Characteristics of Lida house with mezzanine. The main characters of the story “The House with a Mezzanine”: characteristics of the characters

Having entered literature in the early 80s of the 19th century with humorous stories (“Letter to a learned neighbor”, “Death of an Official”, “Thick and Thin”, “Chameleon”, etc.), by the mid-1880s the writer changed the character of his creativity, enhances the psychological depth in the depiction of heroes, moves from funny characters to complex, contradictory ones.

A special Chekhov style of storytelling is emerging, which is also characteristic of the story “The House with a Mezzanine.”

The history of the creation of the story “House with a Mezzanine”.

In the fall of 1889, A. Chekhov's sister Maria introduces him to a young gymnasium teacher, her friend Lika Mizinova, a beautiful, charming, intelligent girl. Lika becomes a frequent guest in the Chekhovs' house.

In the summer of 1891, the whole family vacationed in Aleksin, where Lika was invited. On the way to Aleksin, the girl meets the owner of the Bogimovo estate in Kaluga province, E.D. Bylim-Kolosovsky. He, in turn, having learned that his beloved writer Chekhov lives at his dacha in Aleksin, invites him to his estate for the summer. Anton Pavlovich accepts the invitation. It is Bogimov’s summer of 1891 that is the basis of the story, at the beginning of which the Bylim-Kolosovsky estate is presented to the reader and in which some of the features of the owner of the estate are transferred to Belokurov.

Questions for analyzing the story “House with a Mezzanine.”

— How does the narrator characterize the landowner Belokurov? What can you say about the author's point of view?

“I lived on the estate of the landowner Belokurov, a young man who got up very early, walked around in a jacket, drank beer in the evenings and kept complaining to me that he did not find sympathy anywhere or in anyone...” He always said “boring, sluggish and long , with a clear desire to appear smart and progressive... he talked about how hard you have to work when you want to become an exemplary farmer. And I thought: what a heavy and lazy fellow he is... he worked just as he said - slowly, always being late, missing deadlines. I had little faith in his efficiency, because the letters that I instructed him to send to the post office, he carried around in his pocket for weeks on end...”

The narrator gives a direct description of Belokurov as a man and landowner who is unable to manage a household. Pyotr Petrovich is young, but does nothing, does not serve in the zemstvo, but only talks about his efficiency. He is lazy and weak-willed; Lyubov Ivanovna, who lived with him in the outbuilding, “... was ten years older than him and ruled him strictly, so that when he left home, he had to ask her permission...”

— What is Belokurov’s estate like? What epithet is repeated in his description? What state of the narrator colors the story? What idea is the author conveying?

The narrator does not give a detailed description of Belokurov’s estate: “... He lived in an outbuilding, and I lived in an old manor house.” The description of the interior reveals the emotional state of the artist. He feels uncomfortable in the empty “huge hall with columns” because “... even in calm weather something hummed in the old Amosov stoves, and during a thunderstorm the whole house shook and seemed to be cracking into pieces, and it was a little scary, especially at night , when all ten large windows were suddenly illuminated by lightning...”

In the description of the interior, in the artist’s expression of its internal state, the idea of the fading of the noble estate is conveyed (it is no coincidence that the epithet “old” is repeated twice). Exploring Chekhov's narrative style, Yu.V. Mann says that the type of Chekhov's narrative can be judged by the way the landscape and interior are presented; the author retells the state of his character, uniting with him in a common feeling...

— What is the Volchaninov estate? What role does the landscape play?

“I accidentally wandered into some unfamiliar estate. The sun was already hiding. and on
The evening shadows stretched across the blooming rye. Two rows of old, closely planted, very tall fir trees stood like two solid walls, forming a gloomy, beautiful alley. I easily climbed over the fence and walked along this alley... Then I turned onto a long linden alley. And here, too, desolation and old age... To the right in the old orchard, reluctantly, an oriole sang in a weak voice, must
be an old lady too. But now the lindens are over.

I walked past a white house with a terrace and a mezzanine, and in front of me suddenly unfolded a view of the manor’s courtyard and a wide pond with a bathhouse, with a crowd of green willows, with a village on the other side, with a tall narrow bell tower on which a cross burned, reflecting the setting sun. For a moment I felt the charm of something familiar, very familiar, as if I had already seen this same panorama once in childhood.”

A house with a mezzanine is a symbol of a noble estate. And although the Volchaninovs feel the breath of life, at the same time, “old spruces”, “desolation and old age”, an old oriole - all this suggests that the nobility is losing its position in public life. The evening landscape accompanying the hero's meeting with the girls, the comparison of reality with a dream, foreshadow a sad development of events.

— What do the artist and Belokurov say about the Volchaninovs, about relationships in the family? How is the idea of the typicality of life in a noble estate carried out?

Belokurov notes that this is a “wonderful, intelligent family.” The artist feels comfortable in the Volchaninovs’ house, in which “they said “you” to the servants, and ... everything breathed with decency ... “.

The family has developed a trusting relationship, so Zhenya tells the artist: “We have no secrets from each other, I must now tell everything to my mother and sister...”.

Ekaterina Pavlovna and Zhenya live in idleness. They are the closest, “adored each other... always prayed together, and both equally believed and understood each other well, even when they were silent...”, the artist says that Ekaterina Pavlovna “... was in awe of her eldest daughter. Lida never caressed, she spoke only about serious things; She lived her own special life, and for her mother and sister she was the same sacred, slightly mysterious person as for the sailors the admiral, who always sits in his cabin...” Because of her convictions, Lida works, does charity work, and is proud of the fact that she “lives at her own expense.”

The ambiguity of the attitude towards Lida is removed by comparing her with the admiral, as well as by the fact that her mother is worried about her: “School, first aid kits, books - all this is good, but why extremes? After all, she is already twenty-four years old, it’s time to think seriously about herself. You won’t see how life goes by with books and first aid kits... You need to get married...”

The artist’s story about how days pass in Shchelkovka testifies to the idle life of its inhabitants: they play croquet and tennis, drink tea, and have long dinners. The typicality of the life of this noble family is confirmed by the generalization: “For me, a carefree person looking for an excuse for his idleness, these festive mornings in our estates have always been unusually attractive.”

The ambiguity of this positive assessment is removed by the following reasoning: “... when everyone is so nicely dressed and cheerful and when you know that all these healthy, well-fed, beautiful people will do nothing all day, then you want your whole life to be like this...”.

Yu.V. Mann notes: “Neutralization of categoricality is a constant Chekhovian technique”

— How is the relationship between the artist and Lydia?

The artist understands that he is unsympathetic to Lydia: “She didn’t like me because I’m a landscape painter and don’t depict people’s needs in my paintings...”. He talks about Lida’s appearance like this: “thin, pale, very beautiful, with a whole shock of brown hair on her head, with a small stubborn mouth, had a stern expression and barely paid attention to me...”.

This psychological portrait reveals the girl’s character traits, which will be revealed later. And here is another description of the girl: “Lida had just returned from somewhere and, standing near the porch with a whip in her hands, slender, beautiful, illuminated by the sun, she was giving orders to the worker...”.

— How does the narrator characterize himself, how does he reveal his feelings for Zhenya?

The artist is dissatisfied with himself and believes that his life “has passed so quickly and uninterestingly.” He calls himself a “strange man” because “he has been tormented since his youth by envy ... lack of faith in his work,” constantly emphasizes his idleness and says with bitterness: “... I am always poor, I am a tramp.” But he is a talented artist. Ekaterina Pavlovna knows and praises his landscapes, which she saw at an exhibition in Moscow, and Zhenya also likes his work.

He tells Lydia that he leads an idle life because in an unfairly structured society the people are oppressed and under such conditions the life of an artist has no meaning, and the more talented he is, the stranger and more incomprehensible his role is, since in reality it turns out that he works... maintaining the existing order. And he adds: “I don’t want to work and I won’t...”

In ideological disputes with Lydia, the artist expresses utopian ideas characteristic of socialists: the liberation of man from labor, universal equality, the establishment of a healthy lifestyle, when there will be no need for pharmacies or hospitals, the liberation of man from the fear of death and even from death itself. He does not recognize the “theory of small affairs”, which completely absorbed Lydia, but he also does not say how his ideas can be realized, although it becomes clear that this requires a radical change in the social structure.

The heroes did not hear or understand each other. The author does not accept any of the positions in the ideological disputes of the heroes, leaving the right of choice to the reader. But at the same time, it becomes clear that living life with its eternal values is more significant than any one-sided theoretical ideas about it and disputes.

The topic of ideological disputes remains open. The artist analyzes his feelings for Zhenya in an internal monologue: “I loved Zhenya. I must have loved
her for meeting and seeing me off, for looking at me tenderly and with admiration. How touchingly beautiful were her pale face, her thin neck, her thin arms, her weakness, her idleness, her books. What about the mind? I suspected she had a remarkable mind, I was admired by the breadth of her views, perhaps because she thought differently than the strict, beautiful Lida, who did not love me.

Zhenya liked me as an artist, I won her heart with my talent, and I passionately wanted to write only for her, and I dreamed of her as my little queen, who, together with me, would own these trees, fields, fog, dawn, this nature, wonderful, charming, but among which I still felt hopelessly lonely and unnecessary.”

It is impossible not to notice that in this monologue “... in the very characteristics of experiences and especially their motives, the author allows variability...”.

The hero is not entirely sure of his feeling: “should be”, “maybe”. He thinks that he loves Zhenya because she loved him, but the strict, beautiful Lida did not love him. But at the same time, one feels an unexpected, timid and reverent feeling for Zhenya, which constitutes the poetic charm of the story. Love is born, hope for the artist’s creative renaissance grows, the landscape contributes to the growth of anxiety and evokes a feeling of inevitable drama.

