The Cherry Orchard drama comedy. The Cherry Orchard" as a lyrical tragicomedy. The problem of genre identification of a play

26.06.2020

Disputes about the genre interpretation of the play “The Cherry Orchard”

One of the features of Chekhov's dramaturgy was the problem of determining the genre of his plays. Very often the author’s point of view on this issue did not coincide with the opinion of critics. The “undercurrents” characteristic of Chekhov’s plays give a completely original and deep sound to his works. Particularly heated debates took place around his last play, which was staged in 1904, and there is still no clear answer to the question: “The Cherry Orchard” - drama, comedy or tragedy?

Chekhov, just starting to work on his last play, defined its genre as a comedy, which he announced in a letter to his wife O. Knipper, who became the first performer of the role of Ranevskaya. It was very important for Chekhov that on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater, for which “The Cherry Orchard” was written, the actors conveyed the comedy of everything that was happening. Therefore, the author, in correspondence with each actor, gave additional characteristics of the characters so that everyone could fully embody their character; unfortunately, in most cases, he was simply not heard.

However, after the first reading new play Stanislavsky, a dispute arose between the director and the playwright - is “The Cherry Orchard” a drama or a comedy? The production of the play was under the control of Chekhov; during rehearsals, he changed the play, adapting to the theater actors, and this greatly upset the author. And even despite the success of the play, Chekhov believed that it was a complete failure, since the directors completely inverted and mutilated the concept of the entire action, simply because they did not understand its meaning and did not figure out the characters.

One of the main mistakes of the first production was that Ranevskaya and Gaev became the main characters, although Chekhov repeatedly said that the central character was Lopakhin. But, nevertheless, their feelings about the loss of the estate were brought to the surface. But the author himself constantly tried to explain that in fact their experiences are a consequence weak characters and weak-willedness, therefore, they do not deserve sympathy and pity. Anton Pavlovich pointed out that there is tearfulness in the play, but there should be no real tears on the faces.

And some critics generally asked the question “The Cherry Orchard” - a comedy or a tragedy? Of course, the play contains purely comic characters, depicted as extremely ridiculous and it even seems that they are not really needed in the plot. For example, Epikhodov is so clumsy that he received the nickname “twenty-two misfortunes.” The servants Yasha and Dunyash are simple, uneducated peasants who consider themselves almost equal to their masters. Charlotte Ivanovna is a governess, but she has no one to educate her, because there is not a single child in the play. And what can a former circus performer, who entertains guests in the third act with various tricks, teach?

And what about the “eternal student” Petya Trofimov? Chekhov portrayed him as an empty talker, capable only of beautifully talking about a wonderful future and how to live. And it’s simply funny that the young and naive Anya listens carefully to him and becomes his like-minded person. And Gaev? All the characters in the play consider him funny and absurd, and even Yasha allows himself to be ironic about him. But Ranevskaya doesn’t live in the present at all. The tendency to act rashly does not evoke sympathy. Perhaps, the author’s tragic notes sound only when Lyubov Andreevna remembers her deceased son.

The problem of genre identification of a play

So what is the problem with determining the genre of the play “The Cherry Orchard”? From the very beginning creative activity Chekhov tended to portray surrounding reality through the prism of humor. It is no coincidence that his very first stories were published in humor magazines. Using satire and humor, Anton Pavlovich tried to show the absurdity of many human actions. A " Cherry Orchard"became the final work of his entire work, incorporating all his thoughts about life and once again showing everyone that it was Chekhov who made a huge contribution to the development of the theater. Probably not yet consensus, what genre does “The Cherry Orchard” belong to? For example, A.I. Revyakin classified this play as a tragicomedy, and even then very conditionally, because it lacks tragicomic situations and characters. M. Gorky called Chekhov's last play a “lyrical comedy.”

For viewers, “The Cherry Orchard” is always presented in the director’s interpretation. Over more than a century of history, this play has been presented to the viewer with tragedy, comedy, and drama. This play is successfully staged in different theaters not only in Russia, but also abroad. And what is quite remarkable is that the topic touched upon in it is still relevant.

No matter what genre “The Cherry Orchard” is staged, it will always remain the pinnacle of the work of the great innovator - playwright Chekhov, who changed not only Russian but also world theater. The arguments in this publication can be used by 10th grade students when preparing a report or essay on the topic of the “Cherry Orchard” genre.

Work test

A.P. Chekhov wrote a wonderful play “The Cherry Orchard” in 1903. The art world, as well as the socio-political world, felt the need for renewal. A.P. Chekhov, being already a gifted writer who showed his skill in short stories, enters dramaturgy as a discoverer of new ideas. The premiere of the play "The Cherry Orchard" gave rise to a lot of discussion among critics and spectators, among actors and directors about genre characteristics plays. Let's consider what "The Cherry Orchard" is in terms of genre - drama, tragedy or comedy.

While working on the play, A.P. Chekhov spoke in letters about its character as a whole: “What came out of me was not a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce...” In letters to Vl. A.P. Chekhov warned I. Nemirovich-Danchenko that Anya should not have a “crying” tone, so that in general there would not be “a lot of crying” in the play. The production, despite its resounding success, did not satisfy A.P. Chekhov. Anton Pavlovich expressed dissatisfaction general interpretation plays: “Why on posters and in newspaper advertisements is my play so persistently called a drama? Nemirovich and Alekseev (Stanislavsky) see in my play positively not what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word that both of them have never read carefully my play." Thus, the author himself insists that The Cherry Orchard is a comedy. This genre did not at all exclude the serious and sad in A.P. Chekhov. Stanislavsky, obviously, violated the Chekhovian measure in the relationship between the dramatic and the comic, the sad and the funny. The result was drama where A.P. Chekhov insisted on lyrical comedy.

