The Cherry Orchard is the problem of the interrelation of generations. Composition on the topic Three generations in play A
The play " The Cherry Orchard” was written by Chekhov in 1903. This is a time when great social changes are brewing in Russia, a premonition of a "healthy and strong storm" is felt. Dissatisfaction with life, vague and indefinite, embraces all classes. Writers express it in different ways in their work. Gorky creates images of rebels, strong and lonely, heroic and bright characters, in which he embodies the dream of a proud Man of the future. The symbolists, through unsteady, vague images, convey the feeling of the end of the present world, the disturbing mood of the impending catastrophe, which is terrible and desirable. Chekhov, in his own way, conveys these same moods in his dramatic works.
Chekhov's drama is a completely new phenomenon in Russian art. It lacks acute social conflicts. In the play "The Cherry Orchard" all the characters are seized with anxiety and a thirst for change. Although the action of this sad comedy revolves around the question of who gets the cherry orchard, the characters do not enter into a fierce struggle. Here there is no usual conflict between predator and prey or two predators (as, for example, in the plays of A. N. Ostrovsky), although in the end the garden goes to the merchant Yermolai Lopakhin, and he is completely devoid of predatory grip. Chekhov creates a situation in which open enmity between heroes with different views on life, belonging to different classes, is simply impossible. All of them are interconnected by love, family relationships, for them the estate where events unfold is almost a home.
So, there are three main groups of characters in the play. The older generation is Ranevskaya and Gaev, half-ruined nobles, personifying the past. Today, the middle generation, is represented by the merchant Lopakhin. And, finally, the youngest heroes, whose fate is in the future, are Anya, the daughter of Ranevskaya, and Petya Trofimov, a raznochinets, a teacher of Ranevskaya's son.
All of them have a completely different attitude to the problem associated with the fate of the cherry orchard. For Ranevskaya and Gaev, the garden is their whole life. Here they spent their childhood, youth, happy and tragic memories bind them to this place. In addition, this is their state, that is, all that is left of it.
Yermolai Lopakhin looks at the cherry orchard with completely different eyes. For him, this is primarily a source of income, but not only. He dreams of acquiring a garden, as it is the embodiment of a way of life that is inaccessible to the son and grandson of serfs, the embodiment of an unattainable dream of something else. beautiful world. However, it is Lopakhin who persistently offers Ranevskaya to save the estate from ruin. This is where the true conflict is revealed: differences arise not so much on economic as on ideological grounds. Thus, we see that without taking advantage of Lopakhin's offer, Ranevskaya loses her fortune not only because of her inability to do something, because of lack of will, but because the garden for her is a symbol of beauty. “My dear, I’m sorry, you don’t understand anything. If there is anything interesting, even remarkable, in the whole province, it is only our cherry orchard.” He represents for her both material and, more importantly, spiritual value.
The scene of the purchase of the garden by Lopakhin is the climactic scene in the play. Here is the highest point of the hero's triumph; his wildest dreams came true. We hear the voice of a real merchant, reminiscent in part of Ostrovsky’s heroes (“Music, play clearly! Let everything be as I wish. I can pay for everything”), but also the voice of a deeply suffering person, not satisfied with life (“My poor, good, now (with tears.) Oh, if only everything would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.
The leitmotif of the play is the expectation of change. But do the heroes do something for this? Lopakhin only knows how to make money. But this does not satisfy his “thin, tender soul”, which feels beauty, longing for real life. He does not know how to find himself, his true path.
Well, what about the younger generation? Perhaps he has an answer to the question of how to live on? Petya Trofimov convinces Anya that the cherry orchard is a symbol of the past, which is terrible and needs to be rejected as soon as possible: “Really from every cherry in the garden, from every leaf. human beings do not look at you. Owning living souls - because it reborn you all. you live in debt, at someone else's expense. » Petya looks at life exclusively from a social point of view, through the eyes of a commoner, a democrat. There is a lot of justice in his speeches, but they do not have a concrete idea of resolving eternal issues. For Chekhov, he is the same "clunky" as most of the characters, "a shabby gentleman" who understands little in real life.
The image of Anya appears in the play as the brightest and most uncomplicated. It is full of hope, vitality, but in it Chekhov emphasizes inexperience, childishness.
“All of Russia is our garden,” says Petya Trofimov. Yes, in Chekhov's play central theme- this is the fate of not only the cherry orchard, owned by Ranevskaya. This dramatic work is a poetic reflection on the fate of the Motherland. The author does not yet see a hero in Russian life who could become a savior, a real owner of the "cherry orchard", the keeper of its beauty and wealth. All the characters in this play (excluding Yasha) evoke sympathy, sympathy, but also a sad smile from the author. All of them are sad not only about their personal fate, but they feel a general ill-being, rushing, as it were, in the very air. Chekhov's play does not resolve issues, nor does it give us an idea of the future fate of the characters.
