Pechorin's character is revealed. The relationship between Pechorin and Mary in brief
Doctor Werner, not inferior to Pechorin in intelligence and observation, differs from him in that “he never knew how to use his knowledge.” Werner in the story is presented as a witness of life rather than as a participant in it. His kind heart sympathizes with the pain, his noble mind is outraged by the baseness, but at the same time the doctor is only accompanied by Pechorin. He does not commit actions of his own free will, although he sympathizes with Pechorin and protects him as best he can. Werner's skepticism paralyzes his actions, makes him indifferent to everything, while Pechorin's dissatisfaction with life leads to protest. Pechorin's activity testifies to his deep faith in people and thereby elevates him above Werner.
Werner is passive, and this puts him significantly lower than Pechorin in our eyes. But in his relationship with Werner, Pechorin’s egoism is also revealed, who does not recognize friendship because it requires self-forgetfulness: “... I am not capable of friendship: of two friends, one is always the slave of the other, although often not one of them admits this to himself; I cannot be a slave, and in this case commanding is tedious work, because at the same time I have to deceive...”
Pechorin's attitude towards Mary is contradictory. Pechorin assures himself of fearlessness. “From the storm of life,” he says to Werner before the duel, “I brought out only a few ideas - and more than one feeling. For a long time now I have been living not with my heart, but with my head. I weigh and examine my own passions and actions with strict curiosity, but without participation." It would seem that his relationship with Mary completely confirms this idea of Pechorin about himself and testifies to the ruthless coldness and harshness of his play. But Pechorin is not as dispassionate as recommended. Several times he feels carried away, even excited.
Pechorin’s “pathetic and disgusting role” in his relationship with Mary is condemned by himself, and this sometimes prevents us from seeing that, despite all the nobility of the intrigue, Pechorin accomplished something amazing: the Doll Lady became a living, albeit suffering, person.
He remains an “instrument of execution” even in his relationship with Vera, whom he loves, the only one, although he is separated from her. If it weren’t for the romance with Vera developing in parallel with the princess’s story, we would have been convinced of Pechorin’s callousness, of his inability to love. But his relationship with Vera emphasizes that Pechorin, contrary to his conviction, is capable of “going mad under the influence of passion.”
Vera enters the novel as a reminder of the "beneficial storms" of Pechorin's youth and as a victim of his strange character. "Deep and calm eyes» Faith, knowing the feeling and suffering, are so different from the “velvet eyes” of the still unexcited princess. Vera loves deeply and sincerely. “Reproach”, “Deep despair” and ardor - this is the living movement of her feelings during the several minutes of her meeting with Pechorin in the grotto. And Pechorin, although he says without pride that “he has never become a slave to the woman he loves,” is surprised to notice the trepidation and pain in himself.
Under the influence of this first meeting with Vera in Pyatigorsk, Pechorin writes: “She entrusted herself to me again with the same carelessness - and I did not deceive her: she is the only woman in the world whom I would not be able to deceive.”
Nevertheless, Pechorin also recognizes the depth of Vera’s nature: “... this is one woman who understood me completely, with all my minor weaknesses, bad passions...” Vera sees not only them: “... there is something special in your nature, something... something proud and mysterious... no one knows how to better use their advantages, and no one can be as truly happy as you, because no one tries so hard to convince themselves otherwise.”
The justice of these words and the rigidity of the logic of life, which separates Vera and Pechorin, is emphasized by the place of the episode with the letter in the story. Grushnitsky has just been killed. Pechorin is mentally exhausted, and new blow- the loss of Vera - falls on him like an unbearable shock. Not finding harmony in human relations, Pechorin surrenders to the majestic and undisturbed harmony of nature.
1. Pechorin and his entourage. Revealing the character of the hero.
2. Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych.
3. Pechorin and Grushnitsky.
4. Werner's role in the story.
Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin, the main thing character novel “A Hero of Our Time” by M. Yu. Lermontov, throughout the narrative it revolves in different circles, among different sections of society. He is shown surrounded secular society- his environment according to his position (in the chapter “Princess Mary”), among the highlanders (“Bela”), falls into the circle of smugglers (“Taman”), and does not find a suitable environment for himself. This is a lone hero. The author characterizes Pechorin through the mouths of minor characters-storytellers, his contemporaries. All these people perceive Grigory Alexandrovich and judge him differently, each from his own height life experience. As a result, we have the opportunity to look at it from different sides. A portrait of a hero of the time gradually emerges before the reader. Who tells us about him? This is a nameless officer, Maxim Maksimych and Grigory Aleksandrovich Pechorin himself, speaking to the reader through his diary.
