Contents of the article Russian person on rendez vous. Reviews about "Russian man at rendez-vous"

Source: Chernyshevsky N. G. Russian man at rendez-vous // Chernyshevsky N. G. Complete works: In 15 volumes. M.: State Publishing House of Fiction, 1950. T. 5: Articles 1858-1859. pp. 156–174.

RUSSIAN MAN AT RENDEZ-VOUS

Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya” 1

“Stories of a businesslike, incriminating nature leave a very difficult impression on the reader; Therefore, while recognizing their usefulness and nobility, I am not entirely satisfied that our literature has taken exclusively such a gloomy direction.”

This is what quite a lot of people say, apparently not stupid, or, better to say, they said so until the peasant question became the only subject of all thoughts, all conversations. Whether their words are fair or unfair, I don’t know; but I happened to be under the influence of such thoughts when I began to read perhaps the only good new story, from which, from the first pages, one could already expect a completely different content, a different pathos, than from business stories. There is no chicanery with violence and bribery, no dirty swindlers, no official villains explaining in elegant language that they are the benefactors of society, no philistines, peasants and little officials tormented by all these terrible and disgusting people. The action is abroad, far from all the bad surroundings of our home life. All the characters in the story are among the best people among us, very educated, extremely humane, imbued with the noblest way of thinking. The story has a purely poetic, ideal direction, not touching on any of the so-called black sides of life. Here, I thought, my soul will rest and be refreshed. And indeed, she was refreshed by these poetic ideals until the story reached the decisive moment. But the last pages of the story are not similar to the first, and after reading the story, the impression left from it is even more bleak than from the stories about disgusting bribe takers with their cynical robbery 2. They do bad things, but they are recognized by each of us as bad people; It is not from them that we expect improvements in our lives. There are, we think, forces in society that will put a barrier to their harmful influence,

who will change the nature of our lives with their nobility. This illusion is most bitterly rejected in the story, which awakens the brightest expectations with its first half.

Here is a man whose heart is open to all high feelings, whose honesty is unshakable, whose thought has absorbed everything for which our century is called the century of noble aspirations. So what is this man doing? He makes a scene that would put the last bribe-taker to shame. He feels the strongest and purest sympathy for the girl who loves him; he cannot live an hour without seeing this girl; all day and all night his thoughts draw him a beautiful image of her; the time of love has come for him, you think, when the heart is drowned in bliss. We see Romeo, we see Juliet, whose happiness nothing interferes with, and the moment is approaching when their fate will be decided forever - for this Romeo must only say: “I love you, do you love me?” and Juliet will whisper: “Yes...” And what does our Romeo (as we will call the hero of the story, whose surname was not told to us by the author of the story) do when he appears on a date with Juliet? With trembling love, Juliet awaits her Romeo; she must learn from him that he loves her - this word was not uttered between them, it will now be uttered by him, they will unite forever; bliss awaits them, such a high and pure bliss, the enthusiasm of which makes the solemn moment of decision barely bearable for the earthly organism. People died from less joy. She sits like a frightened bird, covering her face from the radiance of the sun of love appearing before her; she is breathing quickly, trembling all over; she lowers her eyes even more tremblingly when he enters and calls her name; she wants to look at him and cannot; he takes her hand - this hand is cold, lies as if dead in his hand; she wants to smile; but her pale lips cannot smile. She wants to talk to him, and her voice breaks. They both were silent for a long time - and, as he himself says, his heart melted, and so Romeo says to his Juliet... and what does he say to her? “You are guilty before me,” he tells her; - you got me into trouble, I am dissatisfied with you, you are compromising me, and I must end my relationship with you; It’s very unpleasant for me to part with you, but if you please, go away from here.” What it is? What is her fault? Was it because she considered him a decent person? Compromised his reputation by going on a date with him? This is amazing! Every feature in her pale face says that she is waiting for her fate to be decided by his word, that she has given her whole soul to him irrevocably and now only expects him to say that he accepts her soul, her life, and he reprimands her for that she is compromising him! What kind of ridiculous cruelty is this? What kind of low rudeness is this? And this man

the age that acts so vilely has been presented as noble until now! He deceived us, deceived the author. Yes, the poet made a very serious mistake in imagining that he was telling us about a decent person. This man is worse than a notorious scoundrel.

Such was the impression made on many by the completely unexpected turn in the relationship of our Romeo to his Juliet. We have heard from many that the whole story is spoiled by this outrageous scene, that the character of the main character is not sustained, that if this person is what he appears to be in the first half of the story, then he could not have acted with such vulgar rudeness, and if he could have acted like that, then From the very beginning he should have appeared to us as a completely crappy person.

It would be very comforting to think that the author was really mistaken, but the sad dignity of his story lies in the fact that the character of the hero is true to our society. Perhaps, if this character were such as people would like to see him, dissatisfied with his rudeness on a date, if he were not afraid to give himself to the love that took possession of him, the story would have won in an ideally poetic sense. The enthusiasm of the first date scene would be followed by several other highly poetic minutes, the quiet charm of the first half of the story would rise to pathetic charm in the second half, and instead of the first act from Romeo and Juliet with an ending in the style of Pechorin, we would have something really similar to Romeo and Juliet, or at least one of Georges Sand's novels. Anyone looking for a poetically complete impression in a story should really condemn the author, who, having lured him with sublimely sweet expectations, suddenly showed him some vulgar, absurd vanity of petty, timid egoism in a man who started out like Max Piccolomini and ended up like some Zakhar Sidorich, playing penny preference.

if I hadn’t come across a tree that I could lean against. As soon as the man had time to recover, the woman he loves, who expressed her love for him, comes up to him and asks what he intends to do now? He... he was "embarrassed." It is not surprising that after such behavior of a loved one (otherwise the image of this gentleman’s actions cannot be called “behavior”) the poor woman developed a nervous fever; It’s even more natural that he then began to cry about his fate. It's in Faust; almost the same in “Rudin”. Rudin at first behaves somewhat more decently for a man than the previous heroes: he is so decisive that he himself tells Natalya about his love (although he does not speak of his own free will, but because he is forced to this conversation); he himself asks her for a date. But when Natalya on this date tells him that she will marry him, with or without the consent of her mother, it doesn’t matter, as long as he loves her, when he says the words: “Know, I will be yours,” Rudin only finds an exclamation in response : "Oh my God!" - an exclamation more embarrassed than enthusiastic - and then he acts so well, that is, to such an extent he is cowardly and lethargic, that Natalya is forced to invite him on a date herself to decide what to do. Having received the note, “he saw that the denouement was approaching, and was secretly troubled in spirit.” Natalya says that her mother told her that she would rather agree to see her daughter dead than to see Rudin’s wife, and again asks Rudin what he now intends to do. Rudin answers as before, “My God, my God,” and adds even more naively: “So soon! what am I going to do? My head is spinning, I can’t think of anything.” But then he realizes that he should “submit.” Called a coward, he begins to reproach Natalya, then lectures her about his honesty, and to the remark that this is not what she should hear from him now, he replies that he did not expect such decisiveness. The matter ends with the offended girl turning away from him, almost ashamed of her love for the coward.

But perhaps this pitiful trait in the characters’ characters is a feature of Mr. Turgenev’s stories? Perhaps it is the nature of his talent that inclines him to portray such faces? Not at all; the nature of the talent, it seems to us, means nothing here. Remember any good, true-to-life story by any of our current poets, and if there is an ideal side to the story, be sure that the representative of this ideal side acts exactly the same as the people of Mr. Turgenev 3 . For example, the nature of Mr. Nekrasov’s talent is not at all the same as Mr. Turgenev’s; You can find any shortcomings in him, but no one will say that Mr. Nekrasov’s talent lacks energy and firmness. What does the hero do in his poem “Sasha”? He explained to Sasha that, he said, “one should not weaken in soul,” because “the sun of righteousness will rise above the earth,” and that it is necessary to act

to fulfill his aspirations, and then, when Sasha gets down to business, he says that all this is in vain and will lead nowhere, that he was “talking empty talk.” Let us remember how Beltov acts: in the same way he prefers retreat to any decisive step. There could be a lot of similar examples. Everywhere, whatever the character of the poet, whatever his personal ideas about the actions of his hero, the hero acts in the same way as all other decent people, like him, derived from other poets: for now there is no talk of business, but one only needs to occupy idle time , to fill an idle head or an idle heart with conversations and dreams, the hero is very lively; As the matter approaches to directly and accurately express their feelings and desires, most of the heroes begin to hesitate and feel clumsy in their language. A few, the bravest, somehow still manage to gather all their strength and tongue-tiedly express something that gives a vague idea of their thoughts; but if someone decides to grab hold of their desires, say: “You want such and such; we are very happy; start acting, and we will support you,” - with such a remark, one half of the bravest heroes faints, others begin to very rudely reproach you for putting them in an awkward position, they begin to say that they did not expect such proposals from you , that they are completely losing their heads, cannot figure out anything, because “how is it possible so quickly,” and “besides, they are honest people,” and not only honest, but very humble and do not want to expose you to trouble, and that in general Is it really possible to bother about everything that is talked about out of nothing to do, and what is best is not to take on anything, because everything is connected with troubles and inconveniences, and nothing good can happen yet, because, as already said , they “didn’t expect or expect at all” and so on.

These are our “best people” - they are all like our Romeo. How much trouble for Asya is that Mr. N. did not know what to do with her, and was decidedly angry when courageous determination was required of him; We don’t know how much trouble there is in this for Asya. The first thought that comes to her is that this will cause her very little trouble; on the contrary, and thank God that the crappy impotence of character in our Romeo pushed the girl away from him even when it was not too late. Asya will be sad for several weeks, several months and will forget everything and may surrender to a new feeling, the object of which will be more worthy of her. Yes, but that’s the trouble, she’s unlikely to meet a more worthy person; This is the sad comedy of our Romeo’s relationship with Asya, that our Romeo is truly one of the best people in our society, that there are almost no people better than him in our country. Only then will Asya be satisfied with her relationships with people, when, like others, she begins to limit herself to beautiful reasoning, until

There is no opportunity to start making speeches, but as soon as the opportunity presents itself, he will bite his tongue and fold his hands, as everyone else does. Only then will they be satisfied with it; and now, first of all, of course, everyone will say that this girl is very sweet, with a noble soul, with amazing strength of character, in general a girl whom you cannot help but love, whom you cannot help but revere; but all this will be said only as long as Asya’s character is expressed in words alone, as long as it is only assumed that she is capable of a noble and decisive act; and as soon as she takes a step that in any way justifies the expectations inspired by her character, hundreds of voices will immediately shout: “For mercy, how is this possible, this is madness! Give a rendez-vous to a young man! After all, she is destroying herself, destroying herself completely uselessly! After all, nothing can come of this, absolutely nothing, except that she will lose her reputation. Is it possible to risk yourself so insanely?” “Risk yourself? “That would be nothing,” others add. “Let her do what she wants with herself, but why put others in trouble?” What position did she put this poor young man in? Did he think she would want to take him this far? What should he do now given her recklessness? If he follows her, he will destroy himself; if he refuses, he will be called a coward and he will despise himself. I don’t know whether it is noble to put people in such unpleasant situations who, it seems, have not given any special reason for such incongruous actions. No, this is not entirely noble. And the poor brother? What is his role? What bitter pill did his sister give him? He won't be able to digest this pill for the rest of his life. Nothing to say, my dear sister borrowed it! I don’t argue, all this is very good in words - noble aspirations, self-sacrifice, and God knows what wonderful things, but I will say one thing: I would not want to be Asya’s brother. I will say more: if I were in her brother’s place, I would lock her in her room for six months. For her own good, she needs to be locked up. She, you see, deigns to be carried away by high feelings; but what is it like to dispense to others what she deigned to brew? No, I will not call her action, I will not call her character noble, because I do not call those noble who frivolously and impudently harm others.” Thus, the general cry will become lazy with the reasoning of sensible people. We are partly ashamed to admit, but still we have to admit that these reasoning seems to us to be thorough. In fact, Asya harms not only herself, but also everyone who had the misfortune of being related or lucky enough to be close to her; and we cannot help but condemn those who, for their own pleasure, harm all their loved ones.

By condemning Asya, we justify our Romeo. In fact, what is his fault? had he given her a reason to act recklessly? did he incite her to do something that should not be done?

11 N. G. Chernyshevsky, vol.

approve? didn't he have the right to tell her that it was in vain that she entangled him in an unpleasant relationship? You are indignant that his words are harsh, you call them rude. But the truth is always harsh, and who will condemn me if even a rude word escapes me, when I, innocent of anything, are entangled in an unpleasant matter, and even pester me so that I rejoice at the trouble into which I was dragged?

I know why you so unfairly admired Asya’s ignoble act and condemned our Romeo. I know this because I myself for a moment succumbed to the unfounded impression that remained in you. You have read about how people in other countries acted and acted. But realize that these are other countries. You never know what is being done in the world in other places, but what is very convenient in a certain situation is not always and not everywhere possible. In England, for example, the word “you” does not exist in the spoken language: a manufacturer to his worker, a landowner to the digger he hires, a master to his footman always says “you” and, wherever it happens, they insert sir in a conversation with them, that is, it’s the same French monsieur, but in Russian there is no such word, but it comes out as politeness in the same way as if a master said to his peasant: “You, Sidor Karpych, do me a favor, come to me for a cup of tea, and then straighten the paths in my garden " Will you judge me if I speak to Sidor without such subtleties? After all, I would be ridiculous if I adopted the language of an Englishman. In general, as soon as you begin to condemn what you don’t like, you become an ideologist, that is, the funniest and, to tell you the truth, the most dangerous person in the world, you lose the solid support of practical reality from under your feet. Beware of this, try to become a practical person in your opinions and for the first time try to reconcile at least with our Romeo, by the way we are already talking about him. I am ready to tell you the path by which I reached this result, not only regarding the scene with Asya, but also regarding everything in the world, that is, I became happy with everything that I see around me, I am not angry at anything, I am not upset by anything (except for failures in matters that are personally beneficial to me), I do not condemn anything or anyone in the world (except for people who violate my personal benefits), I do not wish for anything (except for my own benefit) - in a word, I will tell you how I became a man from a bilious melancholic so practical and well-intentioned that I wouldn’t even be surprised if I received a reward for my good intentions.

I began with the remark that one should not blame people for anything or anything, because, as far as I have seen, the most intelligent person has his own share of limitations, sufficient to ensure that in his way of thinking he cannot stray far from society,

Sir. — Ed.

in which he was brought up and lives, and the most energetic person has his own dose of apathy, sufficient so that in his actions he does not stray too far from routine and, as they say, floats with the flow of the river, where the water carries. In the middle circle, it is customary to paint eggs for Easter; at Shrovetide there are pancakes - and everyone does it, although some people don’t eat colored eggs at all, and almost everyone complains about the weight of pancakes. This is true not just in trifles, but in everything. It is accepted, for example, that boys should be kept more freely than girls, and every father, every mother, no matter how convinced they are of the unreasonableness of such a distinction, raises their children according to this rule. It is accepted that wealth is a good thing, and everyone is happy if, instead of ten thousand rubles a year, thanks to the happy turn of affairs, he begins to receive twenty thousand, although, rationally speaking, every intelligent person knows that those things that, being inaccessible with the first income , become available during the second, cannot bring any significant pleasure. For example, if with ten thousand income you can make a ball of 500 rubles, then with twenty you can make a ball of 1,000 rubles: the latter will be somewhat better than the first, but still there will not be any special splendor in it, it will be called nothing more than a fairly decent ball , and the first one will be a decent ball. Thus, even the feeling of vanity with an income of 20 thousand is satisfied with very little more than with 10 thousand; As for pleasures that can be called positive, the difference in them is completely unnoticeable. Personally, a person with 10 thousand income has exactly the same table, exactly the same wine and a chair in the same row at the opera as a person with twenty thousand. The first is called a fairly rich man, and the second is also not considered an extremely rich man - there is no significant difference in their position; and yet, according to the routine accepted in society, everyone will rejoice when their income increases from 10 to 20 thousand, although in fact they will not notice almost any increase in their pleasures. People are generally terrible routineists: you only have to look deeper into their thoughts to discover this. Some gentleman will puzzle you extremely at first with the independence of his way of thinking from the society to which he belongs; he will seem to you, for example, a cosmopolitan, a man without class prejudices, etc., and he, like his acquaintances, imagines himself to be so from a pure heart. But observe more precisely a cosmopolitan, and he will turn out to be a Frenchman or a Russian with all the peculiarities of concepts and habits belonging to the nation to which he is classified according to his passport, he will turn out to be a landowner or official, a merchant or a professor with all the shades of the way of thinking belonging to his class. I am sure that the number of people who have the habit of being angry with each other and blaming each other depends solely on the fact that

too few people make observations of this kind; but just try to start peering into people in order to check whether this or that person, who at first seems different from others, really differs in anything important from other people of the same position, just try to engage in such observations, and this analysis will captivate you so much , will so interest your mind, will constantly deliver such calming impressions to your spirit that you will never leave it behind and will very soon come to the conclusion: “Every person is like all people, in each there is exactly the same as in others.” . And the further you go, the more firmly you will become convinced of this axiom. Differences seem important only because they lie on the surface and are striking, but beneath the visible, apparent difference, perfect identity is hidden. And why on earth would a person really be a contradiction to all the laws of nature? After all, in nature, cedar and hyssop feed and bloom, elephants and mice move and eat, rejoice and get angry according to the same laws; under the external difference of forms lies the internal identity of the organism of a monkey and a whale, an eagle and a chicken; one has only to delve into the matter even more carefully, and we will see that not only different creatures of the same class, but also different classes of creatures are constructed and live according to the same principles, that the organisms of a mammal, a bird and a fish are the same, that a worm breathes like a mammal, although he has neither nostrils, nor a windpipe, nor lungs. Not only would the analogy with other beings be violated by non-recognition of the identity of the basic rules and springs in the moral life of each person, but the analogy with his physical life would also be violated. Of two healthy people of the same age in the same mood, one’s pulse beats, of course, somewhat stronger and more often than the other’s; but is this difference great? It is so insignificant that science does not even pay attention to it. It’s a different matter when you compare people of different ages or in different circumstances: a child’s pulse beats twice as fast as an old man’s, a sick person’s pulse beats much more often or less often than a healthy person’s, someone who drank a glass of champagne beats more often than someone who drank a glass of champagne. who drank a glass of water. But even here it is clear to everyone that the difference is not in the structure of the organism, but in the circumstances under which the organism is observed. And the old man, when he was a child, had a pulse as fast as the child with whom you compare him; and a healthy person’s pulse would weaken, like a sick person’s, if he fell ill with the same disease; and Peter, if he drank a glass of champagne, his pulse would increase in the same way as Ivan’s.

