Immoral and ignorant district governors mistake a St. Petersburg official who happened to be passing through their city for a real auditor, whose appointment they already knew.

The whole goal, all the aspirations of the mayor, whose frightened imagination made Khlestakov the personification of the punitive power of the law, are aimed at inclining this power in his favor and thus avoiding punishment for criminal acts.

There is a struggle that reveals various moments state of mind hero. But this struggle is comic: it is waged against an imaginary force, it depicts negative sides reality, that is, the world of vulgar, petty passions, vulgar egoism.

From the theory of dramatic poetry it is known that in order to express the idea of ​​struggle and present the characters in their mutual relations, the playwright must choose a moment in the life of his heroes in which its entire essence and meaning could be expressed. Such a moment in Gogol's comedy is the arrival of the inspector.

The entire movement of the play is based on this moment, all the details of the action are dedicated to it, none of which seems superfluous, because it has one or another relation to the main event, i.e., to the appearance of the auditor.

Most characters characters are clarified at the same moment: the arrival of the auditor illuminated the whole past life district leaders, full of untruth and arbitrariness, and fully revealed their real feelings and passions. Hence the remarkable unity of action, according to which Gogol’s comedy should be classified as an exemplary dramatic work.

There are no leaps in it, everything consistently develops from one general idea, and each individual moment of action is imbued with remarkable naturalness, complete agreement with the truth of life.

The Inspector's premise has its own characteristics. Usually the plot is taken in the sense of a love affair. But Gogol departed from the usual approach of playwrights, guided by considerations expressed by him in the words of one of the characters in “Theater Travel.”

“It’s time to stop relying so far on this eternal premise. It's worth taking a close look around. Everything changed a long time ago in the world. Now the drama is more strongly tied to the desire to get an advantageous place, to shine and outshine, at all costs, the other, to avenge neglect, for ridicule. Don’t they now have more power, money capital, and a profitable marriage than love?”

In addition, according to Gogol, the plot of a comedy should embrace all faces, and not just one or two, touch on what worries, more or less, all the characters.

This is the character of the Inspector's premise, where each individual person accepts live participation in a common endeavor. The ending of the comedy seemed artificial to some.

But, according to Belinsky’s fair remark, the end of the comedy should take place where the mayor finds out that he was punished by a ghost, and that he will be punished by reality, and therefore the arrival of the gendarme with the news of the arrival of the true auditor perfectly ends the play and gives it its entirety and all the independence of a special, self-contained world.

