Chekhov Short Story Thread [Archive] - Page 4

Quark

08-09-2008, 07:30 PM

I will check the stories out this weekend. 'Dreams' sort of intrigues me, because I am an avid nite dreamer. Of course, that title might throw me way off, but we will see. Either one sounds like a good story if you say so; you should know since you are the Chekhov expert here.

"Dreams" is an interesting story. I would be glad to discuss that one. As for the other story, which doctor story is that? There are two. One is called (on LitNet) "The Doctor" and the other is called "A Doctor's Visit." Which one are you thinking of? Does it involve a doctor visiting a family that owns a factory, or is about a conversation between a doctor and mother who's son is dying?

If I can just pop in here, we do get significant cues as to Varka's mental state.

Yes, by that point in the story we know quite a lot about Varka, but what I was trying to say earlier is that Varka's reasoning isn't clear to herself at that point. The two paragraph that DM and I were discussing were told from Varka's perspective, and hence we're not privy to her inner reasoning. DM didn't like this so much, but I argued that it was important for the effect. If we were more privy to Varka's reasoning, than the declaration "That foe was the baby" wouldn't be as chilling.

She is emotionally and mentally exhausted by her poverty, by the past incident of her father dying on the floor with his "boo boo boo". The father not only prefigures the infant, but I'd say his pain and death are the actual monsters Varka wants to defeat, and tries to, in transferring the monstrous onto the infant without truly realizing the horror of infanticide.

Varka might hate pain and death in the abstract, but don't you think her real antagonist in this story is her masters? They're what's keeping her up. When Chekhov says that she looks around to find what's keeping her up, don't you think Chekhov means the masters? Varka, of course, fails to see that, however, and she blames the baby.

I've read a significant amount of Chekhov, and "Sleepy" is a superb little gem. It is sparse, dramatic, real without being maudlin. Varka is little more than a young girl herself, therein the tragedy.

I completely agree. It's probably best story from that part of Chekhov's career. I've gushed about it quite a bit already.

Janine

08-09-2008, 08:12 PM

"Dreams" is an interesting story. I would be glad to discuss that one. As for the other story, which doctor story is that? There are two. One is called (on LitNet) "The Doctor" and the other is called "A Doctor's Visit." Which one are you thinking of? Does it involve a doctor visiting a family that owns a factory, or is about a conversation between a doctor and mother who's son is dying?

:) Hi again Quark, I guess it was 'The Doctor's Visit'...hahah...I did not read it yet...sounds cheery;) :( ...

Let's do 'Dreams' then - that one is short and sounds interesting to me. If you say it is 'interesting' I will believe you. I think it would be fun to discuss that one and hopefully not too taxing for the time left to us in this month. They don't kill any babies or small animals, do they? :( hahaha

Quark

08-09-2008, 09:37 PM

Let's do 'Dreams' then - that one is short and sounds interesting to me.

Okay, if DM doesn't have any objections I'll go ahead and post an introduction tomorrow. There's no rush as far as reading the story, but I do want to get the intro out as soon as possible.

They don't kill any babies or small animals, do they? :( hahaha

No, there isn't any infanticide or wanton killing of cute animals--nothing too objectionable. It's a pretty humane story, so feel free to read this one.

Dark Muse

08-09-2008, 09:44 PM

Ok I will see if it it in my book, and if not look for it online

Quark

08-09-2008, 10:23 PM

Ok I will see if it it in my book, and if not look for it online

You can find it on LitNet (http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1189), if nowhere else.

Jozanny

08-10-2008, 06:18 AM

Varka might hate pain and death in the abstract, but don't you think her real antagonist in this story is her masters? They're what's keeping her up. When Chekhov says that she looks around to find what's keeping her up, don't you think Chekhov means the masters? Varka, of course, fails to see that, however, and she blames the baby.

That is the beauty of interpretation.;) I agree that the family who keeps Varka doesn't seem to have any compassion. Chekhov seems to have neither the space or time to supply it, and so it is up to the reader to supply it ourselves.

At the risk of disturbing Janine, however, I admit I have a dark fascination with toddler/infant vunerability in literature, and "Sleepy" is one of the best of its kind I've come across. Eliot's Adam Bede is another but with a much more common occurrence, one which is still prevalent in our day, that of a pregnant girl who disposes of the newborn as a consequence of what *we* as a society deem the immorality of sexual activity before marriage.

Bede starts slowly but if one stays with the novel Eliot packs quite a wallop. I almost like it better than Middlemarch. An instructor told me once that Ibsen had such a play or story too, but I haven't been able to ferret it out on the basis of what he told me.

Now Doris Lessing, of whom I am a huge fan, has one where she pushes the envelope, and the child itself is the *Monster*, but I haven't read it yet, and she published it before she was awarded the Nobel in 07, but I have some idea of how she'd treat the issue.

Dark Muse

08-10-2008, 11:58 AM

You can find it on LitNet (http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1189), if nowhere else.

Thank you

Quark

08-10-2008, 02:49 PM

I agree that the family who keeps Varka doesn't seem to have any compassion. Chekhov seems to have neither the space or time to supply it, and so it is up to the reader to supply it ourselves.

It's not just that they have no compassion for her, though. It's that it's their abuse which is keeping Varka up. Therefore, when Varka searches for what's keeping her awake we, the readers, know that she's looking for the masters. That isn't to say that death and poverty are not weighing on her mind--far from it. You were right to point to those causes of misery, and I liked how you linked the father and baby. However, the misery that those cause doesn't keep her awake. Pain and death are actually what make Varka want to sleep. It's the masters who prevent this, though.

At the risk of disturbing Janine, however, I admit I have a dark fascination with toddler/infant vunerability in literature, and "Sleepy" is one of the best of its kind I've come across.

You must share DM's dark streak. I don't know how I felt about the whole thing. Ambivalent, maybe. I thought the effect was great, but if it could have been created without infanticide I think I would have preferred that.

I'm starting to read "Dreams" now, so I should have something posted on it soon.

Dark Muse

08-10-2008, 03:06 PM

You must share DM's dark streak. I don't know how I felt about the whole thing. Ambivalent, maybe. I thought the effect was great, but if it could have been created without infanticide I think I would have preferred that.

I have to disagree with you there. I think without it, the effect of the story would have been signifcinatly lessoned. Perhaps the same point could have been gotton across, but it would have been a "taking the easy way out" Personaly I like a good story that does not cop out of a tragic ending.

Jozanny

08-10-2008, 03:33 PM

It's not just that they have no compassion for her, though. It's that it's their abuse which is keeping Varka up. Therefore, when Varka searches for what's keeping her awake we, the readers, know that she's looking for the masters. That isn't to say that death and poverty are not weighing on her mind--far from it. You were right to point to those causes of misery, and I liked how you linked the father and baby. However, the misery that those cause doesn't keep her awake. Pain and death are actually what make Varka want to sleep. It's the masters who prevent this, though.

You must share DM's dark streak. I don't know how I felt about the whole thing. Ambivalent, maybe. I thought the effect was great, but if it could have been created without infanticide I think I would have preferred that.

I'm starting to read "Dreams" now, so I should have something posted on it soon.

Well, I am the kind who sheds tears when animals are shot on nature shows, or killed by humans for no reason. Hate it and it nearly makes me hate people dispassionately. Watching lions kill cubs or wolves kill coyotes isn't pretty either, but animal power plays are necessary. Humans do not need to destroy on such a scale anymore. I don't mean killing for food of course, that is necessary even if our industrialization of it isn't sustainable, and babies are irrevocably fragile--but for me that is part of the pull in the artistic sense of the word.

When I hit kitty in my power chair by accident because my guard went down, and kitty yeows and I feel terrible and buy extra treats, how far is that from the psychopath? I just like seeing what the artist or movie director does with it and what it says about human nature.

My own work is mildly on the dark side, not as good as some treatments which have made me wince. "Sleepy" did not though.

Quark

08-10-2008, 03:52 PM

I have to disagree with you there. I think without it, the effect of the story would have been signifcinatly lessoned.

You're probably right. I can't see any other way to conclude the story in such a shocking way, and the shock is critical for the effect. Some people are more fond of shock that others, though. Janine, in particular, had problems with this kind of shock since she recently became a grandmother. I wasn't so opposed to it as she, but usually I don't go for the shocking stories. As you're probably already aware, I seem to go for the more lachrymose ones. What does that say about me? I don't know. It just happens to be the kind of Chekhov stories I usually read.

My own work is mildly on the dark side, not as good as some treatments which have made me wince. "Sleepy" did not though.

Did it at least make you jump? The ending still get me even though I've read it twenty times now.

Jozanny

08-10-2008, 04:36 PM

Did it at least make you jump? The ending still get me even though I've read it twenty times now.

Her thought, not the act.

Janine

08-10-2008, 05:33 PM

You're probably right. I can't see any other way to conclude the story in such a shocking way, and the shock is critical for the effect. Some people are more fond of shock that others, though. Janine, in particular, had problems with this kind of shock since she recently became a grandmother. I wasn't so opposed to it as she, but usually I don't go for the shocking stories. As you're probably already aware, I seem to go for the more lachrymose ones. What does that say about me? I don't know. It just happens to be the kind of Chekhov stories I usually read.

Wowy, lots of new posts here. That is great! Wecome Jozanny! I hope you take part in the next story discussion.

Quark, I am in agreement about the story 'Dreams' - I believe that is right up your alley being lacrhrymose - using those big words again, eh? Anyway, I am happy to report that I read 'Dreams' along with 'Oysters' and 'Chameleon and I liked all three. They are all are 'lachromose' I believe if I have the right definition of that word;) . I liked how each was a slice of life, a sad slice but still a little window into a short period in each person's life. 'Oysters' was not without it's humor, which I really liked. We had thunderstorms earlier, so it seemed a good time to read the story and after reading the one I decided to read a few more; I could not reconnect the computer in fear of a power surge; I stay cautious these days. The book is great, Quark - thanks again! I will be sending you those Chekhov CD's (set) real soon, now that I am back and able to burn them on this new computer.

Did it at least make you jump? The ending still get me even though I've read it twenty times now.

Even though I did not want to discuss this story at the time, because of my new grandma statis and sensitivity, I did read the story and it seemed to me that it was necessary to have the ending as it was - shocking. I think I knew what was coming actually, but it did kind of make me jump and feel rather depressed afterwards - it had that shocking effect as in the Hardy novel, "Jude the Obscure"; if you have read the novel you know what I am referring to...that was truly disturbing and like this story one does not ever truly forget that moment in the story. Another thing is that I did not realise the girl was so young - did you say she was only 13 yrs old?

Dark Muse

08-10-2008, 05:37 PM

Yes at the very beigning of the story it says she is 13

Janine

08-10-2008, 05:44 PM

Yes at the very beigning of the story it says she is 13

Thanks DM, I must have charged ahead and forgotten that part.

Dark Muse

08-10-2008, 05:45 PM

It is in like the opening secentence and than it really does not get mentioned again

Quark

08-10-2008, 09:51 PM

Quark, I am in agreement about the story 'Dreams' - I believe that is right up your alley being lacrhrymose - using those big words again, eh? Anyway, I am happy to report that I read 'Dreams' along with 'Oysters' and 'Chameleon and I liked all three.

Yeah, "Dreams" is not particularly cheery--definitely lachrymose. I like the characters, though, and the narration is quite beautiful through sections. I'll post an introduction right after this post to get things going.

'Oysters' was not without it's humor, which I really liked.

If you liked "Oysters" and "Chameleon," you might enjoy some of the other little jokes Chekhov came up with.

We had thunderstorms earlier, so it seemed a good time to read the story and after reading the one I decided to read a few more; I could not reconnect the computer in fear of a power surge

Protect that computer!

Even though I did not want to discuss this story at the time, because of my new grandma statis and sensitivity, I did read the story and it seemed to me that it was necessary to have the ending as it was - shocking. I think I knew what was coming actually, but it did kind of make me jump and feel rather depressed afterwards

It was certainly necessary for "Sleepy" to end with death. The story would have been kind of boring if it didn't, actually. I just meant to say that I'm sort of ambivalent about shock and infant mortality in general when it comes to fiction. It doesn't kill (sorry) a story for me if there's something like that, but it doesn't necessarily make the story either.

Quark

08-10-2008, 10:14 PM

I responded to your last post Janine on the previous page.

I don't mean to prevent anyone from discussion "Sleepy," or any other story for that matter, but I do want to introduce "Dreams" since that was the agreed upon story.

"Dreams"

"Dreams" is only six or seven pages long, so the reading shouldn't be too difficult for this one. You can find the text online at LitNet here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1189. As usual I'll post segments of the story for discussion whenever we're ready to discuss. This keeps the conversation focused, and makes it easier for everyone to understand what's being talked about. Just let me know when you're done with the story, and I'll post the first chunk of text.

Anyway, the story is about a tramp who is arrested by two peasant constables. The criminal refuses to give his name, and the two officers are taking him to a court which will probably exile him to Siberia. The story revolves around the conversation these three characters have, and the mutual hope and despair they each feel. I'm glad we're doing this story after having done "The Black Monk" because the nameless tramp in this story has many similarities to Kovrin from the previous story. Also, the stories share some common themes. By itself, though, the story has still the same effect. It should be a good read. Also, I also like the characters from this one, too.

Here's the picture I went with for "Dreams."

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/157/371402295_a2ede76beb.jpg
Random Picture I Found in a Google Search

It's not a famous painting, an original manuscript, or anything else inherently interesting, but I thought it shows something of what the characters would see. That's incredibly important in this story, too. The fog and dreary sameness of the scenery take on much meaning as the story progresses. The picture--while not being entirely accurate--renders the right idea.

Dark Muse

08-10-2008, 10:16 PM

I haven't read the story yet, but I love that picture

Janine

08-10-2008, 10:16 PM

Yeah, "Dreams" is not particularly cheery--definitely lachrymose. I like the characters, though, and the narration is quite beautiful through sections. I'll post an introduction right after this post to get things going.

Oh, goody! I had to come in and edit what I had written just now - Quark, you beat me out with your post and cool photo. That is perfect I think! I like to read your introductions, also - you did a real good job, Quark! :thumbs_up Maybe the three trees represent the three individuals in the foggy landscape. ;)

If you liked "Oysters" and "Chameleon," you might enjoy some of the other little jokes Chekhov came up with.

I did get a chuckle out of each of those. I can just imagine how a kid would perceive the strange unknown food and the dog story was hilarious actually.

Protect that computer!

You better believe it kiddo! Just a tiny rumble or thunder and I am heading for the plugs. Thunderstorms now seem to be out of our area so I thought I would check back in.

It was certainly necessary for "Sleepy" to end with death. The story would have been kind of boring if it didn't, actually. I just meant to say that I'm sort of ambivalent about shock and infant mortality in general when it comes to fiction. It doesn't kill (sorry) a story for me if there's something like that, but it doesn't necessarily make the story either.

Yes, if it had not ended in death it would be like "Hamlet" not ending in death. It is inevitable in both instances. The story would not have been anything without that ending and the dire act. It is not that I don't appreciate talking about tragic plays or stories - to the contrary but it was the timing on that one. I won't dispute it was a good story - well written but it was a little too sad and horrifying to me, at the time I read it, just before my grandchild was born. You know they used to claim that crib deaths were actually murders - I believe it and woman (mothers) were not treated correctly having post pardum (sp?) depression. In this case the poor girl was not treated correctly either; she was starving for sleep and no doubt her sleep deprivation caused her to be temporarily insane enough to commit murder. The baby and the girl were both victims - that was what was truly sad about it.

Quark

08-11-2008, 03:30 PM

I love that picture

I like to read your introductions, also - you did a real good job, Quark! :thumbs_up Maybe the three trees represent the three individuals in the foggy landscape. ;)

Thanks, I wanted to keep the intro and picture to minimum this time since I didn't want to give anything away. This story reveals itself gradually, and if I opened my mouth too much here I might spoil it. The setting is told right away, so I don't think I ruining anything with the picture. Besides, the picture isn't even completely accurate. It's supposed to be mud they're walking on, and the photo above shows grass. What I wanted to get through, though, was the dreary sameness of the scene. The evenly spaced trees and damp, bleak atmosphere do that well.

Yes, if it had not ended in death it would be like "Hamlet" not ending in death.

I thought about the same thing. No, the story and play couldn't have ended differently.

The baby and the girl were both victims - that was what was truly sad about it.

Yeah, we talked a bit about how Chekhov builds our sympathy for the girl. It almost makes you feel worse for the murderer than the murdered.

Janine

08-11-2008, 04:42 PM

Thanks, I wanted to keep the intro and picture to minimum this time since I didn't want to give anything away. This story reveals itself gradually, and if I opened my mouth too much here I might spoil it. The setting is told right away, so I don't think I ruining anything with the picture. Besides, the picture isn't even completely accurate. It's supposed to be mud they're walking on, and the photo above shows grass. What I wanted to get through, though, was the dreary sameness of the scene. The evenly spaced trees and damp, bleak atmosphere do that well.

Quark, Funny thing is while reading this story, I kept being reminded of this old film I just saw - old version of "War and Peace" and one big scene their are soldiers and prisoners who are drudging through the mud and then it turns to winter - all frozen, there is fog as well. I think I can percieve what a Russian landscape would look like after seeing that film. Your photo fits that mood very well, I think. The fog plays a true role in this story much as it did in "The Black Monk", don't you think?

I thought about the same thing. No, the story and play couldn't have ended differently.

Yeah, we talked a bit about how Chekhov builds our sympathy for the girl. It almost makes you feel worse for the murderer than the murdered.

I agree.

Dark Muse

08-11-2008, 05:09 PM

I just finnised reading the story and I found it to be quite commical

Janine

08-11-2008, 05:18 PM

WHAT - comical???? reeeealy, DM? ....you should be exiled to Siberia.:lol: hahaha....Wonder what our Quark will say about your comment.

Dark Muse

08-11-2008, 05:22 PM

Janine

08-11-2008, 06:28 PM

Haha, yes I know, but I cannot help it.

Well I always did like the cold :D

But the way the characters were described it made them sound more like caricatures and well I could not help but to find the story a bit amusing.

hhehehaha...DM, you never fail to amuse me. Glad you enjoyed it so. I am just the opposite - I like the warmth and summer is my time of year. However, strangely enough I am fascinated by films set in cold, even frigid climates; especially survival stories about the Antarctic.

Quark

08-11-2008, 07:36 PM

I kept being reminded of this old film I just saw - old version of "War and Peace"

I haven't read or seen "War and Peace," unfortunately. I'll google it to see if I can't pull up that scene.

The fog plays a true role in this story much as it did in "The Black Monk", don't you think?

Do you mean the part in "The Black Monk" where the monk forms from the cloud? Or was there another fog scene? I'm starting to forget the story.

But the way the characters were described it made them sound more like caricatures and well I could not help but to find the story a bit amusing.

The two constables are funny. You can tell Chekhov is laughing at the pair of country bumpkins in this scene. The appearance of the tramp has its absurdities, too. His refined/impoverished look is sort of humorous.

WHAT - comical???? reeeealy, DM? ....you should be exiled to Siberia.:lol: hahaha....Wonder what our Quark will say about your comment.

No, I get what she's saying: no need to banish her to Siberia. She's laughing with Chekhov here, and not at him. Although, I couldn't fault her if she did laugh at Chekhov in this story since there are parts which are a little over-the-top. He's really straining in certain paragraphs to drive home how dreary this scene is and it almost gets ridiculous. His description of the leaf falling, for example, is one of those parts. You almost want to scream "Oh, C'mon!" Despite those moments, though, I still think this a great story.

It seems like everyone's read the story, so now I can spit out the first piece of text. Here's the initial characterization of our three slightly humorous characters:

Two peasant constables -- one a stubby, black-bearded individual with such exceptionally short legs that if you looked at him from behind it seemed as though his legs began much lower down than in other people; the other, long, thin, and straight as a stick, with a scanty beard of dark reddish colour -- were escorting to the district town a tramp who refused to remember his name. The first waddled along, looking from side to side, chewing now a straw, now his own sleeve, slapping himself on the haunches and humming, and altogether had a careless and frivolous air; the other, in spite of his lean face and narrow shoulders, looked solid, grave, and substantial; in the lines and expression of his whole figure he was like the priests among the Old Believers, or the warriors who are painted on old-fashioned ikons. "For his wisdom God had added to his forehead" -- that is, he was bald -- which increased the resemblance referred to. The first was called Andrey Ptaha, the second Nikandr Sapozhnikov.

The man they were escorting did not in the least correspond with the conception everyone has of a tramp. He was a frail little man, weak and sickly-looking, with small, colourless, and extremely indefinite features. His eyebrows were scanty, his expression mild and submissive; he had scarcely a trace of a moustache, though he was over thirty. He walked along timidly, bent forward, with his hands thrust into his sleeves. The collar of his shabby cloth overcoat, which did not look like a peasant's, was turned up to the very brim of his cap, so that only his little red nose ventured to peep out into the light of day. He spoke in an ingratiating tenor, continually coughing. It was very, very difficult to believe that he was a tramp concealing his surname. He was more like an unsuccessful priest's son, stricken by God and reduced to beggary; a clerk discharged for drunkenness; a merchant's son or nephew who had tried his feeble powers in a theatrical career, and was now going home to play the last act in the parable of the prodigal son; perhaps, judging by the dull patience with which he struggled with the hopeless autumn mud, he might have been a fanatical monk, wandering from one Russian monastery to another, continually seeking "a peaceful life, free from sin," and not finding it. . . .

Dark Muse

08-11-2008, 08:03 PM

Janine

08-12-2008, 12:14 AM

I haven't read or seen "War and Peace," unfortunately. I'll google it to see if I can't pull up that scene.

I was closed out of this site for awhile this evening...anybody else have that problem? I emailed to Virgil and he said he could not get access either. Here I was worried, because right before that something came on my screen about my Norton and said something was needing to fixed - some minor problem - not critical, so I went and fixed it. Then I could not access Lit Net, but the rest of the internet was fine...odd. Well, anyway, now I am back here and all is well - it must have been the site, to my own relief.

The movie was good, if looked at in the light of very out-dated film, but I would not rave about it. I think it was pretty unrealistic and rather humorous itself at times, besides being especially long. I did not read the book yet either, Quark, so don't feel badly. It will be a taunting task to take on - I think it is about 2000 pages, isn't it? or am I exagerating?... like someone we know...I read your interview today and liked it very much - you had me really laughing in places!

Do you mean the part in "The Black Monk" where the monk forms from the cloud? Or was there another fog scene? I'm starting to forget the story.

Weren't there a bunch of foggy scenes in 'The Black Monk', that we discussed quite a lot and how the fog was a sort of isolating device that Chekhov employed to emphasis the point of the main character's isolation? I see this crop up again in this story, where as, the 'dreamer' is seeing broader horizons, than what is really there. In reality, there is fog all about him; the fog, in this case, is restricting and not expanding -I hope that makes sense. He is in a sort of fog of denial and unrealistic dreams of his future in Siberia and exile. At anyrate, I think your photo serves this story very well. I like it very much.

The two constables are funny. You can tell Chekhov is laughing at the pair of country bumpkins in this scene. The appearance of the tramp has its absurdities, too. His refined/impoverished look is sort of humorous.

DM, I was really just kidding with you. I know there was some humor. I also wonder about what DM brought up about the first part; why did Chekhov choose to describe them as such opposites in physical characteristics? I too, looked for significance in that part of the tale. At first, I thought this reminds me of that children's rhyme - "Jack Sprat could eat no fat, his wife could eat no lean." In this way, I too was somewhat amused.

I guess what was making me feel more sad or lacrhrymose (Quark's word) is that it played into my memory of the film scenes in "War and Peace" because those are soldiers who have become prisoners and one of them who is very gentle, does die from the march through the winter weather. He is so accepting of it and his blight in life; that is what makes it so sad and tragic. He reminded me of this guy who dreams of his excile as something so wonderful; even an improvement on his past life. This is the part I found to be truly sad and I also found it sad, the way the two constables were so light-hearted about it all and comical. In some sense, I found that more disturbing, since they were not the poor soul who was being send to his dire fate; they did not seem to care much about him at all. He could have been a piece of baggage for all they were concerned.

No, I get what she's saying: no need to banish her to Siberia. She's laughing with Chekhov here, and not at him. Although, I couldn't fault her if she did laugh at Chekhov in this story since there are parts which are a little over-the-top. He's really straining in certain paragraphs to drive home how dreary this scene is and it almost gets ridiculous. His description of the leaf falling, for example, is one of those parts. You almost want to scream "Oh, C'mon!" Despite those moments, though, I still think this a great story.

Well, she said she liked the cold.;) ....just kidding with her....:lol: I will have to re-read that part about the leaf - now I will probably laugh at it, too. With you two's help to give me a new perspective, I will probably now thing this story is a comedy/tragedy like "The Winter's Tale".

It seems like everyone's read the story, so now I can spit out the first piece of text. Here's the initial characterization of our three slightly humorous characters:[/QUOTE]

I am too weary now to properly comment on that part but will look that over tonight in my book and I will comment tomorrow instead when I can think more clearly.

Other than the fact, that I think it does provide certain comic releif to the story. What is the significance of the two constables being projected as complete oppisites of each other. I have to wonder that there must be some reason behind doing this, though I cannot say as I grasp it completely.

I also found it kind of amusing that Ptaha is sort of the steroytypical "jolly fat man" if you will.

I could not help but to laugh at this image of this figure all bundled up with just this red nose sticking out. It kind of made me think of Rudolph LOL. I saw the three of almost being like cartoon characters.

DM, you bring up some good points. Now I will keep thinking of Ptaha as Santa Claus and the other guy as his beloved reindeer; or was that the same guy?

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 12:30 AM

I was closed out of this site for awhile this evening...anybody else have that problem? I emailed to Virgil and he said he could not get access either. Here I was worried, because right before that something came on my screen about my Norton and said something was needing to fixed - some minor problem - not critical, so I went and fixed it. Then I could not access Lit Net, but the rest of the internet was fine...odd. Well, anyway, now I am back here and all is well - it must have been the site, to my own relief.

Yes I had a problem getting on the site as well for a while

Weren't there a bunch of foggy scenes in 'The Black Monk', that we discussed quite a lot and how the fog was a sort of isolating device that Chekhov employed to emphasis the point of the main character's isolation? I see this crop up again in this story, where as, the 'dreamer' is seeing broader horizons, than what is really there. In reality, there is fog all about him; the fog, in this case, is restricting and not expanding -I hope that makes sense. He is in a sort of fog of denial and unrealistic dreams of his future in Siberia and exile. At anyrate, I think your photo serves this story very well. I like it very much..

It was mostly smoke in the Black Monk, they were burning to protect the orchid from the frost, so there was all this hovering smoke around a lot of the time.

DM, you bring up some good points. Now I will keep thinking of Ptaha as Santa Claus and the other guy as his beloved reindeer; or was that the same guy?

hehe the tramp is the one who had the red nose.

Janine

08-12-2008, 12:37 AM

maybe he was nipping the bottle....

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 01:09 AM

I thought it was suppose to be becuase he was sick

Janine

08-12-2008, 01:30 AM

Yeah, it was and cold I would imagine. I was just getting tired and silly; think now I will retire and go to bed. Nite, DM!

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 01:31 AM

Hehe ok, goodnight

Janine

08-12-2008, 03:43 PM

Two peasant constables -- one a stubby, black-bearded individual with such exceptionally short legs that if you looked at him from behind it seemed as though his legs began much lower down than in other people; the other, long, thin, and straight as a stick, with a scanty beard of dark reddish colour -- were escorting to the district town a tramp who refused to remember his name. The first waddled along, looking from side to side, chewing now a straw, now his own sleeve, slapping himself on the haunches and humming, and altogether had a careless and frivolous air; the other, in spite of his lean face and narrow shoulders, looked solid, grave, and substantial; in the lines and expression of his whole figure he was like the priests among the Old Believers, or the warriors who are painted on old-fashioned ikons. "For his wisdom God had added to his forehead" -- that is, he was bald -- which increased the resemblance referred to. The first was called Andrey Ptaha, the second Nikandr Sapozhnikov.

I like the way that Chekhov has contrasted these two characters and I can see now in reading it a second time, that this paragraph does have some humor in it; very amusing, indeed. I do recall that, when I read the part about his forehead, I had to laugh out loud, he being bald. I like the way the one character is likened to an 'old fashioned ikon' - and 'a priest' among the 'Old Believers' and that takes us to the line "For his wisdom God had added to his forehead" and the bald factor which made me laugh. I like the way in which the author presents the characters, right from the start. These are mere 'impressions', but like DM said, they appear as caricaturations and this makes this part of the story amusing.

The man they were escorting did not in the least correspond with the conception everyone has of a tramp. He was a frail little man, weak and sickly-looking, with small, colourless, and extremely indefinite features. His eyebrows were scanty, his expression mild and submissive; he had scarcely a trace of a moustache, though he was over thirty. He walked along timidly, bent forward, with his hands thrust into his sleeves. The collar of his shabby cloth overcoat, which did not look like a peasant's, was turned up to the very brim of his cap, so that only his little red nose ventured to peep out into the light of day. He spoke in an ingratiating tenor, continually coughing. It was very, very difficult to believe that he was a tramp concealing his surname. He was more like an unsuccessful priest's son, stricken by God and reduced to beggary; a clerk discharged for drunkenness; a merchant's son or nephew who had tried his feeble powers in a theatrical career, and was now going home to play the last act in the parable of the prodigal son; perhaps, judging by the dull patience with which he struggled with the hopeless autumn mud, he might have been a fanatical monk, wandering from one Russian monastery to another, continually seeking "a peaceful life, free from sin," and not finding it. . . .

Now, Chekhov seems to go into more detail with his description and assumptions about the third man - the tramp - I think this puts greater emphasis on his central importance to the story. He does not even name him, in this first introductory paragraph. In the previous paragraph, C left us lastly with the names of the two constables. Here Chekhov leaves the tramp nameless, because the tramp is saying he has forgotten his name. He sets up a mystery about his man from the very beginning of the story; this makes one want to read on, out of sheer curiosity.

Quark

08-12-2008, 03:54 PM

Other than the fact, that I think it does provide certain comic releif to the story. What is the significance of the two constables being projected as complete oppisites of each other.

I don't know if there is another significance to the two constables. Their appearances differ to heighten their comical aspects, I think. At least I can't find any buried meaning in their contrast. Most likely, this shows us that idiocy can come in many shapes and sizes. One can be ridiculous by being fat and jolly, and they can be just as stupid by being slim and laconic. I think they're supposed to be two sides of the same coin rather than actual foils.

I also found it kind of amusing that Ptaha is sort of the steroytypical "jolly fat man" if you will.

Yeah, it's safe to say that Ptaha is more of a caricature than a character. Of course, Sapozhnikov isn't much less of a stereotype than his colleague. Tall, dignified, austere, pompous, these are usually connected, too.

I could not help but to laugh at this image of this figure all bundled up with just this red nose sticking out. It kind of made me think of Rudolph LOL. I saw the three of almost being like cartoon characters.

They are quite a pack of misfits, right? Each character is ridiculous in some way or another. I think this has a purpose in the story, too. It shows how each characters' interpretation of themself differs from their actual appearance. This is similar to how their dreams differ from the reality of their situation. Also, by making them misfits, Chekhov makes it clear that these characters can never realize their dreams. If they were dynamic, self-aware individuals, then maybe they could analyze their situations better and have more strength to reach their goals. The discrepancy between the dream world and the actual world wouldn't be so great if they were smarter and more able. By making them misfits, Chekhov is making the dream world appear even more far of than it might be.

I was closed out of this site for awhile this evening...anybody else have that problem? I emailed to Virgil and he said he could not get access either.

We all were blocked, I guess. It probably was related to the recent upgrade--which I have mixed feelings about. It added several useful functions, but it also cut out over one hundred posts from this thread. I was getting ready for the 1000 post party we were almost upon, and then suddenly I log on and there are only 790 posts! What the...! It was bad enough when they deleted Antiquarian's posts, so we couldn't go back and see previous conversations. Now, they've even taken away the post count from those posts. They probably also combined a lot of posts. So now much of the post history has been lost. I'm more than miffed about it.

I did not read the book yet either, Quark, so don't feel badly. It will be a taunting task to take on - I think it is about 2000 pages, isn't it? or am I exagerating?

You're not exaggerating by much, Janine. It's almost 1000 pages depending on the translation and edition. So, while I may watch the movie to find the scene, it's pretty much decided that I won't touch the book.

Weren't there a bunch of foggy scenes in 'The Black Monk', that we discussed quite a lot and how the fog was a sort of isolating device that Chekhov employed to emphasis the point of the main character's isolation? I see this crop up again in this story, where as, the 'dreamer' is seeing broader horizons, than what is really there. In reality, there is fog all about him; the fog, in this case, is restricting and not expanding -I hope that makes sense. He is in a sort of fog of denial and unrealistic dreams of his future in Siberia and exile. At anyrate, I think your photo serves this story very well. I like it very much.

I know there was smoke in "The Black Monk," but I forget if there was fog. There might have been in one of those lyrical nature descriptions.

As for "Dreams," I agree about the fog there. Yeah, it is limiting. It's a cold, damp, oppressive fog. While I think the fog can also be likened to the dreams in that it's obscure, it mostly is a limiting force.

He is so accepting of it and his blight in life; that is what makes it so sad and tragic. He reminded me of this guy who dreams of his excile as something so wonderful; even an improvement on his past life. This is the part I found to be truly sad and I also found it sad, the way the two constables were so light-hearted about it all and comical.

The constables are callous, and that certainly makes us feel more for the tramp. I wonder how resigned the tramp is, though. After all, he keeps dreaming for more.

Janine

08-12-2008, 04:41 PM

I don't know if there is another significance to the two constables. Their appearances differ to heighten their comical aspects, I think. At least I can't find any buried meaning in their contrast. Most likely, this shows us that idiocy can come in many shapes and sizes. One can be ridiculous by being fat and jolly, and they can be just as stupid by being slim and laconic. I think they're supposed to be two sides of the same coin rather than actual foils.

Quark, I know here you are really addressing DM's post but in doing so you are speaking to both of us. I like this comment of yours -
"idiocy can come in many shapes and sizes" - that seems about accurate...and it is interesting to think of them as "two side of the same coin."

Yeah, it's safe to say that Ptaha is more of a caricature than a character. Of course, Sapozhnikov isn't much less of a stereotype than his colleague. Tall, dignified, austere, pompous, these are usually connected, too.

Yes, I agree.

They are quite a pack of misfits, right? Each character is ridiculous in some way or another. I think this has a purpose in the story, too. It shows how each characters' interpretation of themself differs from their actual appearance. This is similar to how their dreams differ from the reality of their situation. Also, by making them misfits, Chekhov makes it clear that these characters can never realize their dreams. If they were dynamic, self-aware individuals, then maybe they could analyze their situations better and have more strength to reach their goals. The discrepancy between the dream world and the actual world wouldn't be so great if they were smarter and more able. By making them misfits, Chekhov is making the dream world appear even more far of than it might be.

That is a good word - 'misfits'. I think that describes them all well and puts them on more common ground in order for them to communicate with each other. It is also interesting what you observe - "how each characters' interpretation of themself differs from their actual appearance." Perception is a funny thing and a big part of this story. I guess the dream that the tramp percieves in his mind depends on where one is standing - his perspective, not theirs. He has little hope to grasp onto and this is one way of keeping sane but having a dream, even if the dream is one of pure fantasy, as we know it to be. In the same way that Kovrin hung onto the image of the black monk, this tramp holds dearly to his dream of life in Siberia. It reminds me also of the novel, "The Grapes of Wrath"...throughout the story the family are talking of California like it is the Garden of Eden - paradise...big oranges on all the trees, etc...land of milk and honey. Eventually they come to CA only to discover that the all was a pure fantasy, a dream. As you said " By making them misfits, Chekhov is making the dream world appear even more far of than it might be."....and unattainable.

We all were blocked, I guess. It probably was related to the recent upgrade--which I have mixed feelings about. It added several useful functions, but it also cut out over one hundred posts from this thread. I was getting ready for the 1000 post party we were almost upon, and then suddenly I log on and there are only 790 posts! What the...! It was bad enough when they deleted Antiquarian's posts, so we couldn't go back and see previous conversations. Now, they've even taken away the post count from those posts. They probably also combined a lot of posts. So now much of the post history has been lost. I'm more than miffed about it.

Oh horrors! I saw that post about the changes and thought it sounded like a lot of improvements, although I only half understand them at this time. Lawrence is not gone, is it? ekk. We have been inactive for a short while now. I wonder if the 'Tortoise poems' is gone, as well. I would be mortified. How about our Women in Love thread discussion? I better go and check. I was going to copy that to my hard-drive. I hope they only cut frivolous thread and not the serious lit discussion threads. Maybe they just merged some of the threads - they do that sometimes. FYI, Anti's posts were not deleted by the mods, but by herself. She said she requested that they be deleted and asked to delete her own blog. It is a shame they were deleted from the Lawrence and this discussion thread - now the answers to some don't make a lot of sense, do they?

You're not exaggerating by much, Janine. It's almost 1000 pages depending on the translation and edition. So, while I may watch the movie to find the scene, it's pretty much decided that I won't touch the book.

See the movie; at least looking at gorgeous Audrey Hepburn is worth it and some scenes are quite commentable for an old epic film.

I know there was smoke in "The Black Monk," but I forget if there was fog. There might have been in one of those lyrical nature descriptions.

I thought there was fog also; but I will have to review to find out if I am right. Wasn't there fog over the sea near the end of the story when the monk finally appears to him?

As for "Dreams," I agree about the fog there. Yeah, it is limiting. It's a cold, damp, oppressive fog. While I think the fog can also be likened to the dreams in that it's obscure, it mostly is a limiting force.

Yes, for some reason the first thing I thought of midway through was how limiting it was. Of course 'fog' would always represent obscurity and a dreamworld atmosphere. But this fog seemed to enclose the three characters and create a more intimate setting. This reminds me of Ambroise Bierce short stories during the Civil War - many of those take place in fog - hey, 'the fog of war', as they say. This fog gives his stories this wonderful atmosphere of unreality. I saw a film recently based on some of his stories and the way the depicted these foggy scenes was extraordinary.

The constables are callous, and that certainly makes us feel more for the tramp. I wonder how resigned the tramp is, though. After all, he keeps dreaming for more.

Yes, I thought they were callous also...and in this way we do sympathise with the tramp. Besides, usually everyone goes for the underdog and in this case he is the underdog to be pittied and sympathised with. I think the tramp dreams because he has nothing else to hold onto. He is all alone so dreams help him to go out past that restricting fog - take that away from him and he has nothing to keep himself going and alive.

I am editing this now: I just went to check on the L thread and short stories is locked. I wrote a few desperate emails. I also wrote one to you Quark, so check your box. J

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 05:51 PM

Yes, they are quite the motley crew.

I have noticed the Chekhov uses isolatation a lot within his stories. Particuarly using nature as an isolatation device for the characaters. In a way I can see the fog here as isolating the characters and the fact that they are trudging through this baren muddy land with no sign of civilization, or anyone else in sight.

It did make me think of Varka's dream in sleepy, in which she kept seeing the men who were walking through the mud.

Though Sapozhnikov came off as being rather cold, I did not find Ptaha as truly beging very callous.

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 08:12 PM

I just happend to come acorss this poem, and it made me think of the story, so I thought I would share

Ghosts of Dreams

WE are all of us dreamers of dreams,
On visions our childhood is fed;
And the heart of a child is unhaunted, it seems,
By ghosts of dreams that are dead.

From childhood to youth's but a span,
And the years of our life are soon sped;
But the youth is no longer a youth, but a man,
When the first of his dreams is dead.

'Tis a cup of wormwood and gall,
When the doom of a great man is said;
And the best of a man is under a pall
When the best of his dreams is dead.

He may live on by compact and plan
When the fine bloom of living is shed,
But God pity the little that's left of a man
When most of his dreams are dead.

Let him show a brave face if he can;
Let him woo fame and fortune instead;
Yet there's not much to do, but to bury a man
When the last of his dreams is dead.

William Herbert Carruth

Janine

08-12-2008, 10:47 PM

Is this some sort of a glitch in the new programs? When I click on the last page of this thread it just returns to this one everytime; now I see this was posted tonight. Why, then, does it say '55' to 'last' on the top of my screen?

I love that poem, Dark Muse. Where and how did you ever find it? Wow, it does fit the story well.

Dark Muse

08-12-2008, 10:49 PM

Pensive

08-12-2008, 11:33 PM

But the way the characters were described it made them sound more like caricatures and well I could not help but to find the story a bit amusing.

Just completed the story and I can't help agreeing with you here. And Quark that's a good way of putting it, we are surely laughing with Chekhov, not at Chekhov. :)

Also I think the contrast between the two constables has been just for the sake of humour...

Janine

08-13-2008, 12:06 AM

Yeah it does that too me, but if you just post, the post comes up fine. Not sure why it says that, but it does not seem to affect the forum

I found the poem here:

http://theotherpages.org/poems/poem-cd.html

Well, it might not in here but I posted a reply to your post in the Lawrence thread and it would not let me go to the following page. I don't know if my post is lost or what. Anyway, how can one find the right page. I am a big confused with this new upgrade. Maybe they just have to refine it in the next few days.

Pensive, so glad to see you here again. I haven't downloaded my IM yet but I should do that now. Send me your ID's in a PM so I can put you in my list or contact me when I am online and then we can chat.

Dark Muse

08-13-2008, 12:11 AM

I think when you post it is acutally on the right page, it just highlights the wrong page at the bottom.

Janine

08-13-2008, 12:40 AM

I think when you post it is acutally on the right page, it just highlights the wrong page at the bottom.

I don't know about that. In the L thread I had to start on the first page and keep working back until I found the last page that was a number, not last page - that seemed odd to me.

Quark

08-13-2008, 09:09 PM

Perception is a funny thing and a big part of this story.

I think so, too. Chekhov appears to be talking more about daydreams than actual dreams. The dream that entices the three in this story is more about hopes than about a deep subconscious experience. Perception--or the distortion of perception--plays a large role in the creation of daydreams, and these characters are no exception.

In the same way that Kovrin hung onto the image of the black monk, this tramp holds dearly to his dream of life in Siberia.

Yeah, this is the main link between the tramp and Kovrin. They both share the same highs and lows, as they're stuck between dream and reality. "The Black Monk" might be considered different in the fact the story ends more ambiguously than this one, but the characters and moods are very similar.

See the movie; at least looking at gorgeous Audrey Hepburn is worth it and some scenes are quite commentable for an old epic film.

I found you can download it from online. I'll have to look for the fog scene.

Yes, for some reason the first thing I thought of midway through was how limiting it was. Of course 'fog' would always represent obscurity and a dreamworld atmosphere.

Yeah, the fog is probably the main symbol in the story, so we'll have to watch how Chekhov uses it. It's safe to say that it has more than one meaning.

I think the tramp dreams because he has nothing else to hold onto. He is all alone so dreams help him to go out past that restricting fog - take that away from him and he has nothing to keep himself going and alive.

He certainly has a good motive for daydreaming. He's not just trying to pass the time in a boring class. No, he's about to die without really having ever lived. I would be fantasizing too, if it were my only way to live a full life.

I have noticed the Chekhov uses isolatation a lot within his stories. Particuarly using nature as an isolatation device for the characaters. In a way I can see the fog here as isolating the characters and the fact that they are trudging through this baren muddy land with no sign of civilization, or anyone else in sight.

That's odd. You seem them as isolated? I thought they connected, toward the end at least. The part where they're all dreaming makes it seem like the tramp got through to the two constables.

It did make me think of Varka's dream in sleepy, in which she kept seeing the men who were walking through the mud.

This story certainly casts some light on that "liquid mud" we encountered in the last one. I couldn't figure out what Chekhov was trying to get at before, but I now I have a slightly better idea. The mud conveys the monotony that these characters live in. The scenery never changes, and it makes us feel like no matter what these characters do they will always be treading mud.

Though Sapozhnikov came off as being rather cold, I did not find Ptaha as truly beging very callous.

Ptaha is in a better mood, but isn't he making light of the tramp's circumstances?

Is this some sort of a glitch in the new programs? When I click on the last page of this thread it just returns to this one everytime; now I see this was posted tonight. Why, then, does it say '55' to 'last' on the top of my screen?

The page glitch is a result of the deleted posts. They must not have deleted the page count when they lowered the post count.

Just completed the story and I can't help agreeing with you here.

Good to see you again Pensive. How are things going? What did you make of "Dreams?"

I responded to some posts above.

More from "Dreams:"

The travellers had been a long while on their way, but they seemed to be always on the same small patch of ground. In front of them there stretched thirty feet of muddy black-brown mud, behind them the same, and wherever one looked further, an impenetrable wall of white fog. They went on and on, but the ground remained the same, the wall was no nearer, and the patch on which they walked seemed still the same patch. They got a glimpse of a white, clumsy-looking stone, a small ravine, or a bundle of hay dropped by a passer-by, the brief glimmer of a great muddy puddle, or, suddenly, a shadow with vague outlines would come into view ahead of them; the nearer they got to it the smaller and darker it became; nearer still, and there stood up before the wayfarers a slanting milestone with the number rubbed off, or a wretched birch-tree drenched and bare like a wayside beggar. The birch-tree would whisper something with what remained of its yellow leaves, one leaf would break off and float lazily to the ground. . . . And then again fog, mud, the brown grass at the edges of the road. On the grass hung dingy, unfriendly tears. They were not the tears of soft joy such as the earth weeps at welcoming the summer sun and parting from it, and such as she gives to drink at dawn to the corncrakes, quails, and graceful, long-beaked crested snipes. The travellers' feet stuck in the heavy, clinging mud. Every step cost an effort.

Andrey Ptaha was somewhat excited. He kept looking round at the tramp and trying to understand how a live, sober man could fail to remember his name.

"You are an orthodox Christian, aren't you?" he asked.

"Yes," the tramp answered mildly.

"H'm. . . then you've been christened?"

"Why, to be sure! I'm not a Turk. I go to church and to the sacrament, and do not eat meat when it is forbidden. And I observe my religious duties punctually. . . ."

"Well, what are you called, then?"

"Call me what you like, good man."

Ptaha shrugged his shoulders and slapped himself on the haunches in extreme perplexity. The other constable, Nikandr Sapozhnikov, maintained a staid silence. He was not so naïve as Ptaha, and apparently knew very well the reasons which might induce an orthodox Christian to conceal his name from other people. His expressive face was cold and stern. He walked apart and did not condescend to idle chatter with his companions, but, as it were, tried to show everyone, even the fog, his sedateness and discretion.

"God knows what to make of you," Ptaha persisted in addressing the tramp. "Peasant you are not, and gentleman you are not, but some sort of a thing between. . . . The other day I was washing a sieve in the pond and caught a reptile -- see, as long as a finger, with gills and a tail. The first minute I thought it was a fish, then I looked -- and, blow it! if it hadn't paws. It was not a fish, it was a viper, and the deuce only knows what it was. . . . So that's like you. . . . What's your calling?"

Oh, and I liked the poem you posted, DM. Did you just run across that recently, or is that something you read a while back?

Dark Muse

08-13-2008, 09:17 PM

That's odd. You seem them as isolated? I thought they connected, toward the end at least. The part where they're all dreaming makes it seem like the tramp got through to the two constables.

I think it could be debateble if they truly connected with each other, they might to some degree be having a shared experince, but I do not think eitherof them empahtieis with the others circumstance or condition, they each are only thinking about thier own situation.

But truly what I was originally was trying to say, is that the tree of them are isolated together. The fog sort of closes them out from everything else. There is no sign of civilization, there is only the three of them out there in the cold baren landscape.

This story certainly casts some light on that "liquid mud" we encountered in the last one. I couldn't figure out what Chekhov was trying to get at before, but I now I have a slightly better idea. The mud conveys the monotony that these characters live in. The scenery never changes, and it makes us feel like no matter what these characters do they will always be treading mud.

Good observations

Ptaha is in a better mood, but isn't he making light of the tramp's circumstances?

I am not sure I would consider that the same thing as being callous though.

I think I will have to give this story another read.

The travellers had been a long while on their way, but they seemed to be always on the same small patch of ground. In front of them there stretched thirty feet of muddy black-brown mud, behind them the same, and wherever one looked further, an impenetrable wall of white fog. They went on and on, but the ground remained the same, the wall was no nearer, and the patch on which they walked seemed still the same patch.

This made me think of a dream itself. If you ever had those dreams, where you can only move in really slow motion, or it seems like you are not really getting anywhere as much as you try.

It also reflects their situation in life, and the fact that they are trapped within a dreary rut of which they have no true escape, but perhaps for their dreams.

They got a glimpse of a white, clumsy-looking stone, a small ravine, or a bundle of hay dropped by a passer-by, the brief glimmer of a great muddy puddle, or, suddenly, a shadow with vague outlines would come into view ahead of them; the nearer they got to it the smaller and darker it became; nearer still, and there stood up before the wayfarers a slanting milestone with the number rubbed off, or a wretched birch-tree drenched and bare like a wayside beggar.

I loved this description. And again it is much like a dream. It offers from a distance a glimmer of hope, but when they draw near to it, it begins to fade away, until reality is reveled. The unattainable always lingering just out of their each.

The birch-tree would whisper something with what remained of its yellow leaves, one leaf would break off and float lazily to the ground. . . . And then again fog, mud, the brown grass at the edges of the road. On the grass hung dingy, unfriendly tears. They were not the tears of soft joy such as the earth weeps at welcoming the summer sun and parting from it, and such as she gives to drink at dawn to the corncrakes, quails, and graceful, long-beaked crested snipes

Ok I agree that this passage is perhaps a tad bit much. It seems to be stretching a bit too far the idea of trying to hit you over the head with the dreariness of the scene. That bit about the tears does border upon the cheesy

Every step cost an effort.

I thought this one line was quite powerful and I loved the symbolism behind it.

Oh, and I liked the poem you posted, DM. Did you just run across that recently, or is that something you read a while back?

It was something I recently came acorss

Janine

08-14-2008, 12:18 AM

I think it could be debateble if they truly connected with each other, they might to some degree be having a shared experince, but I do not think eitherof them empahtieis with the others circumstance or condition, they each are only thinking about thier own situation.

There again it is a case of perception....when one is going down a straight road such as a highway that all looks identical, then one loses the true sense of time and space - the road will appear to be endless. This happens often when one travels. A friend of mine relayed a waking experience to me about this same thing - never seeming to gain on any distance and seeing a traffic light up ahead which appeared to not get any closer. Of course, at the time I think they had partaken of something a little funny;) to have their perception so altered. I have had dreams in sleep that did seem like this and did seem odd or ilogical. I think everyone does and time sequences can be perceived differently.

But truly what I was originally was trying to say, is that the tree of them are isolated together. The fog sort of closes them out from everything else. There is no sign of civilization, there is only the three of them out there in the cold baren landscape.

Yes, I see your point. The fog does isolate the travelers and it seems to make them more close to each other - intimate enough for the tramp to reveal his true circumstances finally to the other two men.

I think I will have to give this story another read.
I also need to give this story another read.

I loved this description. And again it is much like a dream. It offers from a distance a glimmer of hope, but when they draw near to it, it begins to fade away, until reality is reveled. The unattainable always lingering just out of their each.

It also reflects their situation in life, and the fact that they are trapped within a dreary rut of which they have no true escape, but perhaps for their dreams.

I agree. Good observation, their lives are stagnant and not going anywhere just as the perceive that the road is staying the same, DM.

Ok I agree that this passage is perhaps a tad bit much. It seems to be stretching a bit too far the idea of trying to hit you over the head with the dreariness of the scene. That bit about the tears does border upon the cheesy
I guess I am a sap; I actually liked this part...but maybe those 'tears' are a bit much to swallow. Maybe the writing seems a little forced here.

"Every step cost an effort."

I thought this one line was quite powerful and I loved the symbolism behind it.

Yeah, that is a good line and more simple, yet effective in getting the point across.

I think so, too. Chekhov appears to be talking more about daydreams than actual dreams. The dream that entices the three in this story is more about hopes than about a deep subconscious experience. Perception--or the distortion of perception--plays a large role in the creation of daydreams, and these characters are no exception.

Quark, that is well stated; I agree.

Yeah, this is the main link between the tramp and Kovrin. They both share the same highs and lows, as they're stuck between dream and reality. "The Black Monk" might be considered different in the fact the story ends more ambiguously than this one, but the characters and moods are very similar.

Agree again. I like the analogies you have drawn here.

I found you can download it from online. I'll have to look for the fog scene.
Oh good. I bought the movie in a bargain bin; think it was at my local drugstore. I also bought one of my favorite old films with Hepburn - "Roman Holiday". The scene I speak of is of Fonda and this peasant guy who befriends a dog and they are marching along with the army. The setting does remind me somehow of the photo you posted...the atmosphere, stark.

Yeah, the fog is probably the main symbol in the story, so we'll have to watch how Chekhov uses it. It's safe to say that it has more than one meaning.

Interesting - it almost seems that the fog is another character...one that is ellusive, transparent.

He certainly has a good motive for daydreaming. He's not just trying to pass the time in a boring class. No, he's about to die without really having ever lived. I would be fantasizing too, if it were my only way to live a full life.

"No, he's about to die without really having ever lived." - that is a good way of putting it. The story is somewhat about futility of the tramp's life as well.

That's odd. You seem them as isolated? I thought they connected, toward the end at least. The part where they're all dreaming makes it seem like the tramp got through to the two constables.

I thought so also; but as DM says below, she means the three are isolated from the rest of the world in these scenes,.... and the fog surrounds them, closing them in.

This story certainly casts some light on that "liquid mud" we encountered in the last one. I couldn't figure out what Chekhov was trying to get at before, but I now I have a slightly better idea. The mud conveys the monotony that these characters live in. The scenery never changes, and it makes us feel like no matter what these characters do they will always be treading mud.

That is interesting.

Ptaha is in a better mood, but isn't he making light of the tramp's circumstances?

I didn't find him very sympathetic. I did think he was making light of his plight but I could be wrong. A second reading would be helpful, I am sure.

The page glitch is a result of the deleted posts. They must not have deleted the page count when they lowered the post count.

How do you know that? Also some of my posting seems particularly slow to go through. Is that what you have been experiencing. I guess they are all working out the glitches. I know that Logos said she was investigating it all in the L thread - that one is truly wacky with the number sequences. This thread seems ok to me. It is only the L short story thread that seems to be counting wrong.

Good to see you again Pensive. How are things going? What did you make of "Dreams?"

I can speak for Pensive - she loves dreaming! :lol: She is a bluebird isn't she? Hey, Pensy, does that bird ever get anywhere?

Quark

08-15-2008, 12:39 AM

It's been a long day. Sorry I haven't been able to get to the thread until now, but I've been packing for my move. Tomorrow morning I'll try to get to everyone's posts. In the meantime, I'll at least keep posting text. Here's the first exposition of the tramp's character:

"I am a peasant and of peasant family," sighed the tramp. "My mamma was a house serf. I don't look like a peasant, that's true, for such has been my lot, good man. My mamma was a nurse with the gentry, and had every comfort, and as I was of her flesh and blood, I lived with her in the master's house. She petted and spoiled me, and did her best to take me out of my humble class and make a gentleman of me. I slept in a bed, every day I ate a real dinner, I wore breeches and shoes like a gentleman's child. What my mamma ate I was fed on, too; they gave her stuffs as a present, and she dressed me up in them. . . . We lived well! I ate so many sweets and cakes in my childish years that if they could be sold now it would be enough to buy a good horse. Mamma taught me to read and write, she instilled the fear of God in me from my earliest years, and she so trained me that now I can't bring myself to utter an unrefined peasant word. And I don't drink vodka, my lad, and am neat in my dress, and know how to behave with decorum in good society. If she is still living, God give her health; and if she is dead, then, O Lord, give her soul peace in Thy Kingdom, wherein the just are at rest."

The tramp bared his head with the scanty hair standing up like a brush on it, turned his eyes upward and crossed himself twice.

"Grant her, O Lord, a verdant and peaceful resting-place," he said in a drawling voice, more like an old woman's than a man's. "Teach Thy servant Xenia Thy justifications, O Lord! If it had not been for my beloved mamma I should have been a peasant with no sort of understanding! Now, young man, ask me about anything and I understand it all: the holy Scriptures and profane writings, and every prayer and catechism. I live according to the Scriptures. . . . I don't injure anyone, I keep my flesh in purity and continence, I observe the fasts, I eat at fitting times. Another man will take no pleasure in anything but vodka and lewd talk, but when I have time I sit in a corner and read a book. I read and I weep and weep."

"What do you weep for?"

"They write so pathetically! For some books one gives but a five-kopeck piece, and yet one weeps and sighs exceedingly over it."

"Is your father dead?" asked Ptaha.

"I don't know, good man. I don't know my parent; it is no use concealing it. I judge that I was mamma's illegitimate son. My mamma lived all her life with the gentry, and did not want to marry a simple peasant. . . ."

"And so she fell into the master's hands," laughed Ptaha.

"She did transgress, that's true. She was pious, God-fearing, but she did not keep her maiden purity. It is a sin, of course, a great sin, there's no doubt about it, but to make up for it there is, maybe, noble blood in me. Maybe I am only a peasant by class, but in nature a noble gentleman."

The "noble gentleman" uttered all this in a soft, sugary tenor, wrinkling up his narrow forehead and emitting creaking sounds from his red, frozen little nose. Ptaha listened and looked askance at him in wonder, continually shrugging his shoulders.

After going nearly five miles the constables and the tramp sat down on a mound to rest.

"Even a dog knows his name," Ptaha muttered. "My name is Andryushka, his is Nikandr; every man has his holy name, and it can't be forgotten. Nohow."

"Who has any need to know my name?" sighed the tramp, leaning his cheek on his fist. "And what advantage would it be to me if they did know it? If I were allowed to go where I would -- but it would only make things worse. I know the law, Christian brothers. Now I am a tramp who doesn't remember his name, and it's the very most if they send me to Eastern Siberia and give me thirty or forty lashes; but if I were to tell them my real name and description they would send me back to hard labour, I know!"

Janine

08-15-2008, 12:53 AM

Oh no! Now this thread is doing the same thing as the L thread did. You can't click on the 'last' page - it won't let you in. I notice they placed those symbols at the bottom of the screen - could that have anything to do with it, I wonder.

Quark, glad to see you here, but don't worry about posting quickly. We have other things going on anyway and with your move coming up it must be hard to keep up. Just post the segments of the story at your own pace. There is no rush really. I am tired out now and retiring for the night. I will look over the text tomorrow and comment.

Quark

08-15-2008, 01:00 AM

Oh no! Now this thread is doing the same thing as the L thread did.

Yes, I think the problem is tied to the deletion of Antiquarian's posts. It set back the post count, and so the server thinks were on a previous page. The page count, however, hasn't updated. That's why the last page doesn't appear as the last page on the bottom. What have the mods told you about fixing this problem?

Quark, glad to see you here, but don't worry about posting quickly.

Oh, good. I feared that I was holding everyone up. I will try to get the posts tomorrow, though, because I don't want to fall too far behind. Plus, I have a point or two of my own that I'd like to add.

Edit:
I posted more of the story on the previous page.

Janine

08-15-2008, 02:43 PM

Yes, I think the problem is tied to the deletion of Antiquarian's posts. It set back the post count, and so the server thinks were on a previous page. The page count, however, hasn't updated. That's why the last page doesn't appear as the last page on the bottom. What have the mods told you about fixing this problem?

No, I don't think that is the problem, Quark. I think it is those new tags or browser links at the bottom of the page. I noticed pages with them seem to run slower - like for posts to go through. The mods got the L thread straightened out so I feel sure they will get this one back to normal also. You could email them and point out the problem. I did that with the L thread. Come to think of it; now I think it is straightened out, because I just clicked the page 'last' and I got here with no problem.

Oh, good. I feared that I was holding everyone up. I will try to get the posts tomorrow, though, because I don't want to fall too far behind. Plus, I have a point or two of my own that I'd like to add.

That is fine.

Edit:

I posted more of the story on the previous page.

Oh, I did not look there yet. You are going too fast for me. I haven't addressed the above text yet or commented on it. I will check the next page out now - maybe you have made comments.

Now it is my edit - what page? I can't go any further than page 54 (this page). The last clump of text you posted started with something about peasants...and ended with..."I know". Is there anything after this portion?

Quark

08-15-2008, 07:45 PM

Okay, this is a long post. I tried to quote as little as I could from your posts to keep it short. That means that I may be replying to more than just the person I quoted.

No, I don't think that is the problem, Quark. I think it is those new tags or browser links at the bottom of the page. I noticed pages with them seem to run slower - like for posts to go through.

I think we may be talking about different problems. What I was noticing is that the page count was skewed. The numbers at the bottom went up to 64, but the last page shown was on page 54. They have since fixed this problem, though, so it's no longer an issue. Now, as for slow posting, I don't know what would be causing that.

Oh, I did not look there yet. You are going too fast for me.

I probably won't post any more of the story until Sunday. I, too, am falling behind.

Now it is my edit - what page? I can't go any further than page 54 (this page).

LitNet combines posts that are by the same user when the posts are right after each other. When our posts consolidated it moved my last post back onto page 54. Before, when our previous posts were separated, my last post appeared on page 55.

I think it could be debateble if they truly connected with each other, they might to some degree be having a shared experince, but I do not think eitherof them empahtieis with the others circumstance or condition

Yeah, I think you're right. There is no actual empathy between the characters, but they do share an experience. I called that connecting, but maybe it isn't.

Whatever we call it, though, I thought that was one of the best parts of the story. It was probably the only happy event in the story, and it's a rare moment in Chekhov's fiction where a character gets through to someone else. Most of the time Chekhov has his characters stranded in their own little world, so I think the tramp accomplishes something meaningful here.

But truly what I was originally was trying to say, is that the tree of them are isolated together. The fog sort of closes them out from everything else. There is no sign of civilization

That's well put--especially the point about their distance from civilization. The fog separates them from all the rest of society, and this important because it makes it easier for them to dream. Civilization, which clearly has rules and structure, limits opportunities that the peasants might have otherwise. By placing a wall of fog between them and everything else, Chekhov makes it possible to imagine better situations.

I am not sure I would consider that the same thing as being callous though.

I might have missed the right word, but it seems like you see what I'm getting at. Affable people can be just as distant and haughty ones. That appears to be the case here.

This made me think of a dream itself. If you ever had those dreams, where you can only move in really slow motion

This part does seem almost surreal, but I think Chekhov is just stretching for effect here. He's trying to show how monotonous the journey is, and how fruitless their labor will be. As I've said before, Chekhov goes over-the-top with his language in this story. This is another instance of that. I don't think he's trying to make the journey seem dreamlike, though. This part is supposed to be contrasted with the dreams later on, so it seems like that contrast would lose its effect if this scene were dreamlike. Also, I think the title refers to daydreams more than just dreams. The copy of the story I found in my library names this story "Daydreams," too. That's probably a better translation.

It also reflects their situation in life, and the fact that they are trapped within a dreary rut of which they have no true escape, but perhaps for their dreams.

This is the sense I got from it.

I loved this description. And again it is much like a dream. It offers from a distance a glimmer of hope, but when they draw near to it, it begins to fade away, until reality is reveled.

This fog is very dreamlike. I agree. At least, I agree in a sense. The fog is dual symbol in this story. At times it refers to the cold, damp, miserable reality around them, but at other times it reflects the misty, unrealized dream world.

That bit about the tears does border upon the cheesy

Right, this story doesn't quite have the control that Chekhov will find for his later works. "The Black Monk" is much better at handling this theme without all the exaggeration.

I guess I am a sap; I actually liked this part...but maybe those 'tears' are a bit much to swallow. Maybe the writing seems a little forced here.

Oh, I liked it to. The imagery was excellent. I just found some of his analogies unnecessary. I prefer it when Chekhov just lets his setting do the work.

Interesting - it almost seems that the fog is another character...one that is ellusive, transparent.

Yes, the fog has its own characteristics and it plays a large role in the story.

"No, he's about to die without really having ever lived." - that is a good way of putting it. The story is somewhat about futility of the tramp's life as well.

It's a statement on the futility of his life, as well as the futility of his action. It shows that no matter what he does, he is still going to die unhappy.

I didn't find him very sympathetic. I did think he was making light of his plight but I could be wrong.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at before.

I also need to give this story another read.

Me three. I recently pulled a version of this story with a different translation. I'd like to see how things are written in the other book and compare.

Janine

08-15-2008, 09:48 PM

Quark and DM, I read both your posts so now I feel I am up-to-date with this. Posting the next part on Sunday would be just fine with me, Quark. I will be busy tomorrow and may not be on here so much.

Dark Muse

08-15-2008, 10:25 PM

I hope to be able to comment soon upon the latest section that Quark has posted, as that has not yet been addressed I do not think.

Jozanny

08-15-2008, 10:38 PM

I read the story before the upgrade, and I think the word I'd use for the landscape and the constables is surreal--what gave me trouble with the piece though, is, if the fugitive really was a seven year old convicted for conspiracy to murder, well, I know this is Czarist Russia in the 19th century, but Chekov is either stretching credibility or the gent is a charlatan, not sure which--but it was a bit too schematic for me. Most 19th century short stories are, but it was still a little too stagey.

Dark Muse

08-16-2008, 01:34 AM

I wanted to address some of the things within the last segment of the text that was posted, before we move one to the next part of the text.

First of all, one of the things I noticed about this story, is that there seems to be a certain element of mystery which is offered within the story, particularly in regards to the tramp. There is the initial introduction in which we are told he is not what one would expect a tramp to be and speculation upon his true identity, as well there is his namelessness, and as more of his life starts to be reveled bit by bit, at first it seems to just add to the mystery that surrounds him.

The other thing that I really noticed in the section of the text that was more recently posted (I don't want to repost it all again), is when we begin to discover the somewhat nobel upbringing of the tramp and learn a bit more about his past. This seems to have a two-fold effect. In some ways it adds to the comic aspect of the story and the character. Making him this sort of mix-match, adds to a certain ridiculousness about him, and well there were moments in which the way he was described, made him seem almost a Fool/Jester. He is sort of a mockery of himself, being the bastard son of a peasant woman, but dressed in fine clothes and schooled like a gentleman.

