Why does Famus society not accept Chatsky? The main reasons for the conflict between Chatsky and Famus society. "Portrait" character of the comedy

The comedy "Woe from Wit" has two storylines. The first is related to the development of relationships in the love triangle Chatsky-Sofya-Molchalin. The second, deeper one – socio-political – lies in the clash of morals and orders of the “present century” and the “past century”.

Thus, the personification of the “present century” in the comedy is almost single-handedly represented by Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who returned to Moscow. But Chatsky’s loneliness in Famus society is only apparent. Besides him, there are a number of off-stage heroes: Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew Fyodor, who studies chemistry and biology, Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service and went to the village to read books, as well as Chatsky’s friends, whom he mentions in passing. But the play really abounds with representatives of the “past century”. Literary scholars, as a rule, unite them under the general name “Famus society.” These are characters with “talking” names and surnames - first of all, Famusov himself, as well as Sofya, Molchalin, Skalozub, Khlestova, Zagoretsky, Repetilov, the Tugoukhovsky family, the Gorichis, the Khryumins. They are dependent on the opinions of others and suffer from gallomania - admiration for everything French and foreign in general. Representatives of the views of the “past century” do not see any benefit in enlightenment, but they chase ranks and know how to achieve them.

Like a tornado, Chatsky bursts into the monotonous life of Famusov’s house. The hero immediately notices that while he received new knowledge and impressions during his journey, in sleepy Moscow life flowed as before:

What new will Moscow show me?
Yesterday there was a ball, and tomorrow there will be two.
He made a match - he managed, but he missed,
All the same sense, and the same poems in the albums.

Chatsky’s monologues in the comedy “Woe from Wit” are characterized by a large amount of journalisticism: they express the opinion of a certain group of progressively thinking people, and also contain many rhetorical questions and exclamations, and often contain archaisms. “He speaks as he writes,” notes Famusov. Chatsky resolutely opposes everything that should already become obsolete, forgotten, sink into oblivion - against those vices of Famus society that prevent the new generation from starting their life, a life without serfdom, illiteracy, hypocrisy, and sycophancy.

Famusov, as the main antipode of the protagonist in the comedy, does not want to understand and accept progressive views on life. Therefore, the principle “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening” sounds wild to Famus society. The truth “the houses are new, but the prejudices are old” is perceived as a vile lie, “persecution of Moscow.” At the end of the work, we see that neither Famusov nor his entourage understood Chatsky’s moral lessons.

Unfortunately for him, Chatsky realizes too late that this “crowd of tormentors” cannot be convinced. According to Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, the main character is not so smart at all, since he does not recognize unworthy people in his interlocutors, but continues to throw pearls “in front of Repetilov and the like.” However, during the four acts of the comedy, he still manages, with his bold phrases, to instill in the reader complete disgust for the vices of the “past century.” Chatsky’s conflict with Famus society nevertheless brought its educational fruits.

Comedy A.S. Griboyedov's "Woe from Wit" is a satire on the society of Moscow nobles of the early 19th century. It presents the split that had emerged by that time among the nobility, the essence of which lies in the historically natural contradiction between old and new views on many social issues. In the play, Chatsky and Famus society collide - “the present century” and “the past century.”

Moscow aristocratic society is represented by Famusov, the manager of the state house, his secretary Molchalin, Colonel Skalozub, and minor and off-stage characters. This rather large camp of conservative nobles is opposed by one main character of the comedy - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky.

The conflict between Chatsky and Famus society arises when the main character of the play returns to Moscow, where he had been absent for three years. Once upon a time, Chatsky was brought up together with Sophia, Famusov’s seventeen-year-old daughter. There was youthful love between them, which still burns in Chatsky’s heart. Then he went abroad to “search for his mind.”

His beloved now has tender feelings for Molchalin, who lives in their house. But Chatsky has no idea about this. The love conflict develops into a social one, forcing Chatsky to speak out against Famus society on the most pressing issues. Their disputes concern education, family relations, serfdom, public service, bribery, and servility.

Returning to Moscow, Chatsky discovers that nothing has changed here, no social problems have been resolved, and the nobles continue to spend their time in fun and idleness: “What new will Moscow show me? Yesterday there was a ball, and tomorrow there will be two.” Chatsky’s attacks on Moscow and on the way of life of landowners makes Famusov fear him. The conservative nobility is not ready to change their views on life, their habits, and are not ready to part with their comfort. Therefore, Chatsky is a “dangerous person” for Famus society, because “he wants to preach freedom.” Famusov even calls him a “carbonari” - a revolutionary - and believes that it is dangerous to let people like Chatsky even close to the capital.

