Critical assessment of the work Woe from Wit. Criticism and contemporaries about the comedy “Woe from Wit”
History of the comedy
The comedy “Woe from Wit” is the main and most valuable result of the work of A.S. Griboedova. When studying the comedy “Woe from Wit”, analysis should be made, first of all, of the conditions in which the play was written. It touches on the issue of the brewing confrontation between the progressive and conservative nobility. Griboyedov ridicules the mores of secular society of the early 19th century. In this regard, the creation of such a work was a rather bold step in that period of development of Russian history.
There is a known case when Griboyedov, returning from abroad, found himself at one of the aristocratic receptions in St. Petersburg. There he was outraged by the obsequious attitude of society towards one foreign guest. Griboedov's progressive views prompted him to express his sharply negative opinion on this matter. The guests considered the young man crazy, and news of this quickly spread throughout society. It was this incident that prompted the writer to create a comedy.
Themes and issues of the play
It is advisable to begin the analysis of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by referring to its title. It reflects the idea of the play. The main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who is rejected by society only because he is smarter than the people around him, experiences grief from his sanity. This also leads to another problem: if society rejects a person of extraordinary intelligence, then how does this characterize society itself? Chatsky feels uncomfortable among people who consider him crazy. This gives rise to numerous verbal clashes between the protagonist and representatives of the society he hates. In these conversations, each party considers itself smarter than the other. Only the intelligence of the conservative nobility lies in the ability to adapt to existing circumstances in order to obtain maximum material gain. Anyone who does not pursue rank and money is considered a madman.
Accepting Chatsky's views for the conservative nobility means beginning to change their lives in accordance with the demands of the time. Nobody finds this comfortable. It’s easier to declare Chatsky crazy, because then you can simply ignore his accusatory speeches.
In Chatsky’s clash with representatives of aristocratic society, the author raises a number of philosophical, moral, national-cultural and everyday issues. Within the framework of these topics, the problems of serfdom, service to the state, education, and family life are discussed. All these problems are revealed in comedy through the prism of understanding the mind.
The conflict of a dramatic work and its originality
The uniqueness of the conflict in the play “Woe from Wit” lies in the fact that there are two of them: love and social. The social contradiction lies in the clash of interests and views of representatives of the “present century” represented by Chatsky and the “past century” represented by Famusov and his supporters. Both conflicts are closely related to each other.
Love experiences force Chatsky to come to Famusov’s house, where he has not been for three years. He finds his beloved Sophia in a confused state, she receives him very coldly. Chatsky does not realize that he arrived at the wrong time. Sofya is busy experiencing a love story with Molchalin, her father’s secretary, who lives in their house. Endless thoughts about the reasons for the cooling of Sophia's feelings force Chatsky to ask questions to his beloved, her father, Molchalin. During the dialogues, it turns out that Chatsky has different views with each of his interlocutors. They argue about service, about ideals, about the morals of secular society, about education, about family. Chatsky’s views frighten representatives of the “past century” because they threaten the usual way of life of Famus society. Conservative nobles are not ready for change, so rumors about Chatsky’s madness, accidentally started by Sophia, instantly spread through society. The protagonist's beloved is the source of unpleasant gossip because he interferes with her personal happiness. And here again we see the interweaving of love and social conflicts.
System of comedy characters
In his depiction of characters, Griboyedov does not adhere to a clear division into positive and negative, which was mandatory for classicism. All heroes have both positive and negative traits. For example, Chatsky is smart, honest, brave, independent, but he is also quick-tempered and unceremonious. Famusov is the son of his age, but at the same time he is a wonderful father. Sophia, ruthless towards Chatsky, is smart, courageous and decisive.
But the use of “speaking” surnames in the play is a direct legacy of classicism. Griboedov tries to put the leading feature of his personality into the hero’s surname. For example, the surname Famusov is derived from the Latin fama, which means “rumor.” Consequently, Famusov is the person who is most concerned about public opinion. It is enough to remember his final remark to be convinced of this: “...What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!” Chatsky was originally Chadsky. This surname hints that the hero is in the throes of his struggle with the mores of aristocratic society. The hero Repetilov is also interesting in this regard. His last name is related to the French word repeto - I repeat. This character is a caricature double of Chatsky. He does not have his own opinion, but only repeats the words of others, including the words of Chatsky.
It is important to pay attention to the placement of characters. The social conflict occurs mainly between Chatsky and Famusov. A love confrontation is being built between Chatsky, Sophia and Molchalin. These are the main characters. The figure of Chatsky unites love and social conflict.
The most difficult part in the comedy “Woe from Wit” is the image of Sophia. It is difficult to classify her as a person who adheres to the views of the “past century.” In her relationship with Molchalin, she despises the opinion of society. Sophia reads a lot and loves art. She is disgusted by the stupid Skalozub. But you can’t call her a supporter of Chatsky either, because in conversations with him she reproaches him for his causticity and mercilessness in his words. It was her word about Chatsky’s madness that became decisive in the fate of the main character.
Minor and episodic characters are also important in the play. For example, Lisa and Skalozub are directly involved in the development of a love conflict, complicating and deepening it. The episodic characters who appear as guests of Famusov (Tugoukhovskys, Khryumins, Zagoretsky) more fully reveal the morals of Famusov’s society.
Development of dramatic action
Analysis of the actions of “Woe from Wit” will reveal the compositional features of the work and the features of the development of dramatic action.
The exposition of the comedy can be considered all the phenomena of the first act before Chatsky’s arrival. Here the reader gets acquainted with the scene of action and learns not only about the love affair between Sophia and Molchalin, but also that Sophia previously had tender feelings for Chatsky, who had gone to travel around the world. The appearance of Chatsky in the seventh scene of the first act is the beginning. What follows is the parallel development of social and love conflicts. Chatsky's conflict with Famus society reaches its peak at the ball - this is the culmination of the action. The fourth act, 14th appearance of the comedy (Chatsky’s final monologue) represents the denouement of both social and love lines.
At the denouement, Chatsky is forced to retreat to Famus society because he is in the minority. But he can hardly be considered defeated. It’s just that Chatsky’s time has not yet come; a split among the nobility has only just begun.
