In order to determine what is the structure and poetics of a play, one needs to understand the concepts of "structure" and "poetics".

Structure literary work - the structure of a work of verbal art, its internal and external organization, the way of connecting its constituent elements. The presence of a certain structure ensures the integrity of the work, its ability to embody and convey the content expressed in it.

Poetics(from the Greek poietike - poetic art) - a term that has two meanings: 1) a set of artistic, aesthetic and stylistic qualities that determine the originality of a particular phenomenon of literature (less often cinema, theater), - its internal structure, a specific system of its components and their interrelationships;

2) one of the disciplines of literary criticism (See Literary criticism), including: the study of common stable elements, the interconnection of which is composed of fiction, literary genera and genres, a separate work of verbal art;

Researchers have repeatedly noted the artistic originality of A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard": the absence of an acute single conflict in it, external dynamism, unexpected, spectacular plot twists. The action in Chekhov develops due to the inner experiences of the characters, the diversity of life is represented by the dominant development of the emotional and psychological plan of the play. Chekhov's characters are revealed not only in dialogues, but also in monologues, through the motives of the play, through artistic details. Yes, and the external conflict itself in the work in in a certain sense not real, but imaginary. There are four acts in the comedy, and there is no division into scenes. Events take place over several months (from May to October). The first action is exposure. Here is a general description of the characters, their relationships, connections, and also here we learn the whole background of the issue (the reasons for the ruin of the estate). The action begins in the estate of Ranevskaya. We see Lopakhin and Dunyasha, the maid, waiting for the arrival of Lyubov Andreevna and her youngest daughter Anya. For the last five years, Ranevskaya and her daughter lived abroad, while Ranevskaya's brother, Gaev, and her adopted daughter, Varya, remained on the estate. We learn about the fate of Lyubov Andreevna, about the death of her husband, son, we learn the details of her life abroad. The estate of the landowner is practically ruined, the beautiful cherry orchard must be sold for debts. The reasons for this are the extravagance and impracticality of the heroine, her habit of overspending. The merchant Lopakhin offers her the only way to save the estate - to break the land into plots and rent them out to summer residents. Ranevskaya and Gaev, on the other hand, resolutely reject this proposal, they do not understand how it is possible to cut down a beautiful cherry orchard, the most “wonderful” place in the whole province. This contradiction, emerging between Lopakhin and Ranevskaya-Gaev, is the plot of the play. However, this plot excludes both the external struggle of the actors and the sharp internal struggle. Lopakhin, whose father was a serf of the Ranevskys, only offers them a real, reasonable, from his point of view, way out. At the same time, the first act develops at an emotionally growing pace. The events that take place in it are extremely exciting for all the actors. This is the expectation of the arrival of Ranevskaya, who is returning to her home, a meeting after a long separation, a discussion by Lyubov Andreevna, her brother, Anya and Varya of measures to save the estate, the arrival of Petya Trofimov, who reminded the heroine of her dead son. In the center of the first act, therefore, is the fate of Ranevskaya, her character. In the second act, the hopes of the owners of the cherry orchard are replaced by a disturbing feeling. Ranevskaya, Gaev and Lopakhin again argue about the fate of the estate. Internal tension grows here, the characters become irritable. It is in this act that “a distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad,” as if foreshadowing an impending catastrophe. At the same time, Anya and Petya Trofimov fully reveal themselves in this act, in their remarks they express their views. Here we see the development of the action. The external, social conflict here seems to be a foregone conclusion, even the date is known - "auctions are scheduled for the twenty-second of August." But at the same time, the motif of ruined beauty continues to develop here. The third act of the play contains the climactic event - the cherry orchard is sold at auction. Characteristically, the off-stage action becomes the culmination here: the auction takes place in the city. Gaev and Lopakhin go there. In their expectation, the rest arrange a ball. Everyone is dancing, Charlotte is doing magic tricks. However, the disturbing atmosphere in the play is growing: Varya is nervous, Lyubov Andreevna is impatiently waiting for her brother's return, Anya transmits a rumor about the sale of the cherry orchard. Lyrical and dramatic scenes are interspersed with comic ones: Petya Trofimov falls down the stairs, Yasha enters into a conversation with Firs, we hear the dialogues of Dunyasha and Firs, Dunyasha and Epikhodov, Varya and Epikhodov. But then Lopakhin appears and reports that he bought an estate in which his father and grandfather were slaves. Lopakhin's monologue is the pinnacle of dramatic tension in the play. The climactic event in the play is given in the perception of the main characters. So, Lopakhin has a personal interest in buying the estate, but his happiness cannot be called complete: the joy of making a successful deal struggles in him with regret, sympathy for Ranevskaya, whom he has loved since childhood. Lyubov Andreevna is upset by everything that is happening: the sale of the estate for her is a loss of shelter, “parting with the house where she was born, which became for her the personification of her usual way of life (“After all, I was born here, my father and mother lived here, my grandfather, I I love this house, I don’t understand my life without a cherry orchard, and if you really need to sell it, then sell me along with the garden ...”). For Anya and Petya, the sale of the estate is not a disaster, they dream of a new life. The Cherry Orchard for them, it is the past, which is “already finished”. Nevertheless, despite the difference in the attitudes of the characters, the conflict never turns into a personal clash. The fourth act is the denouement of the play. The dramatic tension in this act weakens. After the problem is resolved, everyone calms down, rushing to the future. Ranevskaya and Gaev say goodbye to the cherry orchard, Lyubov Andreevna returns to her former life - she is preparing to leave for Paris. Gaev calls himself a bank employee. Anya and Petya greet new life without regretting the past. At the same time, a love conflict between Varya and Lopakhin is resolved - the matchmaking never took place. Varya is also preparing to leave - she has found a job as a housekeeper. In the confusion, everyone forgets about old Firs, who was supposed to be sent to the hospital. And again the sound of a broken string is heard. And in the finale, the sound of an ax is heard, symbolizing sadness, the death of the passing era, the end of the old life. Thus, we have a circular composition in the play: in the finale, the theme of Paris reappears, expanding the artistic space of the work. The author's idea of ​​the inexorable course of time becomes the basis of the plot in the play. Chekhov's heroes seem to be lost in time. For Ranevskaya and Gaev, real life seems to have remained in the past, for Anya and Petya it lies in a ghostly future. Lopakhin, who has become the owner of the estate in the present, also does not feel joy and complains about the "awkward" life. And the very deep motives of the behavior of this character do not lie in the present, but also in the distant past. Chekhov also expands the artistic space of the play thanks to a large number of off-stage characters. In The Cherry Orchard, in addition to fifteen characters, thirty-two more off-stage images are mentioned: the drowned son of Lyubov Andreevna - the seven-year-old boy Grisha, the Yaroslavl aunt of the Ranevskys, the Parisian lover of the heroine, her parents, Lopakhin's father and so on. All these heroes also contribute to the deepening ideological concept plays, saturate the work with subtle lyricism. The lyrical atmosphere of The Cherry Orchard is conveyed in monologues, in the author's remarks, with the help of pauses and omissions. Chekhov's dramatic and comic scenes alternate, contributing to the atmosphere of realism of what is happening, bringing stage episodes closer to life. Thus, in The Cherry Orchard, the distinctive features of the poetics of Chekhov the playwright appeared: a departure from the pretentious plot, theatricality, external eventlessness, when the plot is based on the author's thought, which lies in the subtext of the work, the presence of symbolic details, subtle lyricism. There is no main character in the work who would be connected with all other characters; The cherry orchard can be considered the compositional center of the system of images - it is not only a symbol of noble estates and noble culture that are fading into the past, but also a symbol of the beauty of life, a symbol of Russia, which could be transformed into a flowering garden by the efforts of many people. For Chekhov the writer and playwright, it is characteristic that his characters cannot be classified as “positive” or “negative”, “comic” or “tragic”: they, like real people, combine the most heterogeneous qualities - high and low. Non-heroes also act in The Cherry Orchard: Ranevskaya - warm-hearted, soft and delicate - after learning that the nanny has died, without any emotions, “sits down and drinks coffee”: “Yes, the kingdom of heaven. They wrote to me." She does not react at all to Gaev's message about the death of another servant; spends the last money in a restaurant and on alms to a passerby, although he knows that there is nothing to feed the servants; Lopakhin, who ardently sympathizes with Lyubov Andreevna, is even ready to give up his interests for her sake - to give money to buy out the estate, openly triumphs at the victory won at the auction, not noticing the crying Ranevskaya; Petya Trofimov, as if at a rally, makes grandiloquent speeches about the future in front of Anya, advises Lopakhin “not to wave his arms”, and he does the same: he accuses others of inaction, doing nothing himself. The most important means of disclosure inner world the heroes of the play, as well as the means of creating their images are lyrical monologues. It should be noted that all the heroes of the play, according to the figurative expression of one of the critics, “suffer from deafness”: they almost do not hear and do not listen to each other, each speaks about his own, not reacting to the remarks of other characters. However, this behavior is not caused by the selfishness of the participants in the polylogue, but by their helplessness before life: not having the strength to solve their own problems, they do not find the strength in themselves to sympathize and help others. Many researchers of A.P. Chekhov celebrate the unique language of his works. A significant role in the play is played by the speech of its characters. For example, the inconsistency of Ranevskaya's nature is reflected in the language: her speech is either spontaneous, sincere, or mannered and even melodramatic (ruthlessly ... tortured me ...; have pity on me; my soul trembles from every sound; I swear to you; I will die now). The disorganization, superficiality, frivolity of Gaev are manifested in the carelessness and confusion of his speech, the fusion of solemn vocabulary with vernacular; the speech of the landowner Pishchik is replete with vernacular, demonstrating his ignorance (probably, my cart all four wheels disappear, but look, and look there, in the morning, rubles), Lopakhin’s speech reflects his peasant origin and commercial activity (left over a lot, forty thousand clean and so Further); the vulgar bookish style of speech of the clerk Epikhodov, Yasha's servant. The author expands the artistic time and space of the play at the expense of off-stage characters, off-plot episodes (mainly, the characters' memories of their lives, past events) and remarks, symbolic details. It is in the remarks that we find a symbolic landscape that conveys the passage of time. For example, in the second act: “Field. An old, crooked, long-abandoned chapel, next to it is a well, large stones that once were, apparently, gravestones, and an old bench. The road to Gaev's estate is visible. To the side, towering, poplar trees darken: there begins a cherry orchard. In the distance there is a row of telegraph poles, and far, far away on the horizon, a large city is indistinctly marked, which is visible only in very good, clear weather. The sun will set soon." In this landscape, the movement from the past to the future is tangibly conveyed, from Russia of noble nests to industrial Russia; the approaching sunset, associated with the sunset of the former life, is also symbolic. Twice we find in the remarks a mention of a resounding "distant sound, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad." This is a sign of a passing era. Contemporaries, noting the originality of Chekhov's plays, their innovative character, recognized the artistic perfection of The Cherry Orchard. K.S. Stanislavsky, addressing in a letter to A.P. Chekhov, said: “In my opinion, The Cherry Orchard is your best play. I fell in love with her even more than the sweet "The Seagull" ... It has more poetry, lyrics, stage presence, all the roles, including the passerby, are brilliant ... I'm afraid that all this is too subtle for the public. She will not soon understand all the subtleties. Maybe I'm biased, but I don't find any flaw in the play. There is one: she requires too large and thin actors to reveal all her beauties. IN AND. Nemirovich-Danchenko called The Cherry Orchard Chekhov's most refined work, noting the play's "thin, delicate writing, realism honed to symbols, and the beauty of feelings."

