Fiction that’s why it’s called artistic,
that depicts life as it really is.
Its purpose is unconditional and honest.”
A.P. Chekhov
After the play “Three Sisters,” which was somewhat tragic, Chekhov conceived a new play. On March 7, 1901, in a letter to O.L. Knipper he admits: “The next play I write will definitely be funny, very funny, at least in concept.”.
This last play writer, therefore it contains the most intimate thoughts about life, about the fate of Russia. It reflected many of A.P.’s life experiences. Chekhov. 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, in many ways became the prototype of Gaev.
In 1888 and 1889, Chekhov vacationed on the Lintvarev estate near Sumy, Kharkov province, where he saw many neglected and dying noble estates. Thus, the idea of a work gradually matured in the writer’s mind, which would reflect many details of the life of the inhabitants of the old noble nests.
Work on the play " The Cherry Orchard"demanded from A.P. Chekhov great effort. “I write four lines a day, and those with unbearable torment”, he told his friends. However, overcoming illness and everyday disorder, Chekhov created 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 the plays of many of the group’s productions, timed to coincide with the 25th anniversary literary activity A.P. Chekhov.
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, Valery Bryusov, Maxi Gorky, Sergei Rachmaninov, Fyodor Chaliapin and others.
Identifying 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 from 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 V.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.”.
Conclusion
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 summer there 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
Question
What kind of “unconditional and honest” truth could Chekhov see in late XIX centuries?
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 V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko called it “the background”, or “undercurrent”.
Chekhov is interested in the hero’s experiences that are not declared in monologues ( “They don’t feel what they say”– 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.
Literature
1. D.N. Murin. Russian literature second half of the 19th century century. Guidelines in the form of lesson planning. Grade 10. M.: SMIO Press, 2002.
2. E.S. Rogover. Russian literature XIX century. M.: Saga; Forum, 2004.
3. Encyclopedia for children. T. 9. Russian literature. Part I. From epics and chronicles to classics of the 19th century century. M.: Avanta+, 1999.
It should be noted that even during this period the manor house is not some kind of idyllic place where there are no problems. And here complex tragic collisions occur, reflecting the existing stratification among the nobles. Thus, the process of the already emerging destruction of the noble “nests” is associated with Pushkin’s unfinished and rather complex work “Dubrovsky”. Several manor houses are shown here. Here is a description of the house of Troekurov, “an old Russian gentleman”: “He (Vladimir) was riding along the shore of a wide lake, from which a river flowed and meandered between the hills in the distance; on one of them, above the dense greenery of the grove, towered the green roof and belvedere of a huge stone house, on the other, a five-domed church and an ancient bell tower; Scattered around were village huts with their vegetable gardens and wells.” The estate of Kiril Petrovich Troekurov emphasizes his property status: a huge, stone house with a belvedere; There is also a rich “five-domed church with a bell tower” nearby. Complements this picture " White dress flashing between the trees of the garden." The Dubrovsky house looks completely different: “...Vladimir saw birch grove and to the left, in an open place, a gray house with a red roof... In front of him he saw Kistenevka and his father’s poor house.” Even from the description it is clear that this house belongs to a poor landowner, since the yard is overgrown with grass, the once wide road is lost in the grass, and the porch is dilapidated. And one more manor house is presented in the story - this is the estate of Prince Vereisky: “Approaching Arbatov, he (Troekurov) could not help but admire the clean and cheerful huts of the peasants and the stone manor house, built in the style of English castles. In front of the house lay a dense green meadow, on which Swiss cows grazed, ringing their bells. A spacious park surrounded the house on all sides.” The house of Prince Vereisky is also made of stone, with many “alien” elements; externally, the house resembles an English castle; purebred “Swiss” cows with bells, imported from abroad, graze in the meadow. An equally pleasant view opens from the windows of the house: “The prince led the guests to the window, and a lovely view opened up to them. The Volga flowed in front of the windows, loaded barges sailed along it under stretched sails and flashed fishing boats... Hills and fields stretched beyond the river, several villages enlivened the surroundings.” In Vereisky's house Art Gallery, it is clear that the owner knows a lot about painting, understands the advantages and disadvantages of paintings. They drink “coffee” in the gazebo in the garden, music plays, they ride a boat on the lake, sometimes mooring to the islands. The reception ends with a magnificent fireworks display in honor of the guests. The prince spent most of his life abroad, so the structure of his house is far from his native one, “his own”; even the mention of the Volga does not bring the description of the estate closer to domestic models. The prince is well versed in painting; in his house, paintings are not just interior, as the author notes, “he spoke about paintings with ... feeling and imagination.” Vereisky is lonely, he is just about to get married, and his choice falls on Marya Kirilovna.
Some researchers rightly pointed out the sociological nature of this work by Pushkin. Formally, the house of an old aristocrat, nobleman Dubrovsky, is being destroyed. We see the absence of law, lawlessness, he is expelled from his own “nest,” and this is done by the “grandson of a bearded millionaire,” as some representatives of the nobility are characterized in “The Novel in Letters.” This is social discomfort. For Pushkin, it is important here to show the denial of those moral norms that lead to the destruction of the “father’s tombs.” This process also negatively affects Troekurov himself.
