 6 portraits of heroes): always confident in their rightness, both do not succumb to the influence of others, are able to subjugate others.
2. Boundless pride, inability to listen to the opinions of opponents in disputes.
3. Mutual enmity: complete rejection of the opponent’s views and actions.
The answer of the second group is about the origin and social affiliation of the heroes.
1. P.P. Kirsanov - nobleman, aristocrat, son of a general, retired guards officer, liberal-conservative.
2. E. Bazarov - the son of a military doctor who had peasant roots (“my grandfather plowed the land” and a small noblewoman, a student at the Faculty of Medicine at St. Petersburg University, a commoner, a nihilist democrat.
The answer of the third group is about the appearance of the heroes.
1. Bazarov is a “tall man in a long robe with tassels.” The face is “long and thin, with a wide forehead, a flat top, pointed nose downwards, large greenish eyes and drooping sand-colored sideburns... enlivened by a calm smile and expressing self-confidence and intelligence.” He has "naked red hands."
2. P. P. Kirsanov - in his appearance there is gloss and panache: “a dark English suit, a fashionable low tie and patent leather ankle boots.” The appearance of Pavel Petrovich, as the author emphasizes, is “elegant and thoroughbred.” The contrast between him and Bazarov immediately catches the eye, but it is even more noticeable when Pavel Petrovich takes his beautiful hand with long pink nails out of his pants pocket.
The fourth group's answer is about the peculiarities of the characters' speech.
1. Important for revealing the images of the characters in the novel is their speech characteristics. Pavel Petrovich constantly uses French expressions in conversation, his speech is strictly refined, but it hurts the ear that he often distorts Russian words in a foreign manner (principles and other examples). Evgeny speaks simply and artlessly, without thinking about giving his speech harmony and grace; his speech is common, with the frequent use of sayings and aphorisms (examples).
Teacher: Yes, there are many differences between the heroes, but perhaps the most important thing that makes them irreconcilable opponents is the ideological and ideological positions of each. In the comparative description we have come to the fourth point, read it (Philosophical, socio-political views, moral position).
- When does the difference between these views become clear? (in disputes).
- We will talk about these disputes today. Let's formulate the topic of the lesson together.
Slide number 7 (lesson topic).
“Ideological disputes between “fathers” and “children” in I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.” The relationship between E. Bazarov and P. P. Kirsanov.”
Teacher: I propose to take as an epigraph the words of the literary critic Vaclav Vatslavovich Vorovsky. How do you understand it? Will it help us formulate the goals and objectives of the lesson? (read the epigraph and comment). The goal is to identify the main “points” of the ideological dispute between the heroes of the novel.
Slide No. 8 (epigraph) The two generations compared by Turgenev in his work diverge not so much because some were “fathers” and others were “children,” but because “fathers” and “children,” due to circumstances, became exponents of different, opposing ideas eras, they represented different social positions: the old nobility and aristocracy and the young revolutionary-democratic intelligentsia. Thus, this purely psychological conflict develops into deep social antagonism. V.V.VorovskyTeacher: We have come to the analysis of the 10th chapter of the novel, where an open ideological conflict takes place between E. Bazarov and P. Kirsanov, a nihilist and an aristocrat.
2.Comprehension.
A) Cluster.To identify the main lines of the dispute, Vyacheslav Naumenko compiled a cluster to help us.
art |
B ) A table that is filled in as the lesson progresses.
Slide No. 10
B) Work in groups. Each group is invited to answer questions and discuss these issues in the group (slide No. 11)
- What questions would you ask the participants in the dispute?
- Why Kirsanov P.P. heading towards a collision?
- Why will none of the parties to the dispute give up their positions?
- What problems is the author trying to solve in this dispute?
Slide No. 12 (about the nobility)
The first line of argument.
The first thought of the dispute, which arose by chance, was important for both Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich. It was a dispute about the aristocracy and its principles. Chapter 8 – read the passage, comment on who won the argument?
Expected result
Pavel Petrovich sees the main social force in aristocrats. The significance of aristocracy, in his opinion, is that it once gave freedom in England, and that aristocrats have a highly developed sense of self-esteem and self-respect. Their self-respect is important because society is built on the individual. Bazarov breaks down this seemingly harmonious system with simple arguments. The conversation that the aristocracy gave England freedom - “Old Song”, a lot has changed after the seventeenth century, so Pavel Petrovich’s reference cannot serve as an argument. The belief that aristocrats are the basis of the public good is completely shattered by Bazarov’s apt remarks that the aristocracy is of no use to anyone, their main occupation is doing nothing (“sitting with folded hands”). They only care about themselves, about their appearance. Under these conditions, their dignity and self-respect look like empty words. Aristocratism is a useless word. In idleness and empty chatter, Bazarov sees the basic political principle of the entire noble society, living at the expense of others.
What is the outcome of this dispute?
Pavel Petrovich “turned pale” and did not start talking about aristocracy anymore. - A subtle psychological detail of Turgenev, conveying Pavel Petrovich’s defeat in this dispute.
Second line of argument. Slide No. 13
The second line of dispute is about the principles of nihilists. Let's read an excerpt from the text. Pavel Petrovich has not yet laid down his arms and does not want to discredit new people for being unprincipled. “Why are you acting?” he asks. And it turns out that nihilists have principles, they have beliefs.
What are the principles of nihilists, what do they reject?
Expected result
Nihilists act deliberately, based on the principle of usefulness of activity for society. They deny the social system, that is, autocracy, religion, this is the meaning of the word “ALL”. Bazarov notes that the freedom that the government is trying to achieve is unlikely to be of any use; This phrase contains a hint of impending reforms. Bazarov does not accept reform as a means of changing the social situation. Denial is perceived by new people as activity, not chatter. These statements by Bazarov can be called revolutionary. Turgenev himself understood Bazarov's nihilism as revolutionary.
What is Kirsanov’s attitude to this position of Bazarov?
Later in this dispute, Pavel Petrovich stands for the preservation of the old order. He is afraid to imagine the destruction of “everything” in society. He agrees to make only minor changes in combining the foundations of the existing system, to adapt to new conditions, as his brother does. They are not reactionaries, they are liberals compared to Bazarov.
Other groups answer who is right.
The third line of dispute about the Russian people. Slide No. 14
How do Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov imagine the character of the Russian people? Read and comment.
Expected result
According to Pavel Petrovich, the Russian people are patriarchal, sacredly value traditions, and cannot live without religion. These Slavophile views (with a lifestyle in the English way) speak of reactionaryness. He is touched by the backwardness of the people and sees this as the key to the salvation of society.
The situation of the people causes Bazarov not tenderness, but anger. He sees trouble in all areas of people's life. Bazarov turns out to be far-sighted and condemns what will later become the creed of populism. It is no coincidence that he says that the Russian people do not need useless words like “liberalism” and “progress”. Bazarov has a sober attitude towards the people. He sees the lack of education and superstition of the people ( read a passage about superstition). He despises these shortcomings. However, Bazarov sees not only the downtrodden state, but also the discontent of the people.
Their speech can serve as clear evidence of the hero’s connection with the people. Bazarov's speech is characterized by simplicity, accuracy and precision of expressions, an abundance of folk proverbs and sayings. Pavel Petrovich does not use proverbs in his speech, distorts words, and uses many foreign words.
Other groups answer who is right.
Fourth line of argument. Slide No. 15
The fourth direction in the dispute is the difference in views on art and nature.
Pavel Petrovich believes that nihilism has captured the field of art. Read this episode. Is Pavel Petrovich right when he says this about the artists of the sixties?
Expected result
Yes and no. He is right in understanding that the new Peredvizhniki artists are abandoning frozen academic traditions and blindly following old models, including Raphael. He is wrong in that the Peredvizhniki artists, in his opinion, absolutely abandoned traditions. New artists are “powerless and sterile to the point of disgusting.”
Bazarov denies both old and new art: “Raphael is not worth a penny, and they are no better than him.”
Teacher: Who is Bazarov's opponent in the dispute? How is the fallacy of both Bazarov’s and Pavel Petrovich’s ideas about art shown?
It is not Pavel Petrovich who is Bazarov’s opponent in this dispute, but Nikolai Petrovich.
He is especially favorable to art, but does not dare to enter into an argument. Turgenev himself does this, showing a sense of the organic influence of Pushkin’s poems, spring nature, the sweet melody of playing the cello.
Teacher: How does Bazarov look at nature?
He does not deny it at all, but sees in it only the source and field of human activity. Bazarov has a master's view of nature, but it is also one-sided. By denying the role of nature as an eternal source of beauty that influences humans, Bazarov impoverishes human life.
Teacher: This line of dispute is resolved already in the 11th chapter, in which landscapes appear.
G) Summing up the lesson.
Are there any winners in this debate? Did the heroes want to find the truth or were they just sorting things out?
Teacher's word:
Turgenev believed (like the creators of ancient tragedies) that a truly tragic conflict arises when both warring parties are to a certain extent right... Does the text of the novel confirm this assumption? (Yes, it confirms. Both heroes turn out to be right on some issues and have false ideas about others. We cannot agree with Bazarov’s views on art and love, with his materialistic approach to nature. The “Fathers” in the novel hold different views Their position is closer to us.
But how can one accept the way of life, the primitiveness of the interests of the Kirsanov brothers? In this, Evgeny Bazarov acts as the complete opposite of them.)
I.S. himself Turgenev naturally considered himself to be among the generation of “fathers.” When drawing his hero, he wanted to show both the positive and negative qualities of people of modern times. He admired their desire for progress, the realism of their views on reality, etc. But the writer is not trying to erase the life and work of the “fathers” generation. By drawing the best representatives of this camp, Turgenev tries to convey to the reader the idea of the important role of “old people” in the past and present of Russia. The writer, through his own example, understands the difficulty of accepting the views and beliefs of modern times. Yes, it is necessary to change life, to develop the natural sciences, to stop denying the obvious aspects of reality, but, at the same time, one cannot deny all the experience accumulated by mankind, art, religion, the spiritual side of the life of society. He is trying to convey to the reader the idea of finding some kind of compromise between generations.
3. Reflection. Slide No. 16
Writing a syncwine
The first line is the key word
Second line – three adjectives for this word
Third line - three verbs
Fourth line – Key phrase that reveals the character’s state or meaning
The fifth line is one word.
This mental operation allows you to find out the level of understanding.
Conflict.
Strict, irreconcilable, hostile.
Quarreling, revealing, divorcing.
The truth is discovered in a dispute.
"Fathers" and "sons".
Different, irreconcilable, refuting.
They argue, they say, they don’t accept.
They are so different. They don't understand each other.
River banks.
Grading for the lesson.
- Homework. Complete the compilation of comparative characteristics of the heroes according to the table in groups (1 - No. 5, 2 - No. 6, 3 - No. 7). The fourth group analyzes an episode of a “hot” dispute between opponents, i.e. their real duel in chapter 24 “Duel”).
