Chatsky's attitude to Famus society. Essay on the topic: Chatsky and the Famusov Griboyedov Society, Woe from Wit

The satirical comedy by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov describes the noble society of the 10-20s of the 19th century. The main character of the work, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, is a young, noble, honest and free-thinking person. In the comedy, he is contrasted not only with individual characters, but also with the entire Famus society, which lived according to the traditions of the “past century.”

Famusov, in whose house the events unfolded, is a typical Moscow gentleman, an official - a bureaucrat, a serf owner, devoid of morality. He did not like service, he served only for money, ranks and awards. He didn’t even know the essence of his work: “It’s signed, off your shoulders,” and he wasn’t interested in what he was signing. Chatsky, on the contrary, served the Motherland, wanted to benefit the people, fought for the abolition of serfdom and personal freedom. He was very smart and educated.

Alexey Stepanovich Molchalin lived and worked in Famusov's house. He looked after Sophia, but did not love her, but simply hoped with her help to get a better job in life and make a career. To achieve this, he stopped at nothing: he deceived Famusov and curried favor with everyone. All his politeness was feigned, he just wanted to appear to be what those around him wanted him to be. His motto: please everyone on whom he depends. Molchalin was accepted in society, although he was just a minor nobleman. Chatsky spoke caustically about him, considered him stupid and ridiculous. He spoke with a contemptuous grin about Molchalin: “He will reach the famous levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.”

Another representative of the Famusov society was Sergei Sergeevich Skalozub. Colonel, spent his whole life in the barracks, a smug careerist. He was promoted at the expense of deceased or dismissed colleagues. Skalozub also viewed service as a source of personal benefits. His dream is to rise to the rank of general without expending any effort. Famusov dreamed of such a son-in-law, because their worldviews are the same. Chatsky did not understand how it was possible to live next to such petty people, who were not interested in anything except money and power, who were so disdainful of everything popular and valued a person only by origin and the number of serfs.

The Famus society also included: Prince and Princess Tugoukhovsky, the spouses Gorichi, Zagoretsky, and the imperious lady Khlestova. They were all united by the same views on life. They all supported veneration, ignorance, serfdom and idleness. Their main activities were entertainment and spreading gossip. Chatsky criticized this society; he could not find like-minded people in it. He didn’t understand why they didn’t want to change their lives for the better, and didn’t even listen to his judgment. Chatsky has completely different views on education and upbringing, on service, civic duty, social order, and attitude towards people. He did not fit into Famus society, and therefore left Moscow. It became clear to him that they still firmly held loyalty to the ideals of the “past century.”

The play "Woe from Wit" is a famous work by A. S. Griboedov. In the process of its creation, the author moved away from the classical canons of writing “high” comedy. The heroes in "Woe from Wit" are ambiguous and multifaceted images, and not caricatured characters endowed with one characteristic feature. This technique allowed Alexander Sergeevich to achieve stunning verisimilitude in depicting the “picture of morals” of the Moscow aristocracy. This article will be devoted to the characteristics of representatives of such a society in the comedy “Woe from Wit”.

Issues of the play

In "Woe from Wit" there are two plot-forming conflicts. One of them concerns the personal relationships of the heroes. Chatsky, Molchalin and Sofia participate in it. The other represents the socio-ideological confrontation between the main character of the comedy and all the other characters in the play. Both storylines reinforce and complement each other. Without taking into account the love line, it is impossible to understand the characters, worldview, psychology and relationships of the heroes of the work. However, the main one, of course, is Chatsky and Famus society confront each other throughout the entire play.

"Portrait" character of the comedy

The appearance of the comedy "Woe from Wit" caused a lively response in literary circles of the first half of the 19th century. Moreover, they were not always laudatory. For example, a longtime friend of Alexander Sergeevich, P. A. Katenin, reproached the author for the fact that the characters in the play are too “portrait-like,” that is, complex and multifaceted. However, Griboyedov, on the contrary, considered the realism of his characters to be the main advantage of the work. In response to critical remarks, he replied that “...caricatures that distort the real proportions in the appearance of people are unacceptable...” and argued that there was not a single one in his comedy. Having managed to make his characters alive and believable, Griboyedov achieved a stunning satirical effect. Many unwittingly recognized themselves in the comedy characters.

