Hero of our time direction. Genre of the work: "Hero of Our Time"

Option 1.

B) lyrics;

D) story.

3. Determine the theme of the work:

A) topic " extra person»;

B) the theme of the interaction of an extraordinary personality with the “water society”;

C) the theme of loneliness among people;

D) the theme of interaction between personality and fate.

4. What was the name of the main character:

A) Maxim Maksimych;

B) Pechorin;

B) Grushnitsky;

D) Kazbich.

5. Why did Lermontov need to disrupt the chronological sequence of the stories?

A) to show the development, evolution of the hero;

B) to identify character traits in the main character that do not depend on time;

B) to show how main character suffers from the same problems all his life;

D) to emphasize the dynamism of the narrative.

6. Can Pechorin be called a fatalist?

B) with some reservations it is possible;

B) it is impossible;

D) Pechorin himself does not know whether he is a fatalist or not.

7. What role do they play in the novel? female images?

A) contribute to the disclosure of the image of the main character;

B) create a romantic flavor;

B) actively participate in the resolution moral problems novel;

D) are key figures.

A) positive;

B) negative;

C) it is impossible to say for sure.

9. What is more similar or different in the characters of Onegin and Pechorin?

A) more similarities;

B) there are similarities, but there are many differences;

C) these are completely different characters in different circumstances;

D) more differences.

10 List the chapter titles.

M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time"

Option 2.

1. What type of literature does this work belong to?

B) lyrics;

2. Name the genre of this work:

A) story;

3. Determine the main conflict of the work:

A) the hero’s conflict with secular society;

B) the hero’s conflict with himself;

B) Pechorin’s conflict with Grushnitsky;

D) the hero’s conflict with the political structure of society.

4. What was the name of the main character:

A) Azamat;

B) Maxim Maksimych;

B) Pechorin;

D) Grushnitsky.

5. Are the stories in chronological order or not?

A) chronologically;

C) partly chronological, partly not.

6. Can Pechorin be called an egoist?

A) Pechorin – “suffering egoist”;

B) Pechorin is not an egoist at all;

C) Pechorin is certainly an egoist;

D) it is impossible to say for sure.

7 Why does the novel take place in the Caucasus?

A) to create a romantic flavor;

B) to emphasize the exclusivity of the main character;

C) the location of the action does not matter;

D) to emphasize the tragedy of what is happening.

8. Positive or bad guy Pechorin?

A) positive;

B) negative;

C) it is impossible to say for sure.

9. Why does the main character seek death at the end of his life?

A) he is tired of life;

B) out of cowardice;

B) he was a fatalist;

D) he realized that he had not found and would not find his purpose in life.

10. List the chapter titles.

ANSWERS

EVALUATION CRITERIA

What type of literature does “A Hero of Our Time” belong to?

Read the text fragment below and complete tasks B1-B7; C1-C2.

Our conversation began with slander: I began to sort through our acquaintances who were present and absent, first showing their funny, and then their bad sides. My bile became agitated. I started jokingly and ended with sincere anger. At first it amused her, and then it scared her.

You dangerous man! - she told me, - I would rather fall under the knife of a murderer in the forest than on your tongue... I ask you not jokingly: when you decide to speak ill of me, you better take a knife and stab me - I think this It won't be very difficult for you.

Do I look like a murderer?..

You are worse...

I thought for a minute and then said, deeply touched

Yes, this has been my lot since childhood. Everyone read on my face signs of bad feelings that were not there; but they were anticipated - and they were born. I was modest - I was accused of guile: I became secretive. I felt good and evil deeply; no one caressed me, everyone insulted me: I became vindictive; I was gloomy, - other children were cheerful and talkative; I felt superior to them - they put me lower. I became envious. I was ready to love the whole world, but no one understood me: and I learned to hate. My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the world; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart: they died there. I told the truth - they didn’t believe me: I began to deceive; Having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life and saw how others were happy without art, freely enjoying the benefits that I so tirelessly sought. And then despair was born in my chest - not the despair that is treated with the barrel of a pistol, but cold, powerless despair, covered with courtesy and a good-natured smile. I became a moral cripple: one half of my soul did not exist, it dried up, evaporated, died, I cut it off and threw it away - while the other moved and lived at the service of everyone, and no one noticed this, because no one knew about the existence of the deceased its halves; but now you have awakened in me the memory of her, and I read her epitaph to you. To many, all epitaphs seem funny, but not to me, especially when I remember what lies underneath them. However, I do not ask you to share my opinion: if my trick seems funny to you, please laugh: I warn you that this will not upset me in the least.

At that moment I met her eyes: tears were running in them; her hand, leaning on mine, trembled; cheeks were burning; she felt sorry for me! Compassion, a feeling that all women so easily submit to, let its claws into her inexperienced heart. During the entire walk she was absent-minded and did not flirt with anyone - and this is a great sign!

M. Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”

Indicate the title of the chapter “A Hero of Our Time” from which the given fragment is taken.

Answer: Princess Mary

Establish a correspondence between the three main characters appearing in the above fragment and their characteristics given in the novel.

Explanation.

A-4. Werner is a doctor, which is why anatomical terms (“veins, corpse”) are used to describe him. Despite the down-to-earth nature of his profession, Werner is poetic (“he studied the strings of the heart”), kind and impractical; he never used his knowledge of the human heart to manipulate people (unlike Pechorin).

B-1. Grushnitsky is a poser; the main thing for him is to impress others. His disappointment in life is not a consequence of a sad experience, like Pechorin’s, but a tribute to fashion, a beautiful pose. Grushnitsky adorns himself with extraordinary feelings, like accessories.

B-2. Pechorin - an important place in the novel is occupied by the psychological portrait of Pechorin, based on contrasts in the appearance and behavior of the hero. The main thing in Pechorin’s appearance is his eyes, at the bottom of which one could read both deep knowledge of people and contempt for them and which “did not laugh when he laughed,” which is why his gaze made a heavy impression.

Answer: 412.

Answer: 412

Establish a correspondence between the three main characters appearing in this fragment and their future fate. Write the answer in numbers.

Write down the numbers in your answer, arranging them in the order corresponding to the letters:

Explanation.

Werner (4) - masks the consequences of the duel, since duels were prohibited by law at that time.

Grushnitsky (1) - killed in a duel by Pechorin, becoming a victim of his own intrigue (spread gossip about Mary and Pechorin, who stood up for the girl’s honor, challenging the slanderer to a duel; in preparation for the duel, Grushnitsky and his second agreed not to put a bullet in Pechorin’s pistol, thereby turning an honest duel into a vile murder, as a result of which he was killed by Pechorin when he refused to apologize).

Pechorin (2) - killed on the way from Persia, where he went, having experienced a number of personal tragedies associated with the loss of Vera, the death of Grushnitsky, the death of Bela, with a devastated soul and a cold heart, not expecting anything good from life, perhaps in search of death , which he finds.

Answer: 412.

Answer: 412

What is the name of the technique based on a sharp opposition (“good - evil”, “caressed - insulted”, “sullen - cheerful”, etc.) used by the author in Pechorin’s monologue?

Explanation.

