Eternal images - characters literary works, which went beyond the scope of the work. They are found in other works: novels, plays, stories. Their names have become common nouns, often used as epithets, indicating some qualities of a person or literary character. There are four eternal images: Faust, Don Juan, Hamlet and Don Quixote. These characters have lost their purely literary meaning and acquired a universal meaning. They were created once, but since then they have meant so much that they began to appear again among writers different eras, their traits sometimes emerge in characters seemingly far from them. The novel "Oblomov" contains features of some of these heroes. For example, Oblomov is very similar to Hamlet. Shakespeare's Hamlet was always in search of some kind of ideal, and Oblomov too. These two souls both want something higher; they are not satisfied with life on Earth. They strive for some ideal that is far from them, and they perish. Hamlet wants to take revenge for the death of his father, for his murder. Oblomov does not take revenge on anyone, but he also wants to find himself in life. At the beginning of the novel, a series of potential Oblomovs pass in front of him. Oblomov can choose “himself”, but he doesn’t like any of these heroes, this is not the ideal that he wants, which he strives for, however, only with his soul, but cannot find it. IN real life Hamlet is also tormented by choice. His soul is restless. He also has several paths: he can become like Polonius, like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, or like Claudius or Gertrude. Hamlet does not want to become any of them. He remains himself and dies. He is killed by that musty atmosphere of Elsinore, in which everything is rotten through and through. Oblomov is also trying to find his ideal in the moldy atmosphere of St. Petersburg, where it simply cannot exist. He is killed by this hopelessness of outdated Petersburg, this impossibility of an ideal in it.
From Don Quixote in Oblomov - veneration of women, the chivalrous spirit, a romantic perception of the world, the search for some higher principle. Oblomov also fights with windmills- with the residents of soulless, idealless St. Petersburg. Oblomov thinks, dreams, wants to change them, he feels cramped in St. Petersburg, he does not want to communicate with the people who surround him. Oblomov, with his thoughts, is trying to change St. Petersburg, this arrogant and pompous city, but
Nothing works for him. The city does not want to change, it still “flapping its wings”, that is, life goes its own way, but Oblomov - Don Quixote is not there, but life goes on, and Petersburg is the same, and Stolz is married to Olga - Dulcinea Oblomov, himself Oblomov achieved nothing, his life was empty and meaningless, like Don Quixote’s battle with windmills.
Third eternal image who appears in the novel is Faust, represented by the image of Stolz. A practical, educated man, Faust is a scientist who travels the world with Mephistopheles. Stolz is a traveler. He is away all the time, he rarely visits St. Petersburg, and in the end he leaves there altogether. He lives in Crimea - in a blessed land. Faust is also trying to find his blessed land and for this he enters into an alliance with Mephistopheles. Faust does not succeed, but Stolz is also not entirely happy - after all, Olga loves Oblomov and cannot love anyone but Oblomov. Faust sells his soul to Mephistopheles in search of happiness, and Stolz gives it to Olga. But Olga does not accept this sacrifice, and Stolz does not find his happiness in life.
Stolz - Faust. Firstly, Stolz is educated, much more educated than Oblomov. Faust did not have a spiritual quest, like Oblomov. Faust was a pragmatic scientist, he was interested in science, not the soul, he was not looking for an ideal - he was looking for happiness. And Oblomov is looking for an ideal. He embodied so many qualities that are inherent in all people on earth. There is a piece of Oblomov in each of us. This literary image has become an eternal image. It has acquired universal significance. The term “Oblomovism” appeared, and it has several meanings, that is, in different understanding Oblomovism is different. Along with the terms “quixoticism” and “Hamletism,” the term “Oblomovism” has firmly entered our lives. These terms are derived from the names and surnames of heroes who have become eternal images. And it should be noted characteristic feature correlating the title of the work with the characters: all works in which there are heroes who have become eternal images are called by their names, for example: “Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” by Shakespeare or “Faust” by Goethe. Goncharov’s novel is also called “Oblomov,” and Oblomov is also an eternal image. We are all a little Oblomov, but each of us is different.
I. A. Goncharov worked on the novel “Oblomov” for ten years. In this (best!) work, the author expressed his beliefs and hopes; depicted the problems of contemporary life that worried and deeply affected him, and revealed the causes of these problems. Therefore, the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrei “Ivanovich Stolts” acquired typical features, and the word “Oblomovism” itself began to express a very definite, almost philosophical concept. One cannot exclude the image of Olga Sergeevna Ilyinskaya, without which the characters of the men would not be fully illuminated.
To understand a person’s character and the motives for his actions, one must turn to the origins of personality formation: childhood, upbringing, environment, and finally, the education received.
It seems that the strength of all generations of his ancestors was concentrated in Ilyusha; in him were felt the makings of a man of a new time, capable of fruitful activity. But Ilya’s aspirations to independently explore the world were thwarted by a nanny who did not take her eyes off him, from whose supervision he escaped only during the afternoon nap, when all living things in the house, except Ilya, fell asleep. “It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death.”
An attentive child observes everything that is happening in the house, “feeds a soft mind with living examples and unconsciously draws a program for his life based on the life around him,” the “main concern of life” of which is good food, and then a sound sleep.
The quiet flow of life was disturbed only occasionally by “illnesses, losses, quarrels and, among other things, labor.” Labor was the main enemy of the inhabitants of Oblomovka, a punishment imposed “on our forefathers.” In Oblomovka they always got rid of work when the opportunity presented itself, “finding it possible and proper.” This attitude towards work was brought up in Ilya Ilyich, who accepted a ready-made standard of life, passed on from generation to generation without change. The ideal of inaction was reinforced in the child’s imagination by nanny’s tales about “Emelya the Fool,” who receives various gifts from the magic pike, and undeserved ones at that. Fairy tales penetrate deeply into Ilya’s consciousness, and he, already an adult, “is sometimes unconsciously sad, why is a fairy tale not life, and why is life not a fairy tale?”
The desire for independence, young energy was stopped by the friendly cries of the parents: “What are servants for?” Soon Ilya himself realized that it was calmer and more convenient to give orders. The dexterous, active child is constantly stopped by his parents and nanny for fear that the boy will “fall, hurt himself” or catch a cold; he was cherished like a hothouse flower. “Those seeking manifestations of power turned inward and sank, withering away.”
In such conditions, Ilya Ilyich’s apathetic, lazy, difficult-to-rise nature developed. He was surrounded by the excessive worries of his mother, who made sure that the child ate well, did not overwork himself in studying with Stolz, and was ready, under any, even the most insignificant pretext, not to let Ilyushenka go to the German. She believed that education is not such an important thing, for the sake of which you need to lose weight, lose your blush and skip holidays. But still, Oblomov’s parents understood the need for education, but saw it only as a means for career advancement:
At that time, ranks and awards began to be received “no other way than through training.” The parents wanted to present Ilyusha with all the benefits “somehow cheaper, with different tricks.”
His mother's worries had a detrimental effect on Ilya: he was not accustomed to systematic studies, he never wanted to learn more than the teacher asked.
Oblomov’s peer and friend, Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, loved Ilya, tried to stir him up, instill an interest in self-education, set him up for activities that he himself was passionate about, for which he was disposed, because he was brought up in completely different conditions.
Andrei's father, a German, gave him the upbringing that he received from his father, that is, he taught him all the practical sciences, forced him to work early and sent away his son, who had graduated from the university, as his father had done to him in his time. But the father’s rough burgher upbringing constantly came into contact with the tender, affectionate love of his mother, a Russian noblewoman, who did not contradict her husband, but quietly raised her son in her own way: “... taught him to listen to the thoughtful sounds of Hertz, sang to him about flowers, about the poetry of life , whispered about the brilliant calling of either a warrior or a writer..." The proximity of Oblomovka with its "primitive laziness, simplicity of morals, silence and immobility" and the princely "with the wide expanse of lordly life" also prevented Ivan Bogdanovich Stoltz from making the son of the same burgher, what he was like. The breath of Russian life “took Andrei away from the straight path outlined by his father.” But nevertheless, Andrei adopted from his father a serious outlook on life (even at all its little things) and pragmatism, which he tried to balance “with the subtle needs of the spirit.”
Stolz kept all emotions, actions and actions under the “never dormant control” of his mind and spent strictly “according to the budget.” He considered himself the cause of all his misfortunes and suffering; he “did not hang guilt and responsibility, like a caftan, on someone else’s nail,” unlike Oblomov, who did not find the strength to admit himself guilty of his troubles, of the worthlessness of his fruitless life: “. ..the burning reproaches of his conscience stung him, and he tried with all his might to find the culprit outside himself and turn their sting on him, but on whom?
The search turned out to be useless, because the reason for Oblomov’s ruined life was himself. It was very painful for him to realize this, since he “painfully felt that some good, bright beginning was buried in him, as in a grave, perhaps now dead...”. Oblomov was tormented by doubts about the correctness and necessity of his life. However, over the years, excitement and repentance appeared less frequently, and he quietly and gradually settled into a simple and wide coffin for the rest of his existence, made with his own hands...
Stolz and Oblomov have a different attitude towards the imagination, which has two opposite incarnations: “... a friend - the less you believe him, and an enemy - when you fall asleep trustingly under his sweet whisper.” The latter happened to Oblomov. Imagination was his favorite companion in life; only in his dreams did he embody the rich, deeply buried abilities of his “golden” soul.
Stolz did not give free rein to his imagination and was afraid of any dream; it “had no place in his soul”; he rejected everything that “has not been subject to analysis of experience, practical truth,” or accepted it as “a fact to which the turn of experience has not yet reached.” Andrei Ivanovich persistently “went towards his goal,” he valued such persistence above all else: “... it was a sign of character in his eyes.” He only retreated “from the task when a wall appeared on his way or an impassable abyss opened up.” He soberly assessed his strength and walked away, not paying attention to the opinions of others.
Oblomov was afraid of any difficulties; he was too lazy to make even the slightest effort to solve not the great, but the most pressing problems. He found solace in his favorite “conciliatory and soothing” words “maybe”, “maybe” and “somehow” and protected himself from misfortunes with them. He was ready to shift the matter to anyone, without caring about its outcome or the integrity of the chosen person (this is how he trusted the scammers who robbed his estate). Like a pure, naive child, Ilya Ilyich did not allow even the thought of the possibility of deception; elementary prudence, not to mention practicality, was completely absent from Oblomov’s nature.
Ilya Ilyich’s attitude to work has already been discussed. He, like his parents, avoided work in every possible way, which in his mind was synonymous with boredom, and all the efforts of Stolz, for whom “work is the image, content, element and goal of life,” to motivate Ilya Ilyich to some kind of activity were in vain, the matter did not progress beyond words. Figuratively speaking, the cart stood on square wheels. She needed constant pushes of considerable force to move from her place. Stolz quickly got tired (“you fiddle around like a drunkard”), this activity also disappointed Olga Ilyinskaya, through her love for whom many sides of the characters of Oblomov and Stolz are revealed.
In introducing Ilya Ilyich to Olga, Stolz wanted to “introduce into Oblomov’s sleepy life the presence of a young, pretty, intelligent, lively and partly mocking woman,” who could awaken Ilya to life and illuminate his dull existence. But Stolz “did not foresee that he would bring in fireworks, Olga and Oblomov even more so.”
Love for Olga changed Ilya Ilyich. At Olga's request, he gave up many of his habits: he did not lie on the couch, did not overeat, and traveled from the dacha to the city to carry out her instructions. But finally enter into new life I couldn't. “To go forward means to suddenly throw off the wide robe not only from your shoulders, but from your soul, from your mind; along with the dust and cobwebs from the walls, sweep away the cobwebs from your eyes and see clearly!” And Oblomov was afraid of storms and changes, he absorbed the fear of the new with his mother’s milk, in comparison with whom, however, he went ahead (Ilya Ilyich already rejected “the only use of capital is to keep it in a chest,” realizing that “the duty of every citizen is to be honest labor to maintain the general welfare"), but achieved little, given his abilities.
He was tired of Olga’s restless, active nature, and therefore Oblomov dreamed that she would calm down and quietly, sleepily vegetate with him, “crawling from one day to another.” Realizing that Olga will never agree to this, Ilya decides to break up with her. For Oblomov, the break with Olga meant a return to previous habits, a final spiritual decline. In his life with Pshenitsyna, Ilya Ilyich found a pale reflection of his dreams and “decided that the ideal of his life had come true, although without poetry.
Having made a lot of efforts to awaken Oblomov’s desire for activity, Olga soon becomes convinced, as Dobrolyubov puts it, “of his decisive worthlessness,” that is, of his inability for spiritual transformation, and abandons him.
Having gone through love and disappointment, Olga began to take her feelings more seriously; she grew so morally that Stolz did not recognize her when he met a year later, and suffered for a long time, trying to unravel the reason for the dramatic changes in Olga. It was so difficult for Stoltz to understand her heart that “his arrogant self-confidence subsided a little.” After listening to Olga’s confession about “walks, about the park, about his hopes, about Oblomov’s enlightenment and fall” and having received her consent to the marriage, Andrei says to himself: “Everything has been found, there is nothing to look for, there is nowhere else to go!” However, this does not mean at all that he is plunging into something similar to Oblomov’s apathy. Stolz's family life contributed to the harmonious, mutually enriching development of both spouses. However, now Andrei has calmed down, he is happy with everything, and Olga is tormented by doubts: what next? Is the circle of life really closed? Stolz tells her: “We will not go... into a daring struggle with rebellious issues, we will not accept their challenge, we will bow our heads and humbly endure the difficult moment.” He understood that Olga had outgrown him, “saw that the former ideal of his woman and wife was unattainable, but he was happy” and became only a pale reflection of Olga, in whom, as Dobrolyubov put it, “more than in Stolz, one can see a hint of new Russian life."
Oblomov and Stolz are people with different worldviews, and therefore different destinies. Their main difference is that the active, energetic Stolz managed to properly manage his life and natural talents, trying to “bring the vessel of life to last day, without shedding a single drop in vain." And the soft, trusting Oblomov did not have the willpower to withstand the difficulties of life and defend his right to existence and self-realization.
In the novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov, the complex relationship between slavery and lordship is exposed; there is a story about two opposite types of people, differing in their concepts of the world: for one the world is abstract, ideal, for the other it is material and practical. The author described these two types in Oblomov and Zakhara.
Oblomov is educated, not stupid, but he is too lazy to do anything to solve this or that problem. All day long he just lies and thinks. Sometimes he seems to decide to do something, but rarely follows through with his impulses. There is nothing better for him than lying quietly and doing nothing. Even his village is run by a trusted person. For him, ordinary dressing becomes an obstacle to business, because he does not want to part with his favorite robe. Oblomov tries to understand himself, to understand why he is like this, and remembers his childhood, his mother’s affection, and care. Little Ilya was not allowed to be independent: to dress and wash himself. For this there were a huge number of nannies and servants. Accustomed to such guardianship, Oblomov, having matured, cannot do without the help of a servant. An “eternal child” was formed, dreamy, beautiful-hearted, but completely unsuited to practical life.
Ilya Ilyich finds this ideal of family, his native Oblomovism, in his marriage to Agafya Matveevna Pshenitsyna, a bourgeois woman, into whose house he moved from Gorokhovaya Street. In his description of the yard, Goncharov gives a multi-valued description of peace and quiet, noting that “except for the barking dog, it seemed that there was not a single living soul.” The first thing Oblomov notices about Agafya is her thriftiness and thoroughness. She is talented in housekeeping, but otherwise knows nothing. Oblomov's feeling for Pshenitsyna was down-to-earth, for Olga - sublime. He dreams of Olga, looks at Agafya, something had to be done for the wedding with Olga, but the marriage with Agafya develops on its own, imperceptibly. Even Stolz had already given up hope of getting his friend out of this Oblomovism after seeing Ilya Ilyich’s “eternal” robe. If Olga “took off” the robe, then Agafya, patching it up, “so that it would last longer,” put Oblomov in it again. The only thing Stolz can do is take care of Oblomov’s son. Thus, by handing over little And-ryusha to Stoltz to raise, Goncharov shows who the future belongs to.
Agafya, to whom, after Oblomov’s death, Stolz offered to live with his son, cannot overcome the inextricable connection with Oblomov’s environment. The significance of Oblomov’s image is unusually great. Goncharov contrasted it with the vanity and meaninglessness of the St. Petersburg life of the Volkovs, Sudbinskys, Penkins, who had forgotten about man and sought to satisfy their petty vanity or mercantile interests. This St. Petersburg “Oblomovism” is not accepted by Goncharov, and through Oblomov’s mouth he expresses protest against the condemnation of “fallen people.” Oblomov speaks about compassion for the “fallen”, getting up from the sofa in a fit of emotion. Seeing no meaning in the hectic life of St. Petersburg, in pursuit of illusory values, Oblomov’s doing nothing is a kind of protest against the advancing rationalism of the bourgeois era. During this era, Oblomov retained a pure childish soul, but “Oblomovism” - apathy, laziness and lack of will - led him to spiritual and physical death.
Zakhar is the servant of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov. Goncharov defines his character as a knight “with fear and reproach,” who “belonged to two eras, and both put their stamp on him. From one he inherited boundless devotion to the Oblomov family, and from the other, later, sophistication and corruption of morals.” loves to drink with friends, gossip in the yard with other servants, sometimes embellishing his master, sometimes presenting him as Oblomov never was. Zakhar is an eternal uncle, for whom Oblomov remains a small, unreasonable child almost for the rest of his life.
He is unconditionally loyal not only to his master, but also to his entire family, since this has been the custom from time immemorial: there are masters and there are their servants. At the same time, Zakhar can grumble at the owner, and even argue with him, and insist on his own. Thus, the eternal habit of the servants of the old century does not allow him to squander his lordly possessions. When Oblomov’s fellow countryman, the swindler Tarantyev, asks Ilya Ilyich to give him a tailcoat for a while, Zakhar immediately refuses: until the shirt and vest are returned, Tarantyev will not receive anything else. And Oblomov is lost in front of his firmness.
We can say that Ilya Ilyich is completely dependent on Zakhar, becomes a slave to his serf, and it is difficult to decide which of them is more submissive to the power of the other. At least, what Zakhar doesn’t want, Ilya Ilyich cannot force him to do, and what Zakhar wants, he will do against the master’s will, and the master will submit. Therefore, the servant Zakhar, in a certain sense, is a “master” over his master: Oblomov’s complete dependence on him makes it possible for Zakhar to sleep peacefully on his bed. The ideal of existence of Ilya Ilyich - “idleness and peace” - is to the same extent Zakhara’s longed-for dream. Goncharov shows that the character and worldview of both the master and the servant were formed under the influence of the centuries-old practice of legalized lordship and slavery. In the novel we will not find angry denunciations of serfdom, but the problems of the work are connected with the analysis of exactly how it affects a person and what comes of it.
The novel “Oblomov” is one of the brightest works of Russian literature of the 19th century, which even today excites readers with the severity of the questions raised by the author. The book is interesting, first of all, because the problems of the novel are revealed through the method of antithesis. The contrast between the main characters in Oblomov makes it possible to emphasize the conflict between different worldviews and characters, as well as to better reveal the inner world of each character.
The action of the work unfolds around the destinies of the four main characters of the book: Ilya Ilyich Oblomov, Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, Olga Ilyinskaya and Agafya Pshenitsyna (some researchers supplement this list with Zakhar, but in terms of importance in the narrative he is still considered secondary acting persons). Through the male and female characters in the novel, the author analyzes various aspects of a person’s social and personal life and reveals many “eternal” themes.
Characteristics of male characters
Ilya Oblomov And Andrey Stolts – main characters of "Oblomov" Goncharova. According to the plot of the novel, the men met back in school years and, having become friends, continued to support each other even after decades. Oblomov and Stolz are an example of a truly strong, reliable and fruitful friendship for both men. Ilya Ilyich saw in Andrei Ivanovich a person who is always ready and, most importantly, knows how to solve his problems with others, with the expenses and income of the estate. For Stolz, Oblomov was a pleasant conversationalist, whose company had a calming effect on Andrei Ivanovich and helped him return to peace of mind, which he often lost in the pursuit of new achievements.
In “Oblomov” the characters are presented as antipodes - completely different and almost in no way similar heroes. This can be clearly seen in the depiction of the fates of Oblomov and Stolz. Ilya Ilyich grew up as a “greenhouse”, “room” child, who from an early age was taught a lordly lifestyle, laziness and an attitude towards new knowledge as something optional and unnecessary. Having graduated from school and university “for show,” Ilya Ilyich enters the service, where one of the first disappointments in life awaits him - at work he needs to fight for his place, constantly work and be better than others. However, the most unpleasant thing for Ilya Ilyich is that his colleagues remain unfamiliar people, and do not become for the man new family. Not accustomed to disappointments and blows, Oblomov, after the first failure at work, gives up and closes himself off from society, creating his own special world of the illusory Oblomovka.
Compared to the active, striving forward Stolz, Ilya Ilyich looks like a lazy, apathetic lump who simply does not want to do anything himself. Andrei Ivanovich's childhood and youth were filled with new impressions. Without suffering from excessive parental care, Stolz could leave home for several days, chose his own path forward, read a lot and was interested in almost everything. Andrei Ivanovich learned his love of knowledge from his mother, while his practical approach to everything, perseverance and ability to work - from his German father. After graduating from university, Stolz leaves his native estate, building his own destiny, earning material wealth and meeting the right people.
Interdependence of male images
The male images of heroes in the novel “Oblomov” are two ways of realizing a person in society, two leading principles that do not find a harmonious combination in any of the characters. On the other hand, Stolz and Oblomov perfectly complement each other, helping each other in finding the most important things to achieve true, not illusory, happiness. After all, Oblomov, in his dreams of rebuilding Oblomovka, appeared to be a man no less active and sociable than his friend, while Stolz throughout the novel continues to reach for the peace of mind that he found in Oblomov. As a result, unconsciously to himself, Andrei Ivanovich creates a kind of Oblomovka on his own estate after his marriage to Olga, gradually turning into a person attached to his home and appreciating the monotonous, calm passage of time.
Despite the fact that the characterization of the heroes of “Oblomov” is built on an antithesis, neither Oblomov nor Stolz are Goncharov’s ideals, but rather are presented as an extreme manifestation of “Oblomov’s” and “progressive” characteristics in a person. The author showed that without the harmony of these two principles, a person will not feel complete and happy, and will not be able to realize himself both socially and spiritually.
Characteristics of female images
The main heroines of the novel “Oblomov” are also opposed to each other. Olga Ilyinskaya is a young lady from a wealthy family, from childhood she studied literacy, science and the art of singing, an active and purposeful girl who likes to choose her own destiny, without adjusting to her husband or loved ones. Olga is not at all like the meek, homely Agafya, ready to do anything for the sake of her loved one, capable of adapting to any lifestyle, as long as Oblomov is happy. Ilyinskaya was not ready to follow the desires of Ilya Ilyich, to become his ideal “Oblomov” woman, whose main area of activity would be housekeeping - that is, the framework prescribed by Domostroy.
Unlike the uneducated, simple, quiet - the true prototype of the Russian woman - Agafya, Olga is a completely new type of emancipated woman for Russian society, who does not agree to limit herself to four walls and cooking, but sees her destiny in continuous development, self-education and striving forward . However, the tragedy of Ilyinskaya’s fate lies in the fact that even after marrying the active, active Stolz, the girl still takes on the classic role of wife and mother for Russian society, which is not much different from the role described in Domostroy. The discrepancy between desires and the real future leads to Olga’s constant sadness, the feeling that she has not lived the life she dreamed of.
Conclusion
The main characters of the novel “Oblomov” are interesting, attractive personalities, whose stories and destinies allow us to better understand the ideological meaning of the work. Using the example of male characters, the author analyzes the themes of human development, formation in society, the ability to set goals and achieve them, and using the example of female characters, he reveals the theme of love, devotion, and the ability to accept a person as he is.
Oblomov and Stolz are not only opposing characters, but also complementary ones, as are Olga and Agafya. By accepting or developing in themselves the features and qualities of the antipodean image, the heroes could become absolutely happy and harmonious, because it is in the lack of understanding of the path to true happiness that the tragedy of the characters in Oblomov lies. That is why their characteristics in Goncharov’s novel do not have an exclusively negative or positive connotation - the author does not lead the reader to ready-made conclusions, inviting him to choose the right path himself.
Work test
Goncharov managed to create an amazing, one might even say, the only image in literature - The entire work is unique, there are no sharp turns in the plot, the setting almost never changes (the entire first part it was the protagonist’s apartment), but nevertheless you worry about the characters. An image like Oblomov cannot but cause controversy about his character and understanding of life.
The novel does not raise political issues; it only touches on personal and interpersonal conflicts, which remain relevant in any era. Goncharov's novel is studied at school, and writing an essay on Oblomov's theme is mandatory in the literature program. They rise there serious questions of a moral nature that make the reader think while reading.
Essay topics on "Oblomov"
The list of topics on which you are asked to write an essay is quite extensive, so the most interesting ones will be presented below.
- "Love theme in the work "Oblomov".
- Essay on the topic "Oblomov and Stolz".
- "Historical and philosophical meaning of the novel "Oblomov".
- "Oblomov and Oblomovism."
- "Oblomov's childhood in the novel "Oblomov".
Relations between Oblomov and Stolz
An essay on the topic “Oblomov and Stolz” is both simple and difficult to write. Simple, because these are two main characters with clearly defined characters, with clear and understandable life principles. But their friendship is not as simple as it might seem.
After all, they not only respect and value each other, but they are also opposites, which cannot but affect their attitude towards each other’s lifestyle. If at some point in his life Ilya tries to accept the point of view of his comrade, then Andrei sharply criticizes “Oblomovism” and does not even try to understand why Ilya Ilyich is so attracted to a solitary lifestyle.
But this does not prevent them from remaining close and only friends throughout their lives. After all, only Stoltz Oblomov could tell about his experiences, and he, in turn, is always ready to help his friend.
Discussion about "Oblomovism"
An essay on the topic “Oblomov’s Life” will not be distinguished by any bright events that could happen to the main character, but it will be interesting in how the main character’s life principles changed. A very true and accurate description of the life of Ilya Ilyich was given by his friend Andrei Stolts - “Oblomovism”.
An essay on the theme of Oblomov differs from discussions about other works precisely in that greater emphasis in the novel itself is placed precisely on inner world main character. Of course, the character of other heroes is also told, but Oblomov himself is created in such a way that his lifestyle cannot be of much interest to the reader.
It is much more important to understand why he has such a craving for a solitary and monotonous life. And the reason lies in his childhood, where every day was similar to one another, where his parents did not burden themselves with serious matters or thoughts and were happy.
But if the son had been like them, then he would not have thought about Stolz’s words, he would not have understood that times have changed, that living this way is not entirely correct. But because Oblomov was not educated at home, he was brought up philosophical beginning, which prompted him to various thoughts.
But despite all Stolz’s attempts to take his friend away from that monotonous course of life, Oblomov still returned to his roots. Because the basis of his character was this monotony, unhurriedness, a sense of calm in this measured way of life and actions.
Assessing the Main Character's Personality
In an essay on the topic of Oblomov, it will be quite difficult to give any unambiguous assessment central character. On the one hand, this way of life is wrong in that gradually a person weanes himself from making responsible decisions, becomes lazy, and not purposeful. Gradually, his personal development may stop due to a narrow circle of friends and narrowing interests. After all, self-education requires willpower and discipline, which is lost with such a lifestyle. Therefore, Ilya Ilyich had doubts and a desire to change his lifestyle.
But, on the other hand, the formation of his character was greatly influenced by the environment and environment in which he grew up. And he associated this feeling of calm and stability with such a measured way of life. For him, it remained an ideal, so at the end of the novel, despite all the efforts of Stolz and Olga, he returns to his previous philosophy.
In an essay on the topic of Oblomov, one can also point out that the example of the Oblomovs shows how the old lordly way of life was replaced, that people became more educated, and progress reached housekeeping. Oblomov and Stolz were a reflection of the opposing public opinions that reigned in the country at that time. Therefore, despite the lack of great variety of characters and changes in setting, this novel has become a classic work whose relevance continues to be maintained over time.