Famus Society
The comedy "Woe from Wit" was written by Griboyedov in 1824. It gives a general picture of the entire Russian life of the 10-20s of the 19th century, reproduces the eternal struggle between old and new, which unfolded with particular force at that time not only in Moscow, but throughout Russia between two camps: the progressive, Decembrist-minded people of the "century" present" and serf-owners (people of the "past century").
All the images created by G-dov in the comedy are deeply realistic. Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin, Khlestova, the rogue Zagoretsky and all the others are a reflection of reality. These people, stupid and selfish, afraid of enlightenment and progress, their thoughts are focused only on acquiring honors and titles, wealth and outfits, they form a single camp of reaction that tramples all living things. “The Past Century” in the comedy is represented by a number of bright types. These are Famusov, Skalozub, Repetilov, and Molchalin.
F-th society is traditional. His principles of life are such that he must learn, “looking at his elders,” destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with obedience to persons standing a step higher, and most importantly, be rich. The ideal of this society is in Famusov's monologues Uncle Maxim Petrovich and Kuzma Petrovich: ... here is an example: The deceased was a respectable chamberlain, With a key, and he knew how to deliver the key to his son; Rich, and married to a rich woman; Married children, grandchildren; Died; everyone remembers him sadly. Kuzma Petrovich! Peace be upon him! - What kind of aces live and die in Moscow!..
At the head of the entire society is the figure of Famusov, an old Moscow nobleman who has earned general favor in the capital's circles. He is friendly, courteous, witty, cheerful. But this is only the external side. The author reveals the image of Famusov comprehensively. This is not only a hospitable host, but also a convinced serf owner, a fierce opponent of enlightenment. “They would take all the books and burn them,” he says. Chatsky, a representative of the “present century,” dreams of “injecting a mind hungry for knowledge into science.” He is outraged by the rules established in the f-th society, since it evaluates a person by his origin and the number of serf souls he has. Famusov himself dreams of marrying off his daughter Sophia at a better price and says to her: “Oh, mother, don’t finish the blow! Whoever is poor is not a match for you.” And then he adds: “For example, from time immemorial it has been the practice among us that honor is given to father and son: be poor, but if there are two thousand souls from the family, he is the groom.” Unlike representatives of the f-th society, Chatsky craves " sublime love", before which the whole world is dust and vanity."
In the relationship between Chatsky and the f-go society, the views of the “past century” on careers, on service, on what is most valued in people are revealed and ridiculed. In other words, Chatsky despises them. Famusov takes only relatives and friends into his service. He respects flattery and sycophancy. He wants to convince Chatsky to serve, “looking at the elders,” “putting up a chair, raising a handkerchief.” To this Chatsky objects: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” Chatsky takes service very seriously. And if Famusov treats it formally, bureaucratically (“it’s signed, off your shoulders”), then Chatsky says: “When in business, I hide from fun, when fooling around, I’m fooling around, and mixing these two crafts is a darkness of experts, I don’t from among them." Famusov worries about affairs only on one hand, mortally afraid, “so that a lot of them do not accumulate.” He does not consider his servants to be people, he treats them rudely, he can sell them, send them to hard labor. He scolds them as donkeys, logs, calls them Parsleys, Filkas, Fomkas. Thus, representatives of the f-go society treat service as a source of personal benefits, service to individuals, and not to business.
Chatsky strives to serve the fatherland, “the cause, not the persons.” He despises Molchalin, who is accustomed to “pleasing all people without exception - the owner where I happen to live, the boss with whom I will serve, his servant who cleans dresses, the doorman, the janitor, to avoid evil, the janitor’s dog, so that it is affectionate.” Everything in Molchalin: both behavior and words - emphasize the youthfulness of an immoral person making a career. Chatsky speaks bitterly about such people: “Silent people are blissful in the world!” It is Molchalin who arranges his life best of all. He is also talented in his own way. He earned Famusov's favor, Sophia's love, and received three awards. He values two qualities of his character most of all: “moderation and accuracy.” For Famusov and his circle, the opinion of the world is sacred and infallible; the most terrible thing is “what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say!”
Another prominent representative of the f-th society is Skalozub. This is exactly the kind of son-in-law Famusov dreamed of having. After all, Skalozub is “both a golden bag and aims to be a general.” This character embodied the typical features of a reactionary of Arakcheev’s time. “A wheeze, a strangled man, a bassoon, a constellation of maneuvers and a mazurka,” he is as much an enemy of education and science as Famusov. “You can’t fool me with learning,” says Skalozub. It is quite obvious that the very atmosphere of the f-th society forces representatives younger generation show your negative qualities.
