Woe from Wit - Griboyedov A.S. Quotation characteristic of Chatsky What is beautiful about Chatsky is smart and eloquent
Sofia, Lisa.
Lisa
Well, the holiday is here! Well, here's some fun for you!
But no, now it’s no laughing matter;
It is dark in the eyes, and the soul froze;
Sin is not a problem, rumor is not good.
Sofia
What is my rumor? Who wants to judge
Yes, the father will force you to think:
Obese, restless, quick,
It's always been like that, but ever since...
You can judge...
I judge, sir, not from stories;
He will ban you; - good is still with me;
And then, God have mercy, as time
Me, Molchalin and everyone out of the yard.
Sofia
Think how capricious happiness is!
It happens worse, get away with it;
When the sad nothing comes to mind;
Forgotten by the music, and time passed so smoothly;
Fate seemed to take care of us;
No worry, no doubt...
And grief awaits around the corner.
Lisa
That's it, sir, you are my stupid judgment
Never complain:
But here's the trouble.
What is the best prophet for you?
I repeated: in love there will be no use in this
Not forever.
Like all Moscow ones, your father is like this:
He would like a son-in-law with stars, but with ranks,
And under the stars, not everyone is rich, between us;
Well, of course, besides
And money to live, so that he could give balls;
Here, for example, Colonel Skalozub:
And the golden bag, and marks the generals.
Sofia
Where is cute! and fun me fear
Hear about the front and rows;
He didn’t utter a smart word,
I don't care what's behind him, what's in the water.
Lisa
Yes, sir, so to speak, eloquent, but painfully not cunning;
But be a military man, be a civilian,
Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreevich Chatsky!
Not to embarrass you;
It's been a long time, don't turn back.
And remember...
Sofia
What do you remember? He's nice
He knows how to laugh at everyone;
Chatting, joking, it's funny to me;
You can share laughter with everyone.
Lisa
But only? as if? - Shedding tears
I remember, poor he, how he parted with you.
Why, sir, are you crying? live laughing. -
And he answered: “No wonder, Liza, I’m crying,
Who knows what I will find when I return?
And how much, perhaps, I will lose!
The poor thing seemed to know that in three years ...
Sofia
Listen, don't take too many liberties.
I'm very windy, maybe I did,
And I know, and I'm sorry; but where did you change?
To whom? so that they could reproach with infidelity.
Yes, with Chatsky, it’s true, we were brought up, we grew up;
The habit of being together every day is inseparable
She connected us with childhood friendship; but after
He moved out, he seemed bored with us,
And rarely visited our house;
Then he pretended to be in love again,
Demanding and distressed!!.
Sharp, smart, eloquent,
Especially happy with friends.
That's what he thought about himself...
The desire to wander attacked him,
Oh! if someone loves someone
Why look for the mind, and travel so far?
Lisa
Where is it worn? in what regions?
He was treated, they say, on acidic waters,
Not from illness, tea, from boredom - more free.
Sofia
And, of course, happy where people are funnier.
Who I love is not like this:
Molchalin is ready to forget himself for others,
The enemy of insolence - always shyly, timidly
A whole night with whom you can spend like this!
We sit, and the yard has long turned white,
What do you think? what are you busy with?
Lisa
God knows!
Ma'am, is it my business?
Sofia
He takes his hand, shakes his heart,
Breathe from the depths of your soul
Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,
Hand in hand, and the eye does not take my eyes off me. -
Laugh! is it possible! gave a reason
To you I to such laughter!
Lisa
Your aunt has now come to my mind,
How a young Frenchman ran away from her house.
Dove! wanted to bury
I failed my annoyance:
I forgot to blacken my hair
And three days later she turned gray.
(Continues to laugh.)
Sofia
(with chagrin)
That's how they talk about me later. -
Lisa
Excuse me, right, how holy is God,
I wanted this stupid laugh
Helped to cheer you up a bit.
Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp ...
I am starting a series of posts dedicated to the biography of Al. Andr. Chatsky - a hero who is very inadequately assessed in the national tradition (el_d is expected to participate). Ekat made a huge contribution to clarifying the case. Tsimbaeva (in my opinion, the best expert on Griboedov and Griboyedov in the entire history of Russia, with all the splendor of the names of Piksanov and others), to which I will often refer.
So far, for starters, the chronology of the life and activities of a number of characters in "Grief", primarily Chatsky (see justification under the cut).
Early 1801 - the birth of Chatsky. He is "the same age as the new century" in the exact sense of the word. Apparently, from the Smolensk gentry, closely associated with the Commonwealth (like Griboyedov himself).
November-beginning December 1805 - the birth of Sofia Famusova.
Late 1800s - early 1810s: Chatsky's father dies, Chatsky is taken to his house by the Famusovs; Chatsky is brought up with Sophia.
Early 1818 - Chatsky, upon reaching a relative age, moves out of the Famusovs' house; for several months he almost does not visit their house and practically does not communicate with Sophia. At this very time (until August) there are guards and a court in Moscow, and they fascinate Chatsky. Apparently, he falls into the company of some guardsmen and communicates intensively with them.
