Past, present, future in the play “The Cherry Orchard. Image a

Any society consists of specific people, they, in turn, are a reflection of this society, era and values ​​inherent in that time. People come up with ideologies and rules of life and then they themselves are forced to abide by them. Inconsistency with one’s time always knocks a person out of society, while at the same time drawing the close attention of those around him to himself. The problem of man in society is raised by many poets, writers, and playwrights. Let's look at how Chekhov solves this problem in his play "The Cherry Orchard."

Anton Pavlovich tried to reflect social contradictions associated with changes in the economic structure.

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.

For example, Lopakhin skillfully integrates into the new economic life of the country. The most important thing for him is to have money. Ermolai Alekseevich can be called a unique businessman of that time. He knows how to handle the estate and the cherry orchard, is practical, knows how to manage a budget, and earn money. To obtain greater benefits, Lopakhin comes up with a plan: to cut down the garden and divide it into small plots that can be rented out. Such an enterprising businessman personifies a person who skillfully adapts to the conditions of the surrounding world and does not miss the opportunity to get a better job in a new society.

The opposite of Lopakhin is Ranevskaya. Lyubov Andreevna, accustomed to a life of prosperity and even luxury, cannot live within her means and, being completely in debt, still continues to live in grand style. Even when her only remaining estate was put up for sale, she still eats in restaurants and gives out tips. And when there was nothing to feed the servants, he gave the gold to a passerby. Ranevskaya does not understand that for a nobleman it is not enough to have a certain external gloss; it is also necessary to use finances wisely and manage the estate. This requires new times.

What do we see in the end? Ranevskaya goes completely bankrupt, losing her cherry orchard, and Lopakhin is now rich, and he understands that his fortune will soon increase. Yes, of course, we feel sorry for Lyubov Andreevna, but the time of the “Ranevskys” has passed, and people like her need to change in order to fully exist.

Society is sometimes cruel. To live well and with dignity in it, you need to try to be energetic, purposeful and, of course, progressive, because the world itself changes every day, and we must correspond to it.

Updated: 2018-02-05

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

Yesterday, today, tomorrow in A. P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard” (Essay)

The past looks passionate
into the future
A. A. Blok

Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” was written during the period of social upsurge of the masses in 1903. It reveals to us another page of his multifaceted creativity, reflecting the complex phenomena of that time. The play amazes us with its poetic power and drama, and is perceived by us as a sharp exposure of the social ills of society, an exposure of those people whose thoughts and actions are far from moral standards of behavior. The writer clearly shows deep psychological conflicts, helps the reader to see the reflection of events in the souls of the heroes, makes us think about the meaning of true love and true happiness. Chekhov easily takes us from our present to the distant past. Together with its heroes, we live next to the cherry orchard, see its beauty, clearly feel the problems of that time, together with the heroes we try to find answers to complex questions. It seems to me that the play “The Cherry Orchard” is a play about the past, present and future not only of its characters, but also of the country as a whole. The author shows the clash between representatives of the past, the present and the future inherent in this present. Lopakhin denies the world of Ranevskaya and Gaev, Trofimov - Lopakhin. I think that Chekhov managed to show the justice of the inevitable departure from the historical arena of such seemingly harmless persons as the owners of the cherry orchard. So who are they, the garden owners? What connects their lives with his existence? Why is the cherry orchard so dear to them? Answering these questions, Chekhov reveals an important problem - the problem of passing life, its worthlessness and conservatism.
Ranevskaya is the owner of the cherry orchard. The cherry orchard itself serves as a “noble nest” for her. Life without him is unthinkable for Ranevskaya; her whole destiny is connected with him. Lyubov Andreevna says: “After all, I was born here, my father and mother, my grandfather lived here. I love this house, I don’t understand my life without the cherry orchard, and if you have to sell it, then sell me along with the orchard.” It seems to me that she is suffering sincerely, but soon I understand that she is actually thinking not about the cherry orchard, but about her Parisian lover, to whom she decided to go again. I was simply amazed when I learned that she was leaving with money sent to Anna by her Yaroslavl grandmother, leaving without thinking about the fact that she was appropriating other people’s funds. And this, in my opinion, is selfishness, but in a special way, giving her actions the appearance of good nature. And this, at first glance, is so. It is Ranevskaya who cares most about the fate of Firs, agrees to lend money to Pishchik, it is her who Lopakhin loves for her once kind attitude towards him.
Gaev, Ranevskaya’s brother, is also a representative of the past. He seems to complement Ranevskaya. Gaev talks abstractly about the public good, about progress, and philosophizes. But all these arguments are empty and absurd. Trying to console Anya, he says: “We will pay the interest, I’m convinced. On my honor, I swear whatever you want, the estate will not be sold! I swear to avenging happiness!” I think Gaev himself doesn’t believe what he says. I can’t help but say something about the lackey Yasha, in whom I notice a reflection of cynicism. He is outraged by the “ignorance” of those around him and speaks of his impossibility of living in Russia: “There’s nothing to be done. It’s not for me here, I can’t live... I’ve seen enough of ignorance - that’s enough for me.” In my opinion, Yasha turns out to be a satirical reflection of his masters, their shadow.
The loss of the Gaevs and the Ranevskaya estate, at first glance, can be explained by their carelessness, but I am soon dissuaded from this by the activities of the landowner Pishchik, who is trying his best to maintain his position. He is used to money regularly falling into his hands. And suddenly everything is disrupted. He is desperately trying to get out of this situation, but his attempts are passive, like those of Gaev and Ranevskaya. Thanks to Pishchik, I realized that neither Ranevskaya nor Gaev are capable of any activity. Using this example, Chekhov convincingly proved to the reader the inevitability of noble estates becoming a thing of the past.
The energetic gays are replaced by the clever businessman and cunning businessman Lopakhin. We learn that he is not of noble class, which makes him somewhat proud: “My father, it’s true, was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes.” Realizing the complexity of Ranevskaya’s situation, he offers her a project to reconstruct the garden. In Lopakhin one can clearly feel that active vein of new life, which will gradually and inevitably push into the background a meaningless and worthless life. However, the author makes it clear that Lopakhin is not a representative of the future; it will exhaust itself in the present. Why? It is obvious that Lopakhin is driven by the desire for personal enrichment. Petya Trofimov gives him an exhaustive description: “You are a rich man, you will soon be a millionaire. Just as in terms of metabolism we need a beast of prey that eats everything that gets in its way, so we need you!” Lopakhin, the buyer of the garden, says: “We will set up dachas, and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will see a new life here.” This new life seems to him almost the same as the life of Ranevskaya and Gaev. In the image of Lopakhin, Chekhov shows us how predatory capitalist entrepreneurship is inhuman by its nature. All this involuntarily leads us to the idea that the country needs completely different people who will accomplish different great things. And these other people are Petya and Anya.
With one fleeting phrase, Chekhov makes it clear what Petya is like. He is an “eternal student.” I think that says it all. The author reflected in the play the rise of the student movement. That is why, I believe, the image of Petya appeared. Everything about him: his thin hair and his unkempt appearance, it would seem, should cause disgust. But this doesn't happen. On the contrary, his speeches and actions even evoke some sympathy. One can feel how attached the characters in the play are to him. Some treat Petya with slight irony, others with undisguised love. After all, he is the personification of the future in the play. In his speeches one can hear a direct condemnation of a dying life, a call for a new one: “I’ll get there. I’ll get there or show others the way to get there.” And he points. He points it out to Anya, whom he loves dearly, although he skillfully hides it, realizing that a different path is destined for him. He tells her: “If you have the keys to the farm, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free like the wind." Petya causes deep thoughts in Lopakhin, who in his soul envies the conviction of this “shabby gentleman,” which he himself so lacks.
At the end of the play, Anya and Petya leave exclaiming: “Goodbye, old life. Hello, new life.” Everyone can understand these words of Chekhov in their own way. What new life did the writer dream of, how did he imagine it? It remains a mystery to everyone. But one thing is always true and correct: Chekhov dreamed of a new Russia, of a new cherry orchard, of a proud and free personality. Years go by, generations change, and Chekhov’s thought continues to disturb our minds, hearts and souls. 

Scientific adviser: Barnashova Elena Vyacheslavovna, Ph.D. Philol. Sciences, Department of Theory and History of Culture, National Research Tomsk State University, Russia, Tomsk

Annotation.

This article is devoted to the study of the attitude and inner world of a person at a turning point in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. To explore this topic, the author uses an analysis of the work of A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard". This play was not chosen by chance; it is in it that the writer most fully reveals the mood of a person in a crisis era, and also gives an assessment of the general atmosphere of that time.

Key words: A.P. Chekhov, “The Cherry Orchard”, human perception of the world, the era of the late 19th – early 20th centuries, crisis worldview.

This topic is relevant for the 21st century, since the consonance of eras can now be traced. Modern man is in a similar state. The surrounding reality shows its instability, values ​​quickly become outdated, new ideas, opinions, preferences appear, the world around is rapidly changing every second. Confidence in a stable future disappears. As at the end of the 19th century, a person cannot find support, unshakable ideals on which he could rely. The 21st century is embraced by a special atmosphere of languor, expectation of change, and weariness of life. In this regard, the author of the article considers it appropriate to study the work of A.P. Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard” to identify the special mood of this crisis era and human worldview. And an understanding of the atmosphere of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. will provide an opportunity to understand the processes occurring in the inner world of modern man.

Anton Pavlovich writes the play “The Cherry Orchard” in 1903, a year before his death. He shares his idea for a new work in a letter with his wife O.L. Knipper March 7, 1901: “The next play I write will certainly be funny, very funny, at least in concept.” And already in the summer of 1902, the writer clearly defined the contours of the plot and came up with a title for his new play. However, the writing of the play was postponed due to Anton Pavlovich’s illness, but already in June 1903, while at a dacha in Naro-Fominsk near Moscow, the writer began writing a full-fledged plot of the play. And on September 26, 1903, the play was completed.

The play is being created at a difficult time for the country. The era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries was marked by rapid changes in all spheres of society. Society was torn apart by contradictions, revolutionary sentiments grew, especially among workers. The socio-political situation in the country worsened. Old values ​​are losing authority among the common people. Revolutionary movements, speaking out against the old, cannot yet offer anything concrete in return. A man finds himself at a crossroads.

And it is precisely in this “troubled” time that this play is created. This last work written by Chekhov reflects the whole essence of the cultural era of that time and how people felt in it.

This is one of his most interesting and most discussed plays. Until now, researchers have not come to a consensus on the interpretation of this work; with each reading it reveals new meanings and gives rise to new interpretations.

The plot of this play is quite everyday and ordinary. However, the value of Chekhov’s work is not at all in the plot, but in the subtle human psychologism with which the writer shows a person, his experiences and spiritual quests. A special atmosphere of the work is also created; it becomes more depressing compared to other plays. Here we will no longer see dreams of a happy life, or any feeling of dissatisfaction. There is now a sense of doom in the air. It is in this that Chekhov’s work especially accurately and subtly shows a turning point era and a person living in it, who is trying to find support, but cannot do it. The characters cannot understand exactly what is tormenting them and cannot express their feelings. They are in an endless search for answers to the questions that torment them.

There is a special relationship between the characters themselves. The misunderstanding between them is clearly shown. The characters seem to speak different languages, as a result of which so-called “parallel dialogues” appear, when, for example, Ranevskaya and Lopakhin are talking about the sale of an estate, the landowner does not seem to hear what her interlocutor is talking about (or does not want to hear), she speaks about her wonderful childhood, plunging into memories, she does not notice anything around her.

Chekhov, moving away from class, portrays people from the point of view of their perception of the surrounding reality. And we see Lopakhin, who was able to adapt and survive in this changed world, but on the other hand, the image of Ranevskaya, a person who does not want and cannot change, she is not ready for changes in her life, and therefore continues to live as before. In her image one can read a special fear of the future; she looks defenseless and desperate. It should be noted that this aspect cannot be tied to the social aspects of the characters, since then their status would be emphasized, however, in the play, attention is instead focused on emotional experiences.

The image of the Garden occupies a special place in the play; on the one hand, it appears as a kind of metaphor for life, an ideal where everyone strives to get to. It is symbolic that the heroes look at the garden only from afar. But on the other hand, the Garden is an image of the past, that happy, carefree past where everything was clear. Where certain authorities and unshakable values ​​remained, where life flowed smoothly and measuredly and everyone knew what awaited tomorrow. Therefore, Firs says: “In the old days, about forty to fifty years ago, cherries were dried... And the dried cherries then were soft, juicy... They knew the method then...”. This special method, the secret of life, which allowed the cherry orchard to bloom, has been lost and now must be cut down and destroyed. Time moves forward, the world around us changes, which means the Garden must become a thing of the past. It is very difficult to part with it, but this will be the main impetus for the development of the present, and with it the future.

At the same time, the problem of human self-determination in a new, constantly changing world can be traced. Some find their occupation (like Lopakhin), others (Ranevskaya) still live in the past and are afraid to face the future. At first she is really afraid to part with the orchard, but after selling it, Gaev says: “Before the sale of the cherry orchard, we were all worried, suffering, and then, when the issue was resolved finally, irrevocably, everyone calmed down, even became cheerful,” thereby proving the need for change.

Another important factor is “random” sounds. Like, for example, the sound of an arrow bursting at the end. In my opinion, these are assumptions about the future of the author himself. Throughout the play, tension grew, an internal conflict occurred between the person and himself with his old habits and prejudices, inevitable changes were felt that put pressure on the person, forcing him to make his “right” decision. The heroes rushed about in search of the truth and did not want to change anything, but changes slowly took over their lives. And at the end the garden is sold, everyone has left, and we see an empty stage, hear the sound of a broken string, nothing and no one is left except Firs. The tension is resolved, leaving a void that invites the reader to see something of themselves in it. Chekhov didn’t know exactly what this “future” would look like, he didn’t know what would happen there, but he definitely foresaw the inevitable changes that were already very close, so close that we can already hear the sound of an axe.

Thus, the writer sought to show the character’s inner life, his feelings and emotions; external everyday aspects were not so important. And therefore Chekhov is trying to get away from the usual social characteristics of the characters; he is trying to more fully describe their extra-class features. For example, personal characteristics, individualization of speech, special gestures. Another feature of “The Cherry Orchard” is that the reader does not see a pronounced social conflict, there are no contradictions or clashes. The speech of the characters also becomes new: they often say “random” phrases, and at the same time do not listen to each other, they conduct parallel conversations. The whole meaning of the work is manifested in the totality of these small touches, unsaid words.

The characters appear before the readers as realistically as in life; the writer shows that there is no single true truth that can be accepted by everyone. Everyone has their own truth, their own meaning and way of life in which they sincerely believe. Anton Pavlovich showed the tragedy of the situation at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, when a person stood at a crossroads. Old values ​​and guidelines were collapsing, but new ones had not yet been found and adopted. The life to which everyone was accustomed was changing, and the person felt the inevitable approach of these changes.

Bibliography:

1. Chekhov A.P. Complete works and letters: in 30 volumes / chapter. ed. N.F. Belchikov. – M.: Nauka, 1980. – T. 9: Letters 1900-March 1901. – 614 p.

2. Chekhov A.P. Stories and plays / A.P. Chekhov. – M.: Pravda, 1987. – 464 p.

Features of Chekhov's dramaturgy

Before Anton Chekhov, Russian theater was going through a crisis; it was he who made an invaluable contribution to its development, breathing new life into it. The playwright snatched small sketches from the everyday life of his characters, bringing drama closer to reality. His plays made the viewer think, although they did not contain intrigues or open conflicts, but they reflected the internal anxiety of a turning point in history, when society froze in anticipation of imminent changes, and all social strata became heroes. The apparent simplicity of the plot introduced the stories of the characters before the events described, making it possible to speculate what would happen to them after. In this way, the past, present, and future were mixed in an amazing way in the play “The Cherry Orchard,” by connecting people not so much from different generations, but from different eras. And one of the “undercurrents” characteristic of Chekhov’s plays was the author’s reflection on the fate of Russia, and the theme of the future took center stage in “The Cherry Orchard.”

Past, present and future on the pages of the play “The Cherry Orchard”

So how did the past, present and future meet on the pages of the play “The Cherry Orchard”? Chekhov seemed to divide all the heroes into these three categories, depicting them very vividly.

The past in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is represented by Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs - the oldest character in the entire performance. They are the ones who talk most about what happened; for them, the past is a time in which everything was easy and wonderful. There were masters and servants, each had their own place and purpose. For Firs, the abolition of serfdom became the greatest grief; he did not want freedom, remaining on the estate. He sincerely loved the family of Ranevskaya and Gaev, remaining devoted to them until the very end. For aristocrats Lyubov Andreevna and her brother, the past is a time when they did not need to think about such base things as money. They enjoyed life, doing what brings pleasure, knowing how to appreciate the beauty of intangible things - it is difficult for them to adapt to the new order, in which highly moral values ​​are replaced by material values. For them, it is humiliating to talk about money, about ways to earn it, and Lopakhin’s real proposal to rent out land occupied by an essentially worthless garden is perceived as vulgarity. Unable to make decisions about the future of the cherry orchard, they succumb to the flow of life and simply float along it. Ranevskaya, with her aunt’s money sent for Anya, leaves for Paris, and Gaev goes to work in a bank. The death of Firs at the end of the play is very symbolic, as if saying that the aristocracy as a social class has outlived its usefulness, and there is no place for it, in the form in which it was before the abolition of serfdom.

Lopakhin became a representative of the present in the play “The Cherry Orchard”. “A man is a man,” as he says about himself, thinking in a new way, able to make money using his mind and instincts. Petya Trofimov even compares him to a predator, but a predator with a subtle artistic nature. And this brings Lopakhin a lot of emotional distress. He is well aware of the beauty of the old cherry orchard, which will be cut down according to his will, but he cannot do otherwise. His ancestors were serfs, his father owned a shop, and he became a “white farmer”, amassing a considerable fortune. Chekhov placed special emphasis on the character of Lopakhin, because he was not a typical merchant, whom many treated with disdain. He made himself, paving the way with his work and desire to be better than his ancestors, not only in terms of financial independence, but also in education. In many ways, Chekhov identified himself with Lopakhin, because their pedigrees are similar.

Anya and Petya Trofimov personify the future. They are young, full of strength and energy. And most importantly, they have a desire to change their lives. But, it’s just that Petya is a master at talking and reasoning about a wonderful and fair future, but he doesn’t know how to turn his speeches into action. This is what prevents him from graduating from university or at least somehow organizing his life. Petya denies all attachments - be it to a place or to another person. He captivates the naive Anya with his ideas, but she already has a plan for how to arrange her life. She is inspired and ready to “plant a new garden, even more beautiful than the previous one.” However, the future in Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” is very uncertain and vague. In addition to the educated Anya and Petya, there are also Yasha and Dunyasha, and they, too, are the future. Moreover, if Dunyasha is just a stupid peasant girl, then Yasha is a completely different type. The Gaevs and Ranevskys are being replaced by the Lopakhins, but someone will also have to replace the Lopakhins. If you remember history, then 13 years after this play was written, it was precisely these Yashas who came to power - unprincipled, empty and cruel, not attached to anyone or anything.

In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” the heroes of the past, present and future were gathered in one place, but they were not united by an internal desire to be together and exchange their dreams, desires, and experiences. The old garden and house hold them together, and as soon as they disappear, the connection between the characters and the time they reflect is severed.

Connection of times today

Only the greatest creations are able to reflect reality even many years after their creation. This happened with the play “The Cherry Orchard”. History is cyclical, society develops and changes, moral and ethical standards are also subject to rethinking. Human life is not possible without memory of the past, inaction in the present, and without faith in the future. One generation is replaced by another, some build, others destroy. This is how it was in Chekhov’s time, and this is how it is now. The playwright was right when he said that “All of Russia is our garden,” and it depends only on us whether it will bloom and bear fruit, or whether it will be cut down at the very root.

The author's discussions about the past, present and future in comedy, about people and generations, about Russia make us think even today. These thoughts will be useful for 10th graders when writing an essay on the topic “Past, present, future in the play “The Cherry Orchard”.”

Work test

Man and nature

In many of Chekhov's stories, there is resentment for the disorder that has established in nature, and the play “The Cherry Orchard” is no exception. It was nature that largely helped Russian writers understand the interconnection and unity of all life on earth, the meaning of life’s purpose. And the theme of a blooming spring garden ran through all of Russian literature, not bypassing the works of Pushkin, Gogol, Prishvin, Bunin and other writers.

Nature is presented in a completely new way in Chekhov’s work “The Cherry Orchard”. This time she becomes

Not simply a backdrop to actions and unfolding events, but rather a participant in them, thus gaining symbolic meaning.

The attitude towards the cherry orchard and its fate affects the moral character of each of the characters in the play, who can be conditionally divided into two camps. The first camp consists of people of the old school, cherishing the memory of the garden in which more than one generation grew up. These include Raevskaya with her Daughter, Gaev, the old and faithful Firs, Varya.

And the second camp includes the poorly educated governess Charlotte Ivanovna, the cynical lackey Yasha, the landowner Simeonov-Pishchik, who only

And he does what he does: he asks his neighbors to borrow money. For these people there is no past. They don’t care whether the cherry orchard is sold or divided into plots for rent.

Separately from everyone else, the figure of Lopakhin is depicted - a man who conquered his serf past. This businesslike merchant is a descendant of former serfs, but through his labor he earned himself an exorbitant fortune and became a respected person in the area. He is not indifferent to the fate of the cherry orchard.

It means a lot to him, both good and bad. Ermolai Alekseevich finds himself faced with a difficult choice, which decides his entire future fate. On the one hand, he wants to get Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna out of the debt trap, since she has always been kind to him, and since childhood he grew up surrounded by her.

On the other hand, this cherry orchard and everything connected with it, by their very existence, remind Lopakhin of his slave past. He himself says about the current situation: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only this awkward, unhappy life would soon change.” His confusion after buying the garden is far from accidental. With pain in his soul he feels the severity of his moral crime.

And when he says that he wouldn’t mind taking “an ax to the cherry orchard,” it’s the pain and bitterness of the current situation that speaks to him. He understands perfectly well that for Ranevskaya this garden is the embodiment of not only beautiful nature, but also a home. However, there is no other way out.

It is noteworthy that the image of the garden in the play is inextricably linked with the color white, and flowering trees symbolize purity, beauty and light. With their cutting down, it’s as if an entire era disappears. Only Anya believes that a new garden will be planted “even better than the previous one.”

The laws of nature are undeniable: everything that is destroyed will certainly be reborn again. It is not for nothing that the author paid so much attention to nature. The power of Russian landscapes has been known for centuries and no amount of money could compare with them.

It seems to me that it was this idea that Chekhov wanted to convey to readers, how imperfect human relationships unfold against the backdrop of the eternal beauty of nature.

(No Ratings Yet)

Related posts:

1. The Cherry Orchard House is one of the most famous works of the Russian classic A.P. Chekhov, which he wrote shortly before his death. It is noteworthy that he himself grew a garden in Melikhovo, and in Crimea, next to his house, he had another beautiful southern garden. Thus, the garden meant a lot to him, as well as to his heroes. […]...
2. Life and Garden The play “The Cherry Orchard” was written by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov shortly before his death. It is saturated with bitterness, a premonition of the inevitable and concern for the fate of one’s country, one’s home, family, and garden. Reading this work, we understand that by the term “cherry orchard” the author meant the whole country. Thus, one of the key characters, Petya Trofimov, exclaims: “All of Russia is ours […]...
3. Love for home In the work of the great Russian classic A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard” the central place is given to the theme of home and homeland. Like a cherry orchard that fell at the hands of an ax, the former homeland is slowly dying. Or, if you look at it from the other side, it does not die, but is reborn: the old generation is replaced by a new, young generation, full of faith in a happy […]...
4. The Problem of Happiness They say about Chekhov's plays that they are pervaded by a certain feeling of constant unhappiness. And, indeed, even the most inattentive reader will notice that all the heroes, despite the resolution of problems and obvious changes, remain unhappy. What is the problem and what is happiness for these people? For some, happiness lies in achieving love, success, recognition, justice, health, material well-being, […]...
5. Dispute between generations Anton Pavlovich Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” is unusual and surprising. Unlike other works of the playwright, it places not a person at the center of all events, but the lyrical image of a beautiful cherry orchard. He is like the personification of the beauty of Russia of old times. Several generations are intertwined in the work and, accordingly, the problem of differences in thinking and perception of reality arises. The Cherry Orchard [...]
6. Hello, new life The play “The Cherry Orchard” was written by A.P. Chekhov during a period of significant changes in the social life of Russian society, namely at the very beginning of the twentieth century. There was hope in the air for the new life promised by the revolutionaries. This is precisely the idea that the author wanted to convey to readers. Not the least place in the theme of the work is occupied by the cherry orchard and its [...]
7. A gentle soul or a cunning beast When creating his last work, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov paid great attention to the depiction of the main characters and their social significance. One of the main characters in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is Ermolai Lopakhin, a suddenly rich man from the serfs. Ranevskaya knew his father, and Ermolai himself grew up before her eyes. It is not surprising that […]...
8. Which of the characters in the drama touched me? The play “The Cherry Orchard” is one of the best works by A.P. Chekhov, which showed the drama of the Russian intelligentsia within a single family. The owners of the estate with the cherry orchard are people from a respected and previously wealthy family - Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya and her brother Leonid Andreevich Gaev. In addition to these characters, the play features a seventeen-year-old […]...
9. Perhaps the main character in the play is the cherry orchard. He is dear to all residents of the estate, and especially to the older generation. For Ranevskaya and Gaev, the garden reminds them of a time when life seemed cheerful and cloudless, of a carefree childhood: Gaev (opens another window). The garden is all white. Have you forgotten, Lyuba? This long alley goes straight, straight, like a stretched belt, [...]
10. Which heroes are called klutzes? A.P. Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” was written in 1903 and is considered one of the most famous in Russian literature. She managed to convey old ideas in a new style and became an example of innovation. The author himself is sure that a person in his soul is deeply unhappy and helpless in front of the world. For this reason, in the play […]...
11. The main themes of the play “The Cherry Orchard,” written in 1904, are: the death of a noble nest, the victory of an enterprising merchant-industrialist over the obsolete Ranevskaya and Gaev, and an essay on the future of Russia, associated with the images of Petya Trofimov and Anya. The new, young Russia’s farewell to the past, to the moribund, the aspiration to the tomorrow of Russia – this is […]...
12. The play “The Cherry Orchard” is the last work of A.P. Chekhov. It is called a play about the decline of noble life and the rise of the imaginary and true masters of Russia. The scene takes place on the estate of the main character of the work, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya. She is one of the representatives of the noble class who were unable to adapt to new living conditions, namely […]...
13. A.P. Chekhov completed work on “The Cherry Orchard” in 1903. The beginning of the century was a turning point for Russia; a revaluation of traditional values ​​began. The aristocracy was ruined and stratified. The doomed nobility was replaced by an enterprising bourgeoisie. It was this fact that became the basis of Chekhov's play. “The Cherry Orchard” presents characters of different classes with a different worldview. The dying class of nobility is represented in the images of […]...
14. To begin with, let's speculate what would have happened if the garden had not been sold to Lopakhin. Let's just imagine that no one had money at the auction except the aunt from Yaroslavl. The house would have gone for 15 thousand, everyone would have been happy. But what next? This would brighten up the family’s financial situation a little, because roughly speaking, the house […]...
15. In the mid-1890s, A.P. Chekhov returned to dramatic works. And it seems that in the play the playwright is trying to transfer the basic principles of “objective” prose. Plot sharpness is replaced by an outwardly calm course of events. Many of Chekhov's plays can be called such. But let’s turn to the comedy “The Cherry Orchard”. Here we are presented with a rather banal plot picture, characteristic of the reflection […]...
16. Past, present and future in Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” The play “The Cherry Orchard” was published at the very beginning of the 20th century and is a kind of final work of A.P. Chekhov. In this work, he most clearly expressed his thoughts about the past, present and future of Russia. He was able to masterfully show the real situation in society on the eve of the first [...]
17. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov is a great playwright of Russian literature. This writer brought a lot of novelty. And before analyzing one of his plays, it is necessary to say what exactly was new in Chekhov’s work. First of all, his innovation lay in the fact that his plays are based not on conflict, but on a deep analysis of the characters’ characters, their [...]
18. The play “The Cherry Orchard” was called a comedy by its author, the famous Russian writer A.P. Chekhov. But from the very first lines of the work we understand that if this is a comedy, it is a very sad one. After all, from the very beginning it becomes clear that the estate in which all the events take place, just like its inhabitants, is doomed. Ranevskaya, Gaev, Anya and Varya are not [...]
19. “The Cherry Orchard” is the last work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, completing his creative biography, his ideological and artistic quest. The new stylistic principles he developed, new “techniques” for plotting and composition were embodied in this play in such figurative discoveries that elevated the realistic depiction of life to broad symbolic generalizations, to an insight into future forms of human relations in the hidden depths of the current […]...
20. Life and the Garden (based on A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”) “The Cherry Orchard” is Chekhov’s last work. Terminally ill, aware of his imminent death, the writer painfully reflects on the fate of the country, on who can be trusted with Russia, its beauty and wealth. The Cherry Orchard is a complex and ambiguous image. This is a concrete garden, familiar to Russian villages, but it […]...
21. Unfortunately, in the modern world people are becoming more and more disconnected from nature. It's sad and unpleasant, but it's not surprising. The concentration of people living in cities is constantly growing. Cities, on the other hand, are places with a limited amount of nature. Thus, a person breaks away from nature, begins to feel like something other than nature, although [...]
22. “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov leaves an indelible impression on the soul. Until the end of the play, the reader is left with a feeling of anxiety and confusion. What does the writer warn about with his work? It seems to me that the author’s position is expressed in the very idea of ​​the work - the inevitability of future changes both for the local nobility (using the example of the fate of the aristocrats Ranevskaya and Gaev) and for the state, […]...
23. In the play “The Cherry Orchard” there is no pronounced conflict. A.P. Chekhov hid it behind the everyday difficulties of the characters. The key image of the drama is undoubtedly the garden, around which events develop. The thoughts and memories of the characters in the play are connected with the cherry orchard. The action takes place on a specific estate; the author replaced the external conflict with the drama of the experiences of the stage characters. Through the description […]...
24. Man and Nature Chingiz Aitmatov’s novel “The Scaffold” is dedicated to the philosophical problems of good and evil, as well as the eternal issue of preserving nature. The author took an innovative approach to the topic of confrontation between man and nature. He showed how people destroy innocent saigas in the reserves of Central Asia, not sparing helicopters, military vehicles, and machine gun fire. At the same time, they don’t think for a second about [...]
25. So, in “Three Sisters” the heroines express their innermost desires and dreams “about” Vershinin’s arrival in the city, his acquaintance with Andrei... So, Uncle Vanya says, or rather, shouts out, his confessional confessions about a life lived in vain and only shoots at Serebryakov - Apparently - because he offered to mortgage the estate. Behind this shot is the accumulated […]
26. The theme of nature is one of the main and favorite themes in the work of the 19th century Russian poet Fyodor Tyutchev. This man was a subtle lyricist who knew how to spy behind the scenes of nature the most intimate action and describe it vividly and with feeling. When Tyutchev touches on the topic of nature, he shares with us his conviction that nature is animate, it lives in the same way […]...
27. Many authors, one way or another, touched on the theme of love in their works. This topic will never cease to be relevant. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov did not ignore her either. In his works, the theme of love is revealed deeply and in a special way, according to Chekhovsky. What does A.P. Chekhov tell us about love? Let us turn to the heroes of the play “The Cherry Orchard”. Already on [...]
28. 1st competition: “Who says this?” Assignment: Read the passage expressively, identify the hero and characterize him. 1. “All of Russia is our garden. The earth is great and beautiful, there are many wonderful places on it. (Pause.) Think... your grandfather, great-grandfather and all your ancestors were serf owners who owned living souls, and is it really possible that from every cherry in the garden, from every leaf, from […]...
29. The worst thing in life is to be happy in the past. Voltaire In most religions, most peoples have the concept of heaven - a place where the souls of those who lived in accordance with religious commandments go. But for most people this concept is much broader and is not associated with death. What do we call heaven? Sometimes we can hear […]...
30. Most literary scholars who studied the work of the famous Russian poet and writer M. Yu. Lermontov noted one of the main features of his works: he tried to contrast the ugly and tragic phenomena of real life with the beautiful and harmonious world of nature. The lyrical hero of the poem “Mtsyri” becomes a victim of merciless laws, which are based on disharmony, violence, hostility and evil. Mtsyri, by the will of fate, was still a child [...]
31. “Notes of a Hunter” was an event in the literary life of the early 50s of the 19th century. Turgenev showed the deep content and spirituality of the Russian peasant, the variety of characters that are most fully manifested against the backdrop of the landscape. Nature in “Notes...” appears in several functions. First of all, Turgenev depicts nature to show the beauty of Russia, its greatness and mystery. The writer creates lyrical pictures of morning, sunrise, […]...
32. Man and nature The theme of nature and taiga landscapes occupies an important place in the works of V. P. Astafiev. The story “Vasyutkino Lake” was no exception, in which a thirteen-year-old boy spent five days alone with an endless forest. From childhood, the boy’s grandfather taught him to respect the laws of the taiga. He also often noted that progress and civilization have a bad impact on natural [...]
33. A.P. Chekhov was not only a master of the story, his talent extended to other genres. Thus, Chekhov’s plays, filled with subtle symbolism and vitality, have long become immortal. “The Cherry Orchard” is considered one of the best and most famous works of this genre. This play was written in 1903, almost before the writer's death. In “The Cherry Orchard” Chekhov reveals his […]...
34. “The Cherry Orchard” is undoubtedly one of the best plays by A.P. Chekhov. Important philosophical problems are touched upon here - the painful death of the old, the coming to replace it of a new, incomprehensible, threatening one. The author shows the drama of Russian life at the end of the 19th century: the cherry orchard, which is a symbol of landowner Russia, falls into the hands of an enterprising merchant. So Chekhov is trying to understand and analyze the transition from the old […]...
35. Man and nature in M. M. Prishvin’s fairy tale “The Pantry of the Sun” The work of Mikhail Prishvin is characterized by a great love for nature. In his works he often depicted the relationship between man and nature, human behavior in the natural world. In the world of literature, this writer is famous precisely as a singer of the joyful life of nature. The fairy tale “The Pantry of the Sun” is no exception. In it he also […]...
36. Essay plan 1. Introduction 2. The image of the cherry orchard in the work: A) What does the cherry orchard symbolize? B) Three generations in the play 3. Problems of the play A) Internal and external conflict 4. My attitude to the work For more than a century, the play “The Cherry Orchard” has been successfully performed on the stages of many theaters, and not only Russian ones. Directors are looking for everything in […]...
37. Ranevskaya Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna is the main character of A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”, landowner and mistress of the estate with a cherry orchard. Several years ago, her husband died, and then her son Grisha died tragically. After this, she hastily left for Paris, leaving her estate, servants and adopted daughter Varvara. There she bought a dacha in Monton, which later [...]
38. Many of the events that worried the poet Sergei Yesenin have long gone into the past, but each new generation discovers something near and dear in his work. It is quite simple to explain this phenomenon: Yesenin’s poetry was born of love for man and nature. M. Gorky wrote: “... Sergei Yesenin is not so much a person as an organ created by nature exclusively for poetry, for expression […]...
39. The plays of A. N. Ostrovsky “The Thunderstorm” and A. P. Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard” are different in terms of issues, mood, and content, but the artistic functions of the landscape in both plays are similar. The load that the landscape bears is reflected in the titles of the plays. In Ostrovsky and Chekhov, the landscape is not only a background, nature becomes a character, and in Chekhov [...]
40. Researchers of the work of M. Yu. Lermontov noted one of the characteristic features of his poetics: the poet contrasts the disgusting, negative phenomena of real life with the harmonious, beautiful world of nature. Evil, hostility, violence, disharmony reign in human society, and the lyrical hero of the poem “Mtsyri” becomes a victim of these merciless laws. Torn from his native land by evil will, as a child Mtsyri realizes the full horror of his situation. […]...