CRITICS ABOUT THE NOVEL.“Oblomov” - the central link of Goncharov’s novel “trilogy” - was published in the first four issues of the journal “Otechestvennye zapiski” for January - April 1859. A new, long-awaited work by the public by the author of “Ordinary History” and “Frigate “Pallada” (1858 ) was almost unanimously recognized as an outstanding artistic phenomenon. At the same time, contemporaries immediately diverged almost polarly in understanding the main pathos of the novel and the meaning of the images created in it.

Calling the novel “Oblomov” “the most important thing that hasn’t happened for a long, long time,” L.N. Tolstoy wrote to A.B. Druzhinin: “Tell Goncharov that I am delighted with Oblomov and am re-reading it again. But what will be more pleasant for him is that “Oblomov” is a success not accidental, not miserably, but healthy, thorough and timeless in the real public.” “Oblomov” was also appreciated by I.S. as the fruit of a huge creative generalization of reality. Turgenev and V.P. Botkin. The solution, first of all, to the “vast universal human psychological problem” was seen in it by the young D.I. Pisarev.

The opinion of the author of the article “What is Oblomovism?” was different. (“Contemporary”. 1859. No. 5), revolutionary critic N.A. Dobrolyubova. In Goncharov’s new work, he believed, a “modern Russian type, minted with merciless rigor and correctness,” was brought out, and the novel itself is a “sign” of the current socio-political state of Russia.

The debate about him that arose with the advent of “Oblomov” does not fade to this day. Some critics and researchers objectively defend Dobrolyubov’s point of view, while others develop Tolstoy’s. The first see in the characters and conflicts of “Oblomov” a meaning that is primarily social and temporary, while others see, first of all, an enduring, universal meaning. Who is closer to the truth? To answer this question, it is necessary to take a closer look at the composition of the work, take into account its creative history, and also get acquainted with Goncharov’s philosophy of love and its reflection in the novel.

COMPOSITION, TYPICATION. OBLOMOV AND OBLOMOVSHCHINA. OLGA ILYINSKAYA AND STOLTZ. The plot basis of “Oblomov” is the story of dramatic love, and at the same time the fate of the title character - a thinking nobleman and at the same time a landowner - for Olga Ilyinskaya, a girl of integral and spiritual character, who enjoys the undoubted sympathy of the author. The central second and third parts of the total four are devoted to the relationship between Ilya Ilyich and Olga in the novel. They are preceded by a detailed picture of the stationary life of Ilya Ilyich in St. Petersburg and his upbringing in the conditions of the ancestral patriarchal Oblomovka, which made up the first part of the work.

The main thing in the novel was the question of what ruined his hero, endowed by nature with an “ardent head, a humane heart,” a soul not alien to “lofty thoughts” and “universal human sorrows.” Why was neither friendship nor love itself, which temporarily transformed Ilya Ilyich, able to overcome his life apathy, which eventually led Oblomov to the Vyborg side of St. Petersburg - this capital Oblomovka, where he finally plunges into spiritual, and ultimately eternal sleep? And what played a decisive role in this outcome: Oblomov’s upbringing and social position or some laws of modern reality hostile to the spiritualized personality? In which, to put it differently, part of the novel should we look for the answer to this question: in the first, with its famous picture of Ilya Ilyich’s childhood, or in the second and third, depicting the “poem” and “drama” of his love?

At first glance, the explanation of the character and further behavior of Ilya Ilyich lies in the upbringing and noble-landowner concepts of the hero, with which the reader becomes acquainted in the first part of the work. Following immediately after Oblomov’s words: “However... it would be interesting to know... why am I... like this?” - the picture of his childhood, it would seem, gives a clear and comprehensive answer to it. Goncharov himself called “Oblomov’s Dream” the “overture of the entire novel” in his autocritic article “Better late than never.” However, the novelist also has directly opposite assessments of the initial stage of the work. “If anyone is interested in my new work,” he wrote to his brother in Simbirsk in 1858, “then advise him not to read the first part: it was written in 1849 and is very sluggish, weak and does not correspond to the other two, written in 1857 and 58, that is, this year.” “Don’t read the first part of Oblomov,” Goncharov recommends to L. Tolstoy, “but if you bother, read the second and third.” The writer's indignation was caused by the French translation of Oblomov, in which the novel was arbitrarily “replaced” by its first part. “The point is,” Goncharov explained in “An Extraordinary History” (1875, 1878), “that this first part contains only an introduction, a prologue to the novel... and nothing more, but there is no novel! No Olga, no Stolz, no further development of Oblomov’s character!”

In fact: lying on the sofa or arguing with Zakhar, Ilya Ilyich is still far from the same person we recognize in his relationship with Olga Ilyinskaya. There is every reason to believe that in the course of working on the novel, Goncharov fundamentally deepened the image of its title character. Conceived back in the year of publication of “Ordinary History,” “Oblomov” was nevertheless created, essentially, in two relatively short periods, separating the original concept of the work from the final one. At first, the writer thought of depicting in a novel, called at that time not “Oblomov”, but “Oblomovshchina,” the history of a Russian noble landowner - from cradle to grave, in his village and city life, with the concepts and morals characteristic of the latter. An outline sketch of this Russian social and everyday type is contained at the end of the first chapter of “The Frigate “Pallada””. Note that the idea of ​​a “novel of a Russian landowner” was hatched in the mid-50s. and L. Tolstoy. Going back to the morally descriptive stories of the natural school, Goncharov’s novel would at the same time compare favorably with them in the thoroughness and “monographic” nature of the picture, the natural beginning of which was the depiction of the hero’s upbringing in his father’s house and his ordinary day. This fragment of the initial “Oblomov” became its first part, created back in 1849.

Neither the depiction of noble-landowner life, nor the characters limited by it could, however, captivate Goncharov for long. A student of Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, a Christian artist, Goncharov never limited the personality of his contemporary to the external conditions of life surrounding him, which did not obscure for him “man himself” as a phenomenon that was as universal, divine as social. The idea of ​​a “monograph” about a Russian patriarchal gentleman soon begins to be supplanted in Oblomov’s plan by the thought of the fate of a spiritually developed, ideally tuned personality in the modern world. “Having read what was written carefully,” Goncharov reported after completing the first part of the novel by A.A. Kraevsky, “I saw that all this had gone to the extreme, that I had taken up the subject in the wrong way, that one thing needed to be changed, another to be released, that, in a word, this work was no good” (my italics. - V.N.).

The new concept of “Oblomov,” nurtured by the artist for several years, was finally realized in July-August 1857, when Goncharov in the German city of Marienbad incredibly quickly, “as if by dictation,” created the second and third parts of the novel, which included Ilya’s relationship Ilyich with Olga Ilyinskaya and Agafya Pshenitsyna.