So, Sophia uses her sharp mind to outright lie, spreading rumors about Chatsky’s madness. Sophia fully corresponds to the morality of the “fathers”. And although she is a smart girl, with a strong independent character, with a warm heart, a dreamy soul, all the same, false upbringing instilled in Sophia many negative qualities, making her a representative of the generally accepted views in this circle. She does not understand Chatsky, she has not grown up to him, to his sharp mind, to his logical, merciless criticism. She also does not understand Molchalin, who “loves her because of his position.” It is not her fault that Sophia has become a typical young lady of the f-th society. The society in which she was born and lived is to blame, “she was ruined, in the stuffiness, where not a single ray of light, not a single stream of fresh air penetrated” (Goncharov “A Million Torments”).
Another comedy character is very interesting. This is Repetilov. He is a completely unprincipled person, a “cracker,” but he was the only one who considered Chatsky to be “highly intelligent” and, not believing in his madness, called Famus’s pack of guests “chimeras” and “game.” Thus, he was at least one step above them all. “So! I have completely sobered up,” says Chatsky at the end of the comedy. What is this - defeat or insight? Yes, the end of this work is far from cheerful, but Goncharov is right when he said about the ending this way: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, having dealt it in turn a fatal blow with the quality of fresh power.” And I completely agree with Goncharov, who believes that the role of all Chatskys is “passive”, but at the same time always “victorious”.
Chatsky opposes the society of ignoramuses and serf owners. He fights against noble scoundrels and sycophants, swindlers, cheats and informers. In his famous monologue “Who are the judges?..” he tore off the mask from the vile and vulgar Famus world, in which the Russian people turned into an object of purchase and sale, where landowners even exchanged serfs for dogs: That Nestor of noble scoundrels, Surrounded by a crowd of servants; Zealous, they saved his honor and life more than once during the hours of wine and fights: suddenly he traded three greyhounds for them!!!
Chatsky defends a real person, humanity and honesty, intelligence and culture. He protects the Russian people, his Russia from a bad, inert and backward society. Chatsky wants to see Russia literate and cultural. He defends this in disputes and conversations with all the characters in the comedy "Go", directing all his intelligence, wit, evil, temper and determination to this. Therefore, those around him take revenge on Chatsky for the truth, which hurts his eyes, for his attempt to disrupt the usual way of life. The “past century,” that is, the f-th society, is afraid of people like Chatsky, because they encroach on the order of life that is the basis of the well-being of this society. Chatsky calls the past century, which Famusov admires so much, the century of “humility and fear.” The community is strong, its principles are firm, but Chatsky also has like-minded people. These are the persons mentioned: Skalozub's cousin ("The rank followed him: he suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village."), nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya. Chatsky himself constantly says “we,” “one of us,” thus speaking not only on his own behalf. So ASG-dov wanted to hint to the reader that the time of the “past century” is passing, it is being replaced by the “present century”, strong, smart, educated.
Bibliography
To prepare this work, materials from the site http://ilib.ru/ were used
After the foreign campaigns of the Russian army in 1812-1813, the ideas of Western liberalism began to penetrate and take root in Russia. They infected a large and best part high society.
As a result, there was a noticeable polarization of views, and conservative forces rallied around the government to combat freethinking. It is precisely such people, representatives of the “past century,” who form the basis of Famusov’s Moscow in A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.” It is not difficult to guess that the ideologist of this society in the work of A. S. Griboedov will be one of the main characters - P. A. Famusov. It most clearly reflects the main qualities of this world: serfdom, ignorance, hypocrisy, admiration for foreigners, serving persons rather than business, willingness to serve for the sake of momentary gain, lack of independence, attitude to service as a means of enrichment. But, oddly enough, in Griboyedov’s work, Famusov also appears as a caring father, wishing only good for his daughter, but good in his own understanding:
He would like a son-in-law with ranks and stars.
But anyway main feature The society of the Famusovs, the silent and Khlestovs, so accurately reflected in the comedy, is that almost all of its representatives are convinced serf owners: and Khlestova, who has a new pastime - arapka; and Famusov, ready to be exiled to Siberia for the slightest offense or in a fit of anger:
to settle you,
and those landowners who are presented in Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?” The writer cannot calmly relate to such perverted forms of serfdom and, through the mouth of the main character, condemns them.
The next feature characteristic of the old world is lack of education: at the ball, discussion of lyceums, universities and books causes general indignation:
Once evil is stopped:
They would take all the books and burn them.