Representatives of the Famusov society

In response to comments about the imperfection of his “plan,” he stated that in his play there were “25 fools for one sane person.” Thus, he spoke quite harshly to the capital’s elite. It was obvious to everyone who the author portrayed under the guise of comedy characters. Alexander Sergeevich did not hide his negative attitude towards Famusov’s society and contrasted it with the only intelligent person - Chatsky. The remaining characters in the comedy were images typical of that time: the well-known and influential Moscow “ace” (Famusov); a loud and stupid careerist martinet (Skalozub); a quiet and dumb scoundrel (Molchalin); a domineering, half-mad and very rich old woman (Khlestova); eloquent talker (Repetilov) and many others. Famus society in the comedy is motley, diverse and absolutely unanimous in its resistance to the voice of reason. Let us consider the character of its most prominent representatives in more detail.

Famusov: a staunch conservative

This hero is one of the most influential people in Moscow society. He is a fierce opponent of everything new and believes that one must live as his fathers and grandfathers bequeathed. For him, Chatsky’s statements are the height of freethinking and debauchery. And in ordinary human vices (drunkenness, lies, servility, hypocrisy) he sees nothing reprehensible. For example, he declares himself to be “known for his monastic behavior,” but before that he flirts with Lisa. For Famusov, a synonym for the word “vice” is “learnedness.” For him, condemning bureaucratic servility is a sign of madness.

The question of service is the main one in Famusov’s system. In his opinion, any person should strive to make a career and thereby ensure a high position in society. For him, Chatsky is a lost man, as he ignores generally accepted norms. But Molchalin and Skalozub are businesslike, reasonable people. Famusov's society is an environment in which Pyotr Afanasyevich feels accomplished. He is the embodiment of what Chatsky condemns in people.

Molchalin: a dumb careerist

If Famusov in the play is a representative of the “past century,” then Alexey Stepanovich belongs to the younger generation. However, his ideas about life completely coincide with the views of Pyotr Afanasyevich. Molchalin makes his way “into the people” with enviable tenacity, in accordance with the laws dictated by Famus society. He does not belong to the noble class. His trump cards are “moderation” and “accuracy,” as well as lackey helpfulness and boundless hypocrisy. Alexey Stepanovich is very dependent on public opinion. The famous remark about evil tongues that are “more terrible than a pistol” belongs to him. His insignificance and unprincipledness are obvious, but this does not prevent him from making a career. In addition, thanks to his boundless pretense, Alexey Stepanovich becomes the protagonist's happy rival in love. "Silent people dominate the world!" - Chatsky notes bitterly. He can only use his own wit against Famus society.

Khlestova: tyranny and ignorance

The moral deafness of Famus society is brilliantly demonstrated in the play "Woe from Wit." Griboedov Alexander Sergeevich entered the history of Russian literature as the author of one of the most topical and realistic works of his time. Many aphorisms from this comedy are very relevant today.

The comedy "Woe from Wit" has two storylines. The first is related to the development of relationships in the love triangle Chatsky-Sofya-Molchalin. The second, deeper one – socio-political – lies in the clash of morals and orders of the “present century” and the “past century”.

Thus, the personification of the “present century” in the comedy is almost single-handedly represented by Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who returned to Moscow. But Chatsky’s loneliness in Famus society is only apparent. Besides him, there are a number of off-stage heroes: Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew Fyodor, who studies chemistry and biology, Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service and went to the village to read books, as well as Chatsky’s friends, whom he mentions in passing. But the play really abounds with representatives of the “past century”. Literary scholars, as a rule, unite them under the general name “Famus society.” These are characters with “talking” names and surnames - first of all, Famusov himself, as well as Sofya, Molchalin, Skalozub, Khlestova, Zagoretsky, Repetilov, the Tugoukhovsky family, the Gorichis, the Khryumins. They are dependent on the opinions of others and suffer from gallomania - admiration for everything French and foreign in general. Representatives of the views of the “past century” do not see any benefit in enlightenment, but they chase ranks and know how to achieve them.

Like a tornado, Chatsky bursts into the monotonous life of Famusov’s house. The hero immediately notices that while he received new knowledge and impressions during his journey, life in sleepy Moscow continued as before:

What new will Moscow show me?
Yesterday there was a ball, and tomorrow there will be two.
He made a match - he managed, but he missed,
All the same sense, and the same poems in the albums.

Chatsky’s monologues in the comedy “Woe from Wit” are characterized by a large amount of journalisticism: they express the opinion of a certain group of progressively thinking people, and also contain many rhetorical questions and exclamations, and often contain archaisms. “He speaks as he writes,” notes Famusov. Chatsky resolutely opposes everything that should already become obsolete, forgotten, sink into oblivion - against those vices of Famus society that prevent the new generation from starting their life, a life without serfdom, illiteracy, hypocrisy, and sycophancy.

