Tuesday, August 6, 2013

The Cherry Orchard – Final Review

For Let’s Read Plays – other author theme of July, I have picked Anton Chekhov. Chekhov is actually more famous with his short stories; he is actually the father of short story writing in Europe. I have once read one of his short stories, and have caught his clear, sharp, and deep method of writing. And I thought it would be interesting to see whether his play was written in the same style. I picked The Cherry Orchard, in particular, as it is listed on my WEM self project. I have worked on the Act summaries, as well as the stage inquiries: the first and the second level.

The Cherry Orchard tells the story within the Ranevskys’ household. The famous cherry orchard itself located within the Ranevskys estate; and said to be one of the most beautiful places on earth. It might be exaggerated—as a cherry orchard should looks just as other cherry orchards—but it certainly kept the secrets and history of the family for many generations, which creates a special bound between the orchard and the residents; the cherry orchard looks beautiful because it bears many memorable events of the past. And now the Ravenskys must let their estate go, as it would be sold in an auction to pay their debts.

This play’s main conflicts lay on the cherry orchard’s sale, as each of the characters’ future would be depended on the sale. There are people who detest the idea; Lubov Andreyevna—the present owner—a widowed mother, who has been abroad for five years before finally returns to Russia. Lubov cannot think of leaving, as she would be like being cut off from her history by that. On the other hand, Lopakhin—a businessman, son of the estate’s old slave but later on was raised by the family—insists that the cherry orchard must be cut down, so that a villa can be built on it. Trofimov—a family teacher—is pleased with the idea of moving from the estate, and is excited to welcome the future together with Anya, Lubov’s daughter. While for Varya—Lubov’s adopted daughter—it would be a total ruin, as she would loose her job besides her home.

To read this play as only portraying what it performs, would be very deceiving. At first, you would think that the whole play is only the fuss around losing a family estate and moving away. But if you read between the lines, you would find Chekhov’s idea or critics on how Russians see the upcoming waves of change. At the time Chekhov wrote this, modernism was entering Russia, and the old values are struggling to survive (this play was first performed on 1904). Each character here stands for certain idea which reflects the contrast between people who are with modernism versus people who keep holding on the Old Russian values.

In the play, you’d see many incoherent dialogs or scenes within the Acts which makes the plot seems won’t go anywhere. Actually the first four Acts feels flat and overstretched, you would be asking yourself, what does Chekhov wanted to say, really? Just keep reading, because in Act Five Chekhov would change the gear, and the acceleration is suddenly increasing towards a climax. And lo! The ending would be very surprising, if not shocking. After the curtain has been down, you would sit still, struck, and couldn’t believe that the play has ended, and that ‘that’ would be the end! And then, you would reflect the whole play, of the pieces of incoherent dialogs and scenes, and suddenly, every piece would makes sense, as if the play is a huge puzzle game. By reflecting it, you would also see what Chekhov has wanted to tell you beneath the flat story. And finally, you would see the genius brain of the author who could present his ideas in this play!

Four and a half stars for The Cherry Orchard, as although I sometimes feel uncomfortable with the sudden changes in scenes or immediate incoherent interruption, the language is beautiful, and I love Chekhov’s detailed description of the background settings.

~~~~~~~~

*I read ebook version from Gutenberg Project*

*This book is counted as:*



Let’s Read Plays (July) theme: Other Author



Friday, August 2, 2013

Dante’s Purgatorio – Final Review

I was struggling through this second part of The Divine Comedy: Purgatorio. Unlike Inferno—with a vivid description of Hell and some recognized figures—Purgatorio is more like an abstract image of divine actions. It is full of allegories representing many acts and symbols from Bible, that the poem is often boring and tedious.

After leaving Hell/Inferno, Dante, still with his guide Virgil, enters the Purgatorio. The setting of Purgatorio is of course different with Inferno. Dante imagined purgatory as a mountain that has many levels. At the bottom is Ante-Purgatory, then seven terraces where souls are being punished and purged. The more the mount ascend, Dante gets more spiritual growth. The mountain top is the Earthly Paradise, and after this one, Dante is purified from his sins and deserves to enter the Paradise (the third part).

We already know from Inferno that it was Beatrice who initiated this journey for Dante, and she even chose Virgil—the Roman poet—to be his guide. Now in Purgatorio, Beatrice shows herself in the middle of the journey, and even guides Dante at certain point after Virgil leaves them, near their end of journey. Another poet called Statius also accompanies Dante.

The poem itself is of course still beautiful; and this is the only aspect that kept me reading. So, if you just want to read a poem, this might be your choice. But, if you want to get what Dante talks about, you can hardly depend on the poem only. Fortunately, thanks to the digital era, there are many reading guides for these kinds of complex classics works. I was lucky to have found this site from which I learned a lot of things I would never thought about before. I think Purgatorio is more like a theological study about the Church than a poem; no wonder several people stuck on it although they can get through Inferno. Shortly, Purgatorio is a great work of poem, but needs a huge determination to finish it.

To get a better idea of the contents, you can read my summaries: Ante-PurgatoryTerrace1~2Terrace 3~5Terrace 6~7The Earthly Paradise.

Three stars for Purgatorio, and now I really hope Paradiso would be much better than this…

