Means of artistic expressiveness in the comedy of an ignoramus. Ideological and artistic originality of the comedy “The Minor” D. Fonvizin. The composition “The ideological and artistic originality of the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin“ The Minor “The Minor” is an example of classicism.

The minor is rightly considered the pinnacle of D.I.Fonvizin's creativity. This play is the first social and political comedy on the Russian stage. The main conflict in it is the clash between the advanced nobility and the conservative part of the noble class on the question of the extermination of slavery and savage serfdom. But at the same time, a number of other acts are revealed in comedy - that is, without distracting from it only some of its poetic moments; took it with all the cold, with all its prose and vulgarity ... Belinsky notes.

At the beginning of 1782, Fonvizin read to friends and secular acquaintances the comedy "The Minor", on which he worked for many years. He did the same with the new play as he did with the Brigadier.

Fonvizin's previous play was the first comedy about Russian morals and, according to N.I. Panin, the Empress Catherine II liked it very much. Will it be with "Nedorosly"? Indeed, in "Nedorosl", according to the just remark of the first biographer Fonvizin, P.A. Vyazemsky, the author “No longer makes noise, does not laugh, but resent the vice and stigmatizes it without mercy, if the viewers are amused by the picture of abuse and tomfoolery, then the instilled laughter does not entertain from deeper and more deplorable impressions.

Pushkin admired the brilliance of the brush that painted the Prostakov family, although he found traces of "pedantry" in the positive characters of "The Minor" Pravdin and Starodum. Fonvizin for Pushkin is an example of the truth of gaiety.

No matter how old-fashioned Fonvizin's heroes seem to us at first glance, it is impossible to exclude them from the play. After all, then in comedy movement disappears, the confrontation between good and evil, baseness and nobility, sincerity and hypocrisy, the animality of high spirituality. Fonvizin's "undersized" is built on the fact that the world of the Prostakovs from the Skotinins - ignorant, cruel, narcissistic landowners - wants to subjugate their whole life, to appropriate the right of unlimited power over serfs and noble people, who own Sophia and her fiancé, the valiant officer Milon ; Uncle Sophia, a man with the ideals of Peter's time, Starodum; guardian of laws, official Pravdin. In comedy, two worlds collide with different needs, lifestyles and manners of speech, with different ideals. Starodum and Prostakova most openly expresses the positions of essentially irreconcilable camps. The ideals of the heroes are clearly visible in how they want to see their children. Let us recall Prostakova in Mitrofan's lesson:

“Prostakova. It is very nice for me that Mitrofanushka does not like to step forward ... He is lying, my dear friend. If he found money, he won't share it with anyone .. Take everything for yourself, Mitrofanushka. Don't study this stupid science! "

Now let's remember the scene where Starodum speaks to Sophia:

“Starodum. Not the one who counts off the money, what to hide in the chest, but the one who counts off the excess in himself to help the one who does not have what is needed ... Fatherland to serve ”.

Comedy, in Shakespeare's words, is an "incompatible connector." The comic of the "Minor" is not only in the fact that Mrs. Prostakova is funny, colorful, like a street vendor, scolding that her brother's favorite place is a barn with pigs, that Mitrofan is a glutton: having barely rested from a plentiful supper, he is already five in the morning I ate buns. This child, as Prostakova thinks, is of “delicate build”, unencumbered by neither mind, nor occupation, nor conscience. Of course, it’s funny to watch and listen to how Mitrofan is shy in front of Skotinin’s fists and hides behind the backs of Eremeevna’s nanny, then with dull importance and bewilderment he talks about the doors “which is adjective” and “which is noun”. But there is a deeper comic in the “Minor”. internal: rudeness that wants to look kind, greed, covering up with generosity, ignorance, claiming to be educated.

The comic is based on absurdity, inconsistency of form and content. In Nedoroslya, the miserable, primitive world of the Skotinins and Prostakovs wants to break through into the world of the noble, to appropriate its privileges, to take possession of everything. Evil wants to get its hands on good, while acting very energetically, in different ways.

According to the playwright, serfdom is a disaster for the landowners themselves. Accustomed to treating everyone rudely, Prostakov does not spare his relatives either. The basis of her nature will stop by its own will. Self-confidence is heard in every remark of Skotinin, devoid of any dignity. Rigidity and violence are becoming the most convenient and familiar weapon of the serfs. Therefore, their first impulse is to force Sophia into marriage. And only realizing that Sophia has strong defenders, Prostakova begins to fawn and try to imitate the tone of noble people.

In the finale of the comedy, impudence and servility, rudeness and confusion make Prostakova so pathetic that Sophia and Starodum are ready to forgive her. The autocracy of the landowner taught her to be impatient with any objections, not to recognize any obstacles.

But the good heroes of Fonvizin can win in a comedy only thanks to the sharp intervention of the authorities. If Pravdin had not been such a persistent guardian of laws, he had not received a letter from the governor, everything would have turned out differently. Fonvizin was forced to cover up the satirical acuteness of the comedy with the hope of legitimate rule. As a consequence of Gogol in The Inspector General, he cuts the Gordian knot of evil with an unexpected intervention from above. But we heard Starodum's story about a true life and Khlestakov's chatter about Petersburg. The capital and the remote corners of the province are actually much closer than it might seem at first glance. The bitterness of the thought about the chance of the victory of good gives the comedy a tragic overtones.

The creative activity of Fonvizin - the author of "Foxes - the treasurer", "Epistles to the servants", "Brigadier", "Discourses on the indispensable laws of the state", "Minor" and a number of sharp satirical and journalistic works directed against the autocratic - serf policy of Catherine II covers the 1760s - 1780s. All the most significant that was created by Fonvizin, everything that makes him - in the words of M. Gorky - the initiator of "the most magnificent and, perhaps, the most socially - fruitful line of Russian literature - the line of accusatory - realistic", is closely connected with ideological and artistic and aesthetic tendencies brought about by the peculiarities of the social and historical development of Russia in the second half of the 18th century. It is not without reason that Belinsky also referred the works of Fonvizin to the number of such literary monuments that are important "as moments of the historical development and development of the public among the people."

Fonvizin, both in his youth and in his mature years, believed that the nobility was responsible for the situation in the country. But he saw that the overwhelming majority of the nobles were unworthy of this high role. Representatives of the ruling class, they are inhuman, selfish, ignorant and least of all think about the interests of the homeland. Exposing the nobles who are unworthy to be nobles, and finding out the reasons that disfigure the human personality, occupies a huge place in the writer's work.

The confusing question of the dating of the comedy can now be considered resolved. Fonvizin's work on the "Brigadier", if not completely, then in large part, should be attributed to the time of his six-month stay in Moscow in the winter of 1768 - in the spring of 1769. In April 1769, Fonvizin reported to I.P. Elagin: “he added almost his comedy. " In the next letter to him, he again mentions the comedy, apparently already finished. It seems that the specification of the dating is not so important. One thing is clear: the work on the comedy is connected with a range of issues raised during the convocation of the Commission for the preparation of the New Code. Fonvizin joined those who, like Ya.P. Kozelsky, considered it necessary to show a picture of Russian life with the help of "righteous speeches". At the same time in the "Brigadier" the question of ways of creating a national comedy, posed in the circle of Elagin, was solved in a new way. The first Russian national - everyday comedy "Brigadier" by Fonvizin is, first of all, a literary monument reflecting the struggle of the progressive Russian people of the 18th century for the national identity of Russian culture. Fonvizin, in his comedy, cruelly ridiculed the servility of his contemporary noble society to a foreign, in this case French, civilization.

If Lomonosov and Suvorov with all their might resisted the German dominance, then a vivid expression of the same process of the struggle for the national identity of Russian culture is the unfolding in Russian fiction, mainly from the middle of the 18th century, the denunciation of the nobility's predilection for the French. It was not by chance that the ridicule of "Frenchmania" took such a prominent place in Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century, since it was at this time that the Germans, who flooded Russia in the first half of the century, were replaced by the French. They enjoyed special patronage at the court of Elizabeth. Following the court milieu, "Frenchmania" embraced fairly wide circles of Russian society, not excluding the upper strata of the clergy. It cannot be said that the government of Elizabeth and the government of Catherine did not take any measures to curb this evil, but these measures were very ineffective. The main role in the fight against the dominance of foreign crooks and their pernicious influence on the Russian noble society belonged to writers. The exposure of this "foreign rage" is becoming one of the main themes in Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century, especially in comedy and satire, one of the forms of the struggle for national education and the purity of the national language.

Sentimentalism is replacing classicism. The influence of the aesthetics of sentimentalism, more or less forcefully affected all genres of Russian literature. Earlier and most clearly, its signs were manifested on the theatrical stage, where the mixed genre is most widespread. In the 60s - early 70s, despite the fierce opposition of Sumarokov, “a new and dirty kind of tearful comedies” “crawled” onto the Russian stage, as this defender of the foundations of classicism characterized all new “sensitive” drama. To the great indignation of Sumarokov, these "tearful comedies" have earned "nationwide praise and applause." The very penetration of the mixed genre on the Russian stage testified to the democratization of the Russian theater, to the new aesthetic requirements presented to it by a new, more democratic spectator.

In close interaction with the advanced ideological and artistic aspirations of the Russian literary intelligentsia of the 60s - 80s of the 18th century, the work of Fonvizin develops - a publicist, satirist and playwright, in whose works the distinctive features of the ideology of the Russian Enlightenment and the best conquests of Russian literature on paths to critical realism.

In "Sincere Confession" Fonvizin says that his definition under Elagin's leadership was due to the success of his translation of Voltaire's tragedy "Alzir". This translation was started by Fonvizin, possibly back in Moscow, but completed upon moving to St. Petersburg. This play is imbued with an anti-clerical tendency. The choice of this particular tragedy was deeply logical for Fonvizin, whose original work, starting with "The Fox - the Treasurer" and "The Epistle to the Servants" and ending with letters from Italy, is full of anti-clerical sentiments.

Voltaire spoke out in "Alzira" against the violence allegedly committed in the name of the triumph of Christianity by civilized colonialists in the countries they conquered. At the end of the tragedy, the dying ruler of Peru, Don Guzman, condemning his atrocities against the enslaved people, turns to his murderer Zamora with words of reconciliation that sound like the apotheosis of the Christian religion, but in essence do not smooth out the general anticlerical tone of the play.

Similar information.

