Evgeny Onegin Tatyana's moral choice. What is the problem of the novel "Eugene Onegin"? The history of the creation of an innovative work

And happiness was so possible, so
close... Chapter VIII, stanza XLVIII

Was happiness possible?

Lesson objectives:

Educational: formation of conscious skills and abilities to work with text

Developmental: speech development - enrichment and complexity of vocabulary.

Educating: purposeful formation of such moral qualities as responsibility and honesty in relation to the chosen position.

Lesson plan:

1. Organizational moment.

2. The stage of preparing students for the active acquisition of knowledge.

3. The stage of generalization and systematization of what has been studied.

4. Stage of informing students about homework.

Methods and forms of work:

1. Greeting.

2. Heuristic conversation.

3. Reproductive task. :

Preparation for the lesson:

Students:

They must know the content of A. S. Pushkin’s work “Eugene Onegin” (Chapter 8).

Lesson progress

Org moment.

Start of the lesson.

Working with text.

— What facts of the author’s biography are discussed at the beginning of Chapter 8? (Tale about the lyceum, exile, memoriesknowledge about the Caucasus, Crimea, Moldova, but most importantly— inner world, movement of creative thought, developmentity of the author’s state of mind.)

— Pushkin needed five stanzas to remember his whole life. There was youth - it left, there were friends, but they were destroyed. But the memory of them remained, loyalty to the ideas for which they gave their lives and went to the Nerchinsk mines. The muse remains, it is unchanged, it will always remain pure and

bright, it will help you live:

And now for the first time I am a muse...

I bring you to a social event... In the first chapter we saw a glimpse of the St. Petersburg ball, essentially from the street, through the window:

Shadows move across the solid windows...

In Chapter 8 we are at a social event. There is much that is attractive in the world:

You can admire the noisy crowd, the flickering of dresses and speeches, the slow appearance of guests before the young hostess, and the dark frame of men around you, as if around paintings.

The appearance of Onegin: he seems alien to everyone.

— Was Onegin a stranger to secular society? (No.)

- The world decided that he was smart and very nice. A whole series of questions appears. Who can ask them? Author? Regular at social events?

Where has he been for three years? With this bewilderment we can compare the words of Molchalin: “How surprised we were! If only you could serve with us in Moscow!”

- Rumors about him. (“Makes a weirdo.”) Who will he appear? (INthe highest society is accustomed to non-humans, and “decorously pulled masks”, and those who are not like them,— countries-we are unclear.)

- What advice do they give to Onegin? ( They advise him“be a kind fellow like everyone else.”)

- Is Onegin familiar to the world? (Yes, he spent eight yearsHere. But there was something about him that wasn't quite right before.everyone, and now? “That conversations are too frequent //We are happy to accept business // That stupidity is flightyand evil, // That the eyes of important people are important // And thatmediocrity alone // We can handle even non-countrieson? “Silent people are blissful in the world”; idealmediocrity: “Blessed is he who was young from his youth,// Blessed is he who matures in time, // Who graduallythe cold of life // I was able to endure the years; //Whodid not indulge in strange dreams, // Who are the secular rabbledid not shy away, // About whom they have been repeating for a whole century: // NN pre-red man"; Pushkin's conviction: one cannot betraylose youth! “It’s unbearable to see before you // One-there is a long row of them, // Looking at life asritual"; excerpts from Onegin's journey will be answeredto the question of what cargo he arrived with in the fall of 1824. Route: Moscow - Nizhny Novgorod - Astra-Han - Caucasus— Crimea - Odessa. Onegin introduceswith my homeland.)

Conclusion: Onegin comes to St. Petersburg renewed.

- Why did Onegin, like Chatsky, get from the ship to the ball? (Irreconcilable hostility towards society, in Onegina deep inner life that was not there before.)

On the board is the topic of the lesson:

“TATYANA AND EUGENE IN CHAPTER VIIINOVEL. MORAL PROBLEMS OF THE NOVEL “EUGENE ONEGIN”

- And now a new meeting of heroes takes place. Tatyana appears, and Onegin does not recognize her and recognizes her. As Pushkin describes, what was Tatyana like, what did she do without? (She was leisurely, // Not cold,not talkative, //Without an insolent look for everyone, //Without pre-aspirations for success, // Without these little antics, //No imitative ideas...)

-Why is Onegin, who did not fall in love with Tatiana in the village, now overwhelmed by such an all-consuming passion? (The heroes have changed, Onegin is now updatedcan appreciate the depth of Tatyana’s soul.)

— What has changed in Tatyana? (She learned to "power"“behave yourself”, as Evgeniy once advised herThat.) Why is Onegin so attracted to her?

- What about Evgeniy? ( What's wrong with him? What country is he in?nom dream? // What stirred in the depths // Souls want-hungry and lazy?//Annoyance? Vanity?Or again// The concern of youth is love?)
What's happening to him? How has he changed?

Expressive recitation of Onegin's letter. What hero do we see in the letter? What feelings are they experiencing?

