The meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov

The meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” would be tempting to express in one short, concise, whip phrase. But this is hardly possible in this way. Let us explain what was said.

Search for the idea “Woe from Wit”

The dramaturgy of Alexander Sergeyevich Griboedov in this play is innovative, multifaceted. Therefore, it is impossible to determine which of the heroes of the work (representing the "old century" or presenting a new one), and who lost, is impossible.

The play carries a philosophical meaning and therefore compares favorably with the simulated scenes from the classic salon drama of the 19th century. Griboedov in it displayed a full-fledged model of the Russian “half-light”.

The title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is deceptive: although, according to the author himself, it expresses the idea of ​​the work, this does not happen. The point is Griboedov’s talent. In fact, he made the work an order of magnitude deeper than he himself was able to characterize it. This idea can be explained only by analogy with ... "Quiet Don" by Mikhail Sholokhov.

Griboedov-artist is stronger than Griboedov-playwright

We abstract from the difference of eras. Another thing is important: the writer Sholokhov turned out to be stronger than the communist Sholokhov (who branded Pasternak's shame). Mikhail Alexandrovich didn’t in the “Quiet Don” disclose the “correctness” of the commissioners, but he earnestly told about Grigory Melekhov. And already on this basis, the reader saw a true model of an unhealthy society.

Returning to the work of Alexander Sergeyevich Griboedov, we can rightfully say: the author showed an order of magnitude more than he himself said in the simplified model “25 fools per one smart”.

A play without winners and vanquished

The urgent issues of the beginning of the 19th century, raised in his work by diplomat Griboedov, a man who is undoubtedly insightful, should be looked at more broadly. The civilization conflict of the old with the new makes sense of this work. “Woe from Wit” is an arena of a clash of two worldviews: the old, feudal bureaucratic (last century), and the new, bourgeois-raznochinsky born in the minds of future Decembrists after Russia's victory over Napoleon.

Indeed, Alexander Andreyevich Chatsky, who expresses sharp and reasonable judgments after arriving from Europe, encounters a wall of misunderstanding of the Moscow aristocratic society during the play.

But for the young man, the only pain is that his hopes for mutual feeling with the young unmarried daughter of Famusov, Sofia Pavlovna, are crumbling. In addition, he "does not work out his career" and, obviously, does not work out. Do you think he lost completely? Do you think that the word "grief" is said by the author specifically with respect to Chatsky?

But Famusov’s not to become an “ace”!

Representatives of two worlds: Chatsky and Famusov

Which author gives a description of the consequences of the conflict? “Woe from Wit” in the finale contains a scene when Alexander Andreevich leaves, feeding offense from “offended feelings”. However, the “manager in a public place” Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, the organizer of Chatsky’s reception in his house, does not look like a winner. He is also not the winner of the conflict. He gets his "million torment." Famusov in the current hierarchy cannot "jump above his head" in terms of career. He has very average business qualities (he is lazy and does not know how to work with documents). His only hope is to increase the family’s capital through the marriage of his daughter with Colonel Sergey Sergeyevich Skalozub. However, this is problematic. Sophia understands the idiocy of a fictitious passion father.

“Woe from Wit” - a story about pre-Decembrist Russia

Thus, the meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is completely different. This is not the “grief” exclusively of Chatsky from the public underestimation of his views. (In the course of the play, the positive character encounters 25 characters who are apologists of the old bureaucratic society.) This problem should be looked at more broadly.

This is the grief of all post-war feudal Russia, where the Chatsky (future Decembrists) have already understood: the social matrix of society should be changed, the career ladder based on service and flattery should be destroyed, and new projects should be developed in society. And society (including the aristocratic one) continues to live the “old life”, resolving its small mercantile career aspirations, giving birth to the Molchalin.

The meaning of the work

The personality of the author himself is the key that determines his own work meaning. “Woe from Wit” is Griboedov’s attempt to publicly, resonantly, scream loudly (there is no way to do without gross directness) to the entire Russian society that there is a problem in its development. The clever diplomat felt not only the pressing issues of the “current day”, perhaps he foresaw the impending split in society (which, as we know from history, led to a brutal reaction in the time of Nicholas I).

Do you think you heard him? Even Pushkin ironically reacted to Chatsky’s image, not understanding it. What can I say next?

“Woe from Wit” is an innovative play

The work makes great vivid images. “Woe from Wit” is not only 26 people who appear on the stage. After all, there are also off-stage characters. Prince Fedor, “a nerd and a chemist,” Skalozub’s cousin, along with the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, “practicing in schisms and unbeliefs,” are Chatsky’s potential allies.

It is also noteworthy that the author is trying to convey the meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit”, completely “breaking into” the old dramaturgy. Griboedov, an innovator, departed from classicism when creating a work, his creation is quite realistic. The author creates a full-fledged model of society with 26 real, characteristic characters instead of 5-6 (the usual circle of classicism characters). In the end, Alexander Sergeevich does not use the classic Alexandrian verse, but switches to a “free iambic”.

Instead of a conclusion

Speaking about the play, we finally came to the opportunity to understand the meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit”. Note that characters not ideal are introduced into the work:

• freethinker, melancholic, “funny fellow” (according to Pushkin's review) Chatsky;
• the mercantile father of the family and the official with the average abilities of the Famus;
• a crafty careerist and a liar Molchalin;
• the smug and dim-witted servant — Colonel Skalozub;
• entangled between the desire for happiness and capable of meanness Sophia;
• still decent, but disenfranchised servant Lisa.

All of them help the reader of a comedy to find deep philosophical implications in it.

Let us define the main thing in “Woe from Wit” - the idea of ​​a work. Is it possible to say that Chatsky is smart? Yes and no. He has an understanding of the dynamics of progress, but no contact with people. Let's be honest: he is intellectually unable to become a donor of these ideas to society.

Famusov is ideologically opposed to Alexander. Is it possible to say that he is smart? Yes and no. He does not understand that the feudal state is moving toward disaster, supporting the obsolete orders with all its might. But is he stupid? Unlikely. Most likely, he just lives on today. In addition, he, unlike Chatsky, has a certain social status: the father of the family, lives in harmony with society, that is, is oriented in people. His home for the closest community of aristocrats is the center of social life.

Conclusion: each of these heroes has its own mind. However, their orientation is polar opposite. One understands the promising ways of development of society and cannot realize them. Another, in principle, can (he will find words if he wants to convince his “inner circle”), but does not consider Chatsky’s pro-Western thinking to be true, preferring “patriarchal antiquity”.

The problem is that the mind of these two people is aimed at mutual opposition, and not at the development of society. This is the essence of the idea inherent in the title of the work. The classic said correctly: “The problem of Russia is fools and roads!”