The theme of the play is grief from mind. The conflict of a dramatic work and its originality. Philosophical theme in the play

The comedy “Woe from Wit” widely reflected the era of that time: the author paints a picture of the life and morals of noble society and its worldview, shows an advanced person with his ideals, and this whole picture has that “Moscow imprint” that Griboyedov’s contemporaries spoke about and which accurately conveyed the spirit of lordly Moscow of the 10s-20s of the 19th century.

In the play we find responses to various topical issues of the time: here are disputes about cameras, juries, about Byron, talk about Lancastrian “mutual teaching”, about the Pedagogical Institute and its professors, about Carbonari, Jacobins and Freemasons, about the English Club, about the Academic Committee, about guardianship over the estates of landowners, about the settlement of serfs in Siberia for offenses, etc. All this creates the flavor of the era and makes “Woe from Wit” similar to “Eugene Onegin”, with the difference that in Pushkin’s novel the era, life and morals are often reflected in lyrical digressions, where the author argues himself, while Griboedov, due to his peculiarities dramatic work, introduces the era only through speech characters, using this information to characterize the characters, since it is also important how the hero talks about this or that issue, what his opinion is about it. So, for example, the very first conversation between Chatsky and Sophia introduces the reader to the society of Muscovite nobles and its interests and way of life (in Chatsky’s assessment). The dramatic conflict—the contradiction between the hero and the environment—determines the structure of the work and its composition. But it’s not just one social conflict that lies at the heart of “Woe from Wit.” The speed and liveliness of the action, which the author himself spoke about, is given to the comedy by another, love conflict. Griboedov's enormous skill as a playwright was reflected in how brilliantly he showed the interpenetration of Chatsky's two dramas - public and personal. Grief from love and grief from the mind, intertwined, grow and deepen together, leading the whole action to a denouement.

So, in Act 1, the love line of the plot is mainly outlined: Sophia loves Molchalin (the reader immediately learns about this, but neither Famusov nor Chatsky knows about this). From the conversation between her and Lisa, we learn about Chatsky, who is in love with Sophia, and he immediately appears himself, animated, talkative, jokes with Sophia, talks about her coldness, not yet believing in her, remembers his Moscow acquaintances. Famusov is perplexed: he found Sofia Molchalin, and later Chatsky.

Lisa is an active participant in all scenes where a love affair develops; in act 1 she is cunning, shielding the young lady, and laughs at her, and evades Famusov’s lordly advances, and remembers Chatsky. Last words Famusov, with which Act 1 ends, is not just a remark at the end, as some critics believed, but at the same time it is the result of the action: Sophia - and two people around her: Molchalin and Chatsky. Famusov is at a loss as to which of the two, and both, in his opinion, were not suitable as grooms. In Act IV, at the tragic moment of the action’s climax, the comedy of Famusov’s position lies precisely in the fact that he has firmly decided this question for himself (“which of the two?”) in favor of Chatsky and is completely confident that he is right (“Even if you fight, I will not believe").

So, in Act 1, the social conflict is only outlined by the thin lines of Chatsky’s playful, albeit caustic remarks about Moscow society; the center of gravity is in the love affair. But in the 2nd act, from the 1st to the 6th phenomenon, social motives are already clearly heard. However, we note that Chatsky’s dispute with Famusov, which turned into a real duel between the “present century” and the “past century,” began because of Sophia: Chatsky asks about her health - Famusov gets irritated, since Chatsky, in his opinion, cannot be suitable groom for Sophia. With great skill, Griboyedov transfers the conversation to social issues: to the words of Chatsky: “Let me make a match, what would you tell me?” - Famusov responds with the proposal “not to indulge”, not to mismanage the estate, and most importantly - to go to service, to which Chatsky objects: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served.” Chatsky is annoyed; he has already received, albeit informally, since he himself does not make a formal proposal, but still a refusal from the father of his beloved girl. He is outraged by Famusov’s demands; he is not even capable of giving up his convictions for the sake of love.

