The relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is the leading storyline in Goncharov’s novel. The relationship between Oblomov and Stolz The problem of true friendship, the arguments of Oblomov and Stolz

The famous Russian writer I. A. Goncharov published his next novel “Oblomov” in 1859. It was an incredibly difficult period for Russian society, which seemed to be divided into two parts. A minority understood the need and advocated for improving the lives of ordinary people. The majority were landowners, gentlemen and wealthy nobles, who were directly dependent on the peasants who fed them. In the novel, Goncharov invites the reader to compare the image of Oblomov and Stolz - two friends, completely different in temperament and fortitude. This is a story about people who, despite internal contradictions and conflicts, remained true to their ideals, values, and way of life. However, sometimes it is difficult to understand the true reasons for such confidential closeness between the main characters. That is why the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz seems so interesting to readers and critics. Next, we will get to know them better.

Stolz and Oblomov: General characteristics

Oblomov is undoubtedly the main figure, but the writer pays more attention to his friend Stolz. The main characters are contemporaries, yet they turn out to be completely different from each other. Oblomov is a man aged just over 30 years. Goncharov describes his pleasant appearance, but emphasizes the absence of a specific idea. Andrei Stolts is the same age as Ilya Ilyich, he is much thinner, with an even dark complexion, practically without blush. Stolz's green, expressive eyes are also contrasted with the gray and dull gaze of the protagonist. Oblomov himself grew up in a family of Russian nobles who owned more than one hundred serf souls. Andrei was raised in a Russian-German family. Nevertheless, he identified himself with Russian culture and professed Orthodoxy.

Relationship between Oblomov and Stolz

One way or another, the lines connecting the destinies of the characters in the novel "Oblomov" are present. The author needed to show how friendship arises between people of polar views and temperament types.

The relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is largely predetermined by the conditions in which they were brought up and lived in their youth. Both men grew up together in a boarding house near Oblomovka. Stolz's father served there as a manager. In that village of Verkhleve, everything was imbued with the atmosphere of “Oblomovism”, unhurriedness, passivity, laziness, and simplicity of morals. But Andrei Ivanovich Stolz was well educated, read Wieland, learned verses from the Bible, and recounted illiterate reports of peasants and factory workers. In addition, he read Krylov’s fables and discussed sacred history with his mother. The boy Ilya sat at home under the soft wing of parental care, while Stolz spent a lot of time on the street, communicating with the neighboring children. Their personalities were shaped differently. Oblomov was the ward of nannies and caring relatives, while Andrei did not stop doing physical and mental labor.

The secret of friendship

The relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is surprising and even paradoxical. There are a huge number of differences between the two characters, but, undoubtedly, there are features that unite them. First of all, Oblomov and Stolz are connected by a strong and sincere friendship, but they are similar in their so-called “life dream”. Only Ilya Ilyich dozes at home, on the sofa, and Stolz falls asleep in the same way in his eventful life. Both of them do not see the truth. Both are unable to give up their own lifestyle. Each of them is unusually attached to their habits, believing that this particular behavior is the only correct and reasonable one.

It remains to answer the main question: “Which hero does Russia need: Oblomov or Stolz?” Of course, such active and progressive individuals as the latter will remain in our country forever, will be its driving force, and will feed it with their intellectual and spiritual energy. But we must admit that even without the Oblomovs, Russia will cease to be the same as our compatriots knew it for many centuries. Oblomov needs to be educated, patiently and unobtrusively awakened, so that he, too, can benefit his homeland.

"FRIENDSHIP AND ENEMITY"

Official comment:

The direction focuses on reasoning about the value of human friendship, about ways to achieve mutual understanding between individuals, their communities and even entire nations, as well as about the origins and consequences of hostility between them. The content of many literary works is associated with the warmth of human relationships or the hostility of people, with the development of friendship into enmity or vice versa, with the image of a person who is capable or incapable of valuing friendship, who knows how to overcome conflicts or who sows enmity.

The proposed direction can be considered in different aspects: - friendship between people, the meaning and value of friendly relations in human life; - friendship and enmity between human communities and generations; - friendship or enmity between peoples and the consequences of hostile relations; - friendship between man and animal, etc. The very concept of “friendship” is one of the fundamental ones in the human worldview and in the system of human value guidelines. This is confirmed by the abundance of proverbs and sayings dedicated to friendship, aphorisms and catchphrases. When starting to think about the topic proposed in this direction, students can build their reasoning based on statements and definitions known to them. Here are just a few of them:

Proverbs : Don’t have a hundred rubles, but have a hundred friends. An old friend is better than two new ones. If you don’t have a friend, look for him, but if you find him, take care of him. Friend is known in trouble. To know a friend is to eat a pound of salt together. The enemy agrees, and the friend argues. Make new friends, but don’t lose old ones. Good brotherhood is dearer than wealth. In true friendship, it’s like this: get lost yourself, and help your friend out of trouble. Friendship is strong not through flattery, but through truth and honor.

It's easier to lose a friend than to find one. The kind of friendship you make, the kind of life you will lead. A man without friends is like a bird without wings.

Aphorisms and sayings of famous people:

Only a true friend can tolerate his friend's weaknesses. W. Shakespeare Everything will pass - and the seed of hope will not sprout, Everything that you have accumulated will be lost for a penny. If you don’t share it with a friend on time, all your property will go to the enemy. Omar Khayyam

Fulfilling the duties of friendship is somewhat more difficult than admiring it. Lessing

Friendship should be a durable thing, capable of surviving all changes in temperature and all the shocks of that bumpy road along which efficient and decent people make their life journey. A.I. Herzen

People on earth should be friends... I don’t think it’s possible to make all people love each other, but I would like to destroy hatred between people. Isaac Asimov

Friendship is like a treasury: you cannot get out of it more than you put into it. Osip Mandelstam

Help students think throughvocabulary work .

So, in the dictionary of S.I. Ozhegov gives the following interpretation of the words “friendship” and “enmity”:

FEUD – relationships and actions imbued with hostility, hatred (Irreconcilable enmity; nourish enmity).

