Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin (1744-1792) - writer, dramaturg, educator, who entered the history of Russian literature as the creator of Russian social comedy. “Satyrs are a bold ruler,” Pushkin called him. Already in its first original comedy"The Brigadier" (1769) Fonvizin showed his vivid satirical gift, ridiculing ignorance, bribery, hypocrisy and passion for everything French, so characteristic of the Russian nobility of the second half of the 18th century. But true and enduring fame came to Fonvizin when he created the comedy "Un-growth" (1782). Gogol put it on a par with "Woe from Wit"
A.S. Griboedov and called truly " public comedy". "Un-growth" is a satirical comedy in which, according to N.V. Gogol, the writer revealed "the wounds and diseases of our society, severe internal abuses, which are exposed by the merciless force of irony in stunning evidence."
The comedian focuses on the whole estate - the Russian nobility, and not in itself, but in close connection with what the system of serfdom brings with it, which determines the life of the whole country. The theme of the comedy is landlord arbitrariness and its disastrous consequences, the system of noble education, legislation, social and family relations in Russia XVIII century.
According to the plot and title, "Undergrowth" is a play about how badly and incorrectly a young nobleman was trained, raising him as an "undergrowth". But we are talking not about learning, but about education in the broadest sense. Stageally Mitrofan is a minor person, but the history of his upbringing explains where he comes from. scary world Skotin-ins and Prostakovs, what should be changed so that the ideals of goodness, reason and justice reign in him.
Thus, the idea of comedy is the exposure and condemnation of the world of ignorant, cruel and arrogant landlords who want to subjugate their whole life, to appropriate the right of unlimited power over both serfs and noble people; approval of the ideals of humanity, progress, enlightenment, expressed through goodies (Sofya, Starodum, Milon, Pravdin).
Among the positive characters of the play, Starodum stands out. This is the hero-reasoner, the second "I" of the author himself. Through his mouth, Fonvi-zin pronounces a sentence on the world of arbitrariness and slavery, and he places his hopes on good beginnings human soul, on a reasonable upbringing, on the strength of conscience. “Have a heart, have a soul, and you will be a man at all times,” Starodum says to Sofya. This is the author's ideal. In many respects, it is connected with the enlightenment illusions of Fonvizin, but the scale of satirical denunciation in comedy takes it beyond the narrow framework of the enlightenment positions of classicism and allows us to speak of pronounced realistic principles.
Features of the artistic method of Fonvizin are a combination of features of classicism (the division of characters into positive and negative, schematism in their depiction, "three unities" in the composition, "talking" names, features of reasoning in the image of Starodum, etc.) and realistic tendencies (life authenticity of images, images of noble life and social relations in a serf village). The playwright's innovation was primarily reflected in a more complex understanding of character. Although the heroes of the comedy are static, but in the living fabric of the work, their characters acquired a multiplicity of meanings unusual for the dramaturgy of classicism. If the images of Skotinin, Vralman, Kuteikin are sharpened to the point of caricature, then the images of Prostakova and Eremeevna are distinguished by great internal complexity. Eremeevna is a “slave”, but she retains a clear awareness of her position, knows the characters of her masters perfectly, her soul is alive in her. Prostakova, a vicious, cruel serf, turns out to be at the same time a loving, caring mother, who in the finale, rejected by her own son, looks really unhappy and even arouses the sympathy of the audience.
The creation of realistic authenticity of images is largely facilitated by the language of comedy heroes, which becomes a means of their individualization and helps to reveal the socio-psychological essence of the character. Starodum, as it should be for a traditional reasoning hero, speaks in the correct, bookish language. But Fonvizin introduces into the speech of the hero and other - individual - features: aphorism, saturation with archaisms. All the individual and typical qualities of Prostakova are also reflected in her language. She addresses the serfs rudely, using abusive vocabulary ("dog's daughter", "bad mug", "beast"), and her mother's affectionate, caring speech is addressed to her son Mitrofan ("darling", "my dear friend") . With Prostakov’s guests there is a secular lady (“I recommend you a dear guest”), and when she laments humbly, begging for forgiveness, folk phrases appear in her speech (“you are my dear mother, forgive me”, “the sword does not cut a guilty head”) . material from the site
All this makes Fonvizin's comedy "Undergrowth", formally created according to the rules of classicism, a truly innovative work that had a huge impact on the formation of realism in Russian literature. According to A.I. Herzen, “Fonvizin managed to put his barnyard of wild landowners on stage in advance, and Gogol published his cemetery” dead souls". Goncharov noted the successive connection between Fonvizin's dramaturgy and Ostrovsky's theater, and Saltykov-Shchedrin brought out a number of Fonvizin's characters in his works.
Enlightenment tendencies characteristic of Russian literature of the 18th century manifested themselves not only within the framework of classicism, which in the last quarter of the century was already clearly losing ground, but also in the works of a new direction for that time - sentimentalism. It also relied on the ideas of the Enlightenment, but in the first place put a specific person with his feelings and experiences. Feelings, experiences in sentimentalism replace the dominance of reason in classicism, and the heroes are representatives of the middle and lower classes. Although sentimentalism has not received such a wide development in Russian literature as in Western Europe, but in the works of N.M. Karamzin, poems by young V.A. Zhukovsky, prose by A.N. Radishchev's sentimentalism is noticeable.
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page, material on the topics:
- Fonvizin, creator of Russian comedy
- starodum - hero reasoner
- Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin undergrowth summary
- the ideals of humanity progress in the comedy undergrowth
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is the founder of Russian comedy, a diatribe-realistic trend in Russian literature. In his works, satire is closely intertwined with educational journalism. An admirer of Voltaire, Rousseau, the writer was an enemy of autocratic despotism.
In 1762, Fonvizin moved to St. Petersburg and began an intensive literary activity. He was a regular guest of Kozlovsky's circle. As a result of rapprochement with this circle, the satirist wrote "Message to my servants Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka", published for the first time in the monthly publication "Pustomel", in 1770. Some of his poems and new translations belong to this period of Fonvizin's life, of which a special translations of Bitobe's poem "Joseph", as well as Barthelemy's story: "The Love of Karita and Polydor" were successful.
In 1764 F. made his first independent dramatic work, the comedy Corion. A few years after Korion, the social comedy Brigadier appears. In "The Brigadier" the features of Russian life are clearly expressed. The type of dandy, realized in the person of Ivanushka and the adviser, was familiar to the viewer from observations of metropolitan life, which is confirmed by articles in satirical magazines of that time. Even more original, grown on Russian soil, are the types of adviser, foreman and foreman.
In 1782, the comedy "Undergrowth" was released. The play is imbued with accusatory pathos. In his comedy, the satirist answered all the questions that worried advanced people that time. State and social order, civic obligations member of society, serfdom, the family, marriage, the upbringing of children - these are the range of problems posed in The Undergrowth. The educational ideas of the author are realized through the image of Starodum. Starodum is an enemy of the corrupt Catherine's nobles, who received ranks, estates for flattery and sycophancy. In his words one can hear a direct denial of serfdom. He is also the enemy of ignorant education. Being mainly a supporter of the French Enlightenment, he does not, however, share their materialistic ideas.
In 1783, Fonvizin took part in the journal Interlocutor, published in it The Experience of the Russian Soslovnik, Petition to the Russian Minerva from Russian Writers, Questions to the Writer of Tales and Fables, and Instruction Spoken on Spirits Day. In the work “Questions to the author of “Tales and Fables””, the writer sharply criticizes the state orders and social vices of his day: favoritism at court, the moral decline of the nobility, etc. Yesin B.I. writes: “Catherine II was hiding under the pseudonym of the writer of “Tales and Fables”. Fonvizin pretended not to know who this author was, and addressed him as an equal to an equal. Using the ostentatious liberalism of the empress, Fonvizin risked publishing his 20 questions, but he was forced to refuse to continue them.
In 1788, Fonvizin decided to publish the Starodum magazine, received permission and began to prepare material, but by order of Catherine the magazine was banned.
Literary heritage last period Fonvizin's activity consists of articles for the magazine (Vyatkin's letter, Starodum's letter, General Court Grammar, etc.) and from dramatic works - the comedy "The Choice of a Tutor" and the dramatic feuilleton "A Conversation with Princess Khaldina". Besides last years of his life, the writer worked on his autobiography "Frank Confession".
Thus, Fonvizin belonged to that circle of advanced Russian people of the 18th century who made up the camp of the enlighteners, and his work was permeated with the pathos of affirming the ideals of justice and humanism. Satire and journalism became his main weapon against autocracy and serf abuse.
Fonvizin is widely known as the author of the comedy "Undergrowth", as a bold and brilliant satirist. But the creator of "Undergrowth" was not only large and talented playwright XVIII century. He is one of the founders of Russian prose, a remarkable political writer, a truly great Russian educator, fearlessly, for a quarter of a century, fought against the autocracy of Catherine II.
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born in Moscow on April 14 (April 3, O.S.) 1745, he was the successor of a knightly family, which was of Livonian origin and completely Russified. Elementary education was received by Denis thanks to his father, who held an official position in the revision board; their home was patriarchal.
Education was continued in the gymnasium at Moscow University, and then in itself: Fonvizin during 1759-1762. was a student at the Philosophical University. From 1756 to 1759 he was a member of the troupe of the amateur university theater of M. Kheraskov, and later he played in the professional Public Theater. During his student days, Fonvizin also made his debut in the literary field - with translation activities. He came to grips with this upon his arrival in St. Petersburg in 1760: Fonvizin and his brother arrived in the capital as one of the best gymnasium students.
Fulfilling the order of one of the booksellers, Fonvizin in 1761 translated into Russian the fables of Ludwig Golberg, who wrote in German. In total, he translated more than 200 fables, the novel by the Frenchman Terrason, the tragedy of Voltaire, Ovid's Metamorphoses, etc. Fonvizin considered J.-J. to be his favorite writer. Rousseau. In parallel with his translation activities, he began to write essays of a satirical nature.
After graduating from the university, D.I. Fonvizin became a translator in a foreign collegium, and from 1763 he was transferred to the service of I.P. Elagin. By the way, this appointment was facilitated by the occupation of literature: his translation of Voltaire's tragedy did not go unnoticed. Working under Elagin, Fonvizin did not leave translation activities. Having become close to the literary circle of Kozlovsky, he created his debut independent work - “Message to my servants Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka”; in 1764 his first play-comedy "Korion" appeared. During 1766-1769. the comedy Brigadier was written and published in 1786. She laid the foundation for the genre of comedy of manners, because. the overwhelming majority of Russian authors created comedies of characters.
The period of the biography from 1769 to 1782 was associated with the service of Count N.I. Panin; Fonvizin worked as his secretary, and later turned into a confidant. While in this position, he entered the world big politics, behind the scenes games. In 1777, Fonvizin left Russia, lived for a long time in France, where he tried to understand the processes taking place in this state, while thinking about the fate of his homeland, trying to see a path that would allow him to bring socio-political life to a new level.
In 1782, Fonvizin had to resign because Count Panin fell into disgrace. Based on his ideas, Fonvizin wrote "Discourse on the indispensable state laws" (1782-1783). This work was intended for the count's pupil, who in the future was to become Emperor Paul, and is considered one of the best essays national journalism.
The peak of Denis Ivanovich's creative achievements was the comedy The Undergrowth written in 1882 and published in 1883, which, like The Brigadier, caused a huge public outcry. Belinsky once noted that Russian comedy began only with Fonvizin, and his plays are one of the "remarkable phenomena" in the history of Russian literature.
Leaving the public service, Fonvizin devoted himself to literature, although his state of health left much to be desired (the writer had partial paralysis). Catherine the Second in many ways hindered the realization of his creative ideas, in particular, by imposing a ban on the publication of the magazine "Friend of Honest People, or Starodum", a collection of works in 5 volumes. In this period creative activity he wrote several dramatic works, magazine articles and an autobiography (remained unfinished). In 1784 and 1785, Fonvizin went to Italy for treatment, in 1787 he corrected his noticeably shaky health in Vienna. The Fonvizin couple also experienced financial difficulties at that time. Classes in literature were actually curtailed. The writer died on December 12, 1792.
In The Brigadier, Fonvizin laughs merrily at the ugliness of life. Sometimes we smile when we see Frenchmania or the idiotically meaningless life of an idler. But in most cases, the behavior of Ivanushka, his speech causes indignation and indignation. When he, a “fool” according to his father, declares: “I owe ... to the French coachman for my love for France and for my coldness towards the Russians”, or: “my body was born in Russia, it’s true, but my spirit belongs to the French crown ", or: "I'm a very unhappy person. I have been living for twenty-five years and still have a father and mother, ”or when he is engaged in dirty loving courtship of someone else’s wife, not a smile, but anger arises in the soul of the viewer and reader. And this is the merit of the playwright - the image of Ivan is built sharply satirically and accusatory. Ivans - the young generation of Russian noble serfs - are the enemies of Fonvizin.
Fonvizin's social experience helped to deepen the characterization of other characters. The writer was not interested in demonstrating abstract vices, understood as a deviation from the ideal norms of human behavior, but in revealing real practice, the living everyday life of ordinary representatives of the "noble class". Both the foreman and the adviser are landowners. The household in the foreman's house is run by his wife. Stupid and ignorant, she manages both yard and village serfs. The adviser keeps everything in his hands. Both are stingy, domineering and greedy for money. Behind the external decency lies the predatory appearance of the owners, ready to cut each other's throats.
Both the foreman and adviser served in the past. The brigadier, having served for more than a dozen years, finally reached a more or less significant rank and immediately retired. The only purpose of the service was self-interest. Having received the rank, he does not get tired of boasting in front of his wife, adviser, son. A military man called to defend his fatherland, he never remembers a single campaign where he distinguished himself, where he really showed that he served the fatherland, and not his own self-interest. From the foreman there is a direct pedigree to Skalozub, a colonel who deftly pursues his "parquet" career.
The adviser is related to Famusov. A noble official, a bribe-taker, an insolent, a hypocrite, he is not ashamed to admit that the purpose of his service was acquisitiveness, personal enrichment. “God has blessed me with enough, which I have acquired by virtue of decrees.” In a conversation with his daughter, the adviser openly declares that the meaning of royal service is profit. “I myself have been a judge: the guilty one used to pay for his guilt, and the right one for his truth, and so in my time everyone was happy: the judge, the plaintiff, and the defendant.”
The action in "The Brigadier" takes place mainly in the camp of the convicted. Connects them all love story. But their love is "ridiculous, shameful and makes them dishonorable." The adviser and foreman, Ivanushka and the adviser, have long lost their human appearance, their sense of personality has been erased by their animal egoism, bestial complacency. They are incapable of true human feeling especially for love.
The true nobles in the comedy are Dobrolyubov and Sophia. They are distinguished by intelligence, education, humanity, love for the fatherland, respect for their native culture, language, high morality, consciousness of their duty. In this respect, they were close to the noble heroes of high tragedy. They appeared before the audience not just in love and suffering from someone else's evil, but people concerned about the fate of their class.
"The Brigadier" is a comedy, and the first comedy is truly Russian, and the first comedy is truly merry. Pushkin highly valued gaiety and was extremely sorry that there were so few truly merry writings in Russian literature. That is why he lovingly noted this feature of Fonvizin's talent, pointing out the direct continuity of the dramaturgy of Fonvizin and Gogol. Pushkin's comparison of Gogol and Fonvizin is not accidental. Gogol, creator of the Russian realistic comedy, is closely associated with Fonvizin. Fonvizin began what Gogol completed. In particular, Fonvizin was the first to take a decisive step towards realism and in the field of the comic. "The Brigadier" was written during the heyday of Russian noble classicism.
At the center of the play is the problem of education. Education, according to Fonvizin, is the remedy that can cure all social ills, therefore it is the upbringing of a true nobleman that is the primary problem of our time.
In relation to the dramatic composition, Fonvizin follows in the five-act Brigadier the principles that Sumarokov previously applied to his small (no more than three acts) comedies. In The Brigadier there is no single plot movement covering all the positions of the play and through them all its characters. It breaks up into a series of more or less independent episodes. The love affair of the virtuous heroes, which seems to connect these episodes, fades into the background and only occasionally pops up in comedies. In this regard, in the "Brigadier", in fact, there are no main, central characters(Dobrolyubov and Sofya play too small a role in the play). Groups of characters pass before the viewer, each with its own limited plot core; each of them carries its own "dramatic interest". And so the plan of this comedy was created, where one pair of lovers is followed by another, and all the threads of these novels are pulled together only in the final scenes, which bring out the love tricks of all the characters. This technique of comedy, in which almost all scenes are a departure from an almost fictitious main intrigue, elevating comic situations into an end in itself.
Comedy D.I.Fonvizin "Undergrowth". Development of the main social conflict and composition. Techniques of satirical ridicule of social vices and the creation of image-types by Fonvizin. Positive characters of "Undergrowth" and their role in comedy.
Second half of the 18th century - the heyday of theatrical classicism in Russia. It is the comedy genre that becomes the most important and widespread in the stage and dramatic art. Best comedies of this time are part of social and literary life, are associated with satire and often have political orientation. The popularity of comedy was in direct connection with life. "Undergrowth" 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 the composition, " talking names". However, in comedy, one can also see realistic features: the authenticity of images, the image of noble life and social relations.
The famous researcher of creativity D.I. Fonvizina G.A. Gukovsky believed that “two literary styles are fighting among themselves in The Undergrowth, and classicism is defeated. Classic Rules forbade the mixing of sad, cheerful and serious motives. “In Fonvizin's comedy there are elements of drama, there are motives that were supposed to touch, touch the viewer. In The Undergrowth, Fonvizin not only laughs at vices, but also glorifies virtue. "Undergrowth" - semi-comedy, semi-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 of the XVIII century. M., 1939).
Having made both negative and positive characters life-like, Fonvizin managed to create new type realistic comedy.
The accusatory pathos of the content of the "Undergrowth" is fed by two powerful sources, equally dissolved in the structure dramatic action. These are satire and journalism. Destructive and merciless satire fills all the scenes depicting lifestyle the Prostakova family. The final remark of the Starodum, which ends the "Undergrowth": "Here are the evil spirits worthy fruits!" - gives the whole play a special sound.
At the heart of the comedy "Undergrowth" are two problems that particularly 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 that determines the moral character of a person. In the views of Fonvizin, the problem of education acquired state significance, since proper education could save the noble society from degradation.
The comedy "Undergrowth" (1782) became a landmark event in the development of Russian comedy. It is a structured, complex, well-thought-out system in which every line, every character, every word is subject to the identification of the author's intention. Having started the play as an everyday comedy of manners, Fonvizin does not stop there, but boldly goes further, to the root cause of "malice", the fruits of which are known and severely 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. 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 full-bloodedly, with all life authenticity. The scope of the requirements of classicism to the comedy genre by Fonvizin was significantly expanded here. The author completely overcomes the schematism inherent in his earlier heroes, and the characters of "Undergrowth" become not only real persons, but also common nouns.
Defending her cruelty, crimes and tyranny, Prostakova says: "Am I not powerful in my people?" The noble but naive Pravdin objects to her: “No, madam, no one is free to tyrannize.” And then she suddenly refers to the law: “Not free! The nobleman, when he wants, and the servants are not free to flog; but why have we been given a decree on the freedom of the nobility? The astonished Starodum and, together with him, the author exclaim only: “The master of interpreting decrees!”
Subsequently, the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky rightly said: "It's all about last words Mrs. Prostakova; they have the whole meaning of the drama and the whole drama in them ... She wanted to say that the law justifies her lawlessness. Prostakova does not want to recognize any obligations of the nobility, she calmly violates the law of Peter the Great on the compulsory education of the 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 duties. There is no need to talk about some kind of noble honor, personal dignity, faith and loyalty, mutual respect, serving the state interests. Fonvizin saw what this led to in practice: to state collapse, immorality, lies and venality, ruthless oppression of serfs, general theft and the Pugachev uprising. Therefore, he wrote about Catherine’s Russia: “A state in which the most respectable of all states, which is supposed to defend the fatherland, together with the sovereign and its corps to represent the nation, guided by honor alone, the nobility, already exists in name and is sold to every scoundrel who robbed the fatherland.
The conflict of comedy lies in the clash of two opposing views on the role of the nobility in public life countries. Mrs. Prostakova declares that the decree "on the liberty of the noble" (which freed the nobleman from compulsory service to the state, established by Peter I) made him "free", primarily in relation to the serfs, freeing him from all burdensome human and moral obligations to society. Fonvizin puts a different look at the role and duties of a nobleman into the mouth of Starodum, the person closest to the author. According to political and moral ideals, Starodum is a man of the Petrine era, which is contrasted in the comedy with the era of Catherine.
The audience in the comedy "Undergrowth" was attracted, first of all, goodies. Received with great enthusiasm serious scenes in which Starodum and Pravdin performed. Performances thanks to Starodum turned into a kind of public demonstrations. “At the end of the play,” recalls one of his contemporaries, “the audience threw a purse filled with gold and silver onto the stage to Mr. Dmitrevsky ... G. Dmitrevsky, lifting it, spoke to the audience and said goodbye to her” (“Art Newspaper”, 1840, No. 5.).
One of the main characters of Fonvizin's play is Starodum. According to his worldview, he is the bearer of the ideas of the Russian noble Enlightenment. Starodum served in the army, fought bravely, was wounded, but bypassed with a reward. It was received by his former friend, the count, who refused to go to the active army. After retiring, 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, the associate of Starodum, official Pravdin, acts on the Prostakov estate not on behalf of the government, but “from his own feat of the heart”. The success of Starodum determined Fonvizin's decision to publish in 1788 the satirical magazine Friend of Honest People, or Starodum.
Positive characters are depicted by the playwright somewhat pale and schematically. Starodum and his associates teach from the stage throughout the play. But such were the laws of the then dramaturgy: classicism assumed the image of heroes uttering monologues-teachings "from the author." Behind Starodum, Pravdin, Sophia and Milon stands, of course, Fonvizin himself with his rich experience in state and court service and unsuccessful struggle for his noble educational ideas.
Presented with amazing realism by Fonvizin negative characters: Mrs. Prostakova, her husband and son Mitrofan, the evil and greedy brother of Prostakova Taras Skotinin. All of them are enemies of enlightenment and the law, they bow only to power and wealth, they are afraid only of material strength and they are cunning all the time, they achieve their benefits by all means, guided only by their practical mind and their own interest. They simply do not have morality, ideas, ideals, any moral principles, not to mention the knowledge and respect for laws.
The central figure of this group, one of significant characters Fonvizin's play is Mrs. Prostakova. She immediately becomes the mainspring driving the stage action, because in this provincial noblewoman there is some kind of powerful vitality, which is lacking not only positive characters, but also to her lazy selfish son and pig-like brother. “This face in comedy is unusually well conceived psychologically and excellently sustained dramatically,” the historian V.O., an expert on the era, said about Prostakova. Klyuchevsky. Yes, it is a character in the full sense of the 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 Mrs. Prostakovs in real life and will be defenseless.
The plot of Fonvizin's comedy is simple. In the family of provincial landowners Prostakov lives their distant relative - the orphaned Sophia. The brother of Mrs. Prostakova, Taras Skotinin, and the son of the Prostakovs, Mitrofan, would like to marry Sophia. At a critical moment for the girl, when her uncle and nephew are desperately sharing her, another uncle appears - Starodum. He is 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 estate of the Prostakovs is taken into state custody for the cruel treatment of serfs. Mitrofan is given 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 of the 18th century. This is a struggle with the serf-owner Prostakova, depriving her of the right to own her estate. At the same time, other storylines: 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.
"Undergrowth" is a comedy in five acts. Events unfold in the estate of the Prostakovs. A significant part of the dramatic action in The Undergrowth is devoted to solving the problem of education. These are the scenes of Mitrofan's teachings, the vast majority of Starodum's moralizing. The culminating point in the development of this theme, no doubt, is the scene of Mitrofan's exam in the 4th act of the comedy. This satirical picture, deadly in terms of the strength of the accusatory sarcasm contained in it, serves as a verdict on the education system of the Prostakovs and Skotinins.
Other characters also act on the stage: the downtrodden and intimidated husband of Prostakov, and her brother Taras Skotinin, who loves his pigs more than anything in the world, and the noble "undergrowth" - the mother's favorite, who does not want to learn anything, the son of Prostakov Mitrofan, spoiled and corrupted by maternal upbringing. Next to them are taken out: the yard Prostakovs - the tailor Trishka, the serf nanny, the former breadwinner Mitrofan Eremeevna, his teacher - the village deacon 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 - all the time remind the viewer of the invisibly present behind the scenes, given by Catherine II to the full and uncontrolled power of Skotinin and Prostakov, the peasants of the Russian serf village. It is they who, remaining behind the scenes, actually become the main suffering face of the comedy, their fate casts a formidable, tragic reflection on the fate of its noble characters. The names of Prostakova, Mitrofan, Skotinin, Kuteikin, Vralman became household names.
23. Small genres of satire by D.I. Fonvizin. “The Treasurer Fox”, “Message to My Servants…”, “Experience of the Russian Soslovnik”, “General Court Grammar”, “A Few Questions…” and “Answers” by Catherine II.
In Fonvizin's satires, two main properties of this writer are clearly reflected: "the gift to laugh together merrily and venomously," which was aptly pointed out by the great Russian democrat critic Belinsky, and sharp observation, the ability to grasp and vividly show the typical characters of his contemporaries.
The activity of Fonvizin as a literary critic began with the translation of the fables of the then famous Danish poet Golberg. Later, he himself began to write still largely "raw", but interesting for his time, fables and parables. However, being already known as a translator, Fonvizin more than once found himself in an awkward position - most of the fables he created were considered either elegantly executed transcriptions of foreign works into Russian, or outright plagiarism. Nevertheless, several fables are still known as the genuine work of Fonvizin and represent special interest to reveal the initial stages of the creative path of the master. These are the political fable "The Fox Treasurer" and the satire "Message to my servants, Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka", written in 1760.
The first named work was written shortly after the death of Empress Elizabeth and became an angry response to the church ceremony associated with her funeral. The writer ridiculed in his work the sycophancy and sycophancy of the courtiers and revealed to the reader true essence deeds the highest of the world this. The emperor "King-Lion" is depicted as a "dreadful cattle", and his kingdom and leadership of the people are based on oppression and violence:
In his reign, favorites and nobles
They ripped off innocent skins from animals without ranks.
The fable "The Fox-Kaznodey" is aimed at dexterous and shameless sycophants-officials who, with flattering speeches and obsequious behavior, support the mighty of the world this. (Koznodey - plotting intrigues.) ;. Speech in work is coming about a certain "Libyan side", which, however, is very reminiscent of Russian reality. Not embarrassed by outright lies, the Fox praises the Lion. In addition to the Fox, two more characters are bred in the fable: the Mole and the Dog. These are much more frank and honest in their assessments of the deceased king. However, they will not tell the truth aloud; whisper into one another's ear. Descriptions of the lion's reign are given in tones of angry reproof. The king's throne was built "from the bones of torn beasts";. From the inhabitants of the Libyan side, the royal favorites and nobles, without trial or investigation, "tear off the skin. Fox-Kaznodey"; - a bright and impressive work, not only for the bold ideas stated here, but also for their poor implementation. The reception of the antithesis works especially clearly: the opposite to the flattering speeches of the Fox of the truthful and bitter assessments given by the Mole and the Dog.
The second work presents the reader with a conversation between the author and his servants. To the question: “For what was this light created? - the author could not get a clear answer. Shumilov believes that there is no point in the question, that the lot of a serf is eternal slavery and humiliation of a servant; he is simply not ready to express his thoughts, which most likely do not exist at all. Vanka expresses his opinion that "the world around here" is bad, and talking about it is a trifle, a worthless conversation. Vanka's judgments are the central and most important part of the poem. Choosing the conductor of your ideas common man from the people, Fonvizin gives a sharp description of the order in the country. No church dogmas, no government regulations will explain or justify a social order in which the system of general hypocrisy, deceit and theft triumphs. light. It becomes obvious to everyone that there is no higher divine plan, and that society and the division into estates are at least unreasonable.
Later, Fonvizin moved from poetic satire to satire in prose. One of the most daring and witty examples of satirical literature XVIII V. - "The General Court Grammar" written by him. Here, in the form of an explanation in response to questions of basic grammatical definitions and a presentation of grammatical rules, an exceptionally sharp criticism of the court of Catherine II, which Fonvizin considered the most infected place in the whole state, is given, corrupt flatterers-odopists, etc. To the very first question: “What is court grammar? - follows the answer: "Court grammar is the science of cunningly flattering with tongue and pen." “What does it mean to flatter slyly?” “It means to speak and write such lies that would be pleasing to the noble, and useful to the flatterer.” “What is a court lie?” “There is an expression of a vile soul before an arrogant soul.” To the question: "What is a number?" - follows the answer: "The number at the court means the score: for how many meanness - how many favors you can get." - "What is the court case?" - “The court case is the inclination of the strong to impudence, and the powerless to meanness. However, most of the boyars think that everyone is in front of them in the accusative case, but they usually win their favor and patronage in the dative case. In this way, the explanation of verbal forms - moods, conjugations - goes on.
Engaged in translation for a number of years, Fonvizin showed interest in the problems of language back in the 70s, participating in the compilation of a French-Russian dictionary (see notes to the letter to Ya. I. Bulgakov from Montpellier). “The Experience of a Russian Soslovnik” is a work of a kind in terms of genre, where political satire was presented to the reader under the pretext of philological research. In preparing the "Experience" Fonvizin used the "Dictionary of Synonyms" by the French abbot Girard. Of the one hundred and five words explained by Fonvizin, he almost literally translated the following from Girard's dictionary: timid, cowardly, full, enough, misconduct, guilt, help, help, commit, rightness, always, in love, peace, silence, peace. The translation of these neutral words, as it were, covered up groups of synonyms that quite clearly interpreted political topics, illustrated with satirical examples. First published in the magazine "Interlocutor of Lovers of the Russian Word" for 1783 (parts I, IV, X).
In 1783, State Councilor Fonvizin, who retired and was attracted by E.R. Dashkova to participate in the new journal, publishes article after article2. Among other works, he sends to the “Interlocutor” “Several questions that can raise in intelligent and honest people special attention." Taking advantage of the new magazine's print platform, Fonvizin intended to open a discussion about the Russian political system, or rather, about its absence, fraught with instability, the precariousness of power. The writer was worried about the absence of “fundamental laws” in the country, which were determined according to the scale of Sh.L. Montesquieu. There are no laws - there is no “spirit” of civilization, that is, the established system of institutions, habits, norms of life, paradigms for the development of society. The best and most honest nobles are retired, the moral degradation of the nobility, busy educating not people, but non-commissioned officers, decomposes society, and the government itself welcomes the most insignificant. This point about the exaltation of "jesters" (the allegory unequivocally extended further - to the favorites) became the focus of controversy and provoked the empress's most stormy rebuke. Fonvizin touched upon a painful and extremely important aspect of the political system, reproaching Catherine for the absence of the core of the monarchical type of government - an honor that sets in motion all parts of the political organism, according to Montesquieu.
This 14th “question” about the “jesters” close to power especially annoyed the Empress: it dealt with her favorite Lev Aleksandrovich Naryshkin, the chief master of the horse, court wit, who regularly received ranks and awards. To her answer, Catherine added the characteristic mark “NB”, containing a reproach that the very possibility of such a daring conversation with the monarch was generated by freedom of speech (“free speech”), which she herself established:
14. Why, in former times, jesters, spies and jokers did not have ranks, but now they do, and they are very high?
At 14. Our ancestors were not all able to read and write. N.B. This question was born from free speech, which our ancestors did not have; but if they had, they would have counted ten former ones on the present one.
The general conclusion of researchers (primarily of the Soviet era) was the thesis that the brave writer Denis Fonvizin was rudely reprimanded by the empress, who was slipping into repression.
Catherine demanded that the questions and her answers be printed together as a single text. In this form, in two columns, with the new title “Questions and Answers with the addition of a Preface”, this essay was placed on the pages of the “Interlocutor”, and not as a separate publication of two authors, but inside the empress’s humorous essay “There were and fables." The complex interference of “three” authors (Catherine acted in two guises at once - as the author of an essay and as the author of “Answers”) was combined in a journal publication with a very whimsical system of “narrators”, on whose behalf the Empress also commented on the “Questions” of an anonymous author and her own "Answers".
