Why is the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov’s society inevitable in the work “Woe from Wit” (A. S. Griboedov). “Woe from Wit”: what conflict determines Chatsky’s clash with society? Why does the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov society arise?

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.

Griboedov's comedy “Woe from Wit” is an invaluable masterpiece in Russian literature. This work describes the noble society of the 19th century. The main character of this comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - an intelligent, free-thinking young man. The author in the work contrasts Famus’s society with him, thereby showing us the contradictions between the “Century of the Present” and the “Century of the Past.”
The most prominent representative of the Famusov society is Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. This is a person who does not like service and works only for rewards. Famus society included people who lived according to established customs. The main task in their life was to gain a high rank and a high position in society in order to “win awards and live a fun life.” These people are ardent serf owners, capable of killing and robbing people and controlling their fate. Chatsky furiously unleashes his anger on these people. He does not accept their beliefs and does not believe in the laws of old Moscow. Chatsky responds to Famusov’s story about his late uncle Maxim Petrovich with a remark characterizing Catherine’s age as “the age of obedience and fear.” Chatsky advocates the abolition of serfdom. He is very outraged that peasants are not considered people, that they can be exchanged for some things or sold. He indignantly talks about how one landowner sold the serf ballet for debts, and another exchanged his best servants for greyhounds. I am also greatly outraged by the nobles’ imitation of the West. Chatsky noticed that the doors of noble houses are always open to foreign guests. Thus, a Frenchman from Bordeaux, who was going to the country of barbarians, received the warmest welcome in Russia and did not find here “neither the sound of a Russian nor a Russian face.” But Chatsky could not change the people around him, because he was opposed not by individuals, but by the entire noble life.
In his work, Griboyedov managed to create the image of a hero who fights for people's rights. Although the author describes only Moscow and Famusov’s house, readers are presented with a picture of all of Russia in the first half of the 19th century. And I am very sorry that at that time there were few people like Chatsky.

There are many different people in the world: some, like Chatsky, are educated and interesting, others, like the Famus society, are mean, envious, thinking only about wealth and nobility. Such people were compared in his comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov. The whole conflict takes place in the house of the nobleman Famusov.
Famusov is one of the main characters of the work. He is a rich uneducated man. Famusov does not care at all about the future of his country, his people. He hates books: “I would like to take all the books and burn them.” Famusov has created a society around himself in which people spread gossip against each other, doing it behind their backs. Famusov says about Chatsky: “A dangerous man,” “He wants to preach freedom.” Sofia about Chatsky: “I’m ready to pour bile on everyone.” Chatsky about Molchalin: “Why not a husband? There’s just not enough intelligence in him.” Platon Mikhailovich about Zagoretsky: “An out-and-out swindler, a rogue.” Khlestova considers Zagoretsky “a liar, a gambler and a thief.” Famus society scolds everything new and advanced, but no one looks at themselves from the outside, “not noticing about themselves.” All these people live in the world only for intrigues that look like madness. Chatsky, the main character of the comedy, opposes their views. He is a preacher of a new life, a defender of advanced ideas. Alexander Andreevich is an intelligent, sincere, noble person. He is also very courageous and determined. This is confirmed by Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?..”. Remember how he criticized high society with its old views on life, talked about the injustice that reigns between rich and poor, how he wanted to serve the Fatherland, but “it’s sickening to be served”? Witty, eloquent, Chatsky angrily ridicules the vile vices of Famus society: servility to superiors, servility and servility. His mind, rich and figurative language find abundant material for this:
Judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers
The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of Crimea...
Chatsky despises braggarts who receive their “lire” not by serving the Motherland, but by flattering some individual person. Griboyedov wanted to show how
It is difficult for a person whose thoughts and behavior differ from the opinions of the majority.
It is likely that Famus society will exist all the time, because there will always be people who will be commanded by the upper classes. The comedy “Woe from Wit” made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature and became an immortal treasure of people. We can say that Russian drama was born with this work.

