Composition “The satirical skill of D. And

1. The beginning of the journey: Fonvizin is a fable.
2. Comedy "Foreman"
3. "Undergrowth" as a satire of its time.
4. Innovation of the writer.

D. I. Fonvizin is a writer in many respects significant for the literature of the 1760s - 1780s. The originality and difference of Fonvizin's work is determined primarily by the fact that the writer stands at the origins of a new stage in the development of Russian satire.

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 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 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. Petrushka, a lackey, also cannot answer the question, but proudly declares his intention to live his pleasure in this world. It becomes obvious to everyone that there is no higher divine plan, and that society and the division into estates are at least unreasonable. The first major satirical work of the writer was the comedy "The Brigadier", written in 1763. The comedy brilliantly played up a plot common in the 18th century, while the hackneyed comedy theme received a new understanding and became almost an innovation in theater tradition. Parents seek to profitably marry children who have long given their hearts to others. Two families - the Counselor and the Brigadier - decide to arrange the marriage of the brigadier's son Ivan and the adviser's daughter Sophia. At the same time, Fonvizin “twirls” the intrigue that had begun to develop according to the standard in a completely different direction: the foreman’s son begins to go after the Counselor, while the Brigadier is ready to move his son in the battle for the beautiful lady. The Counselor starts hunting for the Brigadier, and the prudent Sophia is left alone, with the choice of her heart. Such clashes of feelings and intrigues are introduced by Fonvizin into the text not by chance. Thus, the author manages to demonstrate all the absurdity and vulgarity of the behavior of feudal lords and gallomaniac dandies. With regard to the genre, Brigadier is an unusual comedy for Russian literature. This is one of the first "comedy of manners" in the history of Russian satire and dramaturgy. The process of formation of this kind of characters has not yet been shown by the author, but the explanation of the behavior and impulses of each of the characters is already present in the text of the comedy. A lot of innovative techniques - self-disclosure, outright buffoonery, grotesque - make the comedy understandable and funny even for a modern reader.

Fonvizin's next work is Undergrowth, a comedy written in 1781. She happens to be milestone in the life and work of the writer. This work became a program and was the highest point in the development of Russian satire of the 18th century.

The main task that the author set for himself was to expose the rotten mores of that time, the formation of which is due to the established tradition of relationships between people within a notorious and conserved society.

The main theme of the comedy is the malevolence of the feudal lords, which Fonvizin presents as the most terrible social evil. The main conflict of the era - landlord arbitrariness and lack of rights of serfs - is the leitmotif of the entire work. The main subject of the image, therefore, is not the nobility in itself, but the nobility, shown in close interaction with the serfs.

The problem of comedy is the decay of the nobility as the main ruling class of the country. The author presents the viewer with an unusual, but easily imagined world even for a modern reader, where some people own others. The ruling figure of this world is Mrs. Prostakova - "despicable fury" and "inhuman lady." The sovereign mistress of this world, Prostakova subjugates both the serf slaves (the old woman Eremeevna, Trishka, the girl Palashka), and relatives and friends of people in whom she cannot find either support or support.

The author seeks to discover two problems of contemporary society. The fact is that the servility of the serf system not only kills everything human in the serfs, making them a soulless and meek herd, but also corrupts the serfs themselves, makes them drunk on power over people, and with each new obscene act pushes them down the inclined plane getting lower and lower.

For the first time in Russian dramaturgy, Fonvizin not only qualitatively and completely gave a possible solution to the social issue, but also fully and voluminously described goodies. Before that, only evil turned out to be visible and weighty, while positive characters were perceived differently - their speeches and actions seemed too straightforward and feigned. Fonvizin and goodies got the right to life. They felt, spoke, and acted like living heroes, not like machines programmed for goodness.

It is difficult to create a work that would become relevant not only for the modern reader, but also for the coming generation. One hot topic is not enough, it also requires a remarkable talent for writing, combined with a pure and clear thought. However, the talent is not so simple thing. Even natural talent requires constant development, polishing.

Fonvizin went through a difficult creative way. Starting with rather “raw” and gray works, he was able to hone his writing talent to such an extent that he became not only an outstanding writer of his time, but also an innovative author who opened the doors to a new stage of development for all Russian literature.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is the author of the famous comedies "Undergrowth", "Brigadier", 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 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 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", 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, distinctive features comedies "Undergrowth" are the relevance of the topic, 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 teaching of the feudal system, this comedy is rightfully considered

More outstanding dramatic work Russian literature of the second half of the 18th century.

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 his 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 in the 18th 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 this is not about learning, but about education in the broadest sense. Stagewise Mitrofan is a minor person, but the history of his upbringing explains where the terrible world of the Skotins and Prostakovs comes from, what needs to be changed so that the ideals of goodness, reason and justice reign in it.

Thus, the idea of ​​comedy is the exposure and condemnation of the world of ignorant, cruel and arrogant landowners who want to subjugate their whole life, to appropriate the right of unlimited power over both serfs and over 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, Fonvizin pronounces a sentence on the world of arbitrariness and slavery, and he places his hopes on the good beginnings of the human soul, on reasonable education, 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.

Peculiarities artistic method Fonvizin consists in a combination of features of classicism (the division of characters into positive and negative, schematism in their depiction, “three unities” in the composition, “speaking” 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

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 noble malice 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 entered the history of 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. The unsurpassed artistic skill of Fonvizin was noted at the time by Pushkin. It afflicts us to this day.