These people are self-sufficient - they do not need education, they hire teachers for their children only because they follow fashion; If it were their will, there would be no books or gymnasiums. The Famusov world is close in spirit to that “consumptive” from the academic committee “who is the enemy of books,” whom Chatsky mocks, and at the same time they cannot accept their cousin Skalozub: after all, he “started reading books in the village!”
Representatives of the “past century” also condemn literature, considering it unnecessary and useless:
She can't sleep from French books,
And the Russians make it hard for me to sleep.
However, the influence of literature on public opinion, which everyone cherishes. This is especially evident in Zagoretsky’s censorship remarks:
Eternal mockery of lions! over the eagles!
No matter what you say:
Although they are animals, they are still kings.
But along with these sharply negative traits representatives of the “past century” still have, albeit a small, piece of humanity: Khlestov, whose feelings, it would seem, are separated from outside world, suddenly sympathizes with Chatsky:
And I feel sorry for Chatsky.
In a Christian way, he deserves pity.
And then, when the exponent of new ideas advocates a return to the national, he is ignored again - a sore spot in Famusov’s society is touched, and at the same time one of the main features is admiration for everything foreign, a contemptuous attitude towards Russian culture and especially towards native language(“Madam! Ha! ha! ha! ha! terrible!!”). For Famusov, all this is not a lifestyle close to him, but following fashion. It is precisely not wanting to lag behind life that such people hire teachers to educate their children, reluctantly pay them, and it is then that hatred of education in any form appears - both to gymnasiums and lyceums, so as not to contradict fashion and not be considered For this rebel, they do not condemn homeschooling.
What is characteristic is that education does not imply the use of knowledge in the future - when solving official matters, they are increasingly guided by established traditions:
Well, how can you not please your loved one?
My custom is this:
Signed, off your shoulders.
Here everything is based on self-interest, to which even feelings are subordinated: Molchalin “loves” Sophia “by position.” In this world, a person is ready to trample on his human dignity for the sake of vital mercantile interests: with what pathos Famusov talks about Maxim Petrovich, admiring his self-humiliation! In addition, this banter is already becoming a habit, becoming a way of life - a shining example is “fraudster, rogue Anton Antonovich Zagoretsky.” In his desire to please everyone: Sophia, Khlestova, and the state (very reminiscent of a high-society informer) - he crosses boundaries and turns into an exaggerated image.
An example of a different kind of service - stupid, thoughtless martinet - is S.S. Skalozub - he measures everything by military standards, jokes like a military man and generally embodies those traits that were so needed by the system of that time - lack of initiative (which, incidentally, characteristic of all representatives of Famus society), dullness and narrow-mindedness, which means he has prospects for growth.
Another no less colorful representative of the “past century” is Repetilov, “a repeater of other people’s thoughts, a member of the “Secret Union” and generally an inveterate liberal. In this case, an image is presented as a parody of this entire high society society, where everyone fancies himself a genius of speech, like Ippolit Markelych Udushtev, where there are secret societies"on Thursdays". Can’t all this cause a smile, but a smile of sympathy for vulgarity and emptiness!
In addition to these heroes, the play contains a large number of off-stage characters who help to more fully reveal one or another feature of Famus’s Moscow; but they all show the unnaturalness, the deadness of this society. As Goncharov rightly noted, Griboyedov transferred all this spirit of Moscow living rooms into comedy, took into account all the psychological details, took all the best and nothing superfluous. And indeed, “Woe from Wit” shows the entire spectrum of views, interests and sympathies of the capital’s nobility early XIX century.
Speaking about the system of characters in "Woe from Wit", we should first of all note the contrast between Chatsky - a lonely fighter - and the many-sided Famus society.
Famus Society- this is the conservative-minded Moscow nobility in satirical depiction Griboedova.
Famusov and his circle are distinguished by the following common features.
First of all, it's careless service. As you know, the main purpose of the nobility was to serve the fatherland. Service was considered an honorable duty of a nobleman. However, representatives of the Moscow nobility depicted in the comedy (Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin) regard service exclusively as a source of ranks and awards.
Secondly, this despotism towards servants. It is known that many nobles owned serf souls. Serfdom created the ground for tyranny and violence against the individual. Famusov, Khlestova, and a number of off-stage characters in the comedy are shown as wayward serf owners.
In addition, all representatives of Famus society are distinguished by a sharp rejection of enlightenment, education.
Ostentatious patriotism Famusov and his guests are combined with a blind man admiration for everything foreign, thoughtless passion for French fashion.
