Minor characters. "Minor": analysis of Fonvizin's work, images of heroes. Other positive characters

One of the main positive characters in the play. She is Starodum's niece, who was left an orphan. In his absence, the estate is managed by the Prostakovs. They look after Sophia and at the same time rob her. Having learned that the girl has a rich inheritance, they begin to fight for her hand and heart. However, the girl has a lover named Milon, to whom she remains faithful.

One of the main characters and the driving force in the play. She is the mother of Mitrofanushka and the sister of Taras Skotinin. Prostakova participates in almost all the events of the play, since the action takes place in the house where she is the mistress. She is a noblewoman by status, has serfs and is a typical example of a Russian landowner of the mid-18th century.

The son of the landowners Prostakovs and one of the main negative characters of the comedy. As a minor teenager, he is a prominent representative of the noble youth and one of the many “minors” who inhabited Russia in the 18th century. By nature, he is rude and cruel, does not want to study or serve, does not value his father and, taking advantage of his mother’s boundless love, manipulates her as he wishes.

One of the main characters of the comedy, Sophia's uncle. His surname indicates that he is a man of the “old” era, that is, the era of Peter I. His role in the work is very important, especially his speeches and instructions. Starodum's father served under Peter the Great and always told his son that one must remain human at any time and in any situation.

One of the characters in the comedy, the brother of Mrs. Prostakova. This surname was not chosen by chance by the author. Taras loves and breeds pigs. Farm animals are the character's only interest. Having learned that Starodum's pupil, Sophia, is a rich heiress, he tries to win her favor and marry her.

One of the minor characters of the play. The character's surname was not chosen by chance. Pravdin is an honest and noble official, called upon to understand the actions of the Prostakov-Skotinins. He serves as a bureaucrat in the viceroyalty created by Catherine II.

One of the characters in the comedy, Sophia's fiancé, a young man of great merit, an officer with a valiant character. Milo is a modest and not arrogant person. Sophia and Starodum really like him. Thanks to him, Sophia manages to avoid marriage with Mrs. Prostakova’s underage son and courtship from Skotinin.

One of the minor characters of the play. She is Mitrofan's nanny and nurse. Using her image as an example, the author tries to show how serfdom distorted domestic servants, how it disfigured and humiliated them. Despite her inherent good human qualities, slavish humiliation takes over.

One of the characters in the comedy, Mitrofan's tutor and the highest paid employee in the Prostakovs' house. Adam Adamych Vralman was hired as a teacher of French and other sciences. In fact, he is Starodum’s former coachman, and not a teacher at all.

Denis Fonvizin’s immortal comedy “The Minor” is an outstanding work of Russian literature of the 18th century. Bold satire and truthfully described reality are the main components of this writer’s skill. Centuries later, every now and then in modern society heated debates arise about the main character of the play, Mitrofanushka. Who is he: a victim of improper upbringing or a vivid example of the moral decay of society?

The comedy “Brigadier” written by Fonvizin, which had a stunning success in St. Petersburg, became the basis of one of the world’s greatest literary monuments. After its publication, the writer did not return to drama for more than ten years, devoting himself more and more to state issues and tasks. However, the thought of creating a new book excited the author’s imagination. Let’s not hide the fact that, according to scientists, the first note related to “The Minor” was started back in the 1770s, long before its publication.

After a trip to France in 1778. The playwright had an exact plan for writing the future work. An interesting fact is that initially Mitrofanushka was Ivanushka, which naturally speaks of the similarity of the two comedies (Ivan was a character in “The Brigadier”). In 1781 the play was completed. Of course, a production of this type meant coverage of one of the most problematic issues of the noble society of that time. However, despite the risk, Fonvizin became the direct “instigator” of the literary revolution. The premiere was postponed due to the empress's hostility to any kind of satire, but it still took place on September 24, 1782.

Genre of the work

COMEDY is a type of drama in which the moment of effective conflict is specifically resolved. It has a number of signs:

1. does not entail the death of one representative of the warring parties;
2. aimed at “nothing” goals;
3. the narrative is lively and vivid.

Also in Fonvizin’s work, a satirical orientation is obvious. This means that the author set himself the task of ridiculing social vices. This is an attempt to veil life's problems under the guise of a smile.

“Minor” is a work built according to the laws of classicism. One storyline, one location, and all events take place within 24 hours. However, this concept is also consistent with realism, as evidenced by individual objects and places of action. In addition, the characters are very reminiscent of real landowners from the outback, ridiculed and condemned by the playwright. Fonvizin added something new to classicism - merciless and sharp humor.

What is the work about?

