The image of Chatsky in Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit. Characteristics of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov: description, biography of the hero Griboyedov Woe from Wit who is Chatsky

Characteristics of Chatsky based on the work "Woe from Wit"

The comedy was written in the 20s of the 19th century. After the victorious war with Napoleon in 1812, when the Russian people dealt a mortal blow to the Napoleonic army, which had gained the glory of invincibility in Europe, the contradiction between the greatest capabilities of ordinary Russian people and the plight in which they found themselves at the will of the powers that be, in The Arakcheev reaction was rampant in the country. Honest people of that time could not put up with this. Among the progressive-minded nobility, protest and dissatisfaction with the existing order were brewing, and secret societies were created. And it was A.S. Griboedov who embodied the emergence of these germs of protest in his comedy, bringing “the present century and the past century” face to face.

The first pages of the comedy were read... It became clear: everyone in Famusov’s house was waiting for the person who interested me so much. Who is he? Why is he the only one they talk about in this house? Why does Liza, the maid, remember him as a cheerful, witty person, but Sophia, Famusov’s daughter, doesn’t want to hear about Chatsky? And later I am convinced that Famusov is also irritated and alarmed. Why? I need to resolve all these questions. The comedy interested me from the very first pages.

The plot basis of the work is the conflict between the young nobleman Chatsky and the society from which he himself came. The events of the comedy take place in one Moscow aristocratic house over the course of one day. But Griboedov managed to expand the temporal and spatial framework of the work, giving a complete picture of the life of the noble society of that time and showing the new, living, advanced that was emerging in its depths.

So, it turns out that Chatsky, who was left an orphan early, lived in the house of his guardian Famusov, a friend of his father, and was brought up with his daughter, having received an excellent education at home from foreign tutors. “The habit of being together every day inseparably” connected them with childhood friendship. But soon the young man Chatsky became “bored” in Famusov’s house, where there were no serious intellectual interests, and he “moved out,” that is, he began to live separately, independently, made good friends, and became seriously involved in science. During these years, his friendly disposition towards Sophia becomes a serious feeling. But his love for a girl did not distract him from his pursuit of knowledge and the study of life. He goes "to wander". Three years have passed...And now our hero is again in Moscow, in Famusov’s house. He hurries to see Sophia, whom he loves passionately. And such sincerity, such love and joy from meeting his beloved girl can be heard in his voice! He is lively, cheerful, witty, handsome! Chatsky is completely overwhelmed with the joy of life and does not know that trouble awaits him: after all, Sophia loves not him, but her father’s secretary, the cunning liar Molchalin.

Chatsky does not even suspect how Sophia has changed during his absence; he trusts her, as in the days of his early youth. And Sophia not only does not love him, but is even ready to hate him for his caustic words addressed to Molchalin. She is capable of lies, pretense, gossip, just to hurt, to take revenge on Chatsky. In Chatsky’s playful, sarcastic remarks, she cannot feel the pain of a man who truly loves his Motherland. Chatsky and Famusov meet as close people. But we soon become convinced that there are constant clashes between them.

In Famusov's house, Chatsky meets Skalozub, a possible contender for Sophia's hand. It is here that an intense ideological struggle arises and flares up between Famusov, a defender of autocratic serfdom, and Chatsky, a patriot, defender of “free life,” an exponent of the ideas of the Decembrists, new ideas about man and his place in society. The dispute between them is about the dignity of a person, his value, about honor and honesty, about the attitude towards service, about the place of a person in society.

Chatsky sarcastically criticizes the tyranny of serfdom, the cynicism and soullessness of the “fathers of the fatherland,” their pathetic admiration for everything foreign, their careerism, and fierce resistance to moving forward to a better life.

Famusov is afraid of people like Chatsky, since they encroach on the order of life that is the basis of well-being for the Famusovs. The smug serf owner teaches the “today’s proud people” how to live, setting up sycophants and careerists like Maxim Petrovich as an example.

Could, say, Belinsky, Ryleev, Griboyedov remain silent in such a case? Hardly! This is why we so naturally perceive Chatsky’s accusatory monologues and remarks. The hero is indignant, despises, mocks, accuses, while thinking out loud, not paying attention to how others will react to his thoughts.

Chatsky has the seething passion of a fighter for a fair society. He wants to bring his enemies to “white heat” and express his truth.

A citizen's anger and resentment give him energy.

Reading the comedy, I admire more and more how expressively Griboyedov compared Chatsky and his rivals. Chatsky evokes my sympathy and respect, recognition of his noble deeds. His statements about the world of feudal owners are near and dear to me.

The secular crowd, skillfully depicted by Griboyedov’s pen, is the personification of meanness, ignorance, and inertia. In my opinion, Sophia, whom our hero loves so much, can also be included in this crowd. After all, it is she who deals him a treacherous blow: by writing gossip about Chatsky’s madness. I understand that she wanted to take revenge for his ridicule towards Molchalin. But you can’t be so cruel and inhumane! After all, she is a representative of the fair sex and suddenly such meanness! The fiction about Chatsky's madness spreads with lightning speed. Nobody believes, but everyone repeats it. Finally, this gossip reaches Famusov. When the guests begin to list the reason for Chatsky’s madness, another meaning of this phrase is revealed: in their opinion, crazy means “freethinker.” Everyone is trying to determine the cause of the madness. Khlestova says: “I drank tea beyond my years,” but Famusov is firmly convinced:

Learning is a plague

Learning is the reason...

Various measures to combat the “madness” are then proposed. Colonel Skalozub, a narcissistic, stupid colonel of stick drill, an enemy of freedom and enlightenment, dreaming of the rank of general, says:

I will make you happy: universal rumor,

That there is a project for lyceums, schools, gymnasiums;

There they will only teach in our way: one, two;

And schools will be kept like this: for big occasions.

And Famusov, as if summarizing the opinions expressed about enlightenment, says:

Once evil is stopped:

Take all the books and burn them.

Thus, Chatsky is declared crazy for his freethinking. He is hated by reactionary society as an ideological enemy, as a progressive freedom-loving person. And society takes measures to neutralize him - he erects vile slander against him. Soon Chatsky heard gossip about his madness. He is hurt, bitter, but this does not concern him as deeply as who Sophia loves, why she is so cold towards him.

And suddenly an unexpected resolution of these issues occurs. Chatsky witnessed an accidentally overheard conversation between Molchalin and the maid Liza. Molchalin confesses his love to the girl, but the maid boldly hints at his wedding with the young lady, Sophia, and shames Molchalin. And then Molchalin “takes off his mask”: he admits to Liza that “there is nothing enviable in Sofya Pavlovna”, that he is in love with her “by position”, “who feeds and drinks, and sometimes gives her rank.” Anger and shame torment Chatsky: “Here I am sacrificed to whom!” How he was deceived in Sophia! His happy rival is Molchalin, a low hypocrite and deceiver, a “fool,” a “famous servant,” convinced that “at his age,” in his rank, “he should not dare to have his own judgment,” but must, “pleasing everyone, and take awards and have fun."

And Sophia, on her way to a date with Molchalin, accidentally heard his frank confession to Lisa. She is surprised, offended, humiliated! After all, she loved him so much, idealized this insignificant person! What a pitiful role Sophia played in his life! But the girl finds the strength in herself to renounce her delusions forever, to push away Molchalin, who is crawling at her feet, but she cannot defend and justify herself before Chatsky. Chatsky is dealt another wound: he learns that the absurd gossip about his madness belongs to Sophia. No, he will never be able to forgive her for this, since he also considers her a representative of the Famus society, which is hostile to him. Chatsky decided to leave Moscow forever. Why? Leaving “the tormentors of the crowd, traitors in love, tireless enmity,” he intends to “search the world where there is a corner for the offended feeling.”