You have almost reached the boundaries of human wisdom when you are established in this simple truth that every person is a person like everyone else. Not to mention the gratifying consequences of this conviction for your everyday happiness; you re-

you will become angry and upset, you will stop being indignant and blaming, you will meekly look at what you were previously ready to scold and fight for; in fact, how would you become angry or complain about a person for such an act, which would be done by everyone in his place? An undisturbed, gentle silence settles into your soul, sweeter than which can only be the Brahminical contemplation of the tip of the nose, with the quiet, incessant repetition of the words “om-mani-pad-me-hum” 4 . I’m not even talking about this invaluable spiritual and practical benefit, I’m not even talking about how many monetary benefits wise condescension towards people will bring you: you will completely cordially welcome a scoundrel whom you would have driven away from yourself before; and this scoundrel, perhaps, is a man of importance in society, and a good relationship with him will improve your own affairs. I’m not even saying that you yourself will then be less embarrassed by false doubts of conscientiousness in taking advantage of those benefits that will come your way: why should you be embarrassed by excessive ticklishness if you are convinced that everyone would act in your place in exactly the same way? , just like you? I do not expose all these benefits, with the goal of pointing out only the purely scientific, theoretical importance of the belief in the sameness of human nature in all people. If all people are essentially the same, then where does the difference in their actions come from? Striving to achieve the main truth, we have already found in passing the conclusion from it that serves as the answer to this question. It is now clear to us that everything depends on social habits and circumstances, that is, in the final result everything depends exclusively on circumstances, because social habits, in turn, also arose from circumstances 5 . You blame a person - first look at whether he is to blame for what you blame him for, or whether the circumstances and habits of society are to blame, look carefully, perhaps it is not his fault at all, but only his misfortune. When talking about others, we are too inclined to consider every misfortune as guilt - this is the true misfortune for practical life, because guilt and misfortune are completely different things and require treatment, one not at all the same as the other. Guilt causes censure or even punishment against the person. Trouble requires assistance to a person through the elimination of circumstances stronger than his will. I knew a tailor who poked his apprentices in the teeth with a hot iron. Perhaps he can be called guilty, and he can be punished; but not every tailor pokes a hot iron into his teeth; examples of such fury are very rare. But almost every craftsman happens to get into a fight after drinking on a holiday - this is not a fault, but simply a misfortune. What is needed here is not punishment of an individual, but a change in living conditions for the whole class. The harmful confusion of guilt and misfortune is all the sadder because it is necessary to distinguish between these two things

very easy; We have already seen one sign of difference: wine is a rarity, it is an exception to the rule; trouble is an epidemic. Intentional arson is a fault; but out of millions of people there is one who decides to do this. There is another sign needed to complement the first. Trouble falls on the very person who fulfills the condition leading to trouble; guilt falls on others, benefiting the guilty. This last sign is extremely accurate. A robber stabbed a man to rob him, and finds it beneficial for himself - this is guilt. A careless hunter accidentally wounded a man and is the first to suffer from the misfortune he caused - this is not guilt, but simply misfortune.

The sign is true, but if you accept it with some insight, with a careful analysis of the facts, it turns out that there is almost never guilt in the world, but only misfortune. Now we have mentioned the robber. Is life sweet for him? If it weren’t for special, very difficult circumstances for him, would he have taken up his craft? Where will you find a person who would rather hide in dens in cold weather and bad weather, and wander through the deserts, often endure hunger and constantly tremble at his back, awaiting the lash - for whom this would be more pleasant than comfortably smoking a cigar in quiet armchairs? or play Jumble at the English Club, as decent people do?

It would also be much more pleasant for our Romeo to enjoy the mutual pleasures of happy love than to remain a fool and cruelly scold himself for his vulgar rudeness with Asya. From the fact that the cruel trouble to which Asya is exposed brings him not benefit or pleasure, but shame in front of himself, that is, the most painful of all moral griefs, we see that he is not in guilt, but in trouble. The vulgarity he did would have been done by very many other so-called decent people or the best people of our society; therefore, this is nothing more than a symptom of an epidemic disease that has taken root in our society.

A symptom of a disease is not the disease itself. And if the matter were only that some, or, better yet, almost all of the “best” people offend a girl when she has more nobility or less experience than them, this matter, we admit, would interest us little. God be with them, with erotic questions - the reader of our time, busy with questions about administrative and judicial improvements, financial reforms, and the emancipation of the peasants, has no time for them. But the scene made by our Romeo Ace, as we noticed, is only a symptom of a disease that in exactly the same vulgar way spoils all our affairs, and only we need to look closely at why our Romeo got into trouble, we will see what we all like him, to expect from himself and to expect for himself and in all other matters.

Let's start with the fact that the poor young man does not understand at all the business in which he is taking part. The point is clear, but he is obsessed with such stupidity that he is unable to reason with the most obvious facts. We absolutely do not know what to compare such blind stupidity to. The girl, incapable of any pretense, not knowing any trick, tells him: “I myself don’t know what’s happening to me. Sometimes I want to cry, but I laugh. You shouldn't judge me... by what I do. Oh, by the way, what is this story about Lorelei? After all, this is her rock visible? They say that she drowned everyone first, and when she fell in love, she threw herself into the water. I like this fairy tale." It seems clear what feeling awoke in her. Two minutes later, with excitement reflected even by the pallor on her face, she asks whether he liked the lady whom, somehow jokingly, was mentioned in a conversation many days ago; then he asks what he likes in a woman; when he notices how well the sky shines, she says, “Yes, good! If you and I were birds, how we would soar, how we would fly!.. We would drown in this blue... but we are not birds.” “But we can grow wings,” I objected. - “How so?” - “Wait, you’ll find out. There are feelings that lift us from the ground. Don't worry, you will have wings." - “Have you had any?” - “How can I tell you?.. it seems that I haven’t flown yet.” The next day, when he came in, Asya blushed; I wanted to run away from the room; she was sad and finally, remembering yesterday’s conversation, said to him: “Remember, yesterday you talked about wings? My wings have grown."

These words were so clear that even the slow-witted Romeo, returning home, could not help but come to the thought: does she really love me? I fell asleep with this thought and, waking up the next morning, asked myself: “Does she really love me?”

Indeed, it was difficult not to understand this, and yet he did not understand. Did he at least understand what was going on in his own heart? And here the signs were no less clear. After the first two meetings with Asya, he feels jealous at the sight of her tender treatment of her brother and, out of jealousy, does not want to believe that Gagin is really her brother. The jealousy in him is so strong that he cannot see Asya, but he could not resist seeing her, so he, like an 18-year-old boy, runs away from the village in which she lives, wanders around the surrounding fields for several days . Having finally become convinced that Asya is in fact only Gagin’s sister, he is happy as a child, and, returning from them, he even feels that “tears are boiling in his eyes with delight”, he feels at the same time that this delight is all concentrated on thoughts about Asa, and finally comes to the point that he can’t think about anything but her. It seems that a person who has loved several times should understand what feeling

the essence is expressed in itself by these signs. It seems that a person who knew women well could understand what was going on in Asya’s heart. But when she writes to him that she loves him, this note completely amazes him: he, you see, did not foresee this in any way. Wonderful; but be that as it may, whether he foresaw or did not foresee that Asya loves him, it doesn’t matter: now he knows positively: Asya loves him, he now sees it; Well, what does he feel for Asya? He really doesn’t know how to answer this question. Poor thing! in his thirties, due to his youth, he would need to have an uncle who would tell him when he should wipe his nose, when he should go to bed and how many cups of tea he should have. When you see such a ridiculous inability to understand things, you may feel like you are either a child or an idiot. Neither one nor the other. Our Romeo is a very smart man, who, as we noticed, is nearly thirty years old, has experienced a lot in life, and has a rich stock of observations about himself and others. Where does his incredible slow-wittedness come from? Two circumstances are to blame for it, of which, however, one stems from the other, so it all comes down to one thing. He was not used to understanding anything great and living, because his life was too petty and soulless, all the relationships and affairs to which he was accustomed were petty and soulless. This is the first. Second: he is timid, he powerlessly retreats from everything that requires broad determination and noble risk, again because life has accustomed him only to pale pettiness in everything. He looks like a man who all his life played jumble for half a penny in silver; put this skilled player in a game in which the win or loss is not a hryvnia, but thousands of rubles, and you will see that he will be completely embarrassed, that all his experience will be lost, all his art will be confused; he will make the most ridiculous moves, perhaps he will not even be able to hold cards in his hands. He looks like a sailor who all his life made voyages from Kronstadt to St. Petersburg and very deftly knew how to navigate his small steamer according to the indications of milestones between countless shoals in semi-fresh water; what if suddenly this experienced swimmer sees himself in the ocean after a glass of water?

My God! Why do we analyze our hero so harshly? Why is he worse than others? Why is he worse than all of us? When we enter society, we see around us people in uniform and non-uniform frock coats or tailcoats; these people are five and a half or six, and others even more, feet tall; they grow or shave hair on their cheeks, upper lip and beard; and we imagine that we see men in front of us. This is a complete delusion, an optical illusion, a hallucination - nothing more. Without acquiring the habit of original participation in civic affairs, without acquiring the feelings of a citizen, the child of a man

of the sex, growing up, he becomes a male creature of middle age and then old age, but he does not become a man, or at least does not become a man of noble character. It is better for a person not to develop than to develop without the influence of thoughts about public affairs, without the influence of the feelings awakened by participation in them. If from the circle of my observations, from the sphere of actions in which I move, ideas and motives that have a common benefit are excluded, that is, civic motives are excluded, what remains for me to observe? What remains for me to participate in? What remains is the busy confusion of individuals with their narrow personal concerns about their pockets, their bellies, or their amusements. If I begin to observe people in the form in which they appear to me when I distance myself from participation in civic activities, what concept of people and life will form in me? Once upon a time we loved Hoffmann, and his story was once translated about how, through a terrible incident, the eyes of Mr. Perigrinus Thiess 6 received the power of a microscope, and about what the results of this quality of his eyes were for his concepts about people. Beauty, nobility, virtue, love, friendship, everything beautiful and great disappeared from the world for him. Whoever he looks at, every man seems to him to be a vile coward or an insidious intriguer, every woman - a coquette, all people - liars and selfish, petty and base to the last degree. This terrible story could only have been created in the head of a person who had seen enough of what is called in Germany Kleinstädterei, who had seen enough of the life of people deprived of any participation in public affairs, limited to a closely measured circle of their private interests, who had lost all thought about anything higher than penny preference (which, however, was not yet known at the time of Hoffmann). Remember what a conversation becomes in any society, how soon the conversation ceases to be about public affairs? No matter how intelligent and noble the interlocutors are, if they do not talk about matters of public interest, they begin to gossip or talk idle talk; malicious vulgarity or dissolute vulgarity, in both cases senseless vulgarity - this is the character inevitably adopted by a conversation moving away from public interests. The nature of the conversation can be used to judge who is talking. If even people with the highest development of their concepts fall into empty and dirty vulgarity when their thoughts deviate from public interests, then it is easy to imagine what a society must be like if it lives in complete alienation from these interests. Imagine a person who was brought up living in such a society: what will be the conclusions from his experiences? What are the results of his observations of people? He understands everything vulgar and petty perfectly, but apart from this he understands nothing, because

I saw and experienced nothing. He could read God knows what wonderful things in books, he can find pleasure in thinking about these wonderful things; perhaps he even believes that they exist or should exist on earth, and not in books alone. But how do you want him to understand and guess them when they suddenly meet his unprepared gaze, experienced only in classifying nonsense and vulgarity? How do you want me, who was served wine under the name of champagne, which has never seen the vineyards of Champagne, but, however, a very good sparkling wine, how do you want me, when I am suddenly served truly champagne wine, to be able to say for sure: yes , is this really not a fake anymore? If I say this, I will be phat. My taste only feels that this wine is good, but have I drunk enough good fake wine? Why do I know that this time they brought me not fake wine? No, no, I am an expert in fakes, I can distinguish good from bad; but I cannot evaluate genuine wine.

We would be happy, we would be noble, if only the unprepared look, the inexperience of thought prevented us from guessing and appreciating the high and great when it comes our way in life. But no, and our will is involved in this gross misunderstanding. It’s not just the concepts that have narrowed in me because of the vulgar narrow-mindedness in whose vanity I live; this character passed into my will: what is the breadth of vision, such is the breadth of decisions; and, besides, it is impossible not to get used to finally doing as everyone else does. The contagiousness of laughter and the contagiousness of yawning are not exceptional cases in social physiology; the same contagiousness belongs to all phenomena found among the masses. There is someone's fable about how some healthy person ended up in the kingdom of the lame and crooked. The fable says that everyone was attacking him, why do he have both eyes and both legs intact; the fable lied because it didn’t finish everything: the stranger was attacked only at first, and when he settled in the new place, he himself squinted one eye and began to limp; It already seemed to him that it was more convenient, or at least more decent, to look and walk this way, and soon he even forgot that, strictly speaking, he was not lame or crooked. If you are a hunter of sad effects, you can add that when our visitor finally needed to walk with a firm step and look vigilantly with both eyes, he could no longer do this: it turned out that the closed eye no longer opened, the crooked leg no longer straightened; from long coercion the nerves and muscles of the poor distorted joints had lost the power to act in the right way.

Anyone who touches the resin will turn black - as a punishment for himself, if he touched it voluntarily, to his own misfortune, if not voluntarily. It is impossible for someone who lives in a tavern not to be saturated with the drunken smell, even if he himself has not drunk a single glass; can't help but

to be overwhelmed by the pettiness of the will for those who live in a society that has no aspirations other than petty everyday calculations. Shyness involuntarily creeps into my heart from the thought that I may have to make a lofty decision, boldly take a brave step off the beaten path of daily exercise. That’s why you try to assure yourself that no, the need for nothing so extraordinary has not yet come, until the last fateful minute, you deliberately convince yourself that everything that seems to come out of habitual pettiness is nothing more than seduction. A child who is afraid of a beech closes his eyes and shouts as loudly as possible that there is no beech, that the beech is nonsense - by this, you see, he encourages himself. We are so smart that we try to convince ourselves that everything we are afraid of, we are afraid only because we have no strength for anything lofty - we try to convince ourselves that all this is nonsense, that they only scare us with it, like a child with a beech , but in essence there is nothing like that and there never will be.

What if it does? Well, then the same thing will happen to us as in Mr. Turgenev’s story with our Romeo. He also did not foresee anything and did not want to foresee anything; He also closed his eyes and backed away, and as time passed, he had to bite his elbows, but he couldn’t get it.

And how short was the time in which both his and Asya’s fate was decided - just a few minutes, but a whole life depended on them, and, having missed them, nothing could be done to correct the mistake. As soon as he entered the room, barely had time to utter a few thoughtless, almost unconscious reckless words, and everything was already decided: the break was forever, and there was no return. We don’t regret Asa at all; It was hard for her to hear the harsh words of refusal, but it was probably for the best for her that it was a reckless person who drove her to the breaking point. If she had remained connected with him, for him, of course, it would have been great happiness; but we don’t think it would be good for her to live in close relations with such a gentleman. Anyone who sympathizes with Asya should rejoice at the difficult, outrageous scene. Asya's sympathizer is absolutely right: he chose the subject of his sympathies as a dependent creature, an insulted creature. But although with shame, we must admit that we take part in the fate of our hero. We do not have the honor of being his relatives; There was even dislike between our families, because his family despised everyone close to us. But we still cannot break away from the prejudices that have crammed into our heads from false books and lessons that educated and ruined our youth, we cannot break away from the petty concepts instilled in us by the surrounding society; It all seems to us (an empty dream, but still an irresistible dream for us) that he has rendered some services to our society, that he is a representative of our enlightenment, that he is the best among us, that

We would be worse off without him. The thought is developing in us more and more strongly that this opinion about him is an empty dream, we feel that we will not be under its influence for long; that there are people better than him, precisely those whom he offends; that it would be better for us to live without him, but at the moment we are still not sufficiently accustomed to this idea, have not completely broken away from the dream on which we were brought up; therefore, we still wish the best for our hero and his brother M. Finding that in reality the decisive moment is approaching for them, which will determine their fate forever, we still do not want to say to ourselves: at the present time they are not able to understand their situation; are not able to act prudently and at the same time generously - only their children and grandchildren, brought up in other concepts and habits, will be able to act as honest and prudent citizens, and they themselves are now not suitable for the role that is given to them; we do not want to turn the words of the prophet to them: “They will see and will not see, they will hear and will not hear, because the meaning in these people has become coarse, and their ears have become deaf, and they have closed their eyes so as not to see,” no , we still want to believe them capable of understanding what is happening around them and above them, we want to think that they are able to follow the wise admonition of the voice that wanted to save them, and therefore we want to give them instructions on how to get rid of the troubles that are inevitable for people, those who do not know how to understand their situation in time and take advantage of the benefits that a fleeting hour represents. Against our wishes, our hope for the insight and energy of people weakens every day, whom we beg to understand the importance of present circumstances and act in accordance with common sense, but at least let them not say that they did not hear prudent advice, that it was not explained to them position.

