home → About separation Modernity and immortality of comedy woe from wit. Griboyedov's immortal work

Modernity and immortality of comedy woe from wit. Griboyedov's immortal work

One hundred and seventy years separate our time from the creation of A. S. Griboedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit,” but to this day it has not lost its significance and relevance.

Aren’t there people in our time who are ready to “please a loved one” and those who want to “serve the cause, not individuals”? Don't you meet girls these days who see a successful careerist as the hero of their novel? And what about the problem of relations between fathers and daughters, which the author so widely covers in his work?
I would like to tell you in my essay about the vivid typicality of some images, close or distant, arousing my sympathy or antipathy, but never leaving me indifferent.

Following the rules of decency, I will first remember the owner of the house - Pavel Afanasyevich. He is the father of a daughter-bride, something he cannot forget for a minute. “What a commission, creator, to be a father to an adult daughter!” - Pavel Afanasyevich sighs. She needs to be married off. But, of course, it’s not easy to “get away with it.” A worthy son-in-law - here the main problem, which torments our “respected”1 parent. His hopes for a good game are connected with Skalozub: after all, he is “a gold bag and aims to become a general.” What is not every father's dream! (Note, not brides.) How shamelessly Famusov fawns over the future general, flatters him, noisily admires every word of this frankly stupid “warrior”, who spent time “in the trench” during the fighting! Skalozub himself is comical - his intelligence is not even enough to learn the basic rules of decent behavior. He constantly makes loud jokes and laughs, talks about the “many channels” of obtaining ranks, about happiness and camaraderie at a time when his comrades are “killed” and he gets titles. But what’s interesting: Skalozub is always funny “in the same way.” The image of Famusov is much more complex: it is interesting to the author. And Griboedov makes him funny “in different ways.” He is simply comical when he fawns over the brave colonel, flirts with Lisa, or pretends to be a saint, reading moral teachings to Sophia. But his reasoning about the service: “signed, so with off your shoulders“, his admiration for Uncle Maxim Petrovich, his anger at Chatsky and humiliated fear of the court of “Princess Marya Alekseev” are no longer only funny. They are also terrible, terrible with their deep immorality and unprincipledness. They are scary because they are by no means unique to Famusov—they are the life attitudes of the entire Famusov world, the entire “century of the past.”

If I haven’t really tired my generous reader, I’ll take the liberty of talking about the most interesting and close character of this immortal comedy to me - A. Chatsky.

The charm of Chatsky’s image lies for me in the strength of his mind and convictions, he expresses them ardently and passionately, they are hard-won for him. He is not concerned about how many people will believe him and support him now. He is convinced of the truth of his words, therefore he is persistent and persistent. Chatsky speaks on behalf of the advanced generation. He is “positively smart...” wrote Goncharov. “His speech is seething with intelligence and wit. He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest.”

Chatsky contrasts the slave morality of the Famusovs and the silent ones with the high, Decembrist understanding of honor and duty. Like Griboyedov himself, he sees “the goal not in enjoying life,” but in serving society and the homeland.

Chatsky’s childhood was spent in Famusov’s house, “adulation” and the emptiness of life early aroused boredom and disgust in Chatsky “... but then He moved out, he seemed bored with us, and rarely visited our house,” Sophia later says. In his monologues, Chatsky exposes serfdom and its products: inhumanity, hypocritical morality, stupid military, ignorance, false patriotism. In his most acute political monologue, “Who are the judges?..”, he sharply denounces “the meanest traits of his past life.” Chatsky attacks those “noble scoundrels” who exchange their servants for greyhounds, drive “from the mothers and fathers of rejected children” for their undertakings to the serf ballet and sell them “one by one.” Chatsky’s heated denunciations are completely in the spirit of the mindset of the Decembrists, who swore in their charter of the Union of Welfare to fight all untruths and educate themselves and those around them as valiant citizens of a free Russia. Chatsky left the service, the uniform does not appeal to him. “I’d be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he says. In the same way, Ryleev, upon resigning, said: “Only scoundrels can serve.”

Chatsky, like the Decembrists, castigates noble society for its groveling before everything foreign, for its contempt for its native language and customs:

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?

So that our smart, cheerful people

Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.

Chatsky returns to Moscow, full of hopes and dreams. In foreign lands, he yearned for his homeland, “and the smoke of the fatherland” was “sweet and pleasant” to him. But here a personal drama awaits him. Tormented by doubts, but still hopeful, he finally learns the bitter truth. Without giving a name, the girl he loves admits that the “others” are dearer to her than Chatsky. But is Sophia to blame?

Having left to travel for three years, Chatsky leaves his beloved girl alone. He “wanted to travel around the whole world and didn’t travel a hundredth part,” probably wanted to go abroad, and maybe he was there, since Sophia says:

Oh! If someone loves someone,

Why bother searching and traveling so far?

And the girl, brought up on novels from the Kuznetsky Most, from which “she has no sleep,” meets Molchaliv and sees in him the hero of her novel:

He will take your hand and press it to your heart,

He will sigh from the depths of his soul,

Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,

Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me.

But this is understandable! She is young and inexperienced.

What about Chatsky? With Sophia he is deaf and blind. “That’s why I love him,” says Sophia about Molchalin. What about our hero? Did you hear, did you understand? No, nothing like that: “He’s being naughty, she doesn’t love him.”

Chatsky is not able to take Molchalin and his “talents” seriously. Meanwhile, this “most pitiful creature” is not so insignificant. During Chatsky's absence, Molchalin took a place in Sophia's heart; it was he who was the happy rival of the protagonist. The thrown words: “the silent are blissful in the world...” turn out to be a prophecy.

It is the silent people, whose ideal is “to win awards and live happily,” to reach “the famous levels,” who become the pillars of society today. Any power today relies on them: because they are obedient, because above all else the power values their “talent” - “moderation and accuracy.”

Half a century after the creation of “Woe from Wit,” in the 80s, Molchalin again declared himself in the Essay on “The Lord of Molchalin” by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Saltykov-Shchedrin saw in Molchalin one of the most terrible figures in Russian society. He “appreciated” the silent ones and the dark role they played in society. According to him, it is the molchalins who are the creators of those twilights, thanks to which “a real real person cannot take a step without cutting his forehead.”

Returning to Moscow, Chatsky foresaw a meeting with representatives of the Famus society. However, the reality turned out to be much darker. Old friends were infected to one degree or another by Famusism. The meeting with Repetilov revealed to Chatsky the superficiality and emptiness of the liberalism of many. Chatsky realized that Famus’s ideals and principles are very tenacious, that too early he called the “past century” “tradition.”

“The comedy “Woe from Wit” is a drama about the collapse of a person’s mind in Russia, about the grief experienced by a representative of the mind in Russia,” notes A. V. Lunacharsky.

