- Essays
- Literature
- Fonvizin
/
/
The work “Undergrowth” is one of the most successful works of D.I. Fonvizina. It was written in 1782, but is still popular today. Productions based on the work “The Minor” have great success in modern theaters.
The work “The Minor” tells about the nobility and serfdom that existed in the Russian Empire. In those days, much attention was paid to the topic of educating a worthy person and citizen. She became one of the main ones in D.I.’s comedy. Fonvizina.
One of the main characters of the comedy “The Minor” is Mitrofan Prostakov, a lazy and selfish teenager, the son of the noble Prostakov family. In general, in the comedy “The Minor” all the characters have meaningful first and last names, allowing them to immediately characterize their owner or mistress.
Mitrofan's mother, Mrs. Prostakova, affectionately calls her son Mitrofanushka, pampers him and fulfills any whims of her child. She herself is a stupid and ignorant person. His father raises his son using the same principle. Permissiveness and the lack of an educational process raised Mitrofanushka as a person who does not respect his parents. He makes fun of his mother, plays on her feelings, is rude and snaps.
The main example of disgusting behavior in the Prostakov family was the attitude of Mrs. Prostakova towards her husband. She does not respect her husband, does not take into account his opinion, and he, in turn, transferred all the care of the house and household to her and left her without help.
Mitrofan has no purpose in life, he only wants to eat, chase pigeons and be lazy. He does not want to study, but wants to get married, and Mrs. Prostakova hired teachers for him only because this was the royal decree. The woman herself considers all these sciences useless.
Mrs. Prostakova wants to enroll the orphan girl Sophia as her bride. Later it turns out that Sophia’s uncle is alive and has prepared a good inheritance for his niece. By making Sophia Mitrofan’s wife, Prostakova thereby hoped to get her hands on the girl’s inheritance. But all these thoughts were not allowed to come true.
The problem of upbringing and education is still relevant today. Even today there are parents who send their children to school “for show,” simply because society demands it.
Essay 2
“The Minor” was written by Fonvizin, this comedy touches on a decree introduced in the eighteenth century in Russia. The decree stated that absolutely everyone in the country had to have an education, otherwise illiterate people could not get married.
In Fonvizin’s comedy, the main class is the nobility; he shows how the personality of the younger generation of the nobility is formed. Fonvizin’s position is clearly visible here: he believes that only educated people can save Russia and help the country develop.
Mitrofan is the main character in the comedy, he is the child of nobles, his upbringing is carried out by his mother, who herself has no education, more than anything, she was brought up poorly. In contrast to Mitrofan, other heroes are presented in the work: Starodum, Sophia, Pravdin. Through these heroes, the author shows what kind of people Russia needs. They spoke beautifully and competently, their minds were pure, the main thing in their lives was education. But most of the heroes are negative, for example, the Skotin or Prostakov family.
Mitrofan himself grew up as a lazy, greedy and stupid child. He is completely dependent on his mother; her word is law for him. Prostakova herself wanted to be with her son constantly, and did not even let him into the army. She decides to teach him herself, but knows nothing about education, her speech is poor, she uses abusive language and rude language. Mitrofan was used to living in excessive love and affection from his mother, he was always right, ate his fill, was constantly protected, and therefore grew up incapable of independent life.
Prostakova’s husband understands that such upbringing is not good for his son, but is afraid to express his opinion, so he leaves everything as it is. This is another characteristic of the eighteenth century nobility. But the introduction of a new decree forces Mitrofan to hire a teacher who would explain the basics of sciences and languages. A loving mother does this, but it is all to no avail. Mitrofanushka thinks only about the future wedding, and science is not at all interesting to him. Despite this, Fonvizin hopes for the best for Russia, that the reform can raise the level of education in the country among the nobles.
There is also another problem in Fonvizin’s comedy - the oppression of the serfs. This can be seen from Prostakova’s attitude towards different people. She is rude to family members and her assistants, but is sweet and friendly to guests. Prostakova wants to establish connections with richer people, to join their company for her own benefit, so she flatters them. Such people do not have moral values, concepts of selfless actions, or kindness.
Other topics: ← Brief description of the characters of Nedorosl↑ FonvizinSofya in the comedy “Nedorosl” →
`
Essay on the topic of undergrowth, grade 7
The comedy “The Minor” was written by Dmitry Ivanovich Fonvizin in the 18th century, when classicism was the main literary movement. One of the features of the work is “speaking” surnames, so the author called the main character Mitrofan, which means “revealing his mother.” The question of false and true education is contained in the title. It’s not for nothing that in modern Russian the word nedorosl means dropout. After all, Mitrofan did not learn anything positive at the age of sixteen, although his mother hired him teachers, but she did this not out of love for literacy, but only because Peter 1 commanded so. Prostakova did not hide this “... at least for the sake of appearance, learn so that it reached his ears how you work!..” Positive, intelligent heroes, such as Pravdin, Starodum, said: “... have a heart, have a soul and you will be a man at all times...” They despise cowardly, unjust, dishonest people. Starodum believed that it is not necessary to leave a child a lot of money, the main thing is to instill dignity in him. “... The golden fool is everyone’s idiot...” A person’s character is formed in the family, and what kind of person could Mitrofanushka become? He adopted all the vices from his mother: extreme ignorance, rudeness, greed, cruelty, contempt of others. Not surprising, because parents are always the main role models for children. And what kind of example could Mrs. Prostakova set for her son if she allowed herself to be rude, rude, and humiliate those around him in front of his eyes? Of course, she loved Mitrofan, but because of this she spoiled him greatly: “Go and let the child have breakfast.” “He already ate five buns.” - So you feel sorry for the sixth one, beast? What zeal! please take a look. “... Mitrofanushka, if learning is so dangerous for your little head, then for me, stop...” The influence of his mother and serfdom seduced Mitrofan - he grows up ignorant. The teachers also could not give Mitrofan a decent education, because they were just as half-educated. Kuteikin and Tsifirkin did not contradict or force the undergrowth to study, and he is not interested in this process. If something didn’t work out, the boy gave up and started something else. He had already studied for three years, but had learned nothing new. “... I don’t want to study, I want to get married...” To these teachers, Mrs. Prostakova prefers the former German coachman Vralman, who does not tire her son, and if he is tired, of course, he will let the tired child go. As a result, the beloved son makes his mother faint with his indifference to her feelings and betrayal. “... These are the fruits worthy of evil!” This remark from Starodum says that such upbringing leads to heartlessness, to an irreparable result. In the finale, Mitrofan is an example of heartlessness. I think the problem of education was, is and will probably always be. That is why the modern reader will find the comedy “The Minor” interesting and useful. She will reveal the consequences of the unworthy upbringing given to the main character. It will make both young readers and their parents think. Fonvizin “Minor” - essay “Main themes and artistic images” The play was conceived by D.I. Fonvizin as a comedy on one of the main themes of the era of enlightenment - as a comedy about education. But later the writer’s plan changed. The comedy “Nedorosl” is the first Russian socio-political comedy, and the theme of education is connected in it with the most important problems of the 18th century. Main topics: 1. the topic of serfdom; 2. condemnation of autocratic power, the despotic regime of the era of Catherine II; 3. the topic of education. The uniqueness of the artistic conflict of the play is that the love affair associated with the image of Sophia turns out to be subordinate to the socio-political conflict. The main conflict of the comedy is the struggle between the enlightened nobles (Pravdin, Starodum) and the serf owners (landowners Prostakovs, Skotinin). “Nedorosl” is a vivid, historically accurate picture of Russian life in the 18th century. This comedy can be considered one of the first pictures of social types in Russian literature. At the center of the story is the nobility in close connection with the serf class and the supreme power. But what is happening in the Prostakovs’ house is an illustration of more serious social conflicts. The author draws a parallel between the landowner Prostakova and high-ranking nobles (they, like Prostakova, are devoid of ideas about duty and honor, crave wealth, subservience to the nobles and push around the weak). Fonvizin's satire is directed against the specific policies of Catherine II. He acts as the direct predecessor of Radishchev's republican ideas. The genre of “The Minor” is a comedy (the play contains many comic and farcical scenes). But the author’s laughter is perceived as irony directed against the current order in society and the state. Artistic images: The image of Mrs. Prostakova. The sovereign mistress of her estate. Whether the peasants are right or wrong, this decision depends only on her arbitrariness. She says about herself that “she doesn’t lay down her hands: she scolds, she fights, and that’s what the house rests on.” Calling Prostakova a “despicable fury,” Fonvizin claims that she is not at all an exception to the general rule. She is illiterate; in her family it was considered almost a sin and a crime to study. She is accustomed to impunity, extends her power from the serfs to her husband, Sophia, Skotinin. But she herself is a slave, devoid of self-esteem, ready to grovel before the strongest. Prostakova is a typical representative of the world of lawlessness and tyranny. She is an example of how despotism destroys the person in man and destroys the social ties of people. Image of Taras Skotinin. The same ordinary landowner, like his sister. He has “every fault to blame”; no one can fleece the peasants better than Skotinin. The image of Skotinin is an example of how “bestial” and “animal” lowlands take over. He is an even more cruel serf owner than his sister Prostakova, and the pigs in his village live much better than the people. “Isn’t a nobleman free to beat a servant whenever he wants?” - he supports his sister when she justifies her atrocities with reference to the Decree on the Liberty of the Nobility. Skotinin allows his sister to play with him like a boy; he is passive in his relationship with Prostakova. The image of Starodum. He consistently sets out the views of an “honest man” on family morality, on the duties of a nobleman engaged in the affairs of civil government and military service. Starodum’s father served under Peter I and raised his son “in the way of that time.” He gave “the best education for that century.” Starodum wasted his energy and decided to dedicate all his knowledge to his niece, the daughter of his deceased sister. He earns money where “they don’t exchange it for conscience” - in Siberia. He knows how to control himself and does not do anything rashly. Starodum is the “brain” of the play. In Starodum's monologues, the ideas of enlightenment that the author professes are expressed. Traditionality and innovation of D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor.” The essay The aesthetics of classicism prescribed strict adherence to the hierarchy of high and low genres and assumed a clear division of heroes into positive and negative. The comedy “The Minor” was created precisely according to the canons of this literary movement, and we, the readers, are immediately struck by the contrast between the heroes in their life views and moral virtues. But D.I. Fonvizin, while maintaining the three unities of drama (time, place, action), nevertheless largely departs from the requirements of classicism. The play “The Minor” is not just a traditional comedy based on a love conflict. No. “The Minor” is an innovative work, the first of its kind and signifying that a new stage of development has begun in Russian drama. Here the love affair around Sophia is relegated to the background, subordinating to the main, socio-political conflict. D.I. Fonvizin, as a writer of the Enlightenment, believed that art should perform a moral and educational function in the life of society. Having initially conceived a play about the education of the noble class, the author, due to historical circumstances, rises to consider in the comedy the most pressing issues of that time: the despotism of autocratic power, serfdom. The theme of education, of course, is heard in the play, but it is accusatory in nature. The author is dissatisfied with the system of education and upbringing of “minors” that existed during the reign of Catherine. He came to the conclusion that the evil itself lies in the serf system and demanded a fight against this silt, pinning hopes on the “enlightened” monarchy and the advanced part of the nobility. Starodum appears in the comedy “Undergrowth” as a preacher of enlightenment and education. Moreover, his understanding of these phenomena is the author’s understanding. Starodum is not alone in his aspirations. He is supported by Pravdin and, it seems to me, these views are also shared by Milon and Sophia. Pravdin personifies the idea of legal justice: he is an official called by the state to bring a cruel landowner to justice. Starodum, being the herald of the author's ideas, personifies universal, moral justice. “Have a heart, have a soul, and you will be a man at all times,” this is Starodum’s life credo. His life is a role model for many generations. Having received an excellent education, Starodum decides to devote all his energy to his niece. He goes to Siberia to earn money, where it “is not exchanged for conscience.” His father's upbringing turned out to be such that Starodum did not have to re-educate himself. It was this that did not allow him to remain in the service at court. Service to the Fatherland by the so-called “statesmen” has been forgotten. For them, only rank and wealth are important, to achieve which all means are good: sycophancy, careerism, and lies. “I left the court without villages, without ribbons, without ranks, but I brought mine home intact, my soul, my honor, my rules.” The yard, according to Starodum, is sick, it cannot be cured, it can become infected. With the help of this statement, the author leads the reader to the conclusion that some measures are needed to limit despotic power. Fonvizin creates a model of a mini-state in his comedy. The same laws exist in it and the same lawlessness occurs as in the Russian state. The author shows us the life of various social strata of society. The images of the serfs Palashka and the nanny Eremeevna embody the joyless life of the most dependent and oppressed class. For her faithful service, Eremeevna receives “five rubles a year, five slaps a day.” The fate of the teachers of the undergrown Mitrofan is also unenviable. The author brings both officer Milon and official Pravdin onto the stage. The class of landowners is represented by the Prostakov-Skotinin family, who are aware of their strength, the strength of their own power. Thus, Fonvizin draws a parallel between the estate of ignorant serf owners, this “barnyard,” and the high society, the imperial court. Teaching and upbringing cannot be viewed as a fashion, says Starodum, and therefore Fonvizin. The world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins does not accept education. For them there is one good knowledge - the strength and power of the serf owners. According to Prostakova, her son does not need to know geography, because a nobleman only has to give an order, and he will be taken where he needs to go. It’s strange to even talk about the “ideals” of the Prostakovs’ life. The peculiarity of their existence is that there are no “ideals” as such, and only rudeness, baseness and lack of spirituality reign there. The object of Skotinin's thoughts, feelings, and desires are pigs. He only wants to get married because he might have more pigs. Of course, now comedy seems somewhat difficult for us to perceive. The characters seem monotonous, and it is difficult to grasp the ideological and artistic meaning “dissolved” in the images of the work and situations. But, as it turns out after careful reading, the comedy “The Minor” serves a very clear and definite purpose - correcting the vices of society, the state and instilling virtue. The author does not give up hope for changing society for the better. His immortal comedy calls us to the better. The essay “Funny and tragic in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor”” All this would be funny if it weren’t so sad. M. Yu. Lermontov The last four decades of the 18th century. are distinguished by the genuine flowering of Russian drama. But classic comedy and tragedy far from exhaust its genre composition. Works not provided for by the poetics of classicism are beginning to penetrate into dramaturgy, indicating an urgent need to expand the boundaries and democratize the content of the theatrical repertoire. Among these new products, first of all, there was the so-called tearful comedy, that is, a play that combines touching and comic principles. It was distinguished not only by the destruction of the usual genre forms, but also by the complexity and contradictory nature of the characters of the new heroes, who combined both virtues and weaknesses. The famous comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” is distinguished by its great social depth and sharp satirical orientation. In essence, this is where Russian social comedy begins. The play continues the traditions of classicism. “For his entire life,” G. A. Gukovsky pointed out, “his artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the school.” However, Fonvizin’s play is a phenomenon of later, more mature Russian classicism, which was strongly influenced by Enlightenment ideology. In “The Minor,” as the first biographer Fonvizin noted, the author “no longer jokes, no longer laughs, but is indignant at the vice and brands it without mercy, and even if it makes you laugh, then the laughter it inspires does not distract from deeper and more regrettable impressions.” The object of ridicule in Fonvizin’s comedy is not the private life of the nobles, but their public, official activities and serfdom. Not content with just depicting noble “evil morality,” the writer strives to show its reasons. The author explains the vices of people by their improper upbringing and dense ignorance, presented in the play in its various manifestations. The genre uniqueness of the work lies in the fact that “The Minor,” according to G. A. Gukovsky, is “half comedy, half drama.” Indeed, the basis, the backbone of Fonvizin’s play is a classic comedy, but serious and even touching scenes are introduced into it. These include Pravdin’s conversation with Starodum, Starodum’s touching and edifying conversations with Sophia and Milon. The tearful Drama suggests the image of a noble reasoner in the person of Sta-Rodum, as well as of “suffering virtue” in the person of Sophia. The finale of the play also combines touching and deeply moralistic principles. Here Mrs. Prostakova is overtaken by a terrible, completely unforeseen punishment. She is rejected, rudely pushed away by Mitrofan, to whom she devoted all her boundless, albeit unreasonable love. The feeling that the positive characters have for her - Sophia, Starodum and Pravdin - is complex and ambiguous. It contains both pity and condemnation. It is not Prostakova who evokes compassion, but the trampled human dignity. Starodum’s final remark addressed to Prostakova also resonates strongly: “These are the worthy fruits of evil” - that is, fair retribution for violating moral and social norms. D.I. Fonvizin managed to create a vivid, strikingly true picture of the moral and social degradation of the nobility at the end of the 18th century. The playwright uses all the means of satire, denounces and criticizes, ridicules and condemns, but his attitude towards the “noble” class is far from the view of an outsider: “I saw,” he wrote, “from the most respectable ancestors of the despised descendants... I am a nobleman, and this is what tore to pieces my heart". Fonvizin's comedy is an extremely important milestone in the history of our drama. Following it are “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov and “The Inspector General” by Gogol. “... Everything turned pale,” wrote Gogol, “before two bright works: before the comedy “The Minor” by Fonvizin and “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov... They no longer contain light ridicule of the funny aspects of society, but the wounds and illnesses of our society... Both comedies took two different eras. One was struck by illnesses from lack of enlightenment, the other from ill-understood enlightenment.” Fonvizin “The Minor” - essay “Images of the immortal comedy “The Minor”” Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is the creator of the immortal comedy “The Minor.” For more than two hundred years it has not left the stages of Russian theaters, remaining interesting and relevant to new and new generations of viewers. What is the secret of comedy's permanence? The work attracts attention, first of all, with its gallery of negative characters. Positive characters are less expressive, but without them there would be no movement, confrontation between good and evil, baseness and nobility, sincerity and hypocrisy, animality and high spirituality. After all, the comedy “The Minor” is built on the fact that the world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins wants to suppress, subjugate life, arrogate to itself the right to dispose of not only serfs, but also free people. So, for example, they are trying to decide the fate of Sophia and Milon, Roughly, primitively, resorting to violence, but that’s what they know how to do. Such is their arsenal of weapons. The comedy encounter two worlds with different needs, styles of life, speech manners, ideals. Recall Madame Prostakov in the lesson of Mitrofanushka! “I am very nice that Mitrofanushka does not like to walk forward ... He is lying, my friend's friend. I find the money, do not share with anyone, take everything to yourself, Mitrofanushka. Don't study this stupid science. Do not work in a desert way, my friend. I will not add a penny, and not at all. Science is not like that. Only you torment; And I see the void. There is no money, what to count. There is money - we consider it and without Pafnitiich well ... ”Starodum, talking with Sophia, says:“ Not the one who counts the money to hide it in a chest, but the one that counts the excess to help one who does not have the necessary ... nobleman ... I would think for the first dishonor to do nothing: there are people to help, there is the Fatherland to serve. " Probably, these phrases sound somewhat highly and archaic in shape, but are they so outdated. Starodum expresses thoughts of education, the need for love for the homeland, attachment to her past and future. These thoughts sound very relevant, consonant with our time. Is there little around the child -loving parents, the upbringing of which is limited to concern for the saturation of their favorite offspring. Is it not necessary to meet people who, as Starodum says, “neither the ancestors nor the descendants, that is, people living momentary interests, have never come to the thought of their life. The comic of the “undergrowth” is not only that Prostakova is scolding like a street merchant, is touched by his son's gluttony. There is a deeper meaning in the comedy. She sarcastically makes fun of rudeness, which wants to look kind, greed, covering up generosity, ignorance, claiming education. According to the playwright, serfdom is detrimental not only for peasants, since it makes obedient, wordless slaves, but also for landowners, turning them into tyrants, tyrants and non -teaching. Cruelty, violence become the most convenient and familiar weapon for serfs. Therefore, the first motivation of Scotinin, and then Prostakova, is to force Sophia to marry. And only having realized that Sophia has strong intercessors, Prostakova begins to swell and tries to fake under the tone of the noble people. But is Prostakova able to wear a mask of nobility for a long time? Seeing that Sophia escapes from his hands, the landowner resorts to the usual action - violence. In the final of the comedy, we are not only funny, but also scary. A mixture of impudence and sakelness, rudeness and confusion makes Prostakov so miserable that Sophia and old -thinking are ready to forgive her. Impunity and permissiveness accustomed Prostakov to the idea that there were no insurmountable obstacles in front of her. She becomes a toy of her own passions. And thoughtless maternal love turns against herself. Mitrofan refuses his mother at the most difficult moment of her life. He does not need a mother, who has lost money and power. He will look for new influential patrons. His phrase: “Yes, get rid of, mother, as it imposed ...” became winged. But from this, her sinister meaning did not change, but rather intensified. The crushing, angry-satirical laugh of Fonvizin, aimed at the most disgusting sides of the autocratic and consumer structure, played a great creative role in the further fate of Russian literature. The importance of “undergrowth” is great in the formation and approval of the Russian National Theater. Gogol already noted that the “undergrowth”, in which the traditional love intrigue is moved far into the background, laid the foundation for the original Russian genre of “truly public comedy”. This is the secret of the long stage life of the comedy. Fonvizin “Undergrowth” - an essay “Analysis of the work of D.I. Fonvizina "Undergrowth". " At the beginning of 1782, Fonvizin read the comedy “Undergrowth” to his friends and a secular acquaintance, on which he worked for many years. He acted with a new play as once, as once with the “foreman”. The former play Fonvizin was the first comedy about Russian morals and, according to N.I. Panina, Empress Catherine II unusually liked. Will it be with the "under -road"? Indeed, in the "undergrowth", according to the fair remark of the first biographer Fonvizin, P.A. Vyazemsky, the author “is no longer noisy, does not laugh, but is indignant at the vice and stigmatizes it without mercy, if it mixes the audience with a picture of the dumping and wipes deduced, then the suggestible laughter does not entertain the deeper and regrettable impressions. Pushkin admired the brightness of the brush, who painted the Prostakov family, although he found traces of "pedanity" in the positive heroes of the "undergrowth" of Truth and Starodum. Fonvizin for Pushkin is an example of the truth of mercy. No matter how old -fashioned the heroes of Fonvizin are prudent at first glance, it is impossible to exclude them from the play. Indeed, then in the comedy movement disappears, the confrontation of good and evil, baseness and niozo, sincerity and hypocrisy, liveliness of high spirituality. The “undergrowth” of Fonvizin is built on the fact that the world of prostakovs from the Skotinins - ignorant, cruel, narcissistic landowners - wants to subjugate all his life, assign the right of unlimited power both over the serfs and over the noble people who own Sophia and her fiancé, the valiant officer Milon ; Uncle Sophia, a man with the ideals of Peter's Time, Old Duma; Keeper of Laws, official Pravdin. The comedy encounter two worlds with different needs, styles of life and speech manners, with different ideals. Starodum and Prostakova most openly expresses the positions of irreconcilable, in essence, camps. The ideals of the heroes are clearly visible in what they want to see their children. Let us recall Prostakov in the lesson of Mitrofan: “Prostakova. I am very nice that Mitrofanushka does not like to walk forward ... He is lying, my friend's friend. I found money - he doesn’t share with anyone ... Take everything for yourself, Mitrofanushka. Do not learn this stupid science! ” Now let's recall the scene where Starodum says with Sophia: “Old Duma. It is not the one who counts the money that hide them in the chest, but the one who counts the excess in order to help someone who does not have the right ... nobleman ... would think for the first dishonor to do anything: there are people who to help, there is Fatherland to serve. " The comedy, in the words of Shakespeare, is “incompatible connector”. The comic of “undergrowth” is not only that Mrs. Prostakova is funny, colorful, like a street merchant, scolding that her brother’s favorite place is stable with pigs, that Mitrofan is a glutton: he has difficulty resting from a plentiful dinner, he has been five in the morning for five already in the morning I ate a buns. This is a child, as Prostakova thinks, “delicate addition”, is not indispensable either with his mind, or classes, nor conscience. Of course, it’s ridiculous to look and listen to how Mitrofan shases in front of Skotinin’s furs and hides behind the backs of the nanny Yeremeevna, then with dull importance and perplexity discusses the doors of “Kotor is adjective” and “Kotora is noun”. But there is a more deep, internal comic in the “undergrowth”: rudeness that wants to look kind of, greed, covering generosity, ignorance, claiming education. The comic is based on absurdity, the mismatch of form and content. In the “undergrowth” the miserable, primitive world of the Skotinins and Prostakov wants to break into the world of the noble, to appropriate his privileges, to take possession of everything. Evil wants to take away the good acts in this very vigorously, in different ways. According to the playwright, serfdom is a disaster for the landowners themselves. Accustomed to treat everyone rudely, Prostakova does not spare relatives. The basis of her nature will stop with its will. Self -confidence is heard in every replica of Skotinin, devoid of any merits. Hardiness, violence becomes the most convenient and familiar weapons. Therefore, their first motivation is to force Sophia to marry. And only having realized that Sophia has strong intercessors, Prostakova begins to swell and try to fake under the tone of the noble people. In the finale of the comedy of arrogance and sedimentation, rudeness and confusion make Prostakov so miserable that Sophia and old -thinking are ready to forgive her. The landowner’s autocracy taught her to impatient any objections, not to recognize any obstacles. But the good heroes of Fonvizin can defeat the comedy only thanks to the sharp intervention of the authorities. If Pravdin had not such a persistent guardian of laws, he did not receive a letter from the governor, everything would turn out differently. Fonvizin was forced to cover the satirical severity of comedy with the hope of legal rule. As a consequence of Gogol in the “Examiner”, he cuts the Gordian knot of evil with an unexpected intervention at the top. But we heard the story of Starodum, about the true life and the chatter of Khlestakov about St. Petersburg. The capital and deaf corners of the province are actually much closer than it might seem at first glance. The bitterness of the thought of the chance of the victory of good gives the comedy tragic subtext.
Similar articles:
Study room > ESSAYS on the works of A. I. Kuprin Study room > ABSTRACT: Analysis of Gogol’s comedy “The Inspector General” Study room > ESSAYS based on the novel by A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” Study room > WORKS on the works of M. Gorky Study room > WORKS based on the novel “Quiet Don” by M. Sholokhov
Popular writings
- Essay What distinguishes a leading person from a led one?
Recently, one of my friends told me a scary story: they say that her cousin is an energy vampire. Every time a girl comes to visit them, some kind of nightmare begins in the house - the household - Essay Description of the painting Reshetnikov’s deuce again for 7th grade
Let’s consider the famous painting by artist Fyodor Reshetnikov “Deuce again.” The main character is a boy who stands in the center of a spacious room. - Essay What does the word family mean in Russian?
In Russian, the word family refers not only to a group of people who are relatives. The meaning of this word is much more. This group must not only be related by blood ties
