Why couldn't Stolz help Oblomov? Could Stolz return Oblomov to active life? Why Stolz could not save Oblomov

Slide 15

7. How is their family life? Whose dreams did Stolz make come true?

Slide 16

8. Why did everything that Oblomov dreamed of come true in Stolz’s life?

What to do? Go forward or stay?...now or never?

Slide 17

9. Why couldn’t Stolz save Oblomov?

Slide 18

10. What unites these people? What is similar about them?

Stolz is close to Oblomov’s upbringing. Stolz’s mother saw in him the ideal of a gentleman, the son of a Russian noblewoman (she curled his curls, sewed elegant collars and shirtfronts; ordered jackets, “taught to listen to music, sang about flowers, about the poetry of life..” “Childhood and school - two strong springs, “Russian, kind, fat caresses, abundantly lavished in the Oblomov family on a German boy”

Slide 19

In Stolz’s soul, Oblomovka and the princely castle were united with German elements - “with a wide expanse of lordly life.” Having well learned the lessons of his father, the life of Oblomov’s house and the prince’s castle, Stolz learned to get comfortable and practical in life. His ideal was comfort and material well-being, but Oblomov had all this.

Slide 20

Oblomov and Stolz love and respect each other. They are real friends. They are brought together by honesty, kindness, decency. In friendship, Stolz, like Oblomov, is gentle and devoted to a friend. Stolz, like Oblomov, is an egoist, lives only for himself.

Slide 21

Both strive for a harmonious lifestyle, but each has their own idea of ​​how to achieve it. They dreamed of devoting their lives to useful work needed for Russia, but subsequently neither one nor the other has high aspirations. Stolz could not save his friend, because... does not complete the matter, like Oblomov.

Slide 22

Stolz “stopped at the threshold of the secret”..., “waited for the appearance of the law, and with it the key to it.” In the face of difficulties, Stolz gives in: “...we will not go with the Manfreds and Fausts to a daring struggle with rebellious issues, we will not accept them challenge, let’s bow our heads and humbly wait out the difficult moment...” Another version of Oblomovism, and the worst, because Stolz’s is stupid and self-righteous.

Slide 23

There is tragedy in the fates of both heroes: 1. Oblomov plunges into a terrible quagmire of apathy, loses interest in life and dies. 2. Stolz’s tragedy in his unnaturalness, artificiality Stolz believed that “an even and slow burning of fire is better than stormy fires, no matter what poetry burns in them,” and Oblomov did not want impetuous passion. Both loved the same woman.

Slide 24

Family happiness overshadowed Stolz's entire business life. They lived “like everyone else, just as Oblomov dreamed,” and reached the “standard of love” that he spoke about. Guided by true love, Stolz comes to Oblomov’s ideal, i.e. all true love leads, according to the author, to a calm, quiet life, no matter how stormy its achievement may be.

Slide 25

Research result.

Thus, the hypothesis put forward turned out to be correct. Indeed, following Goncharov, we conclude that Stolz is close to Oblomov.

Slide 26

Think about whether Moscow State University professor V.I. is right. Kuleshov, who wrote:

“Stolz saves Oblomov from ruin, but Stoltz does not take genuine self-sacrificing participation in his affairs. Oblomov is visible in him at every step... He only invigorates Oblomov, promises to do something - and abandons everything halfway.

Slide 27

“Stolz does not shine with his own light: he is bright to the extent of what is cast on him from Oblomov, a man with the makings and soul, but inert. Stolz is a machine that works methodically. Everything for him is a means, not an end... Stolz works for the sake of work itself, but he did not have a higher ideal and did not suspect that ideals were needed. He never thought about the purpose of life. He was satisfied with a simple tautology: life is life, work is the element of life, therefore, one must work; money should bring money, enrich for the sake of wealth. Stolz is a typical bourgeois businessman who knows only the continuity of capital growth. He doesn’t look further..."? homework

View all slides

Roman I.A. Goncharov's "Oblomov" permeates the pathos of social criticism. The collision of two heroes (Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts), two opposing lifestyles can be viewed in a broad social sense.

Oblomov in this regard symbolizes the inert feudal lordship that has flourished everywhere in the vastness of the Russian land. He spends most of his time on the couch. Any work does not attract him: he cannot even finish reading a book he has started for years. The author constantly emphasizes the gentleness both in the character of the hero and in

Everything that surrounds him.

