Composition "Hero of our time". Hero of our time. School essay

Borova D, Sharashenidze M.

This work is an attempt to rethink the work of the classic in relation to modern life, to answer the question: "Are there heroes of our time in modern Russia? What traits do they have?"

Download:

Preview:

Like a fable, so is life

Not valued for length

But for the content.

Seneca.

Every era has its heroes. Writers, poets, artists talked about them.

So in Lermontov's work "A Hero of Our Time", according to traditional opinion, Pechorin acts as a hero of his time. But the author emphasizes that this image is not a portrait of one person, but an artistic type that has absorbed the features of a whole generation of the early 19th century. The novel shows a young man suffering from his restlessness, in despair asking himself a painful question: “Why did I live? For what purpose was I born? He has not the slightest inclination to follow the well-trodden path of secular young men. Pechorin is an officer. He serves, but is not served. We cannot but see that Pechorin is head and shoulders above the people around him: he is smart, educated, talented, brave, energetic. We are repelled by his indifference to people, his inability to true love and friendship, individualism and selfishness. He is deeply unsympathetic to us by the "pathetic actions", the waste of his strength, by the actions by which he brings suffering to other people.

The complexity and inconsistency of Pechorin's character can be considered a consequence of the socio-political conditions of the 30s of the 19th century, a time of gloomy reaction, deep shocks and disappointments.

Man is, by his very nature, a social being, he is not capable of self-isolation, of a closed existence in himself. The joys and sufferings of others become the real food of his life only when his relations with people are built on the basis of goodness, nobility of aspirations, and justice.

In the image of Pechorin, Lermontov showed the futility of trying to live in society and be free from it.

Reading Lermontov's novel, you involuntarily draw a parallel with the twenty-first century and understand that we have a lot in common. Our time is a time of great economic and political changes. Time to accelerate objective development, which increases the price of the quality of education, efficiency. And just as sharply increases the price and quality of moral, inextricably linked with social sphere life - conscience, honesty, humanity. Difficult time...

But in Russia there were, are and will be many heroes in various spheres of life. Heroes are known and unknown. Each person has their own. For some, it may be, for example, a participant in the hostilities in Chechnya - General Romanov, actor Menshov, figure skater Plushenko, singer Dima Belan, a well-known politician, scientist, doctor, teacher, businessman.

It seems that now the Hero is an energetic, purposeful person, who understands well that it is necessary to work with pleasure, and where and by whom he works is not important. This is not necessarily the highest position.

Here, for example, is one of our acquaintances, who is not yet thirty. Graduated from university, worked in different companies. independently studied two foreign languages. Now - the commercial director of large firm. His business is flourishing. And this is the result of his diligence and professionalism.

For modern Hero important to have good house. As a rule, he has a working wife and always has children. He understands that he is no longer working only for himself, but also for his children. He wants to give his children a good education. For him, the family is very important, because without a family a person simply loses perspective.

I admire in such people the ability to work in such a way as to get satisfaction from their work, the ability to organize themselves in such a way as to find time for work and rest, moreover, weekly rest with family, children, friends.

It matters to him that he is not alone. When a person is for himself, he is flawed, and when he can lean on the shoulder of a friend, when there is someone to hope for, someone to help, life becomes a joy. For our country to become stable, such people are needed.

And there are many such people in our country. They understand that in order to live successfully and happily, you must be an internationalist. Therefore, those people who are prone to xenophobia are being forced out of the number of Heroes.

And their friends are the same as they are: honest and decent. They are the core, the foundation of our society.

I would like to tell you about a man who lives in our native village of Kutuzovka. This is Olga Petrovna Kargina. She successfully graduated from the Kutuzov secondary school and the Omsk Regional College of Culture and Art, now she is a student at the Omsk University. F. M. Dostoevsky.

Olga Petrovna has been the artistic director of the Kutuzovsky rural House of Culture for 8 years. This is a man of high morality, honesty and integrity. For her pupils, Olga is an example of great diligence and dedication to her work. A good organizer, she rallied around her guys who are in love with dance. The choreographic groups led by this talented person are laureates, diploma winners not only regional, but also international competitions. Her life is work, search, striving to surpass yesterday's self. She is still full of creative plans and ideas.

Fellow villagers know Olga Petrovna as a demanding leader and as sympathetic person always ready to help.

Olga is a person of an active life position, the initiator of many interesting things in the village, deputy chairman of the Youth Chamber of the Sherbakul district of the Omsk region.

Looking at this fragile girl, you involuntarily think: this is the image of the Hero of our time. She is independent, active, active. Has moral principles and good education. And although Olga is still young, enough has already been done in her life to earn the respect and love of the people among whom she grew up and lives. Indeed, only in work for the benefit of people, society, a person is most fully revealed as a person, finds the meaning of his existence, spiritually enriching himself.

Pechorin's time has long passed. Today's Hero, possessing moral qualities, education, efficiency, diligence, lives not only for himself, his family, but also for people, society, his country.

Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation

MOU "Kutuzovskaya secondary school".

Composition "Hero of our time"

Completed by: Borova D. and Sharashenidze M.

10th grade students.

Head: Veikum G.V.

Teacher of Russian language and literature.

S. Kutuzovka.

IMAGE OF PECHORIN

The novel "A Hero of Our Time" became a continuation of the theme of "superfluous people". This theme became central in the novel in verse by A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin". Herzen named Pechorin younger brother Onegin. In the preface to the novel, the author shows his attitude towards his hero. Like Pushkin in "Eugene Onegin" ("I'm always glad to see the difference between Onegin and me"), Lermontov ridiculed attempts to equate the novel's author and its protagonist. Lermontov did not consider Pechorin a positive hero, from whom one should take an example. The author emphasized that in the image of Pechorin, a portrait is given not of one person, but of an artistic type that has absorbed the features of a whole generation of young people at the beginning of the century.

Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time" shows a young man suffering from his restlessness, in despair asking himself a painful question: "Why did I live? For what purpose was I born?" He has not the slightest inclination to follow the well-trodden path of secular young men. Pechorin is an officer. He serves, but is not served. Pechorin does not study music, does not study philosophy or military affairs. But we cannot but see that Pechorin is head and shoulders above the people around him, that he is smart, educated, talented, brave, energetic. We are repelled by Pechorin's indifference to people, his inability to true love, to friendship, his individualism and egoism. But Pechorin captivates us with a thirst for life, a desire for the best, the ability to critically evaluate our actions. He is deeply unsympathetic to us by the "pathetic actions", the waste of his strength, by the actions by which he brings suffering to other people. But we see that he himself suffers deeply.

The character of Pechorin is complex and contradictory. The hero of the novel says about himself: "There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him ...". What are the reasons for this dichotomy? "I told the truth - they did not believe me: I began to deceive; having learned well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life ..." Pechorin admits. He learned to be secretive, vindictive, bilious, ambitious, became, in his words, a moral cripple. Pechorin is an egoist. Belinsky also called Pushkin's Onegin "a suffering egoist" and "an unwilling egoist." The same can be said about Pechorin. Pechorin is characterized by disappointment in life, pessimism. He experiences a constant split spirit.

In the socio-political conditions of the 30s of the 19th century, Pechorin cannot find a use for himself. He is wasted on petty adventures, exposes his forehead to Chechen bullets, seeks oblivion in love. But all this is just a search for some way out, just an attempt to unwind.

He is haunted by boredom and the consciousness that such a life is not worth living. Throughout the novel, Pechorin shows himself as a person who is accustomed to looking at "the suffering, joys of others only in relation to himself" - as "food" that supports his spiritual strength, it is on this path that he seeks consolation from the boredom that haunts him, tries to fill the emptiness of your existence.

And yet Pechorin is a richly gifted nature. He has an analytical mind, his assessments of people and their actions are very accurate; he has a critical attitude not only to others, but also to himself. His diary is nothing but self-disclosure. He is endowed with a warm heart, able to feel deeply (Bela's death, a date with Vera) and experience a lot, although he tries to hide soul feelings under the guise of indifference. Indifference, callousness - a mask of self-defense. Pechorin is still a strong-willed, strong active person, "life forces" are dormant in his chest, he is capable of action. But all his actions carry not a positive, but a negative charge, all his activities are aimed not at creation, but at destruction. In this, Pechorin is similar to the hero of the poem "The Demon". Indeed, in his appearance (especially at the beginning of the novel) there is something demonic, unsolved. In all the short stories that Lermontov combined in the novel, Pechorin appears before us as the destroyer of the lives and destinies of other people: because of him, the Circassian Bela is deprived of shelter and dies, Maxim Maksimovich is disappointed in friendship, Mary and

Vera, dies at his hands Grushnitsky, forced to leave native home"honest smugglers", the young officer Vulich dies. Belinsky saw in the character of Pechorin "a transitional state of the spirit, in which for a person everything old is destroyed, but there is no new yet, and in which a person is only the possibility of something real in the future and a perfect ghost in the present."

PECHORIN AND GRUSHNITSKY

In 1839, Mikhail Lermontov's story Bela was published in the third issue of the Otechestvennye Zapiski magazine. Then, in the eleventh issue, the story "The Fatalist" appeared, and in the second book of the magazine for 1840 - "Taman". In the same year, three short stories already known to the reader, telling about various episodes in the life of a certain Pechorin, were published as chapters of the novel A Hero of Our Time. Criticism greeted the new work ambiguously: a sharp controversy ensued.

Along with the stormy enthusiasm of Belinsky, who called Lermontov's novel a work representing "completely new world art", who saw in him "deep knowledge of the human heart and modern society"," richness of content and originality, "there were voices of critics in the press who absolutely did not accept the novel. One of Lermontov's most ardent opponents, a certain A.S. Burachok, argued that the image of the protagonist of the novel was "aesthetic and psychological absurdity," and in the work itself "there is no trace of Russian folk philosophy, religiosity".

Throughout the work, the author strives to reveal as fully as possible inner world his hero - Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin. The compositional complexity of the novel is inextricably linked with the psychological complexity of the image of the protagonist. The ambiguity of Pechorin's character, the inconsistency of this image was revealed not only in the study of his spiritual world itself, but also in the correlation of the hero with other characters. In the first part we see Pechorin through the eyes of Maxim Maksimych. This person is sincerely attached to Pechorin, but spiritually deeply alien to him. They are separated not only by the difference social position and age. They are fundamentally people. various types consciousness and children of different eras. For the staff captain, an old Caucasian, his young friend is an alien, strange and inexplicable phenomenon. Therefore, in the story of Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin appears as a mysterious, mysterious person. In the chapter "Maxim Maksimych" the veil of secrecy begins to lift. The place of the narrator is taken by the staff captain's former listener, a traveling officer. And the mysterious hero of the "Caucasian short story" is given some living features, his airy and mysterious image begins to take on flesh and blood.

