Fonvizin's life and creative path. Fonvizin's artistic method Fonvizin's works and their features

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin - Russian writer and publicist, playwright and translator during the reign of Catherine the Great, the founder of everyday comedy, who worked in such literary direction like classicism. The life and work of this man made an invaluable contribution to the development of Russian literature.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born on April 3, 1745 and grew up in a noble family in Moscow. His family went back to German roots, so his last name is a Russian variation of the Germanic name Von Wiesin.

Initially, the future genius was educated at home, and after that he was enrolled in the lists of students of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University. After his merits in the literary sphere, he will be sent to St. Petersburg, where he met such iconic figures of the state as Lomonosov, Sumarokov.

Creative path: a success story

The first works began to appear already in 1760. The writer began with translations, which were periodically published. The first landmark publication was in the form of an early version of the famous play "Undergrowth". Later, already by 1781, the finished play would be staged in St. Petersburg, and two years later it would occupy the stages of Moscow. After 8 years, a comedy with a satirical orientation called "The Brigadier" came out from the pen of the classicist, which elevated Fonvizin as a writer and was honored to be read in front of the empress herself in her summer house in Peterhof.

Like many writers, Fonvizin spent a lot of time abroad, in particular in France. His work as an adviser to the office is accompanied by the writing of a large number of journalistic texts, for example, "Discourse on the indispensable state laws", as well as work on translations that allowed the Russian reader to get acquainted with the works of Rousseau, Ovid and even Walter.

Personal life

Little is known about the writer's personal life. His wife's name was Katerina Ivanovna Rogovikova, she was from the family of a wealthy merchant. Children are not mentioned in his biography.

It is only known that he was an exemplary family man, so all his works are instructive. In matters of family and marriage, he was categorical: a woman is adorned with fidelity, piety and education, and a man with virtue, strength and wisdom.

last years of life

IN last years life, spending time traveling abroad in Europe, the writer will face a disease that is too tough for the medicine of those years. The first apoplectic gift will be enough for him, because of which he will be forced to return to Russia.

The role of Fonvizin as a playwright and author of satirical essays in the development of Russian literature is enormous, just like the fruitful influence he had on many Russian writers not only in the 18th, but also in the first half of the 19th century. Not only the political progressiveness of Fonvizin's work, but also his artistic progressiveness determined the deep respect and interest in him that Pushkin quite clearly showed.

Elements of realism arose in Russian literature of the 1770s-1790s simultaneously in its various sections and in various ways. Such was the main trend in the development of the Russian aesthetic worldview of that time, which prepared - at the first stage - its future Pushkin stage. But Fonvizin did more in this direction than others, if we do not talk about Radishchev, who came after him and not without dependence on him. creative discoveries, because it was Fonvizin who first raised the question of realism as a principle, as a system of understanding of man and society.

On the other hand, realistic moments in the work of Fonvizin were most often limited to his satirical task. It was precisely the negative phenomena of reality that he was able to understand in a realistic way, and this narrowed not only the scope of the topics embodied by him in a new manner discovered by him, but also narrowed the very principledness of his posing the question. In this regard, Fonvizin is included in the tradition of the “satirical trend”, as Belinsky called it, which is a characteristic phenomenon of Russian literature of the 18th century. This direction is peculiar and almost earlier than it could be in the West, prepared the formation of a style critical realism. By itself, it grew in the depths of Russian classicism; it was associated with the specific forms that classicism acquired in Russia; it eventually exploded the principles of classicism, but its origin from it is obvious.

Fonvizin grew up as a writer in the literary environment of Russian noble classicism of the 1760s, in the school of Sumarokov and Kheraskov. Throughout his life, his artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the influence of this school. The rationalistic understanding of the world, characteristic of classicism, is strongly reflected in the work of Fonvizin. And for him, a person is most often not so much a specific individuality as a unit in social classification, and for him, a political dreamer, the public, the state can completely absorb the personal in the image of a person. The high pathos of social duty, subordinating in the mind of the writer interests to the “too human” in a person, and Fonvizin forced him to see in his hero a scheme of civic virtues and vices; because he, like other classics, understood the state itself and the very duty to the state not historically, but mechanically, to the extent of the metaphysical limitations of the Enlightenment worldview of the 18th century in general. Hence, Fonvizin was characterized by the great virtues of the classicism of his century: both clarity, clarity of analysis of a person as a general social concept, and the scientific character of this analysis at the level of scientific achievements of his time, and the social principle of evaluating human actions and moral categories. But Fonvizin was also characterized by the inevitable shortcomings of classicism: the schematism of abstract classifications of people and moral categories, the mechanistic idea of ​​a person as a conglomerate of abstractly conceivable "abilities", the mechanistic and abstract nature of the very idea of ​​the state as the norm of social life.

In Fonvizin, many characters are built not according to the law of an individual character, but according to a predetermined and limited scheme of moral and social norms. We see the quarrel, and only the quarrel of the Counsellor; gallomaniac Ivanushka, - and the whole composition of his role is built on one or two notes; martinet Brigadier, but, apart from martial arts, there is little in him characteristic features. Such is the method of classicism - to show not living people, but individual vices or feelings, to show not life, but a scheme of social relationships. Characters in comedies, in satirical essays by Fonvizin are schematized. The very tradition of calling them "meaningful" names grows on the basis of a method that reduces the content of a character's characteristic mainly to the very trait that is fixed by his name. The bribe-taker Vzyatkin appears, the fool Slaboumov, the “Khalda” Khaldin, the tomboy Sorvantsov, the truth-seeker Pravdin, etc. At the same time, the task of the artist is not so much the depiction of individual people as the depiction of social relations, and this task could and was performed brilliantly by Fonvizin. Social relations, understood in relation to the ideal norm of the state, determined the content of a person only by the criteria of this norm. The subjectively noble nature of the norm of state life, built by the Sumarokov-Panin school, also determined a feature characteristic of Russian classicism: it organically divides all people into nobles and "others." The characteristics of the nobles include signs of their abilities, moral inclinations, feelings, etc. - Pravdin or Skotinin, Milon or Prostakov, Dobrolyubov or Durykin; such is the differentiation of their characteristics in the text of the respective works. On the contrary, the “other”, “non-noble” are characterized primarily by their profession, estate, place in the system of society - Kuteikin, Tsyfirkin, Tsezurkin, etc. Nobles for this system of thought are still people par excellence; or - with Fonvizin - on the contrary: the best people should be nobles, and the Durykins should be nobles only in name; the rest act as carriers common features their social affiliation, assessed positively or negatively depending on the attitude of this social category to the political concept of Fonvizin, or Sumarokov, Kheraskov, etc.

