Chekhov's Final Play The Cherry Orchard example essay topic

The Cherry Orchard: Critical Analysis The Cherry Orchard by Anton Chekhov is about a Russian family that is unable to prevent its beloved estate from being sold in an auction due to financial problems. The play has been dubbed a tragedy by many of its latter producers. However, Chekhov labeled his play a farce, or more of a comedy. Although this play has a very tragic backdrop of Russia's casualty-ridden involvement in both World Wars and the Communist Revolution, the characters and their situations suggest a light-hearted tone, even though they struggle against the upcoming loss of the orchard. Apathy and passivity plague the characters and contribute often to the comic side of things.

Sometimes, however, the passivity erupts the tragic flaws of the characters as they fail to save the estate. Another theme of The Cherry Orchard is the thin line between reality and outer appearance between which the characters cannot distinguish. Although indirect, this confusion provides the play yet again with comedy. On the contrary, the confusion is also seen as another tragic flaw of the characters contributing to the downfall of the estate and its orchard. Another theme Chekhov portrays is the effect of choice and free will. In some surcumstances this is the ultimate form of tragedy, depending on the outcome.

With this, Chekhov succeeds in confusing tragedy and comedy in his final play The Cherry Orchard. Chekhov's characters in The Cherry Orchard contribute greatly to the comedy. The action takes place on a Russian estate belonging to Mrs. Ranevsky. There is a debate over finances and a wealthy businessman named Lopakhin, whose father was a serf on the estate, thinks of a way to solve the financial problems. The family, however, seems to ignore the problem of losing the estate. This is the first instance of comedy in that the family chooses to ignore the problems while a wealthy businessman pleads with them to take action.

The family continues to ignore the future for the estate as personalities are developed in each of the characters. A very comical character is the clerk Yepikhodov, also known as 'Twenty-two Calamities. ' ; In his entrance he stumbles over a chair while babbling at whatever comes to his mind. Firs, a senile manservant, is the next to add comic elements as he hobbles across the stage also talking to himself. As if the characters themselves weren't funny enough, their interaction and dialogue between each other is just as comical. Gayev, Mrs. Ranevsky's brother, continues to spit out billiard shots as the conversation continues, after which he weeps over the nursery's bookcase.

Pishchik, a neighbor who is also in financial struggle, grabs Mrs. Ranevsky's pills out of her hand and swallows them all for no apparent reason. Again in this scene Firs mutters to himself as he trails off of the conversation taking place. The characters, it seems, are being warmed up for some sort of comic routine. Yet through this dialogue, unpleasant truths spring forth. The mortgage has not been paid in a while due to Mrs. Ranevsky being broke. And while Mrs. Ranevsky was in Paris, Varya has not been paying the mortgage.

This is somewhat tragic because the estate is now going to be lost because of Mrs. Ranevsky and Varya not being able to pay off the estate's debts. When Lopakhin proposes his idea the family finds it impractical and Gayev even calls the idea 'utter nonsense'; (Chekhov 226-296). Pishchik also reveals that he too is going to be losing his estate due to an unpaid mortgage. Looking for a loan from Mrs. Ranevsky, he is denied.

This is the first instance of tragedy. The character's actions, moreover, are the comical focus in the play. It seems as though Chekhov gives the characters an awareness of their faults, and their actions reinforce these faults, as though the characters had forgotten them. For example, Mrs. Ranevsky pities herself for her carelessness with money, then immediately bestows one of her last gold coins to a beggar.

Another example of a character's inability to suppress foolishness is Yepikhodov's role of the 'unfortunate clod'; (Galens 21-39). He continues to stumble over furniture in each of his appearances. He is immediately dubbed 'Twenty-two Calamities. ' ; Gayev's actions also provoke comedy in The Cherry Orchard. He is addicted to fruit candy and spends every cent he has on feeding his addiction. Another of his actions is his incisive billiard shot calls.

Sparatically in the conversation or in mid sentence he will call a shot as if he has a cue in his hand at a pool hall. John Fiero writes in his critical analysis of The Cherry Orchard: Madame Ranevsky is a foolish woman only too anxious to return to a worthless young lover; Gayev is an amiable ass who talks too much; Anya is a goose and her Trofimov a solemn windbag; Lopakhin, the practical self-made man, is confused and unhappy; Epihodov a clumsy idiot; Dunyasha a foolish girl; Yasha an insufferable jumped-up lad; and Firs far gone in senility (Corbin, John 33-37). This quote shows the comic elements of the character's personalities and how they are put to work in the play. Apathy and passivity contrast the comic side of the characters by roping the tragedy back into focus. Mrs. Ranevsky is the biggest example of these qualities.

She states, 'If only this heavy load could be lifted from my heart; if only I could forget my past!' ; (Galens 21-39). This is a prime example of how Mrs. Ranevsky wishes to no longer worry about what is ahead, and now takes life as it comes. In this manner she becomes passive and lets the auction take place. Although she has an extremely small amount of money, she goes out and buys gifts for Anya, lends money to Pishchik, and also foolishly gives a gold coin to a beggar she ran into on the street. Again, her passiveness leads her to do these things. Anya and Varya become passive solely in the fact that they believe everything will work out in their favor.

Gayev, who also shares this belief, is even more passive than his nieces, 'I've been thinking, racking my brains; I've got all sorts of remedies, lots of them, which, of course, means I haven't got one. ' ; (Galens 21-39). Gayev seems to ignore the problem at hand while he rambles off billiard shots and eats fruit candy. The whole family ignores Lopakhin as he offers splitting up the land and orchard into plots for summer cottages. Varya, who has been in control of the estate tries to overcome the passivity by cutting her spending down to a minimum. She goes as far as to feed the servants dried peas!

Yet because the debt is so great, this does little. She wants more than anything to enter a convent, yet by the end of the play she does not. Varya is even passive when it comes to her love for Lopakhin, as is Lopakhin passive towards her. They are convinced in marriage, yet neither proposes. When alone, only small talk is exchanged and an interruption intrudes.

Obviously by the end of the end of the play, there are no wedding plans for these two. This passivity is undeniably one of the causes for the downfall of the estate and is another example of tragedy. Although the passive actions of the characters are tragic, they bring forth a laugh in certain situations. The above example of Gayev calling out billiard shots and consuming massive amounts of fruit candy brings images of a drunk blurting nonsense while drowning in his beverages, which is altogether very funny. Lopakhin's constant nagging about making a decision, preferably his own, is constantly pacified and brushed away by the family.

In this manner he is like a giddy dog nipping at your heel, and is also something to laugh heartily at. Also, Lopakhin and Varya's marriage ideas leads into nothing but laughter as it is easy to relate to. It is the cat and mouse game of love where one chases another, only to give up, only to be chased themselves and so on in a continuous loop. Neither is objective towards marriage, yet neither is willing to propose it. Mrs. Ranevsky even pushes it upon Lopakhin, although it is of no use. Lopakhin eventually seems to be set upon proposing when he says to Mrs. Ranevsky, 'I'm ready now...

Let's settle it at once and get it over. I don't feel I'll ever propose without you here. ' ; (Chekhov 226-296). Yet when brought together, nothing is accomplished and they are called away. Laughter springs from the nature of these two characters and their inability to act when called to do so. Comedy is mixed with the tragic flaws of the characters in each of these.

Yet another tragic element in the play is the inability of the characters to distinguish reality from appearances. The whole family, including its servants, seem to believe that everything is under control when in actuality, it is far out of control. Only Lopakhin seems to have a grasp on the situation and is attempting to avoid the loss of the orchard. Mrs. Ranevsky is blind by her passivity which shows as she continues to lead the extravagant life she has led up until the current dilemma. The family is compelled to not show their despair possibly because they think if the problem isn't evident, it is not there.

They conceal their situation by throwing mass parties, keeping servants, and lending money to their neighbors. Although everything looks fine on the outside, the reality on the inside doesn't look so good. This is eventually proven by the loss of the orchard. The final display of tragedy in Chekhov's The Cherry Orchard is the consequences of choices made by the characters. The members of the Ranevsky family are the only victims from the choices made in the play as they choose to remain passive and let the auction consume their estate. Since the Ranevsky family remained passive, their estate fell into the hands of Lopakhin who purchased it at the auction.

It is ironic in two ways since Lopakhin's father was a serf on the once wealthy estate and also that he had tried to help the family prevent the estate from being sold. He benefited from the choices made by the Ranevsky family. Another example of this is Pishchik and his finance dilemma. He allows his estate to be mined and eventually makes enough money to pay his debts; although he pays Mrs. Ranevsky back, he is too late to help in her time of need. Chekhov uses this as a theme to blame consequences on those who refuse to act in a situation to save themselves. This shows how the tragedy falls primarily on the Ranevsky family in the end because of their actions, or lack thereof.

Chekhov's final play The Cherry Orchard is a masterpiece in the way it intertwines tragedy and comedy into one dialogue. This play succeeded in telling a story while it shined in its most comic moments, and dulled in its tragic mourning's. The perception of whether this is a comedy or a tragedy is a battle uselessly fought. The play clearly exhibits both a comic perception as well as a tragic one. The comedy, although more directly comes from the characters themselves, would be half as noticeable without the tragic occurrences of the family and those surrounding them. Just as with comedy, the tragic moments would not seem as tragic without the comic outbursts of the characters and their repeated failing actions.

Chekhov intended The Cherry Orchard to be a comedy or farce; almost all of the producers that chose to interpret The Cherry Orchard did so as a tragedy. Clearly it is neither. It incorporates both.

Bibliography

Chekhov, Anton. 'The Cherry Orchard. ' ; Best Plays by Chekhov. New York: Young, 1956.
226-296. Corbin, John. 'Russian High Comedy. ' ; Galens 38-39. Fiero, John. Galens 33-37. Galens, David and Spampinato, Lynn. Drama For Students. Detroit: Gale, 1998.