Composition on the topic: "The main conflict of the comedy '' Woe from Wit'' ". The main conflict of the comedy ``Woe from Wit`` The main conflict of Woe from Wit

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 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:

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 innovation of the comedy "Woe from Wit"

Comedy A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" is innovative. This is due to the artistic method of comedy. Traditionally, "Woe from Wit" is considered the first Russian realistic play. The main departure from classicist traditions lies in the author's rejection of the unity of action: there is more than one conflict in the comedy Woe from Wit. In the play, two conflicts coexist and flow from one another: love and social. It is advisable to refer to the genre of the play to identify the main conflict in the comedy "Woe from Wit".

The role of love conflict in the comedy "Woe from Wit"

As in the traditional classic play, the comedy Woe from Wit is based on a love affair. However, the genre of this dramatic work is a public comedy. Therefore, social conflict predominates over love.

Nevertheless, the play opens with a love conflict. Already in the exposition of the comedy, a love triangle is drawn. Sophia's nightly meeting with Molchalin in the very first appearance of the first act shows the girl's sensual preferences. Also in the first appearance, the maid Lisa recalls Chatsky, who was once associated with Sophia by youthful love. Thus, a classic love triangle unfolds before the reader: Sofia - Molchalin - Chatsky. But, as soon as Chatsky appears in Famusov's house, a social line begins to develop in parallel with the love one. The plot lines closely interact with each other, and this is the originality of the conflict in the play "Woe from Wit".

To enhance the comic effect of the play, the author introduces two more love triangles into it (Sofya - Molchalin - the maid Lisa; Lisa - Molchalin - the barman Petrush). Sofya, who is in love with Molchalin, does not suspect that the maid Lisa is much dearer to him, which he explicitly hints to Lisa. The maid is in love with the barman Petrusha, but is afraid to confess her feelings to him.

Public conflict in the play and its interaction with the love line

The basis of the social conflict of the comedy was the confrontation between the "current century" and the "past century" - the progressive and conservative nobility. The only representative of the "current century", with the exception of off-stage characters, in the comedy is Chatsky. In his monologues, he passionately adheres to the idea of ​​serving "the cause, not the persons." The moral ideals of the Famus society are alien to him, namely the desire to adapt to circumstances, to “serve” if it helps to get another rank or other material benefits. He appreciates the ideas of the Enlightenment, in conversations with Famusov and other characters he defends science and art. This is a man free from prejudice.

The main representative of the "past century" is Famusov. It concentrated all the vices of the aristocratic society of that time. Most of all, he is concerned about the opinion of the world about himself. After Chatsky's departure from the ball, he is only concerned about "what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say." He admires Colonel Skalozub, a stupid and shallow man who only dreams of "getting" himself a general's rank. This is what Famusov would like to see as his son-in-law, because Skalozub has the main advantage recognized by the world - money. With rapture, Famusov talks about his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who, during an awkward fall at the reception of the Empress, was "granted with the highest smile." Admiration, according to Famusov, is worthy of the uncle's ability to "serve": in order to amuse those present and the monarch, he fell two more times, but this time on purpose. Famusov is sincerely afraid of the progressive views of Chatsky, because they threaten the usual way of life of the conservative nobility.

It should be noted that the clash between the "current century" and the "past century" is not at all a conflict between fathers and children of "Woe from Wit". For example, Molchalin, being a representative of the generation of "children", shares the views of the Famus society on the need to make useful contacts and skillfully use them to achieve their goals. He has the same reverent love for awards and ranks. In the end, he only associates with Sophia and supports her infatuation with him out of a desire to please her influential father.

Sophia, Famusov's daughter, cannot be attributed either to the "current century" or to the "past century". Her opposition to her father is connected only with her love for Molchalin, but not with her views on the structure of society. Famusov, frankly flirting with the maid, is a caring father, but is not a good example for Sophia. The young girl is quite progressive in her views, smart, not concerned about the opinion of society. All this is the cause of disagreement between father and daughter. “What a commission, creator, to be a father to an adult daughter!” Famusov laments. However, she is not on the side of Chatsky. With her hands, or rather with a word spoken out of revenge, Chatsky was expelled from the society he hated. Sophia is the author of rumors about Chatsky's madness. And the world easily picks up these rumors, because in Chatsky's accusatory speeches everyone sees a direct threat to their well-being. Thus, in spreading the rumor about the madness of the protagonist in the world, a love conflict played a decisive role. Chatsky and Sophia collide not on ideological grounds. It's just that Sophia is worried that her former lover can destroy her personal happiness.

conclusions

Thus, the main feature of the conflict in the play "Woe from Wit" is the presence of two conflicts and their close relationship. The love affair opens the play and serves as a pretext for Chatsky's clash with the "gone century". The love line also helps the Famus society to declare their enemy insane and disarm him. However, the social conflict is the main one, because Woe from Wit is a public comedy, the purpose of which is to expose the mores of the noble society of the early 19th century.

Artwork test

The first name of the comedy sounded like this: "Woe to the mind." The comedy is fascinating, but cheerful or critically tragic - it's not up to the author of the lines to decide. “Woe from Wit” can be understood both in two ways and in three ways, or ... in no way. A.S. Pushkin spoke about himself in a letter to his dear wife, “The devil has managed to be born in Russia, endowed with mind and talent” ... Russia does not need a mind, it is sheer grief.

But “Woe from Wit”, as a hidden psychological device - sarcasm, a scandal of collective folly and selfishness, is the best suited to the scenes described in the comedy.

Living their lives, not embarrassed to walk over their heads with petty gossip and stories, people who consider themselves high society eat each other, embellishing reality in order to spoil the neighbor's reputation, leaving their own kind of crystal clear, which is not really.

If someone struggled with the “big top” of modern high society, it was Chatsky, who was immediately accused of losing his mind. Where is the logic and where is the mind, and are they needed in the race for fame and honors in the social stratum called "nobility"? After all, the corresponding rank endowed the owner with a lot of privileges, such as immunity, the reliability of words and information transmitted, a deliberate invitation to all secular evenings, dinners and congresses. Talking about the person of a nobleman was impartial not only in bad form, but also in undesirable conversation. However, if the rumor, nevertheless, was picked up by two, three, four people, the stigma on a person could deepen to indelible dimensions and spread to the whole family. Does this secular behavior of those times differ from today's Russian politics in general? Perhaps - nothing.

Famus Society - an island in the ocean of islands

A striking example of those who do not need either intelligence or grief are representatives of the Famus society and Famusov himself at the head. Respect only to those who are themselves rich and are in relationships with rich people. Who can boast of a dowry or overseas trophies, not understanding and not accepting the history and culture of foreign places, hiding his ignorance behind pathos and lies - this is the personification of society. Is it only Famustovsky?

Naturally, a big role here is assigned to the removal of masks from those who believe that they rule the world and people in Russia.
Misunderstood aspirations of self-improvement and no desire to accept something that may be more expensive than the rank - a stupid, worthless, but actual conflict of Griboyedov's tragicomedy.

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 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:

“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 individuals. 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.

Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is an outstanding work of Russian literature. The main problem of the work is the problem of two worldviews: the “past century”, which defends the old foundations, and the “present century”, which advocates decisive changes. The difference in the worldview of the old Moscow nobility and the advanced nobility in the 10-20s of the 19th century constitutes the main conflict of comedy.

The comedy ridicules the vices of society: serfdom, martyrdom, careerism, sycophancy, bureaucracy, low level of education, admiration for everything foreign, servility, servility, the fact that in society it is not the personal qualities of a person that are valued, but “two thousand tribal souls”, rank, money .

The past century is a Moscow noble society, consisting of the Famusovs, Khlestovs, Tugoukhovs, puffers. In society, people live according to the principle:

In my summers must not dare

Have your own opinion

because

We are small in ranks.

Famusov is a representative of the past century, a typical Moscow gentleman with all the views, manners and way of thinking characteristic of that time. The only thing he bows before is rank and wealth. “Like all Moscow ones, your father is like this: He would like a son-in-law with stars, but with ranks,” Lisa, the maid, characterizes her master. Famusov lives the old fashioned way, he considers his uncle, Maxim Petrovich, who “produces to the ranks” and “gives pensions” as his ideal. He is “not on silver, on gold; I ate on gold; one hundred people at your service; All in orders; drove forever in a train." However, with all his arrogant disposition, “He bent over” in front of his superiors, when he had to serve.

Famusov most fully absorbed the laws and principles characteristic of this time. He considers careerism, respect for rank, and pleasing elders to be the main norms adopted in life. Famusov is afraid of the opinions of nobles, although he willingly spreads them. He is worried about "what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say."

Famusov is an official, but he regards his service only as a source of Sitnov and income, a means of achieving prosperity. He is not interested in the meaning or results of labor. When Molchalin reports that there are inaccuracies in the papers:

And I have what's the matter, what's not the case,

My custom is this:

Signed - so off your shoulders

Nepotism is another of the ideals so dear to Famusov's heart. Kuzma Petrovich, a “venerable chamberlain”, with “a key, and he knew how to deliver a key to his son”, “rich and was married to a rich woman” and therefore earns deep respect from Famusov.

Famusov is not very educated, and he “sleeps well from Russian books”, unlike Sophia, who does not “sleep from French books”. But at the same time, Famusov developed a rather frisky attitude towards everything foreign. Appreciating the patriarchal way of life, he stigmatizes the Kuznetsky Most and the "eternal French", calling them "destroyers of pockets and hearts."

