Although there are hunters to scoff everywhere,
Yes, laughter is scary now
And keep the shame in check.
A. Griboyedov
The meaning of the comedy "Woe from Wit", I believe, is to show the spirit of Moscow at that time, its customs. The comedy unfolds a confrontation between two forces: the old world of aristocrats, who do not want to leave the stage of life, and the new generation of progressively minded people in Russia.
Chatsky's clash with Famusov is inevitable, because the old aristocrats do not like change, they are accustomed to live and live out as they please. The life of society in this sense is not enough

Interested.
Famusov immediately felt that with the arrival of Chatsky, various troubles and violations of order would begin, although he did not yet know about his views. A young, strong, flowering beginning in a person already in itself gives people like Famusov a reason for concern. And what can we say about the reaction to the bold judgments of Chatsky.
The world that Famusov so diligently protects from external influences is a complete lie of relationships and depressing immorality. Sophia hides her poetic feelings for Molchalin, fearing that they will not be understood. And Molchalin, in turn, pretends to be in love.
At Famusov's balls, the spirit of swagger and arrogance reigns. The Tugoukhovsky princes, for example, are deaf to everything in the world, except for wealth and titles.
There is a chill of caution and hostility towards each other in the relations between the guests.
Naturally, Chatsky, once in such an environment, fell into the blues and boredom. Even falling in love with Sophia did not help him to cheer up in any way. He leaves, but love for Sophia and for his homeland nevertheless returns him to Moscow already energetic, full of creative aspirations. But new disappointments await him: no one needs his energy and noble impulses in Famusov's Moscow. Love also fails: after a conversation with Famusov, Chatsky suspected that he was dreaming of giving Sophia for General Skalozub. Yes, Chatsky himself, gradually recognizing Sophia, is disappointed in her. He notices that she sees the world distorted. Hearing how admiringly she speaks of Molchalin, Chatsky is convinced that she does not understand his true essence at all. He asks her, “But does he have that passion? That feeling? Is that ardor? So that, besides you, the whole world would seem to him as dust and vanity?” Then he adds: “And Skalozub! Here is a sight!..”
But Sophia sensed neither caution nor irony in his words. She replies: "The hero is not my novel."
Chatsky is tormented by the thought of how such a smart girl could fall in love with the scoundrel Molchalin, a greedy man and a sycophant:
With such feelings, with such a soul, we love you!
Liar, laugh at me!
At the end, when everything is finally revealed, Chatsky admits to himself that he was bitterly deceived in Sophia;
Why am I lured into hope?
Why didn't they tell me directly
What did you turn all the past into laughter? ..
… Here I am donated to whom!
But the sacrifice of love is not the biggest sacrifice in Chatsky's life. Him, with the light hand of Sophia, who dropped: “Ah, Chatsky! You love to dress up everyone in jesters. If you want to try on yourself, ”they declare them crazy, and this rumor quickly spreads throughout Moscow.
The meaning of the comedy, in my opinion, is that Chatsky, despite his defeats and moral torments, did not deviate from loyalty to his ideals.
In Famusov's house, he acts to the end as a detractor of its inhabitants, who are clinging to the past with all their might, trying to stop the passage of time.

The main idea that Alexander Griboyedov put into his comedy is to show the way of life, the customs of his contemporary society, his contemporary Moscow. In the work, two camps collide, two worldviews - old conservative conformist aristocrats worshiping ranks, wealth, trying with all their might to maintain the existing habitual way of life and advanced people striving for change, wanting to a better life than they have.

In the work, there is a confrontation between Chatsky and Famusov, and this clash is completely predictable. This conflict should have been, because the old townsfolk like Famusov, accustomed to caring only about their personal welfare, and indifferent to the aspirations of others, cannot stand people like Chatsky, who “sow confusion”, violate the established order for everyone, striving to establish justice. In people like Chatsky, Famusov sees a real enemy, a threat to his high position, his comfortable, idle, stupefying life. The spirit of pride and arrogance reigns at Famusov's balls. Chatsky, having got to one of the balls, fell into unbearable boredom because of that host living there (even falling in love did not save him from boredom, everything was so depressing). And all because their interests are limited only by banknotes and titles. In addition, all the guests are wary of each other, an atmosphere of hostility and arrogance hovers among them.

What did Griboedov want to tell us with this work? What is the meaning of comedy? It lies in Chatsky's loyalty to his convictions, despite mental anguish and multiple failures. In the vile house of Famusov, he plays the role of an accuser of ignorant inhabitants, retrogrades who make every effort to maintain the existing order, not striving for a more honest and just life, thinking about themselves. Such subjects hinder our time, the development of the world, and the likes of Chatsky make our planet spin and progress. People like him are trying to free the common people from unbearable oppression.

In the play Woe from Wit, the essence lies in the conflict between a gifted, progressive personality (inclined to Decembristism) and Famus Society(honoring money, ranks, vanity and hypocrisy) which appears as a struggle for the rights and dignity of a person. Through the lips of Chatsky, the author's position was expressed in relation to his contemporary society. A lot of images from the work have become common nouns, and some passages have become aphorisms.

Option 2

A satirical comedy written by one of the famous Russian authors of the 19th century - Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov. Initially, Griboedov conceived of writing a comedy about the rather strange and cruel living conditions of ordinary peasants during the serfdom.

Since comedy touches on satire, this work makes the reader understand that even the most intelligent person who has not done anything wrong can also become the object of various gossip, discussions, and so on. main topic comedies are the vices of mankind, which both ridicule and try to hide. Hypocrisy and servility makes the reader think about how these two main vices can affect the outcome of the work.

The name of the work, "Woe from Wit" hides a small meaning, which is revealed in the work itself. After all, it is easier to accuse another person of illiteracy or insanity than to change yourself and try to live in accordance with the new directions and styles of life itself that have come with the advent of the new century.

Also in the comedy touches serfdom, court customs and much more, which affects the very meaning of the work and its essence. When reading this work one can notice his connection with Decembristism, however, Griboyedov himself was not part of the Decembrist societies and did not share the main directions of Decembristism with friends or in literature.

Not the deepest meaning of the comedy is manifested in the fact that Chatsky, with all his efforts, despite his failures throughout the action of the comedy and despite moral principles and torment, did not retreat, but remained true to his inner ideals.

Griboyedov did not hesitate to add some kind of confrontation to this work, on the one hand, aristocrats who did not want to leave the brightness of life spoke, and on the other hand, a society of progressive-minded people came forward who wanted to fill their lives with vivid emotions and unforgettable memories. In other words, two generations clashed in this comedy - the new generation of the then 19th century and the generation of the past, the 18th century. This disagreement between the two generations has not disappeared even now, in the 21st century.

Some interesting essays

    You can't go through life without making mistakes. Every person and every generation that lives on earth makes a mistake. It is impossible to gain experience without making mistakes.

  • Composition based on the painting by Shishkin Rye Grade 4 description

    In the foreground of the picture is a sunny golden rye, neatly divided into two parts by a thin path. Rye glitters in the light, shimmering in a bizarre way against the background of distant trees and flying birds.

  • The tragedy of conscience in the drama Thunderstorm Ostrovsky essay

    In his work, Ostrovsky described a merchant family in which their daughter Catherine grew up in abundance. Parents allowed Catherine to make an independent choice, and she had the right to make

    • Evgenia Komelkova is one of the key figures in the story "The Dawns Here Are Quiet...". Her life story is tragic. An anti-aircraft gunner who entered with her battalion into the care of Fedot Evgrafych, along with the same young girls as herself.

  • The meaning of the title of the play Chekhov's Cherry Orchard composition

The innovation of Alexander Griboedov is that he created a comedy in which only the emerging trend in literature, realism, was clearly manifested. The playwright has not yet completely departed from the laws of classicism, but is already largely using the realistic method. Firstly, the work is built on several conflicts: love and social. Secondly, the classification of heroes goes beyond unequivocally positive and negative. Thirdly, there is no happy ending in comedy. IN classic comedy the authors in the finale resolve the conflict, showing the triumph goodies and the shame of the negative. Classicism gave ready-made answers to readers. Griboedov in the comedy "Woe from Wit" leaves the conflict unresolved, forcing the reader to think about its possible solution.

The title as the key to the meaning of the comedy

In the first edition, the comedy was called "Woe to the Mind". This option led to the idea that at the heart of the conflict is an intelligent person who opposes a stupid society. But "one in the field is not a warrior," therefore fools, who are the majority, win, and an intelligent person is considered a madman. This meaning of the name was not quite suitable for the implementation of the author's intention, so he changes the name to "Woe from Wit". Now the problem of the mind in comedy becomes wider and is not limited to the image of the protagonist. The author pushes us to the conclusion that ideas born of a great mind do not always lead to happiness.

Is the main character Chatsky smart?

Alexander Chatsky - main character comedy, a key figure who opposes an ignorant immoral society. He has seen the world, absorbed the spirit of free-thinking, therefore, returning to Moscow, he sees the limitations of the thinking of the “fathers”. The hero is witty, he notices the slightest weaknesses of the representatives of the Famus society. Chatsky knows that he is smart and demonstrates this to others in every possible way, trying to reason with his reasonable speeches. However, is the hero as smart as he thinks? For example, Alexander Pushkin, after reading the comedy, did not consider Chatsky to be a truly intelligent person, because smart people understand when and to whom to express their ideas. The hero speaks beautifully, but the Famus society is deaf to his speeches, it is simply not able to understand him, because they think differently. Therefore, Chatsky simply “throws pearls” in front of unworthy people - and this is not a sign of a great mind, according to Pushkin.

The reason for Chatsky's "woe from wit"

Griboedov himself sympathizes with his hero, considering him one sane person among twenty-five fools. In such an unequal confrontation, romantic motives are guessed. But the author does not show us a miracle in the final, on the contrary, the only sane person is declared crazy. What is the reason for his defeat? Chatsky is smart, but his ideas are only good in theory. The hero does not take into account the realities of life in the Famus society, so his thoughts for them are an empty phrase. Having not achieved love and understanding, Chatsky is disappointed, never realizing that his "woe" is from the mind, which generates ideas that are far from real life.

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

comedy feature

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

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

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

Conflict. Composition. Issues

The play is traditionally distinguished two types of conflict: private (love drama) and public (contrasting the old and new times, the "famus society" and Chatsky). Since this work is partially related to romanticism, we can argue that there is a romantic conflict between the individual (Chatsky) and society (Famusovsky society) in the play.

One of the strict canons of classicism is the unity of action, which implies a causal relationship of events and episodes. In Woe from Wit, this connection is already significantly weakened, it seems to the viewer and reader that nothing significant is happening: the characters walk back and forth, talk, that is, the external action is rather monotonous. However, the dynamics and drama are laid down precisely in the dialogues of the characters, the play must first of all be listened to in order to catch the tension of what is happening and the meaning of the production.

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

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

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

In the play, which the author himself considered a comedy, oddly enough, the most pressing problems of that period are highlighted: the injustice of serfdom, an imperfect state apparatus, ignorance, the problem of education, etc. Griboyedov also included, it would seem, in an entertaining work, the burning disputes about boarding houses, jury trials, censorship and institutions.

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

The composition of the drama is sustained in the classic style: the observance of the three unities, the presence of large monologues, the speaking names of the characters, etc. The content is realistic, so the performance is still sold out in many theaters in Russia. Heroes do not personify one vice or one virtue, as was customary in classicism, they are diversified by the author, their characters are not devoid of both negative and positive qualities. For example, critics often call Chatsky a fool or an overly impulsive hero. Sophia is not to blame for the fact that during his long absence she fell in love with the one who was nearby, and Chatsky is immediately offended, jealous and hysterically denounces everything around just because his beloved has forgotten him. A quick-tempered and absurd character does not paint the main character.

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

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

Why is Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" now readable?

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

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

At first glance, the play is written in the spirit classicism: there are antagonist heroes, the plot reveals the struggle of two contenders for the hand of one heroine. The main thing that distinguishes the classic work is three unities: places (everything happens in Famusov's house), time (a day passes from the moment Chatsky appears to departure) and action (all the action unfolds around Sophia). But Griboyedov makes significant changes to genre features plays, violating almost all the laws of classicism.

Comedy begins with lies. In Famusov's house, all relationships are built on a lie that serves as an instrument of pretense (like Molchalin's) or takes the form of virtue (like Famusov's). Sofya, Famusov's daughter, is forced to hide her love for "rootless" secretary Molchalin, because the father needs a groom "with stars and ranks". Molchalin pretends to love Sophia for career reasons. The head of the house hides from his daughter everything that is contrary to the reputation of a respectable head of the family.

And in such an atmosphere of general deceit appears main character- Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Three years ago he fled from this exorbitant boredom "mind search". "Smoke of the Fatherland" and tender feelings for Sophia return him to Moscow. Having not been to the capital for three years, he is waiting for changes, but everything turns out to be the same: all the same hobbies, the same faces, the same boredom from which he fled. Why is Chatsky now staying? The answer is simple: he sees in front of him not a teenage girl, but a young lady who, at seventeen, "bloomed beautifully". And he remains in the hope of evoking a reciprocal feeling in Sophia.

In addition, Chatsky notices that Famusov is concerned about his appearance. Realizing that the young man is ready to marry, he sets a condition: he must put things in order, go to serve, and most importantly, not be proud. As a worthy example, Pavel Afanasyevich cites Uncle Maxim Petrovich, and Famusov’s speech is more like an attack, and Chatsky involuntarily has to defend himself: he delivers his first monologue about the stupidity of Famus society, which caused Sophia’s father to panic fear of the revolutionary mood of the young man.

Chatsky naively believes "past century", century "obedience and fear", has already passed, but the refutation of this idea is the appearance of Colonel Skalozub. And again, restraint betrays Chatsky. He is shocked: is he given to Skalozub for trial? his monologue “Who are the judges? ... " born in protest against it. But insight has not yet come to the ardent young man. After Molchalin's fall from the horse and Sofya's fainting that followed, he would have guessed who his childhood friend was in love with, but the excitement for Sophia does not allow him to correctly perceive what is happening.

Chatsky, according to the hero himself, "mind and heart are not in harmony". The mind suggests that it is necessary to break off all relations with the Famus society, but the heart demands Sophia's love. That's just the noble mind of Chatsky cannot recognize the fact that a girl is in love with a nonentity - Molchalin. He asks Sophia what attracts her in this man. It turns out that he "submissive, modest, quiet". Chatsky assures himself that she is joking: you can’t love a person for this. And having learned from Molchalin about his ideals and life aspirations, the young man in love makes a fatal conclusion for himself:

With such feelings, with such a soul
We love! … The deceiver laughed at me!

However, Sophia builds her life according to generally accepted patterns, in accordance with the morality accepted in Moscow society. For a secular lady you need "husband-boy, husband-servant", and Molchalin is suitable for this role. Chatsky hit the mark by defining main feature character of your opponent: “After all, they love the wordless now”. Yes, Sophia loves for this, but in the mouth of Chatsky it sounds like an insult to her. Therefore, she so easily commits meanness, dissolving gossip at the ball about the fact that Chatsky allegedly went crazy.

You love to dress up everyone in jesters,
Would you like to try on yourself?

Why did gossip spread so quickly among Famusov's guests and did not even cause doubts in anyone? From the first appearance on the stage, the hero attracts the viewer with his directness of judgment, intolerance to lies, and ardor. He "smart, sharp, eloquent" but too impatient. And if this impatience causes only a smile in the viewer, then the representatives of the high society of Moscow are offended. Chatsky rejected them life principles, and this causes irritation of society, which so easily resulted in the spread of gossip about Chatsky's madness.

Each of the guests named his own reason for insanity, but Famusov turned out to be more “original” than all. He saw the root of evil in education:

Learning is the plague, learning is the cause...

The appearance of Chatsky causes fear among the guests, but he is so depressed in spirit "empty, slavish, blind imitation" that, bursting into another monologue about "Frenchie from Bordeaux", does not notice how he was declared crazy. But his anger is incomprehensible to Famusov's guests, they confuse lofty ideas with scandalousness and scatter in horror. So the ball becomes the climax of the conflict "of the current century" And "past century". But there is still a denouement ahead - a night of insights.

Sophia will have to find out how low her beloved Molchalin is, Chatsky will be shocked by Sophia's betrayal, learning that it was she who started the rumor about his insanity. Famusov will make sure that his daughter, "like her mother, dead woman", "somewhere with a man".

Each hero will experience his own "a million torments". But if Chatsky leaves Moscow forever, which so easily mistook him for a madman, saying his last monologue in parting, denouncing "torturers of the crowd", then Sophia's situation seems more tragic. She rejected Chatsky, was disappointed in her beloved, remained a toy in the hands of an angry father, threatening to exile “to the village, to my aunt, to the wilderness, to Saratov”.

Is Chatsky right, confident that she will make peace with Molchalin? Will Sophia be able to survive the insult and reconcile with the Moscow circle, choosing her husband "low worshiper and businessman"? These questions remain unanswered. But the reader understands how tragic the fate of a girl whose sharp mind collides with the dogmas of society. So the name of the comedy "Woe from Wit" is related to both Chatsky and Sophia. Such ambiguity of the images testifies to their inconsistency with the traditions of classicism.