Among you, gentlemen (we will address these honorable people), there are quite a lot of literate people; they know how happiness was depicted in ancient mythology: it was represented as a woman with a long braid blown in front of her by the wind carrying this woman; It’s easy to catch her while she’s flying towards you, but miss one moment - she’ll fly by, and you’d run in vain to catch her: you can’t grab her if you’re left behind. A happy moment cannot be returned. You will not wait until the favorable combination of circumstances repeats itself, just as the conjunction of the heavenly bodies that coincides with the present hour will not repeat. Not to miss a favorable moment is the highest condition of everyday prudence. Happy circumstances exist for each of us, but not everyone knows how to use them, and in this art almost the only difference lies between people whose lives are going well or badly, and for you, although, perhaps, you were not worthy

Moreover, the circumstances developed happily, so happily that your fate at the decisive moment depends solely on your will. Will you understand the demands of the time, will you be able to take advantage of the position in which you are now placed - that is the question of happiness or unhappiness for you forever.

What are the methods and rules for not missing out on the happiness offered by circumstances? Like in what? Is it difficult to say what prudence requires in any given case? Suppose, for example, that I have a lawsuit in which I am entirely to blame. Let us also assume that my opponent, who is completely right, is so accustomed to the injustices of fate that he can hardly believe in the possibility of waiting for the resolution of our litigation: it has been dragging on for several decades; Many times he asked in court when the report would be, and many times he was answered “tomorrow or the day after tomorrow,” and each time months and months, years and years passed, and the case was not resolved. Why it dragged on so long, I don’t know, I only know that the chairman of the court for some reason favored me (he seemed to believe that I was devoted to him with all my soul). But then he received an order to resolve the matter immediately. Out of his friendship for me, he called me and said: “I cannot delay the decision of your process; it cannot end in your favor by judicial procedure - the laws are too clear; you will lose everything; The loss of property will not end the matter for you; the verdict of our civil court will reveal circumstances for which you will be liable under criminal laws, and you know how strict they are; I don’t know what the decision of the criminal chamber will be, but I think that you will get off too easily if you are sentenced only to deprivation of the rights of your fortune - between us, we can expect much worse. Today is Saturday; on Monday your lawsuit will be reported and decided; I do not have the strength to postpone it further, despite all my affection for you. Do you know what I would advise you? Take advantage of the day you have left: offer peace to your enemy; he does not yet know how urgent the necessity is that I am placed in by the order I have received; he heard that the lawsuit was being resolved on Monday, but he had heard about its imminent resolution so many times that he gave up his hopes; now he will also agree to an amicable deal, which will be very beneficial for you in monetary terms, not to mention the fact that you will get rid of it from the criminal process, acquire the name of a forgiving, generous person, who seems to have felt the voice of conscience and humanity . Try to end the litigation with an amicable deal. I ask you this as your friend.”

What should I do now, let each of you say: would it be smart for me to rush to my enemy to conclude a peace deal? Or would it be smart to lie on your sofa alone?

What day do I have left? Or would it be wise to attack with rude curses a judge who was favorable to me, whose friendly warning gave me the opportunity to end my litigation with honor and benefit for myself?

From this example the reader sees how easy it is in this case to decide what prudence requires.

“Try to reconcile with your adversary before you reach the court, otherwise your adversary will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the executor, and you will be thrown into prison and will not come out of it until you have paid for everything down to the last detail.” "(Matt., chapter V, verses 25 and 26).

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

1. Article by N.G. Chernyshevsky "Russian man at rendez-vous"

2. The story "Asya"

3. "Hamlet of Shchigrovsky district"

5. "Nobles' Nest"

6. "Fathers and Sons"

7. "Spring Waters"

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

By chance in Moscow I came across the play “Russian Man at a Rendez-vous” based on Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev’s novel “Spring Waters”, which ran with great success throughout the 2011 season on the old stage of the Pyotr Fomenko Theater. The new performance by Evgeniy Kamenkovich is, first of all, a gift to the faithful Fomenkovo audience, to those who for years stood in lines for tickets, made their way into the small theater hall by hook or by crook, and caught every appearance of their favorite troupe on the stage of other theaters. However, even “casual” spectators who, for a change, decided to while away the evening “under the shadow of the Fomenki” (like me) could rest assured that they would not be able to get away with just one date with this theater.

In part, the story played out by the actors echoes the writer’s personal experiences. As we all know from the school curriculum, Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev loved the singer Polina Viardot all his life and followed her around the world. Kamenkovich created a drama about how a noble, fearless, charming, educated Russian nobleman turns out to be unable to achieve happiness either for himself or for others. This performance about the lack of will and powerlessness of the Russian man is imbued with subtle irony and sincere regret. However, two things save you from painful conclusions and murderous topicality. First: Turgenev himself in “Spring Waters” portrayed Dmitry Sanin as not such a hopeless loser. At the end of the play, the hero notices that he has increased his fortune and has not even allowed serfs to wander around the world. Second: the famous Fomenkovsky lightness, playfulness, etude. Not a word, not a gesture in vain, everything is in place, with subtext. It seems as if someone from above with a generous hand bestowed talents on everyone.

The name of the performance of the P. Fomenko Theater “Russian Man at Rendez-vous” was given by an article by N. G. Chernyshevsky, dedicated to several stories and novels by Turgenev, primarily “Ace” (“Spring Waters” was not included in the analysis, since they were written many years later ).

1. Article by N.G. Chernyshevsky "Russian man at rendez-vous"

The article “Russian man on rendez-vous (Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya”) was published in the May book of the Moscow magazine “Atheneum”. By the way, after the final transition to N. A. Nekrasov’s magazine, this is the only case when a critic was not published in Sovremennik, but he could not publish an article in his journal, since the story under review was published here.

Polemicizing with the author of "Asi" and his like-minded people, Chernyshevsky subjected to critical analysis the types of noble "superfluous people" who turn out to be cowards at a critical moment. Instead of being ready to fight, they show weakness and submission. The hero of the story “becomes timid, he powerlessly retreats from everything that requires broad determination and noble risk.” The reviewer transfers these character traits to the whole society; "The vulgarity that he did would have been done by very many other so-called decent people in our society; therefore, it is nothing more than a symptom of an epidemic disease that has taken root in our society." Demchenko, A.A. N.G. Chernyshesky. - M.: Education, 1989. -S. 9.

Behind the criticism of Turgenev's hero is the criticism of liberals, very educated, extremely humane people, imbued with the noblest way of thinking, but who wilted at the decisive moment. They do not belong to those forces in society that will put a barrier to the harmful influence of “bad people”; they will not form a strong and effective opposition to the serf owners.

In the article, Chernyshevsky gives a broad picture associated with contemporary Russian society, namely, with the image of the “positive hero” of stories and novels, who in a number of situations displays unexpected negative character traits (indecisiveness, cowardice). First of all, these traits manifest themselves in love and personal relationships.

The title of the article is directly related to the reason for its writing. Food for thought was the ambiguous situation in the story “Asya”, when the girl showed determination and made an appointment with the hero herself (“rendez-vous”).

In the very first lines - impressions of the date scene in the story “Asya”, when the main character (perceived by the reader of the story as “positive” and even “ideal”) says to the girl who came on a date with him: “You are to blame for me, you got into trouble and I must end my relationship with you." “What is this?” exclaims Chernyshevsky. “What is she to blame for? Is it because she considered him a decent person? She compromised his reputation by coming on a date with him? This man is worse than a notorious scoundrel.”

Next, the critic analyzes the love line of a number of Turgenev's works ("Faust", "Rudin") in order to understand whether the author was mistaken in his hero or not (the story "Asya"), and comes to the conclusion that in Turgenev's works the main character, personifying the “ideal side”, in love affairs he behaves like a “pathetic scoundrel”. "In Faust, the hero tries to cheer himself up by the fact that neither he nor Vera have serious feelings for each other. He behaves in such a way that Vera herself must tell him that she loves him. [...] In "Rudin" the matter ends the fact that the offended girl turns away from him (Rudin), almost ashamed of her love for the coward." Turgenev without gloss. - St. Petersburg: Amphora, 2009. -MS. 268.

Chernyshevsky asks the question: “Perhaps this pitiful trait in the character of the heroes is a feature of Mr. Turgenev’s stories?” - And he himself answers: “But remember any good, true to life story of any of our current poets. If there is an ideal side to the story, rest assured that the representative of this ideal side acts exactly the same as the persons of Mr. Turgenev.” In order to argue his point of view, the author, as an example, analyzes the behavior of the main character of Nekrasov’s poem “Sasha”: “I explained to Sasha that “you should not weaken in soul,” because “the sun of truth will rise above the earth” and that you need to act to realize your aspirations, and then, when Sasha gets down to business, he says that all this is in vain and will lead nowhere, that he was “talking empty talk.” He in the same way prefers retreat to any decisive step." Returning to the analysis of the story "Asya", Chernyshevsky concludes: "These are our best people." Chernyshevsky N.G., Collected Works in 5 volumes. T. 3. Literary Criticism - M.: Pravda, 1974. - P. 398

Then the critic unexpectedly declares that the hero should not be condemned, and begins to talk about himself and his worldview: “I have become satisfied with everything that I see around me, I am not angry at anything, I am not upset by anything (except for failures in business, personally beneficial for me), I do not condemn anything or anyone in the world (except for people who violate my personal benefits), I do not wish for anything (except for my own benefit) - in a word, I will tell you how I turned from a bilious melancholic person into a practical person and well-intentioned, that I wouldn’t even be surprised if I receive a reward for my good intentions.”

Further, Chernyshevsky resorts to an extensive contrast between “trouble” and “guilt”: “A robber stabbed a man to rob him, and finds it beneficial for himself - this is guilt. A careless hunter accidentally wounded a man and he himself is the first to suffer from the misfortune that he caused - this It’s not a fault, it’s just a misfortune.”

What happens to the hero of the story "Asya" is a disaster. He does not receive benefit and pleasure from the situation when the girl in love with him strives to be with him, and he backs down: “The poor young man does not understand at all the business in which he is taking part. The point is clear, but he is obsessed with such stupidity, whom the most obvious facts are unable to reason with.” Next, the author gives a number of examples from the text when Asya allegorically, but very clearly let “our Romeo” understand what she was really experiencing - but he did not understand. "Why do we analyze our hero so harshly? Why is he worse than others? Why is he worse than all of us?"

Chernyshevsky reflects on happiness and the ability not to miss the opportunity to be happy (which the hero of the story “Asya” fails to do): “Happiness in ancient mythology was represented as a woman with a long braid blown in front of her by the wind carrying this woman; it is easy to catch her as she flies up to you, but miss one moment - it will fly by, and it would be in vain for you to rush to catch it: you cannot grab it if you are left behind. A happy moment is irrevocable. Not to miss a favorable moment is the highest condition of everyday prudence. Happy circumstances happen for each of us , but not everyone knows how to use them." At the end of the article, Chernyshevsky gives a detailed allegory when, in a situation of a long-lasting and exhausting legal battle, the hearing is postponed for a day. “What should I do now, let each of you say: would it be smart for me to rush to my opponent to conclude a peace settlement? Or would it be smart to lie on my sofa for the only day remaining to me? Or would it be smart to attack the judge who favors me with rude curses, friendly warning which gave me the opportunity to end my litigation with honor and benefit for myself? Demchenko, A.A. N.G. Chernyshesky. - M.: Education, 1989. - P. 12.

Chernyshevsky ends the article with a significant warning. The last paragraph of the article was a Gospel verse in which the critic replaced the word “servant” with “executor of sentences.” The article ends with a quote from the Gospel: “Try to reconcile with your adversary before you reach the court with him, otherwise your adversary will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the executor of sentences, and you will be thrown into prison and will not come out of it until you will pay for everything to the last detail" (Matt., chapter V, verses 25 and 26).

But I remember that the critic wrote: “The story has a purely poetic, ideal direction, not touching on any of the so-called dark sides of life. Here, I thought, the soul will rest and be refreshed.” Chernyshevsky N.G., Collected works in 5 volumes. T. 3. Literary criticism. - M.: Pravda, 1974. - P. 400

But it turned out that Chernyshevsky was not at all going to rest his soul and enjoy Turgenev’s style. The article was devoted to exposing the main character of the story - Mr. N. For me, he was, first of all, not very experienced in life, a dreamy young man who, more than anything in the world, was afraid of committing an ignoble, unworthy act. In other words, I assessed him as a real intellectual. His happiness with Asya did not materialize because he was afraid, could not afford to abuse her trust, or respond with evil to her brother’s friendly attitude.

In addition, both the girl and the narrator became victims of social prejudices of the century before last. Asya's brother, Gagin, was sure that Mr. N. would not marry her, because she was illegitimate. He wrote: “There are prejudices that I respect...” The main character of the story did not even immediately understand what was being discussed. “What prejudices?” I cried, as if he could hear me. “What nonsense!” Turgenev wrote with bitterness that people do not understand each other, misinterpret other people's words and actions, and thereby destroy their own happiness.

But Chernyshevsky saw something completely different in the story. For him, Mr. N. is almost a villain, at least a hopelessly bad person. The most surprising thing is that the critic considers these qualities not personal, but social. He argues that the narrator is a public portrait of the Russian intelligentsia, and it is disfigured by the lack of civil liberties. “...The scene made by our Romeo Ace... is only a symptom of a disease that in exactly the same vulgar way spoils all our affairs, and only we need to look closely at why our Romeo got into trouble, we will see what we all, like him, can expect from himself and expect for himself in all other matters... Without acquiring the habit of original participation in civil affairs, without acquiring the feeling of a citizen, a male child, growing up, becomes a male being of middle age, and then of old age, but he does not become a man... It is better not to develop man rather than to develop without the influence of thoughts about public affairs, without the influence of the feelings awakened by participation in them."

Chernyshevsky treats Turgenev’s hero very harshly, accusing him of insensitivity, selfishness, and indifference to the experiences of a young girl. Asya dreams of growing wings and flying into the sky, and the hero tells her about the feelings “that lift us from the ground.” The critic is outraged by the hero’s slow-wittedness: Asya tells him that her wings have grown, but the hero does not understand what is happening in Asya’s heart and in his own. Doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand? According to Chernyshevsky, the hero is infantile and incapable of making independent decisions. The critic believes that there are two reasons for this: in the petty and soulless life of N.N. “I’m not used to understanding anything great and living,” and besides, he “becomes timid and powerlessly retreats from everything that requires broad determination and noble risk.” The hero is afraid of responsibility, is incapable of action, feels only his own doubts, hesitations, experiences, but does not understand the experiences of someone else's soul. Sympathizing with Asya, the critic is happy for her that she did not connect her fate with this man. Egorov, O.G. Novels by I.S. Turgenev: problems of culture. - M.: Prometheus, 2001. - P. 177

The hero is severely punished for his momentary weakness, and perhaps N.G. Chernyshevsky is too harsh towards this honest and kind man, who was unable to overcome his indecision at the right moment.

It turns out that Mr. N. rejected and offended Asya because he had no experience in public affairs? This sounds absurd to me. But I understood much better what the “method of real criticism” is. Using it, you can connect any work of art with social and political issues.

I imagined Chernyshevsky himself much more clearly. In 1858, when Turgenev’s story was published and the article “Russian man on rendez-vous” appeared, revolutionary democrats were gaining strength. They looked for practical meaning and benefit in everything and were sure that writing about love, about nature, about beauty was a completely unnecessary activity. It was important for Chernyshevsky on the eve of great social reforms to convince readers that they must be active citizens, fight for their rights and their happiness. This is, of course, a worthy goal for a publicist. But I still feel sorry for Turgenev’s story “Asya”. I guess it has nothing to do with the fight for civil liberties. Her heroine is memorable because she sees the world in her own way. “You drove into the moon pillar, you broke it,” Asya shouted to me. Such images do not become outdated, unlike Chernyshevsky’s political allusions. And, in my opinion, today, almost one hundred and sixty years later, it is better to read this story as one reads beautiful poetry.

The critic-publicist in the article “Russian man on rendez-vous” addresses the noble liberal intelligentsia with a serious warning: whoever does not take into account the demands of the peasantry, does not meet the revolutionary democracy that defends the vital rights of the working people, will ultimately be swept away by the course of history. This is stated in an allegorical form, but quite definitely. The reader was led to this conclusion by the subtle analysis contained in Chernyshevsky’s article of the behavior of “our Romeo,” who was frightened by the girl’s selfless love and abandoned her. Examining the main character of the story as if under a strong microscope, the critic discovers in him a commonality with other literary heroes of Russian literature, with the so-called “superfluous people.” Demchenko, A.A. N.G. Chernyshesky. - M.: Education, 1989. -S. 17.