And Sophia? After all, reconciliation with her was so possible! But Chatsky, having ranked her among the world of his enemies, is convinced that “there will be another well-behaved sycophant and businessman.” Maybe our hero is right. After all, Sophia, brought up in the spirit of hatred of everything progressive and new, would not bring happiness to a person who has a definite opinion about serfdom, education, and service. It was not for nothing that the Decembrists saw Chatsky as their like-minded person.

I admit, I feel sorry for Sophia, because she is not a bad girl, not immoral, but, unfortunately, she turned out to be a victim of the lies that are characteristic of Famus society, which destroyed her. Chatsky is a representative of that part of the noble youth who are already aware of all the inertia of the surrounding reality, all the insignificance and emptiness of the people who surround him. There are still a few such people, they are not yet able to fight the existing system, but they appear - this is the spirit of the times. That is why Chatsky can rightfully be called a hero of his time. It was these people who came to Senate Square on December 14, 1825. Chatsky is a man of extraordinary intelligence, brave, honest, sincere. In his disputes with Famusov, in his critical judgments, the appearance of a man emerges who sees the vices and contradictions of his society and wants to fight them (with words for now).

Griboyedov shows these qualities especially clearly, contrasting Chatsky with the low sycophant and hypocrite Molchalin. This vile man, who has nothing sacred, regularly fulfills his father’s behest “to please all people without exception,” even “to the janitor’s dog, so that it is affectionate.” Molchalin is “a sycophant and a businessman,” as Chatsky characterizes him.

Famusov is a high-ranking official, a conservative to the core, a stupid martinet and obscurantist Skalozub - these are the people Chatsky meets. In these characters, Griboyedov gave an accurate and vivid description of the noble society of that time.

In the musty world of Famus, Chatsky appears like a cleansing thunderstorm. He is in every way the opposite of typical representatives of Famus society. If Molchalin, Famusov, Skalozub see the meaning of life in their well-being (“bureaucratic towns, small towns”), then Chatsky dreams of disinterested service to his homeland, of bringing benefit to the people, whom he respects and considers “smart and cheerful.” At the same time, he despises blind veneration, servility, and careerism. He “would be glad to serve”, but he “sickens being served.” Chatsky sharply criticizes this society, mired in hypocrisy, hypocrisy, and depravity. He says bitterly:

Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland,

Which ones should we take as models?

Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?

We found protection from fate in friends, in kinship,

Magnificent building chambers,

Where they indulge in feasts and extravagance...

These people are deeply indifferent to the fate of their homeland and people. Their cultural and moral level can be judged by the following remarks from Famusov: “They would take all the books and burn them,” because “learning is the reason” that “there are crazy people, and deeds, and opinions.” Chatsky has a different opinion; he values ​​people who are ready to “put their minds hungry for knowledge into science” or engage in “creative, lofty and beautiful” art.

Chatsky rebels against the society of the Famusovs, Skalozubovs, and Mollins. But his protest is too weak to shake the foundations of this society. The conflict of the young hero with an environment where love, friendship, every strong feeling, every living thought is doomed to persecution is tragic. They declare him crazy and turn away from him. "Who was I with! Where did fate throw me! Everyone is chasing me! Everyone is cursing me!" “Get out of Moscow! I don’t go here anymore,” Chatsky exclaims sadly.

In the comedy, Chatsky is alone, but there are more and more people like him (remember Skalozub’s cousin, who “followed the rank,” and he suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village, or Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, “a chemist and a botanist”). It was they who were to carry out the first stage of the revolutionary liberation movement, to shake up the country, to bring closer the moment when the people would free themselves from the chains of slavery, when those principles of fair social relations that Chatsky, Griboyedov himself, and the Decembrists dreamed of would triumph.

The comedy "Woe from Wit" has entered the treasury of our national culture. Even now she has not lost her moral and artistic strength. We, people of the new generation, understand and are close to Griboedov’s angry, irreconcilable attitude towards injustice, meanness, hypocrisy, which are so often encountered in our lives. Grief from crazy (1)Essay >> Literature and Russian language

... « Grief from mind" from crazy” - one of the brightest works...characters of accusatory monologues Chatsky: “Nestor... about their arbitrariness By towards the peasants... characteristic off-stage characters in the comedy by A. S. Griboyedov “ Grief from crazy”.

Female images in the comedy of A. S. Griboyedov Grief from crazy (1)

Essay >> Literature and Russian language

... « Grief from mind" from crazy... soubrette, giving well-aimed characteristics characters; and Natalya... in her work not only stage... mother Chatsky, By in whose words, she “with crazy went...

By Literature 11th grade 2006

Cheat sheet >> Literature and Russian language

... "Svetlana" with works Russian folklore? (Ticket 14) 4. Image Chatsky and the problem crazy in the comedy A.S. Griboyedov " Grief from mind". (Ticket... the author portrays Vladimir Lensky as the hero. By characteristics Pushkin himself, these two people...

Answers to exam questions By Literature 11th grade 2005

Cheat sheet >> Literature and Russian language

... By student's choice). 45. A.P. Chekhov is an exposer of philistinism and vulgarity. (For example, one works ... ; - Chatsky. 4. Chatsky- winner or loser? 5. The meaning of A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “ Grief from mind". 1. Comedy " Grief from mind" was written...

The image of Chatsky in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
The image of Chatsky caused numerous controversy in criticism. I. A. Goncharov considered the hero Griboyedov a “sincere and ardent figure”, superior to Onegin and Pechorin. “...Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. His speech is full of intelligence and wit. “He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest,” the critic wrote. Apollo Grigoriev spoke about this image in approximately the same way, who considered Chatsky a real fighter, an honest, passionate and truthful person. Finally, Griboyedov himself shared a similar opinion: “ In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person; and this person, of course, is in conflict with the Society around him.”

Belinsky assessed Chatsky completely differently, considering this image almost farcical: “...What kind of a deep person is Chatsky? This is just a loudmouth, a phrase-monger, an ideal buffoon, profaning everything sacred he talks about. ...This is a new Don Quixote, a boy on a stick on horseback, who imagines that he is sitting on a horse...” Pushkin assessed this image in approximately the same way. “In the comedy Woe from Wit, who is the smart character? answer: Griboyedov. Do you know what Chatsky is? An ardent, noble and kind fellow, who spent some time with a very smart man (namely Griboedov) and was imbued with his witticisms and satirical remarks. Everything he says is very smart. But to whom is he telling all this? Famusov? Skalozub? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? This is unforgivable,” the poet wrote in a letter to Bestuzhev.

Which of the critics is right in assessing Chatsky? Let's try to understand the character of the hero.

Chatsky is a young man of the noble circle, smart, capable, received a good education, and shows great promise. His eloquence, logic, and depth of knowledge delight Famusov, who considers the possibility of a brilliant career quite real for Chatsky. However, Alexander Andreevich is disappointed in the public service: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” he tells Famusov. In his opinion, one must serve “the cause, not individuals,” “without demanding either places or promotion to rank.” Bureaucracy, veneration for rank, protectionism and bribery, so widespread in contemporary Moscow, are not acceptable for Chatsky. He does not find a social ideal in his fatherland:

Where? show us, fathers of the fatherland,

Which ones should we take as models?

Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?

They found protection from court in friends, in kinship,

Magnificent building chambers,

Where they spill out in feasts and extravagance,

And where foreign clients will not be resurrected

The meanest features of the past life.

Chatsky criticizes the rigidity of the views of Moscow society, its mental immobility. He also speaks out against serfdom, recalling the landowner who exchanged his servants, who repeatedly saved his life and honor, for three greyhounds. Behind the lush, beautiful uniforms of the military, Chatsky sees “weakness,” “poverty of reason.” The hero also does not recognize the “slavish, blind imitation” of everything foreign, which manifests itself in the foreign power of fashion, in the dominance of the French language.

