1. The image of a cherry orchard.
2. How the death of the cherry orchard is perceived by the characters of the play.
3. Who is to blame for the death of the garden?
Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" is a fresh and deep look at the realities of life of the nobility as a class and at the relationship between representatives of various classes and estates of Russian society in the second half of the nineteenth century. Chekhov, as a subtle psychologist, was able to penetrate deeply into the essence of the characters he portrayed and convey the personality of each character figuratively, many-sidedly, vividly. The background for the development of the character's storyline throughout the play is the cherry orchard, the image of which is so tangible and important that it is sometimes perceived as another character. The tragic fate of the cherry orchard is perceived by the main characters of the play in completely different ways. Each of the central characters of The Cherry Orchard perceives this cozy and quiet corner in their own way, and the author reveals the character of each character through his attitude to the garden.
For Ranevskaya and Gaev, the death of the cherry orchard becomes a real tragedy - after all, they grew up here, admired the beauty of the garden from childhood, their whole life was connected with it. The Cherry Orchard, like the entire family estate, becomes the personification of not only the childhood and youth of these heroes, but also their dreams, hopes, and experiences. He firmly entered their minds as an island of home peace and comfort, with him they associate everything that is dear and bright that warms the soul of a person. The death of the cherry orchard, respectively, is for Ranevskaya and Gaev almost equivalent to the death of their past, "that" life that has passed - and it cannot be returned, it has been lived in vain, it is destined to sink into oblivion along with the warmth of the family nest and lush trees in the garden. That is why these heroes perceive the sale and death of the cherry orchard so tragically and hysterically. At the same time, the representatives of the younger generation depicted in the play - Anya and the "eternal student" Petya Trofimov - experience farewell to the cherry orchard much easier and easier: for them it is not such a significant symbol as for the older generation. They are more energetic, they look at life easier, they are directed to the future - therefore parting with the past does not become a tragedy for them. Ermolai Lopakhin considers the cherry orchard only as a trading facility. He created for himself the image of a person who is not prone to sentimentality, and in his mind the cherry orchard is not associated with anything metaphysical.
None of the characters in the play ever takes that decisive step that could change the fate of the cherry orchard and save it from destruction. Perhaps, under the existing conditions, such an outcome of the case would be simply impossible? The author thinks otherwise. And we understand that it was possible to save the cherry orchard. But none of the characters in the play could do this - for various reasons. Ranevskaya, Gaev - they are most worried about the fate of the garden, but are unable to force themselves to take practical steps to save it. Anya, Trofimov and Lopakhin do not believe that the life of the cherry orchard should be fought for at all. That is why all the heroes are somehow to blame for the death of the garden.
- November 17th, 2014
- 376
Reflections on the topic: Should the cherry orchard be saved?
Time moves inexorably forward, one era replaces another, and the question inevitably arises: is it necessary to part with the past?
"The Cherry Orchard" is the last work of A.P. Chekhov, his "swan song". This play is called "the most Chekhovian" of all the writer's plays. Stanislavsky, who highly appreciated it, noted that Chekhov was one of the first "to cut down a beautiful flowering cherry orchard, realizing that his time had passed, that the old life was irrevocably condemned to be scrapped." Showing the historical change of social structures, Chekhov tries to solve the question: is it necessary to save the cherry orchard? His whole play is woven from premonitions and expectations, it feels the proximity of renewal. The time of cherry orchards with their delicate beauty is coming to an end; The owners of the cherry orchard, the landlords Ranevskaya and Gaev, are unable to resist decisive, assertive, practical entrepreneurs, because they are too passive and not adapted to a life that requires struggle. They fail, and one of the main reasons is that their time has run out.
