The image and characterization of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit" by Griboyedov. Essays Bold or Foolish
In 1824, A. S. Griboedov finished his comedy Woe from Wit. Written in the era of the Decembrists' "knightly feat", the play told about the moods and conflicts of that tense time. Signs of the coming great social and social changes were manifested in Chatsky's sharp denunciations, and in Famusov's frightened remarks, and in the general tone of the comedy.
In the center of the play lies the clash between the supporters of lordly Moscow and the representative of the "new" people - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. This hero alone opposes the entire "famus society". Thus, the author emphasizes the exceptional position of people with progressive views. “In my comedy,” wrote Griboyedov, “twenty-five fools per sane person.”
The brightest representative of retrogrades in the play is Famusov. It is he who is the most powerful and influential opponent of Chatsky. It is he who is arguing with Alexander Andreyevich about life, about the ideological values and priorities of a person and the entire Moscow society. It can be said that Famusov and Chatsky, being representatives of two radically opposite worldviews, represent two types of patriotism - two models of Russian (in particular, Moscow) society.
What does Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov put above all else in life? Truly, this hero does not care about either the fate of his daughter or official affairs. Famusov is afraid of only one thing in his life: “What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!”. Thus, in the person of Famusov, the author denounces the ceremonial worship of the old Moscow world.
Each conversation between Famusov and Chatsky ends with the inevitable "disorder" of the first. So, in the second act (app. 2), the characters are left alone, and they manage to talk. Famusov has not seen Chatsky for a long time, so he still does not know what the boy he once knew became.
In their conversation, the heroes first touch on the issue of service. Chatsky immediately notes: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” Famusov, not understanding what Alexander Andreevich means, is trying to teach him how to achieve "both places and promotion." Famusov's mouth speaks at this moment all the lordly Moscow:
And uncle! What is your prince? What is Count?
When to Serve
And he folded over...
This and only this way of serving, as Famusov says, can bring glory and honor. And so it was in the era of Catherine II. But times have changed. This is what Chatsky points out when, in an ironic and somewhat evil manner, he retorts:
But meanwhile? who the hunt will take
Though in the most ardent servility,
Now to make people laugh
Is it brave to sacrifice the back of your head?
Further, Chatsky, in the most apt and witty expressions, stigmatizes the "age of the past." He argues that now is a new time, that people no longer fawn over their patrons (“the patrons yawn at the ceiling”), but achieve everything in this life only with the help of abilities and intelligence:
No, today the world is not like that.
Everyone breathes freely
And not in a hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.
All this the hero says in such ardor that he does not notice - Famusov has not listened to him for a long time, he plugged his ears. Thus, the conversation between the two characters is a farce. The author uses this technique specifically to describe the position of the Chatskys even more clearly - they do not listen to their arguments, because it is impossible to oppose them. The only thing that Famusov can protect with the old familiar regime is
I would strictly forbid these gentlemen
Drive up to the capitals for a shot.
In Chatsky's fair, ardent attacks on Moscow society, Famusov sees danger, liberty. He believes that the reason lies in the fact that
Here they scour the world, they beat the buckets,
They come back, wait for order from them.
We also hear one of Famusov's exclamations: “What does he say! And he speaks as he writes! It refers to the speeches of Chatsky and is among such characteristics of this hero as “a dangerous person”, “Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!”, “Carbonari”. Why is this, from the point of view of Famusov, terrible? Later, in the third apparition, Famusov will declare that the reason for Chatsky's insanity is "learning", so all books must be burned.
For the age of servility, learning, thinking, and one's own opinion were indeed dangerous, because then they were punished for it. But even now, when there is no longer the reign of Catherine, Famusov is still afraid. And the worst thing is that people like him held high positions in society, being an example to follow.
Thus, the conflict between Chatsky and his opponents, led by Famusov, is, among other things, the struggle of two ideas of patriotism, two models of man and society. One of them is conservative, inert, burdened with all sorts of vices and prejudices. The second is progressive, built on respect for the person, based on justice and humanism. In my opinion, despite all the difficulties, the victory of the Chatsky model is inevitable, because the future belongs to it.