2. The story "Asya"

The story "Asya" has a romantic background. While in Germany, the writer, admiring the ancient ruins along the banks of the Rhine, saw a two-story house. An old woman was looking out of the window on the lower floor, and from the window on the upper floor the head of a pretty girl was sticking out. He began to figure out who this girl was, what she was like, what her relationship was with the old woman. Immediately, the plot of the story took shape, about which Nekrasov speaks like this: “... It (the story) is so lovely. It exudes spiritual youth, it is all pure gold of poetry. Without a stretch, this beautiful setting fits the poetic plot, and something came out unprecedented in beauty and purity."

Since this story was fictional, the characters' characters are somewhat sketchy. Asya is a pretty girl, whose life circumstances played a role in shaping her personality. She is very impulsive, exalted, with frequently changing moods - “roles”. Her Romeo is Mr. N.N. - an honest young man, his heart is open to all high feelings, but this feeling breaks out in the process of thought, thought paralyzes feeling. Nedzvetsky, V.A. Female characters in the works of I.S. Turgeneva //Literature at school. - 2007. - No. 6. - P. 3 It’s not his fault, he got into trouble. To understand this, you need to go directly to the plot of the story.

When 18-year-old Asya first saw N.N., she laughed and ran away. She truly made N.N. fall in love with her, although she did nothing for it. N.N. I was now in worry, now in thought, now in excitement. N.N. He constantly suspected Gagin of lying. But then he realized that everything was true. Asya asked N.N. several times to teach her how to behave, how to talk. Asya realizes that she is in love with N.N. She tells Gagin about this. Gagin thinks, comes to N.N. and tells him about it. And the day before Asya sends N.N. a note requesting a meeting. About this N.N. decides to tell Gagin and respond with revelation to revelation. N.N. upon meeting, he begins to reproach Asya. I consider it unworthy to insult a small fluffy chicken - Asya is a defenseless and gentle creature. After the meeting, Asya disappears. She is found an hour after the search begins. N.N. already wants to propose to her, but Gagin does not allow this. The next morning, Gagin and Asya leave for Cologne, and then to London, and N.N. will never see either Asya or Gagin again.

So, the story has been read. The work contains love and longing, everything is combined in inexplicable colors, the story seems to shout to us: “Don’t miss your chance while you are young! Time flies, no one will wait.” Turgenev recalled: “...I wrote her (Asya) passionately, almost with tears...” For me, Turgenev’s work is lyrical and sublime. What depth of feelings!

The story is told from the perspective of the main character - a young man who arrived in a small German town. There he meets with a Russian family - brother and sister Gagin.

Asya's real name is Anna. But throughout the entire story she is addressed only by the name Asya. Why is this happening? The answer can be found if you find out the meanings of these two names: Anna is grace and comeliness, and Asya is born again. We understand that Turgenev did not choose the name for the heroine by chance. Anna is a girl of noble origin, by nature she is a true aristocrat, but she has a hard time in life, she is in danger and she has to lead a “double life”, pretending to be a completely different person. That's why the author calls her “born again” - she finds a new life. Akimova, N.N. “Irresistible like a thunderstorm”...: the story “Asya” in the creative evolution of I.S. Turgeneva //Literature at school. - 2007. - No. 6. - P. 6

In the story, neither the narrator nor Gagin have names. I think the author did this on purpose, used it as a kind of artistic device to further emphasize that Asya is the main character of the story.

Narrator - N.N. - appears before us in a not very clear image. Nowhere is his appearance specifically described. We only know that at the time when the events described in the story took place, he was twenty-five years old. In fact, this is where the story begins. He himself is a kind and open person. He is more interested in people, characters and actions than in monuments, museums, and nature. In a crowd of people he felt much freer than alone in nature. This, in my opinion, speaks of his sociability and desire to get to know people. I think this is its key feature. It should be noted that the narrator is much older, he simply recalls his youth and the love story that happened to him.

The young man completed his education and went on a trip abroad, just like that, without a goal - “to look at the world of God.” He says about himself that he was “healthy, young, cheerful,” “his money was not transferred, his worries had not yet begun.” The hero's love experiences due to the fact that he was rejected by a beautiful young widow did not occupy him for long - he met the Gagins, brother and sister. The brother is a young nobleman who is interested in painting. Asya is his sister.

Gagin is a handsome young man. This is how the narrator describes him: “Gagin had just such a face, sweet, affectionate, with large soft eyes and soft curly hair.” From his (the narrator’s) words it is immediately clear that he is more than cordially disposed towards Gagin. Gagin is an open, sympathetic, truthful, loving person.

Asya is a very pretty girl. “There was something special about her dark, round face, with a small thin nose...” "She was gracefully built." In general, Asya’s character is quite difficult to grasp. She is always different, as if each meeting with the narrator plays some role. “Chameleon girl,” is how N.N. described her. This is the main characteristic feature of Asya. It was noticeable that she was well educated, but “she had a strange upbringing,” not typical for Russian young ladies. This is a proud, independent nature, open and sincere. Having fallen in love with the hero, she did not hide it from him, but she writes to him, makes an appointment, confesses her feelings, just like her favorite heroine, Pushkin’s Tatyana. Tankova, N.S. Turgenev girl // Literature at school. - 1996. - No. 5. - P. 132.

At N.N. and Gagina immediately established very warm friendly relations. I think this happened because they both love Asya. At first, Gagin simply liked N.N., as he was a gentle and cheerful person. The narrator valued these qualities very much. Later, when they got to know each other better, Asya became a thread that firmly tied the ties of friendship.

Gagin decided to reveal a family secret to him. It turned out that Asya is Gagin's half-sister. Her mother is the former maid of Gagina's deceased mother. Asya lived with her father for nine years and did not know Gagin, but after his death Gagin took her in and they became very close, although at first Asya was shy about Gagin. I think that Gagin told this story to N.N. because he realized how caring Asya was for the young man.

At N.N. and Asya immediately develop mutual sympathy. Later, sympathy grew into something more. N.N. was attracted to Asa by her soul, her state of mind, her incomprehensible actions and mood swings.

Like Pushkin's Tatiana, Asya makes a date herself. Like Tatyana, she is the first to confess her love to her chosen one. In my opinion, Asya is the personification of a typically Russian female character. For Asya, Mr. N.N. is a hero of a lofty dream, an unusual, exceptional person. Asya is a girl with a pure and sincere heart, “her feelings are never half-hearted.” According to Gagin, Asya’s feelings for Mr. N.N. "unexpected and as irresistible as a thunderstorm." Her feeling is free, it is difficult to restrain it: “If you and I were birds, how we would soar, how we would fly...”

Let's turn to the date (breakup) scene. Asya is “like a dead bird” on a date. Why, because she hopes for love? This key image of a bird helps to understand the writer’s thought: not fate! This detail operates throughout the story; these two people are not meant for each other. Asya understands everything before the hero. N.N. acts according to the rules, and love is not a rule, not laws. Love is a violation of all the rules, a sea of stars, a storm of feelings, moonlight and a moon pillar... which the hero breaks. He broke it - and Asya is gone!

Date N.N. and Asi takes place in a small, rather dark room, in the house of the burgomaster's widow, Frau Louise. In this scene, N.N.’s psychological incompatibility is most clearly visible. and Asi. The heroine’s laconic remarks speak of her timidity, bashfulness and submission to fate. Her words are barely audible in the darkness of the room.

Mr. N.N., on the contrary, showing initiative in dialogue, is verbose; he hides his unpreparedness for reciprocal feelings, his inability to surrender to love behind reproaches and loud exclamations.

The reciprocal feeling, either by chance or by the fatal predetermination of fate, ignites in the hero later, but nothing can be changed. N.N. he himself admits this: “When I met her in that fateful room, I did not yet have a clear consciousness of my love... it flared up with uncontrollable force only a few moments later, when, frightened by the possibility of misfortune, I began to look for and call her ...but then it was already too late."

The date scene, in which we meet the main character of the story for the last time, finally shows how contradictory Asya’s character is. In the short time of the meeting, she experiences a whole range of feelings - timidity, a flash of happiness, complete dedication (“Yours...” she whispered barely audibly”), shame and despair. We understand how strong she is in character, that she could stop the painful scene herself and, having overcome her weakness, disappeared “with the speed of lightning,” leaving Mr. N. in complete confusion. We see how weak Mr. N.N. turns out to be, compared to Asya, we see his moral inferiority.

Turgenev punishes his hero for not recognizing love and doubting it. You cannot doubt love (Bazarov paid for this with his life), love cannot be put off until tomorrow. The author condemns his hero. And Mr. N.N. himself. speaks sarcastically about his decision to be happy “tomorrow”: “Happiness has no tomorrow...” Tseitlin, A.G. Turgenev's skill as a novelist. - M.: Sov. writer, 1956. -S. 204.

But Asya thought that N.N. despises her, which is why she told Gagin that she loves no one but him. But later she still could not stand it and confessed everything to her brother, after which she asked to immediately leave the city. After much thought, N.N. I got confused and drove myself into a dead end. Asya, apparently, was also completely confused. In the end, be that as it may, everything ended extremely sadly. Asya and Gagin left the city. No matter how hard N.N. tried, he was never able to pick up their trail. And yet, not a single woman could replace the narrator Asya. This once again tells us that true love never dies...

When I turned the last page of I. S. Turgenev’s story “Asya,” I had the feeling that I had just read a poem or heard a gentle melody. Everything was so beautiful: the stone walls of the ancient city, the silver Rhine at night... Actually, there is no point in retelling Turgenev’s landscapes in your own words. For me, “Asya” is “the subtle smell of resin in the forests, the cry and knock of woodpeckers, the incessant chatter of light streams with colorful trout on the sandy bottom, not too bold outlines of mountains, gloomy rocks, clean villages with venerable old churches and trees, storks in the meadows, cozy mills with swiftly turning wheels...” Turgenev, I.S. Favorites. - L.: Lenizdat, 1980. - P. 148. This is a feeling of a calm world in which a person can be happy, unless he himself destroys the harmony that has arisen.

3. "Hamlet of Shchigrovsky district"

I wanted to know how love relationships develop in other works by I.S. Turgenev, how heroes manifest themselves. And the first work that interested me, where the hero is not shown in the best way in his relationship with women, was the essay “Hamlet of the Shchigrovsky District.” In the center of the story is Vasily Vasilyevich, the self-exposing Russian Hamlet, who cannot find a place for himself in life. Turgenev subjected him to a sharp satirical exposure, pointing out the social reasons and conditions of education that gave rise to reflection in Russian intellectuals and made them incapable of practical activity. Pustovoit, P.G. Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 1957. -S. 14.

The hero’s self-exposure achieves particular power in his story about the history of his marriage. Spouting at length about women and love, developing various ingenious theories of marriage, Vasily Vasilyevich gives in when meeting women, behaves extremely cowardly and is comically pitiful. Once in the house of a Berlin professor, Vasily Vasilyevich falls in love with his daughter Linchen. This is rather not love, but some kind of appearance of love, a strange speculative illusion. For six whole months it seems to him that he is in love. The state of this six-month loving self-deception was expressed in the fact that he read various touching works aloud to the blue-eyed Linchen and secretly shook her hands. When this sentimental and extremely monotonous paradise became too painful, Vasily Vasilyevich confessed: “in the very, as they say, moments of inexplicable bliss, for some reason everything was sucking in the pit of my stomach and a melancholy, cold shiver ran through my stomach. I finally I couldn't stand such happiness and ran away." Thus, the first round of love for Hamlet of the Shchigrovsky district ended with a shameful capitulation at the rendez-vous.

The hero returns to Russia, to the village. There the second round of his love began. The heroine of the new novel turned out to be the consumptive daughter of the colonel Sophia. In all likelihood, she did not have a beautiful appearance, for the hero categorically states: “I liked Sophia most when I sat with my back to her or, perhaps, when I thought or dreamed more about her, especially in the evening, on the terrace.” Intoxicated by his dream, the moon and the evening landscape, Hamlet asked the old woman for her daughter’s hand. But here he sums up what happened: “It seemed to me that I loved her, and now, by God, I don’t know if I loved Sophia.” Such is the love of this man - “empty, insignificant and unnecessary, unoriginal”, whose whole life is a continuous imitation of someone, philosophizing from someone else’s voice. Pustovoit, P.G. Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 1957. -S. 15.

4. "Rudin"

Those life factors and social conditions that crippled and shattered the impressionable, weak and nervous nature of Hamlet of the Shchigrovsky district were presented by Turgenev in their true light, without a satirical accent in the novel "Rudin".

The novel was rewritten several times by the author under the influence of his friends; all these reworkings could not but give rise to a number of contradictions in the character of the main character and in the attitude of other characters towards him. Rudin is smart, talented, the fire of love for truth has not died out in him, he knows how to light this fire in other people (Natalya, Basistov), he speaks with passion about the high calling of a person, but Rudin is not ready for practical activity. And this is the main contradiction in his character, and in his relationship with Natalya.

In the novel, Turgenev created a poetic image of a Russian girl - Natalya Lasunskaya. The writer’s personal experiences and his relationship with T. A. Bakunina played a significant role in its creation. In his letters to Bakunina, Turgenev speaks of the highest, ideal love, bordering on self-sacrifice. The embodiment of such love is the image of Natalia. The charm of Turgenev's heroines, despite the difference in their psychological types, lies in the fact that their characters are revealed in moments of intense poetic feeling. Nedzvetsky, V.A. Female characters in the works of I.S. Turgeneva //Literature at school. - 2007. - No. 6. - P. 4

Natalya is truly touching and charming in her love for Rudin. Receptive to poetry and art, deeply feeling joy and grief, seventeen-year-old Natalya rises above the world of the Pigasovs and Pandalevskys in her spiritual development. Meek and domineering at the same time, she managed to resist the hothouse upbringing, bypassing the usual prohibitions and tedious teachings of her teachers, and was thoughtful about everything that happened around her. Along with natural tenderness, she cultivated strength and determination of character. This is evident from the fact that she was ready to go anywhere for her loved one, even against the will of her mother, in spite of any obstacles, she was ready for self-sacrifice. But is Rudin ready to accept such a sacrifice? Lebedev, Yu.V. Life of Turgenev. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006. -S. 390. Turgenev love hero Asya

Rudin, like all Turgenev's heroes, goes through the test of love. In Turgenev, this feeling is sometimes bright, sometimes tragic and destructive, but it is always a force that reveals the soul, the true nature of a person. Although Rudin's speeches are full of enthusiasm, years of abstract philosophical work have dried up his heart and soul. This is where the “heady”, far-fetched nature of Rudin’s hobby is revealed, his lack of naturalness and freshness of feelings. We feel the predominance of the rational principle in the hero in the scene of love confession. Rudin does not know either himself or Natalya, initially mistaking her for a girl.

Natalia's appearance is covered with light and tender poetry. At the same time, in the novel we are presented with not only a sublimely airy, but also a strong, unyielding girl who managed to renounce the bright poetry of natural feeling. It should also be emphasized that, revealing the inner world of a man, Turgenev strives to capture those character traits that would explain him as a social type, and when creating the image of a woman, he primarily proceeded from the “norm”, “model” of human personality. Lebedev, Yu.V. Life of Turgenev. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006. -P.392.

As very often in Turgenev, the heroine is placed above the hero in love - with integrity of nature, spontaneity of feeling, recklessness in decisions. Natalya, at seventeen years old, without any life experience, is ready to leave home and join fate with Rudin. Natalya loves Rudin so much that she doesn’t even see his weaknesses, she believes in his strength and ability to do great things.

In response to the question: “What do you think we should do?” - she hears from Rudin: “Of course, submit.” Natalya throws a lot of bitter words at Rudin: she reproaches him for cowardice, cowardice, and for the fact that his lofty words are far from reality.

In the climactic scene at Avdyukhin's pond, Turgenev strives primarily for a realistic understanding of the dependence of a person's mental state on the social environment. The behavior of Turgenev's hero in the face of his beloved girl reveals in the novel not only his personal qualities, but also Rudin's ability to serve society and the people. A date in the garden leads to a decisive explanation. The significance of this scene is extremely great. Natalya says to Rudin: “I will be yours,” Rudin himself convinces himself with a smile that he is happy. This scene in the garden is the beginning of the external and internal action of the novel: it was now that the conflict was determined between Natalya’s determination, the reflection of the “cowardly” Rudin and the inevitable resistance that Lasunskaya will provide to both. “What?” thought Rudin after an explanation with Natalya, who mercilessly exposed him. “...how pitiful and insignificant I was in front of her!”

The hero is debunked, he does not stand the test of love, revealing his human inferiority. However, Rudin cannot part with Natalya without writing her a frank letter of confession, full of critical introspection. The sad and lyrical tone of the letter and Rudin’s departure enhance the dramatic denouement of the intimate and personal relationships of the novel’s characters. Tseytlin, A.G. Turgenev's skill as a novelist. - M.: Sov. writer, 1956. - P. 123.

5. "Nobles' Nest"

The next novel in time of writing is “The Noble Nest”, I began to consider it from the point of view of the love relationships of the characters.

Turgenev in “The Noble Nest” devotes a lot of space to the theme of love, because this feeling helps to highlight all the best qualities of the heroes, to see the main thing in their characters, to understand their soul. Love is depicted by Turgenev as the most beautiful, bright and pure feeling that awakens the best in people. In this novel, like in no other novel by Turgenev, the most touching, romantic, sublime pages are dedicated to the love of the heroes. Along with deep and relevant ideological debates, the novel illuminates the ethical problem of personal happiness and duty. This problem is revealed through the relationship between Lavretsky and Lisa, which is the plot core of the novel. The image of Lisa Kalitina is a huge poetic achievement of Turgenev the artist. A girl with a natural mind, subtle feeling, integrity of character and moral responsibility for all her actions, Lisa is filled with great moral purity and goodwill towards people; she is demanding of herself, in difficult moments of life she is capable of self-sacrifice. Raised in religious traditions from childhood, Lisa is deeply religious. However, she is attracted not by religious dogma, but by the preaching of justice, love for people, readiness to suffer for others, to accept someone else’s guilt, to make sacrifices if necessary. Lebedev, Yu.V. Life of Turgenev. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006. -S. 352.