Chatsky has his own opinion about everything, he openly despises Molchalin’s self-abasement, Maxim Petrovich’s flattery and sycophancy. Alexander Andreevich evaluates people according to their internal qualities, regardless of

ranks and wealth.

It is characteristic that Chatsky, to whom “the smoke of the Fatherland is sweet and pleasant,” sees absolutely nothing positive in his contemporary Moscow, in the “past century,” and finally, in those people for whom he should feel love, respect, and gratitude. The young man's late father, Andrei Ilyich, was probably a close friend of Pavel Afanasyevich. Chatsky spent his childhood and adolescence in the Famusovs’ house, and here he experienced the feeling of first love... However, from the first minute of his presence, almost all of the hero’s reactions to those around him are negative, he is sarcastic and caustic in his assessments.

What keeps the hero in a society that he hates so much? Only love for Sophia. As S.A. Fomichev notes, Chatsky rushed to Moscow after some special shock, desperately trying to find his elusive faith. Probably, during his trip abroad, the hero matured spiritually, experienced the collapse of many ideals, and began to evaluate the realities of Moscow life in a new way. And now he longs to find the previous harmony of worldview - in love.

However, even in love, Chatsky is far from “ideal” and is not consistent. At first, he suddenly leaves Sophia and does not give any news about himself. Returning from distant travels three years later, he behaves as if he broke up with the woman he loved just yesterday. Chatsky’s questions and intonations when meeting with Sophia are tactless: “Has your uncle lost his life?”, “And that consumptive one, your relatives, is the enemy of books...”, “You’ll get tired of living with them, and in whom you won’t find any stains?” As I. F. Smolnikov notes, this tactlessness can only be explained by the spiritual closeness that Chatsky feels in relation to Sophia, out of old habit considering her worldview close to his own.

In the depths of his soul, Chatsky probably does not even think that during his absence Sophia could fall in love with someone else. Not timid hope, but selfishness and self-confidence sound in his words

Well, kiss me, weren’t you waiting? speak!

Well, for the sake of it? No? Look at my face.

Surprised? but only? here's the welcome!

Chatsky cannot believe in Sophia’s love for Molchalin, and here he is to a certain extent right. Sophia only thinks that she loves Molchalin, but she is mistaken in her feelings. When Alexander Andreevich witnesses the heroes’ failed meeting, he becomes cruel and sarcastic:

You will make peace with him after mature reflection.

Destroy yourself, and why!

Think you can always

Protect, and swaddle, and send to work.

Husband-boy, husband-servant, from the wife's pages -

The high ideal of all Moscow men.

Chatsky regards Sophia’s affair with Molchalin as a personal insult: “Here I am sacrificed to someone!” I don’t know how I curbed my rage!” Perhaps Chatsky, to some extent, could understand Sophia if her chosen one was a worthy person with progressive views and principles. In this situation, the heroine automatically becomes Chatsky’s enemy, without arousing in him either pity or noble feelings. He does not understand Sophia’s inner world at all, assuming her reconciliation with Molchalin “after mature reflection.”

Thus, the hero fails both “in the love field” and in the public sphere. However, as N.K. Piksanov notes, “these two elements do not exhaust Chatsky’s psychological and everyday appearance. Literary criticism has long noted another feature of Chatsky: dandyism. With Molchalin he is lordly arrogant. ...Like a socialite he stays with the countess-granddaughter. Finally, Chatsky’s charming dialogue with Natalya Dmitrievna Griboyedov maintains a flirtatious tone...”

Of course, Chatsky’s civic position was close to Griboyedov. Chatsky’s criticism of the social order and way of life of the Moscow nobility of the 20s of the 19th century contains a lot of true and vitally truthful things. But Chatsky wastes all his “ardor” on declaring civic views and beliefs - in love he is too dry, despite the sincerity of his feelings; he lacks kindness and warmth. He is too ideological in his relationship with Sophia. And this is the most important contradiction in the character of the hero.

The historical significance of the image of Chatsky
Chatsky is a new type of person active in the history of Russian society. His main idea is civil service. Such heroes are called upon to bring meaning to public life and lead to new goals. The most hated thing for him is slavery in all its manifestations, the most desirable thing is freedom. Everything around him needs, in his opinion, a total overhaul. We understand that Chatsky’s clash with Famusov’s world is not everyday, not private. It is universal. Freedom in everything must replace the hierarchical order of the previous life. Chatsky, wanting to realize his ideas, takes several practical steps, the result of which is his “connection with the ministers”, which Molchalin mentions. After all, this is nothing more than the hero’s participation in specific government reforms that did not take place. Chatsky moderates his reformist ardor and goes abroad not only in search of intelligence, but also out of powerlessness to do anything in the current situation. Nothing connects him with his native land anymore; he probably wouldn’t have come at all if it weren’t for Sophia. Departure is also a form of protest, albeit a passive one. After the scandal in Famusov’s house, Chatsky is unlikely to ever appear in Russia again. He only became stronger in the choice he made long ago: it is impossible to live such a life.

And that homeland... no, on this visit

I see that I will soon get tired of her.

In the eyes of society, which lives in the old fashioned way and is very happy with it, he is a dangerous person, a “carbonari” who violates the harmony of their existence. For the viewer, he is a revolutionary who has confused a secular drawing room and a civil debate. For Russian critical thought, which has always presented a literary work as an illustration of the history of the liberation movement, this is a socially significant person, devoid of a field of activity.

Griboyedov was the first in Russian literature of the 19th century to show the “superfluous man” (the term of A.I. Herzen), the mechanism of his appearance in society. Chatsky is the first in this row. Behind him are Onegin, Pechorin, Beltov, Bazarov.

One can imagine the future fate of such a hero in society. The most likely paths for him are two: revolutionary and philistine. Let us remember that the play takes place approximately in the 20s of the last century, when a social movement was formed in Russia, which later received the name Decembrism It was a society with a specific socio-political program, which was supposed to solve the main issue of the day - the liberation of peasants from serfdom and the limitation of autocratic power. In the minds of the Decembrists, this was an issue requiring an urgent solution - without the eradication of slavery in all its manifestations, it was impossible to move forward. But the Decembrists failed. After December, a thirty-year “eclipse” began in Russia - Nicholas I, who became emperor after the death of his brother, established a regime of strict authoritarian power. “The first years following 1825 were terrifying. Only 10 years later could society wake up in an atmosphere of enslavement and persecution. He was overcome by deep hopelessness, a general loss of strength,” as A.I. Herzen wrote about this time.

Chatsky could have been among those who came out to Senate Square on December 14, and then his life would have been predetermined for 30 years in advance: those who took part in the conspiracy returned from exile only after the death of Nicholas I in 1856. But it could have been something else - an insurmountable disgust for the “abominations” of Russian life would have made him an eternal wanderer in a foreign land, a man without a homeland. And then - melancholy, despair, bile and, what is most terrible for such a hero-fighter and enthusiast - forced idleness and inactivity
Hero of Time in "Woe from Wit"

(essay plan)
I. The problem of the “hero of time” in Russian classics, arising at different stages of socio-historical development. Reflection in the play of the main conflict of the era: the opposition of the “present century” to the “past century.” The emergence in the era of preparation for the December uprising of a new type of personality, an exponent of the progressive ideas of the time. In the play, this new type of personality is embodied in the image of Chatsky.

II. Chatsky is an exponent of the ideas of the “present century”. Analysis of Chatsky’s monologues and his disputes with representatives of Famusov’s Moscow.