The originality of the play
Research and analysis of the work “Woe from Wit” will reveal its striking originality. Traditionally, “Woe from Wit” is considered the first Russian realistic play. Despite this, it retained the features inherent in classicism: “speaking” surnames, unity of time (the events of the comedy take place within one day), unity of place (the action of the play takes place in Famusov’s house). However, Griboyedov refuses the unity of action: in the comedy two conflicts develop in parallel at once, which contradicts the traditions of classicism. In the image of the main character, the formula of romanticism is also clearly visible: an exceptional hero (Chatsky) in unusual circumstances.
Thus, the relevance of the play’s problems, its unconditional innovation, and the aphoristic language of the comedy are not only of great importance in the history of Russian literature and drama, but also contribute to the popularity of the comedy among modern readers.
Work test
Introduction
Analysis of the comedy "Woe from Wit" by Griboyedov A.S.
1 History of creation and publication of the work
1.2 Ideological and philosophical content of the work
3 Comedy genre
4 The plot of the comedy
5 Features of building a character system
6 Language and features of comedy verse
2. Immortal work of Griboyedov
Conclusion
List of used literature
Introduction
In the history of literature, there are authors who are also called “authors of one work.” A classic example of such a writer is Griboyedov. This man's talent is truly phenomenal. His knowledge was enormous and multifaceted, he learned many languages, was a good officer, a capable musician, an outstanding diplomat with the makings of a major politician. But despite all this, few would have remembered him if not for the comedy “Woe from Wit,” which put Griboyedov on a par with the greatest Russian writers.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" scattered into catchphrases, quatrains, and expressions before it had yet 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,” “It’s a terrible age!”, “Friend, can’t we choose a nook for a walk further away,” without thinking that these are phrases from brilliant comedy "Woe from Wit".
Griboedov accurately and truthfully portrayed not only the characters of the heroes of the first quarter of the 19th century, but also presented a wonderful storehouse of wisdom, 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.
All the action of the comedy takes place in one house (Famusov’s house) and lasts one day, but leaves the impression of a peaceful acquaintance with the life of the Moscow nobility. This is “a picture of morals, a gallery of living types, and an ever-sharp, burning satire.” (N.A. Goncharov).
“Griboyedov is a “man of one book,” noted V.F. Khodasevich. “If it were not for Woe from Wit, Griboyedov would have no place at all in Russian literature.” Griboyedov in his comedy touched upon and exposed, in the spirit of the socio-political ideas of Decembrism, a wide range of very specific phenomena of the social life of feudal Russia.
The topical meaning of Griboyedov's criticism today, of course, is not felt with such acuteness as it was felt by his contemporaries. But at one time the comedy sounded topical. And the questions of noble education in “boarding houses, schools, lyceums”, and the question of “Lankart mutual education”; and debates about the parliamentary system and judicial reform, and individual episodes of Russian social life, reflected in Chatsky’s monologues and in the remarks of Famusov’s guests - all this was of the most current importance.
All of the above factors determine the relevance and significance of the topic of work at the present stage, aimed at a deep and comprehensive study of the system of characters and prototypes of A.S.’s comedy. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit".
The purpose of this test is to systematize, accumulate and consolidate knowledge about the characters of A.S.’s comedy. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit".
In accordance with the goal, the work is expected to solve the following tasks:
- do analysis of the comedy "Woe from Wit";
consider the gallery of human portraits in the comedy by A.S. Griboyedova;
The purpose and objectives of the course work determined the choice of its structure. The work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, and a list of literature used in writing the work.
This structure of the work most fully reflects the organizational concept and logic of the material presented.
When writing the work, the works of domestic authoritative authors in the field of studying the issue under consideration were used: Bat L.I., Ilyushina L.A., Vlashchenko V., Vyazemsky P.A., Gladysh I.A., etc.
1. Analysis of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov A.S.
.1 History of creation and publication of the work
Information about the history of the creation of Griboyedov’s main work of art is quite meager. According to the writer’s friend, S.N. Begichev, the idea for the comedy arose back in 1816. It was supposed to write 5 acts, in which an important role was assigned to Famusov’s wife, “a sentimental fashionista and aristocrat.” Subsequently, the number of actions was reduced, and the playwright abandoned the important female character. Apparently, the discussion here was not actually about the work that we know, but about a sketch, plot-wise similar to the comedy, but still not its first edition. The date of the beginning of work on “Woe from Wit” is considered to be 1820. A letter from Griboyedov from Persia dated November 17, 1820 to an unknown person has been preserved, which recounts in detail a dream in which the writer allegedly saw the main points of the future work.
The original title of the play was “Woe to Wit.” The writer formulated the main intrigue of the future comedy in a letter to Katenin as follows: “The girl, not stupid herself, preferred a fool to an intelligent man.” However, social contradictions did not fit into the designated plot scheme. In addition, the name itself sounded like a condemnation of every mind for all times. Griboyedov sought to present such a paradoxical, but, alas, typical situation in which a positive personality trait - intelligence - brings misfortune. It is this situation that is reflected in the new name - “Woe from Wit”.
Direct study of the first and second acts was carried out in 1822 in the Caucasus. An important role in the depiction of social confrontation was played by communication with Kuchelbecker, whose observations Griboedov took into account. Work on the 3rd and 4th acts was carried out in 1823 on the estate of S.N. Begichev, and the first act was burned and rewritten. The completely original version of the comedy was completed in 1824 in Moscow and presented to the same Begichev (the so-called Museum Autograph). The writer goes to St. Petersburg for censorship permission, continuing to make changes to the text along the way. This is how the scene of Molchalin flirting with Lisa in the 4th act was completed and the entire ending was changed. Arriving in the capital, Griboedov reads the play by A.A. Gandru, who was in charge of the entire office. The latter instructs scribes to prepare copies of the work. The playwright gave the list, corrected in his own hand and signed, to his friend (Zhandrovskaya manuscript). The future Decembrists played the main role in disseminating the play during this period.
