What works of Fonvizin are known to modern readers? Of course, "Minor". After all, comedy is included in the school curriculum. It is known that the Russian writer wrote critical articles and translations of foreign authors. However, Fonvizin’s works are not limited to literary works and satirical essays about the ignorant Prostakov family.
What else did the creator write? domestic comedy? And why, in his declining years, was it difficult for the author of “The Minor” to publish his creations?
Russian author of foreign origin
The writer lived and worked in Catherine's era. Fonvizin’s works would not have been created if one of the comedian’s ancestors had not once fallen into Russian captivity. The creator of such characters as Prostakov, Starodum and Mitrofanushka was of foreign origin, but was the most Russian of all Russian writers of the eighteenth century. At least that's what Pushkin said about him.
Translation activities
The writer studied at the gymnasium, then became a student at the Faculty of Philosophy. Fonvizin's works represent the pinnacle theatrical arts eighteenth century. However, before receiving recognition, the writer spent many years poring over translations of famous foreign and even ancient playwrights. And only after gaining experience, he began to write original essays.
The hero of this article began to engage in literary translation by accident. One day one of the St. Petersburg booksellers heard about his excellent knowledge of foreign languages. Businessman suggested young man translate the works of Ludwig Holberg into Russian. Denis Fonvizin coped with the task. After which many offers from publishers poured in.
Literary creativity
When did Fonvizin’s original works begin to appear? The list of his works is small. Below is a list of dramatic works and publications on political topics. But first it’s worth saying a few words about the worldview of this author.
In the second half of the eighteenth century, educational thought was in fashion throughout Europe, one of the founders of which was Voltaire. The Russian writer happily translated the works of the French satirist. The humor that distinguishes Fonvizin’s works in the style of classicism probably became a feature formed under the influence of Voltaire’s work. During the years when the writer was especially active in visiting circles of freethinkers, the first comedy was created.
"Brigadier"
Literary studies helped Fonvizin climb the career ladder in his youth, but had a detrimental effect on the writer’s work in his old age. The empress herself drew attention to the translation of the tragedy of the Aviary. The comedy “Brigadier” enjoyed particular success.
Journalism
In 1769, the writer entered the service of which prompted him to write a political treatise. The title of this work fully corresponds to the time in which the author lived: “Reflections on the completely destroyed form of government and on the precarious state of the empire and sovereigns.”
In Catherine’s era, educated people expressed themselves in a very florid way, even the empress herself, who, by the way, did not like the essay. The fact is that in this work the author criticized both Catherine and her favorites and demanded constitutional reform. At the same time, he even dared to threaten a coup.
In Paris
Fonvizin spent more than two years in France. From there he carried on regular correspondence with Panin and other like-minded people. Social problems have become main theme both letters and essays. Fonvizin's journalistic works, the list of which is little known to contemporaries, despite the absence of strict censorship in those years, were imbued with a thirst for change and a reformist spirit.
Political Views
After visiting France, Denis Fonvizin wrote new “Discourses”. This time they were dedicated to state laws. In this essay, the author raised the issue of serfdom. Convinced of the need to destroy it, he was still under the impression of “Pugachevism,” and therefore proposed getting rid of serfdom moderately, without haste.
Fonvizin was engaged in literary creativity until the end of his days. But due to the disapproval of the empress, he was unable to publish a collection of his works. Finally, it is worth mentioning the works of Fonvizin.
List of books
- "Brigadier."
- "Undergrown."
- "Discourses on indispensable state laws."
- "Governor's Choice"
- "Conversation with Princess Khaldina."
- « Sincere confession».
- "Corion".
The writer created “A Sincere Confession” when he was in his old age. This work is autobiographical in nature. IN last years writer Fonvizin mainly wrote articles for magazines. Fonvizin entered the history of Russian literature as the author of comedies in the genre of classicism. What is this direction? What are its characteristic features?
Works by Fonvizin
Classicism is a movement based on the principles of rationalism. The works contain harmony and faith, and poetic norms are strictly observed. The heroes of the comedy “The Minor” are divided into positive and negative. There are no contradictory images here. And this is also a characteristic feature of classicism.
This trend originated in France. In Russia, classicism was distinguished by its satirical orientation. In the works of French playwrights, ancient themes came first. They are characterized by national-historical motives.
main feature dramatic works the eighteenth century - the unity of time and place. The events of “The Minor” take place in the house of the Prostakov family. Everything that is described in the comedy takes place within twenty-four hours. Fonvizin gave his characters meaningful names. Skotinin dreams of villages where many pigs graze. Vralman pretends to enlighten Mitrofanushka, while he introduces the undergrowth into even more terrible ignorance.
The comedy touches on the topic of education. Enlightenment thought had a significant influence on all of Fonvizin’s work. The writer dreamed of change political system. But he believed that without enlightenment, any changes would lead to rebellion, “Pugachevism” or other negative socio-political consequences.
Fonvizin Denis Ivanovich (1745 1792) - one of the most educated people of his era. He was a writer and playwright, publicist and translator. He is rightfully considered the creator of the national Russian everyday comedy, the most famous of which are “The Minor” and “The Brigadier”. Born on April 14, 1745 in Moscow, into a noble family of descendants of a knight of the Livonian Order. Even under Ivan the Terrible, one of the knights of the Von Wiesen Order was captured and remained in the service of the Russian Tsar. From him came the Fonvizin family (the prefix von was added in the Russian manner to the surname Wizen). Thanks to my father I got elementary education Houses. He was brought up in the patriarchal structure that reigned in the family. From 1755 he studied at the noble gymnasium at Moscow University, then at the Faculty of Philosophy of the same university.
Since 1762 he has been in the public service, first working as a translator, then, from 1763, in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs as secretary of the cabinet minister Elagin. After working here for about six years, in 1769 he became the personal secretary of Count Panin. From 1777 to 1778 travels abroad, spending a lot of time in France. In 1779 he returned to Russia and entered service as an adviser to the chancellery of the Secret Expedition. In 1783, his patron Count Panin passed away and he immediately resigned with the rank of state councilor and 3,000 rubles. annual pension. Free time dedicated to travel.
Since 1783, Denis Ivanovich visited Western Europe, Germany, Austria, spent a lot of time in Italy. In 1785, the writer suffered his first stroke, due to which he had to return to Russia in 1787. Despite the paralysis that tormented him, he continued to engage in literary work.
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin passed away on December 1 (12), 1792. The writer was buried in St. Petersburg at the Lazarevskoye cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.
