The theme of this play is the cherry orchard. Past, present and future in the play "The Cherry Orchard"

Present, past and future in a play
A. P. Chekhov " The Cherry Orchard».
"The past looks passionately into the future."
A. A. Blok
Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" was written during the period of public upheaval of the masses in 1903. The writer vividly shows deep psychological conflicts, helps the reader to see the display of events in the souls of the characters, makes us think about the meaning true love and true happiness. Chekhov easily takes us from our present to the distant past. Together with his heroes, we live near the cherry orchard, we see its beauty, we clearly feel the problems of that time, we try to find answers to difficult questions. The Cherry Orchard is a play about the past, present and future of not only its characters, but the country as a whole. The author shows the clash of representatives of the past, present and future, their disputes, discussions, actions, relationships. Lopakhin denies the world of Ranevskaya and Gaev, Trofimov - Lopakhin. I think that Chekhov succeeded in showing the justice of the inevitable disappearance into the past of such seemingly harmless persons as the owners of the cherry orchard. Chekhov tries to show the connection between the life of his characters and the existence of the cherry orchard.
Ranevskaya is the mistress of the cherry orchard. The cherry orchard itself serves for her" noble nest". Without him, life is unthinkable for Ranevskaya, her whole fate is connected with him. Lyubov Andreevna says: “After all, I was born here, my father and mother, my grandfather lived here. I love this house, I don’t understand my life without a cherry orchard, and if it’s necessary to sell it like that, then sell me along with the garden.” She suffers sincerely, but soon one can understand that she really thinks not about the cherry orchard, but about her Parisian lover, to whom she decided to go again. She leaves with the money sent to Anna by her Yaroslavl grandmother, leaves without thinking about the fact that she appropriates other people's funds. To us, in my opinion, this is a selfish act. After all, it is Ranevskaya who cares most about the fate of Firs, agrees to lend money to Pishchik, it is her Lopakhin loves for once good relations to him.
Gaev, Ranevskaya's brother, is also a representative of the past. He, as it were, complements Ranevskaya. Gaev abstractly talks about the public good, about progress, philosophizes. But all these arguments are empty and absurd. Trying to console Anya, he says: “We will pay the interest, I am convinced. By my honor, whatever you want, I swear, the estate will not be sold! I swear by my happiness!” Gaev himself does not believe in what he says. I cannot but mention the lackey Yasha, in whom I notice a reflection of cynicism. He is outraged by the “ignorance” of those around him, speaks of his impossibility to live in Russia: “There is nothing to be done. It’s not for me here, I can’t live ... I’ve seen enough of ignorance - it will be with me. Yasha is a satirical reflection of his masters, their shadow.
The loss of the Gaevs and the Ranevskaya estate, at first glance, can be explained by their carelessness, but soon we are dissuaded by the activities of the landowner Pishchik, who is trying his best to maintain his position. He is used to the fact that the money itself regularly goes into his hands. And suddenly everything is broken. He is desperately trying to get out of this situation, but his attempts are passive, like those of Gaev and Ranevskaya. Thanks to Pishchik, one can understand that neither Ranevskaya nor Gaev are capable of any kind of activity. With this example, Chekhov convincingly proved to the reader the inevitability of the disappearance of noble estates into the past.
Gaev is replaced by the clever businessman Lopakhin. We learn that he is not from a noble class: “My father, however, was a peasant, but here I am in a white vest, in yellow shoes.” Realizing the complexity of Ranevskaya's position, he offers her a project to reconstruct the garden. In Lopakhin, one can clearly feel that active streak of new life, which will gradually and inevitably push a senseless and worthless life into the background. However, the author makes it clear that Lopakhin is not a representative of the future; he exhausts himself in the present. Why? It is obvious that Lopakhin is driven by the desire for personal enrichment. An exhaustive description of him is given by Petya Trofimov: “You are a rich man, you will soon be a millionaire. That's how, in terms of metabolism, you need a predatory beast that eats everything that comes in its way, so you are needed! Lopakhin, the buyer of the garden, says: “We will set up dachas, and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will see here new life". This new life seems to him almost the same as the life of Ranevskaya and Gaev. In the image of Lopakhin, Chekhov shows us that capitalist entrepreneurship is inherently inhumane. All this involuntarily leads us to the idea that the country needs completely different people who will do other great things. And these other people are Petya and Anya.
With one phrase, Chekhov makes it clear what Petya is. He is a perpetual student. I think that says it all. The author reflected in the play the rise of the student movement. That is why, I believe, the image of Petya appeared. Everything in him: both thin hair and an untidy look - it would seem, should cause disgust. But that doesn't happen. On the contrary, his speeches and actions cause even some sympathy. It is felt how the characters of the play are attached to him. Some treat Petya with slight irony, others with undisguised love. After all, he is the personification of the future in the play. In his speeches, one can hear a direct condemnation of a dying life, a call for a new one: “I will come. I will reach or show others the way how to reach. And points. He points it out to Anya, whom he loves passionately, although he skillfully hides this, realizing that another path is destined for him. He tells her: “If you have the keys to the household, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free as the wind." Petya evokes deep thoughts in Lopakhin, who in his heart envies the conviction of this "shabby gentleman", which he himself so lacks.
At the end of the play, Anya and Petya leave exclaiming: “Goodbye, old life. Hello new life. Everyone can understand these words of Chekhov in their own way. What kind of new life did the writer dream of, as he imagined it? For everyone, it remains a mystery. But one thing is always true and right: Chekhov dreamed of new Russia, about a new cherry orchard, about a proud and free personality. Years go by, generations change, but Chekhov's thought continues to be relevant.

