The play "The Cherry Orchard" is not only one of the most famous plays by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, but also one of the most famous plays of Russian literature in general.

We offer you an essay based on the play "The Cherry Orchard". The essay is designed primarily for students in grade 10, but can be used in other grades of high school.

In the essay, attention is paid to the genre originality of Chekhov's play. This – .

GENRE ORIGINALITY OF THE PLAY "THE CHERRY GARDEN"

Chekhov's plays seemed unusual to his contemporaries. They differed sharply from the usual dramatic forms. There were no seemingly necessary plots, climaxes, and, strictly speaking, there was no dramatic action as such either. Chekhov himself wrote about his plays:

“People only have dinner, wear jackets, and at this time their fates are decided, their lives are broken.”

In Chekhov's plays there is a subtext that acquires a special artistic significance. How is this subtext conveyed to the reader, the viewer? First of all, with the help of author's remarks. Chekhov attached great importance to the author's remarks, which not only help to reveal the spiritual world of the characters, but also emphasize the main idea of ​​the play.

The whole series of former garden owners is united by the senselessness and uselessness of their existence. They all live "on credit" , without bringing any benefit to the Fatherland, and not caring at all about his estate. Unable to manage, died "from champagne" Ranevskaya's husband. With irony, Chekhov talks about Gaev, another unfortunate owner of a cherry orchard, who "I ate my fortune on candy" . Yes, and Ranevskaya herself, in addition to sympathy, causes at least surprise with her impracticality and mismanagement. Having a lot of debts, she indulges her passion for luxury and distributes exorbitant tips to the servants.

Depicting the characters of the former owners of the estate, Chekhov resorts to the grotesque, conveying their manners and character traits through their servants. In ostentatious sensuality and "tenderness" Dunyasha, we see the frivolity and superficiality of Ranevskaya's feelings. "Education" Yasha and "eccentricities" Charlotte Ivanovna illustrates to us the whole absurd and awkward fate of Ranevskaya, her attitude towards children, the estate, and her country. Firs is a very striking servant character, his short remarks make us hear in the words of his masters either an empty farce or frivolity. For example, when meeting with his mistress, not hearing her assurances of love, Firs says: "Day before yesterday" . This seemingly inappropriate phrase helps to discern some superficiality and comicality in Ranevskaya's feelings. The old servant is caring and considerate in relation to the high-aged child Gaev. This infantile landowner, with his pathetic oaths to defend the estate, is simply ridiculous and pitiful against the background of Fiers' remarks: “again, sir, they put on the wrong trousers” . Subtle Chekhov's irony to the owners of the garden calls "Laughter through tears" .

Chekhov's satirical look does not spare the other heroes of the play either. Even Lopakhin, a representative of an advanced capitalist tribe, often finds himself in comical situations. They hit him on the head with a stick, which was intended for Epikhodov, he wants to treat everyone with champagne, but Yasha drinks it. Lopakhin is ironic over himself, saying that the “muzhik is a peasant”, although he put on “ white vest and yellow shoes «.

The same trait makes a hero attractive, funny, and pitiful. This, perhaps, is the feature that unites them all, regardless of external position. The intentions, the words of the characters are wonderful, the results are at odds with the intentions, that is, they are all to some extent " klutzes ". This idea of ​​the author is carried in the play by Petya Trofimov, who believes that people of the Lopakhin type are needed only as predators. in terms of metabolism.

Clever Petya evokes sympathy from both the viewer and the reader. But the comedy genre chosen by Chekhov does not bypass him with its satire. Petya suffers numerous ridicule from others, receives nicknames "eternal student" And "shabby barin" , gets into various troubles.

This attitude of the author Petya Trofimov deserved his verbosity. which, as we know, Chekhov did not tolerate. Trofimov talks beautifully and talks a lot, but does almost nothing. He is overly emotional, arguing about his loftiness over love, over which Chekhov ironizes in remarks. Peter is screaming "with fear" , now choking with indignation, cannot utter a word, then threatens to leave and cannot do this in any way. Of all the characters in the comedy, only Anya is not ridiculed by the author. She is always kind to people, concerned about the economy and her thoughts about a better future. Nevertheless, for all the comicality of many episodes, we keenly feel the tragedy of the fate of many heroes of the play, primarily Ranevskaya, Charlotte Ivanovna, and the devoted Firs.

The Cherry Orchard, the central image of the play, grows into a comprehensive symbol expressing the inevitable death of a passing, decaying life. All the characters in the play are to blame for this, although they are all sincere in their striving for the best. But intentions and results diverge.