A tragic chord completes the drama - the old servant Firs, who has been forgotten, remains in the boarded-up house. This is a reproach to all the heroes, a symbol of indifference, disunity of people. However, the play also contains optimistic notes of hope, although uncertain, but always living in a person, because life is directed to the future, because the old generation is always replaced by youth.
www.razumniki.ru
Cherry Orchard Generational Dispute
1. Problems of the play by A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”.
2. Features of the genre of the play.
3. The main conflict of the play and its characters:
a) the embodiment of the past - Ranevskaya, Gaev;
b) the spokesman for the ideas of the present - Lopakhin;
c) the heroes of the future - Anya and Petya.
4. Tragedy of the era - breaking the connection of times.
1. The play "The Cherry Orchard" was completed by A.P. Chekhov in 1903. And although it reflects the real social phenomena of those years, the play turned out to be in tune with the moods of subsequent generations - primarily because it touches on eternal problems: this is dissatisfaction with life and the desire to change it, the destruction of harmony between people, their mutual alienation, loneliness, weakening of kindred connections and loss of spiritual roots.
2. Chekhov himself believed that his play was a comedy. It can be attributed to a lyrical comedy, where the funny is intertwined with the sad, the comic with the tragic, just like in real life.
3. The central image of the play is the cherry orchard, which unites all the characters. The Cherry Orchard is both a specific garden, common for estates, and an image-symbol - a symbol of the beauty of Russian nature, Russia. The whole play is permeated with a sad feeling from the death of a beautiful cherry orchard.
In the play, we do not see a bright conflict, everything, it would seem, goes on as usual. The heroes of the play behave calmly, there are no open quarrels and clashes between them. And yet, the existence of a conflict is felt, but hidden, internal. Behind the usual conversations, behind the calm attitude towards each other, the heroes of the play hide their misunderstanding of each other. The main conflict of the play "The Cherry Orchard" is a misunderstanding between generations. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future.
The older generation is Ranevskaya, Gaev, half-ruined nobles, personifying the past. Today, the middle generation, is represented by Lopakhin. The youngest generation, whose fate is in the future, is represented by Anya, the daughter of Ranevskaya, and Petya Trofimov, a commoner, a teacher of Ranevskaya's son.
a) The owners of the cherry orchard seem to us graceful, refined people, full of love to others, able to feel the beauty and charm of nature. They carefully keep the memory of the past, love their home: “I slept in this nursery, looked at the garden from here, happiness woke up with me every morning. ”- recalls Lyubov Andreevna. Once, Lyubov Andreevna, then still a young girl, consoled Yermolai Lopakhin, a fifteen-year-old “peasant”, whom his father, a shopkeeper, hit in the face with his fist. Lopakhin cannot forget the kindness of Lyubov Andreevna, he loves her, “like his own. more than native." She is affectionate with everyone: she calls the old servant Firs “my old man”, rejoices at meeting him, and when leaving, she asks several times if he has been sent to the hospital. She is generous not only to the person she loves, who deceived her and robbed her, but also to a random passerby, to whom she gives the last piece of gold. Without a penny in her pocket, she asks to lend money to Semyonov-Pishchik. Relations between family members are imbued with sympathy for each other and delicacy. No one reproaches Ranevskaya, who actually led to the collapse of her estate, Gaev, who “ate a fortune on candy”. The nobility of Ranevskaya is that she does not blame anyone but herself for the misfortune that befell her - this is a punishment for the fact that “we have sinned a lot. ". Ranevskaya lives only with memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not want to think about the future. Chekhov considers Ranevskaya and Gaev to be the culprits of their tragedy. They behave like small children who close their eyes in fear when they are in danger. Therefore, both Gaev and Ranevskaya so diligently avoid talking about the real plan of salvation put forward by Lopakhin, hoping for a miracle: if Anya married a rich man, if the Yaroslavl aunt sent money. But neither Ranevskaya nor Gaev are trying to change anything. Speaking of the “beautiful” old life, they seem to have resigned themselves to their misfortune, let everything take its course, give in without a fight.
b) Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a man of the present. On the one hand, this is a person with a subtle and tender soul, able to appreciate beauty, loyal and noble; He is a hard worker, working from morning to night. But on the other hand, the world of money has already subjugated him. The businessman Lopakhin conquered his “subtle and tender soul”: he cannot read books, he is unable to love. His efficiency has eroded spirituality in him, and he himself understands this. Lopakhin feels himself the master of life. “The new owner of the cherry orchard is coming!” “Let everything as I wish!” he says. Lopakhin did not forget his past, and now the moment of his triumph has come: “beaten, illiterate Yermolai” bought “an estate, more beautiful than which there is nothing in the world”, an estate “where father and grandfather were slaves”.
But Yermolai Lopakhin remained a “peasant”, despite the fact that he went “to the people”. He is unable to understand one thing: the cherry orchard is not only a symbol of beauty, it is a kind of thread that connects the past with the present. You can't cut your own roots. And the fact that Lopakhin does not understand this is his main mistake.
At the end of the play, he says: “I would rather change. our awkward, unhappy life!” But how to do it, he knows only in words. But in fact, he cuts down the garden in order to build summer cottages there, thereby destroying the old one, which was replaced by his time. Destroyed the old, 'torn days binding thread”, and the new one has not yet been created, and it is not known whether it will be created at least someday. The author does not rush to conclusions.
c) Petya and Anya, coming to replace Lopakhin, represent the future. Petya is an “eternal student”, always hungry, sick, unkempt, but a proud person; lives by labor alone, educated, intelligent. His judgments are deep. Denying the past, he predicts the short duration of Lopakhin's stay, as he sees his predatory essence. He is full of faith in a new life: “Humanity is moving towards the highest truth, towards the highest happiness, which is possible on earth, and I am in the forefront!” Petya managed to inspire Anya with a desire to work, to live at her own expense. She no longer feels sorry for the garden, because ahead of her is a life full of joyful work for the common good: “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this. Will her dreams come true? Unknown. After all, she still does not know life to change it. And Petya looks at everything too superficially: not knowing true life, he tries to rebuild it on the basis of ideas alone. Yes, and in the whole appearance of this hero, some kind of insufficiency, shallowness, lack of a healthy vitality shows through. The author cannot trust him. the beautiful future he talks about. Petya does not even try to save the garden, he does not care about the problem that worries the author himself.
4. There is no time connection in the play, the gap between generations is heard in the sound of a broken string. The author does not yet see a hero in Russian life who could become the real owner of the “cherry orchard”, the keeper of its beauty.
The peculiarity of the conflict in the play "The Cherry Orchard". Representatives of the past, present and future. (Chekhov A.P.)
What is conflict? Conflict is disagreement between people. In the play "The Cherry Orchard" Chekhov considers different conflicts, the main of which is the conflict of times, it can be compared with the conflict of generations. Because all the characters are representatives of different generations and different times. It can be conditionally divided into three groups, so past, present, future.
Young people are for the future, and older people are for the past.
The conflict lies in the fact that it does not have a pronounced character - this is one of the features dramatic works. Chekhov may note a kind of philosophical conflict, which is based on different time levels.
Some of the heroes live in memories and the past in which it was comfortable and calm (Examples of the heroes were Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs). Others live in the present, in which they feel like households of life, examples are the characters Lopakhin and Varya.
The third group of characters is directed to the future, progressively, it seems to them that the future is wonderful, but it is not known how to achieve what they want. Anya and Petya belong to this category. These heroes are young and inexperienced, so they are waiting for a brighter fate.
They are young and want to become independent and leave the garden, while adults, on the contrary, cannot live without a settled place. The older, the more difficult it is to change life, living conditions.
Thus, the author wants to show that the basis of this conflict is the conflict of fathers and children. That is, all conflicts between people of different ages are often due to misunderstanding and mutual distrust. It is important for harmony to perceive each other with patience and to their culture.
Effective preparation for the exam (all subjects) - start preparing
www.kritika24.ru
The main conflict in the play "The Cherry Orchard"
Conflict in drama
One of the features of Chekhov's dramaturgy was the absence of open conflicts, which is quite unexpected for dramatic works, because it is the conflict that is the driving force of the entire play, and it was important for Anton Pavlovich to show people's lives through the description of everyday life, thereby bringing the stage characters closer to the viewer. As a rule, the conflict finds expression in the plot of the work, organizing it, internal dissatisfaction, the desire to get something, or not to lose it pushes the characters to do something. Conflicts can be external and internal, and their manifestation can be obvious or hidden, so Chekhov successfully hid the conflict in the play "The Cherry Orchard" behind everyday difficulties. actors present as an integral part of that modernity.
The origins of the conflict in the play "The Cherry Orchard" and its originality
To understand the main conflict in the play "The Cherry Orchard" it is necessary to take into account the time of writing this work and the circumstances of its creation. Chekhov wrote The Cherry Orchard at the beginning of the 20th century, when Russia was at the crossroads of eras, when the revolution was inevitably approaching, and many felt the impending enormous changes in the entire habitual and established way of life of Russian society. Many writers of that time tried to comprehend and understand the changes taking place in the country, and Anton Pavlovich was no exception. The play "The Cherry Orchard" was presented to the public in 1904, becoming the final in the work and life of the great writer, and in it Chekhov reflected his thoughts about the fate of his country.
The decline of the nobility, caused by changes in the social structure and the inability to adapt to new conditions; separation from their roots not only of landowners, but also of peasants who began to move to the city; the birth of a new class of the bourgeoisie, who came to the place of the merchant class; the emergence of intellectuals who came from the common people - and all this against the background of the emerging general discontent with life - this is perhaps the main source of the conflict in the comedy "The Cherry Orchard". The destruction of dominant ideas and spiritual purity affected society, and the playwright caught it on a subconscious level.
Feeling the coming changes, Chekhov tried to convey his feelings to the viewer through the peculiarity of the conflict in the play The Cherry Orchard, which became a new type, characteristic of all his dramaturgy. This conflict does not originate between people or social forces, it manifests itself in the discrepancy and repulsion of real life, its denial and replacement. And it could not be played, this conflict could only be felt. By the beginning of the 20th century, society was not yet able to accept this, and it was necessary to rebuild not only the theater, but also the audience, and for the theater, which knew and was able to reveal open confrontations, it was practically impossible to convey the features of the conflict in the play The Cherry Orchard. That is why Chekhov was disappointed with the premiere. Indeed, out of habit, the conflict marked the clash of the past in the face of impoverished landowners and the future. However, the future closely connected with Petya Trofimov and Anya does not fit into Chekhov's logic. It is unlikely that Anton Pavlovich connected the future with the “shabby gentleman” and “eternal student” Petya, who was not even able to keep track of the safety of his old galoshes, or Anya, in explaining whose role, Chekhov made the main emphasis on her youth, and this was the main requirement for performer.
Lopakhin is the central character in revealing the main conflict of the play
Why did Chekhov focus on the role of Lopakhin, saying that if his character fails, then the whole play will fail? At first glance, it is precisely Lopakhin's opposition to the frivolous and passive owners of the garden that is a conflict in his classical interpretation, and Lopakhin's triumph after the purchase is his permission. However, it was precisely this interpretation that the author feared. The playwright said many times, fearing the coarsening of the role, that Lopakhin is a merchant, but not in his traditional sense, that he is a soft person, and in no case can one trust his portrayal of a “screamer”. After all, it is through the correct disclosure of the image of Lopakhin that it becomes possible to understand the entire conflict of the play.
So what is the main conflict of the play? Lopakhin is trying to tell the owners of the estate how to save their property, offering the only real option, but they do not heed his advice. To show the sincerity of his desire to help, Chekhov makes it clear about Lopakhin's tender feelings for Lyubov Andreevna. But despite all the attempts to reason and influence the owners, Ermolai Alekseevich, the “man is a man,” becomes the new owner of a beautiful cherry orchard. And he is glad, but this is fun through tears. Yes, he bought it. He knows what to do with his acquisition in order to make a profit. But why does Lopakhin exclaim: “I wish all this would pass, our awkward, unhappy life would change somehow!” And it is these words that serve as a pointer to the conflict of the play, which turns out to be more philosophical - the discrepancy between the needs of spiritual harmony with the world and reality in the transitional era and, as a result, the person does not coincide with himself and with historical time. In many ways, this is precisely why it is practically impossible to single out the stages of development of the main conflict in the play The Cherry Orchard. After all, it was born even before the beginning of the actions described by Chekhov, and it never found its solution.
An essay on the theme of the Dispute of Generations in the play The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov read for free
The dispute of generations
The play by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard" is unusual and amazing. Unlike other works of the playwright, she puts at the center of all events not a person, but the lyrical image of a beautiful cherry orchard. He is like the personification of the beauty of Russia of the past. In the work, several generations are intertwined at once and, accordingly, the problem of a difference in thinking, perception of reality arises. cherry orchard plays a fundamental role. It is becoming a meeting place for the past, present and future of a country that is on the verge of grandiose changes.
This drama is an absolutely new phenomenon in Russian art. There are no sharp social conflicts in it, none of the main characters enter into an open argument, and yet the conflict exists. What is it connected with? In my opinion, this is a dispute between generations that do not hear or do not want to hear each other. The past appears before us in the form of Ranevskaya and Gaev. These are inveterate nobles who are unable to change their habits even for the sake of saving the estate, which still belonged to their parents and grandparents. Ranevskaya has long squandered her fortune and continues to overspend. Gaev hopes to receive an inheritance from a rich aunt living in Yaroslavl.
Will such people be able to keep their property - a family estate and a luxurious cherry orchard? Based on this description, no. One of the most prudent characters in the play is Yermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin, a representative of the current generation. This is the son and grandson of serfs, who suddenly became rich and became a wealthy merchant. This hero achieved everything himself, with his work and perseverance, and as a poet he deserves respect. Unfortunately, it cannot be classified as happy people, since he himself is not happy about the opportunity to redeem Ranevskaya's beloved cherry orchard. For this reason, at the very beginning of the play, he recommends that she break it into sections and hand it over to summer residents, but the frivolous bourgeois do not even want to hear about this.
The third generation, the so-called "future" of the country, is represented by Ranevskaya's seventeen-year-old daughter and her son's former teacher. Anya and Petya are fighters for the "new life", and therefore they are little concerned about the fate of the cherry orchard. They think they can plant a new garden better than the old one. Trofimov is a talented student, but, alas, he talks more than he does, and therefore the future with such young people scares the older generation. Anya is drawn to us as the brightest and most uncomplicated character. She adopted the best features from the nobility and continued to confidently keep pace with the times towards changes. Confidence in a positive outcome never left her. It is through her that the author expresses his hopes for a brighter future.
A.P. Chekhov called his work The Cherry Orchard a comedy. We, having read the play, attribute it more to tragedy than to comedy. The images of Gaev and Ranevskaya seem tragic to us, their fates are tragic. We sympathize and empathize with them. At first we cannot understand why Anton Pavlovich classified his play as a comedy. But rereading the work, understanding it, we still find the behavior of such characters as Gaev, Ranevskaya, Epikhodov, somewhat comical. We already believe that they themselves are to blame for their troubles, and perhaps we condemn them for this. What genre does A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" belong to - comedy or tragedy? In the play "The Cherry Orchard" we do not see a bright conflict, everything, it would seem, flows as usual. The heroes of the play behave calmly, there are no open quarrels and clashes between them. And yet we feel the existence of a conflict, but not open, but internal, hidden in the quiet, at first glance, peaceful atmosphere of the play. Behind the usual conversations of the heroes of the work, behind their calm attitude towards each other, we see them. internal misunderstanding of others. We often hear remarks from characters out of place; we often see their distant looks, as if they do not hear others. But the main conflict of the play "The Cherry Orchard" is the misunderstanding of generation by generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. These three generations dream of their time, but they only talk and cannot do anything to change their lives. Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs belong to the past generation; to the present - Lopakhin, and representatives of the future generation are Petya Trofimov and Day. Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, a representative of the old nobility, constantly talks about her best young years spent in an old house, in a beautiful and luxurious cherry garden. She lives only with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not even want to think about the future. And we think her infantilism is ridiculous. And the whole old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about the “beautiful” old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course, give in without fighting for their ideas. And so Chekhov condemns them for this. Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present. He lives for today. We can't help but notice that his ideas are smart and practical. He has animated conversations about how to change lives for the better, and seems to know what to do. But all these are just words. In fact, Lopakhin is not the ideal hero of the play either. We feel his self-doubt. And at the end of the Work, his hands seem to drop, and he exclaims: “Our clumsy, unhappy life would rather change!”. It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author's hope for the future. But how can such a person as Petya Trofimov, the "eternal student" and "shabby gentleman" change this life? After all, only smart, energetic, self-confident people, active people can put forward new ideas, enter the future and lead others. And Petya, like the other characters in the play, talks more than he acts; he generally behaves somehow ridiculously. And Anya is still too young, she does not yet know life to change her. So, the main tragedy of the play lies not only in the sale of the garden and estate in which people spent their youth, with which their best memories are associated, but also in the inability of these same people to change anything to improve their situation. We, of course, sympathize with Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, but we cannot but notice her infantile, sometimes ridiculous behavior. We constantly feel the absurdity of the events taking place in the play. Ranevskaya and ^aev look absurd with their attachments to old objects, Epikhodov is absurd, and Charlotte herself is the personification of uselessness in this life. The main conflict of the work is the conflict of times, misunderstanding of one generation by another. There is no connection between times in the play, the gap between them is heard in the sound of a broken string. And yet the author expresses his hopes for the future. No wonder the knock of an ax symbolizes the transition from the past to the present. And when a new generation plants a new garden, the future will come. A.P. Chekhov wrote the play The Cherry Orchard before the 1905 revolution. Therefore, the garden itself is the personification of Russia at that time. In this work, Anton Pavlovich reflected the problems of the past nobility, the bourgeoisie and the revolutionary future. At the same time, Chekhov portrayed in a new way main conflict works. The conflict is not shown openly in the work, however, we feel the internal conflict that occurs between the heroes of the play. Tragedy and comedy run inextricably throughout the work. We both sympathize with the characters and condemn them for their inaction.
Three generations in A. P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" 1. "The Cherry Orchard" - Chekhov's "swan song". 2. Ranevskaya and Gaev are representatives of the outgoing life. 3. Lopakhin is the personification of the present. 4. Petya Trofimov and Anya as representatives of a new generation, the future of Russia.
A.P. Chekhov turned to the genre of dramaturgy already in early work. But his real success as a playwright began with the play The Seagull. The play "The Cherry Orchard" is called Chekhov's swan song. She was completed creative way writer. In The Cherry Orchard, the author expressed his beliefs, thoughts, and hopes. Chekhov believes that the future of Russia belongs to people like Trofimov and Anya. In one of his letters, Chekhov wrote: “Students and female students are good and honest people. This is our hope, this is the future of Russia.” It is they, according to Chekhov, who are the true owners of the cherry orchard, which the author identified with his homeland. “The whole of Russia is our garden,” says Petya Trofimov.
The owners of the cherry orchard are the hereditary nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev. The estate and the garden have been the property of their family for many years, but they can no longer be in charge here. They are the personification of Russia's past, there is no future behind them. Why?
Gaev and Ranevskaya are helpless, idle people, incapable of any active actions. They admire the beauty of the blooming garden, it evokes nostalgic memories in these people, but that's all. Their estate is ruined, and these people cannot and do not try to do anything in order to somehow improve the situation. The price of such "love" is small. Although Ranevskaya says: “God knows, I love my homeland, I love dearly.” But the question arises, what kind of love is this if she left Russia five years ago and returned now only because she failed in her personal life. And in the finale of the play, Ranevskaya again leaves her homeland.
Of course, the heroine gives the impression of a person with open mind, she is cordial, emotional, impressionable. But these qualities are combined with such traits of her character as carelessness, spoiledness, frivolity, bordering on callousness and indifference to others. We see that in fact Ranevskaya is indifferent towards people, even sometimes cruel. How else to explain the fact that she gives the last gold to a passerby, and the servants in the house are left to live from hand to mouth. She thanks Firs, asks about his health, and... leaves an old, sick man in a boarded up house, simply forgetting about him. It's monstrous to say the least!
Like Ranevskaya, Gaev has a sense of beauty. I would like to note that he, more than Ranevskaya, gives the impression of a gentleman. Although this character can be called exactly the same inactive, careless and frivolous as his sister. as if Small child, Gaev cannot give up his habit of sucking lollipops and counts on Firs even in small things. His mood changes very quickly, he is a fickle, windy person. Gaev is upset to tears because the estates are being sold, but as soon as he heard the sound of balls in the billiard room, he immediately cheered up, like a child.
Of course, Gaev and Ranevskaya are the embodiment of the past passing life. Their habit of living “in debt, at the expense of others” speaks of the idleness of the existence of these heroes. They are definitely not the masters of life, since even their material well-being depends on some kind of accident: either it will be an inheritance, or the Yaroslavl grandmother will send them money in order to pay off their debts, or Lopakhin will lend money. People like Gaev and Ranevskaya are being replaced by a completely different type of people: strong, enterprising, dexterous. One of these people is another character in the play, Lopakhin.
Lopakhin embodies the present of Russia. Lopakhin's parents were serfs, but after the abolition of serfdom, the fate of this man changed. He made his way into the people, got rich, and is now able to buy the estate of those who were once his masters. Lopakhin feels his superiority over Ranevskaya and Gaev, and even they treat him with respect, because they are aware of their dependence on this person. It is clear that Lopakhin and people like him will very soon oust the well-born nobles.
However, Lopakhin gives the impression of a person who is the "master of life" only in a given, short period of time. He is not the owner of the cherry orchard, but only its temporary owner. He is going to cut down the cherry orchard and sell the land. It seems that, having increased his capital from this enterprise that is beneficial to him, he still will not occupy a dominant place in the life of the state in the future. In the image of this character, Chekhov masterfully managed to portray a bizarre and contradictory combination of features of the past and the present. Lopakhin, although he is proud of his current position, does not forget for a second about his low origin, his resentment for life is too strong in him, which, as it seems to him, was unfair to him. Very soon the reader and viewer realizes that Lopakhin is just an intermediate step between the past and future generations.
In the play Chekh'ba we also see characters opposed to the destructive activity of Lopakhin and the inaction of Ranevskaya and Gaev. This is Anya and Petya Trofimov. It is for such people, according to the author, the future of Russia. Trofimov is an ardent seeker of truth, who sincerely believes in the triumph of a just life in the near future. Student Petya Trofimov is poor, suffers hardships, but as an honest person he refuses to live at the expense of others. He talks a lot about the need for a reorganization of society, but he has not yet taken real actions. But he is a great propagandist. This is one of those who are followed by young people, who are trusted. Anya is carried away by Trofimov's call to change life, and at the end of the play we hear her words calling for "planting a new garden." The author does not give us the opportunity to see the fruits of the activities of the representatives of the new generation. He only leaves us hope that the words of Petya Trofimov and Anya will not diverge from deeds.
Chekhov depicted three generations of people in his play The Cherry Orchard, and each character personifies the life of Russia: Ranevkaya and Gaev - the past, Lopakhin - the present, Trofimov and Anya - the future. Time has shown that Chekhov was absolutely right - in the near future, the Russian people were expecting a revolution, and it was people like Trofimov who made history.
In Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard, Anya and Petya are not the main characters. They are not directly connected with the garden, like other characters, for them it does not play such a significant role, because of which they somehow fall out of common system characters. However, in the work of a playwright of Chekhov's level there is no place for accidents; therefore, the isolation of Petya and Anya is not accidental either. Let's take a closer look at these two characters.
Among critics, the interpretation of the images of Anya and Petya, depicted in the play The Cherry Orchard, as a symbol of the young generation of Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century, is widespread; generation, which is replacing the long-obsolete "Ranev" and "Gaev", as well as the creations of the turning point of the era "Lopakhin". In Soviet criticism, this statement was considered undeniable, since the play itself was usually considered in a strictly defined vein - based on the year of writing (1903), critics associated its creation with social changes and the impending revolution of 1905. Accordingly, the understanding of the cherry orchard as a symbol of the "old", pre-revolutionary Russia, Ranevskaya and Gaev as images of the "dying off" noble class, Lopakhin - the emerging bourgeoisie, Trofimov - the raznochintsy intelligentsia was affirmed. From this point of view, the play was seen as a work about the search for a "savior" for Russia, in which inevitable changes are brewing. Lopakhin, as the bourgeois master of the country, should be replaced by the commoner Petya, full of transformative ideas and aimed at a brighter future; the bourgeoisie must be replaced by the intelligentsia, which, in turn, will carry out the social revolution. Anya here symbolizes the "repentant" nobility, which takes an active part in these transformations.
Such a "class approach", inherited from ancient times, reveals its failure already in the fact that many characters do not fit into this scheme: Varya, Charlotte, Epikhodov. In their images, we do not find a "class" overtones. In addition, Chekhov was never known as a propagandist, and, most likely, he would not have written such an unambiguously deciphered play. Do not forget that the author himself defined the genre of The Cherry Orchard as a comedy and even a farce - not the most successful form for demonstrating high ideals ...
Based on the foregoing, it is impossible to consider Anya and Petya in the play The Cherry Orchard solely as an image of the younger generation. Such an interpretation would be too superficial. Who are they for the author? What role do they play in his design?
They have no vital interest in the auction and the garden, there is no clear symbolism associated with it. For Anya and Petya Trofimov, the cherry orchard is not a painful attachment. It is the lack of affection that helps them survive in the general atmosphere of devastation, emptiness and meaninglessness, so subtly conveyed in the play.
The general characterization of Anya and Petya in The Cherry Orchard inevitably includes a love line between the two characters. The author designated it implicitly, half-hint, and it is difficult to say for what purposes he needed this move. Perhaps this is a way to show a collision in the same situation of two qualitatively different characters. We see a young, naive, enthusiastic Anya, who has not yet seen life and at the same time full of strength and readiness for any transformations. And we see Petya, full of bold, revolutionary ideas, an inspired speaker, a sincere and enthusiastic person, moreover, absolutely inactive, full of internal contradictions, therefore absurd and sometimes funny. We can say that the love line brings two extremes together: Anya - a force without a vector, and Petya - a vector without a force. Anya's energy and determination are useless without guidance; Petya's passion and ideology are dead without inner strength.
In conclusion, it can be noted that the images of these two heroes in the play today, unfortunately, are still considered in the traditional "Soviet" vein. There is reason to believe that a fundamentally different approach to the system of characters and Chekhov's play as a whole will allow us to see much more shades of meaning and reveal many interesting moments. In the meantime, the images of Anya and Petya are waiting for their unbiased critic.
Artwork test
The title of the play is symbolic. “All of Russia is our garden,” Chekhov said. This last play was written by Chekhov at the cost of enormous physical exertion, and the mere rewriting of the play was an act of the greatest difficulty. Chekhov completed The Cherry Orchard on the eve of the first Russian revolution, in the year of his early death (1904).
Thinking about the death of the cherry orchard, about the fate of the inhabitants of the ruined estate, he mentally imagined all of Russia at the turn of the eras.
On the eve of grandiose upheavals, as if feeling the steps of a formidable reality near him, Chekhov comprehended the present from the standpoint of the past and the future. The far-reaching perspective saturated the play with the air of history, communicated the special extent of its time and space. In the play "The Cherry Orchard" there is no acute conflict, everything seems to go on as usual, and there are no open quarrels and clashes between the heroes of the play. And yet the conflict exists, but not open, but internal, deeply hidden in the seemingly peaceful setting of the play. The conflict lies in the misunderstanding of generation by generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. And each of the three generations dreams of its time.
The play begins with Ranevskaya's arrival at her old family estate, with a return to the cherry orchard, which stands outside the windows all in bloom, to people and things familiar from childhood. There is a special atmosphere of awakened poetry and humanity. As if in last time flashes brightly - like a memory - this living life on the verge of death. Nature is preparing for renewal - hopes for a new, pure life awaken in Ranevskaya's soul.
For the merchant Lopakhin, who is going to buy the Ranevskaya estate, the cherry orchard also means something more than just an object of a commercial transaction.
In the play, representatives of three generations pass before us: the past - Gaev, Ranevskaya and Firs, the present - Lopakhin and representatives of the future generation - Petya Trofimov and Anya, Ranevskaya's daughter. Chekhov not only created images of people whose lives fell on a turning point, but captured Time itself in its movement. The heroes of The Cherry Orchard turn out to be victims not of particular circumstances and their own lack of will, but of the global laws of history - the active and energetic Lopakhin is just as much a hostage of time as the passive Gaev. The play is built on a unique situation that has become a favorite for the drama of the 20th century - the situation of the “threshold”. Nothing like this is happening yet, but there is a sense of the edge, the abyss into which a person must fall.
Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, a representative of the old nobility, is an impractical and selfish woman, naive in her love interest, but she is kind and sympathetic, and her sense of beauty does not fade, which Chekhov especially emphasizes. Ranevskaya constantly recalls her best young years spent in an old house, in a beautiful and luxurious cherry garden. She lives with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, but she does not want to think about the future. Her childishness seems ridiculous. But it turns out that the whole old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about the beautiful old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course and give in without a fight.
Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present. Here is how Chekhov himself defined his role in the play: “The role of Loahina is central. After all, this is not a merchant in the vulgar sense of the word ... this is a gentle person ... a decent person in every sense ... ”But this gentle person is a predator, he lives for today, so his ideas are smart and practical. The combination of disinterested love for beauty and a merchant's streak, peasant simplicity and subtle artistic soul merged together in the image of Lopakhin. He has animated conversations about how to change lives for the better, and seems to know what to do. But in fact, he is not the ideal hero of the play. We feel his self-doubt.
The play intertwines several storylines. The perishing garden and failed, even unnoticed love are two cross-cutting, internally connected themes of the play. The line of the failed romance between Lopakhin and Varya ends before everyone else. It is built on Chekhov's favorite technique: most of all and most willingly they talk about what is not, discuss the details, argue about the minutiae of the non-existent, not noticing or deliberately hushing up the existing and essential. Varya is waiting for a simple and logical course of life: since Lopakhin is often in a house where there are unmarried girls, of which only she suits him. Varya, therefore, must marry. Varia doesn’t even have a thought to take a different look at the situation, to think, does Lopakhin love her, is she interesting to him? All Varia's expectations are based on idle gossip that this marriage would be successful!
It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author's hope for the future. The romantic plan of the play is grouped around Petya Trofimov. His monologues have much in common with the thoughts of Chekhov's best heroes. On the one hand, Chekhov does nothing but put Petya in ridiculous situations, constantly compromising him, reducing his image to the extremely unheroic - an “eternal student” and a “shabby gentleman”, whom Lopakhin constantly stops with his ironic remarks. On the other hand, the thoughts and dreams of Petya Trofimov are close to Chekhov's own mentality. Petya Trofimov does not know specific historical paths to a good life, and his advice to Anya, who shares his dreams and forebodings, is at least naive. “If you have the keys to the household, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free as the wind." But in life, a radical change has ripened, which Chekhov foresees, and inevitability is determined not by the character of Petya, the degree of maturity of his worldview, but by the doom of the old.
But how can a person like Petya Trofimov change this life? After all, only smart, energetic, self-confident people, active people can put forward new ideas, enter the future and lead others. And Petya, like other heroes of the play, talks more than he acts, he generally behaves somehow ridiculously. Anya is still too young. She will never understand her mother's drama, and Lyubov Andreevna herself will never understand her passion for Petya's ideas. Anya still knows little about life in order to change it. But Chekhov saw the strength of youth precisely in freedom from prejudice, from the sheathness of thoughts and feelings. Anya becomes like-minded to Petya, and this strengthens the motif of the future wonderful life.
On the day of the sale of the estate, Ranevskaya starts a ball that is completely inappropriate from the point of view of common sense. Why does she need him? For the living Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, who is now fiddling with a wet handkerchief in her hands, waiting for her brother to return from the auction, this ridiculous ball is important in itself - as a challenge to everyday life. She wrests a holiday from everyday life, grabs from life that moment that is able to stretch the thread to eternity.
The property has been sold. "I bought!" - triumphs new owner rattling keys. Yermolai Lopakhin bought an estate where his grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen. He is ready to hit the cherry orchard with an axe. But at the highest moment of triumph, this “intelligent merchant” suddenly feels shame and bitterness of what has happened: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” And it becomes clear that for yesterday's plebeian, a man with a tender soul and thin fingers, buying a cherry orchard is, in fact, an "unnecessary victory."
Ultimately, Lopakhin is the only one who comes up with a real plan to save the cherry orchard. And this plan is real, first of all, because Lopakhin understands that the garden cannot be preserved in its former form, its time has passed, and now the garden can be preserved only by reorganizing it in accordance with the requirements new era. But new life means, first of all, the death of the past, and the executioner is the one who most clearly sees the beauty of the dying world.
So, the main tragedy of the work lies not only in the external action of the play - the sale of the garden and estate, where many of the characters spent their youth, with which their best memories are associated, but also in the internal contradiction - the inability of the same people to change anything for improving your position. This absurdity of the events taking place in the play is constantly felt. Ranevskaya and Gaev look ridiculous with their attachment to old objects, Epikhodov is ridiculous, and Charlotte Ivanovna herself is the personification of uselessness in this life.
The last act, as always with Chekhov, is the moment of parting, farewell to the past. Sad for the old owners of the “cherry garden”, troublesome for a new businessman, joyful for young souls with their reckless Blok readiness to reject everything - home, and childhood, and loved ones, and even the poetry of the “nightingale garden” - in order to openly, shout with a free soul: “Hello, new life!” But if from the point of view of the social tomorrow "The Cherry Orchard" sounded like a comedy, then for its time it sounded like a tragedy. These two melodies, without merging, appeared in the finale at the same time, giving rise to a complex tragicomic outcome of the work.
Young people, cheerfully, invitingly calling to each other, run ahead. Old people, like old things, huddled together, people stumble over them without noticing them. Suppressing tears, Ranevskaya and Gaev rush to each other. “Oh my dear, my tender, beautiful garden. My life, my youth, my happiness, goodbye!.. Goodbye!..” But the music of farewell is drowned out by “the sound of an ax on wood, which sounds lonely and sad.” Shutters and doors close. In the empty house, sick Firs remains unnoticed in the bustle: “But the man has been forgotten ...” The old man is alone in the locked house. One hears “as if from the sky the sound of a broken string”, and in the silence the ax thumps dully on the tree.
The symbolism of the "Cherry Orchard" spoke of the approach of grandiose social cataclysms and the change of the old world.
This work reflects the problems of the past nobility, the bourgeoisie and the revolutionary future. At the same time, Chekhov portrayed the main conflict of the work in a new way - the conflict of three generations.
