A.S. Griboedov is the author of the immortal comedy “Woe from Wit,” which had a huge influence on all Russian literature and occupied a special place in it. The comedy “Woe from Wit” became the first realistic comedy in the history of Russian literature. In the images of the comedy, Griboyedov accurately reproduced the "high society society" of that time, showed the conflict between two opposing sides - Chatsky and Famusov, representatives of the "present century" and the "past century."

Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov is a bright representative of the “past century”, a narrow-minded manager in a government place, a cruel serf owner. It costs Famusov nothing to humiliate the dignity of his servant or threaten to exile his serfs for unknown reasons “to a settlement”. Landowners do not consider their serfs to be people. For example, Old woman Khlestova puts her maid on an equal footing with a dog:
Out of boredom I took it with me
A little black girl and a dog.
People in Famusov’s circle especially hate education, science, and the movement towards progress. Famusov gives his daughter an upbringing that precludes the possibility of true enlightenment:
To teach our daughters everything -
And dancing! and singing! and tenderness! and sighs!
And Famusov himself is not distinguished by his education and says that there is no use in reading, and his “comrade-in-arms,” in the “scientific committee that has settled,” screams for oaths so that “no one knows or learns to read and write,” and even teachers for his children. Famusov speaks about freedom of thought:
Learning is the plague, learning is the cause.
What is worse now than before,
Crazy people and affairs and opinions
And his final statement about enlightenment and education in Russia is “to take away all the books and burn them.”
Representatives of the “Famusovism” think only about rank, wealth and profitable connections. They treat the service formally, they see in it only a means to make a career. “I just wish I could become a general,” says Colonel Skalozub, limited and rude. Famusov also does not hide his attitude towards the service:
As for me, what matters and what doesn’t matter.
My custom is this:
Signed, off your shoulders.
Famusov does not serve a cause, but people. He does not want to serve his native country, he does not care about the future of his homeland and his people, service for him is a source of ranks, awards and income. The ideal for Famusov is Maxim Petrovich, who, currying favor, “bent over backwards” , “bravely sacrificed the back of his head,” but he was a respected person, “he knew honor before everyone.”
Native Russian customs, traditions, even the language are alien to Famusov’s society. Chatsky ironically says that in the world “a mixture of languages ​​dominates: French with Nizhny Novgorod.” Foreigners and everything foreign is the ideal to which representatives of Famus society are equal. Famusov himself, “a venerable member of the English Club to his death,” says that “the door is open for the invited and the uninvited, especially for foreigners.” But not only foreigners are welcome guests in Famusov’s house. Every man who visits his house is considered by the owner as a potential groom for Sophia. For Famusov, a marriage of convenience is the only sure way to marry off his daughter. Certain material requirements are imposed on the “candidate groom”:
Be bad, but if you get enough
Two thousand family souls, -
He's the groom.
Of course, Sofia’s beloved Molchalin, the penniless and rootless secretary Famusov, has no chance, because the father strictly punishes his daughter: “whoever is poor is not a match for you.” But Colonel Skalozub is “a gold bag and aims to become a general.” Ranks, uniforms, money - these are the ideals that the “past century” worships. Women “just cling to uniforms,” “because they are patriots,” says Famusov.
The main representative of the “present century” is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, young, well-educated, intelligent, noble, honest and brave. Chatsky has a completely different attitude “towards stars and ranks.” He left the service because “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” He hates careerism and sycophancy:
As he was famous for, whose neck bent more often;
As not in war, but in peace they took it head on,
They hit the floor without regret!...
But in the meantime, who will the hunt take?
Even in the most ardent servility,
Now, to make people laugh,
Bravely sacrifice the back of your head...
Chatsky stands for true enlightenment, and not for external gloss, condemns the desire to “recruit a regiment of teachers, in larger numbers, at a cheaper price”:
Now, let one of us
Among the young people there will be an enemy of quest,
Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge.
Chatsky most sharply denounces the vices of serfdom. He indignantly condemns “Nestor the noble scoundrel,” who exchanged his devoted servants for greyhounds, and the heartless landowner who
He drove to the serf ballet on many wagons
From mothers and fathers of rejected children?!
I myself am immersed in mind in Zephyrs and Cupids,
Made all of Moscow marvel at their beauty!
But the debtors did not agree to a deferment:
Cupids and Zephyrs all
Sold out individually!!!
Chatsky also advocates the development of folk culture; he condemns blind submission to foreign fashion:
Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion,
So that our smart, kind people
Although by language we are Germans.
Chatsky attracts people with his deep and sharp mind, independence of judgment, willpower, courage, noble desire to help his homeland and change for the better. It seems to me that Chatsky is both a winner and a loser, he “lost the battle, but won the war.” Of course, Chatsky could not change Famus society in one day. Goncharov wrote: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of strength, inflicting it in turn with the quality of fresh strength.” Famus society understands that it cannot cover its ears all its life and scatter to the sides, fleeing the truthful speeches of the hero But, nevertheless, he managed to disturb the peace of the measured life of the inhabitants of Moscow, which means that Chatsky has already won.

Nesterova I.A. Famusov and Chatsky, comparative characteristics // Encyclopedia of the Nesterovs

Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" does not lose its relevance, as it is a reflection of human weaknesses and vices that remain unchanged despite historical changes.

Illustration by D. N. Kardovsky for the comedy "Woe from Wit". 1912

Great comedy by A.S. Griboedova Woe from Wit" was conceived by the author in 1816, and saw the light only in 1825, and even then not in the full version, but excerpts. Only in 1833 the play was published in Russian in its entirety.

The comedy came under close attention from critics. Many of them unanimously note in their works that the comedy “Woe from Wit” stands apart in literature. I. A. Goncharov in his article “A Million Torments” compares the comedy with a hundred-year-old man, feeling cheerful and fresh between the graves of old and the cradles of new people, and says that “Woe from Wit” appeared before Onegin, Pechorin, and outlived them and will survive many more eras and still not lose its relevance.

In the immortal comedy, we are shown Moscow, captured with special tenderness; the life of the Moscow nobility, its interests, aspirations, and relationships is very accurately conveyed.

It was thanks to the picture of the Moscow brotherhood represented by the “Famusov society” that the expression “Griboedov’s Moscow” acquired a common meaning.

But nevertheless, the basis of A. S. Griboyedov’s play was the eternal conflict of “fathers and sons”, the clashes of interests of the “present century”, which is symbolized by Chatsky, and the “past century”, very accurately conveyed in the image of Famusov. Chatsky and Famusov are contrasted against the backdrop of two different worldviews, two different incarnations of Moscow.

Famusov is conservative and completely unwilling to accept the fact that the world is changing. He cultivates around him the same stubborn and cunning sycophants as himself. At the same time, Chatsky cannot claim to be a full-fledged personification of the “present century”, since he is too stubborn and at the same time is not ready to make efforts to change “Famus society”. He doesn't want to start small or be content with little.

Chatsky, like any liberal, does not know how to be understandable. He is alien to both representatives of the “Famus society” and ordinary people.

The collision of the “present century” and the “past century” occurs due to the fact that people like Chatsky are hostile to representatives of the “Famus society”. Pavel Afanasyevich and his like-minded people cannot understand the complete correctness of the young man’s ideas.

Already from the first act it becomes clear how different people Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov and Alexander Andreevich Chatsky are. In the very first episodes, Famusov expresses his opinion about books and service (“what’s my business, what’s not my business... is signed, off my shoulders”). From Sophia’s conversation with Liza, we learn that Pavel Afanasyevich, “like all Moscow people,” values ​​only rank and wealth in people, and he himself tells Sophia:

Anyone who is poor is not a match for you.

Chatsky appears to us completely differently in the first act. Sincere, animated by a date with his beloved girl, witty, he laughs at Famusov, sharply jokes about the life and pastime of the nobles of Famusov’s circle.

In the first act, an ideological conflict brews between Famusov and Chatsky, which unfolds in the second act. Their dispute shows strong disagreement on all issues.

Pavel Afanasyevich tries to teach Chatsky:

“Brother, don’t mismanage your property.
And most importantly, come and serve."

He reinforces his teachings with a reference to the court orders of Catherine’s times, when his uncle Maxim Petrovich gained the Empress’s favor with flattery and servility, and convinces Chatsky to serve, “looking at his elders.” And then Gribodov’s hero responds with a phrase that has become a phraseological unit:

“I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.”

He believes that one must serve “the cause, not individuals,” and approves of those young people who “are in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.” Alexander Andreevich defends the right of a person to freely choose his own activities: travel, live in the countryside, “focus his mind” on science or devote himself to art. In response to this, Pavel Afanasyevich declares Chatsky a dangerous person who does not recognize the authorities, and threatens him with trial.

Famusov is a person who does not recognize human dignity in people of a low class, who considers the landowner’s right to dispose of people as he pleases to be completely legal. Chatsky, on the contrary, shows respect to ordinary people, calls the Russian people “smart, cheerful,” and directs his anger against such serf owners as Famusov in the famous monologue “Who are the judges?..”

Differences in views, culture, and morality are clearly visible in the speech of Chatsky and Famusov. Famusov's speech is the speech of a not very educated, but intelligent, cunning, powerful master, accustomed to consider himself infallible. He argues with Chatsky, defends his views, sometimes showing wit.

Chatsky is an educated man, his speech is logical, rich in intonations, figurative, it reflects the depth of his feelings and thoughts. He passionately defends his rights and deeply believes in the power of reason, in the power of words. People like Chatsky destroyed the old world as soon as it seemed possible. Chatsky’s word was then his business, his merit. It corresponded to his educational views. However, it would not hurt to demonstrate some deeds in addition to words. The lack of concrete actions, excessive pathos, combined with great intelligence and honesty, creates the image of an idealist who does not want or cannot change anything in the ossified world of bribe takers and scoundrels, to which Famusov belongs. This is the main tragedy of Chatsky.

The famous comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov was created after the Patriotic War of 1812, when a period of spiritual upsurge began in Russia. Therefore, this work discusses the most pressing social issues and issues of public service, upbringing and education, imitation of everything foreign and contempt for one’s own national.

Chatsky's character

The character of one of the main characters of this work - Chatsky - is quite simple, but his emotional portrait is very diverse, however, in general, he portrays Chatsky as a positive person who shows maximalism in all his actions and feelings. He has an extraordinary mind, seeking knowledge and perfection, and has a very ambitious disposition. Chatsky’s attitude to service must be viewed through the prism of the fact that he was an enlightened man and could soberly assess political problems. He did not remain indifferent when Russian culture was oppressed and the issue of human pride and honor was raised. However, Chatsky did not understand love affairs at all, was constantly eager to fight and soon, as usual, experienced disappointment.

Biography of Chatsky

To expand on a topic such as Chatsky’s attitude to service, you first need to figure out who he is. So, Alexander Andreevich is a young nobleman, whose late father was a friend of Famusov. He returns from abroad to Moscow to see his beloved Sofia Famusova, whom he has not seen for three whole years. As children, they were friends and loved each other, but Sophia could not forgive Chatsky for his unexpected departure abroad, who left without even notifying her about it. And so their meeting took place in a cold and indifferent atmosphere because of Sophia.

Griboedov served as the prototype for Chatsky, who sharply criticized Russia and was declared crazy because of his writings. His works were banned and not published in the Russian Empire.

Chatsky's attitude to service

Where did the whole conflict between Chatsky and society flare up? It all started with a conversation with Molchalin. Chatsky cannot understand how Sophia could fall in love with such a person. When guests come to Famusov’s house, Chatsky manages to communicate with everyone, and with each such conversation the confrontation will increase.

Chatsky openly opposes serfdom and against those people who are considered the “pillars” of noble society, for example, such as Famusov. He also hates the order of Catherine's century.

Chatsky considers himself a free and independent person who is alien to slavery. But Famusov and his entire society are the nobles of Catherine’s century and special “hunters of indecency.”

Chatsky's attitude towards the service is negative, and therefore he leaves the service. Chatsky with great desire could serve the Motherland, but he does not at all want to serve his superiors, while in Famusov’s secular society there is an opinion that service to persons, and not to the cause, is a source of personal benefits.

Attitude to wealth, rank, etc.

Chatsky’s attitude towards rank and wealth is different in that he wants a person to be assessed by his personal qualities and merits. It recognizes the freedom of thought of every person in their statements and beliefs. In turn, it does not evaluate these progressive views of the hero; it evaluates people by noble origin and the number of serfs. And the opinion of high society is sacred and infallible. Chatsky advocates enlightening the country in literature and art through scientific work, for the unity of the secular intelligentsia with the common people and against imitation of foreigners.

But it is more comfortable without books and teachings; it slavishly imitates everything foreign, especially French.

In love, Chatsky seeks sincerity of feelings, and in high society there is pretense and marriage of convenience everywhere.

The comedy "Woe from Wit" reflects the brewing split in noble society. The change from one century to another, the end of the War of 1812, required landowners to reassess values ​​and change their outlook on public life. In this regard, nobles appear who want to improve the position of Russia by increasing the value of the human personality and civic consciousness. The struggle between two groups of nobles is designated in the play as a clash of the “present century” with the “past century.” In the comedy "Woe from Wit" Chatsky and Famusov are the main opponents.

The Problem of the Mind in Comedy

A.S. Griboedov wrote about his work: “In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person.” By “sensible person” Griboyedov means the main character of the comedy - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. But in the process of analyzing the work, it becomes clear that Famusov cannot be called a fool. Since Griboedov put his own thoughts and ideals into the image of Chatsky, the author finds himself completely on the side of the protagonist. However, both Chatsky and Famusov have their own truth, which each of the heroes defends. And each of them has their own mind, it’s just that Chatsky’s mind and Famusov’s mind differ in quality.

The mind of a nobleman, adhering to conservative views and ideals, is aimed at protecting his comfort, his warm place from everything new. The new is hostile to the old way of life of the feudal landowners, because it threatens its existence. Famusov adheres to these views.

Chatsky, on the other hand, is the owner of an effective, flexible mind, aimed at building a new world in which the main values ​​will be the honor and dignity of a person, his personality, and not money and position in society.

Values ​​and ideals of Chatsky and Famusov

The views of Chatsky and Famusov differ sharply on all issues related to the nobleman’s way of life. Chatsky is a supporter of education, enlightenment, he himself is “sharp, smart, eloquent,” “writes and translates well.” Famusov and his society, on the contrary, consider excessive “learning” harmful to society and are very afraid of the appearance of people like Chatsky in their midst. The Chatskys threaten Famusov’s Moscow with the loss of its usual comfort and the opportunity to spend life “in feasts and in extravagance.”

The dispute between Chatsky and Famusov also flares up around the attitude of the nobles to the service. Chatsky “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that.” The main character of the comedy explains it this way: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” But conservative noble society is structured in such a way that without “serving” it is impossible to achieve anything. Chatsky wants to serve “the cause, not individuals.”

But Famusov and his supporters have a completely different view on the issue of service.

Famusov’s ideal is his late uncle Maxim Petrovich. He earned the respect of the empress herself because he once behaved like a buffoon at a reception. Having stumbled and fallen, he decided to turn this awkward situation to his advantage: he fell several more times on purpose to make the audience and Empress Catherine laugh. This ability to “curse the favor” brought Maxim Petrovich enormous wealth and weight in society.

Chatsky does not accept such ideals; for him this is humiliation. He calls this time an age of “submission and fear” that clamps down on human freedom. The hero’s comparison of the “present century” and the “past century” does not turn out to be in favor of the latter, because now “everyone breathes more freely and is in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.”

Family values ​​of Chatsky and Famusov

The clash between Famusov and Chatsky also occurs over the divergence of their views on family values. Famusov believes that when creating a family, the presence of love is not at all important. “Whoever is poor is not a match for you,” he tells his daughter. Both in society and in the family, money is at the forefront. Wealth for Famus society is the same as happiness. Personal qualities do not matter either in the world or in the family: “Be bad, but if there are two thousand family souls, that’s the groom.”

Chatsky is a supporter of living feelings, which is why he is terrible for Famusov’s Moscow. This hero puts love above money, education above position in society. Therefore, the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov flares up.

conclusions

A comparative description of Chatsky and Famusov reveals all the meanness and immorality of Famusov and his supporters. But Chatsky’s time in the society described in the comedy “Woe from Wit” has not yet come. The main character is expelled from this environment, declaring him crazy. Chatsky is forced to retreat due to the numerical superiority of the “past century.” But he leaves Moscow not a loser, but a winner. Secular Moscow was frightened by his speeches. His truth is scary for them, it threatens their personal comfort. His truth will prevail, so the replacement of the old with the new is historically natural.

The clash between Famusov and Chatsky is a dispute between two generations, two different worlds. The arguments and causes of the conflict described in this article can be used by 9th grade students when writing an essay on the topic “Characterization of Chatsky and Famusov in the comedy “Woe from Wit””

Work test

The comedy “Woe from Wit” has been a highlight of the repertoires of many theaters for almost 200 years. Everyone remembers Chatsky's quotes. And everyone knows who wrote it. Diplomat and poet Griboyedov, state councilor. For a more complete description of this personality, it should be recalled that this man, highly erudite and competent, was a hussar by temperament. He knew what it was to defend the laws of honor, and could defend it in a duel.

Griboyedov - among the three most educated people in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century

And Alexander Sergeevich was the most educated man of his time, who knew the majority of Asia. It is amazing to be able to communicate fluently, in addition to your native language, in German, French, Italian, English, Greek, Turkish, and Arabic. In addition, he rendered great service to Russia as a virtuoso diplomat. The peace treaty he developed with Persia gave Russia 2 khanates. And in this sense, as his contemporaries argued, Griboedov alone was worth an army of 20,000. Despite the disgrace, even Emperor Alexander I could not ignore the efforts of the diplomat without attention and rewards. That’s what strength his education and clear mind represented!

Is it surprising that the theme of enlightenment was heard in the main work of Alexander Griboyedov’s life? Chatsky’s attitude towards education essentially echoes the point of view of the diplomat-playwright himself. However, first we should look at what Griboedov’s Russia itself was like.

Uncultured, uneducated Russia at the beginning of the 19th century

According to the famous philosopher Berdyaev, the country of Russia was a “huge, vast peasant kingdom,” led by the local nobility, “poorly cultured and lazy,” as well as a powerful bureaucratic apparatus. At the same time, the layer of educated and cultured people was insignificant. Here is the answer why Chatsky’s expressed attitude towards education causes such negativity

After all, even Emperor Alexander I, who came to power as a pro-Western liberal, led the anti-European opposition at the time of writing Griboyedov’s immortal comedy, and approached religious mysticism.

Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov - patriot and citizen

What to do when Famus’s words “collect all the books and burn them” become the essence of the reactionary position of the officials and landowners, secretly supported by the tsar? They are not just afraid of a remix of the French revolution in their Fatherland, they are afraid that they will be pushed out of the Olympus of Russian power.

That is why Chatsky’s attitude towards education frightens them: after all, literacy in the future will cause a change in the country’s course to an anti-serfdom, liberal one.

Alexander Griboedov, in his “seditious” comedy, raises a really pressing issue for Russia, which actually affects its future. Moreover, his interpretation of the proper level deserves close attention.

What Griboyedov said through the lips of the main character of the comedy about training

In 1816 in Russia, among the military educated nobles, there arose These are the people who during the time saw the liberal life of Europe and noticed the dynamics of the development of Western democracies. They expected Emperor Alexander I to adopt a constitution and abolish serfdom.

Chatsky’s attitude to education actually coincides with the position of the Decembrists. We bring to your attention the corresponding phrases of the main character of the comedy.

The above-mentioned quotes from Chatsky are sharp and laconic! What did Alexander Sergeevich want to express with these phrases? It shows the inconsistency of the system of Russian noble education in force at that time. Firstly, its ostentatious nature. Pseudo-governesses often went unrecognized. By hiring them, there was no control over what they could actually teach. Chatsky’s attitude towards education and enlightenment, despite his recent visit abroad, is pro-Russian. He does not consider it reasonable, for example, to blindly follow the experience of the Germans. Moreover, the young man is confident that the “smart and cheerful” believing Russian people, possessing an instinct for truth, solve many internal problems more effectively than Western advisers.

Who opposes Chatsky on the issue of education

The landed nobility enjoyed unlimited power over their serf slaves, who regularly earned them an income. Whether the master was smart or stupid, educated or not - there was no difference. He was rich and completely commanded his subordinates. Did this status create incentives for the local nobility to study seriously? Not at all.

Unlike classical landowners, nobles employed in the civil service were forced to have a certain education, although its criteria were, to put it mildly, low. The official is the same Famusov. The question arises: how much intelligence is needed to work with documents, following the principle “signed, out of sight”? Skalozub is a high military rank. It is precisely his education and mental abilities that cause only regret...

Famusov’s views are opposite to Chatsky’s views

Chatsky’s zealous attitude towards education and enlightenment, in which a pro-state position is felt, collides with the inert, primitive position of Famusov. One feels that he was personally taught at one time (as Pushkin aptly said) “somehow.” However, this Moscow nobleman with an average fortune, not bothering himself with reading books, spares no time on empty secular formalities. And what is characteristic is that his inner circle of acquaintances, nobles and officials, agrees with him.

Chatsky’s education, unlike Famusov and Molchalin, corresponds to the standards of the “current century.” The author does not go into details, but mentions that Alexander Andreevich went beyond the cordon to “gain his wits.”

Instead of a conclusion

However, Alexander Andreevich is not alone in his reverent attitude towards education, as shown by readers’ analysis of Chatsky, whose point of view is shared by the extra-plot characters of the comedy. This, for example, is the one mentioned by Skalozub, his cousin, Prince Fyodor, a botanist and chemist, as well as a professor at the Moscow Pedagogical Institute “practicing schisms and unbelief.”

Therefore, we do not perceive Chatsky’s departure from Famus’s house as a complete disregard by society of his views on education.