Comic scenes in D. Fonvizin's work "The Minor". Essay “Funny and tragic in the comedy D

All this would be funny if it weren't so sad. M. Yu. Lermontov The last four decades of the 18th century. are distinguished by the genuine flowering of Russian drama. But classic comedy and tragedy far from exhaust its genre composition. Works not provided for by the poetics of classicism are beginning to penetrate into dramaturgy, indicating an urgent need to expand the boundaries and democratize the content of the theatrical repertoire. Among these new products, first of all was the so-called tearful comedy, that is, a play that combines touching and comic principles. It was distinguished not only by the destruction of the usual genre forms, but also by the complexity and inconsistency of the characters of the new heroes, who combined both virtues and weaknesses. The famous comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” is distinguished by its great social depth and sharp satirical orientation.

In essence, this is where Russian history begins. social comedy. The play continues the traditions of classicism. “For life,” G. A. Gukovsky pointed out, “his artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the school." However, Fonvizin's play is a phenomenon of later, more mature Russian classicism, which was strongly influenced by Enlightenment ideology. In "Nedorosl", according to the first biographer of Fonvizin, the author "no longer jokes, does not laugh, but is indignant at vice and stigmatizes he has no mercy, and even if he makes him laugh, then the laughter he inspires does not distract him from deeper and more regrettable impressions." The object of ridicule in Fonvizin's comedy is not private life nobles, and their public, official activity and serfdom.

Not content with just depicting noble “evil morality,” the writer strives to show its causes. The author explains the vices of people by their improper upbringing and dense ignorance, presented in the play in its various manifestations. Genre originality The work lies in the fact that “The Minor,” according to G. A. Gukovsky, is “half comedy, half drama.” Indeed, the basis, the backbone of Fonvizin’s play is classic comedy, but serious and even touching scenes are brought into it.

These include Pravdin’s conversation with Starodum, Starodum’s touching and edifying conversations with Sophia and Milon. The tearful Drama suggests the image of a noble reasoner in the person of Sta-Rodum, as well as of “suffering virtue” in the person of Sophia. The finale of the play also combines touching and deeply moralistic principles. Here Mrs. Prostakova is overtaken by a terrible, completely unforeseen punishment.

She is rejected, rudely pushed away by Mitrofan, to whom she devoted all her boundless, albeit unreasonable love. The feeling they have for her goodies- Sophia, Starodum and Pravdin - complex, ambiguous. It contains both pity and condemnation. It is not Prostakova who evokes compassion, but trampled human dignity. Starodum’s final remark addressed to Prostakova also resonates strongly: “Here is evil worthy fruits"_ i.e. fair retribution for violating moral and social norms. D. I. Fonvizin managed to create a bright, amazing true picture moral and social degradation of the nobility late XVIII V. The playwright uses all the means of satire, denounces and criticizes, ridicules and condemns, but his attitude towards the “noble” class is far from the view of an outsider: “I saw,” he wrote, “from the most respectable ancestors of despised descendants...

I am a nobleman, and this is what tore my heart apart." Fonvizin's comedy is extremely important milestone in the history of our drama. Following it are “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov and “The Inspector General” by Gogol. “...Everything turned pale,” Gogol wrote, “before two bright works: before Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” and Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit.”

This might interest you:

“One respect should be flattering for a person - spiritual, and only those who are in rank not by money, and in the nobility not by rank, are worthy of spiritual respect.” I.FonvizinV early XVIII...

The comedy by D. N. Fonvizin “The Minor” is the pinnacle of Russian drama of the 18th century. The work was created according to the strict rules of classicism: the unity of time (day), place (Prostakovs’ house) and action (rivalry of suitors) is observed...

The comedy “Minor” absorbed all the experience accumulated by Fonvizin, and in depth ideological issues, in terms of the courage and originality of the artistic solutions found, it remains an unsurpassed masterpiece Russian...

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin - creator immortal comedy“Undergrowth.” For more than two hundred years it has not left the stages of Russian theaters, remaining still interesting and relevant...

The Russian line of literary satire, to which N.V. Gogol, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, A.P. Chekhov can be counted in the 19th century, and in the 20th century -...

