Chatsky's struggle with Famus society. Among the great riches classical literature Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit", completed by him in 1824, occupies a special place. She is full of youth and freshness, distinguished by lively dramatic action, bright and rich characteristics. Living images of comedy, telling about the distant past, draw the reader and viewer to the present. The main conflict of the comedy is the struggle of the new, advanced with the old, outdated, of the “present century” with the “past century”. The struggle between Chatsky, the main character of the comedy, and the Moscow nobility is life and death. In the eyes of his contemporaries, Chatsky is an innovator, a “liberalist” and a freethinker. Representatives of the “past century” cannot forgive him for this.
The story of Chatsky's life in the play is outlined in separate strokes. Childhood in Famusov’s house, then service in the regiment “five years ago”, St. Petersburg - “connection with the ministers, then a break”, travel abroad - and a return to the sweet and pleasant “smoke of the fatherland”. Chatsky is young, but he already has a lot behind him life events. It is no coincidence that he is so observant and understands people well.
The author repeatedly emphasizes in the comedy Chatsky’s mind, clear, sharp, distinguished, however, by a “somewhat rational approach to life.” Chatsky studied abroad. In addition to scientific truths, he also picked up “new rules” there. During these years, restless Europe was still seething with the passions of great battles. It was a nice first quarter XIX century after the revolution of 1789 in France, the time of revolutionary uprisings in Italy and Spain, the national liberation struggle throughout Europe. Our hero was, in all likelihood, a witness to this and returned to his homeland full of thoughts about personal freedom, equality and brotherhood.
But what awaits him in Moscow?
His dear Sophia, to whom he rushed “forty-five hours, without squinting his eyes in an instant, for more than seven hundred versts...”, fell in love with another, his father’s secretary, Molchalin. For Chatsky this is a heavy blow, because his ardent, sincere love is deep and constant. In addition, he feels insulted by Sophia's choice. How could she, an intelligent, developed girl, give preference to Molchalin, who did not even dare to “have his own opinion”?
But, unfortunately, this is not the only disappointment awaiting Chatsky in Moscow. Returning home full of hope, our hero foresaw a meeting with representatives of the Famus society. “You’ll get tired of living with them,” he says to Sophia on their first date, immediately consoling himself: “and you won’t find any stains in anyone.” But he was still sure that Famusism was only a fragment of the “past century.” However, the reality turned out to be much darker. Even old friends were infected with famusism. Former friend Gorich, just recently full of life, now “he repeats on the flute “duet a-molny” and complains about his health. A conversation with Repetilov reveals to Chatsky the surface and emptiness of the liberalism of many, the insignificance of the meetings of “liberalists” taking place in the English Club. And communication with other representatives of Famus society became generally dramatic for Chatsky. And this is quite natural. In the society of Moscow “aces”, where everyone lives “looking up to their elders”, where they value only wealth and rank, where they are afraid of truth and enlightenment, Chatsky stands in a special place, for this many nobles hate and persecute him.
What distinguishes this hero from his opponents?
Intelligence, sincerity, directness - this is what distinguishes Chatsky from many of his peers in Moscow society. Molchalin seems to be smart. If we get to know him better, we will see that the main thing in him is cunning, resourcefulness, and deceit. Skalozub is direct and frank, but he “has never uttered a smart word.” And only Chatsky combines intelligence and honesty - qualities that are very important for a real person.
Chatsky contrasts his ideal with Famusov’s understanding of a person, “even if inferior,” but rich, who “takes head on, not in war, but in peace”:
“Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind, hungry for knowledge, on science.”
Representatives of the two camps have completely different ideas about the service. For Famusov, the model of attitude towards official duties is Maxim Petrovich, who “bent over backwards” if it was necessary to “curry favor.” Chatsky has the opposite opinion on this matter:
“I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.”
In contrast to Famusov and his entourage, Chatsky is devoid of aristocratic contempt for people of lower rank. In his monologue “Who are the judges?” Chatsky angrily attacks those who “are rich in robbery,
Having found protection from court in friends, in kinship,
Magnificent building chambers,
Where they indulge in feasts and extravagance.”