The external plot of "The Cherry Orchard" consists in the change of owners of the house and garden, the sale of the family estate by auction. In his youth, Chekhov already addressed this topic in "Fatherlessness", where, however, she was of secondary importance. The plot of the play can be considered in terms of social issues and commented accordingly. A representative of the "third estate", an enterprising and businesslike merchant, opposes the educated, but not adapted to life, nobles. The plot of the play lies in the destruction of the idyllic life of the "noble nests" and the advent of a new, much more cruel, historical era. Such an unambiguous and straightforward interpretation of the conflict was very far from the original author's intention.

The plot of the play "The Cherry Orchard" is constructed outside the box. There is no conflict in it, since there is no outwardly expressed confrontation of the parties and a clash of characters. The merchant-purchaser Lopakhin is far from being a stranger to sentimentality. For example, a meeting with Ranevskaya is a long-awaited and exciting event for him: "... I would only like you to believe me as before, so that your amazing, touching eyes look at me as before. Merciful God! My father was a serf at your grandfather and father, but you, in fact, you once did so much for me that I forgot everything and love you like my own ... more than my own. But at the same time, Lopakhin remains a man of his entrepreneurial class - a pragmatist and a man of action. So, already in the first act, he joyfully offers a tempting project: “There is a way out ... Here is my project. Please pay attention! summer cottages and then rent them out for summer cottages, then you will have at least twenty-five thousand a year income. However, this is an "exit" to a completely different, material plane - the plane of benefit and benefit. Therefore, to the aesthetes-owners of the garden, it seems to be "vulgar", since there is no "beauty" in it. Indeed, outwardly there is no opposition. On the one hand, there is Ranevskaya's plea for help: "What should we do? Teach me what?" On the other hand, Lopakhin's offer to help: "I teach you every day. Every day I say the same thing." The characters seem to be speaking different languages, completely not understanding (and not trying to understand) each other. In this sense, the dialogue in the second act is indicative:

"Lopakhin. We must finally decide - time does not wait. The question is completely empty. Do you agree to give the land for summer cottages or not? Answer in one word: yes or no? Just one word!

Lyubov Andreevna. Who's smoking disgusting cigars here... (Sits down.)

Gaev. Here railway built, and it became convenient. (Sits down.) We went to the city and had breakfast ... yellow in the middle! I'd like to go to the house first, play one game...

Lyubov Andreevna. You will succeed.

Lopakhin. Only one word! (Pleading.) Give me an answer!

GAYEV (yawning). Whom?

LYUBOV ANDREYEVNA (looks in her purse). Yesterday there was a lot of money, and today there is very little. My poor Varya, out of economy, feeds everyone with milk soup, in the kitchen they give old people one pea, and I somehow waste it senselessly ... life positions, but not a struggle of characters. Lopakhin does not seem to be heard, or rather, they do not want to hear. The viewer retains the illusion that it is he who will play the main role of a patron and friend and save the most valuable, the most expensive - the cherry orchard - from destruction. The climax of the story coincides with the denouement. On August 22, the cherry orchard is auctioned off. Destroyed hopes that everything will somehow work out. Despite the fact that the cherry orchard and the estate have been sold, nothing has changed in the fate of the characters. The denouement of the external plot even seems superficially optimistic:

"Gaev (cheerfully). In fact, now everything is fine. Before the sale of the cherry orchard, we all worried, suffered, and then, when the issue was finally resolved, irrevocably, everyone calmed down, even cheered up ... I am a bank employee, now I am a financier ... yellow in the middle, and you, Luba, after all, look better, that's for sure."

Chekhov departed from the canons of classical drama in organizing external action. The central event of the play takes place somewhere on the "periphery", behind the stage. Logically, this is just a private episode in the continuous cycle of life. In the play, a single plot movement synthesizes the external action (event series) and its internal manifestation (emotional semantic series). First of all, Chekhov is interested in the everyday course of life and the passage of time. The external plot of the play - the sale of the estate for debts - echoes the internal plot, where a person appears in an endless stream of time. There can be only one conclusion here: "... Time is running out." This is the key philosophical conflict of the play. "The Cherry Orchard" reflects on what time does with a person and what kind of relationship he enters with this indomitable force.

Features of the chronotope. Chekhov expanded the chronotope (time and space) of classical Russian literature XIX century, which can be called patriarchal: the center of the works of Russian classics was, first of all, the noble estate, Russia noble and peasant, and he introduced the urban man with his urban worldview into literature. Chekhov's chronotope is the chronotope of a big city. And this does not mean geography, not social status, but sensations, the psychology of an “urban” person. Even M. M. Bakhtin noted that “a provincial philistine town with its musty life is an extremely common place for the accomplishment of novel events in the 19th century.” In such a chronotope - closed and homogeneous - meetings, recognitions, dialogues, understandings and misunderstandings, partings of the characters inhabiting it take place. “In the world of Russian classics of the “pre-Chekhov” period, in principle, “everyone knows everyone”, everyone can enter into a dialogue with each other. The epic, “village” image of the world in Chekhov’s work is being replaced by the chronotope of the “big city”, because openness and heterogeneity, the mismatch of geographical space with the psychological field of communication are signs of urban society. Chekhov's characters are familiar strangers, they live side by side, together, but they live "in parallel", each is closed in his own world. This chronotope and a new feeling of a person determined the poetics of Chekhov's drama, the features of conflicts, the nature of dialogues and monologues, and the behavior of characters.

At first glance, the "urban" chronotope (with its disunity of people) is contradicted by the fact that the action of most of Chekhov's plays takes place in a landowner's estate. There are several possible explanations for this localization of the site of action:

- in any dramatic work (this is its generic property), the scene of action is limited, and this was most clearly expressed, as you know, in the aesthetics of classicism with its rules of three unities (place, time, action). Chekhov's estate, estate, due to the closed space, limit the actual plot-event side of the play, and the action in this case passes into the psychological plane, which is the essence of the work. The localization of the scene provides more opportunities for psychological analysis;

- in a large, complex and indifferent world, "people seem to be driven into the last refuges, where, it seems, while you can hide from the pressure of the outside world: in your own estates, houses, apartments, where you can still be yourself." But they fail to do this, and in the estates the heroes are divided: they are not given the opportunity to overcome the parallelism of existence; a new worldview of the urban chronotope embraced both estates and estates;

- the estate as a scene of action allows Chekhov to include pictures of nature, a landscape in a dramatic action, which was so dear to the author. The lyrical beginning, brought by natural pictures and motifs, sets off the illogic of the being of the heroes of the plays.

Polyphonic, multi-heroic. Missing in Chekhov's plays through action and the main character. But the play does not crumble into separate episodes, does not lose its integrity. The fates of the characters echo and merge into a common "orchestral" sound. Therefore, they often talk about the polyphony of Chekhov's drama.

Features of the image of characters. In classical drama, the hero reveals himself in deeds and actions aimed at achieving a specific goal. Therefore, delaying the action turned into an anti-artistic fact. Chekhov's characters are revealed not in the struggle to achieve goals, but in self-characteristic monologues, in experiencing the contradictions of life. The characters' characters are not sharply defined (in contrast to the classical drama), but blurred, indefinite; they exclude the division into "positive" and "negative". Chekhov leaves a lot to the reader's imagination, giving only basic guidelines in the text. For example, Petya Trofimov in The Cherry Orchard represents the younger generation, the new, young Russia, and for this reason alone, it seems, there should be goodie. But in the play he is both a “prophet of the future”, and at the same time a “shabby gentleman”, a “clunker”. The characters in Chekhov's dramas lack mutual understanding. This is expressed in the dialogues: the characters listen, but do not hear each other. In Chekhov's plays, an atmosphere of deafness reigns - psychological deafness. With mutual interest and goodwill, Chekhov's characters cannot get through to each other (a classic example of this is the lonely, unwanted and forgotten old servant Firs from The Cherry Orchard), they are too absorbed in themselves, their own affairs, troubles and failures. But their personal disorder and trouble are only part of the general disharmony of the world. Not in Chekhov's plays happy people: all of them in one way or another turn out to be losers, they strive to break out of the limits of a boring, meaningless life. Epikhodov with his misfortunes (“twenty-two misfortunes”) in The Cherry Orchard is the personification of the general discord in life from which all heroes suffer. Each of the plays (“Ivanov”, “The Seagull”, “Uncle Vanya”, “The Cherry Orchard”) is perceived today as a page of a sad story about the tragedy of the Russian intelligentsia. The action of Chekhov's dramas takes place, as a rule, in the noble estates of central Russia.

Author's position. In Chekhov's plays author's position does not manifest itself openly and distinctly, it is embedded in the works and is derived from their content. Chekhov said that the artist must be objective in his work: "The more objective, the stronger the impression." These words spoken by the playwright in connection with the play "Ivanov" apply to his other works: "I wanted to be original," he wrote to his brother, "I did not bring out a single villain, not a single angel (although I could not did not accuse, did not justify anyone.

The role of subtext. In Chekhov's plays, the role of intrigue and action is weakened. The plot tension was replaced by psychological, emotional tension, expressed in “random” remarks, broken dialogues, in pauses (the famous Chekhov pauses, during which the characters seem to listen to something more important than what they are experiencing at the moment ). All this creates a psychological subtext, which is the most important part of the performance. The language of Chekhov's play is symbolic, poetic, melodic, polysemantic. This is necessary to create a general mood, a general feeling of subtext: in the play, replicas, words, in addition to direct meanings, are enriched with additional contextual meanings and meanings.