The poster itself explains the characters. PA Vyazemsky about the comedy "The Minor" ... A truly public comedy. NV Gogop about the comedy “The Minor” The first appearance of the comedy “The Minor” on the stage in 1872 caused, according to the memoirs of contemporaries, “throwing wallets” - the audience threw wallets filled with ducats onto the stage, such was their admiration for what they saw. Before D.I.Fonvizin, the public almost did not know Russian comedy. In the first public theater, organized by Peter I, plays by Moliere were staged, and the appearance of Russian comedy is associated with the name of A.P. Sumarokov. “The property of comedy is to rule the temper with mockery” - these words of AP Sumarokov Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin embodied in his plays. What caused such a violent reaction from the viewer? The liveliness of the characters, especially the negative ones, their figurative speech, the author's humor, so close to the folk, the theme of the play is a satire on the principles of life and upbringing of landlord's offspring, denunciation of serfdom. Fonvizin departs from one of the golden rules of classical comedy: observing the unity of place and time, he omits the unity of action. There is virtually no plot development in the play, it consists of conversations between negative and positive characters. This is the influence of the contemporary European comedy author, here he goes further than Sumarokov. "The French comedy is absolutely good ... There are great actors in comedy ... when you look at them, you will, of course, forget that they are playing a comedy, but it seems that you are seeing a direct story," Fonvizin writes to his sister, traveling across France. But Fonvizin is by no means an imitator. His plays are filled with a truly Russian spirit, written in a truly Russian language. It was from the "Minor" that IA Krylov's fable "Trishkin's caftan" grew, it was from the speeches of the characters of the play that the aphorisms "mother's son", "I do not want to study, I want to marry," show the fruits of a bad upbringing or even its absence, and it grows to a frightening picture of wild landlord malice. Contrasting "malevolent characters" taken from reality, presenting them in a ridiculous way, Fonvizin puts the author's comments into the mouths of positive heroes, unusually virtuous persons. As if not hoping that the reader himself will figure out who is bad and what is bad, the writer assigns the main role to positive heroes. “Truth - Starodum, Milon, Pravdin, Sophia are not so much living persons as moralistic mannequins; but their real originals were no more vivid than their dramatic photographs. .. They were walking, but still lifeless schemes of a new good morality ... It took time, intensifying experiments, to awaken organic life in these still lifeless cultural preparations, "wrote the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky about the comedy. The negative characters appear completely alive before the viewer. And this is the main artistic merit of the play, Fonvizin's luck. Like the goodies, the negative ones have speaking names, and the surname "Skotinin" grows into a full-fledged artistic image. In the very first act, Skotinin is naively surprised at his special love for pigs: “I love pigs, sister; and we have such large pigs in the neighborhood that there is not a single one of them, which, standing on its hind legs, would not be taller than each of us with a whole head. " The author's ridicule is all the more powerful because it is put into the mouth of the hero we are laughing at. It turns out that love for pigs is a family trait. “Simpletons. Strange thing, brother, how relatives can resemble relatives! Our Mitrofanushka is all uncle - and he is just as much a hunter as you are before the pigs. As he was three more years old, it happened, seeing a mumps, tremble with joy. ... Skotinin. This is truly a curiosity! Well, let, brother, Mitrofan loves pigs so that he is my nephew. There is some similarity: why am I so addicted to pigs? Prostakov. And here there are some similarities. I think so. " The author also plays up the same motive in the replicas of other characters. In the fourth act, in response to Skotinin's words that his family is "great and ancient", Pravdin ironically remarks: "That way you will assure us that he is older than Adam." Unsuspecting Skotinin falls into a trap, readily confirming this: “What do you think? At least a little ... ", and Starodum interrupts him:" That is, your ancestor was created even on the sixth day, but a little before Adam. " Starodum directly refers to the Bible - on the sixth day, God created first animals, then man. Comparison of caring for pigs with caring for a wife, sounding from the lips of the same Skotinin, evokes Milon's indignant remark: “What a bestial comparison!” Kuteikin, a cunning clergyman, puts the author's characterization into the mouth of Mitrofanushka himself, forcing him to read the word for hours: "I am cattle, not a man, vilification of men." The representatives of the Skotinin family themselves, with comical innocence, repeat about their "bestial" nature. “Prostakova. After all, I am after the father of the Skotinins. The dead father married the dead mother; she was nicknamed the Priplodins. They had eighteen of us children. .. "Skotinin speaks about his sister in the same terms as about his" cute pigs ":" To be honest, one litter; Yes, see how she squealed ... "Prostakova herself likens her love for her son to the dog's affection for her puppies, and says about herself:" I, brother, I won't bark with you "," Oh, I'm a dog's daughter! What have I done!". The peculiarity of the play "The Minor" is also that each of the characters speaks his own language. This was appreciated at its true worth by Fonvizin's contemporaries: "each one differs in his own character with sayings." The speech of a retired soldier Tsyfirkin is full of military terms, Kuteikin's speech is built on Church Slavonic phrases, the speech of Vralman, a Russian German, obsequious with the masters and arrogant with the servants, is filled with aptly captured pronunciation features. The striking typicality of the play's heroes - Prostakov, Mitrofanushka, Skotinin - goes far beyond its limits in time and space. And in A.S. Pushkin in Eugene Onegin, and in M. Yu. Lermontov in the Tambov Treasury, and in M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in The Lords of Tashkent, we find mentions of them living and bearing the essence of serf-owners, so talentedly revealed by Fonvizin.

A comedy by D.I.Fonvizin, in which, while preserving the theatrical-conditional plot collision, the everyday life of middle-class landowners, busy with concerns about their own prosperity, was depicted, the artistic content of which consisted in a new display of everyday life on stage, and precisely Russian provincial, showing a man with more complex psychological characteristics and in more clarified specific social conditions, had a great influence on the subsequent development of the comedy genre.

The artistic method of the "Minor" by D.I.Fonvizin is defined as early Russian realism of the Enlightenment, which relies on existing literary traditions (classicistic), uses artistic techniques and pictorial means of previous literary trends, but updates them, subjecting them to their creative task.

Outwardly, the comedy is based on the traditional motive of matchmaking and the emerging struggle of suitors for the heroine. All three unities are observed in it - action, time, place. The action takes place in the village of Prostakova during the day. By the beginning of the events in the house of Prostakova, the fate of the heroes was determined as follows. Sophia and Milon love each other. They are familiar from St. Petersburg. Uncle Milona, \u200b\u200bCheston, favored the love of young people. On business, Milon travels with his team to one of the provinces. During his absence, Sophia's mother dies. A young girl was taken by a distant relative to the village. Here, after a while, the events that are narrated in the comedy unfold. They are already the final stage and fit in a day.

Prostakova decides to marry off her poor relative Sophia for her brother, believing that Sophia as a bride is of no interest to her personally. Starodum's letter, from which everyone learns that she is a rich heiress, changes Prostakova's plans. A conflict arises between her and her brother.

The third "seeker" appears - Milo. Prostakova decides to put it on her own and organizes the abduction of Sophia. Sophia is saved from a very dramatic end of matchmaking by the intervention of Milon, who is beating his bride away from Prostakova's “people”. This scene prepares the denouement. Comic heroes are put to shame, vice is punished: the comedy has a moralizing ending. Prostakova was deprived of the rights over the peasants for abuse of her power, her estate was taken under guardianship.

Thus, Skotinin's matchmaking, the receipt of Starodum's letter, the decision to marry Sophia Mitrofan, the attempt to kidnap Sophia, the intention of Prostakova to deal with the courtyards, sort them out "one by one" and try to find out "who let her out of her hands", finally, Pravdin announced a decree to take houses and villages of Prostakova under guardianship are the key, central situations of the comedy.

In connection with the main theme of the comedy, the structure of "The Minor" includes scenes and persons that are not directly related to the development of the plot, but are somehow connected with the content of the comedy. Some of them are imbued with true comedy. These are scenes with Mitrofan trying on a new dress and a discussion of Trishka's work, Mitrofan's lessons, a fight between a sister and a brother that ends in a "scuffle", a quarrel between teachers, a comic dialogue during Mitrofan's exam. All of them create an idea of \u200b\u200bthe everyday, everyday life of an uncultured landlord family, the level of its needs, intra-family relations, convince the viewer of the credibility and vitality of what is happening on the stage.

Other scenes are in a different style. These are dialogues of positive heroes - Starodum, Pravdin, Milon, Starodum and Sophia, echoing in their content with the dialogues of tragic heroes. They talk about an enlightened monarch, about the appointment of a nobleman, about marriage and family, about the upbringing of young nobles, about "that it is illegal to oppress your own kind with slavery." These speeches, in fact, represent the positive program of DI Fonvizin.

Action in a comedy brings all the characters together and divides them into at the same time. malevolent and virtuous. The former are, as it were, concentrated around Prostakova, the latter around Starodum. This also applies to secondary characters: teachers and servants. The nature of the participation of characters in events is not the same. In terms of the degree of activity among the negative characters, Prostakova is rightly put in first place, then Skotinin, Mitrofan. In essence, simpletons do not participate in the struggle. Of the goodies, Sophia is passive. As for the rest, their participation in events manifests itself in the most decisive moments; Starodum announces his "will" to the suitors, predetermining the outcome; rescues his bride, arms in hand, from Milo's captors; announces the ruling decree on the guardianship of Pravdin.

It should be noted that, keeping the classicist tradition, D.I.Fonvizin gives the heroes of the comedy speaking names and surnames. This corresponds to the one-line character of the characters, in whose characters there is a certain dominant. New in the portrayal of heroes were the individual biographical factors in the formation of characters (Prostakov and Prostakova), the presence of vivid speech characteristics of the characters, the reflection in the comedy of the complexity of characters capable of self-development (images of Mitrofan, Prostakova, Eremeevna).

The difference between the heroes is not limited to their moral qualities. The introduction of extra-plot scenes into the comedy expanded and deepened its content, determined the presence of other, deeper grounds for opposing the nobles depicted in it. Accordingly, the comedy has two outcomes. One concerns the relationship between Mitrofan, Skotinin, Milon and Sophia, whose fate was determined, on the one hand, by Prostakova, and on the other, by Starodum; the second refers to the fate of Prostakova as a malevolent landowner and a bad mother. In the events of this denouement, the author's social and moral ideals are revealed, the ideological and ethical orientation of comedy as a whole is determined.

The pinnacle of Russian drama of the 18th century is DI Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor", the first Russian socio-political comedy in which "evil worthy fruits" are condemned with sarcasm. According to Gogol, Fonvizin created a "truly social comedy", where he exposed "the wounds and diseases of our society, severe internal abuses, which, by the merciless power of irony, are exposed in stunning evidence."

The comedy genre has been known since ancient times. Even Aristotle defined the main features of comedy, proceeding from the fact that the main thing in a dramatic work is the image of a person, his character. Since people "are either good or bad," "they differ either in viciousness or virtue," he saw the difference between tragedy and comedy in the fact that comedy "seeks to portray the worst", and tragedy - "better people than existing ones." The next stage in the development of comedy was associated with classicism, which retained the distinction between the tragic and the comic, characteristic of the era of antiquity. The moral principle of dividing people into "best" and "worst" was also preserved. At the same time, in the literature of classicism, those who were worried about state affairs were recognized as "the best", and those who lived by their own interests were "worse".

The goal of the classic comedy is to "educate" by making fun of the shortcomings: eccentricity, extravagance, laziness, stupidity. However, it does not follow from this that the comedy of the period of classicism was devoid of social content. Quite the opposite: the ideal of that era, its true hero was a person of a social nature, for whom the interests of the state and the nation were above personal. The comedy was intended to affirm this lofty ideal by ridiculing the psychological human properties that reduced the social significance of the individual.

DI Fonvizin in "Nedorosl" observes the classical principle of the "trinity" of time, place and action: events take place "in the village of Prostakova" during the day. At the same time, the readers are delighted with the boldness and unexpectedness of the artistic solutions proposed by the playwright. It is safe to say that Fonvizin was a true innovator at Nedorosl. The genre definition of comedy caused controversy among critics. The playwright himself called his comedy public. V.G.Belinsky, noting genre originality this work, gave its clear definition - "satire of genres." The critic asserted: "Minor" is not piece of artbut satire on manners, and satire workshop. Its characters are fools and smart: all fools are very nice, and smart are all very vulgar; the first are caricatures written with great talent; the second are the resonators who bore you with their maxims ”. He also noted that Fonvizin's comedies "will never cease to excite laughter and, gradually losing readers in the higher educational circles of society, the more they will win in the lower ones and become popular reading."