Introduction
1. Problems of the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard"
2. The embodiment of the past - Ranevskaya and Gaev
3. Spokesman for the ideas of the present - Lopakhin
4. Heroes of the future - Petya and Anya
Conclusion
List of used literature

Introduction

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov is a writer of powerful creative talent and a kind of subtle skill, which manifests itself with equal brilliance, both in his stories and in stories and plays.
Chekhov's plays constituted an entire epoch in Russian dramaturgy and Russian theater and had an immeasurable influence on all their subsequent development.
Continuing and deepening best traditions dramaturgy of critical realism, Chekhov strove to ensure that his plays were dominated by the truth of life, unadorned, in all its usual, everyday life.
showing natural flow Everyday life ordinary people, Chekhov bases his plots on not one, but several organically connected, intertwined conflicts. At the same time, conflict is predominantly the leading and unifying one. actors not with each other, but with the entire social environment surrounding them.

The problems of the play by A.P. Chekhov "The Cherry Orchard"

The play "The Cherry Orchard" occupies a special place in Chekhov's work. Before her, he aroused the idea of ​​the need to change reality by showing the hostility of living conditions to a person, highlighting those features of his characters that doomed them to the position of a victim. In The Cherry Orchard, reality is depicted in its historical development. The theme of changing social structures is being widely developed. Noble estates with their parks and cherry orchards, with their unreasonable owners, are fading into the past. They are being replaced by businesslike and practical people, they are the present of Russia, but not its future. Only the younger generation has the right to purify and change life. Hence the main idea of ​​the play: the establishment of a new social force that opposes not only the nobility, but also the bourgeoisie and is called upon to rebuild life on the basis of genuine humanity and justice.
Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" was written during the period of public upheaval of the masses in 1903. She opens another page for us multifaceted creativity reflecting the complex phenomena of that time. The play amazes us with its poetic power, drama, is perceived by us as a sharp denunciation of the social ulcers of society, exposing those people whose thoughts and actions are far from moral standards behavior. The writer vividly shows deep psychological conflicts, helps the reader to see the reflection of events in the souls of the characters, makes us think about the meaning of true love and true happiness. Chekhov easily takes us from our present to the distant past. Together with his heroes, we live near the cherry orchard, we see its beauty, we clearly feel the problems of that time, together with the heroes we try to find answers to difficult questions. It seems to me that the play "The Cherry Orchard" is a play about the past, present and future not only of its heroes, but of the country as a whole. The author shows the clash of representatives of the past, the present and the future embedded in this present. I think that Chekhov succeeded in showing the justice of the inevitable departure from the historical arena of such seemingly harmless persons as the owners of the cherry orchard. So who are they, the owners of the garden? What connects their life with his existence? Why is the cherry orchard dear to them? Answering these questions, Chekhov reveals an important problem - the problem of the outgoing life, its worthlessness and conservatism.
The very name Chekhov's play tunes in a lyrical way. In our mind, a bright and unique image of a blooming garden emerges, embodying beauty and striving for a better life. The main plot of the comedy is connected with the sale of this old noble estate. This event largely determines the fate of its owners and inhabitants. Thinking about the fate of the heroes, one involuntarily thinks about more, about the ways of Russia's development: its past, present and future.