1. The hero’s opposition to the rest of society on all the most important socio-political and moral issues of that time:

a) attitude to serfdom: Chatsky’s memory of the serf theater, of “Nestor of the noble scoundrels,” who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds; "

b) attitude to education: Chatsky is endowed with a “hungry for knowledge” mind, “writes and translates well”, is distinguished by free-thinking, it is not without reason that Famusov believes that what made Chatsky “crazy” was his “cleverness”, that is, deep knowledge and free thinking; he also calls Chatsky a “carbonari” for his freethinking;

c) attitude towards public opinion:

And who in Moscow was not silenced?

Lunches, dinners and dances?

d) attitude towards veneration and sycophancy:

Who needs it: those are arrogant, they lie in the dust,

And for those who are higher, flattery was woven like lace;

e) attitude towards the dominance of foreigners:

May the Lord destroy this unclean spirit

Empty, slavish, blind imitation...

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?

So that our smart, cheerful people

Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans;

f) indignation at the moral decline of the metropolitan society of men, at the role that is often assigned to the husband in the family: A husband-boy, a husband-servant from his wife's pages - the High ideal of all Moscow husbands.

(We can add that Molchalin would have made the same husband next to Sophia; the example of a “boy husband” in a comedy is Gorich);

g) Chatsky’s desire to “serve” and not “be served”, to serve the “cause” and not “persons”, his “connection with ministers” and a further complete break - a hint at the desire of the progressively minded part of the youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.

2. Chatsky’s trip abroad was connected not only with the “search for the mind,” that is, with the idea of ​​self-improvement, but also with the need to find like-minded people in his business. This is another feature of the “hero of the time” of the first quarter of the 19th century.

III. Conclusion. The irreconcilability of views between Chatsky and Famus society puts him in a tragic situation. According to Goncharov, his role is “passive”: at the same time he is a “advanced warrior”, a “skirmisher”, and at the same time “always a victim”.
The role of Chatsky’s love drama in the main conflict

comedy by A. S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”
“Woe from Wit” is the only widely known work by A.S. Griboyedov. The comedy was written in the first quarter of the nineteenth century. In it, Griboyedov was able to reflect a picture of a society that was in great need of renewal, of breaking the old way of life and thinking. In short, society needed revolutionary personalities like Chatsky. He appeared in the world of the Famusovs like a fresh stream bursting into the stagnant air of Moscow. Alexander Andreevich brought with him new views on life, on the existing order. But the secular society of Moscow, accustomed to living without changing anything, rejected Chatsky, declaring him crazy.

Love and love affair occupy a very important place in revealing the plot and the main conflict in a comedy. I will try to show the importance of Chatsky’s love drama for the action of the comedy.

We know that before Chatsky left Famusov’s house, Sophia loved Chatsky. This feeling began with childhood friendship (after all, Chatsky was a pupil in Famusov’s house), then friendship turned into affection, which never developed into true love.

Chatsky, who is the bearer of new revolutionary ideas in the comedy, leaves Sophia, who was still a girl at that time, for three whole years and leaves to wander. Chatsky has been absent for three whole years. But over these three years, significant changes take place in Sophia’s soul, her attitude towards Chatsky changes.

Let us remember that in the novel “War and Peace” Prince Andrei leaves Natasha Rostova for only a year. But even this one year could not withstand Natasha, whose essence lay in the need to love not sometime later, in the future, but this very minute. The psychology of girls at that age is such that they need love, affection, attention, admiration. They may not be able to bear the separation. If love is not strong enough, then the wind of separation blows out love. But if the feeling is strong enough, then separation only aggravates the suffering.

In this case, the love of Sophia and Chatsky failed to grow and become stronger, because they were still young. Separation destroyed Sophia's love, but could not destroy Chatsky's love. Hence the love drama, the misunderstanding of one hero by another. Alexander Andreich Chatsky acted too rashly, leaving his love in Moscow. After all, Sophia’s soul was a sponge, greedily absorbing everything new and

the unknown, equally good and bad, in a word, everything that surrounded her. And Sophia was surrounded by Famus society, its morals and foundations.

Returning to Moscow, Chatsky hurries to his beloved in the hope that Sophia still loves him. But he is cruelly mistaken: Sophia’s cold reception cuts the ground from under his feet. Doubts about Sophia's loyalty creep into his soul. And for the rest of the time, Alexander Andreich Chatsky is trying to find out who Sophia really loves, who his rival is. But trying to find out this, the main character of the comedy comes into conflict with the entire Famusov society: his teacher Famusov himself; Sophia's lover, Molchalin; with Colonel Skalozub and other socialites of Moscow.

Thus, a love drama helps to introduce the reader to the mainstream of comedy. Indeed, it’s not just that Chatsky begins to criticize the customs and morals of the house, the family where he grew up. His goal is not at all to tear off the masks of pretense, hypocrisy, ignorance, and stupidity from the inhabitants of Famus’s world. He does all this as if on the way, in a fit of irritation and jealousy.

In the end, he is finally convinced (and before the scene of Molchalin and Liza’s explanation, he still cannot believe that Sophia chose him over Molchalin) of Sophia’s betrayal, that she has become completely different, that there is no hope of returning her youthful feelings. He is also convinced that Sophia is the flesh of her father, that she lives according to the laws of the Famus society that he hates.

Despite all the inertia, Famus society is very strong. It managed to win over Sophia, a representative of the new generation, to its side.

Griboyedov also used the love drama to show that people like Alexander Andreich Chatsky are still rare, that the majority still live according to the old laws.

So, a love drama in a comedy does not exist on its own, but helps to reveal the main conflict of the work: socio-political. The love drama in the comedy “Woe from Wit” was undoubtedly the catalyst for the main conflict.
“A Million Torments” by Chatsky
A. S. Griboyedov entered Russian literature as the author of one work. His comedy “Woe from Wit” cannot be put on a par with the immortal creation of A. S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”, since “Eugene Onegin” has already become history for us, an encyclopedia of the life of the Russian nobility of the early 19th century, and Griboedov’s play was, is and will be a modern and vital work until careerism, veneration, and gossip disappear from our lives, as long as our society is dominated by the thirst for profit, living at the expense of others, and not at the expense of one’s own labor, as long as hunters to please and serve.

All this eternal imperfection of people and the world is superbly described in Griboyedov’s immortal comedy “Woe from Wit.” Griboyedov creates a whole gallery of negative images: Famusov, Molchalin, Repetilov, Skalozub, etc. They seem to have absorbed all the negative features of the development of their contemporary society.

But all these heroes are opposed alone by the main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. He came to Moscow, “returning from distant wanderings,” only for the sake of Sophia, his beloved. But, returning to his once dear and beloved home, he discovers very strong changes: Sophia is cold, arrogant, irritable, she no longer loves Chatsky.

Trying to find an answer to his feeling, the main character appeals to his former love, which was mutual before his departure, but all in vain. All his attempts to bring back the old Sophia are a complete fiasco. To all Chatsky’s passionate speeches and memories, Sophia replies: “Childishness!” This is where the young man’s personal drama begins, which ceases to be narrowly personal, but develops into a clash between a man in love and the entire Famus society. The main character stands alone against the army of old “warriors” and begins an endless struggle for a new life and for his love.

He encounters Famusov himself and argues with him about the way and path of life. The owner of the house acknowledges the correctness of his uncle’s life:

Maxim Petrovich: he’s not on silver,

He ate on gold, a hundred people were at his service.

It is absolutely clear that he himself would not refuse such a life, which is why he does not understand Chatsky, who demands “service to the cause, not to persons.” Love and social conflicts are combined, becoming a single whole. For the hero, personal drama depends on society’s attitude towards him, and public drama is complicated by personal relationships. This exhausts Chatsky and as a result, he experiences “a million torments,” as Goncharov aptly puts it.

The state of uncertainty in life drives him into a frenzy. If at the beginning of the action he is calm and confident:

No, the world is not like that these days...

Everyone breathes more freely

And he’s in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters,

Patrons yawn at the ceiling.

Show up to be quiet, shuffle around, have lunch,

Bring a chair, bring a handkerchief... -

then in the monologue at the ball in Famusov’s house, all the imbalance of the soul and mind is visible. He makes himself a laughing stock, from which everyone shies away. But, at the same time, his image is very tragic: his entire monologue is a consequence of unhappy love and society’s rejection of those thoughts and feelings, those beliefs that Chatsky defends throughout the comedy.

Under the weight of “a million torments,” he breaks down and begins to contradict common logic. All this entails absolutely incredible rumors that seem unfounded, but the whole world is talking about them:

He's gone crazy, it seems to her, here he is!

No wonder? That is...

Why would she take it!

But Chatsky not only does not refute the rumors, but with all his might, without knowing it, he confirms them, arranging a scene at the ball, then a scene of farewell to Sophia and the exposure of Molchalin:

Breathe the air alone

And in whom reason will survive...

Get out of Moscow! I don't go here anymore

I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world,

Where is there a corner for an offended feeling!

In a fit of passion, our hero more than once sins against logic, but in all his words there is truth - the truth of his attitude towards Famus society. He is not afraid to say everything to everyone’s face and rightly accuse representatives of Famus’s Moscow of lies, hypocrisy, and hypocrisy. He himself is clear proof that the obsolete and sick closes the way to the young and healthy.

The image of Chatsky remains unfinished; the framework of the play does not allow us to fully reveal the full depth and complexity of this character’s nature. But we can say with confidence: Chatsky has strengthened in his faith and, in any case, will find his way in a new life. And the more such Chatskys there are on the path of the Famusovs, Molchalins and Repetilovs, the weaker and quieter their voices will sound.

Tragedy of Chatsky
The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboedov is one of the most mysterious works of Russian literature of the 19th century, although not very complex in terms of plot.

Two lines determine the development of the play's action. At first, Chatsky’s personal story and the collapse of his love seem to develop separately from the social one, but already from the seventh scene of the first act it becomes clear that both storylines are closely connected.

The action proceeds smoothly, characters appear one after another, and disputes ensue. The protagonist’s conflict with the “past century” deepens. Having told everyone about his “millions of torments,” the young hero remains completely alone. It looks like the comedy movement is about to start to decline. But no! The development of the action continues - the personal fate of the hero must be decided. Chatsky learns the truth about Sofia and Molchalin. The denouement of both storylines occurs simultaneously, they merge, and the unity of content - one of the advantages of comedy - comes into force. The personal and social are fused in the lives of ordinary people, and they also merge in the development of the plot of the comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Why is this comedy still one of the most attractive works of our literature? Why, after so many years, do we care about Chatsky’s drama? Let's try to answer these questions, and to do this we will re-read Chatsky's monologues and remarks, and take a closer look at his relationships with other characters.

The hero of the comedy contained not only the real traits of the best people of the Decembrist era, but also embodied the best qualities of a leading socio-political figure in Russia in the 19th century. But for us, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is an artistic image of the immortal comedy, which “reflects the century and modern man,” and, although many called the comedy “Woe from Wit” a “comedy of manners,” each new generation recognizes its contemporary in Chatsky. So in I. A. Goncharov’s sketch “A Million Torments” there are the following words: “Chatsky is inevitable with every change of century to another... Every business that requires updating evokes the shadow of Chatsky...”

What is this comedy about?

Most often, critics argue about the title of the play: woe from the mind or woe to the mind? What if we shift the emphasis to the first word? After all, the play talks not about imaginary, but about real grief. We are talking about Chatsky's life drama - personal and public.

The story of the hero's life in the play is outlined in separate strokes.

Childhood spent in Famusov’s house with Sofia, then service with Gorich in the regiment “five years ago”, St. Petersburg - “connection with the ministers, then a break”, travel abroad - and return to the sweet and pleasant smoke of the Fatherland. He is young, and already has many events and life’s ups and downs behind him, hence his observation and understanding of what is happening is no coincidence. Chatsky understands people well and gives them accurate characteristics. “He himself is fat, his artists are skinny,” he says about one of the Moscow “aces” and his serf theater. He notices the hatred of the world for everything new:

And that consumptive one, your relatives, the enemy of books,

In the scientific committee which settled

And with a cry he demanded oaths,

So that no one knows or learns to read and write?..

Years have passed, and, returning from distant travels, the hero sees that little has changed in Moscow. Abroad, Chatsky “searched for his mind” and studied. But in addition to scientific truths, restless Europe, seething with revolutionary uprisings and national liberation struggles, instilled or could instill thoughts about individual freedom, equality, and fraternity. And in Russia after the Patriotic War of 1812, there was an atmosphere of critical understanding of what was happening in the empire.

It’s funny to Chatsky that he could admire embroidered uniforms that covered “weakness, poverty of reason.” Now he clearly sees that in Moscow “the houses are new, but the prejudices are old.” And therefore, the poor nobleman Chatsky refuses to serve, explaining that “I would be glad to serve - it’s sickening to be served.” He “writes and translates well,” he is kind and gentle, witty and eloquent, proud and sincere, and his love for Sophia is deep and constant.

Already Chatsky’s first monologue makes one feel the important quality of the hero - his openness. At the moment of his first date with Sofia, he is far from sarcasm, and in his remarks one can feel the mocking, good-natured mockery of an intelligent observer who notices the funny and absurd aspects of life, which is why Molchalin is mentioned after the Frenchman Guillaume. Trying to melt the ice of indifference with which Sofia greeted him, he achieves the opposite. Puzzled by her coldness, Chatsky utters a prophetic phrase: “But if so: the mind and heart are not in harmony!” This is said surprisingly accurately: in this phrase, as in the title of the comedy, the definition of the dual nature of the conflict of the work is concentrated as a play about the civic position of a person of progressive convictions and a play about his unhappy love . There is no “watershed” that separates one from the other, but there is a man-citizen, passionately in love with a beautiful girl, his like-minded person. It reveals itself to us in actions that have both personal and social meaning.

For Chatsky, in his own way, “the connection of times has fallen apart.” The time when he and Sofia had a common language and feelings, and the time when the events of the comedy take place. His mind has matured and now gives no mercy to anyone, but he loves Sophia even more than before, and this causes both her and himself great grief. Truly, “the mind and the heart are not in harmony.”

The main battle that takes place in the second act turns out to be entirely connected with an intimate line. His love monologue “Let us leave this debate...” contains perhaps Chatsky’s most important political statement. It is expressed by a hint-joke about the transformations that are possible in Molchalin, since they turned out to be possible in the government, which has transformed from liberal-democratic to barracks-despotic. Satirical bile about the transformations of “governments, climates, morals, and minds” is combined with the elegiac outpourings of the hero.

But can love overshadow, drown out in Chatsky the heartbeat of a citizen who dreams of freedom and the good of the Fatherland? The fate of his people, their suffering is the main source of Chatsky's civic pathos. The most striking parts of the hero’s monologues are those where he angrily speaks out against oppression and serfdom. He is disgusted by the “unclean spirit of blind, slavish, empty imitation” of everything foreign.

Chatsky’s drama lies in the fact that he sees tragic moments in the fate of society, but cannot correct people, and this also leads him to despair. What makes Chatsky so attractive is that even in despair he does not sigh, like Gorich, does not chatter, like Repetilov, does not even withdraw from society, like Skalozub’s brother, but boldly rushes into battle with the obsolete, the old, the dilapidated.

