Š Huntington Theatre Company Boston, MA 02115 January 2007 No portion of this Teacher Curriculum Guide may be reproduced without written permission from the Huntington Theatre Company’s Department of Education. Inquiries should be directed to: Donna Glick, Director of Education Huntington Theatre Company 264 Huntington Avenue Boston, MA 02115
Limelight
teacher literary & curriculum guide
herry Th
rchard by
nton hekhov in a new translation by
ichard elson Directed by
icholas artin Photo of Kate Burton: T. Charles Erickson
January 5 - February 4, 2007 at the Boston University Theatre
HUNTINGTON THEATRE COMPANY IN RESIDENCE AT BOSTON UNIVERSITY
HUNTINGTON THEATRE COMPANY
Nicholas Martin
IN RESIDENCE AT BOSTON UNIVERSITY
Norma Jean Calderwood Artistic Director
Michael Maso Managing Director
herry rchard Th
nton hekhov in a new translation by ichard elson Directed by icholas artin by
Table of Contents STAFF
Table of Contents
This Teacher Literary and Curriculum Guide was prepared for the Huntington Theatre Company by Marisa Jones, Education Consultant
With contributions by Donna Glick, Director of Education
3
Synopsis
4
Anton Chekhov: Playwright, Doctor, Humanitarian
5
Chekhov as Dramatist
6
An Uneasy Partnership: Chekhov and the Moscow Art Theatre
7
Aperture into Eternity
8
A Conversation with Richard Nelson
10 Audience Etiquette 10 Background & Objectives
Ilana Brownstein, Literary Manager
11 Preparation for The Cherry Orchard 12 Open Response & Writing Assignments
Laura Bucci, Education Intern
13 Mastery Assessment 13 Related Works and Resources
Wendy Weckwerth, Faculty Fellow in Theatre and Dance at Colby College
14 For Further Exploration 15 Media Assessment 16 Questions for After the Performance
Amanda Rota, Education Department Manager
17 Lesson Plans 18 Handout 1: Vocabulary
Melissa Wagner-O’Malley, Layout
19 Handout 2: Lost in Translation Proud Sponsor
herry Th
rchard by
nton hekhov in a new translation by
ichard elson Directed by
icholas artin Photo of Kate Burton: T. Charles Erickson
January 5 - February 4, 2007 at the Boston University Theatre
SYNOPSIS
The Cherry Orchard — Comedy in Four Acts
C
overing a period from May through October, The Cherry Orchard unfolds on Madame Ranevskaya’s estate. In decline for years, the estate is on the edge of foreclosure, headed for auction to pay off old debts largely due to Ranevskaya’s imprudent lifestyle. The play opens in the estate’s former nursery. Ranevskaya, who has been in France since the deaths of her husband and young son five years ago, returns to news of the pending foreclosure. Lopakin offers a solution to the family’s financial concerns: raze the orchard, parcel the land, and build vacation homes for escaping city dwellers. In act two, the action moves to a clearing near an abandoned chapel at the edge of the cherry orchard; telegraph poles, and perhaps the city, are visible in the distance. Blinded by nostalgia for their beloved orchard, and unwilling to accept Lopakin’s sensible solution, Ranevskaya and her brother, Gaev, remain paralyzed. Act three moves to a sitting room adjacent to the ballroom, where Ranevskaya is hosting a farewell party, though she lacks the money to pay the orchestra. Lopakin, unable to pass up the opportunity to own the land his family once worked as serfs, arrives with the news that he has purchased the estate at auction, intending to put his real estate development plan in action. Circling back to the beginning, the final setting is the nursery, now emptied of furnishings in preparation for the move. Occasionally, the sound of an ax striking a tree trunk echoes, signaling the beginning of Lopakin’s enterprise. Expelled from their ancestral home, Ranevskaya and her family depart for the train station and their new, landless lives. She plans a return to Paris. Gaev will begin a job at a bank. Anya, Ranevskaya’s daughter, will enter school and train for a job. Varya, who ran the estate in Ranevskaya’s absence, will take on a new position as a housekeeper. Yephikhov, the accountant, will stay on at the estate on behalf of Lopakin, who is off to attend to other business interests. But Firs the butler, an avatar of the past, remains — forgotten, locked in the nursery, his future as uncertain as Russia’s.
