Features of the development of the conflict in the comedy A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". The conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit" Social conflict in the play "Woe from Wit"
A play by A.S. Griboedov "Woe from Wit" is a work in many respects innovative, unusual for its time, original.
The main feature of the comedy is the interaction of two plot-forming conflicts: a love conflict, the main participants of which are Chatsky and Sofia, and a socio-ideological conflict, in which Chatsky faces conservatives who have gathered in Famusov's house.
From the point of view of problems, in the foreground in the work is the conflict between Chatsky and Famusovsky society. But in the development of the plot, the traditional love conflict is no less important: after all, it was precisely for the sake of meeting with Sofia that Chatsky was in such a hurry to Moscow. Both clashes - love and socio-ideological - complement and reinforce each other. I believe that they are equally necessary in order to understand the worldview, characters, psychology and relationships of the characters.
In the two storylines of "Woe from Wit" all the elements of the classic plot are easily found: the exposition - all the scenes of the first act preceding the appearance of Chatsky in Famusov's house; the beginning of a love conflict and, accordingly, the plot of a love story - the arrival of Chatsky and his first conversation with Sofia. The socio-ideological conflict (Chatsky - Famusov society) is outlined a little later - during the first conversation between Chatsky and Famusov.
Both conflicts develop in the comedy in parallel. Stages of development of a love conflict - dialogues between Chatsky and Sofia. The hero is persistent in his attempts to call Sophia to frankness and find out why she became so cold towards him, who is her chosen one. Chatsky's conflict with the Famus society includes a number of private conflicts: Chatsky's verbal "duels" with Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin and other representatives of Moscow society.
Private conflicts in "Woe from Wit" allow many secondary characters to enter the stage, forcing them to reveal their position in life in remarks or actions. Based on the foregoing, we come to the conclusion that Griboyedov not only creates a broad “picture of morals”, but also shows the psychology and life principles of people surrounding Chatsky from all sides in the Famusov house and, more broadly, in life.
It can be said that the two main conflicts of comedy go side by side throughout the play, touching and diverging again. Information from the site Bigreferat.ru / bigreferat.ru But at the climax, the conflicts are connected, drawing a general collapse of Chatsky and other heroes of the comedy
At the heart of the climax of the socio-ideological plot is the rumor about Chatsky's madness. The reason for its occurrence was given by Sofia with her remark “aside”: “He is out of his mind.” The annoyed girl threw these words by accident, meaning that Chatsky "went crazy" with love and became simply unbearable for her.
Here the author uses a trick based on a play on words and meanings: Sophia's words were heard by the secular gossip Mr. N. and understood them literally. The heroine decided to take advantage of this misunderstanding to take revenge on Chatsky for his mockery of Molchalin. It is important that, having become a source of gossip about Chatsky's madness, the girl "burned all the bridges" between herself and her former lover.
Based on the above, we come to the conclusion that the climax of the love plot predetermines the climax of the socio-ideological plot. Thanks to this, both seemingly independent storylines of the play intersect at a common climax - the scene, the result of which is the recognition of Chatsky as crazy:
Crazy! I humbly ask!
Yes, by chance! yes, how clever!
Based on the foregoing, we come to the conclusion that the arrival of the enamored Chatsky gave rise to fundamental disputes between him (“the current century”), and those who stubbornly cling to the life values of the “past century”
At the end of the play, Sophia's "slander" on the "crazy" lover led society to a complete ideological disengagement from Chatsky. In fact, any dissent, unwillingness of Alexander Andreevich and his like-minded people to live as prescribed by "public opinion" was declared "madness" in Famusov's house.
After the climax, the "Woe from Wit" storylines diverge again. The denouement of a love affair precedes the denouement of the socio-ideological conflict.
The night scene in Famusov's house, in which Molchalin and Liza participate, and in addition Sofia and Chatsky, finally explains the position of the characters, making the secret clear. Sophia is convinced of the hypocrisy of Molchalin, and Chatsky finds out who his rival was:
Here is the solution to the puzzle at last!
Here I am donated to whom!
The actual defeat, failure both in love and in Moscow society make the protagonist run away from the city.
Formally, in the finale of the comedy, Chatsky loses in both conflicts, being completely defeated. Is it really? If you look more broadly, it seems to me that everything is not so simple. The future will show that Chatsky is a man of the new time, and in the long run he will win. At least in the socio-political conflict. This is evidenced by many details, "scattered" in the text of the play. The future belongs to Chatsky and his supporters - the author of the work is convinced of this, and we, the readers, are once again convinced of this.
Pushing around Paskevich,
The disgraced Yermolov is slandering...
What is left for him?
Ambition, coldness and anger...
From official old women,
From caustic secular injections
He rolls in a wagon,
Rest your chin on the cane.
D. Kedrin
Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov gained great literary fame and national fame by writing the comedy Woe from Wit. This work was innovative in Russian literature of the first quarter of the 19th century.
Classical comedy was characterized by the division of heroes into positive and negative. The victory was always for the good guys, while the bad ones were ridiculed and defeated. In Griboedov's comedy, the characters are distributed in a completely different way. The main conflict of the play is connected with the division of the characters into representatives of the “current century” and “past century”, and the former actually includes one Alexander Andreyevich Chatsky, moreover, he often finds himself in a ridiculous position, although he is a positive hero. At the same time, his main “opponent” Famusov is by no means some notorious bastard, on the contrary, he is a caring father and a good-natured person.