One of the features of “The Cherry Orchard” is that all the characters are presented in an ambivalent, tragicomic light. The play has purely comic characters: Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov, Yasha, Firs. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov laughs at Gaev, who “lived his fortune on candy,” at the sentimental Ranevskaya, who is beyond her age, and her practical helplessness. Even over Petya Trofimov, who, it would seem, symbolizes the renewal of Russia, A.P. Chekhov is ironic, calling him an “eternal student.” Petya Trofimov deserved this attitude from the author with his verbosity, which A.P. Chekhov did not tolerate. Petya pronounces monologues about workers who “eat disgustingly and sleep without pillows,” about the rich who “live in debt, at someone else’s expense,” about “a proud man.” At the same time, he warns everyone that he is “afraid of serious conversations.” Petya Trofimov, having done nothing for five months, keeps telling others that “they have to work.” And this is with the hardworking Vara and the businesslike Lopakhin! Trofimov does not study because he cannot both study and support himself. Petya Ranevskaya gives a very sharp but accurate description regarding Trofimova’s “spirituality” and “tact”: “... You have no purity, and you are just a neat person.” A.P. Chekhov speaks ironically about his behavior in his remarks. Trofimov either screams “with horror”, or, choking with indignation, cannot utter a word, or threatens to leave and cannot do this.

A.P. Chekhov has certain sympathetic notes in his portrayal of Lopakhin. He does everything possible to help Ranevskaya keep the estate. Lopakhin is sensitive and kind. But in double lighting he is far from ideal: there is a businesslike winglessness in him, Lopakhin is not capable of getting carried away and loving. In his relationship with Varya, he is comical and awkward. The short-term celebration associated with the purchase of a cherry orchard is quickly replaced by a feeling of despondency and sadness. Lopakhin utters a significant phrase with tears: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life"Here Lopakhin directly touches on the main source of drama: it lies not in the struggle for the cherry orchard, but in dissatisfaction with life, experienced differently by all the characters in the play. Life goes on absurd and awkward, bringing no joy or happiness to anyone. This life is unhappy not only for the main characters, but also for Charlotte, lonely and useless, and for Epikhodov with his constant failures.

Defining the essence of a comic conflict, literary scholars argue that it rests on the discrepancy between appearance and essence (comedy of situations, comedy of characters, etc.). In A.P. Chekhov's new comedy, the words, deeds and actions of the heroes are in precisely this kind of discrepancy. Inner drama everyone turns out to be more important external events(so-called "undercurrents"). Hence the "tearfulness" characters, which does not have a tragic connotation at all. Monologues and remarks “through tears” most likely indicate excessive sentimentality, nervousness, and sometimes even irritability of the characters. Hence the all-pervasive Chekhovian irony. It seems that the author seems to be asking questions to the audience, the readers, and himself: why do people waste their lives so mediocrely? Why do they treat loved ones so frivolously? Why is it so irresponsible to waste words and vitality, naively believing that they will live forever and there will be an opportunity to live life completely, anew? The heroes of the play deserve both pity and merciless “laughter through tears invisible to the world.”

In Soviet literary criticism, it was traditional to “group” the characters of the play, calling the representatives of Russia’s “past” Gaev and Ranevskaya, its “present” - Lopakhin, and its “future” - Petya and Anya. I think this is not entirely true. According to one of the theatrical versions of the play “The Cherry Orchard,” the future of Russia turns out to be people like the lackey Yasha, who looks to where the power and finances are. In my opinion, A.P. Chekhov cannot do without sarcasm here, since he does not see the place where the Lopakhins, Gaevs, Ranevskys and Trofimovs will find themselves after a little more than ten years, when such Yakovs will carry out their trial? A.P. Chekhov, with bitterness and regret, searches for Man in his play and, it seems to me, does not find him.

Undoubtedly, the play "The Cherry Orchard" is characterized by complexity and ambiguity. That is precisely why today the interest of directors from many countries around the world is riveted to it; “The Cherry Orchard” does not leave the theater stage. The debate about the genre of the work continues. However, we should not forget that A.P. Chekhov himself called his creation a comedy.

Almost the entire land of the old noble estate, owned by Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya and her brother, Leonid Andreevich Gaev, is occupied by a huge cherry orchard, famous throughout the province. Once upon a time, it gave the owners a large income, but after the fall of serfdom, the economy on the estate fell apart, and the garden remained for him just a non-profitable, albeit charming decoration. Ranevskaya and Gaev, no longer young people, lead an absent-minded, carefree life typical of idle aristocrats. Preoccupied only with her feminine passions, Ranevskaya leaves for France with her lover, who soon robs her completely there. Management of the estate falls on the adopted daughter of Lyubov Andreevna, 24-year-old Varya. She tries to save on everything, but the estate is still mired in unpayable debts. [Cm. full text of “The Cherry Orchard” on our website.]

Act 1 of The Cherry Orchard begins with the scene of returning on a May morning to home Ranevskaya, who went bankrupt abroad. Her youngest also comes with her, own daughter, 17-year-old Anya, who has been living with her mother in France for the past few months. Lyubov Andreevna is met on the estate by acquaintances and servants: the rich merchant Ermolai Lopakhin (the son of a former serf), the neighbor-landowner Simeonov-Pishchik, the elderly footman Firs, the frivolous maid Dunyasha and the “eternal student” Petya Trofimov, in love with Anya. The scene of Ranevskaya’s meeting (like all other scenes of “The Cherry Orchard”) is not particularly rich in action, but Chekhov, with extraordinary skill, reveals in her dialogues the characteristics of the characters in the play.