Religiosity does not turn Lisa into a prude. The girl retains her natural intelligence, warmth, love of beauty, and concern for ordinary people. Lavretsky felt this healthy, natural and life-giving principle, combined with other positive qualities of Lisa, even when he first met her.

Lavretsky returned from abroad after breaking up with his wife, having lost faith in the purity of human relationships, in female love, in the possibility of personal happiness. However, communication with Lisa gradually restores his former faith in everything pure and beautiful.

Turgenev does not trace in detail the emergence of spiritual intimacy between Lisa and Lavretsky. But he finds other means of conveying this rapidly growing and strengthening feeling. The history of the relationship between Lisa and Lavretsky is revealed both directly in the dialogues of the main characters of the novel, and with the help of subtle psychological observations and conclusions of the author. Lemma's music plays an important role in poeticizing these relationships. To the accompaniment of the passionate melodies of Lemm's inspired music, the best movements of Lavretsky's soul are revealed, against the backdrop of this music the most poetic explanations of the novel's heroes take place. Tseytlin, A.G. Turgenev's skill as a novelist. - M.: Sov. writer, 1956. - 24

But the hope that flashed for Lavretsky was illusory: the news of his wife’s death turned out to be false. The unexpected arrival of his wife put the hero in a dilemma: personal happiness with Lisa or duty towards his wife and child. And the hero was forced to submit to sad but inexorable circumstances. Continuing to consider personal happiness as the highest good in a person’s life, the hero of the novel bows to duty.

In the light of Chernyshevsky's article about "Ace", the ending of "The Noble Nest" should also be considered. Lavretsky expresses sad thoughts at the end of the novel primarily because he is experiencing great personal grief: “Burn out, useless life!” Lavretsky felt the impossibility of returning love, purity, the impossibility of personal happiness for him.

Turgenev leads his heroes along a path of trials. Lavretsky's transitions from hopelessness to an extraordinary upsurge, born of hope for happiness, and again to hopelessness create the internal drama of the novel. Everything around is a reproach to lovers. This is retribution for the sins of fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers. Lisa also experienced the same vicissitudes, for a moment she surrendered to the dream of happiness and then felt even more guilty. For what? For unconscious joy at the news of a person’s death, for criminal hopes, for “happiness on earth does not depend on us.” Following the story about Liza’s past, forcing the reader to sincerely wish her happiness and rejoice in it, Liza suddenly suffers a terrible blow - Lavretsky’s wife arrives, and Liza remembers that she has no right to happiness, which nevertheless “was... so close". Lisa's charm lies not in external, but in internal beauty: she is full of moral purity and spirituality. And in this she is superior to Lavretsky according to Turgenev’s plan, like all his heroines. Tseytlin, A.G. Turgenev's skill as a novelist. - M.: Sov. writer, 1956. -S. 315.

Liza Kalitina combines all the qualities of “Turgenev’s girls”: modesty, spiritual beauty, the ability to deeply feel and experience, and most importantly, the ability to love, to love selflessly and boundlessly, without fear of self-sacrifice. She “leaves” Lavretsky after learning that his legal wife is alive. She does not allow herself to say a word to him in the church, where he came to see her. And even eight years later, when meeting in the monastery, she passes by: “Moving from choir to choir, she walked close past him, walked with the even, hasty, humble gait of a nun - and did not look at him; only the eyelashes of the eye turned towards him slightly trembled, only she tilted her emaciated face even lower - and the fingers of her clenched hands, intertwined with rosaries, pressed even tighter to each other.”

Not a word, not a look. And why? You can’t bring back the past, and there’s no future, so why bother with old wounds?

The epilogue of the novel is an elegy, life has flown away like sand! And after reading the novel, you ask yourself: “Was such a sacrifice necessary, is it worth giving up love, happiness for the sake of some prejudices?” After all, such an act of the hero did not make anyone happy: neither Lisa, nor the hero himself, and especially his wife and child.

6. "Fathers and Sons"

The hero of Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons" Evgeny Bazarov also passes the test of love, he also finds himself on the "rendez-vous".

At the beginning of the novel, the author introduces us to his hero as a nihilist, a man “who does not bow to any authorities, who does not take a single principle on faith,” for whom romanticism is nonsense and a whim: “Bazarov recognizes only what can be felt hands, see with the eyes, put on the tongue, in a word, only what can be witnessed by one of the five senses.” Therefore, he considers mental suffering unworthy of a real man, high aspirations - far-fetched and absurd. Thus, “aversion to everything detached from life and evaporating in sounds is the fundamental property” of Bazarov. Turgenev without gloss. - St. Petersburg: Amphora, 2009. -S. 336.

Turgenev is fighting “nihilism” using such a means as a love affair. It is so compact in the novel that it fits into only five chapters (XIV-XVIII). Of all the previous collisions in which Bazarov is typical, he emerges victorious; in love he fails. This changes Bazarov's fate.

Bazarov, a proud and self-confident commoner, who laughed at love as a romanticism unworthy of a man and a fighter, experiences inner excitement and embarrassment in front of the self-confident beauty, is embarrassed and, finally, passionately falls in love with the aristocrat Odintsova. Listen to the words of his forced confession: “I love you stupidly, madly.” There is only feeling, romanticism, excitement.

Bazarov immediately saw in Odintsova an extraordinary person, felt involuntary respect for her and singled her out from the circle of provincial ladies: “She’s not like the other women.” But this is still a nihilistic view. Odintsova's aristocracy is not coldness or aloofness, it is a national ideal of female beauty that demands respect. In many ways she is worthy of Bazarov, but is he worthy of her? The background against which Bazarov and Odintsova’s explanation takes place is a poetic picture of a summer evening. The romantic feeling of high love illuminates the world around us with a new light. In the explanation scene, when asked by Odintsova whether he could completely surrender to the feeling of love, he honestly answers: “I don’t know, I don’t want to brag.” Meanwhile, we see that he is capable of great feeling. But from his words, Odintsova could conclude that this man, no matter how much he loved, would not sacrifice his beliefs in the name of love. Some critics who wrote about the novel argued that in the story of Bazarov's love for Odintsova, Turgenev debunks his hero. Lebedev, Yu.V. Life of Turgenev. - M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2006. -S. 433.

“He is more likely to be pitied to whom this thing happens” or “it is better to break stones on the pavement than to allow a woman to take possession of even the tip of a finger,” - this is how Bazarov talks about love.

Bazarov is a nihilist, for him any warm attitude towards a woman is “romanticism, nonsense,” so his sudden love for Odintsova split his soul into two halves: “a staunch opponent of romantic feelings” and “a passionately loving person.” Perhaps this is the beginning of a tragic retribution for his arrogance. Naturally, this internal conflict of Bazarov is reflected in his behavior. When he was introduced to Anna Sergeevna, Bazarov surprised even his friend Arkady, as he was noticeably embarrassed (“... his friend blushed”). True, Evgeny himself was annoyed: “Now you’re scared of the women!” He covered up his awkwardness with exaggerated swagger. Bazarov made an impression on Anna Sergeevna, although his “breakdowns in the first minutes of the visit had an unpleasant effect on her.”

In the life of the nihilist Bazarov, love played a tragic role. And yet the strength and depth of Bazarov’s feelings do not disappear without a trace. At the end of the novel, Turgenev draws the grave of the hero and “two already decrepit old men,” Bazarov’s parents, who come to her. But this is also love!” Isn’t love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent?

The images of heroes in Turgenev's novels are contrasted with heroines. They always come from a noble environment, surpassing it in their cultural, and to a certain extent, political level. Turgenev does not create a single female character: if Natalya and especially Elena (the novel “On the Eve”) are “consciously heroic natures”, incapable of compromise and revealing a rare strength of character, then Odintsova and Liza, on the contrary, are afraid of the dangers of life’s struggle. Pustovoit, P.G. Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University, 1957. - P. 54.

7. "Spring Waters"

And finally, “Spring Waters” is a story that attracted my attention not only because of the performance I watched, but also because the hero is another interesting addition to Turgenev’s gallery of weak-willed people.

The plot of the story is sad. The hero, sorting through some old papers, suddenly stumbles upon a garnet cross and remembers an old story. Several decades ago, not afraid of a duel and death, he, Dmitry Pavlovich Sanin, betrayed love, and even betrayed it somehow stupidly, senselessly, if only one can imagine betrayal as reasonable and having a deep meaning.

The main narrative is told as the memoirs of a 52-year-old nobleman and landowner Sanin about the events of 30 years ago that happened in his life when he was traveling in Germany.

One day, while passing through Frankfurt, Sanin went into a pastry shop, where he helped the owner’s young daughter Gemma with her younger brother who had fainted. The family took a liking to Sanin, and unexpectedly for himself, he spent several days with them. When he was out for a walk with Gemma and her fiancé, one of the young German officers sitting at the next table in the tavern allowed himself to be rude, and Sanin challenged him to a duel.

The duel ended happily for both participants. However, this incident greatly shook up the girl’s measured life. She refused her fiance, who could not protect her. Sanin suddenly realized that he loved her. The love that gripped them led Sanin to the idea of marriage. Even Gemma’s mother, who was initially horrified by Gemma’s breakup with her fiancé, gradually calmed down and began to make plans for their future life.

To sell his estate and get money for living together, Sanin went to Wiesbaden to visit the rich wife of his boarding house friend Polozov, whom he accidentally meets in Frankfurt. However, the rich young Russian beauty Marya Nikolaevna, on her whim, lured Sanin and made him one of her lovers. Unable to resist Marya Nikolaevna's strong nature, Sanin follows her to Paris, but soon turns out to be unnecessary and returns to Russia with shame, where his life passes sluggishly in the bustle of society.

Only 30 years later he accidentally finds a miraculously preserved garnet cross, given to him by Gemma. He rushes to Frankfurt, where he finds out that Gemma got married two years after those events and lives happily in New York with her husband and five children. Her daughter in the photo looks like that young Italian girl, her mother, to whom Sanin once proposed marriage.

How Sanin’s heart flared up when he looked at Gemma Roselli! And before he knew it, two days later he was already groomed and ready to sell his only estate and settle forever next to a pastry shop in Frankfurt. And how, just as quickly, in two days, he falls victim to skillful coquetry - and not only breaks up with his adored bride, but throws his whole life at the feet of a woman with an amazing body, ardent character and melodious Moscow speech. Why?

Are there any super meanings here? I don’t know... But the story of a 22-year-old Tula landowner, who passionately fell in love with the Italian Gemma in Frankfurt, was ready to fight a duel over her, was ready to sell his estate and stand behind the counter of a pastry shop, the story of a great love that absurdly collapsed a week later, when Sanina was seduced by a bored woman. on the waters, the irresistible millionaire lady Marya Nikolaevna, a love story that Sanin could not forget all his life, leads to the idea that the “rendez-vous” again did not take place.

True, at the end of his life, and it is absolutely clear that these 52 years of his life are already the end, he has neither strength nor feelings, he, “already taught by experience, after so many years - was still unable to understand how he could leave Gemma, so tenderly and passionately loved by him, for a woman whom he did not love at all?..” The main thing is that the hero still asks himself this question.

Behindinclusion

So, the love affair, in which the main features of the heroes of the Russian novel are most clearly revealed, forms the basis of most works of Russian classical literature. Love stories of heroes attracted many writers, and they had a special significance in the works of Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev.

The writer apparently believed that a love affair reveals both the personal qualities and social views of the heroes. It is based on a system of “triangles” that provide a situation of choice: Rudin - Natalya - Volyntsev; Lavretsky - Liza - Panshin; Insarov - Elena - Bersenev, Shubin, Kurnatovsky; Nezhdanov - Marianna - Kallomiytsev (Solomin). During the development of a love affair, the hero’s worth or failure and his right to happiness are tested. The center of the “triangle” is a woman (Turgenev’s girl).

...

Similar documents

The relationship between the characters in the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". Love lines in the novel. Love and passion in the relationship of the main characters - Bazarov and Odintsova. Female and male images in the novel. Conditions for harmonious relationships between heroes of both sexes.

presentation, added 01/15/2010

Reading as the most important element of culture and life, its reflection in literary works and the introduction of a “reading hero”. Literary preferences in the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". Reading circle of Pushkin's heroes. The role of the book in the novel "Eugene Onegin".

course work, added 07/12/2011

Duel in Russian literature. A duel is an act of aggression. History of dueling and dueling code. Duels at A.S. Pushkin in "The Captain's Daughter", "Eugene Onegin". The duel in the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time". Duel in the work of I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".

scientific work, added 02/25/2009

Love in the lives of heroes of literature of the 19th century. Analysis and characteristics of works based on the problem of love: I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" and A.N. Ostrovsky "Thunderstorm". Characteristics of female images in Ostrovsky’s work: old woman Kabanova and Katerina.

presentation, added 02/28/2012

The confrontation of generations and opinions in Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons", images of the work and their real prototypes. A portrait description of the main characters of the novel: Bazarov, Pavel Petrovich, Arkady, Sitnikov, Fenechka, a reflection of the author’s attitude in it.

abstract, added 05/26/2009

The idea and the beginning of the work of I.S. Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons". The personality of a young provincial doctor as the basis of the main figure of the novel - Bazarov. Finishing work on the work in my beloved Spassky. The novel "Fathers and Sons" is dedicated to V. Belinsky.

presentation, added 12/20/2010

The life and work of the Russian writer Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev. Oxford University Doctor's Robe. Passionate love for hunting. Westernism - the novel "On the Eve". The writer’s personal life: love for Pauline Viardot. Poems in prose, novel "Fathers and Sons".

presentation, added 11/04/2014

Biography of I.S. Turgenev. The novel "Rudin" is a dispute about the attitude of the noble intelligentsia towards the people. The main idea of "The Nobles' Nest". Revolutionary sentiments of Turgenev - the novel “On the Eve”. "Fathers and Sons" - a polemic about the novel. The significance of Turgenev's creativity.

abstract, added 06/13/2009

"Berlin period" I.S. Turgenev. The theme of Germany and the Germans in the works of Turgenev. Spatial organization of the stories "Asya" and "Spring Waters". Topos of a provincial town in the story "Asya". Topos of the tavern. Chronotope of the road: real-geographical topoi.

course work, added 05/25/2015

Analysis of the historical fact of the emergence of a new public figure - a revolutionary democrat, his comparison with the literary hero Turgenev. Bazarov's place in the democratic movement and private life. Compositional and plot structure of the novel "Fathers and Sons".

“Russian man at rendez-vous” refers to journalism and has the subtitle “Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya”. At the same time, in the article Chernyshevsky gives a broader picture associated with contemporary Russian society, namely, with the image of the “positive hero” of stories and novels, who in a number of situations displays unexpected negative character traits (indecisiveness, cowardice). First of all, these traits manifest themselves in love and personal relationships.

The title of the article is directly related to the reason for its writing. Food for thought was the ambiguous situation in the story “Asya”, when the girl showed determination and herself made an appointment with the hero (“rendez-vous”).

In the very first lines - impressions of the date scene in the story “Asya”, when the main character (perceived by the reader of the story as “positive” and even “ideal”) says to the girl who came on a date with him: “You are to blame for me, you have confused me I'm in trouble and I have to end my relationship with you." "What it is?" - Chernyshevsky exclaims. - “What is she to blame for? Was it because she considered him a decent person? Compromised his reputation by going on a date with him? This man is worse than a notorious scoundrel.”

Next, the author analyzes the love story of a number of Turgenev’s works (“Faust”, “Rudin”) in order to understand whether the author was mistaken in his hero or not (the story “Asya”), and comes to the conclusion that in Turgenev’s works the main character is personifying the “ideal side”, in love affairs he behaves like a “pathetic scoundrel.” “In Faust, the hero tries to cheer himself up by the fact that neither he nor Vera have serious feelings for each other. He behaves in such a way that Vera herself must tell him that she loves him. In “Rudin” the matter ends with the offended girl turning away from him (Rudin), almost ashamed of her love for the coward.”

Chernyshevsky asks the question: “Perhaps this pitiful trait in the character of the heroes is a feature of Mr. Turgenev’s stories?” - And he himself answers: “But remember any good, true to life story of any of our current poets. If there is an ideal side to the story, rest assured that the representative of this ideal side acts exactly the same as the people of Mr. Turgenev.” In order to argue his point of view, the author, as an example, analyzes the behavior of the protagonist of Nekrasov’s poem “Sasha”: “I explained to Sasha that “you should not weaken in soul,” because “the sun of truth will rise above the earth” and that you need to act to realize your aspirations, and then, when Sasha gets down to business, he says that all this is in vain and will lead nowhere, that he was “talking empty talk.” In the same way, he prefers retreat to any decisive step.” Returning to the analysis of the story “Asya,” Chernyshevsky concludes: “These are our best people.”

Then the author unexpectedly declares that the hero should not be condemned, and begins to talk about himself and his worldview: “I have become satisfied with everything that I see around me, I am not angry at anything, I am not upset by anything (except for failures in business, personally beneficial for me), I do not condemn anything or anyone in the world (except for people who violate my personal benefits), I do not wish for anything (except for my own benefit) - in a word, I will tell you how I turned from a bilious melancholic into a person who was so practical and well-intentioned that I wouldn’t even be surprised if I receive a reward for my good intentions.” Further, Chernyshevsky resorts to a detailed contrast between “trouble” and “guilt”: “A robber stabbed a man to rob him, and finds it beneficial for himself - this is guilt. A careless hunter accidentally wounded a man and is the first to suffer from the misfortune he caused - this is not guilt, but simply misfortune.” What happens to the hero of the story “Asya” is a disaster. He does not receive benefit and pleasure from the situation when a girl in love with him strives to be with him, and he backs down: “The poor young man does not understand at all the business in which he is taking part. The matter is clear, but he is possessed by such stupidity that the most obvious facts are unable to reason with him.” Next, the author gives a number of examples from the text when Asya allegorically, but very clearly let “our Romeo” understand what she was really experiencing - but he did not understand. “Why do we analyze our hero so harshly? Why is he worse than others? Why is he worse than all of us?

At the end of the article, Chernyshevsky gives a detailed allegory when, in a situation of a long-lasting and exhausting legal battle, the hearing is postponed for a day. “What should I do now, let each of you say: would it be smart for me to rush to my enemy to conclude a peace deal? Or would it be smart to lie on my couch for the only day I have left? Or would it be smart to attack with rude curses a judge who was favorable to me, whose friendly warning gave me the opportunity to end my litigation with honor and benefit for myself?

The article ends with a quote from the Gospel: “Try to reconcile with your adversary before you reach the court with him, otherwise your adversary will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the executor of sentences, and you will be thrown into prison and will not come out of it until you will pay for everything to the last detail” (Matt., chapter V, verses 25 and 26).

N. G. Chernyshevsky

Russian man at rendez-vous
Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev's story "Asya"

