Who is to blame and what should the author of the work do? "who is guilty?" and “what to do?”: the psychological subtext of Russian questions - male: men and women

It happens that you seem to know a person, but you never got beyond a greeting and a few words about the weather.

How wonderful, smart and intelligent he seemed then! Until you began to contact him regularly and closely. Very soon you will learn many facts about him and features of his character that you didn’t even suspect. It may turn out that this amazing person It never occurred to him to wash his mug after himself, or he argues about everything for no reason or reason. And who knows what else is unattractive in it? You, as a tactful person, will naturally not point out his flaws. However, you won’t stop noticing. Unfulfilled irritation tends to accumulate, and each subsequent incident will cause more and more internal dissatisfaction. If you leave everything as it is, then sooner or later the valve will break and a conflict will occur. Moreover, everything often happens asymmetrically: the person didn’t seem to say anything like that, but for someone it was Last straw. As a result, before us are two mortally offended, but equally confident in own rightness people: one got angry at him out of the blue, and the second is already fed up with everything, he doesn’t have any strength to endure.

This issue has received a lot of attention in practical psychology. And it’s not surprising: we live in a society and lion's share Our problems concern precisely the relationship with its other representatives. Let's try to look at this classic situation from different angles.

Let's say I was unfairly offended. Let us immediately recall the statement that in any conflict both sides are to blame. Some more, some less, but always both. Even if in this specific case my action, which caused such an inadequate reaction, looks quite innocent, then it is likely that the reason is not so much in it, but in the totality of all my previous words and actions. In other words, in my behavior in general. This very unpleasant thought, as a rule, is rejected by us almost at the subconscious level. It's the same as admitting that you're imperfect. No, I, of course, consider myself a great sinner, but I just think, and not feel. Theoretically, in general, I think so. Often calling oneself a sinner is perceived more as part of church etiquette: everyone is a sinner - and I am a sinner. When it comes down to it and I need to admit that I was wrong in a conflict, then I immediately become an innocent victim, that is, an absolutely sinless person.

It may happen that I still admit part of my guilt in this situation, but... And then just have time to write it down. I may be wrong (of course, just a little), but I could have remained silent or gotten into the position. I have a lot of excuses for myself and none for others. It turns out that I can, but they can’t. As my aunt says: “What kind of people are they? You’ll spit in the face, they’ll rush to fight...” When I create discomfort for those around me with my actions, it’s just awkward, but when they do it to me, it’s already terribly unfair and in general terms normal people can they do this?!

Let's fast forward to the other side of the conflict. There is a person who methodically and systematically brings us to white heat. Of course, we can assume that he does this intentionally, but such cases are still extremely rare in nature. As a rule, it is more of an impatience with each other's weaknesses. Again, the form of our current relationship is the result of our joint work, so to speak. In addition, a person feels when they feel hostility towards him, and can even begin to answer us in kind on an instinctive level.

For some reason, we often think that a person should guess for himself that he is doing something wrong. Because of this, out of the blue you can pile up big problem. Therefore, it is very important to still talk about your dissatisfaction. Of course, it’s better to do this without any complaints, and ideally, ask for it. A request is always more constructive than a demand. When we were students, we shared an apartment with a classmate. She had a way of putting a cup of tea leaves in the sink. I don’t know why, but it really pissed me off. I hinted in every possible way, pointedly put it back, pointedly shook out the tea leaves, etc., etc. But the cup still invariably ended up in the sink. It felt like she was doing it to spite me. I once said, “Don’t ask why, just don’t ever do that again. It’s annoying - I have no strength.” She replied: "Okay." And the episode with the cup never happened again! It turned out that she did not notice my “obvious” hints. This was normal for her, and she attributed all my grumblings and sidelong glances to anything but this ill-fated cup.

