What is the main conflict of Oblomov's novel? "Oblomov." The tragic conflict of generations and its denouement. How did the novel end?

Roman I.A. Goncharov's "Oblomov" shook up Russian society in the 50s and 60s. XIX century, it can undoubtedly be called one of the largest events in the literary life of the country. The attention of readers was primarily attracted by the acute problems of the novel; the literary elite was split into two parts, some considered Oblomov a positive hero, others made a comparison in favor of Stolz. But all the eminent writers and critics agreed on one thing: Goncharov managed to find a new successful solution to the theme of the “superfluous man.” The newly appeared novel was also recognized as an “encyclopedia of Russian life” and placed on a par with the immortal works of Pushkin and Lermontov, and the image of Oblomov entered the gallery of classical heroes of Russian literature along with Evgeny Onegin and Grigory Pechorin.

One of the distinctive features of the novel is the originality of the development of the conflict. The entire work is divided into four logical parts.

In the first part, the author introduces us to Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. The first pages are entirely devoted to the description of the hero. From the very beginning, Goncharov creates the image of such a good-natured, sincere person. He describes Oblomov’s lifestyle with irony, but is immediately surprised at how wonderfully laziness suits this man. In general, the central character of the first part is Ilya Ilyich; quite a significant part of the work is devoted to his general characteristics. The character of the hero is revealed both through the description of everyday life and through the image of Zakhar, but mainly, of course, through Oblomov’s communication with his guests. Thus, a social conflict arises; the author describes the hero’s attitude to the world around him as the attitude of a person to a large anthill, where everyone is rushing about their business, and he is not interested in their problems. The social conflict is finally formed when the author introduces the image of Stolz. He first appears immediately after Oblomov’s dream, thus the character of Ilya Ilyich is already clearly opposed to the character of his friend, and since these are not just characters, but entire types, the social conflict takes the form of a opposition between Oblomov and Stolz.

With the arrival of Stolz, the action seems to receive a powerful impetus. Andrei pulls his friend out of isolation, and this contributes to a much deeper development of the hero's image. The second part is more eventful than the first. Oblomov begins to appear in society, communicate with other people and, most importantly, meets the Ilyinskys. Olga strikes Oblomov’s heart, his laziness finally disappears. This is the beginning of a love conflict.

The third part is a complete description of the love of Oblomov and Olga. The tension of the social conflict is weakening, since Stolz has gone abroad, and Oblomov seems to have finally “re-educated”. His activity reaches its climax, the hitherto unknown rich inner world of Oblomov is completely revealed. In this part, in fact, the culmination and denouement of the love conflict occurs. Ilya Ilyich could not, even for the sake of Olga, completely break with the past. He understands this and is not going to fight any further. This suggests that simultaneously with the love conflict, an internal conflict was developing in Oblomov himself.

The culmination of the internal conflict is a difficult choice between movement and stagnation, Olga and Pshenitsyna. The choice is made, the final break with Olga and Stolz occurs.

The fourth and final part is Oblomov’s return to his usual Oblomovism. The main problem of the novel is summed up: when will Russian people get rid of Oblomovism, wake up from spiritual sleep and go forward, towards the sun. Therefore, never. Ilya Ilyich’s inner world has calmed down, now completely. The finishing touches are being applied to Oblomov’s portrait; he is shown as an aged man surrounded by his family, where he has already completely plunged into spiritual hibernation. And with Oblomov’s death, there is a visible end to the plot-shaping social conflict. It would seem that the ideal person is Stolz, but he cannot be considered a winner. The ending of the novel remains open; the conflict between two personality types continues.

Particular attention is drawn to the dynamics of action in these parts.

The first part is not so much the beginning of the plot-shaping conflict as it is an exposition, an introduction to the main character. The leisurely pace of the narrative, the absence of a change in the scene of action - all this characterizes Ilya Ilyich and his measured life. However, the action develops with the arrival of Stolz, the dynamics become more intense, Oblomov “wakes up” and ceases to be a ruin, a mattress. He meets Olga, this is the beginning of another plot-shaping conflict. And in the third part, its culmination occurs, the culmination of Oblomov’s life. From the moment Oblomov is chosen, the action begins to slow down, the tension begins to drop. Ilya Ilyich returns to his robe, and nothing can pull him back out.

