Table break criteria and Stolz. Oblomov and Stolz: comparison of images. The meaning of the images of Oblomov and Stolz

In fiction, authors often use the technique of antithesis. It consists in opposing characters as carriers of certain ideas and life philosophies. Most often, a writer or poet in this way denotes his own worldview, unobtrusively hinting to the reader about his sympathy for this or that character.

Antagonists and protagonists

Modern writers most often adhere to the generally accepted format, according to which each positive hero (protagonist) has a mirror negative reflection in the face of the antagonist. Such a simplification makes the work more accessible to the understanding of the general reader, but the schematization also has a significant flaw: people who are completely bad or pleasant in all respects are extremely rare in life, and if you look closely, then never. Much more difficult, and therefore more interesting, is the situation in the novel by I. A. Goncharov. Comparison of Oblomov and Stolz at first glance leads to an unambiguous rejection of useless contemplative laziness, but as the images are revealed, it makes the reader think more and more about the fates and personal qualities of the two characters. And it turns out that everything is not so simple.

Stolz as a representative of progressive capitalism

As is clear from the surname, Andryusha Stolz was born in the family of a Russified German. Pointing to this, Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov expresses the generally accepted opinion (which, by the way, continues to this day) that foreigners, moreover from Europe, play the role of bearers of technical, philosophical and other progress in our country.

Previously, in Russia, everyone, regardless of nationality, who came from the West was called German. But it is clear that Andrei's ancestors come from Germanic lands. Almost nothing is known about his mother, except that she is a Russian noblewoman. From childhood, the life of the boys is different. Oblomov and Stolz are brought up differently. The German father seeks to raise a worthy replacement for himself. He wants his son to be like him. This is a normal desire of almost all fathers, there is nothing surprising in that. He inspires that success is achieved by work. This important (known, by the way, not only to the Germans) makes you show strictness and exactingness. The father not only loves his son, he teaches him everything he knows and can do himself. This is commendable, such a parent could serve as a universal example, but the whole point is that there are subjects for the comprehension of which textbooks are not written. And now two antipodes meet, Oblomov and Stolz. Comparison of an active German and a lazy Russian is a favorite topic for jokes, and in both countries. We like to be ironic about our own stupidity, and in Germany they are happy to focus on positive features

Oblomov

Comparison of Stolz and Oblomov will not be objective if you do not take into account the peculiarities of the children's upbringing of two boys. If Andryusha's father constantly kept in suspense and taught everything he could, then Ilyusha, on the contrary, spent his youth in blissful relaxation. This fact alone deals a serious blow to the theory of special German efficiency, so respected by our "Westerners" of all eras. It is possible that the genetic nature would have taken over, but it is highly likely that, having received such an upbringing, Andrey would have grown up a loafer. The desire for activity is developed in problematic conditions, this is known to every psychologist. Therefore, a wise educator, even in the conditions of a cloudless childhood, creates "educational" conflict situations in order to develop a strong character among the representatives of the younger generation. If everything is fine anyway, then efforts will be useless, and the will will atrophy. Nevertheless, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov also has good character traits. He is kind and wise in his own way, vanity and pride are alien to him, he has a very clear understanding of his place in life, that is, correct self-esteem.

Friendship

There are many strange things in our life. An illustration of this idea in Goncharov's novel is the friendship between Stolz and Oblomov. Antipodes are attracted both in physical phenomena and in life circumstances. Each of the heroes of the story is looking for something in his comrade that he himself lacks. Ilya Ilyich implicitly would like to resemble Andrei Ivanovich in some ways, although not in everything. Yes, and Stolz likes the romantic sentimentality (by the way, one of the national German traits) of his comrade. A realist who is afraid to dream and thinks directly and concretely often lacks the imagination to achieve true success. In addition, having succeeded in business, having achieved a high social status, another person catches himself thinking that he has not found happiness. But it is in it the meaning of life for everyone. Is Oblomov happy? A comparison of Stolz and Oblomov suggests that each of the characters has big life problems, which they themselves sometimes do not even think about.

Behavior algorithms

A person is known when he has serious problems. Oblomov and Stolz react completely differently to changes in life circumstances. A comparison of the behavioral manner of the two comrades makes it possible to assess the degree of paternal care shown by the German Ivan (Johann?) towards his son during his upbringing. In adolescence, the young man received a lot of useful knowledge about the world around him. But, for all their systematic nature, they were rather a set of options for actions, chosen from an arsenal, just like a housekeeper finds the right key in a bunch. In the age of the events described, perhaps this approach justified itself, because Stoltz managed to become a successful businessman and succeed. In addition, the nature of the relationship that Oblomov and Stolz were connected with is also interesting. Their friendship from childhood was built on the recognition of the supremacy of Andrei.

As for Oblomov, the algorithm of his behavior was reduced to minimizing anxiety and unrest. He didn't want to teach anyone, but he didn't want to learn anything either. Being an educated person, he doubted the usefulness of the knowledge he received, rightly believing that with his way of life they were of no use to him.

Women and heroes

Lying on the couch, it is difficult to be successful with the ladies. This statement is hardly subject to doubt, but fate gave a chance to Ilya Ilyich, whose favorite pastime was precisely this occupation. Olga Ilyinskaya, young and beautiful, despite the many absurdities of Oblomov's behavior (and maybe thanks to them, who will understand the female soul?) Fell in love with the unlucky hero. Andrey Ivanovich also liked the young charmer, who at first did not attach importance to this rivalry, but, having felt its reality, was able to turn the situation in his favor. Comparison of Oblomov and Stolz in the context of human decency will not be in favor of the latter, but in love, as in war, all means are good. So, at least, think the Europeans, especially the French. Ivan Ilyich's indecisiveness, as usual, worked against him. Oblomov found his happiness with another woman, probably more suitable for him, Agafya Pshenitsyna, albeit not as bright as Olga, but calm and caring.

difference and similarity

There is a strong opinion that, in the person of Oblomov, I. A. Goncharov stigmatizes laziness, inertia and inertia of the Russian nobility with a shameful brand. If we follow this logic, then the image of Stolz personifies the progressive aspirations of the nascent domestic capital (after all, in the end, he, in spite of himself, was also a Russian person). It seems, however, that Goncharov wanted to say something more with his novel, and he succeeded. Not so antipodes were Oblomov and Ilya Ilyich's "secular pastime" very caustic and well-aimed. He does not want to sit at the card table, talk about trifles, be interested in what everyone is. He is prone to a contemplative attitude towards the world around him and is by no means stupid. The similarity between Oblomov and Stolz lies in the desire of both to sleep. Only the dream of the first of them is quite specific, physical, and the second is moral. At the same time, Ilya Ilyich realizes the destructiveness of his vice, tells his friend about it, recognizing his own impotence in the fight against laziness. Andrei Ivanovich is not capable of self-criticism.

Where should Oblomov go?

And what is the most different Oblomov and Stolz? The comparison seems obvious. One lies all the time, the other is in constant motion. Oblomov does not even want to hear about the claims of creditors, he wants to write some kind of plan for the reconstruction of his own estate, which is falling into decay, but every time he falls asleep without starting this lesson. Stolz is constantly on the road, mainly abroad. He invites his friend there too, hoping that the atmosphere of distant countries will awaken in him vital activity. Ilya Ilyich is in no hurry to go somewhere, he is not bad in his native country, especially at a time when something begins to change in his personal life. By the way, both friends are no longer young, they are over thirty (for example, Tolstoy's "old man" Karenin was less than 50 years old). Maybe it was right that Oblomov did not want to fuss in his old age ...

Who is more helpful?

If we consider Goncharov's novel as a conceptual work, then it can really be reduced to the opposition of such types as Oblomov and Stolz. Comparing them in the political-economic sense will reveal the clear superiority of an active and enterprising beginning over a passive-contemplative life position. One is always in labor, making good, imitating the "yellow man" who gets up at six and exhausts himself with hygienic gymnastics. The second lies and languidly talks about philosophical problems, not caring about the future. Stoltz is more useful for society. But can everyone become like him? And is it necessary?

About freedom

Having once again re-read the immortal novel by I. A. Goncharov and assessing it from the standpoint of a liberal idea that is fashionable in some sections of modern society, one can come to the paradoxical conclusion that it is Oblomov who, to a greater extent, is the spokesman for “free values”. The “Westerner” Stolz and the “yellow man” respected by him work to strengthen the economy of their native country, but Oblomov lives on his own, without interfering with anyone, not wanting to take care of the collective good. Well, he was not born a fighter, what can you do ... He does not like it when he is bothered, even if this is done out of friendly motives. This is a matter of individual freedom, and everyone lives as he wants.

He dies young, judging by the text of the novel, before reaching the age of forty. I. I. Oblomov was killed, obviously, by an unhealthy lifestyle, deliberately chosen by him after parting with Olga. This is also a personal choice, although humanly it is a pity.

Oblomov Ilya Ilyich - the main character of the novel "Oblomov". Landowner, nobleman living in St. Petersburg. Leads a lazy life. Doesn't do anything, just dreams and "decomposes" lying on the couch. A bright representative of Oblomovism.

Stolz Andrei Ivanovich is a childhood friend of Oblomov. Half German, practical and active. The antipode of I. I. Oblomov.

Let's compare the heroes according to the following criteria:

Memories of childhood (including memories of parents).

I. I. Oblomov. From early childhood, everything was done for him: “The nanny is waiting for his awakening. She pulls on his stockings; he is not given, he is naughty, dangles his legs; the nanny catches him." “.. She washes him, combs his head and leads him to his mother. Since childhood, he also bathed in parental affection and care: “Mother showered him with passionate kisses ...” Nanny everywhere, for days on end, like a shadow followed him, constant guardianship did not end for a second: “... all the days and nights of the nanny were filled with turmoil, running around: either by trying, or by living joy for the child, or by fear that he will fall and hurt his nose ... ”.

Stolz. His childhood passes in a useful but tedious study: “From the age of eight he sat with his father behind a geographical map ... and with his mother he read sacred history, taught Krylov’s fables ...” His mother was constantly worried about her son: “... she would have kept him near her.” But his father was completely indifferent and cold-blooded to his son, and often "put his hand": "... and kicked him from behind so that he knocked him down."

Attitude towards study and work.

Oblomov. He went to school without much interest and desire, hardly sat in the classroom, to overcome any book for Oblomov was a great success and joy. “Why all these notebooks ... of paper, time and ink? Why study books? ... When to live? Instantly cold to one or another kind of activity, be it study, books, hobbies. The same attitude was to work: “... you study, you read that the time of disaster is about to come, an unhappy person; here you gather your strength, work, homogenize, endure terribly and work, everything is preparing clear days.

Stolz. He studied and worked from childhood - the main concern and task of his father. Teaching and books fascinated Stoltz throughout his life. Labor is the essence of human existence. "He served, retired, went about his business and actually made a home and money."

Attitude to mental activity.

Oblomov. Despite the lack of love for study and work, Oblomov was far from being a stupid person. Some thoughts, pictures were constantly spinning in his naked, he constantly made plans, but for completely incomprehensible reasons, all this was put off in a debt box. “When he gets out of bed in the morning, after tea he immediately lies on the sofa, props his head with his hand and thinks it over, sparing no effort, until, finally, his head gets tired ..”

Stolz. Realist to the core. A skeptic in life and in thought. “He was afraid of any dream, or, if he entered her area, then he entered, as they enter a grotto with an inscription ... knowing the hour or minute when you leave from there.”

Choice of life goals and ways to achieve them. (Including lifestyle.)

Oblomov. Life is monotonous, devoid of colors, every day is similar to the previous one. His problems and worries are breathtakingly funny and ridiculous, even funnier he solves them by turning from side to side. The author justifies Oblomov with all his might, saying that he has a lot of ideas and goals in his head, but none of them materialize.

Stolz. Skepticism and realism are everywhere. “He walked firmly, cheerfully; lived on a budget, trying to spend every day, like every ruble. “And he himself went stubbornly along the chosen path.”

In I. A. Goncharov’s novel Oblomov, one of the main techniques for revealing images is the antithesis technique. With the help of opposition, the image of the Russian master Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and the image of the practical German Andrey Stolz are compared. Thus, Goncharov shows what are the similarities and what are the differences between these heroes of the novel.

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov- a typical representative of the Russian nobility of the XIX century. His social position can be briefly described as follows: "Oblomov, a nobleman by birth, collegiate secretary by rank, has been living in St. Petersburg for the twelfth year." By nature, Oblomov is a gentle and calm person, trying not to disturb his usual way of life. “His movements, when he was even alarmed, were also restrained by softness and laziness, not devoid of a kind of grace.” Oblomov spends whole days at home, lying on his sofa and thinking about the necessary transformations in his Oblomovka estate. At the same time, any definite idea was often absent from his face. “The thought walked like a free bird across the face, fluttered in the eyes, sat on half-open lips, hid in the folds of the forehead, then completely disappeared, and then an even light of carelessness glimmered all over the face.” Even at home, “he was lost in the tide of everyday worries and kept lying, tossing and turning from side to side.” Oblomov eschews secular society and generally tries not to go out into the street. His serene state is violated only by visitors who come to Oblomov only for selfish purposes. Tarantiev, for example, simply robs Oblomov, constantly borrowing money from him and not returning it. Oblomov turns out to be a victim of his visitors, not understanding the real purpose of their visits. Oblomov is so remote from real life that light for him is an eternal vanity without any purpose. “No sincere laughter, no glimmer of sympathy… what kind of life is this?” - Oblomov exclaims, considering communication with secular society an empty pastime. But suddenly the calm and measured life of Ilya Ilyich is interrupted. What happened? His friend of youth, Stolz, arrives, with whom Oblomov pins hopes for improving his situation.

“Stolz is the same age as Oblomov: and he is already over thirty years old. He served, retired, went about his business and actually made a house and money.” The son of a burgher, Stolz can be considered an antipode to the idle Russian gentleman of the 19th century, Oblomov. From early childhood, he was brought up in harsh conditions, gradually getting used to the difficulties and hardships of life. His father is German, his mother is Russian, but Stolz inherited practically nothing from her. His father was completely involved in his upbringing, so the son grew up just as practical and purposeful. “He is all made up of bones, muscles and nerves, like a blooded English horse.” Unlike Oblomov, Stolz "was afraid of any dream", "the mysterious, the mysterious had no place in his soul." If Oblomov’s normal state can be called lying down, then Stolz’s is movement. Stolz's main task was "a simple, that is, a direct, real view of life." But what then connects Oblomov and Stolz? Childhood and school - that's what connected people so different in character and in their views for the rest of their lives. However, in his youth, Oblomov was just as active and passionate about knowledge as Stolz. They spent long hours together reading books and studying various sciences. But upbringing and gentle character still played a role, and Oblomov soon moves away from Stolz. Subsequently, Stolz tries to bring his friend back to life, but his attempts are futile: Oblomovism has swallowed up Oblomov.

Thus, the reception of antithesis is one of the main techniques in the novel by I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”. With the help of antithesis, Goncharov compares not only the images of Oblomov and Stolz, he also compares the objects surrounding them and reality. Using the technique of antithesis, Goncharov continues the tradition of many Russian writers. For example, N. A. Ostrovsky in his work “Thunderstorm” contrasts Kabanikh and Katerina. If for Kabanikhi “Domostroy” serves as the ideal of life, then for Katerina, love, honesty and mutual understanding are above all. A, S. Griboyedov in the immortal work “Woe from Wit”, using the antithesis technique, compares Chatsky and Famusov.

• In the novel "Oblomov" the skill of Goncharov the prose writer manifested itself with full force. Gorky, who called Goncharov "one of the giants of Russian literature", noted his special, plastic language. Goncharov's poetic language, his talent for imaginative reproduction of life, the art of creating typical characters, compositional completeness and the enormous artistic power of the picture of Oblomovism presented in the novel and the image of Ilya Ilyich - all this contributed to the fact that the novel "Oblomov" took its rightful place among the masterpieces […]
• There is a type of book where the reader is carried away by the story not from the first pages, but gradually. I think Oblomov is just such a book. Reading the first part of the novel, I was inexpressibly bored and did not even imagine that this laziness of Oblomov would lead him to some kind of sublime feeling. Gradually, boredom began to leave, and the novel captured me, I read it with interest. I have always liked books about love, but Goncharov gave it an interpretation unknown to me. It seemed to me that boredom, monotony, laziness, […]
• The remarkable Russian prose writer of the second half of the 19th century, Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov, in his novel Oblomov, reflected the difficult time of transition from one era of Russian life to another. Feudal relations, the estate type of economy were replaced by a bourgeois way of life. The centuries-old views of people on life collapsed. The fate of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov can be called an “ordinary story”, typical of landowners who lived serenely at the expense of the labor of serfs. The environment and upbringing made them weak-willed, apathetic people, […]
• Despite the significant volume of the work, there are relatively few characters in the novel. This allows Goncharov to give detailed characteristics of each of them, to draw up detailed psychological portraits. The female characters in the novel were no exception. In addition to psychologism, the author widely uses the method of oppositions and the system of antipodes. Such couples can be called "Oblomov and Stolz" and "Olga Ilyinskaya and Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna." The last two images are complete opposites of each other, […]
• Andrei Stolz is Oblomov's closest friend, they grew up together and carried their friendship through life. It remains a mystery how such dissimilar people with such different outlooks on life could maintain a deep attachment. Initially, the image of Stolz was conceived as the complete antipode of Oblomov. The author wanted to combine German prudence and the breadth of the Russian soul, but this plan was not destined to come true. As the novel developed, Goncharov realized more and more clearly that under the given conditions such a […]
• Introduction. Some people find Goncharov's novel Oblomov boring. Yes, indeed, the entire first part of Oblomov lies on the couch, receiving guests, but here we get to know the hero. In general, there are few intriguing actions and events in the novel that are so interesting to the reader. But Oblomov is “our people's type”, and it is he who is a bright representative of the Russian people. Therefore, the novel interested me. In the main character, I saw a particle of myself. Do not think that Oblomov is a representative of only Goncharov's time. And now live […]
• Olga Sergeevna Ilyinskaya Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna Character traits Captivating, delightful, promising, good-natured, cordial and unfeigned, special, innocent, proud. Good-natured, open, trusting, sweet and restrained, caring, thrifty, neat, independent, constant, stands her ground. Appearance Tall, bright face, delicate thin neck, gray-blue eyes, fluffy eyebrows, long braid, small compressed lips. gray-eyed; nice face; well-fed; […]
• The image of Oblomov in Russian literature closes a number of "superfluous" people. An inactive contemplative, incapable of active action, at first glance really seems incapable of a great and bright feeling, but is it really so? In the life of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov there is no place for global and cardinal changes. Olga Ilyinskaya, an extraordinary and beautiful woman, a strong and strong-willed nature, undoubtedly attracts the attention of men. For Ilya Ilyich, an indecisive and timid person, Olga becomes the object of […]
• The novel by I.A. Goncharov is full of different opposites. The reception of antithesis, on which the novel is built, helps to better understand the character of the characters, the author's intention. Oblomov and Stolz are two completely different personalities, but, as they say, opposites converge. They are connected by childhood and school, which can be found in the chapter “Oblomov's Dream”. From it it becomes clear that everyone loved little Ilya, caressed, did not allow him to do anything himself, although at first he was eager to do everything himself, but then he […]
• Oblomov's personality is far from ordinary, although other characters treat him with slight disrespect. For some reason, they read it almost flawed compared to them. This was precisely the task of Olga Ilyinskaya - to wake up Oblomov, to force him to prove himself as an active person. The girl believed that love would move him to great accomplishments. But she was deeply mistaken. It is impossible to awaken in a person what he does not have. Because of this misunderstanding, people's hearts were broken, heroes suffered, and […]
• Oblomov Stolz comes from a wealthy noble family with patriarchal traditions. his parents, like grandfathers, did nothing: serfs from a poor family worked for them: his father (a Russified German) was the manager of a rich estate, his mother was an impoverished Russian noblewoman. pour water for himself) labor in the block was a punishment, it was believed that it was stigmatized with slavery. there was a cult of food in the family, and […]
• By the middle of the XIX century. under the influence of the realistic school of Pushkin and Gogol, a new remarkable generation of Russian writers grew up and formed. Already in the 1940s, the brilliant critic Belinsky noted the emergence of a whole group of talented young authors: Turgenev, Ostrovsky, Nekrasov, Herzen, Dostoevsky, Grigorovich, Ogaryov, and others. Among these promising writers was Goncharov, the future author of Oblomov, the first novel which "Ordinary History" was highly appreciated by Belinsky. LIFE AND CREATIVITY I. […]
• Created eight centuries ago by the genius of the Russian people, The Lay retains the significance of an unfading model for the present, for the future - both with its powerful patriotic sound, and the inexhaustible richness of content, and the unique poetry of all its elements. For Ancient Rus', a dynamic style is very characteristic. He finds himself in architecture, painting and literature. This is a style within which everything that is most significant and beautiful appears majestic. Chroniclers, authors of lives, church words […]
• The literary fate of Fet is not quite usual. His poems, written in the 40s. XIX century., were met very favorably; they were reprinted in anthologies, some of them were set to music and made the name Fet very popular. And indeed, lyrical poems, imbued with spontaneity, liveliness, sincerity, could not fail to attract attention. In the early 50s. Fet was published in Sovremennik. His poems were highly appreciated by the editor of the magazine Nekrasov. He wrote about Fet: “Something strong and fresh, pure […]
• Sonya Marmeladova for Dostoevsky is the same as Tatyana Larina for Pushkin. We see the author's love for his heroine everywhere. We see how he admires her, speaks of God, and somewhere even protects her from misfortunes, no matter how strange it sounds. Sonya is a symbol, a divine ideal, a sacrifice in the name of saving humanity. She is like a guiding thread, like a moral model, despite her occupation. Sonya Marmeladova is Raskolnikov's antagonist. And if we divide the heroes into positive and negative, then Raskolnikov will […]
• This is not an easy question. Painful and long is the path that must be passed in order to find the answer to it. And can you find it? Sometimes it seems that this is impossible. Truth is not only a good thing, but also a stubborn thing. The further you go in search of an answer, the more questions arise in front of you. And it's not too late, but who will turn halfway? And there is still time, but who knows, maybe the answer is two steps away from you? Truth is tempting and many-sided, but its essence is always the same. Sometimes it seems to a person that he has already found the answer, but it turns out that this is a mirage. […]
• The theme of Petersburg was set in Russian literature by Pushkin. It is in his "The Bronze Horseman", in "The Queen of Spades" that we encounter a two-faced city: the beautiful, mighty St. Petersburg, the creation of Peter, and the city of poor Eugene, a city whose very existence turns into a tragedy for a small person. In the same way, Gogol's Petersburg is two-faced: a brilliant fantastic city is sometimes hostile to a person whose fate can be broken on the streets of the northern capital. Sad Petersburg Nekrasov - Petersburg front […]
• Among the best students, I had the opportunity to go to Moscow. The next day after our arrival, we were taken on an excursion to the State Tretyakov Gallery. I entered a huge hall. I was surrounded by a "society" of pictures. I slowly walked around the hall, carefully examining each work of great, famous artists, and suddenly stopped for some reason near the most, in my opinion, an ordinary picture. It depicted a landscape of a Russian village. Looking at it carefully, I finally found the creator of this […]
• In general, the history of the creation and the idea of ​​the play “Thunderstorm” are very interesting. For some time there was an assumption that this work was based on real events that took place in the Russian city of Kostroma in 1859. “In the early morning of November 10, 1859, the Kostroma bourgeois Alexandra Pavlovna Klykova disappeared from the house and either threw herself into the Volga, or was strangled and thrown there. The investigation revealed a dull drama that played out in an unsociable family living with narrowly trading interests: […]
• Nekrasov's poem "Who Lives Well in Rus'" occupies a special place both in the history of Russian classical literature and in the creative heritage of the poet. It is a synthesis of Nekrasov's poetic activity, the completion of many years of creative work of the revolutionary poet. Everything that Nekrasov developed in separate works over the course of thirty years is collected here in a single plan, grandiose in content, scope and courage. It merged all the main lines of his poetic searches, most fully […]

So, we start working with text.

At one of the lessons, you were asked to make a quotation comparative description according to the plan, using only the material of the novel. The text of the novel.

Why is this needed?

Text analysis, deep text analysis! will allow you in this case to understand what makes up the image of the hero, how the choice of lexical means allows the Master (writer!) to create the character of the character. We will see that the choice of one or another will make it possible to convey to the reader a deep thought, idea (which idea - we will try to determine together)

You are on a wiki page, which means you can make changes. How to do it - see. Do not forget to indicate authorship - so it will be clear to me who to evaluate.

I filled in the first column for a sample - here is everything that we talked about in the lesson. If you have a desire to supplement the first column - please, this is encouraged.

Comparative characteristics of the image

Ilya Oblomov and Andrey Stolz

The novel "Oblomov" is one of the landmark works of the 19th century, covering many social and philosophical topics. An important role in revealing the ideological meaning of the work is played by the analysis of the relationship between the two main male characters in the book. In the novel "Oblomov", the characterization of Oblomov and Stolz reflects their completely different nature, opposed by the author.
According to the plot of the work, the characters are best friends from an early age, helping each other as much as possible even in adulthood: Stolz Oblomov - the solution to many of his pressing problems, and Ilya Ilyich to Andrei Ivanovich - pleasant conversations that allow Stolz to restore peace of mind.

Portrait characteristics of heroes

A comparative description of Oblomov and Stolz in Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" is given by the author himself and is most remarkable when comparing their portrait characteristics, as well as characters. Ilya Ilyich is a soft, quiet, kind, dreamy, reflective bumpkin who makes any decision at the behest of his heart, even if the mind leads the hero to the opposite conclusions. The appearance of the introverted Oblomov fully corresponds to his character - his movements are soft, lazy, rounded, and the image is characterized by excessive effeminacy, which is not typical for a man.

Stolz, both internally and externally, is completely different from Oblomov. The main thing in the life of Andrei Ivanovich is the rational grain, in all matters he relies only on the mind, while the dictates of the heart, intuition and the sphere of feelings for the hero are not only something secondary, but also inaccessible, incomprehensible to his rational thoughts. Unlike the “flabby beyond his years” Oblomov, Stolz seemed to consist of “bones, muscles and nerves.” His life is a rapid race forward, an important attribute of which is the constant self-development of the individual and continuous work. The images of Oblomov and Stolz seem to be a mirror image of each other: active, extroverted, successful in society and in the career field, Stolz is opposed to the lazy, apathetic, unwilling to communicate with anyone, and even more so to return to the service, Oblomov.

Differences in the upbringing of heroes

When comparing Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolz, as well as for a better understanding of the images of the characters, it is important to briefly describe the atmosphere in which each of the characters grew up. Despite the “addictive”, as if covering with a veil of half-asleep and laziness, Oblomovka’s environment, little Ilya was a cheerful, active and curious child, which at first was very similar to Stolz. He wanted to learn as much as possible about the world around him, but the excessive concern of his parents, the "hothouse" upbringing, the inculcation of obsolete, obsolete and aimed at the ideals of the past values, made the child a worthy successor to the traditions of "Oblomovism", the bearer of the "Oblomov" worldview - lazy, introvert, living in his own illusory world.

However, Stolz also did not grow up the way he could have grown up. At first glance, the combination in his upbringing of the strict approach of a German father and the tenderness of a noble mother of Russian origin would allow Andrei to become a harmonious, comprehensively developed personality. Nevertheless, as the author points out, Stolz grew up "like a cactus accustomed to drought." The young man lacked love, warmth and gentleness, since he was mainly raised by his father, who did not think that sensitivity should be instilled in a man. However, the Russian roots of Stolz until the end of their lives were looking for this spiritual warmth, finding it in Oblomov, and then in the idea of ​​​​Oblomovka, which he denied.

Education and career of heroes

The inconsistency of the characters of Stolz and Oblomov manifests itself already in his youth, when Andrei Ivanovich, trying to learn as much as possible about the world around him, tried to instill in Ilya Ilyich a love of books, to ignite a flame in him that would make him strive forward. And Stoltz succeeded, but for a very short time - as soon as Oblomov remained on his own, the book became less important for him than, for example, sleep. Somehow, rather, for his parents, Ilya Ilyich graduated from school, and then the university, where he was absolutely not interested, since the hero did not understand how mathematics and other sciences could be useful to him in life. Even a single failure in the service was the end of his career for him - it was too hard for the sensitive, soft Oblomov to adapt to the strict rules of the capital world, far from the norms of life in Oblomovka.

Stolz, with his rational, active view of the world, is much easier to move up the career ladder, because any failure was more like another incentive for him than a defeat. Andrey Ivanovich's continuous activity, high efficiency, ability to please others made him a useful person in any workplace and a pleasant guest in any society, and all thanks to the purposefulness laid down by his father and the continuous thirst for knowledge that his parents developed in Stolz in childhood.

Characteristics of Oblomov and Stolz as carriers of two opposite principles

In critical literature, when comparing Oblomov and Stolz, it is widely believed that the characters are two opposites, two types of “superfluous” heroes who cannot be found in real life in their “pure” form, even though Oblomov is a realistic novel. , and, consequently, the described images must be typical images. However, when analyzing the upbringing and formation of each of the characters, the reasons for Oblomov's apathy, laziness and daydreaming become clear, as well as excessive dryness, rationality, even similarity with a certain Stolz mechanism.

A comparison of Stolz and Oblomov makes it possible to understand that both heroes are not only personalities typical of their time, but are also images that are tendentious for any time. Oblomov is a typical son of wealthy parents, brought up in an atmosphere of love and increased care, protected by his family from the need to work, decide something and act actively, because there will always be “Zakhar” who will do everything for him. Stolz, on the other hand, is a person who is taught from an early age to the need to work and work, while being deprived of love and care, which leads to a certain internal callousness of such a person, to a misunderstanding of the nature of feelings and emotional deprivation.

Artwork test