But it also almost seemed to suggest that because of his upbringing he should be more sympathetic than a "mere" peasant would be, because he is use to having fine things in life and was raised to expect fine things. There seems to be some classicism within this section, as the tramp is painted to appear almost as being "superior" to the lowly peasants.

Here it states:

If it had not been for my beloved mamma I should have been a peasant with no sort of understanding!

This seems almost to suggest that if he was raised like a peasant than somehow he would be less affected by his current position, that because he was raised like a nobel he is more aware of his fate and suffers more because of his "proper" upbringing.

Another man will take no pleasure in anything but vodka and lewd talk, but when I have time I sit in a corner and read a book. I read and I weep and weep."

And here it seems to be suggesting that he is better than most men, perhaps even more "human" which would lend one to view his situation all the more dire. While other men simply waste themselves in drinking, he reads and presents himself as being much more sensitive, for than it is truly absurd, that he cries because he finds the books in such poor quality.

"What do you weep for?"

"They write so pathetically! For some books one gives but a five-kopeck piece, and yet one weeps and sighs exceedingly over it."

Quark

08-18-2008, 05:39 PM

At the moment I don't have internet at my apartment, so unfortunately I can't post regularly. I hope to have a connection by the end of this week, though.

Janine

08-19-2008, 12:25 AM

At the moment I don't have internet at my apartment, so unfortunately I can't post regularly. I hope to have a connection by the end of this week, though.

Oh gosh, you are going through what I went through a month ago. I am still working to have my files taken off my old hard drive and infact tried to extract the unit from the old computer today but could not get the screws out...didn't have the right tool. I had to drag the whole tower into the shop to have them remove it. It should be done a few days from now.

Anyway, that is ok, Quark, we can wait, can't we Dark Muse? I will try and address what you wrote tomorrow, DM....I was out tonight and did not get back until an hour or so ago and watched some Olympics. We started the Lawrence thread also, but we will go slowly this week and you can catch up if you have the time to do the story this month. It is a short one but you can wait till Sept if that is more convenient for you. Fully understandable. Glad you are in your new place; I know it takes time to get settled.

Dark Muse

08-19-2008, 12:52 AM

Hehe yes, I can wait

Janine

08-19-2008, 12:59 AM

Hehe yes, I can wait

Good, because I have one eye ;) open again - that means one is closed...I am really tired out now.

OlgaG

08-19-2008, 04:50 PM

Janine

08-20-2008, 05:12 PM

My first impression was the sad contrast between our “Dreams” and reality. Chekhov told me how unreachable our dreams are. It’s not enough that the desirable place doesn’t even exist; but if it was, you still wouldn’t be able to get there because of the physical weakness, or other reason.
About elements of mystery, noticed by Dark Muse. I thought that the trump’s dreams were not only about his future, but about his past as well. It least two hits gave me that impression. First, his story about getting seven years as accomplice for handling a glass to the master (unbelievable even for Czarist Russia); second, he talks a very simple language (unfortunately, lost somehow in translation) He made up his life story with the help of books: “when I have time I sit in a corner and read a book. I read and I weep and weep."

OlgaG, You pointed out some good impressions; well expressed. I hope you stick around for the whole discussion. It is moving along rather slowly this month, so be patient. Our fearless leader, Quark, just moved into a new appartment, so we are waiting for his return to post more text. He will resurface soon, I believe. He is busy also with school I believe.
And... OlgaG, Welcome to the forum! I see you are new. I know you will enjoy these threads and discussion groups; this is a great site!

Dark Muse, I will try and comment on what you wrote last about the story...probably tonight.

Quark

08-21-2008, 09:39 AM

Janine

08-21-2008, 12:45 PM

I just heard that my internet is getting hooked up sometime on Saturday afternoon. I should be able to post that night. In the meantime, it's rather hard for me to post because the library is only open during the hours I'm supposed to be at a training class.

If you're through with what's been posted so far, you can go ahead and post more. I wouldn't mind. I'll catch up on the weekend.

Quark, that is ok, we fully understand, or at least I do. I went through the same ordeal over a month ago - library, limited hours, incovenience, etc. Take your time and we can wait for you to post the next part. I am super busy, also. Sat or Sun will be fine with me. Anyway, I still need to comment on what Dark Muse observed about the text you did post. Good luck with everything.

Quark

08-24-2008, 09:50 PM

Okay, I'm completely back now. I've got home internet and everything. I'm not seeing much activity on the thread at the moment, though, so I'm not sure if we should go on with the discussion. Were you all just waiting for me? If so, I can post more text from the story. If not, we might hold off on this thread for a while and focus more on the Lawrence thread. What do you guys think?

Dark Muse

08-24-2008, 09:53 PM

Good to see you back, I think Janine was waiting for you

Quark

08-24-2008, 10:08 PM

Good to see you back

Thanks, it's good to be back. I wasn't expecting to be without internet for so long, but it turned out to be an entire week before Comcast sent someone out here to hook my place up.

I think Janine was waiting for you

I hope not. I was trying to get everyone to go on without me.

Janine

08-25-2008, 12:43 AM

Good to see you back, I think Janine was waiting for you

:lol: DM, Could be I was...or maybe Janine was too busy, with the new forum upgrades, not to mention getting involved in 6 Social Groups, also starting a blog (I have no idea what I am doing in there:() and also continuing to taylor this computer to my particular needs, such as installing supportive software for my antiquated devices, and a few newer ones - not an easy task, and very time-consuming. I have had to read a lot of 'help' menus...I really need tech education.

Anyway, Quark, It is good to see you back again but still take your time; I guess I was waiting now for your return, and the next section to discuss of the actual text. The L thread is just creeping along so you can definitely catch up there.

Quark, do you recall the photo of a painting that I posted in here awhile ago? It was when we discussed 'Misery'. I was online and saw the artist sitting in front of the painting (which by the way, is huge!). I copied it and will post it to show you. I think it is of St. Petersburg and painted by a prominent artist, whose work I particularly like.

Quark

08-25-2008, 11:39 AM

:lol: DM, Could be I was...or maybe Janine was too busy

Yes, I've been looking at all the work you've been doing. Very impressive. Are you into blogging now?

I guess I was waiting now for your return, and the next section to discuss of the actual text.

I can restart the "Dreams" discussion if there's interest, but I don't want to push people into it. I'm certainly up for continuing. I just don't know how everyone else feels.

Quark, do you recall the photo of a painting that I posted in here awhile ago? It was when we discussed 'Misery'. I was online and saw the artist sitting in front of the painting (which by the way, is huge!). I copied it and will post it to show you.

I remember you posting some images about "Oh! The Public," but I can't recall the one you posted for "Misery." What was it of? I'll try to find it.

Janine

08-25-2008, 12:34 PM

Yes, I've been looking at all the work you've been doing. Very impressive. Are you into blogging now?

Thanks Quark, that is really nice of you to say; and thanks for coming by my new profile page. Did you request to be my friend or leave any comments? I have not gotten into blogging quite yet; I just posted that one topic in my blog; hope you can read it soon. I still need to name my blog and write a short description.

I can restart the "Dreams" discussion if there's interest, but I don't want to push people into it. I'm certainly up for continuing. I just don't know how everyone else feels.

Well, can you just pick up from where we left off or must we start all over again - say for Sept? I am not feeling really well today so I can't post very much right now and I know you must still be busy with your new place.

I remember you posting some images about "Oh! The Public," but I can't recall the one you posted for "Misery." What was it of? I'll try to find it.

Oh, not sure which it was for now, but know it was a snow scene - St. Petersburg - and very nice. I think really it for "Misery". I will check it out, too.

Quark

08-25-2008, 06:19 PM

Did you request to be my friend or leave any comments?

I would if I could. I'm not even sure how the friend system works. Is there a button somewhere to click on?

Well, can you just pick up from where we left off or must we start all over again

We don't have to start over. I'll post something on the story tomorrow, and see what happens. If there isn't much interest, we can focus on just the L thread. Next month I plan to start another story, though.

Oh, not sure which it was for now, but know it was a snow scene - St. Petersburg - and very nice.

Was it this?

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/mucha8TheAbolitionofSerfdominRussia.jpg

Janine

08-25-2008, 10:43 PM

I would if I could. I'm not even sure how the friend system works. Is there a button somewhere to click on?

Yep, there is a couple of buttons; Quark, just look around the page for them and you will find them eventually. I think it is right near the 'Friends' box. I think I already befriended you, so doesn't that automatically make you my friend, in my profile page?

We don't have to start over. I'll post something on the story tomorrow, and see what happens. If there isn't much interest, we can focus on just the L thread. Next month I plan to start another story, though.

I like this story. I will post something when I can; let's continue in the same vane.

Was it this?

Yep, that is the exact one. Thanks for finding it and reposting.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/muchasep.jpg

See the man in relation to the size of the painting - rather impressive.
Painting by Alphonse Mucha

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/muchapho.jpg

This is a self portrait of Mucha

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/The-Astrologer.jpg

You probably have seen his work prior to this. He did many like this beautiful Art Nouveau poster

Well that livened up the Chekhov thread, even though it was a bit of a departure.

Quark

08-25-2008, 11:45 PM

I think I already befriended you, so doesn't that automatically make you my friend, in my profile page?

That's what I thought. You asked whether I requested to be your friend before, and I was under the impression that it automatically reciprocates friendships. I could be wrong, though. I'm not sure how these things work.

I like this story. I will post something when I can; let's continue in the same vane.

I'll pick up where we left off before. There's a post or two I want to reply to and then I'll post more from the story.

You probably have seen his work prior to this. He did many like this beautiful Art Nouveau poster

No, this was new to me. Was he a 19th C artist?

Janine

08-26-2008, 12:45 AM

That's what I thought. You asked whether I requested to be your friend before, and I was under the impression that it automatically reciprocates friendships. I could be wrong, though. I'm not sure how these things work.

Quark, I think now that you are in my friend's list so don't worry about it. I saw I was in yours already. We are all learning as we go along - like the blind leading the blind..:eek:

I'll pick up where we left off before. There's a post or two I want to reply to and then I'll post more from the story.

Glad to hear that. Take your time.

No, this was new to me. Was he a 19th C artist?

I recently bought a large book of his art at Barnes and Noble. I have always loved his decorative designs and his advertising and then I discovered his wonderful classic paintings. The man was a genius and very talented - very colorful, too. He was born in 1860 and painted into the early part of the next century. My book says he was Czech and studied and lived in Paris. I think he helped to bring the Art Nouveau movement to the public eye. I just love his work and have copied many pieces from online and can run a screen-saver slideshow on this computer; either morph the images or fade from one to the other. I also can make a film with Movie Maker - that will take some time to learn, I imagine, but it looks like loads of fun. The computer is so nice; I love it! I can post way faster now also. Yeah!

Quark

08-27-2008, 11:38 PM

Looking back over the posts I missed while I was away, I noticed one from Jozanny and another from DM that each make some good points. I keep promising to post more text, but before I do that I want to completely catch up.

I think the word I'd use for the landscape and the constables is surreal

If I remember, I think I objected to the label "surreal" before. The landscape and constables appear to be contrasted with the dreams that follow later in the story. The landscape, for example, depresses us with its dreary sameness, while the later dreams are filled with cheerful variety. The constables also contrast in that their close-minded fools who lack imagination. Now this isn't to say that there isn't anything odd about the constables or the landscape--clearly there is. I just chalk this up to Chekhov stretching for effect. He really wants to convince us that the constables are country bumpkins and the landscape is dreary, so he exaggerates. This gives the scene its oddness.

it was a bit too schematic for me. Most 19th century short stories are, but it was still a little too stagey.

I would agree that this story is a little stagey. Yet, I wouldn't say all 19th C short stories are. I wouldn't even say all of Chekhov's are. I keep bringing up "The Black Monk" because of its connections with this story's themes, but it also shows the development of Chekhov as a writer. The later story is much less stagey.

First of all, one of the things I noticed about this story, is that there seems to be a certain element of mystery which is offered within the story, particularly in regards to the tramp.

The beginning is mysterious. We're not sure what to make of the situation or the characters. While it might be unsettling not to know, it doesn't feel that way in this story. In this instance, it seems to make one feel free. The characters are set off by themselves by the mystery. They aren't determined by any social forces. I think this feeling of freedom at the beginning is part of what makes the ending so sad. When the mystery is over the characters realize that their doomed to continue their unfulfilling lives.

it also almost seemed to suggest that because of his upbringing he should be more sympathetic than a "mere" peasant would be, because he is use to having fine things in life and was raised to expect fine things. There seems to be some classicism within this section, as the tramp is painted to appear almost as being "superior" to the lowly peasants.

That's definitely a good point. What do you make of that, though? Why would Chekhov make his habits be some incongruous with his situation? Does it fit in with the theme of depressing circumstances vs. hopeful dreams?

Quark, I think now that you are in my friend's list so don't worry about it. I saw I was in yours already. We are all learning as we go along - like the blind leading the blind..:eek:

We'll figure this stuff out eventually, Janine. In the meantime, we can console ourselves with the fact that we're so ahead of everyone in using images. Look how many pictures we have on our threads!

Janine

08-27-2008, 11:55 PM

We'll figure this stuff out eventually, Janine. In the meantime, we can console ourselves with the fact that we're so ahead of everyone in using images. Look how many pictures we have on our threads!

;)Yeah really, Quark....and we always come up with great images to express the stories, don't we? I am tired out now so can't respond to the other parts of your posts. I have just spend hours uploading a new album for my profile page. This photo thing is quite to my liking. If you have a chance, peek in and see my new Garden Album. Of course, the garden now is over-run with weeds; but at least, I have the photos to show the 'glory days':D

Dark Muse

08-28-2008, 12:15 AM

That's definitely a good point. What do you make of that, though? Why would Chekhov make his habits be some incongruous with his situation? Does it fit in with the theme of depressing circumstances vs. hopeful dreams?

I am really not sure what to make of it, I just could not help but to notice the suggestion of it seemed to be there. In someways I thought perhaps, it was intended to make the ending more tragic, becasue considering his education, we are let to beleive that perhaps he would have more hopeful dreams, or perhaps possibly greater prospects were it not for the circumstance he found himself in.

Or perhaps that his mother had worked so hard to try and give him better oppetunities in life, only to have him end up as a criminal and soon to be exile.

Quark

08-28-2008, 02:55 PM

I thought perhaps, it was intended to make the ending more tragic, becasue considering his education, we are let to beleive that perhaps he would have more hopeful dreams, or perhaps possibly greater prospects were it not for the circumstance he found himself in.

It does build our sympathy for him. He clearly has ambitions and ideas. If he wasn't going to die during his journey to Siberia, he may have been able to lead a happy, productive life.

I also think his refined habits add to the contrast between his current prospects and his dreams for more. By having his personal situation differ so much from his ideas, Chekhov is introducing a theme that will come to forefront later.

Or perhaps that his mother had worked so hard to try and give him better oppetunities in life, only to have him end up as a criminal and soon to be exile.

We'll talk about this more when we get into the text I posted below.

If you have a chance, peek in and see my new Garden Album.

I did. It looks like a big garden, but I can't tell from the close-up photos. It's certainly a very colorful garden. You say it's been taken over by less attractive weeds now, though? That's unfortunate. I suppose LitNet has pulled you away from gardening too much. At least your LitNet page is colorful now. I like the sea foam theme.

Anyway, here's more of the text. This is the part where we finally get a full history of the tramp's crime. There isn't too much to say about this part, but it is interesting to note how the mother's desires are frustrated just as the son's are later on.

"Why, have you been a convict?"

"I have, dear friend. For four years I went about with my head shaved and fetters on my legs."

"What for?"

"For murder, my good man! When I was still a boy of eighteen or so, my mamma accidentally poured arsenic instead of soda and acid into my master's glass. There were boxes of all sorts in the storeroom, numbers of them; it was easy to make a mistake over them."

The tramp sighed, shook his head, and said:

"She was a pious woman, but, who knows? another man's soul is a slumbering forest! It may have been an accident, or maybe she could not endure the affront of seeing the master prefer another servant. . . . Perhaps she put it in on purpose, God knows! I was young then, and did not understand it all . . . now I remember that our master had taken another mistress and mamma was greatly disturbed. Our trial lasted nearly two years. . . . Mamma was condemned to penal servitude for twenty years, and I, on account of my youth, only to seven."

"And why were you sentenced?"

"As an accomplice. I handed the glass to the master. That was always the custom. Mamma prepared the soda and I handed it to him. Only I tell you all this as a Christian, brothers, as I would say it before God. Don't you tell anybody. . . ."

"Oh, nobody's going to ask us," said Ptaha. "So you've run away from prison, have you?"

"I have, dear friend. Fourteen of us ran away. Some folks, God bless them! ran away and took me with them. Now you tell me, on your conscience, good man, what reason have I to disclose my name? They will send me back to penal servitude, you know! And I am not fit for penal servitude! I am a refined man in delicate health. I like to sleep and eat in cleanliness. When I pray to God I like to light a little lamp or a candle, and not to have a noise around me. When I bow down to the ground I like the floor not to be dirty or spat upon. And I bow down forty times every morning and evening, praying for mamma."

The tramp took off his cap and crossed himself.

"And let them send me to Eastern Siberia," he said; "I am not afraid of that."

"Surely that's no better?"

Janine

08-28-2008, 04:08 PM

I have been reading all the posts, although not posting much myself. I feel bogged down now with all the new changes and my own new computer work/installations, etc. I hope you will forgive me. I will try and post comments on this next section, but DM always beats me to it, and usually I just agree with what she says/observes...weird lately...we have been agreeing way too much.

Thanks Quark, for looking at my once and glorious garden, now a tangle of weeds. Actually many of the perennial plants are still there, but they have been crowded out by the unwanted invaders: mulberrry trees and God knows what else, wild ferns, vines, etc.
It is a big garden - too big! I kept expanding it, until it was uncontrollable; I call it 'natural'. If you click on each photo, you will see the full size view. You haven't commented on my page yet, have you?

Be back later to comment on this story.

Quark

08-28-2008, 05:57 PM

You haven't commented on my page yet, have you?

I haven't gotten a chance to yet. I've been so busy with the Lawrence and Chekhov threads--my "official duties"--that I really haven't had much time for anything else.

Janine

08-28-2008, 06:02 PM

I haven't gotten a chance to yet. I've been so busy with the Lawrence and Chekhov threads--my "official duties"--that I really haven't had much time for anything else.

:lol: You're forgiven....just come visit when you have time...no rush.

Dark Muse

08-28-2008, 06:51 PM

Quark

08-29-2008, 01:12 PM

One thing I was a bit confussed about in this story, was what exzactly the two constables had arrested him for. They did not know of his past deeds untill he began to speak of them. Was he taken in just for being a tramp? Or did I miss something?

I remember asking myself this question when I was reading, and I thought something later in the text gave me a clue. I can't remember what it was, though. I'll have to look it over again. Originally, I assumed that he was arrested for being a tramp, and then forgetting his name was an added crime--like not complying with officials. Of course, why would they be arresting tramps? Was he loitering, or something? Would they really send people to Siberia for that?

While we're figuring this out, let me point to one other thing. What do you make of the tramp's version of his past? It seems like he's trying to paint himself as the victim. Later it tells us that he begins relating things to the constables in "mawkish" tones. Do you think that the tramp may be a little self-pitying? Could this be part of his daydreams? We know we can't trust his foresight, so why should we trust his memory?

Dark Muse

08-29-2008, 03:04 PM

While we're figuring this out, let me point to one other thing. What do you make of the tramp's version of his past? It seems like he's trying to paint himself as the victim. Later it tells us that he begins relating things to the constables in "mawkish" tones. Do you think that the tramp may be a little self-pitying? Could this be part of his daydreams? We know we can't trust his foresight, so why should we trust his memory?

I do think he is trying to make himself look more like a victim. Particuarlly the way he keeps saying he is but a decent Christain. I think in someways he is perhaps a bit wrapped up in himself and is pitying himself, becasue of his upbrigning he does seem to think he is better than other people.

I have briefly mentioned this before, but in many ways he really does seem to be a fool/jesture like character to me.

I am going to have to read this story again. Beacause there was something about his exile that I was unsure about but before I comment I want to go back over it and make sure I had not missed for forgotton anything.

Dark Muse

08-29-2008, 05:51 PM

I was reading over the story again, and after my reading, it sounds as if he really is being exiled just for being a tramp.

Here is the pragraph that seems to suggest it:

"Who has any need to know my name?" sighed the tramp, leaning his cheek on his fist. "And what advantage would it be to me if they did know it? If I were allowed to go where I would -- but it would only make things worse. I know the law, Christian brothers. Now I am a tramp who doesn't remember his name, and it's the very most if they send me to Eastern Siberia and give me thirty or forty lashes; but if I were to tell them my real name and description they would send me back to hard labour, I know!"

Nossa

08-29-2008, 06:15 PM

Hey guys! I wanted to know if you are going to have a September story? I missed Dreams, and I really wanna start reading Chekhov again. I have plenty of time next month, so I was wondering if you guys are having a new read for next month. Or are you gonna take a break? Or maybe you're not decided yet lol

Janine

08-29-2008, 06:53 PM

Nossa, It is mostly up to Quark, and I would imagine he wants to continue on, unless he is too busy with school. He is sort of unofficially, the one who chooses the story and posts the introductions.

No doubt, soon as I write his name here, he will magically appear. He always does! :lol:

Nossa

08-29-2008, 07:14 PM

:lol: Yeah, I saw that in the Lawrence thread! Maybe you should ask him about it...maybe he has secret psychic powers ;) :p

Janine

08-29-2008, 07:22 PM

:lol: Yeah, I saw that in the Lawrence thread! Maybe you should ask him about it...maybe he has secret psychic powers ;) :p

I did tell him, countless times, that he must have ESP. It is kind of bizzare - he always pops in right after I mention his name; but at least my avy does not look like his and so our posts have never merged. ;):lol: Now that was truly bizzare, wasn't it?

Quark

08-30-2008, 03:56 PM

I think in someways he is perhaps a bit wrapped up in himself and is pitying himself, becasue of his upbrigning he does seem to think he is better than other people.

"Wrapped up in himself" is a good way to put it. I don't think he's lying here. I just have a feeling he's manipulating the story in such a way to make it more affecting and to cast himself in a certain light. His story is obviously a sad one, but the tramp keeps altering reality to make it more enjoyable for himself.

As for his refined habits, I don't think that those make him believe he's better than other people. He treats the constables nicely, at least. Perhaps you could see his manner as condescending, but I didn't see anything to prove that. If the tramp thinks he's superior, he believe he's superior to his circumstances. For example, he constantly complains about his fate and the conditions at the prison. He doesn't feel like he belongs in this place at all.

I have briefly mentioned this before, but in many ways he really does seem to be a fool/jesture like character to me.

I saw that before, but I was a little confused. What makes him a fool/jester? He doesn't find anything funny in his situation, and he doesn't seem like a fool. He appears to recognize his situation perfectly (other than his fancied trip to Siberia).

I was reading over the story again, and after my reading, it sounds as if he really is being exiled just for being a tramp.

I couldn't make heads or tails of that. It says he's knows what happens to a "tramp who doesn't remember his name." Both not remembering his name and being tramp are mentioned here, so it's still difficult to decide which is the crime.

Hey guys! I wanted to know if you are going to have a September story?

Nothing has been decided yet, but I assume there will be another story. When we finish with this story, I'll throw out some possible stories we could read and if there's any interest we'll start again with a different story. If we do another story, though, we probably won't start until the end of next week.

It is kind of bizzare - he always pops in right after I mention his name

This time it isn't so bizarre, but yes I have appeared often once my name's been said.

Dark Muse

08-30-2008, 06:35 PM

"Wrapped up in himself" is a good way to put it. I don't think he's lying here. I just have a feeling he's manipulating the story in such a way to make it more affecting and to cast himself in a certain light. His story is obviously a sad one, but the tramp keeps altering reality to make it more enjoyable for himself.

As for his refined habits, I don't think that those make him believe he's better than other people. He treats the constables nicely, at least. Perhaps you could see his manner as condescending, but I didn't see anything to prove that. If the tramp thinks he's superior, he believe he's superior to his circumstances. For example, he constantly complains about his fate and the conditions at the prison. He doesn't feel like he belongs in this place at all..

It just seems to me that he is trying to use his upbrigning and the way he was educated as a way to make him look even more pitful and gain more sypathy. As if, if he were just a "mere" peseant, it would not be as bad, because he would not have as full of an understanding of his situation.

He just seems to act to me, as if his situation is so much worse because he is a gentleman.

And the fact when he says he weeps when he reads becasue of how poorly the books are written. That struck me as condencending.

"I saw that before, but I was a little confused. What makes him a fool/jester? He doesn't find anything funny in his situation, and he doesn't seem like a fool. He appears to recognize his situation perfectly (other than his fancied trip to Siberia).

I guess he comes off to me that way more visually than his acutal actions. I will try and explain what I mean. But of how they describe him, and of how mismatched he is. And the way he is this sickly figure talking in such an elequant way. And his clothing, and the fact that he is a mix-match between a peseant and a gentleman, and dose not truly fit either. He almost seems a mokery of himself in that regaurd in my eyes.

When I first read the story and they were talking about his apperence I had this image in my head of like a gestures mix-matched costume.

Janine

08-30-2008, 10:03 PM

Ah - see I knew he would appear....

I have been reading the posts, but not posting very much, sorry I have not been as active as usual, Quark. I had not felt well all this past week.

Today my grand-daughter came to visit all day, so I was quite happy and preocuppied with seeing her - it had been awhile.

I did however, just read all of your comments. Another new story would be fine with me for the end of next week or maybe even the following Monday.

Quark

08-31-2008, 01:45 PM

It just seems to me that he is trying to use his upbrigning and the way he was educated as a way to make him look even more pitful and gain more sypathy.

Yeah, part of his argument is that he wouldn't be so miserable if he wasn't so aristocratic. The section where he describes the conditions of the prison shows exposes this pretty well.

And the fact when he says he weeps when he reads becasue of how poorly the books are written. That struck me as condencending.

It's difficult to say whether he's posing here. It's possible that he is trying to hold his delicate feelings over the constables. It's also possible, though, that he might actually feel deeply about the stories he reads. This may even be the more probable assumptions since Chekhov entertained this notion of literature, too. His stories were cheap tales that had sad conclusions--at least, that's how they were viewed at the time. Chekhov may be trying to say that people with real feeling enjoy his type of fiction.

I guess he comes off to me that way more visually than his acutal actions. I will try and explain what I mean. But of how they describe him, and of how mismatched he is. And the way he is this sickly figure talking in such an elequant way. And his clothing, and the fact that he is a mix-match between a peseant and a gentleman, and dose not truly fit either.

No doubt his appearance is funny. All three of them are pretty humorous. I think I described them as misfits before, and I stick with that label. They're characters, positions, aspirations, clothes, and manner all contradict each other. It makes them a little funny in our eyes, but I think it also humanizes them in a way. Even though all the characteristics Chekhov gives them are pretty stereotypical, the odd combination of them in each character makes them unique. And, as Chekhov adds each characteristic, one by one, we move from a humorous sketch of misfits to a poignant ending of individual desire thwarted.

I have been reading the posts, but not posting very much, sorry I have not been as active as usual, Quark. I had not felt well all this past week.

There isn't any rush to post here, but what are you going to do for the L thread? Are you going to do another story (as labor-intensive as that is)?

Today my grand-daughter came to visit all day, so I was quite happy and preocuppied with seeing her - it had been awhile.

Well that certainly trumps LitNet. Hopefully it went well.

Another new story would be fine with me for the end of next week or maybe even the following Monday.

The end of next week is the earliest we could start, I think. Most likely, it will be the following week. We still have two more sections in this story left, then we have to decide on the next story, then I have to post an introduction. All this will take a while. Plus, I'd like to look into the Winter's Tale thread again. It appears they finally started Act IV.

Here's more of the story. The tramp begins to explain his dreams to the constables:

"It is quite a different thing. In penal servitude you are like a crab in a basket: crowding, crushing, jostling, there's no room to breathe; it's downright hell -- such hell, may the Queen of Heaven keep us from it! You are a robber and treated like a robber -- worse than any dog. You can't sleep, you can't eat or even say your prayers. But it's not like that in a settlement. In a settlement I shall be a member of a commune like other people. The authorities are bound by law to give me my share . . . ye-es! They say the land costs nothing, no more than snow; you can take what you like! They will give me corn land and building land and garden. . . . I shall plough my fields like other people, sow seed. I shall have cattle and stock of all sorts, bees, sheep, and dogs. . . . A Siberian cat, that rats and mice may not devour my goods. . . . I will put up a house, I shall buy ikons. . . . Please God, I'll get married, I shall have children. . . ."

The tramp muttered and looked, not at his listeners, but away into the distance. Naïve as his dreams were, they were uttered in such a genuine and heartfelt tone that it was difficult not to believe in them. The tramp's little mouth was screwed up in a smile. His eyes and little nose and his whole face were fixed and blank with blissful anticipation of happiness in the distant future. The constables listened and looked at him gravely, not without sympathy. They, too, believed in his dreams.

"I am not afraid of Siberia," the tramp went on muttering. "Siberia is just as much Russia and has the same God and Tsar as here. They are just as orthodox Christians as you and I. Only there is more freedom there and people are better off. Everything is better there. Take the rivers there, for instance; they are far better than those here. There's no end of fish; and all sorts of wild fowl. And my greatest pleasure, brothers, is fishing. Give me no bread to eat, but let me sit with a fishhook. Yes, indeed! I fish with a hook and with a wire line, and set creels, and when the ice comes I catch with a net. I am not strong to draw up the net, so I shall hire a man for five kopecks. And, Lord, what a pleasure it is! You catch an eel-pout or a roach of some sort and are as pleased as though you had met your own brother. And would you believe it, there's a special art for every fish: you catch one with a live bait, you catch another with a grub, the third with a frog or a grasshopper. One has to understand all that, of course! For example, take the eel-pout. It is not a delicate fish -- it will take a perch; and a pike loves a gudgeon, the shilishper likes a butterfly. If you fish for a roach in a rapid stream there is no greater pleasure. You throw the line of seventy feet without lead, with a butterfly or a beetle, so that the bait floats on the surface; you stand in the water without your trousers and let it go with the current, and tug! the roach pulls at it! Only you have got to be artful that he doesn't carry off the bait, the damned rascal. As soon as he tugs at your line you must whip it up; it's no good waiting. It's wonderful what a lot of fish I've caught in my time. When we were running away the other convicts would sleep in the forest; I could not sleep, but I was off to the river. The rivers there are wide and rapid, the banks are steep -- awfully! It's all slumbering forests on the bank. The trees are so tall that if you look to the top it makes you dizzy. Every pine would be worth ten roubles by the prices here."

In the overwhelming rush of his fancies, of artistic images of the past and sweet presentiments of happiness in the future, the poor wretch sank into silence, merely moving his lips as though whispering to himself. The vacant, blissful smile never left his lips. The constables were silent. They were pondering with bent heads. In the autumn stillness, when the cold, sullen mist that rises from the earth lies like a weight on the heart, when it stands like a prison wall before the eyes, and reminds man of the limitation of his freedom, it is sweet to think of the broad, rapid rivers, with steep banks wild and luxuriant, of the impenetrable forests, of the boundless steppes. Slowly and quietly the fancy pictures how early in the morning, before the flush of dawn has left the sky, a man makes his way along the steep deserted bank like a tiny speck: the ancient, mast-like pines rise up in terraces on both sides of the torrent, gaze sternly at the free man and murmur menacingly; rocks, huge stones, and thorny bushes bar his way, but he is strong in body and bold in spirit, and has no fear of the pine-trees, nor stones, nor of his solitude, nor of the reverberating echo which repeats the sound of every footstep that he takes.

I'll post the constables reaction and the conclusion of the story in the next chunk.

Janine

08-31-2008, 02:33 PM

Yeah, part of his argument is that he wouldn't be so miserable if he wasn't so aristocratic. The section where he describes the conditions of the prison shows exposes this pretty well.

I agree - I thought that fact set up a good contrast to his present state and also make it even seem worse for him to endure. It is a kind of fall from grace, even though he probably wasn't exactly wealthy. I am sure now being reduced to a tramp is pretty humiliating to him and his former stature....at least personally, to himself.

It's difficult to say whether he's posing here. It's possible that he is trying to hold his delicate feelings over the constables. It's also possible, though, that he might actually feel deeply about the stories he reads. This may even be the more probable assumptions since Chekhov entertained this notion of literature, too. His stories were cheap tales that had sad conclusions--at least, that's how they were viewed at the time. Chekhov may be trying to say that people with real feeling enjoy his type of fiction.

I tend to agree with this idea since Chekhov did write this sort of fiction with much pathos and sadness. I think he would know that people could identify with these sorry states and therefore they did like the sadder fiction as opposed to lighter, and perhaps meaningless, stories. The deeper meaning of this story kind of hits one at the end. It has impact in the finale.

