初恋是什么？文学作品中通常会这样描写：初恋是如露珠般的纯真情感，初恋是闪电一般的热情洋溢，初恋是阴晴不定的夏日天空。这一切，在屠格涅夫的《初恋》中可谓应有尽有。在古今中外的文学史上，产生过许多描写初恋的作品，屠格涅夫在 1860年发表的中篇小说《初恋》，就是其中的一首动人的青春颂歌。法国著名作家安德烈·莫洛亚在《<屠格涅夫传》中称赞这部作品：“它即使不是他最伟大的一部作品，可能也称得上是一部绝妙的佳作。”
如同屠格涅夫不少中篇小说一样, 《初恋》的故事情节也是通过一位故事中介人来讲述的, 采用的也是第一人称的角度。《初恋》的故事带有浓重的自传色彩, 在某种程度上说, 它讲述的是作者自己的故事。屠格涅夫曾谈到：“《初恋》也许是我最爱的作品，其他作品或多或少有编造的部分，《初恋》却根据真事写成。不加一点修饰，每当我反复阅读时，人物的形象就在我眼前鲜明地呈现出来。”① 这部带有自传性的小说以诚挚、抒情、优美的笔调抒写坠入情网的少年对爱情的憧憬、追求、渴望，同时刻画了少女齐娜伊达对爱情鞭打不散的执着，讴歌了美丽的青春，讴歌了纯洁的初恋。
这是一个情窦初开的花季少年 。“那时候，我的血液在沸腾, 我的心在发痛,有一种极舒服、而又莫名其妙的感觉。那个时候, 在我的头脑里，女人的形象,、女性的爱情幻影几乎一向是模糊的。然而我所想到的, 我所感觉到的一切,，无不隐含着一种朦朦胧胧的羞怯的预感，一种新鲜的无比甜蜜的、与女性有关的东西……这种预感、这种期待，占据了我整个身心：它随着我的呼吸融入我的血液，沿着我的血管流变我的全身……”（《初恋》，第96页）
命运果然给青春的少年弗拉基米尔送来一位天使,在他充满着爱的预感的时候, 他们家旁搬来了的一户新邻居—— 一位穷贵族公爵夫人和她的女儿, 正是这位美丽非凡的公爵小姐齐娜伊达——小说的女主人公，以其不可抗拒的魅力令无数男子深深倾倒，少年弗拉基米尔与其父也不例外。
很自然的，作品第三小节就开始写到少年弗拉基米尔与齐娜伊达相遇了。当少年见到齐娜伊达时，“我忘记了一切，贪婪的凝望着她的那窈窕的身段、洁白的脖颈，她那纤纤玉手、洁白的头巾下蓬松的金发，她那双半睁半闭的充满智慧的眼睛，她那灵秀的睫毛下面娇柔的腮……”（《初恋》，96页）弗拉基米尔被齐娜伊达的美深深地吸引了，视觉上的享受令他陶醉。于是，他便朝思暮想与她结识。当他第一次坐在齐娜伊达身边时，他兴奋异常如鱼得水般快活极了。 “我心想，‘能够同她认识……多么幸福啊，感谢上帝！’我高兴得跳了起来，但我克制住了，只是想得到美食的孩子那样，坐在椅子上轻轻地摇动一下双腿。” （《初恋》，105页）这天晚上，“ 我的感受是那样的新鲜、甜蜜……我坐在那里，时而朝四周顾盼，身子却没有动弹，缓缓的呼吸着，只是有时想起什么事，便默默地笑，有时想到我在恋爱，想到我爱她，爱情终于来临……”（《初恋》，第123页） 对于少年而言, 当时的感觉是这样深刻, 以至在接下来的日子里,他总是在追寻着这种感觉。
“ 初恋” 给少年主人公带来了新鲜感但同时也带来了痛苦。“ 我说过, 我的热情是从那一天开始的, 我还可以加一句，我的痛苦也是从那一天开始的。”
心仪的人魅力四射，吸引的目光也会很多，所以，少年的情敌就相当多。另外，心仪之人并未偏向自己，却同时游离在那些情敌中。于是，“ 初恋” 的少年甚至也学会了嫉妒，而这正是少年真正堕人情网的最有力的明证。
值得一提的是，这场恋情其实只是少年的“单恋”。因为，作品中多次间接提到，齐娜伊达的岁数比少年的大很多。她是一个有独立思想和独特个性的人，是个成熟的甚至老练的女子。她情归何处呢？作品中有这样一个情节：
有一天, 我独自坐在墙头上, 眺望远方，悠悠的钟声不绝于耳……我朝下一看。下面路上— 齐娜伊达身穿一件浅灰色衣服, 肩上撑一把粉红色阳伞, 匆匆忙忙地走过来。她看见我, 就站住了, 把草帽边往上一推, 抬起她那双温柔的眼睛望着我。
“ 您在做什么呀，爬那么高?” 她问我，脸上带着一种古怪的笑容。“对了，” 她接着说下去, “ 您总是说您爱我,—倘使您真爱我的话, 那么就跳到路上我这儿来。”
齐娜伊达的话还不曾说完, 我纵身凌空地跳了下去, 就像有人在背后猛地推了我一下似的。这墙大约有两沙绳高。我跳下来的时候, 脚先落地, 不过震动得太厉害了, 我竟然站不住我倒在地上, 一下子就失去了知觉。我醒过来, 还没有张开眼睛, 就感觉到齐娜伊达在我的身边。
“ 我亲爱的孩子, ” 她向我弯下身子—她的声音里透露出一种惊惶不安的温柔“ 你怎么可以这样做呢, 你怎么可以听我的话呢……你知道我爱你……起来吧”
她的胸部就在我的胸旁一起一伏,她的手抚摸我的头, 突然—我怎么来说明我那时的感觉呢—她那柔软的、清凉的嘴唇吻了我的整个脸……她的嘴唇吻到我的嘴唇了……我的腿再没有劲站起来了。——可是这一次我所经验的至上的幸福感, 在我的生命里决不会再有第二次了。它成为一种甜蜜的痛苦渗透我的全身, 最后它爆发为大欢大乐的狂喜和狂跳。的确, 我还是一个孩子。（《初恋》，第148页）
这一情节中，心仪之人怜惜、“疼爱”和那一吻使纯情少年的心中引发的是一种多么巨大的力量, 这是一种潜能，它使少年更无可救药地沉迷于自己对齐娜伊达的爱恋之中。
对于少年主人公来说, 初恋的感觉是那样纯洁和神圣, 是那样令人感动然而, 正如一位哲人所说, 大凡初恋还算不上恋爱,初恋其实是一种对爱的向往。小说后来的情节发展便证实了这一点。对齐娜伊达而言, 与少年的爱情原本只是一场游戏,她根本没有料到少年对她爱到如此痴迷的地步, 少年的真诚和勇敢甚至也感动了她, 不过在她的心中所唤起的不是爱情, 而只是一种怜爱。因为她早已与少年的父亲陷人另一条爱河。
齐娜伊达无疑也是一个有魅力的少女形象，她是美的化身, 爱的幻影, 是屠格涅夫把爱情视为一种自然力量的爱情观的体现。较之于“ 自然的女儿” 阿霞, 这个形象更少一些社会的内容, 更多一些自然力的象征。如果女主人公身上带有鲜明的浓重的社会的烙印如屠格涅夫长篇小说中的女主人公叶琳娜和玛利安娜, 那与《初恋》的情调显然是不协调的。② 正是这种超社会超时代的普遍意义, 赋予《初恋》以哲学的光彩。 “啊，青春呀青春！你对什么都无所谓, 你仿佛拥有宇宙间一切的财富, 甚至忧愁反到使你开心, 悲哀会使你感到惬意，你充满着自信，胆大妄为，你总是说：你们瞧吧，只有我青春常在……你的魅力的全部奥妙，也许不在于你做成任何事情，而在于你能够想到这一点，认为自己能做成任何事情。” 这种画龙点睛式的哲学抒情是对作品的思想的最精练的概括。
青春，就像是第一口茶。只有这一口，我们才能在其间体会到最初的美妙和苦涩。作品《初恋》就是一曲青春的颂歌, 又是一支“ 初恋” 的挽曲。它讴歌了美丽的青春，讴歌了纯洁的初恋，诠释了少年对生活满怀热望，对爱情的美好憧憬。我们赞颂青春，不是为了让青春被后人所景仰，而是为了度过青春这本书的人，在合上后，可以感叹之后，唏嘘不已……青春，总是那么富有激情和坚强。青春总是能让人感到即使路途再怎么黑暗，也会有一束叫做“爱”的火把，会照亮我们前进的道路。尽管，青春总是会让人留下一点遗憾。
Plot summary
Vladimir Petrovich, a 16-year-old, is staying in the country with his family and meets Zinaida Alexandrovna Zasyekina, a beautiful 21-year-old woman, staying with her mother, Princess Zasyekina, in a wing of the manor. This family, as with many of the Russian minor nobility with royal ties of that time, were only afforded a degree of respectability because of their titles; the Zasyekins, in the case of this story, are a very poor family. The young Vladimir falls irretrievably in love with Zinaida, who has a set of several other (socially more eligible) suitors whom he joins in their difficult and often fruitless search for the young lady's favour. Zinaida, as we find throughout the story, is a thoroughly capricious and somewhat playful mistress to a set of rather love-struck suitors. She fails to reciprocate Vladimir's love in a sensible and honest manner, often misleading him, mocking his comparative youth in contrast to her early adulthood. But eventually the true object of her affections and a rather tragic conclusion to the story are revealed.
Conclusion and outcome
Vladimir discovers that the true object of Zinaida's affection is his own father, Pyotr Vasilyevich. In the tragic and devastatingly succinct closing two chapters, Vladimir secretly observes a final meeting between Pyotr and Zinaida at the window of her house in which his father strikes her arm with a riding crop. Zinaida kisses the welt on her arm and Pyotr bounds into the house. Eight months later, Vladimir's father receives a distressing letter from Moscow and tearfully begs his wife for a favor. Pyotr dies of a stroke several days later, after which his wife sends a considerable sum of money to Moscow. Three or four years later, Vladimir learns of Zinaida's marriage to a Monsieur Dolsky and subsequent death during childbirth.
Central characters
Vladimir Petrovich
The storyteller, at the time of narration a 16-year old boy; the protagonist of the story.
Zinaida Alexandrovna Zasyekina
The object of Vladimir's affections. Capricious, mocking and difficult, she is inconsistent in her affections towards her suitors, of which Vladimir is the one to whom she shows (outwardly) the most affection. However, it is the affection of sister to brother rather than between lovers.
Pyotr Vasilyevich
Vladimir's father, a stoic symbol of 19th century masculinity; very 'British' in outlook and apparently unreceptive to emotion.
Structure
The book has one introductory chapter followed by 22 chapters over a length of between 60 and 102 pages depending upon translation and publication.
Context
Vladimir, having persuaded his friends that he cannot deliver the story orally, has presented a written version to them two weeks after they urged him to do so at a party (which itself takes place many years after the events surrounding Zinaida).
Other relevant works of Turgenev
The three stories, Torrents of Spring, Asya, and First Love work well when read in combination; they are often found published together and deal with similar topics and take place in similar contexts.
The importance of First Love
The story First Love is a true Russian 'classic' (for want of a better phrase). It remains an important book for young Russians. The ending itself is of some interest - clearly designed as a surprise of sorts but, crucially, it encourages the reader to reassess what he thought of the characters and causes the reader to muse a little over the content. The text is regularly used in the teaching of Russian at schools and colleges.
如同屠格涅夫不少中篇小说一样, 《初恋》的故事情节也是通过一位故事中介人来讲述的, 采用的也是第一人称的角度。《初恋》的故事带有浓重的自传色彩, 在某种程度上说, 它讲述的是作者自己的故事。屠格涅夫曾谈到：“《初恋》也许是我最爱的作品，其他作品或多或少有编造的部分，《初恋》却根据真事写成。不加一点修饰，每当我反复阅读时，人物的形象就在我眼前鲜明地呈现出来。”① 这部带有自传性的小说以诚挚、抒情、优美的笔调抒写坠入情网的少年对爱情的憧憬、追求、渴望，同时刻画了少女齐娜伊达对爱情鞭打不散的执着，讴歌了美丽的青春，讴歌了纯洁的初恋。
这是一个情窦初开的花季少年 。“那时候，我的血液在沸腾, 我的心在发痛,有一种极舒服、而又莫名其妙的感觉。那个时候, 在我的头脑里，女人的形象,、女性的爱情幻影几乎一向是模糊的。然而我所想到的, 我所感觉到的一切,，无不隐含着一种朦朦胧胧的羞怯的预感，一种新鲜的无比甜蜜的、与女性有关的东西……这种预感、这种期待，占据了我整个身心：它随着我的呼吸融入我的血液，沿着我的血管流变我的全身……”（《初恋》，第96页）
命运果然给青春的少年弗拉基米尔送来一位天使,在他充满着爱的预感的时候, 他们家旁搬来了的一户新邻居—— 一位穷贵族公爵夫人和她的女儿, 正是这位美丽非凡的公爵小姐齐娜伊达——小说的女主人公，以其不可抗拒的魅力令无数男子深深倾倒，少年弗拉基米尔与其父也不例外。
很自然的，作品第三小节就开始写到少年弗拉基米尔与齐娜伊达相遇了。当少年见到齐娜伊达时，“我忘记了一切，贪婪的凝望着她的那窈窕的身段、洁白的脖颈，她那纤纤玉手、洁白的头巾下蓬松的金发，她那双半睁半闭的充满智慧的眼睛，她那灵秀的睫毛下面娇柔的腮……”（《初恋》，96页）弗拉基米尔被齐娜伊达的美深深地吸引了，视觉上的享受令他陶醉。于是，他便朝思暮想与她结识。当他第一次坐在齐娜伊达身边时，他兴奋异常如鱼得水般快活极了。 “我心想，‘能够同她认识……多么幸福啊，感谢上帝！’我高兴得跳了起来，但我克制住了，只是想得到美食的孩子那样，坐在椅子上轻轻地摇动一下双腿。” （《初恋》，105页）这天晚上，“ 我的感受是那样的新鲜、甜蜜……我坐在那里，时而朝四周顾盼，身子却没有动弹，缓缓的呼吸着，只是有时想起什么事，便默默地笑，有时想到我在恋爱，想到我爱她，爱情终于来临……”（《初恋》，第123页） 对于少年而言, 当时的感觉是这样深刻, 以至在接下来的日子里,他总是在追寻着这种感觉。
“ 初恋” 给少年主人公带来了新鲜感但同时也带来了痛苦。“ 我说过, 我的热情是从那一天开始的, 我还可以加一句，我的痛苦也是从那一天开始的。”
心仪的人魅力四射，吸引的目光也会很多，所以，少年的情敌就相当多。另外，心仪之人并未偏向自己，却同时游离在那些情敌中。于是，“ 初恋” 的少年甚至也学会了嫉妒，而这正是少年真正堕人情网的最有力的明证。
值得一提的是，这场恋情其实只是少年的“单恋”。因为，作品中多次间接提到，齐娜伊达的岁数比少年的大很多。她是一个有独立思想和独特个性的人，是个成熟的甚至老练的女子。她情归何处呢？作品中有这样一个情节：
有一天, 我独自坐在墙头上, 眺望远方，悠悠的钟声不绝于耳……我朝下一看。下面路上— 齐娜伊达身穿一件浅灰色衣服, 肩上撑一把粉红色阳伞, 匆匆忙忙地走过来。她看见我, 就站住了, 把草帽边往上一推, 抬起她那双温柔的眼睛望着我。
“ 您在做什么呀，爬那么高?” 她问我，脸上带着一种古怪的笑容。“对了，” 她接着说下去, “ 您总是说您爱我,—倘使您真爱我的话, 那么就跳到路上我这儿来。”
齐娜伊达的话还不曾说完, 我纵身凌空地跳了下去, 就像有人在背后猛地推了我一下似的。这墙大约有两沙绳高。我跳下来的时候, 脚先落地, 不过震动得太厉害了, 我竟然站不住我倒在地上, 一下子就失去了知觉。我醒过来, 还没有张开眼睛, 就感觉到齐娜伊达在我的身边。
“ 我亲爱的孩子, ” 她向我弯下身子—她的声音里透露出一种惊惶不安的温柔“ 你怎么可以这样做呢, 你怎么可以听我的话呢……你知道我爱你……起来吧”
她的胸部就在我的胸旁一起一伏,她的手抚摸我的头, 突然—我怎么来说明我那时的感觉呢—她那柔软的、清凉的嘴唇吻了我的整个脸……她的嘴唇吻到我的嘴唇了……我的腿再没有劲站起来了。——可是这一次我所经验的至上的幸福感, 在我的生命里决不会再有第二次了。它成为一种甜蜜的痛苦渗透我的全身, 最后它爆发为大欢大乐的狂喜和狂跳。的确, 我还是一个孩子。（《初恋》，第148页）
这一情节中，心仪之人怜惜、“疼爱”和那一吻使纯情少年的心中引发的是一种多么巨大的力量, 这是一种潜能，它使少年更无可救药地沉迷于自己对齐娜伊达的爱恋之中。
对于少年主人公来说, 初恋的感觉是那样纯洁和神圣, 是那样令人感动然而, 正如一位哲人所说, 大凡初恋还算不上恋爱,初恋其实是一种对爱的向往。小说后来的情节发展便证实了这一点。对齐娜伊达而言, 与少年的爱情原本只是一场游戏,她根本没有料到少年对她爱到如此痴迷的地步, 少年的真诚和勇敢甚至也感动了她, 不过在她的心中所唤起的不是爱情, 而只是一种怜爱。因为她早已与少年的父亲陷人另一条爱河。
齐娜伊达无疑也是一个有魅力的少女形象，她是美的化身, 爱的幻影, 是屠格涅夫把爱情视为一种自然力量的爱情观的体现。较之于“ 自然的女儿” 阿霞, 这个形象更少一些社会的内容, 更多一些自然力的象征。如果女主人公身上带有鲜明的浓重的社会的烙印如屠格涅夫长篇小说中的女主人公叶琳娜和玛利安娜, 那与《初恋》的情调显然是不协调的。② 正是这种超社会超时代的普遍意义, 赋予《初恋》以哲学的光彩。 “啊，青春呀青春！你对什么都无所谓, 你仿佛拥有宇宙间一切的财富, 甚至忧愁反到使你开心, 悲哀会使你感到惬意，你充满着自信，胆大妄为，你总是说：你们瞧吧，只有我青春常在……你的魅力的全部奥妙，也许不在于你做成任何事情，而在于你能够想到这一点，认为自己能做成任何事情。” 这种画龙点睛式的哲学抒情是对作品的思想的最精练的概括。
青春，就像是第一口茶。只有这一口，我们才能在其间体会到最初的美妙和苦涩。作品《初恋》就是一曲青春的颂歌, 又是一支“ 初恋” 的挽曲。它讴歌了美丽的青春，讴歌了纯洁的初恋，诠释了少年对生活满怀热望，对爱情的美好憧憬。我们赞颂青春，不是为了让青春被后人所景仰，而是为了度过青春这本书的人，在合上后，可以感叹之后，唏嘘不已……青春，总是那么富有激情和坚强。青春总是能让人感到即使路途再怎么黑暗，也会有一束叫做“爱”的火把，会照亮我们前进的道路。尽管，青春总是会让人留下一点遗憾。
Plot summary
Vladimir Petrovich, a 16-year-old, is staying in the country with his family and meets Zinaida Alexandrovna Zasyekina, a beautiful 21-year-old woman, staying with her mother, Princess Zasyekina, in a wing of the manor. This family, as with many of the Russian minor nobility with royal ties of that time, were only afforded a degree of respectability because of their titles; the Zasyekins, in the case of this story, are a very poor family. The young Vladimir falls irretrievably in love with Zinaida, who has a set of several other (socially more eligible) suitors whom he joins in their difficult and often fruitless search for the young lady's favour. Zinaida, as we find throughout the story, is a thoroughly capricious and somewhat playful mistress to a set of rather love-struck suitors. She fails to reciprocate Vladimir's love in a sensible and honest manner, often misleading him, mocking his comparative youth in contrast to her early adulthood. But eventually the true object of her affections and a rather tragic conclusion to the story are revealed.