Being one of the most bright figures Enlightenment humanism in Russia in the 18th century, Fonvizin embodied in his work the rise of national self-consciousness that marked this era. 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 travel 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 the ideas of the 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 who denounced venality and lawlessness in the courts, the baseness of the moral character of the 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.

SEI HPE "Udmurt State University"

Abstract on the topic:

"The work of D. I. Fonvizin"

Is done by a student

2nd course

Faculty of Journalism

Mukminova Svetlana.

Checked:

Doctor of Philology,

Associate Professor of the Department

Theories of literature

Zvereva T.V.

Izhevsk, 2008

1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. 3
2. Comedies by D. I. Fonvizin ………………………………………………….. 7

2.1 Comprehension of forms national life in the comedy "The Brigadier" ... 9

2.2 Understanding Russian culture and Russian history

In the comedy "Undergrowth" ……………………………………………. 15

3. The language element of D. I. Fonvizin’s creativity ……………………….. 25

4. Crisis of world relations and change of ideological position

D. I. Fonvizina ………………………………………………………… 30

5. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………… 32

6. Bibliography …………………………………………………………… 33

Introduction

“In the history of Russian literary satire of the 18th century, Fonvizin has a special place. If it were required to name a writer in whose works the depth of comprehension of the mores of the era would be commensurate with courage and skill in exposing the vices of the ruling class and the highest authority, then Fonvizin should undoubtedly be called such a writer, ”says Fonvizin renowned critic Yu. V. Stennik, author of the book Russian Satire of the 18th Century (9, 291).

In the 18th century, a satirical stream penetrated almost all types and forms of literature - dramaturgy, novel, story, poem and even ode. The development of satire was directly related to the development of all Russian social life and advanced social thought. Accordingly, the artistic and satirical coverage of reality by writers was expanding. The most acute problems of our time were brought to the fore - the struggle against serfdom, against autocracy.

In line with this satirical trend, the work of the young Fonvizin also unfolds. Being one of the most prominent figures of enlightenment humanism in Russia in the 18th century, Fonvizin embodied in his work the rise of national self-consciousness that marked this era. In the vast country awakened by Peter's reforms, 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 the oblivion of the nobles of their duty to society, he saw the cause of all public evils: “I happened to travel around my land. I saw what most of the noblemen who bear the name believe their piety. I saw many of those who serve, or, moreover, occupy I have seen many others who retired as soon as they won the right to harness quadruplets. broke my heart." So wrote Fonvizin in 1783 in a letter to the writer of "Tales and Tales", that is, to Empress Catherine II herself.

Fonvizin joined the literary life of Russia at the moment when Catherine II encouraged interest in the ideas of the 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 creative abilities and sharp observation, Fonvizin took the place of a satirical writer who denounced venality and lawlessness in the courts, the baseness of the moral character of nobles close to the throne and favoritism encouraged by the highest authorities.

Fonvizin was born in Moscow on April 3 (14), 1745 (according to other sources - 1744) in noble family average wealth. Already in his childhood, Denis Ivanovich received the first lessons of an uncompromising attitude towards cringing and bribery, evil and violence from his father, Ivan Andreevich Fonvizin. Later, some character traits of the writer's father will find their embodiment in the positive characters of his works. “Fonvizin’s life was not rich in external events. Studying at the noble academy of Moscow University, where he was determined as a ten-year-old boy and which he successfully completed in the spring of 1762. Service in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, first under the command of the State Councilor of the Palace Chancellery I.P. Elagin, then, from 1769, as one of the secretaries of the Chancellor Count N.I. Panin. And the resignation that followed in the spring of 1782. Start literary activity Fonvizin was marked by translations. While still a student at the university gymnasium, he, by order of the bookseller of the university bookstore, translated in 1761. Moral Fables by Ludovic Holbert. The fables had a prosaic form and were generally instructive in nature. Many of them were provided with didactic moralizing. However, there were fables that resembled a folk anecdote, a witty satirical miniature, which testified to the democratic sympathies of an enlightening author. In addition, the critical pathos of the fables gave them a sharp social significance. It can be considered that the translation of the book by L. Golberg was the first school of educational humanism for the young Fonvizin, instilling in the soul of the future playwright an interest in social satire. The decisive factor for the further fate of Fonvizin as a writer was his sudden appointment to serve in a foreign collegium, which followed in 1763. moving together with the court to St. Petersburg. Yesterday's student is first used as a translator, and soon appointed secretary "for some cases" under the State Councilor I.P. Elagin. Fulfillment of small assignments, conducting official correspondence alternate with obligatory visits to official receptions at the court (kurtags), court masquerades. Fonvizin becomes close to the literary circles of St. Petersburg, very often attends the performances of various troupes at the court. (9.295) Court life, with all its outward splendor, weighs on Fonvizin. And in the mid-1760s. the writer becomes close to F. A. Kozlovsky, thanks to whom he enters the circle of St. Petersburg young freethinkers, admirers of Voltaire. In their society, Fonvizin receives the first lessons of religious freethinking. By the time of acquaintance with Kozlovsky, the composition of the famous satire "A Message to My Servants - Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka" dates back. The anti-clerical pathos of the satire brought the accusation of atheism on the author. Indeed, in the literature of the 18th century, there are few works where the greed of spiritual shepherds, who corrupt the people, would be so sharply denounced.

The eighteenth century in the history of Russian literature has left many remarkable names. But if it were required to name a writer, in whose works the depth of comprehension of the mores of his era would be commensurate with courage and skill in exposing the vices of the ruling class, then, first of all, Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin should be mentioned.