FRIENDSHIP – close relationships based on mutual trust, affection, common interests (long-standing friendship; friendship of peoples). In the antonym dictionary, these words are presented as an antonymic pair. Synonym dictionaries present the following synonym series:Synonyms of FRIENDSHIP - friendship, friendliness, goodwill, harmony, peace, harmony, familiarity, short acquaintance, twinning, (good) affection, amikoshonship, love, fraternization, unity,

communication; friendship is sincere, hypocritical, doglike, close. Do something out of friendship. To be in friendship, to lead friendships, to break friendships, to bring friendships together.Synonyms of HATE - antagonism, malice, ill will, dislike, hatred, hostility, hostility, discord, unfriendliness, discord. To have a grudge against someone. Feed enmity.

List of literature in the direction of “Friendship and Enmity”

A. S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”

M. Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”

L. N. Tolstoy “War and Peace”

I. S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”

I. A Goncharov “Oblomov”

G. N. Troepolsky “White Bim Black Ear”

A. S. Pushkin “The Captain's Daughter”

A. P. Chekhov “Kashtanka”

W. Shakespeare "Romeo and Juliet"

Materials for literary arguments.

A. S. Pushkin novel “Eugene Onegin”

Alexander Sergeevich presents his attitude to the partnership to the reader through the images of the heroes of the novel"Eugene Onegin" . Two “friends”, Onegin and Lensky, in their communication show us that a friend is a very ambiguous and contradictory concept. In the end, we even begin to doubt whether Evgeniy and Vladimir are friends or enemies. In the dialogues of the heroes, the presence of the author is felt; he is not a simple silent observer, he is a direct participant in the events, we catch his attitude towards friendship in the conversations of the heroes. The friendship between Onegin and Lensky happened, in the words of Pushkin himself, “there’s nothing to be done.” Indeed, they were completely opposite in character, with different life experiences, with different aspirations.

They were united by their situation in the rural wilderness. Both of them were burdened by the imposed communication from their neighbors, both were quite smart (in relation to Lensky, it would be more correct to say that he was educated). Both heroes are young, so they find common topics for conversation. Friends reflect on Rousseau’s “social contract,” on science, on moral problems, that is, on everything that occupied the minds of progressive people of that time. But Pushkin emphasizes the complex relationship between the hero and the society that formed him. A random quarrel (Onegin aroused jealousy in Lenskoye at the Larins' party) is only a pretext for a duel. The reason for Lensky's death is much deeper: Lensky, with his naive, romantic view of the world, cannot withstand a collision with life. Onegin, in turn, is unable to resist generally accepted morality, which says that it is shameful to refuse a duel. Can such a relationship be called a true friendship?Regardless of beliefs, every person strives to communicate with others like themselves. Only a mentally abnormal person can fundamentally flee not from any particular social group, but from people in general. A holy hermit may be secluded, but he communicates with the whole world, praying for him. Onegin's solitude was painful for him, and he was glad that there was at least one person with whom he did not mind communicating. Moreover, such communication was necessary for Vladimir Lensky. Onegin was an ideal listener. He was mostly silent, without interrupting the poet, and if he objected, it was justified, and he was interested in the subject of the conversation. Lensky was in love, and like anyone in love, he needed a person to whom he could pour out his love, especially if poetry was written at the same time, they had to be read to someone. Thus, it is clear that in other conditions Onegin and Lensky would hardly have communicated so closely, but that’s what makes human relationships special, is that different situations bring people together and separate them, sometimes in a completely paradoxical way. The difference between Lensky and Onegin was not as fundamental as their difference with the neighboring landowners, who considered Lensky half-Russian, and Onegin a dangerous eccentric and pharmacist. Speaking extremely generally, Onegin and Lensky were opposites within the same system, and their neighbors generally went beyond the system. That is why Vladimir and Evgeniy instinctively found each other and teamed up. The fact that their friendship was superficial and largely formal is proven by their duel. What kind of friend would shoot with a friend, and without any explanation?! In reality, there was very little that connected them, and it was quite easy to break this little.

True friendship is always based on common hobbies and interests, mutual understanding, trust and sympathy. It is important that true friendship is the absence of any competition between people. But precisely such a relationship did not exist between Onegin and Lensky.
Of course, if there had not been a duel that ended in Lensky’s death, there would have been no tragedy and, as a consequence, the continuation of the novel. After all, according to some researchers (and I agree with them), it was the duel that became a turning point in Onegin’s fate, which forced him to look at life differently and rethink a lot.
But the main reason, in my opinion, why the friendship of Onegin and Lensky led to such a tragic outcome is that the relationship between them was not real from the very beginning.

M. Yu. Lermontov novel “Hero of Our Time”

The theme of friendship also appears in the novel."Hero of our time" . Is friendship possible in Pechorin’s life, and how does the main character understand it?

“Friendship, friendship,” we read from V. Dahl in the “Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language,” “mutual affection of two or more people, their close connection; in a good sense, a disinterested, lasting affection based on love and respect...” We see a similar affection in the ingenuous staff captain - the first who tells us about Pechorin. Despite the fact that Maxim Maksimych considers him a strange person and clearly does not approve of the way Grigory acts with Bela, he is attached to Pechorin and considers him his friend: “We were friends,” “we were bosom friends.” Maxim Maksimych’s ideas are not justified. Yes, Pechorin does not hide his character from the captain and does not promise friendship: “Am I a fool or a villain, I don’t know; ... in me the soul is spoiled by light, the imagination is restless, the heart is insatiable; “I can’t get enough of it: I get used to sadness just as easily as to pleasure, and my life becomes emptier day by day.” During the meeting, Pechorin is so cold, Maxim Maksimych is so offended and upset, for the sake of the meeting he broke the rules for the first time: “Am I really not the same?.. What should I do? to each his own way...”