~~~~~~~

*I read ebook from Gutenberg Project*

*This book is counted as:*



Thursday, August 1, 2013

The Cherry Orchard – Second Level Inquiry (Logic Stage)

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.

~~~~~~~~



Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Anton Chekhov - Play Monthly Meme July: Playwrights

This month Let’s Read Plays picked ‘other authors’ theme, which means we can pick any author out of Shakespeare, Greek, or Oscar Wilde (that we have done in the previous months). So, July Play Monthly Meme’s prompt naturally follows this theme accordingly,



“Who is your playwright this month?”

From many playwrights I have wanted to read, I finally picked Anton Chekhov. I have read Oscar Wilde’s plays—and really enjoyed them—so now I want to compare him with Chekhov, who wrote his plays at the same century. I’d be interested to see the differences between them. So, here it is…

Mini bio

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov—a Russian writer, born on January 29, 1860—is known as one of the greatest short stories writers in the world. His other interest and career besides writing was medical doctor, as he once stated: "Medicine is my lawful wife, and literature is my mistress." Although his father is abusive, Chekhov reckoned him as the source of his talent, while his mother left him the soul. His father was also his portrays of hypocrisy he later wrote about.

Lived in poverty, Chekhov began writing short stories and sketches of Russian daily life to financially support the family and pay his tuition fee. Not long after he graduated and practiced as medical doctor, he diagnosed himself with tuberculosis, but hid the fact from family and friends, and kept writing. A celebrated writer named Dmitry Grigorovitch read his story ‘The Huntsman’ and advised Chekhov to write less, but concentrate more on the literary quality. It worked, as in 1887 Chekhov won the Pushkin Prize "for the best literary production distinguished by high artistic worth” for his short stories collection: ‘At Dusk’.

Anton Chekhov died on July 15th, 1904 in the age of 44, leaving his many short stories and plays as a eternal legacy to literary world. Of his most famous plays are: The Cherry Orchard, The Seagull, Uncle Vanya, Three Sisters.

Playwright



The Cherry Orchard is the first play I’ve ever read from Chekhov, so I can’t be too objective in judging his playwright. However, there are some unique points that I found different from others (Shakespeare, Greek and Oscar Wilde).

First, his scenes portrayal. I was amazed at his detailed and beautiful description of the cherry orchard. It might be because of the theme, but nevertheless I have never found any other play with that detailed portrayal.

Chekhov’s dialogs are sometimes seems incoherent. In the middle of a conversation, suddenly someone would interrupt with a comment that does not relate at all to the conversation. It feels trivial and awkward, but in the end, it turns out to be quite important. Chekhov likes also to let his audience to comprehend some ideas from unexpressed dialogs, which let you reflect quite often while reading, unlike Wilde’s plays which just flow.

It turns out also that Chekhov uses quite many allegories in The Cherry Orchard. I think his plays would be best enjoyed from the book rather than seeing it live-performed. The live performance would be great too, but to grab his meaning, I think one ought to read from the book too.

Who’s your favorite playwright, other than the Bard and Wilde?


Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Scene on Three (2): The Cherry Orchard

The Cherry Orchard is one of Anton Chekhov’s most famous plays. It’s about a family who is about to lose their estate in an auction because of their debts. Among the most treasured things about the estate, is the cherry orchard, which is claimed as the most beautiful place in the world by one of the characters in the play. The cherry orchard might not be just beautiful, but it keeps family history and secret for years, which bear sentimental memories in the resident’s heart.

For today’s Scene on Three, I picked a passage describing the beauty of the cherry orchard.



