Explanation of Chatsky's monologue and who is the judge. The role of Chatsky’s monologues in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit. The role of the main character's monologues in the work

The role of Chatsky’s monologues in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.”

“Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. His speech is full of intelligence and wit. He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest” (I. A. Goncharov).
“Chatsky is not a smart person at all - but Griboyedov is very smart... The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with, and not to throw pearls in front of Repetilov and the like...” (A.S. Pushkin).
“Young Chatsky is like Starodum... This is the main flaw of the author, that among fools of various types he brought out one smart person, and even then he was mad and boring...” (77. A. Vyazemsky).
“...In Chatsky, the comedian did not think to present the ideal of perfection, but a young, fiery man, in whom the stupidities of others arouse ridicule, and finally, a person to whom the poet’s verse can be attributed: The heart cannot tolerate dumbness” (V.F. Odoevsky).
“Woe from Wit” is a “social” comedy with a social conflict between the “present century” and the “past century.” Chatsky is the ideologist of the “present century.” Like all ideologists in comedy, he speaks monologically.
It is in the monologues that Chatsky’s attitude to the main aspects of his contemporary life is revealed: to education (“The regiments are busy recruiting teachers...”); to education (“...So that no one knows or learns to read and write”); to the service (“As he was famous, whose neck often bent...”); to ranks (“And to those who are higher, flattery is like weaving lace...”); to foreigners (“Not a Russian sound, not a Russian face...”); to serfdom (“That Nestor of noble scoundrels...”).
Many of Chatsky’s statements express the opinion of Griboyedov himself, that is, we can say that Chatsky acts as a reasoner.
Chatsky's monologues appear in the comedy at turning points in the development of the plot and conflict.
The first monologue is an exposition (“Well, what about your father?..”). The conflict is just beginning. Chatsky gives a vivid description of Moscow morals.
The second monologue (“And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid...”) is the beginning of the conflict. It provides a sharp contrast between the “present century” and the “past century.”
The third monologue (“Who are the judges?”) is the development of the conflict. This is a program monologue. It presents the views of Chatsky most fully and comprehensively.
The fourth monologue is important for the development of a love affair. It embodies Chatsky’s attitude towards love.
The fifth monologue (“There is an insignificant meeting in that room...”) is the culmination and denouement of the conflict. Nobody hears Chatsky, everyone is dancing or enthusiastically playing cards.
The sixth monologue (“You will make peace with him, after mature reflection...”) is the denouement of the plot.
The monologues reveal not only Chatsky’s thoughts and feelings, but also his character: ardor, enthusiasm, some comedy (inconsistency between what he says and to whom).
Chatsky's monologues have features of a journalistic style. “He speaks as he writes,” Famusov characterizes him. Chatsky uses rhetorical questions, exclamations, and forms of the imperative mood.
In his speech there are many words and expressions related to high style, archaisms (“a mind hungry for knowledge”).
One cannot help but note the aphoristic nature of Chatsky’s statements (“The legend is fresh, but hard to believe...”)

Alexander Chatsky, the main character in the play “Woe from Wit,” becomes the herald of the ideas of its author, A. S. Griboedov. Ideas are usually most clearly formulated in the monologues of the main character, becoming a key point in determining the meaning of the play.

There are a total of six monologues by the main character. They all play an important role in the development of the storyline.

The role of the main character's monologues in the work

First monologue “Well, what’s your father?..”

It is considered to be an exposition, since it contains a satire of the moral principles of contemporary society. But this satire is very brief, it contains only outlines of the subsequent development of the ideological content and essence of the following monologues.

Monologue “And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid...”

This monologue is often seen as the beginning of the conflict in the play "Woe from Wit." When comparing the past and present centuries, the main character gives a sharp critical assessment of the servility and court circles, his desire to grovel before his superiors. Receiving new ranks is worth the humiliation.

Chatsky about feelings in a monologue

“Let us leave this debate...” - another detailed speech by Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, a love conflict develops in it.

