Duel of bazarov and kirsanov analysis essay. Duel in the work of i.s

"Fathers and Sons"

Duels as a way to resolve conflicts that arise between people of the same circle were adopted by the nobles. The duel entered literature, on the one hand, as part of the noble life of that era, on the other hand, as a technique that helps the writer to aggravate the conflict, bring it to a climax or to a denouement. In the novel "Fathers and Sons" by the time of the duel, the climax in the relationship between the heroes of Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich is already behind (Chapter 10, an argument over tea). The role of the duel episode in this work is to show the noble custom as a relic. The duel, like the whole work, is directed "against the nobility as an advanced class."

The episode is saturated with the author's irony from beginning to end. Curiosity is the very reason for the duel, because it was generally accepted either to fight because of the “beautiful lady”, or to wash away the insult with blood. Here, Pavel Petrovich calls Bazarov because he spied on the innocent kiss of his enemy and Fenechka, to whom, by the way, Pavel Petrovich was not indifferent. For some unknown reason, she reminded him of the woman he loved before. This, undoubtedly, reduces the image of Pavel Petrovich, gives it a comic shade, because the commoner Fenechka is no match for the mysterious Princess R.

Why does Bazarov accept the challenge? He believes that "from a theoretical point of view, a duel is absurd, but from a practical point of view, it is another matter." By agreeing to follow the obsolete aristocratic custom, he thereby destroys the nihilistic idea. Throughout the novel, the author forces Bazarov to violate the commandments of nihilism.

At the outset of the episode, Bazarov is in a stalemate, because the enemy made a challenge with a heavy cane in his hands. At the thought of a possible insult, "all his pride rose on its hind legs." The absurdity and comicality of this scene is emphasized by the words of Bazarov: “How beautiful and how stupid! What a comedy broke off! Smart dogs dance like that on their hind legs.”

Having accepted the challenge, Bazarov may feel the proximity of death. On the evening before the fight, he even starts a letter to his father, but leaves it with the thought: “I will loom in this world for a long time.” The word "loom" reflects the state of mind of the hero, who is going through a crisis after breaking up with Odintsova.

Turgenev again deviates from the image of a duel accepted in Russian literature. The participants in the duel traditionally summed up their lives (Onegin, Pechorin). For Bazarov, the time of comprehension of the life lived will be a dying illness, and not a duel.

So it was "a glorious, fresh morning." Turgenev draws nature with great skill before the duel. It does not depend on the events taking place around, but remains invariably beautiful. With this picture, the writer once again emphasizes the idea that everything acutely political, momentary fades into the background before the eternal. “No matter how passionate, sinful, rebellious heart hides in the grave, flowers ... speak of eternal reconciliation and endless life,” it will be written at the end of the novel.

And on this beautiful morning, Bazarov, together with Peter, goes to the appointed place. Along the way, they meet a peasant, whose appearance once again sets off the senselessness of the duel: “This one also got up early, yes, at least, on business, and we?”

Pavel Petrovich tries to fulfill all the rules and formalities of the duel. On the contrary, in every action of Bazarov. one can see the irony about these formalities ("I will measure the steps" because "my legs are longer"). He mocks all the actions and words of Pavel Petrovich. When he offers to “please choose” pistols, he replies: “I deign!” Even the appointment of Peter as a second is another way to make fun of Pavel Petrovich.

The culmination of this episode is the wounding of Pavel Petrovich. Even in this “tragic” moment, the author does not leave an ironic tone with which he announces the appearance of a trickle of blood on his white dandy pantaloons - how “beautiful”! Although the wound is not serious, Pavel Petrovich loses consciousness. By this, the writer emphasizes his weakness. The escape of the second looks comical: “Peter! come here; Peter! Where did you hide?

After being wounded, Bazarov shows his best qualities by helping his former enemy. “Now I am no longer a duelist, but a doctor,” says Bazarov, and one can feel relief in his words that he has finally got rid of the role of “duelist” imposed on him.

