The novel by M. Yu. Lermontov "A Hero of Our Time" was an extremely unexpected and interesting phenomenon. The first who drew attention to him was I. S. Turgenev. He wrote: “What a delight! There was nothing like it in our literature. Of course, this is an imitation of the French, but still beautiful! For a number of years (40-90s of the 19th century), the work attracted writers, readers, and critics in various aspects.

Before us is a novel with a very well-thought-out composition, a familiar plot and achronological narrative. Acquaintance with Pechorin for the reader is unexpected and varied. Either he is an officer in the service of Maxim Maksimych, his good colleague, neighbor and comrade; then he is an aristocrat who has grown cold towards an old non-official friend; then he is a person who plays with the fate of others: everyone is bored, and he too. But all this is event material, on which the main content of the novel grows - what Pechorin talks about in his thoughts. Why was he born? What is it for? After all, was there some kind of big idea, a destiny that fell to his lot? Was he not destined to do it? Or did it not fall to him?

Reality is that secular circle in which Pechorin is placed, where, by the force of circumstances, his life flows, upbringing, living conditions - this is the whole image of the aristocratic world. The doctor, as a rule, is a foreigner, strongly Russified, who has become Russian without noble relatives and capital; this smart Stolz is present in many Russian novels as an invariable character in Russian life: smart, honest, noble by nature, but financially dependent. "Water Society" - a mixture of the aristocracy with the Russian province; illnesses and ailments do not depend on belonging to a class, and therefore everyone is drawn to this blessed land - an earthly paradise. Here is the society in which Pechorin finds himself and where it gives him pleasure to dominate. And in vain he flirts when he asks why they, the environment, do not like him so much. The answer to this is simple: all the time he makes people feel the difference between themselves and them - in interests, in life demands, in clothes. And here for Pechorin there is a huge field of activity: there are a lot of objects, phenomena worthy of satire and parody. His wickedness can be satisfied. Here the unpretentious intrigue of the novel is revealed.

The most remarkable thing is that Lermontov managed to put a very large human content into an unpretentious story. The external resort novel turned out to be the first Russian psychological novel in which the whole gamut of human feelings is described in an unusually subtle and detailed way, where the author forces Pechorin to expose himself and encourages the reader to show sympathy for him, not only to call him an egoist, but to pity him. Sorry humanly.

Pechorin is well aware that his love did not bring happiness to anyone, including him. But he loved because it was the need of the organism, which he satisfied. Pechorin, consciously or unconsciously, is an adherent of egoism (he "only wants freedom for himself"). Hence his judgment, full of indifferent cynicism, about the immense pleasure "in the possession of a young, barely blossoming soul": "She is like a flower", which "must be plucked<...>and, after breathing it to its fullest, throw it on the road: maybe someone will pick it up! This is almost the whole of his morality, the philosophy of happiness.

And this is the combat officer speaking, noble man, philosopher! Knight! But the narrative just leads to the idea that he does not have happiness. Flirting with Princess Mary - to annoy Grushnitsky. Grushnitsky wants Pechorin to be his friend - it's so impressive! But Pechorin laughs at this, and he, in essence, mocks Grushnitsky, who takes everything seriously. Grushnitsky does not notice Mary's condescension to his courtship, persistent and therefore annoying, but Pechorin noticed a long time ago and made, as they say now, conclusions ... And why all this? What is the purpose? You can answer with vulgarity: to spend time without boredom.

But the author gives a difficult psychological picture of the hero with such thoroughness that the reader involuntarily asks: is his behavior a property of the character of an aristocrat who does not understand life, or is it a consequence of the barracks of Nicholas's despotism, or is it an innate trait of a person? The author must answer this question.

We put Pechorin in credit for his disdain for aristocracy, almost disgust. And this is quite natural: he is a military officer, although the author does not show him anywhere in military affairs. But his behavior, bold, self-confident, almost to the point of desperation, testifies to military ferment (“hussar bone”). The opposition of Pechorin and the environment is very characteristic: he does not conflict with the environment, but he himself is a part of it, but an independent part.

The despotism of the barracks did not make him a slave. Willpower overcomes any prejudice, alertness. The struggle with a drunken Cossack indicates the unbridled courage of our hero (“The officers congratulated me - and for sure, there was something!”).

What is there in common between this man who risks his life for pleasure and a man who argues that one should pick a flower, inhale and quit? And here we have at the same time an image of a heroic, beautiful in spirit and - vulgar, insignificant. Just think, what a victory over a girl just entering life! And this vulgarity, not romanticism, not the “attractiveness of evil” (because there is no evil here) Lermontov wants to present as a spring of activity, and this is precisely vulgarity, no matter what toga it is. Therefore, this part of the story causes the reader to be sarcastic towards the hero.

At the very beginning, it was not by chance that I mentioned the name of I. S. Turgenev, an author who can be called a monopolist in the depiction of first love. In "A Hero of Our Time" - an anticipation of what will be in many of his works. Lermontov describes the first love of Princess Mary with all the nuances, filling this feeling with the beauty of feeling and the beauty of hope. A girl with "velvet eyes" turns into a woman who understands her power, her strength, who does not allow the thought that she might not like her. And in this situation, Pechorin is almost pathetic when he says that he was joking, laughing at the princess. The offended girlish feeling says: “I hate you,” but, in fact, Mary turned out to be the winner here, and not Pechorin, who only played his role poorly. And Lermontov showed it with great skill.

Next to this unnecessary romance of Pechorin with a girl whom he did not want to insult or humiliate, but just to flirt, a great feeling arises - Vera's love. How often do we not understand the intention of the artist! Even such a thoughtful and subtle critic as Belinsky and the talented Vl. Nabokov could not understand the significance of the image of Vera for revealing the character of Pechorin and for the entire novel. Nabokov wrote that this was an "unnecessary" image. What does “unnecessary” mean when through it we see the whole of Pechorin, a real, deep revelation of his character? Nabokov lists the stylistic flaws, omissions, repetitions, and patterns that he painstakingly found in the novel. But he did not see the psychology of the hero of time. Behind all the formalistic blunders, he saw the "harmony of particulars." Nabokov understood everything as a formalist. But at the same time, he likes the novel, as a Russian who grew up on stories about Russia.

Special mention must be made of the image of Vera. Indeed, in essence, the entire love-romantic part of the story unfolds against the backdrop of the history of the relationship between Vera and Pechorin. Surrendering entirely to this love, being its victim, Vera at the same time owns Pechorin himself, his soul, his past, which never passes for him, his present. And the future - who knows? Everything is broken in this world: Pechorin does not marry Vera, because he is terribly afraid of the word "marriage", marriage bonds are worse for him than prison chains. But he, narcissistic, smart, allows one of the biggest abominations: he shares love with another.

He who does not tolerate opponents at all and has no rivals. And when, it would seem, he got rid of this contradiction, physically retired, moved to another city, he did not get rid of love, he still loves Vera, and, even worse, she loves him as before. And there is no force that could stop their passion. This passion is so great and captivating that it almost dominates the narrative. High pathos seems to be crossed out by vulgarity love relationship Faith with her husband, and no explanation for the conventions of the time, the environment does not justify this behavior. And Pechorin himself is well aware that this is a feeling from which he runs and cannot escape. And the vulgarity of his position only teases and irritates the pride of Pechorin, who is not used to having rivals. This constant dual world of Vera not only does not oppress her, but gives rise to the forces of love for Pechorin in her. In this feeling, the forces of Vera's physical endurance burn out. And all that remains is the desire to adapt to life, while not all the women's credit has been exhausted, that is, to get married. This whole novel, as if standing "behind the scenes", is the main thing in revealing the character of the hero and the composition of the work as a whole.

The description of this great feeling is interspersed with the everyday life, the pettiness that surrounds people. And Pechorin is terribly unfair when he complains of boredom, for he has no time to be bored. He is completely absorbed in relations with Vera, where the past turns out to be stronger than the present, and life requires a response to the everyday, ordinary, current. And so everyday is the officer environment in the novel, which is opposed to Pechorin: Grushnitsky, the dragoon captain, etc. Grushnitsky sees that “fighting happiness” is entirely on the side of Pechorin. The princess's sympathies are on his side. Grushnitsky is very upset by this, and the rest, primarily the dragoon captain, is very amused. It is clear that everyone is bored, and it is very entertaining to pit two opponents. What can be the measure of the highest virtue of an officer? Of course, courage. And to say about Pechorin that he is a coward is courage in itself, because it is not true. And this greatly humiliates Pechorin, who always opposed himself to others. So - detailed description plot, narration about the duel, description of the place, platform; finally, the story of the unloaded pistol and the revelation of the conspiracy by Pechorin at the last moment. Pechorin's opponents want to turn the tragic act of the duel into a farce when he aims with an unloaded pistol. But Pechorin exposes the criminal vaudeville invented by the dragoon captain. The boy Grushnitsky understands how far the idea of the dragoon captain has gone, and tells him that Pechorin and Werner are right. But his boyish vanity and the opinion of the dragoon captain do not allow him to give up slander.

"Shoot!<...>There is no place for us on earth together ... ”- the pathos of speech does not leave poor Grushnitsky even at this moment. How clever man, Pechorin understands that this boy, who is 21 years old, is driven by pride. Why didn't he shoot in the air? Because the resentment that he could become an inevitable victim of this conspiracy is too strong. And here when we are talking about life and death, Pechorin could not rise above Grushnitsky. And our respect for the hero fades, as it faded with Werner (“You can sleep peacefully ... if you can ...”). Thus, the insignificant satisfaction of self-love turned into a human tragedy. We will be told: such were the order, honor. But everything was different. And the novel is remarkable in that Lermontov brilliantly captured precisely these traits of human weakness. Where it came from - from the general nature of time or from the personal qualities of a person - this is already the secret of the writer, but he revealed it to us and showed it.

But the "end of comedy" is not yet in sight. Two letters were received by Pechorin after the duel: Vera's letter Pechorin is afraid to read and first reads Werner's letter containing a reproach. That's how they all are: at first they sympathize and help, and when something has happened, they disapprove and retreat ... Vera's letter reported on a difficult explanation with her husband and expressed feelings that Pechorin knows to the last drop, but still reads with greed. .. Only one thought - to say goodbye. For what? After all, the last kiss and shaking hands will not save anything. Why this crazy run? But all the same, he will be, and Pechorin is driving his horse along the Kislovodsk road. He flies like a whirlwind. The horse stumbled, made several jerks and fell dead. Then Pechorin realized that he was alone in the steppe. And here we have the exposure of Pechorin, his suffering, helplessness ... He was pitiful, like a powerless creature that had lost everything: “... all my firmness, all my composure - disappeared like smoke. The soul is exhausted, the mind is silent ... ".

It was here that the whole Pechorin was revealed, revealed tragically, for real. He understood how deep and hopeless human suffering is. How does he, a strong-willed man, a brave officer, not value his own life and flirt with himself, supposedly he does not need life? But when a real, big life captures him - not a masquerade being, but a life that touches the soul, an infinitely dear life, the only one and therefore necessary and beautiful, turned to a dear being, with whom he, perhaps, parted forever - then he appears before us in all the nakedness of human weakness and human nobility. Now he will not say: pick a flower, inhale and throw it, maybe someone will pick it up - you yourself pick up this flower that you breathed in! Here the whole tragedy of Pechorin's character was revealed. Hopeless pain that gripped him, all human, coming out. With what aching pain he guessed that he was the same as everyone else, and only in vain tried to resist everyone, posing as something greater, standing above a person, and believing in it himself. Only now did he understand it. Just as well as the reader understood that he is a hero of the times. Reproaches: is it bad person may be the hero of the time - now filmed for the reader. Pechorin is the hero of the time, because he is the same as everyone else.

But this awakening is only for a few hours. After that, Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin will again put on the “uniform” of a cynic, a skeptic, a person who is confident that evil is attractive, a person who is indifferent to everything. Thus, the tragedy of a man of the lost generation of the 40s of the 19th century stood before us in full growth, where, along with noble impulses, the author, with extraordinary cruelty, showed the other side of the hero's behavior. Eavesdropping, peeping, spying - all the everyday espionage that Pechorin resorts to cannot be noble by nature. This practice of life is the tragedy of a generation. In essence, Pechorin is not who he claims to be - he constantly taunts those who take him seriously: "There are two people in me"; “Some will say: he was a kind fellow, others - a scoundrel. Both will be false." In his imagination, he considers himself great, or at least believes in his great destiny. In reality, he perfectly understands the limitations of his spiritual (inner) existence. Hence - the hero "on stilts". His reality lies in the fact that he shows his failure, the contradictions that constantly tear him apart. Such is the reality that the big man could not realize himself. But besides this, we saw Pechorin in the true light and did not dare not pity him, for nothing human is alien to him.

Lermontov's romanticism is interesting in that the writer combines styles, making extensive use of realism, even naturalism, even sentimentalism (“A Hero of Our Time”, chapter “Princess Mary”). First Russian psychological novel written at a time when romanticism as such is already losing its charming popularity. For Lermontov, romanticism was never a transitional stage from one style to another. And at the beginning of his work, and later, throughout the years, he remained a consistent romantic. Without placing this trend below realistic art, Lermontov brilliantly showed in his perfect works that every style, in its complete completion, objectively depicts reality.

The appearance of Lermontov's novel immediately caused a sharp controversy, which revealed the polar opposite of his interpretations and assessments. Before others, with extraordinary fidelity, he appreciated the "Hero ..." Belinsky, in the first printed response to the novel, who noted in it a “deep sense of reality”, “richness of content”, “deep knowledge of the human heart and modern society”, “originality and originality” of a work that represents “completely new world arts." With the concretization and development of these thoughts, the critic spoke in a large article devoted to the "Hero ..." and published in the summer of 1840 in "OZ", showing the enormous life-knowledge, socio-psychological and philosophical significance of the image of Pechorin, as well as the novel as a whole. Protective criticism fell upon Lermontov's novel, seeing in it, especially in the image of Pechorin, a slander on Russian reality.

Belinsky's view of the essence and meaning of the "Hero ..." was largely developed in the new historical conditions by N. G. Chernyshevsky and N. A. Dobrolyubov. Chernyshevsky pointed out the role of the "Hero ..." in the formation psychological analysis in the works of L. N. Tolstoy (“dialectics of the soul”). At the same time, agreeing to recognize the significance of the socio-psychological type of their time for Pechorin, the revolutionary democrats somewhat underestimated the moral and philosophical content of this image, sometimes unnecessarily straightforwardly opposing him and other "superfluous people" of the 1830s-1840s of the sixties raznochintsy. Pechorin's lack of socially useful activity, considered from the standpoint of modern tasks, was interpreted by Dobrolyubov as a manifestation of the social essence of his character, whose name is "Oblomovism" ("What is Oblomovism?", 1859). Herzen turned out to be more historical in interpreting the essence and meaning of "superfluous people", in particular Onegin and Pechorin. In Art. "Superfluous people and bile" (1860), arguing against their identification with modern liberals, he emphasized that " extra people were then just as necessary as it is now necessary that they should not be.” At the same time, Herzen was inclined to identify Lermontov with Pechorin, arguing that the poet died in the hopeless hopelessness of the Pechorin trend ... ".

Slavophile and liberal-Western criticism (K. S. Aksakov, S. S. Dudyshkin, A. V. Druzhinin, and others) converged in their rejection of the “Lermontov trend”; Lermontov was declared the last Russian poet of the imitative era, respectively exaggerating the significance of the Western European sources of the image of Pechorin. IN research literature this trend was most clearly manifested in the works of the comparativists (E. Duchen, S. I. Rodzevich, and others), in which, despite some accurate observations, the search for the context of “parallels” prevailed. More meaningful were the studies of representatives of the cultural-historical school (A.N. Pypin, N.A. Kotlyarevsky). In their works, for the first time, the idea of Lermontov's "reconciliation" with life, which was developed in pre-revolutionary literature, was indicated. Populist criticism in the person of N.K. Mikhailovsky, on the contrary, put forward the protesting principle in the work of Lermontov, but the false theory of the “crowd and hero” prevented the true essence of the image of Pechorin from penetrating.

Symbolists of the early twentieth century. (Vl. S. Solovyov, D. S. Merezhkovsky) considered Lermontov's poetic heritage and novel without regard to specific historical problems, trying to find a mystical, "superhuman" beginning in the author and his characters. The representative of the psychological school, D. N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskii, deduced the content of The Hero... from the depths of the author's psychology, identifying Lermontov with Pechorin, considering the innate "egocentrism" in their characters to be the main thing. At the same time, M. Gorky considered Lermontov's work from other socio-historical positions in the course of Russian literature, read in 1909 at the Capri school. The main thing in it for Gorky is "the greedy desire for business, active intervention in life." Emphasizing the typicality of Pechorin and at the same time his spiritual closeness to the author, Gorky did not identify them, noting that "Lermontov was wider and deeper than his hero." New methodological principles in the study of the novel were determined in a number of general works on Lermontov and his era, which belonged to representatives of early Marxist criticism (G. V. Plekhanov, A. V. Lunacharsky); they raised questions about the social content of Lermontov's work, about his connection with the social movement.
The originality of the plot and composition of the novel 1

A Hero of Our Time is both similar and unlike the traditional novel that has developed in the West. It does not tell about an incident or an event with a plot and denouement that exhausts the action. Each story has its own plot. Closest to the traditional novel is the fourth story - "Princess Mary", however, its ending contradicts the Western European tradition and on the scale of the whole work is in no way a denouement, but implicitly motivates the situation of "Bela", placed in the general narrative in the first place - explains why Pechorin ended up in a fortress under the command of Maxim Maksimych. "Bela", "Taman", "Fatalist" abound in adventures, "Princess Mary" - intrigues: a short work, "A Hero of Our Time", unlike "Eugene Onegin", is oversaturated with action. It contains many conditional, strictly speaking, implausible, but just typical situations for novels. Maxim Maksimych has just told a random fellow traveler the story of Pechorin and Bela, and immediately they meet with Pechorin. In different stories, the heroes repeatedly eavesdrop and peep - without this there would be no story with smugglers, no exposure of the plot of the dragoon Getmtan and Grushnitsky against Pechorin. Main character predicts his death on the way, so it happens. At the same time, "Maxim Maksimych" is almost devoid of action, it is primarily a psychological study. And all the various events are not valuable in themselves, but are aimed at revealing the character of the hero, revealing and explaining his tragic fate.

The same purpose is served by the compositional rearrangement of events in time. Pechorin's monologues, turned to his past, constitute the novel's prehistory. For some reason, this St. Petersburg aristocrat turned out to be an army officer in the Caucasus, he goes there through Taman "from the road for state needs", then, together with Grushnitsky, he takes part in the battles, which is mentioned in "Princess Mary", and after a while meets him in Pyatigorsk. After the duel, he lives with Maxim Maksimych in a fortress for "a year", from where he leaves for two weeks in a Cossack village. Upon retirement, he probably lives in St. Petersburg, then travels. In Vladikavkaz, he has a chance meeting with Maxim Maksimych and an officer dealing with literature, who receives from the staff captain "some notes ..." and subsequently publishes them, providing a preface beginning with the words: "Recently, I learned that Pechorin, returning from Persia, died. The sequence of "chapters" in the novel is as follows: "Bela", "Maxim Maksimych"; "Pechorin's Journal" - the publisher's preface, "Taman", "Princess Mary", "Fatalist". That is, the action begins in the middle after the announcement of the death of the hero, which is highly unusual, and the previous events are described thanks to the journal after those that occurred later. This intrigues the reader, makes him reflect on the riddle of Pechorin's personality, and explain to himself his "great oddities."

As the events are presented, as they are presented in the novel, Pechorin's bad deeds accumulate, but his guilt is less and less felt and her virtues emerge more and more. In "Bel" he, on his whim, commits a series of crimes, although according to the concepts of the nobility and officers who participated in the Caucasian War, they are not. In "Maxim Maksimych" and "Taman" everything goes without blood, and in the first of these stories Pechorin unwittingly offended an old friend, and in the second his victims are only strangers without moral principles (the girl is ready to drown Pechorin on one suspicion of wanting to convey, she and Yanko leave an old woman and a blind boy to their fate). In “Princess Mary”, Pechorin is very to blame, the people around him are mostly completely vile - they turn the “comedy” he conceived into a heavy drama with the death of a person, not the worst of them. Finally, in The Fatalist, it is not Pechorin’s bet with Vulich that has a tragic outcome, and then Pechorin accomplishes a real feat, capturing the Cossack killer, whom they already wanted to “shoot” in fact in front of his mother, without giving him the opportunity to repent, even though he “ not a cursed Chechen, but an honest Christian.”

Of course, the change of narrators plays an important role. Maxim Maksimych is too simple to understand Pechorin, he basically sets out external events. The great monologue of Pechorin about his past that he conveyed is conditionally motivated: “So he spoke for a long time, and his words stuck in my memory, because for the first time I heard such things from a 25-year-old man, and, God willing, the last .. "The words of the captain:" I have always said that there is no use in someone who forgets old friends! mind, of course, Byron): “... why, they were always notorious drunkards!” ("Bela").

A writer who denounces Pechorin with his own eyes is a man of his circle, he sees and understands much more than an old Caucasian. But he is deprived of direct sympathy for Pechorin, the news of whose death he was "very pleased" with the opportunity to print a magazine and "put his name on someone else's work." Let this be a joke, but on a very gloomy occasion. Finally, Pechorin himself fearlessly, without trying to justify anything, talks about himself, analyzes his thoughts and actions. In "Taman" events are still in the foreground, in "Princess Mary" experiences and reasoning are no less significant, and in "The Fatalist" the very title of the story is a philosophical problem.

But the most important thing, for the sake of which events are rearranged in time, is how Pechorin leaves the novel. We know that he "was exhausted" and died young. However, the novel ends with the only act of Pechorin that is worthy of him. "The people dispersed, the officers congratulated me - and for sure, it was with what." The Fatalist does not contain any plot denouement on the scale of the entire novel; in the last phrase, only a passing characterization of Maxim Maksimych is given, who "does not like metaphysical debate at all." On the other hand, we say goodbye not only to the “hero of time”, but also to a real hero who could do wonderful things if his fate had turned out differently. This is how he, according to Lermontov, should be remembered by the reader most of all. The compositional technique expresses the hidden optimism of the author, his faith in man.

Lesson 46

The purpose of the lesson: analysis of the part "Princess Mary", comparison of the actions, characters of the heroes of this story with the character of Pechorin, teaching monologue speech and elements of analysis of the author's style.

vocabulary work: plot self-sufficiency, climax, philosophical problems, the symbolic meaning of the image.
During the classes

I. Conversation

The story "Princess Mary" is perceived as main story in the novel. Why do you think?

The story is characterized by plot self-sufficiency; this is the culmination of Pechorin's diary; it contains the most reasoning about the soul and fate; in the chapter, the philosophical content of the novel receives the most detailed development.
II. Group work

The initial impetus to all events is given by Pechorin's relationship with Grushnitsky. Analyze the history of their friendship-enmity. Compare this with the situation "Onegin - Lensky" and with Pushkin's discussion of friendship in the second chapter of the novel "Eugene Onegin".

Analyze the history of relations between Pechorin and Princess Mary. For comparison, in The Fatalist, pay attention to the episode with the daughter of the constable Nastya as an example of Pechorin's usual indifference to a woman.

How and why are relations between Pechorin and Vera developing? What does the tragic scene of the pursuit of Vera indicate (compare it with the chase scene in the story "Bela", paying attention to symbolic meaning image of a horse in both cases).

Analyze the relationship between Pechorin and Dr. Werner. How did Pechorin develop relations with the "water society"? Why?

Compare the finals of "Princess Mary" and "Taman". Expressive reading fragments.

This is a difficult task, and the children should be helped to conclude that, despite the common theme - the seascape - there is a significant difference: in "Taman" this is a real landscape, and in "Princess Mary" - an imaginary, romantic emblem inner peace Pechorin.

How does Pechorin's personality manifest itself in the manner of keeping a diary? In its content?
III. Checking the perception of the text by students. Dispute

Why is Pechorin like a foreign element wherever he appears?

How is the century characterized through the protagonist of Lermontov's novel?
Homework

2. Compose questions in groups to test knowledge of the text of the chapter "Taman".

Lesson 47

(according to the chapter "Taman")

The purpose of the lesson: teaching the main stages of analysis of an episode of a literary text.

The students were already working on the analysis of part of the piece (see lesson 24). Given that the word "episode" in the exam topics suggests exactly part of the text for analysis on this lesson we will take the chapter "Taman". Considering also that we have before us a prose text, not a dramatic one, let us change the structure of the analysis somewhat.
During the classes

I. We offer students a plan for working with an episode

Consider the episode "from the inside":

a) microplot;

b) composition;

Establish immediate connections, consider the episode in the system of other episodes.

Pay attention to possible "roll calls" of episodes with other works.

Link your observations to the theme, idea of the piece, the author's worldview, and skill.
II. Working with a detailed composition plan(distributed to each table)

The role of the head "Taman" in the novel "A Hero of Our Time":

1. The division into parts that differ in plot and characters is a distinctive feature of the novel "A Hero of Our Time".

2. The role of the head "Taman" in the novel.

3. The plot of the chapter, its construction.

4. The character of Pechorin, speaking from the events described; how the central situation of the chapter helps to reveal its character.

5. Laconism of the story, accuracy and simplicity as the distinguishing features of the narrative.

6. Landscape, contrast, romantic motifs, accurate reproduction of everyday life, image of the exotic world - ways of expressing the author's position.

7. "Taman" - the first part of Pechorin's diary entries, the "self-disclosure" of the hero begins from this chapter.

8. The influence of the chapter on Russian literature (N. N. Tolstoy's story "Plastun" and the poem "By the Sea" by N. Ogarev).

9. Appreciation of “Taman” by V. Belinsky: “We did not dare to make extracts from this story, because it resolutely does not allow them: it is like some kind of lyrical poem, all the charm of which is destroyed by one verse released or changed not by the poet himself ..."

The transformation of a cycle of stories into a psychological novel is an innovative solution to the problem of the Russian novel and the beginning of its further development by Turgenev, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky.
Homework

1. Prepare for the final work on the work of M. Yu. Lermontov.

3. Individual tasks: to prepare a review of books about Gogol on general theme"Interesting about Gogol".

4. Home composition. My favorite pages of the novel "A Hero of Our Time". Episode analysis.
Information for the teacher

The theme of fate and chance in the novel "A Hero of Our Time" 1

The theme of fate and chance runs through the entire novel "A Hero of Our Time" and becomes central in the story "The Fatalist".

The events described in The Fatalist are recorded by Pechorin in his own diary at about the same time as the story of the duel with Grushnitsky. It seems that Pechorin during her stay in the fortress N worries about some question, in an attempt to clarify which there are records of a duel and an incident with Vulich. This is the same question, so the events of the Fatalist must be correlated with the duel. What is this question?

This is an opportunity to fight the case. Why does Pechorin go to a duel with Grushnitsky? Indeed, from the very beginning, Pechorin is trying to convince us that Grushnitsky is immeasurably lower than him, he does not miss the opportunity to prick Grushnitsky and literally forces us to believe that everything that happens looks exactly as he, Pechorin, describes. In the scene with the fallen glass, it may have been really painful for the wounded Grushnitsky to bend down, but in the presentation by Pechorin, Grushnitsky appears as depicting suffering.

In general, Pechorin denies Grushnitsky the right be; portray, seem, pretend - yes, but not be. This is the privilege of one Pechorin. Pechorin, unwittingly, in his diary betrays his passion to be above everyone - even when describing a completely foreign lady at the ball, he does not miss the opportunity to notice the "variegation of uneven skin" and a large wart on the neck, covered with a clasp. Pechorin is in general extremely perceptive, but why should one record observations like these in a diary, which, in his own words, is kept by him for himself and should eventually serve as a “precious memory” for him? What joy did Pechorin want to experience in his declining years, remembering this wart? But the point is not in a specific external defect that has not escaped Pechorin's keen eye, the point is that he practically cannot but notice human shortcomings, those very “weak strings” that he is so proud of knowing. This is a feature of his, Pechorin's, vision, and it stems primarily from the desire to be the best, the highest.

However, everything looks like this only in the diary, where Pechorin is the owner, where he creates his own world, setting the accents he needs. Real life, obviously, differs from the desired, and therefore anxiety penetrates into Pechorin's notes. He had just tried to convince us of the insignificance of Grushnitsky, looked down at him, when he suddenly drops the phrase: "... I feel that someday we will collide with him on a narrow road, and one of us will be unhappy." Perhaps there are “strong strings” in Grushnitsky, the existence of which Pechorin cannot admit to himself? Or does this Pechorin feel like a not so unambiguous celestial being? One way or another, but the struggle with Grushnitsky is so serious and tense that it is impossible not to feel that this is how one fights only with an equal opponent.

Pechorin's anxiety has one more reason. Pechorin is actually smart, observant, cold-blooded, bold, decisive. He is used to getting whatever he wants. However, Pechorin cannot but be disturbed by the question of the limits of his possibilities, his power. Is there something in the world that cannot be defeated with Pechorin's skills, which, as a rule, bring success? Can he always "be on horseback", keep the situation under control, calculate everything to the smallest detail? Or are there cases that do not depend on it? The duel with Grushnitsky becomes for Pechorin not only a struggle with a man who dared to want to become on the same level with Pechorin, but also an opportunity to find out his relationship with such chance who do not want to obey the will and reason of man. It is paradoxical, but that is why it is extremely important for Pechorin that Grushnitsky should be the first to shoot. And the point is not only that Pechorin has an internal justification for the murder; it is much more important that only in such a scenario can one enter into combat with chance. Shoot Pechorin first - he would have won without any doubt. But he would have won a man, which is no longer news either for Pechorin or for us. But when Grushnitsky shoots first, when the muzzle of a pistol is directed against you, that's when the deadly game begins, the very terrible experience that, as a little later Vulich, Pechorin will also put on himself.

What are the possible costs? Grushnitsky can simply miss or shoot to the side - then Pechorin wins, because the next shot will be for him. Such an outcome, as well as generally winning the right of the first shot, would be desirable for Pechorin if he fought a specific person and wished for his physical destruction, or at least only that. However, the essence of the matter lies much deeper, and in order to solve this case, Pechorin needs the most unfavorable alignment for him. So, Grushnitsky must shoot and at the same time aim at Pechorin, while Pechorin himself will stand on the edge of the cliff, so that even the slightest wound will cause a fall and death - these are the initial conditions under which it will be possible to measure strength with chance. In a situation where everyone is against him, Pechorin directs all his remarkable strength, all his knowledge of human nature to literally split, break Grushnitsky from the inside, squeeze him out, plunge him into such an abyss of internal struggle that he, even aiming at Pechorin, won't be able to get in. And Pechorin achieves this. And this becomes his real victory - solely by the power of his own will, he managed not to leave a single loophole unfavorable for the outcome of the case, he managed to make it so that almost all possible outcomes can be completely calculated. This is breathtaking, for it is likely that chance, fate, and all other transpersonal forces that have been given such importance actually seem strong only because a person of such abilities, such firmness of such will, has not yet appeared.

It is from here that the thread stretches to the Fatalist. The word "case" has a special meaning. In fact, with the same case, Pechorin faces his power in The Fatalist.

Literally before his eyes, the same type of event occurs twice with Vulich: something exceptional falls out to him, really one case out of a thousand. The first time a loaded pistol misfires and it is at the very moment when Vulich shoots himself, the second time - a meeting with a drunken Cossack, the intersection at one point in time and space of the whimsical and winding paths of two people. Note that the exceptional nature of what happened is specially emphasized: if the gun were simply not loaded, the incident could be called almost ordinary; not just a meeting led Vulich to death - he also approached the Cossack and spoke to him. But with this general exclusivity, the two incidents are opposite in result: the first time, as a result of the incident, Vulich remains alive, and the second time, he dies. Is it because Pechorin was shocked when he learned about the death of Vulich that before his eyes the case again demonstrates its strength, omnipotence, unpredictability, lack of control? Chance governs a person's life; chance does whatever it wants. Is it not because the events of the Fatalist are entered in the diary that Pechorin cannot come to terms with what he saw, and what he saw just when he had just remembered and recorded to the smallest detail how the character defeats this very case (a duel with Grushnitsky)?

And Pechorin decides to test himself once again, to once again enter a duel with fate. And he wins again: as a result of his calculation, his decisive and cold-blooded actions, he manages to accomplish the almost impossible - to capture the Cossack who has locked himself in the house.

So, fight with the case. Constantly figuring out who is who. And a permanent victory, at least within the novel.

Lesson 48

The purpose of the lesson: to reveal the assimilation of the topic.
During the classes

Vocabulary work: plot self-sufficiency, culmination, philosophical problems, symbolic meaning of the image.

During the classes

I. Conversation

The story "Princess Mary" is perceived as the main story in the novel. Why do you think?

II. Group work

Analyze the relationship between Pechorin and Dr. Werner. How did Pechorin develop relations with the "water society"? Why?

Compare the finals of "Princess Mary" and "Taman". Expressive reading of fragments.

This is a difficult task, and the children should be helped to conclude that, despite the commonality of the theme - the seascape - there is a significant difference: in "Taman" this is a real landscape, and in "Princess Mary" - an imaginary, romantic emblem of Pechorin's inner world.

How does Pechorin's personality manifest itself in the manner of keeping a diary? In its content?

III. Checking the perception of the text by students. Dispute

Why is Pechorin like a foreign element wherever he appears?

How is the century characterized through the protagonist of Lermontov's novel?

2. Compose questions in groups to test knowledge of the text of the chapter "Taman".

Lesson 47

(according to the chapter "Taman")

The purpose of the lesson: teaching the main stages of analysis of an episode of a literary text.

Information for the teacher

The students were already working on the analysis of part of the piece (see lesson 24). Given that the word "episode" in the exam topics suggests exactly part of the text for analysis in this lesson, we will take the chapter "Taman". Considering also that we have before us a prose text, not a dramatic one, let us change the structure of the analysis somewhat.

During the classes

I. We offer students a plan for working with an episode

Consider the episode "from the inside":

a) microplot;

b) composition;

Establish immediate connections, consider the episode in the system of other episodes.

Pay attention to possible "roll calls" of episodes with other works.

Link your observations to the theme, idea of the piece, the author's worldview, and skill.

II. Working with a detailed composition plan(distributed to each table)

The role of the head "Taman" in the novel "A Hero of Our Time":

1. The division into parts that differ in plot and characters is a distinctive feature of the novel "A Hero of Our Time".

2. The role of the head "Taman" in the novel.

3. The plot of the chapter, its construction.

4. The character of Pechorin, speaking from the events described; how the central situation of the chapter helps to reveal its character.

5. Laconism of the story, accuracy and simplicity as the distinguishing features of the narrative.

6. Landscape, contrast, romantic motifs, accurate reproduction of everyday life, image of the exotic world - ways of expressing the author's position.

7. "Taman" - the first part of Pechorin's diary entries, the "self-disclosure" of the hero begins from this chapter.

8. The influence of the chapter on Russian literature (N. N. Tolstoy's story "Plastun" and the poem "By the Sea" by N. Ogarev).

Homework

1. Prepare for the final work on the work of M. Yu. Lermontov.

3. Individual tasks: to prepare a review of books about Gogol on the general topic "Interesting about Gogol."

4. Home composition. My favorite pages of the novel "A Hero of Our Time". Episode analysis.

Information for the teacher

The theme of fate and chance in the novel "A Hero of Our Time"

The theme of fate and chance runs through the entire novel "A Hero of Our Time" and becomes central in the story "The Fatalist".

However, everything looks like this only in the diary, where Pechorin is the owner, where he creates his own world, setting the accents he needs. Real life, obviously, differs from what is desired, and therefore anxiety penetrates into Pechorin's notes. He had just tried to convince us of the insignificance of Grushnitsky, looked down at him, when he suddenly drops the phrase: "... I feel that someday we will collide with him on a narrow road, and one of us will be unhappy." Perhaps there are “strong strings” in Grushnitsky, the existence of which Pechorin cannot admit to himself? Or does this Pechorin feel like a not so unambiguous celestial being? One way or another, but the struggle with Grushnitsky is so serious and tense that it is impossible not to feel that this is how one fights only with an equal opponent.

It is from here that the thread stretches to the Fatalist. The word "case" has a special meaning. In fact, with the same case, Pechorin faces his power in The Fatalist.

So, fight with the case. Constantly figuring out who is who. And a permanent victory, at least within the novel.

28.03.2013 17859 2382

Lesson 45 Lermontov's century in the novel

Goals: to teach to compare the actions, characters of the heroes of the story with the character of Pechorin; to teach monologue speech; analyze the story "Princess Mary".

During the classes

I. Work on the topic of the lesson.

1. introduction teachers.

The story "Princess Mary" is perceived as the main story in the novel. Why do you think? Probably because this story is characterized by plot self-sufficiency; it is the culmination of Pechorin's diary; it contains the most reasoning about the soul and fate; in this story, the philosophical content of the novel receives the most detailed development.

But before starting work on this story, let's try to find the "key" to Lermontov's novel and the image of Pechorin. This is probably the confession of the hero, containing his whole life: "My colorless youth passed in the struggle with myself and the world." Pechorin, however, speaks only of youth, considering it "colorless." Do you accept such self-esteem? By the way, we know little about Pechorin's youth. And yet: is it possible to imagine it, to “think”? Pechorin constantly falls into self-abasement: “I didn’t guess my destination ... I chased the bait of empty and ungrateful passions ...” What is your opinion about these confessions of Pechorin?

- But what does it mean - "struggle with yourself and the light"? Who has won this fight?

Are there any changes in the art world novel - and in Pechorin?

Let's get back to Taman. By the way, what is the genre of Tamani? Is it by chance that Lermontov writes not a story, not a story, but a short story? Does the genre of this part of the novel correspond to the character of Pechorin?

2.Condensed analytical retelling of "Taman"(trained student). Conversation on the story "Taman".

- Who is the narrator? Why?

- What are the secrets of the poetry of "Taman"? (Do you know that Chekhov was in love with these pages?)

- Does Pechorin change in Taman? Why, despite the dangers, does he feel so good, at ease in this "bad little town"?

- What confessions of Pechorin seemed especially significant, downright discoveries of Lermontov?

Here is one of them: "I memorized this song from word to word."

3.Group work.

Compare the adjacent pages of the novel: "Taman" and "Princess Mary". Where is it more difficult for Pechorin? And yet: does Taman continue in its own way for Pechorin here, among the “water society”?

- What pages of the story "lead" the style of "Taman", its images? Why does she so stubbornly remind herself of herself, although Pechorin finds herself in a completely different world - among the "light", the "struggle" with which became his life? But let's not forget: with ourselves.

- Does the chapter "Princess Mary" remind of the poems of M. Yu. Lermontov? Compare: “How often surrounded by a motley crowd ...” and “Princess Mary”. Why is there the same contrast in the chapter of the novel: "dreams of one's creation ..." and "iron verse, doused with bitterness and anger ..."?

- Which pages of "Princess Mary" are especially lyrical, reverent?

Tasks by groups:

I group. Pechorin and Vera ... How did you see, feel the hero of Lermontov in this "romantic" story?

How and why are relations between Pechorin and Vera developing?

What does the tragic scene of the pursuit of Vera indicate? Compare it with the chase scene in Bela, paying attention to the symbolic meaning of the image of the horse in both cases.

II group. What about Mary's story? What entry in Pechorin's diary might surprise you? (“Why do I work so hard to win the love of a young girl whom I do not want to seduce and whom I will never marry?”) Is Pechorin mysterious to himself? And yet, perhaps, it is possible to explain his actions?

Analyze the history of relations between Pechorin and Princess Mary. For comparison: in The Fatalist, pay attention to the episode with the daughter of the constable Nastya as an example of Pechorin's usual indifference to a woman.

III group. and finally, the story of Grushnitsky.

The initial impetus to all events is given by the relationship of these two young people.

Analyze the history of their friendship and enmity. Compare it with the situation "Onegin - Lensky" and with Pushkin's arguments about friendship in the second chapter of the novel "Eugene Onegin".

Why, in relation to Grushnitsky, Pechorin is completely different: he continually “interferes” with him in his courtship of the princess. What did it remind you of? Another analogy: the same "triangle" as in "Woe from Wit". Compare the close pages of Griboedov's comedy and Lermontov's novel and the outcome of the "love" duels: Chatsky - Molchalin, Pechorin - Grushnitsky.

Is Pechorin fair in relation to people? To Grushnitsky, for example? And isn't Pechorin cruel in relation to Princess Mary? Why does Pechorin need this imaginary "romance"?

What plot twist did you like the most? Of course, a duel with Grushnitsky!

Again - the oddities of Pechorin. How did you understand it in the intricacies of events around the duel? How did they react to his shot and to the death of Grushnitsky? Compare the duel in Onegin and in A Hero of Our Time, which means that Onegin and Pechorin are in the most terrible test for them.

IV group. Is there a contrasting hero in his relationship with Pechorin in the novel? Is Dr. Werner necessary in the novel?

Analyze Pechorin's relationship with Dr. Werner.

How did Pechorin's relationship with the "water society" develop? Why?

4.Comparison of the finals of "Princess Mary" and "Taman". Expressive reading of fragments.

Despite the commonality of the theme - the seascape - there is a significant difference: in "Taman" it is a real landscape, and in "Princess Mary" - an imaginary, romantic emblem of Pechorin's inner world.

- How does Pechorin's personality manifest itself in the manner of keeping a diary?

5. Dispute on the topic "Pechorin - a hero of his time?".

- Why is Pechorin like a foreign element wherever he appears?

– How is the century characterized through the protagonist of the novel? Pechorin - a hero of his time?

6.Concise retelling and discussion of the story "The Fatalist".

- Does the fatal “experiment” that Pechorin goes to in a duel with Grushnitsky continue in the story “The Fatalist”?

Yes, an even more desperate play of the hero with fate can be traced here.

What is the genre of these pages? Again, a novel! Why? Unravel the mysterious plot of The Fatalist. Why does Lermontov complete the novel with these pages, having apparently exhausted the secrets of Pechorin's "I"?

- And yet: is this rebellious note the secret in Pechorin? Let us remember him at the most disturbing moment of his life - on the morning before the duel. It could be his last morning. Let's remember Lermontov's lines, close to these pages of the novel, sounding like poetry: "I don't remember a morning more blue and fresh!.."

II. Summary of the lesson.

Homework:

1) make tests for the chapter "Taman";

Download material

See the downloadable file for the full text.
The page contains only a fragment of the material.

1. Speech by students of group I: selective retelling of "Bela".

- Why did the author put the story about Pechorin's love story into the mouth of Maxim Maksimych?

- What pages of the story puzzled you, caused bewilderment? Remember, for example, contrasting episodes: Pechorin's unforgettable hunt - and his fright, confusion, as soon as "the shutter hits."

- How was the kidnapping of Bela and Pechorin's "romance" met in the fortress? And his terrible laugh, when Maxim Maksimych remembered the death of "poor Bela"? What words of Pechorin, perhaps, will explain the story with Bela, shed light on this mysterious page of his life?

2. Speech by students of group II on the story "Maxim Maksimych". Artistic retelling: a portrait of Pechorin.

- Which of the heroes gives a portrait of Pechorin? Why?

- Why does the scene of the meeting between Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych make you sympathize with Pechorin too?

- In the novel there is Pechorin's confession, which, it would seem, could explain his character, would help to understand the hero, who was so unlucky in the opinions of others: "I was ready to love the whole world ..." What pages, however, can sow doubt in this? Why, for example, is he so cold, indifferent to Maxim Maksimych at their last meeting?

- What are the secrets of the artistic expressiveness of Pechorin's portrait?

III. Summary of the lesson.

Homework: prepare for the commented reading of the story "Princess Mary"; select episodes that characterize the "age of Lermontov".

Lesson 45

Lermontov's century in the novel

Goals: to teach to compare the actions, characters of the heroes of the story with the character of Pechorin; to teach monologue speech; analyze the story "Princess Mary".

During the classes

I. Work on the topic of the lesson.

1. Introductory speech of the teacher.

- But what does it mean - "struggle with yourself and the light"? Who has won this fight?

- Are there changes in the artistic world of the novel - and in Pechorin?

2. A concise analytical retelling of Tamani (by a trained student). Conversation on the story "Taman".

- Who is the narrator? Why?

- What are the secrets of the poetry of "Taman"? (Do you know that Chekhov was in love with these pages?)

- Does Pechorin change in Taman? Why, despite the dangers, does he feel so good, at ease in this "bad little town"?

- What confessions of Pechorin seemed especially significant, downright discoveries of Lermontov?

Here is one of them: "I memorized this song from word to word."

3. Work in groups.

- Which pages of "Princess Mary" are especially lyrical, reverent?

Tasks by groups:

I group. Pechorin and Vera ... How did you see, feel the hero of Lermontov in this "romantic" story?

How and why are relations between Pechorin and Vera developing?

What does the tragic scene of the pursuit of Vera indicate? Compare it with the chase scene in Bela, paying attention to the symbolic meaning of the image of the horse in both cases.

III group. and finally, the story of Grushnitsky.

The initial impetus to all events is given by the relationship of these two young people.

Analyze the history of their friendship and enmity. Compare it with the situation "Onegin - Lensky" and with Pushkin's arguments about friendship in the second chapter of the novel "Eugene Onegin".

Is Pechorin fair in relation to people? To Grushnitsky, for example? And isn't Pechorin cruel in relation to Princess Mary? Why does Pechorin need this imaginary "romance"?

What plot twist did you like the most? Of course, a duel with Grushnitsky!

IV group. Is there a contrasting hero in his relationship with Pechorin in the novel? Is Dr. Werner necessary in the novel?

Analyze Pechorin's relationship with Dr. Werner.

How did Pechorin's relationship with the "water society" develop? Why?

4. Comparison of the finals of "Princess Mary" and "Taman". Expressive reading of fragments.

- How does Pechorin's personality manifest itself in the manner of keeping a diary?

5. Dispute on the topic "Pechorin - a hero of his time?".

- Why is Pechorin like a foreign element wherever he appears?

– How is the century characterized through the protagonist of the novel? Pechorin - a hero of his time?

6. Concise retelling and discussion of the story "The Fatalist".

- Does the fatal “experiment” that Pechorin goes to in a duel with Grushnitsky continue in the story “The Fatalist”?

Yes, an even more desperate play of the hero with fate can be traced here.

- And yet: is this rebellious note the secret in Pechorin? Let us remember him at the most disturbing moment of his life - on the morning before the duel. It could be his last morning. Let's remember Lermontov's lines, close to these pages of the novel, which sound like poetry: "I don't remember a morning more blue and fresh!.."