The wandering officer does not just describe Pechorin, he gives a psychological portrait. He is a man of the same generation and probably close circle. If Maxim Maksimych was horrified when he heard from Pechorin about his tormenting boredom: "... my life is becoming emptyer day by day ...", then his listener accepted these words without horror as quite natural: "I answered that there are many people who say that the same thing; that there are probably those who tell the truth ... "And therefore, for the officer-narrator, Pechorin is much closer and more understandable; he can explain a lot in that: both "the depravity of metropolitan life", and "storms of the soul", and "some secrecy", and "nervous weakness". So, the mysterious, unlike anyone else, Pechorin becomes a more or less typical person of his time, in his appearance and behavior general patterns. And yet the riddle does not disappear, the "oddities" remain. The narrator will note Pechorin's eyes "they did not laugh when he laughed!" In them, the narrator will try to guess "a sign - either of an evil temper, or of deep, laughed sadness"; and will be amazed at the brilliance: "it was a brilliance, like the brilliance of smooth steel, dazzling, but cold"; and shudder from the "piercing heavy" look ...

Lermontov shows Pechorin as an extraordinary, intelligent person, strong will, brave. In addition, he is distinguished by a constant desire for action, Pechorin cannot stay in one place, surrounded by the same people. Isn't that why he can't be happy with any woman? Pechorin creates adventures for himself, actively interfering in the fate and lives of those around him, changing the course of things in such a way that he leads to an explosion, to a collision. He brings into people's lives his alienation, his craving for destruction. He acts without considering the feelings of other people, not paying attention to them. He is selfish. The inner world of the hero is most fully and deeply revealed in the chapter "Princess Mary". The plot here is Pechorin's meeting with Grushnitsky, a familiar cadet. And then Pechorin's next "experiment" begins.

The whole life of the hero is a chain of experiments on himself and other people. Its purpose is the comprehension of truth, human nature, evil, goodness, love. This is exactly what happens in the case of Grushnitsky. Why is the young cadet so unpleasant to Pechorin? As we can see, Grushnitsky is by no means a villain worth fighting against. This is the most ordinary young man who dreams of love and stars on uniform. He is mediocrity, but he has one weakness that is quite excusable at his age - "drape in extraordinary feelings", "passion to recite." He strives to play the role of the Byronic disappointed hero, fashionable among young men, "a creature doomed to some secret suffering." Of course, the reader understands that this is a parody of Pechorin! That is why he is so hated by Pechorin. Grushnitsky, as a narrow-minded person, does not understand Pechorin's attitude towards him, does not suspect that he has already begun a kind of game. At first, Pechorin even evokes a certain condescending feeling in Grushnitsky, since this young man is self-confident and seems to himself a very insightful and significant person. "I'm sorry for you, Pechorin," - that's how he talks at the beginning of the novel. But events are developing as Pechorin wants. Mary falls in love with him, forgetting about Grushnitsky. Overwhelmed by jealousy, indignation, and then hatred, the Junker suddenly opens up to us from a completely different side. He turns out to be not so harmless at all. He is capable of being vindictive, and then - dishonorable, vile. Anyone who recently dressed up as nobility is now able to shoot an unarmed person. Pechorin's experiment was a success! Here, the "demonic" properties of his nature were manifested with full force: "to sow evil" with the greatest art. During the duel, Pechorin again tempts fate, calmly standing face to face with death. Then he offers Grushnitsky reconciliation. But the situation is already irreversible, and Grushnitsky dies, having drunk the cup of shame, repentance and hatred to the end. So, the image of Grushnitsky is very important in the novel, it reveals, perhaps, the most important thing in the central character. Grushnitsky - false mirror Pechorin - sets off the truth and significance of the suffering of this "suffering egoist", the depth and exclusivity of his nature, brings Pechorin's qualities to the point of absurdity. But in the situation with Grushnitsky, the whole danger is revealed with particular force, which is always inherent in the individualistic philosophy inherent in romanticism. Lermontov did not seek to pass a moral judgment. He only with great power showed all the abysses human soul devoid of faith, imbued with skepticism and disappointment.

LERMONTOV AND PECHORIN - AUTHOR AND HERO

The introduction to the topic in other words can be called a preface. According to Lermontov, the preface is both the first and the last thing in the book. It is both simple and difficult to compare any author with the hero of the work he created, because the author is connected with his hero by direct, but at the same time, mysterious, inexplicable threads. Because the creative process is inexplicable. The connection between the author and the hero can be considered in two ways: the first is the fusion of the author with the hero; the second is the author's view of the hero from afar, from the standpoint of condemning his vices, ridiculing him. Sometimes these views can be combined. In the preface to "A Hero of Our Time" Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov says that he painted modern man, which he met too often: "The author of this book ... He just had fun drawing modern man, as he understands him and, unfortunately, met him too often." How is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin similar to his creator, Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov?

What are these signs, features that both of them possessed as representatives of the epoch of the 30s of the nineteenth century? Firstly, Pechorin is an army man, he is a military man, which was typical for the nobility of the 19th century. He is an officer and in this they are similar to Lermontov. Secondly, he fought a duel, as many thousands did at that time. The duel between Pechorin and Grushnitsky is typical of the behavior of many people of that time. And for Lermontov himself too.

Thirdly, he is the lover of someone else's wife, which is common among people in all ages, starting from biblical times. Pechorin loves Vera and she loves him, even, perhaps even more, even more than he and the lame old man, Verin's husband, having learned about this, calls his wife a terrible word and takes her away from Pyatigorsk. According to modern research by Lermontov scholars, Lermontov himself and a certain Smirnova, whose husband served in Benckendorff's office, had such a situation.

Fourthly, he is a man who is sensitive to matters of honor, he is what is called a secular person, a slave to secular rules and prejudices, he stands up for the honor of Princess Mary Ligovskaya, who was suspected that she was secretly giving the officer an intimate night meeting when Grushnitsky with an ambush in the garden, he almost catches Pechorin jumping out of the window. Lermontov in his life relationships with Nikolai Martynov, he also did not escape petty questions of honor when he was called to a duel from the drawing room of the general's wife Verzilins, for having ridiculed Martynov in front of women as a "highlander with a long dagger."

Pechorin is a melancholic disappointed in everything, which is characteristic of the romantic trend of that time in literature, including Byron, and transferred from literature to a life manner of behavior, to a tone characteristic of a person, to fashion. "Maybe I'll die somewhere along the way," meaning on the way to Persia or further, somewhere abroad. Only those who are disappointed in life can speak like that, they don’t want and don’t expect anything more from it. Spleen, melancholy, were fashionable at that time and many young men put on this mask, which sometimes grew to the face.

In many of Lermontov's poems, such as "No, I'm not Byron, I'm different ...", the same theme of disappointment and death sounds:

"I started earlier, I will finish the wound,

My mind won't do much.

In my soul, like in the ocean

The hopes of the broken cargo lies."

Pechorin is inherent in demonism, which was also characteristic of many heroes of the early 19th century, recall at least Pushkin's poem "The Demon", dedicated to Raevsky. Lermontov also immersed himself in thoughts about the demon, even creating the brilliant poem "The Demon".

Pechorin is a killer, he shot Grushnitsky in a duel, which is also a typical phenomenon in Russia and European West. According to statistics, a huge number of nobles died in duels. Lermontov could not become a murderer, this is the main difference between him and Pechorin, he could not become a murderer, so to speak, by definition. He could not, most likely, become one, even if he probably wanted to, because, according to Pushkin's definition: "Genius and villainy are two incompatible things." And Lermontov is a genius.

Lermontov's attitude to his hero, although it is allegedly expressed in the preface, where he calls him an immoral person, vicious, a spokesman for the disease of society: “Others were terribly offended, and not jokingly that they are given as an example such an immoral person as the Hero of Our Time; others very subtly noticed that the writer painted his own portrait ... In fact, such an attitude towards the hero expressed by Lermontov is, of course, a pose. His attitude is actually very ambiguous, mysterious, it does not fit into the aesthetic categories of good and evil, into the ethical norms of "good" or "bad", this attitude is pulsating, moving, non-one-dimensional, like art itself, like the connection of an artist who draws psychological experiences of the described hero from his life experience, refracting it, of course, through the magic crystal of creative insight.

The fact is that everyone loved Pechorin: women - Bela, Mary, Vera, Maxim Maksimovich loved him, secretly loved him and at the same time Grushnitsky envied him. They loved him for his will, for his strength, for the fact that he could do what no one else could: after all, even no one could capture a drunken, bloodthirsty Cossack who sat in a mud hut. Pechorin was able, jumping out the window, to grab him.

And here comes to the surface true attitude Lermontov to Pechorin, the attitude of the author to his hero, how it comes to the surface at least in such a scene as Pechorin's pursuit of Vera who has left, the chase in which he drove the horse. Pechorin's experiences are described so highly that the author's love shines in them: "I prayed, cursed, cried, laughed ... no, nothing will express my anxiety, despair! .. With the opportunity to lose her forever, Vera became dearer to me than anything in the world - dearer than life, honor, happiness!"

Speaking in conclusion about Lermontov and Pechorin, about the author and his hero, one can admire the fact that Lermontov loves Pechorin so much that even one hundred and fifty years after his tragic death he makes him involuntarily love his hero, because more and more generations of readers love him . This can be done only by the great power of art.

PECHORIN AND MAXIM MAKSIMYCH

Time ... It was it that stood up as an insurmountable wall between the twenties and thirties of the last century. Time has thrown back noisy disputes about the future of Russia, dreams, the joy of waiting for future changes. Everything remained there, behind the thirtieth of July, 1826 - the terrible day of the execution of the Decembrists. You won't hear more words"freedom"; "youth languishes amid empty storms" of Lermontov and his peers. At fifteen, Lermontov, ahead of whom was whole life, wrote: Why deep knowledge, a thirst for glory, talent and an ardent love of freedom, when we cannot use them? "Unwashed Russia, a country of slaves, a country of masters" - the suffering and pain of Lermontov. In this Russia, Pechorin, the hero of the novel A Hero of Our Time, turned out to be an "extra" person.

When you open this novel, you forget that the book was written over a hundred years ago. From the very first pages you are immersed in a world where such different people live - Maxim Maksimych, who, according to Belinsky, has "a wonderful soul, a heart of gold", and Pechorin. Two chapters - two meetings. Only then do we learn about the past of the hero, about how fate threw him into the wild, only then will the soul of Pechorin be fully revealed to us. In the meantime ... In a small fortress in the Caucasus, the old staff captain Maxim Maksimych quietly and peacefully serves. And the whole event in his life is the arrival of a new person. "His name was ... Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin," - a little slowly, stretched out, as if the name itself gave him pleasure, Maxim Maksimych tells his fellow traveler about the arrived officer. Only the memory of him makes the staff captain talk. "He was so thin, white, his uniform was so new," - this is how Maxim Maksimych tells the author about his first meeting, who in detail, word for word, writes down the captain's story. In these words - all the soul, all the kindness of the old man, ready to give Pechorin all his unspent tenderness.

telling to a stranger about Grigory Alexandrovich, Maxim Maksimych is worried, as if he is reliving his best moments anew. One can imagine how he opened up to meet this "thin" officer. "You will be a little bored ... well, yes, we will live as friends. Yes, please, just call me Maxim Maksimych ...", he immediately, without any ceremony, offers Pechorin. And Pechorin? Only officiality sounds in his answer to all questions: "That's right, Mr. Staff Captain." Yes, and Maxim Maksimych himself notices Pechorin's eccentricity, his dissimilarity to others, and classifies him as a person who "has written in his family that various unusual things should happen to them." However, for himself, Maxim Maksimych explained everything simply: Pechorin's eccentricities are due to the fact that he is rich, simple, good-natured Maksim Maksimych fell in love with a new officer. And although he feels sorry for the deceased Bela, although in his heart he blames Pechorin for her death, all the same for him the extravagant young man is "poor thing." "Pechorin was unwell for a long time, emaciated, poor thing," he says to his fellow traveler. With this phrase alone, Lermontov conveys all the grief experienced by Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych's undying love for him. And only once Pechorin himself lifts the veil from his soul. “My soul is corrupted by the light, my imagination is restless, my heart is insatiable,” he admits to Maxim Maksimych.

