The comedy "Woe from Wit" is the famous work of A. S. Griboedov. Having composed it, the author instantly stood on a par with the leading poets of his time. The appearance of this play provoked a lively response in literary circles. Many were in a hurry to express their opinion on the merits and demerits of the work. Particularly heated debate caused the image of Chatsky - the main character of the comedy. This article will be devoted to the description of this character.
Prototypes Chatsky
Contemporaries of A. S. Griboedov found that the image of Chatsky reminds them of P. Ya. Chaadayev. This was pointed out by Pushkin in his letter to P. A. Vyazemsky in 1823. Some researchers see an indirect confirmation of this version in the fact that initially the main character of the comedy bore the name Chadsky. However, many refute this opinion. According to another theory, Chatsky's image is a reflection of the biography and character of V.K.Kyukhelbeker. A disgraced, unsuccessful, just returned from abroad man could well become the prototype of the protagonist "Woe from Wit."
About the similarity of the author with Chatsky
It is obvious that the protagonist of the play expressed in his monologues the thoughts and views that Griboedov himself adhered to. “Woe from Wit” is a comedy that has become the author’s personal manifesto against the moral and social vices of Russian aristocratic society. Yes, and many of Chatsky’s character traits seem to have been written off from the author himself. According to contemporaries, Alexander Sergeyevich was impetuous and hot, sometimes independent and sharp. Chatsky’s views on imitation of foreigners, inhumanity of serfdom, bureaucracy are the true thoughts of Griboedov. He has repeatedly expressed them in society. The writer even once was really called crazy when, at a social event, he warmly and impartially responded to the subservient attitude of Russians to everything foreign.
Author's characterization of the hero
In response to the criticisms of his co-author and long-time friend P. A. Katenin that the character of the protagonist is "inconsistent", that is, very inconsistent, Griboedov writes: "In my comedy there are 25 fools per one sane person." The image of Chatsky for the author is a portrait of a smart and educated young man who finds himself in a difficult situation. On the one hand, he is in “contradiction with society,” since he is “a little higher than the others,” he is aware of his superiority and is not trying to hide it. On the other hand, Alexander Andreevich cannot achieve the former location of his beloved girl, suspects the presence of an opponent, and even then unexpectedly falls into the category of crazy people, of which he finds out last. Griboedov explains the excessive fervor of his hero by a strong disappointment in love. Therefore, in “Woe from Wit” the image of Chatsky turned out to be so inconsistent and inconsistent. He "did not give a damn about everyone and was like that."
Chatsky in the interpretation of Pushkin
The poet criticized the main character of the comedy. At the same time, Pushkin appreciated Griboedov: he liked the comedy "Woe from Wit." Chatsky’s characterization in the interpretation of the great poet is very impartial. He calls Alexander Andreevich an ordinary hero-resonator, the mouthpiece of the ideas of the only intelligent person in the play - Griboedov himself. He believes that the main character is a "good fellow" who gained extraordinary thoughts and witticisms from another person and began to "throw beads" before Repetilov and other representatives of the Famus guard. According to Pushkin, such behavior is unforgivable. He believes that Chatsky’s contradictory and inconsistent character is a reflection of his own stupidity, putting the hero in a tragicomic position.
The nature of Chatsky, according to Belinsky
The famous critic in 1840, like Pushkin, refused the main character of the play in his practical mind. He interpreted the image of Chatsky as a completely absurd, naive and dreamy figure and dubbed him the “new Don Quixote”. Over time, Belinsky somewhat changed his point of view. The characterization of the comedy "Woe from Wit" in its interpretation has become very positive. He called it a protest against the "heinous racial reality" and considered it a "noble, humanistic work." The critic did not see the true complexity of the image of Chatsky.
The image of Chatsky: interpretation in the 1860s
Journalists and critics of the 1860s began to attribute only socially significant and socio-political motives to Chatsky's behavior. For example, A.I. Herzen saw in the main character of the play a reflection of Griboedov's "back thought". He considers the image of Chatsky a portrait of a Decembrist-revolutionary. The critic A. A. Grigoriev sees in Alexander Andreevich a man struggling with the vices of modern society. For him, the heroes of “Woe from Wit” are not characters of a “high” comedy, but a “high” tragedy. In such interpretations, Chatsky’s appearance is extremely generalized and is interpreted very one-sidedly.
The image of Chatsky by Goncharov
Ivan Aleksandrovich in his critical study, The Million of Torment, presented the most insightful and accurate analysis of the play Woe from Wit. The characterization of Chatsky, according to Goncharov, should be made taking into account his state of mind. Unhappy love for Sophia makes the protagonist of the comedy bile and almost inadequate, makes him say long monologues in front of people indifferent to his fiery speeches. Thus, without taking into account the love affair, it is impossible to understand the comic and at the same time tragic nature of the image of Chatsky.
The problems of the play
The heroes of “Woe from Wit” confront Griboedov in two plot-forming conflicts: love (Chatsky and Sofia) and socio-ideological (Famus society and the main character). Of course, it is the social issues of the work that come to the fore, but the love line in the play is very important. After all, Chatsky was in a hurry to Moscow exclusively for a meeting with Sofia. Therefore, both conflicts - socio-ideological and amorous - reinforce and complement each other. They develop in parallel and are equally necessary for understanding the worldview, character, psychology and relationship of comedy heroes.
Main character. Love conflict
In the character system of the play, Chatsky is in the forefront. He connects two storylines into a single whole. For Alexander Andreevich, love conflict is of primary importance. He perfectly understands what kind of people he got into society, and is not at all going to engage in educational activities. The reason for his stormy eloquence is not political, but psychological. The "impatience of the heart" of a young man is felt throughout the entire play.
At first, Chatsky’s “talkativeness” was caused by the joy of meeting with Sofia. When the hero realizes that the girl has no trace of her previous feelings for him, then she begins to do inconsistent and daring actions. He remains in Famusov’s house for the sole purpose of finding out who became Sofia’s new lover. Moreover, it is quite obvious to him that "the mind with the heart is out of tune."
After Chatsky learns about the relationship between Molchalin and Sofia, he falls into another extreme. Instead of love, he is embraced by bitterness and rage. He accuses the girl of “enticing him with hope”, proudly announces to her a breakdown, swears that he “has sobered up… completely,” but at the same time he is going to pour out “all the bile and all the annoyance” onto the world.
Main character. Socio-political conflict
Love experiences increase the ideological confrontation between Alexander Andreevich and the Famus society. At first, Chatsky refers to the Moscow aristocracy with ironic calm: "... I’m in a crank for another miracle / Once I laugh, then forget ..." However, as he becomes convinced of Sofia’s indifference, his speech becomes more impudent and unrestrained. Everything in Moscow begins to annoy him. In his monologues, Chatsky addresses many of the pressing problems of the modern era: questions of national identity, serfdom, education and enlightenment, real service, and so on. He speaks about serious things, but at the same time, according to I. A. Goncharov, from excitement falls into “exaggeration, into almost drunkenness of speech”.
Worldview of the protagonist
Chatsky’s image is a portrait of a person with an established system of life values, worldview and morality. He considers the main criterion for assessing personality the desire for knowledge, for beautiful and high matters. Alexander Andreevich is not against working for the good of the state. But he constantly emphasizes the difference between “serve” and “serve”, which he attaches to fundamental importance. Chatsky is not afraid of public opinion, does not recognize authorities, protects his independence, which causes fear among Moscow aristocrats. They are ready to recognize in Alexander Andreevich a dangerous rebel, encroaching on the most sacred values. From the point of view of Famus society, Chatsky’s behavior is atypical, and therefore reprehensible. He is "familiar with the ministers", but does not use his connections in any way. To Famusov’s proposal to live “like everyone else” he replies with contemptuous refusal.
Much agrees with his hero Griboedov. The image of Chatsky is a type of enlightened person who freely expresses his opinion. But in his statements there are no radical and revolutionary ideas. It’s just that in a conservative Famus society, any deviation from the usual norm seems outrageous and dangerous. No wonder, in the end, Alexander Andreevich was recognized as a madman. The heroes of “Woe from Wit” could only so explain for themselves the independent nature of Chatsky's judgments.
Conclusion
In modern life, the play "Woe from Wit" remains more relevant than ever. The image of Chatsky in the comedy is a central figure that helps the author throughout the world express his thoughts and views. By the will of Alexander Sergeyevich, the protagonist of the work is placed in tragicomic conditions. His impetuous accusations are caused by disappointment in love. However, the problems that arise in his monologues are eternal topics. Thanks to them, comedy was included in the list of the most famous works of world literature.