The tragic fate of man (Based on the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”) (School essays).

Lermontov’s novel “a hero of our time” is rightly called not only a socio-psychological, but also a moral and philosophical novel, and therefore philosophical questions are organically included in it. The main idea of ​​the novel is the search for a place strong personality in life, the problem of freedom of human action and the role of fate limiting it.

The problem of action, both socially and philosophically, was one of the most important for Russia in the 1830s. It is not without reason that in the poem “Duma,” which critically draws a portrait of his generation, Lermontov, as the most important, reproaches him for inaction:

I look sadly at our generation!

His future is either empty or dark,

Meanwhile, under the burden of knowledge and doubt,

It will grow old in inactivity.

Much of what Lermontov said in this poem about his generation is also inherent in Pechorin, but, preserving as one of the main traits of the “hero of the time” a tendency to doubt (“I love to doubt everything”), the author endows him with an uncontrollable thirst for activity , active action. And in this the hero is similar to Lermontov himself:

I need to act, I do every day

I would like to make him immortal, like a shadow

Great hero, and understand

I can't, what does it mean to rest.

It is known that Lermontov planned to create the image of his contemporary in contrast to the character of Onegin. Pechorin does not have that disappointment that leads to “longing laziness”; on the contrary, he rushes around the world in search of true life, ideals, but does not find them, which leads him to skepticism and complete denial of the existing world order. He craves activity, constantly, tirelessly strives for it, but what he does in life turns out to be petty, meaningless and useless even for himself, since it cannot dispel his boredom.

But it is not so much the hero himself who is to blame for all this, a bright and extraordinary personality who stands out from the general background of people of that time, capable of true freedom of thought and action. Rather, the blame lies with the world, the society in which he lives, where the Shakespearean situation is clearly felt: “the century has dislocated a joint,” “the connection of times has broken down.” What should a person do in such a situation?

Pechorin is faced with Hamlet’s question: “What is nobler in spirit - to submit / To the slings and arrows of furious fate / Or, taking up arms on a sea of ​​turmoil, to defeat them with confrontation?” With all his energy he strives to solve it, but does not find an answer.

Nevertheless, the issue of free human will and predestination, fate is considered in one way or another in all parts of the novel. Pechorin is not for a minute free from the question: “Why did I live? For what purpose was I born?.. And, it’s true, it existed, and, it’s true, I had a high purpose, because I feel immense strength in my soul; but I did not guess this purpose, I was carried away by the lures of empty and ungrateful passions.” And therefore, this is another “Russian Hamlet”, human and social type, doomed to be a “clever useless person,” a “superfluous person.”

But Pechorin does not stop his dispute with fate even when he is almost confident in its power over himself. The situation in which Pechorin finds himself in Taman makes him think about the question: why did fate put him in such a relationship with people that he involuntarily brings them only misfortune? Can he change her and become at least something useful people? Or is he destined to remain the “executioner in the fifth act of the tragedy,” the “axe” of fate?

Almost until the end of the novel, only a negative answer is given to all these questions. Before us is a Demon in human form, bringing suffering and death to everyone he encounters: Bela dies, Mary suffers, Vera’s life is shattered, Grushnitsky dies. But still, Pechorin is a man, pity and compassion are accessible to his heart: “I have an unhappy character,” he says, “whether my upbringing made me like this, whether God created me this way, I don’t know; I only know that if I am the cause of the misfortune of others, then I myself am no less unhappy.”

However, this makes Pechorin no less guilty: after all, he himself consciously tries to play the role of the arbiter of the destinies of other people. This can be seen in the story of Mary, the duel with Grushnitsky, whom Pechorin makes puppets in his game. But isn't he himself a toy in the hands of fate?

More than once the hero tries to test this. Even in the episode of the duel with Grushnitsky, in fact, built by Pechorin precisely in order to test not only Grushnitsky, but also himself, the hero asks the question: “What if his happiness overcomes him? What if my star cheats on me?

And yet, a detailed answer to the question about the degree of human freedom in the world, about the role of fate in his life and about the existence of predestination is posed in the final part of the novel - the philosophical story “Fatalist”.

A fatalist is a person who believes in the predetermination of all events in life, in the inevitability of fate, fate, fate. In the spirit of its time, reconsidering fundamental issues human existence, Pechorin is trying to resolve the question of whether it is predetermined higher will the purpose of a person or the person himself determines the laws of life and follows them.