It hurts and is scary for a person to whom "the bitterness of a cold life is a bowl and nothing amuses the soul." “I am alone, no one understands me,” Lermontov writes in one of his poems. So could Pechorin say. Maxim Maksimych did not understand his confession. And how can an old serviceman, who has spent his whole life in this lost fortress, who knows only his duties and regularly fulfills them, understand a person who "asks for a storm"? No, Bela's love, the whole story with Kazbich and Azamat is not a "storm". All this has passed. And again boredom, boredom, boredom... Five years have passed. We see the second meeting through the eyes of the author himself. What changed? Maxim Maksimych is still the same. But for the sake of meeting with Pechorin, he throws "in the first phase of life ... the affairs of the service", forgetting about his years, runs to him. And suddenly ... "How glad I am, dear Maxim Maksimych! Well, how are you?" he hears. Polite phrase. Only. Maxim Maksimych immediately felt this in his heart, and yet "he wanted to throw himself on Pechorin's neck." Tears choke him, the friendly "you" has to be replaced by "you". And how shameful! Maksim Maksimych received a heavy blow from fate, there is nothing to "replace in his years" "hopes and dreams." "Forget it!.. I haven't forgotten anything...", his words reproach Pechorin. But is it worth it? Were they buddies? Maksim Maksimych took wishful thinking. Pechorin cannot be his friend, these people are at different poles. Perhaps it is Pechorin who is truly unhappy. Full of strength, mind, energy, he rushes around the world. What to do with him "immense forces"? What is waiting for him? Anguish, death. "Poor old man" ... But Pechorin himself is much "poorer" than him.

There were few people like Pechorin in the noble society of Nikolaev Russia. And, nevertheless, in this peculiar, exceptionally gifted man, Lermontov showed a typical noble hero of the tragic period of Russian public life, which came after the suppression of the Decembrist uprising. Pechorin is a victim of the most difficult time. But does Lermontov justify his actions, his moods? On a sleepless night on the eve of the duel with Grushnitsky, the hero of the novel, as it were, sums up the life he has lived. And he comes to the conclusion that he "has lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations - best color life". Sad and difficult confessions. What we learn about Pechorin from his diary, from the stories of others actors, gives him an ambivalent feeling. We cannot but condemn Pechorin for his attitude towards Bela, towards Princess Mary, towards Vera, towards the good Maxim Maksimych.

But we cannot but sympathize with him when he caustically ridicules the aristocratic "water society", exposes the intrigues of Grushnitsky and his friends. We cannot fail to notice that Pechorin is head and shoulders above the people around him, that he is very smart, educated, and talented. But at the same time, we are repelled by Pechorin's indifference to people, his inability to true love, true friendship. Pechorin attracts us with a thirst for life, a desire for the best, the ability to critically evaluate one's actions. And the hero is deeply unsympathetic with his "pity of actions", a waste of energy. Pechorin himself notices this inconsistency of character in himself: "There are two people in me: one lives, in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him ...". Strong-willed nature attracts him to activity, to struggle. But Pechorin is not yet morally ready to rebel against reality, against the established foundations of secular society. Lermontov shows that his hero is waging a fierce struggle with individuals who meet on his way. This struggle is essentially petty, aimless and hopeless. When Pechorin "with the severity of a judge and a citizen" evaluates his actions, devoid of deep meaning, then he himself comes to the sad conclusion: "In this vain struggle, I have exhausted both the heat of the soul and the constancy of the will necessary for real life."

But Pechorin was not born a "moral cripple." Nature gave him both a deep, sharp mind and a kind, sympathetic heart. He is capable of noble impulses and humane deeds. Who is to blame for the fact that the wonderful makings of Pechorin died? And society is to blame, to blame social conditions in which the hero was brought up and lived. Pechorin himself said more than once that in the society in which he lives, there is no selfless love, nor true friendship nor fair, humane relations between people. That is why Pechorin turned out to be a stranger to Maxim Maksimych. The novel is closed, but the time when Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych lived was imprinted in my memory. How many people, smart and talented, died only because they did not want to be content with an empty life!.. But such was Russia. Live actively, profitably, live fully, wonderful life, to feel not "superfluous" - Pechorin wanted this. Lermontov wanted this, and the problems that he raised in his work, eternal problems friendship, love, devotion and mutual understanding still excite us.

COMPOSITIONAL FEATURES OF THE NOVEL M.Yu. LERMONTOV "HERO OF OUR TIME"

"Desires?

What is the use of wanting in vain and forever? And the years

pass - all the best years "

M.Yu Lermontov

A Hero of Our Time is one of the first attempts to create a psychological realistic novel in Russian literature. The goal, the idea of ​​M.Yu. Lermontov is to show a contemporary person, his psychology, as the author himself notes, "... a portrait made up of the vices of our generation, in their full development."

In order to realize his plan, to reveal the character of the hero most fully, objectively, the writer uses an unusual compositional construction novel: the chronological sequence of events is broken here. Not only the composition of the novel is unusual. This work is a unique genre fusion, a combination of various genres already mastered by Russian prose: travel notes, a secular story, and a diary-confession, beloved by romantics, are used here. Roman Lermontov - socio-psychological and moral-philosophical. "In the main idea of ​​the novel lies an important modern question about the inner man," writes Belinsky. The author's desire to achieve maximum objectivity and versatility in the depiction of the protagonist forces him to resort to a non-standard narrative structure: the author, as it were, entrusts the story about his hero to the wandering officer, then to Maxim Maksimych, then to Pechorin himself.

If we want to restore the chronology of the events described in the novel, then we should start with the incident in Taman, through which the hero's journey to the Caucasus passes. Pechorin will stay in Pyatigorsk and Kislovodsk for about a month ("Princess Mary"), from where he will be exiled for a duel with Grushnitsky to the fortress. From the fortress, Pechorin leaves for the Cossack village ("Fatalist"), upon his return to the fortress, the story of Bella's abduction is played out. Then there is the last meeting with Pechorin, no longer a military man, but a secular man, leaving for Persia ("Maxim Maksimych"). And from the foreword of the officer-narrator, we learn about the death of the hero. These are the events of the life of Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin in their chronological sequence. But Lermontov determined the order of the parts that follow each other out of chronology real events, because each of the stories played its own special significant role in the system of the whole work. Reading the story "Maxim Maksimych", we get acquainted with the portrait of Pechorin, so psychologically subtly and deeply written by an educated officer-narrator familiar with writing. He notices Pechorin's white skin, and eyes that are not laughing, full of sadness, and a "noble forehead", and Pechorin's "thoroughbred * beauty, and Pechorin's coldness. All this simultaneously attracts and repels the reader. A direct look at the portrait of the hero makes him incomparably closer to the reader, than the system of narrators through which we get to know Pechorin in the chapter "Bela" (Maxim Maksimych tells the story to the traveler-officer, he leads travel notes, and the reader will learn about everything from them).

Then the author opens before us the confessional pages of Pechorin's Journal. We see the hero again in a new perspective - the way he was alone with himself, which he could appear only in his diary, but would never open up to people. This is confirmed by the words from the preface to Pechorin's Journal, from which it is clear that it was not intended for someone else's eyes, and even more so for printing. It was "the consequence of the observation of the mature mind upon itself" and it was written "without a vain desire to arouse interest or wonder." So Lermontov, using a similar "arrangement" of the chapters of his novel, brings the main character as close as possible to the reader, allows you to look into the very depths of his inner world.

Carefully turning over the pages of "Taman", "Princess Mary" and "The Fatalist", we finally comprehend the character of Pechorin in his inevitable duality. And, learning the causes of this "illness", we delve into the "history of the human soul" and think about the nature of "time". "The Fatalist" ends the novel, this story plays the role of an epilogue. And it's so wonderful that Lermontov built his novel just like that! It ends on an optimistic note. The reader learns about Pechorin's death in the middle of the novel and by the end manages to get rid of the painful feeling of death or the end. Such a feature in the composition of the novel made it possible for the author to end the work with a "major intonation": "the novel ends with a perspective into the future - the hero's exit from the tragic state of inactive doom. Instead of a mourning march, congratulations are heard on the victory over death." (B. Eikhenbaum, Art. "Hero of our time").

Creating the novel "A Hero of Our Time", M.Yu. Lermontov found new artistic means, which literature did not know, and which delight us to this day with the combination of a free and wide image of faces and characters with the ability to show them objectively, revealing one hero through the perception of another.

LANDSCAPE IN LERMONTOV'S NOVEL "HERO OF OUR TIME"

Having become acquainted with the composition of the novel "A Hero of Our Time", which is unusual and complex, I would like to note the artistic merits of the novel. The Lermontov landscape has a very important feature: it is closely connected with the experiences of the characters, expresses their feelings and moods, the whole novel is imbued with deep lyricism. From here comes the passionate emotionality, the excitement of the descriptions of nature, which creates a sense of the musicality of his prose. The silvery thread of the rivers and the bluish fog gliding through the water, escaping into the gorges of the mountains from warm rays, and the sparkle of snow on the crests of the mountains - the exact and fresh colors of Lermontov's prose are very reliable.

In "Bela" we are fascinated by the truthfully painted pictures of the manners of the highlanders, their harsh way of life, their poverty. Lermontov writes: “The saklya was stuck on one side to the rock, three wet steps led to its door. The people of the Caucasus lived hard and sadly, oppressed by their princes, and also tsarist government, which considered them "natives of Russia". Showing the shadow side of the life of the highlanders, Lermontov sympathizes with the people. The majestic pictures of mountain nature are drawn very talentedly. It is very important in revealing the image of Pechorin artistic description nature in the novel. In Pechorin's diary, we often come across a description of nature associated with certain thoughts, feelings, moods, and this helps us to penetrate into his soul, to understand many of his character traits. Pechorin is a poetic person, passionately loving nature, able to figuratively convey what he sees. Often his thoughts about nature seem to be intertwined with his thoughts about people, about himself. Pechorin masterfully describes the nature of the night /his diary, May 16/ with its lights in the windows and "gloomy, snowy mountains".

