Travel around Karelia
Ideas of Decembrism in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.” Chatsky and the Decembrists.
“Woe from Wit” is a socio-political comedy. Griboyedov gave in it a true picture of Russian life after the Patriotic War of 1812. The comedy raised the topical social issues of that time: about public service, serfdom, education, education, about the slavish imitation of the nobles to everything foreign and contempt for everything national and popular.
Griboedov's comedy showed the reasons for the emergence of Decembrism, in addition, the social issues posed in “Woe from Wit” are resolved by the author in the same way as the Decembrists solved them.
In Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit", the ethical and aesthetic views of the Decembrists were reflected as in a mirror.
The aesthetics of the Decembrists arose at the intersection of the classicism of the noble Enlightenment of the eighteenth century and romanticism and was called “Civil Romanticism.” Ethics, that is, moral laws, obliged the heroes of the works of the Decembrists to perceive the public as their own personal, to take, as we now say, an active civic position. Such, for example, is the hero of Ryleev’s poem of the same name, Voinarovsky. Such is the lyrical hero of Raevsky’s “Message to Priklonsky,” who exclaims: “Living for the benefit of one’s neighbor is a sweet dream.”
Chatsky, the hero of the comedy “Woe from Wit,” can be put on a par with them. The witty, eloquent Chatsky evilly ridicules the vices of the society in which he moves. His tireless mind, rich and figurative language find abundant material for this, and the direction of his speeches is in many ways similar to the ideas of the works of the Decembrist poets.
Let us remember Chatsky’s famous monologue “Who are the judges?” In this monologue, Chatsky, and with him the author, ridicules the nobles who live according to the canons of the 18th century, drawing knowledge from “forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” Chatsky also denounces serf owners who sell and exchange people for dogs. Very indicative here is the image of a nobleman who traded for two greyhounds devoted servants who, in difficult times, “saved his life and honor.”
In another monologue (“A Frenchman from Bordeaux…”) Chatsky attacks the Gallomaniacs who worship everything foreign, foreign.
In his speeches, Chatsky constantly uses the pronoun “we”. And this is no coincidence, since Chatsky is not alone in his desire for change. On the pages of the comedy, a number of off-stage characters are mentioned who can be classified as allies of the protagonist. This is Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service, “began reading books in the village,” this is a professor at the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute, this is Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, Prince Fedor, a chemist and botanist. Chatsky, as the hero of the work, not only embodies the ethics and aesthetics of the Decembrists, but also has much in common with real historical figures.
Chatsky left the service, as did Nikita Muravyov, Nikolai Turgenev, Ryleev, Chaadaev. Chatsky has especially much in common with Chaadaev P.Ya., who wrote “Philosophical Letters,” for which he was severely punished - declared crazy. Initially, the surname Chatsky was written as Chadsky. The comedy "Woe from Wit" was written a year before the Decembrist uprising. The events there seemed to anticipate the events on Senate Square. The comedy “Woe from Wit” made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature. Inheriting the traditions of Fonvizin, Griboyedov gave comedy a civic sound, raised the reasoner Chatsky to a tragic hero on the level of Hamlet, thereby violating the classical law of non-mixing of genres. We can say that together with the comedy “Woe from Wit” Russian drama was born. And the traditions of Russian drama, including the plays of Gogol, Ostrovsky, Chekhov, largely rely on this comedy.
The nature of the main conflict in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit".
Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov was one of the smartest people of his time. He received an excellent education, knew several oriental languages, and was a keen politician and diplomat. Griboedov died a painful death at the age of 34, torn to pieces by fanatics, leaving his descendants with two wonderful waltzes and the comedy “Woe from Wit.”
“Woe from Wit” is a socio-political comedy. Griboyedov gave in it a true picture of Russian life after the Patriotic War of 1812. The comedy shows the process of the advanced part of the nobility moving away from an inert environment and fighting their class. The reader can trace the development of the conflict between two socio-political camps: serf owners (Famus society) and anti-serf owners (Chatsky).
Famus society is traditional. His principles of life are such that “one must learn by looking at one’s elders,” destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with obedience to persons standing a step higher, and most importantly, be rich. A unique ideal of this society is represented in Famusov’s monologues by Maxim Petrovich and Uncle Kuzma Petrovich:
... Here's an example:
The deceased was a respectable chamberlain, who knew how to deliver the key to his son; Rich, and married to a rich woman; Married children, grandchildren; He died, everyone remembers him sadly: Kuzma Petrovich! Peace be upon him! - What kind of aces live and die in Moscow!... The image of Chatsky, on the contrary, is something new, fresh, bursting into life, bringing change. This is a realistic image, an exponent of the advanced ideas of its time. Chatsky could be called a hero of his time. A whole political program can be traced in Chatsky’s monologues. He exposes serfdom and its products: inhumanity, hypocrisy, stupid military, ignorance, false patriotism. He gives a merciless characterization of Famus society.
