Fonvizin comedy ignoramus characteristics of the comedy. Household comedy "Undergrown" D

History of Russian literature of the 18th century Lebedeva O. B.

The problem of the genre originality of the comedy “Minor”

At the level of genre formation, the poetics of “Minor” continues to be paradoxical: the comedy characters, satirical and everyday in their artistic imagery, appear in a dense halo of tragic associations and genre-forming motifs, while the ideological heroes, whose aesthetic status goes back to the disembodied voice of the high genres of ode and tragedy, completely immersed in the element of comedic structural elements.

Let's start with the fact that everyday characters are archaists, adherents of antiquity and custom, like truly tragic heroes. “Ancient people” (III.5) are not only the parents of Prostakova and Skotinin, but also themselves, belonging to the “great and ancient” family (IV.1), whose history dates back to the sixth day of creation. However, long before this circumstance becomes clear, the distant ringing of tragic associations is heard in the very first description that Mrs. Prostakova receives from an outsider: “Pravdin. I found a landowner who is a countless fool, and a wife who is a despicable fury, whose hellish disposition brings misfortune to their entire house (II, 1).” Furies and hell are persistent verbal halos of Sumarokov’s tragic tyrants, appearing in each of his nine tragic texts (cf., for example, “Dimitri the Pretender”: “The evil fury in my heart is gnawing in confusion”; “Go to hell, soul, and be forever captured!"). As for misfortune, it is precisely this concept that covers the tragic world image in which a specifically tragic ups and downs take place - a turning point from happiness to unhappiness.

It is precisely this kind of peripeteia that takes place in “The Minor” along the line of action in the camp of everyday heroes: those joyfully preparing for Skotinin’s wedding at the beginning of the comedy (“Skotinin. On the day of my conspiracy! I ask you, sister, for such a holiday to postpone the punishment until tomorrow” - I, 4), they unanimously fall into melancholy and sorrow in the finale. The motif of melancholy, which initially arises in connection with everyday images in the punning-objective sense of the gastric troubles of the overeating Mitrofan (“Eremeevna. I yearned until the very morning” - I,4), very quickly spreads in the meaning of “state of mind” throughout the text of the comedy and defines the emotional dominant action for everyday characters:

Mrs. Prostakova. That's enough, brother, let's start about pigs. Let's talk better about our grief. (To Pravdin.) ‹…› God told us to take the girl into our arms. She deigns to receive letters from her uncles (I,7); Kuteikin. Your life, Eremeevna, is like pitch darkness. Let's go to dinner, and drink a glass of grief first. Eremeevna (in tears). The difficult one won't clean me up! (II,6); Mrs. Prostakova. How! We must part with Sofyushka! ‹…› I’ll leave you behind just from the melancholy of bread. (III.5); Tsyfirkin. Oh my! Sadness takes over. Kuteikin. Oh, woe to me, a sinner! (III.6); Ms. Prostakova (mourning). Oh, grief has taken over! Oh, sad! (V,4).

This final melancholy of Prostakova, expressed by herself and supported by two remarks (“seeing Mrs. Prostakova in anguish”- V, 5; "waking up in despair" - V, yavl. the latter) is also aggravated by typically tragic plasticity: kneeling, stretching out her arms and fainting complete the associative-tragic picture of her role, emphasizing the emotional meaning of the action, associated with images of everyday heroes, as tragic.

And such a property of a tragic action as its constant oscillation on the brink of life and death, fraught with death and bloodshed, also finds its adequate expression in the associative verbal fabric of “The Minor.” True, in comedy no one dies physically. But the word itself death and words synonymous with it died, disappeared, died, deceased literally never leave the lips of everyday characters who have the exclusive right to this tragic concept and widely use it. Conventional phraseological units, including the word “death” as an expression of the utmost concentration of quality or emotion, appear every now and then in their speech:

Mrs. Prostakova. I'm drinking tea, you're dying (I, 1); Skotinin. And not the villages, but what is found in its villages, and what my mortal desire is (I, 5); Mrs. Prostakova. I’m dying, I want to see this venerable old man (II.5); Prostakov. And I’ve already folded and disappeared (III.5).

Violent physical action in the camp of those exposed constantly puts their lives at risk and puts them on the brink of death, and such a purely tragic motive as suicide is also not very alien to everyday comedy characters:

Skotinin. Mitrofan! You are now within a hair's breadth of death. Eremeevna. Oh, he's leaving! ‹…› Skotinin. ‹…› so that I don’t knock the spirit out of you in my heart. ‹…› Eremeevna. I’ll die on the spot, but I won’t give up the child! (II,4); Mitrofan. No, thank you, I’m already done with myself! ‹…› After all, the river is close here. I’ll dive, so remember my name. Mrs. Prostakova. Killed me! Killed me! ‹…› For you, at least kill the little boy to death (II, 6).

The original tragic meaning of this theme begins to sound with all its force in the final fifth act, which is saturated to the limit with the motive of death and death:

Mrs. Prostakova. I'll order everyone to be beaten to death! (V,2), I don’t want to be alive! (V,3), My sin! Don't ruin me! (V,4); Starodum. I don't want anyone to die. I forgive her (V,4); Mrs. Prostakova. I'm losing everything. I'm completely dying! (V,4), I completely died! My power has been taken away! ‹…› I don’t have a son! (V, is the last one).

Thus, the action of the comedy, which for the Prostakov family is characterized by an avalanche-like growth of the motive of destruction and death, is resolved by a completely tragic ending, at least in a purely verbal sense: physically alive, Prostakova persistently repeats about her death, which, in this case, perhaps should be considered spiritual. And isn’t her soul dead throughout the entire action? Didn’t Mitrofan kill her, resurrected for a second in the finale, by plunging her into a swoon equivalent to death with his rude words?

Finally, such a specific property of a tragic action as its fatal nature, predictability and inevitability of the tragic ending, highly characterizes the action of “The Minor” in relation to the everyday heroes of the comedy. From the very beginning it is known how it will end for them: “Pravdin. I have no doubt that measures will be taken to calm them down” (II, 1); “Pravdin. In the name of the government I order you ‹…›” (V,4).

This global repetition in the structure of comedy, in essence, eliminates the need for everything that happens between the designated phenomena. However, the action takes place, rapidly moving towards the destined catastrophe, its tragic character is aggravated by the truly tragic manic blindness and the opposite expectations of the Prostakov family, who always rely on chance - but this universal assistant of comedy heroes refuses to serve them:

Mrs. Prostakova. How is happiness destined for anyone, brother (1.6). Perhaps the Lord is merciful, and happiness is destined for his future (II, 5). Father, perhaps the child is prophesying his happiness: perhaps God will grant him to be your nephew (III.5).

