What spiritual qualities of Oblomov attract Stolz. What spiritual qualities of Oblomov attract Stolz Active and purposeful Stolz

Subject: "Oblomov and Stolz: comparative characteristics of the heroes (based on the novel

I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov").

Tasks:

educational:

to form the skills of characterization of literary characters;

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

developing:

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

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

improve the skill of pair and independent work;

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

to promote the development of thinking, creative abilities and cognitive activity of students;

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

educational:

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

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

educate the ability to listen and hear each other;

to educate the spiritual and moral culture of students.

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

Teaching methods: heuristic, explanatory and illustrative.

Lesson type: combined.

Equipment: portrait of I.A. Goncharov, illustrations for the novel "Oblomov", projector, screen, handouts, multimedia presentation, a fragment of the feature film by N. Mikhalkov "A Few Days in the Life of Oblomov".

DURING THE CLASSES

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

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

I. Repetition of what was previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

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

II. Learning new material.

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

2. The word of the teacher.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Getting to know the hero

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Portrait of Stolz

What was Stoltz most afraid of?

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

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

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

So why are Oblomov and Stolz friends?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Suggested answers:

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

Why Oblomov does not accept the modern norm of life?

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

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

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

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

What is the reason for the extinction of Oblomov?

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

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

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

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

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

3. The image of Andrei Ivanovich Stolz.

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

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

3.2. Education and upbringing.

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

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

3.3. Stolz character.

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

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

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

Such a human type, both in real life and in literary incarnation, always carries something ambiguous: its positivity seems to be undeniable, but many things make you resist emerging sympathies, especially since one of the important components of Stolz's philosophy is to achieve the goal in any way, despite the obstacles (“he put perseverance in achieving goals above all else”).

4. Conclusions about Stolz.

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

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

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

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

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

5. Conclusions about Oblomov.

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

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

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

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

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

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

Most afraid of everything difficult and difficult to achieve.

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

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

He was afraid of every dream."

Answer:

Answer (Stolz):

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

2. strength, calmness, energy; desire for enlightenment

3. striving for personal independence

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

IV. Summing up the lesson.

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

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

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

V. Homework.

2. Draw up a plan for the comparative characteristics of Oblomov and Stolz.

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

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

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

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

Portrait of Stolz

A defining feature (compare with Oblomov).

A story about nature, character, attitude to life.

The main thing is rationality and balance.

- What was Stoltz most afraid of?

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

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

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

The essence of the dispute - HOW TO LIVE?!

Episode Analysis .

How does a dispute arise?

When does a dispute occur?

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

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

Is there one answer to this question?

Comparison of Oblomov and Stolz.

“Most of all he was afraid of the imagination…

He was afraid of every dream."

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

“Above all, he put perseverance in

achieving goals ... he went to his goal,

bravely stepping through all obstacles ... "

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

For me

Repetition of what was previously learned.

1. Oblomovism as a type of life:

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

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

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

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

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

Love in the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Analytical conversation.

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

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

Closeness and indifference to the rest of the world)

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

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

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

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

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

Homework

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

Features of the speech of the characters in the novel by I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov" Features of the speech of the characters in the novel by I.A Goncharov "Oblomov" Prepared by a student of class 10 "B" MOU "Pervomaiskaya sosh" village Pervomaisky, Tambov region MOU "Pervomaiskaya sosh" village Pervomaisky Tambovskaya region Vorobyova Ekaterina Vorobyova Ekaterina Teacher Khalyapina L.N. Teacher Khalyapina L.N.

The language of the novel is different The language of the novel is distinguished by its purity and lightness. purity and lightness. Belinsky, during whose lifetime Belinsky, during whose lifetime only Goncharov's first novel was published, Goncharov's first novel "An Ordinary Story", noted Goncharov's clean, correct, light, free, flowing "language. To this, the critic added that Goncharov's story was "live improvisation", that "when reading Goncharov, you think that you are not reading, but you are hearing a masterful oral story." The same features of Goncharov's language are also visible in the novel Oblomov.

The main feature of the author's speech in the novel is that it is built on the basis of a living, colloquial, everyday folk language. In the language of the characters, there are such commonly used folk words as “chai” in the meaning of “probably” (“tea, lying around somewhere on the main feature of the author's speech in the novel is that it is built on the basis of a living, colloquial, everyday folk language. In the language of the characters, there are such commonly used folk words as “tea” in the meaning of “probably” (“tea, lying somewhere in the attic”) or “sleep”, attic”) or “sleep”, “blur”, giving “blur ”, which give the speeches of the heroes the colloquial speech of the heroes a colloquial flavor. coloring.

Goncharov's comparisons are simple and very often based on the material of peasant life: "you lie like a deck", "not a person, but just straw"; the moon looks like “a copper, cleaned basin”, and Pshenitsyna, when Oblomov wanted to kiss her, “stood like a horse on which they put on a collar”. Goncharov's comparisons are simple and very often based on the material of peasant life: "you lie like a deck", "not a person, but just straw"; the moon looks like “a copper, cleaned basin”, and Pshenitsyna, when Oblomov wanted to kiss her, “stood like a horse on which they put on a collar”. When Tarantiev spoke, it might seem, as the author writes, "as if three empty carts were driving along the pavement." Similar When Tarantiev spoke, it might seem, as the author writes, "as if three empty carts were driving along the pavement." Such comparisons clearly reveal comparisons clearly reveal the author's desire for vernacular. the author's desire for vernacular.

