Let's try to explain the meaning of the name Woe from the mind, because if you follow logic, then there can be no grief from the mind. What then is the meaning of the title of the comedy that the writer intended? To get the answer to this question, it is enough to get acquainted with the work, where two poles and two eras collided, people of the past century and a representative of the present century. And here everything immediately falls into place, and we begin to understand the meaning of the name of the comedy.
Woe from mind can happen when normal person falls into a society of degraded people who are mired in their prejudices. It is impossible to convince them, they live by old principles, and do not strive for knowledge, as in comedy. There, ranks and awards are easily received without any problems. For this, intelligence and knowledge are not needed at all, because it is enough to hit the floor with your forehead, and the reward will not be long in coming. And so, a representative of the new time finds himself in such a society. He is smart, well-mannered, well-read, he came from abroad to help people learn something, to help change their lives for the better. But they did not understand him, his intelligence and knowledge were not appreciated. Moreover, Chatsky’s erudition and education were considered dangerous. In Famus society, Chatsky is called crazy, and they say that he went crazy abroad.
What is the meaning of the comedy's title?
This reveals the meaning of the title of the comedy Woe from Wit. After all, Chatsky, in fact, due to misunderstanding by those around him, while the best decision for himself, he chose to leave the capital, from a society mired in its prejudices. He goes to a place where he will be appreciated, where he can be listened to, and where his thoughts will be useful.
Expanding our topic about the meaning of the name Woe from Wit, it is worth noting that the author revealed such problems as intelligence and stupidity, intelligence and madness, the desire for better and the sad realities of life.
It was not by chance that I chose this topic. The problem it touches on interests me not only as a reader, but also as a person who lives in the interests of his time and his generation. In our time, happiness also does not always fall to the lot of smart, thoughtful people, and often “lucky fools.” The remarkable philosopher Helvetius wrote: “ Common sense almost everyone calls agreement with what is recognized as foolish, and a person who seeks only the truth and therefore usually deviates from accepted truths is considered a fool.” In comedy there is a clash of the mind as a moral and philosophical category, the pragmatic, everyday mind. This statement can be revealed using the example of the confrontation between Chatsky and Famus society, and the same idea is well illustrated by Sophia’s statement:
Of course, he doesn’t have this mind,
What a genius is to some, and a plague to others,
Which is fast, brilliant and will soon become disgusting,
Which the world scolds on the spot,
So that the world can at least say something about him,
Will such a mind make a family happy?
This is the essence of the opposition: the mind is a “genius”, which is “quick, brilliant,” a critical, sharp, inquisitive mind, “which scolds the world on the spot,” a mind “for itself,” a selfish mind, capable of “making the family happy.” Sophia accepted the morality of Famusov's society, according to which the second type of mind is valuable and honorable: the mind of Silent, Famusov, Kuzma Petrovich and Maxim Petrovich, and not the mind of Chatsky and Prince Fyodor. From the point of view of Famus’s world, a critical, quick, brilliant genius is a “plague”. A mind “for the family” brings high dividends: its owner knows how to “win rewards and live a fun life.” Comfortable, profitable mind. And up the career ladder for ranks - please, and make profitable acquaintances. What about a genius? “A mind hungry for knowledge,” striving for eternal improvement and bitterly suffering from the imperfections of the world, looking for new paths and not finding them, like Chatsky, with his high mind, striving for high moral ideals. The entire Fama society, possessing a “worldly, everyday mind,” strives for its ideals: Maxim Petrovich and Kuzma Petrovich. Famusov strives for their lifestyle, and therefore, to have enough high rank, and money, and material goods. This is what the “worldly mind” gives, and what does the “genius” mind give? Woe to such a mind, he is strange and terrible to society. Arriving after a long absence main character Alexander Andreevich Chatsky cannot understand why Sophia, with whom he grew up, whom he fell in love with and whom he longed for, has changed so much. He does not see that Sophia has fallen in love with someone else. Such “blindness” can be misinterpreted, yet Chatsky is not blind or stupid. He is “not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart. His speech is full of intelligence and wit. He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest... Only his personal grief arose not from the mind alone, but more from other reasons, where the mind played passive role...” The fate of a person like Chatsky cannot but be tragic in Famus’s world. Society rejects such a genius, feeling him alien. It is no coincidence that Sophia starts a rumor about “Chatsky’s madness”: a person with the mind of a “genius” is dangerous in society. Chatsky was called a madman. But is there a lot of slander in this from the point of view of Famus society? By what laws does it live? According to the laws of the “Table of Ranks”, “Maxim Petrovich and Kuzma Petrovich”, according to the laws of “Famusov and Marya Aleksevna”, the life of Famusov’s society is a life in which everything happens according to the laws established once and for all by their grandfathers and great-grandfathers:
They would ask how the fathers did,
We would learn by looking at our elders.
