Essay “Chatsky and Famusov. Comparative characteristics of heroes. Comparative characteristics of Famusov and Chatsky (based on A.S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”)
1) Chatsky 2) Famous societyATTITUDE TO WEALTH, RANKS, CAREER:1) “Ranks are given by people, but people can become naked.”First, mockingly, and then angrily protests against the ruling rabbis in society, who demand slavish obedience, hypocrisy and opportunism.2) Famusov: “With me, strangers’ employees are very rare; More and more sisters, sisters-in-law, children... Be bad, but if there are two thousand family members, Tom and the groom.”Molchalin: “After all, you have to depend on others. ... We are of small ranks.”ATTITUDE TO THE SERVICE:1) “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening...”"When I'm busy, I hide from fun,When I'm fooling around, I'm fooling aroundAnd to mix these two craftsThere are tons of skilled people, I am not one of them."2) Famusov: "...My custom is this: Signed, off your shoulders." Molchalin: "Well, really, what would you like to serve us in Moscow?And take awards and have fun?"ATTITUDE TO SERfdom:1) Famusov about Chatsky (with horror)“A dangerous man! He wants to preach freedom! But he doesn’t recognize the authorities!”He calls the feudal landowners “noble scoundrels,” some of whom “he drove to the serf ballet on many wagons from the mothers and fathers of rejected children,” who were then all “sold off one by one.” He dreams of ridding the Russian people of slavery.2) Khlestakova: “Out of boredom, I took with me Arapka the girl and the dog, - Tell them to feed, already, my friend.... From dinner, they left a handout.” In this society, man and dog have the same value: the landowner exchanges serfs who “more than once his life and honor were saved” by three greyhounds.ATTITUDE TO EDUCATION:1) Well educated.Famusov about Chatsky“...he’s a smart guy, and he writes nicely, translate” 2) Khlestakov: “You’ll really go crazy from these, just from boarding schools, schools, lyceums...” Skalozub: “... You won’t faint me with your learning. .."Famusov:"...Learning is a plague, learning is the reason, What is worse now than before, There are crazy people, and deeds, and opinions."HOW HEROES UNDERSTAND THE MIND:1) “There are important people who were considered fools...... but called by the whole world,Especially in recent years,That they have become smart, no matter where..."(It is assumed that these lines are dedicated to Alexander 1)The mind in Chatsky’s understanding is enlightenment, progressive views, the desire to seek good not for oneself, but for the Fatherland. For Famusov, it is the mind of a rebel, “carbonari”. That is why, in his perception, Chatsky’s mind is madness (in their world they are doomed to persecution every independent thought, every sincere feeling). 2) Sophia (about Chatsky) "Is it the kind of mind that will make a family happy..."intelligence in Famus society is the ability to make a career, achieve rank, live richly, marry profitably - “reach the famous levels.” This is a practical, worldly, resourceful mind.
The famous comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedova was created after Patriotic War 1812, when a period of spiritual upsurge began in Russia. Therefore, this work discusses the most pressing social issues and issues. civil service, upbringing and education, imitation of everything foreign and contempt for one’s own national.
Chatsky's character
The character of one of the main characters of this work - Chatsky - is quite simple, but his emotional portrait is very diverse, but in general he portrays Chatsky as positive person who shows maximalism in all his actions and feelings. He has an extraordinary mind, seeking knowledge and perfection, and has a very ambitious disposition. Chatsky’s attitude to service must be viewed through the prism of the fact that he was an enlightened man and could soberly assess political problems. He did not remain indifferent when Russian culture was oppressed and the issue was raised human pride and honor. However, Chatsky did not understand love affairs at all, was constantly eager to fight and soon, as usual, experienced disappointment.
Biography of Chatsky
To expand on a topic such as Chatsky’s attitude to service, you first need to figure out who he is. So, Alexander Andreevich is a young nobleman, whose late father was a friend of Famusov. He returns from abroad to Moscow to see his beloved Sofia Famusova, whom he has not seen for three whole years. As children, they were friends and loved each other, but Sophia could not forgive Chatsky for his unexpected departure abroad, who left without even notifying her about it. And so their meeting took place in a cold and indifferent atmosphere because of Sophia.
Griboedov served as the prototype for Chatsky, who sharply criticized Russia and was declared crazy because of his writings. His works in Russian Empire were banned and not published.