This technique is called antithesis. Let's give a definition.

Antithesis is a turn of poetic speech in which, to enhance expressiveness, directly opposite concepts, thoughts, and character traits of the characters are sharply contrasted.

Answer: antithesis.

Answer: antithesis|contrast

What is the name in literary criticism for a type of comic based on hidden, veiled ridicule, characteristic of the hero’s self-analysis in this fragment?

Explanation.

This variety is called irony. Let's give a definition.

Irony as a means of self-characterization is one of the main features characteristic of Pechorin, which manifests itself in many situations (in particular, when summing up his communication with smugglers). This property reveals in him an intelligent person, capable of being critical of himself, and arouses the reader’s sympathy for him.

Answer: irony.

Answer: irony

What is the name in literary criticism for the means of allegorical expressiveness used by the author to convey the feelings of the heroine (the line “Compassion, a feeling that all women so easily submit to, has let its claws into her inexperienced heart”)?

Explanation.

This means is called metaphor. Let's give a definition.

A metaphor, in this case based on the similarity of sensations: just as a hawk plunges its claws into the body of its prey, so compassion covers the soul of an inexperienced girl listening to Pechorin’s confession.

Answer: metaphor.

Answer: metaphor

How does Lermontov define his main artistic task in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”?

Explanation.

The novel “A Hero of Our Time” is the first psychological novel in Russian literature, and one of the perfect examples of this genre. Psychological analysis the character of the main character is carried out in a complex compositional construction a novel whose composition is bizarre due to the violation of the chronological sequence of its main parts. In the novel “A Hero of Our Time,” composition and style are subordinated to one task: to reveal the image of the hero of his time as deeply and comprehensively as possible, to trace the history of his inner life. According to the author, Pechorin is “a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their full development.” The author does not just show the hero, but wants to explain and justify his character by the conditions of the life that Pechorin leads. Lermontov sees this as his main artistic task.

Throughout the novel, Pechorin encounters different people, but every time Lermontov puts his hero above them. The relationship between Pechorin and other heroes of the novel is very reminiscent of a psychological experiment that serves the same purpose - to show the inner world, to reveal the character of the heroes. This is what happens in the above conversation between Pechorin and Mary. Lermontov tries to understand the history of the human soul, to look into this soul, to find there that special thing that pushes the heroes to certain actions.

F.M. becomes the continuer of Lermontov’s traditions in penetrating the inner state of the hero. Dostoevsky. Raskolnikov is tormented, his experiences are shown in all the fullness of his feelings, again through collisions with different people, dreams, and the thoughts of the hero.

Tolstoy’s famous “people are like rivers” also gives us reason to consider him a successor to Lermontov’s traditions: with deep psychologism, the writer reveals the inner world of his heroes.

Explanation.

"Hero of Our Time" refers to the epic. Let's give a definition.

Epic is:

1) folk poetic variety of narrative works in prose and verse (folk epic). As an example of oral creativity, the epic is associated with an accompanying melody (chant) and the art of the performer.

2) one of the three types of fiction (along with lyrics and drama) - narrative.

3) literary genre, in which the object of the image can be any phenomena of the external world (people, events, objects) in their complex relationships and interconnections, as well as the inner world of people. The basis of the epic is storytelling, which in principle has no restrictions in time and space. The possibilities for depicting the objective world, the psychology of people, the ideas and moods of the writers themselves are also almost limitless. The main epic genres: novel, story, short story, short story, poem.

Answer: epic.

Answer: epic

Our conversation began with slander: I began to sort through our acquaintances who were present and absent, first showing their funny, and then their bad sides. My bile became agitated. I started jokingly and ended with sincere anger. At first it amused her, and then it scared her.
- You are a dangerous person! - she told me, - I would rather fall under the knife of a murderer in the forest than on your tongue... I ask you not jokingly: when you decide to speak ill of me, you better take a knife and stab me - I think this It won't be very difficult for you.
- Do I look like a murderer?..
- You are worse...
I thought for a minute and then said, looking deeply moved:
- Yes, this has been my lot since childhood. Everyone read on my face signs of bad feelings that were not there; but they were anticipated - and they were born. I was modest - I was accused of guile: I became secretive. I felt good and evil deeply; no one caressed me, everyone insulted me: I became vindictive; I was gloomy, - other children were cheerful and talkative; I felt superior to them - they put me lower. I became envious. I was ready to love the whole world, but no one understood me: and I learned to hate. My colorless youth passed in a struggle with myself and the world; Fearing ridicule, I buried my best feelings in the depths of my heart: they died there. I told the truth - they didn’t believe me: I began to deceive; Having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life and saw how others were happy without art, freely enjoying the benefits that I so tirelessly sought. And then despair was born in my chest - not the despair that is treated with the barrel of a pistol, but cold, powerless despair, covered with courtesy and a good-natured smile. I became a moral cripple: one half of my soul did not exist, it dried up, evaporated, died, I cut it off and threw it away - while the other moved and lived at the service of everyone, and no one noticed this, because no one knew about the existence of the deceased its halves; but now you have awakened in me the memory of her, and I read her epitaph to you. To many, all epitaphs seem funny, but not to me, especially when I remember what lies underneath them. However, I do not ask you to share my opinion: if my trick seems funny to you, please laugh: I warn you that this will not upset me in the least.
At that moment I met her eyes: tears were running in them; her hand, leaning on mine, trembled; cheeks were burning; she felt sorry for me! Compassion, a feeling that all women so easily submit to, let its claws into her inexperienced heart. During the entire walk she was absent-minded and did not flirt with anyone - and this is a great sign!

History of creation. Lermontov's only completed novel has a rather complex and contradictory history of creation. It is known that he was preceded by other experiences of the writer in prose. Even before leaving for the Caucasus in 1836, Lermontov began working on the novel “Princess Ligovskaya” from the life of St. Petersburg society in the 1830s, in which the heroes of his future work, Pechorin and Vera Litovskaya, appear for the first time. Work on the work was interrupted in 1837, and after the poet was expelled from the capital to the south, Lermontov began work on “A Hero of Our Time,” where a hero with the same name is depicted, but the location of the action changes - from the capital it is transferred to the Caucasus. In the fall of 1837, rough sketches were made for “Taman” and “Fatalist”: In 1838-1839. Active work on the work continues. First, in March 1839, the magazine “Domestic Notes” published the story “Bela” with the subtitle “From the Notes of an Officer about the Caucasus”, then in the November issue the reader became acquainted with the story “Fatalist”, and in February 1840 “Taman” was published. At the same time, work continues on the remaining parts of the novel (“Maksim Maksimych” and “Princess Mary”), which appeared in its entirety in the April issue of Otechestvennye Zapiski for 1840. The title “Hero of Our Time” was suggested by the magazine publisher A.A. Kraevsky, who recommended that the author replace the previous one with it - “One of the Heroes of Our Century,” which was reminiscent of the title of the novel that appeared shortly before that French writer A. Musset “Confession of a son of the century” (1836).

