4 lines of fathers and children. Summary of the lesson on literature "Ideological disputes in the novel "Fathers and Sons" by I. Turgenev"

Criticism's perception of Bazarov's image

Two points of view

Novel character system

Two camps

Bazarov's doubles

Women's images

I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”

Test

There is a small rural cemetery in one of the remote corners of Russia.

Like almost all of our cemeteries, it has a sad appearance: the ditches surrounding it have long been overgrown; gray wooden crosses droop and rot under their once painted roofs; the stone slabs are all shifted, as if someone is pushing them from below; two or three plucked trees barely provide scant shade; sheep wander freely through the graves... But between them there is one, which is not touched by man, which is not trampled by animals: only birds sit on it and sing at dawn. An iron fence surrounds it; two young fir trees are planted at both ends: Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave. From a nearby village, two already decrepit old men often come to her - a husband and wife. Supporting each other, they walk with a heavy gait; they will approach the fence, fall down and kneel, and cry long and bitterly, and look long and carefully at the silent stone under which their son lies; they exchange a short word, brush away the dust from the stone and straighten the tree branch, and pray again, and cannot leave this place, from where they seem to be closer to their son, to the memories of him... Are their prayers, their tears, fruitless? Isn't love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent? Oh no! No matter what passionate, sinful, rebellious heart hides in the grave, the flowers growing on it serenely look at us with their innocent eyes: they tell us not only about eternal peace, about that great peace of “indifferent” nature; they also talk about eternal reconciliation and endless life...

(I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”)

B1.

B2. The above passage is a description of nature. What is this description called? work of art?

B3. The above excerpt is taken from the final part of the work, which tells about the fate of the heroes after the completion of the main plot. What is another name for such an artistic finale?

works?

Q4. The word “indifferent” (nature) is placed in quotation marks in the above passage. This is a quote: here Turgenev refers to a poem by a poet who is mentioned and quoted many times on the pages of Fathers and Sons. Write down the name of this poet.

B5. Establish a correspondence between the three characters of the work and their statements about the main character of the passage - Bazarov. For each position in the first column, select the corresponding position from the second column. Write your answer in numbers in the table.

B6. Establish a correspondence between Bazarov’s three remarks and the words that are missing from them (they are given in the nominative case). For each position in the first column, select the corresponding position from the second column. Write your answer in numbers in the table.

Q7. What is the technique of syntactically similar arrangement of speech elements in adjacent sentences or parts of sentences called (for example, An iron fence surrounds it; two young Christmas trees

planted at both ends: Evgeny Bazarov is buried in this grave or Are their prayers, their tears fruitless? Isn't love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent?)?

C1. What do you think makes it possible to bring the above passage closer to a prose poem?

C2. In what other works of literature do we encounter philosophical reflections about life and death and how do they resonate with the above passage (or with the work of I.S. Turgenev as a whole)?

I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”

Test

Six months have passed. It was a white winter with the cruel silence of cloudless frosts, dense, creaking snow, pink frost on the trees, a pale emerald sky, caps of smoke above the chimneys, clouds of steam from instantly opened doors, fresh, as if bitten, faces of people and the busy running of chilled horses. The January day was already drawing to a close; the evening cold squeezed the still air even more tightly, and the bloody dawn quickly faded. Lights were lit in the windows of the Maryinsky house

lights; Prokofich, in a black tailcoat and white gloves, set the table for seven places with particular solemnity. A week ago, in a small parish church, two weddings took place quietly and almost without witnesses: Arkady with Katya and Nikolai Petrovich with Fenechka; and on that very day Nikolai Petrovich gave a farewell dinner to his brother, who was going to Moscow on business. Anna Sergeevna left there immediately after the wedding, generously endowing the newlyweds.

At exactly three o'clock everyone gathered at the table. Mitya was placed right there; he already had a nanny in a glazed kokoshnik. Pavel Petrovich sat between Katya and Fenechka; The "husbands" lined up next to their wives. Our acquaintances have changed in lately: everyone seemed to have become prettier and more mature; Only Pavel Petrovich lost weight, which, however, gave even more grace and grandeur to his expressive features... And Fenechka became different. In a fresh silk dress, with a wide velvet hairpiece, with gold chain on her neck, she sat respectfully motionless, respectful to herself, to everything that surrounded her, and smiled as if she wanted to say: “Excuse me, it’s not my fault.” And she wasn’t the only one—the others were all smiling and also seemed to be apologizing; everyone was a little awkward, a little sad and, in essence, very good. Each served the other with amusing courtesy, as if everyone had agreed to act out some simple-minded comedy. Katya was the calmest of all: she looked around her trustingly, and one could notice that Nikolai Petrovich

I had already fallen in love with her madly. Before the end of dinner, he stood up and, taking the glass in his hands, turned to Pavel Petrovich.

“You are leaving us... you are leaving us, dear brother,” he began, “of course, not for long; but still I can’t help but express to you that I... that we... as much as I... as much as we... That’s the trouble, that we don’t know how to speak! Arkady, tell me.

- No, dad, I didn’t prepare.

– I’m well prepared! Just, brother, let me hug you, wish you all the best, and come back to us soon!

Pavel Petrovich kissed everyone, not excluding, of course, Mitya; At Fenechka’s, he, moreover, kissed the hand, which she still did not know how to give properly, and, drinking a second-filled glass, said with a deep sigh: “Be happy, my friends! Farewell!” (Farewell! (English).) This English ponytail went unnoticed, but everyone was touched.

“In memory of ____________,” Katya whispered in her husband’s ear and clinked glasses with him. Arkady shook her hand firmly in response, but did not dare to loudly propose this toast.

I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons"

B1. What genre does the work from which the excerpt is taken belong to?

B2. The chapter from which the excerpt is taken tells about the fate of the heroes after the completion of the main plot. What is the name of such a final, final part of a work of art, its ending?

B3. Write down the hero's surname (in the nominative case), which must be inserted instead of the blank.

Q4. Write down from the text a word that, along with the word “toast,” denotes a short table speech of a welcoming nature.

B5. Match the three characters in the passage with their future fate. For each position in the first column, select the corresponding position from the second column.