Autumn 1818, winter 1818/1819 - Chatsky begins to court Sophia, but -
But at the beginning of 1819, having entered the service, he left Moscow. He enters the cavalry, serves in 1819-ca. 1821 in the Kingdom of Poland, but not in the ranks, but in the administration. In Poland, then, according to the statement of the emperor, a constitutional project for the whole of Russia is unfolding; Chatsky serves brilliantly - he is connected with the Warsaw ministers.
In 1821, Chatsky broke with the ministers and went into service (he ended up in the same cavalry regiment where Platon Mikhailovich served), and by the end of 1821/beginning of 1822 he retired. This break with the service is due to the fact that the emperor abandoned all constitutional projects.
The turn of 1821/1822 - the end of 1822 Chatsky spends on travels, in particular, on "sour waters" (rather in Europe than in Russia).
In December 1822, he returned to Moscow with the intention of proposing to Sophia, who had just turned 17 years old. Here and the beginning of the action of "Grief".
Meanwhile, a regiment is about to woo Sophia at this very moment. Skalozub, whose biography has been restored in detail (after many other attempts) here (http://vif2ne.ru/nvk/forum/archive/1084/1084020.htm) and by Tsimbaeva; With the necessary corrections, here is a summary version:
Sergey Sergeyevich was born c. 1790, entered the army in 1809. He and his brother “distinguished themselves” together “in the thirteenth year, in the 30th jaeger, and after in the 45th”; there is no doubt that the award “for the third of August” jointly with his brother (again!) refers to this very episode, when they “distinguished themselves” together, that is, we are talking about 08/3/15/1813. On this day, hostilities between the French and Russian-Prussian troops (which included the 30th Chasseurs) resumed (after the expiration of the Pleischwitz truce on July 29 / 10.08). It is pointless to search for that specific skirmish for which Skalozub received the order (according to the draft of "Gor" - for taking the battery, according to the white copy - for repelling an enemy attack in a trench), it is pointless - Griboyedov simply used the date the hostilities began, not knowing exactly where he was then 30 th Chasseur Regiment. As noted in discussions on the issue, the notorious order “on the neck” should be George of the 2nd or 3rd degree, that is, obviously, the second St. George Cross of Skalozub (the first was to be George of the 4th degree - only after give George a higher degree). A lot for a Little Russian army ranger of twenty-five years, at most!
From the end of 1813 - in the 45th Chasseur Regiment. In 1819, together with this regiment, he was moved to the Caucasus. Participates in Caucasian operations in 1819-1821; here he was “led behind the regiment for two years”, and the words “I am quite happy in my comrades, the vacancies are just open; Then others will turn off the elders, Others, you look, are killed ”(by 1822 Skalozub’s “comrades” could not die anywhere else so that he spoke about it in the present tense, as about the current situation - “others, you look, killed”; about 1812- 1814 in 1822 it would be impossible to say so). From the combination of phrases about this "I'm happy in my comrades", "colonels for a long time, but you serve recently" (in response to which he says his own "I'm pretty happy ...) and" I spent two years behind the regiment "it can be deduced that he was a colonel (by 1822) for at least a few years, that he received a colonel at the very time when one of his comrades was "killed" (that is, in the Caucasus), but already being in the rank of colonel, for two years he could not get command of a regiment (without being in the rank of colonel, it would be impossible to assume that you are "not given enough" of the regiment and "lead" after it, forcing you to wait - the major, say, command of the regiment was not due). in any case, he could not rise to the rank of colonel - he only entered the service in 1809, and for 5 years a jaeger army officer without connections and nobility had no chance of getting a colonel.
So, Skalozub received a colonel in the Caucasus, in 1819 / 1820, for successful military operations against the highlanders, but for another 2 years he cannot receive command of the regiment. And only in 1822 Skalozub was transferred from the Caucasus to the 15th Infantry Division as a colonel, finally receiving an appointment to the regiment. He is about 30-35 years old. This is a combat jaeger officer. For the Famusovs, the groom is not the most enviable (Little Russian, from a petty gentry, a hopelessly provincial surname, a soldier), but ranks, orders, wealth ... For Chatsky, he is a terrible rival.
N.B. The 45th Jaeger Regiment was renamed in 1819 into the 44th Chasseur Regiment (and vice versa). He fought in the Caucasus, mainly in Abkhazia. Here is Yermolov's order dated 04/28/1820 to this very 44th Jaeger (former 45th), that is, Skalozub regiment:
You have lost, brave comrades, your boss, the zeal for the service of the great sovereign, the excellent, the exemplary care of you. I regret together with you that he died at the hands of vile traitors, together with you I will not forget how it is necessary to avenge the vile murder of a worthy boss. I will show you the place where the meanest robber Koikhosro Guriel lived; do not leave stone upon stone in this refuge of villains, do not leave a single living one of his vile accomplices. I demand, brave comrades, friendly behavior with the inhabitants of peaceful, meek, loyal subjects of the emperor; I order to punish without regret the evil traitors.
