What is the innovative meaning of the portrait of Pechorin. Portrait characteristic of Pechorin

"Hero of our time" - the most famous work M.Yu. Lermontov. At one time, it gained considerable fame, mainly due to its main character, Grigory Pechorin. Lermontov himself spoke of him as "a portrait, but not of one person: it is a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their development on the canvas." So who was Pechorin really - a villain or a unique person for his time?

The novel has five fragments, five episodes-stories, united by one common hero.

Each of them helps to better understand his nature, and in each one can be traced the most main feature Pechorin - inconsistency. Pechorin is contradictory: in love and life, in his thoughts and actions. He's like a demon work of the same name Lermontov - always rushing about and does not find peace.

Pechorin is bored with life. He is constantly looking for new entertainment and gets angry when he does not find it. For the sake of fulfilling his own whim, Pechorin is even ready to risk his life and not only his own. He destroys everyone who gets in his way. This happened to Bela, to Mary, to Grushnitsky. Their destinies were broken... And for what? A moment of peace of mind?

From this follows another feature of Pechorin - his egoism.

He understands that he makes others suffer, but does nothing to stop. On the contrary, for him it is another entertainment. Take the same Mary - Pechorin did not like, but achieved it only because he liked the difficulty of the task. And then the princess became uninteresting to him.

Yes, Pechorin can be called an egoist. But insensitive - never. Despite all his coldness and prudence, Pechorin was able to fall in love with Vera. But ironically, these feelings again bring only suffering.

So who is Pechorin? His personality is ambiguous. She evokes admiration and dislike. And this duality haunts Pechorin throughout his life, making him a man lost and suffering from his own throwings.

Updated: 2017-05-15

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

Useful material on the topic

"A Hero of Our Time" is the most famous prose work of Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov. In many respects, it owes its popularity to the originality of the composition and plot and the inconsistency of the image of the protagonist. We will try to figure out why Pechorin's characteristic is so unique.

History of creation

The novel was not the first prose work writer. Back in 1836, Lermontov began a novel about the life of a Petersburg high society- “Princess Ligovskaya”, where the image of Pechorin first appears. But because of the exile of the poet, the work was not completed. Already in the Caucasus, Lermontov again takes up prose, leaving the former hero, but changing the scene of the novel and the title. This work was called "The Hero of Our Time".

The publication of the novel begins in 1839 in separate chapters. Bela, Fatalist, Taman are the first to be published. The work caused a lot of negative reviews from critics. They were connected primarily with the image of Pechorin, which was perceived as a slander "for a whole generation." In response, Lermontov puts forward his own characterization of Pechorin, in which he calls the hero a collection of all vices contemporary author society.

Genre originality

The genre of the work is a novel that reveals the psychological, philosophical and social problems Nikolaev times. This period, which came immediately after the defeat of the Decembrists, is characterized by the absence of significant social or philosophical ideas who could inspire and unite the progressive society of Russia. Hence the feeling of uselessness and the impossibility of finding one's place in life, from which the younger generation suffered.

The social side of the novel already sounds in the title, which is saturated with Lermontov's irony. Pechorin, despite his originality, does not correspond to the role of a hero; it is not for nothing that he is often called an anti-hero in criticism.

The psychological component of the novel is great attention, which the author gives to the internal experiences of the character. With the help of various artistic techniques the author's characterization of Pechorin turns into a complex psychological portrait, which reflects all the ambiguity of the character's personality.

And the philosophical in the novel is represented by a number of eternal human questions: why does a person exist, what is he like, what is the meaning of his life, etc.

What is a romantic hero?

Romanticism as a literary movement emerged in the 18th century. His hero is, first of all, an extraordinary and unique personality who is always opposed to society. A romantic character is always lonely and cannot be understood by others. He has no place in the ordinary world. Romanticism is active, it strives for accomplishments, adventures and unusual scenery. That is why Pechorin's characterization is replete with descriptions unusual stories and no less unusual actions of the hero.

Portrait of Pechorin

Initially, Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin is an attempt to typify young people of the Lermontov generation. How did this character turn out?

A brief description of Pechorin begins with a description of his social position. So, this is an officer who was demoted and exiled to the Caucasus because of some unpleasant story. He is from an aristocratic family, educated, cold and prudent, ironic, endowed with an extraordinary mind, prone to philosophical reasoning. But where to apply his abilities, he does not know and is often exchanged for trifles. Pechorin is indifferent to others and to himself, even if something captures him, he quickly cools down, as was the case with Bela.

But the fault is that outstanding personality cannot find a place for himself in the world, lies not on Pechorin, but on the whole society, since he is a typical "hero of his time." The social environment gave birth to people like him.

Quotation characteristic of Pechorin

Two characters speak about Pechorin in the novel: Maxim Maksimovich and the author himself. Also here you can mention the hero himself, who writes about his thoughts and experiences in his diary.

Maksim Maksimych, simple-hearted and kind person, describes Pechorin as follows: "A nice fellow ... just a little strange." In this oddity, the whole Pechorin. He does illogical things: he hunts in bad weather and sits at home on clear days; goes to the boar alone, not cherishing his life; it can be silent and gloomy, or it can become the soul of the company and tell funny and very interesting stories. Maxim Maksimovich compares his behavior with the behavior of a spoiled child who is used to always getting what he wants. This characteristic reflected mental throwing, experiences, inability to cope with their feelings and emotions.

Author's quotation characteristic Pechorin is very critical and even ironic: “When he sat down on the bench, his figure bent ... the position of his whole body depicted some kind of nervous weakness: he sat like a thirty-year-old Balzac coquette sits on her downy chairs ... In his smile there was something childish ... ”Lermontov does not idealize his hero at all, seeing his shortcomings and vices.