What ideas does Famusov and his supporters defend? Most of all, in the society of Old Moscow nobles, the opinion of the world is valued. To gain a good reputation, they are ready to make any sacrifice. It doesn’t matter whether the person matches the impression he makes. Famusov believes that the best example for his daughter is the example of her father. In society he is “known for his monastic behavior.”

But when no one is watching him, not a trace remains of Famusov’s morality. Before scolding his daughter for being alone in the room with Molchalin, he flirts with his maid Liza and makes clear hints to her. It becomes clear to the reader that Famusov, reading his daughter’s morals, himself lives by immoral principles, the main one of which is “sin is not a problem, rumor is not good.”

This is the attitude of Famus society towards service. Here, too, external attributes prevail over internal content. Chatsky calls the Moscow nobility passionate about rank and believes that the uniform covers “their weakness, poverty of reason.”

When Chatsky turns to Famusov with a question about how Sophia’s father would respond to his possible matchmaking with his daughter, Famusov angrily replies: “Go ahead and serve.” Chatsky “would be glad to serve,” but he refuses to “serve.” This is unacceptable for the protagonist of a comedy. Chatsky considers this humiliation. He strives to serve “the cause, not the persons.”

But Famusov sincerely admires the ability to “curry favor.” Here the reader, from the words of Famusov, learns about Maxim Petrovich, who “knew honor before everyone,” had “a hundred people at his service” and “ate on gold.” At one of the receptions with the Empress, Maxim Petrovich stumbled and fell. But, seeing the smile on Catherine’s face, he decided to turn this incident to his advantage, so he fell several more times on purpose to amuse the court. Famusov asks Chatsky: “...What do you think? In our opinion, he’s smart.” But Chatsky’s honor and dignity cannot allow him to “fit into the regiment of jesters.” He is not going to earn his position in society through servility and sycophancy.

If Famusov is outraged by Chatsky’s reluctance to serve, then the careerism of Colonel Skalozub, who is “beyond his years and has an enviable rank,” evokes obsequious awe in this hero. Skalozub, according to Sophia, is so stupid that “he will never utter a smart word.” But it is him who Famusov wants to see as his son-in-law. After all, all Moscow nobles want to acquire relatives “with stars and ranks.” Chatsky can only lament that this society persecutes “people with a soul”, that a person’s personal qualities do not matter here, and only money and rank are valued.

Even Molchalin, who is taciturn throughout the entire play, in a dialogue with Chatsky boasts of his successes in the service: “With my work and effort, since I am listed in the archives, I have received three awards.” Despite his young age, he was accustomed, like the old Moscow nobles, to making acquaintances based on personal gain, because “you have to depend on others” until you yourself have a high rank. Therefore, the life credo of this character is: “At my age one should not dare to have one’s own judgment.” It turns out that the silence of this hero is just a mask covering his meanness and duplicity.
Chatsky’s attitude towards Famus society and the principles by which this society exists is sharply negative. In it, only those “whose necks bend more often” reach heights. Chatsky values ​​his freedom.

The noble society depicted in the comedy “Woe from Wit” is afraid of change, of everything new that, under the influence of historical events, penetrates the consciousness of the Russian nobleman. He manages to defeat Chatsky only due to the fact that he is completely alone in this comedy. This is the uniqueness of Chatsky’s conflict with Famus society. However, the aristocrats experience genuine horror from Chatsky’s words, because he fearlessly exposes their vices, points out the need for change, and therefore threatens their comfort and well-being.

Light found a way out of this situation. At the ball, Sophia, in a conversation with one of the guests, throws out the phrase that Chatsky is “out of his mind.” Sophia cannot be classified as a representative of the “past century,” but her former lover Chatsky threatens her personal happiness. This gossip instantly spreads among Famusov’s guests, because only the crazy Chatsky does not pose a danger to them.
By the end of the day in which the action of the comedy “Woe from Wit” takes place, all Chatsky’s hopes are dispelled. He “sobered up... completely.” Only after experiencing all the cruelty of Famus society does he realize that his paths with him have completely diverged. He has no place among people who live their lives “in feasts and extravagance.”

Thus, Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” is forced to retreat in the face of Famus’s society only because alone he has no chance of winning. But time will put everything in its place, and Chatsky’s supporters will introduce among the nobles the spirit of freedom and the value of a person’s personal qualities.

The described originality of Chatsky’s conflict with Famusov’s society will help 9th grade students recreate the confrontation between two worlds in their essay on the topic “Chatsky and Famusovsky society”

Work test

1. The history of the creation of the comedy “Woe from Wit.”
2. The reason for the disagreements between representatives of the “present century” and the “past century”.
3. The immortality of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy.