The businesslike merchant Lopakhin reminds Ranevskaya and Gaev that in three months, in August, their estate will be put up for auction for an outstanding debt. There is only one way to prevent its sale and the ruin of the owners: to cut down the cherry orchard and turn over the vacated land for dachas. If Ranevskaya and Gaev do not do this, the garden will almost inevitably be cut down by the new owner, so it will not be possible to save it in any case. However, the weak-willed Gaev and Ranevskaya reject Lopakhin’s plan, not wanting to lose the dear memories of their youth along with the garden. Those who like to have their head in the clouds, they shy away from destroying the garden with their own hands, hoping for some miracle that will help them out in unknown ways.

Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”, act 1 – summary full text of act 1.

"The Cherry Orchard". Performance based on the play by A. P. Chekhov, 1983

Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard", act 2 - briefly

A few weeks after Ranevskaya’s return, most of the same characters gather in a field, on a bench near an old abandoned chapel. Lopakhin again reminds Ranevskaya and Gaev that the deadline for selling the estate is approaching - and again invites them to cut down the cherry orchard, giving the land for dachas.

However, Gaev and Ranevskaya answer him inappropriately and absent-mindedly. Lyubov Andreevna says that “dacha owners are vulgar,” and Leonid Andreevich relies on a rich aunt in Yaroslavl, from whom he can ask for money - but hardly more than a tenth of what is needed to pay off his debts. Ranevskaya's thoughts are all in France, from where the scammer-lover sends her telegrams every day. Shocked by the words of Gaev and Ranevskaya, Lopakhin in his hearts calls them “frivolous and strange” people who do not want to save themselves.

After everyone else leaves, Petya Trofimov and Anya remain at the bench. Untidy Petya, who is constantly expelled from the university, so that he cannot complete the course for many years, crumbles in front of Anya in high-flown tirades about the need to rise above everything material, above even love itself, and through tireless work to go towards some (incomprehensible) ideal. The existence and appearance of commoner Trofimov is very different from the lifestyle and habits of the nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev. However, in Chekhov's portrayal, Petya appears to be just as impractical a dreamer, just as worthless a person as those two. Petya's sermon is enthusiastically listened to by Anya, who is very reminiscent of her mother in her tendency to get carried away by any emptiness in a beautiful wrapper.

For more details, see the separate article Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”, act 2 – summary. You can read the full text of Act 2 on our website.

Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard", act 3 - briefly

In August, on the very day of bidding for the estate with the cherry orchard, Ranevskaya, on a strange whim, hosts a noisy party with an invited Jewish orchestra. Everyone is tensely awaiting news from the auction, where Lopakhin and Gaev have gone, but, wanting to hide their excitement, they try to dance cheerfully and joke. Petya Trofimov venomously criticizes Varya for wanting to become the wife of the predatory rich man Lopakhin, and Ranevskaya for love affair with an obvious swindler and unwillingness to face the truth. Ranevskaya accuses Petya of the fact that all his bold, idealistic theories are based only on a lack of experience and ignorance of life. At 27 years old, he does not have a mistress, preaches work, and he himself cannot even graduate from university. Frustrated, Trofimov runs away almost in hysterics.

Pre-revolutionary poster for the play based on Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard”

Lopakhin and Gaev return from the auction. Gaev walks away, wiping away his tears. Lopakhin, at first trying to restrain himself, and then with increasing triumph, says that he bought the estate and the cherry orchard - the son of a former serf, who was previously not even allowed into the kitchen here. The dancing stops. Ranevskaya cries, sitting down on a chair. Anya tries to console her with the words that they have beautiful souls instead of a garden, and now they will begin a new, pure life.

For more details, see the separate article Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”, act 3 – summary. You can read the full text of Act 3 on our website.

Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard", act 4 - briefly

In October, the old owners leave their former estate, where the tactless Lopakhin, without waiting for their departure, already orders the cutting down of the cherry orchard.

A rich Yaroslavl aunt sent Gaev and Ranevskaya some money. Ranevskaya takes them all for herself and again goes to France to visit her old lover, leaving her daughters in Russia without funds. Varya, whom Lopakhin never marries, has to go as a housekeeper to another estate, and Anya will take the exam for the gymnasium course and look for work.

Gaev was offered a place at the bank, but everyone doubts that, due to his laziness, he will sit there for a long time. Petya Trofimov returns to Moscow to study late. Imagining himself as a “strong and proud” person, he intends in the future to “reach the ideal or show others the way to it.” However, Petya is greatly worried about the loss of his old galoshes: without them, he has nothing to set off on. Lopakhin goes to Kharkov to immerse himself in work.

Having said goodbye, everyone leaves the house and locks it. The 87-year-old footman Firs, forgotten by his owners, finally appears on the stage. Mumbling something about past life, this sick old man lies down on the sofa and falls silent into immobility. In the distance there is a sad, dying sound, similar to the breaking of a string - as if something in life has gone away without return. The ensuing silence is broken only by the knocking of an ax on a cherry tree in the garden.