Undoubtedly, he himself has the most accurate information about the hero, and a diary, a way to record his thoughts, can tell a lot about his owner. How does Pechorin characterize himself? He admits that he doesn’t know how to swim and has a prejudice against crippled people - he’s scared by “ strange attitude between a person’s appearance and his soul: as if, with the loss of a member, the soul loses some feeling.” The incident with the smugglers helps us evaluate the hero as an inquisitive, risky, and decisive person. But, having left the peaceful smugglers, he is no longer interested in them, he does not care “about the joys and misfortunes of men.” In “Princess Mary” Pechorin appears to us as an experimenter over those around him. He first arouses hatred in the princess, then kindling her love. Pechorin notes his passion to contradict, this is what drives him - noticing that Mary has singled out Grushnitsky, he is jealous and wants to anger him. “Since I have been living and acting, fate has somehow always led me to the outcome of other people’s dramas, as if without me no one could die or despair!” - Pechorin says about himself, thinking that his purpose is to destroy other people's hopes.
We also learn that the hero is capable of strong feeling. On the waters he meets the woman whom Pechorin previously loved. He calls her “the only woman in the world whom he would not be able to deceive,” this is the only woman who accepted and understood Pechorin “with all his petty weaknesses and bad passions.”
Let's now see what impression the hero makes on others. How does Maxim Maksimych perceive him? Pechorin is incomprehensible to him: “He was a nice fellow, I dare to assure you; only a little strange... there are, really, some people who have it written in their nature that all sorts of extraordinary things should happen to them.” Staff Captain Maxim Maksimych is the complete opposite of Pechorin, he is a man of a different era, a different upbringing and character, position. It can nourish warm sincere feelings to the hero as to an old acquaintance, but tries in vain to understand him. Pechorin and Maxim Maksimych perceive what surrounds them from completely opposite points of view. Maxim Maksimych will never challenge the orders of his superiors and think about them, and one of Pechorin’s qualities is to weigh everything. Maxim Maksimych speaks of him as a person “with whom one must certainly agree.” The staff captain agrees with the customs of the mountaineers, but Pechorin does not limit himself to any boundaries; as soon as he left the care of his relatives, he wanted to experience all the pleasures: “In me, the soul is spoiled by the light, the imagination is restless, the heart is insatiable; I'm not enough; I get used to sadness just as easily as to pleasure, and my life becomes emptier day by day; I have only one remedy left: travel.” A chance meeting with Pechorin pleases Maxim Maksimych, he is ready to throw himself on his neck, but Pechorin’s coldness and indifference surprises the staff captain, although Grigory Alexandrovich tells him that he has remained the same.
How does the officer who witnessed his meeting with Maxim Maksimych see Pechorin? He notices a careless lazy gait - a sign of some secrecy of character; Grigory Alexandrovich's eyes did not laugh when he laughed. This, as the narrator says, is “a sign of either an evil disposition or deep, constant sadness.” His gaze is indifferently calm.
The officer is much closer to Pechorin in age than Maxim Maksimych, so for him the hero is more understandable. What the staff captain does not understand in Pechorin’s behavior, for the officer - characteristic features his contemporaries. After reading Pechorin’s journal, the nameless officer tells the reader that he “was convinced of the sincerity of the one who so mercilessly exposed his own weaknesses and vices,” because the story of the hero of our time was written without vanity.
Junker Grushnitsky is a dapper young man who speaks in elaborate, pompous phrases and loves to recite. This young man hopes to make an effect and looks like a parody of Pechorin. Just look at Pechorin’s words that Grushnitsky is reputed to be a brave man, but this is not Russian courage - he rushes forward with a saber, his eyes closed. The reason for his arrival in the Caucasus “will remain an eternal secret between him and heaven.” Pechorin does not like him and feels the inevitability of a collision. Not only does Grushnitsky provoke him into a clash by taking Princess Mary away from under Pechorin’s nose. Grushnitsky is arrogant and self-satisfied, while Pechorin behaves simply, at ease, like a spectator in a theater, where the performance is played out according to the script he has conceived and ends in a duel. In a duel, Grushnitsky is not honest - knowing that Pechorin’s pistol is not loaded, he refuses reconciliation in order to expose Pechorin as a coward. Pechorin shows himself to be courageous and noble man. He invites Grushnitsky to remember that they were friends and abandon the slander. This infuriates the cadet - he demands to shoot, says that he despises himself and hates the hero, he will stab him at night from around the corner if he does not kill him now.