The image of the sleeping Oblomov symbolizes the ruined mind, inertia and inertia of the Russian nobility. The hero harbors some abstract plans for reform, but with his immaturity, these plans are never destined to come true. Oblomov seems to be “quietly and gradually settling into the coffin of the rest of his existence, made with his own hands, like desert elders who, turning away from life, dig their own grave.”

Andrei Stolz (this is evidenced by the German origin of the hero) is an adherent of the active capitalist mentality that came to us from Europe. Active, economic

The rationalist breaks into the sluggish life of Oblomovka in order to shake up the established order and revive Ilya Ilyich to a different existence. It is no coincidence that Stolz reminds Oblomov of his youthful dreams of going on a trip.

Andrey introduces Ilya Ilyich to Olga, hoping that love can change a friend. At some point, the heroine was able to awaken sparks of living life in her admirer. However, Oblomov and Olga are different people. And the heroine soon realized this. She exclaims: “I loved the future Oblomov! You are meek and honest, Ilya; you are gentle... like a dove; you hide your head under your wing - and don’t want anything more; you’re ready to coo under the roof all your life... but I’m not like that: this is not enough for me, I need something else, but I don’t know what!”

In the end, Olga chooses Stolz. This indicates that the future belongs to such active and enterprising people. “He was all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse,” writes I.A. Goncharov. Stolz's ideal is material wealth, comfort and well-being, which he achieves through his own labor: the hero lives by reason, and his inert friend lives by feelings and dreams.

Oblomov sees wonderful dreams, but this does not change anything in his real life. Looking at this, Stolz derives his own term denoting landowner idleness and inertia, leading to death - “Oblomovism.”

Why didn’t A. Stolz manage to change Oblomov’s lifestyle? The fact is that Ilya Ilyich is not just afraid of change: he also protected himself from the living and diverse world with a special philosophy of life in order to justify his inaction and laziness. Oblomov is soaring in the clouds of his own illusions, claiming that he has no empty desires and thoughts. He despises vanity and is proud that he can afford not to engage in trade, not to go to the office with a report or papers - to be above all the base problems of everyday life. Oblomov is satisfied with himself, so he does not strive to change. The hero refuses to grow up and understand that no miracle that suddenly descends on him will solve all the pressing problems either in the household or in his personal life.

However, gradually a belated insight still comes to Ilya Ilyich. He confesses to Stolz: “From the first minute, when I became aware of myself, I felt that I was already extinguishing... Either I did not understand this life, or it is no good, and I didn’t know anything better, I didn’t see anything, no one showed it to me.” ..." Although Oblomov has not changed, he at least belatedly admitted his mistakes. The trouble is that he did not see a life ideal in front of him, and due to the nature of his soul, he could not become like Stolz.

Essay text:

In the novel Oblomov I. A. Goncharov draws the traditional type of Russian patriarchal hero for Russian literature, the Russian patriarchal gentleman Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, who has a naturally honest and loyal heart, but was unable to resist life and became one of the superfluous people in it. Oblomov is opposed by his friend, Andrei Stolts, a very interesting and deeply conceived hero. If Oblomov is the embodiment of the patriarchal noble way of Russian life, then the image of Stolz combines features characteristic of both Russia and European bourgeois civilization. Here are expressed the views of I. A. Goncharov on the mutual differences between Russia and the West, and if Oblomov is the Russian national character, which is characterized by kindness, honesty, naturalness and depth of feelings, as well as laziness and lack of initiative, then the European mentality is embodied by Stolz’s father, Ivan Bogdanovich. He is characterized by hard work, meticulousness, punctuality, stinginess in the expression of emotions, and rationalism. His son Andrei, Oblomov’s friend, received just such a rational upbringing from his father: he was allowed everything, but he was strictly required to fulfill his duties. The father was not alarmed that his son disappeared from home for a week; on the contrary, he himself kicked him out when he found out that when he returned, he did not make the assigned Latin translation. From childhood, the child was taught to work, to practical activities, and after giving him an education, his father sent him away and warned him not to count on his help anymore. The son justified his father's hopes, having achieved prosperity and a strong position in life, but the defectiveness of such a German upbringing is shown in the scene of the farewell of father and son, when the feelings that did not receive an outlet when saying goodbye to their father break out from the words of an old woman who took pity on Andrei in a motherly way. His character was not European due to the influence of his mother, a Russian noblewoman. She put into her son the ability to feel, love and understand music, art, and poetry. She died early, but in memory of her, her son puts in his travel bags not only the work coat she hated, given by his father, but also an elegant tailcoat and thin shirts. The mother dreamed of the extraordinary role in society that her son would get, and it was the influence of two trends of different nations that shaped the character of Andrei Stolts. Oblomovka, with its kind, fat affections abundantly lavished on the German boy, and the princely estate in Verkhlev, where the father served as manager, with a wide expanse of lordly life, played their role, and all this, in the author’s words, turned the narrow German “track into such a wide a road that Stolz’s German ancestors never even dreamed of. Unlike Oblomov, Stolz leads an active lifestyle: he serves in some trading company, often travels abroad, carries out various projects, goes out into the world, reads a lot, is aware of all events and manages to do everything. He did not forget Oblomov: they are firmly connected by childhood and youth, and Stolz always played the role of the strong. So now he patronizes his friend, trying to stir him up, convince him to go abroad together, introducing Oblomov to Olga. There is complete trust between them, but in their attitude to life they are opposites. If Oblomov is inactive and lazy, then, according to Stolz, work is the image, content, element and purpose of life. And for the last time he tries to stir up Oblomov, force him to change his life and change himself: Now or never. And indeed, having fallen in love with Olga, Oblomov changes internally, he leads an active lifestyle, gets up early, reads a lot. There is no sleep, no fatigue, no boredom on his face. But Stolz left, and there is no one to support Oblomov when he is mentally tired. He cannot but agree with Olga’s point of view that life is a duty, but he himself is not capable of such intense constant dedication, his lyrical impulse has faded, his lack of faith in his strength has been aggravated by financial problems. Having become a victim of the scammers Tarantiev and Mukhoyarov, Ilya Ilyich abandoned the fight and his word given to Andrei. And although Andrei is trying to help his friend and really helps him understand the financial situation, he also gave up the fight, the hope of awakening a living soul and a thirst for life and activity in Oblomov.
The image of Stolz is assessed, as a rule, negatively by critics. Starting with N.A. Dobrolyubov, critics reproached him for selfishness, dryness, and rationality. But that's probably not the point. Stolz is an atypical figure for Russian life. Although the author expresses his hope: How many Stoltsevs should appear under Russian names!, the image of the hero is more declarative than real. Stolz seeks in his life a balance of practical aspects with the subtle needs of the spirit. Oblomov once said to Stolz, criticizing St. Petersburg society: Either I didn’t understand this life, or it’s no good. Stolz embodies the author’s ideal, which understood this life, for which the main thing is work, movement and, finally, love, the last happiness of a person, which became possible for Andrei when he received Olga’s consent to marry him. But it is precisely this declared happiness of the heroes that is unconvincing. They live in love and harmony, but Olga is sad for some reason, feels dissatisfied, some strange blues. Their house is full, but life is closed, and it cannot be said that this is the happiness they dreamed of. Even the author himself admits that Stolz is not alive, but just an idea, and the artistic embodiment of this idea is far from perfect. The soft-hearted, inert Ilya Ilyich really did not understand this life, could not achieve meaning in it, which would have been impossible without the manifestation of energy and will. But even the strong-willed, decisive Stolz failed to achieve the ideal of happiness for himself and Olga. This philosophical task is too difficult for the average person. The author also understood the utopian nature of the idea of ​​creating an image of a harmonious person and the same kind of love. In one of his letters, he comes to the following sad conclusion: Between reality and the ideal lies... an abyss through which a bridge has not yet been found, and it is unlikely that it will ever be built. For Goncharov’s contemporary reality, the problem turned out to be insoluble.

The rights to the essay “Oblomov and Stolz (based on the novel by I. A. Goncharov Oblomov)” belong to its author. When quoting material, it is necessary to indicate a hyperlink to

Oblomov and Stolz are the main characters of the novel by I.A. Goncharova are people of the same class, society, time, they are friends. It would seem that, formed in the same environment, their characters and worldviews should be similar. In fact, these heroes are antipodes. Who is he, Stolz, who is not satisfied with Oblomov’s lifestyle and who is trying to change it?

Andrei's father, German by birth, was a manager on a rich estate, and his mother, an impoverished Russian noblewoman, once served as a governess in rich houses. Therefore, Stolz, having received a German upbringing, had great practical ingenuity and hard work, and inherited from his mother a love of music, poetry, and literature. All days in the family were spent at work. When Andrei grew up, his father began to take him to the field, to the market. The boy studied well, his father taught him science, the German language and made him a tutor in his small boarding school, even paying him a salary. Quite early, the father began sending his son to the city on errands, “and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, overlooked it, or made a mistake.” His father taught him to rely primarily on himself, explained that the main thing in life is money, rigor and accuracy.

For Stolz, work became not just a part of life, but a pleasure. By the age of thirty, he, an extremely purposeful and strong-willed man, retired, acquired a house and a fortune. Stolz is always busy with something: he works a lot, travels. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse.” In a way, the perfect hero. But “the dream, the mysterious, the mysterious had no place in his soul.” Stolz “didn’t feel sick at heart, never got lost in complex, difficult or new circumstances, but approached them as if he were former acquaintances, as if he was living a second time, passing through familiar places.” And one more thing - Stolz is calm all the time, he is happy with his life.

Any person usually manifests himself brightly in love. Stolz was barely disturbed by love. He acts rationally here too, “falling” Olga into love with himself. The family life of Andrei and Olga, correct and boring, does not evoke any emotions when reading. The writer himself seemed to be bored with the life of this exemplary bourgeois family. And although both heroes diligently occupy themselves with various practical activities, traveling, reading and discussing books, playing music, their lives, it must be admitted, acquire color only when they come into contact with Oblomov’s life.

Why didn’t Stolz manage to change the lifestyle of his friend and antipode Oblomov? And who is he who resisted Stolz’s pressure? A Russian gentleman, who at the time of our acquaintance with him was about thirty-two or three years old, “of pleasant appearance, with dark gray eyes, but with the absence of any definite idea, any concentration in his facial features.” Inertia, apathy, fear of any activity - this is the result of upbringing, when a boy is raised like an “exotic flower in a greenhouse”, not allowed to take a step on his own, pampered and pampered beyond measure. Studying makes him sad, and with his mother’s approval, he skips classes at every opportunity.

The favorite pastime of the matured Oblomov is lying on the sofa in empty dreams and sweet dreams. Life for the weak-willed Ilya Ilyich was divided into two halves: one consisted of work and boredom - these were synonyms for him; the other - from peace and peaceful fun. The service was unpleasant to him, and he very quickly resigned. He can afford it: in addition to his servant Zakhar, he has at his disposal 350 souls of serfs who work for him. And if things go badly on the estate, it is only because of Oblomov’s reluctance and inability to manage the estate. He suffers from the consciousness that he has no strength and will, but he himself cannot, and does not really strive, to budge and asks his active childhood friend Stolz to help him: “Give me your will and mind and lead me.” wherever you want".

Having once pulled Oblomov out into the world, Stolz hears from a friend: “Boredom, boredom, boredom!.. Where is the man here? Where is his integrity? Where did he disappear, how did he exchange for all sorts of little things?” These words directly apply to Stolz. His ability to be everywhere is an almost inhuman ability. He “learned Europe as if it were his domain” and traveled Russia “the length and breadth of it.” His circle of acquaintances is varied: there are some barons, princes, bankers, gold miners. All enterprising people who consider “business” to be the goal of their life.

What should Oblomov do in this company? What is he for Stolz: a tribute to childhood friendship, or some kind of outlet, or just an object for listening to his moral teachings? And this, and another, and a third. A lazy but smart man, Oblomov does not at all want to become like Stolz.

Stolz introduces Oblomov to Olga Ilyinskaya, and when going abroad, “he bequeathed Oblomov to her, asked her to look after him, to prevent him from sitting at home.” This is how Olga enters the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Not a beauty, “but if she were turned into a statue, she would be a statue of grace and harmony.” She has the intelligence and determination to defend the right to her position in life. And Oblomov, seeing in her the absence of artificiality, the beauty not frozen, but alive, perceived Olga as the embodiment of a dream.

What attracts Olga to Oblomov? She sees in him a lack of cynicism, a capacity for doubt and empathy. She appreciates his intelligence, simplicity, gullibility, the absence of those secular conventions that are alien to her. Olga wants to help this painfully incapable person. She dreams that she will “show him a goal, make him fall in love with everything that he has stopped loving...”. She likes to recognize herself as an “educator”: after all, she, a woman, leads a man! Love will become a duty for her. To love in order to re-educate, “for ideological reasons” - this has never happened in Russian literature. Olga's falling in love is a kind of experiment.

Olga Ilyinskaya is like that in her love, but what about Oblomov? The further the relationship between young people develops, the more sincere he becomes. The very way of his life changes: he enjoys visiting the Ilyinskys, listens spellbound to Olga’s singing, walks a lot and for a long time, he does not have dinner and has forgotten about his afternoon nap. He is ashamed of himself for not reading - he takes up books. Oblomov suddenly realizes the uselessness and purposelessness of his existence.