The embodiment of the past - Ranevskaya and Gaev

The spokesman for the ideas of the present - Lopakhin

Heroes of the future - Petya and Anya

All this involuntarily leads us to the idea that the country needs completely different people who will do other great things. And these other people are Petya and Anya.
Trofimov is a democrat by birth, by habits and convictions. Creating the images of Trofimov, Chekhov expresses in this image such leading features as devotion to the public cause, striving for a better future and propaganda of the struggle for it, patriotism, adherence to principles, courage, hard work. Trofimov, despite his 26 or 27 years, has a great and difficult life experience behind him. He has already been expelled from the university twice. He has no confidence that he will not be expelled a third time and that he will not remain a "perpetual student".
Experiencing both hunger, and need, and political persecution, he did not lose faith in a new life, which would be based on just, humane laws and creative creative work. Petya Trofimov sees the failure of the nobility, mired in idleness and inaction. He gives a largely correct assessment of the bourgeoisie, noting its progressive role in the economic development of the country, but denying it the role of creator and builder of a new life. In general, his statements are distinguished by directness and sincerity. With sympathy for Lopakhin, he nevertheless compares him with a predatory beast, "which eats everything that comes in its way." In his opinion, the Lopakhins are not able to decisively change life, building it on reasonable and fair principles. Petya evokes deep thoughts in Lopakhin, who in his heart envies the conviction of this "shabby gentleman", which he himself so lacks.
Trofimov's thoughts about the future are too vague and abstract. “We are moving irresistibly towards the bright star that burns there in the distance!” he says to Anya. Yes, the goal is great. But how to achieve it? Where is the main force that can turn Russia into blooming garden?
Some treat Petya with slight irony, others with undisguised love. In his speeches, one can hear a direct condemnation of a dying life, a call for a new one: “I will come. I will reach or show others the way how to reach. And points. He points it out to Anya, whom he loves passionately, although he skillfully hides this, realizing that another path is destined for him. He tells her: “If you have the keys to the household, then throw them into the well and leave. Be free as the wind."
In disgrace and shabby gentleman"(as Trofimova Varya ironically calls) there is no strength and business acumen of Lopakhin. He submits to life, stoically enduring its blows, but is not able to master it and become the master of his fate. True, he captivated Anya with his democratic ideas, who expresses her readiness to follow him, firmly believing in a wonderful dream of a new flowering garden. But this young seventeen-year-old girl, who gathered information about life mainly from books, pure, naive and spontaneous, had not yet encountered reality.
Anya is full of hope vitality, but there is still so much inexperience and childhood in it. In terms of character, she is in many ways close to her mother: she has love for beautiful word, to sensitive intonations. At the beginning of the play, Anya is carefree, quickly moving from concern to animation. She is practically helpless, accustomed to living carefree, not thinking about daily bread, about tomorrow. But all this does not prevent Anya from breaking with her usual views and way of life. Its evolution is taking place before our eyes. Anya's new views are still naive, but she forever says goodbye to the old house and the old world.
It is not known whether she will have enough spiritual strength, stamina and courage to go through the path of suffering, labor and deprivation to the end. Will she be able to maintain that ardent faith in the best, which makes her say goodbye to her without regret? old life? Chekhov does not answer these questions. And it's natural. After all, one can only speak about the future presumably.