The novel also has many comparisons and literary character. An attempt to somehow stir up the sleepy life of Oblomov by meeting Olga Stolz compares with bringing a lamp into a gloomy room. There are also comparisons in the novel - aphorisms of this type: "Cunning is like a small coin, which you can't buy much." Goncharov also uses poetic metaphors: when Olga sang a romance without enthusiasm, the author says: "She took her soul out of singing." The novel also has many comparisons and literary character. An attempt to somehow stir up the sleepy life of Oblomov by meeting Olga Stolz compares with bringing a lamp into a gloomy room. There are also comparisons in the novel - aphorisms of this type: "Cunning is like a small coin, which you can't buy much." Goncharov also uses poetic metaphors: when Olga sang a romance without enthusiasm, the author says: "She took her soul out of singing."

In a realistic work, the language of the hero bears the imprint of his social position and profession. We find this in Goncharov's novel, Oblomov and Olga speak the usual language of the intelligentsia of the nobility. At the same time, Olga, who grew up in the city, almost does not feel the common folk vocabulary. This is the elegant language of a well-bred girl. In a realistic work, the language of the hero bears the imprint of his social position and profession. We find this in Goncharov's novel, Oblomov and Olga speak the usual language of the intelligentsia of the nobility. At the same time, Olga, who grew up in the city, almost does not feel the common folk vocabulary. This is the elegant language of a well-bred girl. In the language of Oblomov, who grew up in the village, In the language of Oblomov, who grew up in the village, common words are quite common, for example: “It pulled me, blurt out”; "He cracks potatoes and herring"; “The other day” and other common words are quite common, for example: “It pulled me, blurt out”; "He cracks potatoes and herring"; "the other day", etc.

But basically the language of Goncharov's characters is characterized not by vocabulary, but by a peculiar intonation. Oblomov's speech is usually calm. Only in rare cases, under the influence of irritation (for example, when Zakhar compared him with "other" people or in the scene of Tarantiev's exile), does she take on an agitated character. But basically the language of Goncharov's characters is characterized not by vocabulary, but by a peculiar intonation. Oblomov's speech is usually calm. Only in rare cases, under the influence of irritation (for example, when Zakhar compared him with "other" people or in the scene of Tarantiev's exile), does she take on an agitated character. Olga's speech is elegant, sensible, thoughtful, now lively witty, now sad. Olga's speech is elegant, sensible, thoughtful, now lively witty, now sad. In Stolz's speech, self-confidence, perseverance sound, in Zakhar's speech, slowness of thought, rusticity, and rudeness in Tarantiev's speech affect. In Stolz's speech, self-confidence, perseverance sound, in Zakhar's speech, slowness of thought, rusticity, and rudeness in Tarantiev's speech affect.

In the speech of the characters there are proverbs and sayings, for example: “The flour will be milled”, “The urchin has ripened everywhere”, etc. In the speech of the characters there are proverbs and sayings, for example: “The flour will be milled”, “The urchin has ripened everywhere”, etc. Dialogue of Goncharov owns brilliantly. The reader is involuntarily captured not only by such dramatic episodes of the novel as the scene of Oblomov's break with Olga or Oblomov's conversation with Stolz about Oblomovism, but also everyday dialogues full of humor, such as Oblomov's conversation with Zakhar in the 8th chapter of the second part of the novel. Dialogue Goncharov owns brilliantly. The reader is involuntarily captured not only by such dramatic episodes of the novel as the scene of Oblomov's break with Olga or Oblomov's conversation with Stolz about Oblomovism, but also everyday dialogues full of humor, such as Oblomov's conversation with Zakhar in the 8th chapter of the second part of the novel.

All these artistic merits of Goncharov's novel make understandable the general appreciation given to him by Russian society. The impression made by "Oblomov" upon its appearance was enormous. N. A. Dobrolyubov immediately responded to the novel. Herzen called the novel "an excellent thing". L. N. Tolstoy and A. M. Gorky rated the novel as one of the best in Russian literature. All these artistic merits of Goncharov's novel make understandable the general appreciation given to him by Russian society. The impression made by "Oblomov" upon its appearance was enormous. N. A. Dobrolyubov immediately responded to the novel. Herzen called the novel "an excellent thing". L. N. Tolstoy and A. M. Gorky rated the novel as one of the best in Russian literature.

Information resources Sakharov V. I., Zinin S. A. Literature of the 19th century. Grade 10: Textbook for educational institutions: In 2 hours, Part 1. – 2nd ed. - M .: LLC "TID "Russian Word - RS", - 336 p. Sakharov V. I., Zinin S. A. Literature of the 19th century. Grade 10: A textbook for general educational institutions: At 2 hours. Part 1. – 2nd ed. - M .: LLC "TID "Russian Word - RS", - 336 p.