Thus, Kirila Petrovich Troekurov “in home life... showed all the vices of an uneducated person. Spoiled by everything that surrounded him, he was accustomed to giving full rein to all the impulses of his ardent disposition and all the ideas of his rather limited mind.” He suffered from gluttony, was always tipsy, created a kind of harem of serf girls, was strict with the peasants and constantly made fun of his neighboring landowners. However, he was capable of friendship with a man less wealthy and a gentle father, loving and caring in his own way. The author noted: “He was not selfish by nature, the desire for revenge lured him too far, his conscience grumbled.” And the victory in court did not please Troekurov, “satisfied revenge and lust for power drowned out to some extent nobler feelings, but the latter finally triumphed. He decided to make peace with his old neighbor, to destroy the traces of the quarrel, returning his property to him.” Troekurov was not devoid of noble impulses, but unlimited power over people spoiled him and made him a tyrant.
Inside the Troekurov House itself, a process of destruction has also begun. His daughter, Marya Kirilovna, on the one hand, is a district young lady, loves novels, romantic and sensitive, raised on French novels, in the shade of garden trees, pretty, her father loves her in his own way; but on the other hand, the servant for her is not a person, not a man. So, seeing the teacher for the first time, Marya Kirilovna, does not pay attention to him, since he is a servant: “Masha did not pay any attention to the young Frenchman, brought up in aristocratic prejudices, the teacher was for her a kind of servant or artisan, and the servant or artisan did not seem to her a man." She noticed Vladimir only after he showed courage in the story with the bear: “... this incident made an even greater impression on Marya Kirilovna. Her imagination was amazed... She saw that courage and proud pride did not exclusively belong to one class, and from then on she began to show respect to the young teacher, which became more attentive hour by hour.”
Marya Kirilovna blushes from her father's rude manners, she has no friends because of this, she has certain moral qualities that appear in the final chapters of the story. Married not for love, she nevertheless refuses to leave her husband and run away with Dubrovsky. However, her sacrifice most likely comes not from heart movements, but from fear of her father, fear of punishment. Sometimes in her behavior this sacrifice manifested itself in a very significant adjustment moral forms. Marya Kirilovna behaves romantically; she decides to take Dubrovsky, a robber, a man who lost his House through the fault of her father, as his intercessor. However, she is forced to submit to her father’s will and become the wife of Prince Vereisky.
In many ways, Marya Kirilovna cannot rise to the heights of Tatyana Larina. She values the opinion of the world, her dad taught her to look down on people, she does not see that Troekurov crushed Vladimir. At the same time, Masha Troekurova is also a victim, she suffers from her father’s tyranny, however, if she had Tatyana’s high morality, perhaps the fate of Vladimir Dubrovsky could have been different. In our opinion, both Masha and Vladimir are the “fruits” of the same home education that Pushkin had a negative attitude towards.
The story reflects the motive of the destruction of the noble “nest”, and the theme of homelessness appears. Young Dubrovsky begins to take revenge for his father, a motive of unrest develops, which destroys the moral foundations of the Dubrovsky estate itself and its inhabitants. The scene of the reprisal against the clerks who carried out an unjust court decision is given in contrast with the rescue of the cat. Almost all the characters in the story are characterized by positive and negative traits.
The actions of Vladimir Dubrovsky also characterize him ambiguously in many ways. The author considered it necessary to talk about how his character was formed. We know that “he lost his mother from an early age and, almost without knowing his father, was brought to St. Petersburg in the eighth year of his age; with all that, he was romantically ... attached to his father and loved family life the more, the less he had time to enjoy its quiet joys.” With the same mood of immersion in joy family life Vladimir reads letters from his late mother: “Vladimir became engrossed in reading and forgot everything in the world, plunging his soul into the world of family happiness...”. Leaving his parents' house forever, he takes away the only things valuable to him: letters from his mother. Vladimir shows tenderness, nobility, and the concept of honor when communicating with Marya Kirilovna. It is because of her that he refuses revenge on her father: “I realized that the house where you live is sacred, that not a single creature connected with you by blood ties is subject to my curse.” Dubrovsky is not without romantic features character: “Poor, poor my fate,” he said, sighing bitterly. “I would give my life for you; seeing you from afar, touching your hand was ecstasy for me.” And when the opportunity opens up for me to press you to my worried heart and say: angel, we will die! Poor thing, I must beware of bliss, I must distance it with all my might. I do not dare to fall at your feet, thank heaven for an incomprehensible undeserved reward. Oh, how I should hate him..., but I feel that now there is no place for hatred in my heart.” However, at the same time, Vladimir finds the only, in his opinion, path to justice: he leads a gang of robbers, going into the forest and carrying out raids for the purpose of retribution. They live “in the middle of a dense forest” in huts and dugouts; they have already lost their home and certain moral qualities, which Vladimir himself admits. The description of the place where the robbers led by Vladimir live is very reminiscent of the beginning of the poem “The Robber Brothers.” “In the middle of a dense forest, on a narrow lawn, there stood a small earthen fortification, consisting of a rampart and a ditch, behind which there were several huts and dugouts. In the courtyard, many people, who by the variety of clothes and general weapons could immediately be recognized as robbers, were having dinner, sitting without hats, near the brotherly cauldron.” These people, apparently, are also all brothers by fate, that is, they are related by their common share of outcasts. The content of this episode echoes the poetic lines of one of the first romantic poems Pushkin:
...A gang of swashbucklers was gathering.