Attitude towards love

Bela, Princess Mary, Vera, "undine" made Pechorin his beloved. The characterization of the hero would be incomplete without a description of his love stories.

Seeing Bela, Pechorin believes that he has finally fallen in love, and this is what will help brighten up his loneliness and save him from suffering. However, time passes, and the hero realizes that he was mistaken - the girl is only short time entertained him. In Pechorin's indifference to the princess, all the selfishness of this hero, his inability to think about others and sacrifice something for them, manifested itself.

The next victim of the character's restless soul is Princess Mary. This proud girl decides to step over social inequality and is the first to confess her love. However, Pechorin is afraid family life that will bring peace. The hero does not need this, he longs for new experiences.

A brief description of Pechorin in connection with his attitude towards love can be reduced to the fact that the hero appears cruel man incapable of permanent and deep feelings. He only causes pain and suffering to both the girls and himself.

Duel Pechorin and Grushnitsky

The protagonist appears as a contradictory, ambiguous and unpredictable personality. The characteristic of Pechorin and Grushnitsky points to another bright line character - the desire to have fun, to play with the fate of other people.

The duel in the novel was Pechorin's attempt not only to laugh at Grushnitsky, but also to conduct a kind of psychological experiment. The main character gives his opponent the opportunity to do the right thing, to show the best qualities.

Comparative characteristics of Pechorin and Grushnitsky in this scene are not on the side of the latter. Since it was his meanness and desire to humiliate the protagonist that led to the tragedy. Pechorin, knowing about the conspiracy, is trying to give Grushnitsky the opportunity to justify himself and retreat from his plan.

What is the tragedy of Lermontov's hero

Historical reality dooms to failure all Pechorin's attempts to find at least some useful application. Even in love, he could not find a place for himself. This hero is completely lonely, it is difficult for him to get close to people, open up to them, let them into his life. Sucking melancholy, loneliness and the desire to find a place in the world - this is Pechorin's characteristic. "A Hero of Our Time" became the epitome of a novel greatest tragedy of a person - the impossibility of finding oneself.

Pechorin is endowed with nobility and honor, which manifested itself during the duel with Grushnitsky, but at the same time, egoism and indifference predominate in him. Throughout the story, the hero remains static - he does not evolve, nothing can change him. Lermontov seems to be trying to show by this that Pechorin is practically a half-corpse. His fate is predetermined, he is no longer alive, although he is not completely dead yet. That's why main character does not care about his safety, he fearlessly rushes forward, because he has nothing to lose.

The tragedy of Pechorin is not only in the social situation, which did not allow him to find application for himself, but also in the inability to simply live. Introspection and constant attempts to comprehend what is happening around led to throwing, constant doubts and uncertainty.

Conclusion

An interesting, ambiguous and very contradictory characterization of Pechorin. "A Hero of Our Time" became Lermontov's landmark work precisely because of such difficult hero. Having absorbed the features of romanticism, social changes of the Nikolaev era and philosophical problems, Pechorin's personality was out of time. His throwing and problems are close to today's youth.

The fate of an individual person presented in Lermontov's novel, depicted in all its specific socio-historical, national conditionality and at the same time in the individual uniqueness of a sovereign, spiritually free tribal being, at the same time acquired a universal meaning.

Pechorin, says in the preface to the novel, - type " modern man”, how the author “understands him” and how “he met too often”. At the same time, this is not a “mass-like” type, but a “typical exception”, a kind of “strange person”. Calling Pechorin the Onegin of his time, Belinsky paid tribute to the unsurpassed artistry of Pushkin's image: "Pechorin is the Onegin of our time", but at the same time he believed that "Pechorin is higher than Onegin in theory, however, this advantage belongs to our time, not Lermontov" .

Without justifying or blaming Pechorin, Belinsky notes that the “instinct of truth” is very strong in him, but that, due to the duality of his character, he does not stop at slandering himself and society. After weighing the merits and demerits of Pechorin’s character, Belinsky concludes: “But the court does not belong to us: for each person, the court is in his affairs and their consequences”

The validity of this thought of Belinsky is confirmed by the merciless trial of himself, which Pechorin conducts, weighing and evaluating the life he lived in vain: “... It was true that I had a high appointment ... But I did not guess my destination ... "In these words, Pechorin is the key to understand the causes of the tragedy of his generation of "smart useless things", the tragedy of the Russian people of the post-Decembrist period.

Starting from the second half of the 19th century, the definition of “ extra person”, although neither Lermontov himself nor Belinsky gave him such a definition, primarily because such a term did not exist in their time. For them, Pechorin is “a hero of the time, a modern man, a strange man". The typological essence of the image of the “superfluous person” in Russian literature is interpreted very contradictory.

Herzen most accurately defined the meaning and specificity of the type of "superfluous person" for Russian society and Russian literature of the Nikolaev era. "The sad fate of an extra person, lost man, only because he developed into a man, then appeared not only in poems and novels, but on the streets and in living rooms, in villages and cities. Our literary flankers are now poking fun at these weak dreamers who broke down without a fight, over these idle people who did not know how to find themselves in the environment in which they lived.

According to Herzen, Pechorin becomes "superfluous" because in his development is underway further than the majority, developing into a person, and to be exact - into a personality, which, in the conditions of the impersonal reality of Nikolaev Russia, was, according to Herzen, "one of the most tragic situations in the world."

According to Lermontov, the tragedy of his time is not only that "people suffer patiently," but also that "the majority suffer without realizing it." In this sense, Pechorin captures an act of intensive development of public and personal self-consciousness in Russia in the 1930s. Belinsky wrote: "In introducing society to itself, that is, by developing self-consciousness in it, it satisfies its most important and most important need at the present moment."

