"The Cherry Orchard" as Comedy Author(s): Jacqueline E. M. Latham Source: Educational Theatre Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Mar., 1958), pp. 21-29 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3204230 Accessed: 28-11-2016 01:42 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Educational Theatre Journal

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE CHERRY ORCHARD AS COMEDY

JACQUELINE E. M. LATHAM

Chekhov suffered during his lifetime Four Colonels. Desmond MacCarthy from bad productions of his plays. (as did Shaw and many others) fully ac- Even Stanislavsky, the founder of ceptedthe Chekhov's plays as tragedies of Moscow Art Theatre, misunderstood frustration and in 1937, in The New the nature of his comedies, The Seagull Statesman and Nation, he reviewed a and The Cherry Orchard, and after theproduction of Uncle Vanya sharply crit- production of the latter Chekhov wrote icizing the humor and comedy in the to his wife: "How awful it is! An act performance. However, his criticisms that ought to take twelve minutes elicited at a letter from Dorothy Sayers most lasts forty minutes. There is only(whose first acquaintance with Chek- one thing I can say: Stanislavsky hov has this was) in defense of the produc- ruined my play for me."1 Stanislavsky tion, saying "But the whole tragedy of and his fellow-director Nemirovich- futility is that it never succeeds in Danchenko believed that Chekhov was achieving tragedy. In its blackest wrong in thinking that he had written moments it is inevitably doomed to the comedies; when Stanislavsky had read comic gesture."2 This, the central point The Cherry Orchard he wrote to Chek- of Chekhov's comedy, is what so many hov informing him that it was, in fact, critics have missed. In the United a tragedy. These Moscow productions, States, too, Edmund Wilson writing in which were, of course, in many ways The New Yorker3 admits that in re- very fine, displeased Chekhov who was reading Chekhov's plays he can find a too ill to protest forcibly about them, broader humour than he remembers in and so they became the first of the stageline productions. Indeed, the tradi- of melancholy productions which today tion is established and Chekhov has we accept almost without question been in accepted as a writer of gloomy England and the United States. In- tragedies of frustration; I doubt wheth- deed, the pattern is so well established er he can be reinstated as he would that it was brilliantly and easily paro- wish. died in Peter Ustinov's The Love of The Cherry Orchard,4 Chekhov's last

