The play " Cherry Orchard", the last dramatic work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, can be considered a kind of testament of the writer, which reflected Chekhov’s cherished thoughts, his thoughts about the past, present and future of Russia.

The plot of the play is based on the history of a noble estate. As a result of the changes taking place in Russian society, the former owners of the estate are forced to give way to new ones. This plot outline is very symbolic, it reflects important stages socio-historical development of Russia. Fates Chekhov's characters turn out to be connected with the cherry orchard, in the image of which the past, present and future intersect. The characters remember the past of the estate, about those times when the cherry orchard, cultivated by serfs, still generated income. This period coincided with the childhood and youth of Ranevskaya and Gaev, and they remember these happy, carefree years with involuntary nostalgia. But serfdom canceled long ago, the estate is gradually falling into disrepair, the cherry orchard is no longer profitable. The time of telegraphs is coming and railways, the era of business people and entrepreneurs.

The representative of this new formation in Chekhov's play is Lopakhin, who comes from the Ranevskaya family of former serfs. His memories of the past are of a completely different nature; his ancestors were slaves on the very estate of which he now becomes the owner.

Conversations, memories, disputes, conflicts - all the external action of Chekhov's play is centered around the fate of the estate and the cherry orchard. Immediately after Ranevskaya’s arrival, conversations begin about how the mortgaged and remortgaged estate can be saved from auction. As the play progresses, this problem will become increasingly acute.

But, as is most often the case with Chekhov, there is no real struggle, no real clash between the former and future owners of the cherry orchard in the play. Quite the opposite. Lopakhin is doing everything possible to help Ranevskaya save the estate from sale, but a complete lack of business skills prevents the hapless owners of the estate from taking advantage of useful tips; they are enough only for complaints and empty rantings. It is not the struggle between the emerging bourgeoisie and the nobility that is giving way to it that interests Chekhov; the fate of specific people, the fate of all of Russia, is much more important to him.

Ranevskaya and Gaev are doomed to lose the estate that is so dear to them and with which it is connected

so many memories, and the reason for this is not only their inability to heed practical advice Lopakhina. The time is coming to pay old bills, but the debt of their ancestors, the debt of their family, the historical guilt of their entire class has not yet been atoned for. The present stems from the past, their connection is obvious, it’s not for nothing that Lyubov Andreevna dreams of her late mother in a white dress in a blooming garden. This reminds us of the past itself. It is very symbolic that Ranevskaya and Gaev, whose fathers and grandfathers did not allow those at whose expense they fed and lived, even into the kitchen, are now entirely dependent on Lopakhin, who has become rich. In this Chekhov sees retribution and shows that the lordly way of life, although it is covered in a poetic haze of beauty, corrupts people, destroys the souls of those who are involved in it. This is, for example, Firs. For him, the abolition of serfdom is a terrible misfortune, as a result of which he, useless and forgotten by everyone, will be left alone in an empty house... The same lordly way of life gave birth to the footman Yasha. He no longer has the devotion to masters that distinguishes old man Firs, but without a twinge of conscience he enjoys all the benefits and conveniences that he can derive from his life under the wing of the kindest Ranevskaya.

Lopakhin is a man of a different type and a different formation. He is businesslike, has a strong grip and firmly knows what and how to do today. It is he who gives specific advice on how to save the estate. However, being a businesslike and practical person, and differing favorably from Ranevskaya and Gaev, Lopakhin is completely devoid of spirituality and the ability to perceive beauty. The magnificent cherry orchard is interesting to him only as an investment, it is remarkable only because it is “very large”; and based on purely practical considerations, Lopakhin proposes to cut it down in order to rent out the land for summer cottages - this is more profitable. Disregarding the feelings of Ranevskaya and Gaev (not out of malice, no, but simply because of a lack of spiritual subtlety), he orders the garden to begin to be cut down, without waiting for the former owners to leave.

It is noteworthy that in Chekhov's play there is not a single happy person. Ranevskaya, who came from Paris to repent of her sins and find peace in the family estate, is forced to return back with old sins and problems, since the estate is being auctioned off and the garden is being cut down. The faithful servant Firs is buried alive in a boarded-up house, where he served all his life. Charlotte's future is unknown; years pass without bringing joy, and dreams of love and motherhood are never realized. Varya, who did not wait for Lopakhin’s offer, is hired by some Ragulins. Perhaps Gaev's fate turns out a little better - he gets a place in the bank, but it is unlikely that he will become a successful financier.

The cherry orchard, in which the past and present intersect so intricately, is also associated with thoughts about the future.

Tomorrow, which, according to Chekhov, should be better than the day of today, are personified in the play by Anya and Petya Trofimov. True, Petya, this thirty-year-old “eternal student”, is hardly capable of real deeds and actions; he only knows how to talk a lot and beautifully. Another thing is Anya. Realizing the beauty of the cherry orchard, she at the same time understands that the garden is doomed, just as her past slave life is doomed, just as the present, full of unspiritual practicality, is doomed. But in the future, Anya is sure, there must be a triumph of justice and beauty. In her words: “We will plant new garden, more luxurious than this” is not only a desire to console the mother, but also an attempt to introduce a new one, future life. Inheriting Ranevskaya’s spiritual sensitivity and sensitivity to beauty, Anya is at the same time full of a sincere desire to change and remake life. She is focused on the future, ready to work and even sacrifice in its name; she dreams of a time when the whole way of life will change, when it will turn into a blooming garden, giving people joy and happiness.

How to arrange such a life? Chekhov does not give recipes for this. Yes, they cannot exist, because it is important that every person, having experienced dissatisfaction with what is, is fired up with a dream of beauty, so that he himself seeks the path to a new life.

“All of Russia is our garden” - these significant words are heard repeatedly in the play, turning the story of the ruin of the estate and the death of the garden into a capacious symbol. The play is full of thoughts about life, its values, real and imaginary, about the responsibility of each person for the world in which he lives and in which his descendants will live.

What is conflict? Conflict is disagreement between people. In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” Chekhov examines various conflicts, the main one of which is the conflict of times, which can be compared to the conflict of generations. Because all the heroes represent representatives of different generations and different times. We can conditionally divide into three groups, so past, present, future.

Young people are for the future tense, and older people are for the past.

The conflict is that it is not of a pronounced nature - this is one of the features dramatic works. Chekhov can note a certain semblance of a philosophical conflict, which is based on different time levels.

Some of the heroes live in memories and a past in which it was cozy and calm (Examples of heroes were Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs). Others live in the present, in which they feel like they are the managers of life; examples are the characters Lopakhin and Varya.

The third group of characters is focused on the future, progressively; the future seems wonderful to them, but they do not know how to achieve what they want. Anya and Petya fall into this category. These heroes are young and inexperienced, so they are waiting for a bright fate.

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefits to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

Introduction
1. Problems of the play by A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard"
2. The embodiment of the past - Ranevskaya and Gaev
3. Exponent of the ideas of the present - Lopakhin
4. Heroes of the future - Petya and Anya
Conclusion
List of used literature

Introduction

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov - writer of the mighty creative talent and a kind of subtle skill, manifested with equal brilliance, both in his stories and in his stories and plays.
Chekhov's plays constituted an entire era in Russian drama and theater and had an immeasurable influence on all their subsequent development.
Continuing and deepening the best traditions dramaturgy of critical realism, Chekhov strove to ensure that in his plays the truth of life, unvarnished, in all its commonness and everyday life, would dominate.
Showing natural progression everyday life ordinary people, Chekhov bases his plots not on one, but on several organically related, intertwined conflicts. At the same time, conflict is predominantly leading and unifying. characters not with each other, but with the entire social environment around them.

Problems of the play by A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard"

The play “The Cherry Orchard” occupies a special place in Chekhov’s work. Before her, he awakened the idea of ​​​​the need to change reality, showing the hostility of man's living conditions, highlighting those features of his characters that doomed them to the position of a victim. In The Cherry Orchard, reality is depicted in its historical development. The topic of changing social structures is being widely developed. The noble estates with their parks and cherry orchards, with their unreasonable owners, are becoming a thing of the past. They are being replaced by business-like and practical people; they are the present of Russia, but not its future. Only the younger generation has the right to cleanse and change life. Hence the main idea of ​​the play: the establishment of a new social force, opposing not only the nobility, but also the bourgeoisie and called upon to rebuild life on the principles of true humanity and justice.
Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” was written during the period of social upsurge of the masses in 1903. She reveals to us another page of him multifaceted creativity, reflecting the complex phenomena of that time. The play amazes us with its poetic power and drama, and is perceived by us as a sharp exposure of the social ills of society, an exposure of those people whose thoughts and actions are far from moral standards of behavior. The writer clearly shows deep psychological conflicts, helps the reader to see the reflection of events in the souls of the heroes, makes us think about the meaning true love and true happiness. Chekhov easily takes us from our present to the distant past. Together with its heroes, we live next to the cherry orchard, see its beauty, clearly feel the problems of that time, together with the heroes we try to find answers to difficult questions. It seems to me that the play “The Cherry Orchard” is a play about the past, present and future not only of its characters, but also of the country as a whole. The author shows the clash between representatives of the past, the present and the future inherent in this present. I think that Chekhov managed to show the justice of the inevitable departure from the historical arena of such seemingly harmless persons as the owners of the cherry orchard. So who are they, the garden owners? What connects their lives with his existence? Why is the cherry orchard so dear to them? Answering these questions, Chekhov reveals an important problem - the problem of passing life, its worthlessness and conservatism.
The very name of Chekhov's play sets one in a lyrical mood. In our minds, a bright and unique image of a blooming garden appears, personifying beauty and the desire for a better life. The main plot of the comedy is related to the sale of this ancient noble estate. This event largely determines the fate of its owners and inhabitants. Thinking about the fate of the heroes, you involuntarily think about more, about the ways of development of Russia: its past, present and future.

The embodiment of the past - Ranevskaya and Gaev

Exponent of the ideas of the present - Lopakhin

Heroes of the future - Petya and Anya

All this involuntarily leads us to the idea that the country needs completely different people who will accomplish different great things. And these other people are Petya and Anya.
Trofimov is a democrat by origin, habits and beliefs. Creating images of Trofimov, Chekhov expresses in this image such leading features as devotion to public causes, desire for a better future and propaganda of the fight for it, patriotism, integrity, courage, and hard work. Trofimov, despite his 26 or 27 years, has a lot of difficult life experience behind him. He has already been expelled from the university twice. He has no confidence that he will not be expelled a third time and that he will not remain an “eternal student.”
Experiencing hunger, poverty, and political persecution, he did not lose faith in new life, which will be based on fair, humane laws and creative creative work. Petya Trofimov sees the failure of the nobility, mired in idleness and inaction. He gives a largely correct assessment of the bourgeoisie, noting its progressive role in the economic development of the country, but denying it the role of creator and creator of new life. In general, his statements are distinguished by directness and sincerity. While treating Lopakhin with sympathy, he nevertheless compares him with a beast of prey, “who eats everything that comes his way.” In his opinion, the Lopakhins are not capable of decisively changing life by building it on reasonable and fair principles. Petya causes deep thoughts in Lopakhin, who in his soul envies the conviction of this “shabby gentleman”, which he himself so lacks.
Trofimov's thoughts about the future are too vague and abstract. “We are heading uncontrollably towards the bright star that burns there in the distance!” - he says to Anya. Yes, his goal is wonderful. But how to achieve it? Where is the main force that can turn Russia into a blooming garden?
Some treat Petya with slight irony, others with undisguised love. In his speeches one can hear a direct condemnation of a dying life, a call for a new one: “I’ll get there. I’ll get there or show others the way to get there.” And he points. He points it out to Anya, whom he loves dearly, although he skillfully hides it, realizing that he is destined for a different path. He tells her: “If you have the keys to the farm, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free like the wind."
The klutz and “shabby gentleman” (as Varya ironically calls Trofimova) lacks Lopakhin’s strength and business acumen. He submits to life, stoically enduring its blows, but is not able to master it and become the master of his destiny. True, he captivated Anya with his democratic ideas, who expresses her readiness to follow him, firmly believing in the wonderful dream of a new blooming garden. But this young seventeen-year-old girl, who gained information about life mainly from books, is pure, naive and spontaneous, has not yet encountered reality.
Anya is full of hope, vitality, but there is still so much inexperience and childhood in her. In terms of character, she is in many ways close to her mother: she has a love for beautiful word, to sensitive intonations. At the beginning of the play, Anya is carefree, quickly moving from concern to animation. She is practically helpless, she is used to living carefree, without thinking about daily bread, O tomorrow. But all this does not prevent Anya from breaking with her usual views and way of life. Its evolution is taking place before our eyes. Anya’s new views are still naive, but she says goodbye to the old home and the old world forever.
It is unknown whether she will have enough spiritual strength, perseverance and courage to complete the path of suffering, labor and hardship. Will she be able to maintain that ardent faith in the best, which makes her say goodbye to her without regret? old life? Chekhov does not answer these questions. And this is natural. After all, we can only talk about the future speculatively.

Conclusion

The truth of life in all its consistency and completeness is what Chekhov was guided by when creating his images. That is why each character in his plays represents a living human character, attracting with great meaning and deep emotionality, convincing with its naturalness, the warmth of human feelings.
In terms of the strength of his direct emotional impact, Chekhov is perhaps the most outstanding playwright in art. critical realism.
Chekhov's dramaturgy, which responded to pressing issues of his time, addressed the everyday interests, experiences and worries of ordinary people, awakened the spirit of protest against inertia and routine, and called for social activity to improve life. Therefore, she has always had a huge influence on readers and viewers. The significance of Chekhov's drama has long gone beyond the borders of our homeland; it has become global. Chekhov's dramatic innovation is widely recognized outside the borders of our great homeland. I am proud that Anton Pavlovich is a Russian writer, and no matter how different the masters of culture may be, they probably all agree that Chekhov, with his works, prepared the world for better life, more beautiful, more fair, more reasonable.
If Chekhov looked with hope into the 20th century, which was just beginning, then we live in the new 21st century, still dreaming of our cherry orchard and of those who will nurture it. Flowering trees cannot grow without roots. And the roots are the past and the present. Therefore, for a wonderful dream to come true, the younger generation must combine within themselves high culture, education with practical knowledge reality, will, perseverance, hard work, humane goals, that is, to embody the best features of Chekhov's heroes.

List of used literature

1. History of Russian literature second half of the 19th century century / ed. prof. N.I. Kravtsova. Publisher: Prosveshchenie - Moscow 1966.
2. Exam questions and answers. Literature. 9th and 11th grades. Tutorial. – M.: AST – PRESS, 2000.
3. A. A. Egorova. How to write an essay with a "5". Study guide. Rostov-on-Don, "Phoenix", 2001.
4. Chekhov A.P. Stories. Plays. – M.: Olimp; LLC "Firm" Publishing house AST, 1998.

Past, present and future in the play by A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard"

I. Introduction

“The Cherry Orchard” was written in 1903, in an era that was in many ways a turning point for Russia, when the crisis of the old order had already become apparent, and the future had not yet been determined.

II. Main part

1. The past is represented in the play by characters of the older generation: Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs, but other characters in the play also talk about the past. It is associated primarily with the nobility, which end of the 19th century- at the beginning of the 20th century it was in obvious decline. The past is ambiguous. On the one hand, it was a time of serfdom, social injustice, etc., which, for example, Lopakhin and Petya Trofimov talk about. On the other hand, the past seems to be a happy time not only for Ranevskaya and Gaev, but also, in particular, for Firs, who perceives “will” as misfortune. There was a lot of good things in the past: goodness, order, and most importantly - beauty, personified in the image of a cherry orchard.

2. The present in Russia is vague, transitional, and unstable. This is how it appears in Chekhov’s play. The main exponent of the present is Lopakhin, but we should not forget about other heroes (Epikhodov, lackey Yasha, Varya). The image of Lopakhin is very contradictory. On the one hand, he, a merchant who emerged from the former serfs, is the master of the present; It is no coincidence that he gets the cherry orchard. This constitutes his pride: “the beaten, illiterate Ermolai /.../ bought an estate, the most beautiful of which there is nothing in the world /.../ bought an estate where his father and grandfather were slaves.” But, on the other hand, Lopakhin is unhappy. He is a subtle person by nature, he understands that he is ruining beauty, but he cannot live otherwise. The feeling of his own inferiority is especially evident in his monologue at the end of the third act: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.”

3. The future in the play is completely vague and uncertain. It would seem that it belongs to the younger generation- Trofimov and Anya. It is they, especially Trofimov, who speak passionately about the future, which seems to them, of course, wonderful. But Anya is still just a girl, and how her life will turn out, what her future will be, is completely unclear. There are serious doubts that Trofimov will be able to build the happy future he talks about. First of all, because he does absolutely nothing, but only talks. When it is necessary to demonstrate the ability to perform at least minimal practical action (comfort Ranevskaya, take care of Firs), he turns out to be incompetent. But the main thing is the attitude towards the key image of the play, the cherry orchard. Petya is indifferent to its beauty; he urges Anya not to regret the cherry orchard, to forget about the past altogether. “We will plant a new garden,” says Trofimov, and that means let this one die. This attitude towards the past does not allow us to seriously hope for the future.

III. Conclusion

Chekhov himself believed that the future of his country would be better than its past and present. But in what ways this future will be achieved, who will build it and at what cost - the writer did not give specific answers to these questions.

Features of Chekhov's dramaturgy

Before Anton Chekhov, Russian theater was going through a crisis; it was he who made an invaluable contribution to its development, breathing new life into it. The playwright snatched small sketches from the everyday life of his characters, bringing drama closer to reality. His plays made the viewer think, although they did not contain intrigues or open conflicts, but they reflected the internal anxiety of a turning point in history, when society froze in anticipation of imminent changes, and all social strata became heroes. The apparent simplicity of the plot introduced the stories of the characters before the events described, making it possible to speculate what would happen to them after. So amazingly past, present, future mixed in the play “The Cherry Orchard”, by connecting people not so much from different generations, but different eras. And one of the “undercurrents” characteristic of Chekhov’s plays was the author’s reflection on the fate of Russia, and the theme of the future took center stage in “The Cherry Orchard.”

Past, present and future on the pages of the play “The Cherry Orchard”

So how did the past, present and future meet on the pages of the play “The Cherry Orchard”? Chekhov seemed to divide all the heroes into these three categories, depicting them very vividly.

The past in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is represented by Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs - the oldest character in the entire performance. They are the ones who talk most about what happened; for them, the past is a time in which everything was easy and wonderful. There were masters and servants, each had their own place and purpose. For Firs, the abolition of serfdom became greatest sorrow, he did not want freedom, remaining on the estate. He sincerely loved the family of Ranevskaya and Gaev, remaining devoted to them until the very end. For aristocrats Lyubov Andreevna and her brother, the past is a time when they did not need to think about such base things as money. They enjoyed life, doing what brings pleasure, knowing how to appreciate the beauty of intangible things - it is difficult for them to adapt to the new order, in which material values ​​replace highly moral values. For them, it is humiliating to talk about money, about ways to earn it, and Lopakhin’s real proposal to rent out land occupied by an essentially worthless garden is perceived as vulgarity. Unable to make decisions about the future of the cherry orchard, they succumb to the flow of life and simply float along it. Ranevskaya, with her aunt’s money sent for Anya, leaves for Paris, and Gaev goes to work in a bank. The death of Firs at the end of the play is very symbolic, as if saying that the aristocracy as a social class has outlived its usefulness, and there is no place for it, in the form in which it was before the abolition of serfdom.

Lopakhin became a representative of the present in the play “The Cherry Orchard”. “A man is a man,” as he says about himself, a thinking in a new way who knows how to make money using his mind and instincts. Petya Trofimov even compares him to a predator, but a predator with a subtle artistic nature. And this brings Lopakhin a lot of emotional distress. He is perfectly aware of the beauty of the old cherry orchard, which will be cut down according to his will, but he cannot do otherwise. His ancestors were serfs, his father owned a shop, and he became a “white farmer”, amassing a considerable fortune. Chekhov placed special emphasis on the character of Lopakhin, because he was not a typical merchant, whom many treated with disdain. He made himself, paving the way with his work and desire to be better than his ancestors, not only in terms of financial independence, but also in education. In many ways, Chekhov identified himself with Lopakhin, because their pedigrees are similar.

Anya and Petya Trofimov personify the future. They are young, full of strength and energy. And most importantly, they have a desire to change their lives. But, it’s just that Petya is a master at talking and reasoning about a wonderful and fair future, but he doesn’t know how to turn his speeches into action. This is what prevents him from graduating from university or at least somehow organizing his life. Petya denies all attachments - be it to a place or to another person. He captivates the naive Anya with his ideas, but she already has a plan for how to arrange her life. She is inspired and ready to “plant a new garden, even more beautiful than the previous one.” However, the future in Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” is very uncertain and vague. In addition to the educated Anya and Petya, there are also Yasha and Dunyasha, and they, too, are the future. Moreover, if Dunyasha is just a stupid peasant girl, then Yasha is a completely different type. The Gaevs and Ranevskys are being replaced by the Lopakhins, but someone will also have to replace the Lopakhins. If you remember history, then 13 years after this play was written, these are the Yashas who came to power - unprincipled, empty and cruel, not attached to anyone or anything.

In the play “The Cherry Orchard” the heroes of the past, present and future were collected in one place, but they were not united inner desire be together and exchange your dreams, desires, experiences. Old Garden and the house holds them, and as soon as they disappear, the connection between the heroes and the time they reflect is severed.

Connection of times today

Only the greatest creations are able to reflect reality even many years after their creation. This happened with the play “The Cherry Orchard”. History is cyclical, society develops and changes, moral and ethical standards are also subject to rethinking. Human life is not possible without memory of the past, inaction in the present, and without faith in the future. One generation is replaced by another, some build, others destroy. This is how it was in Chekhov’s time, and this is how it is now. The playwright was right when he said that “All of Russia is our garden,” and it depends only on us whether it will bloom and bear fruit, or whether it will be cut down at the very root.

The author's discussions about the past, present and future in comedy, about people and generations, about Russia make us think even today. These thoughts will be useful for 10th graders when writing an essay on the topic “Past, present, future in the play “The Cherry Orchard”.”

Work test