Brothers from fathers and sons. Literary and historical notes of a young technician

May 20, 1859 Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, a forty-three-year-old, but already middle-aged landowner, worriedly awaits his son at the inn Arcadia who just graduated from university.

Nikolai Petrovich was the son of a general, but his intended military career did not materialize (he broke his leg in his youth and remained “lame” for the rest of his life). Nikolai Petrovich married the daughter of a lowly official early and was happy in his marriage. To his deep grief, his wife died in 1847. He devoted all his energy and time to raising his son, even in St. Petersburg he lived with him and tried to get closer to his son’s friends and students. Lately he has been intensively busy transforming his estate.

The happy moment of the date arrives. However, Arkady does not appear alone: ​​with him is a tall, ugly and self-confident young man, an aspiring doctor who agreed to stay with the Kirsanovs. His name, as he attests to himself, is Evgeniy Vasilyevich Bazarov.

The conversation between father and son does not go well at first. Nikolai Petrovich is embarrassed by Fenechka, the girl whom he keeps with him and with whom he already has a child. Arkady, in a condescending tone (this slightly offends his father), tries to smooth out the awkwardness that has arisen.

Pavel Petrovich, their father’s elder brother, is waiting for them at home. Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov immediately begin to feel mutual antipathy. But the yard boys and servants willingly obey the guest, although he does not even think about seeking their favor.

The very next day between Bazarov And Pavel Petrovich a verbal skirmish occurs, and its initiator is Kirsanov Sr. Bazarov does not want to polemicize, but still speaks out on the main points of his beliefs. People, according to his ideas, strive for one or another goal because they experience different “sensations” and want to achieve “benefits.” Bazarov is sure that chemistry is more important than art, and in science the practical result is most important. He is even proud of his lack of “artistic sense” and believes that there is no need to study the psychology of an individual: “One human specimen is enough to judge all others.” For Bazarov, there is not a single “resolution in our modern life... that would not cause complete and merciless denial.” He has a high opinion of his own abilities, but assigns a non-creative role to his generation - “first we need to clear the place.”

To Pavel Petrovich, the “nihilism” professed by Bazarov and Arkady, who imitates him, seems to be a daring and unfounded teaching that exists “in the void.”

Arkady tries to somehow smooth out the tension that has arisen and tells his friend the life story of Pavel Petrovich. He was a brilliant and promising officer, a favorite of women, until he met the socialite Princess R*. This passion completely changed the existence of Pavel Petrovich, and when their romance ended, he was completely devastated. From the past he retains only the sophistication of his costume and manners and his preference for everything English.

Bazarov’s views and behavior irritate Pavel Petrovich so much that he again attacks the guest, but he quite easily and even condescendingly breaks down all the enemy’s “syllogisms” aimed at protecting traditions. Nikolai Petrovich strives to soften the dispute, but he cannot agree with Bazarov’s radical statements in everything, although he convinces himself that he and his brother are already behind the times.

The young people go to the provincial town, where they meet with Bazarov’s “student”, the son of a tax farmer, Sitnikov. Sitnikov takes them to visit the “emancipated” lady, Kukshina. Sitnikov and Kukshina belong to that category of “progressives” who reject any authority, chasing the fashion for “free thinking.” They don’t really know or know how to do anything, but in their “nihilism” they leave both Arkady and Bazarov far behind them. The latter openly despises Sitnikova, and with Kukshina he “is more interested in champagne.”

Arkady introduces his friend to Odintsova, a young, beautiful and rich widow, in whom Bazarov immediately becomes interested. This interest is by no means platonic. Bazarov cynically says to Arkady: “There is profit...”

It seems to Arkady that he is in love with Odintsova, but this feeling is feigned, while mutual attraction arises between Bazarov and Odintsova, and she invites young people to stay with her.

At Anna Sergeevna's house, guests meet her younger sister Katya, who behaves stiffly. And Bazarov feels out of place, he began to get irritated in the new place and “looked angry.” Arkady is also uneasy, and he seeks solace in Katya’s company.

The feeling instilled in Bazarov by Anna Sergeevna is new to him; he, who so despised all manifestations of “romanticism,” suddenly discovers “romanticism in himself.” Bazarov explains to Odintsova, and although she did not immediately free herself from his embrace, however, after thinking, she comes to the conclusion that “peace […] is better than anything in the world.”

Not wanting to become a slave to his passion, Bazarov goes to his father, a district doctor who lives nearby, and Odintsova does not keep the guest. On the road, Bazarov sums up what happened and says: “...It is better to break stones on the pavement than to allow a woman to take possession of even the tip of a finger. This is all […] nonsense.”

Bazarov’s father and mother can’t get enough of their beloved “Enyusha,” and he gets bored in their company. After just a couple of days, he leaves his parents’ shelter, returning to the Kirsanov estate.

Out of heat and boredom, Bazarov turns his attention to Fenechka and, finding her alone, kisses the young woman deeply. An accidental witness to the kiss is Pavel Petrovich, who is deeply outraged by the act of “this hairy guy.” He is especially indignant also because it seems to him that Fenechka has something in common with Princess R*.

According to his moral convictions, Pavel Petrovich challenges Bazarov to a duel. Feeling awkward and realizing that he is compromising his principles, Bazarov agrees to shoot with Kirsanov Sr. (“From a theoretical point of view, a duel is absurd; well, from a practical point of view, this is a different matter”).

Bazarov slightly wounds the enemy and himself gives him first aid. Pavel Petrovich behaves well, even makes fun of himself, but at the same time both he and Bazarov feel awkward. Nikolai Petrovich, from whom the true reason for the duel was hidden, also behaves in the most noble manner, finding justification for the actions of both opponents.

The consequence of the duel is that Pavel Petrovich, who had previously strongly opposed his brother’s marriage to Fenechka, now himself persuades Nikolai Petrovich to take this step.

And Arkady and Katya establish a harmonious understanding. The girl astutely notes that Bazarov is a stranger to them, because “he is predatory, and you and I are tame.”

Having finally lost hope of Odintsova’s reciprocity, Bazarov breaks himself and breaks up with her and Arkady. In parting, he says to his former comrade: “You are a nice fellow, but you are still a soft, liberal gentleman...” Arkady is upset, but soon enough he is consoled by Katya’s company, declares his love to her and is assured that he is loved too.

Bazarov returns to his parents’ home and tries to lose himself in his work, but after a few days “the fever of work disappeared from him and was replaced by dreary boredom and dull anxiety.” He tries to talk to the men, but finds nothing but stupidity in their heads. True, the men also see in Bazarov something “like a clown.”

While practicing on the corpse of a typhoid patient, Bazarov wounds his finger and gets blood poisoning. A few days later he notifies his father that, by all indications, his days are numbered.

Before his death, Bazarov asks Odintsova to come and say goodbye to him. He reminds her of his love and admits that all his proud thoughts, like love, have gone to waste. “And now the giant’s whole task is to die decently, although no one cares about this... All the same: I won’t wag my tail.” He says bitterly that Russia does not need him. “And who is needed? I need a shoemaker, I need a tailor, I need a butcher..."

When Bazarov is given communion at the insistence of his parents, “something similar to a shudder of horror was instantly reflected on his dead face.”

Six months pass. Two couples are getting married in a small village church: Arkady and Katya and Nikolai Petrovich and Fenechka. Everyone was happy, but something in this contentment felt artificial, “as if everyone had agreed to act out some kind of simple-minded comedy.”

Over time, Arkady becomes a father and a zealous owner, and as a result of his efforts, the estate begins to generate significant income. Nikolai Petrovich takes on the responsibilities of a peace mediator and works hard in the public sphere. Pavel Petrovich lives in Dresden and, although he still looks like a gentleman, “life is hard for him.”

Kukshina lives in Heidelberg and hangs out with students, studying architecture, in which, according to her, she discovered new laws. Sitnikov married the princess who pushed him around, and, as he assures, continues Bazarov’s “work”, working as a publicist in some dark magazine.

Decrepit old men often come to Bazarov’s grave and cry bitterly and pray for the repose of the soul of their untimely deceased son. The flowers on the grave mound remind of more than just the tranquility of “indifferent” nature; they also talk about eternal reconciliation and endless life...

On May 20, 1859, at an inn, a gentleman in his early forties, Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, was waiting for his son Arkady, who was coming to visit him. Nikolai Petrovich was the son of a military general in 1812. Like his older brother Pavel, he was raised at home, then had to enlist in military service, but on the day when the news was sent to which unit he was assigned to, he broke his leg, lay in bed for two months and remained “lame” for the rest of his life. Nikolai Petrovich studied at the university in St. Petersburg, while his parents were still alive, much to their chagrin, he fell in love with the daughter of an official, the owner of his former apartment. He married her as soon as the period of mourning for his parents expired, and went with his Masha, first to a dacha near the Forestry Institute, then lived with her in the city, then moved to the village, where their son Arkady was born. The couple lived in love and harmony, ten years passed “like a dream,” then Kirsanov’s wife died, he barely survived this blow, and only economic worries and the need to take care of his son saved him. He took his son to the university in St. Petersburg, lived with him there for three winters, tried to make friends with his son’s young comrades, but was unable to come the last winter and only in May awaits his son to visit him on the porch of the inn.

Arkady arrives not alone, but with a friend, Evgeniy Vasilyevich. Portrait: “A long and thin face with a wide forehead, a flat nose at the top, a pointed nose at the bottom, large greenish eyes and drooping sand-colored sideburns, it was enlivened by a calm smile and expressed self-confidence and intelligence.” Arkady met him recently, since his father, who visited his son in St. Petersburg last winter, did not know him. The father shares his economic problems with his son, tells him that his nanny Egorovna has died, and then proceeds to the most sensitive issue: the fact is that now a young woman, Fenechka, lives in his house, and Nikolai Petrovich does not know how his son will react to this news. “The places they passed through could not be called picturesque. The fields, all the fields, stretched all the way to the sky, now rising, then falling again; here and there small forests could be seen and, dotted with sparse and low bushes, ravines twisted, reminding the eye of their own image on the ancient plans of Catherine’s time... Arkady’s heart gradually sank. As if on purpose, the peasants were all shabby; roadside willows with stripped bark and broken branches stood on bad nags, like beggars in rags; emaciated, rough, as if gnawed, cows greedily nibbled grass in the ditches... “No,” thought Arkady, “this is not a rich region, it does not amaze with its contentment or hard work, it cannot, it cannot remain like this, transformations are necessary. But how to fulfill them; how to start?.."

While they are traveling to the Kirsanovs' estate, Nikolai Petrovich, sitting with his son in a cart, tries to read Pushkin's poems about spring, but this does not meet with approval, who cuts Nikolai Petrovich off mid-sentence. Upon arrival at the estate, Kirsanov offers to have dinner immediately. Nikolai Petrovich's brother appears - Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, an Anglomaniac, dressed in a dark English suit, tie and patent leather ankle boots. “He looked about forty-five years old; his short-cropped gray hair shone with a dark shine, like new silver; his face was bilious, but without wrinkles, unusually regular and clean, as if carved with a thin, light incisor, showing traces of remarkable beauty; The light, elongated black eyes were especially beautiful; the whole appearance of Arkady’s uncle, graceful and thoroughbred, retained youthful harmony and that desire upward, away from the earth, which for the most part disappears after the 20s.” Pavel Petrovich shakes his nephew's hand and simply nods. The young people leave the room, and Pavel Petrovich immediately expresses his negative attitude towards the fact that “this hairy guy” will be visiting the house. At dinner, Bazarov says practically nothing, but eats a lot. Nikolai Petrovich tells various incidents from his life in the village, Arkady reports several St. Petersburg news. After dinner everyone leaves. Bazarov tells Arkady that his uncle is an eccentric because he walks around the village like such a dandy. However, Bazarov speaks of Kirsanov’s father with praise, although he notes: “He reads poetry in vain and hardly understands housekeeping, but he is a good-natured person.”