An approximate version of the compiled table
Lines of dispute | Views of Pavel Petrovich | Bazarov's views. |
On the attitude towards the nobility | Pavel Petrovich sees the main social force in aristocrats. The significance of aristocracy, in his opinion, is that it once gave freedom in England, and that aristocrats have a highly developed sense of self-esteem and self-respect. Their self-respect is important since society is built on the individual | The conversation that the aristocracy gave England freedom - “Old Song”, a lot has changed after the seventeenth century, so Pavel Petrovich’s reference cannot serve as an argument. The aristocracy is of no use to anyone; their main occupation is doing nothing (“sitting with folded hands”). They only care about themselves, about their appearance. Under these conditions, their dignity and self-respect look like empty words. Aristocratism is a useless word. In idleness and empty chatter, Bazarov sees the basic political principle of the entire noble society, living at the expense of others. |
On the principle of activity of nihilists | Pavel Petrovich stands for preserving the old order. He is afraid to imagine the destruction of “everything” in society. He agrees to make only minor changes in combining the foundations of the existing system, to adapt to new conditions, as his brother does. They are not reactionaries, they are liberals | Nihilists act deliberately, based on the principle of usefulness of activity for society. They deny the social system, that is, autocracy, religion, this is the meaning of the word “ALL”. Bazarov notes that the freedom that the government is trying to achieve is unlikely to be of any use; This phrase contains a hint of impending reforms. Bazarov does not accept reform as a means of changing the social situation. Denial is perceived by new people as activity, not chatter. |
About attitude towards the people | The Russian people are patriarchal, they sacredly value traditions, and cannot live without religion. These Slavophile views (with a lifestyle in the English way) speak of reactionaryness. He is touched by the backwardness of the people and sees this as the key to the salvation of society. | The situation of the people causes Bazarov not tenderness, but anger. He sees trouble in all areas of people's life. Bazarov turns out to be far-sighted and condemns what will later become the creed of populism. It is no coincidence that he says that the Russian people do not need useless words like “liberalism” and “progress”. Bazarov has a sober attitude towards the people. He sees the lack of education and superstition of the people. He despises these shortcomings. However, Bazarov sees not only the downtrodden state, but also the discontent of the people. |
About views on art |
In Chapter 10, an open ideological conflict occurs between Bazarov and the Kirsanov brothers. Let's sort out their dispute.
What do you think dominates the chapter: description, narration, dialogue?
(The dialogue of this chapter and most of the others is a characteristic feature of the novel’s composition.)
How can you explain so much dialogue in the novel?
(A large number of disputes are due to the content of the novel. The presence of an acute conflict gives the work drama, and the predominance in the manner of presentation of dialogues with author’s remarks, reminiscent of stage directions, speaks of the well-known stage nature of the novel; that is why the novel was dramatized many times.)
(Main lines of dispute:
- about the attitude towards the nobility, aristocracy and its principles;
- about the principle of activity of nihilists;
- about the attitude towards the people;
- about views on art and nature.)
The first line of argument.
The first thought of the dispute, which arose by chance, was important for both Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich. It was a dispute about the aristocracy and its principles. Chapter 8 - read the passage by role, comment; who won the argument?
(From this dialogue we see that Pavel Petrovich sees the main social force in aristocrats. The significance of aristocracy, in his opinion, is that it once gave England freedom, that aristocrats have a highly developed sense of self-esteem and self-respect; their self-respect important, since society is built on the individual. Bazarov breaks this seemingly harmonious system with simple arguments. The conversation that the aristocracy gave England freedom - the old song has changed a lot after the 17th century, so this reference by Pavel Petrovich cannot serve as an argument that the aristocrats. - the basis of the public good, are completely destroyed by Bazarov’s apt remarks that aristocrats are of no use to anyone, and their main occupation is doing nothing (“they sit with their hands folded”). look like empty words. Aristocratism is a useless word. In idleness and empty chatter, Bazarov sees the main political principle of the entire noble society, living at the expense of others.)
What is the outcome of this dispute?
(Pavel Petrovich “turned pale” and did not start talking about aristocracy anymore - a subtle psychological detail of Turgenev, conveying Pavel Petrovich’s defeat in this dispute.)
Second line of argument.
The second line of dispute is about the principles of the nihilists. Let's read an excerpt from the text. Pavel Petrovich has not yet laid down his arms and wants to discredit new people for being unprincipled. “Why are you acting?” - he asks. And it turns out that nihilists have principles, they have beliefs.
What are the principles of nihilists, what do they reject?
(Nihilists act deliberately, based on the principle of usefulness of activity for society. They deny the social system, that is, autocracy, religion, this is the meaning of the word “everything.” Bazarov notes that the freedom about which the government is busy is unlikely to be of any use; this phrase contains a hint of the reforms being prepared. Bazarov does not accept reform as a means of changing the social situation. Denial is perceived by new people as activity, not chatter. These statements of Bazarov can be called revolutionary. Turgenev himself understood Bazarov’s nihilism as revolutionary.)
But what shortcomings can be seen in Bazarov’s views?
(He does not consider it his business to build on a destroyed sheet. Bazarov has no positive program.)
What is Kirsanov’s attitude to this position of Bazarov?
(Later in this dispute, Pavel Petrovich stands for the preservation of the old order. He is afraid to imagine the destruction of everything in society. He agrees to make only minor changes when combining the foundations of the existing system, to adapt to new conditions, as his brother does. They are not reactionaries, they liberals compared to Bazarov.)
Are there like-minded people of Bazarov in the novel?
(Sitnikov and Kukshina consider themselves nihilists.)
What do we know about these heroes?
(Sitnikov is busy paying off his father; Kukshina is “really a landowner,” she says about herself; she regularly manages her estate.
Both heroes accepted only the external form of nihilism. "Down with Macaulay!" - Sitnikov thunders. But he stopped immediately. “Yes, I don’t deny them,” he said. (Macaulay is an English bourgeois historian who defends the interests of the big bourgeoisie). So briefly Turgenev shows the absurdity of this denial. Everything about Kukshina is unnatural. And behind this fakeness everything went ugly and gone.)
(Turgenev treats Bazarov with respect and with irony, disdain for Sitnikov and Kukshina, because Bazarov’s convictions are deeper and sincere, but for these people it is false. Kukshina is a caricature of those who dress up as new people. People like her cannot be real students of Bazarov, since they do not have the ideological basis of nihilism, Sitnikov and Kukshina are imitators of Bazarov, emphasizing the seriousness, sincerity, and depth of the true nihilist Bazarov.)
The third line of dispute about the Russian people.
How do Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov imagine the character of the Russian people? Read and comment.
(According to Pavel Petrovich, the Russian people are patriarchal, they sacredly value traditions, and cannot live without religion. These Slavophile views (with a lifestyle in the English way) speak of reactionism. He is belittled by the backwardness of the people and in this he sees the key to the salvation of society.
The situation of the people causes Bazarov not tenderness, but anger. He sees trouble in all areas of people's life. Bazarov turns out to be far-sighted and condemns what will later become the creed of populism. It is no coincidence that he says that the Russian people do not need useless words like “liberalism” and “progress”.
Bazarov has a sober attitude towards the people. He sees the lack of education and superstition of the people. He despises these shortcomings. However, Bazarov sees not only the downtrodden state, but also the discontent of the people.)
Whom are the peasants most likely to recognize? prove it with text.
(Bazarov got up early in the morning (not like a bar), speaks to the servants without a lordly tone, although he makes fun of us; Dunyasha could not help but be attracted by the fact that Bazarov addressed her as “you” and asked her about her health. Fenechka feels at home with Bazarov also freely. Pavel Petrovich does not know how to talk to peasants, he himself admits this. For him, peasants are dirty men, without whom, however, one cannot do.
N.P., forced to communicate more with the peasants, is more democratic, he calls the valet “brother,” but the ordinary people themselves treat the Kirsanovs as gentlemen, and they are afraid of Pavel Petrovich.)
Their speech can serve as clear evidence of the hero’s connection with the people. What can you note in the language of Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich?
(Bazarov’s speech is characterized by simplicity, accuracy and precision of expressions, an abundance of folk proverbs, sayings (the song is sung; we have heard this song many times...; that’s the way to go; Moscow burned down from a penny candle). Pavel Petrovich does not use proverbs in his speech , distorts words (efto), uses a lot of foreign words.)
Fourth line of argument.
The fourth direction in the dispute is the differences in views on art and nature.
Exercise.
Pavel Petrovich, defeated in everything else, found a weak point in Bazarov and decides to take revenge. He believes that nihilism, “this infection,” has already spread far and captured the field of art. Read it. Is Pavel Petrovich right when he says this about the artists of the sixties?
(Both yes and no. He is right in understanding that the new Peredvizhniki artists are abandoning frozen academic traditions, from blindly following old models, including Raphael. Pavel Petrovich is wrong in that the Itinerant artists, as he believes , absolutely abandoned tradition. He says that the new artists are “powerless and sterile to the point of disgusting.”
Bazarov denies both old and new art: “Raphael is not worth a penny, and they are no better than him.”)
Remember what else Bazarov says about art in other chapters? How can you evaluate this position?
(Bazarov does not know art well, he does not engage in art not because he could not, but because he was only interested in science, since he saw strength in science. “A decent chemist is 20 times better than any poet.” He does not know Pushkin and denies This was typical of part of the democratic youth of the 60s, who preferred the study of science. But Pavel Petrovich cannot judge art, having read about 5-6 French books in his youth and some in English by Russian contemporary artists. he only knows by hearsay.)
Who is Bazarov's opponent in the dispute? How is the fallacy of Bazarov’s and P.P.’s ideas about art shown?
(It is not Pavel Petrovich who is Bazarov’s opponent in this dispute, but Nikolai Petrovich. He is especially favorable to art, but does not dare to enter into a dispute. Turgenev himself does this, showing a sense of the organic influence of Pushkin’s poems, spring nature, the sweet melody of playing the cello.)
How does Bazarov look at nature?
(He does not deny it at all, but sees in it only the source and field of human activity. Bazarov has a master’s view of nature, but it is also one-sided. By denying the role of nature as an eternal source of beauty affecting man, Bazarov impoverishes human life. But Arkady and Nikolai Petrovich does not argue with him, but objects in the form of timid questions.)
How is this line of argument resolved?
(In chapter 11, landscapes appear. All the signs of the evening affirm the existence of eternal beauty. This is how the last line of the dispute is resolved.)
V. Lesson summary
Consolidating knowledge on the topic “Ideological differences between Bazarov and the elder Kirsanovs” can be carried out in the form of a survey.
Highlight the main issues of the dispute. Is there a connection between them?
Prove that aristocracy is a “sterile principle.”
Do nihilists have principles? Prove it.
Is Turgenev right in calling Bazarov a revolutionary? What is the hero’s attitude towards reforms?
What is the Kirsanovs’ position in relation to reforms? What is the weak side of Bazarov’s views?
How do the Bazarovs and Kirsanovs treat the people? Whose views are progressive?
Is Bazarov right in his denial of art? Why does he have such views?
Does Bazarov feel the beauty of nature? What does he base his attitude towards her on?
Do the Kirsanovs feel defeated?
Homework
Write out quotes from the novel that explain the attitude of the main characters (N.P., P.P., Arkady, Bazarov, Odintsova, Katya, Fenechka, Princess R.) to love and its place in a person’s life.
V. Lesson summary
Consolidating knowledge on the topic “Ideological differences between Bazarov and the elder Kirsanovs” can be carried out in the form of a survey.
Highlight the main issues of the dispute. Is there a connection between them?
Prove that aristocracy is a “sterile principle.”
Do nihilists have principles? Prove it.
Is Turgenev right in calling Bazarov a revolutionary? What is the hero’s attitude towards reforms?
What is the Kirsanovs’ position in relation to reforms? What is the weak side of Bazarov’s views?
How do the Bazarovs and Kirsanovs treat the people? Whose views are progressive?
Is Bazarov right in his denial of art? Why does he have such views?