Description of the presentation on individual slides:

1 slide

Description of the slide:

2 slide

Description of the slide:

In a realistic work, the language of the hero necessarily bears the imprint of his social position and profession. We find this in Goncharov's novel as well. Oblomov and Olga speak the usual language of the intelligentsia of the nobility. At the same time, Olga, who grew up in the city, almost does not feel the common folk vocabulary. This is the elegant language of a well-bred girl. In the language of Oblomov, who grew up in the countryside, common words are quite common, for example: “It pulled me, blurted out; “He cracks potatoes and herring”; "the other day", etc. But basically the language of Goncharov's characters is characterized not by vocabulary, but by a peculiar intonation. Oblomov's speech is usually calm. Only in rare cases, under the influence of irritation (for example, when Zakhar compared him with "other" people or in the scene of Tarantiev's exile), does she take on an agitated character. Oblomov's speech

3 slide

Description of the slide:

The speech of the characters also reveals their essence, spiritual traits. Oblomov's speech emphasizes lordly inclinations, spiritual softness, sincerity, and the ability for deep feeling. In some cases, he finds it difficult to build phrases (in a letter to the headman in one sentence he put the words that, which twice); this is to be expected from a landowner vegetating on a sofa. And in another case, he writes an inspirational letter to Olga. Usually Oblomov speaks languidly, apathetically, but in moments of excitement, during meetings with Olga, his speech changes dramatically: she becomes sublime, pathetic. Thus, the writer emphasizes the inconsistency of Oblomov's nature, achieving vitality, truthfulness of the image. Oblomov's speech

4 slide

Description of the slide:

Stolz's speech is opposed to Oblomov's speech: his phrases are short, concise. They feel the energy, assertiveness of the speaker. Often there are words of a business lexicon. Stolz's speech

5 slide

Description of the slide:

Stolz's speech allows us to identify some features of his character. In the image of this hero, the writer wanted to present a whole, active, active person, to embody a new Russian type. Stolz is a strong, strong-willed person who controls not only all his actions, but also feelings. He never completely surrendered to his feelings, "even in the midst of passion he felt the ground under his feet." He was not afraid of difficulties, he looked at life directly and simply. Pisarev notes that "Stolz is not one of those cold, phlegmatic people who subordinate their actions to calculation, because there is no vital warmth in them ...". Stolz is inconsistent in his good impulses. So, in the novel, he twice helps Oblomov, arranging the affairs of a friend with the estate, exposing Tarantiev's money frauds. But in general, the fate of Oblomov does not excite him. The image of Stolz is a rather complex, realistic image, studied by the writer deeply and comprehensively. Stolz's speech

What is true friendship? This is, first of all, understanding, the desire to help, support a person in difficult times.

How many people do we feel like this? Of course not. Their units. True friends are a gift of fate. Not everyone is lucky to meet such people in life. But if luck is on your side, you will never be alone, and you can always feel the invisible presence of a friend, because he already lives in your heart.

If you look at the heroes of Goncharov's novel Oblomov, you might think that Ilya Ilyich and Stolz are an illustration of true friendship.

But is it?

These characters have known each other since childhood, they know each other very well. Stolz has tender feelings for Oblomov, in every possible way strives to stir him up, to force him to live an active life, since he himself is a very “mobile” character. He is trying to adjust the character of Oblomov for himself, sadly, breaking him. Do real friends do this? No! They accept you as you are, with all your shortcomings, appreciating your virtues without destroying your individuality. Of course, these actions of his are a kind of concern, but you need to know when to stop.

Stolz, communicating with Ilya Ilyich, also receives a “dose” of spiritual warmth, which he lacks so much in life - it seems to me that this is the main reason for his “friendly feelings”. He is the real consumer. In addition, I think Stolz, seeing a lot of shortcomings in Oblomov, comparing him with himself, is engaged in narcissism. That fundamental difference, which can be seen from a kilometer away between these two heroes, gives Stolz an undeniable advantage, which he enjoys using.

Of course, understanding all these nuances, we can draw far from impartial conclusions about Stolz. But, on the other hand, he, no matter what, is always ready to help Oblomov, as can be seen in the episode where Tarantiev robs Ilya Ilyich, and Andrei helps the main character get out of history. In addition, after all, Oblomov's feelings are not accidental. He cannot love an unworthy person. Ilya Ilyich is a sensitive nature, he saw in Stolz the features of a beautiful heart. We can be sure that on the part of Oblomov there can be no question of the authenticity of friendship, he firmly believes in Andrei. From Stolz's side, this is a moot point.

Goncharov's novel Oblomov helps us understand the role friendship plays in a person's life by providing a rich example of its ups and downs. Oblomov does not need anything from Stolz, Stolz is simply his only friend. With whom else can he discuss his thoughts and feelings? Thanks to the described relationship between Oblomov and Stolz, the essence of these heroes and the differences in their characters were fully revealed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let us return, however, to the novel.

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

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