A.P. Chekhov called his work " Cherry Orchard"comedy. Having read the play, we attribute it more to a tragedy than a comedy. It seems to us tragic images Gaev and Ranevskaya, their fates are tragic. We sympathize and empathize with them. At first we cannot understand why Anton Pavlovich classified his play as a comedy. But re-reading the work, understanding it, we still find the behavior of such characters as Gaev, Ranevskaya, Epikhodov somewhat comical. We already believe that they themselves are to blame for their troubles, and perhaps we condemn them for this. What genre does A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" belong to - comedy or tragedy? In the play "The Cherry Orchard" we do not see a clear conflict, everything seems to flow as usual. The characters in the play behave calmly, there are no open quarrels or clashes between them. And yet we feel the existence of a conflict, but not open, but internal, hidden in the quiet, at first glance, peaceful atmosphere of the play. We see them behind the ordinary conversations of the heroes of the work, behind their calm attitude towards each other. internal misunderstanding of others. We often hear lines from characters that are out of place; We often see their detached looks, as if they do not hear those around them. But the main conflict of the play “The Cherry Orchard” lies in the misunderstanding of generation by generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. These three generations dream of their time, but they only talk and can do nothing to change their life, to the past generation includes Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs; to the present - Lopakhin, and representatives of the future generation are Petya Trofimov and Dnya. Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, a representative of the old nobility, constantly talks about her best young years spent in the old house, in the beautiful and luxurious cherry orchard. She lives only with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not even want to think about the future. And we think her immaturity is funny. And the entire old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about the “wonderful” old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course, and give in without fighting for their ideas. And therefore Chekhov condemns them for this. Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present. He lives for today. We can't help but notice that his ideas are smart and practical. He has lively conversations about how to change life for the better, and seems to know what to do. But all these are just words. In fact, Lopakhin is not the ideal hero of the play. We feel his lack of self-confidence. And at the end of the Work, he seems to give up, and he exclaims: “If only our awkward, unhappy life would change!” It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author’s hope for the future. But how can a person like Petya Trofimov, an “eternal student” and “ shabby gentleman"change this life? After all, only smart, energetic, self-confident people, active people, can put forward new ideas, enter into the future and lead others. But Petya, like the other heroes of the play, talks more than he acts; he generally leads feels somehow ridiculous. And Anya is still too young, she doesn’t know life yet to change it. So, the main tragedy of the play lies not only in the sale of the garden and the estate in which people spent their youth, with which their best memories are connected, but also in the inability of these same people to change anything to improve their situation. We, of course, sympathize with Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, but we cannot help but notice her infantile, sometimes ridiculous behavior. We constantly feel the absurdity of the events taking place in the play. Ranevskaya and Kaev with their attachments to old objects, Epikhodov is absurd, and Charlotte herself is the personification of uselessness in this life. The main conflict of the work is the conflict of times, the misunderstanding of one generation by another. There is no connection between times in the play; the gap between them is heard in the sound of a broken string. And yet the author expresses his hopes for the future. No wonder the sound of an ax symbolizes the transition from the past to the present. And when the new generation plants new garden, the future will come.A. P. Chekhov wrote the play "The Cherry Orchard" before the 1905 revolution. Therefore, the garden itself is the personification of Russia at that time. In this work, Anton Pavlovich reflected the problems of the passing nobility, the bourgeoisie and the revolutionary future. At the same time, Chekhov depicted in a new way main conflict works. The conflict is not shown openly in the work, but we feel internal conflict, occurring between the characters of the play. Tragedy and comedy run inextricably through the entire work. We simultaneously sympathize with the characters and condemn them for their inactivity.
Tasks and tests on the topic "Three generations in A. P. Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard"
- Morphological norm - Important Topics to repeat the Unified State Exam in Russian
Lessons: 1 Tasks: 8
- Three declensions of nouns. Algorithm for determining declination - Noun as part of speech grade 4
Three generations in A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard” 1. “The Cherry Orchard” is Chekhov’s “swan song”. 2. Ranevskaya and Gaev are representatives of the passing life. 3. Lopakhin is the personification of the present. 4. Petya Trofimov and Anya as representatives of the new generation, the future of Russia.