All stupid - happiness from madness,
All smart - woe from the mind.
Word patriotism comes from the word "patris", which translates as "homeland", fathers, love for the motherland, attachment to the native land, language, culture, traditions.
Even as a child, my parents instilled in me love for their Motherland, love for its people. Even despite how many difficult periods our Russia has gone through, people have always fought for it, gave their lives in the war, worked in its fields - this patriotism of the people was able to elevate the country to an honorable world pedestal, despite all attempts to distort this truth.
The vast expanses of Russia spread over 17 thousand square kilometers. Here are all the beauties of the Earth: deep forests, wide fields, highest mountains, fast rivers, bright flower meadows, raging seas and oceans. Many encroached on these territories, but the Russian people did not want to give their native and beloved lands into someone else's possession. Therefore, there was always a struggle for life. And now, we live in a vast country, under a bright blue peaceful sky, we have everything for a comfortable life.
Russia is proud not only of its size and natural resources, but also of the great ones, which have made a huge contribution to the development of the Russian language and the “true Russian word”.
And I, as a representative of the younger generation, sincerely wish to contribute to this section. The first material was devoted to, and I, in turn, would like to talk about A.S. Griboedov and discuss the true and false in the great work of this author, “Woe from Wit”.
Biographical information
Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov was born on January 4 (15), 1795 in a well-to-do, well-born family. As a child, Alexander was very focused and unusually developed. At the age of 6 he was fluent in three foreign languages, in his youth already six, in particular in perfection English, French, German and Italian. He understood Latin and Greek very well.
In 1803 he was sent to the Moscow University Noble Boarding School; three years later, Griboyedov entered the university at the verbal department of Moscow University.
In 1808 he received the title of candidate of verbal sciences, but did not leave his studies, but entered the moral and political department, and then the physics and mathematics department.
During the Patriotic War of 1812, when the enemy appeared on the territory of Russia, he joined the Moscow Hussar Regiment (volunteer irregular unit) of Count Peter Ivanovich Saltykov, who received permission to form it. Arriving at the place of service, he got into the company "young cornets from the best noble families"- Prince Golitsyn, Count Efimovsky, Count Tolstoy, Alyabyev, Sheremetev, Lansky, the Shatilov brothers. Griboyedov was related to some of them. Until 1815, Griboyedov served with the rank of cornet under the command of a cavalry general.
In the spring of 1816, the novice writer left military service, and already in the summer he published an article “On the analysis of the free translation of the Burger ballad “Lenora” - a review of N. I. Gnedich’s critical remarks about P. A. Katenin’s ballad “Olga”. At the same time, Griboedov's name appears in the lists of full members of the Masonic lodge "Les Amis Reunis" ("United Friends").
In 1818 he was appointed secretary of the Russian mission in Tehran. Since 1822, he was in Tbilisi the secretary for diplomatic affairs under the commander of the Russian troops in the Caucasus, A.P. Yermolov. Here Griboyedov began to write the comedy "Woe from Wit". Like the Decembrists, Griboyedov hated the autocratic-serf system, but was skeptical about the possibility of a purely military conspiracy succeeding.
“Woe from Wit” is the main work of Alexander Griboyedov. It reflects a whole historical era. The idea of “Woe from Wit”, the content of the comedy are connected with the ideas of the Decembrists. The dramatic conflict of the comedy was an expression of the struggle between two social camps: the feudal-serf reaction and the progressive youth, from whose midst the Decembrists emerged. In comedy it is also given, in the words of Pushkin, “... a sharp picture of manners” lordly Moscow.
Sent in April 1828 as a plenipotentiary resident minister (ambassador) to Iran, Griboyedov treated this appointment as a political exile. On his way to Iran, Griboyedov again spent several months in Georgia; in Tbilisi, he married Nina Chavchavadze, the daughter of his friend, the Georgian poet A. Chavchavadze.
As ambassador, Griboyedov pursued a firm policy. “...Respect for Russia and its demands - that's what I need”, he said. Fearing the strengthening of Russian influence in Iran, agents of British diplomacy and reactionary Tehran circles, dissatisfied with peace with Russia, set a fanatical crowd on the Russian mission. During the defeat of the mission, Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov was killed, his entire body was disfigured. He was buried in Tbilisi on Mount David.
True and false patriotism in the comedy "Woe from Wit".
“Woe from Wit” is a unique comedy by a brilliant writer, but during the life of Griboyedov it was not fully published. The idea of the comedy is to combine secular comedy with the comedy of manners. There are two plot conflicts in this work: social and love.
The main character is Chatsky. Throughout the comedy, we observe that this hero demonstrates mental health, cheerfulness, love of life, honesty, and most importantly - "enlightened mind".
His antagonist Famusov appreciates only rank and money. He is deceitful and two-faced. Rejects books, saying: "take away all the books and burn them."
“I would be glad to serve
Serving is sickening…”- says A.A. Chatsky. A true patriot does everything for her good. The whole tragedy of Chatsky was that he advocated that society reach a new stage of development. To replace the “past century” with the “present century”. He was a defender of individual freedom, ridiculed those who blindly imitate foreign fashion. Alexander Andreevich calls the people "kind and smart", he suffers for the fate of this very people. The vices and flaws of the Famus society are especially forced to suffer. He worries about the landowners' bullying of the peasant.
He spent all his spiritual strength to bring noble ideas into the "Famous society", but under the influence of the prevailing force, he failed.
“That's it, you are all proud!
Would you ask how the fathers did?
We would learn from the elders by looking”- words from the monologue of P.A. Famusova. He condemns the advanced youth, urges them to listen to the older generation. Pavel Afanasyevich does not advocate the development of society, he is used to the one that has existed for a long time. In the "famus" society, everything is based on connections, and such a model of life seems ideal to members of Moscow society, they consider it the only correct one and do not want any changes.
So what conclusions can be drawn?
The image of Chatsky is the image of a citizen in the highest sense of the word. He is a true patriot who always advocates the development of society, rejects all wrong positions, has a sense of justice and equality.
The false patriot sits still and thinks it's right. His patriotism is only in words. He does not want the best for his country, referring to the fact that he is already living well and does not need anything. Such pseudo-patriots are also called “leavened”.
How to prove that the classics will not cease to be modern? The Russian Drama Theater named after Lermontov found the answer to this question: through theatrical lessons that actors play not only on the stage of the theater, but also in the most ordinary school classes. This is both a lesson in literature and an opportunity to think about the challenges of the time. Although, without love here, too, could not do. But love is eternal...
spicy story
In order to make a literature lesson interesting, it is enough that it begins with a knock on the door. True, not through an ordinary, but through an imaginary door. And for her to have two lovers who are about to be caught by a strict father. Knocking by itself, should the maid, who was asked to warn of the danger. That is, about the approaching father. What the lovers are doing at this time for the time being, or rather, until the beginning of the next scene, temporarily remains a mystery. Although a little later it turns out that the creators of the theater lesson “Griboyedov. Woe from Wit "decided not to deviate from the classical version of the play. That is why the young people talked and “played music”, which is why the sounds of either the violin or the piano were heard in the house almost all night, as the audience was informed by the awakened, and yet the father who had suddenly appeared at the wrong time, he is Famusov, he is also an artist and director of the Russian Drama Theater named after Lermontov Igor German.
The situation is saved by the same maid Lisa performed by Olga Izotova. Or the fact that the lonely widower Famusov suddenly decided to flirt with her. Which, in principle, is also quite a modern story, if you mentally replace a long dress with frills and a maid's apron with a shorter uniform, and a suit from the time of Pushkin and Griboedov with some fashionable Versace or Armani, to which, according to fashion magazines, officials and owners are addicted big businesses in modern Russia.
