Already in the very title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” (1822 - 1824) a significant contradiction is reflected. For Enlightenment philosophy, intelligence and happiness were perceived as synonymous. The basis of the Enlightenment's beliefs was the belief that the enlightened mind is the arbiter of the destinies of mankind. This found a vivid expression in Pushkin’s “Bacchic Song” (1829): “So false wisdom flickers and smolders // Before the immortal sun of the mind.” But in the 20s years XIX V. in conditions of serious social contradictions, the most insightful thinkers began to understand that the powers of reason had to severe trials. This is what happens in Griboyedov's comedy.
It is no coincidence that the theme of the mind (learning, knowledge) is touched upon by almost all the characters in the comedy. And immediately a sharp contrast emerges. For Chatsky, the highest value is “a mind hungry for knowledge”; for Famusov, “Learning is a plague...”. Repetilov is convinced that “an intelligent person cannot help but be a rogue.” contemptuously throws out: “You can’t faint with your learning...”. And Sophia asks from her position (knowing the answer in advance): “Why look for intelligence?” and “Will such a mind make a family happy?”, which determines its place in the system of images. Chatsky, a pious believer in the power of the mind, notices with horror that no one understands him - and does not want to understand that the mind brings him not joy, not happiness, but grief. This debate about the mind is fundamentally important in comedy, because it touches on an issue that has acquired socio-political significance. This is how a sharp division appears from the very beginning: an inert Famusov society, who thinks primarily about the usual values: money, career, position in the world, and Chatsky, who is an expression of the ideals of the Decembrists, educators according to his fundamental convictions. This conflict is outlined immediately; it unites two storylines in the play: personal, psychological, associated with Chatsky’s love for Sophia, and socio-political.
Chatsky arrives early in the morning at Famusov’s house not at all in order to enter into battle with outdated views or pronounce loud monologues. He is in a hurry to see his beloved girl. But it turns out that the hero’s love is doomed to failure - and not just because Sophia does not reciprocate Chatsky’s feelings, but also for another reason: there is nothing in common that would connect the hero with her world. Chatsky and representatives of Famus’s circle (not excluding Sophia) think, say, and act differently. In Act II, Chatsky talks with Famusov about Sophia. It's about about matchmaking, that is, about things that seem to be of a purely family, everyday nature. But this conversation instantly turns into an open debate about life, economics, worldview, and finally politics. Thus, the difference in human characters and psychology is defined by Griboedov as fundamentally opposite life positions, direct antagonism in value orientations.
In "Woe from Wit" there is a constant, direct and fierce struggle between two camps. It would seem that Chatsky is alone in this struggle. However, if you carefully read the text, it turns out that he also has like-minded people, people close to his views.
This, for example, is Skalozub’s cousin, who suddenly left the service, although he was about to receive another rank. He “got a strong grip on some new rules” and “began to read books in the village.” In the same row is Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, Prince Fyodor, who “does not want to know the ranks”, but is engaged in science. Academician M.V. Nechkina, who paid a lot of attention to the problem of Chatsky’s camp, drew attention to Sophia’s words about the hero of the comedy: “I am especially happy with friends.” Consequently, he has friends, he has his own camp, on behalf of which he speaks here, in Famusov’s house: “Now let one of us, one of the young people, be found...” Plural this is far from accidental. Chatsky clearly speaks not only on his own behalf: “Where, point out to us, are the fathers of the fatherland, // Which we should take as models,” etc. And Famusov, in turn, does not mean only Chatsky alone when he exclaims , talking about Maxim Petrovich’s sycophancy: “Huh? what do you think? in our opinion, he’s smart.”
It is significant that representatives of Famus’s world very quickly find the appropriate political terminology that defines Chatsky’s position in the social struggle of the era. They compare him with figures of the European liberation movement. From Famusov’s point of view, he is a Carbonari, according to Princess Tugoukhovskaya, he is a Jacobin. And even the deaf countess-grandmother immediately found the appropriate term: “Oh, damned Voltairian.”