Conclusion and outcome
Vladimir discovers that the true object of Zinaida's affection is his own father, Pyotr Vasilyevich. In the tragic and devastatingly succinct closing two chapters, Vladimir secretly observes a final meeting between Pyotr and Zinaida at the window of her house in which his father strikes her arm with a riding crop. Zinaida kisses the welt on her arm and Pyotr bounds into the house. Eight months later, Vladimir's father receives a distressing letter from Moscow and tearfully begs his wife for a favor. Pyotr dies of a stroke several days later, after which his wife sends a considerable sum of money to Moscow. Three or four years later, Vladimir learns of Zinaida's marriage to a Monsieur Dolsky and subsequent death during childbirth.
Central characters
Vladimir Petrovich
The storyteller, at the time of narration a 16-year old boy; the protagonist of the story.
Zinaida Alexandrovna Zasyekina
The object of Vladimir's affections. Capricious, mocking and difficult, she is inconsistent in her affections towards her suitors, of which Vladimir is the one to whom she shows (outwardly) the most affection. However, it is the affection of sister to brother rather than between lovers.
Pyotr Vasilyevich
Vladimir's father, a stoic symbol of 19th century masculinity; very 'British' in outlook and apparently unreceptive to emotion.
Structure
The book has one introductory chapter followed by 22 chapters over a length of between 60 and 102 pages depending upon translation and publication.
Context
Vladimir, having persuaded his friends that he cannot deliver the story orally, has presented a written version to them two weeks after they urged him to do so at a party (which itself takes place many years after the events surrounding Zinaida).
Other relevant works of Turgenev
The three stories, Torrents of Spring, Asya, and First Love work well when read in combination; they are often found published together and deal with similar topics and take place in similar contexts.
The importance of First Love
The story First Love is a true Russian 'classic' (for want of a better phrase). It remains an important book for young Russians. The ending itself is of some interest - clearly designed as a surprise of sorts but, crucially, it encourages the reader to reassess what he thought of the characters and causes the reader to muse a little over the content. The text is regularly used in the teaching of Russian at schools and colleges.
1840年5月屠格涅夫在游历了意大利和瑞士回柏林途中来到德国城市法兰克福。在那里他偶然踏进一家糖果店想喝杯柠檬汁，适遇店主的女儿向他呼救，请他帮助抢救突然昏厥的弟弟。女郎的美貌和气质使他产生爱慕之心，只是由于匆匆离去，爱情种子未及萌芽便夭折了。
This literary work, as an unhappy love story, is often understood by readers as a description of Turgenev's own failure in finding romantic love. The story is partly autobiographical with the main character Sanin representing Turgenev himself during his younger days when the author did indeed visit Frankfurt and other European cities outside his native Russia.
While it is not an extended literary masterpiece like Turgenev's most famous novel Fathers and Sons, Torrents of Spring is significant in its revealing of the author's thoughts and intimate emotions.
A 101 minute movie based on this novel was released in 1989 and stars Timothy Hutton, Nastassja Kinski and Valeria Golino.
This literary work, as an unhappy love story, is often understood by readers as a description of Turgenev's own failure in finding romantic love. The story is partly autobiographical with the main character Sanin representing Turgenev himself during his younger days when the author did indeed visit Frankfurt and other European cities outside his native Russia.
While it is not an extended literary masterpiece like Turgenev's most famous novel Fathers and Sons, Torrents of Spring is significant in its revealing of the author's thoughts and intimate emotions.
A 101 minute movie based on this novel was released in 1989 and stars Timothy Hutton, Nastassja Kinski and Valeria Golino.
《父与子》是俄国著名作家屠格涅夫的代表作。《父与子》完成于1860年8月至1861年 8月，经多次修改后，于1862年在《俄罗斯导报》上。
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》是俄国著名作家屠格涅夫的代表作。《父与子》完成于1860年8月至1861年8月，经多次修改后，于1862年在《俄罗斯导报》上。
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》-人物特点
《父与子》的中心人物是平民知识分子巴扎洛夫。巴扎洛夫是平民知识分子的典型，是“新人”的形象，他性格的突出特征是具有鲜明的革命色彩，这表现在：
1、他激烈地否定现存制度。巴扎洛夫的否定有其历史的合理性。这里首先是历史进步的需要，其次才是革命者的版面认识和过激情绪。作家对巴扎洛夫的这种精神特质虽不欣赏，但却作了真实的描述。
2、蔑视贵族阶级。这是平民觉醒的一个重要特征。巴扎洛夫确信真理在自己手中，确信自己是时代英雄，有权蔑视贵族阶级。他对于巴威尔的愤怒挑战始终从容对待，而且常常摆出一付不屑一顾的态度。在论辩中，在决斗里，他老师崇高的胜利者。最后巴威尔也不得不承认自己的光荣已成往事。
3、以平民身份自豪，跟人民保持着密切的关系。巴扎洛夫已经不同于巴西斯托夫，他不再是优秀贵族分子的追随者，他已经意识到，平民优于贵族。这是平民势力兴起的又一个重要标志。同时，屠格涅夫也表现了巴扎洛夫的知识分子的生活方式使他和人民隔膜起来的情形。一个农民评论巴扎洛夫说：“当然啦，他是一位少爷，他能懂得什么呢？”这样的描述也是很深刻的，它揭示了巴扎洛夫高于普通农民和脱离人民的一面，在当时的平民知识分子中，这也是一种典型的现象。这正是后来的民粹主义运动失败的重要原因之一。
巴扎罗夫是精神上的强者。他充满自信，生气勃勃，具有锐利的批判眼光。他和阿尔卡狄家的仆人们和睦相处，并不妨碍他批判老百姓的落后迷信。他的精神力量和批判锋芒集中表现在他与巴威尔的论战上。两人初次相见，就在感觉上互不相容，进而展露出思想观点上的针锋相对。巴扎罗夫以他特有的简洁、粗鲁的话语对巴威尔以强有力的反击。颇有咄咄逼人之势。他决不屈从权威，具有自主的人格和评判标准，体现了年青一代独立思考的处世态度和初生牛犊不怕虎的斗争精神，当然，也带有年轻人从不成熟走向成熟的过程中的可能产生的偏颇和极端。但他还是以毋庸置疑的精神优势压倒了对手。巴扎罗夫吻费涅奇卡，在巴威尔看来，是严重地侵犯了贵族的权利，也是他们之间对立观点的继续发展。决斗暴露了巴威尔的偏狭、虚弱和做作，显示了巴扎罗夫的豁达、镇定和自信，双方精神力量的强弱在此得到进一步的揭示。
巴扎罗夫是行动的巨人，他抨击贵族的泛泛空谈，自己首先从小事做起。他具有实践能力，注重自然科学研究。他的行动有价值取舍标准：“凡是我们认为有用的事情，我们就依据它行动。”他的行动目标很明确——为未来打扫地盘。他敢于行动的勇气在一定程度上也表现在对待爱情的态度上。他曾恼怒自己也产生那样浪漫的情感，但在爱情之火燃烧起来的时候他却决不回避躲闪。
屠格涅夫写出了在否定爱情的巴扎罗夫内心，爱情是如何萌芽、发展的，写得真实可信。但是作家让巴扎罗夫在爱情受挫后一蹶不振，重蹈了巴威尔在恋爱上的覆辙，那句对巴威尔的尖刻评价“雄性生物”犹如一记耳光反打在巴扎罗夫自己的脸上。这并不是说，不能写他的失恋痛苦，英雄也有儿女情长的一面。但屠格涅夫却让他的主人公一味消沉下去，不能自拔，直至死亡。这不能不是对巴扎罗夫的曲解。那个在贵族庄园所向披靡的勇士竟无力使自己最终摆脱消极悲观的情绪，人物性格的整体性因此受到损害。作家把巴扎罗夫临终前期待阿金左娃的一吻这幕写得极为动人，然而他的锐气，他的愤恨，他的精神威力，他的坚强意志也在这女人敷衍式的一吻中消溶殆尽。
这种违反人物性格发展逻辑的矛盾变化，与作家的思想倾向不无联系。屠格涅夫对巴扎罗夫所代表的平民知识分子有一种情不自禁的向往，他钦佩他们的个人品质和牺牲精神，但并不赞成他们的社会政治主张。这位温和的自由主义贵族作家害怕暴力革命，不希望他们的事业取得成功。他认为他们的观点必然导致他们成为悲剧人物，因此他安排了巴扎罗夫的失恋、悲观乃至最后死亡。巴扎罗夫性格上的不一致正好折射出作家对民主主义者的矛盾态度。
阿尔卡狄这个人物在小说中有特殊的意义。就年龄来说，他属于子辈，也曾追随过巴扎罗夫；但就思想意识来说，他是父辈的子弟，因此巴扎罗夫称他为“温柔的自由主义少爷”。在刚刚到来的新观念和迟迟不肯退去的旧观念相互争斗的时候，青年人凭借他们的敏感、勇气和朝气等生理、心理因素有可能更倾心于新观念，然而子辈并不是先进思想的当然代表者，进化论的观念在社会思想斗争中并不具有绝对普遍性，更何况其中也不乏有猎奇求新的表面追求。因此，屠格涅夫所表现的不全是生理、心理意义上两代人的代沟，更渗透着不同社会阵营之间政治思想的分歧，从而揭示出当时俄国民主主义对贵族自由主义的胜利。
《父与子》-中心思想
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》-作者简介
伊凡·谢尔盖耶维奇·屠格涅夫（俄语：Иван Сергеевич Тургенев；英语：Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev，公历1818年11月9日－1883年9月3日，合儒略历1818年10月28日－1883年8月22日）俄国现实主义小说家、诗人和剧作家。
俄国19世纪批判现实主义作家、诗人和剧作家，出生于世袭贵族之家，生于俄国奥廖尔省奥廖尔一个旧式富裕家庭，父亲是一个骑兵团团长，十六岁的时候父亲去世。屠格涅夫的妈妈脾气很不好，经常打骂自己的孩子。1833年进莫斯科大学文学系，一年后转入彼得堡大学哲学系语文专业，毕业后到德国柏林大学攻读哲学、历史和希腊与拉丁文。屠格涅夫进入莫斯科大学学习一年，随后转入圣彼得堡大学学习经典著作，俄国文学和哲学。1838年前往柏林大学学习黑格尔哲学。在欧洲屠格涅夫见到了更加现代化的社会制度，被视为“欧化”的知识分子，主张俄国学习西方，废除包括农奴制在内的封建制度。
屠格涅夫是 19 世纪俄国有世界 声誉的现实主义艺术大师。他的小说不仅迅速及时地反映了当时的俄国社会现实 ，而且善于通过生动的情节和恰当的言语、行动，通过对大自然情境交融的描述，塑造出许多栩栩如生的人物形象。他的语言简洁、朴质、精确、优美，为俄罗斯语言的规范化作出了重要贡献。中国早在1917年就开始翻译介绍屠格涅夫的小说，现在几乎他所有的主要作品都有了中译本，一些名作还有多种译本。早期写诗（《帕拉莎》《地主》等）。1847～1852年发表《猎人笔记》，揭露农奴主的残暴，农奴的悲惨生活，因此被放逐。在监禁中写成中篇小说《木木》，对农奴制表示抗议。以后又发表长篇小说《罗亭》（1856年）、《贵族之家》（1859年），中篇小说《阿霞》《多余人的日记》等，描写贵族地主出身的知识分子好发议论而缺少斗争精神的性格。在长篇小说《前夜》（1860年）中，塑造出保加利亚革命者英沙罗夫的形象。后来发表长篇小说《父与子》，刻画贵族自由主义者同平民知识分子之间的思想冲突。后期长篇小说《烟》（1867年）和《处女地》（1877年），否定贵族反动派和贵族自由主义者，批评不彻底的民粹派，但流露悲观情绪。此外，还写有剧本《村居一月》和散文诗等。
屠格涅夫是一位有独特艺术风格的作家，他既擅长细腻的心理描写，又长于抒情。小说结构严整，情节紧凑，人物形象生动，尤其善于细致雕琢女性艺术形象，而他对旖旎的大自然的描写也充满诗情画意。
《父与子》-作品赏析
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
巴扎罗夫是精神上的强者。他充满自信，生气勃勃，具有锐利的批判眼光。他和阿尔卡狄家的仆人们和睦相处，并不妨碍他批判老百姓的落后迷信。他的精神力量和批判锋芒集中表现在他与巴威尔的论战上。两人初次相见，就在感觉上互不相容，进而展露出思想观点上的针锋相对。巴扎罗夫以他特有的简洁、粗鲁的话语对巴威尔以强有力的反击。颇有咄咄逼人之势。他决不屈从权威，具有自主的人格和评判标准，体现了年青一代独立思考的处世态度和初生牛犊不怕虎的斗争精神，当然，也带有年轻人从不成熟走向成熟的过程中的可能产生的偏颇和极端。但他还是以毋庸置疑的精神优势压倒了对手。巴扎罗夫吻费涅奇卡，在巴威尔看来，是严重地侵犯了贵族的权利，也是他们之间对立观点的继续发展。决斗暴露了巴威尔的偏狭、虚弱和做作，显示了巴扎罗夫的豁达、镇定和自信，双方精神力量的强弱在此得到进一步的揭示。
巴扎罗夫是行动的巨人，他抨击贵族的泛泛空谈，自己首先从小事做起。他具有实践能力，注重自然科学研究。他的行动有价值取舍标准：“凡是我们认为有用的事情，我们就依据它行动。”他的行动目标很明确——为未来打扫地盘。他敢于行动的勇气在一定程度上也表现在对待爱情的态度上。他曾恼怒自己也产生那样浪漫的情感，但在爱情之火燃烧起来的时候他却决不回避躲闪。
屠格涅夫写出了在否定爱情的巴扎罗夫内心，爱情是如何萌芽、发展的，写得真实可信。但是作家让巴扎罗夫在爱情受挫后一蹶不振，重蹈了巴威尔在恋爱上的覆辙，那句对巴威尔的尖刻评价“雄性生物”犹如一记耳光反打在巴扎罗夫自己的脸上。这并不是说，不能写他的失恋痛苦，英雄也有儿女情长的一面。但屠格涅夫却让他的主人公一味消沉下去，不能自拔，直至死亡。这不能不是对巴扎罗夫的曲解。那个在贵族庄园所向披靡的勇士竟无力使自己最终摆脱消极悲观的情绪，人物性格的整体性因此受到损害。作家把巴扎罗夫临终前期待阿金左娃的一吻这幕写得极为动人，然而他的锐气，他的愤恨，他的精神威力，他的坚强意志也在这女人敷衍式的一吻中消溶殆尽。
《父与子》《父与子》
这种违反人物性格发展逻辑的矛盾变化，与作家的思想倾向不无联系。屠格涅夫对巴扎罗夫所代表的平民知识分子有一种情不自禁的向往，他钦佩他们的个人品质和牺牲精神，但并不赞成他们的社会政治主张。这位温和的自由主义贵族作家害怕暴力革命，不希望他们的事业取得成功。他认为他们的观点必然导致他们成为悲剧人物，因此他安排了巴扎罗夫的失恋、悲观乃至最后死亡。巴扎罗夫性格上的不一致正好折射出作家对民主主义者的矛盾态度。
阿尔卡狄这个人物在小说中有特殊的意义。就年龄来说，他属于子辈，也曾追随过巴扎罗夫；但就思想意识来说，他是父辈的子弟，因此巴扎罗夫称他为“温柔的自由主义少爷”。在刚刚到来的新观念和迟迟不肯退去的旧观念相互争斗的时候，青年人凭借他们的敏感、勇气和朝气等生理、心理因素有可能更倾心于新观念，然而子辈并不是先进思想的当然代表者，进化论的观念在社会思想斗争中并不具有绝对普遍性，更何况其中也不乏有猎奇求新的表面追求。因此，屠格涅夫所表现的不全是生理、心理意义上两代人的代沟，更渗透着不同社会阵营之间政治思想的分歧，从而揭示出当时俄国民主主义对贵族自由主义的胜利。
《父与子》是屠格涅夫的代表作。巴扎罗夫身上尽管有瑕疵，但他仍以不同凡响的艺术个性给人以鲜明的印象，在俄国文学史上他是第一个俄国“新人”形象，率先传达出平民知识分子已成为生活主角的时代信息。
《父与子》-创作背景
屠格涅夫从《巴拉莎》（一八四三），《地主》（一八四六）等诗篇开始文学生涯。他的《猎人笔记》（一八四七——五二）的发表曾当作俄国文学生活中的一件大事。这一篇篇特写，以俄国中部地区的自然景色为衬托，广泛地描绘了庄园地主和农民的生活，深刻揭露了地主表面上文明仁慈、实际上丑恶残暴的本性，全书充满对含垢受辱、备受欺凌的劳动人民的同情。当时的进步思想界称它是对农奴制的“一阵猛烈炮火”，是一部 “点燃火种的书”。一八五二年屠格涅夫因撰文悼念果戈理逝世，实质上则因其《猎人笔记》的社会思想倾向而被捕，送往斯巴斯科耶——鲁托维诺夫村软禁。软禁期间他写了中篇《木木》，以满腔仇恨对农奴制进行控诉。五十至六十年代是他创作最旺盛的时期，适逢俄国社会运动逐步高涨，他及时地反映了社会生活的方方面面。长篇《罗亭》（一八五六），《贵族之家》（一八五九），中篇《阿霞》（一八五八），《多余人的日记》（一八五○）展示了贵族知识分子言语脱离行动，理论脱离实践的一些典型特征。长篇《前夜》（一八六○）则反映俄国农奴制垮台前夕在俄国出现的进步社会思潮。在屠格涅夫创作中占有中心地位的长篇《父与子》（一八六二）刻画了两种社会势力——民主主义者和自由派贵族间的思想冲突。
屠格涅夫文笔婉丽，结构巧妙，语言清新简洁，深得读者喜爱。其作品很早就有人译介，译介者有老一代知名作家，也有我的同时代人。屠格涅夫创作《父与子》的那些年月，农奴主已不再可能。
《父与子》《父与子》
但屠格涅夫是个深沉的现实主义作家，他必然把历史的重大客观事件置于视界之内，把再现生活作为无可推卸的责职，去塑造符合时代的典型。《父与子》中的巴扎罗夫可说是十九世纪六十年代俄国民。
巴扎罗夫不屈从任何权威，不把任何准则当作信仰，即使这准则是多么受到尊重。赫尔岑把巴扎罗夫的这种虚无主义归结为“完全、彻底摆脱了一切现成概念和陈规旧俗”。杜勃罗留波夫进一步认同：“新人——他是唯心主义哲学的反对者，因为唯心主义哲学把准则看成高于朴素的生活真理。”巴扎罗夫对借抽象法得出的科学概念确无好感：“指的是什么科学？泛泛的科学吗？科学一如手艺，有具体的门类，而泛泛的科学是不存在的。”在此他只承认具体的科学，而把“泛泛的科学”即哲学彻底否定了。他把哲学看成是 “浪漫主义”哲学，腐朽，胡说八道，与浪漫主义是等同概念。曼恩由此认为巴扎罗夫的思辩“从黑格尔的 Allgemeinneit总体中得到了解放”。巴扎罗夫认为人的行为不由抽象的、必须遵循的准则，而是由现实生活决定的：“总的说来，准则是没有的，……只有感觉。一切都取决于感觉。”巴扎罗夫对基尔萨诺夫所奉准则的抗议也就是民主主义者对唯心观的抗议。那时平民中的民主主义者按杜勃留波夫说法“不但懂得，而且亲身感受到，世上绝对的东西是没有的，一切事物只有它的相对意义”，因此他们断然“摆脱开绝对理念而去接近现实生活，用他们的现实观替代一切抽象概念”。把小说《父与子》中发生的事件限定在一八五九年自有其。
此书获全国优秀畅销书奖，不朽的杰作，永远的畅销书！
