The climax of the play is the cherry orchard. "The Cherry Orchard": analysis of Chekhov's work, images of heroes

In his work The Cherry Orchard, the author describes Russia as a whole. He showed her past, painted a dying present and looked into the distant future. Chekhov expressed his own attitude to the events taking place in the country. He predicted the impending changes that awaited the country, although he himself was no longer destined to see them. This is the author's last play, written shortly before his death and taking pride of place in the classics of Russian literature. Below is a brief literary analysis of the work of the outstanding playwright.

Brief analysis

Year of writing - 1903

History of creation - The personal example of the writer's father, who was forced to sell his family estate, suggested to the writer the plot of the play.

Composition— The composition of the play consists of 4 acts.

Genre- According to the author himself, he wrote a comedy. From the point of view of modernity, the genre of "The Cherry Orchard" is more related to the genre of tragedy.

Direction— Realism.

History of creation

It is known from Chekhov's letter to his wife that the author began work on his new play in 1901. The impetus for the creation of this work was the personal family tragedy of the writer. Life circumstances were such that Anton Pavlovich's father had to sell his family estate in order to get out of debt.

The writer was close and understandable those feelings that he endowed the heroes of the play. And this happened not only in his family. Everywhere, throughout great Russia, the nobility as a class was degenerating. Prosperous strong farms were ruined, a huge number of the once richest estates went under the hammer. Thus began a new milestone in the history of the country.

All this destructive process could not leave aside the genius of the Russian writer, and from the author's pen came his last play, which became the pinnacle of the playwright's work. At the time of the creation of this masterpiece of Russian classics, the writer was already seriously ill, the work did not move as fast as he wanted, and was completed only in 1903.

Subject

The main theme of the play- sale of the Ranevskaya estate. And it is on this example that the writer describes the situation in Russia.

All the action in the play takes place around the cherry orchard, the author puts a very deep meaning into this concept. Chekhov personifies the image of the cherry orchard with Russia. During the time of the nobility, virtually all estates were surrounded by gardens, this was their distinguishing feature. The situation in the country is also compared with them: in the past, everything was fine, there was a riot of gardens and greenery. The cherry orchard blooms, filling everything around with its fragrance. And the country rose and flourished. But gardens in bloom last no more than a week, the time comes, and the color flies around. So in Russia everything starts to crumble.

There comes a time when another generation appears. It is ready to ruthlessly cut down these gardens. The degeneration of a whole class begins, the nobility dies. Estates are sold by auction, trees are cut down. The next generation is still at a crossroads, and what it will choose is unknown. With the sale of family nests, the memory of the past is also destroyed, the connection between generations is broken. The present is full of uncertainty, and the future is frightening. Changes are coming, but what they bring is hard to understand. The connection between generations is being destroyed, the monuments that preserve the history of the family are crumbling, and without the past you cannot build the future.

The system of images in Chekhov's play is divided into three categories, on the example of which the life of the country is described. Her past is symbolized by Ranevskaya, her brother Gaev, the old servant Firs. This is the generation that lives without thinking about tomorrow. They came to everything ready, without putting any effort into it and without making any attempts to improve or change anything. It turned out a time of stagnation, which inevitably led them to ruin and impoverishment. Impoverishment, not only material, but also spiritual, when the history of the family no longer has any value for them.

The hero of this country is Lopakhin. This is a stratum of the population that has become a people from the very bottom of human society, who have become rich by their own labor. But this generation is also poor spiritually. Their goal of life is to preserve and increase their wealth, the accumulation of material values.

The future of Russia is personified by representatives of the younger generation. Ranevskaya's daughter Anya and Petya Trofimov dream of a future that they see bright and happy. These heroes are at a crossroads, they are not ready to change something themselves. There is a possibility that they will go by trial and error. They have a whole life ahead of them, and maybe they will be able to build a happy future.

Composition

The play is divided into four acts. Exposition - the inhabitants of the estate are waiting for the arrival of their mistress from abroad. Everyone is saying something, completely ignoring each other, not listening to the interlocutor. Thus, Chekhov showed the many faces of a divided Russia.

In the first act, there is a plot - the mistress of the estate, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, finally appears and it becomes known to others that the estate is on the verge of ruin. Nothing can be done anymore. Lopakhin, a former serf, and now a wealthy landowner, offers to somehow save the estate. The essence of his proposal is to cut down the cherry orchard, and lease the vacant plots.

In the second act, the development of the plot continues. The fate of the estate is still being discussed. Ranevskaya does not take any decisive action, she is nostalgic for the irretrievably passing past.

The climax occurs in the third act. Lyubov Andreevna arranges a farewell ball in the estate, which is acquired at the auction by the former serf of the Ranevskys, the current merchant from the Lopakhin family, Yermolai.

In the fourth act of the play, the story comes to a denouement. Lyubov Andreevna again leaves her native country. Her plans are short-sighted and stupid. She will squander her last savings, and she has nothing more to hope for. The former mistress of the estate is so irresponsible and frivolous that she forgets the old and devoted servant Firs in the house. Nobody needs and forgotten by all the servant remains in a boarded up house, where he dies. A farewell chord for the passing past is the lone thud of an ax on the cut down trees of the cherry orchard.

Genre

It is difficult to determine the genre of this work. The author himself admitted that he began to write a comedy, and it turned into a farce. When the play was released on the theater stage, it was given the definition of "drama". From the point of view of modernity, it can easily be classified as a tragedy genre. There is still no clear answer to this question. Chekhov thought about the fate of Russia, thought about what awaits her. The philosophical orientation of this work makes it possible for everyone to define it from their own point of view. The main thing is that the play will not leave anyone indifferent. She makes everyone think about themselves, and about the meaning of life, and about the fate of their homeland.

Chekhov as an artist can no longer be compared
with former Russian writers - with Turgenev,
Dostoevsky or with me. Chekhov has his own
own form, like the Impressionists.
You look as if a person without any
parsing smears with paints that come across
under his arm, and nothing
between themselves, these strokes do not have.
But if you go some distance, you'll see
and in general, a solid impression is obtained.
L. Tolstoy

Oh, I wish it all passed, I wish
our awkward, unhappy life has changed.
Lopakhin

The analysis of Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" contains the following sections:

New generation, young Russia in a play: The future of Russia is represented by the images of Anya and Petya Trofimov. Chekhov's "new people" - Anya and Petya Trofimov - are also polemical in relation to the tradition of Russian literature, like Chekhov's images of "little" people: the author refuses to recognize as unconditionally positive, to idealize "new" people only because they are "new", for that they act as debunkers of the old world.

Analysis of the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard"

The play "The Cherry Orchard" (1903) is the last work of A.P. Chekhov, completing his creative biography.

The action of the play, as the author reports with the very first remark, takes place on the estate of the landowner Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, on an estate with a cherry orchard, surrounded by poplars, with a long alley that "goes straight, straight, like an outstretched belt" and "glistens on moonlit nights."

Ranevskaya and her brother Leonid Andreevich Gaev are the owners of the estate. But with their frivolity, their complete misunderstanding of real life, they brought it to a miserable state: it will be sold at auction. The rich peasant son, the merchant Lopakhin, a family friend, warns the owners about the impending catastrophe, offers them his projects of salvation, urges them to think about the impending disaster. But Ranevskaya and Gaev live in illusory representations. Gaev rushes about with fantastic projects. Both of them shed many tears over the loss of their cherry orchard, without which they think they cannot live. But things go on as usual, auctions take place, and Lopakhin buys the estate himself. When the trouble happened, it turns out that there seems to be no special drama for Ranevskaya and Gaev. Lyubov Andreevna returns to Paris, to her ridiculous "love", to which she would have returned anyway, despite all her words that she cannot live without a homeland. Leonid Andreevich also comes to terms with what happened. The “terrible drama” does not turn out to be so difficult for its heroes for the simple reason that they cannot have anything serious at all, nothing dramatic. Such is the comedic, satirical basis of the play. The way in which Chekhov emphasized the illusiveness, the frivolity of the Gaev-Ranevsky world is interesting. He surrounds these central characters of the comedy with characters that reflect the comic worthlessness of the main figures. The figures of Charlotte, the clerk Epikhodov, the lackey Yasha, the maid Dunyasha are caricatures / of "gentlemen".

In the lonely, absurd, unnecessary fate of Charlotte Ivanovna's hanger-on, there is a resemblance to the absurd, unnecessary fate of Ranevskaya. Both of them treat themselves as something incomprehensible, unnecessary, strange, and both life seems foggy, unclear, some kind of ghostly. Like Charlotte, Ranevskaya also "everything seems to be young," and Ranevskaya lives like a host during her lifetime, not understanding anything about her.

The buffoon figure of Epikhodov is remarkable. With his "twenty-two misfortunes" he is also a caricature - both of Gaev, and of the landowner Simeonov-Pishchik, and even of Petya Trofimov. Epikhodov - "klutz", using old man Firs's favorite proverb. One of Chekhov's contemporary critics correctly pointed out that "The Cherry Orchard" is "a play of klutzes." Epikhodov concentrates this theme of the play in himself. He is the soul of all "nonsense". After all, both Gaev and Simeonov-Pishchik also have constant “twenty-two misfortunes”; like Epikhodov, nothing comes out of all their intentions, comical failures follow at every step.

Simeonov-Pishchik, who is constantly on the verge of complete bankruptcy and, out of breath, running around all his acquaintances asking for a loan, also represents "twenty-two misfortunes." Boris Borisovich is a man "living on credit", as Petya Trofimov says about Gaev and Ranevskaya; these people live at someone else's expense - at the expense of the people.

Petya Trofimov does not belong to the number of advanced, skillful, strong fighters for the future happiness. In all his appearance, one can feel the contradiction between the strength, scope of the dream and the weakness of the dreamer, which is characteristic of some Chekhov's heroes. "Eternal student", "shabby gentleman", Petya Trofimov is clean, sweet, but eccentric and not strong enough for a great struggle. It has the features of "non-warmth" that are common to almost all the characters in this play. But everything that he says to Anya is dear and close to Chekhov.

Anna is only seventeen years old. And youth for Chekhov is not only a biographical age sign. He wrote: "... That youth can be taken healthy, which does not put up with the old order and stupidly or cleverly fights against them - this is how nature wants and progress is based on this."

Chekhov does not have "villains" and "angels", he does not even distinguish between heroes into positive and negative. In his works, very often there are "good bad" characters. Such principles of typology, unusual for the former dramaturgy, lead to the appearance in the play of characters that combine contradictory, moreover, mutually exclusive features and properties.

Ranevskaya is impractical, selfish, she is petty and went in her love interest, but she is also kind, sympathetic, her sense of beauty does not fade. Lopakhin sincerely wants to help Ranevskaya, expresses genuine sympathy for her, shares her passion for the beauty of the cherry orchard. Chekhov emphasized in letters related to the production of The Cherry Orchard: “The role of Lopakhin is central ... After all, this is not a merchant in the vulgar sense of the word ... This is a gentle person ... a decent person in every sense, he must behave quite decently, intelligently , not small, without tricks. But this soft man is a predator. Petya Trofimov explains to Lopakhin his life's purpose in this way: "That's how, in terms of metabolism, a predatory beast is needed, which eats everything that comes in its way, so you are needed." And this gentle, decent, intelligent person "eats" the cherry orchard...

The Cherry Orchard in the play is both the personification of a wonderful creative life and the “judge” of the characters. Their attitude to the garden as to the highest beauty and purposefulness - this is the author's measure of the moral dignity of this or that hero.

Ranevskaya is not given to save the garden from destruction, and not because she was unable to turn the cherry orchard into a commercial, profitable one, as it was 40-50 years ago ... Her spiritual strength, energy was absorbed by love passion, drowning out her natural responsiveness on the joys and troubles of those around her, making her indifferent both to the final fate of the cherry orchard and to the fate of loved ones. Ranevskaya turned out to be below the idea of ​​the Cherry Orchard, she betrays her.

This is precisely the meaning of her confession that she cannot live without the person who left her in Paris: not a garden, not an estate, the focus of her innermost thoughts, hopes and aspirations. Does not rise to the idea of ​​the Cherry Orchard and Lopakhin. He sympathizes and worries, but he is only concerned about the fate of the owner of the garden, while the cherry orchard itself is doomed to death in the plans of the entrepreneur. It is Lopakhin who brings to its logical conclusion the action that develops in its climactic inconsistency: “Silence sets in, and you can only hear how far in the garden they knock on wood with an axe.”

I.A. Bunin blamed Chekhov for his "Cherry Orchard", since in Russia there were no orchards entirely of cherry trees, but were mixed. But Chekhov's garden is not a concrete reality, but a symbol of fleeting and at the same time eternal life. His garden is one of the most complex symbols of Russian literature. The modest radiance of cherry blossoms is a symbol of youth and beauty; Describing in one of the stories a bride in a wedding dress, Chekhov compared her to a cherry tree in blossom. Cherry tree - a symbol of beauty, kindness, humanity, confidence in the future; this symbol contains only a positive meaning and does not have any negative meanings.

Chekhov's symbols have transformed the ancient genre of comedy; it had to be staged, played and viewed in a completely different way than the comedies of Shakespeare, Moliere or Fonvizin were staged.

The Cherry Orchard in this play is least of all a decoration against which the characters philosophize, dream, and quarrel. The garden is the personification of the value and meaning of life on earth, where each new day branches off from the past, like young shoots coming from old trunks and roots.

Chekhov as an artist is no longer possible
compare with former Russians
writers - with Turgenev,
Dostoevsky or with me. Chekhov
its own form, like
impressionists. Watch how
like a man without any
parsing smears with paints, which
fall into his hands, and
no relation to each other
these smears do not have. But you will move away
some distance,
look, and in general
gives a complete impression.
L. Tolstoy

Oh, I wish it all went away
would rather change our
awkward, unhappy life.
Lopakhin

To analyze the play, you need a list of characters, and with the author's remarks-comments. We will give it here in full, which will help to enter the world of the "Cherry Orchard"; the action takes place in the estate of Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya. So, the characters of the play:

Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna, landowner. Anya, her daughter, 17 years old. Varya, her adopted daughter, 24 years old. Gaev Leonid Andreevich, brother of Ranevskaya. Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich, merchant. Trofimov Petr Sergeevich, student. Simeonov-Pishchik Boris Borisovich, landowner. Charlotte Ivanovna, governess. Epikhodov Semyon Panteleevich, clerk. Dunyasha, maid. Firs, footman, old man 87 years old. Yasha, a young footman. Passerby. Station manager. Postal official. Guests, servants.

Genre problem. The genre nature of The Cherry Orchard has always been controversial. Chekhov himself called it a comedy - "a comedy in four acts" (although a special type of comedy). K. S. Stanislavsky considered it a tragedy. M. Gorky called it "a lyrical comedy". Quite often the play is defined as "tragicomedy", "ironic tragicomedy". The question of the genre is very important for understanding the work: it determines the code for reading the play and the characters. What does it mean to see a tragicomic beginning in a play? It means “to a certain extent agree with their [heroes. - V.K.] originality, to consider them sincerely and truly suffering, to see in each of the characters a sufficiently strong character. But what kind of strong characters can the “weak-willed”, “whining”, “whining”, “lost faith” heroes have?

Chekhov wrote: "I did not come out with a drama, but a comedy, in places even a farce." The author denied the characters of The Cherry Orchard the right to drama: they seemed to him incapable of deep feelings. K. S. Stanislavsky, in his time (in 1904), staged a tragedy, with which Chekhov did not agree. In the play there are tricks of a booth, tricks (Charlotta Ivanovna), blows with a stick on the head, after pathetic monologues, farcical scenes follow, then a lyrical note appears again ... closet"), funny, inappropriate replicas and out of place answers, comic situations arising from a misunderstanding between the characters. Chekhov's play is both funny and sad and even tragic at the same time. There are many crying people in it, but these are not dramatic sobs, and not even tears, but only the mood of faces. Chekhov emphasizes that the sadness of his characters is often superficial, that their tears hide the tearfulness common to weak and nervous people. The combination of the comic and the serious has been a hallmark of Chekhov's poetics since the first years of his work.

External plot and external conflict. The external plot of The Cherry Orchard is the change of owners of the house and garden, the sale of the family estate for debts. At first glance, the play clearly indicates the opposing forces that reflect the alignment of social forces in Russia at that time: old, noble Russia (Ranevskaya and Gaev), entrepreneurs gaining strength (Lopakhin), young, future Russia (Petya and Anya). It would seem that the clash of these forces should give rise to the main conflict of the play. The characters are focused on the most important event in their lives - the sale of the cherry orchard, scheduled for August 22. However, the viewer does not become a witness of the sale of the garden itself: the seemingly climactic event remains outside the scene. The social conflict in the play is not relevant, the main thing is not the social position of the characters. Lopakhin - this "predator"-entrepreneur - is depicted not without sympathy (like most of the characters in the play), and the owners of the estate do not resist him. Moreover, the estate, as it were, turns out to be in his hands, against his will. It would seem that in the third act the fate of the cherry orchard is decided, Lopakhin bought it. Moreover, the denouement of the external plot is even optimistic: “Gaev (cheerfully). In fact, everything is fine now. Before the sale of the cherry orchard, we all worried, suffered, and then, when the issue was finally resolved, irrevocably, everyone calmed down, even cheered up ... I'm a bank employee, now I'm a financier ... yellow in the middle, and you, Lyuba, like - no way, you look better, that's for sure." But the play does not end, the author writes the fourth act, in which nothing new seems to be happening. But the motif of the garden resounds here. At the beginning of the play, the garden, which is in danger, attracts the whole family, gathered after a five-year separation. But no one is allowed to save him, he is no more, and in the fourth act everyone leaves again. The death of the garden led to the breakup of the family, scattered all the former inhabitants of the estate around the cities and villages. Silence sets in - the play ends, the motif of the garden falls silent. This is the external plot of the play.

Lesson 4.5. “We would rather change somehow our awkward, unhappy life.” Analysis of the play "The Cherry Orchard". Generalization

Double lesson progress

I. The comedy The Cherry Orchard, which concludes the trilogy, can be seen as the writer's testament, his last word.

1. Student's message. The history of the creation of the play, its perception by contemporaries (K. Stanislavsky, V. Nemirovich-Danchenko, M. Gorky, V. Meyerhold).

2. Reading of the I action.

Homework.

Homework results.

In assessing the plot, it is important to pay attention to the absence of a plot characteristic of plays; the mood of the characters, their loneliness, disunity determine the development of the plot. They propose a lot of projects to save the cherry orchard, but are decidedly unable to act.

The motifs of time, memories, unresolved fate, the problem of happiness are also leading in The Cherry Orchard, as in previous plays, but now they play a decisive role, completely subjugating the characters. The motives of “purchase - sale”, “departure - stay” in the house open and complete the action of the play. Let us draw the students' attention to the fact that the motive of death here sounds more insistent.

The arrangement of heroes becomes more complicated. In act I, we have new, but easily recognizable heroes. They have aged a lot, gained the ability to take a sober look at the world, but they do not want to part with their illusions.

Ranevskaya knows that the house needs to be sold, but she hopes for Lopakhin’s help, she asks Petya: “Save me, Petya!” Gaev perfectly understands the whole hopelessness of the situation, but diligently fences himself off from the world of reality, from thoughts about death with the absurd phrase “Whom?” He is absolutely helpless. Epikhodov becomes a parody of these heroes, who cannot decide whether to live or shoot himself. He adapted to the world of the absurd (this explains his nickname: “22 misfortunes”). He also turns the tragedy of Voinitsky (“Uncle Vanya”) into a farce and brings to its logical conclusion the storyline associated with the idea of ​​suicide. The “young generation” in the play looks no less helpless: Anya is naive, full of illusions (a sure sign of the failure of the hero in Chekhov's world). The image of Petya clearly illustrates the idea of ​​the degradation of the idealist hero (in previous plays, these are Astrov and Vershinin). He is an “eternal student”, a “shabby gentleman”, is not busy with anything, he says - and that is inopportune. Petya does not accept the real world at all, the truth does not exist for him, which is why his monologues are so unconvincing. He is "above love". Here the obvious irony of the author sounds, emphasized on the stage (in Act III, in the ball scene, he falls down the stairs and everyone laughs at him). Lyubov Andreevna calls him “Chistyulka”. The most sensible, at first glance, looks Ermolai Lopakhin. A man of business, he gets up at five o'clock in the morning, cannot live without work. His grandfather was a serf at Ranevskaya, and Yermolai is now rich. It is he who breaks the illusions of Ranevskaya and Gaev. But he also buys a house, which is the focus of illusions; he cannot arrange his own happiness; Lopakhin lives in the power of memories, the past.

3. Thus, the main character in the play becomes the house - the “cherry garden”.

Let's think about the question why in relation to the comedy "The Cherry Orchard" it is more appropriate to speak of the chronotope of the house, while in relation to the first two plays of the trilogy it is more correct to speak of the image of the house?

Let's remember what a chronotope is.

Chronotope - spatio-temporal organization of the image.

Work with stage directions of the play. Let's see how the image of time and space is created in the play. The action “cherry orchard” is a house.

I. “The room, which is still called the nursery ... Dawn, the sun will soon rise. It's already May, cherry trees are blooming, but it's cold in the garden, it's a matinee. The windows in the room are closed.”

II. "Field. An old, crooked, long-abandoned chapel .., large stones, once, apparently, tombstones ... To the side, towering, poplar trees grow dark: a cherry orchard begins there. In the distance there is a row of telegraph poles, and far, far away on the horizon, a large city is indistinctly marked, which is visible only in very good, clear weather. The sun will set soon."

III. “The living room…a Jewish orchestra is playing in the hallway…Evening. Everyone is dancing". At the end of the action: “There is no one in the hall and living room except Lyubov Andreevna, who is sitting and ... crying bitterly. The music plays softly."

IV. “The scenery of the first act. There are no curtains on the windows, no paintings, there is a little furniture left, which is folded into one corner, as if for sale. It feels empty... The door to the left is open...” At the end of the action: “The stage is empty. You can hear how all the doors are locked with a key, how the carriages then drive off.

Results of observations.

In the first act, the events do not go beyond the room, which "is still called the nursery." The feeling of an enclosed space is achieved by the mention of closed windows. The author emphasizes the lack of freedom of the characters, their dependence on the past. This is reflected both in Gaev's “odes” to the centenary “cupboard”, and in Lyubov Andreevna's delight at the sight of the nursery. The topics of conversation of the characters are connected with the past. They talk about the main thing - the sale of the garden - in passing.

In the second act on the stage - a field (boundless space). The images of a long-abandoned chapel and stones that were once gravestones become symbolic. With them, the play includes the motive not only of death, but also of overcoming the heroes of the past, memories. The image of a different, real space is included in the designation on the horizon of a big city. This world is alien to the heroes, they are afraid of it (the scene with the passer-by), but the destructive impact of the city on the cherry orchard is inevitable - one cannot escape reality. Chekhov emphasizes this idea with the sound instrumentation of the scene: in the silence “suddenly a distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad.”

Act III is the climax, both in the development of the external conflict (the garden is sold) and the internal one. We again find ourselves in the house, in the living room, where an absolutely absurd action takes place: a ball. “And the musicians came inopportunely, and we started the ball inopportunely” (Ranevskaya). The tragedy of the situation is overcome by the carnivalization of reality, the tragedy is combined with a farce: Charlotte shows her endless tricks, Petya falls down the stairs, they play billiards, everyone dances. Misunderstanding, disunity of heroes reach their climax.

Work with text. Let's read Lopakhin's monologue, which concludes the third act, follow the author's remarks for changes in the psychological state of the hero.

“The new landowner, the owner of the cherry orchard” does not feel happy. “Our clumsy, unhappy life would rather change,” Lopakhin says “with tears”. Lyubov Andreevna weeps bitterly, "there is no one in the hall and the living room."

The image of an empty house dominates act IV. Order, peace in it are violated. We are again, as in act I, in the nursery (circular composition). But now everything feels empty. The former owners leave the house. The doors are locked, forgetting about Firs. The play ends with “a distant sound, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad” again. And in the silence “you can hear how far in the garden they knock on wood with an ax”.

What is the meaning of the last scene of the play?

The house is sold. Heroes no longer binds, illusions are lost.

Firs - the personification of ethics and duty - is locked in the house. Done with "ethical".

The 19th century is over. The 20th, “iron” age is coming. "Homelessness becomes the fate of the world." (Martin Heidegger).

What then do Chekhov's characters gain?

If not happiness, then freedom... This means that it is freedom in Chekhov's world that is the most important category, the meaning of human existence.

II. Generalization.

What makes it possible to combine A. Chekhov's plays "Uncle Vanya", "Three Sisters", "The Cherry Orchard" into a trilogy?

We invite the children to summarize the material of the lessons on their own.

Summary of work.

Let us define criteria for this generality.

1. In every play, the hero is in conflict with the outside world; everyone also experiences internal discord. Thus, the conflict acquires a total character - almost all persons are its carriers. Heroes are characterized by the expectation of change.

2. The problems of happiness and time become leading in the trilogy.

For all heroes:

happiness in the past

misfortune in the present

hope for happiness in the future.

3. The image of the house (“noble nest”) is central in all three plays.

The house embodies the heroes' idea of ​​happiness - it keeps the memory of the past, testifies to the troubles of the present; its preservation or loss inspires hope for the future.

Thus, the motives of “buying and selling” a house, “leaving or staying” in it become semantic and plot-organizing in plays.

4. In the plays, the hero-idealist is degrading.

In "Uncle Vanya" - this is Dr. Astrov;

in "Three Sisters" - Colonel Vershinin;

in the "Cherry Orchard" - student Trofimov.

Row work. Call them “positive programs”. What unites them?

Answer: The idea of ​​work and happiness in the future.

5. The heroes are in a situation of choosing their future fate.

Almost everyone feels the situation of the collapse of the world to a greater or lesser extent. In "Uncle Vanya" - this is, first of all, Uncle Vanya; in "Three Sisters" - sisters Olga, Masha and Irina Prozorova; in the "Cherry Orchard" - Ranevskaya.

There are also parodies of them in the plays: Telegin, Chebutykin, Epikhodov and Charlotte.

Other parallels can be traced between the heroes of the plays:

Marina - Anfisa;

Ferapont - Firs;

Telegin - Epikhodov;

Salty - Yasha;

Serebryakov - Prozorov.

There is also a superficial resemblance here:

religiosity, deafness, failed professorship, and so on.

Such a commonality of the conflict, the plot, the system of images allows us to introduce the concept of a metaplot.

A meta-plot is a plot that unites all the plot lines of individual works, building them as an artistic whole.

It is the situation of choice in which the characters find themselves that determines the metaplot of the trilogy. Heroes must:

either open up, trust the world of the absurd, abandoning the usual norms and values;

or continue to multiply illusions, dragging out an untrue existence, relying on the future.

The finale of the trilogy is open, we will not find answers to the questions posed in the plays by Chekhov, because this is not the task of art, according to the playwright. Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, we are asking ourselves questions about the meaning of being, which so worried A.P. Chekhov, and it is wonderful that everyone has the opportunity to give their own answer, to make their own choice ...