Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
Ты сочувствуешь Печорину? Поздравляем, ты — его жертва: разбор «Героя нашего времени» | Правое полушарие Интроверта | YouTubeToText
YouTube Transcript: Ты сочувствуешь Печорину? Поздравляем, ты — его жертва: разбор «Героя нашего времени»
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
Tell us honestly, do you like Grigory
Pechorin? Yes, he is charming, smart,
resourceful, and at the same time cruel and
cynical, an ideal trickster like Loki
or the Joker. 10th-century critics even called
him the spawn of hell. The hero's image
was so sinister, and Pechorin really seems
more of a villain than a hero of the time, but was that what
Lermontov intended? We'll tell you now.
Pechorin once said, "I would be ready to press the
bell." No one understood me, but
you understand. Support your favorite hero by
notifications. What we expect from a villain is
usually a charismatic character,
cruel, egoistic, obsessed with an idea that
most people don't accept, and Pechorin
fits this description perfectly.
True, in romantic literature,
the concept of an antagonist or antihero
existed. But there was an extra man
who met all the necessary
criteria. Pechorin. The second most significant extra
man in the history of 10th-century literature before
him was Pushkin's Eugene Onegin, who was
partly inspired by him, and Lermontov
even indicates this by the hero's last name. Onega and
Pechora are rivers. However, on a
psychological level, the heroes turned out to be
very different. Yes, Pichurin is the same
intellectual who suffers and cannot
find a place for himself in society as Onegin,
he is withdrawn and deeply disappointed in the
world order, only that. Looking at
Onegin, one could say that a superfluous
person does little with the
pressure and just goes with the flow. And
Lermontov showed that the struggle of a superfluous
person. It may well be active. His
Pechorin is constantly trying to test himself
and those around him, but nothing
changes for the better. The hero’s attempts are
either futile or lead to only
destruction. He not only senselessly
resisted circumstances, his
behavior is a reflection of the era. The
reign of Nicholas I was a time of
social stagnation and disappointment in
ideals. A superfluous person was just
born of such times. On the one hand,
in Russia there were educated,
talented people with enormous potential. On the
other hand, they could not realize themselves
because of censorship; they felt unnecessary and
superfluous. As a result, young people with enormous
potential wasted it on
useless things. This is how we see Pechorin,
his mind and He uses charisma to
lure women into a trap. Surely you
thought nothing has changed. Such people
still exist, and modern writers will
agree with you. The new superfluous man was
described, for example, by Pelevin in his novel
Generation P. And we talked about this in the
course, a guide to modern literature.
Watch the course to understand
postmodernism for only 300 rubles a month. You will
find the link in the description. To manifest
and find a place in the world. Pechorin gets involved
in adventures; other people always suffer from them.
Most often, he is focused on
girls. The hero admits that my first
pleasure is subordinating everything that
surrounds me to my will. Accordingly, Pechorin
chooses women who are difficult to achieve,
so he proves to himself that he is worth something.
Remember what happens to Bella, the proud
daughter of the Circassian prince. Pechorin
kidnaps her for two reasons. To
avoid boredom and test his strength. To
manifest, as you see, love
fades into the background. Yes, Grigory
says that he is ready to give everything so that the
girl is happy next to him, and
perhaps he would have done so. A real
hero. But as soon as Bella
Pechorin reciprocates his feelings, but he cools towards her, and
when she dies at the hands of a robber,
although he regrets, he does not repent. In the
chapter, the fatalist Pechorin admits that in
this futile struggle, seek both the heat of the soul and the
constancy of the Will of
life. He even regrets. He is no longer
about her, but about himself and his wasted
potential. In the chapter, book Mary, Pechorin
has fun playing with the feelings of
two women at once, book Mary and Vera, he skillfully
manipulates them, makes them jealous and
suffer. Perin seeks the favor of
book Mary. But only in order to be
own, they brought satisfaction to the hero. Why is everything so
simple? Imagine that you have been saving up for an
expensive sports car for a long time, and now you
Inside, there is emptiness, because the
car is only an external attribute of the part, and
internally, nothing has changed for you, hence the
disappointment. It seems
you have done a lot, but globally, everything
remains the same, and Perin is
focused on something external. Although he
needs to take care of himself first. The murder of
Grushnitsky, seduction. In the book Mary,
Bella's abduction is only external
events. Yes, they show the baseness to which
Pechorin is ready to go in order to
betray the meaning of his life, but Lermontov was
not interested in this plot. His
character arc is constructed in a much more
interesting way for the 19th century. The
writer often went against the rules. We
proved this in the lecture "Why Lermontov is the
first." Watch it on the channel.
You probably noticed that the chapters of the hero of
our time are not in chronological
order. We learn that Pechorin died
already in the middle of the novel. The fact is that
Lermontov did not try to simply tell
us about the external life of the hero. He showed
internal development and reflection. So, in the
chapter "Bella," Pechorin admits that he is
simply bored with life, and already in the book Mary,
we see that the hero has changed and now
amuses himself by fighting with himself and the light on the eve of the
on the eve of the
room. Reflection, the feather bed reaches its peak and he
asks himself who I am, why I live, could
I live differently? It seems that his
life could be different. Calm and
quiet, but Pechorin himself understands. This
path does not suit him. It is as if a
more significant role is destined for him, but he himself is
not knows which one and still can't find out, the
reader fairly judges
Perin for his actions. The hero
can really be called here
and recorded in the Red Flags of Russian
Literature, but this is too unambiguous.
Lermontov suggests that in the image of
Pechorin, history shines through more
globally, and literary scholar Alexander
Yanushkevich notes that the writer showed the
personal history of the hero who is painfully
trying to understand himself and the time in which
he happened to live. Pechorin suffered from
his situation, he can be called a
victim of the environment in the portrait of which there are
positive traits, and Lermontov had
time. We are accustomed to the fact that a hero is a
strong and courageous character who
fights against everything bad for the sake of everything
good. Don Quixote, for example, is definitely a
hero, a true knight without fear and
reproach. But what if we say that Perin
is the Heir of Donta SDI. In
In
1823, 30 years before Perin, Karamzin
wrote the novel A Knight of Our Time. In
it, he tried to find an image that
would best characterize the present through the
hero Leon. The writer showed that the knight
of the era is a changeable,
reflective person, he can even be A
sentimental dreamer, and here
Karamzin refers to Don Jota Serva, already
inscribed the hero, recognizing the
chain from Chatsky and Onegin. The idea of a
knight of time came to Lermontov, and he
perceived it critically, based on the
quixotic nature of Karamzin's hero. He created
his evil clone. After all, chivalry remained
somewhere in the 10th century. At the center of the era, now
featherbeds that look cynically at people
and themselves, but it is important to understand that the seed of
quixotism remained in the hero.
Lermontov simply looked at him more critically.
critically.
Lermontov did not give the title to his novel himself, although it seems that the
idea was obvious from the beginning. The
novel A Hero of Our Time was called
one of the heroes of the early 20th century. The title
referred readers to the novel by the French
writer Alfred de Musset, Confessions of a Son of the
Century. Another source of
Lermontov's inspiration, the title A Hero of Our Time was
suggested by the publisher Andrei Kraevsky. Did
he make a mistake with his choice? We have already said
that in his magazine,
we understand how much the hero Dak is detached from
morality and ethics. He writes
quite honestly, so it is important that
Pechorin talks about others in his text, we
see how the society lives, to which the
Hero does not want to belong and its
distinctive features - indifference to the
sublime and spiritual passivity. Remember, for
example, the story of Azamat and Kazbich from the
chapter. They seem to be proud Caucasians, but with
revenge, fights, and senseless violence.
Pechorin sees in this not strength of spirit, but,
on the contrary, his immaturity, and there is no meaning in their fight for
Bella. The same thing
happens with honest smugglers, and
Pechorin does not see anything good in Taman in their lives.
After all, these people do not have a
deep idea or purpose in life. Water
society is imbued with envy, meanness, and
rivalry, and even Maxim Maksimych,
who stands out from the rest with his
golden heart, does not look at the world
critically and takes everything on faith. It
turns out that Pechorin believes that people
around him do not analyze anything, they have no
inner work, they do not care about finding themselves,
they strive for ordinary, selfish
happiness through intrigue, poseurism, or
adventurism. Against this background, the rebel Pechorin
seems to be a more It's not for nothing that
critics compared him to Hamlet or
Faust, as he seeks answers. NM
contains not only the vices of the era, but also the
best that was in the protesting youth of
the time of Nicholas I, an inquisitive mind and a
desire for change. Therefore, he
becomes a hero of the time, a mirror in which both the
good and the bad are reflected.
Pechorin awaits a tragic end; he
dies on the road from Persia to Russia.
What the narrator tells the reader? Remember the
special structure of the novel? So,
ends in the fortress. The writer seems to be
telling us that there is no way out of the situation in which
Pechorin finds himself. The hero's fate is
hopeless from the very beginning, and he
does nothing that could
truly change this. It no longer resembles the
story of a villain. True, the tragic
story makes one doubt that the hero of the
time is evil. Irony, however, is that
some of Lermontov's contemporaries
held a different opinion. Yet,
meeting a person similar
to Pechorin in reality is an alarm bell. We
suggest avoiding them and pressing the
correct bell, then the calls
please. The hero of our Over the years, it was received by the
reading public in different ways. Emperor
Nicholas I, for example, generally called
Lermontov's text a pathetic book and said that
such novels spoil character. On the side of
side of
criticism, according to Yanushkevich, some
saw in the novel's hero a slander against
Russian reality, an imitation of
Western models. The Decembrist Kuchelbecker
regretted that Lermontov had wasted
his talent on depicting such a
creature as his Ugly Pechorin. Many
said that
Lermontov copied the character of the selfish Pechorin from himself. The author
and the hero were indeed brought together by many things:
noble origin,
views on honor and dignity, and episodes
from his personal life. One can recall, for example, the
writer's relationship with Ekaterina
Sushkova. They met. When
Lermontov was 15, he immediately fell in love, and the
girl only mocked him.
After 4 years, the writer began to show
her signs of attention, and Catherine left her
fiancé to be with Lermontov. But he
coldly and cruelly refused to take revenge on her for the
mockery. I sing
we saw. In In the episode with the temptation of the book dream,
dream,
Vissarion Belinsky, a
famous critic, looked at Lermontov's novel quite differently. He experienced a
period of doubt, stagnation, and attempts to understand
himself and the times. Therefore, in Pechorin, he found
strength of spirit and power of feelings, which he defended
to colleagues. It was thanks to
Belinsky that the high role of
self-analysis in the novel became obvious. He also showed that
Perin's actions are like a yoke, inaction, and the
influence of society. Lermontov
expressed little about the criticism of the novel, expressing the
hero's autobiographical nature; he did not
confirm it, saying that "This is an old and
pathetic joke." One thing is clear: in Pechorin,
Lermontov saw rather a portrait of a generation.
He directly wrote about it in the preface. The
author outlined the problem but showed that it
cannot be solved. He wrote that "It will be." And the fact
that the disease is indicated. And how to cure
it, God knows.
After a detailed analysis of Pechorin, you will
surely want to find new sides
in other ambiguous heroes. Therefore, we
offer you a lecture on rebel heroes in
Russian literature of the 10th century. Analysis of
Turgin as a writer, as an aesthete, a very
sensitive artist. Of course, he
condemned such statements by his
hero, and it is for this reason that he
kills Bazarov in the end. He becomes infected with
typhus and understands that death is coming. And
death can no longer be denied, and this is, of
course, a rather cruel move by
Turgenev. But if we analyze
all the writer's texts, we will understand that the author
often resorts to this technique. That
is, we see a hero with whose views the
writer does not agree, and as a rule, a
tragic ending awaits him. Watch the lecture
in the application for only 300 rubles per month.
Minutes are available to you right now so you
can decide to stay or leave. Link in the
description. Heroes of Our Time is a
novel that still causes controversy.
Some see Pechorin as a villain and an egoist,
others as a victim of circumstances. But be that as it
may, this work is a deep and
multifaceted study of human
psychology. Lermontov wrote the first
analytical novel in Russian prose,
which centered on the inner world of a
living, ambiguous hero.
We will later encounter the same deep psychologism
in Dostoevsky, and we will again argue
whether Verkhovensky and Rogozhin are villains. And the
truth will remain. Somewhere in the middle,
because it's impossible to clearly evaluate human
nature. What arguments for and
against Pechorin's heroism do you have?
Share them in the comments. For the most
convincing arguments, you'll receive a month's subscription
subscription [music]
[music]
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
Chrome Extension