Pechorin’s meeting with Grushnitsky will take place in a completely different way: “We met as old friends,” but from the first lines of the description it is clear that under the friendly relations there are completely different ones hidden. And indeed, Grushnitsky is a man whose main pleasure is to “produce an effect” and who “importantly drapes himself in extraordinary feelings” and plays the disappointed. Pechorin is disappointment itself, this is his illness, and he cannot help but feel the artificiality of the cadet and for this reason not accept him: “I understood him, and he doesn’t love me for it.”

Perhaps the theme of friendship in “A Hero of Our Time” is most clearly revealed in the relationship with Werner. Perhaps Pechorin could develop a friendship with the doctor, they are so similar in many ways. From the moment Werner and Pechorin “distinguished each other in the crowd,” their relationship reminded others so much of it. “Werner is a wonderful man,” the main character knows the doctor’s strengths and weaknesses perfectly. What brought the two together? “We are quite indifferent to everything except ourselves,” “we soon understood each other and became friends.” But are they capable of friendship? Grigory denies true friendships; friendship does not exist in Pechorin’s life, since it requires self-forgetfulness, openness, trust - everything that the main character of the novel does not have. He says that “of two friends, one is always the slave of the other,” and, quite likely, this is not a conviction, but a desire to hide the inability to let anyone into his heart.

L. N. Tolstoy novel “War and Peace”

(Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov)

The first scenes of the novel paint us a very clear picture, at first glance. So, Prince Andrei Bolkonsky is certainly a welcome guest in secular society. He is handsome, smart, sophisticated, his manners are impeccable, he is politely cold. An ideal combination for a society that, fortunately, does not have the slightest influence on him.

Still in the same “picture”, Pierre who appears seems to be an unsuccessful caricature of a socialite. He is kind, sincere and selfless - these, without a doubt, wonderful qualities already make him a black sheep, because where there is a place for self-interest, big money and hypocrisy, there is no place for spiritual openness. In addition, Pierre is absent-minded and not very attractive in appearance. Trying at first to integrate into this society, to become a part of it, Bezukhov does not demonstrate the best manners, which completely discourages the sympathy of the majority of the elite.

But behind these images of such different people lies much more than what the “light” sees in them.

They are both alien to the society in which they find themselves. Both of them are superior to him in their thoughts and moral values, only Pierre takes time to understand this. Andrei is confident in his own, special purpose, and an empty, unchanging life is not for him. He tries to convince Pierre, who is the only one he respects in that environment due to the contrast with the empty elite, to stay away from this life. But Pierre is still convinced of this on his own, from his own experience. It is difficult for him, so simple and unpretentious, to resist temptation.

Despite his simplicity, Pierre is essentially very wise, and this quality is one of the things that makes him a close friend of Bolkonsky. Their conversations, in which they share everything that they keep to themselves the rest of the time, have an important influence on the course of thought of both. And even despite the fact that their positions in some cases are strikingly different, each recognizes the other’s opinion as having the right to exist.

Even though each of them experiences many ups and even more downs, both Andrei and Pierre do not become bitter through their disappointments in life, but continue to believe in goodness and seek justice. Having been burned by his relationship with Helen, Pierre, nevertheless, does not look for those to blame and, what is striking to the core, sincerely, with all his might and to the detriment of his own feelings, rejoices at the appearance of Andrei’s feelings for Natasha. And then, when it all ends, he in no way tries his luck, but only provides disinterested support to Natasha and with all his heart wants Andrei to forgive her. It seems that he suffers no less than Andrei himself, but his life is meaningless and gray for him.

The friendship of Andrei and Pierre can be considered true, beautiful and immortal, because the soil on which it stood was the most worthy and noble. There was not an iota of self-seeking in this friendship, and neither money nor influence were a guideline for any of them, either in their relationships or in the lives of each individual. This is what should unite people if they live in a society where all feelings can be bought and sold so cold-bloodedly.

Fortunately, in Tolstoy’s novel these heroes found each other, thereby finding salvation from moral loneliness and finding worthy soil for the development of morality and real ideas that should not be lost at least by a minority of people.

Pierre considered Bolkonsky “a model of all perfections precisely because Prince Andrei united to the highest degree all those qualities that Pierre did not have and which can be most closely expressed by the concept of willpower.” The friendship of Bolkonsky and Bezukhov has been tested. Pierre was in love with Natasha Rostova at first sight. And Bolkonsky too. When Andrei proposed to Rostova, Pierre did not reveal his feelings. He was sincerely happy about his friend's happiness. Could L.N. Tolstoy allow his favorite hero to be dishonest? Pierre showed nobility in his relations with Andrei Bolkonsky. His awareness of the relationship between Rostova and Kuragin did not allow him to betray his friend. He didn’t laugh at Natasha, much less Andrei. Although he could easily destroy their happiness. However, devotion to friendship and honesty in his heart did not allow Pierre to become a scoundrel.

I. S. Turgenev novel “Fathers and Sons”

In the novel"Fathers and Sons" , published in 1862,I.S. Turgenev revealed the image of a new hero of Russian life. Bazarov is a nihilist, revolutionary democrat. This is a strong personality capable of influencing other people. Bazarov is self-confident, endowed with a natural mind, and educated. In the novel, he is shown accompanied by a younger, naive and simple-minded friend - Arkady Kirsanov. Analysis of the relationship between the two heroes allows us to understand their characters, the strength of their beliefs and the strength of their friendship.

At the very beginning of the novel, Bazarov is not so alone, he has an ally - his friend Arkady Kirsanov. In the first chapters of the novel, Arkady appears as a faithful follower of Bazarov, a student who listens to his teacher with delight and rapture and shares his views on life. Kirsanov Jr. is convinced of Bazarov’s special purpose. Arkady undoubtedly values ​​his friendship with Bazarov very much and is proud of him. This is evidenced by his enthusiastic intonations with which he tells his father Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov about his comrade. Arkady warmly supports Evgeny in his dispute with Pavel Petrovich. But this is only the beginning. As the action progresses, Arkady gradually cools down to the “raznochinsky views” that he initially adheres to. Why is this happening? The answer to this question is simple, and it was given by the author himself: Turgenev wrote that Arkady basically “sybaritized” under the influence of a nature much stronger than himself - under the influence of Bazarov. But the difference between the friends was not slow to reveal itself: Bazarov is constantly busy with business, while Arkady does nothing, only sometimes, to unwind, he helps his father. Bazarov is a man of action, as can be seen immediately from his red bare hand. He tries to do his work in any environment, in any home. His path is natural sciences, studying nature and testing theoretical discoveries in practice. Bazarov here keeps up with the times, since passion for science is a typical feature of the cultural life of Russia in the 1860s. Arkady is the absolute opposite. The young man is not truly captivated by anything. All he strives for is comfort and peace, which runs counter to Bazarov’s life philosophy - not to sit idly by, to work, to move.

And the characters of those who for the time being call themselves friends are completely opposite: Arkady is gentle and kind, Evgeny is proud and proud.

It is no coincidence that they say that truth is born in disputes. Indeed, in a novel that is replete with scenes of ideological disputes, the positions of the heroes are sooner or later revealed in full. And then, when the attitude of the characters to various issues of the life of society, the life of the human soul becomes clear, then the polarity of the characters’ characters is revealed. Then the question arises about the authenticity of the friendship of young people. After all, friendship implies, first of all, mutual understanding, and in the case of Bazarov and Arkady it turns out that mutual understanding is precisely what they lack. As the novel progresses, it turns out that Bazarov ridicules what is so dear to Arkady: the open manifestation of warm feelings for family and loved ones, admiration for the beauty of nature, the opportunity to be sad and happy to the sounds of music, to enjoy poetic lines...

Arkady, having discovered for himself that his life beliefs are not similar to Bazarov’s beliefs, gradually begins to learn to express his opinion, which is opposite to the judgments of the nihilist. One day, an argument between friends almost led to a fight. And in the scene when Bazarov, as if jokingly, spreads out “his long and stiff fingers” to close them on Arkady’s neck, and at the same time grins “sinisterly,” there is a share of the nihilist’s true attitude towards the “chick.” After all, it was precisely Bazarov who considered Arkady a “chick,” and at the same time always treated him patronizingly. Bazarov understands that Kirsanov Jr. cannot become his associate: “You are a gentle soul, a weakling,” he says to Arkady. And he is right - time very quickly puts everything in its place, and Arkady turns out to belong to the old generation, the generation of “fathers”. Pisarev very accurately assesses the reasons for the disagreements between Arkady and Bazarov: “Bazarov’s attitude towards his comrade casts a bright streak of light on his character; Bazarov has no friend, because he has not yet met a person who would not give in to him. Bazarov’s personality closes in on itself, because outside of it and around it there are almost no elements related to it.” Arkady would never have been able to integrate with the ideas of the new century, so his break with Bazarov is obvious.

Bazarov is the leader in this pair. He treats Arkady condescendingly and patronizingly. Kirsanov called his friend a mentor; he “respected his teacher” and considered Bazarov “one of the most wonderful people.” Arkady's still unformed nature is entirely under the influence of Bazarov, who, although he is frank with him, always keeps him in a secondary role. Arkady does not notice and does not understand this. He tells Odintsova about his friend “in such detail and with such delight that Odintsova turned to him and looked attentively.”In disputes with Bazarov, Arkady “usually remained defeated, although he spoke more than his comrade.” However, this does not bother him at all, since he sees in Bazarov a man for whom “a great future awaits.”

I. A. Goncharov “Oblomov”

In the novel"Oblomov" I.A. Goncharov created images of two people, each of whom is in many ways a typical representative of a certain circle of people, an exponent of ideas that were close to the corresponding strata of their contemporary society. Andrei Stolts and Ilya Oblomov, at first glance, seem to have nothing in common, except for memories of childhood games. And yet, no matter how these characters in Goncharov’s novel are assessed, it is impossible to deny that they are connected by sincere, selfless friendship. What's the matter?

Indeed, Oblomov and Stolz are strikingly different from each other in their lifestyles. In Stolz’s view, the essence of being lies in movement: “Labor is the image, content, element and goal of life, at least mine.” Oblomov, having not yet started any business, is already dreaming of peace, which he already has in abundance: “...Then, in honorable inactivity, enjoy a well-deserved rest...”.

For some time, Oblomov and Stolz were brought up together - in a school run by Andrei's father. But they came to this school, one might say, from different worlds: the undisturbed, once and for all established order of life in Oblomovka, similar to a long afternoon nap, and the active labor education of a German burgher, interspersed with lessons from a mother who tried her best to instill my son has a love and interest in art.

It is also important to note how Oblomov and Stolz approach life in general. According to Oblomov’s own feeling, his existence is becoming more and more like a fruitless wandering in the forest thicket: not a path, not a ray of sun... “It’s as if someone stole and buried in his own soul the treasures brought to him as a gift by peace and life.” This is one of Oblomov’s main miscalculations - he subconsciously seeks to place responsibility, his failures, his inactivity on someone else: on Zakhar, for example, or on fate. And Stolz “attributed the cause of all suffering to himself, and did not hang it, like a caftan, on someone else’s nail,” therefore “he enjoyed joy, like a flower plucked along the way, until it withered in his hands, never finishing the cup to that drop of bitterness which lies at the end of all pleasure." However, all of the above does not yet shed light on the foundations of strong friendship between people so different in their habits and aspirations. Apparently, their sincere, warm attitude towards each other is rooted in the fact that both Stolz and Oblomov are inherently worthy people, endowed with many high spiritual qualities. They need each other because they complement each other so well, they find in each other something that is not in themselves.

The friendship between Oblomov and Stolz began during their school days. At the time of their acquaintance, the characters were similar in character and had common hobbies. Little Ilya is depicted as a curious child who was interested in many things. He wanted to explore the world around him and learn as much new things as possible; even as a young man, he was still preparing for the fact that his life would “take on other, broader dimensions,” he was full of various aspirations and hopes, preparing for an important role in society. However, due to the “hothouse”, “Oblomov” upbringing and the influence of relatives, the hero remains in place, continuing only to hope and plan, never taking action. All of Oblomov’s activity goes into the world of dreams and daydreams, which he himself invents and lives in.