The plot of Denis Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” revolves around a family of landowners who are completely mired in immorality and tyranny. Children became like their rude and narrow-minded parents, and their sense of morality suffered as a result. Sixteen-year-old Mitrofanushka is trying his best to finish his studies, but he lacks the desire and ability. The mother looks at this carelessly, she does not care whether her son will develop. She prefers that everything remain as it is; any progress is alien to her.

The Prostakovs “sheltered” a distant relative, the orphan Sophia, who differs from the rest of the family not only in her outlook on life, but also in her good manners. Sophia is the heiress of a large estate, which Mitrofanushka’s uncle, Skotinin, who is a great hunter, “looks” at. Marriage is the only available way to take over Sophia’s household, so the relatives around her are trying to persuade her into a profitable marriage.

Starodum, Sophia’s uncle, sends his niece a letter. Prostakova is terribly dissatisfied with this “trick” of her relative, who was considered dead in Siberia. The deceit and arrogance inherent in her nature is manifested in the accusation of a “deceptive” letter, supposedly “amorous”. Illiterate landowners will soon learn the true content of the message, resorting to the help of the guest Pravdin. He reveals to the whole family the truth about the Siberian inheritance he left, which gives him as much as ten thousand in annual income.

It was then that Prostakova came up with an idea - to marry Sophia to Mitrofanushka in order to appropriate the inheritance for herself. However, officer Milon, walking through the village with soldiers, “bursts” into her plans. He met with his old friend Pravdin, who, as it turned out, is a member of the vicegerental board. His plans include observing landowners mistreating their people.

Milon speaks of his long-standing love for a sweet person who was transported to an unknown place due to the death of a relative. Suddenly he meets Sophia - she is that same girl. The heroine talks about her future marriage to the undersized Mitrofanushka, from which the groom “flashes up” like a spark, but then gradually “weaken” with a detailed story about his “betrothed.”

Sophia's uncle has arrived. Having met Milon, he accepts Sophia’s choice, while inquiring about the “correctness” of her decision. At the same time, the Prostakovs' estate was transferred to state custody due to cruel treatment of the peasants. Seeking support, the mother hugs Mitrofanushka. But the Son did not intend to be polite and polite, he was rude, causing the venerable matron to faint. Waking up, she laments: “I am completely lost.” And Starodum, pointing at her, says, “These are the fruits worthy of evil!”

The main characters and their characteristics

Pravdin, Sophia, Starodum and Milon are representatives of the so-called “new” time, the Age of Enlightenment. The moral components of their souls are nothing more than goodness, love, thirst for knowledge and compassion. The Prostakovs, Skotinin and Mitrofan are representatives of the “old” nobility, where the cult of material well-being, rudeness and ignorance flourish.

• The minor Mitrofan is a young man whose ignorance, stupidity and inability to adequately analyze the situation do not allow him to become an active and reasonable representative of the noble community. “I don’t want to study, but I want to get married” is a life motto that fully reflects the character of a young man who does not take anything seriously.
• Sophia is an educated, kind girl who becomes a black sheep in a society of envious and greedy people.
• Prostakova is a cunning, careless, rude woman with many shortcomings and a lack of love and respect for all living things, except for her beloved son Mitrofanushka. Prostakova’s upbringing is only a confirmation of the persistence of conservatism, which does not allow the Russian nobility to develop.
• Starodum raises “his little blood” in a different way - for him Sophia is no longer a small child, but a mature member of society. He gives the girl freedom of choice, thereby teaching her the correct fundamentals of life. In it, Fonvizin portrays the type of personality that has gone through all the “ups” and downs,” becoming not only a “worthy parent,” but also an undoubted example for the future generation.
• Skotinin, just like everyone else, is an example of a “talking surname.” A person whose inner essence is more similar to some kind of rude, uncouth cattle than to a well-bred person.

Theme of the work

• The education of the “new” nobility is the main theme of the comedy. “Undergrowth” is a kind of allusion to the “disappearing” moral principles in people who are afraid of transformations. Landowners raise their offspring the old fashioned way, without paying due attention to their education. But those who were not taught, but were only spoiled or intimidated, will not be able to take care of either their family or Russia.
• Family theme. The family is a social institution on which the development of the individual depends. Despite Prostakova’s rudeness and disrespect towards all residents, she cherishes her beloved son, who does not at all appreciate her care or her love. This behavior is a typical example of ingratitude, which is a consequence of spoiling and parental adoration. The landowner does not understand that her son sees her treatment of other people and repeats it. Thus, the weather in the house determines the character of the young man and his shortcomings. Fonvizin emphasizes the importance of maintaining warmth, tenderness and respect in the family towards all its members. Only then will children be respectful and parents worthy of respect.
• The theme of freedom of choice. The “new” stage is Starodum’s relationship with Sophia. Starodum gives her freedom of choice, without limiting her with his beliefs, which can affect her worldview, thereby cultivating in her the ideal of a noble future.