Rating entries
- - 15,565 views
- - 11,062 views
- - 10,650 views
- - 9,827 views
- - 8,733 views

News

Fonvizin's play "The Minor" is the first Russian socio-political comedy. In it, the playwright exposes the vices of the Russian nobility and, at the same time, develops his ideal, based on educational ideas of universal education. Although the genre of “The Minor” is defined as a comedy, the work skillfully combines and intertwines the funny and the sad, the comic and the dramatic. What in the play makes us laugh? It seems to me, first of all, the scenes related to Mitrofan’s training. This overgrown lout doesn’t even know the simplest things, and, moreover, doesn’t want to learn anything. He dreams only of marrying Sophia for the sake of receiving a large dowry. What thoughts about studying can there be! It is interesting that Mitrofan’s expression “I don’t want to study, but I want to get married” entered the colloquial Russian language and became popular. Episodes of Mitrofan's “training” are depicted in comic tones. The scenes of his “ostentatious” lessons with Tsifirkin, Kuteikin, Vralman are hilarious. We see how ignorant and rude this little fellow is to teachers. He has one solution for all problems: “Once three is three. Once zero is zero. Once zero is zero,” to all comments there is one answer: “Well! Give me the board, garrison rat! Ask what to write." It’s interesting that the teachers, who knows how educated people, and some, like Vralman, are completely decent swindlers, who long ago “saw through” the lazy and stupid Mitrofan. Thus, seminarian Kuteikin almost openly mocks his student, but neither he nor his mother sees this: “Kuteikin. Worm, that is, animal, cattle. In other words: “I am cattle.” Mitrofan. “I am cattle.” Kuteikin (in a training voice). "Not a man." Mitrofan (ditto). "Not a man." In addition, the scenes of “The Minor” seem funny, where they describe family relationships Prostakov-Skotinin. One involuntarily laughs at the way Prostakova treats her husband and brother - “holds them under her thumb” and twirls them as she wants. Her swear words addressed to the serfs, her curses are funny. Skotinin is funny with his obsession with pigs, etc. But, reading all these scenes, you involuntarily catch yourself thinking that something sad and even scary is mixed in with the laughter. This feeling reaches its culmination, for example, in the episode of Skotinin’s quarrel with his nephew. These seemingly dear people are ready to physically destroy each other because of money - Sophia’s dowry: “Skotinin (trembling and threatening, walks away). I'll get you there. Eremeevna (trembling, following). I have my own grips sharp! Mitrofan (following Skotinin). Get out, uncle; get lost." Among other things, in this scene additional touches appear to the image of Mitrofan. This little guy, well-fed and physically strong, turns out to be a coward. We see that he, frightened by his uncle, hides behind old Eremeevna’s back: “Mommy! shield me." Mitrofan was accustomed to always and in everything rely on his mother and serfs. Without them, this almost adult man is as helpless as a child. We see that he largely repeats the fate of his father, the same spineless lump. It is sad to observe Eremeevna’s behavior in this scene. A peasant woman who had never heard one in her entire life. kind words from the owners, however, she is devoted to them to the last drop of blood: “Eremeevna (shielding Mitrofan, becoming furious and raising her fists). I’ll die on the spot, but I won’t give up the child.” How can we explain this truly canine devotion? Historical circumstances or peculiarities of the Russian character? It seems to me that the author leaves this question unanswered, only raising the question of a more humane, “enlightened” attitude of the nobles towards their serfs. Sad and dramatic final scenes“Undergrowth”, where “the worthy fruits of evil” are punished. But, despite the fact that Prostakova rightly failed in all her plans and deservedly lost her estate, in the last scenes her fate evokes pity and even sympathy. But we feel sorry not for Prostakova the serf-wife, but for Prostakova the mother. In the finale, Mitrofan, for whom she lived and who, in fact, was the meaning of her life, betrays Prostakova, cowardly refuses her: “Let go, mother, how you imposed yourself...” A playwright with great psychological mastery describes the mother’s grief: “And you! And you leave me! A! ungrateful! (Fainted).” And then follows the almost final phrase of this heroine: “Ms. Prostakova (waking up in despair). I'm completely lost! My power has been taken away! You can’t show your eyes anywhere out of shame! I don’t have a son!” Thus, in the play by D.I. Fonvizin's work closely intertwines the funny and the sad, the comic and the dramatic. Furthermore, the laughter in the work is, in my opinion, not entertaining, but edifying in nature. By ridiculing the shortcomings of the Russian nobility, the writer seeks to point them out to enlightened people, and, perhaps, to eradicate them. The same purpose is served by dramatic episodes"Undergrown." The combination of these contrasting ways of depicting reality enhances the effect and makes Fonvizin’s comedy outstanding work Russian drama of the 18th century.

