The present century and the past century are the causes of the conflict. “The present century” and “the past century.” Dispute between generations in the comedy "Woe from Wit"
“THE PRESENT CENTURY” AND “THE PAST CENTURY” IN GRIBOEDOV’S COMEDY “WOE FROM MIND”
Plan.
1. Introduction.
“Woe from Wit” is one of the most topical works in Russian literature.
2. Main part.
2.1 The collision of the “present century” and the “past century”.
2.2. Famusov is a representative of the old Moscow nobility.
2.3 Colonel Skalozub is a representative of the Arakcheevo army environment.
2.4 Chatsky is a representative of the “present century”.
3. Conclusion.
The collision of two eras gives rise to change. Chatsky is broken by quantity old power, dealing her, in turn, a fatal blow with the quality of fresh power.
I. Goncharov
The comedy “Woe from Wit” by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov can be called one of the most topical works in Russian literature. Here the author touches on the pressing issues of that time, many of which continue to occupy the minds of the public even many years after the creation of the play. The content of the comedy is revealed through the collision and change of two eras - “the present century” and the “past century”.
After Patriotic War In 1812, a split occurred in Russian noble society: two public camps were formed. The camp of feudal reaction in the person of Famusov, Skalozub, and other people in their circle embodies the “past century.” New times, new beliefs and positions of advanced noble youth are represented in the person of Chatsky. Griboedov expressed the clash of “centuries” in the struggle of these two groups of heroes.
“The Past Century” is presented by the author by people different positions and age. These are Famusov, Molchalin, Skalozub, Countess Khlestova, guests at the ball. The worldview of all these characters was formed in the “golden” age of Catherine and has not changed in any way since then. It is this conservatism, the desire to preserve everything “the way the fathers did it,” that unites them.
Representatives of the “past century” do not accept novelty, and see enlightenment as the cause of all the problems of the present:
Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is now, more than ever,
There were crazy people, deeds, and opinions.
Famusov is usually called a typical representative of the old Moscow nobility. He is a convinced serf owner and sees nothing reprehensible in young people learning to “bend over backward” and serve in order to achieve success in their careers. Pavel Afanasyevich categorically does not accept new trends. He bows to his uncle, who “ate on gold,” and the reader understands perfectly well how his numerous ranks and awards were received - of course, not thanks to his faithful service to the Motherland.
Next to Famusov, Colonel Skalozub is “a golden bag and aims to become a general.” At first glance, his image is caricatured. But Griboyedov created a completely truthful historical portrait representative of the Arakcheevo army environment. Skalozub, like Famusov, is guided in life by the ideals of the “past century,” but only in a rougher form. The purpose of his life is not to serve the Fatherland, but to achieve ranks and awards.
All representatives of Famus society are egoists, hypocrites and self-interested people. They are only interested in their own well-being, social entertainment, intrigue and gossip, and their ideals are wealth and power. Griboedov exposes these people in Chatsky's passionate monologues. Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - humanist; it protects the freedom and independence of the individual. In the angry monologue “Who are the judges?” the hero denounces what he hates serfdom, highly appreciates the Russian people, their intelligence, love of freedom. Chatsky's groveling before everything foreign evokes a sharp protest.
Chatsky is a representative of the progressive noble youth and the only hero in the comedy who embodies the “present century.” Everything says that Chatsky is a bearer of new views: his behavior, lifestyle, speech. He is confident that the “age of submission and fear” should become a thing of the past, along with its morals, ideals and values.
However, traditions days gone by are still strong - Chatsky is convinced of this very quickly. Society sharply puts the hero in his place for his straightforwardness and audacity. The conflict between Chatsky and Famusov only at first glance appears to be an ordinary conflict between fathers and children. In fact, this is a struggle of minds, views, ideas.
So, along with Famusov, Chatsky’s peers, Molchalin and Sophia, also belong to the “past century.” Sophia is not stupid and, perhaps, in the future her views could still change, but she was raised in the company of her father, on his philosophy and morality. Both Sophia and Famusov favor Molchalin, and let him “not have this mind, / What a genius is for others, but for others a plague.”..