We are talking about the death of Colonel Puzyrevsky 1st, who commanded the 45th (> 44th) Chasseurs since November 1819. He was replaced as regiment commander by Lieutenant Colonel Prince. Abkhazov, Ivan Nikolaevich (commanded the regiment from May 1820).
And Griboedov himself wrote about the same death of Puzyrevsky in one of his correspondence!
I quote:
Your Majesty,
Dear Andrey Ivanovich,
where are you now? In your last letter, to which I am indebted for merry moments, you were looking for people at Paul's in the club. In front of whom was the lantern extinguished? Tell me sincerely. Or are they going to transfer your search to St. Petersburg? What the commander-in-chief intends to do, I do not ask: because he is the sphinx of modern times. You won't believe how ambiguous our position is here. From Aleksey Petrovich for a whole year we never learn where he is, and with what eye from a height he looks at our daily activities. And the political existence of Simon Mazarovich and his crusaders is barely molded in the wandering place of Persian untruths and nonsense. What a life! For the first time in my life, I thought of playing a joke, tasting the civil service. I would rather throw myself into the fire of the Nerchinsk factories and cry with Job: May the day perish on which I put on the uniform of a foreign collegium, and the morning on which they said: this is the titular adviser. That day, may the Lord not seek him from above, may light come upon him below, but may darkness, and the shadow of death, and twilight receive him. - About my affairs, not a word more, do not ruin me with my boredom. I would like to know about your life.
Why do you have no time for generals? One went crazy (Eristov). Another (Puzyrevsky) fell from a traitorous hand; Akhverdov at the hands of peaceful, charitable, doctoral, sorry for his family, the niece in Kizlyar is the most pitiful.
Why does your great general wave his hand at us miserable ones, and does not want to push us forward in the vast field of sovereign service below one rank? What would he say with his talent if he remained a captain of artillery for a century? Although I have not yet dared my opinion to the point of testing my abilities with it, I am truly worth more than my rank.
It is likely that I will not receive an answer from you from my questions, well, at least about something else, just do not forget: unsubscribe and force yourself to love more and more.
to you devoted
A. Griboedov".
So, here he is, this chief of those that "look, they are killed" - Puzyrevsky 1st! Griboyedov gave Skalozub a service in a regiment he knew well from his own Caucasian affairs, and at the same time and in the circumstances that Griboedov knew - and in this regiment there is hardly an exact prototype of Skalozub, familiar to Griboyedov in 1820-21. ..
In addition, I will pay attention to how Yermolov (Yermolov! - a man of extremely cruel nature, whose temper would entice him to kill, and not spare, at least civilians, at least anyone) makes a distinction in the order between the accomplices of Kay-Khosrov Gurieli in the murder of Puzyrevsky and "peaceful" residents.
(1) “Woe from Wit” was conceived in the bud by Griboyedov in 1820, and written in full (albeit in draft) in the spring - early autumn of 1823 (Griboyedov wrote the last acts of the play daily in the gazebo of the Begichev estate, where he had been visiting since the end of July; clearly, that since mid-autumn you can’t write in the gazebo), the white text was completed by the summer of 1824. Since it was not customary in the literature of that time to place the time of the action of the work _in the future_, the time when work on the text was completed is the deadline for the time of the play itself. Ekat. Tsimbaeva writes: “The duration of the play is determined very clearly. Griboedov finished Woe from Wit in late May - early June 1824, after which he made only minor stylistic corrections to the text. Therefore, events in comedy cannot take place later than this period” (http://magazines.russ.ru/voplit/2003/4/cimbaev.html).
This observation, however, can be narrowed down. "Woe" had a completely finished appearance by the end of the autumn of 1823, and its plot was fully thought out already in the spring of 1823, when Griboyedov wrote the initial part of the play. Since there is no reason to believe that something has changed in terms of chronology in the concept of “Gor” and Chatsky’s biography in the process of moving from a draft to a white version (on the contrary, everything suggests that the chronology of the characters’ lives remained the same) and that logic , with which Tsimbaeva approaches the draft, should actually be transferred to the draft and considered the terminus ante quem for the action "Woe" in the summer of 1823.
Further, this action takes place in winter (specifically - according to the draft in Great Lent, i.e. in February, according to the white copy - earlier, apparently, in December, see the fine analysis of Ekat Tsimbaeva in the same place, in: http:// magazines.russ.ru/voplit/2003/4/cimbaev.html), therefore, the last winter when it can occur is the winter of 1822/23. Ekat herself. Tsimbaeva believes that here it would be necessary to put 1823/24 instead of 1822/23, since she measures the time limit of action by the moment of writing a white copy, and not a draft of "Gorya". For the final argument that no action can be placed later than the winter of 1822/23, see paragraph (3) below.