However, by the standards of Russia in the twenty-first century, Lisa is completely short-sighted: she rejects the “courtship” of a rich widower, instead of portraying sincere love and mentally pinning a more expensive diamond brooch to her dress. But it is understandable: the play has other realities. The maid is not a member of the domestic staff team, who may leave for another employer for a higher salary, or marry the owner of the house and become a housewife herself. Lisa is the property of an oligarch from the time of Griboyedov, and therefore she does not want to become a toy. After all, in the end, they can buy not a brooch, but Lisa herself, and when she gets tired of the master, and he decides to sell the serf, who wants too much from him. The maid, like any "little" forced person, is used to maneuvering between dangers. “ Bypass us more than all sorrows and lordly anger and lordly love,” she breathed, practically escaping from the tenacious hands of the “master of life”.
In trend
– You have probably already noticed that the theater is not chasing educational standards - the audience must remember, if not basic, but original and useful, - will tell me later about the project "Theatre Lessons" (within the framework of which the play "Griboedov. Woe from mind") Nina Todybaeva, public relations specialist of the Russian Drama Theater. - And yet, an obligatory condition for conducting a "theatrical lesson" is the distinction between the personalities of the narrator and the hero. So, first the artist talks about the author, work, theme, and only then appears in the image. And the spectators, in turn, watch the reincarnations taking place on the stage, learn to understand the “theatrical conventions”, reflect together with the artists, and discover something new, I hope.
We deliberately express controversial points of view on the themes of the play, because we hope for a dialogue between the theater and the school. We all know that the heroes of Griboedov - Chatsky and Famusov - are already almost two hundred, but let's still imagine that they live not in the nineteenth, but in the twenty-first century? Which of them would be successful today? This is a good question and I want to find an answer to it, right? By the way, if you didn't already know, theater actors have been giving theater lessons for the third year already. And during this time they were watched by hundreds of schoolchildren of Khakassia, including Abakan. And today, as you can see, we had a show for teachers, - Nina sums up.
In a small hall, made from the most ordinary auditorium, it is even a little crowded. The audience is small, but there are many spectators. They came here not only to decide for themselves whether they would put questions to the students proposed by the director of the play, Yevgeny Lantsov and the actors, but also to understand whether they would like to show this performance to their students. After all, he breaks stereotypes.
Think about it, most of us, already adults, were taught at school that the same Chatsky (played by Denis Engel) is a progressive-minded person, and Famusov is a lawless landowner in whom there is nothing good. But if we move away from the usual interpretation of Griboyedov's play, it turns out that, for example, Famusov is just a caring father who cares about what a contender for his daughter's hand is. And will this applicant be able to provide her with the same standard of living to which she is accustomed, will he be able to adapt to the society to which he returned after several years of absence and study abroad? Ordinary human questions that worry fathers today.
By the way, about today. Creative deviations from the classical text are quite interesting.
« If he is such a patriot, then why does he travel abroad?”- the creators of the performance ask a question about Chatsky. " Officials are bad for him! Our officials are who we are. And so from time immemorial: what we have, we work with it”, is another theatrical remark. Agree with her, or argue, this is a personal matter of the viewer. After all, no one claims anything, art exists in order to make people think. Again and again.
Daring or stupid
For example, about the same Chatsky, who upon closer examination may seem simply ... stupid. He came from afar, not paying attention to the life experience and mentality of other people, he imposes his ideals on them. And ideals are everyone's personal business. The beliefs of others are not easy to change, and arguing with people is definitely not the best way to do this. Confrontation is confrontation. Nothing more to add here. But instead of picking up arguments and listening, he argues. And it turns out that Molchalin's opponent is smarter! He does not expect others to unconditionally take his side, because he knows that this does not happen.
Meanwhile, such a manner of communication (we mean, as in Chatsky's) is for some reason called "daring". At least many literary critics often use this word. Only having met with such behavior in life, boldness is immediately forgotten. They react as to a personal attack or rudeness, expecting that they will not argue with them with burning eyes, but listen carefully and agree.
How to win a woman
What can we say about the feelings of Sophia (played by Galina Loputko), who prefers to give her heart to “some Molchalin”, as this character was previously spoken about in literature lessons. Meanwhile, whatever he may be, he receives the sympathy of a young woman. Why? Because everything is simple. Easier than it seems. She loves to be understood, and not required to do what the fan thinks is right. But the fan is not able to realize this, and such competitors are quickly overtaken. After all, a woman's heart is a delicate matter. Dare is tiring, you want romance, violins, piano, conversations after midnight, heart secrets. Molchalin understands this. Surely there is no point in arguing.
Perhaps one of the literature teachers who shared their impressions of the performance with each other and with the Abakan correspondent would agree with this point of view. At least, there were interesting opinions: “it was not in vain that Pushkin denied Chatsky the mind” and “Pushkin said that the only smart person in the case of the comedy Woe from Wit” is Griboedov himself, that is, its author. “But we ask children questions in the classroom: who is better? Molchalin or Chatsky? But it turned out that we need to ask other questions! I got it now ".
In general, a good performance, and a good lesson in life for all of us, both readers and viewers. To make sure everyone once again: the classics are immortal. And within the framework of a school lesson there is always a place for a theatrical experiment.
This material was published on the BezFormata website on January 11, 2019,below is the date when the material was published on the site of the original source!
(392 words) Alexander Andreyevich Chatsky is a nobleman, a bright representative of the advanced generation of the Decembrist era of the 1820s.
Chatsky is a “new type” hero, whom the author introduced into the narrative outline in order to emphasize the inconsistency of the views on life of representatives of the “past century” and to encourage the youth of the “present century” to take action aimed at changing the social system. Alexander Andreevich expresses his thoughts about the detrimental effect of serfdom on the servants who are subordinate to the landlords, the gradual mortification of the souls of high-ranking officials, because the main goal of their life is to achieve wealth, the gradual disappearance of patriotism, which is replaced by a blind imitation of French standards in fashion and language .
Chatsky is rather quick-tempered, which can be clearly seen in the episode where he speaks unflatteringly about Molchalin, whom he finds next to Sophia on the day of his arrival in Moscow after long wanderings. Not finding answers to questions in the direction of Sophia, Alexander begins to talk with Molchalin, hinting that he must have already climbed the career ladder, "because now they love the dumb." These caustic words indicate that Chatsky is "sharp on the tongue." Even Sophia herself notices this, calling him to herself “not a man! snake!"
The self-willed nature of the hero is evidenced by his response to Famusov's words that it is necessary to "serve". The young man declares that he "would be glad to serve, it's sickening to serve." From that moment on, the head of the estate began to have thoughts that Chatsky's speeches were too "freedom-loving".
Noticing that Sophia has feelings for Molchalin when he falls off the horse, Alexander Andreevich talks with them in turn and resolutely understands that the girl simply could not fall in love with a person who bows to power, because Chatsky is unpleasant to people who have achieved success only thanks to someone else's help. This became the starting point for the development of rumors in the Famusovsky society (thanks to Sophia) about the madness of a nobleman who speaks so wittily about people who borrow French culture, instead of defending their own, showing patriotism.
Undoubtedly, Chatsky is smart, which is proved by his bold arguments about the value of education, the preservation of morality, the culture of his native land, but A. S. Pushkin has a slightly different opinion on this matter. He believes that “the smart character in the play is A.S. Griboyedov. The protagonist, according to Pushkin, is smart and somewhat stupid at the same time, as he talks to those who cannot understand his words, so “throwing pearls in front of pigs” is pointless - all these smart speeches will hit the wall of distrust and condemnation.
Chatsky remains misunderstood, "an extra person" in the Famusovsky society, because, preaching his ideology alone, it is very difficult to ensure that society begins to change thanks to the words of one person who is trying to influence him.