Very often in life we ​​come across people who can be compared to Famus society. They are vile, stupid and untalented. What is the mind for them? And what does it really mean? These questions are resolved in the great work of Russian literature by A.S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”.
This grief was for the main character of the comedy, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, an intelligent, noble, honest and brave man. He hates and despises Famus society, in which the main theme in life is servility. He can be compared to a lone hero who fights an entire regiment. But his superiority was that he was unusually intelligent. Chatsky wanted to honestly serve his Motherland, but he did not want to serve higher ranks: “I would be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served.” These words of his indicate that before us is a proud, witty and eloquent man. In this work A.S. Griboyedov shows the conflict between two opposing sides - Chatsky and Famusov society. Alexander Andreevich is a victim of his wit.
The people with whom he was surrounded did not understand him and did not even strive to do so. They are accustomed to living in eternal “slavery”; the concept of freedom is alien to them. It seems to me that Chatsky is not the only positive hero in this comedy; there are characters that Griboyedov only mentions in his work. This is Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service and went to the village, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, Prince Fyodor, a chemist and botanist. They can be considered Chatsky's allies. It is simply unbearable for the main character to be in the company of people like Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin. They considered themselves very smart, having earned their position by sycophancy. So Famusov confirms this in his own words: “Whether he’s honest or not, it’s all right for us, dinner is ready for everyone.” And also, talking about his late uncle, who knew when to help himself, he was proud that it was his relative who was so “smart.” People from Famus society did not notice how stupid their morals were. These people lived a fictitious life, without reflecting on the main thing - its meaning. Chatsky loved Sofia very much and admitted this to her at their first meeting after a long separation, and she answered him: “Why do I need you?” The main character begins to think that she has become the same as her father and those around him. Chatsky leaves Moscow, realizing that he has no place there. But Famus society cannot be considered a winner, since Chatsky did not lose this battle, he did not become like these people, did not sink to their level. It seems to me that this man was born a little earlier than the time in which it would have been easier for him to live. I believe that the comedy of A.S. Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit” is a great work of Russian literature that is immortal.

I read the magnificent comedy by A.S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”. It was created by the author over eight years. “Woe from Wit” is a comedy about how a crowd of fools do not understand one sane person. The events of the comedy develop in one Moscow aristocratic house over the course of one day. The main characters of this work are Chatsky, Famusov, his daughter Sofia and Famusov's secretary Molchalin.
In the comedy there is a Famus society that opposes Chatsky. It lives with an opposing worldview, honoring and defending veneration and hypocrisy. Chatsky himself appears in Famus’s world 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, then Chatsky dreams of selflessly serving his homeland, of bringing benefit to the people, whom he respects and considers “smart and cheerful.” So, in a conversation with Famusov, Skalozub utters the following phrase:
..Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels.
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 should take all the books and burn them,” because “learning is the reason” that “there are crazy people, both in their deeds and in their opinions.” Chatsky has a different opinion - a man of extraordinary intelligence, brave, honest, sincere. He values ​​people who are ready to “put their minds hungry for knowledge into science.” This is the only character that reflects many important personality traits of the author. Chatsky is a person to whom the author trusts his thoughts and views. Griboedov's hero has a lot of strength, he is eager to take action and is ready to prove his point. So, in a conversation with Famusov, Chatsky says:
Chatsky is a representative of that part of the noble youth who rebels against the society of the Famusovs, the rock-toothed, silent ones. There are still a few such people, they are not yet able to fight the existing system, but they are appearing. That is why Chatsky can rightfully be called a hero of his time. It was they who had to carry out the first stage of the revolutionary liberation movement, shake up the country, and bring closer the time when the people would free themselves from the chains of slavery.

