The appearance of a simpleton from the comedy of a dwarf. Characteristics of Mrs. Prostakova (based on the comedy by D.I.Fonvizin). The image of the hero in the work

Prostakov, the characterization of which is the subject of this review, is a minor character in the well-known comedy by DI Fonvizin "The Minor". It is interesting in that it sets off the character traits of his wayward wife, who occupies a prominent place in the work. He is the father of the protagonist Mitrofanushka, and his personality partly explains the character of the young man, who is registered by the author as a spoiled young man of a narrow mind.

Personality

When analyzing this play, special attention should be paid to the role that Prostakov plays in the development of the plot. The characterization of this hero will allow students to understand the lifestyle that this noble family led. Schoolchildren need to point to the character's speaking surname, which from the very beginning gives readers a hint of what to expect from this person.

Indeed, Prostakov is very simple-minded by nature, he almost never thinks about anything, allowing his wife to manage the household and raise his son. He is timid and even downtrodden: anyone can get nasty at him, for example, his wife is often rude to him and does not hesitate in expressions, allowing herself rather harsh, contemptuous and mocking remarks about her husband.

Hero image

Prostakov, whose characteristics must necessarily include an analysis of the degree of his education, judging by the reviews of others, is a man of a narrow mind. This explains the fact that his wife seized all power in the house and estate into her own hands. He does not have his own opinion, he completely left his wife with a solution to domestic problems. The hero periodically emphasizes that he relies on her in everything, and this once again proves that it is she who is the real mistress in the house.

Obviously, Fonvizin in this case plays in contrast: a timid husband and a cruel wife. Prostakov, whose characterization is impossible without comparison with the image of his wife, looks like her complete opposite under the pen of a talented playwright. In general scenes, this difference between characters is especially striking to the reader. The author created a sitcom, in which each character is a bearer of some kind of flaw, and at the same time criticized the social reality of his time, when the landowners led an idle lifestyle.

Social subtext

The characterization of Prostakov should include an analysis of his social position: without this, it will be impossible to understand the author's idea. The fact is that Fonvizin created a work that was relevant for his time. Therefore, all of his characters are very recognizable, situations are typical for Russian reality in the second half of the 18th century.

The hero is a nobleman, a landowner, that is, a representative of the class that at the time in question was privileged and was considered dominant. These people enjoyed all the privileges that the government gave them. Under Catherine II, they were exempted from compulsory military and civil service, which from now on was made voluntary. Therefore, many remained in the village, in their estates, doing housework or idly spending their time.

Mitrofanushka's father also belongs to the last category. But Mrs. Prostakova took care of the house. The characterization of this heroine shows the image of a cruel, but extraordinary woman. She does the housework and takes care of her son's upbringing, and her husband does nothing at all. Rather, he resembles a child who also needs care and attention. So the author ridiculed many noble landowners who did not bother themselves with any obligations and refused to serve. Therefore, the play turned out to be especially relevant, lively and recognizable.

Appearance

The characteristic of Prostakov should also include a brief overview of his behavior and appearance. Judging by the remarks of his wife and those around him, the hero looks like a confused and absent-minded person. He is inattentive, slow, sluggish. Often he cannot find an answer, stumbles and finds words with difficulty. The hero is somewhat baggy, his clothes, judging by the comments of his wife, do not sit well on him.

Mrs. Prostakova, whose characterization reveals her as a powerful woman, but not devoid of some taste, takes care of a suit for her husband. Obviously, he has no sense of style, and he does not care at all how he looks in public and in society. The hero obviously lacks what she called good, secular manners. He does not know how to receive guests according to etiquette and only gets a little lost in the presence of strangers.

Hero comparison

As a rule, the characteristics of the Prostakovs do not cause great difficulties for students. The Little Boy is a play that, as mentioned above, is a comedy of positions and characters. All characters are revealed both through their own remarks, and through the statements and remarks of others. The Prostakovs are no exception in this regard. Despite the striking difference in their characters, both have one thing in common - this is their blind love for their son. Mitrofanushka's father, like his mother, understands all his shortcomings: laziness, stupidity and shortsightedness, but does not make any attempts to correct the young man. Perhaps this is the main mistake of both characters.

