Essay by Chatsky and Famusov (comparative characteristics). Griboedov, Woe from Wit
Which depicts the life of the country after Patriotic War 1812. This is life where two camps collide. The first camp is an advanced, Decembrist view, a new look at life and its foundations. The second camp is the nobility, or the past century, they are Famus society. It is precisely about the ideals of Famus society that we will talk about, having examined both their moral and life ideals.
To understand what the ideals are in Famusov’s society, to highlight their ideals and values, it is enough to get acquainted with Griboyedov’s work. In it, the author, depicting the past century, creates images of noble nobles of Moscow who call themselves aces, they are also representatives of Famus society.
Life ideals of Famus society
Who is the person from this circle and what are their life ideals? Here we see only the rich, noble nobles, so to speak, the elite of the capital. They all come from noble families, and the ideals of these people are simple and clear.
For these people, only money is important, with the help of which they can get ranks and orders. These are people who are not famous for their services to the Fatherland, for them civic duty means nothing, the main thing is that the groom has a fatter wallet and then he will be a respected person. Famusov, talking about the ideals of a person, says this: be inferior, but if there are two thousand family souls, he is the groom. So, Skalozub was a good candidate for a groom, because he aims to be a general, and besides, he also has a gold bag. But if there is no money, if a person is poor, then Famus society will treat him with contempt. There is no need to talk about serfs at all, because they are not considered people at all, calling them blockheads and crowbars. Again, for the elite to respect you, you need wealth. For example, Tatyana Yuryevna is respected because she throws rich balls.
Moral ideals of Famus society
If we talk about moral ideals and views in Famusov’s society, then for Famusov his uncle is the ideal, whom he sets as an example to everyone. His uncle served under Catherine, but he received his place at court not with the help of any talents or merits. He simply sacrificed the back of his head, his neck simply bent often in bows. What’s worst is that many representatives of this environment also receive honor and wealth. The same Skolozub is no better. According to his story, in 1813 he simply sat in hiding, and after such an outstanding feat he received a medal, and now he is awaiting the rank of general.
The ideal of Famus society is definitely not enlightenment, because enlightenment and teaching are like a plague for them. People who are engaged in science and creativity are useless people for society. Famusov believes that education only harms, so he would simply burn all the books. And they themselves don’t even read newspapers.
Famus’ circle is also false patriots. They only talk about patriotism, but they themselves do nothing for the country. Although there are ranks, they are not earned in the performance of military or civil duty. Foreign words are constantly heard in their conversation, they listen to French romances, they follow French fashion.
The comedy "Woe from Wit" reflects the brewing split in noble society. The change from one century to another, the end of the War of 1812, required landowners to reassess values and change their outlook on social life. In this regard, nobles appear who want to improve the position of Russia by increasing the value of the human personality and civic consciousness. The struggle between two groups of nobles is designated in the play as a clash of the “present century” with the “past century.” In the comedy "Woe from Wit" Chatsky and Famusov are the main opponents.
The Problem of the Mind in Comedy
A.S. Griboedov wrote about his work: “In my comedy there are 25 fools for one sane person.” By “sensible person” Griboyedov means the main character of the comedy - Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. But in the process of analyzing the work, it becomes clear that Famusov cannot be called a fool. Since Griboedov put his own thoughts and ideals into the image of Chatsky, the author finds himself completely on the side of the protagonist. However, both Chatsky and Famusov have their own truth, which each of the heroes defends. And each of them has their own mind, it’s just that Chatsky’s mind and Famusov’s mind differ in quality.
The mind of a nobleman, adhering to conservative views and ideals, is aimed at protecting his comfort, his warm place from everything new. The new is hostile to the old way of life of the feudal landowners, because it threatens its existence. Famusov adheres to these views.
Chatsky, on the other hand, is the owner of an effective, flexible mind, aimed at building a new world in which the main values will be the honor and dignity of a person, his personality, and not money and position in society.
Values and ideals of Chatsky and Famusov
The views of Chatsky and Famusov differ sharply on all issues related to the nobleman’s way of life. Chatsky is a supporter of education, enlightenment, he himself is “sharp, smart, eloquent,” “writes and translates well.” Famusov and his society, on the contrary, consider excessive “learning” harmful to society and are very afraid of the appearance of people like Chatsky in their midst. The Chatskys threaten Famusov’s Moscow with the loss of its usual comfort and the opportunity to spend life “in feasts and in extravagance.”
