Problematic issues of Russian literature. Why is The Cherry Orchard a comedy Why is the play The Cherry Orchard called a comedy

Lyrical comedy - original literary genre, which is characterized by the absence of division of characters into good and bad, the absence of such an action - instead, it is an “internal” action in which events are replaced by details that play a significant role in the plot of the work. This genre was invented by A.P. Chekhov and realized in the plays " Cherry Orchard", "The Seagull", "Three Sisters" and "Uncle Vanya". “The Cherry Orchard” is a lyrical comedy because outwardly it is a comedy, but the lyricism is characterized by the tragedy that is present in it. In the Russian repertoire there are many comedies that fall under the definition of “lyrical comedy”: A.S. Griboyedov with his “Woe from Wit” and D.I. Fonvizin with the comedy “The Minor” - and these two plays have obvious similarities with Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard”.

In “Woe from Wit,” the comedic component of the work comes to the fore: Famusov with his fingers plugged into his ears, flatly refusing to listen to Chatsky’s liberal ideas, Molchalin with the phrase: “Your Spitz is a lovely Spitz,” - it was funny in the 19th century, it’s funny in Our time and Chekhov in this regard lags behind his fellow writer.

Our experts can check your essay according to the Unified State Exam criteria

Experts from the site Kritika24.ru
Teachers of leading schools and current experts of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.

Gaev and long, extensive monologues dedicated to the love of the closet, the deaf old man Firs, who was forgotten at home at the end of the play - Chekhov and Griboedov are similar in the way their works are structured - comedy is in the foreground.

At D.I. Fonvizin has no problems with humor either - as Chekhov and Griboedov did later, he gave comedy a place to be: Mitrofanushka is an ignoramus who uttered a phrase that became an aphorism: “I don’t want to study, I want to get married,” - Prostakova’s brother, whose dreams boil down to this or that otherwise to the pigs.

In all three works there is an element of comedy brought to the fore.

But also in all three comedies there is also a flip side - a tragic one.

The main task of “Woe from Wit” is to show all the meanness and inferiority of the nobility of the 18th century, which existed in the 19th century with its updates and liberalization, and Chekhov tried to convey an almost similar idea in “The Cherry Orchard,” where the nobility of the late 19th century cannot live in the 20th century with the emergence of the working class and general modernization and, ultimately, revolution. The conflict of time is also present in Fonvizin’s “Minor”, ​​where Starodum - a character with a telling surname and a man from the time of Emperor Peter I - teaches the present-day nobles how to live.

Origins of the play's title

The last play by A.P. Chekhov caused controversy both at the beginning of the 20th century and now. And this applies not only to the genre, the characteristics of the characters, but also to the name. Both critics who became the first spectators and current admirers of Chekhov’s legacy have already tried to figure out the meaning of the title of the play “The Cherry Orchard”. Of course, the title of the play is not accidental. After all, at the center of events is the fate of a noble estate, surrounded by a cherry orchard. Why did Chekhov take the cherry orchard as the basis? After all, gardens planted with only one species fruit trees, were not found in estates. But it is the cherry orchard that becomes one of the central characters, no matter how strange it may sound in relation to an inanimate object. For Chekhov great value the title of the play plays on the use of the word “cherry” and not “cherry”. The etymology of these words is different. Cherry is called jam, seeds, color, and cherry is the trees themselves, their leaves and flowers, and the garden itself is cherry.