Jacqueline E. M. Latham, a graduate of London play, was written slowly and painfully University, spent 1956-7 as a Teaching Associate at Indiana University. 2 Dorothy Sayers, The New Statesman and 1 March 29, 1904. The Letters of Anton Nation, Feb. 27, 1937, p. 324. Pavlovitch Tchehov to Olga Leonardovna Knip- 3 Edmund Wilson, "Seeing Chekhov Plain," per, trans. Constance Garnett (New York, n.d.), The New Yorker, Nov. 22, 1952, p. 180-194. p. 374. The last sentence is omitted here. It is 4 The text used is the translation by Stark given in full by David Magarshack, in Chekhov Young in Best Plays by Chekhov (New York, a Life (London, 1952), footnote on p. 383. 1956). All names will be given in his spelling.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 22 EDUCATIONAL THEATRE JOURNAL in 1903. It was produced in January, Cherry Orchard (although it was not, 1904, by Stanislavsky at the Moscow Art of course, of this play that he was Theatre only six months before the au- speaking). All classes of men were for thor's death. The subject of the play Chekhov possible subjects of comedy; is the impoverishment of an aristocratic his plays are about human nature and family who sell their house and orchard his sympathies did not lie exclusively to one of their ex-serfs who wishes to with one class, nor did he wish to satir- build summer cottages. The passing ize the other. It is because he shows of an era is a favourite subject for senti- "divergence from the norms" that The mentalists and it would have been Cherry Orchard is a comedy, and these easy for Chekhov to have shown anormalities aristo- he sees in the wealthy as cratic nobility and integrity at wellthe asmer- in their servants. The play has, cy of an unscrupulous bourgeois. certainly, But tragic overtones, as has he did not write that play, althoughMoliere's Le Misan,thrope, but the many producers have wished point that of viewhe of the author is definite- had. He wrote instead a comedy. ly comic, "The and as if he wishes to empha- play has turned out not a drama, size thisbut he a introduces certain farcical comedy, in parts even a farce."5 incidents: He squeaking boots, clumsi- did not see the passing of the oldness, order conjuring tricks, a governess as tragic, and, in emphasizing dressed the so-as a man jumping about in a cial uselessness of the aristocratic fam- ball-room, and an accidental blow with ily, he treats the subject from a comic a stick struck by Varya on the man she viewpoint. He sees in them no love, loves. no sense of responsibility; their deepest Chekhov's purpose in writing The emotion is only sentiment. Cherry Orchard was to give a criti- Chekhov's father was of peasant cism of life by showing characters who stock, for the grandfather had pur- deviate from the norm. The cherry or- chased their freedom, although he was, chard itself is not a constant symbol of said Chekhov, "a most rabid upholder beauty wantonly destroyed, but, as the of serfdom."6 Chekhov's love for hu- centre of the play, it has a different sig- manity was universal; he neither ideal-nificance for each character. There are ized the serfs from whom he sprang twelve nor people who make up the come- did he fawn upon the rich who die were humaine, all individuals, all more now his friends. Lydia Avilov, in or herless comic, some contributing to a memoir, Chekhov in my Life, quotescentral pattern of meaning, others Chekhov as saying, "I will describe life merely performing peripherally their to you truthfully, that is artistically, own comic dance and only occasionally and you will see in it what you have impinging on the central pattern. not seen before, what you never no- ticed before: its divergence from Althoughthe Chekhov considered the norms, its contradictions."7 It is ex- merchant Lopahin the central figure in actly this that Chekhov achieves in The the play,8 it is best for us to consider first the brother and sister, Gayeff and 5 Letter to Madame Stanislavsky, Sept. 15, Madame Ranevskaya. They are middle- 1903. The Life and Letters of Anton Tchekhov, ed. and trans. S. S. Koteliansky & Philip Tomlin- aged children. For Gayeff life is a game, son (New York, n.d.), p. 290. 6 Quoted in Chekhov a Life, p. 18. 7 Chekhov in my Life, trans. David Magar- 8 Letter to Stanislavsky, Oct. 30, 1903. Life shack (London, 1950), p. 32. and Letters, p. 291.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE CHERRY ORCHARD AS COMEDY no more serious than the game ing Fiers of andbil- the bookcase too.10 For the liards which cheers him when his estate brother and sister the orchard is a sym- is sold and which he plays in imagina- bol of their youth, the youth they have tion (though with words and gestures) never left. As Madame Ranevskaya looks whenever the problems of the material out at it from their childhood nursery, world seem too much for him. He she imagines that one of the trees in leaves his estate for a life as a bank blossom is their mother, dressed in official saying "I am a financier white, now- walking through the orchard. "I yellow ball into the side pocket."9 slept Even in this nursery," she exclaims, "and his tardily acquired career as a financier looked out on the orchard from here, -for which his own financial failure every morning happiness awoke with has ill-prepared him-seems to me,be itonly was just as it is now, then, noth- a continuation of his life at the billiard ing has changed." (I) This is, of course, table: trying to make a big break be-Chekhov's point. The brother and sister fore he finally loses. have not changed, yet the world has. Gayeff's ridiculousness is accentuated They are children in an adult world, by his continual eating of candies. and for the most part they are unaware "They say I've eaten my fortune up in of reality; even in their rare moments hard candies" (II) he says laughing, but of self-knowledge they lack the power we know he doesn't believe it. This of coming to grips with reality. candy eating is a symbol of his childish- Madame Ranevskaya's embrace of ness, of his unfitness for the adult the bookcase is matched by her brother's world. Even old Fiers, the butler, treats even more ludicrous piece of self-dram- him like a child, worrying whether atization,he is also in Act I, when he salutes dressed properly when he goes out theand bookcase (tearfully) as "sustaining bringing him his coat when it is throughcold. the generations of our family His sister, too, has never matured. our courage and our faith in a better When her husband had died and her future and nurturing in us ideals of son had been drowned shortly goodness after- and of a social consciousness." wards, she left Russia with her lover, This comic gesture not only helps us leaving her two daughters behind. Her to see Gayeff's essential ridiculousness, lover has been unfaithful and has spent but serves as an ironic commentary on all her money, yet at the end of the his sister's character. The generosity play she returns to him. She has spent shown when Madame Ranevskaya gives her life avoiding real sorrow, for she the drunken stranger a gold piece de- spite their extreme poverty is ludicrous, has not the depth of character to accept it and to be purified by it. She is a not admirable, for it is not based upon altruism or love but is an automatic creature of moods and in Act I appears like a child in her unconscious self- gesture paralleled by her extravagance at restaurants where they cannot pay consciousness: "Is it really me sitting the bills. There is no longer any ideal here? (Laughing) I'd like to jumpof "goodness and of a social conscious- around and wave my arms. (Covering ness" in the family; had there been, her face with her hands) But I maythe play be might have been a tragedy. dreaming." Soon she is tearful, then Rather, kiss- there is continual self-decep-