For more details, see the separate article Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”, act 4 – summary. On our website you can read and

The remarkable merits of the play “The Cherry Orchard” and its innovative features have long been unanimously recognized by progressive critics. But when it comes to the genre features of the play, this unanimity gives way to differences of opinion. Some see the play “The Cherry Orchard” as a comedy, others as a drama, and others as a tragicomedy. What is this play - drama, comedy, tragicomedy?
Before answering this question, it is necessary to note that Chekhov, striving for truth in life, for naturalness, created plays that were not purely dramatic or comedic, but of a very complex form.
In his plays, the dramatic is realized in an organic mixture with the comic, and the comic is manifested in an organic interweaving with the dramatic.
Chekhov's plays are unique genre formations that can be called dramas or comedies, only bearing in mind their leading genre tendency, and not the consistent implementation of the principles of drama or comedy in their traditional understanding.
A convincing example of this is the play “The Cherry Orchard.” Already completing this play, Chekhov wrote to Vl. on September 2, 1903. To I. Nemirovich-Danchenko: “I’ll call the play a comedy” (A. P. Chekhov, Complete collection works and letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 129).
On September 15, 1903, he informed M.P. Alekseeva (Lilina): “What came out of me was not a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce” (Ibid., p. 131).
Calling the play a comedy, Chekhov relied on the comic motifs prevailing in it. If, when answering the question about the genre of this play, we keep in mind the leading tendency in the structure of its images and plot, then we will have to admit that it is based not on a dramatic, but on a comedic principle. Drama presupposes drama goodies plays, i.e. those to whom the author gives his main sympathies.
In this sense, such plays by A.P. Chekhov as “Uncle Vanya” and “Three Sisters” are dramas. In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” the author’s main sympathies belong to Trofimov and Anya, who do not experience any drama.
To recognize “The Cherry Orchard” as a drama means to recognize the experiences of the owners of the cherry orchard, the Gaevs and Ranevskys, as truly dramatic, capable of evoking deep sympathy and compassion of people who go not back, but forward, into the future.
But this could not have happened in the play. Chekhov does not defend, does not affirm, but exposes the owners of the cherry orchard; he shows their emptiness and insignificance, their complete incapacity for serious experiences.
The play “The Cherry Orchard” cannot be recognized as a tragicomedy. To do this, it lacks neither tragicomic heroes, nor tragicomic situations that run through the entire play and determine its end-to-end action. Gaev, Ranevskaya, Pischik are too small as tragicomic heroes. Yes, in addition, the leading optimistic idea, expressed in positive images, emerges clearly in the play. It is more correct to call this play a lyrical comedy.
The comedy of The Cherry Orchard is determined, firstly, by the fact that it positive images What Trofimov and Anya are are shown in no dramatic way. Drama is not characteristic of these images, either socially or individually. Both in their inner essence and in the author’s assessment, these images are optimistic.
The image of Lopakhin is also clearly undramatic, which, in comparison with the images of local nobles, is shown as relatively positive and major. The comedy of the play is confirmed, secondly, by the fact that of the two owners of the cherry orchard, one (Gaev) is presented primarily comically, and the second (Ranevskaya) in such dramatic situations that mainly contribute to showing their negative essence.
The comic basis of the play is clearly visible, thirdly, in the comic-satirical depiction of almost all the minor characters: Epikhodov, Pishchik, Charlotte, Yasha, Dunyasha.
“The Cherry Orchard” also includes obvious motifs of vaudeville, even farce, expressed in jokes, tricks, jumping, and Charlotte’s dressing up. According to the issue and its nature artistic interpretation"The Cherry Orchard" is a deeply social play. It has very strong accusatory motives.
Here the most important questions for that time are raised: the liquidation of the noble-manorial economy, its final replacement with capitalism, the growth of democratic forces, etc.
With a clearly expressed socio-comedy basis in the play “The Cherry Orchard”, lyrical-dramatic and socio-psychological motives are clearly manifested: lyrical-dramatic and socio-psychological motives are most fully expressed in the depiction of Ranevskaya and Varya; lyrical and socio-psychological, especially in the depiction of Anya.
The originality of the genre of “The Cherry Orchard” was very well revealed by M. Gorky, who defined this play as a lyrical comedy.
"A. P. Chekhov,” he writes in the article “0 plays,” “created... a completely original type of play - a lyrical comedy” (M. Gorky, Collected Works, vol. 26, Goslitizdat, M., 1953, p. 422).
But the lyrical comedy “The Cherry Orchard” is still perceived by many as a drama. For the first time, such an interpretation of “The Cherry Orchard” was given by the Art Theater. On October 20, 1903, K. S. Stanislavsky, after reading “The Cherry Orchard,” wrote to Chekhov: “This is not a comedy... this is a tragedy, no matter what the outcome is.” better life You have not opened last act... I was afraid that on a second reading the play would not captivate me. Where to go!! I cried like a woman, I wanted to, but I couldn’t hold back” (K, S. Stanislavsky, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, “Iskusstvo” publishing house, M., 1953 , pp. 150 - 151).
In his memoirs about Chekhov, dating back to around 1907, Stanislavsky characterizes The Cherry Orchard as “a difficult drama of Russian life” (Ibid., p. 139).
K.S. Stanislavsky misunderstood and underestimated the power of the accusatory pathos directed against the representatives of the then departing world (Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pishchik), and in connection with this, in his directorial decision of the play, he overemphasized the lyrical-dramatic line associated with these characters.
Taking the drama of Ranevskaya and Gaev seriously, wrongfully putting forward a sympathetic attitude towards them and to some extent muting the accusatory and optimistic orientation of the play, Stanislavsky staged “The Cherry Orchard” in a dramatic manner. Expressing the erroneous point of view of leaders Art Theater on “The Cherry Orchard,” N. Efros wrote:
“... no part of Chekhov’s soul was with Lopakhin. But part of his soul, rushing into the future, also belonged to “mortuos”, “The Cherry Orchard”. Otherwise, the image of the doomed, dying, leaving the historical stage would not be so tender” (N. Efros, “The Cherry Orchard” staged by the Moscow Art Theater, Pg., 1919, p. 36).
Based on the dramatic key, evoking sympathy for Gaev, Ranevskaya and Pischik, emphasizing their drama, all their first performers played these roles - Stanislavsky, Knipper, Gribunin. So, for example, characterizing the play of Stanislavsky - Gaev, N. Efros wrote: “this is a big child, pitiful and funny, but touching in its helplessness... There was an atmosphere of the subtlest humor around the figure. And at the same time she radiated great touching... everything in auditorium together with Firs, they felt something tender for this stupid, decrepit child, with signs of degeneration and spiritual decline, the “heir” of a dying culture... And even those who are not at all prone to sentimentality, to whom they are sacred harsh laws historical necessity and the change of class figures on the historical stage - even they probably gave moments of some compassion, a sigh of sympathetic or sympathetic sadness to this Gaev" (Ibid., pp. 81 - 83).
In the performance of the artists of the Art Theater, the images of the owners of the cherry orchard turned out to be clearly larger, nobler, more beautiful, and spiritually complex than in Chekhov’s play. It would be unfair to say that the leaders of the Art Theater did not notice or ignored the comedy “ Cherry Orchard».
When staging this play, K. S. Stanislavsky used its comedic motifs so widely that he aroused sharp objections from those who considered it a consistently pessimistic drama.
A. Kugel, based on his interpretation of “The Cherry Orchard” as a consistently pessimistic drama (A. Kugel, The Sadness of “The Cherry Orchard,” “Theater and Art,” 1904, No. 13), accused the leaders of the Art Theater of that they overused comedy. “My amazement was understandable,” he wrote, “when The Cherry Orchard appeared in a light, funny, cheerful performance... It was the resurrected Antosha Chekhonte” (A. Kugel, Notes on the Moscow Art Theater, “ Theater and Art", 1904, No. 15, p. 304).
Critic N. Nikolaev also expressed dissatisfaction with the excessive, deliberate comedy of the stage embodiment of “The Cherry Orchard” at the Art Theater. “When,” he wrote, “the oppressive present foreshadows an even more difficult future, Charlotte Ivanovna appears and passes, leading a little dog on a long ribbon and with her entire exaggerated, highly comic figure causes laughter in the auditorium... For me, this laughter was a tub cold water... The mood turned out to be irreparably spoiled" (N. Nikolaev, Among the artists, "Theater and Art", 1904, No. 9, p. 194).
But the real mistake of the first producers of The Cherry Orchard was not that they played up many of the play’s comic episodes, but that they neglected comedy as the leading principle of the play. Revealing Chekhov's play as a heavy drama of Russian life, the leaders of the Art Theater gave space to its comedy, but only subordinately; secondary.
M. N. Stroeva is right in defining the stage interpretation of the play “The Cherry Orchard” at the Art Theater as a tragicomedy (M. Stroeva, Chekhov and the Art Theater, publishing house “Iskusstvo”, M., 1955, p. 178 etc.).
Interpreting the play in this regard, the direction of the Art Theater showed the representatives of the passing world (Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pishchik) as more internally rich and positive than they really are, and excessively increased sympathy for them. As a result, the subjective drama of the departing people sounded more deeply in the performance than was necessary.
As for the objective-comic essence of these people, the exposure of their inconsistency, this side was clearly not sufficiently revealed in the play. Chekhov could not agree with such an interpretation of The Cherry Orchard. S. Lyubosh remembers Chekhov at one of the first performances of “The Cherry Orchard” - sad and detached. “There was a roar of success in the packed theater, and Chekhov sadly repeated:
- Not that, not that...
- What’s wrong?
- Everything is wrong: both the play and the performance. I didn't get what I wanted. I saw something completely different, and they couldn’t understand what I wanted” (S. Lyubosh, “The Cherry Orchard.” Chekhov’s Anniversary Collection, M., 1910, p. 448).
Protesting against the false interpretation of his play, Chekhov, in a letter to O. L. Knipper dated April 10, 1904, wrote: “Why is my play so persistently called a drama on posters and in newspaper advertisements? Nemirovich and Alekseev see in my play positively not what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word - that both of them have never read my play carefully” (A.P. Chekhov, Complete Works and letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 265).
Chekhov was outraged by the purely slow pace of the play, especially the painfully drawn out IV act. “An act that should last 12 minutes maximum, with you,” he wrote to O. L. Knipper, “lasts 40 minutes. I can say one thing: Stanislavsky ruined my play” (Ibid., p. 258).
In April 1904, talking with the director Alexandrinsky Theater, Chekhov said:
“Is this my “Cherry Orchard”?.. Are these my types?.. With the exception of two or three performers, all this is not mine... I write life... This is a gray, ordinary life... But this is not boring whining... They either make me a crybaby or just a boring writer... And I wrote several volumes funny stories. And criticism casts me as some kind of mourner... They invent for me out of their heads what they themselves want, but I didn’t even think about it, and never saw it in a dream... This is starting to make me angry” (E.P.K a r p o v, Two last meetings with Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, “Yearbook of the Imperial Theaters”, 1909, no. V, p. 7).
According to Stanislavsky himself, Chekhov could not come to terms with the interpretation of the play as a heavy drama “until his death” (K. S. Stanislavsky, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, ed. . "Art", M., 1953. p. 139).
This is understandable, since the perception of the play as a drama dramatically changed its ideological orientation. What Chekhov laughed at, with such a perception of the play, already required deep sympathy.
Defending his play as a comedy, Chekhov, in fact, defended the correct understanding of it ideological meaning. The leaders of the Art Theater, in turn, could not remain indifferent to Chekhov’s statements that they were embodying “The Cherry Orchard” in a false way. Thinking about the text of the play and its stage embodiment, Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko were forced to admit that they misunderstood the play. But it is misunderstood, in their opinion, not in its fundamental sense, but in its particulars. The performance underwent changes along the way.
In December 1908, V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko wrote: “Look at The Cherry Orchard, and you will not at all recognize in this lacy, graceful picture the heavy and heavy drama that The Orchard was in the first year” (V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, Letter to N. E. Efros (second half of December 1908), “Theater”, 1947, No. 4, p. 64).
In 1910, in a speech to the artists of the Art Theater, K. S. Stanislavsky said:
“Let many of you admit that you did not immediately understand “The Cherry Orchard.” Years passed, and time confirmed Chekhov was right. It became clearer and clearer to the leaders of the Art Theater that the need for more decisive changes in the performance in the direction indicated by Chekhov became clearer and clearer.
Resuming the play “The Cherry Orchard” after a ten-year break, the directors of the Art Theater made major changes to it: they significantly accelerated the pace of its development; the first act was comedically enlivened; they removed excessive psychologism in the main characters and increased their exposure. This was especially reflected in the game between Stanislavsky and Gaev. “His image,” noted in Izvestia, “is now revealed primarily from a purely comedic side. We would say that idleness, lordly daydreaming, the complete inability to take on any work and truly childish carelessness were completely exposed by Stanislavsky. Stanislavsky's new Gaev is a most convincing example of harmful worthlessness. Knipper-Chekhova began to play even more openly, even easier, revealing her Ranevskaya in the same plane of “exposure” (Yur. Sobolev, “The Cherry Orchard” at the Art Theater, “Izvestia” dated May 25, 1928, No. 120).