These unrealistic hopes actualize the purely tragic motive of prophecy-rock in the categorical apparatus of “The Minor.” The fate that overtakes the Prostakov family brings down on them a well-deserved, but nevertheless quite tragic punishment of loss: as P. A. Vyazemsky rightly noted, “in our comedies, the authorities often take the place of fate in ancient tragedies.” This ending is the loss of what the character possessed at the outset - the classic structure of the relationship between the initial situation and the denouement of tragic texts. All the everyday characters in “The Minor” lose something: Mrs. Prostakova - power and her son, Skotinin - his bride and her village with pigs, Mitrofan - a carefree life in his parents’ house (“Pravdin. I went to serve ... " - V, yavl. , last thing). Only those who have nothing to lose lose nothing. Prostakov and Eremeevna remain with their own, like Starodum without a snuffbox, but for them what is theirs is complete and wordless personal slavery, which even a decree on guardianship cannot cancel. And if we take at face value the harmony that Pravdin, in the name of the government, forcibly establishes in the world of simpleton’s estate, distorted by madness, then isn’t this also a tragic outcome?

As a result, we have to state a fact: that group of characters that concentrates the quintessence of the comic of “The Minor”, in its formal and dramatic parameters, is comprehensively built by invariants of the tragic structure, which gives an absolutely incredible genre definition: comedy... of rock.

We can observe exactly the same picture, but rotated 180°, in the opposite world of “The Minor.” The images of the heroes-ideologists of the comedy, created according to the ethical and aesthetic principles of the high genres of ode and tragedy, are deployed in the action of a purely comedic structure.

Despite the fact that Starodum bears an “old” surname, in comedy he is a “new man”, an innovator, as befits a comedy hero. The history of his family does not go further than the era of Peter the Great - in comparison with the sixth day of creation, this is quite “new”, even if we do not take into account the obvious fact that the era of Peter I is generally recognized to usher in a period of new Russian history. And if Starodum thinks in the old way under Catherine II, then this actually means that he thinks in a new way.

The peripeteia that takes place for the ideologue heroes in “The Minor” also has a distinctly comedic character, a turn from misfortune to happiness. In the beginning of the comedy, Sophia, who came to the Prostakovs after the death of her mother and was separated from Milon, is deeply unhappy, and Milon, who has lost traces of his beloved and is tormented by suspicions that his love is unrequited, appears unhappy on stage, but the initial misfortune and mutual loss are crowned with complete and the complete happiness of Sophia and Milo in the finale of the comedy:

Sophia. How many sorrows have I endured since the day of our separation! My unscrupulous relatives... Truthful. ‹…› don’t ask about what is so sad for her…” (II, 2); Milo. ‹…› and, what’s even sadder, I didn’t hear anything about her all this time. Often, attributing the silence to her coldness, I was tormented by grief. ‹…› I don’t know what to do in my sad situation. (II,1). Milo (hugging Starodum). My happiness is incomparable! Sophia (kissing Starodumova’s hands). Who could be happier than me! (IV.6).

Pravdin, who experiences the “misfortune of the whole house” of the Prostakovs as his own, is happy with the opportunity to “put limits to the wife’s malice and the husband’s stupidity” (II, 1); Starodum experiences this comedic twist literally in one moment, for his very arrival, equivalent to Sophia’s deliverance from a forced marriage, is the very point of the comedic twist, which sums up the final result of the “last phenomenon” of the comedy:

Starodum. Nothing tormented my heart more than innocence in the networks of deceit. I have never been so pleased with myself as if I happened to snatch prey from the hands of vice ‹…› (III, 2); Starodum (to Pravdin, the impudent hand of Sophia and Milon). Well, my friend! We go. Wish us... Pravdin. All the happiness to which honest hearts are entitled (V, the last one).

And even when, along this line of action, a virtuous character, even if only verbally, finds himself on the verge of death, the motive of life is actualized in his remarks. In the world of heroic ideologists, even war is not so much fraught with death as it serves as a means of affirming life principles. It is no coincidence that the word “death” is fundamentally absent from the vocabulary of positive characters, even when talking about life on the brink of death:

Starodum. At that very time ‹…› we accidentally heard that war had been declared. I rushed to hug him with joy. “Dear Count! Here is a chance for us to distinguish ourselves. Let us immediately join the army and become worthy of the title of nobleman” ‹…› (III, 1); Starodum. How! Being in battles and exposing his life... ‹...› Milo. He [the military leader] ‹…› prefers his glory to life. ‹…›his fearlessness consists, consequently, not in despising his life. ‹…› It seems to me that the courage of the heart is proven in the hour of battle, and the fearlessness of the soul in all trials, in all situations of life (IV, 6).

And of course, it is far from accidental that in the reasoning of virtuous characters about risking their lives, such a substantial-comedy category emerges, which is the all-powerful engine of this type of action - chance. The research tradition is also inclined to consider numerous chance meetings of closely acquainted people on the Prostakov estate as a flaw in Fonvizin’s dramatic technique: “Milon unexpectedly meets the girl he loves in the Prostakovs’ house, Pravdin meets Milona, Starodum finds in him the nephew of his friend, Count Chestan, even Vralman turns out to be an acquaintance Starodum, for whom he was a coachman.” In these numerous accidents of comedy, many literary critics see an excess of dramatic convention, an artificial concentration of events and coincidences within the limits of stage time.

But if we treat randomness as a genre-forming category, then it will become obvious that such a concentration of random coincidences in “The Minor” is far from accidental: it is a genre dominant, an aesthetic characteristic of the world of ideological heroes. Just as the tragic word “death” never leaves the lips of the everyday characters in “The Minor,” the comedic word “case” is firmly established in the circle of concepts of the hero-ideologists: the all-powerful comedic case rules the lives of abstract rhetorical characters, whose artistic genesis goes back to high genres and odo -tragic type of imagery:

Milo. How glad I am, dear friend, that I accidentally met you! Tell me by what occasion... (II,1); Milo. Dear Sophia! Tell me, how do I find you here? (II,2);Starodum. ‹…› we accidentally heard that war had been declared. ‹…› Dear Count! Here is a chance for us to distinguish ourselves. ‹…› On many occasions I had to distinguish myself. ‹…› Then blind chance led me in a direction that never even occurred to me. ‹…› I saw a lot of people here, to whom neither ancestors nor descendants had ever visited them at all times in their lives. (III,1); Starodum. It happened to be often irritated ‹…› (III,2); Pravdin. I will find a chance to introduce you after (III,5); Milo. I confess to you sincerely that I have not yet had any opportunity to show direct fearlessness (IV, 4); Starodum. In the first case, it would also fit to the fact that if you happen to go, you know where you are going (IV, 8); Milo. I think in this case your forehead would be no stronger than a scientist (IV, 8).

Backed by the benevolence of a comedic occasion, the action! “The Minor” for virtuous heroes develops according to a typically comedic scheme of acquisition: Starodum, who has acquired material wealth outside the text, finds in action a niece with the “heart of an honest man”, Milon and Sophia find each other, Pravdin, as if he had received nothing special except the opportunity to curb arbitrariness, in fact, also gains, and perhaps more than others: the loss of illusions regarding the “humane types of supreme power” is ultimately also an acquisition, and a fundamental one for the hero-ideologist, since it takes place in the sphere of the spirit.