The genre of the play is The Cherry Orchard. The remarkable merits of The Cherry Orchard and its innovative features have long been unanimously recognized by progressive critics. But when it comes to genre features plays, this unanimity is replaced by dissent. Some see the play "The Cherry Orchard" as a comedy, others as a drama, others as a tragicomedy. What is this play - drama, comedy, tragicomedy? Before answering this question, it should be noted that Chekhov, striving for the truth of life, for naturalness, created plays not of purely dramatic or comedic, but of very complex formation. In his plays, the dramatic is realized in an organic mixture with the comic, and the comic is manifested in an organic interweaving with the dramatic. The originality of the genre of The Cherry Orchard was very well revealed by M. Gorky, who defined this play as a lyrical comedy. "A. P. Chekhov, - he writes in the article "On Plays", - created ... a completely original type of play - a lyrical comedy "(M. Gorky, Collected Works, vol. 26, Goslitizdat, M., 1953, p. 422) . But the lyrical comedy "The Cherry Orchard" is still perceived by many as a drama. For the first time, such an interpretation of The Cherry Orchard was given by the Art Theater. October 20, 1903 K.S. Stanislavsky, after reading The Cherry Orchard, wrote to Chekhov: “This is not a comedy ... this is a tragedy, whatever the outcome a better life No matter how you opened it in the last act... I was afraid that the second reading of the play would not captivate me. Where is it!! I cried like a woman, I wanted to, but I could not restrain myself ”(K, S. Stanislavsky, Articles. Speeches. Conversations. Letters, ed. Art, M., 1953, pp. 150 - 151). In his memoirs of Chekhov, dating back to about 1907, Stanislavsky characterizes The Cherry Orchard as "the heavy drama of Russian life" (Ibid., p. 139). K.S. Stanislavsky misunderstood, underestimated the power of accusatory pathos directed against the representatives of the then departing world (Ranevskaya, Gaev, Pishchik), and in this regard, unnecessarily emphasized the lyric-dramatic line associated with these characters in his directorial decision of the play. Taking seriously the drama of Ranevskaya and Gaev, unduly promoting a sympathetic attitude towards them and to some extent muffling the accusatory and optimistic direction of the play, Stanislavsky staged The Cherry Orchard in a dramatic vein. Expressing the erroneous point of view of the leaders of the Art Theater on The Cherry Orchard, N. Efros wrote: “... no part of Chekhov's soul was with Lopakhin. But part of his soul, rushing into the future, belonged to the "mortuos", the "Cherry Orchard". Otherwise, the image of the doomed, dying, leaving the historical stage would not have been so tender ”(N. Efros, The Cherry Orchard staged by the Moscow Art Theater, Pg., 1919, p. 36). Proceeding from the dramatic key, evoking sympathy for Gaev, Ranevskaya and Pishchik, emphasizing their drama, all their first performers played these roles - Stanislavsky, Knipper, Gribunin. So, for example, characterizing the game of Stanislavsky - Gaev, N. Efros wrote: “this is a big child, pathetic and funny, but touching in its helplessness ... There was an atmosphere of the subtlest humor around the figure. And at the same time, she radiated great touching... everyone in the auditorium, together with Firs, felt something tender for this stupid, decrepit child, with signs of degeneration and spiritual decline, the "heir" of a dying culture... And even those who are by no means inclined to sentimentality, to which the harsh laws of historical necessity and the change of class figures on the historical stage are sacred - even they probably gave moments of some compassion, a sigh of sympathetic or condoling sadness to this Gaev ”(Ibid., pp. 81 - 83) . In the performance of the artists of the Art Theater, the images of the owners of the cherry orchard turned out to be clearly larger, noble, beautiful, spiritually complex than in Chekhov's play. It would be unfair to say that the directors of the Art Theater did not notice or bypassed the comedy of The Cherry Orchard. When staging this play, K. S. Stanislavsky used its comedy motives so widely that he aroused sharp objections from those who considered it a consistently pessimistic drama. A. Kugel, based on his interpretation of The Cherry Orchard as a consistently pessimistic drama (A. Kugel, The Sadness of The Cherry Orchard, Theater and Art, 1904, No. 13), accused the leaders of the Art Theater of abusing comedy. “My amazement was understandable,” he wrote, “when The Cherry Orchard appeared in a light, funny, cheerful performance ... It was the resurrected Antosha Chekhonte” (A. Kugel, Notes on the Moscow Art Theater, “Theatre and Art”, 1904, No. 15, p. 304).

Thus, in the third chapter, we examined the structure and poetics of the work, its internal and external organization and the way of connecting its constituent elements, the totality of the artistic, aesthetic and stylistic qualities of the play, namely: internal and external composition, conflict, features of the chronotope, symbolism, role subtext, author's position and genre.

Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that Chekhov's plays are original genre formations that can be called dramas or comedies, only keeping in mind their leading genre trend, and not the consistent implementation of the principles of drama or comedy in their traditional sense. A convincing example of this is the play "The Cherry Orchard". Already completing this play, on September 2, 1903, Chekhov wrote to V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko: “I will call the play a comedy” (A.P. Chekhov, Complete Works and Letters, vol. 20, Goslitizdat, M., 1951, p. 129). On September 15, 1903, he informed M.P. Alekseeva (Lilina): “I did not get a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce” (Ibid., p. 131). Calling the play a comedy, Chekhov relied on the comic motives prevailing in it. If, answering the question about the genre of this play, we keep in mind the leading trend in the structure of its images and plot, then we must admit that it is based on not a dramatic, but a comedic beginning. Drama presupposes the drama of the positive characters of the play, that is, those to whom the author gives his main sympathies. In this sense, such plays by A.P. Chekhov as "Uncle Vanya" and "Three Sisters" are dramas.

The play "The Cherry Orchard" is written on the theme of ruin noble nest passing into the hands of a wealthy peasant merchant. But behind a private everyday conflict, epochal changes are revealed here: the change of noble culture to bourgeois culture, the break in cultural traditions, different life and spiritual orientations of people at the turn of eras. Life appears in motion, historical changes are reflected (1861) and the inevitable radical shifts in social and personal psychology. The past causes acute nostalgia not only among the ruined nobles, but also among people of other social and generational groups: Lopakhin, Anya Ranevskaya. It’s not just the klutzy nobles who are fading into the past. The culture that encouraged people to live not only according to profit calculations, but also according to the laws of beauty, is leaving. For a merchant, a garden is only an object of income or loss. For the nobles, he is a symbol of the beauty of the Russian land a symbol of the fatherland, faith in his country and his strength, always dear to a Russian person. Before our eyes, there is a break in times and traditions (19-20 and 20-21 centuries). That is why Lopakhin's victory over Ranevskaya and Gaev does not seem to be the final triumph, the complete victory of a businessman. And the well-being of the winner becomes evidence of the historical incompleteness of the play. Only for one hour after the end of the auction, he experiences a sense of success and triumph. In another, he himself reflects on his socially transformative mission: “you just need to start doing something to understand how few honest, decent people ...” The characters are devoid of typical certainty. Ranevskaya and her brother cannot be called only loafers, idle, frivolous people. All this belongs to them. But they also have sensitivity, kindness, dignity, patriotism. They can take the drama of the situation lightly, which is why their social frivolity is even attractive. Lopakhin does not look like a typical merchant, he has no hostility towards the masters, he keeps a grateful memory of them, he is attached to their estate. The word "klutz" is applicable to all the characters in the play, all of them have some vulnerability. With this quality of the play is connected its genre originality. The play was often performed as a drama and perceived by readers as a drama, although by its nature it is a lyrical comedy. She has lyrical-dramatic and comedic-humorous pathos at the same time. Real Faces evoke in the reader either sympathy, or ridicule, or admiration, or irony. Chekhov creates this play of "tonal chiaroscuro" by unexpected collisions of people; their statements inappropriate to the situation; remarks thrown "for themselves", not addressed to anyone. In the play there is no strict division of heroes into positive and negative. The author's assessment of their characters is devoid of unambiguity. The main collision of Chekhov's plays is the general dissatisfaction with the way of life, the passionate expectation of change. In the plays of Ch. there are many symbols, entire scenes and episodes are symbolic: left in a boarded-up estate in the finale of "V.s." Firs. Topoi are symbolic - house and garden. The sounds are symbolic: the sound of a broken string in the second act of V.S., the blow of an ax on the cherry trees at the end of the play. Some lyrical and comic means are also symbolic: pauses, omissions, eccentric tricks, etc.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

The formation of a cultural reader is the goal of modern literary education for schoolchildren. Experience in reading fiction, journalistic, critical and scientific texts; stable ideas about how a literary work and the literary process are "arranged"; a system of skills that allows one to expand the experience of reading, analysis and text generation in the course of later life - the main parameters of the result of education in the subject of "literature".

Traditionally, the bulk of literature lovers' reading is made up of literary works of the epic and lyrical genres. Dramaturgy is usually associated with the theater. Indeed, "drama lives on the stage" (N. Gogol), but watching a performance cannot be an adequate substitute for reading a play, since staging is a historically and socially conditioned reading, concretization of possible meanings, in addition, not all dramatic works can be seen on theatrical stage, but this should not mean their "death" for the spiritual life of society.

To understand the idea of ​​a literary work, says Professor G. A. Gukovsky, means to understand the idea of ​​each of its components in their synthesis, in their totality.

In preparation for work on the drama "The Cherry Orchard" we use literary works: V. I. Sorokin "Theory of Literature", V. V. Vinogradov "Subject and Style", G. A. Gukovsky "Studying a literary work at school", a collection of articles "Theory of Literature" ed. Abramovich, Elsberg and others, the book by N. Ya. Meshcheryakova "Studying the style of a writer in high school."

Acquaintance with the specifics of drama as a special kind of literature and teaching methods will help to understand the originality and originality of each of the studied dramatic works, will contribute to a more meaningful perception of it.

“A play-drama, a comedy is the most difficult form of literature,” wrote M. Gorky. “... In a novel, in a story, the people portrayed by the author act with his help, he is with them all the time, he shows the reader how to understand, explains to him the secret thoughts, hidden motives of the actions of the depicted figures, sets off their moods with descriptions of nature, the situation ... controls their actions, deeds, words, relationships ... The play requires that each unit acting in it be characterized by both word and deed on its own, without prompting from the author ... ".

The playwright does not talk about life, about the characters of his characters, but shows them in action. The absence of the author's characterization, portrait and other components of the image, typical for prose, complicates the perception of the drama by students. Therefore, it is necessary to look for such methods and forms of work that, on the one hand, would make it possible to acquaint schoolchildren with the specifics of drama as a special kind of literature, and, on the other hand, would help them see in the studied samples works intended for the stage and therefore requiring much more imagination and effort on the part of the reader. This is the relevance of the work, that the originality of the drama, its difference from the epic and lyrics give reason to raise the question of some features in the ratio of methods and techniques of work used in the analysis of dramatic works in high school.

And then, when reading the play, determine the plot, find the plot, follow the development of the action, catch the growing drama, stop at the climax, give your first assessment of the work as a whole.

Only when considering all elements artwork by interconnection, in linkage, the reader perceives it as a whole. “Thus, on the basis of the “moves” of perception and understanding of the whole work and its parts, their organic connection with each other,” writes P. M. Yakobson, “the viewer has a deepening holistic impression, which is born with sufficient artistic susceptibility, a significant range of experiences , aspirations of thoughts.

The purpose of the work: to identify the specifics of teaching dramatic work based on the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard".

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to solve the following tasks:

Consider the methods of teaching drama in school

Describe the methods of teaching drama in school

Analyze the problems and poetics of the work in question

Describe the system of teaching the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard"

Create a presentation of the lesson “The play of A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard"

The work consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion, literature.

literary dramatic image Czechs

1. teachingdramaticworksVschool

1. 1 MethodologyteachingdramaticworksVschool

One of the significant shortcomings of teaching literature, which is still quite common at school, is ignoring the issues of the writer's creative individuality. Writers are presented in such general formulations that erase the features, strength and charm of their art.

Recall the great importance Belinsky attached to the study of originality, the originality of a great artist, in whom everything “shines with its own, unborrowed colors, everything breathes with original and creative thought, everything forms a new, hitherto unseen world.”

Speaking about the process of studying the writer's work, Belinsky emphasized the need to understand the originality of a given writer to determine his "pathos", which marks the main feature of artistic individuality and "is poured in full creative activity poet", and is "the key to his personality and to his poetry".

Belinsky subtly revealed the features of the creative "pathos" of Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol and other great Russian writers.

Belinsky's fifth article on Pushkin shows the relationship between the whole and the particular in the writer's work: each individual work of the great artist lives its own life and has its own pathos, which refers to the pathos of the writer's entire work, as "part to the whole, as a shade, as a modification of the main idea, as one of its innumerable sides."

How much in Belinsky's wonderful words about the "pathos" of the great writer there is valuable, "key" material for staging the study of the writer's creative individuality in high school!

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov stands out among other great Russian writers with his unique individual appearance, his artistic style. Features of Chekhov's creative individuality are exceptionally valuable and interesting material for students of grade IX, where Chekhov is studied. Denote following methods teaching drama at school

1. Method of creative perception (method of creative reading)

Its purpose: to promote a strong and lasting artistic impression, which then continuously deepens (may be interrupted by a commentary, a short conversation).

2. Analyzing and interpreting (search, research) method. Its purpose: mainly a deeper penetration into a literary work.

3.Synthesizing method (realizes a double aspect: art and science in teaching literature).

Its purpose: the complex mental activity of students in the final phase of work, the requirement for a high degree of creative activity of students. All of these methods can be applied at all phases of the study of the work. However, the method of creative perception (creative reading) is mainly used in the first and second phases of studying the work, analyzing and interpreting - mainly in the second, synthesizing - mainly in the third phase. Each technique used by the teacher should be associated with the corresponding type of student activity.

The task of the teacher:	The method is manifested through the techniques:	The method develops:	Types of student activities:
CREATIVE READING METHOD
To develop and improve a deeper, more active and full, creative perception of a work of art	1. Expressive (artistic) reading of the teacher, reading of masters artistic word, individual scenes performed by actors; 2. Training expressive reading students; commented reading; 3. The word of the teacher, who knows how to fully correct and possibly deeper emotional perception of the work; 4. Conversation (the goal is to find out the impressions of students about the read work, directing attention to ideological and artistic features; 5. Statement of an artistic, moral, philosophical problem that directly follows from the read work; 6. Teacher's word or conversation after studying the work.	1. Observation; 2. The ability to see and hear the phenomena of life; 3. The ability to find the right words and expressions to convey their impressions by performing various kinds of creative tasks;	1. Reading works at home and in the classroom; 2. Expressive reading; 3. Learning by heart; 4. Listening to artistic reading; 5. Drawing up a plan; 6. Close to the text and concise paraphrases; 7. Artistic storytelling; 8. Oral and written reviews of the work just read; 9. Dramatization; 10. Critical notes; 11. Consideration of illustrations and evaluation of them; 12. Compositions of different genres.
HEURISTIC METHOD
To help students master the work, comprehend it, resolve the moral, social, artistic problems that have arisen. It is important to help students solve these problems; to teach to analyze a work, to understand its unity in the diversity of its components, to teach to reflect, to formulate one's thoughts in words, in a coherent, consistent, evidence-based speech - oral or written. In working with this technique, it is important that: 1. Pupils understood the essence of the problem for discussion; 2. Managed to substantiate their judgments with facts; 3. Managed to listen to the arguments of others, justify their pros and cons; 4. Clarified the meaning of the concepts of terms.	1. Teaching students to analyze the text of a work of art, analyze an episode, several interrelated episodes of a whole work; images of heroes; language; compositions of the work, comparison various works; 2. Statement of a system of questions, and the answer to each question logically implies a transition to the next question or the corresponding tasks; 3. Students independently search for a significant problem for analysis, try to answer questions, solve problems.	It contributes to the further assimilation by students of the method of science: the method of analyzing a work of art par excellence and some methods of historical and literary analysis, and in the process of this work, mastering the knowledge provided by the program on the theory and history of literature. It develops the scientific, critical thought of students, develops their literary abilities, teaches them to independently acquire knowledge and skills in the special analysis of a literary work.	1. Work on the text of a work of art, analysis of an episode or a whole work; 2. Retelling as a method of analysis; 3. Selection of quotes to answer the question; 4. Drawing up a plan as a technique for analyzing a composition, part or whole work; 5. Analysis of the image of the hero, Comparative characteristics heroes; 6. Drawing up a plan for your detailed answer, for a report and essay; 7. Summary of the results of the analysis of the work, comparative analysis of works various arts, analysis of the problem; 8. Speech at the debate. 9. Essay on private topics as a result of your work on the work.
RESEARCH METHOD (close to heuristic in function and name, but the essential difference between one and the other is in the difference between the teaching role of the teacher and the educational, cognitive activity of students)
The teacher not only poses a number of questions or problems, but also explains the ways to solve them, teaches to collect material, analyze, systematize it, shows or explains the conditions or methods of work.	The teacher puts forward a problem for the whole class, and a number of aspects of this problem are developed by groups of students or individual students. (The teacher indicates sources, offers a number of essay topics, puts forward topics for seminars)	1. Thinking of students; 2. Mastering skills related to this subject	1. Independent analysis of a part, episode of the work being studied, analysis of the whole work not studied at school; 2. Comparison in thematic, problem-ideological, theoretical-literary, historical-literary plans of two or more works; 3. Comparison, analysis of several points of view expressed in criticism on the work, the image of the hero with the justification of his opinion; 4. Comparison of a literary work with its adaptation; 5. Self-assessment of a literary work, heroes (reports, seminars, essays, participation in disputes).

The method of conversation used in the study of epic and lyrical works is also effective for dramatic ones. Most methodologists recommend using it mainly when analyzing the development of an action, clarifying the conflict, problems and ideological meaning of dramatic works. One cannot but agree with this, since the conversation makes it possible to widely involve the text of the work, to use the facts obtained by students as a result of independent work on the work.

Of particular importance in the analysis of dramatic works is the independent work of students on the text of the work. An analysis of the speech and actions of the characters helps students to understand the essence of their characters and create in their imagination a concrete idea of ​​their appearance. In this case, the analysis carried out by students of a particular phenomenon or scene of a dramatic work will to some extent resemble the work of an actor on a role.

Of great importance in the analysis of the play is the clarification of the subtext of the replicas of the characters. Work on clarifying the subtext of the heroes' speech can be carried out already in the 8th grade when studying "Woe from Wit" (act. 1, yavl. 7, Chatsky's meeting with Sophia).

In the process of analyzing a dramatic work, we pay special attention to the speech of the characters: it helps to reveal spiritual world the hero, his feelings, testifies to the culture of a person, his social position.

However, one cannot consider the speech of characters only in this function; should be remembered and in the process of work more than once stop students' attention to the fact that each phrase actor, each replica, "like electricity, is charged with action, because all of them should move the play forward, serve to develop its conflict, plot."

In the play, a person, placed by the playwright in certain circumstances, acts according to his own logic, the characters, as it were, themselves, “without the prompting of the author”, lead the events to a “fatal ending”. “With each phrase, the character takes a step up the ladder of his destiny,” wrote A. N. Tolstoy. (there are, as a rule, very few of them), the images that arise in the imagination are based on visual representations of some persons. So, students often recreate the appearance of the hero according to the external data of the actor who played his role in the play or movie.

In plays, everything is reported and everything is done through the speech of the characters themselves. The author only in exceptional cases indicates the behavior of the character and the emotional-intonational side of his speech in an unusually short form (remarks).

Many students, when reading a play, cannot at all recreate in their imagination either the actions or the behavior of the characters. Others, proceeding from the logical and semantic side of the speech of the characters and perceiving it as a source of information, recreate in their imagination only the actions of the characters. Some students (as a rule, there are very few of them) pay attention when reading a play to remarks that indicate the external actions of the characters, and on this basis try to "see" the external (physical) side of their behavior, ignoring the mental state of the characters, which and determines their external actions. In addition, the vast majority of schoolchildren do not notice at all the remarks indicating the psychological state of the characters. But, "seeing" only the physical side of the character's behavior and not "seeing" his inner state, the students do not represent him as a person. For them, the hero remains an incorporeal being, the mouthpiece of the author's ideas, the character of the hero is not deeply known.

Schoolchildren cannot recreate the psychophysical behavior of the characters in a dramatic work on the basis of their speech, because they take into account only its content side (what is said) and lose sight of the form of expression of this content. This, however, is not limited to the peculiarities of students' "vision" of the actions and behavior of the heroes of the drama based on the perception of the content side of their speech. At best, students “see” the act itself, but, excluding it from a specific situation that predetermines it to some extent, they cannot thus reveal the subtext of this act.

The experience of perceiving the dramatic genre, acquired by students in the process of studying literature, is the most important help for the perception of a dramatic work. We mean the student's certain knowledge of the specifics of the genre - its structure, elements, features of the reconstruction of characters, etc.

Another thing is the circle of historical and everyday realities, human relations, linguistic idioms.

Sometimes, to activate the imagination of students, one should turn to the historical and everyday commentary. This is done in those cases when students, far from the era depicted in the drama, do not have the necessary ideas and knowledge and cannot recreate in their imagination the details of the external appearance of the protagonist of the play, for example: the uniform of the mayor, the clothes of the Kabanikh, etc. If the students help, then they will not have the appropriate ideas and they will only learn the meaning of the word.

Aspirations, moods, feelings of the character in the course of action, dialogue "move", change. All this is expressed by his speech, therefore, when analyzing the most important moments of the dialogue, it is necessary to understand the behavior of the character, which should be considered in its “dual” nature, that is, as psycho-physical. It is impossible to bypass such an important moment in dramaturgy as the text.

In Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya" the characters have just gone through very dramatic events, the collapse of hopes, the loss of ideals. And one of them, Dr. Astrov, suddenly, outwardly seemingly without any motivation, comes up to a geographical map hanging on the wall and, as if completely out of place, says: “Ah, it must be hot in this very Africa now - a terrible thing!”

In the Gorky play "At the Bottom" Vaska Pepel leads the most important and not only for himself - an explanation with Natasha. Bubnov at this moment inserts: “But the threads are rotten” - at this very time he really sews something from rags. But it is clear that this remark is not accidental, and does not carry the meaning that lies in it, so to speak, "on the surface." And this should be explained to the students.

"The first condition for the analysis of a dramatic work will be the recreation in ... their (schoolchildren's) imagination of the performance ... Therefore, it is necessary to attract material that tells about the performance of the artists, who gave not only bright, but also consonant images to the author." This is undeniable. But “seeing” and “hearing” how a character acts, speaks, feels, can only be based on reading and analyzing a dramatic work.

Here is the last scene of The Examiner. Everyone has just learned that Khlestakov is "not at all an auditor." Anger and malice take possession of the mayor. He (according to remarks) commandingly “waves his hand”, indignantly “beats his forehead”, shouts “in his heart”, “threatens his fist at himself”, “knocks his feet on the floor with anger”. Meager author's instructions should be carefully used when reading the play - they alone in many ways depict the psychophysical state of the hero.

Simultaneously with the expressive reading of the play or after it, an analysis of the work is carried out. This analysis is based on taking into account the specific features of the construction of the drama and the disclosure of its images and, of course, the peculiarities of the perception of this genre by schoolchildren.

The specific subject of depiction in drama is life in motion, or, in other words, action, and it is a holistic analysis of the play following the stage action that makes it possible to understand the essence of this action.

In the play, along with the central line, there are always non-main lines, "side" lines, which "flow into the mainstream of the struggle, intensifying its flow." Not to consider these lines in interconnection, to reduce everything to only one central line means to impoverish the ideological content of a dramatic work. Of course, this requirement is feasible only when studying the play as a whole or in montage. In the same national schools, in which only excerpts from the drama are studied, the teacher informs about the plot of the play.

As mentioned above, the action of the drama is manifested in the characters entering into conflict. This means that when analyzing the drama, one must consider the development of the action and the disclosure of characters in an organic unity. Even V.P. Ostrogorsky suggested that the teacher, analyzing a dramatic work, pose the following questions to students: Do people's actions completely agree with their characters? .. What prompts the hero to act? Does he have an idea or a passion? What obstacles does he meet? Are they within it or outside of it?

A holistic analysis of the drama following the development of its action obliges us to proceed from this fundamental law of dramatic art. At the same time, we must not forget that action is understood not only as the actions of characters, but also as a manifestation of character in the details of behavior. The characters in the play are revealed either in the struggle for the realization of certain goals, or in the awareness and experience of one's being. The whole question is what action in this drama comes to the fore. Given this, the teacher in the process of analyzing the drama focuses either on the actions of the heroes of the drama, or on the details of their behavior. Thus, in the course of the analysis of The Thunderstorm, the “volitional acts” of the characters will be in the center of attention, while in the analysis of The Cherry Orchard, the “detailed behavior” of the characters will be in focus.

When analyzing the images of a play, one should not be limited only to clarifying the actions of the characters. It is necessary to draw the attention of students to how the character carries out his actions. And the teacher faces the task of forming and developing the recreating imagination of students.

The psychophysical behavior of a character in a dramaturgical work - especially when reading a play, and not when perceiving it from the stage - is difficult to imagine and comprehend due to the absence of the author's commentary in the drama. It can emerge only from dialogue and stingy author's remarks. Therefore, when starting to analyze the hero’s speech, it should be remembered that it characterizes the character with its causal character, its content, logical and semantic side and the form in which this content was embodied.

Starting to analyze the scene-dialogue, first of all, the question should be posed to the students: In what environment and why did this dialogue arise and be conducted? Here, the author's remarks will provide some help, and, therefore, it is necessary to pay due attention to their consideration, to find out how much they armed the students.

If the author's remarks, as often happens, do not provide students with sufficient support for the work of the recreating imagination, they will have to provide a number of additional materials: either sketches of scenery (for example, for B. Kustodiev's Thunderstorm), then author's explanations (say, in Chekhov's letters to Stanislavsky about the scenery of Act II of The Cherry Orchard), then use books (the chapter “Khitrov Market” from Vl. Gilyarovsky’s essays “Moscow and Muscovites”, photographs of doss houses from the album “Moscow Art Theater” - for the play “At the Bottom”) and etc.

We should not miss the opportunities sometimes inherent in the work itself. So, in The Cherry Orchard, one should point out what the situation is before us in the speeches of the participants in the events themselves (Gaev: The garden is all white; Varya: The sun has already risen ... Look, mommy, what wonderful trees! .. what air! Starlings sing! etc.).

It is clear that the reproduction in the imagination of students of a specific situation of events is not an end in itself, but contributes to the disclosure of the ideological content of the work.

Given that schoolchildren, as a rule, do not have visual representations of the hero of a dramatic work, and the process of understanding the image of the hero is associated with a visual representation of him, it is necessary in the process of analyzing the work in the course of the development of the action to find out what the author says about the appearance of the hero, what they say other characters in the play about the appearance of the character, what the hero himself says about his appearance, what details in the appearance of the hero indicate his origin and living conditions, how certain personality traits are expressed in his appearance.

Students cannot be expected to develop a complete understanding of the play and its characters as a result of textual analysis conducted in the classroom. Further work is needed - a synthesis of materials accumulated in the process of a holistic analysis, for example, a generalization of observations on the images of heroes.

This work in each case is specific, but you can specify a number of general issues, which are clarified in a generalizing conversation about the character: What is the role this hero in the general flow of the drama? What does this hero look like? In what scenes does he most expressively and fully reveal himself? Do we know his backstory and how do we find out about it? What thoughts, views, character traits does the hero discover in the dialogues and with whom does he conduct these dialogues? How does the character characterize his attitude towards other characters? What ideological meaning image.

It is necessary to identify the true conflict underlying the playwright so that students do not have erroneous ideas about it. So, it may seem to them, for example, that in Gorky's play "At the Bottom" the conflict is in the clash of interests of Natasha and Ash, on the one hand, and the Kostylevs, on the other. Meanwhile, if this were the case, the play would end in the third act and the fourth would simply be superfluous. And the conflict of the play is in the clash of worldviews, and the disappearance of Luke, also in the third act, only emphasizes the continuation of the spiritual struggle, the struggle with the "saving" lie, which ends in the fourth act with the life test of "consolation", the collapse of this "philosophy", the revelation of futility and the harmfulness of the illusions propagated by Luke.

Revealing the main conflict of the play, the teacher shows the students that the author's worldview is expressed in the essence of this conflict.

1.2 tricksstudydramaticworksVschool

The initial stage of studying a dramatic work at school, reading a play, moreover, expressive reading, reading in the classroom.

In the middle classes, it is necessary to read the entire drama work in the lesson; in the senior classes, only individual actions or phenomena will be allocated for reading. If in the middle grades the teacher's reading will be combined with the reading of the students, then in the upper grades one can limit oneself to reading only the students themselves.

The first independent home reading of the drama introduces students to the content only in the most general form - this is the assimilation of the purely external, eventful side, individual plot moments. Extremely rarely perceived with some degree of depth, the dramatic characters and the severity of the conflict. And although in this case an emotional response arises to the depicted picture of life, however, in many respects it is accidental and shallow.

Preparation of students for face reading will also vary depending on the age, knowledge and skills of students. If in the middle classes a lot of preparatory work is needed, during which the characters of the characters, their history, appearance, manner of speaking are clarified, children learn to read a dramatic work by faces, then in the senior classes a lot will be done by students on their own.

And expressive reading here is a powerful means of introducing students to the world of thoughts and feelings of the heroes of the play. After all, “listening ... means seeing what they are talking about.”

Therefore, the study of a dramatic work at school begins, as a rule, with reading it in class. In the lesson, only some scenes are read, in which the causes of the clashes of the characters are revealed. Reading should be accompanied by small comments. While reading and talking about the content of the work, it is recommended to use illustrations and transparencies for the work.

The initial acquaintance of students with the content of the work is completed by reading it by faces. With such a sequence in the work, it is easier for students to understand the characters of the characters and correctly read the analyzed dramatic work. However, reading by faces can be used not only in the process of commented reading, but also during the analysis of the drama, in the final lessons and as an independent method of work used at various points in the analysis of the work. Reading by faces is caused by the very form of a dramatic work and, consequently, contributes to a deep disclosure of its content.

We must also not forget that expressive reading educates readers. fiction, and this is one of the main tasks of teaching Russian literature. It will save a lot of teaching time reading the entire play by the teacher. But with all the undoubted advantages of teacher reading, it also has an obvious drawback - it is very difficult for one person to convey the thoughts and feelings of all the characters in the play.

As for the expressive reading of the play by roles by students, it is possible only after they understand the ideological and artistic content of the work, that is, after a long preparation - both in terms of analytical and in terms of mastering its language.

The most effective way is the combination of teacher's reading with student's reading. Let's say a teacher reads one or two roles, and schoolchildren take part in the so-called "mass" scenes.

But even to participate in the “mass scenes” of schoolchildren, performers must be prepared in advance, before the first reading of the play with the class. It is clear that for this purpose the most successful students in the Russian language are selected. preliminary work with the "readers", of course, includes their introduction to the foundations of the ideological and artistic content of the play, and teacher's samples of reading the roles assigned to them, and rehearsal work with them. But the time spent preparing these few students is more than paid off when working on the class play as a whole. Describing the process of learning a dramatic image by schoolchildren, N. I. Kudryashev rightly noted: “In essence, a deeper understanding of dramatic images is achieved only when those who study them become at least to some extent in the position of a performer.” Plays should become “Readers” in the final all work on it, if possible, all or almost all students of the class. That is why, looking ahead a little, let us touch on some general features of the expressive reading of a dramatic work in the classroom.

“Standing in the position of a performer” is not only striving to convey in a word one’s well-being and internal state his "hero". Inevitably, there is a need for other means of "stage" expressiveness - gesture, movement, smile, grin, etc.

It is clear that the students are not actors, but the elements of "external" expressiveness will not only not interfere with expressive reading, but will contribute to its organization. And these elements should be considered by the teacher, follow from his own analysis of the work, and only after that are reasonably recommended to the student.

Petya Trofimov in The Cherry Orchard addresses Lopakhin, on his face is a half-sympathetic, half-mocking smile, and in it is the whole essence of his relationship to Lopakhin.

Lopakhin, worried, tells the owners of the cherry orchard, Ranevskaya and Gaev, the news, which, in his opinion, should please them: after all, he has found a panacea for all their troubles. To which, however, of the two owners of the garden, is he addressing, although formally his speech is to both? Of course, to Ranevskaya, because, as you know, he never took Gaev seriously. And indeed, although he hears Gaev's reaction to his proposal: "Sorry, what nonsense," Gev's remark does not bother him at all, does not stop him. He is all impatiently waiting for Ranevskaya's answer, her decision, her sentence. And therefore, naturally, he looks at Ranevskaya, he is all turned towards her, does not take his eyes off her. A turn towards her, a look at her, a gesture that not only illustrates what is being said, but represents an action that is organically connected with the word and therefore necessary.

To prepare students for reading comedy, it is necessary to tell them about the Russian reality of the 30s. XIX century, about the order that prevailed in cities, about the relationship of people belonging to different strata of society, or read the relevant places from a work of art that describes the life of a county town in the 30s. last century. Reading, for example, excerpts from chapter 27 of Herzen's Past and Thoughts will help students understand what the majority of governors, mayors, officials and merchants were like. In this case, already during the initial reading of The Inspector General, students will understand its accusatory nature, and the typical character of the characters.

However, the nature and content of introductory classes will vary depending on the task set by the teacher. If he intends to introduce the students to the play "The Government Inspector" before reading the comedy in class, then, naturally, he will need to report on the work of the director, artist, actors, on their participation in the creation of the play and on how to watch the play. Discussing the play and all its details will prepare students for reading the comedy.

However, it should be noted that familiarity with the performance before studying the work in class reduces to some extent the depth of perception of it, since it is difficult for some students to cover all the characters at once and understand their characters and actions. Sometimes schoolchildren are carried away only by external comedy, without thinking about its accusatory meaning. Therefore, in cases where students are not sufficiently prepared for the perception of the performance by all previous work and are not well-read, it is better to acquaint them with the performance after reading the comedy or in the final classes.

The tasks of studying dramatic works in the senior grades become much more complicated in connection with the study of the foundations of the history of Russian literature.

In introductory lectures, the teacher introduces high school students not only to the events reflected in the work, but also to the history of its creation and those social issues that worried the writer and found artistic resolution in his work. In addition, in the process of studying the foundations of the history of Russian literature, the teacher gives an idea to schoolchildren about the ways of developing realistic drama and theater.

The applied methods of work may have a different combination in the upper grades. The teacher's lecture or his story can be combined with independent work students: reports, small messages or reading on the faces of individual scenes that are an illustration of one or another stated position. It is advisable to combine a lecture on Chekhov's dramaturgy, for example, with short oral reports of students about Chekhov's plays recommended for independent reading, a lecture on Gorky's dramaturgy with students' independent written work on plays recommended for reading. These works can be read by students in the classroom or in extracurricular activities, and can be used by the teacher in a review lecture.

In the introductory classes, students also get acquainted with some facts that reveal the history of Russian drama and theater.

Introductory review sessions literary activity A. N. Ostrovsky, will give an opportunity to acquaint schoolchildren with a whole era in the history of the Russian theater and with various genres realistic drama and their features. In this case, the teacher involves the works recommended by the program for independent reading.

The originality of the dramaturgy of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. will be revealed when studying the works of Chekhov and Gorky. In connection with the characterization of Chekhov's dramaturgy, it is advisable for students to raise the question of the difference between Chekhov's plays and the dramatic works of Gogol and Ostrovsky. The story of the teacher about the Art Theater, who managed to fully reveal the originality of Chekhov's and Gorky's plays, will complete the previous reports from the history of the Russian theater at the end of the 19th century. It is advisable to inform students about Gorky's views on drama, as they are the result of observations, theoretical generalizations and creative searches of the writer himself.

It is necessary to conclude the study of dramatic works by visiting the theater, watching a film or a school play.

The discussion of the performance will require the involvement of the stage history of the work under study and some information from the history of the Russian theater.

But in view of the fact that it is often impossible to visit the theater and watch the performance. Then at the final lessons you can introduce students to the most important facts from the history of the Russian theater. Methodists wrote about this in their works. It is best to communicate this information in lectures that conclude the study of dramatic works.

The conversation about the performance turns into the teacher's story about the stage fate of the play. There is no need to express all stage history from the production of The Cherry Orchard at the Moscow Art Theater to its production at Sovremennik, it is important to show how different stage interpretations can deepen the author's intention or, conversely, damage it. It should be noted how the theatrical interpretations of the same play differ at different times, how they depend on the tasks of the interpreters.

It is good to acquaint students with the staging of works of Russian drama on the stage, with the history of the life of this work in the theater, with the influence that the work of the Russian playwright had on the formation and development of drama.

Summing up the conversation about the performance, the teacher will ask the students about the following questions: To what extent does the appearance of the performers of the roles correspond to your visual representation of the characters? In what scenes do the actors most fully and vividly reveal the main features of the characters? By what means of external expressiveness do the actors draw our attention to these features? What role did music, scenery and light play in revealing the idea of ​​the work? With what in the performance we can not agree? And etc.

Thus, the methods and techniques of work used in the study of dramatic works do not differ from the methods and techniques used in the analysis of epic and lyrical works, but their relationship is somewhat different. In this regard, it is necessary to consider, using specific examples, how the methods and techniques of work used in the study of dramatic works vary, depending on the characteristics of their perception, the goals and objectives of the study.

2 . PeculiaritiesteachingdramaticworksVschoolonexampleplaysA.P. Chekhov"Cherrygarden"

2.1 IssuesAndpoeticsplaysA.P.Chekhov« Cherrygarden"

Yes, understand. That everything came to an end, almost two centuries ago, but with thoughts to wander in the night forest and still not hear the sound of a woodcutter.

We are approaching a specific consideration of the skill of A.P. Chekhov in the play "The Cherry Orchard". First we pass summary dramas, we determine the ideological and thematic basis in the characters. We name the theme, define the storyline, focus on the main components of the play.

This work has three sessions. The conversation focused on the following questions:

1. Name the social types of broad and deep generalization, note their personal properties, highlight their leading features and prove that the leading feature dominates, but does not absorb others.

2. When analyzing the play, highlight the characters of strong drama and comedy. How is the lyricism, the sublime feelings of the heroine presented by the author?

3. Pay attention to the originality of the language of the characters.

5. Note the stylistic unity of all components.

The play "The Cherry Orchard" was written by A.P. Chekhov in 1903. Not only the socio-political world, but also the world of art was in need of renewal. A.P. Chekhov, being talented person who have shown their skill in short stories, enters dramaturgy as an innovator. After the premiere of The Cherry Orchard, a lot of controversy broke out among critics and spectators, among actors and directors about the genre features of the play. What is The Cherry Orchard in terms of genre - drama, tragedy or comedy

While working on the play, A.P. Chekhov spoke in letters about her character as a whole: “I did not come out with a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce ...”. In letters to Vl. A.P. Chekhov warned I. Nemirovich-Danchenko that Anya should not have a “crying” tone, that in general there should not be “a lot of crying” in the play. The production, despite the resounding success, did not satisfy A.P. Chekhov. Anton Pavlovich expressed dissatisfaction with the general interpretation of the play: “Why is my play so stubbornly called a drama on posters and in newspaper ads? Nemirovich and Alekseev (Stanislavsky) positively see in my play something different from what I wrote, and I am ready to give any word that both of them have never read my play attentively.

Thus, the author himself insists that The Cherry Orchard is a comedy. This genre did not at all exclude the serious and sad in A.P. Chekhov. Stanislavsky, obviously, violated Chekhov's measure in the ratio of the dramatic to the comic, the sad to the funny. The result was a drama where A.P. Chekhov insisted on a lyrical comedy.

One of the features of The Cherry Orchard is that all the characters are presented in a dual, tragicomic light. There are purely comic characters in the play: Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov, Yasha, Firs. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov laughs at Gaev, who “lived his fortune on candies”, at the precocious Ranevskaya and her practical helplessness. Even over Petya Trofimov, who, it would seem, symbolizes the renewal of Russia, A.P. Chekhov is ironic, calling him an “eternal student”. This attitude of the author Petya Trofimov deserved his verbosity, which A.P. Chekhov did not tolerate. Petya utters monologues about workers who “eat disgustingly, sleep without pillows”, about the rich who “live in debt, at someone else’s expense”, about a “proud person”. At the same time, he warns everyone that he is “afraid of serious conversations.”

Petya Trofimov, doing nothing for five months, keeps telling others that "we need to work." And this is with the hardworking Varya and the businesslike Lopakhin! Trofimov does not study, because he cannot study and support himself at the same time. Petya Ranevskaya gives a very sharp but accurate description of Trofimov's "spirituality" and "tact": A.P. Chekhov speaks with irony about his behavior in remarks. Trofimov now cries out “with horror,” now, choking with indignation, he cannot utter a word, now he threatens to leave and cannot do it in any way.

A.P. Chekhov has certain sympathetic notes in the image of Lopakhin. He does everything possible to help Ranevskaya keep the estate. Lopakhin is sensitive and kind. But in double coverage, he is far from ideal: there is a business lack of wings in him, Lopakhin is not able to get carried away and love. In relations with Varya, he is comical and awkward. The short-term celebration associated with the purchase of a cherry orchard is quickly replaced by a feeling of despondency and sadness. Lopakhin utters with tears a significant phrase: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” Here Lopakhin directly touches the main source of drama: he is not in the struggle for the cherry orchard, but in dissatisfaction with life, experienced differently by all the heroes of the story. Life goes on absurdly and awkwardly, bringing neither joy nor happiness to anyone. This life is unhappy not only for the main characters, but also for Charlotte, lonely and useless, and for Epikhodov with his constant failures.

There is a large literature about The Cherry Orchard, including methodological literature, which will help the teacher to build interesting and creative classes for the study of this peculiar play by Chekhov.

"The Cherry Orchard" is the artistic result of the great Russian writer's observations of the social processes that took place in modern reality. The play developed an important social theme, which excited the imagination of the writer throughout his creative life, starting with the first youthful play without a title, and which received an artistically complete completion in last play"The Cherry Orchard". This is the theme of the material impoverishment and moral decay of the nobility and the transfer of noble nests into the hands of a new owner - the bourgeois.

The deep social content in the play is expressed in a subtle, peculiar artistic manner. Vl. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko called The Cherry Orchard Chekhov's most refined work, finding in the play "subtle, delicate writing, realism honed to symbols, beauty of feelings."

K. S. Stanislavsky wrote to Anton Pavlovich: “In my opinion, The Cherry Orchard is your best play. I fell in love with her even more than the sweet "The Seagull" ... It has more poetry, lyrics, stage presence, all the roles, including the passerby, are brilliant ... I'm afraid that all this is too subtle for the public. She will not soon understand all the subtleties. Maybe I'm biased, but I don't find any flaw in the play. There is one: she requires too large and thin actors to reveal all her beauties.

Chekhov's play is quite complex work despite its clear overall social pattern. The complexity of the play lies in the versatility and inconsistency of individual images and Chekhov's peculiar attitude towards these characters. The complexity of the ideological content of Chekhov's play led to different interpretations of some of the images and meaning of the play in literary and theatrical criticism, to different stage "interpretations of The Cherry Orchard".

For ninth grade students studying The Cherry Orchard, a certain difficulty in analyzing this play will be an excellent incentive for in-depth work on this work, for the work of independent thought, for “discoveries”, for acquiring the skills of a subtle analysis of complex literary phenomena.

The process of image analysis should consist in the fact that students, having received the corresponding task from the teacher, first independently reveal the characteristics of the characters of the characters, based on the text of the play, and then the teacher sums up, correcting, supplementing and systematizing the material proposed by the students. In some cases, critical and stage material is involved.

Analyzing the images of the younger generation, noting some vagueness, indefiniteness of these images (Chekhov himself spoke of the “incompleteness of some student Trofimov”), students should come to the conclusion that this “incompleteness” is not accidental, it is an expression of the uncertainty of Chekhov’s social ideals. In pronouncing the verdict on the past and the present, Chekhov vaguely imagined a better future, which he dreamed of and called for.

It is useful to stop students' attention on the figure of a passerby in order to find out the interesting question of what function this episodic image performs in the system of images of the play. People's Artist of the USSR N. V. Petrov gave the correct answer to this question: “The episodic figure of a passerby from the second act of The Cherry Orchard is needed as an opposition to another world that the Ranevskys do not know, which they are afraid of and are ready to give everything in fear, If only he did not disturb their quiet life.

The question of the genre of The Cherry Orchard is still controversial. This circumstance can serve as a basis for a debate in the classroom. It is necessary to offer students to first independently understand the dispute between the author and Moskovsky Art Theater and prepare for a debate on the topic: “The Cherry Orchard” - a drama or a comedy? After the debate, the teacher sums up, summarizes and supplements the material of the dispute, and draws a conclusion. In our opinion, the final word of the teacher after the debate should contain such basic provisions.

Chekhov already in the play "Ivanov" followed his famous principle: "Let everything be as complicated and at the same time simple on the stage as in life." In Ivanov, as in subsequent events, including The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov does not seek to squeeze in a complex vital content, within the narrow boundaries of "pure" genres. He has neither dramas nor comedies in a "pure" form; his plays were different characteristic feature- in them, as in life, heterogeneous elements are combined, therefore his dramatic works can be called as Dobrolyubov called Ostrovsky's plays: these are “plays of life”. Tolstoy's definition of Chekhov the writer as "an artist of life" is full of deep meaning.

People's Artist of the USSR B. Zakhava pointed out this feature of Chekhov's dramaturgy: “With surprising persistence, most of his plays, not wanting to listen to any objections, he declared comedies. But how many lyrics, tears, sadness, and sometimes the most real tragic notes are in these “comedies!”

In this regard, there is a sense in Gorky's definition of the genre of Chekhov's play: lyrical comedy. The point here is not only in individual lyrical scenes (the relationship between Petya and Anya, the farewell of Gaev and Ranevskaya in the last act), but in the deep lyricism of the idea. and subtext of the play. In The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov's lyricism manifested itself, that is, a purely individual, agitated perception of life, his deep thoughts about the present and future of Russia.

The comic and satirical elements in Chekhov's play have their own characteristics. The well-known Czech scholar V. Yermilov in a review of the play "The Cherry Orchard" at the Central Television and Radio Theater (V. Yermilov. "The Search Continues." "Soviet Culture", April 29, 1995. It would be useful to familiarize students with this review, which has a characteristic title: the search " key" for the "discovery" of unrevealed secrets in Chekhov the artist continues in our time) correctly noted these features: "The play has a special, subtle," imperceptible "Chekhov's satire - satire on the sly .., a kind of lyric-satirical Chekhov's comedy. .."

The study of drama. Drama specific. Drama analysis. The specifics of studying the play by A.N. Ostrovsky. Methodological research on the teaching of the play. Thematic planning for the play. Summaries of lessons on the study of the work.

term paper, added 01/19/2007

The originality of estate life and features of the image of Russian nature in A. Chekhov's plays "Three Sisters", "The Cherry Orchard", "Uncle Vanya", "The Seagull". Guidelines on the study of the image of the Russian estate in Chekhov's plays at literature lessons at school.

thesis, added 02/01/2011

The history of the formation and development of Japanese literature. Features of A.P. Chekhov and revealing the nature of the Japanese interest in his works. Disclosure of the plot of the play "The Cherry Orchard" in Russia and Japan. Reflection of Chekhov in Japanese art and literature.

term paper, added 12/03/2015

The play "The Cherry Orchard" is Chekhov's top work, the playwright's reflections on Russia, the fate of the noble class. The idea of ​​the play, the formation of the plot, brief chronology creation. The symbolism of the title, the construction of the composition, the plot relationships of the images.

presentation, added 06/11/2014

"The Seagull" by the outstanding Russian writer A.P. Chekhov - the first play of the new Russian drama. Artistic originality dramaturgy of the play. Contradictions and conflicts of the play, their originality. The absence of antagonistic struggle between the characters of the play.

abstract, added 08/11/2016

Introduction to the concept of "undercurrents" on the example of the play "The Cherry Orchard". The peculiarity of Chekhov's language in remarks. Chekhov's monologues, pauses in Chekhov's plays. Chekhov's preliminary (prepositive) remarks according to T.G. Ivleva. The influence of foreign playwrights on Chekhov.

term paper, added 06/12/2014

The study of drama. Drama specific. Drama analysis. Questions of the theory of literature. The specifics of studying the play by A.N. Ostrovsky. Methodological research on teaching the play "Thunderstorm". Summaries of lessons on the study of the play "Thunderstorm".

term paper, added 12/04/2006

Chekhov's innovation as a playwright. Special place of the category of time in dramatic conflicts. The unity of the tragic and the comic in the works. Transmission of semantic shades of the dialogues of the characters of the play with the help of remarks. Symbolism of the Cherry Orchard.

"The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhova: In Search of Lost Time*

The nature of the action, genre values, compositional techniques, worldview guidelines, methods of symbolization and generalization, parameters of space and time, principles of characterization of characters, communicative features of Chekhov's dramaturgy in The Cherry Orchard are perhaps more vivid than in any other play by this author. "The Cherry Orchard" closes the circle of addition of the Anton Chekhov Theatre, coming very close in its poetics to the miniatures of his own vaudevilles. Meanwhile, the noted crystallization of the figurative properties of Chekhov's dramaturgy paradoxically coincided with the deepening of discrepancies and contradictions in its interpretation.

The dispute about the genre priorities of The Cherry Orchard is well known, which goes back to disagreements in understanding them by A.P. Chekhov and K.S. Stanislavsky. Is the play a comedy or a drama, a tragedy or a farce? Already in 1904, V.E. expressed his authoritative opinion on this matter. Meyerhold. Meanwhile, the intention of Chekhov himself to write a "fun play" for the Moscow Art Theater, which first arose as early as 1901, subsequently remained unchanged. In 1903, in a series of letters, Chekhov clarified the details of the comedy plan. The central role in the play will belong to the "old woman", wrote the playwright V.F. Komissarzhevskaya. "You will play stupid," he assured O.L. Knipper. "If my play does not come out the way I planned it, then hit me on the forehead with your fist. Stanislavsky has a comic role, and so do you." In the Moscow Art Theater production of 1904, Knipper played the role of Ranevskaya, and Stanislavsky - Gaev. It was with these images that the "tragic-dramatic" representations of directing were first of all mated. “I will call the play a comedy,” wrote Chekhov V.I. Nemirovich-Danchenko. “I didn’t get a drama, but a comedy, in some places even a farce,” he insisted, addressing the performer of the role of Anya M.P. Lilina. And even after the performance was shown to the public, and the obvious discrepancy in the understanding of The Cherry Orchard became a stage reality, Chekhov continued to appeal to Knipper. “Why is my play so stubbornly called a drama on posters and in newspaper ads? Nemirovich and Alekseev see positively in my play something that I didn’t write, and I’m ready to give any word that they never once carefully read my play".

Since then, "The Cherry Orchard" has been read and re-read countless times, each time, while reading its own. I will try again to read carefully some pages of the play in connection with certain circumstances that accompanied its appearance and existence. No more. And even less. In real detail, I intend to analyze only the first two pages of the text. However, to begin with, you should look at the poster for The Cherry Orchard.

In the list of actors, attention is drawn to Chekhov's record number of significant characters of the lower class - servants. Looking ahead, I note that in terms of their dramatic functions, they are all clowns. Clowns and heroes with clown functions are present in almost every Chekhov play. Meanwhile, in The Cherry Orchard, almost all of its heroes are clowns. Absolute clowns - Simeonov-Pishchik, Charlotte Ivanovna, Epikhodov, Firs, Yasha, Dunyasha. Persons with clowning - Ranevskaya and Gaev (the latter at the same time reveals a clear tendency to absolute clowning). Anya and Trofimov are nothing more and nothing less than a couple of comic simpletons in love. Trofimov's pathetic monologues often sound like a paraphrase of Gaev's clown monologues, and Anya, as we know from Chekhov himself, is "a child cheerful to the end." In his own way, a "child" (in social terms) and her Petya, who, according to Ranevskaya, does not know real, practical life. "Eternal Student" - "role" in itself, of course, comedy. Finally, the relationship between Varya and Lopakhin also comes through with a comedic interpretation and is associated with the central situation of Gogol's "Marriage". In Chekhov, such transparent associations are never accidental.

The scene of the first act is "the room that is still called children's"whereas in the play no one has children of the appropriate tender age." bloom cherry trees but in the garden cold, morning". So, two "shifts" in time, indicating a clear temporal discrepancy, are already hidden in the first remark.

What happens in the first scene? What is its action? Expectation. Waiting as an action. In terms of events, nothing happens, at the same time, the effective filling of the scene is so intense, tense, that at the end of the episode, with its permission, Dunyasha is close to fainting. We still do not know anything about the nature of Dunyasha's extreme delicacy and sensitivity, and therefore the word "fainting" is perceived as identical to itself. An "intense" action unfolds at two in the morning (another significant shift in time) against the background of not only a visible, but even a deliberate lack of action - Lopakhin "yawns and stretches", he "overslept".

Who and when sleeps in the Cherry Orchard is of significant importance. As already mentioned, the duration of the episode is night. Lopakhin overslept, but what is so important he overslept? Never mind. His apparent awkwardness, missing the temporary situation - imaginary. We know that in the final Lopakhin will be the only one who won't oversleep. real time. It is no coincidence that Chekhov warned the Moscow Art Theater that Lopakhin was "a role ... central." If it diverges in time, it is not with time itself, but with other actors. All the rest will "sleep" the real time and won't even notice it. Lopakhin is the only person who is in real time, he sleeps at night, he sleeps at night. Ranevskaya drinks coffee at night.

"Everything is like a dream," Varya notes further. "What if I'm sleeping?" - Ranevskaya will ask herself. The clown Pishchik constantly falls asleep and snores in the course of the action. Sleeping in her childish ignorance of life Anya. The leittheme of the dream that unfolds further, which is extremely significant in the play, begins in the first episode precisely with Lopakhin, who allegedly "overslept".

There are two characters on stage, Lopakhin and Dunyasha. We learn from them that the train on which the expected heroes arrived is also out of tune with time - it was "late" for at least two hours. Thanks to the sluggishness of the train, we can learn something about those present.

Lopakhin's auto-representation that follows is full of meaning. "... My father ... he traded in a shop in the village" and Lopakhin himself was a "man" for Ranevskaya as a child. "Man ... My father, however, was a man, but I in a white vest, yellow shoes. With a pig's snout in a kalashny row ... Only now he is rich, there is a lot of money, but if you think and figure it out, then a peasant is a peasant ... I read a book and did not understand anything. I read and fell asleep. "The fact that Lopakhin fell asleep while reading a book is not so important. If reading this overcame Yermolai Alekseevich, then either the book was boring, or there was no practical meaning in it, which for him is the same thing. Lopakhin's incomprehensibility, as and his lack of time, imaginary, for the time being masking his extreme sharpness. It is much more important that in the person of Lopakhin we meet the first "disguised" "Cherry Orchard". He is in a white waistcoat and yellow shoes, and he himself is a peasant. So it begins main topic plays, the theme of a man who is not in his place and not in his time.

Having introduced himself, Lopakhin, as if inadvertently, “introduces” his interlocutor to us.

"LOPAKHIN. What are you, Dunyasha, such ... DUNYASHA. My hands are shaking. I'm going to faint.

(Later, the theme of Dunyasha's fainting will be pumped up and developed by Chekhov in a purely farcical way - A.K.)

LOPAKHIN. You are very gentle, Dunyasha. And you dress like a young lady, and your hair too. You can not do it this way. We must remember ourselves."

So Dunyasha is also "in disguise", also, in her own way, out of place. The third character enters, Epikhodov. Chekhov's remark: "Epikhodov enters with a bouquet, he is in a jacket and in brightly polished boots that creak strongly". It turns out that Epikhodov is also "disguised". Meanwhile, Chekhov immediately makes it clear that he has entered clown. Remarque: "on entering, he drops the bouquet." Epikhodov voiced yet another piece of news about the "dislocated time", already stated in the first remark: "Now it's a matinee, the frost is three degrees, and the cherry is all in bloom."

On the one hand, Chekhov offers us a subtle poetic dramatic image of "flowers in the frost", but this image is put into the mouth of Epikhodov. This is immediately followed by Epikhodov's comedic clown's revealing commentary, warning against taking his words seriously. “I can’t approve of our climate. (Sighs.) I can’t. Our climate cannot help just right. Here, Yermolai Alekseich, let me add, I bought myself boots the day before, and I dare to assure you, they creak so that there's no way..."

The comic effect is carried out here by a clear discrepancy between words, language, and the meaningful meaning of the spoken text. It turns out that not only Epikhodov himself turns out to be in disguise, but also his language, his I. "Disguised" are also his "twenty-two misfortunes", which are not misfortunes: he dropped his bouquet, his boots creak, he stumbled over a chair, and the like.

Epikhodov leaves, but Dunyasha picks up his comedy theme At the top of her "lyrical" story about Epikhodov's "crazy" love for her and about the proposal he made to her, the waiting episode is resolved - "they are coming!"

In principle, the entire two-page episode looks like a clown divertissement before the start of the show. This divertissement already contains all the future themes of the big play and, above all, the main theme of "dislocated time", people who are not in their place and in their time, who have fallen out of time, who have confused time, and therefore are in a relationship of opposition with time. Comedy opposition.

This divertissement is reminiscent of the opening divertissement of another Chekhov comedy, The Seagull, played by Medvedenko and Masha ("Why do you always wear black?") True, in The Seagull the clown couple Medvedenko and Masha form a contrasting opposition to the pair of lovers of the first plan, Treplev and Zarechnaya. In the "farcical" "The Cherry Orchard", despite its parody, parody is not perceived as a contrast, but only as a doubling and exaggeration of a situation or a behavioral motive. The distance between the parodied and the parodied is not so great, because the clownery of The Cherry Orchard is total, rampant and captures almost all characters from the frank clowness Charlotte Ivanovna to Ranevskaya and Gaev, inclusive.

In The Cherry Orchard itself, the initial still implicit clownish divertissement of the first act is developed in the already frank clowning of the first scene of the second act, performed by Charlotte, Yasha, Dunyasha and Epikhodov. This scene is a parade of caricatured clowns with revolvers, guns, talmochki, cigars, love romance, explanations, betrayal, offended dignity, motives for loneliness and desperate suicide. Fatal themes and the surroundings and vocabulary corresponding to them "in a human" look parodic, while the main theme "a man is out of place and out of his time" is preserved. Charlotte says that she does not have a passport, that she does not even know how old she is. "... Where I come from and who I am - I don't know... (Takes a cucumber out of his pocket and eats it.) I don't know anything." Charlotte with the cucumber in this scene is nothing more and nothing less than a parody double of Ranevskaya.

Returning to the first act, it is appropriate to note that it was Ranevskaya who was the first to pick up the theme of the clown divertissement there, joyfully, through tears, touched by the room, "children's!". "Children's" this is akin to Gaev's "closet". "Children's, my dear, beautiful room ... I slept here when I was little ... ( crying.) And now I’m like a little one ... "If we recall Chekhov's definition of Ranevskaya as an "old woman", the inappropriateness of her sentiments will become more than obvious. expresses nothing more than the mood of the character, and by no means the scene, and does not contradict the comedic nature of the action.

The life of the cherry manor is already history. The garden is remarkable only because it is mentioned in the Encyclopedic Dictionary. The house and everything in it are associated with memories, but are not at all suitable for real life. In fact, in reality, they no longer exist. In fact, they no longer belong to the previous owners. Lopakhin pronounces the verdict on the cherry orchard at the beginning of the first act.

In 1914, Stanislavsky recalled. "The play was not given for a long time. Especially the second act. It has, in the theatrical sense, no action and seemed very monotonous at rehearsals. It was necessary to portray boredom of doing nothing so that it would be interesting..." We turned to Chekhov with a request for a reduction. "Apparently, this request hurt him, his face darkened. But then he replied: "Well, cut it..." Stanislavsky, who is looking for action, actually becomes a prisoner of words, not noticing the action behind them. Chekhov's heroes he does not feel the real course of time, finding himself not on the stage, but in life in a comic situation. The theme of the second act is not "boredom" at all - such an understanding of the play in 1904 was criticized by the same Meyerhold. Subject it, again, expectation, rapidly growing in scale - the expectation of a mystical catastrophe of a collapsing house. The effect of the second act lies in the fact that there is no action, or rather, no action, despite Lopakhin's persuasion to make a practical decision. At the same time, real time moves, bringing the inevitable collapse of the cherry estate closer. Meanwhile, this is by no means "the boredom of doing nothing", but the tension of a stretched string, which breaks off at the end of the act (the "sound of a broken string" is heard).

The third act opens at all with a farce: a dance scene, a "ball" taking place against the backdrop of ongoing auctions. It is no coincidence that the dancers appeared to Meyerhold as carelessly dancing marionettes. The meaning of this farce is expressed not so much in the words and behavior of individual characters, but in the situation as a whole. (However, as it should be in a farce, the clown Pishchik is the first to speak, telling about the horse origin of his kind.) Before the impending catastrophe, even Ranevskaya herself seems to see clearly. Reality emerges. Her insight, however, like Lopakhin's seeming "misses", is imaginary. “The misfortune seems to me so incredible that I somehow don’t even know what to think, I’m at a loss ...” Meanwhile, the “misfortune” has already taken place. Lopakhin bought the Cherry Orchard, and this fact speaks for itself and for him, Lopakhin, more than anything else. In the face of Lopakhin, real time triumphs over illusory time.

The fourth act is again opened by the clown, this time by Yasha. A series of goodbyes follows. Lopakhin and Trofimov compare their values, while the educated, talkative and absolutely inactive Petya has long and in all respects "lost" to the uneducated, but active Yermolai Alekseevich. Saying goodbye, Yasha and Dunyasha also explain, not allowing the action to fall out of the comedy framework prescribed for him by Chekhov. Gaev and Ranevskaya fall back into childhood. With someone else's, Anina's aunt's money, she goes to Paris, knowing that the funds will not last long, but not wanting to look far into the future. The case, it turns out, is not at all in the cherry orchard, which in reality no longer exists. The Cherry Orchard finally reveals its own symbolic nature. Firs is forgotten locked in the house. The sound of a broken string is heard again, followed by the sound of an ax ...

Responding to Chekhov's letter to Lilina, Stanislavsky objected. "This is not a comedy, not a farce, as you wrote - this is a tragedy, no matter what outcome to a better life you open in the last act. I cried like a woman." Meanwhile, there is no special "outcome to a better life" in Chekhov's play. The outcome is exhausted by the exposure of the illusion, the illusory nature of imaginary time. Anya is happy about the collapse of the Cherry Orchard only because it means freedom from illusion. Trofimov's revolutionary past and future are also absent from the play. They will be invented later. In part, this will be facilitated by the events not of the play, but of the life of the next 1905.

It is curious that for Stanislavsky and the tradition he represents, "exodus" is the main determinant of the genre of the play. The absence of an outcome for Ranevskaya and Gaev makes the play a tragedy in his opinion. Meanwhile, it is obvious that Stanislavsky and Chekhov demonstrate a different understanding of the scale and nature of the conflict due to a different understanding of the nature of not only action, but also humanism. Different both historically and aesthetically. Stanislavsky professes a personalistic understanding of humanism: at the level of people he likes, the conflict turns out to be insoluble - this Stanislavsky sees as a tragedy. That is why he interprets the conventions of the play in terms of the logic of life behavior that does not correspond to them.

Chekhov has a different, generalized understanding of humanism. His characters are not in conflict with each other, but with the inexorable passage of time. Stanislavsky, like many after him, cannot admit, for example, that the comedy ends with a scene with the sick Firs, forgotten and locked in the house, who will now inevitably die. For Chekhov, however, in real time, Firs had long since died, long before the play began. The fact that he was forgotten is another proof of the "dislocated century", a time that, with the sale of the cherry orchard, finally lost its illusory nature. The Cherry Orchard was the last illusion that made it possible to consider the unreal time dimension in which its heroes lived as a reality. In this generalized meaning of "The Cherry Orchard" is the guarantee of its relevance.

Chekhov's play is by no means rigidly tied to any particular time, or to any particular social stratum. To talk in connection with it about the crisis of the nobility or serfdom, about the growing activity of the merchants, about the revolutionary spirit of Trofimov, and the like, is to bury the play in history. However, she successfully resists this. How the theater resists this, over time offering new and relevant interpretations of The Cherry Orchard.

________________________________________

* All quotes are taken from the book: Chekhov A.P. Sobr. cit.: In 12 t. M., 1963. T. 9. Italics are mine everywhere - A.K.

taken from the site: http://www.utoronto.ca/tsq/16/index16.shtml

Exercise 1

Identification of the two-part aesthetic pathos of the play: the combination of lyrical-pathetic tonality with comic.

Working with the text of the first action. Students must show:

- how a constant change of tone is created, a transition from pathos to comedy and vice versa;

– how do the unconverted remarks of the characters serve this play of tones, their inadequate utterance, the concatenation of random phrases; unexpected collisions of people, sudden changes in their moods, "accidental" comic situations that the main characters find themselves in; significant statements by comic faces;

- how this dual unity of pathos is manifested in the interaction of cross and opposite assessments that the characters of the play give to the same persons (for example, Ranevskaya).

Task 2

Work on the plot of the play:

- revealing the plot role of Lopakhin;

- to determine, "build" the logic of Lopakhin's personal relationships with Varya and Ranevskaya;

- the imaginary of his suitor and sincere declarations of love to another, readiness for sacrifice - and the reaction of the woman he loves "more than his own" to them.

Is it good luck for Lopakhin to buy a cherry orchard? How does the theme of Lopakhin's fate relate to the theme of the "cherry orchard"?

Task 3

Study of the relationship between the central and secondary characters of the play.

Determine the similarities in the situation of Lopakhin's declaration of love with Varvara, Epikhodov with Dunyasha, Dunyasha with Yasha. Who reflects and parodies whom?

Task 4

Study of the relationship between everyday and essential plans. Working with the text of the 2nd step.

How is the plot of saving the estate moving? How are conversations about everyday life interrupted by the characters' statements about the general structure of life? To whom do these statements belong? How do the main and minor characters? Are the "essential" statements presented only in a pathetic tone, or does the play of tones continue?

Task 5

Clash of two cultures. Analyze the dialogue between Ranevskaya and Trofimov in the 3rd act (from the words of Lyubvi Andreevna “Do not tease her, Petya ...” to her own words “What an eccentric this Petya is ...”).

To explain to Petin the “truth” and “truth” of Ranevskaya, the expression in them of the position of different cultural strata, different historical generations.

Task 6

Analysis symbolic images plays. How do different heroes of the play feel about the cherry orchard? What is the symbolic meaning of the cherry orchard? Why does the second action take place on the border between home and open space?

Saturation of traditional toposes of the House and Garden with new intentions. What?

symbolic meaning other details: telegrams from Paris; noise from a bucket that fell off in a mine, etc. Find symbolic details and explain them.

Bibliography

Chekhov A.P. The Cherry Orchard (any edition).

Polotskaya E A."The Cherry Orchard" / E. A. Polotskaya, I. Yu. Tverdokhlebov // Chekhov A. P. Fields. coll. cit.: In 30 vols. T. 13. M., 1978.

Berdnikov G.P. Dramaturgy of Chekhov. M., 1971 Or: He. Fav. Works: In 2 vols. T. 2. M., 1986.

Singerman b. Chekhov's theater and its world significance. M., 1988. S. 319–383.

Paperny A. On the unity of form and content in "The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov // Moral quest Russian writers. M., 1972. S. 339–380.

Semanova M. L."The Cherry Orchard" by A.P. Chekhov. L., 1958.

Educational edition

History of Russian literature of the 2nd half of the 19th century

Topics of practical classes for students of the Faculty of Philology

Compilers

Podchinenov Alexey Vasilievich

Sozina Elena Konstantinovna

Slinger ____________________

Editor

Computer layout