Poster for Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit". Performance Woe from Wit in the Maly Theater

How many Chatskys and Famusovs have you seen on the theater stage? Can't count! First staged in 1831, A. Griboyedov’s immortal comedy was performed on the stages of Russian and foreign theaters countless times. Shchepkin and Mochalov shone in it, and V. Solomin captivated the audience with his wonderful performance...

How can one take on such a perfect and classic, such a programmatic and categorically necessary work again? Can! The absence of tickets for “Woe from Wit” at the box office in Sovremennik is a clear confirmation of this.

About the history of the creation of the Sovremennik version

In 2007, Sovremennik presented to the audience its own interpretation of the work, which was very far, by the way, from the generally accepted reading. As many theatergoers and critics say, that’s why he is our eternal Contemporary, so as not to go into the past in the old fashioned way, but to look for everything in the present!

— All of Moscow immediately started talking about the “modernized” “Woe from Wit.”

— Interest in the production has not waned to this day.

Director Rimas Tuminas was invited to play the main “role”. He, as everyone knows, never treated any classical text as dogma. "Woe from Wit" was no exception.

About the features of the performance

R. Tuminas created a play not about the struggle of views, but about their complete absence among characters who are unable to think independently. The director clearly and expressively showed the savagery of morals and the plebeian simplicity of feelings.

Tuminas's idea enhances the unusual design of the performance, filled with symbolic objects. The artist A. Jacovskis worked on them. On the stage:

- a stove reminiscent of the bell tower of Ivan the Great, from which smoke pours directly onto the stage;

- gloomy fake birds, dumped logs of firewood...

The entire action of the play takes place in this uncomfortable atmosphere. Is it familiar to you from school? Nothing like this. Everything happens here differently than you imagined!

About familiar characters and performance

On stage - dressed in an absurd sheepskin coat, disheveled Famusov. He is played ironically and wittily by S. Garmash. The hero, as interpreted by the famous actor, furiously chops down books with an axe.

— The unusually fussy Chatsky, hurriedly choking on his own monologues, appears, rattling his suitcases, performed by I. Stebunov.

— The guests gathered for the ball are marching aggressively to the sounds of the waltz.

“All this surprises, alarms, captivates, makes you look carefully and listen carefully to the accents placed by the director.

Many famous actors are involved in the production of “Woe from Wit,” but its real discovery was the performance of Elena Plaksina. She began working on the image of Sophia in 2011, after M. Alexandrova, who originally played this role, left Sovremennik. According to critics and theatergoers, the young actress managed not only to repeat the role, but also to introduce new expressive colors into it.

The musical background, harmoniously interwoven into the overall outline of the performance, was a waltz written by Griboyedov in a modern arrangement by the Lithuanian composer F. Latenas. Do you want to get real pleasure from a completely familiar situation and work? It’s worth buying tickets to Woe from Wit and going to Sovremennik. The theatrical evening promises to be languid, but it also promises unique finds.

The duration of the performance is 3 hours 00 minutes. The performance has one intermission.

The performance takes place on the stage of the Palace on the Yauza

Characters and performers:

• Famusov -
• Sofya Pavlovna -
• Lisa -
• Molchalin -
• Chatsky -
• Skalozub -
• Natalya Dmitrievna Gorich -
• Platon Mikhailovich Gorich - ,
• Prince Tugoukhovsky -
• Princess Tugoukhovskaya -

To a certain extent, the history of productions of the comedy by A.S. Griboedov's "Woe from Wit" on the stage of the Maly Theater is the history of Russian theater. For the first time at his benefit performance, M.S. himself Shchepkin played Famusov. The great tragedian of the Moscow stage Pavel Stepanovich Mochalov played Chatsky here, as in the twentieth century A. A. Ostuzhev, A. I. Sumbatov-Yuzhin. A. Lensky played first Chatsky, and then Famusov. Mikhail Tsarev, like his great predecessor, also played Chatsky as a young man, and Famusov as an older man.