(2) Famusov shouts to his yards “to work you, to the settlement [to Siberia] you!” E. Tsimbaeva points out that the right of soul owners to exile their serfs to the settlement, which was canceled by Alexander, was reintroduced by him in 1823, and only after this renewal would Famusov's exclamation make sense. The logic of this assumption by E. Tsimbaeva can be challenged. She believes that Famusov could not have commemorated the exile to the settlement in such a mood, if the law did not give him the appropriate rights. While exclamations such as "to the settlement WOULD have you", "you are worthy of the settlement" or "gallows" certainly do not imply the competence of the speaker to send to the settlement or the gallows, a similar exclamation without "would" can be taken as implying such eligibility. But is it? Any of us can say: “Duct you slap for such mistakes! For the second year you for such mistakes! - by no means implying that the speaker himself is entitled to give grades or leave for the second year.
However, the thesis of E. Tsimbaeva can be defended from the other side. It is easy to see that exclamations like “Go to jail for this!” or “For the second year you for it!” in Russian (at least now) they sound meaningful without “would” only if at least _someone_ is authorized to put in jail or leave for the second year for this very “it” (not necessarily a speaker, but at least someone / something court, for example). The phrase "under execution you for this anecdote!" in 1970 it will not sound meaningful (but with “would” it will sound) because in 1970 no one shoots for jokes at all, but in 1937 it will sound meaningful even without any “would”.
This means that Famusov’s exclamation is only conceivable if at least someone (some authority) at that time could send his yard servants to the settlement for the offense that Famusov’s case is about. But what is this fault? These are oversights, insufficient loyalty to the master, indulgence in the tricks of the master's daughter, contrary to the will of the master, which is obvious in this regard. Who in Russia in the XVIII-XIX centuries could punish for such things (if he could at all), except for the master himself? No other authority will parse and punish such offenses ...
Thus, the wording “if at least someone (some authority) at that time could have exiled his courtyards to the settlement for the offense under discussion” in this case is equivalent to the wording “if Famusov himself at that time could have sent his courtyards to the settlement for discussed fault "- because except for himself, no other authority would deal with this in any case. Thus, we return to Tsimbaeva's thesis: Famusov's remark is conceivable only after the return of the soul owners the right to exile their souls to the settlement.
True, there seems to be a way to get around this conclusion: it can be assumed that Famusov, in a rage, spews a threat to which he was accustomed in his youth and maturity, when soul owners still had the right to exile their souls to the settlement. However, to issue such cries in conditions where the actual right to do so has long ceased to exist means to put oneself in the most miserable position in the face of the threatened one - after all, he knows (like the threatening person himself) that the threat is unrealistic (imagine how the boss would look 1970, shouting to a subordinate: “Shackle you!”), and Famusov could put himself in such a position only in complete self-forgetfulness of rage, in complete hysteria. However, he is clearly not in such a state of mind when he utters his “to work for you, to settle you” - his reaction in this whole scene is emotionally much closer to an annoyed grunt than to fury. Thus, Tsimbayeva's imprisonment cannot be bypassed from this side either.
However, Tsimbaeva is mistaken, believing that this return took place in 1823 - in fact, it took place in 1822. I quote the famous legal aid Tagantsev (Tagantsev N.S. Criminal Law (General Part). Part 1. According to the 1902 edition. Allpravo .ru - 2003. 21. Disciplinary power of individuals):
“... Decrees of 1749 and 1760. the landowners were given the right to exile their peasants to settlements for presumptuous acts, as long as the exiles were no older than 45 and fit for work. By decree of 1765, Catherine expanded this right of the landowners, allowing the return of peasants to hard labor for any time with the right to take them back at her own discretion. The link to hard labor at the will of the landowners was destroyed in 1809, but the link to the settlement, which was terminated by the Law of 1811, was again restored in 1822, indicating that the noble authorities could not even investigate the validity of the demands of the landowners about the exile of their peasants to Siberia ". Decrees of 1823 and 1824 only expanded the respective rights of the landowners.
So, the time of action is after the decree of 1822. In other words, the earliest winter when the action of "Grief" can unfold is the winter of 1822/1823 (and not 1823/24, as Ekaterina Tsimbaeva believes due to the aforementioned mistake).
(3) Thus, the time of action can be determined exactly: it is December, 1822. Sofya at that moment had just turned seventeen years old (Tsimbaeva showed that Famusov’s ball was most likely given shortly after Sophia’s birthday and on the occasion of this birthday - see E. Tsimbaeva. Griboyedov. M., 2003. S. 336), she was born, which means, in November-December 1805 - the daughter, so to speak, of Austerlitz ...