Main problems

• The main problem of the work is the consequences of improper upbringing. The Prostakov family is a family tree that has its roots in the distant past of the nobility. This is what the landowners boast about, not realizing that the glory of their ancestors does not add to their dignity. But class pride has clouded their minds, they do not want to move forward and achieve new achievements, they think that everything will always be as before. That’s why they don’t realize the need for education; in their world, enslaved by stereotypes, it really isn’t needed. Mitrofanushka will also sit in the village all her life and live off the labor of her serfs.
• The problem of serfdom. The moral and intellectual decay of the nobility under serfdom is an absolutely logical result of the tsar’s unjust policies. The landowners have become completely lazy; they don’t need to work to support themselves. The managers and peasants will do everything for them. With such a social system, the nobles have no incentive to work and get an education.
• The problem of greed. The thirst for material well-being blocks access to morality. Prostakovs are fixated on money and power, they don’t care whether their child is happy, for them happiness is synonymous with wealth.
• The problem of ignorance. Stupidity deprives the heroes of spirituality; their world is too limited and tied to the material side of life. They are not interested in anything other than primitive physical pleasures, because they don’t know anything else at all. Fonvizin saw the true “human appearance” only in that person who was raised by literate people, and not by half-educated sextons.

Comedy idea

Fonvizin was a person, so he did not accept rudeness, ignorance and cruelty. He professed the belief that a person is born a “blank slate”, therefore only upbringing and education can make him a moral, virtuous and intelligent citizen who will benefit the fatherland. Thus, the glorification of the ideals of humanism is the main idea of ​​“Minor.” A young man who obeys the call of goodness, intelligence and justice is a true nobleman! If he is brought up in the spirit of Prostakova, then he will never go beyond the narrow confines of his limitations and will not understand the beauty and versatility of the world in which he lives. He will not be able to work for the good of society and will not leave anything significant behind.

At the end of the comedy, the author speaks of the triumph of “retribution”: Prostakova loses the estate and the respect of her own son, raised in accordance with her spiritual and physical ideals. This is the price to pay for miseducation and ignorance.

What does it teach?

Denis Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor,” first of all, teaches respect for one’s neighbors. The sixteen-year-old young man Mitrofanushka did not perceive the care of either his mother or his uncle at all; he took it for granted as a fact: “Why, uncle, have you eaten too much henbane? Yes, I don’t know why you deigned to attack me.” The natural result of rough treatment in the home is the ending where the son pushes away his loving mother.

The lessons of the comedy “Minor” do not end there. It is not so much respect as ignorance that shows people in the position they are carefully trying to hide. Stupidity and ignorance hover in the comedy like a bird over a nest, they envelop the village, thereby not letting the residents out of their own shackles. The author cruelly punishes the Prostakovs for their narrow-mindedness, depriving them of their property and the very opportunity to continue their idle lifestyle. Thus, everyone needs to learn, because even the most stable position in society can easily be lost if you are an uneducated person.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

Fonvizin's contemporaries highly valued The Minor; he delighted them not only with his amazing language, the clarity of the author's civic position, and the innovation of form and content.

Features of the genre

According to the genre, this work is a classic comedy, it complies with the requirements of “three unities” (place, time, action) inherent in classicism; the heroes are divided into positive and negative, each of the heroes has its own role (“reasoner”, “villain”, etc.). etc.), however, there are also deviations from the requirements of classicist aesthetics, and serious deviations.So, the comedy was only supposed to amuse, it could not be interpreted in multiple meanings, there could be no ambiguity in it - and if we remember “The Minor”, ​​then we cannot help but admit that, raising in the work the most important social issues of his time, the author resolves them by means far from comic: for example, at the end of the work, when, it would seem, “the vice is punished,” the viewer cannot help but sympathize with Mrs. Prostakova, who is rudely and cruelly pushed away by the ungrateful Mitrofanushka, preoccupied with his own fate: “Let go, mother, how you imposed yourself. .." - and the tragic element powerfully invades the comedy, which was unacceptable.. And with the “unity of action” everything is also not so simple in comedy, it has too many storylines that do not “work” in any way to resolve the main conflict , but create a broad social background that determines the characters of the characters. Finally, Fonvizin’s innovation was reflected in the language of the comedy “The Minor”; the speech of the characters is very highly individualized, it contains folklorisms, vernacular, and high style (Starodum, Pravdin), which also violates the classic canons of creating speech characteristics of characters. We can, summing up, conclude that Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” became a truly innovative work for its time; the author pushed the boundaries of the aesthetics of classicism, subordinating it to the solution of the task set for himself: to angrily ridicule the vices of his contemporary society, to rid it of “evil morals.” ", capable of destroying both the human soul and public morality.

