The composition of the death of Oblomov. What is the meaning of Oblomov's life? Oblomov: a life story The public meaning of the novel

1. What things have become a symbol of "Oblomovism"?

The symbols of "Oblomovism" were a bathrobe, slippers, a sofa.

2. What turned Oblomov into an apathetic couch potato?

Laziness, fear of movement and life, inability to practice, substitution of life for a vague dreaminess, turned Oblomov from a man into an appendage of a dressing gown and sofa.

3. What is the function of Oblomov's dream in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov"

The chapter "Oblomov's Dream" draws an idyll of a patriarchal serf village, in which only such Oblomov could grow up. The Oblomovites are shown as sleeping heroes, and Oblomovka as a sleepy kingdom. The dream shows the conditions of Russian life that gave rise to "Oblomovism".

4. Can Oblomov be called "an extra person"?

ON THE. Dobrolyubov noted in the article “What is Oblomovism?” that the features of Oblomovism were characteristic to some extent of both Onegin and Pechorin, that is, “superfluous people”. But the "superfluous people" of previous literature were surrounded by a certain romantic halo, they seemed strong people, distorted by reality. Oblomov is also "superfluous", but "reduced from a beautiful pedestal to a soft sofa." A.I. Herzen said that the Onegins and Pechorins treat Oblomov like fathers treat children.

5. What is the peculiarity of the composition of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov"?

The composition of the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" is characterized by the presence of a double storyline - Oblomov's novel and Stolz's novel. Unity is achieved with the help of the image of Olga Ilyinskaya, which connects both lines. The novel is built on the contrast of images: Oblomov - Stolz, Olga - Pshenitsyna, Zakhar - Anisya. The entire first part of the novel is an extensive exposition introducing the hero already in adulthood.

6. What role does I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" epilogue?

The epilogue tells about the death of Oblomov, which made it possible to trace the whole life of the hero from birth to the end.

7. Why is the morally pure, honest Oblomov dying morally?

The habit of getting everything from life, without putting any effort into it, developed apathy, inertia in Oblomov, made him a slave of his own laziness. Ultimately, the feudal system and the domestic upbringing generated by it are to blame for this.

8. As in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" shows the complex relationship between slavery and nobility?

Serfdom corrupts not only masters, but also slaves. An example of this is the fate of Zakhar. He is as lazy as Oblomov. During the life of the master, he is content with his position. After the death of Oblomov, Zakhar has nowhere to go - he becomes a beggar.

9. What is "Oblomovism"?

"Oblomovism" - social phenomenon, consisting in laziness, apathy, inertia, contempt for work and an all-consuming desire for peace.

10. Why did Olga Ilyinskaya's attempt to revive Oblomov fail?

Having fallen in love with Oblomov, Olga tries to re-educate him, to break his laziness. But his apathy deprives her of faith in the future of Oblomov. Oblomov's laziness was higher and stronger than love.

Stolz is hardly goodie. Although, at first glance, this is a new, progressive person, active and active, but there is something in him from a machine, always impassive, rational. He is a schematized, unnatural person.

12. Describe Stolz from the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Ob-crowbars".

Stolz is the antipode of Oblomov. He is an active, active person, a bourgeois businessman. He is enterprising, always striving for something. The outlook on life is characterized by the words: "Labor is the image, content, element and purpose of life, at least mine." But Stoltz is incapable of experiencing strong feelings, it exudes the calculatedness of each step. The image of Stolz in the artistic sense is more schematic and declarative than the image of Oblomov.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page, material on the topics:

• Oblomov questions on the text
• Oblomov test answers
• Oblomovism symbol
• characterize the objects-symbols in Oblomov's novel?
• how many storylines of bummers

Goncharov, Ivan Aleksandrovich, the greatest Russian critic and writer, who became famous thanks to his works. In his work, the life of people, their way of life and the entire era of the rule of peasant law appear. One of his famous works, is called "Oblomov". Here, the writer expresses his thoughts as a critic, and expressively shows all the actions taking place in the novel.

In this work of the author, the main character is Ilya Oblomov, after Father Ilyich. It was the gentleman who was brought up by calmness, inaction, and very restless people close to him. Due to which, Oblomov became, practical empty space for himself and for society as a whole. The main tragedy of life was indifference to oneself. From an early age, he was forbidden in almost all his actions, and in every possible way protected from his thoughts. Even taking into account the walks on the street, which did not take place without the intervention of relatives. With their feelings about the boy, the people around him created this empty appearance in life, for which Ilya will be practically punished by fate. Over time, the boy grew up as a “houseplant”. And having entered adulthood, it becomes catastrophically difficult for him to keep the balance of life in his hands.

Despite all the inaction of the protagonist, the author mentions an important trait of Ilya's character, this is his harmlessness. This characterized him as a positive character.

Due to the fact that the hero led a useless lifestyle, the scene in which Ilya meets a new love also speaks, but from his inaction, he sees that she can “pull” him out of this routine. But be that as it may, he finds happiness with Agafya, who gives birth to his son. From his inaction, the whole household went "downhill". Against this background, the ingenuity of swindlers worked, who, after his death, planned to completely ruin his property.

Heart attacks, more and more often visited Oblomov, in which Agafya caught him. Lately She practically waited for his death. And now, after a while, Ilya Oblomov is struck by another last stroke, which Agafya Matveevna sees, and he leaves his useless life.

Thanks to Stolz, the descendant of the Oblomovs is in good hands. At that time, Stolz lived with Olga and, unlike his father, he was determined to raise a young orphan. If we take into account the disposition of the new father Andrei, then the boy will grow up to be a smart and determined guy.

Composition pr Oblomov's death in Goncharov's novel

Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov, with his novel Oblomov, described a large number of people who live like Oblomov in the Oblomov region. Everyone would like to allow themselves to live like Oblomov, to lie on the couch for their own pleasure. Oblomov was accustomed to such a life from childhood, his parents taught him that all the servants should do for him. Oblomov, after the death of his parents, did not know how to manage so many serfs, so this did not bother him much. Oblomov is not a stupid person, but his laziness overpowered his activity.

Oblomov was satisfied with the fact that he lies all day long and does nothing, he only cares about food and sleep. Ilya Ilyich seems to be ready to do something for his serfs, but then the fuse goes out, and he again lies on the sofa and does nothing. Oblomov was not prompted to an active lifestyle either by the help of a friend or by love. Everything suits him and the changes in his life Oblomov is very frightened, he does not want to do anything to change his life.

Goncharov wanted to write about a man who was not taught how to live adulthood and make decisions on your own. Around him in the house all around is dirt and cobwebs, and Oblomov does not care. Ivan Alexandrovich wrote about Oblomov as a man with a pure heart, there are very few such people left in society. The material side does not bother Ilya Ilyich, for him the spiritual side of life is more important.

When Olga Ilyinskaya tries to remake the adult Oblomov, he resists it. In the scene described by Goncharov, he even asks his friend Stolz not to let Ilyinskaya see him again. Oblomov does not like being pressured, he did not want to be like his friend, he chose a different path for himself.