Sometimes pictures of nature serve as an occasion for him to think, reason, compare. An example of such a landscape is the description of the starry sky in the story "The Fatalist", the appearance of which leads him to reflect on the fate of the generation. Exiled to the fortress, Pechorin is bored, nature seems boring to him. The landscape here helps to understand state of mind hero. This is served by the description of the agitated sea in the story "Taman". The picture that opens up to Gregory from the square where the duel was to take place, the view of the sun, the rays of which do not warm Pechorin after the duel, all nature is sad. Thus, we see that the description of nature occupies a large place a. revealing the personality of Pechorin. Only alone with nature Pechorin experiences the deepest joy. "I don't remember a deeper and fresher morning!" - exclaims Pechorin, struck by the beauty of the sunrise in the mountains. To the boundless expanses of the sea, the sound of the waves are directed and last hopes Pechorin. Comparing himself to a sailor born and raised on the deck of a robber brig, he says that he misses the coastal sand, listens to the roar of the oncoming waves and peers into the distance covered with fog.

Lermontov was very fond of the sea, his poem "Sail" echoes the novel "A Hero of Our Time". Pechorin is looking for the desired "sail" in the sea. Neither for Lermontov nor for the hero of his novel did this dream come true: the "desired sail" did not appear and rush them off to another life, to other shores on last pages novel. Pechorin calls himself and his generation "miserable descendants wandering the earth without conviction and pride, without pleasure and fear." The marvelous image of a sail is a longing for a failed life. The story "Princess Mary" opens with a wonderful landscape. Pechorin writes in his diary: "I have a wonderful view from three sides." Lermontov was highly appreciated by Chekhov. He wrote; "I don't know a better language than Lermontov's. I learned to write from him." The language of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" delighted the greatest masters of the word. “No one has ever written in our country in such correct, beautiful and fragrant prose,” Gogol said about Lermontov. Like Pushkin, Lermontov sought the accuracy and clarity of each phrase, its refinement. The language of the novel is the fruit of the author's extensive work on manuscripts. Pechorin's language is very poetic, the flexible structure of his speech testifies to a man of great culture, with a subtle and penetrating mind.

The richness of the language of the novel is based on Lermontov's personal attitude to nature. He wrote a novel in the Caucasus, nature inspired him. In the novel, Lermontov protests against the aimless and thoughtless life to which his generation is doomed, and the landscape helps us understand the inner world of the characters. Pictures of nature are well depicted not only in the novel "A Hero of Our Time", but also in his poems. His poem "When the yellowing field is agitated" is famous. It belongs to the masterpieces of world art. The poem evokes sadness: When the yellowing field is agitated, And the fresh forest rustles at the sound of the breeze, And the crimson plum hides in the garden Under the shade of a sweet green leaf. In the poem "Motherland" the same sad pictures of nature: I love my homeland, but strange love..., But I love - for what, I do not know myself - Her steppes cold silence, Her boundless forests swaying, River spills, like seas. All the work of Lermontov had a significant impact on the development of Russian literature.

The famous landscapes of Turgenev were written under the influence of Lermontov's prose, some of Tolstoy's stories / "The Raid" / resemble realistically sketched images of Lermontov, Dostoevsky also proceeded from Lermontov's creative experience, Lermontov's influence affected poetic activity Blok, adored Lermontov and Yesenin. And I would like to end my essay with the words of Mayakovsky: "Lermontov descends to us, defying the times."

MORAL PROBLEMS IN M.YU. LERMONTOV'S NOVEL "HERO OF OUR TIME"

Explaining the image of Pechorin, VG Belinsky said: "This is the Onegin of our time, the hero of our time. Their dissimilarity among themselves is much less than the distance between Onega and Pechora." Onegin - a reflection of the era of the 20s, the era of the Decembrists; Pechorin is the hero of the third decade, " cruel century". Both of them are thinking intellectuals of their time. But Pechorin lived in a difficult era of social oppression and inaction, and Onegin lived in a period of social revival and could be a Decembrist. Pechorin did not have this opportunity. Therefore, Belinsky says: "Onegin is bored, and Pechorin Pechorin, an aristocrat by birth, received a secular upbringing. Coming out from under the care of his relatives, he “set off into the big world” and “began to enjoy all the pleasures furiously.” The frivolous life of an aristocrat soon became sick of him. books After "the sensational story in St. Petersburg," Pechorin was exiled to the Caucasus.

Drawing the appearance of his hero, the author points out with a few strokes his aristocratic origin: "pale, noble forehead", "small aristocratic hand", "dazzlingly clean underwear". Pechorin is a physically strong and hardy person: "broad shoulders proved a strong build, able to endure all the difficulties of nomadic life ... undefeated neither by the depravity of metropolitan life, nor by spiritual storms." The portrait of the hero also reflects internal qualities: inconsistency and secrecy. Isn't it surprising that, "despite the light color of his hair, his mustache and eyebrows are black?" His eyes did not laugh when he laughed. "Pechorin is endowed with an extraordinary mind, critically evaluating the world. He reflects on the problems of good and evil, love and friendship, on the meaning human life. In the assessment of his contemporaries, he is self-critical: "We are no longer capable of great sacrifices, either for the good of mankind, or even for our own happiness." He is well versed in people (for example, in Grushnitsky, in Princess Mary), is not satisfied with the sleepy life of the "water society" and gives devastating characteristics to the capital's aristocrats. Pechorin's memory is saturated with information from literature and history. In his diary we find quotes from Griboyedov and Pushkin, titles of works, names of writers and literary heroes. Pechorin is insanely bold, as if playing with life. Standing on the edge of the abyss with an unloaded pistol, he exposes his chest to Grushnitsky's shot. And this is done in order to "explore the limit of the meanness of my opponent." A man of strong will and great opportunities, Pechorin passionately strives for active life. "Born for a high purpose," he is forced to live in languid inactivity or waste his strength on deeds unworthy of a real person. Even sharp adventures cannot satisfy him. Love brings only disappointment and grief. He causes grief to those around him, and this deepens his suffering. Remember the fate of Bela, Grushnitsky, Princess Mary and Vera, Maxim Maksimych. However, with wealth mental strength and the giftedness of the hero, Lermontov reveals such qualities of Pechorin, which sharply reduce his image. Pechorin is a cold egoist, he is indifferent to the suffering of others, and this characterizes him as an individualist. But the heaviest accusation to Pechorin is the absence life purpose, the futility of existence. Thinking about the question of the purpose of his life, he wrote in the "journal": "Ah, it is true, it existed and, it is true, I had a high appointment, because I feel immense strength in my soul." Did Pechorin find his "higher assignment"? Have you used your "immense forces" to good use?

And didn’t Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov say about people like him in the famous “Duma” of the 30s of the last century: ... We will pass over the world without noise or trace, Without throwing a fruitful thought to the centuries, Nor to the geniuses of the work begun. Can Pechorin be called a hero in the positive sense of the word? Or, perhaps, a deep irony is hidden in the very title of the novel? The answer to this question is to be found in the preface. In it, Lermontov categorically states that Pechorin is “a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation in their full development. Pechorinism was a typical disease of the time. However, even in those years, full of darkness and hopelessness, the names of true heroes appeared. step by step they passed the "flinty path" of the fighters and showed the world examples of patriotism and civic courage.

ONEGIN AND PECHORIN AS HEROES OF THEIR TIME

... Onegin is Russian, he is possible only in Russia, he is needed in it and he is met at every step ...

"Hero of our time" Lermontov - his younger brother.

A.I. Herzen

Plan

I. The problem of the hero of time in Russian literature.

II. Types of superfluous people in the novels of Pushkin and Lermontov

a) Onegin is a contemporary of Pushkin and the Decembrists.

- "suffering egoist", "egoist involuntarily"

Wealthy landowner

Person off duty

Schedule

Duel

b) Pechorin is a hero of his time.

Lack of high ideals

A truly tragic person

Nobleman

His "soul is corrupted by the light"

Active personality

Fullness of feelings and depth of thoughts

- "His powers are immeasurable"

His individualism

III. "Eugene Onegin" and "A Hero of Our Time" are the best artistic documents of their era.

The problem of the hero of time has always excited, worried and will excite people. It was staged by classical writers, it is relevant, and until now this problem has interested and worried me ever since I first discovered the works of Pushkin and Lermontov. That is why I decided to address this topic in my abstract. Pushkin's novel in verse "Eugene Onegin" and Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time" are the pinnacles of Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century. In the center of these works are people who, in their development, are higher than the society around them, but who are not able to find application for their rich strengths and abilities. Therefore, such people are called "superfluous".

Onegin is a typical figure for the noble youth of the 20s of the 19th century. More in the poem Prisoner of the Caucasus" A.S. Pushkin set as his task to show in the hero "that premature old age of the soul, which has become the main feature younger generation". But the poet, according to him own words, did not cope with this task. In the novel "Eugene Onegin" this goal was achieved. The poet created a deeply typical image.

Onegin is a contemporary of Pushkin and the Decembrists. The Onegins are not satisfied with secular life, the career of an official and a landowner. Belinsky points out that Onegin could not engage in useful activities "due to some inevitable circumstances beyond our will," that is, due to socio-political conditions. Onegin, the "suffering egoist", is nevertheless an outstanding personality. The poet notes such traits as "involuntary devotion to dreams, inimitable strangeness and a sharp, chilled mind." According to Belinsky, Onegin "was not from among ordinary people." Pushkin emphasizes that Onegin's boredom comes from the fact that he did not have a socially useful business. The Russian nobility of that time was an estate of land and soul owners. It was the possession of estates and serfs that was the measure of wealth, prestige and height social status. Onegin's father "gave three balls every year and finally squandered", and the hero of the novel, after receiving an inheritance from "all his relatives", became a rich landowner, he is now

Factories, waters, forests, lands

The owner is complete...

But the theme of wealth turns out to be connected with ruin, the words "debts", "pledge", "lenders" are already found in the first lines of the novel. Debts, remortgaging already mortgaged estates were the work of not only poor landowners, but also many " powers of the world this" left huge debts to descendants. One of the reasons for the general debt was the idea that developed during the reign of Catherine II that "truly noble" behavior consists not only in big expenses, but in spending beyond one's means.

It was at that time, thanks to the penetration of various educational literature from abroad, that people began to understand the perniciousness of serf farming. Among these people was Eugene, he "read Adam Smith and was a deep economy." But, unfortunately, there were few such people, and most of them belonged to the youth. And therefore, when Eugene "with a yoke ... replaced the corvee with an old dues with a light one",

... In his corner pouted,

Seeing in this terrible harm,

His prudent neighbor.

The reason for the formation of debts was not only the desire to "live like a nobleman", but also the need to have free money at your disposal. This money was obtained by mortgaging estates. To live on the funds received when mortgaging the estate was called living in debt. It was assumed that the nobleman would improve his position with the money received, but in most cases the nobles lived on this money, spending it on the purchase or construction of houses in the capital, on balls ("gave three balls annually"). It was on this, habitual, but leading to ruin, that Father Evgeny went. Not surprisingly, when Onegin's father died, it turned out that the inheritance was burdened with large debts.

Gathered before Onegin

Lenders greedy regiment.

In this case, the heir could accept the inheritance and, together with it, take on the father's debts or refuse it, leaving the creditors to settle accounts among themselves. The first decision was dictated by a sense of honor, the desire not to sully the good name of the father or to preserve the family estate. The frivolous Onegin went the second way. Receipt of the inheritance was not the last means to correct the frustrated affairs. Youth, the time of hopes for an inheritance, was, as it were, a legalized period of debts, from which in the second half of life one had to be freed by becoming the heir to "all one's relatives" or by marrying favorably.

