Essay: Why is Fonvizin’s comedy Minor, denouncing serfdom, called a comedy of education. The theme of serfdom and education in the comedy "Undergrowth" The attitude of Fonvizin to serfdom

Style: interaction of several artistic directions. 1. classicism - love intrigue as the engine of the plot, division into +s and -s heroes, one-dimensional character of the hero, saying surnames (\The playwright gives his characters names and surnames indicating their main features. Thus, Mitrofan, translated from Greek means “like a mother.” Prostakov’s surname comes from the word “simpleton,” which in the time of Fonvizin meant “low-minded,” “misguided.” The surnames of other characters in the play are equally eloquent: Skotinin, Vralman, Starodum, Pravdin, Tsyfirkin.), preserved the classic principle of “three unities”: unity of place, unity of time and unity of action. Events take place in the house of the landowner Prostakova during the day. The play has five acts. The plot of the comedy is based on a traditional love affair - the relationship between Sophia and contenders for her hand and heart (Milon, Skotinin and Mitrofan).

2. features of the emerging Enlightenment realism - love intrigue on the 2nd plane, on the 1st plane problems of real reality, a false love triangle (Skotinin, Sophia, Metrofan), the image of some characters becomes more complicated, becomes psychologically ambiguous (Ms. Prostakova as a disturbing despot. love for son).. However, Fonvizin’s “negative” heroes are already multifaceted; he tries to avoid schematism in depicting the characters. Thus, Mitrofanushka in “The Minor” is not only ignorant, but also rude, cowardly, and malicious. In the finale, he actually renounces his own mother, who has completely failed in her intentions. Mrs. Prostakova rushes to her son, trying to find support and consolation from him, and in response she hears: “Let go, mother, how you imposed yourself...” In a certain sense, the character of the landowner herself is multifaceted. Mrs. Prostakova is depicted in the play in various guises: she is a landowner who is cruel in her relations with the serfs, and a domineering wife, and a mother who blindly loves her child. A broader than usual depiction of the everyday background of the play due to off-stage and episodic characters. The serf girl Palashka doesn’t work because she’s sick. “Oh, she lies shameless as if she were noble” (off-stage character. problems of serfdom). individualization of language, especially of characters. The life-like authenticity of the comedy and the versatility of the characters are largely created thanks to the speech of the heroes. Thus, in the speech of the landowner Prostakova, rude, abusive, and insulting expressions are often found. “From morning to evening, like someone hanged by the tongue, I don’t lay down my hands: I scold, I fight; This is how the house holds together,” she confidentially tells Pravdin. “Cattle”, “thief”, “thief’s mug”, “scum”, “beast”, “dog’s daughter” - these are her addresses to the servants. She considers her husband a “freak” and a “weeper.” Affectionate, ingratiating intonations that convey maternal love appear in her only when communicating with her son: “my dear friend,” “darling.” Skotinin’s speech also clearly outlines the range of his interests: “Well, be I a pig’s son, if ...”, “I want to have my own piglets”, “if I ... have a special barn for each pig, then I will find a little room for my wife.” Researchers have repeatedly noted that likening a hero to an animal is one of the main techniques for creating satirical characters. Fonvizin actively uses this technique in his comedy, emphasizing the animal nature of all the “negative” heroes of “The Minor.” Skotinin’s remark about himself takes on a symbolic character: “I love pigs, sister, and in our neighborhood there are such large pigs that there is not a single one of them that, standing on its hind legs, would not be a whole head taller than each of us.” The speech of Mitrofan's teachers also reflects their personality and life circumstances. Thus, a half-educated seminarian Kuteikin often uses words of high style, Church Slavonicisms in his speech: “meal”, “fingers”, “a byword”. Retired sergeant Kuteikin reminds us of military service with his remarks: “We wish your honor good health...”. The German Vralman, who teaches Mitrofan French, also reveals to us in his remarks traces of his former “profession” (he was previously a coachman for Starodum): “horse”, “little horses”, “carriage”. The speech of Eremeevna, Mitrofan’s nurse, is bright and colorful. Her remarks contain stable phrases (“a column of smoke”, “she carried away her legs with force”), repetitions (“get married, my father, get married”), words with diminutive suffixes (“little head”, “brother”).

“I don’t want to study, I want to get married.”

FROM ALINA'S SPUR. The liter of the 18th century is the liter of the era of enlightenment, its main pathos is the idea of ​​morality, development of intelligence, active enlightenment of the individual. The 18th century is the century of active state construction. Ch. The theme is educational.

Hood Stroit 19th century - a movement from classicism with its idea of ​​normativity, exemplaryness, imitativeness to sentimentalism and romanticism, where there is an interest in the inner world and freedom of creativity.

In the 60-70s. - serious changes at all levels of literature, classicism has collapsed, ideology has changed, the ideas of the Enlightenment come to the fore - freedom, equality, fraternity, there is a struggle with the church, faith in an enlightened monarchy, in science ( it is science that is better). In Russia Russian Enlightenment developed in parallel with class-ism and is closely connected with state-military politics. problems.

The highest development of Enlightenment. received on TV by Radishchev, Krylov, Fonvizin.

There is some debate about when work began on "Ned" in 1766. A kind of prototype for the collisions of Ned's play was Catherine II's comedy "Oh, Time."

“Ned” is determined not only by the theme of images and education, but also by a more general theme - what place should the nobility occupy in modern society. The play shows a turning point - the moment when the heroes get the right to choose between obliging society to duty and living “for themselves.” The play actively discusses the “decree on the freedom of the nobility” of 1761.

More specific problems addressed in the play are the condemnation of ignorance, the failure to educate part of the nobility, which Fon considers to be destructive of the human personality, reducing people to the level of animals, this is manifested in the technique (Taras Skotinin, comparison of Prostakova with animals).

Upbringing and education itself, as Fonvizin understands, is multidimensional; he distinguishes between the education of the mind and moral development and considers moral development to be more important, significant, and shaping personality.

The theme of education is completely important in the play, which is connected with the characteristics of not only Mitrofanushka, but also other characters: Mrs. Prostakova, Skotinin on the one hand, and Starodum, Sophia on the other.

Fonvizin speaks more carefully about the problem of abuse of serfdom; he emphasizes that serfdom is becoming obsolete economically, but to a greater extent serfdom does not constitute the moral side; Fonve shows its corrupting effect on both masters and servants.