Thus, from its very appearance, the text of Fonvizin's article was surrounded by a contradictory and multi-referential context, oriented towards completely different socio-political and aesthetic expectations. Fonvizin himself offered readers a serious conversation about a free, civil society. “Questions” appealed to something that did not exist in Russia - to “ public opinion". The article outlined the space for free discussion, criticism of the government and political disputes that are not under the control of state power.
The empress, who started a magazine and filled her “There were tales” with jokes about her courtiers, was busy creating a gallant court society according to the latest French models. She needed not denunciations and satires, but the development of a new cultural paradigm, a new cultural language, which was intended to unite the court society and represent power in a new way. To the political and stylistic dissonance that arose in connection with the reception of this article, was added the fact that Catherine did not know who was its true author.
Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is the author of the famous comedies \"Undergrowth\", \"Foreman\", which still do not leave the theater stage, and many others satirical works. According to his convictions, Fonvizin belonged to the educational movement, so the noble malevolence was the leading theme of his dramaturgy. Fonvizin managed to create a vivid and surprisingly true picture of the moral degradation of the nobility late XVIII century and sharply condemn the reign of Catherine II. The role of the writer as a playwright and author of satirical essays is enormous.
Fonvizin's special Russian warehouse of humor, the special Russian bitterness of laughter that sounds in his works and was born by the socio-political conditions of serf-owning Russia, were understandable and dear to those who traced their literary pedigree from the author of "Undergrowth". AI Herzen, a passionate and indefatigable fighter against autocracy and serfdom, believed that Fonvizin's laughter "resonated far away and woke up a whole phalanx of great scoffers".
A feature of Fonvizin's work is the organic combination in most of his works of satirical witticism with a socio-political orientation. Fonvizin's strength lies in his literary and civic honesty and directness. He boldly and directly opposed social injustice, ignorance and prejudices of his class and his era, exposed the landlord and autocratic-bureaucratic arbitrariness.
Fonvizin's comedy\"Undergrowth\" is directed against\"those malevolent ignoramuses who, having their full power over people, use it for evil inhumanly\". From the first to the last scene, this comedy is constructed in such a way that it is clear to the viewer or reader: unlimited power over the peasants is the source of parasitism, tyranny, abnormal family relations, moral deformity, ugly upbringing and ignorance. The undergrowth-Mitrofanushka does not need to study or prepare himself for public service because he has hundreds of serfs who will provide him with a well-fed life. This is how his grandfather lived, this is how his parents live, so why shouldn't he spend his life in idleness and pleasure?
Without doubting the power of laughter, Fonvizin turned it into a formidable weapon. But in the comedy\"Undergrowth \" he also introduced the features of the\"serious genre\" by introducing the images of\"bearers of virtue \": Staro-Duma and Pravdin. He complicated the traditional positive images lovers - Sophia and Milon. They are entrusted with the thoughts and feelings of the playwright himself and people close to him in terms of views. They talk about what is dear to the author himself: about the need to instill in a person from childhood a sense of duty, love for the motherland, honesty, truthfulness, self-esteem, respect for people, contempt for baseness, flattery, inhumanity.
The playwright managed to describe all the essential aspects of the life and customs of the feudal-serf society of the second half of the 18th century. He created expressive portraits of representatives of the feudal lords, opposing them, on the one hand, to the progressive nobility, and on the other, to representatives of the people.
Trying to give brightness and credibility to the characters, Fonvizin endowed his characters, especially negative ones, with an individualized language. Characters in \"Undergrowth \" everyone speaks in their own way, their speech is like lexical composition and different intonation. Such a careful selection of language means for each of the characters helps the author to more fully and reliably reveal their appearance. Fonvizin makes extensive use of the richness of the living folk language. The proverbs and sayings that are used in the play give its language a special simplicity and expressiveness: \"All guilt is to blame\", \"Live and learn,\" , \"Ends in the water\", etc. The author also uses colloquial and even swear words and expressions, particles and adverbs:\"until tomorrow\", \"uncle-de\", \"first\", \"which I mean \" etc.
The wealth of linguistic means of the comedy\"Undergrowth\" suggests that Fonvizin had an excellent command of the dictionary folk speech and was well acquainted with folk art.
Thus, the distinctive features of the comedy \"Undergrowth\" are the relevance of the topic, the denunciation of serfdom, the realism of the created picture of the life and customs of the depicted era and the living colloquial. By the sharpness of the satirical denunciation feudal system this comedy is considered to be the most outstanding dramatic work Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century.
The author of the famous comedies "Undergrowth", "Foreman", which still do not leave the theater stage, and many other satirical works. According to his convictions, Fonvizin belonged to the educational movement, so the noble malevolence was the leading theme of his dramaturgy. Fonvizin managed to create a vivid and surprisingly true picture of the moral degradation of the nobility at the end of the 18th century and sharply condemn the reign of Catherine P. The role of the writer as a playwright and author of satirical essays is enormous.
The special Russian warehouse of Fonvizin's humor, the special Russian bitterness of laughter, sounding in his works and born of the socio-political conditions of feudal Russia, were understandable and dear to those who traced their literary pedigree from the author of The Undergrowth. A. I. Herzen, a passionate and tireless fighter against autocracy and serfdom, believed that Fonvizin’s laughter “resounded far away and woke up a whole phalanx of great scoffers.”
A feature of Fonvizin's work is the organic combination in most of his works of satirical witticism with a socio-political orientation. Fonvizin's strength lies in his literary and civic honesty and directness. He boldly and directly opposed the social injustice, ignorance and prejudices of his class and his era, exposed the landlord and autocratic-bureaucratic arbitrariness.
Fonvizin's comedy "Undergrowth" is directed against "those moral ignoramuses who, having their full power over people, use it for evil inhumanly." This comedy, from the first to the last days of the scene, is constructed in such a way that it is clear to the viewer or reader: unlimited power over the peasants is a source of parasitism, a petty tyrant.
And, abnormal relations in the family, moral deformity, ugly upbringing and ignorance. The undersized Mitrofanushka does not need to study or prepare himself for public service, because he has hundreds of serfs who will provide him with a well-fed life. This is how his grandfather lived, this is how his parents live, so why shouldn't he spend his life in idleness and pleasure?
Without doubting the power of laughter, Fonvizin turned it into a formidable weapon. But in the comedy "Undergrowth" he also introduced the features of the "serious genre", introducing the images of "bearers of virtue": Starodum and Pravdin. He also complicated the traditional positive images of lovers - Sophia and Milo. They are entrusted with the thoughts and feelings of the playwright himself and people close to him in terms of views. They talk about what is dear to the author himself: about the need to instill in a person from childhood a sense of duty, love for the motherland, honesty, truthfulness, self-esteem, respect for people, contempt for baseness, flattery, inhumanity.
The playwright managed to describe all the essential aspects of the life and customs of the feudal-serf society of the second half of the 18th century. He created expressive portraits of representatives of the feudal lords, opposing them, on the one hand, to the progressive nobility, and on the other, to representatives of the people.
Trying to give brightness and credibility to the characters, Fonvizin endowed his characters, especially negative ones, with an individualized language. The characters in "Undergrowth" each speak in their own way, their speech is different both in terms of lexical composition and intonation. Such a careful selection of language means for each of the characters helps the author to more fully and reliably reveal their appearance. Fonvizin makes extensive use of the richness of the living folk language. The proverbs and sayings that are used in the play give its language a special simplicity and expressiveness: “All guilt is to blame”, “Live for a century, learn for a century”, “Guilty without guilt”, “I will do you good”, “Ends in the water”, etc. The author also uses colloquial and even swear words and expressions, particles and adverbs: “until tomorrow”, “uncle-de”, “first”, “which is to say”, etc.
The richness of the language means of the comedy "Undergrowth" suggests that Fonvizin had an excellent command of the dictionary of folk speech and was well acquainted with folk art.
Thus, the distinctive features of the comedy "Undergrowth" are the relevance of the topic, the denunciation of serfdom. The realism of the created picture of the life and customs of the depicted era and the lively spoken language. By the sharpness of the satirical teaching of the feudal system, this comedy is rightfully considered
A more outstanding dramatic work of Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century.
Fonvizin went down in history national literature as the author of the famous comedy "Undergrowth". But he was also a talented prose writer. The gift of a satirist was combined in him with the temperament of a born publicist. The scourging sarcasm of Fonvizin's satire was feared by Empress Catherine II. unsurpassed artistic skill Fonvizin was noted at the time by Pushkin. It afflicts us to this day.
Being one of the most prominent figures of enlightenment humanism in Russia in the 18th century, Fonvizin embodied in his work that rise national consciousness how this era was marked. Awakened by Peter's reforms huge country the best representatives of the Russian nobility acted as spokesmen for this renewed self-consciousness. Fonvizin perceived the ideas of enlightenment humanism especially sharply, with pain of heart he observed the moral devastation of part of his estate. Fonvizin himself lived in the power of ideas about the high moral duties of a nobleman. In oblivion by the nobles of their duty to society, he saw the cause of all public evils: “I happened to travel around my land. I saw in what most of those bearing the name of a nobleman believe their piety. I have seen many such who serve, or, moreover, take places in the service for the sole reason that they go by steam. I saw many others who immediately retired as soon as they won the right to harness quadruplets. I have seen from the most respectable ancestors contemptuous descendants. In a word, I saw noblemen servile. I am a nobleman, and this is what tore my heart to pieces.” So Fonvizin wrote in 1783 in a letter to the writer of "Tales and Fables", that is, to the Empress Catherine I.
Fonvizin joined in literary life Russia at the moment when Catherine II encouraged interest in ideas European Enlightenment: at first, she flirted with the French enlighteners - Voltaire, Diderot, D "Alembert. But very soon there was no trace of Catherine's liberalism.
By the will of circumstances, Fonvizin found himself in the thick of the internal political struggle that flared up at court. In this struggle gifted with brilliant creativity and sharp observation, Fonvizin took the place of a satirical writer, denouncing corruption and lawlessness in the courts, lowland moral character nobles close to the throne and favoritism encouraged by the highest authorities.
N. I. Novikov with his satirical magazines "Truten" and "Painter", Fonvizin with his publicistic speeches and the immortal "Undergrowth" and, finally, A. N. Radishchev with the famous "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" - these are the milestones in the formation of the tradition the most radical line of the Russian noble Enlightenment, and it is no coincidence that each of the three prominent writers era was persecuted by the government. In the activities of these writers, the prerequisites for that first wave of the anti-autocratic liberation movement, which was later called the stage in the development of noble revolutionary thought, ripened.
Need to download an essay? Click and save - "Example of an essay: The satirical skill of D. I. Fonvizin. And the finished essay appeared in the bookmarks.