Creative path
The creation of the first works dates back to the 1760s. Being by nature a lively and witty person who loved to laugh and joke, he creates his own early works in the genre of satire. This was facilitated by his gift of irony, which did not leave him until the end of his life. During these years, intensive work has been going on in the literary field. In 1760, in “Literary Heritage” he published his so-called “early “Minor””. At the same time, in the period from 1761 to 1762, he was engaged in translations of Holberg's fables, works of Rousseau, Ovid, Gresse, Terrason and Voltaire.
In 1766, his first well-known satirical comedy, “The Brigadier,” was completed. The play became an event in literary circles, the author himself read it masterfully and Fonvizin, then still little known, was invited to Peterhof to read his work to Empress Catherine II herself. It was a huge success. The play was staged on the theater stage in 1770, but was published only after the death of the author. The comedy has not left the theater stage to this day. A legend has reached us that after the premiere, Prince Potemkin said to Fonvizin: “Die, Denis! But you can’t write better!” In the same year, a translation of the treatise “The Trading Nobility, Contrasted with the Military Nobility” was published, which presented evidence of the need for the nobility to engage in trade.
Mature creativity
Among the journalistic works, “Discourse on the Indispensable Laws of State,” created in 1783, is considered one of the best. In the autumn of the same 1783, the premiere of the main play in Fonvizin’s work, the comedy “The Minor,” took place. Despite the extensive literary heritage, left by Fonvizin, for most of us his name is associated with this comedy. The first production of the play was not easy. The censors were embarrassed by the satirical orientation of the play and the boldness of the remarks of some of the comedy characters. Finally, on September 24, 1782, the production was carried out on the stage of Volny Russian Theater. The success was colossal. As one of the authors of the “Dramatic Dictionary” testified: “The theater was incomparably filled and the audience applauded the play by throwing purses.” The next production took place in Moscow on May 14, 1783 at the Medox Theater. Since that time, for more than 250 years, the play has been performed with constant success in all theaters in Russia. With the birth of cinema, the first film adaptation of the comedy appeared. In 1926, based on “The Minor,” Grigory Roshal made the film “The Skotinins’ Gentlemen.”
It is difficult to overestimate the influence of Fonvizin’s “Minor” on subsequent generations of writers. His works were read and studied by all subsequent generations of writers from Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol, Belinsky to the present day. However, in the life of the writer himself, she played a fatal role. Catherine the Second perfectly understood the freedom-loving orientation of comedy, as an attempt on existing social and state foundations. After 1783, when a number of the writer’s satirical works were published, she personally prohibited further publication of his works in print. And this continued until the death of the writer.
However, despite publication bans, Denis Ivanovich continues to write. During this period, the comedy “The Governor’s Choice” and the feuilleton “Conversation with Princess Khaldina” were written. Just before his departure, Fonvizin wanted to publish a five-volume set of his works, but was refused by the empress. Of course, it was published, but much later after the master left.
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is a Russian writer and publicist, playwright and translator during the reign of Catherine the Great, the founder of everyday comedy, who worked in such literary direction like classicism. The life and work of this man made an invaluable contribution to the development of Russian literature.
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born on April 3, 1745 and grew up in a noble family in Moscow. His family went back to German roots, so his surname is a Russian variation of the German name Von Wisin.
Initially, the future genius was educated at home, and then was enrolled in the list of students of the Faculty of Philosophy at Moscow University. Afterwards, for his services in the literary field, he will be sent to St. Petersburg, where he met such iconic figures of the state as Lomonosov and Sumarokov.
Creative path: a success story
The first works began to appear already in 1760. The writer began with translations, which were published periodically. The first landmark publication was in the form of an early version of the famous play “The Minor.” Later, by 1781, the completed play will be staged on the stage of St. Petersburg, and two years later it will occupy the stages of Moscow. 8 years later, from the pen of the classicist, a comedy with a satirical orientation called “The Brigadier” came out, which elevated Fonvizin as a writer and was honored to be read before the Empress herself in her Peterhof summer house.
Like many writers, Fonvizin spent a lot of time abroad, in particular in France. His work as an adviser to the chancellery is accompanied by writing large quantity journalistic texts, for example, “Discourse on the Indispensable Laws of State,” as well as work on translations that allowed the Russian reader to become acquainted with the works of Rousseau, Ovid and even Walter.
Personal life
Little is known about the writer’s personal life. His wife's name was Katerina Ivanovna Rogovikova, she was from the family of a wealthy merchant. There is no mention of children in his biography.
It is only known that he was an exemplary family man, therefore all his works are edifying in nature. In matters of family and marriage, he was categorical: a woman is decorated with fidelity, piety and education, and a man is decorated with virtue, strength and wisdom.
last years of life
In the last years of his life, spending time traveling abroad in Europe, the writer encountered a disease that was too tough for the medicine of those years. The first apoplectic gift will suffice him, because of which he will be forced to return to Russia.
Suffering from paralysis, the author will continue to engage in creative activities. Main work, left by him and written in the last days of his life, is an autobiographical work “Frank Confession”. The writer died on December 1, 1792 in St. Petersburg and was buried at the Lazarevskoye cemetery.
Interesting? Save it on your wall!State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Udmurt State University"
Abstract on the topic:
“Creativity of D. I. Fonvizin”
Is done by a student
2nd year
Faculty of Journalism
Mukminova Svetlana.
Checked:
Doctor of Philological Sciences,
Associate Professor of the Department
Literary theories
Zvereva T.V.
Izhevsk, 2008
- Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….. 3
- Comedies by D. I. Fonvizin ……………………………………………………………….. 7
2.1 Comprehension of the forms of national life in the comedy “Brigadier” ... 9
2.2 Understanding Russian culture and Russian history
In the comedy “Minor” ……………………………………………. 15
3. The linguistic element of creativity of D. I. Fonvizin ……………………….. 25
4. Crisis of world relations and change in ideological position
D. I. Fonvizina ……………………………………………………… 30
5. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………… 32
6. Bibliography ……………………………………………………… 33
Introduction
“In the history of Russian literary satire of the 18th century, Fonvizin has a special place. If it were necessary to name a writer, in whose works the depth of comprehension of the morals of the era would be commensurate with the courage and skill in exposing the vices of the ruling class and the highest authorities, then such a writer should undoubtedly be called Fonvizin” - this is what he says about Fonvizin famous critic Yu. V. Stennik, author of the book “Russian Satire of the 18th Century” (9, 291).