Conclusion

The truth of life in all its sequence and completeness - this is what Chekhov was guided by when creating his images. That is why each character in his plays is a living human character, attracting with great meaning and deep emotionality, convincing with its naturalness, warmth of human feelings.
By the strength of his direct emotional impact, Chekhov is perhaps the most outstanding playwright in art. critical realism.
Chekhov's dramaturgy, which responded to topical issues of their time, addressing the everyday interests, experiences and worries of ordinary people, awakened the spirit of protest against inertia and routine, called for social activity to a better life. Therefore, it has always had a huge impact on readers and viewers. The significance of Chekhov's dramaturgy has long gone beyond the borders of our homeland, it has become global. Chekhov's dramatic innovation is widely recognized abroad. great motherland. I am proud that Anton Pavlovich is a Russian writer, and no matter how different the masters of culture are, they probably all agree that Chekhov, with his works, prepared the world for a better life more beautiful, more fair, more reasonable.
If Chekhov peered hopefully into the 20th century, which was just beginning, then we live in the new 21st century, we still dream of our cherry orchard and those who will grow it. Flowering trees cannot grow without roots. Roots are past and present. Therefore, in order for a beautiful dream to come true, the younger generation must combine high culture, education with practical knowledge reality, will, perseverance, diligence, humane goals, that is, to embody best features Chekhov's heroes.

Bibliography

1. History of Russian literature second half of XIX century / ed. prof. N.I. Kravtsova. Publisher: Education - Moscow 1966.
2. Exam questions and answers. Literature. 9th and 11th grades. Tutorial. - M.: AST - PRESS, 2000.
3. A. A. Egorova. How to write an essay on "5". Tutorial. Rostov-on-Don, "Phoenix", 2001.
4. Chekhov A.P. Stories. Plays. – M.: Olimp; Firma LLC, AST Publishing House, 1998.

Features of Chekhov's dramaturgy

Before Anton Chekhov, the Russian theater was in crisis, it was he who made an invaluable contribution to its development, breathing new life into it. The playwright snatched small sketches from the everyday life of his characters, bringing the dramaturgy closer to reality. His plays made the viewer think, although there were no intrigues or open conflicts in them, but they reflected the inner anxiety of a critical historical time, when society froze in anticipation of imminent changes, and all social strata became heroes. The apparent simplicity of the plot introduced the stories of the characters before the events described, making it possible to speculate what will happen to them after. So the past, present, future in the play "The Cherry Orchard" miraculously mixed up, by connecting people not so much of different generations as different eras. And one of the "undercurrents" characteristic of Chekhov's plays was the author's reflection on the fate of Russia, and the theme of the future took center stage in The Cherry Orchard.

Past, present and future on the pages of the play "The Cherry Orchard"

So how did past, present and future meet on the pages of The Cherry Orchard? Chekhov, as it were, divided all the heroes into these three categories, portraying them very vividly.

The past in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is represented by Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs - the oldest character in the whole action. It is they who speak most of all about what was, for them the past is a time in which everything was easy and beautiful. There were masters and servants, each had its own place and purpose. For Firs, the abolition of serfdom became greatest grief, he did not want freedom, remaining on the estate. He sincerely loved the family of Ranevskaya and Gaev, remaining devoted to them until the very end. For the aristocrats Lyubov Andreevna and her brother, the past is the time when they did not need to think about such base things as money. They enjoyed life, doing what brings pleasure, being able to appreciate the beauty of intangible things - it is difficult for them to adapt to the new order, in which material values ​​replace high moral values. It is humiliating for them to talk about money, about ways to earn it, and Lopakhin's real proposal to lease the land occupied by, in fact, a worthless garden is perceived as vulgarity. Unable to make decisions about the future of the cherry orchard, they succumb to the flow of life and simply float along it. Ranevskaya, with her aunt's money sent for Anya, leaves for Paris, and Gaev goes to serve in a bank. The death of Firs at the end of the play is very symbolic, as if saying that the aristocracy as a social class has outlived itself, and there is no place for it, in the form in which it was before the abolition of serfdom.