The fact that the initial interpretation of “The Cherry Orchard” at the Art Theater was the result of a misunderstanding of the text of the play was acknowledged by its directors not only in correspondence, in a narrow circle of artists of the Art Theater, but also before the general public. V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, speaking in 1929 in connection with the 25th anniversary of the first performance of “The Cherry Orchard,” said: “And this wonderful work it was not understood at first... maybe our performance will require some changes, some rearrangements, at least in particulars; But regarding the version that Chekhov wrote vaudeville, that this play should be staged in a satirical context, I say with complete conviction that this should not happen. There is a satirical element in the play - both in Epikhodov and in other persons, but pick up the text and you will see: there it is “crying”, in another place it is “crying”, but in vaudeville they will not cry! Vl. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, ed. "Art", 1952, pp. 108 - 109).
It is true that The Cherry Orchard is not a vaudeville act. But it’s unfair that they supposedly don’t cry in vaudeville, and based on the presence of crying people, “The Cherry Orchard” is considered a heavy drama. For example, in Chekhov’s vaudeville “The Bear” the landowner and her lackey cry, and in his vaudeville “The Proposal” Lomov cries and Chubukova groans. In the vaudeville “Az and Fert” by P. Fedorov, Lyubushka and Akulina cry. In the vaudeville “Teacher and Student” by A. Pisarev, Lyudmila and Dasha cry. In the vaudeville "Hussar Girl" Kony Laura cries. The point is not in the presence or even in the number of people crying, but in the nature of the crying.
When, through tears, Dunyasha says: “I broke the saucer,” and Pischik says, “Where is the money?”, this evokes not a dramatic, but a comic reaction. Sometimes tears express joyful excitement: for Ranevskaya at her first entry into the nursery upon returning to her homeland, for the devoted Firs, who waited for the arrival of his mistress.
Often tears signify special cordiality: in Gaev, when addressing Anya in the first act (“my little one. My child”...); in Trofimov, calming Ranevskaya (in the first act) and then telling her: “after all, he robbed you” (in the third act); at Lopakhin, calming Ranevskaya (at the end of the third act).
Tears as an expression of acutely dramatic situations in The Cherry Orchard are very rare. These moments can be recounted: in Ranevskaya in the first act, when meeting with Trofimov, who reminded her of her drowned son, and in the third act, in an argument with Trofimov, when she remembers her son again; from Gaev - upon returning from the auction; in Varya - after a failed explanation with Lopakhin (act four); at Ranevskaya and Gaev - before the last exit from the house. But at the same time, the personal drama of the main characters in “The Cherry Orchard” does not evoke such sympathy from the author, which would be the basis for the drama of the entire play.
Chekhov strongly disagreed that there were a lot of people crying in his play. “Where are they? - he wrote to Nemirovich-Danchenko on October 23, 1903. - Only Varya, but this is because Varya is a crybaby by nature, and her tears should not arouse sad feelings in the viewer. I often see “through tears,” but this only shows the mood of the faces, not the tears” (A. P. Chekhov, Complete Works and Letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, pp. 162 - 163).
It is necessary to understand that the basis of the lyrical pathos of the play “The Cherry Orchard” is created by representatives not of the old, but of the new world - Trofimov and Anya, their lyricism is optimistic. The drama in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is obvious. This is the drama experienced by representatives of the old world and is fundamentally associated with the protection of dying forms of life.
Drama associated with the defense of dying, selfish forms of life cannot evoke the sympathy of advanced readers and viewers and is unable to become the positive pathos of progressive works. And naturally, this drama did not become the leading pathos of the play “The Cherry Orchard”.
But in the dramatic states of the characters in this play there is also something that can evoke a sympathetic response from any reader and viewer. One cannot sympathize with Ranevskaya mainly - in the loss of the cherry orchard, in her bitter love wanderings. But when she remembers and cries about her seven-year-old son who drowned in the river, she feels humanly sorry. One can sympathize with her when she, wiping away tears, tells how she was drawn from Paris to Russia, to her homeland, to her daughter, and then when she says goodbye forever to the home where she passed away. happy years her childhood, adolescence, youth...
The drama of “The Cherry Orchard” is private, not defining, not leading. Stage embodiment“The Cherry Orchard”, given by the Art Theater in a dramatic manner, does not correspond ideological pathos And genre originality this play. To achieve this compliance, not partial amendments are required, but fundamental changes to the first edition of the play.
Revealing the fully optimistic pathos of the play, it is necessary to replace the dramatic basis of the performance with a comedic and non-lyric one. The prerequisites for this are found in the statements of K. S. Stanislavsky himself. Emphasizing the importance of a more vivid stage transfer of Chekhov's dream, he wrote:
“In the fiction of the end of the past and the beginning this century he was one of the first to sense the inevitability of the revolution, when it was only in its infancy and society continued to wallow in excesses. He was one of the first to give a wake-up call. Who, if not he, began to cut down a beautiful, blooming cherry orchard, realizing that his time had passed, that the old life was irrevocably condemned to be scrapped... Give Lopakhin in “The Cherry Orchard” the scope of Chaliapin, and young Anya the temperament of Yermolova, and let the first, with all his might, chops down what has become obsolete, and the young girl, who, together with Petya Trofimov, senses the approach new era, shout to the whole world: “Hello, new life!” - and you will understand that “The Cherry Orchard” is alive and close to us, modern play that Chekhov’s voice sounds cheerful and fiery in it, for he himself looks not back, but forward” (K. S. Stanislavsky, Collected Works in eight volumes, vol. 1 , ed. "Art", 1954, pp. 275 - 276).
There is no doubt that the first theatrical edition of The Cherry Orchard did not have the pathos that sounds in Stanislavsky’s just quoted words. These words already contain a different understanding of “The Cherry Orchard” than that which was characteristic of the leaders of the Art Theater in 1904. But while affirming the comedic-lyrical beginning of “The Cherry Orchard,” it is important to fully reveal, in an organic fusion with comic-satirical and major-lyrical motifs, the lyrical-dramatic, elegiac motifs embodied in the play with such amazing subtlety and power. Chekhov not only denounced and ridiculed the heroes of his play, but also showed their subjective drama.
Chekhov's abstract humanism, associated with his general democratic position, limited his satirical possibilities and determined certain notes of sympathetic portrayal of Gaev and Ranevskaya.
Here you need to beware of one-sidedness and simplification, which, by the way, have already happened (for example, in the production of “The Cherry Orchard” by director A. Lobanov in the studio theater under the direction of R. Simonov in 1934).
As for the Art Theater itself, changing the dramatic key to a comedic-lyrical one should not cause a decisive change in the interpretation of all roles. There is a lot in this wonderful performance, especially in its latest edition, is given correctly. One cannot help but recall that, while sharply rejecting the dramatic solution of his play, Chekhov found even in the first, far from mature performances at the Art Theater, a lot of beauty, carried out correctly.

