What features of young contemporaries tried to capture Turgenev. Famous people in portraits by Repin and in photographs (11 photos)

Where is this sculpture?
Alexander Kachalin

Somewhere near Leninsky Prospekt?THE THIRD IS NOT SUPERIOR 6

What empire that ever existed on earth was the largest and most powerful for its time?

The British Empire was the largest in the history of mankind with colonies on all continents (42.7 million km2). In second place is the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan. This is the largest continental unitary state in the history of mankind. It was founded by Genghis Khan in 1206 and included the largest territory in world history: from the Danube to the Sea of ​​Japan and from Novgorod to Cambodia.

What decides the fate of mankind in this world? Some invisible being or law, like the Hand of the Lord hovering over the world?

How to describe the drawing "Prometheus and Atlas" and answer the questions, see?

This drawing shows the heavy burden of the titan brothers Prometheus and Atlanta. Titans in ancient Greek mythology are the deities of the second generation, the children of Earth and Sky (Gaia and Uranus).

On the right in the figure is Prometheus, he is called the protector of people. According to legend, he stole fire from Mount Olympus, which was taken from people in order to bring it back and carried it to Earth in a reed stalk. He showed people how to save it. After which Zeus, the supreme god, punished Prometheus and chained him to a rock. Each time an eagle flew to him and pecked out the liver, which grew back. His punishment lasted for many centuries, Prometheus was immortal, like other gods. And in the end, he was freed by Hercules, who killed the eagle with an arrow.

At the left of the picture is Atlas, who holds the vault of heaven on his shoulders. According to ancient Greek myth, Zeus punished him this way for participating in the battle on the side of the titans against the gods. Titan was the father of the Hespides, who guarded the golden apples that prolong youth. When Hercules needed to get them, he agreed with Atlas to help him. Hercules could not cope with the snake guarding the garden, which is also depicted in the picture. Therefore, Hercules temporarily shifted the burden on his shoulders, while Atlas was getting apples. After the apples were received, Hercules cunningly shifted the vault of heaven onto the shoulders of Atlas and he held it until the titans reconciled with the gods.

Before Prometheus stole fire, were all people gay or genderless?

Work on the main novel "Fathers and Sons" was completed by Turgenev in July 1861. By this time, a bitter event had occurred in his creative life - a break with Sovremennik, due to the writer’s disagreement with the article “When will the real day come?” N. A. Dobrolyubov about the novel “On the Eve”.

It's time for the 60s. Turgenev saw that a lot was changing in the alignment of social forces in Russian society, he observed the reflection of this process in the editorial life of the journal, with which he was associated for many years, the development of which he contributed to and where the star of his own literary glory rose.

He understood that the liberal nobles were being replaced by a younger generation of revolutionary democrats, among whom was Dobrolyubov, who appeared in Sovremennik together with Chernyshevsky in the late 1950s. And although the article itself contained a flattering review of the novel, Turgenev could not agree with its revolutionary conclusions. Dobrolyubov wrote that Russia also has its own enslavers, but not external ones (like the hero’s native country), but internal ones. And that is why she needs the "Russian Insarovs" to fight the "internal Turks." “When will they finally appear? When will the real day come?" - the meaning of the article was reduced to such questions.

Turgenev strongly disagreed with this interpretation of his novel. In addition, he, being a supporter of reforms rather than social revolution, could not share the radical moods of the young critic. And therefore Turgenev asks Nekrasov "not to print this article." He hesitates. Seeing this, Turgenev declares: "Choose: me or Dobrolyubov." Nekrasov takes the side of a person who is ideologically close to himself - Dobrolyubov, and thereby predetermines Turgenev's departure from the magazine.

“The connection of times has broken up ...” - Even Turgenev, who assumed an indifferent attitude to his novel, did not count on the boiling of passions around “Fathers and Sons”. But most of all, he was discouraged by the desire for a one-sided interpretation of the essence of the conflict and the character of the protagonist of the novel, which appeared in printed publications.

Russia in the late 50s lived on the eve of a huge social event - the abolition of serfdom, which for the country was supposed to be a turning point in all spheres of public life, including breaking the worldview of advanced social strata.

As expected, time "split", separating the liberal nobles and the "new" people of Russia - raznochintsy-democrats, fathers and children - on different sides of the historical barrier.