Conflict manifests itself in everything: in the definition of value human personality, both in relation to the people and in the understanding of patriotism. For Chatsky main value a person lies in his civil service to the Motherland. For Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin, the ideas of the good of the Fatherland simply do not exist. It’s enough to remember with what taste and pleasure they talk about awards, chips, insignia - about anything, just not about business: “And what I have to do, what’s not my business, // My custom is this: // Signed, so with off your shoulders." The conflict is ideological, conscious in nature. Chatsky preaches his ideas, but Famusov also diligently strives to instill in his interlocutor his view of food, to win him over to his side: “You should learn by looking at your elders...” And he even tries to teach Chatsky: “You should go to Tatyana Yuryevna at least once. ..”
System of images. At the center of the comedy’s image system is, of course, Chatsky. His views, thoughts, actions, character are revealed not only in monologues, but also in relation to Sophia, Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin. And they, in turn, manifest themselves in contacts both with Chatsky and with each other. Thus, to complete the picture of Famusov, it is necessary to take into account both his self-characteristics and relationships with other actors. The result is an idea of a living, multifaceted human character. Famusov is shown both as a father, and as an important Moscow gentleman, and as a hospitable host. But he has main feature, giving his image the necessary integrity and unity. He finds support in the unshakable foundations consecrated by antiquity. Famusov is a conservative by conviction, by nature, by habit, finally. Everything that threatens this system threatens him personally. Therefore, Famusov passionately and convincingly defends not just everyday life and morals, but also the ideas of the old world, defending its indispensable attributes: careerism, sycophancy, servility, unprincipledness, immorality.
If homework on the topic of: » “Woe from Wit” – Issues and main conflict If you find it useful, we will be grateful if you post a link to this message on your page on your social network.
Latest news
Categories
News
Essays on the topic
- Chatsky and Famusov society. (3) I read the magnificent comedy by A. S. Griboedov “Woe from Wit”. It was created by the author over eight
Reversible and irreversible chemical reactions. Chemical balance. Shift in chemical equilibrium under the influence of various factors 1. Chemical equilibrium in the 2NO(g) system
Niobium in its compact state is a lustrous silvery-white (or gray when powdered) paramagnetic metal with a body-centered cubic crystal lattice.
Noun. Saturating the text with nouns can become a means of linguistic figurativeness. The text of A. A. Fet’s poem “Whisper, timid breathing...”, in his
1. Creative path writer, writer
2. “Woe from Wit”: history of origin and main meaning.
3. Bright, figurative language of comedy.
4. Timelessness of comedy.
Alas! Silent people are blissful in the world!
A. S. Griboyedov
A. S. Griboyedov, diplomat, talented poet, composer, went down in the history of Russian literature as the author of the only, brilliant comedy “Woe from Wit.”
A man with an excellent education and a brilliant mindset, Griboedov devoted his life to serving his homeland, believing: “The more enlightened a person is, the more useful he is to his fatherland.” Close acquaintance with the Decembrists and sharing their ideas and hatred towards the autocratic serfdom system gave the poet a lot. However, he did not believe in the revolutionary method of changing Russian reality and in the happy outcome of the Decembrist conspiracy.
Early little-known creativity Griboyedov was closely connected with drama. The writer co-authored with P. A. Katenin (“Student”), A. A. Shakhovsky and B. M. Khmelnitsky (“Own Family, or a Married Bride”), Gendre (“Feigned Infidelity”, a brilliant translation of the comedy by G. Barthes) . The writer’s first independent work is the comedy “Young Spouses” - a free adaptation of the famous plot French playwright K. de Lesser.
Already Griboedov’s first dramatic experiments became innovative: with his help, something new arose for Russian theater direction - “secular” or “light” comedy. In the first, still clumsy and timid experiments, ideas and techniques were discovered that would acquire a new sound in his programmatic work “Woe from Wit.” The exact origin of the idea for the comedy is unknown, but creativity researchers place its date back to 1816. The first two acts were written in the Caucasus, where the writer stayed for official affairs from 1821 to 1822. The main work was carried out in St. Petersburg (1824), but in next year the artist returns to his comedy again, changing some scenes and introducing missing elements into the comedy.
The main theme of the work is the depiction of reality as it is: the depravity of the morals and principles of life of the decaying nobility and the sad, largely unfair situation advanced person found himself in such an environment. The problems that the author poses in the work are truly serious. They relate to the situation of the Russian people, principles of upbringing and education that have become obsolete and outdated, autocracy and the identity of Russia. Many of them were raised earlier in the works of other authors of this time, but most of them never received their logical resolution.
The action of the comedy reveals the situation of the Russian nobility on the eve of 1925. This can be judged by the realities that are quite accurately described in the text and related to specific historical dates: 1817 - the formation of a committee “so that no one knew or learned to read and write”, 1819 - Lancastrian education, popular among the Decembrists, 1821 - “schisms” and lack of faith,” which accused the Russian advanced professors, as well as foreign events that took place in the period from 1820 to 1823.
The contradiction between the heroism of the people, revealed during Patriotic War 1812, and the regime of serfdom that oppresses and suppresses it, a red line runs through the entire fabric of the work. It was expressed in the clash between the representative of the advanced educated Russian nobility Chatsky and the Famus society, typical of Russia. The situation in which Chatsky found himself is typical of the entire Russian reality of that time. Despite the existence of people close in ideology to Chatsky, main character helpless and alone in a hostile environment.
Griboedov's innovation was manifested in many aspects, in particular, in the novelty of the main idea in the title of the comedy - all grief in society comes “from the mind,” that is, from “excessive” education and intelligence. The playwright shows two polar views on life in the comedy. This is the point of view of Chatsky, for whom the highest value is “a mind hungry for knowledge,” and Famusov, who believes that “learning is a plague, learning is the reason that today there are more people than when there were crazy people.” The main story line comedy - leading dialogues, scenes, even development love line depend on the views of heroes opposed to each other. Intelligence, stupidity, madness are the spring for the development of the entire action.
The bright, figurative, aphoristic language of comedy still makes the work interesting for modern reader. There is no such work either in Russian or in foreign literature, which would sparkle with such abundance winged words and expressions. A. S. Pushkin spoke about Griboyedov’s skill like this: “I’m not talking about poetry: half of it should become a proverb.” Catchphrases not only embellished the text of the work, organically intertwining with it and flowing from it, but also became the wealth of the Russian language, went “to the people.”
The topicality of comedy is still undeniable. Silent people are blissful in the world. Typical people are found even now only in masks of decency, with behavior that makes them less noticeable in the crowd, and with a new “gloss” that modern Sophias are susceptible to.
Each comedy character has become a household name. About the existence of such images in real life, unfortunately, there is no doubt. Take Repetilov, for example, a most useless, unnecessary person for society, who, however, was accepted into it thanks to his brilliant abilities - the ability to “stick” to a smarter person and feed on his thoughts and ideas, distorting them and claiming their authorship for himself. No wonder the phrase that became popular was put into his mouth:
“Yes, an intelligent person cannot help but be a rogue.”
"Woe from Wit" appeared greatest work of a similar kind for his contemporaries. Until now, his images are alive, heroes and themes exist side by side with reality. Sometimes it becomes scary to look into the future - centuries pass, generations change, but Griboyedov’s comedy continues to remain, because human thought and human judgment are largely conservative. Who are the judges? The permanent Famusovs and Molchalins. Chatsky? There are plenty of them, but they occupy the same place as they did several centuries ago. They can criticize, quite rightly and justifiably, they can criticize ossified and dilapidated, but no less vulgar social conditions. But things usually don’t progress beyond criticism, and there is only one way out: like the main character of a comedy, run away
Get out of Moscow!
I don't go here anymore.
I'm running, I won't look back,
I'll go search around the world,
Where there is a corner for an offended feeling.”
Griboyedov’s timeless work will remain so not only because of its special poignancy and relevance, but also thanks to its brilliant imagery, perfectly applied to modern society:
Well done! Well Famusov!
He knew how to name guests!
Some freaks from the other world
And there was no one to talk to, and no one to dance with.
There are cases in the history of art and literature when just one work makes its author immortal. A.S. Griboedov forever entered literature with his socio-political comedy “Woe from Wit,” which shows the spiritual life of Russia after the Patriotic War of 1812, the contradictions of the “present century” and the “past century.”