Thus, the purpose of our work was to study and analyze critical literature about D. I. Fonvizin and his work, reflecting the educational credo of the writer.

Fonvizin entered the history of 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. The unsurpassed artistic skill of Fonvizin was noted at the time by Pushkin. It afflicts us to this day.

Comedies by D. I. Fonvizin

“Comedy is a type of drama in which the moment of effective conflict or struggle of antagonistic characters is specifically resolved” - such a definition of comedy is given by the Big School Encyclopedia, M .: OLMA-PRESS, 2000. Qualitatively, the struggle in comedy is different in that it: 1) does not entail serious, disastrous consequences for the belligerents; 2) is aimed at "low", i.e. ordinary, goals; 3) is conducted by funny, amusing or ridiculous means. The task of comedy is to make a comic impression on the audience (readers), causing laughter with the help of a funny appearance (comic form), speeches (comic word) and actions (comic action of characters) that violate the socio-psychological norms and customs of a given social environment. All these types of comedy are intertwined in comedy, and outweigh one or the other. Fonvizin is dominated by the comedy of the word and the comedy of the actions of the characters, which are considered more developed forms.

"Russian comedy began long before Fonvizin, but started only from Fonvizin. His "Undergrowth" and "The Brigadier" made a terrible noise when they appeared and will forever remain in the history of Russian literature, if not art, as one of the most remarkable phenomena. In fact, these two comedies are the work of a strong, sharp mind, a gifted person ... ”- Fonvizin highly appreciates the comedic work.

"The comedy of the gifted Fonvizin will always be popular reading and will always retain a place of honor in the history of Russian literature. She doesn't piece of art, but a satire on manners, and a satire workshop. Its characters are fools and smart: the fools are all very nice, and the smart ones are all very vulgar; the first are caricatures written with great talent; second reasoners who bore you with their maxims. In a word, when Fonvizin's comedies, especially The Undergrowth, never cease to arouse laughter and, gradually losing readers in the higher circles of society, they will win them all the more in the lower ones and become popular reading ... "- says the same V. G. Belinsky.

Fonvizin's crushing, angry-destroying laughter, directed at the most disgusting aspects of the autocratic-feudal system, played a great creative role in the future fate of Russian literature.

In fact, direct threads run from Fonvizin's laughter to the sharp humor of Krylov's fables, to the subtle irony of Pushkin, to the "laughter through tears" of the author of "Dead Souls", and finally to the bitter and angry sarcasm of Saltykov-Shchedrin, the author of "Lord Golovlyov", mercilessly who finished the last act of the drama of the "spiritually ruined, degenerated and corrupted" by serfdom of the nobility.

"Undergrowth" conceives a glorious series the greatest creatures Russian comedyography, which in the next century will include Griboedov's Woe from Wit, Gogol's Inspector General, plays about Ostrovsky's "dark kingdom" (From an article by D. D. Blagoy "Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin." In the book: "Classics of Russian Literature ”, Detgiz, M. - L., 1953).

Comprehension of forms of national life

In the comedy "The Brigadier"

All the characters in "The Brigadier" are Russian nobles. In the modest everyday atmosphere of middle-class life, the personality of each character is revealed as if gradually in conversations. The viewer learns about the propensity for extravagance of the coquette of the Counselor, and about the difficult fate of the Brigadier who spent his life on campaigns. The sanctimonious nature of the Counselor, who has profited from bribes, and the downtroddenness of the uncomplaining Brigadier, are being clarified.

Already from the lifting of the curtain, the viewer was immersed in an environment that struck with life's reality. This can be judged by the introductory remark to the first act of the comedy: Theater represents a room decorated in a rustic way. Brigadier , in a frock coat walks and smokes tobacco. Son him, in dezabile, squirming, drinking tea. Advisor in Cossack, looks at the calendar. On the other side is a table with a tea set, next to which sits advisor in dezabille and cornet, and, smirking, pours tea. Brigadier an odal sits and knits a stocking. Sofia the odal also sits and sews in the tambour.”

In this peaceful picture of home comfort, everything is significant and at the same time everything is natural: the rustic decoration of the room, the clothes of the characters, their activities, and even individual touches in the manner of behavior. In the presupposed remark, the author already outlines both the nature of the future relationship between the characters and the satirical task of the play. It is no coincidence that the son and the adviser appear on the stage, both “in dezabile” at tea, one “coying”, and the other “coying”.

“Ivan, who recently visited Paris, is full of contempt for everything that surrounds him in his homeland. “Everyone who has been in Paris,” he frankly, “has the right, speaking of Russians, not to include himself among those, because the op has already become more French than Russian.” In his contempt for his parents, whom he directly calls “animals,” Ivan finds the full support of the Counselor: “Ah, my joy! I love your sincerity. You do not spare your father! This is the direct virtue of our age.”

The absurd behavior of the newly-minted "Parisian" Ivan and the Counselor, who is delighted with him, suggests that the basis of the ideological plan of the comedy is the struggle against the vices of fashionable education, which gives rise to blind worship of everything French. Ivan's mannerisms and Counselor's affectation at first glance seem to be opposed to the arguments of parents wise by life experience. This pair of french freaks is really moving to the forefront of laughable denunciation. But the satirical pathos of "The Brigadier" is not limited only to the program of combating phranzoomania. (9, 307)

The following episode of the same first act is indicative, where those present on the stage have to express their opinions about grammar. Its usefulness is unanimously denied. “How many serviceable secretaries we have, who compose extracts without grammar, it’s a pleasure to watch! exclaims the Advisor. “I have one in mind who, when he writes, another scientist cannot understand it with grammar forever.” The Brigadier echoes him: “What, matchmaker, grammar? Without her, I lived to be almost sixty years old, and raised children. The Brigadier does not lag behind her husband; “Of course, grammar is not needed. Before you begin to teach it, you still need to buy it. You pay eight hryvnias for it, and whether you learn it or not, God knows.” Nor do the Counselor and Son see any particular need for grammar. The first admits that only once she was useful to her "for papillots." As for Ivan, then, according to his confession, "my light, my soul, adieu, ma reine, one can say without looking at the grammar."

