SOURCE: Kalbouss, George. “Rhyming Patterns in Griboedov's Gore ot uma.” Slavic and East European Journal 39, no. 1 (spring 1995): 1-13.

[In the following essay, Kalbouss analyzes the rhyming patterns of Woe from Wit, claiming that Griboedov skillfully demonstrated the importance of rhyming as a form of entertainment in early nineteenth-century Moscow.]

1994 marked 200 years since the birth of Aleksandr Sergeevič Griboedov, the author known primarily for one significant work, Gore ot uma (Woe From Wit). The fame of this play has generated scores of studies, ranging from biographies of Griboedov's life to more formal analyses of the play's poetics. This study focuses on one formal aspect of this play—its rhyming patterns. In Griboedov's day, rhyming was a form of social entertainment. A person was considered only as clever as his rhymes. Since historians agree that in Woe From Wit Griboedov captures much of the essence of Muscovite culture of the 1820's, this study intends to show that Griboedov likewise captures the various practices of rhyming of that time in his play. Hopefully, the paper will show that the play's principle characters may be evaluated by the “quality” of their rhyme, especially Čatskij and Sofija. With regard to these two, can one determine who is the better rhymer? This study relies on the work done by Professor J. Thomas Shaw in his studies of rhyming patterns in the works of Puškin, Batjuškov and Baratynskij.¹

The rhyming schemes of this work may be compared to a symphonic composition. The work is dominated by “solo” rhyming, in which various characters deliver monologues while others listen. A second kind of rhyming could best be called “fugue” rhyming, in which three characters or more—both principle and secondary—engage in rhyming together, each interrupting the other, and each rhyming lines begun by another. The best example of this is the rumor scene (III:14-22) where various characters at the ball conclude erroneously that Čatskij has gone mad. The third kind of rhyming is a combination of the two, in which the characters' dialogues with each other could also be regarded as a rhyming repartee, where one character rhymes lines started by another, engage each other not only by discussing and arguing, but also in trying to best each other through rhyming. Such repartees occur between Čatskij and Sofija at various moments in the play.

The play's verse structure enables these different kinds of rhyming. Written in variable length, rhyming iambic verse, the lines are reminiscent of Krylov's basennij stix. Alternating between masculine and feminine, the rhymes signal both the end of a line and, for the most part, the end of a phrase. Since the lines vary in length, the rhymes occur at irregular frequencies, giving the impression of conversation rather than spoken poetry. Also, rhymes do not necessarily immediately follow line-after-line. Characters frequently “share” lines between each other, so that one character begins a line, a second adds several more words, and a third completes the line. This typical device for eighteenth and nineteenth century verse drama is also found in the operas of this time, and has been termed, “pоdkvatyvanii stika” by Tomaševskij.² All of these conventions imbue the dialogue with a conversational tone. Three possible rhyming patterns are found in the play: AA (adjacent/smiznyi), AB AB (alternate/piriкristnyi), and AB BA (enclosing/оkvatnyi). The rhymes do not repeat predictably—there is no equivalent in this play to an Onegin stanza—yet the longer monologues at least shift rhyming patterns. There are seven instances of triple rhyme (i.e. ABBACAC). For the purposes of this study, the rhyming is identified as A, B, or occasionally C (in capital letters); masculine and feminine rhymes are not addressed.

The rhymes may be also classified according to their “quality” against standards established in the 1820's. These may be summarized as follows:

1. “Canonical” rhymes. These are the permissible rhymes for the time as delineated in various works on how to rhyme (see ftn. 1 above). In general, Shaw observes that permissable rhyming prefers the declinables to the verbals, and discourages mixing parts of speech.
2. “Non-canonical” rhymes. These rhymes do not adhere to the canons of the rhyming books. Shaw observes that Puškin and his contemporaries already showed derision in their works by not adhering to the canons, especially by mixing parts of speech.
3. “Clever” rhymes. These are rhymes which rely on words which one would not expect could provide a rhyme, i.e., names of persons, towns, foreign words, mispronunciations and regionalisms. Griboedov is particularly fond of rhyming with particles, adverbs, and other parts of speech.³