Does Bazarov feel the beauty of nature? What does he base his attitude towards her on?
Do the Kirsanovs feel defeated?
Homework
Write out quotes from the novel that explain the attitude of the main characters (N.P., P.P., Arkady, Bazarov, Odintsova, Katya, Fenechka, Princess R.) to love and its place in a person’s life.
Lesson 51. Bazarov and Odintsova (chap. 13-19, 25-27)
Objective of the lesson: reveal the essence of the characters’ relationship, understand what the author wanted to say when he experienced the main character’s love for a woman.
Epigraph:
“I’ve already spent too long in a sphere that’s foreign to me. Flying fish can stay in the air for a while, but must soon splash into the water; let me plop down into my element.”
I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”, ch. 26.
Lesson progress
I. The teacher's word
The relationship between E. Bazarov and A. Odintsova is one of the lines of general conflict. What is the purpose of this conversation? To reveal in the clash between Bazarov and the cold lady Odintsova the alienness of their characters, the deep internal differences that led to the unhappy outcome. We need to find out what kind of relationship Bazarov has with Odintsova and why. How did Bazarov pass the “test of love”? In any Turgenev novel, the main character is led through love for a woman, through the most personal of all human feelings. Turgenev did this not only for the completeness and versatility of the image. In his novels, love is one of the main moments in revealing the character of the hero. The inseparable unity of personal and social themes forms the basis of Turgenev's novel.
Rudin's love for Natalya in the novel "Rudin" made it possible to reveal an entire era in the life of Russian cultural society, the era of domination and fall of people of the Rudin type - enlighteners, but not transformers. The ability to light Natalia's heart and the inability to fight for love. Lavretsky’s love for Liza, also sad, spoke of the impossibility of happiness for these two good people when religious beliefs still dominated in people’s minds. Compared to previous novels in Fathers and Sons, the love plot does not run through the entire novel, but occupies only one of the stages of development of the action. We have already encountered Bazarov's statements about love.
How does he approach this feeling? Read (chapter 7).
(Bazarov has a vulgar, simplified approach to love. At the same time, criticizing Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov correctly says that you cannot put your life only on the card of female love, and even more so you cannot become limp from failure and turn into a person incapable of anything But this is still theoretical reasoning.)
II. Conversation. Commenting
What are your first impressions of Anna Sergeevna Odintsova?
(For the first time, Odintsova appears at the governor’s ball. She appears to Arkady in some kind of regal aura. Indeed, she is unusually beautiful: “her naked arms lay beautifully along her slender figure; light fuchsia branches fell beautifully from her shiny hair onto her sloping shoulders.” K Moreover, she “struck” Arkady “with the dignity of her posture,” but most importantly, in her entire appearance and behavior there was a deep calm. As a result, the resulting chain of characteristics of Anna Sergeevna - calm, politely sympathetic, condescending, cold, strict - the law leads the reader to the idea. about her possible indifference to everything that happens around her.)
What feelings do Bazarov and Arkady experience when they are next to Odintsova?
(Arkady is imbued with frank “happiness to be in her proximity, to talk to her, looking into her eyes, into her beautiful forehead, into her whole sweet, important and intelligent face.” At the same time, in the presence of Anna Sergeevna, he experiences inexplicable timidity, reverence and “graceful humility,” like a young page next to his mistress.
As for Bazarov, his open cynicism in relation to Odintsova does not look anything unexpected for the natural scientist (“What kind of figure is this? She doesn’t look like other women”; “... cold? That’s the very taste. After all, you love ice cream?"). However, finding himself next to Odintsova, Bazarov suddenly begins to feel embarrassed. In the hotel room where she invited friends, he, unsuccessfully trying to hide his condition with swagger and verbosity, ended up “blushing” when he heard an invitation to visit Nikolskoye, the estate of the “duchess,” as he dubbed Odintsova. Already on the street, Bazarov continues to make fun of Anna Sergeevna’s “rich body,” which, in his opinion, can be placed “even now in the anatomical theater.” But it is he who also owns the absolutely accurate psychological characteristics of the heroine - her coldness (“Look how she froze herself!”) and royalty (“She should only wear a train behind her and a crown on her head”), associated with Odintsova’s above-mentioned indifference. And Bazarov, as it turns out, will need her warmth and humanity.)
Does Bazarov remain the same in Nikolskoye as he was before he arrived there?
(In Nikolsky, the hero continues to make jokes, but in relation to himself: he - “the future doctor, and the doctor’s son, and the deacon’s grandson” - is invited to visit the “duchess”! However, Bazarov is not far from the truth regarding his assessment of his own person.)
Assignments.
1. Tell about A. Odintsova (chap. 14-15).
2. Tell the story of Bazarov’s love for Odintsova.
(From the very beginning, there is little in common between Bazarov and Odintsova: she is a “duchess”, he is a “doctor”; she is cold and serene, he, as the love story for this woman will show, is not indifferent and passionate.
How difficult it will be for him to feel for Odintsova! Something not Bazarovsky begins to happen in him: “something else has taken possession of him... which he never allowed.” Odintsova belongs to those people who do not know anxiety: she was worried “occasionally”, and her blood was “quietly rolling”: just some kind of “fish” woman! The hero is on the verge of a great personal drama. But Bazarov did not have the strength to leave this woman. He loved her, and hid his love, and dreamed... of tenderness!
At the same time, Turgenev’s hero understands a lot about Odintsova. So, he does not believe that she is “capable of getting carried away,” except out of curiosity.
Anna Sergeevna really “was curious”: in her relationship with Bazarov, she wanted to “test him” and “test herself.” But in the end Odintsova got scared. It is no coincidence that in the scene of the characters’ explanation, Turgenev repeats the word “fright” twice. Perhaps she was afraid of Bazarov’s unbridledness, the unexpected coarseness of his feelings? This is how they try to explain the hero’s failed love. Although Bazarov’s spontaneity can be regarded as the exact opposite: as a manifestation of his deep sincerity.
Ultimately, Bazarov will be right not only that this woman “frozen herself,” but that she is undoubtedly a “queen.”
Why did Odintsova decide “not to joke about it”?
(The basis of her life is tranquility. Bazarov’s intervention in her life would mean the end of this tranquility).
Could Odintsova go with Bazarov into his “bitter, tart, free life”?
(Bazarov is a nihilist, was a man of a world alien to her. Politically, he was a person who did not believe in the fundamentals of life that seemed legitimate to her. In terms of social status, Bazarov came from the lower classes. In material terms, he was a poor man, a future doctor. She was not afraid the harshness of Bazarov’s expression of feelings. Even if she fell in love with him, she would not follow him into his “bitter life.”)
Why do you think Anna Sergeevna came to the dying Bazarov?
(Odintsova came to him, dying of cholera, just as royal persons visit cholera barracks and hospitals out of the highest generosity. She gave him a ritually dispassionate kiss befitting the situation and behavior of royal persons. And what is especially bitter, Bazarov understood everything correctly in Madame Odintsova’s behavior, greeting her appearance with the phrase: “This is royal.”)
III. Lesson summary
How has Bazarov changed during this time?
(It’s hard for him in this conflict. By position, he is defeated in it, but how strong and deeper in heart he looks in this story. Bazarov denied romance, but it appeared in him and adorned him).
Teacher's word.
The test of love becomes a milestone for the hero. Only love reveals in him a deep, significant, unusually powerful person in emotional experience, self-burning in his feelings and at the same time becoming even stronger. How much suffering Bazarov experiences during his last visit to Odintsova! Still secretly and reverently loving Anna Sergeevna, he at the same time understands that her farewell impulse is driven by pity for him! And therefore, he seems to rise above his own feelings in order to have the strength to say: “I am a poor man, but I have not yet accepted alms. Farewell and be healthy."
If it weren’t for the love that awakened emotional forces in Bazarov, how could the reader know how simultaneously convincing, heartfelt and passionate a nihilist can be in expressing his attitude towards his “fathers”: “Your nobleman brother cannot go beyond noble humility or noble boiling, but it's nothing. For example, you don’t fight - and you already imagine yourself to be great - but we want to fight. What! Our dust will eat into your eyes, our dirt will stain you, and you haven’t even grown up to us...”
In the loving Bazarov, a powerfully feeling soul awakens, concealing an abyss of passions, and therefore attracting to itself and becoming, as it were, a continuation of the elements of the night, a witness standing outside the window during his conversation with Odintsova.
But love not only reveals many things in Bazarov. At the same time, she brings him face to face with the world and opens this world to him.
Homework
Lesson option 51. “Duel of Evgeny Bazarov and Anna Odintsova” 1
Lesson objectives: analyze the changes that have occurred to the main character; reveal the essence of the characters’ relationships; understand why the author built the love line of the novel in this way.
Lesson progress
I. Introductory conversation
What is the reason for Bazarov and Arkady’s arrival at Odintsova’s estate?
The heroes spent 15 “monotonous” days on this estate. What are their activities and pastimes?
II. Work based on the text of the novel
Let us pay attention to the moment of D. Pisarev’s article about the fatal meeting of Evgeny with A. Odintsova: “Bazarov’s relationship with Odintsova ends with a strange scene happening between them. She calls him to a conversation about happiness and love, she, with the curiosity characteristic of cold and intelligent women, asks him what is happening in him, she pulls out of him a declaration of love, she pronounces his name with a shade of involuntary tenderness; then, when he, stunned by the sudden influx of sensations and new hopes, rushes to her and presses her to his chest, she jumps back with fear to the other end of the room and assures him that he misunderstood her, that he was mistaken.”
It's over. One of Bazarov’s principles: “If you like a woman, try to get some sense, but you can’t - well, don’t, turn away - the earth is not a wedge,” - in its first part it has outlived its usefulness! No matter how hard it was for Bazarov to realize, now he has nothing to do with Odintsova! “Bazarov leaves the room, and that’s the end of the relationship. He leaves the next day after this incident, then sees Anna Sergeevna twice, even stays with her together with Arkady, but for him and for her the past events turn out to be truly an irrevocable past, and they look at each other calmly and speak to each other in a tone reasonable and respectable people."
Is everything so calm in the relationship between Bazarov and Odintsova? Maybe there were some deep mental processes that led to Bazarov’s death?
What did his new visit to Odintsova’s estate mean for Bazarov? After all, there was a principle that determined the meaning of his life?
(Ch. 22, 25, 26).
(He violated this principle: he knew that he wouldn’t get any sense from Odintsova, but he still went to see her again; he loved her very much, so perhaps he flattered himself with the hope that he could be deceived in her coldness... suddenly she would turn out to be better and will love him too...).
Then we can say that he subjected his entire worldview to a cruel test: after all, once this one principle is “broken,” then what is the price for everything else? It was not easy for Bazarov to decide to visit Odintsova’s estate for the third time.
What happened during this meeting?
(Now Bazarov did not stay with Odintsova for long. But he would have been glad to live here longer, then he went. He realized that Odintsova would not change her attitude towards him.)
But why, after some phrase Bazarov said the next day after his arrival, Odintsova’s face “... alternately turned red and pale”? What's happened?
(Bazarov spoke about the possibility of an engagement between Katya and Arkady. She was afraid that he had revealed her cunning, and she felt ashamed, which is why her face alternately turned red and pale.)
All this is confirmed by a kind of “invisible” duel between Odintsova and Bazarov, which began after his “unraveling” words about the possibility of Katya and Arkady’s engagement. Odintsova suddenly began to lament the love between him and Katya that she had not recognized in time (before Arkady’s letter). “How come I didn’t see anything? This surprises me! - she says with an exclamation. Then he tries to laugh, but still turns away. And here Bazarov notes: “Today’s youth have become painfully cunning.”
