“Fonvizin is a friend of freedom, a bold ruler of satire. “Friend of Freedom”, “Satyrs brave ruler” Fonvizin Satires brave ruler Fonvizin summary

Why is there ... abuse, how
not from disastrous inequality between people?
J. J. Rousseau

This is how the talented playwright of the 18th century A. S. Pushkin assessed, adding to this characteristic one more - "... a friend of freedom." The bold and brilliant satire of Fonvizin determined for many years the development of the satirical trend in Russian literature. The main objects of Fonvizin's satire in the brilliant comedy "Undergrowth" are "evil rights worthy fruits", the mutilation of all human feelings and relationships.

Using the example of one family of serf-owners, the playwright was able to show all the harmful consequences of serfdom - actual slavery. The theme of the comedy "Undergrowth" was the main conflict in the socio-political life of Russia in the second half of the 18th century - the unrestrained arbitrariness of the landlords and the complete lack of rights of the serfs. The despotic form of government was supported by the highest authority - this idea was repeatedly emphasized by Fonvizin in the speeches of Starodum.

The playwright shows the terrible consequences of slavery. The peasants are completely ruined. Mrs. Prostakova does not know what to do next: “Since we have taken away everything that the peasants had, we cannot tear anything off. Such a disaster! Slavery morally disfigures everyone: both slaves and slave owners. Raba Eremeevna, Mitrofanushka's nanny, is an image of great power. She lives the life of not a man, but a dog: insults, beatings, swearing, humiliation have made this old woman a serf, who, like a chained dog, humiliatedly licks the hand of her mistress who beats her. The slave-owning landlords are so corrupted that they have turned into the Skotinins. People of the skotininskaya breed, although they call themselves the "noble class", in their essence have become despicable and vile brutes. They are not ashamed of their ignorance and ignorance, they are even proud of them: "Without the sciences, people live and lived." Under this they sum up the everyday base: they say that “learning is nonsense”, that even without it they can be put in a position, and without learning you can achieve wealth. Pravdin states with regret that, indeed, "money often leads to ranks, ranks to nobility." material from the site

Fonvizin's satire touched the high society and even the royal court. Although Pravdin is deeply convinced of the enlightened nature of the autocracy in the person of Catherine II, Starodum, who has seen the court and its rules, explains to him that the highest power in Russia encourages slavery, supports the Prostakovs and Skotinins. Starodum does not believe that this power can be cured, he says: "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's bold satire showed that slavery and parasitic life distort the human personality. Despotic and at the same time cowardly, greedy and vile, in whom even kindred feelings are mutilated - this is how the landowners appear in the image of the bold satirist. From here the way was opened (to the brilliant generalizations of Gogol and other Russian classics.

Y. Stennik. Satyrs bold lord

Source: Fonvizin D. I. Favorites. - M., 1983. - S. 5-22. -

The eighteenth century in the history of Russian literature left a lot of wonderful things. But if it were necessary to name a writer whose works would achieve the depth of morals of his era in proportion to his courage and skill in exposing the vices of the ruling class, then such a writer should first of all be called Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin.

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

Being one of the most prominent figures in the enlightenment movement in Russia in the 18th century, Fonvizin embodied in his work the rise of national self-consciousness that marked this era. In the vast country awakened by Peter's reforms, the best representatives of the Russian nobility acted as spokesmen for this renewed self-consciousness. Fonvizin perceived the ideas of enlightenment humanism especially sharply, with pain of heart he observed the moral devastation of part of his estate. Fonvizin himself lived in the power of ideas about the high moral duties of a nobleman. In the oblivion of the nobles of their duty to society, he saw the cause of all public evils: “I happened to travel around my land. I saw what most of the noblemen who bear the name believe their piety. I saw many of those who serve, or, more precisely, 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 is included in literary life at the moment when Catherine II encouraged interest in the ideas of the European Enlightenment: at first she flirted with the French enlighteners - Voltaire, Diderot, D "Alembert. But very soon there was no trace of Catherine's liberalism.

By the will of circumstances, Fonvizin found himself in the midst of the internal political struggle that flared up at court in the 1770s. In this struggle, Fonvizin, gifted with brilliant creative abilities and keen observation, took the place of a satirical writer who denounced corruption and lawlessness in the courts, the baseness of the moral character of the nobles close to the throne, and favoritism encouraged by the highest authorities.

N. I. Novikov with his satirical magazines "Truten" (1769-1770) and "Painter" (1772), Fonvizin with his publicistic speeches and the immortal "Undergrowth" (1782) and, finally, A. N. Radishchev with the famous " Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" (1790) - these are the milestones in the formation of the tradition of the most radical line of the Russian noble Enlightenment, and it is no coincidence that each of the three outstanding writers of the era was persecuted by the government. In the activities of these writers, the prerequisites for that first wave of the anti-autocratic liberation movement at the end of the first quarter of the 19th century, which V. I. Lenin called the stage in the development of noble revolutionary thought, ripened.

Fonvizin was born in Moscow on April 3 (14), 1745 (according to other sources - 1744) in a middle-class noble family. Already in childhood, Denis Ivanovich received the first lessons of an uncompromising attitude towards cringing and bribery from his father, Ivan Andreevich Fonvizin. This was a wonderful person. "In the front of the then noble nobles," Fonvizin later recalled, "no one saw him." Disinterested and direct, he did not tolerate lies, "hated extortion and, having been in places where people profit (having retired from military service in 1762, Ivan Andreevich served in the revision board. - Yu. S.), never accepted any gifts.

And one more quality was absorbed by the young Fonvizin from his father - intolerance to evil and violence. Recalling the quick-tempered, albeit unforgiving nature of his father, Fonvizin noted that he always “treated with meekness with courtyard people, but despite this, there were no bad people in our house. This proves that beatings are not a means to correct people. Fonvizin will also remember Ivan Andreevich's tireless concerns about the education and moral upbringing of his children, of whom there were seven more people in the family, in addition to the eldest, Denis. Some traits of the father's character will find their embodiment in the positive characters of his works. So, the thoughts of Father Fonvizin are heard in the moral instructions of Starodum, one of the main characters of the comedy "Undergrowth" - the pinnacle of Russian educational satire of the 18th century and Russian dramaturgy of this century.

Fonvizin's life was not rich in external events. Studying at the noble gymnasium 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 Chancellor Count N.I. Panin. The resignation that followed in the spring of 1782. In 1762-1763, 1777-1778, 1784-1785, 1787, Fonvizin traveled abroad, at first on official assignments, later mainly for treatment. In recent years, shackled by a serious illness, he devoted himself entirely to literature. A contemporary of the Great French bourgeois revolution, Fonvizin passes away at the moment when Catherine II, frightened by the development of events in France, brings down cruel repressions on representatives of the educational movement in Russia. He died on December 1, 1792 and was buried at the Lazarevsky cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg.

Behind this sparse outline of external biographical facts, the life of one of the most original and courageous Russian writers of the 18th century is hidden, full of internal tension and the richest spiritual content. Let's dwell on the individual stages of his creative path.

