Aesthetic position of A. S.

Griboedov's date of birth is still unknown - it is either 1790 or 1795. Our view of the writer’s personality depends on this. In any case, he was born and raised in the family of a retired military man. His mother and father were namesakes. Until 1803 (until he was 8 or 13 years old), he was educated at home under the guidance of teachers from Moscow University. In 1806 he became a student at the university's literature department. Two years later he graduated with a candidate's degree. In the Patriotic War of 1812, he was part of a hussar regiment, but did not participate in battles. In 1816, Griboedov retired from military service and a year later became provincial secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs along with Pushkin and Kuchelbecker.

As secretary of the Russian diplomatic mission in Persia in 1818, he went south. In 1822, he returned from Persia to Tiflis, and soon left for Moscow. He returned to the Caucasus in 1825, where he was arrested on suspicion of participation in the Decembrist conspiracy. A year later he was released, and he took part in the war with Persia, after which he became one of the authors of the peace treaty.

In December 1828, he went to Tehran to meet with the Persian Shah, but, having decided to help the Armenian women who had escaped from the Shah’s harem, he incurred hatred. Muslim priests carried out a pogrom against the Russian mission, and Griboyedov died in battle.

The idea for the comedy "Woe from Wit" arose in the south, in Tabriz (in 1818 or 1820). The first and second acts were written in Tiflis under the influence of communication with Kuchelbecker. The third and fourth acts were written during a long vacation at the Tula estate of the Begichevs' friends. In 1824, a new ending was invented, and by the fall the comedy was completed.

The following sources of the text of the comedy have reached us: a manuscript given to Bulgarin, as well as the so-called Gendre manuscript, from which many lists (copies) were compiled in the department of his friend, the official and playwright Gendre.

Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov was very a versatile person. He was saying modern language, an encyclopedist - he knew mathematics very well, was a wonderful psychologist, writer, diplomat, and musician. At that time there were no people like him in Russia; among them he really stood out unusually.

How to download free essay? . And a link to this essay; The life of Griboedov and his work on the comedy “Woe from Wit” already in your bookmarks.

Forward:
Back:

Additional essays on this topic

Popular Essays

Questions for A.S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

1. Tell us about the life of Griboedov and his work on the comedy “Woe from Wit.” What sources of the comedy text have reached us?

Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov was born on January 15, 1795 in Moscow, into an old noble family. - Russian writer, playwright, musician. diplomat.
Alexander had an excellent education at home; at the age of 11 he entered Moscow University and in 1810 graduated from two faculties - law and literature. Griboedov knew very well foreign languages, including the ancient ones.
In 1812, he volunteered for the army, but he did not have to take part in hostilities.
In 1817, Alexander Griboyedov was enrolled in the College of Foreign Affairs; he had to serve not in Moscow, but in St. Petersburg. There he meets the future Decembrists - Odoevsky, Ryleev, Bestuzhev. The first literary experiments Griboyedov - comedies “One’s Own Family” (co-authored with Shakhovsky and Khmelnitsky), “Student” (co-authored with Katenin).
In 1818, Griboedov was appointed secretary of the Russian mission in Tehran, and in 1822, also secretary for the diplomatic affairs of General A.P. Ermolov (who commanded the Russian troops in the Caucasus and was both ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary in Tehran).
Having moved to Tiflis (now Tbilisi), Griboyedov is working on his main work - the comedy "Woe from Wit" (initially called "Woe to Wit"). The work was completed in 1824 in St. Petersburg. Censorship prohibited publication of the text of the play; only small excerpts were published in 1825 in the almanac "Russian Waist".
Having become acquainted with the comedy, A.S. Pushkin spoke about it this way: “I’m not talking about poetry: half of it should become a proverb.”
In 1825, Griboyedov returned to the Caucasus, but was soon arrested and taken to St. Petersburg in connection with the Decembrist uprising. However, Griboyedov’s involvement in the conspiracy could not be proven and he returned to Tiflis.
In April 1828 he was appointed ambassador to Tehran. On the way there, Griboyedov spent several months in Georgia and married the young 16-year-old princess Nina Chavchavadze. But his happiness was short-lived: on February 11, 1829, during the defeat of the Russian mission in Tehran by Muslim fanatics, Alexander Griboedov was killed.

The comedy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov was written during the years of the creation of the secret revolutionary organizations of the Decembrists. It reflects the struggle of progressive-minded people with the inert society of noble serf owners, the struggle of a new worldview with the old. Griboedov showed this struggle of ideas of the “present century” and the “past century” from the point of view vision advanced person of his time, close in views to the Decembrists.
Since September 1823, Griboedov has lived in Moscow and continues to work on comedy there, continuously improving it. In May 1824, Alexander Sergeevich left for St. Petersburg. Here the comedy was again reworked, especially the last act. “I ask you not to read my manuscript to anyone and to consign it to the fire if you decide,” writes Griboyedov to Begichev from St. Petersburg, “it is so imperfect, so unclean; imagine that I changed more than eighty verses, or, better to say, rhymes, now smooth as glass... In addition, on the road it occurred to me to attach a new interchange; I inserted it between the scene of Chatsky, when he saw his scoundrel with a candle above the stairs, and before he denounced her; a living, fast thing, the poems showered with sparks.” Griboyedov was experiencing great creative growth.

In the fall of 1824, the work was completed, but in 1825, until his return from vacation, the writer made certain amendments to the text of the comedy. The censorship troubles began. All attempts to print " Woe from mind" were not successful. “Don’t rely on my comedy, it has no chance; It’s good that I was ready for this,” the author reported to Vyazemsky back in June 1824. Griboyedov’s petitions in the fall of the same year at the Ministry of Internal Affairs were also unsuccessful.

Staging “Woe from Wit” in the theater also turned out to be impossible. An attempt to stage the comedy at least on the stage of the St. Petersburg theater school in May 1825 ended in failure. The famous artist of that time, P. A. Karatygin, talks about this in his notes: “Grigoriev and I suggested that Alexander Sergeevich play “ Woe from mind"at our school theater, and he was delighted with our proposal... It took a lot of effort for us to beg the good Inspector Bok to allow the pupils to take part in this performance... Finally, he agreed, and we quickly got to work; They wrote out the roles in a few days, learned them in a week, and things went smoothly. Griboyedov himself came to our rehearsals and taught us very diligently... You should have seen with what simple-minded pleasure he rubbed his hands, seeing his “ Woe from mind"at our children's theater... Although, of course, we played his immortal comedy with grief in half, but he was very pleased with us, and we were delighted that we could please him. He brought A. Bestuzhev and Wilhelm Kuchelbecker with him to one of the rehearsals - and they also praised us.” 3. The performance was banned by order of the St. Petersburg Governor-General Count Miloradovich, and the school authorities were reprimanded.

In 1825, the anthology “Russian Waist” managed to publish only a few scenes of the first act and the third act of the comedy with numerous censorship distortions and cuts. So, for example, the words “In the Scientific Committee who settled” were replaced with the words “Between the scientists who settled”; “Before the royal person” - “Before any person” and so on. Anything that sounded critical of the government and official institutions was removed or replaced.

Comedy was banned. But it began to spread throughout Russia in hundreds of handwritten lists. The closest friend of Griboyedov and the Decembrists, A. A. Zhandre, talks about the beginning of this handwritten stream. The playwright’s nephew D. A. Smirnov subsequently wrote down from the words of Gendre: “When Griboedov arrived in St. Petersburg and remade his comedy in his mind, he wrote such terrible brothels that it was impossible to make out. Seeing that most brilliant creation almost perishes, I begged him for his half-sheets. He gave them away with complete carelessness. I had a whole office at hand: she copied “ Woe from mind” and became rich because they demanded many lists. The main list, corrected by the hand of Griboedov himself, is with me.” N.K. Piksanov rightly believes: “There is no doubt that this was the first series of comedy lists that went around Russia. And there is also no doubt that the lists that came out of Gendre’s office were copied from the first, “main list” (and then, of course, from one another).”

Even in Moscow, rumors about the comedy spread, and the author read it to some of his friends, in particular Vyazemsky. There were numerous readings in St. Petersburg. “Everyone asks me for a manuscript and gets annoying,” Griboedov tells Begichev. The playwright himself lists twelve readings in the capital. He read to Krylov, Zhandre, Shakhovsky, artists Kolosova and Karatygina and others. It was a universal success. “There is no end to the thunder, the noise, the admiration, the curiosity. Shakhovskoy resolutely admits himself defeated,” writes Griboyedov to Begichev in June 1824. A. Bestuzhev began asking the author for the entire manuscript of the comedy to read. “It passes from hand to hand,” answered Griboyedov, “but the best thing is to come to my housewarming party for dinner... If you want to read my comedy, you will hear it. There will be some of the writers, all for the sake of the connoisseur listeners: a good lunch, soft armchairs and cozy places in the shade to take a nap on occasion.” A. Bestuzhev, of course, was not slow in appearing. “The dinner was without ceremony and very cheerful. Griboyedov was an excellent reader; without farces, without fakes, he knew how to give variety to every face and set off every happy expression. I was in awe."

I got acquainted with comedy in my exile in Mikhailovsky and Pushkin. The reading of the manuscript was interrupted by the arrival of a monk spy. Pushkin hastily disguised it with a thick volume of the Chetya-Minei. After the monk left, Pushkin continued to read the comedy as if nothing had happened: I listened with extraordinary pleasure to his expressive and life-filled reading, pleased that I was able to give him such high pleasure.”

The comedy as a whole did not make it into print, but everyone knew it, and already in connection with the release of the anthology “Russian Waist,” heated debate broke out around the comedy. The reactionary camp accepted " Woe from mind"hostile. The articles by M. Dmitriev and A. Pisarev, published in Vestnik Evropy, stated that the content of the comedy allegedly does not correspond to Russian life. The comedy was declared to be a simple imitation of foreign plays. It was characterized only as a satirical work, “a gross mistake against local morals.” Chatsky was especially hard hit, whom Vestnik Evropy called a madman. “Chatsky has broken free,” Pisarev spoke of Griboyedov’s hero. Dmitriev ridiculed Chatsky’s “brawling patriotism.” It was written about him that “he is a Molierean misanthrope in detail and in caricature.”

Pushkin gave a brilliant and profound description of “Woe from Wit”. In his long letter to Bestuzhev, the poet notes Griboyedov’s independence and dramatic innovation: “A dramatic writer must be judged by the laws that he himself has recognized above himself. Consequently, I do not condemn either the plan, the plot, or the decency of Griboyedov’s comedy.” According to Pushkin, his goal is “characters and a sharp picture of morals.” In the characters of Famusov, Skalozub, Zagoretsky, and in Repetilov’s story about the English club, Pushkin saw “traits of a truly comic genius.”

In the almanac “Polar Star” Bestuzhev spoke about “ Woe from mind” as a literary miracle, unheard of since Fonvizin’s “The Minor”: “A crowd of characters, outlined boldly and sharply; a living picture of Moscow morals, soul in feelings, intelligence and wit in speeches, unprecedented fluency and nature of the spoken Russian language in poetry. All this attracts, amazes, and attracts attention. A person with a heart will not read it without laughing, without being moved to tears... The future will adequately appreciate this comedy and place it among the first creations of the people.”

2.Yours general impression after reading the comedy "Woe from Wit". Are the events of the play sad or funny for you? Why is the comedy called “Woe from Wit”?

Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov entered Russian literature as the author of one work, but it is truly brilliant. The comedy "Woe from Wit" was scattered catchphrases, quatrains, expressions, not yet having time to become generally known. Isn't this a true confession? We often say: “Who are the judges?”, “It’s barely light on your feet! And I’m at your feet,” “Terrible century!”, “Friend, is it possible to choose a farther back street for a walk,” without thinking that these are phrases from the brilliant comedy “Woe from Wit.”
Griboyedov not only accurately and truthfully portrayed the characters of the heroes of the first quarter of the 19th century, but also presented a wonderful storehouse of wisdom and sparkling humor, from which we have been drawing treasures for more than a hundred years, and it is not exhausted. The picture of the life of the Moscow nobility was created no less brilliantly.

In this society, it is not the spiritual qualities of a person that are valued; no one simply thinks about them, but a fat wallet, the opportunity to get closer to the “feeding trough”, bypassing the more sluggish or less fortunate. Patriotism, a sense of duty, the desire to serve the cause, and not people, seem to be in this society thoughts are dangerous, insane, capable of shaking and destroying the foundations of this society. Therefore, all members of Famus’s circle unite against Chatsky. They see in him a symbol of a new time, changes that will sweep away the established “disorder” that suits them, and deprive these people of sources
income.
Famus's circle gossips and slanders each other, makes fun of those around them, but they surprisingly unanimously unite against Chatsky, seeing in him the main evil - the destroyer of the foundations and canons of this society. It fears Alexander Andreevich as much as it hates him.
Comedy is still relevant today. The struggle between the new and the old is the law of life, and as long as this struggle exists, life will move forward, difficult, painfully, overcoming obstacles. Comedy calls the brave and strong forward into the future, sweeping away everything old, outdated, and inert from its path.

The meaning of the title of the comedy "Woe from Wit";. "Woe from Wit" is the first realistic comedy in Russian literature. The realistic method of the play lies not only in the fact that there is no strict division into positive and negative heroes, a happy ending, but also in the fact that there are several conflicts in it at the same time: love (Chatsky and Sophia) and social (Chatsky and Famusov society).

The title of the first edition of the comedy was different - "Woe to Wit." Then the meaning of the comedy would be completely clear: Chatsky, a truly smart man, is trying to open people’s eyes to how they live and what they live with, tries to help them, but the ossified, conservative Famus society does not understand him, declares him crazy, and in finally betrayed and rejected,

Chatsky is running away from a world he hates. In this case, one could say that the plot is based on a romantic conflict, and Chatsky himself is a romantic hero. The meaning of the comedy's title would be just as clear - woe to the smart man. But Griboyedov changed the name, and the meaning of the comedy immediately changed. To understand it, you need to study the problem of the mind in the work.

