"Minor": analysis of Fonvizin's work, images of heroes. Positive heroes of the comedy D.I. Fonvizin "Undergrowth"

Article menu:

“The Minor” is a play in five acts written by Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin. Cult dramatic work XVIII century and one of the most striking examples of classicism. It went into school curriculum, was repeatedly staged on the theatrical stage, received a screen embodiment, and its lines were disassembled into quotes, which today live independently of the original source, becoming aphorisms of the Russian language.

Plot: summary of the play “Minor”

The plot of “The Minor” is well known to everyone since school years, however, we still remind you summary plays to recall the sequence of events in memory.

The action takes place in the village of Prostakovs. Its owners - Mrs. and Mr. Prostakov and their son Mitrofanushka - live quiet life provincial nobles. Also living on the estate is the orphan Sofyushka, whom the lady sheltered in her house, but, as it turns out, not out of compassion, but because of the inheritance, which she freely disposes of as a self-proclaimed guardian. In the near future, they plan to marry Sophia to Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin.

The mistress's plans collapse when Sophia receives a letter from her uncle Starodum, who was still considered dead. Stradum is alive and well and is going on a date with his niece, and he also reports a fortune of 10 thousand in income, which he passes on as an inheritance to his beloved relative. After such news, Prostakova begins to court Sophia, whom she has hitherto given little favor to, because now she wants to marry her to her beloved Mitrofan, and leave Skotinin with nothing.

Fortunately, Starodum turned out to be noble and an honest man wishing well for your niece. Moreover, Sophia already had a betrothed - officer Milon, who had just stopped with his regiment in the village of Prostakov. Starodub knew Milon and gave the young man his blessing.

In desperation, Prostakova tries to organize the kidnapping of Sophia and forcibly marry her to her son. However, even here the treacherous mistress suffers a fiasco - Milo saves his beloved on the night of the kidnapping.

Prostakova is generously forgiven and not put on trial, although her estate, which has long been a source of suspicion, is transferred to a state guardian. Everyone leaves and even Mitrofanushka leaves his mother, because he doesn’t love her, like, in general, no one else in the world.

Characteristics of heroes: positive and negative characters

As in any classic work, the characters in “The Minor” are clearly divided into positive and negative.

Negative heroes:

• Mrs. Prostakova is the mistress of the village;
• Mr. Prostakov is her husband;
• Mitrofanushka is the son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth;
• Taras Skotinin is the brother of the Prostakovs.

Positive heroes:

• Sophia is an orphan, lives with the Prostakovs;
• Starodum is her uncle;
• Milon is an officer, Sophia’s lover;
• Pravdin is a government official who came to monitor affairs in the Prostakov village.

Minor characters:

• Tsyfirkin – arithmetic teacher;
• Kuteikin – teacher, former seminarian;
• Vralman is a former coachman, posing as a teacher;
• Eremevna is Mitrofan’s nanny.

Mrs. Prostakova

Prostakova is the most striking negative character, and indeed the most outstanding character in the play. She is the mistress of the Prostakov village and it is the mistress, who has completely suppressed her weak-willed husband, who establishes the lordly order and makes decisions.

At the same time, she is absolutely ignorant, has no manners, and is often rude. Prostakova, like other members of the family, cannot read and despises science. Mitrofanushka’s mother is involved in education only because this is how it is supposed to be in New World society, but true value does not understand knowledge.

In addition to ignorance, Prostakova is distinguished by cruelty, deceit, hypocrisy, and envy.

The only creature she loves is her son Mitrofanushka. However, the mother’s blind, absurd love only spoils the child, turning him into a copy of himself in a man’s dress.

Mr. Prostakov

The figurative owner of the Prostakov estate. In fact, everything is controlled by his domineering wife, of whom he is terribly afraid and does not dare say a word. Prostakov has long lost his own opinion and dignity. He cannot even say whether the caftan sewn by the tailor Trishka for Mitrofan is good or bad, because he is afraid to say something that is not what his mistress expects.