B6. Match the three characters with the lines they speak in the story. For each position in the first column, select the corresponding position from the second column.

Q7. What is the description of nature in a work of art called (the above passage begins with such a description)?

C1. Why, from your point of view, does Arkady hesitate to propose a toast to his friend out loud?

C2. In what other works of literature do we find scenes in which a family gathers at the table, and how do they resonate with the above passage (or with the work of I.S. Turgenev as a whole)?

M.E. SALTYKOV-SHCHEDRIN

"The Story of a City"

Turgenev is looking for an answer to the question: are nihilists progressive people who can rebuild the world, or is it dangerous people, because for them there is no God, no higher will?

Discussion about the novel:

1. M.A. Antonovich “Asmodeus of our time”: Bazarov is a “caricature” of the younger generation. Turgenev slandered the “children.”

2. DI. Pisarev "Bazarov": Bazarov is an artistically embodied dream of a powerful reformer.

3. N.N. Strakhov “I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons": Turgenev “had a proud goal in time e to point to the eternal." What made the novel such was the idea of ​​uninterrupted time. O m flow of spiritual connection between people.

Turgenev did not accept any of the points of view on his novel. He also refused to directly evaluate his hero in the work. The writer was reproached for insincerity and unclearness of the author's position.

In the novel, a wide panorama of Russian life is presented in two views and angles.

Turgenev brings these two views together, rather than contrasting them: FATHERS AND CHILDREN. One look often shines through the other.

For example:

1) Arkady Kirsanov’s look at the fields, at the peasants - an excerpt from chapter 3. (From: “The places they passed through could not be called picturesque” to: “He threw off his overcoat and looked at his father so cheerfully, like such a young boy, that he hugged him again”).

2) A look at the relationship between Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov and Fenechka:

ü This is a serf harem, the master has the right to have a relationship with the serf.

ü From the point of view of children, this is love that knows no social barriers. This is an act in the spirit of the times.

Chronology of events.

28 chapters can be divided into 2 parts:

Part I (Ch. I - XIII) - Bazarov declares himself as a nihilist, expresses his views on life, defends his philosophy (before meeting Odintsova)

Part II (XIV - XXVIII chapters) - all of Bazarov’s life positions and beliefs are tested, the death of the hero is described.

Two parts - two circles of wanderings. Ring composition.

The 1st circle helps to understand the provisions of the theory of nihilism, the 2nd circle - “debunks” all of Bazarov’s denials. In the second half of the novel, a new Bazarov comes into similar situations, having experienced doubts, painfully trying to preserve his theory, to hide behind it from the complexities of the real world.

Analysis of the ideological conflict in the novel

In Chapter 10, an open ideological conflict occurs between Bazarov and the Kirsanov brothers. The dialogue of this chapter and most others is characteristic feature compositions of the novel.

A large number of disputes are due to the content of the novel. The presence of an acute conflict gives the work a dramatic feel, and the predominance in the manner of presentation of dialogues with the author's remarks, reminiscent of stage directions, speaks of the well-known theatricality of the novel; That's why the novel has been dramatized many times.

Main lines of dispute:

- about the attitude towards the nobility, aristocracy and its principles;

- about the principles 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.

The result of this dispute: Pavel Petrovich “turned pale” and did not start talking about aristocracy anymore - a subtle psychological detail of Turgenev that conveys Pavel Petrovich’s defeat in this dispute.

Second line of argument.

The second line of dispute is about the principles of nihilists. 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.

Are there like-minded people of Bazarov in the novel? They consider themselves nihilists Sitnikov and Kukshina. But 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 ugly.

Turgenev treats Bazarov with respect and with irony, disdain for Sitnikov and Kukshina, because Bazarov’s beliefs are deeper and sincere, but these people’s are false. Kukshina is a caricature of those who dress up as new people. People like her cannot be Bazarov’s true students, 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.

Fourth line of argument.

The fourth direction in the dispute is the differences in views on art and nature. Pavel Petrovich, defeated in everything else, found weak point from Bazarov and decides to take revenge. He believes that nihilism, “this infection,” has already spread far and captured the field of art.

Pavel Petrovich cannot be a real opponent in a dispute about art, because... I myself read about 5-6 French books and something in English in my youth. Russians contemporary artists he only knows by hearsay.

Bazarov's opponent in this dispute is 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, and the sweet melody of playing the cello.

Literature lesson in the technology of “critical thinking”.

General didactic goals: To create conditions for understanding and understanding the content of Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons”, to promote understanding of the connection of new material with life experience 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 inclusion in cultural heritage and process spiritual development 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:

1. Call(insert). At this stage, the previous experience is updated and the problem is identified.
2. 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.
3. 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.

1. 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 ( Dictionary Russian language S.I.Ozhegova, p.26)

Name the most famous antipodes in Russian literature (Chatsky and Molchalin from Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”, Grinev and Shvabrin from Pushkin’s novel “ Captain's daughter", Oblomov and Stolz from Goncharov's novel "Oblomov")

Teacher: Most often, recognizing the typology of such people, we carry out comparative analysis 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)

Examination 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

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 trousers out of his pocket beautiful hand with long pink nails.

The fourth group's answer is about the peculiarities of the characters' speech.

1. Important for revealing the images of the heroes of the novel is their speech characteristic. 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 ideological, ideological positions everyone. IN comparative characteristics 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 use the words as an epigraph literary critic Vorovsky Vatslav Vatslavovich. 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.

Teacher: 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.

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.

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.

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.

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. What's wrong is that Peredvizhniki artists, in his opinion, completely 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:

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 it was 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 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 hero’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.