Lermontov's concept of personality expanded and deepened the possibilities of artistic typification. Pechorin is a typical character, but of a special kind. On the one hand, he is the product of certain social circumstances, the environment, and in this sense he is a firmly defined social type of a “hero of his time”, on the other hand, as a personality with its extra-class value, he goes beyond the circumstances that gave rise to him, social roles, that is, beyond social type, generated by a certain era and a specific environment, acquiring universal significance. Pechorin's personality is wider, more holistic and redundant than that life content that contains it social roles, his social status generally. The combination of certainty and elusiveness of not closeness in the personality and character of Lermontov's hero gave Belinsky reason to say: "He is hiding from us in the same incomplete and unsolved being as he appears to us at the beginning of the novel"

When the novel “A Hero of Our Time” came out of print, protective criticism, aware of the sharply negative assessment of Nicholas 1, assured readers that there was nothing Russian in the novel, that its “vicious” hero was written off by the author from Western European novelists. It got to the point that shortly after the fatal death of the poet, Baron E. Rosen expressed his "joy" about the fact that Lermontov was killed and would no longer write a "second Pechorin". In the reviews of such "critics" there were many half-hints and direct allusions to the fact that the author portrayed himself in the hero of the novel.

Is the "Hero of Our Time" social - undoubtedly, social - objectively and subjectively. Objectively, because all the actions of Pechorin's psychology are determined by time, the conditions of existence of his generation of the environment; many actions and properties of Pechorin's character are dependent - to a greater or lesser extent lesser degree- from public relations and mores, as he himself admits. Subjectively, because the social question is present in the novel as one of the objects of study. Next to the central figure is placed either a “common man” Maxim Maksimych, or “children of the mountains”, or “ honest smugglers- the social-experimental nature of this series of comparisons, it would seem, is beyond doubt.

And yet they do not exhaust the artistic task of the writer. The depth of the idea of ​​the work lies in the fact that different sides public life are placed here in direct dependence on the person himself, as well as the fate of each individual person - on socio-historical circumstances.

Social motivation of mass deviations from humanity. From the highest moral ideals, Lermontov emphasizes with the help of his characteristic compositional technique. Creating a close-up psychological portrait of Pechorin, the writer in monologues and diary retrospectively sketches a picture of the bitterness of the hero’s soul, but at the same time he creates the image of “ common man”, on the one hand, correcting Pechorin’s behavior, as D.E. Maksimov rightly noted, and on the other hand, personifying Pechorin’s moral justification with his fate.

In general, "A Hero of Our Time" combined a philosophical concept with a lively analytical depiction of national life as deep moral and psychological contradictions.

The first readers of A Hero of Our Time were struck by the unusual nature of his art form. Belinsky was the first of the critics to establish how, from several stories, the reader gets "the impression of a whole novel." He sees the "secret" of this in the fact that Lermontov's novel "is a biography of one person." About the extraordinary artistic integrity of the novel, Belinsky says: “There is not a page, not a word, not a line that would be randomly sketched: here everything follows from one main idea and everything returns to it.” Modern explorer B.T. Udodov writes the following about the composition of the novel: “The composition of A Hero of Our Time is not linear, but concentric. And not only because everything in it gravitates towards one central character. All parts of the novel are not so much separate sides of a single whole as vicious circles containing the essence of the work in its entirety, but not in its entire depth. The imposition of these circles on each other does not so much expand the scope of the narrative as deepens it.

There is a lot of controversy and the problem artistic method. This issue has been one of the most controversial for decades.

“In the study of Lermontov’s work,” I.E. Wooseok, the problem of his artistic method is one of the most difficult.” There are different points of view regarding the artistic method. So, B.M. Eikhenbaum, reflecting on the artistic evolution of Lermontov, wrote: “It is customary to speak in general terms that apply equally to Pushkin and Gogol “from romanticism to realism.” This formula is clearly insufficient... It turns out as if realism was the same destination for everyone - you just had to find a way to it, and romanticism was just an inevitable "passage" to this collection point.

Disputes about the “Hero of Our Time” method flared up especially hotly at the V All-Union Lermontov Conference in 1962, where three reports were devoted to this topic at once. In one of them, the method was interpreted as realistic work(V.A. Maikov), in another - as realistic with elements of romanticism (U.R. Focht), in the third - as romantic (K.N. Grigoryan). Later, a work appeared in which an attempt was made to substantiate the fourth point of view on the method of the "Hero of Our Time" as a synthesis of romanticism and realism.

The very fact of the possibility of such heteroglossia and such contrasts, the presence of real, conspicuous disagreements in creativity and creative method Lermontov say a lot. The real contradictions of reality gave rise to art world Lermontov.