Chatsky is hated by reactionary society as an ideological enemy, as a progressive, freedom-loving person. And society takes its own measures to neutralize him: it slanders him. Many of Famusov’s guests consider education and science to be the reason for Chatsky’s “madness.” They themselves are ignorant people, although they undertake to judge everything, believing that their opinions are indisputable. Gossip and slander are the proven weapons of this society’s fight against people like Chatsky. An accurate, free, fiery word is Chatsky’s weapon, but old world is still strong, and the ranks of his supporters are numerous. Chatsky is forced to flee from Famusov’s house, from Moscow, to squeeze around the world, where there is a corner for the offended feeling.”

Independence of actions and judgments often, even today, continues to condemn a person to acute trials in life.

A.D. Sakharov - the Chatsky of our time - with his fate once again proved to us the correctness of this statement. And we, contemporaries, holding our breath in front of our television screens, learned from him, a Man born of all the best that the great Russian intelligentsia, the courage to fight, sometimes alone, sometimes with naive openness, but stubbornly and selflessly for the justice of the acquired truth.

It is personalities like Sakharov who prove that Griboedov and his comedy belong to eternity. She is one hundred and seventy-one years old, and again and again we want to turn over the pages of the comedy, and it seems that its heroes still live next to us.

One hundred and seventy years separate our time from the creation of A. S. Griboedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit,” but to this day it has not lost its significance and relevance.

I would like to tell you in my essay about the vivid typicality of some images, close or distant, arousing my sympathy or antipathy, but never leaving me indifferent.

- Pavel Afanasyevich sighs. She needs to be married off. But, of course, it’s not easy to “get away with it.” A worthy son-in-law is the main problem that torments our “respected”1 parent. His hopes for a good game are connected with Skalozub: after all, he is “a gold bag and aims to become a general.”

The charm of Chatsky’s image lies for me in the strength of his mind and convictions, he expresses them ardently and passionately, they are hard-won for him. He is not concerned about how many people will believe him and support him now. He is convinced of the truth of his words, therefore he is persistent and persistent. Chatsky speaks on behalf of the advanced generation. He is “positively smart,” wrote Goncharov.
“His speech is seething with intelligence and wit. He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest.”

Chatsky’s childhood was spent in Famusov’s house, “adulation” and the emptiness of life early aroused boredom and disgust in Chatsky “... but then He moved out, he seemed bored with us, and rarely visited our house,” Sophia later says. In his monologues, Chatsky exposes serfdom and its products: inhumanity, hypocritical morality, stupid military, ignorance, false patriotism. In his most acute political monologue, “Who are the judges?..”, he sharply denounces “the meanest traits of his past life.” Chatsky attacks those “noble scoundrels” who exchange their servants for greyhounds, drive “from the mothers and fathers of rejected children” for their undertakings to the serf ballet and sell them “one by one.” Chatsky’s heated denunciations are completely in the spirit of the mindset of the Decembrists, who swore in their charter of the Union of Welfare to fight all untruths and educate themselves and those around them as valiant citizens of a free Russia. Chatsky left the service, the uniform does not appeal to him. “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he says. In the same way, Ryleev, upon resigning, said: “Only scoundrels can serve.”

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?
Chatsky, like the Decembrists, castigates the noble society for its groveling before everything foreign, for its contempt for its native language and customs:
So that our smart, cheerful people

Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.
Having left to travel for three years, Chatsky leaves his beloved girl alone. He “wanted to travel around the whole world and didn’t travel a hundredth part,” probably wanted to go abroad, and maybe he was there, since Sophia says:

Oh! If someone loves someone,
Why bother searching and traveling so far?

And the girl, brought up on novels from the Kuznetsky Most, from which “she has no sleep,” meets Molchaliv and sees in him the hero of her novel:

He will take your hand and press it to your heart,
He will sigh from the depths of his soul,
Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,
Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me.

But this is understandable! She is young and inexperienced.

Chatsky is not able to take Molchalin and his “talents” seriously.

Meanwhile, this “most pitiful creature” is not so insignificant. During Chatsky's absence, Molchalin took a place in Sophia's heart; it was he who was the happy rival of the protagonist. The thrown words: “the silent are blissful in the world...” turn out to be a prophecy.

Half a century after the creation of “Woe from Wit,” in the 80s, Molchalin again declared himself in the Essay on “The Lord of Molchalin” by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.

Saltykov-Shchedrin saw in Molchalin one of the most terrible figures in Russian society. He “appreciated” the silent ones and the dark role they played in society. According to him, it is the molchalins who are the creators of those twilights, thanks to which “a real real person cannot take a step without cutting his forehead.”

Chatsky is hated by reactionary society as an ideological enemy, as a progressive, freedom-loving person. And society takes its own measures to neutralize him: it slanders him. Many of Famusov’s guests consider education and science to be the reason for Chatsky’s “madness.” They themselves are ignorant people, although they undertake to judge everything, believing that their opinions are indisputable. Gossip, slander - these are the proven weapons of this society’s fight against people like Chatsky. A precise, free, fiery word is Chatsky’s weapon, but the old world is still strong, and the ranks of its supporters are numerous. Chatsky is forced to flee from Famusov’s house, from Moscow, to squeeze around the world, where there is a corner for the offended feeling.”

Independence of actions and judgments often, even today, continues to condemn a person to acute trials in life.

A.D. Sakharov - the Chatsky of our time - with his fate once again proved to us the correctness of this statement. And we, contemporaries, holding our breath in front of the TV screens, learned from him, a Man born of all the best that the great Russian intelligentsia left us, the courage to fight, sometimes alone, sometimes with naive openness, but stubbornly and selflessly for the justice of the acquired truth.

Is Molchalin pitiful or terrible? (based on A.S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”)
The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Gribredov made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature. The writer showed in it a true picture of Russian life after Patriotic War 1812. The play poses the most burning questions of that time: the situation of the Russian people, serfdom, the relationship between landowners and peasants, autocratic power and the insane wastefulness of the nobles. “Woe from Wit” reflects the struggle between two irreconcilable ideological positions: progressive and reactionary. The representative of the latter is Molchalin.
Molchalin and Chatsky. Two opposites in Griboedov's comedy. Next to the ardent Chatsky, a passionate fighter and a furious accuser, the wordless Molchalin is completely unnoticed. Therefore, probably, not much attention has been paid to it. But behind the expressionless appearance and gray thinking lies a whole life philosophy, very tenacious and persistent.
Let's think about what Molchalin is? Is he worthy of sympathy or condemnation?