He feels within himself, in his time, liberation from the blind faith of his ancestors, accepts and defends the revealed free will of man, but at the same time knows that his generation has nothing to bring to replace “blind faith” previous eras. And yet, the problem of the existence of predestination, posed by Lermontov in this story, is mainly of a philosophical nature. It forms part of the writer’s philosophical concept of the relationship between East and West, which is reflected in all of his work. Belief in predestination is human oriental culture, faith in own strength- to a man of the West.

Pechorin, of course, is closer to man Western culture. He believes that belief in predestination is a trait of people of the past, to modern man they seem funny. But at the same time, the hero thinks about “what willpower this faith gave them.” His opponent, Lieutenant Vulich, is presented as a person associated with the East: he is a Serb, a native of a land under Turkish rule, endowed with an oriental appearance.

Unlike all the previous ones, philosophical story“The Fatalist” is constructed in such a way that everything depicted in it serves as proof of a predetermined thesis: “predestination exists.” Moreover, this proof is given three times. Vulich was unable to shoot himself, although the pistol was loaded. Then he nevertheless dies at the hands of a drunken Cossack, and Pechorin does not see anything surprising in this, since even during the argument he noticed the “stamp of death” on his face. And finally, Pechorin himself tempts fate, deciding to disarm the drunken Cossack, the murderer of Vulich. “... A strange thought flashed through my head: like Vulich, I decided to tempt fate,” says Pechorin.

Thus, as the action of “Fatalist” develops, Pechorin receives triple confirmation of the existence of predestination and fate. But his conclusion sounds like this: “I like to doubt everything: this disposition of mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character; on the contrary, as for me, I always move forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me.”

The story seems to leave open question about the existence of predestination. But Pechorin still prefers to act and control the course of life with his own actions. The fatalist turned into his opposite: if predestination exists, then this should only make human behavior more active. To be just a toy in the hands of fate is humiliating. Lermontov gives exactly this interpretation of the problem, without unequivocally answering the question that tormented the philosophers of that time.

Thus, the philosophical story “Fatalist” plays the role of a kind of epilogue in the novel. Thanks to the special composition of the novel, it ends not with the death of the hero, which was announced in the middle of the work, but with a demonstration of Pechorin at the moment of emerging from the tragic state of inaction and doom. Here, for the first time, the hero, disarming the drunken Cossack who killed Vulich and is dangerous for others, performs not some far-fetched action designed only to dispel his boredom, but a generally useful act, moreover, not associated with any “empty passions”: the theme of love in “Fatalist” turned off completely.

Placed in first place main problem- the possibilities of human action, taken in the most general terms. This is precisely what allows us to end on a positive note the seemingly “sad thought” about the generation of the 30s of the 19th century, as Belinsky called the novel “A Hero of Our Time.”

Nevertheless, the path of search has already been indicated, and this is Lermontov’s enormous merit not only to Russian literature, but also to Russian society. And today, when deciding the question of fate and its role in a person’s life, we involuntarily remember Lermontov and the hero of his novel. Of course, it is unlikely that any of us living in our time will undertake such a deadly experiment, but the very logic of solving the question of fate, proposed in “Fatalist,” I think, may be close to many. After all, “who knows for sure whether he is convinced of something or not?.. And how often do we mistake a deception of feelings or a lapse of reason for conviction!..”

Even Lermontov’s last disastrous duel seems accidental and childish, an unexpectedly tragic consequence of a schoolboy prank common among cadets. But we all, following the wonderful, heroic grandmother Elizaveta Alekseevna Arsenyeva, love a difficult, brilliant child Russian literature, from childhood, they grew close to him with an aching, caring soul. Because we see how young poet lonely, unhappy and defenseless, that he was all fighting. And we know that no one else in Russia could write amazing, heartfelt lines of melancholy and faith:

It’s solemn and wonderful in heaven!
The earth sleeps in a blue glow...
Why is it so painful and so difficult for me?
Am I waiting for what? Do I regret anything?