Listening to an excerpt from Tchaikovsky's opera "Eugene Onegin".
Your impression. How does music and stage acting help to understand the characters and convey feelings?
Teacher's word.

— The compositional scheme of the novel is simple. The main characters switch roles towards the end of the book:

1. SHE loves HIM - HE doesn’t notice HER. SHE writes HIM a letter - listens to HIS sermon.

2. HE loves HER - SHE does not notice HIM. HE writes HER letters - listens to HER confession (sermon, rebuke).

But this simple construction only emphasizes the complexity of human experiences, which outwardly fit into such a simple scheme. How much more beautiful is Onegin’s feeling!

- He turned to books again, as in his youth. The range of reading very definitely tells the reader, a contemporary of A.S. Pushkin: Gibbon, Rousseau, Gorder, Madame de Stael, Belle, Fontenelle—philosophers, educators, scientists. These are not two or three novels,

which reflected “the century and modern man beloved by Onegin before. This is a reading circle for de-cabrists, people striving for action.”

-But this is not enough. Now everything that was inaccessible to him three years ago is revealed to Onegin.

The poet, a friend of his heroes, wishes them happiness with all his heart. But happiness is impossible. There is controversy about the ending of the novel. Different points of view appear, each of which is based in its own way on the text of the novel. In addition, each generation reads Pushkin in its own way.

Eight years after Pushkin’s death, in 1845, V.G. Belinsky wrote his famous articles about “Eugene Onegin”. 80s. Due to

With the opening of the monument in Moscow in 1880, F. M. Dostoevsky delivered a speech at a meeting of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, in which he expressed his interpretation of the ending of the novel.

Assignment: Read thoughts about the ending of the novel and the images of Tatiana and Onegin
famous Russian writers: Vissarion Grigorievich Belinsky and Fedor
Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Work in groups. Write out abstracts from the articles. which express the thoughts and attitudes of critics towards the ending of the novel and the images of the characters.

The tragedy of Chapter VIII is that Tatyana did not understand Onegin and his love. A democrat, a man of the 40s, Belinsky put the freedom of the human person above all else; he condemns Tatyana for sacrificing her love for the sake of loyalty to her husband, whom she does not love, but only respects.

F. M. Dostoevsky:“Tatiana is the ideal of a woman, the ideal of a person. Her behavior in Chapter 8 is the embodiment of moral perfection, because What“...can a person base his own happiness on the misfortune of another? Happiness does not lie in the pleasures of love alone. And also in the highest harmony of spirit. How can you calm the spirit if behind you stands an unhappy, merciless, inhuman act? Should she run away just because my happiness is here? But what kind of happiness can there be if it is based on someone else’s misfortune?... No: the pure Russian soul decides this way: “Let, let me alone be deprived of my happiness, let, finally, no one ever... know my sacrifice and will not appreciate it. But I don’t want to be happy by ruining someone else!”
Conclusion. Belinsky and Dostoevsky judge the actions of the heroes differently. Which of them is more convincing, more accurately understands the motives of Tatyana’s action in relation to Onegin and her own feelings? Why does Tatyana reject Onegin?
1 Research work.

To answer these questions, let's look again at verbs.
Watch Tatiana's monologue, find the verbs, determine the tense. Why Tatyana,
when explaining himself to Onegin in the present, when he talks about himself, he uses
exclusively past tense verbs?
— Light did not spoil, did not ruin Tatyana, her soul remained the same, although during these three years she did not remain the same as she was.

- If Onegin has changed internally, then Tatyana has changed more externally. She matured, became more restrained, calmer, and learned to protect her soul from the gaze of others. And this external restraint, with the same inner wealth, the same spiritual beauty that she possessed in her youth, attracts Onegin to her even more.

- Previously, happiness was not possible because Onegin did not know how to love. Happiness is only possible now with the renewed Onegin, but (too late!) Tatyana does not consider herself entitled to sacrifice her husband’s happiness for the sake of her own happiness.

In March 1825, having lost hope of personal happiness, Onegin was left alone in St. Petersburg. In the main text of the novel, Onegin remains at a crossroads - and the reader, along with him, once again thinks: what is life? How should we live? Where to go? Whom to love? With whom and for what to fight?

Summing up the lesson.

Why does Chapter VIII cause the most controversy and interpretation? (Pushkin does not provide psychologicalthe basis of events, actions, facts.)

At the end of the novel, both main characters are worthy of the readers' sympathy. If one of them could be called “negative,” then the novel would not have a truly tragic sound. Love for an unworthy being can give rise to very sad situations, but it does not become such a source of tragedy as the mutual love of two people worthy of happiness when this happiness is completely impossible.

Onegin at the end of the novel is not a romantic “demon” with a prematurely aged soul. He is full of thirst for happiness, love and the desire to fight for this happiness. His impulse is deeply justified and evokes the reader's sympathy. But Tatiana -... a person of a different type: she tends to give up happiness in the name of higher moral values. Her spirituality is full of true spiritual beauty, which both the author and readers admire. It is precisely the fact that both heroes, each in their own way, are worthy of happiness that makes the impossibility of happiness for them deeply tragic.