Ethical and philosophical views A.S. Griboyedov are already reflected in the title of the comedy. A person who thinks about the rational structure of society and does not accept reactionary views has a difficult time among those who understand intelligence as “the ability to live.”
The main conflict of the work unfolds between Chatsky and Famus society. It reflected the struggle between two social forces: progressive liberal nobles and reactionary serf-owning nobles.
A.S. Griboedov satirically depicts noble-bureaucratic Moscow and, more broadly, Russia. Despite the commonality of many features (selfish interests, lack of high morality, low level of education, fear of enlightenment), each image embodies a specific specific historical type.
Famusov personifies the “past century.” He is a wealthy landowner and a major official, who, however, does not burden himself with service (“what’s the matter, what’s not the matter is signed, so off your shoulders”). Perceiving the service as his own patrimony, Famusov surrounded himself with relatives and acquaintances:
When I have employees, strangers are very rare,
More and more sisters, sisters-in-law, children...
How are you going to present yourself to the cross?
to the place, how can you not please your loved one!
Famusov is a hypocrite and a hypocrite. The ideal of Famusov’s entire entourage is Maxim Petrovich, who, despite his gray hair, fell several times in front of the empress to amuse her, which earned him royal favor. Famusov is ready to give his daughter in marriage to anyone, as long as he has money and power. He sees his son-in-law even in the rude and ignorant martinet Skalozub, whom Chatsky aptly described as “a constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas.” Skalozub reveals his dreams:
...to get ranks, there are many channels...
I just wish I could become a general.
And, without feeling cynicism, he is glad that
The vacancies are just open;
Then the Elders will turn off others,
The others, you see, have been killed.
The entire Famus society is afraid of enlightenment, seeing it as a threat to its own foundations. Famusov is sure that “learning is the plague, learning is the cause” of all troubles; he is echoed by the princess, scolding pedagogical institute and professors; Skalozub would like the lyceums and gymnasiums to teach “our way: one, two,” his “learning will not make you faint,” and he will give “sergeant major like Voltaire” to those who conduct philosophical debates. The views of this society were expressed by Famusov:
...To stop evil,
Collect all the books and burn them.
The younger generation is represented in the play by the images of Chatsky, Molchalin, Sophia and Lisa. This is absolutely different types young people who differ in their moral concepts.
Molchalin personifies the lower part of bureaucratic Russia. His portrait is described in one phrase: “here he is on tiptoe and not rich in words.” He has two talents that he is proud of - “moderation and accuracy.” Molchalin is one of those who achieves a career by being able to stroke the pug of an influential lady at the right time, and play cards (dying of boredom) with old men. This is a sycophant, a hypocrite who follows the rule:
...At my age one should not dare
Have your own opinions.
Such Molchalins support the foundations of Famus society.
One of the most complex in the play is the image of Sophia. As noted by A.S. Pushkin, “it is written unclearly.” Quite educated and smart, she prefers Molchalin to Chatsky. Without being evil and cruel, she hurts her childhood friend and slanders him, declaring him crazy. Her actions are contradictory. This is probably because some features of her character (independence, freedom of judgment) were formed in adolescence under the influence of Chatsky, but after his departure she found herself at the mercy of a conservative society, which instilled in her its own moral code. It can be assumed that Sophia does not love Molchalin, but has created an ideal in her imagination. Chatsky is right when he says that by admiring him, you gave him darkness of your qualities.
Objectively, Sophia also finds herself in the Famusov camp, defending its foundations.
Famus society is opposed by Chatsky. A young educated man returns to Moscow after a three-year absence, driven by a romantic impulse to serve the Fatherland, “the smoke of which is sweet and pleasant to us.” He is an honest, noble man with a sharp mind. It pains him to see that hypocrisy and ignorance still reign, that in Moscow “the houses are new, but the prejudices are old.” His patriotic feeling offends the spirit of “blind, slavish, empty imitation” of everything foreign, admiration for the empty “Frenchman from Bordeaux.”
Chatsky’s moral concepts - independence, self-esteem (“I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served”), integrity - are in irreconcilable contradiction with the morality of Famus society. His monologue “Who are the judges?” - denunciation of the conservatism of the “fathers of the fatherland”, who live according to the laws of the 18th century, “draw their judgments from forgotten newspapers from the times of Ochakov and the conquest of Crimea.” They are enemies of freedom, serf owners who value the lives of peasants at nothing, exchanging their devoted servants for dogs.