At the beginning of 1841, “A Hero of Our Time” was published as a separate edition, which included another preface (the preface to “Pechorin’s Journal” was already included in the first edition). It was written in response to hostile critical articles, appeared in print after the first publication. In response to accusations that Pechorin’s character is far-fetched and the assessment of this hero as slander “on an entire generation,” the author writes in the preface: “A hero of our time,” my dear sirs, is definitely a portrait of more than one person: it is a portrait made up of vices of our entire generation, in their full development,” Tom Lermontov thereby confirmed the realistic orientation of the work.

Direction and genre. “A Hero of Our Time” is the first realistic socio-psychological and moral-philosophical novel in Russian prose about the tragedy of an extraordinary personality in the conditions of Russia in the 30s of the 19th century. Due to the fact that “A Hero of Our Time” was written when the novel as a genre in Russian literature had not yet been fully formed, Lermontov relied mainly on the experience of Pushkin and Western European literary traditions. The influence of the latter was expressed in the romanticism of “A Hero of Our Time.”

Features of romanticism in the novel “A Hero of Our Time” lie in the special closeness of the author and the hero, the lyricism of the narrative, close attention to the “inner man”, the ambiguity of the hero’s past, the exclusivity of his nature and many situations, the closeness of the plot of “Bela” to romantic poems (“Demon”) and the increased expressiveness of the style, which is especially felt in Taman. Thus, the image of Pechorin is shrouded in an aura of mystery until the confessional second part of the novel, when the situation becomes more or less clear. We can only guess what life circumstances influenced the formation of his character, for what reason he ended up in the Caucasus, etc.

However, "A Hero of Our Time" is fundamentally a realistic work. First of all, realistic tendencies in the novel are associated with the objectivity of the author’s position in relation to the hero, in which Lermontov’s novel has similarities with Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin”. It is obvious that Pechorin and Lermontov are not the same person, although they are closer to each other than Onegin and Pushkin. In the Preface to the novel, Lermontov emphasizes this idea: “... Others very subtly noticed that the writer painted his portrait and portraits of his friends... An old and pathetic joke!”

The realism of the novel also lies in the formulation of the most important problems of our time and the creation of the image of a “hero of the time”, a typical representative of the era - a “superfluous person”. The realism of the novel is also manifested in the author’s desire to psychologically reliably and accurately explain the characteristics of the hero’s nature, connecting them with the conditions of the surrounding life. At the same time, other minor characters in the novel are also typical. The relationship between the individual and society is recreated in it in all its complexity and inconsistency. Reality appeared here in its different spheres, different types of life, characters and from different points of view.

Genre specifics Lermontov's works also turned out to be unusual and new. The genre nature of this work is given a special uniqueness by the combination of features of realism of a socio-psychological novel and romanticism, manifested in its construction and style. Belinsky already said that “A Hero of Our Time” is a holistic work, although it was composed of individual stories and short stories. For the first time in Russian literature, it combined socio-psychological and moral-philosophical issues. For philosophical and psychological insight into the nature of the “hero of the time,” a synthesis of narrative genres was required: travel notes, essays, short stories, psychological and philosophical story, diaries, confession. None of these forms, taken alone, was sufficient to explain the contradictory nature of modern man. The first part of the novel - the story "Bela" - is close in genre to travel notes, "Maksim Maksimych" is a short story, "Taman" is a romantic short story with an adventurous plot and an unexpected ending, and the largest part, "Princess Mary" is a psychological story. The work ends with the philosophical story “Fatalist”, in which, according to the laws of the genre, the plot is subordinated to the disclosure of a philosophical idea. In addition, the “Preface to Pechorin’s Journal” is an inserted “document” necessary for the further development of the story about the hero, and the “Pechorin’s Journal” itself is a kind of diary, consisting of several parts in which the hero talks about different episodes from his life .

Another distinctive genre feature of Lermontov’s novel is defined by the words from the author’s preface: “the history of the human soul.” They show a conscious focus on the open psychologism of the work. That is why “A Hero of Our Time” is the first psychological novel in Russian literature, although psychologism was also inherent in other works that appeared earlier, such as the novel “Eugene Onegin.” The task that Lermontov set for himself was not so much to depict the external life of Pechorin, his adventures, although such an element of adventurousness is also present here. But the main thing is to show the inner life and evolution of the hero, for which a wide variety of means are used, including not only monologues, dialogues, internal monologues, psychological portrait and the landscape, but also the composition of the work itself.

Plot and composition. “A Hero of Our Time” is not like the second one we are used to in literature half of the 19th century century classic Russian novel. There is no end-to-end storyline with a beginning and end; each of its parts has its own plot and characters participating in it. And yet, this is an integral work, united not only by one hero - Pechorin, but also by a common idea and problem. It is to the main character that all the main storylines novel: Pechorin and Bela. Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin" and the smugglers, Pechorin and Princess Mary, Pechorin and Grushnitsky, Pechorin and the "water society", Pechorin and Vera, Pechorin and Werner, Pechorin and Vulich, etc. Thus, this work, in contrast from “Eugene Onegin”, moko-heroic. All the characters in it, being full-blooded artistic characters, depicted with varying degrees of detail, are subordinated to the task of revealing the character of the central hero.

This is precisely what explains another feature of the novel’s composition: its parts are arranged in violation of the chronological sequence of events. At the same time, there are various sources from which we learn about Pechorin, as well as several narrators presenting events from different points of view. The range of these points of view on the hero is very wide. First, in the story “Bela,” we learn about Pechorin from a simple Russian officer Maxim Maksi-mych, a kind, honest man who spent a long time with Pechorin and treated him kindly, but completely different from him in spirit and upbringing. He can only note the peculiarities of the behavior of the “strange man”, who remained a mystery to him (and therefore to the reader). In the story “Maksim Maksimych” the narrator changes: he is an officer, fellow traveler and listener of Maxim Maksimych in “Bel”, clearly closer to Pechorin in age, development, social status, and most importantly, similar in spirit and frame of mind. He makes an attempt to somehow explain the characteristics of this unusual person. And finally, we get acquainted with the hero’s diaries, his unique confession, which allows us to see his soul as if “from the inside”, through self-disclosure, thorough analysis and exposure of the underlying reasons for the hero’s behavior and the characteristics of his character.

From the point of view of the temporal sequence of the presentation of events, we observe the crossing of two chronological movements. One of them follows the arrangement of parts of the novel: “Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, the preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”, followed by this journal: “Taman”, “Princess Mary” and “Fatalist”. With this construction, we gradually learn how a certain officer-narrator travels to the Caucasus, meets Maxim Maksimych for the first time, then the second time, when he receives Pechorin’s diaries from him, at the same time managing to see their author, and finally, learning about his death , publishes these notes. The other line is the chronology of events for 11echorip, that is, his biography. From this point of view, the parts should be arranged as follows: “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Bela”, “Fatalist”, “Maksim Maksimych”, preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”. But then the novel would not have worked. Belinsky noted that if we read all the parts in a different sequence, we will get several wonderful stories and two wonderful novellas, but not a novel as a single work. The structure of the novel chosen by the writer makes it possible to gradually introduce the reader into the spiritual world of the hero and create many acute situations - such as the author meeting his future hero and premature (from the point of view of the plot) announcement of his death.