He, as expected, is modest, helpful, silent and will not offend anyone. They do not notice that behind the mask of the ideal groom lies deceit and pretense aimed at achieving the goal. Molchalin, continuing the traditions of the “past century,” is meekly ready to “please all people without exception” in order to achieve benefits. But it is him, and not Chatsky, that Sophia chooses. The smoke of the Fatherland is “sweet and pleasant” to Chatsky.
After the lapse of three years he returns to native home and at first he was very friendly. But his hopes and joys are not justified - at every step he runs into a wall of misunderstanding. Chatsky is alone in his opposition to Famus society; Even the girl he loves rejects him. Moreover, the conflict with society is closely intertwined with Chatsky’s personal tragedy: after all, it is with Sophia’s suggestion that conversations about his madness begin in society.
“The present century and the past century” (the main conflict in the comedy “Woe from Wit”)
The comedy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov became the first innovative in Russian literature quarter of the XIX century.
For classic comedy There was a characteristic division of heroes into positive and negative. Victory was always for positive heroes, while the negative ones were ridiculed and defeated. In Griboyedov's comedy, the characters are distributed in a completely different way. The main conflict of the play is connected with the division of the heroes into representatives of the “present century” and the “past century”, and the first includes almost only Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, moreover, he often finds himself in a funny position, although he is a positive hero. At the same time, his main “opponent” Famusov is by no means some notorious scoundrel; on the contrary, he is a caring father and a good-natured person.
It is interesting that Chatsky spent his childhood in the house of Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. Moscow lordly life was measured and calm. Every day was the same. Balls, lunches, dinners, christenings...
He made a match - he succeeded, but he missed.
All the same sense, and the same poems in the albums.
Women are mainly concerned with their outfits. They love everything foreign and French. The ladies of Famus society have one goal - to marry or give their daughters to an influential and rich man. With all this, as Famusov himself puts it, women “are judges of everything, everywhere, there are no judges over them.” Everyone goes to a certain Tatyana Yuryevna for patronage, because “officials and officials are all her friends and all her relatives.” Princess Marya Alekseevna has such weight in high society that Famusov somehow exclaims in fear:
Oh! My God! What will he say?
Princess Marya Aleksevna!
What about men? They are all busy trying to move up the social ladder as much as possible. Here is the thoughtless martinet Skalozub, who measures everything by military standards, jokes in a military way, being an example of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. But this just means a good growth prospect. He has one goal - “to become a general.” Here is the petty official Molchalin. He says, not without pleasure, that he “received three awards, is listed in the Archives,” and he, of course, wants to “reach the well-known levels.”
The Moscow “ace” Famusov himself tells young people about the nobleman Maxim Petrovich, who served under Catherine and, seeking a place at court, did not show any business qualities, no talents, and became famous only for the fact that he often “bent his neck” when bowing. But “he had a hundred people at his service,” “all wearing orders.” This is the ideal of Famus society.
Moscow nobles are arrogant and arrogant. They treat people poorer than themselves with contempt. But special arrogance can be heard in remarks addressed to the serfs. They are “parsleys”, “crowbars”, “blocks”, “lazy grouse”. One conversation with them: “Get you to work! Get you settled!” In close formation, the Famusites oppose everything new and advanced. They can be liberal, but they are afraid of fundamental changes like fire. There is so much hatred in Famusov’s words:
Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is worse now than then,
There were crazy people, deeds, and opinions.
Thus, Chatsky is well acquainted with the spirit of the “past century,” marked by servility, hatred of enlightenment, and the emptiness of life. All this early aroused boredom and disgust in our hero. Despite his friendship with sweet Sophia, Chatsky leaves the house of his relatives and begins an independent life.
