Author's assessment of the novel fathers and sons.

I option

Not a single work of Turgenev caused such contradictory responses as his novel Fathers and Sons. Some critics said that Turgenev in his novel created the image of a new man, others perceived the novel as a parody of nihilists. Some argued that Turgenev "flogged the liberals", others reproached Turgenev for preaching conservative ideas. This happened, apparently, due to the difficulty of understanding author's position. Indeed, Turgenev nowhere in the novel speaks directly about his likes and dislikes, neither praises nor condemns anyone directly. And yet, it seems that one can understand what the author thinks about life, if only to look at straightforward assessments.

The main conflict of the novel is the conflict of "fathers" and "children". prominent representatives conflicting parties - Bazav and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. At first glance, their opinions

all are opposite to each other. Pavel Petrovich is a supporter of following "principles", Bazarov denies any authority. Pavel Petrovich admires the beauty of nature, and Bazarov says: "Nature is not a temple, but a workshop ...". Pavel Petrovich loves Schiller and Goethe, and for Bazarov "a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." For Pavel Petrovich, love is high and beautiful mystery, and for Bazarov - a manifestation of physiology.

However, Turgenev convincingly shows that these opposites are imaginary. Love for Odintsova, ironically, had the same effect on Bazarov. fatally, as on Pavel Petrovich love for Princess R. In the end, both of them find a surrogate for their love in a feeling for Fenechka. Forcing them to fall in love with the same woman, Turgenev emphasizes the affinity of their deeds - all life turns out to be a victim of love. This is one of the ways of expressing the author's position in the novel - the equalization of opposites.

Excursions into the past acquire great significance in the novel. The narrative of the main events of the novel is constantly interrupted by retrospective inserts. The author persistently refers to the history of the "kind" of heroes, traces the change of generations. What is this change? With all the blood differences between "fathers and children", their fates are close. The situations from the youth of Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov and his son are almost repeated: Nikolai Petrovich's father brought him to the university, and Nikolai Petrovich brought him to the University of Arcadia.

Internal connections are drawn between Anna Odintsova and her father. She also consistently strives for a secure existence. And her younger sister Katya is firmly on the beaten track. At the other pole of society, among the small estate Bazarovs, the strength of traditions is expressed in a different way. It is said about Ari-na Vlasyevna: “She was a real Russian noblewoman of the past, she should have lived for two hundred years, in the old days ...”.

The author depicts Russian life for almost fifty years. It reveals many of the negative aspects of epochs that have sunk into oblivion. In the regimental towns of the 1920s and 1930s, there was the realm of "mothers-commanders" (Chapter I). AT high society of the same years - false Byronism, fatal passions (Chapter VIII), the prosperity of card swindlers (Chapter XV). However, the new time upsets the writer immeasurably more. Nikolai Petrovich let the peasants go to dues, started "on new way economy”, but he himself cannot cope with the management of the estate. “Progressives” appeared in the bureaucratic world. Emancipated women (Kukshina) and tax-farmers (Sitnikov) arguing about freedom appeared in the county demi-monde. How flawed all these innovations are!

All past disadvantages: poverty peasant village, inept management, bureaucracy, spiritual stagnation - have been preserved, and idle talk, practicality, possessive instincts - have increased. And these are the "blood ties" of ties between different generations, those patterns of Russian life, the identification of which was the author's goal.

II option

In a letter to Herzen on April 16, 1862, Turgenev calls his hero a "wolf", and in a letter to Spuchevsky he speaks of Bazarov's "heartlessness" and "ruthless dryness". He is almost a natural force; Turgenev almost defines him in the same letter to Spuchevsky: "... a figure ... wild ... half grown out of the soil."

“He is ... a democrat to the end of his nails,” Turgenev writes about Bazarov in a letter to Sluchevsky. The novel confirms this definition and at the same time reveals the unusual nature of Bazarov's democracy, which goes to the extreme.

The pathos of moral rejection lives in Bazar's denial modern world, it is he who makes the "nihilist" an opponent of the existing order. But Turgenev, apparently, is convinced that this pathos cannot go beyond the limits of Platonic impulses if he does not rely on the instincts and strength of a "predator" who is able to go ahead, regardless of anything, crushing or hating everything that he resists. It is impossible even to mentally imagine Bazarov, who loves poetry, enjoys the beauty of nature, who is selflessly devoted to a woman, and at the same time remains a merciless destroyer, an unbridled rebel, "a gloomy, wild ... strong, evil figure." In a word, those whom it is proposed to call a revolutionary. Bazarov, who fell in love with Pushkin and Mozart, Bazarov, enjoying the charm of the evening landscape, Bazarov, selflessly adoring his beloved, is no longer Bazarov. This is a completely different person, perhaps more pleasant and close to the reader, but different. Incapable of "complete and merciless denial", not doomed to a fatal and unique Bazarov fate.