For a classicist writer, the very attitude to tradition, to settled roles-masks is typical. literary work, to habitual and constantly repeating stylistic formulas, which represent the settled collective experience of mankind (characteristic here is the author’s anti-individualistic attitude towards creative process). And Fonvizin freely operates with such ready-made formulas and masks given to him by a ready-made tradition. Dobrolyubov in "The Brigadier" repeats Sumarokov's ideal love comedies, the clerk's adviser came to Fonvizin from satirical articles and comedies of the same Sumarokov, just as the petitress-Counselor had already figured in plays and articles before Fonvizin's comedy. Fonvizin, within his classical method, does not look for new individual themes. The world seems to him long ago dissected, decomposed into typical features, society - a classified “reason”, predetermined assessments and frozen configurations of “abilities” and social masks. The very genres have stood their ground, prescribed by rules and demonstrated by examples. A satirical article, a comedy, a solemn laudatory speech of a high style (Fonvizin has "A word for Paul's recovery"), etc. - everything is unshakable and does not require the invention of the author, his task in this direction is to inform Russian literature of the best achievements of world literature; this task of enriching Russian culture was solved by Fonvizin the more successfully because he understood and felt the specific features of Russian culture itself, which refracted in its own way what came from the West.

Seeing in a person not a personality, but a unit of the social or moral scheme of society, Fonvizin, in his classical manner, is antipsychological in an individual sense. He writes an obituary-biography of his teacher and friend Nikita Panin; in this article there is a hot political thought, the rise of political pathos; is in it and achievement list hero, there is also a civil glorification of him; but there is no person, personality, environment in it, in the end - a biography. This is a “life”, a scheme of an ideal life, not of a saint, of course, but of a politician, as Fonvizin understood him. Fonvizin's anti-psychological manner is even more noticeable in his memoirs. They are called "A sincere confession in my deeds and thoughts", but disclosures inner life almost none in these memoirs. Meanwhile, Fonvizin himself puts his memoirs in connection with Rousseau's "Confession", although he immediately characteristically contrasts his intention with the intention of the latter. In his memoirs, Fonvizin is a brilliant writer of everyday life and a satirist, first of all; the individualistic autodiscovery brilliantly resolved by Rousseau's book is alien to him. Memoirs in his hands turn into a series of moralizing sketches such as satirical letters-articles of journalism of the 1760s-1780s. At the same time, they give an exceptional picture of social life in its negative manifestations in terms of the richness of witty details, and this is their great merit. The people of Fonvizin-classic are static. Brigadier, Counselor, Ivanushka, Julitta (in the early "Undergrowth"), etc. - all of them are given from the very beginning and do not develop in the process of the movement of the work. In the first act of The Brigadier, in the exposition, the characters themselves directly and unequivocally determine all the traits of their schema-characters, and later on we see only comic combinations and clashes of the same traits, and these clashes are not reflected in the internal structure of each role. Then the verbal definition of masks is characteristic of Fonvizin. The soldier's speech of the Brigadier, the clerk's speech of the Counselor, the petimeter speech of Ivanushka, in essence, exhaust the characterization. minus speech characteristics no other individual human traits remain. And they all make jokes: fools and smart ones, evil and kind, because the heroes of The Brigadier are still the heroes of a classic comedy, and everything in it should be funny and “intricate”, and Boileau himself demanded from the author of the comedy “that he words were everywhere abounding in witticisms” (“Poetic Art”). It was a strong, powerful system artistic thinking, which gave a significant aesthetic effect in its specific forms and superbly realized not only in The Brigadier, but also in Fonvizin's satirical articles.

Fonvizin remains a classic in a genre that flourished in a different, pre-romantic literary and ideological environment, in artistic memoirs. He adheres to the external canons of classicism in his comedies. They basically follow the rules of the school. Fonvizin is most often alien and interested in the plot side of the work.

In Fonvizin, in a number of works: in the early "Undergrowth", in "The Choice of a Tutor" and in "The Brigadier", in the story "Calisthenes" the plot is only a frame, more or less conditional. The Brigadier, for example, is constructed as a series of comic scenes, and above all a series of declarations of love: Ivanushka and the Counsellor, the Counselor and the Brigadier, the Brigadier and the Counsellor, and all these pairs are opposed not so much in the movement of the plot, but in the plane of schematic contrast, a pair of exemplary lovers: Dobrolyubov and Sophia. There is almost no action in comedy; "The Brigadier" is very reminiscent in terms of construction of Sumarokov's farces with a gallery of comic characters.

However, even the most convinced, most zealous classicist in Russian noble literature, Sumarokov, found it difficult, perhaps even impossible, not to see at all and not to depict the specific features of reality, to remain only in the world created by reason and the laws of abstract art. First of all, dissatisfaction with the real, real world obliged us to leave this world. For the Russian noble classicist, the concrete individual reality of social reality, which is so different from the ideal norm, is evil; it invades, as a deviation from this norm, the world of the rationalistic ideal; it cannot be framed in reasonable, abstract forms. But it exists - both Sumarokov and Fonvizin know this. Society lives an abnormal, "irrational" life. This has to be dealt with and fought. positive developments in public life both for Sumarokov and Fonvizin they are normal and reasonable. Negative ones fall out of the scheme and appear in all their individuality, painful for a classicist. Hence, in the satirical genres, as early as Sumarokov, in Russian classicism, the desire is born to show the concrete-real features of reality. Thus, in Russian classicism, the reality of a concrete life fact arose as satirical theme, with a sign of a certain, condemning author's attitude.