“The desire to wander attacked him...” His soul thirsted for the novelty of modern ideas, communication with the progressive people of the time. He leaves Moscow and goes to St. Petersburg. “High thoughts” are above all for him. It was in St. Petersburg that Chatsky’s views and aspirations took shape. He apparently became interested in literature. Even Famusov heard rumors that Chatsky “writes and translates well.” At the same time, Chatsky is fascinated by social activity. He develops a “connection with the ministers.” However, not for long. High concepts of honor do not allow him to serve; he wanted to serve the cause, not individuals.
After this, Chatsky probably visited the village, where, according to Famusov, he “made a mistake” by mistakenly managing the estate. Then our hero goes abroad. At that time, “travel” was looked at askance, as a manifestation of the liberal spirit. But just the acquaintance of representatives of Russian noble youth with life, philosophy, history Western Europe had great importance for their development.
And now we meet the mature Chatsky, a man with established ideas. Chatsky contrasts the slave morality of Famus society with a high understanding of honor and duty. He passionately denounces the feudal system he hates. He cannot calmly talk about “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanges servants for dogs, or about the one who “drove to the serf ballet... from mothers, fathers of rejected children” and, having gone bankrupt, sold them all one by one.
These are the ones who lived to see their gray hairs!
This is who we should respect in the wilderness!
Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!
Chatsky hates “the meanest traits of the past,” people who “draw judgments from forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” His aristocratic servility to everything foreign evokes a sharp protest. French upbringing, common in a lordly environment. In his famous monologue about the "Frenchman from Bordeaux" he talks about passionate affection common people to your homeland, national customs and language.
As a true educator, Chatsky passionately defends the rights of reason and deeply believes in its power. In reason, in education, in public opinion, in the power of ideological and moral influence, he sees the main and powerful means of remaking society and changing life. He defends the right to serve education and science:
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, thirsting for knowledge;
Or God himself will stir up heat in his soul
To the creative, high and beautiful arts, -
They immediately: robbery! Fire!
He will be known among them as a dreamer! Dangerous!!!
Among such young people in the play, in addition to Chatsky, one can also include, perhaps, Skalozub’s cousin, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - “a chemist and a botanist.” But the play talks about them in passing. Among Famusov's guests, our hero is a loner.
Of course, Chatsky makes enemies for himself. Well, will Skalozub forgive him if he hears about himself: “Khripun, strangled, bassoon, constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!” Or Natalya Dmitrievna, whom he advised to live in the village? Or Khlestova, at whom Chatsky openly laughs? But, of course, Molchalin gets the most. Chatsky considers him a “most pitiful creature”, like all fools. Out of revenge for such words, Sophia declares Chatsky crazy. Everyone happily picks up this news, they sincerely believe in the gossip, because, indeed, in this society he seems crazy.
A.S. Pushkin, having read “Woe from Wit,” noticed that Chatsky was throwing pearls before swine, that he would never convince those to whom he addressed with his angry, passionate monologues. And one cannot but agree with this. But Chatsky is young. Yes, he has no goal of starting disputes with the older generation. First of all, he wanted to see Sophia, for whom he had a heartfelt affection since childhood. Another thing is that in the time that has passed since their last meeting, Sophia has changed. Chatsky is discouraged by her cold reception, he is trying to understand how it could happen that she no longer needs him. Perhaps it was this mental trauma that triggered the conflict mechanism.
As a result, there is a complete break between Chatsky and the world in which he spent his childhood and with which he is connected by blood ties. But the conflict that led to this break is not personal, not accidental. This conflict is social. We didn't just collide different people, but different worldviews, different public positions. The external outbreak of the conflict was Chatsky’s arrival at Famusov’s house; it was developed in disputes and monologues of the main characters (“Who are the judges?”, “That’s it, you are all proud!”). Growing misunderstanding and alienation lead to a climax: at the ball, Chatsky is declared insane. And then he understands himself that all his words and emotional movements were in vain:
You all glorified me as crazy.
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.