Dr. Werner, whose prototype was Lermontov’s acquaintance, Dr. Mayer, can be called the person who understands Pechorin better than anyone else. Pechorin himself characterizes Werner as “a remarkable man for many reasons.” Skeptic, materialist and poet Werner, studying strings human heart, said that he would rather do a favor for an enemy than for a friend; was nicknamed Mephistopheles for his appearance. It’s easy for Pechorin with Werner, they could become friends, but the fact is that neither one nor the other considers friendship a relationship of equals. Here, everyone is for himself: “The sad things are funny to us, the funny things are sad, but in general, to be honest, we are quite indifferent to everything except ourselves.” They fence themselves off from society with their union; it’s easy for the two of them. They do not cause rejection from each other, while those around them turn away from them. Having started a story together with Grushnitsky and Princess Mary, they are looking forward to entertainment from boredom.
Observing Werner, we can conclude that a little younger he was the same as the hero of our time: the same intellect, the same ironic mindset. What has time done to him? He became a disillusioned skeptic in everything. After the duel, Werner and Pechorin part coldly. Werner believes that Pechorin committed the deliberate murder of Grushnitsky, the hero himself is not disappointed - it has become customary for him that people “know in advance all the bad sides of an act..., even approve of it... and then wash their hands and turn away indignantly from it.” who had the courage to take on the full burden of responsibility." Werner is interested in experiments on people only as a passive observer, while Pechorin actively acts and always goes to the end, analyzing everything that happened.
Pechorin is a hero of his time, but is time ready for such a hero? Alas, not yet. What would have become of Pechorin is unknown. Would he have been like Werner, giving up without a fight? The life of a hero of our time was interrupted on his way from Persia, leaving us with no answer to this question.
In his relationship with Grushnitsky, Pechorin displays such character traits as bored disdain and a passion, however, rather sluggish, for psychological games. The same can be said about his attitude towards Princess Mary, adding enormous pride, directed arbitrarily. At the same time, he could not resist the cold analysis of an outside observer and he himself became very carried away by a considerable inner strength princesses. You could even say I fell in love. But as a person accustomed to giving himself a detailed account of all the movements of his soul, he clearly understood that he would not be happy at all in his marriage and would soon be disappointed. Therefore, he even showed a willingness to give up love, just to preserve freedom or what he meant by freedom, because true love, undoubtedly, does not constrain a person.
Princess Mary and Vera awakened a cold, calculating passion in him, despite the fact that Pechorin undoubtedly valued Vera as a person who managed to penetrate into his inner world. However, this actually had no effect on his actions with her.
Mary is used to being the center of attention, she takes Grushnitsky’s courtship for granted, but she, as a sensitive girl, was much more attracted to the figure of Pechorin, filled with genuine energy. When it turned out that Pechorin laughed at her, she found the strength to maintain her dignity.
The disconnect between feelings and logic is what Pechorin constantly demonstrates, no matter who he encounters.
Images from the natural world and their role in the fables of I.A. Krylova. (Using the example of one or two fables of your choice.)
In I. A. Krylov’s fables, animals act more often than people. Animals are present in all types of Krylov's fables. It is generally accepted that the fabulist’s image of each animal is an allegory of some character trait. For example, the image of a fox is not composed of cunning or flattery alone, but of cunning, flattery and deceit at the same time. And in accordance with her character, she behaves differently in each specific everyday situation. In the fable “The Peasant and the Fox,” the fox at the end acts as a fox should, without contradicting his character:
The fox has become more satisfying,
The fox has become fatter,
But things didn’t become more honest...
...Choosing a darker night,
Kumanka strangled all his chickens.
For the powerful, the powerless are always to blame, says the moral of the fable “The Wolf and the Lamb.” The image of a lamb is used not only as an allegory of weakness and defenselessness, but this image also appears as a metaphor for a certain social level, possibly minor officials. Sometimes Krylov is ironic not only at social vices, but also above the very support of the social ladder government institutions. For this purpose, images of animals are used. An example is the fable Quartet, where it is parodied State Council, created in 1801, and its four departments, headed by:
Naughty Monkey,
Yes clubfooted bear
They decided to play a Quartet...
They hit the bows, they fight, but there’s no point.
Indeed, what awaits such a quartet-council in the future if its heads7 are not even a pack of dogs, but precisely such different animals.
and the Pike pulls into the water.
So, the images of various animals widely used by Krylov different characters They also point to the realistic basis of the fable, which is manifested in Krylov’s creation of the Russian national character.
