The views of a simpleton. Who is Prostakov? Characteristics of the hero from the comedy "The Minor" by D. Fonvizin. Attitude to Sophia

The comedy "Minor", created by the great Fonvizin back in the 18th century, does not leave the stages of the capital and regional theaters to this day. It has been included since Soviet times in the school curriculum of all Union republics and remained in most of them even after the collapse of the USSR and the formation of independent states. “Satires, the brave ruler,” as the playwright Pushkin called, not only severely criticized and ridiculed mediocrity, ignorance, cruelty of the nobles, stigmatized the serf system of Russia, but also created a whole gallery of images that embody certain types of characters, due to its vitality almost immediately which have become household names. One of them is Mrs. Prostakova, the mother of Mitrofanushka.

The place of the hero in the work

The image of Prostakova in the comedy plays one of the main roles. She is the mistress of the estate, the owner of serf souls, a noblewoman, a stronghold and personification of state power here on her estate. And it, in turn, is one of the thousands of corners of endless Russia. And the problems that arise in a single territory are typical for the entire country. This is the first thing. Secondly, the image of Prostakova is important in that she raises and brings up her son in her own image and likeness. And everything negative that is in the mother is cultivated in Mitrofan tenfold. But if the Prostakovs, Skotinins are the past and present of Russia, then their offspring are its future. This is how Fonvizin thought and wondered what the state would come to if such ignorant boors would run everything in it. Into what jungle of the Middle Ages will they throw the country, to what ruin, impoverishment will they bring? Thirdly, the image of Prostakova is interesting in itself, precisely as a human type, the quintessence of class and personal vices.

From surname to personality

Prostakova is a heroine by her husband. And he really is a "simpleton": weak-willed, weak-willed, completely entrusted to his wife and the management of the estate, and the upbringing of his son. He, no less than the rest of the household, suffers humiliation and insults from her, but it does not occur to him to put in place the presumptuous rude and petty tyrant. However, interpreting the surname, the image of Prostakova acquires a different shade of meaning. In the people, "simple" (not "simple") means "stupid", "stupid", "fool". And the dear lady, who has long stepped over the line, is proud that she is illiterate, cannot read and write. Moreover, he sincerely considers this to be the norm for female noblewomen. So, by simplicity and naivety of the soul, she embodies the most retrograde, conservative, stagnant layer of the nobility. The image of Prostakova is fully revealed through her own surname - Skotinin. "Minor" is a comedy, created in many respects in accordance with the poetics of classicism, allowing in this way to convey the essence of the character to the reader / viewer. The bestial essence of the heroine, not covered by anything, literally screams about herself from her very first remarks on the stage. And the further the action of the play develops, the clearer the animal nature of this woman is to us. An inveterate serf woman, she does not consider servants for people, she scolds and beats them without a twinge of conscience. She ruined her peasants, treats them extremely cruelly. I am ready for any meanness, even a crime, for the sake of profit. Sophia, like a thing, is going to give in marriage to her brother, tk. he liked the pigs from the village, which the girl inherited from her dead parents. In this regard, "Minor" is very indicative.

The heroes of the comedy, embodying the serfdom spirit of Russia, are all negative, as if by selection! She herself crippled spiritually and mentally by social prejudices of the environment, Prostakova also cripples her son. She is engaged in raising and educating him for the sake of appearance, paying tribute to fashion and new social requirements. In fact, "in order to raise children", in the opinion of this woman who loves her son with the animal love, neither one nor the other is needed. And one more "brute" grows out of her child, betraying her mother, recognizing no one but herself, stupid and mean. Therefore, the final words of the work sound like a real verdict for the entire noble-serf system: "Here is evil worthy fruits!"

Modern classic

It is worth noting that this expression became winged and stepped far beyond the content of the play. So we can say about any negative example, an act that has entailed a corresponding reaction. Therefore, you should always try to behave, speak and act in such a way that our "ill will" does not stick out and does not give "worthy fruits"!

”, The landowner Prostakova is a very peculiar character for a comedy written according to the rules of classicism. She stands out against the background of very "pale" positive characters, and is not as disgustingly unambiguous as her son Mitrofan Prostakov and brother Taras Skotinin.

Of course, the classicist "trinity" is observed in Fonvizin's comedy. But Prostakova is not a typical negative classicist character, who, according to the requirements, should not have any positive features at all.

Our main character is Prostakova only in appearance. She is Skotinina by birth and in essence, and can only give rise to something similar to herself.

She is the centerpiece of the conflict that has formed in the comedy. All problems were originally tied to her, and she also created them. This is a woman who was raised by a domineering tyrant-father who received visitors "sitting on a chest." She grew up wealthy and permissive. She was given in marriage, but managed to easily suppress the will of her husband, since, apparently, she was physically stronger.

She solves all controversial issues with the help of fists, and never denies herself the opportunity to humiliate, insult and shout at someone, and even more so at serfs. Everything should be subordinated to Prostakova and should please her. Even the rich Starodub is a “benefactor” who is obliged to do her good. Who, if not her!

She had already disposed of the land and property of the orphan Sophia in advance - not to waste the good, especially since it itself goes into her hands. If not a brother, then a son, especially since Sophia is a rich heiress. Sophia herself is not interesting to anyone, pigs - only they really occupy the groom Skotinin.

And the ignorant groom Mitrofan does not care who he is being married to - he also experienced the strongest emotions at the sight of the "pigs" - "as he was three years old, it used to be, when he saw a mumps, he tremble with joy"! But the fact that she was, Prostakova never let go of her hands. The landowner is even ready for outright meanness when everything does not work out as she planned.

But, oddly enough, this creature is able to love - selflessly, not seeing anything negative. She adores her only son with some kind of animal love, is ready to tear to shreds for the insult inflicted on her offspring: "Have you ever heard of a bitch giving out her puppies?" Whatever she says or does not make her childish, she is ready to justify, protect, rush to the offender. This is the blind maternal instinct of an animal, no living creature is more unworthy of it, only a worthy heir to the Skotinin family, her baby, her pride and joy.

At the end of the comedy, Prostakova is completely unsettled and demoralized: her power over the estate is taken away from her, Sophia marries another and her wealth is lost - and even the adored Mitrofan leaves her without regret as soon as he sees her failure. But most of all, the landowner is killed by the thought that the power that she had is irrevocably lost.

This character, of course, cannot arouse sympathy, he is endowed with painfully unattractive features. However, Prostakova is not a single character who showed us the "tyrant of Russian life" in the comedy. This is a typical representative of the "wild lordship", and since this problem was painful, Fonvizin decides it radically - he shows exactly how to deal with people like her. And although serfdom was abolished only sixty years after the release of "Nedoroslya", it was Fonvizin who started the ridicule of the "tyrants of Russian life" in literature.

The details of Prostakova's biography are very curious. We learn that her father was a commander for fifteen years. And although "he did not know how to read and write, but he knew how to make money and keep it." Hence it is clear that he was a embezzler and a bribe-taker, an extremely stingy person: "lying on a chest with money, he died, so to speak, of hunger." The surname of her mother - Priplodina - speaks for itself.

Prostakova is presented as a domineering uneducated Russian woman. She is very greedy and in order to grab more strangers often, she flatters and "puts on" a mask of nobility, but from under the mask every now and then an animal grin peeps out, which looks ridiculous and ridiculous. Prostakova is a tyrant, despotic and at the same time cowardly, greedy and mean, being the brightest type of Russian landowner, at the same time revealed as an individual character - the cunning and cruel sister of Skotinina, a power-hungry, calculating wife tyrannizing her husband, a mother who loves madly his Mitrofanushka.

“This is“ a despicable fury, whose infernal disposition makes the misfortunes of their whole house. ”However, the character of this“ fury ”is fully revealed in his treatment of serfs.

Prostakova is the sovereign mistress of her villages and in her house She is selfish, but her greed is stupid, mismanaged, inhuman: having taken everything from the peasants, she deprives them of their means of subsistence, but she herself suffers a loss - it is impossible to take a quitrent from the peasants, there is nothing. Moreover, I feel the full support of the supreme power, she considers the situation natural, hence her confidence, arrogance, assertiveness. Prostakova is deeply convinced of her right to offend, rob and punish the peasants, whom she looks at as creatures of a different, lower breed. Sovereignty has corrupted her: she is angry, wayward, scolding and pugnacious - she gives slaps in the face without hesitation. Prostakova dominates the world subject to her, reigns insolently, despotically, with full confidence in her impunity. They see the advantages of the "noble" class in the ability to offend and rob people dependent on them. The primitive nature of Prostakova is clearly revealed in abrupt transitions from arrogance to cowardice, from complacency to servility. Prostakova is a product of the environment in which she grew up. Neither father nor mother gave her any education, did not instill any moral rules. But the conditions of serfdom influenced her even more strongly. It is not held back by any moral foundations. She feels her unlimited power and impunity. She treats servants and hired people with rude, dismissive, insulting. No one dares to oppose her power: "Am I not powerful in my people?" 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, nothing can rip off. my tongue is hung, I don’t lay down my hands: now I swear, now I fight. "

In her house, Prostakova is a wild, domineering despot. Everything is in her unbridled power. She calls her timid, weak-willed husband "a bum", "a freak" and pushes him around in every possible way. Teachers are not paid for a year. Faithful to her and Mitrofan, Eremeevna receives "five rubles a year and five slaps a day." She is ready to "grab" her mug to her brother Skotinin, "rip the snout over the ears."

Prostakova manifests herself not only as a despot, but also as a mother who loves her son with animal love. Even the excessive gluttony of her son causes her first affection, and only then takes care of her son's health. Her love for her son is undeniable: it is she who drives her, all her thoughts are directed towards his well-being. This is how she lives, this is the main thing for her. She is hostile to education. But the wild and ignorant Prostakova realized that after Peter's reforms, it was impossible for a nobleman without education to enter the civil service. She was not taught, but she teaches her son as best she can: another century, another time. She cares about Mitrofan's education not because she understands the benefits of enlightenment, but in order to keep up with fashion: “Robenok, without learning, go to the same Petersburg; say you fool. There are a lot of clever girls now. "

Prostakov's figure is colorful. Yet it is not for nothing that she is Prostakova: everything is outward, her cunning is ingenuous, her actions are transparent, she declares her goals openly. A simpleton's wife and a simpleton herself. If we highlight the main thing in Prostakova, then there are two equilibrium factors: the autocratic mistress in the family and estate; educator and leader of the young generation of nobles - Mitrofan.

Even love for her son - Prostakova's strongest passion - is not capable of ennobling her feelings, for it manifests itself in base, animal forms. Her motherly love is devoid of human beauty and spirituality. And such an image helped the writer from a new side to expose the crime of slavery, which corrupts human nature and serfs and masters. And this individual characteristic makes it possible to show all the terrible, disfiguring power of serfdom. All the great, human, holy feelings and attitudes of Prostakova are distorted, slandered.

Where did such wild manners and habits come from? From Prostakova's remarks, we learn about her and Skotinin's early childhood. They grew up in darkness and ignorance. In these conditions, their brothers and sisters die, resentment and pain are passed on to two living children. The children in the family were not taught anything. “Ancient people, my father! This was not the current century. We weren't taught anything. It used to be that kind people would go to the priest, please, please, so that at least they could send their brother to school. Whether to the article, the deceased is light with both hands and feet, the kingdom of heaven to him! Sometimes she would deign to shout: I will curse the robber who will take something from the Basurmans, and it would not be that Skotinin who wants to learn something. "

It was in this environment that the formation of the character of Prostakova and Skotinin began. Having become a sovereign mistress in her husband's house, Prostakova received even greater opportunities for the development of all the negative traits of her character. Even the feeling of maternal love took on ugly forms in Prostakova.

Mrs. Prostakova received "an enviable upbringing, trained in good manners", she is not alien to her lies, flattery and hypocrisy. 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. She is even proud that she cannot read, she is outraged that girls are taught to read and write (Sophia), because I am confident that much can be achieved without education. "From our own surname Prostakovs ..., lying on their side, they fly to their ranks." And if she has to receive a letter, she will not read it, but will give it to someone else. Moreover, they are deeply convinced of the uselessness and uselessness of knowledge. “People live and lived without science,” Prostakova confidently declares. "Whoever is more intelligent than the same noble brothers will immediately choose another position." Their public perceptions are just as wild. But at the same time, she is not at all worried about raising her son. It is not surprising that Mitrofanushka grew up so spoiled and uncouth.

The illiterate Prostakova understood that there were decrees according to which she could oppress the peasants. Pravdin threw a remark towards the heroine: “No, madam, nobody is free to tyrannize,” and received the answer: “Not free! The nobleman, when he wants, and the servants to whip, is not free. But what was the decree for the freedom of the nobility given to us? " 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! Oh, father! Well! Now I will give the dawn to the canals to my people. Now I will sort everyone out one by one." Prostakova wants her, her family, her peasants to live according to her practical reason and will, and not according to some laws and rules of enlightenment: "I will put what I want on my own." For her despotism, cruelty and greed, Prostakov was severely punished. She is not only deprived of the uncontrolled landlord power, but also her son: "You are the only one left with me, my dear friend, Mitrofanushka!" But he hears the rude answer of his idol: "Yes, get off, mother, how imposed ...". At this tragic moment in the brutal tyrant who raised a soulless villain, the truly human features of an unhappy mother are visible. A Russian proverb says: "With whom you lead, from that you will gain."

The comedy by D. Fonvizin "The Minor" tells about the events that took place in the house of the Prostakovs. Their main participants are Mitrofan, the son of the owner of the house, his mother, Mrs. Prostakova, and Starodum with his niece.

Mrs. Prostakova is madly in love with her son, she cares too much and pokes with him, indulging all his whims and whims, which is why Mitrofan grows up as an absolutely dependent person, whose level of development does not correspond to his age at all. But Mrs. Prostakova blindly follows his wishes. She sees her future in her son, repeating all the time: "Here is my son - my only consolation!" And at the same time, she does nothing so that something traveling will grow out of her son. Mitrofan's diploma is taught by bad teachers, and he himself does not want to study. However, the mother considers her son to be the best and most educated, although this lazy person does not smell of intelligence or knowledge.

With her husband, Mrs. Prostakova behaves as if she does not hold him for a person at all, let alone for the head of the family. She herself decides all issues, disregarding his opinion and neglecting him when it comes to Mitrofan.

Mrs. Prostakova is a cruel and unfair mistress in relation to her servants and peasants. She can severely punish a tailor for having sewn a suit incorrectly, does not pay attention if one of the servants is sick. Mrs. Prostakova chastises Eremeevna for every "mistake". For example, if Mitrofanushka pereledbulochek at dinner, and Eremeevna showed concern about this, she says: “Do you feel sorry for the sixth roll, beast? That's what zeal. " It never occurred to her that overeating would not do her son any good. Prostakova considers all serfs to be her property, practically a thing, therefore she allows herself to thoughtlessly dispose of their lives and rip them off, like sticky, just on a whim.

Mrs. Prostakova treats Sophia like an evil mistress. She is always rough, cold. But as soon as she finds out that Starodum, Sophia's uncle, left a large inheritance to her niece, she changes her behavior, becomes hypocritically kind and affectionate, calls her "dear friend." Now Prostakova wants to marry her son to Sophia in order to receive all her money as a dowry, refusing this to her brother, although she had previously agreed to this marriage. Learning that Sofia is married to an officer in Milan and that Starodum has given his consent to this, Prostakova wants to marry her son to a girl by force and deception. However, her venture failed. According to the law, the village was taken away from her, depriving her of power.

Mrs. Prostakova was a cruel, headstrong woman who did not take into account the interests and feelings of other people, which is why she lost everything. In the image of Prostakova, Fonvizin reveals the negative traits of a narrow-minded, shameless person with power, who by his actions brings himself and his loved ones to trouble. The author shows that it is possible to obtain wealth without losing a couple and a human face. And people like Prostakova, in the end, pay for all the harm done.