But who will finally explain to us the novel by A. S. Pushkin? Who will interpret Onegin in such a way that there is nothing to add? We must hope that no one. May this book live forever, and may each new generation find something of its own in it. Very important for him.

*A task for those who think.

1. Was it possible for a happy reunion between Onegin and Tatyana? An essay is a reflection. Excerpt by heart (Onegin's letter).

2. Research work: “What role can grammatical categories play in a literary text? (A.S. Pushkin
"Eugene Onegin").

Good luck in the lesson!

Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin’s work on the work “Eugene Onegin” took place during a difficult period for Russia. The writing of the novel lasted eight years. During this time, one ruler of the state was replaced by another, society was in the process of rethinking key life values, and the worldview of the author himself changed. It follows that the work raises many important moral issues.

Firstly, Pushkin touched upon the topic of searching for the meaning of human existence. In the novel, we can observe the lives of the characters in dynamics, the path of their spiritual formation. Some heroes managed to find the truth, recognize the right ideals, after going through trials. Others have followed the wrong path, setting their priorities wrong but never realizing it.

The secular society of those times had its own laws. Young people did not strive to make existence meaningful. They were busy with the senseless waste of their parents' money, an idle lifestyle, balls and entertainment, gradually degrading, becoming corrupted, becoming similar to each other. To earn recognition among others, it was enough to follow fashion trends, dance well, speak French, and be able to communicate gallantly. That's all.

Secondly, the work traces the theme of attitudes towards marriage. At first, young people, including Onenin, are burdened by serious relationships and consider family life boring, unattractive, and unpromising. So Evgeny neglected the feelings of young Tatiana, choosing freedom rather than the love of a modest provincial girl.

Only with the passage of time did stable relationships become desirable for the main character. He wanted, passionately desired, peace, comfort, warmth, quiet family happiness, home life. However, the opportunities for this were irretrievably lost due to his own fault. If Onegin had “ripened” in time, he could not only have become happy himself, but also made the romantic Tatiana happy.

Thirdly, the novel has a theme of friendship. Secular young people are absolutely incapable of loyal and true friendships. They are all just friends, maintaining communication “with nothing to do.” But it is pointless to expect help in a difficult situation, support, or understanding from them. Lensky and Onegin seemed to be good friends, but because of some stupidity, one killed the other.

Fourthly, Pushkin mentions the issue of duty and honor. This topic is fully revealed by Tatyana Larina. She, like Eugene, was of noble origin and received a superficial upbringing at home. However, the morals of the world did not affect her pure and innocent soul. She loves Onegin madly, but puts her duty to her husband, albeit unloved, above all else. Even the hero’s passionate tirade did not persuade her to change her decision.

A society mired in lies, hypocrisy, and erroneous guidelines cannot find the true meaning of life, and therefore does not value it. Eugene put secular honor above moral duty by killing a romantic friend. Such a shift in ideals seems absurd, but, alas, this is the harsh reality.

Problems and characters of the novel “Eugene Onegin”

Before talking about the issues and main characters of the novel in verse "Eugene Onegin", it is necessary to clearly understand the features of the genre of this work. The genre of “Eugene Onegin” is lyric-epic. Consequently, the novel is built on the inextricable interaction of two plots: epic (whose main characters are Onegin and Tatyana) and lyrical (where the main character is the narrator, from whose behalf the story is told). The lyrical plot is not only equal in the novel - it dominates, because all the events of real life and the novel’s existence of the heroes are presented to the reader through the prism of the author’s perception, the author’s assessment.

The key, central problem in the novel is the problem of the purpose and meaning of life, because at turning points in history, such as the era after the Decembrist uprising became for Russia, a radical revaluation of values ​​occurs in people's minds. And at such a time, the artist’s highest moral duty is to point out to society eternal values, to provide firm moral guidelines. The best people of the Pushkin - Decembrist - generation seem to be “leaving the game”: they are either disappointed in the previous ideals, or do not have the opportunity to fight for them in the new conditions, to bring them to life. The next generation - the one that Lermontov will call “a gloomy and soon forgotten crowd” - was initially “brought to its knees.” Due to the peculiarities of the genre, the novel, which literary criticism rightly interprets as a kind of “lyrical diary” of the author, reflects the very process of revaluation of the entire system of moral values. Time flows in the novel in such a way that we see the characters in dynamics and trace their spiritual path. Before our eyes, all the main characters are going through a period of formation, painfully searching for the truth, determining their place in the world, the purpose of their existence.

The central image of the novel is the image of the author. Despite all the autobiographical nature of this character, he can in no way be identified with Pushkin, if only because the world of the novel is an ideal, fictitious world. Therefore, when we talk about the image of the author, we do not mean Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin personally, but the lyrical hero of the novel “Eugene Onegin”.