When Griboedov's rhymes are compared to those of Puškin, Batjuškov and Baratynskij (again using Shaw's statistics), Griboedov tends to be slightly more conservative in mixing parts of speech, that is, rhyming nouns with verbs, etc. Shaw reports that 33٪ of Puškin's rhymes are “mixed” (Dictionary, xxxix). With Griboedov, only 25٪ are mixed, but the “mixed rhymes” are not evenly divided among the various characters.

For the record, here is how Griboedov's rhyming compares to the statistics from Shaw's figures published in “Parts of Speech …” on the rhyming of Puškin, Batjuškov and Baratynskij by parts of speech:

	Batjuškov	Puškin 1813-17	Puškin-later
	(in percents)
Nouns	51.48	52.38	50.42
Pronouns	6.16	6.51	8.21
Adjectives	12.44	13.91	12.65
Participles	1.55	2.42	1.66
Verbs	25.38	20.94	20.13
Adverbs	1.98	1.93	3.82

	Baratynskij	Gore ot uma
Nouns	46.17	42.62
Pronouns	13.49	6.89
Adjectives	13.57	11.11
Participles	2.34	1.20
Verbs	17.61	26.04
Adverbs	3.49	8.93 (5)

Summaring noun-forms (declinables) and verb-forms (verbals) we have:

	Batjuškov	Puškin-1813-17	Puškin-later
	(in percents)
Declinables	71.65	75.21	72.94
Verbals	25.38	20.94	20.13
Others	2.99	3.84	6.91

	Baratynskij	Gore ot uma
Declinables	75.58	61.78
Verbals	17.61	26.04
Others	6.81	12.184

The statistics provide some interesting revelations. Griboedov tends to be “more canonical” by not mixing parts of speech, yet is significantly less canonical in terms of using verbal forms. Verbs are the “dynamic” parts of speech and Griboedov puts verbs at the ends of phrases and thus in rhyming positions, to endow the dialogue with a dynamism which declinables might not bring about as theatrically. The “others” category for his work is much higher than those of the other poets. Griboedov's rhymes many more adverbs as well as words which do not easily submit themselves to classification as “parts of speech” (naprimir, nidоsug lybо). This “other” category is the source of much clever rhyming.

Rhyming in drama can also provide some theatrical effects. It has been observed that the most theatrical rhyme is AA. This rhyme enables effective, immediate contrasts, comic effects, and what would be called “punch lines” (here, more accurately, punch “words”). The more complex ABAB rhyme is used more for orchestration and flow of thought. The ABBA rhyme is a mixture of the two above. The BB part enables making the strong contrast, the A … A, separated by the BB, “sandwiches” the contrast into a context and a flow of thought.⁵

It is possible to make some assumptions about rhyming and individual characters. A character is a better rhymer if he varies his rhymes. For example, if a character only uses ABABAB rhymes, he would tend to be more tedious, less original than one who varied his lines, i.e. AABB/ABBA/ABBA/ABAB, etc. On the other hand, a character is the least interesting if he only uses AA rhymes.

In repartees, the above patterns enable various verbal-interplays between the characters. The simplest is when one character “feeds” another a line, and the other rhymes it with an AA rhyme, but more complicated patterns exist. An AB line is “fed” and is responded to by an “AB” rhyme. Other variations are possible: a character may begin a line, and a second character will provide the rhyme. Also, a character may “feed himself” a line, i.e., he will provide the A line, a second character will give a “B” line, the first will rhyme with the “A” line he gave himself and then will rhyme the second character's “B” line as well.

