Positive and negative qualities of Chatsky. The image and character of Chatsky in the comedy Woe from Wit - artistic analysis. Griboyedov Alexander Sergeevich

/A.A. Grigoriev. Regarding the new edition of an old thing. "Woe from Wit." St. Petersburg 1862/

So I now turn to my second position - to the fact that Chatsky is still the only heroic the face of our literature.<...>

Chatsky first of all - honest And active nature, and also the nature of a fighter, that is, an extremely passionate nature.

They usually say that a secular person in a secular society, firstly, will not allow himself to say what Chatsky says, and secondly, will not fight with windmills, preach to the Famusovs, the Silent Ones and others.<...>

In Chatsky there is only a truthful nature, which will not allow any lies - that’s all; and he will allow himself everything that his truthful nature allows himself. And that there are and were truthful natures in life, here is the evidence: old man Grinev 1, old Bagrov 2, old Dubrovsky 3. Alexander Andreevich Chatsky must have inherited the same nature, if not from his father, then from his grandfather or great-grandfather.

Another question is whether Chatsky would talk to people he despises.

And you forget with this question that Famusov, on whom he pours out “all his bile and all his annoyance,” is not just such and such a person for him, but a living memory of his childhood, when he was taken “to bow” to his master, which

He drove away on many trucks from the mothers and fathers of rejected children.<...>

<...>Chatsky believes in the benefit of his sermon less than you yourself, but bile has boiled in him, his sense of truth is offended. And besides, he's in love...

Do you know how such people love?

Not this love, not worthy of a man, which absorbs the entire existence into the thought of a beloved object and sacrifices everything to this thought, even the idea of ​​moral improvement: Chatsky loves passionately, madly and tells the truth to Sophia that

I breathed you, lived, was busy continuously...

But this only means that the thought of her merged for him with every noble thought or deed of honor and goodness. He speaks the truth when asking her about Molchalin:

But does he have that passion, that feeling, that ardor, so that, except for you, the whole world seems like dust and vanity to him?

But underneath this truth lies the dream of his Sophia, as capable of understanding that “the whole world” is “dust and vanity” before the idea of ​​truth and goodness, or, at least, capable of appreciating this belief in the person she loves, capable of loving for it person. He loves only such an ideal Sophia; he does not need another: he will reject the other and broken hearted will do

Search the world, Where there is a corner for the offended feeling.

Look with what deep psychological fidelity the entire conversation between Chatsky and Sophia in Act III is visible. Chatsky keeps asking why he is silent higher And better; he even enters into conversation with him, trying to find in him

A quick mind, a mature genius, -

and yet she cannot, is unable to understand that Sophia loves Molchalin precisely for properties that are opposite to the properties of him, Chatsky, for petty and vulgar properties (she does not yet see Molchalin’s vile traits). Only after being convinced of this, he leaves his dream, but leaves as a husband - irrevocably, he already sees the truth clearly and fearlessly. Then he tells her:

You will make peace with him after mature reflection. Destroy yourself!.. and for what? You can scold him, and swaddle him, and send him to work.

Meanwhile, there is a reason why Chatsky passionately loved this apparently so insignificant and petty nature. What was it about him? Not just childhood memories, but more important reasons, at least physiological. Moreover, this fact is not at all the only one in that strange, ironic cycle that is called life. People like Chatsky often love such petty and insignificant women as Sophia. You could even say that for the most part they like it that way. This is not a paradox. They sometimes meet women who are completely honest, who are quite capable of understanding them, sharing their aspirations, and are not satisfied with them. Sophia is something fatal, inevitable in their life, so fatal and inevitable that for the sake of this they neglect honest and warm-hearted women...

<...>You, gentlemen, who consider Chatsky to be Don Quixote, are especially emphasizing the monologue that ends the third act. But, firstly, the poet himself put his hero here in a comic position and, remaining faithful to the high psychological task, showed what comic outcome untimely energy can take; and secondly, again, you probably haven’t thought about how people with the inclinations of even some kind of moral energy love. Everything he says in this monologue, he says for Sophia; he gathers all the strength of his soul, wants to reveal himself with all his nature, wants to convey everything to her at once.<...>This shows Chatsky’s last faith in Sophia’s nature...; here for Chatsky the question is about the life or death of an entire half of his moral existence. That this personal question merged with public issue, - this is again true to the nature of the hero, who is the only type of moral and courageous struggle in the sphere of life that the poet has chosen.<...>

Yes, Chatsky is - I repeat again - our only hero, that is, the only one who is positively fighting in the environment where fate and passion have thrown him.<...>

Chatsky, in addition to his general heroic significance, also has significance historical. He is a product of the first quarter Russian XIX centuries, direct son and heir of the Novikovs 7 and Radishchevs 8, comrade of people

Eternal memory of the twelfth year,

powerful, still deeply believing in itself and therefore a stubborn force, ready to die in a collision with the environment, to die if only because it would leave behind a “page in history”... He does not care that the environment with which he is struggling, positively unable not only to understand him, but even to take him seriously.

