What spiritual qualities of Oblomov attract Stolz. What spiritual qualities of Oblomov attract Stolz Auxiliary questions to the analysis of this episode

Goncharov's Stolz is fraught with a certain mystery. Our perception, apparently, is hindered by the fact that Oblomov and Stolz are not equivalent, so to speak, in terms of artistic full-bloodedness and persuasiveness. As soon as the novel talks about Stolz, a tongue twister appears. In a number of cases, Goncharov does not show Stolz, but talks about him. The image of Oblomov is given in self-development, and Stolz was completely at the mercy of the author. By the way, Goncharov himself later admitted that Stolz was "weak, pale - an idea peeps out of him too nakedly."

This is explained to a large extent by the peculiarities of the writer's talent. Goncharov argued that literature is intended to depict, first of all, that which has already stood firm, established itself, and clearly manifested itself in life. But Stolz and others like him were only just appearing in Russian reality; their life positions, their role in the development of Russian society were not yet clear. Hence, some uncertainty about the image of Stolz in the novel.

The aesthetic inferiority of Stolz can lead to the rejection of this hero or to a distorted perception of him. Meanwhile, it would be nice to show objectivity and take a closer look at it. We must not forget that, after all, the narration in the novel is conducted to some extent on behalf of Stolz. “And you write it down: maybe it will come in handy for someone,” Stolz says to the author at the end of the novel. "And he told him what was written here."

It is Stolz who gives a commendable speech to Oblomov, so enthusiastic that it is not even clear which Oblomov the novel is written about? "This is a crystal, transparent soul; there are few such people; they are rare; these are pearls in the crowd! .. I knew many people with high qualities, but I have never met a purer, brighter and simpler heart ..." - etc. Stolz one understands what Oblomov is, is able to protect and appreciate him. "Reach out your hand to the man," that's what he does. This is his purpose in the novel. To him, Stolz, the author entrusts some of his thoughts about Oblomov, ideas, views. For example: "It began with the inability to put on stockings, and ended with the inability to live."

Who is Andrey Stoltz? Businessman, pragmatist, rationalist. He destroys the old Oblomovka and actively creates his own new one. Narrating about Stolz, the author does not stray into irony anywhere. But doesn't Stolz's "positivity" arouse a kind of suspicion in you? Stoltz succeeds! In Russia! In the pre-reform 50s! Is this possible? And in this regard, let's make a small digression.

The images of the capitalists were not successful for Russian writers! So Goncharov wanted to create a positive Stolz - and it did not work out! And others did not even think of seeing in the representatives of the bourgeoisie some kind of creative principle. The destructive was seen, but the constructive was not. Meanwhile, Russia became at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. one of the industrialized countries in the world. Who did it? In any case, not the Oblomovs.

In the Western literary tradition we see something completely different. Balzac, partly Dickens, in the 20th century. Dreiser, without any disgust, described the joy and pleasure of enrichment, even a certain poetry of the stock market game ... There was nothing like it in Russian literature.

Let us return, however, to the novel.

Having learned the sad story about the life of Ilya Ilyich, would you like to exclaim: Oblomov, become a Stolz! Or in other words: if to Oblomov's soulfulness and Stoltsev's efficiency, to Oblomov's frankness and naivete, we add the practical rationality of Stolz ... Only nothing will come of this! Oblomov will not become Stoltz, and not only because of a deep disgust for any action. Firstly, Oblomov considers his lifestyle to be completely normal. And secondly, isn't Stolz's entire activity also a "preparation of peace", also a striving for a "lost paradise"?

Take a closer look at how persistently the writer notes in Stolz the so-called "natural" desire to live the four seasons during his life, how Stolz himself is building a modernized Oblomovka together with Olga! Here is what is written in the novel: “Although not at dawn, they got up early; they liked to sit for a long time at tea, sometimes they even seemed to be lazily silent, then they dispersed to their corners or worked together, dined, went to the fields, played music ... " Like everything, as Oblomov also dreamed ... Is there a certain identity of the essential content of Oblomov and Stolz?

The characterization of Stolz - one of the main characters of the famous novel by Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov "Oblomov" - can be perceived ambiguously. This person is the bearer of a new for Russia raznochinsk mentality. Probably, the classic initially wanted to create in his appearance a domestic analogue of the image of Jane Eyre.

Origin of Stolz

Andrey Ivanovich Stolz - the son of a clerk. His father Ivan Bogdanovich came to Russia from Germany. Before that, he tried to find In Russia, he got a job managing the economy, where he scrupulously and skillfully managed the estate, kept records. He brought up his son quite severely. He worked for him from a young age, was a "personal driver" - he ruled a spring cart when his father traveled to the city, to the fields, to the factory, to the merchants. The elder Stolz encouraged his son when he fought with the boys. Teaching science in the village of Verkhlevo to the children of landlords, he gave a thorough education to his Andryusha. Stolz's mother was Russian, so Russian became his native language, and by faith he was Orthodox.

Of course, Stolz and Oblomov, who does not know how to organize his life, will clearly not be in favor of the latter.

Career

The young German brilliantly graduated from the institute. Made a career in the service. Goncharov recounts phrases of other people in snatches. In particular, we learn about the rank of Andrey Stolz from the phrase that he "passed over the guard" in his service. Turning to the table of ranks, we find that the "court counselor" is the chairman of the court court, equal in rank to a lieutenant colonel. Thus, Andrey Stolts is a lawyer by training and earned a colonel's pension. This tells us the novel "Oblomov". The characteristic of Stolz shows the predominance of a business vein in his character.

After his retirement, a thirty-year-old man went into business in a trading company. And here he had good prospects for a career. At work, he was entrusted with responsible missions related to business trips to Europe and the development of new company projects. The business characterization of Stolz, given by the novel, is thorough and promising. For a couple of years of work in a trading company, he has already managed to profitably invest 40 thousand rubles of his father's capital and turn it into 300 thousand rubles. For him, the prospect of amassing a millionth fortune is real.

close people

Stolz has a spirit of camaraderie and cooperation. He spends time and energy to pull his friend Oblomov out of the web of laziness, trying to arrange his life by introducing him to a wonderful girl, Olga Ilyinskaya. Only when Oblomov refused to continue acquaintance with her, Stolz, having considered what kind of treasure Olga was, began to court her. The swindlers, who tried to completely ruin the careless Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, eventually had to deal with him - tough, insightful. He also pronounces the word that has become a household word - "Oblomovism". After the illness and death of Ilya Ilyich, the Stoltzes take his son Andryusha to be raised.

Conclusions in the image of Stolz

At the same time, it should be recognized that the author's characterization of Stolz is the only flaw in the plot of the novel, as Goncharov himself confirmed. According to the plan, Andrei Ivanovich was supposed to turn out to be an ideal person of the future, organically combining pragmatism with his father's genes, and, by inheritance from his mother, artistic taste, aristocracy. In reality, it turned out to be a type of the emerging bourgeoisie in Russia: active, purposeful, unable to dream. Chekhov reacted critically to him, agreeing with the negative characteristic flashed in the novel - "a blowing beast". Anton Pavlovich debunked Stolz in the press as a man of the future, and Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov agreed with him. Obviously, Goncharov's characterization of Stolz went too far with rationality and commitment to rational thinking. These qualities in a normal, living person should not be hypertrophied to such an extent.

Auxiliary questions to the analysis of this episode:

· Under what circumstances did Oblomov rebel against “this Petersburg life of yours”?

· How are the already familiar symbolic images (sofa, bathrobe, shoes) played out throughout the scene?

· Why, at the beginning of the dispute, in his accusatory statements, Oblomov contrasts two concepts: “light” and “life”? Did Andrew understand?

· Why does Oblomov say long speeches for most of the “duel”, while Stolz only parries them with short, biting blows, adding fuel to the fire, and during the dialogue, the friends almost change places twice?

· What does each of the characters consider "life"?

· How does the ideal outlined by Oblomov differ from the life of Oblomovka and the subsequent stay of Ilya Ilyich in Pshenitsyna's house?

· What was Stoltz convinced of? How did he irritate Oblomov's soul?

· How did Oblomov, in turn, touch Andrei's soul at the end of the scene?

· Why is it important to look at the beginning of the next chapter, Chapter 5?

Episode Analysis (Part 2, Chapter 4)

A dispute between friends broke out at the moment when Stoltz once again calls Oblomov to go somewhere, to do something, and they travel for a whole week on all sorts of business. “Oblomov protested, complained, argued, but was carried away and accompanied his friend everywhere,” the author writes. But the next evening, “returning from somewhere late,” Oblomov exploded: “I don’t like this Petersburg life of yours!” After Stolz's question: "Which one do you like?" - Oblomov burst into a sharp, caustic and long monologue about the meaningless fuss, in which there is no "integrity" and there is no person who "exchanged for every little thing." Oblomov’s long satirical speeches expose both the world and society, and card games without the “task of life”, and the activities of youth, and the absence of a “clear, calm look”, and the “non-awakening dream”, in which the fussy and active, first glance, society. In this monologue, only occasionally interrupted by Andrey with short, sharp objections or questions, Oblomov's remarkable mind and satirical talent are revealed.

The monologue of Ilya Ilyich ends with the key phrase: “No, this is not life, but a distortion of the norm, the ideal of life, which nature has indicated as the goal of man ...” To Andrei’s question, what is this ideal, Oblomov did not find an answer immediately, but only after a long dialogue with short remarks of both. Stolz in this dialogue ironically teases Oblomov's awkward attempts to explain at least something to a friend, but then, apparently irritated by this irony, Ilya Ilyich begins to describe in detail how he would "spend his days." This description is long, kind and poetic, even the rather dry Stolz remarks: “Yes, you are a poet, Ilya!” Inspired, Oblomov, who seized the initiative at this time of the conversation, exclaims: “Yes, a poet in life, because life is poetry. It is free for people to distort it.” Oblomov's ideal is not in immobility, into which he seems to have plunged now, Ilya, on the contrary, is very mobile and poetic in this story, this ideal lies in the fact that everything should be "to your liking", sincerely, honestly, freely, measuredly, "what in eyes, in words, then in the heart. And he, Oblomov, actively participates in this life: he makes and gives his wife a bouquet, carries on a conversation with sincere friends, fishes, takes a gun, although, of course, Oblomov’s immobility and gluttony often slip through this story. "That's life!" - sums up Oblomov and immediately stumbles upon an alternative answer: “This is not life!” And it is at this moment that the word “Oblomovism” appears for the first time on the stage of the novel, which Stolz pronounces. Then, with each new objection by Oblomov, he repeats this word in various interpretations, while not finding more convincing arguments against Oblomov's logic that all Stoltsev's "running around" is the same "workout of peace", has the same goal: "Everything looking for rest and peace.

Here, Stoltz still manages to seize the initiative by reminding him of the joint dreams of youth, after which Oblomov’s confidence disappears, he begins to speak unconvincingly, with numerous pauses (the author uses ellipses), hesitations. He still languidly resists: “So when to live? .. Why suffer all the time?” Stolz dryly and meaninglessly answers: "For the work itself." Here, too, the author is not on the side of Stolz, because labor as an end in itself is really meaningless. In fact, the heroes at this moment remain in their positions. And here Stolz again uses the only winning technique - once again reminds Ilya of childhood, dreams, hopes, ending these reminders with the key phrase: “Now or never!” Reception works flawlessly. Oblomov is touched and begins his sincere and pure confession about the lack of a lofty goal, about the fading of life, about the loss of pride. “Either I didn’t understand this life, or it’s no good, but I didn’t know anything better ...” Oblomov’s sincerity unnerved Andrei’s soul, he seemed to swear to a friend “I won’t leave you ...” At the end of the 4th chapter, it seems that victory in the duel was left to Stolz, but at the beginning of the 5th there is a comic decline and, in fact, the destruction of this “victory”.

Stolz's alternative to "Now or never!" turns for Oblomov into the Hamlet question “To be or not to be?”, But at first Oblomov wants to write something (to start acting), he took a pen, but there was no ink in the inkwell, and paper in the table, and then, when it already seemed , decided to answer the Hamlet question in the affirmative, "he got up from his chair, but did not immediately hit his shoe with his foot, and sat down again." The lack of ink and paper and missing the shoe return Oblomov to his former life.

There will still be the whole story with Olga ahead, the internal struggle in Oblomov’s soul is far from over, but in the history of the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz, and in Oblomov’s possible fate after this scene, the accents have already been placed. Even I. Goncharov himself, who believed in the possibility of combining Oblomov's soulfulness with Stoltsev's efficiency and practicality in a Russian person, seems to understand at this moment of his story that the heroes will remain the same: neither from Oblomov, nor from Stolz, as the author originally wanted , such an ideal does not work. One will be prevented by laziness, contemplation and poetry, which are not compatible with the heroes of everyday life, the other - winglessness and the rejection of any reflection on the meaning of life. The author and the reader painfully realize after this dispute that the true ideal, which would combine purity and efficiency, is unattainable. That is why, despite the fact that the heroes are still waiting for a lot of tests, this dispute about the ideal can be considered key episode novel. This will happen later, when each of the heroes finds his “peace”: Oblomov is at first the cozy and satisfying, but devoid of poetry house of Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, and then death, and Stolz is a safe haven with Olga, who is tormented by the loss of the meaning of life, who did not recognize in time for his possible happiness with Oblomov.

In the episode of the dispute between friends, the main question is about the purpose and meaning of human life, and it is this question that is decisive for the entire novel. As a true great artist, I. Goncharov raises this eternal question, but leaves the answer open. Therefore, it is worth recognizing that no one won the dispute between friends in the considered episode of the great novel.

Subject: "Oblomov and Stolz: comparative characteristic heroes (according to the novel

I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov").

Tasks:

educational:

to form the skills of characterization of literary characters;

to help students comprehend the image of the main character from the point of view of social and universal, moral.

developing:

develop students' speech, enrich their vocabulary; the ability to generalize, logically correctly express their thoughts;

develop the skill of working with a literary text; the skill of analyzing the character of a work of art;

improve pairing skills independent work;

promote the development of creative perception skills and expressive reading works;

promote the development of thinking, creativity and cognitive activity of students;

contribute to the improvement of independent work skills in the course of research and search activities.

educational:

to cultivate respect and respect for a woman, love for the Motherland;

to cultivate a careful attitude to the creative heritage of Russian literature;

educate the ability to listen and hear each other;

to educate the spiritual and moral culture of students.

Work form: lesson-research, conversation, analysis of a literary text.

Teaching methods: heuristic, explanatory and illustrative.

Lesson type: combined.

Equipment: portrait of I.A. Goncharov, illustrations for the novel "Oblomov", projector, screen, handout, multimedia presentation, a fragment of the feature film by N. Mikhalkov "A few days in the life of Oblomov".

DURING THE CLASSES

Epigraph: “As long as at least one Russian remains, Oblomov will be remembered until then” I.S. Turgenev.

teacher's word: Oblomov and Stolz - in a broad sense - there are, as it were, two extremes of the national Russian character, in which monstrous laziness, dreamy contemplation, efficiency, talent, love of neighbor are combined in a strange way. Is that so? Here we will talk about these two heroes.

I. Repetition of what was previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

d) the conditions of serf life left their mark: Oblomovites do not know how to be masters, they are impractical, they do not like to work, they do not know how to overcome the difficulties that arise.

II. Learning new material.

1. Message of the topic, goal, lesson plan.

2. The word of the teacher.

Teacher's word: Our today's lesson will be devoted to two characters in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is Ilya Ilyich himself and his childhood friend Andrei Stolz. Let's think together and decide what we have to explore during today's lesson. After all, it is declared as a lesson-research.

Student responses: We must analyze the images of Oblomov and Stolz, select criteria for their comparison, and draw a conclusion.

Teacher's word: Well done! In addition, at the end of our lesson, we will write down the resulting conclusions and try to supplement them on our own as part of a small independent work.

Formulate a response to lesson question: "Why did Andrei Stoltz not manage to change the lifestyle of Ilya Oblomov?

Oblomov and Stolz are opposite friends. Despite the difference in characters, friends were relentlessly attracted to each other. Next to Stolz - reasonable, pragmatic, firmly on the ground, Oblomov felt calmer and more confident. But Stolz himself needed Ilya Ilyich even more. “Often, breaking away from business or from the secular crowd, from the evening, from the ball”, he “went to sit on Oblomov’s wide sofa”, in order to “in a lazy conversation take away and calm the anxious or tired soul". And it was every time like a return to childhood, in which Oblomov's parents loved the German boy and little Andrey spoiled Ilyusha, "either suggesting lessons to him, then doing translations for him", it was every time a return to the "lost paradise", which he yearns for not only the dreamy Oblomov, but also the active Stolz.

Why did Goncharov and critics think that the image of Stolz did not work out for the author? Do you agree with this?

(Attractive features: for Stolz, the meaning of life is in work; he is unusually hardworking and enterprising. Goncharov admires his seething energy (a member of a company doing business with foreign countries traveled Russia far and wide). Strength, calmness, energy in his face; he is against hibernation, for enlightenment. Weaknesses: in Stolz there is no poetry, dreams, he does not have a program of public service. It reflects a certain tendency of Russian life - the desire for personal independence. Stolz is a bourgeois businessman. Stolz treats Oblomovism condescendingly, considering it temporary disease of society).

Hero Matching in the lesson is built according to the sequence proposed by the author himself.

Getting to know the hero

We learn about Stolz in the first part of the novel, before he appears before the readers, that is, in absentia:

In connection with the guests of Oblomov, who he (Oblomov) “is not to his liking”, in contrast to his childhood friend Andrei Ivanovich Stolz, whom he “loved sincerely”; and Tarantiev, who is unpleasant to the reader, does not like the German;

In connection with the dreams of the protagonist, where Stolz, who knew and appreciated best qualities Ilya Ilyich, was an integral part of the paintings happy life in an estate full of love, poetry, friendly feelings and peace;

Stolz also appears in Oblomov's dream, fitting into the idyllic, sweet and at the same time mysterious atmosphere of childhood, which shaped the hero.

The unexpected appearance of the hero at the end of the first part and chapters 1-2 of the second part, telling about Stolz.

Name the episodes, scenes that clearly illustrate how Stolz's childhood passed and how the process of his upbringing went.

His upbringing labor, practical, he was brought up by life itself (cf .: “If Oblomov’s son had disappeared ...”).

A special conversation is required: the attitude of the mother; mother and father; Oblomovka, the prince's castle, as a result of which “bursh did not work”, which replaced the “narrow German gauge” with a “wide road”.

Stolz - Stolz ("proud"). Does he live up to his name?

Portrait of Stolz

What was Stoltz most afraid of?

Justifying their answers with text, students say that dreams, imagination (“ optical illusion”, as Stolz said) were his enemies. He controlled his life and had a “real outlook on life” (cf. Oblomov).

What does life mean and what is the purpose of a person, according to Stolz?

in peace and enjoyment ; see about Oblomov's dreams in the 8th chapter of the first part).

So why are Oblomov and Stolz friends?

We find the answer in Goncharov in the second chapter of the second part: childhood, school and, in the words of the author himself, “a pure, bright and good beginning”, which lies at the base of Oblomov’s nature, “full of deep sympathy for everything that is good ...”

3-4 chapters of the second part. The role of these chapters in the novel. Conversation-argument, where the views, positions of the characters collided.

The essence of the dispute - HOW TO LIVE?! (we add it to the title of the topic of the lesson).

Watching an episode. After watching the episode, students are invited to clarify their observations by comparing them with the text of the novel, then there is a discussion of the results of the work done.If there is enough time, you can analyze this episode in detail and discuss the following questions in sequence:

How does a dispute arise?(Oblomov's dissatisfaction with the empty life of society.)

(The labor path: Stolz's disagreement with the ideal of a friend, because this is “Oblomovism”; the ideal of the lost paradise, drawn by Oblomov, and labor as “the image, content, element and goal of life.”)

Suggested answers:

When Ilya Ilyich says that he does not like modern life society, Stoltz does not find what to object. He interrupts Oblomov’s speech with evaluative statements (“It’s all old, it’s been talked about a thousand times”, “You argue like an ancient one: in old books everyone wrote like this”, “You are a philosopher, Ilya!” Etc.), saying them with obvious irony, but does not express a single argument against Oblomov's convictions.

Why Oblomov does not accept the modern norm of life?

How do we, readers, react to the fact that Stoltz does not find how to object to the statements of his friend?

At what point does the word "Oblomovism" appear on the pages of the novel? What is the significance of Stoltz in it? Oblomov? Reader?

At what point and why does Stolz's mood change in the episode under consideration?

Why does Goncharov call Oblomov's reasoning about lost hopes a confession? What does the writer underline with this title in Oblomov himself and in his relationship with Stolz?

What is the reason for the extinction of Oblomov?

What new in the character of Oblomov does this episode reveal to the reader?

After discussing these issues, students are invited to draw a conclusion about the role of the episode in question in revealing the image of the protagonist of the novel. Then the student's answer is heard and the teacher corrects it accordingly, the conclusion is written by the students in a notebook on their own.

Suggested answer-output: The conflict of the protagonist of the novel "Oblomov" with society is expressed in the hero's internal disagreement with the "distortion of the norm". Oblomov does not see the main thing in the "eternal running around, running around, the eternal game of cheesy passions" - "man". And the fact that Stolz does not object to him, does not find anything to object to, convinces the reader of the correctness of Oblomov’s judgments, revealing the other side of “Oblomovism”: the reasons for the protagonist’s isolation from the outside world, from social problems, it turns out, is much deeper than the nobility and the habit of doing nothing. The way of life that Oblomov leads is a peculiar, perhaps not quite conscious challenge to lack of spirituality. modern Oblomov society. The hero does not see a goal worth striving for. Summing up in his "confession" the consideration of his path, the hero does not consider himself an exception, seeing the "legion" of the same people who have not found themselves, withering people.

(In the process of a lively and interested dispute, the guys come to the conclusion that both principles have a right to exist.)

Here, it is especially interesting and important to hear the opinion of students, because understanding the author's position in a realistic work makes it possible to talk about the discrepancy between the socio-historical concept of the author and the artistic persuasiveness of the characters created by the writer, which will later be very important when studying the work of I.S. Turgenev and L.N. Tolstoy.

3. The image of Andrei Ivanovich Stolz.

3.1. The origin of the hero Viewing a fragment of the film by N. Mikhalkov "A Few Days in the Life of Oblomov".

Friend of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, son of Ivan Bogdanovich Stolz, a Russified German who manages an estate in the village of Verkhlev, five miles from Oblomovka. Stoltz was only half German, according to his father: his mother was Russian: he professed the Orthodox faith; his natural speech was Russian: he learned it from his mother and from books, in games with village boys and in the university auditorium. He inherited the German language from his father and from books.

3.2. Education and upbringing.

Stolz received a specific education: “From the age of eight, he sat with his father at a geographical map, disassembled Herder, Wieland, biblical verses in warehouses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, bourgeois and factory workers, and read sacred history with his mother, taught Krylov’s fables, disassembled according to warehouses of Telemachus. Upbringing, like education, was ambivalent: dreaming that a “good bursh” would grow out of his son, the father in every possible way encouraged boyish fights, without which the son could not do a day, the disappearance of the child for half a day and more with unknown goals to unknown places. If Andrey appeared without a lesson prepared “by heart”, Ivan Bogdanovich sent his son to where he came from, and every time young Stoltz returned with the lessons he had learned.

Stolz's mother, on the contrary, sought to raise a true gentleman, a decent, clean boy with curly curls - "in her son she saw the ideal of a gentleman, albeit an upstart, from a black body, from a burgher father, but still the son of a Russian noblewoman." From this bizarre combination, the character of Stolz was formed.

3.3. Stolz character.

Stolz was taught from an early age by his father not to count on anyone for anything. He wants to do everything at the same time: he is equally interested in commerce, travel, writing, public service. Parting with his father, who sends him from Verkhlev to St. Petersburg, Stolz says that he will certainly follow his father's advice and go to an old friend of Ivan Bogdanovich Reingold - but only when he, Stolz, will have, like Reingold, a four-story house. Such independence and independence, as well as self-confidence, are the basis of the character and worldview of the younger Stolz, which his father so ardently supports and which Oblomov lacks so much.

Stolz's element is constant movement. In his thirties, he feels good and at ease only when he feels his need at once in all parts of the world. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin; he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, bone and muscle, but no sign of fatty roundness; the complexion is even, swarthy and no blush; eyes, although a little greenish, but expressive. The most important thing in Stolz’s character is that “just as he has nothing superfluous in his body, so in the moral administration of his life he was looking for a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit.”

“... A dream, mysterious, mysterious had no place in his soul ... He had no idols, but he retained the strength of his soul, the strength of his body, but he was chastely proud, he exuded some kind of freshness and strength, before which they were involuntarily embarrassed and unshy women.

A similar human type, as in real life, and in the literary incarnation, always carries something ambiguous: its positiveness seems to be undoubted, however, many things make it difficult to resist emerging sympathies, especially since one of the important components of Stolz’s philosophy is to achieve the goal in any way, regardless of obstacles (“he is above all put perseverance in achieving goals).

4. Conclusions about Stolz.

Life.
Target: “labor is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine.”
Perception: life is happiness in work; life without work is not life; “…“life touches!” "And thank God!" Stoltz said.
Principles: to have “a simple, that is, a direct, real outlook on life - that was his constant task ...”. “Above all, he put perseverance in achieving goals ...”, “... he will measure the abyss or wall, and if there is no sure means to overcome, he will depart.”

Love. Stolz loved not with his heart, but with his mind, in every movement of his soul and heart he looked for a rational explanation. Therefore, even in his youth, “among passions, I felt the ground under my feet,” since everywhere I searched for intelligence, and not passion. However, he did not deny this feeling: “he developed a conviction that love, with the power of the Archimedean lever, moves the world; that there is so much universal, irrefutable truth and goodness in it, as there are lies and ugliness in its misunderstanding and abuse.

Friendship. Stolz always and everywhere had a lot of friends - people were drawn to him. But he felt closeness only to people-personalities, sincere and decent. Indeed, he did not have so many real friends, such as Ilya Ilyich and Olga Sergeevna.

Relationships with others. Everyone knows him, he knows everyone. He leaves no one indifferent to him - he is either respected and appreciated or feared and hated.

Most afraid of what is incomprehensible or inaccessible to him, and bypassed it in every possible way: from passions to imagination; but at every opportunity he tried to find the key to this, as yet incomprehensible.

5. Conclusions about Oblomov.

Life.
Target: live life happily; so that she "does not touch".
Perception: fluctuating - from “a pleasant gift for enjoyment” to “sticks like bullies: it will pinch on the sly, then it will suddenly swoop right from the forehead and sprinkle sand ... there is no urine!”
Principles: do what the soul and heart desires, even if the mind is against it; never bother.

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

Conclusion. So, guys, the plot basis of the novel "Oblomov" is the story of dramatic love, and at the same time the fate of the protagonist - Ilya Ilyich Oblomov.

Love. She was never the main one in his life, even in the story with Olga, she quickly faded away.

Friendship. Even in his youth, he “coldly said goodbye to a crowd of friends.” There are acquaintances, but there is not a single true friend, except for Stolz.

Relationships with others. Few people know, has a very narrow circle of friends. He hardly knows anyone. However, he has acquaintances trying to pull him into the light.

Most afraid of everything difficult and difficult to achieve.

III. Consolidation of what has been learned. Now let's turn to the criteria by which the writer characterizes Stolz and Oblomov, which you were able to highlight while reading the text.

Student responses: Appearance (when they appeared before the reader), origin, upbringing, education, programmed program, outlook on life, characteristics of the author, testing by love.

He was afraid of every dream."

Answer:

Answer (Stolz):

1. meaning of life in work; unusually hardworking and enterprising

2. strength, calmness, energy; desire for enlightenment

3. striving for personal independence

4. treats “Oblomovism” condescendingly, considering it a temporary disease of society.

IV. Summing up the lesson.

The dispute between Oblomov and Stolz is interesting both in historical, literary and human terms (Target:help students through the antithesis of the “idealist” hero and the “practitioner” hero to seeRussia at the turn of two historical epochs: patriarchal serfdom and post-reform bourgeois. In this sense, this is an eternal couple, an eternal dispute between the doer and the contemplator. A.I. wrote about these two types of people, two types of life. Herzen in the article "On the Development of Revolutionary Ideas in Russia".

I.A. Goncharov was criticized for the fact that Stolz turned out to be “stilted” (what he does is unknown), declarative, artistically unconvincing, in contrast to Oblomov. But he (the author) needs this pair, and Stolz is needed primarily as an opponent of Oblomov, as his antipode.

Life, time, historical conditions bring to the scene a hero-doer, the creator of his own destiny. So Goncharov's novel, completed in 1858, prepares the appearance of the heroes of I.S. Turgenev, N.G. Chernyshevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, F.M. Dostoevsky, that is, the 1860s.

V. Homework.

2. Make a plan comparative characteristics"Oblomov and Stolz".

A.P. Chekhov (1889) wrote: “Stolz does not inspire any confidence in me. The author says that this is a magnificent fellow, but I do not believe it. This is a swindling beast who thinks very well of himself and is pleased with himself ... ” Share your thoughts on Chekhov’s statement.

Name the episodes, scenes that clearly illustrate how Stolz's childhood passed and how the process of his upbringing went.

Goncharov creates Stolz, involuntarily starting from Oblomov, as an antipode to the main character; Stolz is different.

Stolz - Stolz ("proud"). Does he live up to his name?

Portrait of Stolz

A defining feature (compare with Oblomov).

A story about nature, character, attitude to life.

The main thing is rationality and balance.

- What was Stoltz most afraid of?

- What does life mean and what is the purpose of a person, according to Stolz?

“To live the four seasons, that is, four ages, without jumps and carry the vessel of life to the last day, without spilling a single drop in vain ...” (compare with Oblomov, whose ideal is ...in peace and enjoyment ).

- So why are Oblomov and Stolz friends? What, who is the center of friendship?

The essence of the dispute - HOW TO LIVE?!

Episode analysis .

How does a dispute arise?

When does a dispute occur?

- How did each of the characters come to light in the dispute?

With which of the characters and at what stage of the dispute are you ready to agree?

Is there one answer to this question?

Comparison of Oblomov and Stolz.

“Most of all he was afraid of the imagination…

He was afraid of every dream."

“The desire is about to come true, turn into a feat. But ... the morning will flash by, the day is already leaning towards evening, and with it the tired forces of Oblomov tend to rest: storms and unrest are subdued in the soul ... "Oblomov's peace and weary forces: storms and unrest are reconciled in the soul ..."

“Above all, he put perseverance in

achieving goals ... he went to his goal,

bravely stepping through all obstacles ... "

Outcome. The conflict of the protagonist of the novel "Oblomov" with society is expressed in the hero's internal disagreement with the "distortion of the norm". Oblomov does not see the main thing in the "eternal running around, running around, the eternal game of cheesy passions" - "man". And the fact that Stolz does not object to him, does not find anything to object to, convinces the reader of the correctness of Oblomov's judgments, revealing the other side of "Oblomovism": the reasons for the protagonist's isolation from the outside world, from social problems, it turns out, are much deeper than nobility and habit to doing nothing. The way of life that Oblomov leads is a peculiar, perhaps not quite conscious challenge to the lack of spirituality of modern Oblomov society. The hero does not see a goal worth striving for. Summing up in his "confession" the consideration of his path, the hero does not consider himself an exception, seeing the "legion" of the same people who have not found themselves, withering people.

For me

Repetition of what was previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

a) this type of life determines immobility (peace). Motives of sleep, stagnation, stuffiness;

b) the interests of the Oblomovites are focused on physiological needs, life corresponds to the natural cycle of the change of seasons, this determines the concerns of peasants and gentlemen;

c) Oblomovites lead a habitual existence, there are no unpredictable events; Oblomovites are calm and indifferent to the rest of the world;

d) the conditions of serf life left their mark: the Oblomovites do not know how to be masters, they are impractical, do not like to work, do not know how to overcome the difficulties that arise.

2. The function of the second and third parts of the novel.

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

Teacher: What is love? Innokenty Annensky wrote: “Love is not peace, it must have moral result, first of all for those who love” In the novel “Oblomov”, love is the basis. This feeling reveals the characters of the characters shows them in development. Who does Oblomov love? ( female images in the novel. The story of the student about Olga Ilyinskaya and Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna)

Teacher: In Oblomov’s life, one love was spiritual, which tried to ignite life and actions in him, that is, with a “moral spark”. The other was physical love. This feeling did not advance his moral, spiritual development, did not require anything. The writer believed in all-encompassing love and that only this force can move the world, control the human will and direct it to activity.

Conclusion. So, guys, the plot basis of the novel "Oblomov" is the story of dramatic love, and at the same time the fate of the protagonist - Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. In addition to the main characters, extra-plot characters are given in the novel. And one of them is Zakhar.

What role does Zakhar Trofimovich Trofimov play in the novel? What do we learn about him? (narrator about Zakhara) (part one, seventh chapter, part two, chapter three)

What are the roots of "Oblomovism"? What episode of the novel helps us answer this question?

Teacher: Oblomov's dream is a picture of the hero's childhood. In which N. Dobrolyubov saw the focus of the noble-landlord "Oblomovism" as life at the expense of the labor of serfs. By habit of it, the critic explained in his article all the subsequent behavior and the very fate of I.I. Oblomov.

How many parts can Oblomov's dream be divided? (into three parts):

Analytical conversation.

What is the meaning of the life of Oblomovites? (food, sleep, procreation, not spiritual needs.

The cyclicity of the life circle in its main biological manifestations: homelands, weddings, funerals. Attachment of people to one place.

Closeness and indifference to the rest of the world)

Teacher: The author showed Oblomov's life from the cradle to the grave. Oblomov himself understands that he is ruining. He says to Stolz: “My life began with fading, I began to fade over writing papers in the office; then he went out, reading in books the truths with which he did not know what to do in life, went out with his friends, listening to the talk. Gossip, mimicry, angry and cold chatter, emptiness"

What makes you think about the life and fate of Oblomov? (the life and fate of Oblomov make us think about difficult questions: how to live, how life should be arranged so that a person does not die, does not hide from her, does not shrink from her touch)

What is the place of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" in the history of Russian literature? (the novel occupies a special place in the history of Russian literature. Goncharov created a work of colossal generalizing power. The novel was highly appreciated by Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, Druzhinin. Like no other novel, Russian pre-reform reality is fully and fully reflected here, Russian national character. Roman Goncharova still remains among the outstanding achievements of Russian realistic art. More L.N. Tolstoy said that the novel "Oblomov" is "... the most important thing, which has not been equal for a long time."

Reading the poem by heart by N. Zabolotsky "The soul must work"

Teacher. “Life itself and work is the goal of life.” On this optimistic note, we will end our lesson.

Homework

Preparation for testing on the work of I.A. Goncharova.

The content of Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" was familiar to me from childhood, and when it became necessary to read it myself, I took the book without much desire, because I thought it would be boring, because this work is not rich in external events, there are no unexpected events in it. incidents, spectacular adventures. But I soon realized that my fears were unfounded. From the very first pages, I fell under the spell of Goncharov's unhurried, smooth, and at the same time expressive style, as if alive, the heroes of the work stood up in front of me. Later, when studying the novel in literature classes, I tried to figure out how the writer manages to achieve such authenticity in depicting his characters, so that even to us, living in a century and a half, they seem close and understandable.
The action of the novel is indeed not eventful, but it seems to me that this is due to the fact that all the attention of the writer is focused on inner world man, his psychology, the originality of his character. The main method of revealing the character of Goncharov is a portrait. The portrait in the novel, extremely detailed and detailed, sometimes takes several pages, but gives an idea not only of the appearance, but also of the lifestyle, character, life position of the hero. Behind every detail of the portrait of Oblomov, from which the novel begins, there is some kind of psychological trait. Details such as “lack of any definite idea”, “indifferent” complexion, dressing gown resembling an obedient slave, long, soft, wide shoes, and the remark that Ilya Ilyich is “flabby beyond his years” paint a person who is lazy and apathetic. . It is these strokes of the portrait that catch the eye at the first reading. But when you carefully reread the first pages of the novel, you notice both “pleasant appearance”, and “even light”, and “softness” and you begin to understand that this character is not so unambiguous. Attention to detail is a prerequisite for reading Goncharov's novel. Sometimes this or that portrait detail is repeated many times in the text, emphasizing the most significant character trait. In addition to the already mentioned Oblomov's dressing gown, these are mobile, speaking eyebrows and a small fold above one of them in the portrait of Olga Ilyinskaya, Agafya Matveevna's bare elbow with a dimple, Anisya's nose, as if lagging behind her face, Mukhoyarov's characteristic movement of a finger with a nail down.
Goncharov's interior complements the portrait. The description of Oblomov's office is especially expressive: it has the same duality as in the portrait. Here and beautiful furniture, and carpets, "several paintings, bronze, porcelain", and in general the room "at first glance seemed beautifully cleaned." However, “the view of the office, if you look there more closely, struck by the neglect and negligence that prevails in it.” The paintings are covered with cobwebs, there is dust on the mirrors, stained carpets. Of particular importance, in my opinion, are the following details: the dusty pages of open books, last year's newspaper and the inkwell, in which "if you dip a pen, only a frightened fly would escape with a buzz." All this indicates that not only physical, but also spiritual life froze in Oblomov’s house: he has not read anything for a long time, writes nothing (and meanwhile we find him just at the moment when he should write a letter to the headman and compose estate redevelopment plan).
It is interesting that all changes in the state of mind of the hero will be reflected in the portrait and interior. In those months when Oblomov's life is filled with love for Olga, both his room and his appearance will change: “There is no sleep, no fatigue, no boredom on his face. There were even colors on him, a sparkle in his eyes, something like courage, or at least self-confidence. You can’t see a bathrobe on him: Tarantiev took him with him to his godfather with other things. The disappearance of the dressing gown, a symbol of Oblomov's apathy, is very remarkable, just as it is remarkable that a new significant detail appears on these pages of the novel - a lilac branch - a symbol of hope, love, the resurrection of the soul.
state of mind heroes finds its reflection

speech characteristic- characterization of a literary hero
works through his speech, in which words and phrases appear,
indicating his occupation, social affiliation,
features of education, cultural level, degree of education.

Oblomov is a lazy person who does not see the point in life, and it is this trait
character is most reflected in his speech.-
"Ten places in one day - miserable!"-
“That's just work from eight o'clock to twelve, from twelve to five, yes
still at home - oh, oh! ”-” And write everything, write everything, like a wheel, like a machine: write
tomorrow after tomorrow; the holiday will come, summer will come - and he writes everything?
When to stop and rest? Unhappy!"

Stolz is the exact opposite of Oblomov. He knows how to live and
trying to teach it to everyone around.
“Labor is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine.”
“To work in order to have a sweeter rest, and to rest means to live on the other, artistic, graceful side of life, the life of artists, poets.”
"Well, Ilya, hurry, hurry!"

Olga is a curious, kind but mocking girl, and these traits of her character are observed in her speech.
“Yes, it is an important crime,” she said timidly and quietly, “to put on different stockings.”
"What should be done so that you do not get bored?"
"I want you not to be bored, so that you are here at home, so that you
deftly, freely, easily, and so as not to leave ... to lie down.

Agafya Matveevna is an economic, economical woman, and this is reflected
practically - “I was still in my everyday dress, everything was in the kitchen.” - “How is there no work?
There is always work to be done, she said. - Cook dinner in the morning, sew in the afternoon, and
dinner in the evening."