0 / 5. 0

Sections: Literature

Lesson 1. Comprehensive analysis of the story by A.P. Chekhov. "House with mezzanine"

I. Student message: “The era of A.P. Chekhov.”

Materials for the message. The end of the 19th century is considered to be an era of “timelessness,” an era of reaction. In Russian history, we are so accustomed to “events” that the period of 1881 – 1905, in which the work of A. Chekhov falls and when “nothing happened,” seems to us an empty place or, at best, something dull, colorless (“twilight”, “gloomy”). This feeling of the era determines our perception of A. Chekhov’s work. “The enemy of vulgarity”, “singer of twilight”, “poet of the end”... Now, at the end of the 20th century, the understanding is becoming especially clear that these critical cliches do not bring us even a hundredth part closer to comprehending A. Chekhov. Meanwhile, Chekhov's era was one of those that are called “organic” (as opposed to “critical”) - when there is a real growth of culture, ideas and movement in depth. Vittorio Strada in one of his works called Chekhov “a poet of a transitional state,” the bearer of the most universal ideal of Russian literature - the ideal of civilization, which before him was experienced with the same clarity only by Pushkin.”

II. Teacher's word. On the threshold of the 20th century, the century of “homelessness,” Chekhov wrote the story “House with a Mezzanine” (1896). The story organically combines socio-political issues (the comprehension by Chekhov’s contemporaries of the legacy of the “bankrupt” populist fathers - the generation of the 60s - 70s of the 19th century) and the lyrical element of the “drama of love”. Told on behalf of the narrator, the artist (the subtitle “The Artist’s Story” is noteworthy), the story of “failed love” sounds especially poetic and determines the subjectivity of the narrative.

?Explain the plot of the work, determine the leading motives and features of the composition.

Answer. Two leading motives organize the plot: the motive of time and the motive of memory - central to Chekhov’s work. Stated in the very first line (“It was six or seven years ago”), they complete the story (“I remember...they are waiting for me and we will meet”). This allows us to define the composition of the story as circular.

The movement of time in the story forms a vicious circle: the narrator travels from the present to the past; the question (“Misya, where are you?”), which closes the narrative and is addressed to the future, remains unanswered and creates a piercing feeling of “ringing silence.” Thus, the author embodies the idea of the intractability of the stated conflict.

The lack of “unity of the event” (N. Berkovsky), the weakening of the plot action – a stable dominant of Chekhov’s poetics – are fully realized in the story “The House with a Mezzanine”:

Lida Volchaninova’s active social activities are taken outside the narrative;
The first date between the artist and Misya, with a failed declaration of love, simultaneously becomes the last.

Thus, the development of the action is transferred to the internal plot, to “thought - meaning”, defining the main question: why are Chekhov’s heroes all! – totally unhappy?

The motif of “unfortunate fate” sounds already at the beginning of the story: the hero, “doomed by fate to constant idleness,” did “absolutely nothing.”

Answer:“This doom is emphasized primarily by the fact that the hero does not have his own home. He lives on the estate of the landowner Belokurov, and this is initially a place alien to the artist. The huge hall with columns, in which there was no furniture except a sofa and a table, does not carry anything living in it: neither warmth, nor comfort, nor simply the desire to stay in it; here “always, even in calm weather, something was humming in the old Amosov stoves... and it was a little scary.” Time in the house lost its definiteness and rhythm: “for hours at a time I looked out my windows at the sky, at the birds, at the alleys, read everything that was brought to me from the post office, slept…” (Nadezhda Ivanova).

?What determines the further development of the plot?

Answer. By chance. (“One day...I wandered into some unfamiliar estate”). “The hero finds himself in another world, which is organized primarily by the world of nature: “Two rows of old, closely planted, very tall fir trees stood..., forming a dark, beautiful alley.” The artist's eye surprisingly subtly combines light and shadow in the description of the old garden. There is a feeling of desolation and old age in everything. The ability to hear the “sad” rustle of last year’s leaves underfoot, to see shadows hidden between the trees in the twilight, and by the way the oriole sings “reluctantly, in a weak voice”, to determine that she is “also an old woman,” reveals the inner world of the hero - an artist, a sensitive to the slightest changes in the surrounding world. However, here, too, time seemed to stop: “... I already saw this very panorama in childhood,” thought the artist.” (Nadezhda Ivanova).

III. Analyze the system of images in the story.

Answer:“The system of images in the story can be divided into two groups. Some are representatives of the traditional nobility. Storyteller-artist; landowner Belokurov, “a young man who got up very early, walked around in a jacket, drank beer in the evenings and complained that he did not find sympathy from anyone.” This is Zhenya and her mother - “they always prayed together and believed equally,” “they adored each other.” They are united primarily by absolute inactivity. Others are representatives of the so-called “new” noble intelligentsia. This is Lida and “a circle of people she likes” who deal with “first aid kits, libraries, books.” Two worldviews come into conflict: the idealist narrator affirms the power of genius, “life for higher purposes,” draws a social utopia, while Lida “puts the most imperfect of libraries and first-aid kits above all landscapes in the world.” (Olga Shtur).

?What artistic means does the author use to create the image of Lida?

The narrator gives a fairly detailed description of Lida, in which the following details are highlighted: external beauty, “small stubborn mouth”, “unchangeable” severity, “... with a whip in her hands”, businesslike, preoccupied appearance, “she spoke a lot and loudly”.

Lida’s assessment by her mother and Misya sounds ironic: for them she is “like an admiral for the sailors, who always sits in her cabin.” Repeating twice that “Lida is a wonderful person,” Ekaterina Pavlovna speaks about this “in a low voice in the tone of a conspirator, looking around in fear,” and ends, quite inappropriately, it seems: “You need to get married.”

IV. The clash of the heroes is inevitable (“I was unsympathetic to her”), and it occurs in Chapter III of the story. This is not even a clash, but a duel.

Work with text. Let's see what the meaning of the fight is and how it develops?

The result of the work. The “duel” begins with mutual irritation, which immediately predetermines the reluctance of Lida and the artist to hear each other (the effect of the “deafness” of Chekhov’s heroes will be most fully realized in his plays). The author gives each of the characters the opportunity to present the “thesis” of their programs. Lida begins with an accusation: “Anna died of childbirth last week,” continues with the thought that “the high and holy task of a cultured person is to serve his neighbors and... do something,” and ends with a verdict: “We will never sing ourselves together.” . The artist is no less categorical in his statements. His program begins with a metaphorical image of a people entangled in a “great chain” (how can one not recall N. Nekrasov: “The great chain has broken...”), continues with the favorite thought of the Russian intelligentsia that it is necessary to “think about the soul,” and ends completely absurd: “Nothing is needed, let the earth fall into tartar.”

It seemed that in this dispute Chekhov should be on Lida’s side (by the way, at this time he himself was taking an active part in zemstvo affairs). However, his sympathies are clearly not on the side of the heroine. Maybe because she always emphasizes narrowness and limitation: she is not able to feel the beauty and poetry of the world around her, which is why she is so ironic and dismissive of the artist and his work. Lida’s narrowness and limitations are also reflected in her disputes with the artist regarding zemstvo activities. Of course, people need “libraries and first aid kits,” but in addition to this, they also need universities and freedom.

The author and artist do not crown the winner with laurels. His ideal of a free and happy life for free and healthy people, the conviction that “the calling of every person in spiritual activity is a constant search for the truth and meaning of life,” is undoubtedly close to the author. However, the author cannot accept the hero’s maximalism - all or nothing.

The involuntary spectators of the “duel” are Misyus and Ekaterina Pavlovna, whose role is passive. Misyuska is silent, and then “is expelled with a disdainful “Missyuska, come out,” and Ekaterina Pavlovna just repeats: “It’s true, Lida, it’s true.”

Thus, none of the opponents strives for the truth in the dispute. This becomes the main thing for Chekhov. His characters never hear each other. General alienation turns out to be a stable dominant of both the poetics of the writer and the era itself.

?What literary associations might this dispute evoke?

Answer. A textbook example of misunderstanding of antagonistic heroes was the clash between “fathers” and “children” in I.S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons,” realized in the dispute between Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov and Evgeny Bazarov. But if in Turgenev the conflict between the antagonist heroes begins the narrative and determines the further development of the plot, and death itself enters into the dispute, then in Chekhov the social and ideological sound of the conflict is reduced, and the “duel” itself actually ends the narrative.

V. What then is the compositional role and significance of Chapter IV of the story?

Let's see how the plot of Chapter IV develops.

Results of the work. Against the background of the poetic landscape of the “sad August night”, which is accompanied by the “dark sad eyes” of Misyus, the truth about the worthlessness of the dispute between Lida and the artist is unexpectedly revealed. While “we, decent people, irritate each other and argue,” “humanity will degenerate, and not a trace will remain of genius.” The hero becomes “creepy” from the thought of the immediacy of human existence under “falling stars”, from the thought of loneliness in which he remains “irritated, dissatisfied with himself and people.” Therefore, just as a drowning man clutches at a straw in the hope of salvation, so the artist strives to keep Misya near him for at least another minute.

?Let's think about the question, what is unusual about the declaration of love of Chekhov's heroes?

Answer. First of all, there was no explanation. The declaration of love remains in the artist’s internal monologue. This monologue sounds extremely strange (let's ask the guys to select key words from the text); it is most similar to the proof of a theorem, where two thoughts become main:

“I looked, listened, believed and did not demand proof”;
“I thought differently than the strict, beautiful Lida, who did not love me.”

One gets the feeling that the hero is “let it slip.” And, it should be noted, this is not the first time.

Let's look through the story again and try to find confirmation of this idea.

The result of the work.

“For the sake of such a person,” the artist says about Lida, “you can not only become a Zemstvo, but trample, as in a fairy tale, iron shoes.”
During the argument in Chapter III, Lida also has difficulty maintaining a mask of indifference to the narrator: her face was “burning,” she hardly hides her excitement, covering herself with a newspaper.

Chekhov's stories are generally characterized by the opposition “it seemed - it turned out.” And here it works to its fullest. In a fairy tale, the fairy-tale hero is obliged to fight for his happiness, the real hero of Chekhov gives up without a fight, frightened by the determination and uncompromisingness of the heroine. The “green fire” in the mezzanine windows “went out,” symbolizing the unfulfilled hopes for the happiness of all the heroes without exception. The idea of this is also emphasized by the state of the surrounding world: everything seemed “of the same color,” “it was becoming very cold.”

