I. A. Goncharov worked on the novel “Oblomov” for ten years. In this (best!) work, the author expressed his beliefs and hopes; reflected those problems of contemporary life that worried and deeply affected him, and revealed the causes of these problems. Therefore, the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov and Andrei Ivanovich Stolts acquired typical features, and the word “Oblomovism” itself began to express a very specific, almost philosophical concept. We cannot exclude the image of Olga Sergeevna Ilyinskaya, without which the characters of the men would not be fully illuminated.

To understand the character of a person, the motives of his actions, you need to turn to the sources of personality formation: childhood, upbringing, environment, and finally, the education received.

It seems that the strength of all generations of his ancestors was concentrated in Ilyusha; in him were felt the makings of a man of a new time, capable of fruitful activity. But Ilya’s aspirations to independently explore the world were thwarted by a nanny who did not take her eyes off him, from whose supervision he escaped only during the afternoon nap, when all living things in the house, except Ilya, fell asleep. “It was some kind of all-consuming, invincible dream, a true likeness of death.”

An attentive child observes everything that is happening in the house, “feeds a soft mind with living examples and unconsciously draws a program for his life based on the life around him,” the “main concern of life” of which is good food, and then a sound sleep.

The quiet flow of life was disturbed only occasionally by “illnesses, losses, quarrels and, among other things, labor.” Labor was the main enemy of the inhabitants of Oblomovka, a punishment imposed “on our forefathers.” In Oblomovka they always got rid of work when the opportunity presented itself, “finding it possible and proper.” This attitude towards work was brought up in Ilya Ilyich, who accepted a ready-made standard of life, passed on from generation to generation without change. The ideal of inaction was reinforced in the child’s imagination by nanny’s tales about “Emelya the Fool,” who receives various gifts from the magic pike, and undeserved ones at that. Fairy tales penetrate deeply into Ilya’s consciousness, and he, already an adult, “is sometimes unconsciously sad, why is a fairy tale not life, and why is life not a fairy tale?”

The desire for independence, young energy was stopped by the friendly cries of the parents: “What are servants for?” Soon Ilya himself realized that it was calmer and more convenient to give orders. The dexterous, active child is constantly stopped by his parents and nanny for fear that the boy will “fall, hurt himself” or catch a cold; he was cherished like a hothouse flower. “Those seeking manifestations of power turned inward and sank, withering away.”

In such conditions, Ilya Ilyich’s apathetic, lazy, difficult-to-rise nature developed. He was surrounded by the excessive worries of his mother, who made sure that the child ate well, did not overwork himself in studying with Stolz, and was ready, under any, even the most insignificant pretext, not to let Ilyushenka go to the German. She believed that education is not such an important thing, for the sake of which you need to lose weight, lose your blush and skip holidays. But still, Oblomov’s parents understood the need for education, but saw in it only a means for career advancement: they began to receive ranks and awards at that time “no other way than through study.” The parents wanted to present Ilyusha with all the benefits “somehow cheaper, with various tricks.”

His mother's worries had a detrimental effect on Ilya: he was not accustomed to systematic studies, he never wanted to learn more than the teacher asked.

Oblomov’s peer and friend, Andrei Ivanovich Stolts, loved Ilya, tried to stir him up, instill an interest in self-education, set him up for activities that he himself was passionate about, for which he was disposed, because he was brought up in completely different conditions.

Andrei’s father, a German, gave him the upbringing that he received from his father, that is, he taught him all the practical sciences, forced him to work early and sent away his son, who had graduated from the university, just as his father had done to him in his time. But the father’s rough burgher upbringing constantly came into contact with the tender, affectionate love of his mother, a Russian noblewoman, who did not contradict her husband, but quietly raised her son in her own way: “... taught him to listen to the thoughtful sounds of Hertz, sang to him about flowers, about the poetry of life , whispered about the brilliant calling of either a warrior or a writer...” The proximity of Oblomovka with its “primitive laziness, simplicity of morals, silence and immobility” and the princely “with the wide expanse of lordly life” also prevented Ivan Bogdanovich Stoltz from becoming the son of the same burgher, what he was like. The breath of Russian life “took Andrei away from the straight path outlined by his father.” But nevertheless, Andrei adopted from his father a serious outlook on life (even at all its little things) and pragmatism, which he tried to balance “with the subtle needs of the spirit.”

Stolz kept all emotions, actions and actions under the “never dormant control” of the mind and spent strictly “according to the budget.” He considered himself the cause of all his misfortunes and suffering; he “did not hang guilt and responsibility, like a caftan, on someone else’s nail,” unlike Oblomov, who did not find the strength to admit himself guilty of his troubles, of the worthlessness of his fruitless life: “. ..the burning reproaches of his conscience stung him, and he tried with all his might... to find the culprit outside himself and turn their sting on him, but on whom?”

The search turned out to be useless, because the reason for Oblomov’s ruined life was himself. It was very painful for him to realize this, since he “painfully felt that some good, bright beginning was buried in him, as in a grave, perhaps now dead...”. Oblomov was tormented by doubts about the correctness and necessity of his life. However, over the years, unrest and repentance appeared less frequently, and he quietly and gradually settled into a simple and wide coffin for the rest of his existence, made with his own hands...”.

Stolz and Oblomov have a different attitude towards the imagination, which has two opposite incarnations: “... a friend - the less you believe him, and an enemy - when you fall asleep trustingly under his sweet whisper.” The latter happened to Oblomov. Imagination was his favorite companion in life; only in his dreams did he embody the rich, deeply buried abilities of his “golden” soul.

Stolz did not give free rein to his imagination and was afraid of any dream; it “had no place in his soul”; he rejected everything that “was not subject to the analysis of experience, practical truth,” or accepted it behind“a fact to which experience has not yet reached.” Andrei Ivanovich persistently “went towards his goal,” he valued such persistence above all else: “... it was a sign of character in his eyes.” He only retreated “from the task when a wall appeared on his way or an impassable abyss opened up.” He soberly assessed his strength and walked away, not paying attention to the opinions of others.

Oblomov was afraid of any difficulties; he was too lazy to make even the slightest effort to solve not the great, but the most pressing problems. He found solace in his favorite “conciliatory and soothing” words “maybe”, “maybe” and “somehow” and protected himself from misfortunes with them. He was ready to shift the matter to anyone, without caring about its outcome or the integrity of the chosen person (this is how he trusted the scammers who robbed his estate). Like a pure, naive child, Ilya Ilyich did not allow even the thought of the possibility of deception; elementary prudence, not to mention practicality, was completely absent from Oblomov’s nature.

Ilya Ilyich’s attitude to work has already been discussed. He, like his parents, avoided work in every possible way, which in his mind was synonymous with boredom, and all the efforts of Stolz, for whom “work is the image, content, element and goal of life,” to motivate Ilya Ilyich to some kind of activity were in vain, the matter did not progress beyond words. Figuratively speaking, the cart stood on square wheels. She needed constant pushes of considerable force to move from her place. Stolz quickly got tired (“you fiddle around like a drunkard”), this activity also disappointed Olga Ilyinskaya, through her love for whom many sides of the characters of Oblomov and Stolz are revealed.

In introducing Ilya Ilyich to Olga, Stolz wanted to “introduce into Oblomov’s sleepy life the presence of a young, pretty, intelligent, lively and partly mocking woman,” who could awaken Ilya to life and illuminate his dull existence. But Stolz “did not foresee that he would bring fireworks, Olga and Oblomov - even more so.”

Love for Olga changed Ilya Ilyich. At Olga's request, he gave up many of his habits: he did not lie on the couch, did not overeat, and traveled from the dacha to the city to carry out her instructions. But finally enter into new life I couldn't. “To go forward means suddenly throwing off a wide robe not only from your shoulders, but from your soul, from your mind; together with the dust and cobwebs from the walls, sweep the cobwebs out of your eyes and see clearly!” And Oblomov was afraid of storms and changes, he absorbed the fear of the new with his mother’s milk, compared to. which, however, went ahead (Ilya Ilyich had already rejected “the only use of capital is to keep it in a chest,” realizing that “the duty of every citizen is to maintain the general well-being through honest work”), but he achieved little, given his abilities.

He was tired of Olga’s restless, active nature, and therefore Oblomov dreamed that she would calm down and quietly, sleepily vegetate with him, “crawling from one day to another.” Realizing that Olga will never agree to this, Ilya decides to break up with her. For Oblomov, the break with Olga meant a return to previous habits, the final spiritual decline. In his life with Pshenitsa, Ilya Ilyich found a pale reflection of his dreams and “decided that the ideal of his life had come true, although without poetry...”.

Having made a lot of efforts to awaken Oblomov’s craving for activity, Olga soon becomes convinced, as Dobrolyubov puts it, “of his decisive worthlessness,” that is, of his inability for spiritual transformation, and abandons him.

Having gone through love and disappointment, Olga began to take her feelings more seriously; she grew so morally that Stolz did not recognize her when he met a year later, and suffered for a long time, trying to unravel the reason for the dramatic changes in Olga.

The novel "Oblomov" is one of the iconic works of the 19th century, covering many social and philosophical topics. An important role in disclosure ideological meaning the work is played by the analysis of the relationship in the book of the two main male characters. In the novel “Oblomov,” the characterization of Oblomov and Stolz reflects their completely different natures, contrasted by the author.
According to the plot of the work, the heroes are best friends from an early age, if possible, helping each other even in adulthood: Stolz to Oblomov - with a solution to many of his pressing problems, and Ilya Ilyich to Andrei Ivanovich - with pleasant conversations that allow Stolz to return peace of mind.

Portrait characteristics of heroes

A comparative description of Oblomov and Stolz in Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov” is given by the author himself and is most noteworthy when comparing them portrait characteristics, as well as characters. Ilya Ilyich is a soft, quiet, kind, dreamy, reflective fellow who makes any decision at the behest of his heart, even if his mind leads the hero to the opposite conclusion. The appearance of the introverted Oblomov fully corresponds to his character - his movements are soft, lazy, rounded, and his image is characterized by excessive effeminacy, not typical for a man.

Stolz, both internally and externally, is completely different from Oblomov. The main thing in Andrei Ivanovich’s life is the rational grain; in all matters he relies only on reason, while the dictates of the heart, intuition and the sphere of feelings for the hero not only represent something secondary, but are also inaccessible and incomprehensible to his rational thoughts. Unlike Oblomov, “flabby beyond his years,” Stolz seems to consist of “bones, muscles and nerves.” His life is a rapid race forward, the important attributes of which are constant personal development and continuous work. The images of Oblomov and Stolz seem to be a mirror image of each other: the active, extroverted, successful in society and in his career, Stolz is contrasted with the lazy, apathetic Oblomov, who does not want to communicate with anyone, much less go to work again.

Differences in the upbringing of heroes

When comparing Ilya Oblomov and Andrei Stolts, as well as for a better understanding of the images of the heroes, it is important to briefly describe the atmosphere in which each of the characters grew up. Despite the “dragging” environment that seemed to cover Oblomovka with a veil of half-asleep and laziness, little Ilya was a cheerful, active and curious child, which at first was very similar to Stolz. He wanted to learn as much as possible about the world around him, but the excessive care of his parents, his “greenhouse” upbringing, the instillation of outdated, obsolete and aimed at the ideals of the past, made the child a worthy successor to the traditions of “Oblomovism”, a bearer of the “Oblomovism” worldview - lazy, introverted, living in his own illusory world.

However, Stolz also did not grow up the way he could have grown up. At first glance, the combination in his upbringing of the strict approach of his German father and the tenderness of his mother, a noblewoman of Russian origin, would have allowed Andrei to become a harmonious, comprehensively developed personality. Nevertheless, as the author points out, Stolz grew up “like a cactus accustomed to drought.” The young man lacked love, warmth and gentleness, since he was mainly raised by his father, who did not believe that sensitivity should be instilled in a man. However, until the end of his life, Stolz’s Russian roots sought this spiritual warmth, finding it in Oblomov, and then in the idea of ​​​​Oblomovka, which he denied.

Education and career of heroes

The contradictory characters of Stolz and Oblomov are already evident in teenage years, when Andrei Ivanovich, trying to learn as much as possible about the world around him, tried to instill in Ilya Ilyich a love of books, to light a flame in him that would make him strive forward. And Stoltz succeeded, but for a very short time - as soon as Oblomov was left alone, the book became less important for him than, for example, a dream. Somehow, rather for his parents, Ilya Ilyich graduated from school and then university, where he was absolutely not interested, since the hero did not understand how mathematics and other sciences could be useful to him in life. Even a single failure in the service became the end of his career for him - it was too difficult for the sensitive, soft Oblomov to adapt to the strict rules of the capital's world, far from the norms of life in Oblomovka.

For Stolz, with his rational, active view of the world, it is much easier to move forward career ladder, because any failure was more like another incentive for him than a defeat. Andrei Ivanovich's continuous activity, high efficiency, and ability to please others made him useful person in any workplace and a pleasant guest in any society, and all thanks to the determination laid down by his father and the continuous thirst for knowledge, which in Stolz his parents developed in childhood.

Characteristics of Oblomov and Stolz as carriers of two opposite principles

IN critical literature when comparing Oblomov and Stolz, it is widely believed that the characters represent two opposites, two types of “extra” heroes who cannot be found in their “pure” form in real life, even despite the fact that “Oblomov” is a realistic novel, and, therefore, the images described should be typical images. However, when analyzing the upbringing and development of each of the characters, the reasons for Oblomov’s apathy, laziness and daydreaming become clear, as well as excessive dryness, rationality, and even similarities with a certain Stolz mechanism.

A comparison of Stolz and Oblomov makes it possible to understand that both heroes are not only typical personalities for their time, but are also images that are tendentious for any time. Oblomov is a typical son of rich parents, raised in an atmosphere of love and intense care, protected by his family from the need to work, decide something and actively act, because there will always be “Zakhar” who will do everything for him. Stolz, on the other hand, is a person who, from an early age, is taught the need to work and labor, while being deprived of love and care, which leads to a certain internal callousness of such a person, to a misunderstanding of the nature of feelings and emotional deprivation.

Work test

1 of 25

Presentation on the topic: Stolz and Oblomov

Slide no. 1

Slide description:

Slide no. 2

Slide description:

Slide no. 3

Slide description:

Main questions: - Why didn’t the author depict Oblomov’s miraculous transformation? - How can you generally help a person achieve harmony with life, learn not to hide, but to reveal to the world all his intellectual and spiritual wealth? What needs to be done to help a person overcome apathy and return to a full life? - What did Stolz intend to do in the name of saving his friend? What was his conclusion? - Why such noble spiritual impulses of Stolz did not lead to the expected result.

Slide no. 4

Slide description:

Was the author right in believing that it was a person like Stolz who was capable of saving Oblomov? - Could a person like Stolz awaken Oblomov’s soul? - What traits did the author endow with Andrei Stolts? Can we consider that the image of Stolz is strictly opposed to the image of Oblomov? Compare the author’s description of the lifestyles of Oblomov and Stolz. 1. In what ways are Oblomov and Stolz opposed to each other? 2. What brings Oblomov and Stolz together?

Slide no. 5

Slide description:

“Oblomov, a nobleman by birth, a collegiate secretary by rank, has been living in St. Petersburg for twelve years without a break” (1, V). “Ilya Ilyich’s lying down was neither a necessity, like that of a sick person or like a person who wants to sleep, nor an accident, like that of someone who is tired, nor a pleasure, like that of a lazy person: it was his normal state” (1.1 ). “Stolz is the same age as Oblomov: and he is already over thirty years old... He is constantly on the move...” (2, II) “Stolz was only half German, according to his father; his mother was Russian; he professed the Orthodox faith; his natural speech was Russian...” (2.1) “He walked firmly, cheerfully; lived according to a budget, trying to spend every day, like every ruble, with every minute, never dozing control of the time spent, labor, strength of soul and heart. It seems that he controlled both sorrows and joys by the movement of his hands, the steps of his feet, or how he dealt with bad and good weather” (2, II).

Slide no. 6

Slide description:

“He kept getting ready and preparing to start life, he kept drawing a pattern of his future in his mind; but with every year that flashed over his head, he had to change and discard something in this pattern. Life in his eyes was divided into two halves: one consisted of work and boredom - these were synonyms for him; the other - from peace and peaceful fun” (1, V). “And he himself kept walking and walking stubbornly along the chosen road. We didn’t see him thinking about anything painfully and painfully; apparently, he was not consumed by the remorse of a weary heart; He was not sick in soul, he never got lost in complex, difficult or new circumstances, but approached them as if he were former acquaintances, as if he were living a second time, passing through familiar places” (2, II). 1. Oblomov has been living in one city for more than 12 years, and his main occupation is lying down; Stolz is “constantly on the move.” Oblomov was still just getting ready and preparing to start life, Stolz “kept walking and walking stubbornly along his chosen path.” Oblomov was just creating a picture in his imagination future life; Stolz did everything thoughtfully and confidently, “as if he were living a second time.” 2. Oblomov and Stolz are peers and belong to the same social class.

Slide no. 7

Slide description:

Oblomov and Stolz: relationships with parents - Compare the nature of the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz with their parents. 1. In what ways are Oblomov and Stolz opposed to each other? (1, IX, 1, IX, 2,1) 2. What brings Oblomov and Stolz together? 1. Oblomov knew almost no male education; Stolz's father, on the contrary, sought to make a real man out of his son; he was a supporter of harsh methods of education and did not allow his wife to interfere with his communication with Andrei with pity and excessive care. 2. Both Oblomov and Stolz remember their mothers with tenderness, unable to hold back their tears. Their mothers - an example of tenderness and caring - treasured their sons, sought to protect them from danger, and could not stop looking at their children.

Slide no. 8

Slide description:

Oblomov and Stolz: attitude to the teaching - Compare information about the attitude to the teaching of Oblomov and Stolz. How are Oblomov and Stolz opposed to each other? (1, VI;2,1) 2. What brings Oblomov and Stolz together? 1. Oblomov studied against his will, not understanding why he was given this punishment and why he needed this knowledge in life; the parents sought to protect their son from difficult teaching. Stolz's education was supervised by his father, who gave him important assignments and asked him how to behave as an adult. Stolz was an excellent student. And soon he began teaching himself. 2. Both Oblomov and Stolz were created the necessary conditions for the study. They both got a good education, and long years studied together.

Slide no. 9

Slide description:

Oblomov and Stolz: attitude to service and to society. -Compare information about the attitude of Oblomov and Stolz to service and role in society. 1. In what ways are Oblomov and Stolz opposed to each other? (1, V; 2, II) 2. What brings Oblomov and Stolz together? 1. Oblomov was alien to the lifestyle that the service required of him, as well as the vanity and noise social life; he had successfully isolated himself from them. Stolz felt confident both in the service and in society, but never attached much importance to it. There are no bummers in the world; Stolz, despite his busy schedule, manages to appear in secular society. 2. Neither Oblomov nor Stolz believed that the service or secular society have special significance in their lives. Both Oblomov and Stolz are retired.

Slide no. 10

Slide description:

Oblomov and Stolz: understanding of love - Compare the nature of the experiences of lovers Oblomov and Stolz - How are Oblomov and Stolz opposed to each other? (2, X; ,XI; 3, VI; 4,IV; 4, VII). 1. For Oblomov, love is a shock, an illness, it causes him mental and physical suffering. For Stolz, love is a labor of mind and soul. 2.Both Oblomov and Stolz are gifted with the ability to love deeply, sincerely.

Slide no. 11

Slide description:

Conclusion. The author characterizes Stolz as a bright, attractive personality; If Oblomov is lazy, inactive, good-natured, good-natured, sensitive, capable of emotional impulse, indecisive, then Stolz is active, active, kind, benevolent, focused on his goal, immersed in thought, prudent, calculating, and quickly makes decisions. The images of Oblomov and Stolz are contrasted both in terms of upbringing, and in relation to teaching, and in the perception of love... However, it cannot be said that the basis for the comparison of these images is a strict opposition. The author presented the reader with two bright personalities, inner world which are not limited to mutually exclusive characteristics. He draws the reader's attention to the fact that these heroes are brought together by their deep affection for their mother, memories of childhood and youth, and the ability to deeply and sincerely love. It is obvious that Stolz is exactly the person who could awaken Oblomov’s soul.

Slide no. 12

Slide description:

Maybe Oblomov was afraid to trust Stolz? - What kind of relationship connected Oblomov and Stolz? Write down the words and phrases of the text with which the author characterizes the relationship between Oblomov and Stolz. (I,III; 2,II) Oblomov and Stolz were connected not only by common pages of biography. They valued each other, were always glad to meet, knew how to appreciate best qualities and be tolerant of each other's weaknesses. Their relationship is one of deep emotional affection, sincere heartfelt feelings. Oblomov and Stolz needed each other and were grateful to fate for sending them each other. Oblomov trusted Stolz, believed that he could help him, and expected help from him.

Slide no. 13

Slide description:

Maybe Stolz made a mistake in choosing the means to save his friend? - Did Stolz choose the right means to realize his plan? Stolz, it would seem, calculated everything correctly. Love is a feeling that causes the most powerful shocks. If there are still living feelings in a person’s soul, love will not allow them to doze. Stolz was sure that Olga would charm Oblomov. - Were Stolz’s expectations met? Oblomov and Olga: awakening of love

A comparative description of the image of Oblomov and Stolz will help the reader figure out whether it is capable of changing a person for the better.

Childhood and education

Andrey Ivanovich Stolts was a smart boy. He absorbed knowledge like a sponge. His father raised him in strictness. Mother didn't encourage labor education" When the father sent his son to university, he did not take him to the city. I said goodbye at the gate without unnecessary emotions, put on his cap, and pushed him so hard that he knocked him off his feet.”

Appearance

Andrey he is thin, has no cheeks at all, and has dark skin. “It was made of bones, nerves and muscles, and resembled an English horse.” His face had expressive green eyes. It exudes masculinity and health.

Aspirations and wealth

Stolz“I served, after resigning, I took up own affairs and made a house and money. He's involved in some company that ships goods overseas." Does not make mistakes in work. Achieved respect in society and material goods, thanks to our own efforts. “He is constantly on the move: if society needs to send an agent to England or Belgium, they send him. Should be created new project or disassemble new idea- Stolz is chosen.”

Love for a woman

Ilya always tactful in dealing with women. He loved Olga Ilyinskaya, but could not overcome his laziness and reluctance to change. I was afraid of the ordinariness of marriage. He caused his beloved a lot of trouble; she often cried because of his caustic speeches. He married the widow Pshenitsyna, from whom he rented a room. She demanded absolutely nothing from him. Such relationships suited Oblomov.

Attitude to life

Ilya Oblomov calls himself an “old caftan.” Sometimes he voices thoughts that he would lie down and fall asleep forever. Likes to dream. His imagination often paints imaginary pictures. The images of the future wife and children are especially clearly highlighted.

I.A. Goncharov in his novel touches upon very current topic the confrontation between work and laziness, which for centuries remains the most discussed and debatable. Nowadays, this topic is very problematic, since in our modern society Technology progresses and people stop working, laziness develops into the meaning of life.

The heroes of the novel Oblomov and Stolz are friends with early childhood. Their acquaintance occurs while studying in the house of Stolz’s father, who taught the basics of the most important sciences.

Ilya Oblomov comes from a noble family; from early childhood, little Ilya is pampered and cherished. Parents and nannies forbid him to show any independent activity. Ilyusha, seeing this attitude toward himself, immediately realized that he could do nothing, since other people would do it all for him. His education took place in Stolz's house; he did not particularly want to study and his parents indulged him in this. This is how Oblomov’s entire youth passed. Adult life was no different from childhood and adolescence; Oblomov continues to lead a calm and lazy lifestyle. His passivity and idleness are reflected in Everyday life. He woke up at lunchtime, slowly climbed out of bed, lazily ate his food and was not interested in any business. Laziness, ingrained from childhood, did not give Oblomov the slightest chance to strive for science, to understand the world around him. Despite all this, his imagination was very well developed, since due to idleness Oblomov’s imaginary world was very rich. Oblomov was also a very trusting person, and the main person Ilya trusted was Andrei Stolts. Stolz is the complete antipode of Oblomov. From early childhood, Andrei was accustomed to order and to work. His parents raised him strictly but fairly. His father, a German by nationality, instilled in Andrei precision, hard work and punctuality. WITH youth Andrei carried out various assignments for his father, strengthening his character. He studied with Ilya, from his father, unlike Oblomov, Andrei was good at science, and he studied them with curiosity. Stolz made the transition from childhood to adulthood very early, so Andrei was a very active person. He strived for constant replenishment of knowledge, because “learning is light, and ignorance is darkness. He had a sober and practical view of current events, he never did anything hastily without thinking this issue, which he needed to solve. Prudence and punctuality, ingrained in childhood, have found a place in adult life Stolz. Mobility and energy contributed to him in any endeavors. Considering life positions Oblomov and Stolz in relation to Olga Ilyinskaya, the following conclusions can be drawn: Oblomov, living in his world - “Oblomovshchina,” was a romantic who took a long time to decide on concrete steps in real life. Their acquaintance with Olga Ilyinskaya occurs thanks to Stolz. Their relationship was not strong from the very beginning. Olga, knowing a lot about Oblomov from Stolz’s stories, tries to bring Oblomov back to life through the means of her love, but she fails to do this and “Oblomovism” wins. The relationship between Olga and Andrey develops naturally throughout life, “she laughs at his jokes, and he listens to her singing with pleasure.” They had a lot in common, but the most important thing was that they strived for life, this contributed to their rapprochement and the formation of a family.

Be that as it may, the fates of both heroes turn out relatively well. Stolz finds his happiness with Olga, and Oblomov finds his Oblomovka in the house on Vyborg side and lives out his life there with the woman he always dreamed of. This denouement shows that the author’s position towards both of his heroes is positive.

After reading the novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov”, I am inclined to think that the events described in this work may be applicable to our time, since in modern society there are many people like Stolz and Oblomov. And their confrontation will be eternal.