The main character expresses his understanding of feelings and relationships between a man and a woman. In his opinion, if there is no beloved in the world, then this world is only “dust and vanity.”

The hero's penultimate monologue

The penultimate monologue marks the culmination of the social conflict. Alexander Chatsky vehemently condemns the admiration of everything foreign. Unknown to any of the guests at Famusov's ball, the Frenchman becomes the highest authority in all matters. People listen to his opinion not only when he talks about fashion, but also when he talks about something Russian.

The main character reflects on the gap between the nobility and the people. At first he addresses only his beloved, but then he addresses his reasoning to everyone around him. But they don’t want to listen to him, so he is forced to interrupt his passionate speech.

Closing monologue

In the final speech we can see the resolution of the plot. Chatsky becomes an exposer of Famus society, since he not only does not accept its foundations, but also blames it for his love drama.

The hero does not find a place for himself in Moscow, in the circle from which he himself came, so he leaves the ancient capital, ending the monologue with the now famous phrase “A carriage for me, a carriage”

The role of the key monologue “Who are the judges?”

The third fiery speech of the protagonist is considered the most significant in the development of social confrontation and determining the ideological content of the comedy.

The main antithesis is the opposition of the aspirations of part of the younger generation to the foundations of Famus society. People who sincerely strive to serve the people and the Motherland do not find a place for themselves in this world.

They are like a foreign body; Famus society is afraid of these people, seeing them as a threat to its own well-being.

The third monologue, like the entire play, is an example of the highest artistic merit. Its stylistic features include a close interweaving of archaic and vernacular expressions, which are characterized by special poetics and intonation flexibility.

The capacity and aphorism of the language are no less important. Many lines of comedy have become firmly established in the everyday speech of many generations, and today every now and then you can hear aphorisms created almost two centuries ago. Even Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin prophetically noted that half of the verses of this play will become proverbs.

Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?” its content goes beyond the scope of the situation in which it is pronounced. The speech situation determines the psychological motivation of the monologue as a “counterstrike”. But Chatsky could have fought off his opponents with caustic remarks like “The houses are new, but the prejudices are old.” Monologue “Who are the judges?” in its ideological and artistic role it is “broader” than a detailed response to the interlocutors: this is an accusatory speech directed not so much against Famusov and Skalozub, but against the entire Famusov society, and the author needs this monologue in order to show the complete incompatibility of Chatsky not with individual persons of this world, but with the entire conservative society.

The fact that Chatsky is not understood does not make him funny: he should not be understood, since he is one sane person out of 25 fools. This is the essence of comedy. And the monologue “Who are the judges?” designed for the reader, for the audience. The comic situation (Skalozub’s reaction to Chatsky’s monologue) makes it not Chatsky funny, but Skalozub. We sympathize with Chatsky, together with him we experience “woe from the mind,” which means that comedy in this situation turns into drama.

The comic situation has its own meaning. The author, in such an original way, warns the reader about the changes that took place within the Decembrist movement in the last three years while Chatsky was traveling. The time has passed when the eloquent freethinker was the soul of the secular salon. The reaction has intensified, conservative circles of society are attacking the “Jacobins”, the Decembrists now do not speak at balls and receptions with their freedom-loving speeches - they are restructuring the activities of their societies according to the laws of conspiracy and speeches such as the monologue “Who are the judges?” are pronounced only at meetings secret societies.

But Chatsky, who has just returned from a trip, does not know about the changes that have taken place in the Decembrist movement, and therefore there is nothing surprising or absurd in the fact that he makes an accusatory speech in the living room of a Moscow master. Thus, this scene, as if not connected with the cross-cutting action, which consists of Chatsky’s desire to find out why Sophia is cold to him, in fact has a direct relation to him. She points to general changes in the life of Russian society, and in subsequent scenes Chatsky will see this general in private, specific manifestations, and in the last one he will see that “transformation” that is about; happened to Sophia, and will make the only possible decision in his situation.

