The system of images of the comedy woe from wit. The system of images of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboedova. Characteristics of the heroes “Woe from Wit”

The ideological content and system of images of the play "Woe from Wit"

2. Typical character of Griboedov’s characters

The uniqueness of Griboyedov's heroes consisted not only of everyday and psychological traits, as in the comedies of Shakhovsky or Khmelnitsky, but was given in the social content of the image.

“Griboedov’s Moscow” is not only a broad frame for the psychological drama of Chatsky - Sophia. On the contrary, the intimate drama of the individual is interpreted as a result of the social drama. The comparison of Chatsky and lordly Moscow is not only a contrast of a given individual character and environment. This is a collision of the decrepit feudal world with new people. Along with individual images, the playwright creates another - a collective, image of lordly society. This was a great achievement of social, politically oriented realism. Griboyedov brilliantly depicted Famusov's everyday Moscow. In “Woe from Wit” another Moscow is also recreated, social, lordly, serfdom, militant and not at all comic. It was this Moscow, with its special morality, with its educational system, with its everyday ideals, that spiritually crippled Sofya Pavlovna. Her father, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, is a vivid example of lordly feudal Moscow, growing to the level of leader of a large and powerful social group. In the struggle between two worlds, which is revealed in the third act, Famusov reveals himself as a militant representative of the old world, the leader of an inert nobility. In his monologues, he combines lordly Moscow with noble St. Petersburg. And Chatsky interprets the collision as a struggle between two worlds: the one where “submission and fear” are, and the one in which “everyone breathes more freely.” The clash of these two social groups at Famusov's ball is depicted by Griboyedov with remarkable power of realism. In the living room there is a kind of flying meeting, a whole trial of Chatsky. The trial of Chatsky and his like-minded people mentioned in his remarks is the culmination of the social drama. In 1824, when Griboedov portrayed this enmity between two social groups, he did not yet know (but, undoubtedly, had a presentiment) how friendly and viciously the reactionary circles of noble society would support the tsarist government in 1826 in its brutal reprisal against the rebels and the defeated Decembrists.

The confrontation between Chatsky and Moscow is not a contrast between a high personality and a meager everyday environment, but a clash of the decrepit, but still strong feudal lordly world with new people and a new world that is replacing it, which we will call democratic. In "Woe from Wit", as in a social drama, the struggle of social forces in Russian society before December 14 is recreated. At the same time, the struggle was revealed and comprehended by Griboyedov not only as a political struggle of the reactionary government with opposition circles, but as a social struggle, within society itself - between an inert feudal society and a group of democratically minded people. The realist playwright not only showed a deep understanding of the connections between the past and the present, but also foresaw the near future, determined by the relationship of contending forces: at the next stage of the struggle, the Chatskys will be broken by the Famusovs and Skalozubs.

In Griboedov's play, attention is drawn to the repeated references to the free-thinking common intelligentsia. This ridiculed obscurantism, hostility towards new people, Famusov’s attacks on the spread of education (“learning is the plague, learning is the reason...”, “... take all the books and burn them,” “... now it’s worse, than ever, crazy people, and affairs, and opinions were divorced"). Famusov probably had in mind the universities, against which persecution began precisely then and in which the majority of professors and students were commoners. Famusov is echoed by the old Moscow lady Khlestova: “You really will go crazy from these, from boarding houses, schools, lyceums, you name it; yes from lankartachny mutual trainings.” Many soldiers were trained in Lancaster schools at that time. Princess Tugoukhovskaya takes up arms against the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who “practice in schisms and lack of faith.” The comedy is filled with echoes of the public life of that time: mention is made of the “scientific committee” that pursued books and the spread of education, the Italian Carbonari, talk about the “chambers”, that is, about the Chambers of Deputies, about Byron, “Voltairianism” and much more. There are sharp attacks against the abuses of serfdom, against “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged “a crowd of servants” for “three greyhounds”; against the theater master who drove “rejected children from their mothers and fathers” into the serf ballet. A lot of sarcasm is directed against the “nobles in the case” - the favorites, against the “ardent servility” of the courtiers “hunters of indecency everywhere”, against the “fathers of the fatherland”, “robbery of the rich”. There are many denunciations of the bureaucratic bureaucracy, to which one must “listen”, before which one “should not dare to have one’s judgment” and which is guided by rules like: “it’s signed, off your shoulders” and “how not to please your loved one.”

The creation of the literary type of Molchalin was a major acquisition of social thought. No less significant is the Skalozub type, in which military careerism and a passion for the uniform are branded. Skalozubovism and silence as social and everyday formulas have absorbed a wide range of phenomena. In both cases, Griboyedov showed great power of journalistic generalization. The author elevated the little official, Famusov’s secretary, vividly depicted by his individual traits, into a symbol of a significant socio-political group, tightly linking silence with Famusovism. The same with Skalozub. A colorful individual portrait of a narrow-minded, rude army colonel is generalized into the meaning of a broad symbol. The existence of Skalozubovism in life itself—Arakcheevism—exacerbated the significance of this image as a political satire on the characteristic features of the military-bureaucratic regime that had developed by the early 20s. With the image of Repetilov, the playwright responded satirically to the petty liberalism that had proliferated around Decembrism.