The second half of 1824 and the beginning of 1825 were spent in trouble: the writer met with the Minister of the Interior B.C. Lansky, Minister of Education A.S. Shishkov, Governor of St. Petersburg M.A. Miloradovich, was introduced to the Grand Duke (future emperor) Nikolai Pavlovich. All of them reacted favorably to the playwright, but they failed to achieve publication of the entire work. Only phenomena 7-10 of the first act and the third act were published with censorship abbreviations in F.V.’s almanac. Bulgarin "Russian Waist in 1825". When he left for the East in 1828, Griboedov gave him the last authorized version of the work (Bulgarin list). After the death of the writer, permission was finally obtained for a theatrical production in a highly distorted form. In 1833, a theatrical "edition" of the comedy was published.
The play was published completely without censorship cuts abroad in 1858, and in Russia only in 1862. By this time, there were several tens of thousands of handwritten copies in the country, which significantly exceeded all circulations of printed materials known at that time. At the same time, the handwritten versions contained serious discrepancies, caused both by simple mistakes of copyists and by their desire to make their own additions and changes to the text. The editors of the 1862 edition were not able to completely overcome these difficulties. Only in the 20th century, through the efforts of literary scholars who conducted textual studies, and above all N.K. Piksanov, based on a comparison of the Museum autograph, the Zhandrovsky manuscript and the Bulgarin copy, the version of the comedy text that we have today was established.
Artistic method of comedy
Traditionally, "Woe from Wit" is considered the first Russian realistic comedy. This fact is indisputable. At the same time, the play retained the features of classicism (for example, the unity of time and place, “speaking surnames,” traditional roles: “deceived father,” “close-minded military man,” “confidante soubrette”) and revealed elements of romanticism, reflected in a number of exceptional features the personality of the protagonist, in his incomprehension by others and loneliness, in his maximalism, opposition to the entire reality surrounding him and the promotion of his ideal ideas in contrast to this reality, as well as in the pathos of his speech. Realism was expressed primarily in the typification of characters and circumstances, as well as in the author’s conscious refusal to follow numerous norms for constructing classicist plays. Griboyedov violated a number of genre and plot-compositional principles canons<#"justify">.4 The plot of the comedy
When considering the conflict and plot organization of Woe from Wit, it is necessary to remember that Griboyedov innovatively approached the classicist theory of three unities. While observing the principles of unity of place and unity of time, the playwright did not consider it necessary to be guided by the principle of unity of action, which, according to existing rules, was supposed to be built on one conflict and, starting at the beginning of the play, receive a denouement in the finale, and the main feature of the denouement was the triumph of virtue and the punishment of vice . The violation of the rules of suspense caused sharp differences in criticism. Thus, Dmitriev, Katenin, Vyazemsky spoke about the absence of a single action in “Woe from Wit”, emphasizing the dominant role not of events, but of conversations, seeing this as a stage flaw. The opposite point of view was expressed by Kuchelbecker, who argued that there is much more movement in comedy itself than in plays built on traditional intrigue.
The essence of this movement lies precisely in the consistent disclosure of the points of view of Chatsky and his antipodes, “... in this very simplicity there is news, courage, greatness...” Griboyedov. The outcome of the controversy was later summed up by Goncharov, who identified two conflicts and, accordingly, two closely intertwined storylines that form the basis of the stage action: love and social. The writer showed that, having initially begun as a love conflict, the conflict is complicated by opposition to society, then both lines develop in parallel, reach a climax in the 4th act, and then the love affair receives a denouement, while the resolution of the social conflict is taken outside the scope of the work - Chatsky is expelled from Famusov society, but remains true to his convictions. Society does not intend to change its views - therefore, further conflict is inevitable.
This kind of “openness” of the ending, as well as the refusal to show the obligatory triumph of virtue, reflected the realism of Griboyedov, who sought to emphasize that in life, unfortunately, there are often situations when vice triumphs. The unusualness of the plot decisions with a pattern led to an unusual compositional structure: instead of the three or five acts prescribed by the rules, the playwright creates a comedy of four. If the love affair were not complicated by social conflict, then probably three actions would be enough to resolve it; if we assume that the author set out to show the final outcome of the social conflict, then, obviously, he would need to write a fifth act.
.5 Features of building a character system
When considering the features of constructing a character system and revealing characters, it is necessary to keep in mind the following circumstances. Firstly, the author creates images of his heroes according to the principles of realism, while remaining faithful to some features of classicism and romanticism. Secondly, Griboedov abandoned the traditional division of characters into positive and negative, which was reflected in the difference in critical assessments given to the images of Chatsky, Sophia, and Molchalin. Chatsky, for example, in addition to positive qualities - intelligence, honor, courage, versatile education - also has negative ones - excessive ardor, self-confidence and unceremoniousness.
Famusov, in addition to numerous shortcomings, has an important advantage: he is a caring father. Sophia, who so mercilessly and dishonestly slandered Chatsky, is smart, freedom-loving and determined. The obsequious, secretive and double-minded Molchalin is also intelligent and stands out for his business qualities. Attempts by critics to absolutize the positive or, on the contrary, negative aspects of the characters led to a one-sided perception of them and, consequently, to a distortion of the author’s position. The writer fundamentally opposed the traditional way of creating characters, based on classical roles and exaggeration of any one character trait ("caricatures", according to Griboedov's definition), with a method of depicting social types, drawn through individual detail as versatile and multi-dimensional characters (called by the author "portraits" ).
The playwright did not set himself the task of absolutely accurately describing any of the familiar faces, while contemporaries recognized them by individual striking details. Of course, the characters had prototypes, but even there were several prototypes of one character. So, for example, Chaadaev (due to the similarity of the surname and an important life circumstance: Chaadaev, like Chatsky, was declared crazy), and Kuchelbecker (who returned from abroad and immediately fell into disgrace), and, finally, were named as prototypes of Chatsky. the author himself, who found himself at some evening in Chatsky’s situation and declared later: “I will prove to them that I am sane. I will introduce comedy into them, I will bring this entire evening into it: they will not be happy.” Gorich, Zagoretsky, Repetilov, Skalozub, Molchalin and other characters have several prototypes. The situation with Khlestova’s prototype looks most definite: most researchers point to the famous N.D. Ofrosimov, who also became the prototype of MD. Akhrosimova in the novel by L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace", although there are also references to other persons. They pay attention, for example, to the fact that Khlestova’s behavior and character resemble the traits of Griboyedov’s mother, Nastasya Fedorovna.