Library of Russian classics N. G. Chernyshevsky. Collected works in five volumes. Volume 3. Literary criticism Library "Ogonyok". M., “Pravda”, 1974 “Stories in a businesslike, incriminating manner leave a very difficult impression on the reader; therefore, while recognizing their usefulness and nobility, I am not entirely satisfied that our literature has taken exclusively such a gloomy direction.” This is what quite a lot of people say, apparently not stupid, or, better to say, they said so until the peasant question became the only subject of all thoughts, all conversations. Whether their words are fair or unfair, I don’t know; but I happened to be under the influence of such thoughts when I began to read perhaps the only good new story, from which, from the first pages, one could already expect a completely different content, a different pathos, than from business stories. There is no trickery with violence and bribery, no dirty swindlers, no official villains explaining in elegant language that they are the benefactors of society, no philistines, peasants and little officials tormented by all these terrible and disgusting people. The action is abroad, far from all the bad surroundings of our home life. All the characters in the story are among the best among us, very educated, extremely humane: imbued with the noblest way of thinking. The story has a purely poetic, ideal direction, not touching on any of the so-called black sides of life. Here, I thought, my soul will rest and be refreshed. And indeed, she was refreshed by these poetic ideals until the story reached the decisive moment. But the last pages of the story are not similar to the first, and after reading the story, the impression left from it is even more bleak than from the stories about disgusting bribe takers with their cynical robbery. They do bad things, but they are recognized by each of us as bad people; It is not from them that we expect improvements in our lives. There are, we think, forces in society that will put a barrier to their harmful influence, that will change the nature of our life with their nobility. This illusion is most bitterly rejected in the story, which awakens the brightest expectations with its first half. Here is a man whose heart is open to all high feelings, whose honesty is unshakable, whose thought has absorbed everything for which our century is called the century of noble aspirations. So what is this man doing? He makes a scene that would put the last bribe-taker to shame. He feels the strongest and purest sympathy for the girl who loves him; he cannot live an hour without seeing this girl; all day and all night his thoughts draw him a beautiful image of her; the time of love has come for him, you think, when the heart is drowned in bliss. We see Romeo, we see Juliet, whose happiness nothing interferes with, and the moment is approaching when their fate will be decided forever - for this Romeo must only say: “I love you, do you love me?” And Juliet will whisper: “Yes...” And what does our Romeo (as we will call the hero of the story, whose last name was not told to us by the author of the story) do when he goes on a date with Juliet? With trembling love, Juliet awaits her Romeo; she must learn from him that he loves her - this word was not uttered between them, it will now be uttered by him, they will be united forever; bliss awaits them, such a high and pure bliss, the enthusiasm of which makes the solemn moment of decision barely bearable for the earthly organism. People died from less joy. She sits like a frightened bird, covering her face from the radiance of the sun of love appearing before her; she is breathing quickly, trembling all over; she lowers her eyes even more tremblingly when he enters and calls her name; she wants to look at him and cannot; he takes her hand - this hand is cold, lies as if dead in his hand; she wants to smile; but her pale lips cannot smile. She wants to talk to him, and her voice breaks. They both were silent for a long time - and, as he himself says, his heart melted, and now Romeo says to his Juliet... and what does he say to her? “You are to blame for me,” he tells her; “you got me into trouble, I am dissatisfied with you, you are compromising me, and I must end my relationship with you; it is very unpleasant for me to part with you, but if you please, get out of here.” away." What it is? How she guilty? Is it what I thought his a decent person? Compromised his reputation by going on a date with him? This is amazing! Every feature in her pale face says that she is waiting for her fate to be decided by his word, that she has given her whole soul to him irrevocably and now only expects him to say that he accepts her soul, her life, and he reprimands her for that she is compromising him! What kind of ridiculous cruelty is this? What kind of low rudeness is this? And this man, who acts so vilely, has been presented as noble until now! He deceived us, deceived the author. Yes, the poet made a very serious mistake in imagining that he was telling us about a decent person. This man is worse than a notorious scoundrel. Such was the impression made on many by the completely unexpected turn in the relationship of our Romeo to his Juliet. We have heard from many that the whole story is spoiled by this outrageous scene, that the character of the main person is not sustained, that if this person is what he appears to be in the first half of the story, then he could not have acted with such vulgar rudeness, and if he could have acted like that, then From the very beginning he should have appeared to us as a completely crappy person. It would be very comforting to think that the author was really mistaken, but the sad dignity of his story lies in the fact that the character of the hero is true to our society. Perhaps, if this character were such as people would like to see him, dissatisfied with his rudeness on a date, if he were not afraid to give himself to the love that took possession of him, the story would have won in an ideally poetic sense. The enthusiasm of the first date scene would be followed by several other highly poetic minutes, the quiet charm of the first half of the story would rise to pathetic charm in the second half, and instead of the first act from Romeo and Juliet with an ending in the style of Pechorin, we would have something really similar to Romeo and Juliet, or at least one of Georges Sand's novels. Anyone looking for a poetically complete impression in a story should really condemn the author, who, having lured him with sublimely sweet expectations, suddenly showed him some vulgar, absurd vanity of petty, timid egoism in a man who started out like Max Piccolomini and ended up like some Zakhar Sidorich, playing penny preference. But was the author really wrong about his hero? If he made a mistake, this is not the first time he makes this mistake. No matter how many stories he had that led to a similar situation, each time his heroes emerged from these situations in no other way than being completely embarrassed in front of us. In Faust, the hero tries to cheer himself up by the fact that neither he nor Vera have serious feelings for each other; sitting with her, dreaming about her is his business, but in terms of determination, even in words, he behaves in such a way that Vera herself must tell him that she loves him; For several minutes the conversation had been going on in such a way that he should definitely have said this, but he, you see, did not guess and did not dare to tell her this; and when the woman who must accept the explanation is finally forced to make the explanation herself, he, you see, “froze,” but felt that “a wave of bliss was running through his heart,” only, however, “from time to time,” but actually speaking, he “completely lost his head” - it’s only a pity that he didn’t faint, and even that would have happened if he hadn’t come across a tree to lean against. As soon as the man had time to recover, the woman he loves, who expressed her love to him, comes up to him and asks what he intends to do now? He... he was "embarrassed." It is not surprising that after such behavior of a loved one (otherwise, the image of this gentleman’s actions cannot be called “behavior”), the poor woman developed a nervous fever; It’s even more natural that he then began to cry about his fate. It's in Faust; almost the same in "Rudin". Rudin at first behaves somewhat more decently for a man than the previous heroes: he is so decisive that he himself tells Natalya about his love (although he does not speak of his own free will, but because he is forced to this conversation); he himself asks her for a date. But when Natalya on this date tells him that she will marry him, with or without the consent of her mother, it doesn’t matter, as long as he loves her, when he says the words: “Know, I will be yours,” Rudin only finds an exclamation in response : "Oh my God!" - an exclamation more embarrassed than enthusiastic - and then he acts so well, that is, to such an extent he is cowardly and lethargic, that Natalya is forced to invite him on a date herself to decide what to do. Having received the note, “he saw that the denouement was approaching, and was secretly troubled in spirit.” Natalya says that her mother told her that she would rather agree to see her daughter dead than to see Rudin’s wife, and again asks Rudin what he intends to do now. Rudin answers as before, “My God, my God,” and adds even more naively: “So soon! What do I intend to do? My head is spinning, I can’t figure out anything.” But then he realizes that he should “submit.” Called a coward, he begins to reproach Natalya, then lectures her about his honesty, and to the remark that this is not what she should hear from him now, he replies that he did not expect such decisiveness. The matter ends with the offended girl turning away from him, almost ashamed of her love for the coward. But perhaps this pitiful trait in the characters’ characters is a feature of Mr. Turgenev’s stories? Perhaps it is the nature of his talent that inclines him to portray such faces? Not at all; the nature of the talent, it seems to us, means nothing here. Remember any good story true to life by any of our current poets, and if there is an ideal side to the story, be sure that the representative of this ideal side acts exactly the same as the people of Mr. Turgenev. For example, the nature of Mr. Nekrasov’s talent is not at all the same as Mr. Turgenev’s; You can find any shortcomings in him, but no one will say that Mr. Nekrasov’s talent lacks energy and firmness. What does the hero do in his poem "Sasha"? He explained to Sasha that, he says, “you should not weaken in soul,” because “the sun of righteousness will rise above the earth,” and that you need to act to fulfill your aspirations, and then, when Sasha gets down to business, he says that all this is in vain and It won’t lead to anything that he was “talking empty talk.” Let us remember how Beltov acts: in the same way he prefers retreat to any decisive step. There could be a lot of similar examples. Everywhere, whatever the character of the poet, whatever his personal concepts about the actions of his hero, the hero acts in the same way as all other decent people, similar to him, bred from other poets: while there is no talk of business, but you just need to occupy idle time, to fill an idle head or an idle heart with conversations and dreams, the hero is very lively; As the matter approaches to directly and accurately express their feelings and desires, most of the heroes begin to hesitate and feel clumsy in their language. A few, the bravest, somehow still manage to gather all their strength and tongue-tiedly express something that gives a vague idea of their thoughts; but if anyone decides to grab hold of their desires, to say: “You want such and such; we are very glad; start acting, and we will support you,” - at such a remark, one half of the bravest heroes faints, others begin to reproach you very rudely for putting them in an awkward position, they begin to say that they did not expect such proposals from you, that they completely lose their heads, cannot figure anything out, because “how is it possible so soon,” and “besides, they are honest people,” and not only honest, but very meek and do not want to expose you to trouble, and that in general, is it really possible to bother about everything that is talked about out of nothing to do, and that the best thing is - - not to take on anything, because everything is connected with troubles and inconveniences, and nothing good can happen yet, because, as already said, they “didn’t expect or expect anything” and so on. These are our “best people” - they are all like our Romeo. How much trouble for Asya is that Mr. N. did not know what to do with her, and was decidedly angry when courageous determination was required of him; We don’t know how much trouble there is in this for Asya. The first thought that comes to her is that this will cause her very little trouble; on the contrary, and thank God that the crappy impotence of character in our Romeo pushed the girl away from him even when it was not too late. Asya will be sad for several weeks, several months and will forget everything and may surrender to a new feeling, the object of which will be more worthy of her. Yes, but that’s the trouble, she’s unlikely to meet a more worthy person; This is the sad comedy of our Romeo’s relationship with Asya, that our Romeo is truly one of the best people in our society, that there are almost no people better than him in our country. Only then will Asya be satisfied with her relationship with people, when, like others, she begins to limit herself to beautiful reasoning, until the opportunity presents itself to start making speeches, and when the opportunity presents itself, she will bite her tongue and fold her hands, as everyone else does. Only then will they be satisfied with it; and now, first of all, of course, everyone will say that this girl is very sweet, with a noble soul, with amazing strength of character, in general a girl whom you cannot help but love, whom you cannot help but revere; but all this will be said only as long as Asya’s character is expressed in words alone, as long as it is only assumed that she is capable of a noble and decisive act; and as soon as she takes a step that in any way justifies the expectations inspired by her character, hundreds of voices will immediately shout: “For mercy, how is this possible, this is madness! To assign a rendez-vous to a young man! After all, she is ruining herself, ruining herself is completely useless! "Nothing can come of this, absolutely nothing except that she will lose her reputation. Is it possible to risk oneself so insanely?" “Risk herself? That would be nothing,” others add. “Let her do with herself what she wants, but why expose others to trouble? What position did she put this poor young man in? Did he really think that she would want lead him so far? What should he do now, given her recklessness? If he follows her, he will destroy himself; if he refuses, he will be called a coward and will despise himself. I do not know whether it is noble to put people in such unpleasant situations, who, it seems, did not give any special reason for such incongruous actions. No, this is not entirely noble. And the poor brother? What is his role? What bitter pill did his sister give him? He won't be able to digest this pill for the rest of his life. Nothing to say, my dear sister borrowed it! I don’t argue, all this is very good in words - noble aspirations, self-sacrifice, and God knows what wonderful things, but I will say one thing: I would not want to be Asya’s brother. I will say more: if I were in her brother’s place, I would lock her in her room for six months. For her own good, she needs to be locked up. She, you see, deigns to be carried away by high feelings; but what is it like to dispense to others what she deigned to brew? No, I will not call her action, I will not call her character noble, because I do not call those noble who frivolously and impudently harm others." Thus the general cry will be explained by the reasoning of sensible people. We are partly ashamed to admit, but still we have to admit, that these reasoning seem to us to be solid. In fact, Asya harms not only herself, but also everyone who had the misfortune of being related or by chance to be close to her; and those who, for their own pleasure, harm all their loved ones, we cannot help but condemn ". By condemning Asya, we justify our Romeo. In fact, what is he to blame for? Did he give her a reason to act recklessly? Did he incite her to an act that could not be approved? Didn't he have the right to tell her that in vain she confused him in unpleasant relationship? You are indignant at the fact that his words are harsh, you call them rude. But the truth is always harsh, and who will condemn me if even a rude word escapes me, when I, innocent of anything, are entangled in an unpleasant matter; and are they pestering me to make me rejoice at the misfortune into which I was dragged? I know why you so unfairly admired Asya’s ignoble act and condemned our Romeo. I know this because I myself for a moment succumbed to the unfounded impression that remained in you. You have read about how people in other countries acted and acted. But realize that these are other countries. You never know what is being done in the world in other places, but what is very convenient in a certain situation is not always and not everywhere possible. In England, for example, the word “you” does not exist in the colloquial language: a manufacturer to his worker, a landowner to the digger he hires, a master to his footman always says “you” and, wherever it happens, they insert sir in a conversation with them, that is, it doesn’t matter what French monsieur, but in Russian there is no such word, but it comes out as politeness in the same way as if a master said to his peasant: “You, Sidor Karpych, do me a favor, come to me for a cup of tea, and then straighten the paths in my garden ". Will you judge me if I speak to Sidor without such subtleties? After all, I would be ridiculous if I adopted the language of an Englishman. In general, as soon as you begin to condemn what you don’t like, you become an ideologist, that is, the funniest and, to tell you the truth, the most dangerous person in the world, you lose the solid support of practical reality from under your feet. Beware of this, try to become a practical person in your opinions and for the first time try to reconcile at least with our Romeo, by the way we are already talking about him. I am ready to tell you the path by which I reached this result, not only regarding the scene with Asya, but also regarding everything in the world, that is, I became happy with everything that I see around me, I am not angry at anything, I am not upset by anything (except for failures in matters that are personally beneficial to me), I do not condemn anything or anyone in the world (except for people who violate my personal benefits), I do not wish for anything (except for my own benefit) - in a word, I will tell you how I turned from a bilious melancholic a man so practical and well-intentioned that I wouldn’t even be surprised if I received a reward for my good intentions. K began with the remark that one should not blame people for anything and for nothing, because, as far as I have seen, the most intelligent person has his own share of limitations, sufficient to ensure that in his way of thinking he cannot stray far from society in which he was brought up and lives, and the most energetic person has his own dose of apathy, sufficient so that in his actions he does not stray too far from routine and, as they say, floats with the flow of the river, where the water carries. In the middle circle, it is customary to paint eggs for Easter; at Shrovetide there are pancakes, and everyone does it, although some people don’t eat colored eggs at all, and almost everyone complains about the weight of pancakes. This is true not just in trifles, but in everything. It is accepted, for example, that boys should be kept more freely than girls, and every father, every mother, no matter how convinced they are of the unreasonableness of such a distinction, raises their children according to this rule. It is accepted that wealth is a good thing, and everyone is happy if, instead of ten thousand rubles a year, thanks to the happy turn of affairs, he begins to receive twenty thousand, although, rationally speaking, every intelligent person knows that those things that, being unavailable at first income that become available in the second cannot bring any significant pleasure. For example, if with ten thousand income you can make a ball of 500 rubles, then with twenty you can make a ball of 1,000 rubles: the latter will be somewhat better than the first, but still there will not be any special splendor in it, it will be called nothing more than a fairly decent ball , and the first one will be a decent ball. Thus, even the feeling of vanity with an income of 20 thousand is satisfied with very little more than with 10 thousand; As for pleasures that can be called positive, the difference in them is completely unnoticeable. Personally, a person with 10 thousand income has exactly the same table, exactly the same wine and a chair in the same row at the opera as a person with twenty thousand. The first is called a fairly rich man, and the second is also not considered an extremely rich man - there is no significant difference in their position; and yet, according to the routine accepted in society, everyone will rejoice when their income increases from 10 to 20 thousand, although in fact they will not notice almost any increase in their pleasures. People are generally terrible routineists: you only have to look deeper into their thoughts to discover this. Some gentleman will puzzle you extremely at first with the independence of his way of thinking from the society to which he belongs; he will seem to you, for example, a cosmopolitan, a man without class prejudices, etc., and he, like his acquaintances, imagines himself to be so from a pure heart. But observe more precisely a cosmopolitan, and he will turn out to be a Frenchman or a Russian with all the peculiarities of concepts and habits belonging to the nation to which he is classified according to his passport, he will turn out to be a landowner or official, a merchant or a professor with all the shades of the way of thinking belonging to his class. I am sure that the large number of people who have the habit of being angry with each other, blaming each other, depends solely on the fact that too few are engaged in observations of this kind; but just try to start peering into people in order to check whether this or that person, who at first seems different from others, really differs in anything important from other people of the same position, just try to engage in such observations, and this analysis will captivate you so much , will so interest your mind, will constantly deliver such calming impressions to your spirit that you will never be left behind and will very soon come to the conclusion: “Every person is like all people, in everyone there is exactly the same thing as in others." And the farther, the harder You you will become convinced of this axiom. Differences seem important only because they lie on the surface and are striking, but beneath the visible, apparent difference, perfect identity is hidden. And why on earth would a person really be a contradiction to all the laws of nature? After all, in nature, cedar and hyssop feed and bloom, elephants and mice move and eat, rejoice and get angry according to the same laws; under the external difference of forms lies the internal identity of the organism of a monkey and a whale, an eagle and a chicken; one has only to delve into the matter even more carefully, and we will see that not only different creatures of the same class, but also different classes of creatures are constructed and live according to the same principles, that the organisms of a mammal, a bird and a fish are the same, that a worm breathes like a mammal, although he has neither nostrils, nor a windpipe, nor lungs. Not only would the analogy with other beings be violated by non-recognition of the identity of the basic rules and springs in the moral life of each person, but the analogy with his physical life would also be violated. Of two healthy people of the same age in the same mood, one’s pulse beats, of course, somewhat stronger and more often than the other’s; but is this difference great? It is so insignificant that science does not even pay attention to it. It's different when you compare people of different years or in different circumstances; a child's pulse beats twice as fast as an old man's, a sick person's pulse beats much more often or less frequently than a healthy person's, someone who drank a glass of champagne beats more often than someone who drank a glass of water. But even here it is clear to everyone that the difference is not in the structure of the organism, but in the circumstances under which the organism is observed. And the old man, when he was a child, had a pulse as fast as the child with whom you compare him; and a healthy person’s pulse would weaken, like a sick person’s, if he fell ill with the same disease; and Peter, if he drank a glass of champagne, his pulse would increase in the same way as Ivan’s. You have almost reached the boundaries of human wisdom when you are established in this simple truth that every person is the same person as all others. Not to mention the gratifying consequences of this conviction for your everyday happiness; you will stop being angry and upset, stop being indignant and blaming, you will meekly look at what you were previously ready to scold and fight for; in fact, how would you become angry or complain about a person for such an act, which would be done by everyone in his place? An undisturbed, gentle silence settles in your soul, sweeter than which can only be the Brahminical contemplation of the tip of the nose, with the quiet, incessant repetition of the words “om-mani-padmekhum.” I’m not even talking about this invaluable spiritual and practical benefit, I’m not even talking about how many monetary benefits wise condescension towards people will bring you: you will completely cordially welcome a scoundrel whom you would have driven away from yourself before; and this scoundrel, perhaps, is a man of importance in society, and a good relationship with him will improve your own affairs. I’m not even saying that you yourself will then be less embarrassed by false doubts of conscientiousness in taking advantage of those benefits that will come your way: why should you be embarrassed by excessive ticklishness if you are convinced that everyone would act in your place in exactly the same way? , just like you? I do not expose all these benefits, with the goal of pointing out only the purely scientific, theoretical importance of the belief in the sameness of human nature in all people. If all people are essentially the same, then where does the difference in their actions come from? Striving to achieve the main truth, we have already found in passing the conclusion from it that serves as the answer to this question. It is now clear to us that everything depends on social habits and on circumstances, that is, in the final result everything depends exclusively on circumstances, because social habits, in turn, also arose from circumstances. You blame a person - first look at whether he is to blame for what you blame him for, or whether the circumstances and habits of society are to blame, look carefully, perhaps it is not his fault at all, but only his misfortune. When talking about others, we are too inclined to consider every misfortune as guilt - this is the true misfortune for practical life, because guilt and misfortune are completely different things and require treatment, one not at all the same as the other. Guilt causes censure or even punishment against the person. Trouble requires assistance to a person through the elimination of circumstances stronger than his will. I knew a tailor who poked his apprentices in the teeth with a hot iron. Perhaps he can be called guilty, and he can be punished; but not every tailor pokes a hot iron into his teeth; examples of such fury are very rare. But almost every craftsman happens to get into a fight after drinking on a holiday - this is not a fault, but simply a misfortune. What is needed here is not punishment of an individual, but a change in living conditions for the whole class. The harmful confusion of guilt and misfortune is all the sadder because it is very easy to distinguish between these two things; We have already seen one sign of difference: wine is a rarity, it is an exception to the rule; trouble is an epidemic. Deliberate arson is a fault; but out of millions of people there is one who decides to do this. There is another sign needed to complement the first. Trouble falls on the very person who fulfills the condition leading to trouble; guilt falls on others, benefiting the guilty. This last sign is extremely accurate. A robber kills a man in order to rob him, and finds it beneficial for himself - this is guilt. A careless hunter accidentally wounded a man and is the first to suffer from the misfortune he caused - this is not guilt, but simply misfortune. The sign is true, but if you accept it with some insight, with a careful analysis of the facts, it turns out that there is almost never guilt in the world, but only misfortune. Now we have mentioned the robber. Is life sweet for him? If it weren’t for special, very difficult circumstances for him, would he have taken up his craft? Where will you find a person for whom it would be more pleasant to hide in dens in cold and bad weather and wander through the deserts, often endure hunger and constantly tremble for his back, awaiting the lash - for whom this would be more pleasant than comfortably smoking a sitar in quiet armchairs or play jumble at the English Club, as decent people do? It would also be much more pleasant for our Romeo to enjoy the mutual pleasures of happy love than to remain a fool and cruelly scold himself for his vulgar rudeness with Asya. From the fact that the cruel trouble to which Asya is exposed brings him not benefit or pleasure, but shame in front of himself, that is, the most painful of all moral griefs, we see that he is not in guilt, but in trouble. The vulgarity he did would have been done by very many other so-called decent people or the best people of our society; therefore, this is nothing more than a symptom of an epidemic disease that has taken root in our society. A symptom of a disease is not the disease itself. And if the matter were only that some, or, better to say, almost all of the “best” people offend a girl when she has more nobility or less experience than them, this matter, we admit, would interest us little. God be with them, with erotic questions - the reader of our time, busy with questions about administrative and judicial improvements, financial reforms, and the emancipation of the peasants, has no time for them. But the scene made by our Romeo Ace, as we noticed, is only a symptom of a disease that in exactly the same vulgar way spoils all our affairs, and only we need to take a closer look at why our Romeo got into trouble, we will see what we all like on him, to expect from himself and to expect for himself and in all other matters. Let's start with the fact that the poor young man does not understand at all the business in which he is taking part. The point is clear, but he is obsessed with such stupidity that he is unable to reason with the most obvious facts. We absolutely do not know what to compare such blind stupidity to. The girl, incapable of any pretense, not knowing any trick, tells him: “I myself don’t know what’s happening to me. Sometimes I want to cry, but I laugh. You shouldn’t judge me... by what I do.” ". Oh, by the way, what kind of fairy tale is this about Lorelei? After all, this is her rock that can be seen? They say that she was the first to drown everyone, and when she fell in love, she threw herself into the water. I like this fairy tale." It seems clear what feeling awoke in her. Two minutes later, with excitement reflected even by the pallor on her face, she asks if he liked that lady whom, somehow jokingly, was mentioned in a conversation many days ago; then asks what he likes in a woman; when he notices how well the sky shines, she says: “Yes, good! If you and I were birds, how we would soar, how we would fly!.. We would drown in this blue... but we are not birds ".-- “But wings can grow on us,” I objected.-- “How so?” - “As you wait, you will find out. There are feelings that lift us from the ground. Don’t worry, you will have wings.” - “Did you have them?” - “How can I tell you?.., it seems that I haven’t flown yet.” The next day, when he came in, Asya blushed; I wanted to run away from the room; she was sad and finally, remembering yesterday’s conversation, told him: “Remember, yesterday you talked about wings? My wings have grown.” These words were so clear that even the slow-witted Romeo, returning home, could not help but come to the thought: does she really love me? I fell asleep with this thought and, waking up the next morning, asked myself: “Does she really love me?” Indeed, it was difficult not to understand this, and yet he did not understand. Did he at least understand what was going on in his own heart? And here the signs were no less clear. After the very first two meetings with Asya, he feels jealous at the sight of her tender treatment of her brother and, out of jealousy, does not want to believe that Gagin is really her brother. The jealousy in him is so strong that he cannot see Asya, but he could not resist seeing her, so he, like an 18-year-old boy, runs away from the village in which she lives, wanders around the surrounding fields for several days . Having finally become convinced that Asya is really only Gagin’s sister, he is happy as a child, and, returning from them, he even feels that “tears are boiling in his eyes with delight,” and at the same time he feels that this delight is all concentrated on thoughts about Asa, and finally comes to the point that he can’t think about anything but her. It seems that a person who has loved several times should understand what feeling is expressed in himself by these signs. It seems that a person who knew women well could understand what was going on in Asya’s heart. But when she writes to him that she loves him, this note completely amazes him: he, you see, did not foresee this in any way. Wonderful; but be that as it may, whether he foresaw or did not foresee that Asya loves him, it doesn’t matter: now he knows positively: Asya loves him, he now sees it; Well, what does he feel for Asya? He really doesn’t know how to answer this question. Poor thing! in his thirties, due to his youth, he would need to have an uncle who would tell him when he should wipe his nose, when he should go to bed and how many cups of tea he should have. When you see such a ridiculous inability to understand things, you may feel like you are either a child or an idiot. Neither one nor the other. Our Romeo is a very smart man, who, as we noticed, is nearly thirty years old, has experienced a lot in life, and has a rich stock of observations about himself and others. Where does his incredible slow-wittedness come from? Two circumstances are to blame for it, of which, however, one stems from the other, so it all comes down to one thing. He was not used to understanding anything great and living, because his life was too petty and soulless, all the relationships and affairs to which he was accustomed were petty and soulless. This is the first. Second: he is timid, he powerlessly retreats from everything that requires broad determination and noble risk, again because life has accustomed him only to pale pettiness in everything. He looks like a man who all his life played jumble for half a penny in silver; put this skilled player in a game in which the winnings or losses are not hryvnias, but thousands of rubles, and you will see that he will be completely embarrassed, that all his experience will be lost, all his art will be confused - he will make the most ridiculous moves, perhaps , will not be able to hold cards in his hands. He looks like a sailor who all his life made voyages from Kronstadt to St. Petersburg and very deftly knew how to navigate his small steamer according to the indications of milestones between countless shoals in semi-fresh water; what if suddenly this experienced swimmer sees himself in the ocean after a glass of water? My God! Why do we analyze our hero so harshly? Why is he worse than others? Why is he worse than all of us? When we enter society, we see around us people in uniform and non-uniform frock coats or tailcoats; these people are five and a half or six, and others even more, feet tall; they grow or shave hair on their cheeks, upper lip and beard; and we imagine that we see men in front of us, this is a complete delusion, an optical illusion, a hallucination - nothing more. Without acquiring the habit of original participation in civic affairs, without acquiring the feelings of a citizen, a male child, growing up, becomes a male being of middle age, and then of old age, but he does not become a man, or at least does not become a man of noble character. It is better for a person not to develop than to develop without the influence of thoughts about public affairs, without the influence of the feelings awakened by participation in them. If from the circle of my observations, from the sphere of actions in which I move, ideas and motives that have a common benefit are excluded, that is, civic motives are excluded, what remains for me to observe? What remains for me to participate in? What remains is the busy confusion of individuals with their narrow personal concerns about their pockets, their bellies, or their amusements. If I begin to observe people in the form in which they appear to me when I distance myself from participation in civic activities, what concept of people and life will form in me? Once upon a time we loved Hoffmann, and his story was once translated about how, by a strange incident, the eyes of Mr. Perigrinus Thyss received the power of a microscope, and about what the results of this quality of his eyes were for his concepts about people. Beauty, nobility, virtue, love, friendship, everything beautiful and great disappeared from the world for him. Whoever he looks at, every man seems to him to be a vile coward or an insidious intriguer, every woman - a coquette, all people - liars and selfish, petty and base to the last degree. This terrible story could only have been created in the head of a person who had seen enough of what is called in Germany Kleinstadterei (The Outback (German). ), who had seen enough of the life of people deprived of any participation in public affairs, limited to a closely measured circle of their private interests, who had lost all thought about anything higher than penny preference (which, however, was not yet known in the time of Hoffmann). Remember what a conversation becomes in any society, how soon the conversation ceases to be about public affairs? No matter how intelligent and noble the interlocutors are, if they do not talk about matters of public interest, they begin to gossip or talk idle talk; malicious vulgarity or dissolute vulgarity, in both cases senseless vulgarity - this is the character inevitably adopted by a conversation moving away from public interests. The nature of the conversation can be used to judge who is talking. If even people with the highest development of their concepts fall into empty and dirty vulgarity when their thoughts deviate from public interests, then it is easy to imagine what a society must be like if it lives in complete alienation from these interests. Imagine a person who was brought up living in such a society: what will be the conclusions from his experiences? What are the results of his observations of people? He understands everything vulgar and petty perfectly, but besides this, he understands nothing, because he has not seen or experienced anything. He could read God knows what wonderful things in books, he can find pleasure in thinking about these wonderful things; perhaps he even believes that they exist or should exist on earth, and not in books alone. But how do you want him to understand and guess them when they suddenly meet his unprepared gaze, experienced only in classifying nonsense and vulgarity? How do you want me, who was served wine under the name of champagne, which has never seen the vineyards of Champagne, but, however, a very good sparkling wine, how do you want me, when I am suddenly served truly champagne wine, to be able to say for sure: yes , is this really not a fake anymore? If I say this, I will be phat. My taste only feels that this wine is good, but have I drunk enough good fake wine? How do I know that this time they brought me a real wine? No, no, I am an expert in fakes, I can distinguish good from bad; but I cannot evaluate genuine wine. We would be happy, we would be noble, if only the unprepared look, the inexperience of thought prevented us from guessing and appreciating the high and great when it comes our way in life. But no, and our will is involved in this gross misunderstanding. It’s not just the concepts that have narrowed in me because of the vulgar narrow-mindedness in whose vanity I live; this character passed into my will: what is the breadth of vision, such is the breadth of decisions; and, besides, it is impossible not to get used to finally doing as everyone else does. The contagiousness of laughter and the contagiousness of yawning are not exceptional cases in social physiology; the same contagiousness belongs to all phenomena found among the masses. There is someone's fable about how some healthy person ended up in the kingdom of the lame and crooked. The fable says that everyone attacked him, why do he have both eyes and both legs intact; the fable lied because it didn’t finish All: the newcomer was attacked only at first, and when he settled in the new place, he himself squinted one eye and began to limp; It already seemed to him that it was more convenient, or at least more decent, to look and walk this way, and soon he even forgot that, strictly speaking, he was not lame or crooked. If you are a hunter of sad effects, you can add that when our visitor finally needed to walk with a firm step and look vigilantly with both eyes, he could no longer do this: it turned out that the closed eye no longer opened, the crooked leg no longer straightened; from long coercion the nerves and muscles of the poor distorted joints had lost the power to act in the right way. Anyone who touches the resin will turn black - as a punishment for himself, if he touched it voluntarily, to his own misfortune, if not voluntarily. It is impossible for someone who lives in a tavern not to be saturated with the drunken smell, even if he himself has not drunk a single glass; It is impossible not to be imbued with the pettiness of will for someone who lives in a society that has no aspirations other than petty everyday calculations. Shyness involuntarily creeps into my heart from the thought that I may have to make a lofty decision, boldly take a brave step off the beaten path of daily exercise. That’s why you try to assure yourself that no, the need for nothing so extraordinary has not yet come, until the last fateful minute, you deliberately convince yourself that everything that seems to come out of habitual pettiness is nothing more than seduction. A child who is afraid of a beech closes his eyes and shouts as loudly as possible that there is no beech, that the beech is nonsense - by this, you see, he encourages himself. We are so smart that we try to convince ourselves that everything we are afraid of, we are afraid only because we have no strength for anything lofty - we try to convince ourselves that all this is nonsense, that they only scare us with it, like a child beech, but in essence there is nothing like that and never will be. What if it does? Well, then the same thing will happen to us as in Mr. Turgenev’s story with our Romeo. He also did not foresee anything and did not want to foresee anything; He also closed his eyes and backed away, but time passed - he had to bite his elbows, but he couldn’t get it. And how short was the time in which both his and Asya’s fate was decided - just a few minutes, but a whole life depended on them, and having missed them, nothing could be done to correct the mistake. As soon as he entered the room, barely had time to utter a few thoughtless, almost unconscious reckless words, and everything was already decided: the break was forever, and there was no return. We don’t regret Asa at all; It was hard for her to hear the harsh words of refusal, but it was probably for the best for her that it was a reckless person who drove her to the breaking point. If she had remained connected with him, for him, of course, it would have been great happiness; but we don’t think it would be good for her to live in close relations with such a gentleman. Anyone who sympathizes with Asya should rejoice at the difficult, outrageous scene. Asya's sympathizer is absolutely right: he chose the subject of his sympathies as a dependent creature, an insulted creature. But although with shame, we must admit that we take part in the fate of our hero. We do not have the honor of being his relatives; There was even dislike between our families, because his family despised everyone close to us. But we still cannot break away from the prejudices that have crammed into our heads from false books and lessons that educated and ruined our youth, we cannot break away from the petty concepts instilled in us by the surrounding society; It all seems to us (an empty dream, but still an irresistible dream for us) as if he has rendered some service to our society, as if he is a representative of our enlightenment, as if he is the best among us, as if without him we would be worse off. The thought is developing in us more and more strongly that this opinion about him is an empty dream, we feel that we will not be under its influence for long; that there are people better than him, precisely those whom he offends; that it would be better for us to live without him, but at the moment we are still not sufficiently accustomed to this idea, have not completely broken away from the dream on which we were brought up; therefore we still wish well to our hero and his brothers. Finding that in reality the decisive moment is approaching for them, which will determine their fate forever, we still do not want to say to ourselves: at the present time they are not able to understand their situation; are not able to act prudently and at the same time generously - only their children and grandchildren, brought up in other concepts and habits, will be able to act as honest and prudent citizens, and they themselves are now not suitable for the role that is given to them; we do not want to turn the words of the prophet to them: “They will see and will not see, they will hear and will not hear, because the sense in these people has become coarse, and their ears have become deaf and they have closed their eyes so as not to see,” no , we still want to believe them capable of understanding what is happening around them and above them, we want to think that they are able to follow the wise admonition of the voice that wanted to save them, and therefore we want to give them instructions on how to get rid of the troubles that are inevitable for people, those who do not know how to understand their situation in time and take advantage of the benefits that a fleeting hour represents. Against our wishes, our hope for the insight and energy of people weakens every day, whom we beg to understand the importance of present circumstances and act in accordance with common sense, but at least let them not say that they did not hear prudent advice, that it was not explained to them position. Among you, gentlemen (we will address these honorable people), there are quite a lot of literate people; they know how happiness was depicted in ancient mythology: it was represented as a woman with a long braid blown in front of her by the wind carrying this woman; It’s easy to catch her while she’s flying towards you, but miss one moment - she’ll fly by, and you’d run in vain to catch her: you can’t grab her if you’re left behind. A happy moment cannot be returned. You will not wait until the favorable combination of circumstances repeats itself, just as the conjunction of the heavenly bodies that coincides with the present hour will not repeat. Not to miss a favorable moment is the highest condition of everyday prudence. Happy circumstances exist for each of us, but not everyone knows how to use them, and this art is almost the only difference between people whose lives are going well or badly. And for you, although perhaps you were not worthy of it, the circumstances turned out happily, so happily that your fate at the decisive moment depends solely on your will. Will you understand the requirement of the time, will you be able to take advantage of the position in which you are now placed - that is the question of happiness or misfortune for you forever. What are the methods and rules for not missing out on the happiness offered by circumstances? Like in what? Is it difficult to say what prudence requires in any given case? Suppose, for example, that I have a lawsuit in which I am entirely to blame. Let us also assume that my opponent, who is completely right, is so accustomed to the injustices of fate that he can hardly believe in the possibility of waiting for the resolution of our litigation: it has been dragging on for several decades; many times asked He V court, when the report would come, and many times he was answered “tomorrow or the day after tomorrow,” and each time months and months, years and years passed, and the case was not resolved. Why it dragged on so long, I don’t know, I only know that the chairman of the court for some reason favored me (he seemed to believe that I was devoted to him with all my soul). But then he received an order to resolve the matter immediately. Out of his friendship for me, he called me and said: “I cannot hesitate to resolve your case; it cannot end in your favor by judicial procedure - the laws are too clear; you will lose everything; the loss of property will not end for you; with the verdict of our civil court will reveal circumstances for which you will be liable under the criminal laws, and you know how strict they are; what the decision of the criminal chamber will be, I don’t know, but I think that you will get off too easily if you are sentenced only to deprivation of rights state, - be it said between us, we can expect much worse for you. Today is Saturday; on Monday your lawsuit will be reported and decided; I have no power to postpone it further, with all my affection for you. Do you know what I would advise you ? Take advantage of the remaining day you have: offer peace to your opponent; he does not yet know how urgent the need is, which I am placed in by the order I received; he heard that the lawsuit will be resolved on Monday, but he has heard about its imminent solution so many times that he lost faith to your hopes; now he will also agree to an amicable deal, which will be very beneficial for you in monetary terms, not to mention the fact that it will get you rid of the criminal process, acquire the name of a forgiving, generous person, who seems to have felt the voice of conscience and humanity himself . Try to end the litigation with an amicable deal. I ask you about this as your friend." What should I do now, let each of you say: would it be smart for me to rush to my enemy to conclude a peace deal? Or would it be smart to lie on my sofa for the only day remaining to me? Or would it be smart to attack with with rude curses at a judge favoring me, whose friendly advance notice gave me the opportunity to end my litigation with honor and benefit to myself? From this example the reader sees how easy it is in this case to decide what prudence requires. “Try to reconcile with your adversary before you reach you are with him until the trial, otherwise your adversary will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the executor, and you will be thrown into prison and will not come out of it until you have paid for everything down to the last detail" (Matt. , chapter V, verse. 25 and 26).