In any conflict or just simmering situation, we are used to analyzing in detail and carefully the character traits and details of the actions of our offender. We consult and plan what he needs to change in himself, in his attitude towards life and how we can help him with this. But we almost never think about what we could change about ourselves. For example, how can you behave differently in similar situations to make it easier for him to communicate with me? Even if it was wrong for him to do this, what can I do to prevent this from happening again? These thoughts don’t even come to mind because deep down we are sure that we are doing everything right. No matter what we say or admit. Besides, it’s easy to change others, but it’s hard and pathetic to change yourself.

The Lord says: “You have heard what was said to the ancients: do not kill; whoever kills will be subject to judgment. But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother without cause will be subject to judgment” (Matthew 5:21, 22). Even in the above quotation from the Gospel, you just want to cling to the word “in vain”: they say, I’m not doing it just like that, but on purpose! But the interpreters upset us: everything that concerns you personally is vain anger. For example, St. John Chrysostom writes: “When is the right time for anger? Then, when we do not avenge ourselves, but curb the daring, and turn the careless to the straight path. And when is anger inappropriate? Then, when we get angry to avenge ourselves... Just as this last anger is unnecessary, so the first is necessary and useful. But many do the opposite. They become furious when they themselves are offended, but remain cold and faint-hearted when they see how another is being offended. Both are contrary to the laws of the Gospel.” And blzh. Hieronymus of Stridonsky notes that in many codes the word “in vain” is absent, therefore in the interpretation of this place it does not carry any special semantic load.

So why is anger equated with murder? For example, there is someone who does not give us life, terribly irritates us and drives us crazy. We don’t want to make peace with him, because we consider him, as we have already found out, to be one-sidedly guilty. He is also unlikely to make contact, either for the same reason, or without noticing that we have a nervous tic from him. Somewhere in the depths of our souls, at this moment we want him to stop talking like that, stop doing that, and stop interfering with us altogether. My eyes wouldn't have seen him. Thus, it turns out that I want this person not to be in my life. Now, if he were different or changed so that I could feel good with him, I might still think about it. But as he is now, I don’t want him, I don’t need him. If it weren’t for this recurring situation, if it weren’t for this person, then how much easier life would be for me. If it weren’t for him... It turns out that actual murder is just taking this desire to its logical conclusion.

All New Testament permeated with love, forgiveness and humility. This means that when we are angry with our neighbor, we are fundamentally at odds with the teachings of Christ. “You, Lord, of course, created and said a lot of beautiful things, but please go away, I with my wounded ego have no time for You now.” It sounds crazy, of course, but that’s essentially what happens.

One of the Optina elders wrote that there is an opinion according to which the Lord grieved so much in the Garden of Gethsemane also because he knew how many people would not want to take advantage of His sacrifice on the cross. Isn’t it us when we cannot step over our pride and take the first step towards reconciliation? We also ask Him every day to forgive us our debts, just as we forgive our debtors... If we ask Him for the same attitude towards ourselves that we have towards everyone from whom we have suffered at least some kind of trouble, then, I’m afraid, dear brothers and sisters, most of us are in big trouble.

Ekaterina Vykhovanets

ACCORDING TO THE ORTHODOX PRESS

What did you think of when you read the title of this article? Of course it's two rhetorical question, by which you can mean anything, but today I want to look at them in context. That is, the questions will sound like this:

Who is to blame for our financial problems?
What should I do to fix this?

I'll start with those whom people themselves consider to be the culprits of their financial troubles. There are 5 such subjects. If you ask a person in a distressed or simply unstable financial situation who is to blame, most likely his answer will be in one way or another connected with one of the following 5 subjects:

State.
Banks.
Employer.
Businessmen.
Relatives (husband, wife, etc.).

Now let's look at all these subjects separately in the context they create, in the format of our article: who is to blame and what to do.

Who is guilty? State! The government contains only thieves and swindlers who think only about themselves! The state does not care about its citizens: it does not create new jobs, cuts old ones, pays low wages to public sector employees, low social benefits and pensions, which are not enough to live on, stifles business with taxes and inspections, does not control prices, creates conditions for corruption to flourish, in general, does everything to ensure that the bulk of the population.