1. 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

The fight took place that same day over evening tea. Pavel Petrovich went into the living room already ready for battle, irritated and determined. He was only waiting for an excuse to attack the enemy; but the pretext did not present itself for a long time. Bazarov generally spoke little in the presence of the “old Kirsanovs” (as he called both brothers), and that evening he felt out of sorts and silently drank cup after cup. Pavel Petrovich was burning with impatience; his wishes finally came true.
The conversation turned to one of the neighboring landowners. “Rubbish, aristocratic,” remarked indifferently Bazarov, who met him in St. Petersburg.
“Let me ask you,” Pavel Petrovich began, and his lips trembled, “according to your concepts, do the words “rubbish” and “aristocrat” mean the same thing?
“I said: “aristocratic,” said Bazarov, lazily taking a sip of tea.
- Exactly so, sir: but I believe that you have the same opinion about aristocrats as you do about aristocrats. I consider it my duty to tell you that I do not share this opinion. I dare say that everyone knows me as a liberal person who loves progress; but that is precisely why I respect aristocrats - real ones. Remember, dear sir (at these words, Bazarov raised his eyes to Pavel Petrovich), remember, dear sir,” he repeated with bitterness, “the English aristocrats. They do not give up an iota of their rights, and therefore they respect the rights of others; they demand the fulfillment of duties in relation to them, and therefore they themselves fulfill their duties. The aristocracy gave freedom to England and maintains it.
“We’ve heard this song many times,” objected Bazarov, “but what do you want to prove with this?”
“I want to prove eftim, dear sir (Pavel Petrovich, when he was angry, said with intent: “eftim” and “efto,” although he knew very well that the grammar does not allow such words. This quirk reflected the rest of the legends of Alexander’s time. The then aces, in rare cases when they spoke their native language, some used - efto, others - ehto: we, they say, are native Russians, and at the same time we are nobles who are allowed to neglect school rules), I want to prove efthy, that without self-esteem, without self-respect - and in an aristocrat these feelings are developed - there is no solid foundation for a public... bien public (public good (French).), public building. Personality, dear sir, is the main thing: the human personality must be as strong as a rock, for everything is built on it. I know very well, for example, that you deign to find my habits, my toilet, my cleanliness, finally, funny, but this all stems from a sense of self-respect, from a sense of duty, yes, yes, duty. I live in a village, in the middle of nowhere, but I don’t give up on myself, I respect the person in me.
“Excuse me, Pavel Petrovich,” said Bazarov, “you respect yourself and sit with your hands folded; What good is this for the bien public? You wouldn't respect yourself and do the same thing.
Pavel Petrovich turned pale.
- This is a completely different question. I don’t have to explain to you now why I’m sitting with my hands folded, as you deign to put it. I just want to say that aristocracy is a principle, and in our time only immoral or empty people can live without principles. I told this to Arkady the next day of his arrival and I repeat it to you now. Isn't that right, Nikolai?
Nikolai Petrovich nodded his head.
“Aristocracy, liberalism, progress, principles,” Bazarov said meanwhile, “just think, how many foreign... and useless words!” Russian people don’t need them for nothing.
- What do you think he needs? To listen to you, we are outside humanity, outside its laws. For mercy - the logic of history requires...
- What do we need this logic for? We can do without it.
- How so?
- Yes, just like that. I hope you don't need logic to put a piece of bread in your mouth when you're hungry. Where do we care about these abstractions!
Pavel Petrovich waved his hands.
“I don’t understand you after that.” You insult the Russian people. I don’t understand how you can not recognize the principles and rules! Why are you acting?
“I already told you, uncle, that we do not recognize authorities,” Arkady intervened.
“We act because of what we recognize as useful,” said Bazarov. “In these times, the most useful thing is denial—we deny.”
-- All?
-- All.
-- How? not only art, poetry... but also... scary to say...
“That’s it,” Bazarov repeated with inexpressible calm.
Pavel Petrovich stared at him. He did not expect this, and Arkady even blushed with pleasure.
“But excuse me,” Nikolai Petrovich spoke. “You deny everything, or, to put it more precisely, you destroy everything... But you also need to build.”
- This is no longer our business... First we need to clear the place.
-- Current state The people demand this,” Arkady added with importance, “we must fulfill these demands, we do not have the right to indulge in the satisfaction of personal egoism.”
Bazarov apparently did not like this last phrase; she emanated philosophy, that is, romanticism, for Bazarov called philosophy romanticism; but he did not consider it necessary to refute his young student.
-- No no! - Pavel Petrovich exclaimed with a sudden impulse, - I don’t want to believe that you, gentlemen, really know the Russian people, that you are representatives of their needs, their aspirations! No, the Russian people are not what you imagine them to be. He sacredly honors traditions, he is patriarchal, he cannot live without faith...
“I won’t argue against this,” Bazarov interrupted, “I’m even ready to agree that you’re right about this.”
- And if I'm right...
“Still, this doesn’t prove anything.”
“It doesn’t prove anything,” Arkady repeated with the confidence of an experienced chess player who foresaw the apparently dangerous move of his opponent and therefore was not at all embarrassed.
- How does it not prove anything? - muttered the amazed Pavel Petrovich. - So, you are going against your people?
- Would it even be so? - exclaimed Bazarov. - People believe that when thunder roars, it is Elijah the prophet in a chariot driving around the sky. Well? Should I agree with him? And besides, he’s Russian, and isn’t I Russian myself?
- No, you are not Russian after everything you just said! I cannot recognize you as a Russian.
“My grandfather plowed the land,” Bazarov answered with arrogant pride. “Ask any of your men which of us—you or me—he would rather recognize as a compatriot.” You don’t even know how to talk to him.
“And you talk to him and despise him at the same time.”
- Well, if he deserves contempt! You condemn my direction, but who told you that it is accidental in me, that it is not caused by the very spirit of the people in whose name you advocate so much?
- Of course! We really need nihilists!
- Whether they are needed or not is not for us to decide. After all, you also consider yourself not useless.
- Gentlemen, gentlemen, please, no personalities! - Nikolai Petrovich exclaimed and stood up.
Pavel Petrovich smiled and, placing his hand on his brother’s shoulder, made him sit down again.
“Don’t worry,” he said. “I will not be forgotten precisely because of that sense of dignity that Mr. ... Mr. Doctor mocks so cruelly.” Excuse me,” he continued, turning again to Bazarov, “perhaps you think that your teaching is new? You are wrong to imagine this. The materialism you preach has been in use more than once and has always proven untenable...
-- Again foreign word! - Bazarov interrupted. He began to get angry, and his face took on a kind of copper and rough color. “First of all, we don’t preach anything; this is not in our habits...
-What are you doing?
- This is what we do. Before, not long ago, we said that our officials take bribes, that we have neither roads, nor trade, nor proper courts...
“Well, yes, yes, you are accusers,” that’s what it’s called, I think. I agree with many of your denunciations, but...
“And then we realized that chatting, just chatting about our ulcers, is not worth the trouble, that it only leads to vulgarity and doctrinaire; we saw that our wise men, the so-called progressive people and exposers, are no good, that we are engaged in nonsense, talking about some kind of art, unconscious creativity, about parliamentarism, about the legal profession and God knows what, when it comes to the urgent ones bread, when the grossest superstition is strangling us, when all our joint-stock companies are bursting solely because there is a shortage of honest people, when the very freedom that the government is fussing about will hardly benefit us, because our peasant is happy to rob himself in order to get drunk on intoxication in a tavern.
“So,” interrupted Pavel Petrovich, “so: you were convinced of all this and decided not to take anything seriously yourself.
“And they decided not to take on anything,” Bazarov repeated gloomily.
He suddenly felt annoyed with himself, why he had made such a fuss in front of this master.
- But just swear?
- And swear.
- And this is called nihilism?
“And this is called nihilism,” Bazarov repeated again, this time with particular insolence.
Pavel Petrovich narrowed his eyes slightly.
- So that’s how it is! - he said in a strangely calm voice. - Nihilism should help all grief, and you, you are our saviors and heroes. But why do you honor others, even the same accusers? Don't you talk like everyone else?
“They are not sinners than other sins,” Bazarov said through clenched teeth.
- So what? Are you acting, or what? Are you going to take action?
Bazarov did not answer. Pavel Petrovich trembled, but immediately controlled himself.
“Hm!.. Act, break...” he continued. - But how can you break it without even knowing why?
“We break because we are strong,” Arkady noted.
Pavel Petrovich looked at his nephew and grinned.
“Yes, the force never gives an account,” said Arkady and straightened up.
- Unhappy! - Pavel Petrovich cried out; he was absolutely not able to hold on any longer—even if you thought that in Russia you are supporting you with your vulgar maxim! No, this can drive an angel out of patience! Power! Both the wild Kalmyk and the Mongol have strength - but what do we need it for? We value civilization, yes, yes, dear sir, we value its fruits. And don’t tell me that these fruits are insignificant: the last dirty guy, un barbouilleur, a pianist who gets five kopecks an evening, and those are more useful than you, because they are representatives of civilization, and not brute Mongolian force! You imagine yourself to be advanced people, but all you have to do is sit in a Kalmyk tent! Power! Yes, remember, finally, gentlemen, mighty, that you are only four and a half people, and there are millions of those who will not allow you to trample under your feet their most sacred beliefs, who will crush you!
“If they crush you, that’s the way to go,” said Bazarov. - Only the grandmother said something else. There are not as many of us as you think.
-- How? Are you seriously thinking of getting along, getting along with the whole people?
“As a result of a penny candle, you know, Moscow burned down,” answered Bazarov.
- Yes, yes. First, almost satanic pride, then mockery. This is what young people are passionate about, this is what the inexperienced hearts of boys conquer! Look, one of them is sitting next to you, because he is almost praying for you, admire it. (Arkady turned away and frowned.) And this infection has already spread far. I was told that in Rome our artists never set foot in the Vatican. Raphael is considered almost a fool, because he is supposedly an authority; and they themselves are powerless and fruitless to the point of disgusting, and they themselves don’t have enough imagination beyond “The Girl at the Fountain”, no matter what! And the girl is written very badly. In your opinion, they are great, don’t they?
“In my opinion,” objected Bazarov. “Raphael is not worth a penny, and they are no better than him.”
- Bravo! Bravo! Listen, Arkady... this is how modern young people should express themselves! And how, do you think, they won’t follow you! Previously, 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 were just idiots, but now they suddenly became nihilists.
“So your vaunted self-esteem has betrayed you,” Bazarov remarked phlegmatically, while Arkady flushed and his eyes sparkled. “Our dispute has gone too far... It seems it’s better to stop it.” “And then I will be ready to agree with you,” he added, standing up, “when you present me with at least one resolution in our modern life, in the family or in society, that would not cause complete and merciless denial.
“I’ll present you with millions of such decisions,” exclaimed Pavel Petrovich, “millions!” Yes, at least the community, for example.
A cold smile curled Bazarov’s lips.
“Well, about the community,” he said, “you’d better talk to your brother.” He now seems to have experienced in practice what a community, mutual responsibility, sobriety and similar things are.
- Family at last, family, the way it exists among our peasants! - Pavel Petrovich shouted.
“And I think it’s better for you not to go into detail about this question.” Have you ever heard of daughters-in-law? Listen to me, Pavel Petrovich, give yourself a couple of days, you’ll hardly find anything right away. Go through all our classes and think carefully about each one, while Arkady and I...
“We should mock everyone,” picked up Pavel Petrovich.
- No, cut frogs. Let's go, Arkady; goodbye, gentlemen.
Both friends left. The brothers were left alone and at first only looked at each other.
“Here,” Pavel Petrovich finally began, “here are the youth of today!” These are our heirs!
“Heirs,” repeated Nikolai Petrovich with a sad sigh. Throughout the entire argument, he sat as if on coals and only furtively glanced painfully at Arkady. - Do you know what I remembered, brother? Once I quarreled with my late mother: she screamed, did not want to listen to me... I finally told her that you, they say, cannot understand me; We supposedly belong to two different generations. She was terribly offended, and I thought: what should I do? The pill is bitter - but you have to swallow it. Now it’s our turn, and our heirs can tell us: you’re not of our generation, swallow the pill.
“You are already too complacent and modest,” objected Pavel Petrovich, “on the contrary, I am sure that you and I are much more right than these gentlemen, although we express ourselves, perhaps, in a somewhat outdated language, vieilh, and do not have that daring arrogance ... And these current youth are so inflated! You ask someone else: what kind of wine do you want, red or white? "I have a habit of preferring red!" - he answers in a deep voice and with such an important face, as if the whole universe is looking at him at this moment...
- Would you like some more tea? - said Fenechka, sticking her head through the door: she did not dare to enter the living room while the voices of those arguing were heard in it.
“No, you can order the samovar to be taken,” answered Nikolai Petrovich and rose to meet her. Pavel Petrovich abruptly told him: bon soir (good evening (French).), and went to his office."

Differences in views on life between the liberal P.P. Kirsanov and the nihilist E. Bazarov lead to constant clashes between them. They argue about many things current problems of that time. As a result, we see their attitude to the social system, the nobility, the people, religion, and art. Pavel Petrovich is forced to admit that not everything is in order in society. For Bazarov, petty accusations are not enough if the foundations are rotten. “Correct society,” is the only benefit he sees in this. Kirsanov’s answer: “We value civilization. Its fruits are dear to us...” This means that this person is not going to change anything. Unlike aristocrats, whose main occupation is “doing nothing,” nihilists are not inclined to engage in empty talk. Activity is their main goal. But what kind of activity? The youth came to destroy and expose, but someone else should do the building. “First we need to clear the place,” says Bazarov. No less important is the dispute between the heroes about the Russian people. Pavel Petrovich is touched by his religiosity and patriarchy, backwardness and traditionalism. Bazarov, on the contrary, despises the peasant for his ignorance, believes that “the grossest superstition is strangling the country.” At the same time, Kirsanov is dismissive of ordinary people: when talking to peasants, he “wrinkles and sniffs cologne.” Bazarov is proud that he knows how to speak with the people, and his “grandfather plowed the land.” Serious differences between “fathers” and “sons” are also found in their attitude towards art and nature. Pavel Petrovich does not shy away from spiritual life and culture. He is irritated by Bazarov's denial of everything that has no practical meaning. For Bazarov, “reading Pushkin is a waste of time, playing music is ridiculous, enjoying nature is absurd.” He believes that art softens the soul and distracts from business. Kirsanov, realizing that he cannot defeat the nihilist in an argument, resorts to the last method of solving the problem - a duel. Ironically depicting the fight, Turgenev emphasizes the absurdity of Pavel Petrovich’s behavior, the inconsistency of his belief that by force it is possible to force the generation of “children” to think the same way as the generation of “fathers”. Kirsanov and Bazarov each remain with their own opinion. There was no winner in this confrontation between the nihilist and the aristocrat. The ending of the novel emphasizes the lifelessness of the ideas of both heroes. Pavel Petrovich leaves for Dresden, where he continues to lead an aristocratic lifestyle, realizing that a completely different time is coming in Russia. Bazarov goes to the village to visit his parents, admitting the inconsistency of his views. Thus, in the novel “Fathers and Sons” I.S. Turgenev showed the ideological struggle of two generations, the struggle of the old world becoming obsolete and the new world being born. We see that the principles and ideals of the “fathers” are becoming a thing of the past, but the younger generation, armed with the ideas of nihilism, is not able to ensure the future of Russia, because before destroying, you need to know what to build. Under no circumstances should the experience of predecessors be discarded. A strong thread must connect one generation to another, only then is movement forward possible.