“In the seventh scene, Chatsky again tries to unravel the reasons for Sophia’s coldness towards him. He sees Sophia's reaction to falling from a horse. Silent. However, both her fainting and her barbs, uttered in response to his attention to her, not only did not explain anything to Chatsky, but completely confused him. To Sophia’s rude outburst, who redirected Skalozub’s stupid joke about Princess Lasova to him, Chatsky responds calmly, but barely restraining himself from... indignation:

* Yes, sir, I have now shown this through My most diligent efforts,
*Both splashing and rubbing;
* I don’t know for whom, but I resurrected you.

The eighth scene for the first time clarifies Molchalin’s line of behavior. She takes us back to the scene when Lisa laughed while listening to Sophia's story about her nightly trysts with the Silent One. Molchalin declares his love to Liza and leaves. Sophia enters and, through Lisa, makes an appointment with Molchalin. The comedic situation ends with Lisa’s words full of mockery:

* Well, people in this side!
* She comes to him, and he comes to me,
* And I... I am the only one who crushes love to death.
* And how can she make the bartender Petrusha fall in love with her!

This comic situation also clarifies the author’s position: he does not want us to sympathize with Sophia. It is no coincidence that the scene of Molchalin’s declaration of love to Liza was staged after the scene of Sophia’s fainting; We remember very well the heartache we experienced together with Chatsky, when Sophia, in response to his efforts to bring her to her senses, allowed herself a rude attack against him, and therefore we cannot sympathize with her after learning that Molchalin loves her “by position.”

If before this we recognized Sofya Pavlovna’s right to love or not love Chatsky and sympathized with both her and him equally, now there is a turning point in our attitude towards her: we do not recognize her right to be rude to the person who loves her. In our eyes, she becomes ridiculous in her lordly arrogance - Sophia does not even allow the thought that Molchalin may not love her, because with her love she “made happy” the rootless Molchalin.

Thus ended the first stage of Chatsky’s struggle. What has he achieved? He realized that Sophia did not love him. But who? I couldn't figure it out. Therefore, he will come to Famusov’s house again.

The wonderful comedy “Woe from Wit” was written at the beginning of the 19th century by the great Russian writer Griboedov. In this work, Griboedov touches on the most important problems of our time: political, social and everyday. But the main conflict of the comedy is relationships...

“Griboedov 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....

A. S. Griboyedov’s play “Woe from Wit” marks a victory in the work of the writer of realism, more precisely, critical realism. The play poses the most burning questions of that time: the position of the Russian people, serfdom, relationships...

In fact, what would happen to us if, instead of the generally convenient rule: honor the rank of rank, something else was introduced into use, for example: honor the mind of the mind? A. S. Pushkin Griboyedov called his play “Woe from Wit.” This name can be taken both seriously and...

In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov puts his cherished thoughts into the mouth of the main character Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who expresses them most often in the form of monologues. They play a vital role in identifying the ideological meaning of a work.

In total, Chatsky pronounces six monologues. Each of them characterizes a stage in the development of the comedy plot.

The first of them (“Well, what’s your father? All the English club…”) can be called expositional. In it, Chatsky gives a caustic satirical description of the morals of Famusov

society. But it is not yet detailed, but brief, as if outlining the themes and images of subsequent monologues.

The second monologue (“And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid…”) represents the beginning of the comedy’s conflict. Comparing “the present century and the past,” Chatsky exposes the servility and servility of representatives of the court nobility, who are ready to “bravely sacrifice the back of their heads” in order to receive ranks and awards.

In Chatsky’s fourth monologue (“Let us leave this debate…”), the love conflict of the work develops. Trying to understand Sophia’s attitude towards Molchalin, Chatsky passionately expresses

your understanding of love. This is a feeling in which for a lover “the whole world seemed like dust and vanity,” if she is absent from it, the one to whom this deep feeling is dedicated.

In Chatsky’s fifth monologue (“There is an insignificant meeting in that room…”), the culmination of the conflict arises. The hero of the comedy angrily condemns the admiration of high society for foreignness. “The Frenchman from Bordeaux” turns out to be the highest authority for Famusov’s guests not only in matters of fashion, but also in relation to everything Russian and national. Chatsky thinks with horror about the abyss that separates the elite of the nobility and the common people, and does not know how to ensure that “our smart, cheerful people, even in language, do not consider us to be Germans.” Addressing his monologue initially to Sophia, Chatsky, carried away, addresses everyone around him. But he has to stop in the middle of a phrase because no one wants to listen to him: “everyone is twirling in the waltz with the greatest zeal.”

And finally, the final monologue (“I won’t come to my senses... I’m guilty...”) becomes the denouement of the plot. Insulted by Sophia in the best of feelings, Chatsky denounces him as the entire Famus society. Now for him it is “a crowd of tormentors, traitors in love, tireless in enmity.” And the hero sees the only way out for himself is to leave the circle alien to him.

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

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

Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!..

Carriage for me, carriage!

The most important thing in the development of social conflict and identifying the ideological meaning of the entire work becomes Chatsky’s third monologue (“And who are the judges? - For the antiquity of years...”). Its main antithesis is the opposition to the “ideals” of Famus society, the main exponent of which is “Nestor of noble scoundrels,” with the noble aspirations of the younger generation. But those who want to devote themselves to public service look like a foreign body in Famus society, which considers them dreamers, and dangerous ones at that.

Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?..”, like the whole comedy as a whole, has high artistic merit. His style intertwines archaisms and common folk expressions; they are characterized by intonation flexibility. Distinctive features of Chatsky's monologue are also capacity and apt aphorism. These qualities delighted Pushkin in his time, who predicted that half of Griboyedov’s poems should become proverbs.

Glossary:

analysis of Chatsky's monologue and who are the judges
Chatsky's monologue
and who are the judges?
analysis of Chatsky’s monologue and the world definitely began to grow stupid
essay and who are the judges

(No ratings yet)

The role of Chatsky’s monologues in A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written by A. S. Griboyedov after the Patriotic War of 1812, that is, during the period when profound socio-political changes were taking place in the life of Russia.

With his work, Griboyedov responded to the most pressing issues of our time, such as serfdom, personal freedom and independence of thought, the state of enlightenment and education, careerism and veneration of rank, admiration for foreign culture. The ideological meaning of “Woe from Wit” is the opposition of two ways of life and worldviews: the old, serfdom (“past century”) and the new, progressive (“present century”).

“The present century” is presented in a comedy by Chatsky, who is an ideologist of new views. He expresses his attitude towards everything happening in society. That is why the monologues of the main character occupy such an important place in the play. They reveal Chatsky’s attitude to the main problems of his contemporary society. His monologues also carry a large plot load: they appear in the play at turning points in the development of the conflict.

We meet the first monologue already in the exhibition. It begins with the words “Well, what about your father?..”, and in it Chatsky gives a description of Moscow morals. He notes with bitterness that during his absence in Moscow, nothing has changed significantly. And here for the first time he starts talking about the system of education accepted in society. The children of Russian nobles are raised by foreign tutors “in more numbers, at a cheaper price.” The younger generation is growing up in the belief “that without the Germans we have no salvation.” Chatsky mockingly and at the same time bitterly notes that in order to be considered educated in Moscow, you need to speak “a mixture of French and Nizhny Novgorod languages.”

The second monologue (“And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid...”) is associated with the outbreak of the conflict, and it is dedicated to the contrast between the “present century” and the “past century.” This monologue is maintained in a calm, slightly ironic tone, which is psychologically justified. Chatsky loves Famusov's daughter and does not want to irritate her father. But Chatsky does not want to agree with Famusov, who insults his pride, his views as a free-thinking person. Moreover, this monologue is caused by the moral teachings of Sophia’s father, his advice on how to make a career, using the experience of the unforgettable uncle Maxim Petrovich.

Chatsky categorically disagrees with this. The entire accusatory meaning of the protagonist’s words lies in the fact that he is trying to explain to Famusov the difference between two historical periods, past and present. The Catherine era, which evokes such tenderness in Famusov, is defined by Chatsky as “the age of humility and fear.” Chatsky believes that now different times have come, when there are no people who want to “make people laugh, bravely sacrifice the back of their heads.” He sincerely hopes that the techniques and methods of the nobles of Catherine’s time are a thing of the past, and the new century values people who are truly honest and dedicated to the cause, and not to individuals:

Although there are hunters everywhere to be mean,
Yes, nowadays laughter frightens and keeps shame in check,
It’s not for nothing that the sovereigns favor them so little.

Third monologue “Who are the judges?” - the most famous and striking monologue of the main character. It occurs at the time of development of the conflict in the play. It is in this monologue that Chatsky’s views receive the most complete coverage. Here the hero clearly expresses his anti-serfdom views, which later gave critics the opportunity to bring Chatsky closer to the Decembrists. How different the tone of this passionate monologue is from the peace-loving lines of the previous one! Citing specific examples of the manifestation of the monstrous attitude of nobles towards serfs, Chatsky is horrified by the lawlessness that reigns in Russia:

That Nestor of noble scoundrels,
Surrounded by a crowd of servants;

Zealous, they are in the hours of wine and fights
And his honor and life saved him more than once: suddenly
He traded three greyhounds for them!!!

Another master sells his serf actors:

But the debtors did not agree to a deferment:
Cupids and Zephyrs all
Sold out individually!

“Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland, // Which we should take as models?” - the main character asks bitterly. In this monologue one can hear the genuine pain of a man who knows the value of the “fathers of the fatherland,” who are “rich in robbery” and protected from trial by the entire existing system: connections, bribes, acquaintances, position. The new man cannot, according to the hero, come to terms with the existing slave position of the “smart, vigorous people.” And how can one come to terms with the fact that the defenders of the country, the heroes of the War of 1812, the gentlemen have the right to exchange or sell. Chatsky raises the question of whether serfdom should exist in Russia.

Griboyedov’s hero is also outraged by the fact that such “strict connoisseurs and judges” persecute everything freedom-loving, free and defend only the ugly and unprincipled. In this monologue of the hero, the voice of the author himself is heard, expressing his innermost thoughts. And, after listening to Chatsky’s passionate monologue, any sane person should inevitably come to the conclusion that such a state of affairs cannot exist in a civilized country.

With the words “There is an insignificant meeting in that room...” begins another monologue of Chatsky. It marks the climax and resolution of the conflict. Answering Sophia’s question “Tell me, what makes you so angry?”, Chatsky, as usual, gets carried away and does not notice that no one is listening to him: everyone is dancing or playing cards. Chatsky speaks into emptiness, but in this monologue he also touches on an important issue. He is outraged by the “Frenchman from Bordeaux” as an example of the admiration of Russian nobles for everything foreign. With fear and tears, he went to Russia, and then he was delighted and felt like an important person, having not met there “neither a Russian sound nor a Russian face.” Chatsky is offended by the fact that the Russian language, national customs and culture should be placed much lower than foreign ones. He ironically proposes to borrow from the Chinese the “wise... ignorance of foreigners.” And he continues:

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although he didn’t consider us Germans based on our language,

The last monologue comes at the denouement of the plot. Chatsky says here that he will never be able to come to terms with the morals and orders of Famusov’s Moscow. He is not surprised that this society of people, terrified of everything new and advanced, declares him insane:

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.

So, Chatsky left the Famusovs’ house offended and disappointed, and yet he is not perceived as a defeated person, a loser, because he managed to remain faithful to his ideals, to remain himself.

Monologues help us understand not only the character of the main character. They tell us about the order that existed in Russia at that time, about the hopes and aspirations of progressive people of that time. They are important both in the semantic and structural construction of the play. Thinking readers and viewers should definitely think about the main problems of Russian society during Griboyedov’s time, many of which are still relevant today.