Features of Chekhov's dramaturgy. Main features of Chekhov's dramaturgy and epic theater

The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy were noted as innovative by many artists. V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko and K. S. Stanislavsky were the first to see in the dramatic movement of Anton Pavlovich’s plays an “undercurrent” that, behind the external ordinariness of what is happening, hides a continuous internal intimate and lyrical flow. It was they who made every effort to bring a fresh interpretation of Chekhov's plays to the audience. Using the example of the dramas “The Cherry Orchard”, “The Seagull”, “Uncle Vanya”, we will consider the artistic originality of the works of this author.

Description of life

The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy are clearly visible in one of his most famous plays - “The Cherry Orchard”. Its main principle was to overcome theatrical conventions, traditional for theatrical works of the 18th century. It is known that Anton Pavlovich strove to ensure that everything on stage was the same as in life. For example, “The Cherry Orchard” is based on the most ordinary event - the sale of a country estate for debts, and not a choice between duty and feeling, tearing apart the character’s soul, not a fatal clash of peoples and kings, villains and heroes. The playwright completely abandoned the externally entertaining plot in favor of simple and uncomplicated events, trying to prove that the hero’s everyday state is no less conflicting.

Ambiguous heroes

The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy (grade 10 studies this topic in detail) are also observed in the description of the characters. For example, in the play “The Cherry Orchard” there is not a single convinced scoundrel or villain. The merchant Lopakhin, who buys his master's estate for debts, is a sincere and sensitive person. He did not forget how warmly Ranevskaya treated him since childhood. From the bottom of his heart, he offers her and Gaev help to save the estate - he offers to divide the garden into separate summer cottages. Also, without any second thought, he gives Lyubov Andreevna a loan, probably knowing that she will not return it. However, it is Lopakhin who buys the estate and gives the order to cut down the cherry trees, without waiting for the old owners to leave. At the same time, he does not even realize the pain this causes to Ranevskaya and Gaev. The merchant, however, recalls with admiration the beauty of the poppy fields, from which he managed to earn 40 thousand. In the character of this hero, the low and the high, the desire for beauty and the thirst for profit, noble impulses and cruelty coexist. Viewers have a contradictory attitude towards him. But in life there are no absolutely bad or good people. Maximum authenticity of characters is another feature of Chekhov's dramaturgy.

"Undercurrent"

In his works, Anton Pavlovich completely abandons some theatrical techniques. For example, it excludes voluminous monologues, since people do not pronounce them in everyday life. The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy in the story “The Cherry Orchard” clearly demonstrate this. Instead of deliberate remarks “to the side,” the author uses a special one, which Nemirovich-Danchenko dubbed subtext or “undercurrent.” First of all, this is the “double sound” of each character, that is, the ambiguity of his character. An example of such a “sound” can be the description of Lopakhin’s character proposed above. In addition, Chekhov builds the dialogue of his characters in a special way, that is, he makes sure that the audience can understand what the characters are thinking about while discussing everyday issues. The conversation between Lopakhin and Varya in the fourth act is an example of such an ambiguous explanation. They want to talk about their feelings for each other, but they talk about unrelated things. Varya is looking for some object, and Lopakhin shares his plans for the coming winter. As a result, the declaration of love between the characters never happens.

Significant pauses

The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy can be listed endlessly. If in most dramatic works the heroes are revealed through the commission of actions, then in Anton Pavlovich they manifest themselves in experiences. That is why it is so important to trace the “undercurrent” in his plays. Ordinary pauses are filled with deep content. For example, after a failed explanation between Varya and Lopakhin, the heroine is left alone and crying. When Ranevskaya enters the room, she asks her one single question: “What?” After all, tears can be caused by both joy and grief. There is a pause between the interlocutors. Lyubov Andreevna understands everything without explanation and begins to rush to leave. Or in the last act of Trofimov, Petya begins to reason about his happy fate and says that “Humanity is moving towards the highest truth, towards the highest happiness that is possible on earth, and I am in the forefront!” To Yermolai Alekseevich’s sarcastic question: “Will you get there?”, Petya responds with conviction: “I’ll get there.” (Pause) I’ll get there or I’ll show others the way to get there.” This silence between phrases indicates that the hero does not feel the irony of his interlocutor and is speaking completely seriously.

Remarks

The peculiarities of Chekhov's dramaturgy (of course, it is quite difficult to describe all the nuances briefly) also lie in the active use of seemingly minor theatrical techniques - the author's stage directions, sound recording, and symbols. For example, in the first act of “The Cherry Orchard,” the author describes in detail the scenery - the room where everyone is waiting for Lyubov Andreevna’s arrival. Particular attention in this remark is paid to the garden, which is visible from the window - its trees are strewn with snow-white flowers. The viewer and reader immediately have a sad feeling that all this splendor will soon perish. And the remark, anticipating the second act, contains the remark that the outskirts of the city and telegraph poles are visible from the garden. In addition to its direct meaning, this decoration also has a symbolic meaning - the new century dictates its own rules, and there is no place in it for the cherry orchard. The “noble nest” of the Ranevsky-Gayevs will certainly be destroyed.

Sounds

Sounds play an important role in the works of Anton Pavlovich. The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy, using the example of the play “The Cherry Orchard,” directly indicate this. A sad waltz playing at the ball, which, contrary to all logic, is arranged by Lyubov Andreevna on the day of the auction; the sound of billiard balls, reminiscent of Gaev’s favorite pastime; the grinding sound of a broken string, irrevocably disrupting the charm and peace of a summer evening. He amazes Ranevskaya so much that she immediately begins to get ready to go home. Although Gaev and Lopakhin immediately give a reliable explanation for the unpleasant sound (the cry of a bird, the breakage of a tub in a mine), Lyubov Andreevna perceives it in her own way. She believes that the sound of a broken string indicates the end of her former life. Of course, the sound of the ax at the end of the play is also symbolic: the beauty of the earth - the cherry orchard - will be destroyed by order of Lopakhin.

Details

The features of Chekhov's dramaturgy are especially clearly revealed in the details. Varya always appears on stage in a dark dress with a bunch of keys at her belt. When at the ball Ermolai Alekseevich announces that he has bought an estate, she defiantly throws her keys at Lopakhin’s feet. Thus, she shows that she gives him the entire household. The ending of the play is also a sad symbol of the end of the era of manor Russia: everyone leaves the house, Ermolai Alekseevich locks the front door until spring, and the old sick servant Firs appears from the back room, lies down on the sofa and freezes. It becomes clear to everyone that local Russia is gradually disappearing along with its last guardian.

"Weakened" plot

Not all of the author’s contemporaries were able to appreciate the features of A.P. Chekhov’s dramaturgy. The insufficiently expressive plot in his works was especially criticized. Before Anton Pavlovich, the plot of the play was built, as a rule, on one external conflict. A cross-cutting event, built on the collision of several heroes, determined the essence of the work. For example, in “Woe from Wit” the action is based on the contradictions between Chatsky and the “Famus society” surrounding him. The traditional conflict decides the fate of the characters and demonstrates the victory of some heroes over others. The situation is completely different in Chekhov's plays. The main event (the sale of the estate for debts) is generally relegated to the background. The inexpressive plot of this work is difficult to divide into the usual supporting elements (culmination, denouement, etc.). The pace of the action constantly slows down, and the drama consists of scenes that interact very little with each other.

The peculiarities of the dramaturgy of A.P. Chekhov (grade 10 in literature lessons become quite deeply acquainted with the writer’s work) lie in the deep psychologism of his creations. The author does not seek to show the external conflict of the heroes, replacing it with the internal conflict of a situation that is unpleasant for his characters. Contradictions develop in the souls of the characters and do not consist in a battle for property (it practically never happens), but in the incompatibility of dreams and reality, the characters’ dissatisfaction with themselves and the world around them. Therefore, at the end of the play we see not a triumphant Lopakhin, but an unhappy man who exclaims in sadness: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” There are no main characters in Chekhov's works, and the blame for what is happening falls on each of them. In Anton Pavlovich's plays, both central and secondary characters are equally important.

Unusual genre

The genre originality also contains the features of Chekhov's dramaturgy. “The Cherry Orchard” is a lyrical work, however, the author managed to weave comic elements into it. M. Gorky called this play a “new drama”, which combined both tragic pathos (regret about the death of the cherry orchard and the collapse of the destinies of some heroes) and comic overtones (explicit in the description of the characters of Charlotte, Simeonov-Pishchik, Epikhodov, etc. .; veiled - in the characters of Lopakhin, Gaev, Ranevskaya, etc.). Outwardly, the heroes are passive, but behind their inertia lies an internal complex action-thought.

"Gull"

All the features of Chekhov’s dramaturgy were briefly outlined by us using the example of only one work - the drama “The Cherry Orchard”. This is the last play by Anton Pavlovich, in which he summarized his creative achievements. However, all of the above applies to other works of the author. For example, for some reason Chekhov called his disturbing “The Seagull”, permeated with languid spirit, a comedy. This mystery of the playwright still excites the minds of researchers, but who will argue with the fact that he is a master of creating sad comedies? Anton Pavlovich knew how to extract poetry from the very disorder of life and compose works that were unusual in their genre. Just like in The Cherry Orchard, there are no central characters in the play The Seagull. All the heroes in it are equal in rights, side and main destinies do not exist, so there is no main character in it. The title of this work is very symbolic. The seagull, according to the author, personifies an anxious flight, a rush into the distance, a stimulus for movement. This drama does not have a banal plot; it reveals a broad theme of bitter dissatisfaction with one’s fate, the dream of a better life. But the meaning of this play is conveyed to the audience through ordinary, everyday details that have a deep meaning, that very “undercurrent”. These are the features of Chekhov's dramaturgy. "The Seagull" is a typical work of this author.

"Uncle Ivan"

This is another innovative work by Anton Pavlovich. It also clearly demonstrates the features of Chekhov's dramaturgy. “Uncle Vanya” is a play in which the author focuses not on the external contradictions between the characters, but on their internal experiences. Everyday everyday life is the only source of conflict here. Nothing tragic really happens in the fate of Chekhov's characters, but all of them are not satisfied with their lives. Some spend their days in lazy idleness, others in impotent anger, others in despondency. The established way of life makes people worse than they could be. Doctor Astrov became vulgar, Voinitsky became angry with the whole world, Serebryakov became ingloriously degraded. They all became callous and indifferent towards each other and, most importantly, towards themselves. Their life is meaningless and useless. And who is to blame for this? As always with Anton Pavlovich - everything at once. The responsibility lies with every hero.

Conclusion

Summarizing all of the above, I would like to outline all the features of Chekhov’s dramaturgy point by point:

Almost all of the author’s works are built on a detailed description of everyday life, through which readers and viewers are conveyed the characteristics of the characters’ characters, feelings, and moods.
There are no bright dramatic events in the plot of Chekhov's plays; the main source of conflict is the internal experiences of the characters.
The heroes in Anton Pavlovich's works are ambiguous; each of them has negative and positive traits.
Dialogues in the author's works often consist of fragmentary meaningful phrases through which the vital well-being of the characters is conveyed.
Stage directions, sounds, symbolic details are of great importance in Chekhov's plays.
Anton Pavlovich's dramaturgy is distinguished by its genre originality. Dramatic events in it are intertwined with comic overtones, which makes the depiction of events more lively and reliable.

Now you know everything about the features of A.P.’s dramatic skill. Chekhov. His work is rightfully included in the golden fund of world classics.

Chekhov's creative practice predetermined the development of epic theater and revealed its main features. The main features of Chekhov's dramaturgy are as follows.

The author focuses not on the conflict, but on the essence and exclusivity of human life, therefore, what is important in the play is not the event, but the impression and experience of this event.
The action has no beginning or ending. Fluid moments of existence are the basis of Chekhov’s plays, “even, ordinary life,” although this ordinariness contains all the tragedy: “People are having lunch, just having lunch, and at this time their happiness is formed and their lives are broken” (A.P. Chekhov) .
The characters are so inactive, weak-willed and indecisive that even an attempt at suicide or protest ends in nothing, and if the hero manages to stop his fight with life, then his death does not matter to anyone.
The characters talk a lot and don't try to hear each other. A problem of understanding arises, words lose their meaning. This is how the disunity of humanity and the devastation of the soul are expressed. Even in the most dramatic situations, the characters do not try to understand each other. In “The Cherry Orchard,” before the auction, Lopakhin, exhausted by the inactivity of Ranevskaya and Gaev, asks the owner of the orchard: “Do you agree to give the land for dachas or not? Answer in one word: yes or no? Just one word!” It seems that it is impossible not to answer and a dialogue must take place. However, Lyubov Andreevna unexpectedly asks: “Who is smoking disgusting cigars here...”
There are many off-stage characters in the plays. They are needed not only to complement the main images with some semantic shades, they expand the epic space, often being almost the main ones in terms of the activity of their actions (as, for example, Protopopov in “Three Sisters” or Ranevskaya’s Parisian lover in "The Cherry Orchard").
Waiting for something important turns into meaninglessness of existence.
Refusal of phenomena - the appearance of the next hero does not introduce new twists and turns into the conflict.

In Chekhov’s plays it is customary to highlight the lyrical element, although the author himself called many of his dramatic works comedies (“The Seagull,” “The Cherry Orchard”). Lyrical dramaturgy- a peculiar phenomenon in the new literature of the 20th century, this is a kind of “poetry in drama”, it is characterized by emotional intensity, poetic monologues, richness in metaphors, melody, increased interest in the inner, rather than the external life of the characters.

In any dramatic work, the hero is a very important category, but in lyrical drama no main character. Each character is important to the author in order to express all the shades of the mood of the play, to show all the multidimensionality of the human psyche. The hero of a lyrical drama is always in a state of search, trying to escape the questions that his conscience asks him. In this kind of plays, insignificant facts of life become the basis of the plot, but even they are not so interesting to the author. The playwright's attention is focused on how to convey to the viewer certain feelings, emotional contagion, and vivid dialogue between characters.

Chekhov does not use the most important technique in drama - action in plays not triggered by events. As B. Zingerman wrote, “the playwright compromises the event” and considers it only an accident. In fact, there are a lot of events in the plays: Chekhov’s characters experience love dramas, compete in love, fight duels, attempt suicide, go bankrupt, get entangled in debt, circumstances drive them out of home, but all this is not the main thing. The peculiarity of Chekhov's concept of theatrical action is not the absence of events, but their assessment throughout human life.

Action in his plays arises from monotony and fades away in monotony, heating up the hidden drama. The author paid great attention stage directions, in which those halftones of moods that can be expressed by sound or light were noted. “To feel a sad, monotonous life,” wrote the author of “The Cherry Orchard,” means to understand the play.” The endings of “Ivanov,” “The Seagull,” and “Three Sisters” are dramatic, even tragic - suicides and murders, but this is not an eventful denouement - this is a manifestation of chance. The death of the hero at the end of the works does not hold our attention, as it did in classical theater, we understand that everything is still ahead for both other heroes and us.

Mood in Chekhov's plays is created not only by external visual techniques (with the help of landscape, sounds and pauses), but also in the actors' lines, at first glance absurd, but significant for understanding eternity. The sound of a broken string in “The Cherry Orchard” plays this role of artistic subtext. This sound brings the characters back to the present, erases the boundaries of time, and makes it possible to realize that life is monotonous and boring.

Action in all Chekhov's plays takes place in the estate, even the Prozorovs’ town house (“Three Sisters”) resembles her, and this is no coincidence. Time and space are related as instant and eternity. Russian noble nests are being destroyed, but nature is eternal. Chekhov felt its beauty very subtly, and therefore in his stage directions for all his plays he gives an expressive image of nature, making it almost the main focus.

Spring expresses the theme of joyful anticipation of happiness, and summer is a period of languor and disappointment; in autumn, the characters feel the inevitability of old age and the fact that everything passes. The action of “The Cherry Orchard” begins in May and ends in autumn, but the garden remains blooming and clean. The emotional life of the characters reveals itself through the perception of nature. It’s as if nature itself switches the life drama of the heroes into a lyrical mode and at the same time gives it an epic, transpersonal character. The landscape elevates and poetizes everyday life.

These are the main features of Chekhov's dramaturgy, whose plays are known all over the world.

Chekhov's dramaturgy of the 1890-1900s. is fundamentally innovative. The writer’s mature plays include “The Seagull” (1895, first staged at the Alexandrinsky Theater in 1896; second at the Moscow Art Theater in 1898), “Uncle Vanya” (1896, staged in 1899), “Three Sisters” (1900, staged in 1901), “The Cherry Orchard” (1903, premiered in 1904). In addition, Chekhov’s legacy includes several vaudevilles, the drama “Fatherless” (1877-1878), unpublished during his lifetime, from his earliest, still high school youth; and two large plays “Ivanov” (1887-1889) and “Leshy” (1889), in which the writer’s dramatic innovation had not yet acquired a stable form (“Leshy” would later become the basis for “Uncle Vanya”).

Chekhov's new word in the field of drama causes sharp rejection by his contemporaries. The most striking manifestation of this attitude is the failure of the first production of “The Seagull” at the Alexandrinsky Theater. Contemporaries accuse the writer of completely not following the laws of the stage, that instead of writing dramas, he writes stories and tries to bring them to the stage.

We need to understand that Chekhov's critics are right: he really completely violates all the traditional laws of the stage - we may not feel this, because we get acquainted with Chekhov's plays as texts for reading, and not as stage performances, and in this capacity (as “stories” ") they do not raise any questions. The great playwright is developing a completely new stage language; the failure of “The Seagull” at the Alexandrinsky Theater is due to the fact that the play was staged there without taking him into account; recognition will come to Chekhov the playwright only after productions at the Moscow Art Theater, whose artistic searches will be consonant with Chekhov’s. But one must take into account the fact that Chekhov’s new stage language is very complex and subtle, it is much more difficult to implement than the traditional one; and to this day Chekhov is difficult to translate theatrically; stage productions of his plays are very rarely successful.

The most important feature of Chekhov's plays is that they do not have dramatic conflict in the usual form: there is no struggle between the characters, there is no confrontation between the protagonist and the antagonist. It is this clash of characters that is the primary basis of the conflict. On top of this we can see a conflict of generations, worldviews, truths, but this kind of abstract ideological level is secondary. Stage performance requires literalism: visually we see exactly what is happening to the characters. This is what attracts and holds our attention - this kind of focus on creating audience interest is a prerequisite for traditional stage performance.

The conflict is always thought of as the center of a dramatic work, through it the main core of the author's idea is realized (Chatsky and Famusov, Katerina and Kabanikha, etc.). The conflict was at the center of the theory of drama even in Aristotle - Chekhov encroaches on principles whose history goes back two millennia - this is precisely the scale of the reform carried out by this writer.

In Chekhov's dramatic works there is no struggle, no clash. The most striking negative example is “The Cherry Orchard”. It shows the departure of the old masters of life and the arrival of new ones - wonderful material for building a conflict, but in Chekhov there is no struggle here either, no one opposes anyone, the heroes, on the contrary, try to help each other to the best of their ability (another thing is why, instead of help, objectively harm results ).

In Chekhov's plays there is no intense action, and this is precisely what the very concept of “drama” implies. Bright, eventful events are also the most important factor in attracting the viewer’s attention to what is happening on stage. Chekhov shows eventless everyday reality. The choice of material may still seem unusual today: for example, Chekhov’s characters can create a whole phenomenon of simply drinking tea - and nothing else - or combing their hair, etc. This is simply a fragment of real time in human life, transferred to the stage.

We will also not find a traditional linear dramatic composition (commencement - development of conflict - climax - denouement). In Chekhov's dramas, nothing begins, develops, reaches a climactic peak, or resolves. There is no main character (there is no reason to single out a protagonist, since there is no conflict). We are shown several apparently disparate stories, situations, destinies that accidentally found themselves nearby in the flow of everyday time. The list of what is “not there” in Chekhov’s world against the backdrop of traditional drama can be continued.

But this is not just an absence, not just a destruction of the usual aesthetics of drama. Chekhov is building a completely new, fully developed artistic system. In place of the traditional external conflict, the great playwright puts an internal conflict: Chekhov’s world is determined by the situation of a person’s dissatisfaction with his life (in “The Seagull,” Sorin invites Treplev to write the drama “The Man Who Wanted,” “L" homme, qui a voulu,” dedicated to the discrepancy between what is desired and actual). The hero's aspirations, his ideas about what is proper, worthy, and desirable, on the one hand, and what he actually achieved, what came true in his life, on the other, come into conflict. Something similar happens in the area of action, a complete absence the external is replaced by the internal: the trivial everyday situations shown to us hide the most complex multidimensional mental processes.

All this also fundamentally does not correspond to the usual laws of stage performance. How can you show on stage the conflict between what is desired and what has been achieved? Traditional drama does not have the means to directly reveal the hidden spiritual content - for this there are lyrics and psychological prose. The “new drama” (not only Chekhov, but also Hauptmann, Ibsen and others) makes a fundamental artistic revolution: a language is created, a system of means with the help of which the inner world of a person is brought onto the stage.

Outwardly, Chekhov's dramatic world is eventless. This thesis requires clarification, since in his plays there are moments that seem to pretend to be eventful and even culminating: Treplev’s suicide in the finale of “The Seagull”, Voinitsky’s shots at Serebryakov in “Uncle Vanya”. But, as critics point out, the eventfulness here is eroded by multiple attempts, the sticky routine wins out, and the eventual peak point turns out to be impossible. But what is even more important is that the climax must radically resolve the conflict, change the situation, lead to a denouement - can we say this in relation to the above cases (even in connection with Treplev’s suicide)? No, absolutely nothing has changed in the general situation, which means we cannot talk about eventfulness, much less climax.

The lack of action, moreover, corresponds to the character of Chekhov's hero. The person in the dramas of this writer turns out to be incapable of action, of generating an event. This is explained by the hero’s weakness and inferiority in life (it is no coincidence that the word “klutz” appears in “The Cherry Orchard”). But there is another side, which is best manifested in “Three Sisters”: the heroines do not fight Natasha, who is taking away their house, they do absolutely nothing, not so much because they are not capable of it. For them, fighting for a home is simply not a truly worthy cause, a goal that could motivate them to act. In Chekhov's works we see a specific situation, which is... Berkovsky called the motivation for action “inflation”: reality does not offer a single truly worthy goal; there is absolutely nothing that could encourage activity.

We can once again correlate Chekhov’s world with the general situation of the 1880-1890s, a time of absence of a goal, a big cause, a “general idea,” the emergence of a new generation of “superfluous people.” Now this is becoming a problem inherent to absolutely everyone - an ordinary person, i.e. to every Chekhov hero. This also, on its part, explains such a sign of the artistic world of Chekhov's drama as the absence of a main character - each character in his own way realizes the internal conflict common to all, highlighting the problem of life's unrealization. Nemirovich-Danchenko will call this property of dramatic structure an “ensemble of characters.”

Chekhov's hero is an “ordinary person”; the subject of comprehension is everyday, trivial reality; artistic time reflects everyday, eventless existence. Everyday life is also present in the structure of internal conflict: its laws determine what has been achieved by a person. Internal discord turns into a conflict with the laws of the world order - one does not contradict the other, in both cases the nature of abstraction is preserved, the impossibility of directly showing this content on stage using traditional theater means; this is not embodied in opposition to another hero - a specific “culprit” for what is happening to a person cannot be found.

Chekhov's everyday life is both correlated with literary tradition and contains revolutionary innovation. As N. Ya. Berkovsky asserts, somewhat sharpeningly, Chekhov’s world is literary secondary, almost all the characters and situations have already been encountered in his predecessors. But in this situation, the scientist continues, Chekhov gives a fundamentally new qualitative model of life: he shows his “age”, life has “gone old”. And in this context, let us add, literary secondaryness itself takes place: the situation seems old and boring even as the plot of a work of art, but life cannot give rise to something new.

Life itself is falling apart and degrading. If among Chekhov's predecessors the loss of high aspirations led the hero to ordinary everyday values, now total inflation has also affected them: the most striking example is Lopakhin, an entrepreneur who does not believe in money, engages in commerce, by his own admission, in order to lose himself in the hustle and bustle, to distract himself from the painful feeling of the meaninglessness of existence.

Berkovsky illustrates this general situation with the plot of Uncle Vanya. Voinitsky's background is connected with the fact that he spent his entire life in hopeless economic activity, without being able to come into contact with something higher; but it seems to him that he serves the spiritual indirectly, being the manager of Professor Serebryakov’s estate, freeing the latter from the need to deal with low practical issues, allowing him to do something truly important. The action of the play is connected with the arrival of the professor himself to the estate after his retirement - and Voinitsky is forced to make sure that Serebryakov is mediocrity, he has done nothing in the field of excellence, which means that his own life was in vain. Voinitsky rebels, refuses the position of manager, tries to take Serebryakov’s young wife away from him, shoots him, but at the end of the play everything returns to its original position: Serebryakov and his wife leave, Voinitsky again works as a manager. But this return is imaginary, as Berkovsky shows: if earlier there was meaning in the hero’s activities, now there is none, Voinitsky will live and work mechanically, by inertia, without any purpose. Chekhov dramaturgy lyrical scene

Chekhov's characters either do nothing or act mechanically, out of inertia. It is no coincidence that the practical heroes in his works are gray and uninteresting people (despite the fact that work is one of the most important values of the writer): as an example, we can point out Varya from The Cherry Orchard, by whose labor all the heroes live.

Self-disagreement affects everyone. Absolutely all the characters have the same problem, the same misfortune - all the more remarkable is their notorious “deafness,” their inability to understand each other. Alienation takes the place of struggle and confrontation. Chekhov uses the technique of “dialogue of the deaf,” but in a reinterpreted form: the characters do not hear each other not because of an absurd misunderstanding, but because they do not want to understand each other, they do not feel any interest in their neighbor. Sometimes, in the context of everyday speech, the characters say something sincere, confessional, but the interlocutor will definitely turn the conversation to something unimportant. The word of one hero is not heard by another. Feelings also remain without reciprocity, unclaimed - the most striking example is “The Seagull”, which is built as a whole labyrinth of unrequited love, in which almost all the characters are included.

Without causing a reaction in the other character, without giving rise to consequences in the plot, i.e. Without performing traditional artistic functions, the word and feeling of the hero carry a completely new load in the non-classical structure of Chekhov's drama. They leave a mark in the emotional atmosphere of the drama and form a lyrical subtext.

The lyrical subtext, or “undercurrent” (the term of V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko), becomes the central element of the innovative structure of Chekhov’s drama, a new system of stage language.

Within its framework, that same internal (conflict, action) that is hidden behind external eventlessness, behind trivial everyday situations is realized. And this is at the same time the means by which this kind of content, unusual for traditional theater, becomes a stage phenomenon. The lyrical subtext is built on the basis of a complex multidimensional language of symbolism, double meanings of what the characters say (the second meaning can be present in the hero’s outlook or in the context of the entire work, in the author’s and viewer’s outlook), echoes between different destinies and situations, and finally, the famous Chekhov’s pauses, when the hero’s silence in a characteristic place allows us to understand what is in his soul now. Let us note once again the specific subtlety, complexity, fundamental non-systematic nature, and intuitiveness of this language, in other words, the difficulty of its implementation compared to the traditional set of stage tools.

Z.S. Paperny also points out that the “undercurrent” becomes a new principle of artistic integrity. Indeed, there is no traditional plot-compositional unity according to the logic of “commencement - development - climax - denouement”; there is also no main character playing the role of the center - the drama crumbles into a series of situations and human positions. It is the undercurrent that becomes the new principle of unity of the dramatic world. In its context, we see rhymes, echoes, and symbolic connections between all elements of the drama.

The phenomenon of the “undercurrent” allows us to express some thoughts in connection with the long-standing question of who should consider Chekhov: an optimist or a pessimist, a singer of hopelessness? In the world of the heroes of Chekhov's drama, hopelessness, loneliness, and doom that no one will hear you reign. But still, there is a person here who hears everything said (and even unsaid) by the hero, and does not leave a single word or feeling unattended and responded to. This person is the author. He hears everything, moreover, it is this internal, confessional content that becomes the new center of the dramatic structure - within the framework of the phenomenon of lyrical subtext. And to the extent that we, readers or viewers, come into contact with this subtext, we learn to hear another person, and total deafness is overcome.

The last question that is related to the aesthetics and poetics of Chekhov’s dramatic world is the problem of genre. The great playwright left us a kind of mystery, the solution of which critics and researchers are still struggling to solve: Chekhov calls comedies works that we perceive as serious, problematic, and far from funny (such as “The Seagull,” which ends with Treplev’s suicide). This, by the way, was the only point of difference between Chekhov and Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko - outstanding directors also perceived and staged Chekhov’s dramas as serious.

If we characterize the history of this mystery more precisely, we see the following sequence of events. "The Seagull" is defined by the author as a comedy. Then, yielding to the criticism of his contemporaries, Chekhov calls “Uncle Vanya” scenes from village life, and “Three Sisters” a drama (although practically nothing changes in the poetics). Finally, “The Cherry Orchard,” which he created on the threshold of death as a kind of artistic testament, bears the genre subtitle “lyrical comedy” - according to the principle “but still it turns.”

This interchangeability of the terms “comedy” and “drama” forces us to talk about a specific synthesis of the comic and dramatic in Chekhov’s plays. The presence of the second is quite obvious to us. The only clarification that needs to be made: from the point of view of a responsible system of aesthetic concepts, it is incorrect to call this pole of Chekhov’s world “tragic,” although there is a long tradition of such - inaccurate - word usage (moreover, it is correlated with the thesaurus of the writer himself).

To be extremely precise in terms, this is a serious, problematic world, but not tragic, but rather dramatic. Tragedy presupposes the action of higher laws - even if their greatness is frightening and destructive for a person, they exist in the world. The dramatic world is devoid of the essential, the majestic; the laws of existence that a person is forced to obey are low, meaningless, prosaic. This difference is best seen in the artistic concept of death. Katerina's death in "The Thunderstorm" is tragic; at this terrible price the highest principles, the superhuman law, were established. Treplev’s death in “The Seagull” is dramatic; it did not establish anything; the base and senseless triumphed in it.

If the presence of the serious, no matter how we call it, does not raise questions, the status of the comic remains problematic, the important role of which is so insistently affirmed by the author himself.

V.E. Khalizev proposes to rethink the very category of “comedy”: what if we do not consider the laughter principle here as the genre-forming principle (after all, there were “tearful comedies” in France at the beginning of the 19th century)? Maybe the point is in the looseness of the plot, the absence of conflict, the design of the composition as a series of paintings and situations? This kind of play has always been written in parallel with the Aristotelian conflict drama - and these were precisely comedies. This hypothesis must be recognized as productive, but for us the significance of the laughter principle for Chekhov is obvious - it is enough to recall the context of his entire work.

The humorous element is present in Chekhov's plays in the background: the characters perceive each other precisely in a comic way; not hearing or taking into account the internal drama, seeing around you only funny eccentrics, “klutzes”. But perhaps our system of reference is incorrect, according to which the internal, visible to us, is much more important than the external, accessible to the heroes. Maybe this is also an important part of the truth about man: the fact that to other people we can be funny weirdos.

And one more assumption, which does not claim to be binding (the genre mystery left by Chekhov may well remain unsolved). Perhaps we need to change our point of view, to perceive the genre definition not as something literally embodied in the world of heroes, but as a kind of author’s task. The heroes, from within their own horizons, perceive their lives as hopeless and dramatic; but perhaps, according to the author, they should take themselves, their own “importance”, their own “drama” less seriously - and then many knots will unravel by themselves, many problems will turn out to be non-existent. A lot of bad things would not have happened to the characters if they had been able to look at their lives this way (this is especially obvious in the fate of Treplev).

Literature

1. Skaftymov A.P. Poetics of a work of art. M.: Higher. school, 2007. pp. 308-347, 367-396.
2. Berkovsky N.Ya. Articles about literature. M.; L., 1962.
3. Paperny Z.S. Contrary to all the rules... Chekhov's plays and vaudevilles. M.: Art, 1982. 284 p.
4. Jesuitova L.A. Chekhov's Comedy “The Seagull” as a type of new drama // Analysis of a dramatic work. L., 1988.
5. Khalizev V.E. Creative principles of Chekhov the playwright: abstract. dis. ...cand. Philol. Sci. M., 1965. 20 p.
6. Berdnikov G.P. Chekhov the playwright: Traditions and innovation in dramaturgy by A.P. Chekhov. M.: Art, 1981. 356 p.
7. Zingerman B.I. Chekhov's Theater and its global significance. M.: Rusanov, 2001. 429 p.
8. Odinokov V.G. Plays by A.P. Chekhov's "The Seagull", "Uncle Vanya", "Three Sisters", "The Cherry Orchard": poetics and evolution of the genre. Novosibirsk, 2006.

What does a dramatic writer need? Philosophy, dispassion, the state thoughts of a historian, insight, liveliness of imagination, no prejudice of a favorite thought. Freedom.
A. S. Pushkin

By staging the plays of A.P. Chekhov on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater, K.S. Stanislavsky developed a new theatrical system, which is still called the “Stanislavsky system”. However, this original theatrical system appeared thanks to new dramatic principles embodied in Chekhov's plays. It is not for nothing that a seagull is painted on the curtain of the Moscow Art Theater, reminiscent of the first play of the innovative playwright.

The main principle of Chekhov's dramaturgy is the desire to overcome theatrical conventions, dating back to the 18th century from the theater of classicism. Chekhov’s words are well known that on stage everything should be like in life. “The Cherry Orchard” is based on the most ordinary everyday event - the sale of an estate for debts, and not a struggle between feelings and duty, tearing apart the character’s soul, not a catastrophic clash of kings and peoples, heroes and villains. That is, the playwright refuses to make the plot externally entertaining. It shows that the everyday state of a person is internally conflicting.

Chekhov strives to create in his plays not conventional theatrical heroes who are carriers of ideas, but living, complex images of ordinary modern people. The image of the merchant Lopakhin can serve as proof. He is a sincere man, remembering good things: he has not forgotten how kindly Ranevskaya treated him when he was a boy. Lopakhin from the bottom of his heart offers her and Gaev his help in saving the estate - he advises them to divide the cherry orchard into summer cottages. He constantly lends Lyubov Andreevna money, although he understands perfectly well that she will never repay these debts. At the same time, none other than Lopakhin buys a cherry orchard at auction and gives the order to cut down the trees without waiting for the previous owners to leave. He doesn’t even realize what kind of mental pain this can bring to Ranevskaya and Gaev. Another striking detail in the image of Lopakhin is his mention of a recent visit to the theater, where he watched a funny play (II). It can be assumed that the merchant has in mind W. Shakespeare’s tragedy “Hamlet” (!), because later he teases Varya with phrases from this play. And at the same time, the hero recalls with admiration how his poppy fields bloomed, not forgetting to mention that he earned forty thousand that year from selling poppies. Thus, in the soul of a merchant, sublime feelings, noble impulses, a craving for beauty, on the one hand, are combined, and at the same time, business acumen, cruelty, and lack of education, on the other hand.

Chekhov refuses formal theatrical techniques. He excludes long monologues, since in ordinary life people limit themselves to phrases in dialogue. Instead of “to the side” remarks, which in a classical play convey the hero’s thoughts, the playwright develops a special method of psychologism, which V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko called “undercurrent”, or subtext. “Undercurrent” is, firstly, “the double sound of each character” and, secondly, a special construction of the dialogue so that the viewer can understand what the characters are thinking about when discussing everyday issues. The above discussions about the complex character of Lopakhin can serve as proof of the “double sound of the character.” An example of a special structure of dialogue is the explanation of Varya and Lopakhin in the fourth act. They should talk about their feelings, but they talk about foreign objects: Varya is looking for something among things, and Lopakhin shares her plans for the coming winter - a declaration of love never happened.

If in the plays before Chekhov the heroes manifest themselves mainly in actions, then in Chekhov they show themselves in their experiences, which is why the “undercurrent” is so important in his plays. Ordinary pauses are filled with deep content in The Cherry Orchard. For example, after a failed explanation between Varya and Lopakhin, Ranevskaya enters the room, sees Varya crying and asks a short question: “What?” (IV). After all, tears can equally mean joy and grief, and Lyubov Andreevna is waiting for an explanation. There is a pause. Varya is silent. Ranevskaya understands everything without words and is in a hurry to leave. In the last act, Petya Trofimov talks about his happy destiny: “Humanity is moving towards the highest truth, towards the highest happiness that is possible on earth, and I am in the forefront!” To Lopakhin’s ironic question: “Will you get there?” “Petya replies with conviction: “I’ll get there.” (Pause) I’ll get there or I’ll show others the way to get there.” The pause here shows that Petya does not accept the irony of his interlocutor, but speaks completely seriously, maybe not even for Lopakhin, but for himself.

In Chekhov's plays, theatrical techniques that were traditionally considered secondary acquire particular importance: the author's stage directions, sound design, and symbols. In the first act, the playwright describes in detail the scenery - the room where everyone is waiting for Ranevskaya’s arrival. Particular attention in the remark is paid to the garden, which is visible through a closed window: cherry trees are strewn with white flowers. The reader and viewer have a sad premonition that all this beauty will soon perish. The stage directions before the second act note that telegraph poles and the outskirts of the city are visible in the distance from the garden. In addition to its direct meaning, this decoration, as often happens in Chekhov’s works, takes on a symbolic meaning: the industrial age, the new order are advancing on the “noble nest” of the Gaev-Ranevskys and, of course, will crush it.

Sounds play an important role in the play. This is a sad waltz at a ball, which Ranevskaya for some reason arranged just on the day of the auction; the knock of billiard balls, indicating Gaev’s favorite game; the sound of a broken string, disturbing the peace and charm of a summer evening in the park. He struck Lyubov Andreevna unpleasantly, and she hurried home. Although Lopakhin and Gaev give a very real explanation for the strange sound (a tub in the mine broke, or maybe a bird was screaming), Ranevskaya perceives it in her own way: her usual life is collapsing (“cut off”). Symbolic, of course, is the sound of the ax at the end of the play: the cherry orchard, the beauty of the earth, will be destroyed, as Lopakhin promised.

Even the details in the play are symbolic and significant. Varya always appears on stage in a dark dress and with a bunch of keys on her belt. When Lopakhin announces at the ball that he has bought the estate, Varya throws the keys at his feet, thereby showing that he is giving the entire estate to the new owner. The ending of the play becomes a sad symbol of the end of estate Russia: everyone leaves the house, Lopakhin locks the front door until spring, and the sick Firs, the last guard of the “noble nest,” appears from the distant rooms. The old man lies down on the sofa and, as the stage directions say, “freezes” (IV), it becomes clear: this is local Russia dying, along with its most faithful guardian.

Before Chekhov, plays were usually built on one cross-cutting event, around one intrigue, with one or two main characters. The play showed the clash of these characters, striving for opposite goals (for example, Chatsky and Famus society in A.S. Griboyedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit”). In a traditional conflict, the fate of the characters was decided, the victory of one over the other was depicted, but in “The Cherry Orchard” the main event (the sale of the estate at auction) turned out to be completely behind the scenes. The play presents a “smoothed out” plot, which is difficult to divide into supporting elements (plot, climax, etc.). The pace of the action slows down, the play consists of successive scenes, loosely connected with each other.

This “weakened” plot is explained by the fact that instead of traditional external conflicts, Chekhov depicts the internal conflict of a situation unfavorable for the heroes. The main conflict develops in the souls of the characters and lies not in a specific struggle for the garden (there is practically none), but in the characters’ dissatisfaction with their lives and themselves, in the inability to connect dream and reality. Therefore, after buying a cherry orchard, Lopakhin does not become happier, but exclaims in despair: “Oh, if only all this would go away, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change” (III). In Chekhov's play there are no main characters; the blame for the unsettled life, according to the playwright, lies not with individual people, but with everyone together. The Chekhov Theater is an ensemble theater, where both central and episodic characters are equally important.

Chekhov's dramatic innovation was also manifested in the unusual genre of the play, in the interweaving of the dramatic and the comic. “The Cherry Orchard” is a lyrical philosophical comedy, or “new drama,” as M. Gorky defined it in the article “On Plays” (1933). “The Cherry Orchard” combines dramatic pathos (the author clearly regrets that the orchard is dying, the destinies of many heroes are collapsing) and comic pathos (naked - in the images of Epikhodov, Simeonov-Pishchik, Charlotte, etc.; hidden - in the images of Ranevskaya, Gaev , Lopakhina, etc.). Outwardly, the heroes are inactive, but behind this passive behavior lies a subtext - the complex internal action-thought of the heroes.

To summarize what has been said, it is necessary to emphasize once again that Chekhov’s dramaturgy is innovative in the full sense of the word, and “The Cherry Orchard” is the last play in which the author expressed his own dramatic principles in the most vivid way.

Chekhov does not show events that capture the imagination of the reader-viewer, but recreates everyday situations in which he reveals the deep, philosophical content of contemporary Russian life. The heroes of the play have complex, contradictory characters and therefore cannot be unambiguously classified as either positive or negative characters, as is often the case in life. Chekhov does not use a clear composition, long monologues, “to the side” remarks, or unity of action, but replaces them with a free construction of the play, actively using the “undercurrent” technique, which allows for the most reliable description of the character and internal experiences of the dramatic characters.

“A.P. Chekhov's stories” - An unexpected turn of events, a triolet, a discrepancy. Heroes of the story 40. 1860 January 17(29). Epithet, irony, sarcasm. “Two Newsboys” 1883 Heroes of the story 30. Sneezing, “Death of an Official.” 1901, May 25 Marriage to O. L. Knipper. Epithet. Heroes of the story 20. “Surgery” 1884 Sarcasm. Exam, “Exam for rank.”

“Chekhov’s works” - A. Chudakov. Epigraph. Details: Black glasses, umbrella, raincoat, rubber boots. Work: “Man in a Case.” Assignment: Main character: Belikov. Relevance of the topic: The importance of details. Topic: Work: “Gooseberry”. Case life in the works of A.P. Chekhov (based on the works of “The Little Trilogy” and “Ionych”).

"Chekhov's stories lesson" - "Lady with a dog." Brought the writer world fame. What stories by A.P. Chekhov have you read? "Gull". "Uncle Vanya", "Ward No. 6". Chekhov's last play. "Gooseberry". "House with mezzanine". Nickname. "Duel". "House with mezzanine". “A.P. Chekhov is an incomparable artist of life.”

"Chekhov's Trilogy" - Test. Relevance of the topic. Detail as an artistic device. Part definition. Such people can ruin not only their own, but also other people’s lives... An alternative application in computer science lessons (design) is possible. S. Antonov. In Chekhov’s “little trilogy” “Man in a Case”, “Gooseberry”, “About Love”. Practical significance.

“Intruder” - Sinker - a weight suspended on the line of a fishing rod. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. Why did the man need the nut? Nuts secure the rails to the sleepers. A.P. Chekhov's story “The Intruder”. The investigator believes the man. What should the investigator do with the man? An attacker is a person who has committed a crime. What could happen if you unscrew the nut?

“Man in a Case” - “swallow, oh spider” (Kovalenko). Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language by Vladimir Dahl CASE CASE m. German. a box, a casket, a tube, a packing bag, a case in which the item to be saved is placed. Behind Belikov there is a terrible force - suspicion, perjury, denunciation. 1. “Every detail is needed” (L.N. Tolstoy) 2. The man who gave rise to fear. 3. “Your atmosphere is suffocating” 4. “Caseness” is next to us?!