Image system

Let us analyze the system of images of the comedy "The Minor", which, as required by the aesthetics of classicism, represents two directly opposite "camps" - positive and negative heroes. Here you can also notice a certain deviation from the canons; it manifests itself in the fact that it carries duality; it is almost impossible to classify them as purely positive or purely negative heroes. Let us remember one of Mitrofanushka’s teachers, Kuteikin. On the one hand, he suffers humiliation from Mrs. Prostakova and his student, on the other hand, he is not averse, if the opportunity arises, to “snatch his piece,” for which he is ridiculed. Or “Mitrofan’s mother” Eremeevna: she is reviled and humiliated by her mistress in every possible way, she humbly endures, but, forgetting herself, rushes to protect Mitrofanushka from her uncle, and does this not only out of fear of punishment...

The image of Prostakova in the comedy "Minor"

As already noted, Fonvizin innovatively portrays his main character, Mrs. Prostakova. From the very first scenes of the comedy, we are faced with a despot who does not want to reckon with anyone or anything. She rudely imposes her will on everyone, suppresses and humiliates not only the serfs, but also her husband (how can one not recall Mitrofan’s “dream in hand” about how “mother” beats “father”?..), she tyrannizes Sophia, she wants to force her to marry first her brother Taras Skotinin, and then, when it turns out that Sophia is now a rich bride, her son. Being herself an ignorant and uncultured person (with what pride she declares: “Read it yourself! No, madam, thank God, I was not brought up like that. I can receive letters, but I always tell someone else to read them!”), she despises education, although he tries to teach his son, he does this only because he wants to ensure his future, and what is Mitrofan’s “training” worth, as it is presented in the comedy? True, his mother is convinced: “Believe me, father, that, of course, it’s nonsense that Mitrofanushka doesn’t know”...

Mrs. Prostakova is characterized by cunning and resourcefulness, she stubbornly stands her ground and is convinced that “we will take ours” - and is ready to commit a crime, kidnap Sophia and, against her will, marry her to a man from the “Skotinin family.” When she meets resistance, she simultaneously tries to beg for forgiveness and promises punishment to those of her people, due to whose oversight the “enterprise” failed, in which Mitrofanushka is ready to actively support her: “Take it for people?” The “transformation” of Mrs. Prostakova is striking, who just on her knees humbly begged to forgive her, and, having received the petition, “jumping up from her knees”, fervently promises: “Well! Now I will give the dawn to my people. I'll go through them one by one. Now I'll find out who let her out of their hands. No, swindlers! No, thieves! I won't forgive a century, I won't forgive this ridicule." There is so much voluptuousness in this triple “now”, and how truly scary it becomes from her request: “Give me at least three days (Aside) I would make myself known...”.

However, as already noted, there is a certain duality in the image of Prostakova. She deeply and devotedly loves her son and is ready to do anything for him. Is she guilty of comparing her love for him to the love of a dog for puppies: “Have you ever heard of a bitch giving away her puppies?”? We must not forget that she is from the Skotinin-Priplodin family, where such half-animal love was the only possible one, how could she be different? So she disfigures Mitrofan’s soul with her blind love, her son pleases her in every possible way, and she is happy because he “loves” her... Until he throws her away from him, because now he doesn’t need her, and even those people who just condemned Mrs. Prostakova sympathize with her in her maternal grief...

Image of Mitrofan

The image of Mitrofan was also created by Fonvizin in a non-traditional way. The “minor” who likes to be “small” and who diligently takes advantage of his mother’s attitude toward him is not as simple and stupid as it might seem at first glance. He has learned to use his parents' love for himself for his own benefit, he knows well how to achieve his goal, he is convinced that he has the right to everything he wants. Mitrofanushka’s selfishness is the driving force behind his actions, but the hero also has cruelty (remember his remark about “people”), resourcefulness (what is his discussion about the “door”), and lordly contempt for people, including his mother, from whom he, on occasion, seeks help and protection. And his attitude towards education is so dismissive only because he does not see any real benefit from it. Probably, when he “serves”, he - if it is beneficial - will change his attitude towards education, potentially he is ready for anything: “For me, where they tell me.” Consequently, the image of Mitrofan in the comedy “Minor” is also characterized by a certain psychologism, as is the image of Prostakova, which is Fonvizin’s innovative approach to creating negative images that were only supposed to be “villains”.

Positive images

The playwright is more traditional in creating positive images. Each of them is an expression of a certain idea, and as part of the statement of this idea, an image-character is created. Almost positive images are devoid of individual traits; they are images-ideas inherent in classicism; Sophia, Milon, Starodum, Pravdin are not living people, but exponents of a “certain type of consciousness”; they represent a system of views that was advanced for their time on the relationship between spouses, the social structure, the essence of the human personality and human dignity.

