Analysis of The Cherry Orchard Using Two Critical Approaches: Theatre History and Sociology - Essay Example

Analysis of The Cherry Orchard using Two Critical Approaches: Theatre History and Sociology s (Instructor) (Date) There are different ways of analysing plays and making new interpretations to their performances however the main aspect is to understand the theme of a play and focus on the exploration of the time period, author and the plot of a play. In this perspective, the paper will evaluate the play The Cherry Orchard bsed on two usefulness of two critical approaches; theatre history and sociology analysing. To address this topic, the essay will begin with the analysis of The Cherry Orchard, through to the aspect of the history. It will then follow with the description of social themes in the play in order to contrast and compare these approaches and understand their relevance in terms of directing and making a performance. Literary scholars would find it unacceptable that a play exists only in performance. However, any director has a different approach on how to analyse and achieve productive research leading to delivery of a successful product.1 A play that is written during the early years of 20th century would require a specific attention towards the analysis of its scenes or episodes, the setting, and developing story. In handling the classics, the director is supposed to be fully informed of the conditions of the original productions and of the cultural background against which the play initially came to life.’2 Looking at the analysis of The Cherry Orchard it is essential to explore the history of Russia at that time and the bibliography of Anton Chekhov as the written texts can reflect to the situation in the country. Today, as never before, Chekhov productions provokes discussion. Chekhov’s plays are associated with polyphony together with counterpoint. The Cherry Orchard does not have clear structure of the plot. Therefore, it is more inclined to the poetic and histrionic sensibility that reveals the lives of the characters and shows the natural and objective form of the play as a whole. 3 In the play, the characters function both on subjective and objective levels. On the subjective level of the subtext, life appears tragic due to the fact the characters in The Cherry Orchard are sadly aware that they have wasted their lives. In the same way, on an objective level of the text; however, these similar characters repeatedly behave in a ridiculous trivial manner which is basically comic. The perception of the audience of the inter-relationship between these two levels of reality creates a Chekhovian synthetic tragi-comedy. This tragic-comedy by is synthetic for the reason that the tragic and comic dimensions of a character’s behaviour are perceived at the same time. Even though for Anton Chekhov it took a quite long time to write The Cherry Orchard, his attention to detail reaches another level and introduces the reader to each characters ‘little world’ using rhythms of speech and pauses. In every sentence, pause or rhythm of the speech should be taken in to consideration; conversely, drama requires detailed historical research not only looking at the play but also exploring the time period when the play is written. The Cherry Orchard could be compared with a very delicate peace of art that includes not only the written text or picture that is visible to everyone, but also constructed hidden answer. The question is how to find and reveal the hidden themes in this play? The play commences with the specific names of the characters, and it requires a detailed historical research into Russian names at that time. Chekhov begins using the names of the characters in the form of diminutives to show his informality and casual style of writing. Russian names have three parts: the given name, the patronymic name that is based on fathers first name, and the family name, which when translated to English language it could be understood differently or misunderstood by their meaning. In fact, in different translations Mrs Ranevsky’s given name is Lyubov meaning ‘love’. Maria Shevtsova observes that theatre history and sociology are based on the contours for the future other than the bold lines of successes of the past and present4. The play also starts with a detailed conversation between Dunyasha and Lopakhin where he describes and introduces the reader to Mrs Ranevsky’s past that shows the over all Chekhov’s approach to this play where past plays an important role. Through out the whole play all characters including Firs and Lyuba are talking about the past, specific events in it, and people who where part of it. This clarifies the idea of Chekhov measuring in time and talking about the situation in Russia at that time. One of the main problems at that time was serfdom that evolved from agricultural slavery of the Roman Empire and spread through all around the Europe. ‘By 1859 one-third of the estates and two-thirds of the serfs belonging to landowners were mortgaged to the state of the private banks.’ 5 Russia was the last country to abolish serfdom in 1861 by manifesto of Tsar Alexander II and approved emancipation that gave the serfs a possibility to gain free citizenship. The idea of freedom is manifested throughout the entire play and each character makes it even more powerful with their thoughts, concerns, and goals in the future. Chekhov includes ‘symbolic’ images of Russia and presents them through the characters showing their sensibilities at that time and wish to reach simple human freedom. Even though Chekhov called this play a comedy it is more likely a novel that shows the whole period from 1861 to 1905 – the time when Tsarism was about to collapse.6The Cherry Orchardreflects Chekhov’s future ideas how to develop his homeland – Russia, his earth with its beautiful landscape. Chekhov states the importance of individuals in one of his letters, ‘I have faith in individuals, I seek salvation in individual people, whether intellectuals or peasants. They are scattered all over Russia, they have power, although they are scarce.’7 Besides that, Chekhov uses imagery of the Russian Orthodox Church’s funerary rite to explicate the staging of Firs’s death making sense of the performance text with reference to the “embedded sociocultural signs8.” Another essential point in terms of the historical analysis would be the living standards in 19th century Russia including the information about prices, wages and demography where sociology and history are closely related to each other. It is important to understand the living standards across the Russian empire and how it affected the ‘rich and poor’ situation in the country. Mrs Ranevsky’s extravagant attitude towards her expenses also shows the social aspect of her character by keeping the social status as it was in the past and ignoring the present situation in her life. Her social status is underlines by her often using the plane as a mode of transport. Therefore, the social aspect is as important as the historical. In The Cherry Orchard, the situation is displayed is of a wealthy landowning family forced to sell their estate so as repay their money owed, was thus a familiar one in the Russian society during Chekhovs times. Ranevsky was also of the landowning class that oppressed the peasants. In this context, history provides the material for sociology as well as sociology gives the social background for the study of history. By exploring these points we can start to understand the themes of the play and continue further research describing the characters and their attitude towards The Cherry Orchard. Even though there were thousands of similar country houses throughout Russia the estate was profitable only fifty years ago, but no longer now. However, Lyuba and Gayaev considered it as a unique as it has been mentioned in literature. The discussion of the importance of the estate shows the necessity to explore the history of Russia and look into the idea of Chekhov’s wish to open the eyes of the Russian intelligence. Tromifov’s monologue expresses Chekhov’s views about the order in Russia and also the whole world, ‘The whole of Russia is out orchard.’9 The character of Trofimov makes the play a social allegory explicit. Peter Tromifov plays an important role in the play, because he is the only one who reveals his idea of revolution and wishes to start something new, ‘They call themselves an intelligentsia, but they speak to their servants as inferiors and treat the peasants like animals.’10 During the dialogue of Anya and Trofimov Chekhov tries to embrace the necessary of the emancipation and wanting to live in the present; however, pointing out that it is important to the remember past. Having established the use of history in terms of the analysis of The Cherry Orchard, it is now useful to consider the necessary of the approach of sociology. The play comprises of a group of complicated characters and each of them has a different status in the play. The social class has an important role in this play revealing the necessary to research each of them and understand their role in the house. The Cherry Orchard consists of: Mrs Ranevsky and her family, a landowner, two merchants, a student, a clerk, a governess, a maidservant, an old and young footman. To answer the question about the roles of these characters and if is it possible to read their characters through their social status as well as how we can know that the sociology is imbedded in it, there are sociocultural signs through out the whole play starting from the beginning of the play where Lopakhin and Dunyasha start with a dialogue. It introduces the reader with a sense of oppression where Dunyasha should know her place in the house and understand what she can or cannot do as a maid. Each sentence includes a sign of a social status. The situation in past where Lyuba lived on the fourth floor in Paris together with her husband who is a lawyer gives essential information about her character.I t involves the aspect of the history that could explain the relationship between Russia and France or the status of professions in the 19th century. Therefore, it clarifies that the combination of sociology and history can be useful when analysing this particular play. Sociology helps to understand Luyba’s character in detail, but other characters make it more clearly with specific stories from the past. A good example is a situation when Lyuba is approached by the teenage Lophakin, who has beaten by his father. The social differences did not stop Lyuba from helping Lophakin and he holds this information and thinks of her as a good women. It describes Chekov’s views towards the classes, ‘No division is good, for we are all a nation and the best things we do are for the nation.’11 The play may have been influenced by Chekov’s liking of philosophy, history, and Marxists ideas, as well as sociology. References Edelman, Joshua. “What Phenomenology Can Bring to Theatre Sociology and What it Cannot,” Nordic Theatre Studies, 24(2012):1-12. Shevtsova, Maria, “The Sociology of the Theatre, Part One: Problems and Perspectives” New Theatre Quarterly, 5.17(2009): 23. Read More