Fonvizin's position on this issue is more complicated. tension political struggle pushed him to more radical steps in relation to the perception and depiction of reality, hostile to him, surrounding him from all sides, threatening his entire worldview. The struggle activated his vital vigilance. He raises the question of the social activity of a citizen writer, of the impact on life, more acute than noble writers before him could do. “In the court of the king, whose autocracy is not limited by anything ... can the truth be freely expressed? "- writes Fonvizin in the story" Calisthenes ". And here is the task before him - to explain the truth. A new ideal of a writer-fighter arises, very reminiscent of the ideal of a leading figure in literature and journalism of the Western enlightenment movement. Fonvizin approaches the bourgeois-progressive thought of the West on the basis of his liberalism, rejection of tyranny and slavery, and the struggle for his social ideal.

Why is there almost no culture of eloquence in Russia, - Fonvizin poses the question in "Friend honest people"and answers that this does not come from the lack of national talent, which is capable of everything great, lower from the lack of the Russian language, whose richness and beauty are convenient for any expression," but from the lack of freedom, the lack of social life, preventing citizens from participating in political life of the country. Art and political activity are closely related to each other. For Fonvizin, the writer is "the guardian of the common good", "a useful adviser to the sovereign, and sometimes the savior of his fellow citizens and the fatherland."

In the early 1760s, in his youth, Fonvizin was fascinated by the ideas of the bourgeois-radical thinkers of France. In 1764, he remade Gresse's Sydney, not quite a comedy, but not a tragedy either, into Russian, a play similar in type to the psychological dramas of eighteenth-century bourgeois literature. in France. In 1769, an English story was published, "Sidney and Scilly, or beneficence and gratitude", translated by Fonvizin from Arno. This is a sentimental work, virtuous, sublime, but built on new principles of individual analysis. Fonvizin is looking for rapprochement with the bourgeois French literature. The struggle with the reaction pushes him onto the path of interest in advanced Western thought. And in his literary work, Fonvizin could not be only a follower of classicism.

The month of April is rich in memorable, significant and historical dates, such as:

In our article we will talk about the wonderful writer D.I. Fonvizin, his work, including the comedy "Undergrowth", which is modern and relevant to this day.

DENIS IVANOVICH FONVIZIN

Fonvizin is widely known as the author of the comedy "Undergrowth", as a bold and brilliant satirist. But the creator of "Undergrowth" was not only large and talented playwright XVIII century. He is one of the founders of Russian prose, a remarkable political writer, a truly great Russian educator, fearlessly, for a quarter of a century, fought with Catherine II.

This side creative activity Fonvizin has not been studied enough, and therefore, first of all, that all the original and translated works of Fonvizin have not yet been collected and published. Thus, the militant-enlightenment nature of his works of art, their place in the public life of Russia on the eve of the appearance of Radishchev's book "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" (1790).

Pushkin was the first to point out that Fonvizin was not only "a ripe ruler of satire", but also a "friend of freedom." This estimate refers to 1823. The poet at that time was in exile in the south. A hater of slavery, he was waiting for changes in the state, knowing full well that "our political freedom is inseparable from the emancipation of the peasants." For Pushkin, the concepts of enlightenment and freedom are equivalent. Only through enlightenment can real, and not paper, freedom be achieved. Pushkin wrote down these thoughts in 1822 in Notes on Russian History of the 18th Century.

At the same time, the noble activity of Russian writers-enlighteners of the 18th century was revealed to him.

Pushkin repeatedly urged the participants in the Decembrist movement to remember their predecessors, to remember, in order to feel support and draw strength from the living, long-begun struggle for the freedom of the fatherland, not by the methods of revolution, but by the methods of education, but they did not come to their senses.

Having resolutely taken the position of enlightenment already in the 60s, Fonvizin subordinated all his talent as an artist to the service of a great goal. The ideology of enlightenment raised him to the crest of the indomitably emerging Russian liberation movement. The advanced ideology determined his aesthetic searches, his artistic achievements, his decisive convergence of literature with reality.

Pushkin's assessment is surprisingly concise, historically specific and accurate. Gogol noted this feature of Pushkin's artistic talent, his

the extraordinary art of denoting the whole subject with a few features: Pushkin's epithet is so clear and bold, he wrote, that sometimes one replaces the whole description.

Fonvizin's definition of "a friend of freedom" "meant the whole subject. It should serve as the basis for the "whole description" of his life, his work, his activities.

WRITER'S BIOGRAPHY

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born on April 3, 1745. Fonvizin’s father, a middle-class landowner, was, according to the writer, “a virtuous man”, “loved the truth”, “did not tolerate lies”, “hated covetousness”, “no one saw him in the front nobles”. The mother “had a subtle mind and saw far with soulful eyes. Her heart was compassionate and contained no malice in itself; she was a virtuous wife, a loving mother, a prudent mistress, and a magnanimous mistress.”

Fonvizin spent the first ten years in the family. Here he learned to read and write. His mentor was his father, who "read all Russian books", "ancient and Roman history, opinions of Cicero and other good translations of moral books."

The opening of the first Russian university in 1755 changed the fate of Fonvizin. The writer's father, not being able to hire foreign language teachers, as required by the noble fashion, took advantage of the opportunity to give his son a real education.

did not hesitate, one might say, not a day to send me and my brother to the university, as soon as it became established,

The writer testifies. Fonvizin was enrolled in the Latin school of the noble gymnasium, which prepared for admission to the university. After graduating from the gymnasium in the spring of 1762, he was transferred to the students.

In his gymnasium years, Fonvizin began to engage in literary translations.

My inclination to writing was still in infancy, - the writer recalled, - and I, practicing translations into Russian language reached adolescence.

"Exercises in translations" took place under the guidance of Professor Reichel (he taught general history and German), In 1762, in the university magazine "Collection the best essays to the dissemination of knowledge and to the production of pleasures, some translations were published: “Mr. Menander’s research on the mirrors of the ancients”, “The bargaining of the seven muses”. By the same time, the beginning of work on the translation of Voltaire's tragedy "Alzira" also dates back.

YEARS IN PETERSBURG

In 1760, the director of the university took the best students to the capital to present them to the curator I. I. Shuvalov. Among the best was Fonvizin. During his stay in St. Petersburg, he got to see a play recently (in 1756) created by the Russian theater. “The action produced in me by the theater is almost impossible to describe,” the writer later recalled. First impressions determined the fate of Fonvizin. Upon his return to Moscow, he attended with great interest the performances of the Locatelli Theater, in which the university troupe played. After moving to St. Petersburg in 1762, Fonvizin forever associates himself with the Russian theater.

On June 28, 1762, the wife of Peter III, Ekaterina Alekseevna, relying on the guards regiments, made a coup. The political inspirer of the coup was the tutor of Paul's heir, Nikita Panin. The demands of the noble liberals, led by Panin, boiled down to the establishment of a constitution.

It was at this time that the fate of Fonvizin suddenly changed, and he unexpectedly found himself close to political affairs in the state, to the court, to the struggle that was in full swing around the new empress. Vice-Chancellor Golitsyn decided the student Fonvizin, who was excellent at foreign languages, take an interpreter to a foreign collegium. In October 1762, Fonvizin filed a petition in the name of Catherine. With a petition, he attaches samples of translations from three languages ​​- Latin, French and German. Noteworthy are translations from Latin - M. Tullius Cicero "Speech for Marcel" and from French - "Political Discourse on the Number of Inhabitants of Some Ancient Nations". Fonvizin passed the test not only as a translator. The “materials” he chose for translations testified to the political interests of the student.

Chancellor M. I. Vorontsov, who led the foreign collegium, noticed the talent of the young translator and brought him closer to himself. As Fonvizin later recalled, the chancellor "gave the most important papers to me for translation." Among the "most important" were various political writings. Having become acquainted with one of these French works, Fonvizin made a short essay, titled it "Abstract on the Liberty of the French Nobility and the Usefulness of the Third Rank."

Having outlined the content of the treatise, Fonvizin, deeply understanding the great importance of the "third rank" in the economic and social life of the country, writes that "this third rank is not difficult to establish in Russia." Further, he outlines his plan for the social revival of the fatherland. "The third rank is one with the people." It is necessary to encourage the activity of all those who "strive about manufactories, establish exchanges of things, evaluate goods", - all merchants, artists and artisans. They must all be given free will. Merchants and "glorious artists" "dismissal" to sell. The university accepts the children of peasants, and whoever learns the "higher sciences" must be freed from serfdom according to the certificate.

When, - says Fonvizin, - everyone is able to practice in what he has a talent for, they will all make up an insensitive body of the third rank with the rest of the liberated.

An important part of the plan for social transformation is the question of the peasantry. Fonvizin against slavery. But he believes that it is impossible to free the serfs immediately. Now we need to limit serfdom, increase the rights of the peasants (to allow them to study at universities, to allow them to engage in any business with the right to leave the village, etc.) and thereby gradually prepare their complete liberation. Fonvizin believes that a free peasant will be richer and will find more ways to pay dues. At the end of the article, Fonvizin succinctly outlined the swap plan:

In a word, in Russia there should be: 1) a nobility, completely free, 2) a third rank, completely freed, and 3) a people practicing agriculture - although not completely free, but at least having the hope of being free when they are. farmers or such artists (artisans), so that in time they could bring to perfection the villages or manufactories of their masters.

The program of social transformations developed by Fonvizin was of a bourgeois liberation character. As an educator, he believes in the possibility of its peaceful implementation. The question of who and how can implement this program has not yet been resolved. Fonvizin will give an answer to it in a few years.

In early October 1763, by decree of Ekaterina Fonvizin, "being listed with a foreign collegium", "to be for some cases with our state adviser Elagin." I.P. Yelagin was in the Empress's office "to accept petitions." In addition, he was in charge of theaters. Elagin was not only a dignitary, but also an educated person, amateurishly engaged in poetry, dramaturgy, translations, history ....

But court life weighed on Fonvizin. His letters to his sister in Moscow are filled with complaints:

Today there is a masquerade at the court, and I will drag myself there in my domino; … boring; ... yesterday I was at the Kurtag, and, I don’t know what, I felt so sad that I left without waiting for the end; ... from the kurtag came home embarrassed; ... there were an awful lot of people, but I swear to you that I, with all that, was in the desert. There was hardly a single person with whom I would consider talking even for a small pleasure.

It is almost impossible to live in the world, and in Petersburg it is absolutely impossible.

In another letter, Fonvizin clarified his thought:

An honest person cannot live in circumstances that are not based on honor.

FEATURES OF FONVIZIN'S CREATIVITY

Despite the troublesome court service, Fonvizin worked hard and hard during these years. The main thing was translations.

The most important feature of the development of Russian social thought in the 18th century was the formation of an educational ideology. Not the bourgeoisie, but the nobility put forward the first enlighteners from their midst. This Enlightenment was not bourgeois, but noble.

In the 60s of the XVIII century, at the time of intensified peasant protest, on the eve of the Pugachev uprising, the enlightenment ideology finally took shape. Enlighteners such as philosopher Yakov Kozelsky, writer and publisher Nikolai Novikov, popularizer of educational ideology, Professor Nikolai Kurganov appeared on the public arena. In the same decade, Fonvizin also took the position of enlightenment.

Enlightenment, as an anti-feudal ideology, has its own characteristic and unique features. Hostility to serfdom and all its offspring in the economic, social and legal fields, the defense of education, freedom and, finally, upholding the interests of the people - these are the main features of enlightenment.

In The Brigadier, Fonvizin laughs merrily at the ugliness of life. Sometimes we smile when we see Frenchmania or the idiotically meaningless life of an idler. But in most cases, the behavior of Ivanushka, his speech causes indignation and indignation. When he, a "fool" according to his father, declares:

I owe... to the French coachman for my love for France and for my coldness towards the Russians,... or: my body was born in Russia, it is true, but my spirit belongs to the French crown,... or: I am a most unfortunate person. I have been living for twenty-five years and have a father and a mother.

Or when he is engaged in dirty loving courtship of someone else's wife - not a smile, but anger arises in the soul of the viewer and reader. And this is the merit of the playwright - the image of Ivan is built sharply satirically and accusatory. Ivans - the young generation of Russian noble serfs - are the enemies of Fonvizin.

The Brigadier is a comedy, and the first comedy is truly Russian, and the first comedy is truly merry. Pushkin highly valued gaiety and was extremely sorry that there were so few truly merry writings in Russian literature. That is why he lovingly noted this feature of Fonvizin's talent, pointing to the direct continuity of the dramaturgy of Fonvizin and Gogol. Speaking of Gogol's Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka, Pushkin wrote:

How amazed we were at the Russian book that made us laugh, we who have not laughed since the time of Fonvizin.

Pushkin's comparison of Gogol and Fonvizin is not accidental. Gogol, the creator of Russian realistic comedy, is closely associated with Fonvizin. Fonvizin began what Gogol completed. In particular, Fonvizin was the first to take a decisive step towards realism and in the field of the comic. "The Brigadier" was written during the heyday of Russian noble classicism.

In 1777, Fonvizin publishes a translation of the political work of the French enlightener Tom, “Eulogy to Marcus Aurelius”, prepared by him.

In September 1777, Fonvizin went to France, upon his return from which Fonvizin began work on a new comedy, which he called "Undergrowth".

COMEDY "NEDOROSL"

"Undergrowth" - central essay Fonvizin, the pinnacle of Russian dramaturgy of the 18th century, is organically associated with ideological issues"Reasoning".

For Pushkin, "Undergrowth" is a "folk comedy." Belinsky, who by the 1940s had developed a revolutionary-democratic understanding of nationality, declared that "Undergrowth", "Woe from Wit" and "Inspector General" "in a short time became popular dramatic plays."

The main conflict in the socio-political life of Russia - the arbitrariness of the landlords, supported by the highest authority, and the serfs without rights - becomes the theme of a comedy. In a dramatic work, the theme is revealed with special power of persuasiveness in the development of the plot, in action, in the struggle. The only dramatic conflict of the "Undergrowth" is the struggle between the progressive-minded advanced nobles Pravdin and Starodum and the feudal lords - the Prostakovs and Skotinin.

In the comedy, Fonvizin shows the pernicious consequences of slavery, which should confirm to the viewer the moral correctness of Pravdin, the need to fight the Skotinins and Prostakovs. The consequences of slavery are truly terrible.

The peasants of the Prostakovs are completely ruined. Even Prostakova herself does not know what to do next:

Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we can no longer tear anything off. Such trouble!

Slavery turns the peasants into slaves, completely killing in them all human traits, all the dignity of the individual. With special force it comes through in the courtyards. Fonvizin created an image of enormous power - the slaves of Eremeevna.

An old woman, Mitrofan's nanny, she lives the life of a dog: insults, kicks and beatings - that's what befell her. She has long since lost human name, her name is only abusive nicknames: "beast", "old grunt", "dog's daughter", "scum". Outrages, reproach and humiliation made Eremeevna a serf, a watchdog of his mistress, who humbly licks the hand of the owner who beat her.

In the person of Pravdin and Starodum for the first time appeared on the stage goodies who act to put their ideals into practice. Who are Pravdin and Starodum, who bravely fight against the feudal lords Prostakov and Skotinin? Why were they able to interfere not only in the course of the action of the comedy, but, in essence, in the political life of the state?

As a folk work, the comedy "Undergrowth" naturally reflected the most important and acute problems of Russian life. The lack of rights of the Russian serfs, reduced to the status of slaves, given into the full possession of the landowners, manifested itself with particular force precisely in the 80s. The complete, boundless, monstrous arbitrariness of the landlords could not but arouse feelings of protest among the progressive people of their era. Not sympathizing with the revolutionary methods of action, moreover, rejecting them, at the same time they could not but protest against the slave-owning and despotic in relation to common people regime of Catherine II. That is why the response to the police regime established by Catherine and Potemkin was the intensification of social activity and the subordination of creativity to the tasks of political satire of such noble educators as Fonvizin, Novikov, Krylov, Krechetov. At the end of the decade, Radishchev will publish his books, directly expressing the aspirations and moods of the serfs.

The second theme of "Undergrowth" was the struggle of noble educators with slave owners and the despotic government of Catherine II after the defeat of the Pugachev uprising.

Pravdin, not wanting to be limited to indignation, takes real steps to limit the power of the landlords and, as we know from the play's finale, achieves this. Pravdin acts in this way because he believes that his struggle against the slave owners, supported by the governor, is "thereby fulfilling the philanthropic types of the supreme power," that is, Pravdin is deeply convinced of the enlightened nature of Catherine's autocracy. He declares himself to be the executor of his will - this is the case at the beginning of the comedy.

That is why Pravdin, knowing Starodum, demands from him that he go to serve at the court.

With your rules, people should not be let go from the court, but they must be called to the court.

The old man is perplexed:

Summon? What for?

And Pravdin, true to his convictions, declares:

Then, why do they call a doctor to the sick.

And then Starodum, a politician who has already realized that faith in Catherine is not only naive, but also destructive, explains to Pravdin:

My friend, you are wrong. It is in vain to call a doctor to the sick is incurable: here the doctor will not help, unless he himself becomes infected.