9 Act IV. Subsequent quotations will be 10 It is in character that the only books she identified by act numbers in parentheses. mentions are fairy tales.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 24 EDUCATIONAL THEATRE JOURNAL tion, punctuated by mawkish moments ed in life, is presented far more sym- of self-awareness, as when at the end of pathetically by Chekhov. It is he who Act I Gayeff says "And today I made a has the plan which will enable Gayeff speech to the bookcase-so silly! And and his sister to keep the estate, and it was only when I finished it that I even when eventually he buys it Chek- could see it was silly," only to add hov is careful to point out that he bid shortly after "On my honour I'll swear, for it only against an outsider and after by anything you like, that the estate Gayeff had withdrawn for the auction. shall not be sold! By my happiness, I In a letter to Stanislavsky, Chekhov swear! Here's my hand, call me a writes: worthless, dishonourable man, if I allow Lopahin is a merchant, but he is a decent man it to come up for auction! With all my in every sense; he has to behave with perfect soul I swear it!" Chekhov's stage direc- manners, like an educated man . . . Varya, a tions indicate that before he says this serious and religious girl, loved Lopahin; she would not have fallen in love with a money- he puts a candy in his mouth. grubber.ll This brings us to the central dramatic and later: action-whether the estate should be Dunya and Epihodoff stand in Lopahin's pres- sold to raise the necessary money ence; theyor do not sit. Lopahin, in fact, main- whether Gayeff and his sister should tains behis position like a gentleman. He ad- prepared to raise money by letting dresses part the servants "thou" and they "you" him.12 or all of it for building summer cot- tages. This is their dilemma and Lopahin, this then, is not a Dogberry, is the issue they steadfastly refuse neither to is he a Monsieur Jourdain. In face. When Lopahin suggests that his efforts to save their estate he is prac- they let the land, they refuse to. Gayeff tical, though perhaps a little unfeeling, promises that the estate will not be but Chekhov does not ask us to laugh auctioned, deceiving himself into con- at him for this. Indeed he embodies fidence in uninterested generals and ain many ways Chekhov's hopes for the parsimonious rich aunt. The estate, of future as expressed in Act II by the course, is auctioned and while Gayeff perennial student Trofimoff: the past bids 15,000 roubles (provided by the can only be atoned for "through un- rich aunt and eventually spent in Paris common, incessant labor." Lopahin, by Madame Ranevskaya with her lov- though, is comic in another way; he er), his sister is giving a ball to which who is successful in business matters is the station-master and post-office clerk unsuccessful in his private life. Despite are invited. With magnificent under- the fact that he is loved and respected statement she says "We planned the by the family he is incapable of pro- ball at an unfortunate moment-well, posing marriage to Varya of whom he is it doesn't matter." (III) Their essen- fond and who loves him. As he has tial indifference to the fate of their said in Act I to Dunyasha the maid, estate is shown in the absence of "Youprac- must know your place." He tical measures to preserve it. They knows his too well, or rather, he is dramatize, pose, and make unreal caught ges- in his childhood sense of in- tures but they have protested too feriority. He idealizes Madame Ran- much; in the end they have forfeited evskaya and is unable to marry her their claim to our sympathy. 1i Oct. 30, 1903. Life and Letters, p. 291. Lopahin, the ex-serf who has succeed- 12 Nov. lo, 1903. Life and Letters, p. 293.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE CHERRY ORCHARD AS COMEDY adopted daughter. She had fers said to tohis watch as if for support. him, when he had been hit by Finally, his fath- in Act IV, during his last talk er as a child, " 'Don't cry . .with . little Varya, when he has already told peasant,' " (I) and he still sees Madame himself Ranevskaya that he will ask as a peasant and still worships Varya Madame to marry him, he is unable to Ranevskaya. The stick, as David broach Mag-the subject at all to her. When arshack noted,l3 is a symbol of she his enters, serv- he is looking at his watch itude ("My father . . . just beat and the me conversation in ends when he calls his drunken fits and always to with someone a off-stage "This minute." stick" (II) and it is ironical that The stickwhen and watch are symbols of in Act I he mocks Anya and Varya, Lopahin's who divided personality. He is are perturbed about the debts still incurred in subjection spiritually and he is by the family, Varya threatens unable to "I'd conquer time and circum- land him one like that (shaking stances in her his private life and to impose fist.)" In fact she does, accidentally, his will upon them. We know from hit him with a stick when he returns Chekhov's letters that he wished us to from the auction to tell them that he admire Lopahin, for in many ways he has bought the estate; he may be master is the embodiment of Chekhov's ideal of the house, but he is not the master for society, practical hard work. Yet in his private life. For all his success in his inability to bring his personal as a businessman, for all his kindness desires and relationships into his con- and integrity, he yet remains the slave, trol in the same way that he has domi- unable to master his own happiness in nated the commercial world, he is anor- his relationship with the family. mal. It is thus that he is a comic fig- As if to emphasize this gulf between ure, though he is far more sympatheti- practical success and success in personal cally portrayed than Gayeff and his sister. relationships, Chekhov has associated a second symbol with Lopahin: his The action of the play revolves watch. At the very beginning of the around the debts incurred by the family play Lopahin, who has come especially and the way they can raise money on to meet Madame Ranevskaya at the the estate. The solution that Gayeff station, wakes up to find that the train and his sister are forced to accept-in is in and that he has overslept. He nev- spite of their illusory belief that they er seems to overcome this initial set- deserve to be saved from their predica- back; though he can be decisive aboutment-is not an ideal one. Neither is the remedy the family should take Lopahin's to suggestion of letting the or- save their estate, yet he cannot chardmeet for commercial building wholly the people around him on equal terms. satisfactory to us. However, Chekhov He seems to need the moral support does of imply a different course of action, his watch-which is associated with the though it is now too late to implement well-regulated business world of which it. It is Fiers, the deaf butler to whom he is master-when he is with Gayeff no-one listens, who in Act I indicates a and his family. When he tries to tell positive solution: them his idea for saving the estate and FIERS: There was a time forty-fifty years ago to take his departure, he four times re- when the cherries were dried, soaked, pickled, cooked into jam and it used to be- 13 Chekhov the Dramatist (London, 1952), GAYEFF: Keep quiet, Fiers. p. 281. FIERS: And it used to be that the dried cherries

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 26 EDUCATIONAL THEATRE JOURNAL were shipped by the wagon-load to Moscow and servants, and when at the end they lock to Kharkov. And the money there was! And the house with Fiers inside, it is their the dried cherries were soft then, juicy, sweet, fragrant-They had a way of treating them final gesture of irresponsibility; it is then- symbolically very effective. However, MADAME RANEVSKAYA: And where ison that the literalway level it introduces an now? alien note into the play, though as FIERS: They have forgotten it. Nobody remem- David Magarshack points out 14 there is bers now. no reason to suppose that Fiers dies, for Chekhov's criticism of this aristocrat- Chekhov states clearly that Epihodoff, ic family, then, goes deeper: they have the clerk, is to remain behind. There not only lived in an imaginary world, is fine irony in Fiers' last speech in avoiding responsibility like children, which he worries lest Gayeff may not but they have lost the means by which have worn his topcoat and then, as if in a life like this can be made possible; final recognition, he applies to himself they have lost the secret and they do notthe epithet he has been applying to even realize what they have done. others, "good-for-nothing." He seems at this moment to realize that his life has Only Fiers realizes what has been lost and only he of the servants knows passed in a cause which was not worthy what it is to serve, to work, and to main- of him. This, I believe, is Chekhov's tain order. Significantly enough, like only wholly tragic note. It becomes Chekhov's grandfather, he refers totragic because, although Fiers is self- deceived as the other characters are. we the emancipation of serfs as "the dis- can admire him for his devotion and in- aster" and says that he did not take his freedom but stayed instead with his tegrity. master. Although his aim in life is to Of Madame Ranevskaya's two daugh- serve, the irony of his situation lies inters, Chekov told Nemirovich-Dan- the fact that those whom he serves are chenko: unworthy of this dedication. Madame Anya can be acted by anyone, even by a quite Ranevskaya's affection for Fiers is unknown actress, provided she is young and merely sentimental. He is part of thelooks like a girl, and speaks in a young ringing voice. This is not one of the important parts . . . world that is slipping from her; he does Varya's is a more serious part . . . she is a not exist as a human being worthy figure of in a black dress, nun-like, a silly, a love or of gratitude. His life-long devo- cry-baby etc. etc.15 tion is not even rewarded by a warm farewell when she thinks he is going Varya to is a complementary character the hospital. Instead she relies upon to Lopahin. She is unable to secure another servant to make certain that he happiness because of her indecision yet is taken and cared for. His end, left in her management of the household behind in the doomed house, is the she imposes a severe discipline. She one discordant note in the comedy. loves His Lopahin but "is quite incapable rejection is, of course, symbolic. of Thedisregarding the conventions which days of which he is a legacy are demandover, that the lady has to wait for the days when, as he says, "there thewere gentleman to propose to her." 1 generals, barons, admirals dancing Varya, at as Chekhov wrote to his wife, is our parties," (III) and a new era has begun. Gayeff and his sister cannot 14 Chekhov the Dramatist, p. 285-6. 15 Nov. 2, 1903. Life and Letters, p. 292. even command respect from their other 16 Chekhov the Dramatist, p. 278.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE CHERRY ORCHARD AS COMEDY 27