No doubt his appearance is funny. All three of them are pretty humorous. I think I described them as misfits before, and I stick with that label. They're characters, positions, aspirations, clothes, and manner all contradict each other. It makes them a little funny in our eyes, but I think it also humanizes them in a way. Even though all the characteristics Chekhov gives them are pretty stereotypical, the odd combination of them in each character makes them unique. And, as Chekhov adds each characteristic, one by one, we move from a humorous sketch of misfits to a poignant ending of individual desire thwarted.

Exactly, I agree with these observations and this repeats somewhat what I said above about the ending becoming poignant, as well as more meaningful to us.

There isn't any rush to post here, but what are you going to do for the L thread? Are you going to do another story (as labor-intensive as that is)?

It has been a tricky month with the new forum 'updates', my own working on my new computer to taylor it to my needs, also adjusting to a new Window's Version, etc. I also have had some health issues I am working out with the drugstore and dr's office so this has broken up my time, taken away my full concentration.

I think it is the same as in here concerning the Lawrence story. We won't be done by the end of the month - does it matter if we always adhere to that monthly start? I probably have not even gotten half way through the current story. I will try and post some more text today; however with the avy glinch it deferred us from the last bit I posted. I can repost that since I don't think we fully discussed it, but I will check.

I think to begin another story it will be well into the month, before that happens. As far as continuing; yes, we will go onto a new story when done this current one. There are still many I have in mind. L was quite a prolithic author, you know. Some of the best stories are yet to come.

Well that certainly trumps LitNet. Hopefully it went well. Yes, it does indeed - in fact, no matter what I would have planned if they said I was going to see my grandbaby I would drop it immediately. She now takes precedent over all other things in my life. I adore her so much. The visit was wonderful - what fun laying on the floor and playing with her on her little blanket - she kept grabbing my face - tell me one does not feel total pure love? I did not know being a grannie would be this wonderful!

The end of next week is the earliest we could start, I think. Most likely, it will be the following week. We still have two more sections in this story left, then we have to decide on the next story, then I have to post an introduction. All this will take a while. Plus, I'd like to look into the Winter's Tale thread again. It appears they finally started Act IV.

No rush, Quark, sounds good to me. *sigh* another thread I feel guilty about...Shakespeare...I knew that play and yet the discussion seems to wane too much, much of my own doing; so now you say it has picked up? I will have to check in. I think that play is complicated, but then all of Sh's work is that.

Here's more of the story. The tramp begins to explain his dreams to the constables:

Thanks for posting this. I will look it over today or tomorrow.

I'll post the constables reaction and the conclusion of the story in the next chunk.[/QUOTE]

Oh, good - then we will be near the end, not that I did not like the story; I did like it very much - just been such a hectic month.

Quark

09-01-2008, 12:27 AM

It has been a tricky month

Yes, it's been an erratic few weeks recently. DM is the only person who's been around consistently. I wonder if she's starting the Poe thread just to get away from our weird schedules.

I think it is the same as in here concerning the Lawrence story.

Yeah, there's still a bit left of the story. It's good to know another story is in the works, though.

I did not know being a grannie would be this wonderful!

I did see the granddaughter pictures on your user page: very cute.

another thread I feel guilty about...Shakespeare...I knew that play and yet the discussion seems to wane too much, much of my own doing; so now you say it has picked up?

A few days ago Scher put up Act IV for discussion, but I didn't notice until yesterday. I wouldn't rush over immediately, though. I don't know if anyone is still taking part in the discussion. It might just be dead at this point.

Janine

09-01-2008, 02:07 PM

Yes, it's been an erratic few weeks recently. DM is the only person who's been around consistently. I wonder if she's starting the Poe thread just to get away from our weird schedules.

Yeah, really... and DM has started a number of social groups, as well. I joined some of them; but admit that consistently, I don't know if I will be able to keep up with everything all the time; other things in life do beckon to me. It has been a weird month actually for me, with setting up the new computer; still looking into needed software, drivers online to support my older hardware. Also, the month seemed to fly by with erratic action on here -think many people are getting ready for school and that has taken it's toll on long attention spans; also August is often vacation month and slow...I would think it the same with you - having the big appartment move to contend with. It all could not really be helped. Glad at least this Chekhov story was a short one. That reminds me; I must burn your and Virgil's last CD, so I can mail off your Chekhov set; you will enjoy it. I owe you one for the great little book!

Yeah, there's still a bit left of the story. It's good to know another story is in the works, though.

Yes, and we are slowly but surely getting there. It will be fine if it runs into the next month. We can speed it up a bit and maybe start a new one second week into the month - I can pick another shorter one for the remainder of Sept. Sept will probably be a slow month also with classes starting up.

I did see the granddaughter pictures on your user page: very cute.

Aww...thanks for looking, Quark. We sure do think she is cute also. I took more photos on Sunday and will try and put them into the computer today. Maybe eventually I will rotate those in my page - you know how grandma's are - they can't stop bragging.

A few days ago Scher put up Act IV for discussion, but I didn't notice until yesterday. I wouldn't rush over immediately, though. I don't know if anyone is still taking part in the discussion. It might just be dead at this point.[/QUOTE]

Well, glad she posted it, but don't know how much response there will be, since now all Shakespeare enthusiasts seem to be into the next play, which I believe it "The Merry Wives of Windsor" - I should just pick up there and forget about WT, or briefly comment on it (in summary) since I would like to read TMWOW...never read that particular play before; so it should be interesting.

Dark Muse

09-01-2008, 02:21 PM

Yes, it's been an erratic few weeks recently. DM is the only person who's been around consistently. I wonder if she's starting the Poe thread just to get away from our weird schedules.

Haha, I promoise I did not do it becasue of you guys. Just wait tell I start school again which will be soon. I will not be around as much as I have been over the summer.

Quark

09-01-2008, 02:24 PM

Yeah, really... and DM has started a number of social groups, as well. I joined some of them; but admit that consistently, I don't know if I will be able to keep up with everything all the time; other things in life do beckon to me. It has been a weird month actually for me, with setting up the new computer; still looking into needed software, drivers online to support my older hardware. Also, the month seemed to fly by with erratic action on here -think many people are getting ready for school and that has taken it's toll on long attention spans; also August is often vacation month and slow...I would think it the same with you - having the big appartment move to contend with. It all could not really be helped. Glad at least this Chekhov story was a short one. That reminds me;

[QUOTE=Janine;617051]I must burn your and Virgil's last CD, so I can mail off your Chekhov set

If you would stop bringing it up I might forget about it, but every so often you mention those CD sets and I think, "Oh yeah, what's up with that?"

I can pick another shorter one for the remainder of Sept. Sept will probably be a slow month also with classes starting up.

The length of the story doesn't matter so much to me. It's the activity of the thread I'm worried about. It seems like when you guys really get going I fall behind. Of course, I can't ask anyone not to post. It's just that I may not be able to keep up--which wouldn't be the end of the world, obviously. In fact, I think I'm only really needed when the thread isn't doing well. When it is working well, I'd be getting in the way more then helping.

Shakespeare enthusiasts seem to be into the next play, which I believe it "The Merry Wives of Windsor"

Wow, that play actually won the poll? Curiosity must have gotten the better of everyone. I read part of the play, but I couldn't make it past Act III. I seemed a little pointless to me. It's droll, if you like droll, but little else.

Quark

09-01-2008, 02:25 PM

Just wait tell I start school again which will be soon. I will not be around as much as I have been over the summer.

You say that like it's reassuring, but it's quite the opposite actually.

Oh, and Janine I replied to your post earlier.

Dark Muse

09-01-2008, 02:33 PM

Hehe, just thought I would let you guys know you are not the only ones who are going to be busy, I should still be able to keep up with everything.

I will have to go back and take a look, and I still need to respond to the latest part of the text you posted.

Quark

09-01-2008, 02:37 PM

I still need to respond to the latest part of the text you posted.

As do I, but it seems like I've been talking about this section the whole time, so I don't know how much I will have to add. Whenever I review a text, though, I always come away with something more, so maybe I'll notice something new this time. At the very least, I could compare the LitNet translation with the differing translation in my book. There are some notable changes from one version to the other.

Dark Muse

09-01-2008, 03:27 PM

I agree - I thought that fact set up a good contrast to his present state and also make it even seem worse for him to endure. It is a kind of fall from grace, even though he probably wasn't exactly wealthy. I am sure now being reduced to a tramp is pretty humiliating to him and his former stature....at least personally, to himself.

In some ways I think this makes him a less sympathtic character, at least to me personally, becasue he seems to see his life at a higher vaule than others based upon his education.

I tend to agree with this idea since Chekhov did write this sort of fiction with much pathos and sadness. I think he would know that people could identify with these sorry states and therefore they did like the sadder fiction as opposed to lighter, and perhaps meaningless, stories. The deeper meaning of this story kind of hits one at the end. It has impact in the finale.

Reading over the line again, I can see where it could be interepted to mean that the stories were sad and moving even though they were cheap.

Janine

09-01-2008, 11:53 PM

In some ways I think this makes him a less sympathtic character, at least to me personally, becasue he seems to see his life at a higher vaule than others based upon his education.

DM, I sort of think when I was reading the story I did not sympathise with him entirely; something about him made me question his tale and the validity of it.

Reading over the line again, I can see where it could be interepted to mean that the stories were sad and moving even though they were cheap.

Could be. I was just agreeing more or less with Quark, I think.

Quark

09-02-2008, 09:31 PM

In some ways I think this makes him a less sympathtic character, at least to me personally, becasue he seems to see his life at a higher vaule than others based upon his education.

Yes, I'm also split about whether his story makes him more sympathetic. The fact that he was imprisoned for doing something he didn't intend certainly makes his case sad, but there are other parts of his story that do make him appear superior. Looking over the whole story, though, I think it humanizes him in a way that makes his character more pitiable. Even if you don't like his attitude, just the fact that he has an attitude makes him more sympathetic. This isn't just some person being sent of to Siberia; it's a human being with a past, a personality, and, yes, even an arrogant attitude.

I'll get to the section I most recently posted section tomorrow. I'm a little busy with work at the moment.

Dark Muse

09-02-2008, 10:01 PM

Yes, I'm also split about whether his story makes him more sympathetic. The fact that he was imprisoned for doing something he didn't intend certainly makes his case sad, but there are other parts of his story that do make him appear superior. Looking over the whole story, though, I think it humanizes him in a way that makes his character more pitiable. Even if you don't like his attitude, just the fact that he has an attitude makes him more sympathetic. This isn't just some person being sent of to Siberia; it's a human being with a past, a personality, and, yes, even an arrogant attitude.

I understand what you are saying about "humanizing him" though his arrogant superior attitude makes me inclined to care less about what is going to happen to him. Not to see he deserves to be exiled to Siberia for being arrogant, but it just does not make him very endearing so I am not really overly saddened by it. He is not a particularly "likeable" character, not to say I necessarily hate him either.

Also I am inclined to question his story a bit, and wonder, is really as completely innocent as he says he is?

After all isn't it a little suspect that when he is telling his story he first claims that his mother "accidentally" gave than master arsenic? Did anyone upon reading that actually believe that, even before they read further to the other possible explanation for the mothers actions.

So if he would lie about his mother, isn't it possible that he would also lie about himself?

Janine

09-04-2008, 01:25 PM

Just popping in to check on things. I did read all the posts. I better mention, Quark, so he appears soon to save this story and the thread. I was going to let you two debate the above topic. Also, I believe Quark promised to post more text, to keep things rolling along towards the end of this story. I am sure he is super busy. I know that Virgil is away on vacation, so that is why he is not present in the L thread. This time of year is slow on here, I believe...oh well, can't be helped.

Quark

09-04-2008, 04:03 PM

Also I am inclined to question his story a bit, and wonder, is really as completely innocent as he says he is?

While I do think he frames the story to make himself look good, I'm not sure I believe he's guilty of murder. It's possible--because as we've been saying he's quite unreliable--but I don't think it's likely. He seems pretty meek. Plus, he's head is filled with notions of gentility and religion. It's hard to see him murdering someone.

I better mention, Quark, so he appears soon to save this story and the thread.

Yes, here I am on cue. I've been racking my brains on what to say about the section I last posted, but there isn't much to say that I haven't already said. The one thing I could add is that I think this sections is probably the most beautiful part of the story. I get drawn into his vision just as the constables do. The quote that I used for my signature sums it up nicely, but what's great about this part is that Chekhov doesn't just describe dreams. He draws you into one here.

Also, I believe Quark promised to post more text, to keep things rolling along towards the end of this story.

There's only one last section to post. Here's the reaction of the constables:

The peasants called up a picture of a free life such as they had never lived; whether they vaguely recalled the images of stories heard long ago or whether notions of a free life had been handed down to them with their flesh and blood from far-off free ancestors, God knows!

The first to break the silence was Nikandr Sapozhnikov, who had not till then let fall a single word. Whether he envied the tramp's transparent happiness, or whether he felt in his heart that dreams of happiness were out of keeping with the grey fog and the dirty brown mud -- anyway, he looked sternly at the tramp and said:

"It's all very well, to be sure, only you won't reach those plenteous regions, brother. How could you? Before you'd gone two hundred miles you'd give up your soul to God. Just look what a weakling you are! Here you've hardly gone five miles and you can't get your breath."

The tramp turned slowly toward Nikandr, and the blissful smile vanished from his face. He looked with a scared and guilty air at the peasant's staid face, apparently remembered something, and bent his head. A silence followed again. . . . All three were pondering. The peasants were racking their brains in the effort to grasp in their imagination what can be grasped by none but God -- that is, the vast expanse dividing them from the land of freedom. Into the tramp's mind thronged clear and distinct pictures more terrible than that expanse. Before him rose vividly the picture of the long legal delays and procrastinations, the temporary and permanent prisons, the convict boats, the wearisome stoppages on the way, the frozen winters, illnesses, deaths of companions. . . .

The tramp blinked guiltily, wiped the tiny drops of sweat from his forehead with his sleeve, drew a deep breath as though he had just leapt out of a very hot bath, then wiped his forehead with the other sleeve and looked round fearfully.

"That's true; you won't get there!" Ptaha agreed. "You are not much of a walker! Look at you -- nothing but skin and bone! You'll die, brother!"

"Of course he'll die! What could he do?" said Nikandr. "He's fit for the hospital now. . . . For sure!"

The man who had forgotten his name looked at the stern, unconcerned faces of his sinister companions, and without taking off his cap, hurriedly crossed himself, staring with wide-open eyes. . . . He trembled, his head shook, and he began twitching all over, like a caterpillar when it is stepped upon. . . .

"Well, it's time to go," said Nikandr, getting up; "we've had a rest."

A minute later they were stepping along the muddy road. The tramp was more bent than ever, and he thrust his hands further up his sleeves. Ptaha was silent.

I know we'll have at least one disagreement here: the degree to which the constables are affected. I think he actually gets through to the constables at this point, but, if I remember, DM disagrees.

Dark Muse

09-04-2008, 04:43 PM

While I do think he frames the story to make himself look good, I'm not sure I believe he's guilty of murder. It's possible--because as we've been saying he's quite unreliable--but I don't think it's likely. He seems pretty meek. Plus, he's head is filled with notions of gentility and religion. It's hard to see him murdering someone.

I am not sure if I really think he is guilty of murdur, but knowing he is trying to gain more sympathy for himself, and considering how close he seemed to be to his mother. I cannot help but wonder if he knew more than he lets on.

I will come back later to coment upon the section of posted text.

Quark

09-06-2008, 01:49 PM

I cannot help but wonder if he knew more than he lets on.

Even that seems to clash with his character. It's hard to see him helping to kill someone.

I'll come back later to talk about the last section. I particularly want to comment on why Nikandr tries to make the tramp see reason.

Dark Muse

09-06-2008, 05:16 PM

Yes I noticed that too and wondered about it. I had wanted to talk about that section, but than I have not yet been able to get around to doing so

Dark Muse

09-06-2008, 09:05 PM

The first to break the silence was Nikandr Sapozhnikov, who had not till then let fall a single word. Whether he envied the tramp's transparent happiness, or whether he felt in his heart that dreams of happiness were out of keeping with the grey fog and the dirty brown mud -- anyway, he looked sternly at the tramp and said:

"It's all very well, to be sure, only you won't reach those plenteous regions, brother. How could you? Before you'd gone two hundred miles you'd give up your soul to God. Just look what a weakling you are! Here you've hardly gone five miles and you can't get your breath."

I found this part to be a bit curious, as it seems that Nikandr is bitter toward the tramp about his dreams, or envious of them in someway, when he tries and bring the tramp back into "reality" and chastises him for the dreams he has, and shows their impossibility.

Though from the beginning he is seen as more sever, I really do not think he is doing this purely to be malicious for no other reason.

Yet I question, why would the constables really be jealous of the tamps dreams, when they know the truth? For really the constables are free, while they know the tramp is not actually going to get to live the life he foresees for himself.

Are they so unhappy within their own lives, that they feel the need to crush the Tramp's mere imaginary life.

The tramp turned slowly toward Nikandr, and the blissful smile vanished from his face. He looked with a scared and guilty air at the peasant's staid face, apparently remembered something, and bent his head. A silence followed again. . . . All three were pondering. The peasants were racking their brains in the effort to grasp in their imagination what can be grasped by none but God -- that is, the vast expanse dividing them from the land of freedom. Into the tramp's mind thronged clear and distinct pictures more terrible than that expanse. Before him rose vividly the picture of the long legal delays and procrastinations, the temporary and permanent prisons, the convict boats, the wearisome stoppages on the way, the frozen winters, illnesses, deaths of companions. . . .

I found this passage to be currious, as it seems as if it is death itself in which the Tramp is now pondering, and the idea that death is the freedom from the wretechedness of life.

The peasants were racking their brains in the effort to grasp in their imagination what can be grasped by none but God -- that is, the vast expanse dividing them from the land of freedom.

To me this seems to be suggusting that Paradise is the land of freedom, becasue it is what only God can truly grasp, and life seems to be the expanse which devides them from it.

As it continues

Into the tramp's mind thronged clear and distinct pictures more terrible than that expanse. Before him rose vividly the picture of the long legal delays and procrastinations, the temporary and permanent prisons, the convict boats, the wearisome stoppages on the way, the frozen winters, illnesses, deaths of companions.

These are all concerns of the flesh, of mortality and the physcial living world in which the Tramp is faced with. The things which keep him from his freedom.

The tramp blinked guiltily, wiped the tiny drops of sweat from his forehead with his sleeve, drew a deep breath as though he had just leapt out of a very hot bath, then wiped his forehead with the other sleeve and looked round fearfully.

Why does the tramp seem to feel guilty about his Dreams? As when Nikandr first called him on his dreams, it said the tramp looked scared and guilty, and once more when faced with the truth, it makes him feel guilt and he looks around fearfully.

Quark

09-07-2008, 12:23 PM

it seems that Nikandr is bitter toward the tramp about his dreams, or envious of them in someway

I think so, too. The peasants are small minded, and it appears they envy the tramp's larger imagination, his ability to see beyond the circumstances.

For really the constables are free, while they know the tramp is not actually going to get to live the life he foresees for himself.

Are the constables free? If they were I don't think they would be able to commiserate with the tramp. When Chekhov says "The peasants called up a picture of a free life such as they had never lived" it seems like he's saying that they too are not free.

Interestingly, though, Chekhov makes their dreams ambiguous:

whether they vaguely recalled the images of stories heard long ago or whether notions of a free life had been handed down to them with their flesh and blood from far-off free ancestors, God knows!

We don't know where their dreams come from. They could just derive from the culture surrounding them. We never know whether there actually is such a thing as freedom or whether it's just an image created by culture. Maybe their life is fine and they're just tormented by fictitous stories they've heard? Chekhov like to pull the rug out from under the reader at moments like this, so I think we need to consider the possibility that they characters are creating their own misery here.

To me this seems to be suggusting that Paradise is the land of freedom, becasue it is what only God can truly grasp, and life seems to be the expanse which devides them from it.

Literally, that sentence tells us that only God is capable of understanding the expanse that seperates us from freedom, so I'm not sure whether that means freedom is only with God. The sentence seems to lead us to believe that there could be freedom on Earth--it's only the distance that separates freedom from the rest that is unclear. It's the truth of the situation that is understood by God.

Why does the tramp seem to feel guilty about his Dreams? As when Nikandr first called him on his dreams, it said the tramp looked scared and guilty, and once more when faced with the truth, it makes him feel guilt and he looks around fearfully.

That's a good question. I hadn't noticed that it said "guilty." Does that mean that he actually is guilty of something he's hiding? Or, is he just guilty of being caught dreaming?

Dark Muse

09-07-2008, 12:31 PM

Are the constables free? If they were I don't think they would be able to commiserate with the tramp. When Chekhov says "The peasants called up a picture of a free life such as they had never lived" it seems like he's saying that they too are not free.

They may not be happy with their lives but they are still free. After they deliver the tramp, they can return to thier own homes, and live out thier life. They are not being exiled or imprisoned.

That's a good question. I hadn't noticed that it said "guilty." Does that mean that he actually is guilty of something he's hiding? Or, is he just guilty of being caught dreaming?

It is hard to say, though the impression I get, is that it is not meant to indicate he his truly hiding anything, the way in which it is used. I think it is meant to relate to his dreams. Though I wonder if he is guilty about being caught dreaming. Or of Nickdr makes me feel guilt about having such naive dreams. Makes him feel like a child by scolding him for dreaming such things.

Quark

09-07-2008, 12:41 PM

They may not be happy with their lives but they are still free. After they deliver the tramp, they can return to thier own homes, and live out thier life. They are not being exiled or imprisoned.

Even though they aren't being led off to prison, isn't there still a sense in which they are not free. It says "The peasants called up a picture of a free life such as they had never lived." This indicates the life they are leading now isn't free. I think Chekhov is trying to include more than just these three characters in the not-free category, as well. It seems like he's trying to say that we all are not free--in the sense that our minds are more unbounded than our circumstances. That appears to be the contrast here. Dreams can show us an indefinite number of possibilities which taunt us in our limited state. Chekhov starts showing this in the obvious example of the tramp, but he subtly expands the message by including the constables.

It is hard to say, though the impression I get, is that it is not meant to indicate he his truly hiding anything, the way in which it is used. I think it is meant to relate to his dreams. Though I wonder if he is guilty about being caught dreaming. Or of Nickdr makes me feel guilt about having such naive dreams. Makes him feel like a child by scolding him for dreaming such things.

That makes sense. The word "guilty" is just strange here. Maybe it's a quirk of the translation, but you would think that they mean something like "ashamed" perhaps instead of "guilty."

Dark Muse

09-07-2008, 01:02 PM

Even though they aren't being led off to prison, isn't there still a sense in which they are not free. It says "The peasants called up a picture of a free life such as they had never lived." This indicates the life they are leading now isn't free. I think Chekhov is trying to include more than just these three characters in the not-free category, as well. It seems like he's trying to say that we all are not free--in the sense that our minds are more unbounded than our circumstances. That appears to be the contrast here. Dreams can show us an indefinite number of possibilities which taunt us in our limited state. Chekhov starts showing this in the obvious example of the tramp, but he subtly expands the message by including the constables.

I can see where Chekov is trying to convey that idea, but it is just something I cannot really buy into. Everyone has dreams of things that may likely never be, and not everyone always gets everything they want in life.

But this idea, that they are not truly free, to me is just self-pitying and self-vicimtizing, they are making the choice not to be free by having that attitude. They are simply choosing to wallow in the misery of the things they do not have.

I do not think thier lack of freedom is truly legetimate. They are just unhappy with thier lot in life.

That makes sense. The word "guilty" is just strange here. Maybe it's a quirk of the translation, but you would think that they mean something like "ashamed" perhaps instead of "guilty

Yes, the word ashamed here might work better than guilty

Quark

09-07-2008, 02:55 PM

But this idea, that they are not truly free, to me is just self-pitying and self-vicimtizing, they are making the choice not to be free by having that attitude.

It's probably a little overly dramatic to say that they are not free. I only meant that there is a split between what we can imagine and what is possible, and that the difference between the two can sometimes be depressing. That's what the story is hitting on in this part, I think. It's not that the characters don't have freedom of will; it's that the character don't have the ability to chase all their dreams. Should they? I don't know. What I will say, though, is that it can be sadenning to note all the things one could do, but can't because of one reason or another. The story reminds me of this--at least the end does.

Yes, the word ashamed here might work better than guilty

Which makes me wonder why the word is there. I'll check my other translation to see if it's there also.

Janine

09-15-2008, 03:38 PM

Where is Quark? Aren't we going to finish up this story soon; I am just curious ...or are we finished? I will try to comment on Q's last entry tonight.

Dark Muse

09-15-2008, 04:51 PM

I am not sure where he has been

Janine

09-17-2008, 04:03 PM

It's probably a little overly dramatic to say that they are not free. I only meant that there is a split between what we can imagine and what is possible, and that the difference between the two can sometimes be depressing. That's what the story is hitting on in this part, I think. It's not that the characters don't have freedom of will; it's that the character don't have the ability to chase all their dreams. Should they? I don't know. What I will say, though, is that it can be sadenning to note all the things one could do, but can't because of one reason or another. The story reminds me of this--at least the end does.

I think that is a fair observation and good way of putting it, Quark. I think it is sad that one would have these dreams and never be able to realise them; because of fate or life circumstances.

Which makes me wonder why the word is there. I'll check my other translation to see if it's there also.

You reading two translations?
DM, hoping that posting a comment will bring him here soon. Hope we can finish up this story soon.

Janine

10-01-2008, 06:31 PM

Will we ever finish up this story or is it now considered finished?

Dark Muse

10-01-2008, 06:42 PM

I am not sure, sense Quark as been MIA

Janine

10-01-2008, 08:23 PM

I am not sure, sense Quark as been MIA

That he has....:lol:

Quark

11-08-2008, 12:04 PM

Where is Quark? Aren't we going to finish up this story soon; I am just curious ...or are we finished? I will try to comment on Q's last entry tonight.

I thought we done with this one. Interest appeared to be fizzling and we were approaching the end of the story. That's why I took off for a while. It seemed like all the short story threads were closed.

Janine

11-08-2008, 04:31 PM

I thought we done with this one. Interest appeared to be fizzling and we were approaching the end of the story. That's why I took off for a while. It seemed like all the short story threads were closed.

Well, Hello Quark, how have you been? I was just thinking about you and wondering where you ran off to. I asked Virgil the other day; we just figured you were super busy with grad work. Maybe this story had fizzled, not sure - it just seemed to drop off at some point. I don't even recall which story it was now.

No, we didn't stop all short story threads, that I knew of. We talked about a month's break in the Lawrence thread. Virgil posted the next story last Sunday and now we are reading it; discussion is to begin on Monday. The story is a longer one - about 30 pages, so I don't know if you can swing it this time around.

If you want to delay this thread another month or even untill January, it would fine with me; I am a little bogged down right now, anyway. I thought you wanted to keep Chekhov going since, you mailed me the book, and you are such a Chekhov advocate. I haven't read anymore stories, because I was holding off, until you picked the next one - whenever that might be, as I said. I hope in the future we can still discuss some more of Chekhov's fine short stories.

Quark

11-09-2008, 02:03 PM

I asked Virgil the other day; we just figured you were super busy with grad work.

Something like that, yes. I have been quite busy, and it's been hard to make time. I still have some papers to write before the end of the semster, but other than that I should be able to post--at least until next semster starts.

it just seemed to drop off at some point. I don't even recall which story it was now.

If you're ever confused about which story we're on, all you have to do is look down to my signature. I'm usually pretty good about updating it to whatever story we're doing.

The story is a longer one - about 30 pages, so I don't know if you can swing it this time around.

I'll be a little late, but I think I could read it by Friday. I know this is one we've been meaning to do for some time, so I probably shouldn't entirely miss it.

If you want to delay this thread another month or even untill January, it would fine with me

I'll try to get a discussion going sometime during my winter break, which starts early to mid December--still not sure which story to pick, though.

Janine

11-09-2008, 07:21 PM

Something like that, yes. I have been quite busy, and it's been hard to make time. I still have some papers to write before the end of the semster, but other than that I should be able to post--at least until next semster starts.

I must be going crazy. I thought I answered this post last night. I think I did write in your profile page so I got that confused most likely. Well, welcome back! Glad things will be easing up for you. Understandable that you have been busy.

If you're ever confused about which story we're on, all you have to do is look down to my signature. I'm usually pretty good about updating it to whatever story we're doing.

Great idea and now I see it. I will always have to check out your messageor quote at the bottom.

I'll be a little late, but I think I could read it by Friday. I know this is one we've been meaning to do for some time, so I probably shouldn't entirely miss it.

That is ok, I might be a little late myself although I have read the story now -twice. It goes along pretty quickly.

I'll try to get a discussion going sometime during my winter break, which starts early to mid December--still not sure which story to pick, though.

That sounds perfect. Can you pick a fairly short one...around the holidays is hard for me; I do all the family's decorating, but we don't do tons of shopping anymore - however I will be shopping for my grand-baby:) this year.

PS: I will burn your third Chekhov CD tonight and send that set off to you and to Virgil soon. I found your return address from when you sent me the book. Il- right?

Quark

11-10-2008, 01:05 PM

Can you pick a fairly short one

I promise nothing too ambitious.

Of course, you know you could just read the stories only once, instead of your usual thorough twice or thrice-time over memorization. Sometimes I merely skim. Normally, if you say something too outlandish, someone else will correct you. I plan to say many such things in the L discussion this weekend.

Janine

11-10-2008, 01:39 PM

I promise nothing too ambitious.

Of course, you know you could just read the stories only once, instead of your usual thorough twice or thrice-time over memorization. Sometimes I merely skim. Normally, if you say something too outlandish, someone else will correct you. I plan to say many such things in the L discussion this weekend.

I never have been able to skim a book or a story. Currently I have taken on too much so I won't be reading any anytime soon. I will read it just once, if you insist:lol:, after you announce the one in Dec or Jan - whichever story comes next.
I probably will say some stupid outlandish things, as you pointed out, since that is the time I am usually going a little 'wacky' trying to decorate for the holidays. Of course, Quark, that does not mean I am not normally a little wacky anyway. ;):lol:

As to the Lawrence thread, we welcome any insane or outlandish remarks you make this week...:lol:

I was ill last night and did not get to download the last Chekhov CD; but I promise you it is coming one of these days with the other two. I think you will enjoy the set, if nothing more than a good cure for insomnia.;)

Quark

11-10-2008, 02:06 PM

As to the Lawrence thread, we welcome any insane or outlandish remarks you make this week...:lol:

That's what I assumed, and, no, I won't let you down.

I was ill last night and did not get to download the last Chekhov CD; but I promise you it is coming one of these days with the other two. I think you will enjoy the set, if nothing more than a good cure for insomnia.;)

If you want to send it that's fine, but it's not really that important. Don't worry about it.

Janine

11-10-2008, 02:13 PM

That's what I assumed, and, no, I won't let you down.

Quark, you are too funny! :lol:

If you want to send it that's fine, but it's not really that important. Don't worry about it.

No seriously, I do want to send it; I just could not burn CD's right with my old computer - this one does it in a flash. I can burn it while, I do something else. I just need to dig out the set and copy the last one. I have the first two CD's done in two sets for you and Virgil. Would be a waste not to send them now.

Quark

11-10-2008, 02:27 PM

And do you still oppose Niamh idea of putting our threads in a directory? I'll tell her not to do it, if there's a problem.

Janine

11-10-2008, 02:56 PM

And do you still oppose Niamh idea of putting our threads in a directory? I'll tell her not to do it, if there's a problem.

Quark, No, because she explained to me in an email that it would just be a link to our pages/threads. Just so these threads stay open and active, I am fine with it. You can easily make up a list yourself though, by going to the top of this page and pulling down the 'Thread Tools' menu and you will see 'Subscribe to this thread' and if you do this with all your active threads, it keeps a list just for you. I do it all the time. I then just have to go to 'Quick Links' and pull that down to my 'Subscribed Threads' - so easy! even you can do it, I am sure...;)

Quark

11-11-2008, 12:07 AM

so easy! even you can do it, I am sure...;)

Oh that hurts, Janine.

Anyway, I'll PM Niamh and tell her to put the Chekhov thread into the directory. If you want to her to include the L discussion too, just tell her.

Janine

11-11-2008, 12:31 AM

Oh that hurts, Janine.

Oh, Quark, I was just kidding with you. Do you feel wounded?

I burned that last CD tonight, but now I think I should have done it with itunes. I am not sure why it won't show the full listing in the Mediaplayer program - sort of odd. Maybe my new Mediaplayer program works differently. I will try playing it on my other CD player, one with my stereo. It should play fine. The first two I burned using itunes, but they all are WMA files - that is standard CD format (not MP3). After you get them you can download them and put into MP3 format, if you want to listen on an Ipod.

Anyway, I'll PM Niamh and tell her to put the Chekhov thread into the directory. If you want to her to include the L discussion too, just tell her.

Ok sure, I will email her if you need it in the directory. It is just a link, right? I will ask her again to make certain that we can continue to post in our regular threads - this one and the L one, right? I don't want to do something crazy and then regret it.

