The conflict in Griboyedov's play "Woe from Wit" is a unity of two principles: social and personal. Being an honest, noble, progressive-minded, freedom-loving person, the main character Chatsky opposes the Famus society. His drama is aggravated by a feeling of ardent but unrequited love for Sophia Famusov's daughter.
Even before Chatsky appears on the stage, we learn from Lisa that he is "sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp." Chatsky is excited by the meeting with Sophia, discouraged by her cold reception, trying to find in her the understanding that, apparently, was before. Between Chatsky and Sophia, to some extent, the same thing happens as between Sophia and Silent: he loves not the Sophia whom he saw on the day of his arrival, but the one he invented. Therefore, the emergence of a psychological conflict is inevitable. Chatsky makes no attempt to understand Sophia, it is difficult for him to understand why Sophia does not love him, because his love for her accelerates "every heartbeat", although "the whole world seemed to him ashes and vanity." Chatsky turns out to be too straightforward, not admitting the thought that Sophia might fall in love with Silent, that love does not obey reason. Unwittingly, he puts pressure on Sophia, causing her dislike. Chatsky can be justified by his blindness with passion: his "mind and heart are out of tune."
The psychological conflict turns into a public conflict. Chatsky, excited by the meeting with Sophia, discouraged by her cold reception, begins to talk about what is close to his soul. He expresses views that are directly opposite to the views of Famus society. Chatsky condemns the inhumanity of serfdom, recalling "Nestor of the noble scoundrels", who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds; he is sickened by the lack of freedom of thought in a noble society:
And who in Moscow has not gagged Lunches, dinners and dances?
He does not recognize honor and sycophancy:
To those who need: those arrogance, they lie in the dust, And for those who are higher, flattery, like lace, weaved.
Chatsky is full of sincere patriotism:
Shall we rise again from the foreign rule of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although in terms of language we were not considered Germans.
He seeks to serve "the cause", not persons, he "would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve."
Society is offended and, defensively, declares Chatsky insane. It is characteristic that it was Sophia who laid the foundation for this rumor. Chatsky tries to open her eyes to Molchalin, Sophia is afraid of the truth:
Oh! This person is always
Cause me a terrible frustration!
In a conversation with Mr. N, she states: "He is out of his mind." It is easier for her, it is more pleasant for her to explain Chatsky's causticity with the madness of love, which he himself told her about. Her involuntary betrayal becomes already deliberate revenge:
Ah, Chatsky! You like to dress everyone up as jesters, Is it pleasing to try on yourself?
Society unanimously comes to the conclusion: "insane in everything ..." Chatsky-crazy society is not terrible. Chatsky decides to “look around the world where the offended feeling has a corner”.
look in the world where the offended feeling has a corner. " IA Goncharov assesses the finale of the play: "Chatsky is broken by the amount of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of the new force." Chatsky does not abandon his ideals, he only frees himself from illusions. Chatsky's stay in Famusov's house shook the inviolability of his foundations. Sophia says: "I myself am ashamed of the walls!"
I.A. Goncharov wrote about Chatsky that he was "... a winner, but an advanced warrior, a skirmisher, and always a victim." It seems to me that it is in these words that the answer to the question posed lies: is Chatsky a winner or a loser? After all, it is simply impossible to answer it unequivocally, since both the position of the author and the character of the hero himself are ambiguous.
Chatsky is one against all, and the ending of the conflict, in fact, is a foregone conclusion. “Chatsky is crushed by the amount of the old force,” as Goncharov wrote.
Indeed, on the one hand, the love affair of the comedy is over, and the hero's collapse in the story of his love for Sophia is absolutely obvious. But, on the other hand, the question of whether the expulsion of Chatsky from the Famus society can be called a victory over the hero remains open. It is not without reason that the author introduces extra-stage characters into the comedy - Prince Fyodor, "a chemist and a botanist," and brother Skalozub, who "suddenly left the service" when "the rank followed" him. Such people, like Chatsky, despise the authorities of the "past century", try to live in a new way. And we know that later there will be more and more of them, and as a result they will win, because the new always triumphs over the old. That is why it should be admitted that the debate of such heroes as Chatsky with the old foundations is just beginning. He is a "vanguard warrior, a skirmisher," but that is why he is "always a victim."
But there are also internal, psychological reasons that Chatsky is doomed to defeat. His enthusiasm and fervor lead not only to the fact that the hero did not understand Sophia's attitude towards him, underestimated Molchalin, but also could not really imagine the strength of the resistance of the conservative Famus society. Sometimes it seems that Chatsky is not going to understand this: the hero preaches with inspiration and suddenly suddenly discovers that the guests are “circling in a waltz,” and not at all “listening” to him. Perhaps that is why it was so easy to expel Chatsky by sticking the label of a madman to him. It turns out that the defeat of the comedy hero is also a warning from the author to those who strive for change, but underestimate the strength of the opponent, as well as to buy a computer desk for a student. And the story itself confirmed Griboyedov's fears, which once again emphasizes the realism of his play.
And yet it seems to me that in comedy there is a certain premonition of the coming victory of people like Chatsky. The once monolithic Famus society really gave a hole, and even after the expulsion of the person who so disturbed everyone, there will no longer be peace for the old Moscow “aces” and noble ladies, because they have no confidence in the inviolability of their positions, although they are still strong. That is why Chatsky can be recognized as both a winner and a loser at the same time.
The conflict in Griboyedov's play "Woe from Wit" is a unity of two principles: social and personal. Being an honest, noble, progressive-minded, freedom-loving person, the main character Chatsky opposes the Famus society. His drama is aggravated by a feeling of ardent but unrequited love for Sophia Famusov's daughter.
Even before Chatsky appears on the stage, we learn from Lisa that he is "sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp." Chatsky is excited by the meeting with Sophia, discouraged by her cold reception, trying to find in her the understanding that, apparently, was before. Between Chatsky and Sophia, to some extent, the same thing happens as between Sophia and Silent: he loves not the Sophia whom he saw on the day of his arrival, but the one he invented. Therefore, the emergence of a psychological conflict is inevitable. Chatsky makes no attempt to understand Sophia, it is difficult for him to understand why Sophia does not love him, because his love for her accelerates "every heartbeat", although "the whole world seemed to him ashes and vanity." Chatsky turns out to be too straightforward, not admitting the thought that Sophia might fall in love with Silent, that love does not obey reason. Unwittingly, he puts pressure on Sophia, causing her dislike. Chatsky can be justified by his blindness with passion: his "mind and heart are out of tune."
The psychological conflict turns into a public conflict. Chatsky, excited by the meeting with Sophia, discouraged by her cold reception, begins to talk about what is close to his soul. He expresses views that are directly opposite to the views of Famus society. Chatsky condemns the inhumanity of serfdom, recalling "Nestor of the noble scoundrels", who exchanged his faithful servants for three greyhounds; he is sickened by the lack of freedom of thought in a noble society:
Didn't they shut their mouths in Moscow Lunches, dinners and dances?
He does not admit worship and sycophancy:
To those who need: those arrogance, they lie in the dust, And for those who are higher, flattery, like lace, weaved.
Chatsky is full of sincere patriotism:
Shall we rise again from the foreign rule of fashion?
So that our smart, cheerful people
Although in language we were not considered Germans.
He seeks to serve "the cause", not persons, he "would be glad to serve, it is sickening to serve."
Society is offended and, defensively, declares Chatsky insane. It is characteristic that it was Sophia who laid the foundation for this rumor. Chatsky tries to open her eyes to Molchalin, Sophia is afraid of the truth:
Oh! This person is always
Cause me a terrible frustration!
In a conversation with Mr. N, she states: "He's out of his mind." It is easier for her, it is more pleasant for her to explain Chatsky's causticity with the madness of love, which he himself told her about. Her involuntary betrayal becomes already deliberate revenge:
Ah, Chatsky! You like to dress everyone up as jesters, Is it pleasing to try on yourself?
Society unanimously comes to the conclusion: "insane in everything ..." Chatsky-crazy society is not terrible. Chatsky decides to “look around the world where the offended feeling has a corner”. IA Goncharov assesses the finale of the play: "Chatsky is broken by the amount of the old force, inflicting a mortal blow on it with the quality of the new force." Chatsky does not abandon his ideals, he only frees himself from illusions. Chatsky's stay in Famusov's house shook the inviolability of his foundations. Sophia says: "I am myself, I am ashamed of the walls!"
Woe from Wit is one of the greatest dramatic works. The famous comedy by Griboyedov was created a few years after the end of World War II and shortly before. The main question that worries literary scholars and critics regarding this creation is: "Who is Chatsky - the defeated or the winner?"
Fathers and Sons
When Griboyedov planned to create a comedy, which subsequently caused a resonance in the cultural life of Russia, there was a significant upsurge in society, which was caused primarily by an obvious split among the nobility. The protagonist of the play became the personification of a lively mind and progressive aspirations, especially noticeable against the background of outdated patriarchal mores, the adherents of which are other characters. The author portrayed the struggle of generations in the comedy. In order to write an essay on the topic "Chatsky: Defeated or Winner?", It is necessary to understand the social situation that developed in Russia in the twenties of the nineteenth century.
The origin of the Decembrist movement
French enlighteners had a huge impact on the worldview of young nobles, many of whom became members of secret societies. Often, discussions on political topics did not end with anything. However, an opposition movement was formed by especially zealous young people. The actions of the Decembrists, namely the so-called most active participants in secret organizations, led to a tragedy. An uprising took place on December 14, 1825. Many members of the societies were exiled to Siberia. The main instigators were executed.
Revolutionary ideas
How can these events help answer the question: "Who is Chatsky - a winner or a loser?" The composition "Woe from Wit" was conceived by the author five years before the uprising. The comedy is about a young educated man who wholeheartedly loves a girl, is critical of Moscow society and, most importantly, is not understood by those around him. The fact is that Chatsky is a representative of that very young generation of nobles, among whom there were so many opponents of the old reactionary system. He embodied the best qualities of the Decembrists, expressed his view of the social order that reigned in Russia, which is why he suffered to some extent.
The only representative of the younger generation of the nobility in the comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky. The defeated or the winner is the hero of Griboyedov? This question cannot be answered unequivocally. Chatsky was opposed by the author of the so-called. He is opposed not only by the worldview of one or two characters, but by a whole way of life, a set of prejudices and habits.
Griboyedov and his contemporaries
How to write a paper on the topic "Chatsky - a winner or a loser?" An essay on the one that once caused a lot of controversy in Moscow society, gives many problems to modern students. First of all, you need to have an idea of how contemporaries perceived the play. Comedy was banned for a while. Then the residents of the capital saw it in a censored form. In the original, the comedy made an indelible impression on the theater audience. In the play, extremely sensitive issues were raised for the first time. In addition, there has never been a hero like Chatsky in Russian drama before.
Revolutionary hero ideas
In order to understand the uniqueness of the image created by Griboyedov, one should pay attention to the fact that the most important issues of upbringing and education were touched upon in the comedy. The author raised the topic of civic duty, expressed his opinion on the true service to the Fatherland. And he did all this with the help of the main character. It was in the mouth of Chatsky that he put his thoughts, with his help, expressed advanced views on the ossification of society. The only hero who realizes the need for radical social changes is Chatsky. Defeated or the winner in this dispute, which has a very hidden and satirical character in comedy, is not so important. Chatsky is not understood by Famusov, Sophia and other characters. This is the fate of every person with fresh ideas. Especially if these ideas are at odds with the usual way of life. It is easier for the heroes of the comedy to take Chatsky for a madman than to listen to his words. And in the eyes of this society, he will always be defeated.
Famus Society
Lies and hypocrisy reign in Famusov's house. They have taken root here so much that almost everything is built on them. Famusov lectures his daughter on the purity of morals and sets his monastic lifestyle as an example for her, despite the fact that five minutes before that he had flirted with Liza. Molchalin portrays a man in love in front of Sophia, while in his soul there is only room for ambitious thoughts. Famusov's daughter is able to see lies, but does not want to do this, since living in a familiar lie is more comfortable and calmer. And against this background, does the Winner or the defeated hero stand out clearly in the world of lies and hypocrisy? Chatsky is inspired by innovative ideas. He is ready to go against society in the name of his ideals. But hypocrisy is so ingrained in the way of life of Famusov and his entourage that any dispute about truth and honor can only lead to defeat.
Sophia and Molchalin
The work is based on a love story. When Chatsky learns that Sophia preferred him to the close-minded, but extremely purposeful Molchalin, a social conflict begins to develop, and at the same time the character of the protagonist is revealed. To the question of who Chatsky is the winner or the loser, Griboyedov does not give an answer. The audience forms an opinion about the hero as the play proceeds. They are outraged by the delusions of Sophia, a girl who is not devoid of noble spiritual qualities, but is unable to fall in love with Chatsky, since he turns out to be too alien in her environment.
Molchalin's deception seems crude and obvious. But the secretary of Famusov at the beginning of the play appears as a deceiver only in the eyes of the protagonist. Sophia does not see lies due to her upbringing, French novels, which she reads voraciously, and unwillingness to take seriously the truthful and sharp words that Chatsky utters. In the characterization of the hero, his relationship to Sophia is not of the greatest importance. But it is precisely thanks to the opposition of the hero to the obliging Molchalin that the answer to the main question posed by the author of the work on the comedy "Woe from Wit" becomes clear. Who is Chatsky? Winner or Loser? The answer is this: in the eternal dispute about lies and truth, only this character can win. He does not curry favor with high-ranking officials, does not become like Molchalin. He remains himself even when he is rejected by Sophia, whom he has loved since childhood. And even though the Famus society does not accept his views, preferring to continue to be content with false reasoning, Chatsky does not change his views. The further fate of the characters is unknown to the viewer. But one can only guess that the false world will be destroyed sooner or later.
Get out of Moscow!
Chatsky is worried about social problems. He realizes the horror of serfdom, in which every sincere thought is destroyed. Molchalin feels comfortable in such a society. Chatsky has no place in it, and he leaves.
And if we consider the conflict from an external point of view, the answer to the question: “Who is Chatsky in the comedy? A winner or a loser? " briefly, it can be given in this way: he could not fight for his ideals to the end, and therefore lost. Chatsky left, leaving the Famusovs in bewilderment and irritation. The real winner had to stay and put up a more substantial opposition to the reactionary society. Although, perhaps, the clash of views depicted by Griboyedov was the first impetus for serious revolutionary activity, and one of the future participants in the opposition movement was the prototype of Chatsky? But the question of whether Griboyedov's hero was a Decembrist is the topic of another article.
I.A. Goncharov wrote about the protagonist of the comedy Woe from Wit: “Chatsky is broken by the amount of old power. He dealt her, in turn, a fatal blow with the quality of fresh strength. Chatsky is a winner, a vanguard warrior, a skirmisher and is always a victim. " In the words of Goncharov, there is a certain contradiction that needs to be resolved. So who is Chatsky: winner or loser?
The comedy "Woe from Wit" presents the complex historical process of replacing the old views of the feudal landlords with new progressive ideas of the structure of society. This process cannot happen overnight. It takes time and a lot of effort and sacrifice on the part of the representatives of the new type of thinking.
The play presents the struggle of the conservative nobility, "the past century", with the "present century" - Chatsky, who has an extraordinary mind and desire to act for the good of his Fatherland. Old Moscow nobles defend their personal well-being and personal comfort in this struggle. Chatsky, on the other hand, seeks to develop the country by increasing the value of the individual in society, the development of sciences and education, deeply despising and leaving in the background rank-worship and careerism.
Already in the title of the comedy, Griboyedov indicates that the mind, in its broadest sense, will not bring happiness to the protagonist of the comedy. His accusatory speeches do not like both the world, because they threaten his usual way of life, and his beloved Sophia, since they threaten her personal happiness.
In love, Chatsky is unequivocally defeated. Sophia preferred Chatsky, who is "sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp," Molchalin, who differs only in his modesty and helpfulness. And the ability to "serve as a favor" is very important in the world. And Famusov admires this quality, citing as an example his uncle Maksim Petrovich, who was not afraid to expose himself to ridicule in order to please the empress. For Chatsky, this is humiliation. He says that "I would be glad to serve - it is sickening to serve." And this unwillingness to please the noble society leads to the fact that the hero is expelled from it.
A love conflict gives rise to a conflict between Chatsky and Famusovsky society, with which, as it turned out, he disagrees on all fundamental issues. The whole comedy is Chatsky's verbal struggle with the Moscow nobility. The hero is opposed to the numerous camp of the “past century”. Chatsky, alone, fearlessly opposes him. The main character of the comedy is disgusted that Famusov considers learning a "plague", that Skalozub received the rank of colonel not with the help of personal merit, but with the help of connections, that Molchalin is trying in every possible way to please Famusov and his guests, humiliating himself before them only because he weight in this society that no one is ready to sacrifice personal gain for the good of the Fatherland.
Representatives of the Famus society do not want to allow their ideals to be debunked. They do not know how to live differently and are not ready. Therefore, defending itself, the light quickly spreads gossip that Chatsky is "out of his mind." By declaring Chatsky insane, society makes his words safe. The hero leaves Moscow, which has dispelled "all smoke and smoke" of his hopes. It seems that Chatsky is leaving defeated.
However, it is impossible to answer unequivocally the question of who Chatsky is - the winner or the loser - in the comedy "Woe from Wit". He didn't win just because he was outnumbered. But he remained true to his views, and his words, like seeds, will soon sprout. Like-minded people will gather around him. By the way, they are also mentioned in the play. For example, Skalozub's cousin, who, leaving a successful career, went to the village, where he began to lead a quiet life and read a lot. People who are indifferent to rank and money, who put mind and heart above all, will ultimately triumph over Famus society.
Chatsky leaves, not knowing that he is a winner. History will show it later. This hero is forced to suffer, grieve, but his words will not go unheard. The struggle between the old and the new cannot last forever. Sooner or later it will end with the collapse of outdated views. That is why, as Goncharov writes, in this comedy Chatsky refutes the well-known proverb "one is not a warrior in the field." If he is Chatsky, then he is a warrior, "and, moreover, he is a winner."
The above reasoning about the image of the winner and the loser of Chatsky will be useful to 9 grades when searching for materials on the topic of the essay "Who is Chatsky: the winner or the loser?"
Product test