NOTES

First published in the magazine "Athenaeum", 1858, No. 18. The article was written as a response to Turgenev's story "Asya", which was published in Sovremennik in the same year (No. 1). V.I. Lenin, speaking about the fact that Chernyshevsky raised real revolutionaries with censored articles, had in mind, in particular, this brilliant political pamphlet. Characterizing the cowardly and treacherous behavior of the Russian liberal during the first Russian revolution, Lenin in 1907 recalled the ardent Turgenev hero who escaped from Asya, the “hero” about whom Chernyshevsky wrote: “Russian man on rendez-vous.” Examining the main character of the story as if under a strong microscope, the critic discovers in him a commonality with other literary heroes of Russian literature, with the so-called “superfluous people.” Chernyshevsky’s attitude towards “superfluous people” was not unambiguous. Until about 1858, when the common democrats had not yet completely lost faith in the liberal nobility, the critic took under the protection of “superfluous people” from the attacks of the reactionary-protective press, contrasting them with the inert and complacent “existents.” However, the progressive meaning of “extra people” was limited; it had exhausted itself long before the start of the revolutionary situation in the 60s. In new historical conditions, organic shortcomings of this type of people were revealed both in life and in literature. Russia was seething on the eve of the abolition of serfdom. Effective solutions were required. And the “superfluous people,” having inherited from their predecessors of the 30s and 40s the tendency to endlessly analyze their inner experiences, turned out to be unable to move from words to deeds, and remained “still in the same position.” This explains the harshness of tone and causticity of Chernyshevsky’s speech against the traditional idealization of imaginary “heroes.” And this is the historical significance of his thoughts about “our Romeo,” the hero of the story “Asya,” who “was not used to understanding anything great and living, because his life was too petty and soulless, all the relationships and affairs to which he’s used to it... he’s timid, he powerlessly retreats from everything that requires broad determination and noble risk...". Meanwhile, this “slow-witted” person is smart, he has experienced a lot in life, and is rich in observations of himself and others. The critic-publicist in the article “Russian man on rendez-vous” addresses the noble liberal intelligentsia with a serious warning: whoever does not take into account the demands of the peasantry, does not meet the revolutionary democracy that defends the vital rights of the working people, will ultimately be swept away by the course of history. This is stated in an allegorical form, but quite definitely. The reader was led to this conclusion by the subtle analysis contained in Chernyshevsky’s article of the behavior of “our Romeo,” who was frightened by the girl’s selfless love and abandoned her. Page 398. Stories in a business... kind the critic ironically calls the works of so-called “accusatory literature” (see notes to “Provincial Essays”). Page 401. ...something... similar... on one of Georges Sand's novels.-- This refers to the novels "Indiana", "Jacques", "Consuelo" and others by the French writer Georges Sand (pseudonym of Aurora Dudevant, 1804-1876). Max Piccolomini- the hero of Schiller's dramas "Piccolomini" and "The Death of Wallenstein", a noble romantic dreamer. "Faust".— Here we mean a story in nine letters by I. S. Turgenev, originally published in the magazine Sovremennik (1856, No. 10). Page 403. Beltov- the hero of the novel by A. I. Herzen "Who is to blame?" (1846) sacrifices his love in order not to bring suffering to the husband of the woman he loves. Page 412. The Tale of Lorelei -- The legend of the beautiful Rhine mermaid Lorelei, who lured fishermen and shipmen to dangerous rocks with her singing, was written by the German romantic poet Brentano (1778-1842); this motif was repeatedly used in German poetry. The most famous poem on this subject was written by Heinrich Heine (1797-1836). Page 415. We once loved Hoffmann.— We are talking about the German romantic writer E. T. A. Hoffmann (1776-1822) and his novel “The Lord of the Fleas.” Page 418. ...him the family despised everyone close to us.- Chernyshevsky allegorically points to the antagonism between the nobles and the mixed-democratic intelligentsia. The pathos of the article lies in the affirmation of the idea of the disengagement of forces occurring during the historical process: the “people of the forties” were replaced by a generation of sixties revolutionaries who led the people’s liberation movement. Page 421. The end of the article is a detailed allegory. Chernyshevsky was forced to resort to allegories, talk about “litigation,” and turn to the gospel story in order to convey the idea of the irreconcilability of the class interests of the Russian peasantry and the serf-owner landowners.

N. G. Chernyshevsky

Russian person on rendez-vous. Reflections on reading Mr. Turgenev’s story “Asya”

“Stories of a businesslike, incriminating nature leave a very difficult impression on the reader, therefore, while recognizing their usefulness and nobility, I am not entirely satisfied that our literature has taken exclusively such a gloomy direction.”

This is what quite a lot of people say, apparently not stupid, or, better to say, they said so until the peasant question became the real subject of all thoughts, all conversations. Whether their words are fair or unfair, I don’t know; but I happened to be under the influence of such thoughts when I began to read perhaps the only good new story, from which, from the first pages, one could already expect a completely different content, a different pathos, than from business stories. There is no chicanery with violence and bribery, no dirty swindlers, no official villains explaining in elegant language that they are the benefactors of society, no philistines, peasants and little officials tormented by all these terrible and disgusting people. The action is abroad, away from all the bad surroundings of our home life. All the characters in the story are among the best people among us, very educated, extremely humane, imbued with the noblest way of thinking. The story has a purely poetic, ideal direction, not touching on any of the so-called dark sides of life. Here, I thought, my soul will rest and be refreshed. And indeed, she was refreshed by these poetic ideals until the story reached the decisive moment. But the last pages of the story are unlike the first, and after reading the story, the impression left is even more bleak than the stories about disgusting bribe takers with their cynical robbery. They do bad things, but they are recognized by each of us as bad people; It is not from them that we expect improvements in our lives. There are, we think, forces in society that will put a barrier to their harmful influence, that will change the nature of our life with their nobility. This illusion is most bitterly rejected in the story, which awakens the brightest expectations with its first half.

Here is a man whose heart is open to all high feelings, whose honesty is unshakable, whose thought has absorbed everything for which our century is called the century of noble aspirations. So what is this man doing? He makes a scene that would put the last bribe-taker to shame. He feels the strongest and purest sympathy for the girl who loves him; he cannot live an hour without seeing this girl; all day and all night his thoughts draw him a beautiful image of her; the time of love has come for him, you think, when the heart is drowned in bliss. We see Romeo, we see Juliet, whose happiness nothing interferes with, and the moment is approaching when their fate will be decided forever - for this Romeo must only say: “I love you, do you love me?” - and Juliet will whisper: “Yes...” And what does our Romeo (that’s how we will call the hero of the story, whose last name was not given to us by the author of the story) do when he goes on a date with Juliet? With trembling love, Juliet awaits her Romeo; she must learn from him that he loves her - this word was not uttered between them, it will now be uttered by him, they will unite forever; bliss awaits them, such a high and pure bliss, the enthusiasm of which makes the solemn moment of decision barely bearable for the earthly organism. People died from less joy. She sits like a frightened bird, covering her face from the radiance of the sun of love appearing before her; she is breathing quickly, trembling all over; she lowers her eyes even more tremblingly when he enters and calls her name; she wants to look at him and cannot; he takes her hand - this hand is cold, lies as if dead in his hand; she wants to smile; but her pale lips cannot smile. She wants to talk to him, and her voice breaks. They both were silent for a long time - and, as he himself says, his heart melted, and so Romeo says to his Juliet... and what does he say to her? “You are guilty before me,” he tells her: “you got me into trouble, I am dissatisfied with you, you compromise me, and I must end my relationship with you; It’s very unpleasant for me to part with you, but if you please, go away from here.” What it is? How she guilty? Is it what I thought his a decent person? compromised his reputation by going on a date with him? This is amazing! Every feature in her pale face says that she is waiting for her fate to be decided by his word, that she has given her whole soul to him irrevocably and now only expects him to say that he accepts her soul, her life, and he reprimands her for that she is compromising him! What kind of ridiculous cruelty is this? what kind of low rudeness is this? And this man, who acts so vilely, has been presented as noble until now! He deceived us, deceived the author. Yes, the poet made a very serious mistake in imagining that he was telling us about a decent person. This man is worse than a notorious scoundrel.

Such was the impression made on many by the completely unexpected turn in the relationship of our Romeo to Juliet. We have heard from many that the whole story is spoiled by this outrageous scene, that the character of the main person is not maintained, that if this person is what he appears to be in the first half of the story, then he could not have acted with such vulgar rudeness, and if he could have done so, then From the very beginning he should have appeared to us as a completely crappy person.

It would be very comforting to think that the author was really mistaken; but the sad dignity of his story lies in the fact that the character of the hero is true to our society. Perhaps, if this character were such as people would like to see him, dissatisfied with his rudeness on a date, if he were not afraid to give himself to the love that took possession of him, the story would have won in an ideally poetic sense. The enthusiasm of the first date scene would be followed by several other highly poetic minutes, the quiet charm of the first half of the story would rise to pathetic charm in the second half, and instead of the first act from Romeo and Juliet with an ending in the style of Pechorin, we would have something really similar to Romeo and Juliet, or at least one of Georges Sand's novels. Anyone looking for a poetically complete impression in a story must really condemn the author, who, having lured him with sublimely sweet expectations, suddenly showed him some kind of vulgar, absurd vanity of petty, timid egoism in a man who started out like Max Piccolomini and ended up like some Zakhar Sidorich, playing penny preference.

But was the author really wrong about his hero? If he made a mistake, this is not the first time he makes this mistake. No matter how many stories he had that led to a similar situation, each time his heroes emerged from these situations in no other way than being completely embarrassed in front of us. In Faust, the hero tries to cheer himself up by the fact that neither he nor Vera have serious feelings for each other; sitting with her, dreaming about her is his business, but in terms of determination, even in words, he behaves in such a way that Vera herself must tell him that she loves him; For several minutes the conversation had been going on in such a way that he should definitely have said this, but he, you see, did not guess and did not dare to tell her this; and when the woman who must accept the explanation is finally forced to make the explanation herself, he, you see, “froze,” but felt that “bliss was running like a wave through his heart,” only, however, “from time to time,” but strictly speaking, he “completely lost his head” - it’s just a pity that he didn’t faint, and even that would have happened if he hadn’t come across a tree to lean against. As soon as the man had time to recover, the woman he loves, who expressed her love for him, comes up to him and asks what he intends to do now? He... he was "embarrassed." It is not surprising that after such behavior of a loved one (otherwise the image of this gentleman’s actions cannot be called “behavior”) the poor woman developed a nervous fever; It’s even more natural that he then began to cry about his fate. It's in Faust; almost the same in “Rudin”. Rudin at first behaves somewhat more decently for a man than the previous heroes: he is so decisive that he himself tells Natalya about his love (although he does not speak of his own free will, but because he is forced to this conversation); he himself asks her for a date. But when Natalya on this date tells him that she will marry him, with or without the consent of her mother, it doesn’t matter, as long as he loves her, when he says the words: “Know, I will be yours,” - Rudin only finds an answer exclamation: “Oh God!” - an exclamation more embarrassed than enthusiastic - and then he acts so well, that is, to such an extent he is cowardly and lethargic, that Natalya is forced to invite him on a date herself to decide what to do. Having received the note, “he saw that the denouement was approaching, and was secretly troubled in spirit.” Natalya says that her mother told her that she would rather agree to see her daughter dead than to see Rudin’s wife, and again asks Rudin what he intends to do now? Rudin answers as before: “My God, my God,” and adds even more naively: “So soon!” what am I going to do? My head is spinning, I can’t think of anything.” But then he realizes that he should “submit.” Called a coward, he begins to reproach Natalya, then lectures her about his honesty, and to the remark that this is not what she should hear from him now, he replies that he did not expect such decisiveness. The matter ends with the offended girl turning away from him, almost ashamed of her love for the coward.