Oblomov, the humorously lazy fellow, squanders his life

Ilya Ilyich Oblomov is a remarkable character. In the first chapters of Ivan Goncharov’s famous 1859 novel, the young man from the Russian upper middle-class is bound to his bedroom, not to be bothered by the outside world. Social activities undertaken by his peers tire him; insofar Oblomov lifts a finger, it is to quarrel with his servant Zakhar. There is little to worry about money: as the descendant of a family of landed gentry, Oblomov is entitled to the revenues of Oblomovka, a region named after his family. The income is decreasing, which troubles Oblomov, but he constrains his action to complaints about the peasants. Altogether Oblomov is not an apathetic person however. His interactions with his great love Olga and his old friend Andrey Stoltz show that he does care and can take care. If only he were not so naive and nervous.

Much has been written about Oblomov, not least about the term that was coined by Goncharov himself: ‘oblomovism’. The term is associated with laziness or lethargy, with the state of decay of Russian aristocracy and with the transition from child- to adulthood. There is truth in all these, but they seem too absolute. If Oblomov is predominantly lazy or lethargic, what to say about his upturns? If he symbolises the decline of the aristocracy – who are indeed depicted as blasé – how to construe the turn of events? And if Goncharov wrote a coming-of-age novel, why use such an atypical link? It occurred to me that Oblomov is above all a man without a purpose, inept of meeting social expectations or achieving the goals that match his status, unfit of imagining and pursuing alternative goals and unable of recognising what actually is important.

Oblomov has a lot of comical elements. I did however find some parts too tedious and some of the characters too caricatural. I assume many readers will have enjoyed Oblomov’s love for Olga, but I had to read these chapters diagonally.

Oblomov ovvero l'apatia, ma un'apatia così onesta, dolce, priva di vizio, un ozio naturale, vergognoso di se stesso, ma invincibile.
Chiunque, con gli usi e costumi di Oblomov, ci riuscirebbe importuno, antipatico, insopportabile, e invece Oblomov lo si ama, al punto che ci si domanda a che pro il suo amico Stolz voglia a tutti i costi risvegliarlo da quella sua vita buona e sognante, gli si vuole dire di smetterla.
Oblomovismo, uno stile di vita.
Siamo nel campo dei grandi affreschi russi, sullo stile e nell'ambiente di Tolstoj, che pure non avrebbe saputo rendere così bene un personaggio con così tanti tratti negativi, renderlo così amabile.
Le parti che riguardano il solo Oblomov sono le migliori del libro, le altre, pur ben scritte, si ha voglia di lasciarsele indietro in fretta per tornare al nostro eroe immobile.

Oblomow hatte es sehr schwer bei mir – was weder an der Sprache, noch am Thema lag, sondern in erster Linie daran, dass ich nicht mit einer einzelnen Figur daraus ein Bier hätte trinken wollen – und das, obwohl es vor guten Seelen geradezu wimmelt, die allesamt vor überaus bunter Kulisse mehr oder weniger munter ihrer Wege gehen.

In zweiter Linie ging mir der Kunstgriff Gontscharows gehörig auf den Geist, das Wesen Oblomows mit dem Wesen der Erzählung zu verquicken: Sie ist selten geradeaus, niemals zielstrebig – und immer dazu geneigt, hier und dort einen Abstecher zu machen (und zwar ausgiebig). In literarischer Hinsicht zurecht hochgelobte Ausschweifungen haben mir bereits bei Moby-Dick den Hals gebrochen; ich bin einfach zu ungeduldig für solche Sperenzchen und reagiere mit latenter Leseverweigerung, wenn die Kernhandlung zu oft herumliegen und sich langweilen muss.

Kurzum: Ich habe Oblomow hartnäckig gern gelesen, würde es aber für kein Geld der Welt wieder tun.

Good old Wikipedia describes a "superfluous man" as "an individual, perhaps talented and capable, who does not fit into social norms." Well that is a good description of our main character Ilya Oblomov, in the novel Oblomov by Ivan Goncharov. He is a man who spends his days laying in bed or on the couch day dreaming, refusing to "live" his life. Yup, that's it... and he's my hero (only half joking).

Oblomov is a nobleman who has arrested development. He is lazy, slothful, and a dreamer, but the real question is why does Oblomov behave in this way? The novel describes his childhood, which clearly, any reader can see is the root of his trouble. Now Oblomov does have a bout of energy when he finds love, but his nature, his refusal to make decisions doesn't allow this love to fully bloom.

In the end, it is a sad story of a man whose "intellect was equal to that of his fellows, his soul was as clear and bright as glass, his disposition was kindly, and he was a gentlemen to the core. Yet he – he fell." And what was the cause of his fall? The disease of Oblomovka.