By calling Chatsky “smart,” A. Griboyedov turned everything upside down, ridiculing the old understanding of such a quality in a person as intelligence. A. Griboedov showed a man full of educational pathos, constantly encountering a reluctance to understand him, which stemmed precisely from the traditional concept of “prudence,” which in “Woe from Wit” is associated with a certain social and political program. A. Griboyedov's comedy, starting from the title, is not addressed at all to the Famusovs, but to the funny and lonely Chatskys (“one smart person for 25 fools”), who through reasoning strive to change a world that is not subject to rapid changes. A. Griboedov created a comedy that was unconventional for its time. He enriched and psychologically rethought the characters' characters and introduced into the text new problems unusual for the comedy of classicism. However, although his method is close to realistic, the writer still does not achieve realism in its entirety when showing characters, everyday life, social environment and all the deep problems hidden in the society of that time.

3.Describe Famusov’s guests. What is unique about each of them, what brings them together?

We can divide all the images in the comedy into three groups: the main characters - they participate in a personal conflict (Sofya, Silent, Chatsky, Famusov and Lisa), secondary and off-stage. The second group includes guests of the Famusov dance evening. The third includes all off-stage characters, which we learn about from the dialogues of the characters on stage.
All heroes can be divided into two large camps - representatives of the “past century” and representatives of the “present century”.
The first and most prominent representative of the “past century” is Famusov.

A serf-owning gentleman, “like all Moscow people,” who dreams of getting a son-in-law “with stars and ranks” for his daughter. Service for Famusov, as for all representatives of noble Moscow, is only a means of moving up the career ladder. He adheres to the custom - “it’s signed, off your shoulders.”
Famusov does not want to accept anything new. Old customs and orders suit the entire patriarchal society, and any changes can lead to the loss of their social and material well-being. Therefore, it is not surprising that Pavel Afanasyevich is an ardent opponent of all teachings, professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who “practice in schisms and unbelief.” “They would take all the books and burn them,” he declares. Like all of Griboyedov’s Moscow, Famusov leads an idle life, “fills himself in feasts and extravagance”: “on Tuesday I am called to the trout”, “on Thursday I am called to the funeral”, and on Friday or Saturday I must “baptize at the doctor’s house”, which “according to his calculations” “should give birth” - this is how Pavel Afanasyevich’s week goes. On the one hand, Famusov, like all heroes, is typical, but, on the other hand, he is individual. Here Griboyedov no longer has a strict division into positive and negative heroes. Famusov is not only a serf master who oppresses his peasants, but also a loving father, master of the house, flirting with his maid.
His daughter Sophia stands out among other people. Carried away by reading French novels, she imagines herself as their heroine. That’s why there are many psychological motives in her speech (“I’m ashamed of myself, I’m ashamed of the walls,” “don’t dare expect reproaches, complaints, my tears, you’re not worth them”). Possessing an imperious character and a practical mind, Sophia in the future will be the same as Natalya Dmitrievna, pushing around her “boy husband, servant husband.”

She was brought up with Chatsky. Sophia boldly expresses her opinion: “Whoever I want, I love,” and at the same time does not care what “Princess Marya Aleksevna will say.” That is why she gives her preference to Molchalin. Sophia understands that he will become “the ideal of all Moscow husbands,” and will be grateful to the end of his life for the fact that she raised him to her level and introduced him into society.
Molchalin-.a bright representative of Famus society. He has been serving in Famusov’s house for three years, “listed in the archives,” and has already “received three awards.” He values two qualities in himself, “two talents” - “moderation and accuracy”, he is sure that “at his age one should not dare to have one’s own judgment”, that “one must depend on others.”
The goal of his life is to be in the right place at the right time, and most importantly, to follow his father’s precepts: “to please all people without exception.” He is a man of few words, uses cutesy words in his speech, which not only corresponds to his lifestyle, but also to his last name - “Molchalin”. Every word and step he takes is thought out. He skillfully pretends to be the lover of his master’s daughter, although he himself has sympathy for the maid Lisa (“Her by position, you...”).
The main character of the comedy, representing the “present century”, is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, educated, smart. A clear and sharp mind proves that he is not just an intelligent person, but also a “freethinker.” He is a hero-lover and the main reasoner at the same time. And if Chatsky fails completely in love, then he fulfills his socially accusatory mission. Being the main exponent of Decembrist ideas in comedy, the hero in his angry speeches exposes the ignorance, deceit, harshness and serf-based basis of Famus society.
Plays an important role Lisa, Sophia's maid, a smart, lively, lively girl. On the one hand, she is a soubrette (a traditional role of classicism) and helps her mistress arrange love dates. Lisa gives apt characteristics to the heroes: “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, like Alexander Andreich Chatsky,” “Like all Moscow, your father is like this: he would like a son-in-law with stars and with ranks,” “And Skalozub, like his own crest.” will spin, tell, faint, add a hundred embellishments.”
Minor characters presented in the third act of the comedy at Famusov's dance party. They complement the picture of the Moscow nobility.
A striking example of military and Arakcheevism is Colonel Skalozub, in whose image military careerism and passion for drill are exposed. Limited and rude, he is respected in society, because he “is both a gold bag and aims to be a general. Skalozub speaks in monosyllabic and incoherent sentences, often constructing phrases incorrectly: “I am ashamed, like an honest officer!” And Sophia says that “he never said a smart word.”
Next, we see a whole gallery of representatives of the Moscow nobility. This and Gorichi, representing a typical noble family, where “the husband is a boy, the husband is a servant,” and an imperious, narcissistic wife playing the role of a guardian: “Yes, move away from the doors, the wind blows through there from behind.” Even in the recent past, Platon Mikhailovich “ran around on a greyhound stallion”, and now he suffers from “rumatism and headaches”, “camp noise, comrades and brothers” have been replaced by another activity: “On the flute I repeat the A-mole duet.”
This and Prince Tugoukhovsky with his wife and six dowry-free daughters, who travels to balls in search of suitors. This and Countess Khryumina: the countess-granddaughter is an old maid, always dissatisfied with everything, and her grandmother, who no longer sees or hears anything, but stubbornly attends entertaining evenings.
This is also a “fraudster, rogue” Zagoretsky, who found “protection from court” in best houses Moscow. This and Messrs. N. and O., which are needed only to spread gossip about Chatsky’s madness, and Repetilov- a pathetic parody of representatives of a secret society. All of them embody such a concept as “Famusov’s Moscow.”
Finally, the comedy contains a large number of off-stage characters, the number of which exceeds the number of stage characters, which is a violation of the canons of classicism. The role of these characters is great: they expand both the temporal and spatial boundaries of the comedy.

It is thanks to them that Griboyedov manages to cover the period of time from Empress Catherine II to the beginning of the reign of Nicholas I. Without the off-stage characters, the picture would not be so complete. Like all stage plays, they can be divided into two opposing camps - the “past century” and the “present century”. From dialogues and remarks, we learn about “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged his devoted servants “for three greyhounds,” about the balletomane landowner, “who did not agree with the debtors for a deferment,” as a result of which “Zephyrs and Cupids were all sold one by one,” about Khlestova’s sister Praskovya, for whom Zagoretsky “got two little blacks at the fair,” and about many others.
We also learn about their attitude to service, their servility and respect for rank. This is Maxim Petrovich, who, if necessary, “bent over,” and Kuzma Petrovich, who “was a venerable chamberlain, with a key, and knew how to deliver the key to his son; rich and married to a rich woman,” and Foma Fomich, who “was the head of a department under three ministers,” and Molchalin’s father, who bequeathed to his son “to please all people without seizure,” and others.
The favorite pastime of Moscow ladies is gossip. So, Tatyana Yuryevna, who “returned from St. Petersburg,” talked about Chatsky’s “connection with the ministers.”
Many foreigners who went to Russia “with fear and tears”, but because of the ignorance of Moscow society, found that “there is no end to the caresses.” This is Madame Rosier, and the Frenchman from Bordeaux, and the dance master Guillaume, who, due to their foreign origin, enjoyed great respect.
Representatives of the secret society that Repetilov speaks about also belong to the “past century.” All this is just a pathetic parody of the Decembrist meetings. Anglomaniac Prince Grigory, lover of Italian opera Vorkulov Evdokim, “wonderful guys” Levoy and Borinka, genius writer Udushev Ippolit Markelych, and their chairman “night robber, duelist” - these are those who claim to be the leading people of their time.
But there are also representatives of the “present century”. These are the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who “practice in schisms and unbelief,” and Skalozub’s cousin, who “suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village,” and Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew Fyodor, who studies chemistry and botany, and all the progressive youth, on whose behalf Chatsky speaks in his monologue “And who are the judges?..”
And although there are many characters in the play, there is nothing superfluous in it: not a single extra hero, scenes, a wasted word, not a single unnecessary stroke. Main characters in comedy given close-up, minor ones complement the picture, and off-stage characters expand its temporal and spatial boundaries. This system of images is aimed at revealing the main conflict of the play.

4.How does Chatsky expose ignorance, servility, and sycophancy in his monologues? Why did Sophia decide to take revenge on Chatsky? Why did she succeed? What is the denouement of the comedy "Woe from Wit"?

In the image of Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, the main character of the comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit", reflected the mentality and some essential features of advanced people from among the noble intelligentsia of the first quarter of the 19th century. Chatsky expresses his views on modern society in expanded form in his monologues, which are organically connected with the developing action, psychologically justified and are the culminating center of each act, recording the stages of Chatsky’s escalating conflict, as a representative of the “present century,” with Famus’s society, hostile to any new trends reflecting the ideals of the “past century”. However, the plot of the comedy is built on a love affair between “Chatsky, Sophia, Molchalin and Liza,” a typical motif of all comedies. “Every step, almost every word in the play is connected with the play of his (Chatsky’s) feelings for Sophia, irritated by some kind of lie in her act... all his mind and all his strength are spent on solving it - it served as a motive, a reason for irritation, for “millions of torments” - and this made it possible for Chatsky to play a role of “much greater, higher significance than unsuccessful love”, “Two comedies seem to be embedded in one another.

When the first one is interrupted, another unexpectedly appears in the interval, and the action begins again, a private comedy plays out into a general battle and is tied into one knot.”(Goncharov).

The stages of Chatsky’s escalating conflict with Famus society can be traced through monologues, which are, as it were, the culmination of each of the 4 acts of the comedy. They fit organically into the situation and are psychologically justified.

In the first act, the outbreak of the conflict is based on the personal interests of the characters. Chatsky is puzzled by the cold reception of Sophia and her father, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, a friend of his father, in whose house after the death of his parents he was raised with Sophia; Before leaving for St. Petersburg, he was connected with her by childhood friendship and love; Sophia is afraid that the unexpected arrival of Chatsky, who is in love with her, may complicate her relationship with Molchalin; Famusov is annoyed by the appearance of a new contender for Sophia’s hand: Chatsky is not a match for her, because he is poor and unofficial.

Chatsky's monologue “What new will Moscow show me?” quite natural for a person who, after a three-year separation, returns to his native Moscow, to native home and wants to know if everything remains the same and what changes have occurred during this time. He seems to invite Sophia to remember their childhood hobby of observing acquaintances, noticing their funny sides and making fun of them. And now, in criticizing people he knows, he does not go beyond the usual secular slander, only lightly touches on topics on which he will speak out in full later - about the serf-theater he will say: “He himself is fat, his artists are skinny”; about a member of the academic committee, “who screamed and demanded oaths so that no one knew or learned to read and write,” will also mention. But Sophia, unlike previous times, does not approve of the “persecution of Moscow”; she does not like Chatsky’s slander when he accidentally hurt Molchalin - “Where is he, by the way! \Have you not yet broken the silence of the seal! ...But by the way, he will reach the known degrees, \ After all, nowadays they love the dumb.” The word “dumb” is highlighted as a quotation and was perceived as offensive (by analogy with dumb cattle). Here is the beginning of Sophia’s hostile relationship with Chatsky and the beginning of a painful search for the answer to her changed attitude towards him, the reason for her coldness.

In the second act there are two monologues by Chatsky. Both of them are provoked by Famusov, who is obsessed with the desire to marry Sophia to a rich groom. Chatsky can prevent this. Therefore, Famusov’s task is to deprive Chatsky of any hope of getting Sophia’s hand. He sets Chatsky, a famous freethinker, three obviously impossible conditions: “... first of all: don’t be a whim, \ Do not mismanage your property, brother, \ And, most importantly, serve like a child.” He teaches Chatsky how to make a career, citing as an example himself and his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who, having humbled their pride, achieved money and ranks through servility and sycophancy to their superiors. But Chatsky does not intend to enter into an argument and quarrel with Famusov. His answer is kept in calm, slightly mocking intonations. He does not denounce, he notes what changes have occurred in society over the past last years. "The Age of Submission and Fear" passed, now “Everyone breathes more freely” a sense of self-esteem began to awaken in people, which did not allow "bravely sacrifice the back of your head" also due to fear of public condemnation: “Even though there are hunters everywhere to be mean, | But nowadays laughter frightens and keeps shame in check.”

Chatsky tries to be delicate, not to touch related strings (“I I’m not talking about your uncle, I’m talking about yours..."), but Famusov with this speech of Chatsky, who dared "have your own opinion" outraged and declares war on him (“He is a Carbonari”, “A dangerous man”, “He wants to preach freedom*.”). It is Famusov who translates a personal conflict (reluctance to see Chatsky as Sophia’s fiancé) into a political one.

Next, Famusov inflicts blow after blow on Chatsky, humiliating him in front of Skalozub, forcing "keep quiet" even shouts at him, using the elder’s right: “Hey, tie a knot as a souvenir, I asked you to be silent, it’s not a great service”; clearly throwing pebbles into his garden, setting rich suitors as an example to him (“Be bad, but if you have \ Two thousand family souls, - | That’s the groom”) and speaks disparagingly about “wise men” who read books, like Skalozub’s brother (“Let yourself be known as a wise man, \ But they won’t include you in the family”). But when Famusov, turning to Skalozub, allows himself to feel sorry for Chatsky: it’s a pity that he doesn’t serve, “...it’s a pity, it’s a great pity, he’s a little brainy, \ And he writes and translates nicely, | One cannot help but regret that with such a mind...” Chatsky explodes. To Famusov’s assertion that he is not alone, “everyone also condemns.” Chatsky answers with a question: “Who are the judges?”

In such a situation, to remain silent means to become like Molchalin. And Chatsky accepts the challenge. In his brilliant monologue “Who are the judges!” the most political in content and perfect in oratory, he denies the moral right to the “fathers of the Fatherland” to judge him, because does not see a single role model among them. He condemns the Famus society, which includes the entire “high society” of Moscow, for conservatism and retrograde:

Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers

The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of Crimea...;

for the passion for wealth, luxuries obtained by “robbery”, protecting themselves from fair retribution by mutual guarantee and bribery:

They found protection from the court in friends, in kinship they built magnificent chambers,

Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance,

And where foreign clients will not resurrect the meanest traits of a past life.

And who in Moscow didn’t have their mouths covered?

Lunches, dinners and dances?

for inhumane treatment of serfs. He calls the feudal landowners “noble scoundrels.” One of them - "Nestor of noble scoundrels" - exchanged his faithful, noble servants who “in the hours of wine and fight, his life and honor were saved more than once,” for three greyhounds; another “scoundrel”, a balletomane landowner, “I drove many wagons from the mothers and fathers of rejected children to the serf ballet..., but did not agree to defer the debtors: Cupids and Zephyrs were all sold one by one!!!”

for obscurantism, hostility to freedom and enlightenment. Famou people Sovsky circle understand perfectly well what danger threatens their world from enlightened free-thinking people:

Now let one of us go,

Among the young people, there will be an enemy of quest, 11c demanding neither places, nor promotion to rank,

He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge;

Or God himself will stir up heat in his soul

To the creative, high and beautiful arts, -

They immediately: robbery! fire!

And he will be known among them as a dreamer! dangerous!

In Famus society, external form as an indicator of career success is more important than education, selfless service to a cause (and not to individuals), sciences, and arts:

Uniform! one uniform! he once covered them in their former life, embroidered and beautiful,

Their weakness, their poverty of reason...

In this monologue, Chatsky openly expressed the ideas that were put forward by the Decembrists as priorities - the abolition of serfdom, freedom of citizens, enlightenment (“The more enlightened a person is, the more useful he is to his Fatherland,” - stated Griboedov), which will contribute to the moral revival of society. “Chatsky is a Decembrist,” - asserted by contemporaries, Herzen, Dostoevsky, and Apollo Grigoriev. And even open propaganda of ideas was cultivated by the Decembrists in the early period of the emergence of secret societies. "He (Decembrist) publicly and 18

publicly calls a spade a spade, “rattles on in society, because it is in this naming that he sees the liberation of man and the beginning of the transformation of society. Therefore, straightforwardness, a certain naivety, the ability to get into situations that are ridiculous, from a secular point of view, are also compatible with the behavior of the Decembrist, as is harshness, pride and even arrogance.” (Yu.M. Lotman). All these qualities are characteristic of Chatsky. And he found himself in a funny position at the most dramatic moment of his stay in Famusov’s house, when, with the help of Sophia, he was declared crazy. Everyone happily seized the opportunity to take revenge on Chatsky for his freethinking, for his “crazy ideas”; gossip grows like a snowball. And at that moment, when the development of gossip has reached its climax, Chatsky appears, heated by the argument. He still does not know that he has been called crazy, but he is tormented by some kind of premonition. He feels his loneliness in a world hostile to him: “My soul here is somehow compressed by grief, \ And in the crowds I am lost, not myself. \No\I am dissatisfied with Moscow.” To Sophia's question: “Tell me what makes you so angry!” - he answers in a monologue "a million torments..." In this monologue, Chatsky expresses bitter thoughts about the loss of national pride, national identity, and disrespect for the Russian people and language:

I sent wishes away

Humble, yet out loud,

May the unclean Lord destroy this spirit of Empty, slavish, blind imitation;

…………………………………………………...

Oh! If we are born to adopt everything,

At least we could borrow a little from the Chinese their ignorance of foreigners. Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?

So that our smart, cheerful people

But twice - in a conversation in the room where it happened "insignificant meeting" with a Frenchman from Bordeaux, he found himself alone (“...everyone left me”) and now he pronounces his monologue into the void - no one listens to him, everyone dances.

In this monologue, as noted by I.A. Goncharov, “one can no longer hear sharp, poisonous sarcasm..., but some kind of bitter complaint, as if about a personal insult, an empty one... “an insignificant meeting with a Frenchman from Bordeaux”, which he, in in good condition spirit, he would hardly have noticed... He has ceased to control himself... He falls into patriotic pathos, reaches the point that he finds a tailcoat contrary to “reason and the elements”, finds shaved chins funny, i.e. from the point of view of the princesses, he is “talking nonsense.”

“Not myself” he remains until the end of the play. “There are only a million more torments ahead.” The denouement comes in Act 4, when Chatsky’s final break with Famus society and Sophia was determined, associated with the deepest disappointment in the people who slandered him (“Oh! if only someone penetrated people: | What’s worse in them? soul or language.”), with a feeling of bitterness and anger that Sophia turned out to be the author of gossip, which everyone repeats with triumph and gloating; with humiliation from the knowledge that Sophia chose the base and vile Molchalin over Chatsky. All this was tied into one knot, Sophia in his eyes merged with the crowd of persecutors, “in the love of traitors, in the enmity of indomitable”, and from the depths of the offended spirit, Chatsky pronounces his verdict on Famus society.

Who was it with? Where fate has taken me!

Everyone is driving! everyone curses! Crowd of tormentors

In the love of traitors, in the enmity of tireless, Indomitable storytellers,

Clumsy wise men, crafty simpletons, sinister crones, old men,

Decrepit over inventions, gaze, - Mad YOU I was glorified by the whole choir,

You're right! he will come out of the fire unharmed,

Breathe the air alone

And his sanity will survive.

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!... A carriage for me, a carriage!

Thus, Chatsky’s monologues, closely related to the content of the comedy, focus our attention on the main moments of the hero’s conflict with society - the beginning, the development of the action, the climax and the denouement. Monologues also allow us to learn about some of Chatsky’s essential features that distinguish him from the crowd of “fools.”

This is, first of all, Chatsky’s mind, which many people note. "Oster, smart, eloquent" - Sophia says about Chatsky. This is not the vulgar mind of fools, aimed at achieving personal goals - this is the mind of a person whose noble aspirations are aimed at the common good. The ability to deeply penetrate into the essence of things and evaluate them in an accurate and apt, aphoristically concise phrase is within the power of a person of great intelligence. Chatsky is sharply intelligent - witty. (“Who is as sensitive and cheerful and sharp as Alexander Andreevich Chatsky!”) His speech speaks of high culture Chatsky. He is fluent in oratory, using all layers of Russian speech, from Church Slavonic to colloquial; In his monologues he also includes literary quotes, for example from Derzhavin: “And the smoke of the Fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us.” His speech is so perfect that it evokes admiration even from Famusov: “As he says). And he speaks as he writes."

Human great culture, of great intelligence, he still has a warm heart, not indifferent to the sufferings and disasters of his Fatherland, capable of loving deeply, devotedly and tenderly. In the monologue, when Chatsky decided "once in your life pretend" In order to finally find out from Sophia who her chosen one was, he, praising Molchalin, unexpectedly let slip about his love:

Let Molchalin have a lively mind, a brave genius,

But does he have that passion? that feeling? That ardor?

So that, besides you, he has the whole world

Did it seem like dust and vanity?

So that every heart beats

Has love accelerated towards you?

So that all his thoughts and all his deeds are

Soul - you, please you?...

In love for Sophia, Chatsky reveals himself completely, like a living person: he is ardent and tender (“And yet I love you madly!”), blind and naive in his hope of awakening feelings in Sophia, unfair when, having discovered her betrayal, he accused her of treason, forgetting that “I haven’t written two words for three years”; reproached her for "I lured him with hope" although from the first meeting she demonstrated her coldness, indifference and even hostility. Through monologues, all the nuances of the psychology of an endlessly loving person, doubtful, desperate, but still hoping for something, are conveyed.

The sophistication and grace, ardor and sincerity of Chatsky’s nature found their expression in his monologues.

The role of monologues in the first realistic comedy “Woe from Wit” is different than in the works of classicism, in which the virtuous hero-reasoner delivered his long monologues, addressing directly the audience. In them classic hero expressed the author’s thoughts, and they were loosely connected with the stage action.

Chatsky’s monologues, of course, reflected the views of A.S. himself. Griboedova. However, the hero of the comedy, a typical representative of the generation and the main character, experiencing “a million torments,” pours out civil sorrow and heartache in his monologues, thereby linking two conflicts - socio-political and personal, into one knot.

Why did Sophia decide to take revenge on Chatsky? Why did she succeed?

Sophia and Chatsky grew up together as children and loved each other. But then Chatsky went abroad, to Germany, leaving his home, where both his guardian Famusov and Sophia were. Years later, he returned, first of all he went to his beloved Sophia, but she did not reciprocate, contrary to Chatsky’s expectations. Thus, she decided to take revenge for the fact that he left her, as well as the house that had become his home, and preferred a foreign country to this, which was completely alien. Chatsky was left alone, that is, he experienced what Sophia once experienced in childhood.

What is the denouement of the comedy "Woe from Wit"?

The outcome of the conflict is Chatsky’s departure from Moscow. The relationship between Famus society and the main character is clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other and do not want to have anything in common. It's impossible to tell who has the upper hand. After all, the conflict between old and new is as eternal as the world. And the topic of the suffering of an intelligent, educated person in Russia is topical today. To this day, people suffer more from their intelligence than from their absence. In this sense, A.S. Griboedov created a comedy for all times.

5.What conflict determines Chatsky’s clash with society? How was the historical conflict of the era reflected in the comedy? Which of the heroes belongs to the “past century”, and which to the “present century”?

The conflict of the comedy lies in the opposition between “the present century and the past century,” that is, the new century and an outdated belief system. This conflict is the main one in its era. The comedy was written in the era preceding the Decembrist uprising, during the reign of Alexander I. The ideologist of the “past century” is Famusov, the leader of the Moscow nobility, expressing the way of thinking of the noble society. He can be called a typical character, he expresses distrust of enlightenment and demonstrates reactionary views. The hero is written in a realistic manner, his character is multifaceted, manifested in relation to his daughter Sophia: he loves her, wishes her well, wants to marry her to Skalozub, whom he considers a serious person, on the other hand, he allows himself to lock her in a room, interferes in her life, prevents her from communicating with Molchalin. In the first act, he condemns the young Moscow noblewomen who learn to sing from French teachers, but then speaks positively of the “art of tender sighs.” Famusov is a serf owner (in relation to Lisa), but allows himself to look after her.

It is known that among the Decembrists the name Famusov became a household name and was used to describe the old world. Another representative of the “past century” is Skalozub. Chatsky characterizes him: “And a golden bag, and aims to become a general.” He spent his whole life in the war, is associated with the Arakcheev era, speaks only about military service, condemns progressive officers and freedom of thought. He speaks about a cousin who left the service and went to the village to read books. “The Past Century” is represented by many other characters: Countess Khryumina, the almighty Marya Alekseevna, the Tugoukhovskys. Belonging to this century is not determined by age characteristics; this century includes: Molchalin. He is a hypocrite, strives to win awards and have fun, and is immoral. Sophia, who once shared the views of Chatsky, was also influenced by this society, but during the time when he was gone, she learned to live according to the laws of the “Past Century.” The antithesis of this world is the “present century” - Chatsky. He uses all the same views as the Decembrists, is indignant at the imitation of everything foreign, opposes serfdom, talks about public service“I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” speaks of enlightenment and noble upbringing. It seems that he is lonely, as a representative of the new, but Skalozub’s brother is also close. In his comedy, Griboyedov managed to show not only the time in which he lived, but also to create unforgettable images that are interesting to today’s reader and viewer.

6.Prepare an oral description of Chatsky. Recreate his biography. What is Chatsky’s “million torments”? Who is Chatsky - the winner or the loser?

The main character of the comedy is A.A. Chatsky. In him, the writer embodied many of the qualities of a leading man of his era. According to his beliefs, he is close to the Decembrists. Chatsky lost his parents early and, being the son of Famusov’s deceased friend, Andrei Ilyich Chatsky, grew up and was brought up in the house of F. Chatsky fondly recalls his childhood spent with Sophia, with whom he was in love. From Sophia’s words we learn that he left their home , where he was bored, rarely visited them, then again “pretended to be in love, demanding and distressed,” and then went to “search for his mind.” Chatsky himself said that “he wanted to travel around the whole world, but did not travel a hundredth part.” Chatsky was in military service, probably with the Russian army abroad. Molchalin reminds him that in Moscow they talked a lot about Chatsky’s service in St. Petersburg, about his connection with the ministers and about the break with them. Famusov speaks about Chatsky’s real activities:

It does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in it,
But if you wanted, it would be businesslike.
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small in head,
And he writes and translates well.

After a long journey, he hurries to Moscow to meet his beloved girl. His love for Sophia is a sincere feeling. He wants to believe in reciprocity, so he does not believe in Sophia’s love for Molchalin. He realized that he was mistaken only when he witnessed Molchalin’s explanation with Liza. Love has consumed Chatsky, he suffers and calls his feeling madness. In response to this, Sophia remarks: “I reluctantly drove you crazy!” This definition served as the impetus for the development of gossip about the madness of Chatsky, a dangerous person in his views. Chatsky’s personal drama, which gives movement to the entire plot, deepens and complicates his public drama, contributes to the increasing harshness of his attacks against noble Moscow. In this criticism of the morals and views of Famus society, it is clear what Chatsky is against, what his views are. He has a negative attitude towards serfdom, the cruelty of landowners, careerism, veneration of rank, the slave morality of inertia, the ideals of the “past century”, “ignorance”.

Chatsky proclaims humanity, respect for the common man, service to the cause, not to individuals, freedom of thought. He affirms the progressive ideas of modernity, the prosperity of science and art, respect for national language and culture, to enlightenment. He sees the meaning of life in serving the people, the Motherland.

The hero’s convictions are revealed in his monologues and disputes with representatives of Famus’s Moscow. His rejection of serfdom is heard in his memoirs about the serf theater, about the “Carrier of noble scoundrels”, who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds. After listening to Famusov’s enthusiastic story about Maxim Petrovich, Chatsky speaks with contempt about people who “not in war, but in peace, took their foreheads, knocked on the floor, did not regret,” about those “whose necks often bent.”

He despises people who are ready
The patrons yawn at the ceiling,
Show up to be quiet, shuffle around, have lunch.

He brands the “past century”: “The century of obedience and fear was direct.” He approves of those young people who are in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters." He is critical of the dominance of foreigners:

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.

Chatsky defends the right of a person to freely choose his own activities: travel, live in the countryside, “focus his mind” on science or devote himself to “high and beautiful creative arts.” Chatsky’s desire to “serve” and not “be served”, to serve “the cause” and not “persons”, his “connection with ministers” and the subsequent complete break is a hint at the desire of progressive-minded youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.

Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared crazy. The old world fights Chatsky’s free speech using slander. Chatsky’s struggle with an accusatory word corresponds to that early period the Decembrist movement, when they believed that much could be achieved with words, and limited themselves to oral speeches. However, fighting with words does not lead to victory. The old world is still so strong that it defeats Chatsky, who is fleeing Famusov’s house and Moscow. But Chatsky’s flight from Moscow cannot be perceived as a defeat. The irreconcilability of views between Chatsky and Famusov society puts our hero in a tragic situation. According to Goncharov, his role is “passive”: at the same time he is a “advanced warrior”, “skirmisher”, and at the same time he is “always a victim”. "Chatsky is broken by the number old power, inflicting a mortal blow on her with the quality of fresh strength,” - this is how I. A. Goncharov defined the meaning of Chatsky

Who is Chatsky - the winner or the loser?

“Woe from Wit” is a satirical comedy by Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov. In this play, through clashes of characters, important phenomena public life Russia of the last century.
The conflict of the play (the struggle between different groups of the nobility) sharply divides the characters into two camps: the progressive nobility - Chatsky and his like-minded people - and the conservative nobility - Famus society. The whole struggle is in the name of the people. However, Chatsky had a complete break with Famus society. His image shows that he embodies the thoughts and feelings of an advanced person, a nobleman.
Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is the main character of the play “Woe from Wit”. The author sympathizes with him. We like this hero too. Chatsky loves, doubts, is indignant, suffers defeats, argues, but still remains undefeated. However, Famus society also gains a kind of upper hand, since Chatsky leaves “out of Moscow.” But behind this external victory one can feel the fear of inevitable defeat in a battle with hundreds of Chatskys. Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov said in his remark:

I would strictly forbid these gentlemen
Drive up to the capitals for the shot.

We, readers, listen to Chatsky’s speeches, his advice and actions. After all, everything that the author wants to tell us is concentrated in his image.
Chatsky returns to Moscow full of thoughts, new ideas, love. But surprises await him here. He finds out that his beloved Sofia cheated on him. Regarding this, Chatsky passionately reports:

Blind! In whom I sought the reward of all my labors!
I was in a hurry! flew! trembled! Happiness, I thought, was close.
Before whom am I so passionate and so low
He was a waster of tender words!
And you! Oh my God! who did you choose?
When I think about who you preferred!
Why did they lure me with hope!
Why didn't they tell me directly?
Why did you turn everything that happened into laughter?!
That the memory even disgusts you
Those feelings, in both of us the movements of those hearts,
Which have never cooled in me,
No entertainment, no change of place.
I breathed and lived by them, was constantly busy!

The resolution of the conflict in the comedy is the declaration of Chatsky as crazy for his dissent. But he just ends up in a society where:
Everyone is driving! Everyone curses! Crowd of tormentors
In the love of traitors, in the tireless enmity,
Indomitable storytellers,
Clumsy smart people, crafty simpletons,
Sinister old women, old men.
Decrepit over inventions, nonsense...

But Chatsky finds a way out of this situation and already accuses the Famus society of allegedly going crazy:

You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend a day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his sanity will survive...

In my opinion, Chatsky is both a winner and a loser. He loses some battles, but wins others. He is a fighter for individual freedom and equality. Chatsky wants to introduce something new, progressive. At the same time he is indignant and rejoices. And this mood is conveyed to the reader in Chatsky’s final monologue.
The main idea of this play is an energetic protest against the vile reality of that time. “Woe from Wit” is still relevant today, since in our world people like Famus’s society have not disappeared, but people like Chatsky remain.

7. Read I. A. Goncharov’s article “A Million Torments” and make a simple plan for the beginning of the article (before the words “... and the whole comedy was born”), determine main idea this passage.

Quotation plan

A) The comedy “Woe from Wit” stands apart somehow in literature

B) The main role is the role of Chatsky

C) Chatsky is not only an intelligent person, but also a developed one

D) Chatsky was seriously preparing for his activities

D) His whole mind and all his strength go into this struggle

Main thought:

Chatsky is destined for a role of much greater, higher significance than unsuccessful love, in a word, the role for which the entire comedy was born.

8.What two lines make up the plot of the comedy “Woe from Wit”?

Two lines determine the development of the play's action. At first, Chatsky’s personal story and the collapse of his love seem to develop separately from the social one, but already from the seventh scene of the first act it becomes clear that both storylines are closely connected.
The action proceeds smoothly, characters appear one after another, and disputes ensue. The protagonist’s conflict with the “past century” deepens. Having told everyone about his “millions of torments,” the young hero remains completely alone. It looks like the comedy movement is about to start to decline. But no. The development of the action continues - the personal fate of the hero must be decided. Chatsky learns the truth about Sofia and Molchalin. The denouement of both storylines happens simultaneously, they merge, and the unity of content - one of the advantages of comedy - comes into force. Personal and social are merged in the lives of ordinary people, they also merge in the development of the plot of “Woe from Wit”.

A love line, or as they say “external conflict,” and a clash of ideologies between Chatsky and Famus society, the present century and the past century.

9.Which conflict - personal or public - is the main one and where do they intersect?

The conflict in the comedy “Woe from Wit” lies in the fact that in the work there is an interaction between social and love plans. The conflict seems to acquire duality. I. A. Goncharov in the article “A Million Torments” wrote: “Two comedies seem to be embedded in one another: one, so to speak, private, home, between Chatsky, Sophia, Silent and Liza - this is the intrigue of love, the everyday motive of all comedies. When the first is interrupted, another unexpectedly appears in the interval, and the action begins again, a private comedy plays out into a general battle and is tied into one knot.”

The plot scheme is traditional, where at hand noble maiden two young men are competing at once, whose images are contrasted, and one of them is confident in his superiority, talkative and mocking, and the second is modest and respectful; he is loved by a bride who has the same qualities, and at the end of the play he wins her hand. His comedy contrasts Chatsky and Molchalin, who enjoys success, and his main qualities remain “moderation and accuracy.”
There is a traditional conflict between high and low; an exceptional hero and the world, society, the world as a whole. This conflict was insoluble. Chatsky’s behavior is similar to a romantic hero struggling with “cruel morals.”

Chatsky has much in common with the Decembrists (love for the Russian people, the desire to “serve the cause, not individuals,” hatred of serfdom, true culture and enlightenment, “he is very positive in his demands and declares them in a ready-made program, developed not by him, but already by the century itself”), but behind him there is no power, the entire Decembrist society. He is alone against everyone.
This unusual conflict in “Woe from Wit” is embedded in the plot of the comedy.

The first act is an exposition of conflict development. The first 5 phenomena of this action paint a fairly detailed picture of the lives of Famusov and Sophia before Chatsky’s arrival, thereby preparing the background against which the future conflict will then develop with increasing force. We learn about Sophia's love for Molchalin, which is hidden from Famusov, and about Molchalin's feigned relationship with Sophia (Lisa's story about her aunt and the young Frenchman). 7-9th apparitions - the beginning of a love affair associated with the arrival of Chatsky, who is in love with Sofia.

Personal conflict serves both as a manifestation and social conflict, which can be discerned in Chatsky’s remarks about Moscow morals.

The outbreak of a social conflict and the complication of a personal line relates to the 2nd phenomenon of the second act, in which Chatsky woo, is refused due to his lifestyle incompatible with the foundations of Famusov’s society, and there is a direct clash with Famusov on the issue of morals (Famusov’s monologue “That’s it”) - then, you are all proud!..” and Chatsky’s response with the monologue “And exactly, the world has begun to grow stupid...”). This is how a natural transition is made from a personal conflict to a social conflict.

The confrontation between Chatsky and Famusov reaches its height in Famusov’s monologue “Taste, father, excellent manner...” and in Chatsky’s response: “Who are the judges?..” This monologue of Chatsky confirms the impossibility of reconciliation between the hero and society. In the third act, Chatsky's alienation intensifies, his relationship with Sophia does not improve. The personal conflict is complicated by Sophia’s gossip about Chatsky’s madness, and only in the 13th and 14th scenes of the fourth act does the personal intrigue come to a denouement. The social line of Chatsky’s struggle with Moscow society does not end with anything in the play. The ending of “Woe from Wit” remains open. “The comedy gives Chatsky “a million torments” and leaves, apparently, Famusov and his brothers in the same position in which they were before, without saying anything about the consequences of the struggle.”
The conflict in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy is not just unusual, it is unique, since it reflects the internal contradictions that existed in Russian society in the first quarter of the 19th century.

10. Why do you think " social comedy"begins with a love affair?

Love and love affair occupy a very important place in revealing the plot and the main conflict in a comedy. I will try to show the importance of Chatsky’s love drama for the action of the comedy.

We know that before Chatsky left Famusov’s house, Sophia loved Chatsky. This feeling began with childhood friendship (after all, Chatsky was a pupil in Famusov’s house), then friendship turned into affection, which never developed into true love.

Chatsky, who is the bearer of new ideas in comedy revolutionary ideas, leaves Sophia, who was still a girl at that time, for three whole years, and leaves to wander. Chatsky has been absent for three whole years. But over these three years, significant changes take place in Sophia’s soul, her attitude towards Chatsky changes.

The psychology of girls at that age is such that they need love, affection, attention, admiration. They may not be able to bear the separation. If love is not strong enough, then the wind of separation blows out love. But if the feeling is strong enough, then separation only aggravates the suffering.

IN in this case the love of Sophia and Chatsky failed to grow and become stronger, because they were still young. Separation destroyed Sophia's love, but could not destroy Chatsky's love. Hence the love drama, the misunderstanding of one hero by another.

Chatsky acted too rashly, leaving his love in Moscow, because Sophia was very young and naive, her soul was like a sponge, greedily absorbing everything new and unknown, equally good and bad, in a word, everything that surrounded her. And Sophia was surrounded by Famus society, its morals and foundations.

Returning to Moscow, Chatsky hurries to his beloved in the hope that Sophia still loves him. But he is cruelly mistaken: Sophia’s cold reception cuts the ground from under his feet. Doubts about Sophia's loyalty creep into his soul. And for the rest of the time, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is trying to find out who Sophia really loves, who his rival is. But trying to find out this, the main character of the comedy comes into conflict with the entire Famusov society: his teacher Famusov himself, Sophia’s lover, Molchalin, with Colonel Skalozub and other socialites of Moscow.

Thus, a love drama helps to introduce the reader to the mainstream of comedy. Indeed, it is not for nothing that Chatsky begins to criticize the customs and morals of his home, the family where he grew up. His goal is not at all to tear off the masks of pretense, hypocrisy, ignorance, and stupidity from the inhabitants of Famus’s world. He does all this as if on the way, in a fit of irritation and jealousy. In the end, he is finally convinced (and before the scene of Molchalin and Liza’s explanation, he still cannot believe that Sophia chose him over Molchalin) of Sophia’s betrayal, that she has become completely different, that there is no hope of returning her youthful feelings. He is also convinced that Sophia is the flesh of her father, that she lives according to the laws of the Famus society that he hates.

Despite all the inertia, Famus society is very strong. It managed to win over Sophia, a representative of the new generation, to its side.

Griboyedov also used the love drama to show that people like Alexander Andreevich Chatsky are still rare, that the majority still live according to the old laws.

So, a love drama in a comedy does not exist on its own, but helps to reveal the main conflict of the work: socio-political. The love drama in the comedy “Woe from Wit” was undoubtedly the catalyst for the main conflict.

11.Make an analysis of any monologue (see above)

12.What role does the theme of “mind” play in comedy?

The problem of the mind in the comedy of A.S. Griboedov’s “Woe from Wit” is key. The name itself testifies to this. Speaking about comedy, its themes and figurative system, this problem must be considered, perhaps, the very first. The problem of intelligence and madness has always been relevant. Smart, progressive people of their time were declared crazy and often remained misunderstood by their contemporaries. Ideas that ran counter to generally accepted ones and preached by leading people of our time were persecuted.

It is no coincidence that Griboyedov touches on this problem in his work. The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written before the December uprising and tells the story of society’s reaction to the emergence of advanced intelligence in Russia. The original title of the comedy was “Woe to Wit,” then the author replaced it with “Woe from Wit.”

The concept of the play was not originally the same as it appears to us today. Griboyedov created many versions of his work. “Woe to Wit” implies the oppression of Chatsky, who becomes an outcast in Famus society. “Woe from Wit” makes us think about whether Chatsky needs intelligence at all in such a situation, and we understand that this intelligence makes the hero himself feel bad. That is, the problem becomes two-sided.

Despite its primitiveness, it bears wonderful fruits. All members of Old Moscow society, without exception, act according to the same scheme, which is not explicitly formulated in the work, but lies on the surface. If we remember that Maxim Petrovich, for the sake of a good position, acted, in fact, as a jester (“He fell painfully, but got up healthy”), and Molchalin’s “philosophy” (“At my age, one should not dare to have one’s own judgment”). To begin with, the formula for success requires respect for rank. You have to grovel before everyone who is higher in rank than you (most of the “big” off-stage characters look like demigods). Sooner or later, this will lead the one who previously “took the world head on,” “knocked on the floor without regret,” as Chatsky put it, to power, and then the newly-minted “big man” has every right to humiliate those below him. Chatsky cannot afford this; he values his honor, dignity and intelligence too much. That is why he “woe from his mind” - he only suffers by not accepting the ideas of Famusov and his like-minded people.

But in fact, “woe” from Chatsky’s mind not only to himself, but also to Famus society. Education and enlightenment deal an irreparable blow to old Moscow. We see that Chatsky alone quite frightened everyone present at Famusov’s evening, and only with their numbers they were able to push the “foreign body” out of their circle. If there are many people like Chatsky, then Famus society will suffer a final and crushing defeat.

So, “Woe from Wit,” despite the complexity of the problem, gives us hope for “enlightenment at the end of the tunnel,” so to speak, in the person of such smart and highly educated people as Chatsky. And Famus society looks something deathly pale and dying in its attempts to resist this.

The main character has not yet appeared in Famusov’s house, but the idea of madness is already hovering there, associated with a negative attitude towards education and enlightenment. So, Famusov says: “And reading is of little use.” Later, all the characters in the comedy will speak out on this matter, each will put forward their own version of Chatsky’s madness, but the whole society will unanimously come to the same opinion: “Learning is the plague, learning is the reason.” The Famus society will get rid of Chatsky by declaring him crazy, not accepting accusatory speeches that stigmatize their way of life, and will choose gossip as a weapon.

Famusov, as a typical representative of his society, has his own opinion regarding the mind and an intelligent person. For him, an intelligent person is a practical, worldly wise person. Although he does not deny Chatsky’s intelligence, he nevertheless considers Skalozub a more suitable match for Sophia:

“A respectable person and a character

picked up the darkness of difference,

beyond his years and enviable rank,

not today, tomorrow general.”

In a conversation with Skalozub, the Moscow gentleman talks about the danger that comes from such wise men as Chatsky. In addition, Chatsky incorrectly uses the acquired knowledge. Everything should be aimed at achieving ranks, at maintaining traditions, we should live “as our fathers did.” Famusov puts forward his ideal of an intelligent person. In his opinion, this is Maxim Petrovich, who achieved high ranks and a high position in society thanks to his practical mind, the ability to “bend over” when it was necessary to “curry favor.” Famusov himself has not reached such heights, which is why he curries favor with the princes Tugoukhovsky and Skalozub.

By nature, Molchalin is a petty person, striving by any means to achieve his cherished goal in life, the meaning of which boils down to “winning awards and having fun.” In his practice, he follows his father’s precepts - “to please all people without exception,” but at the same time he believes that “at his age he should not dare to have his own judgment,” since “he is in small ranks.” He loves Sophia “out of position,” and calms the angry Khlestova with a game of cards. According to Chatsky, Molchalin “will reach the famous levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.”

Chatsky is the complete opposite of Molchalin, despite the fact that they are both young. The hero has an ardent, passionate nature. He is ready to sacrifice everything for the sake of his ideals, filled with civic meaning. He wants to serve “the cause, not the individuals.” For Chatsky, mind and truth, truth and honor are the main ones life values. The hero opposes the upbringing adopted in Famus society, when they strive to “recruit regiments of teachers, more in number, at a cheaper price.” He is not alien to patriotic feelings, which is why he is irritated by “blind imitation” of everything foreign. Chatsky expresses his thoughts in accusatory speeches directed against the foundations of Famus society. His monologues, oratorical in style, testify to the education and enlightenment of the protagonist, which is why they contain so many aphorisms. Chatsky's mind is the mind of an advanced person, this is precisely the reason that the inert society does not accept his views and ideas, since they contradict the way of life of the old Moscow nobility.

Chatsky’s love for Sophia is not accidental, because Sophia also has a mind, but a practical one. This is a typical girl of her time and class, drawing her mind from French sentimental novels. And he chooses Molchalin as his husband, in order to eventually make him “a boy-husband, a servant-husband,” and at the same time is guided by worldly wisdom, since she is a true daughter of her father and her time.

There is another type of mind in comedy. We see him with Lisa, the maid in Famusov’s house. She expresses author's position and it is from her lips that we hear the characteristics of various characters: “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, like Alexander Andreich Chatsky,” “Like all Moscow people, your father is like this: he would like a son-in-law with stars and ranks,” and so on . Undoubtedly, Lisa is naturally smart and has the worldly wisdom of a commoner; she is devoted to her Sophia, but at the same time resourceful and cunning.

So, starting from the worldly wise and ending with the advanced, progressive mind, various types of mind are presented in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”. Having declared Chatsky a social madman and forced him to leave Moscow, Famus society does not accept the advanced mind and rejects him.

13. Why did Pushkin think that Chatsky was not a smart person? What is your opinion?

Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin also read the comedy “Woe from Wit” at one time. The list of comedies was brought to Pushkin by I.I. Pushchin, who visited him in Mikhailovskoye (where Pushkin was in exile) on January 11, 1825. In a letter to P. Vyazemsky on January 28, 1825, Pushkin wrote about the main character of this comedy: “Chatsky is not smart at all man - but Griboyedov is very smart.”

Conversation

The reasons why Chatsky seemed to Pushkin to be a stupid person:

Chatsky is sure that Sophia will wait for him after a three-year absence;
Chatsky behaves too rudely with his potential father-in-law;
he rants to those who don't even listen to him;
he notices around him only what he wants to notice.

This is what Pushkin noticed. In a letter to A.A. He wrote to Bestuzhev: “In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” who is the smart character? answer: Griboedov. Do you know what Chatsky is? An ardent and noble and kind fellow, who spent some time with a very smart man (namely Griboyedov) and was imbued with his thoughts, witticisms and satirical remarks. Everything he says is very smart. But to whom is he telling all this? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable. The first sign of smart person - from the first know with your eyes who you are dealing with, and not throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs and the like.”.

...There is a huge gap between the main character and Famusov’s Moscow, it’s like heaven and earth, it’s like a medal with two sides... Life principles and their foundations are different, and, most importantly, Chatsky is several times superior to these people in intelligence. They are afraid of such people, they are angry at their superiority - just like in a comedy. Chatsky is completely different, standing out from the masses, and no one wants to see a person better than themselves. The main character is superfluous at this “celebration of life”.
The dialogue between Chatsky and Molchalin provides clear prerequisites for the hero’s break with those around him, and at the ball this conflict is revealed uncontrollably.
Here guests begin to appear, so typical of Famusov’s entourage. The Gorich couple arrives first, and Natalya Dmitrievna quickly looks for someone who can appreciate her new outfit and husband. Yes, yes, for an imperious lady these things are equivalent: both Platon Mikhailovich and the tulle - everything is one, everything is put on display, all objects of boasting and pride.
The sad, depressed appearance of Natalya’s husband describes his difficult past with his wife; Chatsky does not immediately recognize a cheerful comrade in arms in the swollen, dull man. The wife is happy - her husband is under her complete control, she has molded him into her ideal, primarily for show to the public.
The Tugoukhovsky princes with their six daughters continue the image of the owner of the house. The princess is feverishly looking for suitors for her daughters. Having learned that Chatsky is not rich and has not earned favor, she recalls her husband, who was about to follow him.
Khryumins, Khlestova, Skalozub, Zagoretsky - here almost each of the guests is a rival to the other. There is a competition of vanity going on, and it is going to the death.
The appearance of Chatsky excites those who came, and a shadow of excitement runs through. In a minimal amount of time, Chatsky manages to annoy everyone: Natalya Dmitrievna is afraid that the carefully sculpted ideal of her husband will melt from Chatsky’s hot, “free” words; Khryumina’s granddaughter was offended by his statement that she was just a “milliner imitator,” and Khlestova was offended by the hero’s laughter. Everyone, including Famusov, felt the hostility that was looking for a loophole and finally resulted in rumors of madness.
An interesting fact is that it was Sofia who caused this rumor - she is no less irritated than others and casually drops the phrase: “He is out of his mind.” But, realizing what she said, she decides not to correct anything, and the mistake becomes revenge.
This rumor, as in life, spreads with incredible speed. Speculations are heard from all sides about the cause of Chatsky’s madness. Someone believes that the culprit is alcohol, which the hero supposedly drinks in “glasses, no, bottles, no, barrels.” Others blame heredity, because “his mother went crazy eight times.” But very soon these arguments seemed too innocent. “Learning is the plague, learning is the reason that...many...divorced without smart people, and deeds, and opinions...” - Famusov finally says what tormented everyone so heavily, and everyone feels hatred for everything close to Chatsky - these are lyceums and gymnasiums, professors, and most importantly - books. It turns out that irritation and anger are felt not only towards the main character, but also towards everything that is correct and smart. Ideas to stop the so-called evil are expressed by Famusov: “We should collect all the books and burn them” and Skalozub: “... in schools they will teach in our way: one, two!”
It is not surprising that Chatsky is depressed, and “a million torments” tear his heart. He is outraged by everything that happens here, he talks about the baseness of these people, the stupidity of imitation and worship of others. In the meantime, we know that even greater turmoil lies ahead. His monologue is the only one at the entire ball that talks about significant and worthwhile things.
...Chatsky is lonely. This is probably a loss in the duel between nobility and baseness. The guests are “diligently twirling in the waltz,” and Chatsky stands alone in the middle of the ball, at which he is superfluous and unnecessary. Here he already determines for himself the only correct path: “Get out of Moscow!”

Essay on the topic “Ball in Famusov’s house”

The ball in Famusov's house plays a big role in understanding the comedy. Chatsky arrives first, looking for a new meeting with Sophia, and he already manages to give everyone “unnecessary” advice, send another barb at someone, and inadvertently offend someone.
When meeting Platon Mikhailovich, Chatsky does not recognize his old friend; after his engagement to Natalya Dmitrievna, he became completely different from what he was. His wife answers all of Alexander Andreevich’s questions for him, as if Platon Mikhailovich himself cannot answer, and she wants to seem caring, but it turns out that her husband is under her thumb:

My dear, fasten your buttons.

But Chatsky’s advice is completely meaningless for her, and she again answers for her husband:

Platon Mikhailych loves the city,
Moscow; Why will he waste his days in the wilderness!

Chatsky is interesting to all young ladies, even the princess showed curiosity and asked who he was and whether he was rich, but when she heard that he had little money, she “crossed him off” from the list of candidates for husbands for her daughters.
The countess-granddaughter, about whom the princess said that she had been a wench for a whole century, also showed interest in Chatsky, but he himself pushed her away by calling her an imitator of milliners.
When Sophia appeared, she was surrounded by guests: Zagoretsky gave her a ticket, which, according to him, he got with great difficulty; the countess-granddaughter greeted her in French; old woman Khlestova boasted of her blackamoor. Sophia accidentally recognized Chatsky as crazy, this rumor spread at the speed of light to every guest, and everyone believed it. Everyone found the cause of this “illness”, one version more incredible than the other. Famusov said that Chatsky inherited this:

He took after his mother, after Anna Alekseevna;
The deceased went crazy eight times.

Others believed that it was all the fault of the champagne, which he “pulled in barrels of forties.” Famusov said:

Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is now, more than ever,
There were thoughtless people, deeds, and opinions.

According to him, it’s all to blame for Chatsky’s mind and knowledge, everyone agrees, they say that it’s high time to burn all the books in Russia, and teach, as Skalozub said, “our way: one, two.”
Conflicts are growing around Chatsky like a snowball. The guests are sure that he has gone crazy. In the scene with Liza and Molchalin, Sophia learns the whole truth about Alexei Stepanovich, but with their noise they wake up the whole house, Famusov comes running and reproaches his daughter for being with a man whom she recently called crazy, being near Molchalin’s room, and accusing Chatsky in frivolity and sends him away from Moscow.
Chatsky is both a winner and a loser, because he suffers a million torments, he loses his love, but he learns the whole truth about the inhabitants of Moscow. He is bored with local balls, but somewhere new adventures, people and new love await him.

Essay on the topic “Ball in Famusov’s house”

The ball in Famusov's house is an important part of the entire work, the culmination of the social and the development of the love. The ball scene expresses the main idea of the work: confrontations between representatives of outdated and advanced views.
Chatsky was not in Moscow for three years, he did not report any news about himself, and unexpectedly appeared at the Famus house, but no one was waiting for him there.
Famusov's guests are typical representatives of noble Moscow, who are only concerned with rank and the search for profitable suitors.
At the ball, Chatsky meets his friend Platon Mikhailovich and is surprised at the changes that have happened to him. In the Gorich family, the leadership belongs to Natalya Dmitrievna.
Then the Tugoukhovsky couple appears with six daughters, at balls they look for grooms, and when they learn that Chatsky is not rich and not noble, they lose interest in him. In a conversation with Countess Khryumina’s granddaughter, Chatsky ridicules “imitation milliners”; he is outraged that in Russia manners, outfits, and culture were borrowed from abroad. Zagoretsky is not liked in society; they call him a swindler, a cheat, a liar.
Chatsky and Famusov’s guests have completely different interests; there is nothing in common, which portends a conflict between them. Chatsky ridicules the lifestyle of Moscow bureaucrats, jokes, and is sarcastic. He thinks that his honesty will be answered frankly.
The rumor about Chatsky's madness is born by chance from Sophia's lips and quickly spreads along the chain and by the end of the evening no one doubts that it is true.
The dissemination of this gossip shows the mechanism of formation of public opinion.
The causes of madness include heredity, drunkenness, and enlightenment: “And in truth you will go crazy from these, from boarding schools, schools, lyceums alone.”
Famusov's guests, not yet knowing Chatsky, disliked him. They consider themselves smart, educated, high society, and Chatsky laughed at them.
It is easier for society to show that Chatsky is crazy than to admit that he is right.
Chatsky was left alone, society turned away from him, even his friend Repetilov succumbed to persuasion: “How can you be against everyone! Yes, why you? Shame and laughter!
In the ball scene, the final break between Chatsky and Famusovsky society occurs. After the ball, Chatsky decides to find out true attitude Sofia to him, this is how the outcome of any conflict occurs.

ALEXANDER SERGEEVICH GRIBOEDOV

(1795—1829)

“One of the smartest people in Russia”

The outstanding Russian writer Alexander Griboyedov was born in Moscow into a noble family.

Alexander received an excellent education. First - at home, under the guidance of foreign tutors, then - at the Moscow Noble Boarding School and Moscow University. At the university, he graduated from two faculties: literature and law, after which he began studying natural sciences and mathematics, preparing to receive a doctorate. However, the future writer did not have time to do this due to the entry of Napoleon’s army into Moscow.

At the height of the Patriotic War of 1812, A. Griboedov volunteered to join the Moscow Hussar Regiment. He remained in military service until 1816. His literary debut dates back to this four-year period: in 1814, the magazine “Bulletin of Europe” published correspondence from A. Griboedov describing a holiday organized by fellow soldiers for General Kologrivov. And in 1815, the play “Young Spouses” by a novice author was staged at the St. Petersburg Theater.

Soon after leaving military service, the writer entered the State College of Foreign Affairs.

Interesting fact

Excellent education, knowledge of European (French, German, English, Italian) and eastern (Arabic and Persian) languages, extraordinary musical abilities (A. Griboedov was an excellent pianist and composer) gave A. Pushkin reason to call him “one of the smartest people in Russia."

In 1818, the writer, having become secretary of the Russian diplomatic mission, went to Persia. On this trip, Alexander Sergeevich began work on the comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Staying in the Persian “diplomatic monastery” was a burden for A. Griboyedov, and in 1822 he was transferred to the Caucasus, to Tiflis.

