The appearance of Chatsky in the comedy Woe from Wit. Chatsky through the eyes of the heroes of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit. The character of Chatsky, according to Belinsky

Belinsky assessed Chatsky completely differently, considering this image almost farcical: “...What kind of a deep person is Chatsky? This is just a loudmouth, a phrase-monger, an ideal buffoon, profaning everything sacred he talks about. ...This is a new Don Quixote, a boy on a stick on horseback, who imagines that he is sitting on a horse...” Pushkin assessed this image in approximately the same way. “In the comedy Woe from Wit, who is the smart character? answer: Griboedov. Do you know what Chatsky is? An ardent, noble and kind fellow, who spent some time with a very smart man (namely Griboedov) and was imbued with his witticisms and satirical remarks. Everything he says is very smart. But to whom is he telling all this? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable,” the poet wrote in a letter to Bestuzhev.

Which critic is right in assessing Chatsky? Let's try to understand the character of the hero.

Chatsky is a young man of the noble circle, smart, capable, received a good education, and shows great promise. His eloquence, logic, and depth of knowledge delight Famusov, who considers the possibility of a brilliant career quite real for Chatsky. However, Alexander Andreevich is disappointed in the public service: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he tells Famusov. In his opinion, one must serve “the cause, not individuals,” “without demanding either places or promotion to rank.” Bureaucracy, veneration for rank, protectionism and bribery, so widespread in contemporary Moscow, are not acceptable for Chatsky. He does not find a social ideal in his fatherland:

Where? show us, fathers of the fatherland,

Which ones should we take as models?

Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?

They found protection from court in friends, in kinship,

Magnificent building chambers,

Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance,

And where foreign clients will not be resurrected

The meanest features of the past life.

Chatsky criticizes the rigidity of the views of Moscow society, its mental immobility. He also speaks out against serfdom, recalling the landowner who exchanged his servants, who repeatedly saved his life and honor, for three greyhounds. Behind the lush, beautiful uniforms of the military, Chatsky sees “weakness,” “poverty of reason.” The hero also does not recognize the “slavish, blind imitation” of everything foreign, which manifests itself in the foreign power of fashion, in the dominance of the French language.

Chatsky has his own opinion about everything, he openly despises Molchalin’s self-abasement, Maxim Petrovich’s flattery and sycophancy. Alexander Andreevich evaluates people according to their internal qualities, regardless of

It is characteristic that Chatsky, to whom “the smoke of the Fatherland is sweet and pleasant,” sees absolutely nothing positive in his contemporary Moscow, in the “past century,” and finally, in those people for whom he should feel love, respect, and gratitude. The young man's late father, Andrei Ilyich, was probably a close friend of Pavel Afanasyevich. Chatsky spent his childhood and adolescence in the Famusovs’ house, and here he experienced the feeling of first love... However, from the first minute of his presence, almost all of the hero’s reactions to those around him are negative, he is sarcastic and caustic in his assessments.

What keeps the hero in a society that he hates so much? Only love for Sophia. As S.A. Fomichev notes, Chatsky rushed to Moscow after some special shock, desperately trying to find his elusive faith. Probably, during his trip abroad, the hero matured spiritually, experienced the collapse of many ideals, and began to evaluate the realities of Moscow life in a new way. And now he longs to find the previous harmony of worldview - in love.

However, even in love, Chatsky is far from “ideal” and is not consistent. At first, he suddenly leaves Sophia and does not give any news about himself. Returning from distant travels three years later, he behaves as if he broke up with the woman he loved just yesterday. Chatsky’s questions and intonations when meeting with Sophia are tactless: “Has your uncle lost his life?”, “And that consumptive one, your relatives, is the enemy of books...”, “You’ll get tired of living with them, and in whom you won’t find any stains?” As I. F. Smolnikov notes, this tactlessness can only be explained by the spiritual closeness that Chatsky feels in relation to Sophia, out of old habit considering her worldview close to his own.

In the depths of his soul, Chatsky probably does not even think that during his absence Sophia could fall in love with someone else. Not timid hope, but selfishness and self-confidence sound in his words

Well, kiss me, weren’t you waiting? speak!

Well, for the sake of it? No? Look at my face.

Surprised? but only? here's the welcome!

Chatsky cannot believe in Sophia’s love for Molchalin, and here he is to a certain extent right. Sophia only thinks that she loves Molchalin, but she is mistaken in her feelings. When Alexander Andreevich witnesses the heroes’ failed meeting, he becomes cruel and sarcastic:

You will make peace with him after mature reflection.

Destroy yourself, and why!

Think you can always

Protect, and swaddle, and send to work.

Husband-boy, husband-servant, from the wife's pages -

The high ideal of all Moscow men.

Chatsky regards Sophia’s affair with Molchalin as a personal insult: “Here I am sacrificed to someone!” I don’t know how I curbed my rage!” Perhaps Chatsky, to some extent, could understand Sophia if her chosen one was a worthy person with progressive views and principles. In this situation, the heroine automatically becomes Chatsky’s enemy, without arousing in him either pity or noble feelings. He does not understand Sophia’s inner world at all, assuming her reconciliation with Molchalin “after mature reflection.”

Thus, the hero fails both “in the love field” and in the public sphere. However, as N.K. Piksanov notes, “these two elements do not exhaust Chatsky’s psychological and everyday appearance. Literary criticism has long noted another feature of Chatsky: dandyism. With Molchalin he is lordly arrogant. ...Like a socialite he behaves with the countess-granddaughter. Finally, Chatsky’s charming dialogue with Natalya Dmitrievna Griboyedov maintains a flirtatious tone...”

Of course, Chatsky’s civic position was close to Griboyedov. Chatsky’s criticism of the social order and way of life of the Moscow nobility of the 20s of the 19th century contains a lot of true and vitally truthful things. But Chatsky wastes all his “ardor” on declaring civic views and beliefs - in love he is too dry, despite the sincerity of his feelings; he lacks kindness and warmth. He is too ideological in his relationship with Sophia. And this is the most important contradiction in the character of the hero.

