The younger generation in the play The Cherry Orchard briefly. Composition. Three generations in A. P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard"

The title of the play is symbolic. “All of Russia is our garden,” Chekhov said. This last play was written by Chekhov at the cost of enormous effort. physical strength, and simply rewriting the play was an act of the greatest difficulty. Chekhov finished “ Cherry Orchard” on the eve of the first Russian revolution, in the year of his early death (1904).

Thinking about the death of the cherry orchard, about the fate of the inhabitants of the ruined estate, he mentally imagined all of Russia at the turn of the era.

On the eve of grandiose revolutions, as if feeling the steps of a formidable reality near him, Chekhov comprehended the present from the perspective of the past and the future. The far-reaching perspective imbued the play with the air of history and imparted a special extent to its time and space. In the play “The Cherry Orchard” there is no acute conflict, everything seems to be going as usual and there are no open quarrels or clashes between the characters in the play. And yet the conflict exists, but not openly, but internally, deeply hidden in the seemingly peaceful setting of the play. The conflict lies in the misunderstanding of a generation by a generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. And each of the three generations dreams of its own time.

The play begins with Ranevskaya’s arrival at her old family estate, with a return to the cherry orchard, which stands outside the windows all in bloom, to people and things familiar from childhood. A special atmosphere of awakened poetry and humanity arises. As if in last time flashes brightly - like a memory - this living life on the verge of dying. Nature is preparing for renewal - and hopes for a new, pure life awaken in Ranevskaya’s soul.

For the merchant Lopakhin, who is going to purchase the Ranevskaya estate, the cherry orchard also means something more than just the object of a commercial transaction.

In the play, representatives of three generations pass before us: the past - Gaev, Ranevskaya and Firs, the present - Lopakhin and representatives of the future generation - Petya Trofimov and Anya, Ranevskaya’s daughter. Chekhov not only created images of people whose lives occurred at a turning point, but captured Time itself in its movement. The heroes of “The Cherry Orchard” turn out to be victims not of private circumstances and their own lack of will, but of the global laws of history - the active and energetic Lopakhin is as much a hostage of time as the passive Gaev. The play is built on a unique situation that has become a favorite for 20th-century drama - the situation of the “threshold”. Nothing like this is happening yet, but there is a feeling of an edge, an abyss into which a person must fall.

Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya - a representative of the old nobility - is an impractical and selfish woman, naive in her love interest, but she is kind and sympathetic, and her sense of beauty does not fade, which Chekhov especially emphasizes. Ranevskaya constantly recalls her best young years spent in an old house, in a beautiful and luxurious cherry orchard. She lives with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not even want to think about the future. Her immaturity seems funny. But it turns out that the entire old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about beauty old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course and give in without a fight.

Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present time. This is how Chekhov himself defined his role in the play: “The role of Lo-akhin is central. After all, this is not a merchant in the vulgar sense of the word... he is a gentle man... a decent man in every sense...” But this gentle man is a predator, he lives for today, so his ideas are smart and practical. Combination selfless love towards beauty and a merchant's spirit, peasant simplicity and a subtle artistic soul merged together in the image of Lopakhin. He has lively conversations about how to change life for the better, and seems to know what to do. But in fact, he is not the ideal hero of the play. We feel his lack of self-confidence.

The play intertwines several storylines. A dying garden and failed, even unnoticed love - two end-to-end, internally related topics plays. The line of the failed romance between Lopakhin and Varya ends before anyone else. It is built on Chekhov’s favorite technique: they talk most and most willingly about what does not exist, discuss details, argue about the little things that do not exist, without noticing or deliberately hushing up what exists and is essential. Varya is waiting for a simple and logical course of life: since Lopakhin often visits a house where there is unmarried girls, of which only she is suitable for him. Varya, therefore, must get married. Varya doesn’t even have the thought to look at the situation differently, to think whether Lopakhin loves her, is she interesting to him? All Varina’s expectations are based on idle gossip that this marriage would be successful!

It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author’s hope for the future. The romantic plan of the play is grouped around Petya Trofimov. His monologues have much in common with the thoughts of Chekhov's best heroes. On the one hand, Chekhov does nothing but put Petya in ridiculous positions, constantly compromising him, reducing his image to the extremely unheroic - “eternal student” and “shabby gentleman”, whom Lopakhin constantly stops with his ironic remarks. On the other hand, Petya Trofimov’s thoughts and dreams are close to Chekhov’s own state of mind. Petya Trofimov does not know specific historical paths to a good life, and his advice to Anya, who shares his dreams and premonitions, is naive, to say the least. “If you have the keys to the farm, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free like the wind." But a radical change has ripened in life, which Chekhov foresees, and it is not the character of Petya, the degree of maturity of his worldview, but the doom of the old that determines the inevitability.

But can a person like Petya Trofimov change this life? After all, only smart, energetic, self-confident people, active people, can put forward new ideas, enter the future and lead others. And Petya, like the other heroes of the play, talks more than he acts, he generally behaves somehow ridiculously. Anya is still too young. She will never understand her mother’s drama, and Lyubov Andreevna herself will never understand her passion for Petya’s ideas. Anya still doesn’t know enough about life to change it. But Chekhov saw the strength of youth precisely in freedom from prejudice, from the narrowness of thoughts and feelings. Anya becomes like-minded with Petya, and this strengthens the motif of the future that sounds in the play. have a wonderful life.

On the day of the sale of the estate, Ranevskaya starts something completely inappropriate from the point of view common sense ball. Why does she need him? For the living Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, who is now fiddling with a wet handkerchief in her hands, waiting for her brother to return from the auction, this ridiculous ball is important in itself - as a challenge to everyday life. She snatches a holiday from everyday life, snatches from life that moment that can stretch a thread to eternity.

The property has been sold. “I bought it!” - triumphant new owner, rattling the keys. Ermolai Lopakhin bought an estate where his grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen. He is ready to take an ax to the cherry orchard. But at the highest moment of triumph, this “intelligent merchant” suddenly feels the shame and bitterness of what has happened: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life" And it becomes clear that for yesterday’s plebeian, a man with a gentle soul and thin fingers, the purchase of a cherry orchard is, in essence, an “unnecessary victory.”

Ultimately, Lopakhin is the only one who offers a real plan to save the cherry orchard. And this plan is realistic, first of all, because Lopakhin understands: the garden cannot be preserved in its previous form, its time has passed, and now the garden can be preserved only by rearranging it in accordance with the requirements new era. But a new life means, first of all, the death of the past, and the executioner turns out to be the one who sees the beauty of the dying world most clearly.

So, the main tragedy of the work consists not only in external action plays - the sale of a garden and estate, where many of characters spent their youth, with which their best memories are associated, but also in internal contradiction - the inability of the same people to change anything to improve their situation. The absurdity of the events taking place in the play is constantly felt. Ranevskaya and Gaev look ridiculous with their attachment to old objects, Epikhodov is ridiculous, and Charlotte Ivanovna herself is the personification of uselessness in this life.

The last act, as always with Chekhov, is the moment of parting, farewell to the past. Sad for the old owners of the “cherry orchard”, troublesome for the new businessman, joyful for young souls with their reckless Blok-like readiness to abandon everything - home, childhood, loved ones, and even the poetry of the “nightingale orchard” - in order to openly, with a free soul to shout: “Hello, new life!” But if from the point of view of the social future “The Cherry Orchard” sounded like a comedy, then for its time it sounded like a tragedy. These two melodies, without merging, appeared simultaneously in the finale, giving birth to a complex tragicomic outcome of the work.

The young, cheerfully, calling to each other invitingly, run forward. Old people, like old things, huddled together, they stumble over them without noticing them. Suppressing tears, Ranevskaya and Gaev rush to each other. “Oh my dear, my tender, beautiful garden. My life, my youth, my happiness, farewell!.. Farewell!..” But the music of farewell is drowned out by “the sound of an ax on wood, sounding lonely and sad.” The shutters and doors are closed. In the empty house, the sick Firs remains unnoticed in the bustle: “But they forgot the man...” The old man is alone in a locked house. You can hear “as if from the sky the sound of a broken string,” and in the silence the ax dully knocks on the wood.

The symbolism of “The Cherry Orchard” spoke of the approach of grandiose social cataclysms and changes in the old world.

This work reflects 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 - a conflict of three generations.

A.P. Chekhov called his work “The Cherry Orchard” a comedy. Having read the play, we attribute it more to tragedy than to comedy. It seems to us tragic images Gaev and Ranevskaya, their fates are tragic. We sympathize and empathize with them. At first we cannot understand why Anton Pavlovich classified his play as a comedy. But re-reading the work, understanding it, we still find the behavior of such characters as Gaev, Ranevskaya, Epikhodov somewhat comical. We already believe that they themselves are to blame for their troubles, and perhaps we condemn them for this. What genre does A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" belong to - comedy or tragedy? In the play "The Cherry Orchard" we do not see a clear conflict, everything seems to flow as usual. The characters in the play behave calmly, there are no open quarrels or clashes between them. And yet we feel the existence of a conflict, but not open, but internal, hidden in the quiet, at first glance, peaceful atmosphere of the play. We see them behind the ordinary conversations of the heroes of the work, behind their calm attitude towards each other. internal misunderstanding of others. We often hear lines from characters that are out of place; We often see their detached looks, as if they do not hear those around them. But the main conflict of the play “The Cherry Orchard” lies in the misunderstanding of generation by generation. It seems as if three times intersected in the play: past, present and future. These three generations dream of their time, but they only talk and can do nothing to change their life, to the past generation includes Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs; to the present - Lopakhin, and representatives of the future generation are Petya Trofimov and Dnya. Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, a representative of the old nobility, constantly talks about her best young years spent in the old house, in the beautiful and luxurious cherry orchard. She lives only with these memories of the past, she is not satisfied with the present, and she does not even want to think about the future. And we think her immaturity is funny. And the entire old generation in this play thinks the same way. None of them are trying to change anything. They talk about the “wonderful” old life, but they themselves seem to resign themselves to the present, let everything take its course, and give in without fighting for their ideas. And therefore Chekhov condemns them for this. Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, a hero of the present. He lives for today. We can't help but notice that his ideas are smart and practical. He has lively conversations about how to change life for the better, and seems to know what to do. But all these are just words. In fact, Lopakhin is not the ideal hero of the play. We feel his lack of self-confidence. And at the end of the Work, he seems to give up, and he exclaims: “If only our awkward, unhappy life would change!” It would seem that Anya and Petya Trofimov are the author’s hope for the future. But 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 put forward 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 portrayed the main conflict of the work in a new way. 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"

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 of the younger generation of 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

10th grade

TO to the younger generation include 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 good person. 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 have 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. After reading the list of 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...



Share with friends:
Related publications