The dialogues between Famusov and Chatsky are a struggle. At the beginning of the comedy, it does not yet appear in acute form. After all, Famusov is Chatsky’s teacher. At the beginning of the comedy, Famusov is favorable to Chatsky, he is even ready to give up Sophia’s hand, but sets his own conditions: I would say, firstly: don’t be a whim, Don’t mismanage your property, brother, And, most importantly, do some service. To which Chatsky throws out: I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served.
But gradually another struggle begins to ensue, an important and serious one, a whole battle. Both Famusov and Chatsky threw down the gauntlet to each other.
If only we could watch what our fathers did, we could learn by watching our elders!
Famusov's war cry rang out. And in response - Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?” In this monologue, Chatsky brands “the meanest traits of his past life.” Each new face that appears during the development of the plot becomes in opposition to Chatsky. Anonymous characters slander him: Mr. N, Mr. D, 1st Princess, 2nd Princess, etc. Gossip grows like a snowball. The social intrigue of the play is shown in the clash with this world. But in comedy there is another conflict, another intrigue - love. I.A. Goncharov wrote: “Every step of Chatsky, almost every word of his in the play is closely connected with the play of his feelings for Sophia.” It was Sophia’s behavior, incomprehensible to Chatsky, that served as the motive, the reason for irritation, for that “millions of torments”, under the influence of which he could only play the role indicated to him by Griboyedov. Chatsky is tormented, not understanding who his opponent is: either Skalozub or Molchalin? Therefore, he becomes irritable, unbearable, and caustic towards Famusov’s guests. Sophia, irritated by Chatsky’s remarks, who insult not only the guests, but also her lover, in a conversation with Mr. N mentions Chatsky’s madness: “He’s out of his mind.” And the rumor about Chatsky’s madness sweeps through the halls, spreads among the guests, acquiring fantastic, grotesque forms. And he himself, still not knowing anything, confirms this rumor with a hot monologue “The Frenchman from Bordeaux,” which he pronounces in an empty hall. In the fourth act of the comedy, both conflicts come to a denouement: Chatsky finds out who Sophia’s chosen one is. This is Molchalin. The secret is revealed, the heart is empty, there is no end to the torment.
Oh! How to comprehend the game of fate? A persecutor of people with a soul, a scourge! “The silent ones are blissful in the world!” says the grief-stricken Chatsky. His hurt pride, the escaping resentment, burns. He breaks up with Sophia: Enough! With you I am proud of my breakup.
And before leaving forever, Chatsky angrily throws out to the entire Famus society:
He will come out of the fire unharmed, Whoever manages to spend a day with you, Breathe the same air, And his sanity will survive...
Chatsky leaves. But who is he - the winner or the loser? Goncharov answered this question most accurately in his article “A Million Torments”: “Chatsky was broken by the amount of old power, having dealt it in turn a fatal blow with the quality of fresh power. He is the eternal denouncer of lies, hidden in the proverb: “Alone in the field is not a warrior.” There is no warrior if he is Chatsky, and, moreover, a winner, but an advanced warrior, a skirmisher and always a victim.”
“A Million Torments” by Chatsky.
A.S. Griboedov entered Russian literature as the author of one work. His comedy “Woe from Wit” cannot be put on a par with the immortal creation of A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”, since “Eugene Onegin” has already become history for us, an encyclopedia of the life of the Russian nobility of the early 19th century, and Griboedov’s play was, is and will be a modern and vital work until careerism, veneration, and gossip disappear from our lives, as long as our society is dominated by the thirst for profit, living at the expense of others, and not at the expense of one’s own labor, as long as hunters to please and serve.
All this eternal imperfection of people and the world is superbly described in Griboyedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit.” Griboedov creates a whole gallery of negative images: Famusov, Molchalin, Repetilov, Skalozub, etc. They seem to have absorbed all the negative features of the development of their contemporary society. But all these heroes are opposed alone by the main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. He came to Moscow, “returning from distant wanderings,” only for the sake of Sophia, his beloved. But, having returned to his once dear and beloved home, he discovers very strong changes: Sophia is cold, arrogant, irritable, she no longer loves Chatsky.
Trying to find an answer to his feeling, the main character appeals to his former love, which was mutual before his departure, but all in vain. All his attempts to bring back the old Sophia are a complete fiasco. To all Chatsky’s passionate speeches and memories, Sophia replies: “Childishness!”
This is where the young man’s personal drama begins, which ceases to be narrowly personal, but develops into a clash between a man in love and the entire Famus society. The main character stands alone against the army of old “warriors”, starting an endless struggle for a new life and for his love.
He encounters Famusov himself and argues with him about the way and path of life. The owner of the house acknowledges the correctness of his uncle’s life:
Maxim Petrovich: he didn’t eat silver, he ate gold; one hundred people at your service.
It is absolutely clear that he himself would not refuse such a life, which is why he does not understand Chatsky, who demands “service to the cause, not to persons.” Love and social conflicts are combined, becoming a single whole. For the hero, personal drama depends on society’s attitude towards him, and public drama is complicated by personal relationships. This exhausts Chatsky and, as a result, he experiences “a million torments,” as Goncharov aptly puts it.
The state of uncertainty in life drives him into a frenzy. If at the beginning of the action he is calm and confident:
No, today the world is not like that... Everyone breathes more freely And is in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters, With patrons yawning at the ceiling. Show up to be silent, shuffle around, have lunch, offer a chair, bring a handkerchief.
Then in the monologue at the ball in Famusov’s house, all the imbalance of the soul and mind is visible. He makes himself a laughing stock, from which everyone shies away. But, at the same time, his image is very tragic: his entire monologue is a consequence of unhappy love and society’s rejection of those thoughts and feelings, those beliefs that Chatsky defends throughout the comedy.
Under the weight of “a million torments,” he breaks down and begins to contradict common logic. All this entails absolutely incredible rumors that seem unfounded, but the whole world is talking about them: She’s crazy, it seems to her! No wonder? So... Why would she even think so?
But Chatsky not only does not refute the rumors, but, with all his might, without knowing it, confirms them, arranging a scene at the ball, then a scene of farewell to Sophia and the exposure of Molchalin: You are right, he will come out of the fire unharmed, Whoever has time to spend an hour with you , will breathe the air alone, And in whom reason will survive... Get out of Moscow! I don’t go here anymore, I run, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world Where there is a corner for an offended feeling!
In a fit of passion, our hero more than once sins against logic, but in all his words there is truth - the truth of his attitude towards Famus society. He is not afraid to say everything to everyone’s face and rightly accuse representatives of Famusov’s Moscow of lies, hypocrisy, and hypocrisy. He himself is clear proof that the outdated and sick closes the way to the young and healthy.
The image of Chatsky remains unfinished; the framework of the play does not allow us to fully reveal the full depth and complexity of this character’s nature. But we can say with confidence: Chatsky has strengthened in his faith and, in any case, will find his way in a new life. And the more such Chatskys there are on the path of the Famusovs, Molchalins and Repetilovs, the weaker and quieter their voices will sound.
The following material is worth a look:
Dramatic destinies of the individual in the conditions of a totalitarian social order (based on the novel “We” by E. Zamyatin) The destinies of the Russian village in the literature of 1950-80s The moral choice of heroes in the story “Sotnikov” by V. Bykov The life and work of A. Solzhenitsyn The moral power of good (based on the works V. Shukshina, A. Aleksina, G. Shcherbakova) Modern Soviet prose about the Great Patriotic War. My favorite poet is V. Vysotsky.
“Is Chatsky a Decembrist?”
After the campaigns abroad, Western ideas of liberalism began to penetrate and take root in Russia. To implement them, secret political societies began to appear among the progressive part of the officer corps. The most famous of them are the Union of Salvation, the Union of Welfare, and the Northern and Southern Decembrist Societies. One of the main tasks of these organizations was the abolition of serfdom and the implementation of reforms in the European spirit. These ideas turned out to be no stranger to A. S. Griboedov, who was close to the liberal strata: in his comedy “Woe from Wit,” Chatsky, the main character, was the spokesman for the will of most of the progressive nobility. One of the main points of Chatsky’s program is the need to serve the Fatherland. It is service, and not serving a senior in rank, as Molchalin does. But the main character of the comedy, like many Decembrists, does not find a suitable occupation for himself. “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to be served,” says Chatsky, to some extent agreeing with Ryleev’s statement that “only scoundrels” can serve. The closeness of Griboyedov's hero and the Decembrists is also visible in relation to serfdom - if the freethinkers advocated its abolition, then Chatsky condemned those perverted forms of it that existed in Russia; he will never be able to be in the same room with the one ... who, for the sake of an undertaking, drove to the serf ballet in many tailcoats From the mothers, fathers of rejected children?! I myself am immersed in mind in Zephyrs and Cupids...
Chatsky also has a hard time with admiration for the foreign - in the final monologue of the third act there is a protest against the transformation of Russia into a French province; the moral strength of the Russian people is extolled:
...our smart, cheerful people...
There is immediately a call for a return to the great national culture, to ancient traditions. The attempt to translate the word “mademoiselle” into the native language provides oratorical support for Shishkov’s idea, which was also approved by the Decembrists. Another issue on which Chatsky and members of secret political societies agree is education. Home education is not accepted by any of them, but if the Decembrists patronized universities, then Chatsky does not say anything about this, but apparently sympathizes with them. The similarity is also manifested in speech - neither for Chatsky nor for the Decembrists there are clear differences between writing and oral statements; their monologues are carefully prepared (it is unlikely that Chatsky delivers his inspired speeches impromptu), and oratorical techniques are widely used. Chatsky’s words radiate strength, passion, and are permeated with patriotic pathos - after all, he suffered through them, was convinced of their truth, and now, like the Decembrists, he uses these monologues as a weapon against the thoroughly rotten world of the Famusovs, Khlestovs and Silents. It is impossible not to point out the behavior of Griboyedov’s hero: lengthy speeches are not made for opponents: they are mainly intended for the viewer - this is a feature of most dramatic works. It should also be noted that Chatsky is not alone:
...Now let one of us...
Take Skalozub’s cousin, for example, you can establish some connection: both he, Chatsky, and many Decembrists left the service after campaigns abroad and were engaged in self-education (Chatsky traveled abroad for this). In everyday life, the main character, like the Decembrists, does not dance, does not approach tables covered with green cloth, and generally does not waste time on social entertainment. Griboyedov’s choice of a surname for his hero is also not accidental - it is consonant with the surname of one of the most outstanding people of the first half of the 19th century, P. Ya. Chaadaev. Like Chatsky, he was close to the Decembrist circles, sharing many ideas, but it has not been possible to definitively prove his membership in any of the secret societies to this day... Herzen’s assessment of Chatsky comes in handy here: “The image of Chatsky, melancholy, gone into its irony, trembling with indignation and full of dreamy ideals, appears at the last moment of the reign of Alexander I, on the eve of the uprising on Senate Square. This is the Decembrist”...
Essay on the topic: The idea of Decembrism in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
Composition. The idea of Decembrism in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
In the comedy “Woe from Wit,” the writer reflects the clashes of two camps: the camp of young Russia, represented by Chatsky, and the camp of cruel serf-owners, represented by Famusov, Skalozub, Khlestova, Molchalin and others. This conflict is not an artistic invention of the author; in the play he shows the generation of future Decembrists who are imbued with love for their homeland and people, they are revolutionaries who fight against moral violence against individuals. In the work, Chatsky opposes this. He is the son of Famusov’s late friend, grew up in his house, was brought up and studied together with Sophia. Chatsky is an educated man, engaged in literary work: “He writes and translates well,” served in the military service, had connections with ministers, was abroad for three years, this enriched him with new views, broadened his horizons, but did not make him a fan of everything foreign. The struggle between Chatsky and Famusov's society is becoming increasingly fierce; it turns into Chatsky's personal drama, the collapse of his hopes for personal happiness. If Famusov is a defender of the old century, the time of serfdom, then Chatsky speaks with indignation about the serf owners, about serfdom. In the monologue “Who are the judges?” he angrily speaks out against the order of the Catherine century, dear to Famusov’s heart, “the century of obedience and fear - the century of flattery and arrogance.” Chatsky’s ideal is not Maxim Petrovich, an arrogant nobleman and “hunter of indecency,” but an independent, free person. For Famusov, the ideal is Skalozub, who views service as a source of personal benefits. Chatsky breaks ties with the ministers, leaves the service, because he wants to serve the Motherland, and not serve his superiors. “I’d be glad to serve, but being served is sickening!” - he says. Chatsky - for the development of Russian culture. He himself “searched for intelligence” during his stay in the West, but he is against empty, meaningless, blind imitation of foreigners. Chatsky defends freedom of speech and thoughts; he believes that every person has the right to express his opinion. He asks Molchalin: “Why are other people’s opinions only sacred?” Alexander Andreevich does not perceive flattery, hypocrisy, the emptiness of those interests that are part of the life of the nobility. In the comedy, Chatsky is forced to fight himself. But among the off-stage images like-minded people who share his views are mentioned. This is Skalozub’s cousin, who “strongly picked up some new rules... began to read books in the village,” Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, who “doesn’t want to know the officials.” All this speaks of a whole generation that thinks the same way as Chatsky. I believe that the author of a comedy embodies his views on life in the image of his main character. The comedy does not end with the defeat of Chatsky, although he is declared crazy, readers do not get the impression that he is defeated. I.A. Goncharov wrote in his article “A Million Torments”: “Chatsky was broken by the quantity of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it in turn by the quality of the fresh force. He leaves Moscow to join members of a secret society in order to continue the fight for the liberation of the people from serfdom.
novstudent.ru | 09/25/2012
