Old and new owners of the cherry orchard (Based on the play by A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard”). Old and new owners of the cherry orchard

The main themes of the play " The Cherry Orchard", written in 1904, are: the death of a noble nest, the victory of an enterprising merchant-industrialist over the obsolete Ranevskaya and Gaev, and the theme of the future of Russia associated with the images of Petya Trofimov and Anya.

The farewell of the new, young Russia to the past, to the obsolete, aspiration to the tomorrow of Russia - this is the content of “The Cherry Orchard”.

Russia of the past, becoming obsolete in the play, is represented by the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev. The cherry orchard is dear to both heroes, dear as a memory of childhood, youth, prosperity, an easy and graceful life. They are crying about the loss of the garden, but it was they who ruined it, putting it under the ax. At the same time, they remained true to the beauty of the cherry orchard, and that is why they are so insignificant and funny.

Ranevskaya was a former rich noblewoman who had a dacha even in the south of France in Menton, the owner of an estate, “more beautiful than which there is nothing in the world.” But with her lack of understanding of life, her inability to adapt to it, her lack of will and frivolity, the owner brought the estate to complete ruin, to the point that the estate was to be sold at auction!

Lopakhin, an enterprising merchant-industrialist, offers the estate owners a way to save the estate. He says that all you need to do is set up a cherry orchard for dachas. But although Ranevskaya sheds streams of tears over the loss of her garden, although she cannot live without it, she still refuses Lopakhin’s offer to save the estate. Selling or renting out garden plots seems unacceptable and offensive to her. But the auction takes place, and Lopakhin himself buys the estate.

And when “trouble” struck, it turned out that there was no drama for the owner of the cherry orchard. Ranevskaya returns to Paris to her absurd “love”, to which she would have returned anyway, despite all her words that she cannot live without her homeland. The drama with the sale of the cherry orchard is not a drama at all for its owner. This happened only because Ranevskaya did not have any serious experiences at all. She can easily move from a state of preoccupation and anxiety to cheerful animation. That's what happened this time too. She quickly calmed down and even told everyone: “My nerves are better, it’s true.”

And what is her brother like, Leonid Andreevich Gaev? He is much smaller than his sister. He is able to say simple things, sincere words, realizing with shame his own vulgarity and stupidity. But Gaev's shortcomings reach caricature proportions. Remembering the past, Ranevskaya kisses her favorite closet. Gaev makes a speech in front of him. Gaev is a pathetic aristocrat who spent his fortune on candy.

The failure of the noble liberal intelligentsia in the past determined the dominance in the present of people like Lopakhin. But in fact, Chekhov connects future prosperity with the younger generation (Petya Trofimov and Anya), it is they who will have to build new Russia, plant new cherry orchards.

The play "The Cherry Orchard" - last piece Chekhov. In the eighties, Chekhov conveyed the tragic situation of people who had lost the meaning of their lives. The play was staged Art Theater in 1904. The twentieth century comes, and Russia finally becomes a capitalist country, a country of factories, factories and railways. This process accelerated with the liberation of the peasantry by Alexander II. The features of the new relate not only to the economy, but also to society, people’s ideas and views are changing, and the previous system of values ​​is being lost.

The characters created by Chekhov are complex; they contradictively mix good and evil, comic and tragic. Creating images of the inhabitants of the ruined noble nest of Ranevskaya and her brother Gaev, Chekhov emphasized that such “types” were already “outdated.” They show love for their estate, the cherry orchard, but do nothing to save the estate from destruction. Because of idleness and impracticality, their “sacredly beloved” “nests” are ruined and cherry orchards are destroyed.

Ranevskaya is shown in the play as very kind, affectionate, but frivolous, sometimes indifferent and careless towards people (he gives the last gold to a random passer-by, and at home the servants live from hand to mouth); she is affectionate towards the footman Firs, takes care of his health and leaves him sick in a boarded-up house. She is smart, warm-hearted. She is emotional, but her idle life has corrupted her, deprived her of her will, and turned her into a helpless creature.

We learn that she left Russia 5 years ago, that she was “drawn to Russia” from Paris only after a catastrophe in her personal life. At the end of the play, she nevertheless leaves her homeland and, no matter how much she regrets the cherry orchard and the estate, quite soon “she calmed down and became cheerful in anticipation of leaving for Paris.

Return of Ranevskaya to her homeland

Chekhov makes one feel throughout the course of the play that the narrow vital interests of Ranevskaya and Gaev indicate a complete oblivion of the interests of their homeland. One gets the impression that, despite all their qualities, they are useless and even harmful, since they do not contribute to creation, “not to increase the wealth and beauty” of the homeland, but to destruction

Leonid Andreevich Gaev.

Gaev is 51 years old, and he, like Ranevskaya, is helpless, inactive, careless. His tender treatment of his niece and sister is combined with disdain for the “grimy” Lopakhin, “a peasant and a boor,” with a contemptuous and disgusted attitude towards the servants. All his vital energy is spent on lofty unnecessary conversations and empty verbosity. Like Ranevskaya, he is used to living at “other people’s expense”; he does not count on his own strengths, but only outside help: “it would be nice to receive an inheritance, it would be nice to marry Anya to a rich man.”

So, throughout the entire play, Ranevskaya and Gaev experience the collapse of their last hopes, severe mental shock, they are deprived of their family, home, but they find themselves unable to understand anything, learn anything, or do anything useful. Their evolution throughout the play is ruin, collapse not only material, but also spiritual. They, willingly or unwillingly, betray everything that seems to be dear to them: the garden, their relatives, and their faithful servant Firs.

Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich

Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich - merchant. His father was a serf to Ranevskaya's ancestors. Ranevskaya herself did a lot for L. He is grateful to her for this, says that he loves her like his own. In the new conditions, L. became rich, but remained, in his own words, “a man a man.” L. sincerely wants to help Ranevskaya save their cherry orchard, which is being sold for debts. He proposes a plan - to divide the garden into plots and rent them out as summer cottages. To do this you need to cut down the garden. L. does not feel any nostalgic feelings for the cherry orchard, he only notices that the garden is “big.”

But the owners do not agree to do this with their dear garden. L. is surprised at the frivolity and idleness of Ranevskaya and her brother. He himself gets up at 5 am and works until night. At the end of the play, it is L. who acquires the cherry orchard. This is the moment of his highest triumph: the peasant’s son, “the illiterate Ermolai,” becomes the owner of a noble estate, where his “father and grandfather were slaves.” Here a rude, predatory beginning emerges in L., merchant prowess (“I can pay for everything!”) He no longer thinks about the feelings of the former owners of the estate. Joy bursts out of L., he laughs and stamps his feet. L is a very contradictory image. Hard work, practical intelligence, and ingenuity coexist in him with callousness, rudeness, and predation.

Anya is Ranevskaya’s daughter. A girl of 17 years old. A. is in love with Petya Trofimov and is under his influence. I am fascinated by his ideas that the nobility is guilty before the Russian people and must atone for their guilt. A. says that he no longer loves the cherry orchard as before. She wants to leave her home with Petya. Anya has faith in happiness, in her own strength, in another life. She tells her mother after selling the estate: “We will plant new garden, more luxurious than this” and sincerely rejoices at leaving his parents’ home. Anya blindly believes Trofimov and is ready to follow him anywhere. But perhaps she will be disappointed, because Petya talks more than he does.

Trofimov Petya - former teacher the deceased son of Ranevskaya, commoner, 26 or 27 years old. Trofimov is an eternal student who never finishes his course. Fate throws him from place to place. This hero preaches faith in a better future. To do this, in his opinion, “we must work and help with all our might those who are seeking the truth.”

He scolds everything that slows down the development of Russia - “dirt, vulgarity, Asianism”, criticizes the Russian intelligentsia, which does not look for anything and does not work. But the hero does not notice that he himself is a bright representative of such an intelligentsia: he only speaks beautifully, without doing anything. A characteristic phrase for Trofimov: “I will reach or show others the way to reach” (to the “highest truth”). Trofimov denies love, considering it something “petty and illusory.” He only urges Anya to believe him, as he anticipates happiness. Ranevskaya reproaches Trofimov for his coldness when he says that it makes no difference whether the estate is sold or not. In general, Ranevskaya does not like the hero, calling him a klutz and a second-grade high school student. At the end of the play, Trofimov is looking for forgotten galoshes, which become a symbol of his worthless, albeit illuminated in beautiful words, life.