Lopakhin became the representative of the present in the play The Cherry Orchard. "A man is a man", as he says about himself, thinking in a new way who knows how to earn using his mind and flair. Petya Trofimov even compares him with a predator, but with a predator with a subtle artistic nature. And this brings Lopakhin a lot of emotional experiences. He is well aware of all the beauty of the old cherry orchard, which will be cut down at his will, but he cannot do otherwise. His ancestors were serfs, his father owned a shop, and he became a "white-summer", having made a considerable fortune. Chekhov placed special emphasis on the character of Lopakhin, because he was not a typical merchant, who was treated with disdain by many. He made himself, paving the way with his work and desire to be better than his ancestors, not only in terms of financial independence, but also in education. In many ways, Chekhov identified himself with Lopakhin, because their pedigrees are similar.

Anya and Petya Trofimov personify the future. They are young, full of strength and energy. And most importantly, they have the desire to change their lives. But, that's just, Petya is a master of talking and reasoning about a wonderful and just future, but he does not know how to expose his speeches into action. This is what prevents him from graduating from university or at least somehow arranging his life. Petya denies all attachments - be it a place or another person. He captivates the naive Anya with his ideas, but she already has a plan for how to arrange her life. She is excited and ready to "plant new garden even more beautiful than before." However, the future in Chekhov's play "The Cherry Orchard" is very uncertain and vague. In addition to the educated Anya and Petya, there is also Yasha and Dunyasha, and they, too, are the future. Moreover, if Dunyasha is just a stupid peasant girl, then Yasha is already a completely different type. Gaev and Ranevsky are being replaced by the Lopakhins, but the Lopakhins will also have to be replaced by someone. If you recall the story, then 13 years after the writing of this play, it was precisely such Yashas who came to power - unprincipled, empty and cruel, not attached to anyone or anything.

In the play "The Cherry Orchard" the heroes of the past, present and future were gathered in one place, only they were united not by an inner desire to be together and exchange their dreams, desires, experiences. The old garden and house holds them, and as soon as they disappear, the connection between the characters and the time they reflect is broken.

Connection of times today

Only the greatest creations are able to reflect reality even many years after their creation. This happened with the play "The Cherry Orchard". History is cyclical, society develops and changes, moral and ethical norms are also subject to rethinking. Human life is not possible without the memory of the past, inaction in the present, and without faith in the future. One generation is replaced by another, some build, others destroy. So it was in Chekhov's time, so it is now. The playwright was right when he said that “All of Russia is our garden”, and it depends only on us whether it will bloom and bear fruit, or whether it will be cut down to the very root.

The author's reasoning about the past, present and future in comedy, about people and generations, about Russia makes us think even today. These thoughts will be useful for grade 10 when writing an essay on the topic "Past, present, future in the play" The Cherry Orchard "".

Artwork test

A short essay-reasoning on the topic: Past, present and future of Russia in the play "The Cherry Orchard". Three generations in the comedy The Cherry Orchard. The fate of the Cherry Orchard

In the play The Cherry Orchard, Chekhov portrayed several generations of people at once, each of which represents the past, present or future of Russia. The author does not idealize any of them: each era has its own advantages and disadvantages. For this we value Chekhov's work: he is exceptionally objective in relation to reality. The writer does not try to convince us that the future is cloudless or the past is worthy of worship, but he treats the present most strictly.

