1. The plot of the comedy.
2. Features of the conflict.
3. Character system.
4. Genre originality.
5. Language and verse.

The idea of ​​the comedy apparently dates back to 1818. It was completed in the fall of 1824; the censorship did not allow it to be published or staged on stage. The comedy sold out on the lists and soon became known to the entire reading public. "Who among the literate Russians does not know it by heart!" - asked the well-known magazine "Moscow Telegraph". It was allowed for publication (with censorship exceptions) in 1831, after the death of Griboyedov, and at the same time it was staged on the professional stage. But completely, without cuts, "Woe from Wit" was published almost forty years later - in the era of reforms, in 1862.

The enthusiastic attitude of the Decembrist-minded part of society was expressed by the Decembrist writer A. Bestuzhev: "The future will appreciate this comedy with dignity and place it among the first creations of the people." "... There is a lot of intelligence and funny in verse ...", "... a striking picture of morals ..." (Pushkin), "... mind and salt darkness ..." (Katenin) - these statements show that they have seen contemporaries in the comedy of Griboyedov. The conflict was close and understandable - the clash of an independent, ardent, honest and noble person, a person of new thoughts, with environment, with its sluggishness, lack of spirituality and fierce hostility to all manifestations of independence, with hatred of any attempts to renew life. But there was also something else. For today's reader or viewer in "Woe from Wit" everything is perfect, it never occurs to us to look for any shortcomings or oddities in this classic piece; Griboyedov's contemporaries saw, first of all, his new and unusual form, and it raised many questions. The questions concerned (first of all) the construction of the plot and the character of the protagonist. P.A. Katenin, poet and playwright, close friend Griboyedov, says: "... the plan is insufficient and the main character is confused", Pushkin also writes about the absence of a plan and calls it a "not at all smart" person, P.A. Vyazemsky also writes about the "oddities" of comedy, although he considers them an artistic merit playwright.

What is the "ill-conceived plan"?

The structure of the plot in dramatic work consists of several elements: the exposition (the viewer's acquaintance with the scene of the action and its participants), the initiation (establishment, "tying" of the conflict) the development of the action (the action is continuously moving forward, and each next round of development depends on the previous one) culmination (moment highest voltage, when further development of the conflict is impossible), denouement (resolution of the conflict: either leading to well-being - then it comes about a comedic denouement, or causing death or suffering of the hero - in this case, the denouement is tragic or dramatic).

The exposition in Woe From Wit is not very long (five phenomena of the first act), but strikingly rich: we learn about the character of Famusov with his ingenuous hypocrisy (flirts with Liza, and his daughter says about himself - "... he is known for his monastic behavior") avarice (his memories of Madame Rosier, the "eternal French", "destroyers of pockets and hearts" - no one knows what hurts him more), contempt for education (words about teachers - "vagrants"); Sophia, her character, the ability to get out of difficult situations(composed dream), love for Molchalin, resentment, attitude towards Skalozub - all this also becomes known from the exposition; and himself, who has not yet appeared on the stage, is illuminated by the opposite characteristics of Liza ("... sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp") and Sophia (a pretender and a mocker). The exposition prepares the starting point - arrival. The plot defines a conflict - a clash of interests, a lover and seeking an answer, and Sophia, for whom it is a threat to her love for Molchalin. And the subsequent action is associated with activity, looking for an answer to the question of who can be the chosen one of Sophia. Here are the main dramatic moments in the development of the action: Sophia's provocation by praise to Skalozub ("... the straightness of the camp, the face and voice of a hero") and an indifferent response ("Not my novel"), convincing that Skalozub is not her chosen one; Sophia's fainting due to the fall of Molchalin, for the first time to suspect her interest in "who is like all fools", and the following test of Sophia (the result is a three-fold repetition: "She does not respect him", "She does not give him a penny "," Shalit, she doesn't love him ") and Molchalin's test, again with the same result:

With such feelings, with such a soul, are we loved? The deceiver was laughing at me!

And the culmination is Sophia's response, organizing a rumor about madness: "He's out of his mind," and a little later a remark that leaves no doubt about her intentions:

It is good to try on yourself!

But why did Griboyedov in his letter to Katenin, describing the plot of the comedy, say a strange phrase: "Someone out of anger invented about him that he is crazy ..."? She is strange (how is this “someone”? Why an indefinite pronoun? The whole logic of the action says that it cannot be anyone but Sophia!) Only at first glance. Essentially, it doesn't matter who started snowballing slander, it is important that everyone is involved - both enemies and friends. People who are unlike each other - Famusov and Zagoretsky, Molchalin and Skalozub, Gorich and Khlestova - are united in their confrontation. At the climax, the conflict, which was given as love, reveals its effective social force. It seemed to us that all the words about freedom and slavery, about dignity and obedience, about service and serving and much more - only words that characterize him, nothing more. But it turned out that these are actions that put him one against all. “The only truly heroic face of our literature,” said Apollon Grigoriev. And in the denouement of the comedy, Griboyedov connects two previously divided plans: he learns about who his rival is, and that for everyone he is mad. Reproaches addressed to Sophia are juxtaposed with denunciations of the "tormentors of the crowd." "Insane you all denounced me in chorus," - in the words addressed to Sophia, he unites her, formerly beloved, with the entire hostile circle. His anger pours out not only "on his daughter and on his father and on his foolish lover," but also on "the whole world." A love, private conflict merges with a civil, social one.