“This new chain of revelations, while laying bare the mental horizons of the main characters of the comedy, concretizes the previous sketches of their portrait self-characteristics, leading us to an understanding of the author's intention. In a society where mental apathy and lack of spirituality reign, familiarization with the European way of life is an evil caricature of enlightenment. The parents are to blame for the empty-headedness of children wandering abroad. The moral poverty of Ivan, who prides himself on his contempt for his compatriots, is a match for the ignorance and spiritual deformity of the rest. This idea is proved by the whole further course of events taking place on the stage. So Fonvizin puts the problem of true education at the center of the ideological content of his play. Of course, in comedy this idea is not affirmed declaratively, but by means of psychological self-disclosure of the characters. (9,308)

The play does not have a dedicated exposition - this traditional link in the compositional structure of the "comedy of intrigue", where the servants bring the audience up to date, acquainting them with the circumstances of the life of their masters. The identity of each is revealed during the exchange of remarks, and then implemented in actions.

“Fonvizin found an interesting and innovative way to enhance the satirical and accusatory pathos of comedy. In his "Brigadier", in essence, the content structure of the petty-bourgeois drama, from the traditions of which he objectively repelled, was travestyed in a peculiar way. Solid, burdened by families, fathers embarked on love affairs. The play was saturated with many comic, bordering on farce, scenes and dialogues. Everyday authenticity portrait characteristics developed into a comically pointed grotesque. (9.308-309)

The originality of the action in The Brigadier also consisted in the absence of servants in the comedy as engines of intrigue. There were no other traditional types with a comic role in it (pedants, scoundrels, etc.). And yet the comedy of the action grows from scene to scene. It arises due to the dynamic kaleidoscope of intertwining love episodes. The secular flirting of the coquette of the Counselor and the gallomantic Ivan is replaced by the confessions of the hypocritical saint of the Counselor, courting the Brigadier who does not understand anything, and then, like a soldier, is straightforwardly explained to the Counselor of the Brigadier.

“It is significant that already in this comedy Fonvizin finds one constructive method of satirical denunciation, which later, in the comedy “Undergrowth”, will appear almost fundamental principle typing negative characters. This refers to the motive of likening a person to an animal, due to which the qualities inherent in cattle become a measure of the moral merits of such a person. (9.309-310)

So Ivan sees in his parents "animals", but for the Counsellor. suffering from village life, all the neighbors are also "ignorant" "cattle". “They, my soul, do not think of anything but table supplies; straight pigs.” At the beginning, likening animals to “a donkey, a horse, a bear”, helping to explain to the father and son, are relatively innocent. But angry Ivan, in response to the reminder of the Brigadier, so that his son does not forget who his father is, resorts to a logical argument: “Very good; And when a puppy is not obliged to respect the dog who was his father, do I owe you even the slightest respect?

“The depth of Fonvizin's sarcasm and the accusatory effect achieved at the same time lies in the fact that the recognition of the qualities of the animal follows from the characters themselves. This is still the same technique of comic self-characterization, when the ironic subtext hidden in the character's speech becomes a sentence for the speaker himself. This technique, varied in every way in the speeches of the characters, is intended not only to enhance the comedy of the action, but also to serve as a kind of standard for the spiritual qualities of the characters. (9,310)

Fonvizin, having the gift of a skilled satirist, finds a new method of self-exposing the characters, which achieves a comic effect. This trick will be used frequently along the way. For example, when the Counselor and the Son are left alone, they talk about fashionable hats. “In my opinion,” says Ivan, lace and blond hair make up the best decoration for the head. Pedants think that this is nonsense and that it is necessary to decorate the head from the inside, and not from the outside. What a void! The devil sees what is hidden, but everyone sees the outside.

Counseling. So, my soul: I myself have the same sentiments with you; I see that you have powder on your head, but if there is anything in your head, I can’t, damn it, notice it.

Son. Pardieu! Of course, no one can notice this.” “The lethality of such an exchange of pleasantries for the self-characterization of the moral character of both is obvious. But it is important that the comic subtext arising from the above dialogue, obvious to the viewer, but unconscious by the speaking character, is caused by the words of the speakers themselves. Satire is dissolved in the action of comedy, and the accusatory verdict on the moral ugliness of the characters is passed by their own speeches, and not introduced from outside. This was the fundamental innovation of the Fonvizin-satirist method, ”notes Yu. V. Stennik. (9.349) Thus, a kind of anti-psychologism is a distinctive feature of Fonvizin's comedy.

“Often in The Brigadier, the statements of the characters are direct authorial statements, only conditionally attached to this person. So, Ivanushka talks about education in completely different words: “A young man is like wax. If, malheureusment, I had fallen for a Russian who loved his nation, perhaps I would not have been like that. (8,243)

The author's "presence" in "The Brigadier" is manifested not only in each specific statement, but also in the appearance of topics common to all characters, in the discussion of which the essence of each of them is revealed. Such a common theme of statements in The Brigadier is the theme of intelligence and stupidity. Each character in the comedy is convinced of his undoubted mental superiority over others, while these others tend to consider him a fool. (8, 244)

So frequent judgments of characters about each other, calculated on an immediate, direct reaction auditorium, develop into remarks-maxims, allowing you to look for applications for them outside the comedy's own plot. Thus, the author's voice sounds from the very essence of the disputes that arise between the characters of his comedy, from its general problems.

Laughter and the author in Fonvizin's comedy have not yet become identified, as happened with Griboyedov and especially with Gogol in The Inspector General, where the author does not speak for his characters at all, where they speak and act according to their comedic character, and laughter "i.e. e. author's attitude to the characters" already arises from the collision of actions and thoughts with the ethical norm that inspired the author's laughter, the norm of humanism and deep regret for a person whose true essence is covered with "the rough crust of the earth."

In such a situation, the position of the reader and the viewer is also interesting. The text of the comedy is intended to interest the reader in "co-authorship", in the need to turn on the imagination and see reality and even themselves behind the artistic images. And besides, comedy should enlighten the reader, infecting him with the spirit of justice and humanism. That was the intention of the writer.

Understanding Russian culture and Russian history in the comedy "Undergrowth"

The pinnacle of the achievements of Fonvizin and all Russian literary satire in the comedy genre of the 18th century. became "Undergrowth". "Undergrowth" - the central work of Fonvizin, the pinnacle of Russian dramaturgy of the 18th century - is organically connected with the ideological issues of "Reasoning". For Pushkin, "Undergrowth" is a "folk comedy." Belinsky, who by the 1940s had developed a revolutionary-democratic understanding of nationality, declared that "Undergrowth", "Woe from Wit" and "Inspector General" "in a short time became popular dramatic plays."

For understanding ideological issues and, accordingly, the satirical pathos of the comedy, it is important to remember that more than ten years have passed between the time of the creation of The Brigadier and the writing of The Undergrowth. During this time, Fonvizin's socio-political convictions strengthened and expanded, and his creative method as a satirist gained maturity.

Comedy is based on the principle of intersecting triads. The triad of negative characters: Mrs. Prostakova, Taras Skotinin, Mitrofanushka. The triad of positive characters: Starodum (the main ideologist of the play), Pravdin, Milon. A triad of heroes-adventurers who pretend not to be who they really are: Tsyfirkin, Kuteikin, Vralman. And, finally, service heroes: Eremeevna, Prostakov, Trishka. Only Sophia remains outside these triads. Both positive and negative characters are fighting for her hand, and since “Sophia” means “wisdom” in translation, the hero is actually fighting for wisdom, truth, the true idea.

Thus, the main conflict of the play unfolds between the positive characters, who represent a true aristocracy, and the triad of negative characters, ordinary people belonging to the "lower" society. Even more, A.S. Pushkin drew attention to the fact that the characters speak different languages. The speech of negative characters is dominated by rude common phraseology with the presence of vulgarisms, slang expressions and even abuse. At the same time, the speech of episodic characters - teachers Mitrofan and his mother Eremeevna - was marked with the greatest individualization. Elements of soldier jargon in Tsyfirkin's conversations, flaunting quotations from Holy Scripture the former seminarian Kuteikin, finally, has the monstrous German accent of the illiterate coachman Vralman - all these are signs of a certain social environment. This is a style designed for comic effect, characteristic of magazine satire. But the style of speech of the Prostakova family is marked by special richness. Now bordering on abuse, now full of flattering ingratiation, the speech of the hostess of the house perfectly reflects her temper, in which despotic tyranny coexists with lackey servility. On the contrary, the language of the positive characters of the “undergrowth” appears to be cleansed of vernacular. Before us is a competent book speech, overflowing with the most complex syntactic constructions and abstract vocabulary. Positive characters in everyday life are almost not characterized. Psychology and spiritual world these heroes are revealed not through everyday life, but in the course of conversations on political and moral topics. Their very form very often goes back to the manner of the dialogic philosophical treatises of the Enlightenment, who basically continued the traditions of moralistic dialogues of the era of humanism.

Thus, it can be seen that for all its “clumsiness”, the speech of negative characters is lively, soiled, this Speaking, directly correlated with the plan of life and life. Whereas any phrase of positive characters turns into a moralizing sermon, which serves exclusively for spiritual education and is absolutely not suitable for everyday life. We see that the tragedy of the situation lies in the linguistic gap between the characters. The conflict lies, oddly enough, in the absence of conflict. It's just that the heroes initially belong to different planes and there are no and cannot be points of contact between them. And this is not even a literary problem, but a socio-political one. Since there is a huge unbridgeable gulf between the true aristocracy and the "lower" society, which will never understand each other, but middle class, as a link, is not formed.

Fonvizin, of course, wanted the positive heroes (and therefore the true aristocracy) to win this battle. But they lose, because their images are lifeless, their speech is boring. And besides this, both Starodum and Pravdin strive to change the world without accepting it as it is. And in this sense, they are also "undergrown", for an enlightened mature person is always ready to justify the world, and not to blame it. The ideology that the goodies preach is utopian because it doesn't fit with reality. Thus, the main conflict of comedy lies between ideology and everyday life.

The composition of "Undergrowth" consists of a combination of several relatively independent and at the same time inextricably linked structural levels. This was reflected especially well by the remarkable critic Yu. V. Stennik in his book “Russian Satire of the 18th Century”:

“Carefully peering into the plot of the play, we notice that it is woven from motifs typical of the structure of a “tearful” philistine drama: suffering virtue in the face of Sophia, who becomes the object of claims from ignorant and rude seekers of her hand; the sudden appearance of a rich uncle; attempted forced kidnapping and the final triumph of justice with the punishment of vice. And although such a scheme, in principle, was not contraindicated in the genre of comedy, there was practically no room for a comic beginning. This is the first, plot, level of structure that organizes the compositional framework of dramatic action.

Delving further into the study of the artistic system of the "Undergrowth", we discover its saturation with a comic element. There are many in the play comic scenes involving the whole group actors, which seem to have no direct relation to the development of the plot outlined above. Such are Mitrofan's teachers: the retired soldier Tsyfirkin, the half-educated seminarian Kuteikin, and the former coachman Vralman, who became the educator of the undergrowth of the nobility. Such is the tailor Trishka, partly mother Eremeevna. The connecting links between these persons and the plot of the play are the figure of Mitrofan with his relatives, mother and uncle. And all the most comical episodes of the play include these characters in one way or another. It is important, however, to remember that the object of comedy in them is not so much the servants as their masters.

From this point of view, the scene with Trishka, the scene of Skotinin's explanation with Mitrofan, the scene of Mitrofan's teachings, and, finally, the scene of Mitrofan's examination can be considered the most important episodes from this point of view. In these moralizing scenes, the everyday prose of life, concrete in all its ugliness, is deployed. local nobility. Swearing, fights, gluttony, canine devotion of servants and rude rudeness of masters, deceit and bestiality as the norm of relations with each other - this is the plot of this meaningful aspect of the comedy. Scenes revealing the triumph of ignorance and malevolence create the everyday background of the plot, highlighting the characters of Prostakova's family members.

These scenes create the second, comedic-satirical, level of the artistic structure of The Undergrowth. Existing within the framework of the first, plot plan, this level, however, has its own logic of revealing life phenomena, the main principle of which will be grotesque-naturalistic satire.

Finally, in the course of the action of the comedy, a group of positive characters stands out. Their speeches and actions embody the author's ideas about perfect person and noble nobleman. This aspect of the artistic content of "Undergrowth" is most clearly revealed in the figures of Pravdin and Starodum. The key scenes, in which the ideological program of the ideal nobles is revealed, are also off-plot in their own way (it is not surprising that the practice of staging The Undergrowth knows the case of the removal of individual scenes considered “boring”).

This is how the third, ideally utopian level of the structure of the Undergrowth is established. It is characteristic that the circle of positive characters grouped around Pravdin is practically not implemented in everyday life. At this level of the compositional structure of the comedy, the comic element is completely absent. Scenes where positive characters act are devoid of dynamics and, with their static nature, approach philosophical and educational dialogues. (9, 319-320)

Thus, the ideological concept of the play is revealed through the combination and interaction of the satirical grotesque, sparkling with comedy, presented in moralistic scenes, and abstract utopia in scenes where ideal characters perform. The unity of these polar opposite worlds is the unique originality of comedy.

At each of these structural levels, two central ideas are solved in parallel, feeding the pathos of comedy. This is, firstly, the idea of ​​the true dignity of a nobleman, affirmed both by publicistic declarations in the speeches of Starodum and Pravdin, and by showing the moral decay of the nobility. Pictures of the degradation of the ruling class of the country were supposed to serve as a kind of illustration of the thesis about the need for a proper moral example from the highest authorities and the court. The absence of such became the cause of arbitrariness.

The second problem is the idea of ​​education in the broad sense of the word. In the minds of thinkers of the 18th century, education was seen as the primary factor that determines the moral character of a person. In the reposes of Fonvizin, the problem of education acquired state significance, because, in his opinion, the only possible source of salvation from the evil threatening society was rooted in proper education - the bribery of the Russian nobility.

“If the first idea was intended to awaken public thought, to draw the attention of compatriots to the impending danger, then the second, as it were, indicated the cause of this situation and suggested means of correcting it.” (9,321)

The significance of Fonvizin's comedy, therefore, consisted primarily in the fact that in it the edge of political satire was directed against the main social evil of the era - the complete lack of control of the highest power, which gave rise to the moral devastation of the ruling class and arbitrariness, as on the ground - in the relations of landowners with peasants, and at the highest levels of the social hierarchy. Considering that the play was created under the dominance of a monarchical system of government in Russia, one cannot but be amazed at the courage and foresight of the author of The Undergrowth.317, Stennik.

The main conflict in the socio-political life of Russia - the arbitrariness of the landlords, supported by the highest authority, and the serfs without rights - becomes the theme of a comedy. In a dramatic work, the theme is revealed with special power of persuasiveness in the development of the plot, in action, in the struggle. The only dramatic conflict of the "Undergrowth" is the struggle between the progressive-minded advanced nobles Pravdin and Starodum and the feudal lords - the Prostakovs and Skotinin.

In the comedy, Fonvizin shows the pernicious consequences of slavery, which should confirm to the viewer the moral correctness of Pravdin, the need to fight the Skotinins and Prostakovs. The consequences of slavery are truly terrible.

The peasants of the Prostakovs are completely ruined. Even Prostakova herself does not know what to do next: “Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we can’t tear anything off. Such a disaster!

Slavery turns the peasants into slaves, completely killing in them all human traits, all the dignity of the individual. With special force it comes through in the courtyards. Fonvizin created an image of enormous power - the slaves of Eremeevna. An old woman, Mitrofan's nanny, she lives the life of a dog: insults, kicks and beatings - that's what fell to her lot. She has long lost even a human name, she is called only by abusive nicknames: "beast", "old bastard", "dog's daughter", "scum". Outrages, reproach and humiliation have made Eremeevna a serf, a watchdog of his mistress, who humbly licks the hand of the owner who beat her.

In the person of Pravdin and Starodum, for the first time, positive heroes appeared on the scene, who act, putting their ideals into practice. Who are Pravdin and Starodum, who bravely fight against the feudal lords Prostakov and Skotinin? Why were they able to intervene not only in the course of the action of the comedy, but, in essence, in political life autocratic state?

As a folk work, the comedy "Undergrowth" naturally reflected the most important and acute problems of Russian life. The lack of rights of the Russian serfs, reduced to the status of slaves, given into the full possession of the landowners, manifested itself with particular force precisely in the 80s. The complete, boundless, monstrous arbitrariness of the landlords could not but arouse feelings of protest among the advanced nobility. Not sympathizing with the revolutionary methods of action, moreover, rejecting them, at the same time they could not but protest against the slave-owning and despotic policy of Catherine II. That is why the response to the police regime established by Catherine and Potemkin was the intensification of social activity and the subordination of creativity to the tasks of political satire of such noble educators as Fonvizin, Novikov, Krylov, Krechetov. At the end of the decade, the revolutionary Radishchev will come out with his books, directly expressing the aspirations and moods of the serfs.

The second theme of "Undergrowth" was the struggle of noble educators with slave owners and the despotic government of Catherine II after the defeat of the Pugachev uprising.

Pravdin, not wanting to be limited to indignation, takes real steps to limit the power of the landlords and, as we know from the play's finale, achieves this. Pravdin acts in this way because he believes that his struggle against the slave-owners, supported by the governor, is "thereby fulfilling the philanthropic types of the supreme power," that is, Pravdin is deeply convinced of the enlightened character of Catherine's autocracy. He declares himself to be the executor of his will - this is the case at the beginning of the comedy. That is why Pravdin, knowing Starodum, demands from him that he go to serve at the court. “With your rules, people should not be let go from the court, but they must be called to the court.” Starodum is perplexed: “Summon? What for?" And Pravdin, true to his convictions, declares: "Then, why do they call a doctor to the sick." And then Starodum, a politician who has already realized that faith in Catherine is not only naive, but also destructive, explains to Pravdin: “My friend, you are mistaken. It is in vain to call a doctor to the sick is incurable: here the doctor will not help, unless he himself becomes infected.

Fonvizin forces Starodum to explain not only to Pravdin, but also to the audience that faith in Catherine is meaningless, that the legend of her enlightened rule is false, that Catherine approved a despotic form of government, that it is thanks to her policy that slavery can flourish in Russia, the cruel Skotinins and Prostakovs can be in charge , which directly refer to the royal decrees on the freedom of the nobility.

Pravdin and Starodum, in their worldview, are pupils of the Russian noble Enlightenment. Two major political issues determined the program of the noble educators at that time: a) the need to abolish serfdom by peaceful means (reform, education, etc.); b) Catherine is not an enlightened monarch, but a despot and inspirer of the policy of slavery, and therefore it is necessary to fight against her.

It was this political thought that laid the foundation for the "Undergrowth" - Catherine was to blame for the crimes of the Skotinins and Prostakovs. That is why the fight against the Prostakovs is carried out by private people, and not by the government (the fact that Pravdin is serving does not change things, since he acts according to his own convictions, and not on orders from his superiors). The Catherine's government blesses the feudal policy of the unbridled nobles.

"Undergrowth" was met with open hostility by the government and the ideologists of the nobility. The comedy was completed in 1781. It immediately became clear that it was almost impossible to place it. A stubborn, dull struggle between Fonvizin and the government for staging a comedy began. Nikita Panin was involved in the struggle, who, using all his influence on the heir to Paul, finally achieved the production of a comedy through him. The court demonstrated its dislike for The Undergrowth, which was expressed, among other things, in the desire to prevent its production at the court theater. The premiere was dragged out in every possible way, and instead of May, as it was originally planned, it finally took place with difficulty on September 24, 1782 in a wooden theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow with the help of invited actors from both the court and private theaters.

Crisis of attitude and change

ideological position

“He was, of course, one of the smartest and noblest representatives of the true, sound trend of thought in Russia, especially in the early days of his literary activity, before his illness; but his ardent, disinterested aspirations were too impractical, too little promising of significant benefit before the court of the empress, so that she could encourage them. And she considered it better not to pay attention to him, showing him first that the path he is on will not lead to anything good ... ”says N. A. Dobrolyubov.

Indeed, Fonvizin was a fierce educator, but his ideas were only a theory, they did not imply any practical solutions. Two major political issues determined the program of the noble educators at that time: a) the need to abolish serfdom by peaceful means (reform, education, etc.); b) Catherine is not an enlightened monarch, but a despot and inspirer of the policy of slavery, and therefore it is necessary to fight against her. And we have already said that the struggle and the desire to change the world is, from the point of view of the Enlightenment, a matter of “undergrowth”, that is, not adults who are not able to accept this world. Passion for Voltaire led the still immature Fonvizin to the denial of God and religion.

“Having lost his god, the ordinary Russian Voltairian not only left his temple as a person who had become superfluous in it, but, like a rebellious courtyard, strove to make a fuss before leaving, to kill everything, distort and soil it.”