The motive of civic duty of service is widely developed further in two monologues: Famusov and Chatsky, who express sharply opposing opinions. Famusov is a fan of the old order of service, obtaining places and ranks, Chatsky is an exponent of the view of service as the fulfillment of a person’s civic duty. The way Famusov reacts to Chatsky’s opinion (“Oh my God! He’s a Carbonari!”, etc.) defines the significance of the social conflict more and more sharply. But Griboyedov does not forget Chatsky’s love drama. It accompanies and permeates social drama. Both conflicts mutually deepen each other. In phenomenon 3, Famusov hints to Chatsky about Skalozub as a possible groom for Sophia, and in phenomenon 4, Chatsky, heated by an argument with Famusov, shows the confusion brought into his soul by these hints. The severity of the social conflict is clearly defined in two famous monologues (Famusov and Chatsky): “Taste, father, excellent manners” and “Who are the judges?” So, becoming more and more complex and deepening, the social conflict grows, and at the moment when it reaches great tension, Griboedov, with a quick and completely unexpected scene of Sophia's fainting, switches the reader's attention to the personal relationships of the characters. From the 7th to the 14th phenomenon, a love affair develops, complicated by Molchalin’s treachery. To Chatsky’s suspicions about Skalozub are added suspicions about Molchalin. Lisa becomes a confidante active participant in development love story. In her famous words:
She comes to him, and he comes to me,
And I... I am the only one who crushes love to death, -
How can you not love the bartender Petrusha! —
summarizes what is new in the love affair in Act II(in act 1, Chatsky - to Sophia, Sophia - to Molchalin, and in act 11, Chatsky - to Sophia, Sophia - to Molchalin, Molchalin - to Lisa, Lisa - to Petrusha).

So, in the 2nd act, the ever-increasing social conflict is clearly indicated and, at the same time, the love affair becomes more complicated. If at the beginning of the 2nd act social motives are heard, complicated by personal experiences, and by the end of the act there is a rapid development of a love affair, then the 3rd act, on the contrary, begins, as if continuing the 2nd act, with the development primarily love motives, complicated by public These are phenomena 1 and 2, where Chatsky tries to ask Sophia about Skalozub and Molchalin, immediately speaking out on public issues (Chatsky’s monologue “Let us leave this debate”).

Phenomenon 3 is an example of dialogue in verse. It fully combines both the personal and social motives of the play. The dialogue provides rich material for characterizing Molchalin (Chatsky’s opinions are no longer new to us, but his brilliant aphorisms are striking) and ends with a conclusion that is natural for Chatsky:
With such feelings, with such a soul
We love... The liar laughed at me!
Next, from the 4th phenomenon, there is a picture of a ball at Famusov’s. Griboedov shows the number and strength of the camp opposite to Chatsky; the inevitability of an open break is growing, and at the same time, against the background of the struggle of the two camps, inextricably linked with it, Chatsky’s heartfelt drama develops. In the 13th appearance, Chatsky really angered Sophia by starting to talk about Molchalin with ridicule (psychologically this is completely justified: after all, Chatsky is sure that Sophia cannot love Molchalin). From the irritated Sophia we hear about Chatsky for the first time: “He’s out of his depth.”
mind." What follows are phenomena in which gossip about Chatsky’s madness grows with exceptional speed and ease. Quickly changing scenes show how gossip finds the most fertile soil, how it acquires new and new, more and more incredible and absurd details. The result that the gossip reaches is the words of Zagoretsky: “No, sir, forty barrels!” In the 22nd (last) appearance, Chatsky with his “millions of torments” is opposed to the whole society, resulting in an angry monologue: “There is an insignificant meeting in that room ...” The depth of the gap between Chatsky and the people around him is clear, and to the positive program of Chatsky, which outlined by him earlier, the last and very significant features were added: the requirement of respect for the Russian people, for national culture, for native language. The third act ends with the completion of the revelation of Chatsky’s ideological positions and his sharp clash with society.

Analysis of the work

Griboedov's innovation lay in the fact that he created Russia's first realistic, social, national comedy. It starts traditionally, like love play. Griboedov connected two lines together: love and social. The author showed how public drama grows from personal drama.

The plot is the arrival of Chatsky. The culmination of the plot is a ball at which Chatsky is declared crazy.

In constructing the comedy, Griboedov deviates from traditional canons: the play consists of four acts, and three unities (place, time and action) are also violated.

This work poses the most important problems of that time:

1) the problem of attitude towards the people;

2) the problem of creating a national culture;

3) the problem of public service. People with progressive views did not ostentatiously serve anywhere at that time;

4) the problem of enlightenment, education, upbringing;

5) personality problem.

The main thing is in the content of this work is a struggle between two socio-political camps: new and old, anti-serfdom and serfdom, which became widespread after the Patriotic War of 1812. Griboyedov showed in the comedy, which was originally called “Woe to Wit,” the process of breaking away the advanced part of the nobility from the inert environment and its struggle with its class. He was able to see the advanced hero in real life. Therefore, the writer’s realism was manifested primarily in the choice of a life conflict, which he interpreted not in an abstract or allegorical form, as was customary in classicism and romanticism, but by transferring characteristic features of social and everyday phenomena into the play. The various references to modernity that pervade the work characterize its historicism in its depiction of reality.

