Article menu:

Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is one of the works without which we cannot imagine Russian literature. Many phrases from this work have become catchphrases and are well known even to those who have never held a comedy in their hands and have no idea what it is about.

Fascinating work

Those who forced themselves to pick up the book did not regret it: good poetic style, actual topic, made reading the work fascinating.

A special place in the text is occupied by monologues read by Alexander Chatsky. They are always the harbingers of change storyline and have a bright, contradictory character that denounces society.

The second act of the comedy is marked by a monologue about a comparison of the ideals and aspirations of the last century and the present century.

“And it was as if the world began to grow stupid,” Chatsky begins his reflections. Already in the first words there is a sharp contrast to the past. The world just “began to become stupid”; before that, it was not stupid. In addition, these same words provoke a reaction of indignation and create narrative conflict. Everyone who is present belongs to this “current” world, it turns out that they are also becoming stupid, and this sounds offensive. It is not surprising that Alexander’s speech does not find support - for everyone, it sounds defiant.

Next comes the substantiation of this idea. Chatsky cites one of famous phrases: “The legend is fresh, but hard to believe.” This phrase was often used by literati in the 19th century. And it has a rather prosaic meaning: the events of the past have lost their significance in the context of the present. This process is so different from the postulates of modernity that it is perceived as a fable - something that did not really happen.

The difference between “the present century and the past century” according to Chatsky

Chatsky explains in detail how the “present century” and the “past century” differ. First of all, the changes affected the categories “decent” and “shameful,” “noble” and “shameful.” Contemporaries judge a person by his wallet, connections and ranks. Those “whose neck bent more often” and “whose foreheads hit the floor without regret” are held in high esteem.”

And even if it is humiliating and vile, it will add money to your pocket. And a person with money can afford a lot.

The topic raised will probably always remain relevant, since at any time and in any society there are those who want to make a profit, improve their position, or move up the hierarchical hierarchy. career ladder to a position, or slightly higher, not with the help of labor or military merits, but with the help of flattery. Well, it’s really easier to love a person who admires and idolizes you and it’s easier to forgive mistakes than a hard worker who is stingy with compliments, but an expert in his field.

People began to serve individuals rather than causes...

Service has ceased to be a noble occupation; in order to get out into the world it is enough just to be able to suck up and be a buffoon.

People began to serve individuals rather than causes. “This was the age of obedience and fear,” they say, not noticing that they are contradicting themselves.

In the text of the monologue there are metaphors: “the world began to grow stupid” - meaning people are becoming stupid, “took with their foreheads” - achieved something by sycophancy, “keeps shame in check” - prevents the spread of unnecessary liberties, “the hunt will take” - a phrase denoting the emergence irresistible desire, flattery weaved - fawning.

1. The image of Chatsky in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.”
2. Chatsky and society.
3. A. S. Pushkin about the main character of Griboedov’s comedy.

Often the image of Chatsky from A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” was considered by literary scholars as the image of a person who propagates in the Moscow “society” the high ideals of serving the homeland, freedom of thought, and the like. At times he was regarded almost as a future Decembrist. But how close is such a view to reality?

One thing is certain - Chatsky, of course, is a well-read and educated person. “He writes and translates well,” Famusov says about him, introducing him to Skalozub. By the standards of Moscow society, he is not rich, but he is not destitute either - his late parents left him an inheritance of either three or four hundred serf souls (Famusov and Khlestova argue almost hoarsely about the exact number). The society against which Chatsky rebels so fiercely was not initially at all alien to him, a gathering of “ class enemies" On the contrary, Chatsky is, in essence, flesh and blood of this society. Let us remember: having been left without parents early, Chatsky was brought up in the house of Famusov, a friend of Chatsky’s late father. Who is Famusov? This is one of those “aces” who “live and die in Moscow.” In addition, Chatsky is a landowner, the owner of serf souls. The liberal ideas he expresses are probably the result of a three-year stay abroad and his own thoughts. However, what makes Chatsky suddenly attack society, although it seems that it has not yet infringed on his rights and interests? The situation itself looks quite comical: Chatsky, returning from a trip, arrived at the house of Famusov, who took an active part in his upbringing, and suddenly attacks the owner of the house with barbs, speaking sarcastically about the incident with Famusov’s uncle, who fell at a reception for the sake of the royal favor from Catherine II:

I'm not talking about your uncle;
We will not disturb his ashes:
But in the meantime, who will the hunt take?
Even in the most ardent servility,
Now, to make people laugh,
Bravely sacrifice the back of your head?

Of course, the pompous pride of Famusov, who sincerely admires the way his uncle achieved high ranks, looks funny. But Chatsky’s behavior does not correspond to the norm. It strongly resembles teenage pessimism and maximalism, alien to condescension towards other people's weaknesses. And is it because Chatsky is so indignant that he seriously decided to improve the morals of Moscow? Another thing is much more likely: Chatsky is simply annoyed by Sophia’s cold reception. This irritation, while vague jealousy towards the likely contenders for the girl’s hand and heart, gradually results in Chatsky’s angry tirades. It cannot be said that his attacks were so unfair: the trouble is that in a specific situation they look inappropriate and do not at all indicate Chatsky’s prudence, or the elementary rules of decency. An old Russian proverb says: “You don’t go to someone else’s monastery with your own rules,” but Chatsky is trying to do just that, scolding everyone around him. His attacks are impeccable from the point of view of truth and are presented according to all the rules of oratory. However, Chatsky did not choose the audience that was capable of reacting with sympathy to his passionate speeches. In fact, who would like such an accusation:

Who are the judges? - Since ancient times
Their enmity towards a free life is irreconcilable
...Always ready for battle,
Everyone sings the same song,
Without noticing about yourself:
The older it is, the worse it is.
Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland,
Which ones should we take as models?

Next, Chatsky indignantly mentions cases when landowners sold their serfs. Of course, he is right in his indignation, and therefore, reading Griboedov’s comedy, we somehow forget that Chatsky himself is a landowner. What's going on on his estate? We do not know about this, however, given the fact that Chatsky has not been home for three years, we can conclude that the managers are in charge of his estate. And only God knows how they manage there...

But this is exactly how Griboyedov conceived the character of his hero. If we assume that Chatsky really wants to do something to improve the morals of his contemporaries, then he clearly chose the wrong path. With his tirades he eventually turns everything against himself Moscow society. But there is no practical benefit from this either for Chatsky personally or for Russia, which he, by his own admission, would be happy to serve if he did not have to serve his superiors. Chatsky’s monologues not only demonstrate to us the liberal views and oratory skills of the hero of Griboedov’s comedy, they also testify to his inability to determine what and where it really makes sense to say. As some literary scholars believe, the comedy of Chatsky’s situation lies in the fact that his character is conceived as that of a tragedy hero, but he acts in comedic situations. Chatsky's monologues are becoming longer and longer, but the listeners are rushing away from him. But Chatsky, carried away by his own eloquence, may not notice for quite a long time that no one is listening to him - in this regard, the monologue that begins with the words is indicative:

In that room there is an insignificant meeting:
The Frenchman from Bordeaux, pushing his chest,
Gathered around him a kind of evening
And he told how he was preparing for the journey
To Russia, to the barbarians, with fear and tears...

And again, paradoxically, Chatsky is right in denouncing the empty imitation of the West, which so often, like an epidemic, covers the minds of Russians. Who's listening to him? At some point, the fiery speaker comes to his senses, looks around and sees that no one is paying attention to him: young people are dancing, old people are playing cards. But the claims that Chatsky makes against Sophia in his last monologue seem unfounded and therefore funny:

Why did they lure me with hope?
Why didn't they tell me directly?
Why did you turn everything that happened into laughter?!

When and where did Sophia lure Chatsky with hope? During childhood? At least, within the framework of comedy, we do not see anything like this: on the contrary, Chatsky himself, when meeting Sophia after three years of separation, notes her coldness.

They would say that my sudden arrival was to you,
My appearance, my words, actions - everything is disgusting, -
I would immediately cut off relations with you
And before we part forever,
I wouldn't bother to get there very much,
Who is this dear person to you?..

Chatsky again behaves like an offended teenager. The hero clearly exaggerates the importance of his person in the eyes of Sophia - she is indifferent to him, his barbs and especially his attacks on Molchalin are unpleasant to her, but “everything is disgusting”, this is undoubtedly too strong a word.

A. S. Pushkin, who highly appreciated Griboyedov’s comedy, described Chatsky in one of his letters as follows: “In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” who is the smart character? answer: Griboedov. Do you know what Chatsky is? An ardent, noble and kind fellow, who spent some time with a very smart man (namely Griboedov) and was imbued with his thoughts, witticisms and satirical remarks. Everything he says is very smart. But to whom is he telling all this? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable. First sign smart person“Know at first glance who you are dealing with and not throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs and the like.”