The problem of an ideal monarchy: Fonve condemns the abuses of Catherine's court, but at the same time highly values ​​the very concept of an ideal monarch, who highly values ​​the law, personal power, reason and law (5 acts).

The comedy “Undergrown” is the pinnacle of Fonviz TV. Combines class-zma and innovative features.

Following the traditions of classism is manifested in the fact that comedy retains all the signs of a “low” genre. This is the first social and political comedy on stage. The play ridicules vices (rudeness, stupidity, cruelty, ugliness), which require immediate correction. The problem of education is the center. in the ideas of enlightenment in Fon's comedies. The specificity of the depiction of my action corresponds to the language of pronunciation (one of the rules of the class), Prostakova’s speech in relation to the servants is rude, in relation to her son it is affectionate. “Correct”, “bookish” language will lay the foundation for speech. characters. Observe the rule of 3 unities, the action in the estate of Mrs. Prostakova, as soon as the action is subordinated to the author. task - solving the problem of true education. In the comedy, unenlightened, unimaginative characters (Prostakovs, Skotinin, Mitrofanushka) are contrasted with imaginative, enlightened ones (Starodum, Sophia, Pravdin). Dividing characters into half and deny - one of the rules of class-zma.

Novat-vo. Background, it is important not only to pose the problem of education, but also to show how the environment influences the formation of character and personality. In “The Minor” the foundations are laid for a realistic representation of the action; the author reproduces the atmosphere of landowner tyranny, cruelty, impunity and ignorance of the Prostakovs and Skotinins. Unlike the classic The pronunciation “Undergrowth” is a multi-themed production. Its main problems are closely related to each other: problems of educational communication. with the problems of the serf parv and the state. authorities. To expose vices, the author uses such techniques as telling names and self-exposure of characters. Put it in your mouth. Von's heroes contribute criticism of the depraved age, the idle nobles, and the ignorant landowners. The theme of service to the Fatherland, the celebration of justice, is carried through positively. images. The language also serves to reveal images: bookish language is used as the basis, in Starodum’s speech there are archaisms. Pravdin is characterized by clericalism, and the young people Sophia and Milon have sentimental turns of phrase.

New in the system of images: Fon introduces heroes from the lower class (Trishka, Eremeevna, teachers Kuteikin and Tsyfirkin). In addition, Fon tried to give a brief background to the characters, to reveal different facets of the characters of some of them. Prostakova at the beginning of the comedy is a cruel landowner, in the finale she is an unhappy mother, rejected by her own. son.

2. Roman I.A. Goncharov "Oblomov". Critical literature about the novel and the peculiarities of Goncharov’s talent as an artist.

Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov ()

In the early 50-60s of the 19th century, the destruction of all the old foundations of patriarchal Russia began. The country was saying goodbye to inertia, stagnation, and inaction, but it was losing the warmth of relations between people and respect for traditions.

In 1859 - the novel “Oblomov”, he wrote for ten years.

The main character of the novel is Ilya Ilyich Oblomov: 32 - 33 years old, average height, pleasant appearance, lacking any idea or concentration. There is a light of carelessness throughout his face.

The simple plot of the novel deeply and truthfully reflected Russian reality. The novel is interesting because we can identify the image of Ilya Ilyich Oblomov with a certain type of people living in Russia at that time. Goncharov introduces his hero into different situations in order to show to the maximum extent all the disadvantages and advantages of the Oblomov type. Ilya Ilyich is tested by both friendship and love. The main character's character is most clearly revealed in his relationship with Olga Ilyinskaya. Love literally transforms Ilya Ilyich and brings out his best qualities. Their love continues until Ilya has to face real life, until decisive action is required from him, until Olga realizes that she loves the future Oblomov. Neither friendship, nor even such pure, sincere love could force Oblomov to abandon his ideals: a peaceful, calm, carefree life, hearty food and serene sleep. “What ruined you? There is no name for this evil...” Olga exclaims when parting. “There is... Oblomovism!” - he whispered barely audibly.

The broad and gentle character was influenced by:

1) Central Russian nature of Oblomovka. Nature here, like an affectionate mother, takes care of the silence and measured tranquility of a person’s entire life.

2) a special “mode” of peasant life with a rhythmic sequence of everyday life and holidays.

3) education. Oblomov's parents understood the importance and necessity of education, but saw it only as a means of career advancement.

4) excessive love and affection of the mother. The nanny whispered to him about the side “where there are no nights or cold, where miracles happen, where rivers of honey and milk flow and where no one does anything all year round.” As an adult, he dreams of her.

5) labor was the main enemy of the inhabitants of Oblomovka. They “endured it as a punishment, and where there was a chance, they always got rid of it. The desire for independence was stopped by the cries of the parents: “What are servants for?”

Goncharov revealed the socio-psychological causes of “Oblomovism” and identified many important features of the Russian national character.

Dobrolyubov “What is Oblomovism?”

1) In the type of Oblomov and in all this Oblomovism - there is more than just talent, it is a sign of the times.

2) The main features of Oblomov’s character are complete inertia. The reason lies in his external position, and partly in the manner of his mental and moral development. In terms of his external position, he is a gentleman; “he has Zakhar and three hundred more Zakharovs.” The habit of receiving satisfaction of his desires not from his own efforts, but from others, plunged him into a pitiful state of moral slavery.

3) Oblomovism in literature:

Oblomov is not a completely new face in our literature: Onegin, Pechorin, Beltov, Rudin are also Oblomovs. N.A. Dobrolyubov wrote: “Oblomov is our indigenous, folk type, from which not one of our serious artists could separate.”

I. A. Goncharov wrote his “Oblomov”, being under the strong influence of V. G. Belinsky. A large “programmatic” part of the novel - exposing the social evil of “Oblomovism” - obscures another, no less important part - about love, about the relationship between a man and a woman, about marriage. The artist overpowered the publicist and exposer of social disease in Goncharov.

Belinsky about Goncharov in general.

“A Look at Russian Literature of 1847” (48) consists of 2 articles:

- “General assessment and origins of “nat.shk”;

- “About specific works of “NAT.SHK” writers.

