Article menu:

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

Plot: a summary of the play "The Minor"

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

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

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

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

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

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

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

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

Negative heroes:

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

Goodies:

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

Minor characters:

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

Mrs. Prostakova

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

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

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

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

Mr. Prostakov

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

Mitrofan

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

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

Skotinin

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

Sophia

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

Starodum

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

Milon

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

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

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

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

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

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

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

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

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

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

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

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

The topic of today's story is the history of the creation and analysis of Fonvizin's "Minor". The work of the author of the Catherine's era has not lost its relevance today. Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" was included in the collection of classical literature. This work touches on a number of problems and issues that have attracted readers at all times.

The analysis of Fonvizin's "Minor" should include a brief description of the heroes of this dramatic work. It is also worth talking about the idea of \u200b\u200ba Russian writer. What inspired Fonvizin to write a comedy that has been popular for over two hundred years? What shortcomings of society did the author first of all want to ridicule in his work? And what was the reaction of contemporaries to this work? The answers to all these questions are contained in the article. But before proceeding with the analysis of Fonvizin's "Minor", one should talk about the main events depicted in the play.

Actions, as in any other dramatic work of the era of classicism, take place within just one day.

Events take place in the village of the landowners Prostakovs. What is the meaning of the name of the comedy "The Minor" by Fonvizin? Even without knowing the meaning of this word, one can guess that it has a negative connotation. The meaning of the name of the comedy "The Minor" by Fonvizin should be sought in the realities of the 18th century. The writer's contemporaries used this term in relation to young noblemen who did not receive a special certificate of education. Such a document was issued by the teacher. If the young man did not have a certificate, he was not accepted into the service and was not allowed to marry.

The son of the protagonist, the landowner Prostakova, is called a minor in the comedy. The work begins with a scene taking place in her house. Prostakova is angry with Trishka, because he sewed an overly wide caftan for her son Mitrofanushka. The fact that the servant does not have the necessary skills in tailoring, and giving him such assignments was initially a mistake, she does not take into account.

The sixteen-year-old boy does not show much zeal in his studies, which is facilitated by the ignorance and stupidity of his mother. We'll tell you more about these characters later. First, the author acquaints readers with Sophia, the positive heroine of the work.

The girl not so long ago lives in the house of Prostakova. She is a relative of the landowner, and she has no fortune. At least that's what Prostakova thinks. But one day Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum. Mrs. Prostakova is not able to read the message, because she is not trained to read and write. Pravdin, having read the letter, gives her a summary. In Fonvizin's The Minor, this hero, along with Starodum, is a supporter of enlightenment.

What is the letter received by Sophia? Starodum writes to his niece that he will bequeath her a huge fortune. This excites almost all the characters in the comedy. Prostakova believed that the girl was an orphan. But an unexpected turn of events suggests that Starodum's niece can be married off to the disorderly Mitrofan.

Skotinin also begins to dream of marrying Sophia. However, Sophia's heart is taken. She is in love with officer Milon, whom she met in Moscow before she was orphaned. Soon she will meet the young man again, and he will save her from the claims of the selfish Skotinin and the despotic Prostakova.

Starodum comes to the small town where the main events take place. He recognizes one of the teachers of Mitrofanushka as his former coachman. The teachers of Prostakova's son deserve special attention.

Kuteikin is an undergraduate seminarian. Tsyfirkin is a retired sergeant. Vralman, whose surname speaks very eloquently about his human qualities, does not teach Mitrofanushka anything, because he himself knows little. As already mentioned, he used to work as a coachman. But he was fired, did not find a suitable job, and therefore went to the teacher. The fact that Vralman is incompetent in teaching is not noticed by Prostakova, since she herself is extremely ignorant.

Writing history

Fonvizin's idea for the comedy "The Minor" appeared in 1778. The Russian writer spent more than a year in France, where he studied law and philosophy. He watched how the European aristocrats lived, and came to a rather disappointing conclusion: the Russian nobility was mired in inertia and ignorance. Upon returning home, Fonvizin began writing the work. It took him over three years.

The idea of \u200b\u200bthe comedy "The Minor" by Fonvizin was very original at that time. The writer sought to ridicule the shortcomings of typical representatives of the landlord class. It is not surprising that both Moscow and St. Petersburg refused to stage his comedy for a long time.

Criticism of contemporaries

The theme of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" seemed interesting to the censors, but there were too many bold remarks in it. In 1782 the premiere of the performance took place. Fonvizin's work was an overwhelming success. True, the theater on the stage of which the play was staged was almost closed. In addition, the comedy displeased Catherine II.

The idea of \u200b\u200bthe work

The spiritual decomposition of representatives of the nobility under serfdom is the main theme of the comedy discussed in this article. According to Fonvizin, pedagogical methods determine the moral character of an entire generation. In the 18th century, landowners often entrusted the upbringing of their children to half-educated clerks, illiterate nannies, foreigners with dubious education. Such "teachers" are capable of teaching only young men like Mitrofanushka - the central character of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor".

The author of this work, using simple examples, showed that the majority of nobles do not remember either honor or dignity. They do not serve the interests of the state, do not comply with moral and state laws. The acuteness of Fonvizin's dramatic work is given by the victory of good over evil, which, however, has a random character. If Starodum had not returned from Siberia on time, and Pravdin had not received an order to take Prostakova's property, everything would have ended not so well for Sophia. She would not have left the city with the young, educated officer Milon, but would have become the wife of a stupid Mitrofanushka.

Characters

The system of images in Fonvizin's Nedorosl is quite simple. Heroes are divided into positive and negative, almost all of them have speaking surnames: Vralman, Starodum, Pravdin. Negative characters are representatives of the old nobility, trying to hold out with all their might for the outdated ideas of the serf system. They are opposed by heroes who support the ideas of the Enlightenment - Pravdin, Sophia, Milon, Starodum.

Good and bad characters

Among the characters in the comedy, several dual pairs can be distinguished. So, Sophia is opposed to Mitrofanushka. Starodum is an adherent of enlightenment views. This is a man of modern times. Therefore, he is the opposite of the landowner Prostakova. Milo is opposed to Skotinin. If the first is educated and brought up and has sincere feelings for Sophia, then the second wants to marry a girl for selfish reasons. Skotinin dreams of acquiring land, where he will be actively engaged in animal husbandry, namely raising pigs.

Mitrofanushka

The analysis of Fonvizin's "Minor" cannot do without describing this striking character. A foolish spoiled youth is absolutely not prepared for an independent life. Everything for him is done by the mother, servants or nannies. From Prostakova, the adolescent takes over an uncontrollable passion for money. He, like his mother, is rude, disrespectful to his family. Mitrofanushka inherited weakness from his father. A sixteen-year-old boy does not want to study, but wants to get married. He is the opposite of Sophia, an educated, serious, intelligent girl with a difficult fate.

Prostakova

When making an analysis of Fonvizin's "Minor", one should pay attention to the negative heroine. Prostakova is an uneducated, stupid woman, but at the same time very cunning. She is a practical housewife, a loving mother. For Prostakova, the carefree future and happiness of Mitrofanushka are above all. But in upbringing, she makes fatal mistakes, because she does not know anything about the correct pedagogical methods. She treats her son the way her parents once treated her. In the management of the household and the upbringing of her son, the landowner uses exhausted values \u200b\u200band ideas.

Starodum

When analyzing Fonvizin's "Minor", special attention should be paid to the hero, symbolizing educational ideas, about which in the 18th century in Russia little was known. Starodum communicates with Sophia in a completely different way from Prostakova with Mitrofanushka. He uses completely different methods of education. Talking with Sophia on an equal footing, he instructs, gives advice based on his rich experience. Knowing nothing about Sophia's feelings for Milo, he does not make decisions for her. Starodum wants his niece to marry an intelligent, educated officer, but does not impose his views on her.

In this image, the author portrayed his ideal of a teacher and parent. Starodum is an authoritative strong personality who has passed a worthy path. For modern readers, this hero, of course, is not an ideal educator. But Fonvizin's contemporaries, inspired by educational ideas, he made a strong impression on.

History of Russian literature of the 18th century Lebedeva O.B.

The problem of genre originality of the comedy "Minor"

At the level of genre formation, the poetics of "The Minor" continues to be paradoxical: the satirical and everyday characters of the comedy appear in a dense halo of tragic associations and genre-forming motives, while the heroes-ideologists, in their aesthetic status ascending to the disembodied voice of high genres of ode and tragedy, completely immersed in the element of comedic structural elements.

Let's start with the fact that everyday characters are archaists, adherents of antiquity and custom, as truly tragic heroes. “Ancient people” (III, 5) are not only the parents of Prostakova and Skotinin, but they themselves, belonging to the “great and ancient” family (IV, 1), whose history dates back to the sixth day of creation. However, long before this circumstance becomes clear, the distant ringing of tragic associations is heard in the very first characterization that Mrs. Prostakova receives from an outsider: “Pravdin. I found a landowner, an innumerable fool, and a wife despised by a fury, whose infernal disposition makes their whole house unhappy (II, 1). " Furies and hell are stable verbal halos of Sumarokov's tragic tyrants, appearing in each of his nine tragic texts (cf., for example, "Dimitri the Pretender": "Evil fury in my confused heart gnaws"; "Go to hell, soul, and awake forever captive! "). As far as unhappiness is concerned, it is this concept that covers the tragic world image, in which a specifically tragic upheaval takes place - a turning point from happiness to unhappiness.

It is this kind of twists and turns that take place in "Minor" along the line of action in the camp of everyday heroes: joyfully preparing for Skotinin's wedding at the beginning of the comedy ("Skotinin. On the day of my conspiracy! I ask you, sister, to postpone punishment until tomorrow for such a holiday" 4), they unanimously fall into longing and grief in the finale. The motive of melancholy, initially arising in connection with everyday images in the pun-substantive sense of the gastric troubles of the overeating Mitrofan ("Eremeevna. Longing until the morning" - dominant action for household characters:

Ms. Prostakova. Enough, brother, about pigs to start. Let's talk better about our grief. (To Pravdin.) ‹…›God told us to take the damsel in our arms. She will deign to receive letters from her uncles (I, 7); Kuteikin. Life is yours, Eremeevna, like pitch darkness. Let's go for a meal, and drink a glass of grief first. Eremeevna (in tears).The hard one won't take me away! (II, 6); Ms. Prostakova. How! We should part with Sofyushka! ‹…› I’ll lag behind from one yearning for bread. (III, 5); Tsyfirkin. Oh, me! Sadness takes. Kuteikin. Oh, woe to me, a sinner! (III, 6); Ms. Prostakova (longing).Oh, grief took! Oh, sad! (V, 4).

This final melancholy of Prostakova, expressed by herself and supported by two remarks ("Seeing Mrs. Prostakova in anguish"- V, 5; "Waking up in despair" -V, yavl. the latter) is further aggravated by typically tragic plasticity: kneeling, stretching out her arms and fainting complete the associative-tragic drawing of her role, emphasize the emotional meaning of the action, coupled with the images of everyday heroes, as tragic.

And such a property of a tragic action as its constant hesitation on the verge of life and death, fraught with death and bloodshed, also finds its adequate expression in the associative-verbal fabric of the "Minor". True, in comedy no one dies physically. But the word itself deathand synonymous words died, disappeared, died, deceasedliterally do not leave the lips of everyday characters who have the exclusive right to this tragic concept and widely use it. Conventional phraseological units, including the word "death" as an expression of the ultimate concentration of quality or emotion, now and then flicker in their speech:

Ms. Prostakova. I have tea, you are pressed to death (I, 1); Skotinin. And not villages, but what is in her villages, and what my mortal hunt is (I, 5); Ms. Prostakova. I am dying, I want to see this venerable old man (II, 5); Prostakov. And I have already lost the fold (III, 5).

The violent physical action in the camp of those exposed constantly puts their lives at risk and puts them on the brink of death, and such a purely tragic motive as suicide is also not very alien to the everyday characters of the comedy:

Skotinin. Mitrofan! You are now by a hair's breadth from death. Eremeevna. Ah, he is leaving him! ‹…› Skotinin. ‹…› So that in my hearts I do not kick the spirit out of you. ‹…› Eremeevna. I'll die on the spot, but I won't give up the child! (II, 4); Mitrofan. No, so I thank you, already one end with me! ‹…› After all, the river is close here. Dive, so remember what your name was. Ms. Prostakova. I killed you! I killed you! ‹…› For you, kill the little boy to death (II, 6).

The original tragic meaning of this theme begins to sound with all its might in the final fifth act, saturated to the limit with the motive of death and death:

Ms. Prostakova. I will order everyone to be beaten to death! (V, 2), I don’t want to be alive! (V, 3), My sin! Don't ruin me! (V, 4); Starodum. I do not want anyone's death. I forgive her (V, 4); Ms. Prostakova. I'm losing everything. I am completely dying! (V, 4), I died completely! The power has been taken from me! ‹…› I have no son! (V, yavl. Last).

So the action of the comedy, for the Prostakov family, characterized by an avalanche-like increase in the motive of death and death, is resolved by a completely tragic ending, at least in purely verbal terms: physically alive, Prostakova insistently repeats her death, which, in this case, perhaps, should be considered spiritual. And is not her soul dead throughout the entire action, did not Mitrofan kill her, resurrected for a second in the finale, plunging her into a swoon with his rude word, tantamount to death?

Finally, such a specific property of a tragic action as its fatal character, the predictability and inevitability of a tragic ending, to the highest degree characterizes the action of the "Minor" in relation to the everyday heroes of comedy. From the very beginning it is known how it will end for them: “Pravdin. I have no doubt that measures will be taken to appease them ”(II, 1); “Pravdin. In the name of the government I order you \u003c…\u003e "(V, 4).

This global repetition in the structure of comedy, in essence, eliminates the need for everything that happens between these phenomena. However, the action takes place, is rapidly moving towards the intended catastrophe, its tragic nature is aggravated by truly tragic manic blindness and the opposite expectations of the Prostakov family, who all the time rely on chance - but this universal assistant of comedy heroes refuses to serve them:

Ms. Prostakova. How happiness is written to anyone, brother (1.6). Perhaps the Lord is merciful, and happiness in his family is written to him (II, 5). Father, after all, the child, perhaps, proclaims his own happiness: maybe God will vouch for him to be really your niece (III, 5).

These unrealizable hopes actualize the purely tragic motive of the prophecy-fate in the categorical apparatus of the "Minor". The fate that overtakes the Prostakov family brings down on them, albeit a well-deserved, but, nevertheless, quite tragic punishment of loss: as P. A. Vyazemsky rightly noted, “in our comedies, the authorities often take the place of fatum in ancient tragedies”. This finale is the loss of what the character possessed at the outset - the classic structure of the relationship between the initial situation and the denouement of tragic texts. All everyday characters of the "Minor" lose something: Mrs. Prostakova - the power and her son, Skotinin - the bride and her villages with pigs, Mitrofan - a carefree life in the parental home ("Pravdin. Go to serve ..." - V, yavl , last thing). Only those who have nothing to lose do not lose anything. Prostakov and Eremeevna remain with theirs, like Starodum without a snuff-box, but for them theirs is a complete and wordless personal slavery, which even a decree on custody cannot cancel. And if we take at face value the harmony that Pravdin, in the name of the government, forcibly implants in the world of the simpleton estate, distorted by madness, then isn't this a tragic outcome too?

As a result, we have to state a fact: that group of characters, which concentrates the quintessence of the comic of "The Minor", in its formal dramatic parameters is comprehensively built with the invariants of the tragic structure, which gives an absolutely incredible genre definition: comedy ... of rock.

Exactly the same picture, but turned by 180 °, we can observe in the opposite world of "Minor". The images of the heroes-ideologists of comedy, created according to the ethical and aesthetic principles of the high genres of ode and tragedy, are deployed in the action of a purely comedic structure.

Despite the fact that Starodum bears the "old" surname, he is a "new man" in comedy, an innovator, as befits a comedy hero. The history of his kind does not go further than the Peter's era - compared to the sixth day of creation, this is quite "new", even if one does not take into account the obvious fact that the era of Peter I is generally recognized as a period of new Russian history. And if Starodum thinks in the old way under Catherine II, this actually means that he thinks in a new way.

The twists and turns that take place for the heroes-ideologists in "The Minor" also has a distinctly comedic character of a turn from misfortune to happiness. In the outset of the comedy, Sophia, who came to the Prostakovs after her mother's death and was separated from Milo, is deeply unhappy, and Milo, who has lost the traces of his beloved and tormented by suspicions that his love is unrequited, appears unhappy on the stage, but the initial misfortune and mutual loss are crowned with complete and perfect happiness of Sophia and Milon in the comedy finale:

Sophia. How many sorrows have I endured since the day of our separation! Shameless my relatives ... Truthful. ‹…› Do not ask that she is so saddened… ”(II, 2); Milon. \u003c…\u003e And, what is even more sad, I did not hear anything about her during all this time. Often, attributing the silence to her coldness, I was tormented by grief. ‹…› I don't know what to do in my woeful situation. (II, 1). Milon (hugging Starodum).My happiness is incomparable! Sophia (kissing the hands of the Starodumovs).Who can be happier than me! (IV.6).

Pravdin, experiencing the "misfortune of the whole house" of the Prostakovs as his own, is happy with the opportunity to "put boundaries to the wickedness of his wife and the stupidity of her husband" (II, 1); Starodum experiences this comedic twists and turns literally in one moment, because his very arrival, which is tantamount to saving Sophia from a forced marriage, is the very point of the comedic twists and turns, which the "last phenomenon" of the comedy summarizes:

Starodum. Nothing tormented my heart more than innocence in the nets of deceit. I have never been so pleased with myself as if it happened to snatch prey from the hands of vice \u003c...\u003e (III, 2); Starodum (to Truth, the insolent hand of Sophia and Milon).Well my friend! We go. Wish us ... Pravdin. All the happiness to which honest hearts have the right (V, yavl. Last).

And even when along this line of action a virtuous character, even if only verbally, is on the brink of death, the motive of life is actualized in his remarks. In the world of heroic ideologists, even war is not so much fraught with death as it serves as a means of establishing life principles. It is no coincidence that the word “death” is fundamentally absent in the lexicon of positive characters, even when it comes to life on the brink of death:

Starodum. At that very time \u003c…\u003e we accidentally heard that war was declared. I rushed to hug him with joy. “Dear Count! Here is a case for us to distinguish ourselves. Let's go straight to the army and make ourselves worthy of the title of a nobleman ”‹… ›(III, 1); Starodum. How! By being in battles and putting his life ... ‹…› Milo. He [the military leader] \u003c…\u003e prefers his glory to life. \u003c…\u003e His fearlessness consists, therefore, not in despising his life. ‹…› It seems to me that the courage of the heart is proved in the hour of battle, and the fearlessness of the soul in all trials, in all positions of life (IV, 6).

And, of course, it is far from accidental that in the reasoning of virtuous characters about risking their lives such a substantial-comedic category emerges, which is the omnipotent engine of this type of action - chance. The research tradition is also inclined to regard the numerous chance encounters of close acquaintances at the Prostakovs 'estate as a flaw in Fonvizin's dramatic technique: “Milon unexpectedly meets his beloved girl in the Prostakovs' house, Pravdin - Milon, Starodum finds in him the nephew of his friend, Count Chestan, even Vralman turns out to be an acquaintance Starodum, who had a coachman. " In these numerous accidents of comedy, many literary scholars see an excess of the measure of dramatic convention, an artificial concentration of events and coincidences within the stage time.

But if we treat randomness as a genre-forming category, then it becomes obvious that such a concentration of chance coincidences in "The Nedorosl" is far from accidental: it is a genre dominant, an aesthetic characteristic of the world of ideological heroes. Just as the tragic word “death” does not leave the lips of the everyday characters of “The Minor,” the comedic word “chance” is firmly established in the circle of concepts of the ideological heroes: the omnipotent comedy case rules the life of abstract rhetorical characters, whose artistic genesis goes back to high genres and odo -tragedy type of imagery:

Milon. How glad I am, dear friend, that I accidentally saw you! Tell me, by what occasion ... (II, 1); Milon. Dear Sophia! Tell me, how do I find you here? (II, 2); Starodum. \u003c…\u003e We heard by chance that war was declared. ‹…› My dear Count! Here is a case for us to distinguish ourselves. ‹…› Many cases have I distinguished myself. ‹…› Then a blind chance led me in a direction that never even occurred to me when I was born. ‹…› I saw a lot of people here, to whom neither ancestors nor descendants came in all cases of their life. (III, 1); Starodum. It happened to be often irritated \u003c…\u003e (III, 2); Pravdin. I will find an opportunity to introduce you after (III, 5); Milon. I sincerely confess to you that I have not yet had any chance to show direct fearlessness (IV, 4); Starodum. In the first case, it would have been good for the fact that if it happened to go, you know where you are going (IV, 8); Milon. I think, in this case, your forehead would not be stronger than a scientist (IV, 8).

Backed by the favor of the comedy event, action! The "ignoramus" for virtuous heroes develops according to the typically comedic scheme of acquisition: Starodum, who has acquired material wealth outside the text, finds in action a niece with a "heart of an honest man", Milon and Sophia find each other, Pravdin, as if he had received nothing special, except the ability to curb arbitrariness, in fact, is also gaining, and almost more than others: the loss of illusions about “humane types of higher power” is ultimately also gain, and fundamental for the hero-ideologist, since it occurs in the sphere of the spirit.

However, with this superfavorable outcome of the comedy action; its tragic overtone is not only very perceptible, but is even emphasized by the incredibly high concentration of chances that is needed to keep the logic of events in the sphere of the comedic structure. Chance and only chance, with an invariable regularity, separates the virtuous characters from the truly tragic possible outcome of events for them. And isn't it tragic that ideal virtue, in its quest for a normal, intelligent life, can only rely on luck and outside support? Thus, the second world image of "The Minor", entirely built on the ideological and aesthetic categorical apparatus of high genres, acquires no less paradoxical than the first, genre outlines of a tragedy ... of a case.

So far, we have split the action and the text of the comedy "The Minor" in two. It is time, finally, to remember that this is one action and one text in which, on equal terms, in a constant system of analogies and oppositions, two types of artistic imagery, two world images, two genre attitudes function: the universal double vision of all levels of poetics of the "Minor" finally reaches , until its logical conclusion. Under the pressure of the double word, the double types of artistic imagery, the double world image and the double sphere of genre gravitation of the text "The Minor" to tragedy and comedy, the traditionally single structure of the dramatic work itself doubles, in which, from the Aristotelian-European point of view, there should be one conflict and one action ...

Perhaps, IA Goncharov's assertion that in Griboyedov's Woe from Wit “two comedies seem to be nested one inside the other” can be applied to The Minor with almost great success. This is the fault of the same pun, which initially decisively delimited all the structural elements of comedy. Between characters, whose habitats (house and world) are so different, whose images are formed by such different (thing and concept) categories, and whose levels of mastery of the word (object and figurative meaning) exclude any dialogue, the basis of any dramatic action is impossible no personal conflict that would cover all the characters in the multi-figured composition of the "Minor" in one contradiction. Hence - the natural transition of the conflict into the transpersonal sphere and its fragmentation.

In the conflict of the "Minor" there are constant "deceitful movements" and substitutions. Like any dramatic text, Fonvizin's comedy should have defined its conflict area from the very beginning. However, the line of political confrontation that is outlined in the first five phenomena (the dispute about the caftan, Mrs. Prostakova and Trishka, the serf woman and the serf) does not find development in the action of the comedy. The conflict, therefore, moves to the level of everyday moral description (the struggle between Mitrofan and Skotinin for the right to appropriate Sophia's money - I, 4; II, 3). The appearance on the stage of Pravdiv and Starodum, immediately marked by a dialogue about the incurable disease of the Russian government (III, 1), transfers it into the ideological sphere.

Of these three possibilities for the realization of the conflict in action, only two are actualized: the political substratum, hinted at by the collision of the landlady of the estate with the serf tailor, remains hidden under the cover of action, because the only plot in which this conflict could unfold - the serf rebellion - was naturally unthinkable on the Russian stage. Consequently, we have to admit that there are two conflicts in the comedy "The Minor": family and household rivalry for the hand of a rich bride, which gives rise to a love intrigue crowned by the engagement of Milo and Sophia, and an ideological conflict of ideal concepts about the nature and nature of power, which categorically do not coincide with her practical everyday content. This conflict produces a moral and ideological confrontation between the real tyrant ruler Mrs. Prostakova and the bearers of the ideal concept of power Starodum and Pravdin, which is crowned with the deprivation of Mrs. Prostakova of her political rights.

Thus, each of the two conflicts unfolds in an independent action, which, of course, is also in Fonvizin's comedy: there are two, and within each camp of characters these actions are distributed according to the law of a curved mirror (or, if you prefer, pun intended) reflection of the same type of dramatic situations. If Mrs. Prostakova exercises tyrannical power in practice (“I swear, then I fight; thus the house holds on to…” - II, 5), then Starodum and Pravdin discuss the problem of power and the conditions for its transformation into tyranny. The feeding of Mitrofan parodically corresponds to the enlightenment of the minds of Pravdin and Sophia, the pseudo-exam of Mitrofan is preceded by Milon's true exam for the right to be called an honest man, the fight between Mitrofan and Skotinin for the right to appropriate Sophia's inheritance accompanies Milo's struggle for happiness with his beloved girl, etc. “Moreover, each of these actions. The Minor ”has a full set of compositional elements of the structure: the initial situation, development, culmination and denouement - and this double set accordingly doubles the compositional elements of the comedy action as a whole.

If in the camp of heroes-ideologists a truly productive action with a plus sign takes place: the liberation of Pravdin from political illusions, curbing the arbitrariness and tyranny of Mrs. Prostakova, the union of Milon and Sophia, who love each other, then in the camp of everyday heroes these same elements appear anti-action with a minus sign in the sense of its complete ineffectiveness: Mrs. Prostakova's efforts to educate Mitrofan have a negative effect, her attempts to arrange the fate of first her brother and then her son in marriage with Sophia are crowned with complete failure, and finally, she herself, having lost power, also ends up at a broken trough.

And if we take into account the fact that a truly effective action is carried out in ideological speech, and the ineffectual embraces the material world image of a reliable physical life, then we have to recognize the world-building power of the word-opinion, which rules the world of "Minor" partly even in a sacred sense. "In the beginning was the Word" - and Starodum's letter creates a living, moving world of comedy. At the end - the same word, the "Last Judgment" of the governor resurrects the dead souls of the "Minor" in order to crush this existing, but inappropriate world. So the sacred associations of the plot and composition of the comedy exacerbate the incredible capacity of the Fonvizin picture of Russian life, elevating its general outline to the universal timeless plot archetype of the Gospel and the Apocalypse: the coming of a new hypostasis of the Divine, carrying the New Testament to the one who is mired in vices, has outlived itself in an old world and heralds sinners end times.

The synthesis of the invariant elements of the two oppositional series of the genre hierarchy of the 18th century, which divided literature into areas of high ideal and low everyday world images, a complex system of their parallel and cross combination in "The Minor" gave rise to a fundamentally new aesthetic status of a literary work. If earlier the category of the genre itself, closing each text included in the system of this genre into a rigid system of invariant elements of a given structure, made it a peculiar way of constructing a verbal model of the world from a certain angle of view, that is, a monoscopic model, then Fonvizin's comedy, combining two genre structures, two sets of invariants, two angles of view and two ways of verbal modeling of life connections, created a stereoscopic effect. Hence, the model of reality, produced by "Nedorosl" as a whole, acquired a hitherto unknown volume, all-embracing and universality in Russian literature. Perhaps it is impossible to find in Russian literature of the 18th century. another text, which, with an equally compact volume, would be just as representative in terms of the scale of coverage of Russian reality and literary life, as "The Minor".

A similar picture of the synthesis of stable elements of the tragic and comedy genre structures of drama can be observed in the poetic variety of the genre of high comedy, an example of which is the comedy of V. V. Kapnist "Yabeda", written in 1796 and obviously bearing the imprint of traditional continuity in relation to comedy "Minor".