Blessed...

Who at twenty was a dandy or a grip,

And at thirty profitably married;

Who got free at fifty

From private and other debts.

For the nobles of that time military field seemed so natural that the absence of this feature in the biography had to have a special explanation. The fact that Onegin, as is clear from the novel, never served anywhere at all, made the young man a black sheep among his contemporaries. This reflected a new tradition. If earlier refusal to serve was denounced as selfishness, now it has acquired the contours of a struggle for personal independence, upholding the right to live independently of state requirements. Onegin leads the life of a young man, free from official duties. At that time, only rare young people, whose service was purely fictitious, could afford such a life. Let's take this detail. The order established by Paul I, in which all officials, including the emperor himself, had to go to bed early and get up early, was also preserved under Alexander I. But the right to get up as late as possible was a kind of sign of aristocracy that separated the non-serving nobleman not only from the common people, but also from a village landowner. The fashion to get up as late as possible dates back to the French aristocracy of the "old pre-revolutionary regime" and was brought to Russia by emigrants.

Morning toilet and a cup of coffee or tea were replaced by two or three in the afternoon with a walk. The favorite places for the festivities of St. Petersburg dandies were Nevsky Prospekt and the English Embankment of the Neva, it was there that Onegin walked: "Having put on a wide bolivar, Onegin goes to the boulevard." About four o'clock in the afternoon it was time for dinner. The young man, leading a single life, rarely kept a cook and preferred to dine in a restaurant.

In the afternoon, the young dandy sought to "kill" by filling the gap between the restaurant and the ball. The theater provided such an opportunity, it was not only a place for artistic spectacles and a kind of club where secular meetings took place, but also a place of love affairs:

The theater is already full; lodges shine;

Parterre and chairs - everything is in full swing;

In heaven they splash impatiently,

And, having risen, the curtain rustles.

....

Everything is clapping. Onegin enters,

Walks between the chairs on the legs,

Double lorgnette slanting induces

To the lodges of unknown ladies.

The ball had a dual property. On the one hand, was the area easy communication, secular recreation, a place where socio-economic differences were weakened. On the other hand, the ball was a place of representation of various social strata.

Tired of city life, Onegin settles in the countryside. important event in his life became a friendship with Lensky. Although Pushkin notes that they agreed "from doing nothing." This eventually led to a duel.

At that time, people looked at the duel in different ways. Some believed that a duel, in spite of everything, is a murder, which means barbarism, in which there is nothing chivalrous. Others - that a duel is a means of protecting human dignity, since in the face of a duel both a poor nobleman and a favorite of the court turned out to be equal.

This view was not alien to Pushkin, as his biography shows. The duel implied the strict observance of the rules, which was achieved by appealing to the authority of experts. Zaretsky plays such a role in the novel. He, "a classic and a pedant in duels", conducted his business with great omissions, or rather, deliberately ignoring everything that could eliminate the bloody outcome. Even at the first visit, he was obliged to discuss the possibility of reconciliation. This was part of his duties as a second, especially since no blood offense was inflicted and it was clear to everyone except 18-year-old Lensky that the matter was a misunderstanding. Onegin and Zaretsky break the duel rules. The first is to demonstrate his irritated contempt for the story, into which he fell against his will, the seriousness of which he still does not believe, and Zaretsky because he sees in a duel an amusing story, an object of gossip and practical jokes. Onegin's behavior in the duel irrefutably testifies that the author wanted to make him an unwilling killer. Onegin shoots from a long distance, taking only four steps, and the first, obviously not wanting to hit Lensky. However, the question arises: why, after all, did Onegin shoot at Lensky, and not past? The main mechanism by which the society, despised by Onegin, still powerfully controls his actions, is the fear of being ridiculous or becoming the subject of gossip. In the Onegen era, ineffective duels evoked an ironic attitude. A person who went to the barrier had to show an extraordinary spiritual will in order to maintain his behavior, and not accept the norms imposed on him. Onegin's behavior was determined by the fluctuations between the feelings that he had for Lensky and the fear of appearing ridiculous or cowardly, violating the rules of conduct in a duel. What won us, we know:

Poet, pensive dreamer

Killed by a friendly hand!

The novel "Eugene Onegin" is an inexhaustible source that tells about the customs and life of that time. Onegin himself is a true hero of his time, and in order to understand him and his actions, we study the time in which he lived.

M.Yu. Lermontov is a writer of "a completely different era", despite the fact that a decade separates them from Pushkin.

Years of brutal reaction have taken their toll. In his era it was impossible to overcome the alienation from time, or rather from the timelessness of the 1930s.

Lermontov saw the tragedy of his generation. This is already reflected in the poem "Duma":

Sadly, I look at our generation!

His future is either empty or dark,

Meanwhile, under the burden of knowledge and doubt,

It will grow old in inaction...

This theme was continued by M.Yu. Lermontov in the novel "A Hero of Our Time".

Pechorin is a hero of the transitional period, a representative of the noble youth, who entered life after the defeat of the Decembrists. Lack of high social ideals - bright line this historical period. The image of Pechorin is one of the main artistic discoveries of Lermontov. The Pechorin type is truly epochal. It got its concentrated artistic expression the fundamental features of the post-Decembrist era, in which, according to Herzen, on the surface, "only losses are visible", inside "great work was being done ... deaf and silent, but active and uninterrupted". This striking discrepancy between the inner and the outer, and at the same time the conditionality of the intensive development of spiritual life, is captured in the image-type of Pechorin. However, his image is much broader than what is contained in him in the universal, national - in the world, socio-psychological in the moral and philosophical. Pechorin in his journal repeatedly speaks of his contradictory duality. Usually this duality is considered as a result of the secular education received by Pechorin, the destructive influence of the noble-aristocratic sphere on him, and the transitional nature of his era.

Explaining the purpose of creating the "Hero of Our Time", M.Yu. Lermontov, in the preface to it, quite clearly makes it clear what the image of the protagonist is for him: "The hero of our time, my dear sirs, is like a portrait, but not of one person: this is a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their full development" . The author set himself an important and difficult task, wishing to display on the pages of his novel the hero of his time. And here we have Pechorin - a truly tragic person, a young man suffering from his restlessness, in despair asking himself a painful question: "Why did I live? For what purpose was I born?" In the image of Lermontov, Pechorin is a man of a very specific time, position, socio-cultural environment, with all the contradictions that follow from this, which are investigated by the author in full artistic objectivity. This is a nobleman - an intellectual of the Nikolaev era, its victim and hero in one person, whose "soul is corrupted by light." But there is something more in him, which makes him a representative of not only a certain era and social environment. The personality of Pechorin appears in Lermontov's novel as unique - an individual manifestation in it of the concrete historical and universal, specific and generic. Pechorin differs from his predecessor Onegin not only in temperament, depth of thought and feeling, willpower, but also in the degree of self-awareness, his attitude to the world. Pechorin in more than Onegin, thinker, ideologist. He is organically philosophical. And in this sense, he is the most characteristic phenomenon of his time, according to Belinsky, "the age of the philosophizing spirit." Pechorin's intense thoughts, his constant analysis and introspection in their meaning go beyond the era that gave birth to him, they also have universal significance as a necessary stage in the self-construction of a person, in the formation of an individual-generic, that is, personal, beginning in him.

Pechorin's indomitable effectiveness reflected another essential side Lermontov's concept of man - as a being not only rational, but also active.

Pechorin embodies such qualities as a developed consciousness and self-awareness, "fullness of feelings and depth of thoughts", the perception of oneself as a representative not only of the current society, but of the entire history of mankind, spiritual and moral freedom, active self-affirmation of an integral being, etc. But, being the son of his time and society, he bears on himself their indelible stamp, which is reflected in the specific, limited, and sometimes distorted manifestation of the generic in him. In Pechorin's personality, there is a contradiction, especially characteristic of a socially unsettled society, between his human essence and existence, "between the depth of nature and the pitiful action of one and the same person." (Belinsky) However, Pechorin's life position and activities make more sense than it seems at first glance. The seal of masculinity, even heroism, marks his unstoppable denial of reality unacceptable to him; in protest against which he relies only on own forces. He dies in nothing, without giving up his principles and convictions, although without doing what he could do in other conditions. Deprived of the possibility of direct public action, Pechorin nevertheless strives to resist circumstances, to assert his will, his "own need", contrary to the prevailing "state need". Lermontov, for the first time in Russian literature, brought to the pages of his novel a hero who directly set himself the most important, "last" questions of human existence - about the purpose and meaning of human life, about his purpose. On the night before the duel with Grushnitsky, he reflects: “I run through my memory of all my past and ask myself involuntarily: why did I live? For what purpose was I born? my strength is immense, but I did not guess this destination, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions, from their crucible I came out hard and cold as iron, but I lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations, the best color of life. Bela becomes a victim of Pechorin's self-will, forcibly torn from her environment, from the natural course of her life. Beautiful in its naturalness, but fragile and short-lived harmony of inexperience and ignorance, doomed to inevitable death in contact with reality, even if it is "natural" life, and even more so with the "civilization" invading it more and more powerfully, has been destroyed.

During the Renaissance, individualism was a historically progressive phenomenon. With the development of bourgeois relations, individualism loses its humanistic basis. In Russia, the deepening crisis of the feudal-serf system, the emergence in its depths of new, bourgeois relations, the victory in Patriotic war 1812 caused a truly renaissance upsurge of the sense of personality. But at the same time, all this is intertwined in the first third of the 19th century with the crisis of noble revolutionism (the events of December 14, 1825), with the fall of the authority of not only religious beliefs, but also educational ideas, which ultimately created a fertile ground for the development of individualistic ideology in Russian society. . In 1842, Belinsky stated: "Our century ... is a century ... of separation, individuality, an age of personal passions and interests (even mental ones) ...". Pechorin, with his total individualism, is an epoch-making figure in this regard. Pechorin's fundamental denial of the morality of his contemporary society, as well as his other foundations, was not only his personal merit. It has long matured in the public atmosphere, Pechorin was only its earliest and most vivid spokesman.

Another thing is also significant: Pechorin's individualism is far from pragmatic egoism adapting to life. In this sense, the comparison of individualism, say, Pushkin's Herman from " Queen of Spades"with Pechorin's individualism. Herman's individualism is based on the desire to win a place under the sun at all costs, that is, to rise to the top rungs of the social ladder. He rebels not against this unjust society, but against his humbled position in it, which is inappropriate, as he believes, his inner significance, his intellectual and volitional capabilities... For the sake of winning a prestigious position in this unjust society, he is ready to do anything: to step over, "transgress" not only through the fate of other people, but also through himself as an "inner" person " . Pechorin's individualism is not like that. The hero is full of truly rebellious rejection of all the foundations of the society in which he is forced to live. He is least concerned about his position in it. More than that, in fact, he has, and could easily have even more of what Herman is striving for: he is rich, noble, all the doors of high society are open before him, all the roads on the way to a brilliant career, honors. He rejects all this as purely external tinsel, unworthy of the aspirations living in him for the true fullness of life, which he sees, in his words, in "the fullness and depth of feelings and thoughts", in gaining a significant life goal. He considers his conscious individualism as something forced, since he has not yet found an alternative acceptable to him.

There is another feature in the character of Pechorin, which makes in many ways to take a fresh look at the individualism he professed. One of the dominant internal needs of the hero is his pronounced desire to communicate with people, which in itself contradicts individualistic worldviews. In Pechorin, the constant curiosity for life, for the world, and most importantly, for people, is striking.

Pechorin, it is said in the preface to the novel, is the type of "modern man" as the author "understands him" and as he has met him too often.

So, we have two heroes, both representatives of their difficult time. The remarkable critic V.G. Belinsky did not put an "equal" sign between them, but he did not see a big gap between them either.

Calling Pechorin the Onegin of his time, Belinsky paid tribute to the unsurpassed artistry of Pushkin's image and at the same time believed that "Pechorin is superior to Onegin in theory," although, as if muffling some categoricalness of this assessment, he added: "However, this advantage belongs to our time, and not Lermontov". Starting from 2 half of XIX century for Pechorin, the definition of "an extra person" was strengthened.

The deep meaning and characterization of the type of "superfluous person" for Russian society and Russian literature of the Nikolaev era was probably most accurately defined by A.I. Herzen, although this definition still remains in the "repositories" of literary criticism. Speaking about the essence of Onegin and Pechorin as "superfluous people" of the 1820s and 30s, Herzen made a remarkably deep observation: "The sad type of superfluous ... person - only because he developed in a person, was then not only in poems and novels, but in the streets and in the living rooms, in the villages and cities."

And yet, with all the proximity to Onegin, Pechorin, as a hero of his time, marks completely new stage in the development of Russian society and Russian literature. If Onegin reflects the painful, but in many ways semi-spontaneous process of turning an aristocrat, a "dandy" into a person, becoming a personality in him, then Pechorin captures the tragedy of an already established highly developed personality, doomed to live in a noble-serf society under an autocratic regime.

According to Belinsky, "A Hero of Our Time" is "a sad thought about our time," and Pechorin is "a hero of our time. Their dissimilarity among themselves is much less than the distance between Onega and Pechora."

"Eugene Onegin" and "A Hero of Our Time" are vivid artistic documents of their era, and their main characters personify for us all the futility of trying to live in society and be free from it.

THE LAST EXPLANATION OF PECHORIN AND MARY

Pechorin is an outstanding personality. He is smart, educated, hates indifference, boredom, bourgeois prosperity, he has a rebellious character. The hero of Lermontov is energetic, active, "furiously chasing life."

But his activity and energy are directed to small things. He wastes his powerful nature"for nothing".

Pechorin's nature is complex and contradictory. He criticizes his shortcomings, dissatisfied with himself and others. But what does he live for? Was there a purpose in his life. No. This is his tragedy. Such a hero was made by the environment in which he lives, secular education killed all the best qualities in him. He is a hero of his time. He, like Onegin, does not find the meaning of life. What is Pechorin in the scene last explanation with Mary?

Mary is a secular girl, she was brought up in this society. She has a lot positive qualities: she is charming, simple, direct, noble in actions and feelings. But proud, proud, sometimes arrogant. She fell in love with Pechorin, but did not understand his rebellious soul.

Pechorin learns from Werner that after his duel with Grushnitsky, Mary fell ill. Her mother and she decide that he shot himself out of love for her.

Before leaving, Pechorin went to say goodbye to the princess, who talks about her daughter's illness and that Pechorin loves the princess and can marry.

Now he has to talk to Mary because he has been misunderstood. “No matter how I searched in my chest for at least a spark of love for dear Mary, but my efforts were in vain.” And although Pechorin's heart was beating strongly, "thoughts were calm, his head was cold." He didn't love her. He feels sorry for the princess when he sees how sick and weak she is. Pechorin explains to her, says that he laughed at her, and she should despise him. “Another minute, and I would have fallen at her feet,” Pechorin thinks when he sees that she loves him.

Subsequently, Pechorin asks himself why "quiet joys and peace of mind" are not for him. And he answers: “I, like a sailor, born and raised on the deck of a robber brig: his soul got used to storms and battles ...”. Vera alone understood Pechorin. He could not marry Mary because he did not love her and did not want to lose his freedom and independence.

But in this scene, the contradictory nature of the hero is again revealed. He worries when he sees how sick Mary is, how she loves him, he is ready to "fall at her feet." But he feels sorry for her, that's all. Reason and coldness win. Pechorin is self-critical. He always condemns his unseemly deeds, he speaks directly about it. But we must admit that the hero is selfish. He has no friends. Even with Werner he is cold. He couldn't even love Vera. "My soul is corrupted by the light." Yes it is. It is a pity that Pechorin's remarkable nature did not bring him happiness. He did not find the meaning of life.

ESSAY "BETS PECHORIN WITH VULICH"

The chapter begins with a story about the bet between Pechorin and Vulich. In this dispute, Vulich proves the existence of a destiny from above. He shoots himself with a loaded gun, but the misfire leaves him alive. What is it: a game of chance or fate? Pechorin is sure that it is fate. It is this confidence of his that contributes to the feeling that this incident is not the end, but only the beginning of the main, most likely tragic events in life.

In a philosophical dispute between them, their life positions: Vulich, as a person connected with the East, believes in predestination, and Pechorin acts as a person-bearer of practical thinking: “... if there is definitely predestination, then why are we given will, reason? Why should we be held accountable for our actions?... Pechorin, who questions everything, does not agree with Vulich, the evidence provided by the officer is not enough for him, he must check himself and try his fate. Paradoxically, it is he who predicts imminent death Vulich, based only on the fact that "on the face of a man who is to die in a few hours, there is some kind of terrible imprint of the inevitability of fate."

However, the dispute agitated Pechorin, he thinks about it on the way home, but fate has prepared for him a sleepless night. Describing what is happening, the hero will note: “... apparently, it was written in heaven that I won’t get enough sleep that night.”

This is how the episode begins: officers appear at his house, who bring him shocking news - Vulich has been killed. What a terrible predestination? Confused, because he foresaw this death, Pechorin goes to the hut in which the Cossack murderer Vulich locked himself. How amazed he is is evidenced by his inner reflections, the fragmentary nature of his phrases and thoughts. Approaching the hut, he sees "terrible turmoil." Lermontov psychologically accurately conveys his condition, the rest of the inhabitants of the village and the excited officers. The abundance of verbs (jumped out, outstripped, fled, howled, lamented) reflects the confusion and horror of all these people who learned about tragic death Vulich. They are so frightened that they cannot control themselves, confusion does not allow them to do anything. And Pechorin is already calm. His sharp mind notices the indecisive Cossacks, and the despair of women, and the madness in the eyes of the old mother of the locked-in killer. Everyone is aware of the need to “decide on something”, but no one dares to capture the crazy Cossack. Neither persuasion nor threats against him help. After all, the killer understands the hopelessness of his situation. He, who has already committed such a serious crime, being in an extremely excited state, has nothing to lose. Pechorin, peering through the window, immediately noted the Cossack's pallor, and his horror at the sight of blood, and his terribly rolling eyes, and his gestures when he clutched his head. He looked like a crazy person. He is ready to die, but probably will not surrender voluntarily, but most likely will shoot back if they try to grab him. The officers also understand this, so they offer to shoot the criminal. At this moment, Pechorin decides on a desperate act that struck him:

he wants, like Vulich, to try his luck. This idea, which seems strange and inexplicable, is actually very logical. She is the opportunity to try fate and find out if there is predestination from above. The events of the previous evening, the insane killer, the indecisiveness of the officers - all this forces Pechorin to make a very risky decision, i.e. to try alone and without weapons to seize an armed man, although driven into a corner, but very dangerous. Isn't it suicide? However, the hero takes this step. He challenges his fate, his inner reflection, excitement "do not interfere with the decisiveness of the character", it even creates the feeling that he is delighted, having made a dangerous decision. “My heart was beating strongly,” writes Pechorin. He captures the Cossack, and at the same time remains alive. What is it:

incredible luck or fate? What saved the hero from a bullet flying over his very ear? What prevented the Cossack from picking up the saber lying next to him? Probably luck, or maybe fate.

One way or another, but the killer is captured, and Pechorin survived. All the officers congratulated him, and having returned to the fortress and told Maxim Maksimych about this, he again thinks about predestination. And how not to become a fatalist after everything that happened?! However, Pechorin not only is not convinced of the existence of predestination, but, on the contrary, comes to the conclusion that a person “always moves forward more boldly when he does not know what awaits him.”

This episode, like the whole story "The Fatalist", is Pechorin's diary, his confession, his thoughts about himself and his actions. Analyzing his actions in the scene of the capture of the murderous Cossack, Pechorin comes to the same conclusion as Lermontov in his poem "Duma": their generations are "miserable descendants wandering the earth without conviction and pride, without pleasure and fear." They are left to spend their lives on entertainment, drunkenness, this is a life without meaning and high ideas. And the way such educated people risk their lives aimlessly, thinking people, as Vulich and Pechorin, trying to prove false truths, once again confirms their "lack of demand by society." These are "superfluous people", this is their tragedy, and the episode where Pechorin plays with death proves this.

Composition “Relationship between Pechorin and Vera. Vera's letter. Analysis of the episode (based on the novel "A Hero of Our Time" by M.Yu. Lermontov)»

And we hate, and we love by chance,

Sacrificing nothing to either malice or love,

And some kind of secret cold reigns in the soul,

When the fire boils in the blood.

These Lermontov lines are the best way to characterize the "hero of his time" - Pechorin. In these verses - the whole of Pechorin, his attitude, his attitude to life, his attitude to love. Such is he in the story with Bela, in the experiment with Mary. In the same way, Pechorin behaves towards Vera.

Faith is the main woman in his life. The affair with her has obviously been going on since his youth. Faith - married woman, however, she does not love her second husband, however, like her first. It seems that she loves Pechorin all her life. Fate brings them together again in Pyatigorsk, and Vera is entrusted to him "with the same carelessness."

However, Pechorin again makes her suffer and suffer from jealousy. To divert suspicion from Vera, he promises her to meet the Lithuanians and to court Princess Mary a little. However, Pechorin "is very successful" in his "red tape": Mary Litovskaya falls in love with him. And Vera is again tormented by suspicions, doubting Pechorin's feelings. Having learned from her husband about Pechorin's duel with Grushnitsky, she cannot stand it and opens up to Semyon Vasilyevich in everything. Her husband takes her away, before leaving, she writes a letter to Pechorin, which vividly characterizes Vera and her relationship with Pechorin.

Vera is a smart, insightful woman, she perfectly understands Pechorin's soul, his character, his inner world. “I won’t blame you - you did with me as any other man would have done: you loved me as property, as a source of joys and sorrows that alternated mutually, without which life is boring and monotonous,” writes Vera. However, the heroine accepts such morality. And this affects not only the lack of "feminine pride", but also long life Faith in a secular society, where she learns exactly this type of relationship between a man and a woman.

Vera feels that Pechorin is deeply unhappy. And she succumbs to a secret, purely feminine desire to sacrifice herself in order to make her chosen one happy. And this is the deep delusion of the heroine. She cannot make Pechorin happy, since no one can do this. Grigory Alexandrovich is not capable of true love, Vera's hope and her sacrifice are in vain. However, the heroine is unaware of this.