This last play writer, therefore it contains his most intimate thoughts about life, about the fate of his homeland. It reflected many life experiences. These include memories of the sale of their home in Taganrog, and acquaintance with Kiselev, the owner of the Babkino estate, near Moscow, where the Chekhovs lived in the summer months of 1885–1887. A.S. Kiselev, who after selling his estate for debts entered service as a member of the board of a bank in Kaluga, was in many ways the prototype of Gaev.

In 1888 and 1889 Chekhov rested on the Lintvarev estate, near Sumy, Kharkov province, where he saw many neglected and dying noble estates. Thus, the idea of a play gradually matured in the writer’s mind, which would reflect many details of the life of the inhabitants of the old noble nests.

Working on the play “The Cherry Orchard” required a lot of effort from A.P. Chekhov. “I write four lines a day, and those with unbearable torment,”- he told his friends. However, overcoming illness and everyday disorder, Chekhov wrote a “great play.”

The first performance of “The Cherry Orchard” on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater took place on A.P.’s birthday. Chekhov - January 17, 1904. For the first time, the Art Theater honored its beloved writer and author of plays in many of the group’s productions, coinciding with the 25th anniversary of his literary activity.

The writer was seriously ill, but still came to the premiere. The audience did not expect to see him, and his appearance caused thunderous applause. All artistic and literary Moscow gathered in the hall. Among the spectators were Andrei Bely, V.Ya. Bryusov, A.M. Gorky, S.V. Rachmaninov, F.I. Chaliapin.

About the genre

Chekhov called The Cherry Orchard a comedy: “What I came out with was not a drama, but a comedy, sometimes even a farce.”(From a letter to M.P. Alekseeva). “The whole play is cheerful and frivolous”. (From a letter to O.L. Knipper).

The theater staged it as a heavy drama of Russian life: “This is not a comedy, this is a tragedy... I cried like a woman...”(K.S. Stanislavsky).

A.P. It seemed to Chekhov that the theater was doing the entire play in the wrong tone; he insisted that he wrote a comedy, not a tearful drama, and warned that both the role of Varya and the role of Lopakhin were comic. But the founders of the Art Theater K.S. Stanislavsky and Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, highly appreciating the play, perceived it as a drama.