The past in the play "The Cherry Orchard" is represented in the images of Ranevskaya, Gaev and Firs. All of them can not adapt to the new realities of life. Their position sometimes seems ridiculous to us, because their actions are absurd. To save the estate, the owners only need to rent it out profitably, but they are too scrupulous and arrogant, they are embarrassed by the vulgarity of summer residents who will desecrate them cherry orchards. Instead, they brought the matter to the point that Lopakhin buys the estate and completely cuts it down paradise. This example suggests that the nobles cannot even take care of themselves, let alone Russia. Their behavior is not rational, and their character is capricious, because they are accustomed to carefree living by the labor of others. It is obvious that they did not justify the privileges of their class, so the harsh reality left them in the past: they could not keep up with her, they kept imagining that she should adapt to them. However, Chekhov does not set himself the task of denigrating the past. We see that these people are not devoid of spiritual subtlety, tact and other genuine virtues. They are educated, educated and kind. For example, the devotion of the old servant Firs makes us sympathize with him and recognize the moral superiority of the older generation over modern people Lopakhin type.

The future in The Cherry Orchard is the younger generation: Trofimov and Anya. They are dreamers divorced from reality, maximalists. They are romantic and uplifting, but at the same time independent and intelligent, being able to find the mistakes of the past and the present and try to correct them. Student Trofimov says: “We are at least two hundred years behind, we still have absolutely nothing, we have no definite attitude to the past, we only philosophize, complain about melancholy or drink vodka,” it is obvious that the young man looks soberly at things. But at the same time, the hero demonstrates indifference towards the cherry garden: “We are above love,” he declares, relieving himself of any responsibility for the fate of the garden, and, therefore, of all of Russia. He and Anya, of course, want to change something, but they are losing their roots. This is what worries the author.

Chekhov was well aware of the vices of the past and present of his country, but he could only predict the future, so the dispute about what the writer wanted to say, portraying Peter and Anna, is still open. I think he had hopes for a brighter future, but still he was afraid that he would not recognize his country if he traveled through time.

Interesting? Save it on your wall!

The play "The Cherry Orchard", the last dramatic work Anton Pavlovich Chekhov can be considered a kind of testament of the writer, which reflects Chekhov's cherished thoughts, his thoughts about the past, present and future of Russia.

The plot of the play is based on the history of a noble estate. As a result of the changes taking place in Russian society, the former owners of the estate are forced to give way to new ones. This plot canvas is very symbolic, it reflects milestones socio-historical development of Russia. The fates of Chekhov's characters turn out to be connected with the cherry orchard, in the image of which the past, present and future intersect. The heroes reminisce about the past of the estate, about those times when the cherry orchard, cultivated by serfs, still brought income. This period coincided with the childhood and youth of Ranevskaya and Gaev, and they recall these happy, carefree years with involuntary nostalgia. But serfdom canceled a long time ago, the estate is gradually falling into disrepair, the cherry orchard is no longer profitable. The time of telegraphs is coming and railways, the era of business people and entrepreneurs.

The representative of this new formation is Lopakhin in Chekhov's play, who comes from a family of former serfs Ranevskaya. His memories of the past are of a completely different nature, his ancestors were slaves in the very estate, of which he is now becoming the owner.

Conversations, memories, disputes, conflicts - all the external action of the Chekhov play is centered around the fate of the estate and the cherry orchard. Immediately after the arrival of Ranevskaya, conversations begin about how to save the mortgaged and remortgaged estate from bidding. As the play progresses, this problem will become more and more acute.

But, as is most often the case with Chekhov, there is no real struggle, a real clash between the former and future owners of the cherry orchard in the play. Just the opposite. Lopakhin is doing everything possible to help Ranevskaya save the estate from sale, but the complete lack of business skills prevents the hapless owners of the estate from taking advantage of useful tips; they are only enough for lamentations and empty rantings. Chekhov is not at all interested in the struggle between the emerging bourgeoisie and the nobility giving way to it, the fate of specific people, the fate of all of Russia, is much more important for him.