The senior servant, of course, worked hard in life, but he is a serf by conviction, and he would not be able to live a different life. Therefore, Chekhov cannot sympathize deeply and seriously with his heroes.

He filled the play with many jokes, heavy humor and, most importantly, an optimistic end, faith in "new life" . “I wrote a comedy! What did you make a tearful drama?” - in these words of A.P. Chekhov one can hear the just discontent of the author.

Definition of the genre of the play by A.P. Chekhov

Already at the first mention of the beginning of work on a new play in 1901, A.P. Chekhov told his wife that he had conceived a new play, and one in which everything would be turned upside down. This is what predetermined the genre of The Cherry Orchard as a comedy. K.S. Stanislavsky, who staged The Cherry Orchard on stage, perceived the play as a tragedy, and it was this interpretation that he conveyed on stage, which caused the playwright's deep dissatisfaction and the author's accusation that the director did not understand the meaning of the work. Although Chekhov tried to convey the comedic genre of the play The Cherry Orchard with a variety of techniques: the presence of a small circus performance in the tricks of Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov's clumsiness, Petya's fall from the stairs, Gaev's conversations with furniture.

Also, the author's definition of the genre of "The Cherry Orchard" is also seen in the differences: in the characters of the heroes of the play, the external appearance diverges from the internal content. For Chekhov, the suffering of his heroes is just a reflection of the weak, unbalanced characters of people who are not inclined to a deep understanding of what is happening and incapable of deep feelings. For example, Ranevskaya, speaking of love for her Motherland, of longing for her estate, is going to return to Paris without regret. And the arrangement of the ball on the day of the auction?

It seems such a busy day, and she invites guests to the house. Her brother shows much the same flippancy, just trying to appear saddened by the situation. After the auction, almost sobbing, he complains about his depression and fatigue, but only when he hears the sounds of playing billiards, he immediately revives. Nevertheless, even using such bright features of the genre, the comedy The Cherry Orchard did not see the author's interpretation. Only after Chekhov's death was the play staged as a tragicomedy.

Disputes about the genre affiliation of The Cherry Orchard

From the first production to the present day, there has been talk about the genre originality of The Cherry Orchard, and theatergoers have not yet decided on the designation of the genre of the play. Of course, the problem of the genre is also encountered in other plays by Anton Pavlovich, for example, in The Seagull, but only because of The Cherry Orchard a heated discussion broke out between the author and the leaders of the theater. For everyone: the director, the critic, and even the viewer, The Cherry Orchard was their own, and everyone saw something of their own in it. Even Stanislavsky, after Chekhov's death, admitted that he initially did not understand the idea of ​​​​this play, arguing that The Cherry Orchard is "a heavy drama of Russian life." And only in 1908 Chekhov's last creation was staged as a lyrical comedy.

Features of the genre of the play by A.P. Chekhov "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 the genre features of the play, 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" [Byaly, 1981:48], 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”

On September 15, 1903, he informed M.P. Alekseeva (Lilina): “I didn’t get a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce”

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 presupposes the dramatic nature of the positive characters of the play, 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, the Gaevs and Ranevskys, 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, in the comic-satirical depiction of almost all the minor characters: Epikhodov, Pishchik, Charlotte, Yasha, Dunyasha.

"The Cherry Orchard" also includes explicit 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.

“A.P. Chekhov, he writes in the article “0 plays”, “created ... a completely original type of play - a lyrical comedy” (M. Gorky, Collected Works, vol. 26, Goslitizdat, M. , 1953, p. 422).

But the lyrical comedy "The Cherry Orchard" is still perceived by many as a drama. For the first time, such an interpretation of The Cherry Orchard was given by the Art Theater. October 20, 1903 K.S. Stanislavsky, after reading The Cherry Orchard, wrote to Chekhov: “This is not a comedy ... this is a tragedy, no matter what outcome to a better life you open in the last act ... I was afraid that the second reading of 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, in his directorial decision of the play, he unnecessarily emphasized the lyric-dramatic line associated with these characters.

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, pitiful and funny, but touching in its helplessness ... There was an atmosphere of subtle humor around the figure. And at the same time, she radiated great touching... everyone in the auditorium, together with Firs, 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 which the harsh laws of historical necessity and the change of class figures on the historical stage are sacred - even they probably gave moments of some compassion, a sigh of sympathetic or condoling sadness to this Gaev ”(Ibid., p. 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, more 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 of The Cherry Orchard.

While staging this play, K.S. Stanislavsky used its comedic motives so extensively that he provoked strong objections from those who considered it a consistently pessimistic drama.

