Fonvizin's contemporaries highly appreciated "The Minor", he delighted them not only with his amazing language, clarity of the author's civic position, and innovative form and content.

Features of the genre

According to the genre, this work is a classic comedy, it observes the requirements of "three unities" (place, time, action) inherent in classicism, the heroes are divided into positive and negative, each of the heroes has its own role ("reasoner", "villain", etc.). but it also contains deviations from the requirements of the classicist esthete, and serious deviations.So, the comedy was only supposed to amuse, it could not be interpreted in many ways, there could be no ambiguity in it - and if we recall "The Little Man", then we must admit that, raising in the work the most important social issues of his time, the author resolves them by means, far from comic: for example, in the finale of the work, when it would seem that "vice is punished", the viewer cannot but sympathize with Mrs. Prostakova, who is rudely and cruelly repulsed by the ungrateful Mitrofanushka, anxious about his own fate: "Yes, get off, mother, as imposed. .. "- and the tragic element imperiously invades the comedy, which was unacceptable .. And with the" unity of action "everything is also not so simple in comedy, it has too many storylines that do not" work "to resolve the main conflict , but create a wide social background that determines the characters of the characters. Finally, Fonvizin's innovation was reflected in the language of the comedy "The Minor", the characters' speech is very individualized, it contains folklorism, vernacular, and high style (Starodum, Pravdin), which also violates the classic canons of creating speech characteristics of characters. Summing up, one can conclude that Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" became a truly innovative work for its time, the author expanded the framework of classicism aesthetics, subordinating it to the solution of the task set before him: to angrily ridicule the vices of his contemporary society, to rid him of "evil "capable of destroying both the human soul and public morality.

Image system

Let us analyze the system of images of the comedy "The Minor", which, as demanded by the aesthetics of classicism, represents two directly opposite "camps" - positive and negative characters. Here you can also notice a certain deviation from the canons, it is manifested in what carries duality, it is almost impossible to attribute them purely to positive or purely negative heroes. Let us recall one of the teachers of Mitrofanushka - Kuteikin. On the one hand, he endures humiliation on the part of Mrs. Prostakova and her student, on the other, he does not mind, if the opportunity comes along, "to snatch his piece", for which he is ridiculed. Or "Mitrofan's mother" Eremeevna: she is reviled and humiliated by the hostess in every possible way, she humbly endures, but, forgetting herself, rushes to protect Mitrofanushka from her uncle, and does this not only out of fear of punishment ...

The image of Prostakova in the comedy "Minor"

As already noted, Fonvizin innovatively portrays his main character - Mrs. Prostakova. From the very first scenes of the comedy, we are faced with a despot who does not want to reckon with anyone and with anything. She rudely imposes her will on everyone, suppresses and humiliates not only the serfs, but also her husband (how can you not recall Mitrofan's "dream in the hand" about how "mother" beats "priest"? ..), she tyrannizes Sophia, she wants to force her to marry first to her brother Taras Skotinin, and then, when it turns out that Sophia is now a rich bride, to her son. Being herself an ignorant and uncultured person (with what pride she declares: "Read it yourself! No, madam, I, thanks to God, have not been brought up that way. I can receive letters, but I always tell someone else to read them!"), She despises education, although he is trying to teach his son, he does so only because he wants to ensure his future, and what is the cost of Mitrofan's “training” as it is presented in the comedy? True, his mother is convinced: "Believe me, father, that, of course, this is nonsense, which Mitrofanushka does not know" ...

Mrs. Prostakova is inherent in cunning and resourcefulness, she stubbornly stands her ground and is convinced that "we will take our own" - and is ready to commit a crime, kidnap Sophia and, against her will, marry a man from the "Skotinin family". When she meets a rebuff, she at the same time tries to beg forgiveness and promises punishment to those of her people, whose oversight failed the "enterprise", in which Mitrofanushka is ready to actively support her: "To be taken for people?" Striking is the "transformation" of Mrs. Prostakova, who just on her knees humiliatedly begged to forgive her, and, having received the petition, "jumping up from her knees," vigorously promises: "Well! Now I will give the canals to my people. Now I am all I'll sort it out one by one. Now I'll try to find out who let her go. No, scammers! No, thieves! I will not forgive a century, I will not forgive this ridicule. " How much sensuality is in this threefold "now something", and how really scary it becomes from her request: "Give me a time limit for at least three days (Aside) I would let myself know ...".

However, as already noted, there is a certain duality in the image of Prostakova. She deeply and devotedly loves her son, is ready for anything for him. Is she guilty that she compares her love for him with the love of a dog for puppies "Have you ever heard of a bitch giving out her puppies?" We must not forget that she is from the Skotin-Priplodin family, where such a semi-animal love was the only possible one, where could she be different from? So she disfigures Mitrofan's soul with her blind love, her son pleases her in every possible way, and she is happy that he "loves" her ... Until he throws her away from himself, because now he does not need her, and even those people who have just condemned Mrs. Prostakova sympathize with her in her maternal grief ...