The title as a reflection of the destinies of the heroes

In 1901, when Chekhov started thinking about writing a new play, he already had this title. While not yet knowing exactly what the characters would be like, he already had a clear idea of ​​what the action would revolve around. Telling Stanislavsky about his new play, he admired its title, calling it “The Cherry Orchard,” pronouncing the title many times with different intonations. Stanislavsky did not share or understand the author’s joy over the title. After some time, the playwright and the director met again, and the author announced that the garden in the play and the title would not be “cherry,” but “cherry.” And only after replacing just one letter, Konstantin Sergeevich understood and imbued with the meaning of the name “The Cherry Orchard” of Chekhov’s new play. After all, a cherry orchard is just a piece of land planted with trees, capable of generating income, and when you say “cherry orchard,” some inexplicable feeling of tenderness and home comfort, link generations. And it is no coincidence that the fates of Ranevskaya and Gaev, Anya and Lopakhin, Firs and Yasha are intertwined with the fate of the garden. They all grew up and were born under the shade of this garden. Even before the birth of Firs, the oldest participant in the action, the garden was planted. And the footman saw its heyday - when the garden produced a huge harvest, which always managed to be used. Anya, as the youngest heroine, no longer saw this, and for her the garden is simply a beautiful and native corner of the Earth. For Ranevskaya and Gaev, a garden is something living that they admire to the very depths of their souls; they, like these cherry trees, have taken their roots just as deeply, only not into the ground, but into their beliefs. And it seems to them that since the garden remains so unchanged for many years, then their usual life is also unshakable. However, it is clearly visible that everything around is changing, people are changing, their values ​​and desires are changing. For example, Anya parts with the garden without pity, saying that she no longer loves it; Ranevskaya is attracted by distant Paris; Lopakhin is overcome by pride and thirst for profit. Only the garden remains unchanged, and only by the will of people does it go under the ax.

Symbolism of the play's title

The meaning of the title of the play “The Cherry Orchard” is very symbolic: throughout the entire action it is present in the scenery and conversations. It was the cherry orchard that became the main symbol of the play as a whole. And the image of the garden turns out to be closely connected with the characters’ thoughts about life in general, and through their attitude towards it, in many ways, the author revealed the characters’ characters. It is quite possible that the cherry tree would have become the emblem of the Moscow Art Theater if the seagull from the drama of the same name by A.P. had not taken this place even earlier. Chekhov.

The extraordinary beauty of the blooming cherry orchard is mentioned at the very beginning of the play. One of its owners, Gaev, reports that the garden is mentioned even in “ Encyclopedic Dictionary" For Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, the cherry orchard is associated with memories of bygone youth, of the time when she was so serenely happy. At the same time, the cherry orchard is also the economic basis of the estate, once associated with the suffering of the serf peasantry.

“All of Russia is our garden”

Ranevskaya and Gaev love their estate and cherry orchard, but they are completely unadapted to life and cannot change anything. The only person who is trying to help them save the estate, which is being sold for debts, is the wealthy merchant Ermolai Lopakhin, whose father and grandfather were serfs. But Lopakhin does not notice the beauty of the cherry orchard. He proposes to cut it down and rent out the vacant plots to summer residents. Ultimately, it is Lopakhin who becomes the owner of the garden, and at the end of the play the sound of an ax is heard, mercilessly cutting down the cherry trees.

Among the characters in Chekhov's play there are also representatives of the younger generation - Ranevskaya's daughter Anya and the “eternal student” Petya Trofimov. They are full of strength and energy, but they do not care about the fate of the cherry orchard. They are driven by other, abstract ideas about the transformation of the world and the happiness of all mankind. However, for beautiful phrases Petya Trofimova, like Gaev’s pompous rantings, does not have any specific activity behind her.

The title of Chekhov's play is full of symbolism. The Cherry Orchard is all of Russia at a turning point. The author thinks about what fate awaits her in the future.