The plot and compositional structure of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy are already quite original in themselves. At first glance, it may seem that the main plot is the love story of Chatsky for Sophia. Indeed, this line is very important: the love affair drives the action. But still, the main thing in comedy is Chatsky’s social drama. The title of the play indicates this.
The story of Chatsky's unhappy love for Sophia and his conflict with the Moscow nobility, closely intertwined, are combined into a single plot line and develop simultaneously. The first scenes, morning in Famusov's house - an exposition of the play. Sophia, Molchalin, Liza, Famusov appear, the appearance of Chatsky and Skalozub is being prepared, we learn about the characters and relationships of the characters. The movement and development of the plot begins with the first appearance of Chatsky. At first, Sophia spoke very coldly about Chatsky, and now, when he, animatedly sorting through his Moscow acquaintances, laughed at the Silent One at the same time, Sophia’s coldness turned into irritation and indignation: “Not a man, a snake!” So Chatsky, without knowing it, turned the heroine against himself.
Everything that happened to him at the beginning of the play will receive its continuation and development in the future: he will be disappointed in Sophia, and his mocking attitude towards his Moscow acquaintances will develop into a deep conflict with Famusovsky society. From Chatsky’s dispute with Famusov in the second act of the comedy, it is clearly clear that this is not just a matter of dissatisfaction with each other. Here two worldviews collided. In addition, in the second act, Famusov’s hints about Skalozub’s matchmaking and Sophia’s fainting pose Chatsky with a painful riddle: could Sophia’s chosen one really be Skalozub or Molchalin? And if this is so, then which of them?..
In the third act the action becomes very intense. Sophia makes it clear to Chatsky that she does not love him and openly admits her love for Molchalin, but she says about Skalozub that this is not the hero of her novel. It seems that everything has become clear, but Chatsky does not believe Sophia. He is even more convinced by his conversation with Molchalin, in which he demonstrates his immorality and insignificance. Continuing his sharp attacks against Molchalin, Chatsky arouses Sophia’s hatred of himself, and it is she, first by accident, and then intentionally, who starts the rumor about the hero’s madness. The gossip is picked up, spreads with lightning speed, and they begin to talk about Chatsky in the past tense. This is easily explained by the fact that he has already managed to turn not only the hosts, but also the guests against himself. Society cannot forgive Chatsky for criticism. This is how the action reaches highest point, climax.
The denouement comes in the fourth act. Chatsky finds out about everything and immediately observes the scene between Molchalin, Sophia and Liza. “Here is the solution to the riddle at last! Here I am donated to someone!” - the final epiphany comes. The wounded Chatsky pronounces his last monologue and leaves Moscow. Both conflicts are brought to an end: the collapse of love becomes obvious, and the clash with society ends in a break. Vice is not punished, and virtue does not triumph. From happy ending Griboyedov refused.
Discussing the clarity and simplicity of the composition of the play, V. Kuchelbecker noted: “In “Woe from Wit”... the whole plot consists of Chatsky’s opposition to other persons... here... there is no what in drama is called intrigue. Dan Chatsky, other characters are given, they are brought together, and it is shown what the meeting of these antipodes must certainly be like - and that’s all. It’s very simple, but in this simplicity there is news, courage...”
The peculiarity of the composition of the play is that its individual scenes and episodes are connected seemingly arbitrarily. But everything corresponds to the playwright's intention. With the help of composition, for example, Griboyedov emphasizes Chatsky’s loneliness. At first the hero sees with disappointment that he ex-friend Platon Mikhailovich “became not the same” in short term; Now Natalya Dmitrievna directs his every move and praises him with the same words that later Molchalin did for the Spitz: “My husband is a wonderful husband.” So, Chatsky’s old friend turned into an ordinary Moscow “husband-boy, husband-servant.” But this is not a very big blow for Chatsky. Then Chatsky, in the middle of his fiery monologue, first addressed to Sophia, looks back and sees that Sophia has left without listening to him, and in general “everyone is twirling in the waltz with the greatest zeal. The old men scattered to the card tables.” And finally, the loneliness of the main character is especially acutely felt when Repetilov begins to force himself on him as a friend, starting a “sensible conversation... about vaudeville.” The very possibility of Repetilov’s words about Chatsky: “He and I... we have... the same tastes” and a condescending assessment: “he’s not stupid” - shows how far Chatsky is from this society, if he already has no one to be with talk, except for the enthusiastic chatterbox Repetilov, whom he simply cannot stand.
The motif of falling runs through the entire comedy. Famusov recalls with pleasure how his uncle Maxim Petrovich fell three times in a row to make Empress Ekaterina Alekseevna laugh; Molchalin falls from his horse, tightening the reins; Repetilov stumbles, falls at the entrance and “hastily recovers”... All these episodes are interconnected and echo the words of Chatsky: “And he was completely confused, and fell so many times...” Chatsky also falls to his knees in front of Sophia, who no longer loves him.
The motif of deafness is also persistently repeated: Famusov covers his ears so as not to hear Chatsky’s seditious speeches; the universally respected Prince Tugoukhovsky does not hear anything without a horn; Khryumina, the countess-grandmother, herself completely deaf, not hearing anything and confusing everything, edifyingly says: “Oh! deafness big vice" Chatsky and later Repetilov hear no one and nothing, carried away by their monologues.
There is nothing superfluous in “Woe from Wit”: not a single unnecessary character, not a single meaningless scene, not a single wasted stroke. All occasional persons introduced by the author for a specific purpose. Thanks to off-stage characters, of which there are many in the comedy, the boundaries of Famusov’s house and the boundaries of time expand.
Griboyedov developed the traditions of Fonvizin, Novikov, Krylov, enriching classical comedy with psychologism and dynamics in the depiction of characters. He combined satire and lyricism, comedy and drama, civil pathos and vaudeville scenes, acting as an innovative playwright.

1. Determine the theme of A. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Theme is the vital material underlying the work. The theme of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov is the life and views of the noble-bureaucratic Moscow, and more broadly - of all Russia.

2. Define the concept “ eternal images" Give examples.

“Eternal images” are mythological and literary characters that have been used more than once in the literature of different countries. The reason for their enduring value is the general significance of moral and philosophical content, contained in them. These are the mythological images - Prometheus, Medea, literary images- Don Quixote, Don Juan, Hamlet, Faust, etc.

3. What elements does the plot of the work consist of?

The main elements of a plot are exposition, beginning, development of action, climax, denouement, and sometimes a prologue and epilogue.

4. Determine the climax of the comedy “Woe from Wit”.

The climax of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is Sophia’s words about Chatsky’s madness.

5. Determine the climax of the novel by A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin".

In the novel by A.S. Pushkin's "Eugene Onegin" culminates in the duel between Onegin and Lensky.

6. Determine the climax of N.V.’s comedy. Gogol "The Inspector General".

In the comedy N.V. Gogol's "The Inspector General" the culmination of the plot action is the matchmaking of Khlestakov and the celebration of his engagement to Marya Antonovna.

7. What is the exposition of a work?

Exposition is the portrayal of the characters' lives before the action begins.

8. Determine the plot of N.V.’s comedy. Gogol "The Inspector General".

The beginning of N.V.’s comedy Gogol's "The Inspector General" consists of several events: the mayor's receipt of a letter about the arrival of the inspector, the mayor's dream, and the message from Bobchinsky and Dobchinsky about his arrival "incognito from the capital."

9. Determine the plot of the novel by A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin".

The plot of the novel by A.S. Pushkin's "Eugene Onegin" - Onegin's meeting with Tatyana.

10. What is the role of the prologue in the work?

A prologue is an introduction to the development of the plot, which reveals the background of the events depicted in the work. He explains the reasons for everything that is happening.

11. Determine the nature of the conflict in D.I.’s comedy. Fonviz-na "Nedorosl".

Conflict in the comedy “Minor” by D.I. Fonvizin is the contradictions born of serfdom, affecting all spheres of Russian life, especially the education and life of the local nobility. It can be defined as social and moral.