The second article examines Herzen, Goncharov, Turgenev, Grigorovich, Dal, Druzhinin, Dostoevsky. A comparative analysis of Goncharov's "Ordinary History" and "Who is to Blame?" is given. Herzen (Herzen the thinker, Goncharov the artist; another image of a woman - not cloyingly sentimental; much attention to Aduev Jr. - by type - a romantic, incapable of friendship, love)

A. V. Druzhinin “Oblomov”, Goncharov’s novel “The character of Ilya reflects the essential aspects of Russian life, But in vain many people try to despise Oblomov, he is dear to all of us and is worth boundless love.

It is not good for the land where there are no kind and incapable of evil eccentrics like Oblomov.

Oblomovism is an early stage of the country’s development (childhood). The Druzhinin approach to understanding Oblomov and Oblomovism did not become popular in the 19th century.

But in the 20th century Prishvin about Oblomov:

his peace conceals within itself a demand for the highest value, for an activity for which it would be worth losing peace.

They also wrote: Yu. I. Aikhenvald. “Silhouettes of Russian Writers” - Goncharov (about Oblomov’s novel - excerpt)

This ordinary story of human destiny, human life and death is what is most attractive in the famous novel.

D.I. Pisarev. (From the article “Oblomov”). 1859 Rarely has a novel revealed in its author such a power of analysis, such a complete and subtle knowledge of human nature in general and female nature in particular...

N. O. Lossky. (From the article “The Character of the Russian People”). 1957 Oblomovshchina - the other side of the high qualities of the Russian person - the desire for complete perfection and sensitivity to the shortcomings of our reality...

D. S. Merezhkovsky. (From the article “Eternal Companions. Goncharov”). 1890 Everyone noticed, and the author himself admits, that the German Stolz is an unfortunate, fictitious figure. You feel tired from his long and cold conversations with Olga. He loses all the more in our eyes because he stands next to Oblomov, like a machine gun with a living person...

In all of Fonvizin’s dramatic works, three themes are clearly traced, on which the author tried to focus the reader’s attention. Among them are serfdom, the state structure of Russia, and the topic of educating the younger generation. At first glance, the issues in the comedy “The Minor” concern only social problems, but this is far from the case. It's much deeper. Only after reading the work to the end will it become clear how important it was for the author to emphasize the topical theme of the moral and intellectual level of the nobility.

The problem of educating young nobles

The title of the work speaks for itself. In the 18th century, a young nobleman who had not reached the age of sixteen and had not received an education document was considered a minor. The theme of education in the comedy is leading.

Mitrofan is the son of the landowners Prostakovs. Nobleman. At his age, all roads to a bright future are open, but it is unlikely that he is striving for it. The guy is completely uninterested in anything. Illiterate. Rude and selfish. Sissy.

An appropriate teaching staff was selected for him. It is unclear what criteria his mother based on when she hired these unfortunate teachers. Kuteikin deacon teaching Mitrofan to read and write. Tsyfirkin is a former military man who teaches arithmetic. Vralman used to work as a coachman for Starodum. Now a teacher of French and other sciences. In the four years that they have been working for the Prostakovs, they have not been able to teach Mitrofan basic things. Either he cannot be taught, or the teachers are absolute incompetents. There is nothing to be surprised about. Mitrofan's circle is mother, father, uncle. They are all illiterate people and they taught him that studying is not necessary. If there was money and power, the rest would follow.

There was no positive example before him to follow. The mother is boorish and rude. Characterized by particular cruelty towards serfs. Her own husband suffers from her antics. She managed to turn him into a weak-willed rag, on which she could wipe her feet and step on if necessary. Powerful and demanding. Don't mind letting go.

Mitrofan's father, from a normal man, became a reptile who is afraid to say too much for fear of angering his wife. Has no opinion of his own. Submits to Prostakova in everything. It’s so convenient for him to live behind a woman’s back. He happily handed over to her the reins of government and the opportunity to manage everything and everyone in their household.

Uncle Mitrofan is the same illiterate and narrow-minded person. Has a love for pigs and money. Seeks profit in everything. He dreams of marrying a bride with a rich dowry.

What could these people give Mitrofan? Nothing. Among such surroundings there is not a single worthy person. Mitrofan had no one to follow as an example. He grew up to be a moral monster for whom nothing is sacred. The guy is an exact copy of his mother, having adopted everything bad from her.

Among the positive characters I would like to mention Starodum, Milon, Pravdin, Sophia. Smart, educated people. Starodum is a wise mentor for Sophia. From their conversations it is clear that the person is fighting for truth and justice. Values ​​honesty and decency. I've seen and experienced a lot in my life. He shares his experience and outlook on life with his niece. Sophia was lucky with her uncle. Such a mentor can teach only good things and, unlike Mitrofan, she will go through life the right way.

Fonvizin was deeply worried about the future of Russia. The current state of affairs did not suit him. He is categorically against the nobility being corrupted at the expense of people like the Prostakovs and Skotinins. In his opinion, only proper education can save the nobility from spiritual degradation.

The problem of serfdom

Literally from the first episode of the comedy, you can see how the landowner abuses her position and power, taking out evil on the serfs. Trishka fell under her hot hand, having unsuccessfully sewed a caftan. Retribution awaited the unfortunate tailor. No excuses had any effect on Prostakova. Understanding full well that he was not a professional in his field and one could forgive the guy for unsuccessfully taking measurements, but the landowner was adamant. Without hesitation, the lady gave the order to punish the culprit.

The entire work is saturated with landowner tyranny from beginning to end. A dramatic conflict unfolds between progressive-minded nobles represented by Starodum and Pravdin with serf owners led by Skotinin and Prostakovs.

In this lesson, you will continue your acquaintance with the work of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin “The Minor”, ​​consider how the author presented the problems of education and serfdom in his play, what way out he sees from this situation.

After this, many events took place in Russian life: the annexation of Crimea, Suvorov’s legendary crossing of the Alps, the founding of the Tsarsko-Selo Lyceum and the Patriotic War of 1812. And Pushkin’s generation perceives the era of Fonvizin almost as a venerable antiquity. In the novel “Eugene Onegin” Pushkin writes:

“...in old age,

Satire is a brave ruler,

Fonvizin, friend of freedom, shone..."

If Pushkin (Fig. 2) feels such a temporal distance in 1823, talking about the comedy that was staged in 1782, then it is even more difficult for our generation to understand Fonvizin’s work.

Rice. 2. A.S. Pushkin ()

Like any talented work, the comedy “Minor” (Fig. 3) reflects the specific features of a certain era, its unique signs, but at the same time it also poses universal timeless questions. One of them was the issue of education. This topic turns out to be very important in general for the Enlightenment tradition, where the focus is on the improvement of man, the maturation of his mind, and the social status of a wise public person. We remember education when we work with a movement such as classicism, where the author in one way or another tries to enlighten and educate his reader or viewer. It is no coincidence that Fonvizin’s work is often called a comedy of education. This is such a clarifying genre definition.

Rice. 3. Title page of the first edition of the comedy “Minor” ()

In the comedy, the reader sees the upbringing of Mitrofan, who is a young man, a nobleman, an underage, that is, one who has not yet grown into public service, but will soon grow up. In modern Russian, the concept of “minor” is a common noun and has a negative semantic connotation. Initially, the word “minor” did not imply any assessment. It was a social status, even an age - a teenager, a teenager, someone who is not yet 18 years old and therefore has not yet acquired rights and does not bear responsibility. It is only because of the comedy “The Minor” that the word means what we are accustomed to - an ignorant, uneducated person, spineless, ill-mannered, arrogant.

In the comedy “The Minor”, ​​upbringing and such an important component as education come to the fore.

Education is mastery of the sciences, an increase in scientific knowledge, some kind of academic success.

Let's consider what successes the hero of Fonvizin's comedy shows in the field of teaching science:

Act four. PhenomenonVII

Mitrofan. So I sat down.

Tsyfirkin is cleaning the stylus.

Mrs. Prostakova.And I’ll sit down right away. I'll knit a wallet for you, my friend! There would be somewhere to put Sophia's money.

Mitrofan.Well! Give me the board, garrison rat! Ask what to write.

Tsyfirkin.Your Honor, please always bark idlely.

Ms. Prostakova(working).Oh, my God! Don’t you dare elect Pafnutich, little kid! I'm already angry!

Tsyfirkin.Why be angry, your honor? We have a Russian proverb: the dog barks, the wind blows.

Mitrofan.Get off your butts and turn around.

Tsyfirkin.All butts, your honor. He stayed with his backside a century ago.

Mrs. Prostakova.It's none of your business, Pafnutich. It’s very nice to me that Mitrofanushka doesn’t like to step forward. With his intelligence, he may fly far, and God forbid!

Tsyfirkin.Task. You deigned, by the way, to walk along the road with me. Well, at least we’ll take Sidorich with us. We found three...

Mitrofan(writes).Three.

Tsyfirkin.On the road, for the butt, three hundred rubles.

Mitrofan(writes).Three hundred.

Tsyfirkin.It came down to division. Think about it, why on your brother?

Mitrofan(calculating, whispers).Once three - three. Once zero is zero. Once zero is zero.

Mrs. Prostakova.What, what about division?

Mitrofan.Look, the three hundred rubles that were found should be divided among the three.

Mrs. Prostakova.He's lying, my dear friend! I found the money and didn’t share it with anyone. Take it all for yourself, Mitrofanushka. Don't study this stupid science.

Mitrofan.Listen, Pafnutich, ask another question.

Tsyfirkin.Write, your honor. You give me ten rubles a year for my studies.

Mitrofan.Ten.

Tsyfirkin.Now, really, no problem, but if you, master, took something from me, it wouldn’t be a sin to add ten more.

Mitrofan(writes).Well, well, ten.

Tsyfirkin.How much for a year?

Mitrofan(calculating, whispers).Zero yes zero - zero. One and one...(Thinking.)

Mrs. Prostakova.Don't work in vain, my friend! I won’t add a penny; and you're welcome. Science is not like that. Only you are tormented, but all I see is emptiness. No money - what to count? There is money - we’ll figure it out well without Pafnutich.

Kuteikin.Sabbath, really, Pafnutich. Two problems have been solved. They won’t bring it to reality.

Mitrofan.Probably, brother. Mother herself can’t make a mistake here. Go now, Kuteikin, teach yesterday a lesson.

Kuteikin(opens the book of hours, Mitrofan takes the pointer).Let's start by blessing ourselves. Follow me, with attention. “I am a worm...”

Mitrofan.“I am a worm...”

Kuteikin.Worm, that is, animal, cattle. In other words: “I am cattle.”

Mitrofan.“I am cattle.”

Mitrofan(Also)."Not a man."

Kuteikin."Reproaching people."

Mitrofan."Reproaching people."

Kuteikin."And uni..."

Act four. PhenomenonVIII

Mrs. Prostakova.That's the thing, father. For the prayers of our parents - we sinners, where could we beg - the Lord gave us Mitrofanushka. We did everything to make him the way you would like to see him. Wouldn’t you like, my father, to take on the labor and see how we learned it?

Starodum.O madam! It has already reached my ears that he now only deigned to unlearn. I have heard about his teachers and I can see in advance what kind of literate he needs to be, studying with Kuteikin, and what kind of mathematician, studying with Tsyfirkin. (To Pravdin.) I would be curious to hear what the German taught him.

Ms. Prostakova, Prostakov(together):

- All sciences, father.

- Everything, my father. Mitrofan. Whatever you want.

Pravdin(To Mitrofan).Why, for example?

Mitrofan(hands him the book).Here, grammar.

Pravdin(taking the book).I see. This is grammar. What do you know about it?

Mitrofan.A lot of. Noun and adjective...

Pravdin.Door, for example, which name: a noun or an adjective?

Mitrofan.A door, which is a door?

Pravdin.Which door! This one.

Mitrofan.This? Adjective.

Pravdin.Why?

Mitrofan.Because it is attached to its place. Over there at the closet of the pole for a week the door has not yet been hung: so for now that is a noun.

Starodum.So that's why you use the word fool as an adjective, because it is applied to a stupid person?

Mitrofan.And it is known.

Mrs. Prostakova.What, what is it, my father?

Mitrofan.How is it, my father?

Pravdin.It couldn't be better. He is strong in grammar.

Milo.I think no less in history.

Mrs. Prostakova.Well, my father, he is still a hunter of stories.

Skotinin.Mitrofan for me. I myself won’t take my eyes off it without the elected official telling me stories. Master, son of a dog, where does everything come from!

Mrs. Prostakova.However, he still won’t come against Adam Adamych.

Pravdin(To Mitrofan).How far are you in history?

Mitrofan.How far is it? What's the story. In another you will fly to distant lands, to a kingdom of thirty.

Pravdin.A! Is this the story that Vralman teaches you?

Starodum.Vralman? The name is somewhat familiar.

Mitrofan.No, our Adam Adamych doesn’t tell stories; He, like me, is a keen listener himself.

Mrs. Prostakova.They both force themselves to tell stories to the cowgirl Khavronya.

Pravdin.Didn’t you both study geography from her?

Ms. Prostakova(to son).Do you hear, my dear friend? What kind of science is this?

Prostakov(quietly to mother).How do I know?

Ms. Prostakova(quietly to Mitrofan).Don't be stubborn, darling. Now is the time to show yourself.

Mitrofan(quietly to mother).Yes, I have no idea what they are asking about.

Ms. Prostakova(Pravdin).What, father, did you call science?

Pravdin.Geography.

Ms. Prostakova(To Mitrofan).Do you hear, eorgafiya.

Mitrofan.What is it! Oh my God! They stuck me with a knife to my throat.

Ms. Prostakova(Pravdin).And we know, father. Yes, tell him, do me a favor, what kind of science this is, he will tell it.

Pravdin.Description of the land.

Ms. Prostakova(To Starodum).What would this serve in the first case?

Starodum.In the first case, it would also be suitable for the fact that if you happen to go, you know where you are going.

Mrs. Prostakova.Ah, my father! But what are cab drivers for? It's their business. This is not a noble science either. Nobleman, just say: take me there, and they will take you wherever you please. Believe me, father, that, of course, what Mitrofanushka does not know is nonsense.

Starodum.Oh, of course, madam. In human ignorance, it is very comforting to consider everything that you don’t know to be nonsense.

Mrs. Prostakova.Without sciences people live and lived.

Act one. PhenomenonVI

Sophia.Read it yourself, madam. You will see that nothing could be more innocent.

Mrs. Prostakova.Read it for yourself! No, madam, thank God, I was not brought up like that. I can receive letters, but I always tell someone else to read them. (To my husband.) Read.

Prostakov(looks for a long time).It's tricky.

Mrs. Prostakova.And you, my father, were apparently raised like a pretty girl. Brother, read it, work hard.

Skotinin. I ? I haven't read anything in my life, sister! God saved me from this boredom.

Act three. PhenomenonVII

Mrs. Prostakova.While he is resting, my friend, at least for the sake of appearance, learn, so that it reaches his ears how you work, Mitrofanushka.

Mitrofan.Well! And then what?

Mrs. Prostakova.And there I got married.

In Fonvizin’s comedy, which is natural for works of classicism, everything is said unambiguously, in plain text. We can only ask a rhetorical question: what success can be expected from a child if his parents instill in him from childhood that learning is not only unnecessary, but also harmful?

Mitrofan's teachers are not trustworthy either. The reader will learn interesting details about them:

Mrs. Prostakova.We pay three teachers. The sexton from Pokrov, Kuteikin, comes to him to read and write. One retired sergeant, Tsyfirkin, teaches him arithmetic, father. Both of them come here from the city. The city is three miles away from us, father. He is taught French and all sciences by the German Adam Adamych Vralman. This is three hundred rubles a year. We seat you at the table with us.<…>To tell the truth, we are happy with him, dear brother. He does not bondage the child.

Of course, the “talking” names are striking. The reader immediately gets an idea of ​​Mitrofanushka’s teachers. The “talking” surnames here are a sign of the author’s irony. The surname Vralman especially stands out - a hypocrite who curries favor with his masters and behaves extremely arrogantly with his servants. We find out that we have a deceiver in front of us, because he is a coachman, but pretends to be a competent teacher.

This creates a very sad picture. Indeed, Russian education at that time left much to be desired. Russia, having just immersed itself in a completely alien European culture with the light hand of Peter I, could not learn everything at once. In combination with natural human laziness, this gave such funny and sad results.

It is no coincidence that the famous critic Belinsky will later say about Fonvizin and his characters:

“His fools are very funny and disgusting. But this is because they are not creations of fantasy, but rather faithful lists from life.”

Pushkin and Fonvizin

Consider the table in which two heroes are compared: the hero of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” and the hero of Pushkin’s novel “The Captain’s Daughter.”

The heroes of these two works are in very similar starting conditions, but their life paths will be different. Think about why Pushkin deliberately orients his hero to some similarities with the undergrown Mitrofanushka.

Education involves not only the acquisition of scientific knowledge, but also the awakening of a person’s best qualities, the formation of his character. This situation in the family depicted by the author is even sadder than with arithmetic and geography.

Act four. PhenomenonVII

Skotinin.And here I am.

Starodum.Why did you come?

Skotinin.For your needs.

Starodum.How can I serve?

Skotinin.In two words.

Starodum.What are these?

Skotinin.Hugging me tighter, say: Sophia is yours.

Starodum.Are you planning something foolish? Think about it carefully.

Skotinin.I never think and I’m sure in advance that if you don’t think either, then Sophia is mine.

Starodum.This is a strange thing! You, as I see, are not crazy, but you want me to give my niece, to whom I don’t know.

Skotinin.You don't know, I'll say this. I am Taras Skotinin, not the last of my kind. The Skotinins family is great and ancient. You won’t find our ancestor in any heraldry.

Pravdin(laughing).This way you can assure us that he is older than Adam.

Skotinin.And what do you think? At least a few...

Starodum(laughing.)That is, your ancestor was created at least on the sixth day, and a little earlier than Adam?

Skotinin.No, right? So do you have a good opinion of the antiquity of my family?

Starodum.ABOUT! so kind that I wonder how in your place you can choose a wife from another family, like the Skotinins?

Skotinin.Think about how lucky Sophia is to be with me. She's a noblewoman...

Starodum.What a man! Yes, that’s why you’re not her fiancé.

Skotinin.I went for it. Let them talk that Skotinin married a noblewoman. It doesn't matter to me.

Starodum.Yes, it doesn’t matter to her when they say that the noblewoman married Skotinin.

Milo.Such inequality would make you both miserable.

Skotinin.Bah! What does this one equal? (Quietly to Starodum.) But isn’t he beating?

Starodum(quietly to Skotinin).It seems so to me.

Skotinin(same tone).Where's the line?

Starodum(same tone).Hard.

Skotinin(loudly, pointing to Milo).Which of us is funny? Ha ha ha ha!

Starodum(laughs).I see who's funny.

Sophia.Uncle! How nice it is to me that you are cheerful.

Skotinin(To Starodum).Bah! Yes, you are funny. Just now I thought that there would be no attack on you. You didn’t say a word to me, but now you keep laughing with me.

Starodum.Such is the man, my friend! The hour doesn't come.

Skotinin.This is clear. Just now I was the same Skotinin, and you were angry.

Starodum.There was a reason.

Skotinin.I know her. I'm the same way about this myself. At home, when I go to bite and find them out of order, I get annoyed. And you, without saying a word, when you came here, you found your sister’s house no better than the nibbles, and you’re annoyed.

Starodum.You make me happier. People touch me.

Skotinin.And I'm such a pig.

If the hero, in his own words, was created somewhat earlier than Adam, then, knowing biblical history, we can interpret this unambiguously: he classifies himself as a dumb creature - an animal. If we remember the incredible love for pig-like animals that Skotinin experiences, then a very definite perception occurs. This, of course, is a caricature - a satirical image, but the Prostakov family and the Skotinin line are, in general, not entirely people. They do not have the most important quality for classicists - the quality of reason. These are dumb animals.

It is no coincidence that in his surroundings Mitrofan learns to behave like bestials. He's getting lessons again. Now he is already quite a talented student, and the lessons of immorality are not in vain for him. The main teacher here is his mother. It is no coincidence that the very name of the main character is Mitrofan, which translated from Greek means “like a mother.”

Mitrofan sees how Prostakova despises, insults, and cruelly beats an old man - nanny Eremeevna. How he calls her “hrychovka”, how he tortures his own husband. She was born Skotinina, she is rude to everyone who depends on her, and openly flatters Starodum when she finds out that he has a fortune. At the beginning of the play, she mocks Sophia and humiliates her. And he fawns over her when she becomes a rich bride. Prostakova speaks with pride about her father, who acquired his fortune through bribes. Therefore, in Mitrofan she deliberately cultivates deceit and greed so that he too can achieve prosperity:

“I found the money, don’t share it with anyone! Keep everything for yourself, Mitrofanushka.”

Tired of this nightmare, the reader is glad to find something else in the play - good upbringing. Characters in comedy, as is typical of classicism, are built on the principle of antithesis - a clear opposition of good and bad. The terrible family is opposed, of course, by Starodum.

“My upbringing was given by my father, the best in that century,”- he says.

He has thought a lot in his time and, of course, knows that everything depends on who exactly is raising the young person. “What kind of education can children expect from a mother who has lost virtue?”- he asks. It is in the education of a person’s character and his spiritual qualities that the wise hero sees the promise of future happiness. The main human value for Starodum is inner purity and decency.

Starodum.My father constantly repeated the same thing to me: have a heart, have a soul, and you will be a man at all times.

Everyone will find enough strength within themselves to be virtuous. You have to want it decisively, and then the easiest thing will be not to do something for which your conscience would prick you.

The mind, if it is only the mind, is the most trifle. With runaway minds we see bad husbands, bad fathers, bad citizens. Good behavior gives him a direct price.

The rich man... the one who takes away what you don't have in order to help someone who doesn't have what you need.

This is what Starodum says and is guided by these principles in his life.

The reader finds a positive example and antithesis to Mitrofan in the representative of the younger generation - Sophia, whose name is translated from Greek as “wisdom”. The heroine appears on stage with a book by the French educator Fenelon about the education of girls. Being a poor orphan, she does not have invited teachers and stubbornly wants to improve herself mentally and grow. For this, both Starodum and the author himself sympathize with her.

Starodum is the hero-reasoner in the play.

Reasoning hero- the one who expresses the views of the author in a work.

Starodum loves Sophia very much, because she is ready to learn and become better at all costs, and from her uncle she expects not wealth, but good advice:

“Your instructions, uncle, will make up all my well-being. Give me rules that I must follow." Sophia asks about this.

The characters of the virtuous heroes in the play are not complex and believable. These, paradoxically, are much less alive people than the unpleasant Prostakova and her relatives. However, it is important for Fonvizin, as a classicist author, to give readers and viewers not only a disgusting, frightening picture, but also an example to follow.

According to the author, the ending of the comedy should also have an educational function. We must think about what model of family behavior Mitrofanushka will inherit: will the stupid, weak-willed Prostakovs or the aggressive and cruel Skotinins influence him in the end? But maybe there is some other way? It is obvious that Mitrofanushka, who has neither education nor benefits, will begin his service from the lowest rung of the career ladder. From a simple soldier he will rise up.

The same choice, but not under the pressure of circumstances, but independently and consciously, will be made by Petrusha Grinev’s father in Pushkin’s novel “The Captain’s Daughter.” He does not want an easy fate for Petrusha, but wants to raise him to be a real person and a valiant warrior. Thus, two young heroes - Mitrofanushka Prostakov and Petrusha Grinev - will find themselves in similar life circumstances. You can think for yourself why Pushkin, who wrote his novel much later (in 1836), does this; this is a very interesting question.

Pay attention to one statement of Starodum (hero-reasoner):

Starodum. We see all the unfortunate consequences of bad upbringing... how many noble fathers who entrust the moral education of their son to their serf slave! Fifteen years later, instead of one slave, two come out, an old guy and a young master.

It is not the careful, respectful coexistence and cooperation of peasants and nobles that the hero-reasoner sees in Russian life, but cruel mockery and humiliation. Thus, the text raises a very important and very acute problem in the era of Fonvizin, the problem of serfdom, or rather the abuse of serfdom.

Act one

Ms. Prostakova(examining the caftan on Mitrofan). The caftan is all ruined. Eremeevna, bring the swindler Trishka here. (Eremeevna moves away.) He, the thief, has burdened him everywhere. Mitrofanushka, my friend! I'm guessing you're dying. Call your father here.

Ms. Prostakova(Trishka). And you, brute, come closer. Didn’t I tell you, you thieving mug, that you should make your caftan wider? The first child grows; another, a child and without a narrow caftan of delicate build. Tell me, idiot, what is your excuse?