The Moscow nobility, as depicted by Griboyedov, is also distinguished by such universal human vices as idleness, gluttony, vanity, idle talk, gossip, and meaningless pastime (for example, playing cards).
Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov – one of the central characters comedy "Woe from Wit", middle-aged man, widower. His role in comedy is father of the bride.
Famusov is a high-ranking official, a “government manager.” At the same time, he is a wayward serf-owner who treats his servants autocratically.
As an official, Famusov is characterized by indifference to the matter. “It’s signed, off your shoulders!” - he says to Molchalin. The hero is distinguished by nepotism in the service. He tells Skalozub:
How will you begin to introduce yourself to a little cross, to a small town,
Well, how can you not please your loved one!
With Liza, Famusov behaves like a tyrant gentleman. At first he flirts with her, and then threatens to send her “to go after the birds.” He is ready to send other offending servants “to settlement.”
Famusov’s cool disposition distinguishes him not only in relation to servants, but also in relation to my own daughter. Suspecting Sophia of secret meetings with Chatsky, Famusov is going to send her “to the village, to her aunt, to the wilderness, to Saratov.”
At the same time, Famusov is distinguished by sincere love for his daughter and concern for her future; He is trying with all his might to find a profitable groom for her. Rejection of Chatsky and Molchalin as unworthy suitors for Sophia and pleasing Skalozub, a worthy suitor, clarify Famusov’s life priorities. “Whoever is poor is not a match for you,” Famusov teaches Sophia.
The hero is distinguished by such positive traits, as hospitality, hospitality.
The door is open for the invited and the uninvited,
Especially from foreign ones;
Though fair man, at least not,
It’s equal for us, dinner is ready for everyone, -
Famusov declares in his monologue about Moscow in the second act of the comedy.
Famusov's ideals in the past, in the “past century”. In the monologue that opens the second act of the comedy, the hero admires the merits of the “venerable chamberlain” Kuzma Petrovich. In another monologue, Famusov bows to the “exploits” of Catherine’s nobleman Maxim Petrovich. Famusov’s idea of the true mind is firmly connected with this off-stage character. "A? What do you think? In our opinion, he is smart. / He fell painfully, but got up well,” notes Famusov regarding Maxim Petrovich’s falls in front of Catherine II.
Famusov, like other representatives of the Moscow nobility, is an enemy of enlightenment. He made harsh judgments about books, for example:
Once evil is stopped,
Take all the books and burn them.
He considers studying science to be madness:
Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is worse now than then,
There were crazy people, deeds, and opinions.
In ideological conflict plays by Famusov - Chatsky's main opponent.
Skalozub
Sergey Sergeevich Skalozub another bright representative of Famus society. This is an Arakcheevsky officer. If Famusov personifies the age of nobles and hospitable Moscow bars that is fading into the past, then Colonel Skalozub is new type Russian life, formed after the War of 1812.
Let us note some personality traits, as well as life principles Skalozub.
Main goal The hero sees his life not in military exploits, but in successful career advancement. Skalozub says to Famusov:
Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels;
I judge them as a true philosopher:
I just wish I could become a general.
The hero is determined against freethinkers. He declares to Repetilov:
I am Prince Gregory and you
I'll give the sergeant major to Voltaire.
Skalozub personifies despotic tendencies in the state life of Russia recent years reign of Alexander I. It is no coincidence that Famusov is drawn to Skalozub and reads him as Sophia’s suitor. Famusov sees in Skalozub a real force that can keep the old social foundations unchanged.
Molchalin
Collegiate Assessor Alexey Stepanovich Molchalin also one of the central figures in the comedy.
Molchalin, like Skalozub, - new phenomenon in Russian life. This type of official-bureaucrat, gradually displacing the rich and all-powerful nobles from the state and public spheres.
Like Famusov, Molchalin views service as a way to receive ranks and awards.
As I work and force,
Since I've been listed in the Archives,
Received three awards -
Molchalin says to Chatsky. His view of the service is also expressed in the words: “And win awards and have fun.”
The main life principles of Molchalin - "moderation and accuracy." Molchalin will no longer break the back of his head like Maxim Petrovich. His flattery is more subtle.
Pleasing to the right people, especially strong of the world This corresponds to the hero’s ideas about the true mind. Stupid from Chatsky’s point of view, Molchalin in his own way is not so stupid. Main features of worldview the heroes are revealed in the fourth act, in a monologue about his father’s will:
My father bequeathed to me
First, please all people without exception:
The owner, where he will live,
The boss with whom I will serve,
To his servant who cleans dresses,
Doorman, janitor, to avoid evil,
To the janitor's dog, so that it is affectionate.
Meanwhile, Molchalin’s humility and his pleasing to his neighbors are fulfilled hypocrisy And falsehood. Molchalin's true essence is revealed in his attitude towards Sophia and Lisa.
Let us also note such a trait of Molchalin as feigned sentimentality. Molchalin perfectly mastered the fashion for “sensitive” plays and playing the flute. Sentimentality becomes for the hero an important tool for achieving a strong position in society, where omnipotent ladies, greedy for flattery and exquisite compliments, rule the roost.
Molchalin plays an important role not only in the ideological conflict, but also in the love affair: he first lover! Well aware of the importance of his own role, Molchalin admits to Lisa:
And now I take the form of a lover
To please the daughter of such a man.
The hero successfully copes with his role until the moment of exposure. It is no coincidence that Molchalin, and not Chatsky, becomes Sophia’s chosen one. “Silent people are blissful in the world!” - exclaims Chatsky.
By creating the images of Molchalin and Skalozub, Griboedov expressed his point of view regarding the near future of Russia. Unlike Chatsky, the author of “Woe from Wit” does not idealize the prospects of liberalism in the “present century.” It seems to Chatsky that “everyone breathes more freely.” Griboyedov thinks differently. The playwright realizes that the immediate future of Russia does not belong to Chatsky, but to Skalozub and Molchalin. These heroes stand firmly on their feet, their positions in life are stronger, despite all their cynicism.
Sophia
Famusov's daughter Sophia– central female character comedies. This is rich and noble bride.
Sophia's character is ambiguous. Pushkin also noted: “Sophia is drawn unclearly.”
On the one hand, we see in Sophia, in the words of I. A. Goncharov, “strong inclinations of a remarkable nature.” It is distinguished by its natural mind(the characteristic name “Sophia” means “wisdom” in Greek), everyday prudence, the ability to sincerely feel.
In addition, Sophia is characterized independence life position : Having shown disobedience to her father, Sophia fell in love with a man unequal to herself.
On the other hand, Sophia lives by the values of Famus society. Lies and slander are not alien to her nature.
Perhaps it was precisely the lack of high moral principles that led the heroine to the fact that she was unable to immediately recognize Molchalin’s low and vile nature.
Sophia turns out to be a key character in the plot of the comedy, in a love affair. Sophia's attitude towards Molchalin and Chatsky reflects the priorities that were firmly established among the Moscow nobility. Sophia's ideal, according to Chatsky, is “a husband-boy, a husband-servant, one of his wife’s pages.”
Chatsky and his intelligence are rejected by the heroine. “Will such a mind make a family happy?” - Sophia exclaims, referring to Chatsky’s liberal ideas and wit. The heroine not only turns away from her childhood friend, for whom she once had sympathy, but also turns out to be the initiator of the spread of slander about his madness. At the same time, as a result, she herself turns out to be deceived, she herself suffers grief from her “mind”, becomes a victim of Molchalin’s meanness, as well as her own self-confidence.
The image of Sophia is shaded by the image of a maid Lisa.
The aristocrat Sophia is opposed ordinary girl- witty, intelligent, endowed with a lively mind and self-esteem. So, Lisa rejects the advances of Famusov and Molchalin. She is burdened by her role as Sophia's confidante. Lisa appears in the comedy as a victim of the lord's affection and lordly anger.
Pass us away more than all sorrows
AND lordly anger, And lordly love, –
says Lisa.
In "Woe from Wit" there are a significant number of minor, episodic characters - representatives of Famus society. Minor characters allow Griboedov to show the views, ideals, and morals of the Moscow nobility more broadly and deeply.
Natalya Dmitrievna Gorich- social coquette. Her unrealized dream in relation to her husband - the position of Moscow commandant.
Myself Platon Mikhailovich Gorich in previous years he served, was a comrade of Chatsky, probably shared his opposition views.
Now he is entirely “under the heel” of his wife, “husband-boy, husband-servant,” repeats the A-prayer duet on the flute. “A certificate of commendation for you, you behave properly,” Chatsky addresses Platon Mikhailovich with irony.
Gorich is burdened by idle pastime in secular salons, but he cannot do anything. “Captivity is bitter,” notes Gorich (“a telling” surname) about his situation.
Platon Mikhailovich personifies the degradation of personality in Famus society.
Prince Tugoukhovsky he’s the same henpecked guy as Gorich, only older. His deafness (which is emphasized by the “speaking” surname) symbolizes the hero’s inability for independent thoughts and actions.
Princess Tugoukhovskaya busy trying to get her six daughters married.
