Again about it? Yes, now - Chatsky!
In my head since school times developed such interpretation of characters “ Woe from Wit “: Famusov is nearly the petty tyrant, he has some droplet of mind, but absolutely insignificant person; Molchalin is a prizhivalshchik; Skalozub - the military (and that says it all!) ; Sofya is the clear head and very thin nature, Chatsky - the carrier of advanced views and ideas, the sufferer for progress.
This the last is also the most disputable character (I was engaged in Sofya in the previous article).
What is known of Chatsky? Age - 20 years (or it is very close to it, at most 22). In the years he visited military and civil service, traveled not less than a year and suddenly returned.
He is educated, clever, an oster on language that he is ready to sell the father and mother for a tag, but in soul … In that place where he says the well-known phrase “ And the fatherland smoke is sweet and pleasant to us “ the declaration of love to that Wednesday which it left for three years sounds.
Why Chatsky escaped from Famusov? What it forced to be removed so hastily from the house which was to it as fatherly?
There are only indirect instructions on it in the form of Chatsky`s complaints that Sofya does not give him a kiss that she is absolutely unrecognizable in relation to it. It is possible to think that before sudden separation of an event began to develop in such a way that only immediate departure could rescue reputation both it, and its. Apparently, Sofya`s temperament removed their relations for an admissible framework. It is very probable that the host began to suspect something or even found something absolutely unacceptable.
Return was sudden. It was the surprise for all, and unpleasant both for Sofya, and for Famusov, and for Molchalin. Chatsky is necessary to nobody, nobody waits for him, this is literally the excess person.
Famusov grew up it, and received three years` silence instead of gratitude, he is not eager to make Chatsky the son-in-law at all. And it can be understood: Chatsky not only does not respect him, he did not even think of an elementary tribute of politeness. Coming back to the house in which grew, he was simply obliged to warn the second father about return (I think, it is quite possible to call Famusov so).
Scornful tone of Chatsky in relation to Famusov, his aspiration to set aside towards all who prevent it to sort out the relations with Sofya - as it can cause the benevolent attitude towards him? Chatsky literally broke into the house as the thief!
What to tell about speeches! It is ready to destroy everyone, gets to all - and it seems that in his speeches there is depth, sense. But it is worth remembering Famusov`s words about the associates:
And our old men?? - As they will be taken by enthusiasm,
Will condemn about affairs that they the word - a sentence, -
stolbovy everything, in a mustache blow nobody;
I the government sometimes are so interpreted,
That if who overhears them... trouble!
Not that novelty never entered, -
Rescue us my God! No. And will carp
At that, at this, and is more often to anything,
Will argue, will make a noise, and... will disperse.
Direct chancellors in resignation - on mind!
What follows from this fragment? Chatsky only washed the dirty linen in public, he announced that he is discussed in different forms among officials of a high rank long ago. And how from this it is possible to draw a conclusion that the revolutionary Chatsky nearly?
In my opinion, it is the teenager angered on all and on all from whom took away a live toy (or which he refused itself in due time), who did not have enough manners, mind to keep neither on military, nor on civil service, to conduct the poor rural economy (at it as - in any way, 400 souls). It has no purpose in life - and these were told everything.
We do not know why Alexander Sergeyevich Griboyedov wrote this very interesting play. What so excited A.S. Griboyedov what event (or a chain of events)? Anyway, “ school “ reading of the play has under itself no soil because “ Woe from Wit “ not the satire, the play bytopisut customs. The description not directly, it is veiled and something reminds “ Dangerous liaisons “ Choderlos de Laclos.
It is possible to accept treatment of the play which was stated by I. A. Goncharov in the article “ Milyon of torments “ - it is pink, idealistic. In it Chatsky`s characteristic which is scattered according to the play is not considered at all. And nobody seriously challenged I. A. Goncharov`s opinion, or did not show us other critical notes about the play (I. A. Goncharov, by the way, mentions that according to A.S. Pushkin Chatsky in general has mind).
For what all this is written? Frankly - out of offense that you were inflated in youth that to you enclosed in the head some fabrications unimaginable absolutely (at least and about characters who have no relation to our reality).
Imagine that you wrote it in your school composition! It is impossible! Scandal!
But here in " theater; Contemporary “ in Moscow - a premiere (!) “ Woe from Wit “. The indignant critic does not know how to show the indignation concerning what was seen and heard (and it was possible to re-read once again the original!). Full and unconditional condemnation (from what I can conclude that in the head of the reviewer the same stereotypes which were created in me by school education).
So in spite of the fact that the play is nearly 200 years old, its history begins today anew.
Read classics! Derive pleasure from read and from your new impressions!]