Director Vl. Nemirovich-Danchenko was amazed at Griboyedov’s stagecraft, when “the play suddenly breaks the boundaries of intimacy and spills into a wide stream of the public.” Chatsky’s struggle for the heart of his beloved becomes the moment of his break with the hostile world of the Famusovs, Skalozubovs, and Molchalins around him. Chatsky was deeply deceived in Sofia, and not only in her feelings for himself. The scary thing is that Sofia not only does not love, but also finds herself in the crowd of those who curse and persecute Chatsky, whom he calls “tormentors.”

Two tragedies? Woe from the mind or grief from love? They are inextricably linked, and from two tragedies one very painful one arises, since grief from the mind and grief from love merged together. But all this is complicated by the tragedy of insight, and consequently, the loss of illusions and hopes.

In his farewell monologues, Chatsky seems to sum it up: “What did I expect? What did you think you’d find here?” In his words one can hear annoyance, bitterness, pain of disappointment, and in the very last monologue - hatred, contempt, anger and... there is no feeling of brokenness :

You have glorified me as crazy by the whole choir.

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.

This is not what a defeated man says. His protest is “an energetic protest against the vile racial reality, against bribe-taking officials, libertine barbarians, against ignorance and servility,” wrote L. G. Belinsky.

Smart, trembling with indignation, constantly busy thinking about the fate of Russia, Chatsky not only irritates a society mired in inertia, but also arouses its active hatred. He enters the fray and triumphs over the bureaucratic limitations of Famusov, the soldiery and obscurantism of Skalozub, the servility and meanness of Molchalin, the vulgarity and fanfare of Repetilov.

Chatsky experiences personal, heartfelt grief, thanks to his mind, irreconcilable with social deformities. After all, the cornerstone of the concept of intelligence is freethinking, so Chatsky’s life guidelines are not money and career, but the highest ideals. Chatsky's mind remains invulnerable and brings its owner that highest happiness when a person with a hole in his truth defeats lies and injustice.

This understanding of life, duty, and happiness is taught by A. S. Griboyedov’s smart and deeply human comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov occupies a special place in the history of Russian literature. It combines the features of outgoing classicism with new artistic methods: realism and romanticism. In this regard, literary scholars note the features of the portrayal of the characters in the play. If in the comedy of classicism before all the characters were clearly divided into good and bad, then in “Woe from Wit” Griboyedov, bringing the characters closer to real life, endows them with both positive and negative qualities. This is the image of Chatsky as the main character of the play “Woe from Wit”.

The background of the main character of the play "Woe from Wit"

In the first act, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky returns from a long trip around the world, where he went to “search for his mind.” Without stopping home, he arrives at Famusov’s house, because he is driven by sincere love for the daughter of the owner of the house. They were once brought up together. But now they haven’t seen each other for three long years. Chatsky does not yet know that Sophia’s feelings for him have cooled down, and her heart is occupied with something else. The love affair subsequently gives rise to a social clash between Chatsky, a nobleman of progressive views, and the Famus society of serf-owners and rank-worshippers.

Even before Chatsky appears on stage, we learn from Sophia’s conversation with the maid Lisa that he is “sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp.” It is noteworthy that Lisa remembered this hero when the conversation turned to intelligence. It is intelligence that is the trait that sets Chatsky apart from other characters.

Contradictions in Chatsky's character

If you trace the development of the conflict between the main character of the play “Woe from Wit” and the people with whom he is forced to interact, you can understand that Chatsky’s character is ambiguous. Arriving at Famusov’s house, he began a conversation with Sophia by asking about her relatives, using a sarcastic tone and sarcasm: “Has your uncle jumped off his life?”
Indeed, in the play “Woe from Wit” the image of Chatsky represents a rather hot-tempered, in some moments tactless young nobleman. Throughout the entire play, Sophia reproaches Chatsky for his habit of ridiculing the vices of other people: “The slightest oddity in someone is barely visible, your wit is immediately ready.”

His harsh tone can only be justified by the fact that the hero is sincerely outraged by the immorality of the society in which he finds himself. Fighting her is a matter of honor for Chatsky. It is not his goal to prick his interlocutor. He asks Sophia in surprise: “...Are my words really all caustic words? And tend to harm someone?” The fact is that all the issues raised resonate in the soul of the hero; he cannot cope with his emotions, with his indignation. His “mind and heart are not in harmony.”

Therefore, the hero lavishes his eloquence even on those who are clearly not ready to accept his arguments. A.S. After reading the comedy, Pushkin spoke this way about this: “The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with, and not to throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs...” And I.A. Goncharov, on the contrary, believed that Chatsky’s speech was “boiling with wit.”

The uniqueness of the hero's worldview

The image of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” largely reflects the worldview of the author himself. Chatsky, like Griboyedov, does not understand and does not accept the slavish admiration of the Russian people for everything foreign. In the play, the main character repeatedly ridicules the tradition of inviting foreign teachers into the house to educate children: “...Nowadays, just like in ancient times, regiments are busy recruiting teachers, more in number, at a cheaper price.”

Chatsky also has a special attitude towards service. For Famusov, Chatsky’s opponent in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” his attitude towards the hero is determined by the fact that he “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that.” Chatsky clearly outlines his position on this issue: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.”

That is why Chatsky speaks with such anger about the habit of Famus society to treat disadvantaged people with contempt and curry favor with influential people. If for Famusov his uncle Maxim Petrovich, who fell on purpose at a reception with the empress in order to please her and the court, is a role model, then for Chatsky he is just a buffoon. He does not see among the conservative nobility those from whom it would be worth following an example. Enemies of a free life, “passionate for rank,” prone to extravagance and idleness - this is what the old aristocrats are for the main character of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Chatsky.

Chatsky is also irritated by the desire of the Old Moscow nobles to make useful acquaintances everywhere. And they attend balls for this purpose. Chatsky prefers not to mix business with fun. He believes that everything should have its place and time.

In one of his monologues, Chatsky expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that as soon as a young man appears among the nobles who wants to devote himself to the sciences or arts, and not to the pursuit of rank, everyone begins to fear him. And they are afraid of people like Chatsky himself, because they threaten the well-being and comfort of the nobles. They introduce new ideas into the structure of society, but the aristocrats are not ready to part with the old way of life. Therefore, the gossip about Chatsky’s madness, started by Sophia, turned out to be very opportune. This made it possible to make his monologues safe and disarm the enemy of the conservative views of the nobles.

Feelings and characteristics of the hero’s internal experiences

When characterizing Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit,” you can pay attention to his last name. She's talking. Initially, this hero bore the surname Chadsky, from the word “chad”. This is due to the fact that the main character is, as it were, in the clouds of his own hopes and shocks. Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” experiences a personal drama. He came to Sophia with certain hopes that did not come true. Moreover, his beloved preferred Molchalin to him, who is clearly inferior to Chatsky in intelligence. Chatsky is also burdened by being in a society whose views he does not share and which he is forced to resist. The hero is in constant tension. By the end of the day, he finally understands that he has parted ways with both Sophia and the Russian conservative nobility. There is only one thing the hero cannot accept: why is fate favorable to cynical people who seek personal gain in everything, and so merciless to those who are guided by the dictates of the soul, and not by calculation? If at the beginning of the play Chatsky is in the midst of his dreams, now the true state of affairs has been revealed to him, and he has “sobered up.”

The meaning of Chatsky's image

Griboyedov was led to create the image of Chatsky by the desire to show the brewing split in the nobility. Chatsky's role in the comedy "Woe from Wit" is quite dramatic, because he remains in the minority and is forced to retreat and leave Moscow, but he does not give up his views. So Griboyedov shows that Chatsky’s time has not yet come. It is no coincidence that such heroes are classified as superfluous people in Russian literature. However, the conflict has already been identified, so the replacement of the old with the new is ultimately inevitable.