And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid,


How not in war, but in peace they took it head on; They hit the floor without regret! /Yavl. 2 Summary of the Comedy “Woe from Wit”: “Fight.” Begins with Famusov's monologue Petrushka, forever
you with a new thing, with a torn elbow. This monologue says
about the three acts of our existence: life, death, birth. What is it like
Famusov’s attitude towards them? The attitude towards these sacraments is quite
prosaic, the philosophy of the stomach is evident here:
Philosophize - your mind will spin;
Either you take care, then it’s lunch:
Eat for three hours, but in three days it won’t cook! /Yavl. 1/
The stomach is the main vital organ, and life is perceived
only through the digestive processes. Next about death: what remains
from a person? - Household items that are for Famusov
main values ​​of life:
The deceased was a venerable chamberlain,
With the key, he knew how to deliver the key to his son;
Rich, and he was married to a rich woman... /Javl. 1/
After this monologue, a “fight” occurs between Chatsky and Famusov.
In the dialogue it finally becomes clear that two representatives of the noble
class have completely opposite opinions about life.
At Chatsky's serious attitude to service:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening. /Yavl. 2/
Famusov affirms veneration, considers servility
dignity. And Chatsky gives his assessment, sarcastic, but at the same time
same time and bitter:
And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid,
You can say with a sigh;
How to compare and see
The present century and the past:
The legend is fresh, but hard to believe;
As he was famous for, whose neck bent more often;
How not in war, but in peace they took it head on;
They hit the floor without regret! /Yavl. 2/
This understanding of the foundations of Famusov’s vision of the world leads
Famusova is horrified (Ah! My God! He’s carbonara! Dangerous
Human! He wants to preach freedom! Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!)
For the owner of the house, a rich gentleman, an official, a member of the English
club, it is impossible to listen to such speeches, because Chatsky is destroying
everything that is dear to Famusov.
Colonel Skalozub appears under comical circumstances:
Famusov covered his ears and did not want to hear about the arrival of an important guest.
And he warns Chatsky to be more silent, because the colonel
Famous person, respectable,
And he picked up signs of darkness;
Beyond his years and enviable rank,
Not today - tomorrow general. /Yavl. 3/
Famusov, of course, found support from Skalozub:
Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels;
I judge them as a true philosopher:
I just wish I could become a general. /Yavl. 5/
Philosophy of officials. Famusov's ode to Moscow (Taste, father,
excellent manner) - undisguised praise of the old way of life
Moscow:
That there is honor according to father and son (heredity of ranks);
Showers of two thousand courtyards - he and the groom (wealth is the criterion
significance of a person);
After all, only here they also value nobility (nobility) -
The door is unlocked for those invited and uninvited, especially those from abroad.
(preference for foreigners);
Though fair man, at least not - for us it’s equally about everyone
dinner is ready (honesty is not a virtue);
It’s not like they introduced anything new - never, God save us! No!
(fear of everything new).
They will argue, make some noise, and... disperse. Retired direct chancellors
- according to the mind (The mind of old people is higher than the mind of young people.)
What about the ladies?
Order the command in front of the front!
Be present, send them to the Senate! (women's power)
And indeed, is it possible to be more educated!
They know how to dress themselves up.
Taffeta, marigold and haze,
They won’t say a word in simplicity, everything will be done with a grimace.
They flock to military people...
Upbringing, education, patriotism are reduced to external antics,
dressing up and flirting with the military.
Such praise, of course, is a blow to Chatsky, to his lofty
ideas about duty, honor, upbringing, education. And for this
Chatsky responds with a counterblow in his famous monologue
“Who are the judges?” Chatsky finally becomes an enemy not only
Famusov, but also the entire Famusov society. He is merciless in his assessment
nobility.
Their enmity towards a free life is irreconcilable; their judgments are based on
from forgotten newspapers (persecutors of freedom, conservative in views).
Where, tell us, are the fathers of the Fatherland? - Chatsky asks:
Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?
They found protection from court in friends, in kinship,
Magnificent building chambers,
Where they indulge in feasts and extravagance...
(nobles, corrupted by wealth and dissipation, who are always
protects the law):
And who in Moscow didn’t have their mouths covered?
Lunches, dinners and dances?
(they buy silence with rich social techniques; traits of servility).
For them he exchanged three greyhounds (serf owners, drunken
power over serfs).
Having drawn a portrait of the old generation, Chatsky exclaims:
Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!
But that is not all.
They hate those who love science, art, because people
endowed with talent will never agree to be slaves to conventions.
Chatsky also speaks sarcastically about the military. Military uniform once
was a symbol of honor and a brave heart, and now it covers
"weakness, poverty of reason."
The challenge has been issued. Chatsky’s position becomes dangerous, but then
Everyone's attention is distracted by Molchalin's fall from his horse. Chatsky
at a loss why Sophia reacts so violently to the fact that some
the insignificant Molchalin fell from his horse. It immediately turns out that Silently
Lin is in love with Lisa, Sophia's maid. Here's a paradox: the young lady
loves the servant, and the young lady's lover is in love with the maid. Comedy!

