The image of Chatsky in the comedy "Woe from Wit"

"The main role, of course, is the role of Chatsky, without whom there would be no comedy, but, perhaps, there would be a picture of mores."

(I.A. Goncharov)

One cannot but agree with Goncharov. Yes, the figure of Chatsky defines the conflict of the comedy, both of its storylines. The play was written at that time (1816-
1824), when young people like Chatsky brought new ideas and moods to society. In the monologues and remarks of Chatsky, in all his actions, what was most important for the future Decembrists was expressed: the spirit of freedom, free life, the feeling that "he breathes more freely." Freedom of the individual is the motive of Griboyedov's time and comedy. And freedom from dilapidated ideas about love, marriage, honor, service, the meaning of life. Chatsky and his associates strive for "creative, lofty and beautiful arts", dream of "putting a mind hungry for knowledge into science", longing for "sublime love, before which the whole world ... - dust and vanity." They would like to see all people free and equal.

Chatsky's aspiration is to serve the fatherland, "the cause, not the people." He hates all the past, including slavish admiration for everything foreign, servility, and groveling.

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 protagonist's character is revealed primarily in the plot. Griboyedov, faithful to the truth of life, showed the plight of a young progressive man in this society. The entourage takes revenge on Chatsky for the truth, which hurts his eyes, for an attempt to disrupt the usual way of life. The beloved girl, turning away from him, hurts the hero most of all, spreading gossip about his madness. Here's the paradox: the only sane person is declared insane!

"So! I have completely sober up! ”- exclaims Chatsky at the end of the play. Is it defeat or epiphany? Yes, the end of this comedy is far from cheerful, but Goncharov is right when he said about the finale as follows: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of fresh power”. Goncharov believes that the role of all the Chatskys is "passive", but at the same time always victorious. But they do not know about their victory, they only sow, and others reap.

It's amazing that even now it is impossible to read without worrying about suffering.
Alexander Andreevich. But such is the power of true art. Sure,
Griboyedov, perhaps for the first time in Russian literature, succeeded in creating a truly realistic image of a positive hero. Chatsky is close to us because he is not written as an impeccable, "iron" fighter for truth and good, duty and honor - we meet such heroes in the works of classicists. No, he is a man, and nothing human is alien to him. “Mind and heart are out of tune,” the hero says about himself. The ardor of his nature, which often interferes with maintaining mental balance and composure, the ability to fall in love recklessly, this does not allow him to see the flaws of his beloved, to believe in her love for another - these are such natural features! "Oh, it's not difficult to deceive me, I myself am glad to be deceived," wrote Pushkin in his poem "Confession". Yes, and Chatsky could say the same about himself. And humor
Chatsky, his wit - how attractive they are. All this gives such vitality, warmth to this image, makes us empathize with the hero.

And more ... Having written about his contemporary, reflecting in comedy, as we have already shown, the problems of his time, Griboyedov created at the same time an image of enduring significance. "Chatsky is a Decembrist," Herzen wrote. And he is, of course, right. But an even more important idea is expressed by Goncharov: “Chatsky is inevitable with each change of one century to another. Every case requiring renewal evokes the shadow of Chatsky. " This is the secret of the play's eternal relevance and the vitality of its characters. Yes, the idea of \u200b\u200ba “free life” truly has lasting value.

Chatsky is the first image of a positive hero of his time in Russian literature, who embodied the typical features of a generation of progressive noble youth. The images of freedom-loving heroes, fighters for the common good and personal independence were previously created by the Decembrists, Pushkin in "The Prisoner of the Caucasus", but they were abstract romantic symbols devoid of living flesh. The image of Chatsky, sad, lonely in his irony, dreamy, was created at the end of the reign of Alexander the First, on the eve of the uprising. This is the man who ends the era of Peter the Great "and is striving to see, at least on the horizon, the promised land."

How did the author manage to combine the features of an entire generation in one hero and create a unique personality? Chatsky is the mouthpiece of progressive ideas, and at the same time, his personality is conveyed psychologically accurately, in all its complexity. Even contemporaries of Griboyedov were looking for a prototype of the main character of the comedy among real people. The most popular version was that the author embodied in the image of Chatsky the features of his friend Chaadaev - an outstanding Russian philosopher, a man of brilliant mind and strong character. Even the appearance of the hero resembles Chaadaev, and even Pushkin was interested in whether Griboyedov actually copied the image from their mutual friend.