In general, the dynamics of the main events of the novel are associated with the change of seasons. Here the landscape plays a special plot and compositional role.

So, the development of the action is the spring of Oblomov’s love, the spring of his future life, summer is the happy time of selfless love for Olga, the desire to forever link his destiny with her, and autumn, the autumn of the soul of Ilya Ilyich, his love “fades”, life loses its meaning . Of course, what first attracts attention is the description of summer. Goncharov masterfully knew how to show the climax, the peak of summer - the July heat, the measured breath of nature, the heat of the field and the coolness of the forest. The descriptions are full of colors, they fully correspond to the mood of the main characters.

Of course, the role of landscape in revealing characters is great. The summer landscape characterizes Ilyinskaya, the autumn landscape – Pshenitsyna. Undoubtedly, in some ways Olga is inferior to Pshenitsyna, but the meager and gray descriptions of the Vyborg side, the very life of the hostess, do not speak in her favor.

The landscape is also interesting in terms of understanding the special plot and compositional role of “Oblomov’s Dream”. The landscape in the dream is, of course, an idyllic picture of Oblomovka. Through a dream, unclearly, like in a midday haze, Oblomov sees lovely pictures: forests, fields, meadows, a river, rare villages. Everything breathes peace. Tears well up in Ilya Ilyich’s eyes. This moment is generally very important for understanding the character of the main character, and at the same time Goncharov is trying to show what Oblomovism is.

In "The Dream" the detail is very important as a means of describing Oblomov and Oblomovism. First of all, this is a clear, measured flow of life: the rituals of dressing, drinking tea, and taking an afternoon nap. That state, similar to death, that reigns in Oblomovka during sleep, the collapsing gallery and porch - all this is Oblomovism, people prefer to remember the old, fearing to build a new one, and this fear is depicted in a grotesque form: what prevents you from demolishing the gallery and building a new one? Nothing, but instead a strict order is given not to go to a dangerous place. On the other hand, all this serves to characterize little Ilyusha, while he was not like everyone else: he ran away from home during everyone’s sleep, ate dug up roots, observed nature and loved visiting the forbidden gallery. That is, until Oblomovism extended its power to him.

In general, the details characterize Oblomov well. This is a robe - a symbol of Oblomovism, and a book, laid on one page for many years, which indicates that time has stopped for Ilya Ilyich. His leisurely speech and habit of relying on Zakhar in everything fits perfectly with the image of a “master” who lives simply because he is a master. There is also irony in the descriptions: there is so much dust on Oblomov’s chairs that one of the guests is afraid of ruining his new tailcoat.

But the detail in “Oblomov” characterizes not only Ilya Ilyich himself. The lilac branch is also one of the famous symbols of the novel. This is the love of Olga and Oblomov, which faded so quickly. The crease above Olga’s eyebrow and the dimples on Pshenitsyna’s plump arms also hint at the peculiarities of the characters’ characters.

The plot and compositional role of the secondary characters is no less significant. Oblomov’s guests, on the one hand, emphasize his laziness, but on the other hand, they demonstrate his attitude towards vain and petty life. Zakhar is generally a copy of the master. Goncharov's ironic teasing of him extends to Ilya Ilyich.

The contrast between fathers Oblomov and Stolz gives rise to the main conflict of the work, the conflict of two bright types. Thus, antithesis in the novel is the main artistic device.

Another striking example of antithesis is the contrast between Olga and Pshenitsyna. The author never answered the question of which of them is better. But with the help of antithesis, he managed to more fully and vividly display the merits of both.

So, the plot and composition of the novel "Oblomov" are very interesting, the action is complex and intense. Goncharov used many techniques to diversify the narrative. All this makes the novel extremely interesting both from an artistic and philosophical point of view.

All these features of plot construction undoubtedly reflected the writer’s general view of life, which he sometimes expressed during the course of the narrative. Thus, in the introduction to Part IV of Oblomov, Goncharov talks about the changes that have occurred in the world during the year of Oblomov’s illness. He has a somewhat condescending attitude towards the events of public life (“This year has brought many changes in different places of the world: there it excited the region, and there it calmed down; there some luminary of the world set, another shone there...”, etc.), and then turns with interest to the depiction of the lives of Oblomov and Pshenitsyna. This life “changed with such slow gradualness as the geological changes of our planet.” The slow, “organic” movement of everyday life, the “physiognomy” of its everyday life attracts the writer to a greater extent than the “thunderstorms” and “storms” of personal passions and, especially, political conflicts.

This property of Goncharov’s style appears especially clearly in his mature novels – “Oblomov” and “The Precipice” and mainly in the images of heroes associated with the patriarchal way of life. Thus, the portrait of Oblomov includes not only an image of his good-natured and swollen face, his full body, but also his robe, and shoes, and the ability to get into them with his feet without looking, and his lying on the sofa, and his tendency to eat while lying down, and helpless attempts dress, and the uncleaned dishes around, and all the untidiness and dustiness of his room, etc. Thus, the portrait characteristics of Berezhkova include not only her short-cropped gray hair and a kind look, and the rays of wrinkles around her lips, but also her imperious manners, and her a cane, and its receipts and expenditure books, and all the household goods of life in a village style, with hospitality and treats.

But the episodes developing the conflict are not only preceded by large expositions, they are further, right up to the end of the novels, interspersed with chronicle scenes, where the characterization of the characters’ lifestyle and thoughts is deepened. In Goncharov’s first novel, in parallel with Alexander’s love affairs, his meetings with his uncle and aunt take place and their disputes continue on the topic of “the ability to live.” In “Oblomov” both love stories end by the 4th chapter of the last part and the next 7 chapters are devoted to depicting Oblomov’s life with Pshenitsyna and Stoltsev in their cottage. In “The Precipice”, episodes revealing Vera’s relationship with Raisky and Volokhov alternate with chronicle scenes of everyday life in Malinovka, disputes between Raisky and his grandmother, Kozlov, Volokhov, etc.

Introduction

The novel “Oblomov” was written by Goncharov in 1859. The work belongs to the literary movement of realism. In the novel, the author raises many important social and philosophical issues, revealing them through the use of various literary techniques. The plot of “Oblomov”, built on the use of the method of antithesis, plays a special ideological and semantic role in the work.

The plot basis of the novel "Oblomov"

“Oblomov” begins with a description of the ordinary day of the main character, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. The author portrays to the reader a lazy, apathetic, but kind character who is used to spending all his days in unrealistic plans and dreams. The origins of this life position lie in Oblomov’s childhood, which took place in a distant, quiet, picturesque village, where people did not like to work, trying to rest as much as possible. The author describes his youth, training and service as a collegiate secretary, from which he quickly tired.

Oblomov's monotonous life is interrupted by the arrival of his childhood friend, Andrei Stolts, a man with an active position. Stolz forces Oblomov to leave his apartment and his home sofa, replacing them with social life. On one of these evenings, Andrei Ivanovich introduces Ilya Ilyich to his friend Olga Ilyinskaya. Beautiful, romantic feelings flare up between the girl and Oblomov, which last for about six months.

However, the happiness of the lovers was doomed to parting - their ideas about a happy family life were too different and Olga wanted too much to change the introverted, dreamy Oblomov. After parting, Olga and Oblomov’s paths diverge - Ilya Ilyich finds quiet, calm, “Oblomov” family happiness with Agafya Pshenitsyna, and Olga marries Stolz. The work ends with Oblomov's death after a second stroke of apoplexy.

Plot antithesis in the novel “Oblomov”

The principle of plot antithesis in the novel “Oblomov” is an important meaning-forming device of the work. Even at the beginning of the novel, the author introduces two contrasting characters - the passive, lazy Oblomov and the active, active Stolz. Comparing their childhood and teenage years, Goncharov shows how the personality of each of the heroes was formed - Ilya Ilyich’s gradual sinking into the swamp of “Oblomovism” and Andrei Ivanovich’s independent life. Their destinies are separate storylines of the novel, revealing the idea of ​​the work, based on the opposition of two worldviews - outdated, based on traditions and leaning towards the wonderful events of the past, as well as new, active, striving forward.

If Stolz’s life goes exactly as planned, without surprises and shocks, then a revolution takes place in Oblomov’s fate, which, if Ilya Ilyich were younger, would completely turn his life upside down - his love for Olga. An exciting, inspiring, reverent feeling develops on the edge of fantasy and reality, surrounded by the beauty of spring-summer landscapes. Its spontaneity and strong connection with nature are emphasized by the fact that lovers part in the fall - it is not surprising that a branch of a short-lived lilac becomes a symbol of their love.

The love of Oblomov and Olga is contrasted with the love of Oblomov and Agafya. Their feelings are not so spontaneous and exciting, they are calm, quiet, homely, filled with the spirit of Oblomovka, close to Ilya Ilyich, when the main thing in life is not distant aspirations, but a pacifying, sleepy and well-fed life. And Agafya herself is depicted as a character who seems to have emerged from the dreams of Ilya Ilyich - a kind, quiet, economic woman who does not require any activity or accomplishments from her husband, a “kindred soul” for Ilya Ilyich (while Olga seemed rather distant and an admiring muse than a real future wife).

Conclusion

The plot of the novel “Oblomov” by Goncharov is built on the principle of contrasting both contrasting characters and events of opposite nature in the lives of the heroes. The antithesis in the work allows us not only to better understand the idea of ​​the author, who in the novel touches on not only the issues of “Oblomovism” as a phenomenon of social degradation, but also the conflict between the active, active and passive, reflective foundations, between the heritage of the past and the discoveries of the future. By introducing the technique of opposition into the novel, Gocharov emphasizes the importance of finding harmony and compromise between the two fundamental principles of the world.

Work test

Can. A monograph is a scientific study devoted to one problem. The novel “Oblomov” is a special artistic study, as thorough and comprehensive as scientific ones. Drawing the image of one hero, Goncharov revealed him so deeply, connecting him with the environment that raised him, that, knowing the character, views, beliefs of Oblomov, we can judge thousands of others like him, the socio-political situation in Russia and the social psychology of the Russian nobility .

The main conflict on which the development of action in the novel is based is the internal struggle within Ilya Ilyich himself. It is stimulated by the struggle for Oblomov Stolz and Olga Ilyinskaya and ends with the victory of Oblomovism, which is supported by Zakhar and Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, who in their own way are very devoted to Oblomov.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page there is material on the following topics:

• Goncharov's novel is a bummer why is it called that?
• the main theme of this novel, what is the main conflict
• Is Oblomov’s novel modern and why?
• Does Oblomov understand the essence of the word Oblomovism correctly?
• Does Oblomov himself understand the essence of Oblomovism correctly?

Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" was published in 1859, but the chapter "Oblomov's Dream" was published ten years earlier in the "Illustrated Collection" of Sovremennik. In his novel, Goncharov described the master's life "from feature to feature", showed how Oblomov becomes morally “dead”, gradually cools down to life. Both the author himself and his hero think about why Ilya Ilyich is like this. At the end of the eighth chapter of the first part of the novel, Oblomov is tormented by this question, asking himself: “Why am I like this?” and without answering the question posed by himself, the hero falls asleep and sees a dream. It is this dream that helps us understand how Oblomov’s character was formed.

In “The Dream...” we can roughly distinguish three parts. In the first, Goncharov tells us about Ilyusha’s childhood, when the boy is only seven years old. He is very playful and lively, although he is raised in bliss and care, is constantly looked after and is not allowed to go anywhere alone, everywhere only under the supervision of a nanny. Ilyusha is observant, nothing “eludes the child’s inquisitive attention; the picture of home life is indelibly etched into his soul; his soft mind is nourished with living examples and unconsciously draws a program for his life based on the life around him.” Although little Oblomov likes it such a life, it is not so good as to serve as an example to follow. It has many shortcomings: everything in Oblomov happens the same way every day, and there are no changes in the life of its inhabitants, it is boring and monotonous. The most important part of it is food : The Oblomovites pay a lot of attention to it, carefully choosing dishes for lunch. Eating is a ritual for them. The serfs do the cooking, and Ilya’s parents only advise what products are best to use and what to cook.

The author makes fun of them, says: “they, too, are not without activities.” Like their parents, they do nothing, live off the labor of their serfs and rejoice at every passing day that they have lived happily.

An important ritual in Oblomovka is sleep after lunch, at this time life comes to a standstill and everyone is asleep.

In the second part, Goncharov describes to us another time: on a long winter evening, the nanny tells Ilya Ilyich fairy tales. The child is very impressionable and takes all the nanny’s stories for reality, plunging into the world of fantasy. Later, when he becomes an adult, he finds out that he does not exist " good sorceresses,” honey and milk rivers,” but still Oblomov, secretly from others, understands that “his fairy tale is mixed with life, and he is unconsciously sad at times, why is a fairy tale not life, and life is not a fairy tale, Ilya Ilyich, forever.” remains a big child dreaming of Militrisa Kirbityevna. Also, his father, and grandfather, and great-grandfather, who listened to the same fairy tales in childhood, remained children for the rest of their lives who did not know how to build their own lives.

In the third part of “The Dream...” we see Oblomov, a boy of thirteen or fourteen years old, when he was already studying in the village of Verkhlevo, located not far from Oblomovka. His teacher is the strict and judicious German Stolz, and Ilya studies with his son, Andrei Perhaps Ilyusha would have learned something at the boarding school, but Verkhlevo was only five miles from Oblomovka, and there, except for Stoltz’s house, “everything breathed the same primitive laziness, simplicity of morals, silence and stillness.” Oblomovism reigned and there, she had a corrupting influence on the teenager. He developed a vivid idea of ​​how he should live: the way “the adults live around him.” You, of course, ask how they live. I will answer: without knowing any worries or anxieties, without thinking about the meaning of life; “enduring work as a punishment,” looking for an excuse to get rid of it. Nothing breaks the monotony of their life, they are not burdened by it, and they could not live otherwise. “They didn’t want any other life, and they wouldn’t love.”The development of Ilya Ilyich’s character was also influenced by the way his parents treated their studies. Alas, for his father and mother, the main thing was obtaining a certificate, not knowledge.

It is impossible not to pay attention to Goncharov’s ambivalent attitude towards what he describes. On the one hand, the author sharply condemns the Oblomovites for laziness and lordship, he often ironically describes to us their characters, for example, the pastime of the main character’s parents. Ivan Alexandrovich does not like this that Oblomov is enveloped in love and affection, of which there is too much. The author understands that the constant care of parents, nannies, and aunts did not give the child the opportunity to fully develop. All attempts at independent activity were refuted by the argument: “Why? And Vaska, and Vanka, and Zakharka “What?” Will Ilya Ilyich want anything, and then the servants rush to fulfill his slightest whim. “Those seeking manifestations of power turned inside the nickname, fading,” the author noted.

On the other hand, Goncharov is attracted to many things in the life of Oblomov’s people. Here no one speaks evil of others, everything is calm and quiet. The author admires what he describes, because his childhood is similar to Oblomov’s childhood, he grew up in the same environment, was brought up in those the same traditions as his hero. But the subsequent stages of Oblomov’s life are not similar to Goncharov’s life.

Goncharov was not lazy, weak-willed, inactive, indifferent to life, passive, apathetic, incapable of work. Oblomov became like this under the influence of the environment in which he was raised as a child. His whole life in Oblomovka contributed to the degradation of his personality. At seven years old, Ilya was inquisitive , an energetic, active boy, but every year he became more and more lazy, apathy arose in him, in addition, he was not interested in learning, self-improvement, he considered work boring, did not know how and did not like to work. Oblomov was familiar with the work of the soul, from He would have made a wonderful poet or writer if he had not been so lazy.

The origin of the life on the sofa that Ilya Ilyich spent was his development in an environment where he was not lived in, cherished, and was not allowed to develop independently.

“In this novel, the hero, a lazy and uninterested Russian gentleman, is contrasted with the German Stolz. This is a mobile, active, reasonable person. He, who received a strict, hard-working and practical upbringing from his German father, is ambitious, purposeful and energetic. For him... a rational approach to life is important, passions are alien to him... The German in the novel is organized, hardworking, economical, serious about his work, pedantic...” Oblomov and Stolz are antipodal heroes in the novel. We can say that each of them represents a universal human type. Ilya Ilyich is the embodiment of the Russian national character, and Stolz is the embodiment of the generalized traits of a German. But both of these heroes are not cliche people, they are real. The heroes are endowed with only the most essential features of national character. In Oblomov it is passivity, laziness, immersion in sleep, in Stolz it is activity, determination. The heroes seem to complement each other; they need each other to reveal not only national types, but also ideas and approaches to solving universal human issues of existence.

A.P. Chekhov wrote about Stoltz: “Stoltz does not inspire me with any confidence. The author says that he is a magnificent fellow. But I don't believe it. This is a clever beast who thinks very well of herself and is pleased with herself...” Oblomov’s circle for the most part perceives Andrei... as a German, and the word “German” in their concept is close to a dirty word. According to the Russians, the Germans are stingy, prudent people, caring only about their own benefit and ready to even betray in the name of it. But we see in Stolz an enterprising, hard-working man, for him the meaning of life is in work. His ebullient energy can be envied: he has traveled all over Russia and across, he does business with foreign countries, and in no time he established business on Oblomov’s estate. He had such an irrepressible character since childhood: “From the age of eight, he sat with his father at the geographical map, sorted through the warehouses of Herder, Wieland, Bible verses and summed up the illiterate accounts of peasants, townspeople and factory workers, and read with his mother sacred history, taught Krylov’s fables and sorted Telemak into warehouses.

Taking off from the pointer, he ran to destroy birds’ nests with the boys...” The father raised independence and responsibility in his son, teaching Andrei to work from an early age: “When he grew up, his father put him on a spring cart with him, gave him the reins and ordered take it to the factory, then to the fields, then to the city, to the merchants, to public places, then to look at some clay, which he takes on his finger, smells, sometimes licks and lets his son smell it, and explains what it is like, what it does good. Otherwise, he’ll go and see how potash or tar is mined and lard is melted.

At the age of fourteen or fifteen, the boy often went alone, in a cart, or on horseback, with a bag at the saddle, on errands from his father to the city, and it never happened that he forgot something, changed it, didn’t notice, or made a mistake.”

Ilyusha Oblomov was brought up completely differently. Natural children's curiosity and liveliness were “killed” day after day by parental care. After generously feeding the child “buns, crackers, cream,” Ilyusha was allowed to walk “in the garden, around the yard. In the meadow, with strict confirmations to the nanny not to leave the child alone, not to allow him near horses, dogs, goats, not to go far from the house, and most importantly, not to let him into the ravine, as the most terrible place in the neighborhood...” Ilyusha also did not overwork himself in his studies. Either because of the upcoming holidays the boy is not allowed to go, then the mother suddenly discovers just before leaving that her son’s “eyes are not fresh today” (and “the crafty boy is healthy, but silent”), then “everyone in the house is imbued with the conviction that learning and Parents' Saturdays should not coincide in any way, or that a holiday on Thursday is an insurmountable obstacle to studying throughout the week"; “And Ilyusha stays at home for three weeks, and then, you see, it’s not far from Holy Week, and then there’s a holiday, and then someone in the family for some reason decides that they don’t study on St. Thomas’s Week; There are two weeks left until summer - there’s no point in traveling, and in the summer the German himself is on vacation, so put it off until the fall.”

It was difficult for the elder Stolz to resist such Oblomov’s approach to learning, although he did not let his son down. Having learned that his son’s translation of Cornelius Nepos into German was not ready, “the father took him by the collar with one hand, led him out the gate, put a cap on his head and kicked him from behind so that he knocked him down,” while punishing him not to appear in the house until he translates two given chapters instead of one.

As a result, Stolz, having reached the age of thirty, “served, retired, went about his business and... made a house and money... He is constantly on the move: if society needs to send an agent to Belgium or England, they send him; you need to write some project or adapt a new idea to business - they choose it. Meanwhile, he goes out into the world and reads: when he has time, God knows.”