What to do? Can we agree with this? Yes, that’s basically what happens. Is it possible to change this somehow? Unlikely, for systemic changes, in best case scenario, it will take years. Then what can be done? You need to change your attitude towards this, namely: stop relying on the state!

Waiting for the state to provide you with everything you need and solve your financial problems is obviously a dead-end option that will only worsen the situation. You need to think about what you (and not the state) can do to weaken the influence of these external unfavorable factors for your own financial well-being. For example:

You are paid a low salary - start;
If you don’t like low pensions, create your own;
High prices are scary - study wisely;
It’s difficult to run a business - sell it and start a business in another area, for example, the state has not reached there yet.

Who is guilty? Banks! Vampire bankers, we have holes in our pockets! They set crazy interest rates on loans, they drove you into credit bondage, they tortured you, and now it’s completely impossible to get out of debt. Or large loans (for example,) are not available to the average citizen, what to do if you have nowhere to live.

What to do? Is there such a problem? Yes, of course. Then what to do? Think before using banking services! First, think, analyze, study the terms of the loan, understand, adequately assess your ability to repay, and only then take it. Or better yet, don’t take it at all, especially when we're talking about O . Understand that living in debt will not solve your financial problems, but will only worsen them.

This widespread development of consumer lending is one of characteristic features, in which we all live, and here it is presented in the most unflattering form. Massive influence on people encourages them to live beyond their means, to consume a lot of unnecessary expensive goods and services in order to appear better, to create. If you don’t succumb to this influence and give up everything you can do without, and start living within your means, then you won’t need any loans, and there will be much more free financial resources that can be accumulated to make large purchases.

There is no need to use those banking services that are easily accessible and that are imposed on you. Use only those that are really beneficial for you.

Who is guilty? Employer! The employer does not want to raise my salary, pays me little, and at the same time forces me to work overtime for nothing, perform duties that are not my own, go to work on my days off, and does not allow me to go on vacation. Or maybe he fired me altogether, or has already fired me, leaving me without income, not thinking that I need to support my family and feed my children.

What to do? In conditions of a significant predominance of demand for work over its supply, this situation is quite logical: there are fewer employers, and they will dictate their “rules of the game” as long as employees allow it. However, there is no need to perceive work as something permanent and unshakable. Any person is given a very wide choice of both direct work and work.

Therefore, if you are not satisfied with something about your employer, change him to another. If you're not happy with your job at all, start freelancing private practice, business, network marketing, investing... There are a lot of options for generating income, and most of them, in fact, are more promising than traditional employment.

Who is guilty? Businessmen! They constantly raise already exorbitant prices, it’s not enough for them, they won’t calm down! Even the most vital goods and services have become unavailable (renting housing, undergoing treatment, studying at a university, etc.). Salaries and pensions are completely insufficient to pay for the insatiable appetites of businessmen.

What to do? Because influence this external factor There is no way you can do it, all you have to do is adapt to the existing conditions. Namely: if you don’t have enough money, think:

Both are completely possible if you do it. By the way, businessmen also constantly think about this, which is why prices are rising. So think about it too.

Who is guilty? Husband wife)! Or other relatives. For example, a husband earns little and his wife spends a lot, or it’s the other way around, or one spouse doesn’t spend money on what the other wants, there are very different cases. Spouses blame each other for financial problems. Problems begin in the family, which leads to the deterioration of relationships or even the breakup of the family.

What to do? Stop blaming other people for your problems and think about what you personally can do to normalize the situation. Let's say if the other person doesn't change. For example, go to and manage your own own earnings, providing the same opportunity to your spouse. Or change the roles of breadwinner and manager family budget(let’s say whoever earns money is the one who manages it). This will be fair and there will be no reason for disagreement. And most importantly, it’s yours personally. financial position will depend on you personally, and not on someone else, which is more correct and reliable.