The next morning, Bazarov wakes up before everyone else, leaves the house and immediately forces the yard boys to catch him frogs, which he is going to cut, studying their anatomy. Bazarov has a special ability to arouse trust in himself in lower people, although he treats them quite casually and does not indulge them. Nikolai Petrovich talks to his son about Fenechka, the son is somewhat puzzled that she did not come out for morning tea and is afraid that he has embarrassed her. Not wanting the young woman to be ashamed of him, he goes to meet her and discovers that he has a little brother, and treats this news with delight. When Pavel Petrovich asks his nephew what Bazarov is, Arkady answers in one word - “nihilist.” Explaining this concept, Arkady says that a nihilist is a person who “does not bow to any authority, who does not take a single principle on faith, no matter how respectful this principle may be.” Pavel Petrovich objects that “you cannot live without principles” and that “without principles you can only exist in airless space.” Fenechka appears. “It was a young woman of about twenty-three, all white and soft, with dark hair and eyes, red and childishly plump lips and tender hands.” Then Bazarov appears with a bag of frogs. When asked by Pavel Petrovich what he is going to do with the frogs - eat or breed, Bazarov indifferently replies that he needs them for experiments. At the table, Pavel Petrovich, having learned that Bazarov is interested in natural sciences, asks whether Bazarov is following in the footsteps of the “Germans,” since they have “recently been very successful in this.” Bazarov agrees that “the Germans are our teachers in this.” When asked by Pavel Petrovich why he has such a high opinion of the Germans, Bazarov replies that “the scientists there are efficient people.” Pavel Petrovich puts forward the assumption that “you don’t have such a flattering idea about Russian scientists,” and Bazarov says that “perhaps so.” When asked if it is true that he does not recognize authorities, Bazarov replies: “Why would I recognize them? And what will I believe? They’ll tell me the case, I’ll agree, that’s all.” Pavel Petrovich talks about the Germans, that “the old ones were still here and there,” mentions Schiller, Goethe, “and now they’re all some kind of chemists and materialists.” Bazarov responds to this that “a decent chemist is twenty times more useful than any poet,” to Pavel Petrovich’s surprised exclamation: “So you don’t recognize art?” - answers: “The art of making money, or no more hemorrhoids!” “Pavel Petrovich is trying to find out: “So you believe in one science?” Bazarov says: “There are sciences, just as there are crafts and titles; and science doesn’t exist at all.” When the senior Kirsanovs leave the room, Arkady notices to Bazarov that he treated his uncle too harshly, and in response to Bazarov’s remark that he does not intend to pamper the district aristocrats, Arkady tells his friend the story of his uncle, assuring that he “is more worthy of regret than ridicule." Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov was brought up first at home, then in the page corps, from childhood he was unusually handsome, self-confident, women really liked him, lived in an apartment with his brother, loved him sincerely, but the brothers were completely different from each other. At the twenty-eighth year of his life, he was already a captain, and a brilliant career awaited him. Suddenly everything changed when he met Princess R. She was a strange woman - she suddenly went abroad, returned to Russia, was known as a frivolous coquette, danced until she dropped, laughed, joked, cried at night, prayed, found no peace anywhere, dressed exquisite. Pavel Petrovich met her at one of the balls and fell madly in love. He was used to victories, but despite this, he was so amazed by this woman that he completely lost his mind. One day he gave her a ring with a sphinx carved on it as a souvenir and said that the sphinx was her, since Pavel Petrovich could not figure it out. Soon the princess got tired of Pavel Petrovich and “almost went crazy.” He retired, gave up his career and endlessly followed the princess, bothered her, she drove him away. When Pavel Petrovich realized that everything was over between them, he tried to return to his former life, but he could no longer. He did not think about marriage; ten years passed “colourless, fruitless and quickly.” One day, Pavel Petrovich learns at the club about the death of the princess, who died in a state close to insanity. He received a posthumous letter (package) from her, which contained the ring he had given him. Soon Pavel Petrovich and Nikolai Petrovich began to live together again in the village, since Nikolai Petrovich was widowed and Pavel Petrovich “lost his memories.” Nikolai Petrovich was left with the awareness of a correctly lived life and his son Arkady, Pavel, “a lonely bachelor, was entering that vague, twilight time, a time of regrets similar to hopes, hopes similar to regrets, when youth had passed and old age had not yet come.” Bazarov, in response to the story told, says that “a man who put his whole life on the card of a woman’s love and, when this card was killed for him, became limp and sank to the point that he was not capable of anything, such a person is not a man, not male. .. I’m sure that he seriously imagines himself as a sensible person, because he reads Galinashka and once a month he can save a man from execution.” To Arkady’s objections: “Remember his upbringing, the time in which he lived,” Bazarov replies: “Every person must educate himself, well, even me, for example... And as for time, why will I depend on it? It’s better to let it depend on me. No, brother, this is all licentiousness, emptiness! And what is this mysterious relationship between a man and a woman? We physiologists know what this relationship is. Study the anatomy of the eye. Where does this mysterious look come from, as you say? This is all romanticism, nonsense, rot, art.”

Pavel Petrovich visits Fenechka in her room and asks to show him the child. Fenechka is unusually embarrassed and feels very uncomfortable in Pavel Petrovich’s company. Nikolai Petrovich appears, and Pavel Petrovich immediately disappears. He “returned to his elegant office, covered with beautiful wild-colored wallpaper on the walls, with weapons hanging on a colorful Persian carpet, with walnut furniture upholstered in dark green tripe, with a renaissance library made of old black oak, with bronze figurines on a magnificent desk, with a fireplace."

Nikolai Petrovich met Fenechka three years ago, when he spent the night at an inn in a county town. He really liked the clean room in which he stayed, and Nikolai Petrovich met the hostess, “a Russian Woman of about fifty.” She had a daughter, Fenechka, and Nikolai Petrovich assigned the hostess to be his housekeeper. One day she asked him to help her daughter, who had a spark from the stove hit her eye. Nikolai Petrovich treats Fenechka, he is struck by the girl’s beauty, her innocence, and charm. Soon her mother died, and Fenechka had nowhere to go.

During a walk in the garden, Bazarov himself introduces himself to Fenechka, helps her baby, who is teething, and thereby wins the favor of the young woman. In a conversation with Arkady, Bazarov touches on this topic, and Arkady passionately says that he considers his father wrong in relation to Fenechka only in the sense that he should have married her because she loves him and has a child from him. Bazarov notices to Arkady that on Nikolai Petrovich’s farm “the cattle are bad and the horses are broken. The buildings have also deteriorated, and the workers look like notorious sloths; and the manager is either a fool or a rogue... Good men will definitely cheat your father. You know the saying: “The Russian peasant will eat God.” In response to Arkady’s response that Pavel Petrovich is right that Bazarov “has a decidedly bad opinion of Russians,” Bazarov replies: “The only good thing about a Russian person is that he has a very bad opinion of himself. The important thing is that two and two make four, and the rest is all nonsense.” Arkady asks: “And nature is nothing?” Bazarov: “And nature is nothing in the sense in which you understand it. Nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it.” Suddenly they hear music - someone is playing Schubert's "Waiting" on the cello. Bazarov asks in amazement who is playing, and, learning that Nikolai Petrovich, laughs loudly, since he considers it unworthy for a respectable man, the father of a family, to play the cello.

Several days pass, Bazarov continues to visit the Kirsanovs and wins the favor of the entire courtyard. Nikolai Petrovich is a little afraid of him, but Pavel Petrovich hated the guest with all the strength of his soul. One day, in a friendly conversation, Bazarov declares to Arkady that his father is “a good fellow,” but “a retired man” and “his song is over.” Bazarov says that the other day he saw Nikolai Petrovich reading Pushkin. In his opinion, it’s high time to give up this “nonsense” and read something useful. Advises Arkady to give his father “Matter and Force” by Buchner in German. Nikolai Petrovich hears this conversation and bitterly shares his insult with his brother. Pavel Petrovich is indignant and says that he hates “this doctor,” who, in his opinion, is a charlatan and is not far behind in physics “with all his frogs.” Nikolai Petrovich objects that Bazarov is smart and knowledgeable, complains that he himself is trying his best to keep up with “modern requirements” - he started a farm, organized peasants, but such things are said about him. He shows his brother Buchner the book that his son slipped him, having taken away the volume of Pushkin. The “fight” between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich takes place already at evening tea. Pavel Petrovich, in response to Bazarov’s remark about the neighboring landowner “rubbish, aristocrat,” stands up for the aristocrats: “Remember the English aristocrats. They do not give up an iota of their rights, and therefore they respect the rights of others; they demand the fulfillment of duties in relation to them, and therefore they themselves fulfill their duties. The aristocracy gave freedom to England and maintains it... Without self-esteem, without self-respect - and in an aristocrat these feelings are developed - there is no solid foundation for the public good... for a public building.” Bazarov says that regardless of whether Pavel Petrovich respects himself or not, he sits with folded hands and does not bring any benefit to society. “Aristocracy, liberalism, progress, principles, just think, how many foreign and... useless words! Russian people don’t need them for nothing!” To Pavel Petrovich’s question in the name of what they, that is, the nihilists, act, Bazarov says: “Because we recognize it as useful. At the present time, the most useful thing is denial - we deny.” Having heard that absolutely everything is being denied, Pavel Petrovich notes that “it is necessary to build,” and not just destroy. Bazarov: “This is no longer our business. First we need to clear the place.” Pavel Petrovich argues that the Russian people are not what Bazarov imagines them to be, that they are patriarchal and cannot live without faith. Bazarov agrees. Pavel Petrovich exclaims: “So, you are going against your people?” Bazarov: “Even so. The people believe that when thunder roars, it is Elijah the prophet in a chariot driving around the sky.” To the accusation that he is “not Russian,” Bazarov replies: “My grandfather plowed the land. Ask any of your men which of us - you or me - he would rather recognize as a compatriot. You don’t even know how to talk to him.” Pavel Petrovich: “And you say and despise him at the same time.” Bazarov: “Well, if he deserves contempt! You condemn my direction, but who told you that it is accidental in me, that it is not caused by the very spirit of the people in the name of which you so advocate?” Bazarov says that they do not preach anything, that earlier they “said that officials take our bribes, that we have neither roads, nor trade, nor proper justice... And then we realized that we should talk... about our ulcers it’s not worth the effort, that this only leads to vulgarity and doctrinaire, we have seen... that the so-called progressive people and denouncers are no good, that we are engaged in nonsense, talking about some kind of art, unconscious creativity, about parliamentarism, about the legal profession and God knows what else, when it comes to our daily bread, when the grossest superstition is strangling us, when all our joint-stock companies are bursting solely because there is a shortage of honest people, when freedom itself, 6 which the government is concerned about, will hardly benefit us , because our peasant is happy to rob himself, just to get drunk on dope in a tavern.” Pavel Petrovich reasonably notes that breaking does not build. Arkady enters the conversation and says that they break because they are force, and force does not give an account. Pavel Petrovich loses his temper, shouts that there is strength in both the wild Kalmyk and the Mongol, and he and other enlightened people value civilization and its fruits. He reminds that “there are only four and a half of you, and there are millions of those who will not allow you to trample under your feet their most sacred beliefs, they will crush you.” Bazarov replies that if they crush him, then that’s the way to go, but “here my grandmother said in two,” “there are not as few of us as you think,” “Moscow burned down from a penny candle.” Pavel Petrovich says that this is “satanic pride” and mockery. Bazarov invites Pavel Petrovich to give examples of “decisions” in modern life, family or social, that would not deserve complete and merciless denial. He tries to give examples, but unsuccessfully. Nikolai Petrovich feels that an abyss separates him and his son; he tries to understand Arkady, but he cannot understand why poetry, art, and the worship of nature should be rejected. On the other hand, he remembers how, when he was young, he quarreled with his mother and reproached her for not being able to understand him because they belonged to different generations.