Of course, the spiritual image of Chaadaev was partially reflected in the image of the protagonist. But still it cannot be said that it was he who was brought out in the comedy. This strong, extraordinary personality influenced the worldview of many contemporaries, including Pushkin. His biography is similar to Chatsky's drama. Chaadaev abandoned a brilliant state career, created an original philosophical and political work, in which he very deeply, historically and psychologically reasonably determined the place of Russia in the world process. His original judgments and emphasized opposition infuriated the tsar, and Nicholas the First himself declared Chaadaev insane. The persecution of the thinker was massive, and rumors spread just as easily and willingly as about Chatsky: the crowd does not like individuals who were ahead of their time and did not need her approval.

However, Chatsky also captures the features of another prominent contemporary - the poet, critic, literary critic, Decembrist Wilhelm Kuchelbecker. An infinitely honest, unselfish servant of art, a passionate and ardent defender of freedom, democratic values, Kuchelbecker always defended his views, not looking at the disagreement and rejection of the audience. His romantic love of freedom, enthusiasm, kind and trusting attitude towards people, maximalism in defending his views undoubtedly helped the author in creating the image of Chatsky.

An autobiographical element is also present in the guise of the protagonist. Griboyedov reflected in the comedy both his ideas and character traits: absolute independence from public opinion and complete freedom of expression. Perhaps the author learned the conflict of the comedy from his life experience. One of the playwright's acquaintances, university professor Foma Yakovlevich Evans, recalled that once a rumor spread throughout Moscow that Griboyedov had gone mad. He himself excitedly told the professor that “two days before that he had been at an evening where he was greatly outraged by the wild antics of the then society, the servile imitation of everything foreign and, finally, the servile attention that surrounded some Frenchman, an empty talker”. The enraged writer erupted in an angry tirade denouncing a lack of national pride and undeserved respect for foreigners. The secular crowd immediately declared Griboyedov crazy, and he vowed to reflect this event in his comedy. The “Frenchie from Bordeaux” and the stupid worship of him by the Famousian society aroused the indignation of Chatsky: “Will we ever rise again from the foreign rule of fashions? So that our smart, vigorous people, even by language, do not consider us as Germans. " The friendly confession of Chatsky to be insane, the most incredible reasons for his mental illness that easily arise, all this very much resembles an incident from the life of Griboyedov.

And yet, despite the similarity of the hero with real faces, Chatsky's image is artistic, collective. Chatsky's drama is typical of that period of Russian life, which began with the national-patriotic upsurge of 1812-1815 and ended with the complete collapse of democratic illusions and intensification of reaction in the early 1820s. The Decembrists perceived the image of Chatsky as a creative reflection of their own ideas and feelings, an indomitable desire to renew society, searches, and hopes.

Chatsky's worldview was formed during the rise. The boy brought up in the noble house of Famusov grew up inquisitive, sociable, impressionable. The monotony of the established way of life, the spiritual limitations of the Moscow nobility, the spirit

"The ages of the past" aroused boredom and disgust in him. National-patriotic enthusiasm after the great victory, freedom-loving moods strengthened the sharp rejection of conservatism. Lofty ideas, the desire for transformations captured the ardent hero, and “he found it bored with us, he rarely visited our home,” Sophia recalled. Despite a sincere feeling for Sophia, young Chatsky leaves her and leaves to travel to learn life, to enrich his mind. It would not have been difficult for Chatsky to make a career and arrange a personal life. Sophia, obviously, was in love with him, but she could not appreciate him, her value system did not fit how one could risk personal happiness for the sake of abstract general welfare. The limited worldview does not allow her to objectively perceive the image of Chatsky, which goes beyond the framework of romantic book heroes:

Oster, smart, eloquent,

I'm especially happy with friends

Here he thought about himself high ...

The hunt to wander attacked him.

Oh! If someone loves whom,

Why should the mind seek and travel so far?