If I were asked why I liked the comedy “Woe from Wit,” I would answer this way: “An interesting plot, bright characters, unique thoughts and statements had an emotional impact on me.” This work is one of those that, once you read it, you leave in your memory for a long time. The comedy “Woe from Wit” cannot be imagined without the author himself. Griboyedov and “Woe from Wit” - this is something without which neither one nor the other could exist alone.
The very name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” suggests that the main character was not understood by the people around him. This hero, to whom the author paid more attention, is Chatsky. He is an intelligent, smart, honest, kind, sincere, brave, selfless, cheerful, progressive person. He is not afraid to express his point of view. He soberly assesses the situation and position of Famus society, not being afraid to express his opinion. Boldly entering into a conversation, he expresses his thoughts to the faces of his interlocutors. For example, the quote “The houses are new, but the prejudices are old” speaks of this person’s modern view of life in Russia. Chatsky's subtle and insightful mind does not accept Famus society, which he criticizes. The main character is disgusted to humiliate himself in front of people who are higher in the service and, perhaps, undeservedly occupy military posts, for example, Colonel Skalozub.
Comparing Chatsky with the colonel, we can say that he is superior in mental development, thinking, and courage, which Skalozub does not have. I think that Skalozub, who holds such a position in the state, is not worthy to manage and command the regiments that were under his command. He would not be able to cope with his duty to the Fatherland, because he does not have the same merits as Chatsky.
The person completely opposite to Chatsky is Molchalin. I have a special opinion about him. Even his last name speaks of meanness and flattery. He always takes advantage of the situation for himself. Molchalin is capable of betraying, deceiving, setting up, but at what cost?! Just to get a new position! Chatsky exposes Molchalin’s character and expresses his opinion: “But by the way, he will reach the well-known levels, because nowadays they love the dumb.”
Speaking about the main representative of the Famusov society, Famusov himself, we can say that this man has a very high opinion of himself: “He is known for his monastic behavior.” In fact, he is an egoist; there is nothing interesting about him as a person. Even contrasting Chatsky with Famusov is impossible. Chatsky stands much higher and much more worthy than him.
Chatsky is the winner, despite the fact that he was mistaken for a madman. He was forced to leave Moscow: “Get out of Moscow! I don’t go here anymore.” As a result, he was never able to achieve Famusov’s recognition and Sofia’s reciprocal love.
Chatsky is an exponent of new ideas, and therefore society could not correctly understand him and accept him for who he is. His image in literature will live until the mind of mankind understands what ideas need to be fought for and defended.

I read a wonderful comedy by A.S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”. This comedy makes fun of a stupid, stupid and vile society. It was written in 1824. In the comedy, the author depicts a true picture of the life of the Moscow nobility, which was in need of renewal. I would like to begin my essay with a quote characterizing the lifestyle of these nobles:
In the love of traitors, in the tireless enmity,
Indomitable storytellers,
Clumsy smart people, crafty simpletons,
Sinister old women, old men,
Decrepit over inventions, nonsense...
Griboedov describes the Moscow nobility, consisting of the Famusovs, Zagoretskys, and Skalozubs. They do not belong to high society. These are people who have never served at court. These are various talkers and swindlers like Zagoretsky, who are ready to humiliate themselves before the rich in order to get into their favor. This is Famus society. Wealth and nobility are the main requirement in it. The representative of this society is Famusov, who already has an adult daughter. Famusov’s ideal is his uncle:
He fell painfully, but got up healthy.
And he says this about his attitude to the matter:
...Signed, off your shoulders.
Molchalin does not dare to object to his boss. He is quiet, timid, deceitful. Molchalin does not love Sofia, who does not know this. He cares because she likes it. Molchalin has no opinion. He pleases those on whom he depends.
Skalozub is Famusov’s friend:
And a golden bag, and aims to become a general.
He seeks awards, waits for the moment when someone retires or is killed in the war.
In the third act we get to know Famusov's other friends. This is Zagoretsky - a liar and a pleaser, Khlestova - an ignorant and grumpy old woman, the all-knowing Repetilov, Prince Tugoukhovsky, who is looking for rich and famous husbands for his daughters. The circle of concern of these people is lunches, dinners, searches for connections that will help them advance in their careers. For them, promotion can be obtained without any special merit:
..Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels...
For the sake of rewards, they are ready to humiliate themselves and be buffoons. Relationships in the Famusovs' world are based on fear and subordination to superiors. It doesn't matter to them whether someone is smart or stupid:
Honor between father and son.
The subject of conversation is gossip. The main task for parents is to successfully marry off their children. And in this insignificant society the noble, honest, educated, brave and witty Chatsky appears. Chatsky is the only positive hero in this comedy. He once lived in Famusov’s house and was friends with Sofia. Gradually his friendship grew into love, but then he left to wander. Now, three years later, he returns, full of hope. But Sofia no longer loves Chatsky and gives him a cold shoulder. She became completely different. She is cold and arrogant. Chatsky, trying to find out who Sofia’s chosen one is, comes into conflict with the entire Famus society. This society is afraid of Chatsky because he brings with him new views on life, new orders. But the Moscow nobility does not want to change anything and declares Chatsky crazy. Famusov is also afraid of Chatsky, because the main character is smart and sharp. He is distinguished by his independence of judgment and boldness of statements. He accuses Famus society of lies, slander, helpfulness, pretense, hypocrisy, stupidity, ignorance, for which society rejects him. At the end, Chatsky leaves. But who is he - the defeated or the winner? Chatsky is a winner because he is not alone! Somewhere there are others like him, and there are more of them every day.
I really liked Griboyedov’s comedy, because the author, speaking in the role of Chatsky, is not afraid to accuse the Moscow nobility of lies and slander. I would like there to be no “woe from mind” in our society.