The historian V.O. Klyuchevsky, challenging the definition given by Belinsky, argued that "The Minor" is a comedy of positions: "In Little Age" bad people of the old school are set directly against new ideas embodied in the pale virtuous figures of Starodum, Pravdin and others, who came to tell those people that times have changed, that it is necessary to be educated, think and act differently from the way they used to do it. "

Based on the modern definition of genres, consider artistic and genre features socio-political comedy "Minor". The comedy is based on the traditional motive of matchmaking and the struggle of suitors for the heroine. The events of the comedy have the following background. Sophia, the main character of the comedy, has a mother dying. A distant relative of Prostakov takes the girl to the village and decides to marry Sophia for her brother Skotinin. At this time, Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, from which everyone learns that she is a rich heiress. This radically changes the strategy of behavior of Prostakova, who decides to "attach" her idiot son Mitrofanushka. He gladly accepts the decision of his mother, for he has long become disgusted with studying: “The hour of my will has long come. I don't want to study, I want to get married. "

However, in the arena of the struggle for a rich bride, Milon, whom Sophia loves, frustrates Prostakova's plans. This is the love line of the play. However, not only she was in the center of attention of the playwright.

The action in the comedy unites all the characters and at the same time divides them into "malevolent" and "virtuous". The former are concentrated around Prostakova, the latter around Starodum. The dialogues of the characters of the second group, in fact, represent a presentation of the positive program of Fonvizin himself. They talk about an enlightened monarch, about the appointment of a nobleman, about marriage and family, about the upbringing of young noblemen and about the fact that "it is illegal to oppress your own kind with slavery." This is especially clearly manifested in the didactic, didactic speech of Starodum, addressed to Sophia. Starodum reflects on wealth (“in my calculation, not the one who counts out money in order to hide it in the chest, but the one who counts out excess money from himself to help someone who doesn’t have what is needed”), nobility (“without noble deeds noble fortune is nothing "). His conclusions reflect the system of views and principles of Catherine's era: "An honest person cannot be forgiven in any way, if he lacks some quality of heart ... An honest person must be a completely honest person."

The characters of the first group are depicted in the comedy satirically and caricaturedly. What is Fonvizin opposed to? Against the ignorance of the nobles, "those malicious ignoramuses who, having their full power over people, use it for evil inhumanly." Against the consumer attitude to life, which is determined by the entire atmosphere of the estate. Against the heartlessness and despotism of the masters, their unwillingness to recognize the rights of serfs to equality with the "noble". Thus, this comedy has a bright social and political orientation. According to V.G. Belinsky, Fonvizin's comedies, including The Minor, are not comedies in artistic meaningbut they are "wonderful works of fiction, precious annals of the public at that time."

The originality of DI Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor". Fonvizin executed in his comedies the wild ignorance of the old generation and the coarse gloss of the superficial and external European semi-education of the new generations. The comedy "The Minor" was written by DI Fonvizin in 1782 and still hasn't left the stage. She is one of the author's best comedies. M. Gorky wrote: "In" Nedorosl "for the first time brought to light and onto the stage the corrupting meaning of serfdom and its influence on the nobility, spiritually ruined, degenerated and corrupted precisely by the slavery of the peasantry."

All the heroes of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" are conventionally divided into positive and negative. The Prostakov family belongs to the negative ones. Pravdin, Starodum, Sophia and Milon represent moral and positive people.

Some literary critics believed that the goodies of "Minor" were too ideal, that in fact there were no such people and they were simply invented by the author. However, documents and letters from the 18th century confirm the existence of real prototypes of the heroes of the Fonvizin comedy. And about negative characters, such as the Prostakovs and Skotinins, we can say with confidence that, despite their unconditional generalization, they were often found among the Russian provincial nobility of that time. There are two conflicts in the work. The main one is love, since it is he who develops the action of the comedy. Sophia, Mitrofanushka, Milon and Skotinin participate in it. The heroes have different attitudes to the issues of love, family, marriage. Starodum wants to see Sophia married to a worthy man, wishes her mutual love. Prostakova wants to marry Mitrofan profitably, to get Sofya's money. Mitrofan's motto: "I don't want to study, I want to get married." This phrase from the comedy "Minor" has become a winged one. Overgrown people who do not want to do anything, do not want to study and dream only of pleasure are called Mitrof-1 nushki.

Another comedy conflict is socio-political. It touches upon very important issues of upbringing and education, morality. If Starodum believes that upbringing comes from the family and the main thing in a person is honesty and good behavior, then Prostakova is convinced that it is more important for the child to be fed, dressed and live for his own pleasure. The comedy "The Minor" was written in the traditions of Russian classicism. Almost all the main features of classicism as a literary trend are observed in it. There is also a strict division of heroes into positive and negative, the use of speaking surnames and the application of the rule of three unities (unity of place, time and action). The unity of the place is respected, since the entire action of the comedy takes place in the village of the Prostakovs. Since it lasts for 24 hours, the unity of time is observed. However, the presence of two conflicts in comedy breaks the unity of the action.

Unlike Western European, in Russian classicism, there is a connection with Russian folklore, civic patriotism and satirical orientation. All this takes place in Nedorosl. No one doubts the satirical bias of comedy. Proverbs and sayings that are often found in the text of the comedy make it a truly folk comedy ("Golden caftan, but a leaden head", "Courage of the heart is proved in the hour of battle", "A foolish son is not helped by wealth", "The one who is ranks not for money, and in the nobility not according to ranks "), Pushkin called the" Minor "" the only monument of folk satire. " She is imbued with the spirit of civil patriotism, as her goal is to educate a citizen of her homeland. One of the main virtues of comedy is its language. To create the characters of his heroes, Fonvizin uses speech characteristics. The vocabulary of Skotinin and Mitrofan is significantly limited. Sophia, Pravdin and Starodum speak correctly and very convincingly. Their speech is somewhat schematic and seems to be enclosed in a strict framework.

Fonvizin's negative characters, in my opinion, turned out to be more alive. They speak in a simple, colloquial language, in which sometimes even abusive vocabulary is present. The language of Prostakova does not differ from the language of serfs, in her speech there are many rude words and common expressions. Tsyfirkin in his speech uses expressions that were used in military life, and Vralman speaks broken Russian. In modern society Fonvizin reigned admiration for abroad and contempt for his Russian. The upbringing of the nobles wanted much better. Often the younger generation ended up in the hands of ignorant foreigners who, apart from backward views on science and bad qualities, could not instill anything in their wards. Well, what could the German coachman Vralman Mitrofanushka teach? What knowledge could an over-aged child acquire to become an officer or an official? In "Nedoroslya" Fonvizin expressed his protest against the Skotinins and Prostakovs and showed how it is impossible to educate young people, how spoiled they can grow up in an environment corrupted by the landlord's power, obsequiously worshiping foreign culture. The comedy is instructive in nature, has great educational value. It makes one think about moral ideals, about the attitude towards the family, love for one's fatherland, raises the questions of education, landlord tyranny.

The rich ideological and thematic content of the comedy "The Minor" is embodied in a masterfully developed art form. Fonvizin managed to create a harmonious comedy plan, skillfully interweaving pictures of everyday life with the disclosure of the views of the heroes. With great care and breadth, Fonvizin described not only the main actors, but also minor ones, like Eremeevna, teachers and even Trishka's tailor, revealing in each of them some new side of reality, not repeating anywhere. All the heroes of his comedy are drawn not by an indifferent contemplator of life, but by a citizen writer who clearly shows his attitude towards the people he portrays. He executes some with wrathful indignation and caustic, killing laughter, treats others with cheerful mockery, and draws others with great sympathy. Fonvizin proved to be a deep connoisseur of the human heart, human character. He skillfully reveals the spiritual life of the heroes, their attitude to people, their actions. The same purpose is served in comedy and stage directions, that is, the author's instructions to the actors. For example: "stumbling from timidity", "with annoyance", "frightened, with malice", "delighted", "impatiently", "trembling and threatening", etc. Such remarks were news in Russian dramatic works of the 18th century ...

In the artistic style of comedy, the struggle between classicism and realism is noticeable, that is, the desire for the most truthful depiction of life. The first is clearly on the side of realism.

This is manifested mainly in the depiction of the characters, especially negative ones. They are typical representatives of their class, widely and versatile shown. These are living people, and not the personification of any one quality, which was characteristic of the works of classicism. Even positive images are not devoid of vitality. And Prostakova, Skotinin, especially Mitrofanushka are so vital, typical that their names have become common nouns.

The rules of classicism are violated in the very construction of the comedy. These rules forbade mixing comic and dramatic, funny and sad in the play. In comedy, it was supposed to correct morals with laughter. In "Minor", besides funny (comic) ones, there are also dramatic scenes (the drama of Prostakova at the end of the work). Along with comic pictures, there are scenes that reveal the difficult aspects of serf life. In addition, scenes are introduced in the comedy that are only indirectly related to the main action (for example, the scene with Trishka and a number of others), but the author needed them for a broad and truthful sketch of everyday life pictures.

The language of comedy is so bright and well-marked that some expressions passed from it into life as proverbs: “I don’t want to study - I want to marry”; "Riches cannot help a foolish son", "Here are worthy fruits of evil", etc.

This victory of realism in the most important area - in the depiction of a person - is the most valuable side of Fonvizin - the artist of the word. The truthfulness in the depiction of life is closely connected with the advanced views of Fonvizin, with his struggle against the main evils of his time, so vividly revealed by him in the comedy "The Minor".

The important questions that Fonvizin posed and highlighted in the comedy "The Minor" determined its great social significance, primarily in his contemporary era. From the pages of the comedy, from the stage of the theater, the bold voice of the leading writer sounded, who angrily denounced the ulcers and shortcomings of the life of that time, called for a fight against them. Comedy painted true pictures of life; showed live people, good and bad, urged to imitate the former and fight the latter. She enlightened consciousness, fostered civic feelings, called for action.

The significance of "The Little Man" is also great in the history of the development of Russian drama. It is not for nothing that Pushkin called "The Minor" a "people's comedy". Fonvizin's comedy has remained on the stage of the theater up to the present day. The vitality of the images, the historically correct depiction of people and the life of the 18th century, the natural spoken language, the skillful construction of the plot - all this explains the lively interest that comedy arouses in our days.

Fonvizin's "undersized" is the ancestor of the Russian (in Gorky's words) "accusatory-realistic" comedy, a socio-political comedy. Continuing this line, such wonderful comedies as Woe from Wit by Griboyedov and The Inspector General by Gogol appeared in the 19th century.

37. The problem of education and its artistic expression in the comedy of D.I. Fonvizina "Minor"

In the comedy D.I. Fonvizin's "Minor", of course, comes to the fore the criticism of the ignorant nobility, cruel serf-owners, corrupted by the decree of Catherine II "On the freedom of the nobility" (1765). In connection with this theme, another one is raised in comedy - the problem of education. How to fix the situation so that the younger generation, represented by Mitrofanushka and other ignoramuses, turns into a true support for the state? Fonvizin saw only one way out - in the education of youth in the spirit of enlightenment ideals, in the cultivation of ideas of goodness, honor, and duty in young minds.

Thus, the topic of education becomes one of the leading in comedy. She, in many of its aspects, develops throughout the work. So, first we see scenes of Mitrofanushka's "education". This is what is suggested and demonstrated to the lack of growth by his parents, first of all by his mother - Mrs. Prostakova. She, accustomed to being guided by only one law - her desire, inhumanly treats serfs, as if they were not people, but soulless objects. Prostakova considers it completely normal to sink to curses and beatings, and for her this is the norm of communication not only with servants, but also with family members, with her husband. Only for her son, whom she adores, does the heroine make an exception.