Is it any wonder that Bazarov’s love for Anna Sergeevna Odintsova turns out to be a turning point in his fate, t^mu that the hero’s love experiences grow before our eyes into a real one? spiritual crisis? The inextricable interweaving of the qualities that were discussed forms the basis of the Bazarov personality, and love could not be an addition to all this. Love for Bazarov is an alien, hostile force that threatens to destroy his spiritual structure. This is how it is perceived: “...something else moved into him”, “... indignantly recognized romance in himself” - as if it is talking about something extraneous, about some other person, and not about his own "I".

In a conversation with Ya. P. Polonsky, Turgenev spoke of the tragic contradiction as a clash of two "equal" great truths. It is this contradiction that enters the life and consciousness of Bazarov. Revolutionism and humanity turn out to be incompatible, because each side has its own right and its own wrong. “Complete and merciless denial” is justified as the only one in modern conditions a serious attempt to really change the world, putting an end to the contradictions that have not been resolved by the centuries of the existence of a humanistic culture. Hostile polemicism is also justified in its own way, sweeping aside the desire for harmony, and along with it the moral pathos of altruism, aestheticism, sensitivity and humanity. Doesn't all this eventually turn into reconciliation with the imperfection and injustice of the world?

In the epilogue of the novel, the author speaks of Bazarov's "passionate, sinful, rebellious" heart. These definitions in most correspond to a special nature tragic hero. Bazarov is really like this: he rebels against the laws of objective necessity, which cannot be changed or circumvented. However, for Turgenev it is also indisputable that "nihilism" inevitably leads to freedom without obligations, to actions without love, to searches without faith. Turgenev does not find in "nihilism" a creative creative force.

Reading Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", we constantly meet the author's characteristics and descriptions of the characters, the author's remarks and various comments. Following the fate of the characters, we feel the presence of the author himself. The author deeply experiences everything he writes about. However, his attitude to what is happening in the novel is ambiguous and not as simple as it might seem at first glance.
The author's position in the novel is manifested in descriptions, direct author's characteristics, comments on the characters' speech, in the construction of dialogues and remarks. For example, when the author describes Bazarov’s mother, he often uses words with diminutive suffixes and epithets that tell us about the character of the heroine: “... prop your round face with your fist, to which puffy, cherry-colored lips and moles on the cheeks and above the eyebrows the expression is very good-natured, she did not take her eyes off her son ... ”Thanks to special epithets and suffixes, we understand that the author treats Bazarov’s mother with sympathy, pities her.
Sometimes Turgenev gives a direct description of his characters. For example, about Pavel Petrovich, he says: “Yes, he was a dead man.” These words characterize Pavel Petrovich as a person no longer capable of real feelings; he can no longer develop spiritually, continuing to cognize this world, and therefore, he cannot truly live.
In many of the author's remarks, Turgenev's attitude towards his heroes is also felt. For example, commenting on Sitnikov's speech, the author writes that Sitnikov "laughed shrillly." Here, the author's obvious irony is felt, as in other comments on the speech of two pseudo-nihilists - Sitnikov and Kukshina.
However, if we talk about climaxes novel, about its main character - Bazarov, then here the author's attitude cannot be unambiguously determined.
On the one hand, the author does not share the principles of his hero, on the other hand, he respects his strength and intelligence. For example, in the description of Bazarov’s death, the author’s respect for this hero is felt, because Bazarov is not cowardly in the face of death, he says: “I still don’t fear ...”
In the dispute between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich (and this dispute has importance to understand the idea of ​​the work) the author does not openly support any of the characters. The author seems to be on the sidelines. On the one hand, Bazarov’s reproaches of Pavel Petrovich’s unfoundedness are quite fair: “... you respect yourself and sit back ...”, on the other hand, Pavel Petrovich is right when speaking about the importance of “self-respect”. As Turgenev himself wrote, “... real clashes are those in which both sides to some extent right,” and, perhaps, that is why Turgenev does not take the side of any of the characters, although he respects Bazarov’s mind and Kirsanov’s sense of self-esteem.
The epilogue of the work is of great importance for understanding the idea of ​​the novel. The author describes Bazarov's grave in the epilogue and says that the flowers on the grave "say<...>about eternal reconciliation and about endless life...”. I think what is meant here is that the disputes between nihilists and aristocrats, "fathers" and "children" are eternal. It is from these disputes, clashes, speaking about the development of mankind and philosophical thought and is the life of the people.
I must say that Turgenev does not give us explicit answers, he asks questions to his reader, inviting him to think for himself. This seeming uncertainty, behind which the author's philosophical attitude to the characters and destinies described, is hidden, is not only in the epilogue. For example, when Turgenev talks about the life of Bazarov's mother, he writes: “Such women are now being translated. God knows if we should rejoice in this!” As you can see, the author avoids harsh tones in his judgments about the characters. It leaves the reader free to draw (or not draw) their own conclusions.
So, the author of the novel “Fathers and Sons” - Turgenev - does not impose his point of view on what is happening in the work, he invites readers to take this philosophically. The whole novel is perceived not as an ideological guide or praise to one of the characters, but as material for reflection.

