A satirical depiction of the world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins (based on the comedy by D. Fonvizin “The Minor”)

One respect should be flattering to a person - spiritual, and only those who are in ranks not according to money, and in the nobility not according to ranks, are worthy of spiritual respect. DI. Fonvizin
At this time, in all corners of the country, there were many nobles on estates who did not want to bother themselves with anything and lived like their ancestors hundreds of years ago. Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” is about such gentlemen. Main her characters- the Prostakov family and the brother of Mrs. Prostakova Skotinin. All landowners lived at the expense of the peasants and were, therefore, exploiters. But some became rich because their peasants lived prosperously, while others - because they flayed the last skin from the serfs. But what are the Prostakovs and Skotinins like? What are these people doing, what are their interests, habits, attachments?
In the spotlight - family relationships Prostakov. From the very beginning it becomes clear that the mistress is in Prostakov’s house. The character of Terenty Prostakov is determined at the very beginning of the comedy by his own confession to his wife: “Before your eyes, mine see nothing.” Pushing around her obedient husband, Prostakova turned him into a weak-willed rag. His main occupation and purpose of existence is to please his wife. Prostakov’s unconditional helplessness before the will, energy, and power of his wife, without his own opinion, in unconditional submission, trepidation, to the point of weakness and trembling in his legs. However, the punishment of everyone leads to the execution of it. Orders to the executor go through him, as a formal owner. Simpletons are completely under the thumb of his wife. His role in the house is emphasized at Prostakov’s very first remark: “stammering out of timidity.” This “timidity” or, as Pravdin characterizes it, “extreme weak-mindedness” leads to the fact that Prostakova’s “inhumanity” does not meet any restrictions from her husband and at the end of the comedy Prostakov himself turns out, by his own admission, “guilty without guilt” . In the comedy he plays an insignificant role; his character does not change with the development of the action and is not revealed more widely. All we know about his upbringing is that he was raised, in Prostakova’s words, “like a pretty maiden,” and he doesn’t even know how to read. Also from Prostakova’s speech we learn that he is “humble, like a calf” and “He doesn’t understand for himself what is wide and what is narrow.” Behind long years life together he got used to beatings and insults, he learned to say what his wife thinks. That's all he achieved. But, in essence, it is very profitable to be Prostakov or pretend to be one, to live under the motto: “I have nothing to do with it.”
Much more complex visual means Fonvizin outlined the character of the “despicable fury” - Mrs. Prostakova, née Skotinina. If the image of her husband remains unchanged from the first to the last act of the comedy, then the character of Prostakova herself is gradually revealed throughout the play. For all her cunning, Prostakova is stupid, and therefore constantly gives herself away. Prostakova seriously, with her characteristic ingenuous stubbornness, assures the careless serf tailor Trishka that learning to sew caftans is not at all necessary.
The details of Prostakova’s biography are very interesting. We learn that her father was a commander for fifteen years. And although “he didn’t know how to read and write, he knew how to make and save enough.” From here it is clear that he was an embezzler and a bribe-taker, an extremely stingy person: “lying on a chest of money, he died, so to speak, of hunger.” Her mother's surname - Priplodina - speaks for itself.
Prostakova is presented as a domineering, uneducated Russian woman. She is very greedy and in order to grab more of someone else’s things, she often flatters and “puts on” a mask of nobility, but from under the mask every now and then an animalistic grin peeks out, which looks funny and absurd. Prostakova is a tyrant, despotic and at the same time cowardly, greedy and vile, representing the brightest type of Russian landowner, at the same time revealed as an individual character - the cunning and cruel sister of Skotinin, a power-hungry, calculating wife who tyrannizes her husband, a mother who loves madly his Mitrofanushka.
“This is a “despicable fury, whose hellish disposition brings misfortune to their entire house.” However, the full extent of the disposition of this “fury” is revealed in its treatment of serfs.