Prostakova does not understand that, communicating with others in this way, she humiliates herself, first of all, loses her human dignity and respect. Fonvizin shows that the way of life that the Russian provincial nobility led thanks to, among other things, the state policy, is destructive and fundamentally wrong.

The playwright points out that Mitrofanushka adopted from his mother the manner of dealing with people, it is not for nothing that his name is translated as "showing his mother." We see how this hero mocks with his nanny Eremeevna, other serfs, and neglects his parents:

“Mitrofan. And now I walk like crazy. The night all such rubbish climbed into my eyes.

Ms. Prostakova. What rubbish, Mitrofanushka?

Mitrofan. Yes, then you, mother, then father. "

Mitrofan grows up as a spoiled, ignorant, lazy and selfish bump, thinking only about his own amusements. He is not used to working either mentally or, of course, physically.

Out of necessity, the mother hires teachers for Mitrofan - according to the new decree of the empress, the nobles must have an education, otherwise they will not be able to serve. And so, reluctantly, the young hero is engaged in "sciences". It is important that he does not even have a thought about the benefits of his own enlightenment. He is looking for only one benefit in education, which is given to this hero with great difficulty.

Yes, and a teacher of an ignoramus to match him. Seminarist Kuteikin, retired sergeant Tsyfirkin, teacher Vralman - all of them have nothing to do with real knowledge. These pseudo-teachers give Mitrofan miserable fragmentary knowledge, but he is not able to remember even those. Fonvizin paints comical pictures of young Prostakov's education, but behind this laugh lies the playwright's bitter indignation - such ignoramuses will determine the future of Russia!

In contrast to such upbringing, Fonvizin presents his ideal of upbringing. We find his main postulates in the speeches of Starodum, who in many respects is the reason for the author himself. Starodum shares his experience, views on life with his niece Sophia - and this is presented in the play as another way of education: the transfer of vital wisdom from the older generation to the younger.

From the conversation of these heroes, we learn that Sophia wants to earn "a good opinion of herself from worthy people." She wants to live in such a way that, whenever possible, she will never offend anyone. Starodum, knowing this, instructs the girl on the "true path." His life "laws" relate to the state, social activities of the nobleman: "the degrees of nobility" are calculated according to the number of deeds that the great master did for the fatherland "; “Not the rich man who counts out money in order to hide it in the chest, but the one who counts out the excess in order to help the one who does not have what is needed”; "An honest person must be a completely honest person."

In addition, Starodum gives advice on "matters of the heart", the family life of a well-behaved person: to have "a friendship for her husband that would resemble love." It will be much stronger "," it is necessary, my friend, that your husband obey reason, and you obey your husband. " And, finally, as a final chord, - the most important instruction: “… there is more happiness than all this. This is to feel worthy of all the benefits that you can enjoy. "

I think that Starodum's instructions laid down on fertile ground. They will undoubtedly give positive results - Sophia and Milon will be guided by them and bring up their children according to them.

Thus, the problem of education is central in Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor". Here the playwright raises the question of the future of Russia, in connection with it the problem of education arises. The real state of affairs in this area does not suit the writer, he believes that the nobility is degrading, turning into an ignorant crowd of brutes and simpletons. This is largely due to the connivance of Catherine II.

Fonvizin believes that only education in the spirit of enlightenment ideas can save the situation. The carriers of these ideas in comedy are Starodum, Sophia, Milon, Pravdin.

The undergrowth is rightly considered the pinnacle of D.I.Fonvizin's creativity. This play is the first socio-political comedy on the Russian stage. The main conflict in it is the clash between the advanced nobles and the conservative part of the noble class on the question of the extermination of slavery and savage serfdom. But at the same time, a number of other acts are revealed in the comedy -
There is, without distracting from her only some of her poetic moments; took it with all the cold, with all its prose and vulgarity ... Belinsky notes. Onegin is a poetically true picture of Russian society in a certain era.
Onegin can be called an encyclopedia of Russian life and in the highest degree folk work- Belinsky asserts. He points to nationality as a characteristic feature of this novel, believing that there are more nationalities in Eugene Onegin than in any other Russian folk composition. If not everyone recognizes it as a national one, it is because a strange opinion has long been rooted in our country that a Russian in a tailcoat or a Russian in a corset are no longer Russians and that the Russian spirit makes itself felt only where there is a zipun, bast shoes, sivukha and sour cabbage. The secret of the nationality of each nation lies not in its clothes and cuisine, but in its, so to speak, manner of understanding things.
According to Belinsky, in the person of Onegin, Lensky and Tatiana, Pushkin portrayed Russian society in one of the phases of its formation and development. The critic gave a description of the images of the novel. Describing Onegin, he notes: Most of the public completely denied Onegin's soul and heart, saw him as a cold, dry and selfish person by nature. It is impossible to understand a person more mistakenly and crookedly! Secular life did not kill feelings in Onegin, but only chilled them to fruitless passions and petty amusements ... Onegin did not like to blur in dreams, felt more than he spoke, and did not open up to everyone. An embittered mind is also a sign of a higher nature…. Onegin does not pretend to be a genius, does not climb into great people, but inactivity and vulgarity of life strangle him. Onegin is a suffering egoist ... He can be called an unwilling egoist, Belinsky believes, in his egoism one should see what the ancients called fatum. This explains the understanding of Onegin as the character of the unfinished, whose fate is tragic due to this unfinished. Belinsky does not agree with those critics who considered Onegin a parody, finding in him a typical phenomenon of Russian life.
Belinsky seems to be quite simple and clear about the character of Lensky, typical of the era of ideal existence, divorced from reality. This was, in his opinion, a completely new phenomenon. Lensky was romantic both by nature and by the spirit of the times. But at the same time, his dear heart was an ignoramus, always talking about life, he never knew it. Reality had no effect on him: his sorrows were the creation of his fantasy, writes Belinsky. Lensky fell in love with Olga and adorned her with virtues and perfections, attributed to her feelings and thoughts that she did not have and which she did not care about. Olga was as charming as all young ladies before they became mistresses; and Lensky saw in her a fairy, a selphide, a romantic dream, not in the least suspecting the future lady, the critic writes.
People like Lensky, for all their indisputable merits, are not good in that they are either reborn into perfect philistines, or, if they retain their original type forever, become these outdated mystics and dreamers who are as unpleasant as the old ideal maidens, and who are more enemies of any progress than people simply, without pretensions, vulgar ... In a word, these are now the most unbearable empty and vulgar people, Belinsky concludes his reflections on the character of Lensky.
Tatiana, according to Belinsky, is an exceptional being, a deep nature, loving, passionate. Love for her could be either the greatest bliss, or the greatest disaster in life, without any conciliatory middle. With the happiness of reciprocity, the love of such a woman is an even, bright flame; otherwise, a stubborn flame, which will, perhaps, will not allow to break through, but which is the more destructive and burning, the more it is squeezed inside. A happy wife, Tatiana calmly, but nevertheless passionately and deeply would love her husband, would completely sacrifice herself to children, but not out of reason, but again out of passion, and in this sacrifice, in the strict fulfillment of her duties, she would find her greatest pleasure, your supreme bliss. This marvelous combination of coarse, vulgar prejudices with a passion for French books and with respect to the deep creation of Martin Zadeka is possible only in a Russian woman. Tatiana's entire inner world consisted of a thirst for love, nothing else spoke to her soul, her mind was asleep ..., the critic wrote. According to Belinsky, the real Onegin did not exist for Tatiana. She could neither understand nor know him, because she understood and knew herself just as little. There are creatures whose fantasy has much more influence on the heart ... Tatiana was one of such creatures, the critic says.
Belinsky gives a splendid socio-psychological study of the position of a Russian woman. He sends hard-hitting remarks; copying is prohibited to Tatyana, who has not surrendered, but given, but puts the blame for this not on Tatyana, but on society. It was this society that re-created her, subordinated her whole and pure nature to the calculations of prudent morality. Nothing is more subordinate to the severity of external conditions than the heart, and nothing requires an unconditional will more than the heart. This contradiction is the tragedy of the fate of Tatyana, who ultimately submitted to these external conditions.
In the above-mentioned critical articles, Belinsky took into account and at the same time resolutely rejected all those petty and flat interpretations of Pushkin's novel, which criticism has sinned from the moment its first chapter appeared until the publication of Belinsky's articles. The analysis of these articles allows us to understand the true meaning and value of the immortal, truly national work.

(No ratings yet)

Other compositions:

In one of his letters, N. V. Gogol, commenting on the play "The Inspector General", which was ambiguously accepted in Russian society after its appearance in print and on the theater stage, wrote: "In" The Inspector General "I decided to collect everything bad and Read More ......
DI Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" is sustained within the framework of classicism. The purpose of comedy in classicism is to make people laugh, to “rule the temper with mockery,” that is, to educate individual members of the nobility with laughter. The question of what a true nobleman should be like and whether Russian nobles answer their Read More ......
The novel "Eugene Onegin" is the most significant work of A. Pushkin in terms of volume, coverage of life events, diversity of themes and ideas. He extremely zealously defended his work from the attacks of critics, impatiently awaited the release of each next chapter of the novel, painfully Read More ...
Foolishness, insidiousness, anger, crime are not at all funny in themselves; ridiculously stupid cunning, caught in its own nets, ridiculous evil stupidity, deceiving itself and not causing anyone the intended harm. V. Klyuchevsky In the history of drama "The Minor" is the first Russian comedy Read More ......
Literary activity Fonvizina began as a student. Already in his first works, a penchant for political satire was manifested. The author was widely known for the comedy "The Minor" (1782), in which he ridiculed the backwardness and lack of culture of the local nobility. The word "Minor" is derived from the word Read More ......
In the comedy "Minor" Fonvizin depicts the vices of contemporary society. His heroes are representatives of different social strata: statesmen, nobles, servants, self-appointed teachers. This is the first socio-political comedy in the history of Russian drama. The central heroine of the play is Mrs. Prostakova. She runs the farm, pounds Read More ......
The plot of Fonvizin's play is built around the events taking place in the village where the whole Prostakov-Skotinin family lives in anticipation of the wedding agreement between Taras Skotinin and a distant relative of the Prostakovs - Sophia. A story familiar to Fonvizin's contemporaries from the “middle”, “bourgeois” genre of literature, which brought its characters closer to Read More ......
All this would be funny, When it was not so sad. M. Yu. Lermontov The last four decades of the 18th century. are distinguished by the true flourishing of Russian drama. But classic comedy and tragedy by no means exhaust its genre composition. Works begin to penetrate into the drama, Read More ......

Ideological and artistic originality of the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin "The Minor"

Some literary critics believed that the goodies of "The Minor" were too ideal, that in fact there were no such people and they were simply invented by the author. However, documents and letters from the 18th century confirm the existence of real prototypes of the heroes of the Fonvizin comedy. And about negative characters, such as the Prostakovs and Skotinins, we can say with confidence that, despite their unconditional generalization, they were often found among the Russian provincial nobility of that time. There are two conflicts in the work. The main one is love, since it is he who develops the action of the comedy. Sophia, Mitrofanushka, Milon and Skotinin participate in it. The heroes have different attitudes to the issues of love, family, marriage. Starodum wants to see Sophia married to a worthy man, wishes her mutual love. Prostakova wants to marry Mitrofan profitably, to get Sofya's money. Mitrofan's motto: "I don't want to study, I want to get married." This phrase from the comedy "Minor" has become a winged one. Overgrown people who do not want to do anything, do not want to study and dream only of pleasure are called Mitrof-1 nushki.

