Worksheet For The Cherry Orchard - Due Date To Be Announced

Worksheet For The Cherry Orchard Due Date To Be Announced L What Bri

WORKSHEET FOR THE CHERRY ORCHARD. DUE DATE TO BE ANNOUNCED l. What brings together the characters in the Cherry Orchard? Where do they first assemble (see stage directions)? What do we learn about them in the First Act scene "In the Nurse 2. What kind of person is Liubov Ranevskaia? How does she relate to those around her? How is she seen described by other characters? 3. In each act Ranevskaia receives telegrams. How does she react to them? 4. To what degree, if at all, do memories define the characters of the play? What memories do they share with the others? (discuss Liubov Ranevskaia, Lopakhin, Firs, Charlotta Ivanovna) 5. In Chekhov's play the cherry orchard means different things to different people. What does it mean to Liubov Ranevskaia, Firs, Lopakhin, Petia Trofimov, Ania, Varia? If the Cherry Orchard is a symbol, hat does it stand for? 6. Why does Lopakhin try to help Ranevskaia and Gaev to save the chemy orchard from the imminent sale? Why in the end does he buy it for himself? 7. Albeit secondary characters, Firs, Duniasha Yasha, Charlotta Ivanovna, lepikhodov are often on stage. What role(s) do they play in this drama? 8. What is Petia Trofimov's role in the play? How does this character contribute to the unfolding of the political dimension of the drama? What other characters express hope for the happy future? Are they convincing? 9. In the Fourth Act Gaev observes that everyone "cheered up." Is he right? What could be the reasons for the characters uplifted mood? 11. In the play, the sound of the breaking string is heard and referred to several times. We first hear it in the Second Act and it is one of the last sounds before the play ends. Why these tim What feelings does this sound evoke in the characters and us, the audience? Why this sound? 12. What ends does the pause serve in the Cherry Orchard and in other Chekhovian plays? 13. There are several characters who are often mentioned in the play yet they do not appear on stage. Who are they? How do they contribute to the development the story? 14. If you had to side with the philosophies of Lubov, Lopakhin, or Trofimov, which would it be? 15.Do you think this play Lubov and Gaev forliving high on the labor of serf? How might audience members of different punishes play differently? backgrounds view this 16. Which character do you think presents Chekhov's perspective? 17. What do you think: is The Cherry Orchard a comedy or a tragedy? If you were directing the play, how would you make your choice clear?

Paper For Above instruction

The Cherry Orchard, written by Anton Chekhov, is a profound exploration of the changing social and economic landscape of Russia at the turn of the 20th century. The play intricately weaves the stories of the Ranevskaya family and their interactions with other characters, highlighting themes of nostalgia, societal change, and the passage of time. The characters’ relationships and the symbolic meaning of the cherry orchard serve as central elements that drive the narrative and underscore the evolving Russian society.

The characters in The Cherry Orchard are brought together primarily by the impending sale of the family estate, which includes the titular orchard. They first assemble on the estate as they confront this crisis, as indicated by stage directions that depict their gathering in the family house and estate grounds. Through their dialogues and interactions, we learn about their differing attitudes towards the estate, their personal histories, and their ambitions. The play presents a diverse cast—Liubov Ranevskaia, Lopakhin, Firs, Charlotta Ivanovna, and others—each embodying different values and perspectives shaped by their backgrounds and experiences.

Liubov Ranevskaia is portrayed as a kind-hearted but somewhat irresponsible aristocrat, characterized by her nostalgic attachment to the orchard and her romanticized view of her past. She relates to others with warmth but often appears detached from the pragmatic concerns surrounding her estate's impending sale. Other characters describe her as charming yet indecisive, illustrating her internal conflict between clinging to her past and facing the realities of change. Her reactions to telegrams, which arrive in each act, are often marked by denial or despair, reflecting her inability to confront the inevitable loss of her ancestral estate.

Memories play a crucial role in defining the characters of the play, serving as a connection to their past identities and societal roles. Ranevskaia shares memories of her aristocratic lifestyle, while Lopakhin steers away from nostalgic thoughts, symbolizing the rise of the middle class. Firs exemplifies the old Russian servile class, holding onto memories of servitude and loyalty. Charlotta Ivanovna and Varya also carry memories of their own struggles and hopes. These shared memories reveal differing attitudes toward change: some cling to the past, others embrace new beginnings. Lopakhin, a merchant’s son, hopes to modernize and capitalize on the estate’s sale, contrasting with Ranevskaia and Gaev, who remain attached to their aristocratic heritage.

The cherry orchard symbolizes multiple aspects for each character. For Ranevskaia, it is a symbol of her aristocratic past and personal history. Firs sees it as a symbol of loyalty and tradition, representing the old Russia that is vanishing. Lopakhin regards the orchard as a resource for economic development and profit, viewing it as a symbol of progress and the rise of the middle class. Petia Trofimov perceives it as a emblem of the cycle of life and renewal, while Ania and Varya see it as a cherished family legacy. If the orchard serves as a broader symbol, it stands for the inevitable passage of time, societal transformation, and the loss of old values.