Famusov, as the main antipode of the protagonist in the comedy, does not want to understand and accept progressive views on life. Therefore, the principle “I’d be glad to serve, but being served is sickening” sounds wild to Famus society. The truth “the houses are new, but the prejudices are old” is perceived as a vile lie, “persecution of Moscow.” At the end of the work, we see that neither Famusov nor his entourage understood Chatsky’s moral lessons.

Unfortunately for him, Chatsky realizes too late that this “crowd of tormentors” cannot be convinced. According to Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, the main character is not so smart at all, since he does not recognize unworthy people in his interlocutors, but continues to throw pearls “in front of Repetilov and the like.” However, during the four acts of the comedy, he still manages to instill in the reader with his bold phrases a complete disgust for the vices of the “past century.” Chatsky’s conflict with Famus society nevertheless brought its educational fruits.

I.A. Goncharov wrote about the main character of the comedy “Woe from Wit”: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power. In turn, he dealt her a fatal blow with the quality of fresh strength. Chatsky is a winner, an advanced warrior, a skirmisher and always a victim.” Goncharov’s words conceal a certain contradiction that requires resolution. So who is Chatsky: winner or loser?

The comedy “Woe from Wit” presents the complex historical process of replacing the old views of serf-owners with new progressive ideas for the structure of society. This process cannot happen overnight. It takes time and a lot of effort and sacrifice on the part of representatives of a new type of thinking.

The play presents the struggle of the conservative nobility, the “past century,” with the “present century” - Chatsky, who has an extraordinary mind and a desire to act for the good of his Fatherland. The Old Moscow nobles defend their personal well-being and personal comfort in this struggle. Chatsky strives to develop the country by increasing the value of the individual in society, developing science and education, deeply despising and leaving servility and careerism in the background.

Already in the title of the comedy, Griboyedov indicates that the mind, in its broadest sense, will not bring happiness to the main character of the comedy. His accusatory speeches are not liked both by the world, because they threaten his usual way of life, and by his beloved Sophia, because they threaten her personal happiness.

In love, Chatsky definitely fails. Sophia preferred Chatsky, who is “sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,” to Molchalin, who is distinguished only by his modesty and helpfulness. And the ability to “help yourself” is very important in the world. And Famusov admires this quality, citing as an example his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who was not afraid to expose himself to ridicule in order to please the empress. For Chatsky, this is humiliation. He says that “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” And this reluctance to please noble society leads to the hero being expelled from it.

The love conflict gives rise to a conflict between Chatsky and the Famus society, with which, as it turns out, he disagrees on all fundamental issues. The whole comedy is Chatsky’s verbal struggle with the Moscow nobility. The hero is opposed to the numerous camp of the “past century”. Chatsky alone fearlessly opposes him. The main character of the comedy is disgusted that Famusov considers training a “plague”, that Skalozub received the rank of colonel not with the help of personal merit, but with the help of connections, that Molchalin tries in every possible way to please Famusov and his guests, humiliating himself in front of them only because he does not have much weight in this society, that no one is ready to sacrifice personal gain for the good of the Fatherland.

Representatives of the Famus society do not want to allow their ideals to be debunked. They don’t know how to live differently and are not ready. Therefore, in defense, the world quickly spreads gossip that Chatsky is “out of his mind.” By declaring Chatsky crazy, society makes his words safe. The hero leaves Moscow, which dispelled “all the fumes and smoke” of his hopes. It seems that Chatsky is leaving defeated.

However, it is impossible to answer unequivocally the question of who Chatsky is – the winner or the loser – in the comedy “Woe from Wit”. He did not win only because he was in the minority. But he remained true to his views, and his words, like seeds, will soon sprout. Like-minded people will gather around him. By the way, they are also mentioned in the play. For example, Skalozub’s cousin, who, having left a successful career, went to the village, where he began to lead a quiet life and read a lot. People who are indifferent to rank and money, who put their mind and heart above all else, will ultimately triumph over Famus society.

Chatsky leaves, not knowing that he is the winner. History will show this later. This hero is forced to suffer and grieve, but his words will not go unheard. The struggle between old and new cannot last forever. Sooner or later it will end with the collapse of outdated views. That is why, as Goncharov writes, in this comedy Chatsky refutes the well-known proverb “alone in the field is no warrior.” If he is Chatsky, then he is a warrior, “and, moreover, a winner.”