Poverty is considered a great vice in Famus society. So Famusov directly declares to Sofya, his daughter: “He who is poor is not a couple for you,” or: “We have been doing since ancient times, That honor is due to father and son, Be inferior, but if there are souls of two thousand family, He and the groom. At the same time, a caring father shows truly worldly wisdom, caring about the future of his daughter.

An even greater vice in society is scholarship and education: “Learning is the plague, learning is the reason, What is more today than when people and deeds and opinions were crazy divorced.”

The world of interests of the Famus society is rather narrow. It is limited to balls, dinners, dances, name days.

A bright representative of the “current century” is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who embodies the features of the advanced noble youth of that time. He is the bearer of new ideas. Which he proves with his behavior, way of life, but especially with his passionate speeches, denouncing the foundations of the “past century”, to which he clearly treats with disdain:

And as if the world began to grow stupid,

You can say with a sigh;

How to compare and see

The current century and the past century:

As he was famous

Whose neck bent more often ...

Chatsky considers that century "the century of humility and fear." He is convinced that those morals are a thing of the past and now hunters to scoff "frightens laughter and keeps shame in check."

The traditions of bygone days are too strong. Chatsky himself turns out to be their victim. He, with his directness, wit, impudence, becomes a revolter of social rules and norms. And society takes revenge on him. At the first meeting with him, Famusov calls him "carbonari". However, in a conversation with Skalozub, he speaks well of him, says that he is “small with a head”, “writes and translates nicely”, while regretting that Chatsky does not serve. But Chatsky has his own opinion on this matter: he wants to serve the cause, not individuals. At first it may seem that the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov is a conflict of different generations, a “conflict of fathers and children,” but this is not so. After all, Sophia and Molchalin are almost the same age as Chatsky, but they fully belong to the "past century." Sophia is not stupid. Chatsky's love for her can serve as proof of this. But she absorbed the philosophy of her father and his society. Her chosen one is Molchalin. He is also young, but also a child of that old milieu. He fully supports the morals and customs of the old lordly Moscow. Both Sofia and Famusov speak well of Molchalin. The latter keeps him in the service, "because he is businesslike," and Sophia sharply rejects Chatsky's attacks on her lover. She says:

Of course, he does not have this mind

What a genius for others, and for others a plague ...

But for her, the mind is not the main thing. The main thing is that Molchalin is quiet, modest, helpful, disarms the priest with silence, will not offend anyone. In short, he is the perfect husband. You can say the quality is wonderful, but they are false. This is just a mask behind which his essence is hidden. After all, his motto is “moderation and accuracy”, and he is ready to “please all people without exception”, as his father taught him, he persistently goes to his goal - a warm and moneyed place. He also plays a lover only because it pleases Sophia herself, the daughter of his master:

And here's the lover I assume

To please the daughter of such a man

And Sofya sees in him the ideal of a husband and boldly moves towards her goal, not being afraid of "what Princess Marya Alekseevna will say." Chatsky, getting into this environment after a long absence, is initially very friendly. He strives here, because the "smoke of the Fatherland" is "sweet and pleasant" to him, but Chatsky meets a wall of misunderstanding, rejection. His tragedy lies in the fact that he alone opposes the Famus society. But the comedy mentions the Skalozub's cousin, who also "stranges" - "suddenly left the service", "locked himself in the village and began to read books", but he "followed the rank." There is also the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya "chemist and botanist" Prince Fedor, but there is also Repetilov, who is proud of his involvement in some kind of secret society, whose entire activity boils down to "make noise, brother, make noise." But Chatsky cannot become a member of such a secret union.

Chatsky is not only the bearer of new views and ideas, but also advocates new standards of life.

In addition to the public tragedy, Chatsky is experiencing a personal tragedy. He is rejected by his beloved Sophia, to whom he "flew, trembled." Moreover, with her light hand, he is declared crazy.

Chatsky, who does not accept the ideas and customs of the "past century", becomes a troublemaker in the Famus society. And it rejects it. Chatsky is a mocker, a wit, a troublemaker and even an insulter. So Sophia says to him:

Have you ever laughed? or in sadness?

Mistake? Did you say good things about someone?

Chatsky does not find friendly sympathy, he is not accepted, he is rejected, he is expelled, but the hero himself could not exist in such conditions.

"Current age" and "past century" clash in comedy. The past time is still too strong and gives rise to its own kind. But the time for change in the face of Chatsky is already coming, although it is still too weak. The “current age” replaces the “past century”, for this is an immutable law of life. The appearance of the Chatsky Carbonari at the turn of historical eras is natural and logical.