The dispute between Chatsky and Famusov also flares up around the attitude of the nobles to the service. Chatsky “does not serve, that is, he does not find any benefit in that.” Main character The comedy explains it this way: “I would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” But conservative noble society is structured in such a way that without “serving” it is impossible to achieve anything. Chatsky wants to serve “the cause, not individuals.”
But Famusov and his supporters have a completely different view on the issue of service.
Famusov’s ideal is his late uncle Maxim Petrovich. He earned the respect of the empress herself because he once behaved like a buffoon at a reception. Having stumbled and fallen, he decided to turn this awkward situation to his advantage: he fell several more times on purpose to make the audience and Empress Catherine laugh. This ability to “curse the favor” brought Maxim Petrovich enormous wealth and weight in society.
Chatsky does not accept such ideals; for him this is humiliation. He calls this time an age of “submission and fear”, clamping human freedom. The hero’s comparison of the “present century” and the “past century” does not turn out to be in favor of the latter, because now “everyone breathes more freely and is in no hurry to fit into the regiment of jesters.”
Family values of Chatsky and Famusov
The clash between Famusov and Chatsky also occurs over the divergence of their views on family values. Famusov believes that when creating a family, the presence of love is not at all important. “Whoever is poor is not a match for you,” he tells his daughter. Both in society and in the family, money is at the forefront. Wealth for Famus society is the same as happiness. Personal qualities do not matter either in the world or in the family: “Be bad, but if there are two thousand family souls, that’s the groom.”
Chatsky is a supporter of living feelings, which is why he is terrible for Famusov’s Moscow. This hero puts love above money, education above position in society. Therefore, the conflict between Chatsky and Famusov flares up.
conclusions
A comparative description of Chatsky and Famusov reveals all the meanness and immorality of Famusov and his supporters. But Chatsky’s time in the society described in the comedy “Woe from Wit” has not yet come. The main character is expelled from this environment, declaring him crazy. Chatsky is forced to retreat due to the numerical superiority of the “past century.” But he leaves Moscow not a loser, but a winner. Secular Moscow was frightened by his speeches. His truth is scary for them, it threatens their personal comfort. His truth will prevail, so the replacement of the old with the new is historically natural.
The clash between Famusov and Chatsky is a dispute between two generations, two different worlds. The arguments and causes of the conflict described in this article can be used by 9th grade students when writing an essay on the topic “Characterization of Chatsky and Famusov in the comedy “Woe from Wit””
Work test
Essay 9th grade. Two systems of life values: monologues of Chatsky and Famusov
The play “Woe from Wit” is built on numerous contrasts: Chatsky with Sophia, Chatsky with Molchalin, Chatsky with Famusov. But the latest confrontation is not just a dispute between two people with different points of view. This is much more, because both heroes are representatives of the new and old world, a progressive society and an inert society.
Chatsky appears in the play as a face already familiar to us. We hear the first review about him from the maid Lisa:
Who is so sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,
Like Alexander Andreich Chatsky.
If this a brief description of and will not arouse absentee sympathy for the hero, it will undoubtedly arouse keen interest in the reader.
What kind of person is this? You don’t have to wait long for an answer: very soon Chatsky appears in person. He is like a fresh wind that burst into a stuffy room, young, energetic, in love. Of course, such a hero is endearing.
On the other hand, Famusov. At first, he makes no impression either repulsive or attractive. Moreover, his remarks are sometimes witty, and slight bewilderment arises: did the author really want to contrast Chatsky’s intelligence with Famusov’s stupidity? But the answer is very simple: it is not stupidity, but inertia, one might even say, ossification of views that is opposed to intelligence. And is it appropriate to use the word “mind” here? Pushkin, for example, generally denied Chatsky this dignity, calling Griboyedov himself the only intelligent character. Chatsky is just as stubborn, or, better yet, stubborn, as Famusov. And not one of them, no matter how much he repeats his point, will not convince the other one iota. The fact is that each of them not only has their own point of view. No. Everyone has their own system of life values, their own scale by which they evaluate people and actions. All this is deeply rooted in both one and the other, and this is perhaps the only thing that unites them.
So, Famusov. A person of considerable age, and therefore having ingrained habits and ideas about what is right and what is wrong. The best way to evaluate Famusov is his own remarks.
Here, for example, is a typical Famus postulate:
But who intends to leave the memory on its own
Living a commendable life, here is an example:
The deceased was a venerable chamberlain
With the key, and he knew how to deliver the key to his son,
He is rich, and he was married to a rich woman, he married children, grandchildren, He died, everyone remembers him sadly. How clearly these lines reveal the hero’s life aspirations! Be able to place children, enter into a successful marriage, increase your fortune. Even brighter is Famusov’s story about a certain Maxim Petrovich, who knew how to bend over backwards in front of his superiors at the right moment, and his obvious admiration for this skill. In response to Famusov’s call to follow the example of the fathers, Chatsky responds with sarcastic and
merciless description
life of the older generation:
Just as he was famous, whose neck often bent,
As not in war, but in peace, they took it head on,
They hit the floor without regret!
From this moment on, a direct and overt clash between the two heroes begins. Famusov is firmly convinced that the foundations by which their society lives are unshakable. After all, he was born, grew up and lived in this prim society, not imagining any other life. And how can he imagine it, if all books are “a whim” for him and he considers it best to burn them. He is not interested in knowing anything that is outside his narrow horizons. This is his fundamental difference from Chatsky: he, on the contrary, strives for knowledge, draws it from everywhere and hates ignorance.
The conflict between the two heroes flares up more and more with each action.
Famusov, as a limited person, in their disputes everything revolves around one topic: position in society, decency, compliance with the moral framework. Everyone repeats the same thing: “honor according to father and son,” “everyone from Moscow has a special imprint.” To which Chatsky, becoming more and more irritated (he is unrestrained, this is his weakness), says about Moscow: “The houses are new, but the prejudices are old.” This, however, can be said not only about a single city, but about the entire country, without fear of making a mistake.
Famusov begins to accuse Chatsky of some non-existent offenses, to which he responds with his famous phrase: “Who are the judges?” Really, who judges Chatsky? Who declares him crazy? Yes, that very society that does not see anything around it, that lives on gossip and gossip, whose horizons are ridiculously narrow. What right do they have to judge a person who is a cut above them, who may not be ideal, but is worthy of all respect? Chatsky’s worldview is the result of traveling, studying, reading books, and communicating. He is free from the framework that fetters a “secular” person. Maybe those around him feel that Chatsky is higher than them and does not want to live according to these stupid canons: “On Tuesday I am called to the trout..., on Thursday I am called to the funeral.” He does not share the views of the people around him, is not a hypocrite and does not try to adapt to them. At any time and in any society, white crows are despised. So Chatsky becomes an outcast. But even leaving Famusov’s house, renowned as a madman, he retains his dignity:
You have glorified me as crazy with the whole choir!
You are right: he will come out of the fire unharmed,
Who will have time to spend a day with you,
Breathe the air alone
And now let’s remember what Famusov says after Chatsky left: Ah! My God! What will Princess Marya Aleksevna say? This is what Famusov is all about. It is important to him what the useless princess will say. He didn’t even understand what a high-flying person he had sheltered in his house and branded him a madman. This is probably why these two antipodes - Chatsky and Famusov - will never come together, because one of them is a personality, and the other is an insignificant person, completely dissolved in the quagmire that surrounds him.
The work of Alexander Sergeevich Griboedov “Woe from Wit” has become immortal, it remains relevant for many years. In it, the author seemed to foresee the circumstances in society after the military campaign of one thousand eight hundred and twelve. There was a division of the upper world into two parts. Each had their own interests, concepts and views on life. Griboedov very clearly and accurately conveyed the confrontation between the two communities in his work. The main characters, who reflect the entire society as a whole, are Chatsky and Famusov.
If we evaluate the situation from all possible angles, then both heroes, Famusov and Chatsky, are to some extent right. Their mind lives and develops, but for each it happens in its own way. Each of them is an individual personality.
Famusov lives only in the past. Everything that does not correspond to his norms and concepts is wild and unusual for him.
Chatsky, on the contrary, lives with thoughts about the future and strives for knowledge and something new. Chatsky competently distributes priorities and gives preference primarily to human qualities; money and position in society are of secondary importance for him.
As we see, the opinions and views of Chatsky and Famusov differ markedly, but still they have a common feature, they are both of noble origin. But here, too, there are contradictions. Chatsky strives for knowledge, he is on the side of enlightenment, while Famusov, on the contrary, denies everything connected with enlightenment and education.
Famusov is afraid that norms that have been established over a long period of time will suddenly fall apart. Chatsky advocates replacing established norms with new ones.
The climax scene of Alexander Griboyedov's work "Woe from Wit" is an argument between the two main characters. The essence of the dispute is that position in society should not in any way influence the character and behavior of a person. Position in society and position will be determined only labor activity person. Therefore, nobles must serve the cause without putting themselves above others. Chatsky puts forward this position; accordingly, Famusov denies it.
We have already seen that the heroes have different views on people and their responsibilities. What are their views and attitudes towards family values?
Famusov believes that feelings in a relationship are an unnecessary and completely unnecessary thing. What is important to him is not the personal qualities of a person, but his position in society and well-being. A rich husband, in abundance with a high rank in society, all this is the key to a happy married life.
Chatsky’s position is very different from Famusov’s position. For him, human feelings and emotions are most important. And a family without love and feelings does not exist. Money is a secondary complementary part of life, but not the main one.
Option 2
One of the most common problems in human society is and will remain generational conflict. This problem will haunt humanity throughout its existence, since it simply cannot be avoided. The point is this, because, just like the old generation, it is impossible to give in to young innovative ideas that seem to destroy the established foundation of conservatory life, so to the younger generation, which strives to fight, does not really want to give in to the old conservative laws, and thus we get a rather confusing closed system of conflicts, from which we have never yet found a way out. An excellent example of describing this problem is Griboedov’s work “Woe from Wit.”
In his work, the author describes this problem in sufficient detail, however, not directly, but through a thin veil of humor and classical literary language. In it the author tells us a story young man- Chatsky, who talks about his innovative thinking to a committed conservative, Famusov, and he, in turn, does not accept his philosophy, and along with him, the people around Famusov do not accept him, since they represent the personification of conservatives and established foundations. Thus, we see a conflict between the societies of Famusov and Chatsky, in which Chatsky represents the new generation, which strives for breakthroughs, and the old generation, Famusov’s.
Chatsky and Famusov, oddly enough, are two completely opposite people, whose views and beliefs are strikingly different. If Chatsky believes that universal enlightenment is necessary, scientific development, and the development of one’s own personality and intelligence in particular, then Famusov, a member of the society of old values and training, believes that everything new, as a rule, brings with it adversity and problems that Famusov at his age does not want to see. Famusov also adheres to this opinion because he is simply afraid of losing, under the rapid pace of the new, what he already has, and what he has been striving for for so long. Chatsky tries to convince him of this, citing all the benefits of the new way of life, but Famusov only ridicules him, thanks to which Chatsky is taken only for a madman, and Chatsky no longer decides to fight the conservative views of these people.
Every person has places that are especially dear to him. Memories of them are not erased throughout life and warm the soul for many years. One of these places, undoubtedly, is the Small Motherland
The main conflict of the comedy - the contradiction between “the present century and the past century” - is reflected in the disputes between representatives of these “centuries” with their different views and opposing beliefs. That is why the main characters, Chatsky and Famusov, discuss at length on the problems of our time, giving arguments, proving that they are right. This allows the reader to delve deeper into the essence of the disagreements that arose between the inert, conservative nobility and the progressive people of the era of the 10-20s of the 19th century.
Alexander Chatsky in the comedy “Woe from Wit” is the image of a man who, in his beliefs and views, is close to the future Decembrists. In accordance with the moral principles of the Decembrists, a person must perceive the problems of society as his own, have an active civic position, which is noted in the behavior of Chatsky, who expresses his opinion, coming into conflict with many representatives of the Moscow nobility.
First of all, Chatsky himself is noticeably different from all the other heroes. This is a very educated person with an analytical mind; he is eloquent, gifted imaginative thinking, which elevates him above the inertia and ignorance of the Moscow nobility. He regrets the loss of Russian national identity and speaks about this in a monologue that begins with the words “There is an insignificant meeting in that room...” (Griboyedov used exactly this form of the word, although now we write “insignificant”). Chatsky reminds us of the need to preserve the Russian language and culture:
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although, based on our language, he didn’t consider us Germans.
The main character’s clash with Moscow society occurs on many issues: this is the attitude to serfdom, to public service, to national science and culture, to education, national traditions and language. For example, Chatsky says that he “would be glad to serve, but being served is sickening.” This means that he will not flatter, please, or humiliate himself for the sake of his career. He would like to serve “the cause, not persons” and does not want to look for entertainment if he is busy with business.
In the camp of his opponents, there are different opinions: Molchalin dreams of “winning awards and having fun,” Skalozub is eager to become a general, and Famusov “what’s the matter, what’s not the matter... is signed, off your shoulders.” An important official talks about his own busyness in the monologue “Petrushka, you’re always wearing new clothes...” when he writes down upcoming tasks in the near future. It lists dinner parties, funerals, christenings, and the most important events for the coming week, but makes no mention of any capital or government tasks.
Famusov and his supporters unite in the fight against Chatsky, since they do not tolerate attacks on the foundations of the autocratic-serf system. They want to maintain the unlimited power of the landowners over the peasants, and Chatsky is outraged that “Nestor of the Noble Scoundrels” sold off the serf child actors in order to partially pay off his debts. Moscow nobles are irritated by the desire for knowledge, education, and the ability to think independently, so they consider people like Chatsky dangerous, and they see books as the main evil: “They would take all the books and burn them!”
Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov - defender of the “past century”, Moscow gentleman, official. He is quite rich and famous, he is the manager of a government agency, and therefore has weight in society. Famusov is an important figure, an authoritative, respectable person, with his own ideology and position in life. He is confident that high status and successful advancement up the career ladder should be achieved by any means: bowing before superiors or government officials, flattering, acting, if necessary, as a jester, as his uncle, Maxim Petrovich, did, who achieved the favor of the queen by simply falling on a slippery slope. parquet Famusov discusses this at length in the second act:
That's it, you are all proud!
Would you ask what the fathers did?
We would learn by looking at our elders:
We, for example, or the deceased uncle...
Famusov’s attitude to service is the same as that of his uncle, that is, a high rank should bring him personal benefit. The position of manager is needed in order to live well yourself and to patronize relatives:
When I have employees, strangers are very rare;
More and more sisters, sisters-in-law, children.
Therefore, awards or monetary rewards will go to them:
How will you begin to introduce yourself to a little cross, to a small town,
Well, how can you not please your loved one!
In conversations with Chatsky, Famusov reveals his principles and judgments about life and people. He, like other Moscow gentlemen, values a person for his wealth, nobility and rank. He would choose his daughter’s groom precisely based on these characteristics: either “a bag of gold and aspires to be a general,” or has “two thousand family members.”
A.S. Griboyedov assigns Famusov a special role in the development of the comedy conflict. This is the “engine” of action in the work, because it constantly “throws wood into the firebox,” causing Chatsky to want to argue, since they have opposite opinions on everything, so the conflict between the “past century” and the “present century” is aggravated. Famusov not only teaches the young, but also judges Chatsky for his “missteps”: for his reluctance to find benefits in the service, for his inability to receive income from peasant farms, for his harmful passion for science (“learning is a plague ...”). And he ranks Chatsky among dangerous people because of his freethinking. In this, the important gentleman is supported by all representatives of secular society who came to visit him.
Famusov is one of those judges mentioned in Chatsky’s monologue “Who are the judges?”, where the hero criticizes not only the ignorance of the majority of the nobility, but also the morals of the landowners and officials. Further, the author of the comedy provided readers with the opportunity to see that Famusov, confident in his own infallibility and strictly condemning Chatsky or other young people, himself violates the laws, like many of his supporters. The system of bureaucratic permissiveness, impunity, mutual responsibility gave Famusov the opportunity to feel like a master in Moscow.
The image of the Moscow gentleman created by Griboyedov allows us to see the typicality of this character for noble society in the author’s contemporary Russia. This is confirmed by Famusov’s instructive monologues, which he pronounces on behalf of all his like-minded people. Famusov is also the antipode of Chatsky and the driving force in the development of the comedy conflict.
Chatsky is a representative of a small group of advanced noble intelligentsia, but his monologues are much more convincing and meaningful. However, Famusov’s guests do not want to listen to the accusatory speeches of this hero, since Chatsky expresses his opinions in front of those people who did not want to think about any reforms. That is why people with progressive views, reflecting on changes in the socio-political life of Russia, united in secret societies, the purpose of which was, for example, the creation of the Constitution, as well as the fight for the abolition of serfdom.
Reviews
Oh, Organ Grinder, thank you very much! Only there are some “great literary critics” here like N.A. who turn green with anger when reading my articles. They, you see, have the right view, but in their opinion, I don’t. However, there are already many opposing opinions from readers, from literature teachers who are ready to offer children my works to help. So let those who need their special ideology rage, but I have allies like you and other thinking people, for whose sake I am writing.
My deep gratitude to you. Today I will read your works.
All the best to you. Sincerely