“In a field. An old, crooked shrine, which has been long abandoned; near it a well and large stones, which apparently are old tombstone, and an old garden seat. The road is seen to Gaev’s estate. On one side dark poplars, behind them begins the cherry orchard. In the distance is a row of telegraph poles, and far, far away on the horizon are the indistinct signs of a large town, which can only be seen on the finest and clearest days. It is close on sunset.”

I didn’t get used to read a playwright which is describing the scene so detailed, so this one is quite amazed me.



Jadi bagaimana cara berpartisipasi dalam Scene on Three :

  • Tuliskan suatu adegan atau deskripsi pemandangan/manusia/situasi/kota dan sebagainya ke dalam suatu post.
  • Jelaskan mengapa adegan atau deskripsi itu menarik, menurut versi kalian masing-masing.
  • Jangan lupa cantumkan button Scene on Three di dalam post dengan link menuju blog Bacaan B.Zee.
  • Masukkan link post kalian ke link tools yang ada di bawah post Bacaan B.Zee, sekalian saling mengunjungi sesama peserta Scene on Three.
  • Meme ini diadakan setiap tanggal yang mengandung angka tiga, sesuai dengan ketersediaan tanggal di bulan tersebut (tanggal 3, 13, 23, 30, dan 31).


Monday, July 29, 2013

The Cherry Orchard – First Level Inquiry (Grammar Stage)

For WEM project, I will only work on the first and second level inquiries for this play. You can also check my Acts summaries to get a clearer picture of what it’s about. This post is the first level, the grammar stage.

[source]


What is the initial question or tension?

From the beginning of Act one the talks about the estate’s sale has been emerged, so I think it’s no longer whether it’s going to be sold, but rather: What will happen (to everyone) if the cherry orchard were sold in the auction?

Where is the point of greatest tension?

The greatest tension is in the party, when people are waiting for Gaev to get the confirmation of the auction’s outcome; of who finally gets the estate. There is a slight hope that Gaev—Lubov’s brother—might be able to buy it because an aunt has granted him the money. The tension is so intense here, because each of their faith will depend on the outcome.

Where does the play’s action reach its climax?

When Lopakhin is stating that it’s he who bought the estate. With this new fact, it is inevitable that Lubov and Gaev will be cut off from their root of history (representing by the cherry orchard), Varya’s life is ruined. She lost a job (she has been the estate’s manager), and probably lost chance to get a marriage proposal (I don’t think she would still want to marry Lopakhin—if he’d really propose—after he showed arrogance about buying the estate). On the other hand, Anya would be free to leave the cherry orchard which she did not love anymore, to marry Trofimov. So, everybody’s future is changed by this fact.

Where is the resolution?

In Act V, when the door is locked after everyone left the house (everyone except Fiers). Locking the door is like locking their previous life, and now they would emerge to a new future (still unknown to few people).

What holds the play’s action together?

Attachment with the past; how people used to irrationally let themselves bound to their past and refuse to let it go, to welcome a new era.

~~~~~~~



Friday, July 26, 2013

The Cherry Orchard – Acts Summaries

The Cherry Orchard is one of Anton Chekhov’s most famous plays. I picked this play for Let’s Read Plays (other authors theme), and for my WEM Self-Project. This is the second play I read for WEM, and as usual, I’ll begin with the Acts summaries.

[source]


Act One

Act one is an introduction of each characters and their conflicts. Mrs. Ravensky (Lubov Andreyevna) is arriving at the family estate after five years leaving it for other country together with Anya, her daughter. Her husband and her only son had died, while her adopted daughter, Varya, has been staying and managing the estate during her absence. The Ravensky is falling into poverty, they could not pay their debts, and the estate—with the beautiful cherry orchard—is threatened to be sold in an auction.

I get the feeling somehow that Lopakhin (a peasant’s son who becomes a businessman) and Pischin (another landowner) are using Mrs. Ravensky. Lopakhin persuades Lubov to cut off the cherry orchard and build a summer villas to get money; while Pischin keeps asking for a loan to pay his mortgage. Lubov rejects Lopakhin’s idea because she loves the cherry orchard, while she asks Gaev—her brother—to give Pischin the money, despite of her near-bankruptcy.