Mitrofan

Son of the Prostakovs, an undergrowth. His family lovingly calls him Mitrofanushka. Meanwhile, it’s time for this young man to go out into adult life, but he has absolutely no idea about it. Mitrofan is spoiled motherly love, he is capricious, cruel to servants and teachers, pompous, lazy. Despite many years of lessons with teachers, the young master is hopelessly stupid, he does not show the slightest desire for learning and knowledge.

And the worst thing is that Mitrofanushka is a terrible egoist, nothing matters to him except own interests. At the end of the play, he easily leaves his mother, who loved him so unrequitedly. Even she is nothing to him.

Skotinin

Brother of Mrs. Prostakova. Narcissistic, narrow-minded, ignorant, cruel and greedy. Taras Skotinin has a great passion for pigs; the rest is of little interest to this narrow-minded person. He has no idea of ​​family ties, heartfelt affection and love. Describing how well his future wife will heal, Skotinin only says that he will give her the best light. In his system of coordinates, this is precisely what marital happiness consists of.

Sophia

Positive female image works. A very well-mannered, kind, meek and compassionate girl. Sophia received a good education, she has an inquisitive mind and a thirst for knowledge. Even in the poisonous atmosphere of the Prostakovs’ house, the girl does not become like the owners, but continues to lead the lifestyle that she likes - she reads a lot, thinks, is friendly and polite to everyone.

Starodum

Sophia's uncle and guardian. Starodum is the voice of the author in the play. His speeches are very aphoristic, he talks a lot about life, virtues, intelligence, law, government, modern society, marriage, love and other pressing issues. Starodum is incredibly wise and noble. Despite the fact that he clearly has a negative attitude towards Prostakova and others like her, Starodum does not allow himself to stoop to rudeness and outright criticism, and as for light sarcasm, his narrow-minded “relatives” cannot recognize it.

Milo

Officer, Sophia's lover. The image of a hero-defender, ideal young man, husband. He is very fair and does not tolerate meanness and lies. Milo was brave, not only in battle, but also in his speeches. He is devoid of vanity and low-minded prudence. All of Sophia’s “suitors” talked only about her condition, but Milon never mentioned that his betrothed was rich. He sincerely loved Sophia even before she had an inheritance, and therefore in his choice the young man was not guided by the size of the bride’s annual income.

“I don’t want to study, but I want to get married”: the problem of education in the story

The key problem of the work is the theme of provincial noble upbringing and education. Main character Mitrofanushka receives an education only because it is fashionable and “just the way it is.” In fact, neither he nor his ignorant mother understands the true purpose of knowledge. They should make a person smarter, better, serve him throughout his life and benefit society. Knowledge is gained through hard work and can never be forced into someone's head.

Mitrofan’s home education is a dummy, a fiction, provincial theater. For several years, the unfortunate student did not master either reading or writing. Mitrofan fails the comic test that Pravdin arranges with a bang, but because of his stupidity he cannot even understand this. He calls the word door an adjective, because it is supposedly attached to the opening, he confuses science history with the stories that Vralman tells him in abundance, and Mitrofanushka can’t even pronounce the word “geography”... it’s too tricky.

To show the grotesqueness of Mitrofan’s education, Fonvizin introduces the image of Vralman, who teaches “French and all sciences.” In fact, Vralman (that’s a telling name!) is not a teacher at all, but Starodum’s former coachman. He easily deceives the ignorant Prostakova and even becomes her favorite, because he professes his own teaching methodology - not to force the student to do anything through force. With such zeal as Mitrofan’s, the teacher and student are simply idle.

Education goes hand in hand with acquiring knowledge and skills. Mrs. Prostakova is mostly responsible for him. She methodically imposes her rotten morality on Mitrofan, who (here he is diligent here!) perfectly absorbs his mother’s advice. So, while solving a division problem, Prostakova advises her son not to share with anyone, but to take everything for himself. When talking about marriage, mother speaks only about the bride’s wealth, never mentioning spiritual affection and love. The young Mitrofan is not familiar with such concepts as courage, boldness, and valor. Despite the fact that he is no longer a baby, he is still looked after in everything. The boy cannot even stand up for himself during a clash with his uncle; he immediately begins to call his mother, and the old nanny Eremeevna rushes at the offender with her fists.

The meaning of the name: two sides of the coin

The title of the play has a literal and figurative meaning.

Direct meaning of the name
In the old days, minors were called teenagers, young men who had not yet reached adulthood and had not entered college. public service.

Figurative meaning titles
A fool, an ignoramus, a narrow-minded and uneducated person was also called a minor, regardless of his age. WITH light hand Fonvizin, it is precisely this negative connotation that has become attached to the word in modern Russian.

Every person is reborn from a minor youth into an adult man. This is growing up, a law of nature. However, not everyone transforms from a dark, half-educated person into an educated, self-sufficient person. This transformation requires effort and perseverance.

Place in literature: Russian literature XVIII centuries → Russian drama of the 18th century → The work of Denis Ivanovich Fonvizin → 1782 → The play “The Minor.”

“The Minor” is a play by D. I. Fonvizin. Analysis of the work, main characters

The comedy “The Minor” is recognized as the best work of the outstanding Russian playwright D. I. Fonvizin. In it, the writer truthfully portrayed Russian feudal reality, exposed it, in the words of V. G. Belinsky, “as if to shame, in all its nakedness, in all its terrifying ugliness.”

The cruelty and arbitrariness of the landowners declare themselves in Fonvizin’s comedy “at the top of his voice.” Serf owners like Prostakova and Skotinin commit their lawlessness in full confidence in their own rightness. The local nobility completely forgot about honor, conscience, and civic duty. Landowners have a stupid disregard for culture and education, interpret laws based only on their own benefit, according to their own discretion and understanding. And it is simply not possible for ignorant, illiterate serf owners to understand these laws: for example, in the Decree on the freedom of the nobility, Prostakova sees only confirmation of the right of a nobleman to flog his servant “whenever he wants.” The only thing that upsets her about her peasants is “injustice.” “Since we took away everything the peasants had, we can’t take anything back. Such a disaster! - Prostakova complains to her brother.

Trying to give brightness and persuasiveness to the images, Fonvizin reveals the features of their character not only with the help of depicting behavior, actions, outlook on life, but also with the help of well-aimed speech characteristics. The characters of the comedy, primarily negative ones, are endowed with a mark, deeply individualized speech, sharply distinguishing each of them from the other characters and emphasizing the main features, main shortcomings and vices of this or that person.

Everyone's speech characters in “Nedorosl” differs both in lexical composition and intonation. Creating your heroes, giving them bright linguistic features, Fonvizin widely uses all the wealth of life folk speech. He introduces numerous folk proverbs and sayings, widely uses common and swear words and expressions.

The most striking and expressive are the linguistic characteristics of the local nobility. Reading the words spoken by these heroes, it is simply impossible not to guess who they belong to. The speech of the characters is impossible to confuse, just as it is impossible to confuse the characters themselves with someone - they are such bright, colorful figures. So, Prostakova is a powerful, despotic, cruel, vile landowner. At the same time, she is incredibly hypocritical, capable of adapting to situations, changing her views solely for the purpose of her own benefit. This greedy, cunning lady actually turns out to be cowardly and helpless. This is especially evident in the relationship with my son.

All of the above features of Prostakova are clearly illustrated by her speech - rude and angry, full of swear words, swearing and threats, emphasizing the despotism and ignorance of the landowner, her soulless attitude towards the peasants, whom she does not consider to be people, from whom she tears off “three skins” and He is indignant at this and reproaches them. “Five rubles a year and five slaps a day” is received from her by Eremeevna, Mitrofan’s faithful and devoted servant and nanny (“mother”), whom Prostakova calls “an old bastard”, “a nasty mug”, “a dog’s daughter”, “ beast", "canals". Prostakova is also outraged by the girl Palashka, who lies and raves, having fallen ill, “as if she were noble.” “Fraud”, “cattle”, “thief’s mug” - these words are brought down by Prostakov on the head of the serf Trishka, who sewed a “pretty good” caftan for the “child” Mitrofan. At the same time, Prostakova herself is confident that she is right; due to ignorance, she is simply not able to understand that the peasants should be treated differently, that they are also people and deserve appropriate treatment. “I manage everything myself, father. From morning to evening, as if suspended by the tongue, I don’t lay down my hands: I scold, I fight; That’s how the house holds together, my father!” - the landowner confidentially informs the official Pravdin.

It is characteristic that the speech of this hypocritical lady is capable of completely changing its color in conversations with people on whom she depends: here her language acquires flattering, cunning intonations, she punctuates the conversation with constant ingratiation and words of praise. When meeting guests, Prostakova’s speech takes on a touch of “secularism” (“I recommend you dear guest,” “You are welcome”), and in humiliated lamentations, when after a failed abduction

She begs Sophia’s forgiveness for herself, her speech is close to the people’s (“Ah, my fathers, the sword does not cut off a guilty head. My sin! Do not destroy me. (To Sophia). You are my dear mother, forgive me. Have mercy on me (pointing to husband and son) and over poor orphans").

Prostakova’s speech also changes in those moments when she communicates with her son, Mitrofanushka: “Live forever, learn forever, my dear friend!”, “darling.” This despotic landowner loves her son and therefore addresses him affectionately, at times naively and even humiliatingly: “Don’t be stubborn, darling. Now is the time to show yourself,” “Thanks to God, you already understand so much that you can raise the kids yourself.” But even in this case, Prostakova, whose maiden name was Skotinina, shows an animal nature: “Have you ever heard of a bitch giving away her puppies?” In her rough, often primitive speech, there are also apt proverbial expressions (“like being hung by the tongue,” “where there is anger, there is mercy,” “the sword does not cut off a guilty head”). But the main thing distinguishing feature Prostakova’s speech - frequent use of vernaculars (“pervoet”, “deushka”, “arihmetika”, “robenok”, “sweat him and pamper”) and vulgarisms (“... and you, beast, were dumbfounded, and you didn’t bite your brother’s mug, and you didn’t tear his snout up to his ears...").

In the image of another landowner, Prostakova’s brother Taras Skotinin, everything speaks of his “animal” essence, starting from the very name and ending own confessions The hero is that he loves pigs more than people. It’s about people like this that even ten years before the appearance of “The Minor,” the poet A.P. Sumarokov said: “Oh, should cattle have people?” Skotinin is even more cruel in his treatment of serfs than his sister; he is a resourceful, calculating and cunning owner, never missing out on his benefits and using people solely for profit. “If I weren’t Taras Skotinin,” he declares, “if I’m not guilty of every fault. In this, sister, I have the same custom as you... and any loss... I’ll rip it off from my own peasants, and it’ll go down the drain.” The speech of landowners like Skotinin reveals confidence not only in their own rightness, but also in absolute permissiveness and impunity.

The speech of other negative characters also serves to reveal their socio-psychological essence; it is characteristic and quite individualized, although it is inferior to Prostakova’s language in diversity. Thus, Mitrofanushka’s father, Prostakov, in the scene of meeting Starodum introduces himself: “I am my wife’s husband,” thereby emphasizing his complete dependence on his wife, the lack of his own opinion, his own life position. It has absolutely no independent meaning. Like his wife, he is ignorant, as evidenced by his illiterate speech. Downtrodden by his formidable wife, Prostakov enthusiastically speaks of his son: “this is a smart child, this is a reasonable child.” But we understand that there is no need to even talk about the mind of Mitrofanushka, who has absorbed all the ugly features of his parents. He is not even able to distinguish true words from outright mockery. So, reading the Church Slavonic text offered to him by his teacher, Kuteikin, Mitrofan reads: “I am a worm.” And after the teacher’s comment: “A worm, that is, an animal, a cattle,” he humbly says: “I am a cattle,” and repeats after Kuteikin: “And not a man.”

The language of Mitrofan’s teachers is just as bright and individualized: the soldier’s jargon in Tsyfirkin’s speech, Kuteikin’s quotes (often inappropriate) from the Holy Scriptures, the monstrous German accent of the former coachman Vralman. The peculiarities of their speech make it possible to accurately judge both the social environment from which these teachers came and cultural level those who are entrusted with the upbringing of Mitrofan. It is not surprising that Mitrofanushka remained a minor, having received neither useful knowledge nor a decent upbringing during his studies.

The basis of the speech of positive characters is made up of “correct” book turns. Starodum often uses aphorisms (“it is in vain to call a doctor to the sick without healing”, “arrogance in a woman is a sign of vicious behavior”, etc.) and archaisms. Researchers also note direct “borrowings” in Starodum’s speech from prose works Fonvizin himself, and this is quite natural, because it is Starodum who expresses in comedy author's position. Pravdin is characterized by clericalism, and in the language of the young people Milon and Sophia there are sentimental expressions (“the secret of my heart”, “the mystery of my soul”, “touches my heart”).

Speaking about the peculiarities of the language of Fonvizin’s heroes, one cannot fail to mention the maid and nanny Mitrofan Eremeevna. This is a bright individual character, determined by certain social and historical circumstances. By belonging to the lower class, Eremeevna is illiterate, but her speech is deeply folk, having absorbed the best features of the simple Russian language - sincere, open, figurative. In her sorrowful statements, the humiliated position of the servant in the Prostakovs’ house is especially clearly felt. “I’ve been serving for forty years, but the mercy is still the same...” she complains. “...Five rubles a year and five slaps a day.” However, despite such injustice, she remains faithful and devoted to her masters.

The speech of each comedy hero is unique. This particularly clearly demonstrated the amazing skill of the satirical writer. Wealth linguistic means, used in the comedy “The Minor,” suggests that Fonvizin had an excellent command of the dictionary of folk speech and was well acquainted with folk art. This helped him, according to the rightful assertion of the critic P. N. Berkov, to create truthful, life-like images.

Essay on the topic: THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE IN D. I. FONVIZIN’S COMEDY “THE MINOR”

Searched on this page:

• what is the role positive characters in the comedy D and Fonvizina is a minor
• essay on the topic of positive characters in the comedy undergrowth
• an essay about negative heroes in the comedy Minor
• What is the role of positive characters in D I Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor”?
• what is the role of speaking names and surnames in the play undergrowth essay

Minor characters in the comedy by D.I. Fonvizin "Nedorosl" is playing big role. They are no less important in the development of the plot and are necessary for a deeper understanding of the problems of the play than the main characters.

Yes, exactly minor characters allow the author to raise the problem of obedience and lack of will of the serfs in the work. Let us remember Mitrofan's nanny, the old woman Eremeevna, who is a symbol of obedience and tolerance. She has faithfully served the family for forty years. “I’ll die on the spot, but I won’t give up the child,” - this phrase characterizes her love for Mitrofan. But the nanny receives for her devotion “five rubles a year and five slaps a day.” Another example of such humility is the servant Trishka, whom Prostakova reprimands for his well-tailored caftan. Even Mr. Prostakov himself is pitiful and helpless in the face of the attacks of his tyrant wife, but he believes that there is nothing strange in this and is satisfied with his position. And while he is inactive, the arbitrariness and cruelty of his wife flourishes.

Other minor characters allowed D.I. Fonvizin to clearly show the ignorance of provincial society of that time. For example, let us remember whom Mrs. Prostakova, in her stupidity, following the metropolitan fashion, hires as “teachers” for her son Mitrofan. Literacy was taught to the underage by the half-educated seminarian Kuteikin, and arithmetic by a poorly educated former soldier Tsyfirkin, and “in French and all sciences” is Starodum’s former coachman, Adam Adamych Vralman, who “does not captivate a child.”

The lack of education of the nobles is clearly characterized by Mrs. Prostakova’s brother, Taras Skotinin, who does not lag behind Mitrofan’s sister and teachers in his ignorance. “I never think,” says the landowner, the ruler of the serfs, about himself! What kind of education can we talk about if Skotinin “hasn’t read anything in his life”: after all, “God delivered” him from “this boredom.” And the old, narrow-minded and poorly educated nobleman doted on pigs. Here it is, clean water ignorance!

Thus, the minor characters of the comedy "The Minor" help the author demonstrate to us the morals and ignorance of provincial society of the eighteenth century.

The comedy by D. I. Fonvizin “The Minor” is a work of the 18th century. In it, the heroes are clearly divided into two groups: positive and negative. Here the funny and the sad, the comic and the tragic are combined and mixed. In negative characters, those traits that the author condemns are vivid: ignorance, rudeness, meanness, rudeness, dishonesty. Positive characters condemn these vices, expressing the thoughts of the writer himself.

TO negative characters The “undergrowth” includes Mrs. Prostakova, Taras Skotinin and Mitrofan Prostakov.

Prostakova is a noblewoman, the mother of Mitrofanushka and the sister of Taras Skotinin. Her surname indicates the heroine's lack of education and ignorance, as well as the fact that at the end of the play she gets into trouble.

This heroine is a cruel serfdom. She considers it completely normal to own human souls, mock the people under her control. What is worth the treatment of this heroine with the old nanny Eremeevna, who was devoted to Prostakov with all her soul.

The little girl's mother is extremely uneducated. She doesn't know the simplest things. But, worse than that, Prostakova believes that education is completely unnecessary, because something completely different helps you advance in life: money, connections. How can I not remember life principles Famusov and the entire Moscow society from A. S. Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit.”

Prostakova is rude, ignorant, dishonest. But main feature in Prostakova’s character there is an insane, some kind of animal love for her son. She believes that everything that is beneficial for Mitrofan is good, and that everything that is unprofitable is bad. In this case, the way in which the benefit is achieved does not matter. This heroine can grab her brother’s neck, etc. We can say that her moral and moral concepts are completely distorted, they simply do not exist. P.A. Vyazemsky wrote about Prostakova: “A mixture of arrogance and baseness, cowardice and malice, vile inhumanity towards everyone and tenderness, equally vile, towards his son, with all this ignorance from which ... all these properties flow ...”

It seems to me that D.I. Fonvizin sees two reasons for the heroine’s “evil character”. The first reason is Prostakova’s ignorance, not refined by her upbringing. The second is the decree of Catherine II “On the freedom of the nobles,” which the ignorant nobles understood as complete power over their serfs.

At the end of the play, Prostakova is defeated. She loses everything: power over the serfs, her estate, her son. Her defeat is the defeat of the entire previous system of education, the entire way of life of the nobles of the 18th century.

Prostakova's brother, Taras Skotinin, matches his sister. This is very ignorant and foolish man. The only interest in his life was the pigs, which he was breeding. For the sake of money, Skotinin wanted to marry Sophia, Starodum’s niece. Therefore, he competed with his nephew Mitrofan and constantly quarreled with Mrs. Prostakova: “When it comes to breaking, I’ll bend it, so you’ll crack.”

In my opinion, this hero is a “worthy” representative of his family: he has morally and ethically degraded, turned into an animal, as his last name indicates. The reason for Skotinin’s fall is ignorance and lack of proper upbringing. “If it weren’t for that Skotinin, he would want to learn something,” he declares.

Mrs. Prostakova’s son, Mitrofanushka, is the head of his family. They are trying to give him a good education, because in modern times there is nowhere without it. But the undergrowth has no desire to learn. He is such a “dark” person that it becomes both funny and bitter when you read his “exam” answers to teachers.

Mitrofan is rude and cruel. He does not value his father at all, mocks teachers and serfs. He takes advantage of the fact that his mother dotes on him and spins her around as she wants.

I believe that Mitrofan has stopped in his development. Sophia, Mrs. Prostakova’s pupil, says this about him: “Even though he is 16 years old, he has already reached the last degree of his perfection and will not go further.”

The undergrowth combines the traits of a tyrant and a slave. When Mrs. Prostakova's plan to marry her son to Sophia fails, Mitrofan behaves like a slave. He humbly asks for forgiveness and humbly accepts “his sentence” from Starodum - to go to serve. “For me, wherever they say,” he says, hanging his head. It seems to me that a slave upbringing was instilled in the hero and his serf nanny Eremeevna, and the whole world of the Prostakov-Skotinins, whose concepts of honor are completely distorted.

I think that through the image of Mitrofan, Fonvizin shows the degradation of the Russian nobility: from generation to generation, its ignorance increases, people are gradually turning into animals. No wonder Skotinin calls Mitrofan “damned pig.”

Thus, in Fonvizin’s comedy “The Minor” there are both features of comedy and features of tragedy. Through the funny, the playwright shows us vices noble society 18th century, all their terrible and destructive power, detrimentally affecting the development of society in general and individuals in particular.