12. Determine the nature of the conflict in the novel by M.Yu. Ler-montov "Hero of Our Time".

The main conflict of the novel “A Hero of Our Time” by M.Yu. Lermontov lies in the collision of the hero - a person unclaimed by Russian reality - with society.

13. Determine the nature of the conflict in the novel by I.S. Turgenev "Fathers and Sons".

The main conflict of the novel “Fathers and Sons” by I.S. Turgenev consists of contradictions on social, moral, aesthetic issues between the “fathers” - representatives of the nobility and the “children” - democrats-commoners.

14. Why in epic works Are lyrical digressions introduced?

IN lyrical digressions contains reasoning, assessments, thoughts and feelings of the author, expressed directly. Lyrical digressions allow us to more clearly define the author’s ideal and place the necessary accents.

15. What literary images become household names? Give examples.Material from the site

In some images, writers so vividly and expressively embody certain (usually negative) human traits that the names of the bearers of these traits seem to merge with certain vices, begin to be associated with them and become common nouns. So, Manilov is an idle, fruitless dreamer, Nozdryov is the embodiment of a liar and a braggart, Plyushkin is a senseless miser.

16. Describe lyrical hero poetry by A.S. Pushkin.

Lyrical hero A.S. Pushkina is a harmonious, freedom-loving, spiritually rich personality, believing in love, friendship, and optimistically perceiving life. His image is revealed by analyzing the poems “To Siberia”, “Pushchina”, “To K***”, “I loved you”, etc.

17. Describe the lyrical hero of M.Yu.’s poetry. Lermon-tova.

Lyrical hero M.Yu. Lermontov is a “son of suffering”, disappointed in reality, lonely, romantically yearning for will and freedom and tragically not finding them, which can be seen in the poems “Sail”, “I go out alone on the road”, “And it’s boring , and sad”, “Clouds”, “Stanzas”.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page there is material on the following topics:

• woe from mind plot climax denouement
• questions on different works
• iessay
• woe from mind quotes exposition, climax
• plot, climax, denouement of Hamlet

In what action does the play begin? What caused such a prolonged exposure? Read in their faces that part of the play that you consider to be the beginning.

“Comedy,” wrote Gogol, “must knit itself by itself, with its entire mass into one big knot. The plot should embrace all faces, and not just one or two - touch on what worries more or less all the characters. Everyone is a hero here.” Let's see how this important position of Gogol is realized in the first act of the play, where we get acquainted with both the exposition and the plot of the comedy "The Inspector General".

Reference. Exposition is that part of the play in which the arrangement of the characters, the position and characters of the heroes is given before the action begins, and contains motives that will develop in the future.

The somewhat prolonged exposition in the comedy “The Inspector General” is caused by the desire of the author of the play to acquaint readers and viewers with a picture of the life of one of the county towns, to reveal the reasons that led the officials, led by the mayor, to their fatal mistake, to show that the driving spring of action is fear.

The action in the comedy begins with the mayor informing the assembled officials about “very unpleasant news” - an auditor from St. Petersburg is coming to the city “with a secret order.” But that’s not all: Chmykhov’s letter, which the mayor reads aloud, contains a phrase that plunges everyone present into fear. Chmykhov writes that the auditor “can arrive at any hour, unless he has already arrived and lives somewhere incognito...”. This forces the prudent mayor to begin to act immediately - he considers it necessary to give advice to each of the officials present. All his instructions are superficial, relating only to the external side of the matter: he advises the trustee of charitable institutions to put clean caps on the sick (“This is possible,” agrees Zemlyanika), to write “any disease” in Latin over their beds, when they got sick, what day and numbers, and it is better that there are “fewer” patients; Judge Lyapkin-Tyapkin, whose very last name speaks volumes about his attitude to the matter, is to remove the goose and caterpillars from public places, remove the arapnik from the cabinet with papers, etc. Moreover, each of his advice is accompanied by the words: “I wanted to notice this to you before, but somehow I forgot everything.”

The mayor's advice, and later the instructions to the quarterly (phenomenon IV), the statements of the city fathers themselves indicate a negligent attitude towards their duties, complete irresponsibility, and abuses in the service. Hence the general fear when danger approaches - the arrival of an auditor. The mayor’s remarks, concluding scenes I and II of acts one, are also not accidental: “... incognito damned! Suddenly he’ll look in: “Oh, you’re here, my dears! And who, say, is the judge here? - “Lyapkin-Tyapkin”. - “And bring Lyapkin-Tyapkin here!..”; “...the damned incognito sits in my head. You just expect that the door will open - and off you go...” The door actually opens, and Bobchinsky and Dobchinsky run into it, out of breath, with a message about an “emergency incident,” “unexpected news.”

It would seem that all the officials have already been warned by the mayor about the possible arrival of the auditor, instructions have been given, or rather, advice, but everyone is worried about one question: “Where can the “incognito damned” be located?”