Our whole life testifies to the fact that society in one way or another obeys the dictates of history, and each person takes into account historical laws more than his own feelings, whether he wants it or not. In place of Ranevskaya comes Lopakhin, whom, by the way, she does not blame for anything. And he, in turn, feels sincere affection for this woman. “My father was a serf with your grandfather and father, but you, in fact, you once did so much for me that I forgot everything and love you like my own…” he says. Another character, Petya Trofimov, proclaims the time of a new life and delivers impassioned speeches against historical injustice. But this young man also treats the mistress of the estate with tenderness and on the night of her arrival at the family nest says: “I will only bow to you and leave immediately.” Nevertheless, everything has long been clear to everyone: the atmosphere of universal disposition and sympathy can no longer change anything, because the laws of history are inexorable. Therefore, when, leaving the estate forever, Ranevskaya and Gaev are left alone for a minute, they throw themselves on each other's necks and sob ... In this scene there is a breath of tragedy, a feeling of harsh and inevitable changes. The era of Lopakhin is coming, the cherry orchard is cracking under his axe. Lopakhin cannot but rejoice at the fact that he became the owner of the estate, where his father, being a forced man, served the masters. And, admittedly, his feelings are understandable. There is even some historical justice in Lopakhin's triumph. At the same time, he also understands that his triumph will not bring drastic changes. He cannot but realize that new people will come to replace him, and this will be the next step in history, which Petya Trofimov enthusiastically declares: “All of Russia is our garden”, and these words, permeated with vigor and confidence, set the tone for the whole play. .
Of course, the realization of high goals is still far away, first we have to go through the Lopakhin era, but “humanity is moving towards the highest truth”, life, which, it would seem, has frozen in place, has begun to move. The dreamy and dreary expectation of change has been replaced by the conviction that a brighter future is near. People can already hear his footsteps. The Cherry Orchard does not need to be saved! The salvation of society lies in the renewal of life.
Essay text:
The play The Cherry Orchard is the latest and, presumably, the most perfect dramatic work of A.P. Chekhov. It was written in 1904 shortly before his death. The author called the play a comedy, it is difficult for us to judge why, perhaps because in the ordinary life situation of the ruin of the nobility and the withering away of the old way of life, there really are many ridiculous inconsistencies. The main characters Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna and her brother Gaev Leonid Andreevich are hopelessly behind the times, they cannot comprehend reality, their actions are illogical, their plans are unrealistic. Lyubov Andreevna gives a random passer-by who asked for thirty kopecks, gold, at a time when people at home have nothing to eat. Leonid Andreevich offers three options for saving the cherry orchard, but not one of them is feasible. These heroes are close to the elderly servant Firs. Just as Ranevskaya and Gaev are unthinkable without Firs, so Firs is unthinkable without them. These are the types of outgoing Russia. The end of the play is very symbolic, the old owners of the cherry orchard leave and forget the dying Firs. So, the logical ending: inactive consumers, in the social sense, parasites, the servant who faithfully served them, in the social sense, lackey, the cherry orchard, all this is irretrievably a thing of the past. This is a comedy? Good comedy!
Does it give rise to optimistic expectations? But what's ahead?
New in the play is personified by three people: Petya Trofimov, Anya and Lopakhin. Moreover, the author clearly contrasts Petya and Anya with Lopakhin. Who are they, these people, and what to expect from them?
Petya is an eternal student who cannot complete his course in any way, he was expelled from the university twice. The author does not specify for what for poor progress or for politics. He is twenty-seven years old, he has neither an education nor a specialty, he lives (or rather takes root) in the Ranevskaya estate, where he once was a tutor for the mistress's son. He hasn't done anything in his life. His actions are words. He says to Anya: ...your grandfather, great-grandfather and all your ancestors were serf-owners who owned living souls, and do not human beings look at you from every cherry in the garden, from every leaf, from every trunk, do you really not hear voices. .. Anya, all aspiring to the future, she is only seventeen years old, shares the words of Petya, considers exploitation immoral, but she, and the accuser Petya, help the owners to live what was previously earned by the hard work of serfs.
