Essay text:
The comedy Woe from Wit gives a general picture of the entire Russian life of the 1020s of the 19th century, reproducing the eternal struggle between old and new, which unfolded with great force at that time, not only copying is prohibited in Moscow, but throughout Russia, between two camps: advanced , Decembrist-minded people and serf owners, a stronghold of antiquity.
The Famusov society, which firmly preserved the traditions of the past century, is contrasted in the comedy by Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. This advanced man century of the present, 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 and political societies began to emerge and develop. Chatsky in the literature of the 20s of the 19th century is a typical image of a new man, positive hero, Decembrist in views, public behavior, moral convictions, throughout the whole mentality and soul.
The clash of Chatsky with a strong-willed character, integral in his feelings, a fighter for an idea with Famusovsky society was inevitable. This clash gradually takes on an increasingly fierce character; it is complicated by Chatsky’s personal drama and the collapse of his hopes for personal happiness. His attacks 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 out sharply against the order of the golden age of Catherine, dear to Famusov’s heart, the age of obedience and fear, the age of flattery and arrogance.
Chatsky’s ideal is not Maxim Petrovich, an arrogant nobleman and a hunter of indecency, but an independent, free person, alien to slavish humiliation.
If Famusov, Molchalin, Skalozub view service as a source of personal benefits, service to individuals, not to the cause, then Chatsky breaks ties with ministers, leaving service precisely because he would like to serve the cause, and not servile before his superiors. I’d be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be waited on, he says. He defends the right to serve education, science, literature, but this is difficult under the conditions of an autocratic-serf system:
Now let one of us
Among the young people there will be an enemy of quest,
Without demanding either places or promotion,
In science, he has his mind hungry for knowledge;
Or God himself arouses the heat in his soul
To the creative, high and beautiful arts,
They immediately: robbery! fire!
And he will be known among them as a dreamer! dangerous!..
By these young people we mean people like Chatsky, Skalozub’s cousin, Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, a chemist and botanist.
If Famus society disdains everything folk, national, slavishly imitates the external culture of the West, especially France, even neglecting its native language, then Chatsky stands for the development of a national culture that masters 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 Princess Marya Aleksevna will 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 by which conservative circles of the nobility live.
His spiritual qualities are revealed in the choice of words, in the construction of phrases, intonations, and 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.
The rights to the essay “Chatsky against the Famus Society (based on the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov Woe from Wit)” belong to its author. When quoting material, it is necessary to indicate a hyperlink to
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 is a leading man of the “present century,” more precisely, of the time when, after the Patriotic War of 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, a positive hero, a Decembrist in his views, social behavior, moral beliefs, and in his entire 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 off 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, advanced achievements of 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 every person’s right 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 in the conservative circles of the nobility.
His spiritual qualities are revealed in the choice of words, in the construction
Phrases, intonations, manner of speaking. The speech of this literary hero is the speech of an orator 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.
Among the great riches classical literature Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov'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 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 - 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 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 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
TO free life their enmity 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.
CHATSKY AGAINST FAMUSOVSKY SOCIETY (ON COMEDY
A.S. GRIBOEDOV "Woe from Wit").
The comedy "Woe from Wit" gives a general picture of the entire Russian life of the 10-20s
years of the 19th century, reproduces the eternal struggle between old and new,
which unfolded with great force at that time throughout Russia, and not
only in Moscow, between two camps: advanced, Decembrist
determined people and serf owners, a stronghold of antiquity.
The Famusov society in comedy, which firmly preserved the traditions of the "century"
of the past", is contrasted with Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. This
the leading man of the "present century", more precisely, the time when after
The Patriotic War of 1812, which sharpened the self-awareness of all layers
society of Russia at that time, secret
revolutionary circles, political societies. Chatsky in literature
20s of the 19th century is a typical image of a “new” person,
positive hero, Decembrist in views, social
behavior, moral beliefs, throughout the whole mentality and soul.
The clash of Chatsky - a man with a strong-willed character, integral in
his feelings, a fighter for the idea - with the Famus society there was
inevitably. This collision gradually becomes more and more
fierce character, it is complicated by Chatsky’s personal drama -
the collapse of his hopes for personal happiness. His views are against
the existing foundations of society are becoming increasingly harsh.
If Famusov is a defender of the old century, the heyday
serfdom, then Chatsky with the indignation of a Decembrist revolutionary
talks about serf owners and serfdom. In the monologue "Who are the judges?"
he angrily opposes those people who are the pillars
noble society. He speaks out sharply against those dear to his heart
Famusov of the order of the golden age of Catherine, "the century of humility and
fear - centuries of flattery and arrogance."
Chatsky’s ideal is not Maxim Petrovich, an arrogant nobleman and “hunter”
to be mean", and an independent, free personality, alien to slavish
humiliation.
If Famusov, Molchalin, Skalozub consider the service as
source of personal benefits, service to individuals and not to the cause, then Chatsky breaks
connections with ministers, leaves service precisely because he would like
serve the cause, and not servile before the authorities. "I would be glad to serve,
it’s sickening to be served,” he says. He defends the right to serve
education, science, literature, but it is difficult in these conditions
autocratic-serf system:
Now let one of us, one of the young people, find an enemy of quest,
Without demanding either places or promotion, he will focus his mind on science,
hungry for knowledge; Or in his soul God himself will stir up a fervor for the arts
creative, lofty and beautiful, They immediately: - robbery! fire! AND
will be known among them as a dangerous dreamer...
By these young people we mean people like Chatsky,
cousin of Skalozub, nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya -
"chemist and botanist"
If Famus society treats everything with disdain
folk, national, slavishly imitates external culture
the West, especially France, even neglecting their native language,
then Chatsky stands for the development of national culture, mastering
the best, most advanced achievements of European civilization. Himself
"searched for intelligence" during his stay in the West, but he is against the "empty,
slavish, blind imitation" of foreigners. Chatsky stands for unity
intelligentsia with the people.
If Famus society evaluates a person according to his
the origin and 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, worse
all - “what will Princess Marya Alekseevna say!”
Chatsky defends freedom of thoughts, opinions, recognizes everyone
a person has the right to have his own beliefs and express them openly. He
asks Molchalin: “Why are other people’s opinions only sacred?”
Chatsky sharply opposes arbitrariness, despotism, flattery,
hypocrisy, against the emptiness of those vital interests by which they live
conservative circles of the nobility.
His spiritual qualities are revealed in the choice of words, in the construction
phrases, intonation, manner of speaking. The speech of this literary hero -
this is the speech of a speaker with excellent command of words, highly educated
person. As his struggle with Famus society intensifies,
Chatsky’s speech is increasingly colored with indignation and caustic irony.
“Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, having dealt it, in turn, a fatal blow with the quality of fresh power.”
I. A. Goncharov
Among the enormous riches of classical literature, Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” completed by him in 1824, occupies a special place. It is full of youth and freshness, characterized 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 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 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. 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 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 “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 the fight not in war, but in peace” with his forehead:
“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
“They 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?
For the antiquity of years
Their enmity towards a free life is irreconcilable,
Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers
The times of Ochakovsky and the conquest of 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. Griboedov 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.