Fonvizin's first literary performances date back to the period of his stay at the university gymnasium. Fonvizin received in the gymnasium good knowledge foreign languages, "and above all ... a taste for the verbal sciences." With translations, he began his career as a writer. In 1761, a book was published in the printing house of Moscow University entitled "Fables of moralizing with the explanations of Mr. Baron Golberg, translated by Denis Fonvizin." The translation of the book to the young man was ordered by the bookseller of the university bookstore. The writings of Ludwig Golberg, the greatest Danish writer of the 18th century, were widely popular in Europe, especially his comedies and satirical pamphlets. They were translated into different languages, including in Russia. By the way, the influence of one of Golberg's comedies, "Jean-Frenchman", which ridiculed gallomania, will be reflected in its own way on the plan of Fonvizin's comedy "The Brigadier", which he will write in 1768-1769.

Of the 251 fables, Fonvizin selected 183 for translation (later, with the second edition in 1765, another 42 fables were added). The prose form, the edifying nature of the moralizing were typical of the fable of the XVIII century. Despite the abstractness of the moralizing pathos of most of the plays in the collection, there were baspis among them, reminiscent of a folk anecdote or a witty satirical miniature, where often critical ridicule went beyond just an innocent joke. And then the democratic sympathies of the author gave the fables a sharp social sound.

“The donkey bought the nobility and began to be proud of it in front of his comrades. The magpie, hearing that, said: “It is impossible to be proud of such a stupid creature, and he, with all his nobility, will always remain a stupid donkey” (fable 136, “Donkey-nobleman”). under the cover of allegory, the arrogance of upstarts is ridiculed.The fables denounced the hypocrisy and deceit of courtiers, the greed of the powerful of this world, the absurdity of the unwritten laws of chivalry, and much more.It can be safely said that the translation of Golberg's book of fables was for the young Fonvizin the first school of educational humanism, planting in the soul of the future writer's interest in social satire.

During 1761-1762, Fonvizin published several more of his minor translations in university publications. At the same time, he transcribes Voltaire's tragedy "Alzira" into verse and, finally, turns to the translation of Abbe J. Terrason's extensive adventurous and didactic novel "Heroic Virtue, or the Life of Seth, King of Egypt, taken from the mysterious evidence of ancient Egypt." The first part was already published in 1762, but work on the translation dragged on for another six years.

1762 turned out to be a turning point in the fate of Fonvizin. In the spring, he was enrolled as a student, but he did not have to study at the university. In September, the empress arrived in Moscow for the coronation along with the whole court and ministers. Just at that moment, young translators were required for a foreign collegium. Seventeen-year-old Fonvizin receives a flattering offer from Vice-Chancellor Prince A. M. Golitsyn to enter the service and then, in October 1762, submits a petition addressed to Catherine II. Samples of his translations from three languages were attached to the petition; Latin, German and French. Having passed the necessary test, Fonvizin was found "capable of the affairs of this board." In the summer of 1763, after the coronation celebrations, the court returned to St. Petersburg, and Fonvizin moved to the capital together with the court.

The Petersburg period of Fonvizin's life began. We can judge its content from the writer's correspondence with his relatives who remained in Moscow and his personal memoirs, from the notes of his contemporaries. Fulfillment of assignments for translations, maintenance of official correspondence alternate with obligatory attendance at official receptions at the court (kurtags), masquerades, theaters. But court life weighs on Fonvizin. At first, restrainedly, over the years, more and more insistently, in his letters to his relatives, the motives of loneliness, rejection of the tinsel fuss of secular life begin to sound. “I truly received a terrible disgust for all the nonsense in which people of the present world believe their main pleasure. I believe my happiness in one calmness, which, living without you, I, of course, cannot feel,” he notes in a letter to his parents summer of 1768. Two more years will pass, but Fonvizin will never get used to his position as a court official. “As for me, know, mother,” he wrote to his sister in 1770, “that I really miss court life. Do you know if I was created for her ...”

Despite the workload at work, Fonvizin is keenly interested in modern literature. He often visits the well-known literary salon of the Myatlevs in St. Petersburg, where he meets A.P. Sumarokov, M. M. Kheraskov, V. I. Maikov, I. F. Bogdanovich, I. S. Barkov and others. Kyaz P. A. Vyazemsky, based on the memoirs of Fonvizin's contemporaries, remarks about these meetings: "The ardor of his mind, unbridled, sharp expression always annoyed and infuriated everyone; but with all that, everyone loved him." Even earlier, Fonvizin met the founder of the Russian theater F. Volkov. Communication with the theatrical circles of the capital contributes to the rapprochement of Fonvizin with the first actor of the court theater I. A. Dmitrevsky, friendship with whom he did not interrupt until the end of his life. It was Dmitrevsky who was the first performer of the role of Starodum in the production of "Undergrowth" in 1782.

Fonvizin's friendship with the young writer F. A. Kozlovsky leads him to a circle of St. Petersburg noble youth, who were fond of freethinking and Voltairianism. The composition of the famous poem by Fonvizin "A Message to my servants - Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka" dates back to the time of acquaintance with Kozlovsky. Its content is permeated with frank irony, exposing the lies and hypocrisy of the statutes of official morality. The author turns to his servants in turn with a question that philosophical thought has struggled with for centuries: what is the purpose of the universe, "for what was this light created"? And the servants' answers sound like caustic satire on state of the art society. The coachman Vanka acts as the central accuser. He travels a lot and therefore has seen a lot. Universal deceit and greed are, in his opinion, the only and all-determining law of life:

Priests try to deceive people

Butler's servants, gentlemen's butlers,

Each other's 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.

The anti-clerical pathos of the satire brought accusations of atheism on the author. Indeed, in the literature of the 18th century there are few works where the greed of spiritual shepherds, corrupting the people, would be so sharply denounced. "For the money of the most supreme creator || Ready to deceive both the shepherd and the sheep!" - sums up his observations Vanka.

Fonvizin's first major literary success was brought by his comedy Brigadier. Fonvizin's appeal to dramaturgy was facilitated not only by a passionate love for the theater, but also by some circumstances of a service nature. Back in 1763, he was assigned to serve as a secretary "for some cases" under the state adviser IP Yelagin. This nobleman, who was in the palace office "at the reception of petitions", was at the same time the manager of the "court music and theater". In the literary circles of St. Petersburg, he was known as a poet and translator. By the mid-1760s, a circle of young theater lovers rallied around Yelagin, which included Fonvizin. Members of the circle are seriously thinking about updating the national comedy repertoire. Before that, Russian comedies were written by one Sumarokov, but they were also imitative. In his plays, the characters had foreign names, the intrigue was led by the ubiquitous servants who ridiculed the masters and arranged their personal happiness. Life on stage proceeded according to some incomprehensible canons alien to Russian people. All this, according to young authors, limited the educational functions of the theater, which they put at the forefront of theatrical art. As V. I. Lukin, the theorist of the Elagin circle, wrote, "many viewers do not receive any correction from comedies in other people's manners. They think that they are ridiculed not by them, but by strangers." In an effort to bring the theater as close as possible to the needs of Russian social life, Lukin proposed a compromise path. The essence of his reform was to incline foreign comedies in every possible way to our customs. Such a "declination", or rather, the rewriting of other people's plays, meant replacing the foreign names of the characters with Russian names, transferring the action to an environment corresponding to national mores and customs, and finally, bringing the speech of the characters closer to the norms of the spoken Russian language. Lukin actively put all this into practice in his comedies.

He paid tribute to the method of "inclining" Western European plays to Russian customs and Fonvizin. In 1763 he wrote the poetic comedy "Korion", reworking the drama of the French author L. Gresse "Sydney". Full rapprochement with Russian customs in the play, however, did not work. Although the action in Fonvizin's comedy takes place in a village near Moscow, the sentimental story of Korion and Xenovia separated by misunderstanding and united in the finale could not become the basis of a truly national comedy. Its plot was marked by a strong touch of melodramatic conventionality, characteristic of the traditions of the petty-bourgeois "tearful" drama. The comedy "Korion" was a success on the stage of the court theater, but for Fonvizin himself it was only the first test of his strength in the field of dramaturgy. The real recognition of dramatic talent came to Fonvizin with the creation of the comedy "The Brigadier" in 1768-1769. It was the result of those searches for Russian original comedy that the members of the Elagin circle lived, and at the same time I carried in myself new, deeply innovative principles of dramatic art as a whole. Proclaimed in France, in the theoretical treatises of D. Diderot, these principles contributed to the convergence of the theater with reality.

Already from the lifting of the curtain, the viewer was immersed in an environment that struck with life's reality. In a peaceful picture of home comfort, everything is significant and at the same time everything is natural - the rustic decoration of the room, and the clothes of the characters, and their activities, and even individual touches of behavior. All this corresponded to the stage innovations of the Diderot theater.

But there was one significant point that separated the creative positions of the two playwrights. Diderot's theater theory, born on the eve of the French bourgeois revolution, reflected the tastes and demands of the third-class spectator, asserting in its own way the significance of the average person, those moral ideals that were generated by the modest way of life of a simple worker. This was an innovative step, entailing a revision of many traditional, previously recognized as unshakable, ideas about the function of the theater and the boundaries of artistry.

Fonvizin could not, of course, mechanically follow the program of Diderot's plays for the reason that the moral collisions of Diderot's dramaturgy were not supported by the real conditions of Russian social life. He took from Diderot the requirement of fidelity to nature, but subordinated this artistic principle to other tasks. The center of gravity of the ideological problems in Fonvizin's comedy moved to the satirical-denunciatory plane.

A retired Brigadier arrives at the Councilor's house with his wife and son Ivan, whom his parents marry the owner's daughter Sophia. Sophia herself loves the poor nobleman Dobrolyubov, but no one takes into account her feelings. "So if God bless, then the twenty-sixth will be the wedding" - with these words of Sophia's father, the play begins.

All characters in the "Brigadier" - Russian nobles. In the modest, everyday atmosphere of middle-class life, the personality of each character appears as if gradually in conversations. Gradually, from action to action, the spiritual interests of the characters are revealed from various sides, and the originality is exposed step by step. artistic solutions found by Fonvizin in his innovative play.

The conflict, traditional for the comedy genre, between a virtuous, intelligent girl and a stupid fiancé imposed on her is complicated by one circumstance. Ivan recently visited Paris and is full of contempt for everything that surrounds him at home, including his parents. "Everyone who has been in Paris," he frankly, "has the right, speaking of Russians, not to include himself among those, because he has already become more French than Russian." Ivan's speech is replete with French words pronounced by the way and inopportunely. The only person he finds with mutual language, is the Counselor, who grew up reading romance novels and is crazy about all things French.

The absurd behavior of the newly-minted "Parisian" and the Counselor, who is delighted with him, suggests that the basis of the ideological concept in comedy is the denunciation of gallomania. With their empty talk and newfangled mannerisms, they seem to oppose the wise life experience Ivan's parents and the Counsellor. However, the fight against gallomania is only part of the accusatory program that feeds the satirical pathos of "The Brigadier". Ivan's relationship to all the other characters is revealed by the playwright already in the first act, where they speak out about the dangers of grammar: each of them considers the study of grammar an unnecessary thing, it does not add anything to the ability to achieve rank and wealth.

This new chain of revelations, exposing the intellectual horizons of the main characters of the comedy, brings us to an understanding of the main idea of the play. In an environment where mental apathy and lack of spirituality reign, familiarization with European culture turns out to be an evil caricature of enlightenment. The moral wretchedness of Ivan, proud of his contempt for his compatriots, is a match for spiritual deformity; the rest, because their manners and way of thinking are, in essence, just as base.

And what is important, in comedy this idea is revealed not declaratively, but by means of psychological self-disclosure of the characters. If earlier the tasks of comedy satire were conceived mainly in terms of bringing out a personified vice on the stage, for example, "stinginess", "evil-tonguing", "bragging", now, under the pen of Fonvizin, the content of vices is socially concretized. The satirical pamphletery of Sumarokov's "comedy of characters" gives way to a comically pointed study of the mores of society. And this is the main significance of Fonvizin's "Brigadier".

Fonvizin found an interesting way to enhance the satirical and accusatory pathos of comedy. In The Brigadier, the everyday authenticity of the portrait characteristics of the characters grew into a comically caricatured grotesque. The comedy of the action grows from scene to scene thanks to a dynamic kaleidoscope of intertwining love scenes. The vulgar flirtation in the secular manner of the gallomaniacs Ivan and the Counselor is replaced by the hypocritical courtship of the Counselor for the Brigadier who does not understand anything, and then, with soldierly straightforwardness, the Brigadier himself storms the Counselor's heart. The rivalry between father and son threatens with a brawl, and only a general exposure calms all the unlucky "lovers".

The success of The Brigadier made Fonvizin one of the most famous writers of his time. The head of the educational camp of Russian literature of the 1760s, N. I. Novikov, praised the new comedy of the young author in his satirical magazine Truten. In collaboration with Novikov, Fonvizin finally determines his place in literature as a satirist and publicist. It is no coincidence that in his other magazine "The Painter" for 1772, Novikov will place Fonvizin's sharpest satirical essay "Letters to Falaley", as well as "A word for his recovery by them. Highness of the Sovereign Tsarevich and Grand Duke Pavel Petrovich in 1771" - an essay in which within the genre of official panegyric addressed to the heir to the throne, the practice of favoritism and self-aggrandizement adopted by Catherine II was denounced.

In these works, the outlines of the ideological program and creative guidelines that determined the later artistic originality of The Undergrowth are already visible. On the one hand, in "Letters to Falaley" - this vivid picture of the wild ignorance and arbitrariness of the local nobles - Fonvizin for the first time finds and skillfully uses a special constructive method of satirical denunciation of the feudal lords. The immorality of the behavior of the characters denounced in the letters turns them, according to the satirist, into the likeness of cattle. Their loss of human form is emphasized by the blind passion that they have for animals, while at the same time not considering their serfs for people. Such, for example, is the structure of thoughts and feelings of Fadaleya's mother, for whom, after her son, the most beloved creature is the greyhound bitch Naletka. The good mother does not spare the rod in order to vent her vexation from the death of her beloved bitch on her peasants. The character of Falaley's mother directly leads us to the image of the main character of "Undergrowth" - Mrs. Prostakova. This technique psychological characteristics heroes will be used especially prominently in the grotesque figure of Uncle Mitrofan - Skotiin.

On the other hand, in the "Word for Recovery ..." the prerequisites for the political program that Fonvizin will later develop in the famous "Discourse on the indispensable state laws" are already stated: "The love of the people is the true glory of sovereigns. Be the master of your passions and remember that he cannot control others with glory, who cannot control himself ... "As we will see below, the pathos of reflections of the positive characters of the "Undergrowth" by Starodum and Pravdin is largely fed by the ideas captured in the above-mentioned works.

Fonvizin's interest in political journalism was not accidental. In December 1769, remaining an official of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs, Fonvizin, at the suggestion of Count N.I. Panin, transferred to his service, becoming the chancellor's secretary. And for almost 13 years, until his retirement in 1782, Fonvizin remained Panin's closest assistant, enjoying his unlimited confidence.

Until 1773, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry was the tutor of the Tsarevich, and at the same time, all these years he headed the internal political opposition to Catherine II. The chancellor linked his hopes for the removal from the throne of Catherine, who had illegally assumed him, with the coming of age of the heir, which was to occur in the autumn of 1772. For Fonvizin the Enlightener, who believed in the transformative power of education and a reasonable enlightened monarch, to contribute to Panin's plans meant devoting himself to serving the fatherland. That is why he is included in the political struggle, speaking with publicistically pointed essays, permeated with a clearly traceable trend.

The autumn of 1772 was approaching. But the transfer of the throne to her son was not part of the plans of the empress. Postponing for a year the celebration of Paul's coming of age under the pretext of his upcoming marriage, Catherine managed to get out of a difficult situation. In September 1773, the wedding took place. The influence of Panin on the heir was henceforth set to a limit, for with marriage, education was considered complete. The campaign of political intrigues, which Fonvizin had to observe on the eve of the Tsarevich's marriage, again forced him to face the mores of court life. "It is superfluous to describe the local depravity," he remarked in a letter to his sister in August 1773.

In August 1777, Fonvizin went on a trip abroad. His path lay in France - through Poland, Saxony, small German principalities. In Montpellier, Fonvizin's wife had to undergo a course of treatment. In February 1778, Fonvizin arrived in Paris and stayed there until the end of the summer. During his stay in France, the writer wrote a detailed diary ("magazine"), where he entered all his impressions of getting to know the country. Although Fonvizin's "journal" has not been preserved, some of his notes have come down to us in the texts of letters that he regularly sent to Russia to his sister Fedosya Ivanovna and Count N.I. Panin. In these letters, Fonvizin appears not just as a curious traveler, but as a state thinking person who is interested in the socio-political structure of France, the system of education in this country, the position of the French nobility, the state of the economy. "If I found anything in France in a flourishing state, then, of course, their factories and manufactories. There is no nation in the world that would have such an inventive mind as the French in arts and crafts, touching taste." In Montpellier, Fonvizin takes French law lessons from a lawyer. His reflections on this subject are striking in their insight to this day. “The system of laws of this state is a building, one might say, wise, built by many centuries and rare minds,” he writes in a letter dated December 24, 1777, “but various abuses and corruption of morals that have crept in little by little have now reached the very extreme<...>The first right of every Frenchman is liberty; but his true real condition is slavery, for a poor man cannot earn his livelihood except by slave labor, and if he wants to use his freedom, he will have to die of hunger. In a word, liberty is an empty name, and the right of the strong remains the right above all laws. "Fonvizin is of particular interest to the position of the French nobility. He explains the impoverishment and ignorance of the ruling class by the omnipotence of the clergy and the lack of a correct education system, He connects with this the general decline in virtue he observes in society, the universal thirst for self-interest. "Covetousness has indescribably infected all states, not excluding the very philosophers of the present century."

The Russian writer, who had the opportunity to see with his own eyes the country that sets the fashion and way of thinking of all enlightened Europe, inquisitively observes the cultural life of France and leaves us a description of it. In Paris, he attends a meeting of the French Academy; meets with Marmontel, A. Thomas, D "Alembert; sees Voltaire several times, thinks about meeting with J.-J. Rousseau. Fonvizin is also invited to a meeting of the Society of Writers and Artists, where he speaks about the properties of the Russian language. Admiration causes he has a French theater: "The performances here are the best they can be.<...>Whoever has not seen a comedy in Paris has no direct idea of what a comedy is"; "You can't not forget to look at it until you don't consider it to be the true story that is happening at that moment."

After returning from France, Fonvizin even more acutely perceives the pressing issues of the social and political life of his own country. In reflection on them, the idea of \u200b\u200bThe Undergrowth is born, the work on which, apparently, took several years. By the end of 1781 the play was completed. This comedy absorbed all the experience accumulated by the playwright earlier, and in terms of the depth of ideological issues, the courage and originality of the artistic solutions found, remains an unsurpassed masterpiece of Russian dramaturgy of the 18th century. The accusatory pathos of the content of The Undergrowth is fed by two powerful sources equally dissolved in the structure of the dramatic action. These are satire and journalism. Destroying and merciless satire fills all the scenes depicting the lifestyle of the Prostakova family. In the scenes of Mitrofan's teachings, in the revelations of his uncle about his love for pigs, in the greed and arbitrariness of the mistress of the house, the world of the Prostakovs and Skotinins is revealed in all the ugliness of its spiritual poverty.

But no less annihilating sentence to this world is pronounced by the group of positive noblemen present right there on the train, contrasted in their views on life with the bestial existence of Mitrofan's parents. The dialogues between Starodum and Pravdin, which touch upon deep, sometimes state problems, are passionate publicistic speeches containing author's position. The pathos of the speeches of Starodum and Pravdin also performs a denunciatory function, but here the denunciation merges with the affirmation of the author's positive ideals.

Two problems that particularly worried Fonvizin lie at the heart of The Undergrowth. This is, first of all, the problem of the moral decay of the nobility. In the words of Starodum, indignantly denouncing the nobles; "whose nobility, one might say, was buried with their ancestors," in his observations from the life of the court, Fonvizin not only states the decline in the moral foundations of society - he is looking for the reasons for this decline.

In the scientific literature, a direct connection has been repeatedly noted between the statements of Starodum and Pravdin and the key provisions of Fonvizin's work "Discourse on the indispensable state laws", which was written simultaneously with "Undergrowth". This journalistic treatise was conceived as an introduction to the project "Fundamental Rights, indispensable for all time by any authority", prepared in the late 1770s by N.I. and P.I. Panin, calculated in turn in the event of the accession to the throne of Tsarevich Pavel Petrovich . "Common sense and the experience of all ages show that the good morality of the sovereign alone forms the good morality of the people. In his hands is the spring, where to turn people: to virtue or vice." These words from "Discourse on the indispensable state laws" can serve as a commentary on a number of statements by Starodum. Since the virtue of the subjects is determined by the "good temper" of the sovereign, then he also bears the responsibility for the fact that "malice" prevails in society.

The final remark of the Starodum, which ends the "Undergrowth": "Here are worthy fruits of malevolence!" - in the context of the ideological provisions of Fonvizin's treatise, it gives the whole play a special political sound. The unlimited power of the landlords over their peasants, in the absence of a proper moral example from the highest authorities, became a source of arbitrariness, this led to the oblivion of the nobility of their duties and principles of class honor, that is, to the spiritual degeneration of the ruling class. In the light of the general moral and political concept of Fonvizin, which was expressed in the play by positive characters, the world of the Prostakovs and Skotiins appeared as an ominous realization of the triumph of malevolence.