Phenomenon III of the first act is the beginning, from which the action develops rapidly. The message from Dobchinsky and Bobchinsky fell on prepared ground. On what grounds did the two “city talkers” accept young man, seen in the hotel, for the auditor? There are several of them, which completely satisfied the excited officials who were waiting for the “damned incognito”: the first, which was first of all perceived by those present, does not pay money and does not go; The second one is also important: “He’s not bad looking, in a private dress, he walks around the room like that, and there’s a kind of reasoning in his face...”

The mayor’s first reaction is the words uttered “in fear”: “What are you, the Lord is with you! It's not him!" But he hears in response the convincing exclamations of Dobchinsky and Bobchinsky: “He!” “He, he, by God, he... So observant: he looked at everything... so he looked into our plates.” At the news that the passing young man has been living in the city for more than two weeks, the mayor is overcome with horror. How not to be scared: “During these two weeks... The prisoners were not given provisions! There is a tavern on the streets, uncleanness! The news is no longer in doubt.

We need to act quickly. It is enough to compare the remarks accompanying the mayor’s speech in scenes I and II with the remarks in scene V to see how excited he is: “He significantly raises his finger up,” “He takes a case instead of a hat,” “Instead of a hat he wants to put on a paper case,” etc. His speech contains only interrogative and exclamatory sentences, all instructions to the policeman are given in a hurry, in great excitement.

Almost all the characters (“the plot embraces more than one or two faces”) react to this unexpected news, everyone is in excitement, in panic, everyone is in a hurry to fix at least something in the institutions under his control, everyone has their own sins and “sins”. The mayor, having given instructions to the quarterly and private bailiff, decides to go to the hotel himself to “sniff out” the young man, to find out what he is like (“It’s a problem if the old devil is the old one, and the young one is all upstairs”).

Elena VIGDOROVA

Continuation. See No. 39, 43/2001

Comedy Griboedov "Woe from Wit"

For practitioners of literature

Conversation three

First act: exposition, setup, keywords

So, in the first act - the plot and exposition.
Pushkin wrote: “I’m not talking about poetry - half of it will become proverbs...”. Time has shown: more than half. We begin to read the comedy - and all the words, phrases, expressions - everything is aphoristic, everything has entered, fit into our culture, starting from Lisa’s very first remarks: “It’s dawning!.. Ah! how quickly the night has passed! Yesterday I asked to sleep - refusal... Don’t sleep until you fall out of your chair” - and so on.
Liza's line is connected with the traditional image of the soubrette from the French comedy. Lisa is in a special position not only in relation to Sophia, being her confidante, confidant of her secrets, but also to Famusov, Molchalin, even to Chatsky. The author puts particularly apt aphorisms and maxims into the mouth of Lisa, the maid. Here are examples of Lisa's wit:

You know that I am not flattered by interests;
Better tell me why
You and the young lady are modest, but what about the maid?

Oh! Move away from the gentlemen;
They prepare troubles for themselves at every hour,
Pass us away more than all sorrows
And lordly anger, and lordly love.

Here's how she sums up the created qui pro quo:

Well! people around here!
She comes to him, and he comes to me,
And I...... I am the only one who crushes love to death. –
How can you not love the bartender Petrusha!

Lisa amazingly formulates the “moral law”:

Sin is not a problem, rumor is not good.

Taking advantage of her privileged position in the house, she often talks to Famusov, the young lady, and Molchalin in a commanding, demanding, even capricious manner.

Famusov:

You are a spoiler, these faces suit you!

Let me in, you little windbags,

Come to your senses, you are old...

Please go.

Sofya and Molchalin:

Yes, disperse. Morning.

Molchalin:

Please let me in, there are two of you without me.

Liza’s speech is rich in popular expressions:

You need an eye and an eye.

And fear does not take them!

Well, why would they take away the shutters?

These faces suit you!

I'll bet it's nonsense...

She has frequent incomplete sentences without predicates:

Where are we going?

Foot in the stirrup
And the horse rears up,
He hits the ground and straight to the crown of his head.

In general, you can copy aphorisms from a comedy without missing anything, but Lizin’s language is somehow especially good for its Moscow flavor, its complete lack of bookishness.
It is impossible not to give another example of Lisa’s sharp tongue:

Push, know that there is no urine from the outside,
Your father came here, I froze;
I spun around in front of him, I don’t remember that I was lying...

Lizanka wonderfully defined the nature of her actions with a verb lie. This word and all those close to it in meaning - not true, you're all lying, to be deceived- will turn out to be not just important in the first four phenomena, but key. Because all the characters lie here:
Lisa - because she must protect Sophia from her father’s wrath.

The young lady herself - to protect herself and her lover from troubles. “He just came in,” she says to her father. And for greater plausibility, he will then add: “You deigned to run in so quickly, // I was confused...”. At the end of this scene, Sophia, having recovered “from fright,” composes a dream where, as Famusov will say, “everything is there if there is no deception.” But, as we understand, there is deception here too. And just towards the end, at the end of the first act, Sophia, in our opinion, is not only lying, but intriguing, transferring Famusov’s suspicions from Molchalin to Chatsky: “Ah, father, sleep in hand.”

Of course, Molchalin also lies in this scene, he does it easily and naturally - in order to avoid personal troubles: “I’m off for a walk now.”