In the fate of every great writer there is a certain mystery, prophetic absurdities and coincidences, strange dangers, traps and omens. It was no coincidence that Lermontov wrote the story “Fatalist”; he was interested in various kinds of predictions, signs (remember Grushnitsky’s fall before a duel) and Lavater’s physiognomic fortune-telling. This “mysterious young man” accomplished the seemingly impossible: with his personal will he extended the life of romanticism and at the same time created works of enormous realistic power and depth, revived the Russian novel (“Hero of Our Time”) and drama (“Masquerade”), made those tired of romantic poems Readers should learn “Demon” and “Mtsyri” by heart. The critic V.P. Botkin was right when he wrote to Belinsky with amazement and delight: “Titanic forces were in the soul of this man!”

My essay tells more and more about the fate not so much of the heroes of the novel, but about its author. This is natural. All of Lermontov's work is autobiographical.

There is such an episode in the chapter “Fatalist”. Pechorin in the dark comes across something thick and soft, but at the same time lifeless. A pig lies on the road, cut to pieces with a saber by a drunken Cossack who was being pursued by two other Cossacks. In the middle of the night, they come running to Pechorin with the news that the Cossack has hacked Vulich to death, and then locked himself in an empty hut and no one is able to lure him out of there. Among those gathered is the killer's mother.

Pechorin is ready to try his luck. Esaul distracts the Cossack, and Pechorin jumps out the window of the house. A shot is fired, it misses, the Cossack is captured.

In this scene, Pechorin finds the strength to challenge fate in a way. True, this challenge is made based on precise calculation: rushing out the window of the hut where the Cossack killer has locked himself, Pechorin clearly understands that his chances are increased both by the speed of his actions and by the fact that the killer is distracted by the captain. But his calculation is also based on predestination: Pechorin was predicted to “death from an evil wife,” and the one who is destined to be hanged will not drown.

The fatalism that Pechorin speaks of with irony - “there were once wise people who thought that the heavenly bodies took part in our insignificant disputes ...” - is ultimately confirmed by Vulich’s behavior. But Pechorin would not have been himself if he had not carried out his own experiment, rushing into the house of an armed Cossack, towards the shot. All this is compositionally connected and significant. How significant are the words of the hero, where the complexity of his character is clearly expressed: “I like to doubt everything: this disposition of mind does not interfere with the decisiveness of character - on the contrary, as for me, I always move forward more boldly when I don’t know what awaits me. After all worse than death nothing will happen - and you won’t escape death!”

It must be said that it was not for nothing that Lermontov was compared to Pechorin. He doubted the justice of those social forms, according to which one lived Russian society. By attacking his contemporaries, he also attacked himself, as he was while he was walking along the same road with everyone.

Lieutenant Vulich had “the appearance of a special being, unable to share thoughts and passions with those whom fate gave him as comrades.” It is he who practically, with the help of a loaded pistol, proves to Pechorin the predetermination of fate. This is not an argument in favor of Vulich's fatalism, but simply part of it life philosophy. Pechorin organically merges two contradictory friends friend installation. The first of them is “man proposes, but God disposes,” the second is “water does not flow under a lying stone.” There is a struggle against predestination with the help of himself. This balance, however, is very precarious; it is not for nothing that the novel ends not with a fleeting, but with an ever-increasing feeling big question, the answer to which is unlikely to be found here, in this life.

The ambiguity of Pechorin’s character, the inconsistency of this image, was revealed not only in the study of his spiritual world, but also in the correlation of the hero with other characters; mysterious, not like anyone similar Pechorin becomes more or less typical person of his time, general patterns are revealed in his appearance and behavior. And yet the mystery does not disappear, the “oddities” remain.

The narrator will note Pechorin’s eyes: “they didn’t laugh when he laughed!” In them, the narrator will try to guess “a sign of either an evil disposition or a deep sown sadness”; and will be amazed at their brilliance: “it was a brilliance, like the brilliance of smooth steel, dazzling, but cold”; and shudder from the “insightful, heavy” gaze...

Lermontov shows Pechorin as an extraordinary, intelligent, strong willed, brave. In addition, he is distinguished by a constant desire for action; Pechorin cannot stay in one place, surrounded by the same people. Is this why he cannot be happy with any woman? Pechorin creates adventures for himself, actively interfering in the fate and lives of those around him, changing the course of things in such a way that he leads to an explosion, a collision. He brings into people's lives his alienation, his desire for destruction.

Lermontov did not seek to pass a moral verdict on Vulich or Pechorin. He's only with enormous power showed all the abysses human soul devoid of faith, filled with skepticism and disappointment.

