Chatsky what a work. Chatsky through the eyes of the heroes of the comedy A. S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit. The worldview of the protagonist
The comedy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov was written during the years of the creation of the secret revolutionary organizations of the Decembrists. It reflects the struggle of progressive-minded people with the inert society of noble serfs, the struggle of the new worldview with the old. the vision of an advanced person of his time, close in views to the Decembrists.
The protagonist of the comedy is A.A. Chatsky. In him, the writer embodied many qualities of a progressive person of his era. In his convictions, he is close to the Decembrists. Chatsky lost his parents early and, being the son of Famusov’s deceased friend, Andrey Ilyich Chatsky, grew up and was brought up in the house F. Chatsky fondly recalls his childhood spent with Sophia, whom he is in love with.
From the words of Sophia, we learn that he left their house, where he was bored, rarely visited them, then again "pretended to be in love, exacting and distressed," and then went "to look for the mind." Chatsky himself said that he "wanted to go around the whole world, but did not travel a hundredth. "Chatsky was in military service, probably with the Russian army abroad. Molchalin reminds him that in Moscow they talked a lot about Chatsky's service in St. Petersburg, about his connection with the ministers and about breaking with them. Famusov says about Chatsky's real studies:
Does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that,
But if you want, it would be businesslike.
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small with a head,
And he writes and translates well.
After a long journey, he hurries to Moscow to meet his beloved girl. His love for Sophia is a sincere feeling. He wants to believe in reciprocity, so he does not believe in Sophia's love for Molchalin. He realized that he was mistaken only when he witnessed Molchalin's explanation with Lisa. Love swallowed up Chatsky, he suffers and calls his feeling madness. In response to this, Sophia remarks: “He reluctantly drove me crazy!” This definition served as an impetus for the development of gossip about the madness of Chatsky, a dangerous person in his views. noble Moscow. In this criticism of the morals and views of the Famus society, it is clear what Chatsky is against, what his views are. He has a negative attitude towards serfdom, the cruelty of the landlords, careerism, respect for rank, the slavish morality of inertia, the ideals of the "past century", "ignorance".
Chatsky proclaims humanity, respect for the common man, service to the cause, not to individuals, freedom of thought. He affirms the progressive ideas of modernity, the prosperity of science and art, respect for the national language and culture, for education. He sees the meaning of life in serving the people, the Motherland .
The hero's conviction is revealed in his monologues and disputes with representatives of Famus Moscow. His rejection of serfdom resounds in his reminiscences of the serf theatre, of the "Nes tore of noble scoundrels," who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds. in the world they took it with their foreheads, knocked on the floor, did not regret "about those" whose necks often bent.
He despises people who are ready
Have patrons yawn at the ceiling,
Appear to be silent, to shuffle, to dine.
He stigmatizes "the past century": "The century of humility and fear was straight." 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 foreign power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although the language did not consider us Germans.
Chatsky defends the right of a person to freely choose his occupation: to travel, live in the countryside, "fix his mind" in science or devote himself to "high and beautiful creative arts." Chatsky's desire to "serve" and not "serve" not to "persons", his "connection with the ministers" and the further complete break is a hint at the desire of progressively minded youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.
Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared insane. The old world is fighting Chatsky’s free word, using slander. were limited to oral speeches. However, the struggle with a word does not lead to victory. The old world is still so strong that it defeats Chatsky, who is fleeing from Famusov’s house and from Moscow. But Chatsky’s flight from Moscow cannot be taken as a defeat. The irreconcilability of 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 "leading warrior", "skirmisher", and at the same time he is "always a victim." "Chatsky is broken by the quantity of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of the fresh force," - this is how I.A. Goncharov defined the value of Chatsky.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" is the famous work of A. S. Griboyedov. Having composed it, the author instantly stood on a par with the leading poets of his time. The appearance of this play caused a lively response in literary circles. Many were in a hurry to express their opinion about the merits and demerits of the work. Particularly heated debate was caused by the image of Chatsky, the main character of the comedy. This article will be devoted to the description of this character.
Chatsky's prototypes
The contemporaries of A. S. Griboedov found that the image of Chatsky reminds them of P. Ya. Chaadaev. This was pointed out by Pushkin in his letter to P. A. Vyazemsky in 1823. Some researchers see an indirect confirmation of this version in the fact that the original protagonist of the comedy bore the surname Chadsky. However, many refute this opinion. According to another theory, the image of Chatsky is a reflection of the biography and character of V.K. Kuchelbecker. A disgraced, unfortunate person who had just returned from abroad could well become the prototype of the protagonist of Woe from Wit.