The duel scene is framed by the appearance of a peasant with a horse, important not only in the compositional but also in the ideological sense, emphasizing the contrast between the people and both heroes.

The episode of the duel ends with the departure of the protagonist. It becomes clear that the duel did not resolve the conflict between Pavel Petrovich and Bazarov, between "fathers and children", but only formally reconciled them. “Pavel Petrovich shook hands with him,” “but Bazarov remained as cold as ice. He understood that Pavel Petrovich wanted to be "generous."

The central characters of the novel "Fathers and Sons" Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov are antipodes, although there is something in common between them: both are proud, categorical, while they are decent, sincere and attractive in their own way. All this, as well as the abyss that separates them, we see both in the duel episode and in other episodes.

There are many different energies in a person. And each of them has its own boiling point, that is, a point that characterizes its dimension, in which it can no longer exist in the form in which it exists. So, one day my physical energy reached such a point. Then I sat at work for a long time, and all this work concerned the computer. In the end, after a while, I realized that I would probably die now if I did not kill or stab someone. I was lucky: after some time at the dacha it was necessary to break the closet (it had to be taken out of the house, and it was too large for the doorway and not collapsible), of course, I immediately volunteered. God, how I broke it then! .. I didn’t turn the bolts away, but pounded them with a sledgehammer with all my might, until they burst and flew away the devil knows where! It was useless to hammer on the hinges, I slipped a mount under one of them, pressed it with such force that the cabinet turned over, in my opinion, even the mount was bent a little. There is an example from history: the Franco-Prussian war. Relations between Germany and France became so tense that an easy pretext was enough to start a war.
So it happened with the two heroes of the novel "Fathers and Sons". Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov from the very beginning did not like his nephew's friend Bazarov. According to both, they belonged to different class groups: Kirsanov did not even shake hands with Bazarov when they first met. They had different views on life, they did not understand each other, opposed each other in everything, despised each other. Often there were clashes and quarrels between them. After a while, they began to communicate, and, consequently, quarrel less, but the spiritual confrontation remained. The bomb was planted, it only remained to detonate it. He detuned her case with Fenechka. Pavel Petrovich was jealous of Fenechka for Bazarov when he saw them kissing in the arbor, and the next day challenged him to a duel. As for the reason, he said this: “I think ... it is inappropriate to delve into the real reasons for our collision. We can't stand each other. What more? Bazarov agreed, but called the duel "stupid", "extraordinary". It happens the next day early in the morning. They had no seconds, there was only a witness - Peter. While Bazarov measured out steps, Pavel Petrovich loaded pistols. They dispersed, took aim, fired. Bazarov wounded Pavel Petrovich in the leg ... Although they were supposed to shoot again according to the condition, he ran up to the enemy and bandaged his wound, sent Peter for the droshky. They decided to tell Nikolai Petrovich, who had arrived with Peter, that they had quarreled over politics.
Can Bazarov's victory be considered as a hint that progressive people are right and will win one day? I think not, with the same success as Bazarov won, Pavel Petrovich could have won, he just didn’t have enough luck, you can talk about who defeated whom during their quarrel, but not in a duel, when everything is decided by theory probabilities. Of course, they themselves were the main culprits of the duel: no one incited them to this; this is how Pavel Petrovich himself commented: “We had a little quarrel with Mr. Bazarov, and I paid a little for it.”
The author describes the morning nature, against which Bazarov and Peter walked, as if showing that they, fools, got up early, woke up nature and came to the clearing to engage in “stupidity”, knowing that it would not end in anything good. The author also shows the special behavior of Pavel Petrovich before the duel: “Pavel Petrovich suppressed everyone, even Prokofich, with his chilling politeness”, which indicates that he wanted to win the duel, he really hoped for it, he wanted to get even with the “nihilists”: “He aims me right in the nose, and how diligently he squints, the robber!” Bazarov thought during the duel.
The duel scene occupies one of the final, resulting places in the novel. After her, the characters began to treat each other at least a little, but in a different way: either they treat each other well, or they don’t treat each other at all.