Dissatisfaction with the excessive, deliberate comedy of the stage performance of The Cherry Orchard at the Art Theater was also expressed by the 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 comical figure causes laughter in the auditorium ... For me, this laughter - was a tub of cold water ... The mood turned out to be irreparably spoiled

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, defining the stage interpretation of the play "The Cherry Orchard" in the Art Theater as a tragicomedy

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, in a letter to O.L. Knipper wrote on April 10, 1904: “Why is my play so stubbornly called a drama on posters and in newspaper ads? Nemirovich and Alekseev see positively in my play not what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word - that both of them have never read my play attentively ”(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, is with you,” he wrote to O.L. Knipper, it's 40 minutes. I can say one thing: Stanislavsky ruined my play” (Ibid., p. 258).

In April 1904, talking with the director of the 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 own heads what they themselves want, but I didn’t think about it, and didn’t see it in a dream ... It starts to piss me off ”

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 its 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 of that heavy and overweight 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 way 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 absolute 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 - "crying", in another place - "crying", but in vaudeville they will not cry! Vl.I. N e mi r 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); 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's - 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 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 evident. 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 when, wiping away her tears, she 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 vein, does not correspond to the ideological pathos and genre originality of 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. 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 the obsolete, and the young girl, anticipating the approach of a new era together with Petya Trofimov, will shout to the whole world: “Hello, new life!” - and you will understand that "The Cherry Orchard" is a lively, close, modern play for us, that Chekhov's voice sounds cheerful, incendiary in it, because he himself looks not back, but forward"

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 comedy-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. A lot of things in this wonderful performance, especially in its latest version, are given correctly. It is impossible not to recall that, sharply rejecting the dramatic solution of his play, Chekhov found even in its first, far from mature performances in the Art Theater, a lot of beauty, carried out correctly.

Love a book, it will make your life easier, it will help you sort out the colorful and stormy confusion of thoughts, feelings, events, it will teach you to respect a person and yourself, it inspires the mind and heart with a feeling of love for the world, for a person.

Maxim Gorky

The peculiarity of the genre of the play "The Cherry Orchard"

The genre of the play "The Cherry Orchard" is defined in different ways. A.P. Chekhov called his work a comedy, Stanislavsky called it a tragedy, and contemporaries spoke of the immortal work as a drama.

For all three assumptions, there are good reasons in the text of Chekhov's creation.

There are many comic situations in The Cherry Orchard: the love idyll of Yasha and Dunyasha, magic tricks and Charlotte Ivanovna's speech, Spikhodov's failures. Also in the characters, which cannot be called absolutely comical, there is a lot of funny. For example, Lopakhin is often funny with his jokes - such as "goodbye" or "Okhmeliya, go to the monastery", although he is a rich man respected by all. And Petya Trofimov - "eternal student", "funny man", "shabby gentleman" - often gets into ridiculous situations, for example, falls down the stairs.

Tragedy

At the same time, there is a lot of tragedy in the characters of the play. So, Charlotte Ivanovna, on the one hand, is considered a funny and ridiculous woman, and, on the other hand, a lonely person without a homeland and without relatives. Firs is ridiculous with his deafness, and at the same time the fate of the "forgotten" person is very tragic.

There is not a single happy person in the play: Varya experiences unrequited love, Lopakhin, despite his wealth, looks unhappy, Petya remains an inactive dreamer and philosopher.

The main source of drama in the work is not the conflict, which is the struggle for the cherry orchard, but the subjective dissatisfaction with human life. This dissatisfaction is equally experienced by all the heroes of A.P. Chekhov's work, without exception. The life and fate of the characters proceeds awkwardly, not as we would like, bringing no joy, no positive emotions, no feeling of serene happiness to anyone.

The symbolism of the play "The Cherry Orchard". features of the comedy genre.

Yesterday we ended our conversation on the "undercurrent" of the play. My question to you remains the same:

What do you think about the inner conflict of the other characters? Lopakhin, Gaev, Anya, Petya?

Lopakhin.

Who do they want to marry Lopakhin?

As we know, he and Varya are wooed throughout the play.

But why doesn't he propose to Varya in the decisive scene(action 4 from the words of Lyubov Andreevna “Now you can go ...”, ending with the remark “Quickly leaving”) + we recall the beginning of the play (waiting for the arrival of Ranevskaya and Lopakhin's childhood memories).

We conclude that Lopakhin does not propose to Varya, not because he is shy in front of her, or is busy with any business, but because he is in love with another woman - Ranevskaya, who so struck him in his youth. Lopakhin's internal conflict is that he was never able to confess his feelings to her.

