The Cherry Orchard is a comedy. "The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy
Genre of the play "The Cherry Orchard"
A.I. Revyakin. "Ideological meaning and artistic features of the play "The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov"Collection of articles "Creativity of A.P. Chekhov", Uchpedgiz, Moscow, 1956
OCR site
7. The genre of the play "The Cherry Orchard"
The remarkable merits of The Cherry Orchard and its innovative features have long been unanimously recognized by progressive critics. But when it comes to genre features plays, this unanimity is replaced by dissent. Some see the play "The Cherry Orchard" as a comedy, others as a drama, others as a tragicomedy. What is this play - drama, comedy, tragicomedy?
Before answering this question, it should be noted that Chekhov, striving for the truth of life, for naturalness, created plays not of purely dramatic or comedic, but of very complex formation.
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 a kind of genre formations that can be called dramas or comedies, only keeping in mind their leading genre trend, and not the consistent implementation of the principles of drama or comedy in their traditional sense.
A convincing example of this is the play "The Cherry Orchard". Already completing this play, Chekhov on September 2, 1903 wrote Vl. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko: “I will call the play a comedy” (A.P. Chekhov, Complete Works and Letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 129).
On September 15, 1903, he informed M.P. Alekseeva (Lilina): “I did not get a drama, but a comedy, in places even a farce” (Ibid., p. 131).
Calling the play a comedy, Chekhov relied on the comic motives prevailing in it. If, answering the question about the genre of this play, we keep in mind the leading trend in the structure of its images and plot, then we must admit that it is based on not a dramatic, but a comedic beginning. Drama means drama goodies plays, that is, 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 main sympathies of the author 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, Gaev and Ranevsky, as truly dramatic, capable of evoking deep sympathy and compassion for people who are not going back, but forward, into the future.
But this in the play could not be and is not. 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 either. To do this, she lacks neither tragicomic heroes, nor tragicomic situations that run through the entire play, defining its through action. Gaev, Ranevskaya, Pishchik are too small as tragicomic heroes. Yes, besides, in the play the leading optimistic idea comes through with all distinctness, expressed in positive images. This play is more correctly called a lyrical comedy.
The comedy of The Cherry Orchard is determined, firstly, by the fact that its positive images, such as Trofimov and Anya, are shown by no means dramatic. Dramaticity is unusual for 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 the 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 given primarily comically, and the second (Ranevskaya) in such dramatic situations, which mainly contribute to showing their negative essence.
The comic basis of the play is clearly visible, thirdly, and in the comic-satirical depiction of almost all minor actors: Epikhodova, Pishchika, Charlotte, Yasha, Dunyasha.
The Cherry Orchard also includes obvious vaudeville motifs, even farce, expressed in jokes, tricks, jumps, dressing up Charlotte. In terms of the issues and the nature of its artistic interpretation, The Cherry Orchard is a deeply social play. It has very strong motives.
Here the most important questions for that time were raised: the liquidation of the nobility and estate economy, its final replacement by 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: lyric-dramatic and socio-psychological motives are most complete in the depiction of Ranevskaya and Vari; lyrical and socio-psychological, especially in the image 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.
"BUT. 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, whatever the outcome a better life No matter how you opened it in the last act... I was afraid that when I read it again, the play would not capture me. Where is it!! I cried like a woman, I wanted to, but I could not restrain myself ”(K, S. Stanislavsky, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, ed. Art, M., 1953 , pp. 150 - 151).
In his memoirs of Chekhov, dating back to about 1907, Stanislavsky characterizes The Cherry Orchard as "the heavy drama of Russian life" (Ibid., p. 139).
K.S. Stanislavsky misunderstood, underestimated the power of accusatory pathos directed against the representatives of the then departing world (Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pishchik), and in this regard, unnecessarily emphasized the lyric-dramatic line associated with these characters in his directorial decision of the play.
Taking seriously the drama of Ranevskaya and Gaev, unduly promoting a sympathetic attitude towards them and to some extent muffling the accusatory and optimistic direction of the play, Stanislavsky staged The Cherry Orchard in a dramatic vein. Expressing the erroneous point of view of the leaders of the 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, belonged to the "mortuos", the "Cherry Orchard". Otherwise, the image of the doomed, dying, leaving the historical stage would not have been so tender ”(N. Efros, The Cherry Orchard staged by the Moscow Art Theater, Pg., 1919, p. 36).
Proceeding from the dramatic key, evoking sympathy for Gaev, Ranevskaya and Pishchik, emphasizing their drama, all their first performers played these roles - Stanislavsky, Knipper, Gribunin. So, for example, characterizing the game of Stanislavsky - Gaev, N. Efros wrote: “this is a big child, pathetic and funny, but touching in its helplessness ... There was an atmosphere of the finest humor around the figure. And at the same time, she radiated great touchingness ... all 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 by no means inclined to sentimentality, to whom the harsh laws of historical necessity and change of class are sacred figures on the historical stage - even they, probably, gave moments of compassion, a sigh of sympathy or condolences 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, noble, beautiful, spiritually complex than in Chekhov's play. It would be unfair to say that the leaders of the Art Theater did not notice or bypassed the comedy " cherry orchard».