Who is Chatsky and what kind of Famus society is this? The author compares and contrasts two categories of people who, even in our time, meet and conflict with each other.
Griboedov's comedy, like the globe, has two poles. On one of them is Chatsky - an intelligent, brave, determined man. The author values ​​intelligence in people and wants to show his main character as a person of the highest moral principles. Arriving in Moscow after a long absence, Alexander Andreevich is disappointed. He hopes to meet Sofia, whom he has loved since childhood. But when he comes to her house, he realizes that he is not welcome here. It is in this house that Chatsky encounters Famusov’s society: Famusov himself, Skalozub, Molchalin and other equally stupid, mediocre and insignificant people. Their main goal was to “earn” a high rank and have a place in high society. I'm not saying that Chatsky did not belong to high society, but he did not stoop to the level of Famusov and others like him. Alexander Andreevich remained a man of honor, he did not lose his dignity. Chatsky is trying to understand why he is worse than Molchalin, because he is a deceitful and vile person. Why did Sofia choose Molchalin over him? What did this vile man do to deserve her attention? The main character is afraid to even think that Sofia has become the same as her father. The entire Famus society is trying to destroy a person who is smarter than them. They spread gossip about Chatsky's madness. By this act, the entire Famus society showed its stupidity. Not a single person has refuted this claim. Chatsky understands very well that there is no place for him in Moscow, and he leaves. But this does not indicate that Famus’s society managed to break his pride and honor. On the contrary, Chatsky still remained superior to Famusov and his entourage.
It seems to me that Chatsky is the most striking example for readers, that is, for you and me. By reading the comedy, we absorb into ourselves what the author wanted to teach, namely: honor, intelligence and human dignity.

In the comedy “Woe from Wit” all the characters are divided into positive ones - Chatsky - and negative ones - Famusov and Famusov’s society. Griboyedov called Chatsky an advanced person, that is, a person whose image will live forever, and Famusov’s society - the face of all the nobles of that century (“the century of the past”). In the comedy, Famus society opposes Chatsky. After all, in this society, education and science cause special hatred. Griboyedov not only ridicules this society, but mercilessly condemns it. Famusov, as the main representative of this society, is an undeveloped person. Consequently, ignorance reigns in his house. Chatsky is the absolute opposite of Famusov. He is a thinking and feeling person. His actions speak about this. Chatsky, it seems to me, is very trusting of people. When he returns to Moscow, he, without going home, runs to his beloved. But he was late. Sofia, Famusov’s daughter, has changed, she doesn’t have that old love - that’s how Famusov’s upbringing worked. By this, Griboedov shows Famusov’s selfishness. But as soon as Chatsky arrives, Famusov cordially welcomes him as a person of his own circle. He says:
Well, you threw it away!
I haven’t written two words for three years!
And it suddenly burst out as if from the clouds.
Famusov seems to want to show his friendship, which remains. However, it is not. Chatsky immediately runs to Sofia, but she is no longer the same. Despite this, Chatsky still loves her and immediately talks about her beauty. But in the end he finds out everything about her. For Griboedov, knowledge is above all, and ignorance is below everything. And it is not for nothing that Griboedov shows the role of Chatsky and compares his intelligence with the ignorance of Famus society. There is a lot of negative things in Famusov, and his ignorance is confirmed by the words in a conversation with Lisa about reading Sophia:
Tell me that it’s not good to spoil her eyes,
And reading is not of much use...
The Famus society calls Chatsky bad and says that he has gone crazy. But what struck Chatsky? This is what it was Sofia who started the gossip about Chatsky’s madness, and the whole society picked up:
And you'll really go crazy from these, from some
From boarding houses, schools, lyceums...
And Chatsky needs to leave Famusov’s house. He is defeated, since Famus society turned out to be stronger than Chatsky. But in turn, he gave a good rebuff to the “past century.”
The significance of the comedy “Woe from Wit” lies in the fact that the comedy vividly reflected the time when the struggle of the Decembrists against the oppressive landowners was intensifying.

“Woe from Wit” is a realistic comedy. Griboedov gave in it a true picture of Russian life. The comedy raised the topical social problems of those times: education, contempt for everything popular, worship of foreigners, education, service, ignorance of society.
The main character of the comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. Witty, eloquent, he angrily ridicules the vices of the society that surrounds him. He differs sharply from those around him in his intelligence, abilities, and independence of judgment. The image of Chatsky is something new, bringing change. This hero is an exponent of the progressive ideas of his time. Famus society is traditional. His life positions are such that “one must learn by looking at one’s elders,” one must destroy free-thinking thoughts, serve with obedience to those who are one step higher, one must be rich. Famusov's only passion is the passion for rank and money.
The beliefs of Chatsky and Famus society are different. Chatsky condemns serfdom, imitation of foreign goods, and people’s lack of desire for education and their own opinion. The dialogues between Chatsky and Famusov are a struggle. At the beginning of the comedy it is not so acute. Famusov is even ready to give up Sofia’s hand, but sets conditions:
I would say, firstly: don’t be a whim,
Brother, don’t mismanage your property,
And, most importantly, go ahead and serve.
To which Chatsky replies:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
But gradually the struggle turns into a battle. Chatsky argues with Famusov about the way and path of life. But the main character is alone in the fight against the views of Moscow society, in which he has no place.
Molchalin and Skalozub are not the last representatives of Famus society. They are rivals and opponents of Chatsky. Molchalin is helpful and silent. He wants to please with his humility, accuracy, and flattery. Skalozub shows himself to be someone very important, businesslike, significant. But under his uniform he hides “weakness, poverty of mind.” His thoughts are connected only with obtaining a higher rank, money, power:
Yes, to get ranks, there are many channels;
I judge them as a true philosopher:
I just wish I could become a general.
Chatsky does not tolerate lies and falsehood. This man's tongue is as sharp as a knife. Each of his characteristics is sharp and caustic:
Molchalin was so stupid before!..
Most pathetic creature!
Has he really grown wiser?.. And he -
Khripun, strangled, bassoon,
A constellation of maneuvers and mazurkas!
Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?..” mercilessly condemns Famus society. Each new face that appears during the development of the plot takes Famusov’s side. Gossip grows like a snowball. And Chatsky can’t stand it. He can no longer remain in the company of low, mean, arrogant and stupid people. They condemned him for his intelligence, for freedom of speech and thought, for honesty.
Before leaving, Chatsky throws out to the entire Famus society:
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.
Chatsky is taller than them; the best and rarest qualities are manifested in him. Those who cannot see and appreciate this are, at the very least, simply fools. Chatsky is immortal, and now this hero is relevant.
The comedy “Woe from Wit” made a huge contribution to the development of Russian literature. Griboyedov's play was, is and will be a modern work until veneration for rank, thirst for profit, and gossip disappear from our lives.

The comedy was written on the eve of the Decembrist uprising in 1825. In the comedy “Woe from Wit” Griboedov gave a true picture of Russian life after the Patriotic War of 1812. In a small work, Griboyedov depicted only one day in Famusov’s house.
In comedy we meet people who are of equal origin. These are nobles, but everyone has their own views on life. Their opinions contradict each other. A certain conflict arises between them, which is hidden from prying eyes. But in the comedy “Woe from Wit” this conflict is clearly visible and not hidden - the clash of the “Current Century”, of which Chatsky was a representative, with the “past century”, which is represented by Famusov and his entourage.
One of the most prominent figures in comedy is Famusov. Famusov is an influential person who occupies a significant position. In addition, he is a rich landowner. An important government position and a large estate create a strong position for Famusov among the Moscow nobility. He does not bother himself with work and spends his time in idleness:
...Magnificent chambers built,
Where they indulge in feasts and extravagance...
He looks at public service as a path to achieving wealth and rank. He uses his official position for personal purposes. Famusov looks at enlightenment and new progressive views as a source of “depravity.” Learning considers evil:
Learning is the plague, learning is the reason,
What is worse now than then,
There were crazy people, deeds, and opinions.
However, he gives his daughter a good upbringing.
Hospitality for Famusov is a means of maintaining connections with useful people.
Famusov is one of the most prominent representatives of the Moscow nobility. Other people are also represented: Colonel Skalozub, princes Tugoukhovsky, countesses Khryumina.
Griboedov satirically draws Famus’s society. The characters are funny and disgusting, but not because the author made them that way, but because they are that way in reality.
Skalozub is a man of age and money. Service for him is not the defense of the fatherland, but the achievement of nobility and money.
Famusov's world consists not only of serf owners, but also of their servants. Molchalin is an official dependent on Famus society. Molchalin was taught to please influential people. For his diligence he received three awards. Molchalin is scary because he can take on any form: both a patriot and a lover. Despite individual differences, all members of Famus society are a single social group.
Chatsky appears in this society, a man of advanced ideas, fiery feelings and high morality. He belongs to a noble society, but in terms of his way of thinking he does not find like-minded people. In this society, Chatsky feels lonely. His views provoke resistance from others. Chatsky's most acute denunciations are directed against serfdom. It is serfdom that makes it possible for the people of Famus society to live by robbery.
Chatsky left public service because they demanded sycophancy from him:
I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.
He stands for true enlightenment, art, science. Chatsky is against the education that is given to children in noble families. He fought for freedom of thought, freedom of action. It seems to me that this is the main difference between Chatsky and Famus society, which did not recognize such morals.
I think that such a great work will delight and surprise more than one generation.

The Russian envoy A. S. Griboyedov, nicknamed Vazir-Mukhtar by the Persians, was killed in Tehran in the winter of 1826 as a result of a conspiracy of Muslim fanatics. But the murder was prepared in advance in distant, snowy Russia, frightened by the December events on Senate Square. Griboedov was not among the Decembrists, but he was feared no less than the rebels who came out to protest to the tsar. The comedy “Woe from Wit,” which passed from hand to hand, sowed sedition even in the manuscript, like Radishchev’s “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow.” Mortal

The sentence to the writer - a mission to Persia - was confirmed by the highest hand on the banks of the Neva. Griboyedov became Vazir-Mukhtar. Society doomed a brilliant personality to death. But the play lived on despite everything...

The ideological basis of the work is the conflict of the young nobleman Chatsky with the society from which he himself came. The events of the comedy develop in a Moscow aristocratic house over the course of one day. But, despite the narrow spatial and temporal framework, the author vividly and in detail painted a picture of the life of the noble society of that time and showed everything new, living, advanced that was timidly emerging

In its depths.

Chatsky is a representative of the advanced part of the noble youth, who are already aware of the inertia and cruelty of the surrounding reality, the insignificance and emptiness of people who consider themselves the creators and masters of life.

There are still few heroes like Chatsky, but they are appearing, and this is a sign of the times. Griboedov reflected the main conflict of the era - the clash between the conservative forces of society and freedom-loving individuals, heralds of new trends and ideas. This conflict was not invented by the author; behind it are the best people of the era, future Decembrists, full of anxiety for their homeland and people, embarking on the path of struggle for happiness, for bright ideals, for the future.

