Love, family and other eternal values ​​as perceived by Oblomov and Stolz - a document. My favorite “Oblomov”: Family life of Olga and Stolz Stolz’s attitude towards love

Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" was highly praised by critics of the second half of the 19th century century. In particular, Belinsky noted that the work was timely and reflected the socio-political thought of the 50-60s of the nineteenth century. Two lifestyles - Oblomov and Stolz - are discussed in this article in comparison.

Characteristics of Oblomov

Ilya Ilyich was distinguished by his desire for peace and inaction. Oblomov cannot be called interesting and varied: he is used to spending most of the day thinking, lying on the sofa. Immersed in these thoughts, he often did not rise from his bed all day, did not go out into the street, did not recognize latest news. He didn’t read newspapers on principle, so as not to bother himself with unnecessary, and most importantly, meaningless information. Oblomov can be called a philosopher; he is concerned with other questions: not everyday, not momentary, but eternal, spiritual. He looks for meaning in everything.

When you look at him, you get the impression that he is a happy freethinker, not burdened by the hardships and problems of external life. But life “touches, gets at” Ilya Ilyich everywhere, makes him suffer. Dreams remain just dreams, because he does not know how to make them come true. real life. Even reading tires him: Oblomov has many books he has started, but all of them remain unread and misunderstood. The soul seems to be dormant in him: he avoids unnecessary worries, worries, worries. In addition, Oblomov often compares his calm, solitary existence with the lives of other people and finds that it is not suitable to live the way others live: “When to live?”

This is what Oblomov’s ambiguous image represents. “Oblomov” (I.A. Goncharov) was created with the aim of depicting the personality of this character - extraordinary and extraordinary in its own way. He is no stranger to impulses and deep emotional experiences. Oblomov is a true dreamer with a poetic, sensitive nature.

Characteristics of Stolz

Oblomov’s lifestyle cannot be compared with Stolz’s worldview. The reader first meets this character in the second part of the work. Andrei Stolts loves order in everything: his day is scheduled by hours and minutes, dozens of important things are planned that urgently need to be redone. Today he is in Russia, tomorrow, you see, he has unexpectedly left abroad. What Oblomov finds boring and meaningless is important and significant for him: trips to cities, villages, intentions to improve the quality of life of those around him.

He discovers such treasures in his soul that Oblomov cannot even guess about. Stolz's lifestyle consists entirely of activities that feed his entire being with the energy of vivacity. In addition, Stolz is a good friend: more than once he helped Ilya Ilyich in business matters. The lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz are different from each other.

What is “Oblomovism”?

How social phenomenon the concept denotes a focus on idle, monotonous, devoid of color and any changes in life. Andrei Stolts called “Oblomovism” Oblomov’s very way of life, his desire for endless peace and the absence of any activity. Despite the fact that his friend constantly pushed Oblomov to the possibility of changing his way of existence, he did not budge at all, as if he did not have enough energy to do it. At the same time, we see that Oblomov admits his mistake, uttering the following words: “I have long been ashamed to live in the world.” He feels useless, unnecessary and abandoned, and therefore he does not want to wipe the dust off the table, sort out books that have been lying around for a month, or leave the apartment once again.

Love in Oblomov's understanding

Oblomov’s lifestyle did not contribute in any way to finding real, rather than fictitious, happiness. He dreamed and made plans more than he actually lived. Amazingly, in his life there was a place for quiet rest, philosophical reflection on the essence of existence, but there was a lack of strength for decisive action and the implementation of intentions. Love for Olga Ilyinskaya temporarily pulls Oblomov out of his usual existence, forces him to try new things, and begin to take care of himself. He even forgets his old habits and sleeps only at night, and does business during the day. But still, love in Oblomov’s worldview is directly related to dreams, thoughts and poetry.

Oblomov considers himself unworthy of love: he doubts whether Olga can love him, whether he is suitable enough for her, whether he is capable of making her happy. Such thoughts lead him to sad thoughts about his useless life.