The image of Mitrofan

The image of Mitrofan was created by Fonvizin also not quite traditionally. The "undersized" who likes to be "small", who diligently uses the mother's attitude towards himself, is not so simple and stupid as it might seem at first glance. He learned to use his parents' love for himself for his own benefit, he knows well how to achieve his goal, he is convinced that he has the right to whatever he wants. The selfishness of Mitrofanushka is the driving force behind his actions, but the hero has both cruelty (remember his remark about "people"), and resourcefulness (which is worth his reasoning about the "door"), and lordly contempt for people, including his mother, from which he, on occasion, seeks help and protection. And his attitude to education is so dismissive only because he does not see any real benefit from it. Probably, when he "serves", he - if it is profitable - will change his attitude to education, potentially he is ready for anything: "For me, wherever they are told." Consequently, the image of Mitrofan in the comedy "The Minor" is also characterized by a certain psychologism, as well as the image of Prostakova, which is Fonvizin's innovative approach to creating negative images that were supposed to be only "villains".

Positive images

The playwright is more traditional in creating positive images. Each of them is an expression of a certain idea, and as part of the approval of this idea, an image-character is created. Practically positive images are devoid of individual traits, they are images-ideas inherent in classicism; Sophia, Milon, Starodum, Pravdin are not living people, but spokesmen for a "certain type of consciousness", they represent an advanced system of views on the relationship between spouses, social structure, the essence of the human personality and human dignity for their time.

The image of Starodum

At the time of Fonvizin, the audience was especially sympathetic to the image of Starodum in the comedy "The Minor". Already in the very "speaking" surname of the character, the author emphasized the opposition of "the present century to the past": in Starodum they saw a man of the era of Peter I, when "In that century there were warriors, but there were no court soldiers" Starodum's thoughts about education, about the ways by which a person can achieve fame and prosperity, about what a sovereign should be, evoked a warm response from a significant part of the audience who shared the advanced beliefs of the author of the comedy, while special sympathy for the image of the hero was caused by the fact that he did not just proclaim these advanced ideas - according to the play it turned out that with his own life he had proved the correctness and advantageousness of such behavior for a person. The image of Starodum was the ideological center around which the positive heroes of the comedy united, who opposed the dominance of morality of the Skotinins-Prostakovs.

Image of Pravdin

Pravdin, a government official, embodies the idea of ​​statehood, which protects the interests of education, the people, which seeks to actively change life for the better. The tutelage over the Prostakova estate, which Pravdin appoints by the will of the empress, gives hope that the ruler of Russia is able to defend those of her subjects who most need this protection, and the decisiveness with which Pravdin conducts transformations should have convinced the viewer. that the supreme power is interested in improving the life of the people. But how, then, can one understand the words of Starodum in response to Pravdin's call to serve at court: "It is in vain to call a doctor to the sick is incurable"? Probably, the fact that behind Pravdin was the System, which confirmed its unwillingness and inability to carry out real transformations, and Starodum represented himself in the play, an individual person, and explained why the image of Starodum was perceived by the audience with much greater sympathy than the image of an "ideal official" ...

Milo and Sophia

The love story of Milon and Sophia is a typically classicistic love story of two noble heroes, each of whom is distinguished by high moral qualities, therefore their relationship looks so artificial, although against the background of a "skotinin" attitude towards the same Sophia ("My friend, you are heartfelt! if now, without seeing anything, for each pig there is a special peck, then I will find a light for my wife ") she really is an example of a high feeling of moral, educated, worthy young people, opposed to the" fertility "of negative heroes.

The meaning of the comedy "Minor"

Pushkin called Fonvizin "a bold master of satire," and the comedy "The Minor", which we analyzed, fully confirms this assessment of the writer's work. In it, the author's position of Fonvizin is expressed completely unambiguously, the writer defends the ideas of enlightened absolutism, he does it with the highest talent, creating convincing artistic images, significantly expanding the framework of the aesthetics of classicism, innovatively approaching the plot of the work, creating images-characters, some of which are not simply represents the expression of certain socio-political ideas, but has a pronounced psychological individuality, expresses the contradictory nature of human nature. All this explains the tremendous significance of Fonvizin's work and the comedy "The Minor" for Russian literature of the 18th century, the success of the work among contemporaries and its significant influence on the subsequent development of Russian drama.

Consider the features of the comedy created by Fonvizin ("Minor"). The analysis of this work is the topic of this article. This play is a masterpiece of Russian literature of the 18th century. This work is now included in the collection of Russian classical literature. It touches upon a number of "perennial problems". And the beauty of a high style still attracts many readers today. The title of this play is connected with the decree issued by Peter the Great, according to which the "ignoramuses" (young nobles) are prohibited from entering the service and marrying without education.

The history of the play

Back in 1778, the idea of ​​this comedy arose from its author, which is Fonvizin. "The Minor", the analysis of which we are interested in, was written in 1782 and presented to the public in the same year. It is necessary to briefly highlight the time of the creation of the play of interest to us.