A few days later, Bazarov and Arkady share their plans to finally go to their parents. Before this, Kirsanov’s relative Matvey Ilyich Kalyazin invites the Kirsanovs to visit him in the city. The older Kirsanovs refuse to go, but Arkady and Bazarov decide to visit a relative. “Matvey Ilyich had the highest opinion of himself. His vanity knew no bounds, but he behaved simply, looked approvingly, listened condescendingly and laughed so good-naturedly that at first he could even be considered a wonderful fellow.” Matvey Ilyich invites young people to the governor’s ball. When the young people are walking home from the governor, a man in a “Slavophile Hungarian” jumps out of a passing droshky and rushes to Bazarov. This turns out to be Sitnikov, Bazarov’s “student”, as he calls himself. “An alarming dull tension was reflected in the small, however, pleasant features of his sleek face; small, like sunken eyes, looked intently.” Sitnikov invites them to visit a certain Evdoksia Kukshina, an emancipated woman with an unusually interesting nature, according to Sitnikov. She was “a young, fair-haired, somewhat disheveled woman, in a silk, not entirely neat dress, with large bracelets on her short arms and a lace scarf on her head.” The expression on her face had an unpleasant effect on the guests. All the time it seemed that she was very unnatural, she behaved awkwardly, despite her swagger. Kukshina talks without listening to her guests, trying her best to seem like something she really is not. Bazarov, at breakfast after champagne, asks her point-blank if there are any pretty women here, and Evdoksiya Kukshina replies that they are all empty-nesters for the most part, but notes her friend Odintsova, who, however, “does not have freedom of views.” Breakfast goes on for a very long time, Sitnikov and Kukshina get drunk, talk a lot about what marriage is - a prejudice or a crime, talk about what makes a person’s individuality. Eudoxia sings songs and gypsy romances in an unpleasant voice, and plays the piano very poorly. Without any farewell, Bazarov and Arkady leave, and a few days later they go to the governor’s ball. There they meet Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, a woman of interesting appearance, although not a beauty. Sitnikov introduces the young people to Anna Sergeevna, although upon closer examination it turns out that he does not know her as briefly as he himself assured. Arkady dances a mazurka with Anna Sergeevna, talks a lot about Bazarov, and she listens to him condescendingly. Arkady and, apparently, Bazarov really like Odintsova, who tells his friend that “she has such shoulders as I have not seen for a long time.” Arkady and Bazarov go to Odintsova’s hotel.

Anna Sergeevna was the daughter of Sergei Nikolaevich Loktev, “a handsome man, a swindler, a gambler,” who lost to smithereens and was forced to settle in the village. He soon died, leaving his daughters a small fortune. With the death of their father, the sisters' situation became very difficult. Anna Sergeevna received an excellent education; it was very difficult for her to live in the village, do housework and run the house. She sent her mother's sister, an angry and arrogant old woman, to live with her, who began to manage the estate, then married the old man Odintsov, a rich, intelligent man, who later left her his entire fortune. She had no children. In the province they did not like Odintsova, they gossiped a lot about her marriage with Odintsov, and gossiped. In solitude, Odintsova did not waste time: she read a lot of good books - and as a result of this, she spoke correct Russian. While visiting her, Bazarov feels a little insecure, speaks with exaggerated swagger and notes to himself with surprise that he is a little afraid of this woman. Odintsova invites her friends to her estate, and a few days later Arkady and Bazarov go to her Nikolskoye estate. There they meet Anna Sergeevna's sister Katya - "a girl of about eighteen, black-haired and dark-skinned, with a somewhat round but pleasant face, small dark eyes." Anna Sergeevna and Bazarov argue a lot about artistic meaning and life experience. Bazarov says that there is no difference between people, including no difference between a smart and a stupid person, between a good and an evil person - this difference boils down to the difference between a sick and a healthy person. Anna Sergeevna is not at all interested in Arkady; she constantly sends him to the company of her sister Katya. He, although he is jealous of Odintsov for Bazarov, notes with surprise that Katya plays the piano well and in general he enjoys spending time in her company. Thus, Arkady and Bazarov spend fifteen days with Odintsova, and this is largely facilitated by the order that she has established in her house. She does not want to live chaotically, but she also does not want to be bored; does a lot of housework. Arkady notices that Anna Sergeevna is spending more and more time with Bazarov, that she likes him more and more, unlike himself. One fine day, a yard man appears from Bazarov’s parents and says that the parents are really looking forward to their son’s visit. Bazarov decides to go and informs Anna Sergeevna about this in the evening. She says that she will miss him after he leaves, asks him to tell him something about himself, about his family, admits that she is very unhappy, since she has no “desire) to live.” “I’m very tired, I’m old, it seems to me that I’ve been living for a very long time... There are a lot of memories, but there’s nothing to remember, and there’s a long, long road ahead, in front of me, but there’s no goal... I don’t even want to go.” Bazarov says that she wants to fall in love, but she cannot love, and this is her misfortune. Over morning tea, Odintsova unexpectedly asks Bazarov to come up to her under the pretext of recommending her some management for the household. In fact, she wants to resume yesterday’s conversation, says that she wants to know what he is thinking about, his plans for the future, although Bazarov does not want to disclose them. Unexpectedly, Evgeny confesses his love to Odintsova and leaves. Anna Sergeevna is satisfied with what has been achieved, but believes that peace is most valuable. At dinner, Bazarov apologizes to Odintsova and asks her to forget his insolence, since she does not love him and will never love him. He is about to leave, and an unexpected incident gets him out of his difficulty - Sitnikov arrives completely inopportunely, while repeating with his characteristic importunity that Evdoksia Kukshina sent him to find out about Anna Sergeevna’s health, and other nonsense. But his arrival came in handy: “The appearance of vulgarity is often useful in life: it weakens strings that are too highly tuned, sobers up self-confident or self-forgetful feelings, reminding them of their close relationship with it. With the arrival of Sitnikov, everything became somehow dumber and simpler; “Everyone even had a heartier dinner and went to bed an hour earlier than usual.” Bazarov tells Arkady that he needs Sitnikov and in general he needs such idiots. “It’s really not for the gods to burn pots!”

“Hey, hey!” Arkady thought to himself, and then the whole abyss of Bazarov’s pride was revealed to him for a moment. - So we are gods with you? That is, you are a god, and am I not a fool?”

The next morning, Bazarov and Arkady leave. Arkady asks Bazarov to take him to his parents. Along the way, Bazarov confesses to Arkady: “It is better to break stones on the pavement than to allow a woman to take even the tip of your finger.” When friends come to Bazarov’s parents, they see his father, “a tall, thin man with tousled hair and a thin aquiline nose, dressed in an open old military frock coat.” The old mother throws herself on her son’s neck and only repeats affectionate names. Bazarov's father behaves somewhat tensely in the presence of Arkady, expresses himself in a florid manner and feels uncomfortable because they cannot provide Kirsanov with a sufficiently comfortable room, lunch, etc. However, Bazarov immediately asks his father not to stand on ceremony with Arkady and even goes so far as to of what calls his grandfather “a decent cudgel.” It is noticeable that Bazarov’s parents greatly bother him. They are “simple” people. His mother, Arina Vlasyevna, is a real Russian noblewoman of the past. She believes in fortune telling, omens, brownies, and is afraid of mice, snakes, frogs, thunder, leeches, goats, etc. In the morning, getting out of bed, Arkady sees through the window Bazarov’s father, Vasily Ivanovich, planting turnips in the garden. The father asks Arkady about Eugene, and when he sincerely answers that Eugene is one of the most remarkable people of his time, Vasily Ivanovich’s eyes flash, it is noticeable that he is very flattered, he is sure that his son will glorify his name, and it will be enough for him if in Bazarov’s biography it is mentioned that his father loved him very much and noticed his phenomenal abilities at an early age. Vasily Ivanovich proudly tells Arkady that Evgeny never took an extra penny from his parents.

During the day, Arkady and Bazarov relax in nature, talk about life, about hatred. Bazarov says to Arkady: “You are a gentle soul, a weakling, where can you hate!” Arkady asks how highly he thinks of himself. Bazarov replies: “When I meet a person who would not give up in front of me... then I will change my opinion about myself.” Bazarov reminds Arkady, as he said, passing by the hut of the elder Philip, that “Russia will then achieve perfection when the last peasant has the same premises, and each of us must contribute to this... And I hated this last peasant, Philip or Sidora, for whom I have to bend over backwards and who won’t even say thank you to me... and why should I thank him? Well, he will live in a white hut, and a burdock will grow out of me.” Bazarov adds that all people act based on sensation. “I’m pleased to deny, my brain is designed that way - and that’s it! Why do I like chemistry? Why do you love apples? -also due to sensation. People will never go deeper than this.” Arkady, who loves nature, unexpectedly says that a maple leaf, when it falls to the ground, looks like a butterfly, and this is strange, because the driest and deadest is similar to the most cheerful and lively. Bazarov says: “My, Arkady, don’t speak beautifully,” asks Arkady not to follow in the footsteps of Uncle Pavel Petrovich, whom he calls an idiot. Arkady is indignant, they almost quarrel. Vasily Ivanovich appears, who, as if apologizing, announces that the priest will be dining with them. However, the dinner goes quite calmly, Father Alexey behaves at ease, shakes the young people’s hands and blesses them. Bazarov is desperately bored and is about to leave his parents, which upsets them incredibly. On the way from Bazarov’s parents, the friends stop by Odintsova’s again. However, a cold reception awaits them here, and after staying with Odintsova for only a few hours, they leave, although she assures that she is waiting for them to visit again. The friends again go to Maryino (the Kirsanovs’ estate), where everyone is extremely happy to see them, despite the fact that Nikolai Petrovich’s economic affairs are not going well. Arkady believes that he should, if not help his father, then at least pretend that he is ready to help him. Bazarov again delves into his experiments on frogs. One day Arkady learns from his father that he has letters that the late mother of Anna Sergeevna Odintsova wrote to Arkady’s mother. He forces his father to give him these letters, and so a reason is found for a new trip to the Odintsov estate. Arkady goes there alone and sees Katya in the garden. Thus, his arrival is very natural, the butler does not even report him, he and Katya come to Anna Sergeevna. It is clear that she is happy with him.

At this time, at the Kirsanov estate, Nikolai Petrovich quite often comes to Bazarov, because he likes his experiments, he asks the young naturalist for advice. Bazarov takes his soul away by talking with Fenechka. One day he finds a young woman in a gazebo and calls for a frank conversation, asks if she is ready to pay for the fact that he cured her son, says that he does not need money, but one of the roses that Fenechka collects for the morning bouquet. When Fenechka gives him a rose, he kisses her on the lips, and at that moment Pavel Petrovich appears behind him. About two hours later, Pavel Petrovich knocks on Bazarov’s door, asks his opinion about the duel and calls him in without explaining the reason. As a second, Bazarov suggests calling Pyotr, Nikolai Petrovich’s valet. Reflecting on the real reason for the duel, Bazarov comes to the conclusion that Pavel Petrovich himself is in love with Fenechka. The next morning the duel begins. Opponents take a long time. They measure their steps, Pavel Petrovich shoots, then Bazarov shoots and wounds his opponent in the thigh. They decide to tell Nikolai Petrovich that the duelists argued over politics. Pavel Petrovich’s temperature rises, and when his brother enters his room, he unexpectedly asks: “Isn’t it true, Nikolai, that Fenechka has something in common with Nelly? (Princess R.)"