From all this it follows that the composition of the novel is built not so much on the connection of events, but on the analysis of the feelings and thoughts of Pechorin, his inner world. The independence of the individual parts of the novel is largely due to the angle of view chosen by the author: he does not build the biography of the hero, but seeks the solution to the mystery of the soul, and the soul is complex, divided, and in a certain sense incomplete. The history of such a soul does not lend itself to a strict, logically consistent presentation. Therefore, the order of the stories included in the novel does not correspond to the sequence of events in Pechorin’s life. Thus, we can say that the composition of the novel “Hero of Our Time” plays a significant role in revealing the image of Pechorin, “the history of the human soul,” since its general principle is in the movement from riddle to solution. It is one of the main means of creating a reliable portrait of the “hero of the time.”

Topics and problems. Main topic novel - personality in the process of self-discovery, research spiritual world person. This is the theme of Lermontov’s entire work as a whole. In the novel, she receives the most complete interpretation in revealing the image of its central character - the “hero of the time”. Since the mid-1830s, Lermontov has been painfully searching for a hero who could embody the personality traits of a man of his generation. This is what Pechorin becomes for the writer. The author warns the reader against unequivocally assessing this extraordinary personality. In the preface to Pechorin’s Journal, he writes: “Perhaps some readers will want to know my opinion about Pechorin’s character? My answer is the title of this book. “Yes, this is evil irony!” - they will say. - Don't know". Thus, the theme of the “hero of the time,” familiar to readers from Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin,” acquires new features associated not only with another era, but with a special angle of consideration in Lermontov’s novel: the writer poses a problem, the solution of which he seems to provide to the readers . As stated in the preface to the novel, the author “simply had fun drawing modern man as he understands him and, to his and your misfortune, has met too often.” The ambiguity of the title of the novel, as well as the very character of the central character, immediately gave rise to controversy and various assessments, but fulfilled its main task: to focus attention on the problem of the individual, reflecting the main content of his era, his generation.

Thus, at the center of Lermontov’s novel “A Hero of Our Time” is the problem of the individual, the “hero of the time,” who, absorbing all the contradictions of his era, is at the same time in deep conflict with society and the people around him. It determines the originality of the ideological and thematic content of the novel, and many other plot and thematic lines of the work are connected with it. The relationship between the individual and society interests the writer both in socio-psychological and philosophical terms: he confronts the hero with the need to solve social problems, and problems of universal, universal humankind. Themes of freedom and predestination, love and friendship, happiness and fate are organically woven into them. In “Bela,” the hero seems to be testing for himself whether a rapprochement between a civilized man and a “natural” man is possible. At the same time, the theme of true and false romanticism also arises, which is realized through the clash of Pechorin - a true romantic - with those heroes who only possess the external attributes of romanticism: mountaineers, smugglers, Grushnitsky, Werner. The theme of the relationship between an exceptional individual and an inert environment is considered in the history of the relationship between Pechorin and the “water society”. And the line Pechorin - Maxim Maksimych introduces the theme of generations. The theme of true and false friendship is also connected with these characters, but to a greater extent it develops in “Princess Mary” through the relationship between Pechorin and Grushnitsky.

The theme of love occupies a large place in the novel - it is presented in almost all its parts. The heroines they embody various types female characters are intended not only to show different facets of this great feeling, but also to reveal Pechorin’s attitude towards it, and at the same time clarify his views on the most important moral and philosophical issues. The situation in which Pechorin finds himself in Taman makes him think about the question: why did fate put him in such a relationship with people that he involuntarily brings them only misfortune? In “Princess Mary” Pechorin undertakes to resolve issues of internal contradictions, human soul, contradictions between heart and mind, feeling and action, goal and means.

In "Fatalist" the central place is occupied philosophical problem predestination and personal will, the ability of a person to influence the natural course of life. It is closely connected with the general moral and philosophical issues of the novel - the individual’s desire for self-knowledge, the search for the meaning of life. Within the framework of this problematic, the novel examines a number of complex issues that do not have clear solutions. What is the true meaning of life? What is good and evil? What is human self-knowledge, what role do passions, will, and reason play in it? Is a person free in his actions, does he bear moral responsibility for them? Is there any support outside the person himself or does everything depend on his personality? And if it exists, then does a person have the right, no matter how strong a will he may have, to play with the life, fate, soul of other people? Will he pay for this? The novel does not give an unambiguous answer to all these questions, but thanks to the formulation of this kind of problems, it allows us to reveal the topic of personality in a comprehensive and multifaceted way.

Pechorin's reflections on these philosophical questions are found in all parts of the novel, especially those included in Pechorin's Journal, but most of all philosophical issues characteristic of its last part - “Fatalist”. This is an attempt to give a philosophical interpretation of Pechorin’s character, to find the reasons for the deep spiritual crisis of the entire generation represented by him, and pose the problem of individual freedom and the possibility of its actions. It acquired particular relevance in the era of “inaction”, which Lermontov wrote about in the poem “Duma”. In the novel this problem gets further development, acquiring the character of philosophical reflection.

Thus, the chapter is brought to the fore in the novel. This problem is the possibility of human action, taken in the most general terms and in its specific application to the social conditions of a given era. She determined the originality of the approach to the depiction of the central character and all other characters in the novel.

Main characters. The novel “A Hero of Our Time” is mono-heroic, and therefore in the center there is one hero - Pechorin. Since the appearance of the novel, the opinion has been established that “Lermontov’s Pechorin... is the Onegin of our time, the hero of our time,” as Belinsky confidently concluded, and after him all subsequent generations of critics and readers. And yet, even recognizing a similar type of personality in these heroes, it should be said about very significant differences associated both with the time that each of them reflects, and with the peculiarities of the author’s interpretation and attitude towards his hero.

It is known that Lermontov planned to create the image of his contemporary in contrast to the character of Onegin. Pechorin does not have that disappointment that leads to “longing laziness”; on the contrary, he rushes around the world in search of true life and ideals, but does not find them, which leads him to skepticism and complete denial of the existing world order. He craves activity, constantly, tirelessly strives for it, but what he does in life turns out to be petty, meaningless and useless even for himself, since it cannot dispel his boredom.

But it is not so much the hero himself who is to blame for all this, a bright and extraordinary personality who stands out from the general background of people of that time, capable of true freedom of thought and action. Rather, in accordance with author's position, the blame lies with the world, the society in which his hero lives. Lermontov in Russia in the 30s of the 19th century clearly senses Shakespeare’s situation: “the century has dislocated a joint,” “the connection of times has broken down.” More than once in his work, the writer raises the question of what a person should do in such a situation. The author poses the same question to his hero. It is very reminiscent of Hamlet’s question: “Which is nobler in spirit - to submit / To the slings and arrows of furious fate / Or, taking up arms on a sea of ​​turmoil, to defeat them with confrontation?” With all his energy, Pechorin strives to solve it, but does not find an answer. This is precisely what gives reason, despite all the differences between Pechorin and Onegin, to say that we have before us another “Russian Hamlet,” a human and social type doomed to be a “clever useless person,” a “superfluous person.”

