Sophia is the main mystery of the comedy Woe from Wit. “Who will solve you!” (The riddle of Sophia in comedy A

“Who will figure you out!” (The riddle of Sophia in A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.”) One of the characters in the comedy, which to this day causes controversy among writers and critics, is, of course, Sofya Pavlovna Famusova. The nineteenth century, the spirit of which permeates all the actions and phenomena of comedy, divided critics into two camps. The most irreconcilable condemned the heroine in the most decisive manner. In particular, A.S. Pushkin spoke very sharply about Sophia: “Sophia is not sharply outlined - either a harlot, or a Moscow cousin.” So what is Sofya Pavlovna Famusova really like? At the beginning of the comedy, she appears to us as a spoiled Moscow young lady.

She subjugates the submissive and timid Molchalin to her desires and whims, dexterously deceives her own naive parent, and when he nevertheless catches her in an inappropriate form, she invents a “prophetic” dream with marvelous ease. f" The love affair between Sophia and Molchalin is introduced by Griboyedov into the narrative much earlier than Chatsky's appearance and long before Molchalin's self-exposure.

The reader does not yet know that Chatsky and Sophia grew up and matured together, that Chatsky had hopes for Sophia’s loyalty to adolescent love. In the very first conversation of the heroine with the maid Liza, the author in very sensual tones describes Sophia’s attitude towards her silent and devoted chosen one: He will take your hand, press it to your heart. He sighs from the depths of his soul. Not a free word, and so the whole night passes, Hand in hand, and his eyes do not take his eyes off me. However, the first impression of a romantic female image is quite deceptive.

As this work progresses, the reader begins to understand that Sophia does not fit into this concept. Already upon meeting Chatsky, there is no trace of that sentimental girl brought up on French romance novels. A cold Moscow girl is talking to the main character, accustomed to high-society manners of communication that exclude any kind of frankness and even human warmth. Very little time passes from the tortured “Oh, Chatsky, I’m glad to see you” to the angry, steely-tinged “Not a man, a snake ! The reader is confused.

What is the true essence of the heroine? It seems that Griboyedov deliberately forces him to tirelessly peer into Sophia’s face, covered with a veil of mystery, and try to answer a question that has no answer. The scene of Sophia fainting due to Molchalin's stupid fall from a horse again misleads the reader. Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what is behind this. Is it really that love for Molchalin is so great, and the words “Ah! My God! fell, killed himself! there is a cry of the soul, beating as a wounded bird in a cage of despair, or Sophia simply decided to annoy the annoying Chatsky, who completely unreasonably imagined himself to be the ruler of her thoughts and feelings.

Why did Sophia choose Molchalin? Yes, it is more convenient to deal with him, he can be tamed, he is obedient and uncomplaining, “a husband is a boy, a husband is a servant.” But such a person is not a match for the daughter of a respected Moscow gentleman. And Sophia realizes this. Therefore, this is precisely why she chooses Molchalin, challenging the prejudices and ridiculous beliefs of the ossified Moscow society. “What do I need rumors? Who. wants, so he judges,” the remark thrown by Sophia, as if by an invisible thread, connected her contradictory nature with the image of Chatsky, who consciously put himself in opposition to everyone surrounding and lying in wait for him on the sidelines of Griboyedov’s comedy.

But what if Sophia skillfully plays a more insidious role? After all, it was she who started the clockwork of the climax of the entire comedy, accidentally dropping the phrase: “He’s out of his mind,” characterizing Chatsky.

Like a snowball, inexorably growing in size like an avalanche, descending from the mountainside, the rumor began to spread among members of the “Famus” society, leading to a denouement.I. A. Goncharov compared Griboyedov’s Sofya Famusova with Pushkin’s Tatyana Larina: “In her love, she is just as ready to give herself away as Tatyana: both, as if sleepwalking, wander around in fascination with childish simplicity.” Sophia and Tatyana are strong representatives of the weaker sex, and while “The Silents are blissful in the world,” turning the world into a kingdom of darkness, they are the ones who make life brighter, becoming the only “ray of light in the dark kingdom.”

What will we do with the received material:

If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:

More abstracts, coursework, and dissertations on this topic:

“The present century” and the “past century” in A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
The main representative of the “present century” in comedy is Alexander Andreevich Chatsky - a young man, well educated, who realized that although “smoke.. Famusov himself (“A respectable member of the English Club to the grave”) declares that.. Every man who visits his house , he considers him as a potential groom for Sophia, but a “candidate for groom”...

Female images in A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
In comedy there are also other manifestations of this trend: female characters are typical for their era and placed in a typical, ordinary setting.. They all have different characters, but at the same time they are typical, as they express.. For example, Princess Tugoukhovskaya, who evaluates all the young people as possible grooms for their daughters..

This is the lyrical hero of Raevsky’s Message to Priklonsky, who exclaims: For the benefit of others, living is a sweet dream. You can be on par with them.. Chatsky is close to these ideas and he does not accept sycophancy by those before the earth.. On the pages of the comedy a number of off-stage characters are mentioned who can be classified as allies of the main character..

How can you understand the meaning of the title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov
The meaning of the comedy's title would be just as clear - woe to the smart man. But Griboyedov changed the name, and the meaning of the comedy immediately changed. To him.. Only a stupid person can “throw pearls in front of reptiles and the like.” "What is Chatsky writes Pushkin in his...

Ideas of Decembrism in Griboyedov's comedy "Woe from Wit"
In Griboedov's comedy Woe from Wit, like a mirror, the ethical and aesthetic views of the Decembrists were reflected. The aesthetics of the Decembrists arose at the junction... Such, for example, is the hero of Ryleev's poem of the same name, Voinarovsky. This is the lyrical... Let's remember Chatsky's famous monologue: Who is the judge? In this monologue, Chatsky, and with him the author, ridicules the nobles...

The controversy surrounding the main character of the comedy "Woe from Wit" A.S. Griboedova
He doesn’t even think whether they listen and understand him or not, he expressed everything that was on his heart and it seemed to make him feel better. This is generally... Chatsky, the main character of the comedy that appeared on the eve of the outrage on St. Isaac’s.. A lot of controversy has accumulated , mixed opinions about this comedy, and even more about its main character. My goal...

The role of Chatsky’s love drama in the main conflict of A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”
Alexander Andreevich brought with him new views on life, on the existing order. But the secular society of Moscow, accustomed to living without changing anything... This feeling began with childhood friendship (after all, Chatsky was a pupil in the house... The psychology of girls at that age is such that they need love, affection, attention, admiration. They are separated. .

The system of characters in the comedy by A.S. Griboyedov "Woe from Wit"
At the same time, Sophia found herself a victim of traditional Moscow upbringing, and, as a result, rejected both the caustic and brave Chatsky, whose... But, as a result, Sophia chose Alexei Stepanovich Molchalin - obsequious and... Liza is Sophia's maid and friend, selflessly devoted to his lady. For her good, she is ready to do anything -..

The comedy "Woe from Wit" by A.S. Griboedov is a realistic work
You can recall the theater of Kuchelbecker and Katenin, but Griboyedov became the real pioneer. Woe from Wit was an exceptional comedy in the world... In lyric poetry or epic, you can use a variety of means to... These three unities in the play coexist perfectly with elements of romanticism and realism. Signs of a romantic...

Comparative analysis of conflicts in the comedies "The Misanthrope" and "Woe from Wit"
Therefore, our task is to study the experience of famous literary scholars, analyze it and draw certain conclusions. Research.. It reflects the struggle of progressive-minded people with an inert society.. The play was written in those days of 1816-1824 when young people like Chatsky brought new ideas to society , mood. IN..

In numerous critical articles and notes about A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” written and published over the past one hundred and seventy-eight years, the only idea can be seen most clearly and clearly: this work is extremely ambiguous. Despite the apparent certainty of the posed problem of the relationship between a “man of a new formation” and the rotten through and through “Famus society”, in no case should one lose sight of the mystery and sometimes contradictory nature of the images, supposedly relegated to the background and introduced into the narrative only for greater brightness works. One of these comedy characters, who to this day causes controversy among writers and critics, is, of course, Sofya Pavlovna Famusova.
The nineteenth century, the spirit of which permeates all the actions and phenomena of comedy, divided critics into two camps. The most irreconcilable condemned the heroine in the most decisive manner. In particular, A.S. Pushkin spoke very sharply about Sophia: “Sophia is not sharply outlined - either a harlot, or a Moscow cousin.” V. G. Belinsky adhered to the same point of view: “The measure of a woman’s dignity can be the man she loves.” Struck by the originality of the heroines, they expressed a completely opposite point of view. Thus, I. A. Goncharov in the article “A Million Torments” wrote: “In her own, personal physiognomy, something of her own is hidden, hot, tender, even dreamy. She has some energy of character.” The words of B. Goller were even more decisive: “This is the only character whose actions are absolutely independent and independent.”
So what is Sofya Pavlovna Famusova really like? At the beginning of the comedy, she appears before us as a spoiled Moscow young lady who, according to her father Pavel Afanasyevich, “cannot sleep from French books.” She subjugates the submissive and timid Taciturn to her desires and whims, dexterously deceives her own naive parent, and when he nevertheless catches her in an inappropriate form, she with marvelous ease invents a “prophetic” dream:

Let me... see... first
Flowery meadow and I was looking for
Grass
Some, I don’t remember in reality.
Suddenly a nice person, one of those we
We'll see, as if we've known each other for centuries,
He appeared here with me; and insinuating and smart,
But timid... you know, who is born in poverty...

I want to go to him - you bring with you:
We are accompanied by moans, roars, laughter, and whistling monsters!
He shouts after him!..
Awoke. - Someone says:
Your voice was...

Sophia's love for Molchalin is introduced by Griboedov into the narrative much earlier than Chatsky's appearance and long before Molchalin's self-exposure. The reader does not yet know that Chatsky and Sophia grew up and matured together, that Chatsky had hopes for Sophia’s loyalty to adolescent love. In the very first conversation of the heroine with the maid Liza, the author in very sensual tones describes Sophia’s attitude towards her silent and devoted chosen one:

He takes your hand and presses it to your heart,
He will sigh from the depths of his soul,
Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,
Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me...

However, the first impression of a romantic female image is quite deceptive. The young heroine in the traditional comedy of classicism, as a rule, plays a simple and completely unambiguous role. As this work progresses, the reader begins to understand that Sophia does not fit into this concept. Already upon meeting Chatsky, there is no trace of that sentimental girl brought up on French romance novels. A cold Moscow girl, accustomed to high society manners of communication, which excludes any frankness and even human warmth, talks to the main character. Very little time passes from the tortured: “Oh, Chatsky, I’m glad to see you” to the angry, steely-tinged: “Not a man, a snake!” The reader is confused. What is the true essence of the heroine? It seems that Griboyedov deliberately forces him to tirelessly peer into Sophia’s face, covered with a veil of mystery, and try to answer a question that has no answer.
The scene of Sophia fainting due to Molchalin's stupid fall from a horse again misleads the reader. Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what is behind this. Either the love for Molchalin is really so great and the words: “Ah! My God! fell, killed himself!” there is a cry of the soul, beating as a wounded bird in a cage of despair, or Sophia simply decided to annoy the annoying Chatsky, who completely unreasonably imagined himself to be the ruler of her thoughts and feelings.
Even if Griboyedov assigned Sophia the role of a romantic, loving nature, then here too there is no complete clarity. Why did Sophia choose Molchalin? Yes, it is more convenient to deal with him, he can be tamed, he is obedient and uncomplaining, “a husband-boy, a husband-servant.” But this is definitely a negative character. Moreover, despite his obvious belonging to the “Famus society”, even there he does not deserve due respect: “... on tiptoe and not rich in words,” he has only two talents - moderation and accuracy. He is rootless and is listed in the archives. Such a person is not a match for the daughter of a respected Moscow gentleman. And Sophia realizes this. Therefore, this is precisely why she chooses Molchalin, challenging the prejudices and ridiculous beliefs of the ossified Moscow society. “What do I need rumors? Whoever wants to, judges it,” the remark thrown by Sophia seemed to connect her contradictory nature with the image of Chatsky, who consciously put himself in opposition to everyone around him and lying in wait for him on the sidelines of Griboyedov’s comedy.
But what if Sophia skillfully plays a more insidious role? After all, it was she who started the clockwork of the climax of the entire comedy, accidentally dropping the phrase: “He’s out of his mind,” characterizing Chatsky. Like a snowball, inexorably growing in size, descending like an avalanche from the mountainside, the rumor began to spread among members of the “Famus society,” leading to a denouement. Did Sophia take revenge on Chatsky for his departure and many years of wandering? Or did she become an innocent victim of the conflict between “old” and “new”, as well as betrayal on the part of Molchalin? Probably, more than a dozen years will pass, and the controversy surrounding the true face of the heroine of Griboedov’s comedy will not subside.
I. A. Goncharov compared Griboyedov’s Sofya Famusova with Pushkin’s Tatyana Larina: “...She, in her love, is just as ready to give herself away as Tatyana: both, as if sleepwalking, wander in fascination with childish simplicity.” Probably, they are also united by a unique position in their works: clearly belonging to a certain environment, they still stand above everything that happens and contemplate everything that happens. They are strong representatives of the weaker sex, and while the “Silent Ones are blissful in the world,” turning the world into a kingdom of darkness, they are the ones who make life brighter, becoming the only “ray of light in the dark kingdom.”

Essay text:

In numerous critical articles and notes about A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy Woe from Wit, written and published over the past one hundred and seventy-eight years, the only idea can be seen most clearly and clearly: this work is extremely ambiguous. Despite the apparent certainty of the posed problem of the relationship between a person of a new formation and Famus’s society, which is rotten through and through, in no case should one lose sight of the mystery and sometimes contradictory nature of the images, supposedly relegated to the background and introduced into the narrative only for greater brightness of the work. One of these comedy characters, who to this day causes controversy among writers and critics, is, of course, Sofya Pavlovna Famusova. The nineteenth century, the spirit of which permeates all the actions and phenomena of comedy, divided the critics into two camps. The most irreconcilable condemned the heroine in the most decisive manner. In particular, A.S. Pushkin spoke very sharply about Sophia: Sophia is not sharply delineated as either a harlot or a Moscow cousin. V. G. Belinsky adhered to the same point of view: The measure of a woman’s dignity can be the man she loves. Struck by the originality of the heroines, they expressed a completely opposite point of view. Thus, I. A. Goncharov wrote in his article Million of Torments: In her own, personal physiognomy, something of her own is hidden, hot, tender, even dreamy. She has some kind of character energy. The words of B. Goller were even more decisive: This is the only character whose actions are absolutely independent and independent. So what is Sofya Pavlovna Famusova really like? At the beginning of the comedy, she appears before us as a spoiled Moscow young lady who, according to her father Pavel Afanasyevich, cannot sleep from French books. She subjugates the submissive and timid Taciturn to her desires and whims, deftly tricking her naive parent around her finger, and when he nevertheless catches her in an inappropriate form, she with marvelous ease invents a prophetic dream: Let me... see... first the Flowery Meadow, and I was looking for some kind of Grass, I don’t remember in reality. Suddenly, a dear man, one of those whom we would see as if we had known each other forever, appeared with me; and insinuating and smart, But timid... you know, who was born in poverty... I want to see him you drag with you: We are seen off by the groans, roars, laughter, whistles of monsters! He shouts after him!.. I woke up. Someone says: Your voice was... Sophia's love for Molchalin is introduced by Griboyedov into the narrative much earlier than Chatsky's appearance and long before Molchalin's self-exposure. The reader does not yet know that Chatsky and Sophia grew up and matured together, that Chatsky had hopes for Sophia’s loyalty to adolescent love. In the very first conversation of the heroine with the maid Liza, the author in very sensual tones describes Sophia’s attitude towards her silent and devoted chosen one: He takes your hand and presses it to your heart, He sighs from the depths of your soul, Not a free word, and so the whole night goes by, Hand in hand, and never takes your eyes off me... However, the first impression of the romantic female image is quite deceptive. The young heroine in the traditional comedy of classicism, as a rule, plays a simple and completely unambiguous role. As this work progresses, the reader begins to understand that Sophia does not fit into this concept. Already upon meeting Chatsky, there is no trace of that sentimental girl brought up on French romance novels. A cold Moscow girl, accustomed to high society manners of communication, which excludes any frankness and even human warmth, talks to the main character. Very little time passes from the tortured: Oh, Chatsky, I’m glad to see you, to the angry, with a steely tint: Not a man, a snake! The reader is confused. What is the true essence of the heroine? It seems that Griboyedov deliberately forces him to tirelessly peer into Sophia’s face, covered with a veil of mystery, and try to answer a question that has no answer. The scene of Sophia fainting due to Molchalin’s stupid fall from a horse again misleads the reader. Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what is behind it. Either the love for Molchalin is really so great and the words: Ah! My God! fell, killed himself! there is a cry of the soul, beating like a wounded bird in a cage of despair, or Sophia simply decided to annoy the annoying Chatsky, who completely unreasonably imagined himself to be the ruler of her thoughts and feelings. Even if Griboyedov assigned Sophia the role of a romantic, loving nature, then here too there is no complete clarity. Why the choice of Sofia Molchalin? Yes, it is more convenient to deal with him, he can be tamed, he is obedient and uncomplaining, a husband-boy, a husband-servant. But this is definitely a negative character. Moreover, despite his obvious belonging to Famusov’s society, even there he does not deserve due respect: ... on tiptoe and not rich in words, he has only two talents: moderation and accuracy. He is rootless and is listed in the archives. Such a person is not a match for the daughter of a respected Moscow gentleman. And Sophia realizes this. Therefore, she chooses Molchalin’s lyric music, challenging the prejudices and absurd beliefs of the ossified Moscow society. What do I need rumors? Whoever wants to judge, Sophia’s remark, as if with an invisible thread, connected her contradictory nature with the image of Chatsky, who consciously put himself in opposition to everyone around him and lying in wait for him on the sidelines of Griboyedov’s comedy. But what if Sophia skillfully plays a more insidious role? After all, it was she who started the clockwork of the climax of the entire comedy, accidentally dropping the phrase: He is out of his mind, characterizing Chatsky. Like a snowball, inexorably growing in size, descending like an avalanche from the mountainside, the rumor began to spread among members of the Famus society, leading to a denouement. Did Sophia take revenge on Chatsky for his departure and many years of wandering? Or did she become an innocent victim of the conflict between old and new, as well as betrayal on the part of Molchalin? Probably, more than a dozen years will pass, and the controversy surrounding the true face of the heroine of Griboedov’s comedy will not subside. I. A. Goncharov compared Griboyedov's Sofya Famusova with Pushkin's Tatyana Larina: ... She, in her love, is just as ready to give herself away as Tatyana: both, as if sleepwalking, wander in infatuation with childish simplicity. Probably, they are also united by a unique position in their works: clearly belonging to a certain environment, they still stand above everything that happens and contemplate everything that happens. They are strong representatives of the weaker sex, and while the Molchalins are blissful in the world, turning the world into a kingdom of darkness, they are the ones who make life brighter, becoming the only ray of light in the dark kingdom.

The rights to the essay “Who will solve you! (the riddle of Sophia in the comedy by A. S. Griboyedov Woe from Wit.)” belong to its author. When quoting material, it is necessary to indicate a hyperlink to

In numerous critical articles and notes about A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit,” written and published over the past one hundred and seventy-eight years, the only idea can be seen most clearly and clearly: this work is extremely ambiguous. Despite the apparent certainty of the posed problem of the relationship between a “man of a new formation” and the rotten through and through “Famus society”, in no case should one lose sight of the mystery and sometimes contradictory nature of the images, supposedly relegated to the background and introduced into the narrative only for greater brightness works. One of these comedy characters, who to this day causes controversy among writers and critics, is, of course, Sofya Pavlovna Famusova.
The nineteenth century, the spirit of which permeates all the actions and phenomena of comedy, divided critics into two camps. The most irreconcilable condemned the heroine in the most decisive manner. In particular, A.S. Pushkin spoke very sharply about Sophia: “Sophia is not sharply outlined - either a harlot, or a Moscow cousin.” V. G. Belinsky adhered to the same point of view: “The measure of a woman’s dignity can be the man she loves.” Struck by the originality of the heroines, they expressed a completely opposite point of view. Thus, I. A. Goncharov in the article “A Million Torments” wrote: “In her own, personal physiognomy, something of her own is hidden, hot, tender, even dreamy. She has some energy of character.” The words of B. Goller were even more decisive: “This is the only character whose actions are absolutely independent and independent.”
So what is Sofya Pavlovna Famusova really like? At the beginning of the comedy, she appears before us as a spoiled Moscow young lady who, according to her father Pavel Afanasyevich, “cannot sleep from French books.” She subjugates the submissive and timid Taciturn to her desires and whims, dexterously deceives her own naive parent, and when he nevertheless catches her in an inappropriate form, she with marvelous ease invents a “prophetic” dream:

Let me... see... first
Flowery meadow and I was looking for
Grass
Some, I don’t remember in reality.
Suddenly a nice person, one of those we
We'll see, as if we've known each other for centuries,
He appeared here with me; and insinuating and smart,
But timid... you know, who is born in poverty...

I want to go to him - you bring with you:
We are accompanied by moans, roars, laughter, and whistling monsters!
He shouts after him!..
Awoke. - Someone says:
Your voice was...

Sophia's love for Molchalin is introduced by Griboedov into the narrative much earlier than Chatsky's appearance and long before Molchalin's self-exposure. The reader does not yet know that Chatsky and Sophia grew up and matured together, that Chatsky had hopes for Sophia’s loyalty to adolescent love. In the very first conversation of the heroine with the maid Liza, the author in very sensual tones describes Sophia’s attitude towards her silent and devoted chosen one:

He will take your hand and press it to your heart,
He will sigh from the depths of his soul,
Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,
Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me...

However, the first impression of a romantic female image is quite deceptive. The young heroine in the traditional comedy of classicism, as a rule, plays a simple and completely unambiguous role. As this work progresses, the reader begins to understand that Sophia does not fit into this concept. Already upon meeting Chatsky, there is no trace of that sentimental girl brought up on French romance novels. A cold Moscow girl, accustomed to high-society manners of communication, which excludes any frankness and even human warmth, talks to the main character. Very little time passes from the tortured: “Oh, Chatsky, I’m glad to see you” to the angry, steely-tinged: “Not a man, a snake!” The reader is confused. What is the true essence of the heroine? It seems that Griboyedov deliberately forces him to tirelessly peer into Sophia’s face, covered with a veil of mystery, and try to answer a question that has no answer.
The scene of Sophia fainting due to Molchalin's stupid fall from a horse again misleads the reader. Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what is behind this. Either the love for Molchalin is really so great and the words: “Ah! My God! fell, killed himself!” there is a cry of the soul, beating as a wounded bird in a cage of despair, or Sophia simply decided to annoy the annoying Chatsky, who completely unreasonably imagined himself to be the ruler of her thoughts and feelings.
Even if Griboyedov assigned Sophia the role of a romantic, loving nature, then here too there is no complete clarity. Why did Sophia choose Molchalin? Yes, it is more convenient to deal with him, he can be tamed, he is obedient and uncomplaining, “a husband-boy, a husband-servant.” But this is definitely a negative character. Moreover, despite his obvious belonging to the “Famus society”, even there he does not deserve due respect: “... on tiptoe and not rich in words,” he has only two talents - moderation and accuracy. He is rootless and is listed in the archives. Such a person is not a match for the daughter of a respected Moscow gentleman. And Sophia realizes this. Therefore, this is precisely why she chooses Molchalin, challenging the prejudices and ridiculous beliefs of the ossified Moscow society. “What do I need rumors? Whoever wants to, judges it,” the remark thrown by Sophia seemed to connect her contradictory nature with the image of Chatsky, who consciously put himself in opposition to everyone around him and lying in wait for him on the sidelines of Griboyedov’s comedy.
But what if Sophia skillfully plays a more insidious role? After all, it was she who started the clockwork of the climax of the entire comedy, accidentally dropping the phrase: “He’s out of his mind,” characterizing Chatsky. Like a snowball, inexorably growing in size, descending like an avalanche from the mountainside, the rumor began to spread among members of the “Famus society,” leading to a denouement. Did Sophia take revenge on Chatsky for his departure and many years of wandering? Or did she become an innocent victim of the conflict between “old” and “new”, as well as betrayal on the part of Molchalin? Probably, more than a dozen years will pass, and the controversy surrounding the true face of the heroine of Griboedov’s comedy will not subside.
I. A. Goncharov compared Griboyedov’s Sofya Famusova with Pushkin’s Tatyana Larina: “...She, in her love, is just as ready to give herself away as Tatyana: both, as if sleepwalking, wander in fascination with childish simplicity.” Probably, they are also united by a unique position in their works: clearly belonging to a certain environment, they still stand above everything that happens and contemplate everything that happens. They are strong representatives of the weaker sex, and while the “Silent Ones are blissful in the world,” turning the world into a kingdom of darkness, they are the ones who make life brighter, becoming the only “ray of light in the dark kingdom.”

One of the characters in the comedy, which to this day causes controversy among writers and critics, is, of course, Sofya Pavlovna Famusova. The nineteenth century, the spirit of which permeates all the actions and phenomena of comedy, divided critics into two camps. The most irreconcilable condemned the heroine in the most decisive manner. In particular, A.S. Pushkin spoke very sharply about Sophia: “Sophia is not sharply outlined - either a harlot, a Moscow cousin of the crowd.”

So what is Sofya Pavlovna Famusova really like? At the beginning of the comedy, she appears to us as a spoiled Moscow young lady. She subjugates the submissive and timid Molchalin to her desires and whims, dexterously deceives her own naive parent, and when he nevertheless catches her in an inappropriate form, she with marvelous ease invents a “prophetic” dream.

The love between Sophia and Molchalin is introduced by Griboyedov into the narrative much earlier than Chatsky’s appearance and long before Molchalin’s self-exposure. The reader does not yet know that Chatsky and Sophia grew up and matured together, that Chatsky had hopes for Sophia’s loyalty to adolescent love. In the very first conversation of the heroine with the maid Liza, the author in very sensual tones describes Sophia’s attitude towards her silent and devoted chosen one:

He will take your hand and press it to your heart,

He will sigh from the depths of his soul,

Not a free word, and so the whole night passes,

Hand in hand, and doesn’t take his eyes off me...

However, the first impression of a romantic female image is quite deceptive. As this work progresses, the reader begins to understand that Sophia does not fit into this concept. Already upon meeting Chatsky, there is no trace of that sentimental girl brought up on French romance novels. A cold Moscow girl, accustomed to high society manners of communication, which excludes any frankness and even human warmth, talks to the main character. Very little time passes from the tortured “Oh, Chatsky, I’m glad to see you” to the angry, steely-tinged “Not a man, a snake!” The reader is confused. What is the true essence of the heroine?

It seems that Griboyedov deliberately forces him to tirelessly peer into Sophia’s face, covered with a veil of mystery, and try to answer a question that has no answer. The scene of Sophia fainting due to Molchalin's stupid fall from a horse again misleads the reader. Now it is no longer possible to say with certainty what is behind this. Perhaps the love for Molchalin is really so great. and the words “Ah! My God! fell, killed himself! there is a cry of the soul, beating as a wounded bird in a cage of despair, or Sophia simply decided to annoy the annoying Chatsky, who completely unreasonably imagined himself to be the ruler of her thoughts and feelings.

Why did Sophia choose Molchalin? Yes, it is more convenient to deal with him, he can be tamed, he is obedient and uncomplaining, “a husband is a boy, a husband is a servant.” But such a person is not a match for the daughter of a respected Moscow gentleman. And Sophia realizes this. Therefore, this is precisely why she chooses Molchalin, challenging the prejudices and ridiculous beliefs of the ossified Moscow society.

But what if Sophia skillfully plays a more insidious role? After all, it was she who started the clockwork of the climax of the entire comedy, accidentally dropping the phrase: “He’s out of his mind,” characterizing Chatsky. Like a snowball, inexorably growing in size like an avalanche, descending from the mountainside, the rumor began to spread among members of the “Famus” society, leading to a denouement.