For 25 fools, one is smart. Was A. S. Griboyedov right when he said that in his comedy “25 fools per sane person”? Expanded essay plan
Was A.S. Griboyedov right when he said that in his comedy “25 fools per sane person”?
A.S. Pushkin in a letter to A. Bestuzhev wrote about Chatsky: “Everything that he says is very clever. But to whom does he say all this? Famusov? Puffer? At the ball for Moscow grandmothers? Molchalin? It's unforgivable. The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at a glance who you are dealing with, and not to cast pearls in front of the Repetilovs and the like. Is A.S. Pushkin right?
Who is Chatsky: winner or loser? Prove your point.
Why did A.S. Griboedov replace the original title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” with “Woe from Wit”? What is the difference? Did it affect the main idea of the work?
Why did A.S. Griboyedov change the name of the comedy?
At the time of A.S. Griboyedov, the concept of "mind" included a broad content: in addition to the usual "education", "understanding", "wit" - "freedom", "freethinking", "freethinking", "devotion to advanced ideas" (which, by the way, , was fully reflected in the comedy) ... On the other hand, the name "Woe to the mind" meant the unconditional victory of the opponents of Chatsky and his like-minded people, i.e. famusovyh, pufferfish, silent, etc. Chatsky's lot was grief from the mind, but not his defeat, because he is the winner: he abandoned Sophia as soon as he realized who she was with; did not bow his head in front of the Famus society, remained himself in the fight against the "gone century"
Generalizing repetition
A.I. Herzen considered: “If the literature is somehow reflected, weakly, but with related features, the type of Decembrist is in Chatsky.
In his embittered, bilious thought, in his youthful indignation, one can hear a healthy impulse to the cause, he feels that he is dissatisfied, he beats his head against the stone wall of social prejudices ... He had that restless restlessness that cannot endure dissonance with others and must either break him, or break. »
- Comment on the statement.
Is A. Blok right when he asserted that “Woe from Wit” is “a work, unsurpassed, the only one in Russian literature that has not been completely unraveled”?
Why did the author define the genre of his work as a comedy?
The language of comedy
A.S. Pushkin - A.A. Bestuzhev: "I'm not talking about poetry, half - should be included in the proverb."
What feature of the language of A.S. Griboyedov’s comedy was noted by A.A. Pushkin? Prove him right.
What linguistic features of comedy did you note?
Finish the aphorism
Bypass us more than all sorrows ...
Sin is not a problem...
And yet, he will reach certain degrees ...
Wanted to travel around the world...
Would love to serve...
He fell hurt...
Fresh legend...
The houses are new...
Yes, in order to get ranks ...
Ah, evil tongues...
Ranks are given by people ...
In my summers must not dare
Essay theme- that's what the essay is about.
Essay idea is his main idea.
Topic scope- this is the circle of facts, objects or phenomena that it covers.
Topic content- this is a set of the most significant features characteristic of all the facts that make up the volume of this topic.
Spelling Mistakes Prevention
Literary dictation
Chatsky, Famusov, Skalozub, Famus society, Famus Moscow, socio-political conflict, love conflict, moral principles, ideals of a secular society, confrontation, struggle of the “current century” with the “past” century, clash of views, beliefs, declaring insane, hatred of enlightenment, free from prejudice.
Control error prevention
Thirst(what?) struggle, consciousness(what?) debt, hint(on whom?) on Chatsky, hope(for what?) for success, thought(about whom?) about Famusov, opinion(about what?) about the views, vocation(to what?) to activity, love(to whom?) to Sophia, Vera(in what?) in success, confidence(in what?) in success.
Remember!
play the role
matter
Attend
How to write an essay on a literary topic
Read the topic carefully.
Highlight the keywords in it.
Comment on them.
Formulate the topic in the form of a problematic question.
Define the main idea.
Choose an epigraph that reflects the main idea of the essay.
Make an essay plan.
Pick up quotes that will help prove your point of view, illustrate what is written.
Write a draft essay.
Edit what you have written and correct the mistakes.
Rewrite the work in a clean copy.
Essay topics
Chatsky and Molchalin.
Who is Chatsky: winner or loser?
Why are Molchalins dangerous?
Life ideals of the Famus society.
Modern sounding of A.S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”.
Chatsky and Molchalin
What is special about this essay topic?
What role does the union "and" play here: connection or opposition?
How can the topic be formulated as a problematic issue?
How do you define an essay idea?
Determine the scope of the topic and its content.
Expanded essay plan
I. Introduction. Characteristics of the historical era reflected in comedy (beginning of the 19th century): a). the birth of progressive Decembrist ideas; b). the brewing of a struggle in society between irreconcilable conservatives and progressive-minded people; in). Chatsky and Molchalin as representatives of different social camps.
II. Main part.
Chatsky and Molchalin are people of opposite life positions:
1. Common features: a). young, have certain views on life; b). educated, smart; in). Belonging to the Famusov society (Chatsky is a nobleman, was brought up in Famusov's house; Molchalin is a secretary, lives in Famusov's house)
Expanded essay plan
2. Differences: a). position in society (Chatsky - a nobleman, distinguished by independence of views; Molchalin - "rootless", subordinates his judgments to what is accepted in society); b). the purpose of life (Chatsky - serving the Motherland; Molchalin - "to reach the known degrees"); in). achievement of the goal (Chatsky - the desire to serve honestly; Molchalin - to achieve everything with flattery, servility, sycophancy); G). life position (Chatsky - hope for himself, his abilities and knowledge; Molchalin - counting on the support and patronage of the "powerful ones"); e). relationship with others (Chatsky - nobility and decency; Molchalin - the ability to meanness and betrayal); e) attitude towards Sophia (Chatsky - sincerity, Molchalin - a game of love "by position");
III. Conclusion.
The creation of typical characters by A.S. Griboyedov: Chatsky is a type of wrestler, Molchalin is a type of flatterer, an obliging fellow. AS Griboyedov, having portrayed the types of Chatsky and Molchalin, invited his contemporaries and descendants to make their moral choice.
g). personal qualities (Chatsky - emotional, open, therefore not protected; Molchalin - secretive, prudent to the smallest detail, adheres to "moderation" in everything); h). attitude in society (Chatsky - a sharp rejection of the existing order, which gives rise to a complete misunderstanding of others, aggressiveness on their part and rejection; Molchalin is an indispensable representative of the Famus society).
Homework:
Write a draft essay on one of the given topics.
Used materials:
-
“In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person,” wrote A.S. Griboyedov Katenina. In this statement of the author, the main problem of "Woe from Wit" is clearly indicated - the problem of mind and stupidity. It is also placed in the title of the play, which should also be paid close attention. This problem is much deeper than it might seem at first glance, and therefore it requires a detailed analysis.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" was cutting edge for its time. It was accusatory, like all classic comedies. But the problems of the work "Woe from Wit", the problems of the noble society of that time are presented in a wider range. This became possible due to the use of several artistic methods by the author: classicism, realism and romanticism.
It is known that initially Griboyedov called his work "Woe to the Wit", but soon changed this title to "Woe from Wit". Why did this change take place? The fact is that the first name contained a moralizing note, emphasizing that in the noble society of the 19th century, every intelligent person would endure persecution. This did not quite correspond to the artistic intent of the playwright. Griboyedov wanted to show that an extraordinary mind, progressive ideas of a particular person may be out of time and harm their owner. The second name was able to fully implement this task.
The main conflict of the play is the confrontation between the "current century" and the "past century", old and new. In the disputes between Chatsky and representatives of the old Moscow nobility, a system of views of one and the other side on education, culture, in particular on the problem of language (a mixture of “French and Nizhny Novgorod”), family values, questions of honor and conscience emerges. It turns out that Famusov, as a representative of the "past century", believes that the most valuable thing in a person is his money and position in society. Most of all, he admires the ability to "serve" for the sake of acquiring material benefits or respect for the world. A lot has been done by Famusov and people like him to create a good reputation among the nobles. Therefore, Famusov is only concerned about what will be said about him in the world.
Such is Molchalin, even though he is a representative of the younger generation. He blindly follows the outdated ideals of the feudal landlords. Having an opinion and defending it is an unaffordable luxury. After all, you can lose respect in society. “You shouldn’t dare to have your own judgment in mine,” is the life credo of this hero. He is a worthy student of Famusov. And with his daughter Sophia, he plays a love game only to curry favor with the girl's influential father.
Absolutely all the heroes of Woe from Wit, with the exception of Chatsky, have the same ailments: dependence on the opinions of others, passion for ranks and money. And these ideals are alien and disgusting to the protagonist of the comedy. He prefers to serve "the cause, not the persons." When Chatsky appears in Famusov's house and begins to angrily denounce the foundations of the noble society with his speeches, the Famusov society declares the accuser crazy, thereby disarming him. Chatsky expresses progressive ideas, pointing out to aristocrats the need to change their views. They see in the words of Chatsky a threat to their comfortable existence, their habits. A hero called insane ceases to be dangerous. Fortunately, he is alone, and therefore simply expelled from society, where he is not pleasing. It turns out that Chatsky, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, throws the seeds of reason into the soil, which is not ready to accept and nurture them. The mind of the hero, his thoughts and moral principles turn against him.
Here the question arises: did Chatsky lose in the fight for justice? It can be assumed that this is a lost battle, but not a lost war. Very soon, the ideas of Chatsky will be supported by the progressive youth of that time, and "the meanest traits of the past life" will be overthrown.
Reading Famusov's monologues, watching the intrigues carefully weaved by Molchalin, one cannot at all say that these heroes are stupid. But their mind is qualitatively different from the mind of Chatsky. Representatives of the Famus society are accustomed to dodge, adapt, curry favor. This is a practical, worldly mind. And Chatsky has a completely new mindset, forcing him to defend his ideals, sacrifice his personal well-being, and certainly not allowing him to gain any benefit through useful connections, as the nobles of that time used to do.
Among the criticism that fell upon the comedy "Woe from Wit" after it was written, there were opinions that Chatsky could not be called an intelligent person either. For example, Katenin believed that Chatsky "talks a lot, scolds everything and preaches inappropriately." Pushkin, after reading the list of the play brought to him at Mikhailovskoye, spoke of the main character as follows: “The first sign of an intelligent person is to know at first glance who you are dealing with and not to throw pearls in front of the Repetilovs ...”
Indeed, Chatsky is presented as very quick-tempered and somewhat tactless. He appears in a society where he was not invited, and begins to denounce and teach everyone, not embarrassed in expressions. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that “his speech boils with wit,” as I.A. wrote. Goncharov.
Such a variety of opinions, up to the presence of diametrically opposed ones, is explained by the complexity and diversity of the problems of Griboedov's Woe from Wit. It should also be noted that Chatsky is a spokesman for the ideas of the Decembrists, he is a true citizen of his country, opposing serfdom, cringing, the dominance of everything foreign. It is known that the Decembrists were faced with the task of expressing their ideas directly, wherever they were. Therefore, Chatsky acts in accordance with the principles of the advanced man of his time.
It turns out that there are no outright fools in comedy. It's just that two opposing sides are fighting for their understanding of the mind. However, the mind can be opposed not only to stupidity. The opposite of mind can be madness. Why does society declare Chatsky crazy?
The assessment of critics and readers can be anything, but the author himself shares the position of Chatsky. This is important to consider when trying to understand the artistic intent of the play. Chatsky's worldview is the views of Griboedov himself. Therefore, a society that rejects the ideas of enlightenment, individual freedom, service to the cause, and not subservience, is a society of fools. Being afraid of a smart person, calling him crazy, the nobility characterizes itself, demonstrating its fear of the new.
The problem of the mind, brought out by Griboedov in the title of the play, is the key one. All clashes that take place between the obsolete foundations of life and the progressive ideas of Chatsky should be considered from the point of view of opposing intelligence and stupidity, intelligence and madness.
Thus, Chatsky is not at all insane, and the society in which he finds himself is not so stupid. It's just that the time of people like Chatsky, spokesmen for new views on life, has not yet come. They are in the minority, so they are forced to suffer defeat.
Artwork test
Everyone who has read the work of A.S. Griboyedov should understand it and conduct a little analysis, because few people are able to answer the question unambiguously ...
What is stupidity? Stupidity is an act, and an act is born from a goal, and in the work of A.S. Griboyedov. Each hero is driven by his own goal, his own dream, and everyone has his own purpose, but these “25 fools” must be united by something, but they are united by their love for money, the desire for rank and mutual responsibility. And how can I call these people stupid? No, they are corrupt, careerists, greedy people to the point of horror, but they are not stupid.
It is possible that they do not have a soul and there, in the soul, they are completely empty and uneducated than, like the main character - Chatsky, who is smart and constantly "hungry for knowledge." All of them, although they did not build this terrible system, where everything rests on assent and money, but they settled down perfectly there, and that means something.
The author's position is clear. The author believes that a person should be guided by intangible benefits, and he should not strive for rank or honor, as only the only character in the poetic comedy, Chatsky, did. He went against this society and that is why he became the first "superfluous person" in Russian literature. The author points out that everyone around him is stupid. I fully agree with the author’s position that true goals should not be material, but exactly “25 fools” don’t think so, Famusov says: “God bless you and the rank of general”, each of the characters is so crazy about money and ranks that perhaps they can be called fools, but stupidity is a multifaceted word. I'm not afraid to call Chatsky stupid, he could have guessed that it was completely pointless to retrain the Famus society. He only throws pearls in front of the pigs, but still tries, Chatsky says: “I would be glad to serve, it’s sickening to serve.” It can be called naive or stupid, there are no more facets. Emotions, goals, dreams, money, love… everything is mixed up in this work. Someone is stupid in soul, someone in their head, and someone is simply naive, like Chatsky.
In that little world of Griboyedov. Everyone took up arms against Chatsky and shamed him for not being like everyone else. He does not believe in all these riches and ranks, he believes in love. We are used to judging people by their actions, by the result, although he did not achieve his love - Sophia, he left with dignity, he left with a phrase that future generations will remember, Chatsky exclaimed: “Carriage for me, carriage!”. In conclusion, I would like to say that
Chatsky is the only character who was smart, but as a paradox, he really didn't understand what was going on and how to deal with it all.
A.S. Comedy Test Griboyedov "Woe from Wit"
1.A. S. Griboyedov wrote: “In my comedy, there are 25 fools for one sane person, and this person, of course, is at odds with the society that surrounds him” . Who did the writer mean: a. Skalozuba b) Molchalin c) Chatsky d) Sophia
2. "Signed, so off your shoulders" a). Sofia b). Chatsky c). Molchalin d). Famusov e). Gorich j). Skalozub h). Repetilov
3. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech samples: “... To give ranks - there are many channels ».
a).
4. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech patterns: “What about our old people? Not that novelties were introduced - never, God save us! No. And they will find fault with this, that, and more often nothing, they will argue, make some noise, and ... disperse.
a).
5. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech samples: “He didn’t utter a smart word.”
a). Sofia b). Chatsky c). Molchalin d). Famusov e).Gorich g).Skalozub h).Repetilov
6. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech patterns: “Tell me to the fire: I’ll go as if for dinner” . a). Sofia b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Famusov e) Gorich g) Skalozub h) Repetilov
7. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech samples: “Out of boredom, you will whistle the same ».
a). Sofia b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Famusov e) Gorich g) Skalozub h) Repetilov
8. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech samples: "Yes, a smart person cannot but be a rogue."
a). Sofia b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Famusov e) Gorich g) Skalozub h) Repetilov
9. Each image of a comedy reflects the concrete historical essence of the real social types of its era. Match the actors of the comedy and the speech patterns:"What is my rumor?" a). Sofia b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Famusov e) Gorich g) Skalozub h) Repetilov
10. Aphorism is: a) artistic justification of the actions of the heroes. b). a short saying containing a complete philosophical thought, worldly wisdom or moralizing. c) part of the vocabulary, words and phrases used in the past to refer to any objects, to create historical flavor.
11. Analyzing the speech characteristics of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit", determine which "words and phrases" correspond to the characters of A. S. Griboyedov: servility, prejudice, to a free life, the smoke of the fatherland a).
12. Analyzing the speech characteristics of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit", determine which "words and phrases" correspond to the characters of A. S. Griboyedov: cracked, headlong, faint, gave a blunder, sergeant major, bruised. a).Lisa b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Khlestova e) Skalozub
13. Analyzing the speech characteristics of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit", determine which "words and phrases" correspond to the characters of A. S. Griboyedov: two-s; still-with; sorry, for God's sake; face, angel
14. Analyzing the speech characteristics of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit", determine which "words and phrases" correspond to the characters of A. S. Griboyedov:Passed by, pokudova, they call, repose, I will report to me, sir.
a) Lisa b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Khlestova e) Skalozub
15. Analyzing the speech characteristics of the heroes of the comedy "Woe from Wit", determine which "words and phrases" correspond to the characters of A. S. Griboyedov: trudge, beaten hour, tore by the ears, it's time to go crazy.
a) Lisa b) Chatsky c) Molchalin d) Khlestova e) Skalozub Answers:
1.in; 2.g; 3.d; 4.g; 5.a; 6.b; 7.d; 8.h; 9.a; 10.b; 11.b; 12.d; 13.c; 14.a; 15.g;
The image of Chatsky. Griboyedov wrote: “... in my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person; and this person, of course, is in contradiction with the society surrounding him ... ”In the judgment of the author of the comedy, the word“ of course ”is very important. The conflict is predetermined by the entire course of the historical development of Russian society. The opposing forces have already been identified, their positions are clearly marked. That is why, of course, Chatsky simply cannot, is unable to remain silent, not to come into conflict with the formidable force that opposes him here, in Famusov's house, as, indeed, in any other house where he could get.
Chatsky in Griboedov's comedy is not a reasoner, not a simple spokesman for the author's ideas, but a living personality - a complex, even contradictory one, and at the same time invariably attracts with his liveliness, spontaneity, wit and eloquence. Decembrist ideas are widely and consistently manifested in his brilliant monologues. He is a fiery agitator, seeking to explain his position, to propagate his views. That is why Chatsky never says his monologues "to himself", alone. On the contrary, he constantly strives for communication, but this is exactly what he fails to do. The Famus society does not at all intend to listen to the speeches of its ideological opponent.
Love for the people, respect for their common sense, moral principles determine a lot in Chatsky's worldview. That is why he is so painfully experiencing the separation of not only the Famus society, but also the advanced noble intelligentsia from the people. This detachment manifests itself in language, and even in clothing. Hence Chatsky's dream, "To our smart, cheerful people // Although we were not considered Germans by language." What significant epithets does Chatsky use here: cheerful and - more importantly - smart] Chatsky's words give an additional shade not only to the problems of the comedy, but also to its name. The high appraisal of the people makes Chatsky's Decembrist idea about the need to defend the national independence of Russian culture understandable and justified. Chatsky’s thoughts about the unclean spirit of “empty, slavish, blind imitation” typical of a noble society exactly corresponded to Ryleev’s calls to “destroy the spirit of slavish imitation”, the convictions of Kuchelbeker, with whom Griboyedov became close while working on comedy.
Chatsky, who ardently believes in the possibility of a bright life for a "vigorous and intelligent" people, does not reconcile himself to the existence of serfdom, which insults and humiliates the national pride of a true patriot. Therefore, Chatsky spoke with such indignation about peasants who were exchanged for greyhounds, About serfs sold one by one, that is, in such a way that family relations were broken.
One can guess that Chatsky has already experienced a lot of losses and disappointments in his life: “The uniform ... - now I can’t fall into this childishness ...” He comes to Moscow in the hope that here he will “come to life”, perhaps will find his happiness “There are walls, air, everything is pleasant! They will warm, revive ... ”Nothing like this happens. The romantic faith in love and friendship collapses (the meeting of the hero with Platon Mikhailovich is very important in this respect).
It is essential that the image of Chatsky is given in dynamics. The ideological development of the hero takes place before our very eyes. Like many of his contemporaries (not excluding the Decembrists), even at the beginning of the comedy, he is convinced that the origins of morality lie only in the mind. In his opinion, the true value and significance of a person is determined by his ability to engage in science, the desire for unlimited knowledge. The enlightening philosophy of the hero predetermines not only his strength, but also his weakness. It turns out that the most important criterion of the mind for him can not explain everything in life. So, Sophia, who despises Skalozub because he “didn’t utter a clever word,” is nevertheless in love with Molchalin, attributing non-existent virtues to him. It is quite natural that Chatsky, from the standpoint of his worldview, cannot believe this at all. Indeed, according to all the laws of reason, Sophia should not love Molchalin in any way, but she still loves him. (Here, too, his grief from the mind: Sofya Molchalina invented according to the laws of sentimental literature: a poor, humble young man, endowed with a sensitive soul, Modest and shy ...)
The enlightening principles of Chatsky were no longer able to explain the complexity of reality, the inconsistency of human psychology, the reasons why a fool suddenly turns out to be more cunning than a smart one, etc.
Initially, the comedy was called "Woe to the mind." In such a title one can feel the Enlightenment conviction that the mind in itself is the highest value; his grief could only come from somewhere else. The final version of the title: "Woe from Wit" allows you to feel a new shade in the playwright's plan. The hero himself with anxiety begins to feel not only the most acute conflict with the society around him, but also the contradiction in his own inner world. In himself, "mind and heart are not in harmony."
Chatsky comes to a sober understanding of real life with its complexity, betrayals, even betrayals. He matures, matures, begins to understand people and circumstances more clearly. At the end of the comedy, Chatsky is no longer the same as at the beginning: “So! sobered up incompletely, / Dreaming out of sight, and the veil fell off ... ”He himself speaks of this with all his frankness in the final monologue, calling himself a“ blind man ”... This was the playwright’s intention: to show how things happen the gradual formation of a fighter, parting with youthful good-heartedness and preparing for the harsh trials of life.