Fonvizin forces Starodum to explain not only to Pravdin, but also to the audience that faith in Catherine is meaningless, that the legend of her enlightened rule is false, that Catherine approved a despotic form of government, that it is thanks to her policy that slavery can flourish in Russia, the cruel Skotinins and Prostakovs can be in charge , which directly refer to the royal decrees on the freedom of the nobility.

Pravdin and Starodum, in their worldview, are pupils of the Russian Enlightenment. Two major political issues determined the program of the enlighteners at that time: a) the need to abolish serfdom by peaceful means (reform, education, etc.); b) Catherine is not an enlightened monarch, but a despot and inspirer of the policy of slavery, and therefore it is necessary to fight against her (although it must be said that supporting the second process, many worked for the revolutionaries).

"Undergrowth" was met with open hostility by the government and the ideologists of the nobility. The comedy was completed in 1781. It immediately became clear that it was almost impossible to place it. A stubborn, dull struggle between Fonvizin and the government for staging a comedy began.

CREATIVITY IN RECENT YEARS

On March 7, 1782, Fonvizin filed a petition addressed to Catherine to be "dismissed from service." Three days later, the Empress signed a decree of resignation. Fonvizin defiantly refused to serve Catherine, deciding to devote all his strength to literary activity. After writing "Undergrowth", his attention is increasingly drawn to prose. He wants to write small satirical prose works. It would be best to print them in periodical. This is how the idea of ​​own satirical magazine arises. Unexpected circumstances, which made it possible to take part in the newly opened magazine in the capital, forced us to postpone the plan of organizing our own magazine for a while.

Since May 1783, the magazine "Interlocutor of Lovers of the Russian Word" began to appear. Its official editor was Princess E.R. Dashkov. Behind the scenes, Catherine herself was engaged in the journal, publishing her historical and satirical writings. Fonvizin decided to take part in the journal and publish anonymously several satirical works. The writer gave battle to the empress on her own foothold.

Of all the works of Fonvizin published in the "Interlocutor", the largest public importance had a peculiar form of political satire: "Several questions that can arouse special attention in smart and honest people." "Nedorosl" has already put before smart and honest people several important questions concerning the life of the Russian state.

In 1783, Fonvizin won the battle with Catherine, which he fought on the pages of the Interlocutor. The empress, who suffered a defeat, decided to take cruel revenge on the impudent writer, and, having learned the name of the author of the “free-language” questions, she, as evidenced by the facts, instructed the police to no longer print Fonvizin’s new works.

In the summer of 1784, Fonvizin left for Italy. Visiting Florence, Livorno, Rome, Fonvizin studied italian theater, music and especially the famous painting of Italy. As during his trip to France, he keeps a journal, which he sends in the form of letters to his sister in Moscow, as before.

Return to Russia in August 1785 was overshadowed by a serious illness. Having reached Moscow, Fonvizin went to bed for a long time - he was paralyzed.

A year later, the doctors demanded that Fonvizin leave for treatment in Karlsbad. Only in September 1787 Fonvizin returned to St. Petersburg. It was not possible to fully restore his health, but nevertheless, after a long treatment, the writer felt better - he began to walk, speech returned. Having rested after a tiring trip, Fonvizin set to work. He decided to publish his own satirical magazine, calling it "Friend of honest people, or Starodum." The roll call with the "Undergrowth" was not accidental: the sick writer was preparing for a new duel with the almighty empress.

Such a journal, of course, could not be printed. Presented to the police, he was banned. The name of the publisher was known - this is "the writer of the Undergrowth." After "Undergrowth" and "A Few Questions" published in "Interlocutor", after "The Life of N.I. Panin" Ekaterina decided to put an end to the activities of Fonvizin as a writer, forbidding him to publish. But the writer hated by Catherine did not let up and in the new magazine he bravely took on the mission of being "the guardian of the common good." Undoubtedly, the police were instructed not to allow Fonvizin's new writings to be printed anymore. That is why the "Friend of honest people, or Starodum" was banned.

The last years of Fonvizin's life were spent in a cruel and tragic struggle with the empress. He selflessly and inventively searched for ways to the reader. That is why, immediately after the magazine was banned, Fonvizin decides to publish a complete collection of his works, which would include all the works intended for The Friend of Honest People. But the collected works were banned in the same 1788. Then Fonvizin decided to publish a new magazine, already in Moscow, and not alone, but in collaboration with other writers. The journal was to be called Moscow Works. Fonvizin had already worked out his program, but this magazine did not see the light either.

During 1791 he suffered four strokes of apoplexy.

At the same time, apparently, the last work was begun - autobiographical story"Sincere confessions in my deeds and thoughts." The example of the great Rousseau, who wrote his autobiography Confession, inspired him. The surviving fragments of The Sincere Confession testify that when a great writer began to describe in detail the affairs of his youth, a satirist woke up in him again, who maliciously and mercilessly ridiculed the mores of noble society.

Until his death, Fonvizin worked, lived actively, intensely, in close connection with contemporary writers. In the late 80s, he establishes a relationship with a young translator and publisher, Peter Bogdanovich. He agreed with him to publish complete collection their writings. Despite his illness, the writer prepared 5 volumes of this collection, including again the forbidden articles from The Friend of Honest People. This is the best evidence that Fonvizin did not repent of anything at the end of his life and still wanted to fight Catherine and serve his fatherland with his satirical and political writings. When this edition, almost completed, was banned, Fonvizin, realizing that his days were numbered, handed over all the manuscripts to Pyotr Bogdanovich for publication in the future.

CONCLUSION

Bright, deeply original, "from the trans-Russian Russian", according to Pushkin, Fonvizin's talent manifested itself with the greatest force in the language. Fonvizin, a brilliant master of the language, with a great sense of the word, created figurative speech unparalleled before him in richness, freshness and courage, imbued with irony and gaiety. This skill was reflected in comedy, and in prose writings, and in many letters from France and Italy.