Beyond that, there’re trivial conflicts of Varya—who is expecting to marry Lopakhin but the man hasn’t proposed to her yet; of Dunyasha—the maid servant who likes to dress like a lady, and is proposed by Epikhodov—the clumsy clerk. Dunyasha is annoyed by this, and seems to be more attracted to Yasha—a young footman whom she hasn’t met for five years as he served Mrs. Ravensky in Moskow. While Anya seems to jolt in joy at the news that Peter Trofimov (used to be her death brother’s teacher) is staying there at the moment.

Act Two

In second act we come to know everyone better. Charlotta—governess who likes to wear man’s hat and carry a riffle—is an orphan and feels lonely in this world where she can’t remember her mother and father. Dunyasha expresses her love to Yasha who reacts so disinterestedly; while Epikhodov carries revolver everywhere and implicitly ‘threatens’ to kill himself if Dunyasha doesn’t react to his courting.

Lopakhin still persuades Lubov of the villas idea, and Lubov still persists to reject, which annoys Lopakhin. In her poor condition, Lubov still can’t resist giving gold changes to a tramp.

Trofimov makes an interesting speech about how idle people are; even the intellectuals do nothing important and don’t know the real meaning of ‘working’. Anya and Trofimov discuss their closer relationship—which Trofimov thinks a ‘vulgarity’, and Anya expresses how her love to the cherry orchard has changed. Trofimov expresses how the cherry orchard bears mush of the history of Ravensky ancestors, and that the future lays onto real action (works). He persuades her to leave that place.

Act Three

The night of the auction, the Ravenskys have a party. Gaev is expected to buy the estate as Anya’s grandmother had granted him the money. He and Lopakhin didn’t appear until late at night, making the whole family in distress.

Meanwhile, Varya doubts that Lopakhin would ever propose to her because he is too pre-occupied with business. She also thinks that if she just possesses money, she would go to the convent if the estate is sold.

Act Four

Lubov, in her anxiety to hear the auction result, tells Trofimov about her lover who has been taking advantage of her. He is now severely ill in Paris and asks Lubov to come there. Trofimov says that the auction result hardly means anything and that Lubov should have thinking about the future instead. He also frankly tells Lubov that she better ignores her lover as the man has robbed her. Lubov is angry about this.

An old servant named Fiers remarks that as Ravensky has become poor, the guess at their party has greatly changed. No barons or counts are eager to come now; it’s even difficult to get a station master to come. Meanwhile, Varya cries because Trofimov keeps teasing her as Madame Lopakhin.

Finally Lopakhin and Gaev arrive at the party; the first looks happy while the latter tired. It appears that Lopakhin has bought the estate for himself, defeating Gaev. It means that the Ravenskys must leave the estate, and their dearest cherry orchard will be cut down to make space for the villas building. Lopakhin reflects how he had been succeeded to own the estate where his father and grandfather used to work on as slaves. Lubov weeps and Varya throws away her keys. Lopakhin reproaches Lubov for not listening to his suggestion; while he expresses his eagerness to axe the cherry trees, although not long before he says that the cherry orchard is ‘the most beautiful place in the world’.

Vacating the house is quite a scene. Lopakhin offers a loan to Trofimov, which the latter rejects because he is a man of free. Meanwhile, Anya, Varya and Lubov all concern about Fiers; whether he has been transported to the hospital, which Yasha confirms that he had given the order, and that ‘they’ must have done that. Dunyasha cries over her separation from Yasha, whom takes it very coldly. Varya is the most distressed soul among others because Lopakhin never proposes to her until the end amid Lubov’s personal request to him. Meanwhile, Anya and Trofimov seem to be the happiest couple of all; they look at the future as a brighter one than what they would leave behind. Anya even convinces her mother that they would plant cherries in a new orchard, and that it would be more beautiful than theirs.

*spoiler* Lubov and Gaev are the last to exit the house before Lopakhin locks every door as he will leave for a quite long time. For a moment silence fell on to the empty house. But, it soon appears that it’s not quite empty, because old Fiers is actually still in the locked house, undetected by others!! Oh my… what an ending!

~~~~~~~