What are the conflicts in the play Woe from Wit. Conflict in A.S. comedy

The comedy “Woe from Wit” occupies an exceptional place in the history of Russian literature, because it reflected the protest of the leading part of the Russian nobility against the inertia, backwardness of the reactionary serf-owners, against class privileges. Therefore, the main theme, the main conflict of the comedy is the struggle of the “present century”, everything new, progressive, enlightenment against the “past century”, reactionary, striving to preserve the autocratic-serf system.

There are so many defenders of serfdom in the comedy: these are Famusov, and Molchalin, and Skalozub, and practically the entire Moscow of “Famusov’s circle”! And there is only one active representative of the progressive noble youth - Chatsky, but he has the power to disturb the calm, disturb, awaken the enemies of free thought and enlightenment from their serene slumber.

Two worldviews that developed in Russian society in the first half of the 19th century collided in comedy, each with its own ideals, values, and living standards.

Chatsky is an enthusiastic, open, sincere, emotional young man. Even Famusov appreciates many of his qualities:

He's a smart guy, and he writes and translates nicely...

Chatsky at one time felt cramped in Moscow, and he left to travel, “to search his mind,” to look for the positive foundations of life. Love forces him to return, but he is sure that Moscow has not changed: “What new will Moscow show me?” And he's right about this:

The houses are new, but the prejudices are old. Rejoice, neither years, nor fashion, nor fires will destroy them.

Revealing to Sophia the bright world of his feelings and experiences, entering into an argument with Famusov, Skalozub and the like, Chatsky encounters not only misunderstanding, but also open opposition, hatred of this stream of fresh air. And how could it be otherwise if he is a stranger in this world. The ability to think intelligently, openly express one’s opinion, and the desire for new knowledge turns Chatsky in the eyes of others into a “dangerous” and “strange” person, a “carbonari,” a madman.

Chatsky “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in it,” but only because he is deeply outraged by the hypocrisy, meanness, and sycophancy accepted in the modern “high society.” “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served” to Chatsky. He does not accept the “passion for the uniform,” which for the majority only serves as a cover for weakness and poverty of mind. Famusov and his supporters have the opposite opinion, their ideal is: “and win awards and have fun.” Rank, position in society, wealth are much more important for these people than a person’s personal merits.

Chatsky visited abroad and saw the world, but he remained a true patriot of his homeland, a sincere connoisseur of its originality. He is offended that among the nobility there is still “a confusion of languages: French and Nizhny Novgorod,” and he is offended by the dominance of foreigners.

Chatsky perfectly understands his rejection from the world of the Famusovs and Skalozubovs, he is aware of his exclusivity, because the one who, “without demanding either places or promotion to rank...”, “will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge,” “will be known among them as a dreamer.” , dangerous! And indeed, Famusov’s Moscow agreed that “learning is a plague,” and the best solution for opponents of enlightenment was “to take all the books and burn them.”

A person of the “past century” “should not dare to have his own judgment,” therefore in all their actions they are guided by public opinion. Chatsky angrily speaks out against such “judges” who are “rich in robbery”, “found protection from trial in friends, in kinship”, denounces the morals, cruelty and arbitrariness of the serf owners. An independent, free, educated person is his ideal. Material from the site

From the very beginning, Chatsky understands how much he does not fit into the usual life for the Famusovs, but still waits for the tragic outcome. What keeps him among people who are strangers to him? Love for Sophia - a girl, although she has her own opinion, capable of strong and lively feelings, ready for self-sacrifice, but grew up among stupid, hypocritical people, on French novels, with a living example of her father before her eyes. She cannot fall in love with Chatsky, but he still does not want to understand this, because “if so: the mind and the heart are not in harmony.” Only at the end of the comedy is he freed from this love, from illusions, no matter how painful it is for him to tear the tender threads of feelings and memories.