The “old” owners of the cherry orchard are Gaev and Ranevskaya. The garden itself and the entire estate have belonged to them since childhood. The cherry orchard for them is just a memory of the past.

Ranevskaya, in the story, is a kind, interesting, charming, carefree woman, her flaw is indecision, due to which she does not know how to manage her estate and her life. It is because of this quality that she loses the garden and hopes that someone else will save it.

Gaev did not show himself any better. The author says about the hero: “a klutz” and constantly shows his inability to make vital and everyday decisions. The fate of the cherry orchard in his hands is destructive, and he is certainly not able to save a piece of his estate.

Under the image of the garden, Chekhov depicts Russia, and under the above-described heroes - average inhabitants, mortally and meaninglessly living their lives.

Lopakhin became the “new” owner. The writer speaks extremely positively about him - he says that he is very “decisive”. This hero is a treasure best qualities, collected in one person. Energetic, active, decisive. The only, as it seems to many, “minus” of Lopakhin is his life position- "time is money". But it is precisely because of this that the hero looks at the cherry orchard as his future property, which he is ready to protect and defend. For him there are no beautiful poppies and the scent of cherries - for him this is just the territory that he needs.

Updated: 2017-10-30

Attention!
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.

Thank you for your attention.

The play “The Cherry Orchard” was created by Chekhov in 1903. Its main theme is the death of the noble nest as a result of the collapse

economics and psychology of the nobility. The characters and moods of the class leaving the historical stage are embodied in the play in the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev.

Before us - typical " Noble Nest", an estate surrounded by an old cherry orchard. “What an amazing garden! White masses of flowers, blue sky!..” - says the heroine of the play Ranevskaya enthusiastically.

The noble nest survives last days. The property was not only mortgaged, but also remortgaged. Soon, in case of non-payment of interest, it will go under the hammer. What exactly are these last owners of the cherry orchard, living more in the past than in the present?

In the past, this was a rich noble family that traveled to Paris on horseback and at whose balls generals, barons, and admirals danced. Ranevskaya had a dacha even in the south of France, in Menton.

The past reminds Ranevskaya of a blooming cherry orchard, which must be sold for debts.

Lopakhin offers the estate owners the surest way to save the estate: divide the cherry orchard into plots and rent them out as dachas.

But from the point of view of their lordly concepts, this means seems unacceptable to them, offensive to honor and family traditions. It contradicts their noble aesthetics. “The dacha and summer residents are so vulgar, forgive me,” Ranevskaya lordly and arrogantly declares to Lopakhin. The “poetry” of the cherry orchard and its “noble past” obscures life from them and deprives them of practical calculation. Lopakhin correctly calls them “frivolous, unbusinesslike, strange people.”

Lack of will, inadaptability, romantic enthusiasm, mental instability, and inability to live characterize, first of all, Ranevskaya. The personal life of this woman was unsuccessful. Having lost her husband and son, she settled abroad and spends her money on a man who deceived and robbed her.

Life had never taught her anything. After selling the cherry orchard, she leaves for Paris again, blithely declaring that the money sent by her aunt will not last long.

At first glance, there is a lot in Ranevskaya’s character good features. She is outwardly charming, loves nature and music. This, according to the reviews of others, is a sweet, “kind, nice” woman, simple and spontaneous.

In essence, Ranevskaya is selfish and indifferent to people. While her house servant “has nothing to eat,” Ranevskaya wastes money left and right and even throws a ball that no one needs.

Her life is empty and aimless, although she talks a lot about her tender love for people, for the cherry orchard.

Just like Ranevskaya, her brother Gaev is a weak-willed, worthless person in life. He lived his whole life on the estate doing nothing. He himself admits that he spent his fortune on candy. His only “occupation” is billiards. He is completely immersed in thoughts about various combinations of billiard moves: “...yellow in the middle... Doublet in the corner!”, “I cut into the middle,” he randomly inserts during conversations with others.

His “business” connection with the city is expressed only in the purchase of anchovies and Kerch herrings.

In contrast to his sister, Gaev is somewhat rude. The lordly arrogance towards others is felt in his words “who?” and “boorish”, and in the remarks: “And here it smells like patchouli” or “Get away, my dear, you smell like chicken,” thrown at either Lopakhin or Yasha.