We are first introduced to him through the characteristics given to him by other characters in the play. Famusov was pleased with him, entrusting his timid but faithful assistant with the performance of his simple duties. Loving Sophia notes that he
Compliant, modest, quiet,
Not a shadow of worry in his face
And there are no actions in my soul.
And Molchalin himself says that moderation and accuracy are his main talents. And only once will Sophia burst out with regret:
Of course, he doesn’t have this mind... -
Possibly referring to Chatsky's brilliant and sharp mind. But how wrong the heroine was! The inconspicuous Molchalin is smart, very smart, but prefers to hide it for the time being. After all, it is much more profitable to wear a mask, presenting yourself as others want to see him: tenderly submissive with Sophia, obsequiously devoted with Famusov, falsely humble with Chatsky, familiar with Lizonka. It seems that only with the maid he is completely sincere, revealing his position in life:
My father bequeathed to me:
First, please all people without exception;
The owner, where he will live,
The boss with whom I will serve,
To his servant, who cleans the dress,
To the doorman, the janitor, to avoid harm,
To the janitor's dog, so that it is affectionate.
Why pride and feeling self-esteem like Molchalin? Subservience is the main thing in his philosophy. But all his behavior indicates that he is deeper than the description he gave to himself.
He is resourceful and careful: he tries to hide his relationship with his master’s daughter from strangers, and when he unexpectedly meets Famusov at an inopportune time near Sophia’s room, he does not get lost and instantly comes up with a plausible explanation. A conversation with Chatsky shows that Molchalin does not value an intelligent guest. Having humbly begun the conversation, Molchalin soon goes on the offensive: he asks questions, condemns, and advises.
Love uses Molchalin as a means for his career; he is not only not in love, he is not even passionate about Sophia. He says frankly and shamelessly:
Let's go share love with our deplorable theft...
And later Lizin answers the question about a possible wedding:
There is a lot of hope ahead,
We'll waste time without a wedding.
All his intelligence, cunning and resourcefulness are designed to serve one goal: to get a good, gentle, sweet place in life. And only the disaster that occurred at the end of the play prevents the implementation of his plans. After the scene in the hallway, Molchalin cannot remain the same: the mask is pulled off, and everyone sees his true face. But the old Molchalin was too convenient for everyone, even for Sophia. And Chatsky correctly notes:
You will make peace with him, after sober reflection.
So, Molchalin’s defeat is, in all likelihood, temporary. He will be forgiven. And achievement life goal will become even more tempting.
Molchalin is Chatsky’s opponent. But how correctly Griboyedov was able to foresee in these images the two paths that people would take after the end of the war with the French: the Chatskys will always choose struggle and open battle, the Molchalins will choose humility and peace.
There was no one to feel sorry for: not the pitiful, but the cunning, smart and terrible Molchalin in front of us. So literary hero was the first to pave the way along which a huge mass of actually existing opportunists moved, completely devoid of interest in public life, unprincipled and indifferent. Nothing interests them except their own little well-being. And, looking around, you can see a lot of modern silent people.

Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" was written in 1822-1824. But until now this work has not left the stages of all theaters in Russia, popular expressions from it are in everyday life of the Russian people, and the heroes of this work have in many ways become household names. What is the reason for such popularity and “youth” of this comedy?

I think main reason is that “Woe from Wit” examines one of the “eternal themes” of literature that has worried humanity for many centuries. This is the problem of “fathers and sons,” the relationship between new and old, progressive and conservative. In addition, the values that he preaches main character comedies - Chatsky - are also eternal. They are relevant at all times, for all peoples, for all countries.

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is filled with sublime ideas. He protests against the old order, which existed then not only in Moscow, but throughout Russia. Chatsky fights for “new” laws: freedom, intelligence, culture, patriotism.

Arriving at Famusov's house, Chatsky dreams of the daughter of this rich master - Sophia. He is in love with a girl and hopes that Sophia loves him. But in the house of his father’s old friend, only disappointments and blows await the hero. Firstly, it turns out that Famusov’s daughter loves someone else. Secondly, that the entire Moscow environment is people who are strangers to the hero. He just can’t agree with their views on life.

One of the most significant scenes in the comedy is Chatsky’s conversation with Famusov. The hero responds to the old man’s teachings about how to live with the famous phrase: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.” For Famusov and his friends, the most important thing in life is rank, official position. They absolutely do not care why a person receives a position: for real deeds, useful actions for society, or for deceitful sucking up and servility. Famusov gives a vivid example of how to “serve” in the person of the universal Moscow Maxim Petrovich:

When do you need to help yourself?

And he bent over:

On the kurtag he happened to step on his feet;

He fell so hard that he almost hit the back of his head;

He was granted the highest smile.

To Chatsky, such humiliation and servility seems impossible, incomprehensible to the mind. He is sure that everything has changed in his time:

No, the world is not like that these days.

Everyone breathes more freely

And he’s in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.

The hero says all this in such fervor that he does not notice how Famusov has not listened to him for a long time. He simply covered his ears. This best illustrates the position of the Chatskys in their contemporary society. The arguments of these people are simply not listened to, since they cannot object to anything.

Chatsky believes that education is necessary for every person. The hero himself spent a long time abroad and received a good education. The old society, led by Famusov, believes that learning is the cause of all troubles. Education can even make a person go crazy. That is why Famus society so easily believes the rumor about the hero’s madness at the end of the comedy.

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is a patriot of Russia. At a ball in Famusov’s house, he saw how all the guests groveled before the “Frenchman from Bordeaux” simply because he was a foreigner. This caused a wave of indignation in the hero. He fights for everything Russian in the Russian country. Chatsky dreams that people would be proud of their homeland and speak Russian.

In addition, the hero is an ardent supporter of the abolition of serfdom. He cannot understand how in his country some people can own others. Alexander Andreevich does not accept slavery with all his soul.

In a word, Chatsky wants to change life, to live better, more honestly, more justly. His struggle is difficult and persistent, but the victory of the new is inevitable. Chatsky’s words will spread, be repeated everywhere and create their own storm. They are already of great importance among the “new”, progressive people.

Chatsky’s authority was known before; he already has like-minded people. Skalozub complains that his brother left the service without receiving his rank and began reading books. One of the Moscow old women complains that her nephew, Prince Fedor, is studying chemistry and botany.

Chatsky began a split. Let him be disappointed in his personal expectations and not find the “charm of meetings.” After all, in essence, Sophia betrayed him by spreading a rumor about the hero’s madness. At the end of the play, Chatsky learns about Sophia’s affair with Molchalin. Chatsky is defeated, wounded to the very heart. His rival is the insignificant Molchalin?! Not finding understanding and receiving a double blow - the collapse of personal and public hopes - the hero flees Moscow. But he managed to “sprinkle living water on the dried soil himself.”

Thus, Griboyedov’s comedy proclaims progressive and humanistic ideas and thoughts. She solves the issue of “fathers and sons”, which has become obsolete and is replacing it. In addition, in “Woe from Wit” a love conflict is developed.

