Representatives of the older generation in the play The Cherry Orchard. Three generations in Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard"
A.P. Chekhov called his work " The Cherry Orchard"comedy. Having read the play, we attribute it more to a tragedy than a comedy. It seems to us tragic images Gaev and Ranevskaya, their fates are tragic. We sympathize and empathize with them. At first we cannot understand why Anton Pavlovich classified his play as a comedy. But rereading the work, understanding it, we still find the behavior of such characters as Gaev, Ranevskaya, Epikhodov somewhat comical. We already believe that they themselves are to blame for their troubles, and perhaps we condemn them for this. What genre does A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" belong to - comedy or tragedy? In the play "The Cherry Orchard" we do not see a clear conflict, everything seems to flow as usual. The characters in the play behave calmly, there are no open quarrels or clashes between them. And yet we feel the existence of a conflict, but not open, but internal, hidden in the quiet, at first glance, peaceful atmosphere of the play. We see them behind the ordinary conversations of the heroes of the work, behind their calm attitude towards each other. internal misunderstanding of others. We often hear lines from characters that are out of place; We often see their detached glances, as if they do not hear those around them. But the main conflict of the play “The Cherry Orchard” lies in the misunderstanding of generation by generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. These three generations dream of their time, but they only talk and can do nothing to change their life, to the past generation includes Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs; to the present - Lopakhin, and representatives of the future generation are Petya Trofimov and Dnya. Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, a representative of the old nobility, constantly talks about her best young years spent in the old house, in the beautiful and luxurious cherry orchard. She lives only with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not even want to think about the future. And we find her infantilism funny. And the entire old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about "beautiful" old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course, and give in without fighting for their ideas. And therefore Chekhov condemns them for this. Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present. He lives for today. We can't help but notice that his ideas are smart and practical. He has lively conversations about how to change life for the better, and seems to know what to do. But all these are just words. In fact, Lopakhin is not the ideal hero of the play. We feel his lack of self-confidence. And at the end of the Work, he seems to give up, and he exclaims: “If only our awkward, unhappy life would change!” It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author’s hope for the future. But can a person like Petya Trofimov, an “eternal student” and a “shabby gentleman,” change this life? After all, only smart, energetic, self-confident people, active people, can come up with new ideas, enter the future and lead others. And Petya, like other characters in the play, talks more than he acts; He generally behaves somehow ridiculously. And Anya is still too young, she does not yet know life to change it. So, the main tragedy of the play lies not only in the sale of the garden and estate in which people spent their youth, with which their best memories are associated, but also in the inability of the same most people to change anything to improve their situation. We, of course, sympathize with Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, but we cannot help but notice her infantile, sometimes ridiculous behavior. We constantly feel the absurdity of the events taking place in the play. Ranevskaya and Kaev look ridiculous with their attachments to old objects, Epikhodov is ridiculous, and Charlotte herself is the personification of uselessness in this life. The main conflict of the work is the conflict of times, the misunderstanding of one generation by another. There is no connection between times in the play; the gap between them is heard in the sound of a broken string. And yet the author expresses his hopes for the future. No wonder the sound of an ax symbolizes the transition from the past to the present. And when the new generation plants new garden, the future will come.A. P. Chekhov wrote the play "The Cherry Orchard" before the 1905 revolution. Therefore, the garden itself is the personification of Russia at that time. In this work, Anton Pavlovich reflected the problems of the passing nobility, the bourgeoisie and the revolutionary future. At the same time, Chekhov depicted in a new way main conflict works. The conflict is not shown openly in the work, but we feel internal conflict, occurring between the characters of the play. Tragedy and comedy run inextricably through the entire work. We simultaneously sympathize with the characters and condemn them for their inactivity.
Tasks and tests on the topic "Three generations in A. P. Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard"
- Morphological norm - Important Topics to repeat the Unified State Exam in Russian
Lessons: 1 Tasks: 8
- Three declensions of nouns. Algorithm for determining declination - Noun as part of speech grade 4
At the center of Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard” is the question of saving the cherry orchard, the estate of the landowner Ranevskaya. It is important that the garden represents all of Russia. Thus, the playwright poses in his work the question of whether it is possible to save “old” Russia - a noble country, with its centuries-old way of life, culture, philosophy, and worldview.
We can say that throughout the entire comedy the role of savior is “tried on” to many heroes. We look especially closely at young characters, because who, if not the youth, should we rely on for the salvation of Russia?
First of all, Petya and his “follower” Anya, Ranevskaya’s youngest daughter, attract attention. These heroes are young, full of strength and energy, but they are passionate about completely different ideas - to transform the whole world, to create a wonderful future for all humanity. What is the old cherry orchard to them! For Anya, he is a symbol of everything old and inert; she does not feel any warm feelings towards her mother’s estate. The girl believes that the Russian nobility is to blame for common people and must atone for his guilt. This is exactly what Anya wants to devote her life to together with Petya Trofimov.
Trofimov scolds everything that slows down the development of Russia - “dirt, vulgarity, Asianism”, criticizes the Russian intelligentsia, which does not look for anything and does not work. But the hero does not notice that he himself is bright representative such an intelligentsia: he speaks beautifully without doing anything. A characteristic phrase for Petya: “I will reach or show others the way to reach...” to the “highest truth.” He also doesn’t care about the cherry orchard. Trofimov’s plans are much larger - to make all humanity happy!..
But, I think, these heroes will remain at the stage of words and will not get down to business. Petya spends too much energy on abstract plans, but he is not able to do anything concrete. Let us remember that Trofimov cannot even complete the course or receive a diploma. This is a sure sign that all his affairs will also “hang in the air” and end in “zilch.”
Maybe Anya will be stronger than her “ideological inspiration” and will be able to really participate in the transformation of Russia? The character of this girl allows me to think so, but... It seems to me that Anya is in love with Trofimov, in her eyes he is romantic hero uttering beautiful words, which the girl listens to with delight. So now, I think, the ideas of transformation and salvation are her true, real interest. Perhaps in the future, having matured and become stronger, she will be able to contribute to a good cause, but not now.
The most likely candidate for the role of the savior of the cherry orchard in the play is, in my opinion, Lopakhin. From the very beginning, he appears before us as a man who deeply sympathizes with the ruined Ranevskaya, attached to her since childhood.
This hero is a merchant, a representative of the formation that becomes the “masters of life” in new Russia. Lopakhin came from a peasant background, he is of simple origin: “My father, it’s true, was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes. With a pig's snout in a Kalash line... Only he's rich, he has a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, he's a man..."
Thanks to his enterprise and acumen, Lopakhin was able to “make” himself a decent fortune. His rational brain is aimed primarily at obtaining benefits. Lopakhin does not understand any “sentiments, tenderness”, sublime feelings due to his make-up and level of education. He advises Ranevskaya to cut down the trees and rent out the garden to summer residents, dividing it into plots.
The merchant is, of course, right; this is exactly what should have been done in the current situation with economic point vision. But... in this case, the old cherry orchard, that is, the old Russia, will fade into oblivion and sink into oblivion. This is what happens in the finale. And Lopakhin even rejoices at the departure of old Russia.
Indeed, what good did he see under serfdom? His father and grandfather were slaves there, and the same fate awaited him. And in the new country, Lopakhin rose to prominence, became a respected man, and even gained power over his former masters. Therefore, this hero will not save the old Russia. But will he save the new one? I think yes. From history we know that before the events of 1917, Russia was one of the world leaders in economic and cultural development. The country was gradually rebuilt, preserving old traditions, but, of course, introducing new trends into it. And only October Revolution 1917 radically changed everything.
Thus, there are several young heroes in the play, but among them there is no character capable of saving the old, former Russia. But there is a hero who is the future. In my opinion, this is businessman Lopakhin.
In Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard, Anya and Petya are not the main characters. They are not directly connected with the garden, like other characters; for them it does not play such a role. significant role, causing them to fall out of the picture in some way. common system characters. However, in the work of a playwright of Chekhov's stature there is no room for accidents; therefore, it is no coincidence that Petya and Anya are isolated. Let's take a closer look at these two heroes.
Among critics, there is a widespread interpretation of the images of Anya and Petya depicted in the play “The Cherry Orchard” as a symbol younger generation Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century; generation, which is replacing the long-outdated “Ranevskys” and “Gayevs”, as well as the “Lopakhins”, creatures of a turning point. In Soviet criticism, this statement was considered undeniable, since the play itself was usually viewed in a strictly defined manner - based on the year of writing (1903), critics associated its creation with social changes and the brewing revolution of 1905. Accordingly, the understanding of the cherry orchard as a symbol of the “old” was affirmed. pre-revolutionary Russia, Ranevskaya and Gaev as images of the “dying” noble class, Lopakhin - the emerging bourgeoisie, Trofimov - the various intelligentsia. From this point of view, the play was seen as a work about the search for a “savior” for Russia, in which inevitable changes are brewing. Lopakhin, as the bourgeois master of the country, should be replaced by the commoner Petya, full of transformative ideas and aimed at a bright future; the bourgeoisie must be replaced by the intelligentsia, which, in turn, will carry out a social revolution. Anya here symbolizes the “repentant” nobility, which takes an active part in these transformations.
Such a “class approach,” inherited from ancient times, reveals its inconsistency in the fact that many characters do not fit into this scheme: Varya, Charlotte, Epikhodov. We do not find any “class” subtext in their images. In addition, Chekhov was never known as a propagandist, and most likely would not have written such a clearly decipherable play. We should not forget that the author himself defined the genre of “The Cherry Orchard” as a comedy and even a farce - not the most successful form for demonstrating high ideals...
Based on all of the above, it is impossible to consider Anya and Petya in the play “The Cherry Orchard” solely as an image of the younger generation. Such an interpretation would be too superficial. Who are they for the author? What role do they play in his plan?
It can be assumed that the author deliberately brought out two characters not directly related to the main conflict as “outside observers.” They have no vested interest in the auction and the garden, and there is no clear symbolism associated with it. For Anya and Petya Trofimov, the cherry orchard is not a painful attachment. It is the lack of attachment that helps them survive in general atmosphere devastation, emptiness and meaninglessness, so subtly conveyed in the play.
The general characterization of Anya and Petya in The Cherry Orchard inevitably includes a love line between the two heroes. The author outlined it implicitly, half-hintly, and it is difficult to say for what purposes he needed this move. Perhaps this is a way to show the collision of two qualitatively different characters in the same situation. We see young, naive, enthusiastic Anya, who has not yet seen life and at the same time full of strength and readiness for any transformation. And we see Petya, full of bold, revolutionary ideas, an inspired speaker, a sincere and enthusiastic person, moreover, absolutely inactive, complete internal contradictions, therefore absurd and sometimes funny. It can be said that love line brings two extremes together: Anya - force without a vector, and Petya - a vector without force. Anya's energy and determination are useless without a guide; Petya's passion and ideological spirit inner strength dead.
In conclusion, it can be noted that the images of these two heroes in the play today, unfortunately, are still viewed in a traditional “Soviet” way. There is reason to believe that a fundamentally different approach to the system of characters and Chekhov’s play as a whole will allow us to see many more shades of meaning and will reveal a lot interesting moments. In the meantime, the images of Anya and Petya are waiting for their unbiased critic.
Work test
The younger generation of “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov
Grade 10
The younger generation includes Petya Trofimov and Anya. Let’s focus on Petya, since he bears the main semantic load of the word “young” (here – “beginning to live”, “promising”). Petya Trofimov is 26 years old; six years ago he was the teacher of the son of the owner of the Ranevskaya estate. The boy drowned, his mother, in order to forget the grief, leaves for Paris. Petya settles somewhere nearby. Ranevskaya arrives, having spent all her money abroad, and Petya comes to the house only to bow and leave immediately. It is difficult for him to understand that his behavior is tactless. Others understand this (Anya, Varya). With his appearance, he reminds the woman of her loss. Brings her to tears. He is actually caring for Anya on the estate. That's why it's here. Ranevskaya considers him a good man. Lopakhin sincerely loves him. Varya is strict with him. Anya admires him and is almost in love. Everyone around him considers Petya a smart, honest, proud person. But the characterization of Petya by other heroes is very laconic. Limits himself to the words brother, funny man. We can't make up full portrait hero. Petya, in his words, free man. Fits well into the image of a revolutionary. But where does the strength come from this sickly man, in glasses, in a student uniform, one woman in the carriage called him a shabby gentleman, in his eyes they call him “a klutz”, “ eternal student" He enjoys authority. What kind of authority can he use with his appearance? Let us remember Dunyasha’s words: “On the third day Pyotr Sergeich arrived. They sleep in the bathhouse and live there.” Appearance is not the main thing here. Petya pronounces monologues about the Russian intelligentsia, about workers, about serf owners, about the rich. At the same time he warns that he is afraid serious conversations. Let's look behind Petya's words. Petya sees only dirt around him. In front of you are white-handed women who live at the expense of others. Sometimes he switches from denunciation to self-flagellation. He may be right, because he himself has not done anything for 5 months. But he tells others that they need to work. And this is with the hardworking Vara and the energetic, businesslike Lopakhin. Petya believes that “humanity is moving towards the highest truth, towards the highest happiness that is possible on earth.” The monologue “humanity is coming” is pronounced at the request of the bored Ranevskaya and after Lopakhin’s ironic remark to the words about Petya’s intelligence. Petya’s apt description of Lopakhin (about the “beast of prey”) begins and ends with laughter. Petya's life was difficult, he was expelled from the university 2 times. Trofimov does not study because he cannot study and support himself at the same time. When Petya is asked why he didn’t complete the course? Petya is silent in response. Trofimov has fallen behind the “new”; he lives in the provinces, does nothing, reads nothing. He sees only dirt around him. He speaks beautifully and energetically calls to go forward, but he does not shine with wealth, beauty, or tact. Every other character is more humane than him. His honesty is worthless. He hasn't suffered anything in his life. In the play, Petya not only criticizes the existing order, his main role is a call for a change in life. Petya invites you to follow him because he sees himself in the “front row”. He himself has no idea where or why to go. The goal for him is unclear. He just has a presentiment. He does not know life and is afraid of it, what could be the goal? He hides from fear of life behind in beautiful words and even closes his eyes from “fear.” At the end of the play, Petya and Anya are going to Moscow to plant a new garden there. Begin new life. And what kind of luggage will he travel with, if he can’t even leave the house, he’s looking for galoshes. He was sucked into the life of people like Ranevskaya and Gaev, he is not able to go beyond words. According to Chekhov, the Trofimovs’ task in life and image in the play is to give an impetus to Anya’s movement. Just like Anya. Anya is the bearer of new future revolutionary ideas. Young, with character, without the burden of the past on her feet, she evokes sympathy. It is people like her who move forward. Anya talks about life.
On the topic: methodological developments, presentations and notes
Symbolism of names in A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”
In the 18th century theatergoer Even before the start of the performance, he knew which heroes he would see on stage. The playwright was instructed to give the characters “speaking” surnames. Reading on the list characters...
Presentation "Symbolism of names in A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard"
In the 18th century, theatergoers knew before the start of the performance which characters they would see on stage. The playwright was instructed to give the characters “speaking” surnames. Having read in the list of characters “S...
Dispute between generations
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” is unusual and amazing. Unlike other works of the playwright, it places not a person, but a lyrical image 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. Cherry Orchard plays a fundamental role. It becomes a meeting place for the past, present and future of a country that is on the verge of tremendous change.
This drama is a completely new phenomenon in Russian art. It doesn't have any spicy social conflicts, none of the main characters enter into an open argument and yet the conflict exists. What is it connected with? In my opinion, this is a dispute between generations who do not hear or do not want to hear each other. The past appears before us in the form of Ranevskaya and Gaev. These are inveterate nobles who are unable to change their habits even to save the estate that belonged to their parents and ancestors. Ranevskaya has long squandered her fortune and continues to waste money. Gaev hopes to receive an inheritance from a rich aunt living in Yaroslavl.
Will such people be able to keep their property - the family estate and the luxurious cherry orchard? Judging by this characteristic, no. One of the most prudent characters in the play is the representative of the current generation Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin. This is the son and grandson of serfs, who suddenly became rich and became a wealthy merchant. This hero achieved everything himself, with his work and perseverance, and therefore deserves respect. Unfortunately, it cannot be attributed to happy people, since he himself is not happy about the opportunity to buy out Ranevskaya’s beloved cherry orchard. For this reason, at the very beginning of the play, he recommends that she divide it into plots and rent it out to summer residents, but the frivolous bourgeoisie do not want to hear about this.
The third generation, the so-called “future” of the country, is represented by the seventeen-year-old daughter Ranevskaya and former teacher her son. Anya and Petya are fighters for a “new life”, and therefore they are little concerned about the fate of the cherry orchard. They believe that they can plant a new garden better than the previous one. Trofimov is a talented student, but, alas, he talks more than he does, and therefore the future with such young people frightens the older generation. Anya appears to us as the brightest and most unclouded character. She adopted the best traits from the nobility and continued to confidently move with the times towards change. The confidence in a positive outcome never left her. It is through her that the author expresses his hopes for a bright future.