This has happened more than once in Russian history. Russian literature also knew the problem of fathers and children. Let us recall the moral split in the Russian nobility of the 20s of the 19th century, depicted by Griboedov, or the noble spiritual opposition of the 30s - the central problem in A Hero of Our Time.

However, as regards Turgenev's novel, here it was not only a dispute between generations, but also a break in the connection of times, which is so obvious to the writer. Therefore, the conflict in "Fathers and Sons" was frankly dramatic.

"Fathers and Children". "Retired people" - and "heirs". In the novel, people of the 40s and 60s of the XIX century were face to face. It was the belonging to time that was the source of the conflict between Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov.

The 1840s were at times liberal nobles. Then the concept of “liberal”, according to Turgenev, meant “a protest against everything dark and oppressive, it meant respect for science and education, love for poetry and art, and, finally, love for the people, who, while still under the yoke of serfdom, needed the active help of his happy sons. Liberal-minded people, full of faith in progress, humanity, civilization, were often called idealists, romantics. In general, the atmosphere of high spirituality in Russian society is associated with the 40s. This is the time of Belinsky, Stankevich, Turgenev, the Kirsanov brothers.

Like Turgenev, Nikolai Petrovich graduated from St. Petersburg University and "came out ... as a candidate." He, like Turgenev, could have ended up in Paris, if not for 1848, which, as you know, the writer became a witness. Like Turgenev, he loves Pushkin and music. In a word, they are people of the same blood. And Pavel Petrovich for the author is not only the embodiment of comme il faut and the personification of the guards-noble ideal, but a man who is able to sacrifice his great ambition and all important career considerations to the sacrifice of all-consuming love-passion and, along with the loss of his beloved woman, lose all meaning of existence.

Behind the heroes-nobles in Turgenev's novel is a historically formed cultural tradition that determined a very specific type of spirituality with its norms and values ​​- what we call noble aristocracy.

In the 1960s, a new social group appeared on the cultural scene - the raznochintsy intelligentsia.

The main "target" for the young, assertive generation of raznochintsy was the aristocratic nobility. They refused to see in the aristocracy the highest form of the then culture. Linking noble aristocracy with the social consequences of the serf system - poverty and lack of rights of the people, the lack of public human rights, the raznochintsy categorically did not accept everything that was inherent in him, up to the aristocratic manner of dressing and behavior in society. That is why the well-groomed nails, the neatly shaved chin and the “stone” collars of Pavel Petrovich are so disgusting to Turgenev Bazarov.

As an ideological challenge to aristocracy, young people of different ranks cultivated negligence and even untidiness in their clothes. Therefore, a long robe with tassels, red hands, cheap tobacco, Bazarov's swagger of behavior are quite significant, ideologically weighty signs in the portrait of the sixties.

Turgenev from the first pages of the novel seeks to show the mutual rejection of the old and new generations. So, Bazarov is in no hurry to greet Father Arkady: “not immediately” shook his hand. Pavel Petrovich, when meeting with the guest, generally “did not give his hand and even put it back in his pocket.” And by the way, Bazarov noticed this.

Both sides are emphatically impolite in their assessments of each other. "That hairy one?" - this is the first review of Pavel Kirsanov about Bazarov. Bazarov does not skimp on the characteristics, calling Uncle Arkady an "archaic phenomenon", and Nikolai Petrovich a "retired person."

Frank disdain sounds in the question of Pavel Petrovich addressed to his nephew: “Well, what is Mr. Bazarov himself, actually?” - as if we are talking about an inanimate object, as well as to Bazarov regarding frogs: “Do you eat them or breed them?” Bazarov's behavior is also emphatically impolite when, yawning, he lazily answers Pavel Petrovich.

Turgenev, despite the fact that he was accused of being biased towards the heroes, tried to rise above the impending "fight". He is equally ironic in describing the rustic panache of Pavel Kirsanov, all his fezzes, "colorful" morning shirts, dark English suites, Chinese red shoes, patent leather ankle boots, fragrant mustaches and in the portrait characteristic of "Mr. Nihilist", with a bag of frogs, in a hat entwined tenacious swamp plant, walking through the flower beds.