Image of Starodum

During the time of Fonvizin, the image of Starodum in the comedy “The Minor” aroused special sympathy among the audience. Already in the very “talking” surname of the character, the author emphasized the contrast between “the present century and the past century”: in Starodum they saw a man of the era of Peter I, when “In that century, courtiers were warriors, but warriors were not courtiers.” Starodum’s thoughts on education, on the ways in which a person can achieve fame and prosperity, about what a sovereign should be evoked a warm response from a significant part of the audience who shared the progressive beliefs of the author of the comedy, while special sympathy for the image of the hero was caused by the fact that he did not just proclaim these progressive ideas - according to the play It turned out that with his own life he proved that such behavior was correct and beneficial for a person. The image of Starodum was the ideological center around which the positive heroes of the comedy united, opposing the dominance of the morality of the Skotinins and Prostakovs.

Image of Pravdin

Pravdin, a government official, embodies the idea of ​​statehood, which protects the interests of education and the people, which seeks to actively change life for the better. Guardianship of Prostakova's estate, which Pravdin appoints by the will of the empress, gives hope that the ruler of Russia is able to stand up for the protection of those of her subjects who most need this protection, and the determination with which Pravdin carries out the reforms should have convinced the viewer, that the highest authorities are interested in improving the lives of the people. But how then can we understand Starodum’s words in response to Pravdin’s call to serve at court: “It is in vain to call a doctor to the sick without healing”? It is likely that behind Pravdin stood the System, which confirmed its reluctance and inability to carry out real reforms, and Starodum represented himself, an individual person, in the play, and explained why the image of Starodum was perceived by the audience with much more sympathy than the image of the “ideal official” .

Milon and Sophia

The love story of Milon and Sophia is a typically classic love story of two noble heroes, each of whom is distinguished by high moral qualities, which is why their relationship looks so artificial, although, against the backdrop of Skotinin’s attitude towards the same Sophia (“You are my dear friend! If now, without seeing anything, I have a special peck for each pig, then I’ll find a little one for my wife”) she really is an example of the high feeling of moral, educated, worthy young people, contrasted with the “fertility” of negative heroes.

The meaning of the comedy "Minor"

Pushkin called Fonvizin “a brave ruler of satire,” and the comedy “Minor,” which we analyzed, fully confirms this assessment of the writer’s work. In it, Fonvizin’s author’s position is expressed quite unambiguously, the writer defends the ideas of enlightened absolutism, he does this with extreme talent, creating convincing artistic images, significantly expanding the scope of the aesthetics of classicism, taking an innovative approach to the plot of the work, to the creation of character images, some of which are not It simply represents the expression of certain socio-political ideas, but has a pronounced psychological individuality and expresses the inconsistency of human nature. All this explains the enormous importance of Fonvizin’s work and the comedy “Nedorosl” for Russian literature of the 18th century, the success of the work among his contemporaries and its significant influence on the subsequent development of Russian drama.

This article provides an analysis of the comedy play “Minor”, ​​gives a brief summary of the work and the characteristics of the characters.

The comedy was written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin in 1781.

There are only five acts in the work. Due to the fact that the play was written more than 200 years ago, and the style of the Russian language has changed quite a lot since then, not everyone will be able to read the work in the original.

The main characters of the comedy and their characteristics

Since “The Minor” is not a story or novella, but a play, the characters here are the key carriers of the author’s ideas.

The main characters are divided into pairs with similar social roles, but opposed to each other.

Children:

• Mitrofan is the main character and the undergrowth. A young representative of the nobility, sixteen years old. Spoiled, weak-willed and irresponsible (note: Minor: a young minor nobleman who did not enter the civil service);
• Sophia is the opposite of Mitrofan. An educated and serious girl. An orphan living under the care of the Prostakovs. The black sheep of the family.

Educators:

• Mrs. Prostakova is the mother of the main character. Uneducated and cunning, ready to do anything for profit. On the one hand - a despised fury, on the other - a loving and caring mother. In the work he appears as a “translator” of false and outdated values;
• Starodum is Sophia's uncle. Authoritative and strong personality. He takes his niece seriously, mentors her and gives advice. In the work he appears as an example of a good parent and educator. Basic life principles: a fair government system, full education of the mind, honor and heart (with the heart in the first place), the main principle of education is one’s own positive example.

Owners:

• Prostakov is the father of the main character. A weak-willed and passive person. In the play, he appears as the embodiment of the people, who are dissatisfied with the orders of the old nobility, but because of fear of them they behave quietly;
• Pravdin is an official, the embodiment of the law and one of the positive characters.