He also accuses representatives of the “past century” of inertia and lack of movement:
“Who are the judges? In ancient times K free life their enmity is irreconcilable,
Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers from the times of Ochakov and the conquest of the Crimea.”
We can talk a lot more about Chatsky, but it is already clear that his opponents cannot forgive all his accusatory speeches. Therefore, the phrase casually thrown by Sophia: “He’s out of his mind” came in very handy. Everyone gladly believed in Chatsky’s madness, because they wanted to believe in it. Humiliated and insulted, Chatsky pronounces his last monologue, in which he attacks the world of the Famusovs with all the force of indignation.
With his work, A. S. Griboyedov responded to the need of the time to create an original, highly artistic, socially significant, social comedy. A lot of time has passed since then. Comedy, of course, has already lost its social significance, but not its artistic significance. The theater is never empty when “Woe from Wit” is on stage, especially if leading role The wonderful actor Vladimir Menshikov performs.
Among the enormous riches of classical literature, Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” completed in 1824, occupies a special place. She is full of youth and freshness, distinguished by lively dramatic action, bright and juicy characters. This comedy, telling about the distant past, draws the reader and viewer to the present. The main conflict in it is the struggle of the new, advanced with the old, outdated, of the “present century” with the “past century.” This is the meaning of Chatsky’s struggle with the ideals of the Moscow nobility, in whose eyes Chatsky is an innovator, a “liberalist” and a freethinker. Representatives of the “past century” cannot forgive him for this.
The story of Chatsky's life in the play is outlined in separate strokes. Childhood in Famusov’s house, then service in the regiment “five years ago”, St. Petersburg - “connection with the ministers, then a break”, travel abroad - and a return to the sweet and pleasant “smoke of the fatherland”. Chatsky is young, but he already has many life events behind him. It is no coincidence that he is so observant and understands people well.
The author repeatedly emphasizes in the comedy Chatsky’s mind, clear, sharp, distinguished, however, by a “somewhat rational approach to life.” Chatsky studied abroad. In addition to scientific truths, he also picked up “new rules” there. During these years, restless Europe was still seething with the passions of great battles - not even half a century had passed since the revolution of 1789 in France, and the revolutionary whirlwinds raised by it were raging in Italy and then in Spain. Our hero was, in all likelihood, a witness to this and returned to his homeland full of thoughts about personal freedom, equality and brotherhood. But what awaits him in Moscow?
His dear Sophia, to whom he rushed “forty-five hours, without squinting his eyes in an instant, for more than seven hundred miles...”, fell in love with another, his father’s secretary, Molchalin. For Chatsky this is a heavy blow, because his ardent, sincere love is deep and constant. In addition, he feels insulted by Sophia's choice. How could she, an intelligent, developed girl, give preference to Molchalin, who did not even dare to “have his own opinion”?
But, unfortunately, this is not the only disappointment awaiting Chatsky in Moscow. Returning home full of hope, our hero foresaw a meeting with representatives of the Famus society. “You’ll get tired of living with them,” he says to Sophia on their first date, immediately consoling himself: “And you won’t find any stains in anyone.” But he was still sure that Famusism was only a fragment of the “past century.” However, the reality turned out to be much more gloomy. Even old friends were infected with Famusism. Former friend Gorich, who just recently was full of life, now “plays “duet a-molny” on the flute and complains about his health. A conversation with Repetilov reveals to Chatsky the surface and emptiness of the liberalism of many, the insignificance of the meetings of “liberalists” taking place in the English Club. And communication with other representatives of Famus society became generally dramatic for Chatsky.
And this is quite natural. In the society of Moscow “aces”, where everyone lives “looking up to their elders”, where they value only wealth and rank, where they are afraid of truth and enlightenment, Chatsky stands in a special place, for which many nobles hate and persecute him. What distinguishes this hero from his opponents? Intelligence, sincerity, directness - this is what distinguishes Chatsky from many of his peers in Moscow society. Molchalin seems to be smart. If we get to know him better, we will see that the main thing about him is cunning, resourcefulness, and deceit. Skalozub is direct and frank, but he “has never uttered a smart word.” And only Chatsky combines intelligence and honesty - qualities that are very important for a real person.