The compositional and semantic center of the work is now moving here, its “main task,” according to the writer. After all, only with Ilya Ilyich’s confession at the beginning of the second part of “Oblomov” does the plot arise, and then the novel action, which was absent in the first link of the work. Here, a completely different motivation for the hero’s life apathy appears than before. Telling Stoltz that “his life began with extinction,” Ilya Ilyich explains: “I began to fade away while writing papers in the office; Then he died out, reading truths in books that he didn’t know what to do with in life, he died out with his friends, listening to talk, gossip, mockery, angry and cold chatter, emptiness...” According to Oblomov, during his twelve-year life in St. Petersburg in his soul “there was a locked light that was looking for a way out, but only burned its prison, did not break free and went out.” The main burden of guilt for the hero’s immobility and inactivity is now, therefore, shifted from Ilya Ilyich himself to the spiritually unspiritual society.

The new appearance of the hero prompts Goncharov to make an attempt in 1858 to at least partially free the initial Oblomov from those specifically lordly concepts that sounded, for example, in Ilya Ilyich’s monologue about “others.” The writer also changes the title of the work: not “Oblomovshchina”, but “Oblomov”.

With the fundamental deepening of the creative task of the novel, the features of its initial concept in the final text of Oblomov nevertheless continue - together with the first part - to be preserved. It also contained a picture of the hero’s childhood (“Oblomov’s Dream”), in which Dobrolyubov saw the focus of the noble-landowner “Oblomovism” as life at the expense of the free labor of serfs. The critic explained in his article all the subsequent behavior and the very fate of Ilya Ilyich by his habit of it. What, however, is “Oblomovism” not in Dobrolyubov’s, but in Goncharov’s content of this artistic concept? This question leads us to the uniqueness of typification in the novel and directly when depicting life in Oblomovka.

It would seem that Goncharov simply masterfully described a noble estate, one of thousands of similar ones in pre-reform Russia. In detailed essays, the nature of this “corner”, the customs and concepts of the inhabitants, the cycle of their ordinary day and their whole life are reproduced. All and every manifestation of Oblomov’s life and being (everyday customs, upbringing and education, beliefs and “ideals”) are immediately integrated by the writer into “one image” through the main motif of silence and stillness, or sleep, under the “charming the power” of which resides in Oblomovka and the bar, and the serfs, and the servants, and, finally, the local nature itself. “How quiet everything is... sleepy in the villages that make up this area,” Goncharov notes at the beginning of the chapter, then repeating: “The same deep silence and peace lie in the fields...”; “... Silence and undisturbed calm reign in the morals of the people in that region.” This motive reaches its culmination in the scene of the afternoon “all-consuming, invincible sleep, the true likeness of death.”

Imbued with one thought, the different facets of the depicted “wonderful land” are thanks to this not only united, but also generalized, acquiring the super-everyday meaning of one of the stable - national and global - types of life. It is a patriarchally idyllic life, the distinctive properties of which are a focus on physiological needs (food, sleep, procreation) in the absence of spiritual ones, the cyclical nature of the circle of life in its main biological moments of “homelands, weddings, funerals,” people’s attachment to one place and fear of movement, isolation and indifference to the rest of the world. Goncharov's idyllic Oblomovites are at the same time characterized by gentleness and warmth and, in this sense, humanity.

Goncharov’s “Oblomovism” is not without its social and everyday features (serfdom of the peasants on the landowners). However, in Goncharov they are not only muted, but subordinated to the existential-typological content of the concept. An example of a kind of worldwide “Oblomovism” will be in the novelist’s work the life of a feudal-closed Japan, as if stopped in its development, as it is depicted on the pages of “The Frigate “Pallada””. The persistent desire and ability to emphasize in “local” and “private” circumstances and types some motives and characters fundamental to all humanity is generally a distinctive feature of Goncharov’s art of typification, which primarily ensured the artist’s works of enduring interest. It was fully manifested when creating the image of Oblomov.

Having spent his childhood and adolescence in the bosom of a calm, idyllic existence, Ilya Ilyich as an adult will largely depend on his influence. With reference to his spiritual needs, unknown to his ancestors (“music notes, books, piano”), but generally in a patriarchal-idyllic spirit, for example, he depicts to Stoltz his ideal of family life: he and his wife in the village, among “sympathetic” nature . After a hearty breakfast (“crackers, cream, fresh butter...”) and a walk together in an “endless, dark alley,” they wait for friends, with whom they have a leisurely, sincere conversation, followed by an evening “dessert in a birch grove, or else in field, on mown grass.” The “lordly caress” is not forgotten here, from which a beautiful peasant woman, pleased with her, defends herself only for appearances.

And yet, it is not this ideal that will captivate Oblomov in the second part of the novel, but the need, in Goncharov’s eyes, is truly human, capturing the soul of the hero with his deep and all-consuming feeling for Olga Ilyinskaya. This is the need for such a harmonious “norm” of behavior in which a person’s cherished dreams do not oppose his social and practical concerns and responsibilities, but spiritualize and humanize them.

As if by nature close to this “norm,” according to the novelist, Olga Ilyinskaya, whose personality was formed in conditions of freedom from some class-limited environment. Olga is as much a possible character, desired by the artist, as a real one. The integral appearance of the heroine organically merges concrete historical features with the eternal beginning of the Christian-evangelical covenants. Christian participation motivates Olga’s interest in Oblomov when the characters meet, and it accompanies Olga’s feelings in their future relationships. Calling her love for Ilya Ilyich a duty, Olga explains: “It’s as if God sent her... and told me to love her.” Olga's role in her “romance” with Ilya Ilyich is likened to “a guiding star, a ray of light”; she herself - to the angel, now offended by misunderstanding and ready to leave, now again committed to her mission as the spiritual resurrector of Oblomov. “He,” it is said about the heroine at the end of the second part of the novel, “ran to look for Olga. She sees in the distance, like an angel ascending to heaven, going up the mountain... He follows her, but she barely touches the grass and really seems to fly away.”

Olga’s lofty mission was completely successful for a time. Having thrown off his apathy with his late robe, Ilya Ilyich leads a fairly active lifestyle, which has a favorable effect on his previously sleepy appearance: “He gets up at seven o’clock, reads, carries books somewhere. There is no sleep, no fatigue, no boredom on his face. Even colors appeared on him, there was a sparkle in his eyes, something like courage or at least self-confidence.”

Experiencing the “poem of graceful love” with Olga, Oblomov reveals, according to the novelist, the best principles of both his own and the general nature of man: a subtle and true instinct of beauty (art, women, nature) as harmony, a fundamentally true view of “ relationship... between the sexes,” designed to culminate in a harmonious family union, deep respect for and worship of women.

Noting at the end of the second part that Oblomov “has caught up with life, that is, he has mastered again everything that he had lagged behind for a long time,” Goncharov at the same time clarifies: “He learned only what revolved in the circle of daily conversations in Olga’s house, what was read in the messages he received.” newspapers there, and quite diligently, thanks to Olga’s persistence, followed current foreign literature. Everything else was drowned in the sphere of pure love.”

The practical side of life (building a house in Oblomovka, building a road from it to a large village, etc.) continues to weigh on Ilya Ilyich. Moreover, he begins to be haunted by a lack of faith in his own strength, and with them in Olga’s feeling, finally, in the opportunity to realize in life the true “norm” of love and family. As if by chance, finding himself on the Vyborg side of St. Petersburg, which reminds the hero of the idyllic Oblomovka, he, however, visits Olga less and less and eventually marries his landlady Agafya Pshenitsyna.