This is the basic commandment of existence high society. This is a society where what is profitable is moral. These are the ideals of “all Moscow men.” Their ideals are crudely material, pragmatic - everything for themselves, everything for their own sake: “a hundred people at their service, all in orders, a century at court.” It is not the person who is important, but the degree to which he is needed and able to serve. That is why he was easily accepted into Famusov society Molchalin - “Tver guy”. The same Molchalin who understood all the rules of the Famus circle and did not become an “enemy of quest.” He did not cloud his head with “creative, lofty and beautiful sciences and arts.” For the same reason, the gambler, thief, and informer Zagoretsky, although scolded, is accepted everywhere: after all, he is “a master at serving.” Here relations reign not between people, but between ranks and titles. The world simply cannot consider Chatsky a sane person, because this would mean that his beliefs are reasonable and completely normal. For Moscow society, Chatsky is either a criminal or a madman. And it is much more convenient for the world itself to see him as a madman: after all, then all Chatsky’s denunciations are just a figment of a sick imagination. “A smart person,” Helvetius noted, “is often considered crazy by the one who listens to him, because the one who listens has the alternative of considering either himself a fool, or a smart person crazy; it is much easier to decide on the latter.” In comedy, the “distorting mirror” technique is used: those who look not directly at the interlocutor, but at his reflection in a distorting mirror, cannot understand each other. Chatsky the madman is not afraid of society - that’s the main thing, that’s why Sophia’s slander hit the target, the world believed her so quickly, so sincerely and easily. Two worlds collided. Chatsky confronts a whole crowd of enemies. Of course, somewhere there are people like him, he speaks on behalf of “young people,” and Chatsky’s opponents remember either Skalozub’s cousin, who “picked up some new rules,” or Tugoukhovskaya’s nephew, who “doesn’t want ranks.” know". But in currently he is lonely, wounded by the coldness of his beloved girl. And from that moment on, a soundproof wall stands between Chatsky and those around him.
Chatsky's education, his high intelligence hurt by other characters in the comedy. These people consider themselves far from stupid, mistaking cunning and dexterity for genuine intelligence.
Skalozub, for example, with his poor mind, knows “many channels” to get ranks. “I judge them (the ranks) as a true philosopher,” he proudly declares. Famusov, although he “draws his opinions from forgotten newspapers,” nevertheless gave his daughter an education, hired teachers, so as not to be branded as a narrow-minded retrograde. But he did all this in order to successfully marry Sophia, although in words he is already ready to recognize intelligence as a real value. Natalia Dmitrievna Gorich she rejoices at her successful marriage, her husband suits her “by her liking, by her mind,” but the most cunning and dexterous of all is the quiet and meek Molchalin, who has developed for himself a whole system of views on life. He has his own philosophy, but his thoughts are shallow, his mind is mercantile.
A person with a deep mind is usually simple-minded and straightforward. A little cunning wouldn't hurt Chatsky. But in our eyes he would lose. We are impressed by Chatsky with his daring mind, his gaiety and witticisms.
Thus, the very title of Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” contains significant interpretation. The playwright poses a riddle for his contemporaries and future generations. Many smart people“were scratching our heads” over the meaning of the play’s title. In fact, is grief from the mind possible? The more smart the better. The happier the bearer of the mind and the society in which he lives should be. In our case, the hero experiences bitterness of disappointment and “a million torments,” and society rejoices at Chatsky’s imminent departure from Moscow. Chatsky is woeful from his mind because society did not understand him, did not recognize him and considered his mind dangerous, giving rise to new ideas that are unacceptable by the world, as unnecessary, inconvenient, impractical and even dangerous for a given society. A great mind needs great understanding and recognition. And then there will be happiness from the mind and peace, and not suffering or, in Goncharov’s words, torment. Chatsky is unhappy because he is not understood.
Tasks and tests on the topic "The meaning of the title of the comedy "Woe from Wit""
- Paronyms and their use - Vocabulary. Phraseology. Lexicography 10th grade
It would be tempting to express the meaning of the title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” in one short, laconic, biting phrase. But it is hardly possible to do it this way. Let's explain what was said.
Search for the idea “Woe from Wit”
The dramaturgy of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov in this play is innovative and multifaceted. Therefore, it is unambiguous to determine which of the heroes of the work (representing “ old age” or presenting a new one) won and who lost is impossible.
The play contains philosophical meaning and therefore compares favorably with the simulated scenes from the classical salon dramaturgy XIX century. In it, Griboyedov displayed a full-fledged model of the Russian “demimonde”.
The title of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is deceptive: although, according to the author himself, it expresses the idea of the work, this does not happen. The point is Griboedov's talent. In fact, he made the work an order of magnitude deeper than he himself was able to characterize it. This idea can only be explained by an analogy with... “Quiet Don” by Mikhail Sholokhov.
Griboyedov the artist is stronger than Griboyedov the playwright
Let's abstract from the difference in eras. Another thing is important: Sholokhov the writer turned out to be stronger than Sholokhov the communist (who stigmatized Pasternak). Mikhail Alexandrovich did not become “ Quiet Don” to reveal the “correctness” of the commissars, but soulfully told about And based on this, the reader saw a true model of an unhealthy society.
Returning to the work of Alexander Sergeevich Griboyedov, we can also rightfully say: the author showed an order of magnitude more than he himself said in the simplified model “25 fools for one smart person.”
A play without winners and losers
For pressing questions early XIX centuries, raised in his work by the diplomat Griboyedov, an undoubtedly insightful man, should be looked at more broadly. The civilizational conflict between the old and the new gives this work its meaning. “Woe from Wit” is an arena for the collision of two worldviews: the old, feudal-bureaucratic (of the last century), and the new, bourgeois-raznochinsky, born in the minds of the future Decembrists after Russia’s victory over Napoleon.
Indeed, Alexander Andreevich Chatsky, who expresses sharp and reasonable judgments after arriving from Europe, in the course of the play is faced with a wall of misunderstanding of Moscow aristocratic society.
But for young man The most painful thing is that his hopes for mutual feelings with Famusov’s young unmarried daughter Sofya Pavlovna are crumbling. In addition, his career “doesn’t work out” and, obviously, it won’t work out. Do you think he lost completely? Do you believe that the word “grief” was said by the author specifically in relation to Chatsky?
But Famusov won’t become an “ace” either!
Representatives of two worlds: Chatsky and Famusov
What kind of description does the author give of the consequences of the conflict? “Woe from Wit” in the finale contains a scene when Alexander Andreevich leaves, nursing resentment from “offended feelings.” However, the “government manager” Pavel Afanasyevich Famusov, the organizer of Chatsky’s “cold-as-ice” reception in his home, does not look like a winner. He is also not the winning side in the conflict. He gets his “millions of torments.” In the current hierarchy, Famusov cannot “jump over his head” in terms of his career. He's very average business qualities(he is lazy and does not know how to work with documents). His only hope is to increase the family's capital through the marriage of his daughter to Colonel Sergei Sergeevich Skalozub. However, this is also problematic. Sophia understands the idiocy of her father's contrived passion.
“Woe from Wit” - a story about pre-Decembrist Russia
Thus, the meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit” is completely different. This is not exclusively Chatsky’s “grief” from society’s underestimation of his views. (As the play progresses, the positive hero encounters 25 characters who are apologists for the old bureaucratic society.) This problem should be looked at more broadly.
This is the grief of the entire post-war feudal Russia, where the “Chatskys” (future Decembrists) already understood: it is necessary to change the social matrix of society, to destroy career ladder, based on servility and flattery, begin to develop new projects in society. But society (including the aristocratic one) continues to live “ old life", resolving their petty mercantile career aspirations, giving birth to the Molchalins.
The meaning of the work
The personality of the author himself is the key that determines the meaning of his work. “Woe from Wit” is Griboyedov’s attempt to shout publicly, resonantly, at the top of his voice (here one cannot do without brutal directness) to everything Russian society that there is a problem in its development. The clever diplomat felt not only the pressing issues of the “current day”; perhaps he foresaw the coming split in society (which, as we know from history, led to a brutal reaction during the time of Nicholas I).
Do you think he was heard? Even Pushkin reacted with irony to not understanding him. What can I say next?
“Woe from Wit” - an innovative play
The work is made great vivid images. “Woe from Wit” is not only about the 26 people who appear on stage. After all, there are also off-stage characters. Prince Fyodor, “botanist and chemist”, cousin of Skalozub, along with the professorship “practicing schisms and unbelief” pedagogical institute- potential allies of Chatsky.
It also deserves respect that the author is trying to convey the meaning of the title of the comedy “Woe from Wit”, completely “hacking” the old dramaturgy. Griboyedov the innovator moved away from classicism when creating his work; his creation is quite realistic. The author creates a full-fledged model of society with 26 real, characteristic characters instead of 5-6 (the usual circle of classicism characters). In the end, Alexander Sergeevich does not use classical Alexandrian verse, but switches to “free iambic”.
Instead of a conclusion
We, talking about the play, have finally come to the opportunity to understand the meaning of the name of the comedy “Woe from Wit.” Please note that the work includes characters that are not ideal:
- freethinker, melancholic, “funny guy” (according to Pushkin’s review) Chatsky;
- the mercantile father of the family and an official with average abilities, Famusov;
- the nosy careerist and deceiver Molchalin;
- a smug and narrow-minded campaigner - Colonel Skalozub;
- Sophia, confused between the desire for happiness and capable of meanness;
- still decent, but powerless servant Lisa.
All of them help the reader of the comedy find deep philosophical implications in it.
Let us define the main thing in “Woe from Wit” - the idea of the work. Can we say that Chatsky is smart? Yes and no. He has an understanding of the dynamics of progress, but no contact with people. Let's be honest: he is not intellectually capable of becoming a donor of these ideas to society.
Alexander is ideologically opposed by Famusov. Can we say that he is smart? Yes and no. He does not understand that the feudal state is moving towards disaster, struggling to maintain obsolete orders. But is he stupid? Hardly. Most likely, he simply lives for today. In addition, unlike Chatsky, he has a definite father of the family, lives in harmony with society, that is, he is oriented towards people. His home is the center of social life for the nearby community of aristocrats.
Conclusion: each of these heroes has their own mind. However, their focus is polar opposite. One understands promising paths and cannot implement them. Another, in principle, can (if he wishes, he will find words to convince his “inner circle”), but does not consider Chatsky’s pro-Western thinking to be correct, preferring “patriarchal antiquity.”
The problem is that the minds of these two people are aimed at mutual opposition, and not at the development of society. This is the essence of the idea contained in the title of the work. The classic said it right: “Russia’s problem is fools and roads!”
The title of any work is the key to its understanding; it contains an indication (direct or indirect) of the main idea, the problem posed by the author. The title of A. S. Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" perhaps allows us to see an extremely important category in the conflict of the play, namely the category of the mind. The source of such an expression, which forms the basis of the title and originally sounded like “Woe to Wit,” goes back to a Russian proverb, in which the confrontation between the smart and the stupid ended with the victory of the fool. The conflict between a wise man and a fool was important and relevant for the comedians who preceded A. S. Griboyedov, who belonged to the school of classicism (for example, it is present in the comedies of Moliere and Beaumarchais). In "Woe from Wit" this conflict looks different; here it is rethought. Contemporaries could not help but feel this, so several opinions arose, for example from I. A. Goncharov and A. S. Pushkin, about Chatsky and who, according to Griboyedov’s plan, is the bearer of the mind in comedy. Goncharov, in his article “A Million Torments,” wrote: “Griboedov himself attributed Chatsky’s grief to his mind, but Pushkin denied him any mind at all.”<...>But Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart." Pushkin actually said in a letter to Bestuzhev that "smart actor"in comedy - Griboedov, and Chatsky is only "an ardent, noble and kind fellow who spent some time with a very smart person (namely Griboedov) and was fed with his thoughts, witticisms and satirical remarks." So, what is intelligence in comedy Griboyedov and who is the smart person in it? Intelligence is theoretically a virtue for comedians. early period this quality has never been a disadvantage (Filint, clever man, - reasoner in Moliere's "The Misanthrope"; positive heroes are Starodum, Pravdiv in “Nedorosl” by Fonvizin, etc.). On the contrary, the authors ridiculed fools (Mitrofan in Fonvizin, for example). It is important to note that it was the observance of moderation in everything that was considered smart (therefore, for Moliere, the clever Alceste is not an ideal worthy of imitation). It is Molchalin, and not Chatsky, who has intelligence, as well as a sense of proportion. Molchalin’s mind serves the owner and thoroughly helps him, while Chatsky’s mind (and “his speech is seething with intelligence, wit,” as I. A. Goncharov says) only harms, it is akin to madness for those around him, it is he who brings him “a million torments.” Molchalin’s obsequious mind is contrasted with Chatsky’s strange and sublime mind, but this is no longer a confrontation between intelligence and stupidity. There are no fools in A. S. Griboyedov’s play; its conflict is built on confrontation different types mind. "Woe from Wit" is a comedy that has crossed the narrow boundaries of classicism. The category of mind is related to the philosophical content of the play; the presence of such a layer is simply impossible in the comedy of classicism, focused on already given absolute truths. In his work, A. Griboyedov raises the question of what the mind is. Almost every hero has his own answer, almost everyone talks about intelligence (Famusov: “Modest, but nothing but pranks and the wind on her mind”; Sophia: “Sharp, smart, eloquent, / Oh, if someone loves someone, / Why look for intelligence and travel so far,” etc.), but these are statements of a different series. Each character has his own idea of the mind, which he justifies as he appears in the play, so the comedy does not at all come down to a clear distinction between representatives of high society and Chatsky in terms of identifying the mind. There is no standard of intelligence in A. Griboyedov’s play, therefore there is no winner in it. “The comedy gives Chatsky only “a million torments” and leaves, apparently, Famusov and his brothers in the same position as they were, without saying anything about the consequences of the struggle.” Chatsky differs from those around him not because he is smarter, but because he is more humane, more sensitive (“sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,” as Lisa says). For Chatsky, there are two mutually exclusive categories: mind and feeling (he tells Sophia that his “mind and heart are not in harmony”; describing Molchalin, he again distinguishes between these concepts: “Let Molchalin have a lively mind, a brave genius, / But is there that passion in him? That feeling? That ardor? corner!”, that is, he runs away not to protect his lonely mind, but to forget about the insults inflicted on his feelings). Love drama as if it becomes an expression of the hero’s ideological loneliness. “His personal grief came not from his mind alone, but more from other reasons, where his mind played a passive role, and this gave Pushkin a reason to deny him his mind.” Chatsky's "woe from mind" lies in the fact that his mind differs sharply from the mind recognized in the world, but by feeling ("He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest"), as I. A. Goncharov says in the article " A million torments,” he is still tied to the society in which he moves, depending to some extent on the opinions of the world.
The title of any work is the key to its understanding; it contains an indication (direct or indirect) of the main idea, the problem posed by the author. The title of A. S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”, perhaps, allows us to see an extremely important category in the conflict of the play, namely the category of the mind. The source of such an expression, which forms the basis of the title and originally sounded like “Woe to Wit,” goes back to a Russian proverb, in which the confrontation between the smart and the stupid ended with the victory of the fool. The conflict between a wise man and a fool was important and relevant for the comedians who preceded A. S. Griboyedov, who belonged to the school of classicism (for example, it is present in the comedies of Moliere and Beaumarchais). In “Woe from Wit” the same one the conflict looks different, here it is rethought. Contemporaries could not help but feel this, so several opinions arose, for example from I. A. Goncharov and A. S. Pushkin, about Chatsky and who, according to Griboyedov’s plan, is the bearer of the mind in comedy. Goncharov in his article “A Million Torments” wrote: “Griboedov himself attributed Chatsky’s grief to his mind, but Pushkin denied him any mind at all.”<...>But Chatsky is not only smarter than all other people, but also positively smart.” Pushkin actually said in a letter to Bestuzhev that the “smart character” in the comedy is Griboyedov, and Chatsky is only “an ardent, noble and kind fellow who spent some time with a very smart person (namely Griboedov) and was saturated with his thoughts , witticisms and satirical remarks.” So, what is intelligence in Griboyedov’s comedy and who is the smart person in it?
Intelligence is theoretically a virtue. For comedians of the early period, this quality was never a drawback (Filint, an intelligent person, is a reasoner in Moliere’s “The Misanthrope”; the positive characters are Starodum, Pravdiv in Fonvizin’s “The Minor”, etc.). On the contrary, the authors ridiculed fools (Mitrofan in Fonvizin, for example). It is important to note that it was the observance of moderation in everything that was considered smart (therefore, for Moliere, the clever Alceste is not an ideal worthy of imitation). It is Molchalin, and not Chatsky, who has intelligence, as well as a sense of proportion. Molchalin’s mind serves the owner and thoroughly helps him, while Chatsky’s mind (and “his speech is seething with intelligence, wit,” as I. A. Goncharov says) only harms, it is akin to madness for those around him, it is he who brings him “a million torments.” Molchalin’s obsequious mind is contrasted with Chatsky’s strange and sublime mind, but this is no longer a confrontation between intelligence and stupidity. There are no fools in A. S. Griboyedov’s play; its conflict is built on the opposition of different types of minds. “Woe from Wit” is a comedy that has crossed the narrow boundaries of classicism.
The category of mind is related to the philosophical content of the play; the presence of such a layer is simply impossible in the comedy of classicism, focused on already given absolute truths. In his work, A. Griboyedov raises the question of what the mind is. Almost every hero has his own answer, almost everyone talks about intelligence (Famusov: “Modest, but nothing but pranks and the wind on her mind”; Sophia: “Sharp, smart, eloquent, / Oh, if someone loves someone, / Why look for intelligence and travel so far”, etc.), but these are statements of a different series. Each character has his own idea of the mind, which he justifies as he appears in the play, so the comedy does not at all come down to a clear distinction between representatives of high society and Chatsky in terms of identifying the mind. There is no standard of intelligence in A. Griboyedov’s play, therefore there is no winner in it. “The comedy gives Chatsky only “a million torments” and leaves, apparently, Famusov and his brothers in the same position as they were, without saying anything about the consequences of the struggle.” Chatsky differs from those around him not because he is smarter, but because he is more humane, more sensitive (“sensitive, and cheerful, and sharp,” as Lisa says). For Chatsky, there are two mutually exclusive categories: mind and feeling (he tells Sophia that his “mind and heart are not in harmony”; describing Molchalin, he again distinguishes between these concepts: “Let Molchalin have a lively mind, a brave genius, / But is there that passion in him? That feeling? That ardor? corner!”, that is, he runs away not to protect his lonely mind, but to forget about the insults inflicted on his feelings). It happened not from his mind alone, but more from other reasons, where his mind played a passive role, and this gave Pushkin a reason to deny him his mind.” Chatsky’s “woe from mind” lies in the fact that his mind differs sharply from the mind recognized in the world, but by feeling (“He has a heart, and, moreover, he is impeccably honest”), as I. A. Goncharov says in the article “ A million torments,” he is still tied to the society in which he moves, depending to some extent on the opinions of the world.
The title of A. Griboyedov’s play “Woe from Wit” contains an unusual important question: What is intelligence for Griboedov himself? Direct answer to the same one The writer does not answer the question, and this alone reveals a rethinking of the traditions of classicism. By calling Chatsky “smart,” A. Griboedov turned everything upside down, ridiculing the old understanding of such a quality in a person as intelligence. A. Griboedov showed a man full of educational pathos, constantly encountering a reluctance to understand him, which stemmed precisely from the traditional concept of “prudence,” which in “Woe from Wit” is associated with a certain social and political program. A. Griboyedov's comedy, starting from the title, is not addressed at all to the Famusovs, but to the Chatskys - funny and lonely (“one smart person for 25 fools”), with their reasoning, striving to change a world that is not subject to rapid changes. A. Griboedov created a comedy that was unconventional for its time. He enriched and psychologically rethought the characters' characters and introduced into the text new problems unusual for the comedy of classicism. However, although his method is close to realistic, the writer still does not achieve realism in its entirety when showing characters, everyday life, social environment and all the deep-seated problems hidden in the society of that time.
