- Essays
- On literature
- Chekhov
- Past, present and future in the play The Cherry Orchard
The play “The Cherry Orchard,” written at the beginning of the last century, is the most famous work of A.P. Chekhov. It's about worries and failures, dreams and hopes.
For the characters in the comedy, the past years are tender (Ranevskaya, Anya) or sad (Varya) memories. But the old servant Firs lives in the past, bringing it into the present. Trying to retain the spirit of bygone times, to preserve the traditions of the family, he bores those around him with stories about his former life, bothers his masters with petty care, which they have not needed for a long time.
Most of the characters in the play live “one day at a time”: the lonely Charlotte Ivanovna, and Yasha, rushing to Paris, and Pishchik, rushing about in search of money, and Epikhodov, pondering “live or shoot himself.” Varya and Dunyasha are absorbed in arranging their personal lives, that’s all their thoughts are occupied with. Varya is completely immersed in the current affairs of the estate. She is most acutely worried about the lack of money and impending ruin. Her future life is painted the same gray as her past and present.
Leonid Andreevich Gaev completely fell out of the flow of time. Yesterday, today and tomorrow everything is the same for him: a passion for billiards, which he has not played for a long time, lollipops (“I ate everything... my fortune on lollipops”) and empty conversations that irritate everyone.
But Anya and the eternal student Trofimov are almost indifferent to what is happening around them: “whether the estate is sold or not sold, it doesn’t matter.” Memories of the past are sweet to them, nothing more. All thoughts are directed to the future. Their souls are full of “inexplicable premonitions” and the feeling that happiness is “coming closer and closer.”
The owner of the cherry orchard, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, is touched by her former life in her homeland, sad about her current situation, but cannot change anything and does not want to. She strives to go to Paris to meet the man who ruined her, but whom she loves passionately. Ranevskaya “the misfortune seems... incredible.” She hopes that everything will work out on its own, squanders money, and throws an inopportune ball.
Against this background, the image of the merchant Lopakhin is interesting. It seems that only he knows what he expects from life and how to achieve it. For him, the future is not vague, as for Trofimov, but quite concrete. In fact, Ermolai Alekseevich is the only person who offers and does something real, not limiting himself to conversations and reasoning. Behind the grin and slight self-mocking hides the pride of a simple peasant (his father “traded in a shop in the village”), who managed to get rich and become on par with the landowners, to be accepted into their midst.
Will the heroes' dreams come true? Will they be happy? There are no answers to these questions in the play. But there is a premonition of change.
Essay 3
Lately I have often started reading the works of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. His works touch me to the core, raise philosophical questions and make me think about the issues of the world that surrounds us. In the play “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov illustrates the past, present and future of Russia at that time, the time in which the story is told, the end of the 19th century. This work aroused my deep interest in the history of Russia, in particular, I wanted to study the First Russian Revolution in more detail.
The author expresses the past through the landowner Ranevskaya and her cherry orchard. Ranevskaya's estate was mired in debt, no one had looked after the garden for a long time, it became increasingly old and weak, which reflected the situation that arose in Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. This garden was put up for sale, such were the realities of that time, the heroes had no other choice.
The present is expressed by A.P. Chekhov, through Trofimov, an intelligent man studying at the university, Trofimov, left alone with Anya, tells her that all of Russia is our garden, which expresses his love for his Motherland, but also his simultaneous awareness of the situation in which they find themselves. Modern reality is also defined through Yermolai Lopakhin, who was a slave all his life, like his relatives, he worked all his life for that garden, which is now rotting and stagnating, something needed to be changed, and he suddenly gets such an opportunity. A sharp and coordinated change in the estate that surrounded him was his method of dealing with problems. Cutting down a garden, planting a new one. Lopakhin's position reflected the revolutionary sentiments in society at the end of the 19th century. The realities of that time were difficult and harsh, Chekhov, of course, understood and was aware of them, because he himself lived in that difficult time.