The historical significance of the image of Chatsky
Chatsky is a new type of person active in the history of Russian society. His main idea is civil service. Such heroes are called upon to bring meaning to public life and lead to new goals. The most hated thing for him is slavery in all its manifestations, the most desirable thing is freedom. Everything around him needs, in his opinion, a total overhaul. We understand that Chatsky’s clash with Famusov’s world is not everyday, not private. It is universal. Freedom in everything must replace the hierarchical order of the previous life. Chatsky, wanting to realize his ideas, takes several practical steps, the result of which is his “connection with the ministers”, which Molchalin mentions. After all, this is nothing more than the hero’s participation in specific government reforms that did not take place. Chatsky moderates his reformist ardor and goes abroad not only in search of intelligence, but also out of powerlessness to do anything in the current situation. Nothing connects him with his native land anymore; he probably wouldn’t have come at all if it weren’t for Sophia. Departure is also a form of protest, albeit a passive one. After the scandal in Famusov’s house, Chatsky is unlikely to ever appear in Russia again. He only became stronger in the choice he made long ago: it is impossible to live such a life.

And that homeland... no, on this visit

I see that I will soon get tired of her.

In the eyes of society, which lives in the old fashioned way and is very happy with it, he is a dangerous person, a “carbonari” who violates the harmony of their existence. For the viewer, he is a revolutionary who has confused a secular drawing room and a civil debate. For Russian critical thought, which has always presented a literary work as an illustration of the history of the liberation movement, this is a socially significant person, devoid of a field of activity.

Griboyedov was the first in Russian literature of the 19th century to show the “superfluous man” (the term of A.I. Herzen), the mechanism of his appearance in society. Chatsky is the first in this row. Behind him are Onegin, Pechorin, Beltov, Bazarov.

One can imagine the future fate of such a hero in society. The most likely paths for him are two: revolutionary and philistine. Let us remember that the play takes place approximately in the 20s of the last century, when a social movement was formed in Russia, which later received the name Decembrism It was a society with a specific socio-political program, which was supposed to solve the main issue of the day - the liberation of peasants from serfdom and the limitation of autocratic power. In the minds of the Decembrists, this was an issue requiring an urgent solution - without the eradication of slavery in all its manifestations, it was impossible to move forward. But the Decembrists failed. After December, a thirty-year “eclipse” began in Russia - Nicholas I, who became emperor after the death of his brother, established a regime of strict authoritarian power. “The first years following 1825 were terrifying. Only 10 years later could society wake up in an atmosphere of enslavement and persecution. He was overcome by deep hopelessness, a general loss of strength,” as A.I. Herzen wrote about this time.

Chatsky could have been among those who came out to Senate Square on December 14, and then his life would have been predetermined for 30 years in advance: those who took part in the conspiracy returned from exile only after the death of Nicholas I in 1856. But it could have been something else - an insurmountable disgust for the “abominations” of Russian life would have made him an eternal wanderer in a foreign land, a man without a homeland. And then - melancholy, despair, bile and, what is most terrible for such a hero-fighter and enthusiast - forced idleness and inactivity
Hero of Time in "Woe from Wit"

(essay plan)
I. The problem of the “hero of time” in Russian classics, arising at different stages of socio-historical development. Reflection in the play of the main conflict of the era: the opposition of the “present century” to the “past century.” The emergence in the era of preparation for the December uprising of a new type of personality, an exponent of the progressive ideas of the time. In the play, this new type of personality is embodied in the image of Chatsky.

II. Chatsky is an exponent of the ideas of the “present century”. Analysis of Chatsky’s monologues and his disputes with representatives of Famusov’s Moscow.

1. The hero’s opposition to the rest of society on all the most important socio-political and moral issues of that time:

a) attitude to serfdom: Chatsky’s memory of the serf theater, of “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds; "

b) attitude to education: Chatsky is endowed with a “hungry for knowledge” mind, “writes and translates well”, is distinguished by free-thinking, it is not without reason that Famusov believes that what made Chatsky “crazy” was his “cleverness”, that is, deep knowledge and free thinking; he also calls Chatsky a “carbonari” for his freethinking;

c) attitude towards public opinion:

And who in Moscow was not silenced?

Lunches, dinners and dances?

d) attitude towards veneration and sycophancy:

Who needs it: those are arrogant, they lie in the dust,

And for those who are higher, flattery was woven like lace;

e) attitude towards the dominance of foreigners:

May the Lord destroy this unclean spirit

Empty, slavish, blind imitation...

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

So that our smart, cheerful people

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

f) indignation at the moral decline of the metropolitan society of men, at the role that is often assigned to the husband in the family: A husband-boy, a husband-servant from his wife's pages - the High ideal of all Moscow husbands.

(We can add that Molchalin would have made the same husband next to Sophia; the example of a “boy husband” in a comedy is Gorich);

g) Chatsky’s desire to “serve” and not “be served”, to serve the “cause” and not “persons”, his “connection with ministers” and a further complete break - a hint at the desire of the progressively minded part of the youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.

2. Chatsky’s trip abroad was connected not only with the “search for the mind,” that is, with the idea of ​​self-improvement, but also with the need to find like-minded people in his business. This is another feature of the “hero of the time” of the first quarter of the 19th century.

III. Conclusion. The irreconcilability of views between Chatsky and Famus society puts him in a tragic situation. According to Goncharov, his role is “passive”: at the same time he is a “advanced warrior”, “skirmisher”, and at the same time “always a victim”.
The role of Chatsky’s love drama in the main conflict

comedy by A. S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”
“Woe from Wit” is the only widely known work by A.S. Griboyedov. The comedy was written in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. In it, Griboyedov was able to reflect a picture of a society that was in great need of renewal, of breaking the old way of life and thinking. In short, society needed revolutionary personalities like Chatsky. He appeared in the world of the Famusovs like a fresh stream bursting into the stagnant air of Moscow. Alexander Andreevich brought with him new views on life, on the existing order. But the secular society of Moscow, accustomed to living without changing anything, rejected Chatsky, declaring him crazy.

Love and love affair occupy a very important place in revealing the plot and the main conflict in a comedy. I will try to show the importance of Chatsky’s love drama for the action of the comedy.