In the novel A Hero of Our Time, Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov touches on the same problems that often sound in his lyrics: why can't smart and energetic people find a place for themselves in life, why do they "get old in inaction"? The novel consists of five parts: "Bela", "Maxim Maksimych", "Taman", "Princess Mary", "Fatalist". Each of them is an independent work and at the same time is part of the novel. The central place in all the stories is occupied by the image of a young officer Pechorin. It is no coincidence that the action of the novel takes place in the Caucasus, where at that time people were exiled who were critical of the autocracy. As you know, Pushkin and Lermontov were exiled there. Pechorin belongs to this category of people. Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin, a young man of about twenty-five. In several places of the novel, the author gives a description of the appearance of the hero, indicating some of its features with character. For the first time, Pechorin appears in the novel before Maxim Maksimych in the fortress beyond the Terek ("Bela"): "He came to me in full uniform ... He was so thin, white, his uniform was so brand new." In "Maxim Maksimych" we learn that Pechorin was of medium height, slender; “... broad shoulders proved a strong build, able to endure all difficulties nomadic life and climate change... In Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin is a civilian, retired. Dressed in a velvet coat, dazzlingly clean linen. His gait was "sloppy and lazy". He did not wave his arms, which the author considers a sign of a secret character. Pechorin has blond hair, a mustache and eyebrows - black, a slightly upturned nose, white teeth, brown eyes. The eyes "...didn't laugh when he laughed." About the endurance of Pechorin, Maxim Maksimych explains that in the rain he could spend the whole day hunting. In "Maxim Maksimych" we learn that Pechorin was of medium height, slender; "... broad shoulders proved a strong build, able to endure all the difficulties of nomadic life and climate change ...". In Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin is a civilian, retired. Dressed in a velvet coat, dazzling clean linen. His gait was "sloppy and lazy". He did not wave his arms, which the author considers a sign of a secret character. Pechorin has blond hair, a mustache and eyebrows - black, a slightly upturned nose, white teeth, brown eyes. The eyes "...didn't laugh when he laughed." About the endurance of Pechorin, Maxim Maksimych explains that in the rain he could spend the whole day hunting.

Revealing the complex and controversial nature of Pechorin, the author shows us him in different life situations, in a clash with people of different social strata and nationalities: with smugglers, with mountaineers, with a young aristocratic girl, with representatives of noble youth and others actors. Before us appears the image of a lonely, disappointed person who is at enmity with secular society, although he himself is part of it.

In Lermontov's poems, the image of such a person is drawn in romantic tones; the poet did not reveal in his lyrics the reasons for the appearance of such a hero. And in the novel "A Hero of Our Time" Lermontov portrays Pechorin realistically. The writer is trying to show how a person's character is influenced by the environment in which he lives. Pechorin has a lot in common with Eugene Onegin from the novel of the same name in Pushkin's verse. However, Pechorin lives in a different time, he is a man of the thirties of the XIX century, and this man's disappointment in the society around him is stronger than that of Onegin.

Pechorin was born and raised in an aristocratic family. Nature endowed him with a sharp mind, a responsive heart and a strong will. But the best qualities of this person were not needed by society. “My best feelings, fearing ridicule,” says Pechorin, “I buried in the depths of my heart.” He fell in love and was loved; took up science, but soon realized that it does not give fame and happiness. And when he realized that in society there is neither disinterested love, nor friendship, nor fair humane relations between people, he became bored.

Pechorin is looking for thrills, adventures. Mind and will help him overcome obstacles, but he realizes that his life is empty. And this increases in him a feeling of longing and disappointment. Pechorin is well versed in the psychology of people, therefore he easily wins the attention of women, but this does not bring him a feeling of happiness. He, like Onegin, “is not created for the bliss of family life. He cannot and does not want to live like the people of his circle.

In the story of Princess Mary, whom Pechorin fell in love with, subjugated to his will, he appears both as a “cruel tormentor” and as a deeply suffering person. Exhausted Mary arouses in him a feeling of compassion. “It became unbearable,” he recalls, “another minute, and I would have fallen at her feet.”

Lermontov created a true image of his young contemporary, which reflected the features of a whole generation. In the preface to the novel, he wrote that Pechorin is “a portrait made up of the vices of our generation, in their full development.”

The title of the novel contains the writer's irony over his generation and over the time in which it lives. Pechorin, of course, is not a hero in the literal sense of the word. His work cannot be called heroic. A person who could benefit people is wasting his energy on empty pursuits.

The author does not seek to condemn Pechorin, nor to make him better than he is. It should be noted that M. Yu. Lermontov with great skill revealed the psychology of his hero. Critic N. G. Chernyshevsky noted that “Lermontov was interested in the psychological process itself, its form, its laws, the dialectics of the soul ...” He highly appreciated the role of Lermontov in the development of the socio-psychological novel and L. N. Tolstoy.

18. N.V. Gogol about the specifics of the genre nature of his comedies. new type comedy hero and comic techniques for his embodiment (“The Government Inspector” + 1 comedy of your choice).

The place of the "Inspector General" in his work and the level of artistic generalization to which he aspired while working on the comedy, Gogol revealed in the "Author's Confession" (1847). The "thought" of comedy, he stressed, belongs to Pushkin. Following Pushkin's advice, the writer "decided to put together everything bad in Russia<...>and laugh at everything at once." Gogol defined a new quality of laughter: in "The Government Inspector" - this is "high" laughter, due to the height of the spiritual and practical task facing the author. The comedy was a test of strength before working on a grandiose epic about modern Russia. After the creation of The Inspector General, the writer felt "the need for a complete essay, where there would be more than one thing that should be laughed at. Thus, The Inspector General is a turning point in Gogol's creative development.

In The Theater Journey, Gogol draws attention to the fact that the playwright must find a situation that would affect all the characters, would include in its orbit the most important life concerns of all actors - otherwise the characters simply will not be able to realize themselves in a few hours of stage action, to discover their character . Therefore, a calm, “flat” course of life in a drama is impossible - a conflict, an explosion, a sharp clash of interests are necessary. In addition, there can be no "extra" heroes not included in the conflict. But what then is the situation that the playwright must find in order to include all the characters in its orbit and show their characters? In other words, what can form the basis of a dramatic conflict? Love affair? “But it seems it’s time to stop relying so far on this eternal plot,” says the second lover of the arts, and Gogol with him. “It’s worth looking closely around. Everything has changed long ago in the world. , to shine and outshine at all costs another, to avenge neglect, for ridicule. Do not rank, money capital, advantageous marriage now have more electricity than love? But, leaving at the heart of the conflict of the "Inspector" and the rank, and a profitable marriage, and money capital, Gogol nevertheless finds a different plot, which has much more "electricity": "But everything can tie up," the second art lover sums up, fear of expectation, the storm of the far-reaching law..."