Ranevskaya and Gaev are doomed to lose the estate, which is so dear to them and with which they are connected.

so many memories, and the reason for this lies not only in their inability to heed good advice Lopakhin. The time is coming to pay the old bills, and the debt of their ancestors, the debt of their family, the historical guilt of their entire estate has not yet been redeemed. The present stems from the past, their connection is obvious, it is not for nothing that Lyubov Andreevna dreams of her late mother in a white dress in a blooming garden. It reminds of the past itself. It is very symbolic that Ranevskaya and Gaev, whose fathers and grandfathers did not let those at the expense of whom they fed and lived, even into the kitchen, are now completely dependent on Lopakhin, who has become rich. In this, Chekhov sees retribution and shows that the lordly way of life, although it is fanned by the poetic haze of beauty, corrupts people, destroys the souls of those who are involved in it. Such, for example, is Firs. For him, the abolition of serfdom is a terrible misfortune, as a result of which he, who is needed by no one and forgotten by everyone, will be left alone in an empty house ... The lackey Yasha was also born from the same aristocratic way of life. He no longer has the devotion to the masters that distinguishes old Firs, but he, without a twinge of conscience, enjoys all the benefits and conveniences that he can derive from his life under the wing of the kindest Ranevskaya.

Lopakhin is a man of a different stock and a different formation. He is businesslike, has a strong grip and knows exactly what and how to do today. It is he who gives specific advice on how to save the estate. However, being a businesslike and practical man and favorably differing in this from Ranevskaya and Gaev, Lopakhin is completely devoid of spirituality, the ability to perceive beauty. The magnificent cherry orchard is interesting to him only as an investment, it is remarkable only because it is “very large”; and based on purely practical considerations, Lopakhin proposes to cut it down in order to lease the land for summer cottages - this is more profitable. Ignoring the feelings of Ranevskaya and Gaev (not out of malice, no, but simply because of the lack of spiritual subtlety), he orders to start cutting down the garden, without waiting for the departure of the former owners.

It is noteworthy that in Chekhov's play there is not a single happy person. Ranevskaya, who came from Paris to repent of her sins and find peace in the family estate, is forced to return back with old sins and problems, as the estate is sold by auction, and the garden is cut down. Faithful servant Firs is buried alive in a boarded-up house, where he served all his life. Charlotte's future is unknown; years pass without bringing joy, and dreams of love and motherhood never come true. Varya, who did not wait for Lopakhin's offer, is hired by some Ragulins. Perhaps the fate of Gaev is a little better - he gets a place in the bank, but he is unlikely to make a successful financier.

With the cherry orchard, in which the past and the present intersect so intricately, reflections on the future are also connected.

Tomorrow, which, according to Chekhov, should be better than the day today are personified in the play by Anya and Petya Trofimov. True, Petya, this thirty-year-old "eternal student", is hardly capable of real deeds and deeds; he just knows how to talk a lot and beautifully. Anya is another matter. Realizing the beauty of the cherry orchard, she at the same time understands that the garden is doomed, just as the past slave life is doomed, as the present, full of spiritual practicality, is also doomed. But in the future, Anya is sure, the triumph of justice and beauty should come. In her words: "We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this" is not only a desire to console the mother, but also an attempt to present a new, future life. Inheriting from Ranevskaya spiritual sensitivity and susceptibility to beauty, Anya at the same time is full of a sincere desire to change, to remake life. She is directed to the future, ready to work and even sacrifice in its name; she dreams of the time when the whole way of life will change, when she will turn into a blooming garden, giving people joy and happiness.

How to arrange such a life? Chekhov does not give recipes for this. Yes, they cannot be, because it is important that every person, having experienced dissatisfaction with what is, catches fire with a dream of beauty, so that he himself would look for a way to a new life.

“All of Russia is our garden” - these significant words are repeatedly heard in the play, turning the story of the ruin of the estate and the death of the garden into a capacious symbol. The play is full of thoughts about life, its values, real and imaginary, about the responsibility of each person for the world in which he lives and in which his descendants will live.