The novel "Fathers and Sons" is one of the main works of Turgenev, which most clearly reflected his views on contemporary reality. However, Turgenev does not express his views directly: through the fabric of the narrative, the author's personal attitude to the derived phenomena of life is visible. Everything that is written in this novel is felt to the last line; this feeling breaks through in spite of the will and consciousness of the author himself and "warms the objective story", instead of being expressed in digressions. The author himself is not aware of his feelings, does not subject them to analysis, and this circumstance gives readers the opportunity to see these feelings in all their immediacy. We see what "shines through", and not what the author wants to show or prove, that is, Turgenev uses mainly indirect means of expressing the author's position.

In his novel, Turgenev showed the confrontation of two generations in a specific historic moment. However, the author does not fully sympathize with anyone or anything. Neither "fathers" nor "children" satisfy him. He objectively evaluates both sides and, seeing the advantages and disadvantages of each, does not idealize any of them.

The author's position of Turgenev is already expressed in the very choice of conflict. Realizing the existing conflict of generations and feeling involved in it, Turgenev, as a person, as a representative of his era, tried to find its roots, and as a writer - to reflect the results of his thoughts in the work. Turgenev specially selected the best representatives of the nobility and raznochintsy in order to show the failure of either one or the other by their example.

Creating the image of Bazarov, Turgenev in his person wanted to "punish" the younger generation. Instead, he pays a just tribute to his hero. There is no doubt that nihilism as a trend was denied by Turgenev, but the type of nihilist he himself created was thought out and understood by him. From the very beginning, the author showed us in Bazarov an angular attitude, arrogance, "calling rationality": with Arkady he behaves "arbitrarily-carelessly", he treats Nikolai Petrovich derisively. As always with Turgenev (as with a "secret" psychologist) special meaning has a portrait of the hero, including social, psychological and external characteristic hero. A wide forehead, a pointed nose, large greenish eyes betray Bazarov's strength of character and intelligence. The manner of talking, looking down on the interlocutor and as if doing him a favor by entering into a conversation, is Bazarov’s self-confidence and a sense of superiority over others.

At the beginning of the novel, Turgenev's sympathies turn out to be on the side of those people whom Bazarov offends, those harmless old men who are said to be "retired" people. Further, the author begins to look for a weak point in the nihilist and merciless denier: he puts him in different positions and finds only one accusation against him - the accusation of callousness and harshness. Turgenev is trying to explore these properties of Bazarov's character through a test of love. Turgenev is looking for a man. who could attract such strong personality like Bazarov, who would understand and not be afraid of him. Such a person turns out to be Odintsova, smart, educated, beautiful woman. She examines the figure of Bazarov with curiosity, he peers at her with increasing sympathy, and then, seeing in himself something resembling tenderness, rushes towards her with the uncalculated impetuosity of a young man, loving heart, ready to surrender to his feeling completely, without a second thought. Turgenev understands that callous people cannot love like that, he shows that Bazarov turns out to be younger and fresher than that woman who, fearing a violation of the order of life, suppresses her feelings and desires. And from that time on, the author's sympathy goes over to the side of Bazarov. In describing the death of Bazarov, Turgenev paid tribute to the "children": young people get carried away and go to extremes, but fresh strength and an incorruptible mind are reflected in the hobbies themselves. Bazarov died the way a person with such a character and attitude to life should have died. And by this he earned the love of the author, expressed in the description of the hero's grave at the end of the novel.