For some time, Bazarov, as a doctor, has been caring for Pavel Petrovich. When a doctor arrives from the city, Bazarov is forced to leave. Pavel Petrovich says goodbye to him with dignity and even shakes his hand. Pavel Petrovich asks Fenechka to come to his place and sit with him. He asks if she loves her brother, and unexpectedly passionately begs her to always love Nikolai Petrovich, not to cheat on him, since, according to Pavel Petrovich, the worst thing in the world is to love and not be loved. At this moment Nikolai Petrovich enters the room and Fenechka runs away. Pavel Petrovich asks his brother to give him a solemn promise to fulfill one of his requests, and when he promises, he tells him to marry Fenechka. After his brother’s wedding, Pavel Petrovich himself wants to go abroad and live there until his death. At this time, Arkady spends his leisure time pleasantly with Katya. She notes that Bazarov’s influence on Arkady is weakening every day, and this is a positive change. Katya says that Bazarov is a stranger to everyone - both Arkady and her, because “he is predatory, and we are tame.” Arkady likes Katya more and more, he asks if she would follow her sister’s example in marrying a rich man. Katya replies that she would never do this because she is afraid of inequality. Arkady himself understands that Katya has become very dear to him and that he will not exchange her for anyone, which is what he tells her. Bazarov comes to Odintsova’s estate. He thinks that Arkady is courting Anna Sergeevna, and in a conversation with her he unexpectedly talks about this. Arkady himself is considering a very important step in life, then, calling Katya to the garden, he proposes to her, assuring her that he is ready to make all sacrifices for her sake. Returning from a walk to the house, Odintsova finds a letter in which Arkady Nikolaevich asks for her sister’s hand in marriage. Bazarov finds out that Arkady proposed to Katya and praises him, since he always had a high opinion of her: “Some young lady is considered smart only because she sighs smartly; and yours will stand up for itself, and stand up so well that it will take you into its hands.” Bazarov decides to leave Odintsova and returns to his parents. They are very happy about his sudden return, because they did not even hope for it. Vasily Ivanovich forces his wife not to express her tenderness once again, and they literally walk around their son on tiptoe. Bazarov, nevertheless, is desperately bored and finds consolation only in helping his father in his medical practice: treating peasants who turned to him for help. One day he asks his father for a “hell stone” to cauterize a wound: during an autopsy, he injured his finger. Bazarov understands that if cadaveric poison gets into the blood, nothing will help. Bazarov gets worse, his temperature rises, he asks to send a messenger to Anna Sergeevna to tell him that he is dying. Anna Sergeevna arrives with a German doctor, who once again confirms that there is no hope for recovery. Bazarov recalls with bitter irony his claims to be a giant, thanks Odintsova, says that he loved her, and asks her to kiss him goodbye. Anna Sergeevna kisses him on the forehead, gives him water, “fearfully without taking off her gloves and fearfully breathing.” Bazarov dies. Six months later, two weddings took place in Maryino - Arkady with Katya and Nikolai Petrovich with Fenechka. Pavel Petrovich was getting ready to leave for Moscow and then abroad. Anna Sergeevna left immediately after the wedding, generously giving gifts to the newlyweds. Subsequently, she marries, “not out of love, but out of conviction,” one of the future Russian leaders, a lawyer, a very intelligent person with a strong practical will and a wonderful gift of speech. Nikolai Petrovich becomes a global mediator and works hard. Arkady becomes a zealous landowner, and the estate begins to generate income. He and Katya have a son. Pavel Petrovich lives in Dresden, where he communicates mainly with the British or Russians who come there. With the latter he is more cheeky, mocking himself and them. “He doesn’t read anything Russian, but on his desk there is a silver ashtray in the shape of a peasant’s bast shoe.” He is considered a perfect gentleman. Kukshina also went abroad - to Heidelberg, where she no longer studies natural sciences, but architecture, in which, according to her, she discovered new laws. She still “hangs around” with students, “especially with the young Russian physicists and chemists who fill Heidelberg and who, at first surprising the naive German professors with their sober view of things, subsequently surprise the same professors with their complete inaction and absolute laziness " Sitnikov “with two or three chemists who do not know how to distinguish oxygen from nitrogen, but full of denial and self-respect, hangs around St. Petersburg, preparing to become great and assures that he is continuing the work of Bazarov. Someone recently beat him, but he did not remain in debt: in one dark article, squeezed into one dark magazine, he hinted that the one who beat him was a coward. He calls it irony." In one of the remote corners of Russia there is a small rural cemetery. There is Bazarov’s grave on it, to which his old parents often come. They pray for a long time and cry. “Are their prayers, their tears, fruitless? Isn’t love, holy, devoted love, omnipotent? Oh no! No matter what passionate, sinful, rebellious heart hides in the grave, the flowers growing on it serenely look at us with their innocent eyes: they tell us not only about eternal peace, about that great peace of “indifferent” nature; they also speak of eternal reconciliation and endless life.”

In the second half of the 19th century, Russia was going through difficult times. This is a period of crisis in the national system of serfdom, and, as a consequence, increased discontent of the peasants, repeated outbreaks of popular uprisings and the need for fundamental changes in the economy and government structure. Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev could not remain silent and not respond to the call of time. He writes one of his best works - the novel “Fathers and Sons,” which revealed both the essence of those hot years and the inevitable split in society. In the 60s of the last century, the Russian public was mainly divided into two opposing camps. The first are democrats, spokesmen for the public opinion of the peasant masses, advocating a revolutionary path to change society. They were opposed by the liberal nobility - the old generation, which advocated gradual reforms. Both of them were against serfdom, but the latter were afraid of shock therapy, which could unwittingly lead to peasant revolts and the overthrow of the autocracy. It is around this clash of ideas and opinions that the plot of the work revolves.

If you read “Fathers and Sons” online, you will notice that the main character, Evgeny Bazarov, plays the role of a democrat. He is a representative of the younger generation, a medical student, a nihilist, who does not believe in anything and denies everything and everyone. In his opinion, the meaning of life lies in continuous work, in the desire to create something material. This is where his prejudice against “useless” nature and the arts, aimed solely at contemplation and not having any material basis, arises. Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov, a prominent representative of the liberal nobility, a man of the older generation, comes into confrontation with him. Unlike Bazarov, who devotes every free minute to scientific experiments, he leads the measured life of a socialite. He cannot imagine life without love for nature, literature, painting, and is confident in the inviolability of such concepts as progress, liberalism, the basic principles of human existence, aristocracy and others. But the views and positions of these two heroes differ not only because they belong to the exponents of different ideologies. They are also representatives of different classes and two generations - fathers and sons, whose similarity and at the same time irreconcilability have always been, are and will be in any society and in any century. Hence the title of the book, “Fathers and Sons,” which shows that behind the external opposition there is a deeper problem, a more global confrontation.

Turgenev’s book “Fathers and Sons” can be downloaded in its entirety for free on our website.

The action takes place in 1859, on the estate of landowner Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov. He is awaiting the arrival of his son Arkady from the university.

Nikolai's wife died when Arkasha was 10 years old, and the widower decides to distract himself. To do this, he goes to the village and starts his own farm. After Nikolai's son grew up, he sent him to study.

And now the time has come when Arkady returns to his home. The father is worried and waiting for him, he knows that his son is going with a friend.

Chapter 2

The long-awaited meeting is finally happening. Arkady introduces his fellow student, Evgeny Bazarov, to his father and asks Nikolai Petrovich not to be embarrassed by him and to behave with him in a simple way.

The arriving guest prefers a tarantass for the trip, and Arkady and his father are accommodated in a carriage.

Chapter 3

On the way, the father is overwhelmed with feelings, he hugs his son and asks him to tell him about Evgeniy. Arkady shuns his affection and makes attempts to show that he doesn’t care, speaks sharply and thoughtlessly, looking back at Bazarov to make sure that he does not hear him.

Nikolai Petrovich talks about his farm and scolds the workers. He also notifies his son that a girl named Fenya lives with him and if he doesn’t like it, she will leave their house.

Chapter 4

Only the old servant and the girl greet the guests. In the house they meet Pavel Petrovich, Arkady’s uncle. After the students clean up, everyone sits down at the dining table.

Conversations during lunch just don't work out. Soon everyone leaves and goes to bed, but some of the inhabitants of the Kirsanov house do not fall asleep right away. Nikolai thinks about his son, and Pavel sits by the fireplace. Fenechka admires her sleeping son, his father was Nikolai Petrovich.

Chapter 5

In the morning, Bazarov wakes up early and goes for a walk. Local boys run with him, and they decide to go to the swamp to catch the frogs.

The Kirsanov family decides to drink tea on the summer veranda. Fenya is sick, and Arkady goes to see her. Arriving at her, he sees the baby and learns that it is his younger brother. He rejoices and asks his father why he hid such an event from him.

The owners of the house ask about Evgeniy. Arkady says that his friend is a nihilist, that is, he does not believe in anything. Evgeny comes with the captured frogs and carries them into the experiment room.

Chapter 6

While drinking tea, Pavel talks about the benefits of art, and Evgeniy argues that natural sciences are much more important than poetry and painting. An argument begins between them. They show their dissatisfaction with each other. Nikolai Petrovich diverts the conversation and occupies Bazarov with questions about the correct choice of fertilizers.

Chapter 7

The story of Pavel Kirsanov. He served and was always in demand among women, but one day he fell in love with a married princess, and his whole life went downhill. Pavel left the service and followed his beloved everywhere for several years. But, having failed to achieve reciprocity from her, he left for his native place. Having learned about the death of the princess, he comes to the village to visit his brother and remains on the estate.

Chapter 8

Pavel Kirsanov, after arguing with the guest, finds no place for himself and goes to Fenya to look at his youngest nephew.
Fenechka ended up in their house by chance. Nikolai saw her in a tavern, having learned that she and her mother were living poorly, he took them to live with him. Over time, Nikolai Petrovich realized that he was in love with her and after Feni’s mother died, he began to live with the girl.

Chapter 9

Having met Fenechka and her baby, Evgeniy tells her that he is a doctor, and they can ask for his help if necessary. Arkady says that his father should marry Fenya.
Nikolai Petrovich plays the cello, Bazarov grins at the sounds he hears. Arkady looks at his friend disapprovingly.

Chapter 10 of the story Fathers and Sons

A couple of weeks pass and everyone gets used to the presence of a new tenant in the house. But everyone’s attitude towards him is different: the servants like him, Pavel can’t stand him, and Nikolai thinks that Bazarov is a bad influence on Arkady.

Nikolai Petrovich was offended by Evgeniy after a conversation he overheard between friends, in which Bazarov called him a retired man. He told Pavel about what he had heard, which further provoked him into conflict with Eugene.

In the evening, during a tea party, an argument occurs between Bazarov and the Kirsanov brothers. Eugene claims that aristocrats are crappy people and there is no benefit from their lives. Pavel Petrovich speaks out against the trend of nihilists, arguing that they are spoiling the country with their views.

After bickering between different generations, the young people leave the living room. Nikolai suddenly began to remember how he had a fight with his mother and compared this moment in his life with an argument between him and his son.
This parallel between fathers and children is the most important in the work.

Chapter 11

Before going to bed, everyone is immersed in their thoughts. The elder Kirsanov comes to the gazebo and thinks about his dead wife. Pavel Petrovich admires the stars. Evgeniy tells Arkady that he needs to go to the city and visit an old acquaintance.

Chapter 12

Arkady and Evgeny go to the city, there they come to Matvey Ilyin, a friend of Bazarov, then visit the governor and are given invitations to the ball.
Bazarov also meets with his acquaintance Sitnikov, who invites them both to Evdokia Kukshina.

Chapter 13

They don’t like Kukshina’s because she is untidy and chatters endlessly, which very tires young people. In Evdokia’s meaningless conversation, the name of Anna Sergeevna Odintsova is heard.

Chapter 14

At the governor's ball, friends see Anna Sergeevna for the first time and get to know her. She dances with Arkady, and he tells her about his friend who doesn’t believe in anything. Anna is interested in her new acquaintances, and she invites them to her estate. Bazarov notices an unusual woman in her and decides to visit her estate.

Chapter 15

Arriving at Anna Sergeevna, Evgeniy is embarrassed because this meeting impresses him.

Odintsova inherited the estate from her deceased father in a ruined state. Anna Sergeevna seriously began to restore the lost farm. She got married and after 6 years of marriage, her husband died, and she inherited from him. Odintsova could not stand the city and lived in her house.

Bazarov tried to leave a good opinion of himself. He talked about medicine and talked about botany. Odintsova understood science, and their conversation progressed smoothly. For Anna Sergeevna, Arkady was perceived as a younger brother.
After the conversation ended, Odintsova invited her friends to her estate.

Chapter 16

Anna Sergeevna's estate was located in Nikolskoye, where Arkady and Evgeny meet her shy sister Katya, who plays the piano well.

Odintsova’s evil aunt arrives, and the guests do not pay attention to her. In the evening, Evgeniy plays preference with Anna Sergeevna. Arkady spends all his time with Katya.

Odintsova walks with Bazarov in the garden and talks with him. Arkady likes Anna Sergeevna, and he feels jealous.

Chapter 17

During the time that the friends spend visiting Odintsova, the notorious nihilist begins to change. He realizes that he is in love. Anna and Evgeny's feelings are mutual, but they do not tell each other about it.
Bazarov meets one of his father’s courtiers, he says that his parents have been waiting for him. Evgeniy is going to go to his home and reports this. A conversation takes place between Odintsova and Bazarov in which they want to find out what dreams are hidden in the hearts of each of them.

Chapter 18

Evgeniy reveals his feelings to Anna Sergeevna. But he does not hear the response words of love, Odintsova says that he misunderstood her. Bazarov cannot remain on the estate.

Chapter 19

Odintsova says that Bazarov should stay with her for a while longer, but he refuses. Sitnikov arrives, his appearance helps to defuse the tension between Anna and Evgeny. The next morning, the friends set off on the road.
Arkady notices that Bazarov has become thin and gloomy. Soon they reached the estate of Bazarov's parents.

Chapter 20

On the threshold they are met by Vasily Ivanovich, Evgeniy’s father. He hides his emotions when meeting his son. Arina Vasilievna, Bazarov’s mother, embraces her beloved child. Arkady is given a place in the dressing room.

Bazarov is talking with his parents, asking how the father of the local men is undergoing treatment. After long conversations, everyone goes to their places and goes to bed. Arkady immediately falls asleep, and Evgeny remains in thought all night.

Chapter 21

In the morning, Arkady talks with Vasily Ivanovich and understands that the father loves his son very much. Evgeniy doesn’t know what to do and starts arguing with his friend, it comes to a fight.

The next day they leave, and the parents are sad, realizing that their son is already quite an adult.

Chapter 22

Stopping at an inn, the young people think about where to go. Arkady decides to go to Odintsova, but upon arriving at her estate it turns out that she was not expecting them at all. Anna Sergeevna apologizes and asks them to come next time. Friends go to the Kirsanov estate.

Nikolai Petrovich again complains about the workers on his estate. Arkady constantly thinks about the inhabitants of Nikolskoye and comes to Odintsova alone. Guests are received with joy.

Chapter 23

Bazarov is not offended by his friend, he understands him and is engaged in his own experiments. Pavel Petrovich wants to improve relations with Evgeniy, even tries to help in his experiments.

Fenechka avoids Pavel Kirsanov. In the morning she sorts through flowers in the gazebo and talks with Evgeniy about old age. Bazarov decides to kiss her, but hearing Pavel Petrovich cough, the embarrassed woman runs away and scolds the young man. Evgeny suddenly remembers a similar incident with Anna.

Chapter 24

Pavel Petrovich challenges Bazarov to a duel without specifying the reason, believing that Evgeny himself should know what his fault is. In order not to look stupid, he asks Evgeny to throw a scandal. The opponents stipulate the previous fight and hire a second, Peter.

After Pavel leaves, Bazarov reflects on what happened and thinks that Pavel Kirsanov loves Fenya.
At dawn the duelists arrived at the appointed place. Evgeniy understands that all this is stupid, but is not afraid to die. Pavel Petrovich shoots first, but misses. Bazarov responds with a shot, without aiming, and wounds Pavel in the leg. At home, they claim that the reason for the duel is different views on politics.

The arriving doctor conducts an examination and says that the danger has passed. Pavel admits that he compares Fenechka with his former lover. Nikolai Petrovich does not take his words seriously, thinking that his brother is delusional. Pavel asks Nikolai to propose to Fenechka and is going to go abroad after his brother’s wedding.

Chapter 25

Arkady, meanwhile, is with the Odintsovs. He begins to talk more and more with Anna Sergeevna’s younger sister. They walk, Katya plays the piano for him. The young man suddenly realizes that he cannot be a nihilist like his friend. He likes Katerina, they talk about art, which was forbidden by Bazarov.
Evgeny goes home and stops by Odintsova’s to tell Arkady what happened. Anna Sergeevna no longer evokes feelings in Arkady and he ceases to be jealous of her for Bazarov.

Chapter 26

Love arises between Katya and Arkady. He asks her to marry him. Katerina gives her consent.
Kirsanov writes a letter to the elder Odintsova, asking for her sister’s hand in marriage. Evgeny is very surprised by Arkady’s action, because he assumed that his friend was not indifferent to Anna Sergeevna. Odintsova allows the newlyweds to marry and is happy for Katerina.

Bazarov leaves the estate.

Chapter 27

Evgeniy arrives home, his parents were waiting for him and joyfully greet their son. He decides to work as a doctor and help people. One day they bring him a patient with typhus. Evgeniy becomes infected from it and lies delirious.

Bazarov calls his father and asks him to send for Anna Sergeevna in order to say goodbye to her.

Odintsova brings a doctor who says that the patient can no longer be helped. Having said goodbye to the woman he loved, Bazarov dies. The mother and father cannot believe that their son is no more.

Chapter 28

Six months later, the Kirsanov family celebrates two weddings at once. Arkady and Katerina and Nikolai Petrovich and Fenechka get married. Pavel Petrovich, as planned, is leaving abroad.

Odintsova marries for convenience, not for love. Bazarov is buried in his homeland and his parents often come to visit their only son.

Picture or drawing Fathers and Sons by chapter

Other retellings and reviews for the reader's diary

• Hoffmann Ernst Theodor Amadeus

  When the house is lonely, you can get used to it. But the former loneliness is felt more acutely when a living creature appears in the house. This is exactly what old farmer Mose Abrams felt.

Writing a novel with a progressive or retrograde direction is not difficult. Turgenev had the ambition and audacity to create a novel with all sorts of directions; an admirer of eternal truth, eternal beauty, he had the proud goal of pointing to the eternal in the temporal and wrote a novel that was neither progressive nor retrograde, but, so to speak, everlasting.

N.N. Strakhov “I.S. Turgenev. "Fathers and Sons"

1965 edition

Roman I.S. Turgenev's “Fathers and Sons” is clearly recognized by critics as a landmark work both in the work of the great Russian writer and in the general context of the era of the 60s of the 19th century. The novel reflects all the socio-political contradictions contemporary to the author; both topical and eternal problems of relationships between generations of “fathers” and “children” are vividly presented.

In our opinion, the position of I.S. Turgenev in relation to the two opposing camps presented in the novel looks quite unambiguous. The author's attitude towards the main character Bazarov also leaves no doubt. Nevertheless, with the light hand of radical critics, Turgenev’s contemporaries elevated the largely grotesque, schematic image of the nihilist Bazarov to the pedestal of a hero, making him a real idol of the generation of the 1860-80s.

The unreasonably enthusiastic attitude towards Bazarov, which developed among the democratic intelligentsia of the 19th century, smoothly migrated to Soviet literary criticism. Of all the variety of works of the great novelist I.S. For some reason, only the novel “Fathers and Sons” by Turgenev with its schematic heroes was firmly established in the school curriculum. For many years, literature teachers, citing the authoritative opinions of Pisarev, Herzen, Strakhov, tried to explain to schoolchildren why the “new man” Evgeny Bazarov, who dissects frogs, is better than the beautiful-hearted romantic Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov, who plays the cello. Contrary to all common sense, these explanations about the “class” superiority of democrats over aristocrats, the primitive division into “ours” and “not ours” continue to this day. One has only to look at the collection of Unified State Exam assignments in literature for 2013: the examinee is still required to identify the “socio-psychological types” of the characters in the novel, explain their behavior as a “struggle between the ideologies of the nobility and the various intelligentsia,” etc., etc. .

For a century and a half now, we have blindly trusted the subjective opinion of critics of the post-reform era, who sincerely believed in Bazarov as their future and rejected the thinker Turgenev as a false prophet idealizing the outdated past. How long will we, people of the 21st century, humiliate the greatest humanist writer, the Russian classic I.S. Turgenev by clarifying his “class” position? Pretend that we believe in the “Bazarov’s” path that has long been passed in practice, irrevocably erroneous?..

It should have long been recognized that the modern reader may be interested in Turgenev’s novel not so much for the clarification of the author’s position in relation to the main characters of the work, but for the general humanitarian, eternal problems raised in it.

“Fathers and Sons” is a novel about delusions and insights, about the search for eternal meaning, about the closest relationship and at the same time tragic divergence between the past, present and future of humanity. Ultimately, this is a novel about each of us. After all, we are all someone’s fathers and someone’s children... It simply cannot be any other way.

Background to the creation of the novel

The novel “Fathers and Sons” was written by I.S. Turgenev shortly after his departure from the editorial office of the Sovremennik magazine and the severance of many years of friendly relations with N.A. Nekrasov. Nekrasov, faced with a decisive choice, relied on young radicals - Dobrolyubov and Chernyshevsky. Thus, the editor significantly increased the commercial rating of his socio-political publication, but lost a number of leading authors. Following Turgenev, L. Tolstoy, A. Druzhinin, I. Goncharov and other writers who took moderate liberal positions left Sovremennik.

The topic of the Sovremennik split has been deeply studied by numerous literary scholars. Starting from the second half of the 19th century, it was customary to place purely political motives at the forefront of this conflict: the divergence in the views of commoner democrats and liberal landowners. The “class” version of the split suited Soviet literary studies quite well, and for almost a century and a half it continues to be presented as the only one confirmed by the memories of eyewitnesses and other documentary sources. Only a few researchers, relying on the creative and epistolary heritage of Turgenev, Nekrasov, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky, as well as other people close to the publication of the magazine, paid attention to the implicit, deeply hidden personal conflict of the participants in those long-past events.

In the memoirs of N.G. Chernyshevsky there are direct indications of N. Dobrolyubov’s hostile attitude towards Turgenev, whom the young critic contemptuously called a “literary aristocrat”. An unknown provincial commoner, Dobrolyubov, came to St. Petersburg with the ambitious intention of making a journalistic career for himself at any cost. Yes, he worked a lot, lived in poverty, starved, undermined his health, but the all-powerful Nekrasov noticed him, accepted the aspiring critic into the editorial office of Sovremennik, and settled him in Kraevsky’s house, practically in his apartment. Whether by chance or not, Dobrolyubov seemed to be repeating the fate of young Nekrasov, once warmed and caressed by the Panaevs.

With I.S. Turgenev Nekrasov had many years of personal friendship and close business cooperation. Turgenev, who did not have his own housing in St. Petersburg, always stopped and lived for a long time in the apartment of Nekrasov and Panaev during his visits to the capital. In the 1850s, he occupied the place of the leading novelist of Sovremennik and sincerely believed that the editor of the magazine listened to his opinion and valued it.