In Turgenev's novel, the aristocratic arrogance of Kirsanov (“a doctor's son”, but “not shy”) and the morbid pride of a raznochinets (“Rubbish, aristocratic”) are self-evident. In a word, Turgenev was ready to talk about the main conflict of his time without prejudice.

To complete the task, select only ONE of the four proposed essay topics (17.1-17.4). Write an essay on this topic in a volume of at least 200 words (if the volume is less than 150 words, the essay is rated 0 points).

Expand the topic of the essay fully and multidimensionally.

Argument your theses by analyzing the elements of the text of the work (in an essay on lyrics, you must analyze at least three poems).

Identify the role of artistic means, which is important for revealing the theme of the essay.

Consider the composition of the essay.

Avoid factual, logical, verbal errors.

Write your essay clearly and legibly, following the rules of writing.

Explanation.

To complete the task of part 3, select only ONE of the proposed essay topics (17.1-17.4).

In the M2 answer form, indicate the number of the topic you have chosen, and then write an essay on this topic in a volume of at least 200 words (if the essay is less than 150 words, then it is rated 0 points).

Rely on the author's position and formulate your point of view. Argument your theses based on literary works (in an essay on lyrics, you must analyze at least three poems).

Use literary-theoretical concepts to analyze the work.

Consider the composition of the essay.

Write your essay clearly and legibly, following the rules of speech.

Commentary on essay topics

C17.1. What is the peculiarity of Chatsky's conflict with the Famus society? (According to the comedy by A. S. Griboedov “Woe from Wit”.)

The images created by Griboyedov are bright and ambiguous, uncharacteristic of a classic comedy; unconventional and the conflict of the play. Violent disputes flare up between Chatsky and Famusov about the acceptability of various ways to receive promotions and awards, about the importance of public opinion, about education. This conflict is social; on the one hand - Chatsky and some off-stage characters (brother Skalozub, Prince Fedor, nephew of Tugoukhovskaya), on the other - the Moscow noble society, headed by Famusov. This is not a confrontation between two people, but two worldviews, social positions; Chatsky and Famusov are only their most prominent representatives. From a historical point of view, this variant of social conflict is unresolvable: the confrontation between the old and the new cannot be resolved peacefully. However, in the comedy, the relationship of specific characters, Chatsky and Famusovsky society, is clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other, do not want to have anything in common; the conflict in the literary sense is resolvable, in the universal human sense it is not.

C17.2. What features of the “new man” in the image of Bazarov does I. S. Turgenev accept and what does I. S. Turgenev deny? (Based on the novel Fathers and Sons.)

“I dreamed of a gloomy, wild, big figure, half grown out of the soil, strong, vicious, honest - and yet doomed to death, because it still stands on the eve of the future,” wrote Turgenev about his hero. The writer himself did not decide in relation to Bazarov. On the one hand, he justifies and appreciates Bazarov, quite sincerely admiring his intelligence, firmness, ability to defend his ideals and achieve what he wants; endows this image with features that he does not possess. But, on the other hand, the reader feels (there is no direct indication of this in the text, but this slips by itself, against the will of the author) that Bazarov is alien to the author, incomprehensible - the denial of art, nature, love is unacceptable for Turgenev. Turgenev sincerely wants to force himself to fall in love with his hero, to "ignite" his idea, but to no avail. The author and his protagonist remain on opposite sides. That is why the image of the new man Yevgeny Vasilyevich Bazarov turned out to be complex, contradictory, and, of course, very interesting.

C17.3. Why does A.A. Blok refer to the historical past of the Motherland in his poems about Russia?

According to Blok himself, the theme of Russia is the main one in his poetry. Blok turned to this topic at the very beginning of his career and remained faithful to it until the end of his life. The poem "Gamayun, the prophetic bird" was the first work of the young Blok dedicated to the fate of Russia. The theme of the historical path of the motherland, its tragic history, already arises in it. Bird Gamayun

Broadcasts and sings

Unable to raise the wings of the troubled ...

The cycle "On the Kulikovo Field" is entirely devoted to Russia. In the first poem of this cycle, the theme of the path arises, revealing itself in two planes: spatial and temporal. The temporary plan is an image of the historical path of Russia:

The holy banner will flash in the steppe smoke

And the steel of the Khan's saber...

And eternal battle! We only dream of peace

Through blood and dust...

It is the combination of the temporal plan with the spatial plan that gives the poem a special dynamism. Russia will never freeze in deathly immobility, it will always be accompanied by changes.

