The image of Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit. The image of Chatsky in the comedy Woe from Wit Chatsky’s life position and his conflict with Famusov’s society

The comedy of Alexander Griboyedov brought the author himself enormous success and celebrity, and his main character- Chatsky became a prominent representative of the revolutionary-minded youth of that time, who could no longer live the way the older generation, mired in bribes and veneration, lived. Many critics of that time noted that if Chatsky had not been in Griboyedov’s work, it would have been empty and meaningless, and the content of such a work would have interested few people.

Alexander Andreevich does not appear in Griboyedov’s plot right away, and the author first introduces the reader to the Famusovs’ house, where the rest will unfold in the future important events comedies. The first to remember about him was the maid in the Famusovs’ house, who spoke only good things about him. She noted his character qualities: smart, educated, cheerful, honest and witty. When Chatsky, who spent a long time abroad, studying there and traveling, exploring the world, first appears in the Famusovs’ house, a huge commotion is caused. It turns out that they have known Sofia Famusova for a long time, because they practically grew up together. While he was traveling, he hoped that she was waiting for him and now he was even going to marry her.

But Chatsky is shown by the author as a brave and open person who has a negative attitude towards any injustice, and, of course, towards lies. He understands that with his intelligence and education he can and should benefit his Fatherland, so prepare for serious service, where all his knowledge will be useful. But Russian reality disappoints him, since secular society rejects him, and his knowledge turns out to be superfluous, and this even scares modern high society.

The justification for this behavior of the society ruled by Famusov and others like him lies in the fact that Alexander Andreevich adheres to advanced ideas, he is against those traditions that have long been formed in secular society nineteenth century. For example, he does not accept it at all and speaks negatively about sycophancy, because, in his opinion, one should serve not individuals, but the common cause. Therefore, with great indignation he speaks of Famus society, which is simply mired in many vices. He is sick of serving in front of people who do nothing for the development of their country, but only dream of moving up the career ladder and lining their pockets. Alexander Andreevich is not only young, but ardent and open, so he is ready to sacrifice everything to serve for the benefit of the development of the country, and the Famusov society, where he ends up after returning to his homeland and to places familiar from childhood, he is called scoundrels, although noble .

Chatsky boldly and openly opposes the order that reigns in the country. For example, serfdom, which enslaves the people, makes them think that a person, even a poor one, can be mocked like that. The young hero Alexander Griboedov is presented by the author as a true patriot of his Fatherland, who is ready to fight for order and justice to finally reign in his country.

Therefore, he comes into conflict with society, which does not want to accept his new advanced ideas, which frighten him. He also speaks out against the tsar, who cannot in any way stop this lawlessness against the peasants. He has a conflict not only with high society, with Famusov, the father of his fiancee, Molchalin, who is slowly moving up the career ladder and is ready to humiliate himself and become vile for this. But it is striking that it is Sophia, Chatsky’s fiancée, who also comes into conflict with him when she is the first to start a rumor about him that he is crazy.

Yes, Alexander Chatsky’s speeches are too open, straightforward and daring. He is not afraid to tell the whole truth and in this he is close to the Decembrists. To believe that he will no longer stumble from the work he has started. He knows exactly the goal and will go towards it. And he will definitely be a winner, because he is always a warrior, a righteous and angry denouncer of meanness and sycophancy.

Chatsky is not in Moscow for long, as he does not find support from anyone. Even Sophia, a young and educated girl, turned out to be weak and easily succumbed to the influence of a society in which the Famusovs and Molchalins flourish. But she also betrayed her friend and fiance, chose Molchalin, who does not love her at all, but her father’s fortune and position in society.

Chatsky is depicted by the author as a real fighter, a warrior who has noble traits, dignity and honor. All this was manifested not only in his passionate speeches, but also in his actions, in which he did not allow himself to become like Sophia’s father and become one of them. It was people like the young and noble hero Alexander Griboyedov who ensured that the lives of serfs changed, and the common people finally became free.

Feb 18 2015

The comedy "Woe from Wit" is considered one of the most famous works Griboedova. The subtle Human character traits that have existed and will always exist in Russia are shown. Griboedov wrote this Comedy at the time of the creation of secret revolutionary organizations by the Decembrists. The comedy shows the confrontation between two forces: the old world of aristocrats and the new young generation of people in Russia. The action of the comedy takes place in the house of the Moscow master Famusov. Main role, of course, the role of Chatsky, without whom there would be no comedy, but, perhaps, there would be a picture of morals.

Before the arrival of the young Educated A. A. Chatsky, everything was calm, flowing as usual. But it all begins with the arrival of Alexander Andreevich. Chatsky is a smart young master. He returns to Moscow from abroad and immediately appears at Famusov’s house. Chatsky is in love with Sophia, he misses her and therefore immediately goes to Famusov’s house.

His first words: “It’s barely light on my feet!” and I am at your feet." Chatsky's love for Sophia is not main idea works, and most importantly, in this comedy, Chatsky’s opposition to the Russian nobility. In the image of Chatsky, Griboyedov showed many of the Qualities of a leading man of that era.

Chatsky fights against violence and serfdom. Chatsky’s monologues and remarks, in all his actions, expressed what was most important for future Decembrists: the spirit of Liberty, free life, the feeling that “he breathes more freely than anyone else.” Freedom of the individual is the motive of the times and Griboyedov's Comedy.

He is trying to fight against the Famus society. Chatsky’s desire to serve the fatherland, “the cause, not the people.” He hates the whole past, including slavish admiration for everything foreign, servility, sycophancy.

And what does he see around? A lot of People who are looking only for ranks, crosses, “money to live”, not love, but a profitable marriage. Their ideal is “moderation and accuracy,” their dream is “to take all the books and burn them.” So, at the center of the comedy is the conflict between “one sane person” (Griboyedov’s assessment) and the conservative majority.

As always in a dramatic work, the essence of the main character is revealed primarily in the plot. Griboyedov showed the plight of a young progressive man in this society. Those around him are taking revenge on Chatsky for the Truth, which stings his eyes, for trying to disrupt the usual way of life. The beloved girl, turning away from Him, hurts the hero most of all by spreading gossip about his madness.

Here's a paradox: the only Sane Man is declared a madman! \"So! I have completely sobered up!” exclaims Chatsky at the end of the play. What is this defeat or victory? Yes, the end of this comedy is far from cheerful, but Goncharov is right when he said this about the Finale: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting a fatal blow on it with the quality of the Fresh power.” Under the faces of Skalozub, Molchalin, Khlestova and other guests of Famusov Griboedov showed all of Moscow at that time.

All these landowners value money, fame, and titles. Famusov says: “Be bad, but if you have two thousand family souls, that’s the groom.” Famusov wants to marry Sophia to a rich man.

All members of the Famus Society value the lives of their servants and serfs on an equal basis with animals. Chatsky loses his temper with anger when he learns that one gentleman exchanged his servants for greyhounds. Molchalin is a vile and low Man, he pleases everyone who can be useful to him. For all the people present in Famusov’s house, Chatsky is an Enemy because people like him can destroy the world of Famusov’s society. They all please the one who is richer than them, and Chatsky despises all flatterers.

He says: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” That is why Chatsky left civil service. Famusov says about Chatsky: “A dangerous man.” Chatsky about Molchalin: “Why not a husband? There’s just not enough intelligence in him.” And the whole society is talking about Chatsky: “Learning is the plague, learning is the reason that now it’s worse than when there were crazy people and deeds and opinions.” In this society, everyone takes care of themselves and hates the Other. Chatsky is a smart man. He hates and fights Famusovsky Society.

More than anything else in the world, Chatsky hates serfdom and considers it the cause of all troubles. Alexander Andreevich loves his people, he calls them “our smart, kind people.” He wants to see the Russian people cultured and educated. Chatsky is a smart, intelligent person, but in Famusov’s society such people are considered free-thinking and dangerous. Griboedov contrasted Chatsky with all the other heroes. Chatsky sees the meaning of life not in his well-being, but in serving the Motherland, his People. Chatsky protests against people like Famusov, Skalozub, Molchalin, but he is unable to cope with this Society and is declared crazy.

Chatsky’s views are close to those of the Decembrists. In this comedy, grief from the mind is the grief of an intelligent, honest, proud man who is considered a stranger in this society. The mind brought Chatsky nothing but grief and disappointment.

The comedy “Woe from Wit” by A. S. Griboyedov is considered immortal. Over the years it has not become outdated. Chatsky is inevitable With every change of one century to another.

Every case that requires updating evokes the shadow of Chatsky. This is the secret of the eternal relevance of the play and the vitality of its characters. Yes, the idea of a “free life” truly has lasting Value. Reading this, we see that in our time there are people like Famusov, Skalozub, Mochalin - arrogant, selfish, proud, who put themselves above everyone else.

But there are also those like Chatsky, who will fight and defeat injustice. And today this serves as a reason for readers to reflect on our lives. works: Ilya Sofronov ru

Need a cheat sheet? Then save - "Image of Chatsky. Literary essays!

Article menu:

The image of Alexander Chatsky successfully combined the features of a Byronic hero and extra person. He is a herald of new orders, a man ahead of his time. That is why his personality is clearly contrasted in the comedy with all the other characters, and he is, in fact, lonely and misunderstood by his society.

Family, childhood and youth of the hero

Alexander Andreevich Chatsky is a hereditary nobleman, an aristocrat by birth. He was born in Moscow and from childhood was included in the world of high society so desired by many. Chatsky's parents died early, leaving their son a significant estate as an inheritance.

Dear readers! We invite you to familiarize yourself with the characteristics of Famus society in the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov “Woe from Wit”

Alexander Andreevich has no brothers and sisters - he is the only child in the family. Most likely, Chatsky had no other relatives (even distant ones), since after the death of his parents, Chatsky was taken in by his father’s friend, Pavel Famusov, an official and a noble person in the circles of the aristocracy and Moscow circles in particular.

Chatsky lives in Pavel Afanasyevich’s house for some time. Having matured, he sets off on an independent voyage. Apparently, Famusov was a good teacher, since Chatsky has pleasant memories of him. Alexander Andreevich arrives at Famusov’s house full of positive thoughts and with friendly intentions.

Chatsky is a member of the English Club - a gentlemen's club for aristocrats. The English Club provided for a diverse expression of social and political life. However, in general it boiled down to card games and lunch. Apparently, Alexander Andreevich was not his frequent guest. At first, this was due to his age; later, Chatsky goes abroad, which a priori makes it impossible to visit this club. At the end of the three-year period, Chatsky returns to his homeland, where the main events of Griboedov’s comedy take place.

Abroad, Alexander Andreevich gets the opportunity not only to be impressed by the features of architecture and cultural heritage Europe, but also to learn about the peculiarities of relationships between people, their social and public position.

Personality characteristics

Like any other aristocrat, Chatsky received a basic education, which included a basic concept of the world and economics, and was trained foreign languages(in particular, French, as the most widespread of all foreign languages). In addition, Alexander Andreevich was trained in dance and music - this was commonplace for the aristocracy. Chatsky’s education did not end there, but moved into the form of self-development. Alexander Andreevich actively explores the world and is engaged in independent study and deepening of his knowledge in one category or another. An active and inquisitive personality type and an inquisitive mind allowed Chatsky to accumulate a significant amount of knowledge, thanks to which he became a philosopher without reaching his gray hairs.

Chatsky was previously a member of military service, but he soon became disillusioned with his military career and resigned. Alexander Andreevich did not start civil service. She was of little interest to him.

He plans to devote his future life to the affairs of his estate. However, in the eyes of the public, such an act looks like an unthinkable action - those around them believe that an adequate person cannot do this, because it is thanks to these two types of activities that a young man can make a name for himself and earn authority in society - other types of activities, even if they are beneficial and do not contradict the rules and principles of morality, are not accepted by others and are considered absurd.

Chatsky does not consider it a disadvantage to freely express his position - he thinks that this should be the norm in an educated society.

His speech is often sarcastic and ironic. Apparently, this is due to his outright opposition to other representatives of society. He is a sincere person, Chatsky believes that it is necessary to tell people the truth - he does not accept deceit and lies. Alexander Andreevich has a sensitive and sincere disposition. He is a passionate person, so it is difficult for him to control his emotions.

Chatsky recognizes the need for science and art in human life. People who neglect their education and development disgust Chatsky.

He sincerely loves his homeland and is filled with desire to improve the lives of his people, not only at the level of the aristocracy, but also at the level ordinary people.

Chatsky’s life position and his conflict with the Famusov society

Chatsky actively opposes the so-called Famusov society - a group of aristocrats united by the personality of his educator, an important official - Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov. In fact, based on this group of aristocrats, a typical situation in aristocratic circles is shown. It is not unique individuals who speak through the mouths of representatives of Famus society, but typical individuals characteristic of high society. And their position is not exclusively theirs, but an everyday occurrence.

On our website you have the opportunity to familiarize yourself with the image of Famusov in the comedy “Woe from Wit” by Alexander Griboyedov.

First of all, the difference between Chatsky and his vision from Famusov and his hangers-on lies in his attitude to business management and the peculiarities of career advancement - in the world of the aristocracy, everything is decided by bribes and mutual responsibility - honor and pride have long been forgotten high society. They are ready to admire people who serve and are ready to please their boss in every possible way - no one appreciates people who do their job well, who are professionals in their field, and this is very upsetting young man. To the particular amazement of Alexander Andreevich, not only their own people take bribes, but also foreigners, for whom this is an unacceptable matter.

The next stumbling block was the attitude towards activities, as well as science and art. In the vision of aristocrats, only civil service or military service is worthy of attention and honor - they consider other types of activity to be second-class and shameful for a person of noble birth. They subject servants of science and muses to special hatred and persecution. This position lies, first of all, in an absolute disregard for education. Almost all representatives of Famus society think that science and education do not bring any benefit, but only take away energy and time from people. They have approximately the same opinion about art. They consider people who are ready to engage in science or art to be abnormal and are ready to ridicule them in every possible way.

Chatsky also gives an unsatisfactory characterization of landowners, having analyzed their attitude towards serfs - very often serfs are nothing to the nobles - they can be a commodity or a living toy in the hands of the aristocracy. This applies not only to people who unscrupulously performed their duties, but also to those who diligently served their landowner. Nobles can sell their serfs and even exchange them for dogs. In general, Griboyedov, neither personally nor with the help of his heroes, never campaigned or criticized serfdom as a whole, nor was he a supporter of it. His criticism is directed not at the building of relationships itself, but at specific cases of cruelty and injustice on the part of landowners towards their serfs.

Chatsky and Sonya Famusova

Alexander Chatsky and Sonya Famusova were longtime acquaintances - they had known each other since childhood. After the death of Chatsky’s parents, the girl actually replaced his sister - their relationship was always friendly and positive. As they grew older, they began to change, and childhood affection and friendship was replaced by love. However, the novel was prevented from fully developing by Chatsky’s trip and the fact that he left Famusov, which Sonya perceived not as an everyday occurrence associated with Chatsky’s achievement of a new stage in life - independent formation, but as disappointment. In her opinion, Chatsky left their house because he was bored with life there.

On his trip, Chatsky took with him not only warm memories of his teacher, but also his love for his daughter, Sonya. Upon returning home, he hoped to renew their relationship and develop it. Alexander Andreevich saw his future wife in the image of Sonya. However, immediately after his arrival, he was sharply upset in his intentions to marry the girl by her father, who believed that only a rich man who was ready to pursue his career could apply for the position of his son-in-law. Chatsky did not fit the criteria - he was wealthy, but not rich enough, and he completely abandoned his career, which was perceived extremely negatively by Famusov. From that time on, Famusov’s childhood admiration gradually began to melt away.

Alexander Andreevich hopes that the girl’s feelings towards him are sincere, and they will be able to convince their father of the need for marriage. Sonya reciprocates Chatsky's feelings, however, over time it turns out that his beloved is no better than her father. Her gratitude and reciprocity are just a game for the public, but in fact the girl loves another person, and she was just fooling Chatsky.

The annoyed Chatsky accuses the girl of unworthy behavior and is sincerely glad that he did not become her husband, for this would have been a real punishment.

Thus, Alexander Chatsky’s image is generally humane and full of desire to change the lives of the people around him for the better. He sincerely believes in the benefits of science and art, and people who pay attention to their development arouse his interest and admiration. According to Chatsky, lies and self-interest should fade into the background, and goodness and humanity should take their place. People, in his understanding, should live guided by the laws of morality, and not by personal gain.

Topic:The image of Chatsky in the system of images of the comedy “Woe from Wit”

Lesson objectives:

continue to develop analysis skills dramatic work, stimulate students’ independence in searching for answers to the questions posed;
develop skills benchmarking, the ability to highlight the main thing, generalize, draw conclusions, develop students’ speech;
to cultivate moral qualities of students (conscience, duty, honesty).

Lesson progress

I. Organizational moment lesson.

Teacher's word:

Hello guys! Let's wish each other success. Today we will continue to study the comedy “Woe from Wit”, we will talk about representatives of the Famus society, we will see how different the opinions of the younger generation on certain things can be.

II. Checking homework.

Questions:

III. Conversation on previously studied material

Questions:

What genre does comedy belong to? Why? Remember - 4 actions, prototypes of heroes, living language, 3 unities, speaking names;
In what phenomenon and action does Chatsky appear? Is this legal?;
Why is so much space given to the description of Famusov’s house in Act I?;
Who would you classify as belonging to the “present century” and who to the “past century”? What is most important to them, you and I could learn from the presentation;
Which of the heroes do you sympathize with? What moral qualities does this character have?

IV. Learning a new topic

1/Characteristics of the main character according to plan

Chatsky's personal drama.
What is Chatsky protesting against? what are his own ideals?
Is Chatsky lonely?
Who is Chatsky - the winner or the loser?
The meaning of Chatsky's image.

1.Teacher’s word (recording the topic in notebooks)

So, in the center of our views is Chatsky Alexander Andreevich - the smartest person who should have become a hero of his time. Griboedov was the first in Russian literature to create a realistic image positive hero, who embodied real features in his worldview person XIX century. Chatsky and another young man named Molchalin are contemporaries. And how could they not be the support and hope of their country. But what paths will they choose? What is most important to them? Do society need them?

1 Chatsky is excited, lively, happy. His appearance evokes sympathy. But he doesn’t know that Sophia doesn’t love him.

	What makes Chatsky angry?		What does Chatsky proclaim?
	Serfdom; the cruelty of the landowners.		Humanity, respect for the ordinary Russian person.
	Careerism, veneration of rank.		Serving the cause, not individuals.
	Ignorance.		education
	Slave morality, voicelessness.		Freedom of thought and expression.
	Disregard for national culture		Respect for national customs and language; development of national culture.

Chatsky in the fight against the old world.

: It would seem that vice is not punished, and virtue does not triumph in comedy. However, the reader is firmly convinced of Chatsky’s moral victory over the old world.

Reading a fragment of an article by I.A. Goncharov “A Million Torments” about Chatsky. Slide 7
The teacher's word about the meaning of Chatsky's image.

The significance of Chatsky’s image is not only in exposing the old world, but also in establishing new, Decembrist ideals. In Chatsky they are clearly expressed: he demands the liberation of the enslaved individual, respect for the common people, the development of science and national culture, freedom of opinion, free choice of professions, and a fair assessment of a person according to his qualities.

Is Chatsky lonely?

At first glance, it seems that Chatsky is completely alone. But if you read the play, you can see that Chatsky is supported by his like-minded people. In addition to Skalozub’s cousin, Prince Fyodor and the professors of the Pedagogical Institute, “practicing” “in schisms and lack of faith,” these also include those students who studied with these professors.

So, Chatsky’s circle of like-minded people is wider than it seems at first glance.

Chatsky is a typical image. There weren’t many people like him in Russian life, a minority protested, but Griboyedov realized that such people were the future, and created the image of a leading man of the first period of the liberation movement in Russia.

4. Class work with a table.

The guys are working with the table “ Comparative characteristics Chatsky and Molchalin” (2 students sum up their conclusions).

Comparative features
Origin
Upbringing, education	Free, in Famusov's house
Life values		“And take awards and have fun”
Relation to Sophia		“And so I pretend to be a lover to please the daughter of such a man.”
Attitude to Famus society	The morality of Famus society does not accept

Fizminutka (conducted by the teacher).

5. Generalization on the entire topic

Conclusions. Living like Molchalin is unacceptable (constantly pleasing everyone, being dishonest, constantly deceiving, etc.). “I’d be glad to serve, but it’s sickening to be served,” is Chatsky’s position. Naturally, we see differences between these representatives of the younger generation. A person himself chooses the path he will follow...

V. Lesson summary.

Questions:

Why don’t representatives of Famus society accept Chatsky?
Who is the “real” sincere person in comedy?
Which comedy hero should we be closer to?
What associations do you have with the names of Chatsky and Molchalin?
What do you remember about today's lesson? Will the knowledge you acquired in the lesson help you write an essay if such a topic is stated?

VI. Homework:

analysis of Chatsky’s monologue (from the last act) in writing. characterization of Chatsky’s image based on monologues
article uch.s.152-157

VII.Giving motivated grades to students for the lesson.

Subject: Woe from mind

Questions and answers to A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”

What historical period in the life of Russian society is reflected in the comedy “Woe from Wit”?
Do you think I. A. Goncharov was right when he believed that Griboyedov’s comedy would never become outdated?

I think I'm right. The fact is that, in addition to historically specific pictures of life in Russia after the War of 1812, the author solves the universal problem of the struggle between the new and the old in the minds of people during the change historical eras. Griboyedov convincingly shows that the new is initially quantitatively inferior to the old (25 fools per one smart person, in the apt expression of Griboedov), but “the quality of fresh strength” (Goncharov) ultimately wins. It is impossible to break people like Chatsky. History has proven that any change of eras gives birth to its own Chatskys and that they are invincible.

Is the expression “superfluous person” applicable to Chatsky?

Of course not. It’s just that we don’t see his like-minded people on stage, although they are among the off-stage heroes (professors of the St. Petersburg Institute, practicing “in... lack of faith,” Skalozub’s cousin, who “picked up some new rules... suddenly left his service in the village I started reading books." Chatsky sees support in people who share his beliefs, in the people, and believes in the victory of progress. He actively invades public life, not only criticizes social orders, but also promotes his positive program. His work and his work are inseparable. He is eager to fight, defending his beliefs. This is not an extra person, but a new person.

Could Chatsky have avoided a collision with Famus society?
What is Chatsky’s belief system and why does Famus society consider these views dangerous?
Is it possible for Chatsky to reconcile with Famus society? Why?
Is Chatsky's personal drama connected with his loneliness among the nobles of old Moscow?
Do you agree with the assessment of Chatsky given by I. A. Goncharov?
Which artistic technique is the basis of comedy composition?
What attitude does Sofya Famusova have towards herself? Why?
In which episodes of comedy do you think the true essence Famusov and Molchalin?
How do you see the future of comedy heroes?
What are storylines comedy?

The plot of the comedy consists of the following two lines: love affair and social conflict.

What conflicts are presented in the play?

There are two conflicts in the play: personal and public. The main one is the social conflict (Chatsky - society), because the personal conflict (Chatsky - Sophia) is only a concrete expression of the general trend.

Why do you think comedy begins with a love affair?

“Social Comedy” begins with a love affair, because, firstly, this is a sure-fire way to interest the reader, and secondly, it is a clear evidence of the author’s psychological insight, since it is precisely at the moment of the most vivid experiences, the greatest openness of a person to the world, What love implies is often where the most severe disappointments with the imperfections of this world occur.

What role does the theme of intelligence play in comedy?

The theme of the mind in comedy plays a central role because ultimately everything revolves around this concept and its various interpretations. Depending on how the characters answer this question, they behave.

How did Pushkin see Chatsky?

Pushkin did not consider Chatsky an intelligent person, because in Pushkin’s understanding, intelligence represents not only the ability to analyze and high intelligence, but also wisdom. But Chatsky does not correspond to this definition - he begins hopeless denunciations of those around him and becomes exhausted, embittered, sinking to the level of his opponents.

Read the list characters. What do you learn from it about the characters in the play? What do their names “say” about the characters in the comedy?

The heroes of the play are representatives of the Moscow nobility. Among them are owners of comic and speaking names: Molchalin, Skalozub, Tugoukhovskie, Khryu-miny, Khlestova, Repetilov. This circumstance prepares the audience to perceive comic action and comic images. And only Chatsky of the main characters is named by last name, first name, and patronymic. It appears to be valuable on its own merits.

There have been attempts by researchers to analyze the etymology of surnames. So, the surname Famusov comes from English. famous - “fame”, “glory” or from Lat. fama - “rumour”, “rumor”. The name Sophia means “wisdom” in Greek. The name Lizanka is a tribute to the French comedy tradition, a clear translation of the name of the traditional French soubrette Lisette. Chatsky’s name and patronymic emphasize masculinity: Alexander (from the Greek, winner of husbands) Andreevich (from the Greek, courageous). There are several attempts to interpret the hero’s last name, including associating it with Chaadaev, but all this remains at the level of versions.

Why is the list of characters often called a poster?

A poster is an announcement about a performance. This term is used most often in the theatrical sphere, but in a play as a literary work, as a rule, it is designated as a “list of characters.” At the same time, the poster is a kind of exposition of a dramatic work, in which the characters are named with some very laconic but significant explanations, the sequence of their presentation to the viewer is indicated, and the time and place of action are indicated.

Explain the sequence of the characters in the poster.

The sequence of arrangement of characters in the poster remains the same as is accepted in the dramaturgy of classicism. First, the head of the house and his household are called, Famusov, the manager in the government place, then Sophia, his daughter, Lizanka, the maid, Molchalin, the secretary. And only after them the main character Alexander Andreevich Chatsky fits into the poster. After him come the guests, ranked by degree of nobility and importance, Repetilov, servants, many guests of all kinds, and waiters.

The classic order of the poster is disrupted by the presentation of the Gorich couple: first Natalya Dmitrievna, the young lady, is named, then Platon Mikhailovich, her husband. The violation of dramatic tradition is associated with Griboedov’s desire to hint already in the poster at the nature of the relationship between the young spouses.

Try to verbally sketch the first scenes of the play. What does the living room look like? How do you imagine the heroes when they appear?

Famusov's house is a mansion built in the style of classicism. The first scenes take place in Sophia's living room. A sofa, several armchairs, a table for receiving guests, a closed wardrobe, a large clock on the wall. On the right is the door that leads to Sophia's bedroom. Lizanka is sleeping, hanging from her chair. She wakes up, yawns, looks around and realizes in horror that it is already morning. He knocks on Sophia's room, trying to force her to break up with Molchalin, who is in Sophia's room. The lovers do not react, and Lisa, in order to attract their attention, stands on a chair, moves the hands of the clock, which begins to beat and play.

Lisa looks worried. She is nimble, fast, resourceful, and strives to find a way out of a difficult situation. Famusov, wearing a dressing gown, sedately enters the living room and, as if sneaking, approaches Lisa from behind and flirts with her. He is surprised by the behavior of the maid, who, on the one hand, winds the clock, speaks loudly, and on the other hand, warns that Sophia is sleeping. Famusov clearly does not want Sophia to know about his presence in the living room.

Chatsky bursts into the living room violently, impetuously, with an expression of joyful feelings and hope. He is cheerful and witty.

Find the beginning of the comedy. Determine what plot lines are outlined in the first act.

Arrival at Chatsky’s house is the beginning of the comedy. The hero connects two storylines together - a love-lyrical one and a socio-political, satirical one. From the moment he appears on stage, these two storylines, intricately intertwined, but without in any way violating the unity of the continuously developing action, become the main ones in the play, but are already outlined in the first act. Chatsky’s ridicule of the appearance and behavior of visitors and inhabitants of Famusov’s house, seemingly still benign, but far from harmless, subsequently transforms into political and moral opposition to Famusov’s society. While in the first act they are rejected by Sophia. Although the hero does not yet notice, Sophia rejects both his love confessions and hopes, giving preference to Molchalin.

What are your first impressions of Silent? Pay attention to the remark at the end of the fourth scene of the first act. How can you explain it?

The first impressions of Molchalin are formed from the dialogue with Famusov, as well as from Chatsky’s review of him.

He is a man of few words, which justifies his name. Have you not yet broken the silence of the seal?

He did not break the “silence of the press” even on a date with Sophia, who mistakes his timid behavior for modesty, shyness, and aversion to insolence. Only later do we learn that Molchalin is bored, pretending to be in love “to please the daughter of such a man” “on the job,” and can be very cheeky with Liza.

And one believes Chatsky’s prophecy, even knowing very little about Molchalin, that “he will reach the known levels, Because nowadays they love the dumb.”

How do Sophia and Lisa evaluate Chatsky?

Differently. Lisa appreciates Chatsky’s sincerity, his emotionality, his devotion to Sophia, remembers with what sad feeling he left and even cried, anticipating that he might lose Sophia’s love during the years of absence. “The poor thing seemed to know that in three years...”

Lisa appreciates Chatsky for his cheerfulness and wit. Her phrase characterizing Chatsky is easy to remember:

Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!

Sophia, who by that time already loves Molchalin, rejects Chatsky, and the fact that Liza admires him irritates her. And here she strives to distance herself from Chatsky, to show that before they had nothing more than childish affection. “He knows how to make everyone laugh,” “witty, smart, eloquent,” “pretended to be in love, demanding and sad,” “he thought highly of himself,” “the desire to wander attacked him” - this is what Sophia says about Chatsky and makes a statement. waters, mentally contrasting Molchalin with him: “Oh, if someone loves someone, why search for intelligence and travel so far?” And then - a cold reception, a remark said to the side: “Not a man - a snake” and a caustic question, has it ever happened to him, even by mistake, to speak kindly about anyone. She does not share Chatsky’s critical attitude towards the guests of Famus’s house.

How is Sophia's character revealed in the first act? How does Sophia perceive ridicule of people in her circle? Why?

Sophia does not share Chatsky’s ridicule of people in her circle for various reasons. Despite the fact that she herself is a person of independent character and judgment, she acts contrary to the rules accepted in that society, for example, she allows herself to fall in love with a poor and humble person, who, moreover, does not shine with a sharp mind and eloquence, in She feels comfortable, comfortable, and familiar with her father’s company. Brought up on French novels, she likes to be virtuous and patronize the poor young man. However, as a true daughter of Famus society, she shares the ideal of Moscow ladies (“the high ideal of all Moscow husbands”), ironically formulated by Griboyedov - “A boy-husband, a servant-husband, one of a wife’s pages...”. Ridicule at this ideal irritates her. We have already said what Sophia values in Molchalin. Secondly, Chatsky’s ridicule causes her rejection, for the same reason as Chatsky’s personality and his arrival.

Sophia is smart, resourceful, independent in her judgment, but at the same time powerful, feeling like a mistress. She needs Lisa’s help and completely trusts her with her secrets, but abruptly breaks off when she seems to forget her position as a servant (“Listen, don’t take unnecessary liberties...”).

What conflict arises in the second act? When and how does this happen?

In the second act, a social and moral conflict arises and begins to develop between Chatsky and Famusov’s society, the “present century” and the “past century.” If in the first act it is outlined and expressed in Chatsky’s ridicule of the visitors to Famusov’s house, as well as in Sophia’s condemnation of Chatsky for the fact that “he knows how to make everyone laugh,” then in dialogues with Famusov and Skalozub, as well as in In monologues, the conflict moves into the stage of serious opposition between socio-political and moral positions on pressing issues of life in Russia in the first third of the 19th century.

Compare the monologues of Chatsky and Famusov. What is the essence and reason for the disagreement between them?

The characters show different understandings of key social and moral problems their modern life. The attitude towards service begins a controversy between Chatsky and Famusov. “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening” is the principle of the young hero. Famusov builds his career on pleasing people, and not on serving the cause, on promoting relatives and acquaintances, whose custom is “what matters, what does not matter”: “It’s signed, so off your shoulders.” Famusov uses as an example Uncle Maxim Petrovich, an important nobleman of Catherine’s (“All in orders, He always rode in a train...” “Who promotes to ranks and gives pensions?”), who did not hesitate to “bend over” and fell three times on the stairs to cheer up the lady. Famusov evaluates Chatsky by his passionate condemnation of the vices of society as Carbonari, dangerous person, “he wants to preach freedom,” “he doesn’t recognize the authorities.”

The subject of the dispute is the attitude towards the serfs, Chatsky’s denunciation of the tyranny of those landowners whom Famusov reveres (“That Nestor of noble scoundrels ...”, who exchanged his servants for “three greyhounds”). Chatsky is against the right of a nobleman to uncontrollably control the destinies of serfs - to sell, separate families, as the owner of the serf ballet did. (“Cupids and Zephyrs are all sold out individually...”). What for Famusov is the norm of human relationships, “What is honor for father and son; Be poor, but if you get enough; Souls of a thousand and two clans, - He and the groom,” then Chatsky evaluates such norms as “the meanest traits of the past life,” and angrily attacks careerists, bribe-takers, enemies and persecutors of enlightenment.

How does Molchalin reveal himself during a dialogue with Chatsky? How does he behave and what gives him the right to behave this way?

Molchalin is cynical and frank with Chatsky regarding his views on life. He talks, from his point of view, with a loser (“Were you not given ranks, failure in service?”), gives advice to go to Tatyana Yuryevna, is sincerely surprised by Chatsky’s harsh reviews about her and Foma Fomich, who “with three ministers was the head of the department.” His condescending, even instructive tone, as well as the story about his father’s will, are explained by the fact that he does not depend on Chatsky, that Chatsky, with all his talents, does not enjoy the support of the Famous society, because their views are sharply different. And, of course, Molchalin’s success with Sophia gives him considerable right to behave this way in a conversation with Chatsky. The principles of Molchalin’s life may only seem ridiculous (“to please all people without exception”, to have two talents - “moderation and accuracy”, “after all, you have to depend on others”), but the well-known dilemma “Is Molchalin funny or scary?” ? in this scene it is decided - scary. Molcha-lin spoke and expressed his views.

What are the moral and life ideals Famus society?

Analyzing the monologues and dialogues of the heroes in the second act, we have already touched on the ideals of Famus society. Some principles are expressed aphoristically: “And win awards and have fun,” “I just wish I could become a general!” The ideals of Famusov's guests are expressed in the scenes of their arrival at the ball. Here Princess Khlestova, knowing well the value of Zagoretsky (“He’s a liar, a gambler, a thief / I even locked the door from him ...”), accepts him because he is “a master of pleasing” and got her a blackaa girl as a gift. Wives subjugate their husbands to their will (Natalya Dmitrievna, young lady), the husband-boy, the husband-servant becomes the ideal of society, therefore, Molchalin also has good prospects for entering this category of husbands and making a career. They all strive for kinship with the rich and noble. Human qualities are not valued in this society. Gallomania became the true evil of noble Moscow.

Why did gossip about Chatsky’s madness arise and spread? Why do Famusov’s guests so willingly support this gossip?

The emergence and spread of gossip about Chatsky’s madness is a very interesting series of phenomena from a dramatic point of view. Gossip appears at first glance by accident. G.N., sensing Sophia’s mood, asks her how she found Chatsky. "He has a screw loose". What did Sophia mean when she was impressed by the conversation that had just ended with the hero? It’s unlikely that she put any direct meaning into her words. But the interlocutor understood exactly that and asked again. And it is here that an insidious plan arises in the head of Sophia, offended for Molchalin. Of great importance for the explanation of this scene are the remarks to Sophia’s further remarks: “after a pause, she looks at him intently, to the side.” Her further replies are already aimed at consciously introducing this thought into the heads of secular gossips. She no longer doubts that the rumor started will be picked up and expanded into details.

He is ready to believe! Ah, Chatsky! You love to dress everyone up as jesters, Would you like to try it on yourself?

Rumors of madness spread with amazing speed. A series of “little comedies” begins, when everyone puts their own meaning into this news and tries to give their own explanation. Someone speaks with hostility about Chatsky, someone sympathizes with him, but everyone believes because his behavior and his views are inadequate to the norms accepted in this society. In these comedic scenes, the characters that make up Famus’s circle are brilliantly revealed. Zagoretsky supplements the news on the fly with an invented lie that the rogue uncle put Chatsky in the yellow house. The Countess granddaughter also believes; Chatsky’s judgments seemed crazy to her. The dialogue about Chatsky between the Countess and Prince Tugoukhovsky is ridiculous, who, due to their deafness, add a lot to the rumor started by Sophia: “damned Voltairian”, “overstepped the law”, “he is in the Pusurmans”, etc. Then the comic miniatures give way to a crowd scene (act three, scene XXI), where almost everyone recognizes Chatsky as a madman.

Explain the meaning and determine the significance of Chatsky’s monologue about the Frenchman from Bordeaux.

The monologue “The Frenchman from Bordeaux” is an important scene in the development of the conflict between Chatsky and Famus society. After the hero had conversations separately with Molchalin, Sofia, Famusov, and his guests, in which a sharp opposition of views was revealed, here he pronounces a monologue in front of the entire society gathered at the ball in the hall. Everyone has already believed the rumor about his madness and therefore expects clearly delusional speeches and strange, perhaps aggressive, actions from him. It is in this spirit that Chatsky’s speeches are perceived by the guests, condemning the cosmopolitanism of noble society. It is paradoxical that the hero expresses healthy, patriotic thoughts (“slavish blind imitation”, “our smart, cheerful people”; by the way, condemnation of gallomania is sometimes heard in Famusov’s speeches), they take him for a madman and leave him, stop listening, diligently twirling in a waltz, old people scatter around the card tables.

Critics note that not only Chatsky’s social impulse, but also Repetilov’s chatter can be understood as the author’s view of Decembrism. Why was Repetilov introduced into the comedy? How do you understand this image?

The question presents only one point of view on the role of Repetilov’s image in comedy. It's unlikely to be true. The surname of this character is telling (Repetilov - from Latin repetere - repeat). However, he does not repeat Chatsky, but distortedly reflects the views of him and progressive-minded people. Like Chatsky, Repetilov appears unexpectedly and seems to openly express his thoughts. But we can’t catch any thoughts in the flow of his speeches, and are there any... He talks about those issues that Chatsky has already touched upon, but mostly speaks about himself “such a truth that is worse than any lie.” For him, what is more important is not the substance of the problems raised at the meetings he attends, but the form of communication between the participants.

Please be silent, I gave my word to be silent; We have a society and secret meetings on Thursdays. The most secret alliance...

And finally, the main principle, so to speak, of Repetilov is “Mime, brother, make noise.”

Chatsky’s assessments of Repetilov’s words are interesting, which indicate the difference in the author’s views on Chatsky and Repetilov. The author agrees with the main character in his assessment of the comic character who unexpectedly appeared during the departure of guests: firstly, he ironizes that the most secret union is meeting in an English club, and, secondly, with the words “why are you freaking out? » and “Are you making noise? And that’s all?” nullifies Repetilov's enthusiastic delirium. The image of Repetilov, we answer the second part of the question, plays a significant role in resolving dramatic conflict, moving him towards the junction. According to literary critic L. A. Smirnov: “Departure is a metaphor for the denouement of the eventual tension of the episode. But the tension that is beginning to subside... Repetilov is inflated. The interlude with Repetilov has its own ideological content, and at the same time it is a deliberate slowdown of the outcome of the events of the ball, carried out by the playwright. Dialogues with Repetilov continue the conversations at the ball, the meeting with the belated guest excites the main impression in everyone’s mind, and Chatsky, hiding from Repetilov, becomes an involuntary witness to a great slander, in its abbreviated, but already absolutely established version. Only now is the largest, independently significant and dramatically integral episode of the comedy, deeply embedded in Act 4 and equal in scope and meaning to the whole act, coming to an end.”

Why does the literary critic A. Lebedev call the Molchalins “the forever young old men of Russian history”? What is Molchalin's true face?

By calling Molchalin this way, the literary scholar emphasizes the typicality of this kind of people in Russian history, careerists, opportunists, ready for humiliation, meanness, dishonest play in order to achieve selfish goals, and ways out in every possible way to tempting positions and profitable family connections. Even in their youth, they do not have romantic dreams, they do not know how to love, they cannot and do not want to sacrifice anything in the name of love. They do not put forward any new projects for improving public and state life, serve individuals, not business. Implementing Famusov’s famous advice “You should learn from your elders,” Molchalin assimilates in Famusov’s society “the meanest traits of past life” that Pavel Afanasyevich so passionately praised in his monologues - flattery, servility (by the way, this fell on fertile soil: let us remember what Molchalin’s father bequeathed), the perception of service as a means of satisfying one’s own interests and the interests of the family, close and distant relatives. It is Famusov’s moral character that Molchalin reproduces, seeking a love date with Liza. This is Molchalin. His true face is correctly revealed in the statement of D.I. Pisarev: “Molchalin said to himself: “I want to make a career” - and he walked along the road that leads to “famous degrees”; he has gone and will no longer turn either to the right or to the left; his mother dies on the side of the road, call his beloved woman to the neighboring grove, spit all the light in his eyes to stop this movement, he will continue to walk and get there...” Molchalin belongs to the eternal literary types, not By chance, his name became a household name and the word “silence” appeared in colloquial use, denoting a moral, or rather, immoral phenomenon.

What is the solution? social conflict plays? Who is Chatsky - the winner or the loser?

With the appearance of the XIVth last act, the denouement of the social conflict of the play begins; in the monologues of Famusov and Chatsky, the results of the disagreements sounded in the comedy between Chatsky and Famusov’s society are summed up and the final gap between the two worlds is affirmed - “the present century and century of the past." It is definitely difficult to determine whether Chatsky is a winner or a loser. Yes, he experiences “a million torments”, endures personal drama, does not find understanding in the society where he grew up and which replaced his early lost family in childhood and adolescence. This is a heavy loss, but Chatsky remained true to his convictions. Over the years of study and travel, he became precisely one of those reckless preachers who were the first heralds of new ideas, ready to preach even when no one was listening to them, as happened with Chatsky at Famusov’s ball. Famusov's world is alien to him, he did not accept its laws. And therefore we can assume that moral victory is on his side. Moreover, final phrase Famusova, who concludes the comedy, testifies to the confusion of such an important master of noble Moscow:

Oh! My God! What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say?

Griboyedov first called his play “Woe to Wit,” and then changed the title to “Woe from Wit.” Which new meaning appeared in the final version compared to the original?

The original title of the comedy affirmed the unhappiness of the bearer of the mind, an intelligent person. In the final version, the reasons for the occurrence of grief are indicated, and thus the philosophical orientation of the comedy is concentrated in the title; the reader and viewer are attuned to the perception of problems that always arise before a thinking person. These can be socio-historical problems of today or “eternal” moral ones. The theme of the mind underlies the comedy's conflict and runs through all four of its acts.

Griboedov wrote to Katenin: “In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person.” How is the problem of the mind solved in comedy? What is the play based on - on the clash of intelligence and stupidity or on the clash different types mind?

The conflict of comedy is based on the clash not of intelligence and stupidity, but of different types of intelligence. And Famusov, and Khlestova, and other characters in the comedy are not stupid at all. Molchalin is far from stupid, although Chatsky considers him such. But they have a practical, worldly, resourceful mind, that is, closed. Chatsky is a man of an open mind, a new mindset, searching, restless, creative, devoid of any practical ingenuity.

Find quotes in the text that characterize the characters in the play.

About Famusov: “Grumpy, restless, quick...”, “Signed, off your shoulders!”, “... we have been doing this since ancient times, / That there is honor for father and son,” “How will you begin to present to the cross?” , to the town, Well, how can you not please your loved one,” etc.

About Chatsky: “Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp, / Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky!”, “He writes and translates nicely,” “And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us,” “May the Lord destroy this unclean spirit / Empty, slavish, blind imitation...", "Try about the authorities, and God knows what they'll tell you. / Bow a little low, bend like a ring, / Even in front of the royal face, / That’s what he’ll call you a scoundrel!..”

About Molchalin: “Silent people are blissful in the world”, “Here he is on tiptoe and not rich in words”, “Moderation and accuracy”, “At my age I should not dare to have my own judgment”, “Famous servant... like a thunderbolt", "Molchalin! Who else will settle everything so peacefully! / There he will stroke the pug in time, / Here he will rub the card just in time...”

Get acquainted with various assessments of Chatsky's image. Pushkin: “The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with, and not to throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs...” Goncharov: “Chatsky is positively smart. His speech is seething with wit...” Katenin: “Chatsky is the main person... he talks a lot, scolds everything and preaches inappropriately.” Why do writers and critics evaluate this image so differently? Does your view of Chatsky coincide with the above opinions?

The reason is the complexity and versatility of comedy. Pushkin was brought the manuscript of Griboyedov’s play by I. I. Pushchin to Mikhailovskoye, and this was his first acquaintance with the work; by that time, the aesthetic positions of both poets had diverged. Pushkin already considered an open conflict between the individual and society inappropriate, but nevertheless he recognized that “a dramatic writer should be judged according to the laws that he has recognized for himself. Consequently, I do not condemn either the plan, the plot, or the decency of Griboyedov’s comedy.” Subsequently, “Woe from Wit” will be included in Pushkin’s work through hidden and explicit quotations.

Reproaches to Chatsky for verbosity and preaching inappropriately can be explained by the tasks that the Decembrists set for themselves: to express their positions in any audience. They were distinguished by the directness and sharpness of their judgments, the peremptory nature of their verdicts, without taking into account secular norms, they called things by their proper names. Thus, in the image of Chatsky, the writer reflected the typical features of a hero of his time, a progressive person of the 20s of the 19th century.

I agree with the statement of I. A. Goncharov in an article written half a century after the creation of the comedy, when the main attention was paid to the aesthetic assessment of a work of art.

Read critical study I. A. Goncharov “A Million Torments.” Answer the question: “Why do the Chatskys live and are not transferred in society”?

The condition designated in the comedy as “the mind and heart are not in harmony” is characteristic of a thinking Russian person at any time. Dissatisfaction and doubts, the desire to affirm progressive views, to speak out against injustice, the inertia of social foundations, to find answers to current spiritual and moral problems create conditions for the development of the characters of people like Chatsky at all times. Material from the site

B. Goller in the article “The Drama of a Comedy” writes: “Sofya Griboedova is the main mystery of comedy.” What do you think is the reason for this assessment of the image?

Sophia differed in many ways from the young ladies of her circle: independence, sharp intelligence, sense of her own dignity, and disdain for other people’s opinions. She is not looking, like the Tugoukhovsky princesses, for rich suitors. Nevertheless, she is deceived in Molchalin, mistakes his visits for dates and tender silence for love and devotion, and becomes Chatsky’s persecutor. Her mystery also lies in the fact that her image evoked various interpretations by the directors who staged the play on stage. So, V.A. Michurina-Samoilova played Sophia, who loves Chatsky, but because of his departure she feels offended, pretending to be cold and trying to love Molchalin. A. A. Yablochkina represented Sophia as cold, narcissistic, flirtatious, and able to control herself well. Mockery and grace were combined in her with cruelty and lordliness. T.V. Doronina revealed a strong character and deep feeling in Sophia. She, like Chatsky, understood the emptiness of Famus society, but did not denounce it, but despised it. Love for Molchalin was generated by her power - he was an obedient shadow of her love, but she did not believe Chatsky’s love. The image of Sophia remains mysterious for the reader, viewer, and theater workers to this day.

Remember the law of three unities (place, time, action), characteristic of dramatic action in classicism. Is it followed in comedy?

In the comedy, two unities are observed: time (events take place within a day), place (in Famusov’s house, but in different rooms). The action is complicated by the presence of two conflicts.

Pushkin, in a letter to Bestuzhev, wrote about the language of comedy: “I’m not talking about poetry: half should be included in the proverb.” What is the innovation of the language of Griboyedov’s comedy? Compare the language of comedy with the language of writers and poets of the 18th century. Name the phrases and expressions that have become popular.

Griboyedov widely uses colloquial language, proverbs and sayings, which he uses to characterize and self-characterize the characters. The colloquial character of the language is given by the free (different foot) iambic. Unlike the works of the 18th century, there is no clear stylistic regulation (the system of three styles and its correspondence to dramatic genres).

Examples of aphorisms that sound in “Woe from Wit” and have become widespread in speech practice:

Blessed is he who believes.

Signed, off your shoulders.

There are contradictions, and many of them are weekly.

And the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us.

Sin is not a problem, rumor is not good.

Evil tongues are worse than a gun.

And a golden bag, and aims to become a general.

Oh! If someone loves someone, why bother searching and traveling so far, etc.

Why do you think Griboyedov considered his play a comedy?

Griboyedov called “Woe from Wit” a comedy in verse. Sometimes doubt arises whether such a definition of the genre is justified, because the main character can hardly be classified as comic; on the contrary, he suffers from deep social and psychological drama. Nevertheless, there is reason to call the play a comedy. This is, first of all, the presence of comedic intrigue (the scene with the clock, Famusov’s desire, while attacking, to defend himself from exposure in flirting with Liza, the scene around Molchalin’s fall from the horse, Chatsky’s constant misunderstanding of Sophia’s transparent speeches, “little comedy" in the living room during a gathering of guests and when rumors about Chatsky's madness are spreading), the presence of comic characters and comic situations in which not only they, but also the main character find themselves, gives every reason to consider "Woe from Wit" a comedy, but a high comedy, since it raises significant social and moral issues.

Why is Chatsky considered a harbinger of the “superfluous man” type?

Chatsky, like Onegin and Pechorin later, is independent in his judgments, critical of high society, and indifferent to ranks. He wants to serve the Fatherland, and not “serve his superiors.” And such people, despite their intelligence and abilities, were not in demand by society, they were superfluous in it.

Which of the characters in the comedy “Woe from Wit” belongs to the “present century”?

Chatsky, non-stage characters: Skalo-zub’s cousin, who “suddenly left his service and began reading books in the village”; Princess Fyodor’s nephew, who “doesn’t want to know the officials! He is a chemist, he is a botanist"; professors at the Pedagogical Institute in St. Petersburg, who “practice in schisms and lack of faith.”

Which of the characters in the comedy “Woe from Wit” belongs to the “past century”?

Famusov, Skalozub, Prince and Princess Tugoukhovsky, old woman Khlestova, Zagoretsky, Repetilov, Molchalin.

How do representatives of Famus society understand madness?

When gossip about Chatsky's madness spreads among the guests, each of them begins to remember what signs of it they noticed in Chatsky. The prince says that Chatsky “changed the law”, the countess - “he is a damned Voltairian”, Famusov - “try about the authorities - and God knows what he will say,” that is, the main sign of madness, according to the views of Famusov’s society, is freethinking and independence of judgment.

Why did Sophia choose Molchalin over Chatsky?

Sophia was brought up on sentimental novels, and Molchalin, born in poverty, who, it seems to her, is pure, shy, and sincere, corresponds to her ideas about a sentimental-romantic hero. In addition, after the departure of Chatsky, who had influence on her in her youth, she was raised by the Famus environment, in which it was the Molchalins who could achieve success in their careers and position in society.

Write 5-8 expressions from the comedy “Woe from Wit”, which have become aphorisms.

Happy hours are not observed.

Pass us away more than all sorrows and lordly anger and lordly love.

I walked into the room and ended up in another.

He never said a smart word.

Blessed is he who believes, he is warm in the world.

Where is better? Where we are not!