The Cherry Orchard by Chekhov is Tragic but not a Tragedy
The Cherry Orchard by Chekhov is tragic but not a tragedy
It is very difficult to pigeonhole the modern drama into a tragedy or a comedy. A drama can be either of the two in two ways: either its vision of life is tragic, or the form used to present that vision is essentially tragic2. The sense of life pervading the world of The Cherry Orchard is tragic but there are some elements in the play due to which the tragic sense does not completely permeate the atmosphere of the play. Consequently the tragedy masquerades on the stage as a comedy. Critics who call the play a comedy3 have concentrated mostly upon the comic touches which are lent to certain characters such as Lopakhin’s mooing like a cow, Trofimov’s crash from the stairs, Lopakhin mistakenly receiving a beating, etc. Those who call it a tragedy are focusing upon the effect of time passing and leaving a ruined generation in its wake4. This seems a simplified way of dealing with the play. To me it is neither a tragedy nor a comedy. Chekhov’s characters seem tragic but the tragedy is not treated as the fate of humanity i.e. it is not emphasized on stage. In a tragedy the characters on stage as well as the audience seem to identify with the fate of the protagonist thus intensifying the tragic experience. This identification is prevented in The Cherry Orchard. Instead, the characters are apathetic to each other. They do not recognize each other’s tragic potential. In this way, the emotional experience is distanced from the audience. Consequently the misery and sorrow experienced by the characters in the play do not assume tragic proportions. They remain entirely personal. Chekhov’s comic touches serve to lift the play above the tear-jerking sentimental stuff and the audience does not lose objectivity.
It seems very simple to perceive the voices of past, present and future in The Cherry Orchard as belonging to an old order and a new order as well the present5. But it is much more than the exposure of the social change. Lyubov and Gaev are absentee landlords and therefore, they are economic parasites. They do not play any active part in earning money for themselves. It goes to Chekhov‘s credit that without being sentimental he creates characters that retain their humanity even if they are usurping the resources of the land. Lyubov and Gaev belong...