We know that before Chatsky left Famusov’s house, Sophia loved Chatsky. This feeling began with childhood friendship (after all, Chatsky was a pupil in Famusov’s house), then friendship turned into affection, which never developed into true love.

Chatsky, who is the bearer of new revolutionary ideas in the comedy, leaves Sophia, who was still a girl at that time, for three whole years and leaves to wander. Chatsky has been absent for three whole years. But over these three years, significant changes take place in Sophia’s soul, her attitude towards Chatsky changes.

Let us remember that in the novel “War and Peace” Prince Andrei leaves Natasha Rostova for only a year. But even this one year could not withstand Natasha, whose essence lay in the need to love not sometime later, in the future, but this very minute. The psychology of girls at that age is such that they need love, affection, attention, admiration. They may not be able to bear the separation. If love is not strong enough, then the wind of separation blows out love. But if the feeling is strong enough, then separation only aggravates the suffering.

In this case, the love of Sophia and Chatsky failed to grow and become stronger, because they were still young. Separation destroyed Sophia's love, but could not destroy Chatsky's love. Hence the love drama, the misunderstanding of one hero by another. Alexander Andreich Chatsky acted too rashly, leaving his love in Moscow. After all, Sophia’s soul was a sponge, greedily absorbing everything new and

the unknown, equally good and bad, in a word, everything that surrounded her. And Sophia was surrounded by Famus society, its morals and foundations.

Returning to Moscow, Chatsky hurries to his beloved in the hope that Sophia still loves him. But he is cruelly mistaken: Sophia’s cold reception cuts the ground from under his feet. Doubts about Sophia's loyalty creep into his soul. And for the rest of the time, Alexander Andreich Chatsky is trying to find out who Sophia really loves, who his rival is. But trying to find out this, the main character of the comedy comes into conflict with the entire Famusov society: his teacher Famusov himself; Sophia's lover, Molchalin; with Colonel Skalozub and other socialites of Moscow.

Thus, a love drama helps to introduce the reader to the mainstream of comedy. Indeed, it’s not just that Chatsky begins to criticize the customs and morals of the house, the family where he grew up. His goal is not at all to tear off the masks of pretense, hypocrisy, ignorance, and stupidity from the inhabitants of Famus’s world. He does all this as if on the way, in a fit of irritation and jealousy.

In the end, he is finally convinced (and before the scene of Molchalin and Liza’s explanation, he still cannot believe that Sophia chose him over Molchalin) of Sophia’s betrayal, that she has become completely different, that there is no hope of returning her youthful feelings. He is also convinced that Sophia is the flesh of her father, that she lives according to the laws of the Famus society that he hates.

Despite all the inertia, Famus society is very strong. It managed to win over Sophia, a representative of the new generation, to its side.

Griboyedov also used the love drama to show that people like Alexander Andreich Chatsky are still rare, that the majority still live according to the old laws.

So, a love drama in a comedy does not exist on its own, but helps to reveal the main conflict of the work: socio-political. The love drama in the comedy “Woe from Wit” was undoubtedly the catalyst for the main conflict.
“A Million Torments” by Chatsky
A. S. Griboedov entered Russian literature as the author of one work. His comedy “Woe from Wit” cannot be put on a par with the immortal creation of A. S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”, since “Eugene Onegin” has already become history for us, an encyclopedia of the life of the Russian nobility of the early 19th century, and Griboedov’s play was, is and will be a modern and vital work until careerism, veneration, and gossip disappear from our lives, as long as our society is dominated by the thirst for profit, living at the expense of others, and not at the expense of one’s own labor, as long as hunters to please and serve.

All this eternal imperfection of people and the world is superbly described in Griboyedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit.” Griboyedov creates a whole gallery of negative images: Famusov, Molchalin, Repetilov, Skalozub, etc. They seem to have absorbed all the negative features of the development of their contemporary society.

But all these heroes are opposed alone by the main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. He came to Moscow, “returning from distant wanderings,” only for the sake of Sophia, his beloved. But, returning to his once dear and beloved home, he discovers very strong changes: Sophia is cold, arrogant, irritable, she no longer loves Chatsky.

Trying to find an answer to his feeling, the main character appeals to his former love, which was mutual before his departure, but all in vain. All his attempts to bring back the old Sophia are a complete fiasco. To all Chatsky’s passionate speeches and memories, Sophia replies: “Childishness!” This is where the young man’s personal drama begins, which ceases to be narrowly personal, but develops into a clash between a man in love and the entire Famus society. The main character stands alone against the army of old “warriors” and begins an endless struggle for a new life and for his love.

He encounters Famusov himself and argues with him about the way and path of life. The owner of the house acknowledges the correctness of his uncle’s life:

Maxim Petrovich: he’s not on silver,

He ate on gold, a hundred people were at his service.

It is absolutely clear that he himself would not refuse such a life, which is why he does not understand Chatsky, who demands “service to the cause, not to persons.” Love and social conflicts are combined, becoming a single whole. For the hero, personal drama depends on society’s attitude towards him, and public drama is complicated by personal relationships. This exhausts Chatsky and as a result, he experiences “a million torments,” as Goncharov aptly puts it.

The state of uncertainty in life drives him into a frenzy. If at the beginning of the action he is calm and confident:

No, the world is not like that these days...

Everyone breathes more freely

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

Patrons yawn at the ceiling.

Show up to be quiet, shuffle around, have lunch,

Bring a chair, bring a handkerchief... -

then in the monologue at the ball in Famusov’s house, all the imbalance of the soul and mind is visible. He makes himself a laughing stock, from which everyone shies away. But, at the same time, his image is very tragic: his entire monologue is a consequence of unhappy love and society’s rejection of those thoughts and feelings, those beliefs that Chatsky defends throughout the comedy.

Under the weight of “a million torments,” he breaks down and begins to contradict common logic. All this entails absolutely incredible rumors that seem unfounded, but the whole world is talking about them:

He's gone crazy, it seems to her, here he is!

No wonder? That is...

Why would she take it!