The satirical current penetrated in the 18th century into almost all types and forms of literature - drama, novel, story, poem and even ode. The development of satire was directly related to the development of the entire Russian public life and advanced social thought. Accordingly, the artistic and satirical coverage of reality by writers expanded. The most pressing problems of our time came to the fore - the fight against serfdom, against autocracy.
The work of young Fonvizin also unfolds in line with this satirical trend. Being one of the most prominent figures Enlightenment humanism in Russia in the 18th century, Fonvizin embodied in his work the rise of national self-awareness that marked this era. In the vast country awakened by Peter's reforms, the best representatives of the Russian nobility became the spokesmen for this renewed self-awareness. Fonvizin perceived the ideas of enlightenment humanism especially keenly; with pain in his heart he observed the moral devastation of part of his class. Fonvizin himself lived in the grip of ideas about the high moral duties of a nobleman. In the nobles’ oblivion of their duty to society, he saw the cause of all public evils: “I happened to travel around my land. I saw in what most of those bearing the name of a nobleman put their curiosity. I saw many of them who serve, or, moreover, occupy positions in the service only because they ride a pair. I saw many others who immediately resigned as soon as they gained the right to harness fours. I saw contemptuous descendants from the most respectable ancestors. In a word, I saw servile nobles, and that’s what. my heart was torn apart." This is what Fonvizin wrote in 1783 in a letter to the author of “Facts and Fables,” that is, to Empress Catherine II herself.
Fonvizin became involved in the literary life of Russia at a time when Catherine II encouraged interest in the ideas of the European Enlightenment: at first she flirted with the French enlighteners - Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert. But very soon not a trace remained of Catherine's liberalism. By the will of circumstances Fonvizin found himself in the thick of the internal political struggle that flared up at court. In this struggle, gifted with brilliant creative abilities and keen observation, Fonvizin took the place of a satirical writer, denouncing corruption and lawlessness in the courts, the baseness of the moral character of nobles close to the throne and favoritism encouraged by the highest authorities.
Fonvizin was born in Moscow on April 3 (14), 1745 (according to other sources - 1744) into a middle-income noble family. Already in his childhood, Denis Ivanovich received the first lessons of an uncompromising attitude towards servility and bribery, evil and violence from his father, Ivan Andreevich Fonvizin. Later, some character traits of the writer's father will find their embodiment in the positive characters of his works. " External events Fonvizin's life was not rich. Studying at the noble academy of Moscow University, where he was assigned as a ten-year-old boy and which he successfully completed in the spring of 1762. Service in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, first under the command of the State Councilor of the Palace Chancellery I.P. Elagin, then, from 1769, as one of the secretaries of the Chancellor Count N.I. Panin. And the resignation that followed in the spring of 1782. The beginning of Fonvizin's literary activity was marked by translations. While still a student at the university gymnasium, he translated in 1761 by order of the bookseller of the university bookstore. "Moral Fables" by Louis Holbert. The fables had a prosaic form and were generally edifying in nature. Many of them were equipped with didactic moral teachings. However, there were fables that resembled a folk joke, a witty satirical miniature, which testified to the democratic sympathies of the educationally minded author. In addition, the critical pathos of the fables gave them an acute social meaning. It can be considered that the translation of L. Golberg’s book was the first school of educational humanism for young Fonvizin, instilling in the soul of the future playwright an interest in social satire. The decisive factor for the future fate of Fonvizin the writer was his sudden assignment to serve in a foreign collegium and the subsequent in 1763. moving with the court to St. Petersburg. Yesterday's student is first used as a translator, and is soon appointed secretary “for certain matters” under State Councilor I. P. Elagin. Fulfilling small assignments and conducting official correspondence alternate with obligatory visits to official receptions at the court (kurtags) and court masquerades. Fonvizin becomes close to the literary circles of St. Petersburg, very often attends performances of various troupes at court.” (9.295) Court life, with all its external splendor, weighs heavily on Fonvizin. And in the mid-1760s. the writer becomes close to F.A. Kozlovsky, thanks to whom he enters the circle of St. Petersburg young freethinkers, admirers of Voltaire. In their society, Fonvizin receives his first lessons in religious freethinking. The famous satire “Message to my servants – Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka” dates back to the time of his acquaintance with Kozlovsky. The anti-clerical pathos of the satire brought upon the author the accusation of atheism. Indeed, in XVIII literature century there are few works where the selfishness of spiritual shepherds corrupting the people would be so sharply exposed.
The eighteenth century left many remarkable names in the history of Russian literature. But if it were necessary to name a writer in whose works the depth of comprehension of the morals of his era would be commensurate with the courage and skill in exposing the vices of the ruling class, then, first of all, Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin should be mentioned.
Thus, the purpose of our work was to study and analyze critical literature about D.I. Fonvizin and his work, thereby reflecting the writer’s educational credo.
Fonvizin went down in the history of national literature as the author of the famous comedy "The Minor." But he was also a talented prose writer. The gift of a satirist was combined in him with the temperament of a born publicist. Empress Catherine II feared the flagellating sarcasm of Fonvizin's satire. Fonvizin’s unsurpassed artistic skill was noted in his time by Pushkin. It still affects us today.
Comedies by D. I. Fonvizin
“Comedy is a type of drama in which the moment of effective conflict or struggle between antagonistic characters is specifically resolved” - this is the definition of comedy given by the “Big school encyclopedia", M.: OLMA-PRESS, 2000. Qualitatively, the struggle in comedy is different in that it: 1) does not entail serious, disastrous consequences for the fighting parties; 2) aimed at “base”, i.e. ordinary, goals; 3) is conducted by funny, amusing or absurd means. The task of comedy is to make a comic impression on the audience (readers), causing laughter with the help of a funny appearance (comic form), speeches (comical words) and actions (comical actions of characters) that violate the socio-psychological norms and customs of a given social environment. All these types of comedy are intertwined in comedy, and outweigh one or the other. Fonvizin’s work is dominated by the comedy of words and the comedy of actions of characters, which are considered more developed forms.
"Russian comedy" began long before Fonvizin, but started only from Fonvizin. His “Minor” and “Brigadier” made a terrible noise when they appeared and will forever remain in the history of Russian literature, if not art, as one of the most remarkable phenomena. In fact, these two comedies are the essence of the mind of a strong, sharp, gifted person...” - highly appreciates Fonvizin’s comedic creativity.
“The comedy of the gifted Fonvizin will always be popular reading and will always hold an honorable place in the history of Russian literature. It is not a work of fiction, but a satire on morals, and a masterful satire. Its characters are fools and smart ones: the fools are all very nice, and the smart ones are all very vulgar; the first are caricatures written with great talent; the second reasoners who bore you with their maxims. In a word, when Fonvizin’s comedies, especially “The Minor,” will never cease to excite laughter and, gradually losing readers in the highest circles of society, will all the more win them in the lower ones and become folk reading..." - says the same V. G. Belinsky.
