Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is a priceless masterpiece in Russian literature. This work describes the society of the nobility of the XIX century. The main character of this comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - an intelligent, free-thinking young man. The author in the work contrasts it with the Famus society, thereby showing us the contradictions between the “Current Age” and the “past century”.
The most prominent representative of the Famus society is Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. This is a person who does not like the service and works only for the sake of awards. The Famus society included people who lived according to established customs. The main task in their life was to acquire a high rank and a high position in society, in order to "take awards and live happily." These people are ardent feudal lords, capable of killing and robbing people, controlling their fate. Chatsky furiously unleashes his anger on these people. He does not accept their beliefs and does not believe in the laws of old Moscow. Chatsky responds to Famusov's story about the late uncle Maxim Petrovich with a remark characterizing Catherine's age as "an age of humility and fear." Chatsky advocates the abolition of serfdom. He is very outraged that the peasants are not considered people, that they can be exchanged for some things or sold. He talks indignantly about how one landowner sold a serf ballet for debts, and another changed his best servants for greyhounds. I still strongly resent the imitation of the nobles in the West. Chatsky noticed that the doors of noble houses are always open to foreign guests. So, a Frenchman from Bordeaux, who was going to the country of the barbarians, met the warmest welcome in Russia and did not find here "neither the sound of a Russian, nor a Russian face." But Chatsky could not change the people around him, because he was opposed not by individuals, but by the whole noble life.
In his work, Griboyedov managed to create the image of a hero who fights for the rights of people. Although the author describes only Moscow and Famusov's house, a picture of the whole of Russia in the first half of the 19th century appears before readers. And I am very sorry that at that time there were few people like Chatsky.
There are many different people in the world: some, like Chatsky, are educated and interesting, others, like the Famus society, are vile, envious, thinking only about wealth and nobility. Such people were compared in his comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov. The whole conflict takes place in the house of the nobleman Famusov.
Famusov is one of the main characters of the work. He is a wealthy uneducated man. Famusov does not care at all about the future of his country, his people. He hates books: "take away all the books and burn them." Famusov created a society around him in which people spread gossip against each other, doing it behind their backs. Famusov says about Chatsky: "A dangerous person", "He wants to preach freedom." Sophia about Chatsky: “I’m ready to pour out bile on everyone.” Chatsky about Molchalin: “Why not a husband? There is only little intelligence in him.” Platon Mikhailovich about Zagoretsky: "A notorious swindler, a rogue." Khlestova considers Zagoretsky "a liar, a gambler and a thief." The Famus society scolds everything new and advanced, but no one looks at himself from the outside, "not noticing about himself." All these people live in the world only for intrigues that look like madness. Chatsky, the main character of the comedy, opposes their views. He is a preacher of new life, a defender of advanced ideas. Alexander Andreevich is a smart, sincere, noble person. He is also very courageous and determined. Confirmation of this is Chatsky's monologue “And who are the judges? ..”. Remember how he criticized high society with its old views on life, talked about the injustice that reigns between the rich and the poor, how he wanted to serve the Fatherland, but “it’s sickening to serve”? Witty, eloquent, Chatsky maliciously ridicules the vile vices of Famus society: kowtowing to superiors, servility and servility. His mind, rich and figurative language find abundant material for this:
Judgments draw from forgotten newspapers
The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea ...
Chatsky despises braggarts who receive their "lyre" not by serving the Motherland, but by flattering some individual person. Griboyedov wanted to show how
it is difficult for a person whose thoughts and behavior differ from the opinion of the majority.
It is likely that there will be a Famus society all the time, because there will always be people who will be commanded by the upper classes. The comedy "Woe from Wit" made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature and became an immortal treasure of people. It can be said that Russian drama was born along with this work.
Very often in life we come across people who can be compared with the Famus society. They are vile, stupid and mediocre. What is the mind for them? And what does it really mean? These issues are resolved in the great work of Russian literature by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit".
This grief was the main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - an intelligent, noble, honest and courageous person. He hates and despises the Famus society, in which the main theme in life is servitude. He can be compared to a lone hero who fights an entire regiment. But his superiority was that he was unusually intelligent. Chatsky wanted to honestly serve his homeland, but he did not want to serve higher ranks: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” These words of his testify that we have before us a proud, witty and eloquent person. In this work, A.S. Griboyedov shows the conflict between two opposite sides - Chatsky and Famusovsky society. Alexander Andreevich is a victim of his wit.