Petya Trofimov.

What are the thoughts of Petya? What does he say about the feeling of love?

Too passionate about his thoughts about a better future, he considers himself "above love", so he does not notice Anya's feelings. His problem is that he only talks, makes plans for what will lead people.(An episode of a conversation with Lopakhin from the remark Lopakhin “embraces him” to “you can hear how they knock on wood with an ax in the distance”)

Pay attention to why he does not take money from Lopakhin.

Gaev.

Why does he hide his real feelings behind billiard statements?

A very vulnerable person, loves his family, but, alas, cannot do anything for their happiness. He keeps everything in himself, and this is his internal conflict. Hiding behind words like "Who?" or breaks off dialogue with other characters with the help of phrases known to him, borrowed from billiards, thereby (in his opinion) defusing the situation.

Based on all this, we can say why Chekhov's dialogue is not built: Each hero, by virtue of his emotional experiences, thinks about his own, hence, it is clear that the heroes are deaf to each other's feelings and simply simply do not hear each other, therefore each of them is lonely and unhappy.

Which of the heroes is able to overcome his egoism?

Anya.(End of act 3) She is kind to her mother.

Anya.

This is the only character in the play who is not tormented by internal conflict. She is a whole, bright nature, she has nothing to hide. That is why she is the only person who is capable of being merciful. Therefore, it is better to talk about Anna last.

Is any of the heroes still able to show mercy. Why?

No. The problem with heroes is that they don't know how and don't want to be merciful.(an episode of the purchase of the garden by Lopakhin from the words of L.A .: “who bought it?” to “... awkward unhappy life”) IT IS POSSIBLE TO TALK WHAT CHARACTER FEATURES IN THIS SCENE THE CHILDREN Saw AND IS PETER TROFIMOV RIGHT. WHEN YOU CALLED LOPAKHIN A PREDATOR.

Let's pay attention to the phrase of Firs "oh, you .... silly!" To whom can it be attributed?

This phrase is repeated throughout the play: act 1 scene when Dunyasha forgot to take the cream (p. 33); act 3, when Yasha tells him "I wish you would die sooner." (p. 73); End of act 4.

The phrase can be attributed to all the heroes of the play, even in the phrase “Yes .... (with a grin) I will go to sleep, but without me, who will give, who will order? One for the whole house ”and then it sounds“ Eh, you .... stupid.

Numerous pauses in the text of the play speak of the significance of the internal conflict and the presence of an undercurrent. There are 10 pauses in the last act of the comedy. This is not counting the numerous pauses indicated by dots in the characters' lines. This gives the play an extraordinary psychological depth.

In The Cherry Orchard, the subtext becamebasis of action : to understand the essence of what is happening, it is important not what is said, but what is silent.

Let's talk about the symbolism of the Cherry Orchard. The novelty of Chekhov's drama is that it is realism, growing into symbolism. Chekhov acts in his later work as the forerunner of the new, modernist literature. The presence of images-symbols in the play is a sign of new literature.

Define a symbol. What distinguishes it from allegory? What, in your opinion, can be considered an image-symbol in comedy?

Symbol - an object or word that conditionally expresses the essence of a phenomenon.

Allegory - expression of the abstract content of thought through a concrete image. (Death is a skeleton with a scythe.)

The concept of allegory is close to the concept of a symbol. The difference lies in the fact that the symbol is more polysemantic and organic, while the allegory is unambiguous, expresses one subject.

Let's start with the fact that each hero of the play is a symbol. A symbol of each of its time.

!!! There is no connection between times in the play, the gap between them is heard in the sound of a broken string. 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.

What image-symbol is central in the play?

The Cherry Orchard. For each hero of the play, the garden is a different symbol.

What symbolism does the garden carry for each character?

Ranevskaya and Gaev: a symbol of youth, beauty, childhood

Lopakhin: a symbol of profit

Anya and Petya: a symbol of a relic of the past

How is the symbolism of the garden revealed in Trofimov's monologue? (end of act 2)

All Russia is our garden. (we read a monologue, we reveal why Russia is a garden)

In the same scene Anya, carried away by Petya's words, decides that she will leave home. From afar, the voice of Varya is heard, who is looking for Anya. However, the answer to Varya's cry is silence, Anya runs away with Petya to the river. This is symbolic of the decision of the young heroine to break with her former life and go towards a new, unknown, but tempting one.

Final words 3 actions: Anya - “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this, you will see it, understand it, and joy, quiet, deep joy will descend on your soul, like the sun in the evening hour, and you will smile, mother!” carry a slightly different meaning. What did Chekhov want to show with these words?