The role of Chatsky’s monologues in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written by A. S. Griboedov after the Patriotic War of 1812, that is, during the period when profound socio-political changes were taking place in the life of Russia.

With his work, Griboyedov responded to the most thorny issues modern times, such as serfdom, personal freedom and independence of thought, the state of enlightenment and education, careerism and veneration of rank, admiration for foreign culture. Ideological meaning“Woe from Wit” consists of the opposition of two lifestyles and worldviews: old, serfdom (“past century”) and new, progressive (“present century”).

“The present century” is presented in a comedy by Chatsky, who is an ideologist of new views. He expresses his attitude towards everything happening in society. That's why this important place The play is occupied by monologues of the main character. They reveal Chatsky’s attitude to the main problems of his contemporary society. His monologues also carry a large plot load: they appear in the play at turning points development of the conflict.

We meet the first monologue already in the exhibition. It begins with the words “Well, what about your father?..”, and in it Chatsky gives a description of Moscow morals. He notes with bitterness that during his absence in Moscow, nothing has changed significantly. And here for the first time he starts talking about the system of education accepted in society. The children of Russian nobles are raised by foreign tutors “in more numbers, at a cheaper price.” The younger generation is growing up in the belief “that without the Germans we have no salvation.” Chatsky mockingly and at the same time bitterly notes that in order to be considered educated in Moscow, you need to speak “a mixture of French and Nizhny Novgorod languages.”

The second monologue (“And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid...”) is associated with the outbreak of the conflict, and it is dedicated to the contrast between the “present century” and the “past century.” This monologue is maintained in a calm, slightly ironic tone, which is psychologically justified. Chatsky loves Famusov's daughter and does not want to irritate her father. But also to assent to Famusov, who offends his pride, his views freely thinking man, Chatsky doesn’t want to. Moreover, this monologue is caused by the moral teachings of Sophia’s father, his advice on how to make a career, using the experience of the unforgettable uncle Maxim Petrovich.

Chatsky categorically disagrees with this. The entire accusatory meaning of the protagonist’s words lies in the fact that he is trying to explain to Famusov the difference between two historical periods, past and present. The Catherine era, which evokes such tenderness in Famusov, is defined by Chatsky as “the age of humility and fear.” Chatsky believes that now different times have come, when there are no people who want to “make people laugh, bravely sacrifice the back of their heads.” He sincerely hopes that the techniques and methods of the nobles of Catherine’s time are a thing of the past, and new Age values ​​people who are truly honest and dedicated to the cause, not to individuals:

Although there are hunters everywhere to be mean,
Yes, nowadays laughter frightens and keeps shame in check,
It’s not for nothing that the sovereigns favor them so little.

Third monologue “Who are the judges?” - the most famous and striking monologue of the main character. It occurs at the moment of development of the conflict in the play. It is in this monologue that Chatsky’s views receive the most complete coverage. Here the hero clearly expresses his anti-serfdom views, which later gave critics the opportunity to bring Chatsky closer to the Decembrists. How different the tone of this passionate monologue is from the peace-loving lines of the previous one! Leading specific examples manifestations of the monstrous attitude of the nobles towards the serfs, Chatsky is horrified by the lawlessness that reigns in Russia:

That Nestor of noble scoundrels,
Surrounded by a crowd of servants;

Zealous, they are in the hours of wine and fights
And his honor and life saved him more than once: suddenly
He traded three greyhounds for them!!!

But the debtors did not agree to a deferment:
Cupids and Zephyrs all
Sold out individually!

“Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland, // Which we should take as models?” - asks bitterly main character. In this monologue one can hear the genuine pain of a man who knows the value of the “fathers of the fatherland,” who are “rich in robbery” and protected from trial by the entire existing system: connections, bribes, acquaintances, position. New person cannot, in the opinion of the hero, come to terms with the existing slave position of the “smart, vigorous people.” And how can one come to terms with the fact that the defenders of the country, the heroes of the War of 1812, the gentlemen have the right to exchange or sell. Chatsky raises the question of whether serfdom should exist in Russia.