The outcome of the conflict is Chatsky’s departure from Moscow. The relationship between Famus society and the main character is clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other and do not want to have anything in common. It's impossible to tell who has the upper hand. After all, the conflict between old and new is as eternal as the world. And the theme of the suffering of the smart, educated person in Russia it is still topical today. To this day, people suffer more from their intelligence than from their absence. In this sense, Griboyedov created a comedy for all times.
In A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” we can observe a clash of two eras. The main idea of the work is the confrontation between two worldviews: “the present century” and “the past century.”
Refers to the century "past century" Famus Society, and Chatsky’s society belongs to the “present century”.
Each society treats wealth and rank differently.
Famusov's society evaluates a person by his origin, and Chatsky's society values personal merits in a person. “The Past Century”: “Be poor, but if you get enough, two thousand family souls, that’s the groom...”. “The Present Century”: “Protection from court was found in friends, in kinship, magnificent chambers where they indulge in feasts and extravagance, and where the foreign clients of their past lives do not resurrect the meanest traits.” They also have different opinions regarding the service, for example: Chatsky leaves the service because he believes that it is better to serve the Motherland than to serve someone who is of higher rank, and Famusov has a completely opposite opinion. “The present century”: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening...” “A bygone century”: “And for me, no matter what the matter, my custom is this: it’s signed, then off your shoulders...”.
About enlightenment, the Famusov society believes that teaching is harmful, but Chatsky’s society thinks differently. “The Past Century”: “I would like to throw away all the books and burn them.” “The present century”: “What, now, just like in ancient times, are they trying to recruit more teachers from regiments, at a cheaper price?.. we are ordered to recognize everyone as a historian and geographer.” Attitude to serfdom: “The present century” opposes those people who are the pillars of noble society; “The past century” refers preferably to the old century, the heyday
serfdom. The attitude towards foreignness between the Famusovsky and Chatsky societies also differs. The Famuskovsky Society stands for development national culture, opposes imitation of foreigners. Chatsky's society imitates the external culture of the West, especially France, neglecting its native language. “The Past Century”: “The door is unlocked for those invited and uninvited, especially for foreigners.” “The present century”: “And where the foreign clients of the past life will not resurrect the meanest traits.” Attitude to Moscow morals. Famuskov society tries to comply as much as possible with Moscow morals, and Chatsky’s society despises both morals and people who obsequiously follow all the rules accepted in society. “The Present Century”: “And who in Moscow hasn’t had their mouths gagged at lunches, dinners and dances?” “The Past Century”: “I was invited to Praskovya Fedorovna’s house on Tuesday for trout…”
The conflict between the “present century” and the “past century” is inevitable, since they are different in everything!
Updated: 2018-09-11
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.
THE COLLISION OF "THE PRESENT CENTURY" AND THE "PAST CENTURY"
“The main role, of course, is the role of Chesty, without whom there would be no comedy, but there would, perhaps, be a picture of morals.” I.A. Goncharov One cannot but agree with Goncharov that the figure. Chatsky defines the conflict of comedy - the conflict of two eras. It arises because people with new views, beliefs, and goals begin to appear in society. Such people do not lie, do not adapt, and do not depend on public opinion. Therefore, in an atmosphere of servility and veneration, the appearance of such people makes their clash with society inevitable. The problem of mutual understanding between the “present century” and the “past century” was relevant at the time Griboyedov created the comedy “Woe from Wit”, and it is still relevant today. So, at the center of the comedy is the conflict between “one sensible person” (according to Goncharov) and the “conservative majority.” Griboedov's comedy tells about a man's grief, and this grief comes from his mind. For smart people reactionaries were considered freethinkers. It is on this that the internal development of the conflict between Chatsky and the Famus environment surrounding him, the conflict between the “present century” and the “past century” is based. "The Past Century" in comedy is represented by a number of bright types. These are Famusov, and Skalozub, and Repetilov, and Molchalin, and Liza, and Sofia. In a word, there are many of them. First of all, the figure of Famusov, an old Moscow nobleman who has earned general favor in capital circles, stands