Woe from Wit is the essence of social conflict. Conflict of the comedy “Woe from Wit. Conflict comedy "Woe from Wit"

Through artistic means, Griboedov expressed the protest of the leading part of the Russian nobility against the inertia and backwardness of the society of that time, against class privileges and serfdom. The most educated, smartest man of his era, he grasped the main social conflict that emerged after the Patriotic War of 1812, and this is the realism of Griboyedov the writer. The comedy reflected the explosive, tense atmosphere of noble society on the eve of 1825. The comedy brings to the fore the ideological disagreement of the main characters, the struggle of the present century with the past century, the struggle of two worldviews that developed in Russian society in the first half of the 19th century. On the one hand, representatives of feudal reaction, serf antiquity Famusov, Skalozub, Countess Khryumina, on the other, advanced noble youth, whose features are embodied by Griboyedov in the image of Chatsky. In Chatsky’s accusatory speeches and Famusov’s enthusiastic stories, the ideal of the past century emerges. This was the age of Catherine with her nobles and flatterers of the court, the age of obedience and fear, depraved morals, when insane extravagance

And luxurious feasts in magnificent chambers flourished next to the humiliating poverty and lack of rights of serfs, who could easily be sold or exchanged for dogs of their choice. This century has become the ideal of the lordly, Famus society, which lives by the principle of winning awards and having fun.
The spokesman for outdated feudal institutions is, of course, Famusov himself. He is a convinced serf owner, ready in anger to exile his serf servants to Siberia, a fierce opponent of education, enlightenment (if evil was to be stopped, he would collect all the books and burn them). This is, finally, a person deprived of true dignity and honor, groveling before higher ranks for the sake of promotion, for the sake of his own enrichment.
In the comedy, Chatsky contrasts the defenders of feudal antiquity, the enemies of free thought and enlightenment. This is a Decembrist, this is a man who ends the era of Peter I and is trying to discern, at least on the horizon, the promised land, A. I. Herzen wrote about Chatsky. Between the like-minded people Famusov and Chatsky is one of the main figures of the comedy, Sophia, who also experienced her grief from the mind. It is she who is assigned the difficult, but very important role of repelling Chatsky’s attacks. However, the image of Sophia in the comedy is contradictory. Sophia is drawn unclearly, A.S. Pushkin noted at one time. Indeed, she is endowed with both positive traits that attracted such an extraordinary person as Chatsky and aroused his love, and negative ones that constantly increase his bewilderment and disappointment. In Sophia's behavior and moods, one always feels a contradiction between a subtle, sober mind and sentimental empty experiences.
What attracted Chatsky to Sofya? What made her stand out in the world of the Famusovs, the Tugoukhovsky princesses and Countess Khryumina’s granddaughter? First of all, independence of views, independence in decision-making, in relationships with people. She fell in love with someone unequal to herself and thus, as it were, challenged the Domostroev rules. Deceived in her feelings, Sophia is not afraid of the judgment of others. She courageously says to Chatsky: I blame myself all around. And Molchalin contemptuously orders to get out of the house before dawn. The strong, proud character of the girl cannot but arouse sympathy and participation in her destiny. Apparently, Chatsky always admired this independence, Sophia’s determination, always hoped for her understanding,