All of them - Lisa, Sophia, and Molchalin - in other words, young people Famusovsky house, "children", or, if you like, representatives " this century“- they all deceive the old father, master, owner, patron. They consider him an old man, “a century gone by,” although he himself, if you remember his scene with Lisa, is not always ready to come to terms with this.

Lisa: Come to your senses, you are old...
Famusov: Almost.

It is clear that when flirting with Liza, Famusov is in no hurry to admit that he is an old man, but in a conversation with his daughter he refers to his advanced age: “he lived to see his gray hair.” And with Chatsky too: “In my years...”.

Perhaps from the first minute, even the clock has not yet been changed, some kind of conflict ensues, quite intelligible. This conflict, as Lisa asserts in her very first short monologue, will certainly end in disaster, because “father,” aka “uninvited guest,” can enter at any moment, and young lovers - we don’t yet know that Molchalin loves Sophia “ position" - they show a strange deafness: "And they hear, they don’t want to understand."

Let us note in parentheses that the motif of deafness, which we have already talked about when analyzing the list of characters, such an important motif in comedy, begins right here - in the first phenomenon of the first act.

Lisa, as we remember, performs some manipulations with the arrows, and in response to the noise, of course, Famusov appears - the one whose arrival everyone should be afraid of. So it looks like the conflict is starting to develop. Lisa “spins” in order to avoid at this hour and in this place the meeting of all persons involved in the “domestic” conflict. It seems impossible to avoid a scandal. After all, the intelligent and observant Famusov will immediately draw attention to the strangeness of what is happening. Liza, demanding silence from him, because Sophia was “now asleep” and “read all night // Everything in French, out loud,” and as Famusov should know, since he is “not a child,” “girls have morning sleep so subtle, // The slightest creak of the door, the slightest whisper - Everyone hears,” he won’t believe it. How he doesn’t believe her from the very beginning. The presence of intent is obvious to Famusov (“Just by chance, notice you; // Yes, that’s right, with intent”), but I don’t want to figure it out. He himself is a “pampered man” and flirts with the maid.

It should be noted that Liza will not let the master down either and will not tell Sophia about his advances. Only when Famusov boasts that he is “known for his monastic behavior!” will Lizanka immediately respond: “I dare, sir...”.

It is unlikely that the maid wanted to expose the master and catch him in a lie, although, of course, one could suspect her of this. Famusov is exposed and incriminated by none other than the viewer, the reader, to whom Liza’s remark precisely at that moment when Pavel Afanasyevich says: “You don’t need another example, // When the example of your father is in your eyes,” should remind you of how he somehow a while ago he flirted with a maid, but now he lies as easily and naturally as his secretary, maid and daughter.

Just like Sophia and Molchalin, Famusov hears everything in the scene with Lisa, but does not want to understand and does everything possible to avoid a scandal.

In the scene that ends with the words, of course, which have become a proverb (“Pass us away more than all sorrows // Both lordly anger and lordly love”), two more lines open up for us - the line of madness and the line of moral teaching. When Lisa as loud as possible calls on Famusov not to disturb Sophia’s sensitive sleep, Pavel Afanasyevich covers her mouth and reasonably notes:

Have mercy, how you scream!
Crazy are you going?

Lisa calmly answers:

I'm afraid it won't work out...

It does not occur to Lisa, nor to the reader-viewer, nor to Pavel Afanasyevich himself that the master really considers the maid insane. Idiom you're going crazy works the way an idiom should work: it does not carry a specific semantic load and is, as it were, a metaphor. So in the second act, Famusov will tell Chatsky: “Don’t be a whim.” And in the third he calls Famusov Khlestov himself “crazy”:

After all, your father is crazy:
He was given three fathoms of daring, -
He introduces us without asking whether we are pleased or not?

When in the first scene of the third act Sophia throws aside: “I reluctantly drove you crazy!” – the intrigue has not yet been conceived by her, but already in the fourteenth scene of the same action the innocent idiom will work. “He’s out of his mind,” Sophia will say about Chatsky to a certain Mr. N, and he will ask: “Have he really lost his mind?” And Sophia, after a pause, will add: “Not really...” She already understood how she would take revenge on Chatsky: her “keeping silent” was worth a lot. But we'll talk about this later. Now it is important for us that in a neutral, ordinary situation without additional intrigue, words about madness do not carry a threat, a diagnosis, or slander, and the characters in the play understand and use them the same way as you and I do.

But the line of moral teaching opens as soon as Sophia’s passion for reading is reported. Famusov immediately remembers that he is not just a gentleman who is not averse to having an affair with a maid on occasion, but also “the father of an adult daughter.” “Tell me,” he says to Liza, “that it’s not good for her to spoil her eyes, // And reading is of little use: // French books make her sleepless, // But Russian books make it painful for me to sleep.” Lisa will answer Famusova’s proposal very wittily: “Whatever happens, I’ll report.” Liza’s remark emphasizes the comedy of the situation: the moral teachings are delivered somehow at the wrong time. But in itself this Famus remark is remarkable: it is structured in the same way as all his main speeches, no matter who he addresses - the footman Petrushka, his daughter, Molchalin, Chatsky or Skalozub. Famusov always starts with a very specific imperative: “tell me”, “don’t cry”, “read this wrong”, “be silent”, “you should ask”, “admit”. This is, let's say, the first part of the statement. The second part carries a generalization - Famusov likes to reason and philosophize (“Philosophize - your mind will spin”). Here is a deep thought about the “benefits of reading.” And in the third part - to confirm that you are right! - he always points to authority, cites as an example someone who, in Famusov’s opinion, cannot be disrespected. In this tiny monologue, the main authority is the speaker himself: if Sophia “can’t sleep because of French books,” then her father “has trouble sleeping because of Russians.” Famusov is absolutely sure that he is a completely suitable role model.