The novel by M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time” shows the tragic fate of a young nobleman in the thirties of the 19th century - the time of reaction that came after the massacre of the Decembrists. The young generation of nobles of that time, despite being educated and enlightened, was not able to act actively in a way that would benefit society.

How did Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin live, what did he do? For whom and why did he live? The writer published the main character’s reflections on these questions in Pechorin’s Journal. From the point of view younger generation XXI century, a lot of interesting things happened in his life.

In “Bela” M.Yu. Lermontov tells how Pechorin became interested in a mountain girl. He served in a fortress in the Caucasus. One day he and staff captain Maxim Maksimych were invited to a wedding by the Tatar prince. Pechorin liked his youngest daughter Bela.

To kidnap her, Pechorin managed to convince her brother Azamat of this. This young man loved horses very much. He wanted to have the same horse as the highlander Kazbich. And Pechorin, acting through intrigue, helped steal this horse. Bela did not immediately reveal to Pechorin that she fell in love with him from the very first minute. Pechorin acted first with gifts, and then with cunning. He decided to say goodbye to her forever, and then Bela did not want to part with him. Soon Pechorin fell out of love with the girl. One day he and Maxim Maksimych went hunting. At this time, Kazbich stole Bela. When they caught up with him, he wounded the girl in the back. Then Bela died. After her death, Pechorin was unwell and lost weight. Soon he was transferred to another regiment. So main character destroyed the life of the princely family: Kazbich killed his father, his daughter died, and his brother Azamat disappeared.

We learn about how Pechorin disrupted the lives of smugglers in the story “Taman,” which is located in “Pechorin’s Journal.” Moving to another duty station, he stayed in one house in Taman. One day he heard the amazing voice of an undine girl. It was the assistant of the smuggler Yanko. Pechorin was fascinated by the events associated with the activities of these people. He decided to find out the truth about them. The mystery of their behavior interested Pechorin, who loved adventure. He met a girl. She called him into the boat and almost pushed him into the water. Yanko and the girl sailed away, leaving the blind orphan boy without a means of subsistence. In his diary, Pechorin writes words of repentance and regret for interfering peaceful life people.

The reader understands that Pechorin was aware of the tragedy of his character and his behavior, that he brought misfortune to people. He was cold towards Maxim Maksimych, who loved him as if he were his own. Pechorin fell in love with Princess Mary, but admitted that “he will not sell his freedom.” Vera, who became his dearest being, left forever. He raced on his horse after her. When the horse could not stand it and fell, Pechorin “cried like a child.”

What is the result of Pechorin's life? Capable of acting, but his actions are insignificant. He did not bring any benefit to people. Pechorin is lonely. In all this lies his tragedy. Pechorin did not save his love for Vera. People died because of him. He has no family, no friends. He became disillusioned with life. Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin died in full bloom while traveling to Persia. This is a sad, touching and tragic, from the point of view of M.Yu. Lermontov, life story of not only a personal, but also a social nature.

Effective preparation for the Unified State Exam (all subjects) -

Novel by M. Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time” consists of five independent chapters. The final chapter is called “Fatalist”. The events that took place in it are told by the hero himself, Pechorin. Being "in Cossack village on the left flank,” Grigory Alexandrovich meets Lieutenant Vulich. Pechorin describes him this way: “ Tall and his dark complexion, black hair, black piercing eyes, a large but correct nose, belonging to his nation, a sad and cold smile that always wandered on his lips - all this seemed to agree in order to give him the appearance of a special being, incapable of sharing thoughts and passions with those whom fate gave him as comrades.”

One evening, the officers started a conversation about “the fact that the Muslim belief that a person’s fate is written in heaven is also found between. Christians...many fans." Lieutenant Vu-lich decided to resolve the dispute by testing the predestination of fate on himself: “Gentlemen,... I suggest you try for yourself whether a person can arbitrarily dispose of his life, or whether a fatal moment has been assigned to each of us in advance.” Everyone refused and, perhaps, this conversation would have ended in nothing if Pechorin had not offered a bet, claiming that there is no predestination.. He poured out “two dozen chervonets on the table.” Vulich supported the conditions and “randomly removed one of the different-caliber pistols from a nail...”. It seemed to Pechorin that he was reading “the seal of death on the pale face” of the lieutenant, and he told him about it. Wu-lich remained calm. The officers made new bets. And so - climax: “everyone’s breathing stopped, all eyes, expressing fear and some kind of vague curiosity, ran from the pistol to the fatal ace, which, trembling in the air, descended slowly; the minute he touched the table, Vulich pulled the trigger... misfire!” Of course, there were suggestions that the pistol was not loaded, to which Vulich, without reloading the weapon, fired again and pierced his cap. Vulich was pleased with his experiment, but Pechorin is haunted by the thought that the lieutenant must certainly “die today.”