It is precisely this - "the very horror, the fear of expectation, the storm of the law going far away" that seizes officials - that forms the dramatic situation of "The Government Inspector". The play begins with the very first phrase of the Governor: "I invited you, gentlemen, in order to inform you of the unpleasant news: the auditor is coming to visit us." From that moment on, fear begins to bind the characters and grows from line to line, from action to action. The ever-increasing fear that seizes the officials in The Inspector General forms many comic situations. The mayor, giving orders, confuses words; going to the imaginary auditor, instead of a hat, he wants to put on a paper case. The comedy of the first meeting of the Governor with Khlestakov is determined by the situation of mutual fright, which makes both carry a complete nonsense: "Do not destroy! Wife, small children ... do not make a person unhappy," Skvoznik-Dmukhanovsky pleads, sincerely forgetting that the little ones - then he has no children. Not knowing what to justify himself, he sincerely, just like a frightened child, admits his own uncleanliness: “Out of inexperience, by God, out of inexperience. Insufficiency of the state ... If you please, judge for yourself: the state salary is not even enough for tea and sugar ".

Fear immediately unites the heroes. Having tied up the action of the comedy with just one phrase, Gogol resorts to the technique of compositional inversion: the exposition and the plot have changed places. Preparations of officials for the arrival of the auditor, their conversations about what needs to be done and to whom, become an exposition from which we learn about the state of affairs in the city. But the exposition reveals not only the shortcomings in the city (tell us in detail which ones). It shows the most important contradiction that exists in the minds of officials: between dirty hands and an absolutely clear conscience. All of them are sincerely sure that every smart person "has sins", because he does not like to "miss that which floats into his hands." Exactly the same" smart person"They hope to meet in the auditor as well. Therefore, all their aspirations are not aimed at hastily correcting "sins", but at taking only cosmetic measures that could enable the auditor to turn a blind eye to the true state of affairs in the city - of course, for a certain remuneration. sincerely believes that "there is no person who would not have some sins behind him. It is already so arranged by God himself, and the Voltairians speak against it in vain. Everyone agrees with this, and the only objection that he meets comes from Ammos Fedorovich Lyapkin-Tyapkin: “What do you think, Anton Antonovich, are sins? Sins to sins - discord. I tell everyone openly that I take bribes, but why bribes? Greyhound puppies. This is a completely different matter. "The objection concerns only the form, but not the essence. It is in this openness and sincerity that this contradiction is manifested - between the understanding of one's "sins" and an absolutely clear conscience. - but the passion for dog hunting is great ... "Going to Khlestakov, the Governor reminds the officials:" Yes, if they ask why the church was not built at a charitable institution, for which five years ago the amount was allocated, then do not forget to say that it began to be built but burned out. I submitted a report on this. And then, perhaps, someone, forgetting, will foolishly say that it never even started.

Just as the Governor does not feel guilty and acts not out of malice, but because it is customary, so do the other heroes of The Government Inspector. Postmaster Ivan Kuzmich Shpekin opens other people's letters solely out of curiosity: "... I love to know what's new in the world. I'll tell you that this is an interesting read. ... better than in Moskovskie Vedomosti!"

The judge tries to instruct him: "Look, you will get someday for this." Shpekin is sincerely perplexed: "Ah, fathers!" He didn't think he was wrong. Gogol comments on this image in the following way: "The postmaster is a simple-minded to the point of naivety, looking at life as a collection of interesting stories to pass the time, which he reads in printed letters. There is nothing left for an actor to do but to be as simple-hearted as possible."

Gogol, creating a portrait of society and showing the imperfection of a person deprived of moral law, finds a new type of dramatic conflict. It would be natural to expect that the playwright would take the path of introducing into the conflict an ideological hero, say, a true inspector who serves "the cause, not the persons", who professes true ideas about the appointment of a person and is able to expose the officials of the county town. So, for example, he built the conflict "Woe from Wit" A.S. Griboyedov, showing the failure of the Famus society, confronting him with the hero-ideologist, Chatsky, who expresses true understanding duty and honor. Gogol's innovation lies in the fact that he refuses the genre of comedy with a tall hero, relatively speaking, removes Chatsky from the play.

This determined a fundamentally new character of the dramatic conflict. In comedy there is neither a hero-ideologist, nor a conscious deceiver who leads everyone by the nose. The officials themselves are deceiving themselves, literally imposing the role of a significant person on Khlestakov, forcing him to play it. Heroes, courting Khlestakov in every possible way, rush to nowhere, in pursuit of emptiness, a mirage. It is this circumstance that compels Yu. Mann to speak of a "mirage intrigue" which turns into a situation of delusion in The Inspector General.

A mirage intrigue ensues when Bobchinsky and Dobchinsky appear with news of the auditor.