Before the start of the action, Chatsky was not in Moscow and did not see Sophia for three years in a row ("he will leave for three years") - that is, since 1819. During these three years, Chatsky's service first fell, his "connection with the ministers, then a break," and then, disappointed in the service, he left to travel ("he was treated, they say, on acidic waters"). It was from the moment the service began that he did not appear in Moscow, and did not see Sofya, otherwise in Famusov's house about his connection and break with the ministers by the beginning of the "Grief" they would have learned not only from Tatyana Yuryevna, but also from Chatsky himself. As established, again, Ekat. Tsimbaev, these were Warsaw ministers, and Chatsky's entire career took place in the Kingdom of Poland (http://magazines.russ.ru/voplit/2003/4/cimbaev.html; Griboyedov. S. 332 ff.), where just in 1818 Alexander proclaimed that the introduction of constitutional orders is the constant subject of his thoughts, and that the constitutional Kingdom of Poland should become an example and a springboard for the spread of these orders to Russia: “You (Poles) gave me a means - to show my fatherland what I have long ago I have been preparing for it for years and what it will use when the beginnings of such an important work reach the proper maturity. Then Prince Peter Vyazemsky (one of the brightest people of the liberal party, according to the government) served enthusiastically in Poland, but in 1821 he retired when Alexander completely buried his constitutional passions. Obviously, this was the fate of Chatsky.
Chatsky entered the service after the season of autumn 1817 - autumn 1818: “And in wives, daughters - the same passion for the uniform! Have I renounced tenderness to him for a long time?! Now I can’t fall into this childishness, But then who wouldn’t follow everyone? When from the guard, others from the court Came here for a while, - Women shouted: hurrah! And they threw caps into the air! - and the guards and the court stood in Moscow from August 1817 to August 1818.
Chatsky here clearly says that he entered the service under the direct impression of all this enthusiasm of 1817/1818. - hence, his entry into the service cannot be dated later than the turn of 1818/1819. This, in turn, means that his return to Moscow cannot be placed as late as in the winter of 1823/1824. - in this case, he would have been absent, at least, for almost 5 years, and not at all for 3 years. It remains to put his arrival at the end of 1822, no later. Thus, “three years” of his absence is actually more than three years, the difference between the calendar dates of his departure from Moscow (at the very beginning of 1819, no later) and his arrival in Moscow (December 1822). In reality, he spent almost four years outside Moscow, but only three winters - 1819/1820, 1820/1821 and 1821/22. These three New Years, in which Chatsky was not in Moscow, are those “three years” that he remembers as the time of his absence.
(4) Sofya says in a key remark for understanding the play: “Yes, with Chatsky, it’s true, we were brought up, grew up: The habit of being together every day inseparably Connected us with childhood friendship; but then he moved out, he seemed bored with us, and rarely visited our house; Then again he pretended to be in love, demanding and distressed!!. Sharp, smart, eloquent, Especially happy among friends, He thought highly of himself... The desire to wander attacked him, Ah! if someone loves whom, Why look for the mind and travel so far?
So, Chatsky was brought up with Sophia until the time of his majority, after which he had to move out - an adult young man could no longer be brought up and live with an unmarried girl who was not his close relative. Chatsky at that time should have been 17-18 years old (no more than 18).
And until this very moment, she and Sophia were together “each day inseparably” and they were not “bored” yet, which implies not such a big age gap: a 15-year-old boy would be decidedly uninteresting with a 10-year-old girl, and they would not have had any childhood friendship. The age gap between them should therefore be no more than four years.
Since Sophia was born at the end of 1805, then Chatsky, therefore, not earlier than 1801. This is quite consistent with his entry into the service at the turn of 1818/1819 or at the beginning of 1819.
By the time of his resignation, Chatsky could not have been less than 20 years old, since even the Warsaw ministers could not be “in connection with, and then in rupture” with a youth of 17-18 years old, even if he were seven spans in his forehead (if he was, of course, not super-born or noble - which you can’t say about Chatsky). And his resignation can be dated no later than 1821 (at least 1822 he spent traveling to acidic waters). Thus, the latest date of his birth is 1801. The year of his birth is thus firmly established (1801) and turns out to be quite symbolic - this is the first year of the 19th century! Chatsky is really the same age as the new century.
Between the age of Chatsky and his entry into the service, he managed to move out from the Famusovs, for some time "rarely visit their house", and then visit Sophia "in love, attentive and distressed" (after which he left her a second time, rushing to the service not in Moscow, but in other regions). These two stages together should have taken about a year at the very least. Thus, Chatsky had to move out after 17, but at least a year before leaving Moscow (spring 1819), - in other words, he moved out at the beginning of 1818, and was born at the beginning of 1801 ... almost to the same day with the beginning of the XIX century.
“Children's friendship” Sophia could not call her relationship with Chatsky if he was no longer a child, but a teenager, he ended up in the Famusovsky house. In other words, Chatsky, having become an orphan, was adopted by Famusov (a friend of his father) to be brought up in the latter's house until Chatsky reached the age of 12-13 (that is, until 1813/1814). The words “brought up together, grew up” imply a rather long period of coexistence and prompt us to attribute Chatsky’s arrival to Famusov’s house to an earlier time, until the early 1810s (inclusive).
(5) Chatsky in "Mountain" says to Platon Mikhailovich:
“Well, God judge you; For sure, you became the wrong one in a short time; Wasn't it last year, at the end, I knew you in the regiment? Only morning: foot in the stirrup And rushing on a greyhound stallion? Blow the autumn wind, even from the front, even from the rear.
So, in the fall of 1821, Chatsky was still in the regiment. Therefore, he remained in the service until that very time, and was listed in the cavalry (it is clear that this “knew in the regiment” implies joint service - otherwise how could Chatsky know what P.M. was doing daily in the regiment in the morning? a person could, of course, make acquaintance with a military man, but there is no way to “know” him to such an extent in a regiment).
The full name of the hero is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky:
“…Alexander Andreevich Chatsky…”
Alexander Chatsky - nobleman, landowner with 300-400 serfs:
“- had about three hundred souls. - Four hundred, please understand…”
Chatsky is a single man. He is still young, but already “does not fall into childishness”:
“…Yes, not married…” “…Now I can’t fall into this childishness…”
Chatsky is a lonely person. His mother and father died when he was a child. Chatsky's father was a friend of Famusov:
“... Here, sir, Chatsky, my friend, / Andrei Ilyich’s late son ...”
“... Chatsky, my friend, / Andrei Ilyich ...”
After the death of his parents, Chatsky was brought up in Famusov's house. Growing up, he began to live separately:
“... Yes, with Chatsky, it’s true, we were brought up, we grew up; / The habit of being together every day is inseparable / Tied us with childhood friendship ... "
“... but then / He moved out, he seemed bored with us, / And rarely visited our house ...”
Chatsky has been friends with Sofia Famusova since childhood and has loved her for a long time:
“…I remember you often danced with him as a child…”
“... And yet I love you without memory ...”
At the beginning of the play, Chatsky returns to Moscow after 3 years of “wandering around the world”:
“... I haven’t written two words for three years! / And suddenly it struck like from the clouds ... "
“…Splashed the light…”
“…The desire to wander attacked him…”
Chatsky is a member of the English Club, which consists of rich, noble nobles:
“…Then, think about it, a member of the English club…”
Alexander Chatsky is a smart, witty man:
“…Sharp, smart, eloquent…”
“... he is small with a head / And he writes and translates nicely. // It is impossible not to regret that with such a mind…”
Chatsky is an eloquent person:
“…smart, eloquent…”
“... What does he say! and speaks as he writes!..”
Alexander Chatsky loves to make jokes and “taunt” people, but he doesn’t do it with the intent to harm:
“... and cheerful, and sharp ...”
“...Listen, are my words all chopping? / And tend to harm someone?..”
“... Not a man, a snake! ..” (Sofia about Chatsky)
Chatsky is a mocking person, but his ridicule is always directed against stupid and narrow-minded people:
“... He is gloriously / Knows how to make everyone laugh; / Chatting, joking…”
“...Look at the laugh, Chatsky will lift you up ...”
“... It is noticeable that you are ready to pour out bile on everyone ...”
“... A hail of your barbs and jokes will break out. / Tell jokes! and a century to joke! how it will become of you!..”
“...Ah, Chatsky! You love to dress up everyone in jesters ... "
Chatsky often speaks with others in a harsh tone:
"…Yes! a formidable look, and a sharp tone, / And these features in you abyss ... "
According to Sophia, Chatsky is intemperate in language and too openly despises people:
“Why should I be, I’ll tell you bluntly,
So intemperate language?
In contempt for people so undisguised?”
Chatsky is a proud man, “proud”, according to Famusov:
“That’s it, you are all proud!..”
Alexander Chatsky is a free-thinking person, for which Famusov calls him a “carbonarius” and a “Jacobin”:
"…Oh! My God! he is carbonari*!..” (*i.e. revolutionary)
"…A dangerous person!.."
“…I think he’s just a Jacobin*…” (*that is, a freethinker)
Chatsky is an independent person. He does not want to depend on others, such as Molchalin:
Molchalin: You have to depend on others.
Chatsky: Why is it necessary? ..
Chatsky quit military service and also decided not to serve as an official. Among the nobles, it was customary to choose one of these two employment options, but Chatsky does not do either:
Princess. Retired?
Natalya Dmitrievna. Yes, traveled, recently returned.
According to Chatsky, the nobles should not limit themselves to official or military service. He believes that an intelligent person can also find himself in creativity or science:
“Among young people, there is an enemy of quest, / Without demanding either places or promotion, / In science, he will stick his mind, hungry for knowledge; // Or in his soul God himself will excite the heat // To creative, lofty and beautiful arts…”
Chatsky is a sincere person, not a pretender:
“…For once in my life I’ll pretend…”
Alexander Chatsky loves the truth:
“…Why should I deceive myself?..”
“…Why didn’t they directly tell me…”
Chatsky is a sensitive person:
“... Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, / Like Alexander Andreyich Chatsky! ..”
Alexander Chatsky is a passionate, ardent person:
“…that passion? that feeling? ardor that? ..
“... But what is now boiling in me, worries, infuriates, / I would not wish my personal enemy ...”
Chatsky has his own opinion about everything:
“... Why are the opinions of others only holy? ..”