Having experienced “a million torments,” Chatsky did not change or convince Famus society, but he managed to excite and disturb their serene, carefree existence. Chatsky leaves, but the action is not over, since his shadow has settled forever between the silent, rock-teeth, Famusovs, it worries them, shakes the usual foundations of the autocratic-serf world. Chatsky is a man of the new century, an exposer of the lies of the “past century” and one of the first messengers of great changes in the new free life.

Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search

On this page there is material on the following topics:

Chatsky representative of the progressive nobility
the main conflict in the comedy Woe from Wit by Griboyedov
the main conflict of the comedy Griboyedov's grief from madness
main conflict woe from mind essay
the main conflict of the comedy and with Griboyedov grief from mind

Conflict (from Latin - “clash”) - a clash of opposing interests and views; serious disagreement; heated dispute. Undoubtedly, the key words in this explanation will be “clash”, “disagreement” and “dispute”. All three words are united by the common idea of confrontation, some kind of confrontation, usually moral.
Conflict plays a huge role in a literary work; it constitutes the so-called “electricity” of action. This is both a way to defend some idea, and a disclosure of the author’s position, and the key to understanding the entire work. The composition depends on the conflict. The eternal opponents in Russian literature have always been good and evil, truth and untruth, will and captivity, life and death. And this struggle is shown in the early works of the people - fairy tales. Living life always struggles with the unnatural, artificial, which is evident even in the names themselves (“Living and Dead Water”, “Truth and Falsehood”). A literary hero is always faced with a choice, and this is also a conflict, a clash of man within man. All Russian literature is very pedagogical. Therefore, the role of the conflict is also to correctly interpret both sides, to teach a person to choose between “good” and “evil.”
Griboedov, the creator of the first realistic play, found it quite difficult to cope with this task. Indeed, unlike his predecessors (Fonvizin, Sumarokov), who wrote plays according to the laws of classicism, where good and evil were clearly separated from each other, Griboyedov made each hero an individual, a living person who tends to make mistakes.
The title “Woe from Wit” is the thesis of the entire work, and every word is important. “Grief,” according to Ozhegov’s dictionary, is given in two meanings - grief, sadness and ironic ridicule of something unsuccessful. So what is it? Tragedy? And then whose? Or mockery? Then over whom? “Mind” in Griboyedov’s time had the meaning of progressiveness and activity. The question arises: who is smart at comedy? But the main semantic emphasis falls on the preposition “from”. This is the predestination of the entire conflict. It is also indicated on the poster. “Talking names,” as noted by R. O. Vinokur, characterizing the characters, are associated with the “idea of speech” (Tugoukhovsky, Molchalin, Repetilov), that is, they indicate the ability of the characters to “hear” and “speak” with each other, and therefore, understand others, yourself and the general environment. The conflict in the play is of an onion-like nature - behind the external there is an internal one. All action is subordinated to this revelation, and small conflicts, merging together and interacting, “give” an apotheosis to the main thing.
The first act (appearances 1-6) shows the relationship between Sophia and Molchalin before Chatsky’s arrival. This is an exposition of a love conflict, but even now the author points out the insincerity of Molchalin’s relationship with Sophia, shows this love ironically. This is evident from the first remark (“Lisanka is sleeping, hanging from a chair,” while from the young lady’s room “you can hear a piano with a flute”), from Lisa’s words about Aunt Sophia, and her caustic remarks (“Ah! Damn Cupid!”). This also shows Sophia’s attitude towards Chatsky:
He chats, jokes, it’s funny to me;
You can share laughter with everyone -
she says, not believing in his love. “Pretended to be in love” - this is how Sophia defines his feelings.
And then... he appears! “Oster, smart, eloquent,” he “attacks” Sophia, and then not very flatteringly “lists” her relatives. A social conflict is emerging, which Griboedov himself defined as follows: Chatsky “in contradiction with the society surrounding him.” But it’s not for nothing that the author uses the popular form of “contradiction”, because Chatsky is in conflict not only with the “light”, but also with the people, and with the past, and with himself.
He is lonely and with such a character is doomed to loneliness. Chatsky is pleased with himself, with his speeches, and moves with pleasure from one subject of ridicule to another: “Ah! Let’s move on to education!” He constantly exclaims:
“Well, what do you want, father?”
“And this one, what’s his name?..”,
“And three of the tabloid personalities?”
“And that one is consumptive?..” -
as if it were terribly important after three years. In general, throughout the entire play, Chatsky falls silent, takes a “minute” break, thinking about the words of his interlocutor, only twice - upon his first appearance in the house and in the last monologue. And then he explains his own internal conflict: “The mind and the heart are not in harmony,” that is, the advanced ideas that he speaks so beautifully about do not lie at the basis of his actions, which means that everything he says is a rational impulse , not coming from the heart, therefore, contrived.