The rich ideological and thematic content of the comedy "The Minor" is embodied in a masterfully developed art form. Fonvizin managed to create a harmonious comedy plan, skillfully interweaving pictures of everyday life with the disclosure of the views of the heroes. With great care and breadth, Fonvizin described not only the main characters, but also minor ones, like Eremeevna, teachers and even Trishka's tailor, revealing in each of them some new side of reality, without repeating anywhere. All the heroes of his comedy are drawn not by an indifferent contemplator of life, but by a citizen writer who clearly shows his attitude towards the people he portrays. He executes some with wrathful indignation and caustic, killing laughter, treats others with cheerful mockery, and draws others with great sympathy. Fonvizin proved to be a deep connoisseur of the human heart, human character. He skillfully reveals the spiritual life of the heroes, their attitude to people, their actions. The same purpose is served in comedy and stage directions, that is, the author's instructions to the actors. For example: "stumbling from timidity", "with annoyance", "frightened, with malice", "delighted", "impatiently", "trembling and threatening", etc. Such remarks were news in Russian dramatic works of the 18th century ...

In the artistic style of comedy, the struggle between classicism and realism is noticeable, that is, the desire for the most truthful depiction of life. The first is clearly on the side of realism.

37. The problem of education and its artistic expression in the comedy of D.I. Fonvizina "Minor"

“Mitrofan. And now I walk like crazy. The night all such rubbish climbed into my eyes.

Ms. Prostakova. What rubbish, Mitrofanushka?

Mitrofan. Yes, then you, mother, then father. "

Mitrofan grows up as a spoiled, ignorant, lazy and selfish bump, thinking only about his own amusements. He is not used to working either mentally or, of course, physically.

I think that Starodum's instructions laid down on fertile ground. They will undoubtedly give positive results - Sophia and Milon will be guided by them and bring up their children according to them.

Fonvizin believes that only education in the spirit of enlightenment ideas can save the situation. The carriers of these ideas in comedy are Starodum, Sophia, Milon, Pravdin.

The poster itself explains the characters.
P. A. Vyazemsky about the comedy "Minor"

A truly public comedy.
N. V. Gogop about the comedy "Minor"

The first appearance of the comedy "The Minor" on the stage in 1872 caused, according to the recollections of contemporaries, "throwing wallets" - the audience threw wallets filled with gold pieces onto the stage, such was their admiration for what they saw.

Before D.I.Fonvizin, the public almost did not know Russian comedy. In the first public theater, organized by Peter I, plays by Moliere were staged, and the appearance of Russian comedy is associated with the name of A.P. Sumarokov. “The property of comedy is to rule the temper with mockery” - these words of AP Sumarokov Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin embodied in his plays.

What caused such a violent reaction from the viewer? The liveliness of the characters, especially the negative ones, their figurative speech, the author's humor, so close to the folk, the theme of the play is a satire on the principles of life and upbringing of landlord's offspring, denunciation of serfdom.

Fonvizin departs from one of the golden rules of classical comedy: observing the unity of place and time, he omits the unity of action. There is virtually no plot development in the play, it consists of conversations between negative and positive characters. This is the influence of the contemporary European comedy author, here he goes further than Sumarokov. "The French comedy is absolutely good ... There are great actors in comedy ... when you look at them, you will, of course, forget that they are playing a comedy, but it seems that you are seeing a direct story," Fonvizin writes to his sister, traveling across France. But Fonvizin is by no means an imitator. His plays are filled with a truly Russian spirit, written in a truly Russian language.

It was from the "Minor" that IA Krylov's fable "Trishkin's caftan" grew, it was from the speeches of the characters of the play that the aphorisms "mother's son", "I do not want to study, I want to marry", "being afraid of the abyss of wisdom" ...

The main idea of \u200b\u200bthe play is to show the fruits of a bad upbringing or even its absence, and it grows into a frightening picture of wild landlord malice. Contrasting "malevolent characters" taken from reality, presenting them in a ridiculous way, Fonvizin puts the author's comments into the mouths of positive heroes, unusually virtuous persons. As if not hoping that the reader himself will figure out who is bad and what is bad, the writer assigns the main role to positive heroes.

“Truth - Starodum, Milon, Pravdin, Sophia are not so much living persons as moralistic mannequins; but their real originals were no more vivid than their dramatic photographs ... They were walking, but still lifeless schemes of a new good morality ...

It took time, and intensified experiments, to awaken organic life in these still deadly cultural preparations, ”the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote about the comedy.
The negative characters appear completely alive before the viewer. And this is the main artistic merit of the play, Fonvizin's luck. Like the goodies, the negative ones have speaking names, and the surname "Skotinin" grows into a full-fledged artistic image. In the very first act, Skotinin is naively surprised at his special love for pigs: “I love pigs, sister; and we have such large pigs in the neighborhood that there is not a single one of them, which, standing on its hind legs, would not be taller than each of us with a whole head. " The author's ridicule is all the more powerful because it is put into the mouth of the hero we are laughing at. It turns out that love for pigs is a family trait.

“Simpletons. Strange thing, brother, how relatives can resemble relatives! Our Mitrofanushka is all uncle - and he is just as much a hunter as you are before the pigs. As he was three more years old, it happened, seeing a mumps, tremble with joy. ...

Skotinin. This is truly a curiosity! Well, let, brother, Mitrofan loves pigs so that he is my nephew. There is some similarity: why am I so addicted to pigs?

Prostakov. And here there are some similarities. I think so. "

The author also plays up the same motive in the replicas of other characters. In the fourth act, in response to Skotinin's words that his family is "great and ancient", Pravdin ironically remarks: "That way you will assure us that he is older than Adam." Unsuspecting Skotinin falls into a trap, readily confirming this: “What do you think? At least a little ... ", and Starodum interrupts him:" That is, your ancestor was created even on the sixth day, but a little before Adam. " Starodum directly refers to the Bible - on the sixth day, God created first animals, then man. Comparison of caring for pigs with caring for a wife, sounding from the lips of the same Skotinin, evokes Milon's indignant remark: “What a bestial comparison!” Kuteikin, a cunning clergyman, puts the author's characterization into the mouth of Mitrofanushka himself, forcing him to read the word for hours: "I am cattle, not a man, vilification of men." The representatives of the Skotinin family themselves, with comical innocence, repeat about their "bestial" nature.

“Prostakova. After all, I am after the father of the Skotinins. The dead father married the dead mother; she was nicknamed the Priplodins. They had eighteen of us children ... "Skotinin speaks about his sister in the same terms as about his" cute pigs ":" What a sin to hide, one litter; Yes, see how she squealed ... "Prostakova herself likens her love for her son to the dog's affection for her puppies, and says about herself:" I, brother, I won't bark with you "," Oh, I'm a dog's daughter! What have I done!". The peculiarity of the play "The Minor" is also that each of the characters speaks his own language. This was appreciated at its true worth by Fonvizin's contemporaries: "each one differs in his own character with sayings."

The speech of a retired soldier Tsyfirkin is full of military terms, Kuteikin's speech is built on Church Slavonic phrases, the speech of Vralman, a Russian German, obsequious with the masters and arrogant with the servants, is filled with aptly captured pronunciation features.

The striking typicality of the play's heroes - Prostakov, Mitrofanushka, Skotinin - goes far beyond its limits in time and space. And in A.S. Pushkin in Eugene Onegin, and in M. Yu. Lermontov in the Tambov Treasury, and in M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in The Lords of Tashkent, we find mentions of them living and bearing the essence of serf-owners, so talentedly revealed by Fonvizin.

Outwardly remaining within the bounds of everyday comedy, offering the viewer's attention a number of everyday scenes, Fonvizin in "Nedoroslya" touched upon a new and deep problematic. The task of showing modern "manners" as a result of a certain system of relationships between people determined the artistic success of "The Minor", made it a "popular", according to Pushkin, a comedy.

Touching upon the main and topical issues, "The Minor" really appeared to be a very bright, historically accurate picture of Russian life in the 18th century. and as such he went beyond the ideas of the narrow circle of the Panins. Fonvizin in "Nedorosl" assessed the main phenomena of Russian life from the point of view of their socio-political meaning. But his idea of \u200b\u200bthe political structure of Russia was formed taking into account the main problems of class society, so that comedy can be considered the first picture of social types in Russian literature.

According to the plot and the title, "The Minor" is a play about how badly and incorrectly they taught a young nobleman, raising him to be a direct "ignorant". In fact, we are not talking about learning, but about "education" in the wide sense of the word, usual for Fonvizin. Although Mitrofan is a secondary figure on the stage, the fact that the play was named "The Minor" is not accidental.

Mitrofan Prostakov is the last of the three generations of the Skotinins who pass before the audience directly or in the memories of other characters and demonstrate that during this time nothing has changed in the Prostakovs' world. The history of Mitrofan's upbringing explains where the Skotinins come from and what should be changed so that they do not appear in the future: to abolish slavery and overcome the "bestial" vices of human nature by moral education.

In "Minor" not only the positive characters outlined in the "Brigadier" are developed, but also a deeper image of social evil is given. As before, the focus of Fonvizin is on the nobility, but not in itself, but in close ties with the serf class, which it rules, and the supreme power representing the country as a whole. The events in the Prostakovs' house, quite colorful in themselves, are ideologically an illustration of more serious conflicts.

From the first scene of the comedy, trying on a caftan sewn by Trishka, Fonvizin depicts the very kingdom where “people are the property of people”, where “a person of one state can be both a plaintiff and a judge over a person of another state,” as he wrote in “Reasoning”. Prostakova is the sovereign mistress of her estate.

Whether her slaves Trishka, Eremeevna or the girl Palashka are right or guilty, it depends only on her arbitrariness, and she says about herself that “she doesn’t lay her hands on it: now she scolds, then she fights, so the house holds on.” However, calling Prostakova a “pretentious fury,” Fonvizin does not at all want to emphasize that the tyrant landowner depicted by him is an exception to the general rule.

His idea was to, as M. Gorky exactly noted, "to show the nobility degenerated and corrupted precisely by the slavery of the peasantry." Skotinin, the brother of Prostakova, who is also an ordinary landowner, also has “any fault to blame,” and pigs in his villages live much better than people. "Isn't a noble free to beat a servant when he wants?" (he supports his sister when she justifies her atrocities with reference to the Decree on the freedom of the nobility.

Accustomed to impunity, Prostakova extends her power from the serfs to her husband, Sophia, Skotinin - to everyone from whom she hopes will not meet with resistance. But, by autocratic disposition in her own estate, she herself gradually turned into a slave, devoid of self-esteem, ready to grovel before the strongest, became a typical representative of the world of lawlessness and arbitrariness.

The idea of \u200b\u200bthe "animal" lowland of this world is carried out in "Nedorosl" as consistently as in "Brigadier": both Skotinins and Prostakovs are "of the same litter". Prostakov is just one example of how despotism destroys a person in a person and destroys people's social ties.

Talking about his life in the capital, Starodum paints the same world of selfishness and slavery, people “without a soul”. In essence, Starodum-Fonvizin argues, drawing a parallel between the small landowner Prostakova and the noble nobles of the state, "if an ignoramus without a soul is a beast, then the" most enlightened clever "without her is nothing more than a" pitiful creature. " The courtiers, to the same extent as Prostakov, have no idea of \u200b\u200bduty and honor, they subservience to the nobles and push around the weak, thirst for wealth and rise at the expense of the rival.

Starodum's aphoristic invectives offended the entire nobility. A legend has survived that some landowner filed a complaint against Fonvizin for Starodum's remark “an expert in interpreting decrees”, feeling personally offended. As for his monologues, no matter how close they were, the most topical of them were removed at the request of censorship from the stage text of the play. Fonvizin's satire in Nedorosl addressed Catherine's specific policies.

Central in this respect is the first scene of the 5th act of the "Minor", where, in a conversation between Starodum and Pravdin, Fonvizin sets out the main thoughts of the Discourse about the example that the sovereign should set for his subjects and the need for strong laws in the state.

Starodum formulates them as follows: “A sovereign worthy of the throne seeks to uplift the souls of his subjects ... Where he knows what his true glory is ..., there everyone will soon feel that everyone must seek his own happiness and benefits in the one thing that is legal, and that it is lawless to oppress your own kind with slavery. "

In Fonvizin's pictures of the abuses of serf-owners, in the story of Mitrofan's upbringing as a slave Eremeevna depicted by him, so that “two slaves come out instead of one slave”, in reviews of the favorites who stand at the helm of the power, where honest people have no place, there was an accusation against the ruling empress herself. In a play composed for a public theater, the writer could not express himself as accurately and definitely as he did in the Discourse on Indispensable State Laws intended for a narrow circle of like-minded people. But the reader and the viewer understood the inevitable reticence. According to Fonvizin himself, it was the role of Starodum that ensured the success of the comedy; performance of this role by IA Dmitrevsky, the audience "applauded by throwing wallets" on the stage.

The role of Starodum was important for Fonvizin in another respect. In the scenes with Sophia, Pravdin, Milon, he consistently expounds the views of an "honest man" on family morality, on the duty of a nobleman engaged in civilian government and military service.

The emergence of such a detailed program testified that in the work of Fonvizin, Russian educational thought moved from criticizing the dark sides of reality to looking for practical ways to change the autocratic system.

From a historical point of view, Fonvizin's hopes for a monarchy limited by law, for the effective force of upbringing, "decent for every state of the people," were a typical educational utopia. But on the difficult path of liberation thought, Fonvizin, in his search, became the direct predecessor of Radishchev's republican ideas.

In terms of genre, "The Minor" is a comedy. The play contains many truly comic and partly farcical scenes reminiscent of the Brigadier. However, Fonvizin's laughter in The Nedoroslya acquires a gloomy and tragic character, and farcical brawls, when Prostakova, Mitrofan and Skotinin participate in them, are no longer perceived as traditional funny sideshows.

Turning to not funny problems in comedy, Fonvizin did not so much strive to invent new stage techniques as he reinterpreted the old ones. The techniques of bourgeois drama were interpreted in The Nedoroslya in a completely original way in connection with the Russian dramatic tradition. For example, the function of the resonator of classical drama has changed radically.

In "Nedorosly" Starodum plays a similar role, expressing the author's point of view; this person is not so much an actor as a speaker. A similar figure of a wise old nobleman was encountered in translated Western drama. But his actions and reasoning were limited to the area of \u200b\u200bmoral, most often family problems. Starodum Fonvizin acts as a political speaker, and his moralizations are a form of presenting a political program.

In this sense, he rather resembles the heroes of the Russian tyrannical tragedy. It is possible that the latent influence of the high "drama of ideas" on Fonvizin, the translator of Voltaire's "Alzira", was stronger than it might seem at first glance.

Fonvizin was the creator of public comedy in Russia. His socio-political concept determined the most characteristic and general feature of his drama - a purely educational opposition of the world of evil to the world of reason, and, thus, the generally accepted content of everyday satirical comedy received a philosophical interpretation. Bearing in mind this feature of Fonvizin's plays, Gogol wrote about how the playwright deliberately neglects the content of an intrigue, "seeing through it another, higher content."

For the first time in Russian drama, the love affair of a comedy was completely relegated to the background and acquired an auxiliary meaning.

At the same time, despite the desire for broad, symbolic forms of generalization, Fonvizin managed to achieve a high individualization of his characters. Contemporaries were struck by the convincing credibility of the heroes of the "Brigadier". Recalling the first readings of the comedy, Fonvizin reported on the direct impression it made on N. Panin. “I see,” he said to me, ”writes Fonvizin,“ that you know our manners very well, for the Brigadier is your kin to everyone; no one can say that either a grandmother, or an aunt, or some kind of cousin does not have such Akulina Timofeevna. "

And then Panin admired the art with which the role was written, so that "You see and hear the foreman." The method by which such an effect was achieved is revealed in several remarks by the playwright himself and in the responses of his contemporaries about the vitality of the characters in The Brigadier and The Minor.

The practical method of Fonvizin's comedy work was to rely on a vital original, a vivid prototype. By his own admission, as a young man, he knew the Brigadier, who served as the prototype of the heroine of the play, and made great fun of the innocence of this narrow-minded woman. In connection with the "Brigadier", a legend has been preserved that a well-known president of the collegium served as a model for the Counselor, some of Eremeevna's remarks were overheard by Fonvizin on the Moscow streets.

The image of Starodum was compared with P. Panin, Neplyuev, N. Novikov and others, and several prototypes of Mitrofan were named. It is also known that the actors played some roles, deliberately imitating the mannerisms of their contemporaries well known to the audience on stage.

By itself, the empiricism that Fonvizin resorted to is not an artistic system. But a characteristic detail, a colorful face, a funny phrase, copied from life, can become a vivid means of individualization and detailing of an image or scene. This technique was widespread mainly in the satirical genres of the 1760s.

For example, Fonvizin's poetic messages written at this time, as we know, play on the character traits of quite real persons - his own servants, a certain poet Yamshchikov. On the other hand, in his drama, Fonvizin clearly defines the class and cultural affiliation of the characters and reproduces their real class relationships.

In his original comedies, the servant never acts as a conventional literary confidant. Most often, individualizing traits are manifested not in stage behavior, but in the language characteristic beloved by Fonvizin. Fonvizin's negative characters usually speak professional and secular jargon or rude vernacular. Positive heroes expressing the author's ideas are contrasted with negative ones with a completely literary manner of speech.

Such a technique of linguistic characterization, with the linguistic flair characteristic of Fonvizin the playwright, turned out to be very effective. This can be seen from the example of the Mitrofan exam scene, borrowed from Voltaire, but irreversibly Russified in the processing.

In satirical orientation, Fonvizin's images have much in common with social masks-portraits of satirical journalism. Their fates were similar in the subsequent literary tradition. If the type of Fonvizin comedy as a whole was not repeated by anyone, then the hero-types received a long independent life.

In the late 18th - early 19th centuries. from the Fonvizin images, new plays are composed, in the form of reminiscences they fall into a variety of works, up to Eugene Onegin or Shchedrin's satire. The long stage history of comedies, which remained in the repertoire until the 1830s, turned Fonvizin's heroes into common noun symbols.

Fonvizin's heroes are static. They leave the stage the same as they appeared. The collision between them does not change their characters. However, in the living publicistic fabric of their works, their actions acquired a polysemy that is not characteristic of the drama of classicism.

Already in the image of the Brigadier there are features that could not only make the viewer laugh, but also arouse his sympathy. The foreman is stupid, greedy, evil. But suddenly she turns into an unhappy woman who, with tears, tells the story of Captain Gvozdilova, so similar to her own fate. Even stronger is a similar stage technique - an assessment of the character from different points of view - is carried out in the denouement of "The Minor".

The atrocities of the Prostakovs are punished. An order comes from the authorities to take the estate under the tutelage of the government. However, Fonvizin fills the external rather traditional denouement - vice is punished, virtue triumphs - with a deep inner content.

The appearance of Pravdin with a decree in his hands resolves the conflict only formally. The viewer knew well that the Peter's decree on guardianship over tyrant landlords was not applied in practice. In addition, he saw that Skotinin, a worthy brother of Prostakova in oppressing the peasants, remained completely unpunished.

He is just frightened by the thunderstorm that has broken out over the house of the Prostakovs and safely goes to his village. Fonvizin left the viewer in the clear confidence that the Skotinins would only become more careful.

The "Minor" is concluded with the well-known words of Starodum: "Here is evil worthy fruits!" This remark refers not so much to Prostakova's abandonment of the landlord's power, but to the fact that everyone, even her beloved son, is leaving her, deprived of power. The drama of Prostakova is the final illustration of the fate of every person in the world of lawlessness: if you are not a tyrant, you will be a victim.

On the other hand, with the last scene Fonvizin also emphasized the moral collision of the play. A vicious person prepares himself an inevitable punishment by his actions.

History of Russian Literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983

The role of Fonvizin as an artist-playwright and author of satirical essays in the development of Russian literature is enormous, just as the fruitful influence he exerted on many Russian writers, not only in the 18th century, but also in the first half of XIX centuries. Not only the political progressiveness of Fonvizin's work, but also his artistic progressiveness determined that deep respect and interest in him, which Pushkin quite clearly showed.

Elements of realism emerged in Russian literature of the 1770s and 1790s simultaneously in different areas and in different ways. This was the main tendency in the development of the Russian aesthetic worldview of that time, which prepared - at the first stage - the future Pushkin stage for it. But Fonvizin did more in this direction than others, if not to talk about Radishchev, who came after him and not without dependence on his creative discoveries, because it was Fonvizin who first raised the question of realism as a principle, as a system of understanding a person and society.

On the other hand, realistic moments in Fonvizin's work were most often limited to his satirical assignment. It was precisely the negative phenomena of reality that he was able to understand in a realistic sense, and this narrowed not only the scope of the themes he embodied in the new manner he discovered, but also narrowed the very principledness of his formulation of the question. In this respect, Fonvizin is included in the tradition of the “satirical trend,” as Belinsky called him, which is a characteristic phenomenon of Russian literature of the 18th century. This trend is peculiar and almost earlier than it could be in the West, it prepared the formation of the style of critical realism. By itself, it grew in the depths of Russian classicism; it was associated with the specific forms that classicism acquired in Russia; it eventually exploded the principles of classicism, but its origin from it is obvious.

Fonvizin grew up as a writer in the literary environment of Russian noble classicism of the 1760s, in the school of Sumarokov and Kheraskov. Throughout his life, his artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the influence of this school. The rationalistic understanding of the world, characteristic of classicism, is strongly reflected in the work of Fonvizin. And for him, a person is more often not so much a concrete individual as a unit in social classification, and for him, a political dreamer, the public, the state can completely absorb the personal in the image of a person. The high pathos of social duty, subordinating in the mind of the writer the interests of the “too human” in man, and Fonvizin made him see in his hero a scheme of civic virtues and vices; because he, like other classics, understood the state itself and the very duty to the state not historically, but mechanically, to the extent of the metaphysical limitations of the enlightenment worldview of the 18th century in general. Hence, Fonvizin was characterized by the great advantages of classicism of his century: clarity, clarity of the analysis of man as a general social concept, and the scientific nature of this analysis at the level of scientific achievements of his time, and the social principle of evaluating human actions and moral categories. But Fonvizin was also characterized by the inevitable shortcomings of classicism: the schematism of abstract classifications of people and moral categories, the mechanistic nature of the idea of \u200b\u200ba person as a conglomerate of abstractly conceivable "abilities", the mechanism and abstraction of the very idea of \u200b\u200bthe state as a norm of social existence.