When staging this play, K. S. Stanislavsky used its comedy motives 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, Sadness of the Cherry Orchard, Theater and Art, 1904, No. 13), accused the leaders of the Art Theater of that they abused 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).
Dissatisfaction with the excessive, deliberate comedy of the stage performance of The Cherry Orchard at the Art Theater was also expressed by critic N. Nikolaev. “When,” he wrote, “the oppressive present portends an even more difficult future, Charlotte Ivanovna appears and passes, leading a little dog on a long ribbon and with all her 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. Nikolayev, U Artists,“ Theater and Art ”, 1904, No. 9, p. 194).
But the real mistake of the first directors of The Cherry Orchard was not that they beat many of the comic episodes of the play, but that they neglected comedy as the leading beginning of the play. Revealing Chekhov's play as a heavy drama of Russian life, the leaders of the Art Theater gave place to its comedy, but only a subordinate one; secondary.
M. N. Stroeva is right in defining the stage interpretation of the play “The Cherry Orchard” in the Art Theater as a tragicomedy (M. Stroeva, Chekhov and the Art Theater, ed. Art, M., 1955, p. 178 and etc.).
Interpreting the play in this way, the direction of the Art Theater showed the representatives of the outgoing world (Ranevskaya, Gaeva, Pishchika) more inwardly rich, 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 objectively comic essence of these people, exposing their insolvency, this side was clearly not sufficiently disclosed in the performance. Chekhov could not agree with such an interpretation of The Cherry Orchard. S. Lubosh recalls Chekhov at one of the first performances of The Cherry Orchard - sad and torn off. “In the filled theater there was a noise of success, and Chekhov sadly repeated:
- Not that, not that...
- What's wrong?
- Everything is not the same: 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. Lubosh, The Cherry Orchard. Chekhov’s anniversary collection, M., 1910, p. 448).
Protesting against the false interpretation of his play, Chekhov wrote in a letter to O.L. Nemirovich and Alekseev positively see in my play not what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word - that both of them never carefully read my play ”(A.P. Chekhov, Complete Works and letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 265).
Chekhov was outraged by the purely slow pace of the performance, especially by the painfully drawn-out Act IV. “The act, which should last 12 minutes maximum, you have,” he wrote to O. L. Knipper, “is 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 make me either a crybaby, or just a boring writer... And I wrote several volumes of funny stories. And criticism dresses me up as some kind of mourners ... They invent for me from their heads what they themselves want, but I didn’t think about it, and didn’t see it in a dream ... It starts to make me angry ”(E. P. K arpov, The last two meetings with Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, Yearbook of the Imperial Theatres, 1909, issue 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 embodied in 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 had misunderstood the play. But misunderstood, in their opinion, not in its main key, but in particular. The show has changed 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 that heavy and heavy drama that The Garden 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 confess that you did not immediately understand The Cherry Orchard. Years passed, and time confirmed the correctness of Chekhov. The need for more decisive changes in the performance in the direction indicated by Chekhov became clearer and clearer to the leaders of the Art Theater.
Resuming the play The Cherry Orchard after a ten-year break, the leaders of the Art Theater made major changes to it: they significantly accelerated the pace of its development; they animated the first act in a comedic way; removed excessive psychologism in the main characters and increased their exposure. This was especially evident in the game of Stanislavsky - Gaev, “His image,” noted in Izvestia, “is now revealed primarily from a purely comedic side. We would say that idleness, lordly daydreaming, complete inability to take on at least some kind of work and truly childish carelessness are exposed by Stanislavsky to the end. The new Gaev of Stanislavsky is a most convincing example of harmful worthlessness. Knipper-Chekhova began to play even more openwork, even easier, revealing her Ranevskaya in the same plan of “revealing” (Yur. Sobolev, The Cherry Orchard at the Art Theater, Izvestia, May 25, 1928, No. 120).
The fact that the original 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 was not understood at first .. maybe our performance will require some some changes, some permutations, at least in particulars; but regarding the version that Chekhov wrote a vaudeville, that this play should be staged in a satirical context, I say with complete conviction that this should not be. There is a satirical element in the play - both in Epikhodov and in other persons, but take the text in your hands and you will see: there - “cries”, in another place - “cries”, but in vaudeville they will not cry! Vl. I. N emir o v i ch-Danchenko, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, ed. Art, 1952, pp. 108 - 109).
It is true that The Cherry Orchard is not vaudeville. But it is unfair that vaudeville allegedly does not cry, and on the basis of the presence of crying, 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 "Proposal" Lomov cries and Chubukova moans. In the vaudeville "Az and Firth" by P. Fedorov, Lyubushka and Akulina cry. In the vaudeville "Teacher and Student" by A. Pisarev, Lyudmila and Dasha are crying. In the vaudeville The Hussar Girl, Koni cries Laura. It's not the presence and not even the number of crying, but the nature of crying.
When, through tears, Dunyasha says: “I broke the saucer,” and Pishchik - “Where is the money?”, This causes not a dramatic, but a comic reaction. Sometimes tears express joyful excitement: at Ranevskaya at her first entrance to the nursery upon returning to her homeland, at the devoted Firs, who waited for the arrival of his mistress.
Tears often denote a special cordiality: in Gaev, when addressing Anya in the first act (“my baby. My child ...”); at Trofimov, calming Ranevskaya (in the first act) and then telling her: “because 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 re-read: in Ranevskaya's first act, when she meets Trofimov, who reminded her of her drowned son, and in the third act, in a dispute with Trofimov, when she again remembers her son; at Gaev - upon return from the auction; Varya's - after a failed explanation with Lopakhin (fourth act); 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 of the drama of the entire play.
Chekhov strongly disagreed that there were many weeping people in his play. "Where are they? - he wrote to Nemirovich-Danchenko on October 23, 1903. - Only one Varya, but this is because Varya is a crybaby by nature, and her tears should not arouse a dull feeling in the viewer. Often I meet “through tears”, but this only shows the mood of faces, not tears ”(A P. Chekhov, Complete collection of 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 the representatives of the old world and is fundamentally associated with the protection of departing life forms.
The drama associated with the defense of egoistic forms of life that is passing away cannot arouse the sympathy of advanced readers and spectators and is incapable of becoming a 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 something that can evoke a sympathetic response from any reader and spectator. One cannot sympathize with Ranevskaya in the main - 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 is humanly sorry. One can sympathize with her both when she, wiping her tears, tells how she was drawn from Paris to Russia, to her homeland, to her daughter, and when she forever says goodbye to her home, in which the happy years of her childhood, youth, and youth passed. ...
The drama of The Cherry Orchard is private, not defining, not leading. The stage performance of "The Cherry Orchard", given by the Art Theater in a dramatic way, does not correspond to the ideological pathos and genre originality this play. To achieve this correspondence, not minor amendments are required, but fundamental changes in the first edition of the performance.
Revealing the completely optimistic pathos of the play, it is necessary to replace the dramatic basis of the performance with a comedy-no-lyrical one. There are prerequisites for this in the statements of K. S. Stanislavsky himself. Emphasizing the importance of a more vivid stage rendering of Chekhov's dream, he wrote:
“In the fiction of the end of the last and the beginning of this century, he was one of the first to feel the inevitability of revolution, when it was only in its infancy and society continued to bathe 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... the first, with all his might, cuts down the obsolete, and the young girl, anticipating, together with Petya Trofimov, the approach new era, will shout to the whole world: "Hello, new life!" - and you will understand that "The Cherry Orchard" is alive for us, close, contemporary play that Chekhov’s voice sounds in it cheerfully, incendiary, for he himself looks not backward, but forward ”(K. S. Stanislavsky, Collected Works in eight volumes, vol. 1 , ed. "Art", 1954, pp. 275 - 276).
Undoubtedly, the first theatrical version of The Cherry Orchard did not have the pathos that resounds in the words of Stanislavsky just quoted. In these words, there is already a different understanding of The Cherry Orchard than that which was characteristic of the leaders of the Art Theater in 1904. But asserting the comedic-lyrical beginning of The Cherry Orchard, it is important to fully reveal the lyrical-dramatic, elegiac motifs, embodied in the play with such amazing subtlety and power, in an organic fusion with comic-satirical and major-lyrical motifs. Chekhov not only denounced, 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 the well-known notes of the sympathetic portrayal of Gaev and Ranevskaya.
Here one must beware of one-sidedness, simplification, which, by the way, already existed (for example, in the production of The Cherry Orchard directed by A. Lobanov in the theater-studio under the direction of R. Simonov in 1934).
As for the Artistic Theater itself, the change of the dramatic key to the 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. It is impossible not to recall that, while sharply rejecting the dramatic solution of his play, Chekhov found even in its first, far from mature performances at the Art Theater a lot of beauty, carried out correctly.
So, for example, they recall that Chekhov, sick, tired, tired of the applause and honoring given to him at the first performance of The Cherry Orchard, seized a moment and whispered in the ear of A. R. Artyom, who played the role of Firs: “Great!” (S. Durylin, Chekhov's favorite actor, "Theatre and Drama", 1935, No. 2, p. 24).
He was very pleased with L. M. Leonidov - Lopakhin (L. M. Leonidov, Past and Present. From the Memoirs, ed. of the Museum of Art academic theater USSR named after M. Gorky, M., 1948, p. 102) and found the performance of the role of Epikhodov by I. M. Moskvin wonderful (K. S. Stanislavsky, My life in art. Collected works in eight volumes, vol. 1, Art, 1954, p. 267).
He liked the game of MP Lilina, who played the role of Anya. To Lilina’s question about the tone of her parting words, Chekhov answered: “goodbye house, goodbye old life” - you speak exactly the way you need to” (A.P. Chekhov, Complete Works and Letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 238).
M. P. Lilina conveyed faith in the future well when she listened to Petya Trofimov with wide eyes. It is known that Chekhov liked the last departure of Gaev-Stanislavsky (K. S. Stanislavsky, Complete Works in eight volumes, vol. 1, ed. Art, 1954, p. 272).
Having retained all the achievements of the first theatrical edition of The Cherry Orchard and using all the acquisitions of his subsequent life, which went in the direction of Chekhov's requirements, the Art Theater, when changing the dramatic key to a comedic-lyrical one, will undoubtedly create a performance of enormous social and artistic significance, fully revealing the ideological richness of a wonderful work. Millions of Soviet viewers are looking forward to this performance.
The last comedy play by A.P. Chekhov became "The Cherry Orchard". After the play "Three Sisters", to some extent tragic work, Chekhov suddenly thought about a new one. And for some reason, he wanted, and even wrote about it to his friends, so that this time she would be very funny, at least by design. To answer the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama or a comedy, it is worth noting that the author himself defined it as the second genre. However, even during the life of Chekhov, when the first production took place at the Moscow Art Theater, the play was presented as a heavy drama and even tragedy.
"The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy? Composition
Then where is the truth? Drama by definition is literary work, which is designed primarily for stage life. It is on the stage that it finds its full-fledged existence, reveals the meaning inherent in it, which further determines its genre. But the last word in the definition of the genre, be that as it may, has always been with the theater, directors and actors. Known fact that the innovative ideas of Chekhov as a playwright were assimilated and perceived by theaters reluctantly and not immediately, but for a long time and with great difficulty. If you write about The Cherry Orchard as a drama or a comedy, an essay on this topic can be based on the Moscow Art Theater's traditional interpretation that this is a dramatic elegy - a definition that was assigned to the play by the authorities theatrical art such as Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko. Chekhov, on this occasion, nevertheless managed to express his indignation to the theater with such an interpretation.
"The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy? Briefly about everything
According to the plot of the play, the former owners of the estate say goodbye to their family nest. In the second half of the 19th century, even before Chekhov, this topic was often covered in Russian literature in dramatic, tragic, and comical ways. Let's try to figure out what are the features of solving this problem and how to correctly perceive "The Cherry Orchard" - is it a drama or a comedy.
This attitude of Chekhov was determined by the fact that the nobility, gradually becoming obsolete and fading into social oblivion, was replaced by capitalism, and this is very clearly expressed in the images of Ranevskaya, a ruined noblewoman, and Lopakhin, a wealthy man, and the grandson of a former serf. In these two estates, Chekhov saw the successors of national culture. In the nobility, the writer saw first of all the center of Russian culture. Here, of course, one should not forget about serfdom, which is mentioned in the play, but still culture comes first.
Ranevskaya and Lopakhin
One of the main characters is Ranevskaya, she is the mistress of the estate and its soul. And that's why, despite all her vices and frivolity (and many theaters emphasize that in Paris she became a drug addict), when she returned to her homeland in her father's house, everything around her changed and came to life. The inhabitants, who seemed to have left forever, were drawn into the house.
Another key main character- Lopakhin, who is exactly a match for her. He also loves poetry, he has gentle and thin fingers, like an artist, a sensitive and vulnerable soul. In Ranevskaya, he strongly feels his own soul. However, the vulgarity of life began to attack him from all sides, and he acquires some features of a rude merchant who focuses on his democratic origin and even flaunts his lack of culture, which was then a prestigious norm in "advanced circles." But he, too, is waiting for Ranevskaya to at least somehow cleanse himself near her and try to resume his artistic and poetic hobbies and passions again. In order to carefully deal with the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama or a comedy, one must go to a deeper analysis of the work.
patronage
So, such a vision of the capitalists in Chekhov was really based on real facts. Then many people who had become rich by the end of the century showed great interest, care and love for culture. This can be seen in the example of such large capitalist patrons as Mamontov, Zimin, Morozov, who maintained entire theaters. Or take the Tretyakov brothers, who founded the famous art gallery in the capital, or the merchant's son Alekseev, who is better known to all of us under the pseudonym Stanislavsky. By the way, he brought not only a huge creative potential to the theater, but also all his father's wealth, which was also considerable.
But if we talk about Lopakhin, he is a capitalist of a different order, and that is why he did not succeed in relations with Varya. After all, they are not a couple at all, she is a subtle poetic soul, he is an already wealthy merchant, a mundane and ordinary nature. For him, Varya, the adopted daughter of Ranevskaya, became, alas, the prose of life.
Chekhov
Considering more deeply the topic “The problem of the genre. "The Cherry Orchard": drama or comedy", it is worth noting that Anton Pavlovich reflected in it many of his life impressions and visions. This is the sale of his native estate in Taganrog, and acquaintance with Kiselev, who became the prototype of the hero Gaev, in his estate Babkino, the Chekhov family spent two years in a row, from 1885 to 1887, resting in the summer, it was sold for debts.
When Chekhov visited the Lintvarev estate in the Kharkov province, he saw many neglected and ruined noble estates there, which prompted him to the plot of the play. It was in it that he wanted to display some details of the life of the former inhabitants of the old noble estates.
"The Cherry Orchard". Reviews
Work on the work "The Cherry Orchard" was very difficult, the sick Chekhov wrote to friends that he was working with unbearable torment and was writing four lines a day. About the play "The Cherry Orchard" he will also write to M.P. Alekseeva that he did not come out with a drama, but a comedy, and even a farce in places. O. L. Knipper notes that the play is quite cheerful and frivolous. But K. S. Stanislavsky attributed it to the drama of Russian life, he will write: “This is not a comedy, this is a tragedy ... I cried like a woman.”
And now, returning to the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama, a comedy or a tragedy, it must be said that at the premiere of the play on his birthday, January 17, 1904, it seemed to Chekhov that the theater presented it in the wrong tone, that this is not a tearful drama, and the role of Lopukhin and Varya should generally be comic. But Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko, while appreciating the play very highly, nevertheless perceived it more as a drama. There were critics who considered it a tragicomedy. But A. I. Revyakin in his review writes that if we recognize the play as a drama, then we must recognize the experiences of all the owners of the Ranevskys and Gaevs as truly dramatic, causing compassion and deep sympathy for those people who looked not to the past, but to the future. But this is not and cannot be. Therefore, the play cannot be accepted as a tragicomedy, because for this it lacks neither tragicomic situations nor heroes.
controversy
Disputes about the genre - "The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy, still do not stop. Moreover, the range has also expanded to a circle or tragicomedy. Therefore, it turns out to be almost impossible to unambiguously answer the question that Chekhov involuntarily created: “The Cherry Orchard” - a drama or a comedy?
And once again, referring to the letters written by the great classic of Russian literature and playwright A.P. Chekhov, we will find lines that describe his true attitude to life, which indicates that after summer winter will surely come, after youth, old age will come, happiness and unhappiness will also periodically replace each other, and a person cannot always be healthy and cheerful, because failures, losses will always lie in wait for him, and he will never be able to protect himself from death, even if he Macedonian himself. In life, no matter how sad and sad it may look, you need to be ready for everything and treat the events that take place as inevitable and necessary. "You only need to fulfill your duty to the best of your ability - and nothing more." In the work "The Cherry Orchard" all these thoughts are consonant with the feelings that it evokes.
Conclusion
Chekhov claims that fiction has such a name due to the fact that it describes life as it is. And she has her own purpose - to carry the truth, unconditional and honest. This is how you can end the discussion of the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a tragedy, drama or comedy. Everyone can write their own essay on this topic, because it is quite extensive and requires consideration of various points of view.
Comedy in 4 acts
CHARACTERS
Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna, landowner.
Anya, her daughter, 17 years old.
Varya, her adopted daughter, aged 24.
Gaev Leonid Andreevich, brother of Ranevskaya.
Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich, merchant.
Trofimov Petr Sergeevich, student.
Simeonov-Pishchik Boris Borisovich, landowner.
Charlotte Ivanovna, governess.
Epikhodov Semyon Panteleevich, clerk.
Dunyasha, housemaid.
Firs, footman, old man 87 years old.
Yasha, a young footman.
Passerby.
Station manager.
Postal official.
Guests, servants.
The action takes place in the estate of L. A. Ranevskaya.
STEP ONE
The room, which is still called the nursery. One of the doors leads to Anna's room. Dawn, soon the sun will rise. It's already May, the cherry trees are blooming, but it's cold in the garden, it's a matinee. The windows in the room are closed.
Enter Dunyasha with a candle and Lopakhin with a book in his hand.
Lopakhin. The train arrived, thank God. What time is it now?
Dunyasha. Two soon. (Extinguishes the candle.) It's already light.
Lopakhin. How late was the train? Two hours, at least. (Yawns and stretches.) I'm good, what a fool I made! I came here on purpose to meet me at the station, and suddenly I overslept... I fell asleep while sitting. Annoyance ... If only you would wake me up.
Dunyasha. I thought you left. (Listens.) It looks like they are already on their way.
Lopakhin(listens). No ... get luggage, then yes ...
Pause.
Lyubov Andreevna lived abroad for five years, I don’t know what she has become now ... She is a good person. Easy, simple person. I remember when I was a boy of about fifteen, my father, the deceased - he then traded here in the village in a shop - hit me in the face with his fist, blood came from the nose ... Then we came together for some reason to the yard, and he was drunk. Lyubov Andreevna, as I remember now, still young, so thin, led me to the washstand, in this very room, in the nursery. “Don’t cry, he says, little man, he will heal before the wedding ...”
Pause.
Little man... My father, it's true, was a man, but here I am in a white waistcoat and yellow shoes. With a pig's snout in a kalashny row ... Only now he is rich, there is a lot of money, but if you think and figure it out, then a peasant is a peasant ... (Flips through the book.) I read the book and didn't understand anything. Read and fell asleep.
Pause.
Dunyasha. And the dogs did not sleep all night, they can smell that the owners are coming.
Lopakhin. What are you, Dunyasha, such a ...
Dunyasha. Hands are shaking. I will faint.
Lopakhin. You are very gentle, Dunyasha. And you dress like a young lady, and your hair too. You can not do it this way. We must remember ourselves.
Epikhodov enters with a bouquet; he is in a jacket and in brightly polished boots that creak strongly; entering, he drops the bouquet.
Epikhodov(raises bouquet). Here the gardener sent, he says, put it in the dining room. (Gives Dunyasha a bouquet.)
Lopakhin. And bring me kvass.
Dunyasha. I'm listening. (Exits.)
Epikhodov. Now it's a matinee, the frost is three degrees, and the cherry is all in bloom. I can't approve of our climate. (Sighs.) I can not. Our climate cannot help just right. Here, Ermolai Alekseich, allow me to add, I bought myself boots the third day, and I dare to assure you, they creak so that there is no possibility. What to grease?
Lopakhin. Leave me alone. Tired.
Epikhodov. Every day some misfortune happens to me. And I don’t grumble, I’m used to it and even smile.
Dunyasha enters, serves kvass to Lopakhin.
I will go. (Bumps into a chair, which falls over.) Here… (As if triumphant.) You see, sorry for the expression, what a circumstance, by the way ... It's just wonderful! (Exits.)
Dunyasha. And to me, Ermolai Alekseich, I confess, Epikhodov made an offer.
Lopakhin. BUT!
Dunyasha. I don’t know how ... He is a meek person, but only sometimes, as soon as he starts talking, you won’t understand anything. And good, and sensitive, just incomprehensible. I seem to like him. He loves me madly. He is an unhappy man, every day something. They tease him like that with us: twenty-two misfortunes ...
Lopakhin(listens). Looks like they're on their way...
Dunyasha. They're coming! What is it with me ... all cold.
Lopakhin. They go, in fact. Let's go meet. Will she recognize me? Haven't seen each other for five years.
Dunyasha(in excitement). I'm going to fall... Oh, I'm going to fall!
You can hear two carriages pulling up to the house. Lopakhin and Dunyasha leave quickly. The stage is empty. There is noise in the neighboring rooms. Firs, who had come to meet Lyubov Andreevna, hurriedly passes across the stage, leaning on a stick; he is in an ancient livery and a tall hat; something speaks to itself, but not a single word can be made out. The background noise gets louder and louder. Voice: "Here, let's go here ..." Lyubov Andreevna, Anya and Charlotte Ivanovna with a dog on a chain, dressed like a traveler, Varya in a coat and scarf, Gaev, Simeonov-Pishchik, Lopakhin, Dunyasha with a knot and an umbrella, servants with things - everyone walks across the room.
Anya. Let's go here. Do you remember what room this is?
Lyubov Andreevna(joyfully, through tears). Children's!
Varya. How cold, my hands are numb (Lyubov Andreevna.) Your rooms, white and purple, are the same, Mommy.
Lyubov Andreevna. Children's, my dear, beautiful room ... I slept here when I was little ... (Crying.) And now I'm like a little... (He kisses his brother, Varya, then again his brother.) And Varya is still the same, she looks like a nun. And I recognized Dunyasha ... (Kisses Dunyasha.)
Gaev. The train was two hours late. What is it? What are the orders?
Charlotte(Pishchiku). My dog eats nuts too.
Pishchik(surprised). You think!
Everyone leaves except Anya and Dunyasha.
Dunyasha. We waited… (Takes off Ani's coat and hat.)
Anya. I did not sleep on the road for four nights ... now I am very cold.
Dunyasha. You left in Lent, then there was snow, there was frost, and now? My sweetheart! (Laughs, kisses her.) I've been waiting for you, my joy, my little light... I'll tell you now, I can't stand one minute...
Anya(sluggishly). Something again...
Dunyasha. The clerk Epikhodov proposed to me after the saint.
Anya. You are all about the same... (Fixing her hair.) I lost all my pins... (She is very tired, even staggers.)
Dunyasha. I don't know what to think. He loves me, he loves me so!
Anya(looks at his door, tenderly). My room, my windows, like I never left. I'm home! Tomorrow morning I will get up and run to the garden... Oh, if only I could sleep! I did not sleep all the way, anxiety tormented me.
Dunyasha. On the third day Pyotr Sergeyevich arrived.
Anya(joyfully). Peter!
Arts and Entertainment"The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy (composition)? Genre problem
July 10, 2015The last comedy play by A.P. Chekhov became "The Cherry Orchard". After the play "Three Sisters", a somewhat tragic work, Chekhov suddenly thought about a new one. And for some reason, he wanted, and even wrote about it to his friends, so that this time she would be very funny, at least by design. To answer the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama or a comedy, it is worth noting that the author himself defined it as the second genre. However, even during the life of Chekhov, when the first production took place at the Moscow Art Theater, the play was presented as a heavy drama and even tragedy.
"The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy? Composition
Then where is the truth? Drama, by its definition, is a literary work that is designed primarily for stage life. It is on the stage that it finds its full-fledged existence, reveals the meaning inherent in it, which further determines its genre. But the last word in the definition of the genre, be that as it may, has always been with the theater, directors and actors. It is a well-known fact that Chekhov's innovative ideas as a playwright were assimilated and perceived by theaters reluctantly and not immediately, but for a long time and with great difficulty. If you write about The Cherry Orchard as a drama or a comedy, an essay on this topic can be based on the Moscow Art Theater's traditional interpretation that this is a dramatic elegy - a definition that was assigned to the play by the authorities of theatrical art, such as Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko. Chekhov, on this occasion, nevertheless managed to express his indignation to the theater with such an interpretation.
"The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy? Briefly about everything
According to the plot of the play, the former owners of the estate say goodbye to their family nest. In the second half of the 19th century, even before Chekhov, this topic was often covered in Russian literature in dramatic, tragic, and comical ways. Let's try to figure out what are the features of solving this problem and how to correctly perceive "The Cherry Orchard" - is it a drama or a comedy.
This attitude of Chekhov was determined by the fact that the nobility, gradually becoming obsolete and fading into social oblivion, was replaced by capitalism, and this is very clearly expressed in the images of Ranevskaya, a ruined noblewoman, and Lopakhin, a wealthy man, and the grandson of a former serf. In these two estates, Chekhov saw the successors of national culture. In the nobility, the writer saw first of all the center of Russian culture. Here, of course, one should not forget about serfdom, which is mentioned in the play, but still culture comes first.
Ranevskaya and Lopakhin
One of the main characters is Ranevskaya, she is the mistress of the estate and its soul. And that's why, despite all her vices and frivolity (and many theaters emphasize that in Paris she became a drug addict), when she returned to her homeland in her father's house, everything around her changed and came to life. The inhabitants, who seemed to have left forever, were drawn into the house.
Another key protagonist is Lopakhin, who is exactly a match for her. He also loves poetry, he has gentle and thin fingers, like an artist, a sensitive and vulnerable soul. In Ranevskaya, he strongly feels his own soul. However, the vulgarity of life began to attack him from all sides, and he acquires some features of a rude merchant who focuses on his democratic origin and even flaunts his lack of culture, which was then a prestigious norm in "advanced circles." But he, too, is waiting for Ranevskaya to at least somehow cleanse himself near her and try to resume his artistic and poetic hobbies and passions again. In order to carefully deal with the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama or a comedy, one must go to a deeper analysis of the work.
patronage
So, such a vision of the capitalists in Chekhov was really based on real facts. Then many people who had become rich by the end of the century showed great interest, care and love for culture. This can be seen in the example of such large capitalist patrons as Mamontov, Zimin, Morozov, who maintained entire theaters. Or take the Tretyakov brothers, who founded the famous art gallery in the capital, or the merchant's son Alekseev, who is better known to all of us under the pseudonym Stanislavsky. By the way, he brought not only a huge creative potential to the theater, but also all his father's wealth, which was also considerable.
But if we talk about Lopakhin, he is a capitalist of a different order, and that is why he did not succeed in relations with Varya. After all, they are not a couple at all, she is a subtle poetic soul, he is an already wealthy merchant, a mundane and ordinary nature. For him, Varya, the adopted daughter of Ranevskaya, became, alas, the prose of life.
Chekhov
Considering more deeply the topic “The problem of the genre. "The Cherry Orchard": drama or comedy", it is worth noting that Anton Pavlovich reflected in it many of his life impressions and visions. This is the sale of his native estate in Taganrog, and acquaintance with Kiselev, who became the prototype of the hero Gaev, in his estate Babkino, the Chekhov family spent two years in a row, from 1885 to 1887, resting in the summer, it was sold for debts.
When Chekhov visited the Lintvarev estate in the Kharkov province, he saw many neglected and ruined noble estates there, which prompted him to the plot of the play. It was in it that he wanted to display some details of the life of the former inhabitants of the old noble estates.
"The Cherry Orchard". Reviews
Work on the work "The Cherry Orchard" was very difficult, the sick Chekhov wrote to friends that he was working with unbearable torment and was writing four lines a day. About the play "The Cherry Orchard" he will also write to M.P. Alekseeva that he did not come out with a drama, but a comedy, and even a farce in places. O. L. Knipper notes that the play is quite cheerful and frivolous. But K. S. Stanislavsky attributed it to the drama of Russian life, he will write: “This is not a comedy, this is a tragedy ... I cried like a woman.”
And now, returning to the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a drama, a comedy or a tragedy, it must be said that at the premiere of the play on his birthday, January 17, 1904, it seemed to Chekhov that the theater presented it in the wrong tone, that this is not a tearful drama, and the role of Lopukhin and Varya should generally be comic. But Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko, while appreciating the play very highly, nevertheless perceived it more as a drama. There were critics who considered it a tragicomedy. But A. I. Revyakin in his review writes that if we recognize the play as a drama, then we must recognize the experiences of all the owners of the Ranevskys and Gaevs as truly dramatic, causing compassion and deep sympathy for those people who looked not to the past, but to the future. But this is not and cannot be. Therefore, the play cannot be accepted as a tragicomedy, because for this it lacks neither tragicomic situations nor heroes.
controversy
Disputes about the genre - "The Cherry Orchard" - drama or comedy, still do not stop. Moreover, the range has also expanded to the circle of lyrical comedy or tragicomedy. Therefore, it turns out to be almost impossible to unambiguously answer the question that Chekhov involuntarily created: “The Cherry Orchard” - a drama or a comedy?
And once again, referring to the letters written by the great classic of Russian literature and playwright A.P. Chekhov, we will find lines that describe his true attitude to life, which indicates that after summer winter will surely come, after youth, old age will come, happiness and unhappiness will also periodically replace each other, and a person cannot always be healthy and cheerful, because failures, losses will always lie in wait for him, and he will never be able to protect himself from death, even if he Macedonian himself. In life, no matter how sad and sad it may look, you need to be ready for everything and treat the events that take place as inevitable and necessary. "You only need to fulfill your duty to the best of your ability - and nothing more." In the work "The Cherry Orchard" all these thoughts are consonant with the feelings that it evokes.
Conclusion
Chekhov claims that fiction has such a name because it describes life as it is. And she has her own purpose - to carry the truth, unconditional and honest. This is how you can end the discussion of the question of whether The Cherry Orchard is a tragedy, drama or comedy. Everyone can write their own essay on this topic, because it is quite extensive and requires consideration of various points of view.
"THE CHERRY ORDER" - DRAMA, COMEDY OR TRAGEDY? The play "The Cherry Orchard" was written by A.P. Chekhov in 1903. Not only the socio-political world, but also the world of art was in need of renewal. A.P. Chekhov, being a talented person who showed his skill in short stories, enters dramaturgy as an innovator.
After the premiere of The Cherry Orchard, a lot of controversy broke out among critics and spectators, among actors and directors about the genre features of the play. What is The Cherry Orchard in terms of genre - drama, tragedy or comedy? While working on the play, A.P. Chekhov spoke in letters about her character as a whole: “I did not come out with 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, that in general there should not be “a lot of crying” in the play.
The production, despite the resounding success, did not satisfy A.P. Chekhov. Anton Pavlovich expressed dissatisfaction with the general interpretation of the play: “Why is my play so stubbornly called a drama on posters and in newspaper ads? Nemirovich and Alekseev (Stanislavsky) positively see in my play 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 exclude A.
P. Chekhov serious and sad. Stanislavsky, obviously, violated Chekhov's measure in the ratio of the dramatic to the comic, the sad to the funny. The result was a drama where A.P. Chekhov insisted on a lyrical comedy. One of the features of The Cherry Orchard is that all the characters are presented in a dual, tragicomic light. There are purely comic characters in the play: Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov, Yasha, Firs.
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov laughs at Gaev, who “lived his fortune on candies”, at the sentimental Ranevskaya and her practical helplessness beyond her age. Even over Petya Trofimov, who, it would seem, symbolizes the renewal of Russia, A.P. Chekhov is ironic, calling him "an eternal student." This attitude of the author Petya Trofimov deserved his verbosity, which A.P.
Chekhov couldn't stand it. Petya utters monologues about workers who "eat disgustingly, sleep without pillows," about the rich, who "live on credit, 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, doing nothing for five months, keeps telling others that "we need to work." And this is with the hardworking Varya and the businesslike Lopakhin! Trofimov does not study, because he cannot study and support himself at the same time.
Petya Ranevskaya gives a very sharp, but accurate description of Trofimov’s “spirituality” and “tact”: “... You don’t have cleanliness, but you are just a neat person.” A.P. Chekhov speaks with irony about his behavior in remarks. Trofimov now cries out "with horror," then, choking with indignation, cannot utter a word, then threatens to leave and cannot do it in any way. There are certain sympathetic notes in A.
P. Chekhov in the image of Lopakhin. He does everything possible to help Ranevskaya keep the estate. Lopakhin is sensitive and kind. But in double coverage, he is far from ideal: there is a business lack of wings in him, Lopakhin is not able to get carried away and love. In relations 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 with tears a significant phrase: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.”
Here Lopakhin directly touches the main source of drama: he is not in the struggle for the cherry orchard, but in dissatisfaction with life, experienced differently by all the heroes of the story. Life goes on absurdly and awkwardly, bringing neither joy nor 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 the comic conflict, literary critics argue that it rests on the discrepancy between appearance and essence (comedy of positions, comedy of characters, etc.). In A.P.'s New Comedy
Chekhov's words, deeds and actions of the characters are in just such a discrepancy. Everyone's inner drama turns out to be more important than external events (the so-called "undercurrents"). Hence the “tearfulness” of the actors, persons, which does not have a tragic connotation at all. Monologues and remarks “through tears” most likely speak of excessive sentimentality, nervousness, sometimes even irritability of the characters. Hence the all-pervading Chekhovian irony. It seems that the author, as it were, asks questions to both viewers, readers, and himself: why do people waste their lives so mediocrely? Why are people so careless about their loved ones? why do they so irresponsibly spend words and vitality, naively believing that they will live forever and there will be an opportunity to live life cleanly, anew? The heroes of the play deserve both pity and merciless "laughter through tears invisible to the world."
Traditionally, in Soviet literary criticism, it was customary to “group” the heroes of the play, calling Gaev and Ranevskaya representatives of the “past” of Russia, her “present” - Lopa-khin, and the “future” - Petya and Anya. It seems to me that this is not entirely true. In one of the stage versions of the play "The Cherry Orchard", the future of Russia turns out to be with such people as Yasha, the lackey, who looks to where power and money are. A.P. Chekhov, in my opinion, cannot do without irony here. After all, a little more than ten years will pass, and where will the Lopakhins, Gaevs, Ranevskys and Trofimovs end up when the Yakovs will judge them? With sorrow and regret.
P. Chekhov is looking for Man in his play and, it seems to me, he does not find it. Of course, the play "The Cherry Orchard" is a complex, ambiguous play. That is why the attention of directors from many countries is riveted to it, and four performances were presented at the penultimate theater festival in Moscow. Disputes about the genre have not subsided so far. But do not forget that A.P. Chekhov himself called the work a comedy, and I tried to prove in the essay, as far as possible, why this is so