Each generation made its contribution and appropriated the text of Griboyedov’s immortal comedy in its own way.

When the premiere took place at the Maly Theater in 1975, the discussion revolved not around Famusov, played by Mikhail Tsarev, but around Vitaly Solomin’s Chatsky. The actor was accused of the fact that the public theme faded into the background, the personal drama prevailed, that such a Chatsky was not a tribune, not an accuser.

Vitaly Solomin, indeed, played Chatsky, who was happy to return to Famusov’s house to meet Sophia. Bookish, enthusiastic, cheerful young man in round glasses. He appeared from the road, despite the frost, in an open sheepskin coat, from under which his apache shirt was visible. He was in a hurry to see Sophia. V. Solomin admitted in an interview that he “used to be interested in the meaning of Chatsky’s monologues, now - in the meaning of his behavior.”

This archival young man, pushing away the servant, burst into the house and unexpectedly fell with all his might. But the fall did not stop his happy state; feelings overwhelmed the laughing Chatsky. At that moment, it was as if his entire childhood life in this house flashed by. “It’s barely light and you’re already on your feet!” and I’m at your feet,” Chatsky, sitting on the floor, punned, addressing Sophia (Nelly Kornienko).

V. Solomin played this state of unbridled joy - Chatsky is home again, everything here is dear to him. Leaning against the tiles of the stove, warming himself, he looked around the room, every thing in it was familiar to him, lovingly stroked the wallpaper, memorable from childhood. At first, Chatsky did not notice Sophia’s indifference, Famusov’s growing hostility, or Molchalin’s irony.

Explaining his interpretation, Vitaly Methodievich Solomin said: “My Chatsky understood perfectly well what Famusov and others like him were. But in Famusov’s house he was kept by his deep and strong love for Sophia; he could not put his beloved on the same level as those around him. Hence his monologues. They are addressed to Sophia and no one else.”

And Chatsky’s monologue about the Frenchman from Bordeaux, to whom the guests listened, was actually addressed to Sophia, who was just leaving without listening to Alexander Andreevich, and he continued, as if habitually, to make his caustic observations. In this scene, for the first time, the congregation began to think that he was crazy.

Vitaly Solomin avoided playing that school Chatsky, the accuser and accuser of the “Famusov society” with his head thrown back proudly. It was more important for the actor to humanize the image, to show in the process, step by step, Chatsky’s rejection of the way of the manor’s house. The love boat crashed against everyday life and foundations. Chatsky ran into Famusov’s house as a young man, and left forever bitterly matured. Deceived in love, he began to see why he was deceived. Before leaving the Famusovs' house, Chatsky rushed up the stairs, turning his angry monologue to where Sophia stood in order to peer into her eyes for the last time. And only then, coming very close to the doors, he ordered: “Give me a carriage, a carriage!”

Chatsky's antagonist is Mikhail Tsarev's Famusov, both a Moscow gentleman and an important dignitary. Dapper, always in shape. Over the years, he has developed a strong habit of dressing like a new man.

In the house he controls life, as in the department. His anxiety grows when he goes on his morning rounds and hears the sounds of a flute coming from Sophia’s chambers. Even in his instructions, he notices Parsley’s torn elbow. Shows diplomatic tact at the ball, treating everyone with social courtesy. When gossip about Chatsky's madness reaches its climax, he supports it with his authority. However, Famusov will lose his respectable luster in the finale. At first, the Moscow gentleman did not really listen, or rather, he listened to Chatsky’s condescendingly dangerous speeches. This was not the case when the threat of being compromised by his daughter and himself loomed over Famusov’s house. In Mikhail Tsarev’s Famusov, the will to cruelty awoke from a sense of danger. He already hated Chatsky directly, bluntly, and attacked him with all possible fury. At the same time, Mikhail Tsarev did not raise his tone, and the more he achieved the effect of indignation.

It is worth noting other roles in this performance. Sofia Nelly Kornienko showed her indifference to Chatsky from the first scenes. She was not inspired by the social temperament of her former friend. She was Famusov's daughter and wanted to remain as such. Boris Klyuev’s Molchalin behaved on an equal footing with Chatsky, not to say with hidden condescension. Skalozub Roman Filippov was a good-natured, narrow-minded military man, although he did not understand all of Chatsky’s satirical barbs, but rather sympathized with him. Looking at Evgenia Glushenko’s Lisa, it was easy to notice that this girl was taken from the village. Until recently, it seems, she was running barefoot through the meadows and fields. Much in Famusov’s house seems wonderful to her, but there is nothing she can do, she gets used to it. Nikita Podgorny's repetilov turned out to be unnecessary to anyone, so he had a desire to join at least someone.

Elena Gogoleva's Khlestova was quarrelsome and domineering.

Coherent acting, elaboration of characters, the ability to organically appropriate a poetic text, outstanding acting work, conscientious attitude to the text - everything that is characteristic of the best performances of the Maly Theater was also present in the 1975 production of “Woe from Wit”.

Ticket prices:
Balcony 1000-2400 rubles
Mezzanine 2400-3100 rubles
Amphitheater 2800-4000 rubles
Benoir 3600-4000 rubles
Parterre 4000-6500 rubles

Stage director - laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Honored Artist of Russia S.V. Zhenovach
Artist - Honored Artist of Russia, laureate of State Prizes of Russia A.D. Borovsky
Costume designer - O.P. Yarmolnik
Musical arrangement - People's Artist of Russia G.Ya. Gobernik
Director - Honored Artist of Russia Z.E. Andreeva
Prompter - Honored Worker of Culture of Russia L.I. Merkulova
The performance used music by A.S. Griboyedov, M.I. Glinka, A.S. Dargomyzhsky, S.V. Rachmaninov

Characters and performers:
Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, senator, employee of the archives - Laureate of State Prizes of Russia, People's Artist of the USSR Yuri Solomin
Sofya Pavlovna, his daughter - Polina Dolinskaya, Ekaterina Vasilyeva
Lisa, Sofia Pavlovna's maid - Honored Artist of Russia Inna Ivanova, Olga Zhevakina
Alexey Stepanovich Molchalin, Famusov’s secretary, living in his house - Honored Artist of Russia Alexander Vershinin, Alexander Driven
Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, a young man who was brought up in Famusov’s house - Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Honored Artist of Russia Gleb Podgorodinsky
Colonel Skalozub Sergey Sergeevich - Honored Artist of Russia Viktor Nizovoy
Khlestova Anfisa Nilovna, aunt of Sofia Pavlovna - Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, People's Artist of Russia Lyudmila Polyakova
Prince Tugoukhovsky - Laureate of the State Prizes of the USSR and Russia, People's Artist of Russia Yuri Kayurov, Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Honored Artist of Russia Yuri Ilyin
Princess Tugoukhovskaya, his wife - Honored Artist of Russia Olga Chuvaeva, Natalya Boronina
Their daughters, princesses - Anna Zharova, Natalya Boronina, Honored Artist of Russia Tatyana Korotkova, Honored Artist of Russia Irina Telpugova, Daria Podgornaya, Natalya Vereshchenko, Ekaterina Porubel, Alena Kolesnikova, Olga Pleshkova, Apollinaria Muravyova
Countess Khryumina, grandmother - Honored Artist of Russia Zinaida Andreeva
Countess-granddaughter - People's Artist of Russia Alena Okhlupina
Platon Mikhailovich Gorich, Chatsky's colleague - Honored Artist of Russia Dmitry Koznov, Honored Artist of Russia Oleg Martyanov, Igor Grigoriev
Natalya Dmitrievna, his wife - People's Artist of Russia Svetlana Amanova, Laureate of the Russian Government Prize, People's Artist of Russia Olga Pashkova
Anton Antonovich Zagoretsky - People's Artist of Russia Vladimir Dubrovsky
Mr. N - Honored Artist of Russia Sergey Tezov, Honored Artist of Russia Sergey Veshchev, Dmitry Marin
Mr. D - Honored Artist of Russia Vasily Dakhnenko, Laureate of the Russian Government Prize, Dmitry Solodovnik
Repetilov, Moscow resident - Dmitry Zenichev
Parsley, a servant in Famusov's house - Honored Artist of Russia Pyotr Skladchikov
Servants in Famusov's house - Pyotr Zhikharev, Mikhail Fomenko, Igor Grigoriev, Alexey Anokhin, Alexander Naumov, Evgeny Sorokin

Staged at the Maly Theater, the play “Woe from Wit” acquired new colors, freshness and simplicity thanks to the director’s interpretation. The scenery of the performance is minimalist - a minimum of furniture and yellow, white and blue squares representing doors. The characters have practically nowhere to sit, so they are in motion throughout almost the entire stage time, constantly communicating with each other. The textbook work, worn out to holes by school textbooks and theaters, receives a rebirth on the stage of the Maly Theater. The key definition of the production is liveliness and life.

Having learned that the famous director Sergei Zhenovach was invited to stage "" at the Maly Theater, theater circles immediately dubbed the performance promising. And these hopes came true. Zhenovach is an unsurpassed specialist in the field of working on classical works. He manages not to get bogged down in routine, to find sincerity in every plot, and to replay the genre and style. Therefore, “Woe from Wit” at the Maly Theater can be called both a traditional and innovative performance at the same time.

What comes to the fore in the production is not so much the social theme as the lyrical sound of the love line. And in the center of the performance it is no longer Chatsky, but rather the imposing Famusov, who is brilliantly embodied by Solomin. Famusov here is the father and head of the family, a zealous owner. The role of Famusov in the theatrical career of Yuri Solomin is certainly one of the best. His character constantly runs and fusses, his gestures and facial expressions are incomparably comical. We can say that Famusov in this production of “Woe from Wit” resembles the characters embodied by Louis de Funes - such stupid dads. Griboyedov's Chatsky is an unattractive hero. It is not too clear who he is - either a revolutionary and an exposer, or a boring reasoner. However, Sergei Zhenovach knows how to love all his characters and convey this love to the audience; he treats each character in the play with warmth and tenderness. As a result, it turns out that Chatsky in the Maly Theater’s play “Woe from Wit” is a charming, simple-minded and funny character. The audience warms to him.

The first thing I saw when the curtain opened was that the stage was cluttered with some avant-garde decorations - multi-colored partitions, white, yellow and blue, in which passages automatically opened and on which everything cast clear shadows, as if on bare walls (there is an idea - There is Ikea, damn it. And this is the rich Maly Theater? You immediately get a feeling of such squalor). Among them was some kind of squat antique column, supposed to indicate, apparently, like the bell tower from the Contemporary, a stove - aka a home, aka “smoke of the Fatherland”. The actors moved around this stage quite chaotically: they rarely stood or sat in one place for a long time, but more and more ran back and forth, preferring to rant on the go, or even finished their lines altogether, already out of sight. Now about them, about the images of the characters, so to speak. Famusov (Solomin) is textbook to the core: gray hair, a devil in the ribs, plus the inevitable grumpiness combined with good nature, and in general - a completely dim personality, just a minor character, and also the artistic director plays. Skalozub (Nizovoy) also corresponds to the classical reading: a redneck martinet, and nothing more. Sofya (Molochnaya) and Liza (Ivanova) are the most inexpressive of all, they read their texts unconvincingly, laugh too feignedly and gesture too pretentiously, and in general they look alike like two peas in a pod - two girlfriends from a casket, identical in appearance , it would have been possible to confuse them if it weren’t for the different appearance and, especially, the stupid short braid on Sophia’s head. The first is a muslin young lady who does not arouse any sympathy, who has read herself through the notorious French novels and, under the impression of them, adores her Molchalin (Vershinin), a cutesy hack to match himself, clearly tired of her incessant signs of attention. The second is not inferior to her mistress in feigned aristocracy, she is proud and unapproachable despite the fact that Famusov, and Molchalin, and Chatsky (Podgorodinsky) are trying to paw her. Chatsky, by the way, is a separate article, as usual. Modern hairstyle, southern accent slightly on the nose - here he is like a poor relative-guest worker, who does not know Moscow customs at all, you will not get used to him at first sight, just like the hysterical Chatsky from Sovremennik. In this performance, Chatsky is a fool, funnier than all the others, apparently not out of childish spontaneity in the worst sense of the word. He hardly speaks a single phrase without an underlying sarcastic chuckle and remains very pleased with himself in general and his sense of humor in particular, and those around him, although they are often willingly infected by his laughter, are still tired of the fact that his verbal outpourings, starting at random, and will not end soon. In the form of a joke, he expresses his “advanced ideas”, without fearing anyone or anything, but not because he is brave, but because the law is not written for fools. Only alone with himself, and sometimes - alone with Sophia, he is serious, thinks about something and thereby proves that he was created not only to “share laughter” with him, but proves only to the audience, and not to the rest of the characters in the play , who never began to take him seriously and feel either curiosity or irritation towards him, depending on how far his clumsiness and ignorance go.
In the second department, things slowly reached the ball, as if with a creak, and so what? Again, insipid, unmemorable, transient faces, empty conversations... well, Natalya Dmitrievna (Amanova) was slightly remembered for the steely notes in her capricious voice, well, the elderly, shiny-bald Zagoretsky (Dubrovsky) was a little surprised, and that’s all. Chatsky at first seemed to have completely forgotten about Sophia, walking arm in arm with Natalya Dmitrievna, and when he finally remembered, it came out somehow painfully pitiful and absurd. In the languid tone of a man who is not experiencing mental suffering, but needs a healthy, sound sleep, he asks - he does not demand, no! - a carriage. During the entire performance, I never got a single loud word from him, not a single sudden movement, like a rag doll. And in general, all the actors, if we are to be completely subjective, played somehow colorlessly, without a soul - yes, they did their work conscientiously, but there was no one to single out, note, praise even for their love for this very work: their monologues were completely killed by a certain indifferent dryness, they were like a poem learned by a student, now recited in front of the teacher, in other words, like an unpleasant duty. To summarize, I would like to say that the performance lost greatly because the text was presented in its entirety, along with lines from earlier editions of the play; not a single line was deleted from it, and in the end it completely filled the entire three hours of the performance. Because of the chatter, there was no time left for action - the guests didn’t even dance once, and what’s a ball without dancing? In general, the plot dragged on, sagged, got boring from time to time, I didn’t find a single highlight in this cracker. I didn’t even understand what I was watching: a comedy or a tragedy? If the first, then the audience laughed only at obvious jokes, provided for in the text, and not intonation or acting, but I didn’t laugh, because I already knew this text well; if the latter, then I didn’t feel sorry for anyone in the end, because it didn’t look like Chatsky loved Sophia, and when Liza claims that she loves Petrusha (Sergeev), portrayed in the play as a decrepit old man who can barely move his legs, it is purely physically impossible to believe her. Even if in Sovremennik, with its pot-smoking interpretation, the performance immediately attracted the attention of the public and never let go, here I almost immediately realized that my expectations would not be justified. Why have I already mentioned Sovremennik several times, but not Pokrovka yet? Yes, because I don’t want to compare God’s gift with scrambled eggs. In general, I sincerely feel sorry for those who spent not 600 rubles on a ticket, like I did at my crummy place, but fifteen hundred rubles, or even more, to sit closer to the stage. My advice to you: don’t chase what’s being promoted if you don’t have the same need as me. The fact that real art is always in the underground also applies to theater.