Chatsky did not at all reject Sophia's love, and the point is not that he preferred travel to her. It's just that his spiritual needs are broader than personal well-being. Chatsky could not be happy without realizing himself as a citizen, could not limit himself to a happy marriage. But he is a living person, ardent, trusting, passionate. Chatsky's love for Sophia did not die out in separation, her flame flared up even more. He returns to Moscow full of hopes and dreams and expects reciprocity. But time changed the girl's feelings. Smart, sensitive, refined, having read sentimental novels, she is just as sincerely looking for true love as Chatsky. Sophia also objectively assesses Skalozub's emptiness and limitation ("How sweet! And it's fun for me to hear about fry and ranks. He never uttered a smart word ever,"). Molchalin, in her eyes, is the hero of her favorite sentimental novels. He seems timid, dreamy, modest and gentle, and to love him for Sophia means to express a passive protest to the world of vanity and sober calculation. Having found in the chosen one the features characteristic of her ideal, having fallen in love with him, Sophia can no longer evaluate Molchalin objectively. And the exact description of it in the lips of Chatsky sounds to her like an evil satire.

And Chatsky suffers from doubts, suffers from uncertainty, trying to find out the true feelings of Sophia: "The fate of love is to play blind man's buff, and me ...". The sharp mind of the hero, his brilliant critical characteristics of those around him are perceived by Sophia as "a hail of barbs and jokes", "contempt for people." Her assessment of Molchalin (“Of course, this mind is not in him, which is a genius for some, but for others a plague, which is swift, brilliant and will soon oppose ...”) at first encourages Chatsky: “She does not give him a penny ... , she doesn't love him. " The hero is convinced that such a girl cannot fall in love with such a gray, faceless creature. The stronger is his shock, the cause of which is not even the wounded pride of the rejected lover, but the offended pride of an exalted, noble person. Sophia destroyed their quivering friendship, a sublime idea of \u200b\u200bher, forgetting "and female fear and shame." Chatsky is humiliated and trampled by Sophia's choice: "The taciturns are blissful in the world." He cannot forgive that he, an outstanding man, was put on the same level with Molchalin, a man with a slave morality and a low soul, and it was Sophia who did it:

To whom am I so passionate and so low just now?

Was a waster of tender words!

And you! Oh my goodness! Whom did you choose?

When I think about who you prefer!

The personal drama of the hero was aggravated by the public one: educational ideas, romantic inspiration and freedom-loving hopes faced decisive resistance from the noble Moscow. Chatsky is a maximalist both in his personal life and in public. He mercilessly rips off the masks from the representatives of the "past century", mired in greed, vulgar social entertainment, intrigue, gossip:

As he was famous, whose neck often bent;

As if not in war, but in peace they took with their foreheads;

They knocked on the floor without regret!

Those who need: those arrogance, lie in the dust,

And to those who are higher, flattery was woven like lace.

Chatsky is convinced that the "age of obedience and fear" is over, that the advanced, educated youth of the nobility is not going to cheat on getting ranks, but will "serve the cause, not individuals." He stigmatizes the secular crowd, mired in "feasts and extravagance."

The complete lack of rights of the peasants, legalized slavery are all the more humiliating because "our smart, vigorous people" defended the independence of the fatherland and had the right to count on an improvement in their situation. Chatsky, who “managed the property in error,” that is, freed the peasants from corvée, sharply criticizes the serf system that he hates, sincerely hoping that the power of reason can change the psychology of people. In the power of ideological influence, he sees the engine of progress. Chatsky is a humanist, he believes that people tend to strive for the best. The hero is convinced that there are many such enthusiasts who have set the goal of life for the democratic transformation of society, that these are all modern youth, that the outdated system of autocracy and serfdom will soon collapse. But the old world holds on tight to its privileges. By declaring Chatsky insane, society protects the sphere of its vital interests. The hero suffers defeat, but not moral, qualitative, but quantitative, formal: the traditions of Famus society turned out to be stronger than a brilliant, but lonely mind.

And yet the image of Chatsky, despite the drama, is perceived optimistically, "The Chatskys live and are not translated in a society where the struggle between the fresh and the outlived, the sick and the healthy continues." He is a symbol of eternal renewal of life, a messenger of change.

Chatsky, as a representative of a new generation of nobles, rejects the admiration for everything European that is inherent in Famus society and the "past century"; he is a patriot and has respect for national traditions. These are his qualities and are manifested in the above passage.

Alexander Andreevich is indignant at the fact that Russia cannot be distinguished from France - "not the sound of a Russian, not a Russian face", and that the Russians themselves bow to France. Chatsky calls this imitation of the French "empty, slavish, blind", because it leads to oblivion of all Russian, native - "manners, language, saint antiquity." According to Chatsky, cultivated Western customs do not carry anything exceptionally good; on the contrary, he says that European clothes are "in the fool's pattern" and ridicules Western fashion, giving Russian traditions an advantage over European ones.

All of the above shows that Chatsky is a patriot of Russia and a supporter of the fact that Russia should go its own way and refuse to blindly copy.

_______________________

Chatsky's character belongs to the literary type of "superfluous person" Since Chatsky cannot find someone who would share his views, the hero's worldview can only be expressed in monologues.

Chatsky is the engine of both social, moral and love conflict in comedy, and his monologues reveal the essence of both conflicts.

The image of Alexander Andreevich as a nobleman of a new type, condemning respect for rank and service, is born, first of all, in a monologue about "the present century and the past century." Chatsky calls the age of Famusov "the century of obedience and fear", in which only those "whose necks were more often bent" were famous. He condemns the hypocrisy and pretense that were valued in the "past century", and says that now everything is different.

Actually, this monologue outlines the conflict between Chatsky and the Famus society, and also lets the reader or viewer understand what the essence of this conflict is.

The further development of Chatsky's antithesis as a representative of a new generation of the nobility and Famus society as representatives of the outgoing era occurs in Chatsky's monologue, pronounced under Famusov and Skalozub. "Who are the judges?" - asks Chatsky, pointing out that in the "past century" there are no people who would be a worthy example to follow. Here the reader or viewer understands even more what bold and progressive views Chatsky adheres to, who, among other things, indirectly condemned serfdom, remembering the landowner, who bought small children separately from their parents for the peasant theater and thus forever separated the serf families.

Many of Chatsky's monologues are addressed to Sofya Famusova. Such, for example, is the monologue about the "Frenchie from Bordeaux", where Chatsky appears as a patriot and opponent of the fashion for everything foreign. The hero of Griboyedov makes this speech in response to Sophia's question about what makes him so angry, rejoicing at the opportunity to tell his beloved girl everything that worries him.

Despite the fact that this monologue is addressed to Sophia, it more likely refers to a conflict of beliefs than to a love conflict, but Chatsky's love drama is also revealed through the monologues of this character. For example, asking Sophia about Molchalin, Chatsky talks about the ardor of his feelings, that every moment his heart strives for Sophia.

From Chatsky's monologues, we learn that Alexander Andreevich returned to Moscow for Sophia's sake, that he was madly longing to meet her, and then about his disappointment and bitterness. Thanks to this, the reader or viewer gets the opportunity to understand Chatsky's feelings and put himself in his place.

Thus, Chatsky's monologues reveal his image and participation in two conflicts of the play, reflect his attitude towards Famus society and Sophia.

Updated: 2018-03-02

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, select the text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thus, you will be of invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thanks for attention.

Feb 18 2015

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

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

His first words: “A little light on my feet! and I am at your feet. " Chatsky's love for Sophia is not the main idea of \u200b\u200bthe work, but the main thing In this comedy, Chatsky's opposition to the Russian nobility. In the image of Chatsky, Griboyedov showed many qualities of an advanced person of that era.

Chatsky fights against violence and serfdom. In the monologues and remarks of Chatsky, in all his actions, what was most important for the future Decembrists was expressed: the spirit of Liberty, a free life, the feeling that \\ "breathes more freely \\". Freedom of the individual is the motive of the time and the Comedy of Griboyedov.

He is trying to fight against the Famus society. Chatsky's desire to serve the fatherland, \\ "business, not people \\". He hates all the past, including Slavish admiration for everything foreign, servility, servility.

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 \\ "to take all the books and burn them \\". So, in the center of the comedy - 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. The entourage takes revenge on Chatsky for Truth, which hurts his eyes, for an attempt to disrupt the usual way of life. The beloved girl, turning away from Him, hurts the hero most of all, spreading gossip about his madness.

Here's the paradox: the only Sane is declared insane! \\"So! I have sober up in full! \\ ”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 about the Finale as follows: \\ "Chatsky was broken by the amount of old power, inflicting a fatal blow on it with the quality of Fresh power \\" Griboyedov showed all of Moscow at that time.

All these landowners value money, fame, titles. Famusov says: "Be bad, but if there are two thousand family Souls, he is the groom." Famusov wants to marry Sophia to a rich man.

All members of the Famus Society value the life of their servants and serfs as much as animals. Chatsky loses his temper with anger, When he learns that one master has exchanged his servants for greyhounds. Molchalin is a vile and low Man, 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 All So ch. R U destroy the world of Famusov society. They all please the one who is richer than them, and Chatsky despises all flatterers.

He says: "I would be glad to serve, to serve sickeningly" That is why Chatsky left the civil service. Famusov says about Chatsky: "A dangerous man" Chatsky about Molchalin: "Why not a husband? There is only little intelligence in him. " And the whole society together about Chatsky: “Learning is a plague, learning is the reason that nowadays there is more than when crazy people and deeds and opinions are divorced.” In this society, everyone takes care of themselves and hates the Other. Chatsky is an intelligent person. He hates and fights the Famus Society.

More than anything, Chatsky hates serfdom and considers it the cause of all troubles. Alexander Andreevich loves his people, he calls Him “our smart, kind people”. He wants to see the Russian people cultured, educated. Chatsky is an intelligent, intelligent person, and in Famusov's society such people are considered free-thinking and dangerous. Griboyedov opposed Chatsky to 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 insane.

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 Person who is considered a stranger in this society. The mind brought Chatsky one grief and disappointment.

A. Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" is considered immortal. For many years it has not become obsolete. Chatsky is inevitable At every change of one century to another.

Every case requiring renewal brings up the shadow of Chatsky. This is the secret of the eternal relevance of the play and the vitality of its heroes. Yes, the idea of \u200b\u200b\\ "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 people like Chatsky, Who will fight and overcome injustice. And today this serves as an occasion for readers to Think about our life. compositions: Ilya Sofronov ru

Need a cheat sheet? Then save - "The image of Chatsky. Literary works!

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 on the merits and demerits of the work. Particularly heated controversy 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

A.S. Griboyedov's contemporaries found that the image of Chatsky reminded 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 initially the main character of the comedy bore the surname Chadsky. However, many deny this opinion. According to another theory, the image of Chatsky is a reflection of the biography and character of V.K.Kyukhelbecker. The disgraced, unlucky person who had just returned from abroad could well become the prototype of the protagonist of "Woe from Wit".

About the similarity of the author with Chatsky

It is quite obvious that the main character of the play in his monologues expressed the thoughts and views that Griboyedov himself adhered to. "Woe from Wit" is a comedy that became the author's personal manifesto against the moral and social vices of the Russian aristocratic society. And many of Chatsky's character traits seem to have been copied from the author himself. According to his contemporaries, Alexander Sergeevich was impetuous and ardent, sometimes independent and harsh. Chatsky's views on imitation of foreigners, the inhumanity of serfdom, and bureaucracy are the true thoughts of Griboyedov. He expressed them more than once in society. The writer was even once really called a madman when at a social event he spoke warmly and impartially about the servile attitude of Russians to everything foreign.

Author's characteristics of the hero

In response to criticisms of his co-author and longtime friend PA Katenin that the character of the protagonist is "confused", that is, very inconsistent, Griboyedov writes: "In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person." For the author, the image of Chatsky is a portrait of an intelligent and educated young man in a difficult situation. On the one hand, he is in "opposition to society", since he is "a little higher than others", realizes 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 madmen, which he finds out about as the last one. Griboyedov explains the excessive ardor of his hero by strong disappointment in love. That is why in "Woe from Wit" the image of Chatsky turned out to be so inconsistent and inconsistent. He didn't give a damn about everyone and was like that.

Chatsky as interpreted by 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 hero-reasoner, the mouthpiece of the ideas of the only intelligent person in the play - Griboyedov himself. He believes that the protagonist is a "good fellow" who gathered extraordinary thoughts and witticisms from another person and began to "throw beads" in front of Repetilov and other representatives of the Famusian guard. According to Pushkin, such behavior is unforgivable. He believes that the contradictory and inconsistent character of Chatsky is a reflection of his own stupidity, which puts the hero in a tragicomic position.

Chatsky's character, according to Belinsky

The famous critic in 1840, like Pushkin, denied the main character of the play a practical mind. He interpreted the image of Chatsky as an absolutely ridiculous, naive and dreamy figure and christened 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 the "vile racial reality" and considered it "the noblest, 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 main character of the play the reflection of Griboyedov's "back thought". He considers the image of Chatsky to be a portrait of a Decembrist-revolutionary. The critic sees in Aleksandr Andreevich a man struggling with the vices of his contemporary society. For him, the heroes of "Woe from Wit" are not characters of a "high" comedy, but of a "high" tragedy. In such interpretations, the appearance of Chatsky is extremely generalized and interpreted very one-sided.

The appearance of Chatsky at Goncharov

Ivan Alexandrovich in his critical study "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 made taking into account his state of mind. The unhappy love for Sophia makes the main character of the comedy bilious and almost inadequate, makes him pronounce long monologues in front of people indifferent to his fiery speeches. Thus, without taking into account the love intrigue, it is impossible to understand the comic and at the same time tragic nature of the image of Chatsky.

Problems of the play

The heroes of "Woe from Wit" collide with Griboyedov in two plot-forming conflicts: love (Chatsky and Sophia) 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 also very important. After all, Chatsky was in a hurry to Moscow exclusively 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 the heroes of comedy.

Main character. Love conflict

In the character system of the play, Chatsky is in the main place. It links the two storylines into a coherent whole. For Alexander Andreevich, it is the love conflict that matters. He perfectly understands what kind of society 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" is caused by the joy of meeting Sofia. When the hero realizes that the girl does not have a trace of her previous feelings for him, he begins to do inconsistent and daring actions. He remains in Famusov's house for 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 out of tune.

After Chatsky learns about the relationship between Molchalin and Sophia, he goes to another extreme. Instead of feelings of love, anger and fury seize him. He accuses the girl that she "lured him with hope", proudly declares to her about the severance of relations, swears that he "sobered up ... in full", 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 am in eccentrics to another miracle / Once I laugh, then I forget ..." However, as he becomes convinced of Sofia's indifference, his speech becomes more and more impudent and unrestrained. Everything in Moscow begins to annoy him. In his monologues, Chatsky touches upon many topical problems of his contemporary era: issues of national identity, serfdom, education and enlightenment, real service, and so on. He talks about serious things, but at the same time from excitement falls, according to I. A. Goncharov, into "exaggeration, into almost drunkenness of speech."

The main character's outlook

The image of Chatsky is a portrait of a person with an established system of worldview and morality. He considers the striving for knowledge, for beautiful and lofty matters to be the main criterion for assessing a personality. Alexander Andreevich is not against working for the good of the state. But he constantly emphasizes the difference between "serve" and "serve", which he attaches fundamental importance. Chatsky is not afraid of public opinion, does not recognize authorities, protects his independence, which causes fear among the Moscow aristocrats. They are ready to recognize in Alexander Andreevich a dangerous rebel, encroaching on the most sacred values. From the point of view of Famus society, Chatsky's behavior is atypical, and therefore reprehensible. He "knows the ministers", but does not use his connections in any way. To Famusov's offer to live "like everyone else" he responds with a contemptuous refusal.

In many ways, Griboyedov agrees with his hero. The image of Chatsky is a type of an enlightened person who freely expresses his opinion. But there are no radical and revolutionary ideas in his statements. It's just that in a conservative Famus society, any deviation from the usual norm seems outrageous and dangerous. It was not for nothing that in the end Alexander Andreevich was recognized as a madman. only in this way could they explain for themselves the independent character of Chatsky's judgments.

Conclusion

In modern life, the play "Woe from Wit" remains more relevant than ever. The image of Chatsky in the comedy is the central figure that helps the author to the whole world to declare his thoughts and views. By the will of Alexander Sergeevich, the main character of the work is placed in tragicomic conditions. His impetuous ones are caused by disappointment in love. However, the problems raised in his monologues are eternal themes. It was thanks to them that the comedy entered the list of the most famous works of world literature.