Some reticence and ambiguity remained in the image of Sophia, which gave reason to many critics, starting with Pushkin, to understand her in a simplified way. The character of Sophia was conceived by the playwright boldly and complexly - as a combination of superficial sentimentality with deep nature.

In addition to the characters appearing on stage, in “Woe from Wit” there is also a string of images recreated in conversations and monologues; Without them, the picture of Griboyedov’s Moscow would not have been completed, the ideological composition of the play would not have been complete: Madame Rosier, dance master Guillaume, noble Maxim Petrovich, Skalozub’s brother, Moscow old men and ladies, the consumptive “enemy of books,” Princess Lasova, Tatyana Yuryevna and Foma Fomich , Lakhmotyev Alexey and, finally, “Princess Marya Aleksevna”, who keeps all of Moscow in fear. Using a masterful technique of replicas and cursory references, the playwright draws out these fleeting images one after another and saturates our consciousness with them. Some of these images are developed superbly and in their significance exceed other “acting” ones.

“Woe from Wit” is also a realistic everyday play. The life of a large manor house in Moscow, from early morning, when “everything in the house rose,” “knocking, walking, sweeping and cleaning,” and until late at night, when “the last lamp goes out” in the front vestibule, is depicted with amazing completeness and truthfulness. And not only the everyday life of one lordly mansion is recreated in “Woe from Wit”; with the ingenious accumulation of everyday life through all four acts, and especially in the third, in the picture of the Moscow ball, the playwright gradually reproduces before us the entire life of the Moscow nobility: the education of noble youth, Moscow “lunches, dinners and dances”, business life - civilian and military, Frenchmania, feigned liberalism, poverty and emptiness of interests. The historical and educational significance of “Woe from Wit” is enormous; For a historian, it can serve as a source for studying the life of the Moscow nobility.

Griboyedov's work is also precious as a psychological drama. Psychological realism in “Woe from Wit” manifests itself constantly and in a variety of ways: in the characterization of Famusov, in Chatsky’s dialogue with Natalya Dmitrievna Gorich, in Repetilov’s talkativeness, etc. But it is most deeply and concentratedly applied in revealing the intimate drama of Chatsky and Sophia. Dialogue between Sophia and Lisa, dialogue between Chatsky and Sophia in the first act; the episode of Sophia's fainting in the second act and her brewing hostility towards Chatsky; the playwright’s brilliantly created explanation of Chatsky and Sophia at the beginning of the third act, Chatsky’s short monologue at the beginning of the fourth act about the results of the Moscow day; finally, the scene of Molchalin’s exposure, when the mistake of Sophia’s heart is revealed, her insight and spiritual strength are the elements and episodes of this intimate drama. Griboyedov was the first in Russian literature to create a psychological drama.

Lesson #17. Topic: “The system of images in the comedy of A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". Features of the development of comedic intrigue."

Lesson Objectives :

1) Repeat theoretical material on the topic “Comedy of Classicism”;

2) Begin to analyze the comedy by action;

3) Get interested in comedy, awaken interest in reading;

4) Continue to develop skills in analyzing literary works.

Equipment: textbook, comedy text, presentation.

Epigraph for the lesson: “The characters in Woe from Wit were so alive and convincing that contemporaries immediately began to recognize them as living people.”

D.I. Zavalishin “Notes of the Decembrist”.

Lesson objectives:

Repeat the features of a classic comedy.

Begin a study of comedy from the point of view of the theory of classicism and realism.

Start researching the plot of a comedy.

Introduction to the heroes of the comedy and analysis of act 1.

Progress of the lesson.

1. The teacher introduces the epigraph and the objectives of the lesson . (Display via projector).

2.Check homework

3. Updating basic knowledge .

Now let's listen to the history of the creation of the comedy.

- It is believed that the plan for the comedy began to take shape already in 1816, and individual scenes were written at the same time. There is a version of the birth of the comedy idea in a dream.

1821 Tiflis. A comedy plan was formed. Written I And II acts.

1823 The comedy was brought to Moscow. Work on the last acts on Begichev's estate has been completed.

The comedy was distributed in manuscripts. About 40 thousand manuscripts were made. One of these copies was received from A.S. Pushkin, who came to Mikhailovskoye Pushchin.

During Griboedov's lifetime, in 1825, only a small part of the comedy was published. For the first time, without censorship distortions, the comedy was published in Russia in 1862.

Teacher: Reading and studying a dramatic work requires certain preparation from you. To make it easier for you to start studying the comedy “Woe from Wit,” let us repeat the features of comedy as a literary genre. (presentation No. 1)

Features of comedy as a genre of literary work

comedy

Limitation of action by spatial and temporal boundaries.

Revealing the character's character through moments of confrontation (the role of conflict)

Organization of speech in the form of dialogues and monologues

Stages of conflict development

Presence of a plot

Teacher: The comedy was written during the reign of classicism. This situation greatly influenced the determination of the method of creating the work.

Let us recall the features of classical comedy.

- comedy belongs to the lower style;

- one of the features of the plot is a love triangle: the struggle of two young men for the hand of one girl;

- compliance with the rule of three unities: place, time, action;

- speaking surnames;

- a literary work must instill loyalty to the state, the Fatherland;

- in the end, vice is punished, virtue triumphs.

Teacher: Along with the traditional features of that time, comedy has features of both realism and romanticism. We will talk about them in the next lessons.

Teacher: You can note some traditional features of classicism today.

Teacher: The system of images of a dramatic work differs from other genres. (presentation No. 2).

Teacher: I suggest you fill out in the form of a table:

Classification of heroes of dramatic works: (Table No. 2)

Main characters

Minor characters

Off-stage characters

Teacher: Finally, let’s turn to the heroes of the comedy “Woe from Wit.” Among them there are heroes with telling surnames. These surnames of Griboyedov reflect not the essence of the heroes as a whole, as was the case with Fonvizin (Skotinin, Pravdin, Starodum), but also the ability to “hear” and “speak” them.

Teacher: In your opinion, what are the “speaking” names?

- P.A. Famusov – (from lat. Fama - rumor.) Famusov is afraid of people's rumors.

- Repetilov – (from the French Repeter – repeat)

- Molchalin - a single-root verb - to remain silent. In the first act he is silent and laconic.

In the description of Skalozub, it is first indicated that he is a “colonel”, because he is the main thing in his image, and then it is only added - Sergei Sergeich.

Prince Tugoukhovsky is hard of hearing.

Old woman Khlestova - a single-root verb - to whip, to beat with something flexible. There is an expression “to talk bitingly.”

Teacher: Chatsky Alexander Andreevich - in the draft version Griboyedov wrote this surnameChadian , shortening the surnameChaadaeva . Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev is a friend of Pushkin. Participated in the War of 1812. In 1821 he interrupted his military career and joined a secret society. From 1823 to 1826 he traveled around Europe and studied philosophy. After returning to Russia in 1828–1830, he wrote and published the treatise “Philosophical Letters.” These letters adhered to progressive views and contradicted the orders of Russia.

By decree of the Tsar, Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev was declared crazy. In the image of Chatsky, Griboyedov predicted the fate of Chaadaev (Chatsky was also declared crazy).

Teacher: Let’s imagine the house of a rich Moscow gentlemanI half XIXcentury. We enter the living room. (viewing a fragment of the beginning of the performance)

Teacher: this is how the director of the St. Petersburg Academic Drama Theater named after Pushkin imagined the living room.

What characters did you meet?

How does Famusov relate to others? What are your first impressions?

- Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov is a wealthy landowner and high-ranking official. He is a manager in a government place. The play takes place in his house.

In this scene we see him as the master of the house. He is a domineering gentleman. I imagined him as a good-natured and at the same time grumpy, hot-tempered person. His arrogant tone is revealed in his address to Molchalin.

What other feature of Famusov did you notice?

- Famusov is a loving father. He raised Sophia alone. That's how he says about this: (phenomenon 4, p. 108)

What did Sophia seem like to you?

- Sophia is smart, proud, with a strong and independent character, dreamy. She is 17 years old. She was left without a mother early, so she feels like the mistress of the house. Hence her authoritative tone.

Who is she in love with? Why?

- Sophia is in love with Molchalin. At night she reads French sentimental literature. They brought up dreaminess and sensitivity in her. These novels could make her pay attention to Molchalin - an ignorant, poor, modest man who did not dare raise his eyes to her. This is how she speaks about Molchalin: (appearance 5, p. 113)

What did you learn about Molchalin?

- Molchalin’s goal in life is to slowly but surely move up the career ladder. He doesn't love Sophia at all. During the 3 years of Chatsky's absence, he achieved brilliant success. An unknown, rootless Tver tradesman became Famusov's secretary, received 3 awards, became Sophia's lover and secret fiancé, an irreplaceable person in Famusov's house.

What is the atmosphere like in Famusov’s house?

- The main thing I noticed was deception and hypocrisy. Sophia deceives her father, Molchalin deceives her boss Famusov and Sophia. Liza, forced to cover up Sophia and Molchalin, deceives Famusov.

What are phenomena 1-5 in terms of plot development?

- Exposition. In it, Griboyedov introduces the scene of action and the main characters.

What event does the plot begin with?

- From the appearance of Chatsky in Famusov’s house.

What is the nature of the plot?

- The plot of the play is of a love nature. Main character Chatsky comes to Moscow because of his beloved girl Sophia.

At first in Famusov’s house, he is cheerful, excited, in a good mood and so blinded by Sophia’s beauty that he does not even notice her coldness and alienation.

Noticing Sophia's coldness, Chatsky seeks to find out who Sophia really loves.

How does Chatsky appear in the play?

(Apparition 5, page 112)

What in Chatsky’s behavior immediately catches your eye?

-Chatsky loves Sophia. His love is sincere, just like 3 years ago. He was looking forward to the meeting. At first he is cheerful, excited, and in a good mood.

How does Sophia greet him?

- She greets him coldly and aloofly, although they grew up together in Famusov's house. Chatsky was brought up and studied together with Sophia under the guidance of Russian and foreign teachers and tutors.

Teacher: This is how a conflict arises between Sophia and Chatsky. What is conflict?

- Conflict is a clash, contradiction between characters or characters and circumstances. (entry in dictionaries)

Teacher: There is also an internal conflict, when a person experiences internal contradictions. What is the nature of the conflict between Sophia and Chatsky?

- Love.

Teacher: But already in Act 1, in addition to a personal, love conflict, a social conflict is also outlined. It can be seen in Chatsky’s satirical remarks about Moscow morals. Read this scene. (Appearance 6, page 115)

Teacher: We will monitor the development of social conflict based on table No. 3: (display through a projector). You will need to write down quotes from the comedy.

Relation to:

Chatsky

Famus Society

To the people and to serfdom;

Enlightenment;

Foreign;

Wealth, rank;

Love, marriage;

The meaning of the word "mind"

(selection of several quotes)

Teacher: In Act 1 there are expressions that have become popular. They are called aphorisms. Entry in dictionaries: an aphorism is a short expressive saying containing a generalizing conclusion. (selection of several aphorisms from 1 act).

Lesson summary.

An innovative work in terms of its themes, style, and composition, “Woe from Wit” became the first Russian realistic comedy that reflected the most significant socio-political and moral problems era. For the first time in Russian drama, the task was set to show not mask images corresponding to the traditional roles of classicist comedies, but living, real types of people - Griboyedov’s contemporaries. “Portraits, and only portraits, are part of comedy and tragedy; however, they have features characteristic of many other

Individuals, and others - the entire human race... I hate caricatures, you won’t find a single one in my picture,” the author wrote about his heroes.

The system of images “Woe from Wit” is based on this principle of realistic typification. There is no clear division of characters into positive and negative, as in the works of classicism. According to Goncharov, “the whole play seems to be some kind of circle of faces familiar to the reader,” in which “both the general and the details, all this was not composed, but was entirely taken from Moscow living rooms and transferred to the book and to the stage.”

In the comedies of classicism, the action was usually based

On a “love triangle”, which consisted of heroes with a clearly defined function in the plot and character. This “role system” included: a heroine and two lovers - a lucky one and an unlucky one, a father who has no idea about his daughter’s love and a maid who arranges dates for the lovers - the so-called soubrette. There is some semblance of such “roles” in Griboyedov’s comedy.

Chatsky would have to play the role of the first, successful lover, who in the finale, having successfully overcome all difficulties, successfully marries his beloved. But the development of the comedy and especially its ending refute the possibility of such an interpretation: Sophia clearly prefers Molchalin, she gives rise to gossip about Chatsky’s madness, which forces Chatsky to leave not only Famusov’s house, but also Moscow and, at the same time, give up hopes for Sophia’s reciprocity . In addition, Chatsky also has the traits of a hero-reasoner, who in the works of classicism served as an exponent of the author’s ideas.

Molchalin would fit the role of a second lover, especially since the presence of a second – comic – “love triangle” is also associated with him. But in fact, it turns out that he is the one who is lucky in love, Sophia has a special affection for him, which is more suitable for the role of the first lover. But here, too, Griboyedov departs from tradition: Molchalin is clearly not a positive hero, which is mandatory for the role of the first lover, and is portrayed with a negative author’s assessment.

Griboedov also abandons tradition in his portrayal of the heroine. In the classical “role system” Sophia should have become an ideal heroine, but in “Woe from Wit” this image is interpreted very ambiguously. On the one hand, this is an extraordinary personality, a strong, large character. She, of course, differs in many ways from Moscow young ladies like the Tugoukhovsky princesses.

As Goncharov rightly noted, Sophia has excellent soul qualities, and the rest is upbringing.

Even her preference for Molchalin, who is clearly inferior to Chatsky in nobility and intelligence, honesty and culture and many other remarkable qualities, is understandable. She, like Pushkin's Tatiana, had a chance to be deceived in her expectations. After all, her choice fell on a person unusual for her circle, which required considerable courage and independence.

The girl’s imagination endowed the “wordless” Molchalin with all the qualities of an ideal hero, and for the time being he successfully hid his true face and true interests.

At the same time, this choice can also be explained by the desire to command, which makes Sophia related to her father. “Husband-servant,” the ideal of Moscow ladies, could well suit Sophia. In any case, she clearly does not like Chatsky’s sharp and independent character, and it is she who starts gossip about Chatsky’s madness. So the image of Sophia turned out to be very multifaceted, ambiguous, and in the finale there will be no happy marriage, but a deep disappointment.

The author also deviates from the norms of classicism in the depiction of the soubrette, Lisa. As a soubrette, she is cunning, quick-witted, resourceful and quite courageous in her relations with gentlemen. She is cheerful and relaxed, which, however, does not prevent her, as befits her role, from taking an active part in the love affair.

But at the same time, Griboyedov endows Lisa with features that are quite unusual for such a role, making her similar to the hero-reasoner: she gives clear, even aphoristic characteristics to other heroes, formulates some of the most important positions of Famus society.

Famusov in the “role system” plays the role of a noble father who has no idea about his daughter’s love, but by changing the traditional ending, Griboedov deprives this character of the opportunity to safely complete the development of the action: usually in the end, when everything was revealed, a noble father who cares about his daughter’s happiness , blessed the lovers for marriage and it all ended with a wedding.

Nothing like this happens in the finale of “Woe from Wit.” Famusov knows nothing about the real state of affairs until the very end. But even there he still remains blissfully unaware of his daughter’s true passions - he believes that Sophia is in love with Chatsky, and he doesn’t even think about Molchalin as the object of his daughter’s sighs, otherwise everything would have ended much worse, especially for Molchalin.

Indeed, in addition to what the role of a noble father implies, the image of Famusov includes the features of a typical Moscow “ace”, a big boss, a master who is not used to his subordinates allowing themselves much lesser liberties - it’s not for nothing that Molchalin is so afraid of showing sympathy for him on Sophia’s part, despite all the girl’s precautions.

All participants in this “triangle” went so far beyond their roles precisely because, when creating realistic images, Griboyedov could not endow them with any standard set of features. And as full-blooded, living images, they began to behave completely differently from the rules of classicism.

From the point of view of social conflict, the system of comedy images is built on the antithesis of the “present century” and the “past century.” Chatsky, the only stage character, is opposed to Famus society. He is a typical representative of that part of Russian society of the first quarter of the 19th century, which carried within itself new views, thoughts, ideals and moods - “the present century” - as the young generation of nobles began to be called after the advent of comedy. Subsequently, these people were often correlated with the Decembrists, participants in the uprising of December 14, 1825. “The figure of Chatsky... appears on the eve of the disturbance on St. Isaac's Square; this is the Decembrist.”

The image of Chatsky truly reflected the ideals, morals and spirit of the Decembrist part of society of that era. People like him could not come to terms with a life filled with “lunch, dinner and dancing.” They demand personal and social freedom, strive for the ideals of enlightenment, education, and true national culture.

First of all, Chatsky is similar to the Decembrists in his views. The main thing that brings them together is their protest against serfdom. Like the Decembrists, Chatsky speaks of the need to serve the cause, “not individuals.”

Chatsky combines protest against the system of favoritism, opposition to the authorities of the past - “decisive and strict judges” - with the affirmation of the human right to freely choose a vocation. He speaks with great sympathy about people who in Famusov’s society are called “dreamers, dangerous” people.

Along with this, Chatsky, like the Decembrists, considers it necessary to develop education. The “past century” is mortally afraid of this, because a developed, intelligent person cannot be forced to live according to the rules prescribed to him; he is free in his choice. That is why education, according to the Famus society, is the basis of all new and very dangerous trends. “Learning is the problem,” Famusov says about this.

The question of true enlightenment is closely related to the problem of national culture. Chatsky is concerned about the “Mixing of languages: French with Nizhny Novgorod”, admiration for everything foreign that reigns in Russian society. And the main thing for him, as for the Decembrists, is to overcome the chasm that separates educated Russian people and the people. “So that our smart, cheerful people, even in language, do not consider us to be Germans,” Chatsky demands.

In real life, there weren’t very many people like Chatsky. Griboyedov maintains the same situation in his comedy. In the stage action there is only one of his like-minded people - Repetilov, but he also turns out to be an imaginary comrade-in-arms of Chatsky, only emphasizing the loneliness of the main character.

This is a parody image. The essence of this character is expressed in the words: “We make noise, brother, we make noise.”

From the comedy we know that Chatsky’s way of thinking is shared by Prince Fyodor and Skalozub’s brother, who, having left the service, took up reading books in the village. They are part of the comedy's off-stage characters, which are even more numerous than the stage characters. They are necessary to reveal the full true breadth of the conflict, and also help clarify the positions of the stage characters and can relate to both the “present century” and the “past century.”

Thus, the venerable chamberlain Kuzma Petrovich or Famusov’s uncle Maxim Petrovich are off-stage characters who most successfully embody the morals and ideals of Famusov’s society: the ability to “curry favor” in order to take a high place in society and enjoy all the privileges due to it. “Famous” Tatyana Yuryevna helps to get an idea of ​​​​influential ladies who have “helpful” friends and relatives.

On stage, “the past century” represents the Famus society. Among them, individual figures stand out: the Moscow “ace”, the major boss Famusov; a minor employee from his department, Molchalin; Colonel Skalozub, representing the army. The guests at Famusov’s ball form an independent group, without whom the “gallery of types” of Famusov’s Moscow would be incomplete, but they are not outlined in such detail.

Here we see a peculiar “contingent of brides” and a “happy” married couple: “husband-servant” Platon Mikhailovich Gorich and his wife Natalya Dmitrievna; “a remnant of Catherine’s century” - the influential Moscow lady Khlestova and the rogue and swindler Zagoretsky, despised by everyone, but necessary because he is “a master of serving.” Each of these characters is a unique character with its own unique characteristics. But they all have common features that allow them to be combined into one group.

This is a rather closed society, into which only the most senior and rich people can enter. Their well-being is based on serfdom - after all, thanks to the ownership of rich estates, they can “take rewards and live happily.” In Famusov’s Moscow, it is customary not only to maintain this order of things, but also to evaluate other people in accordance with it. “Be inferior, but if there are two thousand family souls, he will be the groom,” - this is what Famusov says about the applicant worthy of his daughter’s hand.

Obviously, ranks, which are obtained through kinship and patronage, also play an important role in these assessments. The main thing in the service for these people, of course, is not the business - no one here does that - but the benefits that the official position promises. For the sake of rank, they are ready to humiliate themselves and serve, as Molchalin does.

Having reached “famous degrees” like Famusov, you can no longer bother yourself with business - “signed - off your shoulders.”

In the army there is the same “order”: the “channels” through which Colonel Skalozub achieved a high rank are obviously similar - after all, during the War of 1812 he sat in the rear, and others performed feats, who died and thereby helped open “vacancies” ” for people like the character in Griboyedov’s comedy.

Skalozub’s story also demonstrates the true face of the patriotism of Famus society; there is no place for true feeling here, there is only an ostentatious impulse: “The women shouted hurray! And they threw caps into the air.” But what admiration reigns in this society for everything foreign!

This also applies to fashions in clothes, and the desire to flaunt French words in society, however, the result is “A mixture of languages: French with Nizhny Novgorod.”

The fashion for everything foreign and foreigners has reached the point that even the upbringing and education of children is entrusted to very dubious teachers - “more in number, at a cheaper price.” This is not surprising, because a good, real education, like genuine culture, is not of interest to Famusov’s Moscow, but seriously frightens it. Her main activities and interests are “lunches, dinners, and dances,” during which you can not only have a good time, but also make the necessary acquaintances, find profitable suitors for your daughters, patronage for your sons, and also gossip behind the backs of your own friends .

But, despite the external bustle, the life of Famusov’s Moscow flows very monotonously. It is so conservative that three years later, during which Moscow survived the Napoleonic invasion, Chatsky finds practically no changes here: “What new will Moscow show me? Yesterday there was a ball, and tomorrow there will be two.” The energy of Famus society is gathered only to preserve its foundations, to fight dissent - sensing in Chatsky someone who disturbs the peace, the measured course of ordinary life, Famus society declares war on him and uses its most terrible weapon - gossip.

Everyone understands its power. But as soon as the enemy is defeated and expelled, the “element” returns to its shores, and they are even ready to feel sorry for Chatsky - at least in words.

Thus, “in a group of twenty faces, like a ray of light in a drop of water, the entire former Moscow, its design, its then spirit, historical moment and morals were reflected.” But at the same time, the human types that make up this Moscow and shown to us by Griboyedov, in some way turn out to be independent of time, place, and social system. They contain something that relates to the eternal phenomena of life.

And if it is true that every new business “raises the shadow of Chatsky,” then there will always be Famusov, who, no matter what happens, will only say: “Ah! My God! What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say?”

The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov is one of the outstanding examples of Russian drama in the first quarter of the 19th century. The comedy was created at a time when classicism dominated the stage in Russia, but the playwright sought to realistically depict contemporary Russian reality, that is, according to Goncharov, “to take it entirely from Moscow living rooms and transfer it to a book and to the stage.” This is the reason for Griboedov's innovation - in his comedy the leading principle of depicting life is realistic.
The militant revolutionary content, the sharpness of ideas, and the topicality of images determined the high political effectiveness of comedy. A deep ideological connection with the progressive movement of the era allowed the writer to raise in his work the most pressing political issues of the time.
The comedy reflected the era that came after the Patriotic War of 1812. This was the era of the birth and development of the Decembrist movement.
“Woe from Wit” is a socio-political comedy, although the play is based on a love conflict, which fades into the background as the action progresses, and the social conflict comes to the fore - the clash of the “present century” with the “past century”.
The former is presented in the comedy in the image of Chatsky, the latter in the images of Famusov, Molchalin, Skalozub and many other “Moscow” people. Moreover, all the characters in the play are typical characters. The distinctive features of representatives of Moscow society are embodied in the images of comedy so vividly that I. A. Goncharov compares them with a deck of cards. For example, Chatsky is a typical progressive nobleman who has broken away from his class environment and, as a “friend of humanity,” angrily denounces the vices of society: serfdom, veneration of rank, nepotism, the dominance of foreigners and much more. One of Chatsky’s main opponents is Molchalin, a typical little official who dreams of achieving a certain position in society. He wants to become the same as his patron Famusov. Molchalin firmly grasped his father’s commandments - “to please all people without exception,” and also “one should not dare to have one’s own judgment.”
The images of “Woe from Wit” are devoid of the schematic character that was inherent in the heroes of classic plays; they are convex and multifaceted, combining both positive and negative features. So, Chatsky - a passionate and emotional nature - because of his ardent spontaneity, sometimes finds himself in a funny, or even stupid, position. For example, in the middle of another monologue, he notices that everyone is spinning in a waltz “with the greatest zeal.” The image of Molchalin is not limited to showing only his negative traits: sycophancy and the ability to “put on appearances.” He tries to win the favor of Lisa, the maid in Famusov’s house, by bribing with “interests”; in some cases, he is capable of accidentally pricking his interlocutor. So, he asks Chatsky: “Were you not given ranks? Failure in service?”
So, in the comedy “Woe from Wit” Griboedov widely uses the realistic principle when creating characters.
It should be noted that the number of characters significantly exceeded the norms of dramaturgy of that time: five to eight characters. In Griboyedov’s comedy “25 fools for one sane person,” which increased the scale of the stage action.
In addition, the playwright introduced into his play large number off-stage characters, the number of which exceeded the stage ones. They represent the same Moscow society and reflect the struggle of two eras in it. That is why among the off-stage characters there are like-minded people of Chatsky (Skalozub’s cousin, Prince Fyodor, “chemist and botanist”, professors of the Pedagogical Institute, “practicing in schisms and unbelief”), and representatives of Famus society (Moscow “aces” Maxim Petrovich and Kuzma Petrovich , serf owners exchanging their devoted servants for dogs or selling off their “Cupids” and “Zephyrs” one by one, Moscow ladies - “judges of everything, everywhere, there are no judges above them” and others).
Thus, off-stage characters contribute to expanding the display of reality in comedy, and most importantly, they take it beyond the boundaries of Famus’s house.
Both Chatsky and his main opponent Famusov get “each his own “millions of torments”; the latter will probably never become an “ace”, and Chatsky is forced to go “search around the world where there is a corner for an offended feeling.” No one wins an unconditional victory on stage. Griboyedov, as a realist, could not show the victory of the “present century” over the “past century,” although all his sympathies and the sympathies of the audience are on the side of the first.
The creator of “Woe from Wit” was an innovator in the field of language. First of all, the speech of comedy characters is individualized; it is one of the means of revealing characters. This is especially noticeable in the example of Chatsky’s speech. The logic and harmony of his monologues, their accusatory pathos reveal him as a person with a whole system of views and beliefs, with his own view of the world. Chatsky’s correct literary language testifies to his education and erudition, and the abundance of exclamatory sentences and the passion of his speeches prove that we have before us an internally rich, emotional and passionate nature. Chatsky’s speeches are imbued with high civic pathos, this speaks of his free-thinking, that he is characterized by “beautiful impulses of the soul”:

Thus, the passion of Chatsky’s speeches brings him closer to the romantic Decembrists.
As A. S. Pushkin predicted, many lines of the comedy “have become proverbs and sayings”: “The legend is fresh, but hard to believe,” “The houses are new, but the prejudices are old,” “Blessed is he who believes, he is warm in the world.” , “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening” and others.
Griboyedov replaced the venerable Alexandrian verse with free iambic, which made it possible to convey the natural intonations of human speech. It can be argued that with this “Woe from Wit” prepared the transition of Russian drama from poetry to prose (“The Inspector General” by Gogol).
“Woe from Wit” is the first realistic social comedy in Russian literature, in which the author managed to capture typical characters in typical circumstances and recreate Russian life in the first quarter of the 19th century in a broad and multifaceted way.

Comedy image system. The problem of prototypes (A.S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”)

Comedy heroes can be divided into several groups: main characters, secondary characters, masked characters and off-stage characters. All of them, in addition to the role assigned to them in the comedy, are also important as types that reflect certain characteristic features Russian society at the beginning of the 19th century.

The main characters of the play include Chatsky, Molchalin, Sophia and Famusov. The plot of the comedy is based on their relationship. The interaction of these characters with each other drives the play.

The secondary characters - Lisa, Skalozub, Khlestova, Gorichi and others - also participate in the development of the action, but have no direct relation to the plot.

The images of masked heroes are extremely generalized. The author is not interested in their psychology; they interest him only as important “signs of the times” or as eternal human types. Their role is special, because they create a socio-political background for the development of the plot, emphasize and clarify something in the main characters. Their participation in comedy is based on the “distorting mirror” technique. Masked heroes include Repetilov, Zagoretsky, Messrs. N and D, and the Tugoukhovsky family. The author is not interested in the personality of each of the six princesses; they are important in the comedy only as a social type of “Moscow young lady”. These are truly masks: they all look the same, we cannot distinguish the remark of the first princess from the statement of the second or fifth:

3rd. What a charm my cousin gave me!

4th. Oh! yes, barezhevoy!

5th. Oh! lovely!

6th. Oh! how sweet!

These young ladies are funny to Chatsky, the author, and the readers. But they don’t seem funny to Sophia at all. For with all her merits, with all the complexities of her nature, she is from their world, in some ways Sophia and the “chirping” princesses are very, very close. In their society, Sophia is perceived naturally - and we see the heroine in a slightly different light.

Unlike the princesses, whom Griboyedov only numbered, without even considering it necessary to give them names in the poster, their father has both a first name and a patronymic: Prince Pyotr Ilyich Tugoukhovsky. But he is also faceless, and he is a mask. He doesn’t say anything except “uh-hmm”, “a-hmm” and “uh-hmm”, doesn’t hear anything, isn’t interested in anything, own opinion completely deprived... In it, the traits of “a boy-husband, a servant-husband”, which constitute the “high ideal of all Moscow husbands,” are brought to the point of absurdity, to the point of absurdity. Prince Tugoukhovsky is the future of Chatsky’s friend, Plato. Mikhailovich Gorich. At the ball, gossip about Chatsky's madness is spread by Messrs. N and D. Again, no names or faces. The personification of gossip, living gossip. These characters focus all the base traits of Famus society: indifference to truth, indifference to personality, passion for “washing bones,” hypocrisy, hypocrisy... This is not just a mask, it is, rather, a mask-symbol.

Masked heroes play the role of a mirror placed opposite the “high society”. And here it is important to emphasize that one of the author’s main tasks was not just to reflect the features of modern society in comedy, but to force society to recognize itself in the mirror.

This task is facilitated by off-stage characters, that is, those whose names are mentioned, but the heroes themselves do not appear on stage and do not take part in the action. And if the main characters of “Woe from Wit” do not have any specific prototypes (except for Chatsky), then in the images of some minor heroes and off-stage characters the features of the author’s real contemporaries are completely recognizable. Thus, Repetilov describes to Chatsky one of those who “make noise” in the English Club:

You don’t need to name it, you’ll recognize it from the portrait:

Night robber, duelist,

He was exiled to Kamchatka, returned as an Aleut,

And he is firmly unclean in his hand.

And not only Chatsky, but also the majority of readers “recognized from the portrait” the colorful figure of that time: Fyodor Tolstoy - the American. It’s interesting, by the way, that Tolstoy himself, having read “Woe from Wit” in the list, recognized himself and, when meeting with Griboedov, asked to change the last line as follows: “He’s dishonest when it comes to cards.” He corrected the line in this way with his own hand and added an explanation: “For the fidelity of the portrait, this amendment is necessary so that they do not think that he is stealing snuff boxes from the table.”

The collection of scientific works "A. S. Griboyedov. Materials for the biography" contains an article by N. V. Gurov "That little black one..." ("Indian Prince" Visapur in the comedy "Woe from Wit")." Remember, at the first meeting with Sophia, Chatsky, trying to revive the atmosphere of former ease, goes through old mutual acquaintances, with whom they both made fun of three years ago. In particular, he remembers a certain “darkie”:

And this one, what’s his name, is he Turkish or Greek?

That little black one, on crane legs,

I don't know what his name is

Wherever you turn: it’s right there,

In dining rooms and living rooms.

So, Gurov’s note talks about the prototype of this “passing” off-stage character. It turns out that it was possible to establish that during the time of Griboyedov there was a certain Alexander Ivanovich Poryus-Vizapursky, who quite fits the description of Chatsky.

Why did you need to look for a prototype of the “black one”? Isn't he too small a figure for literary criticism? It turns out - not too much. For us, a century and a half after the publication of “Woe from Wit,” it makes no difference whether there was a “black one” or Griboyedov invented him. But the modern reader (ideally, the viewer) of the comedy immediately understood who he was talking about: “he recognized it from the portrait.” And the gap between the stage and the audience disappeared, the fictional characters talked about people known to the public, the viewer and the character turned out to have “mutual acquaintances” - and quite a lot. Thus, Griboyedov managed to create an amazing effect: he blurred the line between real life and stage reality. And what is especially important is that the comedy, while acquiring an intense journalistic sound, did not lose one iota in artistic terms.

The problem of the prototype of the comedy protagonist requires special discussion. First of all, because it is impossible to speak about Chatsky’s prototype with the same certainty and unambiguity as about the prototypes of off-stage characters. The image of Chatsky is least of all a portrait of this or that real person; This is a collective image, a social type of the era, a kind of “hero of the time.” And yet it contains the features of two outstanding contemporaries of Griboedov - P.Ya. Chaadaev (1796-1856) and V.K. Kuchelbecker (1797-1846). A special meaning is hidden in the name of the main character. The surname "Chatsky" undoubtedly carries an encrypted allusion to the name of one of most interesting people that era: Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev. The fact is that in the draft versions of “Woe from Wit” Griboedov wrote the hero’s name differently than in the final version: “Chadsky”. Chaadaev’s surname was also often pronounced and written with one “a”: “Chadaev”. This is exactly how, for example, Pushkin addressed him in the poem “With seashore Taurida...": "Chadaev, do you remember the past?.."

Chaadaev participated in Patriotic War 1812, in the anti-Napoleonic campaign abroad. In 1814, he joined the Masonic lodge, and in 1821 he suddenly interrupted his brilliant military career and agreed to join a secret society. From 1823 to 1826, Chaadaev traveled around Europe, comprehended the latest philosophical teachings, and met Schelling and other thinkers. After returning to Russia in 1828-1830, he wrote and published a historical and philosophical treatise: “Philosophical Letters.” The views, ideas, judgments - in a word, the very system of worldview of the thirty-six-year-old philosopher turned out to be so unacceptable for Nicholas Russia that the author of the Philosophical Letters suffered an unprecedented and terrible punishment: by the highest (that is, personally imperial) decree he was declared crazy. It so happened that the literary character did not repeat the fate of his prototype, but predicted it.

References

Monakhova O.P., Malkhazova M.V. Russian literature of the 19th century. Part 1. - M.-1994