And the premonitions did not deceive our hero: Vulich was stabbed to death that same night by a drunken Cossack. Perhaps everything would have worked out well if Vulich himself had not spoken to the distraught Cossack. Already dying, Vulich became convinced of the validity of Pechorin’s prediction. Apparently, he was destined to die, but not from a bullet, but from the saber of a completely unfamiliar Cossack.

I think that Pechorin himself believed in fate (after all, he believed in a fortune-telling that predicted his death “from an evil wife,” after which he experienced “an insurmountable aversion to marriage”), but he constantly experienced it. It seems that the hero is even looking for death (duel with Grushnitsky). Once again he “decided to tempt fate” when he decided to capture that same Cossack locked in a barn. This time fate was favorable to Pechorin: the bullet fired by the Cossack tore off the epaulette without harming the hero.

I believe that sometimes you need to rely on your fate, but you shouldn't tempt it; and if misfortune befalls you in life, you should not give up, believing that everything is already predetermined and nothing can be changed. After all, according to by and large Every person is the architect of his own happiness.

The theme of fate in the novel “A Hero of Our Time” is one of the fundamental ones. This theme runs through all parts of the novel, starting with the story about Bel and ending with the part “Fatalist”. And this is not surprising, because in its prose work Lermontov continues his thoughts, which he conveyed earlier in many poetic works. In this vein, one can recall the terms from the poem “The Death of a Poet,” in which the author sadly exclaimed:

The poet is dead! - slave of honor -
Fate has reached its conclusion! -

The theme of fate in Lermontov's poems often appears in the image of an evil Fate for a person, which cannot be overcome, and often impossible to come to terms with. The theme of fate in “A Hero of Our Time” is also considered by the author from a tragic point of view. Let's take a closer look at the author's concept of the theme of fate in the novel.

Understanding the theme of fate by Pechorin

In the image of the main character of the novel we can see a deep attention to the theme of fate. Pechorin himself in his diary calls himself “an ax in the hands of fate.” That is, the hero thereby justifies himself and his unseemly actions, believing that, by committing them, he is something like an executioner or, more precisely, a conductor’s baton in the hands of an experienced and all-powerful ruler.

By assigning such a fate to himself, the hero thereby achieves self-affirmation in society, believing that by causing pain to others, he is only justly punishing them for their misdeeds. Thus, Pechorin thinks of himself as a demigod, claiming to be more than a mere mortal man.

Such an understanding of his role by Pechorin brings us closer to the theme of the “superman,” which will become especially relevant for humanity 70 years after the publication of the novel by M.Yu. Lermontov. However, the writer, ahead of his time, created for readers the image of such a “future superman”: a hero who is not ashamed of his bad thoughts or his bad deeds and strives to outdo his fate.

As we remember, it is faith in fate and the desire to experience it that makes Pechorin commit immoral acts, which he is not even interested in: imagining himself “an ax in the hands of fate,” he begins to pursue Mary with his barbs, and then makes her fall in love with him, laughs at Grushnitsky, which ultimately leads to a fatal duel for the young man, advises Azamat, Bela’s brother, to kidnap his sister for your own amusement, etc.

At the same time, sometimes there come moments in Pechorin’s life when the hero believes that the evil Rock is completely defeating him. Here's how he talks about such life collisions:

“...This has been my lot since childhood. Everyone read on my face signs of bad feelings that were not there; but they were anticipated - and they were born. I was modest - I was accused of guile: I became secretive. I felt good and evil deeply; no one caressed me, everyone insulted me: I became vindictive; I was gloomy, - other children were cheerful and talkative; I felt superior to them - they put me lower. I became envious. I was ready to love the whole world, but no one understood me: and I learned to hate.”

