Characteristics of the image of Charlotte Ivanovna. List of characters and character system of Chekhov's drama

When first reading The Cherry Orchard, the reader, as a rule, rarely pays attention to Charlotte. At first it seems that this character simply complements the overall picture of comedy and misunderstanding. But meanwhile, it was Charlotte, with her particularly interesting statements, that Chekhov considered one of the key figures in the drama, and insisted that only very talented actress, noting that “there should be an actress with humor here.”
Such famous literary scholars as A.P. Skaftmov and Z.S. Paperny wrote about the functions of Charlotte. In particular, they noted that Charlotte is far from being a one-sided comic character, but a truly deep psychological image. However, on In my opinion, the original findings of literary scholars did not fully address the question of the role of the character in the work, as well as the question of how comedy and tragedy coexist in the image of Charlotte.
Taking into account the observations and conclusions of famous Czech scholars, I will conduct my own research to clarify the role of Charlotte in the play " The Cherry Orchard».
What does the reader know about Charlotte? Charlotte is the governess of the Ranevskys, an orphan who did not know her parents, raised by “a German woman.”
For the first time we meet the name of Charlotte in the playbill of the drama, and even then it strikes us with its absurdity. Charlotte Ivanovna is a very strange combination of a French name and a Russian patronymic. And the image of a comic character is immediately created in the reader’s imagination. But is Charlotte really like this? Let's try to figure this out.
Charlotte first appears in Act I:

Enter... Anya and Charlotte with a dog on a chain, dressed for travel.
Gaev: The train was two hours late. What's it like? What are the procedures?
Charlotte (to Pishchik). My dog ​​also eats nuts.
Pishchik (Surprised). Just think!

It seems that Charlotte does not participate in the characters’ dialogue and says her line “by the way,” as it might seem at first glance. Perhaps, throughout the previous dialogue, Charlotte has been talking with Pishchik, and it is this phrase, divorced from context, that the audience hears. But this is probably the answer to Gaev’s remark, allegorical and not addressed to him at all. “My dog ​​even eats nuts,” says Charlotte. “My dog ​​tolerates it, even eats nuts, and doesn’t complain, but you complain about the rules. You need to be patient,” this, it seems to me, is the subtext of this phrase. But her statement is addressed to Pishchik, most likely as a person who will pay attention to her, who will listen to her, and not ignore her, as Gaev most likely would have done.
The next scene of the first act, in which we again meet Charlotte Ivanovna, largely clarifies the attitude of the rest of the inhabitants of the Ranevsky house towards her.

Charlotte Ivanovna in a white dress, very thin, tight-fitting, with a lorgnette on her belt, walks across the stage.
Lopakhin: (wants to kiss her) ...
Charlotte: If I let you kiss my hand, then you will then wish on the elbow, then on the shoulder...
Lopakhin: I'm unlucky today. ... Charlotte Ivanovna, show me your magic trick!
………
Charlotte: No need. I want to sleep.

It’s strange, but this episode is not mentioned, even in passing, in the works of A.P. Skaftymov and Z.S. Paperny, but it is precisely this episode that makes it possible to understand exactly how the household treat Charlotte, that Charlotte is perceived as nothing other than a buffoon, ready to make your owners laugh whenever they want. And Charlotte absolutely disagrees with this position. She clearly considers herself “superior”, and when asked to amuse Lopakhin and Anna Andreevna, she responds quite sharply (“no need, I want to sleep”) - after that, the requests immediately subside, and Charlotte calmly leaves.
Almost no one notices Charlotte in the house, but they still respect her opinion and desire. She herself personifies a protest against the indifferent treatment of her as a person. She puts herself on an equal footing with the owners, and demands good service and expensive food, as Anya says at the beginning of the first act.
Outwardly, Charlotte is indeed comical, because this is what those around her expect from her, but in the soul of a person completely different feelings reign. And even her phrase “If I allow you to kiss my hand, then you will wish on the elbow, then on the shoulder...” can be understood in two ways. Firstly, she, as it may seem, emphasizes the comicality of Charlotte, and secondly, she explains how Charlotte herself perceives this treatment of her: “As soon as I allowed you to see me as a buffoon, you tried me more and more persistently them to do, forgetting that I am first of all a human being, just like you,” she seems to be saying.
The next scene in which Charlotte appears is key to understanding this character. It is in this scene that Charlotte Ivanovna’s past is revealed to the viewer, and her loneliness is especially clearly emphasized.

Charlotte, Yasha and Dunyasha are sitting on a bench. Charlotte in an old cap; she took the gun off her shoulders and adjusted her belt buckle.

A comical image that does not match the words. Charlotte always looks quite comical, but she is comical only in the eyes of her owners, who perceive her as a “circus performer” and a “magician.” In such a strange outfit you can also see Charlotte’s pro-test “Did you want me to be a jester? Here, I’m a jester, in clown clothes...” - she seems to be saying with her appearance.
But as a person she is unhappy. And this “opposite” * (as Z. S. Paperny very wittily noted) is emphasized by the comedy that arises when the text of the play correlates the description of her appearance, costume and deep thoughts about her own fate.

Charlotte (thoughtfully) I don’t have a real passport, I don’t know how old I am, and it still seems to me that I’m young. When I was a little girl, my father and mother went to fairs and gave performances, very good ones. And I jumped salto mortale and various things. And when my father and mother died, a German lady took me in and began to teach me. Fine. I grew up, then became a governess. But where I am from and who I am, I don’t know... Who are my parents, maybe they didn’t get married... I don’t know. (Takes a cucumber out of his pocket and eats it.) I don’t know anything. I really want to talk, but not with anyone... I don’t have anyone.

And the reaction from the listeners, or rather, the lack thereof, immediately attracts attention. Charlotte doesn't seem to be noticed at all. She suffers from loneliness and pours out her soul in this “confession,” but her words go unnoticed. Epikhodov continues to sing and Dunyasha begins an argument with him. And even Charlotte’s contemptuous remark does not attract the attention of others.

Epikhodov (plays guitar and sings). “What do I care about the noisy light, what are my friends and enemies...” How pleasant it is to play the mandolin!
Charlotte. These people sing terribly... ugh! Like jackals……………
Epikhodov... Abroad, everything has long been in full swing.
Yasha. By itself.
Epikhodov. I developed person, I read various wonderful books, but I just can’t understand the direction of what I actually want, should I live or shoot myself, strictly speaking, but, nevertheless, I always carry a revolver with me. Here it is... (Shows the revolver.)
Charlotte. I finished. Now I'll go. (Puts on a gun.) You, Epikhodov, are very clever man and very scary; Women should love you madly. Brrr! (Walks.) These smart guys are all so stupid, I have no one to talk to... All alone, alone, I have no one and... and who I am, why I am, it is unknown... (Leaves slowly.)

It seems that Charlotte is already accustomed to the fact that they do not pay attention to her, and calmly, without trying to attract anyone’s attention, accepts the fact that she is not noticed.
Charlotte is depicted at a turning point in her life, when a person wants to find his place in the world, to find loved ones, relatives and like-minded people, but Charlotte doesn’t have them, which causes the heroine’s deep emotional experiences. She is trying to find friends, or just people who could understand and support her. And not outstanding self-taught philosophers who are trying to impress a girl with their statements. This scene echoes the very first one, where Charlotte appears with the dog. No one else has an animal in the house, only Charlotte has a dog, perhaps her only friend. This fact only emphasizes the loneliness of the heroine.
This is followed by the ball scene, the only action where the image of Charlotte acquires liveliness and gaiety, primarily in the scene of the demonstration of tricks entertaining the guests. Here Charlotte forgets about her problems for a while, she finds herself in the “element” of her role, imposed on her by the world order, and does what she likes, what she knows how to do perfectly.

They go out into the living room: the first couple is Pishchik and Charlotte Ivanovna...

(I think it’s worth paying attention to the fact that Charlotte enters the room with Squeaky. Without this character in the play, Charlotte would have been left alone, and most likely would have appeared in the hall when all the guests had gathered, as a circus performer, who was invited for entertainment)

Charlotte (hands Pishchik a deck of cards). Here is a deck of cards, think of one card.
Pishchik. I thought about it.
Charlotte. Now shuffle the deck. Very good. Give it here, oh my dear Mr. Pishchik. Ein, zwei, drei! Now look, it's in your side pocket...
Pishchik (takes out a card from his side pocket). Eight of spades, absolutely right! (Surprised.) Just think!
Charlotte (holds a deck of cards in her palm, Trofimova). Tell me quickly, which card is on top?
Trofimov. Well? Well, queen of spades.
Charlotte. Eat! (To the squeaker.) Well? Which card is on top?
Pishchik. Ace of hearts.
Charlotte. Yes!.. (He hits his palm, the deck of cards disappears.) And what good weather today!
A mysterious female voice answers her, as if from under the floor: “Oh yes, the weather is magnificent, madam.”
You are so good, my ideal...
Voice: “I also really liked you, madam.”
Station Manager (applauds). Madam Ventriloquist, bravo!

In this episode, Charlotte fulfills the role assigned to her in this family - entertaining those around her. In an effort to entertain the guests, she parodies the accent in her speech, ?(STYLE!!!)? although in his notes for the actors, Chekhov notes: “Charlotte speaks not broken, but pure Russian.”

Pishchik (surprised). Just think! The most charming Charlotte Ivanovna... I'm just in love...
Charlotte. In love? (Shrugs.) Can you love? Guter Mensch, aber schlechter Musikant.

For the first time, excitement and gaiety appear in her speech, perhaps feigned, but one still feels the excitement. And during this revival, she “accidentally” rejects Pishchik’s confession, not taking him seriously. (Neither recognition, nor person) She is not interested in him as a person, but still he is the only one who sees Charlotte as a person behind the constant jokes. He is almost the only one in the whole house who ignores her.

Charlotte. Please pay attention, one more trick. (Takes a blanket from the chair.) Here is a very good blanket, I want to sell... (Shakes it.) Does anyone want to buy?
Pishchik (surprised). Just think!
Charlotte. Ein, zwei, drei! (Quickly picks up the lowered blanket.)
Anya is standing behind the blanket; she curtsies, runs to her mother, hugs her and runs back into the hall with general delight.
Lyubov Andreevna (applauds). Bravo, bravo!..
Charlotte. Now more! Ein, zwei, drei!
Raises the blanket; Varya stands behind the blanket and bows.
Pishchik (surprised). Just think!
Charlotte. End! (Throws the blanket on Pishchik, curtsies and runs into the hall.)
Pishchik (hurries after her). The villain... what? What? (Leaves.)

This is perhaps the first scene in the play where Charlotte comes to life. Playfulness and gaiety appear in her words and movements. And even the remark “he curtsies and runs into the hall” can be contrasted with another: “He goes... He leaves slowly.”...
And finally, the departure scene, which received a lot of attention in the studies of Paperny² and Skaftymov."
Lopakhin enters. Charlotte hums a song quietly. Gaev. Happy Charlotte: Singing! Charlotte (takes a knot that looks like a rolled up baby). My baby, bye, bye...
A child is heard crying: “Wa, wa!..” Shut up, my good, my dear boy.
“Wa!.. wa!..” I feel so sorry for you! (Throws the bundle into place.) So, please, find me a place. I can't do this.
Lopakhin. We'll find you, Charlotte Ivanovna, don't worry.
Gaev. Everyone leaves us, Varya leaves... suddenly we are no longer needed.
Charlotte. I have nowhere to live in the city. We have to leave... (Humming.) Anyway...

Here is what Paperny writes about this scene:

The sale of the cherry orchard is a disaster for her, she has lost her place, a corner in the house, fate has dealt her another salto-mortale. And the fact that she “quietly hums” in the fourth act, of course, cannot in any way mean that she is feeling good. And this whole scene is built on the transition of words and phenomena into their opposite. One of the knots moving away turns into a “baby”, you can even hear him shouting: “Waah!.. Wah!..”, and then the baby becomes a knot again, and Charlotte throws him back to his original place. So is Charlotte herself: either she sang, seemed “happy,” or she asks to find a “place” for her.

And Skaftymov:

In Act IV, the picture unfolds of the last farewell minutes before leaving the sold estate. Charlotte's homeless, lonely life is now burdened by a new and already complete homelessness. Nobody needs her now. At the moment of the lyrical farewell conversation between Anya and Lyubov Andreevna, Charlotte appears, “quietly humming a song.” Gaev remarks to this: “Happy Charlotte: she sings!” Charlotte, indeed, does not violate the tone of her usual playful fun, takes a knot that looks like a rolled up child, and gives a scene of “ventriloquism”: “my baby, bye, bye ... (the child’s cry is heard: wa, wa!), etc. . Then he throws the bundle and says: “So, please, find me a place. I can’t do this..." And this remark immediately makes her state of lonely, silent anxiety transparent to the viewer.

As you can see, both literary scholars pay great attention to this passage, considering it key in understanding the character of the hero. They both notice that Charlotte is singing. But is it because she’s just trying to seem cheerful? If so, then the question arises: Why? She will no longer remain the governess of the Ranevskys, no matter how she behaves. Moreover, against the backdrop of general sadness and despondency, her “gaiety” can only irritate. In my opinion, Charlotte is immersed in her thoughts and is not aware of what she is singing.
A. Skaftymov notes “Charlotte, indeed, does not violate the tone of her usual playful fun, takes a knot that looks like a curled up child, and gives a scene of “ghosting”.” I'll try to disagree with him, and since I've already started looking hidden meaning in all Charlotte’s statements, then, perhaps, I will continue this tradition.
As mentioned earlier, Charlotte is depicted at a turning point in her life, when the world around her is collapsing, and when she wants to find loved ones and family, to have her own family. Perhaps Charlotte imagines the bundle as a baby precisely because her previous thoughts were connected with the house, with the family, with children...
Charlotte in this scene is a deeply unhappy person. Nothing holds her back in this family... she is not valued here, she is disgusted by the tone in which they communicate with her, but still, at the expense of this family she existed for a long time, and now she has nowhere to go. That’s why she asks to “find a place for her.”
The image is created of a lonely woman going through a difficult period in her life, a little tired, smart, talented and proud.
Stanislavsky, telling the actors about the role of Charlotte, asked them not to limit themselves to words, he wanted the actors to first of all understand the heroine herself, and then they would already play her. I think that Stanislavsky wanted the actress to understand that behind Charlotte’s outward comic appearance there was hidden a completely different, far from comical image.

First of all, live the image without touching or trivializing the words of the role. Sit down and play whatever comes to mind. Imagine this scene: Pishchik proposes to Charlotte, and she is the bride... How will she behave. Or Charlotte was driven away, and she again joined a circus or a café. How she does gymnastics, or how she sings a chansonette. Hair yourself in different styles and look for something in yourself that will remind you of Charlotte... Don't forget to play Charlotte at a dramatic moment in her life. Get her to sincerely cry over herself.

So, as I tried to tell in this work, Charlotte is far from a minor character in the play, who serves only to create the background of the comedy and introduce additional comic episodes into the play. Charlotte is an independent character, living her own life. Charlotte adds a new conflict to the drama, a conflict of external comedy with deep emotional experiences, which complements the already multifaceted general conflict in the soul of each of the characters.
In the person of Charlotte, Chekhov creates a deep image of a person, reveals his character, shows his problems and introduces him to the story of his life. (But Charlotte is almost the only character whose past is told in the drama).

"Skaftymov A. On the unity of form and content in “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov // Skaftymov A. Moral quest Russian writers. M.: Ho-dozhestven. Literat., 1972. P. 366.

² Paperny Z. “Contrary to all the rules...”. Plays and vaudevilles of Chekhov. M.: Art, 1982. P.221-222.
* Therefore, Gaev’s remark: “Happy Charlotte: sings!” - hits the heart with its “opposite” nature. Gaev’s phrase means one thing, but evokes in the viewer something completely different, a different, directly opposite reaction. (full quote)

The position of the governess in society is described in more detail in literature than in historical sources. Governesses are a difficult status. This is a person with education and a special culture. The image and characterization of Charlotte Ivanovna in the play “The Cherry Orchard” prove how a profession can change a person’s lifestyle and habits.

Appearance

Charlotte is a "very thin" figure woman. The author chose such an epithet to emphasize not the stateliness of the woman, her slimness and grace, but rather her thinness, comparable to soreness. Charlotte's figure is also wrapped in clothes and accessories. For what? Unclear. Here we can assume that the classic wants to emphasize the circus roots: an acrobat. Another option is poor nutrition. Owners with limited funds are unlikely to think about food for their servants.

Interesting selection of clothes for the heroine:

• Lornet on the belt;
• Old cap;
• Belt with buckle;
• Gray cylinder;
• Checkered trousers.

The social status of the woman is not clear, there is no precise statement about her nationality. Maybe that's why the author leaves her faceless. An actress with a sense of humor can play a character on stage - this is the main instruction of the classic.

Character

Lonely and unhappy the woman is always calm. Humor allows her to survive and not lose faith in the future. There is no end to her life, and there is no resolution to the situation with the garden, around which so many destinies revolve.

The woman seems like an extra character, but once you exclude her from the play, you understand that without her the whole meaning is lost. The governess constantly observes and analyzes, her judgments help to understand the essence of the problem, its roots and causes.

Biography

The governess has no home, no homeland. She lives with Ranevskaya no longer as a governess, but as a hanger-on.

A.P. Chekhov said that Charlotte is “an important role.” Collective image shows the problem of a changed Rus'. A rootless servant who has lost touch with loved ones is a whole class. Impoverished parents placed their children with rich ones, hoping that they had provided them with a comfortable existence and relieved themselves of responsibility for their future. Morality, connection between generations, value are lost family traditions. The essence of family, the importance of love, and the obligation to procreate are going nowhere. An example of Charlotte's life is another cherry orchard, cut down and put on sale.

Consciously depriving the play of “events,” Chekhov directed all attention to the state characters, their attitude to the main fact - the sale of the estate and garden, to their relationships, clashes. The teacher should draw students' attention to the fact that dramatic work author's attitude, author's position turns out to be the most hidden. To clarify this position, in order to understand the playwright’s attitude to the historical phenomena of the life of the homeland, to the characters and events, the viewer and reader need to be very attentive to all components of the play: the system of images carefully thought out by the author, the arrangement of characters, the alternation of mise-en-scenes, the coupling of monologues, dialogues, individual lines of characters, author's remarks.

At times Chekhov deliberately exposes the clash of dreams and reality, the lyrical and comic principles in the play. So, while working on “The Cherry Orchard,” he introduced into the second act, after Lopakhin’s words (“And living here, we ourselves should truly be giants...”) Ranevskaya’s response: “You needed giants. They’re only good in fairy tales, but they’re so scary.” To this, Chekhov added another mise-en-scène: the ugly figure of the “klutz” Epikhodov appears at the back of the stage, clearly contrasting with the dream of giant people. Chekhov specifically attracts the audience's attention to Epikhodov's appearance with two remarks: Ranevskaya (thoughtfully) “Epikhodov is coming.” Anya (thoughtfully) “Epikhodov is coming.”

In the new historical conditions, Chekhov the playwright, following Ostrovsky and Shchedrin, responded to Gogol’s call: “For God’s sake, give us Russian characters, give us ourselves, our rogues, our eccentrics! Take them to the stage, to everyone's laughter! Laughter is a great thing!” (“Petersburg Notes”). Chekhov strives to bring “our eccentrics”, our “klutzes” to the ridicule of the public in the play “The Cherry Orchard”.

The author's intention to make the viewer laugh and at the same time make him think about modern reality is most clearly expressed in the original comic characters - Epikhodov and Charlotte. The function of these “klutzes” in the play is very significant. Chekhov forces the viewer to grasp their internal connection with the central characters and thereby exposes these eye-catching faces of comedy. Epikhodov and Charlotte are not only funny, but also pathetic with their unfortunate “fortune” full of inconsistencies and surprises. Fate, in fact, treats them “without regret, like a storm treats a small ship.” These people are disfigured by life. Epikhodov is shown as insignificant in his penny ambitions, pathetic in his misfortunes, in his claims and in his protest, limited in his “philosophy”. He is proud, painfully proud, and life has put him in the position of a lackey and a rejected lover. He pretends to be “educated”, exalted feelings, strong passions, and life “prepared” for him daily “22 misfortunes,” petty, ineffective, offensive.”

Chekhov, who dreamed of people in whom “everything would be beautiful: face, clothes, soul, and thoughts,” still saw many freaks who had not found their place in life, people with complete confusion of thoughts and feelings, actions and words which are devoid of logic and meaning: “Of course, if you look from the point of view, then you, if I may put it this way, excuse the frankness, have completely brought me into a state of mind.”

The source of Epikhodov's comedy in the play also lies in the fact that he does everything inopportunely, at the wrong time. There is no correspondence between his natural data and behavior. Close-minded, tongue-tied, he is prone to lengthy speeches and reasoning; awkward, untalented, he plays billiards (breaking his cue in the process), sings “terribly, like a jackal” (according to Charlotte’s definition), gloomily accompanying himself on the guitar. He declares his love for Dunyasha at the wrong time, inappropriately asks thoughtful questions (“Have you read Buckle?”), inappropriately uses many words: “Only people who understand and are older can talk about this”; “and so you look, something extremely indecent, like a cockroach,” “let me put it this way, you can’t exact it from me.”

The function of Charlotte's image in the play is close to the function of Epikhodov's image. Charlotte's fate is absurd and paradoxical: a German, circus actress, acrobat and magician, she ended up in Russia as a governess. Everything is uncertain, random in her life: Ranevskaya’s appearance on the estate is random, and her departure from it is also random. There are always surprises waiting for Charlotte; How her life will be determined further after the sale of the estate, she does not know, how incomprehensible the purpose and meaning of her existence are: “Everyone is alone, alone, I have no one and ... who I am, why I am - is unknown.” Loneliness, unhappiness, and confusion constitute the second, hidden basis of this comic character in the play.

It is significant in this regard that, while continuing to work on the image of Charlotte during rehearsals of the play in Art Theater, Chekhov did not retain the previously planned additional comic episodes(tricks in Acts I, III, IV) and, on the contrary, strengthened the motive of Charlotte’s loneliness and unhappy fate: at the beginning of Act II everything from the words: “I really want to talk, but there’s no one with...” to: “Why should I - unknown" - included by Chekhov in the final edition.

"Happy Charlotte: Singing!" - says Gaev at the end of the play. With these words, Chekhov emphasizes Gaev’s misunderstanding of Charlotte’s position and the paradoxical nature of her behavior. At a tragic moment in her life, even as if aware of her situation (“so please, find me a place. I can’t do this... I have nowhere to live in the city”), she performs tricks and sings. Serious thought, awareness of loneliness and misfortune are combined with buffoonery, buffoonery, and the circus habit of amusing.

In Charlotte's speech there is the same bizarre combination various styles, words: along with purely Russian ones - distorted words and constructions (“I want to sell. Does anyone want to buy?”), foreign words, paradoxical phrases (“These smart guys are all so stupid”, “You, Epikhodov, are a very smart person and very scary; women should love you madly. Brrr!..”).

Chekhov gave great importance these two characters (Epikhodov and Charlotte) and was concerned that they would be correctly and interestingly interpreted in the theater. The role of Charlotte seemed to the author the most successful, and he advised the actresses Knipper and Lilina to take it, and wrote about Epikhodov that this role was short, “but the most real.” With these two comic characters, the author, in fact, helps the viewer and reader understand not only the situation in the lives of the Epikhodovs and Charlotte, but also extend to the rest of the characters the impressions that he receives from the convex, pointed image of these “klutzes”, makes him see "wrong side" life phenomena, to notice in some cases the “unfunny” in the comic, in other cases - to guess the funny behind the outwardly dramatic.

We understand that not only Epikhodov and Charlotte, but also Ranevskaya, Gaev, Simeonov-Pishchik “exist for unknown reasons.” To these idle inhabitants of ruined noble nests, living “at someone else’s expense,” Chekhov added persons not yet acting on the stage and thereby strengthened the typicality of the images. The serf-owner, the father of Ranevskaya and Gaev, corrupted by idleness, Ranevskaya’s morally lost second husband, the despotic Yaroslavl grandmother-countess, showing class arrogance (she still cannot forgive Ranevskaya that her first husband was “not a nobleman”) - all these “types,” together with Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pishchik, “have already become obsolete.” To convince the viewer of this, according to Chekhov, neither evil satire nor contempt was needed; It was enough to make them look at them through the eyes of a person who had gone a considerable historical distance and was no longer satisfied with their living standards.

Ranevskaya and Gaev do nothing to preserve or save the estate and garden from destruction. On the contrary, it is precisely thanks to their idleness, impracticality, and carelessness that their “sacredly beloved” “nests” are ruined, their poetic beautiful cherry orchards are destroyed.

This is the price of these people’s love for their homeland. “God knows, I love my homeland, I love it dearly,” says Ranevskaya. Chekhov forces us to confront these words with her actions and understand that her words are impulsive, do not reflect a constant mood, depth of feeling, and are at odds with her actions. We learn that Ranevskaya left Russia five years ago, that from Paris she was “suddenly drawn to Russia” only after a catastrophe in her personal life (“there he robbed me, abandoned me, got in touch with someone else, I tried to poison myself...”). , and we see in the finale that she still leaves her homeland. No matter how much Ranevskaya regrets the cherry orchard and the estate, she soon “calmed down and became cheerful” in anticipation of leaving for Paris. On the contrary, Chekhov says throughout the entire course of the play that the idle, antisocial nature of the lives of Ranevskaya, Gaev, and Pishchik testifies to their complete oblivion of the interests of their homeland. He creates the impression that, despite all the subjectively good qualities, they are useless and even harmful, since they contribute not to creation, not to “increasing the wealth and beauty” of the homeland, but to destruction: Pischik thoughtlessly rents out a plot of land to the British for 24 years for the predatory exploitation of Russian natural resources, The magnificent cherry orchard of Ranevskaya and Gaev is dying.

Through the actions of these characters, Chekhov convinces us that we cannot trust their words, even those spoken sincerely and excitedly. “We will pay the interest, I am convinced,” Gaev bursts out without any reason, and he is already exciting himself and others with these words: “On my honor, whatever you want, I swear, the estate will not be sold! .. I swear on my happiness! Here's my hand, call me trashy then dishonest person, if I make it to the auction! I swear with all my being!” Chekhov compromises his hero in the eyes of the viewer, showing that Gaev “allows the auction” and the estate, contrary to his vows, turns out to be sold.

In Act I, Ranevskaya resolutely tears up, without reading, telegrams from Paris from the person who insulted her: “It’s over with Paris.” But in the further course of the play, Chekhov shows the instability of Ranevskaya’s reaction. In the following acts, she already reads telegrams, is inclined to reconcile, and in the finale, calmed down and cheerful, willingly returns to Paris.

Uniting these characters based on the principle of kinship and social affiliation, Chekhov, however, shows both similarities and individual traits of each. At the same time, he forces the viewer not only to question the words of these characters, but also to think about the justice and depth of other people’s reviews about them. “She is good, kind, nice, I love her very much,” Gaev says about Ranevskaya. “She is a good person, an easy-going, simple person,” Lopakhin says about her and enthusiastically expresses his feelings to her: “I love you like my own... more than my own.” Anya, Varya, Pischik, Trofimov, and Firs are attracted to Ranevskaya like a magnet. She is equally kind, delicate, affectionate with her own and adopted daughter, and with her brother, and with the “man” Lopakhin, and with the servants.

Ranevskaya is warm-hearted, emotional, her soul is open to beauty. But Chekhov will show that these qualities, combined with carelessness, spoiledness, frivolity, very often (albeit regardless of Ranevskaya’s will and subjective intentions) turn into their opposite: cruelty, indifference, negligence towards people. Ranevskaya will give the last gold to a random passer-by, and at home the servants will live from hand to mouth; she will say to Firs: “Thank you, my dear,” kiss him, sympathetically and affectionately inquire about his health and... leave him, a sick, old, devoted servant, in a boarded-up house. With this final chord in the play, Chekhov deliberately compromises Ranevskaya and Gaev in the eyes of the viewer.

Gaev, like Ranevskaya, is gentle and receptive to beauty. However, Chekhov does not allow us to completely trust Anya’s words: “Everyone loves and respects you.” “How good you are, uncle, how smart.” Chekhov will show that Gaev’s gentle, gentle treatment of close people (sister, niece) is combined with class disdain for the “grimy” Lopakhin, “a peasant and a boor” (by his definition), with a contemptuous and disgusting attitude towards servants (from Yasha “smells like chicken”, Firs is “tired”, etc.). We see that along with lordly sensitivity and grace, he absorbed lordly swagger, arrogance (Gaev’s word is typical: “who?”), conviction in the exclusivity of the people of his circle (“white bone”). More than Ranevskaya, he feels himself and makes others feel his position as a master and the associated advantages. And at the same time he flirts with his closeness to the people, claims that he “knows the people”, that “the man loves” him.

Chekhov clearly makes one feel the idleness and idleness of Ranevskaya and Gaev, their habit of “living in debt, at someone else’s expense.” Ranevskaya is wasteful (“spends money”) not only because she is kind, but also because money comes easily to her. Like Gaev, she does not count on her labors and siush, but only on random help from outside: she will either receive an inheritance, or Lopakhin will lend it, or the Yaroslavl grandmother will send her to pay off the debt. Therefore, we do not believe in the possibility of Gaev’s life outside the family estate, we do not believe in the prospect of the future, which captivates Gaev like a child: he is a “bank servant.” Chekhov hopes that, like Ranevskaya, who knows her brother well, the viewer will smile and say: What a financier and official he is! “Where are you! Just sit down!”

Having no idea about work, Ranevskaya and Gaev go completely into the world of intimate feelings, refined, but confused, contradictory experiences. Ranevskaya not only devoted her entire life to the joys and sufferings of love, but she attaches decisive importance to this feeling and therefore feels a surge of energy whenever she can help others experience it. She is ready to act as a mediator not only between Lopakhin and Varya, but also between Trofimov and Anya (“I would willingly give Anya for you”). Usually soft, compliant, passive, she only reacts actively once, revealing both sharpness, anger, and harshness, when Trofimov touches this world that is sacred to her and when she recognizes in him a person of a different nature, deeply alien to her in this regard: “In your years you need to understand those who love and you need to love yourself... you need to fall in love! (angrily). Yes Yes! And you have no purity, and you are just a clean person, a funny eccentric, a freak... “I am above love!” You are not above love, but simply, as our Firs says, you are a klutz. Don't have a mistress at your age! .."

Outside the sphere of love, Ranevskaya’s life turns out to be empty and aimless, although in her statements, frank, sincere, sometimes self-flagellation and often verbose, there is an attempt to express interest in general issues. Chekhov puts Ranevskaya in a funny position, showing how her conclusions, even her teachings, diverge from her own behavior. She reproaches Gaev for being “inappropriate” and talking a lot in the restaurant (“Why talk so much?”). She instructs those around her: “You... should look at yourself more often. How you all live in a gray way, how much you say unnecessary things.” She herself also says a lot and inappropriately. Her sensitive, enthusiastic appeals to the nursery, to the garden, to the house are quite consonant with Gaev’s appeal to the closet. Her verbose monologues, in which she tells close people her life, that is, what they have known for a long time, or exposes her feelings and experiences to them, are usually given by Chekhov either before or after she reproaches her for verbosity those around you. This is how the author brings Ranevskaya closer to Gaev, whose need to “speak out” is most clearly expressed.

Gaev’s anniversary speech in front of the closet, his farewell speech in the finale, discussions about decadents addressed to restaurant servants, generalizations about people of the 80s expressed by Anya and Varya, a word of praise to “Mother Nature” pronounced in front of a “walking company” - all it breathes inspiration, fervor, sincerity. But behind all this, Chekhov makes us see empty liberal phrase-mongering; hence in Gaev’s speech such vague, traditionally liberal expressions as: “bright ideals of goodness and justice.” The author shows the admiration of these characters for themselves, the desire to quench the insatiable thirst to express “beautiful feelings” in “beautiful words”, their focus only on their inner world, their experiences, isolation from “external” life.

Chekhov emphasizes that all these monologues, speeches, honest, disinterested, sublime, are unnecessary, pronounced “inappropriately.” He draws the viewer’s attention to this, forcing Anya and Varya to constantly, albeit gently, interrupt Gaev’s beginning rantings. The word inopportunely turns out to be the leitmotif not only for Epikhodov and Charlotte, but also for Ranevskaya and Gaev. Inopportunely speeches are made, inopportunely they throw a ball at the very time when the estate is being sold at auction, inopportunely at the moment of departure they start an explanation between Lopakhin and Varya, etc. And not only Epikhodov and Charlotte, but also Ranevskaya and Gaev turn out to be “klutzes”. Charlotte’s unexpected remarks no longer seem surprising to us: “My dog ​​even eats nuts.” These words are no more inappropriate than the “reasonings” of Gaev and Ranevskaya. Revealing in central characters features of similarity with the “minor” comedic characters - Epikhodov and Charlotte - Chekhov subtly exposed his “noble heroes”.

The author of The Cherry Orchard achieved the same thing by bringing Ranevskaya and Gaev closer to Simeonov-Pishchik, another comedic character in the play. The landowner Simeonov-Pishchik is also kind, gentle, sensitive, impeccably honest, childishly trusting, but he is also inactive, a “klutz.” His estate is also on the verge of destruction and the plans for preserving it, just like those of Gaev and Ranevskaya, are not viable, they feel a calculation of chance: his daughter Dashenka will win, someone will give him a loan, etc.

Giving Pischik another option in his fate: he is saving himself from ruin, his estate is not yet being sold at auction. Chekhov emphasizes both the temporary nature of this relative well-being and its unstable source, which does not at all depend on Pishchik himself, i.e., he emphasizes even more the historical doom of the owners noble estates. In the image of Pishchik, the isolation of the nobles from “external” life, their limitations, and emptiness are even clearer. Chekhov deprived him of even his external cultural gloss. Pishchik’s speech, reflecting his wretchedness inner world, is brought closer by Chekhov in a subtle mocking manner to the speech of other noble characters and, thus, the tongue-tied Pischik is equated with the eloquent Gaev. Pishchik’s speech is also emotional, but these emotions also only cover up the lack of content (it’s not for nothing that Pishchik himself falls asleep and snores during his “speeches”). Pishchik constantly uses epithets in the superlative degree: “a man of enormous intelligence”, “most worthy”, “greatest”, “most wonderful”, “most respectable”, etc. The poverty of emotions is revealed primarily in the fact that these epithets apply equally to Lopakhin , and to Nietzsche, and to Ranevskaya, and to Charlotte, and to the weather. Gaev’s exaggerated “emotional” speeches, addressed to the closet, to sex, to Mother Nature, are neither give nor take. Pishchik's speech is also monotonous. “Just think!” - with these words Pishchik reacts to both Charlotte’s tricks and philosophical theories. His actions and words also turn out to be inappropriate. Inopportunely, he interrupts Lopakhin’s serious warnings about the sale of the estate with questions: “What’s in Paris? How? Did you eat frogs? Inopportunely asks Ranevskaya for a loan of money when the fate of the owners of the cherry orchard is being decided, inopportunely, obsessively constantly refers to the words of his daughter Dashenka, unclearly, vaguely, conveying their meaning.

Strengthening the comedic nature of this character in the play, Chekhov, in the process of working on him, additionally introduced episodes and words into the first act that created a comic effect: an episode with pills, a conversation about frogs.

Denouncing the ruling class - the nobility - Chekhov persistently thinks for himself and makes the viewer think about the people. This is the strength of Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard. We feel that the author has such a negative attitude towards the idleness and idle talk of the Ranevskys, Gaevs, Simeonovs-Pishchikovs, because he guesses the connection of all this with difficult situation people, defends the interests of the broad masses of working people. It was not for nothing that the censorship at one time removed from the play: “The workers eat disgustingly, sleep without pillows, thirty or forty in one room, there are bedbugs and stench everywhere.” “To own living souls - after all, this has reborn all of you, who lived before and are now living, so that your mother, you, uncle no longer notice that you are living in debt, at the expense of others, at the expense of those people whom you do not allow further than the front."

In comparison with Chekhov’s previous plays, in “The Cherry Orchard” the theme of the people is much stronger, and it is clearer that the author denounces the “lords of life” in the name of the people. But the people here are mainly “off-stage”.

Without making the working man either an open commentator or a positive hero of the play, Chekhov, however, sought to provoke thought about him, about his situation, and this is the undoubted progressiveness of The Cherry Orchard. The constant mentions of the people in the play, the images of servants, especially Firs, acting on stage, make you think.

Showing only just before his death a glimpse of consciousness in the slave Firs, Chekhov deeply sympathizes with him and gently reproaches him: “Life has passed, as if you had never lived... You don’t have Silushka, there’s nothing left, nothing... "Eh, you... klutz."

For the tragic fate of Firs, Chekhov blames his masters even more than himself. He speaks of the tragic fate of Firs not as a manifestation of the evil will of his masters. Moreover, Chekhov shows that good people - the inhabitants of the noble nest - even seem to care that the sick servant Firs is sent to the hospital. - “They sent Firs to the hospital?” - “Have they taken Firs to the hospital?” - “Have they taken Firs to the hospital?” - “Mom, Firs has already been sent to the hospital.” Outwardly, the culprit turns out to be Yasha, who answered the question about Firs in the affirmative, as if he had misled those around him.

Firs was left in a boarded up house - this fact can also be considered as tragic accident, for which no one is to blame. And Yasha could be sincerely confident that the order to send Firs to the hospital had been carried out. But Chekhov makes us understand that this “accident” is natural, it is an everyday phenomenon in the lives of the frivolous Ranevskys and Gaevs, who are not deeply concerned about the fate of their servants. In the end, the circumstances would have changed little if Firs had been sent to the hospital: all the same, he would have died, lonely, forgotten, far from the people to whom he gave his life.

There is a hint in the play that Firs' fate is not unique. The life and death of the old nanny and servants Anastasius were just as inglorious and also passed by the consciousness of their masters. The soft, loving Ranevskaya, with her characteristic frivolity, does not react at all to the message about the death of Anastasia, about leaving the estate for the city of Petrushka Kosoy. And the nanny’s death did not make much of an impression on her; she does not remember her with a single kind word. We can imagine that Ranevskaya will respond to the death of Firs with the same insignificant, vague words with which she responded to the death of her nanny: “Yes, the kingdom of heaven. They wrote to me."

Meanwhile, Chekhov makes us understand that remarkable possibilities are hidden in Firs: high morality, selfless love, folk wisdom. Throughout the play, among idle, inactive people, he - an 87-year-old old man - is shown alone as an eternally preoccupied, troublesome worker (“alone for the whole house”).

Following his principle of individualizing the speech of the characters, Chekhov gave the words of the old man Firs, for the most part, a fatherly, caring and grumpy intonation. Avoiding false popular expressions, without abusing dialectisms (“lackeys should speak simply, without let and without now” vol. XIV, p. 362), the author endowed Firs with a pure in folk speech, which is not devoid of specific words characteristic only of him: “klutz”, “in pieces”.

Gaev and Ranevskaya pronounce long, coherent, sublime or sensitive monologues, and these “speeches” turn out to be “inappropriate.” Firs, on the other hand, mutters incomprehensible words that seem incomprehensible to others, which no one listens to, but it is his words that the author uses as apt words reflecting the experience of life, the wisdom of a person from the people. Firs's word "klutz" is heard many times in the play; it characterizes all the characters. The word “in pieces” (“now everything is in pieces, you won’t understand anything”) indicates the nature of post-reform life in Russia. It defines the relationships between people in the play, the alienation of their interests, and misunderstanding of each other. The specificity of the dialogue in the play is also connected with this: everyone talks about his own, usually without listening, without thinking about what his interlocutor said:

Dunyasha: And to me, Ermolai Alekseich, I must admit, Epikhodov made an offer.

Lopakhin: Ah!

Dunyasha: I don’t know how... He’s an unhappy person, something happens every day. They tease him like that: twenty-two misfortunes...

Lopakhin (listens): Looks like they’re coming...

For the most part, the words of one character are interrupted by the words of others, leading away from the thought just expressed.

Chekhov often uses the words of Firs to show the movement of life and the loss at the present time of the former strength, the former power of the nobles as a privileged class: “Before, generals, barons, admirals danced at our balls, but now we send for the postal official and the station master, and even those They’re not going out to hunt.”

Firs, with his every minute concern for Gaev as a helpless child, destroys the viewer’s illusions that might arise based on Gaev’s words about his future as a “bank official”, “financier”. Chekhov wants to leave the viewer with the consciousness of the impossibility of reviving these unworking people to any kind of activity. Therefore, Gaev has only to utter the words: “They are offering me a place in the bank. Six thousand a year...”, as Chekhov reminds the viewer of Gaev’s lack of viability, his helplessness. Firs appears. He brings a coat: “If you please, sir, put it on, it’s damp.”

By showing other servants in the play: Dunyasha, Yasha, Chekhov also denounces the “noble” landowners. He makes the viewer understand the pernicious influence of the Ranevskys and Gaevs on people in the working environment. The atmosphere of idleness and frivolity has a detrimental effect on Dunyasha. From the gentlemen she learned sensitivity, hypertrophied attention to her “delicate feelings” and experiences, “refinement”... She dresses like a young lady, is absorbed in issues of love, constantly listens warily to her “refined-tender” organization: “I have become anxious, I’m still worried... She has become tender, so delicate, noble, I’m afraid of everything...” “My hands are shaking.” “The cigar gave me a headache.” “It’s a little damp in here.” “Dancing makes you dizzy, your heart beats,” etc. Like her masters, she developed a passion for “beautiful” words, for “beautiful” feelings: “He loves me madly,” “I fell in love with you passionately.”

Dunyasha, like her masters, does not have the ability to understand people. Epikhodov seduces her with sensitive, albeit incomprehensible, words, Yasha with “education” and the ability to “reason about everything.” Chekhov exposes the absurd comedy of such a conclusion about Yasha, for example, by forcing Dunyasha to express this conclusion between two of Yasha’s remarks, testifying to Yasha’s ignorance, narrow-mindedness and inability to think, reason and act at all logically:

Yasha (kisses her): Cucumber! Of course, every girl must remember herself, and what I don’t like most is if a girl has bad behavior... In my opinion, it’s like this: if a girl loves someone, then she is immoral...

Like her masters, Dunyasha speaks inappropriately and acts inappropriately. She often says about herself what people, like Ranevskaya and Gaev, think about themselves and even let others feel, but do not directly express in words. And this creates a comic effect: “I’m such a delicate girl, I really love gentle words.” In the final version, Chekhov strengthened these features in the image of Dunyasha. He added: “I’m going to faint.” “Everything went cold.” “I don’t know what will happen to my nerves.” "Now leave me alone, now I'm dreaming." "I am a gentle creature."

Chekhov attached great importance to the image of Dunyasha and was worried about the correct interpretation of this role in the theater: “Tell the actress playing the maid Dunyasha to read The Cherry Orchard in the Knowledge edition or in proof; there she will see where she needs to powder, and so on. and so on. Let him read it without fail: everything in your notebooks is mixed up and smeared.” The author makes us think more deeply about the fate of this comic character and see that this fate, in essence, also by the grace of the “masters of life,” is tragic. Cut off from her working environment (“I’m unaccustomed to simple life”), Dunyasha lost her ground (“she doesn’t remember herself”), but did not acquire a new support in life. Her future is predicted in the words of Firs: “You will spin.”

Chekhov also shows the destructive impact of the world of the Ranevskys, Gaevs, Pischikov in the image of the lackey Yasha. Witnessing the easy, carefree and vicious life of Ranevskaya in Paris, he is infected with indifference to his homeland, people and a constant desire for pleasure. Yasha expresses more directly, sharply, more rudely what, in essence, is the meaning of Ranevskaya’s actions: the attraction to Paris, the careless and contemptuous attitude towards the “uneducated country”, “ignorant people”. He, like Ranevskaya, is bored in Russia (“yawns” is the author’s insistent remark for Yasha). Chekhov makes it clear to us that Yasha was corrupted by Ranevskaya’s careless recklessness. Yasha robs her, lies to her and others. Easy example Ranevskaya’s life, her mismanagement developed Yasha’s claims and desires beyond his capabilities: he drinks champagne, smokes cigars, orders expensive dishes in a restaurant. Yasha’s intelligence is just enough to adapt to Ranevskaya and take advantage of her weaknesses for personal gain. Outwardly, he remains devoted to her and behaves politely and helpfully. He adopted a “well-mannered” tone and words when dealing with a certain circle of people: “I can’t disagree with you,” “let me make a request to you.” Valuing her position, Yasha strives to create a better impression of herself than she deserves, she is afraid of losing Ranevskaya’s trust (hence the author’s remarks: “looks around”, “listens”). Hearing, for example, that “the gentlemen are coming,” he sends Dunyasha home, “otherwise they will meet and think of me as if I’m on a date with you. I can’t stand it.”

Chekhov thus simultaneously exposes both the deceitful lackey Yasha and the gullible, thoughtless Ranevskaya, who keeps him close to her. Chekhov blames not only him, but also the masters, for the fact that Yasha found himself in the absurd position of a man who “does not remember his kinship” and who has lost his environment. For Yasha, who is removed from his native element, men, servants, and a peasant mother are already people of a “lower order”; he is harsh or selfishly indifferent towards them.

Yasha is infected by his masters with a passion to philosophize, to “speak out,” and, like them, his words are at odds with his life practice, with his behavior (relationship with Dunyasha).

A.P. Chekhov saw in life and reproduced in the play another version of the fate of a man from the people. We learn that Lopakhin’s father, a peasant, a serf, who was also not even allowed into the kitchen, after the reform he “made it into the people,” became rich, became a shopkeeper, an exploiter of the people.

In the play, Chekhov shows his son - a bourgeois new formation. This is no longer a “grimy”, not a tyrant merchant, despotic, rude, like his father. Chekhov specifically warned the actors: “Lopakhin, it’s true, is a merchant, but a decent person in every sense, he must behave quite decently, intelligently.” “Lopakhin should not be played as a loudmouth... He is a gentle person.”

While working on the play, Chekhov even enhanced the features of gentleness and external “decency, intelligence” in the image of Lopakhin. Thus, he included in the final edition Lopakhin’s lyrical words addressed to Ranevskaya: “I would like... for your amazing, touching eyes to look at me as before.” Chekhov added to the description given to Lopakhin by Trofimov the words: “After all, I still love you. You have thin, delicate fingers, like an artist, you have a subtle, gentle soul...”

In Lopakhin’s speech, Chekhov emphasizes sharp, commanding and didactic intonations when he addresses the servants: “Leave me alone. I'm tired of it." “Bring me some kvass.” “We must remember ourselves.” In Lopakhin’s speech, Chekhov crosses various elements: it senses both the life practice of Lopakhin the merchant (“he gave forty”, “the least”, “net income”) and peasant origin (“if”, “that’s it”, “played the fool”, “to tear his nose”, “with a pig’s snout in a row of guns”, “hanging out with you”, “was drunk”), and the influence of lordly, pathetically sensitive speech: “I think: “Lord, you gave us... vast fields , the deepest horizons...” “I just wish that you would still believe me, that your amazing, touching eyes would look at me as before.” Lopakhin's speech takes on different shades depending on his attitude towards the listeners, towards the very subject of the conversation, depending on his state of mind. Lopakhin speaks seriously and excitedly about the possibility of selling the estate, warns the owners of the cherry orchard; his speech at this moment is simple, correct, clear. But Chekhov shows that Lopakhin, feeling his strength, even his superiority over the frivolous, impractical nobles, is a little flirtatious with his democracy, deliberately contaminates book expressions (“a figment of your imagination, covered in the darkness of the unknown”), and deliberately distorts the grammatical and stylistic forms perfectly known to him. By this, Lopakhin is simultaneously ironizing those who “seriously” use these cliched or wrong words and revolutions. So, for example, along with the word: “farewell,” Lopakhin says “goodbye” several times; along with the word “enormous” (“Lord, you gave us enormous forests”) he pronounces “enormous” - (“the cone, however, will jump up huge”), and the name Ophelia is probably deliberately distorted by Lopakhin, who memorized Shakespeare’s text and almost who paid attention to the sound of Ophelia’s words: “Ophmelia, O nymph, remember me in your prayers.” “Okhmelia, go to the monastery.”

When creating the image of Trofimov, Chekhov experienced certain difficulties, understanding possible censorship attacks: “I was mainly frightened by ... the unfinished state of the student Trofimov. After all, Trofimov is constantly in exile, he is constantly expelled from the university, but how do you portray these things? In fact, student Trofimov appeared before the viewer at a time when the public was agitated by student “unrest.” Chekhov and his contemporaries witnessed the fierce but inconclusive struggle waged against the “disobedient citizens” for several years by “... the Russian government... with the help of its numerous troops, police and gendarmes.”

In the image of the “eternal student” commoner, the son of a doctor - Trofimov, Chekhov showed the superiority of democracy over the noble-bourgeois “lordship”. Chekhov contrasts the antisocial, antipatriotic idle life of Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pischik, and the destructive “activity” of the acquirer-owner Lopakhin with the search for social truth by Trofimov, who fervently believes in the triumph of a just social life in the near future. When creating the image of Trofimov, Chekhov wanted to preserve a measure of historical justice. Therefore, on the one hand, he opposed the conservative noble circles, which saw modern democratic intellectuals as immoral, mercantile, ignorant “grimy”, “cook’s children” (see the image of the reactionary Rashevich in the story “On the Estate”); on the other hand, Chekhov wanted to avoid idealizing Trofimov, since he perceived a certain limitation of the Trofimovs in creating a new life.

In accordance with this, the democratic student Trofimov is shown in the play as a man of exceptional honesty and selflessness; he is not constrained by established traditions and prejudices, mercantile interests, or an addiction to money and property. Trofimov is poor, suffers hardships, but categorically refuses to “live at someone else’s expense” or borrow money. Trofimov’s observations and generalizations are broad, intelligent and objectively fair: nobles “live in debt, at someone else’s expense”, temporary “masters”, “ beasts of prey"- the bourgeois are making limited plans for the reconstruction of life, the intellectuals are doing nothing, are not looking for anything, the workers live badly, “they eat disgustingly, sleep... thirty or forty in one room.” Trofimov’s principles (work, live for the sake of the future) are progressive and altruistic; His role - as a herald of the new, as an educator - should evoke the respect of the viewer.

But with all this, Chekhov shows in Trofimov some traits of limitation and inferiority, and the author finds in him the traits of a “klutz” that brings Trofimov closer to other characters in the play. The breath of the world of Ranevskaya and Gaev also affects Trofimov, despite the fact that he fundamentally does not accept their way of life and is confident in the hopelessness of their situation: “there is no going back.” Trofimov speaks indignantly about idleness and “philosophizing” (“We only philosophize,” “I’m afraid serious conversations"), and he also does little, talks a lot, loves teachings, ringing phrases. In Act II, Chekhov forces Trofimov to refuse to continue the idle, abstract “yesterday’s conversation” about a “proud man,” while in Act IV he forces Trofimov to call himself a proud man. Chekhov shows that Trofimov is not active in life, that his existence is subject to elemental forces (“fate drives him”), and he himself unreasonably denies himself even personal happiness.

In the play “The Cherry Orchard” this does not happen positive hero, which would be fully consistent with the pre-revolutionary era. The time required a writer-propagandist whose loud voice would sound both in open denunciation and in the positive beginning of his works. Chekhov's distance from the revolutionary struggle muffled his authorial voice, softened his satire, and was expressed in the lack of specificity of his positive ideals.

Comedy in 4 acts

Characters

The action takes place on the estate of L.A. Ranevskaya.

Act one

A room that is still called a nursery. One of the doors leads to Anya's room. Dawn is coming soon the sun will rise. It’s already May, the cherry trees are blooming, but it’s cold in the garden, it’s morning. The windows in the room are closed.

Dunyasha enters with a candle and Lopakhin with a book in his hand.

Epikhodov enters with a bouquet; he is wearing a jacket and brightly polished boots that squeak loudly; upon entering, he drops the bouquet.

Everyone leaves except Anya and Dunyasha.

Varya and Yasha enter.

Everyone laughs.

Charlotte Ivanovna in a white dress, very thin, tight-fitting, with a lorgnette on her belt, she walks across the stage.

Trofimov enters, wearing a worn student uniform and glasses.

What an amazing garden! White masses of flowers, blue sky...

Lyubov Andreevna looks in bewilderment.

Lyubov Andreevna hugs him and quietly cries.

Lyubov Andreevna, Trofimov, Pischik and Firs leave. Gaev, Varya and Yasha remain.

Anya enters.

Firs enters.