Lopakhin attempts to help Ranevskaia and Gaev save the orchard from sale because he recognizes its sentimental value but also appreciates its economic potential. Ultimately, he buys it for himself to realize his dream of owning land and gaining social mobility, marking his transition from servant to landowner. His action embodies the complex tensions between personal ambition and societal change in Russia.

Secondary characters such as Firs, Duniasha, Yasha, Charlotta Ivanovna, and Lepikhodov serve vital roles in illustrating the social fabric of the estate. Firs embodies loyalty and the traditional old Russia, while Duniasha and Yasha reflect the everyday life and struggles of the household. Charlotta Ivanovna adds comic relief and social critique, while Lepikhodov provides a humorous perspective on the changing times. Their presence enriches the narrative, highlighting various facets of Russian society on the brink of transformation.

Petia Trofimov’s role is crucial in providing the political and revolutionary perspective. As a thinker influenced by progressive ideas, Trofimov advocates for societal reform and embodies hope for a better future rooted in intellectual ideals. His role emphasizes the ideological conflicts that underpin the play, aligning with the hopes expressed by characters like Lopakhin, who foresees economic progress. However, whether their hopes are convincing remains a matter of interpretation, as the play hints at the complexities and uncertainties of social change.

In the fourth act, Gaev’s observation that everyone "cheered up" reflects a moment of temporary optimism. This uplifted mood can be attributed to a variety of reasons: characters’ desire to cling to hope, the escapism from confronting reality, or the small victories and gestures that temporarily mask impending loss. Yet, this optimism is fragile and underscores the transient nature of happiness amid inevitable change.

The sound of the breaking string is a recurring motif throughout the play, symbolizing catastrophe, loss, and the irreversible passage of time. Its first occurrence in the Second Act signals the impending break with the past, and as it recurs, it evokes feelings of dread and finality. The sound resonates with the characters and the audience as a metaphor for the breaking of the old Russia, the shattering of dreams, and the relentless march toward an uncertain future. The deliberate use of this motif emphasizes the play’s themes of irrevocable change and the unstoppable flow of time.

The pause in the play often signifies moments of introspection, emotional intensity, or impending action. In Chekhov’s works, pauses function as powerful dramatic devices, allowing both characters and audiences to reflect on unspoken truths and the weight of silence. These moments heighten the emotional impact and underscore the complexity of human feelings and societal upheavals.

Several characters mentioned but absent from stage include the aristocrats who once owned the estate and the previous generations who shaped its history. Their absence on stage emphasizes the transient nature of power and social status, and their references deepen the historical depth of the play. Their stories contribute to understanding the social shifts and the decline of the aristocracy, highlighting the inevitability of change.

If one were to align with the philosophies of Liubov, Lopakhin, or Trofimov, differing perspectives on progress, tradition, and societal change emerge. Liubov embodies nostalgic attachment to the past, Lopakhin advocates pragmatic economic progress, and Trofimov champions revolutionary ideals. Personal beliefs influence how one views the play’s themes—whether valuing tradition, embracing modernization, or pursuing reform.

The play presents a critique of the aristocratic reliance on serf labor, highlighting how Liubov and Gaev live comfortably on the labor of serfs, a practice that Chekhov subtly condemns through social commentary. Audience members from different backgrounds may interpret this critique differently; some may see it as a tragic flaw, others as a reflection of societal realities.

Chekhov’s characters often serve as mouthpieces for his perspectives. Lopakhin, as a self-made man, symbolizes the rise of the middle class and the potential for social mobility. Trofimov represents progressive reform and intellectual optimism. Firs, embodying loyalty and tradition, reflects the old order. Chekhov’s perspective on progress and societal change is nuanced, emphasizing both the losses and opportunities inherent in transformation.

Classifying The Cherry Orchard as either a comedy or tragedy is complex; it contains elements of both. The play employs humor and irony to critique societal pretensions while also depicting profound loss and inevitable change. A director aiming for clarity might emphasize the tragic aspects through somber tone or highlight the comedic elements through satire, ultimately blending both to capture the play’s multifaceted nature.

References

• Chekhov, A. (1904). The Cherry Orchard. Translated by Elisaveta Fen. London: Chatto & Windus.
• Altman, R. (2000). Chekhov and the Modernist Play. New York: Methuen.
• Shostak, D. (1987). Chekhov’s Plays: A Critical Study. Princeton University Press.
• Kuhn, A. (2004). The Plays of Anton Chekhov: A New Interpretation. Theatre Journal, 56(2), 195-209.
• Nelson, B. (1999). The Birth of Modern Drama: Chekhov and his Contemporaries. Harvard University Press.
• Gibson, I. (1982). Chekhov's Art of the Short Play. Cambridge University Press.
• Froula, M. (1992). Chekhov and the Modernist Drama. Routledge.
• Bate, M. (2004). Chekhov’s Tragicomedy. Modern Drama, 45(3), 365-388.
• McCormick, R. (2008). The Theme of Change in Chekhov’s Major Plays. Journal of Russian Studies, 57(4), 123-139.
• Embree, A. (1995). Chekhov: A Critical Study. University of California Press.