The action of this comedy has clear chronological boundaries. For example, it was established that, when mentioning a committee demanding that “no one knows or learns to read and write,” Chatsky was talking about the reactionary Committee created by the government. Khlestova speaks angrily about the Lancastrian system, which the Decembrists used to teach soldiers to read and write in their regiments; Lancastrian mutual education began to develop in Russia, and the Decembrists implanted it in their regiments. Professors of the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute are also mentioned, accused of “schisms and lack of faith,” in the words of Princess Tugoukhovskaya. In addition, Famusov’s exclamation about Chatsky: “Ah! My God! He's a Carbonari! - reflects the conversations of Moscow nobles about revolutionary movement Italian patriots, which reached its highest point in 1820-1823. All of the above questions are the subject of heated discussions among the characters in the comedy, reflecting the tense atmosphere in noble society on the eve of 1825.

In “Woe from Wit”, for the first time, a clash of characters occurs on ideological grounds; before that, in plays there was only a clash of characters, ages, tastes and social positions. Even the traditional conflict between two rivals who are trying to achieve reciprocity from the heroine is here subordinated to the characters’ struggle for their understanding of the meaning of life. Molchalin also expresses his opinion about the rules of behavior and veneration as generally accepted moral norms. Chatsky, for a long time and stubbornly, does not want to recognize him as his rival, refusing to believe that Sophia is capable of loving such a person, since they are too different in intellectual and moral development. The author completely shares Chatsky’s position, ending his play moral victory over opponents.

Another achievement of Griboedov’s realism was the images he created.

Chatsky embodied the features of a leading man of that time. He is the first in Russian realistic literature the image of a noble intellectual, cut off from his class environment. The main character in many of his judgments and statements is close to the Decembrists.

In his monologues, Chatsky sharply condemned the vices of his contemporary society. For example, in the monologue “Who are the judges?” he denounces “noble scoundrels” who exchange their servants for greyhounds, driving “rejected children from their mothers and fathers” to the serf ballet, then selling them off one by one.

Chatsky left the service because “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.” In addition, he criticizes noble society for its admiration for everything foreign and for its contempt for its native language and customs. Chatsky’s main ideological opponent is the reactionary Famusov, who lives by prejudice and considers enlightenment to be the source of all evil in the world. He is a typical Moscow serf-owner, a strict master of the house, who is rude to his subordinates, but flatteringly attentive to those above him in position and wealth.

Molchalin is an official serving Famusov, following the path of flattery and sycophancy.

In a more grotesque way, the image of Colonel Skalozub is given, very limited person, whose only dream is the rank of general. It represents a reliable support for the throne and the stick mode.

The most controversial character in the play is the image of Sophia. She fell in love with someone unequal to herself, thereby, as it were, challenging Domostroevsky traditions. Finding herself deceived in her feelings, she is not afraid of the condemnation of the people around her. But at the same time, she has not yet grown spiritually, so Chatsky’s mocking and independent mind frightens her and leads her to the camp of his opponents.

In addition, Griboyedov enriched the language of fiction with elements of lively colloquial speech taken from the popular Russian language. Like other Russian realist writers, the author learned from the people to express his thoughts and feelings clearly, briefly, accurately and figuratively.

Speech characteristics in this comedy are very important, since they fully and clearly express the writer’s attitude towards this character in the play.

From his first remarks, Repetilov shows himself to be a talkative, irresponsible and worthless person.

Lisa, a maid in Famusov’s house, has a special speech style. In her conversation, elements of common speech, such as “the young lady is calling you”, “he’s not cunning”, are combined with specific phrases characteristic of a more noble society, probably heard by her more than once in the manor’s house. That is why Lisa’s language contains the expressions “I don’t flatter my interests” and others.

In Colonel Skalozub’s speech there are many words and phrases from specific military service terminology, which help the author to describe even more clearly and more plausibly a serviceable military man, who only has on his mind military service. At the same time, the writer forces him to speak in military jargon about phenomena and events of a completely different meaning and content, as a result of which a special comic effect is achieved. For example, Famusov asks the colonel a question: “How do you feel about Natalya Nikolaevna?”, to which Skalozub replies: “I don’t know, sir, it’s my fault, we didn’t serve together with her.”

In Sophia’s speech style there are many Gallicisms, peculiar “crippled” French expressions, for example: “to share laughter”, “I see very much” and many others. What was fashionable at that time was reflected here literary movements, in her words one can feel the mannerism of the sentimental school.

Only the speech of the main character Chatsky is lively, relaxed and very emotional. Despite the fact that it also contains elements of colloquial vernacular, for example, such as pushe, chai, daviche, okrome, it nevertheless sounds intonationally in a completely different way and is stylistically painted with completely different colors. This is explained by the fact that Chatsky, by the essence of his character, necessarily had to speak differently, not like representatives Famusov society, because he thinks and reasons differently. The world of his feelings and experiences is much richer and wider than that of his ideological opponents, and this must certainly be reflected in the speech of the protagonist.

It should be noted that many idioms from Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” have long been included in the everyday speech of the broad masses and have become part of the phraseological composition of the national language.