What a mixture of clothes and faces,
Tribes, dialects, states!
From huts, from cells, from prisons
They flocked together to make money!
Here the goal is the same for all hearts -
They live without power, without law.
Even the song that one of them sings emphasizes their isolation from normal human life:
Don't make noise, mother green oak tree,
Don’t bother me, good fellow, from thinking.
However, this a picturesque picture destroys the appearance of the old nanny: “At that time, the door of one of the huts opened, and an old woman in a white cap, neatly and primly dressed, appeared at the threshold.” Undoubtedly, what looks dissonant in this picture is not the “old woman” herself, but also the fact that she is “in a white cap, neatly and primly dressed.” It is interesting that in this scene there is such an element of the House as a threshold, which has long been considered a certain boundary between the house and the external hostile space, symbolizing a certain border. Perhaps this element notes that Vladimir is, as it were, between the society in which he was and his new, homeless life. And this borderline state of his is emphasized by Yegorovna’s neatness and accuracy, as well as interior decoration hero's home. “In the hut from which the old woman came out, behind the partition, the wounded Dubrovsky was lying on a camp bed. His pistols lay on the table in front of him, and his saber hung at his head. The dugout was covered and hung with rich carpets; in the corner there was a women's silver toilet and dressing table. Dubrovsky held an open book in his hand...” In this description, seemingly incompatible objects are juxtaposed - military: pistols, a saber and home: rich carpets, a silver toilet, a dressing table. The entire description emphasizes Vladimir’s borderline state; he has lost his former roots, his father’s house, and instead there is turmoil, a forest refuge, and robber servants.
When saying goodbye to his accomplices, Vladimir calls on them to change their way of life, although he himself has little faith in it: “A few days after the battle, he gathered all his accomplices, announced to them that he intended to leave them forever, and advised them to change their way of life,” while he is sure that this will not happen: “But you are all scammers and probably will not want to leave your craft.”
Thus, in the manor houses presented in “Dubrovsky”, much of what was characteristic of the traditional Russian House has already been lost; the Troekurov family does not have a mistress, Dubrovsky lost his mother early, Prince Vereisky is lonely in his age. There is no harmony and mutual understanding in these houses, no family happiness. In the future, the motive for the destruction of the noble “nest” will run through all of Russian literature. At the same time, the work of A.S. Pushkin of the 30s makes it possible to return again to the problem of not only the estate, but also the city, St. Petersburg House.
Subject: A.P. Chekhov. “The Cherry Orchard”: history of creation, genre, heroes. The destruction of the noble nest.
The target audience: Grade 10
Target: introduce students to the history of the creation of the play “The Cherry Orchard”; develop skills holistic analysis actions dramatic work; help students understand Chekhov's perception of life; develop creative thinking, ability to compare, analyze, draw conclusions.
Lesson type: lesson in learning new knowledge
Results: students know the content of the play they are studying; formulate the problems raised by the author in the play; reveal ideological meaning plays.
During the classes
Organizational stage.
Updating of reference knowledge
Statement and solution of a problematic issue
How does the “new drama” of A.P. Chekhov differ from classical European drama?
Introductory and orientation conversation.
Have you ever returned home after a long absence?
What feelings and emotions did you experience when you met a very close person after separation?
How does the meeting of our heroes take place in A.P. Chekhov’s play?
Motivation educational activities. State the topic and purpose of the lesson.
Teacher's word
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.
Student's message about the history of the play
Working on the topic of the lesson.
Teacher's explanation
(students write theses)
The desire for naturalness, for the truth of life, prompted A.P. Chekhov to create a play not of purely dramatic or comedic content, but of a very complex genre content. Drama is harmoniously combined with comedy, and the comic is manifested in an organic interweaving with the dramatic. “What I came out with was not a drama, but a comedy, sometimes even a farce,” wrote A.P. Chekhov himself. The basis of the play is not dramatic, but comedic.
Firstly, positive images What Trofim and Anya are are shown not at all dramatically; in their inner essence they are optimistic.
Secondly, the owner of the cherry orchard, Gaev, is also depicted mainly comically.
Thirdly, the comic basis of the play is clearly visible in the comic-satirical depiction of almost all minor characters: Epikhodova, Charlotte, Yasha, Dunyasha.