Indeed, like all heroes united by the concept of “superfluous person,” Pechorin is characterized by egocentrism, individualism, a skeptical attitude towards social and moral values, combined with reflection and merciless self-esteem. He is also characterized by a desire for activity in the absence of a life goal. But the important thing is that Pechorin, with all his shortcomings, embodying the “disease of the century,” remains precisely a hero for the author. He was a realistic reflection of that socio-psychological type of person of the 30s of the 19th century, who retained and carried within himself dissatisfaction existing life, comprehensive skepticism and denial, so highly valued by Lermontov. After all, only on this basis could one begin to revise old ideological and philosophical systems that no longer met the needs of the new time, and thereby open the way to the future. It is from this point of view that Pechorin can be called a “hero of the time,” becoming a natural link in the development of Russian society.

At the same time, Pechorin shared the vices and diseases of his century. Of course, it’s a pity for him, because, in his own words, while he brings suffering to others, he himself is no less unhappy. But that doesn’t make him any less guilty. He analyzes himself, mercilessly exposing vices that, according to the author, represent not just the quality of a given individual, but the vices of an entire generation. And yet it is difficult to forgive Pechorin for his “illness” - disregard for the feelings of other people, demonism and egocentrism, the desire to make others a toy in his hands. This was reflected in the story of Maxim Maksi-mych, led to the death of Bela, the suffering of Princess Mary and Vera, the death of Grushnitsky, etc.

The strangeness and duality of Pechorin's character are recorded from the very beginning. “He was a nice guy, I dare to assure you; only a little strange,” says Maxim Maksimych, ready to explain this strangeness and boredom with French fashion. But Pechorin himself admits to endless contradictions: “In me, a restless imagination, an insatiable heart”; “My life is becoming emptier day by day.” Not for a minute is he free from the question: “Why did I live? For what purpose was I born?.. And, it’s true, it existed, and, it’s true, I had a high purpose, because I feel immense strength in my soul; but I did not guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions.” The “broken connection of times” seems to penetrate inside the “hero of time” and leads to the duality characteristic of him, as well as of Hamlet: “There are two people in me: one lives in in every sense of this word, another thinks and judges it.”

This is how another of Pechorin’s main features manifests itself. It received a special name - reflection, that is, introspection, a person’s comprehension of his actions, feelings, and sensations. In the era of the 30s of the 19th century, reflection became distinctive feature"hero of the times" About this characteristic feature Lermontov also writes about people of his generation in the poem “Duma,” noting that scrupulous introspection leaves a “secret cold” in the soul. At one time, Belinsky pointed out that all at least somewhat deep natures went through reflection; it became one of the signs of the era. Considering Pechorin’s character, the critic also notes: “Internal questions are incessantly heard in him, they disturb him, torment him, and in reflection he seeks solutions to them: he spies every movement of his heart, considers every thought. He has made himself the most curious subject of his observations and, trying to be as sincere as possible in his confession, not only openly admits his true shortcomings, but also invents unprecedented ones or falsely interprets his most natural movements.”

The state of reflection is terrible, it makes a person think even “... at such a time / When no one thinks.” And this thorough analysis kills the feeling. For example, Pechorin learns after a duel about Vera’s departure, rushes in pursuit, the horse falls under him, and he sobs powerlessly. He lost, perhaps, the only person close to him. But after a while, Pechorin finds that such a manifestation of emotions is even pleasant. Discovering in himself the capacity for a feeling that is new to him, he begins to analyze it and as a result comes to the conclusion that the tears that were so unusual for him were the result of an empty stomach and a sleepless night.

The reflective hero reveals himself most fully in confession and diary. That is why “Pechorin’s Journal” occupies a central place in the novel. From it we learn that Pechorin is also characterized by a state of peace, simplicity, and clarity. Alone with himself, he is able to smell “the smell of flowers growing in a modest front garden.” “It’s fun to live in such a land! Some kind of gratifying feeling flows through all my veins,” he writes. Pechorin feels that only in clear and in simple words is the truth, and therefore Grushnitsky, who speaks “quickly and pretentiously,” is unbearable to him. Despite his analytical mind, Pechorin’s soul is ready to expect good from people first of all: having accidentally heard about the conspiracy of the dragoon captain with Grushnitsky, he “with trepidation” awaits Grushnitsky’s answer. But Pechorin cannot fulfill his “high purpose” and use his “immense powers.”

Lermontov reveals a tragic discrepancy between the inner wealth of the individual and his real existence. Pechorin's self-affirmation inevitably turns into extreme individualism, leading to tragic separation from people and complete loneliness. And the result is an emptiness of the soul, no longer able to respond with a living feeling, even in such a small way that was required of him at the last meeting with Maxim Maksimych. Even then he understands his doom, aimlessness and disastrousness of a new and last attempt to change something in himself and his life. That is why the upcoming trip to Persia seems pointless to him. It would seem that the circle of the hero’s life has tragically closed. But the novel ends with something else - the story “Fatalist,” which reveals a new and very important side to Pechorin.

Fatalist- this is a person who believes in the predetermination of all events in life, in the inevitability of fate, fate - fate. This word gave the title to the final part of the novel “A Hero of Our Time” - a philosophical story that raises the question of freedom of human will and action. In the spirit of his time, which reconsiders the fundamental questions of human existence, Pechorin tries to resolve the question of whether the purpose of man is predetermined by a higher will or whether man himself determines the laws of life and follows them. He feels within himself, in his time, liberation from the blind faith of his ancestors, accepts and defends the revealed freedom of will of man, but at the same time knows that his generation has nothing to bring to replace the “blind faith” of previous eras.

As noted by the philologist Yu.M. Lotman1, the problem of fate, the existence of predestination, posed by Lermontov in the novel, forms part of the writer’s philosophical concept of the relationship between East and West, which is reflected in all of his work. According to this concept, belief in predestination is characteristic of a person of Eastern culture, and faith in one’s own strength is characteristic of a person of Western culture. Pechorin, of course, is closer to man Western culture. He believes that belief in predestination is a trait of people of the past; to modern people they seem ridiculous. But at the same time, the hero thinks about “what willpower this faith gave them.” His opponent, Lieutenant Vulich, is presented as a person associated with the East: he is a Serb, a native of a land under Turkish rule, endowed with an oriental appearance.

As the action of “Fatalist” develops, Pechorin receives triple confirmation of the existence of predestination and fate. Vulich was unable to shoot himself, although the pistol was loaded. Then he nevertheless dies at the hands of a drunken Cossack, and Pechorin does not see anything surprising in this, since even during the argument he noticed the “stamp of death” on his face. And finally, Pechorin himself tests fate, deciding to disarm the drunken Cossack, the murderer of Vulich. “...A strange thought flashed through my head: like Vulich, I decided to tempt fate,” says Pechorin. But his conclusion sounds like this: “I like to doubt everything: this disposition of mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character; on the contrary, as for me, I always move forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me.”