连环漫画《父与子》是德国幽默大师埃·奥·卜劳恩的不朽杰作。作品中一个个生动幽默的小故事都是来自于漫画家在生活中的真实感受，父与子实际上就是卡劳恩与儿子克里斯蒂安的真实写照。一幅幅小巧精湛的画面闪烁着智慧之光，无言地流泻出纯真的赤子之情与融融天伦之乐，永远地震撼着人们的心灵。 早在20世纪30年代《父与子》便传入我国，但在这本《父与子》全集之前国内最多只出现过150个《父与子》的小故事，1988年我国在德意志联邦人和国驻华大使及领事的帮助下成功地编成了这本《父与子》全集后，十几年中这本画册重印了数十万，深受读者喜爱，1994年还被评为全国优秀畅销书。
非常难得的是国内的许多出版社对我们这个《父与子》全集的版本十分感偿趣，经常愉快地借用这个版本。例如，山东的黄河出版社竟全盘翻印了我们的《父与子》全集，而成都的天地出版社借用的这个版本（此外还借了我编的许多其他的画册）不到两年竟销了10万册。说真的，我真为此感到高兴，因为模仿是最真诚的恭维，这些年轻的编辑毕竟是真心实意的追随者！不过我们的《父与子》全集到底是原版，细看毕竟不同，不是吗？
【编辑点评】
德国著名漫画家埃· 奥·卜劳恩的连环漫画《父与子》誉满天下、风靡世界。《父与子》所塑造的善良、正直、宽容的艺术形象，充满着智慧之光，流露出纯真的父子之情，深深地打动了千百万读者的心，从而使卜劳恩成为海恩里希·霍夫曼和威廉·布施之后的又一巨匠，《父与子》被人们誉为德国幽默的象征，受到人们一致高度的赞扬，声誉远远地越出了国界。
《父与子》-影视信息
剧情简介
俄国名导苏古诺夫（Aleksandr Sokurov）执导。这部电影是描述一对父子之间，既浓烈特殊又扑朔迷离的情感，极具争议性和震撼力。
父亲与儿子长年生活在同一屋檐下，仿佛与世隔绝般沉浸在他们自己的世界中，被回忆和日常仪式所填满。有时他们看起来就像兄弟，有时甚至像一对恋人。
《父与子》《父与子》
儿子亚力克斯走上了一条和父亲一样的道路，进入了军校。他喜欢体育运动，还有了女朋友。但是情人之间却总有点隔阂，女友似乎在暗暗嫉妒亚力克斯与父亲的亲密关系。
尽管亚力克斯心里明白所有的儿子总有一天终将离开父亲，开始自己的生活，他的内心仍然充满矛盾。
亚力克斯的父亲也清楚他或许应该去另一座城市找一份更好的工作，或者娶一位新太太。但是，谁又能减轻亚力克斯梦魇中的痛苦呢？
从来没有哪对父与子之间的爱如他们这般深厚。
苏古诺夫亲情三部曲系列电影的第二部，备受好评的《母与子》之姊妹篇。
本片的拍摄地点，是2003年正好建城三百周年的俄罗斯名城，如诗如画的圣彼得堡所拍摄，极具诗意且唯美。
Historical context and notes
The fathers and children of the novel refers to the growing divide between the two generations of Russians, and the character Yevgeny Bazarov has been referred to as the "first Bolshevik", for his nihilism and rejection of the old order.
Turgenev wrote Fathers and Sons as a response to the growing cultural schism that he saw between liberals of the 1830s/1840s and the growing nihilist movement. Both the nihilists (the "sons") and the 1830s liberals sought Western-based social change in Russia. Additionally, these two modes of thought were contrasted with the conservative Slavophiles, who believed that Russia's path lay in its traditional spirituality.
Fathers and Sons might be regarded as the first wholly modern novel in Russian Literature (Gogol's Dead Souls, another main contender, is sometimes referred to as a poem or epic in prose as in the style of Dante's Divine Comedy). The novel introduces a dual character study, as seen with the gradual breakdown of Bazarov's and Arkady's nihilistic opposition to emotional display, especially in the case of Bazarov's love for Madame Odintsova and Fenichka. This prominent theme of character duality and deep psychological insight would exert an influence on most of the great Russian novels to come, most obviously echoed in the novels of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky.
The novel is also the first Russian work to gain prominence in the Western world, eventually gaining the approval of well established novelists Gustave Flaubert, Guy de Maupassant, and Henry James.
Major characters
* Yevgeny Vasil'evich Bazarov - A nihilist, a student of science, and is training to be a doctor. As a nihilist he is a mentor to Arkady, and a challenger to the liberal ideas of the Kirsanov brothers and the traditional Russian Orthodox feelings of his own parents.
* Arkady Nikolaevich Kirsanov - A recent graduate of St. Petersburg University and friend of Bazarov. He is also a nihilist, although his belief seems to stem from his admiration of Bazarov rather than his own conviction.
* Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov - A landlord, a liberal democrat, Arkady’s father.
* Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov - Nikolai’s brother and a bourgeois with aristocratic pretensions, who prides himself on his refinement but like his brother is reform minded. Although he is reluctantly tolerant of the nihilism, he cannot help hating Bazarov.
* Vasily Ivanovich Bazarov - Bazarov’s father, a retired army surgeon, and a small countryside land/serf holder. Educated and enlightened, he nonetheless feels, like many of the characters, that rural isolation has left him out of touch with modern ideas. He thus retains a loyalty to traditionalist ways, manifested particularly in devotion to God and to his son Yevgeny.
* Arina Vlas'evna Bazarova - Bazarov’s mother. A very traditional woman of the 15th c. Moscovy style aristocracy: a pious follower of Orthodox Christianity, woven with folk tales and falsehoods. She loves her son deeply, but is also terrified of him and his rejection of all beliefs.
* Anna Sergeevna Odintsova - A wealthy widow who entertains the nihilist friends at her estate. Bazarov declares his love for her, but she is unable to reciprocate, both out of fear for the emotional chaos it could bring and an inability to recognize her own sentiments as love itself. Bazarov's love is a challenge to his nihilist ideal of rejection of all established order.
* Katerina (Katya) Sergeevna Lokteva - A character similar to Arkady and the younger sister of Anna. She lives comfortably with her sister but lacks confidence, finding it hard to escape Anna Sergeevna's shadow. This shyness makes her and Arkady’s love slow to realize itself.
* Fedosya (Fenichka) Nikolayevna - The daughter of Nikolai’s housekeeper, with whom he has fallen in love and fathered a child out of wedlock. The implied obstacles to their marriage are difference in class, and perhaps Nikolai's previous marriage - the burden of 'traditionalist' values.
* Viktor Sitnikov - A pompous and somewhat stupid friend of Bazarov who joins populist ideals and groups.
* Avdotya Nikitishna or Evdoksya Kukshina - An emancipated woman who lives in the town of X. Kukshina is independent but rather eccentric and incapable as a proto-feminist despite her potential.
Themes
Transgression and redemption
Bazarov (the prototypical nihilist) argues with Pavel Kirsanov (the prototypical liberal of the 1840s generation) about the nature of nihilism and usefulness to Russia in an episode which personifies the struggle between the fathers (i.e., the liberals of the 1840s) and their nihilist "sons". "Aristocratism, liberalism, progress, principles," Bazarov says. "Just think, how many foreign…and useless words!"
Bazarov tells Pavel that he will abandon nihilism when Pavel can show him "…a single institution of contemporary life, either in the family or in the social sphere, that doesn’t deserve absolute and merciless rejection." But despite this utter scorn for all things associated with traditional Russia, Bazarov still believes that there is a purpose and a value in applied science.
Human emotion and love as redemption
Bazarov's nihilism falls apart in the face of human emotions, specifically his love for Anna Odintsova. His nihilism does not account for the pain that his unrequited love causes him, and this introduces a despair that he is not capable of contending with.
Bazarov returns to his family after Odintsova rejects him. Bazarov complains to Arkady that "…they, that is, my parents, are occupied, and don't worry in the least about their own insignificance; they don't give a damn about it… While I…I feel only boredom and anger." His theory's inability to account for his emotions frustrates him and he sinks deep into boredom and ennui.
And then there is the enigmatic Anna Odintsova, a beautiful young woman of lowly origin. By virtue of having married well and been widowed young, she has inherited an exceedingly comfortable and insular life on a palatial country estate. In a letter written the same year the novel was published, Turgenev revealed that he conceived of Anna as “the representative of our idle, dreaming, curious and cold epicurean young ladies, our female nobility.” And yet, as with Bazarov, Turgenev’s fictional creation takes on a life of its own, superseding the author’s intellectual scheme to become a complex and perplexing figure.
Apparently content at the outset with her unattached life, Anna finds herself increasingly attracted to the blunt, unorthodox, highly intelligent Bazarov. She proceeds almost unwittingly to emotionally seduce the self-declared womanizer, luring him step by step in a pair of riveting, back-to-back passages to reveal his love. In the intimacy of her study, Anna confesses that she is very “unhappy,” that she has no desire to “go on,” that she longs for a “strong attachment” that is “all or nothing. A life for a life. You take mine, you give up yours, without regrets, without turning back.”
And yet, a moment after Bazarov capitulates and confesses his love, Odintsova rejects him brutally. Afterward, she is tortured, alternately blaming and excusing herself while fearing she may have thrown away a chance for genuine love. Finally she decides, “No. God knows where it might have led; one mustn’t fool around with this kind of thing.”
Conversely, Turgenev shows us Arkady and Nikolai's traditional happiness in marriage and estate management as the solution to Bazarov's cosmic despair and Anna's life of loveless comfort. (Arkady marries Anna Odintsova's sister Katya, though he was also originally in love with Anna). The height of the conflict between Bazarov and the older generation comes when Bazarov wounds Pavel in a duel. Finally, Turgenev also refutes Bazarov's "insignificance principle", i.e., the nihilist idea that life is utterly insignificant and that nothing remains after death: after leaving and then returning again to his parents, Bazarov dies of typhus. The final passage of the book portrays Bazarov's parents visiting his grave.
They walk with a heavy step, supporting each other; when they approach the railing, they fall on their knees and remain there for a long time, weeping bitterly, gazing attentively at the headstone under which their son lies buried: they exchange a few words, brush the dust off the stone, move a branch of the pine tree, and pray once again; they can’t forsake this place where they seem to feel closer to their son, to their memories of him… Can it really be that their prayers and tears are futile? Can it really be that love, sacred, devoted love is not all powerful? Oh, no!
Their love causes them to remember Bazarov: he has transcended death, but only through the love of other people. Fyodor Dostoevsky, who read Fathers and Sons and apparently appreciated Bazarov as a character, explores a similar theme with Raskolnikov's religious redemption (via the love of Christ) in Crime and Punishment.
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》是俄国著名作家屠格涅夫的代表作。《父与子》完成于1860年8月至1861年8月，经多次修改后，于1862年在《俄罗斯导报》上。
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》-人物特点
《父与子》的中心人物是平民知识分子巴扎洛夫。巴扎洛夫是平民知识分子的典型，是“新人”的形象，他性格的突出特征是具有鲜明的革命色彩，这表现在：
1、他激烈地否定现存制度。巴扎洛夫的否定有其历史的合理性。这里首先是历史进步的需要，其次才是革命者的版面认识和过激情绪。作家对巴扎洛夫的这种精神特质虽不欣赏，但却作了真实的描述。
2、蔑视贵族阶级。这是平民觉醒的一个重要特征。巴扎洛夫确信真理在自己手中，确信自己是时代英雄，有权蔑视贵族阶级。他对于巴威尔的愤怒挑战始终从容对待，而且常常摆出一付不屑一顾的态度。在论辩中，在决斗里，他老师崇高的胜利者。最后巴威尔也不得不承认自己的光荣已成往事。
3、以平民身份自豪，跟人民保持着密切的关系。巴扎洛夫已经不同于巴西斯托夫，他不再是优秀贵族分子的追随者，他已经意识到，平民优于贵族。这是平民势力兴起的又一个重要标志。同时，屠格涅夫也表现了巴扎洛夫的知识分子的生活方式使他和人民隔膜起来的情形。一个农民评论巴扎洛夫说：“当然啦，他是一位少爷，他能懂得什么呢？”这样的描述也是很深刻的，它揭示了巴扎洛夫高于普通农民和脱离人民的一面，在当时的平民知识分子中，这也是一种典型的现象。这正是后来的民粹主义运动失败的重要原因之一。
巴扎罗夫是精神上的强者。他充满自信，生气勃勃，具有锐利的批判眼光。他和阿尔卡狄家的仆人们和睦相处，并不妨碍他批判老百姓的落后迷信。他的精神力量和批判锋芒集中表现在他与巴威尔的论战上。两人初次相见，就在感觉上互不相容，进而展露出思想观点上的针锋相对。巴扎罗夫以他特有的简洁、粗鲁的话语对巴威尔以强有力的反击。颇有咄咄逼人之势。他决不屈从权威，具有自主的人格和评判标准，体现了年青一代独立思考的处世态度和初生牛犊不怕虎的斗争精神，当然，也带有年轻人从不成熟走向成熟的过程中的可能产生的偏颇和极端。但他还是以毋庸置疑的精神优势压倒了对手。巴扎罗夫吻费涅奇卡，在巴威尔看来，是严重地侵犯了贵族的权利，也是他们之间对立观点的继续发展。决斗暴露了巴威尔的偏狭、虚弱和做作，显示了巴扎罗夫的豁达、镇定和自信，双方精神力量的强弱在此得到进一步的揭示。
巴扎罗夫是行动的巨人，他抨击贵族的泛泛空谈，自己首先从小事做起。他具有实践能力，注重自然科学研究。他的行动有价值取舍标准：“凡是我们认为有用的事情，我们就依据它行动。”他的行动目标很明确——为未来打扫地盘。他敢于行动的勇气在一定程度上也表现在对待爱情的态度上。他曾恼怒自己也产生那样浪漫的情感，但在爱情之火燃烧起来的时候他却决不回避躲闪。
屠格涅夫写出了在否定爱情的巴扎罗夫内心，爱情是如何萌芽、发展的，写得真实可信。但是作家让巴扎罗夫在爱情受挫后一蹶不振，重蹈了巴威尔在恋爱上的覆辙，那句对巴威尔的尖刻评价“雄性生物”犹如一记耳光反打在巴扎罗夫自己的脸上。这并不是说，不能写他的失恋痛苦，英雄也有儿女情长的一面。但屠格涅夫却让他的主人公一味消沉下去，不能自拔，直至死亡。这不能不是对巴扎罗夫的曲解。那个在贵族庄园所向披靡的勇士竟无力使自己最终摆脱消极悲观的情绪，人物性格的整体性因此受到损害。作家把巴扎罗夫临终前期待阿金左娃的一吻这幕写得极为动人，然而他的锐气，他的愤恨，他的精神威力，他的坚强意志也在这女人敷衍式的一吻中消溶殆尽。
这种违反人物性格发展逻辑的矛盾变化，与作家的思想倾向不无联系。屠格涅夫对巴扎罗夫所代表的平民知识分子有一种情不自禁的向往，他钦佩他们的个人品质和牺牲精神，但并不赞成他们的社会政治主张。这位温和的自由主义贵族作家害怕暴力革命，不希望他们的事业取得成功。他认为他们的观点必然导致他们成为悲剧人物，因此他安排了巴扎罗夫的失恋、悲观乃至最后死亡。巴扎罗夫性格上的不一致正好折射出作家对民主主义者的矛盾态度。
阿尔卡狄这个人物在小说中有特殊的意义。就年龄来说，他属于子辈，也曾追随过巴扎罗夫；但就思想意识来说，他是父辈的子弟，因此巴扎罗夫称他为“温柔的自由主义少爷”。在刚刚到来的新观念和迟迟不肯退去的旧观念相互争斗的时候，青年人凭借他们的敏感、勇气和朝气等生理、心理因素有可能更倾心于新观念，然而子辈并不是先进思想的当然代表者，进化论的观念在社会思想斗争中并不具有绝对普遍性，更何况其中也不乏有猎奇求新的表面追求。因此，屠格涅夫所表现的不全是生理、心理意义上两代人的代沟，更渗透着不同社会阵营之间政治思想的分歧，从而揭示出当时俄国民主主义对贵族自由主义的胜利。
《父与子》-中心思想
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
《父与子》-作者简介
伊凡·谢尔盖耶维奇·屠格涅夫（俄语：Иван Сергеевич Тургенев；英语：Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev，公历1818年11月9日－1883年9月3日，合儒略历1818年10月28日－1883年8月22日）俄国现实主义小说家、诗人和剧作家。
俄国19世纪批判现实主义作家、诗人和剧作家，出生于世袭贵族之家，生于俄国奥廖尔省奥廖尔一个旧式富裕家庭，父亲是一个骑兵团团长，十六岁的时候父亲去世。屠格涅夫的妈妈脾气很不好，经常打骂自己的孩子。1833年进莫斯科大学文学系，一年后转入彼得堡大学哲学系语文专业，毕业后到德国柏林大学攻读哲学、历史和希腊与拉丁文。屠格涅夫进入莫斯科大学学习一年，随后转入圣彼得堡大学学习经典著作，俄国文学和哲学。1838年前往柏林大学学习黑格尔哲学。在欧洲屠格涅夫见到了更加现代化的社会制度，被视为“欧化”的知识分子，主张俄国学习西方，废除包括农奴制在内的封建制度。
屠格涅夫是 19 世纪俄国有世界 声誉的现实主义艺术大师。他的小说不仅迅速及时地反映了当时的俄国社会现实 ，而且善于通过生动的情节和恰当的言语、行动，通过对大自然情境交融的描述，塑造出许多栩栩如生的人物形象。他的语言简洁、朴质、精确、优美，为俄罗斯语言的规范化作出了重要贡献。中国早在1917年就开始翻译介绍屠格涅夫的小说，现在几乎他所有的主要作品都有了中译本，一些名作还有多种译本。早期写诗（《帕拉莎》《地主》等）。1847～1852年发表《猎人笔记》，揭露农奴主的残暴，农奴的悲惨生活，因此被放逐。在监禁中写成中篇小说《木木》，对农奴制表示抗议。以后又发表长篇小说《罗亭》（1856年）、《贵族之家》（1859年），中篇小说《阿霞》《多余人的日记》等，描写贵族地主出身的知识分子好发议论而缺少斗争精神的性格。在长篇小说《前夜》（1860年）中，塑造出保加利亚革命者英沙罗夫的形象。后来发表长篇小说《父与子》，刻画贵族自由主义者同平民知识分子之间的思想冲突。后期长篇小说《烟》（1867年）和《处女地》（1877年），否定贵族反动派和贵族自由主义者，批评不彻底的民粹派，但流露悲观情绪。此外，还写有剧本《村居一月》和散文诗等。
屠格涅夫是一位有独特艺术风格的作家，他既擅长细腻的心理描写，又长于抒情。小说结构严整，情节紧凑，人物形象生动，尤其善于细致雕琢女性艺术形象，而他对旖旎的大自然的描写也充满诗情画意。
《父与子》-作品赏析
《父与子》描写的是父辈与子辈冲突的主题。这一冲突在屠格涅夫笔下着上了时代的色彩。巴扎罗夫代表了19世纪60年代的年轻一代——激进的平民知识分子。而巴威尔和尼古拉则代表了保守的自由主义贵族的老一代人。当然，在对待年轻人的态度上，父辈中的人们态度各有不同，尼古拉比较温和，希望理解子辈，想跟上时代，只是不太成功。巴威尔则固执已见，信奉贵族自由主义，对年轻人的反叛耿耿于怀。父与子的冲突在广义上表现为巴威尔和巴扎罗夫之间的对立，由此，在巴扎罗夫身上塑造了时代“新人”的形象。
巴扎罗夫是精神上的强者。他充满自信，生气勃勃，具有锐利的批判眼光。他和阿尔卡狄家的仆人们和睦相处，并不妨碍他批判老百姓的落后迷信。他的精神力量和批判锋芒集中表现在他与巴威尔的论战上。两人初次相见，就在感觉上互不相容，进而展露出思想观点上的针锋相对。巴扎罗夫以他特有的简洁、粗鲁的话语对巴威尔以强有力的反击。颇有咄咄逼人之势。他决不屈从权威，具有自主的人格和评判标准，体现了年青一代独立思考的处世态度和初生牛犊不怕虎的斗争精神，当然，也带有年轻人从不成熟走向成熟的过程中的可能产生的偏颇和极端。但他还是以毋庸置疑的精神优势压倒了对手。巴扎罗夫吻费涅奇卡，在巴威尔看来，是严重地侵犯了贵族的权利，也是他们之间对立观点的继续发展。决斗暴露了巴威尔的偏狭、虚弱和做作，显示了巴扎罗夫的豁达、镇定和自信，双方精神力量的强弱在此得到进一步的揭示。
巴扎罗夫是行动的巨人，他抨击贵族的泛泛空谈，自己首先从小事做起。他具有实践能力，注重自然科学研究。他的行动有价值取舍标准：“凡是我们认为有用的事情，我们就依据它行动。”他的行动目标很明确——为未来打扫地盘。他敢于行动的勇气在一定程度上也表现在对待爱情的态度上。他曾恼怒自己也产生那样浪漫的情感，但在爱情之火燃烧起来的时候他却决不回避躲闪。
屠格涅夫写出了在否定爱情的巴扎罗夫内心，爱情是如何萌芽、发展的，写得真实可信。但是作家让巴扎罗夫在爱情受挫后一蹶不振，重蹈了巴威尔在恋爱上的覆辙，那句对巴威尔的尖刻评价“雄性生物”犹如一记耳光反打在巴扎罗夫自己的脸上。这并不是说，不能写他的失恋痛苦，英雄也有儿女情长的一面。但屠格涅夫却让他的主人公一味消沉下去，不能自拔，直至死亡。这不能不是对巴扎罗夫的曲解。那个在贵族庄园所向披靡的勇士竟无力使自己最终摆脱消极悲观的情绪，人物性格的整体性因此受到损害。作家把巴扎罗夫临终前期待阿金左娃的一吻这幕写得极为动人，然而他的锐气，他的愤恨，他的精神威力，他的坚强意志也在这女人敷衍式的一吻中消溶殆尽。
《父与子》《父与子》
这种违反人物性格发展逻辑的矛盾变化，与作家的思想倾向不无联系。屠格涅夫对巴扎罗夫所代表的平民知识分子有一种情不自禁的向往，他钦佩他们的个人品质和牺牲精神，但并不赞成他们的社会政治主张。这位温和的自由主义贵族作家害怕暴力革命，不希望他们的事业取得成功。他认为他们的观点必然导致他们成为悲剧人物，因此他安排了巴扎罗夫的失恋、悲观乃至最后死亡。巴扎罗夫性格上的不一致正好折射出作家对民主主义者的矛盾态度。
阿尔卡狄这个人物在小说中有特殊的意义。就年龄来说，他属于子辈，也曾追随过巴扎罗夫；但就思想意识来说，他是父辈的子弟，因此巴扎罗夫称他为“温柔的自由主义少爷”。在刚刚到来的新观念和迟迟不肯退去的旧观念相互争斗的时候，青年人凭借他们的敏感、勇气和朝气等生理、心理因素有可能更倾心于新观念，然而子辈并不是先进思想的当然代表者，进化论的观念在社会思想斗争中并不具有绝对普遍性，更何况其中也不乏有猎奇求新的表面追求。因此，屠格涅夫所表现的不全是生理、心理意义上两代人的代沟，更渗透着不同社会阵营之间政治思想的分歧，从而揭示出当时俄国民主主义对贵族自由主义的胜利。
《父与子》是屠格涅夫的代表作。巴扎罗夫身上尽管有瑕疵，但他仍以不同凡响的艺术个性给人以鲜明的印象，在俄国文学史上他是第一个俄国“新人”形象，率先传达出平民知识分子已成为生活主角的时代信息。
《父与子》-创作背景
屠格涅夫从《巴拉莎》（一八四三），《地主》（一八四六）等诗篇开始文学生涯。他的《猎人笔记》（一八四七——五二）的发表曾当作俄国文学生活中的一件大事。这一篇篇特写，以俄国中部地区的自然景色为衬托，广泛地描绘了庄园地主和农民的生活，深刻揭露了地主表面上文明仁慈、实际上丑恶残暴的本性，全书充满对含垢受辱、备受欺凌的劳动人民的同情。当时的进步思想界称它是对农奴制的“一阵猛烈炮火”，是一部 “点燃火种的书”。一八五二年屠格涅夫因撰文悼念果戈理逝世，实质上则因其《猎人笔记》的社会思想倾向而被捕，送往斯巴斯科耶——鲁托维诺夫村软禁。软禁期间他写了中篇《木木》，以满腔仇恨对农奴制进行控诉。五十至六十年代是他创作最旺盛的时期，适逢俄国社会运动逐步高涨，他及时地反映了社会生活的方方面面。长篇《罗亭》（一八五六），《贵族之家》（一八五九），中篇《阿霞》（一八五八），《多余人的日记》（一八五○）展示了贵族知识分子言语脱离行动，理论脱离实践的一些典型特征。长篇《前夜》（一八六○）则反映俄国农奴制垮台前夕在俄国出现的进步社会思潮。在屠格涅夫创作中占有中心地位的长篇《父与子》（一八六二）刻画了两种社会势力——民主主义者和自由派贵族间的思想冲突。
屠格涅夫文笔婉丽，结构巧妙，语言清新简洁，深得读者喜爱。其作品很早就有人译介，译介者有老一代知名作家，也有我的同时代人。屠格涅夫创作《父与子》的那些年月，农奴主已不再可能。
《父与子》《父与子》
但屠格涅夫是个深沉的现实主义作家，他必然把历史的重大客观事件置于视界之内，把再现生活作为无可推卸的责职，去塑造符合时代的典型。《父与子》中的巴扎罗夫可说是十九世纪六十年代俄国民。
巴扎罗夫不屈从任何权威，不把任何准则当作信仰，即使这准则是多么受到尊重。赫尔岑把巴扎罗夫的这种虚无主义归结为“完全、彻底摆脱了一切现成概念和陈规旧俗”。杜勃罗留波夫进一步认同：“新人——他是唯心主义哲学的反对者，因为唯心主义哲学把准则看成高于朴素的生活真理。”巴扎罗夫对借抽象法得出的科学概念确无好感：“指的是什么科学？泛泛的科学吗？科学一如手艺，有具体的门类，而泛泛的科学是不存在的。”在此他只承认具体的科学，而把“泛泛的科学”即哲学彻底否定了。他把哲学看成是 “浪漫主义”哲学，腐朽，胡说八道，与浪漫主义是等同概念。曼恩由此认为巴扎罗夫的思辩“从黑格尔的 Allgemeinneit总体中得到了解放”。巴扎罗夫认为人的行为不由抽象的、必须遵循的准则，而是由现实生活决定的：“总的说来，准则是没有的，……只有感觉。一切都取决于感觉。”巴扎罗夫对基尔萨诺夫所奉准则的抗议也就是民主主义者对唯心观的抗议。那时平民中的民主主义者按杜勃留波夫说法“不但懂得，而且亲身感受到，世上绝对的东西是没有的，一切事物只有它的相对意义”，因此他们断然“摆脱开绝对理念而去接近现实生活，用他们的现实观替代一切抽象概念”。把小说《父与子》中发生的事件限定在一八五九年自有其。
此书获全国优秀畅销书奖，不朽的杰作，永远的畅销书！
连环漫画《父与子》是德国幽默大师埃·奥·卜劳恩的不朽杰作。作品中一个个生动幽默的小故事都是来自于漫画家在生活中的真实感受，父与子实际上就是卡劳恩与儿子克里斯蒂安的真实写照。一幅幅小巧精湛的画面闪烁着智慧之光，无言地流泻出纯真的赤子之情与融融天伦之乐，永远地震撼着人们的心灵。 早在20世纪30年代《父与子》便传入我国，但在这本《父与子》全集之前国内最多只出现过150个《父与子》的小故事，1988年我国在德意志联邦人和国驻华大使及领事的帮助下成功地编成了这本《父与子》全集后，十几年中这本画册重印了数十万，深受读者喜爱，1994年还被评为全国优秀畅销书。
非常难得的是国内的许多出版社对我们这个《父与子》全集的版本十分感偿趣，经常愉快地借用这个版本。例如，山东的黄河出版社竟全盘翻印了我们的《父与子》全集，而成都的天地出版社借用的这个版本（此外还借了我编的许多其他的画册）不到两年竟销了10万册。说真的，我真为此感到高兴，因为模仿是最真诚的恭维，这些年轻的编辑毕竟是真心实意的追随者！不过我们的《父与子》全集到底是原版，细看毕竟不同，不是吗？
【编辑点评】
德国著名漫画家埃· 奥·卜劳恩的连环漫画《父与子》誉满天下、风靡世界。《父与子》所塑造的善良、正直、宽容的艺术形象，充满着智慧之光，流露出纯真的父子之情，深深地打动了千百万读者的心，从而使卜劳恩成为海恩里希·霍夫曼和威廉·布施之后的又一巨匠，《父与子》被人们誉为德国幽默的象征，受到人们一致高度的赞扬，声誉远远地越出了国界。
《父与子》-影视信息
剧情简介
俄国名导苏古诺夫（Aleksandr Sokurov）执导。这部电影是描述一对父子之间，既浓烈特殊又扑朔迷离的情感，极具争议性和震撼力。
父亲与儿子长年生活在同一屋檐下，仿佛与世隔绝般沉浸在他们自己的世界中，被回忆和日常仪式所填满。有时他们看起来就像兄弟，有时甚至像一对恋人。
《父与子》《父与子》
儿子亚力克斯走上了一条和父亲一样的道路，进入了军校。他喜欢体育运动，还有了女朋友。但是情人之间却总有点隔阂，女友似乎在暗暗嫉妒亚力克斯与父亲的亲密关系。
尽管亚力克斯心里明白所有的儿子总有一天终将离开父亲，开始自己的生活，他的内心仍然充满矛盾。
亚力克斯的父亲也清楚他或许应该去另一座城市找一份更好的工作，或者娶一位新太太。但是，谁又能减轻亚力克斯梦魇中的痛苦呢？
从来没有哪对父与子之间的爱如他们这般深厚。
苏古诺夫亲情三部曲系列电影的第二部，备受好评的《母与子》之姊妹篇。
本片的拍摄地点，是2003年正好建城三百周年的俄罗斯名城，如诗如画的圣彼得堡所拍摄，极具诗意且唯美。
Historical context and notes
The fathers and children of the novel refers to the growing divide between the two generations of Russians, and the character Yevgeny Bazarov has been referred to as the "first Bolshevik", for his nihilism and rejection of the old order.
Turgenev wrote Fathers and Sons as a response to the growing cultural schism that he saw between liberals of the 1830s/1840s and the growing nihilist movement. Both the nihilists (the "sons") and the 1830s liberals sought Western-based social change in Russia. Additionally, these two modes of thought were contrasted with the conservative Slavophiles, who believed that Russia's path lay in its traditional spirituality.
Fathers and Sons might be regarded as the first wholly modern novel in Russian Literature (Gogol's Dead Souls, another main contender, is sometimes referred to as a poem or epic in prose as in the style of Dante's Divine Comedy). The novel introduces a dual character study, as seen with the gradual breakdown of Bazarov's and Arkady's nihilistic opposition to emotional display, especially in the case of Bazarov's love for Madame Odintsova and Fenichka. This prominent theme of character duality and deep psychological insight would exert an influence on most of the great Russian novels to come, most obviously echoed in the novels of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky.
The novel is also the first Russian work to gain prominence in the Western world, eventually gaining the approval of well established novelists Gustave Flaubert, Guy de Maupassant, and Henry James.
Major characters
* Yevgeny Vasil'evich Bazarov - A nihilist, a student of science, and is training to be a doctor. As a nihilist he is a mentor to Arkady, and a challenger to the liberal ideas of the Kirsanov brothers and the traditional Russian Orthodox feelings of his own parents.
* Arkady Nikolaevich Kirsanov - A recent graduate of St. Petersburg University and friend of Bazarov. He is also a nihilist, although his belief seems to stem from his admiration of Bazarov rather than his own conviction.
* Nikolai Petrovich Kirsanov - A landlord, a liberal democrat, Arkady’s father.
* Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov - Nikolai’s brother and a bourgeois with aristocratic pretensions, who prides himself on his refinement but like his brother is reform minded. Although he is reluctantly tolerant of the nihilism, he cannot help hating Bazarov.
* Vasily Ivanovich Bazarov - Bazarov’s father, a retired army surgeon, and a small countryside land/serf holder. Educated and enlightened, he nonetheless feels, like many of the characters, that rural isolation has left him out of touch with modern ideas. He thus retains a loyalty to traditionalist ways, manifested particularly in devotion to God and to his son Yevgeny.
* Arina Vlas'evna Bazarova - Bazarov’s mother. A very traditional woman of the 15th c. Moscovy style aristocracy: a pious follower of Orthodox Christianity, woven with folk tales and falsehoods. She loves her son deeply, but is also terrified of him and his rejection of all beliefs.
* Anna Sergeevna Odintsova - A wealthy widow who entertains the nihilist friends at her estate. Bazarov declares his love for her, but she is unable to reciprocate, both out of fear for the emotional chaos it could bring and an inability to recognize her own sentiments as love itself. Bazarov's love is a challenge to his nihilist ideal of rejection of all established order.
* Katerina (Katya) Sergeevna Lokteva - A character similar to Arkady and the younger sister of Anna. She lives comfortably with her sister but lacks confidence, finding it hard to escape Anna Sergeevna's shadow. This shyness makes her and Arkady’s love slow to realize itself.
* Fedosya (Fenichka) Nikolayevna - The daughter of Nikolai’s housekeeper, with whom he has fallen in love and fathered a child out of wedlock. The implied obstacles to their marriage are difference in class, and perhaps Nikolai's previous marriage - the burden of 'traditionalist' values.
* Viktor Sitnikov - A pompous and somewhat stupid friend of Bazarov who joins populist ideals and groups.
* Avdotya Nikitishna or Evdoksya Kukshina - An emancipated woman who lives in the town of X. Kukshina is independent but rather eccentric and incapable as a proto-feminist despite her potential.
Themes
Transgression and redemption
Bazarov (the prototypical nihilist) argues with Pavel Kirsanov (the prototypical liberal of the 1840s generation) about the nature of nihilism and usefulness to Russia in an episode which personifies the struggle between the fathers (i.e., the liberals of the 1840s) and their nihilist "sons". "Aristocratism, liberalism, progress, principles," Bazarov says. "Just think, how many foreign…and useless words!"
Bazarov tells Pavel that he will abandon nihilism when Pavel can show him "…a single institution of contemporary life, either in the family or in the social sphere, that doesn’t deserve absolute and merciless rejection." But despite this utter scorn for all things associated with traditional Russia, Bazarov still believes that there is a purpose and a value in applied science.
Human emotion and love as redemption
Bazarov's nihilism falls apart in the face of human emotions, specifically his love for Anna Odintsova. His nihilism does not account for the pain that his unrequited love causes him, and this introduces a despair that he is not capable of contending with.
Bazarov returns to his family after Odintsova rejects him. Bazarov complains to Arkady that "…they, that is, my parents, are occupied, and don't worry in the least about their own insignificance; they don't give a damn about it… While I…I feel only boredom and anger." His theory's inability to account for his emotions frustrates him and he sinks deep into boredom and ennui.
And then there is the enigmatic Anna Odintsova, a beautiful young woman of lowly origin. By virtue of having married well and been widowed young, she has inherited an exceedingly comfortable and insular life on a palatial country estate. In a letter written the same year the novel was published, Turgenev revealed that he conceived of Anna as “the representative of our idle, dreaming, curious and cold epicurean young ladies, our female nobility.” And yet, as with Bazarov, Turgenev’s fictional creation takes on a life of its own, superseding the author’s intellectual scheme to become a complex and perplexing figure.
Apparently content at the outset with her unattached life, Anna finds herself increasingly attracted to the blunt, unorthodox, highly intelligent Bazarov. She proceeds almost unwittingly to emotionally seduce the self-declared womanizer, luring him step by step in a pair of riveting, back-to-back passages to reveal his love. In the intimacy of her study, Anna confesses that she is very “unhappy,” that she has no desire to “go on,” that she longs for a “strong attachment” that is “all or nothing. A life for a life. You take mine, you give up yours, without regrets, without turning back.”
And yet, a moment after Bazarov capitulates and confesses his love, Odintsova rejects him brutally. Afterward, she is tortured, alternately blaming and excusing herself while fearing she may have thrown away a chance for genuine love. Finally she decides, “No. God knows where it might have led; one mustn’t fool around with this kind of thing.”
Conversely, Turgenev shows us Arkady and Nikolai's traditional happiness in marriage and estate management as the solution to Bazarov's cosmic despair and Anna's life of loveless comfort. (Arkady marries Anna Odintsova's sister Katya, though he was also originally in love with Anna). The height of the conflict between Bazarov and the older generation comes when Bazarov wounds Pavel in a duel. Finally, Turgenev also refutes Bazarov's "insignificance principle", i.e., the nihilist idea that life is utterly insignificant and that nothing remains after death: after leaving and then returning again to his parents, Bazarov dies of typhus. The final passage of the book portrays Bazarov's parents visiting his grave.
They walk with a heavy step, supporting each other; when they approach the railing, they fall on their knees and remain there for a long time, weeping bitterly, gazing attentively at the headstone under which their son lies buried: they exchange a few words, brush the dust off the stone, move a branch of the pine tree, and pray once again; they can’t forsake this place where they seem to feel closer to their son, to their memories of him… Can it really be that their prayers and tears are futile? Can it really be that love, sacred, devoted love is not all powerful? Oh, no!
Their love causes them to remember Bazarov: he has transcended death, but only through the love of other people. Fyodor Dostoevsky, who read Fathers and Sons and apparently appreciated Bazarov as a character, explores a similar theme with Raskolnikov's religious redemption (via the love of Christ) in Crime and Punishment.
俄国杰出的批判现实主义作家屠格涅夫的代表作《罗亭》创作于1856年。罗亭19世纪40年代，黑格尔的学说在俄国流行，青年们崇尚空谈，不善实际，作品描写的主人公罗亭就是这样一个典型人物。他出身于破落贵族家庭，念过大学，又曾到国外游历，热爱自由，能言善辩，向往理想的生活、事业、爱情。但他是“语言的巨人，行动的矮子”，虽诸多追求，却一事无成。他赢得了美丽勇敢的娜塔利亚的芳心，却为遵从娜塔利亚母亲的意志而放弃幸福。后来他曾创办农业、水利、教育等20多种事业，都以失败告终。之后，他一直过着痛苦的漂泊生活，小说结尾写道：“愿上帝帮助所有无家可归的流浪者！”1860年作者又给《罗亭》作了补充：后来他在1848年的巴黎巷战中阵亡，临死时手里还握着一面红旗。作品以罗亭与娜塔利亚的爱情为线索，情节单纯，以各种人物的对话、观点、评价为依据，深刻展示主人公的人物特性。
屠格涅夫（1818-1883）生于世袭贵族家庭，是俄国杰出的批判现实主义作家。曾在莫斯科大学语文系就读，并开始诗的创作。后到德国学习，长期侨居国外。1847-1852年发表了《猎人笔记》，揭露农奴主的残暴和农奴的悲惨生活，因此 被放逐。在监禁中写成的中篇小说《木木》表现了对农奴制的抗议。早期诗作有《帕拉莎》、《地主》，其他重要作品有长篇小说《罗亭》、《贵族之家》、《父与子》、《烟》、《处女地》，中篇小说《阿霞》、《多余人的日记》等，还有剧本《村中一月》和散文诗等。他善于写景，擅长塑造少女形象，风格清新，富于抒情，被列宁誉为俄国的语言大师。
罗亭-银屏再现
影片《罗亭》根据俄国著名作家屠格涅夫的同名小说改编。
罗亭天资聪颖，博学多才，能言善辩，讲起话来滔滔不绝，口若悬河，他热情洋溢地宣传真理和理想，征服了许多人的心，也因此赢得了娜塔利娅的爱慕，两人真心相爱了。然而罗亭既无钱财又无地位，达里娅·米哈伊洛芙娜不许女儿与他来往。这时，娜塔利娅告诉罗亭，她宁可抛弃亲人和家庭也要跟他远走高飞。然而意志软弱的罗亭竟然选择退出。两年之后，娜塔利娅嫁给了一直爱她的沃伦采夫。罗亭最终孤身一人。
Rudin was the first of Turgenev’s novels, but already in this work the topic of the superfluous man and his inability to act (which became a major theme of Turgenev's literary work) was explored. Similarly to other Turgenev’s novels, the main conflict in Rudin was centred on a love story of the main character and a young, but intellectual and self-conscious woman who is contrasted with the main hero (this type of female character became known in literary criticism as «тургеневская девушка», “Turgenev maid”).
Context
Rudin was written by Turgenev in the immediate aftermath of the Crimean War, when it became obvious to many educated Russians that reform was needed. The main debate of Turgenev's own generation was that of Slavophiles versus Westernizers. Rudin depicts a typical man of this generation (known as 'the men of forties'), intellectual but ineffective. This interpretation of the superfluous man as someone who possesses great intellectual ability and potential, but is unable to realize them stems from Turgenev’s own view of human nature, expressed in his 1860 speech ‘Hamlet and Don Quixote’, where he contrasts egotistical Hamlet, too deep in reflection to act, and enthusiastic and un-thinking, but active Don Quixote. The main character of the novel, Rudin, is easily identified with Hamlet. Many critics also suggest that the image of Rudin was at least partly autobiographical.
Rudin is often compared to Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin and Lermontov’s Pechorin. The latter two are considered to be representations of their generations (‘men of twenties’ and ‘men of thirties’ respectively) as Rudin is considered to be a representation of his generation; the three literary works featuring these characters share many similarities in structure and all three characters are routinely referred to as ‘superfluous men’ (whether the term is applicable to all three has been a subject of scholarly debate).
For a long time, Turgenev was unsure of the genre of Rudin, publishing it with a subtitle of ‘novella’. In 1860, it was published together with two other novels, but in the three editions of Turgenev’s Works that followed it was grouped with short stories. In the final, 1880, edition it was again placed at the head of the novels. The theme of the superfluous man in love was further explored in Turgenev’s subsequent novels, culminating in Fathers and Sons.
Main characters
Dmitrii Nikolaevich Rudin
Rudin's first appearance at Lasunskaya's, by Dmitry Kardovsky
The main protagonist of the novel. Rudin is a well-educated, intellectual and extremely eloquent nobleman. His finances are in a poor state and he is dependent on others for his living. His father was a poor member of the gentry and died when Rudin was still very young. He was brought up by his mother who spent all the money she had on him, and was educated at Moscow University and abroad in Germany, at Heidelberg and Berlin (Turgenev himself studied in Berlin). When he first appears in the novel, he is described as follows: “A man of about thirty-five […] of a tall, somewhat stooping figure, with crisp curly hair and swarthy complexion, an irregular but expressive and intelligent face.[…] His clothes were not new, and were somewhat small, as though he had outgrown them.” In the course of the novel he lives at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate and falls in love with her daughter, Natalya. This love is the main conflict of the novel. His eloquence earns him the respect of the estate's inhabitants, but several other characters display a strong dislike of him, and during the course of the novel it becomes apparent that he is “almost a Titan in word and a pigmy in deed” — that is, despite his eloquence he cannot accomplish what he talks of.
Natal’ya Aleskeevna Lasunskaya
Also referred to as Natasha. Natasha is a seventeen-year old daughter of Dar’ya Mikhailovna. She is observant, well-read and intelligent, but also quite secretive. While her mother thinks of her as a good-natured and well-mannered girl, she is not of a high opinion about her intelligence, and quite wrongly. She also thinks Natasha is ‘cold’, emotionless, but in the beginning of Chapter Five we are told by the narrator that “Her feelings were strong and deep, but reserved; even as a child she seldom cried, and now she seldom even sighed and only grew slightly pale when anything distressed her.” She engages in intellectual conversations with Rudin (which are not discouraged by her mother because she thinks that these conversations “improve her mind”); Natasha thinks highly of Rudin, who confides to her his ideas and “privately gives her books”, and soon falls in love with him. She also often compels him to apply his talents and act. Natasha is often thought of as the first of 'Turgenev maids' to feature in Turgenev's fiction.
Dar’ya Mikhailovna Lasunskaya
A female landowner at whose estate most of the events of the novel happen. She is the widow of a privy councillor, “a wealthy and distinguished lady”. While she is not very influential in St Petersburg, let alone Europe, she is notorious in Moscow society as “a rather eccentric woman, not wholly good-natured, but excessively clever.” She is also described as a beauty in her youth, but “not a trace of her former charms remained.” She shuns the society of local female landowners, but receives many men. Rudin at first gains her favour, but she is very displeased when she finds out about Rudin’s and Natasha’s love. That said, her opinion of Natasha is far from being correct.
Mihailo Mihailych Lezhnev
A rich local landowner, generally thought to be a “queer creature” and described in Chapter One as having the appearance of “a huge sack of flour”. Lezhnev is about thirty years old, and seldom visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna (more often than before as the novel progresses), but is often found at Aleksandra’s Pavlovna Lipina’s house; he is friends both with her and her brother, Sergei. He was orphaned at the age of seventeen, lived at his aunt’s and studied together with Rudin at Moscow University, where they were members of the same group of intellectual young men and was good friends with him; he also knew him abroad, but began to dislike him there as “Rudin struck [Lezhnev] in his true light.” Lezhnev is in fact in love with Aleksandra and in the end marries her. His character is often contrasted to Rudin’s as he is seen as everything a superfluous man is not – he is intelligent, but in a more practical way, and while he does not do anything exceptional, he doesn’t want to either. Seeley writes, that “he concentrates on doing the jobs that lie to hand – running his estate, raising a family – and these he does very competently. Beyond them he does not look.” Lezhnev also acts as Rudin’s biographer – he is the one who tells the reader about Rudin’s life prior to his appearance at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s. He first describes Rudin in extremely unfavourable terms, but in the end he is also the one who admits Rudin's “genius” in certain areas of life.
Aleksandra Pavlovna Lipina
Also a local landowner, she is the first of major characters to be presented in the novel. She is described as “a widow, childless, and fairly well off”; we first see her visiting an ill peasant woman, and also find out that she maintains a hospital. She lives with her brother Sergei, who manages her estate, and visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna sometimes (less often as the novel progresses). Dar’ya Mikhailovna describes her as “a sweet creature […] a perfect child […] an absolute baby”, although the question remains of how well Dar’ya Mikhailovna can judge people. At first, she thinks very highly of Rudin and defends him against Lezhnev, but as the novel progresses she seems to side with his view of Rudin. In the end, she marries Lezhnev and seems to be an ideal partner for him.
Sergei Pavlovich Volyntsev
Aleksandra’s brother. He is a retired cavalry officer and manages his sister’s estate. At the beginning of the novel he is a frequent guest at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, because he is in love with Natasha. He takes a great dislike to Rudnev, whom he sees as far too intelligent and, quite rightly, a dangerous rival. He is also slighted by Rudin when the latter comes to inform him of his mutual love with Natasha (with the best intentions). He is generally shown as a pleasant, if not very intellectual person, and is good friends with Lezhnev.
Minor characters
Konstantin Diomidych Pandalevskii
Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s secretary, a young man of affected manners. He is a flatterer and appears to be a generally dishonest and unpleasant person. He doesn’t appear to play an important role in the novel apart from being a satirical image.
Afrikan Semenych Pigasov
Described as “a strange person full of acerbity against everything and every one”, Pigasov frequently visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna prior to Rudin’s appearance and amuses her with his bitter remarks, mostly aimed at women. Coming from a poor family, he educated himself, but never rose above the level of mediocrity. He failed his examination in public disputation, in government service he made a mistake which forced him to retire. His wife later left him and sold her estate, on which he just finished building a house, to a speculator. Since then he lived in the province. He is the first victim of Rudin’s eloquence, as at Rudin’s first appearance he challenged him to a debate and was defeated easily. He ends up living with Lezhnev and Aleksandra Pavlovna.
Basistov
Tutor to Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s younger sons. He is completely captivated by Rudin and seems to be inspired by him. Basistov is interesting in that he is the first example of an intellectual from the raznochinets background (Bazarov and Raskol’nikov are among later, more prominent fictional heroes from this background). He also serves as an example of how Rudin is not completely useless since he can inspire people such as Basistov, who can then act in a way impossible for Rudin.
Synopsis
Rudin’s arrival
The novel begins with the introduction of three of the characters – Aleksandra, Lezhnev, and Pandalevskii. Pandalevskii relates to Aleksandra Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s invitation to come and meet a Baron Muffel’. Instead of the Baron, Rudin arrives and captivates everyone immediately with his intelligent and witty speeches during the argument with Pigasov. Interestingly, Rudin’s arrival is delayed until Chapter Three. After his success at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, he stays the night and the next morning meets Lezhnev who arrives to discuss some business affairs with Dar’ya Mikhailovna. This is the first time the reader finds out that Rudin and Lezhnev are acquainted, and studied together at university. During the day that follows Rudin has his first conversation with Natasha; as she speaks of him highly and says he “ought to work”, he replies with a lengthy speech. What follows is a description quite typical of Turgenev, where the character of Rudin is shown not through his own words, but through the text which underlines Rudin’s contradictory statements:
“Yes, I must act. I must not bury my talent, if I have any; I must not squander my powers on talk alone — empty, profitless talk — on mere words,’ and his words flowed in a stream. He spoke nobly, ardently, convincingly, of the sin of cowardice and indolence, of the necessity of action.”
On the same day, Sergei leaves Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s early and arrives to see that Lezhnev is visiting. Lezhnev then gives his first description of Rudin.
Rudin and Natasha
Natasha leaves Rudin after their decisive encounter, by Dmitry Kardovsky
In two months, we are told, Rudin is still staying at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, living off borrowed money. He spends a lot of time with Natasha; in a conversation with her he speaks of how an old love can only be replaced by a new one. At the same time, Lezhnev gives the account of his youth and his friendship with Rudin, making for the first time the point that Rudin is “too cold” and inactive. On the next day, Natasha quizzes Rudin over his words about old and new love. Neither she, nor he confess their love for each other but in the evening, Rudin and Natasha meet again, and this time Rudin confesses his love for her; Natasha replies that she, too, loves him. Unfortunately, their conversation is overheard by Pandalevskii, who reports it to Dar’ya Mikhailovna, and she strongly disapproves of this romance, making her feelings known to Natasha. The next time Natasha and Rudin meet, she tells him that Dar’ya Mikhailovna knows of their love and disapproves of it. Natasha wants to know what plan of action is Rudin going to propose, but he does not fulfil her expectations when he says that one must “submit to destiny”. She leaves him, disappointed and sad:
“I am sad because I have been deceived in you… What! I come to you for counsel, and at such a moment! — and your first word is, submit! submit! So this is how you translate your talk of independence, of sacrifice, which …”
Rudin then leaves Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate. Before his departure he writes two letters: one to Natasha and one to Sergei. The letter to Natasha is particularly notable in its confession of the vices of inactivity, inability to act and to take responsibility for one’s actions – all the traits of a Hamlet which Turgenev later detailed in his 1860 speech. Lezhnev, meanwhile, asks Aleksandra to marry him and is accepted in a particularly fine scene.
The Aftermath
Rudin at the barricades, by Dmitry Kardovsky
Chapter Twelve and the Epilogue detail events of over two years past Rudin’s arrival at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate. Lezhnev is happily married to Aleksandra. He arrives to give her news of Sergei’s engagement to Natasha, who is said to “seem contented”. Pigasov lives with Lezhnevs, and amuses Aleksandra as he used to amuse Dar’ya Mikhailovna. A conversation which follows happens to touch on Rudin, and as Pigasov begins to make fun of him, Lezhnev stops him. He then defends Rudin’s “genius” while saying that his problem is that he had no “character” in him. This, again, refers to the superfluous man’s inability to act. He then toasts Rudin. The chapter ends with the description of Rudin travelling aimlessly around Russia. In the Epilogue, Lezhnev happens by chance to meet Rudin at a hotel in a provincial town. Lezhnev invites Rudin to dine with him, and over the dinner Rudin relates to Lezhnev his attempts to “act” – to improve an estate belonging to his friend, to make a river navigable, to become a teacher. In all three of this attempts Rudin demonstrated inability to adapt to the circumstances of Nicholas I’s Russia, and subsequently failed, and was in the end banished to his estate. Lezhnev then appears to change his opinion of Rudin as inherently inactive, and says that Rudin failed exactly because he could never stop striving for truth. The Epilogue ends with Rudin’s death at the barricades during the French Revolution of 1848; even at death he is mistaken by two fleeing revolutionaries for a Pole.
Adaptations
Rudin was adapted for screen in 1976. The 95 minutes-long Soviet-made movie was directed by Konstantin Voynov. The cast included Oleg Yefremov, Armen Dzhigarkhanyan, and Rolan Bykov.
屠格涅夫（1818-1883）生于世袭贵族家庭，是俄国杰出的批判现实主义作家。曾在莫斯科大学语文系就读，并开始诗的创作。后到德国学习，长期侨居国外。1847-1852年发表了《猎人笔记》，揭露农奴主的残暴和农奴的悲惨生活，因此 被放逐。在监禁中写成的中篇小说《木木》表现了对农奴制的抗议。早期诗作有《帕拉莎》、《地主》，其他重要作品有长篇小说《罗亭》、《贵族之家》、《父与子》、《烟》、《处女地》，中篇小说《阿霞》、《多余人的日记》等，还有剧本《村中一月》和散文诗等。他善于写景，擅长塑造少女形象，风格清新，富于抒情，被列宁誉为俄国的语言大师。
罗亭-银屏再现
影片《罗亭》根据俄国著名作家屠格涅夫的同名小说改编。
罗亭天资聪颖，博学多才，能言善辩，讲起话来滔滔不绝，口若悬河，他热情洋溢地宣传真理和理想，征服了许多人的心，也因此赢得了娜塔利娅的爱慕，两人真心相爱了。然而罗亭既无钱财又无地位，达里娅·米哈伊洛芙娜不许女儿与他来往。这时，娜塔利娅告诉罗亭，她宁可抛弃亲人和家庭也要跟他远走高飞。然而意志软弱的罗亭竟然选择退出。两年之后，娜塔利娅嫁给了一直爱她的沃伦采夫。罗亭最终孤身一人。
Rudin was the first of Turgenev’s novels, but already in this work the topic of the superfluous man and his inability to act (which became a major theme of Turgenev's literary work) was explored. Similarly to other Turgenev’s novels, the main conflict in Rudin was centred on a love story of the main character and a young, but intellectual and self-conscious woman who is contrasted with the main hero (this type of female character became known in literary criticism as «тургеневская девушка», “Turgenev maid”).
Context
Rudin was written by Turgenev in the immediate aftermath of the Crimean War, when it became obvious to many educated Russians that reform was needed. The main debate of Turgenev's own generation was that of Slavophiles versus Westernizers. Rudin depicts a typical man of this generation (known as 'the men of forties'), intellectual but ineffective. This interpretation of the superfluous man as someone who possesses great intellectual ability and potential, but is unable to realize them stems from Turgenev’s own view of human nature, expressed in his 1860 speech ‘Hamlet and Don Quixote’, where he contrasts egotistical Hamlet, too deep in reflection to act, and enthusiastic and un-thinking, but active Don Quixote. The main character of the novel, Rudin, is easily identified with Hamlet. Many critics also suggest that the image of Rudin was at least partly autobiographical.
Rudin is often compared to Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin and Lermontov’s Pechorin. The latter two are considered to be representations of their generations (‘men of twenties’ and ‘men of thirties’ respectively) as Rudin is considered to be a representation of his generation; the three literary works featuring these characters share many similarities in structure and all three characters are routinely referred to as ‘superfluous men’ (whether the term is applicable to all three has been a subject of scholarly debate).
For a long time, Turgenev was unsure of the genre of Rudin, publishing it with a subtitle of ‘novella’. In 1860, it was published together with two other novels, but in the three editions of Turgenev’s Works that followed it was grouped with short stories. In the final, 1880, edition it was again placed at the head of the novels. The theme of the superfluous man in love was further explored in Turgenev’s subsequent novels, culminating in Fathers and Sons.
Main characters
Dmitrii Nikolaevich Rudin
Rudin's first appearance at Lasunskaya's, by Dmitry Kardovsky
The main protagonist of the novel. Rudin is a well-educated, intellectual and extremely eloquent nobleman. His finances are in a poor state and he is dependent on others for his living. His father was a poor member of the gentry and died when Rudin was still very young. He was brought up by his mother who spent all the money she had on him, and was educated at Moscow University and abroad in Germany, at Heidelberg and Berlin (Turgenev himself studied in Berlin). When he first appears in the novel, he is described as follows: “A man of about thirty-five […] of a tall, somewhat stooping figure, with crisp curly hair and swarthy complexion, an irregular but expressive and intelligent face.[…] His clothes were not new, and were somewhat small, as though he had outgrown them.” In the course of the novel he lives at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate and falls in love with her daughter, Natalya. This love is the main conflict of the novel. His eloquence earns him the respect of the estate's inhabitants, but several other characters display a strong dislike of him, and during the course of the novel it becomes apparent that he is “almost a Titan in word and a pigmy in deed” — that is, despite his eloquence he cannot accomplish what he talks of.
Natal’ya Aleskeevna Lasunskaya
Also referred to as Natasha. Natasha is a seventeen-year old daughter of Dar’ya Mikhailovna. She is observant, well-read and intelligent, but also quite secretive. While her mother thinks of her as a good-natured and well-mannered girl, she is not of a high opinion about her intelligence, and quite wrongly. She also thinks Natasha is ‘cold’, emotionless, but in the beginning of Chapter Five we are told by the narrator that “Her feelings were strong and deep, but reserved; even as a child she seldom cried, and now she seldom even sighed and only grew slightly pale when anything distressed her.” She engages in intellectual conversations with Rudin (which are not discouraged by her mother because she thinks that these conversations “improve her mind”); Natasha thinks highly of Rudin, who confides to her his ideas and “privately gives her books”, and soon falls in love with him. She also often compels him to apply his talents and act. Natasha is often thought of as the first of 'Turgenev maids' to feature in Turgenev's fiction.
Dar’ya Mikhailovna Lasunskaya
A female landowner at whose estate most of the events of the novel happen. She is the widow of a privy councillor, “a wealthy and distinguished lady”. While she is not very influential in St Petersburg, let alone Europe, she is notorious in Moscow society as “a rather eccentric woman, not wholly good-natured, but excessively clever.” She is also described as a beauty in her youth, but “not a trace of her former charms remained.” She shuns the society of local female landowners, but receives many men. Rudin at first gains her favour, but she is very displeased when she finds out about Rudin’s and Natasha’s love. That said, her opinion of Natasha is far from being correct.
Mihailo Mihailych Lezhnev
A rich local landowner, generally thought to be a “queer creature” and described in Chapter One as having the appearance of “a huge sack of flour”. Lezhnev is about thirty years old, and seldom visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna (more often than before as the novel progresses), but is often found at Aleksandra’s Pavlovna Lipina’s house; he is friends both with her and her brother, Sergei. He was orphaned at the age of seventeen, lived at his aunt’s and studied together with Rudin at Moscow University, where they were members of the same group of intellectual young men and was good friends with him; he also knew him abroad, but began to dislike him there as “Rudin struck [Lezhnev] in his true light.” Lezhnev is in fact in love with Aleksandra and in the end marries her. His character is often contrasted to Rudin’s as he is seen as everything a superfluous man is not – he is intelligent, but in a more practical way, and while he does not do anything exceptional, he doesn’t want to either. Seeley writes, that “he concentrates on doing the jobs that lie to hand – running his estate, raising a family – and these he does very competently. Beyond them he does not look.” Lezhnev also acts as Rudin’s biographer – he is the one who tells the reader about Rudin’s life prior to his appearance at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s. He first describes Rudin in extremely unfavourable terms, but in the end he is also the one who admits Rudin's “genius” in certain areas of life.
Aleksandra Pavlovna Lipina
Also a local landowner, she is the first of major characters to be presented in the novel. She is described as “a widow, childless, and fairly well off”; we first see her visiting an ill peasant woman, and also find out that she maintains a hospital. She lives with her brother Sergei, who manages her estate, and visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna sometimes (less often as the novel progresses). Dar’ya Mikhailovna describes her as “a sweet creature […] a perfect child […] an absolute baby”, although the question remains of how well Dar’ya Mikhailovna can judge people. At first, she thinks very highly of Rudin and defends him against Lezhnev, but as the novel progresses she seems to side with his view of Rudin. In the end, she marries Lezhnev and seems to be an ideal partner for him.
Sergei Pavlovich Volyntsev
Aleksandra’s brother. He is a retired cavalry officer and manages his sister’s estate. At the beginning of the novel he is a frequent guest at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, because he is in love with Natasha. He takes a great dislike to Rudnev, whom he sees as far too intelligent and, quite rightly, a dangerous rival. He is also slighted by Rudin when the latter comes to inform him of his mutual love with Natasha (with the best intentions). He is generally shown as a pleasant, if not very intellectual person, and is good friends with Lezhnev.
Minor characters
Konstantin Diomidych Pandalevskii
Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s secretary, a young man of affected manners. He is a flatterer and appears to be a generally dishonest and unpleasant person. He doesn’t appear to play an important role in the novel apart from being a satirical image.
Afrikan Semenych Pigasov
Described as “a strange person full of acerbity against everything and every one”, Pigasov frequently visits Dar’ya Mikhailovna prior to Rudin’s appearance and amuses her with his bitter remarks, mostly aimed at women. Coming from a poor family, he educated himself, but never rose above the level of mediocrity. He failed his examination in public disputation, in government service he made a mistake which forced him to retire. His wife later left him and sold her estate, on which he just finished building a house, to a speculator. Since then he lived in the province. He is the first victim of Rudin’s eloquence, as at Rudin’s first appearance he challenged him to a debate and was defeated easily. He ends up living with Lezhnev and Aleksandra Pavlovna.
Basistov
Tutor to Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s younger sons. He is completely captivated by Rudin and seems to be inspired by him. Basistov is interesting in that he is the first example of an intellectual from the raznochinets background (Bazarov and Raskol’nikov are among later, more prominent fictional heroes from this background). He also serves as an example of how Rudin is not completely useless since he can inspire people such as Basistov, who can then act in a way impossible for Rudin.
Synopsis
Rudin’s arrival
The novel begins with the introduction of three of the characters – Aleksandra, Lezhnev, and Pandalevskii. Pandalevskii relates to Aleksandra Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s invitation to come and meet a Baron Muffel’. Instead of the Baron, Rudin arrives and captivates everyone immediately with his intelligent and witty speeches during the argument with Pigasov. Interestingly, Rudin’s arrival is delayed until Chapter Three. After his success at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, he stays the night and the next morning meets Lezhnev who arrives to discuss some business affairs with Dar’ya Mikhailovna. This is the first time the reader finds out that Rudin and Lezhnev are acquainted, and studied together at university. During the day that follows Rudin has his first conversation with Natasha; as she speaks of him highly and says he “ought to work”, he replies with a lengthy speech. What follows is a description quite typical of Turgenev, where the character of Rudin is shown not through his own words, but through the text which underlines Rudin’s contradictory statements:
“Yes, I must act. I must not bury my talent, if I have any; I must not squander my powers on talk alone — empty, profitless talk — on mere words,’ and his words flowed in a stream. He spoke nobly, ardently, convincingly, of the sin of cowardice and indolence, of the necessity of action.”
On the same day, Sergei leaves Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s early and arrives to see that Lezhnev is visiting. Lezhnev then gives his first description of Rudin.
Rudin and Natasha
Natasha leaves Rudin after their decisive encounter, by Dmitry Kardovsky
In two months, we are told, Rudin is still staying at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s, living off borrowed money. He spends a lot of time with Natasha; in a conversation with her he speaks of how an old love can only be replaced by a new one. At the same time, Lezhnev gives the account of his youth and his friendship with Rudin, making for the first time the point that Rudin is “too cold” and inactive. On the next day, Natasha quizzes Rudin over his words about old and new love. Neither she, nor he confess their love for each other but in the evening, Rudin and Natasha meet again, and this time Rudin confesses his love for her; Natasha replies that she, too, loves him. Unfortunately, their conversation is overheard by Pandalevskii, who reports it to Dar’ya Mikhailovna, and she strongly disapproves of this romance, making her feelings known to Natasha. The next time Natasha and Rudin meet, she tells him that Dar’ya Mikhailovna knows of their love and disapproves of it. Natasha wants to know what plan of action is Rudin going to propose, but he does not fulfil her expectations when he says that one must “submit to destiny”. She leaves him, disappointed and sad:
“I am sad because I have been deceived in you… What! I come to you for counsel, and at such a moment! — and your first word is, submit! submit! So this is how you translate your talk of independence, of sacrifice, which …”
Rudin then leaves Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate. Before his departure he writes two letters: one to Natasha and one to Sergei. The letter to Natasha is particularly notable in its confession of the vices of inactivity, inability to act and to take responsibility for one’s actions – all the traits of a Hamlet which Turgenev later detailed in his 1860 speech. Lezhnev, meanwhile, asks Aleksandra to marry him and is accepted in a particularly fine scene.
The Aftermath
Rudin at the barricades, by Dmitry Kardovsky
Chapter Twelve and the Epilogue detail events of over two years past Rudin’s arrival at Dar’ya Mikhailovna’s estate. Lezhnev is happily married to Aleksandra. He arrives to give her news of Sergei’s engagement to Natasha, who is said to “seem contented”. Pigasov lives with Lezhnevs, and amuses Aleksandra as he used to amuse Dar’ya Mikhailovna. A conversation which follows happens to touch on Rudin, and as Pigasov begins to make fun of him, Lezhnev stops him. He then defends Rudin’s “genius” while saying that his problem is that he had no “character” in him. This, again, refers to the superfluous man’s inability to act. He then toasts Rudin. The chapter ends with the description of Rudin travelling aimlessly around Russia. In the Epilogue, Lezhnev happens by chance to meet Rudin at a hotel in a provincial town. Lezhnev invites Rudin to dine with him, and over the dinner Rudin relates to Lezhnev his attempts to “act” – to improve an estate belonging to his friend, to make a river navigable, to become a teacher. In all three of this attempts Rudin demonstrated inability to adapt to the circumstances of Nicholas I’s Russia, and subsequently failed, and was in the end banished to his estate. Lezhnev then appears to change his opinion of Rudin as inherently inactive, and says that Rudin failed exactly because he could never stop striving for truth. The Epilogue ends with Rudin’s death at the barricades during the French Revolution of 1848; even at death he is mistaken by two fleeing revolutionaries for a Pole.
Adaptations
Rudin was adapted for screen in 1976. The 95 minutes-long Soviet-made movie was directed by Konstantin Voynov. The cast included Oleg Yefremov, Armen Dzhigarkhanyan, and Rolan Bykov.
在俄罗斯文学史上，伊万·谢尔盖耶维奇·屠格涅夫（一八一八——一八八三）占有一席光荣的位置。而在他的全部文学作品中，长篇小说又具有特殊重要意义。屠格涅夫是俄罗斯和世界文学现实主义长篇小说的奠基者之一，他的长篇小说给他带来了世界声誉。他的六部长篇小说有一个共同的中心主题：与作家同时代的俄罗斯进步知识分子的历史命运。屠格涅夫既是这些知识分子的编年史作者，又是他们的歌手和裁判者。可以毫不夸张地说，如果不认真研究屠格涅夫的长篇小说，就不能深刻理解十九世纪俄罗斯社会和俄罗斯解放运动发展的历史。
十九世纪五十年代中期，俄罗斯贵族阶级趋向没落，农奴制的崩溃已不可挽回。一八五三——一八五六年的克里米亚战争暴露了沙皇制的腐败，进步知识分子在思考人民的命运、祖国的前途。屠格涅夫的长篇小说正是在这个时期酝酿构思和呈献给读者的。
一八五六年，《现代人》杂志上发表了屠格涅夫的第一部长篇小说《罗亭》。
《贵族之家》是屠格涅夫的第二部长篇小说，于一八五八年十月二十七日脱稿，最初发表在一八五九年一月号《现代人》杂志上，同年在莫斯科出版了单行本。一八八○年，在作者生前收入作品最全的最后一版文集里，屠格涅夫本人曾在前言中说：“《贵族之家》获得了我曾经获得的最大的一次成功。”虽然评论界对这部小说的评价并不完全一致，但它确实是俄罗斯经典长篇小说的典范之一。
贵族之家-相关资料
《贵族之家》的故事发生在一八四二年及八年以后；主人公拉夫烈茨基是已经丧失了农奴主“热情”的贵族的最后代表。在某种意义上，可以说拉夫烈茨基仍然是俄罗斯文学中已不止一次出现过的“多余的人”。但他已经不同于普希金的长诗《叶夫根尼·奥涅金》中的奥涅金和莱蒙托夫的《当代英雄》中的毕巧林。《贵族之家》发展了“多余的人”这一类型。奥涅金和毕巧林是利己主义者，他们只考虑个人享受，他们活着只是为了满足个人的欲望；屠格涅夫笔下的“多余的人”却充满热情，愿意为了大众的利益而献身。然而他们只是模模糊糊意识到，应该做点儿什么，却不知道究竟该做什么。米哈列维奇责备拉夫烈茨基无所作为，说他是“懒汉”。拉夫烈茨基回答：“……你最好说说，该做什么”。米哈列维奇却说：“这我可不告诉你，老兄，这一点每个人应该自己知道。”其实，就连米哈列维奇那样的理想主义者，自己也不知道究竟该做什么，否则，他就不会漂泊半生，一事无成，最后为获得一个“学监”的位置而感到心满意足了。这并不奇怪，因为就连小说的作者，恐怕也无法回答拉夫烈茨基提出的问题。
于是，拉夫烈茨基所追求的只能仍然是个人的幸福了。《贵族之家》的“重大、现实思想是幸福问题，是人追求幸福的规律，是个人幸福的思想与有益的劳动思想、进步思想的和谐融合”。然而拉夫烈茨基没能获得个人幸福。个人幸福碰到了“义务”设置的障碍，他的“幸福”“还没开始”就结束了。
对于莉莎来说，爱情不仅是幸福，而且是义务，信任，意识到自己道义上的责任。“上帝结合起来的，怎么能拆散呢？”莉莎问。因此，她和拉夫烈茨基的“幸福”从一开始就是虚幻的，建筑在一个极不可靠的基础上：瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜故意散布的关于她已经死了的谣言。屠格涅夫在小说中反映了十九世纪三十—四十年代在“贵族之家”的温室里培育出来的贵族知识分子的精神悲剧，这一悲剧的实质已经“不在于必须与自己的软弱无能斗争，而是因为”“与一些概念和道德规范发生了冲突。与这些概念和规范相抗衡，确实连那些坚决果断、勇敢大胆的人都会感到可怕。”（杜勃罗留波夫）《贵族之家》异常深刻地提出了贵族教育的问题。贵族的教育制度扭曲了人的优秀品质，使之畸形化了。莉莎的笃信宗教、忍让、顺从，拉夫烈茨基的消极无为，就都是这种教育的结果。杜勃罗留波夫正确地指出：“屠格涅夫选择的、为俄国生活如此熟悉的冲突”应该“成为强有力的宣传鼓动，促使每一位读者思索：那些主宰我们生活的整整一大批概念究竟有什么意义”。
不过莉莎的“义务”并不仅仅是来自对瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜的负罪感。她想要在修道院中寻求的并不是慰藉，她所期待的也不是忘却；她认为，她的“义务”是“赎罪”！她对玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜说：“我什么都知道，无论是自己的罪孽，还是别人的罪孽，还有爸爸是怎样聚敛自己的财富，我全都知道。这一切都需要祈祷，以期得到赦免……”于是个人的悲剧就具有了社会意义：在农奴制社会里，不仅有良知的贵族知识分子不可能获得真正的个人幸福，而且几乎人人都与真正的幸福无缘。“你看看四周，在你周围有谁在享福，有谁感到心满意足？”个人幸福幻灭之后，拉夫烈茨基这样想：正去割草的农人显然并不幸福，他那个对生活并没有多少要求的母亲，更没有获得过真正的幸福……就连玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜也对他说：“你很难过，这我知道，可要知道，大家也并不轻松”……总之，在农奴制的社会环境里，个人幸福是虚幻的，不完满的，根本不可能的。屠格涅夫曾在《文学回忆录》中写下了这样一段话：“我与我仇恨的事物不共戴天……在我心目中，这个敌人有固定的形象，有人所共知的名称：这个敌人就是农奴制度。”《贵族之家》谴责了当时的社会制度，因为它庇护潘申和瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜之流，使他们孳生繁衍，而扼杀天才的性格（列姆，拉夫烈茨基），毒害人民，使他们浑浑噩噩，屈服顺从（玛兰尼娅，阿加菲娅，安东等）。
在《贵族之家》中，屠格涅夫用“春秋笔法”展示了贵族阶级日趋没落的过程：拉夫烈茨基的曾祖父“想做什么就能做什么”，“谁也管不了他”。到了他的祖父，已经是“不管干什么，全都白搭”了。他的父亲先是受了法国式的教育，脑子里装满了伏尔泰、狄德罗和卢梭，然而那些“深奥的道理”“没有和他的血液溶为一体，没有深入他的心灵，没有形成坚定不移的信念”；在国外待了几年以后，他又成了崇拜英国的人，“瞧不起自己的同胞”，要用英国的制度和方法来改造俄国；可是十二月党人遭到镇压后，他立刻烧毁了从国外带回的一切计划和来往信件，躲到自己的庄园里，闭门不出，“在省长大人面前吓得战战兢兢”……最后“变成了一个十足的废物”。
贵族之家的没落已无可挽回，农奴制的崩溃也不可避免；然而由谁来给俄罗斯社会注入新的活力，俄罗斯又该往何处去呢？无论是拉夫烈茨基，还是作者本人，都无法作出明确回答。拉夫烈茨基只是模模糊糊感觉到，应该做点儿什么有益的事情，未来应该是光明的。而作为农奴制贵族阶级的最后代表，回首往事，拉夫烈茨基却感到虚度了一生。“熄灭了吧，无益的一生！”在抒情诗一般的“尾声”中，拉夫烈茨基无可奈何地这样悲叹。故事的结尾无疑带有浓郁的伤感色彩，不过屠格涅夫把希望寄托于青年一代。拉夫烈茨基是在青年一代的欢声笑语中悄然离去的。历史舞台上已经换了新的角色，将要上演的也该是不同的剧目了吧？！
评论家皮沙烈夫①对《贵族之家》作了如下的评价，认为它是屠格涅夫“结构最严谨、最完美的作品之一”。它没有进行说教，然而是一部有教育意义的小说。在这部小说中，屠格涅夫“描写了现代生活，突出它各个好的和坏的方面，阐明了他所描写的现象的根源，促使读者进行严肃认真的深思。”
--------
①皮沙烈夫（一八四○—一八六八），俄罗斯著名评论家，哲学家，革命民主主义者。
屠格涅夫的作品，特别是他的长篇小说，堪称几乎近半个世纪俄罗斯生活的艺术编年史。但就篇幅而言，他的长篇却短小精致，除《处女地》外，可以说是反映当时社会的中篇小说。
生活场面和自然风景的描写在他的小说中随处可见，但这些描写从不喧宾夺主，遮掩情节。他的小说是单一结构的，在这一点上不同于托尔斯泰的长篇小说。
《贵族之家》的结构尤其严谨，对人物都有简明的交待。作者自己曾说：他对这部小说的情节考虑了很久，希望避免像《罗亭》中那样令人感到意外的结局。的确，《贵族之家》情节十分紧凑，故事迅速展开，简练凝缩，不蔓不枝；中间几处插叙主人公的往事，都是读者进一步了解他们所必需的。在这方面，可以说屠格涅夫是普希金、莱蒙托夫的直接继承者。
屠格涅夫对人物的心理描写很有特色。他不是对主人公的感情作详尽的心理分析，而是把读者的注意力集中到人物内心活动的结果上。我们知道莉莎对拉夫烈茨基的感情是怎样产生、怎样发展的，可是我们不知道莉莎心里究竟在想些什么。屠格涅夫甚至宣称，她的内心活动不可能用语言表达出来。“然而语言不能表达一个姑娘纯洁的心灵中正在发生的事情：对于她本人来说，那也是秘密；就让它对于大家也始终是一个秘密吧。”他还借玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜之口说：“别人的心，……就像不透光的树林，女孩子的心就更不用说了。”正是因此，他也拒绝写出拉夫烈茨基和莉莎在修道院里最后一次见面时的感受。
屠格涅夫并不深入描写主人公的内心活动，却十分巧妙地让读者能充分理解他们的内心生活。他经常利用潜台词，对主人公的微妙感情只是点到为止。莉莎和拉夫烈茨基的爱情几乎是默默无言的。他们在卡利京家的客厅里、花园里和拉夫烈茨基家池塘边单独待在一起的时候，往往很少谈话，而是默默地感受对方心中正在发生的一切。
在屠格涅夫的小说中，自然景色对于人物的精神世界往往起一种烘云托月的作用。随着人物命运的改变，自然景物的色彩也在发生变化。在《贵族之家》中，自始至终都让人感到有一种衰败没落的情调：“夕阳无限好，只是近黄昏”。小说中描写的大部分都是傍晚、黄昏和夜晚的景色，或明月当空，或星光闪烁。拉夫烈茨基回乡村去一路上看到的景色，与他忧郁的回忆和对幸福的憧憬是协调一致的。具有象征性的小说结尾是大地回春，万物复苏，一派欣欣向荣的景象：拉夫烈茨基以及他那一代人虽然一生蹉跎，黯然退出历史舞台，但青年一代已经接过了他们手中的接力棒，正在精力充沛地走向未来。
除了自然景色，小说中的音乐也与人物的心情相互交融。借用柴科夫斯基评论普希金的话，可以说：在《贵族之家》中，屠格涅夫的天才常常冲破“散文”的狭窄天地，进入音乐的无限的领域。拉夫烈茨基在花园中与莉莎相会，知道她爱他以后，听到了列姆的奇妙的音乐，而当他的妻子突然回来，使他关于幸福的梦破灭以后，同一个列姆，也完全变了样，在他身上再也看不到二十四小时前那位充满灵感的音乐家的影子了。
屠格涅夫从不用个人的注释来代替情节的发展，从不歪曲他不喜欢的现象；他叙述故事的时候是完全客观的，决不对情节发展进行任何干预。作者的态度、作者的感情，是通过他独特的抒情风格表现出来的，这也正是他的艺术风格的特点之一。特别是在《贵族之家》中，抒情色彩更像空气和阳光一样伴随着拉夫烈茨基和莉莎，为他们谱写出一首首同情、叹息、哀婉的抒情歌曲。一方面在叙述中力求做到客观，另一方面又要以作者的感情感染读者，在屠格涅夫的小说中，可以说这二者已经完美地结合在一起了。
屠格涅夫的语言特点是：反对矫揉造作和华而不实。他的词汇丰富多彩，形象生动，栩栩如生的比喻比比皆是，而且善于巧妙地运用隐喻。他的句子通常都简短精悍，结构清晰，节奏和谐（可参看他介绍列姆的那段文字）。许多人都曾指出屠格涅夫语言的特殊魅力，对他运用语言的才能给予极高的评价。陀思妥耶夫斯基称屠格涅夫为“俄罗斯语言的巨匠”。高尔基说：“未来的文学史专家谈到俄罗斯语言的发展时，一定会说：这种语言是普希金、屠格涅夫和契诃夫创造的”。
翻译这样一位语言大师的作品，其难度可想而知；如果译文能多少传达原作的神韵，对译者来说，也就是最大的幸福了。
Plot summary
The novel's protagonist is Fyodor Ivanych Lavretsky, a nobleman who shares many traits with Turgenev. The child of a distant, Anglophile father and a serf mother who dies when he is very young, Lavretsky is brought up at his family's country estate home by a severe maiden aunt, often thought to be based on Turgenev's own mother who was known for her cruelty.
Lavretsky pursues an education in Moscow, and while he is studying there, he spies a beautiful young woman at the opera. Her name is Varvara Pavlovna, and he falls in love with her and asks for her hand in marriage. The two move to Paris, where Varvara Pavlovna becomes a very popular salon hostess and begins an affair with one of her frequent visitors. Lavretsky learns of the affair only when he discovers a note written to her by her lover. Shocked by her betrayal, he severs all contact with her and returns to his family estate.
Upon returning to Russia, Lavretsky visits his cousin, Marya Dmitrievna Kalitina, who lives with her two daughters, Liza and Lenochka. Lavretsky is immediately drawn to Liza, whose serious nature and religious devotion stand in contrast to Varvara Pavlovna's coquettishness and social consciousness. Lavretsky realizes that he is falling in love with Liza, and when he reads in a foreign journal that Varvara Pavlovna has died, he confesses his love to her and learns that she loves him in return.
Unfortunately, a cruel twist of fate prevents Lavretsky and Liza from being together. After they confess their love to one another, Lavretsky returns home to find his supposedly dead wife waiting for him in his foyer. It turns out that the reports of her death were false, and that she has fallen out of favor with her friends and needs more money from Lavretsky.
Upon learning of Varvara Pavlovna's sudden appearance, Liza decides to join a remote convent and lives out the rest of her days as a nun. Lavretsky visits her at the convent one time and catches a glimpse of her as she is walking from choir to choir. The novel ends with an epilogue which takes place eight years later, in which Lavretsky returns to Liza's house and finds that, although many things have changed, there are elements such as the piano and the garden that are the same. Lavretsky finds comfort in his memories and is able to see the meaning and even the beauty in his personal pain.
Major themes
Ultimately, Turgenev concludes that the truth is best left unstated. He concludes the novel by stating that he could not possibly explain what Lavretsky and Liza felt, and that it is better to point out these individual tragedies and pass them by.
Turgenev wrote the novel shortly after his 40th birthday, and it expresses some of his feelings about middle age, as its protagonist is forced to confront the mistakes of his past and determine what options are left for his dwindling future.
十九世纪五十年代中期，俄罗斯贵族阶级趋向没落，农奴制的崩溃已不可挽回。一八五三——一八五六年的克里米亚战争暴露了沙皇制的腐败，进步知识分子在思考人民的命运、祖国的前途。屠格涅夫的长篇小说正是在这个时期酝酿构思和呈献给读者的。
一八五六年，《现代人》杂志上发表了屠格涅夫的第一部长篇小说《罗亭》。
《贵族之家》是屠格涅夫的第二部长篇小说，于一八五八年十月二十七日脱稿，最初发表在一八五九年一月号《现代人》杂志上，同年在莫斯科出版了单行本。一八八○年，在作者生前收入作品最全的最后一版文集里，屠格涅夫本人曾在前言中说：“《贵族之家》获得了我曾经获得的最大的一次成功。”虽然评论界对这部小说的评价并不完全一致，但它确实是俄罗斯经典长篇小说的典范之一。
贵族之家-相关资料
《贵族之家》的故事发生在一八四二年及八年以后；主人公拉夫烈茨基是已经丧失了农奴主“热情”的贵族的最后代表。在某种意义上，可以说拉夫烈茨基仍然是俄罗斯文学中已不止一次出现过的“多余的人”。但他已经不同于普希金的长诗《叶夫根尼·奥涅金》中的奥涅金和莱蒙托夫的《当代英雄》中的毕巧林。《贵族之家》发展了“多余的人”这一类型。奥涅金和毕巧林是利己主义者，他们只考虑个人享受，他们活着只是为了满足个人的欲望；屠格涅夫笔下的“多余的人”却充满热情，愿意为了大众的利益而献身。然而他们只是模模糊糊意识到，应该做点儿什么，却不知道究竟该做什么。米哈列维奇责备拉夫烈茨基无所作为，说他是“懒汉”。拉夫烈茨基回答：“……你最好说说，该做什么”。米哈列维奇却说：“这我可不告诉你，老兄，这一点每个人应该自己知道。”其实，就连米哈列维奇那样的理想主义者，自己也不知道究竟该做什么，否则，他就不会漂泊半生，一事无成，最后为获得一个“学监”的位置而感到心满意足了。这并不奇怪，因为就连小说的作者，恐怕也无法回答拉夫烈茨基提出的问题。
于是，拉夫烈茨基所追求的只能仍然是个人的幸福了。《贵族之家》的“重大、现实思想是幸福问题，是人追求幸福的规律，是个人幸福的思想与有益的劳动思想、进步思想的和谐融合”。然而拉夫烈茨基没能获得个人幸福。个人幸福碰到了“义务”设置的障碍，他的“幸福”“还没开始”就结束了。
对于莉莎来说，爱情不仅是幸福，而且是义务，信任，意识到自己道义上的责任。“上帝结合起来的，怎么能拆散呢？”莉莎问。因此，她和拉夫烈茨基的“幸福”从一开始就是虚幻的，建筑在一个极不可靠的基础上：瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜故意散布的关于她已经死了的谣言。屠格涅夫在小说中反映了十九世纪三十—四十年代在“贵族之家”的温室里培育出来的贵族知识分子的精神悲剧，这一悲剧的实质已经“不在于必须与自己的软弱无能斗争，而是因为”“与一些概念和道德规范发生了冲突。与这些概念和规范相抗衡，确实连那些坚决果断、勇敢大胆的人都会感到可怕。”（杜勃罗留波夫）《贵族之家》异常深刻地提出了贵族教育的问题。贵族的教育制度扭曲了人的优秀品质，使之畸形化了。莉莎的笃信宗教、忍让、顺从，拉夫烈茨基的消极无为，就都是这种教育的结果。杜勃罗留波夫正确地指出：“屠格涅夫选择的、为俄国生活如此熟悉的冲突”应该“成为强有力的宣传鼓动，促使每一位读者思索：那些主宰我们生活的整整一大批概念究竟有什么意义”。
不过莉莎的“义务”并不仅仅是来自对瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜的负罪感。她想要在修道院中寻求的并不是慰藉，她所期待的也不是忘却；她认为，她的“义务”是“赎罪”！她对玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜说：“我什么都知道，无论是自己的罪孽，还是别人的罪孽，还有爸爸是怎样聚敛自己的财富，我全都知道。这一切都需要祈祷，以期得到赦免……”于是个人的悲剧就具有了社会意义：在农奴制社会里，不仅有良知的贵族知识分子不可能获得真正的个人幸福，而且几乎人人都与真正的幸福无缘。“你看看四周，在你周围有谁在享福，有谁感到心满意足？”个人幸福幻灭之后，拉夫烈茨基这样想：正去割草的农人显然并不幸福，他那个对生活并没有多少要求的母亲，更没有获得过真正的幸福……就连玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜也对他说：“你很难过，这我知道，可要知道，大家也并不轻松”……总之，在农奴制的社会环境里，个人幸福是虚幻的，不完满的，根本不可能的。屠格涅夫曾在《文学回忆录》中写下了这样一段话：“我与我仇恨的事物不共戴天……在我心目中，这个敌人有固定的形象，有人所共知的名称：这个敌人就是农奴制度。”《贵族之家》谴责了当时的社会制度，因为它庇护潘申和瓦尔瓦拉·帕夫洛芙娜之流，使他们孳生繁衍，而扼杀天才的性格（列姆，拉夫烈茨基），毒害人民，使他们浑浑噩噩，屈服顺从（玛兰尼娅，阿加菲娅，安东等）。
在《贵族之家》中，屠格涅夫用“春秋笔法”展示了贵族阶级日趋没落的过程：拉夫烈茨基的曾祖父“想做什么就能做什么”，“谁也管不了他”。到了他的祖父，已经是“不管干什么，全都白搭”了。他的父亲先是受了法国式的教育，脑子里装满了伏尔泰、狄德罗和卢梭，然而那些“深奥的道理”“没有和他的血液溶为一体，没有深入他的心灵，没有形成坚定不移的信念”；在国外待了几年以后，他又成了崇拜英国的人，“瞧不起自己的同胞”，要用英国的制度和方法来改造俄国；可是十二月党人遭到镇压后，他立刻烧毁了从国外带回的一切计划和来往信件，躲到自己的庄园里，闭门不出，“在省长大人面前吓得战战兢兢”……最后“变成了一个十足的废物”。
贵族之家的没落已无可挽回，农奴制的崩溃也不可避免；然而由谁来给俄罗斯社会注入新的活力，俄罗斯又该往何处去呢？无论是拉夫烈茨基，还是作者本人，都无法作出明确回答。拉夫烈茨基只是模模糊糊感觉到，应该做点儿什么有益的事情，未来应该是光明的。而作为农奴制贵族阶级的最后代表，回首往事，拉夫烈茨基却感到虚度了一生。“熄灭了吧，无益的一生！”在抒情诗一般的“尾声”中，拉夫烈茨基无可奈何地这样悲叹。故事的结尾无疑带有浓郁的伤感色彩，不过屠格涅夫把希望寄托于青年一代。拉夫烈茨基是在青年一代的欢声笑语中悄然离去的。历史舞台上已经换了新的角色，将要上演的也该是不同的剧目了吧？！
评论家皮沙烈夫①对《贵族之家》作了如下的评价，认为它是屠格涅夫“结构最严谨、最完美的作品之一”。它没有进行说教，然而是一部有教育意义的小说。在这部小说中，屠格涅夫“描写了现代生活，突出它各个好的和坏的方面，阐明了他所描写的现象的根源，促使读者进行严肃认真的深思。”
--------
①皮沙烈夫（一八四○—一八六八），俄罗斯著名评论家，哲学家，革命民主主义者。
屠格涅夫的作品，特别是他的长篇小说，堪称几乎近半个世纪俄罗斯生活的艺术编年史。但就篇幅而言，他的长篇却短小精致，除《处女地》外，可以说是反映当时社会的中篇小说。
生活场面和自然风景的描写在他的小说中随处可见，但这些描写从不喧宾夺主，遮掩情节。他的小说是单一结构的，在这一点上不同于托尔斯泰的长篇小说。
《贵族之家》的结构尤其严谨，对人物都有简明的交待。作者自己曾说：他对这部小说的情节考虑了很久，希望避免像《罗亭》中那样令人感到意外的结局。的确，《贵族之家》情节十分紧凑，故事迅速展开，简练凝缩，不蔓不枝；中间几处插叙主人公的往事，都是读者进一步了解他们所必需的。在这方面，可以说屠格涅夫是普希金、莱蒙托夫的直接继承者。
屠格涅夫对人物的心理描写很有特色。他不是对主人公的感情作详尽的心理分析，而是把读者的注意力集中到人物内心活动的结果上。我们知道莉莎对拉夫烈茨基的感情是怎样产生、怎样发展的，可是我们不知道莉莎心里究竟在想些什么。屠格涅夫甚至宣称，她的内心活动不可能用语言表达出来。“然而语言不能表达一个姑娘纯洁的心灵中正在发生的事情：对于她本人来说，那也是秘密；就让它对于大家也始终是一个秘密吧。”他还借玛尔法·季莫菲耶芙娜之口说：“别人的心，……就像不透光的树林，女孩子的心就更不用说了。”正是因此，他也拒绝写出拉夫烈茨基和莉莎在修道院里最后一次见面时的感受。
屠格涅夫并不深入描写主人公的内心活动，却十分巧妙地让读者能充分理解他们的内心生活。他经常利用潜台词，对主人公的微妙感情只是点到为止。莉莎和拉夫烈茨基的爱情几乎是默默无言的。他们在卡利京家的客厅里、花园里和拉夫烈茨基家池塘边单独待在一起的时候，往往很少谈话，而是默默地感受对方心中正在发生的一切。
在屠格涅夫的小说中，自然景色对于人物的精神世界往往起一种烘云托月的作用。随着人物命运的改变，自然景物的色彩也在发生变化。在《贵族之家》中，自始至终都让人感到有一种衰败没落的情调：“夕阳无限好，只是近黄昏”。小说中描写的大部分都是傍晚、黄昏和夜晚的景色，或明月当空，或星光闪烁。拉夫烈茨基回乡村去一路上看到的景色，与他忧郁的回忆和对幸福的憧憬是协调一致的。具有象征性的小说结尾是大地回春，万物复苏，一派欣欣向荣的景象：拉夫烈茨基以及他那一代人虽然一生蹉跎，黯然退出历史舞台，但青年一代已经接过了他们手中的接力棒，正在精力充沛地走向未来。
除了自然景色，小说中的音乐也与人物的心情相互交融。借用柴科夫斯基评论普希金的话，可以说：在《贵族之家》中，屠格涅夫的天才常常冲破“散文”的狭窄天地，进入音乐的无限的领域。拉夫烈茨基在花园中与莉莎相会，知道她爱他以后，听到了列姆的奇妙的音乐，而当他的妻子突然回来，使他关于幸福的梦破灭以后，同一个列姆，也完全变了样，在他身上再也看不到二十四小时前那位充满灵感的音乐家的影子了。
屠格涅夫从不用个人的注释来代替情节的发展，从不歪曲他不喜欢的现象；他叙述故事的时候是完全客观的，决不对情节发展进行任何干预。作者的态度、作者的感情，是通过他独特的抒情风格表现出来的，这也正是他的艺术风格的特点之一。特别是在《贵族之家》中，抒情色彩更像空气和阳光一样伴随着拉夫烈茨基和莉莎，为他们谱写出一首首同情、叹息、哀婉的抒情歌曲。一方面在叙述中力求做到客观，另一方面又要以作者的感情感染读者，在屠格涅夫的小说中，可以说这二者已经完美地结合在一起了。
屠格涅夫的语言特点是：反对矫揉造作和华而不实。他的词汇丰富多彩，形象生动，栩栩如生的比喻比比皆是，而且善于巧妙地运用隐喻。他的句子通常都简短精悍，结构清晰，节奏和谐（可参看他介绍列姆的那段文字）。许多人都曾指出屠格涅夫语言的特殊魅力，对他运用语言的才能给予极高的评价。陀思妥耶夫斯基称屠格涅夫为“俄罗斯语言的巨匠”。高尔基说：“未来的文学史专家谈到俄罗斯语言的发展时，一定会说：这种语言是普希金、屠格涅夫和契诃夫创造的”。
翻译这样一位语言大师的作品，其难度可想而知；如果译文能多少传达原作的神韵，对译者来说，也就是最大的幸福了。
Plot summary
The novel's protagonist is Fyodor Ivanych Lavretsky, a nobleman who shares many traits with Turgenev. The child of a distant, Anglophile father and a serf mother who dies when he is very young, Lavretsky is brought up at his family's country estate home by a severe maiden aunt, often thought to be based on Turgenev's own mother who was known for her cruelty.
Lavretsky pursues an education in Moscow, and while he is studying there, he spies a beautiful young woman at the opera. Her name is Varvara Pavlovna, and he falls in love with her and asks for her hand in marriage. The two move to Paris, where Varvara Pavlovna becomes a very popular salon hostess and begins an affair with one of her frequent visitors. Lavretsky learns of the affair only when he discovers a note written to her by her lover. Shocked by her betrayal, he severs all contact with her and returns to his family estate.
Upon returning to Russia, Lavretsky visits his cousin, Marya Dmitrievna Kalitina, who lives with her two daughters, Liza and Lenochka. Lavretsky is immediately drawn to Liza, whose serious nature and religious devotion stand in contrast to Varvara Pavlovna's coquettishness and social consciousness. Lavretsky realizes that he is falling in love with Liza, and when he reads in a foreign journal that Varvara Pavlovna has died, he confesses his love to her and learns that she loves him in return.
Unfortunately, a cruel twist of fate prevents Lavretsky and Liza from being together. After they confess their love to one another, Lavretsky returns home to find his supposedly dead wife waiting for him in his foyer. It turns out that the reports of her death were false, and that she has fallen out of favor with her friends and needs more money from Lavretsky.
Upon learning of Varvara Pavlovna's sudden appearance, Liza decides to join a remote convent and lives out the rest of her days as a nun. Lavretsky visits her at the convent one time and catches a glimpse of her as she is walking from choir to choir. The novel ends with an epilogue which takes place eight years later, in which Lavretsky returns to Liza's house and finds that, although many things have changed, there are elements such as the piano and the garden that are the same. Lavretsky finds comfort in his memories and is able to see the meaning and even the beauty in his personal pain.
Major themes
Ultimately, Turgenev concludes that the truth is best left unstated. He concludes the novel by stating that he could not possibly explain what Lavretsky and Liza felt, and that it is better to point out these individual tragedies and pass them by.
Turgenev wrote the novel shortly after his 40th birthday, and it expresses some of his feelings about middle age, as its protagonist is forced to confront the mistakes of his past and determine what options are left for his dwindling future.
译者：黄伟经
输入：小精灵
－－爱之路
落难
“这些声音声意味着什么呢？”“意味着我感到痛苦，强烈地感到痛苦。”
“当小溪的流水碰到石头的时候，你听见过它的潺潺声吗？”
“听见过……但这说明了说明呢？”
“说明这潺潺声和你的呻吟声都一样是声音，而不是别的什么东西。所不同的是：小溪的潺潺声使人悦耳，而你的呻吟声，却引不起任何人的怜悯。你不必忍住呻吟，可是你记住吧：这反正是声音，声音，象树木被折裂的嘎吱声一样的声音……声音－－而不是什么别的东西。
屠格涅夫这篇散文诗写于他去世前一年，那时他身患重病(脊椎癌)经常处于痛苦呻吟和孤独感之中。
乞丐
我在街上走着……一个乞丐－－一个衰弱的老人档住了我。红肿的、流着泪水的眼睛，发青的嘴唇，粗糙、褴褛的衣服，龌龊的伤口……呵，贫穷把这个不幸的人折磨成了什么样子啊！他向我伸出一只红肿、肮脏的手……。他呻吟着，他喃喃地乞求帮助。我伸手搜索自己身上所有口袋……。既没有钱包，也没有怀表，甚至连一块手帕也没有……。我随身什么东西也没有带。但乞丐在等待着……他伸出来的手，微微地摆动着和颤动着。我惘然无措，惶惑不安，紧紧地握了握这只肮脏的、发抖的手……。“请别见怪，兄弟；我什么也没有带，兄弟。”乞丐那对红肿的眼睛凝视着我；他发青的嘴唇微笑了一下－－接着，他也照样紧握了我的变得冷起来的手指。“那儿的话，兄弟，”他吃力地说道，“这也应当谢谢啦。这也是一种施舍啊，兄弟。”乞丐那对红肿的眼睛凝视着我；他发青的嘴唇微笑了一下－－接着，他也照样紧握了我的变得冷起来的手指。“那儿的话，兄弟，”他吃力地说道，“这也应当谢谢啦。这也是一种施舍啊，兄弟。”我明白，我也从我的兄弟那儿得到了施舍。
明天，明天
度过的每一天，几乎都是那么空虚，那么懒散，那么毫无价值！它给自己留下的痕迹是多么少！这些一点钟又一点钟消逝了的时间，又是多么没有意义，多么糊里糊涂啊！
然而，人却要生存下去；他珍惜生命，他把希望寄托在生命，寄托在自己，寄托在未来上面……噢，他期待着将来什么样的幸福呀！
可是，他为什么设想，其他后来的日子，将不会同刚刚过去的这一天相似呢？
他就是没有料想到这一点。他向来不爱思索－－他这做得很好。
“啊，明天，明天！”他安慰着自己，一直到这个“明天”把他送入坟墓。
好啦－－一旦在坟墓里－－你就不得不停止思索了。
爱之路
一切感情都可以导致爱情，导致热烈爱慕，一切的感情：憎恨，怜悯，冷漠，崇敬，友谊，畏惧，－－甚至蔑视。是的，一切的感情……只是除了感谢以外。
感谢－－这是债务；任何人都可以摆出自己的一些债务……但爱情－－不是金钱。
空话
我害怕，我避免空话；但对空话的畏惧－－也是一种自负。
于是，在这两个外来词之间，在自负与空话之间，我们复杂的生活在流逝着和变动着。
纯朴
纯朴！纯朴！人们把你叫作神圣的。可是，神圣－－这不是人类的事。
谦逊－－这才是。它抑制着，它战胜着骄傲。但不要忘记：胜利感本身就蕴场着自己的骄傲。
你哭……
你哭的是我的悲痛；而我哭，是由于同情你对我的怜悯。
然而，要知道，你哭的也是自己的悲痛，因为只有你在我身上看到了自己的悲痛。
爱情
大家都说：爱情－－这是最高尚的，最特殊的感情。别一个的“我”，深入到你的“我”里：你被扩大了－－你也被突破了；现在从肉体上说你是很超然了，而且你的“我”被消除了。可是甚至连这样的消亡，也使一个有血有肉的人愤懑。只有不朽之神才能复活啊。
啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！
啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！－－果戈里
“啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！”我有个时候也曾经这样感叹过。不过，当我发出这个感叹的时候，我自己还年轻和充满活力。
那时，我不过是想以忧郁的情绪来投自己所好，表面上是在怜悯自己，暗地里是在高兴。
现在，我缄口不语，不再为那些失去的东西唉声叹气，难过伤心……。那些失去的东西，本来就以不能明说的烦恼经常折磨着我。
“嘿！最好别去想吧！”男子汉们坚决地说。
我怜悯……
我怜悯我自己，别人，所有的人，野兽，鸟类……一切有生命之物。
我怜悯孩子们和老年人，不幸者和幸运者……怜悯幸运者甚于不幸者。
我怜悯常胜的、凯旋的首领们，怜悯伟大的艺术家，思想家诗人们。
我怜悯杀人犯和他的受害者，怜悯丑与美，怜悯被压迫者和压迫者。
我怎样从这怜悯中解脱出来呢？它不让我安稳地生活……。它，还有这烦恼。
哦，烦恼，烦恼，充满了怜悯的烦恼啊！人千万不能陷入烦恼之中。
真的，我最好还是羡慕吧！我就羡慕－－岩石。
处世法则
你想成为心情安宁的人吗？那么，去同人们交往吧，不过要一个人生活，对任何事情都不要着手去做，对任何事情都不惋惜吧。
你想成为幸福的人吗？那你首先要学会吃苦。
谁之罪
她向我伸出了自己的温暖的手、苍白的手……我却粗鲁无情地推开了她。年轻、可爱的脸庞上，表现出疑惑不解的神情；年轻、善良的眼睛，带着责备的目光注视着我；年轻、纯洁的心，并不理解我。
“我的罪过是什么？”她的嘴唇喃喃着说。
“你的罪过？在最光辉灿烂的苍穹深处，最快活的安琪儿，可能比你更容易犯下罪过呢。
“可是，在我面前，你的罪过依然是很大的。
“你想知道它，知道这个你不可能了解，我无法给你解释明白的罪过吗？
“这个罪过就在于：你－－正当青春年华；我－－已是老年。”
输入：小精灵
－－爱之路
落难
“这些声音声意味着什么呢？”“意味着我感到痛苦，强烈地感到痛苦。”
“当小溪的流水碰到石头的时候，你听见过它的潺潺声吗？”
“听见过……但这说明了说明呢？”
“说明这潺潺声和你的呻吟声都一样是声音，而不是别的什么东西。所不同的是：小溪的潺潺声使人悦耳，而你的呻吟声，却引不起任何人的怜悯。你不必忍住呻吟，可是你记住吧：这反正是声音，声音，象树木被折裂的嘎吱声一样的声音……声音－－而不是什么别的东西。
屠格涅夫这篇散文诗写于他去世前一年，那时他身患重病(脊椎癌)经常处于痛苦呻吟和孤独感之中。
乞丐
我在街上走着……一个乞丐－－一个衰弱的老人档住了我。红肿的、流着泪水的眼睛，发青的嘴唇，粗糙、褴褛的衣服，龌龊的伤口……呵，贫穷把这个不幸的人折磨成了什么样子啊！他向我伸出一只红肿、肮脏的手……。他呻吟着，他喃喃地乞求帮助。我伸手搜索自己身上所有口袋……。既没有钱包，也没有怀表，甚至连一块手帕也没有……。我随身什么东西也没有带。但乞丐在等待着……他伸出来的手，微微地摆动着和颤动着。我惘然无措，惶惑不安，紧紧地握了握这只肮脏的、发抖的手……。“请别见怪，兄弟；我什么也没有带，兄弟。”乞丐那对红肿的眼睛凝视着我；他发青的嘴唇微笑了一下－－接着，他也照样紧握了我的变得冷起来的手指。“那儿的话，兄弟，”他吃力地说道，“这也应当谢谢啦。这也是一种施舍啊，兄弟。”乞丐那对红肿的眼睛凝视着我；他发青的嘴唇微笑了一下－－接着，他也照样紧握了我的变得冷起来的手指。“那儿的话，兄弟，”他吃力地说道，“这也应当谢谢啦。这也是一种施舍啊，兄弟。”我明白，我也从我的兄弟那儿得到了施舍。
明天，明天
度过的每一天，几乎都是那么空虚，那么懒散，那么毫无价值！它给自己留下的痕迹是多么少！这些一点钟又一点钟消逝了的时间，又是多么没有意义，多么糊里糊涂啊！
然而，人却要生存下去；他珍惜生命，他把希望寄托在生命，寄托在自己，寄托在未来上面……噢，他期待着将来什么样的幸福呀！
可是，他为什么设想，其他后来的日子，将不会同刚刚过去的这一天相似呢？
他就是没有料想到这一点。他向来不爱思索－－他这做得很好。
“啊，明天，明天！”他安慰着自己，一直到这个“明天”把他送入坟墓。
好啦－－一旦在坟墓里－－你就不得不停止思索了。
爱之路
一切感情都可以导致爱情，导致热烈爱慕，一切的感情：憎恨，怜悯，冷漠，崇敬，友谊，畏惧，－－甚至蔑视。是的，一切的感情……只是除了感谢以外。
感谢－－这是债务；任何人都可以摆出自己的一些债务……但爱情－－不是金钱。
空话
我害怕，我避免空话；但对空话的畏惧－－也是一种自负。
于是，在这两个外来词之间，在自负与空话之间，我们复杂的生活在流逝着和变动着。
纯朴
纯朴！纯朴！人们把你叫作神圣的。可是，神圣－－这不是人类的事。
谦逊－－这才是。它抑制着，它战胜着骄傲。但不要忘记：胜利感本身就蕴场着自己的骄傲。
你哭……
你哭的是我的悲痛；而我哭，是由于同情你对我的怜悯。
然而，要知道，你哭的也是自己的悲痛，因为只有你在我身上看到了自己的悲痛。
爱情
大家都说：爱情－－这是最高尚的，最特殊的感情。别一个的“我”，深入到你的“我”里：你被扩大了－－你也被突破了；现在从肉体上说你是很超然了，而且你的“我”被消除了。可是甚至连这样的消亡，也使一个有血有肉的人愤懑。只有不朽之神才能复活啊。
啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！
啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！－－果戈里
“啊，我的青春！啊，我的活力！”我有个时候也曾经这样感叹过。不过，当我发出这个感叹的时候，我自己还年轻和充满活力。
那时，我不过是想以忧郁的情绪来投自己所好，表面上是在怜悯自己，暗地里是在高兴。
现在，我缄口不语，不再为那些失去的东西唉声叹气，难过伤心……。那些失去的东西，本来就以不能明说的烦恼经常折磨着我。
“嘿！最好别去想吧！”男子汉们坚决地说。
我怜悯……
我怜悯我自己，别人，所有的人，野兽，鸟类……一切有生命之物。
我怜悯孩子们和老年人，不幸者和幸运者……怜悯幸运者甚于不幸者。
我怜悯常胜的、凯旋的首领们，怜悯伟大的艺术家，思想家诗人们。
我怜悯杀人犯和他的受害者，怜悯丑与美，怜悯被压迫者和压迫者。
我怎样从这怜悯中解脱出来呢？它不让我安稳地生活……。它，还有这烦恼。
哦，烦恼，烦恼，充满了怜悯的烦恼啊！人千万不能陷入烦恼之中。
真的，我最好还是羡慕吧！我就羡慕－－岩石。
处世法则
你想成为心情安宁的人吗？那么，去同人们交往吧，不过要一个人生活，对任何事情都不要着手去做，对任何事情都不惋惜吧。
你想成为幸福的人吗？那你首先要学会吃苦。
谁之罪
她向我伸出了自己的温暖的手、苍白的手……我却粗鲁无情地推开了她。年轻、可爱的脸庞上，表现出疑惑不解的神情；年轻、善良的眼睛，带着责备的目光注视着我；年轻、纯洁的心，并不理解我。
“我的罪过是什么？”她的嘴唇喃喃着说。
“你的罪过？在最光辉灿烂的苍穹深处，最快活的安琪儿，可能比你更容易犯下罪过呢。
“可是，在我面前，你的罪过依然是很大的。
“你想知道它，知道这个你不可能了解，我无法给你解释明白的罪过吗？
“这个罪过就在于：你－－正当青春年华；我－－已是老年。”