For Fonvizin, many characters are not built according to the law of an individual character, but according to a predetermined and limited scheme of moral and social norms. We see the lawsuit — and only the lawsuit of the Counselor; Galloman Ivanushka - and the entire composition of his role is built on one or two notes; soldier Brigadier, but, apart from the soldier, there is little characteristic features... This is the method of classicism - to show not living people, but individual vices or feelings, to show not everyday life, but a diagram of social relationships. Characters in comedies, in satirical sketches, Fonvizin's sketches are schematized. The very tradition of calling them "meaningful" names grows on the basis of a method that reduces the content of a character's characteristics primarily to the very trait that is enshrined in his name. The bribe-taker Vzyatkin, the fool of the Slabooms, the "khalda" Khaldin, the tomboy Sorvantsov, the truth-lover Pravdin, etc. appear. At the same time, the artist's task is not so much to depict individual people as to depict social relations, and this task could and was carried out by Fonvizin brilliantly. Social relations, understood as applied to the ideal norm of the state, determined the content of a person only by the criteria of this norm. Subjectively, the noble character of the norm of state life, built by the Sumarokov-Panin school, also determined the trait characteristic of Russian classicism: it organically divides all people into nobles and "others." The characteristics of the nobles include signs of their abilities, moral inclinations, feelings, etc., - Pravdin or Skotinin, Milon or Prostakov, Dobrolyubov or Durykin; the same is the differentiation of their characteristics in the text of the corresponding works. On the contrary, the "other", "ignoble" are characterized primarily by their profession, class, place in the system of society - Kuteikin, Tsyfirkin, Tsezurkin, etc. The nobles for this system of thought are still people par excellence; or - with Fonvizin - on the contrary: the best people should be nobles, and the Durykins are nobles only by name; the rest act as carriers of the general features of their social belonging, assessed positively or negatively, depending on the attitude of this social category to the political concept of Fonvizin, or Sumarokov, Kheraskov, etc.

For a classicist writer, the very attitude to tradition, to the settled roles-masks of a literary work, to the familiar and constantly repeating stylistic formulas, representing the settled collective experience of mankind, is typical (the author's anti-individualistic attitude to the creative process is characteristic here). And Fonvizin freely operates with such ready-made formulas and masks given to him by the ready-made tradition. Dobrolyubov in "The Brigadier" repeats Sumarokov's ideal comedies in love, the Clerk's Counselor came to Fonvizin from satirical articles and comedies of the same Sumarokov, just as the Petitemistress-Counselor appeared in plays and articles before the Fonvizin comedy. Fonvizin, within the limits of his classical method, does not seek new individual themes. The world seems to him long ago dismembered, decomposed into typical features, society as a classified "mind" that predetermined assessments and frozen configurations of "abilities" and social masks. The genres themselves have been defended, prescribed by rules and demonstrated by examples. A satirical article, a comedy, a high-style solemn speech of commendation (in Fonvizin's "Word on Paul's Recovery"), etc. - everything is unshakable and does not require the invention of the author, his task in this direction is to inform Russian literature the best achievements of world literature; this task of enriching Russian culture was solved all the more successfully by Fonvizin because he understood and felt the specific features of Russian culture itself, which in his own way refracted what came from the West.

Seeing in a person not a person, but a unit of the social or moral scheme of society, Fonvizin in his classical manner is antipsychological in an individual sense. He writes an obituary-biography of his teacher and friend Nikita Panin; this article contains a hot political thought, a rise in political pathos; there is in it the track record of the hero, there is also a civil glorification of him; but there is no person, personality, environment in it, after all, a biography. This is a "life", a scheme of an ideal life, not of a saint, of course, but of a politician, as Fonvizin understood him. Fonvizin's antipsychological manner is even more noticeable in his memoirs. They are called "Sincere confession in my deeds and thoughts", but there is almost no disclosure of inner life in these memoirs. Meanwhile, Fonvizin himself puts his memoirs in connection with Rousseau's Confession, although he characteristically opposes his idea to the latter's. In his memoirs, Fonvizin is a brilliant everyday writer and satirist, above all; the individualistic auto-disclosure, brilliantly permitted by Rousseau's book, is alien to him. Memoirs in his hands turn into a series of moralizing sketches such as satirical letters-articles of journalism of the 1760s-1780s. At the same time, they give a picture of social life in its negative manifestations, exceptional in terms of the richness of witty details, and this is their great merit. The people of Fonvizin the classic are static. Brigadier, Counselor, Ivanushka, Ulita (in the early "Minor"), etc. - they are all given from the very beginning and do not develop in the process of movement of the work. In the first act of The Brigadier, in the exposition, the heroes themselves directly and unambiguously define all the features of their character schemes, and in the future we see only comic combinations and collisions of the same features, and these collisions are not reflected in the internal structure of each role. Then the verbal definition of masks is characteristic of Fonvizin. The soldier's speech of the Brigadier, the clerk's speech - the Adviser, the pettymetric speech - Ivanushki, in essence, exhausts the description. Minus speech characteristics no other individual human traits remain. And they all joke: fools and smart, evil and kind joke, because the heroes of The Brigadier are still heroes of a classic comedy, and everything in it should be funny and “intricate”, and Boileau himself demanded from the author of the comedy “to words were everywhere abundant with witticisms "(" Poetic Art "). It was a strong, powerful system of artistic thinking, which gave a significant aesthetic effect in its specific forms and was superbly realized not only in the Brigadier, but also in Fonvizin's satirical articles.

Fonvizin remains a classic in a genre that flourished in a different, pre-romantic literary and ideological environment, in fictional memoirs. He adheres to the outer canons of classicism in his comedies. They mostly follow the school rules. Fonvizin is most often alien to the plot side of the work.

In Fonvizin, in a number of works: in the early "Minor", in "The Choice of the Governor" and in "Brigadier", in the story "Calisthenes" the plot is just a frame, more or less conventional. The Brigadier, for example, is constructed as a series of comic scenes, and above all a series of declarations of love: Ivanushka and the Counselor, the Counselor and the Brigadier, the Brigadier and the Counselor, and all these couples are opposed not so much in the movement of the plot as in the plane of schematic contrast. a pair of exemplary lovers: Dobrolyubov and Sophia. There is almost no action in comedy; "Brigadier" is very similar in the sense of construction Sumarokov farces with a gallery of comic characters.

However, even the most convinced, most zealous classicist in Russian noble literature, Sumarokov, found it difficult, perhaps even impossible, not to see and depict specific features of reality at all, to remain only in the world created by reason and the laws of abstract art. To leave this world was obliged, first of all, to be dissatisfied with the real, real world. For the Russian noble classicist, the concrete individual reality of social reality, so different from the ideal norm, is evil; it invades, as a deviation from this norm, into the world of the rationalist ideal; it cannot be framed in reasonable, abstract forms. But it does exist - both Sumarokov and Fonvizin know this. Society lives an abnormal, "unreasonable" life. We have to reckon with this and fight. Positive phenomena in public life for both Sumarokov and Fonvizin are normal and reasonable. Negative ones fall out of the scheme and appear in all their painful individuality for the classicist. Hence, in satirical genres, even Sumarokov in Russian classicism gives birth to the desire to show concretely real features of reality. Thus, in Russian classicism, the reality of a concrete fact of life arose as a satirical theme, with a sign of a definite, condemning author's attitude.

Fonvizin's position on this issue is more complicated. The intensity of the political struggle pushed him to more radical steps in relation to the perception and portrayal of reality, hostile to him, surrounding him from all sides, threatening his entire worldview. The struggle activated his vital vigilance. He raises the question of the social activity of the citizen-writer, of the impact on life, more acute than noble writers before him could have done. “At the court of the king, whose autocracy is not limited by anything ... can the truth be freely expressed? "- writes Fonvizin in the story" Calisthenes ". And now the task before him is to explain the truth. A new ideal of a fighter-writer arises, very reminiscent of the ideal of the leading literary and journalist of the Western educational movement. Fonvizin is drawing closer to the bourgeois-progressive thought of the West on the basis of his liberalism, rejection of tyranny and slavery, and the struggle for his social ideal.

Why is there almost no culture of eloquence in Russia? Fonvizin raises the question in The Friend of Honest People and answers that this does not come from “a lack of national talent, which is capable of everything great, lower from the lack of the Russian language, which wealth and beauty are convenient for everyone expression ”, but from the lack of freedom, lack of public life, the prohibition of citizens to participate in the political life of the country. Art and political activity are closely related to each other. For Fonvizin, the writer is a "guardian of the common good", "a useful adviser to the sovereign, and sometimes a savior of his fellow citizens and fatherland."

In the early 1760s, in his youth, Fonvizin was carried away by the ideas of the bourgeois-radical thinkers of France. In 1764 he remade Gresse's Sydney into Russian, not quite a comedy, but not a tragedy either, a play similar in type to the psychological dramas of 18th century bourgeois literature. in France. In 1769, an English story, Sydney and Scilly, or Benefit and Gratitude, was published, translated by Fonvizin from Arno. It is a sentimental work, virtuous, sublime, but built on new principles of individual analysis. Fonvizin seeks rapprochement with bourgeois French literature. The fight against reaction pushes him on the path of interest in advanced Western thought. And in his literary work, Fonvizin could not only be a follower of classicism.

DI Fonvizin's immortal comedy "The Minor" was and remains one of the most topical works of Russian classics. The breadth of the writer's views, his deep convictions about the benefits of education and enlightenment, were reflected in the creation of this brilliant work. We suggest that you familiarize yourself with a brief analysis of the work according to the plan. This material can be used to work in a literature lesson in grade 8, to prepare for the exam.

Brief analysis

Year of writing - 1782

History of creation - The idea of \u200b\u200ba comedy arose from the writer after returning from abroad, under the influence of the educational views of a foreign country.

Theme- The main theme of the "Minor" is enlightenment and education, upbringing of a new generation in the spirit of new trends of the times and political transformations.

Composition - the comedy is built according to all the rules of the genre, three components are observed in it - the unity of action, place and time. Consists of five actions.

Genre - The play is a comedy, a vivid and lively story that does not contain tragic episodes.

History of creation

The analysis of the work in The Minor assumes the disclosure of the theme, the main idea of \u200b\u200bthe comedy, its essence and idea.

First, let's define the meaning of the name. In the eighteenth century, the word "undergrowth" meant a person without a certificate of education. Such a person was not hired and not allowed to marry.

Fonvizin lived in France for more than a year, deeply delving into its educational doctrines. He was occupied with all spheres of the country's social life, he delved into philosophy and jurisprudence. The writer paid much attention to theatrical performances, in particular, comedies.

When the writer returned to Russia, he had an idea for the comedy "The Minor", where the heroes will receive speaking surnamesto express the meaning of the comedy more deeply. The work on the history of creation took the writer almost three years, began in 1778, and the final year of writing was 1782.

Theme

Initially the main theme of the comedy the topic of upbringing and education of a new generation was supposed, later socio-political problems were included in the problematics of the "Ignorant", which directly related to the decree of Peter the Great on the prohibition of service and marriage of noblemen - ignoramuses.

The Prostakov family, which has an undergrowth Mitrofanushka, has deep noble roots. In the first place among such Prostakovs is pride in their noble class, and they do not accept anything new and progressive. They do not need education at all, since serfdom has not yet been abolished, and there is someone to work for them. Above all, for the Prostakovs, material well-being, greed and greed turns a blind eye to the education of a son, power and wealth are more important.

The family is the example on which the personality grows and is brought up. Mitrofanushka fully reflects the behavior and lifestyle of her despotic mother, but Mrs. Prostakova does not understand that it is she who is an example for her son, and wonders why he does not show her due respect.