Another problem of "Undergrowth" is the problem of education. Understood quite broadly, education in the minds of thinkers of the 18th century was considered as the primary factor that determines the moral character of a person. In Fonvizin's ideas, the problem of education acquired state significance, because in the right education, the only reliable, in his opinion, source of salvation from the evil threatening society - the spiritual degradation of the nobility - was rooted.

A significant part of the dramatic action in "Undergrowth" is to some extent projected onto the solution of the problem of education. Both the scenes of Mitrofan's teachings and the vast majority of Starodum's moralizing are subordinate to her. The culminating point in the development of this theme, no doubt, is the scene of Mitrofan's exam in the 4th act of the comedy. This satirical picture, deadly in terms of the strength of the accusatory sarcasm contained in it, serves as a verdict on the education system of the Prostakovs and Skotinins. The pronouncement of this sentence is ensured not only from within, due to the self-disclosure of Mitrofan's ignorance, but also thanks to the demonstration right there on the stage of examples of a different upbringing. We mean the scenes in which Starodum talks with Sophia and Milon.

With the production of "Undergrowth" Fonvizin had to experience a lot of grief. The performance scheduled for the spring of 1782 in the capital was cancelled. And only in the autumn, on September 24 of the same year, thanks to the assistance of the all-powerful G. A. Potemkin, the comedy was played in a wooden theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow by the actors of the court theater. Fonvizin himself took part in learning the roles of the actors, he entered into all the details of the production. The performance was a complete success. According to a contemporary, "the audience applauded the play by throwing purses." The audience was especially sensitive to the political hints hidden in Starodum's speeches.

Even before the production of "Undergrowth" Fonvizin decides to resign. He motivated his request by the frequent headaches that the writer suffered all his life. But the real reason for the resignation was, apparently, the final conviction of the senselessness of his service at court. By this time N.I. Panin was already seriously ill. Plans for the removal of the Empress from power and hopes to see the crown prince on the throne, it seemed, were not destined to come true. March 7, 1782 Fonvizin submits an official letter of resignation, which Catherine II immediately signed. Now the writer has the opportunity to devote himself entirely to creativity.

In 1783, the establishment Russian Academy. Her task was to prepare a complete explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Fonvizin was one of those who were instructed to develop the rules for compiling a dictionary. Based on acquaintance with French samples of dictionaries of this type, Fonvizin prepared a draft of the rules: "Inscription for compiling an explanatory dictionary of the Slavic-Russian language." It later became the basis for a guide to practical work over the dictionary. At the same time, the writer was involved in cooperation in the new magazine "Interlocutor of Lovers of the Russian Word" that arose under the auspices of the Russian Academy. Although the magazine was controlled by Catherine II, in general, its direction was not of an official nature.

Already in the first issue of "Interlocutor" Fonvizin began to publish "Experience of the Russian Soslovnik". Under the guise of an explanatory dictionary of Russian synonyms, Fonvizin offered readers a skillfully disguised political satire. Abbé Girard's French dictionary of synonyms served as an external model for this work. Some articles were simply translated from there. But most of the choice of lexical composition, not to mention the interpretation, belonged to Fonvizin himself. Here is how, for example, Fonvizin illustrates the definition of the meanings of the synonymous series - to forget, to forget, to consign to oblivion: "You can forget the name of the judge who robs, but it is difficult to forget that he is a robber, and justice itself is obliged not to consign the crime to oblivion." The author's enlightening convictions give his articles a bright journalistic tone, and in some cases, dictionary comments turn into miniature satirical essays.

Of the other satirical materials placed by Fonvizin in the "Interlocutor", one should name "The petition of the Russian Minerva from Russian writers" - hidden behind allegorical stylization official document denunciation of the ignorance of nobles persecuting writers; "Teaching spoken in the spirits of the day by Priest Vasily in the village of P ***", parodic opposing preaching literature; "The Narrative of the Imaginary Deaf and Mute" - an attempt to use the structure of a picaresque European novel for satirical purposes, unfortunately, remained unfinished.

The most serious speech of Fonvizin on the pages of this magazine was the publication in it of the famous "Questions that can arouse special attention in smart and honest people." "Questions" were sent to "Interlocutor" anonymously. In fact, it was an unspoken challenge to the crowned patroness of the magazine, and Catherine II had to accept this challenge. At first she did not know who the author of the Questions was. It is clear from the nature of her answers that she perfectly captured their critical orientation. In essence, Fonvizin's "Questions" were a cleverly found form of criticism of certain aspects of the government's domestic policy, for they drew attention to the most painful issues of public life in Russia at that time. "Why is the main effort of a large part of the nobles not to quickly make their children their people, but to quickly make them without serving as non-commissioned officers of the guard?" - said the 7th question. "Why are we not ashamed to do nothing?" - read the 12th question. In a number of cases, Catherine got off with excuses, such as, for example, answering the 7th question (“One is easier than the other”) or pretended not to understand, as was the case when answering the 12th question (“This is unclear: it’s a shame to do bad things, but to live in society don't eat do nothing"). But in some of the replies, the wounded self-esteem of the monarchess poured out in irritated and unanswerable shouts. The 14th question aroused particular anger in the empress: "Why in former times jesters, spies and jokers did not have ranks, but now they have, and they are very high?" Catherine actually evaded a direct answer to this question, but instead supplied her remark with a threatening note: "NB. This question was born from free speech, which our ancestors did not have; if they had, they would have started on the current one ten before the former."

Fonvizin undoubtedly forced the Empress to defend herself. And regardless of her attempts to reduce the sharpness of the issues, to turn some of them into a trifle for contemporaries, the meaning of the controversy was clear. Apparently, the writer became aware of Catherine's irritation, and in one of the next issues of the "Interlocutor" Fonvizin places a letter "To Mr. the writer of "Tales and Fables" from the writer of questions", where he tried to openly explain himself to her. The Empress did not forgive the satirist for his audacity until the end of his life, imposing a semi-official ban on the publication of his writings.

In the summer of 1784, Fonvizin and his wife again went abroad, this time to Italy. And during this trip, Fonvizin keeps a detailed diary, partially preserved in the letters that he regularly sends to his sister and P.I. Panin. A subtle connoisseur of art, Fonvizin enthusiastically responds in his letters to the masterpieces of Italian painting and architecture.

The Fonvizins spent the entire winter and spring of 1785 in Italy. Already during the trip, Fonvizin had to endure a serious illness in Rome. But the arrival in Moscow was overshadowed by a new heavy blow - Fonvizin was paralyzed. Treatment in Moscow did not bring results. For almost a year, intermittently, the treatment at Carlsbad waters lasted. In the autumn of 1787, having recovered somewhat, Fonvizin returned to St. Petersburg.

Apparently, even before leaving for Italy, Fonvizin created an original work on an antique plot. It was the "Greek" story "Callisthenes", published anonymously in the magazine "New Monthly Works" in 1786. The plot outline of the story goes back to the life story of the Greek Stoic philosopher, a student of Aristotle, at the court of Alexander the Great. The allegorical meaning of this political satire is obvious. Alien to self-interest and flattery, the "herald of truth" Callisthenes is defeated at the court of the conquering monarch, who declared himself a god. Slandered by one of Alexander's favorites, the philosopher dies, tortured in prison.

The story "Callisthenes" is marked by deep pessimism. It clearly shows the author's disappointment in enlightenment illusions associated with hopes for a virtuous monarch who rules according to the laws of goodness and justice.

Fonvizin's last major plan in the field of satirical prose, which, unfortunately, did not materialize, was the magazine Friend of Honest People, or Starodum. Fonvizin planned to publish it in 1788. It was planned to release 12 issues during the year. In a warning to readers, the author informed that his journal would be published "under the supervision of the writer of the comedy" Undergrowth ", which, as it were, indicated the ideological continuity of his new idea.

The journal opened with a letter to Starodum from "the author of The Undergrowth", in which the publisher turned to a "friend of honest people" with a request to help him by sending materials and thoughts, "which, with their importance and moralizing, no doubt, Russian readers will like." In his response Starodum not only approves the author's decision, but also immediately informs him of sending him letters received from "acquaintances", promising to continue to supply him the right materials. Sophia's letter to Starodum, his reply, as well as "Taras Skotinin's letter to his sister, Mrs. Prostakova" should, apparently, have been the first issue of the magazine.

Skotinin's letter is especially impressive in its accusatory pathos. Uncle Mitrofan, already familiar to the writer's contemporaries, tells his sister about the irretrievable loss he has suffered: his beloved motley pig Aksinya has died. In the mouth of Skotinin, the death of a pig appears as an event filled with deep tragedy. The misfortune so shocked Skotinin that now, he confesses to his sister, "I want to stick to moralizing, that is, to correct the morals of my serfs and peasants<...>birch.<...>And I want all those who depend on me to feel the impact of such a great loss on me. ” This small satirical letter sounds like an angry verdict on the entire system of feudal arbitrariness.

No less sharp were the subsequent materials, also "transferred" to the publisher of the magazine Starodum. First of all, this is the "General Court Grammar" - a brilliant example of political satire that denounced court mores.

Both on duty and in personal communications, Fonvizin more than once had the opportunity to experience the true price of the nobility of noble nobles close to the throne, and to study the unwritten laws of court life. And now, when the already sick, retired writer turns to this topic in the satirical magazine he conceived, his own life observations will serve as material for him. "What is a court lie?" - the satirist will ask a question. And the answer will read: "There is an expression of a mean soul in front of an arrogant soul. It consists of shameless praise to a great gentleman for those services that he did not do, and for those dignity that he does not have." It is no coincidence that A. N. Radishchev in his famous "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" used Fonvizin's satire when characterizing a certain "His Excellency" in the chapter "Zavidovo".

A biting pamphlet denouncing the justice system of feudal Russia was also a selection that was capacious in meaning and unusually colorful in style, which included "A letter found after the blessed death of court adviser Vzyatkin, to his late Excellency ***", and attached to the letter "Short register" (a list of cases promising profits to His Excellency) and "Answer" of His Excellency to Vyatkin's letter. This kind of satirical triptych revealed a horrifying picture of widespread abuse and bribery in the courts and administration as a result of the immorality of the ruling elite and the corruption of the state apparatus.

Thus, the magazine conceived by Fonvizin was supposed to continue the best traditions of magazine Russian satire of the late 1760s. It is no coincidence that the subtitle of the magazine read: "Periodical essay dedicated to the truth." But it was useless to count on the consent of Catherine's censorship in issuing such a publication. By decision of the council of the deanery, it was forbidden to print the magazine. Some of its parts were distributed in handwritten lists. (Only in 1830, in the first collected works of the writer published by Pl. Beketov, most of the surviving materials of the Fonvizin journal were published.) The writer tries to organize the publication of another, now a collective journal, Moscow Works, in a year. But the ensuing period of political reaction in connection with the beginning of the Great Bourgeois Revolution in France made this publication impossible.

For the last three years of his life, Fonvizin was seriously ill. During 1791 he suffered four strokes of apoplexy. Watching the repressions that fell upon his fellow enlighteners, alone, hounded by censorship and, moreover, experiencing financial difficulties due to the dishonesty of the tenants of his estates, Fonvizin is in a state of mental breakdown. His last writings are permeated with motives of religious repentance. The most significant among them should be attributed "Frank-hearted confession in my deeds and thoughts" (1791).

In this autobiographical narrative, conceived in four books, Fonvizin follows the example of J.-J. Rousseau with his famous Confession. "The test of my conscience" - this is how the author defines the content of his story. Year after year, starting with memories of early childhood and heartfelt stories about his parents, Fonvizin surveys the past. The first lessons in reading church books, studying at the university gymnasium, serving with Elagin, the first literary debuts. The story ends with the events of 1769, marked by the resounding success of the comedy "The Brigadier". The confession of a seriously ill person leaves a mark on the whole work, dictating a certain selectivity of the reported facts and a peculiar appraisal of the most important, in his opinion, moments of his moral life.

Fonvizin did not leave his pen until the very last days of his life. He also wrote the three-act comedy The Choice of a Governor. About the reading of this comedy in Derzhavin's house on November 30, 1792, the day before the death of the great satirist, news was preserved in the memoirs of I. I. Dmitriev (Dmitriev I. I. A look at my life. M., 1866, p. 58-59) .

A son of his time, Fonvizin, with all his appearance and direction of creative quest, belonged 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.

Notes

1. Vyazemsky L. A. Fon-Vizin. SPb., 1848, p. 244.

2. Lukin. V. I. and Elchaninov B. E. Works and translations, St. Petersburg, 1868.

Fonvizin's first literary performances date back to the period of his stay at the university gymnasium. Fonvizin received a good knowledge of foreign languages at the gymnasium, "and most of all ... a taste for the verbal sciences." With translations, he began his career as a writer. In 1761, a book was published in the printing house of Moscow University entitled "Fables of moralizing with the explanations of Mr. Baron Golberg, translated by Denis Fonvizin." The translation of the book to the young man was ordered by the bookseller of the university bookstore. The writings of Ludwig Golberg, the greatest Danish writer of the 18th century, were widely popular in Europe, especially his comedies and satirical pamphlets. They were translated into different languages, including in Russia. By the way, the influence of one of Golberg's comedies, "Jean-Frenchman", which ridiculed gallomania, will be reflected in its own way on the plan of Fonvizin's comedy "The Brigadier", which he will write in 1768-1769.

Fonvizin's friendship with the young writer F. A. Kozlovsky leads him to a circle of St. Petersburg noble youth, who were fond of freethinking and Voltairianism. The composition of the famous poem by Fonvizin "A Message to my servants - Shumilov, Vanka and Petrushka" dates back to the time of acquaintance with Kozlovsky. Its content is permeated with frank irony, exposing the lies and hypocrisy of the statutes of official morality. The author turns to his servants in turn with a question that philosophical thought has struggled with for centuries: what is the purpose of the universe, "for what was this light created"? And the answers of the servants sound like a caustic satire on the current state of society. The coachman Vanka acts as the central accuser. He travels a lot and therefore has seen a lot. Universal deceit and greed are, in his opinion, the only and all-determining law of life:

Priests try to deceive people

Butler's servants, gentlemen's butlers,

Each other's 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.

All the characters in "The Brigadier" are Russian noblemen. In the modest, everyday atmosphere of middle-class life, the personality of each character appears as if gradually in conversations. Gradually, from action to action, the spiritual interests of the characters are revealed from various sides, and step by step the originality of the artistic solutions found by Fonvizin in his innovative play is revealed.

The conflict, traditional for the comedy genre, between a virtuous, intelligent girl and a stupid fiancé imposed on her is complicated by one circumstance. Ivan recently visited Paris and is full of contempt for everything that surrounds him at home, including his parents. "Everyone who has been in Paris," he frankly, "has the right, speaking of Russians, not to include himself among those, because he has already become more French than Russian." Ivan's speech is replete with French words pronounced by the way and inopportunely. The only person he finds common ground with is the Counselor, who grew up reading romance novels and is crazy about all things French.

The absurd behavior of the newly-minted "Parisian" and the Counselor, who is delighted with him, suggests that the basis of the ideological concept in comedy is the denunciation of gallomania. With their empty talk and newfangled mannerisms, they seem to oppose Ivan's parents and the Counselor, wise by life experience. However, the fight against gallomania is only part of the accusatory program that feeds the satirical pathos of "The Brigadier". Ivan's relationship to all the other characters is revealed by the playwright already in the first act, where they speak out about the dangers of grammar: each of them considers the study of grammar an unnecessary thing, it does not add anything to the ability to achieve rank and wealth.

In these works, the outlines of the ideological program and creative guidelines that determined the later artistic originality of The Undergrowth are already visible. On the one hand, in "Letters to Falaley" - this vivid picture of the wild ignorance and arbitrariness of the local nobles - Fonvizin for the first time finds and skillfully uses a special constructive method of satirical denunciation of the feudal lords. The immorality of the behavior of the characters denounced in the letters turns them, according to the satirist, into the likeness of cattle. Their loss of human form is emphasized by the blind passion that they have for animals, while at the same time not considering their serfs for people. Such, for example, is the structure of thoughts and feelings of Fadaleya's mother, for whom, after her son, the most beloved creature is the greyhound bitch Naletka. The good mother does not spare the rod in order to vent her vexation from the death of her beloved bitch on her peasants. The character of Falaley's mother directly leads us to the image of the main character of "Undergrowth" - Mrs. Prostakova. This method of psychological characterization of the characters will be used most prominently in the grotesque figure of Uncle Mitrofan - Skotin.

In August 1777, Fonvizin went on a trip abroad. His path lay in France - through Poland, Saxony, small German principalities. In Montpellier, Fonvizin's wife had to undergo a course of treatment. In February 1778, Fonvizin arrived in Paris and stayed there until the end of the summer. During his stay in France, the writer wrote a detailed diary ("magazine"), where he entered all his impressions of getting to know the country. Although Fonvizin's "journal" has not been preserved, some of his notes have come down to us in the texts of letters that he regularly sent to Russia to his sister Fedosya Ivanovna and Count N.I. Panin. In these letters, Fonvizin appears not just as a curious traveler, but as a state-minded person interested in the socio-political structure of France, the education system in this country, the position of the French nobility, and the state of the economy. "If I found anything in France in a flourishing state, then, of course, their factories and manufactories. There is no nation in the world that would have such an inventive mind as the French in arts and crafts, touching taste." In Montpellier, Fonvizin takes French law lessons from a lawyer. His reflections on this subject are striking in their insight to this day. “The system of laws of this state is a building, one might say, wise, built by many centuries and rare minds,” he writes in a letter dated December 24, 1777, “but various abuses and corruption of morals that have crept in little by little have now reached the very extreme<...>The first right of every Frenchman is liberty; but his true real condition is slavery, for a poor man cannot earn his livelihood except by slave labor, and if he wants to use his freedom, he will have to die of hunger. In a word, liberty is an empty name, and the right of the strong remains the right above all laws. "Fonvizin is of particular interest to the position of the French nobility. He explains the impoverishment and ignorance of the ruling class by the omnipotence of the clergy and the lack of a correct education system, He connects with this the general decline in virtue he observes in society, the universal thirst for self-interest. "Covetousness has indescribably infected all states, not excluding the very philosophers of the present century."

But no less annihilating sentence to this world is pronounced by the group of positive noblemen present right there on the train, contrasted in their views on life with the bestial existence of Mitrofan's parents. The dialogues between Starodum and Pravdin, which touch upon deep, sometimes state problems, are passionate publicistic speeches containing the author's position. The pathos of the speeches of Starodum and Pravdin also performs a denunciatory function, but here the denunciation merges with the affirmation of the author's positive ideals.

In 1783, the establishment of the Russian Academy took place. Her task was to prepare a complete explanatory dictionary of the Russian language. Fonvizin was one of those who were instructed to develop the rules for compiling a dictionary. Based on acquaintance with French samples of dictionaries of this type, Fonvizin prepared a draft of the rules: "Inscription for compiling an explanatory dictionary of the Slavic-Russian language." It later served as the basis for a guide to practical work on the dictionary. At the same time, the writer was involved in cooperation in the new magazine "Interlocutor of Lovers of the Russian Word" that arose under the auspices of the Russian Academy. Although the magazine was controlled by Catherine II, in general, its direction was not of an official nature.

Of the other satirical materials placed by Fonvizin in the "Interlocutor", one should name "Petition to the Russian Minerva from Russian Writers" - hidden behind the allegorical stylization of an official document, the denunciation of the ignorance of the nobles persecuting writers; "Teaching spoken in the spirits of the day by Priest Vasily in the village of P ***", parodic opposing preaching literature; "The Narrative of the Imaginary Deaf and Mute" - an attempt to use the structure of a picaresque European novel for satirical purposes, unfortunately, remained unfinished.

The journal opened with a letter to Starodum from "the author of The Undergrowth", in which the publisher turned to a "friend of honest people" with a request to help him by sending materials and thoughts, "which, with their importance and moralizing, no doubt, Russian readers will like." In his response Starodum not only approves the author's decision, but also immediately informs him of sending him letters received from "acquaintances", promising to continue to supply him with the necessary materials. Sophia's letter to Starodum, his answer, as well as "Taras Skotinin's letter to his own sister Mrs. Prostakova" and, apparently, should have been the first issue of the magazine.

Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin is one of the most prominent literary figures of the 18th century. His love for the theater was born in his youth, and the talent of the future playwright was noticed by his gymnasium teachers.

Over time, Fonvizin's enlightening views deepened, his desire to intervene with his works in the thick of the events of Russian public life grew stronger. Fonvizin is rightfully considered the creator of Russian social and political comedy. His famous play "Undergrowth" turned the Prostakovs' estate into a center of vices, "malice of worthy fruits," which the playwright denounces with his usual slander, sarcasm, and irony. "Undergrowth" is a multi-dark work. Here questions are raised about the steady performance of the "position" by each citizen, about the nature of family relations in contemporary Russia, about the system of upbringing and education. But the main, undoubtedly, are the problems of serfdom and state power. In the very first act, we find ourselves in an atmosphere of landlord arbitrariness. Trishka sewed Mitrofan's caftan "quite a bit", but this does not save him from scolding and flogging. The old nanny Mitrofana Yeremeevna is immensely devoted to her masters, but receives from them "five rubles a year and five slaps a day." Prostakov is outraged that the serf girl Palashka, having fallen ill, lies, "as if noble." The arbitrariness of the landowners led to the complete impoverishment of the peasants. “Since we took away everything that the peasants had, we can’t tear anything off. Such a disaster! - Prostakova complains. But the landowners are firmly aware that they are protected by the entire system of state power. It was the social structure of Russia that allowed the Prostakovs and Skotinins to dispose of their estates in their own way.

Throughout the comedy, Fonvizin emphasizes the "bestial" essence of Prostakova and her brother. It even seems to Vralman that, living with the Prostakovs, he is a "fairy with horses." Mitrofan will not be any better either. The author does not just make a mockery of his "knowledge" in the sciences, unwillingness to learn. Fonvizin sees that the same cruel serf-owner lives in him.

A huge influence on the formation of people like Mitrofan, according to the author, is exerted not only by the general situation in the noble estates, but also by the adopted system of education and upbringing. The upbringing of young nobles was carried out by ignorant foreigners. What could Mitrofan learn from the coachman Vralman? Could such nobles become the backbone of the state? The group of positive characters in the play is represented by the images of Pravdin, Starodum, Milon and Sophia. It was extremely important for a classicist writer not only to show social vices, but also to identify the ideal to which one should strive. On the one hand, Fonvizin denounces the state order, on the other hand, the author gives a kind of instruction on what a ruler and society should be like. Starodum expounds the patriotic views of the best part of the nobility, expresses topical political thoughts. By introducing into the play the scene of the deprivation of Prostakova's master's rights, Fonvizin suggests to the audience and the government one of the possible ways to suppress the arbitrariness of the landowners. Note that this step of the writer was disapprovingly met by Catherine II, who directly let the writer feel it. The Empress could not help but see in the comedy "Undergrowth" a sharp satire on the most terrible vices of the empire. Fonvizin's sarcasm was also reflected in the work entitled "The General Court Grammar", compiled in the form of a textbook. The writer gives apt descriptions of court morals, reveals the vices of the representatives of the upper class. Calling his grammar "universal", Fonvizin emphasized that these features are characteristic of monarchical rule in general. He calls the courtiers flatterers, sycophants, scoundrels. The satirist divides the people living at the court into “vowels”, “vowelless” and “semivowels”, and considers the verb “to be due” to be the most common, although debts are not paid at court. Catherine never saw humility from Fonvizin, and therefore soon his works ceased to appear in print. But Russia knew them because they were on the lists. And the satirist entered the consciousness of his generation as a bold exposer of the vices of society. It is not for nothing that Pushkin called him “a friend of freedom”, and Herzen put the comedy “Undergrowth” on a par with “ Dead souls» Gogol.

To use the preview of presentations, create an account for yourself ( account) Google and sign in: https://accounts.google.com

Slides captions:

Satyrs of a brave ruler ...

Fonvizin is the largest Russian playwright of the 18th century, the creator of Russian social comedy. The formation of Russian artistic prose is also associated with the name of Fonvizin. Great was the influence of the personality of Fonvizin on his contemporaries, leaders of the advanced culture XIX century. A.S. Pushkin, who saw in Fonvizin a champion of enlightenment, a fighter against serfdom, called him "a friend of freedom."

Born into a wealthy noble family. From 1755 to 1760 he studied at the gymnasium at Moscow University, and in 1761-1762 at the Faculty of Philosophy of the same university. In his student years he was engaged in translations. In 1762, Fonvizin decided to become a translator for the Collegium of Foreign Affairs and moved to St. Petersburg. The surname Von Wiesen (German von Wiesen) was written in the 18th century in two words or with a hyphen.

Fonvizin's literary activity begins in the 60s of the 18th century. An inquisitive and witty man, he was created in order to become a satirist. And there were enough reasons for bitter laughter in the Russian reality of that time. Fonvizin saw that embezzlers, bribe-takers, careerists gathered around the throne of Catherine II, that waves of peasant uprisings were formidable signs of an impending popular storm. As a result of communication with a circle of young free-thinking officers, he created "Message to my servants ..." (1769) - a satirical work based on the traditions of Russian fable and satire. At the same time, the writer showed interest in drama, he had an idea for an original Russian satirical comedy. The first example of this kind was his "Brigadier" (1766-1769).

DI. Fonvizin reads "The Brigadier" in the salon of Tsarevich Pavel Petrovich. From an engraving by P. Borel

In his most significant work - the comedy "Undergrowth" (1781) - Fonvizin points to the root of all Russia's troubles - serfdom. The author evaluates and judges not human vices in themselves, but, above all, social relations. Positive heroes - enlightened nobles - do not just condemn serfdom, but fight against it. Comedy is built on sharp social conflict. Life in the house of the Prostakovs is presented not as a summary of ridiculous customs, but as a system of relations based on serfdom.

Cover of the first edition of the comedy "Undergrowth".

The author creates multifaceted characters, exposing the inner drama of such negative characters as Yeremeevna and Prostakova. According to N.V. Gogol, "Undergrowth" is "... a truly social comedy." In 1782, Fonvizin resigned and was engaged only in literary activities. In 1783 he published a number of satirical works. The empress herself answered them with irritation.

Fonvizin was a living, secular person; educated, courageous, he stood above many prejudices of his time, believed that it was not shameful for a nobleman to engage in trade. He was friends with the actor Ivan Dmitrievsky, although the actors were, according to the concepts of that time, something like servants. Communicating with nobles in the court world, he married the daughter of a merchant, despite the obvious disapproval of his relatives.

The last years of his life, Fonvizin was seriously ill (paralysis), but continued to write until his death. In 1789, he began work on the autobiographical story "A sincere confession in my deeds and thoughts", but did not finish this work. The story is a remarkable work of Russian prose. Here, in the image of the author, the character of a person and a writer is recreated - Russian in mindset, humor, irony, shows the spiritual wealth of a person who knows how to rise above his weaknesses and fearlessly tell his compatriots about them.

With all his heart, Fonvizin loved his homeland and his people. The motto of his life were the words: You must dedicate your life to the Fatherland, If you want to be an honest person forever.

Addresses in St. Petersburg Summer 1773 - 11.1774 - Bolshaya Sadovaya Street, 26. His grave in a cast-iron fence is located at the Lazarevsky cemetery in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra next to the graves of architect I.E Starov, mathematician L. Euler and artist V.L. Borovikovsky.

Magic edge! There in the old days, Satyrs brave ruler, Fonvizin shone, a friend of freedom ... A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin" Excellent satirist Ignorance was executed in the folk comedy A.S. Pushkin "Message to the Censor" Interesting Facts Fonvizin is mentioned: - ... Really, I really like this innocence! Here you are, - continued the Empress, fixing her eyes on a man with a full, but somewhat pale face, who was standing a little distance from other middle-aged people, whose modest caftan with large mother-of-pearl buttons showed that he did not belong to the number of courtiers, - an object worthy of your witty pen! “You, Your Imperial Majesty, are too merciful. At least La Fontaine is needed here! - answered, bowing, a man with mother-of-pearl buttons. N.V. Gogol "The Night Before Christmas"

Independent work with a textbook article What were the educational successes of D.I. Fonvizin? What did the memory of young Fonvizin keep forever from a trip to St. Petersburg? What is the focus of D.I. Fonvizin's work. List his first work. When was it created and where and when was the comedy "Undergrowth" staged? What creative plans did D.I. Fonvizin have but failed to realize?