But Griboyedov, as a great poet, cares about this. No wonder he called his drama a comedy.

Read also other articles by critics about the comedy "Woe from Wit":

A.A. Grigoriev. Regarding the new edition of an old thing. "Woe from Wit"

• Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" - a representation of secular life
• Characteristics of Chatsky

I.A. Goncharov

V. Belinsky. "Woe from Wit." Comedy in 4 acts, in verse. Essay by A.S. Griboedova

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - main character in the play "Woe from Wit" by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov. Chatsky is one of the most famous characters in Russian plays. Griboedov did not try to make this hero, like everyone else in this work, completely positive or negative. He put both good and bad qualities into it, approaching realism.

Chatsky in the play is young, but is no longer a boy. His parents died early, and he was raised by his father’s friend, Famusov. The young man belongs to a family of hereditary nobles. On at the moment Chatsky has three to four hundred souls. He was brought up together with Famusov’s daughter, Sophia. She was his best friend, whom Alexander fell in love with. When Chatsky grew up, he decided to live separately, explaining that he became bored in the house of his father’s friend. Later he went on a trip for three years to gain further knowledge. Before that, he was in the service, but left due to the fact that he did not like serving people. He believed that a different time had come and it was necessary to destroy the old foundations.

Alexander Andreevich is a smart and capable person. Everyone believes that he would have achieved a lot if he remained in the service. Chatsky is also a witty person, but sometimes he can also be sarcastic. After a trip abroad, he ceased to understand the foundations of Russia (to serve people, to make a laughing stock of himself in order to please his superiors). The young man recognized service only in expressing himself precisely in work, using his abilities and knowledge. He openly laughed at Famusov and the people around him, realizing that this offended them. Chatsky condemned the stupidity of this people.

Immediately after his arrival, without stopping home, Alexander went to Sophia. When they met, he found out that she had long been in love with another - Alexei Stepanovich Molchalin - and called former relationship with Alexander "childish pranks". Stepan was not like Chatsky. He was not stupid, he was smart in his own way. Molchalin was the type of person who serves and achieves career success through his cunning. That's why he is "Molchalin". Because of this, Sophia chose him (she would never be with Chatsky). Sophia did not like Alexander’s mocking address to her and started a rumor that Chatsky was crazy, which quickly spread in society.

Having learned about this, the young man fled from that place. Where? One can only guess about this. Maybe he ran away to people like him, wanting a revolution. After all, Griboyedov expressed his thoughts through Chatsky, and the writer had Decembrist friends. And he himself was suspected of participating in the plans of the Decembrists.

Essay about Chatsky

Griboedov's work "Woe from Wit" reflects the conflict political views a conservative society with people of a new generation and new trends. The comedy reflected this problem brightly, bitingly with the satirical force and wit inherent in this genre.

Chatsky is the only person of the new generation who opposes the conservative majority. It is obvious that the play is devoted from start to finish to the ideas of Decembrism. Here are Chatsky’s patriotic spirit, and loud statements in defense of science and education, and critical remarks regarding serfdom, as well as the idea of ​​​​the identity of the Russian people, the peculiarities of Russian national culture.

I wonder what main character a work is, at its core, the embodiment of the author, his ideas and passions. Chatsky traveled around the world for a long time, as a result of which he was inspired by the ideas of equality, brotherhood and personal freedom. But upon returning to his homeland, the hero sees that nothing has changed around him, the people have remained the same. Famusov’s house is not happy about Chatsky’s arrival, and the main character immediately notices this. He sees that society in the country is built on hypocrisy and deception, and the main activities of the Moscow nobility are endless celebrations, dances and feasts.

Chatsky belongs to the nobility, is not rich, at one time he refused military service. He explained his action by saying that he did not see any benefit in this matter and that he would be glad to serve, and not to be served.

Chatsky confronts the residents of Famusov’s house: Skalozub, Molchalin, Repetilov and Famusov himself. In the comedy, the author ridicules and condemns these people as representatives secular society of that time.

The reason for the return of the main character to his homeland was his boundless love for Sophia. Once in Moscow, he immediately goes to Famusov’s house and confesses his feelings to the girl. Based on this act, Chatsky can be characterized as an ardent, passionate and romantic person. Love for him - highest feeling, shrine. What pain he has to experience when he finds out that Sophia loves Molchalin.

Chatsky is educated, has a subtle, sharp mind and resourcefulness. But those around her did not seem to notice all these qualities, and only the maid Lisa was able to note them in a conversation with Sophia. But she didn’t pay any attention to the girl’s words.

The main character harshly condemns serfdom, calling them a source of misfortune. He despises the Moscow “aces”, for whom life ideal is wealth and career growth. Chatsky notes the inability of the older generation to defend their positions and express opinions.

In a confrontation with Famus society, the hero suffers a terrible defeat: Sophia prefers him to Molchalin, society does not accept him and ridicules him. Shocked by these circumstances, Chatsky leaves the city. According to I.A. Goncharov, Chatsky was broken by the quantitative superiority of the “old force,” but he himself dealt a crushing blow to it with the quality of the force of the new generation.

Option 3

Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is dotted with various negative heroes. Heroes who evoke disrespect, contempt and even anger for their actions, words and thoughts. The antagonist of all bad heroes is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky.

Very popular nowadays american films, based on comic books and various kinds of action films, where one hero fights with a dozen opponents. Chatsky is the prototype of such a hero in Russian literature, only he fights not physically, but spiritually.

Alexander Andreevich has the most best qualities person: honesty, dignity, honor, courage, intelligence, wit. When he returns to Moscow to meet the love of his life, Sophia, he comes into great shock because the girl he loves is now cold towards him, and the society that has formed around her father amazes Chatsky with its stupidity, naivety, and admiration for everything. foreign, hypocrisy and the absurdity of his thoughts. Just look at Skalozub, who claims that books have a bad effect on people.

Having seen this whole circus represented by Famusov’s society, our hero decides to fight him, to prove to Sophia that their love is still alive. He traveled for three years, but his love did not pass. He lived his entire childhood and youth in the Famusovs’ house, and he remembers very well how fun he had then. Now a golem of the absurd has risen before him, representing the society of the Famusov house.

At the ball, he never hesitates to tell everyone present to their face how ignorant they are, how petty their lives are, how pathetic their admiration for foreigners is, how unworthy they behave. People, being a huge mass, and because of this having great power of public opinion, agree that Chatsky has gone crazy, and this idea flies like a bullet throughout society.

Chatsky is a foreign body in the stomach, which is saturated with hypocrisy and depravity. The body, poisoned and drunk with the fashion of society, is trying to spew out a foreign body from itself, Famusov’s society, led by the owner of the house, is trying to make Chatsky an abnormal person, because everything that contradicts their laws is abnormal, but they do not admit that it is not Chatsky who is superfluous in this organ, it is the stomach itself that should be cut out, like a festering wound, because it does not bring any benefit, but rather has a detrimental effect on the entire organism called Russia.

Sample 4

The work “Woe from Wit” shows us the struggle between the old and the new, which was widely unfolding in Russia at that time between people with the views of the Decembrists and the masters. The rich society dominated by Famusov and his other like-minded people is contrasted in the comedy by Chatsky.

We see that Chatsky’s worldview occurred during a period of growth. He grew up in Famusov's house as an inquisitive, sociable and vulnerable boy. The monotony of established life and the spiritual poverty of the Moscow aristocracy caused him melancholy and complete disgust. He was completely immersed in freedom-loving thoughts about how to reorganize the old society, and therefore did not visit the house where he grew up at all. Even Sophia noticed this. After all, Chatsky leaves in his youth, leaving his girlfriend, in order to travel and at the same time enrich his mind.

Sophia, of course, had ardent feelings for him, but could not understand how the young man risked his personal happiness for the common good. Limited worldviews do not allow her to appreciate the image of Chatsky at its true worth. But the young man did not reject Sophia’s feelings at all. He set spiritual demands wider than personal ones. Returning to Moscow, the flame of his love is full of hopes for reciprocity. However, over time the girl changed. Reasonable, serious girl, having read romantic works, looking for the same sincere love, like Chatsky. She soberly assesses Skalozub’s empty phrases and limited horizons. Molchalin seems only to be a sweet and impressionable young man. And if Sophia falls in love with him, it means that she will automatically join the Famusov society.

Chatsky directly assesses Molchalin’s character, which offends the girl. But precise statements about the characters in the play and a sharp mind seem to Sophia to be disdainful young man to people. And when the girl evaluates Molchalin at the beginning, this gives some hope to Chatsky. But then, having learned that Sophia still chose her rival as a wife, she greatly insults him. Our hero suffers from being humiliated by being placed next to Molchalin. We see how Chatsky mercilessly tears off the masks of duplicity and meanness from representatives of secular society, which is mired in intrigue and entertainment, debauchery and corruption. Our hero is presented as a humanist. He believes that people should strive to be better. And there are heroes like him. Chatsky spoke about those progressive youth who, albeit in small numbers, began to put forward advanced ideas. And, despite the fact that the character is defeated by Famusov and his supporters, his image is perceived from a positive point of view. After all, such people always exist where there is a struggle between the old generation and the new.

Article menu:

In literature, the appearance of heroes who are ahead of their time, being incomprehensible and not accepted by their contemporary society, is a frequent phenomenon.

At first it seems that this phenomenon is exclusively literary and has nothing to do with real life no, but, in fact, this is a mistaken opinion. The appearance of such people at the end of a century or during crisis periods of development is a frequent occurrence, but it is quite difficult to fully analyze such individuals while being in the same time period. They, against the general background, look eccentric and strange. Their position always contradicts generally accepted principles and therefore sometimes it seems that they are on the verge of madness and common sense.

The logic of their actions and positions can be analyzed based on the further development of history and culture. This process is easy to translate into reality if what we have in front of us is not a living person, but a work of art, moreover, written several decades or even hundreds of years ago. In this case, we can assess the significance of the position of a particular character.

"Extra" Chatsky

The concept of “an extra person” is inherent in the image of Chatsky. This term has Russian roots. The first manifestation of this phenomenon was discovered literary critics and scientific figures in the image of the main character of Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”. Based on the position of literary scholars, such a hero is always higher in his level of education and talents than everyone else around him. His potential is so limitless and diverse that he cannot realize himself in any type of activity. He is constantly in search of the meaning of life, but cannot find it, so he spends his strength and skill on all sorts of little things in life - revelry, balls, duels - in a word, on everything that brings pleasure or is the child of passion. Such characters bring suffering to others (mostly women), ruin the lives of many people, sometimes even those closest to them, and become the cause of death. They do not see any wrongdoing in their actions - they perceive what happened impartially.

To some extent, this position is akin to Chatsky - he also seems to us to be torn from another era, searching for his destiny and possessing extraordinary potential. His distinguishing feature from " extra person"is that Chatsky does not bring such drastic destruction to society or its individual representatives, he does not die, as is customary for such characters at the end of the story, but simply leaves a society alien to him.

Based on this difference, in scientific literature Chatsky is called the harbinger of the extra person. The concept of this type of hero is important to understand complete picture the entire image and actions of the hero - the character periodically acts negatively not because he is poorly brought up, but because, under the pressure of society and his inner world another product of activity and reaction to the environment is impossible for him.

Prototypes of Chatsky

Prototypes are a common phenomenon in literature. Sometimes the relationship between the hero of the story and reality existing person prosaic, sometimes it is difficult to find a prototype due to the person’s lack of fame. In the case of Chatsky, the prototypes were two people: Pyotr Chaadaev and Wilhelm Kuchelbecker.

The first in his activities was a publicist and philosopher (as he himself claimed, a “Christian philosopher”). The second is a poet, friend and classmate of Pushkin. Both Chaadaev and Kuchelbecker were active public figures, who vehemently and sharply criticized the government and order - this position makes them similar to Chatsky. Griboedov's contemporaries repeatedly spoke out about the similarity, even external, with Chaadaev. Many considered the 19th century philosopher to be crazy (like Chatsky’s Famus society) and tried in every possible way to get this sharply sarcastic man out of his area.

Biography

Griboyedov gives the reader scant information about the biographical data of the main character. It is important for the author to show not the process of his formation as a person, but harsh criticism aristocratic society, its habits and principles.

But, still, about some points life path Griboyedov briefly talks about his main character.

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is a nobleman by birth. His parents died when he was still a child. The boy was taken in by his father’s friend, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, to be raised by him. For some time, Chatsky was raised and educated together with Famusov’s daughter, Sophia. Having matured, the young man begins to live separately. He is quite an eligible bachelor in his possession of an estate with 300 - 400 serfs. After some time, Chatsky goes abroad. After three years, Alexander Andreevich returns to Russia and visits the house of Pavel Afanasyevich, dear to him. It is this place that later becomes the background for the unfolding of the main events.

Separation from his homeland and people close to him had a nostalgic effect on Chatsky - everything connected with childhood and youth is dear and dear to him. Neither Famusov nor Sophia feel such joy from his arrival - their joy is more ostentatious than sincere. They pay attention to him so as not to look ignorant in the eyes of others. Their joy is just a sign of decency.

In the further course of events, this situation worsens - the appearance of Chatsky becomes a test for everyone. The fact is that Alexander Andreevich always has some kind of barb or sarcastic remark in stock. Nobody wants to receive such a pleasant message addressed to them, even if it has a real basis. The desire to appear virtuous in the eyes of others takes over among aristocrats. Chatsky always finds something to latch on to - bribery, resolving issues thanks to friendly connections and kinship, theft - this is not his full list main problems modern society.

Chatsky hopes that his love for Sophia will help him realize his future. family life, but this hope is not realized either - the girl plays with the feelings of the young man, but in fact loves another.

More flexible in character, able to give a compliment at the right moment, to suck up. Sophia cares little about the reasons for her lover’s attitude towards her; she seriously thinks that this is a manifestation of love. In fact, the reason for such reverence for her is the material base of her father. Molchalin, whom Sophia dotes on, does not love her, but tolerates and pleases her only in order to improve his financial situation. Chatsky cannot come to terms with such orders - in his monologues he repeatedly claims that the aristocracy has ceased to be guided by the principles of morality. She is only interested in a way to line her pockets.

Rumors spread by Sophia about Chatsky's insanity aggravate the situation. Alexander Andreevich has no choice but to leave.

Chatsky's appearance

Alexander Sergeevich does not give an accurate description of the appearance of the heroes of the comedy “Woe from Wit”. The image of Chatsky is no exception. Oh him appearance, clothing style and physique, we can talk based on reviews about him and brief hints about the personality of others acting characters.

Based on the general opinion, Alexander Andreevich is a pleasant-looking person, without any flaws.

In the comedy, Chatsky gives recommendations to Platon Mikhailovich Gorich on horse riding and active pastime. This fact allows us to conclude that Alexander Andreevich himself is not alien to such an attitude towards leisure; it is likely that he is a man of slender build.

Famusov, who saw Chatsky for the first time after a three-year separation, notes that he is a dandy, that is, a man who dresses in fashion.

Thus, Alexander Andreevich is not without cute, pleasant facial features. He, like all people of his age, is interested in equestrian sports and fashion trends in clothing. Chatsky is a unique comedy character; he is not without negative character traits, but they are explained by the influence of society on him. Being “prickly” is the only way for him to protect himself from the madness of the aristocracy.

Characteristics of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov: description, biography of the hero

The main character of the comedy is A. A. Chatsky. In him the writer embodied many of the qualities of a leading man of his era. According to his beliefs, he is close to the Decembrists. Chatsky lost his parents early and, being the son of Famusov’s deceased friend, Andrei Ilyich Chatsky, grew up and was brought up in the house. F. Chatsky fondly recalls his childhood spent with Sophia, with whom he is in love. Famusov speaks about Chatsky’s real activities:

It does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in it,

But if you wanted, it would be businesslike.

It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small in the head,

And he writes and translates well.

Chatsky proclaims humanity, respect for to the common man, service to the cause, not to persons, freedom of thought. He affirms the progressive ideas of modernity, the prosperity of science and art, respect for the national language and culture, and education. He sees the meaning of life in serving the people, the Motherland.

The hero’s convictions are revealed in his monologues and disputes with representatives of Famus’s Moscow. His rejection of serfdom can be heard in his memoirs about the serf theater, about the “Carrier of noble scoundrels”, who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds. After listening to Famusov’s enthusiastic story about Maxim Petrovich, Chatsky speaks with contempt about people who “not in war, but in peace, took their foreheads, knocked on the floor, did not regret”, about those “whose necks more often bent.”

He despises people who are ready

The patrons yawn at the ceiling,

Show up to be quiet, shuffle around, have lunch.

He brands “a bygone century”: “This was the century of obedience and fear.” He approves of those young people who are in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters." He is critical of the dominance of foreigners:

Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?

So that our smart, cheerful people

Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.

Chatsky defends the right of a person to freely choose his own activities: travel, live in the countryside, “focus his mind” on science, or devote himself to “high and beautiful creative arts.” Chatsky’s desire to “serve” and not “be served”, to serve the “cause” and not “persons”, his “connection with ministers” and the subsequent complete break is a hint of the desire of progressive-minded youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.

Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared crazy. Old world fights Chatsky’s free speech using slander. Chatsky’s struggle with an accusatory word corresponds to that early period the Decembrist movement, when they believed that much could be achieved with words, and limited themselves to oral speeches. However, fighting with words does not lead to victory. The old world is still so strong that it defeats Chatsky, who is fleeing Famusov’s house and Moscow. But Chatsky’s flight from Moscow cannot be perceived as a defeat. Irreconcilable views between Chatsky and Famusovsky Society puts our hero in a tragic situation. According to Goncharov, his role is “passive”: at the same time he is a “advanced warrior”, “skirmisher”, and at the same time he is “always a victim”. "Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting it in turn death blow the quality of fresh strength,” this is how I. A. Goncharov defined the meaning of Chatsky.

Characteristics of Chatsky based on the work "Woe from Wit"

The comedy was written in the 20s of the 19th century. After the victorious war with Napoleon in 1812, when the Russian people dealt a mortal blow to the Napoleonic army, which had gained the glory of invincibility in Europe, the contradiction between the greatest capabilities of ordinary Russian people and the plight in which they found themselves at the will of the powers that be, in The Arakcheev reaction was rampant in the country. Honest people of that time could not put up with this. Among the progressive-minded nobility, protest and dissatisfaction with the existing order were brewing, and secret societies were created. And it was A.S. Griboyedov who embodied the emergence of these germs of protest in his comedy, bringing “the present century and the past century” face to face.

The first pages of the comedy were read... It became clear: everyone in Famusov’s house was waiting for the person who interested me so much. Who is he? Why is he the only one they talk about in this house? Why does Liza, the maid, remember him as a cheerful, witty person, but Sophia, Famusov’s daughter, doesn’t want to hear about Chatsky? And later I am convinced that Famusov is also irritated and alarmed. Why? I need to resolve all these questions. The comedy interested me from the very first pages.

The plot basis of the work is the conflict between the young nobleman Chatsky and the society from which he himself came. The events of the comedy take place in one Moscow aristocratic house over the course of one day. But Griboyedov managed to expand the temporal and spatial framework of the work, giving a complete picture of the life of the noble society of that time and showing the new, living, advanced that was emerging in its depths.

So, it turns out that Chatsky, who was left an orphan at an early age, lived in the house of his guardian Famusov, a friend of his father, and was brought up with his daughter, having received an excellent education at home from foreign tutors. “The habit of being together every day inseparably” connected them with childhood friendship. But soon the young man Chatsky became “bored” in Famusov’s house, where there were no serious intellectual interests, and he “moved out,” that is, he began to live separately, independently, made good friends, and became seriously involved in science. During these years, his friendly disposition towards Sophia becomes a serious feeling. But his love for a girl did not distract him from the pursuit of knowledge, the study of life. He goes "to wander". Three years have passed...And now our hero is again in Moscow, in Famusov’s house. He rushes to see Sophia, whom he loves passionately. And such sincerity, such love and joy from meeting his beloved girl can be heard in his voice! He is lively, cheerful, witty, handsome! Chatsky is completely overwhelmed with the joy of life and does not know that trouble awaits him: after all, Sophia loves not him, but her father’s secretary, the cunning liar Molchalin.

Chatsky does not even suspect how Sophia has changed during his absence; he trusts her, as in the days of his early youth. And Sophia not only does not love him, but is even ready to hate him for his caustic words addressed to Molchalin. She is capable of lies, pretense, gossip, just to hurt, to take revenge on Chatsky. In Chatsky’s playful, sarcastic remarks, she cannot feel the pain of a man who truly loves his Motherland. Chatsky and Famusov meet as close people. But we soon become convinced that there are constant clashes between them.

In Famusov's house, Chatsky meets Skalozub, a possible contender for Sophia's hand. It is here that an intense ideological struggle arises and flares up between Famusov, a defender of autocratic serfdom, and Chatsky, a patriot, defender of “free life,” an exponent of the ideas of the Decembrists, new ideas about man and his place in society. The dispute between them is about the dignity of a person, his value, about honor and honesty, about the attitude towards service, about the place of a person in society.

Chatsky sarcastically criticizes feudal tyranny, cynicism and soullessness of the “fathers of the fatherland”, their pathetic admiration for everything foreign, their careerism, fierce resistance to moving forward to a better life.

Famusov is afraid of people like Chatsky, since they encroach on the order of life that is the basis of well-being for the Famusovs. The smug serf owner teaches the “today’s proud people” how to live, setting up sycophants and careerists like Maxim Petrovich as an example.

Could, say, Belinsky, Ryleev, Griboyedov remain silent in such a case? Hardly! This is why we so naturally perceive Chatsky’s accusatory monologues and remarks. The hero is indignant, despises, mocks, accuses, while thinking out loud, not paying attention to how others will react to his thoughts.

Chatsky has the seething passion of a fighter for a fair society. He wants to bring his enemies to “white heat” and express his truth.

A citizen's anger and resentment give him energy.

Reading the comedy, I admire more and more how expressively Griboyedov compared Chatsky and his rivals. Chatsky evokes my sympathy and respect, recognition of his noble deeds. His statements about the world of feudal owners are near and dear to me.

The secular crowd, skillfully depicted by Griboyedov’s pen, is the personification of meanness, ignorance, and inertia. In my opinion, Sophia, whom our hero loves so much, can also be included in this crowd. After all, it is she who deals him a treacherous blow: by writing gossip about Chatsky’s madness. I understand that she wanted to take revenge for his ridicule towards Molchalin. But you can’t be so cruel and inhumane! After all, she is a representative of the fair sex and suddenly such meanness! The fiction about Chatsky's madness spreads with lightning speed. Nobody believes, but everyone repeats it. Finally, this gossip reaches Famusov. When the guests begin to list the reason for Chatsky’s madness, another meaning of this phrase is revealed: in their opinion, crazy means “freethinker.” Everyone is trying to determine the cause of the madness. Khlestova says: “I drank tea beyond my years,” but Famusov is firmly convinced:

Learning is a plague

Learning is the reason...

Various measures to combat the “madness” are then proposed. Colonel Skalozub, a narcissistic, stupid colonel of stick drill, an enemy of freedom and enlightenment, dreaming of the rank of general, says:

I will make you happy: universal rumor,

That there is a project for lyceums, schools, gymnasiums;

There they will only teach in our way: one, two;

And schools will be kept like this: for big occasions.

And Famusov, as if summarizing the opinions expressed about enlightenment, says:

Once evil is stopped:

Take all the books and burn them.

Thus, Chatsky is declared crazy for his freethinking. He is hated by reactionary society as an ideological enemy, as a progressive freedom-loving person. And society takes measures to neutralize him - he erects vile slander against him. Soon Chatsky heard gossip about his madness. He is hurt, bitter, but this does not concern him as deeply as who Sophia loves, why she is so cold towards him.

And suddenly an unexpected resolution of these issues occurs. Chatsky witnessed an accidentally overheard conversation between Molchalin and the maid Liza. Molchalin confesses his love to the girl, but the maid boldly hints at his wedding with the young lady, Sophia, and shames Molchalin. And then Molchalin “takes off his mask”: he admits to Liza that “there is nothing enviable in Sofya Pavlovna,” that he is in love with her “by position,” “who feeds and waters, and sometimes gives her rank.” Anger and shame torment Chatsky: “Here I am sacrificed to whom!” How he was deceived in Sophia! His happy rival is Molchalin, a low hypocrite and deceiver, a “fool,” a “famous servant,” convinced that “at his age,” in his rank, “he should not dare to have his own judgment,” but must, “pleasing everyone, and take awards and have fun."

And Sophia, on her way to a date with Molchalin, accidentally heard his frank confession to Lisa. She is surprised, offended, humiliated! After all, she loved him so much, idealized this insignificant person! What a pitiful role Sophia played in his life! But the girl finds the strength in herself to renounce her delusions forever, to push away Molchalin, who is crawling at her feet, but she cannot defend and justify herself before Chatsky. Chatsky is dealt another wound: he learns that the absurd gossip about his madness belongs to Sophia. No, he will never be able to forgive her for this, since he also considers her a representative of the Famus society, which is hostile to him. Chatsky decided to leave Moscow forever. Why? Leaving “the tormentors of the crowd, traitors in love, tireless enmity,” he intends to “search the world where there is a corner for the offended feeling.”

And Sophia? After all, reconciliation with her was so possible! But Chatsky, having ranked her among the world of his enemies, is convinced that “there will be another well-behaved sycophant and businessman.” Maybe our hero is right. After all, Sophia, brought up in the spirit of hatred of everything progressive and new, would not bring happiness to a person who has a definite opinion about serfdom, education, and service. It was not for nothing that the Decembrists saw Chatsky as their like-minded person.

I admit, I feel sorry for Sophia, because she is not a bad girl, not immoral, but, unfortunately, she turned out to be a victim of the lies that are characteristic of Famus society, which destroyed her. Chatsky is a representative of that part of the noble youth who are already aware of all the inertia of the surrounding reality, all the insignificance and emptiness of the people who surround him. There are still a few such people, they are not yet able to fight the existing system, but they appear - this is the spirit of the times. That is why Chatsky can rightfully be called a hero of his time. It was these people who came to Senate Square on December 14, 1825. Chatsky is a man of extraordinary intelligence, brave, honest, sincere. In his disputes with Famusov, in his critical judgments, the appearance of a man emerges who sees the vices and contradictions of his society and wants to fight them (with words for now).

Griboedov shows these qualities especially clearly, contrasting Chatsky with the low sycophant and hypocrite Molchalin. This vile man, who has nothing sacred, regularly fulfills his father’s behest “to please all people without exception,” even “to the janitor’s dog, so that it is affectionate.” Molchalin is “a sycophant and a businessman,” as Chatsky characterizes him.

Famusov is a high-ranking official, a conservative to the core, a stupid martinet and obscurantist Skalozub - these are the people Chatsky meets. In these characters, Griboyedov gave an accurate and vivid description of the noble society of that time.

In the musty world of Famus, Chatsky appears like a cleansing thunderstorm. He is in every way the opposite of typical representatives of Famus society. If Molchalin, Famusov, Skalozub see the meaning of life in their well-being (“bureaucratic towns, small towns”), then Chatsky dreams of disinterested service to his homeland, of bringing benefit to the people, whom he respects and considers “smart and cheerful.” At the same time, he despises blind veneration, servility, and careerism. He “would be glad to serve”, but he “sickens being served.” Chatsky sharply criticizes this society, mired in hypocrisy, hypocrisy, and debauchery. He says bitterly:

Where, show us, are the fathers of the fatherland,

Which ones should we take as models?

Aren't these the ones who are rich in robbery?

We found protection from fate in friends, in kinship,

Magnificent building chambers,

Where they indulge in feasts and extravagance...

These people are deeply indifferent to the fate of their homeland and people. Their cultural and moral level can be judged by the following remarks by Famusov: “They would take all the books and burn them,” because “learning is the reason” that “there are crazy people, and deeds, and opinions.” Chatsky has a different opinion; he values ​​people who are ready to “put their minds hungry for knowledge into science” or engage in “creative, high and beautiful” art.

Chatsky rebels against the society of the Famusovs, Skalozubovs, and Mollins. But his protest is too weak to shake the foundations of this society. The conflict is tragic young hero with an environment where love, friendship, everything is doomed to persecution strong feeling, every living thought. They declare him crazy and turn away from him. "Who was I with! Where did fate throw me! Everyone is chasing me! Everyone is cursing me!" “Get out of Moscow! I don’t go here anymore,” Chatsky exclaims sadly.

In the comedy, Chatsky is alone, but there are more and more people like him (remember Skalozub’s cousin, who “followed the rank,” and he suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village, or Princess Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, “a chemist and a botanist”). It was they who were to carry out the first stage of the revolutionary liberation movement, to shake up the country, to bring closer the moment when the people would free themselves from the chains of slavery, when those principles of fair social relations that Chatsky, Griboyedov himself, and the Decembrists dreamed of would triumph.

The comedy "Woe from Wit" has entered the treasury of our national culture. Even now she has not lost her moral and artistic strength. We, people of the new generation, understand and are close to Griboyedov’s angry, irreconcilable attitude towards injustice, meanness, and hypocrisy, which are so often encountered in our lives.

The main character of the comedy teaches us to be irreconcilable towards everything low and vulgar, teaches us to be honest, kind and principled.

Young Griboedov was closely associated with leading people from secret societies. His Chatsky is a portrait of Pyotr Chaadaev, and Griboedov’s friend, the poet Odoevsky, and the ardent, proud Pushkin... a portrait and character of a leading man of that time.