"a foolish creature" 17 and it is in her see the future plainly. He perceives the lack of purpose, her frequent weeping, truth but does not act on it and he is and above all her inability to show anyin this a comic figure. His appearance affection to the man she loves, that she reinforces his ineffectualness and he is a comic character. Anya, too, is a says that a peasant woman called him feeble person but she resembles her "a mangy-looking gentleman." (I) But mother, as Gayeff notices. She is as it is in his affection for Anya that he is easily reassured as her mother is, and really made to look ludicrous. He be- Gayeff's promises that the estate will be lieves that they are "above love." (II) saved make her at once confident. Her It is Madame Ranevskaya who points joy in the cherry orchard is, like out her the absurdity of this pose saying mother's, a child's joy and she wishes that he is a "ridiculous crank, a freak." to run out into the orchard in the early(III) However, Madame Ranevskaya, morning. For Varya, her proposed who has abandoned herself to an un- marriage is "like a dream" (I) and worthy for lover and whose love for her Anya, too, reality hardly exists. Whendaughters is so sentimental, is not the at the end of the play her mother leavesnorm but another extreme. The norm again for Paris and her lover, Anya we must see to lie between these paths, promises her that she will work yet and not in the timidity of Varya and pass examinations: "Then I'll work, Lopahin. I Different attitudes to love, will help you. We'll read all sorts one of of Chekhov's main comic themes, books together. Mama isn't that so?are handled here far more simply than We'll read in the autumn evenings, in The Seagull. read lots of books and a new, wonderful Madame Ranevskaya, Gayeff, Lopa- world will open up before us." hin, Varya, Anya, Trofimoff, and Fiers In Anya's love affair with Trofimoff are the central characters in The one can see another theme with which Cherry Orchard and in their divergence Chekhov is preoccupied. Trofimoff from is the norms they illustrate most a young intellectual-a student who seriously has and effectively Chekhov's been sent down from his university main for comic themes. However, around political reasons-and he becomes themin are grouped less important char- some measure a spokesman for Chekhov acters who are perhaps more obviously and hence in this respect a normative comic in themselves though they have character. He sees physical work less as bearing on the main comic pur- the key to social progress: "One mustpose. David Magarshack points out work and must help with all one's that Semyonoff-Pischtchik's name is it- might those who see the truth. With self comic. "The first half of it is im- us in Russia so far only a few pressively aristocratic and the second work." (II)18 But, ironically he is farcical not (its English equivalent would one of these few. He is as ineffectual as be Squeaker)." 19 He is the lucky fool, Gayeff and his sister, but whereas they the third son of the fairy tales, the man will not act because they cannot seewho deserves nothing-he even asks reality, he does not act although he Gayeffcan for money-yet who wins every- thing. He misses jokes and laughs in 17 Nov. i, 19o3. Letters to Olga Knipper, the p. wrong place; he is so absent minded 336. 18 The orchard is for Trofimoff a symbol of that he even forgets that the house has tyranny. He says in Act II "All Russia is our orchard." 19 Chekhov the Dramatist, p. 284.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms EDUCATIONAL THEATRE JOURNAL been sold and promises to drop in on just as the family are about to leave Thursday when they are just depart- with their luggage. He even welcomes ing. Finally, with a reversal which misfortunes which help to justify the Chekhov so loved, he gives back to Gay- nickname which he thinks has been eff and his sister the money he owes given to him in affection. He is pedan- them, for, extraordinarily, white clay tic and priggish, congratulating him- has been found on his land. He is self on his culture and yet uncertain magnificently vague and inconsequen- whether to live or to shoot himself. His tial, talking about his daughter lack of Dash- control, which manifests itself enka who is of interest to no one in the in his clumsiness, is a reflection of his self-centered family. master's lack of self-discipline, and in his Charlotta, the governess, is another self-conscious (and stupid) pedantry we broadly comic character. She says very can see something of Gayeff's eloquent little but enlivens the untimely ball dramatization.by He is a microcosm of a conjuring and ventriloquist display. the family, the most ludicrous traits of She is completely alone in the world; which are brought together in him. she does not even know how old she is. He loves the foolish maid Dunyasha In her loneliness she gains for herself and sings sad songs celebrating his hap- a group of admirers by her conjuring. piness, yet he has no sense of his posi- She, unlike Madame Ranevskaya, Var- tion in the house as a clerk. Dunyasha, ya, and Anya who love although they in her indecision over whether to marry are not able to achieve happiness thein pompous Epihodoff or the good-for- their love, loves no one. She seems to nothing Yasha, both of whom consider thirst for affection and pathetically themselvesin superior to her, reveals her her ventriloquist act she converses with essential triviality. One of the most herself thus: " 'You are so nice, you're telling indictments of the family is my ideal.' The Voice: 'Madame, you their inability to handle their insolent too please me greatly.'" (III) Charlotta servants or to appreciate the devotion might easily have been a tragic figure of Fiers. In Act II Yasha insults Gayeff except that Chekhov has not explored with impunity, and Gayeff even turns her character deeply. In a letter to his to his sister saying "Either I or he-." wife he insists that the actress "must Dunyasha, in her abandoned love for be funny in Charlotta, that's the chiefthe pretentious Yasha, echoes Madame thing,"20 and later he adds that Ranevskaya's her passion for her lover and dog "must be long-haired, small thiswith preserves the balance of morality no life in it, with sour eyes."21 A betweenwell- servants and masters. cast Charlotta and a well-cast dog would The purpose of this article has been make an amusing pair. to show in what ways The Cherry Finally, there are the younger Orchardserv- is a comedy. It cannot be de- ants. Epihodoff-or twenty-two mis-nied that there are occasional over- fortunes as he is called-is a man in tones of pathos and tragedy but these squeaky boots who drops flowers contribute on the to the depth and complexity floor, falls over the chair, and puts a of the comedy and provide the "con- suitcase on top of a hat-box crushing tradictions" it which, Chekhov said, "you