Dobchinsky’s words (“He! He doesn’t pay money and doesn’t go. Who would be if not him? And the road is registered in Saratov”), supported by Bobchinsky’s remarks (“He, he, by golly he ... Such an observant one: I looked at everything. I saw that Peter Ivanovich and I were eating salmon ... so he looked into our plates. I was filled with fear "), for a completely incomprehensible reason, they convince officials that Ivan Aleksandrovich Khlestakov is hiding "damned incognito". When Khlestakov appears, the mirage seems to materialize. In the scene of the Gorodnichiy's first meeting with him, the comedy of which is based on a situation of mutual fright, the Gorodnichiy loses all doubts about this. And why? After all, everything does not speak in favor of Khlestakov, and even the Governor notices this: "But what a nondescript, short one, it seems, he would have crushed him with a fingernail." But he does not attach any importance to his observations, and only reading a letter to the "soul of Tryapichkin" will reveal the truth to him. The mirage intrigue lies in the transformation of Khlestakov into a significant person, into a statesman, that is, in filling a complete void with fictional content. Its development is due not only to the fear and illogical thinking of officials, but to certain qualities of Khlestakov himself. Khlestakov is not just stupid, but "ideally" stupid. After all, it does not immediately occur to him why he is so received in this city. "I love cordiality," he says, oversleeping after Gorodnichy's reception, "and I, I confess, like it better if they please me from a pure heart, and not out of interest." If the melting fear that obscures the mind is forced to take "icicle, rag", "helicopter dust" for the auditor. If it weren’t for Osip, who immediately inquires about another exit in the Gorodnichiy’s house, and then strongly advises the master to leave (“By God, it’s time already”), believing that they are still pleasing “out of interest”, then he simply could not understand that staying longer is dangerous. He was never able to understand who he was being mistaken for: in a letter to Tryapichkin, he assures that he was "according to his Petersburg physiognomy and costume" taken for the governor-general (and by no means for the auditor). Such innocence and unintentionality allow him not to deceive anyone: he simply plays the roles that officials impose on him. In a few minutes, in the scene of Khlestakov's lies (act three, scene VI), the mirage grows to incredible proportions. In a few minutes, in front of the eyes of officials, Khlestakov makes a dizzying career. His exaggerations are purely quantitative: "700 rubles worth of watermelon", "thirty-five thousand one couriers." Having received an imaginary opportunity to write something for himself from Paris, Khlestakov receives only ... soup in a saucepan, which arrived on a steamer directly from Paris. Such requests clearly characterize the poverty of nature. Being "on a friendly footing with Pushkin," he cannot come up with a topic for conversation with him ("Well, brother Pushkin?" - "Yes, brother," he used to answer, "that's how everything is somehow ..."). Due to Khlestakov’s unintentionality, it is difficult to catch him in a lie - he, lying, easily gets out of a difficult situation: “As you run up the stairs to your fourth floor, you will only say to the cook:“ On, Mavrushka, overcoat ... Well, I’m lying - I forgot that I live in the mezzanine. In "Remarks for gentlemen actors" Gogol writes that Khlestakov's speech is "jerky, and words fly out of his mouth quite unexpectedly" - even for himself. That is why he so easily corrects his lies - just not thinking about the plausibility.

Building a comedy on a situation of fear and self-deception of officials, Gogol, nevertheless, does not refuse a love affair, or rather, parodies it. But still, the ideological and compositional role of love intrigue lies elsewhere. With it, another mirage, as it were, materializes, comes close to the officials - the image of St. Petersburg, longed for, alluring. Thanks to imaginary matchmaking, it becomes almost a reality: the Skvoznik-Dmukhanovsky family almost moves to St. Petersburg, Anna Andreevna dreams of a special "ambergris" in her room, the Governor tries on a sash over his shoulder. The materialized mirage of St. Petersburg is concretized in the naive reflections of the characters.

The image of Petersburg is introduced into the comedy in different ways. Khlestakov talks about his position in the city, lying, the image of the capital appears in his letter to the "soul of Tryapichkin", officials dream of him, Osip shares his memories of the city. In both cases, this is a city based on fear, a “fearful” city, only in one case is Khlestakov afraid of the state council, department, where, when he appears, “it’s just an earthquake, everything trembles and shakes like a leaf,” and in In another case, he himself is afraid of a confectioner who can drag him by the collar "about the pies eaten at the expense of the income of the English king." Petersburg and the Gorodnichiy think in the same way. The only hero who does not feel fear at the mention of Petersburg is Osip: he stands outside the bureaucratic hierarchy based on fear, and he has nothing to be afraid of.

And when both mirages, on the materialization of which the mirage intrigue is built, acquire an almost material embodiment (a thunderstorm with the auditor turns into an incredible win, the matchmaking took place, and the Governor is about to receive a new, Petersburg appointment), the whole building begins to fall apart: two imaginary denouements follow (departure Khlestakov and reading the letter) and then already - the true denouement, the "silent scene", which in a completely different light represents the meaning of the comedy. The importance Gogol attached to the "silent scene" is also evidenced by the fact that he defines its duration as one and a half minutes, and in "An Excerpt from a Letter ... to a Writer" he even speaks of two or three minutes of "petrification" of the characters. . According to the laws of the stage, one and a half, and even more so three minutes of immobility is an eternity. What is the ideological and compositional role of the "silent scene"?

One of the most important ideas of The Inspector General is the idea of ​​inevitable spiritual retribution, the judgment of which no person can escape. Therefore, the "silent scene" acquires a broad symbolic meaning, which is why it does not lend itself to any unambiguous interpretation. That is why the interpretation of the "silent scene" is so varied. It is interpreted as an artistically embodied image doomsday, before which a person cannot justify himself with references to the fact that every smart person "has sins"; draw analogies between the “silent scene” and Karl Bryullov’s painting “The Last Day of Pompeii”, the meaning of which Gogol himself saw in the fact that the artist refers to the situation of a strong “crisis felt by the whole mass” using historical material. A similar crisis is experienced in the moment of shock by the characters of The Inspector General, like the heroes of Bryullov's painting, when "the whole group, which stopped at the moment of impact and expressed thousands of different feelings," is captured by the artist at the last moment of earthly existence. Already later, in 1846, in dramatic excerpts "The denouement of the Inspector General," Gogol offered a completely different interpretation of the "silent" scene. “Look closely at this city, which is shown in the play!” says the First comic actor. “Everyone agrees that there is no such city in all of Russia ... Well, what if this is our soulful city and he is sitting each of us?.. Whatever you say, but the auditor who is waiting for us at the door of the fob is terrible. As if you don’t know who this auditor is? Why pretend? This auditor is our awakened conscience, which will make us suddenly and at once look at everything eyes on ourselves. Nothing will hide before this auditor, because by the Nominal Supreme command he was sent and announced about him when it will not be possible to take a step back. Suddenly, such a monster will open before you, in you, that from horror a hair will rise. It is better to make an audit of everything that is in us at the beginning of life, and not at the end of it.

