Chekhov had such an influence on me as a young, hyper-insecure teen. Chekhov's craft is powerful and widely taught but it's his thematic elements that I really loved. he made a habit of setting up a deeply unlikeable character in the first act, slowly revealing their tragedies and traumas that led them to their insecurity, and the selective love they put into the world so by the final act you're weeping for someone who you scoffed at at first impression. for someone who was so convinced that people disliked or hated him, it was a real balm to know that there were those advocating for the strongest form of compassion as the default mode and not just an occasional, extraordinary act
Well, I can only quote Pushkin's letter to Vyazemsky (used Google AI to translate; in the letter Pushkin wrote about Lord Byron's lost personal memoirs):
"The crowd greedily reads confessions, memoirs, etc., because in its baseness it rejoices at the humiliation of the high, the weaknesses of the mighty. At the discovery of every vice it is in raptures: 'He is small like us, he is vile like us!' You lie, you scoundrels! He may be small and vile—but not like you—differently!"
It is a funny quote, and probably true. But I imagine that few people who are willing to read a serious article about Anton Chekhov these days actually have much interest in rejoicing in seeing his weaknesses.
I think it is important to separate the artist's life from their works of art.Their lives are in some way immaterial to the enjoyment of their work, which even they themselves may not fully comprehend.
Also life is messy:
“You know how you’re always trying to get things to come out perfect in art because it’s real difficult in life"
Unfortunately, a lot of people don't seem to think that way. Which is made more unfortunate by targeted character assassination attempts intended to discredit everything a person has said. Not saying that is what's going on here at all, but it's always at the top of my mind when I see something that looks like a hit piece: "What's the intent of the authors?"
Chekhov's plays more than his stories are instructive here. His masterwork, The Cherry Orchard turns in large part on the intentions of Lophahkin the merchant upstart and whether he loves Varya who is attached to a higher social eshelon. In the scene where Lopahkin, is supposed to propose to Varya, he stalls until he is called away, a reflection of the playwright's and the character's ambivalence towards romantic love. In the early one act The Bear, the Widow claims to be "in morning for my life" and has vowed never again to marry. Within the span of 45 minutes she has surrendered to the Bear who has come to her door.
As a person, unfortunately accursed with an ability to read Chekhov in original, I just say that you should take Chekhov and Gogol and leave tolstoevsky at it's honorary doorstop place.
Also, communist-era science fiction in the accursed language reads much better than anything written in English in the same period (and beyond), if only for the fact that it doesn't suffer from the apocalyptic framing and general doom and gloom. Also, whoever posted the starfish here a few weeks ago, thanks, I wish I could unread it.
Chekhov had such an influence on me as a young, hyper-insecure teen. Chekhov's craft is powerful and widely taught but it's his thematic elements that I really loved. he made a habit of setting up a deeply unlikeable character in the first act, slowly revealing their tragedies and traumas that led them to their insecurity, and the selective love they put into the world so by the final act you're weeping for someone who you scoffed at at first impression. for someone who was so convinced that people disliked or hated him, it was a real balm to know that there were those advocating for the strongest form of compassion as the default mode and not just an occasional, extraordinary act
Well, I can only quote Pushkin's letter to Vyazemsky (used Google AI to translate; in the letter Pushkin wrote about Lord Byron's lost personal memoirs):
"The crowd greedily reads confessions, memoirs, etc., because in its baseness it rejoices at the humiliation of the high, the weaknesses of the mighty. At the discovery of every vice it is in raptures: 'He is small like us, he is vile like us!' You lie, you scoundrels! He may be small and vile—but not like you—differently!"
It is a funny quote, and probably true. But I imagine that few people who are willing to read a serious article about Anton Chekhov these days actually have much interest in rejoicing in seeing his weaknesses.
I think it is important to separate the artist's life from their works of art.Their lives are in some way immaterial to the enjoyment of their work, which even they themselves may not fully comprehend.
Also life is messy:
“You know how you’re always trying to get things to come out perfect in art because it’s real difficult in life"
Woody Allen in Annie Hall
Unfortunately, a lot of people don't seem to think that way. Which is made more unfortunate by targeted character assassination attempts intended to discredit everything a person has said. Not saying that is what's going on here at all, but it's always at the top of my mind when I see something that looks like a hit piece: "What's the intent of the authors?"
Do watch Romance with a double bass (1975) [0]. Wonderful, not very well-known short film adaptation of a Chekhov story featuring John Cleese.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1U42izMOjs
Chekhov's plays more than his stories are instructive here. His masterwork, The Cherry Orchard turns in large part on the intentions of Lophahkin the merchant upstart and whether he loves Varya who is attached to a higher social eshelon. In the scene where Lopahkin, is supposed to propose to Varya, he stalls until he is called away, a reflection of the playwright's and the character's ambivalence towards romantic love. In the early one act The Bear, the Widow claims to be "in morning for my life" and has vowed never again to marry. Within the span of 45 minutes she has surrendered to the Bear who has come to her door.
I am the webmaster for WASHU (rebranding from WUSTL). Happy to see one of those sites on the front page of HN without getting as much as an alert!
(Hosting hundreds of WordPress sites at scale has its challenges).
go bears!
As a person, unfortunately accursed with an ability to read Chekhov in original, I just say that you should take Chekhov and Gogol and leave tolstoevsky at it's honorary doorstop place.
Also, communist-era science fiction in the accursed language reads much better than anything written in English in the same period (and beyond), if only for the fact that it doesn't suffer from the apocalyptic framing and general doom and gloom. Also, whoever posted the starfish here a few weeks ago, thanks, I wish I could unread it.
This article sent me to Joyce's letters to his wife (https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2018/02/02/james-joyces-...) which are ... dirty. Amazingly so. Inspiring use of English.
I thought this was about Anton Yelchin. RIP.
Now I'm just wondering if wustl is still running any excellent FTP servers.