It is interesting that Chatsky's childhood passed in the house of Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. Moscow lordly life was measured and calm. Every day was like another. Balls, dinners, dinners, christenings...
He got married - he managed, but he gave a miss.
All the same sense, and the same verses in the albums.
Women were mainly occupied with outfits. They love everything foreign, French. The ladies of the Famus society have one goal - to marry or marry off their daughters to an influential and wealthy person. With all this, in the words of Famusov himself, women "are judges of everything, everywhere, there are no judges over them." For patronage, everyone goes to a certain Tatyana Yuryevna, because "officials and officials are all her friends and all her relatives." Princess Marya Alekseevna has such weight in high society that Famusov somehow exclaims in fear:
Oh! My God! What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!
But what about men? They are all busy trying to move as high as possible on the social ladder. Here is the thoughtless martinet Skalozub, who measures everything by military standards, jokes in a military way, being a model of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. But this just means a good growth prospect. He has one goal - "to get to the generals." Here is a petty official Molchalin. He says, not without pleasure, that “he received three awards, is listed in the Archives,” and he, of course, wants to “reach the known degrees.”
The Moscow “ace” Famusov himself tells young people about the nobleman Maxim Petrovich, who served under Catherine and, seeking a place at court, did not show any business qualities or talents, but became famous only for the fact that his neck often “bent” in bows. But “had a hundred people at his service”, “all in orders”. This is the ideal of the Famus society.
Moscow nobles are arrogant and arrogant. They treat people poorer than themselves with contempt. But a special arrogance is heard in the remarks addressed to the serfs. They are “parsleys”, “fomkas”, “chumps”, “lazy black grouse”. One conversation with them: “Get you to work! Settle you!”. In close formation, the Famusites oppose everything new, advanced. They can be liberal, but they are afraid of fundamental changes like fire. How much hatred in Famusov's words:
Learning is the plague, learning is the cause
What is now more than ever,
Crazy divorced people, and deeds, and opinions.
Thus, Chatsky is well aware of the spirit of the "past century", marked by cringing, hatred for enlightenment, the emptiness of life. All this early aroused boredom and disgust in our hero. Despite his friendship with sweet Sophia, Chatsky leaves the house of his relatives and begins an independent life.
“The desire to travel attacked him...” His soul longed for the novelty of modern ideas, communication with the advanced people of the time. He leaves Moscow and travels to Petersburg. "High thoughts" for him above all. It was in St. Petersburg that Chatsky's views and aspirations were formed. He appears to have taken an interest in literature. Even Famusov heard rumors that Chatsky “writes and translates nicely.” At the same time, Chatsky is fascinated by social activities. He has a "connection with the ministers." However, not for long. High concepts of honor did not allow him to serve, he wanted to serve the cause, not individuals.
After that, Chatsky probably visited the village, where, according to Famusov, he “blissed out”, blunderingly managing the estate. Then our hero goes abroad. At that time, “travelling” was viewed askance as a manifestation of the liberal spirit. But just the acquaintance of representatives of Russian noble youth with the life, philosophy, history of Western Europe was of great importance for their development.
And here we are already meeting with a mature Chatsky, a man with established ideas. Chatsky contrasts the slave morality of the Famus society with a high understanding of honor and duty. He passionately denounces the hated feudal system. He cannot calmly talk about “Nestor noble scoundrels”, who changes servants for dogs, or about the one who “drew ... from mothers, fathers of rejected children to a fortress ballet” and went bankrupt, sold everyone one by one.
Here are those who lived to gray hair!
That's who we should respect in the wilderness!
Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!
Chatsky hates “the meanest traits of the past life”, people who “draw their judgments from the forgotten newspapers of the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea”. A sharp protest is caused in him by the noble servility to everything foreign, the French upbringing, usual in the lordly environment. In his famous monologue about the “Frenchman from Bordeaux,” he speaks of the ardent attachment of the common people to their homeland, national customs and language.
As a true enlightener, Chatsky passionately defends the rights of reason and deeply believes in its power. In reason, in education, in public opinion, in the power of ideological and moral influence, he sees the main and powerful means of reshaping society, changing life. He defends the right to serve enlightenment and science:
Now let one of us
Of the young people, there is an enemy of quest, -
Not demanding either places or promotions,
In the sciences, he will stick the mind, hungry for knowledge;
Or in his soul God himself will excite the heat
To creative arts, lofty and beautiful, -
They immediately: robbery! Fire!
And they will be known as a dreamer! Dangerous!!!
Among such young people in the play, in addition to Chatsky, one can perhaps also include Skalozub's cousin, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - "a chemist and botanist". But they are mentioned in passing in the play. Among the guests of Famusov, our hero is a loner.
- Of course, Chatsky makes enemies. Well, will Skalozub forgive him if he hears about himself: “Wheezy, strangled, bassoon, a constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!” Or Natalya Dmitrievna, whom he advised to live in the countryside? Or Khlestov, whom Chatsky openly laughs at? But most of all goes, of course, to Molchalin. Chatsky considers him “the most miserable creature”, similar to all fools. Sophia, out of revenge for such words, declares Chatsky crazy. Everyone happily picks up this news, they sincerely believe in gossip, because, indeed, in this society he seems crazy.