out. He is friendly, courteous, witty, cheerful, in general, a hospitable host. But this is only the external side. The author reveals the image of Famusov comprehensively. This is a convinced serf owner, a fierce opponent of enlightenment. “Collect all the books and burn them!” - he exclaims. Chatsky, a representative of the “present century,” dreams of “focusing a mind hungry for knowledge into science.” He is outraged by the order established in Famus society. If Famusov dreams of marrying off his daughter Sophia at a better price, telling her directly (“Whoever is poor is not a match for you”), then Chatsky yearns for " sublime love, before which the whole world... is dust and vanity." Chatsky's desire is to serve the fatherland, "the cause, not the persons." He despises Molchalin, who is accustomed to pleasing "all people without exception": the owner, where he happens to live, the boss, with whom will I serve, His servant, who cleans the dress, The doorman, the janitor, to avoid evil, The janitor’s dog, so that he is affectionate! Everything in Molchalin: behavior, words - emphasize the cowardice of an immoral person making a career. Chatsky speaks with bitterness about such people. : “Molchalins are blissful in the world!” It is Molchalin who arranges his life better than anyone else. In his own way, he is even talented. He earned Famusov’s affection, Sophia’s love, and received three awards. He values two qualities of his character most: moderation and accuracy in relationships. Chatsky and Famusov’s society reveal and ridicule the views of the “past century” on careers, on service, on what is most valued in people. Famusov takes only relatives and friends into his service. He respects flattery and sycophancy. He wants to convince Chatsky to serve, “looking at the elders,” “putting up a chair, raising a handkerchief.” To which Chatsky objects: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” Chatsky takes service very seriously. And if Famusov treats it formally, bureaucratically (“it’s signed, off your shoulders”), then Chatsky says: “When in business, I hide from fun, when fooling around, I’m fooling around,” mixing these two crafts is a darkness of experts, I don’t from among them." He worries about the affairs of the Famuses only on one side, fearing mortally, "so that many of them do not accumulate." Another representative of the "past century" is Skalozub. It was precisely the kind of son-in-law that the Famuses dreamed of having. After all, Skalozub is "both a golden bag and aims to become a general." This character contained within himself typical features reactionary of Arakcheev's time. “A wheeze, a strangled man, a bassoon. A constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas,” he is as much an enemy of education and science as Famusov. “You can’t fool me with learning,” says Skalozub. It is quite obvious that the very atmosphere of Famus society forces ^representatives younger generation show your negative qualities. So Sophia uses her sharp mind to outright lie, spreading rumors about Chatsky’s madness. Sophia fully corresponds to the morality of the “fathers”. And although she is an intelligent girl, with a strong, independent character, a warm heart, and a dreamy soul, her false upbringing still instilled in Sophia many negative qualities and made her a representative of the generally accepted views in this circle. She does not understand Chatsky, she has not grown up to him, to his sharp mind, to his logical, merciless criticism. She also does not understand Molchalin, who “loves her because of his position.” It is not her fault that Sophia has become a typical young lady of Famus society. The society in which she was born and lived is to blame, “she was ruined, in the stuffiness, where not a single ray of light, not a single stream penetrated fresh air"(Goncharov's "A Million Torments"). Another character in the comedy is very interesting. This is Repetilov. He is a completely unprincipled person, an "idle", but he was the only one who considered Chatsky to be "highly intelligent" and, not believing in his madness, called Famus's pack of guests " chimeras" and "game". Thus, he was at least one step above them all. "So! I have completely sobered up!" - Chatsky exclaims at the end of the comedy. What is this - defeat or insight? Yes, the end of this work is far from cheerful, but Goncharov is right when he said about the ending like this: "Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting it on his turn a fatal blow with the quality of fresh strength." And I completely agree with Goncharov, who believes that the role of all Chatskys is “suffering”, but at the same time always “victorious.” Chatsky opposes the society of ignoramuses and serf owners. He fights against noble scoundrels and sycophants , swindlers, cheats and informers. In his famous monologue “And who are the judges”... he tore off the mask from the vile and vulgar Famus world, in which the Russian people turned into an object of purchase and sale, where landowners exchanged serfs who saved “and honor, and life... more than once" to "three greyhounds." Chatsky defends