Vera's letter sheds light on the nature of her relationship with Pechorin. “She who once loved you cannot look without some contempt at other men, not because you were better than them, oh no! but in your nature there is something special, peculiar to you alone, something proud and mysterious; in your voice, no matter what you say, there is an invincible power; no one knows how to constantly want to be loved; in no one is evil so attractive ... ”, Vera admits. Her feeling for Pechorin is nothing but painful adoration, painful dependence. “Love embraces her with such force that all other feelings seem to atrophy. She loses her "moral balance."

Pechorin himself speaks of this, talking about his relationship with women. “... I have never become a slave of a beloved woman; on the contrary, I always acquired invincible power over their will and heart, without even trying about it, ”the hero admits in his diary. This is precisely his relationship with Vera.

Belinsky believed that the image of this heroine was elusive and indefinite, that her relationship with Pechorin was like a riddle. “Then she seems to you a deep woman, capable of boundless love and devotion, of heroic self-sacrifice; you see in it one weakness and nothing more. Especially noticeable in her is the lack of feminine pride and a sense of her feminine dignity, which do not prevent a woman from loving passionately and selflessly, but which will hardly ever allow a truly deep woman to endure the tyranny of love. She loves Pechorin, and another time she marries, and also for an old man, therefore, by calculation, by whatever means; having cheated on one husband for Pechorin, he cheats on another, rather out of weakness than out of passion for feelings.

Another researcher puts forward his version of Vera's behavior. “The ideal and romantic element played a greater role in her love than passion,” remarks Storozhenko.

I think both critics are right. In relations with Pechorin, of course, Vera is attracted by romanticism: the mystery of these relations, the exclusivity of the personality of the chosen one. But in the heroine there is also a lack of feeling dignity. This nature is not independent, weak, falling under the influence of others. The weakness of Vera's character, her uncertainty, are emphasized by the last lines of her letter to Pechorin: “Isn't it true that you don't love Mary? won't you marry her? Listen, you have to make this sacrifice for me: I lost everything in the world for you ... ”In Vera's intonations - uncertainty, confusion.

At the same time, she probably subconsciously guessed what impression her message would make on Pechorin. And indeed, with the possibility of losing Vera, she becomes for him "more expensive than anything in the world - more expensive than life, honor, happiness." Like crazy, he rushes to Essentuki, trying to catch up with her. However, Vera Pechorin is not destined to see: he drives his horse and remains five miles from Essentuki.

Composition "Love in the life of Pechorin"

Love ... Such a beautiful and sublime feeling, to which Pechorin is so thoughtlessly treated. He is an egoist, and beautiful girls who see their ideal in him suffer from this. Bela and Princess Mary, Vera and Undine are so different, but equally hurt by Pechorin, who himself admits: “Yes, and what do I care about human joys and misfortunes ...”.

When Pechorin first saw the beautiful Circassian Bela, he thought that love for her would bring him healing from longing and disappointment. Bela was endowed not only with beauty. She was an ardent and tender girl, capable of deep feelings. Proud and bashful Bela is not devoid of consciousness of her dignity. When Pechorin lost interest in her, Bela, in a fit of indignation, says to Maxim Maksimych: “If he doesn’t love me, who’s stopping him from sending me home? .. If this continues, then I myself will leave: I’m not a slave, I’m a prince’s daughter!” .

The story with Bela showed Pechorin that in female love he was looking for happiness in vain. "I was wrong again," says Pechorin, "the love of a savage woman better than love noble lady; the ignorance and simple-heartedness of one is just as annoying as the coquetry of another.”

Princess Mary, like Bela, is a victim of the restless Pechorin. This proud and restrained aristocrat was deeply carried away by the “army ensign” and decided not to reckon with the prejudices of her noble relatives. She was the first to confess to Pechorin her feelings. But at the moment of a decisive explanation with Princess Pechorin, he felt incapable of giving away his freedom to anyone. Marriage would be a "quiet haven". And he himself rejects Mary's love. Offended in her feelings, the sincere and noble Mary withdraws into herself and suffers.

Love for Vera was Pechorin's deepest and most lasting affection. Among his wanderings and adventures, he left faith, but returned to it again. Pechorin caused her a lot of suffering. “Since we have known each other,” Vera said, “you have given me nothing but suffering.” And yet she loved him. Ready to sacrifice her self-esteem and the opinion of the world to her beloved, Vera becomes a slave to her feelings, a martyr of love. Parting with her, Pechorin realized that faith was the only woman who understood him and continued to love him, despite his shortcomings. Pechorin experiences the final separation from Vera as a catastrophe: he indulges in despair and tears. Nowhere is Pechorin's hopeless loneliness and the suffering he engendered, which he hid from others under his usual firmness and composure, so clearly revealed.

Relations with the undine were just an exotic adventure for Pechorin. She is an undine, a mermaid, a girl from a forgotten fairy tale. This is what attracts Pechorin. Undoubtedly, his interest was influenced by the mysterious environment. For him, this is one of the coils of fate; for her, this is life, where everyone fights for their place, for their work.

Thus, Pechorin did not know how to truly love. He could only make those who treated him so devotedly and reverently suffer.

The image of Pechorin in the novel by M. Yu. Lermontov "" M. Yu. Lermontov lived and worked during the period of the most severe reaction that set in Russia after the defeat December uprising. Lermontov wrote about a man who is constantly looking for himself. "A Hero of Our Time" is the first psychological novel in Russian literature, a work in which the narrative is determined not by the chronology of the development of events, but by the logic of the development of the character of the protagonist - Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin. The novel consists of five stories, each of which represents a stage in revealing the image of the protagonist. Lermontovsky bears resemblance to Pushkin's Onegin. They are both tired of the emptiness of social life.

But Pechorin, unlike Onegin, does not go with the flow, but seeks his own path in life, he "chases life furiously" and constantly argues with fate. We do not know the whole story of Pechorin's life. Lermontov tells only about the events that happened to him in the Caucasus.

How he got there, we don't know. But it is known that the Caucasus in the time of Lermontov was a place of exile, and military operations took place there. Most likely, Pechorin, having left for the Caucasus, hoped to find in constant dangers and risks the meaning of life, the absence of which forced him to leave the high society. Throughout the story, we see a person who plunges into life, as they say, with his head. But at the same time, this life is not of particular interest to him.

Deciding to start a new love affair or getting involved in some kind of adventure, he knows in advance how it will all end. But he still does not sit still, because the worst thing for Pechorin is inaction. He often hurts those around him.

Being exiled to the fortress for a duel with Grushnitsky, he meets the daughter of the local prince Bela there. Pechorin persuades her brother to kidnap his sister in exchange for a stolen horse. Having achieved the girl's love, the hero of the novel cools off towards her and again begins to get bored.

Approximately the same situation with Princess Mary. For the sake of entertainment, he falls in love with her, knowing in advance that he does not need her. Maxim Maksimych is also offended by him because he was cold when meeting him after a long separation. He is far from Pechorin in his spiritual development.

For him, the latter is simply " a strange man". Maxim Maksimych is a type of conscientious campaigner who cannot understand the insatiable soul of Pechorin. Lermontov constantly places his hero in different environments: in the fortress, where he meets Maxim Maksimych and Bela, in the motley environment of the "water society", in the smugglers' shack. Even death overtakes Pechorin on the way.

The protagonist of the novel tirelessly searched for himself, his place in life, but he was not destined to find it. From Pechorin's confession, we learn that his "soul is corrupted by the light", that they did not believe him from childhood and he learned to hide his feelings, they saw in him non-existent vices, which therefore appeared. Pechorin is a person who is interested in life, he is attracted by the highlanders and their customs, attracted by the world of "honest smugglers", he is glad to have a friend, Dr. Werner.

The hero reaches out to people, but he does not find understanding in them. These people were far away in their spiritual development from him, they did not seek in life what he sought. Pechorin is an energetic person, but he directs his energy in the wrong direction. The environment in which he lived did not give him the opportunity to express himself. In essence, Pechorin was not a bad person, although his actions often brought misfortune to people.

When reading a novel, one must look deeper into the soul of the protagonist in order to understand how much Pechorin deserves reproach or is worthy of sympathy. He has a lot good qualities. He is brave and courageous man, knows how to truly love: he has quite sincere feelings for Vera, although there is a strangeness in his behavior. So, in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”, M. Yu. Lermontov showed us a person representing the type of “superfluous people”, who, in his search for the meaning of life, never came to anything.

How to download a free essay? . And a link to this essay; Composition based on the work of Lermontov, the hero of our time. Pechurin's image already in your bookmarks.

Pechorin - a portrait of his generation (based on the novel "A Hero of Our Time") In the novel "A Hero of Our Time" Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov touches on the same problems that often sound in his lyrics: why smart and energetic people cannot find a place in life, why do they "grow old in inaction"? The novel consists of five parts: "Bela", "Maxim Maksimych", "Taman", "Princess Mary", "Fatalist". Each of them represents an independent work and at the same time
1. Features of romanticism and realism in M. Yu. Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time". 2. The image of the hero of the 30s. 19th century 3. The composition of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" and its role in revealing Pechorin's personality. 4. " extra people"in the works of A. S. Pushkin and M. Yu. Lermontov. 5. Pechorin and Grushnitsky. 6. Women's images in the novel by M. Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time". 7. The role of the narrator and the nature of the narration in the novel by M. Yu.
The history of the creation of the novel. (Beginning of work - 1838, under the impression of a trip to the Caucasus. "Bela" and "Taman" were published in the form individual stories. Initially, it was not conceived as a novel (a collection of short stories). But in 1840, "A Hero of Our Time" saw the light of day. The stories included in it are connected by a single composition and plot. The main problem of the novel is personality and time.) The first psychological novel in Russian literature. (The sequence of events, the plot narrative are specially changed. The author's goal is to reveal the character
1. Why does M. Yu. Lermontov tell about the events in the novel "A Hero of Our Time" not in chronological order? What should this sequence be? M. Yu. Lermontov violates the chronological sequence in order to more fully reveal the character of Pechorin. In the stories "Bela" and "Maxim Maksimych" he shows the contradictory actions of the hero, incomprehensible to others. Then the motives of actions are clarified. In addition, the first four stories show the influence of the environment on the formation of Pechorin. The Fatalist poses the problem of man's opposition to fate. Chronological stories
The conflict between Pechorin and Grushnitsky is one of the main ones in the novel. (Pechorin's personality emerges in relationships with others, and in particular with Grushnitsky. The opposition of Pechorin and Grushnitsky is the opposition of the true and the false; Grushnitsky embodies the world against which Pechorin rebels.) Grushnitsky is a parody of Pechorin. Pechorin's mind and Grushnitsky's limitations. (Pechorin tends to analyze both his own actions and the actions of other people, while Grushnitsky cannot understand simple situations.) Disappointment in
About the erudition of Pechorin V methodical works we did not happen to read about the erudition, education of Onegin, Pechorin, Bazarov and other heroes of Russian literature. But it is knowledge that largely shapes the personality, determines its social views. Pechorin has read a lot, knows a lot. His memory keeps a lot historical facts, legends, artistic images and poetic lines. The hero skillfully correlates them with life phenomena, always to the point and with due tact. Note that sometimes deep
Belinsky writes that in the second half of the 1930s "a new bright star rose on the horizon of our poetry and immediately turned out to be a star of the first magnitude. We are talking about Lermontov ...". The novel (immortal work) "A Hero of Our Time" made an exceptionally strong impression on readers because it truly depicts the life of Russian society. "We must demand from art that it show us reality as it is, for whatever it may be, this reality, it will say more

The writing

With the creation of the novel "A Hero of Our Time" Lermontov made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature, continuing Pushkin's realistic traditions. Like his great predecessor, Lermontov generalized in the image of Pechorin typical features the younger generation of his era, creating a vivid image of a man of the 30s of the XIX century. The main problem the novel became an extraordinary fate human personality in an era of timelessness, the hopelessness of the situation of gifted, intelligent, educated young nobles.