A. S. Griboedov created the comedy “Woe from Wit” at the beginning of the 19th century. In those years, new trends began to replace the orders of Catherine’s era; other people appeared in Russian society, with progressive views, who wanted to serve their country, without demanding titles or awards for this. This was, of course, connected with the patriotic upsurge that Russian society experienced after the Patriotic War of 1812. This led the leading part of the nobles in 1825 to Senate Square demanding the provision of civil liberties and the signing of the constitution.

At the center of Griboyedov’s comedy is such a person. In his appearance, behavior, even in his last name, contemporaries guessed the real person - P. Ya. Chaadaev. He was a Western philosopher, and Chaadaev was declared crazy for his progressive views and criticism of the contemporary order. So, the confrontation between Alexander Chatsky and Famus society constitutes the main socio-political conflict of the play.

Chatsky is a young man, he is educated and has his own opinion on many very serious problems of his time. Alexander Andreevich spent two years abroad, where he became acquainted with the advanced ideas of our time and saw how people live in other countries. And here he is in Moscow, among people of high society, in the house of his uncle, the Moscow “ace” Famusov. Chatsky is in love with Famusov's daughter, Sophia, with whom they grew up together. Childhood affection develops over time into a serious feeling. Chatsky is sincerely glad to meet Sophia and immediately begins to explain his feelings to her. He still doesn’t know that while he was away, Sophia became interested in Molchalin, her father’s secretary. Therefore, she is cold with Chatsky and is even dissatisfied with his ardor and passion. Chatsky is confused, he cannot understand the reason for this attitude towards himself. The further development of events is determined by Chatsky’s attempts to find out who the lucky rival is: Molchalin or Skalozub. But the love conflict between Chatsky and Sophia is only external, which subsequently reveals a deeper, socio-political conflict.

Seeing these people, communicating with them, Chatsky cannot understand why Sophia does not notice in them what is so clearly visible to him. The situation is heating up, and Chatsky pronounces his famous monologues. First of all, this is a monologue about old people, about the so-called “judges”, trendsetters who “draw their judgments from forgotten newspapers from the times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea.” The other is about the dominance of everything foreign, about “slavish, blind imitation,” about the “foreign power of fashion.” Chatsky angrily asks:

Where? Show us, 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 court in friends,
related,
Magnificent building chambers...

But Chatsky’s fiery speeches remain without support; moreover, his attacks are met with protest, hostility, and dull misunderstanding. In the end, he is left completely alone against the hostile Famus society. Moreover, Sophia started a rumor that Chatsky was not himself.

A. S. Griboyedov shows readers not only those who do not accept Chatsky’s position and enter into open struggle with him, but also those who are unable to fight injustice, whose will is paralyzed. Such heroes include Gorich, a former colleague and friend of Chatsky. But Gorich got married, fell “under his wife’s heel” and humbly bears his burden, although he understands that he has fallen: “Now, brother, I’m not the same.” When Chatsky was declared crazy, Gorich did not want to believe it, but he did not dare to openly contradict the general opinion. Chatsky found himself alone. His accusatory monologues hung in the air, no one sympathizes with him, and all his “millions of torments,” as I. A. Goncharov said, at first glance, seems futile to us. But that's not true. A. S. Griboedov, in the image of his main character, showed the changes emerging in Russian society, the emergence among the progressive people of the era of the desire to become useful to society, to care about the common good, and not just about personal well-being.

The comedy by A. S. Griboedov shows us the life of Russian society in the first third of the 19th century in all its complexity, inconsistency and heterogeneity. The author realistically depicts the types of that era despite some of the romantic traits of the main character. The writer raises eternal problems in the play - relationships between generations, the contradiction between personal and public well-being, the egoistic principle in a person and his unselfish readiness to help people. Therefore, this work is relevant now, at the beginning of the 21st century, because it helps to understand modern problems, which are practically no different from the life conflicts of the era of A. S. Griboedov.