Chapter 7. Tell the life story of Pavel Petrovich.

Conclusion:

Exercise.

^ IV. Analysis of the ideological conflict in the novel

(Main lines of dispute:

- about the attitude towards the people;

1. First line of argument.

What is the outcome of this dispute?

2. Second line of argument.

What are the principles of nihilists, what do they reject?

What is Kirsanov’s attitude to this position of Bazarov?

What do we know about these heroes?

4. The fourth line of argument.

Exercise.

^

How does Bazarov look at nature?

How is this line of argument resolved?

V. Lesson summary

^ Homework

^ 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 they can stay in the air for a while, but soon they must 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 main character carried 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.)

Lesson 4. Relationship between Bazarov and the Kirsanovs (chap. 5-11)

Lesson Objectives : analyze the images of the main characters of the novel; teach how to compile a supporting outline; draw a conclusion about the main conflict of the novel.

Lesson progress

I. Compilation of characteristics of heroes

For each hero, a table of the following form is compiled:

II. Compiling and working with supporting notes

1. The system of images of the novel “Fathers and Sons.” Student message.

N. P. Kirsanov

P. P. Kirsanov

Bazarov Arkady Kirsanov

Odintsova

Sitnikov, Kukshina

Parents

2. Ring composition (through it the evolution of the hero is shown).

The image of Bazarov occupies a central place in the composition of the novel. Of the 28 chapters, Bazarov does not appear in only two, in the rest he is the main thing character. All the other faces of the novel are grouped around him, revealed in their relationships with him, pushing aside certain of his features more sharply and brightly, emphasizing his superiority, intelligence, strength, and testifying to his loneliness among the district aristocrats.

The chronology of the novel allows us to establish that Bazarov’s personality was formed in conditions of social upsurge. He studied at the Medical-Surgical Academy in 1855-1859, that is, he was already a fully formed person.

III. Bazarov’s relationship with N.P. and P.P. Kirsanov, the people

Exercise.

List the main events described in chapters 5-11.

What do you think is the main social conflict at the heart of the novel? In the clash of which heroes does it reveal itself most clearly?

What first impressions did Bazarov and Kirsanov have of each other? On what basis did they arise? Did Bazarov know anything about the people he comes to visit?

(Arkady only told him that his parents were good people Arkady later tells the biography of his uncle. P.P. Kirsanov also knows nothing about Bazarov; N.P. Kirsanov - not enough: on the way, only Arkady certified his friend as a good friend, a wonderful fellow. This means that the main thing is the appearance, the appearance of the hero.)

(Bazarov’s smile reveals irony and calmness; self-confidence and intelligence are visible in his face. His clothes expose his democracy and simplicity of habits; his bare red hands speak of difficult fate. The Kirsanovs immediately saw that this was not a nobleman, but a person from a different circle. Even. the hairstyle told them a lot. “Hairy” - commoners were hated by the nobles.)

What character traits of Pavel Petrovich could you name after reading him? portrait description?

(Aristocracy, sophistication of tastes, desire for dandyism and gall of character; the archaic and meaningless nature of aristocracy immediately catches the eye. Please note - it is not at all a vice if a deep nature is hidden behind a beautiful appearance. The whole question is in Pyotr Petrovich’s exaggerated attention to his clothes).

What can you say about Nikolai Petrovich?

(He looks more democratic, he is not embarrassed by dusty clothes, but he still has a “coat and checkered trousers”, and not a “robe with tassels.” Bazarov saw kindness and timidity in him. From the description of his past, we see that he strives to keep up with the times).

What is Bazarov's relationship with the common people?

Read the relevant passages from the text of the novel, comment (Chapter 5, 10), draw a conclusion.

Find in the text the answer to the question: how do fathers and sons understand nihilism?

What new hero do we meet in Chapter 5?

How does Bazarov feel about art? Read his aphorism (chapter 6).

How does Arkady react to his words? Remember how Nikolai Petrovich read Pushkin on the way (chap. 6, 10).

Exercise.

Chapter 7. Tell the life story of Pavel Petrovich.

For what purpose does Arkady tell the biography of his uncle? (Tries to justify his uncle's behavior.)

How did Bazarov perceive her? Is Arkady’s phrase true that Pavel Petrovich “is more worthy of pity than scoffers?” can one agree with Arkady?

(Bazarov does not accept the lifestyle of P.P. Kirsanov. Three times through the mouth of Arkady, Turgenev recognizes Pavel Petrovich as “unfortunate,” who is “more worthy of regret than scoffers.” Moreover, the biography of Pavel Petrovich is told not by the author, but by Arkady, so in an indirect way it characterizes himself Arkady. Pavel Petrovich entered life along the beaten path - he followed in his father’s footsteps.)

And in what footsteps is Bazarov following?

(His words are “Every person must educate himself.”)

Conclusion: Bazarov and the Kirsanov brothers are people so different in their social and psychological appearance that, despite all their restraint, a conflict must occur between them.

What can you say about Nikolai Petrovich’s household? (chapter 8)

Exercise.

Draw a parallel with the content of the novel and a biographical fact from the life of the writer: “... having entered into legal possession of the estate in Sp. Lutovinovo, after the death of his mother, Turgenev dismissed a significant part of the courtyards to freedom, and transferred the peasants who wished to do so from barshina to quitrent. He contributed in every possible way to the general liberation and to the peasants who wanted to buy their freedom, he gave up a fifth of the redemption amount established in those years, did not take anything for the estate land, and transferred it free of charge to the peasants. IN last year Turgenev's Spassk exile manager took the settlement. At the age of two, he realized that his income was not enough to cover his salary, and there was not a penny for the owner’s subsistence. Remaining an inept owner of a huge but neglected estate, the writer helplessly threw up his hands or reassured himself with the proverb: “If it grinds, there will be flour.” “I traveled to all my villages,” he reported to P.V. Annenkov, “and must have seemed like a stupid fellow to my peasants.” When selling the harvest, he made the wheat cheaper; managed to buy crappy horses; The buildings erected under his supervision almost collapsed... He worked terribly, and by winter he began to get used to his hopeless situation. Summer 1860 Turgenev was destined to experience the loss of hopes for unity with the people. Life has shown that an abyss opens between the landowner and the peasant. Two years before the manifesto, Turgenev started a farm in Spassky and began cultivating the land with civilian labor, but he did not feel any moral satisfaction. The men do not want to obey the advice of the landowner, they do not want to go to the quitrent and enter into agreements with the masters (“... the people..., in the hope that... another decree will come out - and they will give the land for nothing, or the king will give it away... ")".

IV. Analysis of the ideological conflict in the novel

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.)

1. 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.)

2. Second line of argument.

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 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.)

3. 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), talks 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.)

4. The 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 Bazarov and Kirsanov seniors" can be conducted 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.

When using materials from this site - and placing a banner is MANDATORY!!!

Lesson on Russian literature on the topic: “The present century and the past century.” Conflict of generations in I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.”

Lesson development provided by: Panova Svetlana Viktorovna, teacher of Russian language and literature, Municipal Educational Institution Secondary School No. 12, Voronezh, email:

I tried to imagine the conflict between the two generations. I.S. Turgenev to Pauline Viardot Don't be afraid to open your soul and become in front of the reader face to face. Botkin

Goals and objectives:

• analyze the images of the main characters of the novel;
• draw a conclusion about the main conflict of the novel;
• develop text analysis skills;
• check and consolidate the student’s knowledge.

Equipment:

• portrait of I.S. Turgenev,
• illustrations for the novel “Fathers and Sons”,
• tests.

Students, in accordance with the lesson plan, are divided into two groups - “fathers” and “children”.

Progress of the lesson.

I. Introductory speech by the teacher.

The name of the novel “Fathers and Sons” is not accidental: the author contrasted in it the people of the 40s, liberal nobles, and the sixties, democrat commoners. The plot is based on an acute social conflict between the “new man” Bazarov and the world of the Kirsanovs. But it would be unforgivable to reduce the title of the novel to a change in the social ideology of generations, to a conflict between aristocrats and commoners. Turgenev's novel also has a psychological sound. The author contrasts two generations - “fathers” and “children” - in in every sense this word. (Quote on the board)

The most prominent representatives of two generations, irreconcilable worldviews of “fathers” and “children” are Evgeny Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. To determine our attitude to the problem of “fathers” and “children” in the novel, let’s highlight the main lines of debate between Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov:

• about the attitude towards the nobility, aristocracy and its principles;
• about the principle of activity of nihilists;
• about attitude towards the people;
• about views on art and nature.

I round Representatives from each group (1 person each) come out.

1 line of argument. “On the attitude towards the nobility, aristocracy and its principles”

Teacher's question. What is the attitude of Pavel Petrovich and Evgeny Bazarov to the nobility, aristocracy and its principles?

Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. Pavel Petrovich sees the main social force in the aristocracy. 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 is important because... society is built on the individual.

Teacher's word. Bazarov breaks down this seemingly harmonious system of views with simple arguments. Which ones?

Evgeny Bazarov. The conversation about the aristocracy giving England freedom is an “old song”; a lot has changed after the 17th century, so this reference by Pavel Petrovich cannot serve as an argument. Bazarov aptly notes that aristocrats are 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. According to Bazarov, idleness and emptiness are the main political principles of the entire noble society, living at the expense of others.

Question for the Children group. What is the outcome of this dispute? How does Turgenev show the defeat of Pavel Petrovich?