Grooms:

• Skotinin is Prostakova’s brother and Sophia’s fiancé, whose only goal is the girl’s benefit and dowry. The embodiment of outdated concepts about marriage and family;
• Milon is Sophia's fiancé and her childhood friend. Really loves the girl. Implementation of new ideas in the areas of family and marriage.

Minor characters

Minor characters - Mitrofan's teachers:

• Eremeevna is Mitrofan’s nanny. Devotedly serves the family, despite humiliation. The embodiment of the image of serfs;
• Tsyfirkin is a mathematics teacher. An honest and hardworking man, a retired military man;
• Kuteikin is a teacher of Russian and Church Slavonic who dropped out of seminary. Satire on poorly educated priests;
• Vralman is a teacher of social manners. A simple coachman posing as a German.

A brief retelling of the comedy “The Minor”

Act one

The Prostakov estate and the surrounding rural expanses are the area where the action of “Undergrowth” takes place.

The mistress of the family scolds the servant for poorly sewing a caftan for her son Mitrofanushka. Her husband supports her.

The Prostakovs discuss with Skotinin that they want to marry Sophia to the latter.

Sophia says that a letter has arrived from her uncle Starodum, who has not heard from him for a long time. No one believes her, but when the girl offers to read the letter, it turns out that those present do not speak letters.

The letter is voiced by Pravdin, who came in. It states that Starodum bequeathed 10,000 rubles to his niece. The mistress of the house fawns over the girl, wanting to marry Mitrofan to her.

Act two

Officer Milon arrives in the village and meets Pravdin’s longtime friend, an official. He says that he has heard a lot about the “malicious ignoramuses” and the Prostakovs who mistreat their servants.

Sophia appears. She and Milon are happy to meet. What follows is Sophia’s story that they want to marry her off to Mitrofan. However, Skotinin, passing by them, immediately talks about his plans to marry the girl.

A conflict is brewing between the three “suitors,” but his nanny Eremeevna stands up for Mitrofanushka.

Act three

Starodum arrives with the goal of “freeing” Sophia from the “ignoramuses.” He wants to marry her off to a “worthy man.” This news upsets everyone, but afterward Starodum says that marriage depends entirely on the will of Sophia herself.

Prostakova continues to praise her son, while his teachers, meanwhile, complain about his laziness and poor academic performance. That is why Prostakova persuades her son to study for the sake of appearance - in order to please Sophia’s uncle and thereby obtain consent to the marriage. However, Mitrofan declares that he does not want to study, but to get married.

Act four

Milon's uncle, Count Chastain, sends Starodum a letter about his desire to marry him to Sophia. And Starodum agrees to the marriage. The couple is happy. Having learned about the wedding, Prostakova takes active steps and tries to prevent the plan, hoping to marry off the young heiress to Mitrofan.

Act five

While Starodum is talking with Pravdin, who has been instructed to take charge of the Prostakov estate and their village at the slightest threat, Prostakova’s servants lead the reluctant Sophia to the carriage to take her to marry Mitrofan.

Milon frees his beloved, and Pravdin takes the estate and village under his supervision.

Power completely passes to Pravdin, Mitrofan’s teachers are disbanded, Skotinin leaves the village. Uncle and Milon and Sophia are preparing to leave.

Prostakova hugs her son and complains that he is the only one left with her. However, he is rude to her and the mother loses consciousness. Pravdin wants to send the undergrowth to the service.

Idioms

Phrases that can be written in a reading diary:

• “Every fault is to blame” and “Ends in the water” (Skotinin);
• “Don’t do business, don’t run away from business” and “The dog barks, the wind blows” (Tsyfirkin);
• “Live forever, learn forever” (Prostakova);
• “In the great world there are small souls” (Starodum);
• “Guilty without guilt” and “A dream in your hand” (Prostakov);
• “I ate too much henbane” and “I don’t want to study, but I want to get married” (Mitrofan).

Analysis of Fonvizin's work

Since the abstract does not give the complete picture, you should familiarize yourself with the key points for analysis.

History of creation

The play was born after Fonvizin’s long public service, due to which he did not turn to drama for a long time.

The first drafts of the work appeared in the 1770s and were closer to the writer’s previous play, “The Brigadier.” The first option for the name of the main character is Ivanushka.

The publication date of the final version of the book is 1781.

The play itself created a sensation in the theater. However, due to the topicality of the topic, the reviews from those who watched were contradictory.

main topic

The key theme is the education and formation of the new nobility. Fonvizin illuminates it by contrasting characters with outdated feudal views (all negative characters) with heroes who bear educational ideas (positive characters).

The problem of the phenomenon of “lack of spirituality” can be traced not only in the speaking names of the characters, but also in the relationship between parents and children.

