Scan barcode
paperkit's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
istarius's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
antiheroine's review against another edition
/Thematically, The Hero of Our Time is a socio-psychological character study. The uniqueness of this work is situated within its context, already past the romanticism and not yet realist, indebted to Byron and Pushkin and yet rejecting them; one foot here, the other there. The novel is a question - it poses no answers.
/Formally, it is uneven and underdeveloped, lacking in cohesion, yet achieves precisely what it aims to – a character study through multiple lenses. The shifting timeline allows Lermontov to manipulate focus from distant to close up, to yet again a different angle altogether. The format develops into an experimental montage that creates the protagonist. It is almost as if the plot is irrelevant, and the episodes exist purely to create an image of a character the author is interested in.
Curiously, the most ostensible unevenness is demonstrated through the use of language. Lermontov cannot separate himself as a poet from the narrative – his antihero, an emotionally coarse and unfeeling man describes the landscape lyrically.
/Contextually, Lermontov was much influenced by the liberal (i.e. post Decembrist uprising’s anti-tsarist and anti-serfdom) sentiment in his poetry, which would explain the depiction of aristocracy as rotten through. However, in alliance with many colonial novels, it portrays cultural differences and other nations in an inferior light – a surprising development, albeit not in the context of recurring fatalistic themes favoured by the author.
Pechorin’s situation is atypical – whether the intent here is to suggest that he is an anomaly in the provinces or war-torn regions, or an anomaly amongst high society in the cultural capital is unclear. For every romantic statement, he brings down the prosaic.
//
The protagonist, Pechorin is the 18th century emo boy. He is lonely, alienated and therefore universally relatable. He is also handsome, able, intelligent, and irresistible – an 18th-century bad boy, that is, the Byronic romantic hero. Yet for Pechorin, his entire effort and endeavours are wasted playing games, a narrative that subverts and shatters the nobility of the romantic persona. Kierkegaard’s aesthetics games in Either/Or spring to mind – published whole three years later. In both works, the main (anti)hero seduces a young girl – deviously he makes her fall in love with him and then leaves her, albeit for a different reason. For Kierkegaard’s hero, the epitome of aesthetic love had to be terminated before the banality of marriage tainted it. For Lermontov’s hero, the idea of fatalistic boredom terminates all endeavours.
Pechorin simultaneously presents a human being who genuinely suffers(from being misunderstood) from emotional immaturity, is infinitely at odds with society and himself and yet is capable of great generosity. There are many contradictions of character – he is capable of love, sacrifice, honour, betrayal, lies, pettiness, and maliciousness. It is this multifaceted realism situated within the Romantic convention that is so fascinating; a hero merely in that he is the main character of his own story.
The novel's genius is in presenting a fully formed character through unconventional chronology without ever delving into the origins of his being. He merely hints at past slights, but what are they?
//
The chronology:
- St. Petersburg affair, for which he is presumably sent to the Caucasus (referred to only)
(Vera affair) (referred to only)
- Contrabandist (chapter 3)
- Military involvement, then recovery at the Pyatigorsk
Mary/Grushnitsky (chapter 4)
- Sent to the Caucasus again, as punishment for the duel (chapter 1, Bella)
- Fatalist, brief sojourn whilst at the Fort with MM (chapter 5)
- Georgia, then back to St. Petersburg
- On the way to Persia (Maxim Maximich, chapter 2)
- Back from Persia (Introduction to Diaries)
//
The final chapter, Fatalist leaves a hanging question: is our fate predestined?
Pechorin, an epitome of scepticism, is fully in control of his actions but is unable to answer them. When an officer dies, Maxim Maximych dismisses the fatality as an accident, and then off-hand, leaves us with ‘god’s will’. As with the protagonist’s character, the paradox of this contradiction within the novel is intentional – there are no clear set answers.
It is a great tragedy that Lermontov died at 26 and it will never be possible to truly understand the full intent and possible maturation of his ideas. In a truly fatalistic turn of events, his death in a duel with his friend mirrors that of his characters Pechorin and Grushnitsky.
//
The novel is a system of mirrors, aimed to confuse and obfuscate, create memories of a memory, trickery of the idea of a hero given himself and others.
/Formally, it is uneven and underdeveloped, lacking in cohesion, yet achieves precisely what it aims to – a character study through multiple lenses. The shifting timeline allows Lermontov to manipulate focus from distant to close up, to yet again a different angle altogether. The format develops into an experimental montage that creates the protagonist. It is almost as if the plot is irrelevant, and the episodes exist purely to create an image of a character the author is interested in.
Curiously, the most ostensible unevenness is demonstrated through the use of language. Lermontov cannot separate himself as a poet from the narrative – his antihero, an emotionally coarse and unfeeling man describes the landscape lyrically.
/Contextually, Lermontov was much influenced by the liberal (i.e. post Decembrist uprising’s anti-tsarist and anti-serfdom) sentiment in his poetry, which would explain the depiction of aristocracy as rotten through. However, in alliance with many colonial novels, it portrays cultural differences and other nations in an inferior light – a surprising development, albeit not in the context of recurring fatalistic themes favoured by the author.
Pechorin’s situation is atypical – whether the intent here is to suggest that he is an anomaly in the provinces or war-torn regions, or an anomaly amongst high society in the cultural capital is unclear. For every romantic statement, he brings down the prosaic.
//
The protagonist, Pechorin is the 18th century emo boy. He is lonely, alienated and therefore universally relatable. He is also handsome, able, intelligent, and irresistible – an 18th-century bad boy, that is, the Byronic romantic hero. Yet for Pechorin, his entire effort and endeavours are wasted playing games, a narrative that subverts and shatters the nobility of the romantic persona. Kierkegaard’s aesthetics games in Either/Or spring to mind – published whole three years later. In both works, the main (anti)hero seduces a young girl – deviously he makes her fall in love with him and then leaves her, albeit for a different reason. For Kierkegaard’s hero, the epitome of aesthetic love had to be terminated before the banality of marriage tainted it. For Lermontov’s hero, the idea of fatalistic boredom terminates all endeavours.
Pechorin simultaneously presents a human being who genuinely suffers
The novel's genius is in presenting a fully formed character through unconventional chronology without ever delving into the origins of his being. He merely hints at past slights, but what are they?
//
The chronology:
- St. Petersburg affair, for which he is presumably sent to the Caucasus (referred to only)
(Vera affair) (referred to only)
- Contrabandist (chapter 3)
- Military involvement, then recovery at the Pyatigorsk
Mary/Grushnitsky (chapter 4)
- Sent to the Caucasus again, as punishment for the duel (chapter 1, Bella)
- Fatalist, brief sojourn whilst at the Fort with MM (chapter 5)
- Georgia, then back to St. Petersburg
- On the way to Persia (Maxim Maximich, chapter 2)
- Back from Persia (Introduction to Diaries)
//
The final chapter, Fatalist leaves a hanging question: is our fate predestined?
Pechorin, an epitome of scepticism, is fully in control of his actions but is unable to answer them. When an officer dies, Maxim Maximych dismisses the fatality as an accident, and then off-hand, leaves us with ‘god’s will’. As with the protagonist’s character, the paradox of this contradiction within the novel is intentional – there are no clear set answers.
It is a great tragedy that Lermontov died at 26 and it will never be possible to truly understand the full intent and possible maturation of his ideas. In a truly fatalistic turn of events, his death in a duel with his friend mirrors that of his characters Pechorin and Grushnitsky.
//
The novel is a system of mirrors, aimed to confuse and obfuscate, create memories of a memory, trickery of the idea of a hero given himself and others.
abistic's review against another edition
3.0
3.5/5 na chwilę obecną, ale będę czytać jeszcze raz pod kątem tego, co autor sam przekazał w przedmowie do drugiego wydania książki, czyli: „»Bohater naszych czasów«, to istotnie portret, lecz nie jednego człowieka; jest to zbiorowy portret wad całego naszego pokolenia w pełnym ich rozkwicie”.
andromedace's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
agirlandabook85's review against another edition
4.0
Lermontov despite only living until he was 26, killed via a duel (why is it always a duel with these Russian men?) after teasing a former Cadet school friend who challenged him and went on to shoot him in the heart, is knows as a romantic poet (second only to Pushkin) and painter. He is most known for his novel A Hero of Our Time.
This is a somewhat of an ironic title as the main character Pechorin is a rather manipulative, selfish, cruel and deeply unlikeable character. This view oddly does not seem to be shared by those who come to know him, he has the power to charm those he wishes to. Similar to Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin, an “anti-hero” one in which you love to hate but can’t help but be intrigued by.
I mentioned Lermontov’s death earlier at such an early age because I feel it explains some of the issues I had.
I prefix this by saying there is no doubt that Lermontov is a fantastic writer, his descriptions of places and people are vivid and paint such a rich picture in your mind, his characters have interesting complexities they draw you in to want to know more about them. There is a solid story somewhere in this book however I feel the formatting of this book has not quite been finalised.
Upon finishing my first read through I was left confused about what has happened and when. It is not told in a chronological order, there are three different narrators all telling the story of Pechorin at different times albeit they interlink and whilst you are able to piece together a vague picture it was murky. It was only through listening again to the audiobook and reading additional chapters of the story in the unfinished Princess Ligovskaya I was able to gain a sense of what this novel was trying to say.
A book I’m glad I’ve read but not jumping straight onto my list of favourites.
This is a somewhat of an ironic title as the main character Pechorin is a rather manipulative, selfish, cruel and deeply unlikeable character. This view oddly does not seem to be shared by those who come to know him, he has the power to charm those he wishes to. Similar to Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin, an “anti-hero” one in which you love to hate but can’t help but be intrigued by.
I mentioned Lermontov’s death earlier at such an early age because I feel it explains some of the issues I had.
I prefix this by saying there is no doubt that Lermontov is a fantastic writer, his descriptions of places and people are vivid and paint such a rich picture in your mind, his characters have interesting complexities they draw you in to want to know more about them. There is a solid story somewhere in this book however I feel the formatting of this book has not quite been finalised.
Upon finishing my first read through I was left confused about what has happened and when. It is not told in a chronological order, there are three different narrators all telling the story of Pechorin at different times albeit they interlink and whilst you are able to piece together a vague picture it was murky. It was only through listening again to the audiobook and reading additional chapters of the story in the unfinished Princess Ligovskaya I was able to gain a sense of what this novel was trying to say.
A book I’m glad I’ve read but not jumping straight onto my list of favourites.
rachelhelps's review against another edition
5.0
Despite being written in 1839, A Hero of Our Time seems quite modern. The events surrounding the hero, Pechorin, unfold non-linearly. While the style of the novel is not particularly striking, its content is. Nabokov points out all the inconsistencies in his footnotes, and his introduction displays his confidence in his abilities. A recommended classic, especially for young people.
chxrl_rose's review against another edition
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
petardjokic's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
informative
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
4.75