So, before us is the author’s lyrical diary; a frank conversation with the reader, where confessional moments are interspersed with light chatter. The author is sometimes serious, sometimes frivolous, sometimes maliciously ironic, sometimes simply cheerful, sometimes sad and always witty. And most importantly, he is always absolutely sincere with the reader. Lyrical digressions reflect changes in the author’s feelings, his ability to both lightly flirt (characteristic of “windy youth”) and deeply adore his beloved (compare stanzas XXXII and XXXIII of the first chapter of the novel).

... we, the enemies of Hymen,

In home life we ​​see alone

A series of tedious pictures...

The spouse is perceived as an object of ridicule:

... majestic cuckold,

Always happy with yourself

With your lunch and your wife.

But let us pay attention to the opposition between these verses and the lines of “Excerpts

from Onegin's travels":

My ideal now is a mistress,

My desires are peace,

Yes, there’s a pot of cabbage soup, and it’s a big one.

What in youth seemed a sign of limitation, spiritual and mental poverty, in mature years turns out to be the only correct, moral path. And in no case can the author be suspected of hypocrisy: we are talking about the spiritual maturation of a person, about a normal change in value criteria:

Blessed is he who was young from his youth,

Blessed is he who matures in time.

The tragedy of the protagonist largely stems precisely from Onegin’s inability to “ripe in time,” from the “premature old age of the soul.” What happened harmoniously in the author’s life, although not painlessly, in the fate of his hero became the cause of tragedy.

The search for the meaning of life takes place in different planes of existence. The plot of the novel is based on the love of the main characters. Therefore, the manifestation of a person’s essence in the choice of a lover, in the nature of feelings, is the most important feature of the image, determining his entire attitude to life. Love for the author and for his heroine Tatyana is a huge, intense spiritual work. For Lensky, this is a necessary romantic attribute, which is why he chooses Olga, devoid of individuality, in whom all the typical traits of heroines of sentimental novels merge:

Her portrait is very cute

I used to love him myself,

But he bored me immensely.

For Onegin, love is “the science of tender passion.” He learns true feeling towards the end of the novel, when the experience of suffering comes.

“Eugene Onegin” is a realistic work, and realism, unlike other artistic methods, does not imply any final and only correct solution to the main problem. On the contrary, it requires an ambiguity in the interpretation of this problem:

This is how nature created us,

I am prone to contradiction.

The ability to reflect the “propensity” of human nature “toward contradiction,” the complexity and variability of an individual’s self-awareness in the world are the distinctive features of Pushkin’s realism. The duality of the image of the author himself lies in the fact that he evaluates his generation in its integrity, without ceasing to feel like a representative of a generation endowed with common advantages and disadvantages. Pushkin emphasizes this duality of self-perception of the lyrical hero of the novel: “We all learned a little ...”, “We respect everyone as zeros ...”, “We all look like Napoleons”, “So people, I am the first to repent, // There is nothing to do Friends..."

A person’s consciousness and his system of life values ​​are largely shaped by the moral laws adopted in society. The author himself assesses the influence of high society ambiguously. The first chapter gives a sharply satirical image of the world and the pastime of secular youth. The tragic 6th chapter, where the young poet dies, ends with a lyrical digression: the author’s reflections on the age limit that he is preparing to cross: “Will I soon be thirty years old?” And he calls on “young inspiration” to save the “soul of the poet” from death, not to let “... petrify // In the deadening ecstasy of light, // In this pool where I am with you // Bathing, dear friends!” So, a whirlpool that deadens the soul. But here is the 8th chapter:

And now I'm a muse for the first time

I bring it to a social event.

She likes order and slender

oligarchic conversations,

And the coldness of calm pride,

And this mixture of ranks and years.

Yu.M. explains this contradiction very correctly. Lotman: “The image of light received double coverage: on the one hand, the world is soulless and mechanistic, it remained an object of condemnation, on the other hand, as the sphere in which Russian culture develops, life is inspired by the play of intellectual and spiritual forces, poetry, pride, like the world of Karamzin and the Decembrists, Zhukovsky and the author of “Eugene Onegin” himself, it retains unconditional value. Society is heterogeneous. It depends on the person himself whether he will accept the moral laws of the cowardly majority or the best representatives of the world” (Yu.M. Lotman, A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: Commentary. St. Petersburg, 1995).

The “craven majority”, “friends” who surround a person in a “deadly” “pool of light” do not appear in the novel by chance. Just as the “science of tender passion” has become a caricature of true love, so secular friendship has become a caricature of true friendship. “There’s nothing to do, friends,” is the author’s verdict on the friendly relations of Onegin and Lensky. Friendship without deep spiritual community is only a temporary empty union. And this caricature of secular friendships infuriates the author: “... save us from friends, God!” Compare the caustic lines about the slander of “friends” in the fourth chapter of the novel with the heartfelt poems about the nanny (stanza XXXV):

But I am the fruit of my dreams

And harmonic undertakings

I read only to the old nanny,

A friend of my youth...

A full life is impossible without selfless dedication in friendship - that’s why these secular “friendships” are so scary for the author. For in true friendship, betrayal is the most terrible sin, which cannot be justified by anything, but in a secular parody of friendship, betrayal is in the order of things, normal. For the author, the inability to make friends is a terrible sign of the moral degradation of modern society.

But there is no friendship between us either.

Having destroyed all prejudices,

We respect everyone as zeros,

And in units - yourself.

We all look at Napoleons,

There are millions of two-legged creatures

For us there is one weapon;

We feel wild and funny.

Let us pay attention to these verses; they are one of the most important and central in Russian literature of the 19th century. Pushkin’s formula will form the basis of “Crime and Punishment” and “War and Peace”. The Napoleonic theme was first recognized and formulated by Pushkin as the problem of the purpose of human life. Napoleon appears here not as a romantic image, but as a symbol of the psychological attitude, according to which a person, for the sake of his desires, is ready to suppress and destroy any obstacle: after all, the people around him are just “two-legged creatures”!

The author himself sees the meaning of life in fulfilling his destiny. The entire novel is filled with deep reflections on art, the image of the author in this sense is unambiguous: he is, first of all, a poet, his life is unthinkable outside of creativity, outside of intense spiritual work.

In this, Evgeniy is directly opposite to him. And not at all because he does not plow and sow before our eyes. He has no need to work, to find his purpose. The author perceives Onegin’s education, and his attempts to immerse himself in reading, and his efforts to write (“yawning, he took up the pen”) ironically: “He was sick of persistent work.” This is one of the most serious moments for understanding the novel. Although the action of the novel ends before the uprising on Senate Square, the features of a man of the Nicholas era are often discernible in Evgeniy. A heavy cross for this generation will be the inability to find their calling, to unravel their destiny. This motif is central to Lermontov’s work; Turgenev also comprehends this problem in the image of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.

The problem of duty and happiness is especially important in Eugene Onegin. In fact, Tatyana Larina is not a love heroine, she is a heroine of conscience. Appearing on the pages of the novel as a seventeen-year-old provincial girl dreaming of happiness with her lover, before our eyes she grows into a surprisingly complete heroine, for whom the concepts of honor and duty are above all. Olga, Lensky’s fiancée, soon forgot the deceased young man: “the young uhlan captivated her.” For Tatyana, Lensky's death is a disaster. She curses herself for continuing to love Onegin: “She must hate him // The murderer of her brother.” A heightened sense of duty is the dominant image of Tatyana. Happiness with Onegin is impossible for her: there is no happiness built on dishonor, on the misfortune of another person. Tatyana's choice is a deeply moral choice, the meaning of life for her is in accordance with the highest moral criteria. F.M. wrote about this. Dostoevsky in the essay “Pushkin”: “...Tatyana is a solid type, standing firmly on her own soil. She is deeper than Onegin and, of course, smarter than him. She already senses with her noble instinct where and what the truth is, which is expressed in the finale poem. Perhaps Pushkin would have done even better if he had named his poem after Tatiana, and not Onegin, for undoubtedly she is the main character of the poem, this is a positive type, not a negative one, this is the apotheosis of the Russian woman, and to her. The poet intended to express the idea of ​​the poem in the famous scene of Tatyana’s last meeting with Onegin. One can even say that such a beautiful positive type of Russian woman has almost never been repeated in our fiction - except perhaps for the image of Lisa in Turgenev’s “The Noble Nest.” But the manner of looking down. did something that Onegin didn’t even recognize Tatyana at all when he met her for the first time, in the wilderness, in a modest

in the image of a pure, innocent girl, so shy before him from the first time. He failed to distinguish completeness and perfection in the poor girl and, indeed, perhaps mistook her for a “moral embryo.” This is her embryo, this is after her letter to Onegin! If there is anyone who is a moral embryo in the poem, it is, of course, himself, Onegin, and this is indisputable. And he could not recognize her at all: does he know the human soul? This is an abstract person, this is a restless dreamer throughout his life. He did not recognize her even later, in St. Petersburg, in the guise of a noble lady, when, in his own words, in a letter to Tatyana, “he comprehended with his soul all her perfections.” But these are only words: she passed him by in his life, unrecognized and unappreciated by him; that's the tragedy of their romance<…>.

By the way, who said that secular, court life had a pernicious effect on her soul and that it was precisely the rank of a society lady and new secular concepts that were partly the reason for her refusal to Onegin? No, it wasn't like that. No, it’s the same Tanya, the same old village Tanya! She is not spoiled, on the contrary, she is depressed by this magnificent St. Petersburg life, she is broken and suffering, she hates her rank as a society lady, and whoever judges her differently does not understand at all what Pushkin wanted to say. And so she firmly says to Onegin:

But I was given to someone else

And I will be faithful to him forever.

She said this precisely as a Russian woman, this is her apotheosis. She expresses the truth of the poem. Oh, I won’t say a word about her religious beliefs, about her view of the sacrament of marriage - no, I won’t touch on that. But what: is it because she refused to follow him, despite the fact that she herself told him: “I love you,” or because she is “like a Russian woman” (and not southern or not some kind of French) , incapable of taking a bold step, unable to break her bonds, unable to sacrifice the charm of honor, wealth, her secular significance, the conditions of virtue? No, the Russian woman is brave. A Russian woman will boldly go after what she believes in, and she has proven it. But she “was given to someone else and will be faithful to him forever”<…>. Yes, she is faithful to this general, her husband, an honest man who loves her, respects her and is proud of her. Even though her mother “begged” her, it was she, and no one else, who gave her consent; after all, she herself swore to him to be his honest wife. She may have married him out of desperation, but now he is her husband, and her betrayal will cover him with shame, shame and kill him. Can a person base his happiness on the misfortune of another? Happiness does not lie in the pleasures of love alone, but also in the highest harmony of the spirit. How can you calm the spirit if there is a dishonest, ruthless, inhuman act behind it? Should she run away just because my happiness is here? But what kind of happiness can there be if it is based on someone else’s misfortune? Let me imagine that you yourself are erecting the building of human destiny with the goal of ultimately making people happy, finally giving them peace and quiet. And imagine, too, that for this it is necessary and inevitably necessary to torture just one human being, moreover, even if it is not so worthy, funny even at another glance, not some Shakespeare, but just an honest old man, a young husband his wife, in whose love he blindly believes, although he does not know her heart at all, respects her, is proud of her, is happy with her and is at peace. And now you just need to disgrace, dishonor and torture him and build your building on the tears of this dishonored old man! Would you agree to be the architect of such a building on this condition? Here's the question. And can you admit for a moment the idea that the people for whom you built this building would agree to accept such happiness from you, if suffering is laid in its foundation<…>. Tell me, could Tatyana, with her high soul, with her heart, so damaged, have decided differently? No<…>. Tatiana sends Onegin away<…>. It has no soil, it is a blade of grass carried by the wind. She is not like that at all: even in despair and in the suffering consciousness that her life has been lost, she still has something solid and unshakable on which her soul rests. These are her childhood memories, memories of her homeland, the village wilderness in which her humble, pure life began - this is “the cross and the shadow of the branches over the grave of her poor nanny.” Oh, these memories and former images are now most precious to her, these are the only images left to her, but they are the ones who save her soul from final despair. And this is a lot, no, there is already a lot here, because there is a whole foundation, here is something unshakable and indestructible. Here is contact with the homeland, with the native people, with its shrine<…>."

The climax of the plot is the sixth chapter, the duel between Onegin and Lensky. The value of life is tested by death. Onegin makes a tragic mistake. At this moment, the contrast between his understanding of honor and duty and the meaning that Tatyana puts into these words is especially striking. For Onegin, the concept of “secular honor” turns out to be more significant than moral duty - and he pays a terrible price for allowing a shift in moral criteria: the blood of the friend he killed is on him forever.

The author compares two possible paths for Lensky: sublime (“for the good of the world, or at least glory was born”) and down-to-earth (“ordinary destiny”). And what is important for him is not which fate is more realistic - what is important is that there will be no fate, Lensky is killed. For light, which does not know the true meaning of life, human life itself has no value. For the author, it is the greatest, ontological value. That is why the author’s sympathies and antipathies are so clearly visible in the novel “Eugene Onegin”.

The author's attitude towards the heroes of the novel is always definite and unambiguous. Let us note once again Pushkin’s reluctance to be identified with Eugene Onegin: “I am always glad to notice the difference // Between Onegin and me.” Let us recall the ambiguity of the author’s assessment of Eugene: as the novel is written, his attitude towards the hero changes: the years go by, the author himself changes, and Onegin also changes. The hero at the beginning and end of the novel is two different people: in the finale Onegin is a “tragic face.” For the author, Onegin's main tragedy lies in the gap between his true human capabilities and the role he plays: this is one of the central problems of the Onegin generation. Sincerely loving his hero, Pushkin cannot help but condemn him for his fear of violating secular conventions.

Tatyana is Pushkin’s favorite heroine, the image closest to the author. The poet will call her a “sweet ideal.” The spiritual closeness of the author and Tatyana is based on the similarity of basic life principles: a selfless attitude towards the world, closeness with nature, national consciousness.

The author's attitude towards Lensky is lovingly ironic. Lensky's romantic worldview is largely artificial (remember Lensky's scene at the grave of Dmitry Larin). Lensky's tragedy for the author is that for the right to play the role of a romantic hero, Vladimir sacrifices his life: the sacrifice is absurd and meaningless. The tragedy of a failed personality is also a sign of the times.

