The remarkable Russian playwright Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin (1744 / 45-1792), author of the comedies Brigadier and Undergrowth, his creative way started out as a poet. He was born into a Russified German family that had long since taken root in Moscow. His father, an educated free-thinking man, carried through his whole life high concepts of honor, dignity and social duty of a nobleman. Starodum from the comedy "Undergrowth" Fonvizin, by his own admission, "write off" from his father. Decency and independence of judgment were the main qualities that the head of the family brought up in his sons. Denis's younger brother Pavel, who later left a good mark on himself as the director of Moscow University, also wrote poetry. But the verses of the brothers were different. Pavel Ivanovich was attracted by elegiac poetry. Denis Ivanovich, who was distinguished by a mocking mindset, practiced parodies, satirical messages and fables.

After graduating from the gymnasium at Moscow University, both brothers become students of this university. Denis Ivanovich receives a philological and philosophical education and at the end of the course is determined to serve in St. Petersburg in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs. Here he has been working since 1762 as a translator, and then as a secretary for a major political figure of that time, N.I. Panin, sharing his oppositional views in relation to Catherine II, and on his behalf developed draft constitutional reforms in Russia, which were supposed to abolish serfdom, rid the country of the power of temporary workers, and provide political rights to all estates.

Very early, the young man showed the qualities that his father brought up in him: courage of judgment and independence of behavior. It is no coincidence that, in addition to famous comedies, he left to posterity sharp political pamphlets, boldly and brilliantly written journalistic articles. He translated into Russian the tragedy of Voltaire "Alzira", filled with impudent attacks against the ruling power.

The most daring journalistic work of Fonvizin was the so-called “Testament of N.I. Panin" (1783). The opposition-minded nobleman, to whose party Fonvizin belonged, shortly before his death, asked the writer to draw up a political testament for him. It was supposed to be a pamphlet addressed to the heir to the throne, Paul, and directed against the orders established in Russia by his mother Catherine II. Fonvizin fulfilled the task with brilliance. Three decades will pass, and the formidable accusatory document, written with a masterful hand, will be adopted by the Decembrists, who are creating secret political societies.

Having clarified the ideological position of Fonvizin, let us turn to the analysis of two of his poetic works, which were distributed due to their impudent content in the lists and were published only much later. Both of them were created in the early 1760s, when Fonvizin had already moved to St. Petersburg and served in the Collegium of Foreign Affairs. Both are intensely satirical. One of them is the fable "The Fox-Koznodey", the second is "Message to my servants Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka".

In the fable genre, Fonvizin was a follower of Sumarokov. National customs and characters, exact details and signs of life, colloquial speech with frequent use of common words and expressions are found in his fabled works. Only Fonvizin is more daring and radical than his predecessor. The fable "The Fox-Goater" is aimed at deft and shameless toadies-officials who, with flattering speeches and obsequious behavior, support the powerful of this world. And they have a lot of personal gain from it. The work is about a certain "Libyan side", which, however, is very reminiscent of Russian reality. Not embarrassed by outright lies, the Fox praises the Lion:

In the Libyan side, a true rumor rushed,

That the Lion, the king of beasts, died in the great forest,

Cattle flocked there from all sides

Witness to be a huge funeral.

The fox-Kaznodey, with this gloomy rite,

With a humble hare, in a monastic outfit,

Climbing up to the pulpit, he cries out with delight:

"Oh rock! crazy rock! whom the world has lost!

Struck by the death of the meek lord,

Cry and wail, venerable cathedral of beasts!

Behold the king, the wisest of all forest kings,

Worthy of eternal tears, worthy of altars,

Father to his slaves, terrible to his enemies,

Spread out before us, insensible and mute!

Whose mind could comprehend the number of his goodness?

The abyss of goodness, the greatness of generosity?

In his reign, innocence did not suffer

And the truth fearlessly presided at the court;

He nourished bestiality in his soul,

In it he honored his throne as a support;

There was a planter in the region of his order,

Arts and Sciences was a friend and patron.

In addition to the Fox, two more characters are bred in the fable: the Mole and the Dog. These are much more frank and honest in their assessments of the deceased king. However, they will not tell the truth aloud; whisper in each other's ear.

Descriptions of the lion's rule are given in the tones of invective, that is, angry denunciation. The king's throne was built "from the bones of torn beasts." From the inhabitants of the Libyan side, the royal favorites and nobles, without trial or investigation, "rip off the skin." From fear and despair leaves the Libyan forest and hides in the steppe Elephant. Smart builder Beaver is ruined by taxes and falls into poverty. But the fate of the court painter is shown especially expressively and in detail. He is not only skilled in his craft, but owns new painting techniques. Alfresco is painting with water-based paints on damp plaster walls of dwellings. Throughout his life, the court painter faithfully served the king and nobles with his talent. But he, too, dies in poverty, "out of anguish and hunger."

"The Fox-Kaznodey" is a bright and impressive work not only in terms of the bold ideas stated here, but also in their artistic embodiment. The reception of the antithesis works especially clearly: opposing the flattering speeches of the Fox with the truthful and bitter assessments given by the Mole and the Dog. It is the antithesis that emphasizes and makes the author's sarcasm so deadly.

Let us recall the dialogue between Starodum and Pravdin from the third act of Fonvizin's comedy The Undergrowth (1781). Starodum tells about the vile morals and orders that prevail at the court. An honest and decent person, he could not accept them, adapt to them. Pravdin is amazed: "With your rules, people should not be let go from the court, but they must be called to the court." "What for? "- Starodum is perplexed. “Then, why are they calling a doctor to the sick,” Pravdin gets excited. Starodum cools his ardor with a reasonable remark: “My friend, you are mistaken. It is in vain to call a physician to the sick. Here the doctor will not help, unless he becomes infected. Isn't it true that the ending of the fable resembles the quoted dialogue? Fable and comedy were separated by a time span of almost twenty years. The thoughts expressed by the young poet Fonvizin will find development and completion in another art form: dramaturgy, brought to the wide public stage.

The date of creation of another wonderful poetic work by Fonvizin, “Messages to my servants Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka,” has not been exactly established. Most likely, it was written between 1762 and 1763. No less daring in content than the "Fox-Kaznodey", the "Message" also came to readers without the name of the author, in handwritten lists. In the poem, from the very first lines, a seemingly somewhat abstract, philosophical problem is stated: why was “ White light and what place is assigned to a person in it. However, for clarification, the author, who is also one of the heroes of the "Message", does not turn to learned men, but to his servants. Shumilov, who managed to turn gray to an elderly "uncle" (that is, a servant assigned to the master to "look after" him). Kucher Vanka, apparently a middle-aged man who has already seen a lot in his life. And Petrushka, the youngest and therefore the most frivolous of the trinity of servants.

The judgments of the coachman Vanka are the central and most important part of the poem. Choosing the conductor of your ideas common man from the people, Fonvizin gives a sharp description of the order in the country. No church dogmas, no government regulations will explain or justify a social order in which the system of general hypocrisy, deceit and theft triumphs:

Priests try to deceive people

Servants - the butler, butlers - masters,

Each other - gentlemen, and noble boyars

Often they want to deceive the sovereign;

And everyone, to fill his pocket tighter,

For good reason, I decided to take up deception.

To the money, the dainties of the townspeople, the nobles,

Judges, clerks, soldiers and peasants.

Humble are the shepherds of our souls and hearts

They are pleased to collect dues from their sheep.

Sheep marry, breed, die,

And the shepherds, moreover, stuff their pockets,

For pure money they forgive every sin,

For money, many in paradise promise comfort.

But if you can tell the truth in the world,

That my opinion I will tell you is not false:

For the money of the most supreme Creator

Ready to deceive both the shepherd and the sheep!

From an unpretentious plot picture (three servants seem to be talking about an abstract topic), a large-scale picture of the life of Russian society grows. It captures the life and morality of the common people, the ministers of the church, the "big gentlemen". It includes the Creator himself in its orbit! The "Message" was a bold and risky challenge to both the politics and the ideology of the establishment. Therefore, it could not be printed at that time, it went in handwritten lists. "The Light of the World" lives by untruth - this is the final conclusion of the work.

In 1769, twenty-four-year-old Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin (1745-1792) wrote the comedy Brigadier. This is a cruel satire on young people who have been to France, on the obsequious attitude towards them in Russia, on the disregard for everything domestic. Fonvizin himself, having been abroad several times, including in France, met European countries but was not fascinated by them. The comedy "The Brigadier" did not have a stage incarnation for a long time, but the author read it many times among friends and acquaintances. The listeners, and later the audience, enthusiastically accepted the comedy for its striking similarity, fidelity of characters and typical images.

In 1782, Fonvizin wrote the comedy "Undergrowth". The first production took place on September 24, 1782.V.O. Klyuchevsky called "Undergrowth" "an incomparable mirror" of Russian reality. Exposing the arbitrariness of the lord, Fonvizin showed the corrupting effect of serfdom, which disfigured both peasants and landlords. The problem of educating the nobility, raised in The Brigadier, received a social sounding in The Undergrowth. Fonvizin adhered to the educational program of the moral education of a citizen and patriot, a true son of the Fatherland.

In 1782 Fonvizin retired. Despite serious illness he continued to practice literary creativity. He wrote “The Experience of the Russian Vocabulary” (1783), “Several Questions That Can Arouse Special Attention in Intelligent and Honest People” (1783), which actually contained criticism domestic policy Catherine II, which displeased the Empress. Of great interest are his autobiographical notes “A sincere confession in my deeds and thoughts”, as well as the extensive epistolary heritage of Fonvizin.

The most remarkable Russian comedian of the 18th century was Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin.

He was born in 1744 in Moscow into a noble family, received a good education at Moscow University and began writing and translating very early. After completing the course, he entered the civil service, became the secretary of Count Panin, one of the greatest nobles of Catherine's reign, and in 1766 wrote the first of his two famous comedies - Brigadier. Being a man of means, moving in the best society of the capital, he was always more of an amateur than a professional writer, although in literary circles he soon became an outstanding figure.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin

In 1777–1778 Fonvizin traveled abroad; the purpose of the trip was the Faculty of Medicine in Montpellier. He described his trip in Letters from France; this is the most elegant prose of that era and at the same time a striking document of anti-French nationalism, which coexisted among the Russian elite of Catherine's time with complete dependence on French literary taste. In 1782, Fonvizin's second and best comedy appeared undergrowth(see our website for a summary, full text and analysis of this play), which determined his place as the most prominent Russian playwright. The last years of Fonvizin were spent in constant illness and travel abroad in search of healing. He died in 1792.

Fonvizin's reputation rests almost entirely on two of his plays, which are undoubtedly the finest Russian plays before Griboedov. Both of them are written in prose and correspond to the canons of classical comedy. But the main model for Fonvizin was not Moliere, but the great Danish playwright Holberg, whom he read in German and from the translation of whose plays he began his literary career. Both plays are social satires on quite specific people. Brigadier- a satire on the fashionable French half-educated "petimeters" (young nobles). She is full of genuine gaiety, and although less serious than undergrowth, built better. But undergrowth, although imperfect in construction, is remarkable and rightly considered Fonvizin's masterpiece. As always in Russian classic comedies, there are a couple of virtuous lovers, Milon and Sophia, who are uninteresting and conventional. All interest is focused on negative characters: this is the Prostakov family and their entourage. The point of satire is directed against the stupid, selfish and rude barbarism of uneducated landowners. These characters are beautifully drawn. Mrs. Prostakova is a despot and a fighter, who has only one human feeling - love for her sixteen-year-old son Mitrofan, whom she calls only "child".

Her maternal feelings are of a purely animal and material nature: she only wants her Mitrofanushka to eat as much as she likes, not to catch a cold, not to think about duty and obligations, and to marry a rich heiress. She is followed by her brother Skotinin, who confesses that he loves pigs more than people; her stupid husband Prostakov; a mother who adores her pet, who does nothing but vilify her - and, finally, the hero himself, the famous Mitrofan. This is the personification of vulgar and rude selfishness, without a single human trait - even his madly loving mother does not receive any response from him to her feelings.

Fonvizin. Undergrowth. Performance of the Maly Theater

All these characters are masterfully written and superbly introduce into the wonderful portrait gallery of Russian literature. The dialogues of the negative characters are amazing in their vitality and character. But goodies, Milon and Sophia, with their positive uncles, are just puppets from didactic tales; all four are the embodiment of virtue and honor; all four are expressed in pompous bookish language that does not contribute to our sympathy for virtue when we hear it next to the brilliantly real speeches of the Prostakovs. In the art of creating characters and comic dialogue, Fonvizin surpasses all his contemporaries.

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 the forms of 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 higher power, then Fonvizin should undoubtedly be called such a writer, ”says the well-known critic Yu. V. Stennik about Fonvizin, author of the book "Russian satire of the XVIII 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 the entire Russian public 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. As one of the most prominent figures of enlightenment humanism in Russia XVIII century, Fonvizin embodied in his work the rise of national self-consciousness, which marked this era. In the vast country awakened by Peter's reforms, the spokesmen for this renewed self-consciousness were the best representatives Russian nobility. 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 saw many others who went into retirement as soon as they won the right to harness quadruplets. I saw contemptuous descendants from the most respected ancestors. broke my heart." So Fonvizin wrote in 1783 in a letter to the writer of "Tales and Fables", that is, to Empress Catherine II herself.

Fonvizin became involved in the literary life of Russia at a time when Catherine II encouraged interest in ideas European Enlightenment: at first, she flirted with the French enlighteners - Voltaire, Diderot, D "Alembert. But very soon there was no trace of Catherine's liberalism. By the will of circumstances, Fonvizin found himself in the thick of the internal political struggle that flared up at court. In this struggle, he was 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.

Fonvizin was born in Moscow on April 3 (14), 1745 (according to other sources - 1744) in a middle-class noble family. 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. The beginning of Fonvizin's literary activity 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 an acute 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 the writer was his sudden appointment to serve in foreign collegium and 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 dreaded by Empress Catherine II. unsurpassed artistic skill 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. It is not a work of art, but a satire of manners, and a masterful satire. 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 of the greatest creations of Russian comedyography, which in the next century will include Griboedov's "Woe from Wit", Gogol's "Inspector General", plays about " dark kingdom"Ostrovsky" (From the 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 “simply”.

“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 reasoning of the wise life experience parents. 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 European image life renders 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. The everyday authenticity of the portrait characteristics grew 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 be almost the fundamental principle of 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 method 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 new trick self-revealing characters that achieve 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 the comedy, and the condemnation of 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 - distinguishing feature comedy Fonvizin.

“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 common theme statements in "The Brigadier" is the theme of intelligence and stupidity. Each character in a comedy is convinced of his undoubted mental superiority over others, while these others tend to consider him a fool. (8, 244)

Thus, the characters' frequent judgments about each other, designed for an immediate, direct reaction of the audience, develop into sentence-replicas that allow them to look for applications 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. the author's attitude to the characters" arises already 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 designed to interest the reader in "co-authorship", in the need to turn on the imagination and see beyond artistic images reality and even themselves. 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" - central essay Fonvizin, the pinnacle of Russian dramaturgy of the 18th century, is organically connected with the ideological issues of the Reasoning. For Pushkin, "Undergrowth" is a "folk comedy." Belinsky, who by the 1940s had developed a revolutionary-democratic understanding of the people, declared that "Undergrowth", "Woe from Wit" and "Inspector General" "in a short time became popular drama 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 have grown stronger and expanded, and his creative method satire has come of age.

Comedy is based on the principle of intersecting triads. Triad bad guys: 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 the 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. The psychology and spiritual world of 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 colloquial speech, 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 adapted 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 it's not even literary problem but socio-political. 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 especially well reflected 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 person 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. Such is the first, plot, level of structure that organizes the compositional framework of dramatic action.

Delving further into the research art system"Undergrowth", we discover the saturation of its comic element. There are many comic scenes in the play, in which the whole group participates. 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 a second, comedy-satirical, level artistic structure"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 an ideal person and a 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 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 on the part of 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 the thinkers of the XVIII century, education was considered 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 thing rooted in proper education was possible source salvation from the evil that threatens society - the outcasting 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 in the localities - 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, political figure, 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 is this political thought was laid at the foundation of the "Undergrowth", - Catherine is 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 delayed in every possible way, and instead of May, as it was originally planned, it finally took place with difficulty on September 24, 1782 in wooden theater on the Tsaritsyn meadow by 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 the noblest representatives the true, sound direction of thought in Russia, especially in the early days of his literary activity, before 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 insulting 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 journalistic 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 himself, in order to find the causes of divine wrath, in the existence of which he 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 the historical merit of Russian satire of the 18th century, one of the most prominent representatives of 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 enlightener and, at the same time, he was the finalist of the Russian Enlightenment of the 18th 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 of 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 18th 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

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin was born on April 3 (14), 1745 in Moscow into a noble family descended from a Livonian knightly family. The future writer received his primary education at home. A patriarchal atmosphere reigned in the Fonvizin family.

Since 1755, Denis Ivanovich studied at the noble gymnasium at the University in Moscow, then at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow University. In 1760, Fonvizin, among the "chosen students" leaves for St. Petersburg, where he meets Lomonosov and Sumarokov.

The beginning of the creative path

Since the 1760s, Denis Ivanovich has been creating his first works. Fonvizin's early work was distinguished by a sharp satirical orientation. In 1760, the so-called "early Undergrowth" was published in the Literary Heritage. In parallel, the writer was engaged in translations. In 1761, Fonvizin translated Holberg's fables into Russian. In 1762 - the works of Terrason, Voltaire, Ovid, Gresse, Rousseau.

Since 1762, Fonvizin has been working as a translator, and since 1763, as secretary of the Cabinet Minister Yelagin in the College of Foreign Affairs. In 1769, Denis Ivanovich transferred to the service of Count Panin as a personal secretary.

In 1768, the writer creates the satirical comedy The Brigadier. The play received a wide response and Fonvizin, whose biography was still unknown in the highest circles, was invited to Peterhof to read the work to Empress Catherine II herself.

Public service. Mature creativity

From 1777 to 1778, Fonvizin stayed abroad, spent a long time in France. Returning to Russia in 1779, Denis Ivanovich enters the service of an adviser to the office of the Secret Expedition. At the same time, the writer was translating the book Ta-Gio. In 1783 Fonvizin creates one of the best works Russian journalism - "Discourse on the indispensable state laws."

Since 1781, Denis Ivanovich has been a state councilor. In 1782 he retired. In the autumn of the same year, the premiere of the most important work of the playwright - the comedy "Undergrowth" (date of writing - 1781) was premiered in St. Petersburg. In 1783 the play was staged in Moscow.

Disease. Last years

Since 1783, Denis Ivanovich has been traveling around Europe, visiting Italy, Germany, Austria. In 1785, the writer had his first apoplexy. In 1787 Fonvizin returned to Russia.

IN last years of his brief biography, Fonvizin suffered from a serious illness - paralysis, but did not stop literary activity. Despite the ban of Catherine II on the publication of a five-volume collection of works, Denis Ivanovich at that time created the comedy The Choice of a Tutor, the feuilleton The Conversation with Princess Khaldina, and was working on his autobiography Pure Confession (left unfinished).

December 1 (12), 1792 Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin died. The writer was buried at the Lazarevsky cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg.

Other biography options

• During a trip to St. Petersburg in 1760, Fonvizin attended a theatrical performance for the first time. It was Holberg's play Heinrich and Pernille. What happened on the stage made an indelible impression on the writer, and he retained his passion for the theater for the rest of his life.
• The success of the premiere of "Undergrowth" during the premiere was so great that the audience, according to the custom at the time, threw purses of money on the stage.
• Fonvizin Special attention gave appearance, for which he was recognized as a dandy. The writer decorated his clothes with fresh flowers, wore a sable frock coat and shoes with large buckles.
• Denis Ivanovich was married to Katerina Ivanovna Rogovikova, the daughter of a wealthy merchant.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Similar Documents

Biography and creative activity of the great Russian writer Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. The history of the creation of the masterpiece comedy of the 18th century "Undergrowth", in which the author reveals the problems of the moral decay of the nobility and the problems of education.

creative work, added 09/28/2011


The history of the creation of the comedy Fonvizin "Undergrowth". Consideration of the scene with the tailor Trishka. Acquaintance with the inner qualities, needs and desires of the main characters. The problem of educating a true citizen; search for the most valuable in society and man.

presentation, added 03/28/2014


"Undergrowth" as the first Russian socio-political comedy. A satirical depiction of the world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins in Fonvizin's comedy "Undergrowth". Images of the Prostakovs and Taras Skotinin. Characteristics of the image of Mitrofanushka in Fonvizin's comedy.

abstract, added 05/28/2010


General characteristics, definition of the features of tradition and innovation in the system of characters in D.I. Fonvizin "Undergrowth". Analysis and significance of images of everyday heroes, taking into account the methods of their creation: Prostakov, Skotinin, Mitrofan and other minor ones.

term paper, added 05/04/2010


Biographical data of I.P. Elagin and the historical and literary circle, his activities. The influence of Yelagin's circle on the image of the work of Denis Fonvizin, the author of sharp satirical and journalistic works. Criticism of "Korion" and the collapse of the Elagin circle.

abstract, added 12/12/2010


A masterpiece of Russian drama of the 18th century, which reveals the problem of the moral decay of the nobility and the problem of education. Fonvizin tells us: educates, first of all, the family. Children inherit from their parents not only genes, but also ideals, habits,

essay, added 12/17/2004


The life and creative path of the comedy author D.I. Fonvizin. The beginning of a creative path as a poet. Analysis of the fables of Fonvizin and the comedy "Undergrowth". The largest representative of Russian sentimentalism N.M. Karamzin and his best story "Poor Lisa".

test, added 03/10/2009