The above discussion about the image of Chatsky as a winner and a loser will be useful to 9th graders when searching for materials on the topic of the essay “Who is Chatsky: winner or loser?”

Work test

1. The history of the creation of the comedy “Woe from Wit.”
2. The reason for the disagreements between representatives of the “present century” and the “past century”.
3. The immortality of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy.

A. S. Griboedov created the comedy “Woe from Wit” at the beginning of the 19th century. In those years, new trends began to replace the orders of Catherine’s era; other people appeared in Russian society, with progressive views, who wanted to serve their country, without demanding titles or awards for this. This was, of course, connected with the patriotic upsurge that Russian society experienced after the Patriotic War of 1812. This led the leading part of the nobles in 1825 to Senate Square demanding the provision of civil liberties and the signing of the constitution.

At the center of Griboedov’s comedy is such a person. In his appearance, behavior, even in his last name, contemporaries guessed the real person - P. Ya. Chaadaev. He was a Westerner philosopher; Chaadaev was declared crazy for his progressive views and criticism of the contemporary order. So, the confrontation between Alexander Chatsky and Famus society constitutes the main socio-political conflict of the play.

Chatsky is a young man, he is educated and has his own opinion on many very serious problems of his time. Alexander Andreevich spent two years abroad, where he became acquainted with the advanced ideas of our time and saw how people live in other countries. And here he is in Moscow, among people of high society, in the house of his uncle, the Moscow “ace” Famusov. Chatsky is in love with Famusov's daughter, Sophia, with whom they grew up together. Childhood affection develops over time into a serious feeling. Chatsky is sincerely glad to meet Sophia and immediately begins to explain his feelings to her. He still doesn’t know that while he was away, Sophia became interested in Molchalin, her father’s secretary. Therefore, she is cold with Chatsky and is even dissatisfied with his ardor and passion. Chatsky is confused, he cannot understand the reason for this attitude towards himself. The further development of events is determined by Chatsky’s attempts to find out who the lucky rival is: Molchalin or Skalozub. But the love conflict between Chatsky and Sophia is only external, which subsequently reveals a deeper, socio-political conflict.

Seeing these people, communicating with them, Chatsky cannot understand why Sophia does not notice in them what is so clearly visible to him. The situation is heating up, and Chatsky pronounces his famous monologues. First of all, this is a monologue about old people, about the so-called “judges”, trendsetters who “draw their judgments from forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” The other is about the dominance of everything foreign, about “slavish, blind imitation,” about the “foreign power of fashion.” Chatsky angrily asks:

Where? Show us, fathers of the fatherland,
Which ones should we take as models?
Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?
We found protection from court in friends,
related,
Magnificent building chambers...

But Chatsky’s fiery speeches remain without support; moreover, his attacks are met with protest, hostility, and dull misunderstanding. In the end, he is left completely alone against the hostile Famus society. Moreover, Sophia started a rumor that Chatsky was not himself.

A. S. Griboyedov shows readers not only those who do not accept Chatsky’s position and enter into open struggle with him, but also those who are unable to fight injustice, whose will is paralyzed. Such heroes include Gorich, a former colleague and friend of Chatsky. But Gorich got married, fell “under his wife’s heel” and humbly bears his burden, although he understands that he has fallen: “Now, brother, I’m not the same.” When Chatsky was declared crazy, Gorich did not want to believe it, but he did not dare to openly contradict the general opinion. Chatsky found himself alone. His accusatory monologues hung in the air, no one sympathizes with him, and all his “millions of torments,” as I. A. Goncharov said, at first glance, seems futile to us. But that's not true. A. S. Griboedov, in the image of his main character, showed the changes emerging in Russian society, the emergence among the progressive people of the era of the desire to become useful to society, to care about the common good, and not just about personal well-being.

The comedy by A. S. Griboedov shows us the life of Russian society in the first third of the 19th century in all its complexity, inconsistency and heterogeneity. The author realistically depicts the types of that era despite some of the romantic traits of the main character. The writer raises eternal problems in the play - relationships between generations, the contradiction between personal and public well-being, the egoistic principle in a person and his unselfish readiness to help people. Therefore, this work is still relevant now, at the beginning of the 21st century, because it helps to understand modern problems, which are practically no different from the life conflicts of the era of A. S. Griboedov.