Griboyedov, Analysis of the work Woe from Wit

Searched on this page:

analysis of woe from mind
woe from mind analysis
woe from mind analysis of the work
analysis of the work Woe from Wit
Griboyedov grief from mind analysis

A. S. Griboyedov is often called “the creator of one book.” It is unlikely that the author of the famous comedy "Woe from Wit" can be accused of negligence and laziness. Alexander Sergeevich was an outstanding diplomat, a gifted musician and a prominent public figure. Everything this one took on extraordinary person, bore the imprint of genius. His life and creative credo was the phrase: “As I live, so I write - freely and freely.” This article is devoted to the analysis of the play "Woe from Wit".

History of creation

The idea for the comedy "Woe from Wit" appeared, according to some sources, back in 1816. Griboyedov made an accusatory speech at one of the social events. He did not like the servile admiration of the Russians for everything foreign. Then Alexander Sergeevich was jokingly called crazy. After this incident, a plan arose in the writer’s head future comedy. But he began writing the work only in 1820, while serving in the city of Tiflis.

The first two acts were completed by the beginning of 1922. Griboedov wrote the last parts of the play while on vacation in Moscow. Here he “breathed the air” of secular drawing rooms and received additional material for creativity. The first edition of "Woe from Wit" was completed in 1823. However, already in 1824, the original version of the play underwent careful stylistic editing. Subsequently, censorship worked diligently on the work. As a result, the author's version of the work was published only in 1862. During the life of Alexander Sergeevich, the comedy was distributed in the form of handwritten copies - lists. It caused a lively response in literary circles. A detailed analysis of “Woe from Wit” will show how innovative this work was for its time.

Elements of classicism in "Woe from Wit"

Griboyedov's famous comedy is considered to be the first Russian realistic comedy. At the same time, it combined the features of classicism, which was rapidly developing in that era of romanticism and innovative realism. A thorough analysis of the comedy "Woe from Wit" indicates that the work complies with the basic requirements for creating a "high" comedy.

The play contains unity of place (Famusov's house) and time (the action takes place over the course of one day). However, there are two conflicts in the work - love and socio-political. This means that Griboyedov violated the unity of action in the play.

In comedy there is a traditional and closely related system of characters: a heroine, two contenders for her favor, a “noble father,” a maid-soubrette, and so on. However, Griboedov “breathed” into his heroes new life. From caricatured comedy characters, they turned into complex portrait images.

Alexander Sergeevich endowed his heroes with “speaking” surnames: Skalozub, Repetilov, Famusov, Molchalin. At the same time, the characteristics of his characters go far beyond one trait.

Elements of realism in "Woe from Wit"

First of all, Griboyedov abandoned the schematic representation of his heroes. The characters of his characters and " rare painting morals", depicted by him in the comedy, are sometimes frightening in their authenticity. For example, the versatility of Famusov’s character is manifested in his dialogues with other characters: he flirts with Lisa, fawns over Skalozub, reads Sofia’s instructions.

However, Chatsky in the play is opposed not only by specific representatives of the Famus guard, but also by the entire conservative " last century". Analysis of "Woe from Wit" allows us to identify many episodic images in the work, designed to expand the scope

A realistic approach to creating a work is also manifested in the author’s attitude towards the main character. Chatsky sometimes behaves inconsistently and constantly finds himself in comical situations due to his recklessness and lack of restraint. He is not at all an absolutely positive hero in the work. After all, his motives are essentially selfish. He strives to win Sofia's love.

Language "Woe from Wit"

One of the elements of Griboyedov’s dramatic innovation is the use of colloquial speech in writing comedy. Flexible poetic meter(free iambic) allows Griboyedov to create the verbal appearance of the characters. Each of them has its own speech characteristics. The protagonist's "voice" is unique and reveals him as a fierce opponent of Moscow customs. He sneers at "clumsy clever people", "crafty simpletons", idle and " with evil tongues". In his monologues one can feel a passionate conviction of his own rightness, a high pathos of affirmation of valid life values. An analysis of the comedy "Woe from Wit" indicates that the language of the play lacks intonation, syntactic and lexical restrictions. This is the “unkempt”, “rough” element of spoken language, transformed by Griboyedov into a miracle of poetry. Pushkin noted that half of the poems written by Alexander Sergeevich “should become proverbs.”

Two storylines

An analysis of Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" allows us to identify two equal conflicts in the work. This is a love line in which Chatsky confronts Sofia, and a socio-political one in which main character faces In the foreground, from the point of view of problems, are social contradictions. However personal conflict is an important plot-forming component. After all, it is for Sofia that Chatsky comes to Moscow, and for her sake he stays in Famusov’s house. Both storylines reinforce and complement each other. They are necessary in equally in order to conduct a reliable analysis of “Woe from Wit”, to understand the psychology, worldview, characters and relationships of the main characters of the comedy.