This work also has undoubted artistic merit. The language of the comedy is bright, apt and figurative, phrases from which have been widely distributed catchphrases. Therefore, we, without a doubt, can say that “Woe from Wit,” its heroes, and the author himself will never grow old, but will be forever relevant and in demand.

The brilliant play is dedicated to the life and morals of noble society. And at the center of the story is a man whose worldview differs significantly from the belief system of those around him. Essay on the topic “Griboyedov. “Woe from Wit” is written by schoolchildren year after year. Comedy will never lose its moral and artistic power, and therefore it is one of those great works that should not only be read, but also analyzed.

History of writing

Griboyedov's play "Woe from Wit" took about three years to create. In 1822 the work was completed. However, it was published only seventeen years later and in a distorted form. Censored edits significantly changed the author's text. The play was published in its original form much later.

It is quite difficult to imagine Russian literature without this work. The unsurpassed essay “Woe from Wit,” the images of which personify the vices of metropolitan society, also conveys the oppositional spirit that captured the most advanced representatives of the nobility.

Conflict

The comedy “Woe from Wit” touches on acute socio-political problems. An essay on one of the topics involves studying an artistic conflict. And here he is not alone. At the beginning of the work, a certain love conflict ensues. The comedy author then raises socio-political issues. On the one hand, a progressive-minded young man. On the other hand, there are representatives of the reactionary nobility. Their time is running out, but there is still no place for advanced ideas in this society. The themes of essays are traditionally devoted to the collision of two social worlds alien to each other.

“Woe from Wit” is a work with an open ending. Who has won? Chatsky? Or the Molchalins and Famusovs? The comedy “Woe from Wit” does not give a clear answer to these questions. The work of the tragically deceased diplomat and playwright has been providing food for deep philosophical reflection for almost two centuries.

Issues

The very name of the comedy speaks about the misfortune of the main character. Chatsky's problem is that he is smart. Here, however, intelligence is rather a synonym for the word “freethinking.”

The author makes it clear to the reader that all his characters, with the exception of Chatsky, are stupid. But each of them does not know about this, believing himself to be smart, and the one who does not want to share his views is crazy. Essay on the topic “Griboyedov. “Woe from Wit” can reveal the question of the polysemy of such a concept as mind. After all, Famusov and Molchalin believe that it is nothing more than the ability to adapt and extract mercantile benefits. Toadying, committing meanness and entering into marriages solely of convenience is a peculiar way of thinking and way of life, which reign in Moscow society contemporary to Griboyedov.

Two hundred years later, little has changed in people's worldviews. Therefore, an essay on the topic “Griboyedov. “Woe from Wit” can answer questions such as “What is modern about the comedy of the Russian classic?”, “What is its relevance?”

The image of Chatsky

This hero occupies a special place in Russian literature. The work contains a Decembrist spirit, so relevant for that time. The author pays attention to national-historical, social and political issues.

But if you close your eyes to the events in the atmosphere of which the brilliant play was created, and see in the system of images only characteristic psychological types that are invariably present in society, the question will arise: “Is a Chatsky like this capable of arousing sympathy today?” Hardly. He is witty and intelligent, independent in his judgment and sincere. However, if he appeared now before those who pored over literature textbooks during their school years, creating an essay on the topic “Griboedov. “Woe from Wit,” he would not have been understood. He would only see Famus’s puzzled look.

Artistic originality

Griboedov combined in his work the features of dying classicism and a new literary direction for that period - realism. The play is also not without romantic features.

The author does not ignore binding principles classicism. Story line there is only one in the work, and all the actions take place in one place. The author endowed his characters with meaningful surnames, which is typical for creativity. But the romantic exclusivity of Chatsky is unusual for this literary direction. And finally, the comedy has historical accuracy, which is a sign of realism.

The school curriculum offers various essay topics. “Woe from Wit” is a unique work in artistic terms. The literary techniques that are used in it should not be ignored when working on a creative task. This play was written at a turning point in the history of Russian literature. That’s why it combines so many different artistic forms.

Griboyedov A. S.

Essay on the work on the topic: The system of characters in A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

The comedy “Woe from Wit” is the greatest work of Russian literature. It contains extremely important questions the era that came after the War of 1812 - the time of the birth and development of the Decembrist movement in the country.

Specifics of the conflict genre originality, the features of the language and style of comedy are used by the author to achieve the main goal - to show the struggle between two eras of Russian life - “the present century” and the “past century”. Griboedov is an innovator of his time. Departing from the canons of classicism, he exceeds the permissible number of characters. In addition, the comedy introduces a large number of off-stage characters, the number of which exceeds the stage ones, which is also an innovation for a classic work.

We can divide all the images in the comedy into three groups: the main characters - they participate in a personal conflict (Sofya, Silent, Chatsky, Famusov and Lisa), secondary and off-stage. The second group includes guests of the Famusov dance evening. The third includes all off-stage characters, which we learn about from the dialogues of the characters on stage.

This character system is not accidental. The main characters are presented to us in close-up, the secondary ones complement them, helping to develop the characters in the deepest way, and the off-stage characters expand the spatial and temporal framework of the play. “Woe from Wit” is a realistic comedy, accordingly everything characters- this is the embodiment of typical traits of typical characters in typical circumstances.

Such heroes can be divided into two large camps - representatives of the “past century” and representatives of the “present century”.

The first and most prominent representative of the “past century” is Famusov. A serf-owning gentleman, “like all Moscow people,” who dreams of getting a son-in-law “with stars and ranks” for his daughter. Service for Famusov, as for all representatives of noble Moscow, is only a means of moving up the career ladder. He adheres to the custom - “it’s signed, off your shoulders.”

Famusov does not want to accept anything new. Old customs and orders suit the entire patriarchal society, and any changes can lead to the loss of their social and material well-being. Therefore, it is not surprising that Pavel Afanasyevich is an ardent opponent of all teachings, professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who “practice in schisms and unbelief.” “They would take all the books and burn them,” he declares. Like all of Griboyedov’s Moscow, Famusov leads an idle life, “fills himself in feasts and extravagance”: “on Tuesday I am called to the trout”, “on Thursday I am called to the funeral”, and on Friday or Saturday I must “baptize at the doctor’s house”, which “according to his calculations” “should give birth” - this is how Pavel Afanasyevich’s week goes. On the one hand, Famusov, like all heroes, is typical, but, on the other hand, he is individual. Here Griboyedov no longer has a strict division into positive and negative heroes, as it was during the period of classicism. Famusov is not only a serf master who oppresses his peasants, but also a loving father, master of the house, flirting with his maid.