A. S. Pushkin, after reading “Woe from Wit”, noticed that Chatsky throws beads in front of pigs, that he will never convince those to whom he addresses with his angry, passionate monologues. And one cannot but agree with this. But Chatsky is young. Yes, he did not have the goal of starting disputes with the older generation. First of all, he wanted to see Sophia, to whom from childhood he had a cordial affection. Another thing is that in the time that has passed since their last meeting, Sophia has changed. Chatsky is discouraged by her cold reception, he struggles to understand how it could be that she no longer needs him. Maybe it was this mental trauma that triggered the conflict mechanism.
As a result, there is a complete break of Chatsky with the world in which he spent his childhood and with which he is connected by blood ties. But the conflict that led to this gap is not personal, not accidental. This conflict is social. Not just different people clashed, but different worldviews, different social positions. The external tie-in of the conflict was the arrival of Chatsky to Famusov's house, he received development in disputes and monologues of the main characters (“Who are the judges?”, “That's it, you are all proud!”). The growing misunderstanding and alienation lead to a climax: at the ball, Chatsky is recognized as insane. And then he realizes for himself that all his words and spiritual movements were in vain:
Mad you glorified me all in unison.
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend the day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his mind will survive.
The outcome of the conflict is the departure of Chatsky from Moscow. The relationship between the Famus society and the protagonist is clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other and do not want to have anything in common. It's impossible to tell who's winning. After all, the conflict between the old and the new is eternal, like the world. And the theme of the suffering of an intelligent, educated person in Russia is topical even today. And to this day, they suffer more from the mind than from its absence. In this sense, A.S. Griboedov created a comedy for all time.
The peculiarity of the conflict in the comedy "Woe from Wit" is that in the work there is an interaction of social and love plans. The conflict seems to be ambivalent. I. A. Goncharov in the article “A Million of Torments” wrote: “Two comedies seem to be nested one into the other: one, so to speak, private, domestic, between Chatsky, Sophia, Molchalin and Lisa - this is the intrigue of love, the everyday motive of all comedies. When the first is interrupted, another unexpectedly appears in between, and the action is tied up again, a private comedy is played out in a general battle and tied into one knot.
In the play "Woe from Wit" A. S. Griboedov rethinks the traditions associated with the eras of classicism and romanticism, which is expressed both at the level of creating images, characters, language, special problems, and at the level of the conflict itself.
Traditional for the comedy of classicism is the plot scheme, where two young men at once claim the hand of a noble maiden, whose images are opposed, and one of them is confident in his superiority, talkative and mocking, and the second is modest and respectful; he is loved by a bride of the same quality, and he wins her hand at the end of the play. Having retained this scheme, Griboyedov changed the interpretation of the characters, leaving their characteristics. In his comedy, respectively, Chatsky and Molchalin are opposed, who is successful, and his main qualities remain "moderation and accuracy."
In the era of romanticism, there was a traditional conflict, which was certainly present in any romantic poem, drama. It consisted in opposing high and low; an exceptional hero and light, society, the world as a whole. This conflict was unresolvable. Chatsky, in his behavior and tragedy, is similar to a romantic hero struggling with "cruel morals." But the conflict in A. S. Griboyedov becomes historically concrete. Thus, one can understand that the era depicted in Woe from Wit is the era of secret alliances, on the one hand, and Arakcheevism, on the other.
Chatsky has much in common with the Decembrists (love for the Russian people, the desire to “serve the cause, not individuals”, hatred of serfdom, true culture and enlightenment, “he is very positive in his demands and declares them in a ready-made program developed not by him, but by the century itself”), but there is no force behind it, the entire Decembrist society. He is one against all.
This unusual conflict of "Woe from Wit" is embedded in the plot of the comedy. The first act is an exposition of conflict development. The first 5 phenomena of this action paint a rather detailed picture of the life of Famusov and Sofya before Chatsky's arrival, thereby preparing the background against which the future conflict will then develop with increasing force. We learn about Sophia's love for Molchalin, which is hiding from Famusov, and about Molchalin's feigned attitude towards Sophia (Liza's story about an aunt and a young Frenchman). 7-9th phenomena - the beginning of a love affair associated with the arrival of a lover in Sofia Chatsky. Personal conflict is at the same time a manifestation of social conflict, which is guessed in Chatsky's satirical remarks about Moscow morals (already in the 7th apparition, Sophia remarks: "Persecution of Moscow. What does it mean to see the light!"). The outbreak of a social conflict and the complication of a personal line refers to the 2nd phenomenon of the second act, in which Chatsky gets married, is refused because of his way of life incompatible with the foundations of the Famus society, there is a direct clash with Famusov on the issue of morals (Famusov’s monologue “That’s what - then, you are all proud! .. ”and Chatsky’s answer with a monologue“ And for sure, the world began to grow stupid ...”). This is how the natural transition from personal conflict to social conflict takes place. The confrontation between Chatsky and Famusov reaches a fever pitch in Famusov's monologue "Taste, father, excellent manner ..." and in Chatsky's answer: "And who are the judges? .." This monologue of Chatsky confirms the impossibility of reconciliation between the hero and society. In the third act, Chatsky's alienation intensifies, his relationship with Sophia does not improve. The personal conflict is complicated by Sophia's gossip about Chatsky's madness, and only in the 13th-14th events of the fourth act does the denouement of personal intrigue come. The public line of Chatsky's struggle with Moscow society never ends with anything in the play. The finale of "Woe from Wit" remains open. “Comedy gives Chatsky a “million torments” and apparently leaves Famusov and his brethren in the same position in which they were before, without saying anything about the consequences of the struggle.”