Only in line with this understanding of the internal love conflict can Lida’s cruel decision be explained: “...she demands that I break up with you,” the artist will read in Misyus’ note. Only female jealousy is capable of this! And, perhaps, only Zhenya, with her rich inner world, can understand for whose sake her hero is ready to “tread down iron shoes,” so she is not able to “upset” her own sister by disobedience. What else remains: “My mother and I are crying bitterly!” Maybe Ekaterina Pavlovna’s remark about her eldest daughter at the beginning of the story - “it’s time to get married” - is not such an accident?

Generalization.“Now that the illusions have been destroyed, everything has returned to normal, “a sober and everyday mood took possession” of the artist, and he “became ashamed of everything... and life still became boring.”

The motif of the absurd becomes the leading one at the end of the story and determines the “thought - meaning” of the work. In essence, there was no love - a substitution of feelings occurs (as in the clearly comical relationship between Belokurov and his “girlfriend”). The name of the heroine Misyus is absurd, her unconditional submission and reverence for Lida is absurd; the hero's refusal to fight for happiness is absurd. And what to fight for? General ill-being, the tragic disconnection of everyone from everyone triumphs in the ending of the story. The motif of memory, the circular movement of time (“still”) emphasize the impossibility of resolving the conflict. This idea is also implemented in the title of the work “House with a Mezzanine”. The house is a symbol of a noble nest, a symbol of tradition, past, roots; mezzanine - the upper mezzanine of a house, something that may be added later. The antithesis “top - bottom”, reflected in the title of the story, becomes a symbol of the intractability of the conflict of the old, traditional and new, a symbol of the collision of worlds and eras that are different in nature.” (Olga Shtur).

As an independent work at the end of the lesson, we will ask students to fill out the table.

Themes, motives	Ideas	Image system	Features of poetics

Lesson 2.3. Features of the poetics of Chekhov - a short story writer. Chekhov's Theater and its features. “Everyone should have their own Isaac” (analysis of the plays “Uncle Vanya”, “Three Sisters”)

Progress of a double lesson

I. Chekhov's dramaturgy develops in the same direction as his short stories.

Student’s message “Features of the poetics of A.P. Chekhov - the writer.”

Abstracts of the message:

The world is absurd - one of the most important discoveries of A. Chekhov. Cause and effect, tragedy and farce will henceforth be difficult to distinguish from each other.
If Russian classical literature professes a philosophy of hope (“Truth does not exist without hope. The future must be and will be better than the present”), then Chekhov admits: “I have no convictions.” One of the main features of Chekhov’s worldview is the consistent rejection of any ideal (“God is dead” by F. Nietzsche). Chekhov “killed human hopes” (L. Shestov).
The leading genre of Chekhov as a writer is the story, which can be defined as a “story-discovery”, where the main opposition is “it seemed - it turned out”.
With all the plot diversity and apparent diversity, the situation in Chekhov’s stories can be reduced to the following:

life is illogical, therefore, all attempts to give it meaning lead nowhere, but only increase the feeling of absurdity;
hopes, happiness, “ideals” are illusory, helpless in the face of the necessity of death;
“the connection of times has broken down”: everyone exists separately, separately, no one is capable of sympathy, compassion, and they themselves have lost their meaning - if you cannot understand life, is it possible to understand a person?
customary ethics and morality are no longer capable of regulating relations between people, therefore, a person has no right to condemn anyone or demand compliance with norms - everyone is responsible for their actions.

The hero in Chekhov's prose finds himself in a situation of choice: either to maintain illusions in a world that is falling apart at the seams, or to abandon illusions and face life soberly.

II. All these essential features of the writer’s poetics are reflected in the drama.

Plays by A. Chekhov:

“Fatherlessness” (“Platonov”) 1877 – 78;
"Ivanov" 1887;
"Leshy" 1889;
"The Seagull" 1896;
"Uncle Vanya" 1897;
"Three Sisters" 1900;
"The Cherry Orchard" 1903

In the words of one of the characters in the play “Platonov” we find a model of Chekhov’s theater:

“Platonov is... the best exponent of modern uncertainty... By uncertainty I mean the current state of our society... Everything is mixed to the extreme, confused.”

The main thing here is that everything is “uncertain,” “mixed to the extreme, confused.” This is how Chekhov concludes his story “Lights”: “You can’t figure out anything in this world!”

Already in Chekhov's early plays the features of his theater were formed:

in-depth psychologism;
lack of division of heroes into positive and negative;
unhurried rhythm of action with enormous internal tension.

In his work on the play “The Leshy” (a kind of forerunner of “Uncle Vanya”), Chekhov formulated one of the main principles of his theater:

“Let everything on stage be as complicated and at the same time as simple as in life. People have lunch, they just have lunch, and at this time their happiness is ruined, and their lives are shattered...”

June 22, 1897 - “the day of the historical meeting” K. S. Stanislavsky and V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko at the Slavic Bazaar restaurant is considered to be the birthday of the MHG. However, the true birth of the new theater was the premiere of Chekhov’s “The Seagull,” which had previously failed on the Imperial Alexandrinsky stage in St. Petersburg, despite the ideal performer of the role of Zarechnaya V.F. Komissarzhevskaya. This is how K. Stanislavsky and V. Nemirovich-Danchenko assessed the significance of this triumph: “The Seagull brought us happiness and, like the Star of Bethlehem, showed new paths in our art.” Since then, the seagull has become the symbol and emblem of the MHG.

“The Seagull” is not a play about the “everyday life” of the literary and “theatrical” environment of the 80s and 90s. XIX century. This is a play about the crisis of art, artistic consciousness. This crisis gives rise to drama in the destinies of those involved in art, tearing apart the souls and dislocating the creative consciousness of the heroes. The crisis of consciousness is immersed in a feeling of crisis in life.

“These love failures, one with the other, side by side, speak of a certain general failure of human existence, an epochal failure, a sad state of the world, a crisis in which the modern world finds itself” (N. Berkovsky).

This dramatic structure could be called “polyphonic drama”, so the inner voices of the heroes are both inseparable and unmerged. Their souls and the destinies of their souls unfold an “unsolvable” and “incomplete” dialogue of their inner life.

The play has many plot lines, micro-conflicts, of which none prevails;
characters are vague;
everything is subject to the rhythm of internal time, the play of pauses, the magic of memories, the atmosphere of twilight, music.

Spectacular act finales:

“...the whole action proceeds peacefully, quietly, and at the end I punch the viewer in the face” (Chekhov).

Melodramatic endings.

The name “Seagull” is a symbol.

Symbol- (Greek Symbolon) - a conventional sign, a sign - a word denoting an object endowed with an additional, extremely important meaning in the narrative:

ambiguous;
incomprehensible.

?What, in your opinion, does the seagull become a symbol of?

III. Plays "Uncle Vanya", "Three Sisters" and "The Cherry Orchard" can be considered as a trilogy from the point of view of the commonality of the conflict, plot, system of images, problems and motives.

"Uncle Ivan". Scenes from village life in four acts.

?Give a definition of plot, plot.

?Explain the plot of the play. What is your conclusion?

Answer: The stage action in the play is weakened, the plot takes a secondary place. The murder of the professor never took place; with all the abundance of love collisions, not a single one receives its stage development.

Teacher's summary: Chekhov formulated the tasks of modern drama in 1889:

“Brevity is the sister of talent... love explanations, betrayals of wives and husbands, widows, orphans and all sorts of other tears have long been described. The plot must be new, but the plot may be absent.”

In Uncle Vanya, the plot, if not completely absent, then occupies a completely secondary place in the stage action.

?What then determines the development of action?

Work with text. Let's read the first act of the play by role.

Target setting: Let's make observations:

the moods of the characters;
the nature of the conflict;
themes, motives.

Observation diary:

1. Characters' mood:

Astrov: dissatisfied with his life:

“I don’t want anything, I don’t need anything, I don’t love anyone...”

Voinitsky: irritated, also dissatisfied with his life:

“life has gotten out of track”, “it’s gotten worse because I’ve become lazy, I’m not doing anything and I’m just grumbling like an old horseradish.”

Conclusion: Both characters are unhappy with their real lives. It is noteworthy that already in their first remarks the word “stuffy” is heard, which creates a feeling of general ill-being and closed space.

2. What motives are heard in Act I of the play?

Motif of time. The characters constantly talk about time:

Astrov:“At ten years old I became a different person.”

“... how long has it been since we knew each other?”

“Have I changed much since then?”

Voinitsky:“Since... before there hasn’t been a free minute...”

“But we have been talking and talking and reading brochures for fifty years now...”

“Now I am forty-seven years old. ...wasted my time so stupidly..."

Maria Vasilievna:“Refutes what I defended for seven years... in the last year you have changed so much...”

The motive of the heroes' loneliness. It is realized, first of all, in the inability of the heroes to listen to each other.

Memory motive.

Marina:“God grant memory...”

“People won’t remember, but God will.”

Astrov:“...those who will live after us in a hundred or two hundred years... will they remember us with a kind word?”

Maria Vasilievna:“I forgot to say...I lost my memory.”

The motive of unfavorable fate.

Voinitsky:“I was a bright person, from whom no one could feel light...”

Conclusion: The plot in the play begins not with the event as such, but with the general psychological state of the characters - dissatisfaction with life, fate, and themselves.

3. In addition, the heroes are united by the house in which they live. What is he like?

Answer: Its description can be found in the characters’ remarks and in the author’s remarks. “Crypt”, “trouble in this house”, “some kind of labyrinth, twenty-six huge rooms.” Uncle Vanya's room is both a bedroom and an estate office; a cage with a starling, a map of Africa on the wall...

?Uncle Vanya spent his whole life in this house. Tell us about her.

4. What do you think is unique about the conflict?

Answer: It is, first of all, in the disunity of the heroes, in their mutual irritation; the conflict is internal. The heroes are unhappy with their fate.

Voinitsky:“It’s good to hang yourself in this weather...”

The plot of the action is taken off stage. From the conversation of the heroes, we learn that life “got out of whack” when “the professor decided to settle here.”
The love lines of the play are defined: Voinitsky is in love with Elena Andreevna, Sonya is in love with Astrov, Elena Andreevna is passionate about Astrov, and he, in turn, is in love with Elena Andreevna. The “five pounds of love” that Chekhov spoke about in relation to “The Seagull” are present here too.

?What else aggravates Voinitsky’s conflict with others and himself?

Answer: Unrequited love for Elena Andreevna.

The realization that Professor Serebryakov, the person for whom efforts were expended, turned out to be a “soap bubble.” (D. I, II)

?Which scene becomes the culmination of the characters' manifestation of their dissatisfaction with each other?

Answer: In Act III, Serebryakov offers to sell the house.

Work with text. Reading the scene by role.

Target setting: How do the heroes behave?

How can one explain such a violent protest from Voinitsky?

Answer: The house was the center of Voinitsky’s life, his illusions of true life. For his sake, he “worked like an ox for ten years...”. “The estate is clear of debts...” Uncle Vanya's protest is so strong that he shoots Serebryakov twice, but unsuccessfully.

?How can you evaluate the ending of the play? (D. IV)

Answer: It seems to be “prosperous”: Serebryakov leaves with Elena Andreevna, Voinitsky promises to continue sending translations, and gets back to work. However, it is clear to the reader that the work of happiness will not bring or restore the broken world. But:

“When there is no real life, they live in mirages. Still, it’s better than nothing,” says Voinitsky.

?It is worth thinking about the question: did the heroes achieve what they wanted?

Teacher's summary: No. All the heroes suffer the collapse of their hopes for happiness: Doctor Astrov in love with Elena Andreevna, Sonya in love with Astrov, Elena Andreevna is deeply unhappy. The symbol of the loser in the play is Telegin, an impoverished landowner, a survivor whose name no one remembers. The story of his life is deeply remarkable: his wife ran away from him long ago, but he remains “faithful” to her, helps as much as he can - “he gave all his property to raise the children whom she brought with her loved one.” In Telegin, as in a mirror, the traits common to all heroes are reflected and brought to their logical conclusion. Chekhov emphasizes the absurdity of the hero with stage means.

Work with text. What follows from it?

no one listens to him;
he speaks out of place and stupidly;
nickname “Waffle”;
everyone treats him condescendingly and dismissively: “Shut up the fountain, Waffle.”

?Did the heroes have a chance to become happy and realize their dreams? What needed to be done for this?

Teacher's summary: It was necessary to show a little madness. At the end of Act III, Voinitsky takes the first step towards this: “I’m going crazy!”

Elena Andreevna about him: “He’s gone crazy!”

Astrov needed to forget about the forest and the sick (which he almost does), Elena Andreevna needed to leave Serebryakov. Instead, a pathetic goodbye kiss.

Uncle Vanya has two options:

kill Serebryakov;
sell the estate.

Any of them is liberation from illusions, a chance for happiness, but not a guarantee of it.

?What prevents Chekhov's heroes from making the right choice?

Teacher's summary: Norm, traditional idea of morality. The path of the heroes turned out to be “barred by ethics” (Lev Shestov). “Suspending the ethical,” the ability to sacrifice what is most precious, is an indispensable condition on the path to freedom (namely, all Chekhov’s heroes strive for it). But the question is, why sacrifice? The heroes are ready for sacrifices; Voinitsky’s whole life is an example of self-sacrifice. The paradox is that this is a sacrifice in the name of duty, that is, ethics. But in Chekhov, as we remember, ethics and duty are not an absolute.

In the Old Testament, the biblical myth of Abraham, who was ready to sacrifice his son Isaac at the request of God, becomes an example of endless faith.

“Everyone must decide for himself what to consider his Isaac.” (Kierkegaard)

Uncle Vanya's house is his Isaac. Thus, the question of ethics is central to Uncle Vanya.

Chekhov does not answer why the heroes do not take the next step.

Let's try to find the answer to this question in the next play of Chekhov's trilogy, “Three Sisters.”

IV. "Three sisters". Drama in 4 acts. 1900

1. Explain the plot of the play. What does the plot of the play “Uncle Vanya” have in common?

Answer:

weakened plot action;
the development of action is determined by changes in the psychological state of the characters;
commonality of problems, motives;
commonality of the image system.

2. Work with text. Reading by roles. Act I.

Target setting: Determine the main motives and problems.

Answer: As in Uncle Van, the problem of happiness and the motive of time are central.

3. How are they implemented in the image system? What changes occur to the characters during the course of the play?

Work with text. Drawing up a table.

(It is advisable to divide the class into 4 groups).

Heroes	Act I	Act II	Act III	IV action
Andrey	“My brother will probably be a professor, he still won’t live here, he plays the violin,” “...cuts out various things,” he translates.	“I am the secretary of the zemstvo government,” “... changes, life deceives,” “my wife doesn’t understand me,” “I’m afraid of my sisters.”	“Our Andrey crushed,” “member of the zemstvo council”; “I mortgaged the house” “don’t believe me.”	“The present is disgusting, but when I think about the future, it’s so good...”.
Olga	“I’m already old... I’m already 28 years old,” “... so far I have only one dream... I’d rather go to Moscow.”	“I’m exhausted... the boss is sick, now I’m in her place.”	“That night I aged ten years,” “the slightest rudeness, an indelicately spoken word worries me...”	“A new life will begin for us,” “I didn’t want to be a boss, and yet I became one. That means there won’t be any in Moscow...” “Our life is not over yet. Will live!"
Masha	“I’m in merlehlundia, I’m not happy,” “life is damned, unbearable.”	“a person must be a believer or must seek faith, otherwise his life is empty,” “if I were in Moscow.”	“I’m tired of…”, Andrey “mortgaged… the house in the bank”, “I want to repent… I love Vershinin.”	“I won’t go into the house, I can’t go there...”, “I’m going crazy,” “I have to live.”
Irina	“God willing, everything will work out,” “why is my soul so light”; “Everything in this world is clear to me, and I know how to live” - “a person must work, work hard”, “I’m twenty years old.”	Serves at the telegraph office. “I’m tired,” “what I wanted so much, what I dreamed about, this and that... and no. Work without poetry, without thoughts” “To Moscow”.	“We’ll leave” “throw me out, I can’t do it anymore” “I won’t work...” “I’m already twenty-four years old, I’ve been working for a long time... and nothing, no satisfaction,” “it turned out that it’s all nonsense.” “Let's go to Moscow.”	“It’s hard for me to live here alone... I hate the room I live in” “If I’m not destined to be in Moscow, then so be it”, “I have to work.”

Summarize: As in “Uncle Vanya,” the heroes are in a situation of choice. They experience the collapse of illusions and hopes. But they don’t give up on them. Thus, the conflict outlined in the previous play deepens and develops.

?Which of the characters in the play “Uncle Vanya” can Andrei Prozorov be compared to?

Answer: Andrey is a psychological development of the image of Professor Serebryakov, that is, a man who once showed brilliant hopes, but turned out to be a “soap bubble”.

?How do sisters behave in a situation of choice? What prevents them from being happy?

Teacher's summary:

a) Olga.“Removing the ethical is not for her”:

she does not confront Natasha when she insults Anfisa;
Masha tells Olga about her love for Vershinin. Olga defiantly leaves.

For Olga, ethics exists thanks to “I don’t hear” and for the sake of “I don’t hear.”

b) Irina and Tuzenbach. Using their example, Chekhov mercilessly exposes the illusion of “work”, activity in the name of something. Irina realizes that she is moving further and further from real life; she is ready to scream: “I’m desperate..!” But in the last scene she repeats, as if wound up: “I will work...” But this will not make her happy.

c) Masha. She is more open to the absurd than anyone and is ready to accept it:

“This life, damned, unbearable...”
there is no illusion about work;
she cheats on her husband.

Therefore, by accepting the absurd, you can live and even be happy. However, such happiness is short-lived.

?How does Chekhov emphasize this idea in the play?

Answer: Musical motive. Masha and Vershinin don’t need words.

In addition to Andrei and the three sisters, the following group of heroes stands out - Solyony, Chebutykin and Natasha. Let's look at their functions in the play.

?What is Solyony’s role in the play?

Answer: His main function is to shatter the illusions of idealistic heroes.

Outwardly not attractive, cruel, he is internally close to the author. This is also emphasized by the way the image of Solyony is created: his speech is full of literary reminiscences, which become the semantic leitmotif of the play.

Work with text. Let's see where and when they are implemented.

Result of the work:

“I’m strange, but no one is strange!”- a reference to Griboyedov. There, too, the hero is an idealist who suffers the collapse of illusions.
“Forget, forget your dreams!”– says Tuzenbach, Irina. A reference to Pushkin’s “Gypsies”. Before us is the truth that is so necessary for the heroes.
“He didn’t even have time to gasp when the bear attacked him!” This is a quote from I. Krylov’s fable “The Peasant and the Worker”; Its theme: human ingratitude.

The meaning of borrowing is also that something terrible can be revealed at any moment - “You won’t have time to gasp.”

Solyony looks like Lermontov, the writer who created the first dehumanized hero of Russian literature.

Solyony also plays a more prominent role: he kills Tuzenbach in a duel.

The bullets fired in "Uncle Vanya" reach their target. Tuzenbach dies stupidly, senselessly, at the moment when he is overwhelmed with hope.

?What is the meaning of this death?

Answer: Everything that was said to them the day before seems absurd. He asks for coffee to be prepared for him, and only has minutes to live.

?Chebutykin is functionally close to the image of Solyony.

Work with text. Prove it.

Teacher's summary: His dehumanization is happening before our eyes:

I action. He gives a samovar at Irina’s birthday and cries. The samovar here is a symbol of home, happiness, failed love.
Act III. During the fire he is drunk. Here there is a plot similarity with the image of Doctor Astrov. Dr. Astrov remembers a switchman who died “under [him] under chloroform.” Chebutykin: “Last Wednesday I treated a woman on Zasyp - she died, and it’s my fault that she died.”
Breaking a watch is a gift from the woman he loves.
His phrase “tara... rabumbia... I’m sitting on the cabinet” is full of absurdity and becomes an expression of the absurd.
IV action. He shows Andrey the way out: “Put on your hat, pick up a stick... and leave... without looking back...”.

?Natasha is also in this group of characters.

What is her role?

Work with text. Tell us about her.

Teacher's summary. Outwardly, she is a “philistine”; over her, like over Solyony, the ethical has no power. Her role is also great:

resettles Irina;
Olga and Anfisa leave the house.

Thus, he deprives the sisters of illusions.

under her influence, Andrei gets into debt and mortgages the house.

5. Thus, the hopes and disappointments of the heroes are connected with the house.

Work with text. Follow how Chekhov creates the image of a house. Compare with the image of the house in the play “Uncle Vanya”.

Teacher's summary: The description of the house is less specific. More attention is paid to the psychological state of the characters in it. If in “Uncle Vanya” the estate is free of debts, then here the house is mortgaged. The opposition “life in the house - Moscow” also arises, in which being in the house is conceived as inauthentic, while Moscow becomes a symbol of a different, real life. The heroes already want to sell the house, vaguely feeling that it is this house that is an obstacle to happiness.

Thus, the problems and motives stated in the play “Uncle Vanya” find their further development in “Three Sisters”. However, the ending of the play is open. To Olga’s question: “Why do we live, why do we suffer…” there is no answer.

Homework:

Message “The history of the creation of the play “The Cherry Orchard”, assessment by contemporaries.”
First group of students: evaluate the plot of the comedy from the point of view of completing the development of the general plot in the trilogy.
Second group of students: comment on the leading motifs of “The Cherry Orchard” in the context of the trilogy.
Third group of students: analyze the system of images of the play in comparison with the plays “Uncle Vanya”, “Three Sisters”.

When conducting a lesson, you can use tests on the content of plays, the composition of which can be offered to students as homework.

Test on the content of the play by A.P. Chekhov's "Uncle Vanya"

How many years have Astrov and nanny Marina known each other?
“It’s hot, stuffy, and our great scientist is wearing a coat, galoshes, an umbrella and gloves.” Who are we talking about?
Voinitsky's age.
What Russian writer of the 19th century does Astrov compare himself to?
Who had a dream that he had “an alien leg”?
Which Russian classic, according to Serebryakov, developed angina pectoris from gout?
Who calls Marya Vasilyevna an idiot?
Who compares themselves with one of Ostrovsky's heroes?
Who was the first to call Voinitsky Uncle Vanya?
Who gets dumb from declarations of love addressed to themselves?
In whose veins, according to Voinitsky, does mermaid blood flow?
What linguistically incorrect word does Uncle Vanya often use to mean admitting guilt?
The author of the phrase: “hang your ears on the nail of attention.”
The owner of the estate described in the work.
How much did it cost and how much was it purchased for?
Number of rooms in this estate.

(Dmitry Usmanov).

Test on the content of the play by A.P. Chekhov's "Three Sisters"

The day of the death of the sisters' father and Irina's name day.
How many years has Olga served in the gymnasium?
Sisters' dream.
How old is Olga? Irina? Masha?
For what ailment is the following medicine used: “two spools of mothballs in half a bottle of alcohol... dissolved and consumed daily”?
Who addresses whom: “My white bird”?
Chebutykin's gift to Irina.
The street where the sisters lived in Moscow.
Which character was called the “major in love”?
How old is Vershinin?
Vershinin's favorite tree.
The most aphoristic hero of the play, the “joker.”
How many people are at the table at Irina’s name day? What does this number mean?
Tuzenbach's real name.
How did “renixa” come from the word “nonsense”?
Who owns the line: “Balzac got married in Berdichev”?

(Natalia Lukina).

Lesson 4.5. “If only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” Analysis of the play "The Cherry Orchard". Generalization

Progress of a double lesson

I. The comedy “The Cherry Orchard,” which completes the trilogy, can be considered as the writer’s testament, his last word.

1. Student message. The history of the creation of the play, its perception by contemporaries (K. Stanislavsky, V. Nemirovich-Danchenko, M. Gorky, V. Meyerhold).

2. Reading Act I.

Homework work.

Homework results.

In assessing the plot, it is important to pay attention to the lack of plot characteristic of plays; The mood of the characters, their loneliness, and isolation determine the development of the plot. They propose a lot of projects to save the cherry orchard, but are decisively unable to act.
The motifs of time, memories, unfavorable fate, the problem of happiness are also leading in “The Cherry Orchard”, as in previous plays, but now they play a decisive role, completely subjugating the characters. The motives of “purchase - sale”, “departure - stay” in the house open and complete the action of the play. Let us draw the students' attention to the fact that the motive of death here sounds more insistent.
The placement of heroes becomes more complicated. In Act I we have new, but easily recognizable heroes. They have aged a lot, gained the ability to look at the world soberly, but they do not want to part with illusions.

Ranevskaya knows that the house needs to be sold, but she hopes for Lopakhin’s help and asks Petya: “Save me, Petya!” Gaev perfectly understands the hopelessness of the situation, but diligently fences himself off from the world of reality, from thoughts about death with the absurd phrase “Who?” He is absolutely helpless. Epikhodov becomes a parody of these heroes, who cannot decide whether to live or shoot himself. He adapted to the world of the absurd (this explains his nickname: “22 misfortunes”). He also turns the tragedy of Voinitsky (“Uncle Vanya”) into a farce and brings to its logical conclusion the storyline associated with the idea of suicide. The “younger generation” in the play looks no less helpless: Anya is naive, full of illusions (a sure sign of the hero’s failure in Chekhov’s world). The image of Petya clearly illustrates the idea of degradation of the idealistic hero (in previous plays these were Astrov and Vershinin). He is an “eternal student”, “a shabby gentleman”, he is not busy with anything, he speaks - and even then inappropriately. Petya does not accept the real world at all, truth does not exist for him, which is why his monologues are so unconvincing. He is “above love.” The author’s obvious irony is heard here, emphasized on stage (in Act III, in the ball scene, he falls from the stairs and everyone laughs at him). “Cleany” Lyubov Andreevna calls him. At first glance, Ermolai Lopakhin looks the most sensible. A man of action, he gets up at five in the morning and cannot live without doing anything. His grandfather was Ranevskaya’s serf, and Ermolai is now rich. It is he who breaks the illusions of Ranevskaya and Gaev. But he also buys a house that is the center of illusions; he cannot arrange his own happiness; Lopakhin lives in the power of memories, the past.

3. Thus, the main character in the play becomes the house - the “cherry orchard”.

Let's think about the question: why, in relation to the comedy “The Cherry Orchard,” is it more appropriate to talk about the chronotope of the house, while in relation to the first two plays of the trilogy it is more correct to talk about the image of the house?

Let's remember what a chronotope is?

Chronotope– spatio-temporal organization of the image.

Working with stage directions for the play. Let us trace how the image of time and space is created in the play.

Action	“cherry orchard” – house.
I.	“The room, which is still called the nursery...Dawn, the sun will rise soon. It’s already May, the cherry trees are blooming, but it’s cold in the garden, it’s morning. The windows in the room are closed.”
II.	"Field. An old, crooked, long-abandoned chapel..., large stones that once were, apparently, gravestones... To the side, towering, the poplars darken: there the cherry orchard begins. In the distance there is a row of telegraph poles, and far, far away on the horizon a large city is vaguely visible, which is visible only in very good, clear weather. The sun will set soon.”
III.	“The living room...a Jewish orchestra is playing in the hallway...Evening. Everyone is dancing". At the end of the action: “There is no one in the hall and living room except Lyubov Andreevna, who sits and...cries bitterly. The music is playing quietly.”
IV.	“The scenery of the first act. There are no curtains on the windows, no paintings, there is only a little furniture left, which is folded in one corner, as if for sale. One feels the emptiness...The door to the left is open...” At the end of the action: “The stage is empty. You can hear all the doors being locked and then the carriages driving away.”

Results of observations.

In the first act, events do not go beyond the room, which “is still called the nursery.” The feeling of enclosed space is achieved by mentioning closed windows. The author emphasizes the lack of freedom of the heroes, their dependence on the past. This is reflected in Gaev’s “odes” to the hundred-year-old “cabinet”, and in Lyubov Andreevna’s delight at the sight of the nursery. The topics of the characters' conversations are related to the past. They talk about the main thing - selling the garden - in passing.
In the second act there is a field on stage (limitless space). The images of a long-abandoned chapel and stones that were once gravestones become symbolic. With them, the play includes the motive not only of death, but also of the heroes overcoming the past and memories. The image of another, real space is included by the designation on the skyline of a large city. This world is alien to the heroes, they are afraid of it (scene with a passerby), but the destructive impact of the city on the cherry orchard is inevitable - you cannot escape from reality. Chekhov emphasizes this idea with the sound instrumentation of the scene: in the silence “suddenly a distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad.”
Act III is the culmination of both the development of the external conflict (the garden is sold) and the internal one. We again find ourselves in the house, in the living room, where an absolutely absurd event is taking place: a ball. “And the musicians came at the wrong time, and we started the ball at the wrong time” (Ranevskaya). The tragedy of the situation is overcome by the technique of carnivalization of reality, tragedy is combined with farce: Charlotte shows her endless tricks, Petya falls down the stairs, they play billiards, everyone dances. The misunderstanding and disunity of the heroes reach their apogee.

Work with text. Let's read Lopakhin's monologue, which concludes Act III, and follow the author's remarks for changes in the hero's psychological state.

“The new landowner, the owner of the cherry orchard” does not feel happy. “If only our awkward, unhappy life would change,” Lopakhin says “with tears.” Lyubov Andreevna cries bitterly, “there is no one in the hall and living room.”

The image of an empty house dominates Act IV. Order and peace have been disrupted. We are again, as in Act I, in the nursery (ring composition). But now everything feels empty. The former owners are leaving the house. The doors are locked, forgetting about Firs. The play ends with the sound of a “distant sound, as if from the sky, the sound of a broken string, fading, sad.” And in the silence “you can hear how far in the garden an ax is knocking on a tree.”

?What is the meaning of the last scene of the play?

The house has been sold. The heroes are no longer connected by anything, their illusions are lost.
Firs - the personification of ethics and duty - is locked in the house. The “ethical” is over.
The 19th century is over. The 20th, “iron” century is coming. “Homelessness is becoming the fate of the world.” (Martin Heidegger).

?What then do Chekhov's heroes gain?

If not happiness, then freedom... This means that freedom in Chekhov’s world is the most important category, the meaning of human existence.

II. Generalization.

?What makes it possible to combine A. Chekhov’s plays “Uncle Vanya”, “Three Sisters”, “The Cherry Orchard” into a trilogy?

We invite the children to summarize the lesson material on their own.

The result of the work.

Let us define the criteria for this community.

1. In every play the hero is in conflict with the world around him; everyone also experiences inner discord. Thus, the conflict acquires a total character - almost all people bear it. Heroes are characterized by an expectation of change.

2. Problems of happiness and time become leading in the trilogy.

All heroes have:
happiness is in the past
unhappiness in the present
hopes for happiness in the future.

3. The image of the house (“noble nest”) is central in all three plays.

The house embodies the characters’ idea of happiness - it preserves the memory of the past and testifies to the troubles of the present; its preservation or loss inspires hope for the future.

Thus, the motives of “buying and selling” a house, “leaving and staying” in it become meaningful and plot-organizing in the plays.

4. In the plays, the idealistic hero degrades.

In “Uncle Vanya” it is Doctor Astrov;
in “Three Sisters” - Colonel Vershinin;
in The Cherry Orchard - student Trofimov.

Work in rows. Call them “positive programs.” What do they have in common?

Answer: The idea of work and happiness in the future.

5. The heroes are in a situation of choosing their future fate.

Almost everyone feels the situation of the collapse of the world to a greater or lesser extent. In "Uncle Vanya" it is, first of all, Uncle Vanya; in “Three Sisters” - sisters Olga, Masha and Irina Prozorov; in The Cherry Orchard - Ranevskaya.

There are also parodies of them in the plays: Telegin, Chebutykin, Epikhodov and Charlotte.

You can trace other parallels between the heroes of the plays:

Marina - Anfisa;
Ferapont - Firs;
Telegin - Epikhodov;
Salty - Yasha;
Serebryakov - Prozorov.

There is also an external similarity:

religiosity, deafness, failed professorship, and so on.

This commonality of conflict, plot, and system of images allows us to introduce the concept of a metaplot.

Metaplot- a plot that unites all the plot lines of individual works, building them as an artistic whole.

It is the situation of choice in which the heroes find themselves that determines the metaplot of the trilogy. Heroes must:

or open up, trust the world of the absurd, abandoning the usual norms and values;
or continue to multiply illusions, eking out an untrue existence, hoping for the future.

The ending of the trilogy is open; we will not find answers to the questions posed in Chekhov’s plays, because this is not the task of art, according to the playwright. Now, at the end of the 20th century, we are asking ourselves questions about the meaning of existence that so worried A.P. Chekhov, and the wonderful thing is that everyone has the opportunity to give their answer, make their choice...

Literature for teachers:

Brazhnikov I. Undiscovered Chekhov, or fragments of a broken world. Article 2. Chekhov’s philosophy // Literary almanac “Uncle Vanya”, No. 1(5), 1993.
Paramonov B. The Herald of Chekhov. pp. 254 - 266.
Tamarchenko A. Theater and dramaturgy of the beginning of the century. In the book: History of Russian literature: XX century: Silver Age / Ed. Georges Niva, Ilya Serman, Vittorio Strada and Efim Etkind. - M.: Publishing house. group "Progress" - "Litera", 1995. pp. 336 - 339.

Article menu:

The end of the 19th century - Anton Pavlovich Chekhov publishes one of his most famous works - the story “The House with a Mezzanine”. Not only essays written in a free genre - about general impressions - are devoted to it, but also a significant number of articles of a philological and literary-critical nature.
Our analysis of “The House with a Mezzanine” will also be carried out within the framework of literary criticism.

The main characters of the story

The logic of the development of the author’s thought is such that in the story a division of characters into two categories arises: the main characters and, accordingly, the secondary ones. Among the main characters of the work are Lida, Zhenya, and also the artist. In turn, Belokurova and Ekaterina Pavlovna can be considered minor characters.

Dear readers! We invite you to familiarize yourself with A.P. Chekhov, which tells about the pain of a man who lost his son.

Lida and Zhenya are sisters. They come from a rich family. Lida, the eldest, is a truly lively, but at the same time, a girl distinguished by severity and determination. Despite the fact that Lida has enough material resources to live satisfying her whims, she acts according to the dictates of her rational mind and heart as the source of morality. Lida is smart and educated, she is obsessed with thinking about the state of society and pressing problems.

Concerned about the people, the girl begins active social activities, trying to reform on her own the established position of the zemstvo government, as well as improve the lives of the peasants. Such activity and such a range of interests distances Lida from the idle life characteristic of representatives of her circle. She is alien to flattery and lies; meanwhile, she prefers life in accordance with her principles and truth.

Lida's appearance corresponds to her inner world: she is characterized by cold external severity and aristocracy.

Dear readers! We bring to your attention which was written by A.P. Chekhov

The youngest Zhenya (Misyus) is a dreamy, modest and sentimental person. Zhenya is passionate about romantic ideas; she, like her sister, is a bright and pure person. But she still doesn’t have the same will as Lida, she doesn’t like heated arguments, she prefers conversations on general, neutral topics, meaningless light conversations. It is difficult to say whether Zhenya has the same formed personality as Lida. But most literary critics are of the opinion that she lacks her own “I.”

As for Zhenya’s appearance, her eyes seem especially beautiful to the artist: while Misyu meets him with a look full of admiration, Lida hardly looks at him.

The artist is somewhat similar to Zhenya. Maybe this similarity is the reason that they like to spend time together. He is characterized by idleness and laziness; he does not occupy the lion's share of his time with absolutely any activities. He finds Zhenya full of calm and harmony, while Lida’s personality traits are alien to him.

The artist is full of cynicism and disappointment. He is talented, but art no longer brings him inspiration. He wants to love, but this feeling turns out to be too much for him.

Belokurov, according to some critics, has similar features to Oblomov. He is an idle and lazy person, indifferent to almost everything. An artist stays with him, who is no more active than the landowner himself.

Finally, Ekaterina Pavlovna is the mother of Lida and Zhenya Volchaninov. She is a widow and landowner who owns a significant fortune. She, too, like Zhenya, has a slightly weak-willed character, and then she is afraid of Lida, because her liveliness and activity are unusual for Ekaterina Pavlovna.

Main themes of the story

The text weaves together several themes that, like a thread, string together plot beads. First of all, this is the theme of love. Next is the problem of working life and the question of the people. The structure of A.P. Chekhov’s work is similar to other examples of the construction of classic texts of Russian literature. In the center there is a certain love story, but it is periodically interrupted by reflections on various, often highly social topics for that time. We see something similar in “Fathers and Sons”, or in “Woe from Wit”.

Love

Love in “The House with a Mezzanine” has a transparent, subtle character. It can only be seen by holding the reader's eyepiece close.

Feelings flare up quickly and develop unnoticed. Youthful love is fleeting and fleeting, but adult, mature love is completely different. If love is more characteristic of the mature Lida, then falling in love and the inability to have strong feelings are more characteristic of Zhenya and the artist. At the moment of declaring his love to Zhenya, the artist, for example, succumbs only to fleeting impulses, the essence of which is weakness. He becomes ashamed of this confession.

The structure of the narrative development as applied to each character resembles a circle or a cycle: this is the path from loneliness, through love, back to loneliness - the point where it all began.

Work

This theme is described by the author through some contrast between key characters. If Lida is an example of a lively, active and active person, for whom the center of her life position is not at all selfish interests and motives, then her younger sister, the artist, the landowner Belokurov represent a group of characters who embody the “spirit of the times”: the idleness and laziness of the environment rich people

If in antiquity it was customary to divide practices into two categories - vita active and vita contemplative, then in “The House with a Mezzanine” it cannot be said that the first life - active - is Lida’s lot, and the contemplative life is the style of everyone else. Not at all. Rather, Lida is the embodiment of both types of practices, while the other heroes represent a metaphor for passivity.

A separate motive is the artist’s reflections on the nature of creativity and talent.

It turns out that the artist’s talent makes his life strange and meaningless, his role is incomprehensible, not formalized, and therefore the easiest way is to deepen into idleness. It gives a false sense of a day that drags on forever and never ends: this is necessary to avoid the horror of the moment of gathering the fruits of creativity that are not there.

If the artist suffers from his idleness and even gets tired of it, like a real decadent, but for Belokurov his lifestyle turns out to be quite acceptable.

People and controversy

The theme of the people is revealed in ideological disputes that periodically interrupt the love line of the story. Lida encourages us to think about the existing order, about how we can provide feasible and real assistance to the peasants, improve the life of the zemstvo government as a whole, and also about what role the intelligentsia can play in this process.
The dispute takes on special significance in the third chapter of the story. But the essence of this dispute is not the desire to find the truth or prove the rightness of any of the parties. The meaning of the conversation taking place between Lida and the artist is rather to make it just a pretext for demonstrating the ideological beliefs that dominated society at that time.

Happiness

It may seem that there is no separate talk about happiness in “The House with a Mezzanine”. However, the story still contains a hint not of realized, family happiness, which is only a source of disappointment, but of failed happiness.

The illusory motive of happiness is associated primarily with the personal split of the artist, who cannot be satisfied with his work, is not able to truly feel something - strongly, for a long time and vividly.

The subtitle of the story is “The Artist’s Tale.”

The story is told from the first person - a landscape artist who lives on the estate of his student acquaintance, “doomed to constant idleness.” Nearby, on a neighboring estate, lives a family - a mother with two beautiful daughters, the eldest Lida and the youngest Zhenya with her childhood nickname Misyus. The father of the family, who rose to the fairly large position of Privy Councilor (corresponding to our deputy minister), died. The family is wealthy, but lives in the village solely out of love for nature and quiet time. Almost all the characters spend their lives in complete idleness: they walk, read, play, eat, drink tea, sometimes go to church or pick mushrooms. And so on day after day.

True, the hero’s acquaintance (Petr Petrovich Belokurov), from whom he rents a house, carefully pretends that he is engaged, as they now say, in economic activity. But, according to the hero, he is a “heavy and lazy fellow” and rather creates the appearance of such. He likes to “reduce all conversations to argument,” to seem smarter than he really is and to complain that he “doesn’t find sympathy from anyone.” Everyone is idle, except for the eldest daughter Lida. She is, as they would say now, an emancipated girl, she works as a teacher in a zemstvo school, teaching rural children. He receives 25 rubles and is proud that he spends on himself only what he earns. All characters are described by the hero with a significant amount of irony and hostility. Except for his younger sister Zhenya-Misyus, for whom the hero from the very beginning developed great sympathy, seeing in her a kindred spirit. And, of course, she is a subject for a romantic relationship, since Misyus is young, sweet, naive, enthusiastic, and most importantly, she does not hide her enthusiastic attitude towards the hero, his talents and thoughts.

The main conflict of the story lies in the political disputes taking place against the backdrop of this idyll between Lida and the rest of the characters on the topic of the structure of the surrounding life. These debates are ongoing. They explode and give some energy to this whole sleepy picture. Their essence is expressed in the fact that Lida fanatically professes and, as best she can, with young energy and enthusiasm, implements the idea of the Narodnaya Volya about the need to educate and treat the people in the person of local peasants, charity and other “small deeds.”

Members of the entire family admire, but in fact fear, Lida’s imperious uncompromisingness. The main character defends, albeit rather sluggishly, purely socialist ideas about the need for a radical social reorganization of people's (note, people's, and not all in general and his artist in particular) life, in fact expressing the ideas of utopian socialism. Populism is the ideology and movement of the various intelligentsia at the bourgeois-democratic stage of the liberation struggle in Russia (1861-1895). It expressed the interests of the peasants, opposed serfdom and the capitalist development of Russia, and for the overthrow of the autocracy through a peasant revolution. Populism is a type of peasant, communal socialist utopia. Since the beginning of the 60s. In the 19th century there were two movements: revolutionary and liberal. Founders - A.I. Herzen, N.G. Chernyshevsky, ideologists - M.A. Bakunin, P.A. Lavrov, P.N. Tkachev. “Going to the people”, “the theory of small deeds” are liberal ideas opposed to Marxism and condemned by Marxists, who, as we know, called for a radical social reorganization of society.

Misyus alone remains aloof from politics. She is not at all interested in social ideas. She lives in the world of her spiritual (possibly bookish) values and that is probably why she is very kind, and sincerely radiates goodwill and friendliness.

At the end of the story, the hero finally understands that he loves Zhenya-Misya, since it is impossible not to love her at all. Passionate kisses follow at the gates of the estate. And then, according to the rules of that time, the girl was taken to a neighboring province. The decision comes from the older sister, the informal head of the family. The lovers suffer, but do not resist.

Even during Chekhov’s lifetime, the appearance in print of the story “The House with a Mezzanine” evoked numerous and contradictory responses. The main topic of discussion was the illogical behavior and sketchy images of the main characters in the story, with the possible exception of Zhenya-Misyus.

Both in the story and in its discussion, the main problem was the complete ambiguity and some paradoxical from a logical point of view, the author's presentation of the characters of the two other characters in the story - the older sister Lida and the main character-artist, clearly betraying the author's attitude towards these characters.

Lida, from a formal, very common everyday point of view, is an absolutely positive heroine, embodying the idea of a socially active life position of a person who is not indifferent to the suffering of other people. Indeed, she tries, to the best of her personal strength and capabilities, to do something “here and now”, without waiting for a total change in the existing social order, carrying a charge of some kind of personal involvement in the life around her, as we would say from a modern point of view, practically, Mother Teresa and Princess Diana rolled into one.

However, the author, with all his inherent talent, presents us with an image of her that is deliberately unsympathetic, dry, pedantic, and reasoning. In the image of Lida, the author apparently put everything that could be repulsive to him in a woman: authority, uncompromisingness, determination, hard work, and even some kind of sacrifice for the sake of an idea.

However, since the time of Jung, who was practically a contemporary of the author of the story, such a female type, which later began to be called emancipated, was recognized by psychologists as one of the manifestations of the “mother complex.” According to Jung, the mother complex can develop in several main directions, for example, hypertrophy of the maternal to complete identity with the mother and its denial, the emergence of the effect of atrophy of everything feminine, “protection from the mother.”

In fact, both female types (probably not by chance, because the author is a doctor by training) are described in the story in the form of two sisters. Dear, glorious Misyusya, all the sympathies of both the author and the main character are clearly on her side (although the language does not dare to call him a hero-lover, but more on that later)

It is important to note that Misyus does not seem to live on her own. She is always with her mother, with her mother, and together they practically represent a single whole. The mother in this story is a classic example of a phenomenon about which Jung writes, not without wit:

“In this case, femininity is exaggerated. This means strengthening all female instincts, primarily maternal. The negative aspect of the latter occurs in a woman whose only goal is to give birth. It is clear that the man then represents something secondary; it is an essential instrument of conception, and, as an object that needs care, it is given last place after children, poor relatives, cats, chickens, and furniture.” (Almost all literature of the 18th-19th centuries is full of examples of female images of this type). For such a woman, her own personality is also something secondary; it is even more or less unconscious, because life is lived in and through others...

According to Jung, the maternal instinct in its extreme and unconscious manifestation “leads to the destruction of both one’s own personality and the private life of the child. This already concerns the relationship between two women - the youngest daughter Misyus and her mother. The daughter is, as it were, absorbed by the mother. “The more unconscious such a mother is in her own personality, the greater and more powerful is her unconscious will to power.” Recognizing the deep natural truth of the female mind, in the case of hypertrophy of the feminine principle, Jung notes that the woman herself actually cannot assess the sharpness of her mind, nor is she able to appreciate its depth. And in general, “what the hell, she forgets what she just said.” This applies to both mother and daughter.

Almost such a family duet is described in the story. Jung, as if analyzing this particular story (and some other stories by Chekhov), further writes that with a strong attachment to her mother, the girl does not have a natural process of developing her own erotic beginning. The result is a projection of one’s own personality onto the mother and “everything that resembles motherhood, responsibility, personal affection and erotic claims causes such women to feel inferior and forces them to run away, and, of course, to the mother, who is everything that daughters seems completely unattainable, experiences in a perfect way, ... as if living everything instead of her.”

And then a very interesting thought: “Marriage is not ordered for such faded girls. On the contrary, despite their illusory nature and inner indifference, or precisely because of this, they are rated very highly on the bride market. “So much female uncertainty is the desired equivalent for male certainty and univocity... Because of the characteristic inner indifference and because of the feeling of inferiority that is constantly staged by the injured innocence, the man has an advantageous role - he must, with an air of superiority and yet conniving, that is, in a quasi-knightly manner, to endure known female insufficiency. The girl’s notorious helplessness is especially attractive. She is so much an appendage of her mother that she doesn’t even know what to do if a man is nearby. And besides, she needs help so much and seems to know absolutely nothing at all, that even the meekest shepherd will become a brave kidnapper of women and in the most daring way will steal a daughter from a loving mother.

It is precisely such women who can be sacrificial spouses to those husbands who exist solely due to their identity with their profession or talent. Otherwise, one can see how someone “truly insignificant, downright inconspicuous, as if on a magic staircase, soars to the highest possible heights. Chercher la femme, that’s where the key to unraveling the secret of this success lies.”

Ultimately, such a woman is destiny. A man can talk about it or not, but in the end “he falls, happy to the point of recklessness, into this hole, or he misses and ruins his only chance to take possession of his masculinity.”

Our contemporary Professor A. Meneghetti continues these thoughts. “Women’s psychology, whatever it may be, is determined not so much by the frustration caused by the family, society, man, but by the typology of dyadic symbiosis with the mother.”

But it is unlikely that such a sluggish image could have inspired the author of the story so much. The secret of his power is described by the same expert on the female soul, A. Meneghetti. “At first, a woman frantically attracts, uncontrollably ignites the power of her attraction, but then backs down or completely destroys everything. A woman’s life in general is full of cruel contradictions: it is simply incredible how the angel in her can calmly get along with the devil.

I have often been convinced: a woman is not at all a toy in the hands of a man, she is a puppet exclusively of her own psychology, bringing suffering and desired at the same time.”

Women are “prone to self-destruction, but fortunately they “have an amazing ability to recover: today she is depressed and exhausted, and literally a week later spring returns to her house again, filling her with new strength. At a young age, “a woman blossoms, radiating radiance, exuding the sunny shine of the power of life”...

Despite all the pressing complexes, Misyus, to some extent, strives to live on her own. Her individualism is enhanced by poetry, music, art, songs, theater, i.e. the world in which she is immersed and in which she is saved from the omnipotence of the traditional way of life... Probably Meneghetti writes about such women:

“I... realized that God reserved something in a woman exclusively for himself, but a woman does not know this.”

It seems that this one phrase is enough to express the author’s main idea regarding the image of the main character of the story - Misyus.

As for the second sister, the smart and beautiful Lida, here, following Jung, we are talking about a completely different form of manifestation of the mother archetype, which manifests itself “not in the elevation or weakening of the female instinct, but rather in a kind of protection that prevails over everything else.” , from the omnipotence of the mother”... All her instincts are concentrated in the form of protection from the mother and are therefore inapplicable to arranging her own life. As a result of protection from the mother, a situation occurs here when “spontaneous development of the mind occurs with the aim of mastering some area in which the mother is not involved. This development arises naturally from one’s own needs, and not for the sake of some man who would like to impress or play along with a spiritual comrade. This development must serve to destroy the power of the mother through intellectual criticism or superior knowledge."

In a favorable situation, we can see a person who “resists everything that is dark, unclear, ambiguous, and will cherish and welcome everything that is definite, clear, and reasonable. She surpasses and surpasses her feminine sister in impartiality and cold judgment. Regarding this type, both Jung and Meneghetti say approximately the same thing: “if she turns her face, then the world will open to her... Such insights mean knowledge and the discovery of truth, which are an indispensable condition for awareness. Part of life may pass by, the meaning of life, however, for it can be saved. As for her feminine sister, this type loses its meaning in life over the years. “She was taught to be a mother of a family and a wife, and then what? Love, sex, family - all this is wonderful, but still the purpose of life lies not only in these aspects, and first of all, in the need to become an individual.” But this is more relevant for women of the third millennium. At the end of the 19th century, even for the author of the story, the women's issue was not yet so obvious.

The vulnerability of the type to which the older sister belongs is understandable. Most likely, it arose in the depths of the child’s “rejected” complex (Lida is the eldest child in the family) - to be useful at all costs in order to earn love is the main motive for such behavior from the point of view of this author.. But since such behavior is all the same does not allow a person to achieve the desired goal, then it takes quite rigid forms, with the desire for total control over others, guidance over them.

Truly, justice without love makes a person cruel. This is the negative that the author tried to convey to us with the image of his older sister. Thus, the story of the two sisters is a very colorful demonstration of the ambiguity of the “mother archetype.” In the image of Lida, we see, on the one hand, virtue and advantage, but on the other hand, limitation and impoverishment, because as a result, “a person approaches the desert of doctrinaire and “enlightenment.” And further, quoting Jung, “Man irrevocably becomes the prey of his consciousness and its rational concepts, right and wrong.” Jung writes: “I am far from belittling God’s gift of reason, this highest human ability. But as the only ruler, he has no meaning, just like light in a world in which darkness does not oppose it. We should never forget that the world exists only because its opposites are maintained in balance.”

We can talk a lot more about the many faces of the mother archetype, citing examples from the mythology and philosophy of different nations. Evil and good fairies and goddesses. One can once again admire the courage of the author, living in the 19th century in a Christian Orthodox country, where from the very beginning the dualism of the divine was replaced by monotheism in order to attribute all evil to the sinfulness of man himself. The result is complete confusion and a dead end, both for the mind and for the heart, in which it is so easy to get lost. Around the same time, the psychologist Freud and his followers proved that the psyche is far from being a unity.

And, finally, about the main character, on whose behalf the story is told, if not personifying, then at least somehow representing the male line in the plot, without which everything described would be deprived of any meaning.

The hero himself speaks about his life, character, complexes, and motives quite honestly, frankly and with full knowledge of the basics of psychoanalysis. “My life is boring, hard, monotonous, because I am an artist, I am a strange person, I have been tormented from a young age by envy, dissatisfaction with myself, lack of faith in my work, I am always poor, I am a tramp...”. The hero is aware of the symptoms of developing depression: “I was tormented by dissatisfaction with myself, I felt sorry for my life, which was passing so quickly and uninterestingly, and I kept thinking about how good it would be to tear out of my chest the heart that had become so heavy for me...”.

In accordance with his state of mind, all his communication with women, the conflict of beliefs, and the sluggish ending of the story, full of apathy and pessimism, are built in the spirit of existentialism of that time. Of course, criticism represented by the author’s contemporaries immediately drew attention to the lack of signs of masculinity in the usual sense of the word. In one of the reviews, critic A.M. Skabichevsky, in his article “Sick Heroes of Sick Literature,” wrote about Chekhov’s favorite type of person - supposedly morally sick, broken, psychopathic, obsessed with various mental illnesses.” Like many of us, Skabichevsky is perplexed about the ending of the story, why the hero did not follow the object of his passion: “After all, the Penza province (where little Misya was “exiled”) is not overseas, but there, far from Lida, he could have combined with Zhenya by marriage... You yourself must agree that the hero before us is from head to toe a pure psychopath and, moreover, an erotomaniac.” Many critics did not understand the artist’s reasoning and did not like his excessive breadth of judgment.

Indeed, the story was written in 1886. And the artist expresses very modern thoughts, relevant in the third millennium: “...All the mind, all the spiritual energy was spent on satisfying temporary, transitory needs...Scientists, writers and artists are in full swing, by their grace the conveniences of life are growing every day , the needs of the body are multiplying, meanwhile, the truth is still far away, and man still remains the most predatory and most unclean animal, and everything is tending towards the fact that humanity in its majority will degenerate and lose all vitality forever. Under such conditions, the life of an artist has no meaning, and the more talented he is, the stranger and more incomprehensible his role... And I don’t want to work and won’t... Nothing is needed, let the earth fall into tartar!

The first thing that suggests itself is that the reason for the gloomy state of the hero’s soul is stagnation in creativity and “creative impotence.” It also determines his feelings for Misyus.

In support of this assessment of the hero’s condition, Jung writes about the “Anima” archetype in men, from whom the hero apparently suffered: “The image of Anima gives the mother a superhuman glow in the eyes of her son. When the Anima is sufficiently established, it softens the character of a man and makes him receptive, capricious, jealous, vain and unadapted. He is in a state of “malaise” and spreads this malaise wider and wider...

But after a period of maturity, when “the superhuman glow is gradually erased due to banal everyday life, the prolonged loss of Anima means a growing loss of vitality, flexibility (flexibility), and humanity.”

However, as Jung notes, the “mother complex” in a broader sense can also have a positive meaning for a man - to develop taste and aesthetic sense, in which “a certain feminine element cannot in any way be discounted” and, among the many advantages of the spiritual plane, can give such qualities as “striving for the highest goals, brutality in relation to all kinds of stupidity, stupid perseverance, injustice and laziness.”

Our hero demonstrates many of these qualities. His statement about the nature of the disease of the century, made in passing, among other things, that “ninety-nine out of a hundred have no mind” is quite bold, and practically anticipates (or paraphrases the famous quote from Gogol) all later statements on this topic.

From the perspective of modern psychology, developing Jung’s thoughts, Meneghetti writes: “a man is mostly positive, but always tends to be passive towards a woman, because he sees the world through the prism of dependence on encouragement from a woman. He only feels successful if some woman praises him.” This is a manifestation of the maternal complex and our hero is no exception.

And he, like any other man, is faced with the task of surpassing any connection with maternal psychology, the maternal complex. And it seems that he is coping with it, no matter how paradoxical it may sound to many.

A full-fledged man, “who has achieved internal autonomy from any manifestation of the maternal complex, is able to recognize the intrapsychic fixation that controls the personality of the woman he loves. And as modern mystics and sages say, parting may be necessary to grow in love. “Disappointing another in order to follow one’s truth is the path of an absolutely extraordinary person”

Thus, in a very short story, the author managed to show himself as an extraordinary psychologist, expressing his subtle and deep thoughts, perhaps in many ways ahead of the time in which he lived.

Irina Lebedeva, Candidate of Technical Sciences, graduate of the Institute of Special Psychology and Cosmoenergetics

Volchaninova Zhenya (Misyus) - one of the heroines of the story “The House with a Mezzanine”, Lydia’s sister, a girl of 17-18 years old, thin and pale, with a large mouth and big eyes. Unlike her sister, Misyus spends her life in idleness and reads a lot. She is friends with the artist, she likes to watch him paint sketches, she talks to him about God, about eternal life, about the miraculous. She ends up becoming attracted to him. After his explanation, the heroine tells everything to Lydia, and she, not wanting this relationship to develop, forces her to leave with her mother the next day.

Volchaninova Lidiya - one of the heroines, a teacher. She comes from a good family, the daughter of a Privy Councilor. She is twenty-four years old, “thin, pale, very beautiful, with a whole head of brown hair on her head, with a small, stubborn mouth.” There is an invariably stern, serious expression on her face. Despite her wealth, she, along with her mother and sister, lives all year round on her estate and spends on herself only the 25 rubles she earns at the zemstvo school, and is proud that she lives at her own expense.

Lidia Volchaninova is a supporter of so-called small causes. She treats men, organizes libraries, and is engaged in educational activities. This heroine speaks only about serious things: about zemstvos, about school libraries, about the need to fight the chairman of the zemstvo government, who has taken the entire county into his hands and takes an active part in zemstvo activities.

Her acquaintance with the artist-storyteller occurs when she comes to the landowner Belokurov, with whom he lives, with a signature sheet to ask for fire victims. She has a tense relationship with the artist. He believes that he is unsympathetic to her: “She did not love me because I am a landscape painter and do not depict people’s needs in my paintings and that, as it seemed to her, I was indifferent to what she believed so strongly in.” When starting a business conversation, she always dryly tells him: “This is not interesting for you,” thereby causing him irritation and a desire to argue and contradict her. She dominates the family and enjoys unquestioned authority. When the narrator declares his love to her sister, Lydia makes sure that Misyu and her mother leave the next day.

Artist - narrator, lives on the estate of the landowner Belokurov. At first he does nothing, living in complete idleness and contemplation, wandering a lot around the surrounding area. The hero meets the Volchaninov family and becomes interested in his younger sister Zhenya (aka Misyus). Thanks to this romantic light hobby, he begins to draw again. He has a tense, almost hostile relationship with his older sister Lydia. He is irritated by her narrowness, constant conversations only about serious things - zemstvo, school libraries, etc. He argues with her, refuting the “theory of small affairs” not only as ineffective, but also harmful, because this kind of interference in the lives of ordinary people, in his opinion, it only creates new needs, a new reason for work. He believes that “the calling of every person in spiritual activity is a constant search for the truth and meaning of life.”

Confronting two “truths” - the Artist and Lydia - Chekhov does not take the side of either of them, since, being absolutized, each becomes an obstacle to the living element of life. They are colored precisely by human subjectivity, personal motives and moods (the same irritation of the Artist or Lydia’s hostility towards him) introduce distortion even into what is in its own way irrefutable. After the hero confesses his love to Misya and she tells Lydia about this, she, not wanting the further development of their relationship, forces her to go with her mother to her aunt in the Penza province. The artist, in turn, returns to Moscow.