His daughter Sophia stands out among other people. Carried away by reading French novels, she imagines herself as their heroine. That’s why there are many psychological motives in her speech (“I’m ashamed of myself, I’m ashamed of the walls,” “don’t dare expect reproaches, complaints, my tears, you’re not worth them”). Possessing an imperious character and a practical mind, Sophia in the future will be the same as Natalya Dmitrievna, pushing around her “boy husband, servant husband.” There are no Gallicisms in the girl’s speech. She was brought up with Chatsky. Sophia boldly expresses her opinion: “Whoever I want, I love,” and at the same time does not care what “Princess Marya Aleksevna will say.” That is why she gives her preference to Molchalin. Sophia understands that he will become “the ideal of all Moscow husbands,” and will be grateful to the end of his life for the fact that she raised him to her level and introduced him into society.

Silent - a bright representative of Famus society. He has been serving in Famusov’s house for three years, “listed in the archives,” and has already “received three awards.” He values two qualities in himself, “two talents” - “moderation and accuracy”, he is sure that “at his age one should not dare to have one’s own judgment”, that “one must depend on others.”

The goal of his life is to be in the right place at the right time, and most importantly, to follow his father’s precepts: “to please all people without exception.” He is a man of few words, uses cutesy words in his speech, which not only corresponds to his lifestyle, but also to his last name - “Molchalin”. Every word and step he takes is thought out. He skillfully pretends to be the lover of his master’s daughter, although he himself has sympathy for the maid Lisa (“Her by position, you.”).

The main character of the comedy, representing the “present century,” is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, educated and smart. A clear and sharp mind proves that he is not just an intelligent person, but also a “freethinker.” He is a hero-lover and the main reasoner at the same time. And if Chatsky fails completely in love, then he fulfills his socially accusatory mission. Being the main exponent of Decembrist ideas in comedy, the hero in his angry speeches exposes the ignorance, deceit, harshness and serf-based basis of Famus society.

An important role is played by Lisa, Sophia's maid, an intelligent, lively, lively girl. On the one hand, she is a soubrette (a traditional role of classicism) and helps her mistress arrange love dates. In addition, Liz is the second reasoner on stage. She gives apt descriptions of the characters: “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, like Alexander Andreich Chatsky,” “Like all the Moscow people, your father is like this: he would like a son-in-law with the stars yes with ranks”, “And, as he twirls his crest, he will tell, he faints, he will add a hundred embellishments.”

The secondary characters are presented in the third act of the comedy at Famusov's dance party. They complement the picture of the Moscow nobility.

A striking example of militaryism and Arakcheevism is Colonel Skalozub, in whose image military careerism and passion for drill are exposed. Limited and rude, he is respected in society, because he is “both a gold bag and aims to be a general.” His speech, like that of all heroes, is authorized. Skalozub speaks in monosyllabic and incoherent sentences, often constructing phrases incorrectly: “I am ashamed, like an honest officer!” And Sophia says that “he never said a smart word.”

Next, we see a whole gallery of representatives of the Moscow nobility. These are Gorichi, who are a typical noble family, where “the husband is a boy, the husband is a servant,” and the domineering, narcissistic wife playing the role of a guardian: “Yes, move away from the doors, the wind blows through there from behind.” Even in the recent past, Platon Mikhailovich “ran around on a greyhound stallion”, and now he suffers from “rumatism and headaches”, “camp noise, comrades and brothers” have been replaced by another activity: “On the flute I repeat the A-mole duet.”

This is Prince Tugoukhovsky with his wife and six dowry-free daughters, who travels to balls in search of suitors. These are the Countess Khryumina: the countess-granddaughter is an old maid, always dissatisfied with everything, and her grandmother, who no longer sees or hears anything, but stubbornly attends entertaining evenings.

This is the “swindler, rogue” Zagoretsky, who found “protection from court” in the best houses of Moscow. These are Messrs. N. and O., who are needed only to spread gossip about Chatsky’s madness, and Repetilov - a pathetic parody of representatives of a secret society. All of them embody such a concept as “Famusov’s Moscow.”

Finally, the comedy contains a large number of off-stage characters, the number of which exceeds the number of stage characters, which is a violation of the canons of classicism. The role of these characters is great: they expand both the temporal and spatial boundaries of the comedy. It is thanks to them that Griboyedov manages to cover the period of time from Empress Catherine II to the beginning of the reign of Nicholas I. Without the off-stage characters, the picture would not be so complete. Like all stage plays, they can be divided into two opposing camps - the “past century” and the “present century”. From dialogues and remarks we learn about “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged his devoted servants “for three greyhounds,” about the balletomane landowner, “who did not agree to the debtors’ deferment,” as a result of which “Zephyrs and Cupids were all sold one by one,” about Khlestova’s sister Praskovya, for whom Zagoretsky “got two little blacks at the fair,” and about many others.

We also learn about their attitude to service, their servility and respect for rank. This is Maxim Petrovich, who, if necessary, “bent over,” and Kuzma Petrovich, who “was a venerable chamberlain, with a key, and knew how to deliver the key to his son; rich and married to a rich woman,” and Foma Fomich, who “was the head of a department under three ministers,” and Molchalin’s father, who bequeathed to his son “to please all people without seizure,” and others.

The favorite pastime of Moscow ladies is gossip. So, Tatyana Yuryevna, who “returned from St. Petersburg,” talked about Chatsky’s “connection with the ministers.”

Many foreigners who went to Russia “with fear and tears”, but because of the ignorance of Moscow society, found that “there is no end to the caresses.” This is Madame Rosier, and the Frenchman from Bordeaux, and the dance master Guillaume, who, due to their foreign origin, enjoyed great respect.

Representatives of the secret society that Repetilov speaks about also belong to the “past century.” All this is just a pathetic parody of the Decembrist meetings. Anglomaniac Prince Grigory, lover of Italian opera Vorkulov Evdokim, “wonderful guys” Levoy and Borinka, genius writer Udushev Ippolit Markelych, and their chairman “night robber, duelist” - these are those who claim to be the leading people of their time.

But there are also representatives of the “present century”. These are the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, who “practice in schisms and unbelief,” and Skalozub’s cousin, who “suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village,” and Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew Fyodor, who studies chemistry and botany, and all the progressive youth, on whose behalf Chatsky speaks in his monologue “Who are the judges?”

And although there are many characters in the play, there is nothing superfluous in it: not a single extra character, scene, wasted word, not a single unnecessary stroke. The main characters in the comedy are shown in close-up, the secondary ones complement the picture, and the off-stage characters expand its temporal and spatial boundaries. This system of images is aimed at revealing the main conflict of the play.
griboedov/goreotuma194

History of the people and laws of language development. Questions of method in linguistics. How to write school essay. Book prefaces - works and literature

If homework on the topic: "A. S. Griboyedov, a school essay on a work on the topic, Woe from Wit, The system of characters in A. S. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" was useful to you, we will be grateful if you post a link to this message on your page on your social network.