Prostakova is the sovereign mistress of her villages and in her house she is selfish, but her selfishness is stupid, wasteful, inhuman: having taken everything from the peasants, she deprives them of their means of subsistence, but she also suffers a loss - it is impossible to take rent from the peasants, there is nothing. Moreover, I feel the full support of the supreme power; she considers the situation natural, hence her confidence, arrogance, and assertiveness. Prostakova is deeply convinced of her right to insult, rob and punish the peasants, whom she views as beings of another, lower breed. Sovereignty has corrupted her: she is angry, capricious, abusive and pugnacious - she gives out slaps in the face without hesitation. Prostakova dominates the world under her control, she dominates brazenly, despotically, with complete confidence in her impunity. They see the advantages of the “noble” class in the opportunity to insult and rob people dependent on them. Prostakova's primitive nature is clearly revealed in sharp transitions from arrogance to cowardice, from complacency to servility. Prostakova is a product of the environment in which she grew up. Neither her father nor her mother gave her any education or instilled any moral rules. But the conditions of serfdom had an even stronger impact on her. She is not restrained by any moral principles. She feels her limitless power and impunity. She treats servants and hired people with rude disdain and insult. No one dares to resist her power: “Am I not powerful in my people?” Prostakova’s well-being rests on the shameless robbery of serfs. “Since then,” she complains to Skotinin, “we took away everything that the peasants had, and she can’t rip off anything anymore. Order in the house is restored with abuse and beatings. “From morning to evening,” Prostakova complains again, how I hang my tongue, I don’t lay down my hands: I scold, I fight.”
In her house, Prostakova is a wild, powerful despot. Everything is in her unbridled power. She calls her timid, weak-willed husband a “weeper,” a “freak,” and pushes him around in every possible way. Teachers are not paid a salary for a year. Eremeevna, faithful to her and Mitrofan, receives “five rubles a year and five slaps a day.” She is ready to “grab” her brother Skotinin’s mug, “tear his snout head over heels.”
Prostakova manifests herself not only as a despot, but also as a mother who loves her son with animal love. Even her son’s excessive gluttony first evokes tenderness in her, and only then concerns about her son’s health. Her love for her son is undeniable: it is she who moves her, all her thoughts are directed towards his well-being. She lives by this, this is the main thing for her. She is hostile to enlightenment. But the wild and ignorant Prostakova realized that after Peter’s reforms, a nobleman without education could enter the public service impossible. She was not taught, but she teaches her son as best she can: another century, another time. She cares about Mitrofan’s education not because she understands the benefits of education, but in order to keep up with fashion: “Little child, without studying, go to the same Petersburg; they'll say you're a fool. There are a lot of smart people these days.”
Taking advantage of Sophia's orphanhood, Prostakova takes possession of her estate. Without asking the girl’s consent, he decides to marry her off. He behaves with her openly, brazenly, assertively, without regard for anything. But he instantly changes his mind when he hears about 10 thousand. And strive to achieve her goal with all her might, by all means: her every word, every movement is filled with the energy to marry her son to the rich Sophia.
Prostakova’s figure is colorful. Still, it is not for nothing that she is Prostakova: she is all outward, her cunning is ingenuous, her actions are transparent, she declares her goals openly. The wife of a simpleton and a simpleton herself. If we highlight the main thing in Prostakova, then there are two balancing factors: the autocratic mistress of the family and estate; teacher and leader younger generation nobles - Mitrofan.
Even love for a son is the most strong passion Prostakova - is not able to ennoble her feelings, because it manifests itself in base, animal forms. Her mother's love is deprived human beauty and spirituality. And such an image helped the writer from a new perspective to expose the crime of slavery, which corrupts human nature and serfs and masters. And this individual characteristic allows us to show all the terrible, human-disfiguring power of serfdom. All great, human, holy feelings and relationships in Prostakova are distorted and slandered.
Where do such wild morals and habits come from? From Prostakova's remark we learn about early childhood her and Skotinin. They grew up amid darkness and ignorance. In these conditions, their brothers and sisters die, grievances and pain are transferred to two living children. The children in the family were not taught anything. " Vintage people, my father! This was not the century. We weren't taught anything. It used to be that kind people would approach the priest, please him, please him, so that he could at least send his brother to school. By the way, the dead man is light with both hands and feet, may he rest in heaven! It happened that he would deign to shout: I’ll curse the little boy who learns something from the infidels, and be it not Skotinin who wants to learn something.”
It was in this environment that the character formation of Prostakova and Skotinin began. Having become the sovereign mistress of her husband’s house, Prostakova received even greater opportunities for the development of all negative traits of your character. Even the feeling mother's love took on ugly forms in Prostakova.
Mrs. Prostakova received an “enviable upbringing, trained in good manners,” and she is no stranger to lies, flattery and hypocrisy. Throughout the comedy, the Skotinins and Prostakovs emphasize that they are unusually smart, especially Mitrofanushka. In fact, Prostakova, her husband and her brother do not even know how to read. She is even proud of the fact that she cannot read; she is outraged that girls are taught to read and write (Sophia), because... I am sure that a lot can be achieved without education. “From our surname Prostakovs..., lying on their sides, they fly to their ranks.” And if she had to receive a letter, she would not read it, but would give it to someone else. Moreover, they are deeply convinced of the uselessness and unnecessaryness of knowledge. “People live and have lived without science,” Prostakova confidently declares. “Whoever is smarter than that will be immediately elected by his brothers the nobles to another position.” Their social ideas are just as wild. But at the same time, she is not at all worried about raising her son. It is not surprising that Mitrofanushka grew up so spoiled and uncouth.
Illiterate Prostakova understood that there were decrees by which she could oppress the peasants. Pravdin threw a remark towards the heroine: “No, madam, no one is free to tyrannize,” and received the answer: “Not free!” A nobleman is not free to flog his servants when he wants. Why have we been given a decree on the freedom of the nobility?” When Pravdin announces the decision to put Prostakova on trial for inhumane treatment of the peasants, she humiliatingly lies at his feet. But, having begged for forgiveness, he immediately hurries to deal with the sluggish servants who let Sophia go: “I forgave! Oh, father! Well! Now I’ll give the dawn to my people. Now I’ll sort them all out one by one.” Prostakova wants her, her family, her peasants to live according to her practical reason and will, and not according to some laws and rules of enlightenment: “Whatever I want, I’ll put it on my own.” For her despotism, cruelty and greed, Prostakova was severely punished. She not only loses uncontrolled landowner power, but also her son: “You are the only one left with me, my dear friend, Mitrofanushka!” But he hears the rude answer of his idol: “Let go, mother, how you imposed yourself...”. At this tragic moment, in the brutal tyrant who raised the soulless scoundrel, truly human traits unhappy mother. A Russian proverb says: “Whoever you mess with, you’ll get rich from.”
Skotinin- not a hereditary nobleman. The estate was probably received by his grandfather or father for his service, and Catherine gave him the opportunity not to serve. Appeared THE FIRST FREE MAN IN Rus', unusually proud of his position free man, the master of his time, his life. Taras Skotinin, Prostakova's brother, - typical representative small feudal landowners. He is related to her not only by blood, but also by spirit. He exactly repeats the serfdom practice of his sister. Skotinin loves pigs so much that no matter what business he takes on, he will definitely end up in swinishness. Skotinin’s pigs live well, much better than his serfs. From these, what kind of demand? Unless you take the quitrent from them. Thank God, Skotinin does this cleverly. He is a serious man, he has little time. It’s good that the Almighty saved him from such boredom as science. “If I weren’t Taras Skotinin,” he declares, “if I’m not guilty of every fault. I have the same custom with you, sister... and any loss... I’ll rip off my own peasants, and it’ll end in water."
His very name suggests that all his thoughts and interests are connected only with his barnyard. He lives on his farm and pork factory. It doesn't take much insight to see Skotinin's bestiality. Starting with his last name, pigs are a constant topic of his conversations and an object of love, vocabulary: bristled, one litter, squealed, He is ready to identify himself with pigs: “I want to have my own piglets!”, and about the future family life says: “If now, without seeing anything, I have a special peck for each pig, then I’ll find a little light for my wife.” He shows warmth and tenderness only to his pigs. He speaks about himself with great dignity: “I am Taras Skotinin, not the last of my kind. The Skotinins family is great and ancient. You won’t find our ancestor in any heraldry,” and immediately falls for Starodum’s trick, claiming that his ancestor was created “a little earlier than Adam,” that is, together with animals.
Skotinin is greedy. Self-confidence is heard in every remark of Skotin, who is devoid of any merits. (“You can’t beat your betrothed with a horse, darling! It’s a sin to blame for your own happiness. You’ll live happily with me. Ten thousand of your income! What happiness has come; yes, I’ve never seen so many since I was born; yes, I’ll buy all the pigs in the world with them “Yes, you hear me, I’ll do that, so that everyone will blow the trumpet: in this little neighborhood there’s only pigs to live”).
Skotinin, a pig lover, says without any intention that “we have such large pigs in our neighborhood that there is not a single one of them that, standing on its hind legs, would not be taller than each of us by a whole head » an ambiguous expression which, one, etc....................