As with any lover, the image of his beloved is always with him. “And Oblomov, as soon as he wakes up in the morning, the first image in his imagination is the image of Olga, at full height, with a branch of lilac in her hands. He fell asleep thinking about her, went for a walk, read - she was here, here.” He now took care of his clothes. The carelessness left him the moment she sang for him for the first time. “He no longer lived the same life...” He concludes: “Love is a very difficult school of life.”

But young people are not destined to be happy, because Olga loves Oblomov not as he is, but as he wants to make him. The separation of heroes is painful. Why didn't their relationship work out? Because both expect the impossible from each other. So this approach of Stolz to Oblomov turned out to be ineffective.

It is known that Goncharov several times defined the genre of his novel as a fairy tale. If “Oblomov” is a big fairy tale, then its core should be considered “Oblomov’s Dream” - a figurative and semantic key to understanding the character of the hero depicted by Goncharov, a story about the hero’s childhood in the fairy-tale-real Oblomovka.

In terms of its degree of closedness, Oblomovka can compete with any enchanted, bewitched kingdom. How many people come and visit it during Ilya Ilyich’s long sleep? We have almost nothing to remember, except perhaps a funny episode with a sleeping man, whom the children discover in a ditch and mistake for a werewolf. The appearance of this stranger shocked even the adult Oblomovites so much that they do not dare to wake him up to find out where he came from and why.

But if it is difficult to come or come to Oblomovka, then leaving its boundaries is an even more impossible action for its inhabitants. Where? For what? As one would expect, Oblomov’s ideas about the land are quite fabulous: “they heard that there are Moscow and St. Petersburg, that the French or Germans live beyond St. Petersburg, and then a dark world began for them, as for the ancients, unknown countries inhabited by monsters, people about two heads, giants; there followed darkness - and, finally, everything ended with that fish that holds the earth on itself.”

But all this is somewhere far away. And Oblomovka slept and will continue to sleep peacefully. Goncharov describes how sweetly the Oblomovites know how to sleep: they sleep, doze, and dream in oblivion and unearthly bliss. Even the air is asleep, because it “hangs without moving,” even the sun is immersed in slumber, because it “stands motionless.” “It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death.” The magical kingdom of sleep, of course, is contraindicated in any kind of movement or action. Therefore, Oblomovka is a world of fundamental idleness. The only type of labor sanctified by tradition here is the preparation and consumption of food. It is no coincidence that the writer reproduces a picture of eating a huge pie, which lasts five days.

Such is this “sleepy kingdom”, where almost no one works or dies, where there are no shocks, where “thunderstorms are not terrible”, and “the stars twinkle in a friendly manner from the heavens”, where no one wants to be awakened to a different, even beautiful life .

To emphasize the impression of the fabulousness of the world he created, the writer introduces into “Oblomov’s Dream” the image of a nanny who, on winter evenings, whispers to Ilya fairy tales about “sleeping princesses,” petrified cities and people, about Emel the Fool and the hero Ilya Muromets. This Emelya is a kind of prototype of Oblomov in the novel. In a well-known folk tale, a good sorceress, appearing in the form of a pike, chooses her favorite, whom everyone offends, a quiet, harmless lazy person, and gifts him for no apparent reason. And he eats, dresses up in a ready-made dress and marries some beauty.

In Oblomov’s life, fairy tales and reality seem to be mixed up. He will be fooled and deceived by all and sundry, and finally fate will send him Agafya Matveevna as his wife - a new fairy-tale beauty, ready to do everything for him and for him.

The chapter “Oblomov’s Dream” essentially convinces us that the hero’s entire life was a dream, ending in an eternal sleep. “One morning Lgafya Matveevna brought him coffee, as usual, and found him resting just as meekly on his deathbed as on his bed of sleep...”

So, just as reality cannot defeat a fairy tale, Stolz was unable to change Oblomov’s lifestyle. Moreover, what kind of Stoltz did he get from Goncharov? Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the author of the novel created Stolz as an unrealistic image of a noble friend and a successful businessman, whose character was not fully described, because to write him to the end would mean to expose him, which was not the writer’s intention. After all, the main theme of the novel is Oblomovism: a way of life characterized by apathy, passivity, isolation from reality, contemplation of life around oneself in the absence of work and practical activity.

That is why Goncharov’s work, contemporaries admitted, showing the typical character of Oblomovism for serfdom, was able to strike at “superfluous people” - people of word, not deed. Re-educating Oblomov and changing his lifestyle were not part of the writer’s plans.