Chatsky's attitude to service
Where did the whole conflict between Chatsky and society flare up? It all started with a conversation with Molchalin. Chatsky cannot understand how Sophia could fall in love with such a person. When guests come to Famusov’s house, Chatsky manages to communicate with everyone, and with each such conversation the confrontation will increase.
Chatsky openly opposes serfdom and against those people who are considered the “pillars” of noble society, for example, such as Famusov. He also hates the order of Catherine's century.
Chatsky considers himself a free and independent person who is alien to slavery. But Famusov and his entire society are the nobles of Catherine’s century and special “hunters of indecency.”
Chatsky's attitude towards the service is negative, and therefore he leaves the service. Chatsky with great desire could serve the Motherland, but he does not at all want to serve his superiors, at that time so in secular society Famusov there is an opinion that service to persons, and not to a cause, is a source of personal benefits.
Attitude to wealth, rank, etc.
Chatsky’s attitude towards rank and wealth is different in that he wants a person to be assessed by his personal qualities and merits. It recognizes the freedom of thought of every person in their statements and beliefs. In turn, it does not evaluate these progressive views of the hero; it evaluates people according to noble origin and the number of serfs. And the opinion of high society is sacred and infallible. Chatsky advocates enlightening the country in literature and art through scientific work, for the unity of the secular intelligentsia with common people and against imitation of foreigners.
But it is more comfortable without books and teachings; it slavishly imitates everything foreign, especially French.
In love, Chatsky seeks sincerity of feelings, and in high society pretense and marriage of convenience are present everywhere.
A.S.Griboyedov-author immortal comedy“Woe from Wit”, which had a huge impact on all Russian literature and occupied a special place in it. The comedy “Woe from Wit” became the first realistic comedy in the history of Russian literature. In the images of the comedy, Griboyedov accurately reproduced the “high society society” of that time, he showed a conflict between two opposing sides - Chatsky and Famusov, representatives of the “present century” and the “past century”.
Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov is a bright representative of the “past century”, a narrow-minded manager in a government place, a cruel serf owner. It costs Famusov nothing to humiliate the dignity of his servant or threaten to exile his serfs for unknown reasons “to a settlement”. Landowners do not consider their serfs to be people. For example, Old woman Khlestova puts her maid on an equal footing with a dog:
Out of boredom I took it with me
A little black girl and a dog.
People in Famusov’s circle especially hate education, science, and the movement towards progress. Famusov gives his daughter an upbringing that precludes the possibility of true enlightenment:
To teach our daughters everything -
And dancing! and singing! and tenderness! and sighs!
And Famusov himself is not distinguished by his education and says that there is no use in reading, and his “comrade-in-arms,” in the “scientific committee that has settled,” screams for oaths so that “no one knows or learns to read and write,” and even teachers for his children. Famusov speaks about freedom of thought:
Learning is the plague, learning is the cause.
What is worse now than before,
Crazy people and affairs and opinions
And his final statement about enlightenment and education in Russia is “to take away all the books and burn them.”
Representatives of the “Famusovism” think only about rank, wealth and profitable connections. They treat the service formally, they see in it only a means to make a career. “I just wish I could become a general,” says Colonel Skalozub, limited and rude. Famusov also does not hide his attitude towards the service:
As for me, what matters and what doesn’t matter.
My custom is this:
Signed, off your shoulders.
Famusov does not serve the cause, but the people. He does not want to serve home country, he does not care about the future of his homeland and his people, service for him is a source of ranks, awards and income. The ideal for Famusov is Maxim Petrovich, who, currying favor, “bent over,” “bravely sacrificed the back of his head,” but was a respected person, “before was respected by everyone."
Native Russian customs, traditions, even the language are alien to Famusov’s society. Chatsky ironically says that in the world “a mixture of languages dominates: French with Nizhny Novgorod.” Foreigners and everything foreign is the ideal by which representatives Famusov society. Famusov himself, “a venerable member of the English Club to his death,” says that “the door is open for the invited and the uninvited, especially for foreigners.” But not only foreigners are welcome guests in Famusov’s house. Every man who visits his house is considered by the owner as a potential groom for Sophia. For Famusov, arranged marriage is the only one the right way marry off your daughter. The “candidate groom” is subject to certain material requirements:
Be bad, but if you get enough
Two thousand family souls, -
He's the groom.
Of course, Sofia’s beloved Molchalin, the penniless and rootless secretary Famusov, has no chance, because the father strictly punishes his daughter: “whoever is poor is not a match for you.” But Colonel Skalozub is “a gold bag and aims to become a general.” Ranks, uniforms, money - these are the ideals that the “past century” worships. Women “just cling to uniforms,” “because they are patriots,” says Famusov.
Chief Representative“of the present century” - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is young, well-educated, intelligent, noble, honest and brave. Chatsky has a completely different attitude “to the stars and ranks.” He left the service because “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served "He hates careerism and sycophancy:
As he was famous for, whose neck bent more often;
As not in war, but in peace they took it head on,
They hit the floor without regret!...
But in the meantime, who will the hunt take?
Even in the most ardent servility,
Now, to make people laugh,
Bravely sacrifice the back of your head...
Chatsky stands for true enlightenment, and not for external gloss, condemns the desire to “recruit a regiment of teachers, in larger numbers, at a cheaper price”:
Now, let one of us
Among the young people there will be an enemy of quest,
Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge.
Chatsky most sharply denounces the vices of serfdom. He indignantly condemns “Nestor the noble scoundrel,” who exchanged his devoted servants for greyhounds, and the heartless landowner who
He drove to the serf ballet on many wagons
From mothers and fathers of rejected children?!
I myself am immersed in mind in Zephyrs and Cupids,
Made all of Moscow marvel at their beauty!
But the debtors did not agree to a deferment:
Cupids and Zephyrs all
Sold out individually!!!
Chatsky also advocates the development folk culture, he condemns blind submission to foreign fashion:
Will we ever be resurrected from the foreign power of fashion,
So that our smart, kind people
Although by language we are Germans.
Chatsky attracts people with his deep and sharp mind, independence of judgment, willpower, courage, noble desire to help his homeland and change for the better. It seems to me that Chatsky is both a winner and a loser, he “lost the battle, but won the war.” Of course, Chatsky could not change Famus society in one day. Goncharov wrote: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of strength, inflicting it in turn with the quality of fresh strength.” Famus society understands that it cannot cover its ears all its life and scatter to the sides, fleeing the truthful speeches of the hero But, nevertheless, he managed to disturb the peace of the measured life of the inhabitants of Moscow, which means that Chatsky has already won.
Essay on the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit"
Essay text:
We are talking about the immortality of A.S.’s comedy. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit". This is not a catchphrase. Comedy truly is immortal. For several generations now, we, readers and viewers, have been drawn into a caring dialogue with her characters, which sounds both excited and modern. I think that a comparison of the two main characters is just as modern, because it allows not only a deeper understanding of the ideological and artistic features of the work, but also a better understanding of the significance of the characters’ images for revealing the eternal value meanings of life.
Of course, we have a basis for comparing the two most bright characters comedies - Chatsky and Famusov. What is its essence? Yes, in that both live in the same turning point in the development of Russian society, both in their own way social background belong to the aristocratic elite, that is, both images are typical and socially conditioned.
It would seem that what can unite such dissimilar characters! Still, Famusov and Chatsky have some similarities. Let's think about it: both of them are typical representatives of their environment, both have their own ideal of life, both have a sense of self-esteem.
However, the differences in these characters, of course, are much greater than the similarities. Where does it manifest itself most clearly? Let's take a closer look at the heroes.
Yes, Chatsky is smart. “He is not only smarter than all the other people,” notes Goncharov in the article “A Million Torments,” “but also positively smart. His speech is full of intelligence and wit.” Chatsky’s mind sparkles in his passionate monologues, in his apt characterizations, in his every remark True, we are mostly convinced of Chatsky’s free-thinking, but we can only guess about other aspects of his mind. But this free-thinking is the main thing that Griboyedov values in him.
The smart man Chatsky is opposed to fools, fools and, first of all, Famusov, not because he is stupid in the literal, unambiguous sense of the word. No, he's smart enough. But his mind is the opposite of Chatsky’s. He is a reactionary, which means he is a fool from a socio-historical point of view, because he defends old, obsolete, anti-people views. He is a fool because he has not been touched by enlightenment with its lofty ideas of goodness, humanism, and the ennobling influence of knowledge on man. As for Famusov’s “free-thinking”, it is only enough to grumble at the “vagrant” teachers, as well as fashionistas - a natural detail of his entire lordly, patriarchal essence.
Chatsky and Famusov. How else do these characters differ? Yes, at least because both heroes have ideals, but how opposite they are!
Chatsky’s ideal is everything new, fresh, bringing change. This is an image that reliably embodies the personality traits of a civilian person.