“Fonvizin’s crushing, angry-destroying laughter, aimed at the most disgusting aspects of the autocratic-serf system, played a great creative role in the further destinies of Russian literature.
In fact, from Fonvizin’s laughter there are direct threads to the sharp humor of Krylov’s fables, to the subtle irony of Pushkin, to the “laughter through tears” of the author “ Dead souls", finally to the bitter and angry sarcasm of Saltykov-Shchedrin, the author of "The Golovlev Lords", who mercilessly completed last act dramas of the nobility “spiritually destroyed, degenerated and corrupted” by serfdom.
"Minor" begins a glorious series greatest creatures Russian comedyography, in which in the next century there will be “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov, “The Inspector General” by Gogol, plays about the “dark kingdom” of Ostrovsky” (From the article by D. D. Blagoy “Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin”. In the book: “Classics of Russian Literature ", Detgiz, M. - L., 1953).
Understanding the forms of national life
In the comedy "Brigadier"
All the characters in The Brigadier are Russian nobles. In the modest everyday atmosphere of average local life, the personality of each character is revealed as if gradually in conversations. The viewer learns about the propensity for extravagance of the coquette Advisor, and about the difficult fate of the Brigadier, who spent his life on campaigns. The sanctimonious nature of the Advisor, who profited from bribes, and the downtrodden nature of the resigned Brigadier become clearer.
Already from the moment the curtain rose, the viewer found himself immersed in an environment that amazed with the reality of life. This can be judged by the introductory remark to the first act of the comedy: “ Theater represents a room decorated in a rustic style. Brigadier , walks around in a frock coat and smokes tobacco. Son him, in his desabilia, swearing, drinking tea. Advisor in Cossack, looking at the calendar. On the other side there is a table with a tea set, next to which sits Advisor in desabilles and cornets and, simpering, pours out the tea. Brigadier sitting odal and knitting a stocking. Sophia Odal also sits and sews in the vestibule.”
In this peaceful picture of home comfort, everything is significant and at the same time everything is natural: the rustic decoration of the room, the clothes of the characters, their activities, and even individual touches in their behavior. In the prefatory remark, the author already outlines both the nature of the future relationships between the characters and the satirical task of the play. It is no coincidence that the son and the adviser appear on stage both “in disbelief” while having tea, one “swearing”, and the other “pretentious”.
“Having recently visited Paris, Ivan is full of contempt for everything that surrounds him in his homeland. “Anyone who has been to Paris,” he confesses, “has the right, when speaking about Russians, not to include himself among those, because he has already become more French than Russian.” In his contempt for his parents, whom he directly calls “animals,” Ivan finds the full support of the Advisor: “Ah, my joy! I love your sincerity. You do not spare your father! This is the direct virtue of our age.”
The absurd behavior of the newly minted “Parisian” Ivan and the Advisor, who is delighted with him, suggests that the basis of the ideological concept of the comedy is the fight against the vices of fashionable education, which gives rise to blind worship of everything French. Ivan’s mannerisms and the Counselor’s affectation at first glance seem to be opposed to the reasoning of the wise life experience parents. This couple, obsessed with all things French, are truly at the forefront of the laugh-out-loud diatribe. But the satirical pathos of “The Brigadier” is not limited only to the program of combating Frenchmania.” (9, 307)
The following episode of the same first act is indicative, where those present on stage have to express their opinions about grammar. Its benefit is unanimously denied. “How many serviceable secretaries we have who compose extracts without grammar, it’s delightful to look at! – exclaims the Advisor. “I have one in mind who, when he writes, another scientist cannot understand it with grammar forever.” The Brigadier echoes him: “What is grammar for, matchmaker? I lived without her until I was almost sixty years old, and I also raised children.” The Brigadier does not lag behind her husband; “Of course, grammar is not needed. Before you begin to teach it, you still need to buy it. You’ll pay eight hryvnia for it, but whether you learn it or not, God knows.” Neither the Counselor and her Son see any special need for grammar. The first admits that only once did she need it “for papillotes.” As for Ivan, then, according to his confession, “my light, my soul, adieu, ma reine, one can say without looking at the grammar.”
“This new chain of revelations, revealing the mental horizons of the main characters of the comedy, concretizes the previous sketches of their portrait self-characteristics, leading us to an understanding of the author’s intention. In a society where mental apathy and lack of spirituality reign, familiarization with the European way of life is an evil caricature of enlightenment. Parents are to blame for the empty-headedness of children delirious abroad. The moral squalor of Ivan, proud of his contempt for his compatriots, matches the ignorance and spiritual ugliness of the rest. This idea is proven by the entire further course of events taking place on stage. So Fonvizin puts the problem of true education at the center of the ideological content of his play. Of course, in comedy this idea is not affirmed declaratively, but through the means of psychological self-disclosure of the characters.” (9,308)
The play does not have a dedicated exposition - this traditional element compositional structure“comedies of intrigue”, where servants bring the audience up to date, introducing them to the circumstances of the lives of their masters. The identity of each is revealed during the exchange of remarks, and then realized in actions.
“Fonvizin found an interesting and innovative way to enhance the satirical and accusatory pathos of comedy. In his “Brigadier”, in essence, the substantive structure of the bourgeois drama, from the traditions of which he objectively started, was travestyed in a unique way. Respectable fathers, burdened with families, indulged in love affairs. The play was filled with many comic, bordering on farce, scenes and dialogues. Everyday authenticity portrait characteristics developed into a comically pointed grotesque.” (9.308-309)
The originality of the action in “The Brigadier” also consisted in the absence in the comedy of servants as engines of intrigue. There were no others in it either traditional types with a comic role (pedants, clerks, etc.). And yet the comedy of the action increases from scene to scene. It arises through a dynamic kaleidoscope of intertwining love episodes. The secular flirtation of the flirtatious Advisor and the gallomaniac Ivan is replaced by the confessions of the hypocritical saintly Advisor, courting the incomprehensible Brigadier, and then the Brigadier explains himself in a soldierly manner to the Advisor.