A.P. Chekhov turned to the genre of dramaturgy already in early work. But his real success as a playwright began with the play “The Seagull.” The play “The Cherry Orchard” is called Chekhov’s swan song. It was completed with this creative path writer. In “The Cherry Orchard” the author expressed his beliefs, thoughts, and hopes. Chekhov believes that the future of Russia belongs to people like Trofimov and Anya. In one of his letters, Chekhov wrote: “Students and female students are a good and honest people. This is our hope, this is the future of Russia.” It is they, according to Chekhov, who are the true owners of the cherry orchard, which the author identified with his homeland. “All of Russia is our garden,” says Petya Trofimov.
The owners of the cherry orchard are the hereditary nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev. The estate and garden have been the property of their family for many years, but they can no longer manage here. They are the personification of Russia's past; there is no future for them. Why?
Gaev and Ranevskaya are helpless, idle people, incapable of any active action. They admire the beauty of the blooming garden; it evokes nostalgic memories for these people, but that’s all. Their estate is ruined, and these people cannot and do not try to do anything to somehow improve the situation. The price of such “love” is small. Although Ranevkaya says: “God knows, I love my homeland, I love it dearly.” But the question arises, what kind of love is this if she left Russia five years ago and has returned now only because she suffered a fiasco in her personal life. And in the finale of the play, Ranevskaya again leaves her homeland.
Of course, the heroine gives the impression of a person with an open soul, she is warm-hearted, emotional, and impressionable. But these qualities are combined with such traits of her character as carelessness, spoiledness, frivolity, bordering on callousness and indifference to others. We see that in fact Ranevskaya is indifferent towards people, even sometimes cruel. How else to explain the fact that she gives the last gold to a passerby, and the servants in the house are left to live from hand to mouth. She thanks Firs, inquires about his health, and... leaves the old, sick man in a boarded-up house, simply forgetting about him. This is monstrous to say the least!
Like Ranevskaya, Gaev has a sense of beauty. I would like to note that he gives the impression of a gentleman more than Ranevskaya. Although this character can be called exactly as inactive, careless and frivolous as his sister. As if small child Gaev cannot give up the habit of sucking lollipops and even in small things he counts on Firs. His mood changes very quickly; he is a fickle, flighty person. Gaev is upset to the point of tears that the estates are being sold, but as soon as he heard the sound of balls in the billiard room, he immediately cheered up, like a child.
Of course, Gaev and Ranevskaya are the embodiment of a past passing life. Their habit of living “in debt, at someone else’s expense” speaks of the idleness of the existence of these heroes. They are definitely not the masters of life, since even their material well-being depends on some chance: either it will be an inheritance, or the Yaroslavl grandmother will send them money in order to pay off their debts, or Lopakhin will lend money. People like Gaev and Ranevskaya are being replaced by a completely different type of people: strong, enterprising, dexterous. One of these people is another character in the play Lopakhin.
Lopakhin embodies the present of Russia. Lopakhin's parents were serfs, but after the abolition of serfdom, the fate of this man changed. He rose to prominence, became rich, and is now able to buy the estate of those who were once his masters. Lopakhin feels superior to Ranevskaya and Gaev, and even they treat him with respect, because they realize their dependence on this man. It is clear that Lopakhin and people like him will very soon oust the well-born nobles.
However, Lopakhin gives the impression of a person who is the “master of life” only for a given, short period of time. He is not the owner of the cherry orchard, but only its temporary owner. He plans to cut down the cherry orchard and sell the land. It seems that, having increased his capital from this profitable enterprise, he will still not occupy a dominant place in the life of the state in the future. In the image of this character, Chekhov masterfully managed to portray a bizarre and contradictory combination of features of the past and present. Lopakhin, although proud of his current position, does not forget for a second about his low origins; his resentment towards life, which, it seems to him, was unfair to him, is too strong. Very soon the reader and viewer understands that Lopakhin is just an intermediate step between the past and future generations.