One way or another, but the appearance of a gendarme, announcing the arrival from St. Petersburg "at the nominal order" of the already real auditor, "strikes everyone like thunder," the author's remark says. "A sound of amazement unanimously emanates from the ladies' lips; the whole group, suddenly remains petrified."

Gogol believed that the power of laughter can be changed to better world and man in this world. That is why the laughter in "The Government Inspector" is predominantly satirical, aimed at denying the ridiculed vice. Satire, according to Gogol, is called upon to correct human vices, and this is its high social significance. Such an understanding of the role of laughter determines its focus not on a specific person, official, not on a specific county town, but on the vice itself. Gogol shows how terrible the fate of a person struck by him. This predetermines another feature of the funny in the play: the combination of the comic with the drama, which lies in the discrepancy between the original high destiny of a person and his unrealized, exhaustedness in the pursuit of life's mirages. The final monologue of Gorodnichiy and the imaginary courtship of Khlestakov are full of drama, but the tragic culmination, when the comic completely fades into the background, becomes a "silent scene". The artistic world of Gogol is inherent in the grotesque. Clarify your ideas about the grotesque. Grotesque, exaggeration, sharply violating real features, which turns out to be akin to fantastic. In this case, it is often not the phenomenon as a whole that is exaggerated, but some of its facets, which further violates the actual proportions, distorts the object. In The Inspector General, much is built on exaggeration: fantastically exaggerated, brought to the "ideal" not only Khlestakov's stupidity, but the universal, in essence, desire to appear at least a little higher than you really are. The situation of delusion is comically exaggerated. But the main thing in which Gogol's grotesque was realized was a mirage intrigue, highlighting in a fantastic glare the absurdity of human life in its pursuit of numerous mirages, when the best human forces are wasted in an effort to overtake the void, so brilliantly embodied by Khlestakov. The petrification of the "silent scene" emphasizes, grotesquely highlights the illusiveness, the mirage of goals, the achievement of which sometimes takes a lifetime.

). As its very title shows, Lermontov depicted in this work typical an image that characterizes his contemporary generation. We know how low the poet valued this generation ("I look sadly ..."), - he takes the same point of view in his novel. In the "preface" Lermontov says that his hero is "a portrait made up of the vices" of the people of that time "in their full development." [Cm. See also the articles Image of Pechorin in the novel "A Hero of Our Time", Pechorin and Women.]

However, Lermontov is in a hurry to say that, speaking about the shortcomings of his time, he does not undertake to read morals to his contemporaries - he simply draws the “history of the soul” of “modern man, as he understands him and, unfortunately for others, met him too often. It will also happen that the disease is indicated, but God knows how to cure it!

Lermontov. Hero of our time. Bela, Maxim Maksimych, Taman. Feature Film

So, the author does not idealize his hero: just as Pushkin executes his Aleko, in The Gypsies, so Lermontov, in his Pechorin, removes from the pedestal the image of a disappointed Byronist, an image that was once close to his heart.

Pechorin speaks about himself more than once in his notes and in conversations. He tells how disappointments haunted him since childhood:

“Everyone read on my face the signs of bad qualities that were not there; but they were supposed - and they were born. I was modest - I was accused of slyness: I became secretive. I deeply felt good and evil; no one caressed me, everyone insulted me: I became vindictive; I was gloomy - other children are cheerful and talkative; I felt myself superior to them—I was placed below them. I became envious. I was ready to love the whole world - no one understood me: and I learned to hate. My colorless youth passed in the struggle with myself and the light; my best feelings, fearing ridicule, I buried in the depths of my heart; they died there. I told the truth - they did not believe me: I began to deceive; knowing well the light and springs of society, I became skilled in the science of life and saw how others without art were happy, enjoying the gift of those benefits that I so tirelessly sought. And then despair was born in my chest - not the despair that is cured at the muzzle of a pistol, but cold, powerless despair, hidden behind courtesy and a good-natured smile. I became moral cripple».

He became a "moral cripple" because he was "mutilated" by people; they not understood him when he was a child, when he became a youth and an adult ... They forced his soul duality,- and he began to live two halves of life - one ostentatious, for people, the other - for himself.

“I have an unhappy character,” says Pechorin. “Whether my upbringing created me this way, whether God created me this way, I don’t know.”

Lermontov. Hero of our time. Princess Mary. Feature film, 1955

Insulted by the vulgarity and distrust of people, Pechorin withdrew into himself; he despises people and cannot live by their interests - he experienced everything: like Onegin, he enjoyed both the vain joys of the world and the love of numerous admirers. He also studied books, looked for strong impressions in the war, but admitted that all this was nonsense, and “under Chechen bullets” is as boring as reading books. He thought to fill his life with love for Bela, but, like Aleko was mistaken in Zemfira , - so he did not manage to live one life with a primitive woman, unspoiled by culture.

“I am a fool or a villain, I do not know; but it is true that I am also very pitiful,” he says, “perhaps more than she: in me the soul is corrupted by light, the imagination is restless, the heart is insatiable; everything is not enough for me: I get used to sadness just as easily as to pleasure, and my life becomes emptier day by day; I have only one remedy: to travel.