Little Andrei Stolts was the same curious child as Ilya, but he was not limited in his knowledge of the world and was allowed to leave home even for a few days. And if Oblomov’s upbringing killed the active, active principle, then the formation of Stolz’s personality was influenced by the death of his mother, who dearly loved her son. The strict, unemotional father could not give his son all the love and warmth that he lost after the loss of his mother. Apparently, it was this event, coupled with the need, by order of his father, to leave for another city and build a career on his own, that made a strong impression on young Andrei Ivanovich. Mature Stolz is a person who finds it very difficult to understand his feelings; moreover, he does not understand love, since he cannot grasp it with a rational mind. That is why many researchers compare Andrei Ivanovich with an insensitive mechanism, which is fundamentally wrong - in fact, Stolz is no less sincere and kind person than Oblomov (remember how often and absolutely disinterestedly he helps a friend), but all his sensuality is hidden deeply inside his soul, incomprehensible and inaccessible even to the hero himself.

The relationship between Stolz and Oblomov begins as a friendship between two very similar personalities in nature and character, but their different upbringings make them completely different and even opposing characters, who, nevertheless, continue to see in each other that important and close thing that brought them together in school years.

At every opportunity, Stolz tries to “stir up”, activate Oblomov, force him to act “now or never”, while Ilya Ilyich gradually, unconsciously for both heroes, instills in his friend the very “Oblomov” values ​​that Andrei Ivanovich was so afraid of and to which In the end, I came to a calm, measured, monotonous family life.

The theme of friendship in the novel “Oblomov” is revealed through the example of the relationship between two opposing heroes. However, the differences between Oblomov and Stolz are only external, since both of them are individuals who are in constant search of their own happiness, but have never been able to fully open up and realize their full potential. The images of the heroes are tragic, since neither the constantly striving forward, active Stolz, nor the passive Oblomov, living in illusions, find harmony between the two main principles - rational and sensual, which leads to the death of Ilya Ilyich and the internal confusion and even greater confusion of Stolz.

A. Saint-Exupery “The Little Prince”

A speaks about friendship.Saint-Exupery right on the first page of your fairy tale"A little prince" – in dedication. In the author’s system of values, the theme of friendship occupies one of the main places. Only friendship can melt the ice of loneliness and alienation, since it is based on mutual understanding, mutual trust and mutual assistance. On earth, the Little Prince learns the real truth, which the Fox revealed to him: people can be not only indifferent and alienated, but also necessary to each other, and someone for someone can be the only one in the whole world, and a person’s life “will be illuminated as if by the sun.” “If something reminds you of a friend, that will also be happiness.

The Little Prince once had a tiny sprout, unlike other flowers. Over time, a bud grew on it, which did not open for a long time. When all the petals opened, the baby saw with admiration a real beauty. She turned out to have a difficult character: the guest was a subtle and proud person. The boy, who took everything the beauty said to heart, felt unhappy and decided to run away and go on a journey.

Telling the story about the flower, the Kid already understood that “it was necessary to judge not by words, but by deeds,” - after all, the beauty filled the planet with fragrance, but he did not know how to enjoy this and “did not know how to love.”

Before the trip, the boy carefully cleaned his planet. When he said goodbye to his beautiful guest, she suddenly asked for forgiveness, wished him happiness and admitted that she loved the Little Prince.

The seventh planet on which the Little Prince found himself was Earth, and it was huge.

At first, the baby saw no one on the planet except the snake. From her he learned that not only in the desert, but also among people it can also be lonely. The snake promised to help him on the day when the boy became sad about his home.

At that moment the Fox appeared. The little prince was going to make friends, but it turned out that the animal had to be tamed first. Then “we will need each other... My life will be illuminated as if by the sun,” said the Fox.

The fox taught the baby that “you can only learn those things that you tame,” and “to tame, you need to be patient.” He revealed an important secret to the boy: “Only the heart is vigilant. You can’t see the main thing with your eyes” and asked to remember the law: “you are forever responsible for everyone you have tamed.” The little prince understood: the beautiful rose is more valuable than anything, he gave her all his time and energy, and he is responsible for the rose - after all, he tamed it.

Another important symbol to which almost the entire work is addressed is the rose.
A rose is a symbol of love, beauty, and femininity. The little prince did not immediately discern the true inner essence of beauty. But after a conversation with the Fox, the truth was revealed to him - beauty only becomes beautiful when it is filled with meaning and content.

The meaning of human life is to comprehend, to get as close as possible to the essence. The soul of the author and the little prince is not shackled by the ice of indifference and deadness. Therefore, a true vision of the world is revealed to them: they learn the value of true friendship, love and beauty. This is the theme of “vigilance” of the heart, the ability to “see” with the heart, to understand without words.

The little prince does not immediately comprehend this wisdom. He leaves his own planet, not knowing that what he will look for on different planets will be so close - on his home planet.
People must take care of the purity and beauty of their planet, together protect and decorate it, and prevent all living things from perishing. So, gradually, unobtrusively, another important theme arises in the fairy tale - environmental, which is very relevant for our time. It seems that the author of the fairy tale “foresaw” future environmental disasters and warned about caring for our native and beloved planet. Saint-Exupéry acutely felt how small and fragile our planet is. The Little Prince's journey from star to star brings us closer to today's vision of cosmic distances, where the Earth, due to the carelessness of people, can disappear almost unnoticed. Therefore, the fairy tale has not lost its relevance to this day; That’s why its genre is philosophical, because it is addressed to all people, it raises eternal problems.
And the Fox reveals one more secret to the baby: “Only the heart is vigilant. You can’t see the most important thing with your eyes... Your Rose is so dear to you because you gave her your whole soul... People have forgotten this truth, but don’t forget: you are forever responsible for everyone you have tamed.” To tame means to bind oneself to another creature with tenderness, love, and a sense of responsibility. To tame means to destroy facelessness and indifference towards all living things. To tame means to make the world significant and generous, because everything in it reminds of a beloved creature. The narrator comprehends this truth, and the stars come to life for him, and he hears the ringing of silver bells in the sky, reminiscent of the laughter of the Little Prince. The theme of “expansion of the soul” through love runs through the entire tale.
Together with the little hero, we rediscover for ourselves the main thing in life that was hidden, buried by all sorts of husk, but which constitutes the only value for a person. The little prince learns what the bonds of friendship are.
Saint-Exupery also speaks about friendship on the first page of the story. In the author's system of values, the theme of friendship occupies one of the main places. Only friendship can melt the ice of loneliness and alienation, since it is based on mutual understanding, mutual trust and mutual assistance.