Chatsky and Famusov
The mind of a nobleman, adhering to conservative views and ideals, is aimed at protecting his comfort, his warm place from everything new. The new is hostile to the old way of life of the feudal landowners, because it threatens its existence. Famusov adheres to these views. Chatsky, on the other hand, is the owner of an effective, flexible mind, aimed at building a new world in which the main values will be the honor and dignity of a person, his personality, and not money and position in society. The views of Chatsky and Famusov differ sharply on all issues related to the nobleman’s way of life. Chatsky is a supporter of education, enlightenment, he himself is “sharp, smart, eloquent,” “writes and translates well.” Famusov and his society, on the contrary, consider excessive “learning” harmful to society and are very afraid of the appearance of people like Chatsky in their midst. The Chatskys threaten Famusov’s Moscow with the loss of its usual comfort and the opportunity to spend life “in feasts and in extravagance.” The dispute between Chatsky and Famusov also flares up around the attitude of the nobles to the service. Chatsky “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that.” The main character of the comedy explains it this way: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” But conservative noble society it is arranged in such a way that without “serving” it is impossible to achieve anything here. Chatsky wants to serve “the cause, not individuals.” But Famusov and his supporters have a completely different view on the issue of service. Famusov’s ideal is his late uncle Maxim Petrovich. He earned the respect of the empress herself because he once behaved like a buffoon at a reception. Having stumbled and fallen, he decided to turn this awkward situation to his advantage: he fell several more times on purpose to make the audience and Empress Catherine laugh. This ability to “curry favor” brought Maxim Petrovich enormous wealth and weight in society. Chatsky does not accept such ideals; for him this is humiliation. He calls this time an age of “submission and fear” that clamps down on human freedom. The hero’s comparison of the “present century” and the “past century” does not turn out in favor of the latter, because now “everyone breathes more freely and is in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.” The clash between Famusov and Chatsky also occurs over the divergence of their views on family values. Famusov believes that when creating a family, the presence of love is not at all important. “Whoever is poor is not a match for you,” he tells his daughter. Both in society and in the family, money is at the forefront. Wealth for Famusov society- the same as happiness. Personal qualities do not matter either in the world or in the family: “Be bad, but if there are two thousand family souls, he will be the groom.” Chatsky is a supporter of living feelings, which is why he is terrible for Famusov’s Moscow. This hero puts love above money, education above position in society. Therefore, the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov flares up. Comparative characteristics Chatsky and Famusov reveals all the meanness and immorality of Famusov and his supporters. But Chatsky’s time in the society described in the comedy “Woe from Wit” has not yet come. The main character is expelled from this environment, declaring him crazy. Chatsky is forced to retreat due to the numerical superiority of the “past century.” But he leaves Moscow not a loser, but a winner. Secular Moscow was frightened by his speeches. His truth is scary for them, it threatens their personal comfort. His truth will prevail, so the replacement of the old with the new is historically natural. The clash between Famusov and Chatsky is a dispute between two generations, two different worlds. The arguments and causes of the conflict described in this article can be used by 9th grade students when writing an essay on the topic “Characterization of Chatsky and Famusov in the comedy “Woe from Wit””
In his relationship with Grushnitsky, Pechorin displays such character traits as bored disdain and a passion, however, rather sluggish, for psychological games.
The same can be said about his attitude towards Princess Mary, adding enormous pride, directed arbitrarily. At the same time, he could not resist the brink of a cold analysis of an outside observer and he himself became greatly carried away by the considerable inner strength of the princess. You could even say I fell in love. But as a person accustomed to giving himself a detailed account of all the movements of his soul, he clearly understood that he would not be happy at all in his marriage and would soon be disappointed. Therefore, he even showed a willingness to give up love, just to preserve freedom or what he meant by freedom, because true love, undoubtedly, does not constrain a person.
Communicating with Werner, Pechorin enjoyed the mutual understanding that established between them. But it was a very cold and mechanical understanding, at least on Pechorin’s part. Even with a relatively congenial person, Pechorin could not relax mentally; he continued to mockingly intellectualize, taking advantage of his understanding listener and amusing himself with the puzzles that the doctor offered him to solve.
Princess Mary and Vera awakened a cold, calculating passion in him, despite the fact that Pechorin undoubtedly valued Vera as a person who managed to penetrate his inner world. However, this actually had no effect on his actions with her.
The disconnect between feelings and logic is what Pechorin constantly demonstrates, no matter who he encounters. The basic property of his personality is the duality of a person who discovered the world of constant reflection, but was unable to reunite the picture that had been separated into parts. The desire for deep introspection, commendable in itself, drew Pechorin into the funnel of narcissistic narcissism. Since this quality contradicts human nature, then he lost the opportunity to fruitfully use creative forces, became cold and lethargic even towards himself. The complete expression of this type of person appears in the figure of Stavrogin from F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Demons.”
“A Hero of Our Time” as a work is distinguished by the fact that the characters of all acting characters mostly static. The characters of Vera and Mary are no exception. Another thing is that Pechorin’s attitude towards them changes, and the attitude is situational, and accordingly they show certain reactions. However, in order to seriously talk about character changes, there is too little material - a relatively short period of time is covered and no attention is paid to the past of this or that character. The purpose of the author's narration is exclusively Pechorin himself.
Mary is used to being the center of attention, she takes Grushnitsky’s courtship for granted, but she, as a sensitive girl, was much more attracted by the figure of Pechorin, filled with genuine energy. When it turned out that Pechorin laughed at her, she found the strength to maintain her dignity. Material from the site
As for Vera, we do not know the background of her relationship with Pechorin. She was probably able to understand the essence of Pechorin, because, like Pushkin’s Tatyana, she was able to forget herself and immerse herself in peace of mind loved one. Only, unlike Tatyana, she did not distance herself, having understood his real aspirations, but, on the contrary, became even more attached. Apparently, her character had a strong desire for passive patience; she received emotional satisfaction from artificial romantic relationships, even knowing the whole background of Pechorin’s character. Outwardly it was a desire to preserve the remnants of independence, internally - a desire to be unhappy, but certainly beautiful.
Novel "Hero of Our Time" by M.Yu. Lermontov is considered one of best works classical Russian literature. We can talk about him for a very long time - interesting topics more than enough for discussion. Today we will focus on one of them - we will try to understand what Pechorin’s attitude towards Mary was.
Pechorin's character
First you need to understand the character of the main character. It is impossible not to admit that this is a person whose development is higher than the society surrounding him. However, he failed to find application for his talents and abilities. 1830 - difficult period V Russian history. The future of young people of that time was “either empty or dark.” Lermontov captured the features in Pechorin younger generation those years. The portrait of his hero is made up of the vices of all time. It's like there are two people in it. The first of them acts, and the second observes his actions and talks about them, or rather, condemns them.
Negative character traits of Pechorin
In Pechorin you can see many negative traits, including selfishness. Although Belinsky could not agree with this. He said that egoism “does not blame itself,” “does not suffer.” Indeed, Pechorin suffers because he is bored among people belonging to the “water society.” The desire to break out of it lies in the fact that the hero wastes himself on various small matters. Pechorin risks his life, seeking oblivion in love, exposing himself to Chechen bullets. He suffers greatly from boredom and realizes that living the way he lives is wrong. The hero is ambitious and vindictive. Wherever he appears, misfortunes happen.
Why did the hero deceive Mary?
This hero inflicted a deep emotional wound on Princess Mary. He deceived this girl, betrayed her love for him. What goal did he pursue? Purely your own satisfaction. In this, Pechorin and Princess Mary were completely different. The relationship between the characters is characterized by the fact that the princess strives to make her lover happy, and he thinks only of himself. However, Pechorin is well aware of the thankless role he played in the life of this girl.
Development of the relationship between Pechorin and Mary
In order to understand what Pechorin’s true attitude towards Mary was, let us briefly trace the history of the development of their very unusual novel. Mary is young and beautiful daughter Princess Ligovskaya. However, she is too naive, and also overly trusting of other people, including Pechorin. At first the girl did not pay attention to the main character, but he did everything to interest her. He lured Mary's fans to him by telling them funny stories. After Pechorin won her attention, he tried to impress the princess good impression stories and stories from your life. His goal was for the girl to begin to see him as an extraordinary person, and he achieved his goal. Pechorin gradually conquered the girl. During the ball, he “saved” the princess from a drunken impudent man who pestered her. Pechorin's caring attitude towards Princess Mary did not go unnoticed by the girl. She believed that the hero was sincere in his actions. However, the girl was cruelly mistaken. He just wanted to conquer her, she was just another toy for him. One evening Pechorin and Mary went for a walk. Their relationship by that time had already developed enough for what happened during it. The princess felt bad while crossing the river. Pechorin hugged her, the girl leaned on him, and then he kissed her.
Was Pechorin in love with Mary?