Answer. Pavel Petrovich was defeated in this dispute. The author shows how he “turned pale” and no longer started talking about aristocracy (a subtle psychological detail of Turgenev that conveys Pavel Petrovich’s defeat in this dispute).

2nd line of argument. "On the principles of nihilists"

Teacher's question. Pavel Petrovich has not yet laid down his arms and wants to discredit and accuse new people of unscrupulousness. “Why are you acting?” - he asks. And it turns out that nihilists have principles, they have beliefs. Which?

Evgeny Bazarov. Bazarov believes that nihilists act deliberately, based on the principle of the usefulness of activity for society. They deny the social order, i.e. autocracy, religion - this is the meaning of the word “everything”. Bazarov notes that the freedom that the government is worrying about 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.

Teacher's question. What is Pavel Petrovich’s opinion on this matter?

P.P.Kirsanov. 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.

Assignment to the “Fathers” group. Evaluate the opinions of the characters.

Answer. Bazarov's statements can be called revolutionary. Turgenev himself understood Bazarov's nihilism as revolutionary. But there are shortcomings in Bazarov's views. He does not consider it his business to build on a destroyed site. Bazarov does not have a positive program. The Kirsanovs at this moment do not show themselves as reactionaries. They are liberals compared to Bazarov.

The question is being studied. Who are the reactionaries and liberals?

3 line of argument. "About the Russian people."

Teacher's question. How do P.P. Kirsanov and Bazarov imagine the character of the Russian people?

P.P.Kirsanov. According to P.P., the Russian people are patriarchal, sacredly honor traditions, and cannot live without religion. These are Slavophile views. He is touched by the backwardness of the people and sees this as the key to the salvation of society.

Teacher's question. What is Bazarov’s opinion?

Bazarov. The situation of the people causes Bazarov not tenderness, but anger. He sees trouble in all areas of people's life. Bazarov 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”.

Assignment to the group “Children”. Evaluate the characters' beliefs. Explain who the “Slavophiles” are.

Answer. Slavophile views of P.P. When living in the English way, they talk about reaction. One cannot be moved by the backwardness of the people.

Bazarov turns out to be far-sighted. He has a sober attitude towards the people. He sees the lack of education and superstition of the people. Bazarov despises these shortcomings. However, he sees not only overcrowding, but also the discontent of the people.

4 line of argument. "Views on Art and Nature"

Teacher's word. Pavel Petrovich, defeated in everything else, found a weak point in Bazarov and decides to take revenge.

P.P.Kirsanov. Pavel Petrovich believes that nihilism, “this infection,” has already spread far and captured the field of art. In his opinion, the new Peredvizhniki artists are abandoning academic traditions and following old models, including Raphael. He believes that they have completely abandoned traditions. P.P. says that new artists are “powerless and sterile to the point of disgusting.”

Teacher's question. What is Bazarov’s view of art?

Bazarov. 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, but sees in it only the source and field of human activity. He has a master's view of nature. He understands it as a “workshop” in which a person is a “worker”.

Question for the “Fathers” group. Is P.P. right when he talks about the artists of the sixties?

Answer. P.P. both right and wrong. He is right in understanding that the new Peredvizhniki artists are abandoning frozen academic traditions and blindly following old models. He is wrong in that artists, in his opinion, have completely abandoned traditions.

Assignment to the group “Children”. Evaluate Bazarov’s opinion about art and nature in comparison with the opinion of Pavel Petrovich.

Answer. Bazarov doesn't know art well. He is only interested in science, because... he sees strength in her. He doesn’t know Pushkin and denies it. This was typical of some of the youth of the 60s.

But P.P. also cannot judge art, having read “about 5-6 French books” in his youth and “something in English.” He knows Russian contemporary artists only by hearsay.

Question for the “Fathers” group. How is the fallacy of both Bazarov’s and Pavel Petrovich’s ideas about art shown?

Answer. It is not Pavel Petrovich who is Bazarov’s opponent in this dispute, but Nikolai Petrovich. He loves art, but does not dare to enter into an argument. Turgenev himself does this, showing a feeling of the beneficial influence of Pushkin’s poems, spring nature, and the sweet melody of playing the cello.

Question for the Children group. What is your opinion about Bazarov’s attitude towards nature?

Answer. Although Bazarov has a master's view of nature, it is one-sided. By denying the role of nature as an eternal source of beauty that influences humans, Bazarov impoverishes human life.

Teacher's question. How is this line of dispute resolved by Turgenev himself?

Answer. In chapter 11 landscapes appear. All the signs of the evening affirm the existence of eternal beauty.

2nd round “Recognize the hero by description”

(Work in groups). Students are given sheets with the task “Recognize the hero by description”: for the “Fathers” group - a description of supporters of Bazarov’s views; group “Children” - a description of representatives of the older generation. After discussing the task, representatives of each group take turns giving answers (reading out the description of the hero and answering who it belongs to). The check is carried out by representatives of another group.

“Recognize the hero by description”

(Questions and tasks for the “Children” group)

1. “He looked about 45 years old, his short-cropped gray hair shone with a dark shine, like new silver; his face, bilious, but without wrinkles, unusually regular and clean, as if drawn with a thin and light chisel, showed traces of remarkable beauty" (Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov)
2. A gentleman in his early forties. He has a good estate of two hundred souls fifteen miles from the inn. In his youth, not being particularly brave, he earned the nickname “coward.” After a broken leg, he remained “lame” for the rest of his life (Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov)
3. “Arkady...saw on the porch of the manor’s house a tall, thin man, with tousled hair and a thin aquiline nose, dressed in an open old military frock coat” (Bazarov’s father, Vasily Ivanovich Bazarov)
4. “...A round, short old lady in a white cap and a short, colorful blouse” “...There was a real Russian noblewoman of the past; she should have lived over two hundred years old, in old Moscow time. She was very pious and sensitive, believed in all sorts of omens...” (Arina Vlasevna Bazarova, Bazarov’s mother)

“Recognize the hero by description”

(Questions to the “Fathers” group)

1. The face is “long and thin, with a wide forehead, a flat top, pointed nose downwards, large greenish eyes and drooping sand-colored sideburns, it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence” (Evgeny Bazarov)
2. A young representative of the noble generation, quickly turning into an ordinary landowner. Young candidate. (Arkady Kirsanov)
3. “A short man in a Slavophile Hungarian jacket jumped out of a passing droshky... An alarming and dull expression was reflected in the small, however, pleasant features of his sleek face; small, sunken eyes looked intently and restlessly, and he laughed restlessly: with some kind of short, wooden laugh” (Sitnikov, Bazarov’s false student)
4. “There was nothing ugly in the small and inconspicuous figure of the emancipated woman; but the expression on her face had an unpleasant effect on the viewer. She spoke and moved very casually and at the same time awkwardly” (Kukshina, Bazarov’s false student)

III round. "Test of Love"

Teacher's word. Every person in his life goes through one or another test, which often leaves an imprint on his future life. Our main characters, Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich, passed such a test, the “test of love.” How did this affect their lives?

(Work in groups. Solution problematic issue“How did they pass the test of love P.P. and Bazarov?)

Answer from the group "Fathers". In his youth P.P. was in love with Princess R. She died. Lyubov P.P. - this is a love-obsession that “broke” his life: he was no longer able to live as before after the death of Princess R. This love did not take place, it brought him nothing but torment.

Answer from the group "Children". Bazarov's love for Odintsova is a love-passion that bifurcates his soul, showing that this rude, cynical nihilist can be a romantic. At first glance, Bazarov’s love is similar to the love of Pavel Petrovich, it also did not take place, but it did not “trample” Bazarov; After an explanation with Odintsova, he plunges headlong into work. The test of love shows that Bazarov is capable of truly, passionately, deeply loving.

IV round. "Find the keyword."

Teacher's word. During his arguments and conversations with other heroes, P.P. and Bazarov express certain statements.

Exercise. Let's check how well you understand the text of the work. You are offered individual work on tests. You need to insert a keyword into sentences that represent the characters’ statements. Each group has tests that are different in content: for the “Fathers” group - statements by Pavel Petrovich, for the “Children” group - Bazarov. For this work, students receive an individual assessment.

"Find the keyword"

(Assignment to the group “Children”)

1. “Every person must……educate himself”
2. “Nature is not a temple, but ......, and man is a worker in it” (workshop)
3. “A decent...... is twenty times more useful than any poet” (chemist)
4. “Whoever...... in spite of his pain will certainly overcome it” (angry)
5. “The only good thing about a Russian person is that he has ... an opinion about himself” (very bad)
6. “…… …after all, this feeling is feigned” (love)
7. “Fix ......, and there will be no diseases” (society)
8. “You study the anatomy of the eye: where does that mysterious look, as you say, come from? This is all......, nonsense, rottenness, art" (romanticism)
9. “We ...... because we are strength” (break)
10. In my opinion, ...... is not worth a penny, and they are no better than him” (Raphael)

"Find the keyword"

(Assignment to the group “Fathers”)

1. “We are people of the old century, we believe that without ......, taken, as you say, on faith, it is impossible to take a step or breathe” (principles)
2. “Let me ask you, according to your concepts, do the words “rubbish” and “.....” mean the same thing?” (aristocrat)
3. “I live in a village, in the middle of nowhere, but I don’t give up on myself, I respect myself......” (person)
4. “I just want to say that aristocracy is a principle, and without principles in our time there can only be ...... or empty people” (immoral)
5. “You deny everything, or, to put it more precisely, you destroy everything. But you have to......" (build)
6. “No, the Russian people are not what you imagine them to be. He sacredly honors traditions, he is ......, he cannot live without faith" (patriarchal)
7. “Behold, today's youth! Here they are – ours......" (heirs)
8. “He’s the one who’s going to cut them. He doesn’t believe in principles, but in...... he believes” (frogs)
9. “This signor drove all this into his (Arkady’s) head....... this one" (nihilist)
10. “The human personality must be as strong as a rock, for everything is built on it......” (being built)

V round "The meaning of Bazarov's death."

Question from the teacher (to representatives of both groups). At the end of the novel, Bazarov dies. There is nothing accidental in Turgenev's works. So what is the meaning of Bazarov’s death? Why does the main character die?

VI. Conclusion.

Teacher's word. We have examined the points of view on fundamental issues of two of the most prominent representatives of different generations - Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov. In revealing the social level of the conflict, Bazarov is left alone, and Pavel Petrovich is alone, because Nikolai Petrovich almost does not enter into an argument. So what can we conclude?

Answer. It is no coincidence that Turgenev connected “fathers” and “children” in the title with the connecting conjunction “and”. It should be like this: both “fathers” and “children”. Children of fathers are the future, but only if they learn the traditions of the past.

(The teacher connects the signs with the inscription “Fathers”, “Children” using the conjunction “and” on the tablet.)

Teacher's word. You and I have come to the conclusion that in order for life to continue to develop, an inextricable connection between generations is necessary. “Children” build the future based on the experience of “fathers.”

Assignment for both groups. Let’s conclude our work today by writing a written answer to the question “How modern is Turgenev’s novel and are the questions raised in it relevant in our time?”

Children complete a written task.

Summing up. Grading for the lesson (for oral answers, and each student will receive two marks for written types work - test and answer to the question).

target:

Educational : create conditions for identifying the main “points” of the ideological dispute between the heroes of the novel.

Developmental : 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 : 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).

Progress of the lesson.

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) 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.

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.

(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.

Comparative characteristics of the heroes of the novel

E. Bazarov

P.P.Kirsanov

1. Origin, social affiliation

2. Portrait

3. Speech

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: 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).

“Ideological disputes between “fathers” and “children” in I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.”

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.

(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.Vorovsky

2.Comprehension.

B ) A table that is filled in as the lesson progresses.

Slide No. 10

Lines of dispute

Position of Kirsanov P.P.

Bazarov's position.

Who's right?

On the attitude towards the nobility

On the principle of activity of nihilists

About attitude towards the people

About views on art

(about 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.

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 worrying about 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.

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.

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.

Fourth line of argument.

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 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.”

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.)

Whose side do you think the author is on?

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 society.He is trying to convey to the reader the idea of ​​​​finding some kind of compromise between generations.

3. Reflection.