G.N. Troepolsky "White Bim Black Ear"

The book tells about the dog Bim, who was a very loyal and loving friend to his owner while they were together. But one day Ivan Ivanovich (that was the name of Bim’s owner) became seriously ill - a fragment left over from the war crawled into his heart, and the owner was taken to Moscow for treatment. And Bim was left alone. How much effort the unfortunate dog spent searching for his friend, how many shocks, betrayals and insults he had to endure! In the end, he ended up with dog catchers and was locked in an iron van. The next day the owner arrived, but found him already dead in that van, which became a posthumous prison for Bim.

The theme of the story is love for all living things, respect for our smaller brothers, admiration for animals. At the center of all events is the Gordon Setter dog Bim, the main character of the story. Throughout the book, the author admires the dog's intelligence, loyalty and beauty. Indeed, man has never had a better friend, and “White Bim Black Ear” proves this once again.

As the inscription at the beginning of the book says, it is dedicated to Alexander Trifonovich Tvardovsky.

The author reveals to the reader the inner world of a dog with all its experiences, joys, questions and misfortunes, and again and again emphasizes the superiority of these animals: “And on the fallen yellow grass stood a dog - one of the best creations of nature and patient man.” Again, he points out that without these true friends, our life would be much more boring and aimless: “... a split personality in long-term loneliness is to some extent inevitable. For centuries, a dog saved a person from this.”

The events of the story take place in the Tambov region - in the city and in the village. The year of events is not indicated, but, most likely, the post-war times are described.

The story combines simple, everyday language - devils, cattle, fool, fool; as well as professional hunting words - shuttle, cartridge belt, gonchak, arapnik, setter.

In my opinion, the most striking and memorable moment in the book is the description of the hunt of Ivan Ivanovich and Bim. Probably, the author was also a hunter, otherwise who else but a person with such passion could describe all the events of the hunt so accurately.

First of all, Troepolsky admires the pointer dog and its stance on the bird. Indeed, this is an amazing sight! A previously unprepossessing dog suddenly becomes so elegant, well-coordinated and incomparably beautiful, while maintaining excellent working qualities, which is very important for pointing dogs - so valuable in hunting! The author writes about Bim’s first stance as follows: “And Bim, without putting his right front paw on the ground, froze in place, froze as if he had turned to stone. It was a statue of a dog, as if created by a skilled sculptor! The first awakening of the hunting passion... against the backdrop of the sunset, it is striking in its extraordinary beauty, which not many people can understand.”

Over and over again, throughout the entire story, Bim himself, the most important and memorable character, surprises and makes you fall in love with him. Of course, it is difficult for a person who has never had a dog to understand and imagine the facial expressions and gestures of a dog, a dog’s language, the expression of intelligent, almost human eyes, but the author easily and clearly describes the movements and actions of the dog, bringing Bim to life in front of the reader and making him almost real being.

“White Bim Black Ear” makes you think about a lot. For example, about the role of a dog in our life. Why was it given to man? So that a person has a devoted friend, ready to serve faithfully until the end of his days, going through all the troubles and misfortunes. Why are people sometimes so cruel to these beautiful animals? Probably, they just don’t understand that a dog is only an outwardly animal, but inside it lives a human soul, and that this creature is very, very necessary for a person, that without it our lives will change a lot. We must take care of them, love them and not betray them, because a dog would never do that - we need to learn something from them.

This story made an indelible impression on me. She proved to me once again that we humans will never find a better friend than a dog. The author showed us this using the example of Bim, the smartest creature, emphasizing that behind the image of Bim all dogs are hidden, regardless of breed, age and level of education, loving and devoted friends of humanity.

W. Shakespeare's play "Romeo and Juliet"

The senseless long-term feud of the Montague and Capulet families prevents the love of Romeo and Juliet. The lovers belong to different clans, they cannot be together. But love is stronger than all obstacles, and only it can put an end to the feud between two influential families:
The children of the leaders love each other,
But fate plays tricks on them,
And their death at the grave doors
Puts an end to irreconcilable strife.
Because of the endless enmity of these clans, not only lovers suffer, but also other people close to them. So, Tybalt, Juliet's cousin, kills Mercutio in a fight. And then Romeo does not hold back and kills Tybalt, avenging his friend.
Each character in the play is interesting in their own way, but I probably liked Juliet the most. She is only 14 years old, but her feelings for Romeo are not childish at all. For the sake of her lover, she takes decisive steps and contradicts her parents, which at that time was a terrible crime. When the girl realizes that the wedding with Paris is inevitable, she is ready to commit suicide. After all, before this she had already secretly married Romeo and cannot betray her vow of eternal love. It is not surprising that she is ready to drink the potion and “freeze” for forty-two hours, pretending to be dead.
What struck me most about the play was the ending. Due to a simple coincidence of events, Romeo did not find out that his beloved was alive, and committed suicide out of grief at her grave. Juliet also could not live without her husband.
I was struck by how fragile human happiness is, how strong the passion of two completely young people can be. An absurd accident ruined the lives of Romeo and Juliet. But their endless love for each other put an end to the long-term feud between the Montagues and the Capulets. The heads of these families realized that because of their stupid disagreements, their children died, and it was time to stop.
I believe that you should never hinder love, this is the greatest sin. The heroes loved each other too much, but the world around them was not yet ready for love, kindness, and harmony. So they leave.
You can learn kindness, love, dedication, selflessness, and purity from Romeo and Juliet. This work left an indelible mark on my soul. I think I will read Shakespeare's play again and again.