It is very important to remember that both general and individual traits of heroes are created thanks to a whole arsenal of artistic means and techniques. It is the mastery of dramatic technique, the ability to create bright, lively, memorable pictures and images that form the basis of the artist’s skill. The main personality trait, which the author considered central to the corresponding stage role, is indicated by the “speaking” surname. So, Famusov (from the Latin fama - rumor) is a person dependent on public opinion, on rumors (“Ah! My God! What will / Princess Marya Aleksevna say!”). Chatsky (the original version of the surname Chadsky) is in the grip of passion and struggle. Gorich is a derivative of "grief". Apparently, his marriage and gradual transformation from an efficient officer into a “husband-boy”, “husband-servant” should be viewed as grief. The surname Skalozub indicates both the habit of rude ridicule and aggressiveness. The surname Repetilov (from the Latin repeto - I repeat) suggests that its owner does not have his own opinion, but is inclined to repeat someone else’s. Other surnames are quite transparent in terms of meaning. Messrs. N. and D. are as nameless as they are faceless.
Important means of creating images are also the actions of the characters, their views on existing life problems, speech, characterization given by another character, self-characterization, comparison of characters with each other, irony, sarcasm. So, if one of the heroes goes to “look at how” Molchalin, who fell from his horse, was cracked, “in the chest or in the side,” then the other at the same time rushes to the aid of Sophia. The characters of both are revealed in their actions. If behind the eyes one assessment of a personality is given (for example: “...a dandy friend; declared a spendthrift, a tomboy...”), and in the eyes - another (“... he is a smart guy; and writes and translates nicely”) , then the reader gets the opportunity to form an idea of both what is being characterized and the characterizing. It is especially important to trace the sequence of changes in assessments (from, say, “Auster, smart, eloquent, especially happy with his friends...” to “Not a man - a snake”; from “Carbonari”, “Jacobin”, “Voltairian” to “crazy” ") and understand what causes such extremes.
In order to get an idea of the character system as a whole, it is necessary to analyze the interaction of the levels of its organization - main, secondary, episodic and off-stage. Which characters can be considered main, which - secondary, which - episodic, depends on their role in the conflict, in posing problems, in stage action. Since public confrontation is built primarily along the Chatsky-Famusov line, and the love affair is based primarily on the relationship between Chatsky, Sophia and Molchalin, it becomes obvious that of the four main characters, it is the image of Chatsky that bears the main burden. In addition, Chatsky in comedy expresses a set of thoughts that are closest to the author, partly fulfilling the classicist function of a reasoner. This circumstance, however, in no way can serve as a basis for identifying the author with his hero - the creator is always more complex and multidimensional than his creation.
Famusov appears in the play both as the main ideological antipode of Chatsky, and as an important character in a love affair (“What a commission, Creator, (Being an adult daughter’s father!”), and as a certain social type - a major official, and as an individual character - sometimes imperious and straightforward with his subordinates, sometimes flirting with the maid, sometimes trying to “reason” and “set him on the right path” of the young man, sometimes discouraged by his answers and shouting at him, sometimes affectionate and gentle with his daughter, sometimes hurling thunder and thunder at her lightning, helpful and polite with an enviable groom, a kind host who can, however, argue with the guests, deceived, at the same time funny and suffering in the finale of the play.
The image of Sophia turns out to be even more complex. A witty and resourceful girl contrasts her right to love with the will of her father and social norms. At the same time, brought up on French novels, it is from there that she borrows the image of her beloved - an intelligent, modest, chivalrous, but poor man, the image that she strives to find in Molchalin and is cruelly deceived. She despises the rudeness and ignorance of Skalozub, she is disgusted by the bile, caustic language of Chatsky, who, however, speaks the truth, and then she responds no less bile, not disdaining a vengeful lie. Sophia, skeptical of society, although not seeking confrontation with it, turns out to be the force with which society deals Chatsky the most painful blow. Not loving falsehood, she is forced to fake and hide, and at the same time finds the strength to make Chatsky understand that Molchalin has been chosen by her, which, however, Chatsky refuses to believe. Frightened and forgetting all caution at the sight of her lover falling from a horse, proudly standing up in his defense, she comes to a severe shock when she witnesses the amorous advances of her chosen “knight” towards her own maid. Having courageously endured this blow, accepting the blame upon herself, she is also forced to withstand her father’s anger and Chatsky’s mocking offer to make peace with Molchalin. The latter is hardly possible, given the strength of Sophia's character.
The image of Molchalin in the play is also not completely unambiguous; Pushkin wrote about him: “Molchalin is not quite sharply vile; shouldn’t it have been necessary to make a coward out of him?” Of all the characters in Famus’s circle, Molchalin is perhaps better able to adapt to existing conditions than others. Possessing, among other things, outstanding business qualities, he is able to achieve a high position in society. Molchalin is that type of people, poor and humble, who, through their work, perseverance, and ability to find a common language with people, slowly and steadily make a career. At the same time, he finds himself in a rather difficult position. Respectful of Famusov, he deceives his boss to please his daughter, for whom, however, he has no feelings. Faced with a choice, he strives to please both. As a result, in order to save his career and not make dangerous enemies, he lies to both Famusov and Sophia. Forced to play so many roles - secretary, lover, polite interlocutor, card partner, and sometimes even servant - Molchalin shows only one living feeling (attraction to Liza), for which he pays: his career is under threat.
Minor characters are correlated with the main characters, but at the same time they have important independent significance and directly influence the course of events. Thus, Skalozub is a type of military man, narrow-minded, but self-confident and aggressive. His appearance complicates both love and social conflict. Lisa is a servant-confidante. Without this image, it is impossible to imagine both the emergence and the denouement of a love affair.
At the same time, Lisa is witty, ironic, and gives accurate characteristics to different characters. She is compared with her mistress, and in a number of cases this comparison is resolved in her favor. At the same time, with the help of this image, Griboyedov emphasizes the confrontation between the nobility and the serfs (“Pass us away more than all sorrows / Both the lordly anger and the lordly love”).
The figure of Zagoretsky is noteworthy, representing the type of people without whom no society can do: they know how to be necessary. This character is the antithesis of the image of Chatsky. The latter is honest, but expelled from society, while Zagoretsky is dishonest, but accepted everywhere. It is he who first of all forms public opinion, picking up, coloring and spreading gossip about Chatsky’s madness to all corners.
Two other characters are also compared with the main character - Repetilov and Gorich. The first is a type of pseudo-oppositionist. For the author, obviously, it was important to distinguish a person who has his own deeply thought-out beliefs from someone who is inclined to repeat others. The fate of the second shows what could have happened to Chatsky if he had tried to fulfill Famusov’s conditions and become like everyone else.
Episodic characters - Khlestova, Khryumins, Tugoukhovskys, G.N., G.D. - take part in public confrontation, pick up and spread gossip about Chatsky’s madness. They represent additional social types, thanks to whose presence the picture becomes more satirical. In their depiction, the author widely used the techniques of hyperbole, irony, and sarcasm. It is also important to pay attention not only to what unites them, making them the so-called representatives of Famus society, but also to how they differ from each other, to their individual traits and to the contradictions that arise between them.
There are an unusually large number of off-stage characters in comedy, even more of them than on-stage characters.
They also represent one or another of the warring parties, with their help the scope of the conflict expands: from local, occurring in one house, it becomes public; the narrow framework of the unity of place and time is overcome, the action is transferred from Moscow to St. Petersburg, from the 19th to the 18th centuries; The picture of the morals of those times becomes more complicated and even more specific.
In addition, thanks to off-stage characters, the reader gets the opportunity to more accurately assess the views of the people acting on stage.
.6 Language and features of comedy verse
The language of "Woe from Wit" differed significantly from the language of the comedy of those years. Griboedov contrasted sentimentalist aestheticism and sensitivity, as well as the classicist “theory of three calms,” with the realistic principle of nationality. The speech of the characters in the play is, first of all, the speech that could actually be heard in salons and living rooms, “while driving around on the porch,” at inns, in clubs and in officer meetings. Such a rejection of the basic tenets of belles lettres has generated critical controversy. The already mentioned Dmitriev reproached Griboedov for a number of phrases and speech patterns that, in the critic’s opinion, could not be acceptable in literature. However, most critics praised the playwright's linguistic innovation. “I’m not talking about poetry, half of it should become a proverb,” - this is how Pushkin assessed Griboedov’s skill. “As for the poems with which “Woe from Wit” is written, - in this regard, Griboyedov killed for a long time any possibility of Russian comedy in verse. A brilliant talent is needed to continue with success the work started by Griboedov...” - wrote in one of his articles Belinsky.
Indeed, many lines from the comedy began to be perceived as aphorisms, catchphrases living their own independent lives. Saying: “Happy people don’t watch the clock”; “I walked into a room and ended up in another”; “sin is not a problem, rumor is not good”; “and grief awaits around the corner”; “and the smoke of the Fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us”; “in more numbers, at a cheaper price”; “with feeling, with sense, with arrangement”; “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served”; “the legend is fresh, but hard to believe”; “evil tongues are worse than a gun”; "the hero is not my novel"; “lie, but know when to stop”; “bah! all the faces are familiar” - many people don’t remember where these phrases came from.
Language in comedy is both a means of individualizing characters and a method of social typification. Skalozub, for example, as a social type of military man, very often uses army vocabulary (“frunt”, “ranks”, “sergeant major”, “trench”), and the individual characteristics of his speech reflect his self-confidence and rudeness (“you can’t faint with my learning”, “ and make a sound, it will instantly calm you down"), insufficient education, manifested in the inability to construct a phrase ("on the third of August, we sat in a trench: it was given to him with a bow, on my neck") and in an inaccurate selection of words ("with this estimate" instead "sharpness"). At the same time, he tries to make jokes (“she and I didn’t serve together”).
Famusov’s speech is the so-called Moscow noble vernacular (“they don’t blow anyone’s mouth,” “you should smoke in Tver,” “I scared you,” “trouble in the service”), replete with diminutive forms (“to the little cross, to the town ", "Otdushnikhek"). This character appears in the play in different situations, which is why his speech is so varied: sometimes ironic (“After all, I’m somewhat akin to her,” he says about Sofya to Chatsky), sometimes angry (“To work for you! To settle you!”), then scared.
Especially the monologues and remarks of Chatsky, who appears as a new social type, close in speech characteristics to the Decembrist pathos, required a lot of author’s work. In his speech there are often rhetorical questions (“Oh! if someone penetrated into people: what is worse in them? soul or language?”), inversions (“Aren’t you the one to whom I was still from the shrouds, for some kind of plans?” incomprehensible, did they take children to bow?"), antitheses ("He himself is fat, his artists are skinny"), exclamations and special vocabulary ("weakness", "vilest", "hungry", "slavish", "holiest"). At the same time, in Chatsky’s speech one can find Moscow vernacular (“okrome”, “I won’t remember”). The main character's language contains the most aphorisms, irony, and sarcasm. In addition, this speech conveys a wide range of psychological characteristics of the character: love, anger, friendly sympathy, hope, offended pride, etc. The language also reveals the negative sides of Chatsky’s character - harshness and willfulness. So, to Famusov’s question: “...would you like to get married?” - he replies: “What do you need?”, and Sophia declares: “Has your uncle jumped off his life?” The hero's monologues and remarks are always right on target, and it is always difficult to avoid or parry them. He does not miss a serious reason, not the slightest reason for a strike, and does not give the opportunity to retreat with honor, and then his opponents unite. Chatsky is truly a warrior, as Goncharov convincingly showed, but war always entails grief and suffering.
2. Immortal work of Griboyedov
comedy Griboyedov hero speech
“For more than 150 years, Griboedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit” has attracted readers; each new generation rereads it anew, finding in it consonance with what worries him today.”
Goncharov in his article “A Million Torments” wrote about “Woe from Wit” - that it “all lives its own imperishable life, will survive many more eras and will not lose its vitality.” I completely share his opinion. After all, the writer painted a real picture of morals and created living characters. So alive that they have survived to our times. It seems to me that this is the secret of the immortality of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy. After all, our Famusovs, silents, skalozubs still make our contemporary Chatsky experience grief from his mind.
