Essay on literature.

Here it is - an open secret, the secret of poetry, life, love!
I. S. Turgenev.

The play "The Cherry Orchard", written in 1903, - last work Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, completing it creative biography. In it, the author raises a number of problems characteristic of Russian literature: the problems of fathers and children, love and suffering. All this is united in the theme of the past, present and future of Russia.

The Cherry Orchard is the central image that unites the characters in time and space. For the landowner Ranevskaya and her brother Gaev, the garden is a family nest, an integral part of their memories. They seem to have grown together with this garden, without it they "do not understand their life." To save the estate, decisive action is needed, a change in lifestyle - otherwise the magnificent garden will go under the hammer. But Ranevskaya and Gaev are unaccustomed to any activity, impractical to the point of stupidity, unable to even seriously think about the impending threat. They betray the idea of ​​a cherry orchard. For landlords, he is a symbol of the past. Firs, an old servant of Ranevskaya, also remains in the past. He considers the abolition of serfdom a misfortune, and he is attached to his former masters as to his own children. But those to whom he devotedly served all his life leave him to the mercy of fate. Forgotten and abandoned, Firs remains a monument of the past in a boarded up house.

The present time is represented by Ermolai Lopakhin. His father and grandfather were serfs of Ranevskaya, he himself became a successful merchant. Lopakhin looks at the garden from the point of view of the "circulation of the case." He sympathizes with Ranevskaya, while the cherry orchard itself is doomed to death in the plans of a practical entrepreneur. It is Lopakhin who brings the agony of the garden to its logical conclusion. The estate is divided into profitable summer cottages, and "you can only hear how far in the garden they knock on wood with an ax."

The future is personified by the younger generation: Petya Trofimov and Anya, Ranevskaya's daughter. Trofimov is a student who makes his way through life with difficulty. His life is not easy. When winter comes, he is "hungry, sick, anxious, poor." Petya is smart and honest, understands the difficult situation people live in, believes in a brighter future. “All Russia is our garden!” he exclaims.

Chekhov puts Petya in ridiculous situations, reducing his image to the extremely unheroic. Trofimov is a “shabby gentleman”, an “eternal student”, whom Lopakhin stops all the time with ironic remarks. But the student's thoughts and dreams are close to the author's. The writer, as it were, separates the word from its "carrier": the significance of what is said does not always coincide with the social significance of the "carrier".

Anna is seventeen years old. Youth for Chekhov is not only a sign of age. He wrote: "... that youth can be recognized as healthy, which does not put up with the old order and ... fights against them." Anya received the usual upbringing for nobles. Trofimov had a great influence on the formation of her views. In the character of the girl there is sincerity of feelings and mood, immediacy. Anya is ready to start new life: pass the exams for the gymnasium course and break ties with the past.

In the images of Anya Ranevskaya and Petya Trofimov, the author embodied all the best features inherent in the new generation. It is with their lives that Chekhov connects the future of Russia. They express the ideas and thoughts of the author himself. An ax is heard in the cherry orchard, but young people believe that the next generations will plant new orchards, more beautiful than the previous ones. The presence of these heroes enhances and strengthens the notes of vivacity sounding in the play, the motives of the future wonderful life. And it seems - not Trofimov, no, it was Chekhov who entered the stage. “Here it is, happiness, here it comes, coming closer and closer ... And if we don’t see it, don’t know it, then what’s the trouble? Others will see it!"

The play "The Cherry Orchard", the last dramatic work Anton Pavlovich Chekhov can be considered a kind of testament of the writer, which reflects 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 the important stages of the socio-historical development of Russia. The fates of Chekhov's characters turn out to be connected with the cherry orchard, in the image of which the past, present and future intersect. The heroes reminisce about the past of the estate, about those times when the cherry orchard, cultivated by serfs, still brought income. This period coincided with the childhood and youth of Ranevskaya and Gaev, and they recall these happy, carefree years with involuntary nostalgia. But serfdom has long been abolished, the estate is gradually falling into decay, the cherry orchard is no longer profitable. It's telegraph time railways, the era of business people and entrepreneurs.

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

Conversations, memories, disputes, conflicts - all external action Chekhov's play centered around the fate of the estate and the cherry orchard. Immediately after the arrival of Ranevskaya, conversations begin about how to save the mortgaged and remortgaged estate from bidding. As the play progresses, this problem will become more and more acute.

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

Ranevskaya and Gaev are doomed to lose the estate, which is so dear to them and with which they are connected.

so many memories, and the reason for this lies not only in their inability to heed Lopakhin's practical advice. The time is coming to pay the old bills, and the debt of their ancestors, the debt of their family, the historical guilt of their entire estate has not yet been redeemed. The present stems from the past, their connection is obvious, it is not for nothing that Lyubov Andreevna dreams of her late mother in a white dress in a blooming garden. It reminds of the past itself. It is very symbolic that Ranevskaya and Gaev, whose fathers and grandfathers did not let those at the expense of whom they fed and lived, even into the kitchen, are now completely dependent on Lopakhin, who has become rich. In this, Chekhov sees retribution and shows that the lordly way of life, although it is covered with a poetic haze of beauty, corrupts people, destroys the souls of those who are involved in it. Such, for example, is Firs. For him, the abolition of serfdom is a terrible misfortune, as a result of which he, needed by no one and forgotten by everyone, will be left alone in an empty house ... The lackey Yasha was born from the same aristocratic way of life. He no longer has the devotion to the masters that distinguishes old Firs, but he, without a twinge of conscience, uses 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 stock and a different formation. He is businesslike, has a strong grip and knows exactly 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 favorably differing in this from Ranevskaya and Gaev, Lopakhin is completely devoid of spirituality, 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 proceeding from purely practical considerations, Lopakhin proposes to cut it down in order to lease the land for summer cottages - this is more profitable. Ignoring the feelings of Ranevskaya and Gaev (not out of malice, no, but simply because of the lack of spiritual subtlety), he orders to start cutting down the garden, without waiting for the departure of the former owners.

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, as the estate is being sold under the hammer, and the garden is being cut down. 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 never come true. Varya, who did not wait for Lopakhin's offer, is hired by some Ragulins. Perhaps the fate of Gaev is a little better - he gets a place in the bank, but he is unlikely to make a successful financier.

With the cherry orchard, in which the past and the present intersect so intricately, reflections on the future are also connected.

Tomorrow, which, according to Chekhov, should be better than the day 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 deeds; he just knows how to talk a lot and beautifully. Anya is another matter. Realizing the beauty of the cherry orchard, she at the same time understands that the garden is doomed, just as the past slave life is doomed, as the present, full of spiritual practicality, is also doomed. But in the future, Anya is sure, the triumph of justice and beauty should come. In her words: "We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this" is not only a desire to console the mother, but also an attempt to present a new, future life. Inheriting from Ranevskaya spiritual sensitivity and susceptibility to the beautiful, Anya at the same time is full of a sincere desire to change, to remake life. She is directed to the future, ready to work and even sacrifice in its name; she dreams of the time when the whole way of life will change, when she 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 be, because it is important that every person, having experienced dissatisfaction with what is, catches fire with a dream of beauty, so that he himself would look for a way to a new life.

“All of Russia is our garden” - these significant words are repeatedly heard 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.

A short essay-reasoning on the topic: Past, present and future of Russia in the play "The Cherry Orchard". Three generations in the comedy The Cherry Orchard. The fate of the Cherry Orchard

In the play The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov depicted several generations of people at once, each of which represents the past, present or future of Russia. The author does not idealize any of them: each era has its own advantages and disadvantages. For this we value Chekhov's work: he is exceptionally objective in relation to reality. The writer does not try to convince us that the future is cloudless or the past is worthy of worship, but he treats the present most strictly.

The past in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is presented in the images of Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs. All of them can not adapt to the new realities of life. Their position sometimes seems ridiculous to us, because their actions are absurd. To save the estate, the owners only need to rent it out profitably, but they are too scrupulous and arrogant, they are embarrassed by the vulgarity of summer residents who will desecrate them cherry orchards. Instead, they brought the case to the fact that Lopakhin buys the estate and completely cuts down the paradise. This example suggests that the nobles cannot even take care of themselves, let alone Russia. Their behavior is not rational, and their character is capricious, because they are accustomed to carefree living by the labor of others. Obviously, they did not justify the privileges of their class, so the harsh reality left them in the past: they could not keep up with her, they all seemed to think that she should adapt to them. However, Chekhov does not set himself the task of denigrating the past. We see that these people are not devoid of spiritual subtlety, tact and other genuine virtues. They are educated, educated and kind. For example, the devotion of the old servant Firs makes us sympathize with him and recognize the moral superiority of the older generation over modern people Lopakhin type.

The future in The Cherry Orchard is the younger generation: Trofimov and Anya. They are dreamers divorced from reality, maximalists. They are romantic and uplifting, but at the same time independent and intelligent, being able to find the mistakes of the past and present and try to correct them. Student Trofimov says: “We are at least two hundred years behind, we still have absolutely nothing, we have no definite attitude to the past, we only philosophize, complain about melancholy or drink vodka,” it is obvious that the young man is looking soberly at things. But at the same time, the hero demonstrates indifference towards the cherry orchard: “We are above love,” he declares, relieving himself of any responsibility for the fate of the garden, and, therefore, of all of Russia. He and Anya, of course, want to change something, but they are losing their roots. This is what worries the author.

One of the most unique and interesting creations of Anton Pavlovich, in which he combined three periods of his life, is the play "The Cherry Orchard". In this work, the author connected the past, present and future. The actions of the work show how the merchant class is replacing the nobility. The past is represented by such characters as Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs. Very often, their memories relate to the old days, when there were no worries and they did not worry about money. For them, something more sublime than money and material goods was more important.

Ranevskaya could not even imagine that she would have to cut down the entire garden or sell it, for her it was unacceptable. After all, it was the cherry orchard that was the memories of the past and her life.

Gaev, no less worried, every little thing was important to him. The author focuses on how Gaev treats the old closet with tears. Firs, in turn, did not need the abolition of serfdom. He was very fond of the family of Raevskaya and Gaev, whom he served and treated with respect. He was satisfied with those orders that existed earlier, like other representatives of that time.

Lopakhin is one of those representatives for whom money is important, they had great value for him. He was born and raised in a simple family. His father was a simple shopkeeper. But this did not prevent him from achieving great success and by his own efforts he amassed a huge fortune for himself. Like many others in the Cherry Orchard, it was just a source of material gain and nothing more.

Ermolai helps Ranevskaya get rid of her deplorable state. Thanks to his intelligence and resourcefulness, he was able to create a huge project. For this generation, material gain was important. But this is no reason to avoid the present that overtook them.

A.P. Chekhov, shows how changeable and vague the future can be. The author refers to this generation such characters as Anna, Varya, Pyotr, Dunya the maid and Yashka the footman. But despite the fact that the representatives of the past generation were similar in many respects, the coming generation was completely different. All these heroes were full of vitality and ideas. But many of them were only capable of eloquent words, which in reality could not change the present. One of these characters was Petya. In fact, he does nothing to change the future. Although he says to Anya that they are two hundred years behind in development. Of course, Anna was fascinated by Petya's words and ideas, but this does not stop her from going her own way and arranging her own life.

It was in this unique work "The Cherry Orchard" that all 3 generations of the past, present and future were united.

Option 2

Chekhov's dramaturgy is deep and full of figurative personifications. Due to them, the author tried in his work to show in comparison the past, present and future. To do this, all the heroes of the work are divided by him conditionally into three corresponding camps.

The first heroes of the past tense appear before the reader: Ranevskaya, Gaev, the servant Firs. Their conversations are full of nostalgia for the past, they speak with tenderness and joy about past times. For each of them important role play old things, household items, which are silent witnesses of bygone days. At the very beginning of the play, the reader learns about the room called the "Children's Room", the century-old wardrobe and, of course, the cherry orchard - the main character of the play.

Gaev and Ranevskaya are typical representatives of the Russian aristocracy. This is manifested in their speech, manners and way of life. They are accustomed to living in a big way, not counting their own expenses, to receive numerous guests on the estate, to arrange holidays and festivities. Even in not better times their money spending is unchanged, especially since you can always write a letter to a wealthy relative and ask for more money for current expenses. It is unbearable for Ranevskaya to hear about the need to cut down a cherry orchard and lease plots of land for summer cottages. In her opinion, it is impossible to remain without a garden, not because there is any benefit from it, but because every tree in it reminds her of a happy time from the distant past.

Firs is a hereditary servant of the family, a deeply elderly person. For him, the meaning of life is to serve the masters. His care and love for them is boundless, he takes care of Ranevskaya and Gaev like little helpless children. But they are not really adapted to practical life, do not want to recognize the coming changes. Firs' troublesomeness looks like an eccentricity, but he himself is convinced that his life purpose lies only in caring for the gentlemen.

The heroes of the present in the work are represented by Lopakhin. According to the author, it is these people who should “create” the present. They are active, purposeful, reasonable. They do not build illusions that the problems in life should be solved by themselves. The fate of Lopakhin is an example of how a person himself achieves everything in his life, not relying on his father's inheritance.

The future at the end of the work is indicated very vaguely. Who will be its heroes? The author shows Petya and Anya as people of the new time. However, the young man is also not well adapted to life, he is more interested in endless thoughts about changes, dreams of a brighter future. Anya is fascinated by Petya's ideas, she is ready to act - to plant a new cherry orchard "even more beautiful than the old one."

Essay 3

When a writer creates his own work, he draws on the current situation or past experience, and can also stretch his eyes to the future. In general, a rather banal phrase, however, this fact should be noted.

What the author will focus on depends on his creative and ideological orientation. For example, Chekhov's contemporary Bryusov, as you know, instructed his followers-poets "not to live in the present", because "only the future is the domain of the poet." There were also those who were guided by the high ideals of antiquity or other former eras.

In my opinion, Chekhov did not make separate accents and actually wrote about the eternal and the timeless. This fact is easily confirmed when you read his play. It just struck me how accurately some of the dialogues and phrases describe and state of the art not only affairs, but also human souls, in particular those who found their bodies on the territory of Russia.

Of course, in this sense, Chekhov, so to speak, is not new. He does his job, he just does it with high quality and it’s easy to remember the same Saltykov-Shchedrin with his “drink and steal”, a bit lengthy forecast, but accurate, just like about “fools and roads”, which in the current situation appear surprisingly bright and talk here there is no need to talk about the scope of the forecast, even if it is global and generalized.

Chinese wisdom considers the era of change to be a rather negative situation. For Russia, the previous one and a half hundred years for the most part seems to be an era of change, which is diluted with apathetic periods of stagnation. Here Chekhov found himself in a period that could be more than interesting for a writer.

Whatever the reforms of the past and no matter how eventful the history may seem, through the prism of the Cherry Orchard we see quite obvious time layers that appear as: a long and stable patriarchal past, stable and large-scale; the shaky present with obsolete landlords and nobles; a tragic and sad future that will change the country, lead to refinement and vulgarity.

Triumph little man, which Chekhov sees through the transformation of gardens into summer cottages, really took place. Moreover, the author quite rightly pointed out the absence, in general, of meaning in this transformation. Has the person who settled the summer cottages in the garden where he could only come to work change - a rhetorical question, and, in fact, he also works in this garden, only now fruit trees do not always grow there, but more often it just smells like manure and a chanson sounds mixed with empty chatter and swearing.

Of course, Anton Pavlovich, being like any reasonable creative person, as if above the situation, he saw what Russia was going to. Of course, not all the nobles whom he so criticizes in the person of the weak-willed Ranevskaya and Gaev will turn out to be helpless, someone will become part of white movement and not only in words, but also in deeds, he will prove his intention to fight for ideals and, in fact, the safety of his homeland, the safety of something valuable. Nevertheless, many of these people will not understand, even Lopakhins, just as in the end they do not even understand themselves.

Past, present and future in A.P. Chekhov "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 emerged, and the future had not yet been determined.

II. main part

1. The past is represented in the play by the characters of the older generation: Gaev, Ranevskaya, Firs, but other characters of the play also talk about the past. It is associated primarily with the nobility, which late XIX- the beginning of the 20th century experienced a clear decline. The past is ambiguous. On the one hand, it was a time of serfdom, social injustice, etc., as, 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 “freedom” as a misfortune. There were many 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, has a transitional, unstable character. It appears in the same way in Chekhov's play. The main spokesman of the present is Lopakhin, but one should not forget about other heroes (Epikhodov, footman Yasha, Varya). The image of Lopakhin is very controversial. On the one hand, he, a merchant who has broken out of the former serfs, is the master of the present; it is no coincidence that he gets the cherry orchard. This is his pride: “beaten, illiterate Yermolai /…/ bought an estate, more beautiful than 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 delicate person by nature, he understands that he is destroying beauty, but he does not know how to 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. Serious doubts arise that Trofimov will be able to build the happy future he is talking about. First of all, because he does absolutely nothing, but only speaks. When it is necessary to show the ability to at least minimal practical action (to console Ranevskaya, take care of Firs), he turns out to be untenable. But the main thing is the attitude to the key image of the play, to the cherry orchard. Petya is indifferent to his beauty, he urges Anya not to spare the cherry orchard, to forget about the past altogether. “We will plant a new garden,” says Trofimov, and this one, then, let it die. Such an attitude to the past does not allow one 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.

Searched here:

• past present and future in Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard
• past present and future in the play The Cherry Orchard
• past present and future in Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard composition