At the children's grave, two warring clans forget their grievances. The long-awaited peace is coming to Verona, albeit won at such a terrible price. We can say that the love of young heroes brings prosperity to many people and their homeland.

Therefore, it seems to me that Shakespeare’s tragedy “Romeo and Juliet” is characterized by vital truthfulness and high intensity of passions

Oblomov and Stolz: similarities and differences

Introduction

I.A. Goncharov in the novel “Oblomov” wanted to contrast two cultures: Russian and Western. The entire work is based on the technique of antithesis. As this antithesis, the author presents two characters: Oblomov and Stolz. In Russian literature there are many works constructed in this way, for example “Eugene Onegin”, “Hero of Our Time” and others. There are also similar examples in foreign literature.

Most of all, Miguel de Cervantes's novel Don Quixote has something in common with Oblomov. It describes the same case of contradiction between reality and a person’s idea of ​​an ideal life, which he extends to the outside world. Hidalgo, like Ilya Ilyich, is completely immersed in dreams. Oblomov is surrounded by antipodes who do not understand him, with material ideas about the world. True, the outcome of these two stories is diametrically opposite: before Alonso’s death, insight comes, he realizes that he was mistaken in his dreams, and Oblomov remains Oblomov. This outcome, obviously, lies the difference between Russian and Western mentality.

Thanks to the technique of antithesis, you can gain a deeper understanding of the personalities of the heroes: after all, everything is learned by comparison. If we remove Stolz from the novel, we will not be able to understand Ilya Ilyich. Goncharov shows the shortcomings and advantages of the characters. At the same time, the reader can look at himself from the outside (at his inner world) in order to avoid the mistakes of the heroes.

Oblomov is the image of a man with a Russian soul. Stolz is the image of a man of a new era. There are always both in Russia. I don’t understand where they come from... Apparently this constant confrontation is what makes our country different from others in its social structure. I still can’t decide who I sympathize with more - Oblomov or Stolz.

Main part

Oblomov and Stolz are the main and practically the only characters of the novel. The author conveys the main ideas to the reader through their interaction or their interaction with other characters. Olga Ilyinskaya serves as a similar link between them in the novel (it is as if she is not an independent character, but exists only in their system).

In the life of every person, childhood is of great importance. During this period, a person’s personality has not yet been formed. He is ready to absorb the world around him like a “sponge”. Education occurs in childhood. How a person is raised determines what he will be like in adulthood. Likewise, in Goncharov’s novel, a central role is played by the description of childhood and how the future antipodes Oblomov and Stolz were brought up. After all, without knowing where the roots of these individuals come from, it would be impossible to understand where the differences in their lives come from. The author gives a description of his childhood in the chapter “Oblomov’s Dream,” where Ilya remembers his native village of Oblomovka. After reading this chapter, you can understand where Oblomov’s laziness and immobility came from.

Oblomov and Stolz were brought up completely differently. Ilyusha's upbringing was lordly. Many relatives and guests lived in his parents' house. They all caressed and praised little Ilyusha (“This entire staff and retinue of the Oblomov house picked up Ilya Ilyich and began showering him with affection and praise”). He was fed a lot and exquisitely (“After that, they began feeding him buns, crackers, and cream”). In general, the main concern in Oblomovka was food. For Stolz it’s the other way around. From an early age, Andrei’s father (German) fostered independence in him. He was dry towards his son. Strictness and focus are the main features that the parents put into Stolz’s upbringing.

It is worth looking at the scenes of Oblomov and Stolz leaving their native villages. Everyone sees Oblomov off with tears, they don’t want to let him go - you can feel the atmosphere of love for the baby. And when Stolz leaves, his father gives only a couple of instructions about money. They don’t even have anything to say to each other at the moment of farewell... “Well? - said the father. Well! - said the son. All? - asked the father. All! - answered the son.”

Oblomov and Stolz had common character traits, because Ilyusha and Andrei met in childhood and, while communicating, influenced each other.

Verkhlevo and Oblomovka are two completely different environments. Oblomovka is an island of paradise on Earth, where nothing happens, everything flows quietly and calmly. In Verkhlevo, a German is in power - Andrei’s father. He arranges the German order. Friends lack communication so that they can somehow influence each other. As they grow up, they begin to move away. The fact is revealed that the property status of Oblomov and Stolz is different. Oblomov is a real master of noble blood, the owner of three hundred souls. Ilya could do nothing at all, while his vassals would provide for him. For Stolz it’s different: he was a Russian nobleman only through his mother, so he had to maintain his material well-being himself.

In their mature years, Oblomov and Stolz became completely different. It was already difficult for them to communicate. Stolz began somewhere to make fun of and be sarcastic about Ilya’s reasoning, detached from reality. Judging by this, the aphorism “plus and minus attract” is incorrect. Eventually, differences in the outlook on life and characters of Ilya and Andrei began to tear apart their friendship.

Since Oblomov and Stolz have friendly relations, the question arises: which of them is more interested in this relationship? In my opinion, Stolz is more interested in Oblomov, because Ilya does not need anything that is in Andrei’s character. He will live in complete peace just like that. Stolz is drawn to Oblomov because he feels in him a soul that he himself dreams of possessing all his life. It turns out that Ilya is more sincere in his friendship.

Conclusion

The idea of ​​friendship and its role in a person’s life runs like a red thread through the novel. In friendship, a person can show his true essence. Friendship has many forms: the “brotherhood” praised by Pushkin, selfish friendship, friendship for any reason. In essence, apart from sincere friendship, everything else is some form of selfishness. Oblomov and Stolz had the strongest friendship - childhood friendship. The saying “an old friend is better than two new ones” fits perfectly here. They met in distant childhood, living in different villages, and, despite all the differences that appeared in the course of their later lives, they could not part.

Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” helps us understand what role friendship plays in a person’s life, thanks to the fact that it provides a rich example of its vicissitudes. Oblomov doesn’t need anything from Stoltz, Stoltz is simply his only friend. Who else should he discuss his thoughts and feelings with? Thanks to the described friendship between Oblomov and Stolz, the essence of these heroes, Goncharov’s thought about childhood, that in childhood the foundation of a whole life is laid, was fully revealed to me.

Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” belongs to the class of works that do not lose their relevance over time and actually reflect the essence of people’s lives not only at the time of their writing, but also hundreds of years later (that’s why it is considered a classic). The antithesis proposed by the author of the novel perfectly depicts the essence of fate throughout the history of Russia, this criticality of its existence: either completely one thing, or without understatement another. But we can never find a golden mean, mix together activity and the desire for well-being, Stolz’s hard work and Oblomov’s broad soul, full of light and wisdom. It seems to me that these two extremes live in every Russian person, and in Russia itself: Oblomov and Stolz. Our future depends on which of them prevails.

Reviews

I still think that Oblomov is closer to you out of the two, and it is on his side that your sympathies lie. Because the main thing in Oblomov’s character is the light of the soul, and that’s why Stolz is drawn to him. And it’s no coincidence that Oblomov doesn’t need anything from Stoltz - he doesn’t need his hard work, activity and determination, but Stoltz does. Because the soul can do without a prosperous life, which the hardworking and practical Stolz arranges for himself, and Stolz needs confirmation of the correctness of his life from someone impractical, as it seems to him, whom he is saving, but in fact he doubts all the time, right whether he lives. Subtly. And perhaps I’m even beginning to be inclined to think that if Oblomov had not been led off his vertical path by Stolz (precisely vertical, because any soul grows upward) onto his own path - horizontally oriented, then Oblomov might have had a different fate . He would not feel rejected from the “correct” world and would not have the need to isolate himself from it more and more, retreating into his dreams.. Perhaps...

Friendship is a good thing when it is love between a young man and a woman or a memory of love between old people. But God forbid if it is friendship on the one hand, and love on the other.

Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” is one of the iconic works of Russian literature of the 19th century.
In the fall of 1858, Goncharov completely completed work on the manuscript of Oblomov, adding many scenes and completely reworking some chapters. In 1859, the novel was published in four issues of the journal Otechestvennye zapiski.
With this novel, the writer showed what a detrimental influence feudal orders had on life, culture, and science. We see how the conditions of landowner life and noble upbringing give rise to apathy, lack of will, and indifference in the hero. The writer showed Oblomov’s path to realizing his worthlessness, insolvency, and the collapse of his personality. Throughout the entire novel, observing the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is not only necessary, but also interesting. The collision of two life positions, two worldviews - this is the main conflict in Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”.

The main theme of the novel is the fate of a generation searching for its place in society, but unable to find the right path. Also Goncharovraises questions in the novel about true friendship, love, about humanism, about the equality of women, about true happiness, condemns noble romanticism.

The writer subtly analyzes human relationships, explores and reveals the theme of friendship. Can completely different people be friends? And then he carefully reflects on this problem.

Friendship – this is one of the most beautiful feelings on earth. This is affection for a person, a willingness to do everything for him and the understanding that he will answer you in kind.

The relationship between Stolz and Oblomov begins as a friendship between two very similar personalities in nature and character, but their different upbringings make them completely different and even opposing characters, who, nevertheless, continue to see in each other that important and close thing that brought them together in school years.

The friendship between Oblomov and Stolz began during their school days. At the time of their acquaintance, the characters were similar in character and had common hobbies. Little Ilya is depicted as a curious child who was interested in many things. He wanted to explore the world around him and learn as much new things as possible; even as a young man, he was still preparing for the fact that his life would “take on other, broader dimensions,” he was full of various aspirations and hopes, preparing for an important role in society.

Ilya Ilyich was lucky to have a true, loyal friend. Andrei Stolts came to see his friend and found him in a very deplorable state: Oblomov was completely consumed by laziness and idleness. Stolz decides to do his best to help his friend get out of his comfort zone and start living a full life. Andrey takes Ilya out into the world, introduces him to many people, including Oblomov’s future lover, Olga Ilyinskaya. Stolz is trying with all his might to help his friend, and even when all attempts failed, he did not give up and tried to persuade Ilya Ilyich to start acting, to start living.

At every opportunity, Stolz tries to “stir up”, activate Oblomov, force him to act “now or never,” while Ilya Ilyich gradually, unconsciously for both heroes, instills in his friend the very “Oblomov” values ​​that Andrei Ivanovich was so afraid of and to which eventually came to a calm, measured, monotonous family life

The theme of friendship in the novel “Oblomov” is revealed through the example of the relationship between two contrasting heroes. However, the differences between Oblomov and Stolz are only external, since both of them are individuals who are in constant search of their own happiness, but have never been able to fully open up and realize their full potential. The images of the heroes are tragic, since neither the constantly striving forward, active Stolz, nor the passive Oblomov, living in illusions, find harmony between the two main principles - rational and sensual, which leads to the death of Ilya Ilyich and the internal confusion and even greater confusion of Stolz.

Having followed the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz, we can conclude: such friendship is also necessary and useful, because they amazingly complemented each other and supported each other in difficult moments of life. It is a pity, of course, that Ilya Oblomov died, unable to cope with internal apathy and a lazy lifestyle, but he left behind a son, whom his best and faithful friend, Andrei Ivanovich, took in to raise him. He helped Ilya this time too - now by adopting his own blood and giving the child a chance for a full, meaningful life. But how could it have happened otherwise? After all, the friendship of Ilya and Andrey has always been real.

Summarizing what has been said, we can conclude that the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is true friendship, something that is very difficult to find. But everyone can do it. A loving friend, always ready to help and support, is a real rarity. But every person deserves to have such a friend and become one for another.