Pechorin argued and tried to convince himself that Mary’s passion did not mean anything to him, that he was seeking the love of this girl only for his own pleasure. However, in fact, Pechorin’s attitude towards Mary was somewhat different. The hero's soul yearned true love. Pechorin begins to doubt: “Have I really fallen in love?” However, he immediately catches himself thinking that attachment to this girl is a “pathetic habit of the heart.” Pechorin's love for Mary died in the bud, because the hero did not allow it to develop. It's a pity - perhaps he would have found happiness by falling in love.
Thus, Pechorin’s attitude towards Mary is contradictory. The hero convinces himself that he does not love her. Before the duel, he tells Werner that he brought out only a few ideas from the storm of life, but did not endure a single feeling. He admits that he has long lived with his head, not his heart. He weighs and examines his own actions and passions “with strict curiosity,” but “without participation.” At first glance, the way Pechorin treats Mary confirms this idea of the protagonist about himself, which testifies to the cruelty, merciless coldness of his game. However main character not as dispassionate as he pretends to be. Several times he feels that he is carried away, even becomes agitated. The main character reproaches himself for his ability to feel: after all, he convinced himself that for him happiness lies not in love, but in “saturated pride.” His nature is distorted by the inability to find a high goal in life and eternal discord with others. However, Pechorin in vain believes that this “rich pride” will bring him happiness. Both Mary and Vera love him, but this does not bring him satisfaction. And relationships with these heroines develop not only at the behest of Pechorin.
While the hero sees in the princess a secular young lady spoiled by worship, he takes pleasure in insulting the girl’s pride. However, after the soul emerges in her, the ability to sincerely suffer is revealed, and not just play at love, the main character changes his mind. However, the author does not complete the story happy ending- Pechorin and Princess Mary remain lonely. The relationship between these two heroes led nowhere. It is fear, not indifference, that makes him reject Mary’s feelings.
How should one treat Pechorin?
Pechorin probably ruined this girl’s life forever. He disappointed her in love. Now Mary won't trust anyone. Pechorin can be treated differently. Of course, he is a scoundrel, unworthy of another person's love and even self-respect. However, he is justified by the fact that he is a product of society. He was brought up in an environment where true feelings it was customary to hide it under a mask of indifference.
Did Mary deserve her fate?
And what about Mary? You can also treat it differently. The girl saw the persistence of the protagonist. And from this she concluded that he loved her. Mary heard what strange speeches this hero uttered, and realized that it was extraordinary person. And she fell in love with him, disregarding the laws of society. After all, Mary was the first to dare to speak about her love. This means that she believed that the hero would reciprocate her feelings. However, he was silent.
What was Mary's fault?
We can assume that Mary herself is to blame for everything, since she was both naive and arrogant, self-confident and blind. She does not have the reckless devotion characteristic of Vera, there is no sincerity and passionate power of Bela’s love. But the main thing is that she does not understand Pechorin. The girl fell in love not with him at all, but with the fashionable hero. Her feeling for him can be compared with her feeling for Grushnitsky - Mary sees such different people one and the same thing: the tragedy of Pechorin’s disappointment is no different for her from the mask of Grushnitsky’s disappointment. If the main character had not come to the waters, most likely the girl would have fallen in love with Grushnitsky, married him, despite her mother’s resistance, and would have been happy with him.
What justifies Mary
However, is it possible to blame the heroine so unconditionally? After all, it’s not her fault that she’s young, that she’s looking for a hero and is ready to find him in the first person she meets. Like any woman, Mary dreams of being loved by a lonely and strong man, for whom she is ready to become the whole world, to warm him and comfort him, to bring him peace and joy. In this sense, Pechorin and Princess Mary were products of their environment and time. The relationship between them is characterized by the fact that each played his role. And if the hero invented her himself, then the heroine played the natural role of a woman whose purpose is love.
Perhaps, if Pechorin had not appeared in her life, she would have found her happiness. The girl would have lived her whole life with the illusion that Grushnitsky was a special creature, that she saved him from loneliness and misfortune with her love.
The complexity of human relationships
The complexity of human relationships lies in the fact that even in love, which is the greatest spiritual intimacy, people are often unable to fully understand each other. In order to maintain calm and confidence, illusions are needed. Mary and Grushnitsky could have retained the illusion of need for their loved one, but a quiet hearth and home, love and devotion of the princess. Something similar might have happened if Pechorin and Mary had not separated. The relationship between them, of course, would hardly have lasted long due to the character of the main character, but misunderstandings in this pair would certainly also have occurred.