Bazarov also starts laughing, at whom do you think?
How Odintsova needed it for Bazarov to stay! Even after his next “no!” and “no!” she still insists: “I am convinced that this is not the last time we will see each other.”
It is clear why Bazarov was so absent-minded in the subsequent chapters of the novel. It is impossible to believe that such a strong-willed, strong person like Bazarov could stupidly and accidentally get hurt! Now he was constantly thinking about something of his own: he, figuratively speaking, put the inviolability of his principles on the line when he went to Odintsova for the third time and suffered a crushing defeat. That’s why he couldn’t find a place for himself!.. That’s why he, like a wounded animal (and yet Katya calls him and Odintsova predators), went straight home to heal the wound.
So, it was Odintsova who inflicted a mortal wound on him. This is who turned out to be the main obstacle on the path of the Bazarovs: first learn to be at least outwardly attractive, learn to be cunning tricksters - then you will become immortal...
But if we are talking about cunning, then did Bazarov discover this trait in Odintsova?
Was it really possible to let Bazarov go after all this? Is it acceptable for one predator not to get even with another for causing inconvenience and disturbance? For temporary weakness and defenselessness?
Exercise.
Read the scene of the third meeting of the heroes.
Why did Odintsova still kiss the dying Bazarov, although she was afraid for herself? Was this just a farewell or a gesture of pity? But not love either...
(Bazarov himself asks her for this kiss. Bazarov, who still loves her just as much, demands her presence in order even in the last minutes of his life to prove to both himself and her that nothing can break him, that he is true to himself even now... And if she had not kissed him, he would have proved that he was still stronger than her. But Odintsova kissed him and did not allow him to triumph over herself again, as when she blushed and turned pale because she understood what it was. her last chance to establish her mental balance, disturbed by him. If we talk about Bazarov, then he, in turn, leaves Odintsova no chance of success: Blow on the dying lamp and let it go out... He died in the dark, and no one saw him weak - in his death throes...)
III. Lesson summary
This is the “duel” of the novel’s heroes on equal terms until the last minute. Who is stronger? Bazarov “stumbled” on Odintsova, but without Bazarov’s intrusion into her quiet life, she is doomed to passivity. The power of people like her will “sleep” until new Bazarovs appear.
How did Bazarov pass the test of love?
Is it possible to assume that if Bazarov were alive, his principles in relation to nature and art would remain unshakable?
Lesson 52. Bazarov and his parents
Objective of the lesson: understand what kind of relationship Bazarov has with his parents and why.
Lesson progress
I. Write an epigraph for the lesson
People like them
in our big world you can’t find fire during the day.
"Fathers and Sons". Bazarov about his parents.
II. Work on the topic of the lesson. Analytical conversation
Let's look at the chapters that depict the arrival of Bazarov and Arkady to Bazarov's parents, in their village, not far from Nikolskoye.
How do his father and mother treat Evgeniy and how are their feelings conveyed by the author?
(Turgenev shows with what great love Bazarov’s parents treat their son. The mother affectionately calls him “Enyushka”; she staggered from excitement and probably would have fallen if Bazarov had not supported her. Turgenev writes that old man Bazarov was breathing deeply and squinting more than before, because, probably, tears, etc. So, we see for our son, we feel this thanks to Turgenev’s skill, the power of his words: with laconic, extremely expressive details of the external behavior of the heroes, he shows their state of mind. Take at least a detail about. Chubuk, jumping between the fingers of his father’s trembling hands.)
Let's now try to figure out what these people are. Let's start with Vasily Ivanovich.
What can be said about him based on his conversation with those who arrived?
(a) Vasily Ivanovich is a very kind person. He treats peasants for free, although he has already refused to work as a doctor. He strives to expand his knowledge, reads medical journals, but he also has “Friend of Health” from 1855, that is, very old, since the action takes place in 1859, and even then it is not very readable, everything on the table is covered with dust. He talks about scientists and sciences, which Bazarov rejects, which he laughs at, and he does this to prove his education;
b) Vasily Ivanovich is progressive, he transfers his men to quitrent, although it is not profitable for him. He has few souls, only 22;
c) Vasily Ivanovich is a hospitable host, he greets Arkady with pleasure, offers him a comfortable room, albeit in an outbuilding;
d) Vasily Ivanovich likes to say that he denounces Bazarov: “He talks a lot.” He talks almost alone with the guests, they do not particularly support the conversation;
e) Vasily Ivanovich tries to prove his education, inserts words in French and Latin into his speech.)
When Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov speaks French, at least one word, Turgenev writes it in French, but here, when Vasily Ivanovich speaks French words, they are written in Russian letters. Why does the author do this?
(Vasily Ivanovich probably speaks French poorly, otherwise Turgenev, who has no random words, would not have appeared in this Russian-French saying).
What other interesting features of Vasily Ivanovich’s speech did you note?
(As a doctor, he sometimes uses Latin terms; instead of “died” he says “went to his forefathers”, instead of “bathhouse” - “outhouse”, instead of “house” - “bivouac”, instead of “acacia” - “trees beloved by Horace”; Arkady calls it “my beloved visitor,” that is, it sounds romantic sublime.)
What are the differences between the speech of father and son?
(Vasily Ivanovich strives to speak beautifully, solemnly, but it turns out funny. Ornateness and pompousness distinguish his speech from the simple and concrete, but apt speech of his son.)
What kind of person is Bazarov's father?
(This is really a very kind, nice person. Vasily Ivanovich is a man of work: he cultivates the garden with his own hands. He practices medicine selflessly. In the past, he was a brave man; he was awarded an order for his work in Bessarabia during the plague epidemic.)
What is Vasily Ivanovich’s attitude to science and modernity? Does he manage to get closer to his son in any way?
(In the field of science, he strives to keep up with the times. It would seem that the easiest way for him to establish contact with his son is in the field of medicine. Both of them are doctors. But everything that Vasily Ivanovich talks about is far from Bazarov’s contemporary science. He is proud, for example , by what he understands in phrenology, and this is a false science and at that time was infinitely outdated. Vasily Ivanovich’s knowledge of the sciences is combined with religiosity. He is sincerely devout and even invites the priest to serve a prayer service in honor of his son’s arrival, although he refers to the fact that. seems progressive compared to the activities of others, for example, giving the land “for share” (peasants must give half the harvest for the use of the land), is something other than a half-hearted measure. Good Vasily Ivanovich can flog a peasant for being a thief. not to half-hearted measures, but to radical revolutionary changes. Vasily Ivanovich is far from denying “everything.” This horrifies him no less than Pavel Petrovich.
Thus, with all his humanity, Vasily Ivanovich strives for progress, and positive personal qualities show that he is also a “retired” person, as Bazarov said about Nikolai Petrovich. But Turgenev paints Vasily Ivanovich with sympathy, albeit with some irony.)
Do you think Arina Vlasyevna could have been closer to her son? (End of Chapter 20).
(Arina Vlasyevna could not be a friend to her son, since she was superstitious and ignorant, she was afraid of frogs, she did not read books. She loved to eat, sleep and knew a lot about housekeeping. She did not understand politics; she knew that there are “gentlemen who must give orders, and simple people who must serve.” She is very kind and caring: she will not go to bed if her husband’s voice hurts;
Arina Vlasevna is a person of a different lifestyle than her son, but in the novel she is shown as an infinitely loving mother.)
What role did the parents play in raising their son? Let's analyze Arkady's conversation with Vasily Ivanovich (chapter 21).
(The paths of Bazarov and his parents diverged long ago. Feeling that their son was extraordinary, his parents gave him freedom in childhood. Perhaps, if Bazarov had been more with his father, there could have been more ideological understanding between them. But circumstances were such that Bazarov, in 3 years I visited my parents once.)
How does Evgeny Bazarov relate to his parents? Let's analyze Bazarov's conversation with Arkady about his parents and departure (chapter 20).
(Bazarov loves his parents, he directly says to Arkady: “I love you, Arkady!” - and this is a lot in his mouth. In the first moments of meeting his father, he looks at him with love: “Hey-hey! How, however, he turned gray, poor fellow "The kindness of his father is properly appreciated in him. Even seeing the limitations of his mother’s abilities, he agrees that she is a wonderful woman: “Yes, she is without cunning.” ); Bazarov cannot accept such a deaf life. Bazarov does not want to fight the little things in life, his task is to remake the foundations of life: “there will be no way to correct society and diseases.” at least it would upset them and would not bring any benefit.)
Can we talk about Bazarov's insensitivity?
(No. On the day of departure, he does not want to upset his parents. This is how a tragic conflict develops with his loved ones and those who love him. This conflict, which Bazarov finds himself in at home, speaks of one more thing - Turgenev wrote about this in a letter: “All true deniers... happened from comparatively kind parents. And this is an important meaning: this takes away from the activists, from the deniers, all the shadow of personal indignation, personal irritability. They follow their own path only because they are more sensitive to the demands of people’s life.” , the road is difficult, his life is bitter and thorny."
How does Turgenev himself look at this conflict, does he condemn Bazarov? (answer in Pisarev’s article “Bazarov”).
(“... Looking at Bazarov from the outside, looking as only a “retired” person who is not involved in the modern movement of ideas can look, looking at him with that cold, searching look that is given only by long life experience, Turgenev justified Bazarov and appreciated his dignity. Bazarov came out of the test clean and strong. Turgenev did not find a single significant accusation against this type, Turgenev did not like Bazarov, but recognized his strength, recognized his superiority over the people around him and himself paid him full respect."
Homework
1. Find definitions of the concept of “nihilism” in various sources.
2. Create a table like:
Lessons 53-54. Bazarov is a nihilist
Lesson objectives: get acquainted with the interpretation of the concept of “nihilism”; compare the concept of “nihilism” and Bazarov’s views.
Lesson progress
I. Checking homework
1. Students read out all the definitions of the concept “nihilism.” If necessary, the teacher supplements the answers:
Nihilism- This...
- (from Latin, nihil - “nothing”) denial of generally accepted values: ideals, moral standards, culture, forms of social life. (Large encyclopedic dictionary)
- “an ugly and immoral doctrine that rejects everything that cannot be touched (V. Dahl's Explanatory Dictionary)
- “naked denial of everything, logically unjustified skepticism (Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language)
- “the philosophy of skepticism that arose in Russia in the 19th century at the beginning of the reign of Alexander II. The term was previously applied to certain heresies in the Middle Ages. In Russian literature the term nihilism was first used, perhaps, by N. Nadezhdin in an article in “Bulletin of Europe”... Nadezhdin... equated nihilism with skepticism. ( M. Katkov)
2. Checking the completion of the table. Four students at the board fill out the table (one table item each). Students check their charts against the chart on the board. They supplement the respondents or their own notes.
3. Conclusion and answer to the question:
(Bazarov’s beliefs fully fit the definition of nihilistic. Denial of everything and everyone: moral principles, art, feelings. Bazarov explained all life phenomena from the point of view of science, materialism. All this was collected and described by Turgenev in the image of Bazarov.)
II. Work based on the text of the novel
In order to better understand the essence of Bazarov’s nihilist way of thinking, let us turn to three dialogic scenes of the novel, which reveal the main postulates of the nihilistic picture of the world.
When do we first hear the word “nihilist” and who is present?