However, with this super-favorable outcome of the comedy; its tragic overtone is not only very noticeable, but is even emphasized by that incredibly high concentration of accidents that is needed to maintain the logic of events in the sphere of comedic structure. Chance and only chance, with an invariable pattern, separates virtuous characters from a possible outcome of events that is truly tragic for them. And isn’t it tragic that ideal virtue, in its quest for a normal, rational life, can rely only on a happy occasion and external support? Thus, the second world image of “The Minor,” entirely built on the ideological and aesthetic categorical apparatus of high genres, acquires no less paradoxical than the first, the genre outlines of a tragedy... of chance.

Until now, we have cut the action and text of the comedy “The Minor” in two. It’s time, finally, to remember that this is one action and one text, in which two types of artistic imagery, two world images, two genre settings function on equal terms, in a constant system of analogies and oppositions: the universal doubling of all levels of the poetics of “Minor” finally reaches , to its logical conclusion. Under the pressure of a double word, dual types of artistic imagery, a double world image and the double sphere of genre gravity of the text of “The Minor” towards tragedy and comedy, the traditionally unified structure of a dramatic work itself is doubled, in which, from the Aristotelian-European point of view, there should be one conflict and one action .

Perhaps, I. A. Goncharov’s statement that in Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit” “two comedies seem to be embedded in one another” can be applied to “The Minor” almost with great success. The same punning word, which initially decisively separated all the structural elements of the comedy, is to blame for this. Between characters whose habitats (home and world) are so different, whose images are formed by so different (thing and concept) categories and whose levels of word proficiency (objective and figurative meaning) exclude any kind of dialogue, the basis of any dramatic action is impossible there is no personal conflict that would cover all the characters in the multi-figure composition of “The Minor” with one contradiction. Hence the natural transition of the conflict into the transpersonal sphere and its fragmentation.

In the “Minor” conflict, constant “deceptive movements” and substitutions occur. Like any dramatic text, Fonvizin’s comedy should have outlined its conflict sphere from the very beginning. However, the line of political confrontation that is outlined in the first five phenomena (the dispute about the caftan, Mrs. Prostakova and Trishka, the serf woman and the serf) does not find development in the action of the comedy. The conflict, therefore, moves to the level of everyday moral description (the struggle of Mitrofan and Skotinin for the right to appropriate Sophia’s money - I.4; II.3). The appearance on the stage of Pravdiv and Starodum, immediately marked by a dialogue about the incurable disease of Russian power (III, 1), transfers it to the ideological sphere.

Of these three possibilities for realizing the conflict in the action of the comedy, only two are actualized: the political substrate, which is hinted at by the clash between the mistress of the estate and the serf tailor, remains hidden in the action, because the only plot in which this conflict could unfold - the rebellion of the serfs - was , naturally, is unthinkable on the Russian stage. Consequently, we have to admit that in the comedy “The Minor” there are two conflicts: family and everyday rivalry for the hand of a rich bride, giving rise to a love affair, which is crowned by the engagement of Milon and Sophia, and an ideological conflict of ideal concepts about the nature and character of power, which categorically do not coincide with its practical everyday contents. This conflict produces a moral and ideological confrontation between the real ruler-tyrant Mrs. Prostakova and the bearers of the ideal concept of power Starodum and Pravdin, which is crowned by the deprivation of Mrs. Prostakova of her political rights.

Thus, each of the two conflicts is unfolded in an independent action, of which, naturally, there are also in Fonvizin’s comedy: it turns out there are two, and within each camp of characters these actions are distributed according to the law of a crooked mirror (or, if you like, punning) reflection of the same type of dramatic situations. If Mrs. Prostakova exercises tyrannical power in practice (“I scold, then I fight; that’s how the house is held together ‹…›” - II,5), then Starodum and Pravdin discuss the problem of power and the conditions for its degeneration into tyranny. The feeding of Mitrofan parodically corresponds to the enlightenment of the minds of Pravdin and Sophia, Mitrofan’s pseudo-exam is preceded by Milon’s true exam for the right to be called an honest man, the fight between Mitrofan and Skotinin for the right to appropriate Sophia’s inheritance accompanies Milon’s struggle for happiness with his beloved girl, etc. Moreover, each of these actions “ Minor" has a full set of compositional elements of structure: the initial situation, development, culmination and denouement - and this double set accordingly doubles the compositional elements of the action of the comedy as a whole.

If in the camp of hero-ideologists a truly effective action with a “plus” sign occurs: the liberation of Pravdin from political illusions, the curbing of the arbitrariness and tyranny of Mrs. Prostakova, the union of Milon and Sophia who love each other, then in the camp of everyday heroes these same elements turn out to be anti-action with a “minus” sign in the sense of its complete ineffectiveness: Mrs. Prostakova’s efforts to raise Mitrofan have a negative effect, her attempts to arrange the fate of first her brother, and then her son in marriage with Sophia are crowned with complete collapse, and finally, she herself, having lost power, also ends up with nothing.

And if we take into account the fact that truly effective action is carried out in ideological speaking, and the ineffective one embraces the material world image of reliable physical life, then we have to recognize the world-creating power of the word-opinion, which rules the world of the “Undergrowth”, partly even in the sacred sense. “In the beginning was the Word” - and Starodum’s letter creates a living, moving world of comedy. At the end - the same word, the “Last Judgment” of the governor resurrects the dead souls of the “Undergrowth” in order to crush this existing, but undesirable world. Thus, the sacred associations of the plot and composition of the comedy aggravate the incredible capacity of Fonvizin’s picture of Russian life, elevating its general outline to the universal timeless plot archetype of the Gospel and the Apocalypse: the coming of a new hypostasis of the Divine, bringing the New Testament to the old world, mired in vices, obsolete, and heralding the Last Judgment to sinners in end of times

The synthesis of invariant elements of two oppositional rows of the genre hierarchy of the 18th century, which divided literature into areas of high ideal and low everyday worldviews, and the complex system of their parallel and cross combination in “Nedorosl” gave rise to a fundamentally new aesthetic status of a literary work. If earlier the category of the genre itself, which closed each text included in the system of this genre into a rigid system of invariant elements of a given structure, made it a unique way of constructing a verbal model of the world from a certain angle of view, i.e., a monoscopic model, then Fonvizin’s comedy, combining two genre structures, two sets of invariants, two angles of view and two ways of verbal modeling of life connections, created a stereoscopic effect. Hence, the model of reality produced by Nedorosl as a whole acquired a volume, comprehensiveness and universality hitherto unknown in Russian literature. It is perhaps impossible to find in Russian literature of the 18th century. another text, which, with an equally compact volume, would be as representative in terms of the scope of Russian reality and literary life as “Nedorosl”.

A similar picture of the synthesis of stable elements of the tragic and comedic genre structures of drama can be observed in the poetic variety of the genre of high comedy, an example of which is V. V. Kapnist’s comedy “The Yabeda,” written in 1796 and obviously bearing the imprint of traditional continuity in relation to comedy "Undergrown."

From the book Russian poets of the second half of the 19th century author Orlitsky Yuri Borisovich

Dedication to an unreleased comedy Don't expect harmonious and beautiful songs, Don't ask the dark autumn for flowers! I did not know the days of shining and clear, And how many motionless and voiceless ghosts were abandoned on the gloomy path. This is the law: all the best is in the fog, And what is close either hurts or

From the book Famous Writers of the West. 55 portraits author Bezelyansky Yuri Nikolaevich

From the book History of Foreign Literature of the 17th Century author Stupnikov Igor Vasilievich

Chapter 9. Moliere's comedies Already in the first half of the 17th century. Theorists of classicism defined the comedy genre as a lower genre, the sphere of depiction of which was private life, everyday life and morals. Despite the fact that in France by the middle of the 17th century. comedies by Corneille, Scarron, and Cyrano were written

From the book Volume 6. Foreign literature and theater author Lunacharsky Anatoly Vasilievich

From the history of comedy in France* The other day, the fifth volume of the monumental “General History of Theater in France” by professor and vice-president of the Senate Eugene Lentilak was published. This volume completes the first part of the work - the history of comedy from the Middle Ages to the Second Empire. At three

From the book History of Russian Literature of the 19th Century. Part 2. 1840-1860 author Prokofieva Natalya Nikolaevna

Comedies by N.V. Gogol. Poetics of the comic Gogol's dramatic talent was revealed very early. While still at the Nezhin gymnasium, he takes an active part in student productions. According to classmates, young Gogol was very successful in the role of Mrs. Prostakova from

From the book History of Russian Literature of the 18th Century author Lebedeva O. B.

Typology of the denouement as an indicator of the genre syncretism of Sumarokov's comedies The dual world image of comedy in its very ability to double reveals its internal catastrophism. If one and the same concept in its concrete material embodiment is a vice, and in

From the book History of Russian Literature of the 19th Century. Part 1. 1800-1830s author Lebedev Yuri Vladimirovich

Pun word and the nature of artistic imagery in the comedy “The Minor” The history of interpretation of the comedy “The Minor” over the past two centuries - from the first critical reviews of the 19th century. to the fundamental literary works of the 20th century. – strictly returns anyone

From the book At the Beginning of Life (pages of memories); Articles. Performances. Notes. Memories; Prose from different years. author Marshak Samuil Yakovlevich

Genre traditions of satire and ode in the comedy “Nedorosl” The doubling of the types of artistic imagery in “Nedorosl”, due to the punishly doubled word, actualizes almost all the formative attitudes of the two older literary traditions of the 18th century. (satires and odes) in

From the book Interrelationships of Russian and Foreign Literatures in the School Course author Lekomtseva Nadezhda Vitalievna

“Sneak” and “Nedorosl”: the tradition of prosaic high comedy in the poetic variety of the genre. Of all the comedic texts of the 18th century. no one demonstrates in his poetics such a deep closeness to the poetics of “Nedoroslya” as “Yabeda” by Vasily Vasilyevich Kapnist. Not

From the book Literature 8th grade. Textbook-reader for schools with in-depth study of literature author Team of authors

Practical lesson No. 4. The poetics of D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Literature: 1) Fonvizin D. I. The Minor // Fonvizin D. I. Collection. Op.: In 2 vols. M.; L., 1959. T. 1.2) Makogonenko G.P. From Fonvizin to Pushkin. M., 1969. P. 336-367.3) Berkov P. N. History of Russian comedy of the 18th century. L., 1977. Ch. 8 (§ 3).4)

From the book How to Write an Essay. To prepare for the Unified State Exam author Sitnikov Vitaly Pavlovich

Poetics of the comedy "Woe from Wit". As the first realistic comedy in new Russian literature, “Woe from Wit” bears within itself signs of a bright artistic originality. At first glance, there is a noticeable connection with the traditions of classicism, manifested in the rapid development of action,

From the book Russian Literary Diary of the 19th Century. History and theory of the genre author Egorov Oleg Georgievich

On the search for originality Most often, beginning authors are reproached for the fact that they have not yet “found themselves”, have not shown their poetic individuality. This is a serious accusation. True poetry is never impersonal. A poet must have his own voice, distinct from others,

From the author's book

4 Identification of the stylistic originality of the author’s text (Materials for lessons in theoretical and literary comprehension of the individual creative manner of foreign writers of the 20th century) The literary word in the 20th century is looking for opportunities to manifest itself in a logically complete,

From the author's book

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin Nedorosl D.I. Fonvizin is among the most educated people of his time. The fate of the playwright is interesting: from a young age he was in high society, was close to the court and was involved in many state affairs. Fonvizin graduated from the gymnasium at

From the author's book

N.V. Gogol the satirist (based on the comedy “The Inspector General”) I. The nature of the comic in Gogol’s works.1. An anecdote that expresses the pattern of vice.II. A merciless portrait of the city N - a portrait of Russia.1. City fathers and their attitude to service.2. Gorodnichy's dreams and Khlestakov's dreams as a reflection

From the author's book

3. Organization of diary material according to the principle of genre division The second type of diary composition involves consideration of its material as a whole, and not one of its structural units - a daily entry. This principle applies to the group of “non-classical” diaries,

The original idea of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” was to reveal the theme of education, which was very relevant in the Age of Enlightenment; a little later, socio-political issues were added to the work.

The title of the play is directly related to the decree of Peter the Great, who banned the ability of young uneducated noblemen to serve and marry.

History of creation

The first manuscripts of sketches of “The Minor” date back to approximately 1770. To write the play, Fonvizin had to rework many works with the corresponding ideological content - the works of Russian and foreign modern writers (Voltaire, Rousseau, Lukin, Chulkov, etc.), articles from satirical magazines and even comedies written by Empress Catherine II herself. Work on the text was completely completed in 1781. A year later, after some obstacles from censorship, the first production of the play took place, with Fonvizin himself being the director, and the first publication of the play took place in 1773.

Description of the work

Action 1

The scene begins with a heated discussion of the caftan made for Mitrofanushka. Mrs. Prostakova scolds her tailor Trishka and Prostakov supports her in her desire to punish the careless servant. The situation is saved by the appearance of Skotinin, he justifies the unfortunate tailor. What follows is a comical scene with Mitrofanushka - he reveals himself to be an infantile young man, and also very fond of eating heartily.

Skotinin discusses with the Prostakov couple the prospects of his marriage with Sofyushka. The girl’s only relative, Starodum, unexpectedly sends news of Sophia’s acquisition of an impressive inheritance. Now the young lady has no end to suitors - now the “minor” Mitrofan appears on the list of candidates for husbands.

Act 2

Among the soldiers staying in the village, by chance, turns out to be Sofyushka’s fiancé, officer Milon. He turns out to be a good acquaintance of Pravdin, an official who came to deal with the lawlessness happening on the Prostakov estate. During a chance meeting with his beloved, Milon learns about Prostakova’s plans to arrange the fate of her son by marrying a now wealthy girl. What follows is a quarrel between Skotinin and Mitrofan over the future bride. Teachers Kuteikin and Tsyfirkin appear, they share with Pravdin the details of their appearance in the Prostakovs’ house.

Act 3

Arrival of Starodum. Pravdin is the first to meet Sophia’s relative and reports to him about the atrocities happening in the Prostakovs’ house in relation to the girl. The entire owner's family and Skotinin greet Starodum with hypocritical joy. The uncle’s plans are to take Sofiushka to Moscow and marry her off. The girl submits to the will of her relative, not knowing that he chose Milon to be her husband. Prostakova begins to praise Mitrofanushka as a diligent student. After everyone has left, the remaining teachers Tsyfirkin and Kuteikin discuss the laziness and mediocrity of their underage student. At the same time, they accuse the rogue, Starodum’s former groom, Vralman, of hindering the learning process of the already stupid Mitrofanushka with his dense ignorance.

Act 4

Starodum and Sofyushka are having a conversation about high moral principles and family values - true love between spouses. After a conversation with Milo, having made sure of the young man’s high moral qualities, the uncle blesses his niece to marry her lover. What follows is a comical scene in which the unlucky suitors Mitrofanushka and Skotinin are shown in a very unfavorable light. Having learned about the departure of the happy couple, the Prostakov family decides to intercept Sophia on the way out.

Action 5

Starodum and Pravdin are having pious conversations, hearing a noise, they interrupt the conversation and soon learn about the attempt to kidnap the bride. Pravdin accuses the Prostakovs of this crime and threatens them with punishment. Prostakova begs Sophia's forgiveness on her knees, but as soon as she receives it, she immediately accuses the servants of being slow in kidnapping the girl. A government document arrives announcing the transfer of all the Prostakovs’ property to Pravdin’s custody. The scene of paying off debts to teachers ends with a fair denouement - Vralman’s deception is revealed, the modest hard worker Tsyfirkin is generously rewarded, and the ignorant Kuteikin is left with nothing. The happy young people and Starodum are preparing to leave. Mitrofanushka heeds Pravdin’s advice to join the army.

Main characters

Considering the images of the main characters, it is worth noting that the speaking surnames of the characters in the play express the one-linearity of their character and leave no doubt about the author’s moral assessment of the characters in the comedy.

The sovereign mistress of the estate, a despotic and ignorant woman who believes that all matters, without exception, can be solved with the help of force, money or deception.

His image is the focus of stupidity and lack of education. He has an amazing lack of will and unwillingness to make decisions himself. Mitrofanushka was called a minor not only because of his age, but also because of his total ignorance and low level of moral and civic education.

A kind, sympathetic girl who received a good education and has a high level of internal culture. Lives with the Prostakovs after the death of his parents. She is devoted to her fiancé, officer Milon, with all her heart.

A person who personifies the truth of life and the word of the law. As a government official, he is on the Prostakov estate in order to understand the lawlessness happening there, in particular the unfair treatment of servants.

Sophia's only relative, her uncle and guardian. A successful person who managed to bring his highly moral principles to life.

Sophia's beloved and long-awaited groom. A brave and honest young officer distinguished by high virtue.

A narrow-minded, greedy, uneducated person who does not disdain anything for the sake of profit and is distinguished by deceit and hypocrisy to a high degree.

Comedy Analysis

Fonvizin’s “Minor” is a classic comedy in 5 acts, in which all three unities are strictly observed - the unity of time, place and action.

The solution to the problem of education is the central point of the dramatic action of this satirical play. The accusatory sarcastic scene of Mitrofanushka’s exam is a true culmination in the development of the educational theme. In Fonvizin's comedy, there is a collision of two worlds - each of them with different ideals and needs, with different lifestyles and speech dialects.

The author innovatively shows the life of the landowners of that time, the relationship between the owners and ordinary peasant people. The complex psychological characteristics of the characters gave impetus to the subsequent development of Russian everyday comedy as a theatrical and literary genre of the era of classicism.

Hero Quotes

Mitrofanushka- “I don’t want to study, I want to get married”;

— “The direct dignity in man is the soul” and many others.

Prostakova — « People live and lived without sciences"

Final conclusion

Fonvizin's comedy became a unique iconic work for his contemporaries. In the play there is a vivid contrast between high moral principles, true education and laziness, ignorance and waywardness. In the socio-political comedy “The Minor,” three themes rise to the surface:

the topic of education and upbringing;
theme of serfdom;
the theme of condemnation of despotic autocratic power.

The purpose of writing this brilliant work is clear - the eradication of ignorance, the cultivation of virtues, the fight against the vices that have afflicted Russian society and the state.

Composition

The last four decades of the 18th century. are distinguished by the genuine flowering of Russian drama. But classic comedy and tragedy far from exhaust its genre composition. Works not provided for by the poetics of classicism are beginning to penetrate into dramaturgy, indicating an urgent need to expand the boundaries and democratize the content of the theatrical repertoire. Among these new products, first of all, there was the so-called tearful comedy, that is, a play that combines touching and comic principles. It was distinguished not only by the destruction of the usual

Genre forms, but also the complexity and inconsistency of the characters of the new heroes, who combined virtues and weaknesses. The famous comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” is distinguished by its great social depth and sharp satirical orientation. In essence, this is where Russian social comedy begins. The play continues the traditions of classicism. “For his entire life,” G. A. Gukovsky pointed out, his artistic thinking retained a clear imprint of the school.” However, Fonvizin’s play is a phenomenon of later, more mature Russian classicism, which was strongly influenced by Enlightenment ideology.

In “The Minor,” as the first biographer Fonvizin noted, the author “no longer jokes, no longer laughs, but is indignant at vice and brands it without mercy, and even if it makes you laugh, then the laughter it inspires does not distract from deeper and more regrettable impressions.” The object of ridicule in Fonvizin’s comedy is not the private life of the nobles, but their public, official activities and serfdom.

Not content with just depicting noble “evil morality,” the writer strives to show its reasons. The author explains the vices of people by their improper upbringing and dense ignorance, presented in the play in its various manifestations.

The genre uniqueness of the work lies in the fact that “The Minor,” according to G. A. Gukovsky, is “half comedy, half drama.” Indeed, the basis, the backbone of Fonvizin’s play is a classic comedy, but serious and even touching scenes are introduced into it. These include Pravdin’s conversation with Starodum, Starodum’s touching and edifying conversations with Sophia and Milon. The tearful Drama suggests the image of a noble reasoner in the person of Sta-Rodum, as well as of “suffering virtue” in the person of Sophia. The finale of the play also combines touching and deeply moralistic principles. Here Mrs. Prostakova is overtaken by a terrible, completely unforeseen punishment. She is rejected, rudely pushed away by Mitrofan, to whom she devoted all her boundless, albeit unreasonable love. The feeling that the positive heroes Sophia, Starodum and Pravdin have for her is complex and ambiguous. It contains both pity and condemnation. It is not Prostakova who evokes compassion, but trampled human dignity. Starodum’s final remark addressed to Prostakova also resonates strongly: “These are the worthy fruits of evil,” i.e., fair retribution for violating moral and social norms.

