Lesson objectives.

1. Educational: consider the symbol of the garden in the play by A.P. Chekhov’s “The Cherry Orchard”, draw conclusions about the play, prepare students for homework.

2. Developmental: develop text analysis skills, improve monologue speech.

3. Educational: to arouse interest in the writer’s work, to promote love for the Motherland.

Methods:

reproductive, heuristic, method of creative reading.

Lesson type: final

Lesson type: classical.

Visibility:

a portrait of the writer, slides depicting a blooming garden, scenes from the play “The Cherry Orchard”.

During the classes.

Where are you going, Rus'?

N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls".

Psychological attitude

1. In the play “The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov talks about fate, about the future of Russia. The author asks a question that many writers asked, including N. Gogol in the poem “Dead Souls”: “Where are you rushing, Rus'?”

Today we will look at the symbol of the garden in the comedy “V.S.” and we will prepare for our homework. (Write the topic and epigraph in a notebook)

The title of the play must be perceived in two ways: concrete (garden noble estate) and generalized (symbol of the Motherland, its natural poetic beauty). The comedy is based on the fate of the cherry orchard, everything is connected with it.

How do you imagine the image of a cherry orchard? (Address to slide No. 2) What associations does it evoke in you?

2. Conversation on issues.

How does the image of the cherry orchard permeate all the actions of the play? (Act 1: “The Cherry Orchard is being sold for debts”;

Act 3: “Come everyone and watch how Ermolai Lopakhin grabs the cherry orchard»;

Act 4: “In the distance they are knocking on a tree with an ax.”

(Scenery of Act 1: “Dawn, the sun will rise soon. It’s already May, the trees are blooming, but it’s cold in the garden, matinee.”

Scenery for Act 2: “To the side, towering, the poplars darken: there the cherry orchard begins... The sun will set soon.

Act 4 scenery: “You can hear an ax knocking on a tree.”

At the end of the play: “It becomes quiet. In the midst of the silence, the dull knock of an ax on wood is heard, sounding lonely and sad.” “Silence falls, and you can only hear how far away in the garden they are knocking an ax on a tree.”)

How are the characters in the play related to the image of the cherry orchard? Prove your points with text.

Ranevskaya, Gaev - past, childhood, well-being, pride, memories of happiness. Ranevskaya:“If there is anything interesting, even wonderful, in the entire province, it is only our cherry orchard.”

Firs: garden - lordly well-being.“In the old days, 50-4 years ago, cherries were dried, soaked, pickled, and made into jam. There was money..."

Lopakhin: garden, memories of the past. Grandfather and father were serfs; hopes for the future - cut down, divide into plots, rent out. A garden is a source of wealth, a source of pride.“If you then rent out the cherry orchard for dachas, then you will have at least 25 thousand a year in income.” “Cherry trees are born once every two years, and no one buys even that,” etc.

Trofimov: the cherry orchard symbolizes the serfdom past.“Aren’t human beings looking at you from every leaf, from every trunk...” “All of Russia is our garden” - This is his dream of a transformed homeland, but it is not clear by whose strength this will be done.

Anya: a garden is a symbol of childhood, a garden is a home, but you have to part with childhood.“Why don’t I love the cherry orchard as much as I used to?” At the same time is a garden - hope for the future. “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this.” (Write in notebooks of quotes about the cherry orchard).

5.What is the author’s attitude towards the garden? (For the author, the garden embodies love for native nature; bitterness because they cannot preserve its beauty and wealth; the author’s thought about a person who can change life is important; the garden is a symbol of a lyrical, poetic attitude towards the homeland. In the author's remarks:“beautiful garden”, “wide open space”, “the sound of a broken string” the sound of an axe. Chekhov: “In the second act you will give me a real green field and a road, and a distance unusual for the stage.” “The sound should be shorter and felt very far away”).

TEACHER'S WORD. The garden is a symbol of the Motherland, its present and future. The past is the childhood and happiness of Ranevskaya, Gaev, Ani; this is their pride from owning a beautiful estate, a “noble nest”; this is a symbol of serfdom for Petya and Lopakhin. The future is the construction of dachas, so that grandchildren and great-grandchildren, according to Lopakhin, will see a new life here; this is the hope for better life for Anya: “We will plant a new garden, more luxurious than this.”