But not only Bazarov is discussed in the last paragraph. Here the attitude of the author himself towards Bazarov's parents is manifested: sympathy and love. Depicting Bazarov's attitude towards the elderly, Turgenev by no means blames him. He remains a sincere artist and depicts phenomena as they are: neither with his father nor with his mother Bazarov can neither talk like he talks with Arkady, nor even argue like he argues with Pavel Petrovich. He is bored with them and this makes it hard. But the compassionate Turgenev pities the poor old people and sympathizes with their irreparable grief.

The author's position in relation to the Kirsanov brothers is somewhat contradictory. On the one hand, he loves them as representatives of his generation, educated and intelligent people, and on the other, he sees and understands their backwardness from life.

Nikolai Petrovich is very close to Turgenev. Good-natured, subtly feeling nature, loving music and poetry, he is very dear to the author. Turgenev penetratingly describes the state of the hero in the garden, his admiration of nature, his thoughts. Nikolai Petrovich has much more correspondence and harmony between his mental convictions and natural inclinations than his son Arkady. As a soft, sensitive and even sentimental person, Nikolai Petrovich does not strive for rationalism and calms down on the worldview that gives food to his imagination. And this is what makes him a "retired" person in Turgenev's eyes. With sadness and regret, Turgenev admits that his age has passed.

Describing Kirsanov's older brother, Turgenev also emphasizes his backwardness from life. As a passionate person, gifted with a flexible mind and strong will, Pavel Petrovich differs sharply from his brother. He is not influenced by others. He himself subjugates the surrounding personalities and hates those people in whom he meets resistance. The life of Pavel Petrovich is a strict adherence to once established habits, which he cherishes very much and will never agree to give up. Turgenev, on the other hand, does not see the point in a life devoid of purpose (Pavel Petrovich's life was completely empty after the break in relations with Princess R.). That is why he calls Pavel Petrovich "a dead man." Satirical notes are heard in the address of the elder Kirsanov, when he talks about Russian peasants, and he himself, passing by them, sniffs cologne.

Roman Turgenev "Fathers and Sons", except for his artistic beauty, is also remarkable in that it leads to reflection, although in itself it does not resolve any issue and even illuminates not so much the phenomena being deduced as the author's attitude towards them. And it leads to reflection precisely because it is all imbued with complete and touching sincerity. Reading the novel "Fathers and Sons", we see in it the types of nobles and commoners of the late 50s. 19th century and at the same time we are aware of the changes that the phenomena of reality experienced, passing through the consciousness of the author. Turgenev is not satisfied with either "fathers" or "children", which is clearly visible through the fabric of the narrative.

Not a single work of Turgenev caused such contradictory responses as his novel Fathers and Sons. Some critics said that Turgenev in his novel created the image of a new man, others perceived the novel as a parody of nihilists. Some argued that Turgenev "flogged the liberals", others reproached Turgenev for preaching conservative ideas. This happened, apparently, due to the difficulty of understanding the author's position. Indeed, Turgenev nowhere in the novel speaks directly about his likes and dislikes, neither praises nor condemns anyone directly. And yet, it seems to me, one can understand what the author thinks about life, if only to abandon straightforward assessments.

The main conflict of the novel is the conflict of "fathers" and "children". The most prominent representatives of the conflicting parties are Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. At first glance, their opinions are in everything opposite to each other. Pavel Petrovich is a supporter of following "principles", Bazarov denies any authorities. Pavel Petrovich admires the beauty of nature, and Bazarov says: "Nature is not a temple, but a workshop .-." Pavel Petrovich loves Schiller and Goethe, and for Bazarov "a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet." For Pavel Petrovich, love is a high and beautiful mystery, and for Bazarov it is a manifestation of physiology.

However, Turgenev convincingly shows that these opposites are imaginary. Love for Odintsova, ironically, affected Bazarov in the same fatal way as Pavel Petrovich's love for Princess R. In the end, both of them find a surrogate for their love in a feeling for Fenechka. Forcing them to fall in love with the same woman, Turgenev emphasizes the kinship of their destinies - all life turns out to be a victim of love. This is one of the ways of expressing the author's position in the novel - the equalization of opposites.

Excursions into the past acquire great significance in the novel. The narrative of the main events of the novel is constantly interrupted by retrospective inserts. The author persistently refers to the history of the "kind" of heroes, traces the change of generations. What is this change? With all the blood differences between "fathers and children", their fates are close. The situations from the youth of Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov and his son are almost repeated: Nikolai Petrovich's father brought him to the university, and Nikolai Petrovich brought him to the University of Arcadia.

Internal connections are drawn between Anna Odintsova and her father. She also consistently strives for a secure existence. And her younger sister Katya is firmly on the beaten track. At the other pole of society - among the small estate Bazarovs - the strength of traditions is expressed in a different way. It is said about Arina Vlasyevna: “She was a real Russian noblewoman of the past, she should have lived for two hundred years, in ancient times ...”.

The author depicts Russian life for almost fifty years. It reveals many of the negative aspects of epochs that have sunk into oblivion. In the regimental towns of the 1920s and 1930s, there was the realm of “mothers-commanders” (Chapter I). In the high society of the same years - false Byronism, fatal passions (Chapter VIII), the prosperity of card swindlers (Chapter XV). However, the new time upsets the writer immeasurably more. Nikolai Petrovich released the peasants for quitrent, started "a new way of farming", but he himself could not cope with the management of the estate. “Progressives” appeared in the bureaucratic world. Emancipated women (Kuktina) and tax-farmers (Sitnikov) arguing about freedom appeared in the county demi-monde. How flawed all these innovations are!

All past shortcomings: the poverty of the peasant village, inept management, bureaucracy, spiritual stagnation, have been preserved. And idle talk, practicality, possessive instincts have increased. And these are the "blood ties" of ties between different generations, those patterns of Russian life, the identification of which was the author's goal.

Reading Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", we constantly meet the author's characteristics and descriptions of the characters, the author's remarks and various comments. Following the fate of the characters, we feel the presence of the author himself. The author deeply experiences everything he writes about. However, his attitude to what is happening in the novel is ambiguous and not as simple as it might seem at first glance.

The author's position in the novel is manifested in descriptions, direct author's characteristics, comments on the characters' speech, in the construction of dialogues and remarks. For example, when the author describes Bazarov's mother, he often uses words with diminutive suffixes and epithets that tell us about the character of the heroine: the expression is very good-natured, she did not take her eyes off her son ... ”Thanks to special epithets and suffixes, we understand that the author treats Bazarov’s mother with sympathy, pities her.

Sometimes Turgenev gives a direct description of his characters. For example, about Pavel Petrovich, he says: “Yes, he was a dead man.” These words characterize Pavel Petrovich as a person no longer capable of real feelings; he can no longer develop spiritually, continuing to cognize this world, and therefore, he cannot truly live.

In many of the author's remarks, Turgenev's attitude towards his heroes is also felt. For example, commenting on Sitnikov's speech, the author writes that Sitnikov "laughed shrillly." Here, the author's obvious irony is felt, as in other comments on the speech of two pseudo-nihilists - Sitnikov and Kukshina.

However, if we talk about the climaxes of the novel, about its main character - Bazarov, then here the author's attitude cannot be unambiguously determined.

On the one hand, the author does not share the principles of his hero, on the other hand, he respects his strength and intelligence. For example, in the description of Bazarov’s death, the author’s respect for this hero is felt, because Bazarov is not cowardly in the face of death, he says: “I still don’t fear ...”

In the dispute between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich (and this dispute is important for understanding the idea of ​​the work), the author does not openly support any of the characters. The author seems to be on the sidelines. On the one hand, Bazarov’s reproaches of Pavel Petrovich’s unfoundedness are quite fair: “... you respect yourself and sit back ...”, on the other hand, Pavel Petrovich is right, speaking about the importance of “self-respect”. As Turgenev himself wrote, “... real clashes are those in which both sides are right to a certain extent,” and this is probably why Turgenev does not take the side of any of the characters, although he respects Bazarov’s mind and Kirsanov’s sense of self-esteem.

The epilogue of the work is of great importance for understanding the idea of ​​the novel. The author describes Bazarov's grave in the epilogue and says that the flowers on the grave "speak of eternal reconciliation and endless life ...". I think what is meant here is that the disputes between nihilists and aristocrats, "fathers" and "children" are eternal. It is from these disputes, clashes, speaking about the development of mankind and philosophical thought, that the life of people consists.

I must say that Turgenev does not give us explicit answers, he asks questions to his reader, inviting him to think for himself. This seeming uncertainty, behind which the author's philosophical attitude to the characters and destinies described, is hidden, is not only in the epilogue. For example, when Turgenev talks about the life of Bazarov's mother, he writes: “Such women are now being translated. God knows if we should rejoice in this!” As you can see, the author avoids harsh tones in his judgments about the characters. It leaves the reader free to draw (or not draw) their own conclusions.

So, the author of the novel “Fathers and Sons” - Turgenev - does not impose his point of view on what is happening in the work, he invites readers to take this philosophically. The whole novel is perceived not as an ideological guide or praise to one of the characters, but as material for reflection.