The main conflict of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” is the clash of the “present century” in the person of Alexander Andreevich Chatsky with the “past century” represented in the comedy by Famus society. But is the “past century” a century that is gone forever, making room for a new time with completely different life values? In my opinion, Chatsky is biased in his judgment about the “coming” and “past” times, believing that “the light today is not the same” as before. This bias in the hero’s beliefs is due to his youth and some naivety. Chatsky, who has just returned from a long journey, finds it difficult to understand the atmosphere in Famusov’s house and correctly assess the morals of his “past life.” It seems to the hero that the world has changed, but in reality everything remains the same. The words “past century” in comedy denote a certain way of life, a worldview, within the framework of which the main values ​​are rank and wealth.
Already from the first pages of the play, it becomes obvious to us that in Famusov’s house everyone lies to each other. And only the lies of Lisa and Sophia are of a noble nature. Lisa lies to the master, thereby helping Sofya and Molchalin. Sophia deceives her father so that he does not find out about his daughter’s love for his secretary, because Famusov will not be able to accept a poor person into the family (“Whoever is poor is not a match for you!”). Sophia’s lie can be justified, it is caused by a deep feeling for her lover, but Molchalin’s lie is a betrayal. He deceives both his benefactor and his “beloved” solely for his own benefit.
Forgetting that he had just flirted with Lisa, Famusov says about himself with importance: “He is known for his monastic behavior!” Griboyedov deliberately shows the reader in such detail the situation in Famusov’s house: it reflects the moral atmosphere of the whole society.
Famusov, in whose house the play takes place, can be called Chatsky’s most serious opponent. The conflict between these heroes is socio-political in nature. In the Chatsky-Famusov parallel, it is almost impossible to find points of contact. Famusov is a typical Moscow gentleman, devoid of moral goals. Rank and wealth are his main goals in life, justifying any means: “He would like a son-in-law with stars and ranks.” Famusov’s ideals are Kuzma Petrovich, a supporter of nepotism, a man “with a key” (the golden key was an indicator of the chamberlain’s status), who “knew how to deliver the key to his son,” and Maxim Petrovich, Famusov’s uncle, known for his servility and sycophancy. Famusov lives according to a weekly schedule, which is of an everyday, everyday nature: christenings, trouts, burials... This gentleman’s attitude towards business is superficial, he does not delve into the essence of the service: “It’s signed, so off your shoulders.” But Pavel Afanasyevich does not see any benefit in books: “And reading is of little use...” - which characterizes him as an ignoramus, an unenlightened person. And this attitude towards books is inherent in the entire Moscow noble society with conservative views on the world.
Chatsky, an ardent young man of the Decembrist worldview, does not accept such a way of life, such ideals: “And indeed, the world began to grow stupid...” Famus’s society is alien to him, so Chatsky exposes its “vilest traits.”
So, who represents society in comedy? This is the Moscow “ace” - Colonel Skalozub, a smug careerist, “a famous person, respectable.” His dream is “if only he could become a general.” Skalozub is promoted at the expense of dismissed and deceased comrades: “Some of the older ones will be turned off, others, you see, have been killed.” In a conversation with Skalozub, Famusov curries favor with him, because it is precisely such a son-in-law that is acceptable to Famusov, since Skalozub “is a gold bag and aims to be a general.”
The next character, whose life credo is “to win awards and have fun,” and the means to achieve this is “to please all people without exception,” is Molchalin, a petty nobleman who is the secretary in Famusov’s house. Molchalin has a good reputation in society, he knows how to appear to be who they want to see in him. Dependent on others is Molchalin’s basic principle. This character takes advantage of the opportunities, connections of the “powers that be,” and their position in society. With his obsequiousness, Molchalin endears himself. His ideals are Tatyana Yuryevna and Foma Fomich, whom he considers to be integral individuals and sets as an example to Chatsky. Chatsky speaks about Foma Fomich this way: “the most empty person, one of the most stupid!”
Sophia loves Molchalin because he is much more suitable for calm family happiness than the arrogant Chatsky, bold in his judgments. And Chatsky cannot understand the feelings for someone “who is like all fools!” Molchalin considers Chatsky a stupid, ridiculous boy and feels sorry for him.
It seems that the main criterion for Chatsky’s assessment of the people around him is intelligence. This determines both the positive and negative sides of the hero. A.S. Pushkin denied Chatsky intelligence, meaning the worldly, secular intelligence. Chatsky appears in the comedy as a bearer of a genuine, high mind.
The ball scene is of great importance in comedy: it is in it that a whole gallery of various “portraits” appears before the reader; it is at the ball that the conflict between society and Chatsky is brought to its utmost acuteness. The Gorichs are the first to appear in Famusov's house. Platon Mikhailovich is a vivid image of a boy-husband, a servant-husband, whose family life is monotonous and boring.
The next guests are Prince and Princess Tugoukhovsky and their six daughters. The main concern of parents is to get their daughters married. For the princess, the spiritual qualities of a possible son-in-law are not important, what is important is his property status. Having learned that Chatsky is not rich, the princess, who sent Tugoukhovsky to meet Chatsky, shouts to her husband at the top of her lungs: “Prince, prince, go back!” - not at all embarrassed by Chatsky’s presence.
Countess-grandmother and Countess-granddaughter Khryumin show class arrogance in relation to other people present at the ball (“We are first!”), At the same time rejoicing at meeting Zagoretsky, a “notorious swindler”, useful to everyone.
An important role in the play is played by Repetilov, a kind of “double” of Chatsky, his distorted shadow. It seems strange to the reader that Repetilov is equally kind to both Chatsky and Skalozub. Repetilov talks as much as Chatsky, but they have different motives. Repetilov in some way parodies Chatsky. This comedy hero is a failed careerist, a waster of life, a member of a “secret society.” Repetilov’s monologue contains a description of the supposedly progressive part of the Moscow nobility, but this “smart youth juice” is nothing more than a tribute to the fashion for people with progressive views.
It is at the ball that rumors about Chatsky's madness are spread. Chatsky is a tragic hero who finds himself in a comedic situation. It may seem funny to Famusov's Moscow, but not to the reader. Chatsky's failures are a sign of his relentless desire to remain faithful to his ideals. The hero is intolerant of stupidity, vulgarity and servility, widespread in the society with which fate confronts him. But Chatsky is not alone in his desires for change. “Allies”, like-minded people of the main character in the comedy - Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service and “began reading books in the village”, professors at the Pedagogical Institute, as well as Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew Fyodor, a chemist and botanist who does not want to “know the ranks”. Progressive people of that time saw that society needed changes, they had new life values ​​- education, which representatives of the conservative Famus society were so afraid of, and personal freedom.
Insulted by the slander, Chatsky leaves Moscow, on which he had high hopes. The hero wanted a renewal of Russian life. But that did not happen. In the city - and throughout the country - loyalty to the ideals of the “past century” has been maintained. The noble Chatsky has no place in Famusov’s society, but he does not remain defeated in comedy, just as he is not a winner in it. “Chatsky is broken by the quantity of the old force, inflicting a death blow on it, in turn, by the quality of the new force,” wrote I. A. Goncharov several decades later in the article “A Million Torments,” dedicated to the play “Woe from Wit.”
In contrasting Chatsky with Famusov’s society, Griboedov’s deep confidence was expressed that the “present century” will triumph in Russia over the “past century.” The tragedy of Chatsky’s fate indicates that the confrontation between the two worldviews will be long and painful.