Griboyedov’s hero is also outraged by the fact that such “strict connoisseurs and judges” persecute everything freedom-loving, free and defend only the ugly and unprincipled. In this monologue of the hero, the voice of the author himself is heard, expressing his innermost thoughts. And, after listening to Chatsky’s passionate monologue, any sane person should inevitably come to the conclusion that such a state of affairs cannot exist in a civilized country.

With the words “There is an insignificant meeting in that room...” begins another monologue of Chatsky. It marks the climax and resolution of the conflict. Answering Sophia’s question “Tell me, what makes you so angry?”, Chatsky, as usual, gets carried away and does not notice that no one is listening to him: everyone is dancing or playing cards. Chatsky speaks into emptiness, but in this monologue he also touches on an important issue. He is outraged by the “Frenchman from Bordeaux” as an example of the admiration of Russian nobles for everything foreign. With fear and tears he went to Russia, and then he was delighted and felt important person, without meeting there “neither a Russian sound nor a Russian face.” Chatsky is offended by the fact that the Russian language national customs and culture should be placed much lower than foreign things. He ironically proposes to borrow from the Chinese the “wise... ignorance of foreigners.” And he continues:

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although he didn’t consider us Germans based on our language,

The last monologue comes at the denouement of the plot. Chatsky says here that he will never be able to come to terms with the morals and orders of Famusov’s Moscow. He is not surprised that this society of people, terrified of everything new and advanced, declares him insane:

You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend a day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his sanity will survive.

So, Chatsky left the Famusovs’ house offended and disappointed, and yet he is not perceived as a defeated person, a loser, because he managed to remain faithful to his ideals, to remain himself.

Monologues help us understand not only the character of the main character. They tell us about the order that existed in Russia at that time, about the hopes and aspirations of progressive people of that time. They are important both in the semantic and structural construction of the play. Thinking readers and viewers should definitely think about the main problems of Russian society during Griboyedov’s time, many of which are still relevant today.

/ / / The role of Chatsky’s monologues in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov created his famous comedy at that important time for Russia historical period when it ended Patriotic War, and serious changes were taking place in the country.

The main idea of ​​this work is the struggle between the old and new way of life, conservative, serfdom, which has already outlived its usefulness, and the new, progressive one, slowly but surely replacing the first.

The idea of ​​upcoming changes in the play is carried by the main character. He expresses his sharply negative attitude towards everything that currently happens in society. That's why the monologues of this actor. In them we find Chatsky’s opinion on all the main issues raised in the comedy. But the importance of monologues lies not only in this. They also carry a plot load: they appear at the most peak moments in the development of a conflict situation.

Let us trace all these speeches of Chatsky through the play. The reader becomes acquainted with the first monologue in the exhibition. Its essence is the denunciation of Moscow morals. The young man is upset that during the time he spent traveling, nothing has changed in the city. Here he notes the important features of education of that time - children were raised by hired foreign teachers, native language mixed with French. This fact also saddens the main character.

The second monologue predetermines the development of the conflict. It has already clearly outlined the confrontation between the old way of life and new progressive ideas. The tone of this speech by Chatsky is calm and restrained, which is understandable - the father of his beloved, the young man does not want to seem like a rude person, but he does not intend to agree with what completely disgusts him.

The third, famous and well-known monologue, “Who are the judges?” shows the protagonist's attitude towards serfdom. Chatsky speaks out sharply against this bondage. Subsequently, thanks to these views, Chatsky was brought closer to the Decembrists. There is no trace left of the calm tone; the hero’s speech breathes fire and passion.

The culmination of the conflict is marked by another monologue by Alexander Andreevich. Answering the question, Chatsky speaks into emptiness, no one listens to him, but being carried away, he doesn’t even notice it. Although this monologue is no less important, since it touches on important issues: the admiration of the Russian people, or rather even the nobles, for everything foreign. Chatsky exclaims with bitterness that the Russian language, culture, and customs, which have been revered since ancient times, are now inferior to foreign ones.

There is one more monologue of the main character, the last one, which is given at the end of the conflict. In it, Chatsky notes that he will never be able to reconcile and live according to the laws that are adopted in Famusov society. He's not even surprised that he was declared crazy. These people live in panic and constant fear, afraid of change. But changes will still come, no matter how they are pushed back. It's unavoidable.