Speaking about the state of young Russian prose literature early XIX century, Pushkin wrote that she was still forced to "create turns of words to explain the most ordinary concepts." On this path, it was absolutely necessary to overcome the influence of Karamzin and his school, who left a legacy of "mannership, timidity and pallor." And the dramatic and prose works of Fonvizin, and especially letters from abroad, played a huge, hitherto unappreciated role in the struggle for the “naked simplicity” of Russian prose.

It was here that, with amazing ease and skill, Fonvizin created turns of words to explain concepts, both the most ordinary and the most complex. Simply and efficiently, concretely and vividly, in a truly Russian style, Fonvizin wrote about the life of foreign peoples, about "political matters", about art and economics, about Russian nobles abroad - their behavior, actions, characters, and about European philosophy, theater life Paris, and about roads, taverns and festivities, about museums, religious holidays and theatrical papal service. Belinsky rightly called these letters "efficient", testifying that Fonvizina:

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is the author of the famous comedies "Undergrowth", "Brigadier", which still do not go down with theater stage, and many other satirical works. According to his convictions, Fonvizin belonged to the educational movement, so noble malice was the leading theme of his dramaturgy. Fonvizin managed to create a vivid and surprisingly true picture of the moral degradation of the nobility at the end of the 18th century and sharply condemn the reign of Catherine P. The role of the writer as a playwright and author of satirical essays is enormous.

The special Russian warehouse of Fonvizin's humor, the special Russian bitterness of laughter, sounding in his works and born of the socio-political conditions of feudal Russia, were understandable and dear to those who traced their literary pedigree from the author of The Undergrowth. A. I. Herzen, a passionate and tireless fighter against autocracy and serfdom, believed that Fonvizin’s laughter “resounded far away and woke up a whole phalanx of great scoffers.”

A feature of Fonvizin's work is the organic combination in most of his works of satirical witticism with a socio-political orientation. Fonvizin's strength lies in his literary and civic honesty and directness. He boldly and directly opposed the social injustice, ignorance and prejudices of his class and his era, exposed the landlord and autocratic-bureaucratic arbitrariness.

Fonvizin's comedy "Undergrowth" is directed against "those moral ignoramuses who, having their full power over people, use it for evil inhumanly." This comedy, from the first to the last days of the scene, is constructed in such a way that it is clear to the viewer or reader: unlimited power over the peasants is a source of parasitism, a petty tyrant.

And, abnormal relations in the family, moral deformity, ugly upbringing and ignorance. The undersized Mitrofanushka does not need to study or prepare himself for public service, because he has hundreds of serfs who will provide him with a well-fed life. This is how his grandfather lived, this is how his parents live, so why shouldn't he spend his life in idleness and pleasure?

Without doubting the power of laughter, Fonvizin turned it into a formidable weapon. But in the comedy "Undergrowth" he also introduced the features of the "serious genre", introducing the images of "bearers of virtue": Starodum and Pravdin. He also complicated the traditional positive images of lovers - Sophia and Milo. They are entrusted with the thoughts and feelings of the playwright himself and people close to him in terms of views. They talk about what is dear to the author himself: about the need to instill in a person from childhood a sense of duty, love for the motherland, honesty, truthfulness, self-esteem, respect for people, contempt for baseness, flattery, inhumanity.

The playwright managed to describe all the essential aspects of the life and customs of the feudal-serf society of the second half of the 18th century. He created expressive portraits of representatives of the feudal lords, opposing them, on the one hand, to the progressive nobility, and on the other, to representatives of the people.

Trying to give brightness and credibility to the characters, Fonvizin endowed his characters, especially negative ones, with an individualized language. The characters in "Undergrowth" each speak in their own way, their speech is different both in terms of lexical composition and intonation. Such a careful selection of language means for each of the characters helps the author to more fully and reliably reveal their appearance. Fonvizin makes extensive use of the richness of the living folk language. The proverbs and sayings that are used in the play give its language a special simplicity and expressiveness: “All guilt is to blame”, “Live for a century, learn for a century”, “Guilty without guilt”, “I will do you good”, “Ends in the water”, etc. The author also uses colloquial and even swear words and expressions, particles and adverbs: “until tomorrow”, “uncle-de”, “first”, “which is to say”, etc.

The richness of the language means of the comedy "Undergrowth" suggests that Fonvizin had an excellent command of the dictionary of folk speech and was well acquainted with folk art.

Thus, distinctive features comedies "Undergrowth" are the relevance of the topic, denunciation of serfdom. The realism of the created picture of the life and customs of the depicted era and the living colloquial. By the sharpness of the satirical teaching of the feudal system, this comedy is rightfully considered

A more outstanding dramatic work of Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century.

Although the modern reader is separated from the era of Fonvizin by two whole centuries, it is difficult to find a person who would not know that “undergrowth” is an overgrown dropout, or would not hear the remarks turned into sayings “I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”, “why geography when there are cabbies” and other Fonvizin expressions.

images, winged words and jokes from Fonvizin's comedies "Foreman" and "Undergrowth" have become part of our vocabulary. In the same way, Fonvizin's ideas, which played an important role in the history of the liberation movement, were passed on from generation to generation.

Fonvizin belonged to a generation of young nobles who were educated at the Moscow University, created on the initiative of Lomonosov. In 1755, he was assigned to the university gymnasium, which prepared his pupils for transfer to students, and studied there until 1762.

The university was the center literary life in Moscow. One of the first activities of the university was the publication of Lomonosov's works, his students taught here - the poet and translator N. N. Popovsky, the philologist A. A. Barsov, and publishing M. M. Kheraskov was in charge.

There was a theater at the university, the repertoire of which included translations of pupils of the gymnasium. Their literary exercises were eagerly printed by the journals Useful Amusement and Collected Best Works published at the university. It is not surprising that, in addition to Fonvizin, many subsequently famous writers left the gymnasium - N. I. Novikov, F. A. Kozlovsky, the Karin brothers, A. A. Rzhevsky and others.