A. S. Griboedov creates a work that declares "an energetic protest against the vile racial reality." The conflict in the comedy of A. S. Griboedov is not only unusual, it is peculiar, since it reflects the internal contradictions that existed in Russian society in the first quarter of the 19th century. Along with him, there is a love line in the comedy that plays an important role: Chatsky's love drama becomes an expression of the hero's ideological loneliness. Thus, the peculiarity of this conflict, according to A. A. Blok, “unresolved to the end” in the work of A. S. Griboedov lies in the close interaction of public and personal lines, each of which looks unconventional in the play. A. S. Griboedov rethinks the old models and creates an innovative comedy, interest in which has not disappeared since the middle of the 19th century, when Chatsky began to be perceived as the only positive character in Russian drama.
A play by A.S. Griboedov "Woe from Wit" is a work in many respects innovative, unusual for its time, original.
The main feature of the comedy is the interaction of two plot-forming conflicts: a love conflict, the main participants of which are Chatsky and Sofia, and a socio-ideological conflict, in which Chatsky clashes with conservatives who have gathered in Famusov's house.
From the point of view of problems, in the foreground in the work is the conflict between Chatsky and Famusovsky society. But in the development of the plot, the traditional love conflict is no less important: after all, it was precisely for the sake of meeting with Sofia that Chatsky was in such a hurry to Moscow. Both clashes - love and socio-ideological - complement and reinforce each other. I believe that they are equally necessary in order to understand the worldview, characters, psychology and relationships of the characters.
In the two storylines of "Woe from Wit" all the elements of the classic plot are easily found: the exposition - all the scenes of the first act preceding the appearance of Chatsky in Famusov's house; the beginning of a love conflict and, accordingly, the plot of a love story - the arrival of Chatsky and his first conversation with Sofia. The socio-ideological conflict (Chatsky - Famusov society) is outlined a little later - during the first conversation between Chatsky and Famusov.
Both conflicts develop in the comedy in parallel. Stages of development of a love conflict - dialogues between Chatsky and Sofia. The hero is persistent in his attempts to call Sophia to frankness and find out why she became so cold towards him, who is her chosen one. Chatsky's conflict with the Famus society includes a number of private conflicts: Chatsky's verbal "duels" with Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin and other representatives of Moscow society.
Private conflicts in "Woe from Wit" allow many secondary characters to enter the stage, forcing them to reveal their position in life in remarks or actions. Thus, Griboedov creates not only a broad "picture of morals", but also shows the psychology and life principles of people who surround Chatsky from all sides in the Famusov house and, more broadly, in life.
It can be said that the two main conflicts of comedy go side by side throughout the play, touching and diverging again. But at the climax, the conflicts come together, painting the general collapse of Chatsky and other heroes of the comedy. At the heart of the climax of the socio-ideological plot is the rumor about Chatsky's madness. The reason for its occurrence was given by Sofia with her remark “aside”: “He is out of his mind.” The annoyed girl threw these words by accident, meaning that Chatsky "went crazy" with love and became simply unbearable for her.
Here the author uses a trick based on a play on words and meanings: Sophia's words were heard by the secular gossip Mr. N. and understood them literally. The heroine decided to take advantage of this misunderstanding to take revenge on Chatsky for his mockery of Molchalin. It is important that, having become a source of gossip about Chatsky's madness, the girl "burned all the bridges" between herself and her former lover.
Thus, the climax of the love plot predetermines the culmination of the socio-ideological plot. Thanks to this, both seemingly independent storylines of the play intersect at a common climax - the scene, the result of which is the recognition of Chatsky as crazy:
Crazy! I humbly ask!
Yes, by chance! yes, how clever!
Thus, the arrival of the enamored Chatsky gave rise to fundamental disputes between him (“the current century”), and those who stubbornly cling to the life values of the “past century”. At the end of the play, Sophia's "slander" on the "crazy" lover led society to a complete ideological disengagement from Chatsky. In fact, any dissent, unwillingness of Alexander Andreevich and his like-minded people to live as prescribed by "public opinion" was declared "madness" in Famusov's house.
After the climax, the storylines of "Woe from Wit" diverge again. The denouement of a love affair precedes the denouement of the socio-ideological conflict. The night scene in Famusov's house, in which Molchalin and Liza, as well as Sofia and Chatsky participate, finally explains the position of the characters, making the secret clear. Sophia is convinced of the hypocrisy of Molchalin, and Chatsky finds out who his rival was:
Here is the solution to the puzzle at last!
Here I am donated to whom!