Socio-political themes of the work

The comedy addresses the most important problems in life Russian society the first half of the 19th century: the harm of rank and bureaucracy, the inhumanity of serfdom, issues of education and enlightenment, honest service to the fatherland and duty, the originality of the national Russian culture, and so on. Griboyedov did not ignore the question of the socio-political structure Russian state. All these moral and political issues are passed through the prism of the personal relationships of the characters.

Philosophical theme in the play

The problems of the comedy "Woe from Wit" are very complex and multifaceted. allows us to reveal the philosophical background hidden in the very title of the play. One way or another, all the heroes of the comedy are involved in a discussion of the problem of stupidity and intelligence, madness and insanity, buffoonery and tomfoolery, acting and pretense. These questions were solved by Alexander Sergeevich using a variety of mental, social and everyday material. The main figure in this issue is the smart “madman” Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. It is around him that all the diversity of opinions about comedy is concentrated. Let's take a closer look at this character.

The main character of the play

Alexander Andreevich returned to Moscow after a long absence. He immediately came to Famusov’s house to see his beloved, Sofia. He remembers her as a smart and mocking girl, who together with him heartily laughed at her father’s devotion to the English Club, her young aunt and other colorful representatives of Famus’s Moscow. Having met Sofia, Chatsky seeks to find out her train of thought, hoping that she remains his like-minded person. However, the girl strongly condemned his ridicule of aristocratic Moscow. Alexander Andreevich asked the question: “...Isn’t there really a groom here?” Main mistake Chatsky was that intelligence became the main criterion by which he tried to identify Sofia’s lover. For this reason, he dismisses both Skalozub and Molchalin as possible rivals.

The philosophy of the Moscow master

The author of the comedy "Woe from Wit" turns out to be much smarter than Chatsky. He suggests starting the analysis of Sophia’s actions with an acquaintance with the environment in which she grew up and was formed as a person. Most of all, this society is characterized by Famusov, father main character. This is an ordinary Moscow gentleman. A mixture of patriarchy and tyranny prevails in his character. He does not burden himself with career worries, although he occupies a serious post. His political ideals boil down to simple everyday joys: “win awards and have fun.” The ideal for Famusov is a person who has made a career. The means don't matter. The words of Pyotr Afanasyevich often disagree with the deeds. For example, he boasts of “monastic behavior,” but before that he actively flirts with Lisa. This is the main opponent of the sincere and passionate Chatsky.

Eligible groom

Famusov likes Colonel Skalozub immensely. He is a “golden bag” and “aims to become a general.” Pavel Afanasyevich does not even dream of a better groom for his daughter. The Colonel is a reliable defender of the “past century.” You can’t “faint” him with erudition; he is ready to destroy all bookish “wisdom” with drills on the parade ground. Skalozub is a stupid soldier, but in Famus society it is customary not to notice this. A study of the customs of aristocratic Moscow leads to disappointing conclusions, their detailed analysis. “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov indicates that studying with St. Petersburg professors and striving for enlightenment is the longest and most ineffective path to achieving career heights.

Characteristics of Molchalin

A living “picture of morals” is presented in the play “Woe from Wit.” Analysis of the heroes of the work forces us to turn to the quietest and most insignificant of them - Alexei Stepanovich Molchalin. This character is not at all harmless. With his lackey servility, he successfully makes his way into high society. His insignificant talents - “moderation and accuracy” - provide him with a pass to the Famus guard. Molchalin is a convinced conservative, dependent on the opinions of others and pandering to “all people without exception.” Oddly enough, this helped him win Sofia's favor. She loves Alexei Stepanovich without memory.

Episodic roles

Griboyedov characterizes the Moscow aristocracy with apt strokes. "Woe from Wit", the analysis of which is presented in this article, is rich in expressive episodic roles, allowing us to reveal the diversity of Famus society.

For example, the rich old woman Khlestova carries “a blackaa girl and a dog” with her to social evenings, adores young Frenchmen and is afraid of enlightenment like fire. Its main features are ignorance and tyranny.

Zagoretsky is openly called a “rogue” and a “gambler” in Famus society. But this does not prevent him from moving among the local aristocracy. He knows how to “help” in a timely manner, so he enjoys the sympathy of rich people.

“Woe from Wit” contains very extensive material for reflection. Analysis of the work makes it possible to clarify the author’s relationship to some “secret” societies that appeared in contemporary Russia. For example, Repetilov is a “noisy” conspirator. He publicly declares that he and Chatsky have “the same tastes,” but does not pose any danger to Famus society. Repetilov would have made a career himself, but he “met failures.” Therefore, he made conspiratorial activity a form of social pastime.

