The play "Woe from Wit" is a famous work of A. S. Griboedov. In the process of its creation, the author departed from the classical canons of writing "high" comedy. The heroes in "Woe from Wit" are ambiguous and multifaceted images, and not caricature characters endowed with one characteristic feature. This technique allowed Alexander Sergeyevich to achieve tremendous credibility in the depiction of the "picture of morals" of the Moscow aristocracy. This article will be devoted to the characterization of representatives of such a society in the comedy "Woe from Wit".
The problems of the play
In “Woe from Wit” there are two plot-forming conflicts. One of them concerns the personal relationships of the heroes. It is attended by Chatsky, Molchalin and Sofia. The other is a socio-ideological confrontation between the main character of the comedy and all the other characters in the play. Both storylines reinforce and complement each other. Without taking into account the love line, it is impossible to understand the characters, worldview, psychology and relationships of the heroes of the work. However, the main one, of course, is social conflict. Chatsky and Famus society are opposed to each other throughout the play.
"Portrait" of comedy heroes
The appearance of the comedy "Woe from Wit" caused a lively response in literary circles of the first half of the 19th century. And far from always they were laudatory. For example, a longtime friend of Alexander Sergeyevich - P. A. Katenin - reproached the author for the fact that the characters in the play are too "portrait", that is, complex and multifaceted. However, Griboedov, on the contrary, considered the realism of his characters to be the main advantage of the work. In response to criticisms, he replied that "... cartoons that distort real proportions in the guise of people are unacceptable ..." and argued that there is not one such comedy in his comedy. Having managed to make his heroes alive and believable, Griboedov achieved an amazing satirical effect. Many involuntarily recognized themselves in the characters of the comedy.
Representatives of the Famus society
In response to remarks about the imperfection of the “plan” of his work, Griboedov stated that in his play “25 fools per one sane person”. Thus, he spoke rather sharply to the Moscow elite. It was obvious to everyone who the author portrayed under the guise of comedic characters. Alexander Sergeyevich did not hide his negative attitude to Famus society and opposed him to the only intelligent person - Chatsky. The remaining characters in the comedy were typical images of that time: the well-known and influential Moscow “ace” (Famusov); vociferous and stupid careerist-martinet (Skalozub); silent and wordless scoundrel (Molchalin); imperious, half-mad and very rich old woman (Khlestova); eloquent chatterbox (Repetilov) and many others. Famous society in the comedy is colorful, diverse and absolutely unanimous in its resistance to the voice of reason. Consider the nature of its most prominent representatives in more detail.
Famusov: a staunch conservative
This hero is one of the most influential people in Moscow society. He is a fierce opponent of everything new and believes that it is necessary to live as fathers and grandfathers bequeathed. Chatsky's statements for him are the height of free-thinking and debauchery. And in ordinary human vices (drunkenness, lies, servility, hypocrisy) he does not see anything reprehensible. For example, he claims to be "a monk known for his behavior," but before that he flirts with Lisa. For Famusov, a synonym for the word "vice" is "scholarship." The condemnation of bureaucratic servility for him is a sign of insanity.
The question of service is the main one in the system of life values ​​of Famusov. In his opinion, any person should strive to make a career and thereby secure a high position in society. Chatsky for him is a missing person, as he ignores generally accepted norms. But Molchalin and Skalozub are business, rational people. Famus society is an environment in which Pyotr Afanasyevich feels successful. He is the embodiment of what Chatsky condemns in people.
Molchalin: a wordless careerist
If Famusov in the play is a representative of the “century of the past”, then Alexei Stepanovich belongs to the young generation. However, his ideas about life completely coincide with the views of Pyotr Afanasevich. Molchalin makes his way "into the people" with enviable persistence, in accordance with the laws that are imposed by Famus society. He does not belong to the nobility. His trump cards are “moderation” and “accuracy”, as well as lackey servility and limitless hypocrisy. Alexey Stepanovich is very dependent on public opinion. The famous remark about evil tongues that are "worse than a pistol" belongs to him. His worthlessness and lack of principle are obvious, but this does not prevent him from pursuing a career. In addition, thanks to his limitless pretense, Alexei Stepanovich becomes a happy rival of the main character in love. "Silence reign supreme!" - Chatsky remarks bitterly. Against a Famusian society, he can put up only his own wit.
Khlestova: tyranny and ignorance
This is a colorful character from the Catherine era. The absurd and imperious mistress-serfwoman, who does not hide her aversion to enlightenment and education. From nothing to do, she drags with her to the receptions "a wrap-up girl and a dog." Khlestova likes young Frenchmen and helpful persons like Molchalin. Infinite tyranny is her life credo. He who is rich is right, she believes. Personal merit does not matter.
Puffer: Enviable Groom
This hero is the embodiment of ignorance and stupidity. A rude soldier who “didn’t utter the words of a clever one”. However, Famusov does not want the other groom of his daughter. Still would! With a relatively short service life, Skalozub is already "marking the generals" and also a "golden bag". Famusian society demonstratively does not want to notice the colonel’s uncouthness and rudeness. The “scholarship” of this character cannot be “fainted”. From his point of view, the military drill is much more useful than any books there. The puffer is only interested in discussions of "pounds and rows."
Zagoretsky: rogue and sharpie
This man, despite his disgusting reputation, calmly accepts Famus society into his ranks. Everyone despised Zagoretsky is a “master of service”, therefore they look at his leprosy through his fingers. The fact that he is a "liar", "thief" and "gambler", they say openly. However, they cannot do without him.
Repetilov: breastplate of "noisy" secrets
This is an interesting hero, which allows us to conclude that Griboedov’s negative attitude to ideological “empty dance”, which made “conspiratorial” activity a form of social life. In the words of Repetilov, a fan of "learning." However, he himself admits that he would have enjoyed a career with pleasure, but he had “met failures”. Famus society does not see a particular threat from the chatter of the "noisy" conspirator. Despite the fact that Repetilov publicly declares that he and Chatsky have “the same tastes,” in fact, he is also the same secular idler, like everyone else.
Off-stage characters
Famous society, the characteristic of which is the subject of this article, is not limited to the persons involved in the action. In the comedy, a lot of people are mentioned between the cases, which the audience will never be introduced to. Off-stage characters are the "invisible" participants in social conflict. They have a special function: with their help, the author was able to expand the scope of the work, so to speak, to bring the plot out of the scene. Without playing any specific role in the plot, off-stage characters are inextricably linked with the defenders of the “past century” or, conversely, with representatives of the “present century”. It is these invisible heroes that give an idea of ​​the split of Russian society into two unequal halves. The majority consists of ideologists who were warmed up by Famusian society. "Woe from Wit" demonstrates the moral bankruptcy of their views. To a lesser extent are people like Chatsky. He is not alone at all. The Skolozub brother’s brother’s camp, the nephew of Princess Tugoukhovskaya, Prince Gregory, the “Petersburg” professors from whom the protagonist studied, and so on, enter the camp of scholars of truth. Guests of Famusov consider them impractical madmen.
Author's remarks
In “Woe from Wit”, A. S. Griboedov actively uses remarks to convey the indifference to which Chatsky’s words are addressed by the Famus society. Characteristics of the comedy heroes, their remarks are accompanied by the author's dispassionate remarks. For example, during a dialogue with Alexander Andreevich Famusov, "he sees and does not hear anything." During the ball, when Chatsky utters a revealing monologue condemning the "alien power of the mod", guests "whirl in a waltz with the greatest zeal" or "scattered to the card tables." The situation of pretense of “deafness” enhances the comic effect of the work, and also emphasizes the degree of mutual misunderstanding and alienation between the conflicting parties.
Conclusion
Thus, the collective character and the main ideological opponent of Chatsky is the Famus society. "Woe from Wit" demonstrates to readers the lifestyle and customs of the Moscow aristocracy, who lived in the second half of the 1810s. These people are united by conservative views and primitive practical morality. Their main goal is "to take rewards and have fun." Chatsky and Famus society are at the different poles of moral identity. For Moscow aristocrats, “scholarship” is identified with freethinking and insanity. For Chatsky, the morality of “humility and fear” is a fragment of the past century, a disgusting prejudice that is alien to every normal person. In this confrontation , everyone has their own truth.
The moral deafness of Famusian society is brilliantly demonstrated in the play Woe from Wit. Griboedov Alexander Sergeevich went down in the history of Russian literature as the author of one of the most topical and realistic works of his time. Many aphorisms from this comedy are very relevant in our days.