Chatsky has an ardent character, which is manifested in his romantic love to Sophia, and in his harsh assessments of others. The image of Chatsky is given in development. He first overcomes socio-political illusions, and then his love hopes are destroyed. According to I.A. Goncharov, Chatsky experiences “a million torments” before he “sobers up completely.”
Although the play was written a year before the uprising, the image of Chatsky embodied many features of the moral character and social views of the Decembrists. In the play itself there are hints that Chatsky is not alone in his views on existing society. These are off-stage characters - Skalozub’s cousin: “the rank followed him, ... he suddenly left the service,” “he began to read books in the village”; nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, Prince Fyodor.
The realism of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is expressed in the fact that Famus’s society defeats Chatsky, although, undoubtedly, the playwright’s sympathies are on the side of the hero. But real circumstances did not allow for a positive outcome.
The comedy “Woe from Wit” was an original, vibrant work that has not lost its relevance today. Chatsky’s unusually lively language, specific and apt statements led to the fact that many lines of the play became aphorisms. Sometimes, using such expressions as “Happy people don’t watch the clock”, “The legend is fresh, but hard to believe”, “To have children who lack intelligence”, “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served”, “More in number, at a cheaper price” ", the speaker doesn't even know the source catchphrase. These phrases organically entered into colloquial speech, becoming truly popular.
Comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboedova reflected the sentiments of the progressive nobility of Russia first quarter of the XIX V.
additional literature
Goncharov I. A. A million torments.
Lebedev A. A. Griboedov: Facts and hypotheses. M., 1980.
Meshcheryakov V.P. The life and deeds of Alexander Griboedov. M., 1989.
Fomichev S. A. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.” A comment. M., 1983.
Heroes and problems of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
5 (100%) 10 votesSearched on this page:
- problems in the comedy woe from mind
- woeful problems
- problems in grief from mind
- comedy problems woe from mind
- problems from mind
The problem of mind and madness has been relevant at all times. Smart, progressive people of their time often remained misunderstood by their contemporaries and were declared crazy. This is how society reacted to ideas that ran counter to generally accepted ones, ideas that were preached by progressive people of their time. It is no coincidence that Griboyedov touches on this problem in his work. His comedy “Woe from Wit,” written before the December uprising, tells the story of advanced intelligence and the reaction of society to it. The original title of the comedy was “Woe to Wit,” then the author replaced it with “Woe from Wit.”
The main character Chatsky has not yet appeared in Famusov’s house, but the idea of madness associated with a negative attitude towards education and enlightenment is already in the air there. So, Famusov says: “And reading is of little use.” Later, all the characters in the comedy will speak out on this matter, each will put forward their own version of Chatsky’s madness, but the whole society will unanimously come to one opinion: “Learning is the plague, learning is the reason.” The Famus society will get rid of Chatsky by declaring him crazy, not accepting accusatory speeches that stigmatize their way of life, and will choose gossip as a weapon. Famusov, as a typical representative of his society, has his own opinion regarding the mind and smart person.
For him, an intelligent person is a practical, worldly a wise man. Although he does not deny Chatsky’s intelligence, he nevertheless considers Skalozub to be a more suitable match for Sophia: “A respectable man and has picked up many marks of distinction, beyond his years and an enviable rank, not today’s general.” In a conversation with Skalozub, the Moscow gentleman talks about the danger that comes from such wise men as Chatsky. In addition, Chatsky incorrectly uses the acquired knowledge. Everything should be aimed at achieving ranks, at maintaining traditions, we should live “as our fathers did.” Famusov puts forward his ideal of an intelligent person. In his opinion, this is Maxim Petrovich, who achieved high ranks and a high position in society thanks to his practical mind, the ability to “bend over” when it was necessary to “curry favor.” Famusov himself has not reached such heights, which is why he curries favor with the princes Tugoukhovsky and Skalozub. Molchalin, Famusov's secretary, also embodies a practical mind. This was noticed by Chatsky: Molchalin! – Who else will settle everything so peacefully! There he will pet the pug in time! It's time to rub the card in! By nature, Molchalin is small man, striving by any means to achieve his cherished goal in life, the meaning of which boils down to “to win awards and have fun.” In his practice, he follows his father’s precepts - “to please all people without exception,” but at the same time he believes that “at his age he should not dare to have his own judgment,” since “he is in small ranks.” He loves Sophia “out of position,” and calms the angry Khlestova with a game of cards.
According to Chatsky, Molchalin “will reach the famous levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.” Chatsky is the complete opposite of Molchalin, despite the fact that they are both young. The hero has an ardent, passionate nature. He is ready to sacrifice everything for the sake of his ideals, filled with civic meaning. He wants to serve “the cause, not the individuals.” For Chatsky, mind and truth, truth and honor are the main ones life values. The hero opposes the upbringing adopted in Famus society, when they strive to “recruit regiments of teachers, more in number, at a cheaper price.” He is not alien to patriotic feelings, which is why he is irritated by “blind imitation” of everything foreign. Chatsky expresses his thoughts in accusatory speeches directed against the foundations of Famus society. His monologues, oratorical in style, testify to the education and enlightenment of the protagonist, which is why they contain so many aphorisms.
Chatsky’s mind is the mind of an advanced person, this is precisely the reason that the inert society does not accept his views and ideas, since they contradict the way of life of the old Moscow nobility. Chatsky’s love for Sophia is not accidental, because she also has intelligence. But Sophia's mind is practical. Sophia, as a typical girl of her time and class, draws her mind from French sentimental novels, which is why she chooses Molchalin as her lover in order to subsequently make him “a boy-husband, a servant-husband.” She is guided by worldly wisdom, because she is the daughter of her father. In comedy there is another type of mind that we can see in the maid in Famusov's house, Lisa.
As a second reasoner in a comedy, she expresses author's position, therefore, it is from her lips that we hear the characteristics of various characters: “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, like Alexander Andreich Chatsky,” “Like all Moscow, your father is like this: he would like a son-in-law with stars and ranks,” and so on Further. Undoubtedly, Lisa has the natural intelligence and worldly wisdom of a commoner; she is resourceful, cunning, but at the same time devoted to her mistress. Thus, the comedy “Woe from Wit” presents Various types mind, ranging from the worldly wise to the advanced, progressive mind. But Famus society does not accept the progressive mind, rejects it, declaring Chatsky a social madman and forcing him to leave Moscow.
(1
ratings, average: 5.00
out of 5)
Essays on topics:
- “Woe from Wit” is a famous comedy by Alexander Griboedov, familiar to almost every reader. Despite the fact that the work was first published...
1. The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written by A.S. Griboedov at the beginning of the 19th century, and the era of the change of centuries, as a rule, is accompanied by profound changes in the social environment and a rapid increase in contradictions between representatives of the two centuries, characteristic of this time. Griboyedov grasped the main social conflict that emerged after the Patriotic War of 1812. The comedy poses the most burning questions of that time: the situation of the Russian people, serfdom, the relationship between landowners and peasants, autocratic power, the insane wastefulness of the nobles, the state of enlightenment, the principles of upbringing and education, independence and freedom of the individual, national identity. 2. The ideological meaning of comedy lies in the opposition of two social forces, , worldviews: old, serfdom, and new, progressive; in exposing everything that was backward and proclaiming the advanced ideas of that time. The struggle of the “present century” with the “past century” is the struggle of Chatsky, a leading man of his time, and the backward Famus society. Deeply believing in the correctness of his ideas, Chatsky is convinced that his dreams will come true, that the future belongs to new people, his brothers in spirit.
The problem of mind and madness has been relevant at all times. Smart, progressive people of their time often remained misunderstood by their contemporaries and were declared crazy. This is how society reacted to ideas that ran counter to generally accepted ones, ideas that were preached by progressive people of their time. In his practice, he follows his father’s precepts - “to please all people without exception,” but at the same time he believes that “at his age he should not dare to have his own judgment,” since “he is in small ranks.” He loves Sophia “out of position,” and calms the angry Khlestova with a game of cards. According to Chatsky, Molchalin “will reach the famous levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.”