Chatsky contrasts his ideal with Famusov’s understanding of a person, “even if inferior,” but rich, who “takes the fight not in war, but in peace”:
Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge.
Representatives of the two camps have completely different ideas about the service. For Famusov, the model of attitude to official duties is Maxim Petrovich, who “bent over backwards” if it was necessary to “curry favor.” Chatsky has the opposite opinion on this matter:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
In contrast to Famusov and his entourage, Chatsky is devoid of aristocratic contempt for people of lower rank. In his monologue “Who are the judges?” Chatsky angrily attacks those who
Rich in robbery
Having found protection from court in friends, in kinship,
Magnificent building chambers,
Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance.
He also accuses representatives of the “past century” of inertia and lack of movement:
Who are the judges? For the antiquity of years
Their enmity towards a free life is irreconcilable,
Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers
The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of Crimea.
The comedy turned out to be A. S. Griboyedov’s answer to the urgent need of his time for original, highly artistic, socially significant, social comedy. A lot of time has passed since then. Comedy, of course, has already lost its social significance, but not its artistic significance. Theaters still draw full houses when “Woe from Wit” is on stage.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" gives big picture throughout Russian life of the 10-20s of the 19th century, reproduces the eternal struggle between old and new, which unfolded with great force throughout Russia, and not just in Moscow, between two camps: advanced, Decembrist-minded people and serf-owners, the stronghold antiquity.The Famus society in comedy, which firmly preserved the traditions of the “past century,” is contrasted by Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. This advanced man"the present century", more precisely, the time when after Patriotic War 1812, which sharpened the self-awareness of all layers of Russian society at that time, secret revolutionary circles began to emerge and develop, political societies. Chatsky in the literature of the 20s of the 19th century is a typical image of a “new” person, positive hero, Decembrist in views, public behavior, moral convictions, throughout the whole mentality and soul. The collision of Chatsky - a man with a strong-willed character, integral in his feelings, a fighter for an idea - with Famus society was inevitable. This clash gradually takes on an increasingly fierce character; it is complicated by Chatsky’s personal drama - the collapse of his hopes for personal happiness. His views against the existing foundations of society are becoming more and more harsh.
If Famusov is a defender of the old century, the heyday of serfdom, then Chatsky speaks with the indignation of a Decembrist revolutionary about serf owners and serfdom. In the monologue "Who are the judges?" he angrily opposes those people who are the pillars of noble society. He speaks sharply against the order of the golden age of Catherine, dear to Famusov’s heart, “the age of humility and fear - the age of flattery and arrogance.”
Chatsky’s ideal is not Maxim Petrovich, an arrogant nobleman and “hunter of indecency,” but an independent, free person, alien to slavish humiliation.
If Famusov, Molchalin, Skalozub consider the service as
The source of personal benefits, service to individuals, and not to the cause, then Chatsky breaks ties with the ministers, leaves the service precisely because he would like to serve the cause, and not servile before his superiors. “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he says. He defends the right to serve education, science, literature, but it is difficult in these conditions of the autocratic-serf system:
Now let one of us, one of the young people, find an enemy of quest, without demanding either a place or promotion to rank, he will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge; Or in his soul God himself will arouse a fervor for creative, lofty and beautiful arts, They immediately: - robbery! fire! And he will be known among them as a dangerous dreamer...
By these young people we mean people like Chatsky, Skalozub’s cousin, nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - “a chemist and a botanist.”
If Famus society treats everything folk, national with disdain, slavishly imitates external culture the West, especially France, even neglecting his native language, then Chatsky stands for the development national culture mastering the best, most advanced achievements European civilization. He himself “searched for intelligence” during his stay in the West, but he is against “empty, slavish, blind imitation” of foreigners. Chatsky stands for the unity of the intelligentsia with the people.