The denunciations are confirmed by the entire unfolding of the action. But there is no complete coincidence of the views of the author and the hero: the objective picture of life shown in the play turns out to be wider than the view of the hero. At the beginning of the comedy, I am convinced that the main vices - all types of slavery from serfdom to disrespect for one's own personality - are the vices of the last century, and "now the world is not like that." He is sure that the success of reason is enough for the victory of the new, that the old century is doomed to destruction. The development of action and the entire system of images in comedy shows how naive such a view is: the old evil skillfully adapts to the present. The conflict is determined not by the antagonism of two centuries, but by the ability to survive and adapt evil: Maxim Petrovich repeats itself in Famusov, Famusov - in Molchalin (ie in a generation), Moscow "old men" praised by Famusov, who "argue, make noise and - disperse" , are duplicated in the young participants of the "secret meetings", about which Repetilov tells: "Noise, brother, we are making noise ..." Everyday life becomes a formidable force capable of conquering any ideal aspirations.

The system of characters is based on the confrontation of the entire Moscow, "Famus" circle - young and old, men and women, the main actors and numerous minor guests - Famusov's guests at the ball. The main semantic image that creates this opposition is the image of the “mind”. The general concept of “mind” becomes, as it were, a conventional character in the play, people think of it, they understand it differently, they fear it, they persecute it. In two camps, there are two opposite ideas about the mind: a liberating mind associated with enlightenment, learning, knowledge ("mind hungry for knowledge"), and - base common sense, good nature, the ability to live. The Moscow circle seeks to oppose other values ​​to the mind: for Famusov, these are patriarchal family ties ("Let yourself be known as a wise man / And they will not be included in the family, / Don't look at us. “Oh, if someone loves whom, / Why should the mind seek and travel so far?”), For Molchalin - the precepts of the service hierarchy (“In my years you shouldn't dare / Have your own judgments”), for Skalozub - the poetry of frunt (“By my scholarship you will not faint ... I will give Prince Gregory to you / Feldwebel in Volters ").

An important place in the system is occupied by off-stage characters(those who are mentioned, but who do not appear on stage). They seem to expand the space theatrical stage, introducing into her the life that remained outside theater hall... It is they who allow you to see in not a renegade and a strange eccentric, but also a person who feels like one of his own in his generation. A circle of like-minded people is guessed behind him: mind you, he rarely says “I”, much more often “we”, “one of us”. And Skalozub's disapproving comments about cousin, who “firmly picked up some new rules” and, leaving the service while “the rank followed him,” “began to read books in the village,” or Princess Tugouhovskoy about his nephew, Prince Fyodor, a “chemist and botanist” who studied at the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute, where "professors are practicing schism and unbelief."

Where did the contemporaries feel about the violation of the dramatic canons? Let us briefly note the main aspects of artistic innovation in comedy from the point of view of the genre, the construction of characters' images, and the peculiarities of speech.

Genre. Unlike the aesthetics of classicism, with its strict isolation and definiteness of genre forms (his own system of norms in comedy, satire, tragedy), Griboyedov offers a free and wide combination of possibilities inherent in different genres (“I live and write freely and freely” - letter Katenin). The comedy, built according to the rules of classicism, is combined with genre characteristics satire and a realistic picture of mores. (It was this side that Pushkin especially liked - "a striking picture of morals!"). In addition, in Woe from Wit, the comic is juxtaposed with the dramatic (the term comedy-drama was suggested by Belinsky). The seriousness and pathos of the speech do not exclude the comic positions in which he finds himself - see his conversation with his ears plugged, i.e. deaf, Famusov. But the dialogue of the deaf is an image that applies to the entire situation of the play: deafness is a lack of understanding. Both Skalozub, who decided that he was fighting for the army against the guards, and the princess, who only understood that he had deigned to dignify her as a modist, and Repetilov, who did not feel irony at all and was ready to consider him his comrade-in-arms, were deaf. But he himself is deaf, not hearing Sophia, not understanding how serious the force is, embodied in the funny and pathetic for him Molchalin. The comic creates the complexity of meaning: - a tragic figure standing in a conflict against everyone, but the denouement, moreover, cannot be considered tragic, for she is introduced into a comic situation of misunderstanding. So, Famusov, confident that he found a date with his daughter, remained deaf. And in more general sense- the whole society remained deaf, unable to understand, i.e. To "hear" the hero. This was astutely observed by the remarkable Russian critic Apollon Grigoriev, who remarked that “it is not a matter of the fact that the environment he is struggling with is positively incapable of not only understanding him, but even taking him seriously. But Griboyedov, as a great poet, cares about this. No wonder he called his drama a comedy. "

The classic rules of the three unities (action, time and place) are respected, but take on a different meaning, helping to enlarge the generalizations expressed in the conflict. Famusov's house becomes a model of the entire Moscow society, one day - a means of expressing the maximum confrontation between the hero and everyone else ("... he will come out of the fire unharmed, / Whoever has time to stay with you, / Breathe the air alone, / And the mind will survive in him" ).

In the comedy, there is a traditional outline of a love intrigue, but the more noticeable is the inversion of the usual plot situations: love and success should go to the positive hero, and here the insignificant wins in a love duel; the heroine, traditionally deceiving her father, contrary to tradition, deceives herself; there is no active struggle between rivals provided for by the canon.

Characters images. One of the requirements of traditional comedy at the time of Griboyedov was a limited number of characters. Nothing extra - not a single character you can do without comedy intrigue... Katenin reproaches Griboyedov for introducing "side persons who appear only for a moment." Although they are, according to the critic, "skillfully depicted", but this is a violation of the dramatic canons. A large population, not provided for by tradition ("the people of characters", according to Vyazemsky), Griboyedov needed to create an acute social conflict- the confrontation of one hero to the whole society.

But the main novelty was that in place of the usual comedic roles of an eccentric, blinded by love, his successful rival, a boastful warrior, a comic old man father, original characters appeared, in which there was no schematism or one-sidedness, characters with a new quality - complexity. Although the characters are endowed with "speaking" names, their characters are by no means limited to this. The complexity is manifested primarily in the combination of opposite properties in the heroes. So, in anger, acrimony, acrimony are combined with tenderness, gentleness, good nature; he has a sharp, perceptive mind, but at the same time - innocence, naivety; irony goes hand in hand with sensitivity. Sophia is sentimental - and vindictive, dreamy - and cunning, courageous and capable of desperate actions - and cowardly. It is the indeterminacy of qualities that makes it possible to naturally combine the two lines of the plot: love and ideological. The conflict affects life in its entirety. One of the most interesting finds of Griboyedov is Repetilov. In him is the maximum concentration of the property of repetition, he is a person who does not have his own character and his own ideology and therefore borrows as many strangers as he pleases (Pushkin: “there are 2,3,10 characters in him”). He is both a frivolous playboy, a loser careerist, and a noisy freethinker. How socially significant this image is can be seen from how it is continued in Russian literature (for example, Sitnikov and Kukshin in Turgenev's novel, Lebezyatnikov in Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment).

Language and verse. Comedy in verse was not new in Russian drama before Griboyedov, the poetic form was the norm for high comedy classicism. The surprising novelty of "Woe from Wit" in this area was that in it the Alexandrian verse, obligatory in comedy and tragedy (a couplet system: six-foot iambic with adjacent rhymes), which, due to its monotony, doomed plays to the monotony of verse intonation, was replaced by free , i.e. iambic varieties (you can see such iambics in Krylov's fables). The use of poetic lines of different lengths (from six-foot to one-foot) gave, on the one hand, a natural intonation of lively colloquial speech, on the other hand, the sharp contrast of long and short verses helped to express the sharpness of collisions of ideas, change of thoughts and moods.

The most characteristic side of comedy is the richness of the text with verses-aphorisms. Any of the characters - Molchalin (“Ah! gossips worse than a gun! "), Repetilov (" Yes, an intelligent person cannot but be a cheat "), Liza (" Sin is not a problem, rumor is not good "). Especially a lot of aphorisms belongs to Famusov - the main spokesman for the truths of his circle: “Signed, off your shoulders”, “Who is poor, he’s not a match for you”, “Well, how not to please your own little man”, “What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say!”. But the true storehouse of wit is. Pay attention to the brilliant irony in the aphorisms: "Blessed is he who believes, warmth to him in the world", "I would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve," "The houses are new, but the prejudices are old", "Why are the opinions of others only holy?"

In Woe From Wit, Russian noble life appears in its concreteness, and great value it has the language of comedy. Colloquial speech, everyday vocabulary, noble vernacular, an abundance of phraseological units ("sleep in hand", "gave a blunder", "mortal hunt", etc.), and next to it - speech, brilliant book speech educated person, intellectual and scribe, saturated general concepts(“He speaks as he writes,” Famusov will say about him). The singularity and opposition of speech to other characters supports the main conflict "Woe from Wit". Chatsky ... the most lively person, his nature is stronger and deeper than other persons and therefore could not be exhausted in comedy. "

About Sophia:

“This (Sophia) is a mixture of good instincts with lies, a lively mind with the absence of any hint of ideas and beliefs, confusion of concepts, mental and moral blindness - all this does not have the character of personal vices in her, but appears as common features her circle ... Sophia ... hides in the shadows something of her own, hot, gentle, even dreamy. The rest belongs to upbringing. "

About Famus society:

“This husband (Gorich), recently still a vigorous and lively person, now sank down, donned, as in a dressing gown, in Moscow life the master,“ husband-boy, husband-servant ”, the ideal of Moscow husbands ... This Khlestova, the remainder of Catherine's age , with a pug, with a little arap girl, - this princess and prince Pyotr Ilyich - without a word, but such a talking ruin of the past, - Zagoretsky, an obvious swindler who escapes from prison in the best living rooms and pays off with obsequiousness like dog diarrhea, and these NN and all their sense, and all the content that occupies them! The influx of these faces is so abundant, their portraits are so embossed that the viewer grows cold to intrigue, not having time to catch these quick sketches of new faces and listen to their original dialect. "

Woe From Wit (1824) became the first Russian realistic comedy, this work became a landmark for the establishment of realism in Russian drama. However, precisely because it was the first realistic work, the influence of the aesthetics of romanticism can also be distinguished in it (even the image of Chatsky, which is generally realistic, is very similar to the images romantic heroes opposed to the circumstances and the rest of the heroes), and even the influence of classicism - here both the observance of the requirement of "three unities" and the "speaking" surnames of the heroes. However, we can say that in the comedy "Woe from Wit" Griboyedov creatively reworked all the best that had been created in Russian literature before him, having managed to create a qualitatively new work on the basis of this, and this novelty is determined primarily by new principles of character creation, new an approach to understanding the essence of character images.

Griboyedov's heroes are heroes whose images are socially motivated, they are so because they belong to a certain time and certain strata of society, although this does not mean that they are schematic heroes. It's just that in each of them the main character traits are formed by the environment, each of them expresses this environment, while remaining an individual.