A special discussion is the author's attitude towards minor and episodic characters. In many ways, he reveals not individual, but typical traits in them. This creates the author’s attitude towards society as a whole. Secular society in the novel is heterogeneous. This is also the “secular mob”, which has made the pursuit of fashion the main principle of life - in beliefs, in behavior, in reading, etc. And at the same time, the circle of people received in Tatiana’s St. Petersburg salon is the true intelligentsia. Provincial society appears in the novel as a caricature of high society. One appearance at Tatiana’s name day by the Skotinins (they are also the heroes of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor”) shows that in the fifty years separating Pushkin’s modern province from the province described by Fonvizin, nothing has changed. But at the same time, it is in the Russian province that Tatyana’s appearance is possible.

To summarize, it should be said that the fate of the heroes of the novel primarily depends on the truth (or falsity) of the values ​​they accepted as the basic principles of life.

References

Monakhova O.P., Malkhazova M.V. Russian literature of the 19th century. Part 1. - M.-1994.

Lotman Yu.M. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: Commentary. St. Petersburg - 1995

"Moral Choice"

Option 1

Moral choice - this is, first of all, a choice between good and evil: loyalty and betrayal, love and hatred, mercy or indifference, conscience or dishonor, law or lawlessness... Every person makes it throughout his entire life, perhaps more than once. Since childhood, we have been taught what is good and what is bad. Sometimes life presents us with a choice: to be sincere or hypocritical, to do good or bad deeds. And this choice depends on the person himself. I will prove this thesis by citing arguments from the text by V.K. Zheleznikov and analyzing my life experience.

As a second argument to prove the thesis, I will give an example from the reader’s experience. In A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin,” the main character faces a moral choice: to refuse a duel with Lensky or not to refuse. On the one hand, there was the opinion of society, which would condemn him for refusal, and on the other, Lensky, a friend whose death was not necessary. Evgeniy made, in my opinion, the wrong choice: a person’s life is more important than public opinion.

Thus, I proved that we are constantly faced with moral choices, sometimes even in everyday things. And this choice must be correct so as not to regret it later.

Option 2

What is moral choice? I think a moral choice is a choice between love and hate, trust and mistrust, conscience and dishonor, loyalty and betrayal, and to generalize, it is a choice between good and evil. It depends on the degree of human morality. Nowadays, as always, moral choice can show the true essence of a person, because the choice between good and evil is the most important choice of a person.

In the text by E. Shima you can find an example that confirms my idea. Gosha, a boy with a gentle character, commits a truly heroic act when, risking his health, he protects Vera. When the boy sees that the rocket might explode, he makes the right choice. This act characterizes him differently than at the beginning of the story, because by his act Gosha changes his opinion about himself for the better.

As a second proof of the thesis, I want to give an example from life. I would like to talk about Nikolai Shvedyuk, who, risking his life, saved five people who were riding a snowmobile and fell through the ice. The ninth-grader, seeing what had happened, called an ambulance and, taking a rope, rushed to help people. Nikolai committed this act, although no one forced him to do it: he made his moral choice.

Option 3

Moral choice - this is a choice between good and evil, between friendship and betrayal, between conscience and dishonor... The main thing is that a person makes a decision that he will not regret in the future. I believe that each person understands the phrase “moral choice” differently. For me, a moral choice is a choice in which a person’s upbringing and soul are manifested. To confirm my point of view, I will turn to the text of V. Droganov and personal experience.

The first argument in favor of my opinion can be propositions 24-25. In these sentences, the author talks about what the narrator understands many years later: his choice at that moment when he took the book from Kolka Babushkin was wrong, and he greatly regrets it. This once wrongly chosen decision became his pain, his “inseparable companion”, because the hero understands that, unfortunately, he cannot fix anything, it is no longer even possible to ask for forgiveness (30).

Thus, after analyzing two arguments, I proved that a moral choice is a choice that a person makes first of all with his soul, heart, and then with his mind. And sometimes the experience of the past years tells him that he did wrong.

Option 4

Moral choice - this is making one decision out of several: we always think about what to choose: good or evil, love or hate, loyalty or betrayal, conscience or dishonor... Our choice depends on many things: on the person himself and his moral guidelines, on life circumstances , from public opinion. I believe that moral choices may not always be correct, but are often a reflection of how a person was raised. A person with a bad character will choose decisions in his own favor: he does not think about others, he does not care what happens to them. For evidence, let us turn to the text of Yu. Dombrovsky and life experience. Essays on the OGE and the Unified State Exam

Secondly, I would like to recall the story of a boy from V. Astafiev’s story “The Horse with a Pink Mane.” In the work we observe that the boy realized his mistake and repented of his action. In other words, the hero, who is faced with the question of whether to ask for forgiveness from his grandmother or remain silent, decides to apologize. In this story we observe that the decision of a moral choice depends on the character of a person.

Thus, we have proven that moral choice is a decision that we make every day, and the choice of this decision depends only on ourselves.

Choose only ONE of the suggested essay topics (2.1–2.4). In the answer form, indicate the number of the topic you have chosen, and then write an essay of at least 200 words (if the essay is less than 150 words, then it is scored 0 points).

Rely on the author’s position (in a lyric essay, take into account the author’s intention), formulate your point of view. Argument your theses based on literary works (in an essay on lyrics, you must analyze at least two poems). Use literary theoretical concepts to analyze the work. Think over the composition of your essay. Write your essay clearly and legibly, observing the norms of speech.