Relationship of spouses

In the analysis of the play in question, the characterization of the Prostakovs occupies an important place. "The Minor" is a work in which the author vividly and vividly portrayed the representatives of the nobility, as well as the nascent intelligentsia. The parents of the protagonist are very recognizable for their relationship to each other, as well as to their son. Mrs. Prostakova does not respect her husband and does not perceive him as the owner of the estate. In turn, the latter puts up with the role assigned to him. At the same time, this character is interesting in that he says whatever he thinks. Thus, the characterization of Prostakov from the comedy "The Minor" makes it possible to better understand the image of his wife, who occupies the main place in the entire work.

He is frank in his statements, naive and simple-minded, which causes great irritation in his wife, who prefers to go to various tricks and tricks to get her way. Often the reader sees what is happening through his eyes. He wants to believe, because he is so good-natured that he is incapable of lying.

Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" is one of the classics, without which it is impossible to consider the traditions of social comedy and satire in Russian literature in general. The author skillfully depicts typical characters of the hinterland, ossified, rude, uneducated, but bearing important titles and proud of their own nobility.

An important role in reflecting the author's position and the entire thought of the work is played by such a characteristic character as Mrs. Prostakova. A tough landowner, she is quite typical for the Russian reality of that time. Under her "wing" is a beloved son, as well as a not too loving husband, who simply does not dare to object to an overbearing wife. She is actually a narrow-minded, but very purposeful woman who is completely focused on raising her own son and the financial, social prosperity of her family. She obviously lacks both education and banal upbringing and tact, however, this character is not devoid of strong feelings, and is not at all as unambiguous as it might seem.

Characteristics of the hero

The main features of the character are not so difficult to understand, they are prescribed by Fonvizin quite clearly, since Prostakova herself is neither a mysterious person, nor a lady too deep in her inner content. On the one hand, she is cruel and merciless, she is ready for anything to achieve her own goals. On the other hand, she is filled with love for her son so much that she does not want to notice his most obvious shortcomings. Such a contradiction does not allow the reader to perceive her exclusively as a negative hero.

The main features of the heroine can also be attributed to malice, irascibility, intolerance. She is not too happy, so she is always unhappy with what is happening around her. This applies to both the relationship with her husband and the social structure, even politics and economics to the extent that she is able to understand them at all.

Another important feature of this hero is her dislike for science in all its manifestations. For her, the absence of any development is a guarantee of stability and prosperity. She is very straightforward, so she takes any exercises and lessons literally. In many scenes with the teacher, her greed is also revealed: simple math problems plunge her into a real shock, forcing her to completely protect her child from these harmful sciences.

This is precisely her psychological portrait: the typical consciousness of a domineering landowner over the years literally "killed" everything human in her. Only the thirst for power drives her, and even good feelings turn into something negative: love for her husband turns into command, tenderness for her son - into overprotection. Small but significant features, the author draws through the details, for example, giving a link to an unsightly maiden name. The former Skotina, Prostakova received a no less telling surname after marriage.

The image of the hero in the work

Prostakova is the central image in the comedy, around which several plot lines are twisted at once. Much more important, however, is that she embodies all the old landlordism, which Fonvizin makes fun of. The finale, in which Prostakova again plays a central role, shows the main idea of ​​the author precisely through the social death of this “malicious fury”. She inevitably came to an end, as well as the entire system of petty-bourgeois society. Throughout the entire comedy of Prostakov, there is also the embodiment of the bourgeois order and vestiges.

Through the image of Prostakova, the author of the comedy outlines all the features that are so hateful to him in contemporary society. The mistress does not consider her serfs to be people, they are only soulless and not too smart machines for her to carry out errands. They are obliged to endure any punishment from her with or without him. In her eyes, such people simply cannot have good intentions and need "iron grip".

She does not consider the interests and feelings of other people to be something important. Without deception and cunning, this woman will not be able to arrange her future, and this is a dead-end path of development, which is why it leads to such a tragic ending. The deprivation of her village at the end of Prostakova is a direct reference by the author to the sad end of all philistinism, which must lose all property for its crimes. At the same time, the future of the state, according to Fonvizin, remains with such characters and classes as Sophia and Milan.

Writing

In the comedy Minor Fonvizin depicts the vices of contemporary society. His heroes are representatives of different social strata: statesmen, nobles, servants, self-appointed teachers. This is the first socio-political comedy in the history of Russian drama.

The central heroine of the play is Mrs. Prostakova. She manages the household, beats her husband, keeps the servants in horror, brings up the son of Mitrofan. I scold, then I fight, so the house holds on. No one dares to oppose her power: Am I not powerful in my people. But there are tragic elements in the image of Prostakova. This ignorant and selfish overripe fury is very fond of and sincerely cares about her son. At the end of the play, rejected by Mitrofan, she becomes humiliated and pitiful:

You alone stayed with me.

Let go ...

I have no son ...

The main way to create the character of Prostakova is a speech characteristic. The heroine's language changes depending on who she is addressing. Servant Mrs. Prostakova calls thieves, canals, beasts, a dog's daughter. He addresses Mitrofan: my dear friend, darling. Guests are greeted with respect: I recommend you a dear guest, you are welcome.

The idea of ​​education, which is very important for educational literature, is connected with the image of Mitrofan in the play. Mitrofan is an ignoramus, a loafer, a favorite of his mother. From the parent he inherited arrogance and rudeness. He turns to Eremeevna, who is piously devoted to him: an old hrychovka. The upbringing and education of Mitrofan corresponds to the fashion of that time and the understanding of the parents. He is taught French by the German Vralman, the exact sciences are retired sergeant Tsyfirkin, who marakuts a little bit of arichmetic, grammar by the seminarian Kuteikin, dismissed from all teaching. Mitrofanushka's knowledge of grammar, his desire not to study, but to marry are ridiculous. But his attitude towards Eremeevna, his readiness to accept people, his mother's betrayal already evokes different feelings. Mitrofanushka becomes an ignorant and cruel despot.

The main technique for creating satirical characters in the play is zoologization. Getting ready to marry, Skotinin declares that he wants to have his own piglets. It seems to Vralman that, living with the Prostakovs, he lived with a fairy with little horses. Thus, the author emphasizes the idea of ​​the animal lowland of the surrounding world.

Despite the fact that the genre of the play Minor is a comedy, Fonvizin is not limited to exposing social vices and creating satirical characters. The author draws a number of positive characters Starodum, Pravdin, Sophia, Milon. These heroes openly express the views of an honest man on noble morality, family relations, and even civil structure. This dramatic technique truly means a revolution in Russian educational literature from. criticism of the negative aspects of reality to the search for ways to change the existing system.

Reflecting the actual problems of his time, Fonvizin was a talented psychologist, thinker, artist. His comedy has universal human significance, it lives for centuries, does not leave the stages of modern theaters.

The action takes place in the estate of the Prostakovs. The unlimited hostess is Mrs. Prostakova. It is curious to note that in the list of characters only she was given the title of "mistress", the rest of the heroes are named only by their last name or by their first name. She really dominates the world subject to her, reigns insolently, despotically, with complete confidence in her impunity. Taking advantage of Sophia's orphanhood, Prostakova takes possession of her estate. Without asking the girl's consent, he decides to marry her off. However, the character of this "fury" is fully revealed in the treatment of serfs. Prostakova is deeply convinced of her right to insult, rob and punish peasants, whom she looks at as creatures of another, lower Breed.

The prosperity of Prostakova rests on the shameless robbery of the serfs. "Since then, she complains to Skotinin, like everything that the peasants had, we took away, we can't rip anything off." Order in the house is brought about by abuse and beatings. "From morning to evening, Prostakova complains again, as if she was hanged by the tongue, I can't lay hands on it: now I swear, now I fight." Eremeevna, when asked how much her salary is due, tearfully replies: "Five rubles a year, up to five slaps in the face a day."