What future awaits Russia? Chekhov leaves this question open.

SUMMARIZING.

The play “The Cherry Orchard” is a play about Russia, about its fate. Russia is at a crossroads - there is an auction in the play. Who will be the owner of the country? Anton Pavlovich worries about his country. The play is his testament, but at the same time he understands that he needs to break the old, move away from it.

HOMEWORK. Write an essay on one of the suggested topics.

What does Ranevskaya deserve - condemnation or pity?

What is more in Lopakhin: “beast of prey” or “subtle. Tender soul"?

What is the role minor characters in the character system of the play “The Cherry Orchard”?

Description of work

The image of Russia is embodied in the very title of the play, “The Cherry Orchard.” “All of Russia is our garden,” says Chekhov through the lips of his hero. And, indeed, the cherry orchard for Ranevskaya and her brother Gaev is a family nest, a symbol of youth, prosperity and a former graceful life. The owners of the garden love it, although they do not know how to preserve or save it. Ranevskaya speaks with tears and tenderness about her estate: “.. I love this house, without the cherry orchard I don’t understand my life, and if you really need to sell, then sell me along with the orchard...”. But for Ranevskaya and Gaev, the cherry orchard is a symbol of the past.

Files: 1 file

The play "The Cherry Orchard" was written by Chekhov in 1904 - on last year writer's life. It was perceived by the reader as the creative testament of a talented satirist and

Damaturg. One of the main themes of this play is the theme of the future of Russia, connected in

with the images of Petya Trofimov and Anya, Ranevskaya’s daughter.

The image of Russia is embodied in the very title of the play, “The Cherry Orchard.” “All of Russia is our garden,” says Chekhov through the lips of his hero. And, indeed, the cherry orchard for Ranevskaya and her brother Gaev is a family nest, a symbol of youth, prosperity and a former graceful life. The owners of the garden love it, although they do not know how to preserve or save it. Ranevskaya speaks with tears and tenderness about her estate: “.. I love this house, without the cherry orchard I don’t understand my life, and if you really need to sell, then sell me along with the orchard...”. But for Ranevskaya and Gaev, the cherry orchard is a symbol of the past.

Another hero, the active Lopakhin, looks at the garden only from the practical side. He sees in it an opportunity to get a big income, and he does not stand on ceremony with his methods. Ermolai Lopakhin, a new merchant-industrialist, symbolizing the present of Russia, its transition to capitalist development. Lopakhin feels like the master of life. “The new owner of the cherry orchard is coming!” “Let everything be as I wish!” he says. Lopakhin has not forgotten his past, and now the moment of his triumph has come: “the beaten, illiterate Ermolai” bought “an estate, the most beautiful of which there is nothing in the world,” an estate “where his father and grandfather were slaves.”

But Ermolai Lopakhin remained a “peasant”, despite the fact that he went “into the public eye.” He is not able to understand one thing: the cherry orchard is not only a symbol of beauty, it is a kind of thread connecting the past with the present. You can't cut down your own roots. And the fact that Lopakhin does not understand this is his main mistake.

In the play, Chekhov pays tribute to the good and valuable things that remained in the life of the Russian nobility at that time. We, observing the extreme impracticality of Gaev and Lyubov Andreevna, see their doom - they have a poetic, in their own way, sublime past, which is in the childhood memories of Gaev and Ranevskaya associated with the garden. The present, as Anton Pavlovich showed, is very, very sad, but the reader does not see the future at all... there is no such future... these types must inevitably be replaced by others. History has shown that Chekhov's thought was prophetic.

The present: real life It proceeds absurdly and awkwardly, it brings no joy or happiness to anyone. For all the heroes without exception, this life is unhappy, we remember: Charlotte is lonely and useless to anyone with her tricks, Epikhodov, with his constant failures, Simeonov-Pishchik, with his eternal need for money... The drama of the play lies precisely in the tragic situation of the present, in the discord its most essential, root foundations. This was again conveyed to us through a detail - all the heroes have a sense of the temporary nature of their stay in this world. More specifically, Lopakhin’s phrase: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” Did you notice?