If Famus society evaluates a person by his origin and the number of serf souls he has, then Chatsky values a person for his intelligence, education, his spiritual and moral qualities.
For Famusov and his circle, the opinion of the world is sacred and infallible; the most terrible thing is “what will Princess Marya Alekseevna say!”
Chatsky defends freedom of thoughts and opinions, recognizes the right of every person to have their own beliefs and express them openly. He asks Molchalin: “Why are other people’s opinions only sacred?”
Chatsky sharply opposes arbitrariness, despotism, against flattery, hypocrisy, against the emptiness of those vital interests that live the conservative circles of the nobility.
His spiritual qualities are revealed in the selection of words, in the construction
Phrases, intonations, manner of speaking. This speech literary hero- this is the speech of a speaker with excellent command of words, a highly educated person. As his struggle with Famus society intensifies, Chatsky’s speech is increasingly colored with indignation and caustic irony.
“Woe from Wit” is a realistic comedy. Griboedov gave in it a true picture of Russian life. The comedy contains topical social problems those times: about enlightenment, contempt for everything popular, worship of foreign things, education, service, ignorance of society.
The main character of the comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Witty, eloquent, he angrily ridicules the vices of the society that surrounds him. He differs sharply from those around him in his intelligence, abilities, and independence of judgment. The image of Chatsky is something new, bringing change. This hero is an exponent of the progressive ideas of his time. Famus Society traditionally. His life positions are such that “you must learn by looking at your elders,” destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with obedience to those who are one step higher, and be sure to be rich. Famusov's only passion is the passion for rank and money.
The beliefs of Chatsky and Famus society are different. Chatsky condemns serfdom, imitation of foreign goods, and people’s lack of desire for education and their own opinion. The dialogues between Chatsky and Famusov are a struggle. At the beginning of the comedy it is not so acute. Famusov is even ready to give up Sofia’s hand, but sets conditions:
I would say, firstly: don’t be a whim,
Brother, don’t mismanage your property,
And, most importantly, go ahead and serve.
To which Chatsky replies:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
But gradually the struggle turns into a battle. Chatsky argues with Famusov about the way and path of life. But main character alone in the fight against the views of Moscow society, in which he has no place.
Molchalin and Skalozub are not the last representatives of Famus society. They are rivals and opponents of Chatsky. Molchalin is helpful and silent. He wants to please with his humility, accuracy, and flattery. Skalozub shows himself to be someone very important, businesslike, significant. But under his uniform he hides “weakness, poverty of mind.” His thoughts are connected only with obtaining a higher rank, money, power:
Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels;
I judge them as a true philosopher:
I just wish I could become a general.
Chatsky does not tolerate lies and falsehood. This man's tongue is as sharp as a knife. Each of his characteristics is sharp and caustic:
Molchalin was so stupid before!..
Most pathetic creature!
Has he really grown wiser?.. And he -
Khripun, strangled, bassoon,
A constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!
Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?..” mercilessly condemns Famus society. Each new face that appears during the development of the plot takes Famusov’s side. Gossip grows like a snowball. And Chatsky can’t stand it. He can no longer remain in the company of low, mean, arrogant and stupid people. They condemned him for his intelligence, for freedom of speech and thought, for honesty.
Before leaving, Chatsky throws out to the entire Famus society:
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend a day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his sanity will survive.
Chatsky is taller than them; the best and rarest qualities are manifested in him. Those who cannot see and appreciate this are, at the very least, simply fools. Chatsky is immortal, and now this hero is relevant.
The comedy “Woe from Wit” made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature. Griboedov's play was, is and will be modern work until veneration, thirst for profit, and gossip disappear from our lives.
Among the enormous riches of classical literature, Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” completed in 1824, occupies a special place. She is full of youth and freshness, distinguished by lively dramatic action, bright and juicy characters. This comedy, telling about the distant past, draws the reader and viewer to the present. The main conflict in it is the struggle of the new, advanced with the old, outdated, of the “present century” with the “past century.” This is the meaning of Chatsky’s struggle with the ideals of the Moscow nobility, in whose eyes Chatsky is an innovator, a “liberalist” and a freethinker. Representatives of the “past century” cannot forgive him for this.