The author of the only fully mature and completed work, which, moreover, was not published in its entirety during his lifetime, Griboyedov gained extraordinary popularity among his contemporaries and had a huge influence on the subsequent development of Russian culture. For almost a century and a half, the comedy “Woe from Wit” has been living, without aging, exciting and inspiring many generations for whom it has become part of their own spiritual life, entered their consciousness and speech.
After several years when criticism did not mention Griboyedov’s comedy, Ushakov wrote an article. He correctly determines the historical significance of the comedy "Woe from Wit." He calls Griboedov’s work an “immortal creation” and sees the best proof of the comedy’s “high dignity” in its extraordinary popularity, in the fact that almost every “literate Russian” knows it by heart.
Belinsky also explained the fact that, despite the efforts of censorship, it “even before printing and presentation spread across Russia in a stormy stream” and acquired immortality.
The name of Griboyedov invariably stands next to the names of Krylov, Pushkin and Gogol.
Goncharov, comparing Chatsky with Onegin and Pechorin, emphasizes that Chatsky, unlike them, is a “sincere and ardent figure”: “their time ends with them, and Chatsky begins a new century, and this is his whole meaning and his whole mind,” and that is why “Chatsky remains and will always remain alive.” It is “inevitable with every change from one century to another.”
“Woe from Wit” appeared before Onegin, Pechorin, survived them, passed unscathed through the Gogol period, lived these half a century from the time of its appearance and still lives its imperishable life, will survive many more eras and still not lose its vitality.
The epigram, satire, this colloquial verse, it seems, will never die, like the sharp and caustic, living Russian mind scattered in them, which Griboyedov imprisoned, like some kind of magician, in his castle, and he scatters there with evil laughter. It is impossible to imagine that another, more natural, simpler, more taken from life speech could ever appear. Prose and verse merged here into something inseparable, then, it seems, to make it easier to retain them in memory and to put into circulation again all the author’s collected intelligence, humor, jokes and anger of the Russian mind and language.
The great comedy remains young and fresh even now. She retained her social sound, her satirical salt, her artistic charm. She continues her triumphant march across the stages of Russian theaters. It is studied at school.
The Russian people, who have built a new life, shown all humanity a straight and broad path to a better future, remember, appreciate and love the great writer and his immortal comedy. Now, more than ever, the words written on Griboyedov’s gravestone sound loudly and convincingly: “Your mind and deeds are immortal in Russian memory...”
Conclusion
The comedy "Woe from Wit" by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov became an event in Russian literature at the beginning of the 19th century and was a rare example of its accusatory, satirical direction.
A brilliant playwright, talented poet and composer, outstanding diplomat, A.S. Griboyedov, according to Belinsky, belonged “to the most powerful manifestation of the Russian spirit.” With the immortal comedy “Woe from Wit,” the “pearl” of the Russian stage, Griboedov marked the beginning of the flowering of Russian realistic drama.
The success of the comedy was unheard of. Pushkin gave a brilliant and profound description of “Woe from Wit”. According to the poet, the purpose of comedy is “characters and a sharp picture of morals.”
Griboyedov created a typical image of a “new man” - a public Protestant and fighter - in the typical circumstances of his historical time. He showed how systematically and uncontrollably, becoming more and more aggravated, the contradiction of the main character, Chatsky, with Famus society is growing. This society anathematizes Chatsky, which has the character of a political denunciation: Chatsky is publicly declared to be a troublemaker, a Carbonari, a person who is encroaching on the “legitimate” state and social system.
Woe from Wit, of course, remains one of the masterpieces of punitive social satire. But true satire is never one-sided, because a satirist, if he stands at the forefront of ideological and artistic positions, always denounces evil and vices in the name of good and is virtuous, in the name of establishing a certain positive ideal - social, political, moral. Griboyedov in “Woe from Wit” not only exposed the world of serf owners, but also established his positive ideal in the image of the only true hero of the play - Chatsky.
List of used literature
1. A.S. Griboyedov. Point of view. Series "Classical gymnasium". Comp. biogr. certificates and notes A.I. Ostrovsky. M. Laida, 1994. - p. 187.
Petrieva L.I., Prantsova G.V. A.S. Griboedov. Studying at school: Educational and methodological manual.-M.: Flinta: Nauka 2001.-216 pp.: ill.
Dictionary of characters in Russian literature: Second half of the 18th-19th centuries - M.-SPb.: Universal book, 200. 362 p.
Aikhenvald Yu. Silhouettes of Russian writers: V 2v, T1 / Preface. In Kreida.-M.: TERRA.-Book Club; Republic, 1998.-304 pp.:
Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries: In 2 vols. T.1: Russian literature of the 19th century. A textbook for applicants to Moscow State University. M.V.Lomonosova / Comp. And scientific editor. B.S.Bugrov, M.M.Golubkov. 2nd ed., add. And reworked.
Svetopolk-Mirsky D.P. History of Russian literature since ancient times / D.P. Svyatopolk-Mirsky.-M.: Eksmo, 2008.-608 p.: ill. - (Encyclopedia of Russia).
100 great names in literature: popular science. Ed./ed. Ed. V.P. Sitnikova/ V.V. Bykova, G.N. Bykova, G.P.Shalaeva and others - M.: Philol. Society "Slovo", 1998.-544 p.
Encyclopedia for children. T.9. Russian literature. Part 1./Chief editor. M.D. Aksenova. - M.: Avanta+, 1999. - 672 pp. - pp. - 439-446.
Lanshchikova A.P. "Woe from Wit" as a mirror of Russian life. // Literature at school. - 1997. - No. 5. pp. 31-43.
Vlashchenko V. Lessons on Griboyedov.// Literature.- 1999.- No. 46.S. 5-12.
9.
.
11.helper.ru/p_Istoriya_sozdaniya_i_analiz_komedii_Gore_ot_uma_Griboedova_A_S
Tutoring
Need help studying a topic?
Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
"Woe from Wit" Quotes.
Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov - a famous Russian writer, poet, playwright, brilliant diplomat, state councilor, author of the legendary play in verse "Woe from Wit", was a descendant of an old noble family. Born in Moscow on January 15) 1795
The comedy “Woe from Wit,” written by A. S. Griboedov at the beginning of the 19th century, is still relevant for today’s Russia. R quotes from his famous characters scattered around the world, becoming “catchphrases”. In this work, the author reveals in all depth the vices that afflicted Russian society at the beginning of the last century. However, reading this work, we also find in it heroes of the present day. It is no coincidence that the names of the comedy characters collected by Griboedov in the house of the Moscow master Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov became household names. Let's look at the owner of the house. Every replica of Famusov, every monologue of his is a zealous defense of the “century of obedience and fear.” This person is dependent primarily on traditions and public opinion. He teaches young people that they need to follow the example of their fathers:
-“We would learn by looking at our elders”.
And what, in Famusov’s understanding, is the experience of older generations? This can be seen from his review of the late uncle Maxim Petrovich, who “not only lived on silver, but also on gold.” Maxim Petrovich, a nobleman from the time of “Mother Catherine,” is a role model for Famusov:
-“when he needed to help himself, he bent over.”
Flattery and sycophancy come at a price with this comedy character. Occupying a high post, Famusov admits that he serves in order to obtain ranks and other benefits.
-"But for me, whatever it is or not, my custom is this: Signed, off your shoulders".
A. S. Griboedov brilliantly reflected in the image of Famusov the trait of bureaucracy, which we call today “protectionism.” The comedy hero admits:
-"When I have employees, strangers are very rare, more and more sisters, sisters-in-law, children... How can you introduce yourself to a little baptism, to a small town, well, how can you not please your dear little one?”.
The measure of a person’s value for Famusov is rank and money. He says to his daughter Sophia:
-“Anyone who is poor is not a match for you.” Colonel Skalozub, according to Famusov, would be suitable for Sophia as a husband, because he“not today - tomorrow general”.
And the bureaucracy, which has already become a social phenomenon, rests on these same Famusovs. They are accustomed to “easy” bread, which they achieve by currying favor with their superiors. They love a beautiful life, which is rewarded for their sycophancy and sycophancy. So, Molchalin lives by the principle:
-"Firstly, to please all people without exception - the owner where I happen to live, the boss with whom I will serve, his servant who cleans dresses, the doorman, the janitor, to avoid evil, the janitor’s dog, so that he is affectionate".
It’s scary when there are Famusovs, Mollins, and Skalozubs in society. Because the silent people remain silent, innocent people suffer, even though they are right. Chatsky is also relevant for today. In him, the writer embodied many of the qualities of a leading man of his era. He does not accept careerism, veneration, ignorance, as the ideals of the “past century.” Chatsky - for respect for the common man, service to the cause, not to individuals, freedom of thought, affirms the progressive ideas of modernity, the prosperity of science and art, respect for the national language and culture, and education. 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 more often bent.” He despises people who are ready to yawn at the ceiling at their patrons, show up to be silent, shuffle around, have lunch. He does not accept the “past century”: “The century of obedience and fear was direct.” Critical of the dominance of foreigners:
-"Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion? So that our smart, cheerful people, even though by language, do not consider us Germans".
After reading the comedy, Pushkin said: “I’m not talking about poetry - half of it should be included in proverbs.” Pushkin's words quickly came true. Already in May 1825, the writer V.F. Odoevsky stated: “Almost all the verses of Griboyedov’s comedy became proverbs, and I often happened to hear entire conversations in society, most of which were verses from “Woe from Wit.”
Text from various sources.
“French books make her sleepless, but Russian books make it painful for me to sleep.”
- Pass us away from all sorrows and lordly anger and lordly love.
- Happy hours are not observed.
- Carriage for me! Carriage!
- Anyone who is poor is not a match for you.
- Signed, off your shoulders.
- Sin is not a problem, rumor is not good.
- I don’t care what goes into the water.
- Blessed is he who believes - he is warm in the world!
- And the smoke of the Fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us!
- Tell me to go to the fire: I’ll go to dinner.
- What a commission, Creator, to be a father to an adult daughter!
- I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
- The legend is fresh, but hard to believe.
- The houses are new, but the prejudices are old.
- Who are the judges?
- Ah, evil tongues are worse than pistols.
- I'm strange; but who is not strange?
- Ranks are given by people, but people can be deceived.
- A certificate of commendation for you: you behave properly.
- Bah! All familiar faces!
- The women shouted “Hurray!” and they threw caps into the air.
- Read not like a panorama, but with feeling, with sense, with arrangement
-Where is better? Where we are not.
- More in number, cheaper in price.
- What does he say? And he speaks as he writes!
- If we were to stop evil, we would collect all the books and burn them.
- I don’t go here anymore
In Russian literature it began already in the first third of the 19th century, when literature was predominantly dominated by classicism, sentimentalism and romanticism. However, it would be impossible for the author of that period to do without elements of realism completely, because The main task of realism is to describe a person from all sides, to analyze life and everyday life.
Realist writers paid much attention to the environment in which the hero lives. The environment includes upbringing, the people around you, and your financial situation. Therefore, it is quite interesting to evaluate the comedy of A.S. from the point of view of a comprehensive description of personality. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit", to which many critical articles and assessments of writers were devoted in the 19th century.
Article A Million of Torments: Character Review
One of the most famous and successful is the article I.A. Goncharova "A Million Torments". The point in this article is that every comedy hero is a tragic figure in his own way, everyone faces their own trials.
Chatsky comes to Moscow to meet Sophia, admires her, but he will be disappointed - Sophia has lost interest in him and preferred Molchalin. Chatsky is unable to understand this heartfelt affection.
But he is also unable to understand that a long-standing, tender childhood friendship is not a promise of eternal love; he has no rights to Sophia. Finding her with Molchalin, Chatsky plays the role of Othello, without any reason.
At the same time, Chatsky imprudently comes into conflict with Famusov - they criticize each other’s time (the color of time in comedy is especially strong). Full of wonderful ideas and a thirst for action, Chatsky fails to “bring some sense to” the slightly morally outdated Famusov, therefore he remains the main suffering figure in the comedy. Chatsky’s mind turns into a tragedy for everyone around him, but his own actions are driven primarily by irritation and temper.