The story seems to leave open question about the existence of predestination. But Pechorin still prefers to act and check the course of life with his own actions. The fatalist turned into his opposite: if predestination exists, then this should make a person’s behavior even more active: to be just a toy in the hands of fate is humiliating. Lermontov gives exactly this interpretation of the problem, without unequivocally answering the question that tormented the philosophers of that time.

Thus, the philosophical story “Fatalist” plays the role of a kind of epilogue in the novel. Thanks to the special composition of the novel, it ends not with the death of the hero, which was announced in the middle of the work, but with a demonstration of Pechorin at the moment of emerging from the tragic state of inaction and doom, creating a major ending to the sad story of the “hero of the times.” Here, for the first time, Pechorin, disarming a drunken Cossack who killed Vulich and is dangerous to others, does not perform some far-fetched action designed only to dispel his boredom, but a generally useful act, moreover, not associated with any “empty passions”: the theme of love in “Fatalist” turned off completely. .

But in other parts of the novel, love intrigue is one of the main ones, since the question of the nature of this feeling, the problem of passions, is very important for revealing Pechorin’s character. After all, the “history of the human soul” is most manifested in love. And perhaps it is here that the contradictions in Pechorin’s nature are most noticeable. That is why female characters constitute a special group of characters in the novel. Among them, Vera, Bela, Princess Mary, and the girl Ondine from Taman stand out. All these images are auxiliary in relation to the central character, although each heroine has her own unique personality. Even Lermontov’s contemporaries noted some fadedness of the female images in “A Hero of Our Time.” As Belinsky said, “women’s faces are the weakest depicted,” but this is only partly true. The bright and expressive character of the proud mountain woman is presented in Bel; enigmatic, mysterious Undine; Princess Mary, charming in her purity and naivety; Vera is selfless and selfless in her all-consuming love for Pechorin. But all these wonderful female characters have one thing in common: among them there is no one who could stand on a par with Pechorin, forming the ideological and moral center of the novel opposing the hero, like Tatyana in Eugene Onegin. In Lermontov, Pechorin retains his priority in all storylines.

A bright, strong, extraordinary personality, Pechorin often appears in a halo in the eyes of others, especially women. romantic hero and has a truly hypnotic effect on them. “My weak heart again submitted to a familiar voice,” Vera writes about this in her farewell letter. Despite his proud and independent character, neither the wild mountain girl Bela nor the social beauty Mary can resist Pechorin. Only Ondine tries to resist his pressure, but her life is destroyed as a result of a collision with him.

But he himself thirsts for love, passionately seeks it, “frantically chases” after it around the world. “No one knows how to constantly want to be loved,” Vera says about him. It is in love that Pechorin tries to find something that could reconcile him with life, but every time a new disappointment awaits him. Perhaps this happens because Pechorin is forced to constantly chase more and more new impressions, to look for new love, boredom, and not the desire to find a soul mate. “You loved me as property, as a source of joys, anxieties and sorrows, replacing each other, without which life is boring and monotonous,” Vera rightly notes.

It is obvious that Pechorin’s attitude towards women and love is very peculiar. “I only satisfied the strange need of my heart, greedily absorbing their feelings, their tenderness, their joys and sufferings - and I could never get enough.” These words of the hero sound like undisguised selfishness, and let Pechorin himself suffer from it, but even more so it concerns those women with whom his life was connected. Almost always, a meeting with him ends tragically for them - Bela dies, Princess Mary becomes seriously ill, the established way of life of the girl Ondine from the short story “Taman” is overthrown, Pechorin’s love Vera brought suffering and grief. It is Vera who directly connects the concept of evil with Pechorin: “In no one is evil so attractive,” she says. Her words are literally repeated by Pechorin himself in his reflections on Vera’s love for him: “Is evil really so attractive?”

A seemingly paradoxical thought: evil is not usually perceived as attractive. But Lermontov had his own special position in relation to the forces of evil: without them, the development of life, its improvement, is impossible; they contain not only the spirit of destruction, but also the thirst for creation. It is not for nothing that the image of the Demon occupies such an important place in his poetry, and not so much as an embittered one (“evil is boring him”), but rather as a lonely and suffering one, looking for love, which he is never given the chance to find. It is obvious that Pechorin has the features of this unusual Lermontov Demon, not to mention the fact that the plot of “Bela” largely repeats the story of the romantic poem “The Demon”. The hero of the novel himself sees in himself someone who brings evil to others and calmly perceives this, but still tries to find goodness and beauty, which perish when they collide with him. Why does this happen and is it only Pechorin’s fault that he is not given the opportunity to find harmony in love?

At first glance this seems obvious. After all, he himself says that he “does not like women with character,” he needs to command others, to always be above everyone - after all, he is a true romantic. But is it possible to hope to find true love, the one where not one, but both lovers are ready to sacrifice their interests, to give rather than take? But on the other hand, his life confronts him with women who, despite all their attractiveness, purity and selflessness in love, lack that inner moral core, which Tatyana Larina had. Bela comes to terms with the fact that her family is destroyed, her father is dying; Mary is ready to despise even secular decency for the sake of Pechorin, but cannot completely get rid of her pride; Vera, recognizing the power of evil over her, agrees to violate the sanctity of marriage.

However, it is this heroine that stands out among other female characters, although she is not clearly outlined and in her description the author often uses hints and omissions. This was probably partly due to the fact that one of Vera’s prototypes was Varvara Lopukhina, married to Bakhmetev. There are suggestions that she was Lermontov’s only true love, which he carried throughout his life. But fate separated them, and Varenka’s jealous husband categorically opposed any communication between her and Lermontov. In the situation that is depicted in the novel, there are indeed certain features of this story. But the main thing, perhaps, is that Vera is the only woman who is truly dear to Pechorin; She is the only one who managed to figure out and understand his complex and contradictory character. “Why she loves me so much, I really don’t know! - Pechorin writes in his diary. “Moreover, this is one woman who understood me completely, with all my minor weaknesses and bad passions.” This is precisely what her farewell letter, received by Pechorin after his return from the duel, testifies to.

And yet, like other heroines, Vera finds herself under the power of Pechorin, becoming his slave. “You know that I am your slave: I never knew how to resist you,” Vera tells him. Perhaps this also lies one of the reasons for Pechorin’s failures in love: those with whom his life brought him together turned out to be too submissive and sacrificial in nature. Not only women feel this power; all the other heroes of the novel are forced to retreat before Pechorin. He, like a Titan among people, rises above everyone, but at the same time remains absolutely alone. Such is fate strong personality, unable to enter into harmonious relationships with people.

This is also evident in his attitude towards friendship. On the pages of the novel there is not a single hero who could be considered a friend of Pechorin. However, all this is not surprising: after all, Pechorin believes that he had long ago “solved” the formula of friendship: “We soon understood each other and became friends, because I am not capable of friendship: of two friends, one is always the slave of the other, although often neither none of them admit it to themselves...” Thus, the “golden heart” Maxim Maksimych is only a temporary colleague in a separate fortress, where Pechorin is forced to stay after a duel with Grushnitsky. An unexpected meeting with the old staff captain several years later, which so disturbed poor Maxim Maksimych, left Pechorin absolutely indifferent. The line Pechorin - Maxim Maksimych helps to understand the character of the protagonist in relation to an ordinary person who has a “heart of gold”, but lacks an analytical mind, the ability for independent action and a critical attitude towards reality.