CHEKHOV’S CAST OF CHARACTERS Lyubov Ranevskaya, the owner of the estate, a widow just returning from France, where she has been living beyond her means with a lover; a spendthrift. Anya, her 17-year-old daughter, a great admirer of Trofimov’s ideas. Varya, her 24-year-old adopted daughter, who has been running the household; waiting for Lopakin to propose marriage. Leonid Gaev, Ranevskaya’s brother, prone to non sequiturs and attacks of verbal diarrhea. Yermolay Lopakin, a wealthy and shrewd businessman, wears clothes and cologne of questionable taste; the son of serfs who have labored for the estate. Petya Trofimov, an eternal graduate student and progressive thinker, formerly the tutor for Ranevskaya’s son; romancing Anya. Boris Semeonov-Pishchik, a neighboring landowner; seeks a loan from Ranevskaya, and like her, lacks business sense; stumbles into a mining deal with the English that ultimately saves his estate. Charlotta, the governess who accompanied Anya to France to visit Ranevskaya; purveyor of magic tricks. Semyon Yephikhov, an accountant (and mandolin player) prone to malapropisms; in love with Dunyasha. Dunyasha, the maid, has an affair with Yasha. Firs, aging butler and emancipated serf, whose mumbling, and sagacity, is largely ignored. Yasha, Ranevskaya’s valet; an opportunist. – WW
Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
3
Anton Chekhov, 1904
ANTON CHEKHOV:
Playwright, Doctor, Humanitarian “My holy of holies is the human body, health, intelligence, talent, inspiration, love, and the most absolute freedom imaginable — freedom from violence and lies, no matter what form [they]…take. Such is the program I would adhere to if I were a major artist.” – Anton Chekhov
K
nown for his objective, even clinical, descriptions of Russian life at the turn of the 20th century, Anton Chekhov is a key figure in Russian literature. He was a master of the short story and an innovator in drama. Born in 1860, the son of merchants, the grandson of a serf, Chekhov was the third son in a family of four brothers and one
4
Huntington Theatre Company
sister. His youth was spent in the provincial port of Taganrog in the Crimea where ships from Turkey, Greece, Italy, and Spain offloaded goods that supplied the region. Taganrog, which was superseded by other ports during Chekhov’s lifetime, boasted oil lamps, unpaved streets pocked with puddles and “not a single sign without a spelling mistake.” Chekhov’s father oper-
ated a small shop that sold a wide range of goods, from tobacco and coffee to knives and shovels. The shop was something of a social center, exposing young Anton to people of various occupations and interests, foreign languages and cultures. After his father’s business failed, the family moved to Moscow. There Chekhov trained as a doctor, but even early in his medical studies, he was contributing stories, sketches, satiric ads, and anecdotes to comic magazines to help support his family. “There is no doubt,” he wrote, “that my study of medicine strongly affected my work in literature.” The comic short form allowed, even encouraged, a freedom to experiment with style and structure. His experiments yielded an eclectic body of short stories featuring characters that prefigure those in his later writings. Despite his sporadic, though sometimes quite active medical practice, he relied on income from his writing to help support his family. He framed the balance between his medical and literary pursuits more explicitly: “Medicine is my lawful wife and literature is my mistress; when I get tired of one I go to the other.” In addition to his medical and literary efforts, Chekhov undertook important humanitarian pursuits. He built libraries and schools, organized famine and cholera relief, and practiced medicine for little or no payment. “It would be great,” he wrote, “if each of us left behind a
“Medicine is my lawful wife and literature is my mistress; when I get tired of one I go to the other.”
Chekhov as Dramatist “What happens on stage should be just as complicated and just as simple as things are in real life. People are sitting at a table having dinner, that’s all, but at the same time their happiness is being created, or their lives are being torn apart.” – Anton Chekhov
Anton Chekhov and wife, actress Olga Knipper, 1901
school, a well, or something of that kind so that one’s life wouldn’t vanish into eternity without a trace.” One of his legacies began in 1890, when he traveled across Siberia to the Sakhalin penal island where he conducted a census. Three years later he published a work of non-fiction based on his journey that led to prison reform. He was also something of an environmentalist; records of his efforts to save and plant trees are reminiscent of the character Astrov in his play Uncle Vanya. Chekhov contracted tuberculosis in the early 1880s. The condition, which was incurable at the time, required periods of convalescence for the rest of his life. In 1897, when his symptoms became particularly intense, his doctors recommended a move to Yalta. He complied and it was there that he wrote Three Sisters (1900) and The Cherry Orchard (1903). He married Olga Knipper (1869 – 1959), an actress with the Moscow Art Theater (MAT) whom he first met in 1898, the year she played Arkadina in the MAT production of The Seagull. Knipper also played Masha in Three Sisters and Ranevskaya in The Cherry Orchard. They married in 1901 and spent much of their short marriage apart while she acted in Moscow; his deteriorating health kept him from visiting her there as often as he would have liked. A few months after the premiere of The Cherry Orchard at the MAT in January 1904, Chekhov and his wife traveled to Badenweiler, Germany, where he was to “take the waters” and recuperate. He died there at the age of forty-four on July 15, 1904. – WW
Chekhov’s reputation as a dramatist rests primarily on Ivanov, The Seagull, Uncle Vanya, Three Sisters, and The Cherry Orchard — and several short comic sketches he referred to as “vaudevilles.” He also left behind tantalizing information about a play to follow The Cherry Orchard. It was to be set on a ship of explorers frozen in the polar ice, and was to feature a ghost figure. One can only imagine the dramaturgical leap he might have accomplished. Chekhov’s work deals primarily with the quotidian, raising it to the level of high drama, such as the cases in which his characters join each other for dinner and unexpectedly find their lives touched by happiness and destruction in turn. His work is filled with irony and reaches for verisimilitude over melodrama, stasis over action. In fact, most of the action in his plays happens offstage. He creates evocative landscapes that simultaneously operate realistically and symbolically. His careful use of pauses and sound effects lends a rhythm and musicality to his plays. Chekhov’s scientific training is often credited as a deep influence on his literary efforts. “I’m reading Darwin,” he wrote, “What a treat! I simply adore him.” Darwin’s The Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859) reverberated through the late 19th century, shoring up the equalizing forces of social change. Realism and naturalism, with their primarily middle-class or lower-class domestic subjects, are ascendant in the theatre of the late 19th century. Russia in Chekhov’s lifetime was in a period of deep transition — economic changes with industrialization, and social changes with the emancipation of the serfs, the decline of the aristocracy, and rise of a new bourgeoisie. Chekhov’s plays, and perhaps The Cherry Orchard in particular, dramatize the push and pull of these economic and social changes. The eponymous orchard represents wealth, abstract and easily spent, for sentimental Ranevskaya and idle Gaev. It embodies a romantic and productive rural past for the aging Firs. Trofimov sees it as a monument to the souls whose labor was exploited. And for Lopakin, the orchard is merely an expendable obstacle to future profit. As critic Edward Braun suggests, “…in The Cherry Orchard it becomes clear that everyone is at the mercy of a process of change beyond their control and comprehension.” – WW