These people, accustomed to living carelessly without working, cannot even comprehend the tragedy of their situation. Ranevskaya and Gaev lack genuine, deep feelings. A. M. Gorky subtly notes that the “tear-tear” Ranevskaya and her brother are people “selfish, like children, and flabby, like old people. They were too late to die in time and whine, not seeing anything around them, not understanding anything.”

Both Ranevskaya and Gaev essentially do not love their homeland and live only by personal feelings and moods. Ranevskaya passionately exclaims: “God knows, I love my homeland, I love it dearly,” and at the same time she uncontrollably rushes to Paris. They have no future. These are the last representatives of the degenerating nobility. In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” Chekhov brought this gallery of images to the end.

The play “The Cherry Orchard” was created by Chekhov in 1903. Its main theme is the death of the noble nest as a result of the collapse

economics and psychology of the nobility. The characters and moods of the class leaving the historical stage are embodied in the play in the images of Ranevskaya and Gaev.

In front of us is a typical “noble nest”, an estate surrounded by an old cherry orchard. “What an amazing garden! White masses of flowers, blue sky!..” - says the heroine of the play Ranevskaya enthusiastically.

This noble nest is living out its last days. The property was not only mortgaged, but also remortgaged. Soon, in case of non-payment of interest, it will go under the hammer. What exactly are these last owners of the cherry orchard, living more in the past than in the present?

In the past, this was a rich noble family that traveled to Paris on horseback and at whose balls generals, barons, and admirals danced. Ranevskaya had a dacha even in the south of France, in Menton.

The past reminds Ranevskaya of a blooming cherry orchard, which must be sold for debts.

Lopakhin offers the estate owners the surest way to save the estate: divide the cherry orchard into plots and rent them out as dachas.

But from the point of view of their lordly concepts, this means seems unacceptable to them, offensive to honor and family traditions. It contradicts their noble aesthetics. “The dacha and summer residents are so vulgar, forgive me,” Ranevskaya lordly and arrogantly declares to Lopakhin. The “poetry” of the cherry orchard and its “noble past” obscures life from them and deprives them of practical calculation. Lopakhin correctly calls them “frivolous, unbusinesslike, strange people.”

Lack of will, inadaptability, romantic enthusiasm, mental instability, and inability to live characterize, first of all, Ranevskaya. The personal life of this woman was unsuccessful. Having lost her husband and son, she settled abroad and spends her money on a man who deceived and robbed her.

Life had never taught her anything. After selling the cherry orchard, she leaves for Paris again, blithely declaring that the money sent by her aunt will not last long.

At first glance, Ranevskaya’s character has many good traits. She is outwardly charming, loves nature and music. This, according to the reviews of others, is a sweet, “kind, nice” woman, simple and spontaneous.

In essence, Ranevskaya is selfish and indifferent to people. While her house servant “has nothing to eat,” Ranevskaya wastes money left and right and even throws a ball that no one needs.

Her life is empty and aimless, although she talks a lot about her tender love for people, for the cherry orchard.

Just like Ranevskaya, her brother Gaev is a weak-willed, worthless person in life. He lived his whole life on the estate doing nothing. He himself admits that he spent his fortune on candy. His only “occupation” is billiards. He is completely immersed in thoughts about various combinations of billiard moves: “...yellow in the middle... Doublet in the corner!”, “I cut into the middle,” he randomly inserts during conversations with others.

His “business” connection with the city is expressed only in the purchase of anchovies and Kerch herrings.

In contrast to his sister, Gaev is somewhat rude. The lordly arrogance towards others is felt in his words “who?” and “boorish”, and in the remarks: “And here it smells like patchouli” or “Get away, my dear, you smell like chicken,” thrown at either Lopakhin or Yasha.

These people, accustomed to living carelessly without working, cannot even comprehend the tragedy of their situation. Ranevskaya and Gaev lack genuine, deep feelings. A. M. Gorky subtly notes that the “tear-tear” Ranevskaya and her brother are people “selfish, like children, and flabby, like old people. They were too late to die in time and whine, not seeing anything around them, not understanding anything.”

Both Ranevskaya and Gaev essentially do not love their homeland and live only by personal feelings and moods. Ranevskaya passionately exclaims: “God knows, I love my homeland, I love it dearly,” and at the same time she uncontrollably rushes to Paris. They have no future. These are the last representatives of the degenerating nobility. In the play “The Cherry Orchard,” Chekhov brought this gallery of images to the end.