Chekhov wanted to show us that the new garden is the new Russia.

“A distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad. There is silence, and only one can hear how far in the garden they knock on wood with an ax. The clarification “just from the sky” indicates a certain force from the outside, before which the characters of the play are powerless.“What does a broken string have to do with the death of a garden?” The fact that both events coincide, or in any case overlap in their “form”: a gap is almost the same as a cut. It is no coincidence that in the finale of the play the sound of a broken string merges with the blows of an ax.

At the end of the play, Trofimov searches for forgotten galoshes, which may well symbolize his worthless, albeit illuminated by beautiful words, life.

Trofimov calls Lopakhin a "predator", these words are a kind of symbol of L.'s nature, since this predator is an entrepreneur, and none of the heroes resists him.

The end of the play is very symbolic - the old owners leave and forget the dying Firs. So, the logical ending: inactive owners, a servant who served them all his life, and a cherry orchard - all this irrevocably goes into the past, to which there is no way back. History cannot be returned.

Let's talk about the genre originality of the play.

Stanislavsky designated the play as a tragedy, and for the first time the play was actually staged in a completely different way than Chekhov intended it to be. The question of the genre is very important for understanding the work: it determines the code for reading the play and the characters.

A logical question arises: why did Chekhov call his work a comedy? What is comedy in dramaturgy?

Comedy - a dramatic work, by means of satire and humor, ridiculing the vices of society and man, reflecting the ridiculous and low.

Tragedy - it is a genre of fiction based on the development of events leading to a catastrophic outcome for the characters.

Tragicomedy - a dramatic work that has features of both comedy and tragedy.

Let's remember such a phenomenon as the high comedy discovered by Moliere, Dante's "Divine Tragedy". They go beyond the traditional genre: human life is comical in its essence, in the highest sense of the word.

Is this the case with Chekhov? Let's remember the author's position in the play "V. Sad" in relation to his characters.

Chekhov pities his heroes, but at the same time is ironic towards them.

Calling the play a comedy, Chekhov relied on the comic motives prevailing in it. Answering the question about the genre of this play, we will have to admit that it is based on not a dramatic, but a comedic beginning.

Why are Lyubov Andreevna, Gaev, Petya, Anya, Lopakhin and minor characters funny?

The comic is inherent in the whole situation: in the inability to live, in obsession with one's own experiences and desires, in the fact that they are all “stupid” (clumsy, awkward people).

Let us recall that Chekhov's plays reflected the ordinary life of people, and we will immediately understand that we are all comical, just like the hero of The Cherry Orchard. We also regret missed opportunities, we are also arrogant and somewhere selfish.

What in the characters of the play disapproves of the reader, and in what do we sympathize with them?

Disapproval in inaction, in enthusiasm for oneself, in the inability to listen to one's relatives and friends.

We sympathize with them that each of them is alone in the soul.

There are many crying people in the play, BUT

Are the tears of the characters tears of grief?

No, these are not dramatic sobs and not even tears, this is just the mental mood of the characters. In their tears, tearfulness is often hidden, characteristic of weak, misunderstood and lonely people.

This is just for reference: Tears as an expression of dramatic situations in The Cherry Orchard are very rare. These moments can be re-read: Ranevskaya in the first act, when meeting with Trofimov, who reminded her of her drowned 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.

Are the characters in the play unique?

No. Chekhov paints complex, ambiguous characters for us. Each hero is a complex psychological portrait, so we cannot unequivocally say “this one is good, and this one is bad”. Chekhov is sad about the absurdity of the heroes and is ironic towards them in a kind way.

Can we put Chekhov's play on a par with classical comedy? Is human life inherently comical in The Cherry Orchard?

Chekhov's comedy reveals to us complex characters, a life situation, which the characters look at in different ways. We somewhere condemn the heroes, but somewhere we sympathize with them. Real life is shown here, and therefore the genre (type) of the work must be understood differently than in the previous literary tradition.

Independent work.

Analyze two episodes (by options):

1. End of the first act. Scene with Anya, Vari, Gaev. Start with Gaev’s words “I’m silent ... Only about the case ...” to “Firs enters”
(pp. 44-45)

2. Action three. “Gaev enters; he has purchases in his right hand ... "to" He leaves through the hall ... "(p. 77)

Exercise: after analyzing the episode, show by what means Chekhov reveals the character of Gaev and expresses his attitude towards the character.

Homework: prepare for the test on the play "The Cherry Orchard" (content, theory).