Extremely difficult for both heroes (Olga experienced a deep shock; Oblomov “had a fever”), the collapse of their love is nevertheless depicted by Goncharov as not accidental, but destined for man by fate itself and therefore a universally significant drama. And Ilya Ilyich will forever preserve in the depths of his soul the bright image of Olga and their love, and the heroine will never stop loving Oblomov’s “honest, faithful heart.” At the end of the novel, Olga will fully agree with the description of Ilya Ilyich, which Stolz will give here to his friend: “This is a crystal, transparent soul; there are few such people; they are rare; these are pearls in the crowd!” There is no doubt that this opinion is shared by the author of Oblomov.

In fact: was it only Ilya Ilyich’s personal weakness that prevented him from realizing that true “norm” of life that was revealed to the hero after meeting Olga Ilyinskaya? And was it only the idyllic “Oblomovism” that was to blame for this?

These questions can be answered only taking into account Goncharov’s understanding of the fate of a harmonious “way of life” in the conditions of modern reality. The writer came to the bitter conclusion about the incompatibility of this ideal with the current “age” already in “Ordinary History”. The hero of “Oblomov” becomes convinced of his deep hostility towards him when he gets acquainted with the prevailing concepts and morals in St. Petersburg. The metropolitan society is collectively personified in the novel by the visitors of Ilya Ilyich in the first part, and later by the owners and guests of those living rooms and dachas where Stolz brings Oblomov. The meaning of life here comes down to a career with a government apartment and a profitable marriage (official Sudbinsky) or to satisfying empty secular vanity (Volkov), to writing in a fashionable spirit and on any topic (Penkin), hoarding and other similar “passions” and goals. United, in turn, by the generalizing motif of false activity and bustle, the scenes and figures of “St. Petersburg life” ultimately create a way of existence that is only at first glance not similar to the life of the motionless and drowsy Oblomovka. Essentially, this, in turn, completely unspiritual life is the same “Oblomovism,” but only in a metropolitan, civilized manner. “Where is the man here? - exclaims Ilya Ilyich with the full approval of the author. - Where is his integrity? Where did he disappear, how did he exchange for every little thing?.. All these are dead people, sleeping people...”

Achieving a truly human “norm” of existence is difficult, according to Goncharov, not only by the height of this ideal. Modern reality itself has placed powerful obstacles on the way to it in the form of the basic existing types of life: cold, soulless vanity, on the one hand, and not without a certain charm, especially for a tired soul, but calling only to the past, idyllic immobility, on the other. And only the success or defeat of the ideal in its most difficult struggle with these obstacles ultimately determines one or another fate of the spiritual personality in today's society.

The fate of her love is determined in the same way. Here it is necessary, leaving Oblomov for a while, to explain Goncharov’s philosophy of love and the place of love collisions in his novel.

Like “An Ordinary Story”, “The Cliff”, “Oblomov” is a novel not just with a love plot, but about different types of love. This is because love itself for Goncharov is the main beginning of existence, not only individual, but also family-social, even natural-cosmic. The idea that “love, with the power of the Archimedean lever, moves the world; that there is so much universal, irrefutable truth and goodness in it, as much lies and ugliness in its misunderstanding and abuse,” in “Oblomov” is put into the mouth of Stolz. This was the “capital” conviction of the writer himself. “...You are right,” wrote S.A. Goncharov. Nikitenko, - suspecting me... of believing in universal, all-encompassing love and that only this force can move the world, control the human will and direct it to action... Maybe I was consciously and unconsciously, but I strived for this fire with which all nature warms itself...”

In “Oblomov” Goncharov declared himself a gifted analyst of loving relationships. “She,” wrote a contemporary of Goncharov’s critic ND about Olga Ilyinskaya. Akhsharumov, “goes through a whole school of love with him, according to all the rules and laws, with all the slightest phases of this feeling: anxieties, misunderstandings, confessions, doubts, explanations, letters, quarrels, reconciliations, kisses, etc.”

The “School of Love” for Goncharov is the main school of a person. Love completes the spiritual formation of a personality, especially a woman’s, and reveals to her the true meaning and purpose of existence. “Olga’s view of life...,” the writer reports in the second part of “Oblomov,” “has become even clearer and more definite.” With feelings for Ilya Ilyich, for Agafya Pshenitsyna, “her life also became meaningful forever.” Stolz himself, passionate about his activities for a long time, exclaims, having received Olga’s consent to become his wife: “I’ve waited! How many years of thirst for feeling, patience, saving the strength of the soul! How long have I waited - everything has been rewarded: here it is, the last happiness of man!”

This omnipotence of love is explained by the most important ability that Goncharov endowed it with. With its correct understanding, love does not limit itself only to the happiness of those who love, but also humanizes other relationships of people, even class and class ones. Thus, in the person of Olga Ilyinskaya, who was close to the truth of love, the writer saw not just a “passionately loving wife”, a faithful friend of her husband, but “a creative mother and participant in the moral and social life of an entire happy generation.”

The focus of life, love in “Oblomov” directly characterizes the actual human essence of this or that type of existence. For understanding the idyllic Oblomovites, the most important thing is the author’s remark about their complete absence of deep heart passions, which they “feared like fire”; the soulless, vain meaning of the “St. Petersburg Oblomovism” is revealed by the vulgarly understood intimate interests of the Sudbinskys and Volkovs.

Let's return to the main reasons for the love, and therefore the life, drama of the central character of the novel. Was it possible for Ilya Ilyich to really find the “norm” of love, family and life? After all, it seems that Stolz and Olga managed to realize it in a family union. But is it?

Starting with Dobrolyubov, critics and researchers treated Stolz mostly negatively. The hero was reproached for rationality, dryness, and selfishness. In the image of Stolz, it is necessary, however, to distinguish between the plan and its execution.

Ilya Ilyich's friend is an interesting and deeply conceived figure. Stolz grew up and was brought up in the neighborhood of Oblomovka, but the conditions that formed his character were completely different. The hero's father, a German manager of a noble estate, instilled in his son the skills of independent and hard work, the ability to rely on his own strength. His mother, a Russian noblewoman with a tender heart and a poetic soul, passed on her spirituality to Andrey. Stolz also received beneficial aesthetic impressions from the rich art gallery in the neighboring princely “castle”.

Various national-cultural and socio-historical elements, from patriarchal to burgher, created, united in the personality of Stolz, a character that, according to the novelist, was alien to any limitation and one-sidedness. The young hero’s response to his father’s advice to choose any “career” is indicative: “serve, trade, at least write, perhaps.” “Yes, I’ll see if it’s possible for everyone,” said Andrey.”

Knowing no discord between mind and heart, consciousness and action, Stolz is “constantly in motion,” and this motive is extremely important. After all, only by tirelessly moving forward, and not by spiritual sleep and peace, is a person able to overcome those “deceptive hopes and painful obstacles” that life puts in front of him on the way to the “exceedingly destined goal.” And Stolz, who seeks in his life “a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit,” strives precisely for it, thereby fully meeting the author’s ideal.