The given description of the image of the main character is recommended for reading by 9th grade students before writing an essay on the topic “The image of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit””

Work test

Alexander Chatsky is the main character of the comedy “Woe from Wit,” written by the famous writer A. Griboedov in poetic form. For many years in Russian literature, the author of this most interesting work has been considered a harbinger of a new socio-psychological type, which has been given the name “superfluous person.”

In contact with

The comedy was written during the years of the revolutionary secret organizations of the Decembrists. The author touched upon the struggle of progressive-minded people with the society of nobles and serf owners, in other words, the struggle between the new and old worldviews. In A. A. Chatsky, the writer embodied many qualities of a progressive man of the era in which he himself lived. According to his beliefs the hero he created is close to the Decembrists.

Brief description of Chatsky

The character of Chatsky in comedy can be defined as follows:

• in the diversity of an emotional and at the same time simple portrait;
• the positivity of the hero, who is a born maximalist;
• in all his feelings and actions.

If he falls in love, then to such an extent that “the whole world seems like dust and vanity” to him, he is the owner of unbearable honesty and an extraordinary mind, constantly thirsting for additional knowledge. Thanks to his knowledge, he soberly sees the problems of politics, the disadvantaged state of Russian culture, pride and honor in people, but at the same time he is completely blind in matters of love. Chatsky is a strong personality, a fighter by nature, and he is eager to fight with everyone at once, but often instead of victory he receives disappointment.

Young nobleman son of Famusov's deceased friend, returns to his beloved, Sophia Famusova, whom he has not seen for three long years; Chatsky had known her since childhood. When they grew up, they fell in love with each other, but the unpredictable Chatsky unexpectedly went abroad, from where he did not write a word the entire time. Sophia was offended at being abandoned, and when her lover arrived, she greeted him “coldly.” Chatsky himself says that “he wanted to travel around the whole world, but did not travel even a hundredth part of it,” while the main reason for his departure was military service, after which, according to his plan, he wanted to meet Sophia.

His love for this girl is a sincere feeling. He wants to believe in reciprocity, so he cannot believe that she is in love with Molchalin. But he realizes that he is mistaken when he witnesses his explanation with Lisa. After this, Chatsky suffers and calls his love madness. In response to his words, Sophia says that she “reluctantly drove me crazy.” It was this statement that started development of gossip about the hero's madness, and also, according to many, a dangerous person in his beliefs.

Chatsky’s personal drama not only gives movement to the entire plot, but also complicates and deepens the drama of society, which is confirmed in the comedy by the increase in his sharp attacks against noble Moscow. And in such criticism of the views and morals of Famus society, it is clearly visible what Chatsky is speaking out against and what his views are.

In reality, the hero of the picture does not do anything for which he is declared crazy. He speaks his mind but the old world fights against his word using slander. And the problem is that in this struggle, Chatsky’s objectionable views are losing, because the old world turns out to be so strong that the hero sees no point in arguing and runs away from Famusov’s house to another city. But this flight cannot be perceived as a defeat, since irreconcilable opinions put the hero in a tragic situation.

Description of Chatsky

Chatsky is a straightforward, proud and noble man who boldly expresses his opinion. He does not want to live in the past and sees the truth of the future, does not accept the cruelty of the landowners, opposes serfdom, careerism, veneration of rank, ignorance and the wrong attitude of society towards slave morality and the ideals of the past century. Due to the fact that he is a fighter for justice and dreams of benefiting society, it is difficult for him to be in an immoral society, because among deceitful and vile people he cannot find a place for himself.

In his opinion, society remains exactly the same as it was three years ago. He proclaims respect and humanity for the common man and service to the cause, and not for persons who are against freedom of thought and speech; affirms the progressive ideas of existing life and modernity, the prosperity of art and science, as well as respect for national culture.

Chatsky writes well, translates, seeks knowledge while traveling and serves in the Ministry. At the same time, he does not bow down to foreigners and boldly advocates for domestic education.

His beliefs are revealed in disputes and monologues with representatives of Famus society. He confirms his opposition to serfdom in his memoirs about the theater “Carrying the Tore of Noble Scoundrels,” in which he emphasizes the exchange of faithful servants for greyhounds.

Contradictions in the character of the hero

• when he comes to Sophia and begins a conversation with words in which he uses sarcasm and a caustic tone: “Has your uncle jumped off his life?”;
• At the same time, he does not set out to prick his interlocutors and Sophia, so he asks her in surprise: “...Are my words all... tending towards harm?”

The image of Chatsky in the play is a hot-tempered and in some words tactless nobleman, for which his beloved reproaches him. And yet this harsh tone can be justified by sincere indignation at the existing immorality of the society in which he is forced to find himself. And it is a matter of his honor to fight him.

This behavior of the hero is due to the fact that all the issues that affect him do not resonate in the soul of this opposing person, because he is smart and able to analyze and predict a new future, without serfdom and arrogance. That is why he cannot cope with his own emotions and indignation. His mind is not in harmony with his heart, which means that he lavishes his eloquence even on those who are completely unprepared to perceive his beliefs and arguments.

The hero's unique worldview

Chatsky reveals in comedy the worldview of the author himself. He, like Griboedov, cannot understand and accept the slavish admiration of the Russian people for foreigners. The play ridicules several times the tradition according to which it is customary to hire teachers from abroad to raise children; the author emphasizes: “...they are trying to recruit teachers...in larger numbers...cheaper.”

Chatsky also has a special relationship with service. For Sophia’s father, Chatsky’s opponent, this work precisely defines Famusov’s attitude towards him in the following words: “does not serve... and in that... does not find any benefit.” Chatsky’s answer regarding such a statement also clearly reflects his position: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.”

That is why he speaks with such anger about the habits of society, which outrages him, namely the contemptuous attitude towards disadvantaged people and the ability to curry favor in the eyes of influential people. If Maxim Petrovich, Uncle Famusov, for the pleasure of the Empress at her reception, deliberately sets a role model and tries to serve her, then for Chatsky he is nothing more than a buffoon, and he does not see in the circle of the conservative nobility those who could set a worthy example . In the eyes of the hero of the play, these aristocrats - opponents of free life, prone to idleness and extravagance, they are “passionate for rank,” and they do not care about justice.

The main character is also irritated by the desire of the nobles to cling to useful contacts everywhere. He believes that they attend balls precisely for this purpose, and does not agree with this, because, in his opinion, one should not mix business with fun, since everything should have its time and place.

In one of Chatsky’s monologues, the author emphasizes his dissatisfaction with the fact that as soon as a person appears in society who wants to devote himself to art or science, and not to the thirst for rank, everyone begins to fear him. He is sure that such people are feared, because they threaten the comfort and well-being of the nobles, because they introduce new ideas into the structure of an established society, and the aristocrats do not want to part with the old way of life. That is why gossip about his madness turns out to be very useful, because it allows you to disarm the enemy in views that are displeasing to the nobles.

Brief quotation description of Chatsky

All of Chatsky’s character traits and his manner of communication will never be accepted by society, which would like to live in peace and not change anything. But the main character cannot agree with this. He is smart enough to understand meanness, selfishness and ignorance aristocrats, and vehemently expresses his opinion, trying to open his eyes to the truth. However, the truth is not needed by the established principles of old Moscow life, which the hero of the play is unable to resist. Based on Chatsky’s inappropriate, but at the same time clever arguments, he is called crazy, which once again proves the cause of “woe from the mind.”