There are critics who consider the play a tragicomedy. A.I. Revyakin writes: “To recognize The Cherry Orchard as a drama means to recognize the experiences of the owners of the cherry orchard, the Gaevs and Ranevskys, as truly dramatic, capable of evoking deep sympathy and compassion of people looking not back, but forward, to the future. But this could not and did not happen in the play... The play “The Cherry Orchard” cannot be recognized as a tragicomedy. For this, it lacks neither tragicomic heroes nor tragicomic situations.”

The debate about the genre of the play continues to this day. The range of director's interpretations is wide: comedy, drama, lyrical comedy, tragicomedy, tragedy. It is impossible to answer this question unequivocally.

One of Chekhov's letters contains the following lines: "After the summerthere must be winter, after youth there must be old age, after happiness there must be unhappiness and vice versa; a person cannot be healthy and cheerful all his life, losses are always expected of him, he cannot protect himself from death, even if he was Alexander the Great - and one must be prepared for everything and treat everything as inevitably necessary, no matter how sad it is. You just need to fulfill your duty to the best of your ability - and nothing more.” These thoughts are consonant with the feelings that the play “The Cherry Orchard” evokes.

Conflict and problems of the play

« Fiction That’s why it’s called artistic because it depicts life as it really is. Its purpose is true, unconditional and honest.”

A.P. Chekhov

Question:

What kind of “unconditional and honest” truth could Chekhov see in late XIX century?

Answer:

The destruction of noble estates, their transfer into the hands of capitalists, which indicates the onset of a new historical era.

The external plot of the play is a change of owners of the house and garden, the sale of the family estate for debts. But in Chekhov's works the special nature of the conflict, which makes it possible to detect internal and external action, internal and external plots. Moreover, the main thing is not the external plot, developed quite traditionally, but the internal one, which Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko called the “second plan”, or "undercurrent" .

Chekhov is interested in the hero's experiences that are not declared in monologues. (“They don’t feel what they say”– wrote K.S. Stanislavsky), but manifested in “random” remarks and going into the subtext - the “undercurrent” of the play, which suggests a gap between the direct meaning of a line, dialogue, stage directions and the meaning that they acquire in the context.

The characters in Chekhov's play are essentially inactive. Dynamic tension “is created by the painful imperfection” of actions and actions.

"Undercurrent" Chekhov's play conceals hidden meanings in it, reveals the duality and conflict inherent in the human soul.

A.P. Chekhov wrote a wonderful play “The Cherry Orchard” in 1903. The art world, as well as the socio-political world, felt the need for renewal. A.P. Chekhov, already a gifted writer who showed his skill in short stories, entered dramaturgy as a discoverer of new ideas. The premiere of the play "The Cherry Orchard" gave rise to a lot of discussion among critics and spectators, among actors and directors about the genre characteristics of the play. Let's consider what "The Cherry Orchard" is in terms of genre - drama, tragedy or comedy.

While working on the play, A.P. Chekhov spoke in letters about its character as a whole: “What came out of me was not a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce...” In letters to Vl. A.P. Chekhov warned I. Nemirovich-Danchenko that Anya should not have a “crying” tone, so that in general there would not be “a lot of crying” in the play. The production, despite its resounding success, did not satisfy A.P. Chekhov. Anton Pavlovich expressed dissatisfaction with the general interpretation of the play: “Why is my play so persistently called a drama on posters and in newspaper advertisements? Nemirovich and Alekseev (Stanislavsky) see in my play positively not what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word that Both of them have never read my play carefully." Thus, the author himself insists that The Cherry Orchard is a comedy. This genre did not at all exclude the serious and sad in A.P. Chekhov. Stanislavsky, obviously, violated the Chekhovian measure in the relationship between the dramatic and the comic, the sad and the funny. The result was drama where A.P. Chekhov insisted on lyrical comedy.

A.P. Chekhov has certain sympathetic notes in his portrayal of Lopakhin. He does everything possible to help Ranevskaya keep the estate. Lopakhin is sensitive and kind. But in double lighting he is far from ideal: there is a businesslike winglessness in him, Lopakhin is not capable of getting carried away and loving. In his relationship with Varya, he is comical and awkward. The short-term celebration associated with the purchase of a cherry orchard is quickly replaced by a feeling of despondency and sadness. Lopakhin utters a significant phrase with tears: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” Here Lopakhin directly touches on the main source of drama: it lies not in the struggle for the cherry orchard, but in dissatisfaction with life, experienced differently by all the characters in the play. Life goes on awkwardly and awkwardly, bringing no joy or happiness to anyone. This life is unhappy not only for the main characters, but also for Charlotte, lonely and useless, and for Epikhodov with his constant failures.

Defining the essence of a comic conflict, literary scholars argue that it rests on the discrepancy between appearance and essence (comedy of situations, comedy of characters, etc.). In the “new comedy” by A.P. Chekhov, the words, deeds and actions of the characters are in precisely such a discrepancy. The internal drama of everyone turns out to be more important than external events (the so-called “undercurrents”). Hence the “tearfulness” of the characters, which does not have a tragic connotation at all Monologues and remarks “through tears” most likely speak of the characters’ excessive sentimentality, nervousness, and sometimes even irritability. Hence, the pervasive Chekhovian irony seems to be asking questions to both the audience, the readers, and himself: why is this so. Do people waste their lives so carelessly? Why do they waste words and vitality so irresponsibly, naively believing that they will live forever and there will be an opportunity to live their lives completely, again? The heroes of the play deserve both pity and merciless “laughter through the invisible.” tears to the world."