Or maybe it’s worth ending a relationship with a person if it is tied solely to money. Perhaps there is someone next to you who only needs money from you and nothing more. Without this money, such people will drop out on their own.

In general, I have already written a whole series of articles on the topic of the connection between relationships and money. For example, here:

Check them out, there are a lot of interesting and useful things on this issue.

So, I looked at the most common answers to the question “who is to blame and what to do?”, which people most often name. And in conclusion, I want to add one option from myself, which, in my opinion, is key, but which few people think about.

Who is guilty? You yourself, your financial illiteracy! You are the one who hasn’t thought about how to increase income and optimize spending. It was you who took out loans without understanding them, without thinking about the consequences. It was you who got a low-paying job and worked at it for the sake of “stability” (?). It was you who rejected alternative and more promising ways of earning money. It was you who spent money on expensive entertainment that you could have done without. It was you who did not create monetary funds: but lived one day at a time, spent, roughly speaking, “eat up” everything that you earned. In general, you did a lot of things, which led to the problems that you now have. All these are signs (be sure to read the article at this link).

What to do? Change this situation. Better late than never! Admit your mistakes and start correcting them. Start increasing your income, which will certainly help improve your financial situation.

AND a good helper in this matter, the site you are reading now may help you. A colossal amount has already been collected here useful materials, the study and application of which will increase your financial literacy and teach you to manage your personal finances differently and more competently.

Therefore, stay with us, study, ask questions in the comments, communicate on the forum where you can share experiences and useful information with other readers, subscribe to updates on social networks.

The higher your level financial literacy– the less often you will ask yourself the questions “who is to blame and what to do?”, since the situation will improve and the answers will already be known to you.

I wish you success, and I am always ready to help with advice (note, completely free of charge). See you again on the pages of the site!

It happens that you seem to know a person, but you never got beyond a greeting and a few words about the weather.

How wonderful, smart and intelligent he seemed then! Until you began to contact him regularly and closely. Very soon you will learn many facts about him and features of his character that you didn’t even suspect. It may turn out that this amazing person has never thought to wash his mug after himself, or he argues about everything for no reason or reason. And who knows what else is unattractive in it? You, as a tactful person, will naturally not point out his flaws. However, you won’t stop noticing. Unfulfilled irritation tends to accumulate, and each subsequent incident will cause more and more internal dissatisfaction. If you leave everything as it is, then sooner or later the valve will break and a conflict will occur. Moreover, everything often happens asymmetrically: the person didn’t seem to say anything, but for some it was the last straw. As a result, we are faced with two mortally offended people, but equally confident in their own rightness: one got angry at them out of the blue, and the second is already fed up with everything, he does not have any strength to endure.

This issue has received a lot of attention in practical psychology. And it’s not surprising: we live in a society and the lion’s share of our problems relate to relationships with other members of it. Let's try to look at this classic situation from different angles.

Let's say I was unfairly offended. Let us immediately recall the statement that in any conflict both sides are to blame. Some more, some less, but always both. Even if in this particular case my action, which caused such an inadequate reaction, seems quite innocent, it is likely that the reason is not so much in it, but in the totality of all my previous words and actions. In other words, in my behavior in general. This very unpleasant thought, as a rule, is rejected by us almost at the subconscious level. It's the same as admitting that you're imperfect. No, I, of course, consider myself a great sinner, but I just think, and not feel. Theoretically, in general, I think so. Often calling oneself a sinner is perceived more as part of church etiquette: everyone is a sinner - and I am a sinner. When it comes down to it and I need to admit that I was wrong in a conflict, then I immediately become an innocent victim, that is, an absolutely sinless person.

It may happen that I still admit part of my guilt in this situation, but... And then just have time to write it down. I may be wrong (of course, just a little), but I could have remained silent or gotten into the position. I have a lot of excuses for myself and none for others. It turns out that I can, but they can’t. As my aunt says: “What kind of people are they? They spit in the face, they rush to fight...” When I create discomfort for those around me with my actions, it’s simply inconvenient, but when they do it to me, it’s already terribly unfair and how can seemingly normal people do this?!

Let's fast forward to the other side of the conflict. There is a person who methodically and systematically drives us to white heat. Of course, we can assume that he does this intentionally, but such cases are still extremely rare in nature. As a rule, it is more of an impatience with each other's weaknesses. Again, the form of our current relationship is the result of our joint work, so to speak. In addition, a person feels when they feel hostility towards him, and can even begin to answer us in kind on an instinctive level.

For some reason, we often think that a person should guess for himself that he is doing something wrong. Because of this, a big problem can be piled up out of the blue. Therefore, it is very important to still talk about your dissatisfaction. Of course, it’s better to do this without any complaints, and ideally, ask for it. A request is always more constructive than a demand. When we were students, we shared an apartment with a classmate. She had a way of putting a cup of tea leaves in the sink. I don’t know why, but it really pissed me off. I hinted in every possible way, pointedly put it back, pointedly shook out the tea leaves, etc., etc. But the cup still invariably ended up in the sink. It felt like she was doing it to spite me. I once said, “Don’t ask why, just don’t ever do that again. It’s annoying - I have no strength.” She replied: "Okay." And the episode with the cup never happened again! It turned out that she did not notice my “obvious” hints. This was normal for her, and she attributed all my grumblings and sidelong glances to anything but this ill-fated cup.

In any conflict or just simmering situation, we are used to analyzing in detail and carefully the character traits and details of the actions of our offender. We consult and plan what he needs to change in himself, in his attitude towards life and how we can help him with this. But we almost never think about what we could change about ourselves. For example, how can I behave differently in such situations to make it easier for him to communicate with me? Even if it was wrong for him to do this, what can I do to prevent this from happening again? These thoughts don’t even come to mind because deep down we are sure that we are doing everything right. No matter what we say or admit. Besides, it’s easy to change others, but it’s hard and pathetic to change yourself.

The entire New Testament is permeated with love, forgiveness and humility. This means that when we are angry with our neighbor, we are fundamentally at odds with the teachings of Christ. “You, Lord, of course, created and said a lot of beautiful things, but please go away, I with my wounded ego have no time for You now.” It sounds crazy, of course, but that’s essentially what happens.

One of the Optina elders wrote that there is an opinion according to which the Lord grieved so much in the Garden of Gethsemane also because he knew how many people would not want to take advantage of His sacrifice on the cross. Isn’t it us when we cannot step over our pride and take the first step towards reconciliation? We ourselves also ask Him every day to forgive us our debts, just as we forgive our debtors... If we ask Him for the same attitude towards ourselves as we have towards everyone from whom we have suffered at least some kind of trouble, then, I'm afraid, dear brothers and sisters, that most of us are in big trouble.

Ekaterina Vykhovanets

His novel “What to do?” the famous Russian writer Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky created during the period when he was imprisoned in one of the cells Peter and Paul Fortress. The novel was written from December 14, 1862 to April 4, 1863, that is, the work, which became a masterpiece of Russian literature, was created in just three and a half months. Already starting from January 1863 and until the author’s final stay in custody, he transferred the manuscript in parts to the commission that dealt with the writer’s case. Here the work was censored, which was approved. Soon the novel was published in the 3rd, 4th and 5th issues of the Sovremennik magazine for 1863. For such an oversight, censor Beketov lost his position. This was followed by bans on all three issues of the magazine. However, it was already too late. Chernyshevsky’s work was distributed throughout the country with the help of “samizdat”.

And only in 1905, during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, the ban was lifted. Already in 1906, the book “What is to be done?” published in a separate edition.

Who are the new heroes?

The reaction to Chernyshevsky's work was ambiguous. Readers, based on their opinions, were divided into two opposing camps. Some of them believed that the novel lacked artistry. The latter fully supported the author.