In these words, an outstanding person is depicted in full size, with strong soul, but without the ability to apply their abilities to anything. Life is petty and insignificant, but there are many forces in his soul; their meaning is unclear, since there is nowhere to attach them. Pechorin is the same Demon, who was confused by his wide, free wings and dressed him in an army uniform. If the main features of Lermontov’s soul were expressed in the Demon’s moods, his inner world, then in the image of Pechorin he portrayed himself in the sphere of that vulgar reality, which like lead oppressed him to the earth, to people ... No wonder Lermontov-Pechorin is drawn to the stars - more than once he admires the night sky - it’s not for nothing that only free nature is dear to him here, on earth...

“Thin, white,” but strongly built, dressed like a “dandy”, with all the manners of an aristocrat, with well-groomed hands, he made a strange impression: strength was combined in him with some kind of nervous weakness. On his pale noble forehead there are traces of premature wrinkles. His beautiful eyes"didn't laugh when he laughed." “This is a sign of either an evil temper, or a deep, constant sadness.” In these eyes “there was no reflection of the heat of the soul, or the playful imagination, it was a brilliance, like the brilliance of smooth steel, dazzling, but cold; his gaze is short, but penetrating and heavy. In this description, Lermontov borrowed some features from his own appearance.

With contempt for people and their opinions, Pechorin, however, always, out of habit, broke down. Lermontov says that even he "sat as Balzakova sits a thirty-year-old coquette on her downy chairs after a tiring ball."

Having taught himself not to respect others, not to reckon with the world of others, he sacrifices the whole world to his own. selfishness. When Maxim Maksimych tries to offend Pechorin's conscience with careful allusions to the immorality of Bela's abduction, Pechorin calmly answers with the question: "Yes, when do I like her?" Without regret, he “executes” Grushnitsky not so much for his meanness, but because he, Grushnitsky, dared to try to fool him, Pechorin! .. Ego was outraged. To make fun of Grushnitsky (“without fools it would be very boring in the world!”), He captivates Princess Mary; a cold egoist, he, for the sake of his desire to "have fun", brings a whole drama into Mary's heart. He ruins the reputation of Vera and her family happiness all out of the same boundless selfishness.

“What do I care about human joys and misfortunes!” he exclaims. But not one cold indifference causes these words in him. Although he says that “sad is funny, funny is sad, but, in general, in truth, we are rather indifferent to everything except ourselves” - this is just a phrase: Pechorin is not indifferent to people - he takes revenge, evil and merciless.

He recognizes his "minor weaknesses and bad passions." He is ready to explain his power over women by the fact that "evil is attractive." He himself finds in his soul “a bad but invincible feeling,” and he explains this feeling to us in the words:

“There is an immense pleasure in the possession of a young, barely blossoming soul! She is like a flower, whose best fragrance evaporates towards the first ray of the sun, it must be picked at this moment and, after breathing it to the full, throw it along the road: maybe someone will pick it up!

He himself is aware of the presence of almost all the “seven deadly sins” in himself: he has an “insatiable greed”, which absorbs everything, which looks at the suffering and joys of others only as food that supports spiritual strength. He has a mad ambition, a thirst for power. "Happiness" - he sees in "saturated pride." “Evil begets evil: the first suffering gives an idea of ​​the pleasure of torturing another,” says Princess Mary and, half jokingly, half seriously, tells him that he is “worse than a murderer.” He himself admits that "there are moments" when he understands "Vampire". All this indicates that Pechorin does not have perfect "indifference" to people. Like the "Demon", he has a large supply of malice - and he can do this evil either "indifferently", or with passion (the feelings of the Demon at the sight of an angel).

“I love enemies,” says Pechorin, “although not in a Christian way. They amuse me, excite my blood. To be always on guard, to catch every glance, the meaning of every word, to guess the intention, to destroy conspiracies, to pretend to be deceived and suddenly, with one push, overturn the whole huge and laborious edifice of cunning and designs - that's what I call life».

Of course, this is again a “phrase”: not all of Pechorin’s life was spent on such a struggle with vulgar people, in him there is a better world, which often makes him condemn himself. At times he is “sad,” realizing that he is playing “the miserable role of an executioner, or a traitor.” He despises himself,” he is burdened by the emptiness of his soul.

Why did I live? for what purpose was I born?.. And, it is true, it existed, and, it is true, it was a high purpose for me, because I feel immense powers in my soul. But I did not guess this destination - I was carried away by the lures of passions, empty and ungrateful; from their furnace I came out hard and cold as iron, but I lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations - best color life. And since then, how many times have I played the role of an ax in the hands of fate. Like an instrument of execution, I fell on the heads of doomed victims, often without malice, always without regret. My love did not bring happiness to anyone, because I did not sacrifice anything for those whom I loved; I loved for myself, for my own pleasure; I satisfied the strange need of the heart, greedily devouring their feelings, their tenderness, their joys and sufferings - and could never get enough. The result is "double hunger and despair."

“I am like a sailor,” he says, born and raised on the deck of a robber brig: his soul has become accustomed to storms and battles, and, thrown ashore, he is bored and languishing, no matter how beckoning his shady grove, no matter how the peaceful sun shines on him ; he walks all day long on the coastal sand, listens to the monotonous murmur of the oncoming waves and peers into the misty distance: does he not flash there, on the pale line separating the blue abyss from gray clouds, desired sail". (Compare Lermontov's poem " Sail»).

He is weary of life, ready to die and not afraid of death, and if he does not agree to commit suicide, it is only because he still “lives out of curiosity”, in search of a soul that would understand him: “maybe I will die tomorrow! And there will not be a single creature left on earth who would understand me completely!”