What is Famusov’s ideal person? His ideal is Uncle Maxim Petrovich, a nobleman of Catherine’s time. In those days, as Chatsky put it, “not in war, but in peace, they took it head on, hit the floor, without regret.” Maxim Petrovich was an important gentleman, he ate on gold, “he rode forever in a train”; “When do you need to help yourself, and he bent over backwards.” It was in this way that he gained weight, was “promoted to rank” and “gave pensions” at the court of Catherine II.
Famusov also admires Kuzma Petrovich:
The deceased was a venerable chamberlain,
With the key, he knew how to deliver the key to his son;
Rich, and married to a rich...
Famusov strives to imitate such people; he considers their methods of obtaining ranks and money to be the most correct.
Distinguishes the main characters and their attitude to activity, to service, and slave morality.
Chatsky, of course, is from the breed of activists. He served. The scope of his recent activity causes envy in Molchalin, regret in Famusov, perhaps even some envy. After all, Chatsky ended up there, in St. Petersburg, closer to the “ministers”, where, it is possible, Famusov would like to go at one time. Chatsky’s credo in this matter is: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.” Chatsky is outraged by serving persons rather than business, veneration of rank, and nepotism.
What is service for Famusov? Fulfilling civic duty? No, service for him is only a means of receiving awards, ranks and money. Famusov’s official affairs boil down to signing papers prepared by Molchalin. As a typical bureaucrat, Famusov is not interested in the contents of these papers; he is mortally afraid of only one thing: “So that a lot of them do not accumulate.”
Boasting of his “custom,” he says:
And for me, what matters and what doesn’t matter,
My custom is this:
Signed, off your shoulders.
Famusov is not at all embarrassed by the fact that he reduced all official duties to signing papers. On the contrary, he boasts about it smugly.
The heroes have different attitudes towards education. Chatsky is a humanist. As a patriot, he wants to see his people enlightened and free.
It is worth noting that for Famusov, enlightenment is a danger that threatens the usual foundations of life. Famusov speaks with hatred:
“Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is worse now than before,
There have been crazy people, deeds, and opinions..."
Chatsky’s anti-serfdom ideology is manifested in his high assessment of character, moral qualities enslaved people. In contrast to the slanderous statements of the feudal landowners about the serf peasantry, Chatsky speaks of a vigorous, intelligent, that is, in the phraseology of the Decembrists, a freedom-loving people.
Famusov is an avid serf owner. He scolds the servants, without mincing words, “donkeys”, “chumps”, calls them nothing more than Parsleys, Filkas, Fomkas, without regard to the age or dignity of the person.
Once again I think about the characters of the main characters in the comedy. What is the point of comparing Chatsky and Famusov? Why are they opposed to each other in the play?
In my opinion, comparison is an excellent technique through which the ideological and artistic features of a work are revealed, the author’s intention and his attitude towards the characters becomes much clearer.
Obviously, to some extent, the Famusovs are also necessary in life, because they bring healthy conservatism, stability, and traditions into society, which cannot be avoided. But the flower of society is always the intelligentsia, which excites society, appeals to its conscience, awakens public thought, and thirsts for something new. Such a noble intellectual, a man of the Decembrist circle, was Chatsky - a hero who bequeaths to us love for the Fatherland, a noble desire for truth, love of freedom and the desire to serve people.
|
|
Griboyedov Alexander Sergeevich is one of the most famous Russian playwrights. The well-known comedy “Woe from Wit” belongs to his pen. It reveals the characters' characters very well and, most importantly, truthfully. The author very accurately showed how different thoughts, actions, and actions are in people.
The film takes place in Famusov’s house and takes only a day. But also for this a short time The author managed to convey the characters' characters very well. Chatsky and Famusov attract the main attention. These are two completely opposite people. Famusov was very good friend Chatsky's father, and he, in turn, is in love with his daughter. But such a groom does not suit his father. Chatsky does not have the same income as Famusov and does not behave to his liking. He verbally opposes Moscow morals, he cannot sit still and is not ready to go with the flow. And Famusov is his complete opposite. He just completely dissolves in these morals and praises them. By nature he is a homebody and adheres to the rule that the less you perform, the more you can achieve.
These two heroes represent many people and modern world. Many people look at wealth and try to please everyone who needs it. But there are also, such as Chatsky, eternal disputes, proving one’s point of view and disagreement with the present regimes. Determine which of them is positive and which bad guy It's very difficult for me. Both have their pros and cons.