Griboedov showed a new type of person, active, caring, capable of speaking out against serfdom and rigidity of views in defense of freedom, intelligence and humanity. This is exactly how Chatsky wants to see the features of the “present century”, in which “... the unclean Lord destroyed this spirit of empty, slavish, blind imitation.” With passionate speeches, free thoughts, and the entire behavior of the hero, outdated standards of life are rejected and a new ideology is glorified, the views of the Decembrists are preached.

Famus society, preserving the privileges and traditions of the “past century”, the century of obedience and fear, defends the ideology of servility, veneration and hypocrisy. In the understanding of society, “intelligence is the ability to make a career,” “winning awards,” and “living a fun life.” People who live by such principles are deeply indifferent to the fate of their homeland and people. Their cultural and moral level can be judged by Famusov’s remarks: “They would take away all the books and burn them,” “Learning is the reason that now there are more crazy people, deeds, and opinions than ever.”

The main task of this society is to preserve the way of life intact, to do “as the fathers did.” It is not for nothing that Chatsky often reminds of this very thing: “everyone sings the same song,” “judgments are drawn from forgotten newspapers.” And Famusov instructs everyone: “You should learn by looking at your elders.” The path to cherished well-being is, for example, the career of Maxim Petrovich:

When do you need to help yourself?

And he bent over.

Here everyone, as Chatsky puts it, does not “serve”, but is “served.” This is most clearly manifested in Molchalin, whom his father taught to “please all people without exception,” and even “to the janitor’s dog, so that it was affectionate.”

In the musty world of Famus, Chatsky appears like a cleansing thunderstorm. He is in every way the opposite of the ugly representatives of this society. If Molchalin, Famusov, Skalozub see the meaning of life in their well-being (“bureaucratic”, “shtetls”), then Chatsky dreams of selfless service to the fatherland in order to benefit the people, which he considers “smart and vigorous.” Chatsky sharply criticizes a society mired in hypocrisy, hypocrisy, and debauchery. He values ​​people who are ready to “put their minds hungry for knowledge into science” or engage in “creative, lofty and beautiful” art. Famusov cannot calmly listen to Chatsky’s speeches; he covers his ears. Living deaf is the only opportunity to protect yourself from Chatsky’s accusations!

In his speeches, Chatsky constantly uses the pronoun “we”. And this is no coincidence, since he is not alone in his desire for change. On the pages of the comedy, a number of off-stage characters are mentioned who can be classified as allies of the protagonist. This is Skalozub’s cousin, who left the service, “in the village he began to read books; these are professors from the St. Petersburg Pedagogical Institute; This is Prince Fedor - a chemist and botanist.

Chatsky, as the hero of the work, not only embodies the ethics and aesthetics of the Decembrists, but has much in common with real historical figures.

He left the service, like Nikita Muravyov, Chaadaev. They would be happy to serve, but “being served is sickening.” We know that Chatsky “writes and translates nicely,” like most of the Decembrists: Kuchelbecker, Odoevsky, Ryleev...

There were still several years left before the great and tragic events of the twenty-fifth year, but with the final scene of Chatsky’s defeat, Griboedov perhaps anticipated the outcome of these events.

With fervor and mockery, Chatsky utters his last words, in which he pours out “all the bile and all the annoyance,” and leaves, leaving the “tormenting crowd” alone with slander, deceit, hostility towards each other, inventions and nonsense - in a word, with the emptiness of decrepit light.

At the end of the action, a carriage appears. Maybe this is a symbol of farewell, or maybe a long road that the hero is still destined to travel.

Half a century after the creation of the comedy, when the Chatskys, who miraculously survived in the Nerchinsk mines, returned to freedom, the words of the play’s finale sounded very convincing. After all, the “loyal sons of Russia” returned as winners.

At all times there have been, are and probably will be their own Chatskys, Griboyedovs, Vazir-Mukhtars, who, thanks to their brilliant and far-sighted mind, become prophets in their fatherland. As a rule, this violates the established social order, the “natural” course of things, and society comes into conflict with the individual. But for true prophets there is and cannot be any other way than to go forward - “for the honor of the fatherland, for convictions, for love.”

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’d 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 to instill in the reader with his bold phrases a complete disgust for the vices of the “past century.” Chatsky’s conflict with Famus society nevertheless brought its educational fruits.

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.”