Let's give an example of some statements from the main character:

• After listening to what Famusov said about Maxim Petrovich, Chatsky says: “He despises people... he should yawn at the ceiling...”;
• He contemptuously denounces the past century: “It was a straight century of humility” and approves of young people who do not have a greedy desire to fit into the regiment of aristocrats and “clowns”;
• Has a critical attitude towards the settlement of foreigners on the territory of Russia: “Shall we resurrect... from the foreign power of fashion? So that... the people... don’t consider us to be Germans...”

A. A. Chatsky inherently does a good deed, because with such statements he protects human rights and freedom of choice, for example, occupations: live in the countryside, travel, “focus your mind” on science or dedicate your life “ arts... high and beautiful."

The hero’s desire not to “serve”, but to “serve the cause, not individuals” is a hint of progressive behavior determined youth to change society in an educational and peaceful way.

In his statements he does not shy away from such popular words as “just now”, “tea”, “more”; He uses sayings, proverbs and the following catchphrases in his speech: “total nonsense,” “not a hair of love,” and easily quotes the classics: “and the smoke of the Fatherland is... pleasant to us.” In addition, he confirms his intelligence and knowledge using foreign words, but only if they have no analogues in the Russian language.

He is lyrical in his stories about his love for Sophia, ironic, sometimes makes fun of Famusov, a little caustic, because he does not accept criticism, which, in his opinion, is criticism of the “last century.”

Chatsky is a difficult character. To use witty phrases, he hits it right in the eye and “scatters” the characteristics he has deduced like beads. The main character of this complex comedy is sincere, and this is the most important thing, despite the fact that his emotions are considered unacceptable. But at the same time, they can be considered the hero’s inner wealth, because thanks to them, his real state can be determined.

The creation of the image of Chatsky is the author’s desire to show the Russian people the brewing split in the established noble environment. The role of this hero in the play is dramatic, because he is in the minority of those who are forced to retreat in this verbal struggle for justice and leave Moscow. But he does not abandon his views even in such a situation.

Griboyedov had no task to show the weakness of his hero, on the contrary, thanks to his image, he showed the absence of a strong society and the beginning of Chatsky’s time. And therefore, it is no coincidence that such heroes are considered “superfluous people” in literature. But the conflict has been identified, which means that the change from old to new is ultimately inevitable.

According to I. A. Goncharov, Chatsky’s role in this work is “passive” and at the same time he is both a “advanced warrior”, and a “skirmisher”, and a “victim”. “The hero is broken by the amount of old strength, but at the same time inflicts a mortal blow on it with the quality of fresh strength,” the writer said.

A. S. Pushkin, after reading the play, noted that the first sign of an intelligent person is that at first glance you need to know who you are dealing with and not throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs, but I. A. Goncharov, on the contrary, believed that Chatsky’s speech “seems with wit.”

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is a nobleman who has about 400 serfs on his estate. He was orphaned early, so most of his upbringing was spent in the house of his father’s friend, Famusov. As soon as Alexander entered adulthood, he began to live independently. He wanted to get acquainted with the life of the world, and he left his home for 3 years. In this article we will look at the image and characterization of Chatsky in the comedy in verse “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboedov.

Chatsky's education

Chatsky is a member of the English Club, which included rich and noble representatives of the nobility. He is intelligent, as evidenced by his ability to speak eloquently. From the words of the heroes of the comedy, it becomes known that the young man knows foreign languages ​​and tries to write himself:

“He writes and translates well.”

Chatsky’s speeches are so correctly composed that it seems that he is not speaking, but writing. The young man’s progressive views are not similar to the positions of representatives of Famusov’s circle. It is knowledge and the desire for self-improvement that distinguishes Alexander Andreevich from other heroes of the work. Famusov sees the reason for Alexander’s behavior in education:

“Learning is a plague,

Learning is the reason..."

The fading nobility is ready to close schools, lyceums and gymnasiums, just so that the Chatskys do not appear in their way.

Inconsistency of character

Griboyedov is trying to bring the situation in the landowner's house closer to reality. This explains that all the heroes of the work have positive and negative traits, like ordinary people. Chatsky is no exception.

Intelligence and categoricalness. The hero's intelligence does not prevent him from being tactless. He does not analyze his judgments, and is not afraid to ridicule the defenseless. They cannot answer him in kind, since they are limited in mental capabilities. Only statements against immorality justify the behavior of the young nobleman. He tries to fight it with categorical judgments. But, as an intelligent person, he could understand that he was talking in vain. His statements do not reach those to whom they are directed. At times he just shakes the air. It feels like this is a conversation with yourself. It was this quality that A. Pushkin did not like. He believes that throwing pearls in front of the Repetilovs is not the job of smart people.

Love and passion. Another contradiction is the hero’s feelings. He is in love with a girl who chose someone else. Moreover, it is difficult to even simply compare them. Love made Chatsky blind. His passion and desire to find out who was preferred made him comparable to the funny characters at a comedy ball. I want the hero to leave the stage with his head held high, but he simply runs away from those who slandered him and started gossip.

The hero's love of freedom

Chatsky thinks freely and does not adhere to the rules imposed on him by the older generation. It is the speeches that frighten Famusov. The old landowner includes him among the Jacobins and Carbonari. He does not understand Chatsky's ideas. Freethinking causes fear and apprehension. The love of freedom led the young man to a path incomprehensible to old people. Two career lines were common throughout the century:

• military service;
• work as an official.

Chatsky became neither one nor the other. He did not accept the laws of the service, where established rules had to be obeyed. Service fettered a sensual person and interfered with his development. The role of an official did not suit Chatsky. Sitting behind routine and papers did not give me the opportunity to engage in creativity and research. Alexander is trying to find himself in scientific activity or in the niche of literary creativity:

“I put my mind into science...”

“In my soul... there is a fervor for creative, high and beautiful arts.”

He is not interested in a position among officials, nor in promotions in the ranks of military service or civilian ranks.

Love of truth is the main character trait. The hero always gets to the truth, whatever it may be. It was freedom of thought and liberalism that allowed him to be classified as crazy.

Chatsky's weaknesses

Alexander Andreevich, subtly noticing the characteristics of people’s character and behavior, easily teases and ridicules their vices and weaknesses. He does not try to offend or humiliate his interlocutors with words. Not everyone understands his barbs. He directs most of his judgments against stupid and intellectually limited people. He will make you laugh, make you look like a buffoon, so that the person being ridiculed may not even understand why they are making fun of him. Other weaknesses of the young landowner:

Sharpness of judgments. Angry - intonation changes:

"a menacing look and a harsh tone."

Pride. Chatsky does not accept disrespect:

“...you are all proud!”

Sincerity. Alexander does not want to be cunning, does not want to pretend. He cheats on himself only because of his love for Sofia:

“I’ll pretend once in my life.”

Sensitivity. The quality of the hero distinguishes him from all the guests in Famusov's house. He is the only one who worries about the girl, does not believe in her changes, love for the insignificant Molchalin, without principles and moral principles.

Chatsky's patriotism

Through the hero, Griboyedov conveyed his worldview. He cannot change the servility of the Russian people. He is surprised by the admiration for everything foreign. The author ridicules such aspirations of the landowners: foreign teachers, clothes, dancing, games and hobbies. He is confident that the Russian people should have their own teachers. The hero has a special relationship with language. He doesn’t like the fact that Russian speech has been made into a mixture of “French and Nizhny Novgorod.” He hears the beauty of Russian speech, its unusualness and melodiousness. Therefore, there are many popular words in speech: just now, Pushche, tea. He easily inserts proverbs and sayings into his speech and respects literature. Chatsky quotes the classics, but shows that foreign words should be present in the speech of an educated person, but only where they have a place.