The Cherry Orchard at the Moscow Art Theatre with Stanislavski (far left) as Gaev, 1904
Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
5
Members of the Moscow Art Theatre, 1899. Inset, Konstantin Stanislavski and Anton Chekhov
AN UNEASY PARTNERSHIP:
Chekhov and the Moscow Art Theatre F
ounded by Vladimir NemirovichDanchenko (1858-1943) and Konstantin Stanislavski (1863-1938), the Moscow Art Theatre (MAT) played a central role in Chekhov’s dramatic career. The first season of the MAT opened in October 1898 with a production of Tolstoy’s historical drama Tsar Fyodor that paid careful attention to historical detail in its portrayal of 16th century Russia. Sophocles’ Antigone and Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice followed. The fledgling company was teetering toward collapse when it produced a revival of Chekhov’s play The Seagull, which was an unequivocal failure upon its premiere in St. Petersburg two years earlier. In the hands of Stanislavski and NemirovichDanchenko, however, it was a monumental success, and marked the beginning of a fruitful relationship between Chekhov and the company that lasted until the writer’s early death in 1904. 6
Huntington Theatre Company
This collaboration — between a company so focused on developing a lifelike “natural” style, and the playwright whose plays demanded a new level of psychological subtlety — proved mutually beneficial. The MAT adopted a seagull as its emblem, and became known as the “House of Chekhov.” It went on to produce his final three full-length plays: Uncle Vanya (1897), Three Sisters (1901), and The Cherry Orchard (1904). The relationship had its problems, however. Chekhov objected to Stanislavski’s misreading of his plays — Stanislavski found and emphasized tragedy where Chekhov believed he had created comedy. He wrote: “You tell me that people cry at my plays…. But that is not why I wrote them. It is [Stanislavski] who made my characters into cry-babies. All I wanted was to say truthfully to people: ‘Have a look at yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are!’ The most important point is that people should realize that
when they do, they will most certainly create another, a better, life for themselves…. What is there to cry about?” In fact, Chekhov’s objections to Stanislavski’s approach were most severe in the case of The Cherry Orchard. He particularly disliked the MAT’s choice to advertise the play as a tragedy rather than a comedy. Chekhov’s ironic sensibility, in which the loss of the orchard is part of life’s great comedy, disrupts the traditional boundary between comedy and tragedy. That disruption has been a central concern for many playwrights since Chekhov; it might even be argued that the tragicomic absurdity presaged in Chekhov’s plays reaches its peak in the plays of Samuel Beckett. “The tears of the world are a constant quantity. For each one who begins to weep somewhere else another stops. The same is true of the laugh,” Beckett writes in Waiting for Godot. This, among many other things, Chekhov understood. – WW
“Aperture into Eternity” T
he Cherry Orchard was first performed on January 17, 1904, an occasion that was also intended to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of Chekhov’s literary career. Chekhov was in attendance, though deeply ill, his death from tuberculosis just months away. Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko, co-founder of the Moscow Art Theater, delivered something of a tribute to Chekhov, speaking to him of “the limitless devotion which all Russian society has for you” and praising his “tender heart” and “pure soul.” But Chekhov was unhappy, largely due to Stanislavski’s misinterpretation: “It’s all wrong, the play and the performance.” In spite of Chekhov’s reservations
about the MAT premiere, the play received praise. Perhaps the best-known critical assessment of The Cherry Orchard comes from Andrei Bely’s 1904 essay on the play: “Chekhov, remaining a realist, here draws back the folds of life, and what at a distance seemed to be the shadowy folds turns out to be an aperture into Eternity.” Though not beloved by all Chekhov’s contemporaries, The Cherry Orchard, which critic Donald Rayfield describes as “a progenitor of radical theatre,” has outlasted any disapproval and has enjoyed countless productions in the past century. Among the many directors inspired to stage the play are Tyrone Guthrie, Eva
LaGallienne, Jean-Louis Barrault, Peter Brook, Giorgio Strehler, Peter Hall, Andre Serban, and Mike Alfreds. The leading ladies who have portrayed Madame Ranevskaya include such acclaimed actresses as Russian star Alla Nazimova, Helen Hayes, Jessica Tandy, Uta Hagen, Gloria Foster, Judi Dench, Charlotte Rampling, Vanessa Redgrave, Annette Bening, and now, Kate Burton. In the past thirty years Michael Frayn, David Mamet, Jean-Claude van Itallie, Paul Schmidt, and now Richard Nelson, have rendered English versions of Chekhov’s final play, securing its place among the most revered classics of the modern theatre. – WW
Left, Charles Siebert, Olympia Dukakis, and Joyce Ebert in the Williamstown Theatre Festival 1969 production of The Cherry Orchard. Right, Kate Burton (as Anya) and Maria Tucci in the Williamstown Theatre Festival 1980 production; photo: J. Schuyler
Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
7
The giants of modern theatre. There’s a reason why. They’re incredibly interesting, and they’re often misunderstood, so there’s a chance of rediscovering them for yourself. What’s your personal history with The Cherry Orchard? I love it. It’s a great, great play. I’ve never tackled a version of The Cherry Orchard before, and I’ve wanted to. I’ve done versions of Three Sisters, The Seagull, and The Wood Demon, but The Cherry Orchard was the one sitting, waiting to happen. It’s the one I’ve wanted most to do. George Morfogen, Maria Tucci, Jerome Collamore, Colleen Dewhurst, Kate Burton, and Tom Atkins in the Williamstown Theatre Festival 1980 production; photo: J. Schuyler
A CONVERSATION WITH
Richard Nelson Richard Nelson is many things: a Tony and OBIE Award-winning playwright with a decadeslong career, a respected translator, a director, an associate artist at the Royal Shakespeare Company, and the new head of the M.F.A. playwriting program at the Yale School of Drama. This season, Nelson will bring his love of Chekhov and a new translation of The Cherry Orchard to the Huntington. Literary Manager Ilana M. Brownstein spoke with the writer about his respect for the great Russian master, the challenges of translation, and the soft place he has in his heart for Boston. IB: You’ve said that Broadway musicals were a
big part of your childhood. Is that what initially sparked your interest in the theatre? RN: It did, yes it did. My mother had been a dancer, and she took me to a lot of Broadway musicals. So the first fifteen or twenty times I went to the theatre were to see musicals, on Broadway or on the road. We traveled around a bit, and we lived in Detroit for a while — we saw a lot of shows in Detroit that were trying out. How did you find your way to the playwriting side of things, in particular? It was a process of elimination. When I was very young I did a little acting — I was bad and I hated it and it was really 8
Huntington Theatre Company
scary, but there’s nothing else for a young person to do. You can’t become a director when you’re fifteen, or a set designer, or whatever. So if you really love the theatre you think, I’ll write a play.