The language of the comedy "Woe from Wit"

The language of the comedy "Woe from Wit" has also become fundamentally new for Russian literature, the language characteristics of the heroes are presented to the reader of each of them in such a way that, for example, Sophia's speech cannot be confused with the speech of Princess Tugouhovskaya, and Molchalin and Skalozub differ in both characters and their speech ... The ultimate individualization of the speech characteristics of the heroes, brilliant command of the Russian language, the aphoristic lines of the characters, the acuteness of polemics in dialogues and monologues - all this makes the language of Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" a unique phenomenon in Russian literature of the 20s of the XIX century, and the fact that many phrases from it became "winged", confirms that not only it belonged to its time.

Comedy Conflicts

Comedy conflicts are very interesting. The external conflict is obvious: this is the confrontation between the progressive man of his time (Chatsky) and the society living in the past and striving to keep this life unchanged. In other words, the conflict between the old and the new is, in general, a banal conflict. However, it is most closely connected with the internal conflict of comedy, with the contradiction of the image of Chatsky. How could he, the smartest person, not understand that Sophia loves another after she herself told him about it and gave the name of this person? Why does he with such fervor prove his point of view to people whose value he knows perfectly well, as well as knows that they will never agree with him, but even cannot understand him? Here it is, the internal conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit" by Griboyedov. Chatsky deeply and sincerely loves Sophia, and this feeling makes him so incomprehensible and even funny - although can the one who loves be funny, no matter how funny he may seem? .. Something internal and external conflicts comedies coincide, although Sophia's love for Molchalin is not socially conditioned in terms of motivation, rather, on the contrary, but after all romantic look Famusov's daughter on the latter is also characteristic of the society in which they live.

Famusov's image

The world of Famusov is the world of the Moscow nobility, which lives according to the norms of the "Times of Ochakov and the conquest of the Crimea" and does not want to change anything in their lives. Famusov, "the manager in the official place," does business carelessly ("Signed, off your shoulders" ...), but he succeeds in organizing his life with all sorts of conveniences, not excluding "monastic behavior" ... He knows for sure that for his daughter "Who is poor is not a match for you," he is well versed in gossip and everything that concerns other people's estates, he can, on occasion, remind Molchalin to whom he owes his current position, and he is openly servile to Skalozub, seeing in him a profitable groom for his daughter ... In a conversation with Chatsky, not understanding even half of what the interlocutor says, he is terrified to death, believing that he is talking with a "carbonari" (that is, a rebel) who "wants to preach freedom" and "He does not recognize the authorities," demands: "I would strictly forbid these gentlemen to drive up to the capitals for a shot." He is not at all that stupid, Famusov, so he is ready by any means to fight for the preservation of his position and his way of life, he defends his right to see life like this and live like that. His danger is that he is ready for exactly what to do, or maybe he is still very much, so far he and those like him are the true masters of life, and only one person opposes them - Chatsky, who is very lonely in this society, that no matter what they talk about "nephews" and others, supposedly professing different ideals, in the house of Famusov Chatsky is truly alone.

The image of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit"

The image of Chatsky was perceived by his contemporaries as the image of an advanced person defending the ideals of a new life, which was to replace the dominance of "famusism". He was seen as a representative of the younger generation, an intelligent, educated, decent person who ardently advocates the need to change life and, it seems, is taking some steps in this direction, although the author speaks about it in passing. The only indisputable thing is that Chatsky is a thinking and gifted person, his judgments about public service, it's not for nothing that Famusov is so scared about duty, ideas are expressed in them state structure, undermining the foundations of the existence of Famusov and others like him: "I would serve the cause, not the people ...", "I would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve," "And, for sure, the world began to become stupid."

There was a lot of debate about whether the image of Chatsky in Woe from Wit could be considered the image of a Decembrist in literature, but there is no doubt that the hero's ideas are close to the ideas of the Decembrists, to whom the author of the comedy had great sympathy. However, Chatsky is not just a spokesman for the ideas of his time, advanced in the opinion of the author of a comedy. This is a living person, he is sincere and deep in his feelings, his actions are determined by the feeling of great love that he feels for Sophia. He is in love, he remembers Sophia as a young girl who, judging by the fact that she makes excuses to Lisa, showed him unambiguous signs of attention, and now he wants to see the same Sophia in her, not wanting to see that dramatic changes have happened to her. Irritation and even a certain bitterness of Chatsky is caused by the fact that Sophia has changed her attitude towards him, and this prevents the hero from really perceiving the circumstances, seeing them as they are. The hero's mind and feelings are too much occupied with love for him to control himself, for him now the whole world is concentrated in Sophia, therefore everything else and everyone else simply annoys him: annoys Famusov, whom he nevertheless shows a certain respect as Sophia's father; irritates Skalozub, in which he is ready to see Sophia's possible fiancé; annoying Molchalin, who, "with such a soul", cannot (as he believes!) be loved by the same Sophia.

Chatsky's persistent attempts to find out the truth about Sophia's attitude to himself border on pathology, and his stubborn reluctance to accept this truth might seem blind if it were not for love ... However, the scene, which he witnesses in the last act, gives him the final answer to The most important question for him now is that he receives irrefutable evidence that Sophia not only does not love, but also betrays him, so Chatsky's last monologue is the cry and pain of an offended soul and offended feeling, but here the Famus society is precisely described with a murderous accuracy, which took away from the hero the most precious thing in his life - love. Chatsky leaves Moscow, and his departure seems to indicate that he is defeated. True, there is a well-known idea of ​​I.A. Goncharova that "Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting a fatal blow on it with the quality of fresh power," but can this undoubted victory of the hero help him when his heart is breaking with pain? .. Therefore, we can say that that the ending of the comedy is close to a tragic one - for him, the "eternal denouncer", whom neither a brilliant mind, nor the ability to "laugh everyone" could help to find ordinary human happiness ...

Molchalin

The system of comedy images is built in such a way that the author gives us the opportunity to see Chatsky's "anti-doubles": these are the images of Molchalin and Repetilov. Molchalin is Chatsky's happy rival in love, in his own way he is very strong personality who manages to achieve a lot in life. But at what cost? He faithfully observes the behest of his father: "My father bequeathed to me: First, to please all people without exception ...". He pleases, even with "our deplorable klya" (this is what Sophia calls) the nights "respectfully", because she is "the daughter of such a person"! Of course, we can say that for Molchalin such behavior is the only possible one from the point of view of achieving the "degrees of the known", but is it not at the cost of losing one's self-esteem to achieve them?

Repetilov

The image of Repetilov was perceived by contemporaries as a clear parody of the Decembrists, which may seem strange - if we recall the attitude of the comedy author to them and their ideas. However, Repetilov is very similar to ... Chatsky, only Chatsky, deprived of his mind, his self-esteem, his ability to behave as his honor requires. The comic double of the protagonist helps to better understand the image of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit", to see him strengths and appreciate them at their true worth, while remaining an original and distinctive artistic image, ridiculing those of the supporters of the Decembrists who preferred "words, words, words ..." to action.

Sophia

The image of Sophia in the comedy turned out to be complex and contradictory. She created a romantic image of Molchalin for herself and fell in love with her "creation", ready to defend her beloved from the unfair, as she is convinced, attacks from Chatsky and succeeded a lot in this (remember, it was from her "feed" that gossip from Chatsky's madness went for a walk!), Which became an involuntary witness of how the person she loves taunts her and her love - this is what the heroine of the comedy has to go through, and at the end of the work she cannot but evoke sympathy from the viewer. Sophia is both smart and knows people well - how brilliantly she gives a hint of Chatsky's imaginary madness to the secular gossip G.N., there is nothing to reproach her with on occasion! However, like Chatsky, she was blinded by love, and, bringing suffering to Chatsky, she herself suffers no less from the betrayal of the person whom she believed and for the sake of love for whom she made certain sacrifices.

"Theme of the mind"

The "theme of the mind" occupies a special place in the comedy. The "grief" brought to Chatsky by his undoubted intelligence is aggravated by the fact that in Famusov's world a different idea of ​​"intelligence" dominates: here the one who knows how to achieve ranks and money is appreciated, therefore Uncle Famusov, endlessly falling before those who "ranks gives ", is revered as a model of wisdom, and the clever Chatsky is declared insane ... To be thinking man among those who do not understand the difference between intelligence and cunning - this is Chatsky's lot.

Author's position

The image of the author, the author's position in the comedy "Woe from Wit" is manifested primarily in the creation of characters and the main conflict of the comedy. Chatsky is depicted with great sympathy, his moral superiority, his victory over the world of Famusov speaks about whose side the author is on. Satirical image the world of old Moscow, its moral condemnation also indicate the author's position. Finally, the ending of the comedy, when it turns into a tragicomedy (mentioned above) in terms of expression author's position also clearly tells the viewer which side the author is on. In the comedy of Griboyedov, the author's principle is expressed both in directions and in speech characteristics images-characters, the unique personality of the author of one of the greatest comedies in Russian literature is visible in everything.

As noted, " catch phrases"from" Woe from Wit "they firmly entered both Russian literature and the Russian language. The work itself also took its place in Russian culture, which gives reason to talk about popular character comedy Griboyedov.

The comedy of the Russian classic Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" is divided into four acts. The first takes place in the house of a big official Famusov, here the daughter Sophia, a darling and clever girl, the father finds him at a secret meeting with a minor official, Molchalin. Then comes Chatsky, a man of progressive views, in love with Sophia since childhood, without reciprocity.

Analysis of the second act of "Woe from Wit": here the main problems of the work are raised: the conflict of free-thinking, free-thinking with the old despotic foundations. Also, a conflict of selfish interests and feelings of sincere, unconditional, ardent. In a conversation with Colonel Skalozub, Famusov expresses his opinion: you have your own estate and service - the groom. No - go for a walk, Vasya!

Chatsky has a conversation with Famusov, where the second is horrified by his free views young man: "Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!" “When it is necessary to serve, and he bent over the edge” - around this example of a successful person a dispute arises between the owner and Chatsky, the latter refuses the example offered to him.

At this time, Molchalin falls from his horse, the frightened loving Sophia faints upon seeing this. Her feelings for Molchalin, which she carefully concealed, become clear to the inhabitants of the house.

Analysis of the third act of "Woe from Wit": here the topic of dependence on public opinion, idleness, herd and stupidity in society is raised. The carefree crowd at the ball dress up Chatsky as crazy thanks to Sophia's cruel joke: no one wants to admit that they were not the first to know about this news. Suddenly, wealthy and distinguished individuals resemble a herd of sheep. People trust the authorities unconditionally: “if the princes know, then it’s true!” And they behave with herd cruelty, for the most part with indifference to the fate of Chatsky: everyone is unanimously afraid of him, afraid to speak: "Suddenly he will rush!"

Analysis fourth act"Woe from Wit"... In the finale of the comedy, the theme and the problem of self-esteem are raised. The caught Molchalin crawls on his knees in front of Sophia, but she is already disgusted with his imitation. Self-esteem rises in her at this moment. The same self-esteem awakens in Chatsky and makes him leave the house and sleepy Moscow, where the girl who attracted him played stupid games with him, where he felt sick and stifling to be in society.

Famusov's image: Famusov is the owner of the house, the manager of the official place, Sophia's father, a power-hungry and voluptuous person, as evidenced by his intention to flirt with the servants. "Oh! give it from the gentlemen. For them, prepare yourself for every hour, ”says Liza, the maid, about the owner. Famusov is used to commanding other people, he is used to wealth. For his daughter Sophia, he arranges such headwash on all occasions that keep on: pouring the stream of words on the head of another person Famusov perfectly knows how. His reverence for dignity exceeds all reasonable limits. He does not encourage his daughter's teaching, since he did not find anything for himself in the books, Sophia considers it his property:

“Tell me that it is not good for her to spoil her eyes,

And it's not very useful in reading:

She has no sleep from French books

But the Russians hurt me to sleep ...

Reads fables all night

And here are the fruits of these books! ... "

Sophia's image: Sophia is the daughter of Famusov, a lover of French novels; the girl is proud, freedom-loving and rebellious to her father: “What is the rumor to me? Whoever wants to judge so ... ”- she says, showing courage in her choice. Sophia has her own opinion and is able to make choices. But this girl's mind is more intriguing than positive. He cruelly laughs at the enamored Chatsky, spreads rumors about him, does dirty tricks like a child. The intimidated Molchalin, the hidden schemer, and the outer lamb, for her, is the appropriate pair.

The image of Chatsky. Alexander Chatsky is a rebellious person: "I would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve ...." It is necessary to serve the cause, not the persons - so Chatsky thinks. He is a man with mature feelings, pride and principles, and develops his mind. Unfortunately, Sophia is unable to appreciate this.

The image of Molchalin: Aleksey Stepanovich Molchalin is a person who has his own mind. He does not feel passionate feelings for Sophia, and, probably, does not feel any, this conquers her. V free time he is having an affair with Lisa. He is a restrained, obsequious, quiet man, zealous in service, submissive to Famusov: "In my years one should not dare to have one's own judgment," he is laconic:

"Oh! Sophia! Could it be that Molchalin was chosen by her!

And why not a husband? There is only little intelligence in him;

But to have children

Who lacked intelligence?

Serving, modest, there is a blush in the face ... "

The comedy is written alive and easy tongue, excellent rhymes are selected, the text is full of colorful images and comparisons. The work is filled with vivid images, aphorisms, witty expressions and the author's sayings, which later became widespread among the people: “Pass us more than all sorrows, and lordly anger, and lordly love ... ".

Analysis of the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit"

A comedy written by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov. Unfortunately, there is no exact data on the time of the origin of the idea of ​​the comedy. According to some reports, it was conceived in 1816, but there are suggestions that the first thoughts about comedy appeared with Griboyedov even earlier. Having finished the work in 1824, the author made a lot of efforts to print it, but he failed. It was also not possible to obtain permission for the production of Woe from Wit, but this did not prevent the widespread popularity of the comedy. She dispersed in the lists, she was read, discussed, admired.

"Woe from Wit" stands at the origins of the birth of national Russian literature, opening a new era in its history - the era of realism. The author pays tribute to the traditions of classicism (unity of action, place and time, “meaningful” names, love intrigue), but the play fully reflects the then reality, the characters of its characters are multifaceted (just remember Famusov, flirting with Liza, fawning before Skalozub, reading Sophia's instructions) ... The comedy is written in a lively Russian language, the sharp, polemical dialogue captivates her, makes her feel the tension of the action. I.A. Goncharov wrote in critical article"Million of torments", that the play depicts a long period of Russian life, that "in a group of twenty persons, like a ray of light in a drop of water, all of the former Moscow, its drawing, its then spirit, historical moment and manners" was reflected.

Griboyedov's comedy is based on conflicts: love and social. One with the other turns out to be closely connected, personal problems arise from public ones. Griboyedov wrote in a letter to one of his friends: “... A girl who is not stupid herself, prefers a fool smart person(not because the mind of our sinners was ordinary, no! and in my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person); and this person, of course, in contradiction with society, those around him, no one understands him, no one wants to forgive, why is he a little taller than others ... "

The protagonist of the play, Alexander Andreyevich Chatsky, after a three-year absence returned to Moscow and immediately, without stopping home, came to Famusov's house. One of the many reasons that prompted Chatsky to leave the capital was one that worried and tormented his heart most of all - his love for Sophia. Sophia is a clever girl, Chatsky was sure of that. As a fourteen-year-old girl, she laughed with him both at the youthful aunt and at the devotion of the father to the English Club. If in the past there was no this sympathy, if she then - three years ago - did not share, albeit half-childishly, without a deep enough understanding, his opinions and thoughts, he probably would not have embarked on inquiries and recollections. Trying to resume the conversations interrupted three years ago, Chatsky wanted to know if she was still laughing at what was funny to him, that is, he wanted to understand her current way of thinking. If she is now his associate, then the hopes were not in vain.

But Sophia unequivocally condemned even the lightest of his mockery of Moscow. Naturally, a suspicion arose:

... Isn't there really a groom here?

And the most important thing in Chatsky's painful search was that the criterion of intelligence was the only one for him. Skalozub therefore did not arouse great suspicion in him because the clever Sophia could not fall in love with such a fool. For the same reasons, for a long time he did not believe in her love for Molchalin. Even for a minute, he did not want to admit that the clever Sophia could sincerely praise her beloved for servile obedience and servility.

Realist Griboyedov perfectly understood that a person's character is formed under the influence of living conditions - in broad sense this word - and above all under the influence of the immediate environment: family ties, upbringing, everyday customs, traditional views, opinions, prejudices, etc. You can understand a person only when you know his environment. Therefore, the author acquaints us in sufficient detail with the environment in which Sophia was formed as a person in the absence of Chatsky.

Most of all, this society is characterized by Famus, Sophia's father. Pavel Afanasevich Famusov is a typical Moscow gentleman of the beginning of the century before last with a characteristic mixture of tyranny and patriarchy. He is used to being a gentleman, he is very confident and loves himself. He holds a large official post, but he also treats the service like a lord, does not burden himself with it. His political ideals boil down to the glorification of everything old, established: he lives well, and he does not want any changes. The ideal person for Famusov is one who has made a profitable career, no matter by what means. Subservience and meanness for him too good way if it results in desired result... Famusov is not an abstract evil, but a concrete, living one. You believe in its reality - and therefore it is especially frightening.

Famusov likes Colonel Sergei Sergeevich Skalozub. He is comparatively young, but tomorrow he will certainly become a general; he is a reliable protector of antiquity. Skalozub is a noisy, dressed in uniform, preoccupied with military exercises and dancing, a typical Arakcheev officer, stupid and thoughtless, an opponent of any free thought and enlightenment.

Aleksey Stepanovich Molchalin belongs to the Famusian society, moreover, he is a direct product of it. From the very first appearance, he seems to be a complete insignificance: he is afraid to say an extra word, willingly pleases in front of everyone, does not dare to have his own opinion, he considers his main talent to be "moderation and accuracy." These properties ensure his present and future success in the Famusian world.

Famus society is represented not only by the main characters of the play, but also by episodic ones.

The old woman Khlestova is an important Moscow lady, rude, domineering, accustomed not to restrain herself in words. She, even in relation to Famusov, cannot but show her authority. And at the same time, she is very similar to Famusov: both with a constant desire to command people, and devotion to the old, obsolete foundations and orders.

Anton Antonovich Zagoretsky is a necessary companion of the Famusovs and Khlestovs. He is always ready to offer his services, while his questionable moral qualities do not bother the owners of society. Khlestova says about him:

He is a liar, a gambler, a thief ...

I was from him and the doors were locked;

Yes, master to serve ...

Speaking about Zagoretsky, Khlestova characterizes herself, shows moral level and your own, and your circle. The circle that Chatsky opposes.

Chatsky is a freedom-loving person, his ideals are the ideals of the Enlightenment, he sees his duty and life calling in serving the Motherland. The order that exists in Russia outrages him, he angrily denounces the "noble scoundrels" - the serf-owners, strangling everything new, oppressing their own people. He is a true patriot, he does not understand what exists in high society admiration for everything foreign. Chatsky embodied the best features of progressive youth early XIX century, he is distinguished by a sharp, lively mind. Showing the conflicts between the hero and the society around him, the author reveals the content of the main conflict of the era: the collision of "the present century and the past century", who does not want to give up its positions. The positions of the "past century" are still strong: its representatives form public opinion, the opinion of the world, which is of great importance in the life of anyone. It costs them nothing to declare a person insane, thereby making him safe for themselves: insanity explains Chatsky's impudent speeches, his "strange" behavior. But Chatsky is kept in the house of Famusov by Sophia, her fate, her attitude towards him.

You had to see a night meeting, hear with your own ears that it was Sophia who invented and put into circulation the gossip about madness, in order to finally understand that she had made her choice long ago - the choice between him and Molchalin, between the lofty ideals of humanity and the morality of Famus' Moscow. She may not want to make peace with Molchalin, but Chatsky is lost to her forever. Now she had to wait with the priest with fear "what Princess Marya Alekseevna would say."

In the comedy "the past century" wins, but is Chatsky defeated? "Chatsky is broken quantity old force ", - writes IA Goncharov in the article" Million of torments ". In the words of Goncharov, Chatsky is a “herald”, “initiator” of the new and therefore “always a victim”. “Chatsky is inevitable when one century changes to another,” the writer concludes.

These words contain the eternal, universal meaning of Griboyedov's play. The struggle between the old and the new will always continue. The author with unsurpassed power of persuasiveness showed that the power of the old is flawed, blind.

A huge number of quotes from "Woe from Wit" became sayings, catchphrases, firmly taking a place in the Russian language, thereby ensuring the comedy immortality, as well as its author, Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov. "Woe from Wit" is still unsolved and, perhaps, the greatest creation of all our literature ... "(A. Blok).

He completed his work on the play Woe from Wit back in 1824, and to this day it does not lose its relevance and is popular with readers. This comedy has become on a par with the best works Russian literature, and perhaps was the only creation of the author, which became known throughout the world. V school curriculum this work does not take the last place, so you will have to work on the analysis Griboyedov comedy Woe from wit for episodes.

Conflict and Issues Woe from Wit

- this is a striking work related to the Russian classical literature 19th century. It takes readers to Famusov's house, where an atmosphere of lies and pretense reigns. And now, in the midst of all this deception, Chatsky appears, who three years ago ran away from boredom in search of his mind abroad. Love for Sophia and love for the Motherland makes him come back. Returning home, Chatsky did not notice any changes during his absence, the only thing is that he is now very different from Famus society and no longer fits into it. He's superfluous now, and Chatsky is crazy.

The comedy of grief from the mind is rich in content, where each monologue and remark has its own meaning, helping to reveal the raised conflicts and problems of the work.

Speaking of conflict, the reader sees a contradiction in the title of the comedy. Indeed, in fact, there can be no grief from the mind, but not in the 19th century, not in Famus society. If the mind was the arbiter of destinies for the enlighteners, then for the Famus society it was a plague. And here Chatsky understands that there will be only grief from his mind.

In the play, we see two conflicting camps, so the whole comedy is an eternal conflict, where the heroes even have universal and different attitudes towards the people and the country. So, if for Chatsky the meaning of life is to serve his Motherland, then for the opposite camp, state ideas are not important, they would receive a rank, and titles.

In his play, Griboyedov raises the problem of cruelty, careerism, ignorance and respect for rank. Now let's make a comedy Woe from Wit for action.

Analysis of the comedy Woe from Wit by action

Considering the analysis of individual episodes of Woe from Wit, we will be able to study in more detail the play by Griboyedov with its problems, current topics, ideas, where the imperfection of the state apparatus, the problem of education, the injustice of serfdom are evident. The comedy consists of four acts, we will consider them.

Analysis of 1 action

In the first act of the comedy, all events take place in Famusov's house and we go to Pavel Afanasyevich's house. The maid Liza covers Sophia, who is on a date with Molchalin. The man was supposed to leave unnoticed, but he is still found, who is told that he was passing through the house. Lisa and Sophia are discussing Molchalin, and the servant says that she has no future with this man, since the girl's father will not approve of the marriage. The best choice Sophia will become Skalozub, who has both rank and money. And according to Famusov, this is enough for the happiness of his daughter. Discussing the mind, Liza remembered Chatsky and the young lady's love. At this moment, Chatsky appears, who was in a hurry to Sophia, and whom Sophia met very coldly. Chatsky suspects that the girl is in love with someone else.

In general, here the first acquaintances of the reader with the characters take place, through whose conversations we begin to understand what is important for whom and is in priority.

Analysis of 2 actions

Moving on to the analysis of 2 actions of the play by Griboyedov, we observe the first conflicts that arise between the characters. Even at the beginning, when Chatsky asks Famusov about what answer he would receive if he asked for Sophia's hand, we see that the rank and position of the future son-in-law are important for Famusov. At the same time, everything can be obtained without merit, it is enough to curry favor, as his uncle did in his time, who, for his ability to serve the empress, reached a high position. Such an attitude was alien to Chatsky, who blames the past century, that is, the Famusov generation, for judging people by the size of their wallet and are ready to be jesters. Chatsky, on the other hand, preferred to serve the cause, rather than individuals. We see the rich Skalozub, who has set himself the goal of becoming a general, but he does not want to deserve this title, but to get it. Skalozub would be a good game for Sophia. And here a conflict of free-thinking manifests itself, where Famusov begins to blame Chatsky for his bold thoughts and statements. And Chatsky does not accept the fact that people of science, those who are engaged in art and do not chase ranks, are shunned in Famusian society.

Analyzing the second action, we see that for Famusov he is the groom who has rank and property. In the second act it also becomes known true attitude Sophia to Molchalin. Chatsky now understands who the girl is not indifferent to.

Analysis 3 actions

Next, we are transferred to the room where the conversation between Sophia and Chatsky took place. The man wanted to understand who is dear to the girl's heart, whether it is Molchalin, or Skalozub. But she avoided answering, while Chatsky confesses to Sophia that he is crazy about her. This phrase will be used in the future by the heroine against Chatsky, calling him a madman at a party. News of madness at the ball, where only influential people capital, quickly spread. Chatsky himself was uncomfortable among this society, he was dissatisfied with the capital, where there was nothing Russian. At every step, the spirit of the foreign was felt. There was a lot of French. So much so that the Frenchman felt at home in Russia. It was terrible and unacceptable for Chatsky, but it was customary for Famus society and they gladly bowed to France.

The analysis of 3 actions touches on the topic of society's dependence on a different opinion, where it was worth throwing a phrase, as everyone immediately accepted it, without bothering to search for truth and lies. We see the herd of the crowd, which, because of Sophia's joke, made Chatsky a madman. We see how much the authorities are believed here. And the author himself writes that if the princes say this, then it is so. In fact, this was also one of the problems raised by Griboyedov.

4-action analysis

Continuing the analysis of 4 acts of the comedy, we see its final stage. This is the end of the ball, all the guests are leaving. In act 4, we see the true face of Molchalin, who does not love Sophia at all, but simply curses favor with Famusov. Sophia hears this, who drives Molchalin away. The same man tries to earn forgiveness by throwing himself at Sophia's feet. Chatsky also recalls self-esteem. He hoped to awaken love in the girl, but she only laughed at him, calling Chatsky crazy. She betrayed their friendship, betrayed their feelings. Chatsky accuses the heroine of giving three years ago hope without telling the truth about her indifference to him. But all three years he thought only of her. Chatsky becomes ill in this Famus society. He is stuffy, he is disgusted with the sleepy capital. Without losing his dignity, Chatsky expresses his opinion and now leaves such a strange house of Famusov.

In act 4 of the comedy, we see the problem of human dignity, which should be in everyone. But, for the Famus society, this is alien.

Having finished the analysis of episodes of Griboyedov's work, we were once again convinced how relevant it is. Indeed, in our time, many catch phrases are used in everyday life. The play is filled with vivid images and comparisons. There are a lot of witty statements here, and the language is as clear as possible, which rightfully makes the work great and popular. Its main value is that, unlike other writers of the 18-19th centuries, who denounced the vices of individual people, Griboyedov fell with satire on the entire way of life, which was completely mired in vices. This was the power of comedy, which became the property of Russian literature and is read with pleasure today.

"Woe from Wit" analysis of Griboyedov's comedy

What grade will you give?

Essay on the topic: "Chatsky and Molchalin in the comedy Woe from Wit"