However, it is worth remembering that before Chernyshevsky, writers created images of “ extra people" A striking example of such heroes are Pechorin, Oblomov and Onegin, who, despite their differences, are similar in their “smart uselessness”. These people, “pygmies of deeds and titans of words,” were divided natures, suffering from a constant discord between will and consciousness, deed and thought. Besides this, their characteristic feature served as moral exhaustion.

This is not how Chernyshevsky imagines his heroes. He created images of “new people” who know what they need to desire and are also capable of realizing their own plans. Their the thought goes close to the case. Their consciousness and will are not at odds with each other. The heroes of Chernyshevsky’s novel “What to do?” are presented as bearers of new morality and creators of new interpersonal relationships. They deserve the author's main attention. It’s not for nothing that even a summary of the chapters “What to do?” allows us to see that by the end of the second of them the author “releases from the stage” such representatives of the old world - Marya Alekseevna, Storeshnikov, Serge, Julie and some others.

The main issue of the essay

Even a very brief summary of “What to do?” gives an idea of the issues that the author raises in his book. And they are as follows:

- The need for socio-political renewal of society, which is possible through a revolution. Due to censorship, Chernyshevsky did not expand on this topic in more detail. He gave it in the form of half-hints when describing the life of one of the main characters, Rakhmetov, as well as in the 6th chapter.

- Psychological and moral problems. Chernyshevsky claims that a person, using the power of his mind, is able to create in himself new, given by him moral qualities. At the same time, the author develops this process, describing it from the small, in the form of the fight against despotism in the family, to the most large-scale, which found expression in the revolution.

- Problems of family morality and women's emancipation. This topic the author reveals in Vera's first three dreams, in the history of her family, as well as in the relationships of young people and Lopukhov's imaginary suicide.

- Dreams of bright and have a wonderful life, which will occur with the creation of a socialist society in the future. Chernyshevsky illuminates this topic thanks to Vera Pavlovna’s fourth dream. The reader also sees here easier work, which became possible thanks to the development of technical means.

The main pathos of the novel is the propaganda of the idea of transforming the world through revolution, as well as its anticipation and preparation for this event the best minds. At the same time, the idea of active participation in upcoming events is expressed.

Which main goal Chernyshevsky set himself? He dreamed of developing and implementing the latest techniques, allowing for the revolutionary education of the masses. His work was supposed to be a kind of textbook, with the help of which every thinking person would begin to form a new worldview.

The entire content of the novel “What to do?” Chernyshevsky is divided into six chapters. Moreover, each of them, except the last one, is further divided into small chapters. In order to emphasize the special importance of the final events, the author speaks about them separately. For this purpose, the content of the novel “What to do?” Chernyshevsky included a one-page chapter entitled “Change of scenery”.

The beginning of the story

Let's look at the summary of Chernyshevsky's novel “What is to be done?” Its plot begins with a note found, which was left in one of the hotel rooms in St. Petersburg by a strange guest. This happened in 1823, on July 11. The note reports that soon its author will be heard on one of the bridges in St. Petersburg - Liteiny. At the same time, the man asked not to look for the guilty. The incident happened that same night. A man shot himself on Liteiny Bridge. A holey cap that belonged to him was fished out of the water.

Below is a summary of the novel “What to do?” introduces us to a young lady. On the morning when the event described above happened, she was at the dacha located on Kamenny Island. The lady sews while humming a bold and lively French song, which talks about working people, whose liberation will require a change of consciousness. This woman's name is Vera Pavlovna. At this moment, the maid brings the lady a letter, after reading which she begins to sob, covering her face with her hands. A young man entering the room makes attempts to calm her down. However, the woman is inconsolable. She pushes away young man. At the same time, she says: “His blood is on you! You're covered in blood! I am the only one to blame...”

What was said in the letter that Vera Pavlovna received? We can learn about this from the presented summary of “What to do?”. In his message, the writer indicated that he was leaving the stage.

Appearance of Lopukhov

What next do we learn from the summary of Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?” After the events described, there follows a story telling about Vera Pavlovna, her life, as well as the reasons that led to such a sad outcome.