There may also be semantic differences in the rhyming. In many cases, the semantic “load” is neutral, that is, each word in the rhyming pair is equal in its significance; however, in many rhymed pairs the semantic “load” is not neutral. Some rhymewords carry additional semantic loads, forcing a comparison by the very fact of the rhyme. In this case, the second rhyming word is usually stronger than the first. This device is particularly effective in comedy where the first line serves as a “straight” line and the second as a “punch” line, i.e. duraцкij/Caцкij (I:5-6).

Using the above assumptions, a character's rhyming may be evaluated in the following two ways: 1. by the rhyming patterns they choose and how they vary them, and 2. by the types of words they rhyme according to the above-mentioned parameters (are they canonical? do they mix parts of speech?). The monologues of the principle characters provide the best opportunities for such evaluations. One of Famusov's early monologues (I:3) is typical of his rhyming patterns:

FAMUSOV'S RHYMING PATTERNS (I:3)

• AA: adv-verb (prоvоrnо[Sofija's line]—pокоrnо [F. rhymes line from Sofija])
• AA: verb-verb (vbizal-ispuzal)
• AA: adj-adj (цilyj-ugоrilyj)
• AA: noun-pronoun (klоpоtny-dо miny)
• AA: verb-verb (оbmanut-stanut [Sofija starts line, Famusov completes it])
• AA: verb-verb (zury-gоvоry)
• AA: verb-noun (radili-коlybili)
• AA: verb-noun (prinanyts-mats)
• AA: pronoun-noun (pristavil-pravil)
• AA: noun-noun (dоpustila-sila)
• AA: noun-noun (оbrazцa-оtцa)
• AB: noun-noun (slоzinsim-sidni)
• BA: noun-noun (gоspоdni-pоvidinsim)
• AA: verb-verb (Mоlcats![Famusov completes line started by Liza]-nacats)
• AB: noun-noun (litam-dоbryкi)
• BA: noun-noun (yzyкi-bilitam)
• AB: pronoun-noun (vsimu-vzdоkam)
• BA: noun-pronoun (sкоmоrоkam-к cimu?)
• AB: noun-noun (simijstvо-siкritari)
• AB: noun-noun (sоdijstvо-V Tviri)

• (8-10).⁶

Famusov's rhymes are not that remarkable. He prefers the AA rhymes, which he repeats throughout most of the monologue. Only in the end does he vary his rhymes with ABBA, ABBA. ABAB. Out of the 42 rhymewords, 14 are verbals (33٪), and of the 21 pairs of rhymes, 4 mix parts of speech (19٪), but this percentage is much higher in later speeches. There is one rhyme which could qualify as interesting or even outrageous: siкritari/v Tviri. Compare this rhyming pattern to a typical one of Čatskij's from II:5:

ČATSKIJ'S RHYMING PATTERNS (II:5)

• AB: noun-adj (lit-niprimirima)
• AB: noun-noun (gazit-Kryma)
• AB: noun-particle (zursbi-i tu zi)
• AB: pronoun-adj (оb sibi- kuzi)
• AA: noun-noun (оtcy-оbrazcy)
• AB: adj-noun (bоgaty- rоdstvi)
• AB: noun-noun (palaty-mоtоvstvi)
• AB: noun-noun (кliinty-inоstranцy-cirty)
• BA: noun-noun (rty-tanцy)
• AB: noun-adj (pilin-nipоnytnyk)
• BA: noun-adj (pокlоn-znatnyk)
• AB: noun-noun (slug-draкi)
• AB: adv-noun (vdrug-sоbaкi)
• AB: noun-noun (zatij-фurak)
• AB: noun-noun (ditij-аmurak)
• AB: noun-noun (кrasi-оtsrоcкi)
• AB: pronoun-noun (vsi-v оdinоcкi)
• AB: noun-noun (sidin-bizlysi)
• BA: noun-adj (sudi-оdin)
• CA: noun-noun (isкanij-cin)
• C: noun (pоznanij)
• AB: noun-adj (zar-priкrasnym)
• AB: noun-noun (pоzar-оpasnym)
• AB: noun-adj (bytu-кrasivyj)
• AB: noun-adj (nisitu-scastlivyj)
• AB: noun-verb (strasts-оtriкsy)
• AB: verb-verb (vpasts-pоvliкsy)
• AB: noun-verb (dvоra-priizzali)
• AB: interj-verb (ura!-brоsali)

• (pp. 37-38)

In comparing these two monologues, we see right away that Čatskij is the more versatile rhymer. Famusov's rhymes tend to repeat rhyming patterns almost monotonously, with AA being the most frequent type of rhyme. When one looks at all of his longer monologues, his rhyming appears to “atrophy” from a variety of ABAB or ABBA rhymes to the simpler AA patterns. Čatskij varies his rhymes more frequently, demonstrating his creativity and versatility. Čatskij uses declinables almost exclusively (82٪ in the above monologue) and rarely mixes part of speech. He does venture a few clever rhymes, i.e. i tu zi/kuzi, dvоra/ura! Both Famusov and Čatskij use triple rhymes, but Čatskij's, in the above monologue, is the most complex in the entire play: ABBACAC. Indeed, Čatskij's meticulous rhyming adds further proof to his image as a truly cultured man of the 1820's.

Repetilov's rhymes are more versatile as witnessed in his one long monologue in IV:4. Repetilov's rhyming patterns have a greater symmetry to them than that of the other characters, yet, towards the end, also suffer from an atrophy into AA rhyme, similar to Famusov's.

REPETILOV'S RHYMING PATTERNS (IV:4)

• AB: “other”-noun (nidоsug-dilо)
• BA: verb-adv (sоzrilо-vdrug)
• AA: noun-noun (istоrij-Grigоrij)
• AB: verb-noun (mоrit-sкladкa)
• AB: verb-noun (gоvоrit-pоrydкa)
• AA: pronoun-noun (s nim-Ivdокim)
• AA: noun-noun (divо-оsоblivо)
• AA: adj-particle, foreign wd. (оdnо- nо, nо, nо)
• AA: noun-noun (brata-ribyta)
• AA: verb-verb (sкazats-nazvats)
• AB: noun-pronoun (Marкilyc-igо)
• AB: noun-noun (milоcs-nicigо)
• AB: pronoun, particle-verb (sics-tо—pisats)
• BA: verb-pronoun (оtysкats-nictо)
• AA: pronoun-verb (оbо vsim-pasim)
• AA: particle-noun (nitu-pоrtritu)
• AB: noun-noun (dujlist-aliutоm)
• AB: noun-noun (nicist-plutоm)
• AB: verb-verb (gоvоrit-vnusaim)
• AB: verb-verb (lоrit-rydaim)
• AA: noun-adv (Navryd … -zauryd)
• AA: noun-verb (uzas-pоnatuzass)
• AA: verb-verb (sizu-rоzu)
• AA: verb-verb (lоdciplyt-slipyt)
• AA: verb-verb (кladut-dayt)
• AB: “other”-verb (lybо-narydil)
• BA: verb-noun (mil-Sкalоzuba[rhyme made by servant])

• [pp. 89-90]

Like Čatskij, Repetilov tends to not mix parts of speech. Yet, he uses more verbal forms than Čatskij. True to his character as liberal and party-goer, Repetilov produces more of the clever rhymes than the other characters, including rhyming names and foreign words: istоrij/Grigоrij; s nim/ Ivdокim; оdnо/“а! nоn lassyr mi, nо, nо, nо”; Marкilyc/ milоcs; duelst/nicist; aliutоm/plutоm.

The rhyming of the two main female characters, Liza and Sofija is not as “proper” as is Čatskij's, and many of their longer discourses use a high percentage of verbal forms for rhymes. It is difficult to make a rule for Sofija's rhyming pattern, as some speeches do use declinables. However, others are almost exclusively verbal, for example, in I:5.

Vоzmit оn ruкu, к sirdцu zmit,	verb
Iz glubiny dusi vzdоknit	verb
Ni slоva vоlsnоgо, i taк vsy nоcs prоkоdit,	verb
Ruкa s ruкоj, i glaz s miny ni svоdit.—	verb
Smiissy! Mоznо li! cim pоvоd pоdala	verb
Tibi y к kоkоtu taкоmu!	adj.

(16).

Of the other characters, Skalozub's rhyming is usually simple, of the AA variety. In contrast, Molčalin's two faces are exposed by his rhyming, e.g. when he is pretending to be humble before his superiors, he avoids participating in the rhyming. For example, in I:9, where there are 36 lines shared by Skalozub, Sofija, Čatskij and Molčalin, he only completes one line, which he rhymes with Skalozub's previous line. His rhyming becomes much more lively when he attempts to seduce Liza in I:12 [pp. 46-47] as well as in IV:11-12 [pp. 97-99]. In these scenes, Molčalin commands the situation. In contrast, when Sofija discovers his hypocrisy in IV:12, Molčalin reverts to his “humble self” by only starting the lines which Sofija completes:

SофIY:
Ni pоmny nicigо, ni dокucajti mni.
Vоspоminaniy! кaк оstryj nоz оni.
MоLCALIN
(pоlzait u nоg ii): Pоmilujti …
SофIY:
                                                                                                                                            Ni pоdlicajti, vstansti.
Otvita ni kоcu, y znay vas оtvit,
Sоlziti …
MоLCALIN:
Sdilajti mni milоsts …
SофIY:
                                                                                                                                                      Nit. Nit. Nit

(100)

As stated above, individual or “solo” rhyming is only one of three types in this play. The shorter speeches are frequently integrated into ensemble or “fugue” rhyming, where various characters interact with each other. This kind of rhyming is best seen in Act III in the ball scene, where various secondary characters decide that Čatskij is going mad. In a classical musical fugue, all instruments appear to be playing their own melodies, and the combinations produce interesting harmonies and combinations. Yet, one instrument, usually the first violin, still has the dominant role in the fugue. The same thing is true in these rhyming scenes. While numerous characters appear on the stage and all are interacting with each other, close observation shows that only several perform the rhyming as in III:7:

1-Y кnyzny:
          Kaкоj фasоn priкrasnyj!
2-Y кnкzny:
Kaкii sкladоcкi!
1-Y кnyzny:
          Obsitо bakramоj.
NATALSY Dmitriivna:
Nit, isli b vidiln mоj tyrlyrly atlasnyj!
3-Y кnyzny:
          Kaкоj esarp cousin mоj pоdaril!
4-Y кnyzny:
аk! Da, barizivyj!
5-Y кnyzny:
                    аk! prilists!
6-Y кnyzny:
                                        аk! кaк mil!

(62-63)

Note that only three rhymers are used in this fugue while there are seven voices.

It is rhyming which causes Čatskij's downfall in this episode, notably in the scene where Grafinja Babuška, who is both deaf and has an accent, misunderstands other's lines and arrives at the fatal conclusions (III:19):

GRAфINY Babusкa:
Ctо? Ctо? uz nit li zdiss pоsara?
ZAGоRIUкIJ:
Nit, Caкij prоizvil vsy etu кutirsmu.
GRAфINY Babusкa:
Kaк, Caцкоgо? Ktо svil v tyrsmu?
ZAGоRIUкIJ:
V gоrak izranin v lоb, sоsil s uma оt rany.
GRAфINY Babusкa:
Ctо? K фarmazоnam v кlоb? Pоsil оn v ηusurmany?

(75)⁷

Griboedov intensifies the effect of the traditional comic device of “dialogue of the deaf” to both create comic lines as well as a fatal misunderstanding.

The most interesting comparisons in rhyming are the rhyming repartees between Čatskij and Sofija, where one of them begins a rhyme, and the other completes or “caps” it, the “pоdkvatyvanii stika.” Griboedov creates a repartee immediately in I:7, when Čatskij first arrives, but the repartees intensify throughout the scene. For example, at Catskij's first entrance, we have a fairly civil exchange which Sofija rhymes:

C:
I vоt pоdvigi nagrada!
S:
аk, Cauкij, y vam rada

(17-18).

A few lines later, Čatskij rhymes with a little more versatility in performing an AB rhyme to Sofija's AB:

S:
S vоprоsоm y, kоts buds mоryк
Ni pоvstrical li gdi v pоctоvоj vas кariti?
C:
Pоlоziti, ctо taк
Blazin, кtо viruit, tiplо imu na sviti

(18).

A few lines later, Čatskij interrupts an utterance of Sofija's and “steals” her rhyme:

S:
Gоninsi na Mоsкvu. Ctо znacit vidits svit!
Gdi z lucsi?
C:
                                                                                Gdi nas nit

(19).

Sofija then shows Čatskij that she can interrupt his lines just as well:

C:
а Gilsоmi, фraiuuz, pоdbityj vitirкоm
On ni zinat isi?
S:
                                                                                                              Na коm?

(20).

Sofija counters with two rhyming exchanges. The first is a creative, clever rhyme:

C:
Da dvuk, biz etоgо nilszy z
S:
Nо mudrinо iz nik sкrоits, кaк vas

(21).

In the next exchange, Sofija continues being the rhymer, using rhyme words to insult Čatskij, revealing her low view of him and her suspicions of his high-flown sentiments. With Sofija's rhyming, the semantic load of the phrase is definitely on the rhyming word:

C:
Viliti mni v оgоns, pоjdu кaк na оbid
S:
Da kоrоsо—sgоriti isli z nit?

(22).

In II:8, she further reveals her versatility as an accomplished rhymer:

C:
Pusкaj sibi slоmil by siy
Vas cuts bylо ni umоril
S:
Ubijstvin kоlоdnоstsy svоiy!
Smоtrits na vas, vas slusats nitu sil.
C:
Priкaziti, mni za nigо tirzatssy?
S:
Tuda bizats, tam byt, pоmоcs imu staratssy

[p. 41]

In II:9 Sofija demonstrates her versatility and inventiveness she knowingly injects a line continuing the meter and rhyming exchange after Čatsky mutters something she is not intended to hear:

S:
аk! оcins vizu, iz pustоgо,
а vsy isi tipirs drоzu
C
(prо siby): S Mоlcalinym ni slоva!
S:
Odnaко о sibi sкazu.

[p. 43]

Čatskij's muttering quietly signals his withdrawal from the repartee. Afterwards, Sofija continues to rhyme at Čatskij's expense, including stealing two lines from him in III:1:

C:
Vy zdiss, y оcins rad
а etоgо zilal.
S:
(prо siby):                    I оcins nivpоpad

[p. 48]

And (also in III:1)

C:
Kоts niкstati, nuzdy nit
Kоgо by lybiti?
S:
                                        аk, Bоzi mоj, viss svit.

[p. 48]

In III:2, Sofija steals a “B” rhyme away from Čatskij:

C:
I primi znay stana
Liцоm i gоlоsоm girоj
S:
Ni mоigо rоmana

(52).

And, in her last rhyming exchange in III:13, again completes a line begun by Čatskij:

C:
Za tо, ctо оn smygcil razgnivannuy gоstsy
Kоtil ypоkvalits
S:
а коncim by zlоstsy

(70-71).

In evaluating Čatskij and Sofija's rhyming, we find that Čatskij is most clever when rhyming with himself; he does not possess the quickness of wit to provide colorful rhymes for Sofija's lines. On the contrary, Sofija's rhymewords carry significant semantic loads: they are barbed, angry and in sharp contrast to the lines supplied by others; for example, to her “nilszy z / кaк vas; vо оgоns pоjdu кaк na оbid / sgоriti, isli z nit?; slоmil by siy / kоlоdnоstsy tvоiy; ni umоril / vas slusats nitu sil; tirzatssy / staratssy; nuzdy nit / viss svit; znay stana / ni mоigо rоmana; gоstsy / zlоstsy.”

In addition, the rhyming exchanges point out a significant set of images which are used to define Čatskij, first by himself, and then by Sofija. Repeatedly, Čatskij describes himself with images of warmth: hot, ardent, on fire, etc.; to the contrary, Sofija observes his coldness and detachment.

In summary, it has been shown that Griboedov's rhyming adds significantly to the definition of the characters in this play. The rhymes certainly provide a final artistic touch to the principle characters. Molčalin, who is reticent to talk to people in his own social level, is reluctant to rhyme, yet when he encounters a possible victim from a lower station, he rhymes eloquently. Skalozub, whose world view is limited by his atrophying military mind, performs mostly AA rhymes. Famusov who is pompous and pretentious, varies some rhyme patterns but invariably uses mostly AA rhymes. He also mixes various parts of speech in his rhyming. Repetilov's lines are more “eclectic” revealing his dilettantish personality. Čatskij speaks well and is clever, but is predictable in his rhyming. His best rhymes are in his monologues, when he is making speeches and not engaged with other characters.

It is Sofija, then, whose rhymes are the most interesting. Sofija's rhyming is the most flexible and adaptable to the situation about her. Her rhyming reflects her feelings, particularly her great anger at Čatskij. Moreover, Sofija is a survivor, and the flexibility in her rhyme reflects the flexibility she needs to survive in Famusov's Moscow. Her rhyming takes advantage of the weaknesses of others as do the decisions in her life. While she tends to rhyme with verbs, she does not mix her rhymes, and, there is promise, in her last speech, that she will now be rhyming in declinables, more like a man. Indeed, for Sofija to be independent, she needs to marry a Molcalin whom she can blackmail and control at any moment.

In his book, Griboedov i Mol'er, N. K. Piksanov compares this play to Molière's Le Misanthrope. While the comparisons between characters and situations are certainly convincing, the rhyming patterns do not seem to correspond. N. D. Howarth, a scholar of Molière's poetics comments that while Moliere did tend to use local language, fractured lines were rare, as were examples of comic neologisms. Indeed, Molière appeared to prefer ordinary expected rhymes (when he did rhyme—he often did not) (236-241). We may surmise that the rhyming poetics of Gore ot uma are even more so a testimony to Griboedov's originality and creativity.

Certainly, the terms “orchestration” and “instrumentation” fit this work perhaps better than any other in Russian dramaturgy. Each character speaks with his own voice, not only in terms of content, but also with a distinctive rhyming pattern. At the same time all the voices intertwine into a polyphonic work; the individual voices create a harmonic whole which is greater than the sum of the individual voices. Conversely, the harmonic whole could not be created without each individual voice's contribution.

Yet, there is perhaps a more interesting and significant conclusion that may be drawn from these observations. It has often been commented that the characters in this work curiously do not seem to “connect” with each other; each speaks his or her lines as if into the void, while the others are present. Surely this is true if one only pays attention to the content of their speeches. On this level, characters are intensely reacting to each other, especially when one character feeds a potential end-rhyme to another. On this level, the characters are commenting on each other, reacting, and revealing their true natures. Hopefully this study has shown that Griboedov's “code” for the plot, is not constructed on the lines of simply exchanging words in the dialogue, rather it is constructed on the level of poetics, and specifically on rhyme.

Notes

1. “Rhyming” was a significant cultural and social pastime in early 19th century Russian society. Shaw cites one rhyming “guide” from that time that established norms for various parts of speech as rhymewords, Ivan Levitskij, Kurs rossijskoj literatury dlja devic, SPB, 1819, in J. Thomas Shaw, “Parts of Speech in Puškin's Rhymewords and Nonrhymed Endwords,” SEEJ [Slavic and East European Journal] 37:1 (1993). Rhyming took the form of repartees at various social events, with persons trying to best each other by the more clever rhymes. William Mills Todd III, Fiction and Society in the Age of Pushkin. Cambridge: Harvard, 1986, 56. “Kuplety” were frequently performed at various parties and balls. Geršenzon cites one such in his Griboedovskaja Moskva. Moskva-Berlin: 1922. 99-100. Trike reads such to Tatjana in Onegin. (5:XXXIII) and Čajkovskij gives him “kuplety” to read in his opera. I am indebted to Ms. Constance Cherok for helping gather the statistics on rhyming and parts of speech. I am likewise grateful to Dr. Anelya Rugaleva for her philological expertise in helping identify those more slippery parts of speech.

2. Tomaševskij, “Stixotvornaja sistema ‘Gore ot uma’,” in I. Klabunovskij and A. Slonimskij, eds. A. S. Griboedov. Sbornik statej. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj literaturnyj muzej, 1946. 97. These kinds of rhymes may be found in most Russian 18th century plays, including Sumarokov's Xorev, Semira, and Dmitrij Samozvanec, and Kapnist's Jabeda. A. P. Sumarokov, Izbrannye proizvedenija. Leningrad: Sovetskij pisatel’, 1957; V. V. Kapnist, Izbrannye proizvedenija. Leningrad: Sovetskij pisatel’, 1973. 33-462.

3. Tomaševskij calls these “sostavnye rifmy.” Tomaševskij, Ibid.

4. Shaw classifies adverbs in the “others” category. This study does the same.

5. Tomaševskij's terms these rhymes as: AA = aphoristic, ABAB = for more developed conversation. Tomaševskij, 100.

6. All quotes from Gore ot uma are taken from A. S. Griboedov, Sočinenija, Moskva-Leningrad, 1959.

7. The italics are Griboedov's to cast attention to the mispronunciation.

Works Cited

Bonamour, Jean. A. S. Griboedov et la Vie Littéraire de Son Temps. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1965.

Fomičev, S. A. Komedija A. S. Griboedova, Gore ot uma. Moskva: Prosveščenie, 1983.

Geršenzon, Mixail. Griboedovskaja Moskva. Moskva-Berlin: Gelikon, 1922.

Gordina, A. M., ed. A. S. Griboedov v russkoj kritike. Sbornik statej. Moscow: Goslitizdat, 1958.

Griboedov, A. S. Sočininenija. Moskva-Leningrad, 1959.

Harden, Evelyn Jasiulko. “Griboedov and the Willock Affair.” Slavic Review March (1971): 74-92.

Howarth, N. D. Molière. A Playwright and His Audience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Klabunovskij, I. and A. Slonimskij, eds. A. S. Griboedov. Sbornik Statej. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj literaturnyj muzej, 1946.

Janecek, G. “A Defense of Sof'ja.” SEEJ 20 (1977): 318-331.

Piksanov, N. K. Griboedov i Mol'er. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo, 1922. Reprinted, Letchworth: Prideau Press, 1979.

Shaw, J. Thomas. “Rhymes in a ‘Prose’ Context: Varlaam's Rhyming in Puškin's Boris Godunov.” SEEJ 32.4 (1988): 542-561.

———. “Parts of Speech in Puškin's Rhymewords and Nonrhymed Endwords.” SEEJ 37:1 (1993): 1-22.

———. Pushkin's Rhymes, A Dictionary. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1974.

Tomaševskij, B. “Stixotvornaja sistema ‘Gore ot uma’” A. S. Griboedov, Jbornik Statej. Eds. I. Klabunovskij and A. Slonimskij. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj literaturnyj muzej, 1946.