The actual defeat, failure both in love and in Moscow society make the protagonist run away from the city.
Formally, in the finale of the comedy, Chatsky loses in both conflicts, being completely defeated. Is it really? If you look more broadly, it seems to me that everything is not so simple. The future will show that Chatsky is a man of the new time, and in the long run he will win. At least in the socio-political conflict. This is evidenced by many details, "scattered" in the text of the play. The future belongs to Chatsky and his supporters - the author of the work is convinced of this, and we, the readers, are once again convinced of this.
CONFLICT OF THE COMEDY "Woe From Wit"
The comedy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov became innovative in Russian literature of the first quarter of the 19th century.
Classical comedy was characterized by the division of heroes into positive and negative. The victory was always for the good guys, while the bad ones were ridiculed and defeated. In Griboedov's comedy, the characters are distributed in a completely different way. The main conflict of the play is connected with the division of the characters into representatives of the “current century” and the “past century”, and almost only Alexander Andreevich Chatsky belongs to the former, moreover, he often finds himself in a ridiculous position, although he is a positive hero. At the same time, his main "opponent" Famusov is by no means some notorious bastard, on the contrary, he is a caring father and a good-natured person.
It is interesting that Chatsky's childhood passed in the house of Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. Moscow lordly life was measured and calm. Every day was like another. Balls, dinners, dinners, christenings...
“He got married - he managed, but he gave a miss.
All the same sense, and the same verses in the albums.
Women are mainly occupied with outfits. They love everything foreign, French. The ladies of the Famus society have one goal - to marry or marry off their daughters to an influential and wealthy person.
Men are all busy trying to move as high as possible on the social ladder. Here is the thoughtless martinet Skalozub, who measures everything by military standards, jokes in a military way, being a model of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. But this just means a good growth prospect. He has one goal - "to get to the generals." Here is a petty official Molchalin. He says, not without pleasure, that “he received three awards, is listed in the Archives,” and he, of course, wants to “reach the known degrees.”
Famusov himself tells young people about the nobleman Maxim Petrovich, who served under Catherine and, seeking a place at court, did not show any business qualities or talents, but became famous only for the fact that he often “bent neck” in bows. But "he had a hundred people at his service", "all in orders." This is the ideal of the Famus society.
Moscow nobles are arrogant and arrogant. They treat people poorer than themselves with contempt. But a special arrogance is heard in the remarks addressed to the serfs. They are “parsleys”, “fomkas”, “chumps”, “lazy grouse”. There is only one conversation with them: “Get you to work! Settle you!”. In close formation, the Famusites oppose everything new, advanced. They can be liberal, but they are afraid of fundamental changes like fire.
“Learning is the plague, learning is the cause,
What is now more than ever,
Crazy divorced people, and deeds, and opinions.
Thus, Chatsky is well aware of the spirit of the "past century", marked by cringing, hatred for enlightenment, the emptiness of life. All this early aroused boredom and disgust in our hero. Despite his friendship with sweet Sophia, Chatsky leaves the house of his relatives and begins an independent life.
His soul longed for the novelty of modern ideas, communication with the advanced people of the time. "High thoughts" for him above all. It was in St. Petersburg that Chatsky's views and aspirations were formed. He appears to have taken an interest in literature. Even Famusov heard rumors that Chatsky "writes and translates nicely." At the same time, Chatsky is fascinated by social activities. He has a "connection with the ministers." However, not for long. High concepts of honor do not allow him to serve, he wanted to serve the cause, not individuals.
And here we are already meeting with a mature Chatsky, a man with established ideas. Chatsky contrasts the slave morality of the Famus society with a high understanding of honor and duty. He passionately denounces the hated feudal system.
“Here are those who lived to gray hair!
That's who we should respect in the wilderness!
Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!”
Chatsky hates “the meanest traits of the past life”, people who “draw their judgments from the forgotten newspapers of the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” A sharp protest is caused in him by the noble servility to everything foreign, the French upbringing, usual in the lordly environment. In his famous monologue about the "Frenchman from Bordeaux", he speaks of the ardent affection of the common people for their homeland, national customs and language.
As a true enlightener, Chatsky passionately defends the rights of reason and deeply believes in its power. In reason, in education, in public opinion, in the power of ideological and moral influence, he sees the main and powerful means of reshaping society, changing life. It defends the right to serve enlightenment and science.
Such young people in the play, in addition to Chatsky, may also include Skalozub's cousin, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - "a chemist and botanist." But they are mentioned in passing in the play. Among the guests of Famusov, our hero is a loner.
Of course, Chatsky is making enemies. But most of all goes, of course, to Molchalin. Chatsky considers him "the most miserable creature", similar to all fools. Sophia, out of revenge for such words, declares Chatsky crazy. Everyone happily picks up this news, they sincerely believe in gossip, because, indeed, in this society, he seems crazy.
A.S. Pushkin, after reading "Woe from Wit", noticed that Chatsky throws pearls in front of pigs, that he will never convince those to whom he addresses with his angry, passionate monologues. And one cannot but agree with this. But Chatsky is young. Yes, he does not have the goal of starting disputes with the older generation. First of all, he wanted to see Sophia, to whom from childhood he had a cordial attachment. Another thing is that in the time that has passed since their last meeting, Sophia has changed. Chatsky is discouraged by her cold reception, he struggles to understand how it could be that she no longer needs him. Maybe it was this mental trauma that triggered the conflict mechanism.
As a result, there is a complete break of Chatsky with the world in which he spent his childhood and with which he is connected by blood ties. But the conflict that led to this gap is not personal, not accidental. This conflict is social. Not just different people clashed, but different worldviews, different social positions. The external tie-in of the conflict was the arrival of Chatsky to Famusov's house, he received development in disputes and monologues of the main characters ("Who are the judges?", "That's it, you are all proud! .."). The growing misunderstanding and alienation lead to a climax: at the ball, Chatsky is recognized as insane. And then he realizes for himself that all his words and spiritual movements were in vain:
“Insane, you glorified me all in unison.
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend the day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his mind will survive in him.
The outcome of the conflict is the departure of Chatsky from Moscow. The relationship between the Famus society and the protagonist has been clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other and do not want to have anything in common. It's impossible to tell who's winning. After all, the conflict between the old and the new is eternal, like the world. And the theme of the suffering of an intelligent, educated person in Russia is topical even today. And to this day, they suffer more from the mind than from its absence. In this sense, Griboyedov created a comedy for all time.
In the first scenes of the comedy, Chatsky is a dreamer who cherishes his dream - the thought of the possibility of changing a selfish, vicious society. And he comes to it, to this society, with an ardent word of conviction. He willingly enters into an argument with Famusov, Skalozub, reveals to Sophia the world of his feelings and experiences. The portraits that he draws in the first monologues are even funny. Label specifications, accurate. Here are “an old, faithful member of the“ English Club ”Famusov, and Sofya’s uncle, who has already“ jumped off his age ”, and“ that black-haired one ”who is everywhere“ right there, in the dining rooms and in the living rooms, ”and the fat landowner-theater with his skinny serf artists, and the "consumptive" relative of Sophia - "the enemy of books", demanding with a cry "an oath that no one knows and does not study to read", and the teacher of Chatsky and Sophia, "all the signs of learning" which are a cap, a dressing gown and forefinger, and "Guiglione, a Frenchman blown by the breeze."
And only then, slandered, offended by this society, Chatsky is convinced of the hopelessness of his sermon, freed from his illusions: "Dreams out of sight, and the veil fell off." The clash between Chatsky and Famusov is based on the opposition of their attitudes towards service, freedom, authorities, foreigners, education, etc.
Famusov in the service surrounds himself with relatives: his man will not let you down and “how not to please your own little man.” Service for him is a source of ranks, awards and income. The surest way to achieve these benefits is servility to the superiors. It is not for nothing that Famusov's ideal is Maxim Petrovich, who, cursing himself, "bent into an inflection", "bravely sacrificed the back of his head." On the other hand, he was "kindly treated at court", "he knew honor before everyone." And Famusov convinces Chatsky to learn worldly wisdom from the example of Maxim Petrovich.
Famusov's revelations outrage Chatsky, and he utters a monologue saturated with hatred for "servility", buffoonery. Listening to Chatsky's seditious speeches, Famusov becomes more and more inflamed. He is already ready to take the strictest measures against such dissidents as Chatsky, he believes that they should be banned from entering the capital, that they should be brought to justice. Next to Famusov is a colonel, the same enemy of education and science. He hurries to please the guests with those
“What is the project about lyceums, schools, gymnasiums;
There they will only teach in our way: one, two;
And the books will be kept like this: for big occasions.
For all those present, “learning is the plague,” their dream is “to take away all the books and burn them.” The ideal of the Famus society is "And take awards and live happily." Everyone knows how to achieve ranks better and faster. Puffer knows many channels. Molchalin received from his father a whole science "to please all people without exception." The Famus society strongly guards its noble interests. A person is valued here by origin, by wealth:
“We have been going on for a long time,
What an honor for a father and son."
Famusov's guests are united by the defense of the autocratic serf system, hatred of everything progressive. A fiery dreamer, with a reasonable thought and noble impulses, Chatsky is opposed to the close-knit and diverse world of famous, pufferfish with their petty goals and base aspirations. He is a stranger in this world. The “mind” of Chatsky puts him in the eyes of the Famusians outside their circle, outside the norms of social behavior familiar to them. The best human qualities and inclinations of the heroes make him, in the view of those around him, a “strange person”, “carbonarius”, “eccentric”, “mad”. Chatsky's clash with the Famus society is inevitable. In Chatsky's speeches, the opposite of his views to the views of Famus Moscow is clearly expressed.
He speaks indignantly about the feudal lords, about serfdom. In the central monologue "And who are the judges?" he angrily opposes the order of the Catherine's age, dear to Famusov's heart, "the age of humility and fear." For him, the ideal is an independent, free person.
He speaks indignantly about the inhuman feudal landowners, "noble scoundrels", one of whom "suddenly traded his faithful servants for three greyhounds!"; another sent them to "fortress ballet from mothers, fathers of rejected children", and then they were sold one by one. And there are not a few!
