The history of the creation of Fonvizin’s work “The Minor”
DI. Fonvizin is one of the most prominent figures educational movement in Russia in the 18th century. He perceived the ideas of Enlightenment humanism especially keenly, and lived in the grip of ideas about the high moral duties of a nobleman. Therefore, the writer was especially upset by the nobles’ failure to fulfill their duty to society: “I happened to travel around my land. I saw what most of those bearing the name of a nobleman rely on their curiosity. I have seen many of them who serve, or, moreover, take places in the service just to ride a pair. I have seen many others who immediately resigned as soon as they gained the right to harness fours. I have seen contemptuous descendants from the most respectable ancestors. In a word, I saw nobles servile. I am a nobleman, and this is what tore my heart apart.” This is what Fonvizin wrote in 1783 in a letter to the author of “Facts and Fables,” the authorship of which belonged to Empress Catherine II herself.
The name Fonvizin became known to the general public after he created the comedy “Brigadier”. Then for more than ten years the writer was involved in government affairs. And only in 1781 he completed a new comedy, “The Minor.” Fonvizin did not leave evidence of the creation of “Nedoroslya”. The only story dedicated to the creation of the comedy was recorded much later by Vyazemsky. We are talking about the scene in which Eremeevna defends Mitrofanushka from Skotinin. “It is recounted from the words of the author himself that, having begun to explore the phenomenon mentioned, he went for a walk in order to think about it while walking. At the Myasnitsky Gate he came across a fight between two women. He stopped and began to guard nature. Returning home with the spoils of his observations, he drew his phenomenon and included in it the word hooks, which he overheard on the battlefield” (Vyazemsky, 1848).
Catherine's government, frightened by Fonvizin's first comedy, for a long time opposed the production of the writer's new comedy. Only in 1782 did Fonvizin’s friend and patron N.I. Panin, through the heir to the throne, the future Paul I, managed with great difficulty to achieve the production of “The Minor.” The comedy was performed in a wooden theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow by the actors of the court theater. Fonvizin himself took part in the actors learning their roles and was involved in all the details of the production. The role of Starodum was created by Fonvizin with the expectation of best actor Russian theater I.A. Dmitrevsky. Possessing a noble, refined appearance, the actor constantly occupied the role of the first hero-lover in the theater. And although the performance was a complete success, soon after the premiere the theater, on the stage of which “The Minor” was first staged, was closed and disbanded. The attitude of the empress and the ruling circles towards Fonvizin changed dramatically: until the end of his life, the author of “The Minor” felt from that time on that he was a disgraced, persecuted writer.
As for the name of the comedy, the word “minor” itself is perceived today not as intended by the author of the comedy. In the time of Fonvizin, this was a completely definite concept: this was the name given to nobles who had not received proper education, and who were therefore forbidden to enter the service and marry. So the undergrowth could be more than twenty years old, while Mitrofanushka in Fonvizin’s comedy is sixteen years old. With the appearance of this character, the term “underage” acquired a new meaning - “a dunce, a dumbass, a teenager with limited vicious inclinations.”
Gender, genre, creative method in Fonvizin’s work “Minor”
Second half of the 18th century. - the heyday of theatrical classicism in Russia. It is the comedy genre that is becoming the most important and widespread in stage and dramatic arts. Best comedies of this time are part of social and literary life, are associated with satire and often have a political orientation. The popularity of comedy lay in its direct connection with life. “The Minor” was created within the framework of the rules of classicism: the division of characters into positive and negative, schematism in their depiction, the rule of three unities in composition, “speaking names.” However, in comedy there are also visible realistic features: authenticity of images, depiction of noble life and social relations.
The famous creativity researcher D.I. Fonvizina G.A. Gukovsky believed that “in Nedorosl” two literary style, and classicism is defeated. Classic rules It was forbidden to mix sad, cheerful and serious motives. “In Fonvizin’s comedy there are elements of drama, there are motives that were supposed to touch and touch the viewer. In “The Minor,” Fonvizin not only laughs at vices, but also glorifies virtue. “The Minor” is half-comedy, half-drama. In this regard, Fonvizin, breaking the tradition of classicism, took advantage of the lessons of the new bourgeois dramaturgy of the West.” (G.A. Gukovsky. Russian literature XVIII century. M., 1939).
Having made both negative and positive characters life-like, Fonvizin managed to create new type realistic comedy. Gogol wrote that the plot of “The Minor” helped the playwright to deeply and insightfully reveal the most important aspects social existence of Russia, “the wounds and illnesses of our society, severe internal abuses, which by the merciless power of irony are exposed in stunning evidence” (N.V. Gogol, complete collection of works, vol. VIII).
The accusatory pathos of the content of “The Minor” is fed by two powerful sources, equally dissolved in the structure of the dramatic action. These are satire and journalism. Destructive and merciless satire fills all scenes depicting lifestyle Prostakova family. Starodum’s final remark, which ends “The Minor”: “Here are the evil spirits worthy fruits!” - gives the whole play a special sound.
Subjects
The comedy “Minor” is based on two problems that especially worried the writer. This is the problem of the moral decay of the nobility and the problem of education. Understood quite broadly, education in the minds of thinkers of the 18th century. was considered as the primary factor determining moral character person. In Fonvizin’s ideas, the problem of education became national significance, since proper upbringing could save noble society from degradation.
The comedy “Nedorosl” (1782) became a landmark event in the development of Russian comedy. It represents a complex, well-thought-out system in which every line, every character, every word is subordinated to revealing the author's intention. Starting the play like domestic comedy morals, Fonvizin does not stop there, but boldly goes further, to the root cause of “evil morality,” the fruits of which are known and strictly condemned by the author. The reason for the vicious education of the nobility in feudal and autocratic Russia is the established state system, which gives rise to arbitrariness and lawlessness. Thus, the problem of education turns out to be inextricably linked with the entire life and political structure of the state in which people live and act from top to bottom. The Skotinins and Prostakovs, ignorant, limited in mind, but not limited in their power, can only educate their own kind. Their characters are drawn by the author especially carefully and fully, with all the authenticity of life. Fonvizin significantly expanded the scope of classicism’s requirements for the comedy genre here. The author completely overcomes the schematism inherent in his earlier heroes, and the characters in “The Minor” become not only real persons, but also common nouns.
The idea of the analyzed work
Defending her cruelty, crimes and tyranny, Prostakova says: “Am I not powerful in my people too?” The noble but naive Pravdin objects to her: “No, madam, no one is free to tyrannize.” And then she unexpectedly refers to the law: “I’m not free! A nobleman is not free to flog his servants when he wants; But why have we been given a decree on the freedom of the nobility? The amazed Starodum and together with him the author exclaim only: “She is a master at interpreting decrees!”
Subsequently, historian V.O. Klyuchevsky rightly said: “It’s all about the last words of Mrs. Prostakova; they contain the whole meaning of the drama and the whole drama is in them... She wanted to say that the law justifies her lawlessness.” Prostakova does not want to recognize any duties of the nobility, she calmly violates Peter the Great’s law on the compulsory education of nobles, she knows only her rights. In her person, a certain part of the nobles refuses to fulfill the laws of their country, their duty and responsibilities. There is no need to talk about any kind of noble honor, personal dignity, faith and loyalty, mutual respect, serving state interests. Fonvizin saw what this actually led to: state collapse, immorality, lies and corruption, ruthless oppression of serfs, general theft and the Pugachev uprising. That’s why he wrote about Catherine’s Russia: “The state in which the most honorable of all states, which must defend the fatherland together with the sovereign and its corps and represent the nation, guided by honor alone, the nobility, already exists in name only and is sold to every scoundrel who has robbed the fatherland.”
So, the idea of the comedy: condemnation of ignorant and cruel landowners, who consider themselves full masters of life, do not comply with state and moral laws, affirmation of the ideals of humanity and enlightenment.
Nature of the conflict
The conflict of the comedy lies in the clash of two opposing views on the role of the nobility in public life countries. Mrs. Prostakova states that the decree “on noble freedom” (which freed the nobleman from compulsory service to the state established by Peter I) made him “free” primarily in relation to serfs, freeing him from all burdensome human and moral responsibilities to society. Fonvizin puts a different view on the role and responsibilities of a nobleman into the mouth of Starodum, the person closest to the author. Starodum on political and moral ideals- a man of the Peter the Great era, which is contrasted in the comedy with the era of Catherine.
All the heroes of the comedy are drawn into the conflict, the action seems to be taken out of the landowner's house, family and acquires a socio-political character: the arbitrariness of the landowners, supported by the authorities, and the lack of rights of the peasants.
Main characters
The audience in the comedy “Minor” was primarily attracted by the positive characters. Received with great enthusiasm serious scenes, in which Starodum and Pravdin performed. Thanks to Starodum, performances turned into a kind of public demonstration. “At the end of the play,” recalls one of his contemporaries, “the audience threw G. Dmitrevsky a wallet filled with gold and silver onto the stage... G. Dmitrevsky, picking it up, made a speech to the audience and said goodbye to her” (“Khudozhestvennaya Gazeta”, 1840, No. 5.)-
One of the main characters of Fonvizin's play is Starodum. In his worldview, he is a bearer of the ideas of the Russian noble Enlightenment. Starodum served in the army, fought bravely, was wounded, but was not rewarded. She got it ex-buddy, a count who refused to go to the active army. Having retired, Starodum tries to serve at court. Disappointed, he leaves for Siberia, but remains true to his ideals. He is the ideological inspirer of the fight against Prostakova. In reality, Starodum’s like-minded official Pravdin acts on the Prostakovs’ estate not on behalf of the government, but “out of his own deed of heart.” The success of Starodum determined Fonvizin’s decision to publish the satirical magazine “Friend” in 1788 honest people, or Starodum."
The positive characters are depicted by the playwright somewhat palely and schematically. Starodum and his associates teach from the stage throughout the entire play. But these were the laws of dramaturgy of that time: classicism presupposed the depiction of heroes who delivered monologues and teachings “from the author.” Behind Starodum, Pravdin, Sophia and Milon stands, of course, Fonvizin himself with his rich experience of state and court service and unsuccessful struggle for his noble educational ideas.
WITH amazing realism Fonvizin presents negative characters: Mrs. Prostakova, her husband and son Mitrofan, Prostakova’s evil and greedy brother Taras Skotinin. All of them are enemies of enlightenment and law, they bow only to power and wealth, they fear only material force and are always cunning, using all means to achieve their benefits, guided only by their practical mind and their own interest. They simply do not have morals, ideas, ideals, or any moral principles, not to mention knowledge and respect for laws.
The central figure of this group, one of significant characters Fonvizin's plays are Mrs. Prostakova. She immediately becomes the main spring driving the stage action, for in this provincial noblewoman there is some powerful vital force that is lacking not only in the positive characters, but also in her lazy, selfish son and pig-like brother. “This face in a comedy is unusually well conceived psychologically and superbly sustained dramatically,” historian V.O., an expert on the era, said about Prostakova. Klyuchevsky. Yes, this character is completely negative. But the whole point of Fonvizin’s comedy is that his Mrs. Prostakova is a living person, a purely Russian type, and that all the spectators knew this type personally and understood that, leaving the theater, they would inevitably meet with the Prostakova Mrs. real life and will be defenseless.
From morning to evening, this woman fights, puts pressure on everyone, oppresses, orders, spies, cunning, lies, swears, robs, beats, even the rich and influential Starodum, government official Pravdin and officer Milon with a military team cannot calm her down. At the heart of this living, strong, completely folk character- monstrous tyranny, intrepid impudence, greed for the material goods of life, the desire for everything to be according to her liking and will. But this evil, cunning creature is a mother, she selflessly loves her Mitrofanushka and does all this for the sake of her son, causing him terrible moral harm. “This insane love for one’s child is our strong Russian love, which in a person who has lost his dignity was expressed in such a perverted form, in such a wonderful combination with tyranny, so that the more she loves her child, the more she hates everything that don’t eat her child,” N.V. wrote about Prostakova. Gogol. For the sake of her son’s material well-being, she throws her fists at her brother, is ready to grapple with Milon armed with a sword, and even hopeless situation wants to gain time to use bribery, threats and appeals to influential patrons to change the official court verdict on the guardianship of her estate, announced by Pravdin. Prostakova wants her, her family, her peasants to live according to her practical reason and will, and not according to some laws and rules of enlightenment: “Whatever I want, I’ll put it on my own.”
Place of minor characters
Other characters also act on the stage: Prostakova’s downtrodden and intimidated husband and her brother Taras Skotinin, who loves his pigs more than anything in the world, and the noble “minor” - his mother’s favorite, the Prostakovs’ son Mitrofan, who does not want to learn anything, spoiled and corrupted by his mother’s upbringing. Next to them are the following: the Prostakovs' servant - the tailor Trishka, the serf nanny, the former nurse Mitrofana Eremeevna, his teacher - the village sexton Kuteikin, the retired soldier Tsifirkin, the cunning rogue German coachman Vralman. In addition, the remarks and speeches of Prostakova, Skotinin and other characters - positive and negative - constantly remind the viewer of the peasants of the Russian serf village, invisibly present behind the scenes, given by Catherine II to full and uncontrolled power by Skotinin and Prostakov. It is they, remaining behind the stage, who actually become the main suffering face of the comedy; their fate casts a menacing, tragic reflection on the fate of its noble characters. The names of Prostakova, Mitrofan, Skotinin, Kuteikin, Vralman became household names.
Plot and composition
An analysis of the work shows that the plot of Fonvizin’s comedy is simple. In the family of provincial landowners the Prostakovs, their distant relative lives - Sophia, who remained an orphan. Mrs. Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin and the Prostakovs’ son Mitrofan would like to marry Sophia. At a critical moment for the girl, when she is desperately divided by her uncle and nephew, another uncle appears - Starodum. He becomes convinced of the evil nature of the Prostakov family with the help of the progressive official Pravdin. Sophia marries the man she loves - officer Milon. The Prostakov estate is taken into state custody for cruel treatment with serfs. Mitrofan is sent to military service.
Fonvizin based the plot of the comedy on the conflict of the era, the socio-political life of the 70s - early 80s. XVIII century This is a struggle with the serf woman Prostakova, depriving her of the right to own her estate. At the same time, other storylines are traced in the comedy: the struggle for Sofya Prostakova, Skotinin and Milon, the story of the union of Sophia and Milon who love each other. Although they do not form the main plot.
“The Minor” is a comedy in five acts. Events take place on the Prostakov estate. A significant part of the dramatic action in “The Minor” is devoted to solving the problem of education. These are scenes of Mitrofan's teachings, the vast majority of Starodum's moral teachings. The culminating point in the development of this theme, undoubtedly, is the scene of Mitrofan’s examination in the 4th act of the comedy. This satirical picture, deadly in terms of the power of the accusatory sarcasm contained in it, serves as a verdict on the system of education of the Prostakovs and Skotinins.
Artistic originality
Fascinating, rapidly developing plot, sharp remarks, bold comic situations, individualized spoken language of characters, evil satire on Russian nobility, ridicule of the fruits of the French enlightenment - all this was new and attractive. Young Fonvizin attacked noble society and its vices, the fruits of half-enlightenment, the ulcer of ignorance and serfdom that struck human minds and souls. He showed this dark kingdom as a stronghold of severe tyranny, everyday everyday cruelty, immorality and lack of culture. Theater as a means of social public satire required characters and language understandable to the audience, sharp current problems, recognizable collisions. All this is in Fonvizin’s famous comedy “The Minor,” which is still staged today.
Fonvizin created the language of Russian drama, correctly understanding it as the art of words and a mirror of society and man. He did not at all consider this language ideal and final, or his heroes as positive characters. Being a member Russian Academy, the writer was seriously engaged in studying and improving his contemporary language. Fonvizin masterfully builds the linguistic characteristics of his characters: these are rude, offensive words in Prostakova’s uncouth speeches; the words of soldier Tsyfirkin, characteristic of military life; Church Slavonic words and quotes from the spiritual books of seminarian Kuteikin; Vralman's broken Russian speech and the speech of the noble heroes of the play - Starodum, Sophia and Pravdin. Certain words and phrases from Fonvizin's comedy became popular. Thus, already during the life of the playwright, the name Mitrofan became a household name and meant a lazy person and an ignoramus. Phraseologisms have become widely known: “Trishkin caftan”, “I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”, etc.
Meaning of the work
The “people's” (according to Pushkin) comedy “Nedorosl” reflected the acute problems of Russian life. The audience, seeing it in the theater, at first laughed heartily, but then they were horrified, experienced deep sadness and called Fonvizin’s cheerful play a modern Russian tragedy. Pushkin left for us the most valuable testimony about the audience of that time: “My grandmother told me that during the performance of Nedoroslya there was a crush in the theater - the sons of the Prostakovs and Skotinins, who had come to the service from the steppe villages, were present here - and, consequently, they saw relatives and friends in front of them , your family." Fonvizin's comedy was a faithful satirical mirror, for which there is nothing to blame. “The strength of the impression is that it is made up of two opposite elements: laughter in the theater is replaced by heavy thought upon leaving it,” historian V.O. wrote about “The Minor.” Klyuchevsky.
Gogol, Fonvizin’s student and heir, aptly called “The Minor” authentically social comedy: “Fonvizin’s comedy amazes the brutal brutality of man, resulting from a long, insensitive, unshakable stagnation in the remote corners and backwaters of Russia... There is nothing caricatured in it: everything is taken alive from nature and verified by the knowledge of the soul.” Realism and satire help the author of the comedy talk about the fate of education in Russia. Fonvizin, through the mouth of Starodum, called education “the key to the well-being of the state.” And all the comic and tragic circumstances and the very characters of negative characters can safely be called the fruits of ignorance and evil.
In Fonvizin's comedy there is grotesque, and satirical comedy, and a farcical beginning, and a lot of serious things, something that makes the viewer think. With all this, “Nedorosl” had a strong impact on the development of Russian national dramaturgy, as well as the entire “most magnificent and, perhaps, most socially fruitful line of Russian literature - the accusatory-realistic line” (M. Gorky).
This is interesting
The characters can be divided into three groups: negative (Prostakovs, Mitrofan, Skotinin), positive (Pravdin, Milon, Sophia, Starodum), the third group includes all the other characters - these are mainly servants and teachers. Negative characters and their servants have a common vernacular language. The Skotinins' vocabulary consists mainly of words used in the barnyard. This is well shown by the speech of Skotinin - Uncle Mitrofan. It is all filled with words: pig, piglets, barn. The idea of life begins and ends with the barnyard. He compares his life with the life of his pigs. For example: “I want to have my own piglets,” “if I have... a special barn for each pig, then I’ll find a little one for my wife.” And he is proud of it: “Well, be I a pig’s son, if...” The vocabulary of his sister Mrs. Prostakova is a little more diverse due to the fact that her husband is “a fool beyond counting” and she has to do everything herself. But Skotinin’s roots are also evident in her speech. Favorite curse word: “cattle.” To show that Prostakova is not far behind her brother in development, Fonvizin sometimes denies her basic logic. For example, such phrases: “Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we can’t tear off anything anymore,” “So is it necessary to be like a tailor in order to be able to sew a caftan well?”
All that can be said about her husband is that he is a man of few words and does not open his mouth without his wife’s instructions. But this characterizes him as a “countless fool,” a weak-willed husband who fell under the heel of his wife. Mitrofanushka is also a man of few words, although, unlike his father, he has freedom of speech. Skotinin's roots are manifested in his inventiveness of curse words: “old bastard”, “garrison rat”. Servants and teachers have in their speech characteristic features classes and parts of society to which they belong. Eremeevna’s speech is constant excuses and a desire to please. Teachers: Tsyfirkin is a retired sergeant, Kuteikin is a sexton from Pokrov. And with their speech they show their belonging to the type of activity.
Everyone has characters Apart from the positive ones, the speech is very colorful and emotionally charged. You may not understand the meaning of words, but the meaning of what is said is always clear.
The speech of the positive heroes is not so bright. All four of them lack colloquial, colloquial phrases in their speech. This is a bookish speech, a speech educated people of that time, which practically does not express emotions. You understand the meaning of what is said from the direct meaning of the words. Milon's speech is almost impossible to distinguish from Pravdin's speech. It is also very difficult to tell anything about Sophia based on her speech. An educated, well-behaved young lady, as Starodum would call her, sensitive to the advice and instructions of her beloved uncle. Starodum’s speech is completely determined by the fact that the author put his own into the mouth of this hero. moral program: rules, principles, moral laws by which a “loving person” must live. Starodum's monologues are structured in this way: Starodum first tells a story from his life, and then draws a moral.
As a result, it turns out that the speech negative hero characterizes himself, and speech positive hero used by the author to express his thoughts. The person is depicted three-dimensionally, the ideal is depicted in a plane.
Makogonenko G.I. Denis Fonvizin. Creative path M.-L., 1961.
Makogonezho G.I. From Fonvizin to Pushkin (From the history of Russian realism). M., 1969.
Nazarenko M.I. “An incomparable mirror” (Types and prototypes in D.I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor”) // Russian language, literature, culture at school and university. K., 2005.
StrichekA. Denis Fonvizin. Russia of the Enlightenment. M., 1994.
The rich ideological and thematic content of the comedy “The Minor” is embodied in a masterfully developed art form. Fonvizin managed to create a coherent plan for the comedy, skillfully interweaving pictures of everyday life with revealing the views of the characters. With great care and breadth, Fonvizin described not only the main characters, but also secondary ones, like Eremeevna, teachers and even the tailor Trishka, revealing in each of them some kind of new side in reality, without repeating itself anywhere. All the heroes of his comedy are drawn not by an indifferent contemplator of life, but by a citizen writer who clearly shows his attitude towards the people he portrays. He executes some with angry indignation and a caustic, killing laugh, treats others with cheerful mockery, and depicts others with great sympathy. Fonvizin showed himself to be a deep expert human heart, human character. He skillfully reveals spiritual life heroes, their attitude towards people, their actions. The same purpose is served in comedy by stage directions, that is, by the author's instructions to the actors. For example: “stammering out of timidity”, “with annoyance”, “frightened, with anger”, “delighted”, “impatiently”, “trembling and threatening”, etc. Such remarks were news in Russian dramatic works of the XVIII century.
IN artistic style comedy, the struggle between classicism and realism is noticeable, i.e. the desire for the most possible true portrayal life. The first is clearly on the side of realism.
This is manifested mainly in the depiction of characters, especially negative ones. They - typical representatives of their class, widely and comprehensively shown. These are living people, and not the personification of any one quality, which was typical for the works of classicism. Even positive images are not devoid of vitality. And Prostakova, Skotinin, especially Mitrofanushka are so vital and typical that their names have become household names.
The rules of classicism are also violated in the very construction of comedy. These rules prohibited mixing the comic and dramatic, cheerful and sad in the play. In comedy it was supposed to correct morals with laughter. In “The Minor,” in addition to funny (comic), there are also dramatic scenes (Prostakova’s drama at the end of the work). Along with comic paintings, there are scenes that reveal the difficult sides of serf life. In addition, the comedy contains scenes that are only indirectly related to the main action (for example, the scene with Trishka and a number of others), but the author needed them for a broad and truthful sketch of everyday life.
The language of the comedy is so bright and apt that some expressions have passed from it into life like proverbs: “If I don’t want to study, I want to get married”; " To my stupid son Wealth is no help”, “Here are the worthy fruits of evil”, etc.
This victory of realism in the most important area - in the depiction of a person - constitutes the most valuable side of Fonvizin, an artist of words. Truthfulness in the depiction of life is closely connected with the progressive views of Fonvizin, with his struggle against the main evils of his time, so vividly revealed by him in the comedy “The Minor.”
Those important questions that Fonvizin posed and illuminated in the comedy “Minor” determined its great public importance primarily in the contemporary era. From the pages of the comedy, from the stage of the theater, the bold voice of a leading writer sounded, who angrily denounced the ulcers and shortcomings of life of that time, and called for a fight against them. Comedy drew authentic paintings life; showed living people, good and bad, called on them to imitate the former and fight the latter. She enlightened consciousness, cultivated civic feelings, and called for action.
The significance of “The Minor” is also great in the history of the development of Russian drama. It’s not for nothing that Pushkin called “The Minor” folk comedy" Fonvizin's comedy has remained on the theater stage until the present day. The vitality of the images, the historically accurate depiction of people and life of the 18th century, the natural spoken language, the skillful construction of the plot - all this explains the keen interest that the comedy arouses in our days.
Fonvizin’s “Minor” is the founder of Russian (in Gorky’s words) “accusatory-realistic” comedy, socio-political comedy. Continuing this line, in the 19th century such wonderful comedies appeared as “Woe from Wit” by Griboedov and “The Inspector General” by Gogol.
37. The problem of education and its artistic expression in the comedy D.I. Fonvizin "Minor"
In the comedy D.I. Fonvizin’s “Minor”, of course, criticism of the ignorant nobility, cruel serf-owners, corrupted by the decree of Catherine II “On the Liberty of the Nobility” (1765) comes to the fore. In connection with this topic, another topic is raised in the comedy - the problem of education. How can we correct the situation so that the younger generation, represented by Mitrofanushka and other undergrowth, turns into a true support for the state? Fonvizin saw only one way out - in educating youth in the spirit of educational ideals, in cultivating the ideas of goodness, honor, and duty in young minds.
Thus, the topic of education becomes one of the leading ones in comedy. It, in many of its aspects, develops throughout the work. So, first we see scenes of Mitrofanushka’s “upbringing”. This is also what is instilled and demonstrated to the underage by his parents, primarily by his mother, Mrs. Prostakova. She, accustomed to being guided by only one law - her desire, treats the serfs inhumanly, as if they were not people, but soulless objects. Prostakova considers it completely normal to stoop to curses and beatings, and for her this is the norm of communication not only with servants, but also with family members and her husband. Only for her son, whom she adores, does the heroine make an exception.
Prostakova does not understand that by communicating with others in this way, she first of all humiliates herself, deprives human dignity and respect. Fonvizin shows that the way of life that the Russian provincial nobility led, thanks, among other things, to state policy, is destructive and fundamentally wrong.
The playwright points out that Mitrofanushka adopted his mother’s manner of dealing with people; it is not for nothing that his name is translated as “revealing his mother.” We see how this hero mocks his nanny Eremeevna, other serfs, and neglects his parents:
"Mitrofan. And now I’m walking around like crazy. All night such rubbish was in my eyes.
Mrs. Prostakova. What rubbish, Mitrofanushka?
Mitrofan. Yes, either you, mother, or father.”
Mitrofan grows up as a spoiled, ignorant, lazy and selfish lump, thinking only about his own entertainment. He was not used to working either mentally or, of course, physically.
Out of necessity, Mitrofan’s mother hires teachers - according to the empress’s new decree, nobles must have an education, otherwise they will not be able to serve. And so, reluctantly, young hero is engaged in "sciences". It is important that he does not even think about the benefits of his own enlightenment. He seeks only one benefit in education, which is given to this hero with great difficulty.
And the teenager’s teachers are a match for him. Seminarist Kuteikin, retired sergeant Tsyfirkin, teacher Vralman - all of them have nothing to do with real knowledge. These pseudo-teachers give Mitrofan poor fragmentary knowledge, but he is not able to remember even that. Fonvizin paints comical pictures of the training of young Prostakov, but behind this laughter there is the bitter indignation of the playwright - such underage people will determine the future of Russia!
In contrast to such upbringing, Fonvizin presents his ideal of upbringing. We find its main postulates in the speeches of Starodum, who in many ways is the sounding board of the author himself. Starodum shares his experience and views on life with his niece Sophia - and this is presented in the play as another way of education: the transfer of life wisdom from the older generation to the younger.
From the conversation of these heroes, we learn that Sophia wants to earn “a good opinion of herself from worthy people.” She wants to live in such a way that, if possible, she will never offend anyone. Starodum, knowing this, instructs the girl on the “true path.” His vital “laws” relate to the state and social activities of a nobleman: “degrees of nobility “are calculated by the number of deeds that the great gentleman has done for the fatherland”; “It is not the rich man who counts out money in order to hide it in a chest, but the one who counts out what he has in excess in order to help those who do not have what they need”; “An honest person must be a completely honest person.”
In addition, Starodum gives advice regarding “matters of the heart”, family life a well-behaved person: to have a friendship for her husband that would resemble love. It will be much stronger,” “it is necessary, my friend, that your husband obey reason, and you obey your husband.” And finally, as a final chord, the most important instruction: “...there is happiness greater than all this. This is to feel worthy of all the benefits that you can enjoy.”
I think that Starodum’s instructions fell on fertile soil. They will undoubtedly give positive results - Sophia and Milon will be guided by them and raise their children according to them.
Thus, the problem of education is central to Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor.” Here the playwright raises the question of the future of Russia, in connection with which the problem of education arises. Real situation The writer is not satisfied with the affairs in this area; he believes that the nobility is degrading, turning into an ignorant crowd of brutes and simpletons. This is largely due to the connivance of Catherine II.
Fonvizin believes that only education in the spirit of educational ideas can save the situation. The bearers of these ideas in comedy are Starodum, Sophia, Milon, Pravdin.
P. A. Vyazemsky, From the book “Fonvizin”
In the comedy “The Minor,” the author already had a most important goal: the disastrous fruits of ignorance, bad upbringing and abuses of domestic power were exposed by him with a bold hand and painted with the most hateful colors... In “The Minor” he no longer jokes, does not laugh, but is indignant at the vice and stigmatizes him without mercy: even if he makes the audience laugh with the picture of abuses and tomfoolery brought out, then even then the laughter he inspires does not distract from deeper and more regrettable impressions...
The ignorance in which Mitrofanushka grew up, and the examples at home should have prepared in him a monster, like his mother, Prostakova... All the scenes in which Prostakova appears are full of life and fidelity, because her character is sustained to the end with unflagging art, with unchanging truth. A mixture of arrogance and baseness, cowardice and malice, vile inhumanity towards everyone and tenderness, equally vile, towards her son, with all that ignorance, from which, like from a muddy source, all these properties flow, coordinated in her character by a sharp-witted and observant painter.
The success of the comedy "Minor" was decisive. Its moral action is undeniable. Some of the names of the characters have become household names and are still used today in popular appeal. There is so much reality in this comedy that provincial legends still name several persons who allegedly served as the author’s originals.
N.V. Gogol, From the article “What, finally, is the essence of Russian poetry and what is its peculiarity”
Fonvizin's comedy amazes the brutal brutality of man, which came from a long, insensitive, unshakable stagnation in the remote corners and backwaters of Russia. She exhibited such a terribly bark of coarseness that you could hardly recognize a Russian person in her. Who can recognize anything Russian in this evil creature, full of tyranny, such as Prostakova, the tormentor of peasants, husband and everything except her son... This insane love for her brainchild is our strong Russian love, which in a person who has lost his dignity was expressed in such a perverted form, in such a wonderful combination with tyranny, so that the more she loves her child, the more she hates everything that is not her child. Then Skotinin’s character is a different type of coarseness. His clumsy nature, having not received any strong and violent passions, turned into some kind of calmer, artistic love of its kind for cattle, instead of man: pigs became for him the same as for an art lover Art Gallery. Then Prostakova’s husband - an unfortunate, murdered creature, in whom even those weak forces that were holding on were beaten down by his wife’s prodding - a complete dulling of everything! Finally, Mitrofan himself, who, having nothing evil in his nature, having no desire to cause misfortune to anyone, becomes insensitively, with the help of pleasing and self-indulgence, a tyrant of everyone, and most of all of those who love him most, that is, his mother and nannies, so that insulting them had already become a pleasure for him.
V. O. Klyuchevsky, From the article “Minor” by Fonvizin (Experience of historical explanation of an educational play)
In the comedy there is a group of figures led by Uncle Starodum. They stand out from the comic staff of the play: these are noble and enlightened reasoners, academicians of virtue. They are not so much the characters in the drama as its moral setting: they are placed near the characters in order to sharpen their dark faces with their light contrast... Starodum, Milon, Pravdin, Sophia... appeared as walking, but still lifeless, schemes of a new, good morality, which they put on themselves like a mask. Time, effort and experiments were needed to awaken organic life in these still dead cultural preparations...
“The Minor” is a comedy not of faces, but of situations. Her faces are comical, but not funny, comical as roles, but not at all funny as people. They can amuse you when you see them on stage, but they are disturbing and upsetting when you meet them outside the theater, at home or in society.
Yes, Mrs. Prostakova is a master at interpreting decrees. She wanted to say that the law justifies her lawlessness. She said nonsense, and this nonsense is the whole point of “The Minor”; without it, it would have been a comedy of nonsense... The decree on the freedom of the nobility was given so that the nobleman was free to flog his servants whenever he wanted...
Mitrofan is a synonym for a stupid ignoramus and his mother’s favorite. The underage Fonvizin is a caricature, but not so much a stage caricature as an everyday one: his upbringing disfigured him more than the comedy made him laugh.
Exam: Russian literature of the 18th century
"Nedorosl" is the first socio-political comedy on the Russian stage.
The artistic originality of "The Minor" is determined by the fact that the play combines the features of classicism and realism. Formally, Fonvizin remained within the framework of classicism: observance of the unity of place, time and action, the conventional division of characters into positive and negative, schematism in the depiction of positive ones, " speaking names", features of reasoning in the image of Starodum, and so on. But, at the same time, he took a certain step towards realism. This is manifested in the accuracy of the reproduction of the provincial noble type, social relations in the fortress village, the fidelity of recreating the typical traits of negative characters, the life authenticity of images. For the first time in the history of Russian drama love affair was relegated to the background and acquired secondary importance.
Fonvizin's comedy is a new phenomenon, because it is written on the material of Russian reality. The author innovatively approached the problem of the character of the hero, the first of the Russian playwrights sought to psychologize him, to individualize the speech of the characters (here it is worth adding examples from the text!).
“Fonvizin introduces biographies of heroes into his work, takes a comprehensive approach to solving the problem of education, denoting the trinity of this problem: family, teachers, environment, that is, the problem of education is posed here as social problem. All this allows us to conclude that “The Minor” is a work of educational realism.
K.V. Pisarev: "<...>Fonvizin sought to generalize and typify reality. In the negative images of comedy, he succeeded brilliantly.<...> Positive characters"The Minor" clearly lacks artistic and life-like persuasiveness.<...>The images he created were not clothed with living human flesh and, indeed, are a kind of mouthpiece for the “voice”, “concepts” and “way of thinking” of both Fonvizin himself and the best representatives of his time.”
Critics doubted Fonvizin's art of building dramatic action and they talked about the presence of “extra” scenes in it that do not fit into the action, which must certainly be unified:
P. A. Vyazemsky: “All the other [except Prostakova] persons are secondary; some of them are completely extraneous, others only join in the action.<...>Of the forty phenomena, including several rather long ones, there is hardly a third in the entire drama, and even then short ones, that are part of the action itself."
A. N. Veselovsky: "<...>ineptitude in the structure of the play, which forever remained a weak side of Fonvizin’s writing, despite the school of European models<...>"; "A widely developed desire to speak not in images, but in rhetoric<...>gives rise to stagnation, freezing, and the viewer then learns Milo’s view of true fearlessness in war and in peaceful life, then the sovereigns hear the unvarnished truth from virtuous people, or Starodum’s thoughts on the education of women..."
The word, the initial constructive material of the drama, emphatically appears in “Minor” in dual functions: in one case, the pictorial, plastic-depictive function of the word (negative characters) is emphasized, creating a model of the world of physical flesh, in the other - its self-valuable and independent ideal-conceptual nature (positive characters), for which human character needed only as an intermediary, translating an ethereal thought into the matter of a sounding word. Thus, the specificity of its dramaturgical word, which is initially and fundamentally two-valued and ambiguous, comes to the center of the aesthetics and poetics of “The Minor.”
punning nature of the word
A technique for destroying a phraseological unit that pits the traditionally conventional figurative against the direct literal meaning of a word or phrase.
If your homework is on the topic: » Artistic originality of the comedy “Minor” Specifics artistic method Fonvizin the playwright If you find it useful, we will be grateful if you post a link to this message on your page on your social network.
Latest news
Categories
News
Essays on the topic
- Those important questions that Fonvizin posed and illuminated in the comedy “The Minor” determined its great social significance, primarily in the modern Ideological content of Fonfizin’s comedy The Minor. The ideological content of comedy. The main themes of the comedy “The Minor” are the following four: the theme of serfdom and its corrupting influence. Among Russian writers who had the gift of seeing and conveying everything absurd in life, the first was Fonvizin. In his works, he skillfully D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” is rightfully considered the pinnacle of Russian dramaturgy XVIII century. While maintaining some connection with traditional literary genres The topic involves revealing the personality of D. I. Fonvizin. In the process of studying the play “Minor”, getting acquainted with the writer’s work, telling a story about his life
Essay rating
The shepherd by the Brook sang pitifully, in anguish, His misfortune and his irrevocable damage: His beloved lamb Recently drowned in
Role-playing games for children. Game scenarios. “We go through life with imagination.” This game will reveal the most observant player and allow them
Reversible and irreversible chemical reactions. Chemical equilibrium. Shift of chemical equilibrium under the influence of various factors 1. Chemical equilibrium in the 2NO(g) system
Niobium in its compact state is a lustrous silvery-white (or gray when powdered) paramagnetic metal with a body-centered cubic crystal lattice.
Noun. Saturating the text with nouns can become a means of linguistic figurativeness. The text of A. A. Fet’s poem “Whisper, timid breathing...”, in his
The immortal comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” was and remains one of the most current works Russian classics. The breadth of views of the writer, his deep convictions about the benefits of education and enlightenment, were reflected in the creation of this brilliant work. We invite you to familiarize yourself with brief analysis works according to plan. This material can be used for work in a literature lesson in 8th grade, to prepare for the Unified State Exam.
Brief Analysis
Year of writing– 1782
History of creation– The writer’s idea for a comedy arose after returning from abroad, under the influence of the educational views of a foreign country.
Subject– The main theme of “Minor” is enlightenment and education, educating a new generation in the spirit of new trends of the times and political changes.
Composition- the comedy is built according to all the rules of the genre, three components are observed in it - the unity of action, place and time. Consists of five actions.
Genre– The play is a comedy, a bright and lively narrative that does not contain tragic episodes.
History of creation
In “The Minor,” the analysis of the work involves revealing the theme, the main idea of the comedy, its essence and idea.
First, let's define the meaning of the name. In the eighteenth century, the word “minor” meant a person who did not have an education document. Such a person was not accepted into the service and was not allowed to marry.
Fonvizin lived in France for more than a year, delving deeply into its educational doctrines. He was occupied with all spheres of the country's social life, he delved into philosophy and jurisprudence. Much attention the writer paid theatrical productions, in particular, comedies.
When the writer returned to Russia, he came up with a plan for the comedy “Unorosl”, where the characters would receive meaningful surnames in order to more deeply express the meaning of the comedy. Work on the history of creation took the writer almost three years; it began in 1778, and the final year of writing was 1782.
Subject
Initially main theme comedy the theme of upbringing and education of the new generation was assumed; later, the problems of “Undergrowth” included socio-political problems that directly related to the decree of Peter the Great banning the service and marriage of noblemen – undergrowth.
The Prostakov family, which has the undergrown Mitrofanushka, has deep noble roots. In the first place for such Prostakovs is pride in their noble class, and they do not accept anything new and progressive. They do not need education at all, because serfdom They haven’t canceled it yet, and there is someone to work for them. Above all for the Prostakovs material well-being, greed and greed turns a blind eye to his son’s education, power and wealth are more important.
The family is the example on which a person grows and is educated. Mitrofanushka fully reflects the behavior and lifestyle of her despotic mother, but Mrs. Prostakova does not understand that she is the example for her son, and wonders why he does not show her due respect.
Revealing comedy problems, intrafamily conflict Prostakov, we come to the conclusion that everything depends on a person’s upbringing. A person’s attitude towards others depends only on a decent upbringing in the family. to strangers, his integrity and honesty. What the writer’s comedy teaches is education, respect for one’s neighbor, good manners and prudence.
Composition
The masterfully executed features of the composition allow you to become familiar with the main characters at the very beginning of the play. Already at the end of the first act the plot begins. Pravdin and Sophia immediately appear in the comedy. There is intrigue in the comedy - Sophia's rich dowry, which they learn about from Starodum's story, and the fight for her hand flares up.
In the next two acts, events develop rapidly, tension grows, the peak of which occurs in the fourth act, in which Prostakova comes up with the idea of kidnapping Sophia and forcefully marrying her to a minor.
Gradually, the development of the action begins to decline, and in the fifth act the comedy comes to a denouement. It becomes known about the unsuccessful abduction of Sophia. Pravdin accuses the Prostakovs of evil intentions and threatens punishment.
A paper arrives about the arrest of the Prostakovs' property, Sophia and Milon are about to leave, and Mitrofanushka is forced to join the soldiers.
Using such in your comedy artistic media as speaking surnames and names, the author gives a moral assessment to the characters, which does not raise any doubts about its justice. This is the general characteristic of comedy.
Main characters
Genre
Fonvizin's play is built according to the laws of classicism. Events take place during the day in one place. The comedic nature of the play is clearly expressed through sharp satire, mercilessly ridiculing the vices of society. The play also contains funny motifs, permeated with humor, and there are also sad ones, in which the landowner arrogantly mocks her serfs.
The writer was an ardent supporter of education; he understood that only comprehensive education and proper upbringing can help a person grow into a highly moral person and become a worthy citizen of his homeland. The institution of the family, where the foundations of human behavior are laid, should play a huge role in this.
Critics were enthusiastic about the comedy “The Minor,” calling it the pinnacle of Russian drama in the 18th century. All critics wrote that Fonvizin described with maximum accuracy and straightforwardness typical images and characteristics of society that look caricatured and grotesque, but in fact, are simply taken from life and described from life. And in the modern world, comedy remains relevant: now it is also present in society a large number of“Mitrofanushki”, for whom the meaning of life lies in material wealth, and education is given a minimal place.