The expectation of change is also permeated with the poem “Born in Deaf Years ...”, dedicated to Z. N. Gippius. Blok is aware of the doom of his generation, the generation of children of the "terrible years of Russia", and calls for renewal.

C17.4. Images of two capitals in Russian literature.

Russia has changed its capital more than once in its centuries-old history. Peter the Great, having barely managed to lay a new city - Petersburg - moved the capital there. Since then, the confrontation between St. Petersburg and Moscow began, claiming the title of the main city of the country. This struggle could not but be reflected in the works of writers who feel the spirit of the times. In addition, both cities are original and do not resemble one another: Moscow is always seething, lively, active; Petersburg is gloomy, proud, preserving traditions. He, even having lost his official status, remains the "cultural capital".

A. S. Pushkin admires the proud Moscow that did not surrender to Napoleon: “Moscow ... how much has merged in this sound for the Russian heart!” But Petersburg is dearer to the poet:

I love you, Peter's creation,

I love your strict, slender look,

Neva sovereign current,

Its coastal granite ...

Only a person who truly loves Petersburg could write such poems. For Pushkin, this city is the embodiment of the Petrovsky spirit.

We find a whole cycle of "Petersburg Tales" in Gogol. But the splendor of St. Petersburg fades into the background here, since Gogol writes not at all a guide to the city, but satirical works. Indifference, bureaucracy, depersonalization of a person - that's what worries the writer in the first place. Therefore, the image of the capital is bifurcated.

It is impossible not to recall the "Moscow Tavern", sung by Sergei Yesenin. The nightlife is in full swing here, everything is in smoke, everything is in a drunken stupor. In this Moscow, revelry, drunkenness reign, nothing is sacred. The poet wants to escape from the stuffy atmosphere of taverns, to see at least a piece of clear sky, to breathe fresh air. But there is no way out, and this hopelessness, depression also affects the reader. How far is this Moscow from Pushkin's!

In Russian literature, as in life, there is no single answer: which city is better? Moscow and St. Petersburg are dear to the Russian heart, each in its own way.

Roman I. A. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" came out on the eve of the peasant reform and caused heated debate. In the image of the key character, the author showed a "new person", endowing him with virtues and negative character traits.

Already from the beginning of the story, through a dialogue in the Kirsanovs' house, it becomes clear that Evgeny Bazarov belongs to the nihilists who deny traditional foundations, art and everything that cannot be verified scientifically.

In further episodes, Turgenev reveals the strengths and weaknesses of a man with extraordinary thinking, who firmly defends his position. A clear negative feature in the image of Bazarov is a skeptical attitude towards love. He sincerely considers the bright feeling insignificant, but nature puts Eugene to the test of love for Anna Odintsova. He tries to deal with emotions that unexpectedly caused an internal conflict. Only before his death does Bazarov realize the utopian nature of the theory of nihilism. The author shows that a person is not able to deny spiritual feelings, therefore he condemns this character trait of the hero.

The positive qualities of Bazarov include sincerity and openness. Servants and peasant children are drawn to him. Unlike Pavel Kirsanov, he is not arrogant and capable of mercy, which is proved by the scene with the treatment of little Mitya. Fenechka's child sits calmly in his arms, although before that he had refused to go to Arkady. Turgenev emphasizes the kindness of the hero: "children feel who loves them," he clearly welcomes this trait of Bazarov's character.

At the same time, the author condemns Eugene's cold attitude towards his parents, the denial of attachment to them. Bazarov rarely visited his native home, he was burdened by communication with the old people, although they always looked forward to him. The father literally did not leave his son a single step. It is obvious that Eugene himself has tender feelings for his loved ones, but his character does not allow him to openly show affection. In the episode of Bazarov's departure with Arkady, the old people are shown deeply unhappy, which speaks of the condemnation of the culprit of their sadness.

Thus, through the behavior of the hero in various situations, the author shows his own attitude towards him. Turgenev does not approve of nihilism, the denial of obvious things and feelings, the neglect of parental love. At the same time, he accepts sincerity, disinterestedness and nobility in the character of the "new man". The author does not share the views of Bazarov, but clearly respects and sympathizes with his hero.

Updated: 2017-02-01

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

Thank you for your attention.