You’ve cited Sam Shepard, Edward Bond, Bertolt Brecht, and William Faulkner among your influences. Who else might you count in that club? I’ve been writing a long time, and at different times in my life different people have been very influential. Most recently, it’s been Chekhov. Over the last ten years, Strindberg has been a great influence on me, as well as Ibsen.
You’ve written elsewhere that the plays of Chekhov contain a “universal wisdom” and provide you with “professional and personal benchmarks of decency and honesty, as well as a guiding, helping hand through confusion and uncertainty.” Does that still feel immediate for you, as you work on The Cherry Orchard? That’s totally what I feel. When I’m writing my own plays and I feel stuck, when I’m really confused, when I begin to lack the confidence, Chekhov is always there to inspire. He’s a man of infinite knowledge and he’s the example, for me. When I direct my plays, I tell the actors, “we have one job and one job only. That is: to put people on the stage who are as rich and complicated and confused and ambiguous and as complex as any single person in the audience. We will always fail, but that’s our goal.” Writing at my desk, that’s also my goal, and to my side, always, are Chekhov’s plays. They always do it better.
You have been singled out by scholars as a writer invested in language — would you agree with that assessment? One of the things I’ve realized is a playwright only has one form of expression, and that is the living human being. One of the great things of theatre, if not the greatest thing, is that it is the only artistic form that uses all of a live human being as its expression. I think language is a
way to articulate and convey the theatre process, the power of one’s mind, but ultimately it’s people that interest me, not words.
Walter Benjamin once wrote, “It is the task of the translator to release in his own language that pure language which is under the spell of another, to liberate the language imprisoned in a work in his re-creation of that work.” When you translate, how do you balance the original playwright’s intentions with the inevitability of having your own artistic/aesthetic fingerprints on the material? The job of the translator is complicated, and it’s debated a great deal. The point is, what is a playwright’s intention? If someone is writing a joke, how do you convey that joke? In Marriage of Figaro, Beaumarchais spent a great deal of time getting even with a lot of his enemies, going after very specific targets. None of those targets are known
We’ve been talking about your translation work, but you’re also a prolific writer of original plays. How do you move between these two forms? When doing a translation, what gives me the most fun is when I’ve understood something that hasn’t been conveyed before. That’s the excitement. It’s a different kind of energy than writing my own plays, and I’ve found it’s very nice to do these things one after another. They re-energize each other. Translation requires such a thoroughness; I argue with myself over whether to put a ‘the’ in or not, which is something I don’t necessarily do in my own plays, and so it ends up making me tougher on my own work. Looking back on the ground you’ve covered in your lengthy career, can you draw any predictions about where you might be headed, based on where you’ve been? I can, just because I’ve started to work on something that’s crystallized for me. I
that dealt with societal issues in a more obvious way. Now I’ve tried to do both of those things in one play. I’m at a point in my life where I’m trying to bring the disparate threads of what I’ve been doing together.
The last time you were at the Huntington, it was with James Joyce’s The Dead, which you directed, and for which you wrote the book and lyrics. How are you feeling about this new collaboration? I’m looking forward to it — I’m a great fan of both Nicholas Martin and Kate Burton. This will be the first time I’ve worked with Nicky as a director, which is exciting for me. Kate appeared in my plays Misha’s Party and Some Americans Abroad, and she’s incredible. I love Boston very much. During The Dead, we were there during 9/11, so it’s full of a lot of emotion, a lot of memories. It’s a beautiful city and the Huntington has a gorgeous theatre —
“When doing a translation, what gives me the most fun is when I’ve understood something that hasn’t been conveyed before. That’s the excitement. It’s a different kind of energy than writing my own plays...” today. To translate those jokes and do them as he wrote them would make no sense to a modern audience, so you need to rethink and reconfigure. Now, is that an adaptation or is that a true translation? You can argue over the terms, but the goal is to try to understand the intention of the writer in relationship to his or her audience. My goal is a pure translation of the intention of the author, which may, in fact, mean changing things. Word-byword and literal scholarly translations are extremely valuable, but they are not presentable as theatre.
have a new play, Frank’s Home, about the architect Frank Lloyd Wright; it’s going to be done at the Goodman Theatre in Chicago and Playwrights Horizons in New York next season. It’s a play that attempts to bring two strands of my writing together. One is a sort of a infinite yet domestic kind of writing, intense and somewhat influenced by Strindberg, that can be seen in my last four or so plays — from Goodnight Children Everywhere to Madame Melville, Franny’s Way, and Rodney’s Wife. Then there is a more overtly social playwriting of the type I did earlier in my career — plays
actually it’s one of my favorite theatres. I think it just has a perfect relationship with its audience.
