Fatalism In The Hero Of Our Time

In The Hero of Our Time, Pechorin uses fate as an answer when it is convenient and this bars him from developing a sense of responsibility. Lermontov helps us understand Pechorin’s stance on fate when we read the story of the Fatalist inside Pechorin’s journals; we learn of the inconsistency in Pechorin’s metaphysical beliefs, and how they affect his attitude to consequences of his actions.
Pechorin’s statements constantly flip-flop between belief and doubt in fatalism. Pechorin takes a stance against predestination, then sees a fatal mark of death on Vulich which foretells death in the near future. When Vulich doesn’t get killed by the pistol, Pechorin waves it off as ‘gambler’s luck’. Moments later, Vulich asks if he believes in predestination after the gamble and Pechorin answers that he does; then immediately after saying so, he wonders why he saw the mark of death over Vulich before the bet. In a matter of one single paragraph, we learn that Pechorin tends to agree with whatever makes the most sense at the time: he doesn’t want to delve into deep philosophy when he can conveniently brush something off as fate or luck (whichever seems to best fit the situation).
When we read Pechorin’s thoughts that Lermontov relates to us through this story, we better understand Pechorin’s character throughout his adventures and …show more content…
In the same sentence we see Pechorin having no doubts, yet unsure belief. Pechorin constantly answers questions on his belief with a “yes, but” or “yes, however,” and it feels extremely repetitive in these last few pages. Pechorin ends his thoughts on his eventual night by narrating, “How can one not be a fatalist after this? Yet who really knows if he believes a thing or not? How often our beliefs are mere illusions or mental aberrations. I prefer to doubt everything.” Does Pechorin really have any beliefs at