Love in Stolz's understanding

Stolz approaches the issue of love more rationally. He does not indulge in ephemeral dreams in vain, since he looks at life soberly, without fantasy, without the habit of analyzing. Stolz is a business man. He doesn’t need romantic walks in the moonlight, loud declarations of love and sighs on the bench, because he is not Oblomov. Stolz's lifestyle is very dynamic and pragmatic: he proposes to Olga at the moment when he realizes that she is ready to accept him.

What did Oblomov come to?

As a result of his protective and cautious behavior, Oblomov misses the opportunity to build a close relationship with Olga Ilyinskaya. His marriage was upset shortly before the wedding - Oblomov took too long to gather, explain, ask himself, compare, estimate, analyze. The characterization of the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov teaches not to repeat the mistakes of an idle, aimless existence, and raises the question of what love really is? Is she the object of lofty, poetic aspirations, or is she the calm joy and peace that Oblomov finds in the house of the widow Agafya Pshenitsyna?

Why did Oblomov’s physical death occur?

The result of Ilya Ilyich’s philosophical reflections is this: he chose to bury his former aspirations and even lofty dreams. with Olga his life focused on everyday existence. He knew no greater joy than to eat deliciously and sleep after dinner. Gradually, the engine of his life began to stop, to calm down: ailments and incidents became more frequent. Even his previous thoughts left him: there was no longer room for them in the quiet room, like a coffin, in all this sluggish life, which lulled Oblomov, increasingly removed him from reality. Mentally this man was already dead for a long time. Physical death was only a confirmation of the falsity of his ideals.

Stolz's achievements

Stolz, unlike Oblomov, did not miss his chance to be happy: he built family well-being with Olga Ilyinskaya. This marriage took place out of love, in which Stolz did not fly into the clouds, did not remain in destructive illusions, but acted more than reasonably and responsibly.

The lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz are diametrically opposed and opposed to each other. Both characters are unique, inimitable and significant in their own way. This may explain the strength of their friendship over the years.

Each of us is close to either the Stolz or Oblomov type. There is nothing wrong with this, and the coincidences will probably only be partial. Those who are deep, who love to think about the essence of life, will most likely understand Oblomov’s experiences, his restless mental tossing and searching. Business pragmatists who have left romance and poetry far behind will begin to personify themselves with Stolz.

Introduction

Goncharov’s work “Oblomov” is a socio-psychological novel built on the literary method of antithesis. The principle of opposition can be traced both when comparing the characters of the main characters, as well as their basic values ​​and life path. A comparison of the lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz in the novel “Oblomov” allows us to better understand ideological plan works, to understand the reasons for the tragedy of the destinies of both heroes.

Features of the heroes' lifestyle

The central character of the novel is Oblomov. Ilya Ilyich is afraid life difficulties, does not want to do or decide anything. Any difficulty and the need to act causes sadness in the hero and plunges him even deeper into an apathetic state. That is why Oblomov, after his first failure in the service, no longer wanted to try his hand at a career and took refuge from the outside world on his favorite sofa, trying not only not to leave the house, but not even to get out of bed unless absolutely necessary. Ilya Ilyich’s way of life is similar to slow dying - both spiritual and physical. The hero's personality gradually degrades, and he himself is completely immersed in illusions and dreams that are not destined to come true.

For Stolz, difficulties, on the contrary, spur him on; any mistake for him is only a reason to move on, achieving more. Andrei Ivanovich stays in constant movement– business trips, meetings with friends and social evenings are an integral part of his life. Stolz looks at the world soberly and rationally; there are no surprises, illusions or strong shocks in his life, because he has calculated everything in advance and understands what to expect in each specific situation.

The lifestyle of the heroes and their childhood

The development and formation of the images of Oblomov and Stolz is shown by the author from the very early years heroes. Their childhood, teenage and mature years proceed differently, they are instilled with different values ​​and life guidelines, which only emphasizes the dissimilarity of the characters.

Oblomov grew up like a greenhouse plant, fenced off from the possible influences of the surrounding world. The parents spoiled little Ilya in every possible way, indulged his desires, and were ready to do everything to make their son happy and contented. The very atmosphere of Oblomovka, the hero’s native estate, requires special attention. Slow, lazy and poorly educated villagers considered labor to be something similar to punishment. Therefore, they tried to avoid it in every possible way, and if they had to work, they worked reluctantly, without any inspiration or desire. Naturally, this could not help but influence Oblomov, who from an early age absorbed the love of an idle life, absolute idleness, when Zakhar, as lazy and slow as his master, can always do everything for you. Even when Ilya Ilyich finds himself in a new, urban environment, he does not want to change his lifestyle and start working intensively. Oblomov simply closes himself off from the outside world and creates in his imagination some idealized prototype of Oblomovka, in which he continues to “live.”

Stolz's childhood is different, which is due, first of all, to the roots of the hero - a strict German father tried to raise his son as a worthy bourgeois, who could achieve everything in life on his own, without fear of any work. Andrei Ivanovich’s sophisticated mother, on the contrary, wanted her son to achieve a brilliant secular reputation in society, so from an early age she instilled in him a love of books and the arts. All this, as well as the evenings and receptions regularly held at the Stoltsev estate, influenced little Andrei, forming an extroverted, educated and purposeful personality. The hero was interested in everything new, he knew how to confidently move forward, so after graduating from university he easily took his place in society, becoming an irreplaceable person for many. Unlike Oblomov, who perceived any activity as an aggravating necessity (even university studies or reading a long book), for Stolz his activity was an impulse for further personal, social and career development.

Similarities and differences in the characters' lifestyles

If the differences in the lifestyles of Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts are noticeable and obvious almost immediately, correlating respectively as a passive lifestyle leading to degradation and an active one aimed at comprehensive development, then their similarities are visible only after detailed analysis characters. Both heroes are “superfluous” people for their era; they both do not live in the present time, and therefore are in constant search for themselves and their true happiness. The introverted, slow Oblomov holds on with all his might to his past, to the “heavenly”, idealized Oblomovka - a place where he will always feel good and calm.

Stolz strives exclusively for the future. He perceives his past as a valuable experience and does not try to cling to it. Even their friendship with Oblomov is full of unrealizable plans for the future - about how Ilya Ilyich’s life can be transformed, made more vivid and real. Stolz is always one step ahead, so it is difficult for him to be an ideal husband for Olga (however, Oblomov’s “extra” nature in the novel also becomes an obstacle to the development of relations with Olga).

Such isolation from others and internal loneliness, which Oblomov fills with illusions, and Stolz fills with thoughts about work and self-improvement, become the basis of their friendship. The characters unconsciously see in each other the ideal of their own existence, while completely denying their friend’s lifestyle, considering it either too active and eventful (Oblomov was even upset by the fact that he had to walk for a long time in boots, and not in the soft slippers he was accustomed to), or excessively lazy and inactive (at the end of the novel, Stolz says that it was “Oblomovism” that ruined Ilya Ilyich).

Conclusion

Using the example of the lifestyle of Oblomov and Stolz, Goncharov showed how the fates of people who come from the same social class but who received different upbringings can differ. Depicting the tragedy of both characters, the author shows that a person cannot live, hiding from the whole world in illusion or giving himself overly to others, to the point of mental exhaustion - in order to be happy, it is important to find harmony between these two directions.

Work test

The characters of the main characters in Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” are portrayed exceptionally correctly and talentedly by the author. If the artist’s task is to snatch and capture the essence of life that is inaccessible to the understanding of the average person, then the great Russian writer coped with it brilliantly. His main character, for example, personifies an entire social phenomenon called “Oblomovism” in his honor. No less worthy of attention is the phenomenal friendship of Oblomov and Stolz, two antipodes, who, it would seem, should have irreconcilably argued with each other or even despised each other, as often happens in communication completely different people. However, Goncharov goes against stereotypes, connecting the antagonists with strong friendship. Throughout the entire novel, observing the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz is not only necessary, but also interesting for the reader. Collision of two life positions, two worldviews - here main conflict in Goncharov's novel "Oblomov".

The differences between Oblomov and Stolz are not difficult to find. Firstly, his appearance catches your eye: Ilya Ilyich is a portly gentleman with soft features, plump hands, and slow gestures. His favorite clothing is a spacious robe that does not restrict movement, as if protecting and warming a person. Stolz is fit and slender. Constant activity and business acumen characterize his practical nature, so his gestures are bold and his reactions are quick. He is always dressed appropriately to move in the light and make the right impression.

Secondly, they have different upbringings. If little Ilyusha was groomed and cherished by his parents, nannies and other inhabitants of Oblomovka (he grew up as a pampered boy), then Andrei was brought up in strictness, his father taught him how to run a business, leaving him to make his own way. Stolz, as a result, did not have enough parental affection, which he was looking for in his friend’s house. Oblomov, on the contrary, was too kindly treated, his parents spoiled him: he was not fit for service or for the work of a landowner (taking care of the estate and its profitability).

Thirdly, their attitude to life differs. Ilya Ilyich does not like fuss, does not waste effort on pleasing society or at least wedging into it. Many people condemn him for laziness, but is it laziness? I think not: he is a nonconformist who is honest to himself and to the people around him. A nonconformist is a person who defends his right to behave differently from what is customary in his contemporary society. Oblomov had the courage and fortitude to silently, calmly adhere to his position and go his own way, without wasting his time on trifles. His demeanor reveals a rich spiritual life, which he does not display on a social display. Stolz lives in this showcase, because hanging around in good society always brings benefits to the businessman. We can say that Andrei had no other choice, because he is not a gentleman, his father earned capital, but no one will leave the villages to him as an inheritance. From childhood it was instilled in him that he had to earn his own living, so Stolz adapted to the circumstances, developing hereditary qualities: perseverance, hard work, social activity. But if he is so successful by modern standards, why does Stolz need Oblomov? From his father, he inherited an obsession with business, the limitations of a practical person, which he felt, and therefore subconsciously reached out to the spiritually rich Oblomov.

They were drawn to the opposite, feeling a lack of certain properties of nature, but could not learn from each other good qualities. None of them could make Olga Ilyinskaya happy: with both one and the other she felt dissatisfaction. Unfortunately, this is a fact of life: people rarely change in the name of love. Oblomov tried, but still remained faithful to his principles. Stoltz, too, was only enough for courtship, and then the routine of living together began. Thus, the similarity between Oblomov and Stolz was revealed in love: they both failed to build happiness.

In these two images, Goncharov reflected the contradictory trends in society of that time. The nobility is the support of the state, but its individual representatives cannot take an active part in its fate, if only because it is vulgar and petty for them. They are gradually being replaced by people who have gone through a harsh school of life, the more skillful and greedy Stolts. They do not have the spiritual component that is needed for any useful work in Russia. But even apathetic landowners will not save the situation. Apparently, the author believed that the fusion of these extremes, a kind of golden mean, was the only way to achieve the well-being of Russia. If we look at the novel from this angle, it turns out that the friendship of Oblomov and Stolz is a symbol of the unification of different social forces for a common goal.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Stolz and Olga. Two love stories. While these events are unfolding in a house on the Vyborg side, in distant Switzerland another is taking place in parallel. love story. Having met Olga and her aunt abroad, Stolz again takes on the mission of an older friend and teacher, and suddenly realizes with amazement that she can most likely teach him how to “not allow the soul to be lazy” (these lines from Zabolotsky, although written later, could not have been more better convey the dominant character of Olga - the eternal search). "He ( Stolz) watched with surprise and alarm how her mind demanded daily daily bread, how her soul did not stop talking, kept asking for experience and life<…>. Having furnished Olga with flowers, books, sheet music and albums, Stolz calmed down, believing that he had filled his friend’s leisure time for a long time.<…>and suddenly she would see ready-made questions on her face...” Knowing the history of the temporary resurrection of the phlegmatic Oblomov, we believe that even the rational Stolz could not resist the charm of this searching soul and is wounded by her friendly indifference. "From him<…>the arrogant self-confidence subsided; he didn’t joke lightly, listening to stories about how others lose their minds and waste away<…>out of love..." "What about Olga! Was she oblivious to his situation or was she insensitive to him? Stolz, thus, finds himself in the position of Onegin, who “is drying up, and is hardly / No longer suffering from consumption,” while the society lady Tatyana “... is either not visible, or is it not a pity...”

Olga, like Pushkin’s heroine, is actually “visible” and “sorry”; but Goncharova’s heroine - like Tatyana - feels the chains of duty. Yes, she is not married, but she has already experienced a love interest, and according to the strict Puritan morality of that time, this was already considered treason, baseness: “She ( Olga) rummaged through her experience: no information was found there about second love. I remembered about the authorities<…>- hears an inexorable sentence from all sides: “A woman truly loves only once.” Of course, sanctimoniously minded society maidens, like the notorious Sonechka, used cunning to save themselves from the pangs of conscience: “Sonechka would not even think about saying about Oblomov that she joked with him, for fun, that he is so funny, that is it possible to love “such a bag”, that no one will believe it." But this option is not for honest Olga, another would be closer to her - “...then, perhaps, she would find a “decent match”, of which there are many, and would be a good, smart, caring wife and mother, and would consider the past to be girlish a dream..." That is, she would again be like Tatyana, “she would be a faithful wife and a virtuous mother...”.

But the moment of inevitable explanation has arrived. “I’ll help you... did you... love?..” Stolz said forcefully - his own words hurt him so much.” The strength of the character’s experiences, his jealousy, his pain is emphasized by pauses and remarks: “he again smelled of horror,” “he himself felt that his lips were trembling.” However, the pain gave way to “amazement”, and then “a joyful shiver ran through him” - when he learned that the object of his first love was Oblomov. “Oh, if only I could know that the hero of this novel is Ilya! How long did it take? How much blood has spoiled! For what?" - he repeats several times. A devoted friend, he, however, does not see a worthy opponent in Oblomov; a person you can truly fall in love with. “But for love you need something... which cannot be defined, cannot be named, and which is not in my incomparable, but clumsy Ilya,” Stolz declares triumphantly. Without suspecting that he is repeating Sonechka almost word for word with her arrogant statements that it is impossible to “love such a bag.” I wonder if it would be an exaggeration to say that Andrei Ivanovich at that moment, uttering these words, betrayed his old friend.

Olga behaves the same way. Having made sure that nothing threatened her future happiness with Stolz, she “tried to blame herself only so that he would defend her more fervently, in order to be more and more right in his eyes.” Finally, Ilyinskaya asks the decisive question: “But if he... changed, came to life, listened to me and... wouldn’t I love him then?” “But this is another novel and another hero, about whom we don’t care.” The reader, like Olga, knows that everything was far from so simple. But it is easier for the heroine and Stolz himself to believe and agree with the “retrospectively” derived wisdom: “Your so-called love lacked content; she couldn't go any further. And even before the separation you separated and were faithful not to love, but to its ghost, which you yourself invented...” Before us is a happy explanation, foreshadowing a successful marital union, but if you think about it, one of the most terrible and bleak pages of the novel.

A stunning contrast to this selfishly proud happiness is the scene in which Oblomov finds out that he best friend married the girl he loved (still loved). “Dear Andrey! - Oblomov said, hugging him. - Dear Olga... Sergeevna! - he added<…>- God himself blessed you! My God! how happy I am! Tell her...” ““I’ll say that I don’t know another Oblomov!” - Stolz, deeply touched, interrupted him. This repeated pause before calling his beloved officially - by name and patronymic - can say a lot about his hidden feelings. In the greatness of his soul, Goncharov’s character here equals Pushkin’s lyrical hero: “...I loved you so sincerely, so tenderly, / As God grant you to be loved differently.”]

The explanation took place far from Russia, in charming but alien Switzerland, and the young Stolts settled to live far from the Russian hinterland - in Crimea. “A network of grapes, ivy and myrtles covered the cottage from top to bottom.” In the same vein, Goncharov gives a description of the interior decoration of the charming cottage. Everything is harmonious (the piano is in a place of honor), functional (“high desk”, “gloves”, “samples of various clays, goods and other things”), and - the reader is cold from this “correctness”. As soon as the hero or heroine enters Oblomov’s “field of attraction,” the novel blooms with color. And vice versa: as soon as Oblomov leaves, the method of narration changes: dialogues and genre scenes give way to the author’s rather dry analysis.

“On the outside, everything was done with them, like others,” the narrator states, talking about their family life, and draws the usual daily routine - “they got up ... early,” “they liked to sit for a long time over tea,” “they had lunch,” “I went to the fields”, “played music”. As a result, the author is forced to admit that their days are passing “as Oblomov dreamed.” “Only there was no drowsiness, no despondency in them...”, as if having come to his senses, he makes a reservation. Let's be fair, moving to another era. For its time, equality such as that reigning in the Stolts family was a rare phenomenon. To understand this, it is enough to turn to one of early stories L.N. Tolstoy about family. The heroine of “Family Happiness” Mashenka also marries for love a noble, worthy man, passionate about his rural affairs, landowner Sergei Mikhailych. But in his initially happy marriage, it never occurred to him to involve his wife in his worries and affairs. The result is sad - the young wife is sad, bored, rushes into the pool social life. Only in the finale does the author express hope for harmonization of relations between spouses - through common concerns about raising children. From this historical point of view, Stolz’s relationship with his wife approaches the ideal: “Some kind of construction, affairs on his or Oblomov’s estate, company operations - nothing was done without her knowledge or participation.” In the end brings to a happy conclusion

And suddenly, unexpectedly for her husband (but not for the reader), in the circle of life’s abundance, in the midst of happy family worries, Olga begins to get bored and languish. “I’m not sick, but...I’m sad<…>. Suddenly something seems to come over me, some kind of melancholy... life will seem to me... as if not everything is there<…>. Or am I tormented by a stupid thought: what else will happen? The nervous, stumbling rhythm of Olga’s confession reflects the painful work of self-knowledge, an attempt to understand her own soul. She herself is inclined to define her dissatisfaction with life as “daydreaming”, “stupidity”: “Everything pulls me somewhere else, I become dissatisfied with nothing... My God! I’m even ashamed of these nonsense..."

But Andrei was able to quickly grasp and poetically describe the essence of her torment: “No, your sadness, languor<…>- rather a sign of strength... The search for a living, irritated mind sometimes rushes beyond the boundaries of everyday life, does not find, of course, answers, and sadness appears... temporary dissatisfaction with life... This is the sadness of the soul asking life about its mystery. However, knowing that “if so, this is not nonsense”, that the “Promethean fire” of knowledge and thirst for activity for the benefit of people burns in her - what paths does Stolz offer her? "You and I are not Titans<…>, he suggests. Let us bow our heads and humbly endure this difficult moment. And again then life and happiness will smile...” Moreover, the business-like, rational Stolz suddenly remembers the wrath of the gods. “Make sure that fate doesn’t overhear your murmur,” he concluded with a superstitious remark<…>, - and didn’t consider it ungrateful! She doesn’t like it when her gifts are not appreciated.” He gives her worldly wise, but vulgar from an existential point of view, advice - to cherish the present: “Wait a minute, when<…>grief and labor will come... and they will come - then... there’s no time for these questions...” Long pauses here carry the opposite meaning: not to understand oneself, but to consolidate one’s reasoning in the interlocutor’s mind. It is clear why, after such a conversation, Olga begins to see “certain and menacing dreams,” “... she saw a chain of losses...” And, of course, she became more closely attached to her husband, as the only protector from future troubles: “... Only love did not betray her even in this dream..."

Many readers disagreed that this final stage Olga's relationship with Stolz. This intimidated happiness is too contrary to the logic of the heroine’s character and the “Promethean Fire” that really burns in her. Such a subtle critic as Dobrolyubov saw the inevitability of their breakup if the action of the novel continued: “And she ( Olga) is ready for this fight, yearns for it<…>. It is clear that she does not want to bow her head and humbly experience difficult moments... She left Oblomov when she stopped believing in him; she will leave Stolz too if she stops believing in him. And this will happen if questions and doubts do not stop tormenting her.”

Thus, Stolz cannot be called one of the best people of his generation. It seemed that, unlike Oblomov, Andrei Ivanovich fulfilled all the conditions for this. Many of his peers were eager to “look into German universities” - he “sat on the student benches in Bonn, Jena, Erlangen.” When others were “getting ready... to travel the length and breadth of Europe,” Stolz “learned Europe as his domain.” Conscience commanded them to raise the dignity of women, make them equal to men, “purify their taste” - he accomplished this in his family, with Olga. He forgot the main thing - all these conditions were supposed to lead to the main goal - to “serve” his country, since “Russia needs hands and heads.” Andrei, having received Ilyinskaya’s consent, sums up with satisfaction: “Olga is my wife... Everything has been found. There is nothing to look for, nowhere else to go.” Dobrolyubov expressed the opinion of the majority of readers when he was perplexed how Stolz “could be satisfied with his lonely, separate, exclusive happiness...”. Reflections on Stolz's present allow us to take a different look at Oblomov. He found no great purpose in his life. But the hero, at least, looked for her, fought. He even tried to oppose himself to society, at least in the form of a “domestic” protest. And he became convinced that he couldn’t do anything. Ilya Ilyich does not delude himself about the bitter results of his life.

Love, family and others eternal values in the perception of Oblomov and Stolz

The friendship between such dissimilar people as Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts is amazing. They have been friends since early childhood, and yet they have so little in common! One of them is surprisingly lazy, ready to spend his whole life on the couch. The other, on the contrary, is active and active. Andrey s youth knows firmly what he would like to achieve in life. Ilya Oblomov did not encounter any problems in his childhood and youth. Partly, this calm, easy life, along with an overly gentle character, turned out to be the reason that Oblomov gradually became more and more inert.

Andrei Stolz's childhood was completely different. From a young age, he saw how hard his father’s life was and how much effort was required to “push off the bottom and float up,” that is, to earn a decent living. social status, capital. But difficulties not only did not frighten him, but, on the contrary, made him stronger. As he grew older, the character of Andrei Stolts became more and more solid. Stolz knows well that only in constant struggle can he find his happiness.

The main human values ​​for him are work, the opportunity to build a prosperous and happy life for himself. As a result, Stolz gets everything he dreamed of in his distant youth. He becomes a rich and respected man, wins the love of such an extraordinary and unlike other girl as Olga Ilyinskaya. Stolz cannot stand inaction; he would never be attracted to such a life, which seems to be the height of happiness for Oblomov.

But is Stolz so ideal compared to Oblomov? Yes, he is the embodiment of activity, movement, rationalism. But it is precisely this rationalism that leads him into the abyss. Stolz gets Olga, organizes their life according to his own discretion and will, they live according to the principle of reason. But is Olga happy with Stolz? No. Stolz lacks the heart that Oblomov had. And if in the first part of the novel Stolz’s rationality is affirmed as a negation of Oblomov’s laziness, then in the last part the author is increasingly on the side of Oblomov with his “heart of gold.”

Oblomov cannot understand the meaning of human vanity, the constant desire to do and achieve something. He became disillusioned with such a life. Oblomov often recalls his childhood, when he lived in the village with his parents. Life there flowed smoothly and monotonously, not shaken by any noteworthy events. Such peace seems to Oblomov to be the ultimate dream.

In Oblomov’s mind there are no specific aspirations regarding the arrangement of his own existence. If he has plans for transformations in the village, then these plans very soon turn into a series of yet another fruitless dreams. Oblomov resists Olga's intentions to make him a completely different person, because this contradicts his own life guidelines. And Oblomov’s very reluctance to connect his life with Olga suggests that deep down in his soul he understands: family life with her will not bring him peace and will not allow him to selflessly indulge in his favorite business, that is, absolute inaction. But at the same time, Oblomov, this dove, has a “heart of gold.” He loves with his heart, not with his mind, his love for Olga is sublime, enthusiastic, ideal. Oblomov goes with the flow and becomes Agafya’s husband, because this accomplished fact does not threaten his comfortable and calm existence.

Such family life does not frighten Oblomov; Agafya’s attitude towards him fits perfectly into his ideas about happiness. Now he can continue to do nothing, degrading more and more. Agafya takes care of him, being the ideal wife for Oblomov. Gradually, he stops even dreaming; his existence becomes almost completely similar to that of a plant. However, this does not frighten him at all; moreover, he is happy in his own way.

Thus, Goncharov in his novel does not condemn either Oblomov or Stolz, but also does not idealize any of them. He just wants to show different views on the moral and spiritual values ​​of two opposing people. At the same time, the author says that a rational attitude to life and feelings (Stolz) impoverishes a person no less than boundless daydreaming (Oblomov).