Princess Tugoukhovskaya, like other representatives of Famus society, is distinguished by harsh judgments about freethinkers. Let us remember the princess's monologue about Pedagogical Institute:
No, the institute is in St. Petersburg
Pe-da-go-gic, that’s what their name seems to be:
There they practice schisms and unbelief
Professors!..
Countess Grandmother And Countess-granddaughter- paired characters.
The Countess Grandmother is a “splinter” of the last century. She is filled with anger towards freethinkers. Chatsky, in her view, is a “damned Voltairian.”
The countess-granddaughter embodies the admiration of Moscow ladies for the French. Chatsky angrily ridicules this trait of hers.
Old Woman Khlestova- lady-serf. So, she says:
Out of boredom I took it with me
A little black girl and a dog...
Khlestova, like Princess Tugoukhovskaya, is distinguished by her hostility to enlightenment:
And you'll really go crazy from these, from some
From boarding schools, schools, lyceums, you name it,
Yes from lancard mutual training.
Zagoretsky- the embodiment of baseness and dishonesty. This is what Platon Mikhailovich Gorich says about him:
He is a secular man
A notorious swindler, a rogue...
Meanwhile, the dishonest Zagoretsky is “accepted everywhere.” Chatsky, an honest and decent man, was declared a madman and expelled from society.
All named characters, including two unnamed paired characters, Mr.N. and Mr. D. are rapidly spreading slander about Chatsky. Everyone agrees that the reason for the hero’s madness lies in such properties of his mind as education and liberal ideas. This is especially clearly manifested in the scene of Chatsky’s general condemnation (the 21st scene of the third act).
Special mention should be made about the figure Repetilova.
This character was introduced by Griboedov in the later edition of the comedy. He appears only in the fourth act of the work.
The “talking” surname “Repetilov” is derived from French word“répéter” – “to repeat.”
Repetilov is a type of empty talker who is carried away by liberal ideas and thoughtlessly spreads them.
Griboyedov, creating the image of Repetilov, sought to express his ambiguous attitude towards the liberal nobility. On the one hand, with the help of the image of Repetilov, Griboyedov highlights Chatsky’s loneliness. It turns out that Chatsky’s “like-minded people” are empty talkers like Repetilov; At the same time, Chatsky himself is a significant, extraordinary and lonely figure among the pseudo-liberals.
On the other hand, by creating the image of Repetilov, Griboyedov sought to show his skeptical attitude towards the opposition-minded nobility in general. In this regard, Repetilov is Chatsky’s “double”. Therefore, while denouncing Repetilov, Griboedov also polemicizes with the main character of his work.
Chatsky
Alexander Andreevich Chatsky – main character "Fire from mind" the main ideological opponent of the Famus society.
This is a young nobleman who lost his parents early and was brought up in Famusov’s house.
Facts from the past Chatsky, mentioned in the play, remind us of the fate of many liberal-minded nobles, including future Decembrists. Thus, Chatsky, due to his ideological convictions, left first the military, then the civil service. “I’d be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” declares the hero. It is possible that Chatsky tried to carry out liberal reforms on his estate. No wonder Famusov says to Chatsky: “Don’t mismanage your property, brother.” Probably, Chatsky took part in the reform initiatives of Alexander I, then became disillusioned with them. Molchalin speaks about these facts, referring to Tatyana Yuryevna’s words about Chatsky’s “connection” and “break” with the ministers. Chatsky traveled and was abroad. Perhaps it was there that he became familiar with the educational ideas of the West.
Let's consider the most important aspects hero's personality. In Chatsky we find the features of an educated nobleman of that time, a man honest, noble. He is distinguished by such character traits as moral purity, chastity, capacity for sincere feeling. For Chatsky, love for Sophia is by no means a manifestation of the “science of tender passion”; Chatsky wants to marry Sophia.
Chatsky has active nature, which, according to I.A. Goncharov, distinguishes him from Pushkin’s Onegin.
At the same time, Chatsky is characterized by such qualities as high opinion about oneself, harshness and categoricalness in a statement own position, intolerance to other people's opinions, the habit of judging others, mocking everyone. All this causes hostility from others characters, first of all Sophia.
Particular attention should be paid to the edges crazy Chatsky.
First of all, let's note natural abilities of the hero, their knowledge of languages. Famusov says about Chatsky: “...he’s a guy with a head; / And he writes and translates nicely.”
In addition, Chatsky has critical mind. The hero is distinguished wit, the ability to find comic features in the surrounding society. Lisa says about Chatsky:
Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!
Sophia also recognizes these qualities in the hero. “Oster, smart, eloquent,” she notes about Chatsky. At the same time, Sophia evaluates these qualities of the hero negatively. “A snake is not a man,” she says, not accepting Chatsky’s ridicule of Molchalin.
Chatsky's mind is freethinking, freethinking, that is, those properties of his worldview that cause sharp hostility on the part of Famus society. It is no coincidence that what Chatsky considers intelligence, in the perception of Famusov and his guests is madness.
Chatsky expresses educational ideas, which remind us of the ideology of the Decembrists.
Firstly, this protest against the excesses of serfdom. Let us remember Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?”, where the hero speaks about “Nestor of the noble scoundrels”, who exchanged his faithful servants for “three greyhounds”, about the owner of the serf theater, who sold off his actors one by one.
Secondly, this love of freedom.“Everyone breathes more freely,” declares Chatsky, meaning “the present century.” “He wants to preach freedom,” says Famusov about Chatsky.
Chatsky is close to the idea service to the fatherland. At the same time he performs against veneration of rank, servility, admiration for the uniform. Chatsky has sympathy for those “who serve the cause, not individuals.”
Chatsky appears before us as hot advocate of education, denouncer of ignorance. In the monologue “Who are the judges?” he speaks with sympathy about young man, who “will focus his mind hungry for knowledge on science” and, because of this, will be known in a conservative society as a dangerous dreamer.
Finally, Chatsky defends the idea of national identity Russia, performs against foreign domination. This idea is expressed especially clearly in the monologue about the Frenchman from Bordeaux. The hero exclaims:
Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.
Chatsky becomes main participant in the ideological conflict, which determines the socio-political meaning of comedy. Story line, reflecting Chatsky’s conflict with Famusov and with the entire conservative Moscow nobility, ends with the hero’s break with society. Chatsky wins a moral victory over Famusov’s society, but at the same time, according to I.A. Goncharov, he turns out to be “broken by the amount of old power.”
At the same time Chatsky - one of the key figures in the love affair. He plays a role unlucky lover. The storyline, reflecting the development of a love affair, allows the author of the comedy to show inner world hero, his experiences. Chatsky’s “A Million Torments” is largely due to the fact that the hero turns out to be rejected by his beloved.
Off-stage characters
In addition to the minor (episodic) ones, “Woe from Wit” also contains off-stage characters who do not appear on stage, but are only mentioned in the monologues and remarks of the characters.
Thus, the mention of a number of people in Chatsky’s monologue about Moscow in the first act of the comedy (“dark little one, on crane legs,” “three of the boulevard faces,” “consumptive... enemy of books,” Aunt Sophia, Guillaume the Frenchman) helps Griboedov draw a satirical a picture of Moscow morals.
In Famusov’s monologues in the second act, two representatives of the “past century” are named: “the venerable chamberlain” Kuzma Petrovich and favorite of Catherine II Maxim Petrovich- the embodiment of servility and servility.
In Famusov’s monologue about Moscow in the second act (“Taste, father, excellent manner...”) the names all-powerful ladies, forming public opinion:
Order the command in front of the front!
Be present, send them to the Senate!
Irina Vlasevna! Lukerya Aleksevna!
Tatyana Yuryevna! Pulcheria Andrevna!
In the monologue “Who are the judges?” Chatsky denounces the cruel serf owners. Here are named " Nestor of noble scoundrels”, who exchanged his faithful servants for “three greyhounds”, and owner of the serf theater, which sold out its actors one by one.
In the third act, in a conversation with Chatsky, Molchalin mentions influential persons - Tatyana Yurievna And Foma Fomich. These off-stage characters allow the viewer to better understand the essence of Molchalin - “a sycophant and a businessman”, and also to feel general atmosphere servility that reigns in society.
« Frenchman from Bordeaux"(from Chatsky's monologue at the end of the third act) symbolizes the admiration of the Moscow nobility for everything foreign.
Persons mentioned in Repetilov's monologues in the fourth act ( Prince Grigory, Vorkulov Evdokim, Udushev Ippolit Markelych, Lakhmotyev Alexey and others), allow Griboyedov to recreate the atmosphere of empty liberalism that reigns in the English Club.
In his last remark, Famusov recalls “ Princess Marya Aleksevna». Comic effect is enhanced by the fact that this person is named here for the first time. The image of Marya Aleksevna symbolizes Famusov’s fear of the opinions of all-powerful ladies.
Most of the off-stage characters are representatives of Famus society. However, two characters are possible like-minded people of Chatsky. This is, firstly, Skalozub's cousin, about which the latter says:
But I firmly picked up some new rules.