The people with whom he was surrounded did not understand him and did not even strive for this. They are accustomed to live in eternal "slavery", the concept of freedom is alien to them. It seems to me that Chatsky is not the only positive character in this comedy, there are such characters that Griboyedov only mentions in his work. This is Skalozub's cousin, who left the service and went to the village, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, Prince Fedor, a chemist and botanist. They can be considered allies of Chatsky. The main character is simply unbearable to be in the company of people like Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin. They considered themselves very intelligent, earning their position by sycophancy. So Famusov confirms this in his own words: “Even though he’s honest, though he’s not, it’s even for us, dinner is ready for everyone.” And also, talking about his late uncle, who knew when to serve, he was proud that it was his relative who was so “smart”. People from the Famus society did not notice how stupid their morals were. These people lived an imaginary life, without thinking about the main thing - about its meaning. Chatsky loved Sophia very much and confessed this to her at their first meeting after a long separation, and she answered him: “Why do you need me?”. The protagonist begins to think that she has become the same as her father and his entourage. Chatsky leaves Moscow, realizing that he has no place there. But the Famus society cannot be considered the winner, since Chatsky did not lose this battle, he did not become like these people, did not sink to their level. It seems to me that this person was born a little earlier than the time in which it would be easier for him to live. I believe that the comedy of A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" is a great work of Russian literature, which is immortal.
I read a great comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". It was created by the author for eight years. “Woe from Wit” is a comedy about how a crowd of fools does not understand one sane person. The events of the comedy develop in one Moscow aristocratic house within one day. The main characters of this work are Chatsky, Famusov, his daughter Sophia and Famusova's secretary Molchalin.
In comedy, there is a Famus society that opposes Chatsky. It lives with the opposite worldview, honoring and defending servility and hypocrisy. Chatsky himself appears in the Famus world, like a cleansing thunderstorm. He is in everything opposite to the typical representatives of the Famus society. If Molchalin, Famusov, Skalozub see the meaning of life in their well-being, then Chatsky dreams of selfless service to the fatherland, of benefiting the people whom he respects and considers “smart and vigorous”. So, in a conversation with Famusov Skalozub utters the following phrase:
..Yes, in order to get ranks, there are many channels.
These people are deeply indifferent to the fate of their homeland and people. Their cultural and moral level can be judged by such remarks by Famusov: “Take away all the books and burn them,” because “scholarship is the reason” that “crazy divorced people and deeds and opinions.” Chatsky has a different opinion - a man of extraordinary intelligence, courageous, honest, sincere. He appreciates people who are ready "to put a mind hungry for knowledge into science." This is the only character that reflects many important traits of the author's personality. Chatsky is a person to whom the author trusts his thoughts and views. The hero Griboyedov has a lot of strength, he is eager for action and is ready to prove his point of view. So, in a conversation with Famusov, Chatsky says:
Chatsky is a representative of that part of the noble youth that rebels against the society of the Famusovs, the pufferfish, the silent ones. There are still a few such people, they are not yet capable of fighting the existing system, but they appear. That is why Chatsky can rightly be called a hero of his time. It was they who were to carry out the first stage of the revolutionary liberation movement, stir up the country, bring nearer the time when the people would be freed from the chains of slavery.
If I were asked why I liked the comedy “Woe from Wit”, I would answer this way: “An interesting plot, bright characters, unique thoughts and statements emotionally affected me.” This work is one of those that, once read, you leave in your memory for a long time. The comedy "Woe from Wit" cannot be imagined without the author himself. Griboyedov and "Woe from Wit" - this is something without which neither one nor the other could exist alone.
The very name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” suggests that the main character was not understood by the people around him. This hero, to whom the author pays more attention, is Chatsky. He is an intelligent, smart, honest, kind, sincere, courageous, disinterested, cheerful, progressive person. He is not afraid to express his point of view. He soberly assesses the situation and the position of the Famus society, not being afraid to express his opinion. Boldly entering into a conversation, he expresses his thoughts to the faces of his interlocutors. For example, the quote “Houses are new, but prejudices are old” speaks of the modern view of this person on life in Russia. The subtle and penetrating mind of Chatsky does not accept the Famus society, which he criticizes. The main character is disgusted to humiliate himself in front of people who are higher in the service and, perhaps, undeservedly occupy military posts, for example, Colonel Skalozub.
Comparing Chatsky with the colonel, we can say that he is higher in mental development, thinking, courage, which Skalozub does not have. I think that Skalozub, who holds such a position in the state, is not worthy to manage and command the regiments that were under his command. He could not cope with his duty to the Fatherland, because he does not have such virtues as Chatsky.
The face completely opposite to Chatsky is Molchalin. I have a special opinion about him. Even his last name speaks of meanness, flattery. He always takes advantage of the situation. Molchalin is able to betray, deceive, frame, but at what cost?! Only to get a new position! Chatsky exposes the character of Molchalin and expresses his opinion: “But by the way, he will reach the known levels, because now they love the dumb.”
Speaking about the main representative of the Famusov society, Famusov himself, we can say that this person has a very high opinion of himself: “He is known for his monastic behavior.” In fact, he is an egoist, there is nothing interesting in him as a person. Even contrasting Chatsky with Famusov is impossible. Chatsky is much higher and much more worthy of him.
Chatsky is the winner, despite the fact that he was mistaken for a madman. He was forced to leave Moscow: “Get out of Moscow! I don't come here anymore." As a result, he was never able to achieve the recognition of Famusov and the reciprocal love of Sofia.
Chatsky is a spokesman for new ideas, and therefore society could not understand him correctly and accept him as he is. His image in literature will live on until the mind of mankind understands what ideas need to be fought for and defended.
I read a wonderful comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". This comedy makes fun of a stupid, dumb and mean society. It was written in 1824. In the comedy, the author depicts a true picture of the life of the Moscow nobility, which needed to be updated. I would like to start my essay with a quote characterizing the lifestyle of these nobles:
In the love of traitors, in the enmity of the tireless,
Indomitable storytellers,
Clumsy wise men, crafty simpletons,
Sinister old women, old men,
decrepit over fiction, nonsense ...
Griboedov describes the Moscow nobility, consisting of the Famusovs, Zagoretsky, and pufferfish. They don't belong to the high society. These are people who have never served at court. These are various talkers and swindlers like Zagoretsky, who are ready to humiliate themselves in front of the rich in order to get into their favor. This is a famous society. Wealth and nobility are the main requirements in it. The representative of this society is Famusov, who already has an adult daughter. Famusov's ideal is his uncle:
He fell hurt, got up healthy.
And he says this about his attitude:
... Signed, so off your shoulders.
Molchalin does not dare to object to his boss. He is quiet, timid, deceitful. Molchalin does not love Sophia, who does not know this. He cares because she likes it. Molchalin has no opinion. He pleases those on whom he depends.
Skalozub - Famusov's friend:
And the golden bag, and marks the generals.
He seeks awards, waits for the moment when someone will retire or be killed in the war.
In the third act, we get to know other friends of Famusov. This is Zagoretsky - a liar and a saint, Khlestova - an ignorant and grouchy old woman, the all-knowing Repetilov, Prince Tugoukhovsky, who is looking for rich and famous husbands for his daughters. The circle of concerns of these people is lunches, dinners, the search for connections that help advance in the service. For them, a promotion can be obtained without special merit:
..Yes, in order to get ranks, there are many channels ...
For the sake of awards, they are ready to humiliate themselves, to be jesters. Relations in the world of the Famusovs are based on fear and submission to superiors. It doesn't matter to them whether he is smart or stupid:
Honor for father and son.
The subject of conversation is gossip. The main task for parents is, as it were, to marry or marry their children in a more successful way. And in this insignificant society appears the noble, honest, educated, courageous and witty Chatsky. Chatsky is the only positive character in this comedy. Once he lived in Famusov's house, was friends with Sofia. Gradually, his friendship grew into love, but then he left to wander. Here, three years later, he returns, full of hope. But Sofia no longer loves Chatsky and gives him a cold welcome. She became completely different. She is cold, arrogant. Chatsky, trying to find out who Sofia's chosen one, comes into conflict with the entire Famus society. This society is afraid of Chatsky, because he brings with him new views on life, new orders. But the Moscow nobility does not want to change anything and declares Chatsky crazy. Famusov is also afraid of Chatsky, because the main character is smart, sharp. He is distinguished by independence of judgment and courage of statements. He accuses the Famus society of lies, slander, helpfulness, pretense, hypocrisy, stupidity, ignorance, for which the society rejects him. At the end, Chatsky leaves. But who is he - the defeated or the winner? Chatsky is a winner because he is not alone! Somewhere there are similar to it, which every day becomes more.
I really liked Griboedov's comedy, because the author, acting as Chatsky, is not afraid to accuse the Moscow nobility of lies and slander. It would be desirable that in our society there was no "woe from the mind."
Who is Chatsky and what is this Famus society? The author compares and contrasts two categories of people who even in our time meet and conflict with each other.
Griboyedov's comedy, like the globe, has two poles. On one of them is Chatsky - an intelligent, courageous, determined person. The author appreciates the mind in people and wants to show his main character as a man of higher moral principles. Arriving in Moscow after a long absence, Alexander Andreevich is disappointed. He hopes to meet Sofia, whom he has loved since childhood. But, having come to her house, he realizes that he is not welcome here. It is in this house that Chatsky encounters the Famus society: Famusov himself, Skalozub, Molchalin and others, just as stupid, mediocre and worthless people. Their main goal was to “deserve” a high rank and have a place in high society. I'm not saying that Chatsky did not belong to high society, but he did not sink to the level of Famusov and his ilk. Alexander Andreevich remained a man of honor, he did not drop his own dignity. Chatsky is trying to understand why he is worse than Molchalin, because he is a deceitful and vile person. Why did Sofia prefer Molchalin, and not him? How did this mean man earn her attention? The main character is afraid to even think that Sophia has become the same as her father. The entire Famus society is trying to destroy a person who is smarter than them. They spread gossip about Chatsky's madness. By this act, the entire Famus society showed its stupidity. No one has refuted this claim. Chatsky understands very well that he does not belong in Moscow, and leaves. But this does not indicate that the Famus society managed to break his pride and honor. On the contrary, Chatsky still remained above Famusov and his entourage.
It seems to me that Chatsky is the most striking example for readers, that is, you and me. Reading a comedy, we absorb what the author wanted to teach, namely: honor, intelligence and human dignity.
In the comedy "Woe from Wit" all the characters are divided into positive - Chatsky - and negative - Famus and Famus society. Griboyedov called Chatsky an advanced person, that is, a person whose image will live forever, and Famus society - the face of all the nobles of that century (“the century of the past”). In the comedy, the Famus society opposes Chatsky. Indeed, in this society, enlightenment and science arouse special hatred. Griboyedov not only ridicules this society, but mercilessly condemns it. Famusov, as the main representative of this society, is an undeveloped person. Therefore, ignorance reigns in his house. Chatsky is the absolute opposite of Famusov. He is a thinking and feeling person. His actions speak for themselves. Chatsky, it seems to me, is very trusting of people. When he returns to Moscow, he, without going home, runs to his beloved. But he was late. Sofia, Famusov's daughter, has changed, she does not have that former love - that's how Famusov's upbringing worked. By this, Griboyedov shows Famusov's selfishness. But as soon as Chatsky arrives, Famusov cordially accepts him as a person of his circle. He says:
Well, you threw out a thing!
Three years did not write two words!
And suddenly it burst like from the clouds.
Famusov, as it were, wants to show his friendship, which has remained. However, it is not. Chatsky immediately runs to Sofia, but she is no longer the same. Despite this, Chatsky still loves her and immediately speaks of her beauty. But in the end he learns everything about her. For Griboedov, knowledge is above everything, and ignorance is below everything. And Griboedov knowingly shows the role of Chatsky and compares his mind with the ignorance of the Famus society. There is a lot of negativity in Famusov, and his ignorance is confirmed by the words in a conversation with Lisa about reading Sophia:
Tell me that it's not good for her eyes to spoil,
And in reading, the use is not great ...
The Famus society calls Chatsky bad and says that he has lost his mind. But what struck Chatsky? This is what Sophia started gossip about Chatsky's madness, and the whole society picked up:
And really you will go crazy from these, from some
From boarding schools, schools, lyceums...
And Chatsky needs to leave Famusov's house. He is defeated, since the Famus society turned out to be stronger than Chatsky. But in turn, he gave a good rebuff to the "past century."
The significance of the comedy "Woe from Wit" lies in the fact that the comedy vividly reflected the time when the struggle between the Decembrists and the oppressor landowners was growing.
“Woe from Wit” is a realistic comedy. Griboedov gave in it a true picture of Russian life. The comedy posed topical social problems of those times: about education, contempt for everything national, worship of foreign, education, service, ignorance of society.
The main character of the comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Witty, eloquent, he maliciously ridicules the vices of the society that surrounds him. He differs sharply from those around him in his mind, abilities, independence of judgment. The image of Chatsky is something new, bringing change. This hero is a spokesman for the advanced ideas of his time. Famus society is traditional. His life positions are such that “you need to learn by looking at your elders”, destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with humility to those who are one step higher, be sure to be rich. Famusov's only passion is a passion for rank and money.
The beliefs of Chatsky and Famusovsky society are different. Chatsky condemns serfdom, imitation of foreign, people's lack of desire for education and their own opinion. The dialogues between Chatsky and Famusov are a struggle. At the beginning of the comedy, it manifests itself not so sharply. Famusov is even ready to give in to Sophia, but at the same time he sets conditions:
I would say, firstly: do not be blissful,
Name, brother, do not manage by mistake,
And, most importantly, go and serve.
To which Chatsky replies:
I would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve.
But gradually the struggle turns into a battle. Chatsky argues with Famusov about the way and way of life. But the main character is alone in the fight against the views of Moscow society, in which he has no place.
Molchalin and Skalozub are not the last representatives of the Famus society. They are rivals and opponents of Chatsky. Molchalin is helpful, silent. He wants to please with his humility, accuracy, flattery. Puffer shows himself to be someone very important, businesslike, significant. But under his uniform, he hides "weakness, poverty of reason." His thoughts are connected only with getting a higher rank, money, power:
Yes, in order to get ranks, there are many channels;
About them as a true philosopher I judge:
I just want to be a general.
Chatsky does not tolerate lies and falsehood. This man's tongue is as sharp as a knife. Each of his characteristics is labeled and caustic:
Molchalin used to be so stupid!..
Wretched creature!
Has he really grown wiser? .. And that one -
hoarse, strangled, bassoon,
A constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!
Chatsky's monologue “And who are the judges? ..” mercilessly condemns the Famus society. Each new face that appears in the course of the development of the plot takes the side of Famusov. Gossip grows like a "snowball". And Chatsky can't stand it. He can no longer remain in the society of low, vile, conceited and stupid people. They condemned him for his mind, for freedom of speech and thought, for honesty.
Before leaving, Chatsky throws to the entire Famus society:
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend the day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his mind will survive.
Chatsky is above them, the best and rare qualities are manifested in him. Those who cannot see and appreciate this, at the very least, are simply fools. Chatsky is immortal, and now this hero is relevant.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature. Griboyedov's play was, is and will be a modern work until servitude, greed, gossip disappear from our lives.
The comedy was written on the eve of the Decembrist uprising in 1825. In the comedy Woe from Wit, Griboyedov gave a true picture of Russian life after the Patriotic War of 1812. In a small work, Griboyedov depicted only one day in Famusov's house.
In comedy, we meet people who are equal in origin. These are nobles, but everyone has their own views on life. Their opinions contradict each other. A certain conflict arises between them, which is hidden from prying eyes. But in the comedy "Woe from Wit" this conflict is clearly visible and not hidden - the clash of the "Current Century", of which Chatsky was a representative, with the "past century", which is represented by Famusov and his entourage.
One of the most striking figures of comedy is Famusov. Famusov is an influential person who occupies a significant place. In addition, he is a wealthy landowner. An important state position and a large estate create a strong position for Famusov among the Moscow nobility. He does not bother himself with work, he spends his time in idleness:
... Magnificent build chambers,
Where they overflow in feasts and prodigality...
He looks at public service as a way to achieve wealth and rank. He uses his official position for personal gain. Famusov looks at enlightenment, new progressive views as a source of “debauchery”. The doctrine considers evil:
Learning is the plague, learning is the cause
What is now more than ever,
Crazy divorced people, and deeds, and opinions.
However, he gives his daughter a good upbringing.
Hospitality for Famusov is a means of maintaining ties with useful people.
Famusov is one of the most prominent representatives of the Moscow nobility. Other people are also represented: Colonel Skalozub, princes Tugoukhovsky, Countess Khryumina.
Griboedov satirically draws the Famus society. The characters are funny and disgusting, but not because the author made them so, but because they are such in reality itself.
Skalozub is a man of age and money. Service for him is not the defense of the fatherland, but the achievement of nobility and money.
Famusov's world consists not only of feudal lords, but also of their servants. Molchalin is an official dependent on the Famus society. Molchalin was taught to please influential people. He received three awards for his diligence. Molchalin is terrible because he can take on any form: both a patriot and a lover. Despite individual differences, all members of the Famus society are a single social group.
Chatsky appears in this society, a man of advanced ideas, fiery feelings and high morality. He belongs to a noble society, but in his way of thinking he does not find like-minded people. In this society, Chatsky feels lonely. His views are rebuffed by others. The sharpest denunciations of Chatsky are directed against serfdom. It is serfdom that makes it possible for the people of the Famus society to live by robbery.
Chatsky left the civil service, as they demanded cringing from him:
I would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve.
He stands for true enlightenment, art, science. Chatsky is against the upbringing that is given to children in noble families. He fought for freedom of thought, freedom of action. It seems to me that this is the main difference between Chatsky and the Famus society, which did not recognize such mores.
I think that such a great work will delight and surprise more than one generation.
This comedy), stands Famusov, a representative of the bureaucratic nobility. (See also the article Image of Famusov.) Griboedov himself in one of his letters (to Katenin) says that in the person of Famusov he portrayed his uncle, a famous Moscow gentleman. “What kind of aces in Moscow live and die,” says Famusov himself; it is precisely such an "ace" that he himself portrays. His large, lively figure inspires some sympathy for his liveliness, everyday typicality and integrity; but, listening to his words, delving into the meaning of his speeches, you immediately see his equally large negative features. Famusov, apparently, occupies a prominent place in the public service, has a high rank. But how does he feel about his position, how does he look at the service in general? Under him is the secretary Molchalin, whom Famusov keeps "because (he) is businesslike"; Molchalin sorts things out, brings papers for the report to his boss, but Famusov has one concern:
"I'm afraid, sir, I'm deadly alone,
So that many do not accumulate them;
Give free rein to you - it would have settled down,
And I have - what's the matter, what's not the case,
My custom is this:
Signed, so - off your shoulders».
Famusov, Sophia, Molchalin, Lisa. Illustration by D. Kardovsky for Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit"
It is evident that he does not delve into the matter, the solution of which depends on him, but only hurries to sign and get rid of worries. Service for Famusov does not represent the performance of any duties, but is a way and a way to achieve personal gain, wealth and fame. In contrast to Chatsky, who believes that one must serve "the cause, not the persons", Famusov finds that "serving the persons" is necessary in order to achieve nobility. He sets as an example (the monologue “That's it, you are all proud”) his uncle, Maxim Petrovich, who, already being himself a noble nobleman, -
(“Not on silver, on gold, I ate;
One hundred people at your service; all in orders") -
managed to earn the grace of the Empress (Catherine II) with a buffoon's trick.
“And uncle! What is your prince, what is a count!
Serious look, arrogant disposition!
When do you need to serve?
And he folded over."
Here is Famusov's ideal! Creepiness is the surest way to achieve ranks, and Famusov calls “proud” the one who does not want to follow this beaten path. Not even wanting to listen and ponder over the heated objections of Chatsky, Famusov sure in his rightness, because the way he was thought and "made by the fathers" has been the custom since ancient times. He speaks quite frankly about these low and ugly methods of the bureaucratic world; just as simply admits that he always tries to arrange his relatives in advantageous places, not caring about whether they are able to fulfill the duties assigned to them:
"How do you represent
To the cross or to the town,
Well, how not to please your own little man.
Famusov expresses his cynical confessions with naive innocence.
Woe from the mind. Performance by the Maly Theatre, 1977
Famusov's views on the upbringing of children and on education in general are noteworthy. He sees nothing good in books:
"In reading, the use is not great,"
he says in response to Liza's words that his daughter Sophia "read the whole night" in French. “She can’t sleep from French books,” he continues, “but Russians make me sleep painfully.”
In teachings, in books, he sees the cause of all freethinking and disorder:
“Learning is the plague, learning is the cause,
What is now more than ever,
Crazy divorced people and deeds and opinions.
“... if the evil is stopped, -
Collect all the books and burn them."
However, contrary to this opinion, Famusov hires foreign teachers to Sophia, contemptuously calling them "tramps", but he does this because "everyone" does it, and Famusov's main principle is to follow the general trend. He gives Sophia an education, but does not bother to delve into the moral qualities of her educators: Madame Rosier, "the second mother, the old woman of gold", to whom Famusov entrusted the upbringing of his daughter,
“For extra five hundred rubles a year
I allowed myself to be seduced by others."
What principles could such an educator teach? Obviously, Famusov, like many other parents of secular society, sought for his daughter to recruit "teachers of the regiment, more in number, at a cheaper price." Personally, he does not praise the general enthusiasm for foreigners:
"Kuznetsky bridge and the eternal French,
he is angry
But it is clear that he scolds the French precisely because he considers them "destroyers of pockets", and does not see the difference between a "book" and a "biscuit" shop.
Famusov's concern for his daughter boils down to giving her an external upbringing that is consistent with the generally recognized requirements of society, and marrying her to a suitable person; he tries to convince Sophia that he
"who is poor, he (she) is not a couple."
In his eyes, the ideal husband for Sophia is Skalozub, since he is "both a golden bag and aims for generals." And the fact that Skalozub is disgusting to his daughter does not bother the "caring" father in the least. What is more important for Famusov: for Sophia to choose a husband according to her heart, or for the society to say that she made a brilliant match? Of course, the last one! Public opinion, then, “what Princess Marya Alekseevna will say”, this is the spring and engine of all the words and deeds of Famusov.
And yet in this person there are, if not positive, then at least partly sympathetic features. His hospitality, characteristic of all truly Russian natures, is sympathetic; his house is open:
"The door is open to the invited and the uninvited,
Especially for foreign;
Though an honest person, though not -
It’s even for us - dinner is ready for everyone. ”
But even in these words (from the monologue “Taste, father, excellent manner”), we see, in addition to hospitality, Famusov’s well-known moral promiscuity: he amuses himself with his hospitality, and the moral qualities of his guests are completely indifferent to him. Sympathetic in him is a sincere love for everything of his own, Russian, Moscow; how he admires Moscow aces, old men, ladies, boys and girls! The good nature of Famusov is also sympathetic, rather, the innocence that shines through in all his speeches. Griboyedov depicted a truly living person, with personal features that distinguish him. “Obese, restless, quick,” Sophia characterizes him; he is quick-tempered, but also quick-tempered - "often angry for no reason", but also good-natured.
Speaking of Famusov, one cannot fail to mention the famous artists who played his role. Woe from Wit was first staged in 1831 after Griboedov's death; the remarkable actor Shchepkin was then known in the role of Famusov. In the first half of the 20th century, this role was played with extraordinary talent by the famous director and founder of the tradition of the Moscow Art Theater - Stanislavsky; the role of Chatsky was incomparably performed by Kachalov.
The main positive character of the comedy "Woe from Wit" Chatsky belongs to the people of the Decembrist nature. His opponent in the play is Famusov, a typical representative of the nobility-serf camp. The cardinal opposition of their views becomes clear from the first act.
The scene with Lisa perfectly reveals the moral character of Famusov. As the action develops, we learn about its relation to books and service. It becomes clear that for him the most significant indicators in a person are rank and wealth.
Chatsky, in the first act, appears as a witty and sincere young man who laughs and jokes about the life and pastime of the famus-like nobles.
Such an alignment of views could not but lead to an ideological conflict, which sets in in the second act. Famusov's teachings are alien to Chatsky. According to Famusov, in order to achieve something in life, one must be able to "substitute a chair and raise a handkerchief." As an example, he cites his uncle, who, solely thanks to flattery and servility, managed to achieve the favor of the empress. But Chatsky despises such people. His answer to Famusov became an aphorism:
“I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.”
He wants all young people to “serve the cause, not individuals”, be free to choose their occupation, to which Famusov reacts very painfully. It comes to the fact that he threatens Chatsky with a court.
Famusov, faithful to noble traditions, is afraid of people like Chatsky, who encroach on the basis of noble prosperity. To send people to Siberia, to hard labor and exile, to sell and punish them - all this, according to Famusov, is the completely legal right of the landowner. Human dignity in his view is absent in the serfs. Chatsky, on the contrary, respects the "smart, cheerful" Russian people. His indignation is caused by the fact that the "fathers of the fatherland" are called ruthless feudal lords, those who are engaged in the enslavement of the people.
For such judgments, Famusov's guests represent Chatsky insane, and Famusov declares that he was the first to notice his insanity. In his opinion, the reason for Chatsky's madness is exclusively in learning, in science.
These images are strikingly different in their speech. Educated Chatsky speaks literary. His speech is logical and figurative. The poorly educated Famusov, depending on the situation, speaks obsequiously, sometimes insinuatingly, and sometimes helpfully or authoritatively. It all depends on who he's talking to.
Chatsky can also be described as the personification of modernity, looking at life with different eyes, and Famusov, respectively, as the personification of conservatism.
Ideals and views of Chatsky (Griboyedov)
The action of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” takes place in those years when the split in the noble environment is becoming more and more obvious. It was the beginning of the 20s of the XIX century. The influence of the ideas of the French enlighteners, the growth of Russian national identity after the war of 1812 and foreign campaigns united many young noblemen in an effort to change society. But most of the Russian nobility remained deaf or hostile to the new trends. It is this situation, this conflict that Griboyedov captured in his work.
The main conflict of comedy is the conflict of two worldviews, the clash of the "current century" with the "past century". There is also a second conflict in the comedy - a love one (there is even a classic love triangle: Chatsky - Sofya - Molcha-lin), but it is not the main one, although both conflicts are closely intertwined and complement each other, both of them find their resolution at the end of the play.
The bearer of new, progressive ideas is Alexander Chatsky, his ideological opponent in comedy is the entire Famus society. Why was their clash inevitable? Because Ideals and views of Chatsky did not and could not coincide with the views and ideals of Famusov. First of all, they have different views on the service. If for Famusov service is only a source of rank, wealth, then for Chatsky it is the civic duty of every young nobleman. Chatsky is ready to serve, but “to the cause, not to individuals,” to the Fatherland, and not to a higher official. He tried to serve, he even knew the ministers, but then he retired and broke off his former acquaintances, as he was convinced that it was impossible at that time to serve honestly without being served. Chatsky responds to Famusov’s advice to “go serve”: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.”
In the monologue “And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid,” he speaks indignantly about those officials who “not in war, but in peace, took their foreheads, knocked on the floor without sparing!”. Chatsky calls the past century very precisely: "The century of humility and fear was direct." But for Famusov it was a "golden" age; not without reason he sets as an example Chatsky his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who, having stumbled at the reception, managed to make the queen laugh and achieve her favor. For Skalozub and Molchalin, a career is the main thing in life, and they are ready to achieve ranks by any means, even humiliation and flattery. Skalozub's dream is "I just want to be a general."
Alexander Andreevich appears in comedy as a fierce opponent of serfdom. And this is understandable: he expresses the views on the social structure of Russia not only of the author himself, but also of many of his Decembrist friends, who believed that an educated, enlightened person should not own other people. Chatsky speaks with anger about a certain feudal lord, “Nestor of noble scoundrels,” who exchanged faithful servants who more than once saved his life and honor “in hours of wine and fights” for “three greyhounds”. Chatsky in the monologue "And who are the judges?" denounces those “homelands of the fathers” who, “are rich in robbery”, “found protection from court in friends, in kinship, magnificent building chambers, where they overflow in feasts and extravagance”, denounces “the meanest traits of the past life”. Myself
Chatsky treats the people with great respect, he calls them "our smart, cheerful people." It is impossible to imagine Chatsky in the role of a serf-owner; it is not for nothing that Famusov advises him not to manage the "estate by mistake". Chatsky values a person by his intelligence, education, and not by the number of serf souls or rank. Therefore, for him, a certain Foma Fomich, a well-known and important official, is just "the most empty person, from the most stupid." Chatsky stands up for the freedom of the individual, for the right of a person to decide his own destiny: to serve or not to serve, to engage in science or art, to live in a village or in a city. Chatsky is a supporter of enlightenment, education, and all these Chatsky's views cause horror of rejection among his ideological opponents.
Ideals and views of Chatsky- this is Ideals and views true patriot; he speaks sarcastically about a certain Frenchman from Bordeaux, who, at an evening in Famusov’s house, told the assembled guests “how he equipped himself for the journey, to Russia, to the barbarians, with fear and tears,” but when he arrived, “he found that there was no end to caresses, no did not meet the sound of a Russian, nor a Russian face ... ". This Frenchman felt like a "little king", and Chatsky yearns with all his heart,
So that the Lord destroyed this unclean spirit
Empty, slavish, blind imitation...
In the comedy, Chatsky is tragically alone, he has no supporters among the main characters, but there are two off-stage characters that we can attribute to the protagonist's supporters. First of all, Skalozub’s cousin, who unexpectedly retired and “began reading books in the village,” and the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, about whom she says indignantly: “Chinov doesn’t want to know! He is a chemist, he is a botanist, Prince Fyodor, my nephew.”
In a clash with the Famus society, Chatsky is defeated. This defeat was inevitable, since there were still too few Chatskys in society. As I. A. Goncharov wrote in the critical study “A Million of Torments”: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old strength, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of fresh strength.” But such as Chatsky, Goncharov called "advanced warriors, skirmishers", who are the first to enter the battle and almost always die. But thoughts, ideas, Ideals and views of Chatsky were not in vain, such Chatskys will come to the Senate Square on December 14, 1825, where they will clash with the world of the Famusovs, silent-lings and pufferfish.
Chatsky is close to the people of the Decembrist warehouse, Famusov is his main opponent, the defender of the autocratic-feudal order. Already from the 1st act of the comedy it becomes clear how different people they are. In subsequent episodes, Famusov expresses his opinion about books, about the service. From Sophia's conversation with Lisa, it is clear that Famusov, "like all Moscow ones," appreciates only rank and wealth in people, and he himself says to Sophia: "He who is poor is not a match for you." All this creates a certain idea about Famusov.
Chatsky sees something completely different. Sincere, animated by a date with Sophia, witty, he laughs at Famusov, sharply jokes about the Moscow nobles, their life and pastime.
Thus, an ideological conflict is outlined between Famusov and Chatsky, which begins in the 2nd act. In their dispute, disagreement is manifested decisively in everything.
Famusov tries to teach:
Name, brother, do not manage by mistake. And most importantly - go and serve.
He paints his teachings with memories of the order of Catherine's times, when his grandfather Maxim Petrovich won the favor of the empress with flattery and servility, and convinces Chatsky to serve, "looking at the elders." “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve,” Chatsky replies to this proposal. He despises people who are ready
At the patrons to yawn at the ceiling, Appear to be silent, shuffle, have lunch, Substitute a chair, raise a handkerchief ...Chatsky believes that it is necessary to serve the "cause", not "persons", and approves of those who "are in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters." Famusov declares him a dangerous person who does not recognize the authorities, and threatens him with a trial.
Famusov is a defender of the autocratic-feudal system and admires the old ways and foundations of life. People like Chatsky are dangerous, they encroach on life, which is the basis of his well-being.
Famusov, a feudal lord, considers the right of the landowner to dispose of people as he pleases as legitimate. He sees no human dignity in serfs. Chatsky, on the other hand, expresses respect for ordinary people, calls the Russian people "smart, kind." It is against people like Famusov that Chatsky directs his blow in the monologue “And who are the judges? ..” He is outraged that the “fathers of the fatherland” in society are recognized as cruel feudal lords. These people "draw their judgments from forgotten newspapers."
When Famusov's guests "in unison" declare Chatsky crazy, Famusov claims that he was the first to make this discovery:
Try about the authorities - and God knows what they will say! Bow a little low, bend down with a ring, At least before the monarch's face, So he will call a scoundrel!
Famusov sees the cause of Chatsky's madness in science, in enlightenment: material from the site
Learning - that's the plague, learning - that's the reason, That now more than ever, Crazy divorced people, and deeds, and opinions.
The difference in views and culture is clearly manifested in the speech of Chatsky and Famusov. Chatsky is an educated person, his speech is logical, figurative, reflects the depth of thought. He is a master of aphorisms, caustic epigrams. His word is a destructive weapon.
Famusov's speech is the speech of a person who is not very educated, but not stupid, cunning, powerful, accustomed to considering himself infallible. He argues, defending his views, even shows wit.
In a conversation with Skalozub, insinuatingness, subservience are manifested, in words there are petting suffixes (“an order in the buttonhole”), he even adds “-s”: “Sergei Sergeyich, come here with us.” With servants, he is always rude, grouchy, he calls them names, calling them nothing more than Petrushka, Filka, Fomki, regardless of age.
This is how Griboyedov contrasts the "current century" with the "past century".
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page, material on the topics:
