Analysis of the cherry orchard by action. A.P

Ideological and artistic originality of the play The Cherry Orchard

1.Theme of the past, present and future of Russia.

2. The nature of the conflict and features of the stage action.

In the article “On the question of the principles of constructing plays by A.P. Chekhov" A.P. Skaftymov pointed out the lack of stage and prolixity of the play, the weakness of the plot, and the lack of action. In contrast to this point of view, other researchers, and in particular, K. S. Stanislavsky and V. D. Nemirovich-Danchenko noted the unusualness dramatic conflict and the presence in Chekhov’s play of “undercurrents – intimate and lyrical flows that are felt behind the external everyday details.”

The genre of “The Cherry Orchard” is considered to be a comedy, although the satirical pathos of the play is greatly weakened. Chekhov continued the traditions of Ostrovsky (depiction of everyday life in plays). However, for Ostrovsky, life is the background, the basis for the actual dramatic events. In Chekhov, events only externally organize the plot. Every hero experiences drama - Ranevskaya, Gaev, Varya, and Charlotte. Moreover, the drama lies not in the loss of the cherry orchard, but in everyday life itself. The characters experience a conflict “between what is given and what is desired” - between vanity and the dream of a person’s true purpose. In the souls of most heroes, the conflict is not resolved.

3. The meaning of “underwater currents”.

The meaning of individual characters' remarks is in no way connected with the events taking place. These remarks are important only in the context of understanding the conflict between the given and the desired (Ranevskaya: “I’m still waiting for something, as if the house was about to collapse above us,” Gaev’s “billiard” remarks, etc.).

4. The role of the detail.

The detail is the most important for Chekhov visual means in conveying the psychology of heroes, conflict, etc.

a) Replies from the heroes that do not help in the development of the plot, but illustrate the fragmentation of consciousness, the alienation of the heroes from each other, their inorganicity with the world around them.

“Everyone is sitting, thinking. Suddenly a distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad.

Lyubov Andreevna. What's this?

L o pakhin. Don't know. Somewhere far away in the mines a tub fell off. But somewhere very far away.

G aev. Or maybe some kind of bird... Like a heron.

Trofimov. Or an owl...

Lyubov Andreevna (shudders). It's unpleasant for some reason. (Pause.)

F and r s. It was the same before the disaster. And the owl screamed, and the samovar hummed endlessly.

Gaev. Before what misfortune?

F and r s. Before the will. (Pause).

Lyubov Andreevna. You know, friends, let's go, it's already getting dark. (But not). There are tears in your eyes... What are you doing, girl? (Hugs her.) x

Anya. That's right, mom. Nothing".

b) Sound effects.

The sound of a broken string (“voiced melancholy”). The sound of an ax cutting down a cherry orchard.

c) Landscape.

“Lyubov Andreevna (looks out the window at the garden). Oh my childhood, my purity! I slept in this nursery, looked at the garden from here, happiness woke up with me every morning, and then it was exactly the same, nothing has changed. (Laughs with joy.) All, all white! O my garden! After a dark, stormy autumn and cold winter again you are young, full of happiness, the heavenly angels have not abandoned you... If only I could take the heavy stone off my chest and shoulders, if only I could forget my past!

Gaev. Yes. And the garden will be sold for debts, oddly enough...

Lyubov Andreevna. Look, the late mother is walking through the garden... in a white dress! (Laughs with joy.) It’s her.

Gaev. Where?

Varya. The Lord is with you, mommy.

Lyubov Andreevna. Nobody here. It seemed to me. To the right, at the turn towards the gazebo, a white tree bent over, looking like a woman.”

d) Setting.

The closet to which either Ranevskaya or Gaev address their speech.

Yasha always speaks, barely holding back laughter. Lopakhin always addresses Varya mockingly.

e) Speech characteristics heroes.

Gaev's speech is full of billiard terms.

1. Features of the conflict in the play.
2. Character system.
3. Problems of “The Cherry Orchard”.
4. Genre originality"The Cherry Orchard".