The story of Chatsky's life in the play is outlined in separate strokes. Childhood in Famusov’s house, then service in the regiment “five years ago”, St. Petersburg - “connection with the ministers, then a break”, travel abroad - and a return to the sweet and pleasant “smoke of the fatherland”. Chatsky is young, but he already has many life events behind him. It is no coincidence that he is so observant and understands people well.
The author repeatedly emphasizes in the comedy Chatsky’s mind, clear, sharp, distinguished, however, by a “somewhat rational approach to life.” Chatsky studied abroad. In addition to scientific truths, he also picked up “new rules” there. During these years, restless Europe was still seething with the passions of great battles - not even half a century had passed since the revolution of 1789 in France, and the revolutionary whirlwinds raised by it were raging in Italy and then in Spain. Our hero was, in all likelihood, a witness to this and returned to his homeland full of thoughts about personal freedom, equality and brotherhood. But what awaits him in Moscow?
His dear Sophia, to whom he rushed “for forty-five hours, without squinting his eyes in an instant, for more than seven hundred miles...”, fell in love with another, his father’s secretary, Molchalin. For Chatsky this is a heavy blow, because his ardent, sincere love is deep and constant. In addition, he feels insulted by Sophia's choice. How could she, an intelligent, developed girl, give preference to Molchalin, who did not even dare to “have his own opinion”?
But, unfortunately, this is not the only disappointment awaiting Chatsky in Moscow. Returning home full of hope, our hero foresaw a meeting with representatives of the Famus society. “You’ll get tired of living with them,” he says to Sophia on their first date, immediately consoling himself: “And you won’t find any stains in anyone.” But he was still sure that Famusism was only a fragment of the “past century.” However, the reality turned out to be much darker. Even old friends were infected with Famusism. Former friend Gorich, who just recently was full of life, now “plays “duet a-molny” on the flute and complains about his health. A conversation with Repetilov reveals to Chatsky the surface and emptiness of the liberalism of many, the insignificance of the meetings of “liberalists” taking place in the English Club. And communication with other representatives of Famus society became generally dramatic for Chatsky.
And this is quite natural. In the society of Moscow “aces”, where everyone lives “looking up to their elders”, where they value only wealth and rank, where they are afraid of truth and enlightenment, Chatsky stands in a special place, for this many nobles hate and persecute him. What distinguishes this hero from his opponents? Intelligence, sincerity, directness - this is what distinguishes Chatsky from many of his peers in Moscow society. Molchalin seems to be smart. If we get to know him better, we will see that the main thing about him is cunning, resourcefulness, and deceit. Skalozub is direct and frank, but he “has never uttered a smart word.” And only Chatsky combines intelligence and honesty - qualities that are very important for a real person.
Chatsky contrasts his ideal with Famusov’s understanding of a person, “even if inferior,” but rich, who “takes the fight not in war, but in peace”:
Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge.
Representatives of the two camps have completely different ideas about the service. For Famusov, the model of attitude towards official duties is Maxim Petrovich, who “bent over” if it was necessary to “curry favor.” Chatsky has the opposite opinion on this matter:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
In contrast to Famusov and his entourage, Chatsky is devoid of aristocratic contempt for people of lower rank. In his monologue “Who are the judges?” Chatsky angrily attacks those who
Rich in robbery
Having found protection from court in friends, in kinship,
Magnificent building chambers,
Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance.
He also accuses representatives of the “past century” of inertia and lack of movement:
Who are the judges? For the antiquity of years
Their enmity towards a free life is irreconcilable,
Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers
The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of Crimea.
The comedy turned out to be A. S. Griboedov’s answer to the urgent need of his time for an original, highly artistic, socially significant, social comedy. A lot of time has passed since then. Comedy, of course, has already lost its social significance, but not its artistic significance. Theaters still draw full houses when “Woe from Wit” is on stage.