(In the first scene, which takes place over morning tea, the Kirsanov brothers and Arkady take part. It was here that the word “nihilist” was first heard, seriously alarming the older generation, denoting a critical attitude towards all existing “authorities” and “principles” (“nihilist - This is a person who does not bow to any authority, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respectful this principle may be.")
For what purpose was this word spoken and what was the reaction to it?
(Arkady, an involuntary troublemaker, is more interested not in the meaning of what he says, but in the actual rebellious nature of the words he utters and their stunning effect on his father and uncle. They experience a similar state precisely from the awareness of everything they heard. For Pavel Petrovich, a nihilist is , first of all, the one who “does not bow down” to any experience. However, people who abandon the past, in his opinion, are doomed “to exist in emptiness, in an airless space.” With this dramatic conclusion, Pavel Petrovich concludes his conversation with the young reformer. )
The second scene, already with Bazarov, significantly deepens the idea of nihilistic consciousness. The nihilist himself appears at the table, which causes a new round in the development of the previous conversation.
How does the conversation change with the appearance of Bazarov?
(Speaking of non-recognition of authorities, Bazarov corrects Arkady’s recent statement about the nihilist and softens it, allowing himself to recognize what he considers “business.” But even in this situation, he remains true to his convictions. If Bazarov is inclined to accept something, it is only only passed through one’s own “I”: “they will tell me the case, I will agree...” - that is, exclusively personal experience is put at the forefront, and not what has been verified by time, is authoritative and generally accepted.)
Teacher's comment.
Two weeks later, in a direct “fight” with Pavel Petrovich, Bazarov will openly declare to his opponent that he can do without the “logic of history”, otherwise, without knowledge of the objective laws of social development without inclusion in the general process of historical time, in order to find his place in the progressive movement of history.
However, the general denial of Turgenev's hero was not spontaneous, much less aimless. It had a specific historical justification, conditioned by the opposition of the “new” people to the noble aristocracy. Connecting only the hardships of Russian life with him (it is no coincidence that Turgenev’s novel opens with pictures of a pre-reform village), the democratic hero, naturally, does not want to have anything to do with the legacy of the “fathers”.
(The writer’s appeal to the picture gives the reader the opportunity to realize the democratic origins of Bazarov’s negation, the fact that Bazarov embodies the single essence of the most radical aspirations in Russian society on the eve of the peasant reform. The catastrophic picture of people’s life and the figure of Bazarov against its background are perceived as something indissoluble, interdependent.)
What especially attracted your attention in the picture of the village that opened up to Arkady?
(A piercingly terrible desolation in everything: “Churches... with plaster falling off in some places... with bent crosses and ruined cemeteries”; “like beggars in rags... roadside willow trees with peeled bark and broken branches; emaciated, rough, as if gnawed , cows”; “men... all shabby, on bad nags”... in churches, nature, people, animals, cemeteries... Some kind of all-encompassing “shabbyness”! And everything around is unusually diminished, insignificant, sickly. “insignificance” and “illness” appear closely related in the description of peasant life: “tiny ponds with thin dams,” “villages with low huts under dark, often half-scattered roofs,” “crooked threshing sheds against the backdrop of a painfully crushed rural world.” the only thing that impresses with its size is the “yawning gates” of the threshing sheds “near the empty barns.”)
What is the role of the third scene?
(In the third scene of the “fight” - the heroes, the conflict-producing sides represented by two diametrically opposed social consciousnesses - democratic and liberal: the “doctor” versus the “aristocrat” and vice versa were especially sharply outlined. Bazarov is deeply irritated by Pavel Petrovich’s reasoning about the historical role of the English aristocracy, about the feeling self-esteem, duty, respect for the individual.)
III. Teacher's word
Bazarov is an intelligent and deep person. His nihilistic consciousness largely stems from his inherent comprehensive knowledge of Russian life, which has everything: “vulgarity”, “doctrinaireism”, “lack of honest people”, endless talk about parliamentarism... but where the main thing is missing - “deeds”. Denying all really existing forms of social structure, economic life, culture, and everyday life, Bazarov cannot offer anything in return except a frantic desire to destroy, in his firm conviction, the old, outdated. In this sense, the hero’s position is deeply dramatic, since there is no support in the past and no vision of the future.
IV. Analytical conversation
As we have already discussed in previous lessons, A. S. Odintsova and his love for her had a huge influence on Bazarov.
How did this influence affect Bazarov the nihilist?
(Now the hero perceives the world not as a natural scientist, but with his inner vision, “the eyes of the soul.” In this state, he ceases to be dependent on the power of ideas, and, thanks to his own spiritual power, becomes invulnerable to them. Bazarov is convinced that, in addition to his chosen goal - denial old life order - and movement towards it, in human life there are values that are more important and necessary for the preservation and development of human life itself. One of them is the ability to see the world as singular, unique and to accept this world in its own self-significance. This discovery became the basis for Bazarov. deep spiritual crisis, which presented him no longer as a hero of a goal, but as a reflective hero.)
Can you give examples of the manifestation of the “updated” Bazarov?
(Bazarov tells Arkady about “that aspen tree” from childhood, the memories of which are alive and dear to him. He wants to be perceived not as “some kind of state or society,” that is, something impersonal, but separately, isolated from moreover, having previously perceived man as a harmonious biological organism, he unexpectedly agrees with the idea that every person is a mystery.”)
How is Bazarov’s spiritual crisis expressed?
(Acutely aware of the personal “I”, Bazarov painfully experiences the finitude of his existence against the backdrop of the eternal existence of nature. Previously so familiar and useful (“Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and a person is a worker in it”), it begins to cause dull irritation in Bazarov and bitter thoughts about my own insignificance and abandonment in the vast universe (“The narrow place that I occupy is so tiny in comparison with the rest of the space where I am not and where no one cares about me...”), about my temporaryness and randomness in the general flow of time, where, according to the hero, “I was not and will not be.” He cannot come to terms with the idea that a person before eternity is just an “atom”, “a mathematical point”. about “ugliness.” In such a state, it is difficult to think about some Philip or Sidor who will come after you, gone forever, much less devote your “instant” life to them.)
How do you think these conclusions of the hero are related to the feelings of the author himself?
(Bazarov’s inescapable melancholy from realizing the brevity of human existence is directly related to Turgenev’s own worldview, the “tragic attitude of the spirit” of the writer.)
What way out does Turgenev offer a person?
(Turgenev described one way out in “Notes of a Hunter” - to dissolve in nature, to enter the spontaneous flow of life. But Turgenev could not lead his hero to “impersonal life”: the author of “Fathers and Sons” had a different attitude.
According to the writer, in order to experience the dramatic awareness of his mortal destiny against the backdrop of the eternal life of nature, a person must, in spite of everything, continue to remain an individual, retain within himself “a huge tension of the personal principle,” and be like a bird flying uncontrollably forward. But not to the one with which Bazarov compares Arkady, striving for a “nest”, for ordinary human existence, peace, comfort.)
V. Lesson summary
Bazarov is a homeless wanderer, striving for an unattainable goal. And isn’t this high impulse towards the unattainable romantic? Bazarov, who denies external romanticism, is in his spiritual essence a romantic person.
The path to Bazarov’s goal - “bitter, tart, bovine life” - is a conscious, personal choice of the hero, which takes him out of the ranks of ordinary people, making him the chosen one. To recognize the finitude of one’s being, as Turgenev’s Bazarov does, is not given to everyone, but only to an unusually strong personality in which the spirit triumphs, a personality internally free. But why does the life of Turgenev’s most interesting and controversial hero end so unhappily and mediocrely? We'll talk about this in the next lesson.
Homework
Think about the question: why does the novel “Fathers and Sons” end with the death of the main character?
Lesson 55. E. V. Bazarov in the face of death
Objective of the lesson: lead students to answer the question: why does Turgenev end the novel with the death scene of the main character?
Lesson progress
I. Introductory conversation
We analyzed Bazarov's relationship with all the main characters: the Kirsanovs, Odintsova, his parents and partly with the people. Each time, Bazarov’s objective superiority over the other heroes was revealed. It would seem that the theme of the novel has been exhausted. However, from chapter 22, plot and compositionally, the second cycle of the hero’s wanderings begins to repeat: Bazarov first ends up with the Kirsanovs, then with Odintsova, and again with his parents.
(Bazarov makes the second circle changed: life forced him to accept his romance. This is a new Bazarov, who has experienced doubts, painfully trying to preserve his theory. Bazarov is faced with the need to know himself and the world. It is important for Turgenev to show whether this will force Bazarov to change in his relationships with people , have people changed, the situation.)
Has anything changed in Maryino, have the Kirsanovs come to their senses after their disputes with Bazarov? (Chapter 22-23).
(The same disorder reigns on the Kirsanov estate. Pavel Petrovich’s hostility towards Bazarov has not diminished. Bazarov returns to the Kirsanovs because it is more convenient for him to work there. But even without ideological disputes, their stay together is impossible. Pavel Petrovich comes to a knightly resolution of the conflict - to a duel .)
Did the duel resolve the dispute in favor of Pavel Petrovich? How do we see him after the duel? (Ch. 24)
(Pavel Petrovich is not only wounded, but also morally killed in this duel. Pavel Petrovich is shown comically, the emptiness of elegant noble chivalry is emphasized. After the duel, Bazarov faces not an arrogant aristocrat, not an idiot uncle, but an elderly man suffering physically and morally).
How and why does Bazarov and Arkady break up? What has changed in their relationship? (Ch. 21, 22, 25)
(Bazarov and Arkady are in Maryino for the second time, a split begins when Bazarov is nervous, irritated by his relationship with Odintsova. Arkady is overcome by the desire to test his strength alone, without patronage. That is why Arkady goes to Nikolskoye: “before he would have only shrugged his shoulders if someone told him that he might get bored under the same roof with Bazarov...” Previously, Arkady valued his friendship with Bazarov, made sure that he was well received in Maryino, and extolled Bazarov’s knowledge and simplicity. Youth always chooses Arkady’s idols. It’s flattering to be a friend of such a person. He repeats his statements with pleasure. Moreover, Arkady does not agree with his friend in everything. He is embarrassed to talk about the beauty of nature in front of Bazarov. He does not feel equal in friendship, he only submits to Bazarov’s influence, imitates him in his behavior. behavior, and in ideas. Therefore, his return to the “bosom of his fathers” is not surprising. As soon as he met Katya, the feeling of love replaced all traces of nihilism in him. No wonder Katya calls him tame.”)
Why is Bazarov sure that they are saying goodbye forever? (Ch. 25)
(Even earlier, Bazarov felt the difference in his views with Arkady. The scene under the haystack ends in a quarrel. Even then he told him that he was a “tender soul.” Seeing Arkady upon his arrival in Nikolskoye, Bazarov immediately understood everything. Read: “you’ve already broken up with me... a liberal barich." With these words, Bazarov summed up Arkady's short-term passion for nihilism. It is not easy for Bazarov to lose Arkady, which is why he bitterly pronounces his farewell words: "I expected a completely different direction from you." , since if the tame Arkady leaves Bazarov, then he can’t have any rapprochement with the others.)
Exercise.
Why did Turgenev oppose these representatives of the nobility to Bazarov? These are the best representatives of the nobility, compare them with provincial society: “if cream is bad, what about milk?”
II. Analysis of Bazarov's death scene
Let's turn to the last pages of the novel. What feeling do the last pages of the novel evoke?
(A feeling of pity that such a person is dying. A.P. Chekhov wrote: “My God! What a luxury “Fathers and Sons”! Just shout the guard. Bazarov’s illness was so severe that I weakened, and there was a feeling like as if I got infected from him. And the end of Bazarov? The devil knows how it was done (Read excerpts from chapter 27).
What do you think Pisarev meant when he wrote: “To die the way Bazarov died is the same as performing a great feat”?
(At this moment, Bazarov’s willpower and courage were revealed. Feeling the inevitability of the end, he did not chicken out, did not try to deceive himself, and most importantly, remained true to himself and his convictions. Bazarov’s death is heroic, but it attracts not only Bazarov’s heroism, but also the humanity of his behavior ).
Why does Bazarov become closer to us before his death?
(Romanticism was clearly revealed in him, he finally uttered the words that he had previously been afraid of: “I love you! Goodbye... because I didn’t kiss you then... Blow on the dying lamp and let it go out...” Bazarov becomes more humane .)
Why does Turgenev end the novel with the death scene of the hero, despite his superiority over other heroes?
(Bazarov dies from an accidental cut of his finger, but his death, from the author’s point of view, is natural. Turgenev will define the figure of Bazarov as tragic and “doomed to death.” That is why he “dead” the hero. Two reasons: loneliness and the internal conflict of the hero.
The author shows how Bazarov remains lonely. The Kirsanovs are the first to fall away, then Odintsova, then the parents, Fenichka, Arkady, and the last cut off of Bazarov - from the people. The new people look lonely compared to the vast majority of the rest of society. Bazarov is a representative of the early revolutionary commoner, he is one of the first in this matter, and it is always difficult to be the first. They are alone in the small estate and urban nobility.
But Bazarov dies, but like-minded people remain who will continue the common cause. Turgenev did not show like-minded people to Bazarov and thereby deprived his business of prospects. Bazarov does not have a positive program, he only denies, since Bazarov cannot answer the question: “What next?” What to do after it's destroyed? This is the futility of the novel. This is the main reason for the death of Bazarov in the novel, the main reason that the author was unable to outline the future.
The second reason is the hero's internal conflict. Turgenev believes that Bazarov died because he became a romantic, since he did not believe in the possibility of a harmonious combination of romance and the strength of the civic spirit in new people. That is why Turgenev’s Bazarov wins as a fighter, while there is no romance in him, no sublime feeling for nature, female beauty.)
(Turgenev loved Bazarov very much and repeated many times that Bazarov was “clever” and a “hero”. Turgenev wanted the reader to fall in love with Bazarov (but by no means Bazarovism) with all his rudeness, heartlessness, and ruthless dryness.)
III. Teacher's word
Literary critics have more than once cited the lack of solid ground under one's feet as the main reason for Bazarov's death. In confirmation of this, his conversation with a man was cited, in which Bazarov turns out to be “something like a clown.” However, what Turgenev sees as the doom of his hero does not come down to Bazarov’s inability to find a common language with a man. Can Bazarov’s tragic dying phrase: “...Russia needs me... No, apparently I don’t need you...” - can be explained by the above-mentioned reason? And most importantly, “the hero’s story is included in the writer’s common theme of the death of a person in the crucible of natural forces beyond his control,” “natural forces - passion and death.”
Turgenev did not put up with the metaphysical insignificance of man. It was his unabating pain, growing out of the awareness of the tragedy of human fate. But he is looking for support for a person and finds it in “the dignity of the consciousness of his insignificance.” That is why his Bazarov is convinced that in the face of blind force that destroys everything, it is important to remain strong, as he was in life.
It is painful for the dying Bazarov to recognize himself as a “half-crushed worm”, to present himself as an “ugly spectacle.” However, the fact that he was able to achieve a lot on his path, managed to touch the absolute values of human existence, gives him the strength to look death in the eyes with dignity, to live with dignity until the moment of unconsciousness.
The poet is talking to Anna Sergeevna, who, completing his earthly journey, found for himself the most accurate image - the “dying lamp”, whose light symbolized Bazarov’s life. Having always despised a beautiful phrase, now he can afford it: “Blow on the dying lamp and let it go out...”
On the threshold of death, Turgenev’s hero, as it were, draws a line under his disputes with Pavel Petrovich about whether such, as Kirsanov ironically noted, “saviors, heroes” of Russia are needed. “Russia needs me?” - Bazarov, one of the “deliverers”, asks himself, and does not hesitate to answer: “No, apparently not needed.” Perhaps he was aware of this while still arguing with Pavel Kirsanov?
Thus, death gave Bazarov the right to be what perhaps he always was - doubting, not afraid to be weak, sublime, able to love... Bazarov’s uniqueness lies in the fact that through the entire novel he will pass through in many ways not such a person and thereby dooming himself to the only possible, fatal, tragic - Bazarov's - fate.
However, Turgenev completed his novel with an enlightened picture of a quiet rural cemetery, where Bazarov’s “passionate, sinful, rebellious heart” rested and where “two already decrepit old men - a husband and wife” - Bazarov’s parents often come from a nearby village.
IV. Preparing to write an essay. Choosing a theme
Approximate topics for writing a home essay based on the novel by I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”:
E. Bazarov and P. P. Kirsanov;
- “The Damned Barchuks” (N.P., P.P., Arkady, Kirsanovs, Odintsova);
- “Rebellious Heart” (image of E. Bazarov);
Why does Russia need the Bazarovs?
Bazarov and the Russian people;
- “To die the way Bazarov died is the same as performing a great feat” (Pisarev);
The meaning of the title of I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”;
The problem of “fathers” and “children” in Turgenev’s depiction;
Is the problem of “fathers” and “sons” obsolete today?
What does Turgenev criticize about the “fathers” and in what ways does he differ from the “children”?
What makes Bazarov a hero of his time?
Homework
1. Write an essay on one of the proposed topics.
2. Prepare for a knowledge test on the works of I. S. Turgenev.
Additional material for teachers
The image of the central character of the novel “Fathers and Sons” is unique. In a letter to A. Fet, Turgenev made an important confession: “Did I want to scold Bazarov or extol him? I don’t know this myself, for I don’t know whether I love him or hate him.” And no matter how much the author asserts his sympathy for his hero: “Bazarov is my favorite child,” no matter how much he sympathizes with him, one cannot help but see how alien the “Bazarov type” itself is to Turgenev.
“... the main figure, Bazarov, was based on one personality of a young provincial doctor that struck me...” Turgenev wrote in the article “About “Fathers and Sons.” - This remarkable man embodied a barely born, still fermenting principle, which later received the name of nihilism. The impression made on me by this person was very strong and at the same time not entirely clear...”
The writer, having begun work on the novel, even began to write a diary on behalf of Bazarov in order to delve into the essence of the hero and understand him.
Bazarov is “the hero of a time when the social forces of death and rebirth, old and new” oppose each other and act simultaneously. Such eras give rise to unpredictable personalities built on internal conflict. Therefore, it is impossible to unambiguously determine Turgenev’s attitude towards his “favorite brainchild,” the hero of the novel “Fathers and Sons” Evgeniy Bazarov.
The author not only does not share Bazarov’s nihilistic beliefs, but throughout the course of the novel he consistently debunks them. And at the same time, the writer experiences great interest in his hero, who reflected the era in all its contradictions. No matter how nice Nikolai Petrovich was to Turgenev, you cannot explore the era in his personality. Arkady is even less interesting to him - a weak copy of his father. First of all, he becomes a hero of the time. strong, socially active personality. And such personalities cannot but interest literature. Bazarov's personality itself attracts the author. And indeed, Turgenev, trying to love and understand Bazarov, creates an image that is flawed, but very interesting as a human being, arousing curiosity at first, and by the end of the novel - compassion. Bazarov will not leave anyone indifferent for a second. It evokes hatred or love, but there is nothing about it that breeds boredom.
The moment of social reconstruction necessarily involves the actions of destructive people. But what is the actual interaction of such heroes with the era? What does their nihilism bring to society and what does it give to the nihilists themselves? Turgenev sought to find an answer to these questions.
What turns Turgenev away from nihilism? Why did the author not act for a second as an ideological supporter of Bazarov? From his point of view, nihilism is doomed, because it has no final positive goal. Here it is, Turgenev's first accusation. The author does not cling to the dilapidated “principles” that have become Pavel Petrovich’s armor. He is looking for something new in the coming times. But what new does Bazarov bring? His ideas are, in essence, as old as the world: destruction, destruction. What's new and unprecedented about this? The Romans were already destroying the culture of Ancient Hellas; Peter I had already destroyed patriarchal Rus'... And then, on the scorched ashes, the seeds of the former culture sprouted for a long time, heavily. But how much was lost! True humanism consists in the rejection of such reckless contrition for the sake of unclear utopias of a bright future. Therefore, Turgenev could not sympathize with the ideas of Russian nihilism.
Nihilism is based on the philosophy of vulgar materialism. Everything is sacrificed for immediate practical benefit. In the words of Mayakovsky, they are only interested in what is “weighty, rough, visible.” From this point of view, Pushkin is nonsense, Raphael is “worth a penny,” any decent scientist is better than a poet. For nihilists, love turns out to be only the physiological attraction of males and females, nature is a workshop, and all people are the same, like trees in the forest. Bazarov mocks speeches about the “mysterious gazes” of Pavel Petrovich’s beloved and recommends Arkady to study “the anatomy of the eye: where does it come from, what do you say, with a mysterious look?” Therefore, the proverb lies when it claims that the eyes are the mirror of the soul. Where is the mirror at the intersection of the optic nerves? Yes, and there is no soul. But there is only what you can pick up and put to work. How simple and understandable the world is becoming! Nature turns out to be just a workshop, meaningless and dead without a human master. But then this “worker” came. What will he do to nature? Pursuing the goals of immediate gain, such a worker will turn back rivers, destroy the ozone layer, and destroy entire species of plants and animal populations. We, people of the late twentieth century, know about these results of the activities of vulgar materialists. Turgenev did not know about them. With the brilliant insight of an artist, he saw in Bazarov’s beliefs the germ of future tragedies.”
Turgenev is a great psychologist. His Bazarov, although cynical and shameless in words, is a moral man at heart. He preaches the following theory to Arkady: “If you like a woman... try to achieve some sense; but you can’t - well, don’t, turn away - the earth is not a wedge.” But he will not be able to translate these views into reality; According to Bazarov’s theory, Arkady, who was indignant with her, will do this: having understood; that Odintsova is not interested in him, he will insensitively “switch” to the more accessible Katya.
Without realizing it, Bazarov lives by fairly high moral principles. But these principles and nihilism are incompatible; something will have to be given up.
Turgenev tries in the novel to show the inconsistency of nihilistic philosophy, since, while denying spiritual life, it also denies moral principles. Love, nature, art are not just lofty words. These are the fundamental concepts underlying human morality. Blind admiration of authority is stupid, but blind denial of authority is no smarter. Life is too short for each person to start building the world “from scratch”, rejecting everything that was discovered and created by their ancestors.
You don’t have to love Pushkin and Raphael: there is no crime in the fact that their work is alien to you. But to deny them in general on the grounds that you don’t know them or understand them is a sign of little intelligence. Therefore, Pavel Petrovich was not so far from the truth when he reproached Bazarov: “Before, young people had to study; They didn’t want to be branded as ignorant, so they toiled unwillingly. And now they should say: everything in the world is nonsense! - and the trick is in the bag. The young people were delighted. And in fact, before they would have been just idiots, but now they have suddenly become nihilists.” This is a portrait of the “disciples and followers” of Bazarov, Kukshina and Sitnikov. The images of these heroes become an indirect means of exposing nihilism. A philosophy that has such stupid and ignoble followers as Kukshina and Sitnikov cannot but raise doubts in a thinking person: apparently, there is something in nihilism that is attractive specifically for them - simplicity, accessibility, optionality of intelligence, education, honor, immorality.
This is how the author consistently debunks the beliefs of the main character; beliefs that Turgenev himself did not accept. “I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, large figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, evil, honest - and yet doomed to death, because it still stands on the threshold of the future,” Turgenev wrote about Bazarov, asserting that Bazarov is a “tragic face.” What is the tragedy of this hero? From the author’s point of view, first of all, the Bazarovs’ time has not come.
Turgenev's Bazarov himself feels this: dying, he utters bitter words: “Russia needs me... No, apparently, I don’t.”
With particular force, Bazarov as a “tragic face” is revealed in the chapter depicting his death. In the face of death, Bazarov's best qualities appear: tenderness for his parents, hidden under external severity, poetic love for Odintsova; thirst for life, work, achievement, social cause; willpower, courage in the face of the threat of inevitable death. We hear words so unusual for Bazarov, full of poetry: “Blow on the dying lamp, and let it go out...” We also hear words full of love and pity about parents: “After all, there are people like them in your great light during the day with fire can’t be found...” We hear his frank confessions: “And I also thought: I’ll screw up a lot of things, I won’t die, no matter what!” I have a task, because I’m a giant!”
The pages depicting Bazarov's illness and death perhaps most clearly express the author's attitude towards his hero: admiration for his courage, mental fortitude, sorrowful feelings caused by the death of such an original, strong man.
Bazarov's death makes his image truly tragic. The tragedy increases in the epilogue, from which we learn that Bazarov died without leaving followers. Arkady became a landowner; with two or three chemists who do not know how to distinguish oxygen from nitrogen, but are filled with denial. Sitnikov hangs around St. Petersburg and, according to his assurances, continues the “work” of Bazarov.
Turgenev did not believe that people of Bazarov’s type would find a way to renew Russia. But he accepted their moral strength and great social significance.
“...If the reader does not love Bazarov with all his rudeness, heartlessness, ruthless dryness and harshness,” Turgenev wrote, “if he does not love him, I repeat, “I am guilty and have not achieved my goal.”
Lesson 56. Final lesson on the works of I. S. Turgenev
Objective of the lesson: test and consolidate students' knowledge.
To test students' knowledge, tests are offered on the biography and works of I. S. Turgenev (see at the end of the book).
Application to the lesson. Workshop on the novel “Fathers and Sons”
Card 1
“Bazarov came out as a simple man, alien to any brokenness, and at the same time strong, powerful in soul and body. Everything about him unusually suits his strong nature.<...>Bazarov could not be a cold, abstract person; his heart demanded fullness, demanded feelings; and so he gets angry at others, but feels that he should be even more angry at himself.” ( N. N. Strakhov)
“Just think, this fellow, Bazarov, absolutely dominates everyone and nowhere does he meet with any effective resistance...” ( M. N. Katkov)
“Well, he [Turgenev] got it for Bazarov, the restless and yearning Bazarov (a sign of a great heart), despite all his nihilism.” ( F. M. Dostoevsky)
- Which of the critics’ judgments about Turgenev’s hero is closer to your understanding after reading the novel “Fathers and Sons”?
Which critics do you agree with? Why? Which of the judgments were unexpected for you?
How does Bazarov's nihilism manifest itself?
Formulate your judgment about Bazarov.
Card 2
“The Decembrists are our great fathers, the Bazarovs are our prodigal children.”
“That Turgenev did not bring Bazarov out to pat him on the head is clear; that he wanted to do something in favor of the fathers - and this is clear. But in contact with such pitiful and insignificant fathers as the Kirsanovs, the tough Bazarov carried away Turgenev, and instead of flogging his son, he flogged the fathers.” ( A. I. Herzen)
- What can you agree on and what can you not agree with A. I. Herzen?
Why is Bazarov a prodigal son, according to Herzen?
What was the new spiritual situation in which the “children” found themselves compared to the “fathers”?
Card 3
“...The main figure, Bazarov, was based on one personality of a young provincial doctor that struck me. (He died shortly before 1860.) This remarkable man embodied that barely born, still fermenting principle, which later received the name of nihilism. The impression made on me by this person was very strong and at the same time not entirely clear; At first, I myself could not give myself a good account of it - and I listened intently and looked closely at everything that surrounded me. As if wanting to believe the veracity of his own feelings. I was confused by the following fact: in not a single work of our literature did I even see a hint of what I saw everywhere; doubt inevitably arose; Am I chasing a ghost?" ( I. S. Turgenev.)
- How is the “new” presented in the novel?
Do you think the general psychological mood of the new people, despite all their ideological differences, was reflected in the image of Bazarov? What was it?
In what works did you encounter manifestations of the “new”, previously not described in the literature of that time?
Card 4
"...Based on the plot of Fathers and Sons"<...>the doctor's son - a poor man, a plebeian, a nihilist - finds himself in an atmosphere of noble culture that is alien to him. He falls hopelessly in love with a cold aristocrat, fights a duel, and suffers from world sorrow no worse than Byron's heroes. And his appearance confronts everyone around him with problems the very existence of which they had no idea before.” ( V. M. Markovich)
“The novel “Fathers and Sons” is “a classic example of the strategy of liberalism.” ( V. Arkhipov)
- What events of the novel do you consider to be the main ones? Why?
What hitherto unknown problems do the people around Bazarov face in connection with his appearance?
How do you understand the expression “strategy of liberalism” as applied to the novel?
Card 5
“...Dialogue in its pure form is the main instrument in the orchestra of Turgenev’s novel. If the action of the novel is predominantly influenced by circumstances and conflicts of private life, then deep ideological contradictions are revealed in the dialogue.” ( A. V. Chicherin)
“Turgenev’s artistic system, based on the transparent clarity and clarity of the image, is determined by attention and sensitivity to certain mental states of the individual.” ( G. B. Kurlyandskaya)
- Give examples of Turgenev’s clear and precise depiction of private conflicts and ideological contradictions in the novel.
What other methods of conveying the conflict, besides dialogue, does the author use?
Card 6
“...Bazarov’s denial is directed not so much at ideas, concepts, trends, etc., but at the socio-psychological and personal traits of a person: in Pavel Petrovich he denies everything, not a liberal, not an idealist, but a gentleman, spoiled by his upbringing, spoiled life, doing nothing, wasting his best years loving a woman... This is the enmity of two opposing socio-psychological types, two different mental organizations, two moral principles.” ( D. I. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky)
- Whose point of view, Bazarov or Pavel Petrovich, is more convincing in the dispute?
What is unique about the language of the participants in the dispute? What is the role of Chapter X in the novel?
Card 7
“We see that Bazarov treats ordinary people carelessly - why is this? Is this negligence something he inherited from the depths of the past? Read the whole story and you will see that this is exactly so" ( Maxim Gorky)
“In Bazarov’s relations with the common people, one must notice, first of all, the absence of any pretentiousness, any sweetness. The people like it, because the servants love Bazarov, the children love him, despite the fact that he doesn’t treat them at all and doesn’t shower them with money or gingerbread... The men have a heart for Bazarov, because they see him as not simple and an intelligent person, but at the same time this person is a stranger to them because he does not know their way of life, their needs, their hopes and fears, their concepts, beliefs and prejudices.” ( D. I. Pisarev.)
- What determines Bazarov’s attitude towards the people? Is Bazarov your own or a stranger for people from the people?
Whose judgment about Bazarov’s attitude towards the people seems more convincing to you?
How does the relationship between Bazarov and the people end?
Card 8
“Bazarov does not miss an opportunity to communicate - directly or with a transparent hint - that he is a natural scientist, a physiologist, a doctor, or, at worst, a healer. But here’s another strange thing about him: he rarely and reluctantly speaks about literature “in his specialty,” while he somehow recalls fiction, philosophical literature, and journalism at almost every step, revealing at the same time an extensive and thorough knowledge.” . ( M. Eremin)
- How does Turgenev challenge his hero’s statements about art and nature?
How can one explain Bazarov’s attitude towards art: ignorance, neglect as a useless phenomenon, or a deep understanding of its power to influence people?
Card 9
What is the meaning of Bazarov's test of love?
What artistic details did the author use in the scene of Bazarov’s first declaration of love, especially emphasizing the strength and depth of his feelings?
Compare the love story of Pavel Petrovich and the love story of Bazarov.
Card 10
“...The people surrounding Bazarov suffer not because he treats them badly, and not because they themselves are bad people; on the contrary, he does not do a single bad thing towards them, and they, for their part, are also very good-natured and honest people...” ( D. I. Pisarev)
“...Despite Bazarov’s outward callousness and even rudeness in dealing with his parents, he loves them dearly.... To the direct question of the slow-witted Arkady whether he loves his parents, Bazarov bluntly answers: I love them, Arkady.” It is not easy for him to decide to leave them soon after his arrival, and he does not dare tell his father about it all day long.<...>He even forgives his father for flogging a peasant, which, without a doubt, he would not forgive anyone else - a trait so amazing in Bazarov that it seems almost an artistic mistake by Turgenev.” ( G. Bialy)
- How did the scenes in your parents’ house influence the creation of Bazarov’s image?
What are the main points of difference between father and son?
Who do you think is right in assessing Bazarov’s relationship with his parents?
Card 11
“To die the way Bazarov died is the same as having accomplished a great feat.<...>Because Bazarov died firmly and calmly, no one felt either relief or benefit, but such a person who knows how to die calmly and firmly will not retreat in the face of an obstacle and will not cower in the face of danger.<...>Bazarov does not betray himself: the approach of death does not regenerate him; on the contrary, he becomes more natural, more humane, more at ease than he was in full health.” (D.I. Pisarev.)
“Turgenev’s heroes, as a rule, die or depart from life in some other way, but they never renounce their professed ideals, do not compromise their faith, or sell out.” ( N. Sergovantsev)
- Can Bazarov’s death be called a feat? What is the role of this scene in the novel?
Do you agree that Bazarov did not renounce his “professed ideals” even before his death?
What will be the fate of Bazarov's views in the future?
A). The first thought of the argument was important for both Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich . It was a dispute about the aristocracy and its principles. Pavel Petrovich sees the main social force in aristocrats. The significance of aristocracy, in his opinion, is that it once gave freedom in England, that aristocrats have a highly developed sense of self-esteem and self-respect. Their self-respect is important because society is built on the individual. Bazarov breaks down this seemingly harmonious system with simple arguments.. The conversation that the aristocracy gave England freedom - “Old Song”, a lot has changed after the seventeenth century, so Pavel Petrovich’s reference cannot serve as an argument. The belief that aristocrats are the basis of the public good is completely shattered by Bazarov’s apt remarks that the aristocracy is of no use to anyone, their main occupation is doing nothing (“sitting with folded hands”). They only care about themselves, about their appearance. Under these conditions, their dignity and self-respect look like empty words . Aristocratism is a useless word. In idleness and empty chatter, Bazarov sees the basic political principle of the entire noble society, living at the expense of others.
Outraged by Bazarov's nihilism, Pavel Petrovich - an aristocrat and a liberal, seeks to prove that the nobility and aristocracy, as its best part, are the driving force of social development. It is here that the right paths to progress and the ideal are born - “English freedom”, which is a constitutional monarchy. But behind Kirsanov’s words, Bazarov sees only faith in change and passive hope, and therefore considers aristocrats incapable of action. Bazarov rejects liberalism, denies the ability of the nobility to lead Russia to the future.
B). The second line of dispute is about the principles of nihilists.
Bazarov is a nihilist. He argues that nihilists act deliberately, based on the principle of the usefulness of an activity for society. They deny the social system, that is, autocracy, religion, this is the meaning of the word “ALL”. Bazarov notes that the freedom that the government is trying to achieve is unlikely to be of any use; This phrase contains a hint of impending reforms. Bazarov does not accept reform as a means of changing the social situation. Denial is perceived by new people as activity, not chatter. Pavel Petrovich sharply condemns nihilists for the fact that they “respect no one” and live without principles and ideals. Disagreeing with the nihilists’ denial of everything, Kirsanov considers them unnecessary and useless: “There are only four and a half of you.” “To this, Bazarov laconically answers him: “Moscow burned down from a penny candle.” By denying “everything,” Bazarov first of all means religion, the autocratic serfdom system, and generally accepted morality.
IN). The third line of dispute about the Russian people.
According to Pavel Petrovich , the Russian people are patriarchal, they sacredly value traditions, and cannot live without religion. These Slavophile views (with a lifestyle in the English way) speak of reactionaryness. He is touched by the backwardness of the people and sees this as the key to the salvation of society. The situation of the people causes in Bazarov not tenderness, but anger . He sees trouble in all areas of people's life. Bazarov turns out to be far-sighted and condemns what will later become the creed of populism. It is no coincidence that he says that the Russian people do not need useless words like “liberalism”, “progress” " Bazarov has a sober attitude towards the people. He sees the lack of education and superstition of the people. He despises these shortcomings. However, Bazarov sees not only the downtrodden state, but also the discontent of the people. Bazarov claims that the people are revolutionary in spirit, therefore nihilism is a manifestation of the national spirit . To which Kirsanov objects to him, pointing out the religiosity and patriarchy of the Russian peasant. Pavel Petrovich glorifies the peasant community and family way of life . But arguing with him, Bazarov says that the people do not understand their own interests, that they are dark and ignorant, and consider it necessary to distinguish the people's interests from the people's prejudices. Evgeny is irreconcilably opposed to the lordship and slavery of the people.
G). The fourth direction in the dispute is the difference in views on art and nature. Pavel Petrovich believes that nihilism has captured the field of art.
He is right in understanding that the new Peredvizhniki artists are abandoning frozen academic traditions and blindly following old models, including Raphael. Pavel Petrovich is wrong in that the Itinerant artists, in his opinion, absolutely abandoned traditions. New artists are “powerless and sterile to the point of disgusting.”
Bazarov denies both old and new art: “Raphael is not worth a penny, and they are no better than him.” Bazarov does not deny nature at all, but sees in it only the source and field of human activity . Bazarov has a master's view of nature, but it is also one-sided. By denying the role of nature as an eternal source of beauty that influences humans, Bazarov impoverishes human life. He approaches nature in a purely materialistic way: “Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it.”
In this dispute, Bazarov’s opponent is Turgenev himself. , showing a sense of the organic influence of Pushkin’s poems, spring nature, the sweet melody of playing the cello.
Kirsanov's disputes with Bazarov have ideological significance; they reveal the main idea of the novel. They give special poignancy to the plot, serve as a characteristic of each hero, they show the superiority of new, progressive ideas over old ones, the eternal movement towards progress.
2.Probably, thinking about which side my sympathies are on, one cannot help but recall Turgenev’s words that “a truly tragic conflict arises when both warring parties are to a certain extent right.” I share the point of view of Turgenev, who tries to convey to the reader the idea of the important role of “old people” in the past and present of Russia.. Yes, it is necessary to change life, develop the natural sciences, stop denying the obvious aspects of reality, but, at the same time, one cannot deny all the experience and art accumulated by mankind , religion, the spiritual side of society. I am close to Turgenev’s idea of finding some kind of compromise between generations.
So what kind of person does Russia need, what kind of person will tell Russia “go ahead”? I think that this person, undoubtedly, must have the innate culture and spiritual subtlety of Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, the intelligence, practical acumen, strength of character of Bazarov, and the inner harmony of Arkady Kirsanov. Thus, the most necessary person for Russia is a collective image, the embodiment of which in reality Turgenev, alas, did not find.
2 . Traveling is a wonderful way to learn about life... (based on the pages of N.A. Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'”). Reading an excerpt from a poem by heart« Who can live well in Rus'” (by student’s choice).
“Who Lives Well in Rus'” is not only the result and pinnacle of Nekrasov’s work, but also a landmark work in the history of Russian literature. In his poem “Who Lives Well in Rus',” N. A. Nekrasov shows a vast panorama of people’s life, characters and destinies. It was not by chance that the author introduced the motif of the journey of seven peasants, who set out to find out who “lives freely and cheerfully in Rus',” into the poem. After all, on the way, wanderers meet a variety of people. The images of traveling men are not drawn as carefully as the portraits of those they meet on the road. These images add up to the overall picture, the picture of post-reform Russia. And Nekrasov’s poem turns into an “encyclopedia of folk life.”
1. The image of the wanderer was taken from life by Nekrasov . The culture of wandering was highly developed among the Russian people. Travel could be made for trade purposes or have the nature of a pilgrimage to holy places. It should be noted that there was a special social group of wanderers - holy fools, wretched people, as well as physically and mentally healthy people who moved from one holy place to another. Such people were highly respected by the people: a wanderer could count on a warm welcome not only in a peasant hut, but also in many rich merchant and noble families. Nekrasov, trying to truthfully show people's life, of course, could not ignore such a phenomenon as wandering. Some travelers were a kind of “walking books”: in the families where they stayed, these people told many stories - both about what they saw themselves and what they heard from others.
In the poem, the role of the seven men who set off to look for happy people is approximately the same. After all, the stories that their casual acquaintances tell wanderers are combined into one large poetic canvas.
2. Who can live well in Rus'? - the poem begins with this question.
The poem addresses the most important question of our time: “The people are liberated, but are the people happy?” In connection with this, another question arises: what are the paths leading to people's happiness? Answering this question, Nekrasov was able to prove that the path to people's happiness is the path of struggle, and the poet calls on the people to take this path.
Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” is usually called an epic poem. An epic is a work of art that depicts with maximum completeness an entire era in the life of a people. The author wanted to depict all social strata: from the peasant to the king. But the main topic remained the life of the people. Peasant life .
3. This life appears before us with extraordinary brightness and clarity. All the hardships and troubles that the people have to endure, all the difficulty and severity of their existence. Despite the reform of 1861, which “liberated” the peasants, they found themselves in an even worse situation: not having their own land, they fell into even greater bondage. The idea runs through the entire poem about the impossibility of living like this any longer, about the difficult peasant lot, the peasant ruin.
This motif of the hungry life of a poor man, who was “tormented by melancholy and misfortune,” sounds with particular force in folk songs, of which there are quite a few in the work. In an effort to recreate the complete picture of folk life, Nekrasov uses all the richness of folk culture, all the diversity of oral folk art. However, while recalling folk talent with expressive songs, Nekrasov does not soften the colors, showing the rudeness of morals, religious prejudices and drunkenness in peasant life.
The position of the people is depicted with extreme clarity by the names of the places where the truth-seeking peasants come from:
A tightened province,
Terpigoreva County,
Empty parish,
From adjacent villages -
Zappatova, Dyryavima,
Razutova, Znobishina,
Gorelova, Neelova,
Bad harvest too.
The poem very clearly depicts the joyless, powerless, hungry life of the people: both “the happiness of the peasants, full of holes with patches, hunchbacked with calluses,” and “hungry servants, abandoned by the master to the mercy of fate” - all people who “did not eat their fill, slurped without salt.” .
4. We face many bright, diverse characters : along with inactive slaves like Yakov, Gleb, Sidor, Ipat, images of Matryona Timofeevna, the hero Savely, Yakim Nagogo, Ermil Girin, the elder Vlas, the seven truth-seekers themselves and others appear, preserving genuine humanity and spiritual nobility. These best of the peasants retained the ability for self-sacrifice, each of them has their own task in life, their own reason to seek the truth, but they all together testify that peasant Rus' has already awakened and come to life.
For example, in Yakima Nagom presents the unique character of a people's lover of truth, a peasant righteous man. Yakim is able to deeply understand what the strength and weakness of the peasantry issouls:
Every peasant
The soul is like a black cloud,
Angry, menacing - and it should be
Thunder will roar from there,
Bloody rains,
And it all ends with wine!
Yakim Nagoy lives the same hardworking but miserable life as the rest of the peasantry. But, endowing him with a rebellious disposition and a craving for the sublime (story with pictures), Nekrasov tries to outline in this image the desire of the peasantry for spiritual life, to show that a protest against existing living conditions is already brewing in the souls of the people. But so far it is little noticeable and does not declare itself.
Ermil Girin is also noteworthy. A competent man, he served as a clerk and became famous throughout the region for his justice, intelligence and selfless devotion to the people. . Yermil showed himself to be an exemplary headman when the people elected him to this position. However, Nekrasov does not make him an ideal righteous man: Yermil, taking pity on his younger brother, appoints Vlasyevna’s son as a recruit, but then, in a fit of repentance, almost commits suicide. The hero's story ends sadly. He is jailed for his speech during the riot. The image of Yermil, like the image of Yakim Nagogo, tells us about the spiritual forces hidden in the Russian people.
5. However, the peasant protest turns directly into a riot in the chapter “Savely - the hero of the Holy Russian.” The murder of the German oppressor, which occurred spontaneously, unplanned, personifies large peasant revolts, which also arose spontaneously, as a response to brutal oppression by the landowners.
Savely the hero, from my point of view, is the strongest hero in the poem. In him lives the spirit of a rebel, hatred of oppressors, but at the same time such humane qualities as sincere love for Matryona Timofeevna, strength of spirit, a sense of human dignity, understanding of life and the ability to deeply experience the grief of others . The poet saw that the consciousness of the peasantry was awakening, a violent protest against oppression was brewing. With pain and bitterness, he realized the suffering of the people, but still looked to their future with hope, with faith in the “hidden spark” of powerful internal forces:
The army rises - innumerable,
The strength in her will be indestructible!
6. The peasant theme in the poem is inexhaustible and multifaceted. Here we can also recall the “happy” peasant woman Matryona Timofeevna, whose image absorbed everything that a Russian peasant woman could survive and experience. Her enormous willpower, despite so many sufferings and hardships, was characteristic of all Russian women - the most disadvantaged and downtrodden creatures in Rus'. There are many more interesting images in the poem: “the exemplary slave - Yakov the faithful,” who managed to take revenge on his master, or the peasants from the “Last One” part, who are forced to play a comedy in front of the old Prince Utyatin, pretending that there was no abolition of serfdom, and many more.
Of course, there are many more interesting images in the poem: the “slave of the exemplary Yakov the Faithful,” who managed to take revenge on his master, or the hard-working peasants from the chapter “The Last”, who are forced to put on a comedy in front of the old Prince Utyatin, pretending that there was no abolition of serfdom rights, and many other images.. That’s why, I think, we can call Nekrasov’s poem “Who Lives Well in Rus'” an encyclopedia of people’s life. All these images, even episodic ones, create a mosaic, bright canvas of the poem, echo each other, confirming the statement that travel is a wonderful way of learning about life