The primitive nature of Prostakova is clearly revealed in abrupt transitions from arrogance to cowardice, from complacency to servility. She is rude to Sophia, while she feels her power over her, but upon learning of Starodum's return, she instantly changes her tone and behavior. When Pravdin announces the decision to put Prostakov on trial for inhuman treatment of the peasants, she humbly rolls at his feet. But, having begged forgiveness, he immediately hurries to deal with the sluggish servants who missed Sophia: “Forgive me! Ah, father! Well! Now I will give the dawn to the canals to my people. Now I’m going to sort them all out one by one. ” Brother Prostakova Skotinin is related to her not only by blood, but also by spirit. He is exactly the same serf practice of his sister. “If I’m not Taras Skotinin,” he says, if I’m not all to blame. In this, my sister, I have one custom with you ... and any loss ... I'll rip off my own peasants, and I'll end up in the water. "

The presence of Skotinin in the play emphasizes the wide distribution of nobles like Prostakova, gives it a typical character. No wonder at the end of the play Pravdin advises to warn the other Skotinins about what happened in the Prostakovs' estate. Many nobles in mental and civil development are so low that they can only be compared to animals. Cattle possessing people, this is the painful problem that DI Fonvizin posed with great boldness.

He endowed the heroes with emphatically Russian names, surrounded them with a familiar atmosphere, preserved Russian customs on the stage. Mrs. Prostakova nee Skotinina is always compared to a dog, Skotinin to pigs. They themselves persistently call themselves cattle, animals. “Have you heard of a bitch giving out her puppies?” Asks Prostakov. "Oh, I am a dog's daughter!" she declares elsewhere. The base spiritual image of Skotinin is revealed in his addiction to "pigs". "I love pigs ... he confesses, but we have such large pigs in the neighborhood that there is not a single one of them that, standing on the back of a leg, would not be taller than each of us with a whole head." "No, sister, he declares to Prostakova, I want to have my own piglets." And Mitrofan, according to his mother, "before the pigs was born the same hunter ... It used to be, seeing a mumps, tremble with joy." "I am the cattle, reads Mitrofan according to the book of hours, and not a man."

Fonvizin made a real revolution in the field of comedic language. The speeches of many of his heroes are pre-set specially. the cypher of the image. In "Nedorosl" the speeches of Prostakova, Skotinin, Eremeevna are especially colorful. Fonvizin retains all the inaccuracies of the language of his ignorant heroes: “first” instead of first, “roben” instead of a child, “hollow” instead of a little head, “who” instead of which. Proverbs and sayings are successfully used. Prostakova's rude, licentious nature is well revealed by the vulgarisms she uses: “And you, beast, were dumbfounded, and you didn’t stick to your brother’s mug, and you didn’t rip his snouts over the ears.” Swear words do not leave the language of Prostakova: cattle, mug, canals, an old witch. The news of the illness of the courtyard girl Palashka infuriates her: “Oh, she is a beast! Lies. As if noble! "

Throughout the comedy, the Skotinins and Prostakovs emphasize that they are unusually smart, especially Mitrofanushka. In fact, Prostakova, her husband and her brother do not even know how to read. Moreover, they are deeply convinced of the uselessness and uselessness of knowledge. “People live and lived without science,” Prostakova confidently declares. Their public perceptions are just as wild. High positions exist, in their deep conviction, only for enrichment. According to Prostakova, her father “was fifteen years old governor ... he couldn’t read and write, but knew how to make a fortune”. They see the advantages of the "noble" class in the ability to offend and rob people dependent on them. Bad mentors can also be the cause of "evil". Mitrofan's training was entrusted to the half-trained seminarian Kuteikin, a retired soldier Tsyfirkin and a former coachman, the German Vralman. Mitrofan is one of the main characters in the comedy. Using the techniques of speech characteristics, DI Fonvizin portrayed Mitrofan as the greatest lazy person. But it's not just the teachers, the character and behavior of Mitrofan is a natural result of those living examples with which he is surrounded in his parents' house. It had the most destructive influence on Mitrofan Prostakov. After all, his name, translated from Greek, means "like a mother", that is, "who is a mother." From Prostakova, Mitrofan took over rudeness, greed, contempt for work and knowledge. The upbringing that the mother wanted to give to her son, animal upbringing, upbringing of animal needs.

Slavery corrupts the masters, landowners, depriving them of their human features. They turned their peasants into cattle, but they themselves became cattle, having lost their honor and conscience, forgetting about human and family affections. Fonvizin managed to create truly typical images that became household names and outlived their time. The names of Mitrofanushka, Skotinin, Prostakova became immortal.

Other compositions on this work

> Characteristics of the heroes Minor

Characteristics of the hero of Prostakov

Prostakova is one of the main characters and the driving force in DI Fonvizin's play "The Minor". She is the mother of Mitrofanushka and the sister of Taras Skotinin. Prostakova participates in almost all the events of the play, since the action takes place in the house where she is the mistress. By status, she is a noblewoman, has serfs and is a typical example of a Russian landowner of the middle of the 18th century. She is distinguished by unprincipledness, ignorance, illiteracy and a desire to control everything. The heroine's husband does not dare to contradict her. Concepts such as conscience and honor are alien to her. To achieve her goals, she is ready to go any tricks, including meanness and deception. All that interests her is her personal well-being and the well-being of her son. For the sake of Mitrofanushka, she is ready to do anything. So, for example, having learned about the rich dowry of the pupil Sophia, she immediately decides to marry her son to her, despite the fact that it was initially decided to marry her off to the brother of the landowner Taras Skotinin and, despite the protests of Sophia herself. Even when her plans collapse, she still tries to secretly marry the young.

The play shows Prostakova's boundless and dull love for her son, who is her only joy. Being illiterate herself, she tries to give him a decent education so as not to look worse than other landowners. For this she hires a German teacher. However, this is not done for the sake of the son to be taught, but for the sake of the capital's fashion. Also, in an attempt to remove her brother from the path of Mitrofanushka, she simply grabs his throat. The author clearly shows the reasons for this behavior of Prostakova. First of all, this is due to her inner ignorance and lack of upbringing. The second reason has a social connotation and lies in the decree of Catherine II "On the freedom of the nobles." Thanks to this decree, the nobles of that time received complete power over the serfs and were free to do whatever they wanted. Having shown the collapse of Prostakova and her plans at the end of the play, the author also emphasizes the collapse of the entire system.

The comedy "The Minor" is a brilliant work of Fonvizin, in which the playwright depicted bright, memorable characters, whose names have become common nouns in modern literature and the era. One of the main characters in the play is Mitrofanushka's mother, Mrs. Prostakova. According to the plot of the work, the heroine belongs to negative characters. A rude, uneducated, cruel and self-serving woman from the first scene causes a negative attitude, and in some places even ridicule of readers. Nevertheless, the image itself is subtly psychological and requires detailed analysis.

The fate of Prostakova

In the play, upbringing and heredity almost completely determine the future character and inclinations of the individual. And the image of Prostakova in the comedy "The Minor" is no exception. The woman was brought up in a family of uneducated landowners, whose main value was material wealth - her father even died on a chest with money. Disrespect for others, cruelty towards the peasants and the willingness to do anything for the sake of profit, Prostakov took over from her parents. And the fact that there were eighteen children in the family and only two of them survived - the rest died due to an oversight - causes real horror.

Perhaps if Prostakova married an educated and more active man, the shortcomings of her upbringing would become less and less noticeable over time. However, she got a passive, stupid Prostakov as her husband, it is easier for him to hide behind the skirt of an active wife than to solve economic issues himself. The need to manage the whole village herself and the old landowner upbringing made the woman even more cruel, despotic and rude, strengthening all the negative qualities of her character.

Considering the story of the heroine's life, the ambiguous characterization of Prostakova in "The Ignorant" becomes clear to the reader. Mitrofan is a woman's son, her only consolation and joy. However, neither he nor her husband appreciate the effort Prostakova spent on managing the village. Suffice it to recall the well-known scene when, at the end of the play, Mitrofan abandons his mother, and her husband can only reproach his son - Prostakov also remains on the sidelines of her grief, not trying to console the woman. Even with all the grumpy character, I feel sorry for Prostakov, because her closest people leave her.

Mitrofan's ingratitude: who is to blame?

As mentioned above, Mitrofan was the only joy of Prostakova. Excessive love of a woman raised him "mama's son". Mitrofan is just as rude, cruel, stupid and greedy. At sixteen years old, he still resembles a small child who is naughty and runs around chasing pigeons instead of studying. On the one hand, excessive care and protection of the son from any worries of the real world can be associated with the tragic story of the family of Prostakova herself - one child is not eighteen. However, on the other hand, it was simply convenient for Prostakova that Mitrofan remained a big, feeble-minded child.

As it becomes clear from the stage of a lesson in arithmetic, when a woman solves the problems proposed by Tsyfirkin in her own way, the “own” landowner wisdom of the owner is the main one for her. Without any education, Prostakova solves any situation by seeking personal gain. The obedient Mitrofan, who obeyed his mother in everything, should also have become a profitable investment. Prostakova is not even spent on his education - after all, firstly, she herself lived well without burdensome knowledge, and, secondly, she knows better what her son needs. Even marrying Sophia would first of all replenish the chests of the village of Prostakovs (remember that the young man does not even fully understand the essence of marriage - he is simply not mentally and morally mature enough).

The fact that in the final scene Mitrofan refuses his mother is undoubtedly the fault of Prostakova herself. The young man took over from her disrespect for relatives and the fact that you need to stick to the one who has money and power. That is why Mitrofan, without hesitation, agrees to serve with the new owner of the village, Pravdin. However, the main reason still lies in the general "evil" of the entire Skotinin family, as well as the stupidity and passivity of Prostakov, who could not become a worthy authority for his son.

Prostakova as a bearer of outdated morality

In The Minor, Mrs. Prostakova is contrasted with two characters - Starodum and Pravdin. Both men are carriers of humane educational ideas, contrasting with the outdated, landowner foundations.

According to the plot of the play, Starodum and Prostakova are the parents of young people, but their approach to upbringing is completely different. A woman, as mentioned earlier, pampers her son and treats him like a child. She does not try to teach him something, on the contrary, even during the lesson she says that he will not need knowledge. Starodum communicates with Sophia on equal terms, shares his own experience with her, transfers his own knowledge and, most importantly, respects her personality.

Prostakova and Pravdin are contrasted as landowners, owners of large estates. The woman believes that it is quite normal to beat her peasants, take their last money from them, treat them like animals. For her, the inability to punish the servants is as terrible as the fact that she lost her village. Pravdin is guided by new, educational ideas. He came to the village specifically in order to stop Prostakova's cruelty and give people to work in peace. By comparing the two ideological directions, Fonvizin wanted to show how important and necessary the reforms of the upbringing of Russian society of that era are.

Fonvizin's innovation in the portrayal of Prostakova

In The Minor, Prostakov appears as an ambiguous character. On the one hand, she appears to be a cruel, stupid, self-serving representative of the old nobility and landowners' foundations. On the other hand, we have before us a woman with a difficult fate, who at one moment loses everything that was valuable to her.

According to the canons of classic works, the exposure and punishment of negative characters in the final scene of the play should be fair and not arouse sympathy. However, when in the end the woman loses absolutely everything, the reader feels sorry for her. The image of Prostakova in Nedorosl does not fit into the templates and framework of classic heroes. Psychologism and non-standard depiction of a prefabricated image (Prostakova is a reflection of a whole social stratum of serf Russia in the 18th century) makes it innovative and interesting even for modern readers.

The above description of Prostakova will help pupils of grades 8 and 9 to reveal the image of Mitrofan's mother in her essay on the topic "Characteristics of Prostakova in the comedy" Minor "by Fonvizin"

Product test