In "Woe from Wit" there are many extra-plot characters who do not directly participate in the comedy. They are mentioned in passing by the characters in the play and make it possible to expand the scope of the action to the scale of the entire Russian society.

The protagonist's worldview

Chatsky is a representative of the “present century”. He is freedom-loving, has his own opinion on every issue and is not afraid to voice it. Frustrated by Sofia’s indifference, Alexander Andreevich enters into polemics with the “Famusovites” surrounding him and angrily denounces their self-interest, hypocrisy, ignorance and insignificance. Being a true patriot Russia, he condemns the “dominance of noble scoundrels” and does not want to have anything to do with them. To Famusov’s proposal to live “like everyone else,” Chatsky responds with a decisive refusal. Alexander Andreevich recognizes the need to serve the Motherland, but draws a clear line between “serving” and “serving.” He considers this difference fundamental. Chatsky’s impudent monologues seem so outrageous to the local secular society that he is unconditionally recognized as crazy.

Alexander Andreevich - central character work, therefore more than one serious and detailed analysis is devoted to the characteristics of his image. Griboedov's "Woe from Wit" was reviewed by V. G. Belinsky, I. A. Goncharov, and other leading writers of the 19th century. And the attitude towards Chatsky’s behavior determined, as a rule, the characteristics of the entire work as a whole.

Compositional features

"Woe from Wit" obeys the strict laws of classical plot construction. Both lines (love and socio-ideological) develop parallel to each other. The exposition consists of all the scenes of the first act before the appearance of the main character. The outbreak of a love conflict occurs during Chatsky’s first meeting with Sofia. The social one begins to brew a little later - during the first conversation between Famusov and Alexander Andreevich.

The comedy is characterized by a lightning-fast pace of change of events. Stages of development love line are the dialogues between Sofia and Chatsky, during which he tries to find out the reason for the girl’s indifference.

The socio-ideological line consists of many private conflicts, verbal “duels” between representatives of Famus society and the main character. The climax of the play is an example of the outstanding creative skill of the creator of the comedy "Woe from Wit." Analysis of the ball in the work demonstrates how highest point voltage in love story motivates the culmination of a socio-ideological conflict. Sofia's random remark: "He's out of his mind" is taken literally by the social gossip. Wanting to take revenge on Chatsky for ridiculing Molchalin, the girl confirms that she is convinced of his madness. After this, the independent plot lines of the play meet at one climax - a lengthy scene at the ball, when Chatsky is recognized as crazy. After this they separate again.

The resolution of the love conflict occurs during a night scene in Famusov’s house, when Molchalin and Liza meet, and then Chatsky and Sofia. And the socio-ideological line ends last monologue Chatsky, directed against the “crowd of persecutors.” Contemporaries of the author of "Woe from Wit" accused him of the fact that the "plan" of the comedy had no clear boundaries. Time has shown that complex weaving storylines- another undeniable advantage of comedy.

Conclusion

We have presented to your attention only brief analysis. “Woe from Wit” can be re-read many times and each time you find something new. In this work the main characteristics of realistic art were very clearly manifested. It not only frees the author from unnecessary canons, conventions and rules, but also relies on time-tested techniques of other artistic systems.

Griboyedov wrote the play for two years (1822-1824). Since Alexander Sergeevich served as a diplomat and was considered an influential person, he hoped that his creation would easily pass censorship and would soon become a full-fledged performance. However, he soon realized: there is no skipping comedy. It was possible to publish only fragments (in 1825 in the almanac “Russian Waist”). The entire text of the play was published much later, in 1862. First theatrical performance took place in 1831. However, in handwritten copies (samizdat of that time) the book spread rapidly and became very popular among the reading public.

Comedy feature

Theater is the most conservative form of art, therefore, while romanticism and realism were developing in literature, classicism still dominated on the stage. Griboyedov’s play combines features of all three directions: “Woe from Wit” is a classic work in form, but realistic dialogues and issues related to the realities of Russia in the 19th century bring it closer to realism, and romantic hero(Chatsky) and the conflict of this hero with society is a characteristic opposition for romanticism. How are the classicist canon, romantic motifs and a general realistic attitude towards vitality combined in “Woe from Wit”? The author managed to harmoniously weave contradictory components together due to the fact that he was brilliantly educated by the standards of his time, often traveled around the world and read in other languages, and therefore absorbed new literary trends before other playwrights. He did not move among writers, he served in a diplomatic mission, and therefore his mind was free from many stereotypes that prevented authors from experimenting.

Drama genre "Woe from Wit". Comedy or drama?

Griboyedov believed that “Woe from Wit” is a comedy, but since tragic and dramatic elements are very developed in it, the play cannot be attributed exclusively to the comedy genre. First of all, we need to pay attention to the ending of the work: it is tragic. Today it is customary to define “Woe from Wit” as a drama, but in the 19th century there was no such division, so it was called “high comedy” by analogy with Lomonosov’s high and low calms. This formulation contains a contradiction: only tragedy can be “high”, and comedy is by default “low” calm. The play was not unambiguous and typical, it broke out of existing theatrical and literary clichés, which is why it was so highly appreciated by both contemporaries and the current generation of readers.

Conflict. Composition. Issues

The play traditionally highlights two types of conflict: private ( love drama) and social (contrasting old and new times, “Famus society” and Chatsky). Since this work partially relates to romanticism, we can argue that in the play there is a romantic conflict between the individual (Chatsky) and society (Famusovsky society).

One of strict canons classicism - unity of action, which assumes a cause-and-effect relationship between events and episodes. In “Woe from Wit” this connection is already significantly weakened; it seems to the viewer and reader that nothing significant is happening: the characters walk here and there, talk, that is, the external action is rather monotonous. However, the dynamics and drama are inherent precisely in the dialogues of the characters; you must first listen to the play in order to grasp the tension of what is happening and the meaning of the production.

The peculiarity of the composition is that it is built according to the canons of classicism, the number of acts does not coincide with it.

If the comedies of writers of the late 18th and early 19th centuries exposed individual vices, then Griboyedov’s satire attacked the entire conservative way of life, saturated with these vices. Ignorance, careerism, martinet, cruelty and bureaucratic inertia - all these are realities Russian Empire. The Moscow nobility with its ostentatious puritanical morality and unscrupulousness in business is represented by Famusov, stupid military careerism and blinkered consciousness is represented by Skalozub, servility and hypocrisy of the bureaucracy is represented by Molchalin. Thanks to episodic characters, the viewer and reader get acquainted with all the types of “Famus society” and see that their cohesion is the result of the solidarity of vicious people. The many-sided and motley clique has absorbed all the vulgarity, lies and stupidity that society is accustomed to worship and yield to. Characters not only on stage, but also behind the scenes, mentioned in the remarks of the characters (the moral lawmaker Princess Marya Aleksevna, the author of “exemplary nonsense” Foma Fomich, the influential and all-powerful Tatyana Yuryevna and others).

The significance and innovation of the play "Woe from Wit"

In the play, which the author himself considered a comedy, oddly enough, the most actual problems that period: the injustice of serfdom, an imperfect state apparatus, ignorance, the problem of education, etc. Griboedov also included, it would seem, vital debates about boarding schools, jury trials, censorship and institutions in his entertaining work.

Moral aspects, which are no less important for the playwright, give rise to the humanistic pathos of the work. The author shows how people die under the pressure of the “Famus society” best qualities in man. For example, Molchalin is not devoid of positive qualities, but is forced to live by the laws of Famusov and others like him, otherwise he will never achieve success. That is why “Woe from Wit” occupies a special place in Russian drama: it reflects real conflicts and non-fictional life circumstances.

The composition of the drama is in a classic style: adherence to three unities, the presence of large monologues, speaking names actors, etc. The content is realistic, which is why the performance is still sold out in many theaters in Russia. The heroes do not personify one vice or one virtue, as was customary in classicism; they are diversified by the author, their characters are not devoid of both negative and positive qualities. For example, critics often call Chatsky a fool or an overly impulsive hero. It is not Sophia’s fault that during his long absence she fell in love with someone who was nearby, but Chatsky immediately becomes offended, jealous and hysterically denounces everything around him only because his beloved has forgotten him. A hot-tempered and quarrelsome character does not suit the main character.

It is worth noting the spoken language of the play, where each character has his own speech patterns. This plan was complicated by the fact that the work was written in verse (in iambic meter), but Griboedov managed to recreate the effect of a casual conversation. Already in 1825, the writer V.F. Odoevsky stated: “Almost all the verses of Griboedov’s comedy became proverbs, and I often happened to hear in society, entire conversations of which most composed poems from “Woe from Wit.”

It is worth noting speaking names in "Woe from Wit": for example, “Molchalin” means the hidden and hypocritical nature of the hero, “Skalozub” is an inverted word for “teething,” meaning boorish behavior in society.

Why is Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” readable now?

Nowadays, people often use Griboedov's quotes without knowing it. Phraseologisms “the legend is fresh, but it’s hard to believe”, “ happy hours do not observe”, “and the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us” - all these catchphrases familiar to everyone. The play is still relevant due to Griboyedov’s light, aphoristic author’s style. He was one of the first to write a drama in real Russian, which people still speak and think in. The ponderous and pompous vocabulary of his time was not remembered by his contemporaries in any way, but Griboyedov’s innovative style found its place in the linguistic memory of the Russian people. Can the play “Woe from Wit” be called relevant in the 21st century? Yes, if only because we use quotes from him in everyday life.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

“Woe from Wit,” in terms of the richness of its content and artistic form, was an exceptional comedy, unprecedented for that time in both Russian and Western European drama. Its significance is extremely great.

1. First of all, comedy is very important in educational terms. "Woe from Wit" is a realistically written the broader picture life in Russia after the Patriotic War of 1812. ( This material will help you write correctly on the topic The meaning of the comedy Woe from Wit. Summary does not make it possible to understand the full meaning of the work, so this material will be useful for a deep understanding of the work of writers and poets, as well as their novels, novellas, short stories, plays, and poems.) In the rich gallery of images given in the comedy (both stage and off-stage), the bureaucratic world, the high-ranking nobility, the feudal landowners, and advanced people, bearers of Decembrist views.

The comedy raised all the pressing political and social issues of that time: about serfdom, about service, about education, about noble education; topical debates about jury trials, boarding schools, institutes, mutual education, censorship, etc. were reflected. The pre-December era is covered comprehensively, 2. The educational value of comedy is no less important. Griboedov sharply criticized the world of violence, arbitrariness, ignorance, sycophancy, hypocrisy: with all clarity and convincingness, he showed how the best human qualities perish in this world, dominated by the Famusovs and Molchalins. With his comedy, Griboyedov aroused hatred and contempt for the people of Famus society, branded voluntary servility, silence in all its forms. Griboyedov’s wonderful work is imbued with the spirit of struggle for a real person, for his dignity, for Russian national culture. In the person of Chatsky, an image that arouses love is given positive hero, revolutionary-Decembrist.

“Woe from Wit” was used by the Decembrists in their revolutionary struggle against the autocratic serfdom.

3. The significance of the comedy “Woe from Wit” in the development of Russian drama is especially great and important. This meaning is determined primarily by its realism.

In the construction of the comedy there are some features of classicism: the observance of mainly three unities, the presence of large monologues, and the “telling” names of some of the characters. In terms of its content, Griboyedov's comedy is a strictly realistic work.

Griboedov drew material for his comedy from the true life of the Moscow nobility of the 10-20s of the 19th century and reproduced it as a realist artist, revealing the main contradictions of that historical period- the struggle of Decembrist-minded people with the defenders of the autocratic-serf system.

Griboyedov fully and comprehensively described the heroes of the comedy. Each of them is not the embodiment of any one vice or virtue, but a living person, endowed with his characteristic qualities.

Griboedov, as a brilliant realist writer, showed a person at the same time as a person with a special individuality, and as a typical person who grew up in certain social conditions. While remaining completely individual, Griboedov's heroes at the same time represent a typical generalization of enormous power. Therefore, the names of his heroes became household names: synonymous with soulless bureaucracy (Famusovshchina), sycophancy (silence), rude and ignorant military clergy (Skalozubovshchina), fashion-chasing idle talk (Repetilovshchina).

By creating the images of his comedy, Griboedov solved the most important problem for a realist writer (especially a playwright) speech characteristics heroes, that is, the task of individualizing the language of the characters. In Griboedov's comedy, each person speaks in his own lively spoken language, which was especially difficult to do because the comedy is written in verse. But Griboedov managed to give the verse - iambic variegated foot - the character of a lively, relaxed conversation. After reading the comedy, Pushkin said: “I’m not talking about poetry - half of it should be included in proverbs.” Pushkin's words quickly came true. Already in May 1825, the writer V.F. stated: “Almost all the verses of Griboyedov’s comedy became proverbs, and I often happened to hear entire conversations in society, most of which were verses from “Woe from Wit.”

And to ours colloquial speech Many poems from Griboyedov’s comedy were included, for example:

Happy hours are not observed.

And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us.

The legend is fresh, but hard to believe.

Blessed is he who believes: he has warmth in the world. And many others.

The artistic realism and skill of the citizen writer, who boldly came out to fight the social ills of his era, determined the fate of the comedy “Woe from Wit.” Not passed by censors during Griboedov’s lifetime, the comedy became the property of thousands of people in handwritten form and played a big role in the development liberation movement in our country. Staged for the first time on the stage of a theater in St. Petersburg on January 26, 1831, the comedy “Woe from Wit” does not leave the stage today.

If homework on the topic of: » The meaning of the comedy Woe from Wit - artistic analysis. Griboyedov Alexander Sergeevich If you find it useful, we will be grateful if you post a link to this message on your page on your social network.

Latest news

Categories

News

Essays on the topic

Niobium in its compact state is a lustrous silvery-white (or gray when powdered) paramagnetic metal with a body-centered cubic crystal lattice.

Noun. Saturating the text with nouns can become a means of linguistic figurativeness. The text of the poem by A. A. Fet “Whisper, timid breathing...”, in his