The comic and the tragic in the comedy “The Minor” (mini-review)

Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" makes the reader smile at the funny and absurd characters. The writer ridicules the dense ignorance and reluctance to somehow change the situation, miseducation noble children, their laziness and lack of their own position.

The comedy "The Minor" seems funny only at first glance. Of course, one can condemn Mrs. Prostakova for her incorrect and unreasonable upbringing of her own son. But she received a worthy punishment for her mistakes. The son's words at the end of the comedy are living proof of the genuine contempt and indifference that the son feels towards his mother.

The mother indulged all the whims of her child, but this was precisely what turned out to be the most negative factor, who turned Mitrofanushka into a wretched and insignificant creature. Prostakova is a very colorful character, she personifies everything human vices and weaknesses. Her brother looks the same, whose favorite place is a barn with pigs. Mitrofanushka also left not far from them. He has neither intelligence, nor nobility, nor lofty aspirations. He is primitive and pathetic. Of course, all these characters are very comical. But at the same time, in this comicality lies a huge human tragedy.

Vices such as rudeness, greed, hypocrisy, indifference, ignorance testify to the enormous moral degradation of people. The baseness and squalor of the Prostakovs and Skotinins are active and aggressive qualities that affect the lives of other people, that is, in the work there is a confrontation between good and evil. And the tragedy is precisely that evil is actually very strong.

Bibliography

To prepare this work, materials from the site http://sochinenya.narod.ru were used

In literature, as in life, the cheerful and comic is closely intertwined with the sad and tragic. Reading a work, together with the author we laugh or feel sad, rejoice or suffer. Likewise, D.I. Fonvizin’s play “The Minor,” which is a comedy genre, evokes laughter, but only very often—it’s “laughter through tears.” Why is this so? It would seem that the era of the reign of Catherine II, depicted in the work, is not very clear and close to us, the readers.

XXI century, but the main problems of comedy are so relevant and topical that we are imbued with the author’s ideas and understand what the playwright is laughing at and what he is sad about.

The scene of Mitrofanushka trying on a caftan, and Eremeevna’s words that he “languished until the very morning,” although he “almost didn’t have dinner at all,” also evokes laughter: “three slices of corned beef, and hearth... five... six,” yes “I deigned to eat a whole jug of kvass.” The resourcefulness of the undergrowth is also funny when he “felt sorry” for his mother, who was “so tired, beating the priest.” And at the same time, Mrs. Prostakova’s abusive speech, her arbitrariness and cruelty cause bewilderment and indignation.

Reading the play further and getting to know the characters better, we laugh bitterly at Skotinin, who only loves pigs, and having married Sophia, “wants to have his own piglets,” and at Mitrofanushka, “so-and-so smart,” “so-and-so wise.” "a child whose stupidity is ridiculed by the writer, especially in the scene of teaching the undergrowth.

Tsyfirkin remarks: “All the butts, your honor. After all, a person will remain with his backside.” But this does not bother Mitrofan, and Prostakova is deeply confident that her son is already smart enough, and sincerely exclaims: “With his intelligence, let him fly far, and God forbid!” And then we have the opportunity to see with our own eyes what Mitrofanushka is like in the sciences. This is indeed, in the words of Kuteikin, “I am cattle, not man. Defamation of people."

Besides the fact that Mitrofan is stupid and uneducated, he is also ill-mannered, he does not love anyone and does not feel sorry for him, not even his own mother. And it's sad. Last scene, in which the son rudely pushes away his mother, is truly tragic. What can come out of an undergrowth for whom nothing is sacred in life?!

This is a tragedy for Fonvizin, who dreamed of an enlightened young generation, filled with nobility and a desire to benefit the fatherland, Russia. Laughing at the sad phenomena of reality, the playwright sought to reveal those shortcomings in the upbringing and education of the nobles, which led to the emergence of a whole army of the same Mitrofans - lazy, ignorant, mama's boys. Even now he makes us think about what we are like and whether in some ways we are similar to the undergrowth, and in some ways like his relatives. After all, ignorance, laziness, cruelty, bad manners and other human vices have taken deep roots and it is very difficult to get rid of them, especially in the present time.

Comic scenes in D. Fonvizin's work "The Minor". Essay “Funny and tragic in the comedy D

This might interest you:

Rating entries

News

Popular Essays

Exam essays

The comic and the tragic in the comedy “The Minor” (mini-review)

Bibliography