After breaking up with Olga Ilinskaya Oblomov suffers, because his heart is broken, but there was a woman who was able to give Oblomov that kindness and care that he dreamed of. His connection with Agafya Matveevna brought him that calmness and peace of mind that Ilyinskaya could not give him.

Oblomov, next to Agafya Matveevna, again felt like a little boy who was taken care of. The fruit of their love was their son Andryushka.

Once again, the arrived Stolz, talking with a friend, understands that he will die soon. Oblomov asks his friend before his death not to leave his son and take care of him. Stolz gives Oblomov a promise that he will grow a hardworking and responsible person out of Andryushka. Everyone kept good memories of Oblomov, as a man who did not become callous in heart and poor in soul. He did not change his principles and remained a pure and bright person in their memory.

Some interesting essays

• Composition Nothing happens so rarely in the world as complete frankness between parents and children (R. Rolland) Final

  Nobody chooses their parents. That is why there are contradictions between generations. That is why people often do not understand, argue, do not suit each other. Parents and children often look at others - relatives, neighbors, acquaintances and give examples.

• The image and characteristics of the Wild Master in the story Turgenev's Singers composition

  One of the main characters of the story "Singers" is Wild - Barin. The barin lived in the village of Kolotovka. His real name was Perevlesov. And his acquaintances called him Wild - Barin.

• French Beaupré in Pushkin's Captain's Daughter

  In the times described by Pushkin in Captain's daughter, many noble people are foreigners to raise children. At the same time, foreign teachers were not always teachers in the full sense of the word.

• Essay Peter I - Great reformer or tyrant? writing

  This question cannot be answered unambiguously. What was Russia like in the 17th century? Typical patriarchal state. She seemed to be frozen in her development. She needed for further development push

• Serov V.A.

  Valentin Aleksandrovich Serov was born on January 19, 1965. creative family. The famous Russian artist grew up in Munich. Valentin owes his career as an artist to his teacher P. P. Chistyakov.

"Oblomov in Goncharov's novel" - No sleep, no fatigue, no boredom on his face. Oblomov's dream. The idea of ​​the novel "Oblomov" arose from I.A. Goncharov in the late 40s of the XIX century. As a child, Ilyusha Oblomov was a lively and inquisitive child. Oblomov and Stolz. The second and third parts are devoted to the love story of Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. The chapter "Oblomov's Dream" shows the origins of the hero's character.

"Oblomov" - What details are described by the author in the most detail? Complete the table with quotes from the novel. Lilac branch. I. A. Goncharov "Oblomov". Read chapters 2-4 and answer the questions. Portrait as a means of creating an image. See how the portrait reflects the characters. Love story. Andrey Stolz (part 2, chapters 1 - 5).

"Roman Goncharov Oblomov" - Stolz. Copying reality, cast from nature. Secret Committee for Peasant Affairs. "Oblomov's Dream" Goncharov I.A.1849. " Noble Nest» Turgenev I.S. 1859. Grigoriev A.A. Goncharov enters the Moscow Commercial School on Ostozhenka. 1812 1819 1822. Publication of the novel " ordinary story"in the journal Sovremennik (conceived in 1844).

"Oblomov Goncharova" - Home costume. During 1958, work was underway on the novel. Oblomov is kind to everyone and worth boundless love. Frigate "Pallada" (1858) (essays on world tour). Oblomov in the system of author's reasoning. Precipice (1868). Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov (1812 - 1891). From the history of the creation of the river. N. A. Dobrolyubov.

"Stolz and Oblomov" - Oblomov and Stolz.

"Goncharov's novel Oblomov" - What details of Oblomov's portrait would you note? D. S. Merezhkovsky 1890 ??????????? Sudbinsky. Patriarchal. What prevented the mutual happiness of the heroes? Oblomov's death. Oblomovism. II hour). Criticism about Olga Ilyinskaya. Roman Oblomov. The problems of novels. "I loved the future Oblomov!" Oblomov's choice.

In total there are 8 presentations in the topic

In the third and last time Stolz visits his friend. Under the caring eye of Pshenitsyna, Oblomov almost realized his ideal: “He dreams that he has reached that promised land, where rivers of honey and milk flow, where they eat unearned bread, go in gold and silver ...”, and Agafya Matveevna turns into a fabulous Miliktrisa Kirbityevna .. The house on the Vyborgskaya side resembles a rural area.

However, the hero never reached his native village. Topic "Oblomov and the men" runs throughout the novel. Even in the first chapters, we learned that in the absence of the master, the peasants live hard. The headman reports that the peasants are "running away", "asking for quitrent". It is unlikely that they became better under the rule of the Worn One. While Oblomov was drowning in his problems, he missed the opportunity to build a road, build a bridge, as his neighbor, a village landowner, did. It cannot be said that Ilya Ilyich does not think about his peasants at all. But his plans are to ensure that everything remains as it is. And to the advice to open a school for a peasant, Oblomov replies with horror that “he, perhaps, will not plow ...” But time cannot be stopped. In the finale, we learn that "Oblomovka is not in the middle of nowhere anymore<…>the rays of the sun fell on her! The peasants, no matter how difficult it was, did without the master: “... In four years it will be a station on the road<…>, the men will go to work on the embankment, and then roll along the cast iron<…>bread to the pier ... And there ... schools, letters ... "But did Ilya Ilyich manage without Oblomovka? Goncharov proves his favorite thoughts with the logic of narration. And the fact that on the conscience of every landowner lies the concern for the fate of hundreds of people ("Happy Mistake"). And the fact that village life is the most natural and therefore the most harmonious for a Russian person; she herself will direct, teach and tell you what to do better than any “plans” (“Pallada Frigate”).

In the house on Vyborgskaya Oblomov sank down. What was a free dream became a hallucination - "the present and the past merged and mixed." On the first visit, Stolz managed to lift Oblomov off the couch. In the second, he helped a friend in solving practical cases. And now, with horror, he realizes that he is powerless to change anything: “Get out of this hole, out of the swamp, into the light, into the open space, where there is a healthy, normal life!” Stoltz insisted...

“Do not remember, do not disturb the past: you will not turn back! Oblomov said. - I have grown to this pit with a sore spot: try to tear it off - there will be death ... I feel everything, I understand everything: I have long been ashamed to live in the world! But I can't go your way with you, even if I wanted to. Maybe the last time was still possible. Now... now it's too late... Even Olga is not able to resurrect him: "Olga! - suddenly escaped from the frightened Oblomov ... - For God's sake, do not let her come here, leave!

As in the first visit, Stolz sums up the sad result:

– What is there? Olga asked...

- Nothing!..

Is he alive and well?

Why are you back so soon? Why didn't he call me there and bring him? Let me in!

- It is forbidden!

- What is going on there? ... Has the "abyss been opened"? Will you tell me? .. What is going on there?

- Oblomovism!

And if Ilya Ilyich found people who are willing to endure this life around them, then nature itself, it seems, opposed, measuring out a short period of such an existence. That is why the attempts of the same Agafya Matveevna to restrict her husband produce a tragicomic impression. "How many times have you gone? - she asked Vanyusha ... - Don't lie, look at me ... Remember Sunday, I won't let you visit<…>". And Oblomov, willy-nilly, counted eight more times, then he already came into the room ... "; “It would be nice to have a pie!” “I forgot, I forgot! And I wanted it since the evening, but my memory seemed to be knocked off!” - Agafya Matveevna cheated. It doesn't make sense. For she cannot offer him any other goal in life than food and sleep.

Goncharov devotes relatively little space to the description of the illness and death of his hero. I. Annensky summarizes the reader's impressions, saying that “we read 600 pages about him, we do not know a person in Russian literature so fully, so vividly depicted. Meanwhile, his death affects us less than the death of a tree in Tolstoy's…” Why? Critics " silver age are unanimous, because the worst thing has already happened to Oblomov. Spiritual death overtakes physical death. “He died because he ended ...” (I. Annensky). "Vulgarity" finally "triumphed over purity of heart, love, ideals." (D. Merezhkovsky).

Goncharov says goodbye to his hero with an excited lyrical requiem: “What happened to Oblomov? Where is he? Where? - In the nearest cemetery, under a modest urn, his body rests<…>. Lilac branches, planted by a friendly hand, doze over the grave, and the wormwood smells serenely. It seems that the angel of silence itself guards his sleep.

It would seem that there is an undeniable contradiction here. A lofty eulogy for a fallen hero! But life cannot be considered useless when someone remembers you. Bright sadness filled the life of Agafya Matveevna with the highest meaning: “She realized that<…>God put a soul into her life and took it out again; that the sun shone in it and faded forever ... Forever, really; but on the other hand, her life was forever comprehended: now she knew why she lived and that she did not live in vain.

In the finale, we meet Zakhar in the guise of a beggar on the church porch. The orphaned valet prefers to ask for Christ's sake than to serve the "obnoxious" mistress. The following dialogue takes place between Stolz and his familiar writer about the late Oblomov:

- And he was no more stupid than others, the soul is pure and clear, like glass; noble, gentle, and - gone!

- From what? What reason?

“The reason… what a reason!” Oblomovism! Stolz said.

- Oblomovism! - the writer repeated with bewilderment. - What it is?

- Now I'll tell you ... And you write it down: maybe it will be useful to someone. "And he told him what is written here."

Thus, the composition of the novel is strictly circular, it is impossible to isolate the beginning and end in it. Everything that we read from the first pages, it turns out, can be interpreted as a story about Oblomov, his friend. At the same time, Stoltz could tell the story of a recently ended life. Thus, the circle of human life has been passed twice: in reality and in the memories of friends.

Goncharov, the harmony singer, could not complete his book with one minor note. In the epilogue, a new little hero appears, who, perhaps, will be able to harmoniously combine best features father and teacher. “Don't forget my Andrey! - were the last words of Oblomov, spoken in a faded voice ... "" No, I will not forget your Andrey<…>, - promises Stolz. - But I will take your Andrey where you could not go<…>and with him we will carry out our youthful dreams.”

Let's do a little experiment. Open the last page of the Oblomov edition - any one that you hold in your hands. Turning it over, you will almost certainly find an article by Nikolai Alexandrovich Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism?” This work must be known, if only because it is one of the examples of Russian critical thought of the nineteenth century. However, the first sign of a free person and a free country is the possibility of choice. Dobrolyubov's article is more interesting to consider next to the article with which it appeared almost simultaneously and with which it is in many respects polemical. This is a review by Alexander Vasilyevich Druzhinin “Oblomov”. Roman I.A. Goncharova.

Critics are unanimous in admiring the image of Olga. But if Dobrolyubov sees in her a new heroine, the main fighter against Oblomovism, Druzhinin sees in her the embodiment of eternal femininity: “It is impossible not to be carried away by this bright, pure creature, who has so intelligently worked out in herself all the best, true principles of a woman ...”

Disagreements between them begin with Oblomov's assessment. Dobrolyubov argues with the author of the novel himself, proving that Oblomov is a lazy, spoiled, worthless creature: “He (Oblomov) will not bow to the idol of evil! Why is that? Because he is too lazy to get up on the couch. But drag him, put him on his knees before this idol: he will not be able to get up. Dirt will not stick to him! Yes, as long as there is one. So still nothing; and how Tarantiev, the Worn out, will come. Ivan Matveich - brr! what disgusting nastiness begins near Oblomov.

The critic shrewdly guesses the origins of Oblomov's character in his childhood. In Oblomovism, he sees, first of all, social roots: “... He ( Oblomov) from an early age sees in his house that all household chores are performed by lackeys and maids, and papa and mama only order and scold for bad performance. Gives as an example a symbolic episode with pulling on stockings. He considers Oblomov as social type. This is a gentleman, the owner of “three hundred Zakharov”, who “drawing the ideal of his bliss ... did not think to approve its legitimacy and truth, did not ask himself the question: where will these greenhouses and greenhouses come from ... and why on earth will he use them?”

But still psychological analysis character and meaning of the whole novel is not so interesting to critics. He is constantly interrupted by "more general considerations" about Oblomovism. In Goncharov's hero, the critic is primarily an established literary type; the critic traces his genealogy from Onegin, Pechorin, Rudin. In literary science, it is usually called the type extra person. Unlike Goncharov, Dobrolyubov focuses on his negative traits: “The common thing for all these people is that they have no business in life that would be a vital necessity for them, a sacred thing of the heart ...”

Dobrolyubov presciently guesses that the reason for Oblomov's deep sleep was the absence of a lofty, truly noble goal. I chose the words of Gogol as an epigraph: “Where is the one who, in the native language of the Russian soul, would be able to tell us this almighty word “forward? ..””

Let's now look at Druzhinin's article. Let's be honest: it's a lot harder to read. As soon as we open the pages, the names of philosophers and poets, Carlyle and Longfellow, Hamlet and the artists of the Flemish school, will be full of colors before our eyes. An intellectual of the highest outlook, a connoisseur of English literature, Druzhinin does not descend to the average level in his critical works, but is looking for an equal reader. By the way, this is how you can check the degree of your own culture - ask yourself which of the mentioned names, paintings, books are familiar to me?

Following Dobrolyubov, he pays a lot of attention to "Snu ..." and sees in it "a step towards understanding Oblomov with his Oblomovism." But, unlike him, focuses on the lyrical content of the chapter. Druzhinin saw poetry even in the “sleepy servant”, and put Goncharov in the highest merit that he “poeticized the life of his native land". Thus the critic touched lightly national content Oblomovism. Defending his beloved hero, the critic urges: “Take a close look at the novel, and you will see how many people in it are devoted to Ilya Ilyich and even adore him ...” After all, this is no accident!

“Oblomov is a child, not a lecherous lecher, he is a sleepyhead, and not an immoral egoist or epicurean ...” To emphasize moral value hero, Druzhinin asks the question: who is ultimately more useful for humanity? A naive child or a zealous official, "signing paper after paper"? And he answers: “A child by nature and by the conditions of his development, Ilya Ilyich ... left behind the purity and simplicity of a child - qualities that are precious in an adult.” People "not of this world" are also necessary, because "in the midst of the greatest practical confusion, they often reveal to us the realm of truth and at times put an inexperienced, dreamy eccentric and above ... a whole crowd of businessmen who surround him." The critic is sure that Oblomov - type universal, and exclaims: “It’s not good for that land where there are no good and incapable of evil eccentrics like Oblomov!”

Unlike Dobrolyubov, he does not forget about Agafya Matveevna either. Druzhinin made a subtle observation about the place of Pshenitsyna in the fate of Oblomov: she unwittingly was " evil genius” Ilya Ilyich, “but this woman will be forgiven everything because she loved a lot.” The critic is captivated by the subtle lyricism of the scenes depicting the woeful experiences of the widow. In contrast to her, the critic shows the selfishness of the Stoltsev couple in relation to Oblomov in scenes where "neither worldly order, nor worldly truth ... were violated."

At the same time, a number of controversial judgments can be found in his review. The critic avoids talking about why Ilya Ilyich is dying. Stolz's despair at the sight of a fallen friend is caused, in his opinion, only by the fact that Oblomov married a commoner.

Like Dobrolyubov, Druzhinin goes beyond the scope of the novel. He discusses the features of Goncharov's talent, compares it with Dutch painters. Like the Dutch landscape painters and creators of genre scenes, the details of life under his pen acquire an existential scale and “his creative spirit was reflected in every detail ... like the sun is reflected in a small drop of water ...”

We saw that two critics in their judgments about Oblomov and the novel as a whole argue and deny each other. So which one to trust? I. Annensky answered this question, noting that it was a mistake “to dwell on the question of what type of Oblomov. Negative or positive? This question generally belongs to the school-market ones ... ”And it suggests that“ the most natural way in each analysis of the type is to begin with an analysis of your impressions, deepening them as much as possible. For this "deepening" and need criticism. To convey the reaction of contemporaries, to supplement independent conclusions, and not to replace their own impressions. In fact, Goncharov believed in his reader, and to remarks that his hero was incomprehensible, he retorted: “What is the reader for? Is he some kind of oaf that his imagination will not be able to complete the rest according to the idea given by the author? Are the Pechorins, Onegins ... told to the smallest detail? The task of the author is the dominant element of character, and the rest is up to the reader.

M.V. Otradin EPILOGUE OF THE NOVEL OBLOMOV About a hundred years ago, in his Morphology of the Novel, Wilhelm Dibelius noted: “In any art based on a succession of impressions, the last of them is the most effective”1. For readers of the novel Oblomov, the last impression is connected with the phrase dedicated to Stoltz and the “writer”: “And he told him what is written here” (IV, 493). If you like, this is the most mysterious phrase in Goncharov's novel. And we hardly have reason to doubt that the writer gave it a special, impactful meaning. Of course, this phrase is distinguished by the researchers of the novel. Sometimes the narrator’s message contained in it is understood literally and is not questioned: “... almost the entire story of Oblomov is told by Stolz (which we learn from the last line of the novel), and the author only edits his narration”2. But the opinion of Yu.V. Mann about the “writer” appearing on the last pages: “This “writer” did not participate in the action and, of course, told about everything that was happening not in the way that Stoltz could tell him. ‹…› A narrator comes to the fore, possessing epic omniscience, which extends to everything and everyone, including Stolz.” This " plot detail”, according to the researcher, not only did not complicate the auctorial narration, but even “served as a reason to strengthen this narration and make it more obvious”3. But the question remains: why did Goncharov need to introduce this detail, if the reader, having reached the last page of the novel, already perceives the auctorial narrative about the life of Ilya Ilyich as familiar and organic? From the point of view of the Hungarian researcher Angelika Molnar, Stolz acts in the novel as an “anarrative narrator”, he is deprived of the opportunity to get acquainted with Oblomov’s “text”, his ““Sleep”, ‹...› for this reason, a narrator was needed who processes and reinterprets tells Stolz's story"4. Naturally, the question arises: is it only Oblomov's Dream that remains "closed" to Stolz? 1 Dibelius V. Morphology of the novel // Waltsen O., Dibelius V., Vosler K., Spitzer L. Problems of literary form. M., 2007. P. 119. 2 Balashova E.A. Literary creativity heroes I.A. Goncharova // Goncharov. Materials 190. P. 180. 3 Mann Yu.V. Goncharov as a narrator // I��� �. �o����o�: ���o�: ��o�: �����, ���� ��� ���- ���g: B��t�äg� � �� I. I�t����t�o��l�� �o����o�-Ko�f����z. B�m���g, 8–10 October 1991 / Hg. P. th���g�. Kol�; ���m��; ����, 1994. S. 84–85. 4 Molnar A. Poetics of novels I.A. Goncharova. M., 2004. P. 61. © M.V. Otradin 14 M.V. Otradin “Inversive, mechanistic (and quite artificial), unexpectedly playful, turning all novel action into a convention, ends with a denouement ‹…>“ Oblomov ””, is the opinion of A.G. Grodetskaya. And then she writes: “Attention, reader, - the author is joking, the author is ironic. Here, as, indeed, in other cases, Goncharov’s inversion (sudden change of roles) is close to romantic irony…”1 Obviously, it is necessary to talk about the author’s irony, but did the novelist really allow himself with one phrase “to turn all novel action into convention "? It seems that an analysis of the epilogue of Goncharov's novel can help answer all these questions. As often happens, the epilogue is separated from the plot, event part of the novel by a temporal distance. "Five years have passed" - this is how the tenth chapter of the fourth part of the novel begins. The two final chapters, in their structure and function, should be read as an epilogue. Dialogue - a dispute between two principles - Stoltsev and Oblomov - is already found in Oblomov's Dream, can be traced in the plot of the entire novel and does not fade in the epilogue, although Ilya Ilyich is no longer alive. At the same time, the reader cannot but notice that in the course of the plot the author “blurs” the declared contrast of the characters, emphasizes the relativity of their opposition 2. What prevents the reader from accepting Stolz’s complete and final conclusion about the life of a friend … what reason! Oblomovism” (IV, 493)? For the first time, Stolz utters the word "Oblomovism" when he hears Ilya Ilyich's confession about his dream, about the desired existence. This dream was “read” by Stolz in accordance with the philosophy of literary “physiology”, in terms of rigid socio-psychological determinism. It cannot be said that Stolz's conclusions are "not true", but it is true about the past and about Oblomov's desired life without its "poetry". The word "Oblomovism" "occupies" the consciousness of the hero, he is afraid of this "poisonous" word. It "dreamed to him at night, written with fire on the walls, like Balthazar at a feast" (IV, 185)3. Ilya Ilyich is horrified to realize that there is such a point of view on his life, according to which one can categorically declare about him: "It has been calculated, weighed, divided." Thus, “Oblomovism” is perceived by the hero himself not as a synonym for his dream, but as something directly opposite: after all, the hero’s dream is the “poetry” of life that resists, does not obey rigid determinism. Doubting, reflecting in the face of external formidable forces, Oblomov is compared in the novel with Hamlet: “What should he do? Go ahead or stay? This Oblomov's question was deeper for him than Hamlet's" (IV, 186). What is the meaning of the juxtaposition that makes the reader smile? Why is it so important for the author? Unlike Shakespeare's play, in the novel speech 1 Grodetskaya A.G. Goncharov's auto-irony // S�� sp���� tol����t���: In memory of V.A. Tunimanova. SPb., 2008, p. 542. 2 For details, see: Otradin. pp. 72–147. 3 The inscription on the wall of King Belshazzar read: “Numbered, weighed, divided” (Dan. 5:25), prophesying the inevitable death of the king. What happened. The epilogue of the novel "Oblomov" 15 is not yet about life and death: the tragic meaning of Oblomov's existence is revealed to the reader gradually, towards the end of the novel. And it would seem that the scale of the problems facing the heroes of the two works is incommensurable. Nevertheless, one cannot but see the Hamlet in Oblomov. This was immediately noticed, after reading only the first part of the novel, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. In a letter to P.V. Annenkov of January 29, 1859, he stated with mocking irony: “It is wonderful that Goncharov is trying to psychologically explain Oblomov and make something like Hamlet out of him, but he did not make Hamlet, but Hamlet’s ass”1. Russian critics at a later time, noting the Oblomov–Hamlet parallel declared by the novelist, were no longer so categorical (see commentary: VI, 178–180). Goncharov himself wrote about the special nature of Hamlet in the article “Hamlet Again on the Russian Stage” (published posthumously). From Goncharov's point of view, Hamlet is not a type, but a special nature, a special structure of the soul. “Subtle natures, endowed with a fatal excess of the heart, inexorable logic and sensitive and irritable nerves, more or less carry particles of Hamlet’s passionate, tender, deep and irritable nature.” "Hamlet's properties" are not "in a state of rest: they are born from the touch of a storm, under blows, in struggle"2. Hamlet's situation is a discord with the world, a clash with a terrible reality and, as a result, a doubt about the foundations of life. For Goncharov, Oblomov and Stolz are the heroes of the Awakening 3 era, the era of transition. This "transition" manifested itself primarily in people's minds. Both Oblomov's skepticism and Stoltsev's enthusiasm are connected with the nature of the time they are experiencing. Like Hamlet (and - even more broadly - like people of the Renaissance), Goncharov's heroes face global problems. Skepticism or enthusiasm are the result of the presence or absence in the hero of faith in the identity of appearance and reality, in the expediency and rationality of life, in the good and harmonious nature of man. Ilya Ilyich, like Shakespeare's hero, sees his future: "to go", "to stay", "to grow old peacefully in the apartment of godfather Tarantiev" (IV, 186-187). However, the unexpectedly and comically sounding phrase (Oblomov has not yet been on the Vyborg side, has not seen either the “house” or Agafya Matveevna) later on in the course of the plot acquires a completely non-comic meaning. “Announce me as any instrument you like, you can upset me, but you can’t play on me,” these Hamlet words (translated by B.L. Pasternak) are associated with Ilya Ilyich’s thoughts about his energetic, active friend 4. “ Stolz - mind, strength, ability to manage oneself, others, judge - 1 Saltykov-Shchedrin. T. 18. Book. 1. S. 209. 2 Goncharov. Sobr. op. T. 8. S. 203, 204. 3 Ibid. P. 111. 4 Noted in the comments by L.S. Geiro. See: Goncharov I.A. Oblomov. L., 1987. S. 670 (ser. "Literary monuments"). 16 M.V. Otradin fight. Wherever he comes, with whom he gets along - you look, you have already mastered it, he plays as if on an instrument ... ”(IV, 217-218). As for Ilya Ilyich himself, he usually accepts Stolz's reproaches addressed to him, agrees with him, often promises to change, but lives in his own way. If in the first part of the novel this feature of Oblomov is presented in a comical way (it is said with mild irony about the hero lying on the sofa and indulging in dreams: “He is not some petty performer of someone else’s, ready-made thought; he is the creator and performer of his own ideas” (IV , 65)), the farther, the more obvious it becomes that Ilya Ilyich, outwardly helpless and completely dependent on people, is inwardly free. He can, like Hamlet, say to anyone, including Stolz: “You can’t play on me!” No "accidents", no forces - neither Stolz's exhortations, nor Olga's love - can force Oblomov to live a "not his" life. As Ortega y Gasset remarked, "to be a hero is to be yourself." Oblomov, like Hamlet, in the struggle with the "touching" life, in attempts to hide from it, is destined to "exhaust" (a word from Goncharov's article). The doubts of Ilya Ilyich, like the doubts of Shakespeare's hero, concern the world, and human nature, and himself. Recall the confession that Goncharov made in a letter to S.A. Nikitenko dated August 21, 1866 : "... from the very minute when I began to write for publication<…>, I had one artistic ideal: this is an image of an honest, kind, sympathetic nature, an idealist in the highest degree, struggling all his life, seeking truth who encounters lies at every step, is deceived and, finally, finally cools down and falls into apathy and impotence from the consciousness of the weakness of his own and someone else's, that is, in general, human nature. And further, lamenting the weakness of his talent and limited opportunities modern literature, Goncharov concludes: "Shakespeare alone created Hamlet - yes Cervantes - Don Quixote - and these two giants absorbed almost everything that is comic and tragic in human nature"2. A look back at these great examples is noteworthy. 3 Gradually, Oblomov, like Alexander Aduev, like Raisky, begins to discover the unexpected in himself. This leads him to a special state of “atrophy of the will”, which is the main symptom of the “Hamletian situation”. German philosopher of the early 20th century. Theodor Lessing, speaking about the universality of the “Hamletian situation” in modern times, as the most illustrative 1 Ortega y Gasset x. Our time // Literary newspaper. 1992. No. 51. P. 7. 2 Goncharov. Sobr. op. T. 8. P. 366. 3 Speaking about the “eternal types” of world literature, L.E. Pinsky divided the works dedicated to him into those in which we find a plot-plot, and those based on a plot-situation. "Hamlet" and "Don Quixote" he refers to the plot-situations. “For the ‘Hamlet’ situation ‹…› neither a court environment, nor revenge for the father or another repetition of the motives of Shakespeare’s tragedy is required” (Pinsky L.E. Realism of the Renaissance. M., 1961. S. 301-302). See also: Bagno V.e. “Recognition coefficient” of world literary images // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. SPb., 1997. V. 50. S. 234–241. The epilogue of the novel "Oblomov" 17 example called the story of Oblomov: "Each soul that has come out of conservative traditions and the life sphere of older generations must inevitably, first of all, perceive some features of Hamlet." “Perhaps,” it says further, “this spiritual conflict (which is most typical of Russian culture ‹…›) was most successfully shown by Goncharov in the image of Oblomov”1. So, Oblomov and Hamlet. But when analyzing the epilogue of the novel, another, albeit less obvious, parallel is no less important for us: Stoltz-Horatio. We know only one remark made on this subject at the end of the 19th century. literary and theater critic I.I. Ivanov. “Both of them,” he wrote in a newspaper article, “are great masters of reconciling reason with blood, not succumbing to passions, not knowing hobbies. Stolz is unaware of "dreams", tormenting thoughts, he is afraid of everything mysterious, enigmatic. He, like Horatio, does not suspect that much in the world has never dreamed of his learning and reason. The noted parallel is worthy of being expanded. During the last meeting with Oblomov, Stolz hears from a friend: “Wife! <…> my son! His name is Andrei in memory of you!” (IV, 483). And a little further: "... they hugged silently, tightly, as they hug before a fight, before death" (IV, 483). Stolz, after this meeting with Oblomov, thinks of him as a dead or mortally wounded person, with whom he will no longer have to meet: “You perished, Ilya ...” (IV, 484). “Do not forget my Andrey,” are the last words that Ilya Ilyich utters, referring to Stolz. The request of a person who is already aware of his doom. “Tell me about my life,” Hamlet addresses Horatio before his death. The abundance of "Hamlet" parallels, the sharply declared motif of "farewell to the doomed to perish" allow us to see in this scene of the novel a hidden reminiscence of Shakespeare's tragedy. It's not that Goncharov builds his farewell episode as a literal parallel to the death scene of the tragedy about the Danish prince. But we can talk about certain situational similarities and motivic echoes, remembering that “none of us is infallible in matters of comparison”3. There is no reason to doubt the sincere desire of both Horatio and Stolz to "tell" the whole truth about the deceased. But can they do it? 1 Lessing T. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Wagner // Culturology: XX century: Anthology. M., 1995. S. 404–405. See also: Tunimanov V.A. Shakespeare's motives in the novel by I. A. Goncharova "Oblomov" // T�s��l�m sl�����m: F�sts�h��ft fü� P�t�� Th���g��. Zü���h, 2005. S. 569–580. 2 Ivanov I.I. Echoes of the scene: Europeans from Moscow // Russkiye Vedomosti. 1891. 7 Oct. No. 276. P. 2. 3 Eliot T.S. Tradition and individual talent // Foreign aesthetics and theory of literature of the 19th–20th centuries. M., 1987. S. 171. 18 M.V. Otradin In his early work on Shakespeare's play (1916), L.S. Vygotsky wrote about the explicit and hidden, deep meaning of its finale: “One is the external story of the tragedy, which Horatio must tell with more or less details. ‹…› We know what he will tell: I will publicly tell about everything that happened. I'll tell you about the terrible, bloody and ruthless deeds, the vicissitudes, the murders by mistake, the duplicity punished, and in the end - about the intrigues before the denouement that killed the culprits. That is, ‹…› the plot of the tragedy.” “So,” writes the researcher, “the tragedy, as it were, does not end at all; at the end, she seems to close the circle, returning again to everything that has just passed in front of the audience on the stage - only this time already in the story, but only in the retelling of her plot. The ending of Oblomov also refers, as we remember, to the beginning of the novel. In the retelling of the plot, according to Vygotsky, the first meaning of the tragedy is given, so to speak. But there is also a second one: “This ‘meaning’ is already given in the tragedy itself, or, rather, exists in it, in the course of its action, in its tone, in its words”1. Addressing the writer, Stolz says: “And you write it down: maybe it will be useful to someone” (IV, 493). The reader is given to understand: in the story of Stolz, in what he told the writer, there is a certain life “lesson” that must be taken into account. In the history of Oblomov, indeed, we find a certain, not exceptional, but generalized experience. And at the level of socio-psychological characteristics, this "lesson" with its rigid thesis - "Oblomovism" - cannot be ignored. Reading, or rather, re-reading Goncharov’s novel, already knowing his last phrase, we understand what a difficult, in fact, impossible task for Stolz: to tell the whole truth about Ilya Ilyich, who, in the language of Vygotsky, is “second”, secret, the essential meaning of Oblomov's life. The last chapter of the novel "Oblomov" begins with the word "once". This word is marked in the art world Goncharova. “Once in the summer in the village of Grachakh ...”, - the beginning of the novel “An Ordinary Story”. Such a variant of the beginning in the 1840s. was not only familiar, but also possessed a considerable polemical charge. From this word, E.-T.-A. Hoffmann began his story The Lord of the Fleas (1840), which was widely known in Russia (its Russian translation was published the same year). Hoffmann not only began with the word "once", but, as it were, gave this beginning a theoretical justification: "Once - but what author now dares to begin his story like that. "Old! Boring!“ exclaims a supportive or, rather, unfavorable reader… Publisher wonderful fairy tale it is true that Vygotsky L.S. Tragedy about Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, W. Shakespeare // Vygotsky L.S. Psychology of art. M., 1968. S. 367–368. Epilogue of the novel Oblomov 19 such a beginning is very good, that, in fact, it is even the best for any story - it is not for nothing that the most skillful storytellers, like nannies, grandmothers and others, from time immemorial approached their fairy tales ... "1 If Following the Hoffmannian declaration, the writer defiantly begins his novel with the word “once”, which means that he claims that his “history” has not a purely topical, but a universal, “fabulous” meaning. Let us recall that Goncharov designated the genre of his second novel as a “big fairy tale”2. The hero of The Cliff, Boris Raisky, will begin his novel with the word "one day". Raisky will not go further than this beginning: he will understand that he does not have sufficient creative potential to create a novel. So, in the artistic world of Goncharov, the word “once”, which opens the narrative, is a sign of fiction: we are dealing with artistic fantasy, fictional characters. The emphasized fictitiousness of the last chapter of the novel is also manifested in the fact that the episode of the meeting between Zakhar and Stolz near the cemetery can be read as a travesty finale of the popular novel by M.N. Zagoskin “Yuri Miloslavsky, or the Russians in 1612” (1829)3: at the grave of Yuri Miloslavsky, the servant of the deceased, “gray-haired as a harrier,” Aleksey Burnash, and Miloslavsky’s comrade-in-arms in the heroic struggle against the Poles, the Cossack foreman Kirsha, meet. Burnash is very old, and Kirsha does not immediately recognize him. We also find the situation of “non-recognition” in Goncharov, however, it is inverted: the servant does not recognize “the friend of his master”. Among other things, the novel "Oblomov" cannot be perceived as a recording of Stolz's story, because both in the narrator's story and in plot situations, this hero often appears in a comic light. This also applies to the epilogue. Stolz is ready to help the "writer" to find out where the beggars come from - after all, you can buy his story from any beggar "for a silver ruble". The “friend” of the “writer” easily finds the “type of beggar”, as he says, “the most normal”. There is something in these phrases of Stolz from the declarations of Penkin, who declared to the late Ilya Ilyich: “We need one bare physiology of society” (IV, 28). The "typical" beggar turns out to be Zakhar. A juxtaposition arises, which we encounter in every novel by Goncharov: this is how the novelist perceives a person (Alexander Aduev, Oblomov, Raisky), and the novelist himself portrays and explains. In the case of Zakhar, one can take the position of an objective observer, and then Zakhar is a “type”, the hero of a possible essay “Petersburg Beggar”. Or a character in Eugène Sue's à l� 'Mysteries of Paris', as Stoltz suggests. And you can (everyone who completes the reading of Goncharov's novel is already convinced of this) to see a unique personality, an individual destiny, and create one of the most 1 Quote. Quoted from: Hoffman E.-T.-A. Fav. Prod.: V 3 t. M., 1962. T. 2. S. 341–342. Compare: “One day… Oh, my God, what kind of author would now dare to start his story in such a way? Etc." (Hoffman E. -T. - A. Meister Flo. A Tale of the Seven Adventures of Two Friends // Otechestvennye Zapiski. 1840. Vol. XIII. No. 12. Dep. III. S. 117; translated by N. Kh. Ketcher). 2 Goncharov. Sobr. op. T. 8. P. 291. 3 See the article by A.Yu. Sorochan in present. Sat. 20 M.V. The source of colorful and psychologically filled images of servants in world literature. Which was done not by the "writer", but by the writer Goncharov. In the course of the novel, Oblomov's cry “Zakhar! Zakhar!”, as a rule, produced a comic effect. The episode with the distressed Zakhar, who begs for alms as "crippled in thirty battles, an elderly warrior" is also comically constructed. But Zakhar’s words about visiting the “grave” (“Tears keep flowing, ‹…> everything will quiet down, and it will seem as if he is calling: “Zakhar! Zakhar!”” - IV, 492), - are already taken seriously. This reaction of the reader is also supported by the close literary context, first of all by Gogol's "Old World Landowners": the motif of silence and the "mysterious call" addressed to the still living. The narrator in Gogol's story speaks of "a voice that calls you by name, which the common people explain by the fact that the soul yearns for a person and calls him, and after which inevitable death follows"1. Zakhar's story appears as a travesty literary history about the “mysterious call” and about the imminent afterlife meeting of kindred souls, and as a psychologically explicable confession of inescapable personal grief. We read the words of Zakhar about Ilya Ilyich: “Remember, Lord, his darling in your kingdom!” - and we understand that we no longer need to think about the landowner and the serf, the master and the servant, but about two close souls, the connection between which does not allow Zakhar to leave the “grave” and accept a comfortable existence as the mercy of the virtuous Stolz. A natural question arises: why did Goncharov endow Stolz's friend - the "writer" - with the features of his appearance? This, of course, is an ironic move: ridiculing how I, a novelist, is presented: a “writer”, having barely left the carriage, studies the beggars, “yawning lazily”, asks Stolz about them, it will not be difficult for him to write a novel , you just need to listen carefully to Stolz and transfer his story to paper. A real writer knows that by recording everything you see and hear, you can accumulate a suitcase of manuscripts (this is the case of Raisky), but a novel is not created that way. The author of Oblomov is convinced: “A phenomenon transferred entirely from life into a work of art will lose the truth of reality and will not become artistic truth”3. Of course, A.G. Grodetskaya is right: the ironic modality dominates in the final chapter. But irony still does not "turn into conventionality all novel action." The reader cannot accept the last phrase of the novel 1 Gogol N.V. Sobr. cit.: In 7 vols. Gogol's realism. M.; L., 1959. S. 83; Weiskopf M.Ya. Gogol's plot: Morphology. Ideology. Context. [B. Moscow], 1993, pp. 268–270; Karpov A.A. "Athanasius and Pulcheria" - a story about love and death // Gogol's Phenomenon. SPb. (in the press). 2 See about this: Romanova A.V. In the shadow of Oblomov. (Author and Hero in the Mind of the Reader) // Russian Literature. 2002. No. 3. S. 53–70. 3 Goncharov. Sobr. op. T. 8. S. 106. Epilogue of the novel "Oblomov" 21 (formally - the transition from narration to utterance) as an objective evidence, as a "direct" word of the author. Because we learn about the main event of the epilogue and its consequences already in the first part of the epilogue. At one time, N.D. Akhsharumov, in a review of Goncharov's novel, categorically stated: “The scene of the break between Olga and Oblomov is the last scene of the novel; everything else, the entire fourth part, is nothing more than an epilogue<…>. It was especially easy to do without the Parisian, Swiss and Crimean scenes between Stolz and Olga. The critic did not attach much importance to the fact that the fourth part is the story of another love. It's about Agafya Matveevna. At the beginning of the tenth chapter of the fourth part, the narrator in a metaphorical form reports the death of the protagonist. The extinction of the Vyborg "living idyll" is designated as immersion in the shadow of the "house" - "a peaceful haven of laziness and tranquility." Then there is a sharp shift in the style of the story. According to the successful expression of A.A. Faustov, there is an "invasion of mechanical metaphor"2. About the death of Ilya Ilyich, it is said: “they stopped the machine of life”, “as if a clock stopped, which they forgot to start” (IV, 485). But at the same time, a further correction of style is being carried out in the story about Agafya Matveevna. In the first chapter of the fourth part of the novel, it is reported that before Ilya Ilyich "became a member of her family", she did all the household chores "like a well-arranged machine" (IV, 379). A comparison, stunning in its stylistic sharpness, is also given there: about Agafya Matveevna, with whom Ilya Ilyich wants to kiss, it is said that she stands “straight and motionless, like a horse on which they put on a collar” (IV, 385). The birth in Agafya Matveevna of love for Ilya Ilyich (“she became not herself”) is likened natural phenomena : "gradual settlement of the seabed, shedding of mountains, alluvial silt with an addition of light volcanic explosions" (IV, 378). Her love was spoken of not as an event in the world of feelings, but as a change in her physiological state: “she fell in love with Oblomov simply, as if she had caught a cold and caught an incurable fever” (IV, 380). And in the epilogue in Agafya Matveevna's love, not the natural-biological, but the individual, personal is highlighted. In the epilogue - as if another Agafya Matveevna: “She realized that she lost and shone her life, that God put her soul into her life and took it out again; that the sun shone in it and faded forever. Forever, really; but on the other hand, her life was forever comprehended: now she knew why she lived and that she did not live in vain ”(IV, 488). The paragraphs that speak about the meaning of life acquired and realized by her, the paragraphs that so delighted A.V. Druzhinin (“all this is above the most enthusiastic assessment”3), write- 1 Akhsharumov N.D. Oblomov. Roman I. Goncharova. 1859 // "Oblomov" in criticism. P. 164. 2 Faustov A.A. Roman I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov": artistic structure and concept of man. Abstract diss. … cand. philol. Sciences. Tartu, 1990. P. 10. 3 "Oblomov" in criticism. P. 120. 22 M.V. Otradin of the dignity of that figurative, poetic language that makes you remember Ilya Ilyich. The death of Oblomov is reported as an event that has already happened - and it happened a long time ago, three years ago. L.S. wrote about the reception of such a time shift. Vygotsky: “... This composition carries within itself the destruction of the tension that is inherent in these events, taken by themselves”1. For sharp questions: “What happened to Oblomov? Where is he? Where?”, - follows the answer, in which the details are the same in terms of style (“the nearest cemetery”, “a modest urn”, “peace”, “calm”, “lilac branches planted by a friendly hand”, “angel of silence”) form a special - elegiac emotion. One can say about the feeling that now connects Agafya Matveevna with her late husband, using a poetic line: “For the heart, the past is eternal” (Zhukovsky), and there will be no exaggeration in this. In the life of the heroine, in her reflections and experiences, high poetic meanings suddenly clearly emerged, which, of course, “argue” with the categorical words of Stolz, who reproached his friend: “pit”, “swamp”, “simple woman, dirty life, suffocating sphere of stupidity” . At one time, G.A. Gukovsky marked the plot of Gogol's "Old World Landowners" with the phrase: "Love is greater than death"2. As modern studies have shown, this plot was extremely popular in Russian literature in the first third of the 19th century. 3 The part of the epilogue of the novel "Oblomov" in question should be read with this literary context in mind. Loss of interest in a world in which there is no longer a loved one, immersion in silence, traits of automatism in behavior, alienation from others - these motives are also found on the pages of the epilogue dedicated to Agafya Matveevna. “... Over the years, she understood her past more and more clearly and hid it deeper, became more silent and concentrated” (IV, 489) - an elegiac experience in its essence: a retrospective rethinking of the past life leads Agafya Matveevna to “enlightenment” , which is ultimately the main event of the epilogue, which is understood as “a change in the internal, mental state of the character”4. Yu.M. Lotman wrote that “the Russian novel ‹…› poses the problem of not changing the position 1 Vygotsky L.S. Psychology of art. P. 202. Innokenty Annensky noted in his time with amazement: “...remember<…> how Oblomov dies at Goncharov's. We read 600 pages about him, we do not know a person in Russian literature so fully, so vividly depicted, and yet his death affects us less than the death of a tree in Tolstoy or the death of a locomotive in „�� �êt� h�m� ���" (meaning the novel by E. Zola "The Man-Beast" (1890. - M.O.) "(Annensky I.F. Goncharov and his Oblomov // "Oblomov" in criticism. S. 222) . 2 Gukovsky G.A. Gogol's realism. P. 83. 3 Weiskopf M.Ya. Gogol's plot ... S. 267–272; Karpov A.A. Athanasius and Pulcheria is a story about love and death. 4 Schmid V. Eventfulness, subject and context // Event and eventfulness: Sat. articles. M., 2010. S. 21. Epilogue of the novel "Oblomov" 23 characters, and the transformation of his inner essence "1. The main surprise of the novel "Oblomov" is that such a "transformation" occurs precisely with Agafya Matveevna. The very correctly used introspection (the inner world of the heroine is revealed to the reader) allows us to say that in the epilogue Agafya Matveevna becomes aesthetically equal in rights with the main characters of the novel. To understand the originality of Goncharov in the development of this motif, it is worth noting that the “enlightenment” of the heroine is comprehended by him as a result of the influence of quite earthly causes: living together with Ilya Ilyich and his death. It is said about this “new” Agafya Matveyevna: “She does not, as before, look around with carelessly shifting eyes from object to object, but with a concentrated expression, with a hidden inner meaning in her eyes” (IV, 488). This state - the burden of thought - does not equate Agafya Matveevna with Olga Ilyinskaya, but likens her. That Olga, who knows “the sadness of the soul, questioning life about its secret” (IV, 460). This is what Stolz says to his wife: “This is not your sadness; it is a common malady of mankind. One drop splashed on you…” (IV, 462). Now Ilya Ilyich's widow also got some drop from the "general ailment". Perhaps this is the “strong surprise” that Wilhelm Dibelius considered a frequent motif of the novel’s ending 2. And this “strong surprise” clearly opposes another outcome of the epilogue, expressed by Stolz with the word “Oblomovism”. So, the Oblomov and Stoltsev principles mutually correct each other. But the semantic outcome of the epilogue does not boil down to this. We are talking about the so-called “cathartic experience”. In the epilogue about Agafya Matveevna, it is said that every time Stolz came to Petersburg for the winter, she “ran to his house” and “caressed” Andryusha with tender timidity. And further: “... I would like to say something to Andrei Ivanovich, to thank him, finally, to lay out before him everything, everything that was concentrated and lived incessantly in her heart: he would understand, but she doesn’t know how, and will only rush to Olga, will press his lips to her hands and burst into a stream of such hot tears that she will involuntarily cry with her, and Andrei, agitated, hastily leaves the room ”(IV, 489), - here it is, the highest final point of tension, which, undoubtedly , possesses cathartic energy. As you know, L.S. wrote about the universal catharsis inherent in art as such. Vygotsky 3. The concept of catharsis developed by D.E. Maksimov. “…What can be called the ‘universal catharsis’ inherent in art as such,” the researcher wrote, “does not end the problem. In many works of world art, in addition to this general form of catharsis, there are others that realize 1 Lotman Yu.M. The plot space of the Russian novel of the 19th century // Lotman Yu.M. In the school of the poetic word: Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol. M., 1988. S. 334. 2 Dibelius V. Morphology of the novel. pp. 119–120. 3 Vygotsky L.S. Psychology of art. pp. 249–274. 24 M.V. Otradin the first quite concretely, - a catharsis fixed in certain, relatively isolated fragments and phenomena of the text. And then: “In fiction, one can distinguish both a long, through-going cathartic action, for example, associated with the personality of a character, and the manifestation of brief “cathartic insights”, usually arising in the opening of some basic plot knots” one. The cathartic insight experienced by the three people closest to Ilya Ilyich suddenly “cancels” that “abyss”, that “stone wall” that Andrei Stoltz imagined as insurmountable barriers between their lives and Olga and existence in the “house” on Vyborg side. There is no longer a rigid, rationalistic in nature opposition “Oblomov / Stoltsev”, and the reader will have the wisdom of life itself. 1 Maksimov D.e. On the novel-poem of Andrei Bely "Petersburg": On the issue of catharsis // Maksimov D.E. Russian poets of the beginning of the century. L., 1986. S. 308. UDC 82.09 BBK 83.2 O-18 Editorial Board: S.N. Guskov, S.V. Denisenko (responsible editor), N.V. Kalinina, A.V. Lobkareva, I.V. Smirnova Compiled by: S.V. Denisenko Reviewer: T.I. Ornatskaya O-18 Oblomov: constants and variables: Collection of scientific articles / comp. S.V. Denisenko. - St. Petersburg. : Nestor-History, 2011. - 312 p., ill. ISBN 978-5-98187-816-9 This book is dedicated to one work - the novel by Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov "Oblomov". Consciously limiting the topic, the compilers sought to combine the advantages of a monographic study and a traditional collection of scientific articles under one cover. UDC 82.09 LBC 83.2 Fragments of the painting by Pieter Brueghel (the Elder) “Land of the Lazy” are reproduced on the cover. ISBN 978-5-98187-816-9 ", 2011