Quark

11-11-2008, 12:54 AM

Oh, Quark, I was just kidding with you. Do you feel wounded?

Not really, but I wanted to make sure you know I noticed.

After you get them you can download them and put into MP3 format, if you want to listen on an Ipod.

I'll probably jusy listen to it on my computer. Don't worry about what format the file is in. I have a player for everything.

It is just a link, right? I will ask her again to make certain that we can continue to post in our regular threads - this one and the L one, right? I don't want to do something crazy and then regret it.

I believe it is just a link, and hopefully it will make the thread easier to find.

Janine

11-11-2008, 04:02 PM

Not really, but I wanted to make sure you know I noticed.

Oh good; I really didn't think you were. I know how we joke with each other by now.;)

I'll probably jusy listen to it on my computer. Don't worry about what format the file is in. I have a player for everything.

That is what I do. I actually have my stereo speakers hooked up to my computer, so I have sort of surround sound with 4 speakers - sounds pretty good, since this is a small room. It is easier to play on the computer. However, I do still own a Sony Discman and I listen on there as well when I am in bed. I had this brainstorm to copy a set Virgil lent me - two discs in MP3 format; ok, so I thought, I will make WMA files to listen to on my Sony Walkman - well it said 'will take multiple discs' - ok, I thought about 5 probably....NOT! as it turned out it took 16 discs. I am just a bit wacky I think, but at least I can listen to the book now, on the Walkman or the regular stereo.

I believe it is just a link, and hopefully it will make the thread easier to find.

Hopefully, but I like my method just fine. It is fast and easy to get to all the categories I seek out daily with the Quick Links: Subscribed Threads, Social Groups, and Today's Posts. I can flip back and forth, in seconds, to each section of threads....works for me.:D

Quark

11-12-2008, 02:18 PM

Hopefully, but I like my method just fine. It is fast and easy to get to all the categories I seek out daily with the Quick Links: Subscribed Threads, Social Groups, and Today's Posts. I can flip back and forth, in seconds, to each section of threads....works for me.:D

I, myself, can find the thread easily, but I thought that if the thread were in the general literature section then it would be more visible for others. The Chekhov author thread is a little out of the way, and someone looking for a short story discussion might not notice it.

Janine

11-12-2008, 05:45 PM

I, myself, can find the thread easily, but I thought that if the thread were in the general literature section then it would be more visible for others. The Chekhov author thread is a little out of the way, and someone looking for a short story discussion might not notice it.

Ok, Quark, now I get your point. I guess the sticky thread will just direct them over to our pages and other short story discussions. Maybe this way we will get some more interested participants.

I burned the 3rd CD's last night and will try and send the set off to you, and Virgil on Friday. I have to go to the bank and PO that day, anyway. I will PM you tonight to make sure of the address or you can send it to me via PM. I did it in itunes - worked much better. It will play in either though.

Quark

11-12-2008, 09:41 PM

Maybe this way we will get some more interested participants.

My thoughts exactly.

I burned the 3rd CD's last night and will try and send the set off to you, and Virgil on Friday.

Oh, good. If I remember right, I think there's a few stories on that set that I haven't read before.

Janine

11-13-2008, 12:05 AM

My thoughts exactly.

Quark, Yeah, we could use some fresh faces in here.

Oh, good. If I remember right, I think there's a few stories on that set that I haven't read before.

Gee-wiz, really - you mean you haven't read all of Chekhov's stories?

Revising this today: Calling Quark; where did run off to ? I was going to mail the CD set on Friday when I went to the PO, but I held off, since you didn't get back to me on the address (see the PM I sent you). I will mail next week, if I am sure of the address; didn't you move recently?

Quark

12-10-2008, 12:46 PM

Revising this today: Calling Quark; where did run off to ? I was going to mail the CD set on Friday when I went to the PO, but I held off, since you didn't get back to me on the address (see the PM I sent you). I will mail next week, if I am sure of the address; didn't you move recently?

Finals. I've been having to deal with finals. I'm close to being done, though. Soon--very soon--I'll try to restart the thread. Friday I'll pick a story, and as early as Monday I could post the intro. It might take longer than that to get people back to the thread, though.

As for the CDs, feel free to send them to that address. I did move, but I'm friends with the people there. I can stop by and pick the CDs up there.

Janine

12-10-2008, 03:38 PM

Finals. I've been having to deal with finals. I'm close to being done, though. Soon--very soon--I'll try to restart the thread. Friday I'll pick a story, and as early as Monday I could post the intro. It might take longer than that to get people back to the thread, though.

As for the CDs, feel free to send them to that address. I did move, but I'm friends with the people there. I can stop by and pick the CDs up there.

Hi Quark, Just read your PM, great; will do that - see my reply. Oh, I figured it was finals and a heavy workload for school. If you want to hold off until January for the story, it is fine with me. The thing is, we are still working (more like chipping away) at a (longer than normal) Lawrence story; a compicated one takes longer, too. I don't see it ending until this month is up. I am waiting now for Virgil to comment on some long commentary, I wrote the other night...I got a sudden burst of ambition. Then there is the Shakespeare play - hopefully, the new one won't start until January; however, we are suppose to be continuing (we are all behind on this one) the discussion of "Merry Wives of Windsor"...... no one seems to be able to catch up and I have myself, been totally totally overwhelmed, so to start a new thing here, might be impossible or with little participation, unless you pick a really short and easy one this time. That may be workable....but Christmas is upon us, also; I know I have to decorate for my family and so I don't know how much I can concentrate on things on the computer this month. We'll see.

But still it is good to see you return and at least post a few words in this thread. Good luck with your finals! A smart guy like you will do great, I am sure.

Quark

12-10-2008, 04:02 PM

If you want to hold off until January for the story, it is fine with me.

I might do that if I get caught up in the L discussion.

Then there is the Shakespeare play - hopefully, the new one won't start until January; however, we are suppose to be continuing (we are all behind on this one) the discussion of "Merry Wives of Windsor".

That would be great. I'd like to do a Shakespeare play, but MWOW doesn't really inspire me.

Janine

12-10-2008, 05:53 PM

I might do that if I get caught up in the L discussion.

Following you again - actually I think you are the only posting right now - at least in my 'subscribed links'. I think that would be better to hold off on this discussion till January.

That would be great. I'd like to do a Shakespeare play, but MWOW doesn't really inspire me.

I think this was my problem and possibly others. I am more inclined to be interested in the tragedies myself. I find the comedies so difficult and they also sometimes are downright silly or employ older jargon, colloquialisms, that makes them a challenge to understand. I found this play as such. I was struggling through it every step of the way and I normally love Shakespeare, but it kind of kills it for me when it is that difficult.

Quark

12-10-2008, 06:34 PM

I think that would be better to hold off on this discussion till January.

I don't know if I can hold of that long, but I will wait a couple of weeks. I want to get the story in before I having to work on classes.

I am more inclined to be interested in the tragedies myself. I find the comedies so difficult and they also sometimes are downright silly or employ older jargon, colloquialisms, that makes them a challenge to understand.

The back-and-forths in the comedies do get a little too Elizabethan. Often, you end up reading more of the notes than you do the play. The Histories are fun, though. I look forward to Richard II.

Janine

12-10-2008, 06:44 PM

I don't know if I can hold of that long, but I will wait a couple of weeks. I want to get the story in before I having to work on classes.

Then can it be a shorter one? I don't think I can do a long one during the holiday season. Well, I can see what you will come up with and then decide. At least now I have the book.;) I just finished a novel, too so I won't start another one until after the new year. Concentrate on stuff on here instead for now.

The back-and-forths in the comedies do get a little too Elizabethan. Often, you end up reading more of the notes than you do the play. The Histories are fun, though. I look forward to Richard II.

Exactly my point. I liked all of the history plays so much - that surprised me but then I again I do love the history of the monarchs...the plays border on tragedies, so the interested me greatly. My favorite still is "Henry V", even though I don't particulary like war. It still has such great moments and speeches in that play and I adore the Kenneth Branagh movie. I watch it all the time; it is his most perfect movie, I think.

Quark

12-12-2008, 04:20 PM

Then can it be a shorter one? I don't think I can do a long one during the holiday season.

Whatever we do, I promise it won't be too exhausting. A short one sounds good. I might have to pick one that isn't in your book, though. "The Student" is really the only good story of the shorter ones, and we already did it.

Exactly my point. I liked all of the history plays so much - that surprised me but then I again I do love the history of the monarchs...the plays border on tragedies, so the interested me greatly. My favorite still is "Henry V", even though I don't particulary like war. It still has such great moments and speeches in that play and I adore the Kenneth Branagh movie. I watch it all the time; it is his most perfect movie, I think.

Any idea when the discussion begins on Richard II?

Janine

12-12-2008, 04:32 PM

Whatever we do, I promise it won't be too exhausting. A short one sounds good. I might have to pick one that isn't in your book, though. "The Student" is really the only good story of the shorter ones, and we already did it.

Going soon to the PO to mail you the CD set; if I make it there intime. It is wrapped, addressed and ready to post. Maybe one on there will interest you. That would help me out a lot. I have been having some blurry vision so reading online would be difficult. The vision problem is due to some medication I have been taking. I hope I can get off it soon but it still will take time to vacate my system. A good one would be better for me. At this time, even January, I can't take on too much. There are some stressful things going on with my health and also in my family; so I will do my best.

Any idea when the discussion begins on Richard II?
I have no idea and I can't find a thing on the site about it. Maybe, I should email a mod. I can't figure out when that will begin, and no one else seems to know either. I am hoping it is January. I can't do the play, within the next two weeks...maybe I will just forget about that last one - MWOW. We can revisit it sometime next year, or do it on our own. It didn't interest me that much, anyway - I like either the serious Sh plays or the tragedies. Guess I am tragedy-minded.

Quark

12-12-2008, 07:43 PM

Going soon to the PO to mail you the CD set; if I make it there intime. It is wrapped, addressed and ready to post. Maybe one on there will interest you.

I'll take a look. Wasn't "In the Ravine" in there? That's quite long, though.

I can't figure out when that will begin, and no one else seems to know either. I am hoping it is January. I can't do the play, within the next two weeks

If it's truly a winter Shakespeare discussion, then it would start on the 22nd. January would be fine with me, though. Really, is anyone going to post over Christmas?

Janine

12-12-2008, 09:33 PM

I'll take a look. Wasn't "In the Ravine" in there? That's quite long, though.

A number of shorter stories, too.... but yes, "In the Ravine" is the featured story - I really liked it. I believe it takes up the entire last disc. I sent the 3 CD set off today - yea! You should get it in a few days - think the PO said 3-5. Hope you like it. I really enjoyed it a lot....hey, easy on the eyes, too...I like these readings on audio. I made the dire mistake to take "Frankenstein', actually on tape (still own a Sony Walkman, which plays incredibly well), with me to my urology appointment yesterday - I said to myself while waiting "am I crazy bringing this to with me to listen to?" - the talk of gore, body parts, etc. was not a good thing to listen to while waiting in that office. It hardly calmed my nerves.

I also own an Ipod Shuffle, my sister found on on a pavement; own a Creative Stone MP3 player and a CD Discman (Sony)...I use them all from time to time. I am equipped.

If it's truly a winter Shakespeare discussion, then it would start on the 22nd. January would be fine with me, though. Really, is anyone going to post over Christmas?

I doubt it....haha...they say so, but then no one shows up...you know how that goes...January would be best for me....but a few people seem to be jumping the gun on it; they did not officially announce it yet. Those who read it now will comment and then disappear - mark my words. That to me, is not a real discussion.

Quark

12-12-2008, 09:55 PM

yes, "In the Ravine" is the featured story - I really liked it. I believe it takes up the entire last disc. I sent the 3 CD set off today - yea! You should get it in a few days - think the PO said 3-5. Hope you like it. I really enjoyed it a lot....hey, easy on the eyes, too...

Would you want to do that one, then? It's a great story, but I thought it might be a bit long.

Those who read it now will comment and then disappear - mark my words. That to me, is not a real discussion.

My, you've grown quite jaded with the Shakespeare thread. It's true that it might go nowhere, but it seems like there's at least a few people interested this time. Virgil usually shows up for a while, too.

Janine

12-12-2008, 10:43 PM

Would you want to do that one, then? It's a great story, but I thought it might be a bit long.

aaaahhhhhh...I knew you would suggest that one....well, let me think about it...but it would have to start after the New Year. Yes, it is an excellent story. I think you will like the narration very much. He does a good job on narrating and getting the right bit of pathos in the voice. It is a very sad story to start the New Year off with though...let me think on it.

My, you've grown quite jaded with the Shakespeare thread. It's true that it might go nowhere, but it seems like there's at least a few people interested this time. Virgil usually shows up for a while, too.

Yes, I have grown quite jaded - good word - just check out the track record of the piror play discussion. :( I don't see much hope, past the first couple of weeks. They all just fizzle out....we need something to grab hold of the imagination or someone to sort of run those discussions, like we do on here and Lawrence....post text and talk about it. The whole discussion is always so scattered. We did half good on "A Winter's Tale", but there again, never finished it really. I guess 'unfinished' discussions sort of bug me. I know I was just as guilty, concerning the last one. I really did not have the time and was not feeling well, so I struggled for awhile, but only a few members showed their faces (avatars in this case) and helped answer the questions I posted. That was nice and then I said I would post more text questions; but then I got sidetracked....so now that one, MWOW, is in limbo or just plain deceased.

Your avy alteration makes me think of a cute little 'quark' peering out of the Christmas tree branches....what is a quark, again??? haah:lol:

Pf. HS Dimple

12-12-2008, 11:14 PM

I want to read him, kindly send me his CD at [email protected]
I shall feel most obliged....

Pf. HS Dimple

12-12-2008, 11:15 PM

For discussion on his works visit
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=646765#post646765

Janine

12-12-2008, 11:18 PM

I want to read him, kindly send me his CD at [email protected]
I shall feel most obliged....

Pf. HS Dimple, I am sorry but what do you mean? This site does not give out free CD's. You must have misunderstood us. We make a trade and I burned him some CD's - part of the trade for a book he mailed to me. If we pick a story, most likely you can find the text online. Sorry for the mixup.

Quark

12-14-2008, 12:44 PM

aaaahhhhhh...I knew you would suggest that one....well, let me think about it...but it would have to start after the New Year. Yes, it is an excellent story. I think you will like the narration very much. He does a good job on narrating and getting the right bit of pathos in the voice. It is a very sad story to start the New Year off with though...let me think on it.

Well, let me know if that would do. I've been meaning to reread that one for a while, so it would be easy for me. It is long, though.

Yes, I have grown quite jaded - good word - just check out the track record of the piror play discussion. :( I don't see much hope, past the first couple of weeks. They all just fizzle out....we need something to grab hold of the imagination or someone to sort of run those discussions...MWOW, is in limbo or just plain deceased.

If there's you, Virgil, and I all posting I would think that would help. The discussions always work best when you have a few people committed to the conversation. That way, if things start to slow down, someone will post something to keep it going. I don't think it's neccessarily excitement or imagination-grabbing that attracts so much as it activity. We want to post where we think we'll get noticed and responded to. When there isn't anyone posting regularly on a thread, it seems like you're in void and there isn't much incentive to put effort into posting. Activity and momentum seem key, and if there's three "regulars" posting, I think that could keep the thread going.

Janine

12-14-2008, 10:35 PM

Well, let me know if that would do. I've been meaning to reread that one for a while, so it would be easy for me. It is long, though.

I would do this one, but we have to do it in a month's time; say starting January. I can't do the L thread and this one same time. We will most likely take a break in the L thread in January. Remember we talked about alternating or skipping one month between each story in each thread? It won't be easy, because we are still doing the L one and hope it gets done by then; but, I just looked at the calender and Christmas is a week and a half away - yikes! I didn't realise. I haven't even begun to decorate.:(

If there's you, Virgil, and I all posting I would think that would help. The discussions always work best when you have a few people committed to the conversation. That way, if things start to slow down, someone will post something to keep it going. I don't think it's neccessarily excitement or imagination-grabbing that attracts so much as it activity. We want to post where we think we'll get noticed and responded to. When there isn't anyone posting regularly on a thread, it seems like you're in void and there isn't much incentive to put effort into posting. Activity and momentum seem key, and if there's three "regulars" posting, I think that could keep the thread going.

Where do you mean - the Richard discussion? Well that sounds 'idealistic', because we start out fine, but then we all seem to drift...get distracted with other things. I see some people are reading it now. Make a bet, when the discussion comes, they will be nowhere to be found. I don't want to re-read the play till it is announced and closer to the actual discussion. Then I will read the first Act. If I read the whole thing right off the bat, I will forget most of it. Getting old you know and the memory needs jump starting somedays. But I will try to post and be consistent and brilliant in there and also, in here...:lol:

Quark

12-15-2008, 12:20 AM

It won't be easy, because we are still doing the L one and hope it gets done by then

I don't have my books with me right now, so it's hard for me to pick another one at the moment. When I get back to my house, I'll search for a shorter story.

Where do you mean - the Richard discussion? Well that sounds 'idealistic'

Oh, who knows? I haven't seen many of these people posting on there now. I can't say whether they will get involved or not. I just meant that with you and I, and possibly Virgil, all posting it might do better than past discussions. If it doesn't, it won't really bother me. I've already read the play, so there isn't much work I have to do for the discussion.

Janine

12-15-2008, 01:31 AM

I don't have my books with me right now, so it's hard for me to pick another one at the moment. When I get back to my house, I'll search for a shorter story.

Gee thanks, Quark, how did you read my mind? I guess I was whinning a bit, eh? I just think coming off a long one now in L I am not prepared to attempt another long one right away but keep it on the back burner - maybe we could do that one in the summer - what do you think? It is a fine story. Hope you get the CD set soon. Let me know. Oh guess what. I saw saw some stills and some excerpts from the Ivanov play with Kenneth Branagh on Youtube. I will have to send you the Ivanov videos and discussion links - rather interesting. I would love to read that play someday. Ever read it?

Oh, who knows? I haven't seen many of these people posting on there now. I can't say whether they will get involved or not. I just meant that with you and I, and possibly Virgil, all posting it might do better than past discussions. If it doesn't, it won't really bother me. I've already read the play, so there isn't much work I have to do for the discussion.

I read the play, too about 3 yrs ago. I will read it again once the discussion begins or just prior to that. I won't read another novel in January, so I can dedicate myself to the Shakespeare thread entirely this time. So you will be posting too, and I do hope Virgil does as well - he voted for the play and was pushing it, so I assume he intends to discuss it. I think this one will be a good discussion then...at least we can be steady and post regularly. I do love Shakespeare - I was just getting a little jaded, like you pointed out.

Quark

04-19-2009, 10:27 PM

Dark Muse

04-19-2009, 10:33 PM

Things are kind of hetic for me right now, I am not sure I will be able to squeez in a story.

Janine

04-19-2009, 10:43 PM

Anyone up for a discussion next month? There's still hundreds of Chekhov works we haven't touched yet. I was thinking that we might do one of the short plays or perhaps "In the Ravine" since we put that one off before.

Any ideas?

eeekkk...I will do one of the shorter ones next month with you, but those are sort of long. Maybe a play would be workable, if it were not too long; but then should we do it here on in a new thread? I read 'Ivanov' not long ago. I know that is an early one, so doubt you will not go for it, but I found it interesting. I think I have "The Cherry Orchard" in a book. I would really really like to do one short short story first, Quark...please please.... What do you say? Maybe the one about the house on the CD set I sent you? Is it "The Trouseau"? Maybe we can tackle "In the Ravine" in the summer months; take a few months for that longer story. I have that one on the CD's too, so I can listen to it again. It is a very good story.

Quark

04-19-2009, 10:45 PM

Things are kind of hetic for me right now

Now would be a bad time for me, too. I'm thinking that I'll restart things here in a few weeks after the universities close.

Maybe the one about the house on the CD set I sent you? Is it "The Trouseau"?

Maybe a play would be workable, if it were not too long

Either would work. We could do one of the one act plays which are often funny little things. It might be good to start with something a little easy and lighthearted. I'd love to do a play in a "Short Story" thread, too. I had to make them change the name, didn't I? The mods really should just ignore me when I say things.

Janine

04-19-2009, 11:42 PM

Well, I would really like to do "The Trouseau"; then do a play after. What do you think?

What was the thread called before this?

Dark Muse

04-20-2009, 12:16 AM

Now would be a bad time for me, too. I'm thinking that I'll restart things here in a few weeks after the universities close.

Either would work. We could do one of the one act plays which are often funny little things. It might be good to start with something a little easy and lighthearted. I'd love to do a play in a "Short Story" thread, too. I had to make them change the name, didn't I? The mods really should just ignore me when I say things.

I will see how things look for me in a few weeks and participate if I can. But I would defineintly be in favor of a story that was on the shorter side for the time being.

Quark

04-20-2009, 12:56 AM

Well, I would really like to do "The Trouseau"; then do a play after. What do you think?

That would be great.

What was the thread called before this?

It originally was called just "Chekhov" which I thought was a little bare. I asked the mods to change it, and they humored me.

I will see how things look for me in a few weeks and participate if I can. But I would defineintly be in favor of a story that was on the shorter side for the time being.

We probably will do something short--like four to seven pages. Well, that is if we do one. Really, I'm just throwing this out there to see if there's any interest. If not, I might just wait some more until we get more people.

Janine

04-20-2009, 03:21 PM

That would be great.

Cool, so we could do "The Trouseau" next month, do you think, Quark...then work up to the play in the summer? I am anxious to get back to some Chekhov.

It originally was called just "Chekhov" which I thought was a little bare. I asked the mods to change it, and they humored me.

:lol: Quark,...you are 'simplistic' minded! (note: I did not 'simple' haha). Glad those nice mods changed it. I do think it appropriate to be called 'Chekhov Short Story Thread' since that draws so many to this thread (oh yeah, thousands;), they are beating down the door). Hey, Quark, I am here now and you and possibly Dark Muse. It only really takes two, three to discuss a story if others can't make it one month. At least, we can keep the thread going. Lately, it had been falling into obscurity again. Gladys and I had a discussion (just the two of us) on a Ibsen play and it was quite good and in-depth. It just takes two for any discussion to take place; of course, more participants is better, but not always feasible because of school work and exams, etc.

We probably will do something short--like four to seven pages. Well, that is if we do one. Really, I'm just throwing this out there to see if there's any interest. If not, I might just wait some more until we get more people.

That would be great. I chose a short one for Lawrence thread this month, too; but so far it is not yet off the ground. Delays could not be helped. Short ones won't overwhelm us at this time. I would be up for "The Ravine" in the summer months, too. Maybe we can plain both - that story and a nice Chekhov play. I would personally love to see a Russian Play thread. I bought a book not long ago of several Russian Plays and it might be fun to explore them that way. What do you think of the idea?

Quark

04-21-2009, 11:42 PM

Cool, so we could do "The Trouseau" next month

That would work. I know you have that one on CD, and I'm sure I have it in a book somewhere.

That would be great. I chose a short one for Lawrence thread this month, too; but so far it is not yet off the ground. Delays could not be helped.

Which story do you think you'll read?

Short ones won't overwhelm us at this time. I would be up for "The Ravine" in the summer months, too. Maybe we can plain both - that story and a nice Chekhov play. I would personally love to see a Russian Play thread. I bought a book not long ago of several Russian Plays and it might be fun to explore them that way. What do you think of the idea?

I figure we'll do a play when more people join. It usually takes longer to do a dramatic work, and it might get a little dull if it were just the two of us talking about the same play for a month. Maybe this goes for "In the Ravine," too.

Janine

04-22-2009, 12:29 AM

That would work. I know you have that one on CD, and I'm sure I have it in a book somewhere.

Great, let's start with this one. Can we find the text online, so I can quote from it as well? Or, maybe it's in the book you sent to me; the coffee stain edition - I will never let you live that one down! :lol:

Which story do you think you'll read? Go back to Lawrence thread, I just reposed my introduction page. You will like my creative picture. I posted this page 3 times by now! You guys!:brickwall

I figure we'll do a play when more people join. It usually takes longer to do a dramatic work, and it might get a little dull if it were just the two of us talking about the same play for a month. Maybe this goes for "In the Ravine," too.

Ok, I take the hint; I am a boring person:(....

It's just a joke; I agree but we will have to go canvasing *door to door to get some interested participants. Track down those Chekhov enthusiasts. Detective Janine will get right on the case; or as Virgil likes to refer to me Miss Marple! Miss Marple is going to bed now.:D

*door to door = profile page to profile page

Quark

04-22-2009, 01:17 AM

Great, let's start with this one. Can we find the text online, so I can quote from it as well? Or, maybe it's in the book you sent to me; the coffee stain edition - I will never let you live that one down! :lol:

If Chekhov wrote it you can find it on LitNet. They have a huge selection here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov.

It's not in the coffee book. "The Trousseau" is a slightly less known story, so it usually isn't anthologized. I liked it, though, and it's the right length. I think it would be a good first story to read.

Go back to Lawrence thread, I just reposed my introduction page. You will like my creative picture. I posted this page 3 times by now! You guys!:brickwall

I see it now--good image--but your link is defective. I'm sure I can find the story, but you might want to fix that.

Ok, I take the hint; I am a boring person:(....

You said it, and not me. (I kid, of course).

It's just a joke; I agree but we will have to go canvasing *door to door to get some interested participants. Track down those Chekhov enthusiasts. Detective Janine will get right on the case; or as Virgil likes to refer to me Miss Marple! Miss Marple is going to bed now.:D

*door to door = profile page to profile page

I did that when the thread started. I might bother people again, but I think I'll wait until it gets closer to when we'll be reading the story. It's still going to be a while until I can start a discussion.

Janine

04-22-2009, 02:59 PM

If Chekhov wrote it you can find it on LitNet. They have a huge selection here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov.

Seriously? All C's work is on this very site; everything he wrote? I will check it out then. Thanks, Quark!

It's not in the coffee book. "The Trousseau" is a slightly less known story, so it usually isn't anthologized. I liked it, though, and it's the right length. I think it would be a good first story to read.

You are right. I just checked out the 'coffee' book and it's not in that one or in my other anthology. That's ok; I like listening to it being read. I can then better check the actual text as we go along and you post it.

The 'coffee' book sounds like a book you keep on your coffee table! :lol:

I see it now--good image--but your link is defective. I'm sure I can find the story, but you might want to fix that.

Is the link defective or just taking you to the main Guttenburg Lawrence works page? I posted two links, I believe, and one is that particular volume of the stories, which contains this 'Wintery Peacock', but you have to scroll down to find the actual story. I will, however, check it again. Maybe, the links just do not work at all. Strange.

You said it, and not me. (I kid, of course).

I left myself open for that one! :lol:

I did that when the thread started. I might bother people again, but I think I'll wait until it gets closer to when we'll be reading the story. It's still going to be a while until I can start a discussion.

Well, we must keep doing it. Many of those people may no longer be here. I have keep my ears perked up at all times to hear someone claim they are a Lawrence fan and then I urge them to come join in with the short story thread. I am always canvasing for new recruits! It's a full-time job. But you are right, wait till closer to the actual discussion date. I did that recently for Lawrence thread and then discussion kept getting pushed up and postponed and now I have to go and round everyone up again. I now still intend to begin Friday because we have enough to start and any further delays will be disasterous; they will all depart forever.

Quark, Is this in part in your signature still valid; is this discussion planned for 3 weeks from now?

"Just three weeks until the Chekhov discussion starts again! I know everyone can't wait.

Oh, and if anyone has a particular story they want to suggest just stop by the thread and name it. I have my favorites, of course, but I'm always open to suggestions."

Quark

05-19-2009, 02:07 PM

Seriously? All C's work is on this very site; everything he wrote?

Not quite, but, yes, a lot of it is here. Before the discussion starts, I'll post an introduction to the story and a link to the full text.

You are right. I just checked out the 'coffee' book and it's not in that one or in my other anthology. That's ok; I like listening to it being read. I can then better check the actual text as we go along and you post it.

The 'coffee' book sounds like a book you keep on your coffee table! :lol:

Funny, but I probably wouldn't put that thing on my coffee table. Those Norton editions look so massive and studious. I would try to get something more accessible. The coffee book is great for discussion, though, since it's got so many stories and there's criticism right in the back on the stories.

Quark, Is this in part in your signature still valid; is this discussion planned for 3 weeks from now?

Just to clarify, I'll try to get the thread going again sometime next week. I might post an intro to the story this weekend and see what happens.

Dark Muse

05-19-2009, 02:10 PM

I will try and see if I can get the story read. But I haven't been doing very well over in the D.L. thread.

Quark

05-19-2009, 02:14 PM

I haven't been doing very well over in the D.L. thread.

Better than me--I hadn't posted a word in the Lawrence thread until yesterday.

Janine

05-19-2009, 05:48 PM

Oh good, Quark, I will join in for certain. Timing is good. I like that story very much. I think we will discover more about it, as we discuss the various elements and imagery in the story. I thought it was well constructed. I will listen to the narration this week; probably a few times over.

Janine

05-21-2009, 05:01 PM

Not quite, but, yes, a lot of it is here. Before the discussion starts, I'll post an introduction to the story and a link to the full text.

Is this story text on this site, Quark? I can probably find it on Project Guttenberg. They seem to have everything. I will go and look right now. Great - looking forward to your introduction. Will you have a picture accompany it; you know how I like those illustrations!:D

Funny, but I probably wouldn't put that thing on my coffee table. Those Norton editions look so massive and studious. I would try to get something more accessible. The coffee book is great for discussion, though, since it's got so many stories and there's criticism right in the back on the stories. You mean the coffee-stained book? haha - that's not very big. You should see the books my father left me; those are massive and heavy to hold up to read, especially since I prefer to read in bed. Yes, that part of the 'coffee' book does have some good criticisms in it; I noticed that. Thanks again! Glad you spilled you Starbucks that day.:lol:

Just to clarify, I'll try to get the thread going again sometime next week. I might post an intro to the story this weekend and see what happens.

Quark, I am looking forward to it so much. I actually missed Chekhov. I have been meaning to read his play "The Cherry Orchard". I was on a streak of reading plays, but now I switched to short stories. I was attempting to read all the Lawrence ones I have not yet read. I have read more than half by now, maybe 3/4's. He sure wrote a lot of stories!

Quark

05-21-2009, 05:40 PM

Is this story text on this site, Quark?

It is, but I want to read over a few different translations before I post a link to one. When Dark Muse and I read over "Sleepy" we noticed how different one translation was from another, and the different slant each can give to the story. My favorite translations had the line "that foe was the baby"--really, the climax of the story--as a separate paragraph, and I thought that made a big difference. Seeing that line alone draws attention to it, and makes it more chilling. When it's lumped in with the rest of the text, the story loses a lot of its shock. I assume that I'll find something similar when I read through different translations of "The Trousseau," so I'd like to find the best one before I tell everyone to go to a certain page. If you want a text to work with for the moment, though, there is one on the author page here on Lit Net.

Later, I'll post a link to the text when I introduce the story this weekend.

Will you have a picture accompany it; you know how I like those illustrations!:D

I already have at least one, but the intro is going to be so long that I might use multiple.

Quark, I am looking forward to it so much. I actually missed Chekhov.

Yeah, I've been wanting to get back to this for a while. Right now, I'm trying to educate myself a little more about Chekhov's biography and Russian history. For as much Russian Lit as I read you would think I would know more about the country and the writers, but I'm remarkably unaware.

I have been meaning to read his play "The Cherry Orchard". I was on a streak of reading plays, but now I switched to short stories.

I think the short stories are his best, but I'd like to do a play eventually. Maybe we'll build up to that.

He sure wrote a lot of stories!

Apparently. How long have you been reading Lawrence?

Janine

05-21-2009, 06:19 PM

It is, but I want to read over a few different translations before I post a link to one. When Dark Muse and I read over "Sleepy" we noticed how different one translation was from another, and the different slant each can give to the story. My favorite translations had the line "that foe was the baby"--really, the climax of the story--as a separate paragraph, and I thought that made a big difference. Seeing that line alone draws attention to it, and makes it more chilling. When it's lumped in with the rest of the text, the story loses a lot of its shock. I assume that I'll find something similar when I read through different translations of "The Trousseau," so I'd like to find the best one before I tell everyone to go to a certain page. If you want a text to work with for the moment, though, there is one on the author page here on Lit Net.

Oh, good, that makes sense. We leave it up to your decretion then; in here, you are the leader. Whichever one you pick, we will be fine with that. Thanks for all your hard work, Quark! :)

Later, I'll post a link to the text when I introduce the story this weekend.

Great!

I already have at least one, but the intro is going to be so long that I might use multiple.

Truly? or are you just joking?...haha...don't give too much of the story away...

Yeah, I've been wanting to get back to this for a while. Right now, I'm trying to educate myself a little more about Chekhov's biography and Russian history. For as much Russian Lit as I read you would think I would know more about the country and the writers, but I'm remarkably unaware.

Here I thought you were a regular Russian Lit expert! ;) Well, good for you, studying more of the Russian history!

I think the short stories are his best, but I'd like to do a play eventually. Maybe we'll build up to that.

Well, I didn't particular mean to discuss; I just have wanted to read it for ages. I bought a book of several Russian author's plays. I am anxious to read those soon. They are just from Dover, so I don't know how good the interpretation is. That's the thing with reading works other than our own native language. I never used to think about it before but since I joined on here, I feel I own a lot of inferior translations. Pity, cause I have a lot of classic books, many from my father. But then again, I am not that much of a purest.

Apparently. How long have you been reading Lawrence?

Since about 1979, 80...seriously, I think that is when I discovered him. :lol: Were you even born yet? Someone told me about his books and I read "Women in Love" first. I loved the book and some of my short story paperbacks are from that era, too. I only discovered when I joined here, that they did not contain the entire collection of SS's; that's in the 3 volumes. Now I am checking off (in pencil) ones I've read, in that edition; since it lists all three volumes, even though it's only Volume III. Then, I read "The Rainbow", "Aaron's Rod", "Lady Chatterly's Lover", "Sons and Lovers", and mostly all of the novellas. Recently, I read "The White Peacock" (his first novel), "The Trespasser" (his second novel), "Kangaroo", "The Plumed Serpent", and his collaboration "The Boy in the Bush"; and I got into his biographies in the last 10 yrs. I have even read many of the novels and stories twice, thrice. Even though I feel, that I read a great deal of Lawrence, I know there is still a great deal more to read. The author was super prolithic! I have a book of his posthumous writings and many books of his critical analysis, and his letters, not to mention his philosophy books. I did read one of those. Did I mention all the films I own based on his work? You could say I have a full Lawrence collection by now, and I keep my eye out for more. I even have a book on the works of Lawrence on film. It's fascinating.

jinjang

05-21-2009, 08:08 PM

Janine

05-21-2009, 10:34 PM

I have never read any of Chekhov. Which story are you planning to discuss soon here? Let me read it so that I can decide whether to join in or not. I have only one week before going back to a full load of work.

Do you know Wikipedia gives a very good description of Chekhov?
I got this quote from the site: "Medicine is my lawful wife," he once said, "and literature is my mistress."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Chekhov

I think I will be a reader of your discussion since I haven't read any of his work besides I may not have time then anyway.

Hi Jinjang, I am on to you; you edited, didn't you? haha..I was in here reading your post earlier. It's up to you but at least you may be able to read the story and add something from time to time. The story, I am fairly certain, will be 'The Trousseu.' Not sure I spelled that correctly. Anyway, read Quark's post above. He explains he will post the text and direct us to the online text that is the best translation. I have this particular story on a set narrated by the actor Kenneth Branagh and it's wonderful. I loved the story. It's different, too. All of Chekhov's are that.

Dr. Hill

05-21-2009, 10:40 PM

Today I picked up a book of Chekhov's stories. I've read the first two out of the following:

The Confession
He Understood
At Sea
A Nincompoop
Surgery
Ninochka
A Cure for Drinking
The Jailer Jailed
The Dance Pianist
The Milksop
Marriage in Ten or Fifteen Years
In Spring
Agafya
The Kiss
The Father
In Exile
Three Years
The House with the Mansard
Peasants
The Darling

I very much enjoyed The Confession for its humor and dry wit.

jinjang

05-22-2009, 12:03 AM

Hi Jinjang, I am on to you; you edited, didn't you? haha..I was in here reading your post earlier.

:D You caught me but I always edit. I do not think there is any posting of mine without editing.

After reading Chekhov's biography here and Wikipedia, I thought it best to observe your discussion first and I was tiptoeing away, hoping nobody has seen me here.:D

Quark

05-22-2009, 02:58 PM

Quark's Self-Congratulatory 1000th Post!

Now I'm only 5,802 behind Janine. Nonetheless, though, it feels good to reach quadruple digits.

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd300/Quark3/goldstar.jpg
I so do

Anyway, let me respond to some posts.

Truly? or are you just joking?...haha...don't give too much of the story away...

It is going to be a long intro. I might have to break it up into two posts.

Since about 1979, 80...seriously, I think that is when I discovered him. :lol: Were you even born yet?

No, not quite. I don't think I discovered Lawrence until I was in my late teens--early 2000's.

The author was super prolithic!

Apparently. Were you aware of this when you set out to read the entire Lawrence canon? I would think it would be a little daunting.

I have never read any of Chekhov. Which story are you planning to discuss soon here? Let me read it so that I can decide whether to join in or not. I have only one week before going back to a full load of work.

We're reading "The Trousseau" next week. It's only a few pages long, so it shouldn't be that difficult to read through.

I got this quote from the site: "Medicine is my lawful wife," he once said, "and literature is my mistress."

Yeah, Chekhov's time was split between medicine and writing. He could have supported himself by writing alone, but he always felt a connection to medicine and science. Chekhov didn't see these pursuits as opposites, though, and what he learned from one profession he would use in another. Through his patients, Chekhov gained a wider knowledge of people, and through his scientific training he gained a respect for observation and honesty. He would later say in 1899 "I have no doubt that the study of medicine has had an important influence on my literary work; it has considerably enlarged the sphere of my observations ... Familiarity with the natural sciences and with scientific method has always kept me on my guard, and I have always tried where it was possible to be consistent with the facts of science, and where it was impossible." He wanted to tell "the absolute and honest truth" and not a fantasy about "only honest mayors, high-minded ladies, and virtuous railway contractors." Many of the people around him thought he should stop dividing his attention, but Chekhov thought that all his different pursuits were integral to the person he was.

I think I will be a reader of your discussion since I haven't read any of his work besides I may not have time then anyway.

That's understandable. It's best not to try too many things at once. If you get time later on, feel free to post something. I'm sure we'll do more than one story.

Today I picked up a book of Chekhov's stories. I've read the first two out of the following:

The Confession
He Understood
At Sea
A Nincompoop
Surgery
Ninochka
A Cure for Drinking
The Jailer Jailed
The Dance Pianist
The Milksop
Marriage in Ten or Fifteen Years
In Spring
Agafya
The Kiss
The Father
In Exile
Three Years
The House with the Mansard
Peasants
The Darling

I very much enjoyed The Confession for its humor and dry wit.

That's an odd list. There are some pretty obscure stories they threw in there. I don't know if I've even read "The Jailer Jailed" and "He Understood." I'll have to check them out. Were they some of his earlier, more humorous works? So far in the thread we've read a lot of the tragic stories, so it would be a good change of pace to read something a little more lighthearted.

Dr. Hill

05-22-2009, 03:18 PM

They're very funny so far.

Janine

05-22-2009, 05:52 PM

Quark's Self-Congratulatory 1000th Post!

That's great, Quark! Afterall, you have a job and I don't! 1000 post is to be very proud of. CONGRATULATIONS! Excuse me, for not quoting you above in 7 point size! :lol: I was laughing my fool head off. How could we miss your impressively 'large' post? :lol: Quark, you always go in for a grand dramatic effect! ;)

Now I'm only 5,802 behind Janine. Nonetheless, though, it feels good to reach quadruple digits.[/SIZE]

You will never catch up to me and Virgil! haha...hey, maybe we could celebrate my 6000, when I hit that landmark...doesn't look too far off. If we leave it to me, it will pass right by me, and I won't even take notice. You better remind me.

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd300/Quark3/goldstar.jpg
I so do

This was worth reposting! hahaha....I love it! :thumbs_up:lol:

Anyway, let me respond to some posts.
About time....Just kidding with you.....:D

It is going to be a long intro. I might have to break it up into two posts.
Why is that? The actual story is so short. Does it involve a biographical background? I can't wait now to read your intro.

No, not quite. I don't think I discovered Lawrence until I was in my late teens--early 2000's.

Apparently. Were you aware of this when you set out to read the entire Lawrence canon? I would think it would be a little daunting.

I don't remember if I was aware or not. I certainly didn't realise it in 1980; but when I get back to the author, a few years back, then I did realise there was a great deal of work out there. Believe me, it would take a lifetime to read it ALL. Also, I have picked up some great spin-off books with critical analysis of his works or exploring his life from different perspectives. I am always looking for more, can you believe that? I love discovering more to add to my collection; but some books are out of rage pricewise - check out Amazon and you will see what I mean. Some are truly rare. For instance, I got the first two books of the Cambridge series on his life. Now the third on "The Dying Game" is incredibly expensive. I suppose I will never get that one, unless I stumble across it at a fleamarket or yardsale - highly unlikely, but you never know.

We're reading "The Trousseau" next week. It's only a few pages long, so it shouldn't be that difficult to read through.

I am really looking forward to that. I love the way Chekhov describes the house/the yard. It is like it is a character itself in the story.

Yeah, Chekhov's time was split between medicine and writing. He could have supported himself by writing alone, but he always felt a connection to medicine and science. Chekhov didn't see these pursuits as opposites, though, and what he learned from one profession he would use in another. Through his patients, Chekhov gained a wider knowledge of people, and through his scientific training he gained a respect for observation and honesty. He would later say in 1899 "I have no doubt that the study of medicine has had an important influence on my literary work; it has considerably enlarged the sphere of my observations ... Familiarity with the natural sciences and with scientific method has always kept me on my guard, and I have always tried where it was possible to be consistent with the facts of science, and where it was impossible." He wanted to tell "the absolute and honest truth" and not a fantasy about "only honest mayors, high-minded ladies, and virtuous railway contractors." Many of the people around him thought he should stop dividing his attention, but Chekhov thought that all his different pursuits were integral to the person he was.

That's interesting, Quark, I didn't know all of this exactly. I like to hear anything biographical that will shed light on his writing; that goes for all authors.

That's understandable. It's best not to try too many things at once. If you get time later on, feel free to post something. I'm sure we'll do more than one story.

That's an odd list. There are some pretty obscure stories they threw in there. I don't know if I've even read "The Jailer Jailed" and "He Understood." I'll have to check them out. Were they some of his earlier, more humorous works? So far in the thread we've read a lot of the tragic stories, so it would be a good change of pace to read something a little more lighthearted.

I know this is to Dr. Hill, but I was thinking the same thing. I guess this is not the book I own. I will see if I have any of these in my father's old book. These sound interesting. Would be nice to read lighter ones, too, just for a change from time to time.

Janine

05-22-2009, 06:03 PM

:D You caught me but I always edit. I do not think there is any posting of mine without editing.

:lol:I am laughing because so do I, jinjang. I am a chronic editor on here. I have to have my posts 'just so'...guess it's the perfectionist in me, being an artist.

After reading Chekhov's biography here and Wikipedia, I thought it best to observe your discussion first and I was tiptoeing away, hoping nobody has seen me here.:D

You can't get away without me noticing...tiptoeing, eh? :lol:

Quark

05-23-2009, 01:30 AM

They're very funny so far.

I don't see them in any of the books I have, but I'm sure I could find them online somewhere.

You will never catch up to me and Virgil!

Unless I pick up the pace, no, I probably won't. I'm okay with that, though. It's these people who joined last week and already have more posts than I do that make me feel inferior. Seriously, I think there are some who signed up a couple of months ago and have something like fifteen hundred posts! Twenty or thirty posts a day! How does that happen?

In any case, we'll have a party when this thread reaches 1000. It's so close. Maybe Virgil will give us a geode--or maybe even two geodes. No, now I'm getting greedy. I'd take just one geode.

haha...hey, maybe we could celebrate my 6000, when I hit that landmark...doesn't look too far off. If we leave it to me, it will pass right by me, and I won't even take notice. You better remind me.

You mean 7000, right? You've already crossed 6000.

Why is that? The actual story is so short. Does it involve a biographical background? I can't wait now to read your intro.

There is some background to this story, as the story has something to do with class. Really, though, I'd like to post a long intro to indicate the official start of the thread. Nothing says start like a long post with illustrations.

Also, I have picked up some great spin-off books with critical analysis of his works or exploring his life from different perspectives.

I'd like to do something like that with Chekhov. As I read biographies, it's hard to separate what Chekhov was actually like from the mythology that the biographer is trying to create. Different perspectives would help.

One thing I already notice is how different from Lawrence Chekhov is. They really seem like opposites in a lot of ways. I'll talk more about this later.

Some are truly rare. For instance, I got the first two books of the Cambridge series on his life. Now the third on "The Dying Game" is incredibly expensive. I suppose I will never get that one, unless I stumble across it at a fleamarket or yardsale - highly unlikely, but you never know.

Actually, I could procure this book for you if you wanted it. Having access to a university is a wonderful thing, and I believe mine has a copy of the book. Graduate students can check out books for over a year, too. If you want it, I could send it to you.

I am really looking forward to that. I love the way Chekhov describes the house/the yard. It is like it is a character itself in the story.

The house is right at the start of the story so it's probably the first thing we'll talk about.

Quark

05-25-2009, 02:15 PM

Okay, there's some delay.

I'm think we should wait a little until the L thread starts to wind down. It's a little difficult trying to do two discussion at once.

Janine

05-26-2009, 01:49 AM

I don't see them in any of the books I have, but I'm sure I could find them online somewhere.

They sound interesting to me, too. I think I will copy your list and look online as well.

Unless I pick up the pace, no, I probably won't. I'm okay with that, though. It's these people who joined last week and already have more posts than I do that make me feel inferior. Seriously, I think there are some who signed up a couple of months ago and have something like fifteen hundred posts! Twenty or thirty posts a day! How does that happen?

Game section. Mindless one liners in games will rack up zillions of posts quickly. That's not my style although I do participate in Shared and Three Person Haiku. You accumulate posts in there more rapidly.

In any case, we'll have a party when this thread reaches 1000. It's so close. Maybe Virgil will give us a geode--or maybe even two geodes. No, now I'm getting greedy. I'd take just one geode.

Yes, let's do that. Hey, can we have a party in the L thread when that reaches a substantial number. I will go and check to see what we are up to now. Hahah...so it's geodes now....do you have a fondness for geodes, Quark?

You mean 7000, right? You've already crossed 6000. Yes, my friend pointed that out to me as well; I just never got back to correct it.

There is some background to this story, as the story has something to do with class. Really, though, I'd like to post a long intro to indicate the official start of the thread. Nothing says start like a long post with illustrations.

hummm..interesting...class eh? I can't wait to read your introduction and view any photos or paintings. I love how you set that up...very collegian.

I'd like to do something like that with Chekhov. As I read biographies, it's hard to separate what Chekhov was actually like from the mythology that the biographer is trying to create. Different perspectives would help.

Exactly, I think it would greatly benefit you to do so. I have found it did with me for Lawrence's work. It fills in the missing pieces somehow. It's all like a big puzzle and the more pieces you have the better a chance of understanding the total picture.

One thing I already notice is how different from Lawrence Chekhov is. They really seem like opposites in a lot of ways. I'll talk more about this later.

That is probably true. Wonder what Mr. Lawrence had to say about Chekhov; he wrote a lot of author commentary. He pretty much tore into Dostoyevski, although he did like one of his books, I believe, think it was "The Idiot" which I did happen to write. I think the Russians would have been too dire and sad for Lawrence but really I am not sure enough to make that statement - haven't read enough of those commentaries.

Actually, I could procure this book for you if you wanted it. Having access to a university is a wonderful thing, and I believe mine has a copy of the book. Graduate students can check out books for over a year, too. If you want it, I could send it to you.

Thanks so much. I will let you know when. That would be great. I can send you something in return for your trouble. I have tons of CD's and books on audio. Maybe something that will add you class.

The house is right at the start of the story so it's probably the first thing we'll talk about.

That's right. I recall that. It stands out in my memory. Can't wait now to read it and listen to my audio narration.

Quark

05-26-2009, 07:54 PM

hummm..interesting...class eh? I can't wait to read your introduction and view any photos or paintings. I love how you set that up...very collegian.

The family that the narrator is visiting belongs to a certain class, and Chekhov seems to be commenting on them as a group. It's very similar to what he does in the play Three Sisters.

Exactly, I think it would greatly benefit you to do so. I have found it did with me for Lawrence's work. It fills in the missing pieces somehow. It's all like a big puzzle and the more pieces you have the better a chance of understanding the total picture.

I don't know if I'll ever get a total picture. I'm just hoping that I can answer people's questions if they have any about the author. It's difficult not to start wondering about the writer when we know that the story came from a person with particular experiences and motivations.

That is probably true. Wonder what Mr. Lawrence had to say about Chekhov; he wrote a lot of author commentary. He pretty much tore into Dostoyevski, although he did like one of his books, I believe, think it was "The Idiot" which I did happen to write. I think the Russians would have been too dire and sad for Lawrence but really I am not sure enough to make that statement - haven't read enough of those commentaries.

Lawrence probably didn't say anything directly about Chekhov as he was only a fringe figure in the early twentieth century--Chekhov that is. Really, he didn't become very popular in England until the 40's. I think Lawrence probably would have liked Chekhov for his ambivalent attitude toward society. Like Lawrence, Chekhov didn't approve often of what was going on around him. Chekhov wasn't necessarily disapproving, but he didn't paint a particularly attractive picture of Russian society. Lawrence probably would have agreed with the depiction, and respected the writer who created it.

Dr. Hill

05-26-2009, 08:11 PM

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Selected-Stories/Anton-Chekhov/e/9780451528797/?itm=2

There is the book I own, in case anyone is interested :)

Quark

05-27-2009, 12:03 AM

There is the book I own, in case anyone is interested :)

I was a little interested. The editors came up with an odd selection of stories. If you liked those, you probably would like a lot of Chekhov's other better-known works like "The Lady with the Dog," "The Black Monk," "About Love," "Sleepy," or "In the Ravine."

Quark

05-29-2009, 03:03 PM

Another Update

This is mostly about the translation. I've read through a few different versions of "The Trousseau" now, and I think the best one is actually on Lit Net: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1108/. It's an older translation by Constance Garnette--whose ubiquity in Russian to English translations is greater than Starbucks' in coffee joints or Microsoft's in computers--but her translation does give the story its best appearance. I like her longer sentences, and she seems to have a better grasp on the humor here than the other translators. I read a few other versions that gave the introductory paragraph a more poetic twist, but I think Garnette does a better job with the entire story. I know Janine was particularly struck by the opening description, so if there are reader looking for more beauty in the first paragraph I can point you to some other versions. Garnette's translation, though, I think is better in line with what the story is about.

The Lit Net version does not have notes for the French dialogue, though, so if you're curious what "Où est mon cravatte lequel mon père m'avait envoyé de Koursk?" means you may be left in the dark. I've found notes for this elsewhere, and I'll post them when we start. Or, actually, how about I just do that?

NOTES

Où est mon cravatte lequel mon père m'avait envoyé de Koursk? : Where is my tie, the one my father sent me from Koursk?

Ah, est-ce que, Marie . . . que: Oh, is it that, Marie . . . that

Nous avons donc chez nous un homme peu connu de nous: Because we have with us a man not well known to us

we speak French: French was the primary language of Russian aristocrats; however, by Chekhov's time speaking French was considered an affectation

Dressed all in black with heavy crape pleureuses: mourning clothes

"Je suis charmée de vous revoir, monsieur: I'm charmed to see you again, sir

There--that's done now. Anyway, I'll post an introduction tomorrow to officially start the discussion, and we'll see what happens.

Janine

05-29-2009, 04:57 PM

Quark, that's very helpful. Glad you posted those translations now, before we read the story. Tell me, if I listen to the narration, is that close to the translation here on LitNet by Constance Garnett? I happen to like her translations very much. I have read her Russian novel translations and she is fine, in my book. Thanks for doing all that research. I know it takes time and we all appreciate it, I am sure.

Since, you will be posting parts of the story, I don't see any problem with listening to it being read, as a sort of aid to my reading. I will read along online, as we go along. I think I know the story well by now; listened to the narration several times. I enjoyed it.

Quark

05-29-2009, 08:05 PM

Tell me, if I listen to the narration, is that close to the translation here on LitNet by Constance Garnett?

I can't say, but I'll probably listen to the CD you gave me again. I can check and see if it's the same translation. If it isn't, it's not a big deal. The translations are all pretty similar. Translators read their predecessors it seems like, and make only a few changes. Every version I've read of this story uses the word "vouchsafed" which is a bit of a coincidence. When was last time anyone used the word "vouchsafe?" Um, yes, could you vouchsafe me some cereal for breakfast tomorrow? No? Who else could it be vouchsafed for? Doh! He vouchsafes everything!

I happen to like her translations very much. I have read her Russian novel translations and she is fine, in my book.

I don't object to her translations either. In another thread I heard someone complaining about her version of Anna Karenina, but they could just be complaining about Anna Karenina. Who wouldn't complain about the first half of that novel? Nothing happens, and it happens slowly. It really isn't until the second half that things start to get interesting. No translator, I think, could rescue the stuff about Levin's farming at the beginning.

Since, you will be posting parts of the story, I don't see any problem with listening to it being read, as a sort of aid to my reading. I will read along online, as we go along. I think I know the story well by now; listened to the narration several times. I enjoyed it.

Oh, good. It shouldn't be hard to follow along on the computer screen. The story is only few pages.

Janine

05-29-2009, 08:38 PM

I can't say, but I'll probably listen to the CD you gave me again. I can check and see if it's the same translation. If it isn't, it's not a big deal. The translations are all pretty similar. Translators read their predecessors it seems like, and make only a few changes. Every version I've read of this story uses the word "vouchsafed" which is a bit of a coincidence. When was last time anyone used the word "vouchsafe?" Um, yes, could you vouchsafe me some cereal for breakfast tomorrow? No? Who else could it be vouchsafed for? Doh! He vouchsafes everything!

Oh good, then we are on the same page with this in our thinking. I just copied the story into my offline document program. I read the first part describing the house. I must say I have a very distinct impression now which I will save for later on, when we begin discussing it. I love how graphic it is and the various contrasts just within these few paragraphs. It's a great story, Quark. Glad we are discussing it.

:lol: 'vouchesafe', eh? I have heard the word in some literature and elsewhere but you are right - it is a rather older term I believe. I am not even completely sure of it's meaning. I must look that one up. You rendition of the work cracked me up as usual. Wish you had been my teacher in high school; I would laughed so much in your classroom.

I don't object to her translations either. In another thread I heard someone complaining about her version of Anna Karenina, but they could just be complaining about Anna Karenina. Who wouldn't complain about the first half of that novel? Nothing happens, and it happens slowly. It really isn't until the second half that things start to get interesting. No translator, I think, could rescue the stuff about Levin's farming at the beginning.

Yes, I believe you are correct. It was in the Anna Karenina discussion. I read that book years back and now realise I must have read a condensed version since it was in one of my father's old books which is one author's work each - a compiling of various things he wrote -a few novels, stories, etc. I since picked up the novel, brandnew paperback, cheap at my library but it is by new translators and the complete text. In that same discussion, someone mentioned these translators and they didn't seem to care for them. I have not attempted to re-read the book yet; I have too many others that must come first. I am not sure I am too enthused now that you said the first half is a bore with Levin's farming described in detail. Oh well, I did get through sheep farming in Hardy's "Far from the Madding Crowd," and now I love that book.

Oh, good. It shouldn't be hard to follow along on the computer screen. The story is only few pages.

That will great. I also made a short cut so the story is now on my desktop. This is what I do with the Lawrence short stories, as well.

Quark

05-29-2009, 10:39 PM

It's a great story, Quark. Glad we are discussing it.

Oh, the story is good, but I have no idea how big the "we" will be for the discussion. If it's too small, maybe we'll just switch over to Shakespeare thread.

:lol: 'vouchesafe', eh? I have heard the word in some literature and elsewhere but you are right - it is a rather older term I believe. I am not even completely sure of it's meaning.

You're right that's it's a little old-timey, but we can forgive Garnette since her translation itself is old-timey, as well. She wrote this out in the nineteen teens, I believe--something like 1913. I was just noticing that the following translations kept much of the same language as previous translations. Therefore, there really isn't that much difference between Garnette's and whatever else one might find elsewhere. After all, each of them says "vouchsafed."

It was in the Anna Karenina discussion.

Ah, now I remember.

I have not attempted to re-read the book yet; I have too many others that must come first. I am not sure I am too enthused now that you said the first half is a bore with Levin's farming described in detail. Oh well, I did get through sheep farming in Hardy's "Far from the Madding Crowd," and now I love that book.

There are some great moments in the second half of the novel that redeem it, I think. It is quite an undertaking, though.

JacobF

05-29-2009, 11:13 PM

Quark

05-30-2009, 01:30 AM

I read "Misery" about a week ago and it was one of the most powerful short stories I've ever read, second only to Tolstoy's "How much land does a man need?" The role of Iona's horse as more noble and caring than the people Iona drives and almost like a confidant was done perfectly, and it struck me with relentless emotion at the end. It still resonates with me.

Oh, I agree. We actually did a discussion on that story a few pages back:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17728&page=9

I think there was some disagreement about what the story was about, though. Some of us thought it was more about grieving and others saw the story as a case of just loneliness. I suppose it's probably a little bit of both. I think the story is also somewhat odd in the way that it hits you so immediately. Chekhov lets us know what Iona's problem is right away--which is a little different from what he usually does. A lot of Chekhov stories work like snowballs: they start off somewhat mundanely and then slowly gather force and meaning until they reach an explosive ending. "Ward No. 6" and "Sleepy" are good examples of this. I won't spoil them if you haven't read them yet, but both stories have all the shocking twists and powerful moments close to the end. The beginnings--particularly in "Ward No. 6"--are deceptively slow and simple. The endings come somewhat as a surprise. Yet in "Misery" there isn't that gathering force like in most Chekhov fiction. Chekhov just hits you with everything right away. I don't know whether that makes it a better or a worse story--it was just something I noticed.

Since then the only Chekhov stories I've read are Gusev (a bit on the obscure side but interesting, great overall), The Huntsman (was good, but not great), and Lady with the Dog (spectacular, almost as good as Misery). I definitely plan on reading more of Chekhov's work.

"Gusev" is a strange story. It's hard to know what to make of the strange images. "The Huntsman" I thought was a little boring. There are some funnier comic stories one could read. "The Lady with the Dog" was excellent, though, don't you think? Chekhov took on a huge theme--public vs. private life--and handled it with subtlety and feeling. I think that's hard to do when you're talking about something that big.

Anyway, if you want to stick around we're about to start a new discussion of Chekhov's story "The Trousseau." We have the story on Lit Net here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1108/. I'm sure you would have something to say about this one.

JacobF

05-30-2009, 02:53 AM

Some of us thought it was more about grieving and others saw the story as a case of just loneliness. I suppose it's probably a little bit of both. I think the story is also somewhat odd in the way that it hits you so immediately. Chekhov lets us know what Iona's problem is right away--which is a little different from what he usually does. A lot of Chekhov stories work like snowballs: they start off somewhat mundanely and then slowly gather force and meaning until they reach an explosive ending. "Ward No. 6" and "Sleepy" are good examples of this. I won't spoil them if you haven't read them yet, but both stories have all the shocking twists and powerful moments close to the end. The beginnings--particularly in "Ward No. 6"--are deceptively slow and simple. The endings come somewhat as a surprise. Yet in "Misery" there isn't that gathering force like in most Chekhov fiction. Chekhov just hits you with everything right away. I don't know whether that makes it a better or a worse story--it was just something I noticed.

Yeah, I'd have to say both grieving and loneliness are good descriptions of "Misery." You know Iona is grieving his dead son but he brings it up so much to strangers that it almost seems like loneliness. And when he confides in his horse, you see his desperation and that ultimately was what made the story so powerful for me. I certainly noticed the jolting, sudden impact of "Misery" too. With a title like that, though, it wasn't a complete surprise, and in my opinion I think it was perfectly implemented (maybe because it followed a "short but sweet" style). Still, as you described I really like Chekhov's gathering force plots such as in Lady with the Dog because you really don't know where the story is going to end up. I'm really glad I discovered this author.

Anyway, if you want to stick around we're about to start a new discussion of Chekhov's story "The Trousseau." We have the story on Lit Net here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1108/. I'm sure you would have something to say about this one.

Yeah I'll definitely read it tomorrow along with "Sleepy" and "Ward No. 6" if time permits.

Quark

05-30-2009, 01:26 PM

I think it was perfectly implemented (maybe because it followed a "short but sweet" style).

That's a good observation. I think you're picking up on something that's very central to Chekhov as a writer. He strove for narrative efficiency. Chekhov once commented that if a writer mentions a gun in Act I it should go off in Act II. That is, everything an author writes about should work to some end. Many writers in the Realist tradition before Chekhov included a lot of detail, ambiance, and wordiness that Chekhov wanted to dispense with, and his work was a reaction away from the nine-hundred page novels that had flooded the market in previous decades. I also think his concision may have come from his early experiences as a writer. At the beginning of his career Chekhov was only given a few pages to work with and an audience that demanded a good laugh or cry on one reading. In journals like The Dragonfly, Fragments, or The Alarm Clock he didn't have the kind of space or readers that would tolerate diffuse prose, and he had to learn concision in order to survive. In any case, I think you're right about "Misery," and I would go so far as to say that most of Chekhov's successful stories follow that "short and sweet" style.

Still, as you described I really like Chekhov's gathering force plots such as in Lady with the Dog because you really don't know where the story is going to end up. I'm really glad I discovered this author.

To me, the endings are always the best part. I find it really hard to judge a story of his before I've read that last word because it's always those final moments which change and reinterpret everything that's come before. Some might see the endings as Chekhov trying to emotionalize or moralize his story--they might even view it as Chekhov simplifying and taking shelter from the complexities of his own story. I don't think it's emotionalism or moralizing, though. The endings are just where Chekhov exposes the theme or problem the story centers on. It's problems that Chekhov is exploring--not emotions or morals. A problem like the conflict between our private life and public persona is what drives "The Lady with the Dog." The problem of grieving in a cold, impersonal world is the center of "Misery." We react emotionally (we're sad with Iona) or we react with morality (we might castigate the narrator of "The Lady with a Dog"), but the story itself doesn't try to tell you what to feel or do. It merely explores a problem. I think that's what makes the endings so great. They're so accessible because the problems are usually something pretty universal (like public vs. private) and they give off powerful feeling and food for thought--all without being obvious.

At least, that's what I think.

Yeah I'll definitely read it tomorrow along with "Sleepy" and "Ward No. 6" if time permits.

"Sleepy" is more "short and sweet" I would say, but "Ward No. 6" is probably more impressive. You'll probably respect "Sleepy" for being better-crafted, but find "Ward No. 6" more thought-provoking. The latter is quite a heady brew--lots of talking about philosophy, society, and the mind.

Oh, and Janine I'm almost done with the introduction for "The Trousseau." I'll post it sometime tonight.

Quark

05-30-2009, 09:36 PM

JacobF, I responded to your post above.

In accordance with the treaty that states that the "D.H. Lawrence Short Story Thread" and the "Chekhov Short Story Thread" will alternate so that neither Janine nor Quark get so tired with running a thread that they give it up entirely, I'd like to open up the discussion on "The Trousseau" with a very long sentence. I know it's a been a while since we've done a story here--and there may not be many people left from previous discussion--but I'd like to try to start this up again. That is, if anyone is interested in a new story. Janine suggested this one to me a while back, and after reading it over again I think it would make a great discussion. The story is a little on the lachrymose side, but that isn't anything we're not used to. Anyway, here's:

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd300/Quark3/Trousseau3.jpg

Chekhov wrote "The Trousseau" (full text here: http://www.online-literature.com/anton_chekhov/1108/) early on in his career. He was only 24 when this story came out, and was still studying full-time to become a physician--as well as tutoring on the side. Chekhov wrote many of these early stories with money in mind. His father went bankrupt a couple of years before and this plunged his family deep into debt. Trying to salvage his family's property, Chekhov shopped his fiction around to popular magazines for whatever they would give him. Later, he would look back on these early works as mediocre and lacking in seriousness, and he included very few in the his short story collections. More recently, though, critics have tried bring back these earlier stories. The collection of short stories that Janine has places this story alongside "In the Ravine" (a later classic)--something Chekhov never would have done. At some point, I think we'll have to decide whether "The Trousseau" has the kind of craft and weightiness that it deserves to be included with the other classics.

The story divides very neatly into three section, as the narrator visits the house three times. The first visit takes up considerably more pages than the other two, so I probably will split it up a few times when I post it. In any case, though, the story is quite short so there won't be too may sections. I count five right now. That means we should be able to get through this one pretty quickly. I don't want to rush anyone, though, so let me know if I'm blowing through the text too rapidly. Also, since Chekhov's stories are so dependent on the conclusion, if anyone wants to bring up something that happens later in the story before we get to it as a group feel free to mention it. I know it's difficult to talk about the set up of these stories without talking about what's being set up. Also, let me know how you feel about criticism. Some people love to consult it, but others treat it as an unwelcome intrusion. If anyone's interested what critics think of the story, I can post some examples. But, if it's going to get in the way, I'll gladly omit it.

Let me also mention that there's a few other good threads out there right now for discussion. One is the Shakespeare thread where they're discussing Richard II:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8593

and Henry IV part I:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43183

Another is Janine's thread on D.H. Lawrence's Tortoise poems:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25671

And there's the poetry bookclub on Margaret Avison:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43462

But really the Chekhov Short Story Thread is the best.

Dark Muse

05-30-2009, 09:40 PM

I will see what I can do considering my poor preformace in the D.H. Lawrence thread this time around.

I know you said the translation on this forum is the best, but can you recomend others that are decent? Becasue I don't like reading stories from the computer screen and I don't like the way the stories on this site print out.

Quark

05-30-2009, 09:46 PM

I will see what I can do considering my poor preformace in the D.H. Lawrence thread this time around

Ha, you keep saying that and I still don't know what you mean. How can you have perform poorly in a thread? You had to have performed better than I did. I wasn't even participating--let alone performing. That's all I'm really hoping for in this thread, anyway: participation. To hell with performance.

Doh! and now my intro is lost on the other page. I'll have to retrieve it somehow.

Dark Muse

05-30-2009, 09:49 PM

Haha well I don't like it when I end up having to vannish for long periods of time and can only pop in preidodicaly now and again.

Quark

05-30-2009, 09:53 PM

Haha well I don't like it when I end up having to vannish for long periods of time and can only pop in preidodicaly now and again.

Ah, I see. Yeah, that would get annoying--particularly if the discussion is moving along rapidly. I do hope you can join us this time around, though.

Janine

05-30-2009, 10:40 PM

Quark, I read your beautiful and informative introduction; did I mention witty? haha....seriously, maybe you can post it again and delete it on the previous page. Soon though, this will turn into page #66; keep that in-mind. I did love those illustrations and your choice of font/color was beautiful (title). That painting of the house is just how I pictured that house to look. Do you know who did those two paintings? I love them.

This is pretty funny. This thread, (below) on the Tortoise poems, has been dead for about a year now. It just dwindled away and everyone forgot about it. Now everyone is noticing it; that's because, I posted an account of a turtle siting in my yard last night. I was always hoping to rejuevenate that thread, since it feels to me like one of my 'loose ends'...I hate unfinished discussions. Maybe now, someone will jump in and finish discussing the last poem we posted in there; otherwise, I may be talking to myself. These Lawrence poems are really fascinating. Anyone game?

Another is Janine's thread on D.H. Lawrence's Tortoise poems:

http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=25671

Quark

05-31-2009, 12:16 PM

I know you said the translation on this forum is the best, but can you recomend others that are decent? Becasue I don't like reading stories from the computer screen and I don't like the way the stories on this site print out.

The translation online here at Lit Net is by Constance Garnette. Most translations you'll find of this story will probably be by her. If you don't have the same version, though, that's not terribly important. As I was saying to Janine earlier, the translations all look pretty similar for this story.

.seriously, maybe you can post it again and delete it on the previous page.

I think I'll just leave it there. It seems like everyone knows where it is if they want to find it.

Do you know who did those two paintings? I love them.

I wrote the painters names under the images in the intro. The person who painted the house is some late-nineteenth century American Impressionist--Twachtman, I think.

These Lawrence poems are really fascinating. Anyone game?

I'll stop by once I get things going here.

Here's the first section of the text. It's the description of the house, setting, and mother:

I HAVE seen a great many houses in my time, little and big, new and old, built of stone and of wood, but of one house I have kept a very vivid memory. It was, properly speaking, rather a cottage than a house -- a tiny cottage of one story, with three windows, looking extraordinarily like a little old hunchback woman with a cap on. Its white stucco walls, its tiled roof, and dilapidated chimney, were all drowned in a perfect sea of green. The cottage was lost to sight among the mulberry-trees, acacias, and poplars planted by the grandfathers and great-grandfathers of its present occupants. And yet it is a town house. Its wide courtyard stands in a row with other similar green courtyards, and forms part of a street. Nothing ever drives down that street, and very few persons are ever seen walking through it.

The shutters of the little house are always closed; its occupants do not care for sunlight -- the light is no use to them. The windows are never opened, for they are not fond of fresh air. People who spend their lives in the midst of acacias, mulberries, and nettles have no passion for nature. It is only to the summer visitor that God has vouchsafed an eye for the beauties of nature. The rest of mankind remain steeped in profound ignorance of the existence of such beauties. People never prize what they have always had in abundance. "What we have, we do not treasure," and what's more we do not even love it.

The little house stands in an earthly paradise of green trees with happy birds nesting in them. But inside . . . alas . . . ! In summer, it is close and stifling within; in winter, hot as a Turkish bath, not one breath of air, and the dreariness! . . .

The first time I visited the little house was many years ago on business. I brought a message from the Colonel who was the owner of the house to his wife and daughter. That first visit I remember very distinctly. It would be impossible, indeed, to forget it.

Imagine a limp little woman of forty, gazing at you with alarm and astonishment while you walk from the passage into the parlour. You are a stranger, a visitor, "a young man"; that's enough to reduce her to a state of terror and bewilderment. Though you have no dagger, axe, or revolver in your hand, and though you smile affably, you are met with alarm.

"Whom have I the honour and pleasure of addressing?" the little lady asks in a trembling voice.

I introduced myself and explained why I had come. The alarm and amazement were at once succeeded by a shrill, joyful "Ach!" and she turned her eyes upwards to the ceiling. This "Ach!" was caught up like an echo and repeated from the hall to the parlour, from the parlour to the kitchen, and so on down to the cellar. Soon the whole house was resounding with "Ach!" in various voices.

Five minutes later I was sitting on a big, soft, warm lounge in the drawing-room listening to the "Ach!" echoing all down the street.

I'll come back with some comments later.

Janine

05-31-2009, 03:35 PM

Quark, last night I listened to the audio reading of this story. I love it! What immediately stands out to me, is the first impression the narrator, (who is the outsider in this story, the observer) has of the house and it's surroundings. First, his impression is of the outside. There much contrast here in the first few paragraphs. The very first line sets this idea in motion:

I HAVE seen a great many houses in my time, little and big, new and old, built of stone and of wood, .....

but of one house I have kept a very vivid memory

Three distinct contrasts about houses and how they are build; then that last line that sets appart this house from others the narrator has observed. From first encountering it; curiously enough, from merely the outside, he is drawn to this cottage, this house stands out to him and seems to fascinate him right away.

a tiny cottage of one story, with three windows, looking extraordinarily like a little old hunchback woman with a cap on. Its white stucco walls, its tiled roof, and dilapidated chimney, were all drowned in a perfect sea of green.

Again there is contrast - the white and the sea of green. Wonderful line "drowned in a perfect sea of green". Nature as opposed to the 'unnatural' aspect and atmosphere, that we will soon discover to exist, inside the house is quite evident here, in this preliminary line. The 'stucco, tiled roof, dilapdated chimney' - all indictions of man and decay, even death. This very house mimics the death theme, I believe. I don't want to say anymore about that, for the time being; don't wish to spoil the story for others.

I like the way the author used the metaphor of the this house looking...

like a tiny cottage of one story, with three windows, looking extraordinarily like a little old hunchback woman with a cap on.

This house takes on a character all it's own; yet, I believe it mimics and reflects the stagnant 'old' qualities of the characters within.

Then the next part of this paragraph describes the trees, which seem to be vitally important to the author and the story, to the observation of the narrator. The cottage is said to be...

...lost to sight among the mulberry-trees, acacias, and poplars planted by the grandfathers and great-grandfathers....

So, the relatives of the occupants of the cottage have planted these trees; there are deep family roots and ties to this property.

Now the narrator suddenly switches to the idea of this house being a 'town house'....

And yet it is a town house. Its wide courtyard stands in a row with other similar green courtyards, and forms part of a street. Nothing ever drives down that street, and very few persons are ever seen walking through it.

I wondered much about this. Why is it a town house - because of the close proximity of the other houses in the neighborhood and also why does this street never get any traffic? Nor, do many people come out to walk the street? I admit I found this a bit odd, yet it sets up a kind of mystery in my mind from the beginning. It also makes me feel 'uneasy' about this idyllic little house "drowned in a perfect sea of green"; this line still facinates me. He didn't say 'set' or 'within', but 'drowned' and he used the word 'perfect' to describe this "sea of green." Wonderful imagery and some odd feeling of forboding, with the word 'drowned' (death) being mentioned.

OK, I will stop here, because I would hate to lose my post. I will post more late on the next paragraph which I find totally fascinating.

jinjang

05-31-2009, 09:14 PM

Janine

05-31-2009, 10:37 PM

I would like all of you to know I am a passive but ardent audience of this discussion. I am serious of being unable to participate in it because I face an extremely busy month. Reading your discussions will be my pleasant break because I read the story but it left me only questions which, I am sure, you will answer.

I look forward to it all!

Oh, that is perfectly fine jinjang. I am glad you read the story. I can imagine being bogged down this coming month. I hope you can read along and occasionally make a comment. If you have the inclination, feel free to jump in anytime, even it just to ask a question now and then.

Quark

05-31-2009, 11:54 PM

What immediately stands out to me, is the first impression the narrator, (who is the outsider in this story, the observer) has of the house and it's surroundings. First, his impression is of the outside.

I think you've hit the right word: "outsider." The narrator is very much on the outside looking in. Chekhov positions the narrator to create two feelings, I think. One is the humor. Like in "Wintry Peacock," the narrator is a nameless other who is keenly aware of the absurdity of the situation. Lawrence's narrator reacts to the letter, and Chekhov's is amused by the strange exclamations of the mother. "Ach!" indeed. I love the line: "Five minutes later I was sitting on a big, soft, warm lounge in the drawing-room listening to the "Ach!" echoing all down the street." Being an outsider, the narrator registers just how ridiculous the nervous mother is. Lawrence and Chekhov I think are doing more than just being humorous with the first person, though. I think Lawrence was using it to create a sense of neutrality and objectivity. The couple in "The Wintry Peacock" was embroiled in a fiery conflict (or maybe more of a cold war, now that I think about it), but in any case there was a conflict and neutrality and objectivity are perhaps the first virtues to be sacrificed in those kinds of fights. Lawrence wanted his narrator to stand outside of the conflict and give an honest report. Chekhov, meanwhile, seems to be going for something a little different. Lost objectivity isn't a danger here. Chekhov's more worried about the final effect of the story. He wants the tragedy to have as much force as possible. I think he may have used an outsider narrator to create a sense of understatement. An outsider narrator wouldn't feel the force of the tragedy like a participant, and so would naturally understate it. Chekhov may have thought the tragedy of the family would register better if it were understated than overstated.

There much contrast here in the first few paragraphs.

From first encountering it; curiously enough, from merely the outside, he is drawn to this cottage, this house stands out to him and seems to fascinate him right away.

I'm not sure what to make of either the contrasts or the uniqueness of the house. I'll have to think about. It could be simply a reflection on the people inside. The family belongs to the upper-class--which does not have many members. They would be rare and unique amongst most people, as the house is rare and unique among the other edifices that the narrator remembers.

Again there is contrast - the white and the sea of green. Wonderful line "drowned in a perfect sea of green". Nature as opposed to the 'unnatural' aspect and atmosphere, that we will soon discover to exist, inside the house is quite evident here, in this preliminary line.

The trees also represent how the reputation of the family overshadows the present. It's the grandfathers who planted the trees, and now they're clogging the view of the present generation. There's a theme of restraint and entrapment here, and the trees are part of that.

The 'stucco, tiled roof, dilapdated chimney' - all indictions of man and decay, even death. This very house mimics the death theme, I believe. I don't want to say anymore about that, for the time being; don't wish to spoil the story for others.

Yeah, the word "dilapidated" brings that out. The house is a little rundown, and as we'll see it only gets worse.

I wondered much about this. Why is it a town house - because of the close proximity of the other houses in the neighborhood and also why does this street never get any traffic? Nor, do many people come out to walk the street? I admit I found this a bit odd, yet it sets up a kind of mystery in my mind from the beginning.

This may be referring to the fact that the family, while being very elite and upper class, is still part of society. They have to function in a community. The house is still a "townhouse" and it's connected by a road. But, seeing as there isn't any traffic, it appears to be only a tenuous connection. In other words, the family is a part of society, but it doesn't acknowledge it--and nor does anyone else. The house is this beautiful structure on the fringe of the town that people can see, but not visit. I tend to see the description here as mirroring the relationship between classes. The working and middle class of the town can see the upper class, but they don't mix with them. The upper class is always a set beautiful people on one extreme tier of society.

Reading your discussions will be my pleasant break

We'll try to be entertaining.

because I read the story but it left me only questions which, I am sure, you will answer.

Feel free to ask something. I'm sure someone would have an answer.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 01:17 AM

I wondered much about this. Why is it a town house - because of the close proximity of the other houses in the neighborhood and also why does this street never get any traffic? Nor, do many people come out to walk the street? I admit I found this a bit odd, yet it sets up a kind of mystery in my mind from the beginning. It also makes me feel 'uneasy' about this idyllic little house "drowned in a perfect sea of green"; this line still facinates me. He didn't say 'set' or 'within', but 'drowned' and he used the word 'perfect' to describe this "sea of green." Wonderful imagery and some odd feeling of forboding, with the word 'drowned' (death) being mentioned.

Perhaps it is just becasue of where I live, but I did not find this to strike me as all that odd. Though I do not live in a "town" per sae, but I live in suburban area and we don't get too much traffic here nor are there often all the many people around. It is a fairly quiet area. It describes the area as a courtyard, and to my mind and having once lived in a court, they are not usually areas that get a lot of traffic. It seems to be a fairly out of the way little place so it is not too surprising that it would be so still and unpopulated or infrequently traversed.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 01:28 AM

This may be referring to the fact that the family, while being very elite and upper class, is still part of society. They have to function in a community. The house is still a "townhouse" and it's connected by a road. But, seeing as there isn't any traffic, it appears to be only a tenuous connection. In other words, the family is a part of society, but it doesn't acknowledge it--and nor does anyone else. The house is this beautiful structure on the fringe of the town that people can see, but not visit. I tend to see the description here as mirroring the relationship between classes. The working and middle class of the town can see the upper class, but they don't mix with them. The upper class is always a set beautiful people on one extreme tier of society.

Where did you get that they are elite upper class? That is not the impression I had about thier family from reading the story. They lived in a small one story cottage and the daughters alledged Trousseau is made up scraps which they have swen themselves and the mother says to the narrator

My husbands pay is not very ample, and we are not able to premit ourselves luxuries. So we have to make up everyhing ourselves.

Pehraps they are not working class, but I don't see them has high elite, of very upper class. To me it seems more perhaps middle class.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 01:40 AM

The little house stands in an earthly paradise of green trees with happy birds nesting in them. But inside . . . alas . . . ! In summer, it is close and stifling within; in winter, hot as a Turkish bath, not one breath of air, and the dreariness! . . .

I really liked this descritpion of the house. The way in which it is referd to as an "earthly paradise" and the contrast to the green trees and happy birds that are outside of the house, opposed to the dead hot air in the house, really bout out the image of a tomb for me, which would refect on the house as being a place of connstant mourning and grief, as well as how all inside are decaying and so disconnected with the outside world.

Also the use of the worde "earthly" can be seen in contrast to the way in which the house and those within seem a part of an unearthly, otherworld, they have nothing to do with the life of the trees and the birds, but they are concerned only with death, and the brother in law has spiritual connections in his ambitions, as well when the narrator first visited he noticed a portrait of a bishop among images of dead anccestors.

Quark

06-01-2009, 02:10 AM

Where did you get that they are elite upper class? That is not the impression I had about thier family from reading the story. They lived in a small one story cottage and the daughters alledged Trousseau is made up scraps which they have swen themselves

I don't mean that they're wealthy. Rather, I'm trying to say that they have aristocratic values. Military officials--and their families--were part of the respectable Russian society. We can see some of the mother's and daughter's upper class sensibilities slipping into the text when they start speaking in French. Yet none of this is to say that they have money. Maybe I shouldn't say "upper class" but rather aristocratic or respectable. That's really what the family is. In any case, I think it's important to the story. The reason Chekhov has the mother and daughter in the kind of stasis we find them in is because they're suppose to represent the values of a certain class.

Perhaps it is just becasue of where I live, but I did not find this to strike me as all that odd. Though I do not live in a "town" per sae, but I live in suburban area and we don't get too much traffic here nor are there often all the many people around. It is a fairly quiet area. It describes the area as a courtyard, and to my mind and having once lived in a court, they are not usually areas that get a lot of traffic. It seems to be a fairly out of the way little place so it is not too surprising that it would be so still and unpopulated or infrequently traversed.

Yeah, I could be reading too much into that detail. After all, Russia's population density at that point was only slightly higher than the moon's.

I really liked this descritpion of the house. The way in which it is referd to as an "earthly paradise" and the contrast to the green trees and happy birds that are outside of the house, opposed to the dead hot air in the house, really bout out the image of a tomb for me, which would refect on the house as being a place of connstant mourning and grief, as well as how all inside are decaying and so disconnected with the outside world.

Also the use of the worde "earthly" can be seen in contrast to the way in which the house and those within seem a part of an unearthly, otherworld, they have nothing to do with the life of the trees and the birds, but they are concerned only with death, and the brother in law has spiritual connections in his ambitions, as well when the narrator first visited he noticed a portrait of a bishop among images of dead anccestors.

You make some good points here, but actually they're actually a little too good for this late at night. It would take too much brain power at this point to come up with a response, so I'll have to wait until tomorrow. Janine will probably have something insightful to say about that, though, and she doesn't go to bed until 4 AM--this is still afternoon to her, I believe.

See you all tomorrow.

And thanks for posting everyone. I know I restarted the thread rather suddenly.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 02:15 AM

I don't mean that they're wealthy. Rather, I'm trying to say that they have aristocratic values. Military officials--and their families--were part of the respectable Russian society. We can see some of the mother's and daughter's upper class sensibilities slipping into the text when they start speaking in French. Yet none of this is to say that they have money. Maybe I shouldn't say "upper class" but rather aristocratic or respectable. That's really what the family is. In any case, I think it's important to the story. The reason Chekhov has the mother and daughter in the kind of stasis we find them in is because they're suppose to represent the values of a certain class.

Ahh ok, yes seeing them as artitocratic makes more sense then "upper class" at least what upper class means to me, but I can see where they are of an aristocratic nature in how they live and thier vaules.

Janine

06-01-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote by Dark Muse

Ahh ok, yes seeing them as artitocratic makes more sense then "upper class" at least what upper class means to me, but I can see where they are of an aristocratic nature in how they live and thier vaules.

I agree with Dark Muse on this one. Just curious, Quark, how you determined the family was aristocratic; was it stated in a criticism you read? Just curious. I agree, that so far, the indictions have shown decay to the house and other signs that they no longer had money; perhaps they did at one time? As, Dark Muse pointed out, the mother made direct remarks that they had to make the clothes themselves and not have them sent out for. I didn't quite get the sense, that they were poor, but neither did I think them well off. I guess I agree with DM, in that they seems more middle-class. Perhaps too, the mother exaggerates their family situation with the stranger. I got a sense she was a bit dramatic.

I really liked this descritpion of the house. The way in which it is referd to as an "earthly paradise" and the contrast to the green trees and happy birds that are outside of the house, opposed to the dead hot air in the house, really bout out the image of a tomb for me, which would refect on the house as being a place of connstant mourning and grief, as well as how all inside are decaying and so disconnected with the outside world.

I really liked it too...the house in the first few paragraphs. I like how you point out the pharse "earthly paradise". Here's the exact line:

The little house stands in an earthly paradise of green trees with happy birds nesting in them. But inside . . . alas . . . ! In summer, it is close and stifling within; in winter, hot as a Turkish bath, not one breath of air, and the dreariness!

In fact this one statement, the narrator nicely contrasts the inside of the house to the outer natural surroundings, which to the visitor's first sight, are quite lovely, a paradise. The inside 'dreariness' is like death itself...dry and hot...that could describe a tomb as you suggest. Yes, this is a good way of putting it - "a place of constant mourning and grief"...also, your mention of the decay inside, disconnecting it from the beautiful outside surroundings....that's so true and excellent writing I think. Outside the green is emphasised, inside the gray dreariness. It's like a techicolor film shot half in black and white.

I also like the use of the word 'shutters' in the second paragraph. It evokes immediately the idea of 'shutting' out the world. Also, they don't care for sunlight. This too is so tomb-like. It's like they are vampires, afraid now to encounter the sun/day or even allow air to enter the house-chamber.

I wondered why the narrator points this part out.

People who spend their lives in the midst of acacias, mulberries, and nettles have no passion for nature. It is only to the summer visitor that God has vouchsafed an eye for the beauties of nature.

How can it be beautiful and yet in this statement seems to evoke no passion in the occupants of the property? Of course, he finishes the idea with the following phrase, which I just love.

People never prize what they have always had in abundance. "What we have, we do not treasure," and what's more we do not even love it.

So true.

Quote by Dark Muse

Also the use of the worde "earthly" can be seen in contrast to the way in which the house and those within seem a part of an unearthly, otherworld, they have nothing to do with the life of the trees and the birds, but they are concerned only with death, and the brother in law has spiritual connections in his ambitions, as well when the narrator first visited he noticed a portrait of a bishop among images of dead anccestors.

Good point and the one about the brother-in-law and the portrait and his ties to spirtutal ambitions. I find all the portraits on the wall of great interest. Reminds me of the "House of Seven Gables" for some reason. Ever read it, Dark Muse? The house, from the start echos death. Perhaps the humorous "Ach!", observed in the beginning, becomes almost a death echo by the end; a hollow echo through a lifeless chamber. That "Ach!" rather disturbed me; I could not quite figure out what that was all about. Quark, do you know? Does anyone really understand that part?

Quote by Quark

You make some good points here, but actually they're actually a little too good for this late at night. It would take too much brain power at this point to come up with a response, so I'll have to wait until tomorrow. Janine will probably have something insightful to say about that, though, and she doesn't go to bed until 4 AM--this is still afternoon to her, I believe.

Hahaha...how well you know me, Quark! hahah...do you check my posts and what time I post them - keep tabs on me? Haha...Dark Muse does pretty good herself at being a night owl.

Yes, good points, Dark Muse.

I will try to comment on the remainder of the section you posted later today. Please don't proceed on yet with the text postings, Quark; there is still much here to comment on.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 03:47 PM

How can it be beautiful and yet in this statement seems to evoke no passion in the occupants of the property? Of course, he finishes the idea with the following phrase, which I just love.

I think the reason why its beauty cannot rise passion in the owners is because for them it has become like background, they have become "immune" to it in a way because they do live among every day that it can no longer truly move them. As he references the summer visitor, one coming from the city would be much more affected by such a rare sight. They would still have the ability to be inspired by such beauty.

Good point and the one about the brother-in-law and the portrait and his ties to spirtutal ambitions. I find all the portraits on the wall of great interest. Reminds me of the "House of Seven Gables" for some reason. Ever read it, Dark Muse? The house, from the start echos death. Perhaps the humorous "Ach!", observed in the beginning, becomes almost a death echo by the end; a hollow echo through a lifeless chamber. That "Ach!" rather disturbed me; I could not quite figure out what that was all about. Quark, do you know? Does anyone really understand that part?

No I have not read House of Seven Gables yet, I have it, but I haven't read it yet. It is also kind of House of Usher like, another drab dark isolated house which becomes concerned with death.

I am not sure about Ach! I thought it was just an expression of the woman because she could not really find any words in which to express her since of joy in the moment. And perhaps the rather awkward sound as her expression of joy was meant as a bit of irony, considering the somberness of the house the word Ach! Does not seem as if it indeed would be particularly comforting. It is a rather harsh sound. In imagining someone saying it over and over, I think they would sound rather like a squawking bird quite unlike the beautiful melodious signing outside.

Janine

06-01-2009, 04:06 PM

I think the reason why its beauty cannot rise passion in the owners is because for them it has become like background, they have become "immune" to it in a way because they do live among every day that it can no longer truly move them. As he references the summer visitor, one coming from the city would be much more affected by such a rare sight. They would still have the ability to be inspired by such beauty.

That makes sense; especially, with that last line in that paragraph; about not appreciating what one has. I didn't pick up, on the fact, that the narrator came from the city; I will check back to find that part of the text. I probably just forgot.

No I have not read House of Seven Gables yet, I have it, but I haven't read it yet. It is also kind of House of Usher like, another drab dark isolated house which becomes concerned with death.

Oh, I think you would like that book. It's not too long a read. I should read "The House of Usher"; think it's in one of my father's old books.

I am not sure about Ach! I thought it was just an expression of the woman because she could not really find any words in which to express her since of joy in the moment. And perhaps the rather awkward sound as her expression of joy was meant as a bit of irony, considering the somberness of the house the word Ach! Does not seem as if it indeed would be particularly comforting. It is a rather harsh sound. In imagining someone saying it over and over, I think they would sound rather like a squawking bird quite unlike the beautiful melodious signing outside.

One must admit it's a strange expression - wonder how it translates back into Russian. Does it have any significance in the Russian language that we might be overlooking? Indeed, I thought it sounded harsh and like a squawking bird myself. That's a good thought - it certainly does contrast with the beautiful melodious birdsong outside the house.

Did the mother envision the visitor as a potennial suitor to her daughter - thus this sound of glee or whatever? I wasn't quite sure it was joy; because they seemed like a very joyless family from the start.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 04:25 PM

That makes sense; especially, with that last line in that paragraph; about not appreciating what one has. I didn't pick up, on the fact, that the narrator came from the city; I will check back to find that part of the text. I probably just forgot.

I did not mean that the narrator came from the city per sae, sorry if I was unclear. But the narrator references "Summer visitors" and usually it is people from the city who have places in the country to spend thier summers. But her did say he was on bussiness so that might indicate that he was from the city.

Did the mother envision the visitor as a potennial suitor to her daughter - thus this sound of glee or whatever? I wasn't quite sure it was joy; because they seemed like a very joyless family from the start.

I think her expression of joy is directly related to what was in the letter he brought her from her husband.

I introduced myself and explained why I had come. The alarm and amazement once succeeded by a shrill joyful "Ach!"

He tells the reader he went there to give her a letter from her husband, so perhaps she was just happy to hear from her husband, or the letter he sent bore good news.

Quark

06-01-2009, 05:36 PM

I had a pretty good laugh at Barnes and Noble just now. I usually get my coffee and sit next to the health/fitness shelf of books--not because I'm drawn to them, but more because that's where there's a seat. And I see all the books that are filed under the big "Disease" sign. Most of them look pretty similar. The title are all variants of Living With X or Reversing Y, but one said Getting Pregnant and I had to laugh. I know that's it probably a book about fertility, but it just sounded like the bookstore was equating pregnancy with Cancer or Diabetes. I'd love to read the one called Living With Pregnancy or Reversing Pregnancy, although I would think it would be a pretty short book. Most likely, it would just be a one-liner reading "Wait nine months." While the few books on fertility issues probably don't deserve their own shelf, I still think it's a bit of misfile to put them under "Disease." Whatever, there's always something ridiculous going on there. The time before last I ran into a creative writing class pitching weak ideas to each other about bad Sci-Fi novels they want to write. I laughed openly a few times at them, and by the end I think they caught on to the fact that I was mocking them to the other people sitting around me. I suppose I deserved the glares I got.

Anyway, back to Chekhov and the steep hill I have to climb to catch up with everyone. Let me start with Janine's post since she brought up the class issue again, and I'd like to clear this up if I can before we go on.

I agree with Dark Muse on this one. Just curious, Quark, how you determined the family was aristocratic; was it stated in a criticism you read? Just curious. I agree, that so far, the indictions have shown decay to the house and other signs that they no longer had money; perhaps they did at one time? As, Dark Muse pointed out, the mother made direct remarks that they had to make the clothes themselves and not have them sent out for. I didn't quite get the sense, that they were poor, but neither did I think them well off. I guess I agree with DM, in that they seems more middle-class. Perhaps too, the mother exaggerates their family situation with the stranger. I got a sense she was a bit dramatic.

I imagine their income to be only middling, or even lower. You're right to pick up on their thriftiness with the fabric, and the disorder of the house. I don't remember the narrator seeing any servants, either. The mother meets the narrator herself and is doing the sewing with her daughter. Chekhov may have just avoided mentioning the servants to make the daughter and mother seem more secluded. If he told us about the bustle of attendants, the "we are all alone in the world" may have seemed a little disingenuous. They are certainly not well-attended, though, if the mother and daughter have to take up so much themselves, and this points to a certain impoverishment on the part of the family. If we're to estimate their wealth, I would say they're lower-middle class.

But the word class is used in many different senses. I could say that my old second grade teacher was lower-middle class in terms of income. That would be true since she probably made something just below the national median income. I could also say that she's middle-class in terms of her relationship to production. She isn't a worker, but she isn't an owner. As a service worker, she falls somewhere in between. She's just straight middle class in that sense--even though she's lower-middle class in terms of income. Now suppose that she reads a lot of Tolstoy and identifies herself with the aristocracy in War and Peace. Her idea and values would reflect a different class than the one she belongs to in terms of income or relationship to production. Instead of being middle or lower-middle class, she would be upper-class or aristocratic in values. That means there are at least three different ways to consider class.

1) in terms of wealth

2)values or ideas

3)relationship to production

For 19th C Russian Society it would break down like this:

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd300/Quark3/class.jpg

I think the situation of the family in "The Trousseau" is similar to that of my old second grade teacher. They have a lower-middle class income, a middle-class relationship to production, and aristocratic values. We can see evidence of their aristocratic values in their skill with French--a language prized by the upper-class and intellectuals. We can also see it in the Victorian ideas that the family has about gender and marriage. The mother is very insistent about palming the daughter off on some man as quick as possible it seems like, and the daughter denies any interest in the scheme. This corresponds greatly with aristocratic idea of marriage in which to be a spinster was the worst fate, and girls were supposed to be demure and innocent. The mother, therefore, is extremely apprehensive about the daughter's future marriage, and the daughter has to act like she's oblivious to it all. It's a pose. One taken from an aristocracy which they don't belong to by wealth, but by ideas and values.

Okay, that's Part I of my response. It seems like everyone's moved onto the second paragraph of the story, and I'll try to get something up about that tonight. I'll let you people make fun of my misspellings in the diagram until then.

Dark Muse

06-01-2009, 05:45 PM

I don't remember the narrator seeing any servants, either. The mother meets the narrator herself and is doing the sewing with her daughter. Chekhov may have just avoided mentioning the servants to make the daughter and mother seem more secluded. If he told us about the bustle of attendants, the "we are all alone in the world" may have seemed a little disingenuous. They are certainly not well-attended, though, if the mother and daughter have to take up so much themselves, and this points to a certain impoverishment on the part of the family. If we're to estimate their wealth, I would say they're lower-middle class.

I do not recall any servants, but in the begining there were two random old women that seemed to be there helping. At first I thought it was the mother and the daughter, but the daughter was not suppose to be old. So I was confussed by who they were, as the mother did not mention any other female relations in the house.

In the next room two alarmed and fluttered old women were hurriedly picking up similar patterns and peices of tailor's chalk from the floor.

Janine

06-01-2009, 06:32 PM

I had a pretty good laugh at Barnes and Noble just now. I usually get my coffee and sit next to the health/fitness shelf of books--not because I'm drawn to them, but more because that's where there's a seat. And I see all the books that are filed under the big "Disease" sign. Most of them look pretty similar. The title are all variants of Living With X or Reversing Y, but one said Getting Pregnant and I had to laugh. I know that's it probably a book about fertility, but it just sounded like the bookstore was equating pregnancy with Cancer or Diabetes. I'd love to read the one called Living With Pregnancy or Reversing Pregnancy, although I would think it would be a pretty short book. Most likely, it would just be a one-liner reading "Wait nine months." While the few books on fertility issues probably don't deserve their own shelf, I still think it's a bit of misfile to put them under "Disease." Whatever, there's always something ridiculous going on there. The time before last I ran into a creative writing class pitching weak ideas to each other about bad Sci-Fi novels they want to write. I laughed openly a few times at them, and by the end I think they caught on to the fact that I was mocking them to the other people sitting around me. I suppose I deserved the glares I got.

Pretty funny story, Quark! I think you need a summer job there to sort out their books. By the way, didn't happen to spill coffee on any good ones did you? I was hoping for another handout.;):lol:

Anyway, back to Chekhov and the steep hill I have to climb to catch up with everyone. Let me start with Janine's post since she brought up the class issue again, and I'd like to clear this up if I can before we go on.
Oh yeah, Chekhov, hummm...yes, now I see what you mean in your posts below. Aristocracy is more a state of mind and a way of acting.

I imagine their income to be only middling, or even lower. You're right to pick up on their thriftiness with the fabric, and the disorder of the house. I don't remember the narrator seeing any servants, either. The mother meets the narrator herself and is doing the sewing with her daughter. Chekhov may have just avoided mentioning the servants to make the daughter and mother seem more secluded. If he told us about the bustle of attendants, the "we are all alone in the world" may have seemed a little disingenuous. They are certainly not well-attended, though, if the mother and daughter have to take up so much themselves, and this points to a certain impoverishment on the part of the family. If we're to estimate their wealth, I would say they're lower-middle class.

Interesting that Dark Muse did pick up on two old ladies hanging about picking up patterns. Perhaps they were old servants from the previous generation and just stayed on in the house. I completely understand your idea about 'all alone in the world' and it's emphasis, Quark. If they were servants he would not put much regard on their presense. Still doesn't make them rich.

But the word class is used in many different senses. I could say that my old second grade teacher was lower-middle class in terms of income. That would be true since she probably made something just below the national median income. I could also say that she's middle-class in terms of her relationship to production. She isn't a worker, but she isn't an owner. As a service worker, she falls somewhere in between. She's just straight middle class in that sense--even though she's lower-middle class in terms of income. Now suppose that she reads a lot of Tolstoy and identifies herself with the aristocracy in War and Peace. Her idea and values would reflect a different class than the one she belongs to in terms of income or relationship to production. Instead of being middle or lower-middle class, she would be upper-class or aristocratic in values. That means there are at least three different ways to consider class.

1) in terms of wealth

2)values or ideas

3)relationship to production

For 19th C Russian Society it would break down like this:

http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd300/Quark3/class.jpg

OMG! I was quite hysterical (now who is laughing at whom or with whom?) when I saw "Quark's Official Diagram O' Classes"...and in various colors, too. One can't fall asleep in Quark's classes. Do you use colored chalk on the blackboard? I don't know about correcting your misspellings; I am beginning to think you should have become a doctor with that scrawl.:lol: Quark, you never fail to amuse me! ;) Thanks! Your diagram was quite helpful!

I think the situation of the family in "The Trousseau" is similar to that of my old second grade teacher. They have a lower-middle class income, a middle-class relationship to production, and aristocratic values. We can see evidence of their aristocratic values in their skill with French--a language prized by the upper-class and intellectuals. We can also see it in the Victorian ideas that the family has about gender and marriage. The mother is very insistent about palming the daughter off on some man as quick as possible it seems like, and the daughter denies any interest in the scheme. This corresponds greatly with aristocratic idea of marriage in which to be a spinster was the worst fate, and girls were supposed to be demure and innocent. The mother, therefore, is extremely apprehensive about the daughter's future marriage, and the daughter has to act like she's oblivious to it all. It's a pose. One taken from an aristocracy which they don't belong to by wealth, but by ideas and values. Did this teacher inspire you or something? I do get the drift of your explanation here though. I get the impression this family in the story was much better off at one time but lost money; not sure why I think that. Perhaps because, how else would they learn French, without some education, or did they simply learn it on their own at home?

Okay, that's Part I of my response. It seems like everyone's moved onto the second paragraph of the story, and I'll try to get something up about that tonight. I'll let you people make fun of my misspellings in the diagram until then.

Still on the portion you posted. I will chisel away at that and then you can post more text. I will also try and listen to the story a second time in the next few days.

Quark

06-01-2009, 11:06 PM

The way in which it is referd to as an "earthly paradise" and the contrast to the green trees and happy birds that are outside of the house, opposed to the dead hot air in the house, really bout out the image of a tomb for me, which would refect on the house as being a place of connstant mourning and grief, as well as how all inside are decaying and so disconnected with the outside world.

In fact this one statement, the narrator nicely contrasts the inside of the house to the outer natural surroundings, which to the visitor's first sight, are quite lovely, a paradise. The inside 'dreariness' is like death itself...dry and hot...that could describe a tomb as you suggest. Yes, this is a good way of putting it - "a place of constant mourning and grief"...also, your mention of the decay inside, disconnecting it from the beautiful outside surroundings....that's so true and excellent writing I think. Outside the green is emphasised, inside the gray dreariness.

Yeah, I agree. In the second paragraph the living, beautiful verdure is contrasted with the dead, stifling environment of the house. This is a bit of a change from the first paragraph where it was the house that was alive, but the trees and shrubs were smothering it. The house was dilapidated--showing the weak state of the family--but it still symbolized their life, and the trees were the ones stifling it. Now, in this second paragraph, the positions have been reversed. The trees represent life--perhaps a life being ignored by the family--and the house represents the stifling environment. This opening description is rather complex.

the house and those within seem a part of an unearthly, otherworld, they have nothing to do with the life of the trees and the birds, but they are concerned only with death, and the brother in law has spiritual connections in his ambitions, as well when the narrator first visited he noticed a portrait of a bishop among images of dead anccestors.

For Chekhov, this is quite a lot of foreshadowing he's doing. I was talking to JacobF about two different kinds of short stories: those that hit the reader right away and those that develop into a powerful conclusion. This story is looking more like the former. At the very onset, Chekhov is telegraphing exactly what's going to happen in this story and what it all means. We know immediately this is not going to end well for the family. They're just too static, it seems, to achieve a happy ending. The house, the trees, and the brother all foretell tragedy. It's kind of funny at first, but it turns sad toward the end and only gets sadder after that.

How can it be beautiful and yet in this statement seems to evoke no passion in the occupants of the property? Of course, he finishes the idea with the following phrase, which I just love.

And this is, of course, part of the family's problem. Their lack of interest in life outside of their home makes it impossible for them to accomplish anything. It's one of--they probably have many--fatal flaws. The daughter never leaves the house, and so can never find a husband. She dies alone because they don't take an interest in anything beyond their own home.

I find all the portraits on the wall of great interest. Reminds me of the "House of Seven Gables" for some reason. Ever read it, Dark Muse?

That's a good comparison. Both families are overwhelmed by their past and their reputation. Right? It's been a while since I read The House of Seven Gables, actually. I think there is a parallel there, though.

The house, from the start echos death. Perhaps the humorous "Ach!", observed in the beginning, becomes almost a death echo by the end; a hollow echo through a lifeless chamber. That "Ach!" rather disturbed me; I could not quite figure out what that was all about. Quark, do you know? Does anyone really understand that part?

I didn't think the "Ach" was supposed to be that morbid. I think Dark Muse got it right when she said:

I am not sure about Ach! I thought it was just an expression of the woman because she could not really find any words in which to express her since of joy in the moment.

The mother is happy to receive news from her husband, and she's also pleased with a guest. At the same time, though, she's extremely surprised and nervous since she gets so few visitors. It's kind of like if someone--say a friend or a liked relative--suddenly showed up on your doorstep. You might exclaim something like "Oh!" That's what she doing here, except she's so surprised that she keeps saying it. It's a comical exaggeration on Chekhov's part to have her saying "Ach!" so many times and so loud that it echoes off the walls. Apparently, she does it so many times that it just becomes part of the background noise for the narrator. Hence the line: "Five minutes later I was sitting on a big, soft, warm lounge in the drawing-room listening to the 'Ach!' echoing all down the street." The narrator has had enough time to find himself a seat and the "Ach!" is still going. Humor. It might not have worked, though. I found it funny.

I will try to comment on the remainder of the section you posted later today. Please don't proceed on yet with the text postings, Quark; there is still much here to comment on.

Don't worry. I'm not even done with the second paragraph yet.

Does not seem as if it indeed would be particularly comforting. It is a rather harsh sound. In imagining someone saying it over and over, I think they would sound rather like a squawking bird quite unlike the beautiful melodious signing outside.

No, it wouldn't be very comforting. I don't think much of this experience would be. The mother does not make a great hostess. The narrator realizes that she's trying, but the woman is just too much of a weird shut in.

Janine

06-02-2009, 03:22 PM

Yeah, I agree. In the second paragraph the living, beautiful verdure is contrasted with the dead, stifling environment of the house. This is a bit of a change from the first paragraph where it was the house that was alive, but the trees and shrubs were smothering it. The house was dilapidated--showing the weak state of the family--but it still symbolized their life, and the trees were the ones stifling it. Now, in this second paragraph, the positions have been reversed. The trees represent life--perhaps a life being ignored by the family--and the house represents the stifling environment. This opening description is rather complex.

Why do you suppose Chekhov has the trees and shrubs smothering the house? Is that reflecting the mother, smothering the daughter with her 'good intentions' for a possible future marriage? The daughter could be as the house; slowly becoming enveloped and dilapidated by her relatives and this 'closed in, shut up, airless, sunless' environment, which she is forced to reside in. Perhaps the mother relates to the overgrowth of the trees and shrubs. Just a thought on my part. This is strange to me though, because I would think the outside growth would relate to nature and the inside of the house to a very 'unnatural' place. One has light and air and greenery and the other has only a stiffled atmosphere.

For Chekhov, this is quite a lot of foreshadowing he's doing. I was talking to JacobF about two different kinds of short stories: those that hit the reader right away and those that develop into a powerful conclusion. This story is looking more like the former. At the very onset, Chekhov is telegraphing exactly what's going to happen in this story and what it all means. We know immediately this is not going to end well for the family. They're just too static, it seems, to achieve a happy ending. The house, the trees, and the brother all foretell tragedy. It's kind of funny at first, but it turns sad toward the end and only gets sadder after that.

I thought that also, about the foreshadowing, unless we just didn't pick up on this element in the previous stories we discussed. I can see things now, that I could not see orginally, when I started to read Chekhov and these short stories. I observed your previous posts to JacobF, about this very idea. The story does turn from slightly humorous or ironic to deep profound sadness/tragedy at the end. The last note is very downbeat, poignant, sad.

And this is, of course, part of the family's problem. Their lack of interest in life outside of their home makes it impossible for them to accomplish anything. It's one of--they probably have many--fatal flaws. The daughter never leaves the house, and so can never find a husband. She dies alone because they don't take an interest in anything beyond their own home.

Good point on this fatal flaw. I think you stated it precisely.

That's a good comparison. Both families are overwhelmed by their past and their reputation. Right? It's been a while since I read The House of Seven Gables, actually. I think there is a parallel there, though.

It's been awhile for me, too, Quark. But the dreariness and the 'shut-in stagnant' quality of the house and it's occupants, I can never forget from that novel - the whole atmosphere of blackness/gray/dreariness. I think also, I thought of the pictures, the portraits on the wall. If I recall correctly, they figure into the story quite prominently. This is probably what made me connect the two stories. Also, as long as the family resided in the house and were tied to the past, they could not thrive.

I didn't think the "Ach" was supposed to be that morbid. I think Dark Muse got it right when she said:

Oh, no...you are probably correct on this beginning "Ach". I think it was rather humorous really; amusing, the way the narrator describes it.

The mother is happy to receive news from her husband, and she's also pleased with a guest. At the same time, though, she's extremely surprised and nervous since she gets so few visitors. It's kind of like if someone--say a friend or a liked relative--suddenly showed up on your doorstep. You might exclaim something like "Oh!" That's what she doing here, except she's so surprised that she keeps saying it. It's a comical exaggeration on Chekhov's part to have her saying "Ach!" so many times and so loud that it echoes off the walls. Apparently, she does it so many times that it just becomes part of the background noise for the narrator. Hence the line: "Five minutes later I was sitting on a big, soft, warm lounge in the drawing-room listening to the 'Ach!' echoing all down the street." The narrator has had enough time to find himself a seat and the "Ach!" is still going. Humor. It might not have worked, though. I found it funny.

Oh, right...I simply forgot about that part with the good news and the letter. I need to read that whole section over again. Interesting, that it becomes part of the background noise or even part of the house. The echo is interesting - caves and tombs have such echos. It's particularly funny, when the narrator says "echoing all down the street".

Don't worry. I'm not even done with the second paragraph yet.

Oh good, it's fine to take this slowly....

No, it wouldn't be very comforting. I don't think much of this experience would be. The mother does not make a great hostess. The narrator realizes that she's trying, but the woman is just too much of a weird shut in.

True. All of these people in the house are a bit weird. The daugher comes the closest to being anyway normal; but she is trapped there by circumstance, I would imagine....sad....

Quark

06-02-2009, 04:02 PM

But her did say he was on bussiness so that might indicate that he was from the city.

I get the idea that the narrator's background is decidedly more urban than the family's. He's certainly more urbane. The mother and daughter, while being having elitist sensibilities, do not appear to be well-traveled and their conversational skills are somewhat languished. The narrator finds himself in a situation much like the narrator of "The Wintry Peacock" does. He's a slightly more experience and traveled visitor who finds himself with a couple of rubes. This creates some humor at the beginning of both stories before turning tragic. Unlike in "The Wintry Peacock," however, Chekhov's story just keeps getting sadder. Lawrence returns the story to humor, but Chekhov goes for something more poignant here.

I think her expression of joy is directly related to what was in the letter he brought her from her husband.

A combination of that and her nervousness

I do not recall any servants, but in the begining there were two random old women that seemed to be there helping. At first I thought it was the mother and the daughter, but the daughter was not suppose to be old. So I was confussed by who they were, as the mother did not mention any other female relations in the house.

Good eye. I imagine they are servants, but--as Janine pointed out--their age makes it seem like they were hired long ago when the family may have been better off.

Why do you suppose Chekhov has the trees and shrubs smothering the house? Is that reflecting the mother smothering the daughter with her 'good intentions' for a possible future marriage?

No I was thinking that the trees were connected with the reputation of the family and its values that have been handed down from previous generations. Chekhov says "The cottage was lost to sight among the mulberry-trees, acacias, and poplars planted by the grandfathers and great-grandfathers of its present occupants" (bold added). He's drawing a parallel between the way the plants smother the house to the way the family's past deprives the mother and daughter of life. Again, this goes back to the reading of the story as not just a tale about the ravages of time but also an indictment of aristocratic values. Aristocracies rely on their connections and ancestry a substitute for actual achievements and merit. They also try to maintain the traditions handed down to them by previous generations. One could feel smothered and deprived in this kind of life. The daughter certainly is. She clearly wants to marry (she blushes every time she brings it up), but she's overcome by this inherited idea that women should be modest and blithely innocent. She can't break through the restraint imposed on her, and ends up dying before she can marry. The picture on the wall don't just foreshadow the family's demise. They also remind the occupants of the house of the hold that the past has over them. They're controlled by the bishop on the wall, and the colonel. The daughter eventual joins them as another picture of virtue and a life unlived.

I may be harping too much on this, though. I think you can read the story also as just about one unfortunate family without the whole rant on class. It works as just a poignant story, too.

I thought that also, about the foreshadowing, unless we just didn't pick up this element in the previous stories we discussed. I can sort of see things now I could not see orginally when I started to read Chekhov and these short stories.

No, I don't think it was there. I mean in the other stories that we did. I'm remembering back to our discussion of "About Love" and "Dreams"--two of the recent ones--and I don't recall anything quite like this. "About Love" starts by declaring that love is mysterious which is what we're left with at the end. That's kind of foreshadowing, but it's a clever use of foreshadowing because we don't exactly know how we're going to get to the ending. In this story we know exactly how we're going to get to the ending. The daughter isn't going to get married, the uncle is going to fail at whatever profession he's involved in, and the mother's plans are going to fall through. Chekhov lets us in on this pretty early in the story in way that I didn't see with the others.

True. All of these people in the house are a bit weird. The daugher comes the closest to being anyway normal but she is trapped there by circumstance, I would imagine....sad....

Yeah, I would say the daughter is the least weird of the three family member living in the house. I think she's even supposed to attractive in her awkward way. The narrator gives her a pretty good look and describes her clothes and appearance.

Janine

06-02-2009, 04:39 PM

Quark, not sure how much computer I will be able to partake of tonight - thunderstorms predicted all evening. Awhile ago, I was just writing back, a new entry on the idea of the trees enveloping the house, when a very loud and threatening clap of thunder resounded. I had to immediately shut down. I just heard some again, off in the distance. I unplug in thunderstorms always, since that one time my computer did get hit by a surge and it damaged my DSL modem. Thank heavens it was only that and didn't do harm to my actual computer (that was my old one), but I take no chances now, even at the slightest sound of thunder. As to your post above, I do agree with all that you wrote, so there is really no need to quote all separately and comment further.

The outside is described quite beautifully...this all I really wanted to add. I rethought the idea of the trees enveloping the house; but above I can see your point and the ties to long ago and ancestry. That's quite good; even the idea of a 'family tree'. I love this following passage:

The little house stands in an earthly paradise of green trees with happy birds nesting in them. But inside . . . alas . . . ! In summer, it is close and stifling within; in winter, hot as a Turkish bath, not one breath of air, and the dreariness!

Let me point out, that earlier on, he mentioned the "perfect sea of green", but he did use the word "drowned" preceeding that phrase. I find that very significant.

Quark

06-03-2009, 12:59 AM

Quark, not sure how much computer I will be able to partake of tonight - thunderstorms predicted all evening.

By all means, power down. Don't risk it. If you lost a second computer that would be tragic, and I don't know if Lit Net people would help you out again. They might start to think it's a boy who cried wolf situation.

As to your post above, I do agree with all that you wrote, so there is really no need to quote all separately and comment further.

Tell me when you're ready for the next section of the text. I still want to comment a little more on the mother, but I'm ready to move on whenever anyone else is.

The outside is described quite beautifully...this all I really wanted to add. I rethought the idea of the trees enveloping the house; but above I can see your point and the ties to long ago and ancestry. That's quite good; even the idea of a 'family tree'. I love this following passage:

It's a good image, and it's one that can be appreciated as both a critical part of the story and as just a good image in itself.

Let me point out, that earlier on, he mentioned the "perfect sea of green", but he did use the word "drowned" preceeding that phrase. I find that very significant.

Wait, which part is significant? The "sea of green" or the word "drowned?"

Quark

06-03-2009, 03:01 PM

I know I've already said quite a bit about the first chunk of text, but I'd like to say some things about the last couple paragraphs before we move on.

First, there's this line:

That first visit I remember very distinctly. It would be impossible, indeed, to forget it.
It's another mention of the uniqueness of the narrator's experience. I'm still not entirely sure what to make of this. He might just be pointing out how odd this particular episodes was, or he could be saying that the sadness of the entire story stayed with him a long time. Chekhov liked the idea of his stories being something that resonates with the reader for a long time. "The Student" was a story that made this point rather thoroughly. The students tells the story of Peter before betraying Christ, and his audience responds because the story itself is meaningful. It reaches through time to touch them in some way. It doesn't reach them because the student told the story well, but because the message is one that the audience can relate to. The narrator in "The Trousseau" might think he has a hold of something similar in this story.

Imagine a limp little woman of forty, gazing at you with alarm and astonishment while you walk from the passage into the parlour. You are a stranger, a visitor, "a young man"; that's enough to reduce her to a state of terror and bewilderment. Though you have no dagger, axe, or revolver in your hand, and though you smile affably, you are met with alarm.

I think we've covered the mother's character pretty well already, but I would point to the words "limp little woman." It seems like Chekhov is building a parallel between the woman's frumpy look and the appearance of the dilapidated house.

"Whom have I the honour and pleasure of addressing?" the little lady asks in a trembling voice.

And, of course, there's the nervousness and fear in her voice. Visitors apparently are very unnerving experience for her since she's not used to them.

That's all I have to say on this passage. I'll probably post the next chunk of the story tomorrow. If I'm going too fast, let me know.

Janine

06-03-2009, 04:09 PM

Quark, I have been reading along. Now it's raining again; and more thunderstorms are predicted. I don't know how much longer I can be online. I think you did cover everything thoroughly; I think I and Dark Muse covered a few points you didn't, too. I only want to add this.

I almost think we have understated the mother's first reaction to the stranger, so I will quote this line:

Imagine a limp little woman of forty, gazing at you with alarm and astonishment while you walk from the passage into the parlour. You are a stranger, a visitor, "a young man"; that's enough to reduce her to a state of terror and bewilderment. Though you have no dagger, axe, or revolver in your hand, and though you smile affably, you are met with alarm.

I think that last statement is rather humorous and witty. Then I noticed how quickly her attitude changed when he gave her the letter...total relief, then joy.

So, now I think you can post more of the text. I am ready to move on. Just hope I can be online later tonight. I won't be on much tomorrow. I have an appointment and will be out most of the day into evening.

Dark Muse

06-03-2009, 05:20 PM

Yes I think we have coverved the first part of the text well and I cannot think of anything more I can had to what has already been said.

Quark

06-03-2009, 06:06 PM

I think that last statement is rather humorous and witty. Then I noticed how quickly her attitude changed when he gave her the letter...total relief, then joy.

There is a progression of emotions that she goes through on meeting the narrator. You're right that she's relieved when the narrator reveals his purpose, and then is quite pleased.

Here is another chunk of the story. This takes us just past the introduction of the daughter:

There was a smell of moth powder, and of goatskin shoes, a pair of which lay on a chair beside me wrapped in a handkerchief. In the windows were geraniums, and muslin curtains, and on the curtains were torpid flies. On the wall hung the portrait of some bishop, painted in oils, with the glass broken at one corner, and next to the bishop a row of ancestors with lemon-coloured faces of a gipsy type. On the table lay a thimble, a reel of cotton, and a half-knitted stocking, and paper patterns and a black blouse, tacked together, were lying on the floor. In the next room two alarmed and fluttered old women were hurriedly picking up similar patterns and pieces of tailor's chalk from the floor.

"You must, please, excuse us; we are dreadfully untidy," said the little lady.

While she talked to me, she stole embarrassed glances towards the other room where the patterns were still being picked up. The door, too, seemed embarrassed, opening an inch or two and then shutting again.

"What's the matter?" said the little lady, addressing the door.

"Où est mon cravatte lequel mon père m'avait envoyé de Koursk?" asked a female voice at the door.

"Ah, est-ce que, Marie . . . que. . . Really, it's impossible. . . . Nous avons donc chez nous un homme peu connu de nous. Ask Lukerya."

"How well we speak French, though!" I read in the eyes of the little lady, who was flushing with pleasure.

Soon afterwards the door opened and I saw a tall, thin girl of nineteen, in a long muslin dress with a gilt belt from which, I remember, hung a mother-of-pearl fan. She came in, dropped a curtsy, and flushed crimson. Her long nose, which was slightly pitted with smallpox, turned red first, and then the flush passed up to her eyes and her forehead.

"My daughter," chanted the little lady, "and, Manetchka, this is a young gentleman who has come," etc.

I was introduced, and expressed my surprise at the number of paper patterns. Mother and daughter dropped their eyes.

"We had a fair here at Ascension," said the mother; "we always buy materials at the fair, and then it keeps us busy with sewing till the next year's fair comes around again. We never put things out to be made. My husband's pay is not very ample, and we are not able to permit ourselves luxuries. So we have to make up everything ourselves."

"But who will ever wear such a number of things? There are only two of you?"

"Oh . . . as though we were thinking of wearing them! They are not to be worn; they are for the trousseau!"

"Ah, mamam, what are you saying?" said the daughter, and she crimsoned again. "Our visitor might suppose it was true. I don't intend to be married. Never!"

She said this, but at the very word "married" her eyes glowed.

Dark Muse

06-03-2009, 06:51 PM

But who will ever wear such a number of things? There are only two of you?"

"Oh . . . as though we were thinking of wearing them! They are not to be worn; they are for the trousseau!"

"Ah, mamam, what are you saying?" said the daughter, and she crimsoned again. "Our visitor might suppose it was true. I don't intend to be married. Never!"

She said this, but at the very word "married" her eyes glowed.

I found the whole situation with the daughter to be interesting. I wondered if the fact that she constantly denies that she will be married, and yet the narrator notices the way in which her actions do not match up with what she says, and so it is not as if she simply is making a personal choice to not want to marry, if indeed she knew that her prospects were not very good to for a marriage. While they may be part of the aristocrat elite, they are not part of the wealthy upper class, as had been discussed. The daughter does not really have anything in which she can bring into a marriage, their house is small and falling apart, and in a way her trousseau is something of a morbid joke. It is just a trunk full of old rags which she and her mother sewn together themselves because they have nothing else they can give.

In addition is the fact that they are so very isolated, they are not part of the social society, they keep themselves locked up within their dark house in their loneliness and mourning, so it is not as if the daughter as really any opportunity to try and meet a potential husband. They do not go out, and they don't really receive any visitors.

So I wondered if perhaps the daughter was aware of this, so though she might have liked to be married she saw the fact that she would not make a very good or likely match, and would not really have an opportunity to be married, so she tries to convince herself of this so not to give up her hopes.

It seems as if the mother is living in a sort of delusion in the way in which she dedicates all of her time and effort into putting together this alleged trousseau for her daughter, while there is no real hope in her daughter ever truly being married.

I can almost see the mother as this sort of senile figure that does not acutally want to deal with the outside world and so is pulling everyone else around her into her own little world that she creates for herself within the house. In her head she might have this fantasy of her daughter wedding, perhaps into a station above thier own, yet it is her own very actions that hold her daughter back and prevent her from ever truly being able to do this. The daughter might have had a chance for a different life, in her youthful hopes for marriage in spite of her denial, yet her mother severs her daughters connection with the living world.

Quark

06-04-2009, 12:41 AM

You bring up some interesting points, DM.

I found the whole situation with the daughter to be interesting. I wondered if the fact that she constantly denies that she will be married, and yet the narrator notices the way in which her actions do not match up with what she says, and so it is not as if she simply is making a personal choice to not want to marry, if indeed she knew that her prospects were not very good to for a marriage. While they may be part of the aristocrat elite, they are not part of the wealthy upper class, as had been discussed. The daughter does not really have anything in which she can bring into a marriage, their house is small and falling apart, and in a way her trousseau is something of a morbid joke. It is just a trunk full of old rags which she and her mother sewn together themselves because they have nothing else they can give.

Yeah, when I look back over the text I can see it this way, too. Originally, I had looked at the story as being more about restraint. The daughter and mother want to be social and marry but they're held back by a restrictive social code. While I think this is part of their problem, I can also see what you're saying. The physical reality of their situation holds them back, as well. This is particularly true of the daughter. She has little money and few options. It isn't only her values that are holding her back from marriage (if values are doing it at all)--it's also the situation which is doing that. This is another way to look at her plight and the choices she makes. I also think it brings up an interesting question for anyone reading the story. To what degree is the daughter's tragedy the result of her own choices? And, to what degree is her unfortunate end simply the result of her situation? Is the daughter responsible for what happened to her, or was she doomed from the start?

So I wondered if perhaps the daughter was aware of this, so though she might have liked to be married she saw the fact that she would not make a very good or likely match, and would not really have an opportunity to be married, so she tries to convince herself of this so not to give up her hopes.

It seems as if the mother is living in a sort of delusion in the way in which she dedicates all of her time and effort into putting together this alleged trousseau for her daughter, while there is no real hope in her daughter ever truly being married.

I can almost see the mother as this sort of senile figure that does not acutally want to deal with the outside world and so is pulling everyone else around her into her own little world that she creates for herself within the house. In her head she might have this fantasy of her daughter wedding, perhaps into a station above thier own, yet it is her own very actions that hold her daughter back and prevent her from ever truly being able to do this. The daughter might have had a chance for a different life, in her youthful hopes for marriage in spite of her denial, yet her mother severs her daughters connection with the living world.

This idea of delusion is an important one in the story. The mother is very deluded certainly. She overlooks the flaws in the uncle's character until they become unavoidable. She also avoids talking about the daughter's death when it's obvious that's she's dead. There's some unwillingness in the mother to acknowledge reality. This is a recurring theme in Chekhov's stories. We had Yakov in "Rothschild's Fiddle" refusing to remember his daughter, and the convict in "Dreams" refusing to acknowledge that he can't escape. The mother is certainly another example of this. I wonder to what extent this extends to the daughter, though.

Dark Muse

06-05-2009, 01:18 AM

For some reason I never got notified that there were new posts to this thread, and it never showed up. So sorry for the dely but LitNet was messing with me.

I also think it brings up an interesting question for anyone reading the story. To what degree is the daughter's tragedy the result of her own choices? And, to what degree is her unfortunate end simply the result of her situation? Is the daughter responsible for what happened to her, or was she doomed from the start?

I find it difficult to fault the daughter in this instance, as when we first meet her she is only 13 I think it says, and then he visits again seven years later, so she is just 20. At that period of time, as a young woman, she would not have much choice or ability to go out on her own. Without a husband she could not really leave the house, and it was clear her step brother would be no help to her. So I do not see her as having many options. As a young woman then she could not just go out on her own to try and make a match, she would need a chaperon of some sort.

Though we do not really know what causes her death in the end I think the story sets it up for her to be fated to that end, it is as if her mother saps the life out of her. Living in that house, she really did not have a chance to truly ever move beyond that.

Quark

06-05-2009, 06:03 PM

For some reason I never got notified that there were new posts to this thread, and it never showed up. So sorry for the dely but LitNet was messing with me.

No problem. I don't think I would have been able to respond to anything you posted yesterday anyway. I've been visiting friends and family this week and it's been difficult to find a computer and time to writer out these posts with. Right now, I'm working with this imposible laptop which has such a small keypad that it's really hard to find the right keys. If this post is riddled with spelling and grammar mistakes my apologies, but my clumsy fingers push down several keys when I'm only trying to get one letter. Stupid thing. Don't get me wrong, these little laptops are cute, but they're wholey impractical. They must be cheap. That's the only explanation I can think of for their popularity.

Anyway

I find it difficult to fault the daughter in this instance, as when we first meet her she is only 13 I think it says, and then he visits again seven years later, so she is just 20. At that period of time, as a young woman, she would not have much choice or ability to go out on her own. Without a husband she could not really leave the house, and it was clear her step brother would be no help to her. So I do not see her as having many options. As a young woman then she could not just go out on her own to try and make a match, she would need a chaperon of some sort.

True, and I don't mean to say that the daughter somehow deserved the tragic end she got. I was justt thinking that hte house could be symbolic. It could represent the restraint that she is imposing on herself. Literally, physically, she could have the freedom to find a husband, but the restraint that the house represents could be holding her back.

Though we do not really know what causes her death in the end I think the story sets it up for her to be fated to that end, it is as if her mother saps the life out of her. Living in that house, she really did not have a chance to truly ever move beyond that.

Again, true, but I think that if the daughter had said "I want to leave the house" the mother probably would not have stopped her. If there is a hold the mother has on the daughter, I think it's largely psychological.

If I can find time tongight, I'll try to come back and say something about delusions. I know that was brought up before, and I'd like to comment on it at some point.

Janine

06-05-2009, 06:20 PM

I have been trying to read along, but I am not feeling well today, so I am finding it hard to concentrate. I hope I can comment tomorrow. You two seem to be doing a great job. I like the various points you have both brought to light here. Sorry I can't participate too much today. It's my stomach, not sure what's wrong with it. Gota go and try to eat something now. Hopefully I will be better tomorrow.

Dark Muse

06-05-2009, 07:02 PM

Literally, physically, she could have the freedom to find a husband, but the restraint that the house represents could be holding her back.

Again, true, but I think that if the daughter had said "I want to leave the house" the mother probably would not have stopped her. If there is a hold the mother has on the daughter, I think it's largely psychological.

Unless Russia was more liberal then other parts of Europe (I do not know much of Russia from this period of time, so I can only use what I know of others parts of the world) but would she turly have been able to just go out completely on her own and find a husband for herself without causing a scandal, and thus end up being litterally outcast by society in addition to the self-imposed excile of her mother and the house?

Quark

06-05-2009, 11:43 PM

Sorry I can't participate too much today. It's my stomach, not sure what's wrong with it. Gota go and try to eat something now. Hopefully I will be better tomorrow.

would she turly have been able to just go out completely on her own and find a husband for herself without causing a scandal, and thus end up being litterally outcast by society in addition to the self-imposed excile of her mother and the house?

If the daughter went out and found a husband who was somehow unsatisfactory to the rest of the family perhaps it would create a scandal. I didn't think it would come to that, though. The mother isn't opposed to the daughter getting married. She seems quite enthusiastic about it. The question is would the daughter have been able to go out and actively pursue a husband without seeming unfeminine. Women were not supposed to be the one who is active or pursuing in a relationship, and I think this is what was holding the daughter back. The notion was that women were supposed to sit and wait for their future husbands to arrive out of nowhere and woo them. You brought up a good point when you said that their material situation made it difficult to attract suitors. They didn't have money, and they live in near exile. This isn't the kind of situation that draws gentlemen, and this certainly hinders the daughter's chances at marriage. I think we can account for some of the tragedy through this explanation. I also have to admit, though, that it wasn't just their material situation that was hindering them. Why does the daughter have to wait for someone to woo her? Why does the mother not leave the house and find someone for her daughter to marry if she's so worried about it? To say they brought it upon themselves is too hard, but clearly they could have done more than they did. So there are two reasons for the narrator's sadness at the end: one is the beliefs that family holds which make them overly passive and the other is the material situation which makes it impossible to lure men by being passive.

It sounds like you're attributing this first problem (the passivity of the family) mostly to the mother. The mother manipulates the daughter to go along with it. I'm not entirely sure about this. It's hard to tell what the relationship is between the mother and daughter. The two characters are not on the page long enough to show whether one is controlling the other. We can infer from the fact that the mother runs the household that she has some control over the daughter. But, can we say that she's necessarily using that control to make her daughter more passive? It's difficult to tell. I tend to think that both mother and daughter are victims. Neither is really in control of the other, so much as both are under the control of some unseen influence. I called that influence class earlier, but maybe that's not the right term. Perhaps simply "the past" is a better way of looking at it. Their family and its beliefs seems to have indoctrinated the two, and it's indoctrinated both equally. The mother and daughter are both victims, then, of the same influence. Now the same reason I had for being skeptical about your reading could be applied to mine: that we don't know enough about these characters to know whether there really is an unseen influence acting on the mother and daughter. I have to acknowledge that, no, I can't sure whether I'm right here. It's just the reading I gave it, and there's probably several more good readings one could give the story than the two we've voiced so far. As we keep going, though, I'll try to think a little bit more about why I came to the conclusion that I came too. After all, I doubt I've pulled you over to my side yet.