“It is significant that already in this comedy Fonvizin finds one constructive method of satirical denunciation, which later, in the comedy “The Minor,” will become almost the fundamental principle of typing negative characters. This refers to the motive of likening a person to an animal, due to which the qualities inherent in cattle become the measure of the moral merits of such a person.” (9.309-310)
So Ivan sees “animals” in his parents, but for the Advisor. suffering from village life, all the neighbors are also “ignorant” “cattle”. “They, my soul, think of nothing but table supplies; straight pigs.” At first, the likening to animals “donkey, horse, bear,” helping to explain to father and son, is of a relatively innocent nature. But the angry Ivan, in response to the Brigadier’s reminder that his son should not forget who his father is, resorts to a logical argument: “Very good; And when a puppy is not obliged to respect the dog who was his father, then do I owe you even the slightest respect?
“The depth of Fonvizin’s sarcasm and the accusatory effect achieved is that recognition of the qualities of the animal follows from the heroes themselves. This is the same technique of comic self-characterization, when the ironic subtext hidden in the character’s speech becomes a verdict on the speaker himself. This technique, varied in every way in the speeches of the characters, is intended not only to enhance the comedy of the action, but also to serve as a kind of standard for the spiritual qualities of the heroes.” (9,310)
Fonvizin, possessing the gift of a skilled satirist, finds a new method of self-exposure of characters, which achieves a comic effect. This technique will be used frequently as the action progresses. For example, the Advisor and the Son, left alone, talk about fashionable hats. “In my opinion,” says Ivan, lace and blonde hair make up the best decoration for the head. Pedants think that this is nonsense and that one should decorate the inside of the head, not the outside. What emptiness! The devil sees what is hidden, but everyone sees what is external.
S o v e t n i tsa. So, my soul: I myself share the same sentiments with you; I see that you have powder on your head, but damn if there’s anything in your head, I can’t tell.
Son. Pardieu! Of course, no one can notice this.” “The destructiveness of such an exchange of pleasantries for the self-characterization of the moral character of both is obvious. But it is important that the comic subtext arising from the above dialogue, obvious to the viewer, but unconscious by the speaking character, is caused by the words of the speakers themselves. Satire is dissolved in the action of comedy, and the indictment of the moral ugliness of the characters is made through their own speeches, and not introduced from the outside. This was the fundamental innovation of the method of Fonvizin the satirist,” notes Yu. V. Stennik. (9.349) Thus, a kind of antipsychologism - distinguishing feature comedy by Fonvizin.
“Often in The Brigadier, the characters’ statements are direct author’s statements, only conditionally attached to a given person. Thus, Ivanushka talks about education in completely different words: “A young man is like wax. If, malheureusment, I had fallen in with a Russian who loved his nation, I might not have been like that.” (8,243)
“The author’s “presence” in “The Brigadier” is manifested not only in each specific statement, but also in the appearance of themes common to all characters, in the discussion of which the essence of each of them is revealed. Such common theme statements in “The Brigadier” is the theme of intelligence and stupidity. Each comedy character is convinced of his undoubted mental superiority over others, while these others are inclined to consider him a fool.”(8, 244)
So frequent judgments of characters about each other, designed for an immediate, direct reaction auditorium, develop into replicas-sentiments, allowing you to look for applications for them outside the comedy’s own plot. Thus, the author’s voice sounds from the very essence of the disputes that arise between the characters of his comedy, from its general problems.
Laughter and the author in Fonvizin’s comedy have not yet been identified, as happened with Griboedov and especially with Gogol in The Government Inspector, where the author does not speak for his characters at all, where they speak and act according to their comedic character, and laughter “i.e. e. the author's attitude towards the characters" arises from the collision of actions and thoughts with the ethical norm that inspires the author's laughter, the norm of humanism and deep regret for a person, whose true essence is covered with a "rough crust of earthliness."
In such a situation, the position of the reader and viewer is also interesting. The text of the comedy is intended to interest the reader in “co-authorship”, in the need to turn on the imagination and see beyond artistic images reality and even ourselves. And, in addition, comedy should enlighten the reader, infecting him with the spirit of justice and humanism. This was precisely the writer’s intention.
Understanding Russian culture and Russian history in the comedy “Nedorosl”
The pinnacle of achievements of Fonvizin and all Russian literary satire in the comedy genre of the 18th century. became "Minor". "Minor" - central essay Fonvizin, the pinnacle of Russian drama of the 18th century, is organically connected with the ideological issues of the Discourse. For Pushkin, “Nedorosl” is a “folk comedy.” Belinsky, who by the 1940s had developed a revolutionary-democratic understanding of nationality, stated that “The Minor,” “Woe from Wit” and “The Inspector General” “in a short time became folk dramatic plays."
For understanding ideological issues and according to the satirical pathos of the comedy, it is important to remember that more than ten years passed between the time of the creation of “The Brigadier” and the writing of “The Minor.” During this time, Fonvizin’s socio-political convictions strengthened and expanded, and his creative method the satirist has reached maturity.
Comedy is based on the principle of intersecting triads. Triad of negative heroes: Mrs. Prostakova, Taras Skotinin, Mitrofanushka. A triad of positive characters: Starodum (the main ideologist of the play), Pravdin, Milon. A triad of heroic adventurers who pretend to be someone other than who they really are: Tsyfirkin, Kuteikin, Vralman. And finally, service heroes: Eremeevna, Prostakov, Trishka. Only Sophia remains outside of these triads. Both positive and negative characters are fighting for her hand, and since “Sofia” means “wisdom” in translation, the hero is actually fighting for wisdom, truth, and a true idea.
Thus, the main conflict of the play unfolds between the positive characters, who represent the true aristocracy, and the triad of negative characters, ordinary people belonging to the “lower” society. A.S. Pushkin also drew attention to the fact that the characters speak different languages. The speech of the negative characters is dominated by rough, vernacular phraseology with the presence of vulgarisms, slang expressions and even swearing. At the same time, speech is marked by the greatest individualization episodic characters- teachers of Mitrofan and his mother Eremeevna. Elements of soldier’s jargon in Tsyfirkin’s conversations, former seminarian Kuteikin’s flaunting of quotes from the Holy Scriptures, and finally, the monstrous German accent of the illiterate coachman Vralman are all signs of a certain social environment. This is a style designed for comic effect, characteristic of magazine satire. But the style of speech of the Prostakova family is particularly rich. Either bordering on abuse, or filled with flattering ingratiation, the speech of the mistress of the house perfectly reflects her character, in which despotic tyranny coexists with lackey servility. On the contrary, the language of the positive characters of the “minor” appears cleared of vernacular. Before us is literate book speech, filled with the most complex syntactic structures and abstract vocabulary. Positive characters in everyday life are almost not characterized. The psychology and spiritual world of these heroes are revealed not through everyday life, but during conversations on political and moral themes. Their very form very often goes back to the manner of dialogic philosophical treatises of the Enlightenment, who basically continued the tradition of moralizing dialogues of the era of humanism.
Thus, it can be noted that, for all its “unprepossessing”, the speech of the negative heroes is living, grounded, this colloquial speech is directly related to the plan of life and everyday life. Whereas any phrase of positive characters turns into a moralizing sermon, serving exclusively for spiritual education and absolutely not suitable for everyday life. We see that the tragedy of the situation lies in the language gap between the heroes. The conflict lies, oddly enough, in the absence of conflict. It’s just that the heroes initially belong to different planes and there is and cannot be any common ground between them. And that's not even literary problem, but socio-political. Since there is a huge insurmountable gap between the true aristocracy and the “lower” society, which will never understand each other, and the middle class, as a connecting link, has not been formed.
Fonvizin, of course, wanted the positive heroes (and therefore the true aristocracy) to win this battle. But they lose because their images are lifeless and their speech is boring. And besides this, both Starodum and Pravdin strive to change the world without accepting it as it is. And in this sense, they are also “immature,” because an enlightened mature person is always ready to justify the world, and not to blame it. The ideology that the goodies preach is utopian because it is not consistent with reality. Thus, the main conflict of comedy is between ideology and everyday life.
The composition of “Minor” consists of a combination of several relatively independent and at the same time inextricably linked structural levels. This was reflected especially well by the wonderful critic Yu. V. Stennik in his book “Russian Satire of the 18th Century”:
“Looking carefully at the plot of the play, we notice that it is woven from motives typical of the structure of the “tearful” bourgeois drama: suffering virtue in the person of Sophia, who becomes the object of claims on the part of ignorant and rude seekers of her hand; the sudden appearance of a rich uncle; an attempted violent abduction and the ultimate triumph of justice with the punishment of vice. And although such a scheme, in principle, was not contraindicated in the comedy genre, there was practically no room left for a comic beginning. This is the first, plot level of structure, organizing the compositional framework of dramatic action.
Delving further into the research artistic system“Undergrowth”, we discover its saturation with a comic element. The play contains many comic scenes in which a whole group of characters participate, who do not seem to have a direct relationship to the development of the plot outlined above. These are Mitrofan’s teachers: the retired soldier Tsyfirkin, the half-educated seminarian Kuteikin and the former coachman Vralman, who became the educator of the noble youth. This is the tailor Trishka, partly mother Eremeevna. The connecting link between these persons and the plot of the play is the figure of Mitrofan with his relatives, mother and uncle. And all the most comic episodes of the play in one way or another include these characters. It is important, however, to remember that the object of comedy in them is not so much the servants as their masters.
The most important episodes from this point of view can be considered the scene with Trishka, the scene of Skotinin’s explanation with Mitrofan, the scene of Mitrofan’s teaching and, finally, the scene of Mitrofan’s examination. In these morally descriptive scenes, the everyday prose of life, concrete in all its ugliness, is unfolded. landed nobility. Swearing, fights, gluttony, canine devotion of servants and rude rudeness of masters, deception and bestiality as the norm of relationships among themselves - this is the plot of this meaningful aspect of the comedy. Scenes revealing the triumph of ignorance and evil nature create the everyday background of the plot, highlighting the characters of the members of the Prostakova family.
These scenes create a second, comedic-satirical level artistic structure"Undergrown." Existing within the framework of the first, plot plan, this level, however, has its own logic for revealing life phenomena, the main principle of which will be grotesque-naturalistic satire.
Finally, as the comedy progresses, a group of positive characters stands out. Their speeches and actions embody the author’s ideas about an ideal person and a noble nobleman. This aspect of the artistic content of “The Minor” is most succinctly revealed in the figures of Pravdin and Starodum. The key scenes, in which the ideological program of the ideal nobles is revealed, are also extra-fabulous in their own way (it is not surprising that the practice of productions of “The Minor” knows the case of removing individual scenes considered “boring”).
This is how the third – ideal-utopian level of the structure of “Undergrowth” is established. It is characteristic that the circle of positive characters grouped around Pravdin is practically not realized in everyday life. At this level of the compositional structure of comedy, the comic element is completely absent. Scenes where positive characters act are devoid of dynamics and, in their static nature, approach philosophical and educational dialogues.” (9, 319-320)
Thus, ideological plan The play is revealed through the combination and interaction of a brilliantly comic satirical grotesque, presented in morally descriptive scenes, and abstract utopia in scenes where ideal characters appear. The unique originality of comedy lies in the unity of these polar opposite worlds.
At each of these structural levels, two central ideas that feed the pathos of comedy are resolved in parallel. This is, firstly, the idea of the true dignity of a nobleman, affirmed both by journalistic declarations in the speeches of Starodum and Pravdin, and by the demonstration of the moral corruption of the nobility. Pictures of the degradation of the country's ruling class were supposed to serve as a kind of illustration of the thesis about the need for a proper moral example on the part of the highest authorities and the court. The absence of such became the cause of arbitrariness.
The second problem is the idea of education in the broad sense of the word. In the minds of thinkers of the 18th century, education was seen as the primary factor determining the moral character of a person. In Fonvizin’s visions, the problem of education acquired national significance, because, in his opinion, the only possible source of salvation from the evil threatening society—the ossification of the Russian nobility—was rooted in correct education.
“If the first idea was intended to awaken public thought and draw the attention of compatriots to the impending danger, then the second seemed to indicate the reason for this situation and suggest means of correcting it.” (9.321)
The significance of Fonvizin’s comedy, therefore, lay primarily in the fact that in it the edge of political satire was directed against the main social evil of the era - the complete lack of control of the highest authorities, which gave rise to moral devastation of the ruling class and arbitrariness, both locally - in the relations of landowners with peasants, and at the highest levels of the social hierarchy. Considering that the play was created under the conditions of the dominance of the monarchical system of government in Russia, one cannot help but be amazed at the courage and insight of the author of “The Minor.”317, Stennik.
The main conflict in the socio-political life of Russia - the arbitrariness of the landowners, supported by the highest authorities, and the serfs without rights - becomes the theme of the comedy. In a dramatic essay, the theme is revealed with particular power of persuasiveness in the development of the plot, in action, in struggle. The only dramatic conflict in “The Minor” is the struggle between the progressive-minded progressive nobles Pravdin and Starodum with the serf owners - the Prostakovs and Skotinins.
In the comedy, Fonvizin shows the disastrous consequences of slavery, which should confirm to the viewer the moral correctness of Pravdin and the need to fight the Skotinins and Prostakovs. The consequences of slavery are truly terrible.
The Prostakov peasants are completely ruined. Even Prostakova herself doesn’t know what to do next: “Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we can’t rip off anything. Such a disaster!
Slavery turns peasants into slaves, completely killing in them all human traits, all personal dignity. This comes out with particular force in the courtyards. Fonvizin created the image of enormous power - slaves Eremeevna. An old woman, Mitrofan's nanny, she lives the life of a dog: insults, kicks and beatings are what befall her. She has long lost even her human name, she is called only by abusive nicknames: “beast”, “old bastard”, “dog’s daughter”, “scum”. Abuse, slander and humiliation made Eremeevna a slave, his mistress’s chain dog, who humiliatingly licks the hand of the owner who beat her.
In the person of Pravdin and Starodum, for the first time positive heroes appeared on the stage who act, putting their ideals into practice. Who are Pravdin and Starodum, bravely leading the fight against the serf owners Prostakovs and Skotinin? Why were they able to intervene not only in the course of the comedy, but, in essence, in political life autocratic state?
As a folk work, the comedy “Minor” naturally reflected the most important and the most pressing problems Russian life. The lack of rights of Russian serfs, reduced to the status of slaves, given full ownership to the landowners, manifested itself with particular force in the 80s. The complete, boundless, monstrous arbitrariness of the landowners could not but arouse feelings of protest among the progressive nobility. Not sympathizing with revolutionary methods of action, moreover, rejecting them, at the same time they could not help but protest against the slaveholding and despotic policies of Catherine II. That is why the response to the police regime established by Catherine and Potemkin was the strengthening of public activity and the subordination of creativity to the tasks of political satire of such noble educators as Fonvizin, Novikov, Krylov, Krechetov. At the end of the decade, the revolutionary Radishchev came out with his books, directly expressing the aspirations and moods of the serfs.
The second theme of “The Minor” was the struggle of noble educators with slave owners and the despotic government of Catherine II after the defeat of the Pugachev uprising.
Pravdin, not wanting to limit himself to indignation, takes real steps to limit the power of the landowners and, as we know from the ending of the play, achieves this. Pravdin acts this way because he believes that his fight against slave owners, supported by the governor, is “thereby fulfilling the philanthropic views of the highest power,” that is, Pravdin is deeply convinced of the enlightened nature of Catherine’s autocracy. He declares himself the executor of his will - this is how things stand at the beginning of the comedy. That is why Pravdin, knowing Starodum, demands that he go to serve at court. “With your rules, people should not be released from the court, but they must be called to the court.” Starodum is perplexed: “Summon? What for?" And Pravdin, true to his convictions, declares: “Then why call a doctor to the sick.” And then Starodum, a politician who has already realized that faith in Catherine is not only naive, but also destructive, explains to Pravdin: “My friend, you are mistaken. It is in vain to call a doctor to the sick without healing: here the doctor will not help unless he himself becomes infected.”
Fonvizin forces Starodum to explain not only to Pravdina, but also to the audience that faith in Catherine is meaningless, that the legend about her enlightened reign is false, that Catherine established a despotic form of government, that it is thanks to her policies that slavery can flourish in Russia, that the cruel Skotinins and Prostakovs can rule , which directly refer to the royal decrees on the freedom of the nobility.
Pravdin and Starodum, in their worldview, are students of the Russian noble Enlightenment. Two most important political issues determined the program of noble enlighteners at this time: a) the need to abolish serfdom peacefully (reform, education, etc.); b) Catherine is not an enlightened monarch, but a despot and the inspirer of the policy of slavery, and therefore it is necessary to fight her.
It was this political idea that formed the basis of “Minor” - Ekaterina is to blame for the crimes of the Skotinins and Prostakovs. That is why the fight against the Prostakovs is being waged by private people, and not by the government (the fact that Pravdin serves does not change matters, since he acts according to his convictions, and not according to the orders of his superiors). Catherine’s government blesses the serfdom policy of the unruly nobles.
The “minor” was greeted with open hostility by the government and the ideologists of the nobility. The comedy was completed in 1781. It immediately became clear that it was almost impossible to install it. Fonvizin’s stubborn, silent struggle with the government over the production of the comedy began. Nikita Panin was involved in the struggle, who, using all his influence on the heir Pavel, finally achieved the production of the comedy through him. The court demonstrated its hostility towards The Minor, which was expressed, among other things, in the desire to prevent its production at the court theater. The premiere was delayed in every possible way, and instead of May, as originally planned, it finally took place with difficulty on September 24, 1782 in a wooden theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow with the help of invited actors from both the court and private theaters.
|
Attitude crisis and change
Ideological position
“He was, of course, one of the smartest and noblest representatives of the true, sound school of thought in Russia, especially in the first time of his literary activity, before his illness; but his ardent, disinterested aspirations were too impractical, promised too little significant benefit before the court of the empress for her to encourage them. And she considered it best not to pay attention to him, having previously shown him that the path he was following would not lead to anything good...” says N. A. Dobrolyubov.
Indeed, Fonvizin was a fierce educator, but his ideas were only a theory; they did not imply any practical solutions. Two most important political issues determined the program of noble enlighteners at this time: a) the need to abolish serfdom peacefully (reform, education, etc.); b) Catherine is not an enlightened monarch, but a despot and the inspirer of the policy of slavery, and therefore it is necessary to fight her. And we have already said that the struggle and desire to change the world is, from the point of view of the Enlightenment, the work of “minors,” that is, not adults who are not able to accept this world. His passion for Voltaire led the still immature Fonvizin to deny God and religion.
“Having lost his god, the ordinary Russian Voltairean did not simply leave his temple as a person who had become superfluous in it, but, like a rebellious servant, before leaving he strove to riot, to interrupt everything, to distort and dirty it.”
“Dvorovy” is the expressive name of this son of unfreedom. And his mode of action is its manifestation: even when he rebels, he behaves like a slave,” this is what V. O. Klyuchevsky says about the writer. And there is some truth in this offensive expression: in many ways, if not in everything, an outstanding, talented writer, Fonvizin as a “Voltairian” is very ordinary.
But gradually, as he matures and develops an ideological position, Fonvizin moves away from Voltairianism and his later work has a pronounced journalistic character.
As for Denis Ivanovich’s horror at the youthful sin of Voltairianism and doubt in faith, everything is clear here. His mind, the Russian mind of that time, brought up in religion and very far from the newfangled skepticism, easily overcame what was premature and unnecessary for him, but he remembered all this acutely and painfully when the time came for the painful leisure brought by the disease, when he had to dig in himself, in order to find the reasons for divine anger, the existence of which was believed also because the blows of fate were very constant.
It is very characteristic that one of the letters to Panin dated December 24, 1777 (January 4, 1778) says: “In a word, liberty is an empty name, and the right of the strong remains the right above all laws.” Thus, it is with “Letters from France” that the collapse of the Enlightenment faith begins.
It is interesting that “General Court Grammar” is a sharp allegorical satire on the court and its vices. And in “A sincere confession about my deeds and thoughts,” Fonvizin bitterly declares: “Young people! Do not think that your sharp words constitute your true glory; stop the insolence of your mind and know that the praise attributed to you is pure poison for you; and especially if you feel inclined to satire, tame it with all your strength: for you, without a doubt, will be subject to the same fate as me. They soon began to fear me, then to hate me; and instead of attracting people to me, I drove them away from me with words and pen. My writings were sharp curses: there was a lot of satirical salt in them, but, so to speak, not a drop of reason.”
Thus, there is a contradiction in Fonvizin’s views. This is due to the fact that, due to his illness, his last works, including “Frank Confession,” are permeated with motives of religious repentance and the horror of repression that befell his fellow educators.
Conclusion
“A son of his time, Fonvizin, with all his appearance and the direction of his creative quest, belongs to that circle of advanced Russian people of the 18th century who formed the camp of enlighteners. All of them were writers, and their work was permeated with the pathos of affirming the ideals of justice and humanism. Satire and journalism were their weapons. Courageous protest against the injustices of autocracy and angry accusations against feudal abuses were heard in their works. This was the historical merit of Russian satire of the 18th century, one of the most prominent representatives of which was D. I. Fonvizin” (12, 22).
Thus, having studied Fonvizin’s work in this work, we are convinced of his undoubted talent as a satirist and innovator of words. It was Fonvizin who laid the foundations of the Russian literary language. It was Fonvizin who showed us the reality of Catherine’s era, depicting it in his comedies. Perhaps this is why M. Gorky calls Fonvizin the founder of critical realism: “The types of Skotinin, Prostakovs, Kuteikin and Tsyfirkin are true drawings of the characters of that time, a true reflection of the ignorance and rudeness of the commanding class.”
From all of the above, we can conclude that Fonvizin was truly a brilliant educator and, at the same time, he was the finalizer of the Russian Enlightenment of the 18th century.
Bibliography
- Vinogradov, V.V. Essays on the history of the Russian literary language of the 17th-18th centuries. / Rep. ed. E. S. Istrina. – M.: State educational and pedagogical publishing house, 1934. – 288 p.
- Gorshkov, A. I. History of the Russian literary language, M.: graduate School, 1969. – 432 p.
- Gorshkov, A.I. About the language of Fonvizin - a prose writer // Russian speech. – 1979. - No. 2.
- Gorshkov, A. I. The language of pre-Pushkin prose / Rep. ed. F. P. Filin. – M.: Nauka, 1982. – 240 p.
- Klyuchevsky, V. O. Literary portraits/ Comp., intro. Art. A. F. Smirnova. – M.: Sovremennik, 1991. – 463 pp., portrait. – (B-ka “For Lovers” Russian literature" From the literary heritage).
- Rassadin, S. B. Satire is a brave ruler.
- Pumpyansky, L. V. Classical tradition: Collection of works on the history of Russian literature / Rep. ed. A. P. Chudakov; Compiled by: E. M. Isserlin, N. I. Nikolaev; Entry Art., prepared. text and notes N. I. Nikolaeva. – M.: Languages of Russian Culture, 2000. – 864 p. – (Language. Semiotics. Culture).
- Serman, I. Z. Russian classicism (Poetry. Drama. Satire) / Rep. ed. P. N. Berkov. – L.: Nauka, 1973. – 284 p.
- Stennik, Yu. V. Russian satire of the 18th century / Rep. ed. N. A. Nikitina. – L.: Nauka, 1985. – 362 p.
- Toporov, V. N. “Declensions on Russian customs” from a semiotic point of view // Works on sign systems. Tartu, 1993. Vol. 23.
- Fonvizin in Russian criticism / Intro. Art. and note. P. E. Shames. – M.: State. educational and pedagogical publishing house of the Ministry of Education of the RSFSR, 1958. – 232 p.
- Fonvizin, D. I. Favorites: Poems. Comedy. Satirical prose and journalism. Autobiographical prose. Letters / Comp., intro. Art. and note. Yu. V. Stennik; Artist P. Satsky. – M.: Sov. Russia, 1983. – 366 pp., 1 l. portrait, ill.
- Fonvizin, D. I. Collection. Works: In 2 volumes - M.; L., 1959.
- Az: lib.ru
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Similar documents
Biography and creative activity the great Russian writer Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. The history of the creation of the masterpiece comedy of the 18th century "The Minor", in which the author reveals the problems of moral decay of the nobility and the problems of education.
creative work, added 09/28/2011
The history of the creation of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor". Consideration of the scene with the tailor Trishka. Familiarization with the internal qualities, needs and desires of the main characters. The problem of educating a true citizen; search for the most valuable in society and man.
presentation, added 03/28/2014
"Nedorosl" as the first Russian socio-political comedy. Satirical image the world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor.” Images of Prostakovs and Taras Skotinin. Characteristics of the image of Mitrofanushka in Fonvizin’s comedy.
abstract, added 05/28/2010
general characteristics, defining the features of tradition and innovation in the system of characters in D.I.’s comedy. Fonvizin "Minor". Analysis and meaning of images everyday heroes taking into account the methods of their creation: Prostakovs, Skotinin, Mitrofan and other minor ones.
course work, added 05/04/2010
Biographical data of I.P. Elagin and the historical and literary circle, his activities. The influence of Elagin’s circle on the image of the work of Denis Fonvizin, the author of sharp satirical and journalistic works. Criticism of "Corion" and the collapse of the Elagin circle.
abstract, added 12/12/2010
A masterpiece of Russian drama of the 18th century, which reveals the problem of the moral decay of the nobility and the problem of education. Fonvizin tells us: family brings up, first of all. Children inherit from their parents not only genes, but also ideals, habits,
essay, added 12/17/2004
The life and creative path of comedy author D.I. Fonvizina. The beginning of a creative path as a poet. Analysis of Fonvizin's fables and the comedy "Minor". The largest representative of Russian sentimentalism N.M. Karamzin and his best story "Poor Liza".
test, added 03/10/2009