However, contemporaries perceived new thing Chekhov as a drama. Speaking about the history of the play, three points should be emphasized:
This is the writer’s last play, it expresses his most intimate thoughts about life, about the fate of his homeland;
A.P. Chekhov insisted that this was a comedy, warned that the roles of both Varya and Lopakhin were comic;
For Chekhov, the garden is associated with joy, beauty, work, the future, but not with sadness about the past.
Students retelling the content of the play “in a chain”
Analytical conversation.
What associations arise in your imagination when you hear the phrase “cherry orchard”?
Why does Ranevskaya come from Paris to her estate?
What do you think is the contradiction between the characters in the play?
Find the positive and negative in the images of the local nobility?
Are the images of Petya and Anya, Gaev dramatic?
Who is to blame for the drama of their lives?
Analytical work: characterization of the characters in the play (in groups).
1-group. Lopakhin is the bourgeoisie, replacing the nobility.
2-group. "Younger generation". Peter.
3-group. "Younger generation". Anya.
Mini-discussion.
Do you believe that Anya and Petya will go to jail? new garden?
Chekhov believed that Lopakhin was central image plays. Does the author's point of view coincide with your perception of comedy? What image of comedy do you consider to be the main one?
Reflection. Summarizing.
The teacher's summary word.
Homework.
Write an essay-reflection (miniature) “What attracts you and what worries you about the old owners of the cherry orchard?
”, somewhat tragic, Chekhov conceived a new play. On March 7, 1901, in a letter to O. L. Knipper, he admits: “The next play I write will certainly be funny, very funny, at least in concept.”
“He imagined,” Stanislavsky recalls, “an open window with a branch of white cherry blossoms climbing from the garden into the room. Artyom had already become a lackey, and then
For no reason, for no reason, the manager. His master, and sometimes it seemed to him that it was his mistress, is always without money, and in critical moments she turns for help to her lackey or manager, who has quite a lot of money saved up from somewhere.”
In a letter to Stanislavsky dated February 5, 1903, we read: “It’s already ready in my head. It's called "The Cherry Orchard", four acts, in the first act you can see through the window cherry blossoms, a solid white garden. And ladies in white dresses. In a word, Vishnevsky will laugh a lot - and, of course, no one knows for what reason.”
Speaking about the history of the play, three points should be emphasized:
This is the writer’s last play, so it contains his most intimate thoughts about life, about the fate of his homeland.
Chekhov insisted that this was a comedy and warned that both the role of Varya and the role of Lopakhin were comic.
For Chekhov, the garden is associated with joy, beauty, work, the future, but not with sadness about the past. In a letter from 1889, he writes: “The weather is wonderful. Everything sings, blooms, sparkles with beauty. The garden is already completely green, even the oak trees have blossomed. The trunks of apple, pear, cherry and plum trees are painted to prevent worms white paint, all these trees bloom white, making them strikingly similar to brides during their wedding.”
2. Conversation with the class about the genre of the play.
A question to identify perception: how to determine the genre of a play: comedy, drama, tragicomedy?
A) Chekhov called “” a comedy: “What came out of me was not a drama, but a comedy,
In some places it’s even a farce” (from a letter from M.P. Alekseeva). “The whole play is funny,
Frivolous" (from a letter from O. L. Knipper).
B) The theater staged it as a heavy drama of Russian life: “This is not a comedy, this
Tragedy... I cried like a woman..." (K. S. Stanislavsky).
C) 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
The owners of the cherry orchard, the Gaevs and Ranevskys, truly dramatic,
Capable of evoking deep sympathy and compassion from people watching
Not back, but forward, into the future. But this could not have been in the play and is not... The play
“The Cherry Orchard” cannot be recognized as a tragicomedy. For this
It lacks neither tragicomic heroes nor tragicomic situations.”
This is a lyrical comedy. Lyricism is confirmed by the active presence of the author. And comedy is non-dramatic goodies,
The lack of drama of Lopakhin, the comedy of the owners of the garden, the comedy of almost all the minor characters.
Work with the class to identify the features of the genre can be done using Question:
2. Is Lopakhin dramatic?
3. What is comical about the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev? What makes them dramatic?
4. Who is to blame for the drama in their lives?
5. Prove that minor characters are also comical (Yasha, Dunyasha, Charlotte, Simeonov-Pishchik, Epikhodov).
3. Conflict and problems of the play.
Questions and discussion
1. “Fiction is called fiction because it depicts life as it really is. Its purpose is truly unconditional and honest,” wrote Chekhov. What kind of “unconditional and honest” truth could Chekhov see at the end of the 19th century? (Destruction of noble estates, their transfer into the hands of capitalists.) How is this shown in The Cherry Orchard?
2. What does Firs represent? And Yasha?
3. How does Chekhov show the impoverishment of the nobility? Why do Gaev and Ranevskaya refuse Lopakhin's offer?
4. How is the image of Lopakhin interpreted? Why doesn't Gaev like him?
5. What role does the auction play in the play? Why is he taken off stage?
6. There is a struggle for the garden: the rich man Deriganov is going to buy it, Ranevskaya and Gaev send Anya to her grandmother for money, Lopakhin is thinking about possible participation. Is this the main thing in the play?
