“Woe from Wit” (1823) is one of the brightest and most talented comedies in Russian literature. It touches on many issues and problems of the life of Russian society at the beginning of the 19th century.
In his work, Griboyedov captured two camps that existed in public life Russia at the beginning of the nineteenth century. On the one hand, at that time progressive, independent and educated people appeared, people advocating for the development of Russia. The representative of such people in “Woe from Wit” is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. With all his inherent strength, this hero attacks the ignorance, inertia, and sycophancy that reign in old Moscow.
Chatsky is not alone in his struggle. From the characters’ remarks, we understand that in Russia there are like-minded people of Alexander Andreevich. This cousin Skalozub, who because of some “new rules” “...suddenly left his service, / Started reading books in the village.” This is the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - “chemist and botanist.” These are the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, about whom Princess Tugoukhovskaya indignantly says that they “practice in schisms and lack of faith.”
These “new” people were opposed by a large camp of people with conservative, inert views, alien to science and education, living under the yoke of other people’s opinions and sidelong glances from “respected” authorities. In the comedy, these are Famusov and other representatives of “old” Moscow: Molchalin, Skalozub, Tugoukhovskys, Countess Khryumina, the Gorichi couple, Foma Fomich, Princess Marya Aleksevna and many others.
Representatives of Famusov's Moscow do not accept Chatsky. They do not understand and are afraid of this young upstart who is trying to destroy their foundations, laws and authorities. Therefore, the rumor about Alexander Andreevich’s madness, started by his beloved, Sophia, was received by everyone with gloating. By standards noble society Chatsky is the madman. He is too free in his thoughts and actions, which equates high society to madness.
How is the conflict between “old” and “new” Moscow resolved? In the finale of the comedy, the social conflict (Chatsky - Famusov's Moscow) comes to a resolution, and the love triangle is resolved (Sofya - Molchalin - Chatsky).
Sophia learns that Molchalin did not love her, but courted her unwillingly. Moreover, the girl’s father, Famusov, finds out about Sophia’s affair with his secretary. He blames everything on new trends that made his daughter too “free.” Famusov threatens to take the “lovers” with a tight rein:
Wait, I'll correct you:
Go to the hut, march, and go after the birds;
Yes, and you, my friend, I, daughter, will not leave...
You shouldn’t be in Moscow, you shouldn’t live with people;
To the village, to my aunt, to the wilderness, to Saratov,
There you will grieve...
Moreover, Chatsky also becomes a witness to the exposure. He was finally convinced that it was Molchalin who was his rival in love for Sophia. Alexander Andreevich is amazed and disappointed: “Blind man! In whom I looked for the hope of all my labors!” Not only did Sophia choose such an insignificant person as Molchalin. All the time that Chatsky was in Moscow, the girl led him by the nose and did not admit that she loved someone else.
Alexander Andreevich is broken. In Moscow he was declared crazy, so he must leave the city. His beloved betrayed and deceived him. In despair, Chatsky concludes:
Who was it with? Where fate has taken me!
Everyone is driving! Everyone curses! A crowd of tormentors...
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.
Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore.
The hero leaves. But it cannot be said that he suffered a complete defeat, and the Famusovs won. We know that Chatsky has supporters. I believe that progressive youth will work and fight for the good of their country, without retreating from the “past century.” Therefore, we can say that Chatsky suffered a temporary defeat. He appeared in Moscow too early. The old order was still too strong. But after some time, new trends will still prevail, and the “past century” will recede. I think this is inevitable: the new and young will win sooner or later anyway.
The fate of Sophia is also unclear. It seems to me that Famusov threatened her with Saratov in the heat of his feelings. He wanted everyone around him to hear how angry he was. After all, for this hero the most important thing is public opinion, the word “Princess Marya Alekseevna”. I believe that when Famusov cools down, he will forgive his daughter. Sophia will remain in Moscow and look for a profitable husband. Everyone will gossip about the incident in Famusov’s house and forget, switching to something more “fresh.”