Having earned deep trust, and then Olga’s mutual feeling, Stolz settled with his wife not in St. Petersburg or in the village, but in Crimea, in his own house on the seashore. The choice of this place is far from accidental: equally remote from the harsh North and the tropical South, Crimea is a kind of “norm” in nature. The following detail is also significant: from the gallery of the Stoltsev house “you could see the sea, on the other side - the road to the city.” The home of Stolz and Olga with its “ocean of books and notes”, the presence everywhere of “waking thoughts” and elegant things, among which, however, “a high desk like Andrei’s father had” found its place, as if connecting nature with its “ eternal beauty”, with the best achievements of civilization. Stolz's life is completely devoid of the extremes of rural immobility and vain urban activity. The author of the novel claims that the heroes are happy. True, Olga is sometimes visited by sadness and dissatisfaction. But Stolz reassures his wife by referring to the natural aspirations of a “living irritated mind... beyond the boundaries of everyday life,” the longing of a spiritual person for the absolute.

The happiness of Stolz and Olga, declared by Goncharov, nevertheless does not convince the reader. And not only because the novelist talks about it rather than shows it. What is more important is that the union of heroes in fact turns out to be self-contained, deprived of the main meaning of true love - its humanizing social results. The idea of ​​a harmonious, real-poetic personality in the figure of Stolz did not receive adequate artistic embodiment in the novel.

The declarative nature of the figure of Stolz and his “last happiness,” which was eventually recognized by Goncharov himself (“not alive, but just an idea”), is not explained by some creative miscalculation. As it turned out with the development of the work, Goncharov’s very hope of creating an image of a harmonious person and the same love based on the material of modern reality was a utopia. In a letter dated the year the novel ended, Goncharov stated to one of his correspondents: “Between reality and the ideal lies... an abyss through which a bridge has not yet been found, and hardly ever will be built.”

The final meaning of the image and of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is determined by the consciousness of this sad pattern.

Long before the end of the work, Ilya Ilyich, in a conversation with Stolz, remarked: “Either I did not understand this life, or it is no good.” According to Goncharov, Oblomov really does not understand life when he behaves in it as the heir to the soft-hearted, but inertly deceased “Oblomovism.” When, guessing a person’s cherished goal - indestructible, spiritualized and spiritualizing love and family - he does not show that spiritual and practical energy, without which achieving this goal is impossible. However, the named goal, in essence, was not given in “this life” both to the strong-willed Stolz, who tirelessly pursued it, and to Olga Ilyinskaya herself. This fact casts a different light on Oblomov. The hero's personal guilt is increasingly obscured by his misfortune. The main reason for the drama depicted in the novel is transferred from Ilya Ilyich, who ultimately preferred idyllic peace to eternal movement, to the soulless and soulless social reality, which is “good for nowhere.”

A correct understanding of the type created in the person of Oblomov is helped by the confessions made by Goncharov in a number of letters of the 60s. to an ardent admirer of his work, friend and assistant Sofya Aleksandrovna Nikitenko. “I’ll tell you,” we read in one of them, “what I haven’t told anyone: from the very minute when I started writing for the press... I had one artistic ideal: these are images of an honest, kind, sympathetic nature, in the highest degree of an idealist, struggling all his life, seeking the truth, encountering lies at every step, being deceived and, finally, completely cooling off and falling into apathy and powerlessness from the consciousness of the weakness of his own and others, that is, of human nature in general.”

Directly in connection with this ideal, the hero of “The Precipice”, the “artist” Boris Raisky, is mentioned here. However, almost the same words will be used at the end of “Oblomov” by Ilya Ilyich. “This,” Andrei Stolts says here about the “honest, faithful heart” of the hero, “is his natural gold; he carried it through life unscathed. He fell from the aftershocks, cooled down, fell asleep, finally, killed, disappointed, having lost the strength to live, but did not lose honesty and loyalty.”

The beginning of a “highly idealist” is indeed characteristic of the hero of “Oblomov,” although coupled with patriarchal-idyllic traits. Stated, in particular, by the parallels of Ilya Ilyich with Plato, Hamlet, Don Quixote, it explains to us why Stolz is friends with Oblomov and why Olga Ilyinskaya fell in love with him. The very name of Goncharov’s hero contains a hint of a person broken off by life, and not just rounded (from the ancient Slavic “oblo”) and fragmented (that is, a representative of an archaic way of life).

The hyper-personal reason for Oblomov’s drama gives an ambiguous meaning to the idyllic sympathies of Ilya Ilyich, which led him to the capital’s outskirts. Not only the hero’s weakness and timidity in front of the highest task of man, but also the protest - albeit passive - against the vain existence of the Sudbinsky-Volkov-Lenkins were expressed in Ilya Ilyich’s decision to remain on the Vyborg side of St. Petersburg. And if Oblomov’s “quixotic struggle... with life” - in its active manifestation - was limited to almost a single action - a “loud slap in the face” to Tarantiev, who dared to dirtyly distort the hero’s relationship with Olga Ilyinskaya, then Ilya Ilyich’s very reaction to this baseness ( “Get out, you bastard!” shouted Oblomov, pale, shaking with rage”) truly in the spirit of Don Quixote.

With the development of Oblomov, the increasing dramatization of the image of its title character was a direct result of Goncharov’s rethinking of the original concept of the work. Through the appearance of the Russian patriarchal-idyllic gentleman in Ilya Ilyich, the features of such “indigenous” human types as the classical heroes of Shakespeare and Cervantes emerged more and more clearly. Hamlet’s “to be or not to be” sounds like the question for Oblomov: “To go forward or to remain” in a state of rest? Ilya Ilyich is united with Don Quixote not only by purity of soul and idealism, but also by his relationship with his servant Zakhar. Refracting through “local” social and everyday signs and uniquely synthesizing in his personality the high aspirations, as well as the comedy and tragedy of these great “prototypes,” the hero of “Oblomov” ultimately acquired the meaning of their modern, nationally unique “successor.” In a word, a character that belongs to its era as much as it is eternal.

FEMALE IMAGES IN THE NOVEL. Having absorbed, according to the writer, “little by little the elementary properties of the Russian person,” the figure of the title person was not the only creative success of “Oblomov.” Contemporaries called Olga Ilyinskaya “an excellently outlined character,” emphasizing the unity of ideality with psychological persuasiveness. Quite a “living face” (Dobrolyubov), Olga really compares favorably in this respect with Stolz, although we know practically nothing about the heroine’s childhood or youth. Moreover: Olga is presented in the novel as if completely outside of everyday life. The spiritual essence of the heroine is nevertheless fully motivated - however, not by external, but by internal circumstances. Freed in her aunt’s house from the “despotic control of her will and mind,” Olga first “guesses and understands a lot” thanks to her “happy nature,” which “didn’t offend her in any way,” and finally develops as a person under the influence of the vicissitudes of her heart’s life - in relationships with Oblomov, then Stolz.

Independent in her choices and decisions, Olga is at the same time unusually sensitive to the truth of love. Love for her is not a passion, no matter how strong it may be, but a feeling of duty, sympathy, accompanied by the moral obligations of those who love to carry it to the end of their lives. “Yes... I,” she says to Oblomov, “seem to have the strength to live and love my whole life.” Hence the heroine’s demands on herself and her lover: Olga does not resign herself to Ilya Ilyich’s craving for peace, because she knows: the “norm” of love is given only by the movement “forward, forward.”

The direct opposite of Olga is the landlady, and then the wife of Ilya Ilyich, Agafya Pshenitsyna, as if completely dissolved in the cycle of everyday worries about food, sewing, washing, ironing, etc. The spiritual appearance of Ilyinskaya, whose features reflected the “presence of a speaking thought”, the richness of inner life, is emphasized, the external portrait of Pshenitsyna with her “full, rounded elbows”, “strong, like a sofa cushion, never moving chest” and “simplicity” of spiritual movements is contrasted . Just as “simply,” unaware of the high social purpose of this feeling and the obstacles standing in its way, Agafya Matveevna Oblomov fell in love and “passed under this sweet yoke unconditionally, without resistance and passion, without vague premonitions, yearnings, without play and music.” "

Far from her truth, but selfless, imbued with a maternal principle, Agafya Matveevna’s love is fanned at the same time in “Oblomov” with the author’s deep sympathy. After all, with her, a living soul awakened in this ordinary woman, human meaning and light were revealed in her previously almost automatic existence. Corresponding to the main creative principle of the artist, to reveal in the simplest “contemporary” the “man himself,” the image of the modest “official” Agafya Pshenitsyna became a great achievement for Goncharov and Russian prose in general.

ORIGINALITY OF STYLE. Along with the large-scale characters of the central persons of the work, its bright humor, literary and cultural context, “painting” and “music”, as well as such an artistic and stylistic element as “poetry” served to reveal the final meaning of “Oblomov”.

Goncharov’s special interest in the “poetic” moments of the depicted picture was noted by Belinsky in connection with “Ordinary History”. “In the talent of Iskander (A.I. Herzen - V.N.), - wrote the critic, - poetry is a secondary agent... in Mr. Goncharov’s talent, it is the first and only agent.” “The juice of the novel” was called “poetry” by the author of “Oblomov”, who believed that “novels... without poetry are not works of art” and their authors are “not artists”, but only more or less gifted writers of everyday life. But what did the writer mean by novel “poetry”?

We were talking not only about the high, actually ideal aspirations of our contemporaries, but also about those “universal... passions... sorrows and joys” that spiritually and aesthetically (“poetically”) enrich our life as its best, unforgettable manifestations.

In “Oblomov”, the most important of the “poetic” and poeticizing principles of the work was “graceful love” itself, the “poem” and “drama” of which, in the eyes of Goncharov, coincided with the main moments in the destinies of people. And even with the boundaries of nature, the main states of which in “Oblomov” are parallel to the origin, development, culmination and, finally, the extinction of the feelings of Ilya Ilyich and Olga Ilyinskaya. The love of the heroes arose in the atmosphere of spring with a sunny park, lilies of the valley and the famous lilac branch, blossomed on a sultry summer afternoon, full of thunderstorms and bliss, then died out with the autumn rains, smoking city pipes, finally broke off along with the raised bridges over the Neva and that’s all covered with snow.

“Poetic animation” (A.B. Nikitenko) “Oblomov” was also given by the spiritualized image of Olga Ilyinskaya, which reflected the writer’s ideas about the high purpose of women in the moral and aesthetic improvement of man. Going back, in turn, to a deep cultural and philosophical tradition, Goncharov’s apology for spiritualized femininity can be explained by the following words of the “artist” Boris Raisky in “The Precipice”: “We are not equal: you are above us, you are strength, we are your weapon. Do not take away from us... neither the plow, nor the spade, nor the sword from our hands. We will dig up the earth for you, decorate it, descend into its abysses, sail across the seas, count the stars - and you, giving birth to us, take care, like providence, of our childhood and youth, raise us to be honest, teach us work, humanity, kindness and that love, which the creator has placed in your hearts, and we will firmly endure the battles of life and follow you to where everything is perfect, where there is eternal beauty.”

In “Oblomov,” Goncharov’s ability to paint Russian life with almost painterly plasticity and tangibility was clearly demonstrated. Oblomovka, the Vyborg side, the St. Petersburg day of Ilya Ilyich are reminiscent of the paintings of the “Little Flemings” or everyday sketches of the Russian artist P.A. Fedotova. While not deflecting praise for his “painting,” Goncharov was at the same time deeply upset when readers did not feel in his novel that special “music,” which ultimately permeated the pictorial facets of the work.

Goncharov finds the sphere of cherished human “dreams, desires and prayers”, concentrated primarily in and around love, to be deeply related to music. The feeling of love itself, in its declines and rises, leitmotifs, unisons and counterpoints, develops in “Oblomov” according to the laws of a large musical instrumental composition. The relationships of the main characters of the novel are not so much depicted as played out “with the music of the nerve.” The very confession of Ilya Ilyich: “No, I feel... not music... but... love!”, which became the beginning of “Oblomov,” was provoked by Olga’s singing and was pronounced intermittently and “quietly,” that is, not in words, but like the soul of a hero. The musically whimsical development of love is well conveyed by Goncharov in Oblomov’s message to Olga, about which it is noted that it was written “quickly, with heat, with feverish haste” and “animation.” The love of the heroes arose “in the form of a light, smiling vision,” but soon, says Oblomov, “the pranks passed; I became sick with love, felt the symptoms of passion; you have become thoughtful and serious; give me your leisure time; your nerves started talking; you started to worry...” The pathos (“I love, I love, I love!”) was replaced by the “dissonance of doubts” of the hero, “regret, sadness” of both, again mutual “Anton’s spiritual fire”, then attractive and at the same time frightening “chasms”, “storms”. Finally, everything was resolved by “deep melancholy” and the consciousness of a common “mistake” and the impossibility of happiness.

Dominating the central parts of the novel, its “music” helped readers in a contradictory way to understand the already non-musical, non-spiritual nature of those “ways of life” in which it was replaced only by an external rhythm - biological or business.

The general and eternal aspect of the persons and situations of “Oblomov” expanded thanks to the extensive literary and cultural context of the novel. Previously, it was said that parallels between his personality and the heroes of Shakespeare and Cervantes were far from being ironic for Ilya Ilyich. But young Oblomov dreamed, together with Stolz, to see paintings by Raphael, Titian, Correggio, Michelangelo’s paintings and the statue of Apollo Belvedere, he was engrossed in Rousseau, Schiller, Goethe, and Byron. Each of these names and all of them together very accurately indicate the spiritual capabilities and ideals of the hero “Oblomov”. After all, Raphael is, first of all, the “Sistine Madonna”, in which Goncharov’s contemporaries saw the embodiment and symbol of eternal femininity; Schiller was the personification of idealism and idealists; the author of “Faust” for the first time expressed in this philosophical and poetic drama the human thirst for the absolute and at the same time the consciousness of its impossibility, and Rousseau idealized “natural” life among nature and far from soulless civilization. Ilya Ilyich, thus, even before his love for Olga, was well acquainted with both hopes and “universal human sorrows” and disbeliefs. And one more fact speaks of this: even in his half-asleep St. Petersburg existence, the hero could not, in his words, “indifferently remember Casta diva,” that is, that very female aria from “Norma” by V. Bellini, which would seem to merge with the appearance of Olga Ilyinskaya, as well as with the dramatic outcome of Oblomov’s love for her. It is significant that with his interpretation of Casta diva, Ilya Ilyich actually foresees this drama even before meeting Olga. “What sadness,” he says, “is embedded in these sounds!.. And no one knows anything around... She is alone... The secret weighs on her...”

Not a tragic, but a comic light is shed on Oblomov’s servant Zakhar by his clearly felt parallel in the novel with Don Quixote’s squire. Like Sancho Panza, Zakhar is sincerely devoted to his master and at the same time almost contradicts him in everything. Zakhar’s view of women is especially different from the concepts of Ilya Ilyich, which is fully expressed in his “proudly” gloomy attitude towards his wife Anisya.

Essentially parodying the high union of a man and a woman that Ilya Ilyich dreamed of and which Stolz and Olga Ilyinskaya tried to create in their lives, the married couple of Zakhara and his “pointy-nosed” wife became one of the main sources of humor in Oblomov. Abundant also in the description of Oblomovka (let us remember at least the economic “orders” of its senior owner Ilya Ivanovich or the reaction of the Oblomovites to the letter that came to them, etc.), the St. Petersburg day of Ilya Ilyich (let us remember Zakhar’s reasoning about who “invented” bedbugs and cobwebs, etc.), the life of the Vyborg side and the hero’s landlady, the humor of “Oblomov” is at the same time practically devoid of such means as angry irony, sarcasm, grotesque; he is called not to execute, but to “soften and improve a person,” exposing him to “an unflattering mirror of his stupidities, ugliness, passions, with all the consequences,” so that with their consciousness there will also appear “knowledge of how to beware.” Its main object is any extremes in relation to the “normal” personality and “way of life,” be it the “all-consuming” sleep of the Oblomovites or the “official” love of Sudbinsky, the abstraction of dreams and thoughts or their physiology.

The humor of “Oblomov” is colored by a good-natured and condescending attitude towards people, which does not prevent him from concealing “invisible tears” caused by the author’s awareness of the “weakness of his own and others’ nature.”

According to Goncharov, I.S. Turgenev once told him: “... as long as there is at least one Russian left, Oblomov will be remembered.” Nowadays, the title character of the writer’s central novel has become close to many people all over the world. Such is the charm of the book, in the creative crucible of which the biography of a Russian gentleman was transformed into a highly artistic study of the fate of the best hopes of “the man himself.”

Roman I.A. Goncharov's "Oblomov" shook up Russian society in the 50s and 60s. XIX century, it can undoubtedly be called one of the largest events in the literary life of the country. The attention of readers was primarily attracted by the acute problems of the novel; the literary elite was split into two parts, some considered Oblomov a positive hero, others made a comparison in favor of Stolz. But all the eminent writers and critics agreed on one thing: Goncharov managed to find a new successful solution to the theme of the “superfluous man.” The newly appeared novel was also recognized as an “encyclopedia of Russian life” and placed on a par with the immortal works of Pushkin and Lermontov, and the image of Oblomov entered the gallery of classical heroes of Russian literature along with Evgeny Onegin and Grigory Pechorin.

One of the distinctive features of the novel is the originality of the development of the conflict. The entire work is divided into four logical parts.

In the first part, the author introduces us to Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. The first pages are entirely devoted to the description of the hero. From the very beginning, Goncharov creates the image of such a good-natured, sincere person. He describes Oblomov’s lifestyle with irony, but is immediately surprised at how wonderfully laziness suits this man. In general, the central character of the first part is Ilya Ilyich; quite a significant part of the work is devoted to his general characteristics. The character of the hero is revealed both through the description of everyday life and through the image of Zakhar, but mainly, of course, through Oblomov’s communication with his guests. Thus, a social conflict arises; the author describes the hero’s attitude to the world around him as the attitude of a person to a large anthill, where everyone is rushing about their business, and he is not interested in their problems. The social conflict is finally formed when the author introduces the image of Stolz. He first appears immediately after Oblomov’s dream, thus the character of Ilya Ilyich is already clearly opposed to the character of his friend, and since these are not just characters, but entire types, the social conflict takes the form of a opposition between Oblomov and Stolz.

With the arrival of Stolz, the action seems to receive a powerful impetus. Andrei pulls his friend out of isolation, and this contributes to a much deeper development of the hero's image. The second part is more eventful than the first. Oblomov begins to appear in society, communicate with other people and, most importantly, meets the Ilyinskys. Olga strikes Oblomov’s heart, his laziness finally disappears. This is the beginning of a love conflict.

The third part is a complete description of the love of Oblomov and Olga. The tension of the social conflict is weakening, since Stolz has gone abroad, and Oblomov seems to have finally “re-educated”. His activity reaches its climax, the hitherto unknown rich inner world of Oblomov is completely revealed. In this part, in fact, the culmination and denouement of the love conflict occurs. Ilya Ilyich could not, even for the sake of Olga, completely break with the past. He understands this and is not going to fight any further. This suggests that simultaneously with the love conflict, an internal conflict was developing in Oblomov himself.

The culmination of the internal conflict is a difficult choice between movement and stagnation, Olga and Pshenitsyna. The choice is made, the final break with Olga and Stolz occurs.

The fourth and final part is Oblomov’s return to his usual Oblomovism. The main problem of the novel is summed up: when will Russian people get rid of Oblomovism, wake up from spiritual sleep and go forward, towards the sun. Therefore, never. Ilya Ilyich’s inner world has calmed down, now completely. The finishing touches are being applied to Oblomov’s portrait; he is shown as an aged man surrounded by his family, where he has finally plunged into spiritual hibernation. And with the death of Oblomov, there is a visible end to the plot-shaping social conflict. It would seem that the ideal person is Stolz, but he cannot be considered a winner. The ending of the novel remains open; the conflict between two personality types continues.

Particular attention is drawn to the dynamics of action in these parts.

The first part is not so much the beginning of the plot-shaping conflict as it is an exposition, an introduction to the main character. The unhurried pace of the narrative, the absence of a change in the scene of action - all this characterizes Ilya Ilyich and his measured life. However, the action develops with the arrival of Stolz, the dynamics become more intense, Oblomov “wakes up” and ceases to be a ruin, a mattress. He meets Olga, this is the beginning of another plot-shaping conflict. And in the third part, its culmination occurs, the culmination of Oblomov’s life. From the moment Oblomov is chosen, the action begins to slow down, the tension begins to drop. Ilya Ilyich returns to his robe, and nothing can pull him back out.

In general, the dynamics of the main events of the novel are associated with the change of seasons. Here the landscape plays a special plot and compositional role.

So, the development of the action is the spring of Oblomov’s love, the spring of his future life, summer is the happy time of selfless love for Olga, the desire to forever link his destiny with her, and autumn, the autumn of the soul of Ilya Ilyich, his love “fades”, life loses its meaning . Of course, what first attracts attention is the description of summer. Goncharov masterfully knew how to show the climax, the peak of summer - the July heat, the measured breath of nature, the heat of the field and the coolness of the forest. The descriptions are full of colors, they fully correspond to the mood of the main characters.

Of course, the role of landscape in revealing characters is great. The summer landscape characterizes Ilyinskaya, the autumn landscape – Pshenitsyna. Undoubtedly, in some ways Olga is inferior to Pshenitsyna, but the meager and gray descriptions of the Vyborg side, the very life of the hostess, do not speak in her favor.

The landscape is also interesting in terms of understanding the special plot and compositional role of “Oblomov’s Dream”. The landscape in the dream is, of course, an idyllic picture of Oblomovka. Through a dream, unclearly, like in a midday haze, Oblomov sees lovely pictures: forests, fields, meadows, a river, rare villages. Everything breathes peace. Tears well up in Ilya Ilyich’s eyes. This moment is generally very important for understanding the character of the main character, and at the same time Goncharov is trying to show what Oblomovism is.

In "The Dream" the detail is very important as a means of describing Oblomov and Oblomovism. First of all, this is a clear, measured flow of life: the rituals of dressing, drinking tea, and taking an afternoon nap. That state, similar to death, that reigns in Oblomovka during sleep, the collapsing gallery and porch - all this is Oblomovism, people prefer to remember the old, fearing to build a new one, and this fear is depicted in a grotesque form: what prevents you from demolishing the gallery and building a new one? Nothing, but instead a strict order is given not to go to a dangerous place. On the other hand, all this serves to characterize little Ilyusha, while he was not like everyone else: he ran away from home during everyone’s sleep, ate dug up roots, observed nature and loved visiting the forbidden gallery. That is, until Oblomovism extended its power to him.

In general, the details characterize Oblomov well. This is a robe - a symbol of Oblomovism, and a book, laid on one page for many years, which indicates that time has stopped for Ilya Ilyich. His leisurely speech and habit of relying on Zakhar in everything fits perfectly with the image of a “master” who lives simply because he is a master. There is also irony in the descriptions: there is so much dust on Oblomov’s chairs that one of the guests is afraid of ruining his new tailcoat.

But the detail in “Oblomov” characterizes not only Ilya Ilyich himself. The lilac branch is also one of the famous symbols of the novel. This is the love of Olga and Oblomov, which faded so quickly. The crease above Olga’s eyebrow and the dimples on Pshenitsyna’s plump arms also hint at the peculiarities of the characters’ characters.

The plot and compositional role of the secondary characters is no less significant. Oblomov’s guests, on the one hand, emphasize his laziness, but on the other hand, they demonstrate his attitude towards vain and petty life. Zakhar is generally a copy of the master. Goncharov's ironic teasing of him extends to Ilya Ilyich.

The contrast between fathers Oblomov and Stolz gives rise to the main conflict of the work, the conflict of two bright types. Thus, antithesis in the novel is the main artistic device.

Another striking example of antithesis is the contrast between Olga and Pshenitsyna. The author never answered the question of which of them is better. But with the help of antithesis, he managed to more fully and vividly display the merits of both.

So, the plot and composition of the novel "Oblomov" are very interesting, the action is complex and intense. Goncharov used many techniques to diversify the narrative. All this makes the novel extremely interesting both from an artistic and philosophical point of view.

Novel-monograph. Is it possible to characterize “Oblomov” this way?

Can. A monograph is a scientific study devoted to one problem. The novel “Oblomov” is a special artistic study, as thorough and comprehensive as scientific ones. Drawing the image of one hero, Goncharov revealed him so deeply, connecting him with the environment that raised him, that, knowing the character, views, beliefs of Oblomov, we can judge thousands of others like him, the socio-political situation in Russia and the social psychology of the Russian nobility .

What is the main conflict on which the development of action in the novel “Oblomov” is built?

The main conflict on which the development of action in the novel is based is the internal struggle within Ilya Ilyich himself. It is stimulated by the struggle for Oblomov Stolz and Olga Ilyinskaya and ends with the victory of Oblomovism, which is supported by Zakhar and Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, who in their own way are very devoted to Oblomov.

How is the novel structured? What is the content of each part?

At the beginning of the work, the writer talks in detail about one day of Oblomov. How is the character of the thirty-two-year-old hero of the novel revealed here?

Why do you think the author felt the need to show his character's backstory? What is the significance of the chapter “Oblomov’s Dream” in the novel? Is this chapter only important for understanding Oblomov’s character? What is its significance for the modern reader?

What can you say about the writer’s attitude towards Oblomov? Does the author expose, ridicule his hero, or sympathize with him? Why do you think so?

Why couldn’t love for Olga Ilyinskaya revive Oblomov, return him to an active life (after all, he really wanted this)?

What is the role of Stolz in the fate of Oblomov? What explains his (Stolz’s) defeat in the fight for Ilya Ilyich?

What is Oblomovism? Who utters this word for the first time in the novel? Does Oblomov himself understand its essence correctly? How does P. A. Dobrolyubov explain the essence of Oblomovism? Material from the site

What brought Oblomov to the house of A. M. Pshenitsyna? What attracted Ilya Ilyich to the hostess? What role did she play in the master’s life? How does the writer feel about her? How can this be seen?

Is it possible to call the hero of the novel “an extra person” and put him in a row with Onegin, Pechorin, Rudin? How does Dobrolyubov answer this question? Do you agree with him?

Tell us about Goncharov's artistic skills. What role do descriptions (landscape, portrait, interior), artistic details (robe, sofa, lilac branch, etc.) play in the novel?

Why do you think Oblomov could not repeat the fate of Aduev Jr. (“Ordinary History”)?

Is the novel “Oblomov” outdated today? Why?

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

On this page there is material on the following topics:

• Goncharov's novel is a bummer why is it called that?
• the main theme of this novel, what is the main conflict
• Is Oblomov’s novel modern and why?
• Does Oblomov understand the essence of the word Oblomovism correctly?
• Does Oblomov himself understand the essence of Oblomovism correctly?

The plot and conflict of Goncharov’s “Oblomov” contain almost everything that had already been accumulated by Russian literature in the first half of the 19th century:

• The plot is based on the love of the main character and Olga Ilyinskaya,
• The conflict is based on the contradiction between the main character and the reality in which he lives.

But “Oblomov” would not have become a milestone in the development of Russian literature and in the self-understanding of the Russian national character if its plot and conflict had not been resolved so independently and in a new way.

Conflict in the novel"Oblomov"

The story of Ilya Ilyich’s love for Olga Ilyinskaya is solved in a unique way by the author, since the heroes have no external obstacles to happiness. They love each other, they are socially equal, love should have revived the hero to an active life.

But Olga’s love is not capable of doing this, not because such is this love, not because the heroine has a weak character, but because such is Oblomov’s character.

The hero's marriage to Agafya Matveevna, her touching love, and amazing attitude towards Ilya Ilyich also outwardly have no obstacles: the heroes are well off, there is no one who would treat them badly, who would weave intrigues. No, there are no external obstacles in the plot of the novel. But there are internal obstacles. It is they who are reflected in the conflict of the novel.

The bifurcation of the conflict line of the novel

We can say that the conflict in Oblomov seems to bifurcate.

• On the one hand, this is a confrontation between a gifted individual and Russian reality, in which this individual cannot express himself.
• On the other hand, the conflict is inherent in the character of Ilya Ilyich: a richly gifted nature and “Oblomovism” (in the expression. In the novel, both of these confrontations are interconnected, as if intertwined.

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov asks the question “Why am I...like this?” To understand the basics of the hero’s character, the writer introduces us to the world of Oblomovka. The quality that has been brought up for centuries that someone should help you, do for you what you can do yourself, forms a character that is not able to actively express itself in life. N.A. Dobrolyubov wrote:

“It started with the inability to put on stockings and ended with the inability to live.”

But Oblomovka emanates not only the labor of serfs and servants, a sleepy kingdom where everything peacefully breathes love and tranquility, but also that special poetry of Russian patriarchal silence, which gives rise to dreaminess and poetry in Ilyusha, the desire for a high ideal, an inner sense of freedom. These qualities of the Russian character

(“And to this day, Russian people, amid the strict, devoid of fiction reality that surrounds them, love to believe the seductive legends of antiquity...”),

When faced with Russian reality, they reject it. Neither in the service, where there is no human understanding, nor in friends for whom a career is more important, nor in women who are not capable of love, the hero cannot find an ideal, which is why he prefers to “lie on the couch”, not participating in this life, consciously refusing it.

In this, Oblomov’s character turns out to be the last “superfluous person” in Russian literature.

The basis of the novel’s conflict is the character of Oblomov

The writer shows that the foundations of this conflict are laid in the character of the hero. He has a faithful friend - Stolz, his complete opposite, he has a beloved woman who is ready for self-sacrifice, but his character as a hero makes him unable to be reborn to life.

What are the traits of this character?

1. Laziness, which the reader primarily sees in the main character, was brought up in him from childhood: work is a severe punishment, independence suppressed in childhood (“Those seeking a manifestation of power turned inward and faded away”),
2. Lack of systematicity in studies, daydreaming, in which the strengths and talents inherent in Oblomov find an outlet,
3. The desire to shift the solution of problems to someone else, the inability to practically resolve pressing problems (estate management).

Love in resolving this internal confrontation is a test for Ilya Ilyich. At first, this feeling changes the hero: he abandons many established habits. But this could not last long. Goncharov writes:

“To go forward means to suddenly throw off the wide robe not only from your shoulders, but from your soul, from your mind; together with the dust and cobwebs from the walls, sweep the cobwebs out of your eyes and see clearly!”

The hero is unable to do this. He refuses Olga. And in this, some see his final downfall, for which there is evidence in the novel, others - decisive self-sacrifice, the understanding that you cannot make your beloved happy. In the love of Agafya Matveevna, the hero finds a unique fulfillment of his ideal, “albeit without poetry.”

Oblomov’s figurative system in conflict resolution

The originality in resolving the conflict is also inherent in the system of images.

These are two women who loved Oblomov,

• active, charming, rich nature of Olga Ilyinskaya,
• and soft, touching in her love and devotion Agafya Matveevna.

Such love cannot be given to a negative hero.

But the main thing in understanding the internal conflict of the protagonist, of course, is the image of Stolz.

This character is the complete opposite of Oblomov. But this hero, who seems to have only positive qualities, is still not as attractive as Ilya Ilyich. There seems to be something missing in Stolz. He feels this himself (this is how he feels that Olga, having become his wife, has spiritually outgrown him), so he is so drawn to Oblomov, as if he has something that he does not have.

For all his rationality, orderliness, and progressiveness, Stolz seems to be devoid of dreams and imagination. And this rationality makes his character not Russian (it’s not for nothing that the writer makes the hero’s father a German). A kind of proof of this is the scene of the heroes’ last meeting. When Stolz, outraged by the situation surrounding Oblomov, expresses surprise at how the hero can live with such a woman as Agafya Tikhonovna, Ilya Ilyich, with dignity unexpected for the reader, says that this is his wife, about whom one cannot speak ill. This is where the difference in characters lies. This is the internal conflict in the hero and in his antipode.

I.A. Goncharov showed that patriarchal noble upbringing makes a person like his main character (it’s not for nothing that the surname Oblomov became a household name), giving rise to both the worst and the best traits of national character. This character comes into conflict with reality and withdraws from the struggle, preferring not to participate in it

(“...over the years, excitement and repentance appeared less and less often, and he quietly and gradually settled into a simple and wide coffin for the rest of his existence, made with his own hands”)

Even love cannot revive the hero to an active life. But at the same time, Goncharov’s novel is not just a novel about the Russian reality of the mid-nineteenth century, but a novel - a warning, based on the contradictory features of the Russian national character.

Did you like it? Don't hide your joy from the world - share it

All these features of plot construction undoubtedly reflected the writer’s general view of life, which he sometimes expressed during the course of the narrative. Thus, in the introduction to Part IV of Oblomov, Goncharov talks about the changes that have occurred in the world during the year of Oblomov’s illness. He has a somewhat condescending attitude towards the events of public life (“This year has brought many changes in different places of the world: there it excited the region, and there it calmed down; there some luminary of the world set, another shone there...”, etc.), and then turns with interest to the depiction of the lives of Oblomov and Pshenitsyna. This life “changed with such slow gradualness as the geological changes of our planet.” The slow, “organic” movement of everyday life, the “physiognomy” of its everyday life attracts the writer more than the “thunderstorms” and “storms” of personal passions and, especially, political conflicts.

This property of Goncharov’s style appears especially clearly in his mature novels – “Oblomov” and “The Precipice” and mainly in the images of heroes associated with the patriarchal way of life. Thus, the portrait of Oblomov includes not only an image of his good-natured and swollen face, his plump body, but also his robe, and shoes, and the ability to get into them with his feet without looking, and his lying on the sofa, and his tendency to eat while lying down, and helpless attempts dress, and the uncleaned dishes around, and all the untidiness and dustiness of his room, etc. Thus, the portrait characteristics of Berezhkova include not only her short-cropped gray hair and a kind look, and the rays of wrinkles around her lips, but also her imperious manners, and her a cane, and its receipts and expenditure books, and all the household goods of life in a village style, with hospitality and treats.

But the episodes developing the conflict are not only preceded by large expositions, they are further, right up to the end of the novels, interspersed with chronicle scenes, where the characterization of the characters’ lifestyle and thoughts is deepened. In Goncharov’s first novel, in parallel with Alexander’s love affairs, his meetings with his uncle and aunt take place and their disputes continue on the topic of “the ability to live.” In “Oblomov” both love stories end by the 4th chapter of the last part and the next 7 chapters are devoted to depicting Oblomov’s life with Pshenitsyna and Stoltsev in their cottage. In “The Precipice”, episodes revealing Vera’s relationship with Raisky and Volokhov alternate with chronicle scenes of everyday life in Malinovka, disputes between Raisky and his grandmother, Kozlov, Volokhov, etc.