"Courtyard" - such is the expressive name of this son of unfreedom. And his mode of action is its manifestation: even having rebelled, he behaves like a slave, ”says V. O. Klyuchevsky about the writer. And in this offensive expression there is some truth: in many ways, if not in everything, the outstanding, talented writer, Fonvizin, as a "Voltairian" is very ordinary.

But gradually, as he grows up and develops an ideological position, Fonvizin moves away from Voltairianism and later work has a pronounced publicistic character.

As for Denis Ivanovich's horror before the youthful sin of Voltairianism and doubts about faith, everything is clear here. His mind, the then Russian mind, brought up in religion and very far from newfangled skepticism, easily overcame what was premature and unnecessary for him, but sharply and painfully remembered all this when the time came for painful leisure brought by illness, when he had to dig in myself to find the reasons divine wrath, in the existence of which it was believed, and also because the blows of fate were already very constant.

It is very characteristic that one of the letters to Panin dated December 24, 1777 (January 4, 1778) says: “In a word, liberty is an empty name, and the right of the strong remains the right above all laws.” So, it is with the “Letters from France” that the collapse of the Enlightenment faith begins.

Interestingly, the "Universal Court Grammar" is a sharp allegorical satire on the court and its vices. And in “A sincere confession about my deeds and thoughts,” Fonvizin bitterly declares: “Young people! Do not think that your sharp words will be your true glory; stop the audacity of your mind and know that the praise attributed to you is a real poison for you; and especially if you feel a penchant for satire, tame it with all your strength: for you, too, will no doubt be subject to the same fate with me. I was soon feared, then hated; and I, instead of attracting people to me, drove them away from me both with words and with a pen. My writings were sharp curses: there was a lot of satirical salt in them, but not a drop of reason, so to speak.

Thus, there is a contradiction in Fonvizin's views. This is due to the fact that in connection with the disease, his last works, including “Frank-Hearted Confession”, are permeated with the motives of religious repentance and the horror of repression that fell upon his fellow enlighteners.

Conclusion

“A son of his time, Fonvizin, with all his appearance and direction of creative quest, belongs to that circle of advanced Russian people of the 18th century who made up the camp of enlighteners. All of them were writers, and their work was permeated with the pathos of affirming the ideals of justice and humanism. Satire and journalism were their weapons. A courageous protest against the injustices of autocracy and angry accusations of serf abuses sounded in their works. This was historical merit Russian satire of the XVIII century, one of the most prominent representatives which was D. I. Fonvizin” (12, 22).

Thus, having studied the work of Fonvizin in this work, we are convinced of his undoubted talent as a satirist and innovator of the word. It was Fonvizin who laid the foundations of the Russian literary language. It was Fonvizin who showed us the reality of the Catherine era, displaying it in his comedies. Perhaps that is why M. Gorky calls Fonvizin the founder of critical realism: "The types of Skotinin, Prostakov, Kuteikin and Tsyfirkin are true drawings of the characters of that time, a true reflection of the ignorance and rudeness of the commanding class."

From all of the above, we can conclude that Fonvizin was truly a brilliant educator and, at the same time, he was the consummator of the Russian Enlightenment XVIII century.

Bibliography

1. Vinogradov, V.V. Essays on the history of the Russian literary language of the XVII-XVIII centuries. / Rev. ed. E. S. Istrina. - M .: State educational and pedagogical publishing house, 1934. - 288s.
2. Gorshkov, A. I. History of the Russian literary language, M .: graduate School, 1969. - 432p.
3. Gorshkov, A.I. About the language of Fonvizin - prose // Russian speech. - 1979. - No. 2.
4. Gorshkov, A.I. The language of pre-Pushkin prose / Ed. ed. F. P. Filin. - M.: Nauka, 1982. - 240 p.
5. Klyuchevsky, V. O. Literary portraits / Comp., entry. Art. A. F. Smirnova. - M .: Sovremennik, 1991. - 463 p., portr. - (B-ka "To lovers Russian literature". From the literary heritage).
6. Rassadin, S. B. Satyrs are a brave ruler.
7. Pumpyansky, L.V. Classical tradition: Collection of works on the history of Russian literature / Ed. ed. A. P. Chudakov; Compiled by: E. M. Isserlin, N. I. Nikolaev; Intro. Art., prepared. text and notes. N. I. Nikolaev. - M.: Languages ​​of Russian culture, 2000. - 864 p. – (Language. Semiotics. Culture).
8. Serman, I. Z. Russian classicism (Poetry. Drama. Satire) / Ed. ed. P. N. Berkov. - L .: Nauka, 1973. - 284 p.
9. Stennik, Yu. V. Russian satire of the XVIII century / Ed. ed. N. A. Nikitina. - L .: Nauka, 1985. - 362 p.
10. Toporov, V. N. “Inclinations to Russian mores” from a semiotic point of view // Proceedings on sign systems. Tartu, 1993. Issue. 23.
11. Fonvizin in Russian criticism / Entry. Art. and note. P. E. Shames. - M .: State. educational and pedagogical publishing house of the Ministry of Education of the RSFSR, 1958. - 232p.
12. Fonvizin, D. I. Selected: Poems. Comedy. Satirical prose and journalism. Autobiographical prose. Letters / Comp., entry. Art. and note. Yu. V. Stennik; Artistic P. Satsky. – M.: Sov. Russia, 1983. - 366 p., 1 sheet. portrait, ill.
13. Fonvizin, D. I. Sobr. Op.: In 2 volumes - M .; L., 1959.
14. Az: lib.ru