20 Nov. 8, 1903. Letters to Olga Knipper, never noticed p. before." As Dorothy 341. Sayers says, the "tragedy of futility is 21 Nov. 27, 1903. Letters to Olga Knipper, p. 349. that . . . it is inevitably doomed to the

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms THE CHERRY ORCHARD AS COMEDY 29 comic gesture," and if one wishesself-deceived, to complacent, self-indul- see The Cherry Orchard as a tragedy gent, ill-adjusted of to the outside world, futility, one must grant that ill-adjusted it is re- to themselves, and often vealed in comedy. In his revelation merely offoolish. The pattern of this the ludicrous in human nature Chek- criticism is most easily discerned in the hov successfully achieves a very main rare characters, yet the minor charac- blend of sympathetic and judicial ters perform small steps to the same comedy; although the audience are tune, while retaining their sharp in- aware of the triviality and inadequa- dividuality. Chekhov wrote of a story cies of the comic characters yet they can- "I have let the subject filter through not completely dissociate themselves my memory, so that only what is im- from them, to assume a superior posi- portant or typical is left, as in a filter,"22 tion. The picture is complex: Chekhov this is his method, too, in his very com- criticizes his characters both in their re- plex plays. lation to the material world and in 22 Letter to F. D. Batyushkov, Dec. 15, 1897. their relation to each other; they Life and Letters,are p. 252.

What Price Irony? No, the ironist is generally a passive person who looks on as the world goes by. He is not indifferent to it, but whenever he has an impulse to act he reflects that reform is hopeless and rebellion perhaps worse ultimately than submission. Futility and vanity are his final terms for human effort. To those who under- stand his hidden ironic meaning, his view of life is more discouraging even than outspoken pessimism. It cannot be laughed aside like the gloom of an Ecclesiastes, because it laughs itself and forestalls the mockery of an unwilling hearer. And the final consequence of its disillusioning vision is the despair of an Ibsen or a Swift.-Alan R. Thompson, The Dry Mock (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1948), p. 255. Quoted by permission.

This content downloaded from 37.8.23.143 on Mon, 28 Nov 2016 01:42:22 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms