Where did Chatsky live? Chatsky
Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" provided the author, without any doubt, with true immortality throughout the centuries. The main character of the work, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, became one of the most controversial and famous literary figures of the “Golden Age” of Russian literature. It is about him, who opens up a whole gallery of images of the so-called “superfluous people”, the brightest representative of which will be Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin, that critics responded with extremely ambivalent comments.
The story of a progressive-minded young man told on the pages of the play, who is faced with misunderstanding from the conservative aristocracy, is framed by Griboyedov in a traditional interpersonal love conflict, which, however, is only one of the most superficial problems in the comedy.
The main conflict, as already mentioned, lies in the confrontation between the “present century” and the “past century.” It is worth turning to a well-known fact to confirm this assumption: the initially skillful diplomat A.S. Griboedov, who created his epoch-making work during the years of the development of various kinds of secret organizations that united the leading people of his time, called the comedy “Woe to Wit.”
Later, in his diaries, he would write: “In my comedy there are twenty-five fools for one sane person.” So, here the conflict becomes obvious, which the author himself put, as they say, at the forefront: the main character of “Woe from Wit” is opposed to a traditional society, the life of which is completely saturated with falsehood and stupidity; its values are miserable and empty, it rejects everything new and rational.
Alexander Andreevich turns out to be a foreign body in Famusov's house. His fault lies in the fact that he boldly and directly expresses his own opinion, which goes against the orders of the conservative aristocracy. “I’d be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he remarks in response to Famusov Sr.’s monologue, advising Chatsky to earn his rank. The hero is alien to the morals of the insincere and stupid “high society”, where dubious etiquette rules the roost.
Chatsky is amazingly smart; his speech is witty, sharp and frank. And if at first this arouses interest, then later, realizing that it will not be possible to come to an agreement with this most educated fighter for justice, for honesty, for intelligence, society rejects the hero, declaring him crazy. This is the amazing drama of this immortal comedy.
For Alexander Andreevich, who returned to Moscow after three years of wandering around Europe and was saturated with the advanced ideas of that time, the picture of the life of Moscow society becomes especially clear. He openly opposes veneration, bribery, and protectionism that reign in the public service.
He accepts only serving “the cause, not persons” - and this conflicts with the beliefs of the representatives of the “past century”. In addition, the hero opposes serfdom and even talks about an advanced landowner who freed the peasants from the burden of slave labor. This off-stage hero, mentioned only once in the narrative, turns out to be a kind of “double” of Chatsky - and, alas, in the story of his fate, Griboyedov anticipates the outcome of the activities of the main character himself: he is considered an eccentric and is shunned.
Chatsky has his own opinion on everything and he is ready to defend it. This open, sincere and self-loyal character evaluates people not by their position in society, but by their actions and internal qualities.
In a society in which the main character sees absolutely nothing positive and pleasant, only his love for Sofya Famusova holds him back. At the same time, it is interesting that Chatsky himself behaves selfishly in many ways: he leaves his beloved alone for several years, without leaving a warning about his departure, and then returns completely unexpectedly - and behaves with the heroine as if there were no three years of separation.
Chatsky mistakenly considers Sophia’s worldview to be close to his own, not realizing that she, unlike him, was not trained in the same way as he was, and was not imbued with freedom-loving ideas. On the contrary, this girl who had every chance of becoming close to Chatsky in spirit - it’s not for nothing that she is Sophia, i.e. “wise” - mired in the life of Moscow society more than anyone else. Therefore, the heroine with a telling name bears a “conservative” surname - Famusova. It is she who dooms Alexander Andreevich to the reputation of a madman.
Thus, Chatsky suffers defeat both on the social and love fronts. The character’s drama and grief lie not only in the conflict of his beliefs with the ways of life of the traditionally minded aristocracy, but also in his absolute inability to accept differences in the worldview of other people, in his lack of understanding of the motives of other people’s actions and his refusal to realize his own mistakes.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" is the famous work of A. S. Griboyedov. Having composed it, the author instantly stood on a par with the leading poets of his time. The appearance of this play caused a lively response in literary circles. Many were quick to express their opinions on the merits and demerits of the work. The image of Chatsky, the main character of the comedy, caused especially heated debate. This article will be devoted to a description of this character.
Prototypes of Chatsky
Contemporaries of A. S. Griboyedov found that the image of Chatsky reminded them of P. Ya. Chaadaev. Pushkin pointed out this in his letter to P. A. Vyazemsky in 1823. Some researchers see indirect confirmation of this version in the fact that initially the main character of the comedy bore the last name Chadsky. However, many refute this opinion. According to another theory, the image of Chatsky is a reflection of the biography and character of V.K. Kuchelbecker. A disgraced, unlucky man who had just returned from abroad could well have become the prototype of the main character of “Woe from Wit.”
About the similarity of the author with Chatsky
It is quite obvious that the main character of the play, in his monologues, expressed the thoughts and views that Griboyedov himself adhered to. "Woe from Wit" is a comedy that became the author's personal manifesto against the moral and social vices of Russian aristocratic society. And many of Chatsky’s character traits seem to be copied from the author himself. According to contemporaries, Alexander Sergeevich was impetuous and hot-tempered, sometimes independent and harsh. Chatsky’s views on imitation of foreigners, the inhumanity of serfdom, and bureaucracy are Griboyedov’s genuine thoughts. He expressed them more than once in society. The writer was even once actually called crazy when, at a social event, he warmly and impartially spoke about the servile attitude of Russians towards everything foreign.
Author's description of the hero
In response to the critical remarks of his co-author and longtime friend P. A. Katenin that the character of the main character is “confused,” that is, very inconsistent, Griboyedov writes: “In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person.” For the author, the image of Chatsky is a portrait of an intelligent and educated young man who finds himself in a difficult situation. On the one hand, he is “at odds with society”, since he is “a little higher than others,” he is aware of his superiority and does not try to hide it. On the other hand, Alexander Andreevich cannot achieve the former location of his beloved girl, suspects the presence of a rival, and even unexpectedly falls into the category of crazy people, which he is the last to know about. Griboyedov explains the excessive ardor of his hero as a strong disappointment in love. That is why in “Woe from Wit” the image of Chatsky turned out to be so inconsistent and confusing. He “didn’t give a damn about anyone and was like that.”
Chatsky in Pushkin's interpretation
The poet criticized the main character of the comedy. At the same time, Pushkin appreciated Griboyedov: he liked the comedy “Woe from Wit.” in the interpretation of the great poet is very impartial. He calls Alexander Andreevich an ordinary hero-reasoner, a mouthpiece for the ideas of the only smart person in the play - Griboyedov himself. He believes that the main character is a “kind fellow” who picked up extraordinary thoughts and witticisms from another person and began to “throw pearls” in front of Repetilov and other representatives of Famus’s guard. According to Pushkin, such behavior is unforgivable. He believes that Chatsky's contradictory and inconsistent character is a reflection of his own stupidity, which puts the hero in a tragicomic position.
The character of Chatsky, according to Belinsky
A famous critic in 1840, like Pushkin, denied the main character of the play a practical mind. He interpreted the image of Chatsky as an absolutely ridiculous, naive and dreamy figure and dubbed him “the new Don Quixote.” Over time, Belinsky somewhat changed his point of view. The characterization of the comedy "Woe from Wit" in his interpretation became very positive. He called it a protest against the “vile racial reality” and considered it “a most noble, humanistic work.” The critic never saw the true complexity of Chatsky’s image.
The image of Chatsky: interpretation in the 1860s
Publicists and critics of the 1860s began to attribute only socially significant and socio-political motives to Chatsky’s behavior. For example, I saw in the main character of the play a reflection of Griboyedov’s “second thoughts”. He considers the image of Chatsky to be a portrait of a Decembrist revolutionary. The critic sees in Alexander Andreevich a man struggling with the vices of his contemporary society. For him, the heroes of “Woe from Wit” are characters not of “high” comedy, but of “high” tragedy. In such interpretations, Chatsky’s appearance is extremely generalized and interpreted very one-sidedly.
Goncharov's appearance of Chatsky
Ivan Aleksandrovich, in his critical sketch “A Million Torments,” presented the most insightful and accurate analysis of the play “Woe from Wit.” The characterization of Chatsky, according to Goncharov, should be made taking into account his state of mind. Unhappy love for Sophia makes the main character of the comedy bilious and almost inadequate, forcing him to pronounce long monologues in front of people indifferent to his fiery speeches. Thus, without taking into account the love affair, it is impossible to understand the comic and at the same time tragic nature of Chatsky’s image.
Issues of the play
The heroes of "Woe from Wit" collide with Griboedov in two plot-forming conflicts: love (Chatsky and Sofia) and socio-ideological (the main character). Of course, it is the social issues of the work that come to the fore, but the love line in the play is also very important. After all, Chatsky was in a hurry to Moscow solely to meet with Sofia. Therefore, both conflicts - socio-ideological and love - strengthen and complement each other. They develop in parallel and are equally necessary for understanding the worldview, character, psychology and relationship of the heroes of the comedy.
Main character. Love conflict
In the system of characters in the play, Chatsky is in the main place. It links two storylines into a coherent whole. For Alexander Andreevich, it is the love conflict that is of main importance. He understands perfectly well what kind of people he has found himself in, and has no intention of engaging in educational activities. The reason for his stormy eloquence is not political, but psychological. The young man's "impatience of heart" is felt throughout the entire play.
At first, Chatsky’s “talkativeness” is caused by the joy of meeting Sofia. When the hero realizes that the girl has no trace of her former feelings for him, he begins to do inconsistent and daring things. He stays in Famusov’s house with the only purpose: to find out who has become Sofia’s new lover. At the same time, it is quite obvious that his “mind and heart are not in harmony.”
After Chatsky learns about the relationship between Molchalin and Sofia, he goes to the other extreme. Instead of loving feelings, he is overcome by anger and rage. He accuses the girl of having “lured him with hope,” proudly announces to her the breakup of the relationship, swears that he has “sobered up... completely,” but at the same time he is going to pour out “all the bile and all the frustration” on the world.
Main character. The conflict is socio-political
Love experiences increase the ideological confrontation between Alexander Andreevich and Famus society. At first, Chatsky treats the Moscow aristocracy with ironic calm: “... I’m a stranger to another miracle / Once I laugh, then I’ll forget...” However, as he becomes convinced of Sofia’s indifference, his speech becomes more and more impudent and unrestrained. Everything in Moscow begins to irritate him. Chatsky touches on in his monologues many pressing problems of his contemporary era: questions about national identity, serfdom, education and enlightenment, real service, and so on. He talks about serious things, but at the same time, from excitement, he falls, according to I. A. Goncharov, into “exaggeration, into almost drunkenness of speech.”
The protagonist's worldview
The image of Chatsky is a portrait of a person with an established system of worldview and morality. He considers the main criterion for assessing a person to be the desire for knowledge, for beautiful and lofty matters. Alexander Andreevich is not against working for the benefit of the state. But he constantly emphasizes the difference between “serve” and “being served,” which he attaches fundamental importance. Chatsky is not afraid of public opinion, does not recognize authorities, protects his independence, which causes fear among Moscow aristocrats. They are ready to recognize in Alexander Andreevich a dangerous rebel who encroaches on the most sacred values. From the point of view of Famus society, Chatsky’s behavior is atypical, and therefore reprehensible. He “knows the ministers,” but does not use his connections in any way. He responds to Famusov’s proposal to live “like everyone else” with a contemptuous refusal.
In many ways, Griboyedov agrees with his hero. The image of Chatsky is a type of enlightened person who freely expresses his opinion. But there are no radical or revolutionary ideas in his statements. It’s just that in Famus’s conservative society, any deviation from the usual norm seems outrageous and dangerous. It was not for nothing that in the end Alexander Andreevich was recognized as a madman. This was the only way they could explain for themselves the independent nature of Chatsky’s judgments.
Conclusion
In modern life, the play “Woe from Wit” remains more relevant than ever. The image of Chatsky in comedy is a central figure who helps the author to declare his thoughts and views to the whole world. By the will of Alexander Sergeevich, the main character of the work is placed in tragicomic conditions. His impetuousness is caused by disappointment in love. However, the problems that are raised in his monologues are eternal topics. It is thanks to them that the comedy entered the list of the most famous works of world literature.
Chatsky is a young free man; one might say, a traveler, a seeker of new things. He’s not rich, doesn’t have any rank, and he doesn’t need him for anything: “I’d be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served,” he says to Famusov when he calls on Chatsky to serve if he wants to marry Sophia. Chatsky is smart, witty, says only what is in his heart - and this is his distinctive feature. I would even dare to compare him with Khlestakov: “What’s on the mind is on the tongue.”
Chatsky is a man of new times, progressive views, a man of a different kind:
“I scolded your age mercilessly!” –
He exposes the current age, the time in which he lives and, most importantly, is not afraid to do so. In this regard, the question arises: “Who else if not him?” “Alone in the field is not a warrior,” says popular wisdom. But in this case, a warrior is a warrior if he is Chatsky!
This is true; he is a healer, a healer of freedom. He is trying to make himself understood - he does not accept the current system, as I already said. But the fact is that no one understands him, and cannot understand, and they take him for a madman. Chatsky himself says to Famusov and Skalozub:
“The houses are new, but the prejudices are old;
Rejoice, they won’t destroy you
Neither their years, nor fashion, nor fires" -
That's the problem! But does Chatsky himself understand that all his calls, all his exhortations, all his strength, all that caustic intelligence that he put into his words - does he understand that all this... seems to be in vain? He knows that it is not in vain, for it is not the present age, not these people, who will understand him, but others will certainly understand him.
In the comedy, Chatsky is the most significant character in terms of his function, because without him nothing would have happened: Famusov’s society would have remained Famusov’s, or would have changed slightly in connection with new trends, as is usually the case.
Throughout the comedy, Chatsky earned many characteristics about himself. Here are some of them.
I. Lisa about Chatsky:
1) “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!”
II. Sofya Pavlovna about Chatsky:
1) (D. I, Z. 5)
"...He's nice
He knows how to make everyone laugh;
He chats, jokes, it’s funny to me;
Laughter can be shared with everyone.”
2) (Also D., also me.)
“Austere, smart, eloquent.
I’m especially happy with friends.”
3) (Also D., I 6) Sophia, angry with Chatsky’s words about Molchalin:
“Not a man, a snake!”
4) (D. II, I. 8)
“Deadly with their coldness!
I don’t have the strength to look at you or listen to you.”
5) (Also D., also Y.)
“What do you need me for?
Yes, it’s true, it’s not your troubles – it’s fun for you,
Kill your own father - it’s all the same.”
6) (Also D., I. 9)
“Ah, Alexander Andreich, here,
You appear to be quite generous:
It’s your neighbor’s misfortune that you are so partial.”
7) (Also D., I. 11)
“...I’m afraid that I won’t be able to withstand the pretense.
Why did God bring Chatsky here!”
8) Chatsky receives a thorough characterization from Sophia in III D., 1st phenomenon:
“Your gaiety is not modest,
You've got a joke ready right away,
And you yourself..."
“...a menacing look and a harsh tone,
And there are an abyss of these features in you,
And a thunderstorm above itself is far from useless” -
With this, Sophia reproaches Chatsky for being too frank. She, perhaps, believes that Chatsky himself does not see these “peculiarities of the abyss” - these, in Sophia’s opinion, are the strongest shortcomings. She calls on Chatsky to fight them. But are these disadvantages? Only in the opinion of the Famus society, but not in the opinion of Chatsky.
“It’s noticeable that you are ready to pour out bile on everyone;
And so as not to interfere, I’ll avoid here.”
“Why should there be, I’ll tell you straight,
So I will not restrain my tongue,
In contempt for people so openly,
That there is no mercy even for the humblest!.. What?
If anyone happens to name him:
A hail of your barbs and jokes will break out.
Tell jokes! and joke forever! How will you care about this!”
Hinting at Chatsky:
“Of course, he doesn’t have this mind
What a genius is to some, and a plague to others,
Which is fast, brilliant and will soon become disgusting,
Which the world scolds on the spot,
So that the world can at least say something about him,
Will such a mind make a family happy?
9) (D. III, I. 14)
"Oh, this man always
Causing me terrible distress!
I am glad to humiliate, to stab; envious, proud and angry!
"He has a screw loose"
"Not really..."
"A! Chatsky, you like to dress everyone up as jesters,
Would you like to try it on yourself?”
III. Chatsky about himself:
1) (D. I, I. 7)
“Listen, are my words really all caustic words?
And tend to harm someone?
But if so, the mind and heart are not in harmony.
I'm eccentric to another miracle
Once I laugh, then I’ll forget..."
2) (Also D., Ya. 9)
"Oh! no, I’m not spoiled enough by hopes.”
"I'm not a dream teller"
"I believe my own eyes"
3) (D. II, I. 7)
“It’s not my desire to continue arguing...”
4) (D. III, I. 1)
“Me myself? Isn’t it funny?”
“I’m strange, but who isn’t strange?
The one who is like all fools..."
“But is there in him *(in Molchalin)* that passion,
That feeling, that ardor,
So that he has the whole world besides you
Did it seem like dust and vanity?
So that every beat of the heart
Has love accelerated towards you?
So that all his thoughts and all his deeds are
Soul - you, do you please?..”
"Oh! My God! Am I really one of those people?
For whom the goal of life is laughter?
I have fun when I meet funny people
And more often than not I miss them.”
5) (D. IV, I. 10)
“Am I really going crazy?”
6) (Also D., Y. 14)
“Blind man! In whom I sought the reward of all my labors!”
IV. Famusov about Chatsky
1) (D. I, Z. 10)
“...this dandy friend;
He is a notorious spendthrift, a tomboy;
What's the commission, creator?
To be a father to an adult daughter!”
2) (D. II, I. 2)
“That’s it, you are all proud!
Would you ask what the fathers did?
We would learn by looking at our elders..."
"Oh! My God! he’s a carbonari!”
"A dangerous person!"
“What does he say? and speaks as he writes!
“He wants to preach freedom!”
“He doesn’t recognize the authorities!”
“And I don’t want to know you, I don’t tolerate debauchery.”
“Here they are scouring the world, beating their thumbs,
They come back, expect order from them.”
3) (D. II, I. 3)
"They're going to kill you
On trial, they’ll give you something to drink.”
4) (D. II, I. 4)
“... Andrei Ilyich’s late son:
It does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in it,
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small in head,
And he writes and translates beautifully.”
5) (D. III, I. 21)
“I’ve been wondering for a long time how no one will tie him up!
Try talking about the authorities, and you won’t know what they’ll tell you!
Bow a little low, bend like a ring,
Even in front of a monk's face,
So he’ll call you a scoundrel!..”
“I followed my mother, Anna Aleksevna:
The deceased went crazy eight times.”
6) (D. IV, I. 15)
"Insane! What kind of nonsense is he talking about here!
The sycophant! father-in-law! and about Moscow so menacingly!”
V. Other persons about Chatsky:
1) (D. III, I. 10), Khlestova:
“...What is he happy about? What kind of laughter is there?
It’s a sin to laugh at old age..."
“I pulled his ears, but not enough.”
2) (D. III, I. 15 and 16), G. N. and G. D.:
"Crazy!"
3) (D. III, I. 16), Zagoretsky:
“... His uncle, the rogue, hid him in the insane...
They grabbed me, took me to the yellow house, and put me on a chain.
So they let him off the chain,”
"He's crazy"
Countess granddaughter:
“Imagine, I noticed it myself;
And even if you bet, you’re on the same page with me.”
(I. 19) Zagoretsky:
“In the mountains he was wounded in the forehead, went crazy from the wound.”
(I. 20) Countess grandmother:
“Yes!.. he’s in Pusurmans!
Oh! damned Voltairean!”
(Ya. 21) Khlestova:
“I was drinking glasses of champagne.”
Famusov:
“Learning is the plague, learning is the reason...”
4) (D. IV, I. 7), Princess:
“... it’s dangerous to talk to them,
It's time to ban it long ago...
…
I think he's just a Jacobin..."
According to Famusov, and, I think, in the opinion of the entire Famusov society, Chatsky is a perverted nature; and his perversity is expressed in this: in speech, in actions - in everything, and he is perverted in that he sees all the injustice, unrighteousness, precisely the very perversity of Famus society. What dares, moreover, to express his opinion. "He's a carbonari!" – exclaims Famusov. “He’s a Jacobin,” says the princess. And no matter how they call Chatsky, everyone comes to the conclusion... more precisely, Sophia came to the conclusion, and then as a joke, in revenge, and the rest of society agreed with this conclusion - in general, Chatsky has gone crazy. But this is not so - and we know this very well. He was simply smarter than his time, he was ahead of it and fought with the old order, sophisticatedly and cunningly exposing them... He opposed himself to the whole society; he fought with him... in the end, he comes to the conclusion that only time will change these people. Then he leaves to wander - again:
“Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore.
I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,
Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!
Give me a carriage, a carriage!”
But what did Chatsky leave behind, what did he change? After all, Famus society remained Famus society! Or has he planted a seed, a seed of freedom that will soon bear fruit?
Chatsky, being a sensitive and, moreover, witty person, said all sorts of “caustic things”, accused the Famus society for not being able to understand him, for not wanting to change, and for making fun of him. He tried on a special role - the role of a judge, an exposer of vices, of all this injustice that is piling up and surrounding this entire society. So has anything changed? It is impossible to answer this question, just as it is impossible to answer the question: “Will this person be a talented poet? - and the person has not yet been born; He hasn’t grown up yet - he’s still just in embryo...
), belongs to the best part of the then Russian young generation. Many literary critics argued that Chatsky is a reasoner. This is completely false! One can call him a reasoner only insofar as the author expresses his thoughts and experiences through his lips; but Chatsky is a living, real face; he, like every person, has his own qualities and shortcomings. (See also Image of Chatsky.)
We know that Chatsky in his youth often visited Famusov’s house and, together with Sophia, studied with foreign teachers. But such an education could not satisfy him, and he went abroad to travel. His journey lasted 3 years, and now we see Chatsky again in his homeland, Moscow, where he spent his childhood. Like any person who has returned home after a long absence, everything here is sweet to him, everything evokes pleasant memories associated with childhood; he takes pleasure in going over the memories of acquaintances in whom, by the nature of his sharp mind, he certainly sees funny, caricatured features, but he does this at first without any malice or bile, and so, for laughter, to embellish his memories: “a Frenchman, knocked down by the wind ...”, and “this... little black one, on crane legs...”
Woe from the mind. Maly Theater performance, 1977
Going through the typical, sometimes caricatured aspects of Moscow life, Chatsky passionately says that when
“...you wander, you return home,
And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us!”
In this, Chatsky is completely different from those young people who, returning from abroad to Russia, treated everything Russian with contempt and praised only everything that they saw in foreign countries. It was precisely thanks to this external comparison of native Russian with foreign language that the language developed in that era to a very strong extent. gallomania, which so outrages Chatsky. His separation from his homeland, the comparison of Russian life with European life, only aroused an even stronger, deeper love for Russia, for the Russian people. That is why, having found himself again after a three-year absence among Moscow society, under a fresh impression he sees all the exaggeration, all the funny sides of this gallomania.
But Chatsky, who is hot by nature, no longer laughs, he is deeply indignant at the sight of how the “Frenchman from Bordeaux” reigns among Moscow society only because he is a foreigner; is indignant at the fact that everything Russian and national causes ridicule in society:
“How to put the European in parallel
Something strange about the national one!” –
someone says, causing general laughter of approval. Reaching the point of exaggeration, Chatsky, in contrast to the general opinion, says with indignation:
“At least we could borrow a few from the Chinese
Their ignorance of foreigners is wise.”
………………………
“Will we ever be resurrected from the foreign power of fashion,
So that our smart, kind people
Although he didn’t consider us Germans based on our language?” –
meaning by “Germans” foreigners and hinting that in society in that era everyone spoke foreign languages to each other; Chatsky suffers, realizing what an abyss separates millions of the Russian people from the ruling class of nobles.
From an early age, children were given a foreign upbringing, which gradually alienated secular youth from everything native and national. Chatsky casually sneers at these “regiments” of foreign teachers, “more in number, at a cheaper price,” who were entrusted with the education of noble youth. Hence the ignorance of their people, hence the lack of understanding of the difficult situation in which the Russian people found themselves, thanks serfdom. Through the mouth of Chatsky, Griboyedov expresses the thoughts and feelings of the best part of the nobility of that time, who were indignant at the injustices that serfdom entailed, and who fought against the tyranny of inveterate serf-owners. Chatsky (monologue “Who are the judges?..”) paints pictures of such arbitrariness in bright colors, recalling one master, “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged several of his faithful servants for three greyhounds; another, a theater lover, who
“I drove to the serf ballet on many wagons
From mothers and fathers of rejected children"; –
he made “all of Moscow marvel at their beauty.” But then, in order to pay off creditors, he sold off these children, who portrayed “cupids and zephyrs” on stage, one by one, separating them forever from their parents...
Chatsky cannot calmly talk about this, his soul is indignant, his heart aches for the Russian people, for Russia, which he loves dearly, which he would like to serve. But how to serve?
“I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening,”
he says, hinting that among the many government officials he sees only the Molchalins or such nobles as Famusov’s uncle Maxim Petrovich.
I don't go here anymore.
I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,
Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!
Give me a carriage, a carriage!”
In this stormy outburst of despair, Chatsky’s entire ardent, unbalanced, noble soul is visible.
Perhaps one of the most popular works by Alexander Griboedov is the comedy “Woe from Wit.” One of the main characters of the comedy is Chatsky, and in this article we want to briefly consider the characterization of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit". It is known that it was after composing this work that Griboyedov immediately took an honorable place among the leading poets of the era and gained popularity. Literary circles also reacted violently; many critics rushed to speak out about the images of the comedy and make their own analysis of the work. Just one of these images that aroused particular interest is the image of Chatsky.
Who became the prototype of Chatsky?
For example, Alexander Pushkin wrote a letter to Vyazemsky in 1823, in which he mentioned the comedy “Woe from Wit.” There, Pushkin noted that Chaadaev became the prototype for Chatsky’s image. There is other confirmation of this statement, because it is known that the main character’s surname was originally Chadsky.
But there is another version. Some literary scholars convincingly say that none other than Kuchelbecker acted as the prototype of the image of Chatsky. If you look at Kuchelbecker’s biography, you can easily believe this - passionate and lost success abroad, but returned to his native land, the young man is very similar in character and mode of action to our comedy hero.
These considerations already help to clarify something in the characterization of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov.
What the author himself said about Chatsky
Once, Griboedov’s good friend Katenin said that Chatsky’s character was “confused,” that is, there was no consistency in his actions, to which the author responded quite directly. The essence of Griboyedov's answer: comedy is full of stupid people, and they all come from one smart person with common sense.
Griboyedov saw Chatsky’s characteristics in such qualities as education and intelligence, which manifested themselves in a difficult situation. Yes, Chatsky opposes society, he understands that he is superior to others and does not hide it. But why? Chatsky suspects that he has a rival in relation to his beloved, whose attention cannot be achieved in any way, although before she herself was not indifferent to him. In addition, he is one of the last to hear about his “madness”, which was attributed to him. Chatsky is indeed very hot, but the author believes that this is due to severe disappointment in love. That's why he seems so disgraced, confused and with inconsistent actions.
Chatsky's worldview
The image of Chatsky reflects the portrait of someone who already has an established system of values and principles, who has his own worldview and accepted morality. And this is important in the characterization of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit.” The main character evaluates the personality of himself and others by how much a person strives for knowledge and the high, eternal. He believes that it is worth working for the good of the fatherland, but there is a huge difference between service and servitude - this point is fundamental in comedy.
What else distinguishes Chatsky from society? He is not afraid of what others think, he has no authority, he is independent. All this becomes a cause for fear among the aristocratic circle in Moscow, because for them Chatsky is a dangerous rebel who will not be afraid to encroach on everything sacred. Somehow Famusov invites Chatsky to live “like everyone else,” but such a position is far from Alexander Andreevich, and he contemptuously refuses Famusov.
Let's summarize briefly, talking about the characterization of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit" by Griboyedov. The author largely agrees with his main character. In the image of Chatsky, one can clearly see an enlightened person who is not afraid to openly express his opinion, but it is important: he does not betray a revolutionary and radical attitude. But in fact, in Famusov’s society, everyone who deviates from accepted norms seems crazy and dangerous to others. It is not surprising that in the end Alexander Andreevich Chatsky was declared crazy.
You read in this article about the characteristics of Chatsky and his image, you can also read the biography of Alexander Griboyedov and read a summary of “Woe from Wit”. Also, read.