But Chatsky not only does not refute the rumors, but with all his might, without knowing it, he confirms them, arranging a scene at the ball, then a scene of farewell to Sophia and the exposure of Molchalin:

Breathe the air alone

And in whom reason will survive...

Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore

I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,

Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!

In a fit of passion, our hero more than once sins against logic, but in all his words there is truth - the truth of his attitude towards Famus society. He is not afraid to say everything to everyone’s face and rightly accuse representatives of Famus’s Moscow of lies, hypocrisy, and hypocrisy. He himself is clear proof that the obsolete and sick closes the way to the young and healthy.

The image of Chatsky remains unfinished; the framework of the play does not allow us to fully reveal the full depth and complexity of this character’s nature. But we can say with confidence: Chatsky has strengthened in his faith and, in any case, will find his way in a new life. And the more such Chatskys there are on the path of the Famusovs, Molchalins and Repetilovs, the weaker and quieter their voices will sound.

Two lines determine the development of the play's action. At first, Chatsky’s personal story and the collapse of his love seem to develop separately from the social one, but already from the seventh scene of the first act it becomes clear that both storylines are closely connected.

The action proceeds smoothly, characters appear one after another, and disputes ensue. The protagonist’s conflict with the “past century” deepens. Having told everyone about his “millions of torments,” the young hero remains completely alone. It looks like the comedy movement is about to start to decline. But no! The development of the action continues - the personal fate of the hero must be decided. Chatsky learns the truth about Sofia and Molchalin. The denouement of both storylines occurs simultaneously, they merge, and the unity of content - one of the advantages of comedy - comes into force. The personal and social are fused in the lives of ordinary people, and they also merge in the development of the plot of the comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Why is this comedy still one of the most attractive works of our literature? Why, after so many years, do we care about Chatsky’s drama? Let's try to answer these questions, and to do this we will re-read Chatsky's monologues and remarks, and take a closer look at his relationships with other characters.

The hero of the comedy contained not only the real traits of the best people of the Decembrist era, but also embodied the best qualities of a leading socio-political figure in Russia in the 19th century. But for us, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is an artistic image of the immortal comedy, which “reflects the century and modern man,” and, although many called the comedy “Woe from Wit” a “comedy of manners,” each new generation recognizes its contemporary in Chatsky. So in I. A. Goncharov’s sketch “A Million Torments” there are the following words: “Chatsky is inevitable with every change of century to another... Every business that requires updating evokes the shadow of Chatsky...”

What is this comedy about?

Most often, critics argue about the title of the play: woe from the mind or woe to the mind? What if we shift the emphasis to the first word? After all, the play talks not about imaginary, but about real grief. We are talking about Chatsky's life drama - personal and public.

The story of the hero's life in the play is outlined in separate strokes.

Childhood spent in Famusov’s house with Sofia, then service with Gorich in the regiment “five years ago”, St. Petersburg - “connection with the ministers, then a break”, travel abroad - and return to the sweet and pleasant smoke of the Fatherland. He is young, and already has many events and life’s ups and downs behind him, hence his observation and understanding of what is happening is no coincidence. Chatsky understands people well and gives them accurate characteristics. “He himself is fat, his artists are skinny,” he says about one of the Moscow “aces” and his serf theater. He notices the hatred of the world for everything new:

And that consumptive one, your relatives, the enemy of books,

In the scientific committee which settled

And with a cry he demanded oaths,

So that no one knows or learns to read and write?..

Years have passed, and, returning from distant travels, the hero sees that little has changed in Moscow. Abroad, Chatsky “searched for his mind” and studied. But in addition to scientific truths, restless Europe, seething with revolutionary uprisings and national liberation struggles, instilled or could instill thoughts about individual freedom, equality, and fraternity. And in Russia after the Patriotic War of 1812, there was an atmosphere of critical understanding of what was happening in the empire.

It’s funny to Chatsky that he could admire embroidered uniforms that covered “weakness, poverty of reason.” Now he clearly sees that in Moscow “the houses are new, but the prejudices are old.” And therefore, the poor nobleman Chatsky refuses to serve, explaining that “I would be glad to serve - it’s sickening to be served.” He “writes and translates well,” he is kind and gentle, witty and eloquent, proud and sincere, and his love for Sophia is deep and constant.

Already Chatsky’s first monologue makes one feel the important quality of the hero - his openness. At the moment of his first date with Sofia, he is far from sarcasm, and in his remarks one can feel the mocking, good-natured mockery of an intelligent observer who notices the funny and absurd aspects of life, which is why Molchalin is mentioned after the Frenchman Guillaume. Trying to melt the ice of indifference with which Sofia greeted him, he achieves the opposite. Puzzled by her coldness, Chatsky utters a prophetic phrase: “But if so: the mind and heart are not in harmony!” This is said surprisingly precisely: in this phrase, as in the title of the comedy, the definition of the dual nature of the conflict of the work is concentrated as a play about the civic position of a person of progressive convictions and a play about his unhappy love . There is no “watershed” that separates one from the other, but there is a man-citizen, passionately in love with a beautiful girl, his like-minded person. It reveals itself to us in actions that have both personal and social meaning.

For Chatsky, in his own way, “the connection of times has fallen apart.” The time when he and Sofia had a common language and feelings, and the time when the events of the comedy take place. His mind has matured and now gives no mercy to anyone, but he loves Sophia even more than before, and this causes both her and himself great grief. Truly, “the mind and the heart are not in harmony.”

The main battle that takes place in the second act turns out to be entirely connected with an intimate line. His love monologue “Let us leave this debate...” contains perhaps Chatsky’s most important political statement. It is expressed by a hint-joke about the transformations that are possible in Molchalin, since they turned out to be possible in the government, which has transformed from liberal-democratic to barracks-despotic. Satirical bile about the transformations of “governments, climates, morals, and minds” is combined with the elegiac outpourings of the hero.

But can love overshadow, drown out in Chatsky the heartbeat of a citizen who dreams of freedom and the good of the Fatherland? The fate of his people, their suffering is the main source of Chatsky's civic pathos. The most striking parts of the hero’s monologues are those where he angrily speaks out against oppression and serfdom. He is disgusted by the “unclean spirit of blind, slavish, empty imitation” of everything foreign.

Chatsky’s drama lies in the fact that he sees tragic moments in the fate of society, but cannot correct people, and this also leads him to despair. What makes Chatsky so attractive is that even in despair he does not sigh, like Gorich, does not chatter, like Repetilov, does not even withdraw from society, like Skalozub’s brother, but boldly rushes into battle with the obsolete, the old, the dilapidated.

Director Vl. Nemirovich-Danchenko was amazed at Griboyedov’s stagecraft, when “the play suddenly breaks the boundaries of intimacy and spills into a wide stream of the public.” Chatsky’s struggle for the heart of his beloved becomes the moment of his break with the hostile world of the Famusovs, Skalozubovs, and Molchalins around him. Chatsky was deeply deceived in Sofia, and not only in her feelings for himself. The scary thing is that Sofia not only does not love, but also finds herself in the crowd of those who curse and persecute Chatsky, whom he calls “tormentors.”

Two tragedies? Woe from the mind or grief from love? They are inextricably linked, and from two tragedies one very painful one arises, since grief from the mind and grief from love merged together. But all this is complicated by the tragedy of insight, and consequently, the loss of illusions and hopes.

In his farewell monologues, Chatsky seems to sum it up: “What did I expect? What did you think you’d find here?” In his words one can hear annoyance, bitterness, pain of disappointment, and in the very last monologue - hatred, contempt, anger and... there is no feeling of brokenness :

You have glorified me as crazy by the whole choir.

You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,

Who will have time to spend a day with you,

Breathe the air alone

And his sanity will survive.

This is not what a defeated man says. His protest is “an energetic protest against the vile racial reality, against bribe-taking officials, libertine barbarians, against ignorance and servility,” wrote L. G. Belinsky.

Smart, trembling with indignation, constantly busy thinking about the fate of Russia, Chatsky not only irritates a society mired in inertia, but also arouses its active hatred. He enters the fray and triumphs over the bureaucratic limitations of Famusov, the soldiery and obscurantism of Skalozub, the servility and meanness of Molchalin, the vulgarity and fanfare of Repetilov.

Chatsky experiences personal, heartfelt grief, thanks to his mind, irreconcilable with social deformities. After all, the cornerstone of the concept of intelligence is freethinking, so Chatsky’s life guidelines are not money and career, but the highest ideals. Chatsky's mind remains invulnerable and brings its owner that highest happiness when a person with a hole in his truth defeats lies and injustice.

This understanding of life, duty, and happiness is taught by A. S. Griboyedov’s smart and deeply human comedy “Woe from Wit.”

In the comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" depicts a society of nobles, embodying the features of a backward Russia clinging to past orders. This Famus society of the last century is contrasted with the young nobleman Alexander Andreich Chatsky. Chatsky is a bright representative of the younger generation of Russia, which won the Patriotic War of 1812.

This post-war period became a turning point for the country: the unshakable canons of autocracy suddenly began to shake. A fresh wind of change blew in and brought into the minds of the Russian people an understanding of the worthlessness of the government and the entire social system of Russia. Against this socio-political background, free-thinking citizens of the country unite in secret circles and societies. The Decembrists appear.

The young, energetic Chatsky and the ossified Famus society personify the struggle between old and new Russia, young and old generations, an obsolete socio-political system and new reformist trends, freethinking. Chatsky is the personification of a man of new times, differing from representatives of the outgoing era in his sober mindset and Decembrist views.

Since Chatsky's late father was a friend of Famusov, Chatsky grew up and was raised in Famusov's family along with his daughter Sophia. The play does not contain a detailed description of Chatsky's growing up, studies and wanderings. From the monologues of Chatsky and other characters in the work, we can conclude that he received a good education, writes and translates well, is engaged in literary activities, has visited abroad and served in the Russian army. A three-year stay abroad gave Chatsky the opportunity to expand his horizons, take a fresh look at the world, and acquire new knowledge. However, Chatsky does not at all boast that he has visited other countries, does not bow to everything foreign, like the majority of Famus society. The young nobleman remains a patriot of his homeland; he truly loves Russia and his people. Chatsky condemns and ridicules the stupid orders of the reality around him, he is noble and honest in his judgments.

Chatsky returns to Famusov's house with the hope of meeting Sophia and seeing a renewed Moscow. However, he will be disappointed. His beloved forgot about him, and Moscow appeared before him filled with vulgarity and lies, flattery and stupidity, immorality and limitations. Chatsky finds that Moscow has not changed at all; the same spirit of worthlessness, servility and suppression of the individual reigns here as before 1812.

Chatsky's deep disappointment leads him to an inevitable clash with Famus society. Enthusiastic at the beginning of the play, Chatsky becomes increasingly bitter towards the end, unable to come to terms with the ossified and established orders of the Moscow nobility. The growing contradiction between Chatsky and Moscow noble society is further aggravated by the fact that Chatsky himself is of noble origin. And this already reveals a struggle within the nobility itself, a struggle of views and beliefs.

1. This struggle of beliefs of two generations is depicted between Famusov, a representative and champion of the old order, and Chatsky, a new man, a Decembrist revolutionary. Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?” exposes and debunks all the baseness and vulgarity of the society of Catherine's era, calling it an era of humility and fear, flattery and arrogance. Unlike Famusov, whose ideal is Maxim Petrovich, a flattering and vile nobleman, Chatsky considers his ideal to be a free-thinking, non-servile and intelligent person.

2. If Famusov and others like him serve for the sake of profit and the opportunity to please an important person, then Chatsky wants to serve for the good and prosperity of his homeland. It is precisely because of the need to serve and please his superiors that Chatsky leaves his service. He is happy to serve, but serving Chatsky is sickening. He strives to benefit his country by engaging in science, literature and art. However, a society clinging to antiquity does not understand the importance of this sphere of activity, and immediately persecutes everyone who is involved in science and culture and declares them to be dangerous dreamers. Chatsky is known as such a dangerous dreamer in Famus society. The good news is that he also has like-minded people in the person of Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew and cousin Skalozub.

3. While Famus society, currying favor with the West, in particular with France, worships everything foreign and prefers the French language to Russian, Chatsky, as a true patriot, in every possible way defends national culture, despite the fact that he had to visit the West for a long time . He highly values ​​the Russian people, their intelligence and ingenuity, believes in them and strives to improve their lives.

4. In contrast to Famus society, which evaluates a person by his wealth, kinship and number of serfs, Chatsky values ​​a person’s personal qualities, his intelligence, dignity and talent.

5. Famusov and others like him are dependent on the judgments of others, they are afraid to openly express their opinion and act not as they would like, but in such a way as not to arouse the indignation of Princess Marya Aleksevna. The freedom-loving Chatsky, in a conversation with Molchalin, is surprised at the sanctity of someone else's opinion for Moscow inhabitants. He himself values ​​each person’s own opinion and recognizes the right to defend it.

6. Chatsky caustically ridicules and condemns arbitrariness and despotism, flattery and hypocrisy, the emptiness and worthlessness of the vital interests of the conservative strata of the nobility.

The image of Chatsky is more fully conveyed by his speech, intonation, and manner of communication. Chatsky is an intelligent, highly educated person. His literate speech is characterized by a rich vocabulary. He uses both folk expressions and foreign words. In his speech there are also ancient Russian words such as just now, indeed, more, tea. He does not flaunt foreign words in vain, but uses them only as a last resort, if a suitable Russian word is not available. Chatsky reads a lot and uses quotes from literary works in his speech. For a more vivid perception of what he said, Chatsky uses many aphorisms.

Chatsky’s speech is quite emotional, it is filled with exclamatory and interrogative sentences, it fully conveys his feelings, be it anger, love, contempt, or ridicule. Chatsky can accurately describe any person.

The tone of his speech depends on Chatsky’s state of mind. When communicating with Sophia, he worries like any lover, so he is talkative and animated. The words addressed to the girl are covered with lyrical notes. When communicating with Famusov at the beginning of the play, he is open and good-natured. However, as he stays in Famus’ deceitful society, Chatsky becomes more and more irritated and his speech reaches the highest intensity of indignation and caustic ridicule at the very end of the work.

), belongs to the best part of the then Russian young generation. Many literary critics argued that Chatsky is a reasoner. This is completely false! One can call him a reasoner only insofar as the author expresses his thoughts and experiences through his lips; but Chatsky is a living, real face; he, like every person, has his own qualities and shortcomings. (See also Image of Chatsky.)

We know that Chatsky in his youth often visited Famusov’s house and, together with Sophia, studied with foreign teachers. But such an education could not satisfy him, and he went abroad to travel. His journey lasted 3 years, and now we see Chatsky again in his homeland, Moscow, where he spent his childhood. Like any person who has returned home after a long absence, everything here is sweet to him, everything evokes pleasant memories associated with childhood; he takes pleasure in going over the memories of acquaintances in whom, by the nature of his sharp mind, he certainly sees funny, caricatured features, but he does this at first without any malice or bile, and so, for laughter, to embellish his memories: “a Frenchman, knocked down by the wind ...”, and “this... little black one, on crane legs...”

Woe from the mind. Maly Theater performance, 1977

Going through the typical, sometimes caricatured aspects of Moscow life, Chatsky passionately says that when

“...you wander, you return home,
And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us!”

In this, Chatsky is completely different from those young people who, returning from abroad to Russia, treated everything Russian with contempt and praised only everything that they saw in foreign countries. It was precisely thanks to this external comparison of native Russian with foreign language that the language developed in that era to a very strong extent. gallomania, which so outrages Chatsky. His separation from his homeland, the comparison of Russian life with European life, only aroused an even stronger, deeper love for Russia, for the Russian people. That is why, having found himself again after a three-year absence among Moscow society, under a fresh impression he sees all the exaggeration, all the funny sides of this gallomania.

But Chatsky, who is hot by nature, no longer laughs, he is deeply indignant at the sight of how the “Frenchman from Bordeaux” reigns among Moscow society only because he is a foreigner; is indignant at the fact that everything Russian and national causes ridicule in society:

“How to put the European in parallel
Something strange about the national one!” –

someone says, causing general laughter of approval. Reaching the point of exaggeration, Chatsky, in contrast to the general opinion, says with indignation:

“At least we could borrow a few from the Chinese
Their ignorance of foreigners is wise.”
………………………
“Will we ever be resurrected from the foreign power of fashion,
So that our smart, kind people
Although he didn’t consider us Germans based on our language?” –

meaning by “Germans” foreigners and hinting that in society in that era everyone spoke foreign languages ​​to each other; Chatsky suffers, realizing what an abyss separates millions of the Russian people from the ruling class of nobles.

From an early age, children were given a foreign upbringing, which gradually alienated secular youth from everything native and national. Chatsky casually sneers at these “regiments” of foreign teachers, “more in number, at a cheaper price,” who were entrusted with the education of noble youth. Hence the ignorance of their people, hence the lack of understanding of the difficult situation in which the Russian people found themselves, thanks serfdom. Through the mouth of Chatsky, Griboyedov expresses the thoughts and feelings of the best part of the nobility of that time, who were indignant at the injustices that serfdom entailed, and who fought against the tyranny of inveterate serf-owners. Chatsky (monologue “Who are the judges?..”) paints pictures of such arbitrariness in bright colors, recalling one master, “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged several of his faithful servants for three greyhounds; another, a theater lover, who

“I drove to the serf ballet on many wagons
From mothers and fathers of rejected children"; –

he made “all of Moscow marvel at their beauty.” But then, in order to pay off creditors, he sold off these children, who portrayed “cupids and zephyrs” on stage, one by one, separating them forever from their parents...

Chatsky cannot calmly talk about this, his soul is indignant, his heart aches for the Russian people, for Russia, which he loves dearly, which he would like to serve. But how to serve?

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

he says, hinting that among the many government officials he sees only the Molchalins or such nobles as Famusov’s uncle Maxim Petrovich.

I don't go here anymore.
I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,
Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!
Give me a carriage, a carriage!”

In this stormy outburst of despair, Chatsky’s entire ardent, unbalanced, noble soul is visible.

Comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov occupies a special place in the history of Russian literature. It combines the features of outgoing classicism with new artistic methods: realism and romanticism. In this regard, literary scholars note the features of the portrayal of the characters in the play. If in the comedy of classicism before all the characters were clearly divided into good and bad, then in “Woe from Wit” Griboyedov, bringing the characters closer to real life, endows them with both positive and negative qualities. This is the image of Chatsky as the main character of the play “Woe from Wit”.

The background of the main character of the play "Woe from Wit"

In the first act, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky returns from a long trip around the world, where he went to “search for his mind.” Without stopping home, he arrives at Famusov’s house, because he is driven by sincere love for the daughter of the owner of the house. They were once brought up together. But now they haven’t seen each other for three long years. Chatsky does not yet know that Sophia’s feelings for him have cooled down, and her heart is occupied with something else. The love affair subsequently gives rise to a social clash between Chatsky, a nobleman of progressive views, and the Famus society of serf-owners and rank-worshippers.

Even before Chatsky appears on stage, we learn from Sophia’s conversation with the maid Lisa that he is “sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp.” It is noteworthy that Lisa remembered this hero when the conversation turned to intelligence. It is intelligence that is the trait that sets Chatsky apart from other characters.

Contradictions in Chatsky's character

If you trace the development of the conflict between the main character of the play “Woe from Wit” and the people with whom he is forced to interact, you can understand that Chatsky’s character is ambiguous. Arriving at Famusov’s house, he began a conversation with Sophia by asking about her relatives, using a sarcastic tone and sarcasm: “Has your uncle jumped off his life?”
Indeed, in the play “Woe from Wit” the image of Chatsky represents a rather hot-tempered, in some moments tactless young nobleman. Throughout the entire play, Sophia reproaches Chatsky for his habit of ridiculing the vices of other people: “The slightest oddity in someone is barely visible, your wit is immediately ready.”

His harsh tone can only be justified by the fact that the hero is sincerely outraged by the immorality of the society in which he finds himself. Fighting her is a matter of honor for Chatsky. It is not his goal to prick his interlocutor. He asks Sophia in surprise: “...Are my words really all caustic words? And tend to harm someone?” The fact is that all the issues raised resonate in the soul of the hero; he cannot cope with his emotions, with his indignation. His “mind and heart are not in harmony.”

Therefore, the hero lavishes his eloquence even on those who are clearly not ready to accept his arguments. A.S. After reading the comedy, Pushkin spoke this way about this: “The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with, and not to throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs...” And I.A. Goncharov, on the contrary, believed that Chatsky’s speech was “boiling with wit.”

The uniqueness of the hero's worldview

The image of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” largely reflects the worldview of the author himself. Chatsky, like Griboyedov, does not understand and does not accept the slavish admiration of the Russian people for everything foreign. In the play, the main character repeatedly ridicules the tradition of inviting foreign teachers into the house to educate children: “...Nowadays, just like in ancient times, regiments are busy recruiting teachers, more in number, at a cheaper price.”

Chatsky also has a special attitude towards service. For Famusov, Chatsky’s opponent in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” his attitude towards the hero is determined by the fact that he “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that.” Chatsky clearly outlines his position on this issue: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.”

That is why Chatsky speaks with such anger about the habit of Famus society to treat disadvantaged people with contempt and curry favor with influential people. If for Famusov his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who fell on purpose at a reception with the empress in order to please her and the court, is a role model, then for Chatsky he is just a buffoon. He does not see among the conservative nobility those from whom it would be worth following an example. Enemies of a free life, “passionate for rank,” prone to extravagance and idleness - this is what the old aristocrats are for the main character of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Chatsky.

Chatsky is also irritated by the desire of the Old Moscow nobles to make useful acquaintances everywhere. And they attend balls for this purpose. Chatsky prefers not to mix business with fun. He believes that everything should have its place and time.

In one of his monologues, Chatsky expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that as soon as a young man appears among the nobles who wants to devote himself to the sciences or arts, and not to the pursuit of rank, everyone begins to fear him. And they are afraid of people like Chatsky himself, because they threaten the well-being and comfort of the nobles. They introduce new ideas into the structure of society, but the aristocrats are not ready to part with the old way of life. Therefore, the gossip about Chatsky’s madness, started by Sophia, turned out to be very opportune. This made it possible to make his monologues safe and disarm the enemy of the conservative views of the nobles.

Feelings and characteristics of the hero’s internal experiences

When characterizing Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit,” you can pay attention to his last name. She's talking. Initially, this hero bore the surname Chadsky, from the word “chad”. This is due to the fact that the main character is, as it were, in the clouds of his own hopes and shocks. Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” experiences a personal drama. He came to Sophia with certain hopes that did not come true. Moreover, his beloved preferred Molchalin to him, who is clearly inferior to Chatsky in intelligence. Chatsky is also burdened by being in a society whose views he does not share and which he is forced to resist. The hero is in constant tension. By the end of the day, he finally understands that he has parted ways with both Sophia and the Russian conservative nobility. There is only one thing the hero cannot accept: why is fate favorable to cynical people who seek personal gain in everything, and so merciless to those who are guided by the dictates of the soul, and not by calculation? If at the beginning of the play Chatsky is in the midst of his dreams, now the true state of affairs has been revealed to him, and he has “sobered up.”

The meaning of Chatsky's image

Griboyedov was led to create the image of Chatsky by the desire to show the brewing split in the nobility. Chatsky's role in the comedy "Woe from Wit" is quite dramatic, because he remains in the minority and is forced to retreat and leave Moscow, but he does not give up his views. So Griboyedov shows that Chatsky’s time has not yet come. It is no coincidence that such heroes are classified as superfluous people in Russian literature. However, the conflict has already been identified, so the replacement of the old with the new is ultimately inevitable.

The given description of the image of the main character is recommended for reading by 9th grade students before writing an essay on the topic “The image of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit””

Work test

Article menu:

In literature, the appearance of heroes who are ahead of their time, being incomprehensible and not accepted by their contemporary society, is a frequent phenomenon.

At first it seems that this phenomenon is exclusively literary and has nothing to do with real life, but, in fact, this is a mistaken opinion. The appearance of such people at the end of a century or during crisis periods of development is a frequent occurrence, but it is quite difficult to fully analyze such individuals while being in the same time period. They, against the general background, look eccentric and strange. Their position always contradicts generally accepted principles and therefore sometimes it seems that they are on the verge of madness and common sense.

The logic of their actions and positions can be analyzed based on the further development of history and culture. This process is easy to translate into reality if what we have in front of us is not a living person, but a work of art, moreover, written several decades or even hundreds of years ago. In this case, we can assess the significance of the position of a particular character.

"Extra" Chatsky

The concept of “an extra person” is inherent in the image of Chatsky. This term has Russian roots. The first manifestation of this phenomenon was discovered by literary critics and scientists in the image of the main character of Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”. Based on the position of literary scholars, such a hero is always higher in his level of education and talents than everyone else around him. His potential is so limitless and diverse that he cannot realize himself in any type of activity. He is constantly in search of the meaning of life, but cannot find it, so he spends his strength and skill on all sorts of little things in life - revelry, balls, duels - in a word, on everything that brings pleasure or is the child of passion. Such characters bring suffering to others (mostly women), break the destinies of many people, sometimes even those closest to them, and become the cause of death. They do not see any wrongdoing in their actions - they perceive what happened impartially.

To some extent, this position is akin to Chatsky - he also seems to us to be torn from another era, searching for his destiny and possessing extraordinary potential. His distinctive feature from the “superfluous man” is that Chatsky does not bring such radical destruction to society or its individual representatives, he does not die, as is customary for such characters at the end of the story, but simply leaves a society alien to him.

Based on this difference, in the scientific literature Chatsky is called the harbinger of an extra person. The concept of this type of hero is important for understanding the holistic picture of the hero’s entire image and actions - the character periodically acts negatively, not because he is poorly brought up, but because, under the pressure of society and his inner world, a different product of activity and reaction to the environment is impossible for him.

Prototypes of Chatsky

Prototypes are a common phenomenon in literature. Sometimes the relationship between the hero of the story and a real-life person is prosaic; sometimes it is difficult to find a prototype due to the person’s lack of fame. In the case of Chatsky, the prototypes were two people: Pyotr Chaadaev and Wilhelm Kuchelbecker.

The first in his activities was a publicist and philosopher (as he himself claimed, a “Christian philosopher”). The second is a poet, friend and classmate of Pushkin. Both Chaadaev and Kuchelbecker were active public figures who vehemently and sharply criticized the government and order - this position makes them similar to Chatsky. Griboedov's contemporaries repeatedly spoke out about the similarity, even external, with Chaadaev. Many considered the 19th century philosopher to be crazy (like Chatsky’s Famus society) and tried in every possible way to get this sharply sarcastic man out of his area.

Biography

Griboyedov gives the reader scant information about the biographical data of the main character. It is important for the author to show not the process of his formation as a person, but a sharp criticism of aristocratic society, its habits and principles.

But, nevertheless, Griboyedov briefly talks about some moments of the life path of his main character.

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is a nobleman by birth. His parents died when he was still a child. The boy was taken in by his father’s friend, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, to be raised by him. For some time, Chatsky was raised and educated together with Famusov’s daughter, Sophia. Having matured, the young man begins to live separately. He is quite an eligible bachelor in his possession of an estate with 300 - 400 serfs. After some time, Chatsky goes abroad. After three years, Alexander Andreevich returns to Russia and visits the house of Pavel Afanasyevich, dear to him. It is this place that later becomes the background for the unfolding of the main events.

Separation from his homeland and people close to him had a nostalgic effect on Chatsky - everything connected with childhood and youth is dear and dear to him. Neither Famusov nor Sophia feel such joy from his arrival - their joy is more ostentatious than sincere. They pay attention to him so as not to look ignorant in the eyes of others. Their joy is just a sign of decency.

In the further course of events, this situation worsens - the appearance of Chatsky becomes a test for everyone. The fact is that Alexander Andreevich always has some kind of barb or sarcastic remark in stock. Nobody wants to receive such a pleasant message addressed to them, even if it has a real basis. The desire to appear virtuous in the eyes of others takes over among aristocrats. Chatsky always finds something to latch onto - bribery, resolving issues through friendly connections and kinship, theft - this is not a complete list of the main problems of modern society.

Chatsky hopes that his love for Sophia will help him realize himself in family life, but this hope is not realized - the girl plays with the feelings of the young man, but in fact loves another.

More flexible in character, able to give a compliment at the right moment, to suck up. Sophia cares little about the reasons for her lover’s attitude towards her; she seriously thinks that this is a manifestation of love. In fact, the reason for such reverence for her is the material base of her father. Molchalin, whom Sophia dotes on, does not love her, but tolerates and pleases her only in order to improve his financial situation. Chatsky cannot come to terms with such orders - in his monologues he repeatedly claims that the aristocracy has ceased to be guided by the principles of morality. She is only interested in a way to line her pockets.

Rumors spread by Sophia about Chatsky's insanity aggravate the situation. Alexander Andreevich has no choice but to leave.

Chatsky's appearance

Alexander Sergeevich does not give an accurate description of the appearance of the heroes of the comedy “Woe from Wit”. The image of Chatsky is no exception. We can talk about his appearance, clothing style and physique based on reviews about him and brief hints about the personality of other characters.

Based on the general opinion, Alexander Andreevich is a person of pleasant appearance, without any flaws.

In the comedy, Chatsky gives recommendations to Platon Mikhailovich Gorich on horse riding and active pastime. This fact allows us to conclude that Alexander Andreevich himself is not alien to such an attitude towards leisure; it is likely that he is a man of slender build.

Famusov, who saw Chatsky for the first time after a three-year separation, notes that he is a dandy, that is, a man who dresses in fashion.

Thus, Alexander Andreevich is not without cute, pleasant facial features. He, like all people his age, is interested in equestrian sports and fashion trends in clothing. Chatsky is a unique comedy character; he is not without negative character traits, but they are explained by the influence of society on him. Being “prickly” is the only way for him to protect himself from the madness of the aristocracy.