And Oblomov, having entered the service and once sent the case “instead of Astrakhan to Arkhangelsk, he was so frightened that he first sent a medical certificate about “thickening of the heart with dilatation of the left ventricle,” which developed “from daily work,” and then He completely resigned and began to live on the income that Oblomovka brought in. What did Ilya Ilyich do while at home? “Yes, he continued to draw the pattern of his own life... Having betrayed his service and society, he began to solve the problem of his existence differently, thought about his purpose and, finally, discovered that the horizon of his activity and life lies in himself,” writes author.

But he began his life like any other young man: “he was full of different aspirations, he kept hoping for something, he expected a lot from fate and from himself...”. But “days passed, years gave way to years, the fluff turned into a coarse beard, the rays of the eyes were replaced by two dull dots, the waist rounded, the hair began to grow mercilessly... but he did not move a single step in any field and is still stood at the threshold of his arena..." An idle existence, laziness, ingrained since childhood in Oblomovka, turns Ilya Ilyich into a flabby man beyond his years in a stale robe, constantly lying on the sofa in a cluttered room. And his peer Stolz was “all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse. He is thin; he has almost no cheeks at all, that is, there is bone and muscle, but no sign of fatty roundness; complexion is even, darkish and no blush; the eyes, although a little greenish, are expressive.”

But one cannot assume that Stolz is an ideal hero, and Oblomov is entirely made up of shortcomings. Both heroes are individuals; their inner world cannot be considered based only on the differences in their worldview. Both heroes are united by bright memories of childhood and affection for their mother. But are they capable of deep, sincere feelings? Stolz is a man who “... controlled both sorrows and joys... with the movement of his hands, with the steps of his feet..., was afraid of imagination..., was afraid of every dream..., was not blinded by beauty and therefore did not forget, did not humiliated the dignity of a man, was not a slave, “did not lie at the feet” of beauties...” Andrey had no poetry or dreams; he was a bourgeois businessman striving for personal independence.

Oblomov also “... never gave himself up to beauties, was never their slave, not even a very diligent admirer..., more often he limited himself to worshiping them from afar, at a respectable distance,” and the reason for this was, again, laziness, since “to bring closer There is a lot of trouble with women.” Of course, Oblomov dreamed of family happiness (“...suddenly felt a vague desire for love, quiet happiness, suddenly longed for the fields and hills of his homeland, his home, wife and children...”), but his wife seems to him more like a friend, rather than a mistress.

And then Olga appears in Ilya Ilyich’s life, for whose sake (and under her influence) he changed his lifestyle. We see that the hero is capable of strong, sincere feelings, but the fear of living and solving everyday problems ruins the hero here too. Olga, disappointed in Oblomov (“The stone would have come to life from what I did...”), ends the relationship.

But Stolz, despite all his German restraint and prudence, turned out to be capable of strong feelings: “It seems that in these six months all the torments and tortures of love came together and played out over him... “Whether she loves or not,” he said with painful emotion, almost to the point of bloody sweat, almost to tears. This question flared up more and more in him, engulfed him like a flame, fettered his intentions: this was the one main question no longer of love, but of life.”

By introducing the image of Olga Ilyinskaya into the novel, the author conveys to the reader the idea that each of the heroes has positive traits: in Oblomov it is spiritual depth and sensitivity, sincerity and spontaneity, in Stolz it is will, composure, and determination.

Human nature is imperfect - this is what I. Goncharov shows with the ending of the novel. The ending is the result of the fate of a man who dreamed of a beautiful and harmonious life, hoping for a miracle. The author completely dispels the illusion of the possibility of a miracle and argues that the contemplative lifestyle characteristic of the Russian national character leads to disastrous results. His idea is to show an ideal person, the type of personality that would result if the best qualities of both heroes could be combined. But man is what he is. Of course, it is sad that Oblomov could not live up to Olga’s hopes, did not take upon himself the upbringing of his son, entrusted him to Stolz, could not save his parents’ home from ruin, could not prolong the quiet happiness of Agafya Matveevna, but still he spiritually enriched Olga and the pragmatic Stolz.