Critics about the novel "Fathers and Sons". Roman I. S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons" in the reviews of critics

2024 Author: Leah Sherlock | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 05:25

"Fathers and Sons", the history of which is usually associated with the work "Rudin", published in 1855, is a novel in which Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev returned to the structure of this first creation.

As in it, in "Fathers and Sons" all the plot threads converged to one center, which was formed by the figure of Bazarov - a raznochint-democrat. She alarmed all critics and readers. Various critics have written a lot about the novel "Fathers and Sons", since the work aroused genuine interest and controversy. We will present the main positions regarding this novel in this article.

The significance of Bazarov's image in understanding the work

Bazarov became not only the plot center of the work, but also problematic. The assessment of all other aspects of the novel largely depended on the understanding of his fate and personality. Turgenev: the author's position, the system of characters, various artistic techniques used in the work "Fathers and Sons". Critics examined this novel chapter by chapter and saw in it a new turn in the work of Ivan Sergeevich, although their understanding of the milestone meaning of this work was completely different.

Why was Turgenev scolded?

The ambivalent attitude of the author himself to his hero led to censures and reproaches of his contemporaries. Turgenev was severely scolded from all sides. Critics of the novel "Fathers and Sons" responded mostly negatively. Many readers could not understand the author's thought. From the memoirs of Annenkov, as well as Ivan Sergeevich himself, we learn that M. N. Katkov became indignant when he read the manuscript "Fathers and Sons" chapter by chapter. He was outraged by the fact that the protagonist of the work reigns supreme and does not meet a sensible rebuff anywhere. Readers and critics of the opposite camp also severely criticized Ivan Sergeevich for the internal dispute that he had with Bazarov in his novel Fathers and Sons. Its content seemed to them not quite democratic.

Most notable among many other interpretations are M. A. Antonovich, published in "Sovremennik" ("Asmodeus of our time"), as well as a number of articles that appeared in the journal "Russian Word" (democratic), written by D. I. Pisarev: "The Thinking Proletariat", "Realists", "Bazarov". These critics about the novel"Fathers and Sons" presented two opposing views.

Pisarev's opinion about the main character

Unlike Antonovich, who assessed Bazarov sharply negatively, Pisarev saw in him a real "hero of time". This critic compared this image with the "new people" depicted in the novel What Is To Be Done? N. G. Chernyshevsky.

The theme "fathers and sons" (the relationship between generations) came to the fore in his articles. Contradictory opinions expressed by representatives of the democratic trend about Turgenev's work were perceived as a "split in the nihilists" - a fact of internal controversy that existed in the democratic movement.

Antonovich on Bazarov

Both readers and critics of "Fathers and Sons" were not accidentally worried about two questions: about the author's position and about the prototypes of the images of this novel. They are the two poles by which any work is interpreted and perceived. According to Antonovich, Turgenev was malicious. In the interpretation of Bazarov, presented by this critic, this image is not at all a person written off "from nature", but an "evil spirit", "asmodeus", which was released by a writer embittered at the new generation.

Antonovich's article is written in a feuilleton manner. This critic, instead of presenting an objective analysis of the work, created a caricature of the main character, substituting Sitnikov, Bazarov's "disciple", in the place of his teacher. Bazarov, according to Antonovich, is not at all an artistic generalization, not a mirror in which the younger generation is reflected. The critic believed that the author of the novel created a biting feuilleton, which should be objected to in the same manner. Antonovich's goal - to "quarrel" with the younger generation of Turgenev - was achieved.

What could the Democrats not forgive Turgenev?

Antonovich, in the subtext of his unfair and rude article, reproached the author for making a figure that is too "recognizable", since Dobrolyubov is considered one of its prototypes. The journalists of Sovremennik, moreover, could not forgive the author for breaking up with this magazine. The novel "Fathers and Sons" was published in the "Russian Messenger", a conservative publication, which was for them a sign of Ivan Sergeevich's final break with democracy.

Bazarov in "real criticism"

Pisarev expressed a different point of view about the protagonist of the work. He considered him not as a caricature of certain individuals, but as a representative of a new socio-ideological type that was emerging at that time. This critic was least of all interested in the attitude of the author himself towards his hero, as well as various features of the artistic embodiment of this image. Pisarev interpreted Bazarov in the spirit of so-called real criticism. He pointed out that the author in his image was biased, but the type itself was highly valued by Pisarev - as a "hero of the times." In an article titled"Bazarov" it was said that the protagonist depicted in the novel, presented as a "tragic person", is a new type that literature lacked. In further interpretations of this critic, Bazarov broke away more and more from the novel itself. For example, in the articles "The Thinking Proletariat" and "Realists", the name "Bazarov" was used to name a type of era, a raznochinets-kulturträger, whose worldview was close to Pisarev himself.

Customs of bias

Turgenev's objective, calm tone in portraying the protagonist was contradicted by accusations of tendentiousness. "Fathers and Sons" is a kind of Turgenev's "duel" with nihilists and nihilism, however, the author complied with all the requirements of the "code of honor": he treated the enemy with respect, having "killed" him in a fair fight. Bazarov, as a symbol of dangerous delusions, according to Ivan Sergeevich, is a worthy adversary. The mockery and caricature of the image, which some critics accused the author of, was not used by him, since they could give quite the opposite result, namely, an underestimation of the power of nihilism, which is destructive. The nihilists sought to put their false idols in the place of the "eternal". Turgenev, recalling his work on the image of Yevgeny Bazarov, wrote to M. E. S altykov-Shchedrin in 1876 about the novel "Fathers and Sons", the history of which interested many, that he is not surprised why for the main part of readers this hero remaineda mystery, because the author himself cannot quite imagine how he wrote it. Turgenev said that he knew only one thing: there was no tendency in him then, no bias of thought.

The position of Turgenev himself

Critics about the novel "Fathers and Sons" responded mostly one-sidedly, gave sharp assessments. Meanwhile, Turgenev, as in his previous novels, avoids comments, does not draw conclusions, deliberately hides the inner world of his hero in order not to put pressure on readers. The conflict of the novel "Fathers and Sons" is by no means on the surface. The author's position, so straightforwardly interpreted by the critic Antonovich and completely ignored by Pisarev, is manifested in the composition of the plot, in the nature of the conflicts. It is in them that the concept of Bazarov's fate is realized, presented by the author of the work "Fathers and Sons", the images of which still cause controversy among various researchers.

Evgeny in disputes with Pavel Petrovich is unshakable, but after a difficult "test of love" he is internally broken. The author emphasizes the "cruelty", the thoughtfulness of the beliefs of this hero, as well as the interconnection of all the components that make up his worldview. Bazarov is a maximalist, according to whom any belief has a price, if it is not in conflict with others. As soon as this character lost one "link" in the "chain" of worldview, all the others were reassessed and questioned. In the final, this is already the "new" Bazarov,being the "Hamlet" among the nihilists.