I think to understand the key meaning of this work, you should also consider the image of the cherry orchard itself. According to Trofimov, all of Russia is a cherry orchard. And this was not a random remark. It is precisely here, in this detail, that the author’s attitude towards the future of Russia is found. Follow the thoughts: Russia is a cherry orchard. Cutting it down for Gaev and Ranevskaya is the end of everything. After all, the garden is the last thing they have left, which connects them with the past. For Lopakhin, this is a way to increase capital. Petya and Anya agreed to cut it down. So? So. On condition - they will plant a new garden, which will be “more luxurious than this”! It is in this detail that Chekhov conveys to us his idea of ​​the future. The garden will be cut down, but people will come and plant an even better garden. It can be deciphered like this: Russia will face shocks, but after them they will restore it, make it free and prosperous. But who is destined to become the creator of new life? Who will plant a new garden? It’s as if there is a character – Petya Trofimov. Yes, he talks about the unsettledness of the old life and calls for a new life. Characteristic revolutionary, right? But maybe you noticed that there is no personal power in his rantings; sometimes you even feel the empty loudness in his speeches. In addition, I remind you: he is an “eternal student” and a “shabby gentleman.” Such people do not master life.

Anya is full of hope, vitality, but there is still so much inexperience and childhood in her. In terms of character, she is in many ways close to her mother: she has a love for beautiful word, to sensitive intonations. At the beginning of the play, Anya is carefree, quickly moving from concern to animation. She is practically helpless, she is used to living carefree, not thinking about her daily bread, about tomorrow. But all this does not prevent Anya from breaking with her usual views and way of life. Its evolution is taking place before our eyes. Anya’s new views are still naive, but she says goodbye to the old home and the old world forever.

It is unknown whether she will have enough spiritual strength, perseverance and courage to complete the path of suffering, labor and hardship. Will she be able to maintain that ardent faith in the best, which makes her say goodbye to her old life without regret? Chekhov does not answer these questions. And this is natural. After all, we can only talk about the future speculatively.

Russia, according to Chekhov, at the turn of two centuries had not yet developed a real ideal of man. Therefore, the author shows us that in the present there is no answer to this vital question. In the play, time runs out for all the characters. Chekhov saw in the future not only terrorists and money-grubbers, but also people of broad views who would transform his homeland and make it free and prosperous. By showing Petya, the author makes it clear that he is being born new person, not similar to the previous ones. Between the lines we feel hope that such figures will appear soon. And Petya is only a prototype of these people. The future in the play belongs to those who will replace them all because all the images reflect the present in the play.

Such ardent movements of the soul and noble impulses bring Petya and Anya closer together. They symbolize hope for a better future. It is with their lives that Chekhov connects the future of Russia; it is in their mouths that he puts his own thoughts. Despite the fact that the estate has been sold, and axes are already knocking in the garden, the author believes “that new people will come and plant new gardens, “more beautiful than which there is nothing in the world.”

At the end of the play, according to Chekhov's idea, we got the feeling that the present is ending for all the heroes of the play without exception. With this, Chekhov once again demonstrated to us that in the present there are no people ready to create a “new garden” - people who will create a developing, free Russia. He considered the young generation of Russia to be the creators of a new, happy life.

"The Cherry Orchard" is the great creation of Chekhov, who put comedy on a par with drama and

tragedy that raised her to unattainable heights.

>Essays on the work The Cherry Orchard

Love for home

In the work of the great Russian classic A.P. Chekhov “The Cherry Orchard” the central place is given to the theme of home and motherland. Like a cherry orchard that fell at the hands of an ax, the former homeland is slowly dying. Or, if you look from the other side, it does not die, but is reborn: the old generation is replaced by a new, young generation, full of faith in a happy future. Is this really so, it was later shown October Revolution, but the author no longer witnessed these events. Chekhov died in 1904, and managed to finish writing the play “The Cherry Orchard” in 1903.

The comparison mentioned in the play, “all of Russia is our garden,” turned out to be very symbolic. Anton Pavlovich was a great citizen of his country and raised the theme of his homeland in many of his works. It is not surprising that his main characters are filled with patriotism and love of home. Love for home in the play manifests itself in everyone in their own way. So, for example, for Ranevskaya and Gaev this is a blind attachment to the family estate, and with it to the garden in which more than one generation has grown up. But for Petya Trofimov and Anya, love for home is something more. They find themselves above the love of the garden. They are interested in the future of the country, changes and innovations.

The sale of the garden is what lies on the surface when we read the play. In fact, the roots of the problem raised by the author are much deeper. The sale of the garden symbolizes the decline of the nobility by the beginning of the twentieth century, the destruction of the social structure formed over centuries, the emergence of a new generation of entrepreneurs and the preconditions for the brewing revolution. For new merchants, people who come from the people, neither the cherry orchard nor the family estate have of great importance. Here is a field of poppy, which would bring much more profit, according to Ermolai Lopakhin, more useful than cherries. And it would be even better if you divide this garden into plots and rent it out to summer residents.

Such a proposal greatly upsets Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, who is so tenderly attached to her beloved, native cherry orchard. Even the superficial Gaev worries about the fate of the garden and estate. It would seem that this is true love for home. But is the merchant Lopakhin or Petya Trofimov such a bad person who says that the nobility must atone for their guilt before Russia through labor? Ranevskaya’s daughter, seventeen-year-old Anya, also takes the side of Petya, which means a new generation of patriots. She scolds mother when she wastes money, she reproaches her when she suffers due to the loss of the garden.

Trofimov, in turn, although he does not like Lopakhin, calling him a “beast of prey,” but in his heart he considers him a man of gentle and subtle structure. Therefore, it is not logical to consider that someone is right and someone is wrong in this play. Each character has their own love for home. Even the old and faithful Firs remains to guard the estate of Ranevskaya and Gaev until the last, when it has already been sold at auction to Ermolai Lopakhin. He hears an ax being knocked on the trees and worries that Gaev rode in a coat, and not a fur coat. One thing remains unchanged - the fate of a seemingly ordinary garden decides the fate of ordinary people.

Chekhov A.P.

An essay on a work on the topic: Russia in A. P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”