Between the ideological duel in Chapter X and the pre-duel explanation, a whole series of events take place in Bazarov's life, significantly softening the harsh image of the beginning of the novel. The following contributes to this:

a dispute with Arkady in a haystack, where Bazarov, perhaps for the first time, acutely felt his loneliness and admitted his self-loathing;

a visit to the parents, which highlighted the new, soft facets of the hero's soul, his careful attitude towards his parents, habitually hidden under a rudely ironic mask;

a meeting with Odintsova and an absurd scene of a declaration of love, which for the first time showed Bazarov to the point of helplessly passionate and not entirely understood;

the scene in the gazebo with Fenechka, which reflected the process of intensifying the hero's struggle with his nature.

What makes this scene special? It is interestingly built compositionally: the characters seem to seize the initiative from each other several times. In addition, it is here that, after a long break, “fathers” and “children” clash with even greater sharpness. More clearly than before, in this episode, the characters of the two heroes appear. Not like before, this last of the psychological duels ends, and the heroes suddenly find themselves on the verge of real, physical bloodshed.

Before this duel, the heroes feel differently. Bazarov is in an unusual state of confusion for him, his usual work is not going well. He is annoyed with himself after two clumsy actions in a row in relation to two women - to Odintsova in the scene of a declaration of love and to Fenechka in the scene with a kiss in the gazebo. However, as before, he is completely indifferent to Pavel Petrovich and does not seek further quarrels with him. At the same time, Pavel Petrovich's indignation against Bazarov reached its highest point, and the last straw was a kiss in the arbor.

However, unlike past disputes that arose spontaneously, Kirsanov is preparing for this duel, and this is his initial advantage.

At the beginning of the scene, Bazarov is unusually unsure of himself. After Bazarov's first remark, the author's words come: "... answered Bazarov, in whom something ran across his face as soon as Pavel Petrovich crossed the threshold of the door." Previously, Turgenev did not characterize the state of Bazarov (according to the laws of "secret psychology") with indefinite pronouns.

And further - when Pavel Petrovich spoke about the duel, the author writes: "Bazarov, who stood up to meet Pavel Petrovich, sat down on the edge of the table and folded his arms." Half-gestures “got up”, “sat down” are also not typical for Yevgeny. Immediately after being challenged to a duel: "Bazarov's eyes widened."

Bazarov's confusion at this moment is reflected in his speech. He usually spoke rudely, abruptly, abruptly. And here are the usual turns of the type “yes, no matter what!” are accompanied by phrases more characteristic of Kirsanov: "Very well, sir", "You have a fantasy to test your chivalrous spirit on me."

In turn, Pavel Petrovich tries to restrain his excitement, firstly, by excessively emphasized politeness and formality of tone. Secondly, a “beautiful cane” specially taken for such an occasion, a symbol of aristocratic superiority, helps him not to throw off this mask and maintain the set tone. The cane, as a symbolic detail, went through the whole episode. Bazarov called it a "stick" - an instrument of possible violence.

After Kirsanov's confession, "I despise you," the quarrel culminated: "Pavel Petrovich's eyes sparkled ... They also flared up at Bazarov." It is at this moment that Bazarov takes control of himself and uses the usual weapon of irony, starting to mimic his opponent, repeating almost verbatim the endings of each of Kirsanov's remarks. It doesn't go unnoticed. Kirsanov says: "You keep joking..." But this time Pavel Petrovich won't lose his temper, as he used to. Why? Bazarov, although joking, did not overstep the bounds of what was permitted. In addition, the cane that was present nearby helped - a kind of reminder of aristocracy, a symbol of patience, support.

Each of the characters throughout the scene diligently hides his true feelings from the other. Kirsanov behind a screen of politeness hides resentment, jealousy, indignation, and Bazarov behind a screen of irony - confusion and irritation with himself.

It seems that this psychological duel is won by Pavel Petrovich, who has achieved his goal on almost all counts. And Bazarov, after his departure, even more lost his inherent inner calm, dissatisfied with himself, experiencing remorse and moral feelings that were not inherent in him, having discovered Pavel Petrovich's secret love for Fenechka.

During the duel itself, after the shots, both opponents behave with dignity. Bazarov fulfills his medical and human duty, showing the nobility that he had recently hated, and Pavel Petrovich courageously and even with humor endures pain and loses all resentment towards Bazarov.

"Secondary school No. 109"

Literature lesson in grade 10

Lesson topic: The role of the duel episode in I.S. Turgenev's novel "Fathers and Sons".

Lesson Objectives:

1. Determination of the compositional and ideological role of the episode: the duel as the completion of ideological disputes, the victory of the human principle over ideological convictions.

Formation of students' moral qualities of personality, attitudes and beliefs.

During the classes:

Teacher's word.

Guys, we continue the conversation about the heroes of the novel "Fathers and Sons". Today is a duel between two ideological opponents: Evgeny Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov.slide 1.

What tasks will we solve during our conversation?

( analysis of the duel episode; revealing the compositional and ideological role of the duel episode in the novel, is it possible to fully understand the ideological opponents).Slide 2.

Why do you think this should be given special attention?(suggested answers: it was the duel that put an end to the ideological disputes between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich; this is part of the noble life, life, of that era; the duel is used as a literary device - the need to put an end to the relationship of the characters; at the end of the duel episode we see PEOPLE, human relationships.)

2. Definition of "duel". From the history of the duel.

Guys, how do you understand the word "duel"? (children's answers) And now, before starting to study the role of the duel in the life of society and in Russian literatureXIXcentury, it is necessary to find out the meaning of this word in the explanatory dictionary.Slide 3.

1. D.N. Ushakov Big explanatory dictionary of the modern Russian language:

DUEL , duels, female (French duel). A duel that takes place according to certain rules, a battle between two opponents on the challenge of one of them. A duel between someone and someone. Duel of Pushkin with Dantes. Fight someone in a duel. Challenge someone to a duel.

|| trans. A competition, a struggle between two sides (books, newspapers). Verbal duel between the defender and the prosecutor. Anglo-American duel.

2. Explanatory dictionary of V. Dahl:

DUEL and. single combat, duel; in general, it is customary to call a duel a conditional duel, with already known rituals, on a call. Dueling, pertaining to a duel. Duelist m. combatant, duel, more in meaning. bully, fighter; Breter. ( Breter is an avid, "professional" duelist, ready to fight a duel for any, even the most insignificant reason. Most often, the duel was deliberately provoked by a breter.)

The duel is a class-noble custom that became widespread in Russia in the 18th-19th centuries. (Onegin Encyclopedia).

* In the nobility, especially among the officers, duels were considered as fights in defense of honor, therefore, according to the unspoken internal noble code, refusing to be challenged to a duel was considered a manifestation of cowardice and meant dishonor. A nobleman who refused a duel lost respect and was refused society.

The duel began with a challenge. This, as a rule, was preceded by a collision, as a result of which either side considered itself offended, and as such demanded satisfaction. From that moment on, the opponents were no longer supposed to enter into communication - this was taken over by their representatives - seconds. Having chosen a second for himself, the offended discussed with them the severity of the offense inflicted on him, on which the nature of the future duel depended - from a formal exchange of shots to the death of one or both participants. After that, the second sent a written challenge to the enemy (cartel).

The role of the seconds was as follows: as mediators between opponents, they, first of all, were obliged to make every effort to reconcile. Even on the battlefield, the seconds had to make one last attempt at reconciliation. If reconciliation proved impossible, they drew up written conditions and carefully monitored the strict implementation of the entire procedure.

Which of the authors included duel scenes in their works? For what purpose? (M.Yu. Lermontov "Hero of Our Time" -duel as a result of the confrontation between Pechorin and Grushnitsky, A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin".

(viewing an episode from the film "A Hero of Our Time", a duel scene, an episode from the opera "Eugene Onegin, a duel scene.)

The duel contributes to a more complete disclosure of the characters of Onegin and Lensky. Both heroes understand the fallacy of the decision made and bitterly regret what they have done, but it is not possible to avoid a bloody clash. It is clear to the reader that an accidental quarrel is only a pretext for a duel, but its cause, the cause of Lensky's death, is much deeper. A force enters into the quarrel between Onegin and Lensky, which can no longer be turned back. This is the power of public opinion.). What is the difference between these duels and the duel between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich? (these two duels are tragic, ending in the death of one of the heroes, and the duel in the novel "Fathers and Sons" is stupid, meaningless and ironic).Slides 4, 5, 6, 7.

3. Working with text.

Teacher:

Why didn't Pavel Petrovich explain the true reason for the duel? * Remember the scene with Fenechka. (expected student responses: Pavel Petrovich was secretly in love with Fenechka, she looked like a book R .., the love of her life, for which he sacrificed everything).

Why do you think this duel didn't happen in chapter 10? (expected student responses: in chapter 10, they could not hear and listen to each other, because both considered themselves right. And in the duel scene, they "agreed" because ideological relations were replaced by human relations. It was not yet time for this duel.)

Is complete understanding between people possible? (Yes, if a person is ready to listen to the opponent. In the duel scene, they realized that they were not so far from each other.)

Let's comment on the scene of the call by Pavel Petrovich Bazarov. Let's consider the details. (One student reads an excerpt from the text: “Here is my opinion,” he began ...<...>... I despise you, and if you are unhappy with this ...”). What is Bazarov's attitude to challenging him to a duel? (1. Extremely surprised: “Bazarov goggled his eyes: “With me?”, Bazarov is a raznochinets, and Kirsanov is a nobleman, the duel should be between people of the same class; 2. Ironically refers to the challenge: “Fine,” said Pavel Petrovich. ..<...>- Can; why!”, lexical repetitions by Bazarov, which shows the irony of the situation).

We saw how Bazarov relates to the duel. And how do you feel about this way of clarifying the relationship? And what about I.S. Turgenev? (expected student responses: as always through a description of nature.) Is a description of nature given in the duel scene? How? (expected student responses: the author begins the description of the morning duel with an image of nature. In this episode, the contrast between the landscape, the appearance of a peasant with horses and the upcoming duel is manifested: the peasant was forced to get up early by work, and Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich - their own stupidity.)

What else is the irony of the duel scene? (expected student responses: exchanging remarks, the duel participants pronounce phrases in different foreign languages, this manifests their desire to oppose themselves to each other.During the duel, the author depicts in detail the psychological state of Bazarov, because the duel is a critical moment - the moment of truth at which the essence of a person is manifested. At the climax of the duel, Bazarov continues to sneer: “He aims right in the nose, ... and how diligently he squints, robber!”, “- And you must admit, Pavel Petrovich, that our duel is unusual to the point of ridiculous ...”. Pavel Petrovich is as serious as ever, he behaves like a true duelist: he diligently aims and squints. The phrase: "A trickle of blood ran down his white trousers" has the effect of a scene from a beautiful, romantic French novel.Pavel Petrovich's fainting and the behavior of the "improved" lackey give an ironic character to the denouement of the duel. Both heroes after the duel, while waiting for the droshky, feel depressed. They understand the pointlessness of their duel. The second appearance of a peasant with horses emphasizes the stupidity of the duel between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich.)

How and how the duel ends? (expected student responses: having wounded Kirsanov, Bazarov, like a real doctor, immediately helps him. As a result of their experiences before and during the duel, they became different people.After the duel, restraint and emphasized politeness towards each other appeared in the behavior of the heroes. When leaving the Kirsanov Bazarov estate, he feels bad. Bazarov's departure is the denouement in the conflict between "fathers" and "children".The duel scene is also important because it shows that no matter what the differences between generations, liberals and democrats, first of all - they are people. And this means that in difficult times they will be able to find a common language and exist together.)

Slide 8.9.

4. The results of the lesson.

Let's sum up the lesson. What goals did we set for ourselves at the beginning of the lesson? Have we reached them? (expected student responses: we understood that the episode of the duel became a point in the relationship between the nihilist raznochintsy and the liberal aristocrat, what is the compositional role of the duel scene; in the duel episode, the ideological contradictions between the characters gave way to human relations - this is the ideological role of the duel scene.)slide 10.

And now we will see how the on-screen heroes perform before us. (viewing an episode of the film with a duel scene).

Did the director of the film manage to realize the author's intention?

What other way did the director find to show the confrontation between our heroes?

Discussion of a movie episode.

Homework. Write a miniature essay, answering the question: "What moral lesson does I.S. Turgenev give us?"

The work “Fathers and Sons” is a kind of topic for disputes between the liberal half of the population and the democratic half, whose views differ. When the author wrote this novel, the theme of human freedom, liberalism, and democracy was very relevant in our homeland, which actually contributed to the development of the storyline of the novel.

In the novel, we are told the story of two friends Bazarov, who is a democrat, and Kirsanov, who is an adherent of liberalism. Their friendship is very strange. They constantly argue on political topics, and sometimes their disputes end in almost a light brawl. But for the most part, these disputes ended on a peaceful note, until the fateful day came. In one of these disputes, friends decide to resolve their eternal disputes with a duel, arguing that God will judge them.

Before the duel, Bazarov is pretty nervous, which is why he has bad dreams, and he comes to the duel not getting enough sleep. Further in the course of the duel, he wounds his friend Kirsanov, but, fortunately, not mortally. After the duel, Bazarov leaves Kirsanov's house and leaves.

From this segment of the work, the author shows us the clash of two different opinions. Since Bazarov is a supporter of democracy, and his friend Kirsanov is liberalism, a conflict of opinions flares up between them, which is why Kirsanov later gets injured. Although, despite this, everyone remained in a good mood, since both achieved what they wanted, namely Kirsanov achieved Bazarov's district, and the second, in turn, defended his opinion and convictions. From this episode, the author tried to tell us that different opinions can make people go to murder, because each of them was ready for the death of his opponent, and each of them was ready to die for his beliefs. From this we see that political preferences and friendship almost always go apart, and if you combine these two concepts, then nothing good will come of it.

In this work, I analyzed an episode from the novel “Fathers and Sons”, and from which I drew a conclusion related to political views and their influence on friendship. Everything that I discussed in the work is described above, and has clearly structured and reasoned grounds, but despite this, my opinion is still subjective, based on personal convictions, and it, like any other, can be erroneous.

Some interesting essays

• Analysis of the work of Flaubert Madame Bovary essay

  Flaubert's famous work, Madame Bovary, refers to a psychological drama that depicts the life of the French province of the 20th century. The very idea for writing such a novel

• Do you agree with the words of Pushkin: “There is no return to dreams and years” (Final essay)

  Living his life, long or not very long, every person indulges in dreams. He dreams all the time, all the time. And this is considered a completely normal phenomenon and human behavior, the normal state of the human soul.

• Analysis of Saltykov-Shchedrin's Christmas Tale

  This is a very sad tale, there is no happy ending in it ... From the very beginning, events are pumped up. It seems that in a fairy tale with such a name, a miracle will surely happen, at least at the end.

• Composition Oblomov's lifestyle in Oblomov's novel

  The figure of Oblomov in the novel of the same name is the dominant and most striking among the other characters. Through the description of the fate of the protagonist, Goncharov raises the problem of finding the meaning of life and other equally important questions of philosophy.

• Features of the composition of Lermontov's novel A Hero of Our Time

  Roman M.Yu. Lermontov's "Hero of Our Time" was published in 1840. The work is written in five parts. Five separate stories are united by the main character - Pechorin