Some of Richard Nelson’s other works include The Killing of Yablonski, Principia Scriptoriae, Vienna Notes, Rip Van Winkle, Roots in Water, Tynan, Two Shakespearean Actors, Bal, Between East and West, New England, Chess (musical book), Ethan Frome (screenplay), and translations of plays by Chekhov, Goldoni, Brecht, Fo, Molière, Beaumarchais, Erdman, Pirandello, and Strindberg. Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
9
BACKGROUND
& Objectives Use the following synopsis and lesson objectives to inform your teaching of The Cherry Orchard curriculum. BU Theatre by T. Charles Erickson
Audience Etiquette Because many students have not had the opportunity to view live theatre, we are including an audience etiquette section with each literary/curriculum guide. Teachers, please spend time on this subject since it will greatly enhance your students’ experience at the theatre. 1. How does one respond to a live performance of a play, as opposed to when seeing a film at a local cinema? What is the best way to approach viewing a live performance of a play? What things should you look and listen for?
A
fter wasting her wealth on an extended stay in Europe, a Russian aristocrat returns to her family’s estate, only to discover that life there has changed as much as the country itself has changed during the late nineteenth century. The freeing of the serfs has enabled Lopákhin, the son of her former serf, to become a savvy and respected entrepreneur. Meanwhile, her own family cannot even afford to pay the mortgage. Their only option, it seems, is to destroy the estate’s most precious landmark, a cherry orchard, and build vacation homes that can be leased to Russia’s expanding middle class. Yet with the social hierarchy crumbling and the future so uncertain, they find it difficult to make any decisions, either about the estate or about themselves.
OBJECTIVES Students will: 1. Identify key issues in The Cherry Orchard including: • class struggle • the constant of change and who or what determines its value • the mystery of matchmaking 2. Relate themes and issues in the play to their own lives. 3. Analyze the themes and issues within the historical and social context of the play. 4. Participate in hands-on activities that enhance understanding of the production. 5. Evaluate the Huntington Theatre Company’s production of The Cherry Orchard.
2. What is the audience’s role during a live performance? How do you think audience behavior can affect an actor’s performance? 3. What do you know about the theatrical rehearsal process? Have you ever participated in one as an actor, singer, director, or technical person? 4. How do costumes, set, lights, sound and props enhance a theatre production? Cherry Blossoms on a Fence (detail); photo: S. Schleicher
10
Huntington Theatre Company
PREPARATION FOR
The Cherry Orchard Use the following ideas to engage your class in thinking about Anton Chekhov, introducing them to The Cherry Orchard and its major themes.
LITERATURE AND POLITICS The Cherry Orchard offers students a chance to witness the convergence of two major historical developments, one literary and one political. On the literary front, playwrights such as Chekhov were beginning to adopt a more modern style, known as realism, in which ordinary lives were depicted in everyday language. Before that time, plays tended to focus on the lives of powerful people, such as kings and queens, and to use more formal language. On the political front, the communist philosophies of nineteenth-century philosopher Karl Marx were beginning to spread. The serfs in Russia, like the slaves in America, had been emancipated in the 1860s, but economic inequality continued to be a grave concern. Less than two decades after the publication of The Cherry Orchard, Russia underwent a Marxist revolution led by Vladimir Lenin. In groups, have students discuss (a) how these literary and political developments might have influenced Chekhov’s work, and (b) whether the two developments might have been connected to each other. Have students draft a well-planned paragraph on one of these topics and then ask some students to share their paragraphs with the class. Create a list of any themes or main ideas that emerge. KEY ISSUES Class Struggle The fundamental issue in The Cherry Orchard is the breakdown of Russia’s traditional social structure. An aristocratic family, long accustomed to leisure and financial
security, loses their estate to Lopákhin, son of their former serf, who had been freed by the Tsar’s emancipation manifesto in 1861. This inversion of hierarchy places everyone in an uncomfortable position. Sometimes the discomfort is humorous, as when the increasingly wealthy Lopákhin frets about his poor penmanship, but at times it is quite painful. The characters struggle to accept their losses and to make sense of their gains. Trofímov (a tutor) hits upon a sober truth when he says to Madame Ranyévskaya and her brother Gáyev that “owning human beings has left its mark on all of you.” What types of marks has it left? How, if at all, might they be erased?
The Constant of Change and Who or What Determines its Value The destruction of the cherry orchard to make room for vacation homes is, on one level, a sign of progress. It means that more and more Russians can afford leisure activities that were previously available only to the aristocracy. But it also represents a further departure from the natural environment, yet another exchange of trees for buildings. When Trofímov remarks that “[t]his whole country is our orchard,” modern audiences cannot help but think of the unprecedented urban sprawl that we have witnessed in America during the past century. Trofímov portrays such development as inevitable, saying that “human beings are constantly progressing, and their power keeps growing.” But in the face of global warming and other environmental problems, one might question whether development always represents progress, or whether it necessarily increases our power over the world. More so today than when it was written, The Cherry Orchard forces audiences to confront the inherent ten-
sions between economic equality and sustainable development. Divide the class into two groups to debate the positions taken and decisions made by the various characters in The Cherry Orchard. Consider the inaction and sense of futility on the part of Madame Ranyévskaya and her brother Gáyev with the deliberate and ambitious actions of Lopákhin. Additionally, ask students to consider parallel situations and decision-making currently in their communities, in the state of Massachusetts or the United States, regarding use and potential abuse of land and natural resources. Are they willing to take a stand and defend that stand in agreement or in dissent with the choices made by Chekov’s characters or contemporary politicians, developers, etc?
The Mystery of Matchmaking The Cherry Orchard is filled with failed romances. Although everyone expects Lopákhin to propose to Várya, Madame Ranyévshaya’s stepdaughter, he seems to have no interest in marrying her. Similarly, although Dunyásha, the maid, receives a marriage proposal from the clumsy accountant Yepikhódov, she shows more interest in the opportunistic valet Yásha, who shares her yearning for upward mobility. And Trofímov, while he enjoys conversing with the younger Ánya, Madame Ranyévshaya’s daughter, envisions it as his scholarly duty to remain “above love.” All of these couples seem potentially compatible. What prevents them from making a match? Are they mismatched in social status, in personality, or in intellect? Consider the contrasting example of Madame Ranyévskaya, who recognizes that her lover is abusive but nevertheless intends to continue the relationship, deeming herself “beneath love.” What makes some relationships succeed and others fail? Ask students what qualities and characteristics make a positive relationship and how the relationships in The Cherry Orchard match up to our modern day standards. Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
11
“I rejoice in your existence. For a hundred years now you have borne the shining ideals of goodness and justice, a hundred years have not dimmed your silent summons to useful labor. To generations... you have offered courage, a belief in a better future, you have instructed us in ideals of goodness and social awareness.” The play itself is now a century old, having been published in 1904. Are Gáyev’s words in praise of the bookshelf also true of the play? Why or why not?
Photo: Oliver Gruener
OPEN RESPONSE & WRITING
Assignments Please answer the following as thoroughly as possible in a well-planned and carefully written essay. Remember to use topic sentences and examples from the text.
OPEN RESPONSE ASSESSMENT 1. What does the cherry orchard symbolize? 2. In your opinion, which character in The Cherry Orchard has the most positive personality? Which has the least positive? Explain your answers. 3. Why did Lopákhin decide not to ask Várya for her hand in marriage? Is he a bad person for making this decision? 12
Huntington Theatre Company
4. At the end of the play, the family’s old butler Firs is left behind at the estate, apparently to die. What is playwright Anton Chekhov trying to express through this impending death? Do you believe that he will die in the estate? 5. Did Lopákhin betray his friendship with Madame Ranyévskaya and her family by purchasing their estate at auction? Is it possible to separate business decisions from personal decisions?
WRITING ASSIGNMENTS 1. Early in the play, Leoníd Gáyev notices that a bookcase is one hundred years old and remarks:
2. Trofímov repeatedly asserts that to overcome their problems Russians must “make sacrifices, get down to work, and work harder than we’ve ever worked before.” Yet Trofímov himself is a lifelong student and thus has not held full-time employment. Is he a hypocrite? If so, does that make his words any less meaningful? 3. Madame Ranyévskaya was involved in a negative relationship with the man she left behind in Paris. She calls him “a millstone around my neck.” Nevertheless, she says that she loves him and “can’t live without him.” Why would she willingly submit to a relationship fraught with problems? 4. Choose one of the main characters in The Cherry Orchard, and write a journal entry from the point of view of this character, expanding on what we already know about him or her. Place the character at a key moment in the play, a time critical to propelling the action of the play forward. 5. Write a critical review of the Huntington Theatre Company’s production of The Cherry Orchard and submit it for publication in your school newspaper. Be sure to send the Huntington a copy!
MASTERY
Assessment ACT I 1. Who is about to arrive as The Cherry Orchard opens? How are they traveling? 2. Two proposals of marriage are mentioned, one that has already happened and one that is predicted. Name the two couples. 3. How is Gáyev related to Madame Ranyévskaya? What is his nervous habit? 4. How is Lopákhin, the businessman, connected to Madame Ranyévskaya and her family? 5. Lopákhin delivers some bad news about the estate. What is it? What plan does he offer for saving the estate? 6. Which student did Trofímov once tutor? What happened to that child?
ACT II 7. How did Madame Ranyévskaya lose all of her money in Europe? 8. Although Lopákhin is a successful businessman, he is embarrassed by something that reveals his lack of education. What is it?
9. What is Firs’s connection to the family? 10. What does Trofímov identify as the key to Russia’s progress?
ACT III 11. What is happening at the estate as Act III opens?
Related Works and Resources
12. What is happening in town at the same time?
MAJOR PLAYS BY CHEKHOV
13. From whom does Madame Ranyévskaya receive a telegram? What does it say?
The Seagull (1896) Uncle Vanya (1899) Three Sisters (1901)
14. Who winds up purchasing the estate? What is he planning to do with it?
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
ACT IV 15. Where is Trofímov heading after he leaves the estate? How did he come up with the money to get there? 16. What sound can be heard in the background? 17. What happens between Lopákhin and Várya? Where is Várya going when she leaves the estate? 18. Where does everyone assume Firs went? What actually happens to him at the end of the play?
Chekhov: Scenes from a Life, by Rosamund Bartlett (2006) A History of Russian Literature: From Its Beginnings to 1900, by D.S. Mirsky (1958) A Concise History of the Russian Revolution, by Richard Pipes (1996)
INFLUENCES ON CHEKHOV PLAY: The Wild Duck, by Henrik Ibsen (1884) SHORT STORY: The Necklace, by Guy de Maupassant (1884) BOOK: An Actor Prepares, by Konstantin Stanislavski (trans. 1936) Above: Anton Chekhov as a young man
Photo: Daniel Jaeger
Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
13
FOR FURTHER
EXPLORATION Note to Teachers: The following ideas and questions can be used to further explore the text. They can be used as prompts for class discussion or additional writing assignments. 1. When The Cherry Orchard premiered in 1904, it was directed by another giant of Russian theatre, Konstantin Stanislavski. Although Chekhov conceived of his play as a comedy, “in places even a farce,” Stanislavski insisted on presenting it as a tragedy. Research the life of Stanislavski and his contributions to the methods and principles of theatre. Why, given his views, might Stanislavski have preferred a tragic interpretation of The Cherry Orchard?
2. A major influence on Chekhov was his contemporary Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian playwright who is often called the father of modern drama because his plays were more realistic than any that had come before. Gather information on Ibsen’s techniques and compare them to those employed by Chekhov in The Cherry Orchard. Is Chekhov’s play also a good example of “realism”? Why or why not? 3. Madame Ranyévskaya cautions Trofímov: “The only good giants are in fairy tales. Real ones would scare you to death.” As it turned out, Russia produced two political
“giants” in the century following Chekhov’s play: Lenin and Stalin. Research both leaders and then analyze whether Madame Ranyévskaya’s warning proved true for Russia in the twentieth century. 4. Less than a decade before Chekhov wrote The Cherry Orchard, the English poet A.E. Housman wrote a famous poem about cherry trees. Look up the poem (hint: it begins with the line “Loveliest of trees, the cherry now”). Why has the cherry tree been such a popular symbol in literature? How is Housman’s use of it different from Chekhov’s?
Lenin Mural in Basement of Oslo Opera; photo: Paal Gladso
14
Huntington Theatre Company
MEDIA
Assessment The following exercises are interactive, hands-on challenges in Drama, Music, Visual Arts and Design. They aim to give students a better understanding of the many kinds of tasks that contribute to a theatrical production.
CHARACTERIZATION Have each student choose a character from The Cherry Orchard to portray. As if preparing for the role in rehearsal, have students answer the following questions about their characters: (1) What is my character’s objective in the play, and which obstacles must he or she overcome? (2) How does my character change during the course of the play? (3) Are there any contradictions inherent in my character? (4) What do other characters think of my character, and what does my character think of them? FROM WORDS TO ACTION Two characters in the play, Trofímov and Yepikhódov, seem enchanted by the sound of their own voices. Trofímov, using lyrical language, delivers passionate lectures on social change. Yepikhódov, in contrast, mangles his words. He often makes comments “for the sake of expressivity,” but they never express much of anything. It is clear to anyone who reads the play that Trofímov has a gift for oratory, whereas Yepikhódov does not. But relaying those attributes to an audience can be difficult. The actors have to become as smooth or as clumsy with words as the characters they are portraying. Have students select a short speech by Trofímov and Yepikhódov and deliver it to the class in character. After the performances, have the class discuss which acting techniques were most effective and why.
Barnaul, Altay, Russia; photo: Andrew Sergeyev
MUSIC Although the sale of the estate leaves the characters with little cause for celebration, they nevertheless throw a party in Act III. Imagine that you are directing a modernized version of The Cherry Orchard and that you need to select some contemporary songs to play in the background during the party. What mood would you try to establish with the music? Which specific songs would you choose? THE DESIGN PROCESS Have your students research clothing styles from early twentieth-century
Russia and create costume designs that would be appropriate for a production of The Cherry Orchard. Encourage students to gather pictures and renderings from that period and to choose colors, textures, and materials that reflect the trends, styles, and symbolism in this play. Students should also create a design concept for the set and props necessary in the show. They should be able to defend their choices and explain how each design reflects the historic and cultural context of the production. Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
15
Cherry Trees; photo: Wayne Dodge
QUESTIONS FOR AFTER
Attending the Performance Note to teachers: After viewing the play, ask the following questions:
C. Were the motivations of the characters clear?
1. About the Play and Production A. What was your overall reaction? Were you surprised? Intrigued? Amused? Explain your reactions. How was the play structured? Did it build to a single climax? Was it episodic? Did this structure help or hinder your understanding of the play? Was the dialogue interesting? Appropriate? Poetic? Were you aware of the imagery and symbolism during the course of the play? Would you have been aware of these devices without previous preparation?
D. What qualities were revealed by the action and speech of the characters?
B. Was the pace and tempo of the production effective and appropriate?
2. About the Characters A. Did the characters touch you personally in any way? Did you care about them? B. Were the characters three-dimensional and believable? 16
Huntington Theatre Company
E. Did the characters develop or undergo a transformation during the course of the play? F. In what ways did the characters reveal the themes of the play?
3. About the Set A. Was the set usable and workable? B. Was the set compatible with the production as a whole? Were there any features of the set that distracted from the action of the play? C. Did the design reflect the themes, type and style of the play? D. Were the artistic qualities of unity, balance, line, texture, mass and color used effectively? E. Did the set provide appropriate environment and atmosphere?
F. Was the set used to present any symbolic images or did it simply represent the space in which the action of the play occurred? Did it contain elements of both a “realistic” and a “symbolic” approach?
4. About Lighting and Sound A. What mood or atmosphere did the lighting establish? Was the illumination sufficient? Did the lighting harmonize with, and contribute toward, the unity of the production? B. How did the sound used in the play enhance your overall experience?
5. About Costumes/Makeup/Hairstyles A. Were all of these elements correct in terms of the period fashion? Were they suitable in terms of character and storytelling for the production? B. Did the color/design of the costumes and make-up serve to illuminate the themes, type, and style of the play?
Lesson Plans Teachers’ note: Choose activities that are appropriate for your classroom period. All assignments are suggestions. Only a teacher knows his or her class well enough to determine the level and depth to which any piece of literature may be examined.
ONE-DAY LESSON PLAN introduces students to the context and major themes of the production. DAY ONE - Introducing the Play 1. Distribute Mastery Assessment (P. 13) for The Cherry Orchard for students to read before, and to review again after attending the performance. Optional: Distribute Vocabulary Handout and ask students to define each word. A vocabulary test could be administered after viewing the play. 2. Read the Synopsis (P. 3) of the play. Discuss other works students have studied with similar themes and issues. 3. If time allows, discuss further pages from the literary guide, narrating highlights for students. 4. Ask students to complete Handout #2, “Lost in Translation,” for homework. FOUR-DAY LESSON PLAN introduces students to the production and then, after viewing the performance, asks them to think more critically about what they have seen. Includes time for class discussion and individual assessment. DAY ONE - Introducing the Play Same as Day One above; completed before seeing the production. DAY TWO - The Production Attend the performance at the Huntington Theatre Company. Homework: Students should answer the Mastery Assessment questions. DAY THREE - Follow-up Discussion Discuss Mastery Assessment answers in class. DAY FOUR - Test Individual Assessment: Choose either several questions from the Open Response (P. 12) or one question from Writing Assignments (P. 12) for students to answer in one class period. Optional: Students may choose one of the For Further Exploration (P. 14) or Media Assessment (P. 15) tasks to complete for extra credit. SEVEN-DAY LESSON PLAN completely integrates The Cherry Orchard into your schedule. Within seven school days, you can introduce the play, assign reading and vocabulary, and assess your students on both a group and individual level. Students will ideally view the play after completing Mastery Assessment questions. DAY ONE - Introducing the play Same as Day One above. Homework: Read Act One and answer corresponding Mastery Assessment questions. Optional: Distribute Vocabulary Handout due on Day Four. DAY TWO - Act I and Act II Discuss the first two acts and answers to Mastery Assessment questions. Homework: Read the play’s final two acts and answer corresponding Mastery Assessment questions. Limelight Literary & Curriculum Guide 2006-2007
17
DAY THREE - Act III and Act IV Discuss the final two acts and answers to Mastery Assessment questions. Optional: Complete Vocabulary Handout for homework. DAY FOUR - Attend Performance Optional: Vocabulary Handout due! DAY FIVE - Group Work Divide students into groups. Ask them to select one scene from the play to interpret for the class. They may act out the scene in a traditional or non-traditional fashion. Tasks should be evenly divided among the members of the group. DAY SIX - Presentations Have the groups perform their scenes for the class. After the performances, have students discuss the differences between the groups’ respective approaches. Homework: Students should prepare for the test on the following day. DAY SEVEN - Test Individual Assessment: Choose either several questions from the Open Response or one question from the Writing Assignments for students to answer in one class period. Optional: Students may choose to complete one of the For Further Exploration or Media Assessment tasks for extra credit.
Barnaul, Altay, Russia; photo: Andrew Sergeyev
18
Huntington Theatre Company
Name:_______________________________________________________
Handout 1
VOCABULARY concurrence convent counterfeit directive exemplary extenuating foreclosed glutton governess grotesque inanimate incorrigible lease mortgage radiant rigorous sordid tempest tenements uncanny
Date:_____________________
Name:_______________________________________________________
Date:_____________________
Handout 2
LOST IN TRANSLATION Chekhov wrote The Cherry Orchard in Russian. You will be watching one of many English translations of the play. Each translation is unique. Some translators stick to the script and try to be as literal as possible. Others take a more creative approach, using modern phrasings with which the audience will be more familiar. Translation is more of an art than a science! The following exercises will give you an opportunity to play the role of translator. A. NAME GAME. Many of the characters in The Cherry Orchard are called by unflattering names. Because name-calling tends to change from culture to culture and from time to time, these nicknames can be difficult to translate. In the table below, you will see three different translations of the Russian nicknames used in Chekhov’s play. After reading them, try to come up with your own new translation. Think of a word or phrase that still conveys the same basic meaning as the other translations, but that reflects your everyday language. CHARACTER DESCRIBED
TRANSLATION #1
TRANSLATION #2
TRANSLATION #3
Trofímov
“high-class tramp”
“mouldy gentleman”
“used-up old gentleman”
Yepikhódov
“double trouble”
Lopákhin
“money grubber”
“snob”
“scoundrel”
Yásha
“flibbertigibbet”
“job-lot”
“silly galoot”
Píshchik
“wonder boy”
“nature’s masterpiece”
“one of nature’s miracles”
YOUR TRANSLATION
“twenty-two misfortunes” “two and twenty hard knocks”
B. SLANG-UAGE. Although you may not realize it, you probably use many words that your grandparents, and maybe even your parents, do not understand. Try to translate these popular slang words and phrases into language that older generations could easily understand. no clue:
my bad:
dissed:
keep it real:
mad skills:
give me props:
that’s cool:
don’t have a cow:
hottie:
what’s up:
just chilling:
bling-bling: