At all times, there have been people who resign themselves to the strength and inevitability of circumstances and were ready to accept fate as it is with their heads bowed. But at all times there have been people who were ready to fight for their happiness, people who did not want to tolerate injustice, people who had nothing to lose. We can meet such people on the pages of A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky”.

This work is deep and interesting. It impressed me with its idea, plot twists, sad ending, and characters. Kirilla Petrovich Troekurov, Vladimir Dubrovsky, Masha Troekurov - all these are strong and extraordinary personalities. But the difference between them is that Troekurov was by nature a good person, he had good friendly relations with the poor landowner Dubrovsky, he was characterized by human impulses, but at the same time he was a despot and a tyrant. Troekurov is a typical serf-owner, in whom a sense of his own superiority and permissiveness, depravity and ignorance is developed to the limit. Whereas Dubrovsky and Masha are noble, sincere, pure and honest natures.

The main problem the novel is the problem of protection human dignity. But, one way or another, she is connected with all the characters in the work. First of all, this problem concerns the Dubrovsky family, which Troekurov deprived not only of the family estate, but also encroached on their noble honor and dignity.

Andrei Gavrilovich was confident that he was right, cared little about court case, which Troekurov started against him, and therefore could not defend his rights. Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky could not stand the unequal battle with a stronger opponent and died. Then Dubrovsky Jr. had to defend his own honor. By chance, he became the head of the peasant movement in order to “administrate his own justice.” But from the very beginning he did not agree with the methods of struggle against the landowners. His pure and sincere nature did not allow him to become a real thug - cruel and merciless. He was fair and merciful, so Vladimir did not lead the peasants for long. The peasant revolt was spontaneous, their actions were often contradictory, so they obeyed Dubrovsky’s orders, stopped the armed uprising and dispersed. “...Terrible visits, fires and robberies stopped. The roads have become clear."

But why doesn’t Vladimir touch the property of his offender, the richest landowner in the area - Troekurov? As it turned out, Dubrovsky fell in love with Kirill Petrovich’s daughter, Masha, and for her sake forgave his blood enemy. Masha also fell in love with Vladimir. But these heroes could not be together - Kirill Petrovich forcibly married his daughter to the old Count Vereisky. Vladimir did not have time to save his beloved from a marriage with an unloved person.

With such a plot twist, a sad ending, it seems to me that A.S. Pushkin shows that people in Russia are defenseless against evil and injustice. Neither the law nor society can protect him. He can only rely on his own strength.

Therefore, I understand Vladimir Dubrovsky, who became a robber. What else could he do? Finding no protection from the law, he also decided to live by unwritten rules - the rules of force and cruelty. But his noble, pure and sincere nature still limited the hero in this, making him a “noble robber.”

At all times, there have been people who resign themselves to the strength and inevitability of circumstances and were ready to accept fate as it is with their heads bowed. But at all times there have been people who were ready to fight for their happiness, people who did not want to tolerate injustice, people who had nothing to lose. We can meet such people on the pages of A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky”.

This work is deep and interesting. It impressed me with its idea, plot twists, sad ending, and characters. Kirilla Petrovich Troekurov, Vladimir Dubrovsky, Masha Troekurov - all these are strong and extraordinary personalities. But the difference between them is that Troekurov was by nature a good person, he had good friendly relations with the poor landowner Dubrovsky, he was characterized by human impulses, but at the same time he was a despot and a tyrant. Troekurov is a typical serf-owner, in whom a sense of his own superiority and permissiveness, depravity and ignorance is developed to the limit. Whereas Dubrovsky and Masha are noble, sincere, pure and honest natures.

The main problem of the novel is the problem of protecting human dignity. But, one way or another, she is connected with all the characters in the work. First of all, this problem concerns the Dubrovsky family, which Troekurov deprived not only of the family estate, but also encroached on their noble honor and dignity.

Andrei Gavrilovich was confident that he was right, cared little about the court case that Troekurov started against him, and therefore could not defend his rights. Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky could not stand the unequal battle with a stronger opponent and died. Then Dubrovsky Jr. had to defend his own honor. By chance, he became the head of the peasant movement in order to “administrate his own justice.” But from the very beginning he did not agree with the methods of struggle against the landowners. His pure and sincere nature did not allow him to become a real thug - cruel and merciless. He was fair and merciful, so Vladimir did not lead the peasants for long. The peasant revolt was spontaneous, their actions were often contradictory, so they obeyed Dubrovsky’s orders, stopped the armed uprising and dispersed. “...Terrible visits, fires and robberies stopped. The roads have become clear."

But why doesn’t Vladimir touch the property of his offender, the richest landowner in the area - Troekurov? As it turned out, Dubrovsky fell in love with Kirill Petrovich’s daughter, Masha, and for her sake forgave his blood enemy. Masha also fell in love with Vladimir. But these heroes could not be together - Kirill Petrovich forcibly married his daughter to the old Count Vereisky. Vladimir did not have time to save his beloved from a marriage with an unloved person.

With such a plot twist, a sad ending, it seems to me that A.S. Pushkin shows that people in Russia are defenseless against evil and injustice. Neither the law nor society can protect him. He can only rely on his own strength.

Therefore, I understand Vladimir Dubrovsky, who became a robber. What else could he do? Finding no protection from the law, he also decided to live by unwritten rules - the rules of force and cruelty. But his noble, pure and sincere nature still limited the hero in this, making him a “noble robber.”

Protection of the human personality in A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky”

At all times, there have been people who resign themselves to the strength and inevitability of circumstances and were ready to accept fate as it is with their heads bowed. But at all times there have been people who were ready to fight for their happiness, people who did not want to tolerate injustice, people who had nothing to lose. We can meet such people on the pages of A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky”.

This work is deep and interesting. It impressed me with its idea, plot twists, sad ending, and characters. Kirilla Petrovich Troekurov, Vladimir Dubrovsky, Masha Troekurov - all these are strong and extraordinary personalities. But the difference between them is that Troekurov was by nature a good person, he had good friendly relations with the poor landowner Dubrovsky, he was characterized by human impulses, but at the same time he was a despot and a tyrant. Troekurov is a typical serf-owner, in whom a sense of his own superiority and permissiveness, depravity and ignorance is developed to the limit. Whereas Dubrovsky and Masha are noble, sincere, pure and honest natures.

The main problem of the novel is the problem of protecting human dignity. But, one way or another, she is connected with all the characters in the work. First of all, this problem concerns the Dubrovsky family, which Troekurov deprived not only of the family estate, but also encroached on their noble honor and dignity.

Andrei Gavrilovich was confident that he was right, cared little about the court case that Troekurov started against him, and therefore could not defend his rights. Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky could not stand the unequal battle with a stronger opponent and died. Then Dubrovsky Jr. had to defend his own honor. By chance, he became the head of the peasant movement in order to “administrate his own justice.” But from the very beginning he did not agree with the methods of struggle against the landowners. His pure and sincere nature did not allow him to become a real thug - cruel and merciless. He was fair and merciful, so Vladimir did not lead the peasants for long. The peasant revolt was spontaneous, their actions were often contradictory, so they obeyed Dubrovsky’s orders, stopped the armed uprising and dispersed. “...Terrible visits, fires and robberies stopped. The roads have become clear."

But why doesn’t Vladimir touch the property of his offender, the richest landowner in the area - Troekurov? As it turned out, Dubrovsky fell in love with Kirill Petrovich’s daughter, Masha, and for her sake forgave his blood enemy. Masha also fell in love with Vladimir. But these heroes could not be together - Kirill Petrovich forcibly married his daughter to the old Count Vereisky. Vladimir did not have time to save his beloved from a marriage with an unloved person.

With such a plot twist, a sad ending, it seems to me that A.S. Pushkin shows that people in Russia are defenseless against evil and injustice. Neither the law nor society can protect him. He can only rely on his own strength.

Therefore, I understand Vladimir Dubrovsky, who became a robber. What else could he do? Finding no protection from the law, he also decided to live by unwritten rules - the rules of force and cruelty. But his noble, pure and sincere nature still limited the hero in this, making him a “noble robber.”

Plan for the topic: 1. Who is Shabashkin. 2. His appearance. 3. How Shabashkin reacted to Troekurov’s desire to take possession of someone else’s estate. Why didn't he refuse to participate in this unjust case? 5. In what ways did Shabashkin achieve the fulfillment of Troekurov’s wishes. 6....

The novel “Dubrovsky” is one of the most significant prose works of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Work on this novel began in October 1832, and already in January 1833 Pushkin finished the first two volumes. “The History of Pugachev”, and then “Captain’s...

In the novel “Dubrovsky” A.S. Pushkin talks about honor and meanness, love and hatred, nobility and baseness. One of the important storylines The novel is the story of the relationship between Vladimir Dubrovsky and Masha Troekurova. There are many things in the destinies of these heroes...

A.S. Pushkin is a great reformer not only of the Russian literary language, but also of Russian prose. He took it as a rule that “precision and brevity are the first virtues of prose.” The novel “Dubrovsky” is proof of this. This is a novel about young man, which...

Usually this question begins to be answered from the end. From the last chapters of the story, when Dubrovsky, having received her message late, was unable to appear before the wedding. We see a girl in tears, pale, detached from everything around her, having lost her last hope...

Students are working on the episode “Vladimir Dubrovsky in the Kistenev Grove.” Let’s reread the passage: Vladimir “went deeper into the thicket of trees, trying to drown out his spiritual grief with movement and fatigue. He walked without knowing the road; branches constantly touched and scratched...

The problem of protecting human dignity.

At all times, there have been people who resign themselves to the strength and inevitability of circumstances and were ready to accept fate as it is with their heads bowed. But at all times there have been people who were ready to fight for their happiness, people who did not want to tolerate injustice, people who had nothing to lose. We can meet such people on the pages of A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Dubrovsky”.

This work is deep and interesting. It impressed me with its idea, plot twists, sad ending, and characters. Kirilla Petrovich Troekurov, Vladimir Dubrovsky, Masha Troekurov - all these are strong and extraordinary personalities. But the difference between them is that Troekurov was by nature a good person, he had good friendly relations with the poor landowner Dubrovsky, he was characterized by human impulses, but at the same time he was a despot and a tyrant. Troekurov is a typical serf-owner, in whom a sense of his own superiority and permissiveness, depravity and ignorance is developed to the limit. Whereas Dubrovsky and Masha are noble, sincere, pure and honest natures.

The main problem of the novel is the problem of protecting human dignity. But, one way or another, she is connected with all the characters in the work. First of all, this problem concerns the Dubrovsky family, which Troekurov deprived not only of the family estate, but also encroached on their noble honor and dignity.

Andrei Gavrilovich was confident that he was right, cared little about the court case that Troekurov started against him, and therefore could not defend his rights. Andrei Gavrilovich Dubrovsky could not stand the unequal battle with a stronger opponent and died. Then Dubrovsky Jr. had to defend his own honor. By chance, he became the head of the peasant movement in order to “administrate his own justice.” But from the very beginning he did not agree with the methods of struggle against the landowners. His pure and sincere nature did not allow him to become a real thug - cruel and merciless. He was fair and merciful, so Vladimir did not lead the peasants for long. The peasant revolt was spontaneous, their actions were often contradictory, so they obeyed Dubrovsky’s orders, stopped the armed uprising and dispersed. “...Terrible visits, fires and robberies stopped. The roads have become clear."

But why doesn’t Vladimir touch the property of his offender, the richest landowner in the area - Troekurov? As it turned out, Dubrovsky fell in love with Kirill Petrovich’s daughter, Masha, and for her sake forgave his blood enemy. Masha also fell in love with Vladimir. But these heroes could not be together - Kirill Petrovich forcibly married his daughter to the old Count Vereisky. Vladimir did not have time to save his beloved from a marriage with an unloved person.

With such a plot twist, a sad ending, it seems to me that A.S. Pushkin shows that people in Russia are defenseless against evil and injustice. Neither the law nor society can protect him. He can only rely on his own strength.

Therefore, I understand Vladimir Dubrovsky, who became a robber. What else could he do? Finding no protection from the law, he also decided to live by unwritten rules - the rules of force and cruelty. But his noble, pure and sincere nature still limited the hero in this, making him a “noble robber.”