Merchant Lopakhin cherry orchard characteristics.

home

The play “The Cherry Orchard” became the swan song, the pinnacle work of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. The anticipation of big changes in the life of the country made the writer think about the historical path of Russia, about its past, present and future. Chekhov had never set himself such a task before. However, in Russian literature the theme of impoverishment and decline of noble estates was not new. At one time, N.V. Gogol, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, I.A. Goncharov, I.S. Turgenev and other Russian writers of the 19th century addressed this topic, but Chekhov approached the disclosure of this topic in a completely new way : in connection with times, in showing the changes that I saw in Russia.
At the same time, in the play there is no acute clash of opposing ideas, moral principles, characters - its conflict is of an internal, psychological nature.
The present in the play is personified, first of all, by the merchant Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin. The author attached special significance to this image: “...Lopakhin’s role is central. If it fails, then the whole play will fail.” Lopakhin replaces Ranevsky and Gaev, and in comparison with representatives of the past he is progressive; it is no coincidence that A.P. Chekhov placed him at the center of the figurative system of his work.
Lopakhin undoubtedly has intelligence, business acumen and enterprise. He is energetic, and the scope of his activities is much wider than that of the previous masters of life. At the same time, most of Lopakhin’s fortune was earned by his own labor, and the path to wealth was not easy for him. “I sowed a thousand dessiatines of poppy in the spring and now I have earned forty thousand net,” he says. “And when my poppy bloomed, what a picture it was!” Individual remarks and remarks indicate that Lopakhin has some big “business” in which he is completely absorbed. But at the same time, he easily parted with the money, lending it to Ranevskaya, just as persistently offering it to Petya Trofimov: “So, I say, I earned forty thousand and, therefore, I’m offering you a loan because I can.” He always lacks time: he either returns or is going on business trips. “You know,” he says, “I get up at five o’clock in the morning, I work from morning to evening...”; “I can’t live without work, I don’t know what to do with my hands; hanging out somehow strangely, like strangers”; “And I’m leaving for Kharkov now... There’s a lot to do.”
Lopakhin looks at his watch more often than others; his first remark is: “What time is it?” He constantly remembers the time: “I have to go to Kharkov now, at five o’clock in the morning”; “It’s October, but it’s sunny and quiet like summer. Build well. (Looking at the clock, at the door.) Gentlemen, keep in mind, there are only forty-six minutes left before the train! That means we’ll be heading to the station in twenty minutes. Hurry up." The characters perceive Lopakhin differently. Their reviews of him are very contradictory: for Ranevskaya he is “a good, interesting person”, for Gaev he is a “boor”, a “kulak”, for Simeonov-Pishchik he is “a man of enormous intelligence”. Petya Trofimov gives a playful description of Lopakhin:
“I, Ermolai Alekseevich, understand: you are a rich man, you will soon be a millionaire. Just as in terms of metabolism we need a predatory beast that eats everything that gets in its way, so we need you.” Parting with Lopakhin, he says seriously: “...After all, I still love you. You have tender fingers, like an artist, you have a subtle, unclear soul...” The contradiction inherent in these statements by Petya Trofimov reflects the position of the author.
He defines his hero as a “klutz.” This is manifested both in appearance (white vest, yellow shoes) and in actions: he likes Varya, who hopes that Ermolai Lopakhin will propose to her, but when the girl cries in response to Ranevskaya’s tactless remark that she has been matched, Lopakhin, as if mockingly says: “Okhmelia, oh nymph, remember me in your prayers” (he cannot marry a dowry). Or another clear example: Lopakhin came on purpose to meet Ranevskaya - and “suddenly overslept”, wanted to help her - and bought the estate himself. Chekhov, as a realist artist, sought to emphasize the contradictions between the good qualities of human nature of the “new masters” and the inhumanity generated by their thirst for profit and acquisition.
Lopakhin, like every hero of “The Cherry Orchard,” is absorbed in “his own truth,” immersed in his experiences, does not notice much, does not feel in those around him, and at the same time acutely senses the imperfection of life: “Oh, if only all this would pass, sooner If only our awkward, unhappy life would change somehow.” Lopakhin sees the reasons for this “awkward, unhappy” life in the imperfection of man, in the meaninglessness of his existence: “You just need to start doing something to understand how few honest, decent people there are...”, “...And how many, brother , in Russia, people who exist for no one knows why.”
Lopakhin is the central figure of the work. Threads stretch from him to all the characters. He is the link between the past and the future. Of all the characters, Lopakhin clearly sympathizes with Ranevskaya. He keeps warm memories of her. In a conversation with Dunyasha he says:
“I remember when I was a boy of about fifteen, my late father - he was selling in a shop here in the village back then - hit me in the face with his fist, blood started coming out of my nose... Lyubov Andreevna, as I remember now, was still young, so thin, let me down me to the washstand, in this very room, in the nursery. “Don’t cry, he says, little man, he’ll heal before the wedding...”
For him, Lyubov Andreevna is “still the same magnificent” woman with “amazing”, “touching eyes”. He admits that he loves her “like his own... more than his own,” he sincerely wants to help her and finds, in his opinion, the most profitable “salvation” project. The location of the estate is “wonderful” - there is a railroad twenty miles away and a river nearby. You just need to divide the territory into plots and rent them out to summer residents, while having a considerable income. According to Lopakhin, the issue can be resolved very quickly, the matter seems profitable to him, you just need to “clean up, clean up... for example, ... demolish all the old buildings, this old house, which is no longer good for anything, cut down the old cherry tree garden...". Lopakhin convinces Ranevskaya and Gaev that they need to make this “only correct” decision, not realizing that his reasoning will deeply hurt them.
Convinced of the futility of his attempts to persuade Ranevskaya and Gaev, Lopakhin himself becomes the owner of the “cherry orchard”. Genuine pride can be heard in his monologue: “If only my father and grandfather would get up from their graves and look at the whole incident like their Ermolai... bought an estate, the most beautiful of which there is nothing in the world. I bought an estate where my grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen...” This feeling intoxicates him. Having become the owner of the Ranevskaya estate, the new owner dreams of a new life: “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 our dachas, and our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will see a new life... Music, play!”
The “new master” of life, Lopakhin, personifies the new time. He is the only one who can come closer to understanding the essence of the era, but in his life there is no place for real beauty, sincerity, humanity, because Lopakhin is a symbol only of the present. The future belongs to other people