During the reign of Catherine II, Fonvizin wrote "The Minor". The analysis of the heroes presented below proves that they were the heroes of their time. The period in the development of our country is associated with the dominance of ideas. They were borrowed by the Russians from the French enlighteners. The spread of these ideas, their great popularity among the educated bourgeoisie and nobility, was largely facilitated by the Empress herself. As you know, she corresponded with Diderot, Voltaire, d'Alembert. In addition, Catherine II opened libraries and schools, supported the development of art and culture in Russia by various means.

Continuing to describe the comedy created by D.I. He tried to reflect them in his work, revealing not only positive aspects to readers and viewers, but also pointing out errors and shortcomings.

"Undergrowth" - an example of classicism

An analysis of the comedy "The Minor" by Fonvizin requires that this play be considered as part of the cultural era and literary tradition. This work is considered one of the finest examples of classicism. In the play, there is a unity of action (it does not contain secondary plot lines, only the struggle for Sophia's hand and her property is described), place (the characters do not move long distances, all events take place either near the Prostakovs' house or inside it), and time ( all events take no more than a day). In addition, he used "speaking" surnames, which are traditional for the classicist play, Fonvizin ("Minor"). Analysis shows that, following tradition, he divided his characters into positive and negative. The positive ones are Pravdin, Starodum, Milon, Sophia. They are opposed to Prostakov, Mitrofan, Skotinin DI Fonvizin (play "The Minor"). An analysis of their names shows that they let the reader understand which traits in the image of a particular character are prevalent. For example, Pravdin is the personification of morality and truth in the work.

A new genre of comedy, its features

At the time of its creation, the "undersized" became an important step forward in the development of our country's literature, in particular, drama. Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin created a new socio-political one. It harmoniously combines a number of realistic scenes depicted with sarcasm, irony, laughter from the life of some ordinary representatives of high society (nobility) with sermons about morality, virtue, the need to educate human qualities that were characteristic of the enlighteners. At the same time, instructive monologues do not burden the perception of the play. They complement this piece, as a result of which it becomes deeper.

First act

The play is divided into 5 acts, the author of which is Fonvizin ("The Minor"). Analysis of the work involves a description of the organization of the text. In the first act we get to know the Prostakovs, Pravdin, Sophia, Mitrofan, Skotinin. The characters of the characters emerge immediately, and the reader realizes that the Skotinin and Prostakovs - and Sophia and Pravdin - are positive. In the first act, the exposition and the setting of this work takes place. In the exposition, we get to know the heroes, we learn that Sophia lives in the care of the Prostakovs, whom they are going to marry off to Skotinin. Reading a letter from Starodum is the beginning of the play. Sophia now turns out to be a wealthy heiress. From day to day her uncle comes back to take the girl to him.

Development of events in the play created by Fonvizin ("The Minor")

We will continue the analysis of the work by describing how the events developed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th actions are their development. We get to know Starodum and Milo. Prostakova and Skotinin are trying to please Starodum, but their flattery, falsity, ignorance and a huge thirst for profit only repels. They look silly and funny. The funniest scene of this work is the questioning of Mitrofan, during which the stupidity of not only this young man, but also his mother is exposed.

Climax and denouement

5th act - climax and denouement. It should be noted that the opinions of researchers about which moment should be considered the culmination are different. There are 3 most popular versions. According to the first, this is the abduction of Prostakova Sophia, according to the second, the reading of the letter by Pravdin, which says that Prostakova's estate is being taken under his care, and, finally, the third version is the rage of Prostakova after she realizes her own powerlessness and tries to "recoup "on their servants. Each of these versions is true, since it considers the work of interest to us from different points of view. The first, for example, highlights the storyline dedicated to Sophia's marriage. The analysis of the episode of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor", connected with marriage, really allows us to consider it a key one in the work. The second version examines the play from a socio-political point of view, highlighting the moment when justice prevails on the estate. The third attention focuses on the historical, according to which Prostakova is the personification of the depopulated principles and ideals of the old nobility, which, however, still do not believe in their own defeat. This nobility, according to the author, is based on ignorance, ignorance, and low moral standards. During the denouement, everyone leaves Prostakova. She had nothing left. Pointing to her, Starodum says that these are "worthy fruits" of "evil".

Negative characters

As we have already noted, the main characters are clearly divided into negative and positive. Mitrofan, Skotinin and Prostakovs are negative characters. Prostakova is a woman looking for profit, uneducated, rude, domineering. She knows how to flatter for profit. However, Prostakova loves her son. Prostakov appears as the "shadow" of his wife. This is a weak-willed character. His word means little. Skotinin is the brother of Mrs. Prostakova. This is an equally uneducated and stupid person, rather cruel, like his sister, greedy for money. For him, a walk to the pigs in the barnyard is the best activity. Mitrofan is a typical son of his mother. This is a spoiled youth of 16 years old, who inherited from his uncle a love for pigs.

Issues and heredity

In the play, it should be noted, an important place is given to the issue of family ties and heredity by Fonvizin ("The Minor"). Analyzing this issue, let's say, for example, that Prostakova is only married to her spouse (a "simple" person who does not want much). However, she is actually Skotinina, akin to her brother. Her son, on the other hand, absorbed the qualities of both his parents - "animal" qualities and stupidity from his mother and weakness from his father.

Similar family ties can be traced between Sophia and Starodum. Both are honest, virtuous, educated. The girl listens to her uncle attentively, respects him, "absorbs" science. Pairs of opposites create negative and positive characters. Children - spoiled stupid Mitrofan and meek smart Sophia. Parents love children, but they approach their upbringing in different ways - Starodub talks on topics of truth, honor, morality, and Prostakov only pampers Mitrofan and says that education is not useful to him. A pair of suitors - Milon, who sees the ideal and his friend in Sophia, who loves her, and Skotinin, who calculates the state that he will receive after marrying this girl. At the same time, Sophia as a person is not interesting to him. Skotinin does not even try to equip his bride with a comfortable home. Prostakov and Pravdin are in reality "the voice of truth", a kind of "auditors". But in the person of an official we find active strength, help and real action, while Prostakov is a passive character. The only thing this hero could say was to reproach Mitrofan at the end of the play.

Problems raised by the author

Analyzing, it becomes clear that each of the above-described pairs of characters reflects a separate problem, which is revealed in the work. This is the problem of education (which is complemented by the example of half-educated teachers such as Kuteikin, as well as impostors such as Vralman), upbringing, fathers and children, family life, relationships between spouses, and the relationship of nobles to servants. Each of these issues is examined through the prism of educational ideas. Fonvizin, sharpening his attention on the shortcomings of the era through the use of comic techniques, emphasizes the need to change outdated, traditional, which have become irrelevant foundations. They drag into the swamp of stupidity, ill will, liken people to animals.

As our analysis of Fonvizin's play "The Minor" has shown, the main idea and theme of the work is the need to educate the nobility in accordance with educational ideals, the foundations of which are still relevant today.

As was customary in classicism, the heroes of the comedy "The Minor" are clearly divided into negative and positive. However, the most memorable, vivid are the negative characters, despite their despoticness and ignorance: Mrs. Prostakova, her brother Taras Skotinin and Mitrofan himself. They are interesting and controversial. It is with them that comic situations, full of humor, bright liveliness of dialogues are associated.

Positive characters do not evoke such vivid emotions, although they are resonators that reflect the author's position. Educated, endowed with only positive traits, they are ideal - they cannot create lawlessness, lies and cruelty are alien to them.

Heroes negative

Mrs. Prostakova

History of upbringing and education She grew up in a family characterized by extreme ignorance. She did not receive any education. I have not learned any moral rules since childhood. There is nothing good in her soul. Serfdom has a strong influence: her position is the sovereign owner of serfs.

Main character traits: Rude, unbridled, ignorant. If he does not meet resistance, he becomes arrogant. But if he encounters strength, he becomes cowardly.

Relation to other people In relation to people she is guided by rough calculation, personal gain. Merciless to those who are in her power. She is ready to humiliate herself in front of those on whom it depends, who turns out to be stronger than her.

Attitude to enlightenment Education is superfluous: "People live and lived without sciences."

Prostakova as a landowner A convinced serf woman, considers the serfs to be her full property. Always dissatisfied with her serfs. She is outraged even by the illness of a serf girl. She plundered the peasants: “Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we cannot rip anything off. Such a disaster! "

Attitude towards family and friends Despotic and rude towards her husband, she pushes him around, does not put him in anything.

Attitude to his son, Mitrofanushka Loves him, tender to him. Caring for his happiness, well-being is the content of her life. Blind, unreasonable, ugly love for his son does not bring either Mitrofan or Prostakova herself anything good.

Peculiarities of speech About Trishka: "Swindler, thief, cattle, thief's mug, fool"; addressing her husband: “Why are you so perverted today, my father?”, “All century, sir, you have hung your ears”; addressing Mitrofanushka: “Mitrofanushka, my friend; my dear friend; son".

She has no moral concepts: she lacks a sense of duty, philanthropy, a sense of human dignity.

Mitrofan

(translated from Greek "showing his mother")

About upbringing and education Accustomed to idleness, accustomed to hearty and plentiful food, spends his free time at the dovecote.

The main character traits Spoiled "mama's son", who grew up and developed in the ignorant environment of the feudal local nobility. Not devoid of cunning and quick-wittedness by nature, but at the same time rude and capricious.

Relation to other people Does not respect other people. Eremeevna (nanny) calls her "an old hrychovka", threatens her with harsh reprisals; he does not speak with teachers, but “barks” (in the words of Tsyfirkin).

Attitude towards enlightenment Mental development is extremely low, experiencing an irresistible aversion to work and learning.

Relation to family and close people Mitrofan does not know love for anyone, even for those closest to him - mother, father, nanny.

Features of speech It is expressed in monosyllables, in its language there are many vernaculars, words and phrases borrowed from the courtyards. The tone of his speech is capricious, dismissive, sometimes rude.

The name of Mitrofanushka has become a household name. This is the name given to young people who do not know anything and do not want to know anything.

Skotinin - brother of Prostakova

On upbringing and education He grew up in a family that was extremely hostile to education: "Don't be that Skotinin who wants to learn something."

Main character traits Ignorant, mentally undeveloped, greedy.

Attitude to other people This is a fierce serf-owner who knows how to “rip off” the rent from his fortress peasants, and there are no obstacles for him in this occupation.

Main interest in life Animal house, pig breeding. Only pigs cause in him a disposition and warm feelings, only to them he shows warmth and care.

Relation to family and friends For the sake of the opportunity to marry profitably (learns about the state of Sophia) is ready to destroy his rival - the nephew of Mitrofan.

Features of speech The non-expressive speech of an uneducated person, often uses rude expressions, in speech there are words borrowed from courtyards.

This is a typical representative of small feudal landlords with all their shortcomings.

Teacher of Russian and Church Slavonic. The underachieved seminarian "was afraid of the abyss of wisdom." In his own way, cunning, greedy.

Teacher of history. German, former coachman. He becomes a teacher, because he could not find a coachman's place for himself. An ignorant person who cannot teach his student anything.

Teachers do not make an effort to learn anything about Mitrofan. They are more likely to indulge the laziness of their student. To some extent, they, using the ignorance and ignorance of Mrs. Prostakova, deceive her, realizing that she will not be able to verify the results of their work.

Eremeevna - Mitrofan's nanny

What place does it take in Prostakova's house, its distinctive features Selflessly devoted to her masters, slavishly attached to their home.

Attitude to Mitrofan Not sparing himself protects Mitrofan: “I will die on the spot, but I will not give up the child. Sunxia, ​​sir, just poke your head around. I'll scratch out those thorns. "

What Eremeevna has become over the long years of serf service She has a strongly developed sense of duty, but there is no sense of human dignity. There is not only hatred for their inhuman oppressors, but even protest. Lives in constant fear, in awe of his mistress.

For her loyalty and devotion, Eremeevna receives only beatings and hears only such addresses as "beast", "dog's daughter", "old witch", "old hrychovka". Eremeevna's fate is tragic, because she will never be appreciated by her masters, she will never receive gratitude for her loyalty.

Heroes are positive

Starodum

About the meaning of a name A person who thinks in the old way, giving preference to the priorities of the previous (Peter's) era, preserving traditions and wisdom, accumulated experience.

Education Starodum An enlightened and advanced person. He was brought up in the spirit of Peter's time, the thoughts, morals and activities of the people of that time are closer and more acceptable to him.

The civic position of the hero is a patriot: for him honest and useful service to the Fatherland is the first and sacred duty of a nobleman. Demands the limitation of the tyranny of the feudal landlords: "It is illegal to oppress your own kind with slavery."

Attitude towards other people A person is assessed according to his service to the Fatherland, according to the benefits that a person brings in this service: "I calculate the degree of nobility according to the number of deeds that the great master has done for the Fatherland ... a noble state is nothing without noble deeds."

What qualities are honored as human dignity? An ardent defender of humanity and enlightenment.

Reflections of the hero about education Moral education attaches more value to education: “The mind, if it is only the mind, the most trifle ... Good decency gives a direct price to the mind. Without it, a smart person is a monster. Science in a depraved person is a fierce weapon to do evil. "

What traits in people cause the hero's righteous indignation

"Having a heart, have a soul - and you will be a man at all times."

Pravdin, Milon, Sophia

Pravdin An honest, impeccable official. An auditor empowered to confiscate estates from cruel landowners.

Milon, an officer, faithful to his duty, in a patriotic mood.

Sophia An educated, modest, sensible girl. She was brought up in the spirit of respect and reverence for elders.

The purpose of these heroes in the comedy, on the one hand, is to prove the correctness of Starodum's views, and on the other hand, to highlight the ill-will and ignorance of such surrogates as the Prostakov-Skotinins.

Article menu:

“The Minor” is a play in five acts, written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. An iconic dramatic work of the 18th century and one of the most striking examples of classicism. It entered the school curriculum, was repeatedly staged on the stage, received a screen embodiment, and its lines were disassembled into quotes that today live independently from the original source, becoming aphorisms of the Russian language.

Plot: a summary of the play "The Minor"

Everyone knows the plot of "The Little Growth" since school years, but we still recall the summary of the play in order to restore the sequence of events in our memory.

The action takes place in the village of Prostakovs. Its owners - Mrs. and Mr. Prostakovs and their son Mitrofanushka - live a quiet life of provincial nobles. The estate is also inhabited by the orphan Sofyushka, whom the mistress took in her house, but, as it turns out, not out of compassion, but because of the inheritance, which she freely disposes as a self-proclaimed guardian. In the near future, they plan to give Sophia for Prostakova's brother Taras Skotinin.

The mistress's plans collapse when Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, who was still believed to be dead. Stradum is alive and well and goes on a date with his niece, and he also reports a fortune of 10 thousand in income, which he inherits his beloved relative. After such news, Prostakov begins to court Sophia, whom she still has little regard for, because now she wants to marry her for her beloved Mitrofan, and leave Skotinin with nothing.

Fortunately, Starodum turned out to be a noble and honest man who wished his niece well. Moreover, Sophia already had a betrothed - officer Milon, who had just stopped with his regiment in the village of Prostakovs. Starodub knew Milon and gave the young people a blessing.

In despair, Prostakova tries to organize the kidnapping of Sophia and force her to marry her son. However, even here the perfidious mistress suffers a fiasco - Milo saves his beloved on the night of the abduction.

Prostakova is generously forgiven and not brought to justice, however, her estate, which has long aroused suspicion, is transferred to the state guardian. Everyone leaves, and even Mitrofanushka leaves his mother, because he does not love her, as, in general, no one else in the world.

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

As in any classic work, the characters in "The Ignorant" are clearly divided into positive and negative.

Negative heroes:

• Mrs. Prostakova - the mistress of the village;
• Mr. Prostakov is her husband;
• Mitrofanushka - the son of the Prostakovs, an ignoramus;
• Taras Skotinin is the brother of the Prostakovs.

Goodies:

• Sophia is an orphan, lives with the Prostakovs;
• Starodum is her uncle;
• Milon - officer, beloved of Sophia;
• Pravdin is a government official who came to supervise affairs in the village of Prostakovs.

Minor characters:

• Tsyfirkin - teacher of arithmetic;
• Kuteikin - teacher, former seminarian;
• Vralman - a former coachman, posing as a teacher;
• Eremevna is Mitrofan's nanny.

Mrs. Prostakova

Prostakova is the most striking negative character, and indeed the most prominent character in the play. She is the mistress of the village of Prostakovs and it is the mistress who, having completely suppressed the weak-willed spouse, establishes lordly orders and makes decisions.

At the same time, she is completely ignorant, devoid of manners, often rude. Prostakova, like other members of the family, cannot read and despises science. The mother is engaged in education of Mitrofanushka only because it is so in the new world society, but she does not understand the true value of knowledge.

In addition to ignorance, Prostakova is distinguished by cruelty, deceit, hypocrisy, envy.

The only creature she loves is her son Mitrofanushka. However, the mother's blind absurd love only spoils the child, turning him into a copy of himself in a man's dress.

Mr. Prostakov

The figurative owner of the Prostakovs' estate. In fact, everything is led by his domineering wife, whom he is insanely afraid of and does not dare say a word. Prostakov has long lost his own opinion and dignity. He cannot even say whether the caftan sewn by the tailor Trishka for Mitrofan is good or bad, because he is afraid to say something other than what the mistress expects.

Mitrofan

The son of the Prostakovs, an ignoramus. In the family, he is lovingly called Mitrofanushka. And, meanwhile, it is time for this young man to go out into adulthood, but he has absolutely no idea about it. Mitrofan is spoiled by maternal love, he is capricious, cruel towards servants and teachers, pompous, lazy. Despite many years of lessons with teachers, the young master is hopelessly dull, he does not show the slightest desire for study and knowledge.

And the worst thing is that Mitrofanushka is a terrible egoist, for him nothing matters except his own interests. At the end of the play, he easily abandons his mother, who loved him so unrequitedly. Even she is an empty place for him.

Skotinin

Brother of Mrs. Prostakova. Narcissistic, narrow-minded, ignorant, cruel and greedy. Taras Skotinin has a great passion for pigs, the rest is of little interest to this narrow-minded person. He has no idea about family ties, heartfelt affection and love. Describing how well his future wife will heal, Skotinin only says that he will give her the best light. In his coordinate system, this is precisely what conjugal happiness lies.

Sophia

The positive female image of the work. She is a very educated, kind, meek and compassionate girl. Sophia received a good education, she has an inquiring mind and a thirst for knowledge. Even in the poisonous atmosphere of the Prostakovs' house, the girl does not become like the owners, but continues to lead the way of life that she likes - she reads a lot, thinks, and is friendly and polite with everyone.

Starodum

Uncle and guardian of Sophia. Starodum is the voice of the author in the play. His speeches are very aphoristic, he talks a lot about life, virtues, intelligence, law, government, modern society, marriage, love and other pressing issues. Starodum is incredibly wise and noble. Despite the fact that he clearly has a negative attitude towards Prostakova and others like her, Starodum does not allow himself to stoop to rudeness and open criticism, and as far as slight sarcasm, his close-minded “relatives” cannot recognize.

Milon

Sophia's beloved officer. The image of a hero-defender, an ideal young man, a husband. He is very fair, does not put up with meanness and lies. Milo dared, and not only in battle, but also in his speeches. He is devoid of vanity and base prudence. All the “suitors” of Sophia spoke only about her condition, while Milo never mentioned that his betrothed was rich. He sincerely loved Sophia even before she had an inheritance, and therefore in his choice the young man was not guided by the size of the bride's annual income.

“I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”: the problem of education in the story

The key problem of the work is the theme of the provincial noble upbringing and education. The main character, Mitrofanushka, is educated only because it is fashionable and “so established”. In fact, neither he nor his ignorant mother understands the true purpose of knowledge. They should make a person smarter, better, serve him throughout life and benefit society. Knowledge is acquired through labor and can never be forcibly placed in someone's head.

Mitrofan's home education is an empty shell, a fiction, a provincial theater. For several years, the unfortunate student has not mastered either reading or writing. The comic test that Pravdin arranges, Mitrofan fails with a crash, but because of his stupidity he cannot even understand this. He calls the word door an adjective, because it is said to be attached to the opening, science confuses history with stories that Vralman tells him in abundance, and Mitrofanushka cannot even pronounce the word “geography” ... too tricky.

To show the grotesque nature of Mitrofan's education, Fonvizin introduces the image of Vralman, who teaches “in French and all sciences”. In fact, Vralman (a surname that speaks!) Is not a teacher at all, but a former coachman of Starodum. He easily deceives the ignorant Prostakova and even becomes her favorite, because he professes his own teaching method - not to force the student to do anything through force. With such zeal as that of Mitrofan, the teacher and the student are simply loafing around.

Upbringing goes hand in hand with acquiring knowledge and skills. For the most part, Mrs. Prostakova is responsible for it. She methodically imposes her rotten morality on Mitrofan, who (here he is diligent!) Perfectly absorbs mother's advice. So, while solving the problem of dividing, Prostakov advises his son not to share with anyone, but to take everything for himself. Speaking about marriage, mother speaks only of the bride's wealth, never mentioning emotional affection and love. Such concepts as courage, courage, valor are not familiar to the ignorant Mitrofan. Despite the fact that he is no longer a toddler, he is still cared for in everything. The boy cannot even stand up for himself during a clash with his uncle, he immediately begins to call his mother, and the old nanny Eremeevna rushes at the offender with her fists.

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

The title of the play has a direct and figurative meaning.

Direct meaning of the name
In the old days, teenagers, young men who have not yet reached the age of majority and have not entered the civil service, were called undersized.

The figurative meaning of the name
A fool, an ignoramus, a narrow-minded and uneducated person, regardless of his age, was also called an undersized person. With the light hand of Fonvizin, it was this negative connotation that was fixed on the word in modern Russian.

Every person is reborn from an underage youth into an adult man. This is growing up, a law of nature. However, not everyone turns from a dark, undereducated, half-educated person into an educated, self-sufficient person. This transformation takes effort and perseverance.

Place in literature: Russian literature of the 18th century → Russian dramaturgy of the 18th century → Creativity of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin → 1782 → The play "The Minor".

The comedy "Minor" by Fonvizin is a masterpiece of Russian literature of the 18th century. The work entered the collection of classical literature, touching upon a number of "eternal problems" and attracting modern readers with the beauty of a high syllable. The title of the play is connected with the decree of Peter I, in which the ruler indicated that young noblemen who were “ignorant” without education were forbidden to marry and enter the service.

The idea of ​​a comedy came from the writer back in 1778. And in 1782 it was already written and presented to the public. Fonvizin's analysis of "The Minor" would not be complete without a brief coverage of the time of the play's creation. The author wrote it during the reign of Catherine II. This stage in the development of Russia is associated with the dominance of the then advanced ideas of an enlightened monarchy, borrowed from the French enlighteners. Their spread and popularity among the educated nobility and bourgeoisie was largely facilitated by the empress herself, who corresponded with Voltaire, Diderot, d'Alembert, opened schools and libraries, and strongly supported the development of culture and art in Russia. Fonvizin, as a representative of his time, undoubtedly shared the ideas prevailing in the noble society. He tried to reflect them in his work, exposing to the audience and readers not only their positive moments, but also ridiculing the shortcomings and delusions.

An analysis of the comedy The Minor requires considering the play as part of the literary tradition and the cultural era during which it was written. The work is one of the best examples of classicism. In "Minor" there is a unity of action (there are no secondary plot lines, only a fight for Sophia's hand and property), place (the heroes do not move long distances, events take place either in the Prostakovs' house or near their house), and time (all events are not take more than a day). In addition, Fonvizin used “speaking” surnames traditional for the classicist play and a clear division into positive and negative characters. Positive Pravdin, Milon, Starodum, Sophia are opposed to negative Prostakovs, Skotinin, Mitrofan. At the same time, the names of the characters themselves make it clear to the reader what traits prevail in the image of this character - for example, Pravdin is the personification of truth and morality in the play.

At the time of its creation, "The Minor" was an important step in the development of Russian literature, in particular, Russian drama. Fonvizin creates a new genre of socio-political comedy, harmoniously combining a number of realistic scenes depicted with irony, sarcasm, laughter, from the life of ordinary nobility with educational sermons about virtue, morality, the need to educate the best human qualities in oneself. At the same time, instructive monologues do not burden the perception of the play, but complement the work, making it deeper.

The "undergrowth" is divided into 5 actions. In the first, the reader gets to know the Prostakovs, Sophia, Pravdin, Skotinin Mitrofan. The characters of the characters immediately emerge, it becomes clear to the reader that the Prostakovs and Skotinin are negative heroes, and Pravdin and Sophia are positive. The first act includes exposition and setting of the work. The exposition - the reader gets acquainted with the heroes, learns that Sophia lives in the care of the Prostakovs and they are going to marry her to Skotinin. The plot of the play is reading a letter from Starodum - Sophia is now a rich heiress, and her uncle is returning from day to day to take her to his place.

The second, third and fourth acts are the development of events in the work. The reader meets Milo and Starodum. Skotinin and Prostakova are trying to please Starodum, but their falsity, flattery, excessive greed and ignorance only repulses, looks ridiculous and stupid. The funniest scene of the play is Mitrofan's questioning that he knows where not only the stupidity of the young man, but also his mother is exposed.

The fifth action is the culmination and denouement of the action. Researchers differ as to which point in the play is the culmination of the play. Thus, there are three most widespread versions: the first is the abduction of Sophia Prostakova; the second - Pravdin's reading of a letter stating that Prostakova's estate was completely transferred under his tutelage; the third is the rage of Prostakova, when she realizes her powerlessness and wants to "win back" on the servants. Each of the versions is fair, as it is viewed from different points of view of the work. The first - from the point of view of the storyline of Sophia's marriage, the second - from the socio-political, as the moment of the triumph of justice in this estate, the third - from the historical, Prostakova personifies at this moment the exhausted, gone into the past, but still “do not believe in their defeat »Ideals and principles of the old nobility, based on ignorance, ignorance, low moral foundations. The denouement of the play - everyone is thrown to Prostakov, who has nothing left. Starodum, pointing at her, says: "Here are worthy fruits of evil!"

Speaking about the main characters of the play, then, as already mentioned above, they are clearly divided into positive and negative. Negative - Prostakovs, Skotinin, Mitrofan. Prostakova is a domineering, rude, uneducated woman looking everywhere for profit, who knows how to flatter for profit, but loves her son. Prostakov appears as a “shadow” of his wife, a weak-willed character whose word means little. Skotinin is Prostakova's brother, the same stupid and uneducated, cruel enough, greedy for money, like his sister, for whom there is nothing better than a walk to the barnyard to the pigs. Mitrofan is the son of his mother, a spoiled 16-year-old boy who inherited his love for pigs from his uncle. In general, the issue of heredity and family ties occupies an important place in the play. So, Prostakova is only married to Prostakov (a really "simple" person who does not want much), in fact, she is Skotinina, to match her brother. Mitrofan, on the other hand, absorbed the qualities of both parents - the stupidity and “animal” qualities of the Skotinins (“I don’t want to study, I want to marry,” priorities are to eat, not read a book), and the weakness of his father (for him, the mother decided at first, and then decided Pravdin).

Similar kinship ties can be traced between Starodum and Sophia. Both are educated, virtuous, honest. The girl listens attentively to her uncle, "absorbing" his science, respects him. Positive and negative characters create dual pairs of opposites. "Children" - stupid, spoiled Mitrofan and smart, meek Sophia. “Parents” - both love children, but have different approaches to upbringing - Starodub conducts conversations on topics of morality, honor, truth, while Prostakov pampers Mitrofan and claims that education will not be useful to him. "Grooms" - loving, seeing in Sophia his ideal and friend Milon and counting the money that Skotinin will receive after marriage (while the girl is not interesting to him as a person, he does not even plan to equip her with comfortable housing). Pravdin and Prostakov are actually both “the voice of truth”, some kind of “auditors”, however, if active force, real action and help is expressed in the person of an official, then Prostakov is a passive character who could only say that he reproached Mitrofan at the end plays.

Analyzing Fonvizin's "Minor", it becomes clear that each of these pairs of characters raises a separate problem that is revealed in the work - the problem of education (supplemented by the example of half-educated teachers like Kuteikin and impostors like Vralman), the problem of fathers and children, upbringing, the problem of family life, the relationship between husband and wife, the acute social problem of the relationship of the nobles to their servants. Each of these problems is viewed through the prism of the ideas of enlightenment. Fonvizin, sharpening attention to the shortcomings of the era through the techniques of the comic, emphasizes the need to change the traditional, outdated, long-irrelevant foundations that drag people into the swamp of "evil", stupidity, likening them to animals.
As the analysis of the work "The Minor" has shown, the central theme and idea of ​​the work is the need to educate the Russian nobility in accordance with the ideas of enlightenment, the foundations of which are still relevant today.

Product test