Chatsky also served, he writes and translates “gloriously”, managed to visit the military service, saw the light, has connections with ministers. But he breaks all ties, leaves the service because he wants to serve his homeland, and not his superiors. “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve,” he says. Being an active person, in the conditions of the prevailing political and social life, he is doomed to inaction and prefers to "scour the world." Staying abroad expanded Chatsky's horizons, but did not make him a fan of everything foreign, unlike Famusov's like-minded people.
Chatsky resents the lack of patriotism among these people. His dignity of a Russian person is offended by the fact that among the nobility "a mixture of languages still dominates: French with Nizhny Novgorod." Painfully loving his homeland, he would like to protect society from yearning for a foreign side, from “empty, slavish, blind imitation” of the West. According to him, the nobility should stand closer to the people and speak Russian, "so that our people are smart, vigorous, although they did not consider us Germans by language."
And how ugly is secular upbringing and education! Why are “they bothering to recruit teachers for regiments, more in number, at cheaper prices”?
Griboyedov - a patriot fights for the purity of the Russian language, art, education. Ridiculing the existing system of education, he introduces such characters as the Frenchman from Bordeaux, Madame Rosier, into the comedy.
The intelligent, educated Chatsky stands for genuine enlightenment, although he is well aware of how difficult it is in the conditions of an autocratic feudal system. After all, the one who, "without demanding either places or promotion to rank ...", "puts his mind into science, hungry for knowledge ...", "will be known to them as a dangerous dreamer!". And there are such people in Russia. Chatsky's brilliant speech is evidence of his extraordinary mind. Even Famusov notes this: “he is small with a head,” “he speaks as he writes.”
What keeps Chatsky in a society alien in spirit? Only love for Sophia. This feeling justifies and makes understandable his stay in Famusov's house. The mind and nobility of Chatsky, a sense of civic duty, indignation of human dignity come into sharp conflict with his "heart", with his love for Sophia. Socio-political and personal drama unfolds in a comedy in parallel. They are inseparably merged. Sophia belongs entirely to the Famus world. She cannot fall in love with Chatsky, who opposes this world with all his mind and soul. Chatsky's love conflict with Sophia grows to the extent of the rebellion he raised. As soon as it turned out that Sophia had betrayed her former feelings and turned everything past into laughter, he leaves her house, this society. Chatsky in the last monologue not only blames Famusov, but he himself is spiritually freed, courageously conquering his passionate and tender love and breaking the last threads that connected him with the Famusov world.
Chatsky still has few ideological followers. His protest, of course, does not find a response among "sinister old women, old men, decrepit over inventions, nonsense."
For such people as Chatsky, being in a Famus society brings only “a million torments”, “woe from wit”. But the new, progressive is irresistible. Despite the strong resistance of the dying old, it is impossible to stop the forward movement. The views of Chatsky deal a terrible blow with their denunciations of "famus" and "silent". The calm and carefree existence of the Famus society is over. His philosophy of life was condemned, it was rebelled against. If the "Chatskys" are still weak in their struggle, then the "Famusovs" are powerless to stop the development of enlightenment, advanced ideas. The fight against the Famusovs did not end in comedy. She was just beginning in Russian life. The Decembrists and the spokesman for their ideas, Chatsky, were representatives of the first early stage of the Russian liberation movement.
There are still disputes between different researchers about the conflict "Woe from Wit", even Griboedov's contemporaries understood it differently. If we take into account the time of writing Woe from Wit, then we can assume that Griboedov uses clashes of reason, public duty and feelings. But, of course, the conflict of Griboedov's comedy is much deeper and has a multi-layered structure.
Chatsky is an eternal type. He tries to harmonize feeling and reason. He himself says that "mind and heart are not in harmony," but he does not understand the seriousness of this threat. Chatsky is a hero whose actions are built on one impulse, everything he does, he does in one breath, practically not allowing pauses between declarations of love and monologues denouncing aristocratic Moscow. Griboyedov depicts him so alive, full of contradictions, that he begins to seem like a person who almost really existed.
Much has been said in literary criticism about the conflict between the “current century” and the “past century”. The "Current Age" represented the youth. But young people are Molchalin, Sophia, and Skalozub. It is Sophia who first speaks about Chatsky's madness, and Molchalin is not only alien to Chatsky's ideas, he is also afraid of them. His motto is to live by the rule: "My father bequeathed to me ...". Skalazub is generally a man of an established order, he is only concerned about his career. Where is the conflict of the ages? So far, we are only observing that both centuries not only coexist peacefully, but also that the "current century" is a complete reflection of the "past century", that is, there is no conflict of the ages. Griboedov does not push "fathers" and "children" together; he opposes them to Chatsky, who finds himself alone.
So, we see that the basis of comedy is not a socio-political conflict, not a conflict of the ages. Chatsky’s phrase “mind and heart are out of tune,” said by him at the moment of momentary insight, is not a hint at the conflict of feelings and duty, but at a deeper, philosophical conflict of living life and the limited ideas about it of our mind.