D.I. Fonvizin managed to create a vivid, strikingly true picture of the moral and social degradation of the nobility at the end of the 18th century. The playwright uses all the means of satire, denounces and criticizes, ridicules and condemns, but his attitude towards the “noble” class is far from the view of an outsider: “I saw, he wrote, from the most respectable ancestors of despised descendants... I am a nobleman, and this is what tore my heart apart "

Fonvizin's comedy is an extremely important milestone in the history of our drama. Following it are “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov and “The Inspector General” by Gogol. “...Everything turned pale, wrote Gogol, before two bright works: before the comedy “The Minor” by Fonvizin and “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov... They no longer contain light ridicule of the funny sides of society, but the wounds and illnesses of our society... Both comedies took two different era. One was struck by illnesses from lack of education, the other from ill-understood enlightenment.”

The main problem that Fonvizin raises in the comedy Nedorosl is the problem of educating enlightened, progressive people. A nobleman, a future citizen of the country who must do things for the good of the fatherland, is brought up from birth in an atmosphere of immorality, complacency and self-sufficiency. Such a life and upbringing immediately took away his purpose and meaning in life. And the teachers will not be able to help (this is just a tribute to fashion on the part of Mrs. Prostakova), Mitrofan had no other desires than to eat, run around in the dovecote and get married.

The same thing happens at court. It's a big barnyard where everyone wants to grab the best piece and roll around in the golden dirt. Here I love myself perfectly; I care about myself alone; fussing about one real hour. The nobles forgot what duty and useful good deeds are. They...don’t leave the yard...the yard is useful to them,...ranks are often begged for. They have forgotten what soul, honor, and good behavior are.

But the author does not give up hope that something can change. Pravdiv takes custody of Prostakova’s household and prohibits her from ruling over his estate. It is in vain to call the enemy. cha to the sick without healing. The doctor will not help here, unless he himself becomes infected, this is the conclusion Starodum draws about life at court. Behind all this one can see the radical measures that Fonvizin proposes to take: to limit the power of the Prostakovs and Skotinins over the peasants, and the power of the tsar and courtiers over all Russian life.

But here are the life rules formulated by the playwright that real nobles must follow:

1) ...Have a heart, have a soul, and you will be a man at all times.

2) Everyone will find enough strength in themselves to be virtuous. You have to want it decisively, and then the easiest thing will be not to do something for which your conscience would prick you.

3) Good behavior gives direct value to it (the mind). Without it, an intelligent person is a monster. It is immeasurably higher than all the fluency of the mind.

4) ...A pious person is jealous of deeds, and not of rank.

5) Respect alone should be flattering to a person’s soul; and only those who are in rank not by money, and in the nobility not by rank, are worthy of spiritual respect.

6) I calculate the degree of nobility by the number of deeds that the great gentleman did for the fatherland, and not by the number of deeds that he took upon himself out of arrogance... According to my calculation, it is not the rich man who counts out money to hide it in a chest, but the one who counts out what he has in excess in order to help those who do not have what they need.

7) ...What is a position. This is the sacred vow that we all owe to those with whom we live and on whom we depend... A nobleman, for example, would consider it the first dishonor not to do anything when he has so much to do: there are people to help, there is a fatherland to serve. Then there would be no such nobles whose nobility... was buried with their ancestors. A nobleman unworthy of being a nobleman! I don’t know anything more vile than him in the world.

Other works on this work

Minor Analysis of the work by D.I. Fonvizin "Undergrowth". Enlightened and ignorant nobles in D. Fonvizin’s play “The Minor” Enlightened and unenlightened nobles in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Good and evil in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Good and evil in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Vital questions in the play "Nedorsl" Ideas of Russian enlightenment in the comedy "Nedorosl" Ideas of Russian enlightenment in D. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Portrayal of the nobility in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Portrayal of the small nobility in Russian literature of the 19th century. What kind of Prostakova did I imagine? The image of minor characters in Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” The image of Mrs. Prostakova in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” The image of Mirofanushka in the comedy “Minor” The image of Mitrofanushka in Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” The image of Taras Skotinin in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Images of the immortal comedy "Minor" Images of negative characters in Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” Construction and artistic style of the comedy "Minor" Why is Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor,” which denounces serfdom, called a comedy of education? The problem of education in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” The problem of upbringing and education in the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” Problems of education in the comedy of D.I. Fonvizin "Minor" Problems of education and upbringing in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor.” Problems reflected in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Speech characteristics in the comedy “Minor” SATIRICAL ORIENTATION OF THE COMEDY "UNDERGROUND" The satirical orientation of D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Cattle that own people (Based on the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor”) Funny and sad in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” Funny and tragic in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” The meaning of the title of the comedy by D.I. Fonvizin "Minor" The meaning of the title of Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” A son worthy of his mother Based on the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” The theme of education in Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” The theme of upbringing and education in the play “Minor” Fonvizin - author of the comedy "Minor" Characteristics of Mrs. Prostakova (based on the comedy by D.I. Fonvizin) What did D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” teach me? What does D.I make fun of? Fonvizin in Mitrofanushka's upbringing? “These are the fruits worthy of evil!” (based on the comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor”) Portrait description of Prostakova in the comedy “Minor” Prostakov family IMAGE OF MITROFANUSHKA Analysis of the work Characteristics of Mitrofan in the comedy by D.I. Fonvizin "Minor" Fonvizin "Minor". “These are the fruits worthy of evil!” Problems and heroes of D. N. Fonvizin’s comedy “Minor” The problem of education in the comedy “UNDERGROUND” Characteristics of the image of Starodum in the play “The Minor” The central character of the play “The Minor”, Mrs. Prostakova The main meaning of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Characteristics of the image of Mitrofan Terentyevich Prostakov (Mitrofanushka) The image of Mitrofan in Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" Is the image of Mitrofanushka relevant in our time? Is Mitrofan dangerous or funny (Comedy “The Minor”) The image and character of Prostakova in Fonfizin's comedy The meaning of speech characteristics in the comedy "Minor" Features of classicism in the comedy of D.I. Fonvizin "Minor" Characteristics of the image of Sophia The main character of the comedy is landowner Prostakova Minor Mitrofanushka Teachers and servants in the simpleton’s house (comedy “The Minor”) Classicism in drama. Comedy “The Minor” by D. I. Fonvizin Why Mitrofanushka became an undergrowth (2) The history of the creation of the comedy "Minor" Denunciation of the serfdom system in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Raising a worthy citizen based on D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Mitrofanushka 1 Family portrait of the Prostakov-Skotinins Characteristics of Prostakova’s image in the comedy “Minor” Characteristics of Prostakov's image The satirical skill of D. I. Fonvizin Construction and artistic style of comedy The image and character of Mitrofan The ambiguity of good and evil in the images of the comedy "Minor" by Fonvizin Funny in D. I. Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” Why Mitrofanushka became an undergrowth (1)

Composition. Features of the genre and artistic method of comedy by D.I. Fonvizin "Minor"

Researchers usually define the artistic method of the comedy "The Minor" as early educational realism, emerging within the framework of the classicist tradition. “In “The Minor,” two literary styles fight among themselves, and classicism is defeated. Classical rules forbade the mixing of comic and sad, cheerful and serious motifs. Comedy was supposed to make people laugh and correct morals only through laughter, “mockery.” not everything is funny. There is more evil satire in this comedy than humor," wrote G.A. Gukovsky.