Trishka.But, madam, I was self-taught. I reported to you at the same time: well, if you please, give it to the tailor.

Mrs. Prostakova.So is it really necessary to be a tailor to be able to sew a caftan well? What bestial reasoning!

Trishka.Yes, I studied to be a tailor, madam, but I didn’t.

Mrs. Prostakova.While searching, he argues. A tailor learned from another, another from a third, but who did the first tailor learn from? Speak up, beast.

Trishka.Yes, the first tailor, perhaps, sewed worse than mine.

Act two. PhenomenonVI

Eremeevna.Uncle scared everyone. I almost grabbed him by the hairs. And for nothing... about nothing...

Ms. Prostakova(in anger). Well...

Eremeevna.I pestered him: do you want to get married?..

Mrs. Prostakova.Well...

Eremeevna.The child didn’t hide it, it’s been a long time since he started hunting, uncle. How he will become furious, my mother, how he will throw himself up!..

Ms. Prostakova(trembling). Well... and you, beast, were dumbfounded, and you didn’t dig into your brother’s mug, and you didn’t tear his snout head over heels...

Eremeevna.I accepted it! Oh, I accepted, yes...

Mrs. Prostakova.Yes... yes what... not your child, you beast! For you, at least kill the child to death.

Eremeevna.Ah, creator, save and have mercy! If my brother hadn’t deigned to leave at that very moment, I would have broken down with him. That's what God wouldn't order. If these were dull (pointing to the nails), I wouldn’t even take care of the fangs.

Mrs. Prostakova.All of you beasts are zealous in words only, but not in deeds...

Eremeevna(crying). I'm not zealous for us, mother! You don’t know how to serve anymore... I would be glad if nothing else... you don’t regret your stomach... but you don’t want everything.

Act three. Phenomenon IV

Mrs. Prostakova.Are you a girl, are you a dog’s daughter? Do I have no maids in my house, besides your nasty face? Where is the broadsword?

Eremeevna.She fell ill, mother, and has been lying there since the morning.

Mrs. Prostakova.Lying down! Oh, she's a beast! Lying down! As if noble!

Eremeevna.Such a fever, mother, she raves incessantly...

Mrs. Prostakova.He's delusional, you beast! As if noble!

We find an explanation for this shameless behavior not only in Prostakova’s character, but also in some circumstances external to the heroine. At the end of the comedy, Prostakova utters a phrase that can be called one of the most important lines in the entire play:

Mrs. Prostakova.Not free! A nobleman is not free to whip his servants when he wants! But why have we been given a decree on the freedom of the nobility?

The famous Russian historian Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky (Fig. 5) considers this phrase the most essential for understanding comedy. And all the events that precede this statement are just an introduction to the main topic.

Rice. 5. V.O. Klyuchevsky

To justify her behavior, Prostakova mentions a decree, a manifesto on noble liberty, proclaimed by Emperor Peter III (Fig. 6) in 1762.

In order to understand the essence of this important law, it is worth taking a short historical excursion. It so happened that it was the nobility that bore the brunt of military service for many centuries. Privileges, lands, estates are a fair reward for that person who is always ready to put his chest under arms. For a very long time, service (25 years) was mandatory for nobles, and it was impossible to evade it. As soon as a young man reached a certain age, thereby becoming a minor, he prepared for military service. However, at some point, the size of the army becomes very impressive due to the fact that other classes are already entering military service, and then there is no need for the total service of the nobility. The state sees in this new opportunities for the activities of the nobles. A nobleman is no longer obliged to serve for 25 years and spend his entire life on military campaigns. Now he has the right to work for the good of the Fatherland, living on his own estate. The nobleman’s mission now is to take care of his peasants, make their life easier, establish schools and hospitals, and provide education (at least the basics of basic literacy). The nobleman faces another very important task - to give his children an education of the European level, so that future nobles will be a true support for their Fatherland - a developing, young country.

The Prostakovs did not succeed in either one or the other. And they are not the only ones. The fact is that the law on noble liberty was written in such a respectful, calm language, it was formulated so peacefully, and nothing threatened the person who violated it, that the nobles perceived the law not as an order, but as permission to do whatever they wanted. The authors of the decree thought that the nobles would be truly pleased to voluntarily take care of the peasants, raise children in the traditions of the European Enlightenment, and engage in science, because now they have all the opportunities for this.

But this hope turned out to be unfounded. The nobles took it this way: we have all the rights and no more responsibilities. Thus, the law proclaimed by Peter III in 1762 and after 20 years of the reign of Catherine II (Fig. 7) was never fully comprehended by Russian society, but, on the contrary, everything became even worse.

Rice. 7. Catherine II ()

Two decades after the adoption of the law, Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin undertakes, in a sense, to educate an entire class of nobles. And he writes a work that raised the question of the role of a nobleman very acutely and painfully. This important document (the decree on the liberty of the nobility) must be rethought. The abstract, beautiful law does not reach the consciousness of the nobles. Just polite persuasion and expressions of hope have no effect on those who are accustomed to doing monstrous things with impunity. According to the playwright, government intervention is necessary. When the author forces Pravdin to take custody of Prostakova’s estate at the end of his comedy, he thereby suggests a real way out - all landowners who cruelly treat serfs should be deprived of the right to own peasants and manage their estate.

The image of Prostakova, which absorbed the features of many landowners, was, according to the author’s plan, to become a living reproach to those nobles in whose houses the same thing was happening.

Thus, the comedy “The Minor” calls for a humane and fair attitude towards the peasants. Noting the author’s extremely negative attitude towards the humiliation of serfs, it is worth remembering that the author of “The Minor” is not against serfdom as such, as a form of organizing economic and social life. He is against the abuse of serfdom. The basis of the state is the commonwealth and cooperation of peasants and nobles, which must be humane, fair and based on the principles of the Enlightenment.

In this lesson, you examined how Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” reflected contemporary and eternal problems for the author: the issue of abuse of serfdom and the global issue of educating the human personality and a worthy citizen. You also became acquainted with the important concept of a “reasoning hero.”

Bibliography

1. Ko-ro-vi-na V.Ya., Zhu-rav-lev V.P., Ko-ro-vin V.I. Literature. 9th grade. - M.: Pro-sve-shche-nie, 2008.
2. Lady-gin M.B., Esin A.B., Nefe-do-va N.A. Literature. 9th grade. - M.: Bustard, 2011.
3. Cher-tov V.F., Tru-bi-na L.A., An-ti-po-va A.M. Literature. 9th grade. - M.: Pro-sve-shche-nie, 2012.

1. Internet portal “5litra.ru” ()
2. Internet portal “litresp.ru” ()
3. Internet portal “Festival of Pedagogical Ideas “Open Lesson”” ()

Homework

1. Describe the level of upbringing, education and morality of Mrs. Prostakova and her son Mitrofanushka. Give examples from the text.
2. Draw up Starodum’s “moral code”.
3. How does Fonvizin see the problem of serfdom? What solution does the author propose in the play?

What problems does Fonvizin raise in the comedy “The Minor” you will learn in this article.

“Undergrowth”: problems

Problems raised in the comedy “The Minor”:

1. What should a true nobleman be like - and does the Russian nobility correspond to its purpose?

2. The need for enlightenment, education - their absence..

3. The lack of rights of peasants and the arbitrariness of landowners.

Each of these issues is considered through the prism of educational ideas. Fonvizin, sharpening attention to the shortcomings of the era through comic techniques, emphasizes the need to change traditional, outdated, long-irrelevant foundations that drag people into the swamp of “evil morality”, stupidity, likening them to animals.

The problem of education in the comedy “The Minor”

In Fonvizin’s view, the problem of education acquired national significance, since the only reliable, in his opinion, source of salvation from the evil threatening society—the spiritual degradation of the nobility—was rooted in correct education.

Education should give “the direct value of learning,” awaken humane, philanthropic feelings, and contribute to the general improvement of morals.

"Undergrowth" problem of serfdom

The theme of the lack of rights of peasants and the arbitrariness of landowners is indicated by the writer already in the first act. Prostakova’s first remark: “The caftan is all ruined. Eremeevna, bring the swindler Trishka here. He, the thief, has burdened him everywhere” - introduces us to the atmosphere of the arbitrariness of the landowners’ power. All further five phenomena are devoted precisely to showing this arbitrariness.
This is how “Undergrowth” begins. The main conflict in the socio-political life of Russia - the arbitrariness of the landowners, supported by the highest authorities, and the lack of rights of the serfs - becomes the theme of the comedy. The dramatic conflict of “Nedoroslya” is the struggle of the progressive-minded progressive nobles - Pravdin and Starodum - with the serf owners - the Prostakovs and Skotinins.
Slavery, and not education, corrupts and corrupts the landowners themselves, Fonvizin makes the second conclusion. The playwright sternly and accusatoryly declares: Russian nobles turned into Skotinins, who lost honor, dignity, humanity, became cruel executioners of the people around them and all-powerful tyrants and parasites only as a result of serfdom. Hence the demonstration of the Skotinin nature of those who call themselves the “noble class” - Prostakova, her husband, her son, her brother. Slave owners not only turned their peasants into “draft animals,” but they themselves became vile and despicable slaves.
Fonvizin’s main intention in “Nedorosl” was to show all the actions, deeds, thoughts of Prostakov and Skotinin, all their morality and interests in social conditioning. . They are generated by serfdom, says Fonvizin. That is why, from the first to the last act, the theme of serfdom permeates the entire work.

Why is Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor,” which denounces serfdom, called a comedy of education?

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” was written in 1782. The 18th century in culture was marked by the Age of Enlightenment. This was a time when the value of art was reduced to its educational and moral role. Artists of this time took upon themselves the hard work of awakening in a person the desire for personal development and self-improvement. Classicism is one of the movements within which they worked. The purpose of literature, according to the classicists, was to influence the human mind to correct vices and cultivate virtue.

The main problems of the comedy “The Minor” are the problem of the cruel attitude of landowners towards their peasants and the problem of educating the younger generation and the “wild ignorance of the old generation” (V. G. Belinsky). However, a comedy denouncing serfdom is called a comedy of education.

The reason for this is the close connection between the first two problems. It is the problem of upbringing and ignorance that causes the evil character of the characters in the play. Heartlessness, despotism, unwillingness to recognize the serfs as having any rights to equality with the “noble” characterize the attitude of wild landowners towards their people. One of Prostakova’s most devoted serfs, Mama Eremeevna, has been serving her for forty years now, and receives “five rubles a year and five slaps a day” as a reward for her service. D.I. Fonvizin sees the reason for the evil nature of his heroes in their ignorance, “in their own corruption.” Prostakova and Skotinin’s father “didn’t know how to read and write,” their uncle Vavila Falaleich “didn’t want to hear from anyone” about her; “I haven’t read anything since I was born” Skotinin Jr. Children inherited disdain for science from their fathers. “People live and have lived without science,” the teaching is nonsense,” the main thing is to be able to “make enough and preserve it” - this is what the everyday philosophy of the ignorant nobility boils down to. And in the hands of this nobility is the education of the younger generation of nobles.

The main idea of ​​the work is the question of true, ideal education. This question is raised against the background of Mitrofan’s upbringing and the description of his teachers. “The sexton from Pokrov, Kuteikin, comes to him to read and write. Arithmetic is taught to him by one retired sergeant Tsyfirkin. He is taught French and all sciences by the German Adam Adamych Vralman.” But the boy’s teachers did not teach him anything, since they themselves were uneducated and lazy. In fact, it was just a tribute to fashion on the part of Mrs. Prostakova.

According to Fonvizin, an important part of education is not only the development of the mind, but also moral feelings. Reflections on true education are expressed by the hero-reasoner Starodum in a conversation with Sophia. He discusses this topic globally, seeing the sources of problems of education in the government itself: “An ideal sovereign, first of all, needs enlightened subjects and must take care of his own morality and think about good education.” Fonvizin fought for the flourishing of education in Russia and believed that nobles brought up in strict civil rules would be worthy leaders of the country.

The theme of education in comedy is directly related to the most important problems of the 18th century. Fonvizin believed that ideal education could contribute to the spread of morality and human relations, the humanity of landowners towards peasants.

And in this sense, the comedy “The Minor” was instructive and edifying for Fonvizin’s contemporaries, and was a real “guide” in education.