He was a great citizen of Russia. In many of his works we see our Motherland through his eyes. Before moving on to the topic of my essay, I would like to talk about what kind of person Anton Pavlovich was. He called lies, hypocrisy and arbitrariness his main enemies. The writer's entire life was filled with persistent, systematic work. Having lived for forty-four years, he wrote more than two hundred works of prose and drama, built schools, participated in the creation of hospitals and libraries. He worked as a doctor during the cholera epidemic, treating up to a thousand sick peasants in villages every year. I am very attracted to the traits inherent in Chekhov: decency, humanity, intelligence and love of life. Anton Pavlovich elevated inspired work and healthy human relationships to absolutes. Reading Chekhov's works is easy and interesting. One of my favorite books by the writer is the play “The Cherry Orchard.”
The comedy “The Cherry Orchard” is considered Chekhov’s pinnacle work. The play reflects such a socio-historical phenomenon of the country as the degradation of the “nest of the nobility”, the moral impoverishment of the nobility, the development of feudal relations into capitalist ones, and behind this - the emergence of a new, ruling class of the bourgeoisie. The theme of the play is the fate of the homeland, its future. “All of Russia is our garden.” The past, present and future of Russia seem to emerge from the pages of the play “The Cherry Orchard”. The representative of the present in Chekhov's comedy is Lopakhin, the past - Ranevskaya and Gaev, the future - Trofimov and Anya.
Starting from the first act of the play, the rot and worthlessness of the owners of the estate - Ranevskaya and Gaev - are exposed.
Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya, in my opinion, is a rather empty woman. She sees nothing around her except love interests, strives to live beautifully, carefree. She is simple, charming, kind. But her kindness turns out to be purely external. The essence of her nature is selfishness and frivolity: Ranevskaya distributes gold, while poor Varya, out of “savings, feeds everyone milk soup, in the kitchen the old people are given one pea”; throws an unnecessary ball when there is nothing to pay off debts with. He remembers his deceased son, talks about maternal feelings and love. And she leaves her daughter in the care of a careless uncle, without worrying about her daughters’ future. She resolutely tears up telegrams from Paris, at first without even reading them, and then goes to Paris. She is saddened by the sale of the estate, but rejoices at the opportunity to go abroad. And when he talks about love for his homeland, he interrupts himself with the remark: “However, you need to drink coffee.” For all her weakness and lack of will, she has the ability for self-criticism, for disinterested kindness, for sincere, ardent feeling.
Gaev, Ranevskaya’s brother, is also helpless and lethargic. In his own eyes, he is an aristocrat of the highest circle; “coarse” smells bother him. He doesn’t seem to notice Lopakhin and tries to put “this boor” in his place. In Gaev’s language, colloquialism is combined with lofty words: after all, he loves liberal rantings. His favorite word is “whom”; he is partial to billiard terms.
Having lost their family and home, the former owners of the estate learned nothing and did nothing useful. “Selfish, like children, and flabby, like old people,” says M. Gorky, “they were too late to die in time and whine, not seeing anything around them, not understanding anything - parasites, deprived of the strength to cling to life again.” And I absolutely agree with the words of the writer. body
The present of Russia in Chekhov's play “The Cherry Orchard” is represented by Lopakhin. In general, his image is complex and contradictory. He is decisive and compliant, calculating and poetic, truly kind and unconsciously cruel. These are the many facets of his nature and character. Throughout the entire play, the hero constantly repeats about his origin, saying that he is a man: “My father was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes. With a pig's snout in a Kalash line. Just now he’s rich, he has a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, he’s a man.” Although, it seems to me, he still exaggerates his common people, because he already came from the family of a village kulak-shopkeeper. Lopakhin himself says: “...my father is deceased - he was trading in a shop here in the village back then.” And he himself is currently a very successful businessman. According to him, one can judge that things are going very well for him and there is no need to complain to him about life and his fate in relation to money. In his image one can see all the features of an entrepreneur, a businessman who personifies the real state of Russia and its structure. Lopakhin is a man of his time, who saw the real chain of development of the country, its structure and became involved in the life of society. He lives for today.
Chekhov notes the merchant's kindness and his desire to become a better person. Ermolai Alekseevich remembers how Ranevskaya stood up for him when his father offended him as a child. Lopakhin recalls this with a smile: “Don’t cry, he says, little man, he’ll heal before the wedding. (Pause.) Little man.” He sincerely loves her, willingly lends Lyubov Andreevna money, not expecting to ever receive it. For her sake, he tolerates Gaev, who despises and ignores him. The merchant strives to improve his education and learn something new. At the beginning of the play, he is shown with a book in front of the readers. Regarding this, Ermolai Alekseevich says: “I read the book and didn’t understand anything. I read and fell asleep.”
Ermolai Lopakhin, the only one in the play who is busy with business, leaves for his merchant needs. In one of the conversations about this you can hear: “I have to go to Kharkov now, at five o’clock in the morning.” He differs from others in his vitality, hard work, optimism, assertiveness, and practicality. He alone offers a real plan to save the estate.
Lopakhin may seem like a clear contrast to the old owners of the cherry orchard. After all, he is a direct descendant of those whose faces “look out from every cherry tree in the garden.” And how can he triumph after buying a cherry orchard: “If only my father and grandfather had risen from their graves and looked at the whole incident, like their Ermolai, the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, who ran barefoot in the winter, how this same Ermolai bought the estate where his grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen. I’m dreaming, it’s only imagining it, it’s only seeming. Hey musicians, play, I want to listen to you! Come and watch how Ermolai Lopakhin takes an ax to the cherry orchard and how the trees fall to the ground! We will set up dachas, and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will see a new life here. Music, play!” But this is not so, because in the place of something ruined it is impossible to build something beautiful, joyful and happy. And here Chekhov also reveals the negative qualities of the bourgeois Lopakhin: his desire to get rich, not to miss his profit. He nevertheless buys Ranevskaya’s estate himself and brings his idea of ​​organizing dachas to life. Anton Pavlovich showed how acquisition gradually cripples a person, becoming his second nature. “Just as, in terms of metabolism, a predatory beast is needed that eats everything that gets in its way, so you are needed,” this is how Petya Trofimov explains to the merchant about his role in society. And yet Ermolai Alekseevich is simple and kind, offering help to the “eternal student” from the bottom of his heart. It’s not for nothing that Petya likes Lopakhin - for his thin, delicate fingers, like an artist’s, for his “thin, gentle soul.” But it is he who advises him “not to wave his arms,” not to become arrogant, imagining that everything can be bought and sold. And Ermolai Lopakhin, the further he goes, the more he acquires the habit of “waving his arms.” At the beginning of the play this is not yet so pronounced, but at the end it becomes quite noticeable. His confidence that everything can be considered in terms of money increases and becomes more and more his peculiarity.
The story of Lopakhin’s relationship with Varya does not evoke sympathy. Varya loves him. And he seems to like her, Lopakhin understands that his proposal will be her salvation, otherwise she will have to become a housekeeper. Ermolai Alekseevich is about to take a decisive step and does not take it. It is not entirely clear what prevents him from proposing to Varya. Either it’s the lack of true love, or it’s his excessive practicality, or maybe something else, but in this situation he doesn’t evoke sympathy for himself.
He is characterized by delight and merchant arrogance after purchasing the Ranevskaya estate. Having acquired a cherry orchard, he solemnly and boastfully announces it, cannot resist praising it, but the tears of the former owner suddenly shake him. Lopakhin’s mood changes, and he bitterly says: “Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” The not yet extinguished triumph is combined with self-mockery, merchant daring with spiritual awkwardness.
Another feature of him does not make a good impression. First of all, this is his indelicacy, the desire for quick profit. He begins cutting down trees even before the former owners have left. It’s not for nothing that Petya Trofimov says to him: “Really, is there really a lack of tact?” The felling of the cherry orchard is stopped. But as soon as the former owners left the estate, the axes began to sound again. The new owner is in a hurry to put his idea into action.
Representatives of the future of Russia are Trofimov and Anya. Pyotr Trofimov looks at many life phenomena correctly, is able to captivate with imaginative, deep thoughts, and under his influence Anya quickly grows spiritually. But Petya’s words about the future, his calls to work, to be free like the wind, to move forward are vague, they are too general, dreamy in nature. Petya believes in “highest happiness,” but he doesn’t know how to achieve it. It seems to me that Trofimov is the image of a future revolutionary.
“The Cherry Orchard” was written by Chekhov during the period of pre-revolutionary unrest. The writer confidently believed in the advent of a better future, in the inevitability of revolution. He considered the young generation of Russia to be the creators of a new, happy life. In the play “The Cherry Orchard” these people are Petya Trofimov and Anya. The revolution was accomplished, a “bright future” arrived, but it did not bring “the highest happiness” to the people.
The comedy hero Lopakhin is closer to me. With his work, perseverance and diligence, he achieved his goal - he bought an estate where “his grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen.” He became a rich, respected man. Of course, he also has negative character traits: the desire for profit, the habit of “waving his arms.” But Lopakhin strives to improve his education and learn something new. Unlike Petya Trofimov, Ermolai Alekseevich’s word does not diverge from deeds. Despite his thirst for enrichment, he still had compassion for his neighbor. What I like about Lopakhin is optimism, hard work, and a sober outlook on things.
All of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, in my opinion, was reflected in Chekhov’s play. And now you can meet such impractical, lost ground under their feet people as Ranevskaya and Gaev. Idealists like Petya Trofimov and Anya are still alive, but people like Chekhov’s Lopakhin are quite difficult to meet: modern entrepreneurs very often lack those attractive personality traits that I liked in this hero. Unfortunately, in our society, “Yasha’s lackeys” are coming to the forefront more and more confidently every day. There is not a word about this hero in my essay, since I am limited by the time of the exam work. I could say a lot about him and about other characters in Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard,” since this work provides inexhaustible material for thinking about the fate of Russia. http://vsekratko.ru/chehov/vishnevyjsad46