Let us note the features of classicism in Fonvizin’s comedy. The influence of this artistic method was already felt in the theme of the play, in the designation of the author’s position. The state of education in Russia, serfdom and the manifesto on the “liberty of the nobility,” what a true nobleman should be and what his purpose is - all these questions determine the ideological content of “The Minor.” Fonvizin here conveys the idea that law and education are capable of correcting social mores, that upbringing and education determine the moral character of a person, that an “enlightened sovereign” is a blessing for the Fatherland.

In constructing the play, the playwright follows the canonical rules of classicism. Firstly, Fonvizin follows the rule of “three unities” here. Thus, “The Minor” consists of five acts, it maintains the unity of place and time. All events take place on the Prostakov estate within 24 hours.

The plot of the comedy is based on a traditional love affair: we see several characters - Milon, Skotinin and Mitrofan - fighting for Sophia's hand. In the finale, Fonvizin has the punishment of vice and the triumph of virtue. The characters in the play are clearly divided into positive ones, grouped around Starodum, and negative ones, grouped around Prostakova. Prostakova and Starodum are the two polar artistic centers of the play.

Finally, the presence of speaking surnames was also a feature of the comedies of classicism. This principle is implemented by Fonvizin for almost all groups of characters. Thus, the surname “Prostakovs” correlates with the word “simpleton”, meaning “poor-witted”, “misguided”. Taras Skotinin not only embodies in his appearance his love for pigs, but also, to a certain extent, the author becomes closer to these animals. The meaning of the name "Mitrofan" is "like a mother." And we really see in this hero the unchanged features of the Prostakov-Skotinin breed. The positive characters in the play also have characteristic names. So, the name Sophia means “wisdom”, Milon is her chosen one - a person dear to her heart. Pravdin is a government official who restores justice in the play. Starodum is a supporter of the “old time” and its principles, a person who thinks “in the old way.” All these heroes embody the author’s ideal of the writer, contrasted with the life and customs of the Russian landowner environment. Other characters in “Undergrowth” also have “talking names.” Thus, the surname Kuteikin gives rise to church and religious associations among us (and this hero is a seminarian). The surname Tsyfirkin is associated with arithmetic. It is this character who is Mitrofan’s mathematics teacher. The name of the German who teaches the hero Fonvizin “in French and all sciences” speaks for itself - Vralman.

Now let us note the innovative features of Fonvizin the playwright. The comedy is based on a love affair, but it is closely connected with the ideological orientation of the play - a picture of ignorance and atrocities happening in a Russian landowner's estate. We can say that the love affair is not dominant here. Some researchers even noted the parody of this intrigue, because Milon is the only real contender for Sophia's hand, Taras Skotinin, in reality, is more interested in pigs, and Mitrofanushka dreams of getting married to put an end to his teaching. So the reader is gradually brought to the idea of the seriousness of a confrontation of a completely different kind - between advanced, enlightened nobles and ignorant, inert people.

The characters in the works of classicism were carriers of one dominant character trait. Fonvizin, in his play, breaks this rule, depicting the characters as multifaceted. So, for him, Mrs. Prostakova is not only a domestic tyrant, a cruel, rude landowner, but also a loving mother. The author complements her character with such traits as cowardice, stupidity, and greed. Mitrofanushka is lazy, cunning, resourceful, rude and ignorant. Let us note here that Fonvizin shows us the origins of the origin of characters (Prostakova’s story about life in her parents’ home, the story of Taras Skotinin), his characters are determined by his social environment, life circumstances.

Instead of a conventional setting, we see a truthful, realistic depiction of the life of the landowner family of Catherine’s era, a detailed and reliable depiction of everyday life, a full-fledged, vivid picture of morals. This in the comedy is facilitated by numerous extra-plot everyday scenes: trying on a new caftan and Prostakova’s scolding with the tailor Trishka, her conversation with Eremeevna, the scene with Mitrofan in class, etc. For all their external comedy, these pictures perform an important function in the play. “Already the first scene of “The Minor,” the scene with Trishka, is formally “not needed” for the development of the main plot, just like a number of other satirical and everyday scenes. But these scenes are extremely necessary in the play for another, deeper theme - showing the true picture life; they are expressive, they are real, and this is their justification, although they violate Boileau’s rule that the action of comedy, following the direction of reason, should never be lost in an “empty” stage (“Poetic Art”).”

Fonvizin also violates another classicist canon in “Nedorosl” - the canon of “purity of the genre.” Within one play, he mixes the comic, satirical and tragic, low and high. “At the same time, not everything in “The Minor” is funny. There is more evil satire in this comedy than humor. There is an element of serious drama in it, there are motives that were supposed to touch and touch the viewer.<...>Fonvizin introduces touching pictures of virtue into his comedy (scenes of Milon, Sophia and Starodum), ... bringing “The Minor” closer to a sentimental drama. He decides to introduce into his play even such a tragic situation as the attempt to kidnap Sophia, which is resolved in a heroic way by the appearance of Milo with a drawn sword and the rescue of Sophia.<...>In "The Minor" Fonvizin not only laughs at vices, but also glorifies virtue. “The Minor is half-comedy, half-drama,” wrote G. A. Gukovsky.

But here’s how Fonvizin’s contemporary, playwright and actor P.A., wrote about it. Plavilshchikov: “Although a comedy is a funny scene of adventure and although its main goal is to make the audience laugh with its action, there are many such comedies that also bring tears, and in which a significant difference from tragedy and drama is noticeable... No matter how much our Nedorosl produces laughter, but there is a moment in the fourth act in which a tear appears in the viewer."

Thus, Fonvizin’s entire comedy evokes in the viewer not a simple, cheerful laugh, but a bitter one, which Gogol later defined as “laughter through tears.” “This laughter-irony constitutes one of the features of the national originality of Russian satire and Russian comedy,” the same feature was embodied in the brilliant comedy of Griboedov, in Gogol’s “The Inspector General.”

Let's look at the features of the comedy created by Fonvizin ("The Minor"). Analysis of this work is the topic of this article. This play is a masterpiece of Russian literature of the 18th century. This work is included today in the collection of Russian classical literature. It touches on a number of “eternal problems.” And the beauty of the high style still attracts many readers today. The name of this play is associated with the decree issued by Peter I, according to which “minors” (young nobles) are prohibited from entering the service and getting married without education.

History of the play

Back in 1778, the idea of this comedy arose from its author, who was Fonvizin. “The Minor,” the analysis of which interests us, was written in 1782 and presented to the public in the same year. We should briefly highlight the time of creation of the play that interests us.

During the reign of Catherine II, Fonvizin wrote "The Minor". The analysis of the heroes presented below proves that they were heroes of their time. The period in the development of our country is associated with the dominance of ideas. They were borrowed by the Russians from the French enlighteners. The dissemination of these ideas and their great popularity among the educated philistines and nobility was largely facilitated by the empress herself. She is known to have corresponded with Diderot, Voltaire, and d'Alembert. In addition, Catherine II opened libraries and schools, and supported the development of art and culture in Russia through various means.

Continuing to describe the comedy created by D.I. Fonvizin (“The Minor”), analyzing its features, it should be noted that, as a representative of his era, the author certainly shared the ideas that dominated the noble society at that time. He tried to reflect them in his work, exposing not only the positive aspects to readers and viewers, but also pointing out misconceptions and shortcomings.

"Minor" - an example of classicism

An analysis of Fonvizin's comedy "The Minor" requires considering this play as part of a cultural era and literary tradition. This work is considered one of the best examples of classicism. There is unity of action in the play (there are no secondary plot lines in it, only the struggle for Sophia’s hand and her property is described), place (the characters do not move long distances, all events take place either near the Prostakovs’ house or inside it), and time ( All events take no more than a day). In addition, he used “speaking” surnames, which are traditional for the classic play, Fonvizin (“Minor”). Analysis shows that, following tradition, he divided his characters into positive and negative. The positive ones are Pravdin, Starodum, Milon, Sophia. They are contrasted with Prostakov, Mitrofan, Skotinin by D.I. Fonvizin (play "The Minor"). An analysis of their names shows that they make it clear to the reader which features in the image of a particular character are prevalent. For example, Pravdin is the personification of morality and truth in the work.

A new genre of comedy, its features

At the time of its creation, “Minor” became an important step forward in the development of literature in our country, in particular drama. Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin created a new socio-political. It harmoniously combines a number of realistic scenes depicted with sarcasm, irony, and laughter from the life of some ordinary representatives of high society (nobility) with sermons about morality, virtue, and the need to cultivate human qualities that were characteristic of the Enlightenment. Instructive monologues do not burden the perception of the play. They complement this work, as a result of which it becomes deeper.

First action

The play, the author of which is Fonvizin (“Minor”), is divided into 5 acts. Analysis of a work involves a description of the organization of the text. In the first act we meet the Prostakovs, Pravdin, Sophia, Mitrofan, Skotinin. The characters' personalities emerge immediately, and the reader understands that Skotinin and the Prostakovs - and Sophia and Pravdin - are positive. In the first act there is an exposition and plot of this work. In the exhibition we get to know the characters, we learn that Sophia lives in the care of the Prostakovs, who is going to be married off to Skotinin. Reading the letter from Starodum is the beginning of the play. Sophia now turns out to be a rich heiress. Any day now, her uncle is returning to take the girl to his place.

Development of events in the play created by Fonvizin (“Minor”)

We will continue the analysis of the work with a description of how events developed. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th acts are their development. We meet Starodum and Milon. Prostakova and Skotinin are trying to please Starodum, but their flattery, falsity, lack of education and enormous thirst for profit only repels them. They look stupid and funny. The funniest scene in this work is the questioning of Mitrofan, during which the stupidity of not only this young man, but also his mother is revealed.

Climax and denouement

Act 5 - climax and denouement. It should be noted that researchers have different opinions about what moment should be considered the climax. There are 3 most popular versions. According to the first, this is the kidnapping of Sophia Prostakova, according to the second, Pravdin’s reading of a letter, which says that Prostakova’s estate is coming under his care, and, finally, the third version is Prostakova’s rage after she realizes her own powerlessness and tries to “get back "on his servants. Each of these versions is fair, since it examines the work of interest to us from different points of view. The first, for example, highlights the storyline dedicated to Sophia’s marriage. An analysis of the episode of Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor,” connected with marriage, indeed allows us to consider it key in the work. The second version examines the play from a socio-political point of view, highlighting the moment when justice prevails on the estate. The third focuses on the historical one, according to which Prostakova is the personification of the weakened principles and ideals of the old nobility that have become a thing of the past, who, however, still do not believe in their own defeat. This nobility, according to the author, is based on lack of enlightenment, lack of education, as well as low moral principles. During the denouement, everyone leaves Prostakova. She had nothing left. Pointing to it, Starodum says that these are “worthy fruits” of “evil morality.”

Negative characters

As we have already noted, the main characters are clearly divided into negative and positive. Mitrofan, Skotinin and Prostakovs are negative heroes. Prostakova is a woman seeking profit, uneducated, rude, and domineering. She knows how to flatter to gain benefits. However, Prostakova loves her son. Prostakov appears as the “shadow” of his wife. This is a weak-willed character. His word means little. Skotinin is the brother of Mrs. Prostakova. This is an equally uneducated and stupid person, quite cruel, like his sister, greedy for money. For him, going to the pigs in the barnyard is the best thing to do. Mitrofan is a typical son of his mother. This is a spoiled young man of 16 who inherited a love of pigs from his uncle.

Issues and heredity

In the play, it should be noted that Fonvizin (“The Minor”) devotes an important place to the issue of family ties and heredity. Analyzing this question, let's say, for example, that Prostakova is only married to her husband (a “simple” man who does not want much). However, she is actually Skotinina, akin to her brother. Her son absorbed the qualities of both his parents - “animal” qualities and stupidity from his mother and weak-willedness from his father.

Similar family ties can be traced between Sophia and Starodum. Both of them are honest, virtuous, educated. The girl listens to her uncle attentively, respects him, and “absorbs” science. Pairs of opposites are created by negative and positive heroes. The children are the spoiled, stupid Mitrofan and the meek, smart Sophia. Parents love their children, but they approach their upbringing in different ways - Starodub talks about truth, honor, morality, and Prostakova only pampers Mitrofan and says that he will not need education. A pair of suitors - Milon, who sees an ideal and his friend in Sophia, who loves her, and Skotinin, who calculates the fortune that he will receive after marrying this girl. At the same time, he is not interested in Sophia as a person. Skotinin does not even try to provide his bride with comfortable housing. Prostakov and Pravdin are in fact the “voice of truth”, a kind of “auditors”. But in the person of the official we find active strength, help and real action, while Prostakov is a passive character. The only thing this hero could say was to reproach Mitrofan at the end of the play.

Issues raised by the author

Analyzing, it becomes clear that each of the above-described pairs of characters reflects a separate problem that is revealed in the work. This is the problem of education (which is complemented by the example of half-educated teachers like Kuteikin, as well as impostors such as Vralman), upbringing, fathers and children, family life, relationships between spouses, and the attitude of nobles to servants. Each of these problems is examined through the prism of educational ideas. Fonvizin, sharpening his attention to the shortcomings of the era through the use of comic techniques, places emphasis on the need to change outdated, traditional foundations that have become irrelevant. They drag people into the swamp of stupidity and evil, and liken people to animals.

As our analysis of Fonvizin’s play “The Minor” showed, the main idea and theme of the work is the need to educate the nobility in accordance with educational ideals, the foundations of which are still relevant today.