Interesting? Save it on your wall!In 1824 A.S. Griboyedov finished his comedy Woe from Wit. Written in the era of the Decembrists' "knightly feat", the play told about the moods and conflicts of that tense time. Signs of the coming great social and social changes were manifested in Chatsky's sharp denunciations, and in Famusov's frightened remarks, and in the general tone of the comedy.
In the center of the play lies the clash between the supporters of lordly Moscow and the representative of the "new" people - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. This hero alone opposes the entire "famus society". Thus, the author emphasizes the exceptional position of people with progressive views. “In my comedy,” wrote Griboyedov, “twenty-five fools per sane person.”
The brightest representative of retrogrades in the play is Famusov. It is he who is the most powerful and influential opponent of Chatsky. It is he who is arguing with Alexander Andreyevich about life, about the ideological values and priorities of a person and the entire Moscow society. It can be said that Famusov and Chatsky, being representatives of two radically opposite worldviews, represent two types of patriotism - two models of Russian (in particular, Moscow) society.
What does Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov put above all else in life? Truly, this hero does not care about either the fate of his daughter or official affairs. Famusov is afraid of only one thing in his life: “What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!”. Thus, in the person of Famusov, the author denounces the ceremonial worship of the old Moscow world.
Each conversation between Famusov and Chatsky ends with the inevitable "disorder" of the first. So, in the second act (app. 2), the characters are left alone, and they manage to talk. Famusov has not seen Chatsky for a long time, so he still does not know what the boy he once knew became.
In their conversation, the heroes first touch on the issue of service. Chatsky immediately notes: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” Famusov, not understanding what Alexander Andreevich means, is trying to teach him how to achieve "both places and promotion." Famusov's mouth speaks at this moment all the lordly Moscow:
And uncle! What is your prince? What is Count?
When to Serve
And he folded over...
This and only this way of serving, as Famusov says, can bring glory and honor. And so it was in the era of Catherine II. But times have changed. This is what Chatsky points out when, in an ironic and somewhat evil manner, he retorts:
But meanwhile? who the hunt will take
Though in the most ardent servility,
Now to make people laugh
Is it brave to sacrifice the back of your head?
Further, Chatsky, in the most apt and witty expressions, stigmatizes the "age of the past." He argues that now is a new time, that people no longer fawn over their patrons (“the patrons yawn at the ceiling”), but achieve everything in this life only with the help of abilities and intelligence:
No, today the world is not like that.
Everyone breathes freely
And not in a hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.
All this the hero says in such ardor that he does not notice - Famusov has not listened to him for a long time, he plugged his ears. Thus, the conversation between the two characters is a farce. The author uses this technique specifically to describe the position of the Chatskys even more clearly - they do not listen to their arguments, because it is impossible to oppose them. The only thing that Famusov can protect with the old familiar regime is
I would strictly forbid these gentlemen
Drive up to the capitals for a shot.
In Chatsky's fair, ardent attacks on Moscow society, Famusov sees danger, liberty. He believes that the reason lies in the fact that
Here they scour the world, they beat the buckets,
They come back, wait for order from them.
We also hear one of Famusov's exclamations: “What does he say! And he speaks as he writes! It refers to the speeches of Chatsky and is among such characteristics of this hero as “a dangerous person”, “Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!”, “Carbonari”. Why is this, from the point of view of Famusov, terrible? Later, in the third apparition, Famusov will declare that the reason for Chatsky's insanity is "learning", so all books must be burned.
For the age of servility, learning, thinking, and one's own opinion were indeed dangerous, because then they were punished for it. But even now, when there is no longer the reign of Catherine, Famusov is still afraid. And the worst thing is that people like him held high positions in society, being an example to follow.
Thus, the conflict between Chatsky and his opponents, led by Famusov, is, among other things, the struggle of two ideas of patriotism, two models of man and society. One of them is conservative, inert, burdened with all sorts of vices and prejudices. The second is progressive, built on respect for the person, based on justice and humanism. In my opinion, despite all the difficulties, the victory of the Chatsky model is inevitable, because the future belongs to it.
Noble youth in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit"