The beginning of the social conflict occurs in the second act. The conversation between Famusov and Chatsky about Sophia turns into a kind of duel between “fathers” and “children” arguing about Russia. Moreover, Griboedov constantly points out the contradictions between Chatsky - the master of words and Chatsky - the master of deeds. So, in the second act, he talks about the cruel attitude towards peasants and servants, while in the first he himself did not notice Lisa, just as one does not notice a wardrobe or a chair, and he manages his property by mistake. A person’s speech always reflects his spiritual world. Chatsky's speech is full of both vernacular and gallicisms. This once again indicates the disharmony of Chatsky’s inner world in Chatsky.
“Everything he says is very smart! But who is he telling this to? - wrote Pushkin. Indeed, the key remark in the third act reads: “He looks around, everyone is spinning in the waltz with the greatest zeal. The old men scattered to the card tables.” He remains alone - the culmination of social conflict. Who is he talking to? Maybe for yourself? Without knowing it, he talks to himself, trying to settle the battle between “heart” and “mind”. Having drawn up a life scheme in his mind, he tries to “fit” life to it, to break its laws, which is why she turns away from him, and the love conflict is not forgotten. Sophia also does not accept his rationalism. In general, both of these conflicts are interconnected, and if we agree with Blok that “Woe from Wit” is a work “...symbolic, in the true sense of the word,” then Sophia is the symbol of Russia, where Chatsky is a stranger, because “he is smart in his own way.” otherwise... not smart in Russian. In a different way. In a foreign way" (Weil, Geinis. "Native Speech").
So, both conflicts develop into the main one - the collision of living life and the scheme.
But all the heroes of the play drew up a life plan for themselves: Molchalin, Famusov, Skalozub, Sophia... So, Sophia, who “cannot sleep from French books,” is trying to live her life like a novel. However, Sophia's novel is in the Russian style. As Bazhenov noted, the story of her love for Molchalin is not frivolous, like that of her “French compatriots”, it is pure and spiritual, but still it is just a book fiction. There is no agreement in Sophia’s soul either. Maybe that’s why in the poster she is listed as Sophia, that is, “wise,” but Pavlovna is Famusov’s daughter, which means she is somewhat similar to him. However, at the end of the comedy, she still sees the light; it is her dream that “breaks,” and not she herself. Chatsky is also shown in evolution. But we can only judge his internal change from words about the past. So, when leaving, he spoke confidentially with Lisa: “It’s not for nothing, Lisa, that I’m crying...”, while throughout the entire action he does not say a word to her.
“Great, friend, great, brother!..” - Famusov greets him out of old habit. Chatsky does not say a single kind word to him.
“What do you want?”, “Nobody invites you!” - he only arrogantly remarks to him, immediately entering into an argument.
Chatsky's monologues are close in their ideological orientation to the slogans of the Decembrists. He denounces the servility, cruelty of the serf owners, meanness - this is what Griboyedov agrees with him and the Decembrists. But he cannot approve of their methods, the same patterns of life, only not just one, but the whole society. Therefore, the culmination of all conflicts is Chatsky’s accusation of madness. Thus, he is denied the right to be a citizen, the highest good, according to the Decembrist theory, because one of the definitions of a human citizen is a “sound mind” (Muravyov); the right to be respected and loved. It is precisely for his rationalistic approach to life, the pursuit of his goal by “low” methods that Griboedov calls all the heroes of the comedy “fools.”
The clash between nature and unnaturalness is shown not only on stage. Off-stage characters also struggle with themselves. Skalozub’s brother, for example, suddenly leaving his service, and therefore his intention to become a general, began reading books in the village, but his youth passed and “grab ...”, and he “behaved properly, he’s been a colonel for a long time,” even though he’s been serving “ recently".
Griboedov attributes all of Chatsky’s ardor only to the romantic impulses of youth, and perhaps Saltykov-Shchedrin is right when he described his subsequent fate as the director of the department of insanity, who became friends with Molchalin.
So, the main conflict of the work, revealed through public (Chatsky and society), intimate (Chatsky and Sophia, Molchalin and Sophia, Molchalin and Liza), personal (Chatsky and Chatsky, Sophia and Sophia...) conflicts, is the confrontation between rationalism and reality, which Griboyedov skillfully portrays with the help of stage directions, off-stage characters, dialogues and monologues. Even in the very rejection of the norms of classicism lies the denial of a subjective approach to life. “I write freely and freely,” says Griboyedov himself, that is, realistically. Using free iambic, different types of rhyme, distributing the lines of one verse to several characters, the author abandons the canons, calling not only to write, but also to live “freely.” "Free" from prejudice.