Chekhov reflected the future in this work in one of the last fragments of this work. The author expressed his assumptions in the sounds of an ax hitting wood in the last scene. Moreover, the purchase of the garden by Lopakhin and his joy is a reflection of Chekhov’s opinion about the impending changes in the country, it is not for nothing that the year the play was published was 1905. The future was expected by society, they guessed that drastic changes were coming, innovation in domestic politics, people expected a revolution , help from the new government, care and support.
In conclusion, I would like to say that this brilliant work reflected the situation related to the past, present and future that arose in Russia at that time; it touched me to the depths of my soul, allowing me to trace the parallels drawn by the author between the characters and real people.
Cherry orchard past present future table. Past, present and future in the play “The Cherry Orchard”
The era of the greatest aggravation of social relations, a stormy social movement, and the preparation of the first Russian revolution was clearly reflected in the writer’s last major work - the play “The Cherry Orchard.” Chekhov saw the growth of the revolutionary consciousness of the people, their dissatisfaction with the autocratic regime. Chekhov's general democratic position was reflected in The Cherry Orchard: the characters in the play, being in great ideological clashes and contradictions, do not reach the point of open hostility. However, the play shows the world of the noble-bourgeois in a sharply critical manner and depicts in bright colors people striving for a new life.
Chekhov responds to the most pressing demands of the time. The play “The Cherry Orchard,” being the culmination of Russian critical realism, amazed contemporaries with its unusual truthfulness and convexity of image.
Although “The Cherry Orchard” is based entirely on everyday material, in it everyday life has a general, symbolic meaning. This was achieved by the playwright through the use of an “undercurrent”. The cherry orchard itself is not the focus of Chekhov’s attention: the symbolic garden is the entire homeland (“all of Russia is our garden”). Therefore, the theme of the play is the fate of the homeland, its future. Its old owners, the nobles Ranevskys and Gaevs, leave the stage, and the capitalists Lopakhins come to replace it. But their dominance is short-lived, for they are destroyers of beauty.
The real masters of life will come, and they will turn Russia into a blooming garden. The ideological pathos of the play lies in the denial of the noble-landowner system as outdated. At the same time, the writer argues that the bourgeoisie, which replaces the nobility, despite its vitality, brings with it destruction and oppression. Chekhov believes that new forces will come that will rebuild life on the basis of justice and humanity. The farewell of the new, young, tomorrow's Russia to the past, which has become obsolete and doomed to an early end, the aspiration to the tomorrow of the homeland - this is the content of The Cherry Orchard.
The peculiarity of the play is that it is based on showing clashes between people who are representatives of different social strata - nobles, capitalists, commoners and the people, but their clashes are not hostile. The main thing here is not the contradictions of property, but the deep revelation of the emotional experiences of the characters. Ranevskaya, Gaev and Simeonov-Pishchik form a group of local nobles. The playwright’s work was complicated by the fact that it was necessary to show positive qualities in these characters. Gaev and Pischik are kind, honest and simple, and Ranevskaya is also endowed with aesthetic feelings (love of music and nature). But at the same time, they are all weak-willed, inactive, and incapable of practical matters.
Ranevskaya and Gaev are the owners of an estate, “more beautiful than which there is nothing in the world,” as one of the characters in the play, Lopakhin, says - a delightful estate, the beauty of which lies in the poetic cherry orchard. The “owners” have brought the estate with their frivolity and complete lack of understanding of real life to a pitiful state; the estate is to be sold at auction. The rich peasant son, merchant Lopakhin, a friend of the family, warns the owners about the impending disaster, offers them his rescue projects, and encourages them to think about the impending disaster. But Ranevskaya and Gaev live with illusory ideas. Both shed many tears over the loss of their cherry orchard, which they are sure they cannot live without. But things go on as usual, auctions take place, and Lopakhin himself buys the estate.
When the disaster is over, it turns out that no special drama is happening for Ranevskaya and Gaev. Ranevskaya returns to Paris, to her absurd “love”, to which she would have returned anyway, despite all her words that she cannot live without her homeland and without the cherry orchard. Gaev also comes to terms with what happened. “A terrible drama”, which for its heroes, however, did not turn out to be a drama at all for the simple reason that they cannot have anything serious, nothing dramatic at all. The merchant Lopakhin personifies the second group of images. Chekhov attached special importance to him: “... Lopakhin’s role is central. If it fails, then the whole play will fail.”