ON THE. Nekrasov, despite all his business activity and success as a businessman from literature, retained the sybaritic habits of a Russian master. He slept almost until lunchtime and often fell into causeless depression. Usually in the first half of the day, the publisher of Sovremennik received visitors right in his bedroom, and all important issues regarding the publication of the magazine were resolved while lying in bed. Dobrolyubov, as the closest “neighbor”, soon turned out to be the most constant visitor to Nekrasov’s bedroom, surviving Turgenev, Chernyshevsky from there and almost pushing A.Ya herself out the door. Panaev. The selection of materials for the next issue, the amount of royalties for authors, the magazine’s responses to political events in the country - Nekrasov often discussed all this with Dobrolyubov face to face. An unofficial editorial alliance emerged, in which Nekrasov, of course, set the tone, and Dobrolyubov, as a talented performer, embodied his ideas, presenting them to the reader in the form of bold, fascinating journalistic articles and critical essays.

Members of the editorial board could not help but notice Dobrolyubov’s growing influence on all aspects of the publication of Sovremennik. Since the end of 1858, the departments of criticism, bibliography, and modern notes were united into one - “Modern Review”, in which the journalistic principle turned out to be the leading one, and the selection and grouping of materials was carried out almost single-handedly by Dobrolyubov.

For his part, I.S. Turgenev more than once tried to establish contact with the young employees of Sovremennik, Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov, but was met only with cold aloofness, complete misunderstanding, and even arrogant contempt from working journalists for the “literary aristocrat.” And the main conflict was not at all that Dobrolyubov and Turgenev did not share space in Nekrasov’s bedroom, trying to influence the editor on issues of policy for publishing the magazine. Although this is exactly how their confrontation is presented in the literary memoirs of A.Ya. Panaeva. With her light hand, domestic literary scholars considered Dobrolyubov’s article about Turgenev’s novel “On the Eve” to be the main reason for the split in the editors of Sovremennik. The article was titled “When Will the Real Day Come?” and contained rather bold political forecasts with which I.S. Turgenev, as the author of the novel, categorically disagreed. According to Panaeva, Turgenev sharply objected to the publication of this article, delivering an ultimatum to Nekrasov: “Choose, either I or Dobrolyubov.” Nekrasov chose the latter. N.G. adheres to a similar version in his memoirs. Chernyshevsky, noting that Turgenev was extremely offended by Dobrolyubov’s criticism of his last novel.

Meanwhile, Soviet researcher A.B. Muratov in his article “Dobrolyubov and the gap of I.S. Turgenev with the magazine Sovremennik, based on materials from Turgenev’s correspondence for 1860, thoroughly proves the fallacy of this widespread version. Dobrolyubov’s article about “On the Eve” was published in the March issue of Sovremennik. Turgenev accepted her without any offense, continuing his collaboration with the magazine, as well as personal meetings and correspondence with Nekrasov until the fall of 1860. In addition, Ivan Sergeevich promised Nekrasov for publication the “big story” he had already conceived and begun (the novel “Fathers and Sons”) for publication. Only at the end of September, after reading a completely different article by Dobrolyubov in the June issue of Sovremennik, Turgenev wrote to P. Annenkov and I. Panaev about his refusal to participate in the magazine and the decision to give “Fathers and Sons” to M.N. Katkova. In the mentioned article (a review of N. Hawthorne’s book “Collection of Miracles, Stories Borrowed from Mythology”), Dobrolyubov openly called Turgenev’s novel “Rudin” a “custom” novel, written to please the tastes of wealthy readers. Muratov believes that Turgenev was humanly offended not even by the bilious attacks of Dobrolyubov, whom he unambiguously ranked among the generation of “unreasonable children,” but by the fact that behind the opinion of the author of the article that was offensive to him was the opinion of Nekrasov, a representative of the generation of “fathers”, his personal friend . Thus, the center of the conflict in the editorial office was not a political conflict at all, nor a conflict between the older and younger generations of “fathers” and “sons.” This was a deeply personal conflict, because until the end of his life Turgenev did not forgive Nekrasov for the betrayal of their common ideals, the ideals of the generation of “fathers” for the sake of “reasonable egoism” and the lack of spirituality of the new generation of the 1860s.

Nekrasov’s position in this conflict turned out to be even more complex. As best he could, he tried to soften Dobrolyubov’s “claws” that constantly clung to Turgenev’s pride, but Turgenev was dear to him as an old friend, and Dobrolyubov was necessary as a collaborator on whom the release of the next issue of the magazine depended. And businessman Nekrasov, sacrificing personal sympathies, chose business. Having broken with the old editors, as with an irrevocable past, he led his Sovremennik along a revolutionary radical path, which then seemed very promising.

Communication with young radicals - employees of Nekrasov's Sovremennik - was not in vain for the writer Turgenev. All critics of the novel saw in Bazarov precisely a portrait of Dobrolyubov, and the most narrow-minded of them considered the novel “Fathers and Sons” a pamphlet against the recently deceased journalist. But this would be too simple and unworthy of the pen of a great master. Dobrolyubov, without suspecting it, helped Turgenev find a theme for a deeply philosophical, timeless work necessary for society.

The history of the novel

The idea for “Fathers and Sons” originated with I.S. Turgenev in the summer of 1860, immediately after his visit to St. Petersburg and the incident with Dobrolyubov’s article about the novel “On the Eve”. Obviously, this happened even before his final break with Sovremennik, since in the summer correspondence of 1860 Turgenev had not yet abandoned the idea of ​​​​giving a new thing to Nekrasov’s magazine. The first mention of the novel is contained in a letter to Countess Lambert (summer 1860). Later, Turgenev himself dates the beginning of work on the novel to August 1860: “I was taking sea baths in Ventnor, a small town on the Isle of Wight - it was in August 1860 - when the first thought of Fathers and Sons came into my head, this story, by the grace of which it ceased - and, it seems, , forever - the favorable disposition towards me of the Russian young generation..."

It was here, on the Isle of Wight, that the “Formular list of characters in the new story” was compiled, where, under the heading “Evgeny Bazarov”, Turgenev sketched a preliminary portrait of the main character: "Nihilist. Self-confident, speaks abruptly and little, hard-working. (A mixture of Dobrolyubov, Pavlov and Preobrazhensky.) Lives small; he doesn’t want to be a doctor, he’s waiting for an opportunity. - He knows how to talk to people, although in his heart he despises them. He does not have and does not recognize an artistic element... He knows quite a lot - he is energetic, and can be liked by his freedom. In essence, the most barren subject is the antipode of Rudin - for without any enthusiasm and faith... An independent soul and a proud man of the first hand.”

Dobrolyubov is listed first as a prototype here, as we see. Following him is Ivan Vasilyevich Pavlov, a doctor and writer, an acquaintance of Turgenev, an atheist and materialist. Turgenev treated him friendly, although he was often embarrassed by the directness and harshness of this man’s judgments.

Nikolai Sergeevich Preobrazhensky is a friend of Dobrolyubov from the pedagogical institute with an original appearance - small stature, long nose and hair standing on end, despite all the efforts of the comb. He was a young man with heightened self-esteem, with impudence and freedom of judgment that even Dobrolyubov admired. He called Preobrazhensky “a guy who is not timid.”

In a word, all the “most barren subjects” whom I.S. Turgenev had a chance to observe in real life, merged into the collective image of the “new man” Bazarov. And at the beginning of the novel, this hero, whatever one may say, really resembles an unpleasant caricature.

Bazarov's remarks (especially in his disputes with Pavel Petrovich) repeat almost verbatim the thoughts expressed by Dobrolyubov in his critical articles of 1857-60. The words of German materialists dear to Dobrolyubov, for example, G. Vogt, whose works Turgenev intensively studied while working on the novel, were also put into the mouth of this character.

Turgenev continued to write Fathers and Sons in Paris. In September 1860, he reported to P.V. Annenkov: “I intend to work as hard as I can. The plan for my new story is ready down to the smallest detail - and I’m eager to get to work on it. Something will come out - I don’t know, but Botkin, who is here... very much approves of the idea that is the basis. I would like to finish this thing by spring, by April, and bring it to Russia myself.”

During the winter the first chapters were written, but work proceeded more slowly than expected. In letters from this time there are constantly requests to report on the news of the social life of Russia, seething on the eve of the greatest event in its history - the abolition of serfdom. To get the opportunity to directly become acquainted with the problems of modern Russian reality, I. S. Turgenev comes to Russia. The writer finished the novel, begun before the reform of 1861, after it in his beloved Spassky-Lutovinovo. In a letter to the same P.V. Annenkov, he informs about the end of the novel: “My work is finished at last. On July 20 I wrote my blessed last word.”

In the fall, upon returning to Paris, I. S. Turgenev reads his novel to V. P. Botkin and K. K. Sluchevsky, whose opinion he valued very much. Agreeing and arguing with their judgments, the writer, in his own words, “plows” the text, makes numerous changes and amendments to it. The amendments mainly concerned the image of the main character. Friends pointed out the author’s excessive enthusiasm for the “rehabilitation” of Bazarov at the end of the work, the approaching of his image to the “Russian Hamlet.”

When work on the novel was completed, the writer had deep doubts about the advisability of its publication: the historical moment turned out to be too inappropriate. In November 1861, Dobrolyubov died. Turgenev sincerely regretted his death: “I regretted the death of Dobrolyubov, although I did not share his views,” Turgenev wrote to his friends, “he was a gifted man - young... It’s a pity for the lost, wasted strength!” To Turgenev's ill-wishers, the publication of a new novel could seem like a desire to “dance on the bones” of a deceased enemy. By the way, this is exactly how the editors of Sovremennik rated her. In addition, a revolutionary situation was brewing in the country. Prototypes of the Bazarovs took to the streets. The democratic poet M. L. Mikhailov was arrested for distributing proclamations to youth. Students of St. Petersburg University rebelled against the new charter: two hundred people were arrested and imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress.

For all these reasons, Turgenev wanted to postpone the publication of the novel, but the very conservative publisher Katkov, on the contrary, did not see anything provocative in Fathers and Sons. Having received corrections from Paris, he insistently demanded “sold goods” for the new issue. Thus, “Fathers and Sons” was published at the very height of government persecution of the younger generation, in the February book of the “Russian Messenger” for 1862.

Criticism of the novel “Fathers and Sons”

As soon as it was published, the novel caused a real flurry of critical articles. None of the public camps accepted Turgenev’s new creation.

The editor of the conservative “Russian Messenger” M. N. Katkov, in the articles “Turgenev’s novel and its critics” and “On our nihilism (regarding Turgenev’s novel),” argued that nihilism is a social disease that must be fought by strengthening protective conservative principles; and Fathers and Sons is no different from a whole series of anti-nihilistic novels by other writers. F. M. Dostoevsky took a unique position in assessing Turgenev’s novel and the image of its main character. According to Dostoevsky, Bazarov is a “theorist” who is at odds with “life”; he is a victim of his own, dry and abstract theory. In other words, this is a hero close to Raskolnikov. However, Dostoevsky avoids a specific consideration of Bazarov's theory. He correctly asserts that any abstract, rational theory breaks down in life and brings suffering and torment to a person. According to Soviet critics, Dostoevsky reduced the entire problematic of the novel to an ethical-psychological complex, overshadowing the social with the universal, instead of revealing the specifics of both.

Liberal criticism, on the contrary, has become too interested in the social aspect. She could not forgive the writer for his ridicule of representatives of the aristocracy, hereditary nobles, and his irony regarding the “moderate noble liberalism” of the 1840s. The unsympathetic, rude “plebeian” Bazarov constantly mocks his ideological opponents and turns out to be morally superior to them.

In contrast to the conservative-liberal camp, democratic magazines differed in their assessment of the problems of Turgenev’s novel: Sovremennik and Iskra saw in it a slander against common democrats, whose aspirations are deeply alien and incomprehensible to the author; “Russkoe Slovo” and “Delo” took the opposite position.

The critic of Sovremennik, A. Antonovich, in an article with the expressive title “Asmodeus of our time” (that is, “the devil of our time”) noted that Turgenev “despises and hates the main character and his friends with all his heart.” Antonovich's article is full of harsh attacks and unsubstantiated accusations against the author of Fathers and Sons. The critic suspected Turgenev of colluding with the reactionaries, who allegedly “ordered” the writer a deliberately slanderous, accusatory novel, accused him of moving away from realism, and pointed out the grossly schematic, even caricatured nature of the images of the main characters. However, Antonovich’s article is quite consistent with the general tone that Sovremennik employees took after the departure of a number of leading writers from the editorial office. It became almost the duty of the Nekrasov magazine to personally criticize Turgenev and his works.

DI. Pisarev, editor of the Russian Word, on the contrary, saw the truth of life in the novel Fathers and Sons, taking the position of a consistent apologist for the image of Bazarov. In the article “Bazarov” he wrote: “Turgenev does not like merciless denial, and yet the personality of a merciless denier emerges as a strong personality and inspires respect in the reader”; “...No one in the novel can compare with Bazarov either in strength of mind or strength of character.”

Pisarev was one of the first to clear Bazarov of the charge of caricature leveled at him by Antonovich, explained the positive meaning of the main character of Fathers and Sons, emphasizing the vital importance and innovation of such a character. As a representative of the generation of “children,” he accepted everything in Bazarov: a disdainful attitude towards art, a simplified view of human spiritual life, and an attempt to comprehend love through the prism of natural science views. The negative traits of Bazarov, under the pen of the critic, unexpectedly for readers (and for the author of the novel himself) acquired a positive assessment: open rudeness towards the inhabitants of Maryino was passed off as an independent position, ignorance and shortcomings in education - as a critical view of things, excessive conceit - as manifestations of a strong nature and etc.

For Pisarev, Bazarov is a man of action, a naturalist, a materialist, an experimenter. He “recognizes only what can be felt with the hands, seen with the eyes, put on the tongue, in a word, only what can be witnessed by one of the five senses.” Experience became the only source of knowledge for Bazarov. It was in this that Pisarev saw the difference between the new man Bazarov and the “superfluous people” of the Rudins, Onegins, and Pechorins. He wrote: “...the Pechorins have will without knowledge, the Rudins have knowledge without will; The Bazarovs have both knowledge and will, thought and deed merge into one solid whole.” This interpretation of the image of the main character was to the taste of revolutionary-democratic youth, who made their idol the “new man” with his reasonable egoism, contempt for authorities, traditions, and the established world order.

Turgenev now looks at the present from the heights of the past. He doesn't follow us; he calmly looks after us, describes our gait, tells us how we speed up our steps, how we jump over potholes, how we sometimes stumble on uneven places on the road.

There is no irritation in the tone of his description; he was just tired of walking; the development of his personal worldview ended, but the ability to observe the movement of someone else's thought, to understand and reproduce all its bends remained in all its freshness and completeness. Turgenev himself will never be Bazarov, but he thought about this type and understood him as correctly as none of our young realists will understand...

N.N. Strakhov, in his article about “Fathers and Sons,” continues Pisarev’s thought, discussing the realism and even “typicality” of Bazarov as a hero of his time, a man of the 1860s:

“Bazarov does not arouse disgust in us at all and does not seem to us either mal eleve or mauvais ton. All the characters in the novel seem to agree with us. Bazarov’s simplicity of address and figure do not arouse disgust in them, but rather inspire respect for him. He was cordially received in Anna Sergeevna’s living room, where even some bad princess was sitting...”

Pisarev’s opinions about the novel “Fathers and Sons” were shared by Herzen. About the article “Bazarov” he wrote: “This article confirms my point of view. In its one-sidedness it is truer and more remarkable than its opponents thought.” Here Herzen notes that Pisarev “recognized himself and his friends in Bazarov and added what was missing in the book,” that Bazarov “for Pisarev is more than his own,” that the critic “knows his Bazarov’s heart to the core, he confesses for him.”

Turgenev's novel shook up all layers of Russian society. The controversy about nihilism, about the image of the natural scientist, the democrat Bazarov, continued for a whole decade on the pages of almost all magazines of that time. And if in the 19th century there were still opponents of apologetic assessments of this image, then by the 20th century there were none left at all. Bazarov was raised on a shield as a harbinger of the coming storm, as a banner of everyone who wanted to destroy, without giving anything in return (“...it’s no longer our business... First we need to clear the place.”)

At the end of the 1950s, in the wake of Khrushchev’s “thaw,” a discussion unexpectedly developed, caused by the article by V. A. Arkhipov “On the creative history of the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons". In this article, the author tried to develop the previously criticized point of view of M. Antonovich. V.A. Arkhipov wrote that the novel appeared as a result of a conspiracy between Turgenev and Katkov, the editor of the Russian Messenger (“the conspiracy was obvious”) and a deal between the same Katkov and Turgenev’s advisor P.V. Annenkov (“In Katkov’s office in Leontyevsky Lane, as one would expect , a deal between a liberal and a reactionary took place." Turgenev himself strongly objected to such a vulgar and unfair interpretation of the history of the novel “Fathers and Sons” back in 1869 in his essay “About “Fathers and Sons”: “I remember that one critic (Turgenev meant M. Antonovich) in strong and eloquent expressions, directly addressed to me, presented me, together with Mr. Katkov, in the form of two conspirators, in the silence of a secluded office, plotting their vile plot, their slander against young Russian forces... The picture came out spectacular!”

Attempt V.A. Arkhipov to revive the point of view, ridiculed and refuted by Turgenev himself, caused a lively discussion, which included the magazines “Russian Literature”, “Questions of Literature”, “New World”, “Rise”, “Neva”, “Literature at School”, as well as "Literary newspaper". The results of the discussion were summed up in the article by G. Friedlander “On the debate about “Fathers and Sons”” and in the editorial “Literary Studies and Modernity” in “Questions of Literature”. They note the universal human significance of the novel and its main character.

Of course, there could be no “conspiracy” between the liberal Turgenev and the guards. In the novel “Fathers and Sons” the writer expressed what he thought. It so happened that at that moment his point of view partly coincided with the position of the conservative camp. You can't please everyone! But by what “conspiracy” Pisarev and other zealous apologists of Bazarov launched a campaign to glorify this completely unambiguous “hero” is still unclear...

The image of Bazarov as perceived by contemporaries

Contemporaries I.S. Turgenev (both “fathers” and “children”) found it difficult to talk about the image of Bazarov for the simple reason that they did not know how to relate to him. In the 60s of the 19th century, no one could have predicted what the type of behavior and dubious truths professed by the “new people” would ultimately lead to.

However, Russian society was already falling ill with an incurable disease of self-destruction, expressed, in particular, in sympathy for the “hero” created by Turgenev.

Democratic raznochinsky youth (“children”) were impressed by Bazarov’s previously inaccessible emancipation, rationalism, practicality, and his self-confidence. Such qualities as external asceticism, uncompromisingness, priority of the useful over the beautiful, lack of admiration for authorities and old truths, “reasonable egoism,” and the ability to manipulate others were perceived by young people of that time as an example to follow. Paradoxically, it was precisely in this Bazarov-style caricature that they were reflected in the worldview of Bazarov’s ideological followers - the future theorists and terrorist practitioners of Narodnaya Volya, the Socialist-Revolutionaries-maximalists and even the Bolsheviks.

The older generation (“fathers”), feeling their inadequacy and often helplessness in the new conditions of post-reform Russia, also feverishly sought a way out of the current situation. Some (protectors and reactionaries) turned to the past in their search, others (moderate liberals), disillusioned with the present, decided to bet on an as yet unknown, but promising future. This is exactly what N.A. tried to do. Nekrasov, providing the pages of his magazine for the revolutionary provocative works of Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov, bursting out with poetic pamphlets and feuilletons on the topic of the day.

The novel “Fathers and Sons”, to some extent, also became an attempt by the liberal Turgenev to keep up with new trends, to fit into an era of rationalism that was incomprehensible to him, to capture and reflect the spirit of a difficult time that was frightening in its lack of spirituality.

But we, distant descendants, for whom the political struggle in post-reform Russia long ago acquired the status of one of the pages of Russian history or one of its cruel lessons, should not forget that I.S. Turgenev was never either a topical publicist or a writer of everyday life engaged by society. The novel “Fathers and Sons” is not a feuilleton, not a parable, not an artistic embodiment by the author of fashionable ideas and trends in the development of contemporary society.

I.S. Turgenev is a unique name even in the golden galaxy of classics of Russian prose, a writer whose impeccable literary skill is correlated with an equally impeccable knowledge and understanding of the human soul. The problematics of his works are sometimes much broader and more diverse than it might seem to another unlucky critic in the era of great reforms. The ability to creatively rethink current events, to look at them through the prism of philosophical, moral and ethical, and even simple, everyday problems that are “eternal” for all mankind, distinguishes Turgenev’s fiction from the topical “creations” of Messrs. Chernyshevsky, Nekrasov, etc.

Unlike author-journalists who crave immediate commercial success and quick fame, the “literary aristocrat” Turgenev had the fortunate opportunity not to flirt with the reading public, not to follow the lead of fashion editors and publishers, but to write as he saw fit. Turgenev speaks honestly about his Bazarov: “And if he is called a nihilist, then it should be read: revolutionary.” But does Russia need such"revolutionaries"? Everyone, after reading the novel “Fathers and Sons,” must decide for himself.

At the beginning of the novel, Bazarov bears little resemblance to a living character. A nihilist who takes nothing for granted, denies everything that cannot be touched, he zealously defends his incorporeal, completely immaterial idol, whose name is “nothing,” i.e. Emptiness.

Having no positive program, Bazarov sets as his main task only destruction ( “We need to break others!” ; “First we need to clear the place,” etc.). But why? What does he want to create in this emptiness? “It’s no longer our business,” Bazarov answers a completely natural question from Nikolai Petrovich.

The future clearly showed that the ideological followers of the Russian nihilists, the revolutionaries-janitors of the 20th century, were not at all interested in the question of who, how and what would create in the devastated space they had cleared. It was precisely this “rake” that the first Provisional Government stepped on in February 1917, then the fiery Bolsheviks repeatedly stepped on it, clearing the way for a bloody totalitarian regime...

Brilliant artists, like seers, sometimes reveal truths that are securely hidden behind the veils of future mistakes, disappointments, and ignorance. Perhaps unconsciously, but even then, in the 60s of the 19th century, Turgenev foresaw the futility, even the destruction, of the path of purely materialistic, unspiritual progress, leading to the destruction of the very foundations of human existence.

Destroyers like Turgenev's Bazarov are sincerely deceived themselves and deceive others. As bright, attractive personalities, they can become ideological leaders, they can lead people, manipulate them, but... if a blind man leads a blind man, then sooner or later both will fall into a hole. Known truth.

Only life itself can clearly prove to such people the failure of their chosen path.

Bazarov and Odintsova: test of love

In order to deprive the image of Bazarov of its cartoonish sketchiness and give it living, realistic features, the author of “Fathers and Sons” deliberately subjects his hero to the traditional test of love.

Love for Anna Sergeevna Odintsova, as a manifestation of the true component of human life, “breaks” Bazarov’s theories. After all, the truth of life is stronger than any artificially created “systems”.

It turned out that “superman” Bazarov, like all people, is not free over his feelings. Having an aversion to aristocrats in general, he falls in love not with a peasant woman at all, but with a proud society lady who knows her worth, an aristocrat to the core. The “plebeian,” who imagines himself to be the master of his own destiny, is unable to subjugate such a woman. A fierce struggle begins, but the struggle is not with the object of one’s passion, but with oneself, with one’s own nature. Bazarov's thesis “nature is not a temple, but a workshop, and man is a worker in it” scatters to smithereens. Like any mortal, Bazarov is subject to jealousy, passion, is capable of “losing his head” from love, experiencing the whole gamut of feelings previously denied by him, and reaching a completely different level of awareness of himself as a person. Evgeny Bazarov is capable of love, and this “metaphysics” previously denied by a convinced materialist almost drives him crazy.

However, the “humanization” of the hero does not lead to his spiritual rebirth. Bazarova's love is selfish. He perfectly understands the falsity of the rumors spread about Madame Odintsova by the provincial gossips, but does not give himself the trouble to understand and accept the real her. It is no coincidence that Turgenev addresses Anna Sergeevna’s past in such detail. Odintsova is even more inexperienced in love than Bazarov himself. He fell in love for the first time, she had never loved. A young, beautiful, very lonely woman was disappointed in a love relationship without even recognizing it. She willingly replaces the concept of happiness with the concepts of comfort, order, peace of mind, because she is afraid of love, like every person is afraid of something unfamiliar and unknown. Throughout their acquaintance, Odintsova neither brings Bazarov closer nor pushes him away. Like any woman who is ready to fall in love, she is waiting for the first step from a potential lover, but Bazarov’s unbridled, almost bestial passion frightened Anna Sergeevna even more, forcing her to seek salvation in the orderliness and tranquility of her former life. Bazarov has neither the experience nor the worldly wisdom to act differently. He “needs to do business,” and not delve into the intricacies of someone else’s soul.

Film adaptations of the novel

Strange as it may seem, the most philosophical, completely non-cinematic novel by I.S. Turgenev’s “Fathers and Sons” was filmed five times in our country: in 1915, 1958, 1974 (television play), 1983, 2008.

Almost all the directors of these productions followed the same thankless path. They tried to convey in every detail the eventful and ideological components of the novel, forgetting about its main, philosophical subtext. In the film by A. Bergunker and N. Rashevskaya (1958), the main emphasis is, naturally, on social and class contradictions. Against the background of the caricatured types of provincial nobles Kirsanov and Odintsova, Bazarov looks like a completely positive, “sleek” democratic hero, a harbinger of a great socialist future. Apart from Bazarov, in the 1958 film there is not a single character sympathetic to the viewer. Even the “Turgenev girl” Katya Lokteva is presented as a round (in the literal sense of the word) fool who says smart things.

The four-episode version of V. Nikiforov (1983), despite the excellent constellation of actors (V. Bogin, V. Konkin, B. Khimichev, V. Samoilov, N. Danilova), upon its appearance, disappointed the viewer with its overt textbook nature, expressed primarily in the literal following the text of Turgenev's novel. Reproaches for being “long-winded,” “dry,” and “uncinematic” continue to fall on its creators from the mouths of the current viewer, who cannot imagine a movie without Hollywood “action” and humor “below the belt.” Meanwhile, it is precisely in following Turgenev’s text, in our opinion, that the main advantage of the 1983 film adaptation lies. Classical literature is called classical because it does not require later corrections or original interpretations. In the novel "Fathers and Sons" everything is important. It is impossible to remove or add anything from it without damaging the understanding of the meaning of this work. By consciously abandoning the selectivity of the texts and unjustified “gag,” the filmmakers managed to fully convey Turgenev’s mood, make the viewer involved in the events and characters, and reveal almost all the facets, all the “layers” of the complex, highly artistic creation of the Russian classic.

But in the sensational serial version by A. Smirnova (2008), unfortunately, Turgenev’s mood is completely gone. Despite the location shooting in Spassky-Lutovinovo, there was a good selection of actors for the main roles, “Fathers and Sons” by Smirnova and “Fathers and Sons” by I.S. Turgenev are two different works.

The cute young scoundrel Bazarov (A. Ustyugov), created in contrast to the “positive hero” of the 1958 film, enters into an intellectual duel with the charming old man Pavel Petrovich (A. Smirnov). However, it is impossible to understand the essence of this conflict in Smirnova’s film, even if one wants to. The mediocrely truncated text of Turgenev’s dialogues is more reminiscent of the flaccid arguments of today’s children with today’s fathers, devoid of true drama. The only evidence of the 19th century is the absence of modern youth slang in the speech of the characters, and the occasional French rather than English words that slip through. And if in the 1958 film there is a clear bias in the author’s sympathies towards “children”, then in the 2008 film the opposite situation is clearly visible. The wonderful duet of Bazarov’s parents (Yursky - Tenyakova), Nikolai Petrovich (A. Vasiliev), touching in his resentment, and even A. Smirnov, who is not suitable in age for the role of the older Kirsanov, “outplay” Bazarov in terms of acting and thereby leave no doubt in the viewer’s mind in his rightness.

Any person who takes the time to thoughtfully re-read Turgenev’s text will become clear that such an interpretation of “Fathers and Sons” has nothing in common with the novel itself. Turgenev’s work is therefore considered “eternal”, “everlasting” (according to N. Strakhov’s definition), because it contains neither “pros” nor “minuses”, nor harsh condemnation, nor complete justification of the heroes. The novel forces us to think and choose, and the creators of the 2008 film simply filmed a remake of the 1958 production, sticking “minus” and “plus” signs to the faces of other characters.

It’s also sad that the vast majority of our contemporaries (judging by reviews on online forums and critical articles in the press) were quite happy with this director’s approach: glamorous, not quite banal, and, moreover, perfectly adapted for the mass consumer of the Hollywood “movement.” What else is needed?

“He is predatory, and you and I are tame,”- Katya noted, thereby indicating the deep gap between the main character and other characters in the novel. To overcome the “interspecies difference”, to make Bazarov an ordinary “doubting intellectual” - a district doctor, teacher or zemstvo figure would be too Chekhovian. This was not the intention of the author of the novel. Turgenev only sowed doubt in his soul, but life itself dealt with Bazarov.

The author especially emphasizes the impossibility of rebirth and the spiritual static nature of Bazarov by the absurd accident of his death. For a miracle to happen, the hero needed mutual love. But Anna Sergeevna could not love him.

N.N. Strakhov wrote about Bazarov:

“He dies, but until the last moment he remains alien to this life, which he encountered so strangely, which alarmed him with such trifles, forced him to do such stupid things and, finally, destroyed him due to such an insignificant reason.

Bazarov dies a perfect hero, and his death makes a stunning impression. Until the very end, until the last flash of consciousness, he does not betray himself with a single word or a single sign of cowardice. He is broken, but not defeated..."

Unlike the critic Strakhov and others like him, I.S. Already in 1861, the unviability and historical doom of the “new people” who were worshiped by the progressive public of that time were quite obvious to Turgenev.

The cult of destruction in the name of destruction alone is alien to the living principle, the manifestation of what later L.N. Tolstoy in his novel “War and Peace” described it with the term “swarm life”. Andrei Bolkonsky, like Bazarov, is incapable of rebirth. Both authors kill their heroes because they deny them participation in true, real life. Moreover, Turgenev's Bazarov to the end "doesn't change itself" and, unlike Bolkonsky, at the moment of his far from heroic, absurd death he does not evoke pity. I sincerely feel sorry for his unfortunate parents, to the point of tears, because they are alive. Bazarov is a “dead man” to a much greater extent than the living “dead man” Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. He is still able to cling to life (for loyalty to his memories, for love for Fenechka). Bazarov is stillborn by definition. Even love can't save him.

"Neither fathers nor sons"

“Neither fathers nor children,” one witty lady told me after reading my book, “that’s the real title of your story - and you yourself are a nihilist.”
I.S. Turgenev “About “Fathers and Sons”

If we follow the path of the critics of the 19th century and again begin to clarify the author’s position regarding the social conflict between the generations of “fathers” and “sons” of the 1860s, then only one thing can be said with confidence: neither fathers nor children.

Today one cannot but agree with the same Pisarev and Strakhov - the difference between generations is never as great and tragic as at turning points, key moments in history. The 1860s for Russia were precisely such a moment when “The great chain broke, it broke - one end snapped at the master, the other at the peasant!..”

Large-scale government reforms carried out “from above” and the associated liberalization of society were overdue for more than half a century. The “children” of the 60s, who expected too much from the inevitably coming changes, found themselves too cramped in the narrow caftan of moderate liberalism of their “fathers” who had not yet managed to grow old. They wanted real freedom, Pugachev’s freedom, so that everything that was old and hated would go up in flames and be completely burned out. A generation of revolutionary arsonists was born, thoughtlessly denying all previous experience accumulated by humanity.

Thus, the conflict between fathers and children in Turgenev’s novel is by no means a family conflict. The Kirsanov-Bazarov conflict also goes far beyond the scope of the social conflict between the old noble aristocracy and the young revolutionary-democratic intelligentsia. This is a conflict between two historical eras that accidentally came into contact with each other in the house of the landowners Kirsanovs. Pavel Petrovich and Nikolai Petrovich symbolize the irretrievably gone past, with which everything is clear, Bazarov is the still undecided, wandering, like dough in a tub, mysterious present. Only the future will tell what will come out of this test. But neither Bazarov nor his ideological opponents have a future.

Turgenev equally ironizes both “children” and “fathers”. He portrays some as self-confident and selfish false prophets, while others endow them with the traits of offended righteous people, or even call them “dead men.” Both the boorish “plebeian” Bazarov with his “progressive” views and the sophisticated aristocrat Pavel Petrovich, dressed in the armor of moderate liberalism of the 1840s, are equally funny. Their ideological clash reveals not so much a clash of beliefs as a clash of tragic misconceptions both generations. By and large, they have nothing to argue about and nothing to oppose each other, because there is much more that unites them than that that separates them.

Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich are extremely sketchy characters. They are both alien to real life, but living people act around them: Arkady and Katya, Nikolai Petrovich and Fenechka, touching, loving old people - Bazarov’s parents. None of them is capable of creating something fundamentally new, but no one is capable of thoughtless destruction either.

That is why they all remain alive, and Bazarov dies, thereby interrupting all the author’s assumptions on the topic of his further development.

However, Turgenev still takes it upon himself to lift the curtain on the future of the “fathers” generation. After a duel with Bazarov, Pavel Petrovich calls on his brother to marry the commoner Fenechka, to whom he himself, despite all his rules, is far from indifferent. This demonstrates the loyalty of the generation of “fathers” in relation to the almost accomplished future. And although the duel between Kirsanov and Bazarov is presented by the author as a very comical episode, it can be called one of the most powerful, even key scenes in the novel. Turgenev deliberately reduces the social, ideological, age conflict to a purely everyday insult to the individual and pits the heroes in a duel not for beliefs, but for honor.

The innocent scene in the gazebo might have seemed (and indeed did seem) to Pavel Petrovich offensive to the honor of his brother. In addition, jealousy speaks in him: Fenechka is not indifferent to the old aristocrat. He takes a cane, like a knight takes a spear, and goes to challenge the offender to a duel. Bazarov understands that refusal will entail a direct threat to his personal honor. He accepts the challenge. The eternal concept of “honor” turns out to be higher than his far-fetched beliefs, higher than the assumed position of a nihilist-denier.

For the sake of unshakable moral truths, Bazarov plays by the rules of the “old people,” thereby proving the continuity of both generations at the universal human level and the prospect of their productive dialogue.

The possibility of such dialogue, in isolation from the social and ideological contradictions of the era, is the main component of human life. Ultimately, only eternal, not subject to temporary changes, real values ​​and eternal truths are the basis for the continuity of generations of “fathers” and “children.”

According to Turgenev, the “fathers,” even if they were wrong, tried to understand the younger generation, showing readiness for future dialogue. The “children” have yet to go through this difficult path. The author would like to believe that the path of Arkady Kirsanov, who went through disappointment in previous ideals and found his love and true purpose, is more correct than Bazarov’s path. But Turgenev, as a wise thinker, avoids dictating his personal opinion to his contemporaries and descendants. He leaves the reader at a crossroads: everyone must choose for himself...