The main idea of ​​Lermontov's novel is connected with its central image - Pechorin; everything is subordinated to the task of a comprehensive and deep disclosure of the character of this hero. Belinsky very accurately noticed the originality of the description by the author of Pechorin. Lermontov, but in the words of criticism, portrayed " inner man", acting as a deep psychologist and realist artist. So, Lermontov for the first time in Russian literature used psychological analysis as a means to reveal the character of the hero, his inner world. deep penetration in psychology Pechorin helps to better understand the sharpness social problems set in the novel. This gave Belinsky reason to call Lermontov "the solver of important contemporary issues."

The unusual composition of the novel draws attention. It consists of separate works in which there is not a single plot, no permanent characters, not a single narrator. These five stories are united only by the image of the main character - Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin. They are located in such a way that the chronology of the hero's life is clearly violated. AT this case it was important for the author to show Pechorin in various situations in communication with the most different people, choose to describe the most important, significant episodes of his life. In each story, the author places his hero in new environment, where he encounters people of a different social status and mental warehouse: mountaineers, smugglers, officers, noble "water society". And each time Pechorin opens up to the reader from a new side, revealing new facets of character.

Recall that in the first story "Bela" we are introduced to Pechorin by a man who served with Grigory Alexandrovich in the fortress and was an involuntary witness to the story of Bela's abduction. The elderly officer is sincerely attached to Pechorin, takes his actions to heart. He draws attention to the external oddities of the character of the "thin ensign" and cannot understand how a person who easily endures both rain and cold, who went one on one against a wild boar, can shudder and turn pale from the accidental knock of a shutter. In the story with Bela, the character of Pechorin seems unusual and mysterious. The old officer cannot comprehend the motives of his behavior, as he is unable to comprehend the depths of his experiences.

The next meeting with the hero takes place in the story "Maxim Maksimych", where we see him through the eyes of the narrator. He no longer acts as the hero of some story, says a few nothing meaningful phrases, but we have the opportunity to look closely at the bright, original appearance of Pechorin. vigilant, penetrating glance The author notes the contradictions of his appearance: a combination of blond hair and black mustaches and eyebrows, broad shoulders and pale thin fingers. The attention of the narrator is captured by his gaze, the strangeness of which is manifested in the fact that his eyes did not laugh when he laughed. "This is a sign of either an evil disposition, or a deep constant sadness," the author notes, revealing the complexity and inconsistency of the hero's character.

Pechorin's diary, which combines the last three stories of the novel, helps to understand this extraordinary nature. The hero writes about himself sincerely and fearlessly, not being afraid to expose his weaknesses and vices. In the preface to Pechorin's Journal, the author notes that the history of the human soul is almost more useful and not more curious than history the whole people. In the first story "Taman", which tells about the hero's accidental encounter with "peaceful smugglers", the complexities and contradictions of Pechorin's nature seem to be relegated to the background. We see energetic, bold, decisive person, who is full of interest in the people around him, craves action, tries to unravel the mystery of the people with whom his fate accidentally confronts. But the ending of the story is banal. Pechorin's curiosity destroyed the well-established life of "honest smugglers", dooming a blind boy and an old woman to a beggarly existence. Pechorin himself writes with regret in his diary: "Like a stone thrown into a smooth spring, I disturbed their calmness." In these words, pain and sadness are heard from the realization that all Pechorin's actions are petty and insignificant, devoid of a lofty goal, do not correspond to the rich possibilities of his nature.

The uncommonness, originality of Pechorin's personality, in my opinion, is most clearly manifested in the story "Princess Mary". It is enough to read his well-aimed, accurate descriptions given to representatives of the noble "water society" of Pyatigorsk, his original judgments, amazing landscape sketches, to understand that he stands out from the people around him with the strength and independence of character, a deep analytical mind, high culture, erudition, developed aesthetic sense. Pechorin's speech is full of aphorisms and paradoxes. For example, he writes: "After all, nothing worse than death will happen - and death cannot be avoided."

But what does he spend his spiritual wealth, their immense forces Pechorin? For love affairs, intrigues, skirmishes with Grushnitsky and dragoon captains. Yes, he always comes out the winner, as in the story with Grushnitsky and Mary. But this does not bring him any joy or satisfaction. Pechorin feels and understands the discrepancy between his actions and high, noble aspirations. This leads the hero to a split personality. He focuses on his own actions and experiences. Nowhere in his diary will we find even a mention of his homeland, people, political problems of modern reality. Pechorin is only interested in his own inner world. Constant attempts to understand the motives of their actions, eternal merciless introspection, constant doubt lead to the fact that he loses the ability to simply live, to feel joy, fullness and strength of feeling. From himself he made an object for observation. He is no longer able to experience excitement, because, as soon as he feels it, he immediately begins to think that he is still capable of worrying. This means that a merciless analysis of one's own thoughts and actions kills the immediacy of perception of life in Pechorin, plunges him into a painful contradiction with himself.

Pechorin is completely alone in the novel, since he himself repels those who are able to love and understand him. But still, some entries in his diary indicate that he needs close person that he was tired of being alone. Lermontov's novel leads to the conclusion that the tragic discord in the hero's soul is caused by the fact that the rich forces of his soul did not find a worthy application, that the life of this original, extraordinary nature was wasted and completely devastated.

Thus, the story of Pechorin's soul helps to better understand the tragedy of the fate of the young generation of the 30s of the 19th century, makes us think about the causes of this "disease of the century" and try to find a way out of the moral impasse into which the reaction led Russia.

Composition on the topic "the hero of our time - who is he?"
June 27, 23:44
Current Location:home
Mood: peaceful
Music: RATM

"The hero of our time - who is he?"

The word "hero" can be understood in different ways. On the one hand, this is a participant in some event, on the other hand, this is a special individual who stands out from the crowd due to the outstanding qualities of his personality.

Everyone remembers Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time". Lermontov said that "Pechorin is the name of the work," whatever it may be. It's no secret that Pechorin is far from ideal, he is worse than an ordinary egoist, because he is aware of this, but cannot do anything. Consequently, any person can be a hero of our time, regardless of what his profession, education, what he is interested in, what nationality he is - it simply does not matter. We are all heroes, if you look at the situation from Lermontov's point of view.

However, in order to create the image of such a person, it is necessary from total weight highlight the most characteristics modern personality, traits of character, behavior, and then combine them into one set. In a word, our task is to draw typical person who lives in modern times and is engaged in the most typical affairs of our time.

What is he? Difficult to answer this question, because all people are different, so it is better to consider each case separately. I'll try to draw a bad one and good image and then the middle.

So, the bad hero of our time. This is an immoral, selfish person who lives according to the principles “take everything from life”, “you have to try everything in this life”, etc. He is not interested in anything that goes beyond his borders. biological needs and needs for pleasure, usually does not read, smokes and drinks. But he can even be educated, smart, only use his mind in selfish purposes, for your own benefit only. In short, we can say that this is a subject that contributes to the degradation of society.

Who is this real hero time, what brings progress that aspires to higher ideals? Among people of my age, I almost never met such people, probably because I saw little of the world. This person has specific interests, clear views, his own opinion, which is justified and, most often, fair. He does not allow ignoring the culture that is happening in the world and in the life of society. His mind is always aware of the most actual problems light, and most importantly - he has the ability to reason analytically, supporting his arguments with arguments and facts. A true hero of our time must not only reason, but also do something, set a goal to go towards it, because without a goal it is nobody, just a living organism that does nothing. More with regards to qualities - decency, honesty, neglect public opinion for the sake of achieving good goals, a broad outlook, erudition, good sports training. It will seem to many that I simply described how I see the ideal hero of our time. Yes, this is only an ideal, it is possible to have such qualities, but it is not always easy to live with them. In reality, everything is much more complicated.

And who should we place in the middle? This individual has morality, but often neglects it, is skeptical about it. Undoubtedly, the "average" has his own opinion, but he does not really like to express it, only if it directly concerns his interests. Most likely, the average student reads fantasy literature, preferring it to Russian classics, or reads exclusively scientific books in the process of studying. At the end of a college or institute, his path that develops the mind ends - the mind is dried up by science, and moral development stands still, or the moral foundations are already formed completely. This hero will not do something if they can think badly about him, sometimes he cares so much about what others think of him that he completely stops believing in himself, although he has good abilities. He is also not averse to having fun or doing "doing nothing", but there is hardly a person who does not do this. Sometimes, the middle peasant does bad deeds, but scars remain on his conscience, he suffers like Raskolnikov in the novel "Crime and Punishment" by F. Dostoevsky.

Yes you? It's not always!

I agree…

His conscience does not always torment him, because everything is relative in this world, as you know. Of course, there is no such specific image, no specific person, because everyone is individual, inside everyone there is the whole world, it is not possible for us to study everyone, because there are also closed people.

And now I will describe a man whom I once considered a hero - he is my friend. Not to say that he was a moral monster, but you can't say that he is perfection either. I admire that he managed to create a new self and get used to life in this image. He is a man of mystery, you do not know what to expect from him. Thanks to this, even respect awakens for him, real, which rests not on fear, but on admiration. Yes, he is funny, he likes to joke dirty, but looking around, you understand that the whole world is like that and it is impossible to be a black sheep - you have to adapt to certain conditions, and a person gets used to everything. And my friend gets used to everything, adapts.

Yes, he is an easy fit!

I assure you, no!

Not material adaptation, not the desire to gain, but the desire to be the soul of the campaign, to amuse everyone, to find a certain key for everyone. He has an incredible ability to please girls, he is witty, which is why some girls say - "oh, he is too smart, I would not date him." Of course, my friend is well-read, enlightened and crazy about sports.

And no weaknesses?

Oh no!

For example, sometimes his own ambitions lead him to a dead end, this makes my friend accept the world as it is, because whatever happens, everything is for the better, as M. Bulgakov said.

Thus, the hero of our time is every person living in our time, no matter who he is and what he is - he is still a hero. In my essay, I described three types of people whom I classified according to certain characteristics, these people are the most common types such personalities that are found in our society. And finally, I described a person whom I once admired, some of whose wonderful qualities I set as an ideal, but this person is a separate story, he is real, he exists as one of the heroes of our time. Ideals do not exist. All whom I have described, in my opinion, are the heroes of our time. There may be those who are against it. My answer is I don't know.