Famusov

That's it, you are all proud!
Would you ask how the fathers did?
Learn by looking at your elders...
A. S. Griboyedov

In the 60s of the 19th century, a new type of hero appeared in Russian literature, which is usually called the "new man". This hero replaced the "superfluous person", the main character of the works of the first half of the 19th century. “Superfluous people”, smart, educated, are not satisfied with the life around them and the ideals of their contemporary society. All of them are dissatisfied with their lives without meaning, but they cannot find a serious goal that would capture them, would give meaning to their lives. That is why they are called "superfluous people". A convincing characterization of "superfluous people" is given by N.A. Dobrolyubov in the article "What is Oblomovism?".

The life position of the "superfluous people" for their time was more or less clear: the heroes defiantly opposed themselves to the surrounding society and thus were a living reproach to this society: why are young, educated, capable people turned out to be "superfluous"? But during the first revolutionary situation and later, the position of withdrawal from public life becomes no longer sufficient. In the new historical conditions it is necessary to do business. The new—active—heroes began to be called "new people," following N.G.

In the novel "Fathers and Sons" a "new man" is presented - Bazarov. True, Turgenev calls him a "nihilist" and explains in detail what he means by this foreign word. Hearing it for the first time, Nikolai Petrovich says: “This is from the Latin nihil - nothing ... this word means a person who does not recognize anything” (V). Arkady immediately clarifies: “A nihilist is a person who does not bow to any authorities, who does not accept a single principle on faith, no matter how respect this principle is surrounded” (ibid.). In other words, it is not true that Bazarov does not believe in anything, he trusts "experience", "sensible truth", that is, he does not believe in "principles", but believes in frogs. D.I. Pisarev, who, according to his socio-political views, should be attributed to real (and not literary) nihilists, approves of Bazarov’s similar convictions: “It is precisely here, in the frog itself, that the salvation and renewal of the Russian people lies” (“ Motives of Russian drama”, X). In the natural sciences, the critic explains his thought, phrases and authorities mean nothing, experimental proofs are needed here, and only the scientist who “will live a full intellectual life and look at things reasonably and seriously” (ibid.) can find them.

The conversation about the nihilists ends with Pavel Petrovich's sarcastic remark: “Yes. Before there were Hegelists, and now there are Nihilists. Let's see how you will exist in emptiness, in airless space" (V). There is a reason for this causticity: no matter what Bazarov and his like-minded people say, they cannot get away from the knowledge and achievements of previous generations, that is, “fathers”. This manifests one of the laws of dialectics (the transition of quantity into quality), formulated, by the way, by G. Hegel.

Bazarov as a “new man” is contrasted in the novel with the main ideological opponent, Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, who, both in his convictions and in his life history, is very reminiscent of “superfluous people”, it is not without reason that Bazarov calls him “an archaic phenomenon” without ceremony (IV). In turn, Pavel Petrovich did not like the long-haired nihilist with his bad manners and huge pride at first sight. Bazarov's bad manners, diligently noted by the writer (careless answers through his teeth, stomping on the flower beds, sitting on the table, careless posture "lounging" in an armchair, yawns during a conversation), can be regarded as a conscious challenge to the aristocrats by the "doctor's son": Bazarov neglects the rules of decency and defiantly taunts the well-groomed hands and tight collars of the loafer Pavel Petrovich.

Both of them argue a lot in the novel and thus reveal their philosophical beliefs, political views, and life position. Turgenev gives in detail the statements of each of them about the people, state power, political struggle, the social structure of Russia, Russian history, science, art, etc. Bazarov wins these disputes, which proves the thoughtfulness, solidity of his convictions and at the same time the vulnerability of many of the views of Pavel Petrovich, who, due to age and long rural solitude, has lagged behind life. The former secular lion does not understand that a new time is coming and it requires decisive action, and not just beautiful, albeit fair reasoning. Bazarov says about the new time in the novel: “Before, in recent times, we said that our officials take bribes, that we have no roads, no trade, no proper court ... And then we guessed what to talk, that's all only talking about our ulcers is not worth the trouble (...) ”(X). Repeating this thought, Bazarov turns to Arkady: “Your noble brother cannot go further than noble humility or noble boiling, and this is nothing. You, for example, do not fight - and you already imagine yourself to be good fellows - but we want to fight ”(XXVI).

Thus, two fundamentally different positions in life are revealed to the reader. Bazarov is a democrat both by origin (his grandfather plowed the land, and his father was a regimental doctor) and by conviction (“Our dust will eat your eyes out, our dirt will stain you, and you have not grown up to us ...” (XXVI), - says the main character to Arkady), and according to the working lifestyle. Pavel Petrovich is an aristocrat who is proud of his family, enjoys the fortune of his ancestors and demands respect for himself “for the fact that he generally dined well, and once even dined with Wellington at Louis Philippe” (VII). Bazarov's behavior proves that he is a purposeful, hard-working, strong-willed person. Turgenev's hero is a poor student, just like Rodion Raskolnikov, but he does not despair, he endures all the difficulties (lack of money, neglect of wealthy fellow students, enormous physical stress) that broke Raskolnikov, continues to study and is engaged in social activities. Bazarov is characterized by a materialistic worldview and serious studies in the natural sciences. The business spirit of the nihilist is to the liking of the author, who, however, does not forget that Bazarov formulated his main goal very clearly: to break everything old, “to clear the place” (X).

Turgenev, of course, does not like such "destructive" moods, but, being an honest writer, he shows that even during the holidays in Maryino, the nihilist continues to work hard, cuts frogs, treats little Mitya. And Pavel Petrovich in the same Maryino pays great attention to his appearance, manners, but at the same time does not interfere in the management of the estate, leaving this prosaic concern to his brother, he himself amuses his broken heart, looking for features in the face of Fenichka, similarities with Princess R. Bazarov completely justifiably asks the elder Kirsanov his caustic question: “Excuse me, Pavel Petrovich, you respect yourself and sit back; what is the use of this for the bien public?” (X).

Turgenev portrayed Bazarov as a man with a strong character, which manifested itself, for example, in the story of the hero's love for Odintsova. Although the nihilist at the beginning of the novel confidently declares that there is no love, but there is a physiological attraction of the sexes, he falls in love quite romantically and is rejected by the "lady of his heart." Thus, the story of Bazarov and Odintsova essentially repeats the story of Pavel Petrovich and Princess R. However, unhappy love “breaks” Kirsanov (“an extra person”): he loses interest in life, leaves for the village, where he completely surrenders to his sad memories-experiences. To Bazarov (“the new man”), unhappy love inflicts a severe spiritual wound, but cannot break him: he consciously seeks distraction in his work, helps his father treat the peasants, etc.

With these serious differences, the two antipode heroes are somewhat similar, for example, both do not know and understand the life problems of men, although both are convinced of the opposite. Aristocrat Pavel Petrovich “always stands up for the peasants; True, when speaking to them, he frowns and sniffs the cologne” (VII); Democrat Bazarov "did not even suspect that in the eyes of the peasants he was still something like a pea jester" (XXVII). Turgenev cites a conversation between a young nihilist and a peasant who cannot answer the gentleman's abstruse questions: the interlocutors do not understand each other at all. After listening to the absurdity that the earth stands on three fish, and the village world lovingly submits to a strict master, Bazarov “contemptuously shrugged his shoulders and turned away, and the peasant wandered home,” arguing that the master “was talking something; I wanted to scratch my tongue. It is known, master; does he understand? (XXVII).

Summing up, it should be said that Turgenev made an attempt to truthfully describe the new hero of Russian public life at a time when the ideological and psychological "portrait" of the revolutionary democrats had not yet fully formed. And yet, many aspects of Bazarov's character, as history has shown, were so correctly noticed by the writer that they were repeated in the characters of real Russian democratic revolutionaries (Dobrolyubov, Pisarev and others).

Depicting the "new man", Turgenev contrasted him with the hero of the previous era - the "superfluous man". The author showed that Bazarov has a stronger character than Pavel Petrovich: hard work, determination, will, striving for action for the common good, the breadth of life views and tasks distinguish the young nihilist from the refined gentleman, selfish, immersed in personal experiences, subject to external circumstances .

At the same time, the writer is frightened by the too radical beliefs of the "new people", their contempt for universal human values ​​(family relations, love), neglect of cultural and scientific traditions developed by "fathers and grandfathers". The complex attitude to the "new man" allowed Turgenev to create a multifaceted, interesting image of the main character.