2.5. Which stories from works of domestic and foreign literature are relevant to you and why? (Based on the analysis of one or two works.)

Explanation.

Comments on essays

2.1. What role does the image of military everyday life play in the poem “Vasily Terkin” by A. T. Tvardovsky?

Writer Fyodor Abramov said about the poem “Vasily Terkin” this way: “Russia in living people’s faces, intonations, words.” “The Book about a Soldier,” born in the atmosphere of the war years, is a deep study of the Russian national character, an excited narrative about a soldier and his soldier’s entourage. Through the eyes of Terkin, an “ordinary guy,” not only pictures of battles are drawn, but also scenes of front-line life. The poem about a soldier’s everyday life and a joke, so necessary in mortal danger, surprisingly organically merge in the poem: the story about the accordion player Terkin sounds at ease:

...Warm up, hang out

Everyone goes to the accordion player.

Surround - Stop, brothers,

Let me blow on your hands...

All sorts of chance encounters occur in war, and Vasily Terkin always shows ingenuity, dexterity and efficiency: he can easily find the scale hidden by the hostess, fry lard, fix the clock.

An honest, brave and conscientious artist, A. T. Tvardovsky traveled difficult front roads as a war correspondent, more than once was under shelling and bombing, and not only this experience, but also his enormous talent helped the author create a folk poem close to millions of readers.

2.2. How is M. V. Lomonosov’s idea of ​​an ideal historical figure embodied in “Ode on the Day of the Accession to the All-Russian Throne of Her Majesty Empress Elisaveta Petrovna, 1747”?

In Lomonosov's ode, Tsarina Elizaveta Petrovna appears as an exalted being. The poet places great hopes on her for the peace and prosperity of Russia. First of all, Lomonosov talks about peace, which is the key to the prosperity and happiness of any country.

Lomonosov praises Elizabeth's generosity and expresses his hope for her mercy and attention to her native country. Lomonosov speaks about the happiness of all people. And Queen Elizabeth acts as the guarantee of their peace and happiness:

When she took the throne,

As the Most High gave her a crown,

Brought you back to Russia

Put an end to the war.

Lomonosov idealizes the queen. He paints her as the embodiment of all virtues. And the reader may get the impression that Lomonosov did not see any shortcomings in her. But we should not forget that the classic poet that Lomonosov is, in his work must glorify reality, devoid of any vices. Moreover, an ode of praise is a completely special genre. And Lomonosov’s ode is structured in such a way that he says only good things about the queen.

Lomonosov speaks about the beauty and greatness of Russia, about the inexhaustible wealth that this country possesses. And therefore he believes that a great country is worthy of a great ruler, which, of course, is Elizabeth.

2.3. What is the contrast between the natures of Onegin and Lensky? (Based on the novel by A. S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin.”)

The heroes of the novel “Eugene Onegin” are complex, lively, and sometimes contradictory characters. Onegin and Lensky are close in their social and geographical position: they are landowners - neighbors. Both have education, their spiritual needs are not limited to rural life, like most of their neighbors. Onegin was born and raised in St. Petersburg. Lensky studied in Germany, at the University of Göttingen, so in the wilderness of the village it was difficult for him to find an interlocutor. Pushkin notes that both heroes are good-looking. Onegin is “very sweet”; life in St. Petersburg society has taught him to take care of his appearance.

The difference between the heroes is clearly visible in their attitude towards love. Lensky “sang love, obedient to love,” he is going to marry his chosen one - Olga Larina.

Onegin had long since forgotten what love was: over eight years of social life in St. Petersburg, he had become accustomed to replacing serious feelings with “the science of tender passion,” and was frankly bored in the village. Pushkin gives a number of antonyms, emphasizing the contrast of the characters’ characters: “wave and stone, poetry and prose, ice and fire.”

In the images of Onegin and Lensky, Pushkin embodied the typical features of the youth of his time. The heroes differ in character and worldview. Onegin wasted his best years on empty social amusements and turned into a bored egoist. Lensky is still too young, naive, romantic, but he could turn into an ordinary landowner.

2.4. What social and moral vices does N.V. Gogol expose in the comedy “The Inspector General”?

In the comedy “The Inspector General” N.V. Gogol exposes the vices of society during the times of Tsarist Russia. The focus of his attention is on representatives of the bureaucracy, and the author embodies their images in the characteristic characters of a small county town, where the main events take place. The author clearly shows that local officials are mired in bribery and arbitrariness. The moral of these people is this: “There is no person who does not have some sins behind him. This is already arranged this way by God himself...” The ability not to miss what floats into one’s hands is, in their opinion, a manifestation of intelligence and enterprise. The officials of the district town are stupid and immoral.

The work of N.V. Gogol is not so much comical as it is filled with tragedy, because when reading it, you begin to understand: a society in which there are so many degenerate bosses, corrupted by idleness and impunity, has no future.