“The Cherry Orchard” is considered an example of a dramatic classic. Its creation accompanied a turning point in Russian theater and Russian literature. This is a lyrical comedy with a sad aftertaste characteristic of Chekhov's works.

History of creation

Literary scholars believe that the play is autobiographical. The plot of the work is built around a bankrupt noble family forced to sell the family estate. Chekhov happened to find himself in a similar situation, so he knew the experiences of his heroes firsthand. The mental state of each character was familiar to the writer, as a person faced with the need to leave his home. The narrative is permeated with subtle psychologism.

The innovation of the play lay in the fact that its characters were not divided into positive and negative characters, not into main and secondary ones. These were people of the past, present and future, whom the writer classified according to their worldview. Lopakhin was a representative of the present, although sometimes there is a feeling that he could lay claim to the position of a man of the future.

Work on the work was carried out from 1901 to 1903. Chekhov was seriously ill, but completed the play, and in 1904 the premiere of a theatrical production based on a new plot took place on the stage of the Moscow Art Theater.

"The Cherry Orchard"

The biography and fate of Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin is closely connected with the life of the Ranevskaya family. The hero's father was a serf to Father Ranevskaya and lived in small trade. The young lady showed sympathy for the young man, who was constantly bombarded by his father, and he talks about this, recalling the story of life in serfdom. Ranevskaya’s attitude excited the consciousness of Ermolai Lopakhin. He liked the caress of an attractive girl, but he understood that there was an abyss between them based on slavery. Even the meaning of the hero’s surname and name suggests that he is intended for a completely different society.

Lopakhin became rich by becoming a merchant and was able to change his fate. He made himself and, despite the lack of proper education, became one of the people, of which he is incredibly proud. Although he admits that books are empty for him, and his handwriting has never acquired a noble appearance. The former serf achieved everything through hard work; his whole life consists of work. Lopakhin is in a hurry all the time, looking at his watch, waiting for a new meeting. He knows how to manage his own time and finances, unlike the Ranevskaya family.

Lopakhin more than once starts a conversation about the cherry orchard, offering help. He easily parts with money by lending money, but in the case of the estate being sold, something else is involved: Lopakhin loves Ranevskaya. He acts nobly, offering to buy the garden and rent it out as summer cottages, although he could have quietly bought it for his own use.

Lopakhin demonstrates business qualities that are surprising for a former serf. He is practical and calculating, but does not use his talents against those close to him. At the same time, some characters give an unflattering description of the hero, believing that Lopakhin is pursuing the possibility of a profitable deal.

Throughout the action, the conversation repeatedly comes up about Lopakhin's marriage to Vara. Ermolai does not marry the girl not because of the lack of a dowry, but because of the issue of cutting down the garden. Varya sees in the groom only a businessman for whom the wedding can be beneficial as a deal. Incoherent dialogues between the characters make it clear that there is no mutual understanding between them. The love for Ranevskaya, warming in Lopakhin’s heart, does not allow him to think about other women. The hero proposes to Varya solely at the request of his beloved.

In the play, each character loses something along with The Cherry Orchard. Lopakhin loses faith in love, realizing that the image of a simple man has forever been assigned to him in Ranevskaya’s perception. Having bought Ranevskaya’s garden at auction, he, a representative of the future, the owner of an estate where his family was in service, falls into euphoria. But, having acquired the garden, he did not achieve the fulfillment of a dream that remained unattainable. Ranevskaya leaves Russia, going to Paris, and Lopakhin is left alone with the estate where he spent his youth.

At the end of the play, Ermolai Alekseevich talks about his awkward life. It becomes obvious to him that everything he strived for turned out to be empty. He realizes how many people in his country exist aimlessly and do not understand what they live for.

The author's attitude towards Lopakhin is not as negative as that of other characters in the play. Chekhov considers Lopakhin a “klutz” and justifies the hero with a lack of education and upbringing. Many of Lopakhin’s actions indicate that, despite his business acumen, the man is not distinguished by simple forethought. He is late for the train to meet Ranevskaya. Wanting to help her out of trouble, he buys a garden. He decides to ask Varya to marry and immediately forgets about it.

The image of Lopakhin has been incredibly relevant in recent decades. This is a “hero of our time”, skillfully building a business, but callous in soul. A person incapable of perception and thinking exclusively about his own self-realization through material wealth. Ermolai Lopakhin presents with his description an anti-portrait of Chekhov. A sensitive writer, whose works are full of philosophical meaning and tragedy, is the complete opposite of the son of serfs who has made it into the people.

Film adaptations

The first film adaptation of the play by Russian playwright Chekhov was made in Japan in 1936 by director Morato Makoto. The characters were modernized to match current Japanese images. In 1959, director Daniel Petri shot the film “The Cherry Orchard,” in which Martin Hirte played the role of Lopakhin. In Jan Bull's 1973 production, the image of Lopakhin was absent, and in the 1976 Soviet film adaptation, Yuri Kayurov appeared as a merchant in Leonid Kheifetz's teleplay.

Richard Eid in 1981 directed Bill Paterson in the role of Lopakhin, and played Ermolai in the 1983 Soviet film by Igor Ilyinsky. Anna Chernakova, who directed the film “The Cherry Orchard” 10 years later, invited Lopakhin to play the role. The image of the merchant in the television film by Sergei Ovcharov in 2008 went to. The most famous performer of this role on the theater stage became.

Quotes

Lopakhin is beautiful by the fact that he does not forget his place. Like any person who has not seen a prosperous life, he is proud of what he managed to achieve without patronage and help. For him, the main expression of success is material wealth:

“My father, it’s true, was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes.”

The hero understands how valuable an education he did not receive would be in his current situation. He also feels that he lacks the ability to understand the world that he is so eager to get into, where he wants to be accepted as “one of his own”:

“My dad was a man, an idiot, he didn’t understand anything, he didn’t teach me, he just beat me when he was drunk, and that was all with a stick. In essence, I’m just as much of a blockhead and an idiot. I haven’t studied anything, my handwriting is bad, I write in such a way that people are ashamed of me, like a pig.”

Lopakhin's main achievement is that he manages to understand: the life he strives for is worthless. Money doesn't bring him pleasure. Owning a cherry orchard makes him understand that his dreams turned out to be empty, the pleasure from their fulfillment is doubtful. Work becomes the main life credo for the hero:

“When I work for a long time, tirelessly, then my thoughts are lighter, and it seems as if I also know why I exist. And how many people, brother, are there in Russia who exist for no one knows why.”

Question

How is the image of Lopakhin interpreted? Why doesn't Gaev like him?

Answer

Lopakhin is a representative of the bourgeoisie, replacing the nobility. Chekhov wrote to Stanislavsky: “Lopakhin, it’s true, is a merchant, but a decent person in every sense, he should behave quite decently, intelligently, without tricks.”

The vulgarity of life comes at him from all sides, he acquires the features of a rogue merchant, and begins to flaunt his origin and lack of culture.

Answer

“Good God! My father was a serf to your grandfather and father..."

“...My dad was a man, an idiot, he didn’t understand anything, he didn’t teach me, he just beat me when he was drunk, and that was with a stick. In essence, I’m just as much of a blockhead and an idiot. I haven’t studied anything, my handwriting is bad, I write in such a way that people are ashamed of me, like a pig.”

Question

Why does Petya say about him “a beast of prey” and “a gentle soul”? How to understand this?

Answer

This character is no stranger to sentimentality. He is sensitive to poetry in the broad sense of the word, he has, as Petya Trofimov says, “thin, gentle fingers, like an artist... a subtle, gentle soul.”

Lopakhin is sincerely ready to help Ranevskaya, he is almost in love with her. In the end he buys a cherry orchard, i.e. acts contrary to his wishes.

Lopakhin is very dependent on time. He constantly looks at his watch, urging himself and others: “It’s time,” “Hurry up.” He is so dependent on time that he does not dare follow his feelings: he wants to see Ranevskaya, talk to her - and leaves, postponing the conversation. His life has its own “ghosts,” ambiguities, and uncertainties, for example, his relationship with Varya. Bitterly, Lopakhin admits to Petya: “And how many people, brother, are there in Russia who exist for no one knows why.” Lopakhin has taken possession of the cherry orchard, but feels the fragility of his position and anticipates a radical change in life. Thus, in Lopakhin a “beast of prey” and a “tender soul” coexist.

Question

What quality will win in Lopakhino?

Answer

Pragmatism

Question

What features of Lopakhin are attractive?

Question

Why do Gaev and Ranevskaya refuse Lopakhin's offer?

Answer

Lopakhin is a pragmatist, a man of action. Already in the first act, he joyfully announces: “There is a way out... Here is my project. Attention please! Your estate is located only twenty miles from the city, there is a railroad nearby, and if the cherry orchard and the land along the river are divided into dacha plots and then rented out as dachas, then you will have at least twenty-five thousand a year in income.”

True, this “exit” into a different, material plane - the plane of benefit and benefit, but not beauty, therefore it seems “vulgar” to the owners of the garden.

conclusions

The meaning of Lopakhin’s complex and contradictory image is to show the new “masters of life.” Lopakhin's remarks contain judgments that are not typical of his image. Most likely, thoughts about the homeland, about an awkward, unhappy life are the voice of the author himself.

Questions

Why doesn't Lopakhin propose to Varya?

What future of Russia is he talking about?

Why does he more than once call life “stupid”, “awkward”?

What is unique about Lopakhin’s speech?

How does his attitude towards Ranevskaya and Gaev characterize?

Literature

1. D.N. Murin. Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. Methodological recommendations in the form of lesson planning. Grade 10. M.: SMIO Press, 2002.

2. E.S. Rogover. Russian literature of the 19th century. M.: Saga; Forum, 2004.

3. Encyclopedia for children. T. 9. Russian literature. Part I. From epics and chronicles to the classics of the 19th century. M.: Avanta+, 1999.

Lopakhin, it is true, is a merchant, but a decent one

human in every sense.

A. Chekhov. From letters

The play “The Cherry Orchard” was written by Chekhov in 1903, when great social changes were brewing in Russia. The nobility collapsed, a new class emerged - the bourgeoisie, whose representative in the play is Ermolai Lopakhin.

Chekhov persistently emphasized the significance and complexity of this image: “... Lopakhin’s role is central. If it fails, then the whole play will fail.”

Lopakhin became the new owner of the cherry orchard; he is a symbol of the real Russia. What is it, is it real?

Lopakhin’s father was a “man” - “he traded in a shop in the village.” And Ermolai says about himself: “He’s just rich, he has a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, he’s a man.”

This hero apparently inherited his love of work from his ancestors, and achieved everything in life on his own. His capital is not inherited, but earned. Active and active, Lopakhin was accustomed to relying on his own strength in everything. He really has a “subtle, gentle soul”, he knows how to feel beauty: he is sincerely admired by the garden, “there is nothing more beautiful in the world”, a blooming poppy field. And at the same time, his delight at the profitable sale of poppies is quite understandable.

Lopakhin cannot be considered a villain who snuck into a noble family with evil intent. In fact, he is deeply decent and sincerely attached to Ranevskaya, who once did a lot of kindness for him: “... You, in fact, you once did so much for me that I... love you like dear... more than his own..." That is why he wants to save Ranevskaya and Gaev from ruin, tries to teach them, calls them to action and, seeing how weak-willed these people are, unable to solve even minor everyday problems, sometimes he comes into despair.

Like Ranevskaya, Lopakhin is attached to this house and garden, but this attachment is of a completely different nature than memories of all the good things in life. Lop-khin's father and grandfather were serf "slaves" in a house where "they were not even allowed into the kitchen." Having become the owner of the estate, Ermolai is proud and happy, he wants his ancestors to be happy for him because “their Ermolai, the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, who ran barefoot in the winter,” managed to advance in life. Material from the site

Lopakhin dreams that “our awkward, unhappy life will somehow change,” and is ready to completely destroy the terrible memory of the past. But in this case, his businesslike nature eradicates the spirituality in him, and he himself understands this: he cannot read books - he falls asleep, he does not know how to deal with his love. Saving the cherry orchard, he cuts it down to rent out the land to summer residents, and the beauty dies in his hands. He doesn’t even have the tact to wait for his former owners to leave.

It is clear from everything that Lopakhin feels like the master of life, but the author is clearly not on the side of the man who mercilessly chops down the trunks of beautiful trees with an ax.

It seems to me that the image of Lopakhin is ambiguous; he cannot be called either exclusively a “beast of prey” or only the owner of a “subtle, gentle soul.” These character qualities are combined in him, due to the difficult transition period in the social life of Russia. But the contradictions of Lopakhin’s image precisely constitute the interest and drama of a new type of people - the masters of Russia in Chekhov’s present.

Lopakhin is a merchant and represents the face of a new era, which will fill Russia and destroy the old classes. Landowners are being replaced by capitalists, who in turn came from the common people, but received significant opportunities.

In fact, the story is not new and Chekhov did not ironize the figure of the rich Lopakhin, who can communicate on equal terms with the people who actually owned his ancestors. Ermolai Alekseevich himself has a fairly high degree of accurate reflection and has no illusions about himself. He calls himself a simple man and this makes sense, just as his ancestors got up before dawn and went to bed at night and worked, he also works incessantly, just conditions have changed and now such people can make capital.

In essence, Lapakhin is an illustration of how a more or less decent person who is allowed to certain opportunities will behave. He behaves in many ways ruthlessly and does not have the refinement of nature, high ideals and sublimity of mind. At the same time, it is he who describes the cherry orchard reverently.

Although for Lopakhin such a description is simply beautiful words and a slight movement of the soul, he really simply does not feel deeply, he cannot understand the deep feelings that its owners have for the garden. Yes, Lopakhin likes the garden, but he likes money more, and likes the opportunity to earn money and work in general. Therefore, he easily parts with the garden and even more so.

Chekhov skillfully presents some of the predatory, and, let’s say, “gluttonous” nature of Lopakhin, who, having achieved his goal (buying a garden), can no longer control himself. He dances around and even cuts down the garden before the owners leave - probably precisely to demonstrate his own power, in order to offend Ranevskaya, but mainly Gaev.

Of course, Ermolai is not a negative character in the literal sense, but if you look at it from the side of the landowners, he does not have any special inner dignity. Lopakhin knows about this and is not at all sad, because he can buy a garden, which the landowners cannot, who do not fall asleep over books, but are not particularly awake for this harsh and simple new world that Chekhov foresaw.

Essay about Lopakhin

A man, a man, Lopakhin says about himself. This image is collective and represents, to some extent, the ruler of modern times.

Lopakhin is truly the ruler of the coming era, he managed to make money thanks to new conditions. Such hardworking people become merchants and businessmen and amass capital. They belong to high society, but do not pretend to high culture and high ideals; they fall asleep over books, but work a lot.

For Lopakhin, the cherry orchard (which, by the way, personifies Russia) does not carry any symbolic ideal or shrine, it is only a profitable space for creating summer cottages and receiving money for rent. Quite a short time after Chekhov wrote his play, men like Lopakhin will march en masse throughout the country, dividing up plots for summer residents, and in general, as they say, “selecting them and dividing them up.” Lopakhins do not really need the comfort and grace of high society; they are practical people.

Of course, this world needs people like Lopakhin, simple and active, but when they become the main driving force and replace the elite, then the country turns from a cherry orchard into vulgar areas for summer residents. Of course, Gaev’s happiness is also vulgar, his philistinism is no good, however, Lopakhin’s proletarian happiness does not look like a healthy alternative.

After all, what is happiness for Lopakhin? We see at the end of the play, when he loses control, begins to dance and does not even allow Ranevskaya and the others to leave the estate calmly, he begins to cut down the garden in front of the former owners, in order, as they say, to rub his nose in. Previously, Lopakhin's ancestors worked in this garden for their owners, but now he is the king of the world, who has achieved everything with his hump.

Yes, Lopakhin is hardworking, but, in essence, he achieves everything only through brute force. He received a more or less normal upbringing and some moral principles precisely thanks to the landowners and the Ranevskaya family in particular. By the way, with representatives of the upper class he continues to behave politely and restrains himself, although as soon as he gets what he is looking for, his old manners disappear and Lopakhin becomes a simple and rude predator who sees only the practical side of existence.

Of course, Chekhov does not see Lopakhin as a negative figure; he probably sees in him the natural course of the world, just as the seasons replace each other, so when the landowners become pampered Gaevs, the more practical and stern Lopakhins come to replace them. This is a change of eras, which Chekhov accurately saw and characterized in his own creation.

Option 3

At the center of the play is A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" - sale of a neglected noble estate. The owners, a former rich noble family, are unbusinesslike people, not adapted to the new living conditions. The representative of the new social force that replaced the nobility at the beginning of the 20th century - the bourgeoisie - is one of the heroes of the play - the merchant Lopakhin.

Lopakhin Ermolai Alekseevich is the grandson and son of serfs, an honest, hardworking, energetic person. The bulk of his fortune was earned by his own labor. He is illiterate and has never studied anywhere. But he has business acumen and intelligence. Lopakhin is completely absorbed in some task, he always lacks time, he is constantly on the road. He cannot live without work. He is the only one among the characters in the play who constantly looks at his watch and is interested in time. Lopakhin does not regret lending money to Ranevskaya and Simeonov-Pishchik, and offers it to Petya Trofimov. He is a reasonable, but kind, decent person.

Lopakhin is not at all an enemy of the nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev. On the contrary, he feels sympathy for them and really wants to help. Lopakhin does not want to destroy the cherry orchard, but gives practical advice: divide the garden into plots for summer cottages and rent them out for a reasonable fee. But for them, noble intellectuals, this sounds like an insult. The Cherry Orchard for them is the personification of the noble past. Lopakhin cannot understand why all his impulses to help do not find a response. This is their last chance. He is annoyed by their delay. For him, a garden is an object of purchase and sale, a profitable investment of capital.

Lopakhin is not given personal happiness. His relationship with Varya is complicated. She wants to marry Lopakhin, seeing him as a suitable match. But he hesitates to propose to her, although he understands that this is expected of him. He doesn't love her, he's bored with her. Lopakhin has warm feelings for Ranevskaya. He remembers how kind she was to him, protecting him from his father’s beatings as a child. He lends her money and wants to help. But Lyubov Andreevna does not take Lopakhin’s feelings seriously.

As a result, it is Lopakhin who turns out to be the owner of the garden. He is both happy and embarrassed at the same time. He is the owner of an estate in which his grandfather and father were serfs. The acquisition of an estate is evidence of his success in life and self-affirmation. He is shocked by Ranevskaya's tears. In Lopakhin’s last desperate words, which he addresses to her, one senses an understanding of the impossibility of living the way one wants.

Several interesting essays

• Analysis of the battle between Mtsyri and the leopard with quotes

  Analyzing the poem “Mtsyri” by M. Yu. Lermontov, the first thing that comes to mind is the fight between the main character and the leopard. This episode in the work is key and fully reveals its meaning - freedom is more valuable than life in captivity.

• Analysis of the work Mistress of the Copper Mountain by Bazhova

  The fairy tale “Mistress of the Copper Mountain,” written by the Russian writer Bazhov, has a deep philosophical message. A brief analysis of this wonderful work is presented in this article.

• Characteristics and image of Nikolai Bolkonsky in Tolstoy’s novel War and Peace essay

  Prince Nikolai Bolkonsky is a very prominent character in Leo Tolstoy’s novel War and Peace. This is one of those heroes who at first glance seems like a gloomy and “dry” person, but who gradually reveals himself

Every woman deserves attention. When spring comes, every man strives to thank a woman for her beauty, work and understanding and congratulate her from the bottom of his heart on March 8

• Analysis of the chapter Copper (Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow)

  This chapter is devoted to denouncing serfdom. The author, examining the trade in serfs, shows how immoral and inhumane the laws of the Russian Empire of his time were, as well as the morals of the landowners.