The satirical comedy by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov describes the noble society of the 10-20s of the 19th century. The main character of the work, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, is a young, noble, honest and free-thinking person. In the comedy, he is contrasted not only with individual characters, but also with the entire Famus society, which lived according to the traditions of the “past century.”

Famusov, in whose house the events unfolded, is a typical Moscow gentleman, an official - a bureaucrat, a serf owner, devoid of morality. He did not like service, he served only for money, ranks and awards. He didn’t even know the essence of his work: “It’s signed, off your shoulders,” and he wasn’t interested in what he was signing. Chatsky, on the contrary: served the Motherland, wanted to benefit the people, fought for the abolition of serfdom and personal freedom. He was very smart and educated.

Alexey Stepanovich Molchalin lived and worked in Famusov's house. He looked after Sophia, but did not love her, but simply hoped with her help to get a better job in life and make a career. To achieve this, he stopped at nothing: he deceived Famusov and curried favor with everyone. All his politeness was feigned, he just wanted to appear to be what those around him wanted him to be. His motto: please everyone on whom he depends. Molchalin was accepted in society, although he was just a minor nobleman. Chatsky spoke caustically about him, considered him stupid and ridiculous. He spoke with a contemptuous grin about Molchalin: “He will reach the famous levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.”

Another representative of the Famusov society was Sergei Sergeevich Skalozub. Colonel, spent his whole life in the barracks, a smug careerist. He was promoted at the expense of deceased or dismissed colleagues. Skalozub also viewed service as a source of personal benefits. His dream is to rise to the rank of general without expending any effort. Famusov dreamed of such a son-in-law, because their worldviews are the same. Chatsky did not understand how one could live next to such petty people, who were not interested in anything except money and power, who were so disdainful of everything popular and valued a person only by origin and the number of serfs.

The Famus society also included: Prince and Princess Tugoukhovsky, the spouses Gorichi, Zagoretsky, and the imperious lady Khlestova. They were all united by the same views on life. They all supported veneration, ignorance, serfdom and idleness. Their main activities were entertainment and spreading gossip. Chatsky criticized this society; he could not find like-minded people in it. He didn’t understand why they didn’t want to change their lives for the better, and didn’t even listen to his judgment. Chatsky has completely different views on education and upbringing, on service, civic duty, social order, and attitude towards people. He did not fit into Famus society, and therefore left Moscow. It became clear to him that they still firmly held loyalty to the ideals of the “past century.”