Revealing comedy problems, family conflict Prostakovs, we come to the conclusion that everything depends on the upbringing of a person. The attitude of a person to the surrounding strangers, his decency and honesty depends only on a decent upbringing in a family. What the writer's comedy teaches is education, respect for one's neighbor, good breeding and prudence.

Composition

The skillfully executed features of the composition allow you to get acquainted with the main characters at the very beginning of the play. Already at the end of the first act, the plot begins. Right there in the comedy, Pravdin and Sophia appear. There is intrigue in the comedy - Sophia's rich dowry, which they learn about from Starodum's story, and a fight for her hand flares up.

In the next two acts, the events develop rapidly, tension grows, the peak of which falls on the fourth act, in which the idea of \u200b\u200bkidnapping Sophia and forcefully marrying off a baby comes to Prostakova's head.

Gradually the development of the action begins to decline, and in the fifth act the comedy comes to a denouement. It becomes known about the unsuccessful kidnapping of Sophia. Pravdin accuses the Prostakovs of evil intentions and threatens with punishment.

A paper arrives about the seizure of the Prostakovs' property, Sophia and Milon are going to leave, and Mitrofanushka is forced to join the soldiers.

Using such artistic means as speaking surnames and first names in his comedy, the author gives a moral assessment to the characters, which does not raise any doubts about its fairness. This is the general characteristic of comedy.

main characters

Genre

Fonvizin's play is built according to the laws of classicism. Events take place during the day in one place. The comedic focus of the play is clearly expressed in sharp satire, mercilessly ridiculing the vices of society. The play also contains funny motives, permeated with humor, there are also sad ones, in which the landowner arrogantly mocks her serfs.

The writer was an ardent supporter of enlightenment, he understood that only a comprehensive education and proper upbringing can help a person, grow into a highly moral person, and become a worthy citizen of his homeland. The institution of the family should play a huge role in this, where the foundations of human behavior are laid.

Critics enthusiastically reacted to the comedy "The Minor", calling it the pinnacle of 18th century Russian drama. All critics wrote that Fonvizin, with maximum accuracy and straightforwardness, described the typical images and characteristics of society, which look caricatured and grotesque, but in fact, are simply taken from life and described from nature. And in modern world comedy remains relevant: now in society there is also a large number of "mitrofanushki", for whom the meaning of life lies in material wealth, and education is given a minimum place.

Exam: Russian literature of the 18th century

"The Minor" is the first socio-political comedy on the Russian stage.

The artistic originality of "The Little Growth" is determined by the fact that the play combines features of classicism and realism. Formally, Fonvizin remained within the framework of classicism: the observance of the unity of place, time and action, the conventional division of characters into positive and negative, schematism in the image of positive, "speaking surnames", features of reasoning in the image of Starodum, and so on. But, at the same time, he took a certain step towards realism. This is manifested in the accuracy of the reproduction of the provincial noble type, social relations in the serf village, the fidelity of recreating the typical features of negative characters, the vital reliability of images. For the first time in the history of Russian drama, the love affair was relegated to the background and acquired secondary importance.

Fonvizin's comedy is a new phenomenon, because it is written on the basis of Russian reality. The author has an innovative approach to the problem of the character of the hero, the first of the Russian playwrights sought to psychologize him, to individualize the speech of the characters (here it is worth taking examples from the text!).

“In his work, Fonvizin introduces the biographies of heroes, takes a comprehensive approach to solving the problem of education, designating the trinity of this problem: family, teachers, environment, that is, the problem of education is posed here as a social problem. educational realism.

K. V. Pisarev: "<...> Fonvizin strove for generalization, typification of reality. In the negative images of comedy, he succeeded brilliantly.<...> The positive characters of "The Minor" clearly lack artistic and life-like persuasiveness.<...> The images he created were not clothed with living human flesh and, indeed, are a kind of mouthpiece for the "voice", "concepts" and "way of thinking" of both Fonvizin himself and the best representatives of his time "

Critics doubted Fonvizin's art of constructing dramatic action and spoke about the presence of "extra" scenes in it that did not fit into the action, which must certainly be the same:

P. A. Vyazemsky: "All other [except for Prostakova] persons are secondary; some of them are completely outsiders, others only adjoin the action.<...> Of the forty phenomena, including several rather long ones, hardly a third can be found in the whole drama, and even then short ones that are part of the action itself "

A. N. Veselovsky: "<...> the ineptness of the structure of the play, which has forever remained the weak side of Fonvizin writing, despite the school of European models<...>";" Widespread desire to speak not in images, but in rhetoric<...> generates stagnation, fading, and the viewer then recognizes Milo's view of true fearlessness in war and in peaceful life, then the sovereigns hear the unadorned truth from virtuous people, or Starodum's thoughts about raising women ... "

The word, the initial constructive material of the drama, is emphasized in "The Minor" in twofold functions: in one case, the pictorial, plastic-pictorial function of the word (negative characters), which creates a model of the world of physical flesh, is emphasized, in the other - its intrinsic and independent ideal-conceptual nature (positive characters), for which a human character is needed only as a mediator, translating ethereal thought into the matter of the sounding word. Thus, the specifics of his dramatic word, initially and fundamentally two-valued and ambiguous, is put forward at the center of the aesthetics and poetics of "The Minor".

pun nature of the word

The method of destruction of phraseological units, colliding the traditionally agreed figurative with the direct literal meaning of a word or phrase.

If a homework on the topic of: »Artistic originality of the comedy" The Minor "Specificity artistic method Fonvizin the playwright turned out to be useful to you, then we will be grateful if you post a link to this message on your page in your social network.

Ideological and artistic originality of comedy

D. I. Fonvizina "Minor"

This play is considered the pinnacle of Fonvizin's creativity, and this is a fair decision. She is the first comedy on the Russian stage, revealing in all its glory the socio-political problems of the nobility. The main conflict in the comedy is the clash of the conservative part of the "noble nobles", who decided to exterminate the savage slavery, against the advanced nobles who have serfs.

But, at the same time, the comedy ridicules a number of other problems that were relevant at that time. For example, the most striking is education. Critics noted that in this part Fonvizin revealed his talent, vigilance and skill, which made the work an "incomparable mirror" reflecting all the "evil" of the nobility! But the author not only wanted to show each of the vices by exposing them in all their "glory", he tried to abolish slavery. DI Fonvizin wrote: "It is illegal to oppress your own kind with slavery." True, it was not about the complete abolition of serfdom, the author skillfully showed himself in the play as a politician. Deeply and vividly, he portrayed every vice, every flaw in society, which gave the comedy a certain anti-serfdom orientation. Fonvizin's innovation was reflected not only in this, but also in the form of content and expression.

Trying to expand the boundaries of the chosen direction, Fonvizin tried to preserve the main feature of classicism in comedy. In the backstory of the comedy, the author gave brief description of each character, showing differences in character, as well as an individual trait in the communication of characters with each other. For example, Prostakova - she is both funny and tragic at the same time; ignorant, selfish, ruthless, but at the same time, she loves her son infinitely and tries to do everything possible for him. She is capable of, almost philosophical, peculiar speech. It was she who, responding to Prostakov's words that “no one is free to tyrannize,” answered, seemingly without meaning, but according to V.O. Klyuchevsky, these words contain the meaning of a comedy! Surprised, he says: “I'm not free! The nobleman, when he wants, and the servants are not free to whip; but why have we been given a decree on the freedom of the nobility? " That's right, because in this decree, the nobles saw only what was interesting to them - their rights! Prostakova is able to act intelligently and evaluate her actions, which gives her character assertiveness and purposefulness. Even her recommendations to her son, seemingly so stupid and absurd at first glance, in fact, are quite reasonable. This is what the author shows in the scene with the found money, when Mitrofan found three hundred rubles on the road and did not know how to divide them into three. Prostakova gave the simplest advice to her son: "Take everything for yourself, Mitrofanushka." Although, of course, the solution to the problem was not "in science", but rather it was ... social. Throughout the comedy, Prostakova taught her son about life. The knowledge of the woman herself was not based on goodness and enlightenment, but on power and strength. And as she believed, it was her knowledge that would help her son become a real landowner - strong and powerful. And let the heroine have a kind of logic, namely, using her example, the author introduced into the work features of the conflict of goodness and enlightenment with evil that are new for classicism.

The comedy is about a war of two worldviews, which was typical in Russia in the eighteenth century. That is why every character in a comedy is either one of the vices, or the personification of good and wisdom. For example, Prostakova is a "despicable fury", and her husband is a "dishonest fool." That is why, and the surname of each hero is speaking, and this is a favorite technique of every classic! If the hero is negative, then the surname is the same - Skotinin, Vralman, which is opposed by positive heroes - Starodum, Pravdin, Tsyfirkin ... By all the rules of classicism, the comedy has an appropriate ending: the unity of time and place.

True, the comedy also touches upon other problems, which, nevertheless, closely intersect with the main one: motive, upbringing ... These themes are touched upon in their work and other classics, including A.S. Griboyedov, A.N. Ostrovsky, Gogol N. V. Each of them divided the characters into "friends" and "aliens" and helped "friends".

In a new light, it allows you to see each problem, the theme of love. The comedy features two groups of characters, and both have completely opposite views on the problems presented in the work. In the sphere of education and humanism, Pravdin and Sophia were brought up. Starodum said in a comedy: “My father brought me up in the way of that time, but I did not find the need to re-educate myself. He served Peter the Great. " This phrase makes it clear to the reader why Uncle Sophia has such a desire for knowledge, as well as a desire to preserve honor, peace of mind, honesty, freedom of judgment and independence. He was able to achieve prosperity "without exchanging them for conscience, without vile service, without robbing the fatherland: Pravdin hopes to" put boundaries to the spite of his wife and the stupidity of her husband. " But these heroes are directly opposed by "malevolent" nobles, and this is Skotinin and Prostakova with their son Mitrofan and spouse.

Unlike Sophia, Mitrofan brings up in a different way. He openly shows his teachers how he disdainfully treats sciences, knowledge, and only because he is lazy and does not want to see the benefits that this knowledge can give him in the future. Although Prostakova, his mother, is not a very stupid woman, his son is capable of revelations and irony. Suffice it to recall how he talks about his dream: "all night such rubbish climbed", and then gives the following clarification: "Now you, mother, then father", then begins to feel sorry for mother, who was exhausted in beating his father. Although ... this is just a dream of Mitrofanushka.

The work is entirely sustained in the style of classicism, but the author added individuality, which manifests itself in the language. For example, Prostakova, her manner of speech is slightly changed, the heroine herself is able to change her manner, depending on the situation. The speech of her "secularity" is not devoid of speech, because when meeting noble guests she says: "I recommend you a dear guest", "you are welcome", but when ordering something to her servants, the lady makes speeches familiar to her: "nasty mug", "dog daughter "," kanalyi "... And in a completely different way, Prostakova talks with her beloved son:" Live forever, learn forever, my heart! "," ... don't be stubborn, darling. " Also, in her speeches, like those of most provincial nobles, there are elements of vernacular and folk wisdom. She loves to insert into the conversation a saying, a proverb: "Where is anger, toughness and mercy", "Happiness is written to him" and so on.

The goodies mostly use complex expressions. Pravdin says - with clericalism, Sophia and Milon use turns of sentimentalism, for example: "It touches my heart", "The secret of my heart" and so on. But Starodum “speaks” in the author’s style, there are often aphorisms: “In vain to call a doctor to the sick is incurable”, “insolence in a woman is a sign of vicious behavior”.