First literary works Fonvizin had translations from German and French. He publishes translated articles in university journals and at the same time publishes a separate book, Moral Fables by the Danish educator and satirist L. Golberg (1761), and also begins translating J. Terrason’s multi-volume novel Heroic Virtue, or the Life of Seth, King of Egypt (1762— 1768), whose hero was an ideal enlightened sovereign.

The educational and political ideas of Terrason were positively evaluated by the French enlighteners. Fonvizin also tries his hand at dramatic poetry, starting to translate Voltaire's anti-clerical tragedy Alzira.

This list of works that interested the young writer testifies to his early interest in the ideas European Enlightenment. The liberal beginning of the reign of Catherine II aroused hopes among the advanced part of the nobility for the establishment of an "enlightened" monarchy in Russia.

At the end of 1762, Fonvizin left the university and was assigned as a translator to the Collegium of Foreign Affairs. He stayed directly at the College for only a year, and then was seconded to the office of the secretary of state of the Empress I.P. Elagin.

A serious political education of Fonvizin began in the capital. He was aware of various opinions about the proposed reforms, those disputes that preceded such important events in the history of Russian social thought as the Free economic society on the condition of the serfs (1766) and the convening of a Commission to draw up a New Code (1767). In these disputes, the ideology of the Russian Enlightenment was formed. Fonvizin added his voice to those who demanded political freedom and the elimination of serfdom.

About him public opinion during these years, they give an idea of ​​​​the “Reduction on the Liberty of the French Nobility and the Benefits of the Third Rank” and the translation of “The Merchant Nobility” by G.-F. Kouye with a preface by the German jurist I.-G. Justi, published in 1766.

Coyet's goal was to point out how the degrading nobility could once again become a prosperous class. But Fonvizin, apparently, was attracted by the book, first of all, by the sharp criticism of the nobles contained in it, who, in the name of class prejudices, neglect the interests of the state and the nation, as well as the idea that maintaining rigid class partitions is not in the interests of society.

It was this idea that he developed in his handwritten discussion of the establishment of the "third rank" in Russia, which meant the merchants, artisans and the intelligentsia. The new "petty-bourgeois" class was to be gradually composed of serfs who had redeemed themselves and received an education.

So, according to Fonvizin, gradually, peacefully, with the help of laws issued by an enlightened government, the elimination of serfdom, the enlightenment of society and the flourishing of civil life. Russia was becoming a country with a "completely free" nobility, a third rank, "completely liberated" and a people "practicing agriculture, although not completely free, but at least with the hope of being free."

Fonvizin was an educator, but both his belief in enlightened absolutism and in the primordial chosenness of his class were marked with the stamp of aristocratic narrow-mindedness. It should be noted, however, that Fonvizin's early interest in class, and in essence - in social issues, which is also characteristic of his subsequent work, will allow him to more soberly than many of his contemporaries assess the political situation that developed during the reign of Catherine II. .

Later, creating the image of the nobleman Starodum in The Undergrowth, the image to which the author's thoughts and sympathies are given in this play, he will note that his hero made his fortune and achieved independence as an honest industrialist, and not as a cringing courtier. Fonvizin was among the first Russian writers who began to consistently destroy the class partitions of feudal society.

Fonvizin knew the Russian nobility too well to expect support from him in the implementation of the educational program. But he believed in the effectiveness of the propaganda of educational ideas, under the influence of which a new generation of honest sons of the fatherland was to be formed. As he believed, they would become assistants and support of an enlightened sovereign, whose goal would be the welfare of the fatherland and the nation.

Therefore, Fonvizin, a satirist by the nature of his talent, starting from his early works, also promotes a positive ideal of social behavior. Already in the comedy "Korion" (1764), he attacked the nobles who evade service, and in the words of one of the heroes he declared:

Who has put all his efforts to the common good,

And served for the glory of his fatherland,

He tasted direct joy in his life.

"Korion", a free adaptation of the comedy by the French playwright J.-B. Gresse "Sydney", opens the St. Petersburg period of Fonvizin's work. The translation of Voltaire's tragedy "Alzira" (which was distributed in the lists) created a reputation for him as a talented novice author. At the same time, he was accepted into the circle of young playwrights, who were grouped around his immediate superior, I.P. Elagin, a well-known translator and philanthropist.

In this circle there was a theory of "inclination" of foreign works "to Russian customs". Elagin was the first to apply the principle of "inclination" in the play "Jean de Molay, or Russian Frenchman" borrowed from Golberg, and V. I. Lukin consistently formulated it in the prefaces to his comedies.

Until that time, translated plays depicted a way of life that was obscure to the Russian audience, used foreign names. All this, as Lukin wrote, not only destroyed the theatrical illusion, but also reduced the educational impact of the theater. Therefore, the "remaking" of these plays in the Russian way began. "Korion" Fonvizin declared himself as a supporter of national themes in dramaturgy and joined the fight against translators of entertaining plays.

Elagin's circle showed a keen interest in the new genre of "serious comedy", which received theoretical justification in Diderot's articles and conquered European scenes. An attempt, half-hearted and not entirely successful, to introduce the principles of moralistic dramaturgy into Russian literary tradition was already made in Lukin's plays.

But his comedies were devoid of a sense of the comic and, most importantly, resisted the growing penetration of satire into all areas of literature, which a few years later led to the emergence of satirical journalism. Such private themes as a touching depiction of suffering virtue or the correction of a vicious nobleman did not in any way correspond to the political goals of the Russian enlighteners, who raised the question of transforming society as a whole.

Close attention to human behavior in society allowed Fonvizin to understand the foundations of Diderot's enlightening aesthetics more deeply than his contemporaries. The idea of ​​a satirical comedy about the Russian nobility took shape in the atmosphere of disputes around the Commission for the drafting of the New Code, where the majority of the nobles came out in defense of serfdom. In 1769, The Brigadier was completed, and, turning to public satire, Fonvizin finally breaks with the Elagin circle.

History of Russian literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983