The author says that his heroine was born in St. Petersburg. This is where she grew up. The lady's father, Pavel Konstantinovich Vozalsky, was the manager of the house. The mother was busy giving money as collateral. The main goal of Marya Alekseevna (Vera Pavlovna’s mother) was to have a profitable marriage for her daughter. And she made every effort to resolve this issue. The evil and narrow-minded Marya Alekseevna invites a music teacher to her daughter. Buys Vera beautiful clothes, goes to the theater with her. Soon to dark skin beautiful girl the owner's son, officer Storeshnikov, draws attention. The young man decides to seduce Vera.

Marya Alekseevna hopes to force Storeshnikov to marry her daughter. To do this, she demands that Vera show favor to the young man. However, the girl understands perfectly well true intentions her boyfriend and refuses attention in every possible way. Somehow she even manages to mislead her mother. She pretends to be favorable to the ladies' man. But sooner or later the deception will be revealed. This makes Vera Pavlovna's position in the house simply unbearable. However, everything was suddenly resolved, and in the most unexpected way.

Dmitry Sergeevich Lopukhov appeared in the house. This final year medical student was invited by Verochka’s parents to her brother Fedya as a teacher. At first, the young people treated each other very warily. However, then their communication began to flow in conversations about music and books, as well as about the fair direction of thoughts.

Time has passed. Vera and Dmitry felt sympathy for each other. Lopukhov learns about the girl’s plight and makes attempts to help her. He is looking for a position as a governess for Verochka. Such a job would allow the girl to live separately from her parents.

However, all Lopukhov's efforts were unsuccessful. He could not find owners who would agree to take in a girl who had run away from home. Then the young man in love takes another step. He leaves his studies and begins translating textbooks and giving private lessons. This allows him to start receiving sufficient funds. At the same time, Dmitry proposes to Vera.

First dream

Vera has her first dream. In it, she sees herself emerging from a dark and damp basement and meeting an amazing beauty who calls herself love for people. Verochka talks to her and promises to release girls from such basements who are locked in them, just as she was locked.

Family well-being

Young people live in rented apartment, and everything is going well for them. However, the landlady notices oddities in their relationship. Verochka and Dmitry call each other only “darling” and “darling”, sleep in separate rooms, entering them only after knocking, etc. All this surprises an outsider. Verochka tries to explain to the woman that this is a completely normal relationship between spouses. After all, this is the only way to avoid getting bored of each other.

The young wife runs the household, gives private lessons, and reads books. Soon she opens her own sewing workshop, in which the girls are self-employed and receive part of the income as co-owners.

Second dream

What else will we learn from the summary of Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?” As the plot progresses, the author introduces us to Vera Pavlovna’s second dream. In it she sees a field with ears of corn growing on it. There is also dirt here. Moreover, one of them is fantastic, and the second is real.

Real dirt means caring about what is most necessary in life. This is precisely what Marya Alekseevna was constantly burdened with. This is how you can grow ears of corn. Fantastic dirt represents concern for the unnecessary and superfluous. Ears of corn will never grow on such soil.

The emergence of a new hero

The author shows Kirsanov as strong-willed and courageous personality capable not only of decisive action, but also of subtle feelings. Alexander spends time with Vera when Dmitry is busy. He goes to the opera with his friend's wife. However, soon, without explaining any reasons, Kirsanov stops coming to the Lopukhovs, which greatly offends them. What appeared the real reason this? Kirsanov's falling in love with a friend's wife.

The young man reappeared in the house when Dmitry fell ill in order to cure him and help Vera with her care. And here the woman realizes that she is in love with Alexander, which is why she becomes completely confused.

Third dream

From the summary of the work “What to do?” we learn that Vera Pavlovna is having a third dream. In it, she reads the pages of her diary with the help of some unfamiliar woman. From it she learns that she feels only gratitude towards her husband. However, at the same time, Vera needs a tender and quiet feeling, which she does not have for Dmitry.