The famous Russian writer Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov said wonderful words about the work “Woe from Wit” - “Without Chatsky there would be no comedy, there would be a picture of morals.” And it seems to me that the writer is right about this. It is the image of the main character of Griboedov’s comedy, Alexander Sergeevich “Woe from Wit,” that determines the conflict of the entire narrative. People like Chatsky always turned out to be misunderstood by society; they brought progressive ideas and views to society, but conservative society did not understand them.

Repeatedly different literary critics noted that the words of the protagonist of Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” repeatedly contained motifs that were close to the Decembrists. These are the motives of love of freedom, the spirit of freedom, which in a few years all participants in the December uprising will feel. The main theme of the work is the freedom of man, the individual from all kinds of prejudices of society. Chatsky and people like him dream of the development of society and science; they strive for high and sincere love. These progressive-minded youth want justice to prevail in the world, all people to be equal and free.

First of all, Chatsky wants to work for the good of the Motherland, to serve great causes, and not just any people. He is outraged by the fact that many compatriots worship foreigners, their culture, etc. But he is the only one. At least in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” Chatsky has no friends who share his views. On the contrary, around him there are only careerists, deceitful, envious people who, for the sake of their careers, please their superiors. These people are opposed to everything good, even education is considered unnecessary; in their opinion, books must be collected and burned.

It is this conflict - one sane man Chatsky - against everything conservative society, becomes the central conflict in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.” Naturally, one person, even if he is right a million times, can do nothing against the whole society. So is Chatsky, he is losing the conflict. Against the background of these selfish, evil and stupid people, he looks like a ray of light, but society does not accept him and pushes him away. And a few years later Herzen will say beautiful words, calling Chatsky a Decembrist. The way it is. And just as the Decembrists lost, the main character of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov loses.

The great Woland said that manuscripts do not burn. Proof of this is the fate of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov’s brilliant comedy “Woe from Wit” - one of the most controversial works in the history of Russian literature. A comedy with a political bent, continuing the traditions of such masters of satire as Krylov and Fonvizin, quickly became popular and served as a harbinger of the coming rise of Ostrovsky and Gorky. Although the comedy was written back in 1825, it was published only eight years later, having outlived its […]
After reading A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” and critics’ articles about this play, I also thought about: “What is he like, Chatsky”? The first impression of the hero is that he is perfect: smart, kind, cheerful, vulnerable, passionately in love, loyal, sensitive, knowing the answers to all questions. He rushes seven hundred miles to Moscow to meet Sophia after a three-year separation. But this opinion arose after the first reading. When in literature lessons we analyzed comedy and read the opinions of various critics about [...]
The very name of the comedy "Woe from Wit" is significant. For educators, convinced of the omnipotence of knowledge, mind is a synonym for happiness. But the powers of the mind have faced serious tests in all eras. New advanced ideas are not always accepted by society, and the bearers of these ideas are often declared crazy. It is no coincidence that Griboedov also addresses the topic of the mind. His comedy is a story about advanced ideas and society's reactions to them. At first, the title of the play is “Woe to Wit,” which the writer later replaces with “Woe from Wit.” More […]
The title of any work is the key to its understanding, since it almost always contains an indication - direct or indirect - of the main idea underlying the creation, of a number of problems comprehended by the author. The title of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” introduces an extremely important category into the conflict of the play, namely the category of the mind. The source of such a title, such an unusual name, which also originally sounded like “Woe to the Wit,” goes back to a Russian proverb in which the opposition between the smart and […]
Hero Brief description Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov The surname “Famusov” comes from the Latin word “fama”, which means “rumor”: by this Griboedov wanted to emphasize that Famusov is afraid of rumors, public opinion, but on the other hand, there is a root in the root of the word “Famusov” from the Latin word "famosus" - a famous, well-known wealthy landowner and high official. He is a famous person among the Moscow nobility. A well-born nobleman: related to the nobleman Maxim Petrovich, closely acquainted […]
A “social” comedy with a social clash between the “past century” and the “present century” is called the comedy of A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". And it is structured in such a way that only Chatsky speaks about progressive ideas for transforming society, the desire for spirituality, and a new morality. Using his example, the author shows readers how difficult it is to bring new ideas into the world that are not understood and accepted by a society that is ossified in its views. Anyone who starts doing this is doomed to loneliness. Alexander Andreevich […]
A. A. Chatsky A. S. Molchalin Character A straightforward, sincere young man. An ardent temperament often interferes with the hero and deprives him of impartial judgment. Secretive, cautious, helpful person. The main goal is a career, position in society. Position in society Poor Moscow nobleman. Receives a warm welcome in local society due to his origin and old connections. Provincial tradesman by origin. The rank of collegiate assessor by law gives him the right to nobility. In the light […]
In the comedy “Woe from Wit” A. S. Griboyedov portrayed noble Moscow of the 10-20s XIX century. In the society of that time, they worshiped uniform and rank and rejected books and enlightenment. A person was judged not by his personal qualities, but by the number of serf souls. Everyone sought to imitate Europe and worshiped foreign fashion, language and culture. The “past century”, presented vividly and fully in the work, is characterized by the power of women, their great influence on the formation of tastes and views of society. Moscow […]
The famous comedy "Woe from Wit" by AS. Griboyedov was created in the first quarter of the 19th century. The literary life of this period was determined by obvious signs of the crisis of the autocratic-serf system and the maturation of the ideas of noble revolution. There was a process of gradual transition from the ideas of classicism, with its predilection for “high genres, romanticism and realism. A.S. Griboedov became one of the prominent representatives and founders of critical realism. In his comedy “Woe from Wit,” which successfully combines [... ]
It’s rare, but it still happens in art that the creator of one “masterpiece” becomes a classic. This is exactly what happened with Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov. His the only comedy“Woe from Wit” has become a national treasure of Russia. Phrases from the work are included in our daily life in the form of proverbs and sayings; We don’t even think about who published them; we say: “Just by chance, keep an eye on you” or: “Friend. Is it possible to choose // a nook further away for a walk?” And such catchphrases in comedy […]
The comedy by A. S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit” consists of a number of small episodes-phenomena. They are combined into larger ones, such as, for example, the description of a ball in Famusov’s house. Analyzing this stage episode, we consider it as one of the important stages in the resolution of the main dramatic conflict, which lies in the confrontation between the “present century” and the “past century”. Based on the principles of the writer’s attitude to the theater, it is worth noting that A. S. Griboyedov presented it in accordance with the traditions […]
CHATSKY is the hero of A.S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” (1824; in the first edition the spelling of the surname is Chadsky). The probable prototypes of the image are PYa.Chaadaev (1796-1856) and V.K-Kuchelbecker (1797-1846). The nature of the hero's actions, his statements and relationships with other comedy personalities provide extensive material for revealing the theme stated in the title. Alexander Andreevich Ch. is one of the first romantic heroes of Russian drama, and how romantic hero on the one hand, he categorically does not accept an inert environment, [...]
The very name of the comedy is paradoxical: “Woe from Wit.” Initially, the comedy was called “Woe to Wit,” which Griboyedov later abandoned. To some extent, the title of the play is a “reversal” of the Russian proverb: “fools have happiness.” But is Chatsky surrounded by only fools? Look, are there so many fools in the play? Here Famusov remembers his uncle Maxim Petrovich: A serious look, an arrogant disposition. When you need to help yourself, And he bent over... ...Huh? what do you think? in our opinion - smart. And myself [...]
The comedy “Woe from Wit” was created in the early 20s. XIX century Main conflict, on which the comedy is based, is the confrontation between the “present century” and the “past century.” In the literature of that time, the classicism of the era of Catherine the Great still had power. But outdated canons limited the playwright’s freedom in describing real life, therefore, Griboedov, taking classic comedy as a basis, neglected (as necessary) some of the laws of its construction. Any classic work (drama) should […]
In the comedy "Woe from Wit" Sofya Pavlovna Famusova is the only character conceived and performed close to Chatsky. Griboedov wrote about her: “The girl herself is not stupid, she prefers a fool smart person...". Griboyedov abandoned farce and satire in depicting the character of Sophia. He introduced the reader to a female character of great depth and strength. Sophia was “unlucky” in criticism for quite a long time. Even Pushkin considered the author’s image of Famusova a failure; “Sophia is sketched unclearly.” And only in 1878 Goncharov, in his article […]
Molchalin - character traits: desire for a career, hypocrisy, ability to curry favor, taciturnity, poverty of vocabulary. This is explained by his fear of expressing his judgment. He says mainly in short phrases and chooses words depending on who he is talking to. There are no foreign words or expressions in the language. Molchalin chooses delicate words, adding a postive “-s”. To Famusov - respectfully, to Khlestova - flatteringly, insinuatingly, with Sophia - with special modesty, with Liza - he does not mince words. Especially […]
Characteristics The present century The past century Attitude to wealth, to ranks “We found protection from court in friends, in kinship, building magnificent chambers where they indulge in feasts and extravagance, and where the most vile traits of the foreign clients of their past life will not be resurrected,” “And those whoever is higher, flattery, like weaving lace...” “Be inferior, but if you have enough, two thousand family souls, he is the groom” Attitude to service “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served”, “Uniform! one uniform! He is in their former life [...]
When you see a rich house, a hospitable owner, elegant guests, you can’t help but admire them. I would like to know what these people are like, what they talk about, what they are interested in, what is close to them, what is alien. Then you feel how the first impression gives way to bewilderment, then to contempt for both the owner of the house, one of the Moscow “aces” Famusov, and his entourage. There are other noble families, from them came heroes of the War of 1812, Decembrists, great masters of culture (and if great people came from such houses as we see in comedy, then […]
The gallery of human characters successfully noted in the comedy “Woe from Wit” is still relevant today. At the beginning of the play, the author introduces the reader to two young people who are completely opposite to each other: Chatsky and Molchalin. Both characters are presented to us in such a way that we get a misleading first impression of them. We judge Molchalin, Famusov’s secretary, from Sonya’s words, as “the enemy of insolence” and a person who is “ready to forget himself for others.” Molchalin first appears before the reader and Sonya, who is in love with him […]
The image of Chatsky caused numerous controversy in criticism. I. A. Goncharov considered the hero Griboyedov a “sincere and ardent figure”, superior to Onegin and Pechorin. “...Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. His speech is full of intelligence and wit. He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest,” the critic wrote. Apollo Grigoriev spoke about this image in approximately the same way, who considered Chatsky to be a real fighter, an honest, passionate and truthful person. Finally, I myself held a similar opinion [...]