Alexander Chatsky is a patriot. He loves the Russian people and Russia:
“... So that our smart, cheerful people ...”
In high society, Chatsky is considered crazy because of his freethinking and liberal views:
“... Mad you glorified me with all the chorus ...”
Chatsky does not like the “crowd of people” and the Moscow Famus society. At the end of the play, he leaves Moscow:
“... And in the crowd I am lost, I am not myself. / No! I am dissatisfied with Moscow…”
“...Get out of Moscow! I don't come here anymore. / I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world ... ”
Chatsky is a young free man; one might say, a traveler, a seeker of the new. He’s not rich, he doesn’t have any rank, and he doesn’t need him for anything: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve,” he says to Famusov when he calls to serve Chatsky if he wants to marry Sophia. Chatsky is smart, witty, says only what is in his heart - and this is his hallmark. I even dare to compare him with Khlestakov: "What's on the mind, then on the tongue."
Chatsky is a man of new times, advanced views, a man of a different kind:
“Your age I scolded mercilessly!” -
He exposes the current age, the time in which he lives and, most importantly, is not afraid to do so. In this regard, the question arises: "Who else, if not him?". “There is no warrior alone in the field,” says folk wisdom. But in this case, a warrior is a warrior if he is Chatsky!
This is true; he is a doctor, a doctor of freedom. He is trying to make sure that he is understood - he does not accept the current system, as I said. But the fact is that no one understands him, and cannot understand him, and they take him for a madman. Chatsky himself says to Famusov and Skalozub:
“Houses are new, but prejudices are old;
Rejoice, they will not exterminate
Neither their years, nor fashion, nor fires "-
Here it is, the problem! But does Chatsky himself understand that all his appeals, all exhortations, all his strength, all that caustic mind that he put into his words - does he understand that all this ... as if in vain? He knows that it is not in vain, because it is not the present age, not these people who will understand him, but others will surely understand him.
In the comedy, Chatsky is the most significant character in terms of his function, because without him nothing would have happened: the Famus society would have remained Famus society, or changed slightly due to new trends, as is usually the case.
Throughout the comedy, Chatsky earned many characterizations about himself. Here are some of them.
I. Lisa about Chatsky:
1) “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreevich Chatsky!
II. Sofia Pavlovna about Chatsky:
1) (D. I, I. 5)
“... He is nice
He knows how to laugh at everyone;
Chatting, joking, it's funny to me;
Laughter can share with anyone.
2) (Also D., also me.)
“Sharp, smart, eloquent.
I'm especially happy with friends."
3) (Also D., I 6) Sophia, angry with Chatsky's words about Molchalin:
"Not a man, a snake!"
4) (D. II, I. 8)
“Deadly by their coldness!
To look at you, I have no strength to listen to you.
5) (Also D., also I.)
“What are you to me?
Yes, it’s true, not your troubles - fun for you,
Kill your own father - it doesn't matter.
6) (Also D., I. 9)
“Ah, Alexander Andreevich, here,
You appear quite generous:
To the misfortune of your neighbor, you are so not indifferent.
7) (Also D., I. 11)
“... I’m afraid that I won’t be able to withstand the pretense.
Why did God bring Chatsky here!
8) A fundamental characterization from Sophia Chatsky receives in III D., 1 phenomenon:
"Your gaiety is not modest,
Your sharpness is ready at once,
And you yourself…”
“... a menacing look and a sharp tone,
And these features in you abyss,
And above a thunderstorm is far from useless "-
With this, Sophia reproaches Chatsky for being too frank. She, perhaps, believes that Chatsky himself does not see these “features of the abyss” - these, according to Sophia, are the strongest shortcomings. She encourages Chatsky to fight them. But are these disadvantages? Only in the opinion of the Famus society, but not in the opinion of Chatsky.
“It is noticeable that you are ready to pour out bile on everyone;
And I, so as not to interfere, will evade from here.
“Why should I be, I’ll tell you bluntly,
So I will not restrain my tongue,
In contempt for people so openly,
That there is no mercy even for the humblest! .. What?
Happen to someone to call him:
A hail of your barbs and jokes will break out.
Tell jokes! and a century to joke! how you will become!”
Alluding to Chatsky:
“Of course, he doesn’t have this mind
What a genius for others, and for others a plague,
Which is quick, brilliant and soon opposes,
Which light scolds on the spot,
So that the world at least says something about him,
Will such a mind make a family happy?
9) (D. III, I. 14)
"Oh, this man is always
Cause me a terrible disorder!
I'm glad to humiliate, prick; envious, proud and angry!
"He has a screw loose"
“Not really…”
"A! Chatsky, you love to dress up everyone in jesters,
Would you like to try it on yourself?"
III. Chatsky about himself:
1) (D. I, I. 7)
“Listen, are my words all the pegs?
And tend to someone's harm?
But if so, the mind and heart are not in harmony.
I'm in weirdo to another miracle
Once I laugh, then I forget ... "
2) (Also D., I. 9)
"Oh! no, I'm a little spoiled by hopes"
"I'm not a dream teller"
"I believe my own eyes"
3) (D. II, I. 7)
“It is not my desire to prolong disputes ...”
4) (D. III, I. 1)
“I myself? isn't it funny?"
“I am strange, but who is not strange?
The one who looks like all the fools ... "
“But is there in him * (in Molchalin) * that passion,
That feeling, that fervor,
So that besides you he has a whole world
Was it dust and vanity?
So that every beat of the heart
Has love accelerated towards you?
So that thoughts were everything and all his deeds
Soul - you, pleasing to you? .. "
"Oh! My God! Am I one of those
To whom the purpose of all life is laughter?
I'm happy when I meet funny people
And most of the time I miss them."
5) (D. IV, I. 10)
"Am I really crazy?"
6) (Also D., I. 14)
"Blind man! In whom I sought the reward of all labors!
IV. Famusov about Chatsky
1) (D. I, I. 10)
“... this dandy friend;
Notorious wasted, tomboy;
What's the commission, creator
To be a father to an adult daughter!
2) (D. II, I. 2)
“That’s it, you are all proud!
Would you ask how the fathers did?
We would learn by looking at the elders ... "
"Oh! My God! he's carbonari!"
"A dangerous person!"
“What does he say! and speaks as he writes!
“He wants to preach liberty!”
“Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!”
“And I don’t want to know you, I don’t tolerate debauchery.”
“Here they roam the world, they beat the buckets,
They come back, expect order from them.
3) (D. II, I. 3)
"You'll be kicked
Under court, they will give you how to drink.
4) (D. II, I. 4)
“... Andrey Ilyich, the late son:
Does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that,
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small with a head,
And he writes and translates well.”
5) (D. III, I. 21)
“For a long time I wonder how no one will tie him up!
Try about the authorities, and no one will say anything!
Bow a little low, bend over with a ring,
Even before the monastic face,
So he will call a scoundrel! .. "
“I went after my mother, after Anna Aleksevna:
The dead woman went crazy eight times.”
6) (D. IV, I. 15)
"Insane! what the hell is he talking about here!
Worshiper! father-in-law! and about Moscow is so menacing!”
V. Other persons about Chatsky:
1) (D. III, I. 10), Khlestova:
“... What is he happy about? What's the laugh?
Laughing at old age is a sin ... "
“I was tearing at his ears, only a little.”
2) (D. III, I. 15 and 16), G. N. and G. D.:
"Crazy!"
3) (D. III, I. 16), Zagoretsky:
“... He was hidden in the insane by his rogue uncle ...
They seized me, into a yellow house, and put me on a chain.
So, they let them off the chain, ”
"He's crazy"
Countess granddaughter:
“Imagine, I noticed myself;
And at least bet, you are with me in one word.
(I. 19) Zagoretsky:
"In the mountains he was wounded in the forehead, went crazy from the wound."
(I. 20) Countess grandmother:
“Yes! .. he is in pusurmans!
Oh! cursed Voltairian!"
(I. 21) Khlestova:
"He pulled champagne glasses."
Famusov:
"Learning is the plague, learning is the cause..."
4) (D. IV, I. 7), Princess:
“... it’s dangerous to talk to them,
It's time to ban...
…
I think he's just a Jacobin..."
According to Famusov, and, I think, according to the entire Famus society, Chatsky is a perverted person; and his perversion is expressed in this: in speech, in actions - in everything, and he is perverted by that, that he sees all the injustice, unrighteousness, precisely the very perversion of Famus society. What dares, moreover, to express his opinion. "He's carbonari!" Famusov exclaims. “He is a Jacobin,” says the princess. And as they just don’t call Chatsky, but everyone comes to the conclusion ... more precisely, Sophia came to the conclusion, and then as a joke, in revenge, and the rest of society agreed with this conclusion - in general, Chatsky went crazy. But this is not so - and we know it very well. He was simply smarter than his time, he was ahead of him and fought with the old orders, exposing them in a sophisticated and cunning way ... He opposed himself to the whole society; he fought with him...in the end, he comes to the conclusion that only time will change these people. Then he leaves to wander - again:
“Get out of Moscow! I don't come here anymore.
I'm running, I won't look back, I'll go looking around the world,
Where there is a corner for the offended feeling!
Carriage for me, carriage!”
But what did Chatsky leave behind, what did he change? After all, Famus society has remained Famus society! Or has he planted a seed, a seed of freedom that will soon bear fruit?
Chatsky, being a sensitive and, moreover, a witty person, uttered all sorts of “barbs”, accused the Famus society for not being able to understand him, for not wanting to change, and that it mocked him. He tried on a special role - the role of a judge, an exposer of vices, of all this injustice that is piling up and surrounding this whole society. So has anything changed? It is impossible to answer this question, just as it is impossible to answer the question: “Will this person be a talented poet? - and the person has not yet been born; has not yet grown - it is still only in its infancy ...