7. What is the main thing? (Relations between people, different social classes, but without hostility and irreconcilable struggle.)
4. System of images-characters.
It is necessary to organize in the classroom observation of heroes who unite in several social groups.
1st group.Local nobility(Gaev, Ranevskaya, Simeonov-Pishchik), old owners of the cherry orchard.
Questions and tasks for observations
1. Find the positive and negative in the images of the local nobility.
2. How is Ranevskaya characterized by her attitude towards Varya, towards Anya, towards the servants, towards Lopakhin, towards Trofimov?
3. How does her refusal of Lopakhin’s proposal characterize her?
4. How can you evaluate Ranevskaya’s kindness?
5. How to understand Chekhov’s words: “It’s not difficult to play Ranevskaya, you just need to take the right tone from the very beginning; you need to come up with a smile and a way to laugh, you need to know how to dress”?
Work on the image of Ranevskaya should be carried out according to the text in two plans. External (event-based), although there is also more than one in it (for example, he loves Anya, cries for his dead son, but leaves 12-year-old Anya for 5 years with his unlucky brother; hugs Firs, kisses Dunyasha, but does not think about what is in the house nothing to eat, etc.). And internal (the author's), which arises when comparing remarks, in the contrast between speech and actions.
1. What does Ranevskaya consider to be her sins and are they sins? What are her real sins?
2. Who is to blame for Ranevskaya’s fate? Was there a choice?
3. Tell us about Gaev. How is he similar to Ranevskaya? What are you interested in? Compare their monologues in front of the closet. How do they characterize them?
4. Why did they all calm down after the sale of the cherry orchard?
5. Why is Simeonov-Pishchik close to the owners of the cherry orchard?
Conclusions. This is the embodiment of the world of a noble nest, for which time has stood still. The drama is in their vulnerability and simplicity. Comedy lies in the contrast of speech and actions. A life lived in vain, a future without hope, a life in debt, “at someone else’s expense.” “Selfish, like children, and flabby, like old people,” Gorky will say about them.
2nd group.“Parallels” to the owners. Yasha and Firs.
Firs - a serf background, selfless devotion to the master. “Then I didn’t agree to freedom, I stayed with the masters... And I remember everyone was happy, but what they were happy about, they themselves didn’t know.” Firs's last monologue, where there are two lines - “life has passed” and “klutz” - is also about the owners.
Yasha is a servant of the new generation, arrogant (attitude to, to Dunyasha, to the homeland).
3rd group. Lopakhin is the bourgeoisie, replacing the nobility. Chekhov wrote to Stanislavsky: “Lopakhin, it’s true, is a merchant, but a decent person in every sense, he should behave quite decently, intelligently, without tricks.”
2. What features of Lopakhin are attractive? Why does Petya talk about him? beast of prey" And " gentle soul"? How to understand this? What quality will win in it?
3. Why doesn’t Lopakhin propose to Varya?
4. What future of Russia is he talking about?
5. What are its contradictions? Why does he more than once call life “stupid”, “awkward”?
6. What is unique about Lopakhin’s speech?
Conclusions. The meaning of Lopakhin’s image is to show the new “masters of life.” The complexity and inconsistency of character speak of temporality. It exposes bourgeois practicality, but affirms hard work. Lopakhin's remarks contain judgments that are not typical of his image. Most likely, thoughts about the homeland, about the awkward, unhappy life- this is the voice of the author himself.
4th group."Younger generation". Petya and Anya.
Questions and tasks for discussion
1. What is the role of these characters?
3. Why is Petya shown ironically? Why does his image decrease by combining diverse replicas?
4. Compare Lopakhin and Petya. Why does one work and the other speak?
5. In what way is the image of Petya similar to the image of Gaev?
6. What place does Anya occupy in the play? Why did Chekhov think that Anya should speak in a “young, ringing voice”?
7. Why are Anya’s lines at the end of each act?
Conclusions. The future that Petya and Anya see is a romantic future. The inconsistency of Petya's portrayal, the author's irony. Anya is the embodiment of the writer’s faith in the future of Russia. Purity, spontaneity, integrity of her character.
Lessons 162-163. “Touch the very essence and the most painful strings...” 1
A.P. Chekhov. “The Cherry Orchard”: history of creation, genre, heroes. The destruction of the noble nest.
You can start the lesson with the teacher telling you about the history of the play.
After the play “Three Sisters,” which was somewhat tragic, Chekhov conceived a new play. On March 7, 1901, in a letter to O. L. Knipper, he admits: “The next play I write will certainly be funny, very funny, at least in concept.”
“He imagined,” Stanislavsky recalls, “an open window with a branch of white cherry blossoms climbing from the garden into the room. Artyom had already become a footman, and then, out of the blue, a manager. His master, and sometimes it seemed to him that it was his mistress, is always without money, and in critical moments she turns for help to her lackey or manager, who has quite a lot of money saved up from somewhere.”
In a letter to Stanislavsky dated February 5, 1903, we read: “It’s already ready in my head. It’s called “The Cherry Orchard,” four acts, in the first act you can see cherry blossoms through the window, a solid white garden. And ladies in white dresses. In a word, Vishnevsky will laugh a lot - and, of course, no one knows for what reason.”
Speaking about the history of the play, three points should be emphasized:
This is the writer’s last play, so it contains his most intimate thoughts about life, about the fate of the Motherland;
Chekhov insisted that this was a comedy, warned that both the role of Varya and the role of Lopakhin were comic;
For Chekhov, the garden is associated with joy, beauty, work, the future, but not with sadness about the past. In a letter from 1889, he writes: “The weather is wonderful. Everything sings, blooms, sparkles with beauty. The garden is already completely green, even the oak trees have blossomed. The trunks of apple, pear, cherry and plum trees are painted white from worms, all these trees bloom white, which is why they are strikingly similar to brides during a wedding.”
Issues for discussion
1. How to determine the genre of a play? Comedy? Drama? Tragicomedy?
a) Chekhov called “The Cherry Orchard” a comedy: “What came out of me was not a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce” (from a letter to M.P. Alekseeva). “The whole play is cheerful and frivolous” (from a letter from O. L. Knipper).
b) The theater staged it as a difficult drama of Russian life. “This is not a comedy, this is a tragedy... I cried like a woman...” (K. S. Stanislavsky).
c) There are opinions that 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 tragicomic heroes or tragicomic situations.” This is a lyrical comedy. Lyricism is confirmed by the active presence of the author. And the comedy is due to the undramatic nature of the positive characters, the undramatic nature of Lopakhin, the comic nature of the owners of the garden and almost all the minor characters.
3. What is comical about the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev? What makes them dramatic? Who is to blame for the drama of their lives?
4. Prove that secondary characters are also comical (Yasha, Dunyasha, Charlotte, Simeonov-Pishchik, Epikhodov).
5. Describe the conflict and issues of the play.
6. “Fiction is called fiction because it depicts life as it really is. Its purpose is truly unconditional and honest,” wrote Chekhov. What kind of “unconditional and honest” truth could Chekhov see at the end of the 19th century? (Destruction of noble estates, their transfer into the hands of capitalists.)
7. How is the theme of the withering of noble nests shown in “The Cherry Orchard”? What does Firs represent? And Yasha?
8. How does Chekhov show the impoverishment of the nobility? Why do Gaev and Ranevskaya refuse Lopakhin's offer?
9. How is the image of Lopakhin interpreted? Why doesn't Gaev like him?
10. What role does the auction play in the play? Why is he taken off stage?
11. There is a struggle for the garden: the rich man Deriganov is going to buy it, Ranevskaya and Gaev send Anya to her grandmother for money, Lopakhin is thinking about possible participation. Is this the main thing in the play?
12. What is the main thing? (Relations between people, different social classes, but without hostility and irreconcilable struggle.)
To explore the system of images and characters in the play, you can use group work.
Group 1. Local nobility (Gaev, Ranevskaya, Simeonov-Pishchik), old owners of the cherry orchard.
Find the positive and negative in the images of the local nobility. (Kindness, simplicity, honesty, sympathy for people, spontaneity, love for nature, for one’s “nest”, for music and superficiality of experiences, inability to protect the property dear to them, inability to work, disorderly kindness, selfishness. These are not bad people, but the author exposes them.)
Tell us about Ranevskaya. Compare how Lopakhin and Trofimov talk about it. How is her attitude towards Varya, towards Anya, towards the servants, towards Lopakhin, Trofimov? How does her refusal of Lopakhin’s proposal characterize her? How can you evaluate the kindness of Ranevskaya?
How to understand Chekhov’s words: “It’s not difficult to play Ranevskaya, you just need to take the right tone from the very beginning; you need to come up with a smile and a way to laugh, you need to know how to dress”?
Work on the image of Ranevskaya should be carried out according to the text in two plans. Outer line: charming woman, simple, spontaneous. But in the external (event) line there is also more than one plan (for example, he loves Anya, cries for his dead son, but leaves 12-year-old Anya for 5 years with his unlucky brother; hugs Firs, kisses Dunyasha, but does not think about what is in the house there is nothing to eat, etc.). The internal (author's) line arises when comparing remarks, in the contrast between speech and actions. For example:
“Love Andreevna. The locker is my own. (Kisses the closet.) The table is mine.
G aev. And without you, the nanny died here.
Lyubov Andreevna. (Sits down and drinks coffee.) Yes, the kingdom of heaven. They wrote to me."
When announcing the death of the nanny, Ranevskaya drinks coffee, and Gaev sucks lollipops.
What does Ranevskaya consider her sins and are they sins? What are her real sins? Who is to blame for Ranevskaya’s fate? Was there a choice?
Tell us about Gaev. How is he similar to Ranevskaya? What are you interested in? Compare their monologues in front of the closet. How do they characterize them?
Why did they all calm down after the sale of the cherry orchard?
What is close to the owners of the cherry orchard Simeonov-Pishchik?
Conclusions. The landed nobility is the embodiment of the world of the noble nest, for which time has stood still. The drama is in their vulnerability and simplicity. Comedy lies in the contrast of speech and actions. A life lived in vain, a future without hope, a life in debt, “at someone else’s expense.” “Selfish, like children, and flabby, like old people,” Gorky will say about them.
Group 2.“Parallels” to the owners: Yasha and Firs.
Questions and tasks for observations
What does Firs represent? (Firs - a serf background, selfless devotion to the master. “Then I did not agree to freedom, I stayed with the masters... And I remember, everyone is happy, but what they are happy about, they themselves don’t know.”)
Find the semantic subtext in Firs's last monologue. (Firs’s last monologue has two lines of meaning: “life has passed” and “klutz.” These thoughts are also about the owners.)
How is Yash different from Firs? How does he treat others? (Yasha is a servant of the new generation, arrogant (attitude towards his mother, towards Dunyasha, towards the Motherland).)
Group 3. Lopakhin is the bourgeoisie, replacing the nobility.
Questions and tasks for observations
Chekhov wrote to Stanislavsky: “Lopakhin, it’s true, is a merchant, but a decent person in every sense, he should behave quite decently, intelligently, without tricks.” What features of Lopakhin are attractive?
Why does Petya say about him “a beast of prey” and “a gentle soul”? How to understand this? What are its contradictions? What quality will win in it?
Why doesn't Lopakhin propose to Varya? Why does he more than once call life “stupid”, “awkward”?
What future of Russia is he talking about?
What is unique about Lopakhin’s speech?
Conclusions. The meaning of Lopakhin’s character is the change of “masters of life.” The complexity and inconsistency of character speak of temporality. It exposes bourgeois practicality, but affirms hard work. Lopakhin's remarks contain judgments that are not typical of his image. Most likely, thoughts about the Motherland, about an awkward, unhappy life are the voice of the author himself.
Group 4.“Young Generation”: Petya and Anya.
Questions and tasks for observations
What is the role of these characters in the play? Does the author draw them the same way?
Why is Petya shown ironically? Why does his image decrease by combining diverse replicas?
Compare Lopakhin and Petya. Why does one work and the other speak?
In what ways is Petya’s image similar to Gaev’s?
What place does Anya occupy in the play? Why did Chekhov think that Anya should speak in a “young, ringing voice”?
Why are Anya’s lines at the end of each act?
- Individual task. Trace what role the image of time plays in the play. Why does Chekhov constantly remind the viewer of time throughout the play? Support your thoughts with quotes.
Conclusions. The future that Petya and Anya see is a romantic future. The inconsistency of the image of Petya, the irony of the author speaks of his uncertainty that people like Petya will be able to make the future wonderful. The embodiment of the writer's faith in the future is Anya. The author depicts the purity, spontaneity, and integrity of her character.
Summary of lessons. Genre originality, the character system helps you understand main conflict plays - between a person and time, which inexorably throws back those who cannot live in the present and do not think about the future.
Lesson 164. “Rus', where are you going, give me the answer?” 1
The symbol of the garden in the comedy “The Cherry Orchard.” Preparing for your home essay.
The title of the play should be perceived in two ways: specifically (the garden of a noble estate) and generally (a symbol of the Motherland, its natural poetic beauty). The comedy is based on the fate of the cherry orchard, everything is connected with it.
Questions and tasks for observations
1. How does the image of the cherry orchard permeate all the actions of the play? I action: “Your cherry orchard is being sold for debts”; Act II: “The cherry orchard will be sold on August 22”; Act III: “Come everyone to watch Ermolai Lopakhin take an ax to the cherry orchard”; Act IV: “In the distance they are knocking on a tree with an ax.”
3. Find descriptions of the cherry orchard in the author’s stage directions. What mood do they create? How is it changing? Decoration Act I: “Dawn, soon the sun will rise. It’s already May, the cherry trees are blooming, but it’s cold in the garden, it’s morning.” Decoration Act II: “To the side, towering, the poplars darken: there the cherry orchard begins... The sun will set soon.” Decoration Act IV: “You can hear an ax knocking on a tree.” In the finale: “It’s getting quiet. In the midst of the silence, the dull knock of an ax on wood is heard, sounding lonely and sad.” “Silence falls, and you can only hear how far away in the garden an ax is knocking on a tree.”
4. How are the characters in the play related to the image of the cherry orchard? Support your positions with text.
R a nevskaya, G aev: the garden is the past, childhood, but also a sign of well-being, pride, a memory of happiness.
R a nevskaya: “If there is anything interesting, even wonderful, in the entire province, it is only our cherry orchard.”
G aev: “And in” Encyclopedic Dictionary“This garden is mentioned”, etc.
F i r s: garden - lordly well-being. “In the old days, about forty to fifty years ago, cherries were dried, soaked, pickled, jam was made... There was money!”