Thus, sometimes Pechorin tries to blame not himself for his bad actions, but his fate, believing that it is she who is the unfortunate culprit of all the troubles that happened to him.
All of Pechorin’s experiences regarding the problem of fate are resolved in the last part of the novel, called “Fatalist” (that is, a person who believes in fate). This part still remains a mystery for literary scholars, because it characterizes not so much Pechorin himself as a fatalist, but helps to understand the problems of human existence that are meaningful to the author.

The story “Fatalist” as a problem of the divinity of the theme of fate

It is in the story “Fatalist” that the most important aspect of the author’s understanding of the theme of fate is resolved: namely, God or the devil guides the fate of man on earth. To solve this problem, Lermontov chooses hero Vulich a, who is an even greater fatalist than Pechorin. Vulich decided to test his fate by putting the most precious thing on the line - his life. He offered Pechorin a bet, according to which he would shoot himself in the temple with a loaded pistol and see whether he was destined to live or die (the fact is that pistols of that time misfired with a probability of one out of ten). Pechorin, looking into Vulich’s eyes, tells him that he will die tonight. Vulich shoots himself in the temple, and the pistol misfires. He goes to his home, and in the morning Pechorin finds out that he was right: Vulich died that same evening: he was hacked to death by a drunken Cossack with a saber.

According to literary scholars, Lermontov, in his characteristic authorial manner, considers the problem of fate as cruel joke the devil over man. There is a well-known gospel parable about demons who entered a herd of pigs and forced them to rush down into the abyss. In the story “Fatalist,” a devilish desire to tempt fate comes to the mind of the fatalist Vulich. He, too, seems to be possessed by a demon, forcing him to make a fatal bet. And the same demon leads to the fact that Vulich dies that same night at the hands of a bitter drunkard and brawler. It would seem that the forces of evil are triumphant: they showed people an example of their power. The evil Rock – the Demon, already described by Lermontov in one of his poems – won. However, at the end of his story, the writer somewhat softens the tragic sound of the novel’s ending with the words of the kind Maxim Maksimovich that misfires in pistols often happen, and this has nothing to do with the fact that some Cossack decided to go on a rampage that evening.

Such an ending leaves room for Divine Providence, merciful and comprehensive, and also leaves the reader the right to resolve in his own way the conflict that the author described in the last part of his novel.

Understanding the role of fate by the heroes of the novel

The fates of the heroes of the novel “A Hero of Our Time” are, as a rule, tragic. The heroes strive for happiness, but they realize that they cannot have it.

In this novel there is no happy people! Unhappy is the Circassian Bela, kidnapped by her brother and given by him to Pechorin for fun, unhappy is Mary Ligovskaya, the young princess whom Pechorin fell in love with himself in order to laugh at the feelings of the proud beautiful girl finally, Vera is unhappy - socialite and the secret lover Pechorina, who is tormented by secret passion and deeply suffers from the awareness of the hopelessness of her situation. The proud and intelligent Doctor Werner cannot find joy in life; the ambitious young man Grushnitsky, in love with Mary, dies in a duel. And even the kindest Maxim Maksimovich cannot be called happy man. Of course, the hero does not torment himself with deep and tragic experiences, like Pechorin, however, he often experiences grief from the events of the world around him.

A special theme of the novel is the theme of the fate of a generation in “A Hero of Our Time.” This too the most important topic for Lermontov's creativity. All his life, the writer, poet and playwright tried to answer the question: what does his generation represent, what is his calling, the meaning of life?

As a result, Lermontov comes to the sad conclusion that the fate of his generation is difficult because best people Russia - educated young representatives of the noble class - cannot find their place in life. They are restless and blame both themselves and the external circumstances of life for this. Lermontov himself wrote about it this way:

“We are no longer capable of great sacrifices, either for the good of humanity, or even for our own happiness, because we know its impossibility and indifferently move from doubt to doubt.”

In fact, the writer recreates the image lost generation in "A Hero of Our Time". This generation does not know where to direct their vital forces, how to serve their Fatherland.

In the novel “Hero of Our Time,” the writer raises the vital problems of human existence. He is concerned with the theme of fate, which he tries to consider in both a mystical and realistic vein. This topic itself attracts the attention of readers, which makes the work more exciting and interesting. This material will be useful for 9th grade students when writing an essay on the topic “The Theme of Fate in the novel “A Hero of Our Time”.”

Work test