Through artistic means, Griboedov expressed the protest of the leading part of the Russian nobility against the inertia and backwardness of the society of that time, against class privileges and serfdom. The most educated, smartest man of his era, he grasped the main social conflict that emerged after the Patriotic War of 1812, and this is the realism of Griboyedov the writer. The comedy reflected the explosive, tense atmosphere of noble society on the eve of 1825. The comedy brings to the fore the ideological disagreement of the main characters, the struggle of the present century with the past century, the struggle of two worldviews that developed in Russian society in the first half of the 19th century. On the one hand, representatives of feudal reaction, serf antiquity Famusov, Skalozub, Countess Khryumina, on the other, advanced noble youth, whose features are embodied by Griboyedov in the image of Chatsky. In Chatsky’s accusatory speeches and Famusov’s enthusiastic stories, the ideal of the past century emerges. This was the age of Catherine with her nobles and flatterers of the court, the age of obedience and fear, depraved morals, when insane extravagance

And luxurious feasts in magnificent chambers flourished next to the humiliating poverty and lack of rights of serfs, who could easily be sold or exchanged for dogs of their choice. This century has become the ideal of the lordly, Famus society, which lives by the principle of winning awards and having fun.
The spokesman for outdated feudal institutions is, of course, Famusov himself. He is a convinced serf owner, ready in anger to exile his serf servants to Siberia, a fierce opponent of education, enlightenment (if evil was to be stopped, he would collect all the books and burn them). This is, finally, a person devoid of true dignity and honor, groveling before higher ranks for the sake of promotion, for the sake of his own enrichment.
Chatsky contrasts the defenders of feudal antiquity, the enemies of free-thinking and enlightenment in the comedy. This is a Decembrist, this is a man who ends the era of Peter I and is trying to discern, at least on the horizon, the promised land, A. I. Herzen wrote about Chatsky. Between the like-minded people Famusov and Chatsky is one of the main figures of the comedy, Sophia, who also experienced her grief from the mind. It is she who is assigned the difficult, but very important role of repelling Chatsky’s attacks. However, the image of Sophia in the comedy is contradictory. Sophia is drawn unclearly, A.S. Pushkin noted at one time. Indeed, she is endowed with both positive traits that attracted such an extraordinary person as Chatsky and aroused his love, and negative ones that constantly increase his bewilderment and disappointment. In Sophia's behavior and moods, one always feels a contradiction between a subtle, sober mind and sentimental empty experiences.
What attracted Chatsky to Sofya? What made her stand out in the world of the Famusovs, the Tugoukhovsky princesses and Countess Khryumin’s granddaughter? First of all, independence of views, independence in decision-making, in relationships with people. She fell in love with someone unequal to herself and thus, as it were, challenged the Domostroev rules. Deceived in her feelings, Sophia is not afraid of the judgment of others. She courageously says to Chatsky: I blame myself all around. And Molchalin contemptuously orders to get out of the house before dawn. The strong, proud character of the girl cannot but arouse sympathy and participation in her destiny. Apparently, Chatsky always admired this independence, Sophia’s determination, always hoped for her understanding,