Dr. Werner has no less skepticism than Pechorin, he also has an analytical mind, but, unlike the “hero of the time,” he is not able to accept the active manifestation of evil. Werner recoiled from the demonic hero after the murder of Grushnitsky, which caused Pechorin only a skeptical remark about the weakness of human nature.

The novel tells in more detail about the relationship between Pechorin and Grushnitsky. Grushnitsky is the antipode of Pechorin. He, a completely ordinary and ordinary person, tries with all his might to look like a romantic, an unusual person. As Pechorin ironically notes, “his goal is to become the hero of a novel.” From the point of view of revealing the character of the “hero of the time,” Grushnitsky’s pseudo-romanticism emphasizes the depth of the tragedy of the true romantic - Pechorin On the other hand, the development of their relationship is determined by the fact that Pechorin despises Grushnitsky, laughs at his romantic pose, which causes irritation and anger of the young man, who at first looks at him with delight. All this leads to the development of a conflict between them, which worsens. that Pechorin, by courting Princess Mary and seeking her favor, will finally discredit Grushnitsky.

As a result, this leads to an open confrontation between them, which ends in a duel reminiscent of another scene - a duel from Pushkin's novel Eugene Onegin. But Lermontov shows that the duel planned by Grushnitsky is a dirty game from beginning to end. Together with the dragoon captain, even before the open clash with Pechorin, he decided to “teach him a lesson”, exposing him as a coward in front of everyone. Already in this scene it is obvious to the reader that Grushnitsky himself is a coward, which is confirmed later when he agrees to the dragoon captain’s vile offer to load only one pistol. Pechorin accidentally learns about this conspiracy and decides to seize the initiative: now he, and not his opponents, is leading the party, planning to test not only the extent of Grushnitsky’s meanness and cowardice, but also entering into a kind of duel with his own destiny. But he is interested in Grushnitsky rather as a possible rival (“I love enemies, but not in a Christian way”), and he never considered him a friend. That is why a duel for Pechorin is only one of the arguments in a constant dispute with the people around him, with himself and his fate.

So everything minor characters The novel, including female characters, no matter how bright and memorable they may be, serve primarily to reveal the various personality traits of the “hero of the time.” Thus, the relationship with Vulich helps to clarify Pechorin’s attitude to the problem of fatalism. The lines of Pechorin - the highlanders and Pechorin the smugglers reveal the relationship between the “hero of the time” and the traditional heroes of romantic literature: they turn out to be weaker than him, and against their background the figure of Pechorin acquires the features of not just an exceptional personality, but sometimes a demonic one. The contrast between Pechorin and the “water general” reveals the problem of social relationships between the “hero of the time” and the people of his circle. In this peculiar construction of the novel’s system of images, when all the plot lines are pulled towards one main character, and the other characters help to represent him more fully, consists of one of artistic features works of Lermontov.

Artistic originality. The artistic innovation of the novel is due not only to the combination of the features of romanticism and realism, but also to the specifics of the genre, plot and composition. Having set himself the task of showing “the history of the human soul” and creating the first psychological novel, Lermontov was faced with the need to use traditional novelistic means in a new way. It is he who is credited with the discovery of a special type of portrait in Russian prose, which came to be called a psychological portrait. Such a portrait connects the hero’s appearance with the features of his inner world, records details of appearance that carry information about the person’s thoughts, feelings, experiences, and mood. Gakov’s portrait of Pechorin in “Maxim Maksimych”: “He was of average height; his slender, slender figure and broad shoulders proved a strong build, capable of enduring all the difficulties of nomadic life and climate changes, not defeated by either the debauchery of metropolitan life or spiritual storms... His gait was careless and lazy, but I noticed that he did not swing hands - a sure sign of some secrecy of character. ...I must say a few more words about the eyes. First of all, they didn't laugh when he laughed! Have you ever noticed such strangeness in some people?.. This is a sign of either an evil disposition or deep, constant sadness.” It should also be noted that the psychological portrait of Pechorin is built on antitheses and oxymorons: “strong build” and “feminine tenderness” of pale skin, “dusty velvet frock coat” and “dazzlingly clean linen” under it, blond hair and black eyebrows. Such portrait details are intended to emphasize the complexity and contradictory nature of this hero.

The features of the landscape are primarily related to the genre of each part. “Bela” is written in the form of travel notes, and therefore the nature in this part is described with great documentary accuracy. In "Taman", which is an adventure story and opens Pechorin's diary, the landscape is designed to intrigue the reader and surround the reader with mysterious, romantic aura heroes. Another task of the landscape in this part is to contrast the wildness, indomitability of the elements and the fearlessness of the heroes, to emphasize that for them the raging elements are a natural environment. In “Princess Mary” nature influences people, disposing them to a certain mood. Thus, the steep cliff in the scene of the duel between Pechorin and Grushnitsky, which at first served as an expressive setting, ultimately becomes the reason for the increasing tension of the heroes: the one who gets hit will be killed and will find his refuge at the bottom of a terrible abyss. This function of the landscape is a consequence of the realism of Lermontov’s literary method. In the philosophical story “Fatalist,” the description of nature plays the role of a symbol. Here the starry sky symbolizes the harmony of worldview and clarity of purpose of human existence, which are precisely what is lacking; Pechorin in life.

In addition, the landscape also serves as a means of characterizing various characters. The hero's attitude towards nature serves as a measure of the depth and originality of his nature. Thus, the landscape sketches in “Pechorin’s Journal” help to understand his complex, rebellious character and reveal his chic mental organization. In his diary, he repeatedly gives almost poetic descriptions of the surrounding landscape: “Today at five o’clock in the morning, when I opened the window, my room was filled with the smell of flowers growing in the modest front garden. Branches of blossoming cherry trees look out of my window, and the wind sometimes strews my desk with their white petals.”

The above description allows us to see those features of the novel’s language that allowed many of Lermontov’s contemporaries to give the highest assessment of the author’s artistic skill. “No one has ever written in our country with such correct, beautiful and fragrant prose,” said N.V. Gogol. An equally enthusiastic review of the language of Lermoton’s prose belongs to the writer D.V. To Grigorovich: “Take Lermontov’s story “Taman”, you won’t find a word in it that could be thrown out or inserted; it all sounds from beginning to end in one harmonic chord: what a wonderful language!” Excellent stylist AL. Chekhov also noted the merits of Lermontov’s prose: “I don’t know the language better than Lermontov’s.”

The meaning of the work. The novel “Hero of Our Time” is of great importance, which played a large role in the development of the theme of the search for a “hero of time”, begun by Pushkin in “Eugene Onegin”. Having shown all the inconsistency and complexity of such a person, Lermontov opens the way for the development of this topic for writers of the second half of the 19th century. Of course, they evaluate the type of “extra person” in a new way, seeing its weaknesses and shortcomings rather than its advantages. These are the heroes of this socio-psychological type in Turgenev’s works “The Diary of an Extra Man,” “Rudin,” “ Noble nest", in Nekrasov's poem "Sasha", in Goncharov's novel "Oblomov", in Chekhov's story "Duel". And although the type of “extra person” belongs XIX literature century, the very problem of searching for a “hero of the time” remains relevant not only in the literature of the 20th century, but also in our time.

Lermontov's artistic discoveries are no less important in the history of Russian literature. “A Hero of Our Time” played a significant role in the formation of the genre form of the realistic socio-psychological novel. Writers of the second half of the 19th century would then follow this path. Turgenev, Goncharov, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, giving their own version of works of this kind. Lermontov’s novel played a particularly important role in the formation of Tolstoy’s psychological method of “dialectics of the soul.” L.N. spoke excellently about the importance of Lermontov for the subsequent development of Russian literature. Tolstoy: “If Lermontov had been alive, neither I nor Dostoevsky would have been needed.”

Preview:

Test on the work of M. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”»

1. To which ideological and aesthetic direction in literature does the novel “A Hero of Our Time” belong:

A. Romanticism.

b. Critical realism.

V. Sentimentalism.

g. Enlightenment realism.

d. Classicism.

2. Define the idea of ​​the novel “A Hero of Our Time”:

A. Depiction of the socially typical personality of the noble circle after the defeat of the Decembrist uprising, analysis modern society and psychology.

b. Condemnation of the typical personality of the noble circle and the social environment that gave birth to it.

3. About whom it is said: “he sees nothing as a law for himself except himself.”

A. Pechorin. b. Onegin, V. Dr. Werner. Grushnitsky.

4. What is the tragedy of Pechorin:

A. He is in conflict with others.

b. In dissatisfaction with the surrounding reality and his characteristic individualism and skepticism. In his clear understanding of his contradiction “between the depth of nature and the pitifulness of actions”(V. G. Belinsky).

V. In indifference to everything that surrounds him: people, events.

d. In selfishness.

5. Determine who owns the given characteristics:

1. Spontaneous, integral, honest, kind, generous, sensible, “an honest soul and a heart of gold,” courageous and modest to the point of self-abasement, humble, loyal.

2. “The standard of ideal phrase-mongers”, incapable of “neither real good nor real evil”, narrow-minded, impersonal, boastfully self-loving, envious, false, with unreasonable conceit.

3. A commoner with progressive views, a materialist by conviction, a critical and satirical mind. A high noble soul, a man of great culture, a skeptic and a pessimist, honest and straightforward, humane.

4. Direct, spontaneously passionate, strange, sacrificially loving.

5. Smart, well-read, noble, morally pure.

A. Grushnitsky b. Princess Mary v. Maxim Maksimych Mr. Dr. Werner village Bela

6. Which character in the novel is the story about?

“He was a nice guy, I can assure you, just a little strange. After all, for example, in the rain, in the cold, hunting all day, everyone will be cold and tired - but nothing to him. And another time he sits in his room, the wind smells, he assures him that he has a cold, the shutter knocks, he shudders and turns pale, and with me he went to the wild boar one on one, it happened that for hours you wouldn’t get a word, but sometimes he’ll start telling , you’ll burst your bellies from laughing... Yes, sir, he was very strange...”, a. Grushnitsky. b. Pechorin. 8. Maxim Maksimych. Mr. Dr. Werner.

7 . In order to emphasize the ideological essence of the novel, increase its tension, enhance the impression of the strangeness, inconsistency and tragedy of the hero’s character and show more clearly the ruined possibilities of his rare nature, the chronology of the events of the novel is disrupted.Restore the chronological sequence of events in “A Hero of Our Time.”

A. "Bela."

6. “Maksim Maksimych.”

V. Preface to Pechorin's magazine.

"Taman"

d. End of Pechorin's journal.

e. “Princess Mary.”

and. "Fatalist".

8. Determine the identity of the hero’s portrait:“...He was a remarkable man for many reasons. He was a skeptic and a materialist... and at the same time a poet, and in earnest - a poet in practice always and often in words, although he never wrote two poems in his life. He studied all the living strings of the human heart... He was small, thin, and weak, like a child... His small black eyes, always restless, tried to penetrate your thoughts. There was taste and neatness in his clothes, his thin little

his hands were wearing light yellow gloves. His coat, tie and vest were always black

colors."

A. Grushnitsky. b. Pechorin, V. Werner. Mr. Maksim Maksimych.

9. The psychological nature of the novel’s landscape precedes the state of the characters, events, and their outcome.

What event precedes this landscape:“...All around, lost in the golden fog of the morning,

the peaks of the mountains crowded together like a countless herd, and Elbrus in the south stood up as a white mass, closing thea chain of icy peaks, between which the stringy clouds that had flown in from the east were already wandering. II went to the edge of the platform and looked down, my head almost started spinning: there belowit seemed dark and cold, as if in a coffin; mossy teeth of rocks, thrown off by thunderstorms and time, awaited their prey."

A. Duel between Pechorin and Grushnitsky. b. Kidnapping of Karagöz, c. The death of Bela. Mr. Vulich's shot.

10. Imagine that before you are “creative retellings” of the stories that make up “Hero

of our time." Which story does each retelling relate to? By what signs did you determine this?

a) Misfire (“Asian triggers often misfire”), Cossack saber. The unhappy mother of a young Cossack. The death of a foreign subject in a Russian fortress. A pig cut in half was lying on the road.

b) Thunderstorm in the mountains. Tea drinking in an Ossetian sakla. Great cast iron kettle! The history of the ensign. One princess and ten rams; boar hunting and shot horse. Parting of fellow travelers, c)A fallen orderly and a stolen saber. The naval adventures of an infantry officer in a dirty town. The song is about the "wild little head". Honest lawbreakers.

11. Why didn’t Pechorin stay with Maxim Maksimych for lunch for two hours? Why did he offend his old friend?

a) was in a hurry due to “official needs”;

b) didn’t want to remember Bel; since these memories brought him the same acute suffering as before;

c) Pechorin was bored with Maxim Maksimych.

12. “Honest smugglers” in “Taman” at first glance seem to be truly romantic in nature. Which of the proposed quotes takes Yanko out of the range of romantic heroes?

a) Yanko is not afraid of the sea, nor the winds, nor the fog, nor the coast guards...

b) The swimmer was brave who decided to set off across the strait on such a night...

c) If he had paid him better for his work, Yanko would not have left him; But I love everywhere, wherever the wind blows and the sea roars!

13. Pechorin and Pushkin’s Onegin are called “superfluous people.” Embodying the general type of relationship between man and society, Pechorin and Onegin are different in character. Name the feature that distinguishes Pechorin’s “superfluous man” from Onegin’s “superfluous man”:

a) boredom;

b) contempt for people;

c) lack of purpose in life;

d) almost complete loneliness;

d) the pursuit of life, the desire to escape from boredom.

ANSWERS: 1-b, 2-a, 3-a, 4-b, 5: 1-c, 2-a, 3-d, 4-e, 5-b 6-b, 7- c, d, e ,a,g,b,d 8-c, 9-a, 10 – “Fatalist”, b-“Bela”, c-“Taman” 11-b, 12-c, 13-d