On the similarity of the author with Chatsky
It is quite obvious that the protagonist of the play in his monologues expressed the thoughts and views that Griboedov himself adhered to. "Woe from Wit" is a comedy that has become the author's personal manifesto against the moral and social vices of Russian aristocratic society. Yes, and many of Chatsky's character traits seem to be written off from the author himself. According to contemporaries, Alexander Sergeevich was impetuous and hot, sometimes independent and sharp. Chatsky's views on imitating foreigners, the inhumanity of serfdom, and bureaucracy are the true thoughts of Griboyedov. He repeatedly expressed them in society. The writer was even once really called crazy when at a social event he warmly and impartially spoke about the servile attitude of Russians to everything foreign.
Author's characterization of the hero
In response to the critical remarks of his co-author and longtime friend P. A. Katenin that the character of the protagonist is "confused", that is, very inconsistent, Griboyedov writes: "In my comedy there are 25 fools per sane person." The image of Chatsky for the author is a portrait of an intelligent and educated young man who finds himself in a difficult situation. On the one hand, he is in "contradiction with society", since he is "a little higher than the others", he is aware of his superiority and does not try to hide it. On the other hand, Alexander Andreevich cannot achieve the former location of his beloved girl, suspects the presence of an opponent, and even unexpectedly falls into the category of crazy people, which he learns about last. Griboyedov explains the excessive ardor of his hero by a strong disappointment in love. Therefore, in "Woe from Wit" the image of Chatsky turned out to be so inconsistent and inconsistent. He "spit in the eyes of everyone and was like that."
Chatsky in the interpretation of Pushkin
The poet criticized the main character of the comedy. At the same time, Pushkin appreciated Griboyedov: he liked the comedy Woe from Wit. in the interpretation of the great poet is very impartial. He calls Alexander Andreevich an ordinary reasoning hero, a mouthpiece for the ideas of the only intelligent person in the play - Griboyedov himself. He believes that the main character is a "kind fellow" who picked up extraordinary thoughts and witticisms from another person and began to "throw pearls" in front of Repetilov and other representatives of the Famus Guard. According to Pushkin, such behavior is unforgivable. He believes that Chatsky's contradictory and inconsistent character is a reflection of his own stupidity, which puts the hero in a tragicomic position.
The character of Chatsky, according to Belinsky
A well-known critic in 1840, like Pushkin, denied the protagonist of the play a practical mind. He interpreted the image of Chatsky as an absolutely ridiculous, naive and dreamy figure and dubbed him "the new Don Quixote." Over time, Belinsky somewhat changed his point of view. The characterization of the comedy "Woe from Wit" in his interpretation has become very positive. He called it a protest against "vile racial reality" and considered it "the most noble, humanistic work." The critic never saw the true complexity of Chatsky's image.
The image of Chatsky: interpretation in the 1860s
Publicists and critics of the 1860s began to attribute only socially significant and socio-political motives to Chatsky's behavior. For example, I saw in the protagonist of the play a reflection of Griboyedov's "back thoughts". He considers the image of Chatsky a portrait of a Decembrist revolutionary. The critic sees in Alexander Andreevich a man struggling with the vices of contemporary society. For him, the characters of Woe from Wit are characters not of a "high" comedy, but of a "high" tragedy. In such interpretations, the appearance of Chatsky is extremely generalized and interpreted very one-sidedly.
The appearance of Chatsky at Goncharov
Ivan Alexandrovich in his critical study "A Million of Torments" presented the most insightful and accurate analysis of the play "Woe from Wit". The characterization of Chatsky, according to Goncharov, should be done taking into account his state of mind. Unhappy love for Sophia makes the protagonist of the comedy bilious and almost inadequate, makes him pronounce long monologues in front of people who are indifferent to his fiery speeches. Thus, without taking into account the love affair, it is impossible to understand the comic and at the same time tragic nature of the image of Chatsky.
The problems of the play
The heroes of "Woe from Wit" face Griboedov in two plot-forming conflicts: love (Chatsky and Sofia) and socio-ideological and the main character). Of course, it is the social problems of the work that come to the fore, but the love line in the play is very important. After all, Chatsky was in a hurry to Moscow solely to meet with Sofia. Therefore, both conflicts - socio-ideological and love - reinforce and complement each other. They develop in parallel and are equally necessary for understanding the worldview, character, psychology and relationships of comedy characters.
Main character. love conflict
In the system of characters in the play, Chatsky is in the main place. It ties two storylines together. For Alexander Andreevich, it is the love conflict that is of primary importance. He perfectly understands the society of which people he got into, and is not at all going to engage in educational activities. The reason for his stormy eloquence is not political, but psychological. The "impatience of the heart" of the young man is felt throughout the entire play.
At first, Chatsky's "talkativeness" was caused by the joy of meeting Sophia. When the hero realizes that the girl has no trace of her former feelings for him, he begins to do inconsistent and daring acts. He stays in Famusov's house with the sole purpose of finding out who became Sofia's new lover. At the same time, it is quite obvious that his "mind and heart are not in harmony."
After Chatsky learns about the relationship between Molchalin and Sofia, he goes to the other extreme. Instead of loving feelings, he is overcome by anger and rage. He accuses the girl of "luring him with hope", proudly announces to her about the break in relations, swears that he "sobered up ... completely", but at the same time he is going to pour out "all the bile and all the annoyance" on the world.
Main character. Socio-political conflict
Love experiences increase the ideological confrontation between Alexander Andreevich and the Famus society. At first, Chatsky refers to the Moscow aristocracy with ironic calmness: "... I'm a weirdo for another miracle / Once I laugh, then I'll forget ..." However, as he becomes convinced of Sophia's indifference, his speech becomes more and more impudent and unrestrained. Everything in Moscow begins to irritate him. Chatsky in his monologues touches on many topical issues of his contemporary era: questions about national identity, serfdom, education and enlightenment, real service, and so on. He talks about serious things, but at the same time, from excitement, he falls, according to I. A. Goncharov, into "exaggerations, into almost drunkenness of speech."
The worldview of the protagonist
The image of Chatsky is a portrait of a person with an established system of worldview and morality. He considers the main criterion for evaluating a person to be the desire for knowledge, for beautiful and lofty matters. Alexander Andreevich is not against working for the benefit of the state. But he constantly emphasizes the difference between "serve" and "serve", which he attaches fundamental importance to. Chatsky is not afraid of public opinion, does not recognize authorities, preserves his independence, which causes fear among Moscow aristocrats. They are ready to recognize in Alexander Andreevich a dangerous rebel who encroaches on the most sacred values. From the point of view of the Famus society, Chatsky's behavior is atypical, and therefore reprehensible. He "is familiar with the ministers", but does not use his connections in any way. Famusov's offer to live "like everyone else" replies with a contemptuous refusal.
In many respects he agrees with his hero Griboyedov. The image of Chatsky is a type of an enlightened person who freely expresses his opinion. But in his statements there are no radical and revolutionary ideas. It's just that in a conservative Famus society, any deviation from the usual norm seems outrageous and dangerous. Not without reason, in the end, Alexander Andreevich was recognized as a madman. only in this way could they explain for themselves the independent nature of Chatsky's judgments.
Conclusion
In modern life, the play "Woe from Wit" remains more relevant than ever. The image of Chatsky in comedy is the central figure that helps the author to express his thoughts and views to the whole world. By the will of Alexander Sergeevich, the protagonist of the work is placed in tragicomic conditions. His impetuous are caused by disappointment in love. However, the problems that are raised in his monologues are eternal topics. It is thanks to them that comedy entered the list of the most famous works of world literature.
Work:
Woe from Wit
Chatsky Alexander Andreevich is a young nobleman. Representative of the present century. Progressive person, well educated, with broad free views; true patriot.
After a 3-year absence, Ch. again comes to Moscow and immediately appears in Famusov's house. He wants to see Sophia, whom he loved before leaving and with whom he is still in love.
But Sophia meets Chatsky very coldly. He is perplexed and wants to find the reason for her coldness.
Staying in Famusov's house, the hero is forced to fight with many representatives of the "Famus" society (Famusov, Molchalin, guests at the ball). His passionate accusatory monologues are directed against the order of the age of "submission and fear", when "he was famous for whose neck bent more often."
When Famusov offers Molchalin as an example of a worthy person, Ch. utters the famous monologue “Who are the judges?” In it, he denounces the moral patterns of the "past century", mired in hypocrisy, moral slavery, etc. Ch. considers many areas in the life of the country: public service, serfdom, education of a citizen, education, patriotism. Everywhere the hero sees the prosperity of the principles of the "past century". Realizing this, Ch. experiences moral suffering, experiences "woe from the mind." But to no lesser extent, the hero also experiences "woe from love." Ch. finds out the reason for Sophia's coldness towards him - she is in love with the insignificant Molchalin. The hero is offended by the fact that Sophia preferred him to this "pathetic creature." He exclaims: "Silents rule the world!" Very upset, Ch. goes to a ball in the Famusov's house, where the flower of Moscow society has gathered. All these people are a burden to Ch. Yes, and they can not stand the "stranger". Sophia, offended by Molchalin, spreads a rumor about the hero's insanity. The whole society gladly picks it up, putting forward the hero's free-thinking as the main charge against Ch. At the ball, Ch. utters a monologue about the "Frenchman from Bordeaux", in which he exposes the slavish admiration for everything foreign and the contempt of Russian traditions. In the finale of the comedy, Ch. reveals the true face of Sophia. He is disappointed in her just like in the rest of the "famus" society. The hero has no choice but to leave Moscow.
The comedy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov was written during the years of the creation of the secret revolutionary organizations of the Decembrists. It reflects the struggle of progressive-minded people with the inert society of noble serfs, the struggle of the new worldview with the old. the vision of an advanced person of his time, close in views to the Decembrists.
The protagonist of the comedy is A.A. Chatsky. In him, the writer embodied many qualities of a progressive person of his era. In his convictions, he is close to the Decembrists. Chatsky lost his parents early and, being the son of Famusov’s deceased friend, Andrey Ilyich Chatsky, grew up and was brought up in the house F. Chatsky fondly recalls his childhood spent with Sophia, whom he is in love with. According to Sophia, we learn that he left their house, where he was bored, rarely visited them, then again "pretended to be in love, exacting and upset, "and then went" to look for the mind. "Chatsky himself said that he" wanted to travel around the whole world, but did not travel around the hundredth part. "Chatsky was in military service, probably with the Russian army abroad. Molchalin reminds him that in Moscow They talked a lot about Chatsky's service in St. Petersburg, about his connection with the ministers and about breaking with them. Famusov says about Chatsky's real studies:
Does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that,
But if you want, it would be businesslike.
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small with a head,
And he writes and translates well.
After a long journey, he hurries to Moscow to meet his beloved girl. His love for Sophia is a sincere feeling. He wants to believe in reciprocity, so he does not believe in Sophia's love for Molchalin. He realized that he was mistaken only when he witnessed Molchalin's explanation with Lisa. Love swallowed up Chatsky, he suffers and calls his feeling madness. In response to this, Sophia remarks: “He reluctantly drove me crazy!” This definition served as an impetus for the development of gossip about the madness of Chatsky, a dangerous person in his views. noble Moscow. In this criticism of the morals and views of the Famus society, it is clear what Chatsky is against, what his views are. He has a negative attitude towards serfdom, the cruelty of the landlords, careerism, respect for rank, the slavish morality of inertia, the ideals of the "past century", "ignorance".
Chatsky proclaims humanity, respect for the common man, service to the cause, not to individuals, freedom of thought. He affirms the progressive ideas of modernity, the prosperity of science and art, respect for the national language and culture, for education. He sees the meaning of life in serving the people, the Motherland .
The hero's conviction is revealed in his monologues and disputes with representatives of Famus Moscow. His rejection of serfdom resounds in his reminiscences of the serf theatre, of the "Nes tore of noble scoundrels," who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds. in the world they took it with their foreheads, knocked on the floor, did not regret "about those" whose necks often bent.
He despises people who are ready
Have patrons yawn at the ceiling,
Appear to be silent, to shuffle, to dine.
He stigmatizes "the past century": "The century of humility and fear was straight." 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 foreign power of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although the language did not consider us Germans.
Chatsky defends the right of a person to freely choose his occupation: to travel, live in the countryside, "fix his mind" in science or devote himself to "high and beautiful creative arts." Chatsky's desire to "serve" and not "serve" not to "persons", his "connection with the ministers" and the further complete break is a hint at the desire of progressively minded youth to transform society in a peaceful, educational way.
Chatsky did nothing, but he spoke, and for this he was declared insane. The old world is fighting Chatsky’s free word, using slander. were limited to oral speeches. However, the struggle with a word does not lead to victory. The old world is still so strong that it defeats Chatsky, who is fleeing from Famusov’s house and from Moscow. But Chatsky’s flight from Moscow cannot be taken as a defeat. The irreconcilability of 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 "leading warrior", "skirmisher", and at the same time he is "always a victim." "Chatsky is broken by the quantity of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of the fresh force," - this is how I.A. Goncharov defined the value of Chatsky.
CHATSKIY - the hero of the comedy A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit" (1824; in the first edition, the spelling of the surname is Chadsky). The likely prototypes of the image are P.Ya. Chaadaev (1796-1856) and V.K.Kyukhelbeker (1797-1846). The nature of the hero's actions, his statements and relationships with other persons of the comedy provide extensive material for revealing the theme stated in the title.
Alexander Andreevich Ch. is one of the first romantic heroes of Russian drama, and as a romantic hero, on the one hand, he categorically does not accept the inert environment familiar to him from childhood, the ideas that this environment gives rise to and propagates; on the other hand, he deeply and emotionally "lives" the circumstances associated with his love for Sophia. Ch.'s relationship with the environment could have been suggested to Griboyedov by the comedy The Misanthrope by Molière and its hero Alcestem, but the lyrical element is revealed in the image so "excessively" that this feature makes it possible to violate the approaches familiar to literary criticism and separate this character from the classic tradition. The plot development itself proves that Ch. is a romantic hero: the theme of wandering opens his appearance in Famusov's house, where the "mystery" of Sophia's love awaits him, which he can solve only in the finale of the play, when random circumstances allow him to see and understand the essence of what is happening. Ch.'s activity concerns mainly the sphere of "ideas" and almost does not extend to the concrete movement of the plot. Sofya and Molchalin, the antagonists of Ch., are much more active in achieving the results they desire. ”, dissimilarity with the generally accepted norm.
With the advent of Ch., a draft bursts into the closed atmosphere of the Famusovs' Moscow mansion, accompanying the hero on a long journey in a mail coach. Griboyedov's Moscow is surrounded by wide snow-covered expanses: from there Ch. appeared. Wind, storm; // And the whole was confused ... ”The image of Ch. symbolizes the vast expanses from which he appeared. Another foundation of Moscow life is "day after day, today, like yesterday." Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays, and the duties associated with them, successively celebrated in Famusov's calendar, succeed each other in the solemn rhythm of the stages laid down for everyone living according to the "Moscow" style.
Ch. differs sharply from the surrounding characters. This can be judged by how he behaves in the most conflict situations. Ch. is a little late in his reactions to events, as if he does not keep up with the development of external action. This happens because the hero is obsessed with love for Sophia and is generally separated from what is happening next to him. The fatal misunderstanding of the meaning of the events that are so closely related to his life, the awkwardness of numerous attempts to contact the "Famus" world through Sophia, her hostile unwillingness to understand him give rise to a nervous "madness", "drunk speech" (Goncharov), which is so noticeable in the last scenes of the play. The hero of Griboyedov goes through a painful path from ignorance to the tragic recognition of the truth. Sofya Ch. suddenly understood the worldly philosophy to the subtleties, to the smallest detail: “You will make peace with him after mature reflection ...” In the final scene of the play, Ch. “chooses himself”, he excludes for himself any opportunity to play other roles than his own. There is no compromise. Hence the decision: “I’m running, I won’t look back, I’ll go looking around the world ...”. The hero of Griboyedov leaves, taking with him the reputation of being insane, continuing his journey, interrupted at the beginning of the plot.
The stage fate of "Woe from Wit" developed in such a way that the play got into print, and then onto the stage in a distorted form. Therefore, it was difficult for contemporaries to understand the author's intention of the image of Ch. They attributed him to the role of a reasoner, which in no way corresponds to the complexity of the stage character created by Griboyedov. The first performers of the role of Ch. (in St. Petersburg and Moscow), large, outstanding actors - I.I. Sosnitsky, who played Ch. from scenes from Woe from Wit, V.A. Karatygin, P.S. who had already performed the whole play, were placed at disadvantageous conditions. Parts succeeded, but the whole did not add up. The full text of the play was censored in 1863. In the conditions of another era, a different artistic style, the image of Ch. was adjusted socially and psychologically, became closer to the images of Ostrovsky. The great actors of the middle of the nineteenth century I.V. Samarin, S.V. Shumsky, A.P. Lensky performed Ch. But the whole scattering of romantic colors and shades, given by the author to the image of Ch., disappeared.
In the future, "Woe from Wit", remaining a repertory play, is overgrown with stencils of stage performance. In 1928, an unusual play by V.E. Meyerhold "Woe to Wit" re-discovered a wide range of problems related to the poetics of Griboyedov's comedy and introduced a new concept of the hero. E.P. Garin in the role of Ch. combined the lyrical and the characteristic. Those who watched the performance compared him either with Griboyedov himself, or with Alexander Odoevsky, or with Chaadaev, or with the young dreamy heroes of Hoffmann's short stories.
In G.A. Tovstonogov’s play “Woe from Wit” (1962), the role of Ch. was played by S.Yu.Yursky. The main emotion of the image is the sincere, filling the whole hero, the love for Sophia that flared up again at the moment of the meeting; the main property of character is free breathing, complete inner immediacy in the sensation of life, not softened by any additional considerations of worldly calculation. Ch. in Tovstonogov's play was surrounded not by caricatured monsters, but by smart and strong antagonists. Fighting them took away all the strength of the hero, became life-threatening. The "madness" of Moscow acquired a phantasmagoric character in the director's interpretation.
Lyricism and irony, pathos and sarcasm are uniquely combined by Griboyedov into one poetic style of "comedy in verse", which requires an appropriate stage form, more complex and sophisticated than the genre of social comedy. Ch. as an image is part of this style, a refraction of Griboyedov's well-known thought that the play is like an "excellent poem."
Article menu:
In the literature, the appearance of heroes who are ahead of their time, being incomprehensible and not accepted by modern society, is not uncommon.
At first it seems that this phenomenon is exclusively literary and has nothing to do with real life, but, in fact, this is an erroneous opinion. The appearance of such people at the turn of the century or during crisis periods of development is a frequent occurrence, however, it is quite difficult to fully analyze such individuals being in the same time period with them. They, on the general background, look eccentric and strange. Their position is always contrary to generally accepted principles and therefore sometimes it seems that they are on the verge of insanity 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 we have before us not a living person, but a work of art, moreover, written several tens or even hundreds of years ago. In this case, we can assess the significance of the position of a particular character.
"Extra" Chatsky
With the image of Chatsky, such a concept as “an extra person” is inseparable. This term has Russian roots. The first manifestation of this phenomenon was discovered by literary critics and scientists in the image of the protagonist of Pushkin's novel "Eugene Onegin". Based on the position of literary critics, such a hero is always higher in terms of his level of education and talents than everyone around him. His potential is so limitless and diverse that he fails to embody himself in any of the activities. He is constantly in search of the meaning of life, but cannot find it, therefore he spends his strength and skill on all sorts of life trifles - revelry, balls, duels - in a word, on everything that brings pleasure or is the brainchild of passion. Such characters bring suffering to others (mainly women), break the fate of many people, sometimes even those closest to them, and become the cause of death. They do not see misconduct in their actions - they perceive what happened impartially.
To some extent, this position is akin to Chatsky - he also seems to us torn from another era, looking for his destiny and has extraordinary potential. Its distinguishing feature from the “superfluous 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 the scientific literature, Chatsky is called the harbinger of an extra person. The concept of such a type of heroes is important for understanding the whole picture of the whole image and actions of the hero - the character periodically acts negatively, not because he is poorly educated, but because, under the pressure of society and his inner world, another product of activity and reaction to the environment is impossible for him.
Chatsky's prototypes
Prototypes are common in the literature. Sometimes the relationship between the hero of the story and a real person is prosaic, sometimes it is difficult to find a prototype due to the little known person. In the case of Chatsky, two people were the prototypes: Peter Chaadaev and Wilhelm Kuchelbecker.
The first publicist and philosopher in his activity (as he himself claimed, "a Christian philosopher"). The second is a poet, friend and classmate of Pushkin. Both Chaadaev and Küchelbeker were active public figures who vehemently and sharply criticized the government and order - this position makes them related to Chatsky. Griboyedov's contemporaries have repeatedly spoken out about the similarity, even external, with Chaadaev. The philosopher of the 19th century was considered by many to be crazy (like the Famus society of Chatsky) and they tried in every possible way to survive this sharply sarcastic person from their area.
Biography
Griboedov gives the reader scant information about the biographical data of the protagonist. It is important for the author to show not the process of his formation as a person, but a sharp criticism of an aristocratic society, its habits and principles.
But, nevertheless, Griboedov briefly talks about some moments of the life path of his main character.
Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - a nobleman by birth His parents died when he was still a child. A friend of his father, Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, took the boy to his upbringing. For some time, Chatsky was brought up and educated together with Famusov's daughter, Sophia. Having matured, the young man begins to live separately. He is quite an enviable groom in his possession of the 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 becomes the background for the unfolding of the main events in the future.
Separation from the Motherland and people close to him had a nostalgic effect on Chatsky - everything related to childhood and youth is sweet and dear to him. Neither Famusov nor Sophia experience 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 is aggravated - the appearance of Chatsky becomes a test for everyone. The fact is that Alexander Andreevich always has some kind of taunt or caustic remark in reserve. Nobody wants to receive such a pleasant message in their address, even if it has a real basis. The desire to look virtuous in the eyes of others takes over from aristocrats. Chatsky always finds something to cling to - bribery, resolving issues thanks to friendly ties and kinship, theft - this is not a complete list of the main problems of modern society.
Chatsky hopes that his love for Sophia will help him realize himself in family life, but this hope is not realized either - the girl plays with the feelings of a young man, but in fact loves another.
More, complaisant in nature, able to make a compliment at the right time, to suck up. Sophia does not care much about the reasons for such an attitude of her lover 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, in whom Sophia does not have a soul, does not love her, but suffers and pleases only in order to improve her 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 go away.
Chatsky's appearance
Alexander Sergeevich does not give an exact description of the appearance of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit". The image of Chatsky is no exception. We can talk about his appearance, clothing style and physique based on reviews about him and brief hints about the personality of other acting characters.
Based on the general opinion, Alexander Andreevich is a person of pleasant appearance, without any flaws.
In the comedy, Chatsky gives recommendations to Platon Mikhailovich Gorich on the subject of riding a horse 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 a slender complexion.
Famusov, who first saw Chatsky 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 features. He, like all people of his age, is interested in equestrian sports and fashion trends in terms of clothing. Chatsky is a unique comedy character, he is not devoid of negative qualities of character, 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.
Chatsky is a young free man; one might say, a traveler, a seeker of the new. He’s not rich, he doesn’t have any rank, and he doesn’t need him for anything: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve,” he says to Famusov when he calls to serve Chatsky if he wants to marry Sophia. Chatsky is smart, witty, says only what is in his heart - and this is his hallmark. I even dare to compare him with Khlestakov: "What's on the mind, then on the tongue."
Chatsky is a man of new times, advanced views, a man of a different kind:
“Your age I scolded mercilessly!” -
He exposes the current age, the time in which he lives and, most importantly, is not afraid to do so. In this regard, the question arises: "Who else, if not him?". “There is no warrior alone in the field,” says folk wisdom. But in this case, a warrior is a warrior if he is Chatsky!
This is true; he is a doctor, a doctor of freedom. He is trying to make sure that he is understood - he does not accept the current system, as I said. But the fact is that no one understands him, and cannot understand him, and they take him for a madman. Chatsky himself says to Famusov and Skalozub:
“Houses are new, but prejudices are old;
Rejoice, they will not exterminate
Neither their years, nor fashion, nor fires "-
Here it is, the problem! But does Chatsky himself understand that all his appeals, all exhortations, all his strength, all that caustic mind that he put into his words - does he understand that all this ... as if in vain? He knows that it is not in vain, because it is not the present age, not these people who will understand him, but others will surely understand him.
In the comedy, Chatsky is the most significant character in terms of his function, because without him nothing would have happened: the Famus society would have remained Famus society, or changed slightly due to new trends, as is usually the case.
Throughout the comedy, Chatsky earned many characterizations about himself. Here are some of them.
I. Lisa about Chatsky:
1) “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreevich Chatsky!
II. Sofia Pavlovna about Chatsky:
1) (D. I, I. 5)
“... He is nice
He knows how to laugh at everyone;
Chatting, joking, it's funny to me;
Laughter can share with anyone.
2) (Also D., also me.)
“Sharp, smart, eloquent.
I'm especially happy with friends."
3) (Also D., I 6) Sophia, angry with Chatsky's words about Molchalin:
"Not a man, a snake!"
4) (D. II, I. 8)
“Deadly by their coldness!
To look at you, I have no strength to listen to you.
5) (Also D., also I.)
“What are you to me?
Yes, it’s true, not your troubles - fun for you,
Kill your own father - it doesn't matter.
6) (Also D., I. 9)
“Ah, Alexander Andreevich, here,
You appear quite generous:
To the misfortune of your neighbor, you are so not indifferent.
7) (Also D., I. 11)
“... I’m afraid that I won’t be able to withstand the pretense.
Why did God bring Chatsky here!
8) A fundamental characterization from Sophia Chatsky receives in III D., 1 phenomenon:
"Your gaiety is not modest,
Your sharpness is ready at once,
And you yourself…”
“... a menacing look and a sharp tone,
And these features in you abyss,
And above a thunderstorm is far from useless "-
With this, Sophia reproaches Chatsky for being too frank. She, perhaps, believes that Chatsky himself does not see these “features of the abyss” - these, according to Sophia, are the strongest shortcomings. She encourages Chatsky to fight them. But are these disadvantages? Only in the opinion of the Famus society, but not in the opinion of Chatsky.
“It is noticeable that you are ready to pour out bile on everyone;
And I, so as not to interfere, will evade from here.
“Why should I be, I’ll tell you bluntly,
So I will not restrain my tongue,
In contempt for people so openly,
That there is no mercy even for the humblest! .. What?
Happen to someone to call him:
A hail of your barbs and jokes will break out.
Tell jokes! and a century to joke! how you will become!”
Alluding to Chatsky:
“Of course, he doesn’t have this mind
What a genius for others, and for others a plague,
Which is quick, brilliant and soon opposes,
Which light scolds on the spot,
So that the world at least says something about him,
Will such a mind make a family happy?
9) (D. III, I. 14)
"Oh, this man is always
Cause me a terrible disorder!
I'm glad to humiliate, prick; envious, proud and angry!
"He is not quite all there"
“Not really…”
"A! Chatsky, you love to dress up everyone in jesters,
Would you like to try it on yourself?"
III. Chatsky about himself:
1) (D. I, I. 7)
“Listen, are my words all the pegs?
And tend to someone's harm?
But if so, the mind and heart are not in harmony.
I'm in weirdo to another miracle
Once I laugh, then I forget ... "
2) (Also D., I. 9)
"Oh! no, I'm a little spoiled by hopes"
"I'm not a dream teller"
"I believe my own eyes"
3) (D. II, I. 7)
“It is not my desire to prolong disputes ...”
4) (D. III, I. 1)
“I myself? isn't it funny?"
“I am strange, but who is not strange?
The one who looks like all the fools ... "
“But is there in him * (in Molchalin) * that passion,
That feeling, that fervor,
So that besides you he has a whole world
Was it dust and vanity?
So that every beat of the heart
Has love accelerated towards you?
So that thoughts were everything and all his deeds
Soul - you, pleasing to you? .. "
"Oh! My God! Am I one of those
To whom the purpose of all life is laughter?
I'm happy when I meet funny people
And most of the time I miss them."
5) (D. IV, I. 10)
"Am I really crazy?"
6) (Also D., I. 14)
"Blind man! In whom I sought the reward of all labors!
IV. Famusov about Chatsky
1) (D. I, I. 10)
“... this dandy friend;
Notorious wasted, tomboy;
What's the commission, creator
To be a father to an adult daughter!
2) (D. II, I. 2)
“That’s it, you are all proud!
Would you ask how the fathers did?
We would learn by looking at the elders ... "
"Oh! My God! he's carbonari!"
"Dangerous man!"
“What does he say! and speaks as he writes!
“He wants to preach liberty!”
“Yes, he does not recognize the authorities!”
“And I don’t want to know you, I don’t tolerate debauchery.”
“Here they roam the world, they beat the buckets,
They come back, expect order from them.
3) (D. II, I. 3)
"You'll be kicked
Under court, they will give you how to drink.
4) (D. II, I. 4)
“... Andrey Ilyich, the late son:
Does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that,
It's a pity, it's a pity, he's small with a head,
And he writes and translates well.”
5) (D. III, I. 21)
“For a long time I wonder how no one will tie him up!
Try about the authorities, and no one will say anything!
Bow a little low, bend over with a ring,
Even before the monastic face,
So he will call a scoundrel! .. "
“I went after my mother, after Anna Aleksevna:
The dead woman went crazy eight times.”
6) (D. IV, I. 15)
"Insane! what the hell is he talking about here!
Worshiper! father-in-law! and about Moscow is so menacing!”
V. Other persons about Chatsky:
1) (D. III, I. 10), Khlestova:
“... What is he happy about? What's the laugh?
Laughing at old age is a sin ... "
“I was tearing at his ears, only a little.”
2) (D. III, I. 15 and 16), G. N. and G. D.:
"Crazy!"
3) (D. III, I. 16), Zagoretsky:
“... He was hidden in the insane by his rogue uncle ...
They seized me, into a yellow house, and put me on a chain.
So, they let them off the chain, ”
"He's crazy"
Countess granddaughter:
“Imagine, I noticed myself;
And at least bet, you are with me in one word.
(I. 19) Zagoretsky:
"In the mountains he was wounded in the forehead, went crazy from the wound."
(I. 20) Countess grandmother:
“Yes! .. he is in pusurmans!
Oh! cursed Voltairian!"
(I. 21) Khlestova:
"He pulled champagne glasses."
Famusov:
"Learning is the plague, learning is the cause..."
4) (D. IV, I. 7), Princess:
“... it’s dangerous to talk to them,
It's time to ban...
…
I think he's just a Jacobin..."
According to Famusov, and, I think, according to the entire Famus society, Chatsky is a perverted person; and his perversion is expressed in this: in speech, in actions - in everything, and he is perverted by that, that he sees all the injustice, unrighteousness, precisely the very perversion of Famus' society. What dares, moreover, to express his opinion. "He's carbonari!" Famusov exclaims. “He is a Jacobin,” says the princess. And no matter how they call Chatsky, but everyone comes to the conclusion ... more precisely, Sophia came to the conclusion, and then as a joke, in revenge, and the rest of society agreed with this conclusion - in general, Chatsky went crazy. But this is not so - and we know it very well. He was simply smarter than his time, he was ahead of him and fought with the old orders, exposing them in a sophisticated and cunning way ... He opposed himself to the whole society; he fought with him...in the end, he comes to the conclusion that only time will change these people. Then he leaves to wander - again:
“Get out of Moscow! I don't come here anymore.
I'm running, I won't look back, I'll go looking around the world,
Where there is a corner for the offended feeling!
Carriage for me, carriage!”
But what did Chatsky leave behind, what did he change? After all, Famus society has remained Famus society! Or has he planted a seed, a seed of freedom that will soon bear fruit?
Chatsky, being a sensitive and, moreover, a witty person, uttered all sorts of “barbs”, accused the Famus society for not being able to understand him, for not wanting to change, and that it mocked him. He tried on a special role - the role of a judge, an exposer of vices, of all this injustice that is piling up and surrounding this whole society. So has anything changed? It is impossible to answer this question, just as it is impossible to answer the question: “Will this person be a talented poet? - and the person has not yet been born; has not yet grown - it is still only in its infancy ...