Issues

There are two main problems:

1. Decomposition of the nobility. With the words of Starodum, the writer denounces moral decline and tries to find its causes. It is no coincidence that at the end he says: “These are the fruits worthy of evil!” Fonvizin greatly blames the unlimited power of the landowners and the lack of positive examples from representatives of the highest authorities.
2. Upbringing. Thinkers of that time saw education as a key factor influencing a person’s morality. The plot is based on this. In passing on the right values ​​to the next generation, Fonvizin saw a reliable way to strengthen politics and build a strong, developed nobility.

Thus, the comedy “The Minor” is a typical representative of classicism, exposing the mores of society of that time. Nowadays, the work is studied in schools, starting from the 8th grade, as well as by students of philological and pedagogical universities.

The play was repeatedly staged in the 18th century, the success of which, like the work itself, was enormous. In the 20th century, in 1987, director Grigory Roshal made the film “Lords of the Skotinins” based on the work.

Article menu:

“The Minor” is a play in five acts written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. A cult dramatic work of the 18th century and one of the most striking examples of classicism. It was included in the school curriculum, was repeatedly staged on the theater stage, received a screen embodiment, and its lines were disassembled into quotes, which today live independently of the original source, becoming aphorisms of the Russian language.

Plot: summary of the play “Minor”

The plot of “The Minor” is well known to everyone since school years, but we will still recall a brief summary of the play in order to restore the sequence of events in our memory.

The action takes place in the village of Prostakovs. Its owners - Mrs. and Mr. Prostakov and their son Mitrofanushka - live the quiet life of provincial nobles. Also living on the estate is the orphan Sofyushka, whom the lady sheltered in her house, but, as it turns out, not out of compassion, but because of the inheritance, which she freely disposes of as a self-proclaimed guardian. In the near future, they plan to marry Sophia to Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin.

The mistress's plans collapse when Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, who was still considered dead. Stradum is alive and well and is going on a date with his niece, and he also reports a fortune of 10 thousand in income, which he passes on as an inheritance to his beloved relative. After such news, Prostakova begins to court Sophia, whom she has hitherto given little favor to, because now she wants to marry her to her beloved Mitrofan, and leave Skotinin with nothing.

Fortunately, Starodum turned out to be a noble and honest man who wished well for his niece. Moreover, Sophia already had a betrothed - officer Milon, who had just stopped with his regiment in the village of Prostakov. Starodub knew Milo and gave the young man his blessing.

In desperation, Prostakova tries to organize the kidnapping of Sophia and forcibly marry her to her son. However, even here the treacherous mistress suffers a fiasco - Milon saves his beloved on the night of the kidnapping.

Prostakova is generously forgiven and not put on trial, although her estate, which has long been a source of suspicion, is transferred to a state guardian. Everyone leaves and even Mitrofanushka leaves his mother, because he doesn’t love her, like, in general, no one else in the world.

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

As in any classic work, the characters in “The Minor” are clearly divided into positive and negative.

Negative heroes:

• Mrs. Prostakova is the mistress of the village;
• Mr. Prostakov is her husband;
• Mitrofanushka is the son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth;
• Taras Skotinin is the brother of the Prostakovs.

Positive heroes:

• Sophia is an orphan, lives with the Prostakovs;
• Starodum is her uncle;
• Milon is an officer, Sophia’s lover;
• Pravdin is a government official who came to monitor affairs in the Prostakov village.

Minor characters:

• Tsyfirkin – arithmetic teacher;
• Kuteikin – teacher, former seminarian;
• Vralman is a former coachman, posing as a teacher;
• Eremevna is Mitrofan’s nanny.

Mrs. Prostakova

Prostakova is the most striking negative character, and indeed the most outstanding character in the play. She is the mistress of the Prostakov village and it is the mistress, who has completely suppressed her weak-willed husband, who establishes the lordly order and makes decisions.

At the same time, she is absolutely ignorant, has no manners, and is often rude. Prostakova, like other members of the family, cannot read and despises science. Mitrofanushka’s mother is involved in education only because this is how it is supposed to be in New World society, but she does not understand the true value of knowledge.

In addition to ignorance, Prostakova is distinguished by cruelty, deceit, hypocrisy, and envy.

The only creature she loves is her son Mitrofanushka. However, the mother’s blind, absurd love only spoils the child, turning him into a copy of himself in a man’s dress.

Mr. Prostakov

The figurative owner of the Prostakov estate. In fact, everything is controlled by his domineering wife, of whom he is terribly afraid and does not dare say a word. Prostakov has long lost his own opinion and dignity. He cannot even say whether the caftan sewn by the tailor Trishka for Mitrofan is good or bad, because he is afraid to say something that is not what his mistress expects.

Mitrofan

Son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth. His family lovingly calls him Mitrofanushka. Meanwhile, it’s time for this young man to enter adulthood, but he has absolutely no idea about it. Mitrofan is spoiled by his mother's love, he is capricious, cruel to servants and teachers, pompous, and lazy. Despite many years of lessons with teachers, the young master is hopelessly stupid, he does not show the slightest desire for learning and knowledge.

And the worst thing is that Mitrofanushka is a terrible egoist; nothing matters to him except his own interests. At the end of the play, he easily leaves his mother, who loved him so unrequitedly. Even she is nothing to him.

Skotinin

Brother of Mrs. Prostakova. Narcissistic, narrow-minded, ignorant, cruel and greedy. Taras Skotinin has a great passion for pigs; the rest is of little interest to this narrow-minded person. He has no idea of ​​family ties, heartfelt affection and love. Describing how well his future wife will heal, Skotinin only says that he will give her the best light. In his system of coordinates, this is precisely what marital happiness consists of.

Sophia

Positive female image of the work. A very well-mannered, kind, meek and compassionate girl. Sophia received a good education, she has an inquisitive mind and a thirst for knowledge. Even in the poisonous atmosphere of the Prostakovs’ house, the girl does not become like the owners, but continues to lead the lifestyle that she likes - she reads a lot, thinks, is friendly and polite to everyone.

Starodum

Sophia's uncle and guardian. Starodum is the voice of the author in the play. His speeches are very aphoristic, he talks a lot about life, virtues, intelligence, law, government, modern society, marriage, love and other pressing issues. Starodum is incredibly wise and noble. Despite the fact that he clearly has a negative attitude towards Prostakova and others like her, Starodum does not allow himself to stoop to rudeness and outright criticism, and as for light sarcasm, his narrow-minded “relatives” cannot recognize it.

Milo

Officer, Sophia's lover. The image of a hero-protector, an ideal young man, a husband. He is very fair and does not tolerate meanness and lies. Milo was brave, not only in battle, but also in his speeches. He is devoid of vanity and low-minded prudence. All of Sophia’s “suitors” talked only about her condition, but Milon never mentioned that his betrothed was rich. He sincerely loved Sophia even before she had an inheritance, and therefore in his choice the young man was not guided by the size of the bride’s annual income.

“I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”: the problem of education in the story

The key problem of the work is the theme of provincial noble upbringing and education. The main character Mitrofanushka receives an education only because it is fashionable and “just the way it is.” In fact, neither he nor his ignorant mother understands the true purpose of knowledge. They should make a person smarter, better, serve him throughout his life and benefit society. Knowledge is gained through hard work and can never be forced into someone's head.

Mitrofan's home education is a dummy, a fiction, a provincial theater. For several years, the unfortunate student did not master either reading or writing. Mitrofan fails the comic test that Pravdin arranges with a bang, but because of his stupidity he cannot even understand this. He calls the word door an adjective, because it is supposedly attached to the opening, he confuses science history with the stories that Vralman tells him in abundance, and Mitrofanushka can’t even pronounce the word “geography”... it’s too tricky.

To show the grotesqueness of Mitrofan’s education, Fonvizin introduces the image of Vralman, who teaches “French and all sciences.” In fact, Vralman (that’s a telling name!) is not a teacher at all, but Starodum’s former coachman. He easily deceives the ignorant Prostakova and even becomes her favorite, because he professes his own teaching methodology - not to force the student to do anything through force. With such zeal as Mitrofan’s, the teacher and student are simply idle.

Education goes hand in hand with acquiring knowledge and skills. Mrs. Prostakova is mostly responsible for him. She methodically imposes her rotten morality on Mitrofan, who (here he is diligent here!) perfectly absorbs his mother’s advice. So, while solving a division problem, Prostakova advises her son not to share with anyone, but to take everything for himself. When talking about marriage, mother speaks only about the bride’s wealth, never mentioning spiritual affection and love. The young Mitrofan is not familiar with such concepts as courage, boldness, and valor. Despite the fact that he is no longer a baby, he is still looked after in everything. The boy cannot even stand up for himself during a clash with his uncle; he immediately begins to call his mother, and the old nanny Eremeevna rushes at the offender with her fists.

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

The title of the play has a literal and figurative meaning.

Direct meaning of the name
In the old days, minors were called teenagers, young men who had not yet reached adulthood and had not entered the public service.

The figurative meaning of the name
A fool, an ignoramus, a narrow-minded and uneducated person was also called a minor, regardless of his age. With the light hand of Fonvizin, it was precisely this negative connotation that became attached to the word in the modern Russian language.

Every person is reborn from a minor youth into an adult man. This is growing up, a law of nature. However, not everyone transforms from a dark, half-educated person into an educated, self-sufficient person. This transformation requires effort and perseverance.

Place in literature: Russian literature of the 18th century → Russian drama of the 18th century → The work of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin → 1782 → The play “The Minor”.