Sophia also has her share of “a million torments.” Raised by her father, she is accustomed to living in an atmosphere of easy lies “for the good,” so she sees nothing wrong either in her love for Molchalin or in her refusal to Chatsky. And when they both rejected her, Sophia is almost ready to marry Skalozub - the last option left for her for a calm, orderly life. However, despite this, Sophia is an a priori positive character: unlike many, she knows how to dream and imagine, her actions are always sincere.
According to Goncharov, the comedy “Woe from Wit” will remain relevant at all times, since the problems discussed in it are eternal. He also believes that staging this comedy on stage is an extremely important undertaking, since every little detail plays a huge role in it: costumes, scenery, manner of speech, and selection of actors.
However, according to Goncharov, the only open question of “Woe from Wit” on stage is the image of Chatsky, which can be discussed and corrected for a long time. For other characters, stable images have long been formed.
Rating of comedy by other critics
The same opinion: that the main thing in “Woe from Wit” is characters and social mores, was also held by A.S. Pushkin. According to him, the author turned out to have Famusov and Skalozub as the most complete personalities; Sophia, in the opinion of Pushkin, is a somewhat vague person.
He considers Chatsky a positive, ardent and noble hero, who, however, addresses completely the wrong people with his sensible and reasonable speeches. According to Pushkin, the conflict between Chatsky and Repetilov could be “funny,” but not with Famusov or with the Moscow elderly ladies at the ball.
Famous 19th century literary critic V.G. Belinsky emphasizes that the main thing in the comedy "Woe from Wit" is the conflict of generations. He draws attention to the fact that after publication, the comedy was approved mainly by young people who, together with Chatsky, laughed at the older generation.
This comedy is a vicious satire on those echoes of the 18th century that still lived in society. Belinsky also emphasizes that Chatsky’s love for Sophia is, by and large, unfounded - after all, both of them do not understand the meaning of each other’s lives, both ridicule each other’s ideals and foundations.
In such an atmosphere of mutual ridicule there can be no talk of love. According to Belinsky, “Woe from Wit” should be called not a comedy, but a satire, since the characters of the characters and the main idea in it are extremely ambiguous. But Chatsky’s ridicule of the “past century” was a great success.
Need help with your studies?
Previous topic: Features of the poetic language of “Woe from Wit” and its stage lifeNext topic: Pages of Pushkin’s biography: Pushkin and his contemporaries
A. A. Bestuzhev defended Griboyedov and praised his comedy in “The Polar Star,” O. M. Somov in “Son of the Fatherland,” V. F. Odoevsky and N. A. Polevoy in “Moscow Telegraph.” The Decembrists and all those who then wrote in defense of “Woe from Wit” proved the originality of the comedy and its correspondence to Russian reality. A. A. Bestuzhev, in the article “A Look at Russian Literature during 1824 and Early 1825,” called Griboedov’s comedy a “phenomenon” that had not been seen since the time of Fonvizin’s “The Minor.” He finds its merit in Griboedov’s mind and wit, in the fact that “the author is not liked by the rules,” he boldly and sharply draws a crowd of characters, a living picture of Moscow morals, using the “unprecedented fluency” of “colloquial Russian in verse.” Bestuzhev prophesied that “the future will appreciate this comedy and place it among the first folk creations.”
Decembrist criticism emphasized the clash in the play of two opposing social forces. Opponents tried their best to hide this. The writer’s friends had to prove the specificity of the plot of “Woe from Wit” and its masterful construction.
Apparently, Pushkin had another consideration. The comedy avoided the question of the fate of numerous “good fellows” who diverged from the secular environment, but did not oppose it, like Chatsky. They see the vulgarity of the life around them, but they themselves pay tribute to the prejudices of the world. Pushkin was busy depicting this controversial type of young people of the 20s in Eugene Onegin. And after December 14, 1825, having survived the trials of time, they continued to remain among the best. Later they turned into Pechorin, Beltov, Rudin. There is historical truth in the image of the enthusiast Chatsky, truth in the sharp picture of morals in “Woe from Wit.” But there is historical truth both in the dual image of Onegin and in the softened pictures of Pushkin’s novel. This exactly corresponded to the contradictions of the noble heroes, far from the people and unable to break with the interests and prejudices of their class. Griboedov showed the active, effective side of the social movement, Pushkin - its skeptical, contradictory side. Griboyedov showed how the nobles rebel against injustice, Pushkin - how they fight and make peace with it. Griboyedov showed the struggle of the hero with society, Pushkin - the struggle in the soul of the hero, carrying within himself the contradictions of society. But both truths are important and real. And both great realist artists reflected the progressive movement in all its heroism and historical inconsistency.
But in his assessment of Chatsky, Pushkin somewhat disagreed with both Griboyedov and the Decembrists. Pushkin admits that Chatsky is smart, that he is an ardent and noble young man and a kind fellow, and “everything he says is very smart.” But, firstly, this mind is somewhat borrowed. Chatsky seemed to have picked up thoughts, witticisms and satirical remarks from Griboedov himself, with whom he spent time, and, secondly, “who is he telling all this to? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable." Pushkin notes at the same time: “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 the Repetilovs and the like.” Pushkin knew people like Chatsky well. This is a person close to the circle of Griboyedov and the Decembrists. But Pushkin had already gone through a period of similar hobbies. Once he flooded St. Petersburg with his epigrams, in the poem “Village” he exclaimed: “Oh, if only my voice could disturb hearts!”; Once upon a time he also spoke out in an accusatory spirit among random people. Now Pushkin judges more maturely. He believes that arguing with the Famusovs is useless.
The comedy by A. S. Griboyedov aroused the most controversial rumors among his contemporaries and gave rise to controversy in literary circles. The most interesting were the reviews of P. A. Katenin, the Decembrists and A. S. Pushkin. At the beginning of 1825, Katenin sent Griboedov a letter criticizing “Woe from Wit.” Katenin's letter has not reached us. But Griboedov’s answer arrived, refuting all of his opponent’s points, which Griboyedov repeated in the letter. This allows us to judge the nature of the dispute. Katenin saw the “main flaw” of the comedy – in the plan. Griboedov objected: “...it seems to me that it is simple and clear in purpose and execution.” As proof, the playwright revealed the general idea of the comedy, the arrangement of the characters, the gradual course of the intrigue and the significance of Chatsky’s character.