A. Griboyedov conducted peace negotiations with the heir to the Persian throne, which contributed to the end of the Russian-Persian War of 1826-1828. and the conclusion of the Turkmanchay Peace, beneficial for Russia. As a reward for success, Alexander Sergeevich received the post of plenipotentiary ambassador to Persia.

In October 1828, full of plans and happy A. Griboyedov, who had just married the Georgian princess Nina Chavchavadze in Tiflis, arrived in Persia. Four months later, a crowd incited by religious fanatics destroyed the Russian mission in Tehran. Several dozen mission employees were killed, including A. Griboyedov.

The diplomat's body was taken to Tiflis and buried at the Church of St. David. At the grave, the young widow of Alexander Sergeevich Nina Chavchavadze erected a monument to the writer with the inscription: “Your mind and deeds are immortal in Russian memory, but why did my love survive you?”

Comedy "Woe from Wit". Themes and issues of the play

From 1822 to 1824 A. Griboyedov worked on his most famous work- comedy "Woe from Wit". Since the play was directed against the entire Moscow nobility, it did not pass censorship. The comedy appeared on stage only after the death of A. Griboedov.

"Woe from Wit" is an innovative play. Innovation was evident in the author's choice of topic and formulation of problems. In the comedies created by A. Griboyedov's contemporaries, individual vices were usually ridiculed: tyranny, ignorance, arrogance. A. Griboyedov reflected the life and morals of a large part of Russian society at the beginning of the 19th century. - nobility. According to the writer and literary critic I. Goncharov, “Woe from Wit” is “...a picture of morals, a gallery of living types, and an ever-sharp, burning satire.” In the play, the playwright touched upon the painful social and moral problems of his time: veneration, sycophancy, ignorance, careerism, martinetry, blind imitation of foreign things to the detriment of the original national culture.

Features of conflict comedy

The presentation of acute social and moral problems in the play became possible thanks to the depiction of the clash of the main character, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, with the Moscow nobility, typical representatives which are Famusov and his entourage - the Famusov society.

The writer showed the conflict not only of two different eras: “the present century” with the “past century”, but also of two value systems. Representatives of the “past century” are characterized by hatred of enlightenment, arrogance, lack of their own opinion, admiration for wealth and power, the desire to move up the social ladder as high as possible, groveling before those in power. In public service, Famusov and his like-minded people see only a means to get rich and acquire useful connections.

Chatsky's values are completely different. The hero defends free-thinking, independence of opinions, and spiritual independence. The idea of adapting and pleasing the powers that be for the sake of a career and personal enrichment is deeply alien to him. Alexander Andreevich does not want to be served, but is ready to serve honestly for the benefit of society.

The image of Chatsky

The main and most controversial image of the comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Almost immediately after finishing work on the comedy, conflicting reviews about this hero began to appear.

One group of critics recognized the timeliness of the hero's appearance, but noted his inability to act. For example, N. Gogol wrote: “Even the person who is apparently taken as a model, that is, Chatsky himself, shows only the desire to become something, expresses only indignation against what is despicable and vile in society, but does not provide a model for society.”

A. Pushkin in a letter to A. Bestuzhev noted: “In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” who is the smart character? Answer: Griboyedov. Do you know what Chatsky is?<...>Everything he [Chatsky] says is very smart. But to whom is he telling all this? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable. The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with and not throw pearls in front of Repetilov and the like.”

Critics from the second group considered Chatsky a new hero, whose feat and struggle is to have his say about the imperfections of the world. He does not act yet, he only speaks, but he is ready to suffer for his ideals. A. Grigoriev belonged to this group, claiming that “Chatsky is a product of the first quarter of the Russian XIX century,<...>powerful, still deeply believing in itself and therefore stubborn force, ready to perish in a collision with the environment...”

The answer to the question “Who is Chatsky?” not found yet. In modern theatrical productions, he appears either as a poser and idle talker, or as a tragic and misunderstood figure.

Creating an ambiguous image has become a new word in drama. This is also the innovation of A. Griboyedov.

Reflecting on the fate of Chatsky, I. Goncharov wrote: “Chatsky’s role is a passive role: it cannot be otherwise. This is the role of all Chatskys, although at the same time it is always victorious. But they do not know about their victory, they only sow, and others reap - and this is their main suffering, that is, in the hopelessness of success.”

Chatsky and Molchalin

The image of Chatsky is revealed in confrontation with the Famusov society and its prominent representative - Alexei Stepanovich Molchalin.

Molchalin is the complete opposite of the honest, impatient, ironic Chatsky. Alexey Stepanovich has a “speaking” surname. Unlike Chatsky, he is used to keeping quiet. Molchalin serves as secretary in Famusov’s house, trying to please his patron in everything. The main advantages of Alexei Stepanovich, in his own words, are “moderation and accuracy.” All Molchalin’s efforts are aimed at

to please the right people, make a career and get rich. The hero subordinates even his feelings to this goal.

Chatsky and Sofia

The tragic fate of Chatsky, who single-handedly confronts the entire Famus society, is intensified by his personal drama - unrequited love to Sofia. Sofia is an extraordinary girl.

On the one hand, she was raised by her father, mediocre foreign teachers and sentimental French novels. On the other hand, Sofia, like Chatsky, is smart and independent in thoughts and actions, going against the Famus environment and its values. She gives a damning description of the rich and noble Skalozub: He never uttered a smart word, -

The girl prefers the “rootless” Molchalin to the groom desired in the eyes of society. Defending her love, she shows rare courage and determination: “What do I hear? Whoever wants to judges!”

The meaning of the title of the play "Woe from Wit"

The title of A. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” is associated with the conflict of the play. The playwright poses the question of what the mind is and makes it clear to the reader: each hero has his own answer, depending on the system of moral coordinates in which he lives.

For Famus society, an indicator of intelligence is the ability to acquire wealth and achieve a high position in society. For people like Molchalin, helpfulness and compliance with moderation are considered a sign of intelligence. For Chatsky, an intelligent person is one who thinks independently and has his own opinion.

The minds of Famusov and Molchalin serve their owners, help them adapt to any conditions, achieve success, while Chatsky’s sublime mind only harms him, so for those around him he is akin to madness.

However, Chatsky not only lost, but also won in the fight against the Moscow nobility. Chatsky, being a typical product of this society, nevertheless managed to rise above it, overcome its illusory values and inert worldview. Therefore, in the title of the play - “Woe from Wit” - the reader feels bitter irony.

Comedy language

One of the main advantages of the play “Woe from Wit” is its language. From the great fabulist I. Krylov, A. Griboyedov adopted the experience of using conversational intonations and constructions in poetry. Thereby

The iambic hexameter of comedy becomes light and free. In addition, the speech of each character is individualized.

After reading the play, A. Pushkin said: “I’m not talking about poetry - half of it should be included in proverbs.” And so it happened. Already a year after the appearance of the comedy, the writer V. Odoevsky noted: “Almost all the poems of Griboedov’s comedy became proverbs, and I often happened to hear whole conversations in society, which most composed poems from “Woe from Wit.”

Many expressions and phrases from A. Griboyedov’s work still decorate our speech: “Happy people don’t watch the clock”, “And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us”, “Who are the judges?”, “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served”, “ The legend is fresh, but hard to believe” and others.

Making sense of what we read

1. Why did A. Pushkin call A. Griboyedov one of the smartest people in Russia?

2. In what field of activity, besides literature, did A. Griboedov show himself?

3. Did any fact from the writer’s biography surprise you? Why?

4. List the problems raised by the playwright in the comedy “Woe from Wit”. What works of literature do you know that deal with the social and moral issues you mentioned?

5. Which of A. Griboyedov’s aphorisms given in the article do you know? When are these phrases used?

We are preparing a project

6. Prepare a project “Interesting facts about A. Griboedov.”

WORTH FROM MIND

Comedy in five acts (Abridged)

Characters:

Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, manager at the government office.

Sofia Pavlovna, his daughter.

Lizanka, maid.

Alexey Stepanovich Molchalin, Famusov’s secretary, living in his house.

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky.

Colonel Skalozub, Sergei Sergeevich.

Natalya Dmitrievna, young lady.

Platon Mikhailovich, her husband.

G o r i c h i.

Prince Tugoukhovsky and Princess, his wife, with six daughters.

Countess grandmother.

Countess granddaughter.

Anton Antonovich Zagoretsky.

Old woman Khlestov, sister-in-law of Famusov.

Repetilov.

Parsley and several talking servants.

Lots of guests of all sorts and their lackeys on their way out. Famusov's waiters.

Action in Moscow in Famusov's house.

ACT I

[Early morning. Lizanka, who woke up in a chair in the middle of the living room, remembered that the young lady did not let her go yesterday because Molchalin came to her. The date was still not over, and the alarmed Lisa had difficulty persuading Sofia and Molchalin to break up. At the door Molchalin ran into Famusov. He asked in amazement how the secretary ended up in the living room. Molchalin lied as if he had just returned from a walk. Famusov and the secretary went to sort out business papers.]

Phenomenon 5

Sofia, Lisa.

Just think how capricious happiness is!

It can be worse, you can get away with it;

When sad nothing comes to mind,

We lost ourselves in music, and time passed so smoothly;

Fate seemed to be protecting us;

No worries, no doubts.

And grief awaits around the corner.

That's it, sir, you never favor my stupid judgment:

But here's the problem.

What better prophet do you need?

I kept repeating: there will be no good in this love, Not forever and ever.

Like all Moscow people, your father is like this:

He would like a son-in-law with stars and ranks,

And under the stars, not everyone is rich, between us;

Well, of course, then

And money to live on, so he could give balls; Here, for example, Colonel Skalozub:

And a golden bag, and aims to become a general.

How cute! and it’s fun for me to hear about the front and the rows;

He never said a smart word,

I don’t care what goes into the water.

Yes, sir, so to speak, he is eloquent, but not very cunning;

But be a military man, be a civilian,

Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,

Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!

Not to confuse you;

It's been a long time, can't turn it back

And I remember.

What do you remember? He knows how to make everyone laugh;

He chats, jokes, it’s funny to me;

You can share laughter with everyone.

But only? as if? - Shedding tears,

I remember, poor thing, how he parted with you. - “Why, sir, are you crying? live laughing."

And he responded: “No wonder, Lisa, I’m crying:

Who knows what I will find when I return?

And how much I might lose!”

The poor thing seemed to know that in three years.

Listen, don’t take unnecessary liberties.

I was very windy, perhaps I acted

And I know, and I’m guilty; but where did it change?

To whom? so that they could reproach with infidelity.

Yes, it’s true that we were brought up and grew up with Chatsky; The habit of being together every day inseparably tied us together with childhood friendship; but then he moved out, he seemed bored with us,

And he rarely visited our house;

Then again he pretended to be in love, demanding and distressed!

Sharp, smart, eloquent,

I'm especially happy with friends,

He thought highly of himself...

The desire to wander attacked him,

Oh! if someone loves someone,

Why search for the mind and travel so far?

Where is it running? in what areas?

They say he was treated in sour waters,

Not from illness, tea, from boredom - more freely.

And, of course, he’s happy where the people are funnier.

The one I love is not like this:

Molchalin is ready to forget himself for others,

The enemy of insolence - always shy, timid, whole night with anyone you can spend like that!

We are sitting, and the yard has long since turned white,

What do you think? what are you doing?<...>

He will take your hand and press it to your heart,

He will sigh from the depths of his soul,

Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,

Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me.<...>

[The servant reported on Chatsky’s arrival. Chatsky traveled for almost two days to see Sofia as quickly as possible. However, the girl received him rather coldly.]

ACT II

[Chatsky began persistently asking Famusov about his daughter. The owner of the house asked if the young man wanted to marry Sophia.]

Phenomenon 2

Famusov, Servant, Chatsky. Chatsky

Let me woo you, what would you tell me? Famusov

I would say, firstly: don’t be a whim,

Brother, don’t mismanage your property,

And, most importantly, go ahead and serve.

I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening. Famusov

That's it, you are all proud!

Would you ask what the fathers did?

We would learn from our elders:

We, for example, or the deceased uncle,

Maxim Petrovich: he’s not on silver,

Ate on gold; one hundred people at your service;

All in orders; I was always traveling in a train 1;

A century at court, and at what court!

Then it was not the same as now,

He served under the Empress Catherine.

And in those days everyone is important! at forty poods... Take a bow - we’re stupid 2 and they won’t nod.

The nobleman in case 3 - especially since

Not like anyone else, and he drank and ate differently.

And uncle! what is your prince? what's the count?

Serious look, arrogant disposition.

When do you need to help yourself?

And he bent over:

On Kurtag 4 he happened to step on his feet; He fell so hard that he almost hit the back of his head; The old man groaned, his voice hoarse;

He was granted the highest smile; They deigned to laugh; what about him?

He stood up, straightened up, wanted to bow,

A row suddenly fell - on purpose,

And the laughter is worse, and the third time it’s the same.

A? what do you think? in our opinion - smart. He fell painfully, but got up well.

But it happened that who was most often invited to whist 1?

Who hears a friendly word at court? Maxim Petrovich! Who knew honor before everyone? Maxim Petrovich! Joke!

Who promotes you to ranks and gives pensions?

Maxim Petrovich. Yes! You people today are nootka!

And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid,

You can say with a sigh;

How to compare and see the present century and the past century:

The legend is fresh, but hard to believe,

As he was famous for, whose neck bent more often;

As not in war, but in peace they took it head on,

They hit the floor without regret!

Who needs it: those are arrogant, they lie in the dust,

And for those who are higher, flattery was woven like lace. It was an age of obedience and fear,

All under the guise of zeal for the king.

I'm not talking about your uncle;

We will not disturb his ashes:

But in the meantime, who will the hunt take?

Even in the most ardent servility,

Now, to make people laugh,

Bravely sacrifice the back of your head?

And the peer, and the old man Other, looking at that leap,

And crumbling into old skin,

Tea, he said: “Ax! If only I could too!” Although there are hunters everywhere to be mean,

Yes, nowadays laughter frightens and keeps shame in check; No wonder the sovereigns favor them sparingly.

Famusov Ah! My God! he's a carbonari! 2

No, the world is not like that these days.

A dangerous person!<...>

[The servant reported Skalozub's arrival. Famusov asked Chatsky to be careful around the colonel. When Skalozub appeared, the owner of the house started with him small talk about Moscow, famous for its noble traditions and luxurious houses restored after the fire of 1812.]

Phenomenon 5

Chatsky, Famusov, Skalozub.

The houses are new, but the prejudices are old.

Rejoice, neither years, nor fashion, nor fires will destroy them.

Famusov (to Chatsky)

Hey, tie a knot for memory;

I asked you to be silent, it was not a great service.

(To Skalozub.)

Allow me, father. Here you go - Chatsky, my friend, Andrei Ilyich's late son:

It does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in it,

But if you wanted to, it would be businesslike.

It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small in head,

And he writes and translates well.

One cannot help but regret that with such a mind.

Is it possible to regret someone else?

And your praise annoys me.

I’m not the only one, everyone is also condemning.

Who are the judges? - For the antiquity of years, their enmity is irreconcilable towards a free life,

Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea 1; Always ready to fight,

They all sing the same song,

Without noticing about yourself:

The older it is, the worse it is.

Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland,

Which ones should we take as models?

Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?

They found protection from court in friends, in kinship, building magnificent chambers,

Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance,

And where foreign clients will not resurrect the meanest traits of a past life.

And who in Moscow hasn’t had their mouths clamped at lunches, dinners and dances?

Aren't you the one to whom I was born from the shrouds?

For some incomprehensible plans,

Did you take the children to bow?

That Nestor 2 noble scoundrels,

Surrounded by a crowd of servants;

Zealous, they saved his honor and life more than once during the hours of wine and fights: suddenly he exchanged three greyhounds for them!!!

Or that one over there, who, for the sake of an undertaking, drove many wagons to the serf ballet 3 From the mothers, fathers of rejected children?!

Myself immersed in mind in Zephyrs and Cupids, Made all of Moscow marvel at their beauty!

But the debtors did not agree to a deferment:

Cupids and Zephyrs are all sold out individually!!!

These are the ones who lived to see their gray hairs!

This is who we should respect in the wilderness!

Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!

Now let one of us

Of the young people, there will be an enemy of quest,

Without demanding either places or promotion,

He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge;

Or in his soul God himself will arouse a fervor for creative, lofty and beautiful arts - They immediately: robbery! fire!

And he will be known among them as a dreamer! dangerous!! —

Uniform! one uniform! he once covered them in their former life, embroidered and beautiful,

Their weakness, poverty of reason;

And we follow them on a happy journey!

And in wives and daughters there is the same passion for the uniform!

How long ago did I renounce tenderness towards him?!

Now I can’t fall into this childishness;

But who wouldn’t follow everyone then?

When from the guard, others from the court came here for a while,

The women shouted: hurray!

And they threw caps into the air!<...>

[Famusov hastened to end the conversation and left the living room. Sofia and Lisa entered the room. Through the window they accidentally saw Molchalin fall from his horse. Sofia lost consciousness from fright. Chatsky suspected that the girl was in love with the secretary.]

ACT III Phenomenon 1

Chatsky, then Sofia.

In vain: this all applies to others,

Molchalin would hardly bore you,

If only we could get along better with him.

Chatsky (fervently)

Why did you know him so briefly?

I didn’t try, God brought us together.

Look, he gained the friendship of everyone in the house;

He served under his father for three years,

He is often pointlessly angry,

And he will disarm him with silence,

From the kindness of his soul he will forgive.

And by the way,

I could look for fun;

Not at all: the old people won’t set foot outside the threshold; We frolic, we laugh,

He sits with them all day, whether he’s happy or not, plays...

Plays all day!

He is silent when he is scolded!

(To the side.)

She doesn't respect him.

Of course he doesn’t have this mind,

What a genius is to some, and to others a plague, Which is quick, brilliant and soon disgusted, Which scolds the world on the spot,

So that the world can at least say something about him; Will such a mind make a family happy?

Satire and morality - the point of it all?

(To the side.)

She doesn't give a damn about him.

Finally, He has the most wonderful properties: compliant, modest, quiet.

Not a shadow of worry in his face,

And there are no wrongdoings in my soul,

He doesn’t cut strangers at random, -

That's why I love him.

Chatsky (to the side)

He's being naughty, she doesn't love him.

I’ll help you finish with Molchalin’s image.

But Skalozub? here's a peek:

Stands up for the army,

Not my novel.

Not yours? who will solve you?<...>

[Lisa said that Molchalin will come now. Sofia left.]

Phenomenon 3

Chatsky, then Molchalin.

Oh! Sophia! Was Molchalin really chosen for her?

Why not a husband? There is only little intelligence in him;

But to have children,

Who lacked intelligence?

Helpful, modest, with a blush in his face.

(Molchalin enters.)

There he is on tiptoe and not rich in words;

What kind of sorcery he knew how to get into her heart!

(Addresses him.)

You and I, Alexey Stepanych, were unable to say two words.

Well, what is your way of life?

Without grief today? without sadness?

Molchalin

Still, sir.

How did you live before?

Molchalin

Day after day, today is like yesterday.

To pen from cards? and to cards from the pen?

And the allotted time for the ebb and flow of the tides?

Molchalin As I work and force,

Since I've been listed in Archives 1,

Received three awards.

Lured by honors and nobility?

Molchalin

No, sir, everyone has their own talent...

Molchalin

Moderation and accuracy.

The most wonderful two! and are worth our all.

Molchalin

Have you not been given ranks, have you had no success in your career?

Ranks are given by people,

And people can be deceived.<...>

[Meanwhile, guests began to arrive at Famusov’s house. Upset by Chatsky’s words about Molchalin, Sofia, in a conversation with one of the guests, said that Chatsky was out of his mind. Soon all the guests were discussing Chatsky's madness.

Unaware of the rumor started by Sofia, he delivered a woeful monologue in front of all those gathered about his dissatisfaction with Moscow. When Chatsky finished his fiery speech and looked around, he discovered that no one was listening to him: some guests danced enthusiastically, others played cards.]

ACT IV

[Late in the evening, Famusov’s guests began to leave. Chatsky, who still had not been given a carriage, went to the Swiss one. From there he heard Zagoretsky inform Repetilov about his madness. Zagoretsky’s words were confirmed by other departing guests.]

Phenomenon 10

The last lamp goes out.

Chatsky (leaves the Swiss)

What is this? did I hear with my ears!

Not laughter, but clearly anger. What miracles?

Through what witchcraft

And for others it’s like a triumph,

Others seem to have compassion...<...>

[Sofia appears. Chatsky realized that she was looking for Molchalin and hid behind a column.]

Phenomenon 12

Chatsky behind the column, Liza, Molchalin (stretches and yawns), Sofia (sneaks from above).

Molchalin

<...>I don’t see anything enviable in Sofya Pavlovna. May God grant her a rich life,

I once loved Chatsky,

He will stop loving me like he did.

My little angel, I would like to feel half the same for her as I feel for you;

No, no matter how much I tell myself,

I’m getting ready to be gentle, but when I’m dating, I’ll throw a sheet.

Sofia (to the side)

What baseness!

Chatsky (behind the column)

And you are not ashamed?

Molchalin My father bequeathed to me:

Firstly, please all people without exception - the owner where you happen to live,

The boss with whom I will serve,

To his servant who cleans dresses,

Doorman, janitor, to avoid evil,

To the janitor's dog, so that it is affectionate.<. >

[Molchalin wanted to hug Lisa, but he was stopped by Sofia, who heard the entire conversation. Molchalin fell to his knees in front of her, but the girl demanded that he leave the house immediately. Molchalin hid in his room.]

Phenomenon 13

The same, except for Molchalin.

Rather faint, now it's alright

There is a more important reason why

Here is the solution to the riddle at last!

Here I am donated to!

I don’t know how I curbed my rage!

I looked and saw and didn’t believe it!

And darling, for whom is it forgotten?

And the former friend, and women's fear and shame, -

He hides behind the door, afraid to be held accountable.

Oh! how to comprehend the game of fate?

A persecutor of people with a soul, a scourge! - Silent people are blissful in the world!

Sofia (all in tears)

Don't continue, I blame myself all around.

But who would have thought that he could be so insidious!

Knock! noise! Oh! My God! the whole house is running here. Your father will be grateful.

Phenomenon 14

Chatsky, Sofia, Lisa, Famusov, a crowd of servants with candles.

Here! Behind me! hurry up! hurry up!

More candles and lanterns!

Where are the brownies? Bah! All familiar faces!

Daughter, Sofya Pavlovna! Stranger!

Shameless! Where! with whom! She is like her mother, a deceased wife.

It happened that I was with my better half

A little apart - somewhere with a man!

Fear God, how? How did he seduce you?

She called him crazy!

No! Stupidity and blindness have attacked me!

It's all a conspiracy, and there was a conspiracy

Himself and all the guests. Why am I being punished like this!..<...>

Chatsky (fervently)

<...>Blind! In whom I sought the reward of all my labors! I was in a hurry!.. flying! trembled! Happiness, I thought, was close. Before whom I was so passionately and so lowly Was a waste of tender words!

And you! Oh my God! who did you choose?

When I think about who you preferred!

Why did they lure me with hope?

Why didn't they tell me directly?

Why did you turn everything that happened into laughter?!

That the memory even disgusts you

Those feelings, in both of us the movements of those hearts,

Which have never cooled in me,

No entertainment, no change of place.

I breathed and lived by them, was constantly busy!

They would say that my sudden arrival was to you,

My appearance, my words, actions - everything is disgusting, -

I would immediately cut off relations with you And before parting forever,

I wouldn't bother to get there very much,

Who is this dear person to you?..

(Mockingly.)

You will make peace with him, after mature reflection.

Destroy yourself, and why!

Think, you can always take care of him, and swaddle him, and send him to work. A boy-husband, a servant-husband, one of the wife's pages—the high ideal of all Moscow husbands. - Enough!.. with you I am proud of my breakup.

And you, sir father, you, passionate about ranks:

I wish you to sleep in happy ignorance,

I do not threaten you with my matchmaking.

There will be another, well-behaved one,

A sycophant and a businessman,

Finally, He is equal in merits to his future father-in-law.

So! I have completely sobered up

Dreams out of sight - and the veil fell;

Now it wouldn’t be bad for the daughter and the father in a row,

And on a foolish lover,

And pour out all the bile and all the frustration to the whole world.<...>

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!..

Carriage for me, carriage!

(Leaves.)

Phenomenon 15

Except Chatsky.

Well? Don't you see that he's gone crazy?

Say it seriously:

Insane! What kind of nonsense is he talking about here!

The sycophant! father-in-law! and so menacing about Moscow!

Have you decided to kill me?

Isn't my fate still sad?

Oh! My God! what will he say

Princess Marya Aleksevna!

Reflecting on the text of a work of art

1. There are two conflicts in comedy: social and love. Name their participants. Do the moments at which conflicts begin coincide?

2. What principles do people in the Famus circle adhere to? What is their highest value? What social and moral problems Are they related to the image of Famus society?

3. In what way does Chatsky’s position contradict the views of Famus society?

4. Describe the image of Chatsky. In your opinion, can he be called a positive hero? Justify your answer.

5. What do you think had the strongest influence on Sofia’s attitude towards Chatsky: public opinion, falling in love with Molchalin, or the character of the hero himself? Justify your answer.

6. How do other comedy characters feel about Chatsky? Why was everyone so willing to believe that he had gone crazy?

7. How does Molchalin’s speech reveal his character, views, and principles?

8. In your opinion, which character primarily refers to the title of the comedy “Woe from Wit”?

9. How does the play address the theme of the mind raised in the title?

10. How do the lifestyles and moral principles of Chatsky and Molchalin differ? Fill out the table “Comparative characteristics of Chatsky and Molchalin” in your notebook.

11. Write out phrases from the play that can be called aphorisms.

12. What is comedy? Why did A. Griboedov classify his work in this genre?

13. Why do some researchers say that the play has features of tragedy?

We express our opinion

14. The comedy “Woe from Wit” has been around for almost 200 years. theatrical stage. How do you explain the reason for your interest in her? How can a modern viewer be attracted to the image of Chatsky? Are the questions raised in the play relevant?

We read expressively

15. Remember what a monologue is. Learn by heart and expressively read one of the monologues of Chatsky or Famusov (your choice). In your opinion, what feelings do you want to convey when reading?

Aesthetic position of A. S. Griboyedov. Creative history and genre versatility of the comedy “Woe from Wit”

The creative history of the comedy “Woe from Wit”

There are various testimonies from his contemporaries about the beginning of Griboyedov’s work on the comedy “Woe from Wit”.

At the end of 1821, Griboyedov ends up in Tiflis for service. Here, apparently, his plan for a comedy takes shape, and the first two acts were written here.

At the end of July 1828, Griboyedov went to Begichev’s estate, where he completed work on the last two acts of “Woe from Wit.” At the same time, the comedy received its final name instead of the original “Woe to Wit.” In June 1824, Griboedov, leaving for St. Petersburg, left the manuscript of the comedy with Begichev, but took with him a copy, which later formed the basis of the final edition of the work. In the process of reading the comedy to friends and acquaintances, Griboyedov constantly improves the text of the work, eliminating style errors, changing expressions and turns of phrase. The first separate edition of “Woe from Wit” appeared after the death of Griboyedov, in 1833, and the complete edition, not distorted by censorship, was published only in 1862.

2) about the genre:

It is known that Griboedov initially defined his work as a “stage poem.”

Chatsky's tragedy was supposed to unfold narratively, against the backdrop of a picture of modern reality, against the backdrop of bright events of the time, a clash of different worldviews. In other words, the theatrical genre was rethought and acquired a completely unexpected appearance. This genre ambiguity, which appeared already during the creation of “Woe from Wit” and was clearly reflected in the comedy itself, caused numerous bewilderments and conflicting assessments. The intrigue is based on various kinds of misunderstandings that are resolved as the action progresses. The intrigue is driven by links of chance (Sophia's fainting, her spreading slander about Chatsky, the delay of his carriage, Sophia's unexpected appearance at the moment of Molchalin's love explanation to Liza). Traditional comic roles were also preserved: Chatsky - an unlucky lover; Molchalin is a successful lover and a cunning man; Sophia is a spoiled, sentimental girl; Famusov is a father whom everyone deceives, while he is preoccupied with his daughter’s advantageous marriage; Lisa is a shrewd, dexterous servant.

Characteristic names are also traditional. And yet, with all the similarities with the Russian classic comedy, “Woe from Wit” did not fit into the traditional framework of this genre. First of all, the content of "Woe from Wit" was much broader than the traditional content of a comedy. The usual intrigue and struggle that Chatsky waged as the hero of an ordinary comedy was pushed into the background by another struggle that Chatsky waged with the society of the Famusovs, Skalozubovs, Khlestovs, Repetilovs, and Zagoretskys. This different, higher social and ideological content determined the originality of the comedy genre - satire of social mores, which was noticed by many critics and writers. Russian comedy (before Griboedov) set as its task the ridicule of human vices, but this ridicule only occasionally rose to the ridicule of social vices, entire social phenomena. No wonder Belinsky wrote that “Woe from Wit” is the most evil satire on society. Genre features of satire influenced the composition of the comedy and the development of the main intrigue. The comic, satirical, and tragic are inseparably fused into a single whole, and this is the genre uniqueness of “Woe from Wit.” Namely, in merging, in synthesis, and not in alternating comic episodes with tragic ones, interspersed with satirical monologues. At the same time, two lines are developing, inextricably linked with each other: Chatsky - Sophia, Chatsky - Famusov's society.

Newspapers in the “Correspondence Seminar” section could get acquainted with several lectures by E.I. Vigdorova, devoted to the analysis of Griboyedov’s comedy. We are pleased to now present a book containing these lectures, which were highly appreciated by teachers, and also containing lesson planning, various types of tasks, the history of comedy and a variety of additional material. Book written by E.L. Beznosov and E.I. Vigdorova will undoubtedly be a valuable assistant to a literature teacher. Here are excerpts from it.

There are various testimonies from his contemporaries about the beginning of Griboedov’s work on the comedy “Woe from Wit,” of which the most authoritative seems to be the memoirs of one of the playwright’s closest friends, S.N. Begichev: “...I know that the plan for this comedy was made by him back in St. Petersburg in 1816, and several scenes were even written; but I don’t know, in Persia or in Georgia, Griboedov changed it in many ways and destroyed some of the characters, and among others, Famusov’s wife, a sentimental fashionista and a Moscow aristocrat (at that time fake sensitivity was still somewhat in vogue among Moscow ladies), and at the same time Scenes already written were also thrown out.”

Another friend of Griboyedov, Bulgarin, recalled: “While in Persia in 1821, Griboyedov dreamed of St. Petersburg, Moscow, his friends, relatives, acquaintances, about the theater, which he loved passionately, and about artists. He went to sleep in a kiosk in the garden, and had a dream that presented him with a dear fatherland, with everything that remained dear to his heart. He dreamed that among his friends he was talking about the plan for a comedy that he had written, and even reading some passages from it. Having awakened, Griboyedov takes a pencil, runs into the garden and that same night draws up the plan for “Woe from Wit” and composes several scenes of the first act.

In March 1823, Griboyedov received a long leave and came to Moscow, at which time he had two acts ready. S.N. spoke about his first impression of the comedy in his memoirs. Begichev: “Only two acts were written from his comedy “Woe from Wit”. He read them to me, I made some comments to him during the first act, he argued, and it even seemed to me that he did not take them well. The next day I came to him early and found him just getting out of bed: he was sitting undressed in front of the kindled stove and throwing his first act into it, one sheet at a time. I shouted: “Listen, what are you doing?!” “I’ve thought about it,” he answered, “yesterday you told me the truth, but don’t worry: everything is already ready in my head.” And a week later the first act was already written.”

The autograph of the early edition of the comedy actually lacks pages that contained several scenes from the first act. It can be assumed that Griboedov agreed with Begichev’s remarks, having experienced fresh Moscow impressions, which allowed him to develop new pictures in his comedy.

At the end of July 1823, Griboedov went to Begichev’s estate, where he completed work on the last two acts of “Woe from Wit.” Already at this time, the comedy received its final name, which sounded more comedic compared to the original “Woe to Wit.”

E.L. BEZNOSOV

Commented reading of the comedy "Woe from Wit".

Act four (excerpt)

Probably, the image of Sophia surprises Pushkin with some uncertainty. After all, the most interesting thing about Sophia is her... ordinariness, triviality. Tatyana, the same age and contemporary of Sophia, differs from Griboyedov’s heroine not only in the firmness of her moral position, but also in her inner freedom.<...>Pushkinskaya Tatyana is not like anyone else, not only in the village, where she “seemed like a stranger’s girl in her own family,” and in the capital, because “everything was quiet, it was just there,” - the adult Tatyana is not like the book heroines either , which I “imagined” in my youth. Inner freedom helps Tatyana not only to perform extravagant acts typical of a romantic heroine, but also to choose the most ordinary path, like a mother, like a nanny: she goes to a brides fair and marries a fat general. This is described, as we remember, in the seventh chapter, and Pushkin, it seems, introduces her precisely into Famusov’s society: Moscow aunties and grandmothers, Princess Elena, who “still has the same tulle cap,” Lukerya Lvovna, who “keeps whitewashing herself,” and Lyubov Petrovna, lying “everything is the same”, they have the same husbands and Pomeranians - the same as Khlestova’s, Natalya Dmitrievna’s... Quoting “Woe from Wit”, Pushkin seems to confirm what Griboyedov described, agrees with him , and passing off his Tatyana as “that fat general,” Famusov would be delighted if she were his daughter! – Pushkin shows precisely the independence of his heroine. Outwardly, it would seem that, following other people's norms and even realizing someone else's dream (Famusov's dream of Sophia's marriage), Tatyana remains herself. And about the general, Pushkin will not forget to say that, unlike Skalozub, he received awards not for “sitting in a trench”, but for the fact that “he was maimed in battle”...

So, Griboyedov's comedy influenced the development of the plot in Eugene Onegin, and the comparison with Sophia helped Pushkin highlight the very important character traits of his beloved heroine for him - those traits that Sophia does not have.

The lack of integrity in the character of Griboyedov’s heroine (“either... or a Moscow cousin”) turned out to be not an omission of the comedy author, but main feature his character, completely new to the literature of that time and, by the way, standing apart in all of Russian XIX literature centuries, where, following not Griboyedov’s, but Pushkin’s tradition, writers embodied positive ideal specifically in a female form.

The question “Who is she?” with which we began our conversation about Sophia, will not be so difficult if we accept this version: not a stupid girl, the daughter of her father, following his examples, and her mother, whom she, according to Famusov, resembles :

Neither give nor take, she
Like her mother, the deceased wife.
It happened that I was with my better half
A little apart - somewhere with a man!

And one more thing: Madame Rosier’s pupil, who learned her lessons; a friend of Natalya Dmitrievna, dreaming of a “charming husband”-slave; the niece of the same aunt whose “young Frenchman ran away... from home,” aware that they will “talk about her the same way... later.” Sophia, just like her confidant servant, knows that “evil tongues scarier than a pistol"; like everyone who enters Famus’s house, Sophia does not consider misalliances like the dance master’s marriage “to at least some princess” possible. Sophia - and this happens with book heroines - was disappointed in Chatsky, who laughed and joked; She was also disappointed in Molchalin, who did not joke or laugh - now the memories of her former lover are “like a sharp knife.”

Sophia, like Tatyana, is a well-read young lady, but it was not novels that determined her character, although they influenced her speech, manners, and even more - her last lover, at first glance, looks like a novel hero - it’s not for nothing that he so organically “fits” into her absolutely a book dream (note that Tatyana’s dream, created by Pushkin, of course, after reading the comedy, the heroine actually sees it, hence its special charm). Of course, the reader-viewer has no right to condemn Sophia who has fallen out of love, or Sophia who is offended. But the reader also sees another Sophia - taking revenge on the sly, betraying not only love, but also old friendship, a gossip, and finally a slanderer. Sophia knows what she is doing, and her evil tongue really strikes Chatsky worse than a pistol.

Sofya Famusova turns out to be the inspirer of Chatsky’s “crowd of tormentors” - the same crowd that, if she had followed the literary canons, she herself should have despised or at least feared. But that’s why Sophia is not afraid of this crowd, because it is flesh of flesh, blood of blood of all these old women, old men, old maids and young ladies and brides. No, she will never be a “stranger girl” in the world where she lives, and therefore this play is not written about her, who is trivial even in her experiences.

Its main character is Chatsky, a contemporary of Griboyedov and Pushkin, Onegin and Lensky, happy in friends who, somewhere out there, outside the play, live and write “freely and freely”; unlucky in love; a wanderer looking for a mind and a corner for an “offended feeling.”

A contemporary of Griboyedov and Pushkin, he either took part in the Patriotic War, like the first, or, like the second, he only saw how “army after army flowed,” and recalled how

We said goodbye to our older brothers
And they returned to the shadow of science with annoyance,
Jealous of the one who dies
Walked past us...

We cannot prove either one or the other.

Herzen saw in Chatsky, albeit with some reservations, a type of Decembrist, and assumed that his further path was Senate Square and Siberia. This seems doubtful to us for the reasons already mentioned, but we cannot completely deny this possibility.

The article “A Million Torments” by I.A. Goncharov wrote in 1872 and not only gave an excellent analysis of the comedy, but especially ardently defended Chatsky. “And there is only one warrior in the field, if he is Chatsky” - this is what the author of “Oblomov” writes when, it would seem, the time of the Chatskys has long passed. This is how the longing for Chatsky manifested itself - simple-minded, witty, always ready to enter into a conversation, an argument, incredibly open - both in the manifestation of feelings and in speeches. Who replaced him in the literature of the second half of the century? To some extent, Ilya Ilyich Oblomov inherited his purity, simplicity, and even reluctance to be served. And his willingness to “search and travel so far”—maybe Stolz? Rebellion - Raskolnikov, the desire to change morals... heroes N.G. Chernyshevsky? Traits of Chatsky, but at the same time also of Molchalin, are present in Glumov, the hero of the play by A.N. Ostrovsky “Simplicity is enough for every wise man.” They also exist in Turgenev’s Rudin, a wanderer and idealist who died on foreign barricades. And yet, in none of these heroes the whole of Chatsky was reborn - with his almost childish stubbornness (“I won’t come to my senses, it’s my fault”), with his sensitivity (“I love you without memory”), with his thirst for achievement (“Who would then I didn’t follow everyone”), with his inability to “believe involuntarily.”

In the article “A Million Torments” one simultaneously feels both longing for Chatsky and the consciousness of the timelessness of the human type discovered by Griboyedov, that is, a person whom nothing can force “to believe against his will.” But as for the socio-political views of this hero, he undoubtedly belongs to the people of the Decembrist fold, although it is unlikely that he is a member of any Decembrist organization. And if Chatsky comes out onto Senate Square, then, like Kuchelbecker, it will be almost by accident, or, better yet, by accident, having found himself next to his friends just before the uprising. So, by his own admission, Pushkin could have become involved in the Decembrist affair. Chatsky, who disdains public opinion and is truly independent of the opinions of the notorious “everyone,” can only be drawn behind these “everyone” in one case - if there is a feat, glory, or danger ahead. Yes, he probably could have been a participant in the rebellion, because

A rebellion cannot end in success -
Otherwise his name is different.

And we are unlikely to ever find Chatsky among the winners: after all, his mind can only bring him grief - as Griboyedov said in the title of the comedy.

Just as we cannot define the framework, boundaries for the eternally dissident Chatsky, so we cannot define either the framework or boundaries for Griboyedov’s comedy. Along with the elements of classicism - the unity of place, time, partially - only in speaking surnames– actions, a romantic conflict develops. “A crowd of tormentors” and a lonely hero, burdened with “a million torments,” a wanderer before the beginning of the story, a fugitive and an exile at the end of the play - all this no longer seems like a classic comedy, but a romantic drama.

However, what kind of unity of action can we talk about when even in the minor Repetilov there are “2, 3, 10 characters”, and we still cannot agree on a common opinion about the mind of the main character... If we talk about Chatsky as a romantic hero, it cannot help but note that for a lonely hero he is too “with friends... happy” and that his behavior is still typical.

In the comedy "Woe from Wit" not only morals are depicted, portraits are given, but precisely the types, or, as Gogol would later say, “kinds” of people are developed. It is curious that almost all comedy heroes have a tendency to generalize. “Like everyone from Moscow,” Liza defines Famusova’s type. “These gentlemen,” Famusov says firmly. “A husband is a boy, a husband is a servant, one of his wife’s pages,” Chatsky says about the ideal of Moscow young ladies. It is to this type that his long-time friend, and now Natalya Dmitrievna’s “charming husband”, Platon Mikhailovich, belongs. The incredible number of off-stage characters introduced by Griboedov creates a feeling of the enormity of the world beyond Famusovsky house. There is Chatsky, who “if he wanted, he would be a businessman,” but he doesn’t want to, but there is also Skalozub’s cousin, who “suddenly left the service,” although “the rank followed him.” There is a nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, Prince Fyodor, who studied at the “Pedagogical” Institute, where “professors practice schisms and unbelief,” - he, this nephew, also, like Chatsky, “does not want to know the ranks.” There are also all these gentlemen traveling or living in the countryside.

However, there are also those who make up the “tormenting crowd”

In the love of traitors, in the tireless enmity,
Indomitable storytellers,
Clumsy smart people, crafty simpletons,
Sinister old women, old men...

For Chatsky they are “sinister old women, old men,” and for Famusov they are “our old men” with their wives, sons, grandchildren - all those “Moscow” ones who have a “special imprint,” just like Pavel Afanasyevich and Sofya Pavlovna themselves.

So, the expansion of geographical and temporal space, despite the strict observance of the unity of place and time, is not so much the psychological depth inherent not in a dramatic work, but in an epic work, but rather in the multiplicity and ambiguity of characters noted by Pushkin, as well as the absence or rather some uncertainty of the plan , - all this together creates a feeling of the enormity of the world in the comedy, and determines the scale of its conflict.

A love affair in which, like in a box, a political comedy is inserted; opposition of minds, this love affair aggravated - this is the conflict of the comedy written about people who lived in the early twenties of the last century. By drawing characters and developing the action of the comedy, Griboyedov undoubtedly creates a reliable atmosphere of the time.

However, all these historical costumes, as well as the details pointing to a certain era, all of this turns out to be as conventional as the clock with translated hands that still stands in the living room, which is the stage.

Comedy time still lasts.

Aesthetic position of A. S.

Popular Essays

Aesthetic position of A. S. Griboyedov. Creative history and genre versatility of the comedy “Woe from Wit”

Commented reading of the comedy "Woe from Wit".

Act four (excerpt)