Further in the same monologue, Petya says: It is so clear that in order to begin to live in the present, we must first redeem our past, put an end to it, and it can only be redeemed by suffering, only by extraordinary uninterrupted labor. What does Petya mean by suffering? Perhaps this is the suffering that revolutions, civil wars bring? Most likely, he repeats without deep awareness the words that in those pre-revolutionary years were in great use in an intelligent and semi-intelligent environment. Destructive rhetoric sprouted destructive ideology. It seemed that one had only to put an end to the hated foundations of society, and all of Russia would become a garden. However, Petya, like, probably, Chekhov, does not have a positive program for the reorganization of life. He calls to work, but does not indicate the scope of work.
There is labor to collect stones (for building) and there is labor to scatter stones (destroying). Petya has already worked on Anya's consciousness. She, at seventeen, does not think about her human destiny, about love, about family, about the happiness of being a mother. But still, she has a healthy need for knowledge, before leaving the estate, she says to her mother: We will read in the autumn evenings, we will read many books, and a new, wonderful world will open before us ... Both Petya and Anya, of course, in varying degrees, do not accept the existing order of things and want to change it. With obvious inconsistency, their position is certainly moral, they are sincere in their desire for good for people and are ready to work for this.
But there is a man who occupies his definite place in this order. This is the merchant Lopa-khin, a representative of the active part of society. The author's attitude towards such people is formulated by Petya Trofimov, who says to Lopakhin: I, Ermolai Nikolaevich, understand that you are a rich man, you will soon be a millionaire. That's how in the sense of metabolism you need a predatory beast that eats everything that gets in its way, so you are needed. Lopakhin is a man of action: ... I get up at five o'clock in the morning, I work from morning to evening, well, I always have my own money and other people's money ... His father was a serf with his grandfather and father Ranevskaya. He lacks education, culture. He says to Lyubov Andreevna: Your brother, here is Leonid Andreevich, say about me that I am a boor, I am a kulak... Only Lopakhin offers a real plan for saving the estate, but he make it a source of income. It is noteworthy that the garden still passes to Lopakhin.
So who is the future? For Petya and Anya or for Lopakhin? This question could have been purely rhetorical if history had not given Russia a second attempt to resolve it. Will the active Petya and Anya or the moral Lopakhin come along?
The comedy is over. The comedy continues, gentlemen!
The rights to the composition "Comedy Cherry Orchard *" belong to its author. When citing material, it is necessary to indicate a hyperlink to
The image of the garden in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is ambiguous and complex. This is not just a part of the estate of Ranevskaya and Gaev, as it might seem at first glance. This is not what Chekhov wrote about. The cherry orchard is an image-symbol. It means the beauty of Russian nature and the lives of the people who raised him and admired him. With the death of the garden, this life also perishes.
Center uniting characters
The image of the garden in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is the center around which all the characters unite. At first it may seem that these are only old acquaintances and relatives who have gathered by chance on the estate to solve everyday problems. However, it is not. It is no coincidence that Anton Pavlovich united characters representing various social groups and age categories. Their task is to decide the fate of not only the garden, but also their own.
Connection of Gaev and Ranevskaya with the estate
Ranevskaya and Gaev are Russian landowners who own a manor and a cherry orchard. They are brother and sister, they are sensitive, smart, educated people. They are able to appreciate beauty, they feel it very subtly. Therefore, the image of the cherry orchard is so dear to them. In the perception of the heroes of the play "The Cherry Orchard" he personifies beauty. However, these characters are inert, which is why they cannot do anything to save what is dear to them. Ranevskaya and Gaev, with all their spiritual wealth and development, are deprived of responsibility, practicality and a sense of reality. Therefore, they cannot take care not only of loved ones, but also of themselves. These heroes do not want to heed Lopakhin's advice and rent out their land, although this would bring them a decent income. They believe that dachas and summer residents are vulgar.
Why is the estate so dear to Gaev and Ranevskaya?
Gaev and Ranevskaya are unable to rent out the land because of the feelings that bind them to the estate. They have a special relationship with the garden, which is like a living person for them. Much connects these heroes with their estate. The Cherry Orchard appears to them as the personification of a bygone youth, a past life. Ranevskaya compared her life to "cold winter" and "dark rainy autumn". When the landowner returned to the estate, she again felt happy and young.