The philosophical sound of the comedy “Woe from Wit”, the universal meaning of comedy. “Woe from Wit” is both a picture of morals, and a gallery of living types, and an ever-sharp, burning satire.” (I. A. Goncharov). The comedy “Woe from Wit” as assessed by A. S. Pushkin.

Comedy realism. The conflict and its development. Chatsky against Famusov society. “A Million Torments” by Chatsky.

Intelligence is the most valuable quality of a person. Has the problem of grief from the mind become a thing of the past? The struggle of the mind with stupidity has continued throughout the history of mankind.

Review questions

Why is the comedy called “Woe from Wit”?

What separates Chatsky and Famusov’s Moscow? What led Chatsky to break up with her?

Why did Sophia end up in the camp of Chatsky’s opponents? “What kind of sorcery did Molchalin know how to get into her heart?”

Who spread the rumor about Chatsky's madness and why did it spread so quickly? Which hopes of Chatsky turned out to be illusions and why? Did Chatsky fight to fulfill his hopes? What aspects of his character are close to you? Is Chatsky modern?

Why does Sophia “not stupid prefer a fool to a smart one”

(A.S. Griboyedov)?

Reading by heart Chatsky's monologue

Comedy essay topics "Woe from Wit" Moral character and

life ideals

Chatsky.

“A Million Torments” by Chatsky.

Chatsky and Sophia. The meaning of their images in comedy.

Chatsky against Famusov society.

Moscow as depicted by Griboyedov.

Chatsky and Famusovskaya Moscow. “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov - a comedy for the ages.“In a group of 20 faces, it was reflected like a ray of light in

drop of water

, all the old Moscow” (I. A. Goncharov).

Chatsky and Molchalin.

I am Chatsky.

The ball scene in Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" and its role in the play.

“Why hasn’t Griboyedov’s Chatsky, and with him the whole comedy, grown old yet?” (I. A. Goncharov).

Chatsky and Onegin: who is more significant?

Decembrist orientation of Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit".

“Your mind and deeds are immortal in Russian memory...” (Nina Chavchavadze)., Chatsky and Famusov.

1. “Why hasn’t Griboyedov’s Chatsky, and with him the whole comedy, grown old yet?” (I. A. Goncharov).

2. I am Chatsky.

“Why hasn’t Griboyedov’s Chatsky, and with him the whole comedy, grown old yet?” (I. A. Goncharov)

N. A. Nekrasov

A. S. Griboyedov one of the geniuses of the Russian land, writer, diplomat, composer... To become famous, he did not need to write a dozen works. Thanks to just one comedy, “Woe from Wit,” his name became known.

Why, after two centuries, has the comedy, and with it its main character, not only not grown old, but continue to enjoy growing interest? What is her immortality?