The so-called Lancastrian schools of mutual education for the people, which arose in St. Petersburg in 1821-1822, also caused hostility among the reactionary nobles. These schools, highly valued by the Decembrists, were organized by advanced officers for...
The main role, of course, is the role of Chatsky, without which there would be no comedy, but, perhaps, there would be a picture of morals. Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. Speech...
Every comedy, as a type of dramatic work, is intended to be staged. Therefore, in order to understand comedy better, to understand its situations, characters and ideas, we must imagine when reading a comedy...
The comedy in “Woe from Wit” is created not by deliberately comic situations, but by a truthful depiction of the vulgar sides of life, ridicule of everything low and vile. With Russian comedy of the 18th – early 19th centuries. “Grief...
Polemicizing with the statements of the reactionary camp, Bestuzhev and those close to the Decembrist literary circle V.F. Odoevsky and O.M. Somov pointed to the veracity of the depiction in “Woe from Wit” of the lordly environment, to...
The idea for “Woe from Wit” apparently came to Griboedov in 1816. The playwright began working directly on the comedy later. Two acts were written by him during his stay in the Caucasus in 1821...
Go” by G-dov is a socio-political realistic comedy, one of the most topical works of Russian literature. The comedy “Go” was written in the 20s of the 19th century, when, after the Patriotic War of 1812, in Russian...
The main conflict of A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” is the conflict of new and old, progressive and reactionary, enlightenment and serfdom. Through artistic means, Griboyedov expressed the protest of the advanced part of the Russian nobility against...
In his comedy “Woe from Wit” Griboyedov directly contrasts Chatsky with all the other (without exception) characters. Opposed to the main character is the society of Famusov and his entourage: Molchalin, Skalozub, Repetilov and others. In their...
I. A. Goncharov, in his critical sketch “A Million Torments,” wrote about A. S. Griboyedov’s play “Woe from Wit”: “This is a subtle, smart, elegant and passionate comedy. she is disguised by the typical faces of the heroes...
A. S. Griboyedov was born in 1794, the famous comedy was written in 1824, at the beginning of the 19th century. The author was 28 years old at that time. Quite a mature age. And the issues raised...
It is difficult to predict the fate of a person seeking, so different assumptions can be made about Chatsky’s future. Determining the past of such a person is the same. Anyone who has dedicated himself once and for all to creating a career and wealth...
The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboedov is one of the outstanding examples of Russian drama in the first quarter of the 19th century. The comedy was created at a time when classicism dominated the stage in Russia...
The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written in 1824. In this work, A. S. Griboedov recreated a true picture of Russian life in the first quarter of the 19th century: he showed the changes that took place in Russian society...
Chatsky begins a new century - and this is his whole meaning and his whole mind. I. A. Goncharov A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” played an outstanding role in the matter of socio-political and...
In 1824, AS G-dov wrote his comedy “Go,” which had a huge impact on the further development of Russian literature. In this play, G-dov showed an important problem of all times - the conflict between...
Having combined the features of classicism and realism in the comedy “Go”, G-dov abandoned the one-sidedness in the depiction of the heroes. Therefore, there are no ideal, positive characters in the play, but Chatsky, Sophia,...
The comedy “Woe from Wit” by Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov was completed in 1824, on the eve of the Decembrist uprising. Therefore, its author simply could not help but be influenced by the pre-revolutionary atmosphere of those years. However, the plot...
The comedy “Woe from Wit” gives a general picture of the entire Russian life of the 10-20s of the 19th century, reproduces the eternal struggle between old and new, which unfolded with great force at that time throughout...
The innovation of A. S. Griboyedov in creating the play “Woe from Wit” was manifested in the organic fusion of the tragic and the comic. Therefore, researchers of Griboyedov’s work call this work “high comedy” or tragicomedy. Among the main actors...

The first title of the comedy was: “Woe to Wit.” The comedy is exciting, but whether it is funny or critically tragic is not up to the author of the lines to decide. “Woe from Wit” can be understood in two ways, three ways, or... not at all. A.S. Pushkin spoke about himself in a letter to his dear wife: “The devil destined me to be born in Russia, endowed with intelligence and talent”... Russia does not need intelligence, it is pure grief.

But “Woe from Wit”, as a hidden psychological device - sarcasm, the scandal of collective extravagance and selfishness, fits perfectly with the scenes described in the comedy.

Living their lives without hesitation to let petty gossip and tales go over their heads, people who consider themselves the highest society eat each other, embellishing reality in order to ruin the reputation of their neighbor, leaving theirs seemingly crystal clear, which is not in reality.

If anyone fought against the “tent” of modern high society, it was Chatsky, who was immediately accused of losing his mind. Where is the logic and where is the intelligence, and are they needed in the race for fame and honor in the social stratum called the “nobility”? After all, the corresponding rank bestowed the holder with a lot of privileges, such as immunity, reliability of words and information transmitted, a deliberate invitation to all social evenings, dinners and conventions. Talking about a noble person in an impartial manner was not only bad form, but also an undesirable conversation. However, if the rumor was nevertheless picked up by two, three, four people, the mark on the person could deepen to indelible proportions and spread to the entire family. Does such secular behavior of those times differ from today's Russian politics in general? Perhaps nothing.

Famus Society - an island in an ocean of islands

A striking example of those who do not need either intelligence or grief are the representatives of Famusov’s society and Famusov himself at the head. Respect is only given to those who are rich themselves and are in relationships with rich people. Anyone who can boast of a dowry or overseas trophies, without understanding and not accepting the history and culture of foreign places, hiding their ignorance behind pretentiousness and lies - this is the personification of society. But only Famustovsky?

Naturally, a big role here is given to removing the masks from those who believe that they rule the world and people in Russia.
Misunderstood aspirations for self-improvement and the unwillingness to accept something that may be more valuable than rank - a stupid, useless, but relevant conflict in Griboedov’s tragicomedy.

The author of the comedy focuses on the obvious confrontation that existed at the beginning of the 19th century between adherents of the “old” way of life, reactionaries and younger, enlightened and progressive representatives of the noble class.

Landowners who adhered to the “former” views on life tried in every possible way to preserve the life of serf-owners that was familiar to them, while their opponents strenuously assured those around them that the “present century” had already arrived and it was high time to end the “past century” long ago. The hero of Griboyedov is one of these nobles, throughout the entire action of the play he tries to convince people who do not want not only to understand him, but at least to hear him, that he is right.

At the very beginning of the comedy, a naive and dream-prone young man comes to Famusov’s house, trying to change the vice-ridden society of his day. He talks about his ideas to the owner of the house and his guests, equally old-fashioned and reactionary people who are afraid of any new trends and consider them extremely harmful; for this reason, Chatsky’s words are not perceived at all by his opponents.

It is worth paying attention to how the author characterizes his characters, in particular, the “member of the English Club” Famusov, and his relative, the man who demands that “no one knows how to read and write,” and other acquaintances of Sophia’s father, assessing with one single phrase the whole their narrow-mindedness, narrow-mindedness and hatred of everything unknown to them, which seems alien and dangerous to them.

As a result, Chatsky, having received a deep insult in this “chosen” society, gets rid of all his illusions and understands how pointless it was to try to change such people in any way. According to him at the end of the play, the scales finally fell from his eyes.

Famusov, Chatsky’s main antagonist, does not at all hide his indifferent attitude towards the service, which for him is only a formality, as he claims, “signed and out of sight.” In addition, this gentleman, confident in his infallibility, constantly patronizes exclusively relatives and acquaintances, saying that he will find relatives “at the bottom of the sea” and is ready to do anything for her. The main rule for him is open groveling before higher ranks, and only in this way, according to Famusov, is it possible to “get out into the public eye” and become a truly “worthy” person.

Such words infuriate Chatsky, and the young man pronounces a passionate, heated monologue, filled with the most sincere indignation and anger, denouncing the naked “servility” and “buffoonery” without which his interlocutor cannot imagine life. Famusov, in turn, is frankly horrified by such statements and begins to insist that such dissident individuals as Chatsky should not be allowed into the capital at all, moreover, they must be immediately brought to justice. The guests gathered in the house will be happy to learn from the owner that there is a “new project” regarding educational institutions, where they will teach “our way, once or twice,” while books will actually not be needed by the younger generation.

The people present in Famusov’s chambers consider the teaching a real “plague”; Colonel Skalozub without hesitation expresses the dream of “collecting all the books and burning them.” Molchalin, with whom Sophia is in love, also learned from childhood that everyone around him needs to “please” and behaves exactly like that, absolutely without thinking about self-esteem and pride, he tries to please not only his immediate boss, but also the janitor, and even “ the janitor's dog."

Chatsky turns out to be a complete stranger in this environment of “correct”, old-regime people, enemies of all progress and improvement of society. His reasoning only frightens those around him, he seems to them a very strange person, the assumption arises that he is simply “out of his mind”, Chatsky’s high intelligence and his ardent impulses only repel those gathered at Famusov’s from him.

The main monologue of a young nobleman, in which he asks who are the judges of innovations, and denounces the heartless landowners who do not hesitate to sell children and separate them from their parents or exchange servants for dogs. Chatsky has already had the opportunity to serve and travel, but he wants to be useful to his native country, and not to his superiors, so for now the man, having left his previous occupation, is trying to find his path in life.

He is also deeply outraged by the lack of any patriotism among members of the “high society society,” their obvious admiration for everything foreign and conversations among the nobility in such an absurd combination of languages as “French and Nizhny Novgorod.” He believes that the aristocracy should be closer to the common people and at least be able to speak Russian correctly, while for most nobles it is easier to communicate in one of the European languages. At the same time, even Chatsky’s opponents notice his extraordinary mind and excellent speech. According to Famusov, his guest is “smart” and expresses his thoughts clearly and competently.

The young man is in an environment completely alien to him only for the sake of Sophia, whom he has loved since his youth. However, the girl is completely under the influence of the society around her, which shapes all her ideas about life, and she is unable to reciprocate Chatsky, who contradicts the world of values and concepts familiar to her.

When it becomes clear to Famusov’s guest that Sophia easily betrayed their previous feelings and promises, and exposed Chatsky to everyone’s ridicule, talking about his loss of reason, he immediately leaves the empty space, devoid of any internal content, realizing that now he has absolutely no need to be here. In the final monologue, he emphasizes his complete disappointment in those gathered; from now on, all his ties with the “Famus” world are severed.

For people like this progressive nobleman, presence in such an environment brings only suffering, “woe from mind,” as the play is called. But Chatsky’s efforts are not in vain; his denunciations deal a serious blow to people such as Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin, and other adherents of the “old order.”

True, the fight against reactionaries in comedy does not end with the victory of progress, since in the real life of Russia at that time it was just beginning. However, Famusov, like his supporters, feels powerless before enlightenment, the approaching new era and a different life; they cannot help but realize that their established world is gradually becoming a thing of the past and they are being replaced by completely different people who hold different views and aspirations .