a real person, humanity and honesty, intelligence and culture. He defends the Russian people, his Russia from the bad, inert and backward. Chatsky wants to see Russia literate, cultural. He defends this in arguments, conversations with everyone actors comedy "Woe from Wit", directing all his intelligence, wit, evil, temper and determination to this. Therefore, those around him take revenge on Chatsky for the truth, which hurts his eyes, for his attempt to disrupt the usual way of life. The “past century,” that is, Famus society, is afraid of people like Chatsky, because they encroach on the order of life that is the basis of the well-being of this society. Chatsky calls the past century, which Famusov admires so much, the century of “humility and fear.” The Famus society is strong, its principles are firm, but Chatsky also has like-minded people. These are the persons mentioned: Skalozub's cousin ("The rank followed him - he suddenly left the service..."), the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya. Chatsky himself constantly says “we,” “one of us,” thus speaking not only on his own behalf. So A.S. Griboyedov wanted to hint to the reader that the time of the “past century” is passing, and it is being replaced by the “present century”, strong, smart, educated. The comedy "Woe from Wit" was a huge success. It sold thousands of handwritten copies even before it was printed. Advanced people At that time, the appearance of this work was warmly welcomed, and representatives of the reactionary nobility were outraged by the appearance of the comedy. What is this - a collision of the “past century” and the “present century”? Of course yes. We value Griboedov’s ardent faith in Russia, in his Motherland, and absolutely fair words are written on the grave monument of A.S. Griboedova: “Your mind and deeds are immortal in Russian memory.”
/ / / “The present century” and the “past century” in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
The famous comedy is nothing more than a ridicule of the morals of the noble class of the early nineteenth century.
Its author, Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov, vividly and masterfully showed the conflict between landowners entrenched in the old order and the young advanced generation. The two sides were called “the present century” and “the past century.” And that’s what the young man called them, main character comedy - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Leafing through the pages of our favorite work, we inevitably encounter a dispute between these two opposing camps. Let's see what their views are, what each person's concept is based on.
So, the “past century” has a much larger number of representatives than its opponents. The most striking and large-scale figure representing this side is the manager of the state house, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. All the events described in the play take place in his house. The conflict between fathers and children can already be traced in his relationship with his daughter Sophia. The girl is 17 years old, a widower, and raised her alone.
Finding his daughter alone with Molchalin, the father begins to conduct moralizing conversations. The fault, he believes, is education and those books that she is so passionate about. He sees no benefit in learning. Foreign teachers are valued by their numbers, not by the knowledge they can provide. Famusov offers himself as a role model for his daughter, emphasizing that he is distinguished by the behavior of a monk. But a few minutes before this, he openly flirts with the maid.
For Pavel Afanasyevich, the first place is public opinion, he only worries about what the world will say. For him, it is more important to look worthy, to create an image, and not to actually be one. And what’s worst is that the entire noble society of Moscow at that time was like that, because the main character is a typical representative of it.
The representative of the “current” modern century is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. At the time of the events described, the hero had not been in the Famusovs’ house for 3 years, as he was traveling around the world. He has been in love with Sophia since his youth and still retains tender feelings. But the girl is cold. Everything has changed. Chatsky is an unwanted guest who speaks out against the established life of this house and the people living in it.
Alexander Andreevich expresses a completely opposite opinion on all the topics raised. He is happy to serve, but is not ready to be served for the sake of profit. Chatsky will not put on the mask of a jester and say what is expected. He is disgusted by that society where a person with his qualities and merits has lost all value. Only ranks matter.
He is defeated, but only because his camp is small in number. A split among the nobility has already emerged, and it will inevitably continue. Declaring Alexander Andreevich crazy will not avoid changes. The Famus society only temporarily limited itself from them, it only moved the dates of the inevitable onset “ this century”, which they are so afraid of.