1. The so-called Lancastrian schools of mutual education for the people, which arose in St. Petersburg in 1821-1822, also caused hostility among the reactionary nobles. These schools, highly valued by the Decembrists, were organized by advanced officers for...
2. The main role, of course, is the role of Chatsky, without which there would be no comedy, but, perhaps, there would be a picture of morals. Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. Speech...
3. Every comedy, as a type of dramatic work, is intended to be staged. Therefore, in order to understand comedy better, to understand its situations, characters and ideas, we must imagine when reading a comedy...
4. The comedy in “Woe from Wit” is created not by deliberately comic situations, but by a truthful depiction of the vulgar sides of life, ridicule of everything low and vile. With Russian comedy of the 18th – early 19th centuries. “Grief...
5. Polemicizing with the statements of the reactionary camp, Bestuzhev and those close to the Decembrist literary circle V.F. Odoevsky and O.M. Somov pointed to the veracity of the depiction in “Woe from Wit” of the lordly environment, to...
6. The idea for “Woe from Wit” apparently came to Griboyedov in 1816. The playwright began working directly on the comedy later. Two acts were written by him during his stay in the Caucasus in 1821...
7. Go” by G-dov is a socio-political realistic comedy, one of the most topical works of Russian literature. The comedy “Go” was written in the 20s of the 19th century, when, after the Patriotic War of 1812, in Russian...
8. The main conflict of A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” is the conflict of new and old, progressive and reactionary, enlightenment and serfdom. Through artistic means, Griboyedov expressed the protest of the advanced part of the Russian nobility against...
9. In his comedy “Woe from Wit” Griboyedov directly contrasts Chatsky with all the other (without exception) characters. Opposed to the main character is the society of Famusov and his entourage: Molchalin, Skalozub, Repetilov and others. In their...
10. I. A. Goncharov, in his critical sketch “A Million Torments,” wrote about A. S. Griboyedov’s play “Woe from Wit”: “This is a subtle, smart, elegant and passionate comedy. she is disguised by the typical faces of the heroes...
11. A. S. Griboyedov was born in 1794, the famous comedy was written in 1824, at the beginning of the 19th century. The author was 28 years old at that time. Quite a mature age. And the issues raised...
12. It is difficult to predict the fate of a person seeking, so different assumptions can be made about Chatsky’s future. Determining the past of such a person is the same. Anyone who has dedicated himself once and for all to creating a career and wealth...
13. The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboedov is one of the outstanding examples of Russian drama in the first quarter of the 19th century. The comedy was created at a time when classicism dominated the stage in Russia...
14. The comedy “Woe from Wit” was written in 1824. In this work, A. S. Griboedov recreated a true picture of Russian life in the first quarter of the 19th century: he showed the changes that took place in Russian society...
15. Chatsky begins a new century - and this is his whole meaning and his whole mind. I. A. Goncharov A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” played an outstanding role in the matter of socio-political and...
16. In 1824, AS G-dov wrote his comedy “Go,” which had a huge impact on the further development of Russian literature. In this play, G-dov showed an important problem of all times - the conflict between...
17. Having combined the features of classicism and realism in the comedy “Go”, G-dov abandoned the one-sidedness in the depiction of the heroes. Therefore, there are no ideal, positive characters in the play, but Chatsky, Sophia,...
18. The comedy “Woe from Wit” by Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov was completed in 1824, on the eve of the Decembrist uprising. Therefore, its author simply could not help but be influenced by the pre-revolutionary atmosphere of those years. However, the plot...
19. The comedy “Woe from Wit” gives a general picture of the entire Russian life of the 10-20s of the 19th century, reproduces the eternal struggle between old and new, which unfolded with great force at that time throughout...
20. The innovation of A. S. Griboyedov in creating the play “Woe from Wit” was manifested in the organic fusion of the tragic and the comic. Therefore, researchers of Griboyedov’s work call this work “high comedy” or tragicomedy. Among the main actors...

Conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit"

Conflict in Latin literally means clash, conflict, struggle. Different writers, representatives of different directions, understood the conflict of a work in different ways, for example, among the classicists - the conflict of feelings and duty, among the romantics - the conflict between the individual and society.

Until now, many researchers and experts in Russian literature argue about the conflict in the work “Woe from Wit”; even Griboyedov’s contemporaries accepted it in completely different ways. If we take into account the time when the work was written, we can assume that Griboedov, still in many ways a successor to the traditions of classicism, also uses the traditional conflict of this direction, that is, the clash of reason, social feeling and duty, a lower level of the human psyche (from the point of view of the classicists, Certainly).

But, of course, it is much deeper and has a multi-layered, so to speak, “onion-shaped” structure. To understand its depth and philosophical meaning, it is necessary to consider in turn all levels of this multi-layered conflict.

So, Conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit" Deep, which allowed Goncharov in the article “A Million Torments” to say: “Woe from Wit” appeared before Onegin, Pechorin, outlived them, passed unscathed through the Gogol period, lived these half a century... will survive many more eras, and everything will not lose its vitality." Chatsky is an eternal type. He tries to harmonize feeling and mind. He himself says that “the mind and heart are not in harmony,” but does not understand the seriousness of this threat. Chatsky is a hero whose actions are built on one impulse; everything he does, he does in one breath, practically not allowing pauses between declarations of love and monologues denouncing lordly Moscow. Chatsky is not at all an educator in the style of Voltaire and Rousseau, his “new” ones. He pronounces democratic ideas with such heat and ardor that no reasoner could allow himself. From the point of view of a classicist, for example Katenin, such behavior is unacceptable. For him, Chatsky turns into a caricature, and the whole comedy turns into a farce. It turns out that Chatsky’s ardor comes into conflict with the experience of Famusov, who demands from everyone that everything be done “with feeling, with sense, with order.” But if this happened, the comedy would turn into a farcical conflict - into a confrontation between stupid ardor and worldly wisdom, that is, into a purely psychological one.

Griboyedov wrote (in a letter to Katenin): “I hate caricatures, I can’t find one in my picture.” His Chatsky is not some kind of caricature, the Author portrays him as alive, in motion, full of contradictions, he has character. Conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit" the one that arises between him and Famusov is of a national-psotic nature. The Decembrist uprising declined. His Decembrist friends, contemporaries of Griboyedov, perceived the comedy as a call, as an approval and proclaiming them, and he himself Conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit"- as the resistance of progressive youth in the person of Chatsky, a representative of the “present century”, the old conservative ideas of the “past century”. In Chatsky, the Decembrists partly saw themselves, and they were probably right. These best people of their time, dark, with high goals and aspirations, wanted to change the situation in Russia one day, on one impulse of a sense of honor, duty and justice. Chatsky’s analogy with the Decembrists was drawn not only by Griboyedov’s contemporaries, but also by many current researchers, for example, Academician Nechkina in the book “Griboedov and the Decembrists.” But, carried away by Chatsky’s vivid monologues, adherents of this point did not attach any attention to the ending. She, in fact, does not call for any action at all, Chatsky leaves Moscow disappointed, and the picture of the finale does not carry either joy or optimism. They also did not notice that there was no acute struggle between Chatsky and Famus society. This is indicated by stage directions, such as the last remark of the third act: “He looks around, everyone is spinning in the waltz with the greatest zeal. The old men scattered to the card tables.” Direct remarks from the heroes indicate a complete absence of disputes; no one is going to conflict with Chatsky, he is only asked to remain silent:

Famusov:
I'm not listening, I'm on trial!
I asked you to be silent
Not a great service.

Chatsky, with his progressive ideas, begins to look simply stupid, “he denounces the guests at Famusov’s evening, not taking into account that people here just gathered to dance and have fun,” says Y. S. Bilinkis in the article “Woe from Wit.” By and large, Comedy conflict « Woe from mind“By and large, is not a conflict, a dispute cannot be a dispute if only one side is represented, only one person speaks. “Chatsky’s drama is a storm in a teacup,” says V. Belinsky about Chatsky’s conflict with those around him.

Many wrote and spoke about the conflict between the “past century” and the “present century.” The “past century” was accused of stifling everything new and progressive and preventing it from developing. In the minds of the Decembrists, the “present century” contained the best, because, as they believed, the new is certainly better, more progressive than what was. “The centuries are marching towards a glorious goal!” - Kuchelbecker wrote at that time, that is, in the words of the now popular song, Chatsky, and everyone as a result of this receives “a million torments.” They are all smart, but their mind comes into conflict with living life. Sophia, for example, having read French novels, has the same ghostly idea of ​​life as Chatsky. In life, everything is not as beautifully described in French novels; the rationality of the heroes comes into conflict with life. By the end of the play, everyone is completely confused. Chatsky says:

I won’t come to my senses, I’m guilty
And I listen, I don’t understand...

But Famusov, unshakable in his confidence, suddenly everything that was going smoothly before is turned upside down:

Isn't my fate still sad?
Oh! My God! What will he say?
Princess Marya Alekseevna!

Later, at the end of Gogol’s “The Inspector General,” the weight also seems to freeze in the same silent question, the answer to which lies in “the inconsistency of any kind of historical subjectivism, in the primacy of reality over “dreams” and romantic “fantasies,” as the modern researcher A. Lebedev.

Paskevich is pushing around,
The disgraced Yermolov is slandering...
What is left for him?
Ambition, coldness and anger...
From bureaucratic old women,
From caustic social jabs
He's riding in a wagon,
Resting your chin on the cane.
D. Kedrin

Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov gained great literary fame and national fame by writing the comedy “Woe from Wit.” This work was innovative in Russian literature of the first quarter of the 19th century.
Classic comedy was characterized by the division of heroes into positive and negative. Victory always went to the positive heroes, while the negative ones were ridiculed and defeated. In Griboyedov's comedy, the characters are distributed in a completely different way. The main conflict of the play is connected with the division of the heroes into representatives of the “present century” and the “past century”, and the first one actually includes Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, moreover, he often finds himself in a funny position, although he is a positive hero. At the same time, his main “opponent” Famusov is by no means some notorious scoundrel; on the contrary, he is a caring father and a good-natured person.
It is interesting that Chatsky spent his childhood in the house of Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. Moscow lordly life was measured and calm. Every day was the same. Balls, lunches, dinners, christenings...

He made a match - he succeeded, but he missed.
All the same sense, and the same poems in the albums.

Women were mainly concerned with their outfits. They love everything foreign and French. The ladies of Famus society have one goal - to marry or give their daughters to an influential and rich man. With all this, in the words of Famusov himself, women “are judges of everything, everywhere, there are no judges over them.” Everyone goes to a certain Tatyana Yuryevna for patronage, because “officials and officials are all her friends and all her relatives.” Princess Marya Alekseevna has such weight in high society that Famusov somehow exclaims in fear:
Oh! My God! What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say?
What about men? They are all busy trying to move up the social ladder as much as possible. Here is the thoughtless martinet Skalozub, who measures everything by military standards, jokes in a military way, being an example of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. But this just means a good growth prospect. He has one goal - “to become a general.” Here is the petty official Molchalin. He says, not without pleasure, that “he received three awards, is listed in the Archives,” and he, of course, wants to “reach the well-known levels.”
The Moscow “ace” Famusov himself tells young people about the nobleman Maxim Petrovich, who served under Catherine and, seeking a place at court, showed neither business qualities nor talents, but became famous only for the fact that his neck often “bent” in bows. But “he had a hundred people at his service,” “all wearing orders.” This is the ideal of Famus society.
Moscow nobles are arrogant and arrogant. They treat people poorer than themselves with contempt. But special arrogance can be heard in remarks addressed to the serfs. They are “parsleys”, “crowbars”, “blocks”, “lazy grouse”. One conversation with them: “You’re welcome! You are welcome!” In close formation, the Famusites oppose everything new and advanced. They can be liberal, but they are afraid of fundamental changes like fire. There is so much hatred in Famusov’s words:

Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is worse now than before,
There were crazy people, deeds, and opinions.

Thus, Chatsky is well acquainted with the spirit of the “past century,” marked by servility, hatred of enlightenment, and the emptiness of life. All this early aroused boredom and disgust in our hero. Despite his friendship with sweet Sophia, Chatsky leaves the house of his relatives and begins an independent life.
“The desire to wander attacked him...” His soul thirsted for the novelty of modern ideas, communication with the progressive people of the time. He leaves Moscow and goes to St. Petersburg. “High thoughts” are above all for him. It was in St. Petersburg that Chatsky’s views and aspirations took shape. He apparently became interested in literature. Even Famusov heard rumors that Chatsky “writes and translates well.” At the same time, Chatsky is fascinated by social activities. He develops a “connection with the ministers.” However, not for long. High concepts of honor did not allow him to serve; he wanted to serve the cause, not individuals.
After this, Chatsky probably visited the village, where, according to Famusov, he “made a mistake” by mishandling the estate. Then our hero goes abroad. At that time, “travel” was looked at askance, as a manifestation of the liberal spirit. But it was precisely the acquaintance of representatives of Russian noble youth with the life, philosophy, and history of Western Europe that was of great importance for their development.
And now we meet the mature Chatsky, a man with established ideas. Chatsky contrasts the slave morality of Famus society with a high understanding of honor and duty. He passionately denounces the feudal system he hates. He cannot calmly talk about “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanges servants for dogs, or about the one who “drove ... from their mothers, fathers, rejected children to the serf ballet” and, having gone bankrupt, sold them all one by one.

These are the ones who lived to see their gray hairs!
This is who we should respect in the wilderness!
Here are our strict connoisseurs and judges!