Answer from Cassandra[guru]
One of the features of “The Cherry Orchard” is that all the characters are presented in an ambivalent, tragicomic light. The play has purely comic characters: Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov, Yasha, Firs. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov makes fun of Gaev, who “lived his fortune on lollipops,” and of the sentimental Ranevskaya beyond her age and her practical helplessness. Even over Petya Trofimov, who, it would seem, symbolizes the renewal of Russia, A.P. Chekhov sneers, calling him an “eternal student.” Petya Trofimov deserved this attitude from the author with his verbosity, which A.P. Chekhov did not tolerate. Petya pronounces monologues about workers who “eat disgustingly, sleep without pillows,” about the rich who “live in debt, at someone else’s expense,” about “a proud man.” At the same time, he warns everyone that he is “afraid of serious conversations.” Petya Trofimov, having done nothing for five months, keeps telling others that “they need to work.” And this is with the hardworking Vara and the businesslike Lopakhin! Trofimov does not study because he cannot both study and support himself. Petya Ranevskaya gives a very sharp but accurate characterization regarding Trofimov’s “spirituality” and “tact”: “... You have no cleanliness, and you are just a neat person.” A.P. Chekhov speaks ironically about his behavior in his remarks. Trofimov either screams “with horror,” then, choking with indignation, cannot utter a word, then he threatens to leave and cannot do this.
A.P. Chekhov has certain sympathetic notes in his portrayal of Lopakhin. He does everything possible to help Ranevskaya keep the estate. Lopakhin is sensitive and kind. But in double lighting he is far from ideal: there is a businesslike winglessness in him, Lopakhin is not capable of getting carried away and loving. In his relationship with Varya, he is comical and awkward. The short-term celebration associated with the purchase of a cherry orchard is quickly replaced by a feeling of despondency and sadness. Lopakhin utters a significant phrase with tears: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” Here Lopakhin directly touches on the main source of drama: it lies not in the struggle for the cherry orchard, but in dissatisfaction with life, experienced differently by all the heroes of the forest. Life goes on awkwardly and awkwardly, bringing no joy or happiness to anyone. This life is unhappy not only for the main characters, but also for Charlotte, lonely and useless, and for Epikhodov with his constant failures.
When determining the essence of a comic conflict, literary scholars argue that it rests on the discrepancy between appearance and essence (comedy of situations, comedy of characters, etc.). In “the new comedy of A.P. Chekhov, the words, deeds and actions of the heroes are in precisely such a discrepancy. Everyone’s internal drama turns out to be more important than external events (the so-called “undercurrents”). Hence the “tearfulness” of the characters, which does not have a tragic connotation at all. Monologues and remarks “through tears” most likely indicate excessive sentimentality, nervousness, and sometimes even irritability of the characters. Hence the all-pervasive Chekhovian irony. It seems that the author seems to be asking questions to the audience, the readers, and himself: why do people waste their lives so mediocrely? Why do they treat loved ones so frivolously? Why is it so irresponsible to waste words and vitality, naively believing that they will live forever and there will be an opportunity to live life completely, anew? The heroes of the play deserve both pity and merciless “laughter through tears invisible to the world.”

“The Cherry Orchard” is the pinnacle of Russian drama of the early 20th century, a lyrical comedy, a play that marked the beginning of a new era in the development of Russian theater.

The main theme of the play is autobiographical - a bankrupt family of nobles sells their family estate at auction. The author, as a person who went through such life situation, with subtle psychologism describes the state of mind of people who will soon be forced to leave their home. The innovation of the play is the absence of division of heroes into positive and negative, into main and secondary ones. They are all divided into three categories:

• people of the past - noble aristocrats (Ranevskaya, Gaev and their lackey Firs);
• people of the present - theirs bright representative merchant-entrepreneur Lopakhin;
• people of the future - the progressive youth of that time (Petr Trofimov and Anya).

History of creation

Chekhov began work on the play in 1901. Due to serious health problems, the writing process was quite difficult, but nevertheless, in 1903 the work was completed. The first theatrical production of the play took place a year later on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater, becoming the pinnacle of Chekhov's work as a playwright and a textbook classic of the theatrical repertoire.

Analysis of the play

Description of the work

The action takes place on the family estate of landowner Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, who returned from France with her young daughter Anya. They are met at the railway station by Gaev (Ranevskaya's brother) and Varya (her adopted daughter).

The financial situation of the Ranevsky family is nearing complete collapse. Entrepreneur Lopakhin offers his version of a solution to the problem - break land plot on shares and give them to summer residents for use for a certain fee. The lady is burdened by this proposal, because for this she will have to say goodbye to her beloved cherry orchard, with which many warm memories of her youth are associated. Adding to the tragedy is the fact that her beloved son Grisha died in this garden. Gaev, imbued with his sister’s experiences, reassures her with the promise that they will family estate will not be offered for sale.

