Roman Oblomov social and moral issues. The history of the creation of the novel "Oblomov". Theme, idea, issues, composition Problems that raise potters in Oblomov

Goncharov called the novel “Oblomov* a “novel-monograph.” He was referring to his plan to write the life story of one person, to present a deep psychological study of one biography: “I had one artistic ideal: this is the image of an honest and kind, sympathetic nature, a highly idealist, who has been struggling all his life, seeking the truth, encountering lies. at every step, deceived and falling into apathy and powerlessness.”

In the first part of the novel, the stillness of life, slumber, closed existence is not only a sign of the existence of Ilya Ilyich, it is the essence of life in Oblomovka. She is isolated from the whole world: “Neither strong passions nor brave undertakings worried the Oblomovites.” This life is full and harmonious in its own way: it is Russian nature, a fairy tale, the love and affection of a mother, Russian hospitality, the beauty of the holidays. These childhood impressions are an ideal for Oblomov, from the height of which he judges life. Therefore, he does not accept the “St. Petersburg life”; he is not attracted by either his career or the desire to get rich. Oblomov’s visitors personify three life paths that Oblomov could have gone through: becoming a spoiled dude, like Volkov; head of the department, like Sudbinsky; a writer like Penkin. Oblomov goes into contemplative inaction, wanting to preserve “his human dignity and his peace.” The image of Zakhar determines the structure of the first part of the novel. Oblomov is unthinkable without a servant, and vice versa. Both of them are children of Oblomovka.

The second and third parts of the novel are a test of friendship and love. The action becomes dynamic. Oblomov's main antagonist is his friend Andrei Stolts. The image of Stolz is important for understanding the author's intention and for a deeper understanding of the main character. Goncharov intended to show Stolz as a figure preparing progressive changes in Russia. Unlike Oblomov, Stolz is an energetic, active person, confidence is felt in his speeches and actions, he stands firmly on his feet, believes in the energy and transformative power of man. He is constantly on the move (the novel talks about his moves: Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod, Crimea, Kyiv, Odessa, Belgium, England, France) - and in this he sees happiness. German hard work, prudence and punctuality are combined in Stolz with Russian dreaminess and gentleness (his father is German and his mother is Russian). However, in Stolz the mind still prevails over the heart; he subordinates even the most subtle feelings to control. He lacks humanity, which is Oblomov’s main property. Stolz's childhood and family life are only described. We don’t know what Stolz was happy about, what he was upset about, who his friends were, who his enemies were. Stolz, in contrast to Oblomov, makes his own way in life (he graduated from university brilliantly, successfully serves, begins to run his own business, makes a house and money). The portrait of Stolz contrasts with the portrait of Oblomov: “He is entirely made up of bones, muscles and nerves.” Oblomov is “fat beyond his years,” he has a “sleepy look.” However, Stolz’s image is more multidimensional than it seems at first glance. He sincerely loves Oblomov, speaks of Oblomov’s “honest” and “faithful” heart, “which cannot be bribed by anything.” It was Stolz who the author endowed with an understanding of the moral essence of Oblomov, and it was Stolz who told the “writer” the whole life story of Ilya Ilyich. And at the end of the novel, Stolz finds peace in family well-being, he comes to where Oblomov started and stopped. This “reflection” of images in each other can be considered as a process of combining extremes.

The theme of love occupies an important place in the novel. Love, according to Goncharov, is one of the “main forces” of progress; the world is driven by love. The heroes are tested by love. Goncharov does not give a detailed portrait of Olga, but emphasizes that there was “no affectation, no coquetry, no lies, no tinsel, no intent.” For the first time, the outline of his ideal flashed before Oblomov. The breakup was natural, because Olga and Oblomov expected the impossible from each other. He is of selfless, reckless love, when you can sacrifice everything: “peace, word of mouth, respect.” It comes from his activity, will, energy. But Olga fell in love not with Oblomov, but with her dream. Oblomov also feels this when he writes her a letter. In the future, each of the heroes acquires a life that corresponds to his ideal. Olga marries Stolz, Oblomov finds the heartfelt love of Agafya Matveevna. In her house on the Vyborg side “he was now surrounded by such simple, kind, loving people who agreed with their existence to support his life, to help him not notice, not feel it.” The disappeared world of childhood, Oblomovka, appears again.

Problems of the novel by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”

I.A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” is a socio-psychological work that describes human life from all sides. The main character of the novel is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. This is a middle-class landowner who has his own family estate. From an early age he got used to being a gentleman thanks to the fact that he had someone to give and do, which is why in later life he became a slacker. The author showed all the vices of his character and even exaggerated them in some places. In his novel, Goncharov gives a broad generalization of “Oblomovism” and explores the psychology of a fading person. Goncharov touches on the problem of “extra people,” continuing the works of Pushkin and Lermontov on this topic. Like Onegin and Pechorin, Oblomov did not find use for his powers and found himself unclaimed.

Oblomov’s laziness is primarily due to his inability to comprehend the task assigned to him. He might even have started working if he had found something to do for himself, but for this, of course, he would have had to develop under slightly different conditions than in which he developed. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed moral slavery in him. This slavery is so intertwined with Oblomov’s lordship that it seems there is not the slightest possibility of drawing a line between them. This moral slavery of Oblomov is perhaps the most curious side of his personality and his entire history. Oblomov’s mind had been so formed since childhood that even Oblomov’s most abstract reasoning had the ability to stop at a given moment and then not leave this state, despite any beliefs. Oblomov, of course, could not comprehend his life and therefore was burdened and bored by everything he had to do. He served - and could not understand why these papers were being written; Having not understood, I couldn’t find anything better than to resign and not write anything. He studied and did not know what science could serve him for; not recognizing this, he decided to put the books in a corner and indifferently watch as dust covered them. He went out into society and could not explain to himself why people came to visit; without explaining, he abandoned all his acquaintances and began to lie on his sofa all day long. He was bored and disgusted with everything, and he lay on his side, with complete conscious contempt for the “ant work of people”, killing themselves and fussing about God knows what...

His laziness and apathy are the creation of his upbringing and surrounding circumstances. The main thing here is not Oblomov, but “Oblomovism.” In his present situation, he could not find anything he liked anywhere, because he did not understand the meaning of life at all, and could not reach a reasonable view of his relationships with others. Oblomov’s principle lives in Zakhara, and in the hero’s visits, and in the life of the widow Pshenitsyna.

Zakhar is a reflection of his owner. He doesn't like to do anything, he only likes to sleep and eat. Most often we see him on the couch, and the main excuse for taking any action was: “What, did I just come up with this?”

Oblomov’s guests are also not accidental. Volkov is a social dandy, a dandy; Sudbinsky is Oblomov’s colleague who has been promoted; Penkin is a successful writer; Alekseev is a faceless man. Oblomov could have been a social dandy, like Volkov (but women liked him, even very beautiful women, but he alienated them from himself), he could have served and rise to high ranks, like Sudbinsky, he could have become a writer, like Penkin (Stolz , bringing him books to read, Oblomov became addicted to poetry. Oblomov found rapture in poetry...), and the faceless Alekseev tells us that a choice can still be made.

D.I. Pisarev wrote that the concept of “Oblomovism” “will not die in our literature.” What are the roots of “Oblomovism”? Goncharov in the image of Oblomov reveals character traits affected by Russian patriarchal landowner life. “Oblomov’s Dream” is a magnificent episode that will remain in our literature. This dream is nothing more than an attempt by Goncharov himself to understand the essence of Oblomov and Oblomovism. The time of childhood is very important for a person’s life: it forms his moral foundation, the ability to love, value family, loved ones, home. “Our ancestors did not eat soon...” said A.S. Pushkin. Lunch for a Russian person has always been something more than simple satiation. Among all the worries, “the main concern was the kitchen and dinner. The whole house discussed dinner, and the elderly aunt was invited to the council. Everyone offered their own dish: some noodles or stomach, some tripe, some red, some white gravy for the sauce.” “Caring for food was the first and main concern in Oblomovka.” The entire structure of life was subordinated to this concern. The symbol of her satiety was the pie. After lunch came sleep. “It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death. Everything is dead, only from all corners comes a variety of snoring in all tones and modes.” It was a life similar to a fairy tale, but “the Oblomovites didn’t want any other life.” It was typical for them:

Inaction, pettiness of interests;

Satiety in everything;

Gigantic pie and samovar;

Illiterate landowners;

Stinginess (with money);

The Oblomovites never knew any mental anxieties, they never embarrassed themselves with vague mental or moral questions.

This image has become the largest generalization of global significance. He is the embodiment of vital stagnation, immobility, endless human laziness (a universal human quality). He turned into an apathetic and inert creature.

But it is wrong to see Oblomov only as a negative hero. He is distinguished by his sincerity, sincerity, conscientiousness, and gentleness. He is kind (“his heart is like a well, deep”). Oblomov feels that in him “a bright and good beginning is closed, as in a grave.” He is incapable of evil and is endowed with dreaminess. These positive traits were revealed in him by Olga Ilyinskaya. Goncharov subjects his hero to the test of love. Olga begins with love for Oblomov, with faith in him, in his moral transformation... Long and persistently, with love and tender care, she works to awaken life, to evoke activity in this person. She does not want to believe that he is so powerless for good; loving her hope in him, her future creation, she does everything for him, neglects even conventions and decency, goes to him alone, without telling anyone, and is not afraid, like him, of losing her reputation. But with amazing tact, she immediately notices every falsity that manifests itself in his nature, and extremely simply explains to him how and why this is a lie and not the truth. But Oblomov does not know how to love at all and does not know what to look for in love, just like in life in general. He appears before us exposed as he is, silent, brought down from a beautiful pedestal onto a soft sofa, covered instead of a robe only with a spacious robe. His whole life is one big dream. And during this hibernation, we are shown a picture of the life of a person constantly asking himself one question: “What to do?” All his actions boil down to the fact that he lies on the sofa and thinks: “It would be nice if ...” There is complete “ruin” in his mind, which he is unable to cope with.

Oblomov is a man with a broad soul and a warm heart. He has “heart love” for Olga, and she has “head love”. The lilac branch becomes a symbol of their love. For some time, Olga managed to return Oblomov’s desire to live, but... There was a confession and there was an offer. This love was not destined to continue. Love for Oblomov greatly changed Olga. She matured, became more serious, sad.

And Oblomov? He finally found his ideal of life and love. On the Vyborg side in the house of A.M. Pshenitsyna, in the mind of Ilya Ilyich, fairy tale and reality finally lose their boundaries. Pshenitsyna is the complete opposite of Olga Ilyinskaya; Olga’s “head” love is contrasted with traditional “heart” love, which is not guided by goals, but lives with the beloved. With the appearance of Oblomov, Agafya Matveevna’s life is filled with meaning. The Vyborg side is Oblomov’s ideal of life, his beloved Oblomovka.

At the end of the novel, faithful friend Stolz once again tries to get Oblomov off the couch, but to no avail. As soon as Oblomov decided that he had achieved his ideal in life, the process of the hero’s dying began. He died quietly and unnoticed, as he lived.

But one of the most important questions of the novel remains: What should a Russian person be like?

Oblomov, as we found out, is not ideal. Stolz is also not an ideal hero. His activity for the sake of activity carries within it a terrible destructive principle. Stolz cannot feel, suffer, suffer like Oblomov. He lacks imagination. He never asks himself the questions “why?”, “Why?” that so tormented Oblomov. It is not without reason that Goncharov writes a chapter in which Oblomov is no longer present, but we can trace the fate of his son, Andryusha. Perhaps he is destined to become the “prototype” of the Russian person. He, perhaps, will have the same soul as his father, his gentleness, kindness. But, brought up in Stolz’s house, he will acquire business acumen, a love of work, and resistance to the blows of fate. He will be better than Stolz and Oblomov, perhaps... But who knows...

The problem raised by Goncharov is a reflection of the Russian national character in Oblomov. Dobrolyubov wrote about Oblomov: “The radical type of Russian life.” The serf way of life shaped both of them (Zakhar and Oblomov), deprived them of respect for work, and fostered idleness and idleness. The main thing in Oblomov’s life is futility and laziness.

We need to tirelessly fight Oblomovism, as a deeply alien and harmful phenomenon, destroying the very soil on which it can grow, because Oblomov lives in each of us.

Oblomovism is the scourge and evil of Russia, a characteristic feature of our life. The material for the work was Russian life, which the writer observed from childhood.

Problems of the novel by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”

Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” is a work that describes a person’s life from all sides. The main character of the novel is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. This is a middle-class landowner who has his own family estate. From an early age he got used to being a gentleman thanks to the fact that he had someone to give and do, which is why in later life he became a slacker. The author showed all the vices of his character and even exaggerated them in some places. Throughout the novel, the same question is asked: “What is the essence of Oblomovism?” As events unfold, I. A. Goncharov reveals this issue more and more widely.
Oblomov’s laziness is primarily due to his inability to comprehend the task assigned to him. He might even have started working if he had found something to do for himself, but for this, of course, he would have had to develop under slightly different conditions than in which he developed. But the vile habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, developed moral slavery in him. This slavery is so intertwined with Oblomov’s lordship that it seems there is not the slightest possibility of drawing a line between them. This moral slavery of Oblomov is perhaps the most curious side of his personality and his entire history. Oblomov’s mind had been so formed since childhood that even Oblomov’s most abstract reasoning had the ability to stop at a given moment and then not leave this state, despite any beliefs. Oblomov, of course, could not comprehend his life and therefore was burdened and bored by everything he had to do. He served - and could not understand why these papers were being written; Having not understood, I couldn’t find anything better than to resign and not write anything. He studied and did not know what science could serve him for; not recognizing this, he decided to put the books in a corner and indifferently watch as dust covered them. He went out into society and could not explain to himself why people came to visit; without explaining, he abandoned all his acquaintances and began to lie on his sofa all day long. He was bored and disgusted with everything, and he lay on his side, with complete conscious contempt for the “ant work of people”, killing themselves and fussing about God knows what...
His laziness and apathy are the creation of his upbringing and surrounding circumstances. The main thing here is not Oblomov, but “Oblomovism”. In his present situation, he could not find anything he liked anywhere, because he did not understand the meaning of life at all, and could not reach a reasonable view of his relationships with others. But in the general image of the main character one can also see positive features. These traits were revealed in him by Olga Ilyinskaya. She begins with love for Oblomov, with faith in him, in his moral transformation... Long and persistently, with love and tender care, she works to awaken life, to evoke activity in this person. She does not want to believe that he is so powerless for good; loving her hope in him, her future creation, she does everything for him, neglects even conventions and decency, goes to him alone, without telling anyone, and is not afraid, like him, of losing her reputation. But with amazing tact, she immediately notices every falsity that manifests itself in his nature, and extremely simply explains to him how and why this is a lie and not the truth. But Oblomov does not know how to love at all and does not know what to look for in love, just like in life in general. He appears before us exposed as he is, silent, brought down from a beautiful pedestal onto a soft sofa, covered instead of a robe only with a spacious robe. His whole life is one big dream. And during this hibernation we are shown a picture of the life of a person constantly asking himself one question: “What to do?” All his actions boil down to the fact that he lies on the sofa and thinks: “It would be nice if…” There is complete “ruin” in his mind, which he is unable to cope with.
The novel “Oblomov” was the pinnacle of Goncharov’s creativity. With great artistic force, he branded it as serfdom, which, in his opinion, was inevitably heading towards its collapse. He denounced the inertia and conservatism of the local nobility and showed “Oblomovism” as an evil and a scourge of Russian life. The material for the novel was Russian life, which the writer observed from childhood.

Goncharov called the novel “Oblomov” a “novel-monograph.” He was referring to his plan to write the life story of one person, to present a deep psychological study of one biography: “I had one artistic ideal: this is the image of an honest and kind, sympathetic nature, a highly idealist, who has been struggling all his life, seeking the truth, encountering lies. at every step, deceived and falling into apathy and powerlessness.”