In Chekh'b's play we also see characters contrasted with the destructive activities of Lopakhin and the inaction of Ranevskaya and Gaev. This is Anya and Petya Trofimov. According to the author, the future of Russia lies with such people. Trofimov is an ardent seeker of truth who sincerely believes in the triumph of a just life in the near future. Student Petya Trofimov is poor, suffers hardships, but as an honest person he refuses to live at the expense of others. He talks a lot about the need to restructure society, but has not yet taken any real actions. But he is an excellent propagandist. This is one of those whom young people follow and believe in. Anya is carried away by Trofimov’s call to change her life, and at the end of the play we hear her words calling to “plant a new garden.” The author does not give us the opportunity to see the fruits of the activities of representatives of the new generation. He only leaves us with hope that the words of Petya Trofimov and Anya will not diverge from their deeds.
Chekhov portrayed three generations of people in his play “The Cherry Orchard,” and each character personifies the life of Russia: Ranevkaya and Gaev - the past, Lopakhin - the present, Trofimov and Anya - the future. Time has shown that Chekhov was absolutely right - in the near future, a revolution awaited the Russian people, and it was people like Trofimov who made history.
At the center of Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" is the question of saving the cherry orchard - the estate of the landowner Ranevskaya. It is important that the garden represents all of Russia. Thus, the playwright poses in his work the question of whether it is possible to save “old” Russia - a noble country, with its centuries-old way of life, culture, philosophy, and worldview.
We can say that throughout the entire comedy the role of savior is “tried on” to many heroes. We look especially closely at young characters, because who, if not the youth, should we rely on for the salvation of Russia?
First of all, Petya and his “follower” Anya, Ranevskaya’s youngest daughter, attract attention. These heroes are young, full of strength and energy, but they are passionate about completely different ideas - to transform the whole world, create a wonderful future for all humanity. What is the old cherry orchard to them! For Anya, he is a symbol of everything old and inert; she does not feel any warm feelings towards her mother’s estate. The girl thinks that Russian nobility guilty before common people and must atone for his guilt. This is exactly what Anya wants to devote her life to together with Petya Trofimov.
Trofimov scolds everything that slows down the development of Russia - “dirt, vulgarity, Asianism”, criticizes the Russian intelligentsia, which does not look for anything and does not work. But the hero does not notice that he himself is a bright representative of such an intelligentsia: he speaks beautifully without doing anything. A characteristic phrase for Petya: “I will reach or show others the way to reach...” to the “highest truth.” He also doesn’t care about the cherry orchard. Trofimov’s plans are much larger - to make all humanity happy!..
But, I think, these heroes will remain at the stage of words and will not get down to business. Petya spends too much energy on abstract plans, but he is not able to do anything concrete. Let us remember that Trofimov cannot even complete the course or receive a diploma. This is a sure sign that all his affairs will also “hang in the air” and end in “zilch.”
Maybe Anya will be stronger than her “ideological inspiration” and will be able to really participate in the transformation of Russia? The character of this girl allows me to think so, but... It seems to me that Anya is in love with Trofimov, in her eyes he is romantic hero, pronouncing beautiful words, to which the girl listens with delight. So now, I think, the ideas of transformation and salvation are her true, real interest. Perhaps in the future, having matured and become stronger, she will be able to contribute to a good cause, but not now.
The most likely candidate for the role of the savior of the cherry orchard in the play is, in my opinion, Lopakhin. From the very beginning, he appears before us as a man who deeply sympathizes with the ruined Ranevskaya, attached to her since childhood.
This hero is a merchant, a representative of the formation that becomes the “masters of life” in new Russia. Lopakhin came from a peasant background, he is of simple origin: “My father, it’s true, was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes. With a pig's snout in a Kalash line... Only he's rich, he has a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, he's a man..."
Thanks to his enterprise and acumen, Lopakhin was able to “make” himself a decent fortune. His rational brain is aimed primarily at obtaining benefits. Lopakhin does not understand any “sentiments, tenderness”, sublime feelings due to his make-up and level of education. He advises Ranevskaya to cut down the trees and rent out the garden to summer residents, dividing it into plots.
The merchant is, of course, right; this is exactly what should be done in the current situation from an economic point of view. But... in this case, the old cherry orchard, that is, the old Russia, will fade into oblivion and sink into oblivion. This is what happens in the finale. And Lopakhin even rejoices at the departure of old Russia.
Indeed, what good did he see under serfdom? His father and grandfather were slaves there, and the same fate awaited him. And in the new country, Lopakhin rose to prominence, became a respected person, and even gained power over his former masters. Therefore, this hero will not save the old Russia. But will he save the new one? I think yes. From history we know that before the events of 1917, Russia was one of the world leaders in the world in economic and cultural development. The country was gradually rebuilt, preserving old traditions, but, of course, introducing new trends into it. And only October Revolution 1917 radically changed everything.
Thus, there are several young heroes in the play, but among them there is no character capable of saving the old, former Russia. But there is a hero who is the future. In my opinion, this is businessman Lopakhin.
The future of Russia is represented by the images of Anya and Petya Trofimov.
Anya is 17 years old, she breaks with her past and convinces the crying Ranevskaya that there is a whole life ahead: “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this, you will see it, you will understand, and joy, quiet, deep joy will descend on your soul.” The future in the play is unclear, but it captivates and beckons purely emotionally, as youth is always attractive and promising. The image of a poetic cherry orchard, a young girl welcoming a new life - these are the dreams and hopes of the author himself for the transformation of Russia, for its transformation in the future into blooming garden. The garden is a symbol of eternal renewal of life: “It begins new life“Anya exclaims enthusiastically in the fourth act. Anya’s image is festive and joyful in the spring. “My sunshine! My spring,” Petya says about her. Anya condemns her mother for her lordly habit of wasting money, but she understands her mother’s tragedy better than others and sternly reprimands Gaev for bad words about mother. Where does a seventeen-year-old girl get this wisdom and tact in life, which is not available to her far from young uncle?! Her determination and enthusiasm are attractive, but they threaten to turn into disappointment judging by how recklessly she believes Trofimov and his optimistic monologues.
At the end of the second act, Anya turns to Trofimov: “What have you done to me, Petya, why I no longer love the cherry orchard as before. I loved him so tenderly, it seemed to me that there was no one on earth better place like our garden."
Trofimov answers her: “All of Russia is our garden.”
Petya Trofimov, like Anya, represents young Russia. He former teacher the drowned seven-year-old son of Ranevskaya. His father was a pharmacist. He is 26 or 27 years old, he is an eternal student who has not completed his course, wears glasses and argues that he should stop admiring himself and “just work.” True, Chekhov clarified in his letters that Petya Trofimov did not graduate from the university not of his own free will: “After all, Trofimov is constantly in exile, he is constantly expelled from the university, but how do you portray these things.”
Petya most often speaks not on his own behalf - on behalf of the new generation of Russia. Today for him is “...dirt, vulgarity, Asianism,” the past is “serf owners who owned living souls.” “We are at least two hundred years behind, we still have absolutely nothing, no definite attitude towards the past, we only philosophize, complain about melancholy or drink vodka. It’s so clear, in order to begin to live in the present, we must first redeem our past, put an end to it, and we can redeem it only through suffering, only through extraordinary, continuous labor.”
Petya Trofimov is one of Chekhov’s intellectuals for whom things, tithes of land, jewelry, and money do not represent highest value. Refusing Lopakhin's money, Petya Trofimov says that they do not have the slightest power over him, like fluff that floats in the air. He is “strong and proud” in that he is free from the power of everyday, material, materialized things. Where Trofimov talks about the unsettledness of the old life and calls for a new life, the author sympathizes with him.
Despite all the “positiveness” of Petya Trofimov’s image, he is questionable precisely as a positive, “author’s” hero: he is too literary, his phrases about the future are too beautiful, his calls to “work” are too general, etc. Chekhov's distrust of loud phrases and any exaggerated manifestation of feelings is known: he “could not stand phrase-mongers, scribes and Pharisees” (I.A. Bunin). Petya Trofimov is characterized by something that Chekhov himself avoided and which is manifested, for example, in the following monologue of the hero: “Humanity is moving towards the highest truth, towards the highest happiness that is possible on earth, and I am in the forefront!”; “To get around those small and illusory things that prevent you from being free and happy - this is the goal and meaning of our life. Forward! We are moving uncontrollably towards the bright star that burns there in the distance!
Chekhov’s “New People” - Anya and Petya Trofimov - are also polemical in relation to the tradition of Russian literature, like Chekhov’s images of “little” people: the author refuses to recognize as unconditionally positive, to idealize “new” people only for being “new”, for that they act as denouncers of the old world. Time requires decisions and actions, but Petya Trofimov is not capable of them, and this brings him closer to Ranevskaya and Gaev. Moreover, on the way to the future we lost human qualities: “We are above love,” he joyfully and naively assures Anya.
Ranevskaya rightly reproaches Trofimov for not knowing life: “You boldly solve all the important issues, but tell me, my dear, is it because you are young, that you have not had time to suffer through any of your questions?..” But this is what makes them attractive. young heroes: hope and faith in a happy future. They are young, which means that everything is possible, there is a whole life ahead... Petya Trofimov and Anya are not exponents of a specific program of reconstruction future Russia, they symbolize hope for the revival of Russia-garden...
/ / / Three generations in Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”
In Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" three generations are clearly distinguished. The first rightfully belongs to the footman. He loves the estate where he has worked his entire adult life. The old man’s soul still lives in “serfdom”, since he himself does not want to accept new “strange” laws. He was satisfied with certainty and order in everything. Now, although he feels like a kind of “authorized” person in the estate, he still worries about the future. He is tormented by the fact that there is only uncertainty ahead, from which he, due to his age, may suffer.
The second generation includes and. They inherited the worldview, character and landowner traditions from their parents. However, neither sister nor brother calculated their strength, and the estate is in decline. Their “debt hole” is growing as well as their “lordly” demands. Life teaches heroes practically nothing. Ranevskaya had already sold her dacha near Menton, and literally supported her lover with this money. The woman herself was not averse to living lavishly. Love, just wasted money. Even when she was forced to return to her homeland with virtually no funds, wastefulness did not leave her character.
Gaev is very dissatisfied with this behavior. The man literally reproaches his sister, but he himself leads a very “uneconomical” lifestyle. His habits have long included dinners in expensive restaurants, playing billiards in a club and other celebrations. Living on the Gaev estate, he constantly watches as Varya struggles with all her strength in order to somehow reduce expenses.
And they are the third and final generation. Lopakhin can also be included among them. He, like the girls, is “rooted” to the estate. Ermolai was the son of a simple serf "peasant". However, only he managed to literally rise from the bottom. His plans include a wedding with Varya, but the young couple still fail to explain themselves. They are both busy, both goal-oriented and their actions are very thoughtful. Will they create another generation together? Most likely not.
Despite mutual sympathy, Chekhov does not create a new “cell” of society. With Lopakhin’s indecisiveness, the author literally cuts the knot of emerging feelings and separates the youth in different directions. The garden is cut down, and at the same time the history of this estate ends. Perhaps Lopakhin will get married someday, and a new generation will be born, without the old burdening memories of what he experienced. In the meantime, he is leaving " noble nest"Together with the servants, Gaev and his sister, Varya and Anna.
Anya leaves the estate with joy. She imagines her future in rainbow color. The girl has studies ahead, new discoveries and communication with Peter. It was he who showed the representative of the third generation all the “cons” of the past idea of life. Thanks to him, the girl is not afraid of the unknown future. She boldly steps forward, trying not to look back at the felled cherry trees in the garden...
Three generations, three different views on life and one garden, in which everyone was once able to find their little happiness...