The rank followed him - he suddenly left the service,
Secondly, this is the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - Prince Fyodor, who studied at the Pedagogical Institute in St. Petersburg and there adopted liberal ideas. Freethinkers include professors the same institute.
The role of off-stage characters in Griboedov's comedy is extremely large.
Off-stage characters allow us to better understand the characters and life principles of the main characters in the play.
Finally, off-stage characters complement big picture the life of the Russian nobility, recreated by Griboyedov in “Woe from Wit.”
/ / / Famusov society in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
Griboyedov cast all representatives of the “past century” in the image of Pavel Famusov. He was a famous and respected gentleman. Among his like-minded people are the Tugoukhovskys, the Gorichs, the old woman Khlestova and, of course, Famusov’s pride, Colonel Skalozub. These people were united by one view of life. The main thing for them is wealth, career, position in society. They were ardent supporters of serfdom. They don't have any moral principles, selling or exchanging a serf for a dog is a normal thing for them. People who have reached a high rank are the standard for such people.
In addition, representatives of the Famus society are united by a disdainful attitude towards business. For example, Famusov was a “manager in a government place,” but in all that time, he only got involved in business once, and then at the insistence of. He casually signs some papers without even reading them.
Also, representatives of the Famus society are united by a passion for everything foreign, or rather French. For them, French society is the standard of life. They firmly believe that foreign culture can save them. But, unfortunately, borrowing a language, traditions and customs, and behavior puts such people in a very comical position, although they do not notice it.
And so, the main features of representatives of Famus society are greed, thirst for power, and selfishness. Even when communicating with each other, they spread gossip, play hypocrisy to each other, and use foul language. Their main occupation is entertainment. Most of all they are afraid of the arrival of something new, they are afraid of changes. Famusov even opposes education, comparing it to the plague.
The only goal in life of such people is advancement in career ladder. Career - main meaning their lives. It is for this reason that Famusov praises Skalozub, sets him up as an example to others, and despises Chatsky, although he sees in him the potential for a good career.
We can say that for Famus society it was an ideal in itself, because only in it were the traditions of the nobility, wealth and recognition honored.
In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” Griboyedov revealed to us the utopian nature of Famus’s society and showed us where it could lead Russia.
Although immortal work Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit” was written more than 2 centuries ago; what the great Russian playwright described is still relevant to this day, in our time.
Although both Chatsky and Famusov are heroes of that time, the beginning of the 19th century, echoes of these characters can be found in our social aspects society.
As you know, in Russian history the people have always been concerned about the problem of autocracy, so the question of who is worthy of power, the people or the monarch, has always been relevant. Left a particularly painful imprint on our society serfdom, which did not allow the people to move forward. Griboyedov in his comedy describes precisely those phenomena of society: the struggle of people who agreed with the Decembrists, and the struggle with the nobility, which was conservative.
And why did the nobility need to change anything in their lives, when the privileged mass of people had practically everything that a person living in the 19th century could wish for: their own farm, peasants, servants, and other luxuries of life.
If we consider the character of Famusov, who evokes the most negative and negative feelings, then this man is a very hypocritical character who behaves in two ways in society.
For example, Famusov says that he honors God and sets a worthy example of “monastic” behavior, but in the meantime he cannot do without a keen eye on his young maid Lisa.
Famusov depended on other people of higher rank, so their opinion was the most important driver in his life. He once even told Chatsky that he needed to follow the example of those who, by the will of fate, became rich gentlemen:
We would learn by looking at our elders:
We, for example, or the deceased uncle,
Maxim Petrovich: he’s not on silver,
Ate on gold; one hundred people at your service;
All in orders; I was always traveling in a train;
A century at court, and at what court!
Famusov does not live, but exists. He performs all the functions that the noble society performed then. The whole point of life for rich people was eternal revelry or deliberate aristocracy. Civil service, which most nobles performed, did not make them patriotic and erudite people: for example, work for Famusov was just a tick, they say, he is a nobleman, and that’s what he’s supposed to do.
This hero performed his official duties because he “had to” without any enthusiasm. Therefore, thanks to such a noble society, there was no progress in Russia, while Europe was instantly ahead of us.
Chatsky - extra person in this society, but, as a fighter against the system, he is powerless, because, as they say, “alone in the field is not a warrior.”
But, of course, one cannot take the entire noble class with the same brush with the Famusovs, Kirsanovs, Manilovs and other characters described by great literary figures. For example, Griboyedov himself was a nobleman, but he social status did not prevent him from touching on important issues and ridiculing people of similar rank to himself.