Lopakhin's attitude to the cherry orchard
The image of the garden in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is also revealed in Lopakhin's attitude towards it. This hero does not share the feelings of Ranevskaya and Gaev. He finds their behavior illogical and strange. This person wonders why they do not want to listen to seemingly obvious arguments that will help find a way out of a predicament. It should be noted that Lopakhin is also able to appreciate beauty. The Cherry Orchard delights this hero. He believes that there is nothing more beautiful than him in the world.
However, Lopakhin is a practical and active person. Unlike Ranevskaya and Gaev, he cannot just admire the cherry orchard and regret it. This hero seeks to do something to save him. Lopakhin sincerely wants to help Ranevskaya and Gaev. He never ceases to convince them that both the land and the cherry orchard should be leased. This must be done as soon as possible, as the auction will be soon. However, the landowners do not want to listen to him. Leonid Andreevich can only swear that the estate will never be sold. He says he won't allow the auction.
New garden owner
Nevertheless, the auction still took place. The owner of the estate was Lopakhin, who cannot believe his own happiness. After all, his father and grandfather worked here, "were slaves", they were not even allowed into the kitchen. Buying an estate for Lopakhin becomes a kind of symbol of his success. This is a well-deserved reward for years of hard work. The hero would like his grandfather and father to rise from the grave and be able to rejoice with him, to see how their descendant succeeded in life.
Negative qualities of Lopakhin
The Cherry Orchard for Lopakhin is just land. It can be bought, mortgaged or sold. This hero, in his joy, did not consider himself obliged to show a sense of tact in relation to the former owners of the purchased estate. Lopakhin immediately begins cutting down the garden. He did not want to wait for the departure of the former owners of the estate. The soulless lackey Yasha is somewhat similar to him. It completely lacks such qualities as attachment to the place in which he was born and raised, love for his mother, kindness. In this respect, Yasha is the exact opposite of Firs, a servant who has these senses unusually developed.
Attitude towards the garden of Firs's servant
Revealing, it is necessary to say a few words about how Firs, the oldest of all in the house, treated him. For many years he faithfully served his masters. This man sincerely loves Gaev and Ranevskaya. He is ready to protect these heroes from all troubles. We can say that Firs is the only one of all the characters in The Cherry Orchard who is endowed with such a quality as devotion. This is a very whole nature, which is manifested in its entirety in the relation of the servant to the garden. For Firs, the estate of Ranevskaya and Gaev is a family nest. He seeks to protect it, as well as its inhabitants.
Representatives of the new generation
The image of the cherry orchard in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is dear only to those heroes who have important memories associated with it. The representative of the new generation is Petya Trofimov. The fate of the garden does not interest him at all. Petya declares: "We are above love." Thus, he admits that he is not capable of experiencing serious feelings. Trofimov looks at everything too superficially. He does not know the real life, which he is trying to remake, based on far-fetched ideas. Anya and Petya are outwardly happy. They crave a new life, for which they seek to break with the past. For these heroes, the garden is "the whole of Russia", and not a specific cherry orchard. But is it possible to love the whole world without loving your own home? Petya and Anya lose their roots in the pursuit of new horizons. Mutual understanding between Trofimov and Ranevskaya is impossible. For Petya, there are no memories, no past, and Ranevskaya is deeply worried about the loss of the estate, since she was born here, her ancestors also lived here, and she sincerely loves the estate.
Who will save the garden?
As we have already noted, it is a symbol of beauty. Only people who can not only appreciate her, but also fight for her can save her. Active and energetic people who replace the nobility treat beauty only as a source of profit. What will happen to her, who will save her?
The image of the cherry orchard in Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" is a symbol of the native hearth and the past, dear to the heart. Is it possible to boldly go forward if the sound of an ax is heard behind your back, which destroys everything that used to be sacred? It should be noted that the cherry orchard is, after all, it is no coincidence that such expressions as "hit a tree with an ax", "trample a flower" and "cut roots" sound inhuman and blasphemous.
So, we briefly examined the image of the cherry orchard in the understanding of the heroes of the play "The Cherry Orchard". Reflecting on the actions and characters of the characters in Chekhov's work, we also think about the fate of Russia. After all, it is for all of us a "cherry orchard".
In 1903, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov wrote his last play, which he gave the surprisingly accurate affectionate title The Cherry Orchard. If you hear this phrase, you will immediately want to immerse yourself in the warmth and comfort of the noble nest, which adorned our land a century ago.
It was created by the labor and sweat of serfs for the life and joy of the generations of the Gaev family, something very similar to Oblomov. They are kind, intelligent, but inactive, like Ilya Ilyich, who has lain on the couch all his life.
They also had their own Zakhar, only they called him Firs. Now he is 87. Gaev has also grown old, remaining a big careless child with endless lollipops in his mouth. His sister managed to change her surname - now the mother of a seventeen-year-old girl. But until now, Ranevskaya's room is called the nursery - the power of memory and tradition.
"Oh my youth! O my freshness! exclaims Gogol in Dead Souls. We hear almost the same thing in Ranevskaya's remark, because not only hands, feet, but also the human soul is looking for support. The most reliable support is the parental home. That is why, after spending five years abroad, Ranevskaya returns to the estate at the most difficult moment - it has already been put up for auction.
The Cherry Orchard... It is both a living memory of the departed and medicine for the soul. Ranevskaya loves her estate not for potatoes and tomatoes, but for memory and beauty. She will not save her estate - no matter what. But he tries to at least once again see his native nest.
Perhaps, for the sake of this meeting with Ranevskaya - a man, not a mistress - the old Firs kept his life - the emblem of the house, so merged with him that even now, four decades later, he perceives will as a misfortune. It was not in vain that “the owl screamed and the samovar buzzed endlessly” when serfdom was abolished.
Now other sounds are heard - a broken string and an orchestra (flute, double bass and four violins). Maybe it's a requiem? Not by private property in general, but by that piece of memory and beauty that belongs to you personally, without which a person cannot form spiritually.
Lopakhin offers a real option to save the cherry orchard - giving. But they will destroy everything, because this will mean the arrival of strangers in your house. “Dachis and summer residents are so vulgar,” says Ranevskaya, and Gaev supports her, although he cannot offer anything in return: he is not used to taking responsibility.
She is taken by Lopakhin, the son and grandson of the peasants who worked here. Apparently, these two clans of Lopakhins and Gaevs coexisted quite peacefully, living in parallel social worlds on the same “lordly” land. So he offers to lend money, but there is nothing to give, and decent people in such a situation do not borrow.
Other decent people do not leave this sinking ship until the last minute, which floats from the past to the hopeless present. Servants live in it on pea soup and Charlotte, who does not know her relatives and homeland. Here is Ranevskaya's adopted daughter Varya. The clerk Simeonov-Pishchik, “twenty-two misfortunes,” like the whole estate, is knocking with the bones of the accounts and rustling with the papers of the accounts. She is like a sinking ship. Lopakhin is trying to save him - a new man of a new era, in a white vest, standing firmly on the ground. But all in vain, and at the end of the drama we hear the sound of an ax - it's cherry trees being cut down to the root. Together with the garden, to the sound of an ax, the faithful Firs, a symbol of the past "lordly" life, disappears into oblivion. In the hustle and bustle, everyone forgot about him. There was no one to take personal responsibility for the fate of the old man.
Ranevskaya returned to Russia, but ended up, as it were, in another dimension - the era of the primitive accumulation of capital, which has long passed in the West. But not only the train - they were all late. The train of life has gone in the direction of capitalization, that is, squeezing "cash" and "non-cash" out of everything from which they can only be squeezed out. Including from defenseless beauty. But giving up her and the past is like giving up your own mother. This is what Yasha, who dreams about abroad, does - the most disgusting character in the play. Not so much by position, but by psychology. He is a slave. And slaves do not need spiritual memory.
A person, a state, history simply cannot do without it.
