Fighting the Remix

Remixing , as we know it today, has existed throughout different time periods and continues to be heavily applied especially to the pop culture media. Seldom do we see a new movie with completely original work as Kirby shows on his videos "Everything is a Remix". Although his point holds true for most of the entertainment released today, at some point a source of originality must have existed. Chekhov with The Cherry Orchard is one of those few sources and still, he copied a key element: reality.

The play's structure is revolutionary. In his accurate depiction of life he avoids the established structures and instead, shows glimpses of reality. Even with out the need of a climax, (although you could argue the auction's role as one) this play keeps the readers attention thanks to its characters. These differed from others not only because of their flaws but also, because of their inability to change. Ultimately, Ranevskaya did not accept reality, Anya and Varya continued to suffer because of their mother's decisions and Lopakhin remained a greedy merchant with an inferiority complex. After realizing this I wondered what this play actually was.

In other works like Hamlet, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or even The Canterbury Tales, the author tells us significant tale. In their stories, either someone dies, goes on a voyage or a life changing event happens. This play goes completely against those basic ideas of what a story should be. It tried to find a new kind of creativity in reality, the most ancient inspirational source for art. This attempt to reach realism culminates in these character's whose humanity comes from everyday activities. Finally, this play is not about the events but the people. It is revolutionary because Chekhov refused to remix elements of other plays and tried to create something different that would not even fit into the themes that had classified literature for so long. Today, we need a Chekhov, someone who wants to fight the systematic way Hollywood creates entertainment with something completely original that does not follow the classic genres and stereotypes.

What Humor?

Humor rarely appears inside this four-act play, specially considering the grim setting and flawed characters. These, instead of inspiring any kind of sympathy, earn the public's hate through their irrational or unacceptable actions. Ranevskaya exemplifies this. She not only refuses to accept her dire financial situation, but also worsens it through her lavish spending. Still, there other characters' behaviors demonstrate their unavoidable flaws in a more humorous fashion.

Anyhow, Trofimov shows a playful and humorous side during the start of the third act. Here, he mocks Varya for her supposed marriage with Lopakhin: "Madame Lopakhina! Madame Lopakhina!"(353). Although his offense is small, he clearly shows insensitivity to the family's situation in a humorous fashion. He makes a remark on Varya's marriage with the trader Lopakhin. The merchant had a peasant's upbringing and with the freedom his family earned, he escaped poverty and became even wealthier than his previous owners. Meanwhile, Varya had a noble childhood with serfs and wealth. This marriage would lower her status and self-esteem. In fact, she sunk even lower because she needed Lopakhin to marry her in order to save some of her family's property. She also acknowledged the possibility that he would not propose to her which would lower her status even more. Her unfortunate situation shattered her view of herself and her family.

At any rate, Trofimov mocks this dire situation with a sharp comment that helped make this progress of degradation even more painful. His attitude shows that in reality, this family's tragedy hurts very few of the people surrounding them. They do not matter. Even after loosing the last symbol of their nobility, the Cherry Orchard, they will continue to live and work even if they remain aimlessly on the past.

Right now, I do not understand the humor in this play (if any exists) because my culture differs radically from the one Chekhov grew in. I can only make suppositions, like this one, about the true humor in his works. If the author's intent was really to portray life as accurately as possible, then avoiding extremely humorous moments should be necessary since there are only very few occasions where these appear consistently in life.

Giant Russia

Amongst the vast amount of conversations we see in the second act of The Cherry Orchard one short dialogue in particular seems very important. Unlike the rest of the story it could be interpreted politically or, at least, we can view it with some level of political irony. Even if the Bolschevic revolution and all that followed did not affect him at all, his book seems to have some foresight on it or at least fools today's reader to think so. Here, Lopakhin begins talking about his life and what could be his view on Russia: "You have only start doing something to find out how few honest, decent people there are. Sometimes, when I can't sleep I think: 'Lord, Thou gravest us vast forests, boundless fields, broad horizons, and living in their midst we ourselves out truly to be giants". Lyubov the answers: "Now you want giants! They're good only in fairy tales, otherwise they're frightening" (Chekhov 347). At the time, Russia was going through a period of industrialization that would effectively make it into a giant. Although the he did not even live to see the rise of the Soviet Union, he did see that period of great change and above all, he saw the time where European giants ruled the world. With small deep comments like this one, he gave the play a sense of reality and yet no themes at all.

Although the play has never focuses on politics, these two lines gave it a depth that must be analyzed. During his life, Chekhov must have seen the European empires at their peak. Russia being a vast territory was closer to being an empire than any of the other countries by birth right. The great riches of that land described there makes it clear that to some extent Chekhov's ideal was to see a great Russia that took advantage of its natural resources to become a great power. Still, he also realized the great dangers that came with such gigantic power. Amongst these dangers was the possibility of war against these "frightening" superpowers would attack the great Russia. These clashes amongst titans resulted in the First World War. Evidently the author did not see this but the increase in military power of the empires and the beginnings of Russia's rise must have been evident during his life time. Even though Chekhov tries to avoid themes, his novel incorporates enough plenty of discussion about all themes, even, politics. This possibility is new in the literature we have read in the course so far and therefore, must be noted as a key element of this author's work.

Mimesis

When reading act 1 of The Cherry Orchard, I realized this was a very realistic play. From the beginning, Chekhov establishes a consistent lack of themes and of idealized characters. I can deepen my understanding of this portrayal by describing the society he shows.

Moreover, this play has two main characteristics that define its style: incoherence between the character's conversations and social classes. These are not the play's themes but rather, elements of the reality on which the author based his story. Since he made clear that neither themes nor characters would drive the ideas behind his plays, then only these elements, part of the story's crude realism, remain.

Surely, social classes played a key role in Chekhov's life. During the time of Czars in Russia people had social classes engrained on them like we see here: "Lopakhin: You're much too delicate, Dunyasha. You dress like a lady and do you hair like one too. It's not right. You should know your place" (316). This occurs during the very first moments of the book when Lopakhin and Dunyasha wait for the other to arrive. The merchant warns the maid against her excessively refined ways. She does not agree or disagree with this statement but accepts it in silence. The development of the play's reality needs this because it shows, with few seconds of dialog, the strict social stratification in it. Although this character seems unaffected by this phrase, it clearly shows the importance social classes will have on the behavior of characters as read on.

Anyhow, the inability of characters to truly understand each other plays a key role in the play's reality. In very few moments does the dialogue flow between the characters. Instead, the people inform other of important events that go unnoticed. Here, Dunyasha talks to Anya about her marriage proposal and she blatantly ignored her: "Dunyasha: I really don't know what to think. He loves me- He loves me so! Anya: My room, my windows… it's just as though I'd never been away. I am home! Tomorrow morning I'll get up and run into the orchard… Oh if I could only sleep! I didn't sleep during the entire journey, I was so tormented by anxiety" (319). The fact they do not communicate at all, for what ever reason, matters to develop the ideas in the play. These are deeply flawed characters or so they seem to be. In this first Act we can only skim on their real essence. Still, this lack of communication will play a key role later in the play even if it only serves to maintain the status quo.

The author's unique style helps give the play its realism. Although this only talks about the first act, he already has a clear tone, probably close to gloominess than anything else, that the reader can only begin to understand on the first few pages. On the title page the categorization of the play as a comedy intrigues me considering its tone, defined partly, by the elements described above.