Chatsky hates “the meanest traits of the past,” people who “draw their judgments from forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” His sharp protest is caused by his noble servility to everything foreign, his French upbringing, common in the lordly environment. In his famous monologue about the “Frenchman from Bordeaux,” he talks about the ardent attachment of the common people to their homeland, national customs and language.
As a true educator, Chatsky passionately defends the rights of reason and deeply believes in its power. In reason, in education, in public opinion, in the power of ideological and moral influence, he sees the main and powerful means of remaking society and changing life. He defends the right to serve education and science:

Now let one of us
Of the young people, there is an enemy of quest, -
Without demanding either places or promotion,
He will focus his mind on science, hungry for knowledge;
Or God himself will stir up heat in his soul
To the creative, high and beautiful arts, -
They immediately: robbery! Fire!
And he will be known among them as a dreamer! Dangerous!!!

Among such young people in the play, in addition to Chatsky, one can also include, perhaps, Skalozub’s cousin, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya - “a chemist and a botanist.” But the play talks about them in passing. Among Famusov's guests, our hero is a loner.
- Of course, Chatsky is making enemies for himself. Well, will Skalozub forgive him if he hears about himself: “Wheezing, strangled, bassoon, constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!” Or Natalya Dmitrievna, whom he advised to live in the village? Or Khlestova, at whom Chatsky openly laughs? But, of course, Molchalin gets the most. Chatsky considers him “the most pitiful creature”, like all fools. Out of revenge for such words, Sophia declares Chatsky crazy. Everyone happily picks up the news, they sincerely believe in the gossip, because, indeed, in this society he seems crazy.
A.S. Pushkin, having read “Woe from Wit,” noticed that Chatsky was throwing pearls before swine, that he would never convince those to whom he addressed with his angry, passionate monologues. And one cannot but agree with this. But Chatsky is young. Yes, he had no intention of starting disputes with the older generation. First of all, he wanted to see Sophia, for whom he had had a heartfelt affection since childhood. Another thing is that in the time that has passed since their last meeting, Sophia has changed. Chatsky is discouraged by her cold reception, he is trying to understand how it could happen that she no longer needs him. Perhaps it was this mental trauma that triggered the conflict mechanism.
As a result, there is a complete break between Chatsky and the world in which he spent his childhood and with which he is connected by blood ties. But the conflict that led to this break is not personal, not accidental. This conflict is social. Not just different people collided, but different worldviews, different social positions. The external outbreak of the conflict was Chatsky’s arrival at Famusov’s house; it was developed in disputes and monologues of the main characters (“Who are the judges?”, “That’s it, you are all proud!”). Growing misunderstanding and alienation lead to a climax: at the ball, Chatsky is declared insane. And then he himself understands that all his words and emotional movements were in vain:

You all glorified me as crazy.
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend a day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And his sanity will survive.

The outcome of the conflict is Chatsky’s departure from Moscow. The relationship between Famus society and the main character is clarified to the end: they deeply despise each other and do not want to have anything in common. It's impossible to tell who has the upper hand. After all, the conflict between old and new is as eternal as the world. And the topic of the suffering of an intelligent, educated person in Russia is still topical today. To this day, people suffer more from their intelligence than from their absence. In this sense, A.S. Griboyedov created a comedy for all times.

The main conflict of the comedy "Woe from Wit"

Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is an outstanding work of Russian literature. The main problem of the work is the problem of two worldviews: the “past century,” which defends the old foundations, and the “present century,” which advocates decisive changes. The difference in the worldview of the old Moscow nobility and the advanced nobility in the 10-20s of the 19th century constitutes the main conflict of the comedy.

The comedy ridicules the vices of society: serfdom, martinetism, careerism, sycophancy, bureaucracy, low level of education, admiration for everything foreign, servility, sycophancy, the fact that in society it is not the personal qualities of a person that are valued, but “the souls of two thousand families,” rank, money .

The past century represents a Moscow noble society consisting of the Famusovs, Khlestovs, Tugoukhovs, and Skalozubs. In society, people live according to the principle:

At my age I shouldn't dare

Have your own judgment

because

We are small in rank.

Famusov is a representative of the past century, a typical Moscow gentleman with all the views, manners and way of thinking characteristic of that time. The only thing he bows to is rank and wealth. “Like all Moscow people, your father is like this: He would like a son-in-law with stars, and with ranks,” the maid Lisa characterizes her master. Famusov lives the old fashioned way, considers his uncle, Maxim Petrovich, as his ideal, who “promotes him to rank” and “gives pensions.” He is “either on silver or gold; Ate on gold; one hundred people at your service; All in orders; I was always traveling in a train.” However, for all his arrogant disposition, “He bent over backwards” in front of his superiors when it was necessary to curry favor.

Famusov most fully absorbed the laws and foundations characteristic of this time. He considers careerism, respect for rank, and pleasing elders to be the main norms accepted in life. Famusov is afraid of the opinions of noble nobles, although he himself willingly spreads them. He is worried about “what Princess Marya Aleksevna will say.”

Famusov is an official, but treats his service only as a source of Sitnov and income, a means of achieving prosperity. He is not interested in either the meaning or the results of labor. When Molchalin reports that there are inaccuracies in the papers:

And what matters to me, what doesn’t matter,

My custom is this:

Signed - off your shoulders

Nepotism is another of the ideals so dear to Famusov’s heart. Kuzma Petrovich, “the venerable chamberlain,” with “the key, and knew how to deliver the key to his son,” “is rich and was married to a rich woman,” and therefore earns deep respect from Famusov.

Famusov is not very educated, and he “sleeps well from Russian books,” unlike Sophia, who does not “sleep from French books.” But at the same time, Famusov developed a rather frisky attitude towards everything foreign. Valuing the patriarchal way of life, he stigmatizes Kuznetsky Most and the “eternal French,” calling them “destroyers of pockets and hearts.”

Poverty is considered a big vice in Famus society. So Famusov directly declares to Sophia, his daughter: “Whoever is poor is not a match for you,” or: “We have had it since ancient times, That according to father and son there is honor, Be inferior, but if there are two thousand family souls, He is the groom.” At the same time, a caring father shows truly worldly wisdom, caring about the future of his daughter.

An even greater vice in society is learning and education: “Learning is a plague, learning is the reason, What is worse now than when people, deeds, and opinions were crazy.”

The world of interests of the Famus society is quite narrow. It is limited to balls, dinners, dances, name days.

A bright representative of the “present century” is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who embodies the features of the advanced noble youth of that time. He is the bearer of new views. This he proves by his behavior, way of life, but especially by his passionate speeches denouncing the foundations of the “past century,” which he clearly disdains:

And as if the world began to grow stupid,

You can say with a sigh;

How to compare and see

The present century and the past:

As he was famous,

Whose neck bent more often...

Chatsky considers that century “the century of humility and fear.” He is convinced that those morals are a thing of the past and today, “laughter frightens people and keeps shame in check.”

The traditions of days gone by are too strong. Chatsky himself turns out to be their victim. With his directness, wit, and audacity, he becomes a disturber of social rules and norms. And society takes revenge on him. At the first meeting with him, Famusov calls him “carbonari.” However, in a conversation with Skalozub, he speaks well of him, says that he is “a guy with a head”, “he writes well and translates”, while regretting that Chatsky does not serve. But Chatsky has his own opinion on this matter: he wants to serve the cause, not individuals. At first it may seem that the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov is a conflict of different generations, a “conflict between fathers and children,” but this is not so. After all, Sophia and Molchalin are almost the same age as Chatsky, but they fully belong to the “past century.” Sophia is not stupid. Chatsky’s love for her can also serve as proof of this. But she absorbed the philosophy of her father and his society. Her chosen one is Molchalin. He is also young, but also a child of that old environment. He fully supports the morals and customs of old lordly Moscow. Both Sofia and Famusov speak well of Molchalin. The latter keeps him in his service “because he’s businesslike,” and Sophia sharply rejects Chatsky’s attacks on her lover. She says:

Of course, he doesn’t have this mind

What a genius is to some, but a plague to others...

But for her, intelligence is not the main thing. The main thing is that Molchalin is quiet, modest, helpful, disarms the priest with silence, and will not offend anyone. In general, he is an ideal husband. You can say the quality is wonderful, but they are deceitful. This is just a mask behind which his essence is hidden. After all, his motto is “moderation and accuracy,” and he is ready to “please all people without exception,” as his father taught him, he persistently goes to his goal - a warm and financial place. He plays the lover only because it pleases Sophia herself, the daughter of his master:

And now I take the form of a lover

To please the daughter of such a man

And Sophia sees in him the ideal husband and boldly moves towards her goal, without fear of “what Princess Marya Alekseevna will say.” Chatsky, finding himself in this environment after a long absence, is initially very friendly. He strives here, because the “smoke of the Fatherland” is “sweet and pleasant” to him, but Chatsky encounters a wall of misunderstanding and rejection. His tragedy lies in the fact that he alone opposes Famus society. But the comedy mentions Skalozub’s cousin, who is also “strange” - “suddenly left his service,” “locked himself in the village and began to read books,” but he “followed the rank.” There is also Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, the “chemist and botanist” Prince Fyodor, but there is also Repetilov, who is proud of his involvement in a certain secret society, all of whose activities boil down to “making noise, brother, making noise.” But Chatsky cannot become a member of such a secret union.

Chatsky is not only the bearer of new views and ideas, but also advocates new standards of life.

In addition to the public tragedy, Chatsky is experiencing a personal tragedy. He is rejected by his beloved Sophia, to whom he “flew and trembled.” Moreover, with her light hand he is declared crazy.

Chatsky, who does not accept the ideas and morals of the “past century,” becomes a troublemaker in Famus society. And it rejects him. Chatsky is a mocker, a wit, a troublemaker and even an insulter. So Sophia tells him:

Has it ever happened that you laughed? or sad?

A mistake? Did they say good things about anyone?

Chatsky does not find friendly sympathy, he is not accepted, he is rejected, he is expelled, but the hero himself could not exist in such conditions.

“The present century” and the “past century” collide in comedy. The past time is still too strong and gives rise to its own kind. But the time for change in the person of Chatsky is already coming, although it is still too weak. “The present century” replaces the “past century,” for this is an immutable law of life. The appearance of the Chatsky Carbonari at the turn of historical eras is natural and natural.

In the play “Woe from Wit” there are several conflicts, whereas a necessary condition for a classic play was the presence of only one conflict.

“Woe from Wit” is a comedy with two storylines, and at first glance it seems that there are two conflicts in the play: love (between Chatsky and Sophia) and social (between Chatsky and Famus’s society).

The play begins with the beginning of a love conflict - Chatsky comes to Moscow to see his beloved girl. Gradually, the love conflict develops into a social one. Finding out whether Sophia loves him, Chatsky encounters Famus society. In the comedy, the image of Chatsky represents a new type of personality of the early 19th century. Chatsky is opposed to the entire conservative, ossified world of the Famusovs. In his monologues, ridiculing the life, customs, and ideology of the old Moscow society, Chatsky tries to open the eyes of Famusov and everyone else to how they live and what they live with. The social conflict “Woe from Wit” is insoluble. The old lordly society does not listen to the freedom-loving, intelligent Chatsky, it does not understand him and declares him crazy.

The social conflict in A. S. Griboedov’s play is connected with another conflict - between the “present century” and the “past century.” Chatsky is a type of new person, he is an exponent of the new ideology of the new time, the “present century.” And the old conservative society of the Famusovs belongs to the “past century.” The old does not want to give up its position and go into the historical past, while the new actively invades life, trying to establish its own laws. The conflict between old and new is one of the main ones in Russian life at that time. This eternal conflict occupies a large place in the literature of the 19th century, for example, in such works as “Fathers and Sons”, “The Thunderstorm”. But this conflict does not exhaust all the conflicts of comedy.

Among the heroes of Griboyedov’s play, perhaps, there are no stupid people; each of them has his own worldly mind, that is, an idea of ​​\u200b\u200blife. Each of the characters in “Woe from Wit” knows what he needs from life and what he should strive for. For example, Famusov wants to live his life without going beyond secular laws, so as not to give a reason to be condemned by powerful socialites, such as Marya Aleksevna and Tatyana Yuryevna. That is why Famusov is so concerned about finding a worthy husband for his daughter. Molchalin’s goal in life is to quietly, even if slowly, but surely move up the career ladder. He is not even ashamed of the fact that he will humiliate himself a lot in the struggle to achieve his goals: wealth and power (“and win awards and have fun”). He does not love Sophia, but looks at her as a means to achieve his goals.