What are the features of the composition of the novel “A Hero of Our Time”? Artistic features of the novel “A Hero of Our Time”

M. Yu. Lermontov wrote that in the novel “Hero of Our Time” he wanted to explore “the history of the human soul,” which is “almost more curious and not more useful than history a whole people." The entire plot and compositional structure of the work is subordinated to this goal.

“A Hero of Our Time” includes five stories, each of which tells about an extraordinary story in the life of Pechorin. Moreover, in the arrangement of the stories (“Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”) Lermontov violates the life chronology of the novel’s episodes. In reality, the events took place in the following order: Pechorin’s meeting with smugglers in Taman (“Taman”); the hero's life in Pyatigorsk, his romance with Princess Mary, duel with Grushnitsky (“Princess Mary”); Grigory Alexandrovich’s stay in fortress N (at the same time the story with Bela takes place) (“Bela”); Pechorin's two-week trip to the Cossack village, an argument with Vulich about predestination, and then return to the fortress again (“Fatalist”); meeting with Maxim Maksimych on the way to Persia (“Maksim Maksimych”); death of Pechorin (Preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”).

Thus, Lermontov ends the novel not with the death of the hero, but with the episode where Pechorin, being exposed to mortal danger, nevertheless escaped death. Moreover, in the story “The Fatalist” the hero questions the existence of predestination and fate, giving priority to his own strengths and intellect. Thus, the writer does not relieve Pechorin of responsibility for all the actions he committed, including those that he committed after his stay in the Cossack village. However, Lermontov talks about this at the end of the novel, when readers already know the story with Bela, when they read about the hero’s meeting with the staff captain. How to explain such a discrepancy?

The fact is that Pechorin’s character is static; the novel does not present the evolution of the hero, his spiritual growth, we do not see the internal changes happening to him. Lermontov only varies life situations and guides his hero through them.

Thanks to a specific composition, Lermontov portrays the hero in “triple perception”: first through the eyes of Maxim Maksimych, then the publisher, then Pechorin himself talks about himself in his diary. A similar technique was used by A. S. Pushkin in the short story “The Shot”. The meaning of such a composition is to gradually reveal the character of the hero (from external to internal), when the author first intrigues the reader with the unusualness of situations and the hero’s actions, and then reveals the motives for his behavior.

First, we learn about Pechorin from a conversation between the publisher and Maxim Maksimych. The publisher travels “on a crossroads from Tiflis.” In the story “Bela” he describes his travel impressions and the beauty of nature. His traveling companion is a staff captain who has long served in the Caucasus. Maxim Maksimych tells his fellow traveler the story of Bela. Thus, “an adventurous short story turns out to be included in the “journey”, and vice versa - the “journey” enters the short story as an element that inhibits its presentation.”

The staff captain's story is thus interspersed with his comments, remarks from the listener, landscapes, and descriptions of the difficulties of the heroes' journey. The writer undertakes such “inhibition” of the plot of the “main story” in order to further intrigue the reader, so that the middle and ending of the story are in sharp contrast.

Pechorin’s “Caucasian History” is given in the perception of Maxim Maksimych, who has known Pechorin for a long time, loves him, but does not understand his behavior at all. The staff captain is simple-minded, his spiritual needs are small - inner world Pechorin is incomprehensible to him. Hence the strangeness, mystery of Pechorin, the incredibleness of his actions. Hence the special poetry of the story. As Belinsky notes, the staff captain “told it in his own way, in his own language; but from this she not only lost nothing, but gained infinitely much. Good Maxim Maksimych, without knowing it himself, became a poet, so that in his every word, in every expression lies an endless world of poetry.”

In “Bela” we see the world of the mountaineers - strong, fearless people, with wild morals, customs, but integral characters and feelings. Against their background, the inconsistency of the hero’s consciousness, the painful duality of his nature, becomes noticeable. But here Pechorin’s cruelty becomes especially noticeable. The Circassians in Bel are also cruel. But for them such behavior is the “norm”: it corresponds to their customs and temperament. Even Maxim Maksimych recognizes the justice of the mountaineers’ actions. Pechorin is an educated, well-mannered young man with deep, analytical mind. In this sense, such behavior is unnatural for him.

However, the staff captain never criticizes Pechorin, although in his heart he often condemns him. Maxim Maksimych here embodies the morality of common sense, “which forgives evil wherever it sees its necessity or the impossibility of its destruction” (Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”). However, for Lermontov, such behavior is the spiritual limitation of the staff captain. Behind the reasoning of the “publisher”, amazed by the flexibility of the mind and common sense Russian man, one can guess the author’s own thought about the need to fight evil, regardless of any extraneous conditions.

The story “Bela” is a kind of exposition in revealing the image of Pechorin. Here we learn for the first time about the hero and his life circumstances, his upbringing, and way of life.

Next, the “publisher”, a traveling officer and a writer talk about the hero. In the perception of the “publisher”, Pechorin’s meeting with Maxim Maksimych and a detailed psychological picture hero (story "Maksim Maksimych"),

In this story, practically nothing happens - there is no plot dynamism that is present in “Bel” and “Taman”. However, this is where the hero’s psychology begins to reveal itself. It seems that this story can be considered the beginning of the revelation of the image of Pechorin.

“Taman” is the story of Pechorin’s relationship with “honest smugglers.” As in Bel, Lermontov again places the hero in an environment alien to him - the world of simple, rude people, smugglers. However, the romantic motive here (the love of a civilized hero and a “savage woman”) is almost parodied: Lermontov very quickly reveals true character relations between Pechorin and “ondine”. As B. M. Eikhenbaum notes, “in Taman the touch of naive “Rousseauism” that the reader may perceive in Bel is removed.”

Beautiful undine from the wild, free, romantic world turns out to be an assistant to smugglers. She is decisive and cunning like a man: Pechorin miraculously manages to avoid death in a fight with her. Thus, the world of nature and civilization again turn out to be incompatible in Lermontov. However, in in a certain sense the story restores the semantic balance in the novel. If in “Bela” Pechorin rudely invades the measured course of life of the mountaineers and destroys it, “insulting” nature itself in their person, then in “Taman” “ natural world“does not want to tolerate any more interference from outside and almost takes Pechorin’s life.

As in “Bel,” in “Taman” the hero is compared with the surrounding characters. Bravery and daring coexist in the characters of smugglers with heartlessness and cruelty. Having left their permanent place, they abandon the blind boy and the unfortunate old woman to the mercy of fate. Human life in their eyes has no value: the undine could easily drown Pechorin if he did not resist. But these traits in the heroes are psychologically motivated and justified by their “wild, homeless life,” belonging to the “underworld,” the constant threat of danger, and the constant struggle for survival.

But, noting the courage and heartlessness in Pechorin’s character, we do not find such motivations in his life. For smugglers (as well as for the mountaineers in “Bel”) this behavior is “the norm.” For Pechorin it is unnatural.

The next part of the story, “Princess Mary,” reminds us of a secular story and psychological novel simultaneously. Pechorin is depicted here surrounded by people of his circle - the secular aristocracy, gathered on the waters. As B. M. Eikhenbaum notes, after Pechorin’s fiasco, which he suffered in Taman, he “leaves the world of savages” and returns to the much more familiar and safer world for him of “noble young ladies and mistresses.”

The hero has a lot in common with this society, although he does not want to admit it. Thus, Pechorin is well versed in the world of intrigue, gossip, slander and farce. He not only exposes the conspiracy against himself, but also punishes its initiator - he kills Grushnitsky in a duel. Out of boredom, Pechorin begins to court Princess Mary, but, having achieved her love, he openly admits to her his own indifference. Vera appears in Kislovodsk, the only woman whom Pechorin “could never deceive,” but he cannot give her happiness either.

Failure in love is perhaps the most striking and significant characteristic of a character in Russian literature, which is a prerequisite for failure. life position hero. Pechorin is morally bankrupt, and in the story “Princess Mary” he thinks about this, analyzes his own character, his thoughts and feelings. The story is the culmination of understanding the image of Pechorin. It is here that he reveals his psychology, his life attitudes.

Before the duel with Grushnitsky, he reflects on the meaning own life and does not find him: “Why did I live? for what purpose was I born?.. And it’s true, it existed, and it’s true that I had a high purpose, because I feel immense powers in my soul, but I didn’t guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions; I came out of their furnace hard and cold as iron, but I lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations, best color life..."

“Princess Mary”, in a certain sense, is also the denouement in Pechorin’s storyline: here he brings to its logical conclusion human connections that are especially important to him: he kills Grushnitsky, openly communicates with Mary, breaks up with Werner, breaks up with Vera.

In addition, it is worth noting the similarity of the plot situations of the three stories - “Bela”, “Taman” and “Princess Mary”. In each of them there is love triangle: he - she - rival. Thus, in an effort to avoid boredom, Pechorin finds himself in similar life situations.

The last story that concludes the novel is called “Fatalist”. In revealing the image of Pechorin, it plays the role of an epilogue. Lermontov raises here the philosophical problem of fate, fate, fate.

Vulich dies in the story, as Pechorin predicted, and this suggests that predestination exists. But Pechorin himself decided to try his luck and remained alive, the hero’s thoughts are already more optimistic: “...how often do we mistake for a belief a deception of feelings or a blunder of reason!... I like to doubt everything: this disposition of the mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character - on the contrary “As for me, I always move forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me.”

Thus, the conclusion of "A Hero of Our Time" philosophical story meaningfully. Pechorin often does evil, fully aware true meaning of your actions. However, the hero’s “ideology” allows him such behavior. Pechorin himself is inclined to explain his vices evil fate or fate, life circumstances, etc. “Ever since I’ve been living and acting,” the hero notes, “fate has somehow always led me to the outcome of other people’s dramas, as if without me no one could die or come into despair. I was like necessary person fifth act: involuntarily I played the pitiful role of an executioner or a traitor.” Lermontov does not relieve Pechorin of responsibility for his actions, recognizing the autonomy of the hero’s free will, his ability to choose between good and evil.

Thus, the novel is imbued with unity of thought. As Belinsky noted, “the line of a circle returns to the point from which it left”1. The main idea of ​​the novel is the question of inner man, about his actions and inclinations, thoughts and feelings and the reasons that gave rise to them.

In the novel “A Hero of Our Time,” Lermontov focuses his main attention on depicting the “history of the human soul,” on revealing the character and inner world of the hero who lived in the 30s years XIX century. This is a time of absence of social ideals, detachment noble intelligentsia from socio-political life.
The composition of the novel is determined by its concept and is subordinated to the task of most fully revealing the character and inner world of the main character. The peculiarity of the construction of this work is that Lermontov violated the chronological sequence of events described in the novel.
“A Hero of Our Time” consists of five stories. However, V. G. Belinsky argued that “this is not a collection of several stories and tales, but a novel in which one main character and one main idea.”
The novel has a “ring composition”: first there are chapters devoted to latest events in the life of Pechorin (“Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”), then tells about earlier episodes of the hero’s life (“Taman”, “Princess Mary”). The last story sums up a kind of philosophical conclusion life's quest Pechorin: “I suggest you try for yourself whether a person can arbitrarily dispose of his life, or whether a fatal moment is assigned to each of us in advance” (“Fatalist”).
The uniqueness of the “ring composition” also lies in the fact that the action of the novel begins in the fortress and ends there. The motif of “prison”, “monastery”, “prisonership” is one of the main ones in Lermontov’s work. Associations involuntarily arise with the poem “Mtsyri” - the hero fled from the monastery, but by the will of fate he returned and died outside the monastery walls. A passionate desire for freedom, but the fatal impossibility of achieving it is one of the important thoughts in Lermontov’s poetry and the novel “A Hero of Our Time.”
The composition of the novel allows you to consistently change the “narrators”. First, other heroes talk about Pechorin, then he himself gives an analysis of his personality.
In the story “Bela,” the reader learns about Pechorin from the story of Maxim Maksimych, a kind and decent man, but poorly versed in the complex and contradictory character of Pechorin, in the intricacies of his soul. In the chapter “Maksim Maksimych” the narrator changes. The wandering officer, a subtle and observant man, draws a psychological portrait of the hero, notes the main thing about him: he is entirely woven from contradictions and contrasts. “His figure and broad shoulders proved a strong build,” and in “his smile there was something childish,” “some kind of nervous weakness”; "despite light color his hair, his mustache and eyebrows were black”; the eyes “didn’t laugh,

Tasks and tests on the topic "The originality of the composition of M. Yu. Lermontov's novel "A Hero of Our Time""

• Orthoepy - Important Topics to repeat the Unified State Exam in Russian

  Lessons: 1 Tasks: 7

• Vowel sounds. Letters e, e, yu, i and their function in a word - Sounds and letters 1st grade

  Lessons: 3 Assignments: 9 Tests: 1

• Changing past tense verbs by gender and number - Verb as part of speech grade 4

“A Hero of Our Time” is the first lyrical and psychological novel in Russian prose. Lyrical because the author and the hero have “the same soul, the same torment.” Psychological because the ideological and plot center is not events, but the personality of a person, his spiritual life. Therefore, the psychological wealth of the novel lies primarily in the image of the “hero of the time.” Through the complexity and inconsistency of Pechorin, Lermontov affirms the idea that everything cannot be fully explained: in life there is always something high and secret, which is deeper than words and ideas.

Hence, one of the features of the composition is the increasing revelation of the secret. Lermontov leads the reader from Pechorin's actions (in the first three stories) to their motives (in stories 4 and 5), that is, from riddle to solution. At the same time, we understand that the secret is not Pechorin’s actions, but his inner world, psychology.

In the first three stories (“Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, “Taman”) only the actions of the hero are presented.

Lermontov demonstrates examples of Pechorin's indifference and cruelty towards the people around him, shown either as victims of his passions (Bela) or as victims of his cold calculation (poor smugglers). The conclusion involuntarily suggests itself that Pechorin’s psychological nerve is also egoism: “What do I, a traveling officer, care about the joys and misfortunes of men?”

But it's not that simple. The hero is not at all of the same type. Before us is at the same time a conscientious, vulnerable and deeply suffering person. In “Princess Mary” Pechorin’s sober report sounds. He understands the hidden mechanism of his psychology: “There are two people in me: one lives in the full sense of the word, the other thinks and judges him.” And later Grigory Alexandrovich openly formulates his life credo: “I look at suffering to the joy of others only in relation to myself, as food that supports my spiritual strength...” Based on this rule, Pechorin develops a whole theory of happiness: “To be the cause of suffering and joy for someone, without having to then there is no positive right - isn’t this the sweetest food of our pride? What is happiness? Intense pride." It would seem that the smart Pechorin, who knows what happiness consists of, should be happy, because he is constantly and tirelessly trying to satiate his pride. But for some reason there is no happiness, and instead of it there is fatigue and boredom... Why is the hero’s fate so tragic?

The answer to this question is last story"Fatalist". Here the problems being solved are not so much psychological as philosophical and moral.

The story begins with a philosophical dispute between Pechorin and Vulich about predestination human life. Vulich is a supporter of fatalism. Pechorin asks the question: “If there are definitely predestination, then why were we given will, reason?” This dispute is verified by three examples, three mortal battles with fate. Firstly, Vulich’s attempt to kill himself with a shot to the temple, which ended in failure; secondly, the accidental murder of Vulich on the street by a drunken Cossack; thirdly, Pechorin’s brave attack on the Cossack killer. Without denying the very idea of ​​fatalism, Lermontov leads to the idea that one cannot resign oneself, be submissive to fate. With such a turn philosophical theme the author saved the novel from a gloomy ending. Pechorin, whose death is unexpectedly announced in the middle of the story, in this last story is not only saved from a seemingly certain death; but also for the first time he commits an act that benefits people. And instead of a funeral march, at the end of the novel there are congratulations on the victory over death: “the officers congratulated me - and there was definitely something for it.”

The hero has an ambivalent attitude towards the fatalism of his ancestors: on the one hand, he sneers at their naive faith in the heavenly bodies, on the other hand, he openly envies their faith, since he understands that any faith is good. But rejecting the former naive faith, he realizes that in his time, the 30s, there was nothing to replace the lost ideals. Pechorin’s misfortune is that he doubts not only the necessity of goodness in general; For him, not only do shrines not exist, he laughs “at everything in the world...”. And unbelief gives rise to either inaction or empty activity, which are torture for an intelligent and energetic person.

Showing the courage of his hero, Lermontov simultaneously affirmed the need to fight for personal freedom. Grigory Alexandrovich values ​​his freedom very much: “I am ready for all sacrifices except this one: I will put my life on the line twenty times, but I will not sell my freedom.” But such freedom without humanistic ideals is due to the fact that Pechorin is constantly trying to suppress the voice of his heart: “I have long been living not with my heart, but with my head.”

However, Pechorin is not a smug cynic. Playing “the role of an executioner or an ax in the hands of fate,” he himself suffers from this no less than his victims; the entire novel is a hymn to a courageous, free from prejudices personality and at the same time a requiem to a gifted, and perhaps brilliant, person who could not “guess of his high purpose."

Beautiful and majestic nature contrasts with the petty, unchanging interests of people and their suffering. The restless, capricious element of the sea contributes to the romance in which the smugglers from the chapter “Taman” appear before us. The morning landscape, full of freshness, including golden clouds, makes up the exposition of the chapter “Maksim Maksimych”. Nature in “Princess Mary” becomes a psychological means of revealing Pechorin’s character. Before the duel - in contrast - a radiance is introduced sunlight, and after the fight the sun will seem dim to the hero, and its rays no longer warm him. In "Fatalist" the cold light of shining stars on a dark blue vault leads Pechorin to philosophical reflections about predestination and fate.

In general, this work is a socio-psychological and philosophical novel, akin to a travel novel, close to travel notes. The genre of psychological novel required the creation of a new novel structure and a special psychological plot, where Lermontov separated the author from the hero and arranged the stories in a special sequence.

“Bela” is a work that combines a travel essay and a short story about the love of a European for a savage.

“Maksim Maksimych” is a story with a central episode shown in close-up.

“Taman” is a synthesis of a short story and a travelogue with an unexpected ending.

“Princess Mary” - “secular story” psychological nature with the hero’s diary and a satirical sketch of the mores of the “water society”.

“The Fatalist” is a philosophical story combined with a “mystical story” about a fatal shot and a “mysterious incident.”

But all these genre forms, individual narratives Lermontov became parts of a single whole - research into the spiritual world modern hero, whose personality and fate unite the entire narrative. Pechorin's background is deliberately excluded, which gives his biography an air of mystery.

It is interesting to know what the second person in Pechorin is like, thinking and condemning himself first of all. In "Pechorin's Journal" the hero's character is revealed as if "from the inside", it reveals the motives of his strange actions, his attitude towards himself, and self-esteem.

For Lermontov, not only a person’s actions were always important, but their motivation, which for one reason or another could not be realized.

Pechorin compares favorably with other characters in that he is troubled by questions of consciousness human existence– about the purpose and meaning of a person’s life, about his purpose. He is worried that his only purpose is to destroy the hopes of others. He is even indifferent to his own life. Only curiosity, the expectation of something new excites him.

However, asserting his human dignity, Pechorin actively acts and resists circumstances throughout the entire novel. Pechorin judges and executes himself, and this right of his is emphasized by the composition in which the last one is Pechorin. Everything important that was hidden from the people around him, who lived next to him, who loved him, was conveyed by Pechorin himself.

M. Yu. Lermontov wrote that in the novel “Hero of Our Time” he wanted to explore “the history of the human soul,” which is “almost more curious and useful than the history of an entire people.” The entire plot and compositional structure of the work is subordinated to this goal.

“A Hero of Our Time” includes five stories, each of which tells about an extraordinary story in the life of Pechorin. Moreover, in the arrangement of the stories (“Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”, “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”) Lermontov violates the life chronology of the novel’s episodes. In reality, the events took place in the following order: Pechorin’s meeting with smugglers in Taman (“Taman”); the hero's life in Pyatigorsk, his romance with Princess Mary, duel with Grushnitsky (“Princess Mary”); Grigory Alexandrovich’s stay in fortress N (at the same time the story with Bela takes place) (“Bela”); Pechorin's two-week trip to the Cossack village, an argument with Vulich about predestination, and then return to the fortress again (“Fatalist”); meeting with Maxim Maksimych on the way to Persia (“Maksim Maksimych”); death of Pechorin (Preface to “Pechorin’s Journal”).

Thus, Lermontov ends the novel not with the death of the hero, but with the episode where Pechorin, being exposed to mortal danger, nevertheless escaped death. Moreover, in the story “The Fatalist” the hero questions the existence of predestination and fate, giving priority to his own strengths and intellect. Thus, the writer does not relieve Pechorin of responsibility for all the actions he committed, including those that he committed after his stay in the Cossack village. However, Lermontov talks about this at the end of the novel, when readers already know the story with Bela, when they read about the hero’s meeting with the staff captain. How to explain such a discrepancy?

The fact is that Pechorin’s character is static, the novel does not present the hero’s evolution, his spiritual growth, we do not see the internal changes happening to him. Lermontov only varies life situations and guides his hero through them.

Thanks to a specific composition, Lermontov portrays the hero in “triple perception”: first through the eyes of Maxim Maksimych, then the publisher, then Pechorin himself talks about himself in his diary. A similar technique was used by A. S. Pushkin in the short story “The Shot”. The meaning of such a composition is to gradually reveal the character of the hero (from external to internal), when the author first intrigues the reader with the unusualness of situations and the hero’s actions, and then reveals the motives for his behavior.

First, we learn about Pechorin from a conversation between the publisher and Maxim Maksimych. The publisher travels “on a crossroads from Tiflis.” In the story “Bela” he describes his travel impressions and the beauty of nature. His traveling companion is a staff captain who has long served in the Caucasus. Maxim Maksimych tells his fellow traveler the story of Bela. Thus, “an adventurous short story turns out to be included in the “journey”, and vice versa - the “journey” enters the short story as an element that inhibits its presentation.”

The staff captain's story is thus interspersed with his comments, remarks from the listener, landscapes, and descriptions of the difficulties of the heroes' journey. The writer undertakes such “inhibition” of the plot of the “main story” in order to further intrigue the reader, so that the middle and ending of the story are in sharp contrast.

Pechorin’s “Caucasian History” is given in the perception of Maxim Maksimych, who has known Pechorin for a long time, loves him, but does not understand his behavior at all. The staff captain is simple-minded, his spiritual needs are small - Pechorin’s inner world is incomprehensible to him. Hence the strangeness, mystery of Pechorin, the incredibleness of his actions. Hence the special poetry of the story. As Belinsky notes, the staff captain “told it in his own way, in his own language; but from this she not only lost nothing, but gained infinitely much. Good Maxim Maksimych, without knowing it himself, became a poet, so that in his every word, in every expression lies an endless world of poetry.”

In “Bela” we see the world of the mountaineers - strong, fearless people, with wild morals, customs, but integral characters and feelings. Against their background, the inconsistency of the hero’s consciousness, the painful duality of his nature, becomes noticeable. But here Pechorin’s cruelty becomes especially noticeable. The Circassians in Bel are also cruel. But for them such behavior is the “norm”: it corresponds to their customs and temperament. Even Maxim Maksimych recognizes the justice of the mountaineers’ actions. Pechorin is an educated, well-mannered young man with a deep, analytical mind. In this sense, such behavior is unnatural for him.

However, the staff captain never criticizes Pechorin, although in his heart he often condemns him. Maxim Maksimych here embodies the morality of common sense, “which forgives evil wherever it sees its necessity or the impossibility of its destruction” (Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”). However, for Lermontov, such behavior is the spiritual limitation of the staff captain. Behind the reasoning of the “publisher,” amazed by the flexibility of mind and common sense of the Russian person, one can discern the author’s own thought about the need to fight evil, regardless of any extraneous conditions.

The story “Bela” is a kind of exposition in revealing the image of Pechorin. Here we learn for the first time about the hero and his life circumstances, his upbringing, and way of life.

Next, the “publisher”, a traveling officer and a writer talk about the hero. In the perception of the “publisher”, Pechorin’s meeting with Maxim Maksimych and a detailed psychological portrait of the hero (the story “Maksim Maksimych”) are given,

In this story, practically nothing happens - there is no plot dynamism that is present in “Bel” and “Taman”. However, this is where the hero’s psychology begins to reveal itself. It seems that this story can be considered the beginning of the revelation of the image of Pechorin.

A beautiful undine from a wild, free, romantic world turns out to be an assistant to smugglers. She is decisive and cunning like a man: Pechorin miraculously manages to avoid death in a fight with her. Thus, the world of nature and civilization again turn out to be incompatible in Lermontov. However, in a certain sense, the story restores the semantic balance in the novel. If in “Bela” Pechorin rudely invades the measured course of life of the mountaineers and destroys it, “insulting” nature itself in their person, then in “Taman” the “natural world” no longer wants to tolerate interference from the outside and almost takes Pechorin’s life.

As in “Bel,” in “Taman” the hero is compared with the surrounding characters. Bravery and daring coexist in the characters of smugglers with heartlessness and cruelty. Having left their permanent place, they abandon the blind boy and the unfortunate old woman to the mercy of fate. Human life in their eyes has no value: the undine could easily drown Pechorin if he did not resist. But these traits in the heroes are psychologically motivated and justified by their “wild, homeless life,” belonging to the “underworld,” the constant threat of danger, and the constant struggle for survival.

But, noting the courage and heartlessness in Pechorin’s character, we do not find such motivations in his life. For smugglers (as well as for the mountaineers in “Bel”) this behavior is “the norm.” For Pechorin it is unnatural.

The next part of the story, “Princess Mary,” reminds us of a secular story and a psychological novel at the same time. Pechorin is depicted here surrounded by people of his circle - the secular aristocracy, gathered on the waters. As B. M. Eikhenbaum notes, after Pechorin’s fiasco, which he suffered in Taman, he “leaves the world of savages” and returns to the much more familiar and safer world for him of “noble young ladies and mistresses.”

The hero has a lot in common with this society, although he does not want to admit it. Thus, Pechorin is well versed in the world of intrigue, gossip, slander and farce. He not only exposes the conspiracy against himself, but also punishes its initiator - he kills Grushnitsky in a duel. Out of boredom, Pechorin begins to court Princess Mary, but, having achieved her love, he openly admits to her his own indifference. Vera appears in Kislovodsk, the only woman whom Pechorin “could never deceive,” but he cannot give her happiness either.

Failure in love is perhaps the most striking and significant characteristic of a character in Russian literature, which is a prerequisite for the failure of the hero’s life position. Pechorin is morally bankrupt, and in the story “Princess Mary” he thinks about this, analyzes his own character, his thoughts and feelings. The story is the culmination of understanding the image of Pechorin. It is here that he reveals his psychology, his life attitudes.

Before the duel with Grushnitsky, he reflects on the meaning of his own life and does not find it: “Why did I live? for what purpose was I born?.. And it’s true, it existed, and it’s true that I had a high purpose, because I feel immense powers in my soul, but I didn’t guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions; From their furnace I came out hard and cold, like iron, but I lost forever the ardor of noble aspirations, the best color of life...”

“Princess Mary”, in a certain sense, is also the denouement in Pechorin’s storyline: here he brings to its logical conclusion human connections that are especially important to him: he kills Grushnitsky, openly communicates with Mary, breaks up with Werner, breaks up with Vera.

In addition, it is worth noting the similarity of the plot situations of the three stories - “Bela”, “Taman” and “Princess Mary”. In each of them a love triangle arises: he - she - rival. Thus, in an effort to avoid boredom, Pechorin finds himself in similar life situations.

The last story that concludes the novel is called “Fatalist”. In revealing the image of Pechorin, it plays the role of an epilogue. Lermontov raises here the philosophical problem of fate, fate, fate.

Vulich dies in the story, as Pechorin predicted, and this suggests that predestination exists. But Pechorin himself decided to try his luck and remained alive, the hero’s thoughts are already more optimistic: “...how often do we mistake for a belief a deception of feelings or a blunder of reason!... I like to doubt everything: this disposition of the mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character - on the contrary “As for me, I always move forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me.”

Thus, the conclusion of “A Hero of Our Time” with a philosophical story is significant. Pechorin often does evil, fully aware of the true meaning of his actions. However, the hero’s “ideology” allows him such behavior. Pechorin himself is inclined to explain his vices by evil fate or fate, life circumstances, etc. “Ever since I’ve been living and acting,” the hero notes, “fate has somehow always led me to the outcome of other people’s dramas, as if without no one could die or despair. I was like a necessary person in the fifth act: involuntarily I played the pitiful role of an executioner or a traitor.” Lermontov does not relieve Pechorin of responsibility for his actions, recognizing the autonomy of the hero’s free will, his ability to choose between good and evil.

Thus, the novel is imbued with unity of thought. As Belinsky noted, “the line of a circle returns to the point from which it left”1. The main idea of ​​the novel is the question of the inner man, his actions and inclinations, thoughts and feelings and the reasons that gave rise to them.

Introduction

Composition is one of the most important means by which a writer invents the phenomena of life that interests him the way he understands them and characterizes them. characters works.

The author's ideological task also determined the unique construction of the novel. Its peculiarity is the violation of the chronological sequence of events, which is described in the novel. The novel consists of five parts, five stories, each with its own genre, its own plot and its own title.

"Maksim Maksimych"

"Taman"

"Princess Mary"

"Fatalist"

The hero who unites all these stories into something whole, into a single novel, is Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin. If you arrange the story of his life, invented in the novel, in a certain sequence, you get the following.

A former guards officer, transferred to the Caucasus for something, Pechorin goes to the place of his punishment. On the way he stops in Taman. Here an adventure happened to him, which is described in the story “Taman”.

From here he comes to Pyatigorsk (“Princess Mary”). For a duel with Grushnitsky, he was exiled to serve in the fortress. During his service in the fortress, the events told in the stories “Bela” and “Fatalist” take place. Several years pass. Pechorin, who retired, leaves for Persia. On the way there he meets last time with Maxim Maksimych (“Maksim Maksimych”).

The layout of the parts of the novel should be like this:

"Taman"

"Princess Mary"

"Fatalist"

"Maksim Maksimych"

And I wanted to figure out why M.Yu. Lermontov structured his novel in a completely different way, why he arranged the chapters in a completely different order, what goals the author set for himself, what is the idea of ​​the novel.

Compositional and artistic originality of the novel "A Hero of Our Time"

In 1839, Mikhail Lermontov's story "Bela" was published in the third issue of the journal Otechestvennye zapiski. Then, in the eleventh issue, the story “Fatalist” appeared, and in the second book of the magazine for 1840, “Taman”. In the same 1840 already known to the reader Three short stories telling about various episodes in the life of a certain Pechorin were published in print as chapters of the novel “A Hero of Our Time.” Criticism greeted the new work ambiguously: a heated controversy ensued. Along with the stormy enthusiasm of the “frantic Vissarion” - Belinsky, who called Lermontov’s novel a work that represents “absolutely new world art", who saw in him "a deep knowledge of the human heart and modern society", "richness of content and originality", the press heard the voices of critics who absolutely did not accept the novel. The image of Pechorin seemed to them a slanderous caricature, an imitation of Western models. Lermontov's opponents liked only the "truly Russian" Maxim Maksimych. It is significant that he appreciated absolutely the same " Hero..." and Emperor Nicholas I. He himself explained that, having started reading the novel, he was delighted, deciding that it was Maxim Maksimych who was the "hero of our time." However, having later discovered his mistake, he was very indignant at the author The reaction of critics forced Lermontov to supplement the novel with the author's preface and a preface to Pechorin's Journal. Both of these prefaces play an important, determining role in the work: they reveal as much as possible. author's position and provide the key to unraveling Lermontov’s method of understanding reality. The compositional complexity of the novel is inextricably linked with the psychological complexity of the image of the main character.

The ambiguity of Pechorin's character, the inconsistency of this image, was revealed not only in the study of his very spiritual world, but also in the correlation of the hero with other characters. The author forces the reader to constantly compare the main character with those around him. Thus, a compositional solution for the novel was found, according to which the reader gradually approaches the hero.

Having first published three stories separately, which in the final version of the novel were not even chapters of one part, Lermontov “made an application” for a work related in genre to “Eugene Onegin”. In "Dedication" Pushkin called his novel "a collection motley chapters". This emphasized the dominance of the author's will in the presentation of events: the narrative is subject not only and not so much to the sequence of events as to its significance; episodes are selected not according to the severity of plot collisions, but according to psychological richness. Conceived by Lermontov as a “long chain of stories,” the novel assumed the same , as in Pushkin, artistic task. And at the same time, “A Hero of Our Time” creates in Russian literature a special, absolutely new type a novel that easily and organically combines the features of traditional novel genres (moral, adventurous, personal) and the features of “small genres” that were widespread in Russian literature in the 30s: the travel essay, the bivouac story, the social story, the Caucasian short story. As B. Eikhenbaum noted, ““A Hero of Our Time” was a way out of these small genres on the way to the genre of the novel that unites them.”

The composition of the novel is subject to the logic of revealing the image of the main character. V. Nabokov in the “Preface to “A Hero of Our Time” wrote about the arrangement of the short stories: “In the first two - “Bela” and “Maksim Maksimych” - the author, or, more precisely, the hero-storyteller, an inquisitive traveler, describes his trip to the Caucasus along the Georgian Military Road in 1837 or so. This is Narrator 1. Having left Tiflis in a northern direction, he meets an old warrior named Maxim Maksimych on the way. They travel together for some time, and Maxim Maksimych informs Narrator 1 about a certain Grigory Alexandrovich Pechorin, who, five years old, carrying military service in Chechnya, north of Dagestan, he once kidnapped a Circassian woman. Maxim Maksimych is Narrator 2, and his story is called “Bela”. At their next road date (“Maksim Maksimych”), Narrator 1 and Narrator 2 meet Pechorin himself. The latter becomes Narrator 3 - after all, three more stories will be taken from Pechorin's journal, which Narrator 1 will publish posthumously. The attentive reader will note that the whole trick of such a composition is to bring Pechorin closer to us over and over again, until, finally, he himself speaks to us, but by that time he will no longer be alive. In the first story, Pechorin is at a “second cousin” distance from the reader, since we learn about him from the words of Maxim Maksimych and even in the broadcast of Narrator 1. In the second story, Narrator 2 seems to distance himself, and Narrator 1 gets the opportunity to see Pechorin with his own eyes. With what touching impatience Maxim Maksimych hurried to present his hero in real life. And here we have the last three stories; Now that Narrator 1 and Narrator 2 have stepped aside, we find ourselves face to face with Pechorin.

Because of this spiral composition, the time sequence appears to be blurred. The stories float, unfold before us, sometimes everything is in full view, sometimes as if in a haze, and sometimes, having retreated, they will appear again in a different perspective or lighting, just as a traveler has a view of the five peaks of the Caucasus ridge from a gorge. This traveler is Lermontov, not Pechorin. The five stories are arranged one after another in the order in which the events become the property of Narrator 1, but their chronology is different; V general outline it looks like this:

Around 1830, officer Pechorin, following official needs from St. Petersburg to the Caucasus to join an active detachment, stopped in the seaside town of Taman (a port separated from the northeastern tip of the Crimean peninsula by a narrow strait). The story that happened to him there forms the plot of “Tamani,” the third story in the novel.

In the active detachment, Pechorin takes part in skirmishes with mountain tribes and after some time, on May 10, 1832, he comes to rest on the waters in Pyatigorsk. In Pyatigorsk, as well as in Kislovodsk, a nearby resort, he becomes a participant dramatic events, leading to the fact that on June 17 he kills an officer in a duel. He talks about all this in the fourth story - “Princess Mary”.

On June 19, by order of the military command, Pechorin was transferred to a fortress located in the Chechen region, in the northeastern part of the Caucasus, where he arrived only in the fall (the reasons for the delay are not explained). There he meets staff captain Maxim Maksimych. Narrator 1 learns about this from Narrator 2 in “Bela,” with which the novel begins.

In December of the same year (1832) Pechorin left the fortress for two weeks to the Cossack village north of the Terek, where the story he described in the fifth happened. last story- "Fatalist".

In the spring of 1833, he kidnaps a Circassian girl, who four and a half months later is killed by the robber Kazbich. In December of the same year, Pechorin left for Georgia and soon returned to St. Petersburg. We will learn about this in Bel.

About four years pass, and in the fall of 1837, Narrator 1 and Narrator 2, heading north, make a stop in Vladikavkaz and there they meet Pechorin, who is already back in the Caucasus, on his way to Persia. Narrator 1 talks about this in “Maxim Maksimych,” the second story in the cycle.

In 1838 or 1839, returning from Persia, Pechorin dies under circumstances that may have confirmed the prediction that he would die as a result of an unhappy marriage.

Narrator 1 posthumously publishes his journal, received from Narrator 2. Narrator 1 mentions the death of the hero in his preface (1841) to "Pechorin's Journal", containing "Taman", "Princess Mary" and "Fatalist". Thus, the chronological sequence of the five stories, if we talk about their connection with Pechorin’s biography, is as follows: “Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”, “Bela”, “Maksim Maksimych”. It is unlikely that in the process of working on Bela, Lermontov already had an established plan for Princess Mary. The details of Pechorin's arrival at the Kamenny Brod fortress, reported by Maxim Maksimych in "Bel", do not quite coincide with the details mentioned by Pechorin himself in "Princess Mary." In the first part, we see Pechorin through the eyes of Maxim Maksimych. This man is sincerely attached to Pechorin, but spiritually deeply alien to him. They are separated not only by the difference in social status and age. They are people in principle. various types consciousness and children different eras. For the staff captain, an old Caucasian who began his service under General Ermolov and has forever retained the “Ermolov” view of life, his young friend is a foreign, strange and inexplicable phenomenon. Therefore, in the story of Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin appears as a mysterious, enigmatic person: “After all, there are, really, such people who are written in their family that various extraordinary things should happen to them!” What can this maxim explain to the reader? Nothing, except that Maxim Maksimych Pechorin does not understand and does not particularly strive to understand, loving him simply as a “nice fellow.”

Maxim Maksimych was not chosen as the first storyteller by chance. His image is one of the most important in the novel, because this human type very typical for Russia in the first half last century. In conditions Caucasian war a new type of “Russian Caucasian” was being formed - most often these were people like Ermolov, who put the law of force and authority above all else, and their subordinates were kind, sincere and non-judgmental warriors. This type is embodied in the image of Maxim Maksimych. We must not forget that the Caucasus was called “warm Siberia”; undesirables, in particular, many Decembrists, were exiled there to serve in the active army. Young people also went to the Caucasus in a thirst to be in the “real business”; they strove to go there and how exotic country miracles, to the land of freedom...

All these features of the Caucasus are present in Lermontov’s novel: we see both everyday pictures and exotic ones; Before us flash images of “fairy-tale” highlanders and ordinary, familiar to everyone, regulars of secular drawing rooms. One way or another, they are all akin to Pechorin: there is something of the Circassian in him (remember his crazy horse ride through the mountains without a road after his first date with Vera!); he is natural in the circle of Princess Ligovskaya. Only person, with whom Pechorin has nothing in common is Maxim Maksimych. People different generations, different eras and different types consciousness; The staff captain and Pechorin are completely alien to each other. That’s why Maxim Maksimych remembered his longtime subordinate, because he was never able to understand or unravel him. In the story of Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin appears romantic hero, meeting with whom became one of the brightest events in his life; whereas for Pechorin both the staff captain himself and the story with Bela are just an episode among others. Even with chance meeting When Maxim Maksimych is ready to rush into his arms, Pechorin has nothing to talk to him about: remembering Bela is painful, telling an old friend is nothing... “I have to go, Maksim Maksimych.” So, from the short story “Bela” (by the way, written later than others) we learn about the existence of a certain Pechorin - the hero romantic story with a Circassian woman. Why did Pechorin need Bela? why, having barely achieved her love, he is bored and languishing; why did he rush to take her away from Kazbich (after all, he stopped loving her!); what tormented him at the bedside of dying Bela and why did he laugh when the kindest Maxim Maksimych tried to console him? All these questions remain unanswered; in Pechorin everything is a mystery; the reader is free to explain the hero’s behavior to the best of his own imagination. In the chapter "Maksim Maksimych" the veil of secrecy begins to lift.

The narrator's place is taken by the staff captain's former listener, a traveling officer. AND to the mysterious hero The “Caucasian novella” is given some living features, its airy and mysterious image begins to take on flesh and blood. The wandering officer does not just describe Pechorin, he gives a psychological portrait. He is a person of the same generation and probably close circle. If Maxim Maksimych was horrified when he heard from Pechorin about the boredom tormenting him: “...my life is becoming emptier day by day...”, then his listener accepted these words without horror, as completely natural: “I answered that there are many people who say the same thing; that there are probably those who tell the truth..." And therefore, for the officer-storyteller, Pechorin is much closer and more understandable; he can explain a lot about the hero: “spiritual storms”, and “some secrecy”, and “nervous weakness”. Thus, the mysterious Pechorin, unlike anyone else, becomes a more or less typical person of his time; general patterns are revealed in his appearance and behavior. And yet the mystery does not disappear, the “oddities” remain. The narrator will note Pechorin’s eyes: “they didn’t laugh when he laughed!” In them the narrator will try to guess “a sign of either evil right, or deep, constant sadness”; and will be amazed at their brilliance: “it was a brilliance, like the brilliance of smooth steel, dazzling, but cold... That is why the traveler was so happy when he received Pechorin’s notes: “I grabbed the papers and quickly took them away, fearing that the staff captain would not repent. The preface to Pechorin's Journal, written on behalf of the narrator, explains his interest in this person.

He talks about the endless importance of studying the “history of the human soul”, the need to understand the true reasons for a person’s motives, actions, and character: “... and maybe they will find justification for the actions that they have hitherto accused of...” All this is the preface confirms the spiritual closeness of the narrator and the hero, their belonging to the same generation and the same human type: remember, for example, the narrator’s reasoning about “the insidious insincerity of a true friend,” which turns into “inexplicable hatred, which, lurking under the guise of friendship, awaits only the death or misfortune of the beloved object , so that a hail of reproaches, advice, ridicule and regrets would burst over his head.” How close these words are to Pechorin’s own bitter thoughts about friendship, how they explain his conviction “I am not capable of friendship”!

The narrator's opinion about Pechorin is expressed unambiguously: “My answer is the title of this book.” This is also the explanation for his intense interest in the hero: before us is not only a unique person, typical of his era. A hero of time is a personality formed by a given century, and such a person could not have appeared in any other era. All the features, all the advantages and disadvantages of his time are concentrated in him. In the preface to the novel, Lermontov polemically states: “The hero of our time, my dear sirs, is like a portrait, but not of one person: it is a portrait made up of the vices of our entire generation, in their full development.” But he does not create his novel of “caustic truths” in order to castigate vices: he holds up a mirror to society so that people can see themselves, look into their own faces, and try to understand themselves. This is the main task of Lermontov's novel. No matter how close Pechorin is to the narrator, he cannot fully understand him. For a complete, deep understanding, Pechorin must speak about himself. And two-thirds of the novel is his confession.

It is important that Pechorin, while in no way being a self-portrait of Lermontov (“An old and ridiculous joke!” says the preface about such an interpretation), is often infinitely close to the author in his assessments, emotions, and reasoning. This creates a special feeling of the common destiny of people of Lermontov’s generation. As in “Duma,” the poet, feeling himself within a generation, sharing its guilt and fate, with his understanding common tragedy, with furious indignation and all the bitterness of reflection, emerges from the general mass, rises above it - to unattainable heights of spirit.

The composition of "Pechorin's Journal" is very unique. It's like a "novel within a novel."

The first short story "Taman" is a single story about an incident that happened to the hero. It outlines the main motives of the entire “magazine”: Pechorin’s desire to active actions; “curiosity” that pushes him to conduct “experiments” on himself and those around him, to interfere in matters that do not concern him; his reckless courage and romantic outlook. And - most importantly! - the desire to understand what motivates people, to identify the motives of their actions, to comprehend their psychology. We don’t yet understand why he needs this, but his behavior in the story with Bela is already becoming clearer to us.

"Princess Mary" is built from diary entries - this is an almost daily chronicle of Pechorin's life. He describes the events of the day. But not only and not so many of them. Please note: Pechorin is not at all interested in “general issues”. We learn little about Pyatigorsk, about the public, about events in the country, in the town itself, about the course of military operations (and newbies probably arrive every day and talk!). Pechorin writes about his thoughts, feelings, his behavior and actions. If Grushnitsky had not been his former acquaintance, Pechorin would not have paid attention to him, but, forced to renew his acquaintance, he bursts out in the magazine with a caustic epigram on Grushnitsky himself and others like him. But Dr. Werner is interesting to Pechorin: this is a special human type, close to him in some ways, alien in many ways. At the sight of the lovely Princess Mary, Pechorin begins to talk about legs and teeth, and the appearance of Vera, with her deep, tragic love, makes him suffer. See the pattern? Pechorin is not interested in the completely imitative Grushnitsky, who plays the role of the “disappointed”; at first, the ordinary Moscow young lady Mary Ligovskaya is also uninteresting. He looks for original, natural and deep natures, exploring and analyzing them, just as he explores his own soul. For Pechorin, like the officer-narrator, like the author of the novel himself, believes that “the history of the human soul... is perhaps more interesting and useful than the history of an entire people...”

But it is not enough for Pechorin to simply observe characters: life in its everyday, leisurely flow provides insufficient food for thought. Was the naive Maxim Maksimych right when he considered Pechorin a “sort of” person, for whom “it was written in his family that various extraordinary things should happen to him”? Of course no. The point is not that Pechorin is destined for different adventures - he creates them for himself, constantly actively interfering in his destiny and in the lives of those around him, changing the course of things in such a way that it leads to an explosion, to a collision. This is what happened in “Bel”, when he radically changed the fate of the girl, Aromat, their father, Kazbich, weaving their paths into an unimaginable tangle. This was the case in Taman, where he intervened in life" honest smugglers", in "Princess Mary"...

Everywhere Pechorin not only changes and complicates the lives of those around him. He brings into their destinies his unpleasantness, his thoughtlessness and craving for the destruction of the House - the symbol peaceful life, non-participation in the common fate, shelter from the winds of the era. Deprives Bela of her home - her love does not allow her to return to her father; makes you run away from home, fearing parental anger, Aroma; forces “honest smugglers” to give up their shelter and sail into the unknown; destroys the possible houses of Grushnitsky and Mary... Spiritual restlessness, eternal search, thirst true life and true activity lead Pechorin forward and forward, do not allow him to stop, withdraw into the circle of his family and loved ones, doom him to thoughtlessness and eternal wandering. The motive for the destruction of the House is one of the main ones in the novel: the appearance of a “hero of the time,” a man who embodied all the features of the era, creates an “explosion situation” - makes people feel the whole tragedy of the century, because in the face general laws time a person is defenseless. Pechorin tests these laws on himself and those around him. By pitting people against each other and with their destinies, he forces their souls to manifest themselves fully, to open up absolutely: to love, to hate, to suffer - to live, and not to run away from life. And in these people, in their souls and destinies, Pechorin strives to unravel their true purpose.

The story "Fatalist", which concludes "Pechorin's Journal", concentrates in itself the main philosophical problems novel: the role of fate in human life and the opposition of individual human will to it. But “the main task of the chapter is not the philosophical discussion in itself, but the determination of Pechorin’s character during this discussion.”

In conclusion, I would like to quote the words of V. G. Belinsky from the article “Hero of Our Time”

I included in this book only what related to Pechorin’s stay in the Caucasus; I still have a thick notebook in my hands, where he tells his whole life. Someday she too will appear at the judgment of the world; but now I dare not take upon myself this responsibility for many important reasons.

We thank the author for the pleasant promise, but we doubt that he will fulfill it: we are firmly convinced that he parted with his Pechorin forever. In this conviction we are confirmed by the confession of Goethe, who says in his notes that, having written "Werther", which was the fruit serious condition his spirit, he freed himself from him and was so far from the hero of his novel that it was funny for him to see how ardent youth went crazy over him... such is the noble nature of the poet, by my own strength with his own power he breaks out of every moment of limitation and flies to new, living phenomena of the world, in full of glory creations... by objectifying his own suffering, he is freed from it; translating the dissonances of his spirit into poetic sounds, he again enters his native sphere eternal harmony... if Mr. Lermontov fulfills his promise, then we are sure that he will no longer present the old and familiar Pechorin, about whom much can still be said. Maybe he will show him to us as reformed, recognizing the laws of morality, but, probably, no longer as a consolation, but to the greater chagrin of the moralists; maybe he will force him to recognize the rationality and bliss of life, but in order to be convinced that this is not for him, that he has lost a lot of strength in a terrible struggle, has become embittered in it and cannot make this rationality and bliss his property... And maybe it will also make him a partaker of the joys of life, a triumphant winner over evil genius life... But this or that, and, in any case, redemption will be complete through one of those women whose existence Pechorin so stubbornly did not want to believe, based not on his inner contemplation, but on the poor experiences of his life... So he did and Pushkin with his Onegin: the woman rejected by him resurrected him from death's sleep for have a wonderful life, but not in order to give him happiness, but in order to punish him for his lack of faith in the mystery of love and life and in the dignity of a woman.

List of used literature

1. Belinsky V.G. “Hero of Our Time”: Works by M. Lermontov. Belinsky V.G. Articles about Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol - M. 1983.

2. Gershtein E. The fate of Lermontov M. 1986

3. Korovin V.I. Creative path Lermontov M 1973

4. Manuilov V.A. Roman M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”: Commentary. 2nd ed. additional - L., 1975.

5. Mikhailova E. Prose of Lermontov. - M., 1975

6. Udodova V.T. Roman M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time". - M., 1989.