draw up a plan and cut the text according to the plan "Woe from Wit" - an unsurpassed work, the only one in world literature,

not fully solved" (A. Blok)

The comedy "Woe from Wit" was written between 1815 and 1820. The content of the play is closely connected with the historical events of that time in Russia. The work remains relevant today. In those days, there were defenders of serfdom and Decembrists in society, imbued with love for the Motherland, opposing violence against individuals.

The comedy describes the clash of two centuries: "the present century" with the "past century". A striking example of the old time is the so-called Famus society. These are acquaintances and relatives of Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, a wealthy Moscow gentleman, in whose house the play takes place. These are Khlestova, the spouses Gorichi, Skalozub, Molchalin and others. All these people are united by one point of view on life. They are all cruel feudal lords, they consider human trafficking to be a normal phenomenon. Serfs save their lives and honor, sincerely serve, and they can exchange them for a pair of greyhounds. So at the ball at Famusov's, Khlestova tells Sofya to give a sop from dinner for her arapka - a girl and a dog. She sees no difference between them. This remains relevant today. When a rich person who has power and money can humiliate another person who is lower in level. The ideals for today's society are rich people, in ranks. Famusov cites Kuzma Petrovich as an example to Chatsky, who was a respectable chamberlain, "with a key", "rich and was married to a rich woman." Pavel Afanasyevich wants for his daughter such a groom as Skalozub, because he "both a golden bag and aims for generals."

All representatives of the Famus society are characterized by an indifferent attitude to business. Famusov, the "manager in a state-owned place," deals with business only once; at Molchalin's insistence, he signs papers, despite the fact that "there is a contradiction in them and a lot of weekly." He considers - "signed, so off your shoulders." The saddest thing is that nowadays people think in exactly the same way as Famusov. Attitude to work, almost all irresponsible. This is the unsurpassed great comedy, it remains vital, relevant in the 20th century.

The protagonist of the play is Chatsky, through whom the author expresses his progressive ideas. He opposes the senseless imitation of everything foreign. He wants to punish those around him that they are obliged to love and respect Russian culture. Chatsky says that the Frenchman from Bordeaux, who came to Moscow, did not hear "a word of a Russian" and did not see here, "not a Russian face." The comedy "Woe from Wit" is the only one in world literature, since no one except Griboyedov reveals the whole reality of the events taking place.

In the comedy, Chatsky is declared crazy because the representatives of the Famus society do not understand his ideas. He alone does not want to put up with the humiliation of people over people. Chatsky failed to correctly prove the correctness of his beliefs and still cannot reveal the secret. The comedy remains unsolved, because humanity blindly follows life events, not wanting to change anything.

What are the features of the character system in "Woe from Wit"?

How does Chatsky restore all the guests against himself?
When does the first clash between Chatsky and Famusov take place?
It is known that the main conflict in comedy is a social conflict. What views of the representatives of the "past century" and the "current century" are opposed in comedy?
Why did "Woe from Wit" get such a name?
What is the difference between the names "Woe to the mind" and "Woe from the mind"? Justify your answer.

Help with an essay. Please! Submit tomorrow! Comedy "Woe from Wit"

I need an essay on one of these topics:
1. "Chatsky - winner or loser"
2. Chatsky spokesman for the ideas of his time.
3. Barskaya Moscow in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit"
4. What are the dangers of silence.
5. "The current century and the past century"
6. Author and hero in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit".
If anyone has an essay on one of these topics please reply. If it's good, with a plan and I don't find a copy, I'll pay 40 points

Griboyedov wrote the play for two years (1822-1824). Since Alexander Sergeevich served as a diplomat and was considered an influential person, he hoped that his creation would easily pass the censorship and soon become a full-fledged performance. However, he soon realized: comedy "no pass." It was possible to publish only fragments (in 1825 in the almanac "Russian Thalia"). The entire text of the play was published much later, in 1862. The first theatrical production took place in 1831. However, in handwritten lists (samizdat of that time), the book spread rapidly and became very popular among the reading public.

comedy feature

Theater is the most conservative art form, so while romanticism and realism were developing in literature, classicism still dominated the stage. Griboyedov's play combines the features of all three directions: "Woe from Wit" is a classic work in form, but realistic dialogues and problems related to the realities of Russia in the 19th century bring it closer to realism, and the romantic hero (Chatsky) and the conflict of this hero with society - a characteristic opposition to romanticism. How do Woe from Wit combine the classicist canon, romantic motifs, and a general realistic orientation towards vitality? The author managed to harmoniously weave contradictory components together due to the fact that he was brilliantly educated by the standards of his time, often traveled the world and read in other languages, so he absorbed new literary trends before other playwrights. He did not rotate among writers, he served in a diplomatic mission, and therefore his mind was free from many stereotypes that prevented authors from experimenting.

Drama genre "Woe from Wit". Comedy or drama?

Griboedov believed that "Woe from Wit" is a comedy, but since tragic and dramatic elements are very developed in it, the play cannot be attributed exclusively to the comedy genre. First of all, you need to pay attention to the ending of the work: it is tragic. Today it is customary to define "Woe from Wit" as a drama, but in the 19th century there was no such division, so it was called "high comedy" by analogy with the high and low calm of Lomonosov. This wording contains a contradiction: only tragedy can be “high”, and comedy is by default “low” calm. The play was not unambiguous and typical, it broke out of the existing theatrical and literary clichés, which is why it was so highly appreciated by both contemporaries and the current generation of readers.

Conflict. Composition. Issues

The play is traditionally distinguished two types of conflict: private (love drama) and public (contrasting the old and new times, the "famus society" and Chatsky). Since this work is partially related to romanticism, we can argue that there is a romantic conflict between the individual (Chatsky) and society (Famusovsky society) in the play.

One of the strict canons of classicism is the unity of action, which implies a causal relationship of events and episodes. In Woe from Wit, this connection is already significantly weakened, it seems to the viewer and reader that nothing significant is happening: the characters walk back and forth, talk, that is, the external action is rather monotonous. However, the dynamics and drama are laid down precisely in the dialogues of the characters, the play must first of all be listened to in order to catch the tension of what is happening and the meaning of the production.

The peculiarity of the composition is that it is built according to the canons of classicism, the number of acts does not coincide with it.

If the comedies of writers of the late 18th and early 19th centuries denounced individual vices, then Griboyedov's satire fell upon the entire conservative way of life, saturated with these vices. Ignorance, careerism, martinetism, cruelty and bureaucratic inertia - all these are the realities of the Russian Empire. The Moscow nobility with its ostentatious puritanical morality and unscrupulousness in business is represented by Famusov, stupid military careerism and blinkered consciousness - Skalozub, obsequiousness and hypocrisy of officials - Molchalin. Thanks to episodic characters, the viewer and reader get acquainted with all the types of the “famus society” and see that their cohesion is the result of the solidarity of vicious people. The many-sided and motley clique absorbed all the vulgarity, lies and stupidity that society is accustomed to worship and yield to. The characters are not only on stage, but also off stage, mentioned in the replicas of the characters (truthmaker Princess Marya Aleksevna, writer of "exemplary nonsense" Foma Fomich, influential and all-powerful Tatyana Yuryevna and others).

The meaning and innovation of the play "Woe from Wit"

In the play, which the author himself considered a comedy, oddly enough, the most pressing problems of that period are highlighted: the injustice of serfdom, an imperfect state apparatus, ignorance, the problem of education, etc. Griboyedov also included, it would seem, in an entertaining work, the vital disputes about boarding houses, jury trials, censorship and institutions.

Moral aspects, which are no less important for the playwright, give rise to the humanistic pathos of the work. The author shows how the best qualities in a person die under the pressure of the “famus society”. For example, Molchalin is not devoid of positive qualities, but he is forced to live according to the laws of Famusov and others like him, otherwise he will never succeed. That is why "Woe from Wit" occupies a special place in Russian dramaturgy: it reflects real conflicts and non-fictional life circumstances.

The composition of the drama is sustained in the classic style: the observance of the three unities, the presence of large monologues, the speaking names of the characters, etc. The content is realistic, so the performance is still sold out in many theaters in Russia. Heroes do not personify one vice or one virtue, as was customary in classicism, they are diversified by the author, their characters are not devoid of both negative and positive qualities. For example, critics often call Chatsky a fool or an overly impulsive hero. Sophia is not to blame for the fact that during his long absence she fell in love with the one who was nearby, and Chatsky is immediately offended, jealous and hysterically denounces everything around just because his beloved has forgotten him. A quick-tempered and absurd character does not paint the main character.

It is worth noting the colloquial language of the play, where each character has his own speech turns. This idea was complicated by the fact that the work was written in verse (iambic multi-footed), but Griboedov managed to recreate the effect of a casual conversation. Already in 1825 the writer V.F. Odoevsky stated: “Almost all the verses of Griboedov’s comedy became proverbs, and I often happened to hear in society, the whole conversations of which were mostly verses from Woe from Wit.”

It is worth noting speaking names in "Woe from Wit": for example, “Molchalin” means the hidden and hypocritical nature of the hero, “Skalozub” is the inverted word “gnawing”, meaning boorish behavior in society.

Why is Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" now readable?

At present, people often use Griboyedov's quotes without knowing it themselves. Phraseologisms “a legend is fresh, but hard to believe”, “happy hours are not observed”, “and the smoke of the fatherland is sweet and pleasant to us” - all these catchphrases are familiar to everyone. The play is still relevant today due to Griboedov's light aphoristic author's style. He was one of the first to write a drama in real Russian, which people still speak and think. The heavy and pompous lexicon of his time was not remembered by his contemporary in any way, but Griboedov's innovative style found its place in the linguistic memory of the Russian people. Is it possible to call the play "Woe from Wit" relevant in the 21st century? Yes, if only because we speak it in quotes in everyday life.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

After reading a short summary of the work, you can find out about all the events that the author describes in the play "Woe from Wit". The chapter summary below conveys the main essence of the work and answers the question: "How many actions are in Griboedov's work?".

In contact with

Characters in the play by Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov:

• Famusov Pavel Afanasyevich is a widower raising his only daughter.
• Sofya is the seventeen-year-old daughter and heiress of Famusov.
• Molchalin Aleksey Stepanovich - a cowardly young man, helps Famusov to conduct the deal and lives in his house.
• Chatsky Alexander Andreevich - Sophia's childhood friend. In love with her. Recently returned from abroad.
• Lizanka is a maid in the Famusovs' house.
• Skalozub Sergey Sergeevich is a stupid, but wealthy person. They want to give Sophia for him.
• Repetilov is one of the secondary heroes of the work. He is a parody reflection of Chatsky.

The plot of the play

All 4 actions of the work take place in Famusov's house. A summary of the chapters, which are called actions in a dramatic work, will help to trace the course of events.

Important! In the 1st act of the play "Woe from Wit", the reader learns that Sofya loves Molchalin and is indifferent to Chatsky.

Lovers have to say goodbye. But Famusov finds Molchalin right next to the door and inquires what the young man is doing here so early. Pavel Afanasyevich also reprimands his daughter for allowing herself early meetings with a young man.

When father leaves maid claims that Famusov will never give consent to the marriage of a daughter with an ignorant person. The father thinks that the girl needs to marry a rich and noble Colonel Skalozub. Sophia recalls her first love for Alexander Chatsky, a cheerful and intelligent young man. But, according to the girl, these cannot be called true love. At this moment, the butler appears to report that Alexander Andreevich has arrived at the house.

The guest sincerely rejoices at the meeting with the girl to whom he is not indifferent. The cold reception of his beloved somewhat moderates his ardor. unexpected guest begins to indulge in memories of past relationships with a girl. But Famusov's daughter calls the past feelings between them childish. Then the man asks if the girl's heart is busy thinking about someone else. The young lady claims that her embarrassment is caused by Alexander Andreevich's frank questions.

The father appears. Sophia runs away. Begins conversation between Pavel Afanasyevich and Alexander Andreevich. The young man makes it clear that the girlfriend of his youth still likes it.

The conflict between the heroes of the play - 2 act

Important! In the play Woe from Wit 2, the action tells the reader about Famusov's attitude to Chatsky's feelings for Sofya, and Molchalin appears in a completely different light.

Famusov makes plans for the near future. Chatsky appears. He frankly asks the owner of the house what answer he will receive if he asks his daughter in marriage. Pavel Afanasyevich replies that it would not hurt for an unexpected guest to get a higher rank. The young man begins to blame those who make up opinion of a person only by his ranks. Famusov, listening to the fiery speech of the guest, concludes that he adheres to revolutionary ideas. knotted conflict between Pavel Afanasyevich and Alexander Andreevich.

At this time complained Colonel Skalozub, to whom Pavel Afanasyevich is very happy. Famusov and the colonel begin to discuss Skalozub's brother, who quit his service and left for the village. Here wedged into the conversation Alexander Andreevich and stands up for those who do not try to curry favor with the authorities. Such a heated discussion is interrupted by the departure of the owner of the house.

Suddenly Sophia appears with the message that Molchalin fell off his horse. The excited girl loses her senses. Alexander Andreevich understands who she likes. Puffer comes out to help the victim. Chatsky and Lizanka fussing around a young lady. Skalozub returns with Molchalin. The Colonel reassures everyone, explaining that the victim only had a bruised hand. Chatsky, offended by his beloved, leaves. Sergei Sergeevich retires to Famusov's office.

Aleksey Stepanovich reproaches the girl that she so openly demonstrates her feelings for him. Molchalin is afraid that rumors about their relationship will reach the girl's father. The maid advises the young lady to start flirting with Chatsky in order to mislead her father. Sophia leaves in thought. Molchalin begins to flirt with Lisa.

Climax - act 3

Important! In Woe from Wit 3, the action contains the climax of the piece. When Chatsky confesses his love to Sophia, the girl does not say who she really likes.

In the evening at Famusov's house Numerous guests come to the ball. They are all powerful people. Molchalin begins to curry favor with them. Famusov's daughter casually notices that Alexander Andreevich has gone crazy. This phrase, said in a figurative sense, is perceived as real news. The sensation immediately spreads throughout the hall.

Among Famusov's guests, Repetilov attracts the reader's interest. His long monologues and emotional exclamations are somewhat reminiscent of Chatsky's speech. Even the appearance and departure of the hero are as unexpected as the arrival and departure of Chatsky. Repetilov - a parody of Alexander Andreevich.

Alexander Andreevich discouraged by the fact that in Russia only everything foreign is in fashion. But none of the guests listens to the man, perceiving his ideas for delirium of a madman. This climax is the last step in the conflict between Famus Society and Chatsky. The open ending of the work allows the reader to only guess about the denouement.

Interchange - 4 act

Suddenly Sophia appears. Chatsky hides behind the nearest column. Sofya sends Liza to check if Alexander Andreevich is downstairs. Looking around, Lisa knocks on Molchalin's door to call him to the young lady. A conversation takes place between the maid and Alexei Stepanovich. Molchalin explains that he does not love Famusov's daughter. Sophia hears everything and is disappointed in her lover. Alexander Andreevich comes up to her to reproach her for her dislike.

At this moment, Famusov appears with servants and candles. The father is surprised that he found his daughter with Chatsky, because the girl herself started a rumor that he had gone crazy. Chatsky understands that his beloved is the culprit of false gossip. He is going to leave Moscow forever.

The fourth action allows the characters to see the true state of things:

• Chatsky's dreams and hopes collapsed, and contempt for the Famus society appeared.
• Sophia revealed the real character of Molchalin and fell out of love with him.
• Famusov found out about his daughter's secret meetings.
• Moskovsky speaks of Chatsky as a madman.

Woe from Wit Act III Appearance 1 - 5

Analysis of 4 acts of the comedy "Woe from Wit".

Elena VIGDOROVA

TIME AND SPACE IN COMEDY
"Woe from Wit"

Literary practitioners

Conversation two

The first scene of act I is preceded by a note: “The living room, there is a large clock in it, on the right is the door to Sophia’s bedroom, from where you can hear a piano with a flute, which then fall silent. Lizanka is sleeping in the middle of the room, hanging from her armchairs.
The only thing that turns out to be important in the interior of the living room (namely, the first action takes place in it) is the clock, the “big clock”; the sounds that are heard from behind the door to Sophia's bedroom will then be confirmed by the words of Famusov: “The flute is heard, then it’s like a piano”). The following remark indicates the time when the action begins:

"Morning, a little day dawns."
And Lizanka, suddenly waking up, immediately confirms this: "It's dawning! ..". And he adds: “Ah! how soon the night passed! The fact that "the night has passed" soon, we can not attach, it would seem, special significance: it is generally said so. But it seems that this night was somehow especially short. After all, Sophia will also note: “How fast the nights are.” How much time it really is - this question seems to concern everyone and cannot but interest the viewer, because one way or another they talk about it all the time.
Sophia's conversation with Molchalin, according to Lisa, "went ... overnight." "It's daytime," she says at the beginning of the first monologue. “Yes, go away. Morning,” she says at the end. Sophia responds to her calls with a very specific question: "What time is it?". Lizanka for some reason does not want to answer exactly. She simply reports that "everything in the house has risen", and when Sophia repeats the question, she will say the famous: "Seventh, eighth, ninth." Why does Lizanka not want to answer what the clock shows, why, in addition to the “untruth” that she has already said, she still needs to take action -
I will translate the clock, even though I know: there will be a race,
I'll make them play.
This action was performed and confirmed by the remark: "Climbs on a chair, moves the arrow ...". Famusov immediately comes to watch music. By the way, he informs us that the time is early and that Sophia still usually does not get up at this time: “It would be too early for Sophia.” And it’s also curious: Chatsky, who appeared in Phenomenon 7 of Act I, already after the conversation between Liza and Famusov, the scandal between Famusov and Sophia, Liza, Molchalin, and also Liza’s conversation with Sophia, claims that the morning is still early: “A little light - on your feet!"

Let's not analyze the wonderful scene for now - the conversation between Famusov and Liza - we are concerned about the problem of time. We only note that Famusov, having stopped the hour-long music, does not put the arrows in their place. Almost all the action of the comedy takes place in the living room of Famusov's house - this is how one of the conditions characteristic of a classic play is observed - the unity of the place: Moscow, Famusov's house, living room. But as for the unity of time, then ... Or rather, outwardly, it is completely observed: Lizanka wakes up at dawn - this is the beginning of the first act. Even at the beginning of Act IV (Appearance 4), Chatsky, refusing to go with Repetilov, will say: “Where will I jump? What for? in the dead of night? - in other words, the action of the last act, and this is Repetilov’s arrival, takes place at night, “dead night”, conversations with him Chatsky, and then others, Zagoretsky, princesses, departure of guests, Lisa’s meeting with Molchalin, rebuke of Sophia Molchalin (“But in order to dawn didn’t find you in the house here”), the last big monologue of Famusov, then Chatsky - thus, the night ended, and the words “Carriage to me, carriage” were clearly uttered again at dawn.
So, a day - this corresponds to the provision on the unity of time ... in a play where a clock with the hands translated is placed on the stage for everyone to see ...
Time is so conditional in Griboedov's comedy, it either tightens or moves apart, the characters treat it somewhat familiarly: they want to - they "observe", they don't want to - they don't pay attention to it.
“Do not watch - your power ...” - Liza says wittily in response to Sophia's words that have become an aphorism, “happy hours are not watched.”
With Lizin, “seventh, eighth, ninth,” one might say, rhymes what Famusov says at the beginning of Act II: “Thursday, one to one, Or maybe Friday, or maybe Saturday, I owe the widow , at the doctor's, to baptize. This widow who has not yet given birth fits perfectly into the strange situation we have noticed - the heroes manage time as they want: how much time has passed since the death of the doctor, her husband, no one will tell us - this, it seems, is not our business, - but Famusov, how he he himself will notice, there is some kind of calculation ...

When does the comedy take place? The war with Napoleon ended, but it is still in the memory of the heroes. The King of Prussia had already visited Moscow (and Friedrich-Wilhelm visited Moscow in 1816), the accusation of three professors of the Pedagogical Institute that they “called for an attempt on legitimate authority”, and their expulsion from the educational institution took place in 1821, and the comedy was completed in 1824. So, we have roughly determined the time of the comedy. How old is the main character? Almost the same age as Sophia - the "children's friendship" with which they are connected implies a not very big difference in age - 3-4 years. Let's remember Natasha Rostova, who was 13 years old in the summer of 1805, and how she counted on her fingers how long it would take Boris, already a young man, to propose to her... Now Sophia is 17 years old. We know this from Chatsky: “At seventeen, you blossomed charmingly, Inimitably ...”. She was 14 when they parted, slightly older than Natasha when she asked Boris to kiss the doll; it was by that time that Chatsky managed to move out of Famusov (“he seemed bored with us”), and reduce his visits (“And rarely visited our house”), and again, as Sophia, offended, not believing in the sincerity of his love, would say, “pretend to be in love”, and also make friends (“I am especially happy in friends”). How old could this especially happy in friends, eloquent, witty young man really be? When he managed to get in touch with the ministers, and then leave the service; experience a passion for the uniform, and then "to him ... renounce tenderness ...". What time is he talking about?

But then who would not be attracted to everyone?
When from the guard, others from the court
They came here for a while, -
Women shouted: hurrah!
And they threw caps into the air!

Pushkin quotes these lines of Griboyedov when he talks about the victory over Napoleon (“The Snowstorm”)... And one more thing: Chatsky “did not write two words for three years”, “he went away for three years”, but how did he manage “last year , at the end "to see Platon Mikhailovich in the regiment?
No, in Griboyedov's comedy, time is not "calculated according to the calendar", as in Pushkin's novel... The number "three", so often encountered here, is most likely an absolutely abstract character, a kind of fabulous, almost conditional "three" - "thirty years and three years”, “for faraway lands, in the farthest kingdom”, three sons, three daughters, three conditions - you will go to the right, you will go to the left ... So Griboedov’s heroes seem to use it without introducing a specific meaning:

Dinner:
Eat for three hours, and in three days it will not be cooked!

Rejecting calendar accuracy, Griboedov creates a different category of time - yes, these are the details that give rise to a sense of historical authenticity, but they expand the time space, take the situation played out in comedy beyond the given historical context, pointing to its timelessness.
Geographical space is also not so simple. The unity of the place is observed, but how much is outside of Famus's house! Firstly, he himself, this house, is located in Moscow, with its “distances of enormous size”, with its Kuznetsky bridge, Pokrovka, from where “it took an hour to drive” to the Famusov Khlestova, the English Club, and most importantly, with “its own laws” , which we will discuss below.
But even outside of Moscow there are geographical points, such as: Saratov - compared to Moscow, this is a “backwoods” and a “village”, there is St. Petersburg with its “Pe-da-go-gi-che-sky” institute; in St. Petersburg, as we learn from the conversation between Chatsky and Molchalin (act III, phenomenon 3), there was a certain story with Chatsky (“Tatiana Yuryevna told something, Returning from Petersburg, With the ministers about your connection, Then a break”). Probably, it was from the northern capital that he rode to Sophia (“forty-five hours, without squinting his eyes in an instant, More than seven hundred miles swept - the wind, the storm; And he was all confused, and fell so many times ...”). But there are also foreign lands, from there, from the “eternal French”, who are not only here on Kuznetsky Most, but also in France, in Paris, in Bordeaux - from there “fashions come to us, and authors, and muses.” This, it must be said, is dissatisfied with both Famusov and his antagonist Chatsky; well, "there are strange rapprochements." However, it is precisely there, in foreign lands, that the protagonist of the comedy, who

Wanted to travel around the world
And did not go round a hundredth.

It is interesting that this image is “the whole world”, just “light” in the meaning of “the whole world” is often found in comedy:

How wonderful is the light! (Famusov, II, 1.)

Blessed is he who believes, he is warm in the world! (Chatsky, I, 7.)

Sprayed the light; don't you want to get married? (Famusov, II, 2.)

And sure enough, the world began to grow stupid... (Chatsky, II, 2.)

No, today the world is not like that. (Chatsky, ibid.)

Here they scour the world, beat the buckets ... (Famusov, II, 2.)

I can guard against madness;
I'll go further - to catch a cold, to get cold,
Do not think about love, but I will be able to
Lost in the world...

(Chatsky, III, 1.)

And, finally, at the end of the comedy, in the 14th apparition, Chatsky's monologue ends with the words:

I'm going to search the world
Where there is a corner for the offended feeling! ..
Carriage for me, carriage!

So, from the living room in Famusov's house, from the clock, where the hands indicate inaccurate time throughout the comedy, the scale of both temporal and geographical space expands to the whole world and - who knows? - until eternity...
It is important for us to remember this in order to assess the true scale of the conflict, the outset of which occurs, as it should be, in act I.

According to the nature of the conflict, the plot of the work is also constructed. "Woe from Wit" - two parallel intrigues. But the social intrigue is wider; it seems to frame the love one. The combination of two intrigues at all stages of the development of the plot gives significance and lifelike credibility to the clashes of characters.

But Chatsky immediately touches the aunts as well. When he, not yet realizing that Molchalin was his rival in love, compared himself with him: “What am I more stupid than Molchalin? Where is he, by the way? Sophia is angry with him. She throws the phrase aside: “Not a man, a snake!” From that moment on, the nature of her relationship to Chatsky was completely determined for the reader and the viewer. But Chatsky still does not suspect which sick nerve he touched. Then Chatsky's torment is depicted step by step. Sophia's fainting, as it seemed to him, reveals everything: now there can be no doubt - Sophia loves Molchalin. This scene is a turning point in the development of the comedy love affair. If before that Chatsky, seeking Sophia's reciprocity, referred to his long-standing love for her, now he is trying with renewed fervor to explain to Sophia her terrible delusion. But in response, he hears praise from Molchalin. Moreover, the subsequent conversation between Chatsky and Molchalin, in which he spoke to the end, convinces Chatsky that Sophia looks at many things in life through the eyes of Molchalin. From now on, for Chatsky, the halo surrounding Sophia fades. Now his sarcasm is coming at her too. She joins the ranks of his persecutors and, in revenge for herself and for everyone, she is the first to spread the rumor about his madness.

As the action unfolds, a kind of regrouping of persons takes place. Love for Sophia brought Chatsky to Famusov's house. Even before he appears on the stage, Lisa speaks sympathetically about him, Chatsky's caustic remarks initially do not concern any of those present. He “slightly sorts out the oddities” of his acquaintances: Sophia’s father, a loyal member of the English Club, her uncle, then that black-haired man who, “wherever you go: here, as here,” three “tabloid faces who have been young for half a century” and have “relatives million”, finally, the “consumptive” enemy of books, “settled” in the “scientific committee”.

A. S. considered this incredulity of Chatsky one of the “charming” and “natural” features of comedy. Showing the clash of heroes, he stands entirely on the side of Chatsky and ends the play with his moral victory over opponents.

"Woe from Wit" is a great work of Russian realism. According to the definition of V. G. Belinsky, this is “the noblest humane work, energetic and, moreover, the first protest against the vile racial reality.” In terms of the depth and sharpness of the conflict, the clarity of its resolution, the richness of the specific material of political modernity, innovative dramatic techniques, the convexity of the images and the liveliness of the language, Woe from Wit is one of the most outstanding works of Russian literature X