Lopakhin replaces Ranevsky and Gaev. The playwright persistently emphasizes the relative progressiveness of this bourgeois. He is energetic, businesslike, intelligent and enterprising; he works “from morning to evening.” His practical advice, if Ranevskaya had accepted them, would have saved the estate. Lopakhin has a “thin, gentle soul”, thin fingers, like an artist. However, he recognizes only utilitarian beauty. Pursuing the goals of enrichment, Lopakhin destroys beauty - he cuts down the cherry orchard.
The dominance of the Lopakhins is transitory. New people will come to the stage for them - Trofimov and Anya, who make up the third group of characters. The future is embodied in them. It is Trofimov who pronounces the verdict on the “nests of the nobility.” “Whether the estate is sold today,” he says to Ranevskaya, “or not sold—does it matter? It’s been over for a long time, there’s no turning back..."
In Trofimov, Chekhov embodied aspirations for the future and devotion to public duty. It is he, Trofimov, who glorifies work and calls for work: “Humanity moves forward, improving its strength. Everything that is out of reach for him now will someday become close and understandable, but he must work and help with all his might those who are seeking the truth.”
True, the specific ways to change the social structure are not clear to Trofimov. He only declaratively calls for the future. And the playwright endowed him with features of eccentricity (remember the episodes of searching for galoshes and falling down the stairs). But still, his service to public interests, his calls awakened the people around him and forced them to look forward.
Trofimov is supported by Anya Ranevskaya, a poetic and enthusiastic girl. Petya Trofimov encourages Anya to turn her life around. Anya’s connections with ordinary people and her reflections helped her notice the absurdity and awkwardness of what she observed around her. Conversations with Petya Trofimov made clear to her the injustice of the life around her.
Influenced by conversations with Petya Trofimov, Anya came to the conclusion that her mother’s family estate belonged to the people, that it was unfair to own it, that one must live by labor and work for the benefit of disadvantaged people.
Enthusiastic Anya was captivated and carried away by Trofimov’s romantically upbeat speeches about a new life, about the future, and she became a supporter of his beliefs and dreams. Anya Ranevskaya is one of those who, having believed in the truth of working life, parted with their class. She does not feel sorry for the cherry orchard, she no longer loves it as before; she realized that behind him were the reproachful eyes of the people who planted and raised him.
Smart, honest, crystal clear in her thoughts and desires, Anya happily leaves the cherry orchard, the old manor house in which she spent her childhood, adolescence and youth. She says with delight: “Farewell, home! Goodbye old life! But Anya’s ideas about a new life are not only vague, but also naive. Turning to her mother, she says: “We will read on autumn evenings, we will read many books, and a new, wonderful world will open before us...”
Anya's path to a new life will be extremely difficult. After all, she is practically helpless: she is used to living, ordering numerous servants, in complete abundance, carefree, not thinking about her daily bread, about tomorrow. She is not trained in any profession, is not prepared for constant, hard work and for everyday deprivation of the most necessary things. Striving for a new life, she, by way of life and habits, remained a young lady of the noble-landed circle.
It is possible that Anya will not withstand the temptation of a new life and will retreat before its trials. But if she finds the necessary strength within herself, then her new life will be in studying, in educating the people and, maybe (who knows!), in the political struggle for their interests. After all, she understood and remembered Trofimov’s words that redeeming the past, putting an end to it “can only be done through suffering, only through extraordinary, continuous labor.”
The pre-revolutionary politicized atmosphere in which society lived could not but affect the perception of the play. “The Cherry Orchard” was immediately understood as Chekhov’s most social play, embodying the fate of entire classes: the departing nobility, the capitalism that replaced it, and the people of the future already living and acting. This superficial approach to the play was picked up and developed by literary criticism of the Soviet period.
However, the play turned out to be much higher than the political passions that flared up around it. Already contemporaries noted the philosophical depth of the play, dismissing its sociological reading. Publisher and journalist A. S. Suvorin argued that the author of “The Cherry Orchard” is aware that “something very important is being destroyed, it is being destroyed, perhaps out of historical necessity, but still this is a tragedy of Russian life.”
Essay on literature.
Here it is - an open secret, the secret of poetry, life, love! I. S. Turgenev.
The play “The Cherry Orchard,” written in 1903, is the last work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, completing his creative biography. In it, the author raises a number of problems characteristic of Russian literature: the problems of fathers and children, love and suffering. All this is united in the theme of the past, present and future of Russia.
The Cherry Orchard is the central image that unites the characters in time and space. For the landowner Ranevskaya and her brother Gaev, the garden is a family nest, an integral part of their memories. It’s as if they have grown together with this garden; without it they “don’t understand their life.” To save the estate, decisive action is needed, a change in lifestyle - otherwise the magnificent garden will go under the hammer. But Ranevskaya and Gaev are unaccustomed to all activities, impractical to the point of stupidity, unable to even seriously think about the impending threat. They betray the idea of the cherry orchard. For landowners it is a symbol of the past. Firs, Ranevskaya’s old servant, also remains in the past. He considers the abolition of serfdom a misfortune, and is attached to his former masters as to his own children. But those whom he devotedly served all his life abandon him to his fate. Forgotten and abandoned, Firs remains a monument to the past in a boarded-up house.
Currently represented by Ermolai Lopakhin. His father and grandfather were serfs of Ranevskaya, and he himself became a successful merchant. Lopakhin looks at the garden from the point of view of the “circulation of the matter.” He sympathizes with Ranevskaya, but the cherry orchard itself is doomed to death in the plans of a practical entrepreneur. It is Lopakhin who brings the agony of the garden to its logical conclusion. The estate is divided into profitable dacha plots, and “you can only hear how far away in the garden an ax is knocking on a tree.”
The future is personified by the younger generation: Petya Trofimov and Anya, Ranevskaya’s daughter. Trofimov is a student working hard to make his way into life. His life is not easy. When winter comes, he is “hungry, sick, anxious, poor.” Petya is smart and honest, understands the difficult situation the people live in, and believes in a bright future. “All of Russia is our garden!” - he exclaims.
Chekhov puts Petya in ridiculous situations, reducing his image to the extremely unheroic. Trofimov is a “shabby gentleman”, an “eternal student”, whom Lopakhin constantly stops with ironic remarks. But the student’s thoughts and dreams are close to the author’s. The writer, as it were, separates the word from its “carrier”: the significance of what is spoken does not always coincide with the social significance of the “carrier”.
Anya is seventeen years old. For Chekhov, youth is not only a sign of age. He wrote: “...that youth can be considered healthy, which does not put up with the old orders and... fights against them.” Anya received the usual upbringing for nobles. Trofimov had a great influence on the formation of her views. The girl’s character contains sincerity of feelings and mood, spontaneity. Anya is ready to start a new life: pass exams for her high school course and break ties with the past.
In the images of Anya Ranevskaya and Petya Trofimov, the author embodied all the best features inherent in the new generation. It is with their lives that Chekhov connects the future of Russia. They express the ideas and thoughts of the author himself. The sound of an ax is heard in the cherry orchard, but young people believe that the next generations will plant new orchards, more beautiful than the previous ones. The presence of these heroes enhances and strengthens the notes of vivacity that sound in the play, the motives for a future wonderful life. And it seems that it was not Trofimov, no, it was Chekhov who took the stage. “Here it is, happiness, here it comes, coming closer and closer... And if we don’t see it, don’t know it, then what’s the harm? Others will see him!”
(482 words) “The Cherry Orchard” is the last play by A.P. Chekhov. It was written by him in 1903, shortly before the 1905 revolution. The country then stood at a crossroads, and in the work the author skillfully conveyed the atmosphere of that time through events, characters, their characters and actions. The Cherry Orchard is the embodiment of pre-revolutionary Russia, and heroes of different ages are the personification of the past, present and future of the country.
Ranevskaya and Gaev represent earlier times. They live in memories and do not want to solve the problems of the present at all. Their house is under threat, but instead of making any attempts to save it, they in every possible way avoid conversations with Lopakhin on this topic. Lyubov Andreevna constantly wastes money that could be used to buy out a house. In the second act, she first complains: “Oh, my sins... I’ve always wasted money without restraint, like crazy...” - and literally a minute later, having heard the Jewish orchestra, she suggests “inviting him somehow, having an evening.” There is a feeling that before us are not adult, experienced, educated heroes, but foolish children who are unable to exist independently. They hope that their problem will be solved miraculously, but they themselves do not take any action, leaving everything to the mercy of fate. In the end, they are deprived of the entire past that they treasured so much.
The present time is personified by the merchant Ermolai Lopakhin. He is a representative of the growing class in Russia - the bourgeoisie. Unlike Ranevskaya and Gaev, he is not childish, but very hardworking and enterprising. It is these qualities that help him eventually buy the estate. He grew up in a family of serfs who used to serve the Gaevs, so he is very proud of himself: “... beaten, illiterate Ermolai... bought an estate where his grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen.” For Ermolai, the garden is not a memory of past years; for him, the plot is only a means for making money. Without any doubt, he cuts it down, thereby destroying the old, but at the same time, without creating anything new.
Anya and Petya Trofimov are heroes of the future. They both talk about the future as something absolutely bright and beautiful. But in reality, for the two of them it is quite vague. Petya talks a lot, but does little. At 26, he still hasn't graduated from university, earning him the nickname "the eternal student." He criticizes the nobility and supports the bourgeoisie, calling people to work, but he himself is not capable of anything. Of all the characters in the play, only Anya supports him. She is still a 17-year-old girl who represents the personification of youth, inexhaustible strength and the desire to do good. Her future is also unknown, but it is she who reassures her mother: “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this.” She has no doubt that the loss of an estate is not the worst tragedy and that a new garden can be planted, just as a new life can be started. Although the author does not claim anything, perhaps Anya is the true future of Russia.
A.P. Chekhov showed readers heroes of different generations, classes and views on life of that time, but was never able to give a definite answer as to who the future of the country lay behind. But still, he sincerely believed that Russia’s future would certainly be bright and beautiful, like a blooming cherry orchard.
Past, present and future in A. P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard.”
“The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov is a unique work in which all three periods of life are connected: past, present and future.
The action takes place at a time when the outdated nobility is being replaced by merchants and entrepreneurship. Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, Leonid Andreevich Gaev, the old footman Firs are representatives of the past.
They often reminisce about the old days when there was no need to worry about anything, especially money. These people value something more sublime than material. For Ranevskaya, the cherry orchard is memories and her whole life; she will not allow the thought of selling it, cutting it down, or destroying it. For Gaev, even such things as a hundred-year-old wardrobe matter, to which he addresses with tears in his eyes: “Dear, respected wardrobe!” And what about the old footman Firs? He did not need the abolition of serfdom, because he devoted his whole life and all of himself to the family of Ranevskaya and Gaev, whom he sincerely loved. “The men are with the gentlemen, the gentlemen are with the peasants, and now everything is fragmented, you won’t understand anything,” this is how Firs spoke about the state of things after the abolition of serfdom in Russia. He, like all representatives of the old time, was satisfied with the previously existing order.
The nobility and antiquity are being replaced by something new - the merchants, the personification of the present. The representative of this generation is Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin. He comes from a simple family, his father traded in a shop in the village, but thanks to his own efforts, Lopakhin was able to achieve a lot and make a fortune. Money mattered to him; he saw the cherry orchard only as a source of profit. Yermolai was smart enough to develop a whole project and help Ranevskaya in her deplorable situation. It was savvy and a craving for material wealth that were inherent in the generation of the present time.
But sooner or later the present must also be replaced by something. Any future is changeable and vague, this is exactly how A.P. Chekhov shows it. The future generation is quite diverse, it includes Anya and Varya, student Petya Trofimov, maid Dunyasha and young footman Yasha. If the representatives of the old days are similar in almost everything, then the young ones are completely different. They are full of new ideas, strength and energy. However, among them there are those who are only capable of beautiful speeches, but do not really change anything. This is Petya Trofimov. “We are at least two hundred years behind, we have absolutely nothing, no definite attitude towards the past, we only philosophize, complain about melancholy and drink vodka,” he says to Anya, while doing nothing to make life become better and still remain an “eternal student.” Although Anya is fascinated by Petya’s ideas, she goes her own way, intending to get settled in life. “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this one,” she says, ready to change the future for the better. But there is another type of youth, which includes the young lackey Yasha. A completely unprincipled, empty person, capable of only grins and not attached to anything. What will happen if the future is built by people like Yasha?
“All of Russia is our garden,” notes Trofimov. That’s right, the cherry orchard personifies the whole of Russia, where there is a connection between times and generations. It was the garden that connected all representatives of the past, present and future into one whole, just as Russia unites all generations.
A short essay-discussion on the topic: The past, present and future of Russia in the play “The Cherry Orchard.” Three generations in the comedy "The Cherry Orchard". The fate of the Cherry Orchard
In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” Chekhov portrayed several generations of people at once, each of which represents the past, present or future of Russia. The author does not idealize any of them: each era has its own advantages and disadvantages. This is why we value Chekhov’s work: he is extremely objective in relation to reality. The writer is not trying to convince us that the future is cloudless or the past is worthy of worship, and he treats the present most strictly.
The past in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is presented in the images of Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs. All of them cannot adapt to the new realities of life. Their situation in some places seems funny to us, because their actions are absurd. To save the estate, the owners just need to rent it out at a profit, but they are too scrupulous and arrogant, they are embarrassed by the vulgarity of the summer residents who will desecrate their cherry orchards. Instead, they ended up with Lopakhin buying the estate and completely cutting down the paradise. This example suggests that the nobles cannot even take care of themselves, let alone Russia. Their behavior is not rational, and their character is capricious, because they are accustomed to living carefree through the labor of others. Obviously, they did not live up to the privileges of their class, so the harsh reality left them in the past: they could not keep up with it, they kept imagining that it had to adapt to them. However, Chekhov does not set himself the task of denigrating the past. We see that these people are not devoid of spiritual subtlety, tact and other genuine virtues. They are well-mannered, educated and kind. For example, the devotion of the old servant Firs makes us sympathize with him and recognize the older generation's moral superiority over modern people like Lopakhin.
The future in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is the young generation: Trofimov and Anya. They are dreamers, maximalists, divorced from reality. They are romantic and elevated, but at the same time independent and intelligent, being able to find mistakes of the past and present and try to correct them. Student Trofimov says: “We are at least two hundred years behind, we still have absolutely nothing, there is no definite attitude towards the past, we only philosophize, complain about melancholy or drink vodka,” it is obvious that the young man looks soberly at things. But at the same time, the hero demonstrates indifference towards the cherry orchard: “We are above love,” he declares, abdicating all responsibility for the fate of the garden, and, therefore, of all of Russia. He and Anya, of course, want to change something, but they are losing their roots. This is precisely what worries the author.
Features of Chekhov's dramaturgy
Before Anton Chekhov, Russian theater was going through a crisis; it was he who made an invaluable contribution to its development, breathing new life into it. The playwright snatched small sketches from the everyday life of his characters, bringing drama closer to reality. His plays made the viewer think, although they did not contain intrigues or open conflicts, but they reflected the internal anxiety of a turning point in history, when society froze in anticipation of imminent changes, and all social strata became heroes. The apparent simplicity of the plot introduced the stories of the characters before the events described, making it possible to speculate what would happen to them after. In this way, the past, present, and future were mixed in an amazing way in the play “The Cherry Orchard,” by connecting people not so much from different generations, but from different eras. And one of the “undercurrents” characteristic of Chekhov’s plays was the author’s reflection on the fate of Russia, and the theme of the future took over.