But these are assumptions and conjectures. Griboyedov himself does not say anything about the further fate of his heroes. He leaves the ending of the play “open”.
The stories of the heroes remained unfinished. Why? Perhaps because Griboyedov wrote about his modernity. He couldn't know exactly what would happen next. The writer could only guess or express his wishes.
In addition, it seems to me that the finale was not so important for Griboedov. It was much more important for him to show the clash of heroes itself, to draw their portraits, that is, to capture the “past century” and the “present century.”
The “open” ending of the comedy “Woe from Wit” allows readers to reflect, express their assumptions, opinions about future fate heroes. This means that this work will not leave the reader indifferent. In my opinion, this is what it means the main objective any writer.
Currently watching:
Born on August 20 (31 n.s.) in Moscow in a rich noble family. His childhood years were spent in his father's estate, the village of Nemtsovo, near Moscow, and then in Verkhny Ablyazov. From the age of seven, the boy lived in Moscow, in the family of a relative Argamakov, with whose children he studied at home with professors of the newly opened university. In 1762 - 1766 he studied at the St. Petersburg Page School body,
A.N. Ostrovsky wrote many plays about the merchants. They are so truthful and bright that Dobrolyubov called them “plays of life.” In these works, the life of the merchants is described as a world of hidden, quietly sighing sorrow, a world of dull, aching pain, a world of prison, deathly silence. And if a dull, meaningless murmur appears, it fades away at its birth. In his article devoted to the analysis of Ostrovsky’s plays, critic N.A. Dobrolyubov on
Text. V. Peskov (1) The teacher wanted us to love the village. (2) - Poets grow up in the village. - (3) To prove it, he remembered the names, and the truth turned out: poets grew up in the village. (4) The teacher loved discipline, calculated everything in the lesson down to the minute. (5) But when goldfinches landed on the dry burrs under the windows, he quietly opened the frame and sprinkled seeds on the windowsill. (b) In the summer we weeded beets, transported hay, went to pick strawberries, threshed
All spring fairy tale A.N. Ostrovsky's "Snow Maiden" is fanned good romance. This play is the embodiment of the playwright’s dream about a social future, about the peaceful life of the people, free from the power of arbitrariness and violence, about the fact that good must be done with my own hands. It depicts the kingdom of happy Berendeys, who do not know destructive strife and bloody wars: Merry are the cities in the land of the Berendeys, Joyful are the songs in the groves and valleys. World of Krasnoyarsk
In the 1900s, a severe economic crisis broke out in Russia. After each crop failure, masses of ruined, impoverished peasants wandered around the country in search of income. Factories and factories were closed. Thousands of workers and peasants found themselves homeless and without a means of subsistence. Under the influence of severe economic oppression appears great amount tramps who sink to the “bottom” of life. Taking advantage of the hopeless situation of the impoverished
Our life consists of our actions and interactions with the world around us. Nature makes up important role V environment. She is our mother. It is not simple handsome expression. Man comes from nature and is part of it. She accompanies us from birth to death. We grow up enjoying its beauty, we learn the whole world from the smallest - from a small flower to high mountains and deep oceans. Today we live in a world where
N.V. Gogol’s immortal comedy “The Inspector General” gave us many unforgettable images that are still relevant in our time. One of the main characters of the comedy is the mayor Anton Antonovich Skvoznik-Dmukhanovsky. He's no good as a city leader. The activities of Anton Antonovich led to the fact that everything in the city fell into disrepair; not a single service honestly works. The mayor sees how bad things are everywhere, but does not want to do anything at all. Judge
Plastov Arkady Aleksandrovich is a Russian artist, like his father, he became a legendary master of painting in the portrait genre. This artist is characterized by depictions of human characters and human relationships. He is able to convey through pictures inner world experiences of their heroes, which is truly valued in the world of art. The painting “Sanya Malikov” is one of Plastov’s most touching works. It depicts a boy about two years old
The theme of love is the main theme in the works of A. I. Kuprin. It is love that makes it possible to realize the most intimate principles of the human personality. Especially dear to the writer are strong natures who know how to sacrifice themselves for the sake of feeling. But A. Kuprin sees that man in his contemporary world has become shallow, vulgar, and entangled in everyday problems. The writer dreams of a personality who is not subject to the harmful influence of the environment, and embodies his dream
1. The world of deep and dramatic experiences, charm, wealth and uniqueness of personality are imprinted in love lyrics Anna Akhmatova. The theme of love certainly occupies her poetry. central place. Genuine sincerity, utmost frankness combined with strict harmony, laconic capacity poetic language Akhmatova's love poems allowed her contemporaries to call her the Russian Sappho immediately after the release of the first
In those years when A.S. Griboedov creates his comedy; in Russian society there is already a clear gap between the educated part of society, thinking and searching, striving for fundamental changes in Russian life, and the authorities. The War of 1812, which caused a general patriotic upsurge, united the entire society, allowed hopes to arise that in the near future a whole series of liberal reforms dreamed of by the educated part of society would finally be implemented: repealed, for example, would be shameful for Russia serfdom. However, the reality that set in after the end of the war and some dulling of memories of the unity that took place showed that no changes in Russian social life were expected in the near future. The result was that some European educated people were forced to resign due to scandal, many others became members of secret anti-government organizations. The tense situation that developed eventually ended in an explosion, which went down in Russian history as the Decembrist uprising.
Griboyedov saw what was happening well - and his idea for a comedy gradually matured. Undoubtedly, the fact that the expulsion of the author himself from St. Petersburg was associated with slander played a role here. In a word, Griboyedov was tormented eternal question about fate smart person in Russia. The very name of the comedy sets central problem, indicating the speculative nature of the hero’s ideas due to a certain high position and, therefore, his doom to a bitter and difficult fate. Chatsky’s mind combines a high degree of enlightenment, love of freedom, free-thinking, and ardor (it is no coincidence that Famusov says about him that “he writes and translates well”). Chatsky is convinced that a person can fully express himself in words and fully convey this word to another. But the speculative nature of his positions is immediately revealed by the reality surrounding him in Moscow - his words never reach his interlocutor. To immediately turn everyone against him, it was enough for Chatsky to simply come to Moscow. Its very existence immediately comes into conflict with the existing order in Moscow.
Having arrived, the hero perceives Sophia as a natural interlocutor who will undoubtedly understand him. However, he completely misses the fact that during the time they did not see each other, Sophia could have changed. He does not even assume this possibility, just as he does not assume that his departure then could have offended her, insulted her, caused real pain. Chatsky, without thinking about anything, begins to criticize everything around him, use irony, but goes too far in his rejection of the environment. The constructs of the mind according to which he lives turn out to be too shaky and do not stand the test of reality, with which Chatsky constantly does not coincide. The hero's sharp, insightful mind nevertheless turns out to be compatible with innocence and naivety, irony with sensitivity, freedom with virtue, alien to rigorism. Oddly enough, Chatsky’s main opponent turns out to be Sophia. She is at the same time sentimental and vindictive, dreamy and not without cunning, capable of strong feelings and touchily capricious, sometimes petty, and to a certain extent callous. However, of all the heroes of the comedy, she is the one who is close to Chatsky. Sophia does not entirely accept all the morals of Moscow and views on life and is free from many prejudices: she is not looking for a profitable marriage, she dreams u1086 of high love, to some extent even ready to fight for it. She is strong in character - and this largely contributes to her delusion. Sophia chooses Molchalin, whom she sculpts in accordance with her own ideas about the virtuous young man worthy of her love. And, thus, she is paradoxically mistaken, perceiving Chatsky as an enemy, who precisely has much of what is inherent in herself.
Generally Moscow society represents a kind of frozen, frozen structure, not ready for any changes and categorically does not accept them. This state of affairs leads to the fact that personality traits those who make up this society are inevitably leveled out, leaving only some opportunities for realization. This process personifies Repetilov: he appears as a kind of empty form, which under different circumstances could turn into a playmaker, a careerist or a loser, a loud freethinker. Thus, many other characters also embody a whole set of different possibilities that will never become a reality in conditions of extreme inertia that covers all of Moscow. Chatsky's clash with Moscow is a clash of an awakened, very bright personality with routine, the dogma of an immovable social order. Any, even private intrigue (Chatsky - Molchalin - Sophia) acquires social significance and carries its significant element: primarily due to the fact that it is filled social significance, is projected onto the social dimension. The hero constantly undermines the foundations of Moscow life, Moscow society - everything as a whole and each individual. So, for example, the meaning of Sophia’s life is love for Molchalin, and Chatsky laughs at the secretary’s dumbness. And that’s why the girl says, “He’s out of his mind.” Sophia herself understands these words in figuratively, but I’m glad that the interlocutor, Mr. N., understood them in the literal sense. In the same way, for Khlestova the main thing is respect, for Molchalin it’s a career, for Natalya Dmitrievna it’s social entertainment. And since Chatsky touches all this with all his actions and words, tries to refute it, then he naturally turns out to be crazy in relation to this world and from the point of view of this world.
In fact, Chatsky is restless wherever he finds himself. So, in St. Petersburg he “was not given ranks”; he wanted to serve the state, but when it turned out that it was also necessary to serve, he abandoned these plans. Chatsky’s entire position in life is determined in his dialogue with Sophia, when the question “Where is better?” he replies: “Where we are not.” And that’s why at the beginning of the comedy he appears from nowhere, and in the finale he goes to nowhere. His developed mind is also questionable from another point of view: “Will such a mind make a family happy?” - Sophia asks, and she is right in her own way.
The ending of the comedy remains open. First of all, because the issues raised in it cannot be resolved on such a scale, their solution remains with historical time, and Griboyedov, with the subtle instinct of an artist, understands this. On the other hand, Chatsky himself is not completely defined - many equal opportunities open up before him. And for Griboyedov it turns out to be important not to impose on his hero any one definition, which will inevitably narrow and limit him.
Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" was created by the author over 8 years (1816-1824). This was a period when Russian literature developed rapidly and actively. In less than half a century, she went from classicism to sentimentalism, romanticism, and realism. The changes taking place were reflected in artistic features“Woe from Wit”, in the ending that the author chooses for his work. The writer created the comedy at a time when there were practically no Russians in Russia national theater(it was represented mainly by vaudeville and D.I. Fonvizin’s play “The Minor”). The Russian stage was filled with productions French plays written in accordance with the canons of classicism. The greatest merit of A.S. Griboyedov in artistic terms is that he tried to overcome the canons of classicism (especially the requirement of 3 unities) and introduced huge contribution in the formation of realistic drama. Fulfilling the requirements of unity of time (the action of the comedy takes place over the course of a day), place (all events unfold in Famusov’s house), he decisively violates the requirement of unity of action. Main character comedy - Chatsky - changes significantly in the process of developing intrigue. He came to Moscow bored, in love, and not at all inclined to ridicule Famus society. But under the influence of “a million torments,” his mood changes dramatically. In the last monologue (“Get out of Moscow...”) this is a completely different person - ironic, embittered, indignant. The author also violates the unity of action by the fact that his heroes do not represent a static, one-dimensional figure, they are shown from different sides. Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov appears before us first as a bureaucrat (“Signed, off your shoulders”), then as a conservative (“I don’t listen, I’ll be put on trial!”), but at the same time as a caring father (thinks about the future of Sophia, whom raised alone, without a mother), a hospitable host (receives and treats guests at the ball).
A.S. Griboyedov recreates real picture way of life, morals, life of the lordly Moscow of the first quarter of the XIX centuries, draws typical characters Famusov society(Famusov, Molchalin, Khlestova, Repetilov, Zagoretsky), gives realistic image conflict between the “present century” and the “past century”. The conflict depicted in the comedy and the ending of this conflict, the finale of the work, seem special. The contemporary audience of the playwright is accustomed to the fact that the central intrigue classic comedy is a love conflict. Usually in a play like this, young masters in love with each other, who are prevented by some circumstances from getting together, are helped to solve this problem by servants, who are often smarter and more enterprising than their masters. This " love conflict Griboyedov also has it. But it is depicted and solved in a very unique way. According to the classical tradition, Molchalin (the owner’s secretary) and Liza (the owner’s daughter’s maid) must do everything possible to ensure that the two unite loving hearts: Sophia (the owner's daughter) and Chatsky (a young man in love). And at the end of the play we would have a wedding of lovers. It would be better if there were two weddings at once: between Molchalin and Liza and Sophia and Chatsky. This would be the material for the last fifth act of the classic comedy, its ending. Everyone is happy, u1076 virtue and love have triumphed, and vice is punished.
But Griboedov, following his plans to depict a realistic conflict, strives in every possible way to avoid such a straightforward interpretation of his ideas. He deprives his play of the fifth, final act, and traditional conflict He looks very original. Chatsky loves Sophia, Sophia is in love with Molchalin, Molchalin is drawn to Lisa, Lisa likes the bartender Petrusha, but at the same time she correctly evaluates and human dignity Chatsky (“Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!”). If we add here Famusov’s attempts to flirt with Liza, then instead of the banal classic love triangle we will get an equation with many unknowns from higher mathematics. Basically creative method realism and correlates with classicism, like arithmetic with higher mathematics. How to resolve such a conflict so that vice (that is, Molchalin, Famusov and Sophia) are punished, and virtue (Chatsky and Liza) triumphs? Realistic solution such a conflict in a play is almost impossible (or it will be a work of a completely different genre), the author understands this well. Therefore, he abandons the idea of depicting the fifth act of the comedy, ending it with the so-called “open” ending. But, as I.A. was the first to note. Goncharov, love conflict is not the main thing in comedy. It only complicates and deepens the main one, which is the contradiction between the conservative Moscow nobility and the radical progressive representative of the noble youth - Chatsky. The same heroes are involved in this second, main conflict of the work, and again here the forces are distributed very realistically, that is, completely unevenly. Alone in the play, Chatsky fights against the inert views of an entire society, Famusov’s, as it is commonly called, to which Famusov himself, Molchalin, Sophia, and all the guests, relatives and friends of the owner of the house in which the action takes place belong. Throughout the comedy, this conflict deepens and becomes more complicated, reaching the point of direct slander (on the part of the Famus society) and direct rejection (on the part of Chatsky). What realistic ending could such a conflict have? Vice must be punished. Is it conceivable to imagine that the comedy would realistically show the punishment of the entire Famus society, which, from the point of view of the author and his hero, is conservative, reactionary and patriarchal? Would Chatsky celebrate the victory? A.S. Griboedov understood perfectly well that a realistic depiction of such an ending is impossible, and therefore ends the action of his work at the very end. high note, leaving him without a solution. Chatsky leaves Moscow alive, in his right mind, without abandoning his progressive ideas - this can already be considered a positive ending to the comedy. There is another explanation for the meaning of the ending in A.S.’s comedy. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". Every playwright would like the viewer, upon leaving the theater or putting down the book, not to immediately forget about the characters of what he saw or read, so that he would mentally turn to the situation depicted, reflect on it, draw conclusions, and become a supporter of certain views. Therefore, the “open” ending depicted by A.S. Griboyedov in this play, gives the reader the opportunity to think about what will happen to its characters in the future. How will the heroes behave the next morning? Will Chatsky have the courage to leave Moscow without seeing Sophia? Will Famusov find out the truth about his daughter’s feelings not for Chatsky, but for Molchalin? Will he send his daughter, as he threatened, to Saratov, and Liza to the poultry yard? With the help of servants, will rumors about the embarrassment that occurred in Famusov’s house spread throughout Moscow, will they reach the ears of “Princess Marya Aleksevna”? What verdict will “public opinion” give in connection with what happened? How will Molchalin behave in such a delicate situation? What will Sophia feel and what will she decide for herself? All this is very interesting, and people haven’t stopped thinking about it since the first reading of the text of the comedy. That is why M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin’s work “In an environment of moderation and accuracy” appeared, telling about the matured Molchalins who reached “the famous levels”, A.A. Blok called “Woe from Wit” the only work Russian literature, not fully understood, M.V. Nechkina wondered whether Sophia could simply feign love for Molchalin in order to take revenge on Chatsky for neglecting herself. This, in my opinion, is the meaning of the “open” ending of A.S.’s comedy. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" and its role in the perception of this work and in its long literary and stage life.
Suffering and pain are a sign of a great heart.
F. M. Dostoevsky
What is the meaning of the comedy ending? The figure of Chatsky determines the conflict of the comedy, both of its storylines. The play was written in those days (1816-1824), when young people like Chatsky brought new ideas and moods to society.
It is surprising that even now it is impossible to read about the suffering of Alexander Andreevich without worry. Such is the power true art. Of course, Griboyedov, perhaps for the first time in Russian literature, managed to create a truly realistic image of a positive hero. Chatsky is close to us because he is not written as an impeccable, “iron” fighter for truth and goodness, duty and honor - we meet such heroes in the works of classicists. No, he is a man, and nothing human is alien to him. “The mind and heart are not in harmony,” says the hero about himself. The ardor of his nature, which often interferes with maintaining mental balance and composure, the ability to fall in love recklessly does not give him the opportunity to see the shortcomings of his beloved, to believe in her love for another - these are such natural traits! “Ah, it’s not difficult to deceive me, I myself am glad to be deceived,” Pushkin wrote in the poem “Confession.” Yes, and Chatsky could say the same about himself. And Chatsky’s humor, his witticisms? How attractive they are.
All this gives such vitality, warmth to this image, makes us empathize with the hero.
Chatsky’s monologues and remarks, in all his actions, expressed what was most important for future Decembrists: the spirit of freedom, free life, the feeling that “he breathes more freely than anyone else.” Freedom of the individual is the motive of the times and Griboyedov’s comedy. And freedom from dilapidated ideas about love, marriage, honor, service, the meaning of life. Chatsky and his like-minded people strive for “creative, lofty and beautiful arts”, dream of “focusing a mind hungry for knowledge into science”, thirst for “sublime love, before which the world is whole... - dust and vanity.” They would like to see all people free and equal.
Chatsky’s desire is to serve the Fatherland, the cause, and not individuals. He hates everything vulgar, including slavish admiration for everything foreign, servility, and sycophancy.
And what does he see around? A lot of people who are looking only for ranks, crosses, “money to live”, not love, but a profitable marriage. Their ideal is “moderation and accuracy,” their dream is “to take all the books and burn them.”
So, at the center of the comedy is the conflict between “one sane person” (Griboyedov’s assessment) and the conservative majority.
As always in dramatic work, the essence of the protagonist’s character is revealed primarily in the plot. Griboyedov, faithful to the truth of life, showed the difficult fate of a young progressive man in society.
Those around him are taking revenge on Chatsky for the truth, which stings his eyes, for his attempt to disrupt the usual way of life.
The girl he loves, turning away from him, hurts the hero the most by spreading gossip about his madness. Here is a paradox: the only sane person is declared insane!
" So! I have sobered up completely!” - exclaims Chatsky at the end of the play. What is this - defeat or insight? Yes, the end of this comedy is far from cheerful, but I. A. Goncharov is right when he said about the ending like this: “Chatsky is broken by the number old power, inflicting on her in turn death blow quality of fresh strength."
Goncharov believes that the role of all Chatskys is “passive”, but at the same time always victorious. But they do not know about their victory, they only sow and others reap.
Many writers XIX centuries described balls in their works: Pushkin in “Eugene Onegin”, Lermontov in “Masquerade”, Tolstoy in “War and Peace”. It is at the balls that fateful events for the heroes take place. The ball in the comedy "Woe from Wit" plays many roles. He is the culmination of the work, the decoration, atmosphere and image of the century.
In the composition of comedy, like any other literary work, there is its own exposition, plot, climax and denouement. Without hesitation, I call the ball scene the climax. This is the peak of the work. This is the pinnacle towards which the action has been moving from the very beginning. After the ball, the tension in the plot begins to subside.
In addition, the atmosphere of the ball is a suitable backdrop for the action. The comedy was designed for a person of that time, for whom a ball was a common thing. I believe that the most intense point of the plot should have an ordinary decoration behind it, thereby simplifying the process of perception by the audience. For modern man The ball appears as a picture of that time. It’s as if we are looking into an aquarium with fish, where all natural processes take place. The 19th century is “preserved” in this ball. The entire brilliant, sparkling century is concentrated in the Gorichs, Tugoukhovskys, Khryamins, Zagoretskys, Khlestovs and even in the servants who do not have replicas. By the way, all these surnames are somewhat unpleasant to hear, and their roots are negative character: hard on the ears, whip, grunt. And separately, I would like to examine the surnames Gorich and Zagoretsky. Gorich and “bitterness” are homophones, which causes corresponding associations. But also in this surname one can identify the root of “mountains”, and then the meaning of the surname Zagoretsky will be revealed: behind the Gorichi, hiding behind them. Moreover, everything negative characteristics: "Outstanding fraudster, a rogue”, “He’s a liar, a gambler, a thief” - they put it into his mouth.
All the guests gathered together form an image secular society. Natalya Dmitrievna, speaking for her husband, Countess-granddaughter of Khryumin, interjecting into the speech French phrases, princesses Tugoukhovsky, discussing outfits - they are all the same " dead Souls", which Gogol will later have. Bogged down in small talk and visits, they have lost all original thoughts and real feelings. In their society, serf owners and flatterers do not tolerate dissent. Now they can only serve as conduits for gossip. Cruel, by the way, gossip. Having learned, that Chatsky is supposedly insane, they do not try to help him or at least pretend that they do not know about it. They do everything possible to oust Chatsky, to throw him out of the circle: at the time when he pronounces a monologue at the end of the third act, “everyone spins in the waltz with the greatest zeal.”
Now let’s try to imagine where the action could take place, if not at the ball. This place or atmosphere must meet the following requirements: firstly, people from the nobility must gather there; secondly, they should all be able to move freely over some distance so that they can talk in private; thirdly, the environment should be natural for people like them; fifthly, it must be conducive to small talk, gossip. That is, it can only be a ball.
So, main idea comedy is revealed at the ball, and this is its significance. The meaning of the work is very well formulated by Vladimir Orlov: “Under the conditions of a serf-dominated society, every independent thought, every living passion, every sincere feeling is doomed to persecution. Chatsky’s intimate drama thus grows into the social drama of a whole generation of progressive people of the Decembrist era.”
“Griboyedov is a “man of one book,” noted V.F. Khodasevich. “If it weren’t for Woe from Wit, Griboedov would have no place at all in Russian literature.” The creative history of the comedy, on which the playwright worked for several years, is extremely complex....
Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov became famous thanks to one work, about which Pushkin said: “His handwritten comedy “Woe from Wit” produced an indescribable effect and suddenly placed him alongside our first poets.” Contemporaries claimed...
Griboyedov's contemporaries admired the language of the comedy "Woe from Wit." Pushkin also wrote that half of the verses of the play will become proverbs. Then N.K. Piksanov noted the peculiar speech coloring of Griboedov’s comedy, “the liveliness of the spoken language,” the characteristic...
Sophia's love for Molchalin, like Pushkin's Tatiana for Onegin, is one of the examples of real feeling, a high example of love. Both heroines are firmly convinced that Providence itself sent them great love. “I didn’t try, God brought us together,” with some...