The action of the second part takes place on the street, in the courtyard of the estate. Lopakhin, with his characteristic pragmatism, continues to insist on his plan to save the estate, but no one pays attention to him. Everyone turns to the teacher Pyotr Trofimov who has appeared. He delivers an excited speech dedicated to the fate of Russia, its future and touches on the topic of happiness in a philosophical context. The materialist Lopakhin is skeptical about the young teacher, and it turns out that only Anya is capable of being imbued with his lofty ideas.

The third act begins with Ranevskaya using her last money to invite an orchestra and organize a dance evening. Gaev and Lopakhin are absent at the same time - they went to the city for an auction, where the Ranevsky estate should go under the hammer. After a tedious wait, Lyubov Andreevna learns that her estate was bought at auction by Lopakhin, who does not hide his joy at his acquisition. The Ranevsky family is in despair.

The finale is entirely dedicated to the departure of the Ranevsky family from their home. The parting scene is shown with all the deep psychologism inherent in Chekhov. The play ends with a surprisingly deep monologue by Firs, whom the owners in a hurry forgot on the estate. The final chord is the sound of an axe. The cherry orchard is being cut down.

Main characters

A sentimental person, the owner of the estate. Having lived abroad for several years, she got used to luxurious life and by inertia she continues to allow herself many things that, given the deplorable state of her finances, according to the logic of common sense, should be inaccessible to her. Being a frivolous person, very helpless in everyday matters, Ranevskaya does not want to change anything about herself, while she is fully aware of her weaknesses and shortcomings.

A successful merchant, he owes a lot to the Ranevsky family. His image is ambiguous - he combines hard work, prudence, enterprise and rudeness, a “peasant” beginning. At the end of the play, Lopakhin does not share Ranevskaya’s feelings; he is happy that, despite his peasant origins, he was able to afford to buy the estate of his late father’s owners.

Like his sister, he is very sensitive and sentimental. Being an idealist and romantic, to console Ranevskaya, he comes up with fantastic plans to save the family estate. He is emotional, verbose, but at the same time completely inactive.

Petya Trofimov

An eternal student, a nihilist, an eloquent representative of the Russian intelligentsia, advocating for the development of Russia only in words. In pursuit of the “highest truth,” he denies love, considering it a petty and illusory feeling, which immensely upsets Ranevskaya’s daughter Anya, who is in love with him.

A romantic 17-year-old young lady who fell under the influence of the populist Pyotr Trofimov. Recklessly believing in better life After the sale of her parents' estate, Anya is ready for any difficulties for the sake of shared happiness next to her lover.

An 87-year-old man, a footman in the Ranevskys' house. The type of servant of old times, surrounds his masters with fatherly care. He remained to serve his masters even after the abolition of serfdom.

A young lackey who treats Russia with contempt and dreams of going abroad. A cynical and cruel man, he is rude to old Firs and even treats his own mother with disrespect.

Structure of the work

The structure of the play is quite simple - 4 acts without dividing into separate scenes. The duration of action is several months, from late spring to mid-autumn. In the first act there is exposition and plotting, in the second there is an increase in tension, in the third there is a climax (the sale of the estate), in the fourth there is a denouement. Characteristic feature the play is the absence of genuine external conflict, dynamism, unpredictable turns storyline. The author's remarks, monologues, pauses and some understatement give the play a unique atmosphere of exquisite lyricism. The artistic realism of the play is achieved through the alternation of dramatic and comic scenes.

(Scene from a modern production)

The development of the emotional and psychological plane dominates in the play; the main driver of the action is the internal experiences of the characters. The author expands the artistic space of the work using input large quantity characters who never appear on stage. Also, the effect of expanding spatial boundaries is given by the symmetrically emerging theme of France, giving an arched form to the play.

Final conclusion

Chekhov's last play, one might say, is his “swan song.” The novelty of her dramatic language is a direct expression of Chekhov’s special concept of life, which is characterized by extraordinary attention to small, seemingly insignificant details, and a focus on the inner experiences of the characters.

In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” the author captured the state of critical disunity of Russian society of his time; this sad factor is often present in scenes where the characters hear only themselves, creating only the appearance of interaction.