“The Cherry Orchard” is one of the most famous plays in the world repertoire, and the fact that the theater constantly turns to it, and the possibilities different readings, and the constant discovery of new meanings - all this is connected with the new dramatic language that Chekhov created. What is unique about The Cherry Orchard? This can be seen when analyzing the main elements of the play: the nature of the dramatic conflict, the structure of the character system, speech characters, genre features.

Unusual, from the point of view of classical, pre-Chekhov drama, the move dramatic action. All its elements are present in the play. At the very beginning of the first act, a plot is given - the possibility of a dramatic unfolding of events: this is the upcoming sale of Ranevskaya's estate for debts. The climax - the sale of the estate - occurs in the fourth act, in the denouement - all the inhabitants of the estate leave it, go in different directions. But where are the actions and events that develop that connect these main nodes? dramatic plot? There is none of them. There is no external intrigue existing in any play; the action develops according to some other internal laws. From the very beginning of the play, a theme is set that organizes the conflict, the theme of the cherry orchard. Throughout the play, no one talks about the loss of the estate (the Ranevskys’ old house only reminds of itself in the first act - in Lyubov Andreevna’s exclamation about her nursery, in Gaev’s address to the hundred-year-old closet) - there are disputes about the cherry orchard between Ranevskaya, Lopakhin and Petya, the cherry orchard buys Lopakhin. In the last act, an ax will hit the cherry trees, signaling the end of the established way of life. It, associated with the life of several generations, will become a symbol of the cross-cutting theme of the play - the theme of man and time, man and history.

The absence of a consistently developing external action is caused by the special nature of the conflict in Chekhov's play. Usually a conflict is associated with a clash of opposing forces, a struggle of interests different people, the desire to achieve that goal or avoid the danger that is defined in the beginning. There is no such conflict in The Cherry Orchard. The situation, traditional for Russian literature, of a clash between a wasteful and unadapted nobleman-landowner and a predatory and aggressive merchant (compare with the relationship between Gurmyzhskaya and Vosmibratov in Ostrovsky’s “The Forest”) is not even mentioned here. Moreover, there is no real threat of ruin for Gaev and Ranevskaya. In the initial situation of the first act, Lopakhin explains to them how they could maintain and even increase the income from the estate: by breaking it into parts, renting out the land to summer residents. As if by the way, Lopakhin says that in this case the cherry orchard, old and no longer bearing fruit, must of course be cut down. This is what Ranevskaya and Gaev cannot do; they are hampered by the special feelings they experience for the cherry orchard. It is this area of ​​feelings that becomes the subject of conflict.

Conflict in pre-Chekhov drama necessarily involves a clash between the suffering hero and someone who acts against him and represents the source of his suffering. Suffering is not necessarily of a material nature (cf. the role of money in Ostrovsky’s comedy), it can be caused by ideological reasons. “A million torments” are experienced by Griboedov’s hero, and his “torments” are connected with people, antagonists - the entire Famus circle appearing in the play. In The Cherry Orchard there is no source of external suffering, no evil will and no actions directed against the heroes. They are divided by their attitude to the fate of the cherry orchard, but are united by a common dissatisfaction. existing life, a passionate desire to change it. This is one line of dynamic development of action. There is also a second one. Chekhov gives the feelings of each character in a double light - from the inside and from the outside, in the perception and understanding of other people. This becomes a source of dramatic drama. Lopakhin does not share the feelings of Gaev and Ranevskaya: for him they are strange and surprising; he does not understand why his reasonable arguments about the structure of the estate do not work on them. And for Petya these feelings are alien. What Ranevskaya loves and is afraid to lose is subject to destruction for him; what she sees in her happy past, childhood and youth, is for him a reminder of the unfair structure of life, of the people tortured here. Lopakhin's feelings and truth are understandable and dear only to himself. Neither Ranevskaya nor Petya understands or accepts them. Petya Trofimov has his own feelings and ideas (“All of Russia is our garden”), but they are funny for Lopakhin and incomprehensible to Ranevskaya.

This the most important topic misunderstanding and divergence of people, their isolation in their own feelings and their own suffering is enhanced in the play by the role of minor persons. Each of them has a world of his own experiences, and each of them is lonely and misunderstood among the others. Charlotte, homeless and lonely, makes others laugh and is not taken seriously by anyone. Petya Trofimov and Lopakhin make fun of Varya, immersed in her own world. Simeonov-Pishchik is immersed in his circle of worries - he is constantly looking for money and just as constantly thinks about his daughter Dashenka, causing mocking irritation from those around him. Epikhodov is funny to everyone in his “misfortunes”, no one takes Dunyasha’s experiences seriously... The comic side is indeed strongly expressed in these characters, but in Chekhov’s play there is nothing absolutely funny, absolutely tragic or absolutely lyrical. Their complex mixture is carried out in each character.

The main content of “The Cherry Orchard”, which is that all its characters equally suffer from the disorder of life and at the same time they are all locked in this lonely suffering, inaccessible to others, is also reflected in the nature of the dramatic dialogue; many statements in the play are not related to common line conversation, not addressed to anyone. In the third act, Charlotte keeps everyone busy with her magic tricks. Everyone applauds. Ranevskaya reflects on her own thoughts: “But Leonid is still not there. I don’t understand what he’s been doing in the city for so long.” Charlotte's words about her loneliness at the beginning of the second act are not addressed to anyone, although she is among other people. Varya gives Ranevskaya a telegram. Ranevskaya: “This is from Paris... It’s over with Paris...” Gaev’s next remark: “Do you know, Lyuba, how old is this wardrobe?”

Even more significant in this situation of not listening to others are cases when the heroes seem to be responding to a cue, but the connection turns out to be mechanical - they are again immersed in their own thoughts. Trofimov says that he and Anya are “above love.” Ranevskaya: “But I must be below love... (In great anxiety.) Why is Leonid not there? Just to know: was the estate sold or not?”

The complex genre nature of the play, which Chekhov called a comedy and in which there is so much serious and sad, corresponds to his idea of ​​​​a drama in which everything should go as it happens in life. Chekhov finally destroyed any genre definition, removed all restrictions and partitions. And what was necessary for this was a new combination for drama of the comic and serious, their flow into each other. It has already been said that a comic element is present in each hero of the play, but in the same way, each has its own lyrical intonation. The farcical in the play is combined with the tragic. It's not even that the play is about suffering good people Chekhov uses farcical techniques (hitting with a stick, falling from the stairs), something else is more important: every moment of the play has, as it were, double coverage. Thus, the vaudeville confusion with Firs being sent to the hospital is connected with the image of the end - the end of the house and garden, the end human life, end of an era. The sad and the funny turn out to be reversible in the play. The lyrical beginning helps to understand the deep emotion and sincerity of the hero, the comic laughs at his self-absorption and one-sidedness.

My famous play"The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov was written in 1903. In this play central place It is not so much the personal experiences of the characters that occupy the focus, but an allegorical vision of the fate of Russia. Some characters personify the past (Ranevskaya, Gaev, Firs, Varya), others - the future (Lopakhin, Trofimov, Anya). The characters in Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" reflect the society of that time.

Main characters

The heroes of Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" are lyrical characters with special features. For example, Epikhodov, who was constantly unlucky, or Trofimov, an “eternal student.” Below will be presented all the characters of the play "The Cherry Orchard":

• Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna, mistress of the estate.
• Anya, her daughter, 17 years old. I am not indifferent to Trofimov.
• Varya, her adopted daughter, 24 years old. In love with Lopakhin.
• Gaev Leonid Andreevich, brother of Ranevskaya.
• Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich, a native of peasants, now a merchant. He likes Varya.
• Trofimov Pyotr Sergeevich, eternal student. He likes Anya, but he is above love.
• Simeonov-Pishchik Boris Borisovich, a landowner who constantly has no money, but he believes in the possibility of unexpected enrichment.
• Charlotte Ivanovna, the maid, loves to show tricks.
• Epikhodov Semyon Panteleevich, clerk, unlucky man. He wants to marry Dunyasha.
• Dunyasha, the maid, considers herself like a lady. In love with Yasha.
• Firs, an old footman, constantly takes care of Gaev.
• Yasha, Ranevskaya's spoiled lackey.

Images of the characters in the play

A.P. Chekhov always very accurately and subtly noticed his features in each character, be it appearance or character. This Chekhovian feature is also supported by the play “The Cherry Orchard” - the images of the heroes here are lyrical and even a little touching. Each has its own unique features. For convenience, the characteristics of the heroes of The Cherry Orchard can be divided into groups.

Old generation

Ranevskaya Lyubov Andreevna appears very frivolous, but kind woman, who cannot fully understand that all her money is gone. She is in love with some scoundrel who left her without funds. And then Ranevskaya returns with Anya to Russia. They can be compared to people who left Russia: no matter how good it is abroad, they still continue to yearn for their homeland. The image chosen by Chekhov for his homeland will be written below.

Ranevskaya and Gaev are the personification of the nobility, the wealth of past years, which during the author’s time began to decline. Both brother and sister cannot fully understand this, but nevertheless they feel that something is happening. And by the way they begin to act, you can see the reaction of Chekhov’s contemporaries - it was either a move abroad, or an attempt to adapt to new conditions.

Firs is an image of a servant who was always faithful to her masters and did not want any change in order, because they did not need it. If with the first main characters of “The Cherry Orchard” it is clear why they are considered in this group, then why can Varya be included here?

Because Varya occupies a passive position: she humbly accepts the folding position, but her dream is the opportunity to walk in holy places, and strong faith was typical for people of the older generation. And Varya, despite her vigorous, at first glance, activity, does not accept active participation in conversations about fate cherry orchard and does not offer any solutions, which shows the passivity of the rich class of that time.

Younger generation

Representatives of the future of Russia will be considered here - these are educated young people who put themselves above any feelings, which was fashionable in the early 1900s. At that time, public duty and the desire to develop science were put in first place. But one should not assume that Anton Pavlovich portrayed revolutionary-minded youth - this is, rather, a depiction of most of the intelligentsia of that time, which was engaged only in thinking about high topics, put herself above human needs, but was not adapted to anything.

All this was embodied in Trofimov - the “eternal student” and “ shabby gentleman", who was never able to finish anything, had no profession. Throughout the play he only talked about various matters and despised Lopakhin and Varya, who was able to admit the idea of ​​his possible romance with Anya - he is “above love.”

Anya is kind, sweet, absolutely inexperienced girl, who admires Trofimov and listens carefully to everything he says. She personifies youth, who have always been interested in the ideas of the intelligentsia.

But one of the brightest and characteristic images Lopakhin turned out to be from that era - a native of peasants who managed to make a fortune for himself. But, despite his wealth, he remained essentially a simple man. This is an active person, a representative of the so-called “kulaks” class - wealthy peasants. Ermolai Alekseevich respected work, and work always came first for him, so he kept postponing an explanation with Varya.

It was during that period that Lopakhin’s hero could appear - then this “rising” peasantry, proud of the realization that they were no longer slaves, showed a higher adaptability to life than the nobles, which is proven by the fact that it was Lopakhin who bought Ranevskaya’s estate.

Why was the characterization of the characters in The Cherry Orchard chosen specifically for these characters? Because it is on the characteristics of the characters that their internal conflicts will be built.

Internal conflicts in the play

The play shows not only the personal experiences of the characters, but also the confrontation between them, which makes the images of the heroes of “The Cherry Orchard” brighter and deeper. Let's take a closer look at them.

Ranevskaya - Lopakhin

Most main conflict is in the pair Ranevskaya - Lopakhin. And it is due to several reasons:

• belonging to different generations;
• contrast of characters.

Lopakhin is trying to help Ranevskaya preserve the estate by cutting down the cherry orchard and building dachas in its place. But for Raevskaya this is impossible - after all, she grew up in this house, and “dachas are so vulgar.” And in the fact that it was Ermolai Alekseevich who bought the estate, she sees this as a betrayal on his part. For him, buying a cherry orchard is permission to personal conflict: he, a simple man, whose ancestors could not go further than the kitchen, has now become the owner. And this is where his main triumph lies.

Lopakhin - Trofimov

The conflict in a pair of these people occurs due to the fact that they have opposing views. Trofimov considers Lopakhin an ordinary man, rude, limited, who is not interested in anything other than work. The same one believes that Pyotr Sergeevich is simply wasting his mental abilities, does not understand how one can live without money, and does not accept the ideology that man is above all earthly things.

Trofimov - Varya

The confrontation is most likely based on personal hostility. Varya despises Peter because he is not busy with anything, and fears that with the help of his clever speeches he will make Anya fall in love with him. Therefore, Varya tries in every possible way to prevent them. Trofimov teases the girl “Madame Lopakhina,” knowing that everyone has been waiting for this event for a long time. But he despises her because she equated him and Anya with herself and Lopakhin, because they are above all earthly passions.

So, above it was briefly written about the characters of the heroes of Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard”. We have described only the most significant characters. Now we can move on to the most interesting thing - the image of the main character of the play.

The main character of "The Cherry Orchard"

The attentive reader has already guessed (or is guessing) that this is a cherry orchard. He personifies Russia itself in the play: its past, present and future. Why did the orchard itself become the main character of “The Cherry Orchard”?

Because it is to this estate that Ranevskaya returns after all the misadventures abroad, because it is because of him that the heroine’s internal conflict intensifies (fear of losing the garden, awareness of her helplessness, reluctance to part with it), and a confrontation arises between Ranevskaya and Lopakhin.

The Cherry Orchard also helps resolve internal conflict Lopakhina: he reminded him that he was a peasant, an ordinary man who amazingly was able to get rich. And the opportunity that arose with the purchase of the estate to cut down this garden meant that now nothing else in those parts could remind him of his origin.

What did the garden mean to the heroes?

For convenience, you can write the characters’ attitude towards the cherry orchard in a table.

Symbolism of the cherry orchard in the play

But how then is the image of the main character of “The Cherry Orchard” connected with the image of the Motherland? Through this garden, Anton Chekhov showed the past: when the country was rich, the class of nobles was in its prime, and no one thought about the abolition of serfdom. In the present, there is already a decline in society: it is divided, guidelines are changing. Russia was already on the threshold new era, the nobility became smaller, and the peasants gained strength. And the future is shown in Lopakhin’s dreams: the country will be ruled by those who are not afraid to work - only those people will be able to lead the country to prosperity.

The sale of Ranevskaya's cherry orchard for debts and its purchase by Lopakhin is a symbolic transfer of the country from the rich class to ordinary workers. Debt here means debt for how to for a long time The owners treated how they exploited the common people. And the fact that power in the country is transferring to the common people, is a natural result of the path along which Russia was moving. And the nobility had only to do what Ranevskaya and Gaev did - go abroad or go to work. And the younger generation will try to fulfill their dreams of a bright future.

Conclusion

Having carried out such a small analysis of the work, one can understand that the play “The Cherry Orchard” is a deeper creation than it might seem at first glance. Anton Pavlovich was able to masterfully convey the mood of society at that time, the situation in which it found itself. And the writer did this very gracefully and subtly, which allows this play to remain loved by readers for a long time.

A.P. Chekhov. "The Cherry Orchard". general characteristics plays. Analysis of the third act.

Chekhov brings everyday life to the stage - without effects, beautiful poses, unusual situations. He believed that in the theater everything should be as simple and at the same time complex as it is in life. In everyday life he sees both beauty and significance. This explains the peculiar composition of his dramas, the simplicity of the plot, the calm development of the action, the absence stage effects, "undercurrent".

“The Cherry Orchard” is the only play by Chekhov, in the basis of which one can see, although not quite clearly, social conflict. The bourgeoisie is replacing the doomed nobility. Is it good or bad? An incorrect question, says Chekhov. It is a fact. “What I came out with was not a drama, but a comedy, sometimes even a farce,” wrote Chekhov. According to Belinsky, comedy reveals how real life deviated from the ideal. Wasn't this Chekhov's task in The Cherry Orchard? Life, beautiful in its possibilities, poetic, like a blooming cherry orchard - and the powerlessness of the “klutzes” who are unable to either preserve this poetry, or break through to it, to see it.

The peculiarity of the genre is lyrical comedy. The characters are drawn by the author with slight mockery, but without sarcasm, without hatred. Chekhov's heroes are already looking for their place, but have not yet found it; all the time they are on stage they are going somewhere. But they can never get it together. Tragedy Chekhov's heroes- from not being rooted in the present, which they hate, which they fear. Authentic life, real, seems alien to them, wrong. They see a way out of the melancholy of everyday life (and the reason for it still lies in themselves, so there is no way out) in the future, in the life that should be, but which never comes. Yes, they don’t do anything to make it happen.

One of the main motives of the play is time. It starts with a late train, ends with a missed train. And the heroes don’t feel that time has changed. She entered the house, where (as it seems to Ranevskaya) nothing changes, and devastated and destroyed it. The heroes are behind the times.

The image of the garden in the play “The Cherry Orchard”

Composition of “The Cherry Orchard”: Act 1 - exposition, Ranevskaya’s arrival, the threat of loss of the estate, the exit offered by Lopakhin. Act 2 - senseless waiting for the owners of the garden, Act 3 - sale of the garden, Act 4 - departure of the previous owners, new owners taking possession, cutting down the garden. That is, Act 3 is the climax of the play.

The garden must be sold. He is destined to die, Chekhov insists on this, no matter how he feels about it. Why this will happen is shown quite clearly in Acts 1 and 2. The task of Act 3 is to show how.

The action takes place in the house, the stage directions introduce the viewer to the party that was discussed in Act 2. Ranevskaya calls it a ball and very accurately defines that “we started the ball at the wrong time” - from Petya’s words the viewer learns that it was at this time that auctions take place at which the fate of the estate is decided. Therefore, the mood of this scene is a contrast between external well-being (dancing, magic tricks, optional “ballroom” conversations) and the atmosphere of melancholy, bad feeling and about-to-ready hysteria.

How does Chekhov create this atmosphere? The idiotic speeches of Simeonov-Pishchik, to which no one reacts, as if this is how it should be, every now and then the conversations of the owners of the house about their sad things break through, as if they have no time for guests.

When no one required score exhausted, Gaev and Lopakhin appear with a message about the sale of the estate. “Speech” by Lopakhin in new role leaves a complex, rather heavy impression, but the act ends on an optimistic note - with Anya’s remark addressed to Ranevskaya: “Mom, you have life left...” There is a meaning in this optimism - the most unbearable for the characters of the play (choice, the need to decide and take on responsibility) behind.

What new do we learn about the heroes in Act 3?

Ranevskaya.

It turns out that she is not only capable of infuriating with her impracticality, she is also not stupid. It seems that at this ball she woke up - sensible remarks about the Yaroslavl grandmother, about what the cherry orchard is for her. In a conversation with Petya, she is even wise, very accurately determines the essence of this person, and without pretense or playing with herself, she talks about herself and her life. Although, of course, she remains herself - she speaks truthful words to Petya in order to hurt someone else, because she herself is hurt. But in general this is the peak of her reflection of life; already at the very beginning of Act 4 she will continue to play like an actress for whom only her own role is important and the entire play is inaccessible. And now she accepts the news of the sale of the estate not courageously, but with dignity, without play; her grief is genuine and therefore ugly: “She shrank all over and cried bitterly.”

Gaev.

He is almost absent from this act, and we learn nothing new about him. All he can say is: “How much I have suffered!” - in general, again “I”. It is very simple to console him in grief - with the sound of billiard balls.

Lopakhin.

This is a surprise. Until now we knew him good friend this family that didn't deserve such a friend. He was more worried about saving the cherry orchard than all these fools combined. And the thought did not arise that he himself wanted to buy the garden, that for him this was not just another transaction, but an act of triumph of justice. Therefore, now his honesty is worth more. We also didn’t know about him that he was capable of getting carried away, forgetting himself, rejoicing to the point of madness, he was so even and calm until now. And what a “genetic” hatred he has for his former masters - not personally for Gaev and Ranevskaya, but for the class: “...Grandfather and father were slaves,... they weren’t even allowed into the kitchen...” And he is also weak because he thinks about life: “If only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change...”, and what to think about is not enough: “Let everything be as I wish!”

By the beginning of the 3rd act, ideological and moral positions heroes, a feeling of a global “undercurrent” has been created: through empty chatter, conversations about nothing or everyone about their own, through the seeming eventlessness, a growing internal boiling begins to be clearly felt.

Lopakhin is trying to revive again the dead practical streak of Ranevskaya and Gaev, but they live in another dimension, are not able to understand Lopakhin, they only sensitively sense the approaching disaster.

Petya Trofimov solemnly convinces Anya that they are “above love,” above this particular garden, they need to “bypass the petty and ghostly...”, that “all of Russia is our garden,” that we need to work to “redeem our past.” Anya, seemingly perceiving Petya’s calls, is nevertheless thoughtful and sad, her farewell to the garden is very ambiguous: the joy of moving towards the new life promised by Trofimov is combined with the bitterness of the loss of a tender attachment to the past, and simply love for her mother, who is now unwell.

The act takes place in the living room. A Jewish orchestra is playing, for which there is no one to pay, everyone is dancing (a kind of feast during the plague). Varya quarrels with Trofimov, Charlotte shows Pishchik tricks on cards. Varya is again being wooed by Lopakhin. Epikhodov broke a billiard ball. The ordinariness of what is happening with the simultaneous increase in internal tension is striking.

Ranevskaya’s soul is getting worse and worse. At first, she acts and speaks as if mechanically, absent-mindedly, only complaining several times that there is no news from Lopakhin from the auction. Then she suddenly explodes in a conversation with Petya, revealing her emotional heaviness from saying goodbye to her life in home. So she flared up, bringing down all her indignation on poor Petya’s head.

Music plays, the characters quarrel, make up, and the tension of painful anticipation hangs in the air. Ranevskaya's heaviness intensifies even more with the appearance of Firs, who reminds her of the past. Varya drives Epikhodov away with a stick, and at this moment - the culmination of the action - Lopakhin, who was mistakenly treated to Varya's stick, enters with the main message. Perhaps the tragicomic nature of this decisive situation forced Chekhov to define the play as a comedy?

It is curious that, unlike the entire play (there are 38 famous Chekhov pauses in four acts in total), in the 3rd act there is only one pause - after Lopakhin’s words: “I bought it.” Everything was mixed up. Gaev's crying is replaced by a desire to eat and play billiards ( defensive reaction). Ranevskaya's convulsive anticipation turns into tears and loss of speech (she remains silent). Lopakhin's unbridled and indelicately plebeian triumph is intertwined with Ranevskaya's reproach and sympathy for her. The orchestra is no longer playing cheerfully, but quietly. In Anya’s consoling speech, words of love for her mother coming from the depths of her soul are heard, interspersed with pompous words about the “new garden” learned from Petya.

Act 3 is the climax of the play. Everything important happened. The garden was bought, but it was still bought by his own “predator”, and not by someone else’s Deriganov. All that remains is the scene of farewell and departure, when the equally unnecessary Firs will be forgotten in a house no longer needed by anyone, and the whole play will end with the symbolic sounds of a broken string and the sound of an ax on the still living cherry trees.

Chekhov as an artist can no longer be compared
with former Russian writers - with Turgenev,
Dostoevsky or with me. Chekhov has his own
own form, like the Impressionists.
You look like a person without anything
parsing, smears with whatever paints he comes across
under his arm, and no relation
These strokes have no relationship with each other.
But go some distance and look,
and overall the impression is complete.
L. Tolstoy

Oh, I wish it would all go away, I wish I could
Our awkward, unhappy life has changed.
Lopakhin

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

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