It is impossible not to mention the love conflict of the play, which serves to develop the drama. The first lover, so smart, brave, is defeated, the ending of the comedy is not a wedding, but a bitter disappointment. From the love triangle: Chatsky, Sofya, Molchalin, it is not the mind that comes out the winner, and not even narrowness and mediocrity, but disappointment. The play gets an unexpected end, the mind turns out to be untenable in love, that is, in what is inherent in living life. At the end of the play, everyone is confused. Not only Chatsky, but also Famusov, unshakable in his confidence, for whom suddenly everything that used to go smoothly is turned upside down. The peculiarity of the comedy conflict is that in life everything is not the same as in French novels, the rationality of the characters comes into conflict with life.
The value of "Woe from Wit" is difficult to overestimate. One can speak of the play as a thunderous blow to the society of "famus", "silent", puffers, a play-drama "about the collapse of the human mind in Russia". The comedy shows the process of the withdrawal of the advanced part of the nobility from the inert environment and the struggle with their class. The reader can trace the development of the conflict between the two socio-political camps: serf-owners (Famus society) and anti-serf-owners (Chatsky).
Famus society is traditional. His life foundations are such that “you need to learn by looking at your elders”, destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with humility to persons who are a step higher, and most importantly, be rich. A peculiar ideal of this society is in the monologues of Famusov Maxim Petrovich and Uncle Kuzma Petrovich: ... Here is an example:
“The deceased was a respectable chamberlain,
With the key, he was able to deliver the key to his son;
Rich, and was married to a rich woman;
Married children, grandchildren;
He died, everyone sadly remembers him:
Kuzma Petrovich! Peace be upon him! -
What kind of aces in Moscow live and die! .. "
The image of Chatsky, on the contrary, is something new, fresh, bursting into life, bringing change. This is a realistic image, a spokesman for the advanced ideas of his time. Chatsky could be called a hero of his time. A whole political program can be traced in Chatsky's monologues. He exposes serfdom and its offspring, inhumanity, hypocrisy, stupid militarism, ignorance, false patriotism. He gives a merciless characterization of the Famus society.
The dialogues between Famusov and Chatsky are a struggle. At the beginning of the comedy, it does not yet appear in an acute form. After all, Famusov is Chatsky's tutor. At the beginning of the comedy, Famusov is favorable to Chatsky, he is even ready to give in to Sophia's hand, but at the same time he sets his own conditions:
“I would say, firstly: don’t be blissful,
Name, brother, do not manage by mistake,
And, most importantly, go and serve.
To which Chatsky throws: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” But gradually another struggle begins, an important and serious one, a whole battle. “Would have looked like the fathers did, Would have studied, looking at the elders!” Famusov's war cry rang out. And in response - Chatsky's monologue "Who are the judges?". In this monologue, Chatsky stigmatizes "the meanest traits of the past life."
Each new face that appears in the course of the development of the plot becomes in opposition to Chatsky. Anonymous characters slander him: Mr. N, Mr. D, the 1st princess, the 2nd princess, etc. Gossip grows like a "snowball". In a collision with this world, the social intrigue of the play is shown.
But in comedy there is another conflict, another intrigue - love. I.A. Goncharov wrote: "Every step of Chatsky, almost every word of his in the play is closely connected with the play of his feelings for Sophia." It was Sophia's behavior, incomprehensible to Chatsky, that served as a motive, a reason for irritation, for that "million of torments", under the influence of which he could only play the role indicated to him by Griboyedov. Chatsky is tormented, not understanding who his opponent is: either Skalozub, or Molchalin? Therefore, he becomes irritable, unbearable, caustic in relation to Famusov's guests.
Sofya, irritated by Chatsky's remarks, insulting not only the guests, but also her lover, in a conversation with Mr. N, mentions Chatsky's madness: "He is out of his mind." And the rumor about Chatsky's madness rushes through the halls, spreads among the guests, acquiring fantastic, grotesque forms. And he himself, still not knowing anything, confirms this rumor with a heated monologue "The Frenchman from Bordeaux", which he utters in an empty hall. The denouement of both conflicts is coming, Chatsky finds out who Sophia's chosen one is. - Silencers are blissful in the world! - says heartbroken Chatsky. His hurt pride, escaping resentment burns. He breaks with Sophia: Enough! With you I am proud of my break.
And before leaving forever, Chatsky in anger throws to the entire Famus society:
“He will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend the day with you.
Breathe the air alone
And in him the mind will survive ... "
Chatsky leaves. But who is he - the winner or the vanquished? Goncharov most accurately answered this question in the article “A Million Torments”: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old strength, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of fresh strength. He is an eternal debunker of lies, hiding in the proverb - "One man in the field is not a warrior." No, a warrior, if he is Chatsky, and, moreover, a winner, but an advanced warrior, skirmisher and always a victim.
The bright, active mind of the hero requires a different environment, and Chatsky enters the struggle, begins a new century. He strives for a free life, for the pursuit of science and art, for the service of the cause, and not of persons. But his aspirations are not understood by the society in which he lives.
Comedy conflicts are deepened by off-stage characters. There are quite a few of them. They expand the canvas of life of the capital's nobility. Most of them adjoin the Famus society. But their time is already running out. No wonder Famusov regrets that the times are not the same.
So, off-stage characters can be divided into two groups and one can be attributed to the Famus society, the other to Chatsky.
The first deepen the comprehensive description of the noble society, show the times of Elizabeth. The latter are spiritually connected with the main character, close to him in thoughts, goals, spiritual quests, aspirations.
