Following my
first level inquiry of WEM Project, this is the second and last one I am
working on for The Cherry Orchard. My personal final thoughts would follow soon…
John
Turturro plays Lopakhin and Dianne Wiest portrays Ranevskaya
in Classic Stage
Company's production of Chekhov's classic [source]
|
By what the play is
given unity?
It’s by idea; the characters’ attachment with
their past, their fear of facing the reality, and their obsession to be
released from it that betrays their consciences.
What does each
character stand for?
Lubov stands for the conservatives who refuse
to move on from the past or from their history. They could not accept the idea
that the world is changing; they just do not want to change. The cherry orchard
symbolizes old Russia; Lubov represents Russian who like to hide in the comfort
of their past (old Russia) rather than facing the modernism.
Trofimov stands for the liberals who are
open-minded; who treat the old Russia as a history, and embrace the modern
Russia as brighter future; who can objectively see the weaknesses of the old
Russia and have the courage to welcome changes.
Lopakhin stands for people who want to
forget their sorrowful past and cut down his root completely from history, to
embrace the new wave of materialism. In the process, they might lose their
consciences, and fall into moral corruption.
Do any of the
characters stand in opposition to each other?
I
highlighted here the contras between Lubov and Trofomov:
How do the characters
speak?
Lubov:
sentimental, pessimistic, full of love expression when addressing others: ‘my
treasure’, ‘my dear’, etc., and often lamenting.
“My dear, my gentle,
beautiful orchard! My life, my youth, my happiness, good-bye! Good-bye!”
“I’m all at sea… I may
scream… or do something silly. Save me, Peter. Say something, say something.”
Trofimov:
optimistic, practical, self-confident, idealistic, bit arrogant.
“Welcome, new life!”
“Even if you gave me
twenty thousand I should refuse. I‘m a free man. And everything that all you
people, rich and poor, value so highly and so dearly hasn’t the least influence
over me; it’s like a flock of down in the wind.”
“Yes, I am a decayed
gentleman, and I’m proud of it!”
Does the playwright
lead you into a satisfying resolution?
I think so. Each
of the characters has different destination to reach, and each symbolizes the
idea they represent, and the difference is just emphasizing the irony. But the
most touching is the resolution of Fiers. I think Chekhov wanted to criticize
how forgetful people could be in the turbulence of changes, or maybe he wanted
to emphasize that the past/old Russia has no choices other than being locked up
and dying… ?
What is the play’s
theme?
In a way, it’s
Modernism vs Old Russia. Chekhov criticized people who were still clutching at
their satisfying pasts, and refused to think positively about the inevitable modernism.
Besides that, this play also tells of how people tend to remember and forget.
There are people who love to stick memories of the past to their heart, and try
to forget the present (Lubov), and there are people like Trofimov who are
ignorant of the past, because what’s most important is the future. Lopakhin
actually shares Trofimov’s idea, but with different cause. Trofimov wants to
forget the past because of his ideology, while Lopakhin because of bitterness. Whatever you choose, the past would soon be dead, and replaced by the
modern. The change is inevitable, just like Fiers’ tragic ending.
~~~~~~~~
No comments:
Post a Comment
What do you think?