It seems to me that what makes her truly immortal is the image of Chatsky.

His image can be associated with progressive people of both that time and the present.

Having burst into the sleepy silence of Famus's house, Chatsky becomes out of place in it. His sincere feelings, his passionate love and faith are not needed there:

It's barely light on your feet! and I am at your feet.

Condemnation of the false morality of Famus society, the pretense of their speeches make Chatsky a “dangerous person.”

Chatsky condemns society, “where he is famous, whose neck is more often bent.” Isn’t this sometimes characteristic of our time? Intelligence is the most valuable quality of a person. Has the problem of grief from the mind become a thing of the past? The comedy "Woe from Wit" convinces us of this. The struggle of the mind with stupidity has continued throughout the history of mankind. How many examples can be given when stupidity and ignorance triumph over intelligence and justice. The comedy “Woe from Wit” cannot but be called topical, since the main problem posed in it still does not lose its urgency. This was noted by I. A. Goncharov 50 years after the creation of the work in his critical sketch “A Million Torments”: “But as long as there will be a desire for honors in addition to merit, as long as there will be masters and hunters to please and “take awards and live happily,” while gossip, idleness, emptiness will dominate not as vices, but as elements of social life, until then, of course, they will flicker in

modern society

What is Chatsky fighting for? In the image of the main character, the author showed a man who has embarked on the path of fighting lies and vulgarity. In Chatsky, Griboyedov showed not only a hero of his time, but also gave the image of a fighter for freedom and truth. Chatsky's break with Famusovsky society occurred because he could serve, and not be served:

I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.

He mercilessly stigmatizes the “tormentors of the crowd”:

Blind!

In whom I sought the reward of all my labors!

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky devotes himself to art and science, refuses ranks, hates “noble scoundrels.”

Following Goncharov at the end of the 20th century, we can say that comedy has not lost its relevance. Her images amaze with their vitality and tangibility. Through what is written by the hand of the greatest master, we feel around us the stupid cliff-toothed, silent scoundrels, blissful Famusovs.

If Chatsky had only fought against serfdom, it is unlikely that the comedy would have been successful in our time. Chatsky also condemns the unfair court, which protects people with power and money: “Who are the judges?”

According to Goncharov, “The Chatskys live and are not transferred in society, repeating themselves at every step, in every house, where the old and the young coexist under the same roof, where two centuries come face to face in the close quarters of families, the struggle between the fresh and the outdated continues, sick with healthy... Every business that requires updating evokes the shadow of Chatsky...”

The image of Chatsky contains a huge generalizing power, which is why Goncharov attributed it to the eternal manifestations of the rebellious energy of renewal in humanity.

As a truly great work, Griboyedov’s classic comedy “Woe from Wit” poses transtemporal problems.

Written about two centuries ago, the work raises current issues. And the main character of the comedy excites and inspires us with his resilience, courage and optimism.

The comedy “Woe from Wit” is one of the monuments of world culture, “ eternal book", the brightest artistic document of the Decembrist era. Upon its release, the comedy was recognized instantly, and the prophetic words of A. Bestuzhev: “The future will worthily appreciate this comedy and place it among the first folk creations” seemed overly exalted. But a remarkable quality of the comedy turned out to be that the polyphony of its content became more and more noticeable with the passage of time, which is why “Griboyedov’s Chatsky, and with him the whole comedy, has not aged yet.”

Review. In his essay on the comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboedov, using factual material from the comedy, it convincingly shows that the main criterion for the formation of a person as an individual is his high ideological conviction, and the measure of a person’s value is his spiritual wealth, patriotism, and service to the Fatherland.

The essay proves Chatsky’s originality and talks about the significance of the image of the hero of Griboyedov’s comedy for modern times.

The author's judgments are independent and profound.

I Chatsky

(Based on the comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov)

I am a man who was mistaken for a madman, and a man who is still right!

No, I do not claim that those who declared me crazy (“He’s out of his mind”, “Mad in everything”, “Learning is a plague, learning is the reason that today there are more crazy people and cases than ever before) and opinions") are not right in everything, but in most cases they deliberately fabricate lies or are deeply mistaken.

What brought me to Famusov’s house was my love for Sophia:
It's barely light on your feet! and I am at your feet.
I'm forty-five hours, without squinting my eyes,

More than seven hundred miles passed, the wind, the storm...

But when I found out that Sophia loves someone else, instead of seeking her reciprocity, referring to my long-standing love for her, I try to explain to Sophia her terrible delusion.
Molchalin! Who else will settle everything so peacefully!
There he will pet the pug in time!
It's time to rub the card in!
Zagoretsky will not die in it!
Just now you were calculating its properties for me.

But have many forgotten? yes?

And finally, after talking with Molchalin himself, I became convinced that Sophia looks at many things in life through his eyes.

We love with such feelings, with such a soul!..

And now I'm alone. But I freed myself from illusions in relation to Sophia.
Blind! In whom I sought the reward of all my labors!

I was in a hurry!.. flying! trembled! Happiness, I thought, was close.

I traveled for a long time and thought that I knew people, their thoughts, their thoughts. But no...

Dreams are out of sight and the veil falls.

In Famusov’s circle they talk only about rank, money, achievements, and condemn science:

Learning is the plague, learning is the reason...
...If evil is to be stopped:
Take all the books and burn them.
Marrying for convenience:
Be bad, but if you get enough
Shower thousand two generic
He's the groom.
All this is unacceptable to me.

That’s why every new person who appears in the comedy takes a hostile position towards me, and not only those who had direct clashes with me, but also people who have never spoken to me are terribly slandered:

Crowd of tormentors
In the love of traitors, in the tireless enmity...
And the only thing left for me is:
Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore.
I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,
Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!..

Review. The essay is interesting in form, with a look at Chatsky from the inside. Very personal, bright, excited.

Modern interpretation of the classics

Latest publications on A. S. Griboyedov

Velagin A. P. A. S. Griboedov. “Woe from Wit”: Let’s read it together. M.: Education, 1991. P. 24.

Struve P. B. The face and genius of Griboedov // Literature at school. 1994. No. 1.

Bazhenov A. To the mystery of “grief”: Ideas and images of the comedy “Woe from Wit” // Literature at school. 1996. No. 4, 5.

Lanshchikov A.I. “Woe from Wit” as a mirror of Russian life // Literature at school. 1997. No. 5.

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 Griboyedov’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 new Age, and this is his whole meaning and his whole mind,” and that’s why “Chatsky remains and will always remain alive.” He 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, the satire, this colloquial verse, it seems, will never die, just 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 built new life, who showed all humanity the straight and broad road to a better future, remembers, appreciates and loves 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...”

This is interesting: