The history of writing the play The Cherry Orchard briefly. "The Cherry Orchard": history of creation, genre, heroes

1

On January 31, 1901, the premiere of the play "Three Sisters" took place at the Art Theater. The play was a major success, although its full significance and beauty were realized by many viewers later. March 1 Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko telegraphed Chekhov from St. Petersburg: “They played the Three Sisters, the success is the same as in Moscow ... they played wonderfully ... The first act, hot challenges. The second and third are suppressed. Last standing ovation". At the beginning of March of the same year, M. Gorky informed him about the performance seen in St. Petersburg: “And the Three Sisters are on - amazing! Better than Uncle Vanya. Music, not game.

But the play, which was a great event in the theatrical life, still left a heavy impression on the audience. “I don’t know a work,” wrote theater critic P. Yartsev, “that would be more capable of“ infecting ”with a heavy obsessive feeling ...“ Three Sisters ”sets like a stone on the soul.”

Chekhov wanted to create a cheerful, joyful work.

In the first half of 1901, neither the idea, nor the plot, nor the characters of the future play had yet acquired any clarity in the mind of the playwright. He hasn't found a title for it yet. There was only a desire to write a cheerful play, a comedy. On March 7, 1901, the writer informed O.L. Knipper: “The next play I write will certainly be funny, very funny, at least in concept” (P., vol. 9, p. 220). On April 22, 1901, he confirmed: “In minutes, a strong desire comes over me to write a 4-act vaudeville or comedy for the Art Theater. And I will write, if nothing interferes, only I will give it to the theater not earlier than the end of 1903. (P., vol. 10, p. 15).

At one of the rehearsals that Chekhov attended on this visit to Moscow, the artists of the Art Theater persistently begged him to write a new play. “It seemed to him,” recalls K.S. Stanislavsky, - an open window, with a branch of white flowering cherries climbing from the garden into the room. Artyom had already become a lackey, and then, for no apparent reason, a manager. His master, and sometimes it seemed to him that this was the mistress, was always without money, and at critical moments she turned for help to her footman or manager, who had quite a lot of money accumulated from somewhere.

Then a company of billiard players appeared. One of them is the most ardent amateur, armless, very cheerful and cheerful, always screaming loudly... Then a bosquet room appeared, then it was again replaced by a billiard room” (ibid., p. 353).

On December 18, 1901, complaining about idleness forced by ill health, Chekhov wrote to his wife: “But I still dream of writing a funny play, where the devil would walk like a yoke” (P., vol. 10, p. 143).

In the second half of April, Stanislavsky visited Chekhov in Yalta, and when he “molested him with reminders of a new play, Chekhov said: “Here, here ...” - and at the same time he took out a small piece of paper covered in small, small handwriting "(Stanislavsky, vol. 5, p. 357). On July 6, 1902, Chekhov asked his sister M.P. Chekhov to send him this leaflet from Yalta to Moscow. He wrote: “Unlock my table, and if in the front of the drawer there is an eighth of paper (or 1/3 of a sheet of note paper) written in small letters for a future play, then send it to me in a letter. By the way, many names are written on this sheet” (P., vol. 10, p. 241).

By the summer of 1902, the general contours of the plot became clear to the playwright, and he even had the confidence that he would finish the play by August 1.

Chekhov also found a title for it. He carefully concealed this title even from those closest to him. He feared that the title would be prematurely disclosed. For the first time the writer called him under special circumstances. In early June, O.L., who had already recovered, fell seriously ill again. Knipper. “Chekhov did not leave her bed. Once, in order to entertain the patient, to distract from thoughts about the disease, he said: "Do you want me to tell you what the play will be called?" He knew that it would cheer up, break the gloom. He leaned over to Olga Leonardovna's ear and whispered softly, so that, God forbid, no one else could hear, although there was no one else in the room except for the two of them: "The Cherry Orchard."

At the end of 1902, Chekhov announced the title of the play (under the strictest secrecy!) and to his sister M.P. Chekhova, who talks about it this way: “I have just returned from Moscow. We sat with Ant. Pavel. in his office. He is at the desk, I am near the window... I said that in Moscow they expect plays from him... Antosha listened in silence... Then, smiling, quietly, shyly said: "I am writing, I am writing...". I was interested in the title of the play. He did not want to say anything for a long time, and then, tearing off a piece of paper, he wrote something and handed it to me. I read: The Cherry Orchard.

Chekhov spent July and August near Moscow, in Lyubimovka. He was delighted with the wonderful nature of this area. He was pleased with the silence and the almost complete absence of pesky visitors, who had weighed him down so much in Yalta. He thought well. It was here that the general plan of the plot of the new dramatic work was finally formed. Chekhov was pleased with the plot and found it "magnificent" (P., vol. 11, p. 28).

The directors of the Art Theatre, whom Chekhov had acquainted in the most general terms with the plot of his new play, with its main characters, were already beginning to design its production: they were choosing possible performers; made the first considerations about the scenery. But for all that, Chekhov had not yet begun to write the text.

On October 1, he notified K.S. Alekseev (Stanislavsky): “On October 15 I will be in Moscow and I will explain to you why my play is still not ready. There is a plot, but there is still not enough gunpowder” (ibid., p. 54). On December 14, 1902, to his wife's questions about the play, he answered: “When I sit down at The Cherry Orchard, I will write to you” (ibid., p. 91). Ten days later, sharing his thoughts on a new dramatic work, he informed her: “My Cherry Orchard will be in three acts. That's what I think, but I haven't decided yet. Once I get better, I’ll start making decisions again, but now I’ve abandoned everything” (ibid., p. 101).

2

Reflecting on the play The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov began to gradually select and form the composition of its characters. To do this, he widely used both the stock of his long-standing impressions and what surrounded him, what he saw and heard every day. From the end of the 70s, while still a high school student, Chekhov observed the life of old, ruined estates and the customs of their inhabitants, making trips to the Don steppes, to his student P. Kravtsov.

In May 1888, he lived in the estate of A.V. Lintvareva in the Kharkov province, from where he wrote that there “nature and life are built according to the very pattern that is now so outdated and rejected in the editorial offices: not to mention the nightingales who sing day and night, the barking of dogs that is heard from afar, oh old neglected gardens, about tightly packed, very poetic and sad estates in which the souls of beautiful women live, not to mention the old lackeys-feudal servants, breathing on their last breath, about girls thirsting for the most stereotyped love ... ”(P., vol. 2 , p. 277). In this letter, in fact, the plot of The Cherry Orchard has already been told, not only in its main event (poetic estates packed tightly), individual characters (servile lackeys), but even in private episodes (compare, for example, “the souls of beautiful women” with Ranevskaya’s remark: “Look, the late mother is walking through the garden ... in a white dress!”) (S., vol. 13, p. 210).

In 1892, Chekhov bought his own Melikhovo estate in the Serpukhov district of the Moscow province and lived in it until 1899. Zemstvo and medical activities gave him the opportunity to visit many landowners of the district and get acquainted with their estates, furnishings, customs. Based on his impressions of the life of the local nobility, Chekhov created a number of prose works: “Belated Flowers” ​​(1882), “Drama on the Hunt” (1884), “In the Estate” (1894). In the story "At Friends" (1898), Chekhov gave in embryo not only the plot of the play "The Cherry Orchard", but also individual images, for example, Losev, reminiscent of Gaev.

At the end of 1900 and at the beginning of 1901 Chekhov traveled abroad. There he had ample opportunity to observe the idle life of Russian bars, who squandered their fortunes. On January 6, 1901, he wrote to O.L. Knipper: “And what insignificant women, oh, darling, how insignificant! One of them has 45 winning tickets, she lives here from nothing to do, only eats and drinks, often goes to Monte-Carlo, where she plays cowardly, and does not go to play on January 6th, because tomorrow is a holiday! How much Russian money is wasted here, especially in Monte Carlo” (P., vol. 9, p. 176). It is curious to note that initially Chekhov called the old landowner, that is, Ranevskaya, "the landowner from Monte Carlo."

For the image of Gaev, as well as for Ranevskaya, Chekhov had no shortage of real prototypes. He assured Stanislavsky: “After all, this is reality! It was. I didn’t make it up ...” And he told about some old gentleman who had been in bed all day because his lackey had left the village for the city, without taking out the master's trousers. And the trousers hung in the closet nearby.

The basis for the image of Epikhodov, in all likelihood, was an old acquaintance of the writer A.I. Ivanenko, a big loser in life. M.P. Chekhov, the writer's brother, directly calls him "Epikhodov's prototype." According to his memoirs, "it was a kind, unhappy hokhlik who did not get along with his father in Little Russia, who emigrated to Moscow to study." Here he took an exam at the conservatory in the piano class, passed, but there was not enough instrument for him, and he had to study the flute. Ivanenko met Chekhov's family, and remained with her completely. “He was a pathetic man, loving, gentle, affectionate. He spoke unusually long and did not take offense when they did not listen to him. Chekhov called him "stupid". Some properties of Epikhodov, his nickname "twenty-two misfortunes" were borrowed by Chekhov from one juggler. In the early summer of 1902, the writer, while living in Moscow, occasionally visited the Aquarium, where he liked the dexterous juggler. “He was,” recalls Stanislavsky, “a big man in a tailcoat, fat, a little sleepy, excellent, with great comicality playing a loser among his juggling exercises. “Twenty-two misfortunes” happened to him ... I think, - ends K.S. Stanislavsky, - that it was the prototype of Epikhodov. Or one of the prototypes.

In the same year, while living in Lyubimovka, the estate of K.S. Stanislavsky, Chekhov met an employee, from whom he also took certain features for the image of Epikhodov. “Chekhov often talked with him, convinced him that one must study, one must be a literate and educated person. To become such, the prototype of Epikhodov first of all bought himself a red tie and wanted to learn French” (Stanislavsky, vol. 1, p. 267). Creating the image of Epikhodov, the writer also used his observations on the lackey Yegor, who was very awkward and unlucky. The writer began to convince him that "serving as a lackey is insulting to a person", advised him to learn accounting and go somewhere as a clerk. Yegor did just that. Anton Pavlovich "... was very pleased." It is possible that Chekhov noticed some features of Epikhodov in the guise of I.G. Witte, a zemstvo surgeon, familiar to Chekhov from his medical activities in the Serpukhov district. In his notebook, Chekhov noted: "Witte - Epikhodov" (S., vol. 17, p. 148).

The real prototype of the image of Charlotte was an Englishwoman whom Chekhov met while living in Lyubimovka (Stanislavsky, vol. 1, pp. 226-267). But Chekhov also took advantage of his observations on other women of this kind known to him. He drew a type. And that's why he was so excited when Stanislavsky, who recognized Charlotte as Lyubimov's Englishwoman, decided to make up the artist who played the role of Charlotte to look like this Englishwoman. Chekhov saw in this the danger of naturalism, copying an individual personality, and assured the director that Charlotte "must certainly be a German, and certainly thin and big, like the actress Muratova, completely unlike the Englishwoman with whom Charlotte was written off" (ibid., p. 267).

Chekhov had no shortage of materials for the image of Trofimov. He himself was a student at Moscow University and knew the student environment very well. Chekhov's apartment was often visited by students - comrades and friends of the writer's sister and brothers. In the summer of 1888, while living at the Lintvarev estate, Chekhov met daily with P.M. Lintvarev, expelled from the 4th year of the university. Chekhov treated the students with great sympathy. In 1899, while in Taganrog, he said: “There is a lot of talk that students are now worse than they are in our time. I don't agree with this. In my opinion, they are much better ... they work much more and drink less. At the beginning of the same year, Chekhov, in a letter to I.I. Orlov wrote: “Students and female students are honest, good people, this is our hope, this is the future of Russia” (P., vol. 8, p. 101). One of the real prototypes of Trofimov was the son of a maid on the estate of Stanislavsky's mother. Anton Pavlovich convinced him to "quit the office, prepare for the matriculation exam and enter the university!" Chekhov's advice was carried out. Some features of this young man: “angularity”, “cloudy appearance” - the writer “introduced into the image of Petya Trofimov”.

Drawing images of the play "The Cherry Orchard", Chekhov used for them some words, expressions and phrases that were in his notebooks. For example, for Trofimov - "eternal student" (S., v. 17, p. 14); for Lopakhin - "this is a figment of your imagination, covered with the darkness of the unknown" (ibid., p. 43, 156); for Pishchik, “a hungry dog ​​believes only in meat” (ibid., pp. 44, 156), “got into a pack, don’t bark, but wag your tail” (p. 157); for Firs - "Klutty!" (ibid., p. 94); for Gaev, “a man loves me” (ibid., p. 95); for Ranevskaya - “is this music playing? - I don’t hear” (p. 149).

In the notebook we also find part of the dialogue between Firs and his masters, which takes place in the second act: “Firs: before the misfortune it was so buzzing. Before what misfortune? - Before the will ”(S., vol. 17, p. 148). Chekhov's notebooks also contained other materials that were extracted by the writer and developed in the play. So, in the first book there is an entry: “the cabinet has been standing in the presence of a hundred years, which can be seen from the papers; officials seriously celebrate his anniversary” (ibid., p. 96). This entry was used for the role of Gaev. There are also fragments of Trofimov’s speeches: “we must work with only the future in mind” (ibid., p. 17), “the intelligentsia is good for nothing, because they drink a lot of tea, talk a lot, the room is full of smoke, empty bottles.” Probably, the basis of Ranevskaya's remark “tablecloths smell of soap” was the entry: “In Russian taverns it stinks of clean tablecloths” (ibid., p. 9). In Chekhov's notebooks there are mentions of an estate going under the hammer (ibid., p. 118), a villa near Menton, and others that Chekhov could use for his play. The title of the play was also extracted from this (ibid., p. 122).

Life impressions, deposited in Chekhov's mind, served as the basis and setting for The Cherry Orchard, down to individual details. But he did not copy them. He selected and transformed his observations in accordance with his own view of life, the tasks of art, and subordinated them to the ideological concept of this work.

According to Stanislavsky's memoirs, an Englishwoman familiar to Chekhov, who served as the prototype for Charlotte, was distinguished by cheerfulness and eccentricity. Charlotte retained the eccentricity of the Englishwoman, but the writer gave her, in addition, the bitterness of loneliness, dissatisfaction with a broken and unsettled fate.

Ivanenko, apparently the main prototype of Epikhodov, was a kind, good, obliging person, whose failures aroused universal sympathy. Creating the image of Epikhodov, the writer endowed him with very confused views, rudeness, arrogance and other features of a typical klutz, which has acquired a nominal value.

K.S. Stanislavsky, once characterizing Chekhov's creative process, said that “he imagines a high, high rock, on top of which Chekhov sits. Below, people, little people, are swarming; he intently, bending down, examines them. I saw Epikhodov - grab it! Caught and placed near him; then Firs, Gaev, Lopakhin, Ranevskaya, etc. And then he will arrange them, breathe life into them, and they move with him, and he only makes sure that they do not stop, do not fall asleep, the main thing is that they act.

3

The play "The Cherry Orchard", conceived by Chekhov as a comedy and already presented by him in his main characters, for a long time did not acquire the necessary, thoughtful event connection in all its parts. Without fully resolving all the plot relationships of the characters, without understanding the entire composition of the play, the playwright could not begin to write it. On January 1, 1903, he promised Stanislavsky: “I will start the play in February, at least I count on it. I will come to Moscow with a finished play” (P., vol. 11, p. 110). Chekhov was working at that time on prose works, in particular on the story "The Bride", but reflections on the play "The Cherry Orchard", on its images, plot and composition did not stop and captured the writer more and more forcefully.

Reflections on the "Cherry Orchard" and all other activities of the writer were interrupted by a painful condition. He suffered from pleurisy. He was forced to do nothing. This led to a loss of confidence in their abilities. On January 23, he notified O.L. Knipper: “Today I received a letter from Nemirovich ... asking about my play. That I will write my play is as true as two times two makes four, provided, of course, that I am in good health; but whether it will succeed, whether something will come out, I don’t know” (P., vol. 11, p. 129). Uncertainty also manifested itself in a letter to V.F. Komissarzhevskaya, who asked the writer for a play for the theater she was opening. On January 27, Chekhov answered her: “As for the play, I’ll say the following: 1) The play is conceived, it’s true, and I already have its title (“The Cherry Orchard” - but this is still a secret), and I’ll start writing it, probably no later than the end of February, if, of course, I'm healthy; 2) in this play the central role is played by old women!! - to the great regret of the author…” (ibid., p. 134).

As soon as relief from the disease came, Chekhov immediately began to work. He regained faith in his own strength. Already on January 30, he firmly promised O.L. Knipper: “I will write a play” (P., vol. 11, p. 138). It seemed to him that the play, in its main features already thought out, would not require more than a month to write. On February 5, he informed Stanislavsky: “... after February 20, I expect to sit down for a play and finish it by March 20. It's already in my head. It's called The Cherry Orchard, four acts, in the first act you can see cherry blossoms through the windows, a solid white garden. And ladies in white dresses. In a word, Vishnevsky will laugh a lot - and, of course, it is not known for what reason” (ibid., p. 142).

February 11 Chekhov promising O.L. Knipper, who will start writing the play on February 21, expressed his assumption that she would play "silly" (that is, Varya. - A.R.), and asked, "who will play the old woman - mother?" (P., vol. 11, p. 151). On February 27, he finished the story "The Bride" and on March 1 he informed his wife: "... for the play I have already laid out the paper on the table and wrote the title" (ibid., p. 168). Chekhov did not start writing the play either in March or even in May 1903. But all this time he was intensely thinking about its characters, clarifying their relationships and place in the play. His thoughts on the images of the play were reflected in his notebook, in correspondence with his closest relatives and acquaintances.

So, in the notebook there are the following entries about Lopakhin: 1) "Lopakhin's father was a serf at Terbetsky"; 2) “Lop .: I bought a small estate for myself, I wanted to arrange it more beautifully and did not come up with anything except a plank: entry to outsiders is strictly prohibited”; 3) Lop. Rishu: - in the prisoner companies would have you ”; 4) "The men began to drink heavily - Lopakhin: that's right" (S., vol. 17, p. 148, 149). This, probably the initial sketch of the image of Lopakhin, gradually changes in the process of working on the play.

On March 5, he wrote to O.L. Knipper: “In the Cherry Orchard you will be Varvara Yegorovna, or Varya, adopted, 22 years old” (P., vol. 11, p. 172). On March 6, he made a note that the role of Varya was comic. Chekhov also portrayed the role of Lopakhin as comic, which, according to his initial assumption, was assigned to Stanislavsky (ibid.).

When thinking about the images, Chekhov encountered unexpected complications and difficulties. “And the play, by the way,” he informs O.L. Knipper - I don't quite succeed. One main character has not yet been sufficiently thought out and interferes; but by Easter, I think, this face will already be clear, and I will be free from difficulties ”(P., vol. 11, p. 179). What is this face? Is it not Ranevskaya, who was originally an old woman in the full sense of the word. April 11 Chekhov asks O.L. Knipper: Will you have an actress to play the old lady in The Cherry Orchard? If not, then there won't be a play, and I won't even write it” (ibid., p. 192). And 4 days later, on April 15, again: “I don’t really want to write for your theater - mainly for the reason that you don’t have an old woman. They will impose the role of an old woman, meanwhile there is another role for you, but you have already played an old lady in The Seagull” (ibid., pp. 194-195).

Hard work paid off. The images of the play, their interrelation and development appeared before Chekhov more and more clearly. He discarded everything that cluttered her, deprived her of warmth. On March 21, he assured O.L. Knipper: “The Cherry Orchard will be, I try to make it so that there are as few actors as possible; so intimate” (P., vol. 11, p. 182).

In his new play, he developed the ideological and artistic principles that he had already implemented in previous dramatic works, the principles of depicting ordinary, everyday reality, in its inherent complexity and inconsistency. And life rose from its usual shores, presented its new sides, previously unknown. And it seemed to Chekhov that he creatively stopped. He was seized with doubts, and on April 17 he wrote with anxiety: “The play is getting better little by little, only I’m afraid my tone is generally outdated, it seems” (ibid., p. 196).

The rhythm of Chekhov's life and work during his stay in Yalta was constantly disturbed by numerous visitors: friends, acquaintances, admirers of talent, petitioners and simply curious people. Chekhov suffered greatly from this. April 9, 1903, complaining to O.L. Knipper on the visitors disturbing him, he notified her: “I will write the play in Moscow, it is impossible to write here. Even proofreading is not allowed to be read” (P., vol. 11, p. 191). June 17 in a letter to N.E. He told Efros that he “didn’t even start writing the play” (ibid., p. 226). Chekhov was still busy preparing and sketching sketches, but had not yet begun to paint the picture as a whole.

4

On May 25, 1903, Chekhov settled in a dacha near Moscow in Naro-Fominsk. On June 4, he informed L.V. Middle: “I am sitting at the big window and working little by little” (P., vol. 11, p. 217). In the second half of June, he finally began to write a coherent text for the play The Cherry Orchard. At that time, by the way, several already written scenes of the play were lost, which may have delayed his work on it. Once “Anton Pavlovich left her sheets on the desk, and he himself went to the neighbors. At this time, a sudden summer thunderstorm came up, a whirlwind burst in through the window and carried away from the table into the garden two or three sheets of the play, written in ink in Chekhov's small handwriting ...

"Don't you remember what they had on?" they asked him.

Imagine that I don’t remember,” he answered with a smile. - We'll have to write these scenes again.

On July 7, Chekhov left for Yalta and spent all his free time only occupied himself with the play. On July 28 he informed K.S. Stanislavsky: “My play is not ready, it moves slowly, which I explain by laziness, and wonderful weather, and the difficulty of the plot ... Your role, it seems, came out wow” (P., vol. 11, p. 236).

Chekhov tried to simplify the setting of the play as much as possible. “The situational part in the play,” he wrote on August 22 to V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, - I reduced it to a minimum, no special decorations will be required and gunpowder will not have to be invented ”(ibid., p. 242).

The playwright for a very long time did not find the necessary stage embodiment for the second act, which in the first draft seemed to him boring, viscous, monotonous. On September 2, he wrote to V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko: “My play (if I continue to work in the same way as I worked until today) will be finished soon, rest easy. It was difficult, very difficult to write the second act, but it seems nothing came out” (P., vol. 11, p. 246).

In the process of working on the play, its characters changed. So, the “old woman” became somewhat younger, and her role could already be offered to O.L. Knipper. In the letter to V.I. Chekhov wrote to Nemirovich-Danchenko: “Olga will take the role of mother in my play” (ibid.).

The play "The Cherry Orchard" was created in the real "throes of creativity." Chekhov repeatedly experienced doubts about the dignity of what he had written, and it seemed to him that, being far from the theater, from the center of culture, from the bubbling social life, he was already repeating his asses and was incapable of anything new, original. Having an almost finished play in front of him, on September 20 he wrote to his wife: “I am so far from everything that I begin to lose heart. It seems to me that I have already become obsolete as a writer, and every phrase that I write seems to me worthless and useless for anything ”(P., vol. 11, p. 252).

The last act of the play came more easily to Chekhov. On September 23, Anton Pavlovich informed O.L. Knipper: “The fourth act in my play, compared with other acts, will be meager in content, but effective. The end of your role seems to me not bad” (ibid., pp. 253-254).

On September 25, Chekhov finished writing this act, and on September 26 the play was completed. The playwright had already seen the whole work in front of him, and this time it did not seem outdated to him. “It seems to me,” he admitted to O.L. Knipper, - that in my play, no matter how boring it is, there is something new ”(P., vol. 11, p. 256). For him, it was indisputable that her faces “came out alive” (ibid., p. 257).

5

The process of creating the play was left behind. It just needed to be rewritten. But, carefully reading the text of the play during correspondence, Chekhov again found weaknesses in it that required alteration and polishing. “The play is already over,” he informed O.L. Knipper, - but I rewrite slowly, because I have to redo, rethink; I’ll send two or three places unfinished, I’ll put them off for later - excuse me” (P., vol. 11, 258-259). Chekhov completely reworked many scenes. “Some passages,” he wrote on October 3, “I really dislike, I write them again and rewrite them again” (ibid., p. 262). Anton Pavlovich especially did not like the second act, which, even after revision, remained, in his opinion, “boring and monotonous, like a cobweb” (ibid., p. 267). This act began with the following mise en scene: Yasha and Dunyasha are sitting on a bench, and Epikhodov is standing near them. Trofimov and Anya pass from the estate along the road. The action opened with a dialogue between Anya and Trofimov:

« Anya. Grandmother is single, very rich. She doesn't love her mother. In the early days I had a hard time with her, she spoke little to me. Then nothing, softened. She promised to send money, gave me and Charlotte Ivanovna money for the journey. But how terrible it is, how hard it is to feel like a poor relative.

Trofimov. There is already someone here, it seems ... they are sitting. In that case, let's move on.

Anya. I haven't been home for three weeks. So bored! (They leave.)"

After the departure of Anya and Trofimov, Dunyasha turned to Yasha with the words: “Still, what a happiness to be abroad,” and then the action developed in the sequence already known to us, however, with an additional dialogue of Vari and Charlotte passing along the road from the estate, and ended with a big scene of Fiers and Charlotte.

The dialogue between Varya and Charlotte interrupted the conversation between Ranevskaya, Gaev and Lopakhin and began after Lopakhin exclaimed: “What is there to think about!” Here is its content:

« Varya. She is a smart and well-bred girl, nothing can happen, but still you should not leave her alone with a young man. Dinner at nine o'clock, Charlotte Ivanovna, don't be late.

Charlotte. I don't want to eat... (Quietly sings a song).

Varya. It does not matter. It is necessary for order. You see, they are sitting there on the shore ... (Varya and Charlotte leave).

In the subsequent development of the action, when Anya and Trofimov were hiding from Varya, Firs came on stage and, muttering something, searched on the ground, near the bench. Then Charlotte showed up. Between these people, who felt very lonely, a conversation ensued:

« Firs(mumbling). Oh, you fool!

Charlotte. (sits down on a bench and takes off his cap). Is that you, Firs? What are you looking for?

« Firs. The lady lost her purse.

Charlotte(looking for). Here is a fan... And here is a handkerchief... it smells of perfume... (Pause). There is nothing more. Lyubov Andreevna is constantly losing. She lost her life too (quietly sings a song). I, grandfather, do not have a real passport, I do not know how old I am, and it seems to me that I am young ... (puts a cap on Fars, he sits motionless). Oh, I love you, my dear lord! (laughs). Ein, zwei, drei! (removes the cap from Firs, puts it on himself). When I was a little girl, my father and mother went to fairs and gave performances. Very good. And I was jumping salto mortale and stuff like that. And when my father and mother died, a German lady took me to her and began to teach me. Fine. I grew up, then went to be a governess, but where I am and who I am, I don’t know ... Who are my parents, maybe they didn’t get married ... I don’t know ... (takes a cucumber out of his pocket and eats it). I do not know anything.

Firs. I was 20 or 25 years old, let's go, it's me, and the son of the deacon's father, and the cook Vasily, and just here a man is sitting on a stone ... someone else's, unfamiliar ... For some reason I became shy and left, but they took and killed him without me... He had money.

Charlotte. Well? Weiter.

Firs. Then, it means, the court came in large numbers, they began to interrogate ... They took me away ... And me too ... I spent two years in prison ... Then nothing, they released me. It was a long time ago... (Pause). You won't remember everything...

Charlotte. It's time for you to die, grandfather... (eats cucumber).

Firs. A? (mumbles to himself). And so, it means that we all went together, and there was a stop ... Uncle jumped from the cart ... took a sack ... and in that sack again a sack ... And he looks, and there is something - jerk, jerk!

Charlotte(laughs, quietly). Dryg, jerk!

Thus ended the second act.

With the careful polishing that Chekhov did, in 12 days (by October 7) only two and a half acts were rewritten. “I’m pulling, pulling, pulling,” he reported that day to O.L. Knipper, - and because I pull, it seems to me that my play is immeasurably huge, colossal, I am horrified and have lost all appetite for it ”(P., vol. 11, p. 265). On October 6, 1903, Chekhov informed M. Gorky: “I have finished the play, but I am rewriting it extremely slowly. On October 10, I will probably finish and send it” (ibid., p. 264). The playwright was hurried by the leaders and artists of the Art Theater. They, like air, needed a new Chekhov play. Back in September, V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko asked: "Prinalyag, Anton Pavlovich! .. Oh, how we need her ...". Almost daily O.L. Knipper persistently reminded the writer of the need to complete the play as soon as possible.

But the artist, demanding of himself, delayed the play and continued to work painstakingly. “I am rewriting the play,” he told O.L. Knipper October 9, 1903 - I will soon finish ... I assure you, every extra day is only good, because my play is getting better and better and my faces are already clear. Only now I’m afraid there are places that censorship can cross out, it will be terrible ”(P., vol. 11, p. 269).

For greater specificity of the image of Gaev, the playwright needed specific expressions of billiard players. He asked his wife's brother - K.L. Knipper to watch the game of billiard players and write down their jargon. October 9 K.L. Knipper informed him: “I saw two little men, I sat in the billiard room of the city garden for two hours, but I learned a little about such special billiard terminology: they play more sullenly, muttering moves under their breath ...”.

K.L. Knipper wrote down 22 expressions of billiard players for Chekhov. Here is the beginning of the list of these expressions he sent to the writer:

“1 - (put) - from 2 sides to the middle.

2 - Krause in the middle.

3 - I cut in the middle, in the corner.

4 - Doublet in the corner, in the middle.

5 - I put clean.

6 - From the ball to the right (left) to the corner.

7 - With a ball (that is, with your other ball) into the corner! .

These expressions were useful to Chekhov, he inserted some of them into the role of Gaev. It is important to note that, in an effort to be accurate, the writer was not satisfied with the observations of K.L. Knipper wrote to his wife on October 14: “Ask Vishnevsky to listen to how they play billiards and write down more billiard terms. I don’t play billiards, or I used to play, but now I’ve forgotten everything, and everything in my play is accidental ... ”(P., vol. 11, p. 273).

Chekhov's exactingness towards himself was so great that, having already rewritten the play for the second time, he made a number of corrections, additions and abbreviations to it, just before being sent to Moscow. In the first act, Ranevskaya asked her brother how much they owed Lopakhin, and Gaev named the amount of 40 thousand (RGB. F. 331, l. 13). Chekhov considered this episode superfluous and crossed it out. In the same act, the writer changed Ranevskaya's expression "happiness woke up with me" to a more expressive one: "happiness woke up with me" (l. 14). At the same time, in the first act, Anya's address to Gaev "only a dear uncle" was corrected for the more rhythmic "but dear uncle" (l. 16).

In the second act, the role of Ranevskaya includes a remark in which she refutes Gaev's deceptive hopes for some general. Fully sharing Lopakhin's distrust of Gaev's project to borrow money from an unknown general, Lyubov Andreevna says: “He is delusional. There are no generals” (RGB. F. 331, l. 25). Trofimov, addressing Anya, initially said: "After all, this has corrupted all of you." But, obviously, fearing censorship, Chekhov crossed out the word “corrupted” and instead wrote: “reborn” (l. 29).

In the third act, Yasha's request to take him to Paris, with which he turns to Ranevskaya, also included the words: "What can I say, you yourself see" (l. 40). This reinforced the impudently familiar tone of the "civilized" footman.

In the fourth act, in Pishchik's story about a philosopher who advised jumping from rooftops, the expression is inserted: "Just think about it!". But the same expression is crossed out by the writer after Pishchik's message about the surrender of the plot with clay to the British for 24 years. Perhaps Chekhov found that a close repetition of Piszczyk's favorite proverb in one scene would be too intrusive. Initially, Pishchik, saying goodbye to Ranevskaya, said: “Remember this very ... horse and say:“ There was such and such ... Simeonov-Pishchik ... a horse in the world ”(l. 50). The last word, as a recurring one, Chekhov also removes. He also excludes the remark “fun”, which characterizes the parting words of Pishchik, said by Ranevskaya.

The double rewriting of the play was completed on October 12 or 13, and on October 14 it was sent to Moscow. Despite the great revision made during the rewriting, the play did not seem completely finished to the author. If he had not been rushed so urgently, Chekhov would have continued to hone the text. “There is something in the play,” he wrote to O.L. Knipper, - it needs to be redone ... Act IV has not been completed and something needs to be stirred up in II, and, perhaps, 2-3 words should be changed at the end of III, otherwise, perhaps, it looks like the end of "Uncle Vanya" ”(P. , vol. 11, p. 276). The playwright believed that the role of Ranevskaya "was made only in the III and I acts, in the rest she was only plastered" (ibid., p. 271).

Having sent the play to Moscow, Chekhov began anxiously waiting for its evaluation by the leaders and artists of the Art Theater. “I didn’t write to you yesterday,” he admitted on October 19 to O.L. Knipper, - because all the time I waited with bated breath for a telegram ... I kept cowardly, I was afraid. I was mainly frightened by the immobility of the second act and the unfinished work of some student Trofimov” (P., vol. 11, pp. 278-279). On the same day, Chekhov received a telegram from Vl.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, who wrote that "The Cherry Orchard" "as a stage work, perhaps more of a play than all the previous ones." Two days later the playwright read a telegram from K.S. Stanislavsky: “I'm shocked, I can't come to my senses. I am in an unbelievable delight. I consider the play the best of all the beautiful things you have written. I heartily congratulate the brilliant author. I feel, I appreciate every word. This enthusiastic panegyric aroused Chekhov's displeasure. On the same day he informed O.L. Knipper: “I received a telegram from Alekseev in which he calls my play brilliant, this means over-praising the play and depriving it of a good half of the success that it could have had under happy conditions” (P., vol. 11, p. 280).

On October 21, the play was read to the entire troupe of the Art Theatre. The actors were captured from the first act, appreciated its every subtlety, wept in the last act. Stanislavsky informed Chekhov that "never before has a play been received with such unanimous enthusiasm."

6

The manuscript of the play The Cherry Orchard, sent by Chekhov to Moscow, was reprinted in several copies. One copy of the play was immediately sent to St. Petersburg for drama censorship, which on November 25, 1903 allowed it to be presented on stage. This copy of the play, reflecting one of the most important stages of creative work on it, we will call Yalta, or censored manuscript (there is an inscription on it: “It is allowed to be presented. St. Petersburg, November 25, 1903, censor of dramatic compositions. Vereshchagin”).

December 4 A.P. Chekhov arrived in Moscow. Here the Art Theater was actively preparing The Cherry Orchard for staging. Upon arrival, Chekhov felt unwell, and, in order not to tire him, “the first readings,” says the artist E.M. Muratov - took place in his apartment. In the following time, the playwright attended almost daily rehearsals of his play in the theater, discussed their roles with the participants in the performance, and continued to work daily on the text of the play. Despite the fact that the theater managers and the actors involved in the performance worked with great faith in its success, Chekhov was skeptical about it. His skepticism was so decisive that he offered the theater to buy the play into eternal property for only 3,000 rubles.

The new corrections that Chekhov made and pasted into the main manuscript turned out to be very numerous. Already on December 16, M. Gorky notified K.P. Pyatnitsky about Chekhov's request to send him a proof of the play given to the collection "Knowledge" for amendments to it. “Already even now,” wrote Gorky, “he has made many amendments to the play.” Polishing the text, Chekhov strove for a more distinct disclosure of the socio-psychological essence of the characters, with their inherent complexity and inconsistency, for the utmost correspondence of their actions and characters, for a greater colorfulness of their speech. He paid a lot of attention to the compositional harmony, liveliness, stage presence of the play.

Let us first of all turn to the corrections of the first act.

In order to shade Ranevskaya's kind-heartedness, new affectionate appeals are introduced into her role: “Thank you, my old man,” she says to Firs and kisses him (d. I) (RSL. F. 331, l. 9). "Cut down?" - Lyubov Andreevna repeated Lopakhin's proposal about a cherry orchard in bewilderment and displeasure. And then she continued: “If there is anything interesting, even remarkable, in the whole province, it is only our cherry orchard” (l. 7). The certainty and categoricalness of this remark did not quite go to Ranevskaya. And Chekhov, feeling this, accompanied her question with a softening expression: “My dear, forgive me, you don’t understand anything” (l. 10). In Ranevskaya's recollection of her son, the word "son" is replaced by a more cordial, intimate expression: "my boy drowned" (l. 23). Previously, Ranevskaya, noticing the movement of Gaev, recalling the game of billiards, said: “Yellow in the corner! Doublet in the middle! Chekhov prefaced these words with an introduction: “How is it? Let me remember...” (l. 8). And her remark acquired the necessary naturalness.

When referring to the image of Gaev, Chekhov strengthened in him the trait of groundlessness, empty phrase-mongering. The writer supplemented Gaev's assurances about paying interest on the estate with the following words: “By my honor, whatever you want, I swear that the estate will not be sold! I swear by my happiness! Here's my hand for you, then call me a lousy, dishonest person if I let you go to the auction. I swear with all my being!” (RSL. F. 331, l. 17).

The image of Lopakhin underwent even greater refinement, Chekhov makes corrections and additions that ennoble the figure of the merchant, making him intelligent. Thus, emphasizing Lopakhin's cultural affinity, his characteristic outbursts of cordiality, the playwright flourished his appeals to Ranevskaya with such epithets as "magnificent", "amazing, touching eyes", "God merciful!", "More than native" (ibid., sheet 9). In Lopakhin’s address to Raevskaya, an insertion is made: “so that your amazing, touching eyes look at me, as before, merciful God!”

Lopakhin's advice, designed to save the estate from being sold at auction, as well as his reasoning about summer residents, also become softer, more delicate, sincere. In an early (censored) manuscript, Lopakhin said: “So I want to say before leaving ( looking at the clock). I'm talking about the estate... in a nutshell... I want to offer you a way to find a way out. So that your estate does not give a loss, you need to get up every day at four in the morning and work all day. For you, of course, this is impossible, I understand ... But there is another way out ”(GTB, l. 6), - further, as in print. It was the advice of a businessman, an entrepreneur, alien and even hostile to the owners of the cherry orchard.

In the final version, Chekhov painted Lopakhin differently. Therefore, he changed this callous advice to a soft, delicate appeal of a person deeply disposed towards Ranevskaya. “I want to tell you something very pleasant, cheerful ( looking at the clock). I’m leaving now, there’s no time to talk ... well, yes, I’ll say it in two or three words. You already know that your cherry orchard is being sold for debts, an auction is scheduled for August 22, but don’t worry, sleep peacefully, there is a way out ... Here is my project ”(RSL. F. 331, l. 10), etc. Lopakhin's speech about summer residents is corrected in the same spirit. Saying goodbye to Ranevskaya, Lopakhin once again reminds her: “Think seriously” (l. 12).

The second half of Lopakhin's reasoning about summer residents was at first like this: “... in ten or twenty years, he will show what he really is. Now he only drinks tea on the balcony, but it may happen that on his one tithe he will take care of the household and then, what the hell is not joking, you will have to reckon with him ”(GTB, l. 8). Chekhov again edits the beginning (“in ten or twenty years it will multiply and begin to work”) and the end (“and then your cherry orchard would become happy, rich and you would not recognize it”) of this part of the reasoning (RSL. F. 331, l . eleven). At the same time, Chekhov introduced two expressions into the role of Lopakhin, pronounced in the first act: “congratulations (“in a word, congratulations, you are saved”) and “I swear to you” (“There is no other way ... I swear to you”) (l. 10, eleven). At the same time, the remark was changed " hums" on " softly humming"(l. 24).

Expanding the role of Firs, Chekhov emphasizes his devotion to the masters. Earlier, to Varya’s question: “Firs, what are you talking about?” He replied: "What do you want?" Now his remark continues. He happily says: “My lady has arrived! Waited! Now at least die ... ( Sobbed with joy)” (RSL. F. 331, l. 8). In the first edition, Firs responded to Ranevskaya’s appeal in the same way: “What do you want?” But, intensifying the colorfulness, the stage presence of his role, Chekhov changes this remark. Deaf Firs instead of "What would you like?" replies “The day before yesterday” (ibid., l. 9).

In the same edition, Firs said: “In the old days, 40-50 years ago, cherries were dried, soaked, pickled, jam was cooked, and it used to be that dried cherries were sent by cartloads to Moscow and Kharkov” (GTB, fol. 7). Increasing the theatricality of this story, Chekhov interrupted it with a remark by Gaev, and the story took the following form:

« Firs. In the old days, 40-50 years ago, cherries were dried, soaked, pickled, jam was cooked, and it happened ...

Gaev. Shut up, Firs.

Firs. And it happened ... ”(RSL. F. 331, l. 11), etc.

Turning to the image of Varya, Chekhov considered it necessary to strengthen her dissatisfaction with her position and more clearly set off the desire for a quiet, contemplative life. He included in her remark the words: “I would still go to holy places... I would go and go” (ibid., fol. 7).

Work on other characters was limited mainly to the addition of individual expressions and words. The role of Epikhodov was supplemented with the phrase: “It’s just wonderful!” With this phrase, he completed his reasoning before leaving the nursery at the beginning of the first act. Anya's remarks are endowed with remarks: sadly(“Mom bought this”) (RGB. F. 331, l. 3), childlike fun(“And in Paris I flew in a balloon!”) ​​(l. 7).

More significant corrections required the second act. Chekhov concretized the colorful image of Epikhodov, giving him at the very beginning of this act the words: “I am a developed person, I read various scholarly books, but I just can’t understand the direction of what I actually want, to live or to shoot myself, in fact, but nevertheless I I always carry a revolver with me. Here he is... ( shows a revolver)” (ibid., l. 19). In the first edition, Epikhodov’s reasoning, which began with the words “actually speaking, without touching on other subjects,” ended like this: “That’s me, by the way, Avdotya Fedorovna, and you understand very well why I say this ... ( pause). Let me talk to you, Avdotya Fedorovna” (State Library, fol. 15-16). The concluding words of this address were not very characteristic of Epikhodov, and therefore Chekhov replaced them with the following: “Have you read Buckle? ( pause.) I want to disturb you, Avdotya Fedorovna, for a few words” (RSL, F. 331, fol. 20). Expanding the role of Epikhodov, the author emphasized his phrase-mongering: "Now I know what to do with my revolver." This remark also determined the additional words of Dunyasha: “God forbid, he will shoot himself” (ibid.).

Satirically sharpening the image of Yasha, the writer introduces the following reasoning into his speech: “( yawns.) Yes, sir ... In my opinion, it’s like this: if a girl loves someone, then she, therefore, is immoral. Emphasizing in Yasha the qualities of a cold, depraved egoist, who only amuses himself with Dunyasha, and not loves her, the playwright supplemented the last line of the character in this episode with the words: “Otherwise they will meet and think about me, as if I were on a date with you. I can't stand it" (ibid.).

In the scene of "gentlemen", which replaces the scene of "servants", the playwright, after Lopakhin's words that people "should really be giants", included the following addition:

« Lyubov Andreevna. Do you need giants? They are only good in fairy tales, and so they scare.

(Epikhodov passes in the back of the stage).

Lyubov Andreevna(thoughtfully). Epikhodov is coming...

Anya(thoughtfully). Epikhodov is coming.

Varya. Why does he live with us? Just casually eats and drinks all day...

Lyubov Andreevna. I love Epikhodov. When he talks about his misfortunes, it becomes funny. Don't fire him, Varya.

Varya. You can't, mommy. It is necessary to fire him, the scoundrel ”(RSL. F. 331, l. 27).

Chekhov enriches the roles of almost all the participants in the "gentlemen" scene. In the first, Yalta edition, Lopakhin, going on stage, spoke categorically, demandingly, dryly: “We must finally decide - time does not wait. Do you agree to give the land for dachas or not?” (GTB, l. 16). After the alteration, Lopakhin's appeal acquired softness and even begging: “We must finally decide - time does not wait. The question is completely empty. Do you agree to give the land for dachas or not? Answer in one word: yes or no? Just one word!" (RSL. F. 331, l. 20). In the next remark, Lopakhin almost literally repeated the words of the first appeal: “Do you agree to give the land for dachas or not?” Diversifying Lopakhin’s speech, the writer replaced this remark with a different one: “Only one word ( imploringly). Give me an answer!" (ibid., l. 21).

In a further conversation, he told Ranevskaya: “Your estate is for sale. Understand it's on sale! Do you have to do something?" (GTB, l. 17). The last words in the mouth of Lopakhin, who knew what to do and persistently offered Ranevskaya the only reliable way out of the situation, seemed inappropriate to Chekhov, and he changed them like this: “Your estate is for sale, but you definitely don’t understand” (RSL. F. 331, sheet 22).

Lopakhin, offering Ranevskaya a saving path, declared: “Once you finally decide that there are dachas, in three days you can get as much money as you like” (GTB, l. 17). In accordance with all Lopakhin's previous warnings about the impending catastrophe - the sale of the estate - Chekhov strengthens the concreteness, categoricalness and persuasiveness of this phrase: "Once you finally decide that there are dachas, they will give you as much money as you like, and then you will be saved" (RGB. F 331, sheet 22).

Several new touches are introduced into the role of Ranevskaya. Previously, to Lopakhin's sharp reproaches for inactivity, Ranevskaya somehow languidly and vaguely answered: “What? Learn what?" (GTB, l. 17). Her answer conveyed great interest: “What shall we do? Learn what?" (RSL. F. 331, l. 22). In accordance with this, in her further appeal to Lopakhin, the words appear: “darling” (“stay, my dear”), “my friend” (“You need to marry, my friend”) (ibid., l. 26).

In the play already accepted by the theater and allowed by the censorship, as we see, Chekhov, with exceptional exactingness, introduced new nuances into the images of all the characters.

An example of Chekhov's surprisingly thorough processing of not only the speech of his characters, but also remarks can be the following phrase: " Firs hurried across the stage, wearing an ancient livery and a tall hat, leaning on a stick; he something..." etc. Back in Yalta, this remark took the following form: Firs hastily passes across the stage, having gone to meet Lyubov Andreyevna; he is in an old livery and in a high hat, leaning on a stick, he is something ...". In Moscow, the remark acquired a new edition, which clarifies the natural sequence of actions of the servant: “ Firs, who had gone to meet Lyubov Andreyevna, hurriedly passes across the stage, leaning on a stick; he is in an old livery and in a high hat, he is something ..." etc. (RSL. F. 331, l. 4).

Chekhov had to make two corrections to the play, caused by the requirements of censorship. In the second act, in the scene of the gentlemen, the student Trofimov delivers a diatribe, from which the censorship has excluded the words: “Before everyone’s eyes, the workers eat disgustingly, sleep without pillows, thirty or forty in one room” (GTB, fol. 22). Chekhov replaced them with these: “The vast majority of us, ninety-nine out of a hundred, live like savages, just a little bit - now they are poking, cursing, they eat disgustingly, they sleep in mud, in stuffiness.” In the third act, censorship blacked out the words in Trofimov’s address to Anya: “To own living souls - after all, it has reborn all of you who lived before and now live, so your mother, you, uncle no longer notice that you live in debt, at someone else’s expense , at the expense of those people whom you do not let further than the front ”(ibid., l. 24). Chekhov was forced to replace these words with the following: “Oh, this is terrible, your garden is terrible, and when you walk through the garden in the evening or at night, the old bark on the trees shines dimly and it seems that the cherry trees see in a dream what was a hundred or two hundred years ago, and heavy visions torment them. ( Pause.) - What to say ”(RSL. F. 331, l. 29).

All the corrections that we have just noted were included in the main manuscript sent to Moscow in October 1903. This manuscript, cited above, is conditionally called the Moscow one (recall that it is kept in the Scientific Research Department of Manuscripts of the RSL).

Chekhov's serious work on the text of the already rehearsed play gained fame outside the Art Theater. Thus, the journal Theater and Art reported that the playwright "took back the first act of the play and subjected it to a thorough alteration" (1904, no. 1, p. 5).

7

On January 17, 1904, the play The Cherry Orchard premiered at the Art Theatre. The performance, despite the very contradictory responses about the play - positive, negative and perplexing - was perceived as a great theatrical event. On January 18, the Moscow newspaper Russky Listok reported: “Yesterday, for the first time, a new play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard". The entire literary, artistic Moscow was evident in the hall. The impression from the "Cherry Orchard" is enormous. All the faces drawn by the author were so close and familiar to us; life, Russian life, is so faithfully captured and vividly conveyed in a whole series of small details that interest in the play did not disappear until the last scene. All the performers have made an effort to make bright and interesting types out of their roles. January 25 in the magazine "Alarm clock", signed Imp, poems were printed: “A.P. Chekhov (after staging "The Cherry Orchard"):

Literature of our days

Everything is overgrown with burdocks ...

"The Cherry Orchard" from now on in it

Let it beckons with "new flowers".

The play was already being typed for the second collection of the Znanie publishing house, and its proofreading was expected. On January 20, 1904, Chekhov informed L.V. Sredinu: “I have run out of rigmarole with the play, now I can sit down at the table and write to you” (P., vol. 12, p. 16). Meanwhile, Chekhov was not completely satisfied with either the play or its staging. The "rigger" with the play continued, although all the main things were done and left behind. However, the writer was still living the play, he could not tear himself away from it and made new corrections to its text. One of these corrections was prompted by the production of the Art Theater. It seemed to the director that at the end of the second act, the lyrical episode of Firs and Charlotte, which went “after the lively scene of youth ... lowered the mood of the action” (Stanislavsky, vol. 1, p. 473). And after the first performances, when the weaknesses of the second act were especially clearly revealed, Chekhov was asked to film this episode. K.S. Stanislavsky said that Chekhov “became very sad, turned pale from the pain that we caused him then, but, after thinking and recovering, he answered: “Reduce!”” (ibid., p. 270).

Chekhov made new corrections, obviously, in some kind of typewritten copy of the play, from which they were then transferred to the text of the theatrical manuscript and to the proofreading of the play, first published in the second collection of Knowledge. Consequently, there was a third author's manuscript (edition) of the play, but, unfortunately, it did not reach us. Discrepancies between the second (Moscow) and third manuscripts are established only by comparing the second manuscript with the printed text. What are these new corrections, besides the elimination of the already mentioned scene of Fiers and Charlotte?

The first act included a dialogue between Pishchik and Lyubov Andreevna:

« Pishchik (Lyubov Andreevna). What's in Paris? How? Did you eat frogs?

Lyubov Andreevna. Ate crocodiles.

Pishchik. Do you think..."

At the same time, the episode with pills also entered the play:

« Yasha (gives Lyubov Andreevna medicine). Maybe take some pills now...

Pishchik. There is no need to take medicines, my dear ... they do no harm or good ... Give me here ... dear. (He takes pills, pours them into his palm, blows on them, puts them in his mouth and drinks kvass.). Here!

Lyubov Andreevna (frightened). Yes, you are crazy!

Pishchik. I took all the pills.

Lopakhin. What an abyss. (Everyone laughs.)

Firs. They were with us at Svyatoy, they ate half a bucket of cucumbers ... "

The additions that have just been cited clearly strengthened the comic character of Pishchik's image. By including the dialogue between Pishchik and Ranevskaya, as well as the episode with pills, Chekhov at the same time excluded the scene with Charlotte's trick. In Yalta ( or censored) of the manuscript, Charlotte, before finally leaving the stage, approached the door and asked: “Someone is standing outside the door. Who's there? ( knock on the door from the other side.) Who is knocking? ( knock). This is my fiance! ( Leaves. Everyone laughs)” (GTB, l. 9).

Arriving in Moscow, Chekhov gave a different version of this episode:

« Lopakhin. Charlotte Ivanovna, show me the trick.

Lyubov Andreevna. Charlotte, show me the trick!

Charlotte (coming to the door). Who is behind the door. Who's there? ( knock on the door from the other side). Who is it knocking? ( knock). This is Mr Groom. ( Leaves. Everyone laughs) ”(RSL. F. 331, l. 12).

But this option did not satisfy the playwright, and he considered it best to remove the scene with focus. Charlotte responds to the requests of Lopakhin and Ranevskaya to show the trick: “No need. I want to sleep." And leaves.

Very significant rearrangements were made by Chekhov in the second act in connection with the director's wish to omit the scene of Firs and Charlotte. Part of this scene, namely Charlotte's story about her life, Chekhov kept, moving it to the beginning of the same act and replacing it with the dialogue between Anya and Trofimov. The dialogue of young people did not introduce anything new into the development of the action, but only slowed it down. Thus the second act now opened with a scene of servants and directly with Charlotte's monologue. Epikhodov’s reasoning seemed to the playwright too long, turning into a monologue, and then he separated it with Charlotte’s remark: “It’s over. Now I’ll go,” etc.

Chekhov introduced some changes in this act and in the gentlemen's scene. He removed the episode in which Varya and Anya walked along the road, since their dialogue, without developing the action, interrupted Lopakhin's conversation with Ranevskaya and Gaev. He also eliminated the remarks of Varya, Lopakhin and Ranevskaya concerning Epikhodov, because they did not add anything to his already clear characterization. The young scene, which has now become final, has also undergone a partial reworking. Earlier, after Anya's enthusiastic exclamation: "How well you said!" - they exchanged remarks:

« Trofimov. Shh... Someone's coming. Again this Varya! ( angrily). Outrageous.

Anya. Well? Let's go to the river. It's good there.

Trofimov. Let's go... ( go).

Anya. The moon will rise soon go away)” (GTB, l. 24).

These remarks too abruptly, prosaically reducing them, interrupted Trofimov's speeches, deep in meaning, vivid in expressiveness and pathetic in tone. The student himself was excited by them and carried away his young listener to a new life, to public service. Chekhov, apparently, felt this shortcoming and corrected it. He continued the pathetic conversation of young people about happiness and gave it a real-symbolic meaning, introducing the image of the rising moon - Anya and Trofimov go to admire the moon to the river.

In connection with the amendment of the second act, made by Chekhov after the premiere, on February 16, 1904, the following message appeared in the News of the Day newspaper: “A.P. Chekhov made several changes in The Cherry Orchard, and with these changes the play went on to its final performances. They concern the 2nd act, which left a vague impression. The previous end of the act, the conversation between Charlotte and Firs, is completely cut off. Now the act ends with a scene between Anya and Trofimov running away to the river. Their notes of young feeling, young faith color the last impression of the act much differently, and it no longer seems so viscous. Part of Charlotte's story - about parents, magicians, childhood - is placed as the beginning of the act. Epikhodov's "cruel romance" is inserted in the opening scene. It is sung with great humor by Mr. Moskvin with a guitar. Added guitar accompaniment in a short silent scene of Epikhodov passing in the background. This scene remained completely unnecessary, superfluous, now it adds something to the overall color of the moment.”

In the third act, the playwright left one of the two repeated lines of Ranevskaya, pronounced by her in the scene of Charlotte's tricks, and handed over the second to the head of the station. In previous editions it was: Lyubov Andreevna (applauds). Bravo, bravo! ( applause in the hall too)". It became: station master (applauds). Lady ventriloquist, bravo!”

All other amendments made during this period were intended to deepen the individual characterization of the characters. The role of Ranevskaya has already acquired the necessary completeness in previous editions. But when revising the play, Chekhov found it possible to expand this role with several new words and expressions. All of them entered the conversation between Ranevskaya and Trofimov, which takes place in the third act. Here they are: “But I definitely lost my sight, I don’t see anything”; “but tell me, my dear”; "this" ("is it because you are young"); "only fate throws you from place to place." If the first three inserts reinforce Ranevskaya's softness and sentimentality, then the last phrase, together with other facts, reveals the reasons for Trofimov's so long stay as a student: he was constantly expelled from Moscow.

More serious was the editing of Lopakhin's role. It is now that Trofimov's words appear, giving Lopakhin the features of tenderness, complexity, artistry. “After all,” says Trofimov, turning to Lopakhin, “I still love you. You have thin, delicate fingers, like an artist, you have such a tender soul. In accordance with this characteristic, tendencies of some speech sophistication appear in the role of Lopakhin. Chekhov gives the third edition of Lopakhin's reasoning about summer residents, ending with the words: "and then your cherry orchard will become happy, rich, luxurious."

In act III, in Lopakhin's monologue, after the words "don't laugh at me!" was: “I don’t need it, I don’t need it, I don’t need it!” Chekhov considered these words superfluous and eliminated them. Remarks fit into the same monologue. Before that it was: Raises the keys"(Abandoned by Varya. - A. R.) (RSL. F. 331, l. 43), and it became:" Raises the keys, smiling affectionately". Lopakhin's exclamations: “What is it? Music, play it distinctly! Let everything be as I wish!” Chekhov accompanied the remark: " with irony”, which immediately complicated them, depriving them of rough categoricalness. Third remark " you can hear the orchestra tuning” is added to explain Lopakhin’s appeal to musicians: “Hey, musicians”, etc. ( there). Here, the certainty in relation to Lopakhin to Varya is also strengthened. Previously, to Ranevskaya's proposal to marry Vara, he replied: “So what? I don't mind..." there). Chekhov supplemented this remark with the words: "She is a good girl." After these words, literally repeating Ranevskaya's assessment of Varya as a modest worker, it becomes clear that Lopakhin did not feel any special sympathy - an overbearing feeling for Varya. In this regard, Lopakhin's confession, introduced at the same time, is also understandable: "without you, I feel I will not make an offer."

Lopakhin’s speech is supplemented by two more remarks: “Let him talk” (i.e., Gaev about him as a boor and a fist; d. I), “only he won’t sit still, he’s very lazy” (about Gaev, who took the place of an official in a bank; d. IV).

The role of Trofimov, in addition to the already given assessment of Lopakhin, also acquired a number of additional touches. To Lopakhin’s question: “Will you get there?” - he answered: "I will reach or show others the way how to reach." Chekhov, strengthening Trofimov's faith in the future, precedes this phrase with a decisive statement "I'll get there", and also introduces a pause after which the student finishes his thought. Emphasizing Trofimov's integrity and ardor, the playwright adds in Act III the following remark and remark in response to Ranevskaya: "( leaves but immediately returns). It's over between us!" To characterize Varya, Trofimov’s speech includes the words addressed to Anya: “and does not leave us for whole days” (d. II).

Drawing on the spontaneity of the childishly gullible Anya, Chekhov accompanied her response to Gaev's oaths to pay interest on the estate with a remark: calm mood returned to her, she is happy", and in the very response he entered the words:" I am happy. In the same (first) act, to concretize Anya’s speech, the words “to that” (“six years ago”) and “pretty” (“pretty seven-year-old boy”) are introduced. In this act, two remarks regarding Anya are also added. To the remark " hugging Varya» added the word « quiet”, and to Anya’s message about the man in the kitchen who spread the rumor about the sale of the estate, the remark is attached:“ excitedly».

Some nuances have been added to the role of Vari. Her words about Lopakhin, said to Anya at their first meeting, have been eliminated: “And he himself looks like he is about to make an offer right now” (RSL. F. 331, l. 7). This immediately weakens the prospects for her marriage. The following words were also removed, in which Varya appears in an uncharacteristic, too disturbing, dramatic state of mind: “Sometimes it even becomes scary, I don’t know what to do with myself” (l. 9). Chekhov also removes her sharp, inappropriate and in the course of the action remark about Firs crying with joy: “Well, you fool!” (l. 8). In addition, according to Varya: “Uncle bought it, I’m sure of it,” Chekhov added a remark: “ trying to calm her down"(d. III). Remarque - " He swings, the blow hits Lopakhin, who at that time enters"- he gives in a different edition:" He swings, at this time Lopakhin enters"(d. III). Part of the remark - " Lopakhin rebounds" - changed as follows: " Lopakhin pretends to be frightened"(d. IV).

In the role of Dunyasha, Chekhov deepened the features of feigned tenderness, fragility and dreaminess. To the words "hands are shaking," he added; "I'm going to faint." The expression “Lord ... Lord” was replaced by: “I will fall now ... Oh, I will fall!” He supplemented her remark in the third act with the confession: "I am such a delicate girl." Her answer to Epikhodov in the same act: "Please, we'll talk later... in another place" was changed to: "Please, we'll talk later, but now leave me alone. Now I'm dreaming plays with a fan)". In the same style of false affectation, Dunyasha's story about Epikhodov includes a proud statement: "He loves me madly" (case I).

The final polishing of the play also affected other characters, but to a lesser extent. Chekhov, emphasizing Yasha's self-satisfaction, makes up for his dismissive assessment of Epikhodov with the words: "Empty man!" The writer further strengthened the features of egoistic indifference, moral cynicism in Yasha. Previously, he answered Firs’s memoirs with a remark: “You are tired, grandfather ( laughs). If only you would die sooner” (RSL, F. 331, fol. 39). Remarque " laughs' is now changed to 'yawns'. Epikhodov in act IV, leaving for the first time, " stepped on something hard and crushed"(l. 48), and in the final version:" He put the suitcase on top of the hat box and crushed it.". This is more specific. In previous editions, Firs, having met the lady, “ sobbed with joy”(l. 8), and in the final text:“ crying with joy". This is more natural. The playwright omitted the words in Firs' closing remarks: "I'll sit... I feel good, it's nice like that" (l. 55). In our opinion, these words fell out of the general context of the last scene and did not correspond to Firs' morbid state; In the first editions it was: Firs enters the coat”(l. 24), and for the press Chekhov gave a different edition.

Gaev's farewell speech, apparently, seemed too long to the playwright, and he crossed out its end: “My friends, you, who felt the same way as I, who know” (RSL. F. 331, l. 52-53). Two remarks were also added to the role of Gaev: “ funny- to the words: "Indeed, everything is fine now," and " sadly"- to the words:" A doublet of yellow in the middle.

All corrections made by Chekhov after sending the manuscript to typesetting were included by him in the first proofreading, which he read at the end of January 1904 (P., vol. 12, p. 27).

8

On March 24, to the questions of O.L. Knipper has already answered some details of the role of Dunyasha Chekhov with a reference to the printed text. “Tell the actress playing the maid Dunyasha,” he wrote, “to read The Cherry Orchard in the edition of Knowledge or in proof; there she will see where to powder and so on. and so on. Let him read it without fail, in your notebooks everything is mixed up and smeared ”(P., vol. 12, p. 70). By this Chekhov established the canonicity of the printed text. But for all that, the text, according to which the play was performed at the Moscow Art Theater, had some differences from the printed one. The reasons for this are various.

Firstly, in the process of preparing the performance, individual replicas were introduced into their roles by the actors themselves, who got used to the role and wished to enrich it. March 16, 1904 O.L. Knipper wrote to Chekhov: “Moskvin begs if he can insert a phrase in the 4th act. When he crushes the cardboard, Yasha says: "22 misfortunes", and Moskvin really wants to say: "Well, this can happen to anyone." He somehow accidentally said it, and the public accepted it. Chekhov immediately agreed to this insert. “Tell Moskvin,” he wrote, “that he can insert new words, and I will insert them myself when I read the proofs. I give him a full carte blanche” (P., vol. 12, p. 67).

At the end of April, Chekhov read the second proofreading of the play, which was published in the second collection of "Knowledge", but Epikhodov's remark, proposed by I.M. Moskvin, did not contribute. Why? After all, he already approved it. In our opinion, Chekhov simply forgot to include it. He was in a hurry to read and send proofs, as the release of the collection was greatly delayed, and the provincial theaters urgently demanded the text of the play for productions. Chekhov was very interested in these productions. In addition, the playwright felt very bad these days. There is no doubt that he would have included this remark when reading the proofs of a separate edition of the play, published by A.F. Marx. He intended to make other corrections to the play. On May 31, he wrote to A.F. Marx: “I sent you the proofs and now I earnestly ask you not to release my play until I finish it; I would like to add another description of the characters” (P., vol. 12, p. 110).

So, correcting the proofs, Chekhov changed the words of Lopakhin, pronounced at the beginning of the play by "a boy of five or six years old" to "... fifteen." At this age, it became clear the great impression that his first meeting with Ranevskaya made on Lopakhin. Perhaps Chekhov would have made some other additions to his play proposed by the artists (two prompter copies stored in the Museum of the Art Theater - an early and a later production of the play The Cherry Orchard - have many discrepancies with the printed text). However, many "gags", such as the French phrases of the lackey Yasha, caused Chekhov's displeasure: "... It's not me! This is what they came up with! It's terrible: the actors say, do whatever comes to their mind, and the author answers!”

9

Chekhov, based on his experience, persistently advised young writers to re-read, remake, shorten, painstakingly polish their works. For him, writing meant working, straining all his creative abilities and strength. Chekhov was very offended when L.S. Mizinova in 1893, in a friendly letter (dated August 22), called his creative work writing "for her own pleasure." Here is what he replied to her: “As for writing for your own pleasure, you, charming, tweeted it only because you are unfamiliar with all the severity and oppressive power of this worm that undermines life, no matter how small it may seem to you” (P., vol. 5, p. 232).

Long years of writing convinced Chekhov that the creation of truly artistic works, even in the presence of a genius talent, is possible only through long, patient, meticulous work. "Need to work! To work a lot! he repeated. “And the more expensive the thing, the stricter it must be treated.”

The fruit of artistic genius and long, hard creative work was Chekhov's poetic masterpiece - the play "The Cherry Orchard".

“... The symbolism is hidden already in the very title of the play. Initially, Chekhov wanted to call the play The Cherry Orchard, but then settled on the title The Cherry Orchard. K.S. Stanislavsky, recalling this episode, told how Chekhov, having announced to him about the change of the title, savored it, "pressing on the gentle sound in the word" cherry ", as if trying with its help to caress the former, beautiful, but now unnecessary life, which he with tears destroyed in his play. This time I understood the subtlety: "The Cherry Orchard" is a business, commercial garden that generates income. Such a garden is needed now. But the "Cherry Orchard" does not bring income, it keeps in itself and in its blooming whiteness the poetry of the former aristocratic life. Such a garden grows and blooms for a whim, for the eyes of spoiled aesthetes. It is a pity to destroy it, but it is necessary, since the process of the country's economic development requires it” (Stanislavsky, vol. 1, p. 269).

It should be noted that the symbolism of the title of the play "The Cherry Orchard", as it is understood by the director, does not give complete satisfaction and may give rise to perplexed questions among our readers and viewers. For example, why was chosen as a symbol of the outgoing, obsolete The Cherry Orchard- the personification of poetry and beauty? I recall the wonderful lines of Nekrasov:

Like drenched in milk

There are cherry orchards,

Quiet noise...

("Green Noise").

Why is the new generation called upon to destroy rather than use the beauty of the past?.. And at the same time, it must be admitted that there is some truth in Stanislavsky’s interpretation of the symbolism of the play’s title…

But the symbolism of the title of the play is not limited to what has just been said, it is more voluminous, versatile. It addresses not only the past, but also the future. The Cherry Orchard of Ranevskaya and Gaev is an obsolete, departing, past. But after all, Trofimov, Anya, and behind them Chekhov dreamed of the future. And this future in their minds also took on the image of a garden, but even more luxurious, capable of bringing joy to all people. And so, throughout the development of the play, an image appears in it cherry orchard like the beauty of life...

Describing the play, K.S. Stanislavsky wrote: “Its charm is in its elusive, deeply hidden aroma” (vol. 1, p. 270).

This charm of The Cherry Orchard is largely given by pauses, music, means of real symbolism, which increase the psychological tension of the play, expand its content, deepen its ideological meaning ... "

A.P. Chekhov first mentions the idea of ​​​​writing the play “The Cherry Orchard” in one of his letters dated in the spring of 1901. At first, she was conceived by him "as a funny play, wherever the devil would walk like a yoke." In 1903, when work on The Cherry Orchard continues, A.P. Chekhov writes to friends: “The whole play is cheerful, frivolous.” The theme of the play “the estate goes under the hammer” was by no means new to the writer.

Previously, she was touched by him in the drama "Fatherlessness" (1878-1881). Throughout his career, Chekhov was interested and excited

The psychological tragedy of the situation of the sale of the estate and the loss of the house. Therefore, the play "The Cherry Orchard" reflected many of the writer's life experiences associated with the memories of the sale of his father's house in Taganrog, and acquaintance with the Kiselevs, who owned the Babkino estate near Moscow, where the Chekhov family visited in the summer of 1885-1887.

In many ways, the image of Gaev was written off from A.S. Kiselev, who became a member of the board of the bank in Kaluga after the forced sale of the estate for debts. In 1888 and 1889, Chekhov rested at the Lintvarev estate, near Sumy, Kharkov province. There he saw with his own eyes the neglected and dying noblemen.

Estates.

Chekhov could observe the same picture in detail in 1892-1898, living in his estate Melikhovo, and also in the summer of 1902, when he lived in Lyubimovka - the estate of K. S. Stanislavsky. The growing strength of the “third estate”, which was notable for its tough business acumen, was gradually ousting from the “noble nests” their ruined masters, who thoughtlessly lived out their fortunes. From all this, Chekhov drew the idea for the play, which later reflected many details of the life of the inhabitants of the dying noble estates.
Work on the play "The Cherry Orchard" required extraordinary efforts from the author. So, he writes to friends: “I write four lines a day, and those with unbearable torment.” Chekhov, constantly struggling with bouts of illness and everyday troubles, writes a “peppy play”.
On October 5, 1903, the famous Russian writer N.K. Garin-Mikhailovsky wrote in a letter to one of his correspondents: “I met and fell in love with Chekhov. He's bad. And it burns out like the most wonderful day of autumn. Delicate, subtle, barely perceptible tones.

A beautiful day, caress, peace, and the sea, mountains doze in it, and this moment seems eternal with a wonderful pattern given. And tomorrow ... He knows his tomorrow and is glad and satisfied that he has finished his drama "The Cherry Orchard".

(No Ratings Yet)

related posts:

1. For the first time, A.P. Chekhov mentions the idea of ​​writing this play in one of his letters in the spring of 1901. She was conceived by him as a comedy, "like a funny play, wherever the devil would walk like a yoke." In 1903, at the height of work on The Cherry Orchard, A.P. Chekhov wrote to friends: “The whole play is cheerful, frivolous.” Its theme is “the estate goes under the hammer” [...] ...
2. The plot of The Cherry Orchard is based on problems well known to the author: the sale of a house for debts, an attempt by one of his father’s friends to buy the Chekhov’s house, and finally, Anya’s “liberation” is akin to the state of the writer after the “Taganrog captivity”. The idea for the play appeared as early as the beginning of 1901, but work on The Cherry Orchard would not begin until 1903 and would be completed in a few months […]...
3. The idea of ​​the play “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov is attributed to the spring of 1901. So, in March, the playwright, in a letter to his wife, OL Knipper-Chekhova, mentioned that he was working on a very funny play. And in the autumn of the same year, Chekhov shared separate notes with the actors of the Moscow Art Theater: “A branch of blossoming cherries that climbed from the garden straight into the room through the open […]...
4. Plan Defining the genre of the play by A.P. Chekhov Disputes about the genre affiliation of The Cherry Orchard Defining the genre of the play by A.P. Chekhov Already at the first mention of the beginning of work on a new play in 1901, A.P. Chekhov told his wife that he had planned he is a new play, and one in which everything will be turned upside down. This is what predetermined […]
5. The play "The Cherry Orchard" is Chekhov's last dramatic work, a sad elegy about the passing time of "noble nests". In a letter to N. A. Leikin, Chekhov admitted: “I terribly love everything that in Russia is called an estate. This word has not yet lost its poetic connotation.” The playwright was dear to everything that is connected with the estate life, she symbolized the warmth of family [...] ...
6. The plan The origins of the work Originality and timeliness A play born in pain Artistic methods and style The origins of the work Very often the question arises, what is supposed to be in the history of the creation of Chekhov's “The Cherry Orchard”? In order to understand this, it is necessary to remember at the turn of which eras Anton Pavlovich worked. He was born in the 19th century, society was changing, people were changing [...] ...
7. At the beginning of the 20th century, Gorky turned to dramaturgy. He writes his first plays almost simultaneously. “At the Bottom” was conceived earlier than “Petty Bourgeois”, the idea of ​​“Summer Residents” was outlined even before the first premiere of “At the Bottom”. Work on the play began in 1900. In January of the following year, Gorky wrote to Stanislavsky: “I started another play. Bosyatskaya. There are twenty people involved. Very […]...
8. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" became the most famous work of world drama of the 20th century, theatrical figures of the whole world turned to its comprehension, but most of the stage interpretations of Chekhov's comedy were created in the writer's homeland - in Russia. As you know, the premiere of The Cherry Orchard took place on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater in 1904, the directors were K. Stanislavsky and V. Nemirovich-Danchenko. […]...
9. The heroes of the play "The Cherry Orchard" do not carry any symbolic load. Chekhov transfers the metaphorical emphasis to the inanimate object - the garden, which acquires a symbolic meaning. The garden in this play is not a decoration, but a stage image. It symbolizes the measure of labor, the measure of human life. Chekhov's garden embodies a long peaceful life, the continuity of generations, long tireless work, not counting on [...] ...
10. Chekhov insisted that The Cherry Orchard was a comedy. The first stage directors of the Moscow Art Theater read it as a tragedy. The debate over the genre of the play continues to this day. The range of director's interpretations is wide: comedy, drama, lyrical comedy, tragicomedy, tragedy. It is impossible to answer this question unambiguously. The tragic in "The Cherry Orchard" is constantly strayed into farce, and drama emerges through the comic. […]...
11. The play "The Cherry Orchard" was written by A.P. Chekhov in 1903, at the turn of the era. At this time, the author is full of the feeling that Russia is on the threshold of huge changes. Like any person, Chekhov dreamed of the future, of a new life that would bring people something bright, pure and beautiful. It is this motive of expecting a better life that sounds in the play [...] ...
12. Innovation in literature is the destruction of canons, perceived at a certain moment as the norm. Departure from the canons is dictated by the peculiarities of the life material on the basis of which the innovative writer creates his works. And the vital material bears the stamp of its time. There are "ideas of time", that is, "forms of time" in which these ideas are revealed. The innovative writer deviates from the established rules [...] ...
13. 1. The Cherry Orchard as a scene and the basis of the plot of the play. 2. The meaning of the cherry orchard in the present, past and future of the characters in the play. 3. Comparison of the cherry orchard with Russia. The name of A.P. Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" seems quite natural. The action takes place in an old noble estate. The house is surrounded by a large cherry orchard. Moreover, the development of the plot of the play is connected with [...] ...
14. In the three-part system of characters in Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard, Varya is one of the figures symbolizing the present. Unlike Ranevskaya, her adoptive mother, who cannot break with her past, and her half-sister Anya, who lives in the distant future, Varya is a person who is completely adequate to the times. This allows her to reasonably assess the situation. Strict and rational, […]
15. 1. Life and garden (based on the play by A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”). 2. The theme of happiness in the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard". 3. “On the edge of a cliff into the future” (based on the play by A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”). 4. When there is another life outside the windows ... (based on the play by A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”). 5. The future in the view of Chekhov's heroes […]...
16. Plan The problem of the theme of the play “The Cherry Orchard” The main theme of the play The system of images as a means of revealing the theme of the work The problem of the theme of the play “The Cherry Orchard” In the last play by A.P. then the luxurious Cherry Orchard of ruined nobles. However, the sale of the garden is something that lies on […]...
17. Consider Chekhov's stories. Lyrical mood, piercing sadness and laughter... Such are his plays - unusual plays, and even more so seemed strange to Chekhov's contemporaries. But it was in them that the “watercolor” of Chekhov's colors, his penetrating lyricism, his piercing accuracy and frankness, manifested itself most vividly and deeply. Chekhov's dramaturgy has several plans, and what the characters say is by no means [...] ...
18. Chekhov conceived this work as a comedy, as a funny play, "wherever the devil walks like a yoke." But K. S. Stanislavsky and V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, highly appreciating the work, perceived it as a drama. The external plot of The Cherry Orchard is the change of owners of the house and garden, the sale of an ordinary estate for debts. The businesslike and practical merchant Lopakhin opposes the beautiful here, but absolutely not [...] ...
19. On October 5, 1903, N.K. Garin-Mikhailovsky wrote to one of his correspondents: “I met and fell in love with Chekhov. He's bad. And it burns out like the most wonderful day of autumn. Delicate, subtle, barely perceptible tones. A beautiful day, caress, peace, and the sea, mountains doze in it, and this moment seems eternal with a wonderful pattern given. And tomorrow… He knows his tomorrow […]...
20. The play "The Cherry Orchard" is the last work of Chekhov. In the eighties, Chekhov conveyed the tragic situation of people who have lost the meaning of their lives. The play was staged at the Art Theater in 1904. The twentieth century is coming, and Russia is finally becoming a capitalist country, a country of factories, factories and railways. This process accelerated with the liberation of the peasantry by Alexander P. The features of the new include […]...
21. The play “The Cherry Orchard” is the last work of A.P. Chekhov. It was staged at the Art Theater in 1904. The 20th century is coming, and Russia is becoming a capitalist country, a country of factories, plants and railways. This process accelerated after the emancipation of the peasantry. The features of the new relate not only to the economy, but also to society, they are changing […]...
22. Then a person will become better when We show him what he is. AP Chekhov How understandable were the conflicts in classical plays before Chekhov: Hamlet and Claudius, Chatsky and Famusov, Katerina and Kabanova. Chekhov is not like that. You don't know who to sympathize with. They all seem to be good people: Ranevskaya, Lopakhin, Trofimov. But why don't they […]
23. “The Cherry Orchard” is a capacious and ambiguous name, just like this image itself. It is wrong to understand it only as the scene of the play. The sale of the cherry orchard lies at the heart of its plot, and it can be said that all the heroes of the comedy are characterized in relation to it. But even more important is the meaning attached to the image of the cherry orchard. It is known that at first Chekhov […]
24. Preparation for the Unified State Examination: An essay on the topic: The main characters of the play “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov: images, characterization of heroes, helplessness in life A.P. Chekhov depicted the turning point of the twentieth century of the Russian Empire in the Life of landowners, serfs, and the intelligentsia. The main characters of the play “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov act as representatives of different strata of the social system: feudal (L.A. Ranevskaya, Gaev, Anna) and bourgeois [...] ...
25. The Cherry Orchard was the last and, one might say, the final play by Anton Chekhov. He wrote it shortly before his death, in 1904, at the turn of the eras, when the anticipation of changes in society was especially noticeable. On the eve of the social explosion, he, as a creative person, could not help but feel the general mood, the uncertainty of the moment almost involuntarily caused the need to comprehend the reality of his day from […]...
26. Disputes about the genre of The Cherry Orchard have not subsided to this day, but they were initiated by the leaders of the Moscow Art Theater and the author himself. Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko saw in the play "the heavy drama of Russian life", and Chekhov claimed: "I did not come out with a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce." He insisted that there should be no "crying tone" in the performance. Really, […]...
27. 1. What themes and images traditional for Russian literature are reflected in A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”? The traditional theme of the ruin of noble nests, the doom of the nobility, the coming to replace it with the bourgeoisie. The Cherry Orchard is a typical noble nest. 2. What role does Gaev play in the system of images of A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”? Gaev is a fragment of the degenerate nobility, [...] ...
28. All the plays of A.P. Chekhov are interesting multifaceted paintings that penetrate into the most remote corners of the reader's soul. They are lyrical, frank, tragic ... They have both cheerful laughter and sad notes. This is what makes the author's works special and unusual. Very often it becomes a difficult task to determine what genre Chekhov's works belong to. “The Cherry Orchard” The author refers [...] ...
29. The Cherry Orchard was Chekhov's last and, one might say, final play. He wrote it shortly before his death, at the turning point of eras, when the anticipation of changes in society was especially noticeable. On the eve of the social explosion, he, as a creative person, could not but feel the general mood, the uncertainty of the moment almost involuntarily aroused the need to comprehend contemporary reality from the standpoint of the past […]...
30. The play "The Cherry Orchard" was written by Chekhov shortly before his death. It is impossible to imagine a person who would not know this play. In this touching work, Chekhov, as it were, says goodbye to the world, which could be more merciful and humane. Studying Chekhov's work "The Cherry Orchard", I would like to note one feature of his heroes: they are all ordinary people, and none [...] ...
31. In the play, Chekhov generalizes the theme of the death of noble nests, reveals the doom of the nobility and the coming of new social forces to replace it. The Russia of the past, the Russia of cherry orchards with their elegiac beauty, is represented by the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev. These are fragments of the local nobility. They are indecisive, not adapted to life, passive. The only thing they can do is make pompous speeches like Gaev [...] ...
32. Every man's destiny is created by his morals. The ancient aphorism “The Cherry Orchard” is the last play by A.P. Chekhov. When he held her prints in his hands, he did not have long to live, a few months. Like any play, it is inhabited by various actors: among them are the main, secondary, episodic. But all the characters created by the mature Chekhov almost always open [...] ...
33. A.P. Chekhov does not have “superfluous”, random phrases, words. Every detail is always firmly and logically connected to the main content. Therefore, the scenery of the second act of the play “The Cherry Orchard” is symbolic: “an old, rickety, long-abandoned chapel…”, “stones that were once gravestones…”, “a vaguely marked city that can only be seen in very good weather…”. The heroes' understanding of the past and the future is manifested [...] ...
34. In Chekhov's old plays, the silent participant in the events was the house, the abode that could tell a lot about the owners. The further the action unfolded, the clearer the participants became and the less attention the viewer paid to the auxiliary eloquence of the interiors. It was assumed that the current owners would leave in due time and other voices would sound under the same roof. Quite different in the last play: under the roof of the Gaevs [...] ...
35. On September 15, 1903, Chekhov wrote to Stanislavsky's wife, M.P. Alekseeva (Lilina): “I did not get a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce ...” After reading the play, Stanislavsky answered Chekhov: “This is not a comedy, not a farce, like You wrote. This is a tragedy…” Since then, the controversy about the genre of “The Cherry Orchard” has not ceased. The students were asked to answer the traditional question: “Why [...]
36. "The Cherry Orchard" ... It is impossible to find a person who would not know this play by Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. There is something surprisingly touching in the very sound of these words - “cherry orchard”. This is the writer's swan song, the last "forgive" the world, which could be more humane, more merciful, more beautiful. Comedy in four acts. I recall conversations in the lesson that Chekhov insistently recommended that […]
37. Chekhov does not have "superfluous", random phrases, words. Every detail is always firmly and logically connected to the main content. Therefore, the scenery of the second act is symbolic: “An old, rickety, long-abandoned chapel…”, “stones that were once gravestones…”, “a vaguely marked city that can only be seen in very good weather…”. The heroes' understanding of the past and the future will be manifested not only in directed monologues, […] ...
38. Plan The social statuses of the heroes of the play - as one of the characteristics Brief characteristics of the main characters Brief characteristics of the secondary characters The social statuses of the heroes of the play - as one of the characteristics In the final play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard" there is no division into main and secondary characters. They are all major, even seemingly episodic roles are of great importance for [...] ...

A.P. Chekhov first mentioned the idea of ​​writing the play "The Cherry Orchard" in one of his letters dated in the spring of 1901. At first, it was conceived by him "as a funny play, wherever the devil would walk like a yoke." In 1903, when work on The Cherry Orchard continued, A.P. Chekhov wrote to his friends: "The whole play is cheerful, frivolous." The theme of the play "the estate goes under the hammer" was by no means new to the writer. Previously, she was touched by him in the drama "Fatherlessness" (1878-1881). Throughout his career, Chekhov was interested and worried about the psychological tragedy of the situation of the sale of the estate and the loss of the house. Therefore, the play "The Cherry Orchard" reflected many of the writer's life experiences associated with the sale of his father's house in Taganrog, and acquaintance with the Kiselevs, who owned the Babkino estate near Moscow, where the Chekhov family visited in the summer of 1885-1887. In many ways, the image of Gaev was written off from A.S. Kiselev, who became a member of the board of the bank in Kaluga after the forced sale of the estate for debts. In 1888 and 1889, Chekhov rested at the Lintvarev estate, near Sumy, Kharkov province. There he saw with his own eyes the neglected and dying noble estates. Chekhov could observe the same picture in detail in 1892-1898, living in his estate Melikhovo, and also in the summer of 1902, when he lived in Lyubimovka - the estate of K. S. Stanislavsky. The growing strength of the "third estate", which was notable for its tough business acumen, gradually ousted from the "noble nests" their ruined masters, who thoughtlessly lived out their fortunes. From all this, Chekhov drew the idea for the play, which later reflected many details of the life of the inhabitants of the dying noble estates.

Work on the play "The Cherry Orchard" required extraordinary efforts from the author. So, he writes to friends: "I write four lines a day, and those with unbearable torment." Chekhov, constantly struggling with bouts of illness and everyday troubles, writes a "peppy play".

On October 5, 1903, the famous Russian writer N.K. Garin-Mikhailovsky wrote in a letter to one of his correspondents: “I met and fell in love with Chekhov. He is bad. , caress, peace, and the sea, mountains doze in it, and this moment seems eternal with a wonderful pattern.

Chekhov also sends several letters to directors and actors, where he comments in detail on some scenes of The Cherry Orchard, gives the characteristics of his characters, with particular emphasis on the comedic features of the play. But K.S. Stanislavsky and Vl. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, the founders of the Art Theater, perceived it as a drama. According to Stanislavsky, the reading of the play by the troupe was greeted with "unanimous enthusiasm." He writes to Chekhov: "I cried like a woman, I wanted to, but I could not restrain myself. I hear you say: "Excuse me, but this is a farce." No, for a simple person this is a tragedy ... I feel special for this play tenderness and love."

The staging of the play required a special theatrical language, new intonations. This was well understood by both its creator and the actors. M.P. Lilina (the first performer of the role of Anya) wrote to A.P. Chekhov on November 11, 1903: "... It seemed to me that The Cherry Orchard is not a play, but a piece of music, a symphony. And this play must be played especially truthfully but without any real roughness."
However, the director's interpretation of The Cherry Orchard did not satisfy Chekhov. “This is a tragedy, no matter what outcome to a better life you discover in the last act,” Stanislavsky writes to the author, affirming his vision and the logic of the play’s movement to a dramatic finale, which meant the end of the former life, the loss of the house and the death of the garden. Chekhov was extremely indignant that the performance was deprived of comedic intonations. He believed that Stanislavsky, who played the role of Gaev, dragged out the action in the fourth act too much. Chekhov confesses to his wife: "How terrible it is! The act, which should last 12 minutes maximum, you have 40 minutes. Stanislavsky ruined my play."

In December 1903, Stanislavsky complained: "The Cherry Orchard" "does not bloom yet. Flowers had just appeared, the author arrived and confused us all. The flowers have fallen, and now only new buds are appearing."

A.P. Chekhov wrote "The Cherry Orchard" as a play about home, about life, about the motherland, about love, about losses, about the rapidly escaping time. However, at the beginning of the 20th century this did not seem far beyond dispute. Each new play by Chekhov caused a variety of assessments. The comedy "The Cherry Orchard" was no exception, where the nature of the conflict, the characters, the poetics of Chekhov's dramaturgy were new and unexpected.

For example, A. M. Gorky described Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" as a rehash of old motifs: "I listened to Chekhov's play - in reading it does not give the impression of a big thing. New - not a word. Everything - moods, ideas - if you can talk about them - faces - all this was already in his plays. Of course - beautifully and - of course - from the stage it will blow on the audience with green melancholy. But I don’t know what the melancholy is about.

Despite constant disagreements, the premiere of "The Cherry Orchard" nevertheless took place on January 17, 1904 - on the birthday of A.P. Chekhov. The Art Theater timed it to the 25th anniversary of the literary activity of A.P. Chekhov. The entire artistic and literary elite of Moscow gathered in the hall, and among the spectators were A. Bely, V. Ya. Bryusov, A. M. Gorky, S. V. Rakhmaninov, F. I. Chaliapin. The appearance on the stage after the third act of the author was met with long applause. The last play by A.P. Chekhov, which became his creative testament, began its independent life.

The demanding Russian public greeted the play with great enthusiasm, whose bright spirit could not help captivating the viewer. Performances of "The Cherry Orchard" were successfully staged in many theaters in Russia. But, nevertheless, Chekhov never saw a performance that fully corresponded to his creative ideas. "The chapter on Chekhov is not over yet," Stanislavsky wrote, recognizing that A.P. Chekhov had far outstripped the development of the theatre.

Contrary to critical forecasts, The Cherry Orchard has become an unfading classic of the national theater. The artistic discoveries of the author in dramaturgy, his original vision of the contradictory aspects of life are unusually clearly manifested in this thoughtful work.

Chekhov's Cherry Orchard.
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov! How much is connected with this name in the soul of a Russian person. He was endowed with amazing talent and hard work. Namely, these qualities put him on a par with the best representatives of Russian literature.
He was always attracted by the high art of simplicity and brevity, and at the same time, he strove in his works to enhance the emotional and semantic expressiveness of the narrative.
The work of A.P. Chekhov is permeated with a constant struggle with the unbearable longing of being. One of the few whose eyes were turned not just to the future - he lived this future. With his pen, forcing us, readers, to think about problems that are not momentary, but much more important and significant.
IN 1904 In 1998, the premiere of A.P. Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard was triumphant on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater. After previous, mixed critical reviews of Chekhov's productions, The Cherry Orchard was accepted immediately and unconditionally. Moreover, the play gave impetus to the birth of a "new theater" gravitating towards symbolism and the grotesque.
The Cherry Orchard became an epilogue, a requiem for an entire era. A vivid parody and a desperate comedy with a finale that gives us some hope for the future, this is perhaps the main, innovative phenomenon of this play.
Chekhov, placing the accents quite accurately, clearly gives us an understanding of the ideal, without which, in his opinion, a meaningful human life is impossible. He is sure that pragmatism without spirituality is doomed. That is why Chekhov is closer not to Lopakhin, a representative of capitalism that was emerging in Russia, but rather to the “eternal student” Petya Trofimov, at first glance pathetic and funny, but it is for him that the author sees the future, because Petya is kind.
Anya, another character that Chekhov sympathizes with. It seems to be inept and ridiculous, but there is a certain charm and pureness in her, for which Anton Pavlovich is ready to forgive her everything. He understands perfectly well that Lopakhins, Ranevskaya, etc. will not disappear from our lives, Chekhov still sees the future for good romantics. Even if they are somewhat helpless.
Anton Pavlovich's indignation causes Lopakhin's complacency. With all the originality of Chekhov's humanism, one cannot feel or hear this. Forgotten in a boarded up house, Firs sounds like a metaphor, the meaning of which is still relevant today. Let Firs be stupid, old, but he is a man, and he has been forgotten. The man has been forgotten!
The essence of the play is in its everydayness. But an empty, boarded-up house with Firs forgotten in it and the sound of an ax cutting down a cherry orchard make a depressing impression, touching and revealing the subtle and painful state of our soul. Once, through the mouth of his hero, Shukshin said: "It is not death that is terrible, but parting."
The play "The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov is just about this, about parting. Parting, in the philosophical sense, with life. Let, by and large, not entirely successful, somewhat unhappy, past in useless aspirations, but the one that will never be. Alas, this understanding usually comes at the end of our existence on mortal earth.
"The Cherry Orchard" is a deeply tragic thing, nevertheless, it is called a comedy by Chekhov. Paradox? Not at all. This, his last dying work, is a kind of farewell to the reader, the era, life ... Apparently, therefore, fear, sadness and at the same time joy are “poured” through the whole play.
Chekhov called The Cherry Orchard a comedy not to define the genre, but as an indication to action. By playing a play as a tragedy, tragedy cannot be achieved. She will not be sad, or scary or sad, she will be nothing. Only in a comedy interpretation, having reached dissonance, can one achieve an understanding of the acuteness of the problems of human existence.
A.P. Chekhov's reflections on universal human values ​​do not leave us indifferent even today. Theatrical performances of The Cherry Orchard on the modern stage are proof of this.

The origins of the work

Very often the question arises, what is supposed to be in the history of the creation of Chekhov's "Cherry Orchard"? In order to understand this, it is necessary to remember at the turn of which eras Anton Pavlovich worked. He was born in the 19th century, society was changing, people and their worldview were changing, Russia was moving towards a new system, which developed rapidly after the abolition of serfdom. The history of the creation of the play "The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov - the final work of his work - begins, perhaps, with the very departure of young Anton to Moscow in 1879.

From an early age, Anton Chekhov was fond of dramaturgy and, being a student of the gymnasium, tried to write in this genre, but these first attempts at writing became known after the death of the writer. One of the plays is called "Fatherlessness", written around 1878. A very voluminous work, it was staged on the stage of the theater only in 1957. The volume of the play did not correspond to Chekhov's style, where "brevity is the sister of talent", but those touches that changed the entire Russian theater are already visible.

Anton Pavlovich's father had a small shop, located on the first floor of the Chekhovs' house, the family lived on the second. However, since 1894, things in the store went from bad to worse, and in 1897 the father went bankrupt completely, the whole family was forced, after the sale of property, to move to Moscow, in which the older children had already settled by that time. Therefore, from an early age, Anton Chekhov learned what it was like when you have to part with the most precious thing - your home to pay off your debts. Already at a more mature age, Chekhov repeatedly encountered cases of the sale of noble estates at auctions to "new people", and in modern terms - to businessmen.

Originality and timeliness

The creative history of The Cherry Orchard begins in 1901, when Chekhov, for the first time in a letter to his wife, announced that he had conceived a new play, unlike those that he had written before. From the very beginning, he conceived it as a kind of comedic farce, in which everything would be very frivolous, fun and carefree. The plot of the play was the sale of an old landowner's estate for debts. Chekhov had already tried to reveal this topic earlier in "Fatherlessness", but it took him 170 pages of handwritten text, and a play of such a volume could not fit into the framework of one performance. Yes, and Anton Pavlovich did not like to remember his early offspring. Having honed the skill of the playwright to perfection, he again took up her.

The situation of the sale of the house was close and familiar to Chekhov, and after the sale of his father's house in Taganrog, he was interested and excited by the psychic tragedy of such cases. Thus, his own painful impressions and the story of his friend A.S. Kiselev became the basis of the play. Also before the eyes of the writer passed many abandoned noble estates in the Kharkov province, where he rested. The action of the play takes place, by the way, in those parts. Anton Pavlovich observed the same deplorable state of the estates and the situation of their owners on his estate in Melikhovo, and as a guest in the estate of K.S. Stanislavsky. He observed what was happening and comprehended what was happening for more than 10 years.

The process of impoverishment of the nobles lasted a long time, they simply lived out their fortunes, wasting them unwisely and not thinking about the consequences. The image of Ranevskaya has become collective, depicting proud, noble people who have difficulty adapting to modern life, from which the right to own a human resource in the form of serfs working for the well-being of their masters has disappeared.

A play born in pain

About three years passed from the beginning of work on the play to its production. This was due to a number of reasons. One of the main ones is the author's poor health, and even in letters to friends he complained that the work was progressing very slowly, sometimes it turned out to write no more than four lines a day. However, despite feeling unwell, he tried to write a work that was light in genre.

The second reason can be called Chekhov's desire to fit into his play, intended for staging on the stage, the whole result of thoughts about the fate of not only ruined landowners, but also about such people typical of that era as Lopakhin, the eternal student Trofimov, in whom one feels a revolutionary-minded intellectual . Even the work on the image of Yasha required enormous efforts, because it was through him that Chekhov showed how the historical memory of his roots is being erased, how society and the attitude towards the Motherland as a whole are changing.

The work on the characters was very meticulous. It was important for Chekhov that the actors could fully convey the idea of ​​the play to the audience. In letters, he described in detail the characters of the characters, gave detailed comments on each scene. And he emphasized that his play is not a drama, but a comedy. However, V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko and K.S. Stanislavsky did not manage to consider anything comedic in the play, which greatly upset the author. The production of The Cherry Orchard was difficult for both the stage directors and the playwright. After the premiere, which took place on January 17, 1904, on Chekhov's birthday, disputes broke out between critics, but no one remained indifferent to her.

Artistic methods and style

On the one hand, the history of writing Chekhov's comedy "The Cherry Orchard" is not so long, and on the other hand, Anton Pavlovich went to her all his creative life. Images have been collected for decades, artistic techniques that show everyday life without pathos on stage have also been honed for more than one year. "The Cherry Orchard" became another cornerstone in the annals of the new theater, which began largely thanks to Chekhov's talent as a playwright.

From the moment of the first production to the present day, the directors of this performance do not have a common opinion on the genre of this play. Someone sees a deep tragedy in what is happening, calling it a drama, some perceive the play as a tragicomedy or tragedy. But everyone is unanimous in the opinion that The Cherry Orchard has long become a classic not only in Russian, but also in the global dramaturgy.

A brief description of the history of the creation and writing of the famous play will help grade 10 students prepare a summary and lessons while studying this wonderful comedy.

Artwork test