Word sample we note because it will appear many times in the text and will turn out to be very important for understanding the main conflict. For now, let us pay attention to Famusov’s penchant for demagoguery, rhetoric, and oratory. One must think that Lisa will not tell Sophia in the morning that there is no point in “spoiling her eyes”, and there is no sense in reading, she will not remind her that literature only contributes to her father’s sleep. Doesn’t Famusov understand this? Hardly. But his pedagogical principles correspond to his official ones: “It’s signed, off your shoulders.” Famusov sees the absurdity of the situation, but, as we have already noticed, he does not want to expose anyone, and upon hearing Sophia’s voice, he says: “Shh!” - And sneaks out of the room on tiptoe. It turns out that he, an exemplary Moscow gentleman (he, according to Lisa, is “like all Moscow ...”), has something to hide from prying eyes and ears.

What, Lisa, attacked you?
You’re making noise... –

the young lady who appeared on stage with her lover will say after his disappearance. This “make noise” is a neutral word, and it absolutely accurately defines Lisa’s actions. But let’s not forget that in the future, for some reason, Famusov himself and other characters will pronounce it very often. In Act II, Famusov will tell Skalozub about the Moscow old men: “They’ll bet make some noise " And Chatsky will say to Gorich: “Forgotten noise camp". But Repetilov boasts: “ We make noise , brother, we make noise " Remember how contemptuously Chatsky responds to this: “ Make some noise You? and that’s all?”... So Liza at the beginning of the play is really just making noise, trying to prevent the brewing conflict between the old man and the youth from taking place and getting out of control. And in the third phenomenon, we, in fact, only get to know Sophia and understand that Sophia really reads in French, because Sophia’s speech, her vocabulary, a little later, a dream she composed (however, who knows, maybe not on this, but on another night she saw him - “dreams are strange”) - all this characterizes Sofya Famusova, Chatsky’s beloved, as a bookish young lady.

The conflict, it seems to us, is developing in the third phenomenon, the climax is near: here he is, the “uninvited guest” from whom troubles are expected, has now entered at the very moment when he is especially feared. Sophia, Lisa, Molchalin - they're all here. Famusov indignantly asks his daughter and secretary: “And how did God not bring you together at the right time?” No matter how cleverly the lovers caught by surprise lie, he does not believe them. “Why are you together? // It can’t happen by accident.” It would seem that he exposed. But Famusov, as we have already noted, cannot limit himself to just a remark; the second part of the monologue delivered before this, of course, carries a generalization. Famusov is pronouncing the famous monologue denouncing the Kuznetsky Most and the “eternal French” right now. As soon as Famusov verbally moves from the door of Sophia’s bedroom to the Kuznetsky Bridge and turns not to his daughter and her friend, but to the Creator, so that he saves Muscovites from all these French misfortunes, the guilty daughter will have the opportunity to recover “from her fright.” And Famusov will not forget to move on to the third obligatory part: he will also talk about himself, about his “trouble in his position, in his service.” The examples he gives to Sophia are not only his father, known for his “monastic behavior,” but also smart Madame Rosier (“She was smart, had a quiet disposition, rarely had rules”) - that same “second mother” who “allowed herself to be lured by others for an extra five hundred rubles a year.” Griboyedov introduced exposition into this moralizing monologue by Famusov. After all, it is from Famusov’s story that we learn about Sophia’s upbringing, about her wonderful mentors, role models, who, it turns out, taught her a very important science - the science of lies, betrayal and hypocrisy. We will see later that Sophia has learned these lessons.

Familiar with lies and betrayal from an early age, Sophia (three years later!) suspects insincerity in Chatsky’s actions, which we learn about from her conversation with Lisa (phenomenon 5):

Then he pretended to be in love again...
Oh! if someone loves someone,
Why search for the mind and travel so far?

It seems that “models” do not play a role in Sophia’s life. last role. Let us also remember Liza’s story about Sophia’s aunt, whose “young Frenchman ran away” from home, and she “wanted to bury // Her annoyance, // failed: // She forgot to blacken her hair // And after three days she turned gray.” Lisa tells Sophia about this in order to “amuse her a little,” but smart Sophia will immediately notice the similarity: “That’s how they’ll talk about me later.” If it was not Liza’s intention to compare Auntie’s and Sophia’s situations, then Famusov, at the evil moment of the final revelation (last act), remembering Sophia’s mother, directly speaks of the similarity in the behavior of mother and daughter (phenomenon 14):

She neither give nor take,
Like her mother, the deceased wife.
It happened that I was with my better half
A little apart - somewhere with a man!

But let's return to the 3rd scene of Act I. ...Famusov’s words “A terrible century!” seem to confirm our assumption that the conflict between the “present century” and the “past century” is starting right now. The action, which began with Liza’s failed attempt to prevent a clash between father and daughter, reaches its climax “here and at this hour” and, it seems, is already rapidly moving towards a denouement, but, starting from the “terrible century”, talking about education:

We take tramps, both into the house and with tickets,
To teach our daughters everything, everything -
And dancing! and foam! and tenderness! and sigh!
It’s as if we are preparing them as wives for buffoons. “Famusov will also remember how he benefited Molchalin, and Sophia will immediately stand up for her, as Griboyedov will say, “Sahar Medovich.” She lost her breath while Famusov was ranting, and her lie would be completely thought out and couched in beautiful and literate phrases worthy of a well-read young lady. The scandal, which should have broken out here, and not in the fourth act, begins to get bogged down in words: time, upbringing, plot are already being discussed strange dream, and then Molchalin answered the question “I hurried to my voice, for what? “Speak,” he replies: “With the papers, sir,” and thereby completely changes the whole situation. Famusov, throwing out his ironic: “that this suddenly fell into zeal for written matters,” will let Sophia go, explaining to her at parting that “where there are miracles, there is little storage,” and he will go with his secretary to “sort out the papers.” Finally, he declares his credo relating to official matters:

And for me, what matters and what doesn’t matter,
My custom is this:
Signed, off your shoulders.

The credo, of course, is also exemplary. There will be no resolution, just as, apparently, there was no conflict: so, a petty domestic squabble, of which, apparently, there have already been many: “It can be worse, you can get away with it,” Sophia will remind her maid-friend. In this conflict-scandal-squabble, Famusov will utter another important word in the context of the play. He will say: “Now they will reproach me, // That it is always useless I'm judging " Chide, scold – we will come across these words more than once. Chatsky in the second act will remember the “sinister” old women and old men who are always ready To ordeal. And Famusov himself pronounces the verb scold in his famous monologue about Moscow precisely when he talks about education younger generation: “Please look at our youth, // At the young men - sons and grandchildren. // Jury We will understand them, and if you understand them, // At the age of fifteen they will teach teachers!”

Please note, we do not reprove, we do not condemn, we do not expel from our circle, but... we “reprimand”. “Scold” – that is, “lightly reprimand someone; express censure by instructing” (Dictionary of the Russian Language in 4 volumes; the example given in the dictionary from Chekhov’s “Duel” is also interesting: “As a friend, I scolded him why he drinks a lot, why he lives beyond his means and gets into debt”). So, the resolution of the conflict is replaced by a trial. Famusov, expressing censure, instructs. He, “like all Moscow people,” is raising his daughter, who, like “all Moscow people,” has a “special imprint.” A quarrel occurs between people. They don't expel their own people. They scold their own people.

In the first act there is a plot, but until the fifth event we still do not hear the name of the main character, the main participant in the conflict that is real, and not what we imagined at first. Actually, none of the rivals of Molchalin, who was born in poverty, has yet been named, whom we, perhaps, took for the main character, that is, for a character different from the rest, a kind of defenseless provincial in love with his master’s daughter. “Love will be of no use // Not forever,” prophesies the far-sighted Lisa. Maybe "Woe from Wit" is a tragedy little man? Words trouble, grief will be heard in the fifth scene during a frank (they don’t seem to be lying to each other) conversation between the young lady and the maid several times:

Sin is not a problem...
And grief awaits around the corner.
But here's the problem.

It is in this conversation that all the rivals of Molchalin will be presented, about whom we do not yet know that he will not be able to lay claim to the role of a sensitive hero. Molchalin is still a mystery to us, and in the first act there is not a single hint of his hypocrisy. So far, he differs from the other “suitors”, about whom we will now hear for the first time, only in his modesty and poverty - very positive qualities. And everything we learn about Skalozub and Chatsky does not make them happy. Skalozub greets Famusov, who “would like a son-in-law<...>with stars and ranks,” the “golden bag” is suitable for Famusov, but not for Sophia:

what's in it, what's in the water...

We have already noted that Sophia is not satisfied with Skalozub’s intelligence; in my mind Chatsky she seems to have no doubt: “sharp, smart, eloquent,” but he denies him sensitivity. Let us remember that her words are a response to Lizino “who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp.” Sophia is ready to confirm both the sharpness of his mind and his penchant for fun (“He’s great // He knows how to make everyone laugh; // He chats, jokes, it’s funny to me”), but his sensitivity is not! - does not believe:

if someone loves someone...

But Lisa doesn’t just talk about him spiritual qualities, she remembers how Chatsky “shed himself in tears.” But Sophia has her own reasons: she remembers her childhood friendship and love, her resentment that he “moved out, he seemed bored with us, // And rarely visited our house”, does not believe in his feeling that flared up “later”, and believes that he was only “pretending to be in love, // Demanding and distressed,” and Chatsky’s tears, which Liza remembers, are like tears if there is fear of loss (“Who knows what I will find when I return? // And how many , maybe I’ll lose it!”) did not become an obstacle to leaving: after all, “if someone loves someone, // Why search for intelligence and travel so far?”

So, Chatsky - this is how Sophia sees him - is a proud man who is “happy where people are funnier”, in other words, a frivolous young man, perhaps a talker, whose words and feelings do not inspire confidence. And Molchalin, in Sophia’s understanding, is his positive antipode: he is “not like that.” It was in his shy, timid love, in his sighs “from the depths of the soul”, silence - “not a free word” - that Sophia believed: a reader of sentimental novels.

The first thing we see when Chatsky finally appears on stage is his self-confidence, assertiveness, inability to think about others - even about the same Sophia: somehow she spent these years, which seemed to him so fast, as if not a week had passed! And as if in order to confirm the characterization given by Sophia, Chatsky shows that “he knows how to make everyone laugh”:

Has your uncle jumped back his eyelid?

And this one, what’s his name, is he Turkish or Greek?
The little black one, on crane legs...

And three of the tabloid faces,
Who have been looking young for half a century?

What about our sun?

And that consumptive...?

And auntie? all girl, Minerva?

In a word, “quick questions and a curious look” seem to further highlight Molchalin’s modesty.

During this first meeting with Sophia, Chatsky managed to offend many past acquaintances, expressing his impartial opinions about various aspects of Moscow life: if he talks about theatrical life, he does not forget to say that the one who “has Theater and Masquerade written on his forehead” - “he himself is fat, his artists are skinny”; if he speaks “about education”, and he moves on to this topic without any reason, only remembering that Aunt Sophia “has a house full of pupils and mugs”, then again he is dissatisfied with teachers and Muscovites who “are busy recruiting regiments of teachers, // More in number , at a cheaper price." How can one not recall Famusov’s dissatisfaction with the Kuznetsk Bridge and the “eternal French,” “destroyers of pockets and hearts,” and these “tramps,” as he calls teachers who are taken “both into the house and on tickets, // To teach our daughters everything , everything – //And dancing! and foam! and tenderness! and sigh!”

The reader has reason to assume that it is Chatsky, and not Skalozub, who will even turn out to be Famusov’s desired contender for Sophia’s hand: he was raised in Famusov’s house, and is ready to count many “acquaintances,” and does not favor the French, and - finally! - not rootless - “Andrei Ilyich’s late son” - surely Andrei Ilyich is known for something, and a friend of Famusov, and from Moscow, and in Moscow, after all, “from time immemorial it has been said that honor is given to father and son.”

But the reader (like Pushkin!) has a question: is he smart? Griboyedov’s contemporaries still remember very well the comedy “The Minor” and the hero-reasoner Starodum. Let us remember how he appeared at the Prostakovs’ house. Firstly, it was very timely - if he had come a day earlier, there would have been no conflict related to the marriage, and a day later - the fate of his niece Sophia would have been decided, she would have been married off - no matter, to Mitrofanushka or Skotinin, but Starodum would I couldn't help her. Secondly, it is impossible to imagine Starodum uttering a word without thinking. What does Starodum say when Pravdin calls him to immediately “free” Sophia?

“Wait,” the wise Starodum will say, “my heart is still seething with indignation at the unworthy act of the local owners. Let's stay here for a few minutes. I have a rule: do nothing in the first movement" ( Act III, phenomenon 2).

Everything that Chatsky does, he does in the first “movement” - whether of indignation, delight, joy. Like all other characters, he is “deaf” to others and hears only himself. He wandered for a long time, suddenly became homesick and rushed “through the snowy desert”; For half an hour he is not ready to “tolerate the coldness”; he will turn to the young lady, the bride-to-be, with a demand - well, kiss him!

No, we won’t notice Silly’s modesty in him. Sincerity? Yes, there is sincerity. After all, how touchingly he admits:

And yet I love you without memory.

And then minute silence repents of what he said earlier:

Are my words really all pricks?
And tend to harm someone?
But if so: the mind and heart are not in harmony.

However, in Act I we still do not know about Molchalin’s treachery. But we see that the daughter’s coldness is compensated by the warm embrace of her father: “Great, friend, great, brother, great!” - Famusov will say, hugging Chatsky. Note that Famusov, of course, does not hug either Molchalin or Skalozub. And the first “news” that Chatsky tells him immediately after the first hug is that “Sofya Pavlovna... has become prettier.” And, saying goodbye, once again: “How good!”

Well, that’s how Famusov will see him, one of the young people who “have nothing else to do but notice girls’ beauties.” Famusov himself was once young, he probably remembers this, and so he speaks with sympathy and understanding:

She said something casually, and you,
I am filled with hopes, enchanted.

Until Famusov’s last remark in this action, when it suddenly turns out that Chatsky for him is no better than Molchalin (“half a mile out of the fire”) - “dandy friend”, “spendthrift”, “tomboy” - these are the words he speaks about him Famusov, - until this last remark we do not realize that Chatsky is the main participant in the conflict. We do not yet know that it is he, who is not suitable for either the daughter, or the father, or, as we will see later, for the parents of six princesses as a groom, who appeared, as Pushkin will say, “from the ship to the ball”, who will bring all this fuss, will stir up, alarm, make reality Liza’s assumption that she, “Molchalin and everyone out of the yard”... And he himself, expelled, will again go “to search the world,” but not for the mind, but for that quiet place “where there is a corner for the offended feeling.”

To be continued