Solution

The situation in which three decent and smart people, at first glance seems insoluble. But Lopukhov finds a way out. He shoots himself on the Liteiny Bridge. On the day that Vera Pavlovna received this news, Rakhmetov came to her. This is an old acquaintance of Lopukhov and Kirsanov, who is called a “special person.”

Meeting Rakhmetov

In the summary of the novel “What to do” “ special person"Rakhmetov is presented by the author as a “higher nature”, which Kirsanov helped to awaken in his time by introducing him to necessary books. The young man comes from rich family. He sold his estate and distributed the proceeds to scholarship holders. Now Rakhmetov adheres to a harsh lifestyle. Part of what prompted him to do this was his reluctance to possess what he did not have. common man. In addition, Rakhmetov set as his goal the education own character. For example, to test his physical capabilities, he decides to sleep on nails. In addition, he does not drink wine and does not date women. In order to get closer to the people, Rakhmetov even walked with barge haulers along the Volga.

What else is said about this hero in Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?” Summary makes it clear that Rakhmetov’s whole life consists of sacraments that have a clearly revolutionary meaning. The young man has many things to do, but none of them are personal. He travels around Europe, but in three years he is going to Russia, where he will definitely need to be.

It was Rakhmetov who came to Vera Pavlovna after receiving a note from Lopukhov. After his persuasion, she calmed down and even became cheerful. Rakhmetov explains that Vera Pavlovna and Lopukhov had very different tempers. That is why the woman reached out to Kirsanov. Soon Vera Pavlovna left for Novgorod. There she married Kirsanov.

The dissimilarity between the characters of Verochka and Lopukhov was also mentioned in a letter that soon arrived from Berlin. In this message, some medical student, who supposedly knew Lopukhov well, conveyed Dmitry’s words that he began to feel much better after the separation of the spouses, since he had always strived for privacy. And this is precisely what the sociable Vera Pavlovna did not allow him to do.

Life of the Kirsanovs

What next does the novel “What to do?” tell its reader? Nikolai Chernyshevsky? A brief summary of the work allows us to understand that the love affairs of the young couple worked out well to everyone’s satisfaction. The Kirsanovs’ lifestyle is not much different from that of the Lopukhov family.

Alexander works a lot. As for Vera Pavlovna, she takes baths, eats cream and is already engaged in two sewing workshops. The house, as before, has neutral and common rooms. However, the woman notices that her new husband does not just allow her to lead the lifestyle she likes. He is interested in her affairs and is ready to help in any way. Hard time. In addition, her husband perfectly understands her desire to master some urgent activity and begins to help her in studying medicine.

Fourth dream

Having briefly become acquainted with Chernyshevsky’s novel “What is to be done?”, we move on to the continuation of the plot. It tells us about Vera Pavlovna's fourth dream, in which she sees amazing nature and pictures from the lives of women from different millennia.

First, the image of a slave appears before her. This woman obeys her master. After this, Vera sees the Athenians in a dream. They begin to worship the woman, but at the same time they do not recognize her as their equal. Next comes next image. This beautiful lady, for which the knight is ready to fight in the tournament. However, his love immediately passes after the lady becomes his wife. Then, instead of the goddess’s face, Vera Pavlovna sees her own. It is not distinguished by perfect features, but at the same time it is illuminated by the radiance of love. And here the woman who was in the first dream appears. She explains to Vera the meaning of equality and shows pictures of citizens future Russia. They all live in a house built of crystal, cast iron and aluminum. These people work in the morning and start having fun in the evening. The woman explains that this future must be loved and strived for.

Completion of the story

How does N. G. Chernyshevsky’s novel “What to do?” end? The author tells his reader that guests often come to the Kirsanovs’ house. The Beaumont family soon appears among them. When meeting Charles Beaumont, Kirsanov recognizes him as Lopukhov. The two families become so close to each other that they decide to continue living in the same house.