L o pakhin: the garden is a memory of the past, grandfather and father were serfs; hopes for the future - cut down, divide into plots, rent out. A garden is a source of wealth, a source of pride. Lopakhin: “If the cherry orchard... is then rented out for dachas, then you will have at least twenty-five thousand a year in income.” “Cherry trees are born once every two years, and no one buys even that,” etc.
Trofimov: the cherry orchard symbolizes the serfdom past. “Aren’t human beings looking at you from every leaf, from every trunk...” “All of Russia is our garden” is his dream of a transformed homeland, but it is not clear by whose efforts this will be done.
A n I: a garden is a symbol of childhood, a garden is a home, but you have to part with childhood. “Why don’t I love the cherry orchard as much as I used to?” Garden - hopes for the future. “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this.”
5. What's it like author's attitude to the garden? (For the author, the garden embodies love for native nature; bitterness because they cannot preserve its beauty and wealth; the author’s idea about a person who can change lives is important; the garden is a symbol of a lyrical, poetic attitude towards the Motherland). In the author's remarks: “beautiful garden”, “wide open space”, the sound of a broken string, the sound of an ax. Chekhov: “In the second act you will give me a real green field and a road and a distance unusual for the stage.” “The sound... should be shorter and felt very far away.”
6. Individual task. Simultaneously with the play “The Cherry Orchard”, the story “The Bride” was written, which was close to it in its main content. There is also a May garden. Compare the image of the garden in the play and in the story “The Bride”. How is the image of Anya similar to the image of the heroine of the story?
Conclusions. The garden is a symbol of the Motherland, its past and future. The past is the childhood and happiness of Ranevskaya, Gaev, Ani; this is their pride from owning a beautiful estate, a “noble nest”; this is a symbol of serfdom for Petya and Lopakhin. The future is the construction of dachas, so that grandchildren and great-grandchildren, according to Lopakhin, will see here new life; this is the hope for better life for Anya: “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this.”
What future awaits Russia? Chekhov leaves this Gogolian question open.
Lesson summary. The play “The Cherry Orchard” is a play about Russia, about its fate. Russia at a crossroads - an auction in the play. Who will be the owner of the country? Chekhov worries about his country, the play is his testament, but at the same time he understands that he needs to break the old, leave it.
For homework, schoolchildren can be given problematic questions to help them prepare for the Unified State Exam.
Lesson 165. "A hopeless sigh of compassion for people" 1
The originality of Chekhov's style.
The secret of Chekhov's mastery, the mystery of the impact on the reader has not yet been fully solved. But one thing is clear: Chekhov - unusual writer. Bunin said about him this way: “In addition to his artistic talent, what is amazing in all these stories is his knowledge of life, his deep penetration into human soul" And M. Gorky noted: “You are doing a huge job with your little stories, arousing in people disgust for this very half-dead life.”
The lesson can be conducted in the form of a workshop. In the stories indicated by the teacher, it is necessary to find the features of Chekhov’s writing style.
| Style Features | Stories |
| 1. The story is based on a certain everyday situation (scene), and not a common problem or the fate of the hero. This is reflected in the titles of the stories, which often identify a specific location | "Well, audience!" "Evil boy", "Not in a good mood" |
| 2. An ordinary action leading to an unexpected result | "Well, audience!" "Not in a good mood" |
| 3. The hero is in the world of things, the role of the objective environment is great | "Chameleon" |
| 4. The nature and features of the narrative, which can be told on behalf of the author or hero. External narration can be conducted on behalf of the author, and the description of the situation, portrait, landscape - on behalf of the hero. Objectivity of narration, discreet in appearance | "Chameleon", "The Cook Gets Married" |
| 5. Rich range of vocabulary, wide use of speech styles | "Chameleon" |
| 6. Presentation of tragedy as an everyday phenomenon. A tragicomedy combining smile, irony, sadness | "Well, audience" "Chameleon", "Horse surname" |
| 7. Individualization of the characters’ speech. Speech is a reflection of character | "Chameleon", "Horse surname" |
| 8. Great role of details | "Chameleon", “Well, audience!” |
| 9. “Hiddenness” of the author, manifestation of his position in reticence | "Chameleon" |
| 10. Mature Chekhov - lack of intense action | "Bride" |
| 11. Speaking surnames | "Death of an Official", "Chameleon" |
| 12. Main meaning not named openly. External and internal narration, two-dimensionality, tragicomic nature. Externally - funny, internally - sad | "Chameleon", "Death of an Official", "Thick and Thin" |
| 13. Small form and deep content | "Death of an Official" |
| 14. Brief, concise, meager description of man, nature and interior | "The Cook Gets Married", "Thick and Thin" |
| 15. Significant Role dialogue or monologue. A person reveals himself, through a monologue or dialogue | "Not in a good mood" |
| 16. Mastery of plot and composition. Often the action develops through repetition, reaching the point of absurdity | “Well, audience!”, “Death of an Official” |
| 17. Three unities: place, time, action | "Not in a good mood" |
| 18. Visibility of short stories | "Thick and thin" |