Chekhov Short Story Thread

[Dark Muse]

I do not think the lines have to be read alone to be "primal" I think the act initself is a primal one. Fire was the first source of "engery" one of the first life giving forces that man had. Sense the beigning of man people have gathered around fires.

I think even in this day an age, there is something primitive in the use of fire, the burning of a candle, the using of a fireplace, sitting around a campfire, I think this act initself connects us to our ancient anncestors.

It is as old as time, at least as old as "human time"

[Quark]

I do not think the lines have to be read alone to be "primal" I think the act initself is a primal one. Fire was the first source of "engery" one of the first life giving forces that man had. Sense the beigning of man people have gathered around fires.

You're right that story-telling around the fire is something primal on its own, but within the story it may have other characteristics. Often the context or the language used will change the meaning of scene--or at least the impression it gives. In this case, the paragraph that precedes the greeting and story has a great impact on our interpretation of the scene. Here's the paragraph:

Ivan Velikopolsky, the son of a sacristan, and a student of the clerical academy, returning home from shooting, kept walking on the path by the water-logged meadows. His fingers were numb and his face was burning with the wind. It seemed to him that the cold that had suddenly come on had destroyed the order and harmony of things, that nature itself felt ill at ease, and that was why the evening darkness was falling more rapidly than usual. All around it was deserted and peculiarly gloomy. The only light was one gleaming in the widows' gardens near the river; the village, over three miles away, and everything in the distance all round was plunged in the cold evening mist...And now, shrinking from the cold, he thought that just such a wind had blown in the days of Rurik and in the time of Ivan the Terrible and Peter, and in their time there had been just the same desperate poverty and hunger, the same thatched roofs with holes in them, ignorance, misery, the same desolation around, the same darkness, the same feeling of oppression -- all these had existed, did exist, and would exist, and the lapse of a thousand years would make life no better. And he did not want to go home.

I think this changes the way we look at the fire and story to follow. It's not just a primal reflex which makes Ivan tell the story. The story is prompted by these feeling of recurring misery. I think the description of the widows and the fire is subsumed by this other prompting; and that, while the details of the scene give a primal impression, the context makes us read the passage differently.

That's not to say that there isn't anything primal about that part. It was good that you pointed out how the scene portrays a very basic, instinctual desire to tell stories. I hadn't originally interpreted it as such, and that's why I was a little surprised you would call that scene your favorite. I just wanted to point out that the part does have a greater role within the story.

[Janine]

We haven't spoken much of the similarities in setting and ambiance, but there are several. As you explain, Ivan's story and the biblical account both are set in gardens. I'll list a few more to make the comparison clearer. Both scenes are centered around a fireplace; birds (thrushes, cocks) vocalize in the stories; laborers return at the end of the stories; the frigid wind, obviously, is another linking detail. I know that I must be overlooking some others, but that is all that comes to mind right now. If anyone can think of some more feel free to post them. While it's probably enough just to say that there are connections, finding them can be sort of fun. It reminds me of those picture puzzles I used to play when I was six. There would be a drawing and it would ask you to find odd items (scissors, a telescope, etc.), and then you'd see how many you could get. I was horrible at these, of course, and I couldn't get more then two or three, but I still loved them. When I read the end of "The Student," it just reminded me of those puzzles because the conclusion gives you things to look for. Every time I reread, I try to find as many as I can. I'm still horrible at this, though (notice how I could only find three connections).

Quark, I was always good at doing those puzzles; I just loved them. Maybe I need to go back and examine that text and find those hidden words. Glad you agree with me that there are many parellels to the biblical story.

That's a good point, Janine. The mother would react to the this story because it's about loss, and she has lost her motherhood. Vasilisa watches her daughter leave her and get beaten in the way Peter has to see Christ separated and beaten.

Yes, that was pretty much my point. She didn't lose her motherhood but she no longer had to mother anyone, including Ivan. That is true about Vasilisa leaving and her mother must have stood by and seen her daughter terribly hurt. Yes, this would relate to Christ being separated from Peter and the others and being beaten. I also think the older woman, having been very much a mother, would feel the pain that Christ's mother felt to see her son being beaten and crucified. I am sure she could relate to the 'beating' part of that very well.

While the characterization of the two women is different, their situation is the identical. Both are impoverished widows tending the same garden. Vasilisa distinguishes herself from the common peasants by her manner which she acquired from the gentility; but, behind her pretentiousness, she's still a peasant. This sets up her reaction to the final part of Ivan's story. When Peter discovers that he is not as strong of Christian as he supposed himself, he weeps. Vasilisa cries because she knows she is not a gentle aristocrat.

Not convinced of this as yet; but I will review and see if I think that truly relates. I feel this idea is stretching it a bit; but you may be right. I just had not considered it before.

Chekhov gave the two women these distinguishing characteristics and reactions so that the story didn't become centered on just one idea in Ivan's story. Like I mentioned earlier, if Chekhov had made both women the victims of betrayal, then "The Student" might be considered "about" betrayal. Instead, Chekhov gives different characters and reactions so that the reader doesn't fixate on something irrelevant.

Maybe, too so the idea is more universal and will mean something entirely different to the reader - referring to the bible story.

Well, you're going to be seething with rage for the rest of this story because I'm not going to post text. The story is three pages!

Not me; I am none combative normally and I don't seeth with rage...life is not worth it and who has time to be angry? It is your thread basically, so do as you feel fit; you are 'the leader', Quark. I will go along with it, no matter. If I want to point out some text, I will just go ahead and quote some. I need to find those passages, that reveal parallels, and then I can quote that text, in order to better point out similarities specifically.

That's an odd choice, actually. Why do like that scene? I found it kind of perfunctory. He had to introduce the widows and get the student to tell his story, so he wrote this scene to fill that purpose. I didn't think it a purpose of its own. I suppose it has its charm. I like the way the widow doesn't recognize him at first and then is surprised to see him. One thing is still don't get about their dialogue, though, is the line "You'll be rich." What does that mean?

Whether the fire is primal or not, does this really matter? I find it does relate to the bible story now, and the garden as well. It is interesting how this short short story is so well crafted and the two time periods intertwine, to prove the student's point, of everything being related and interconnected. The fire glow does add a nice touch to the story and one feels that fires do indeed tend to make people tell tales and stories.

[Quark]

I have to go along with Janine on the fact that I don't think Vasilisa is crying because she's not a gentle aristocrat.

Well, two parts of the story led me to think that: the initial characterization of Vasilisa and the end of Ivan's story. Chekhov gives the description of the older widow in half a sentence: "Vasilisa, a woman of experience who had been in service with the gentry, first as a wet-nurse, afterwards as a children's nurse expressed herself with refinement, and a soft, sedate smile never left her face." I glean two pieces of characterization from this. She was employed by the gentry, and she has elegant manners with a calm demeanor. The syntax of the sentence makes it seem like the manners were the result of her employment. If they were unrelated, I would think Chekhov would separate the two ideas with a period; instead, he jams them into the same sentence, and makes it appear that there is some connection. That makes me believe that she acquired her refinement from her contact with the gentry. (Where else would she get it from?). These manners clash with her surroundings and even her appearance. The narrator describes her a fat, old and wearing a man's jacket. Meanwhile, she's living on the outskirts of a poor village. This isn't a good situation for anyone of refinement. I don't think she really wants to consider this. The story Ivan tells might be tapping into the widow's grief over this situation. The student frames the story of Peter as an awakening of self-knowledge. He starts with Jesus telling Peter that he will deny him in the garden three times, and Peter doesn't believe him. Peter says that he will always follow Christ. This could correspond with the widow denying her humble circumstances, and claiming that she's a refined woman. Ivan ends his story with the realization that Jesus was right, and then Peter weeping. Peter discovers that he isn't a strong Christian. Ivan narrates, "For the third time he denied it. And immediately after that time the **** crowed, and Peter, looking from afar off at Jesus, remembered the words He had said to him in the evening. . . . He remembered, he came to himself, went out of the yard and wept bitterly." The story ends with an awakening of self-knowledge as Peter realizes that he isn't what he thought he was. The widow might be suffering a similar awakening.

Another possibility that we've talked about is that Vasilisa might be responding to the loss of her chance at motherhood. In the previous post, I focused on who the widow worked for. Perhaps, though, we best look at what specifically her job was. She was a wet-nurse and then a children's nurse. In each case, she was serving another family instead of her own. She might be reacting to the loss of her daughter as Peter reacted to the loss of Christ.

In either case, I think there is a connection forged between the life of the widow and what happens to Peter in Ivan's story. Chekhov draws so many connections elsewhere that I find it hard to believe he wouldn't be doing it here. This is particularly true since the student believes that "all that had happened to Peter the night before the Crucifixion must have some relation to her."

Janine, I'll get to your post tomorrow. Hopefully, you're feeling better then.

[Quark]

It's been rather quiet recently. At first, I thought people were just in hushed awe at my last post, but, more realistically, it probably has to do with Janine being out due to injury and Antiquarian starting her own thread. I hope, however, that I can get enough participation to get through the end of this story. We're almost done; I don't anticipate the discussion going on for more than another week. There's only two things I have left to talk about. The first is the ending which I still maintain is optimistic, but I know I have at least one person who disagrees. Since this is one part of the story that can be taken by itself, I'll post it:

Now the student was thinking about Vasilisa: since she had shed tears all that had happened to Peter the night before the Crucifixion must have some relation to her. . . .

He looked round. The solitary light was still gleaming in the darkness and no figures could be seen near it now. The student thought again that if Vasilisa had shed tears, and her daughter had been troubled, it was evident that what he had just been telling them about, which had happened nineteen centuries ago, had a relation to the present -- to both women, to the desolate village, to himself, to all people. The old woman had wept, not because he could tell the story touchingly, but because Peter was near to her, because her whole being was interested in what was passing in Peter's soul.

And joy suddenly stirred in his soul, and he even stopped for a minute to take breath. "The past," he thought, "is linked with the present by an unbroken chain of events flowing one out of another." And it seemed to him that he had just seen both ends of that chain; that when he touched one end the other quivered.

When he crossed the river by the ferryboat and afterwards, mounting the hill, looked at his village and towards the west where the cold crimson sunset lay a narrow streak of light, he thought that truth and beauty which had guided human life there in the garden and in the yard of the high priest had continued without interruption to this day, and had evidently always been the chief thing in human life and in all earthly life, indeed; and the feeling of youth, health, vigor -- he was only twenty-two -- and the inexpressible sweet expectation of happiness, of unknown mysterious happiness, took possession of him little by little, and life seemed to him enchanting, marvellous, and full of lofty meaning.

I have three observations which make me interpret this as optimistic. One, the student's thoughts are extermely hopeful, and I don't believe they are meant to be ironic or ambiguous in any way. Also, Ivan's subjective state matches his surroundings, as opposed to other stories we've read where the characters' thoughts contradict their environment. I'll have to post more on this to make this point clear. The third reason I find the ending optimistic is that Chekhov himself interpreted it as such. In letters he explains this story quite well, and I'll post some meaningful comments he made about it later. Right now I'm leaving for my brother's place, so I'm rather rushed. When I get there I will post something more thorough.

[Janine]

It's been rather quiet recently. At first, I thought people were just in hushed awe at my last post, but, more realistically, it probably has to do with Janine being out due to injury and Antiquarian starting her own thread. I hope, however, that I can get enough participation to get through the end of this story. We're almost done; I don't anticipate the discussion going on for more than another week. There's only two things I have left to talk about. The first is the ending which I still maintain is optimistic, but I know I have at least one person who disagrees. Since this is one part of the story that can be taken by itself, I'll post it:

Same in Lawrence thread, where did everyone run off to? I had posted text to discuss and I don't think anyone commented on it but me. Now today there is a flood of posts I must answer. I reeled everyone back in, when I posted another new junk of text, with some comments, last night. Until then, I thought the L thread was lost to infamy. Anyway, I was out of commission for a day or so, and I guess we all needed a short break anyway.
Now my eyes are ok and I was still (the entire time) checking in here and no one was posting and your last line of your last post said:

Janine, I'll get to your post tomorrow. Hopefully, you're feeling better then.

So basically, Quark, I was waiting for you to answer my post. What happened?
I won't answer your last post comments now, until you answer that post you promised to get to 'tomorrow', which was about a week ago. I have to go and answer all the L posts presently, so I will check back later, and see if you posted a reply to this.

Don't let Chekhov fade into the sunset, too.

[Quark]

I'm back from Indiana. Sorry to leave again. I hope my sporadic appearances are not what's losing people.

Now my eyes are ok

That's good news. What was wrong with them, anyway? You said something about about an "erosion." What does that mean?

So basically, Quark, I was waiting for you to answer my post.

Oh, I didn't know you were waiting for me to respond to that. I know I said I would, but when I looked back over your post I found that I agreed with everything you said. I didn't really have anything to add.

Do you want to respond to anything I've written before I post my follow up to my last post? Or, do you still instist that I reply to your other post? I can, if you want.

[Janine]

I'm back from Indiana. Sorry to leave again. I hope my sporadic appearances are not what's losing people.

Great, Quark, how was your trip? I hope you enjoyed yourself. Hey, we can wait. We needed a break, anyway. You can just reel them all back in; I did that on the Lawrence thread and they came when I called. Everyone had flocked to the 'Faulkner' thread, that Antiquarian had starteded, now they must be slowing up over there; it was quite active for a time, lot of fun contraversay about Miss Emily; she and the thread are currently 'resting in peace'. Antiquarian, what is happening in that thread currently, where did everyone go?

That's good news. What was wrong with them, anyway? You said something about about an "erosion." What does that mean?

Well, it is a chronic thing; had it for years now; a 'corneal erosion' sounds worse than it is. It hurts worse than it sounds though, very painful. It looks like your eyeball is fine, but it sometimes will water continually and feels like stabbing pains or grit. It is when the microscopic cells of the cornea actually rub or flake off; Dr. sees it under a microscope. Good news, is that eye tissue can heal quickly. Basically, it is caused by 'dry eye'. Cool air or something unknown (?), can bring on an attack. Now it feel better, but I have to be cautious, because tonight the temperature is changing quickly. Thanks for asking and for your concern, Quark.

Oh, I didn't know you were waiting for me to respond to that. I know I said I would, but when I looked back over your post I found that I agreed with everything you said. I didn't really have anything to add.

Ok, then that is fine with me. Did I say anything important or brilliant? I honestly don't recall what I wrote back then.

Do you want to respond to anything I've written before I post my follow up to my last post? Or, do you still instist that I reply to your other post? I can, if you want.

No, continue to post, unless others wish to respond first to what you have written before. I will be honest, I did not get the chance to read it all yet thoroughly. Oops, I just checked back and I did read it so just push on to your conclusion if you are inclined to do so, Quark.

[Quark]

Great, Quark, how was your trip? I hope you enjoyed yourself.

Oh, it was enjoyable. The only problem was the couch I slept on. It was a sectional whose sections spread out while I was sleeping on it. I woke up at 2:34 A.M. in between two of the sections.

Hey, we can wait. We needed a break, anyway.

I assumed that was the case.

You can just reel them all back in; I did that on the Lawrence thread and they came when I called. Everyone had flocked to the 'Faulkner' thread, that Antiquarian had starteded, now they must be slowing up over there; it was quite active for a time, lot of fun contraversay about Miss Emily; she and the thread are currently 'resting in peace'. Hey, Antiquarian, what is happening in that thread currently, where did everyone go?

That's another thread I would like to join in on, but I already have too much already. I can't even keep this one going! I'm trying to focus on just our two for now, so I can get things back on track.

Well, it is a chronic thing; had it for years now; a 'corneal erosion' sounds worse than it is.

It doesn't sound painful so much as it sounds weird. What causes your eye to erode?

Ok, then that is fine with me. Did I say anything important or brilliant? I honestly don't recall what I wrote back then.

You did make one point that was pretty good. I probably should respond to it. I suppose I will when I post tomorrow. Yes, I will do it this time.

No, continue to post, unless others wish to respond first to what you have written before. I will be honest, I did not get the chance to read it all yet thoroughly.

It's a little late for me to write it up tonight. Plus, I can't find the Chekhov quote I need right now. It's in a book I have, but I've lost my place and can't find anything. I'll search tomorrow, and post when I find it.

[Janine]

Oh, it was enjoyable. The only problem was the couch I slept on. It was a sectional whose sections spread out while I was sleeping on it. I woke up at 2:34 A.M. in between two of the sections.

Oh, the old 'sectional sofa scenerio'! I would have liked to see that live! Note: my creative alliteration...

I assumed that was the case.

It very much was - "we was just plum tired out by then" (that there is 'Jesse James' talk)....I'm feeling kinda funny tonight...

That's another thread I would like to join in on, but I already have too much already. I can't even keep this one going! I'm trying to focus on just our two for now, so I can get things back on track.

I tried to comment some, since I just read the story, but I really was pressed for time, too.

It doesn't sound painful....

That is what you think!!! It is excruciating and when it hurts the worst, it then waters like mad and your nose also runs. Oh, get it sometime and you will see just how painful it can be or better yet, go stick a pin in your eyeball - that is just what it feels like.

.....so much as it sounds weird. What causes your eye to erode?

Not really weird, just painful and you can't see out of your eyes for a day or so, due to putting all kinds of icky drops in it; so basically, you can't read, you can't drive, you can't watch TV, or look at the computer - what else is there??? I listened to a book on my MP3 player, that worked and I kept my eyes closed and moist. A condition known as 'dry eye' causes it. The eye can't keep enough moisture in it naturally. My son has it slightly, too. Anyone, any age, can get it...it is not an old person thing.

You did make one point that was pretty good. I probably should respond to it. I suppose I will when I post tomorrow. Yes, I will do it this time.

Oh goodie; when I mentioned the word 'brilliant', it must have sparked a memory in your brain in reference to my post.

It's a little late for me to write it up tonight. Plus, I can't find the Chekhov quote I need right now. It's in a book I have, but I've lost my place and can't find anything. I'll search tomorrow, and post when I find it.

Is that the same book you were going to mail to me....someday in time?..... I have 2 of your Chekhov disks burned and one pending, but it sounds to me like you need to keep that book. If so tell me and I will order the 40 story one that is on Amazon. The CD's can still be yours.

[Janine]

Everyone deserted me when I wanted to talk about Faulkner's writing style. LOL

See what I mean, Antiquarian; they all just want to get into a good heated fray - if you start talking about 'writing style' they loose interest; head off for another contraversial thread...there is enough of those around....that is for sure.... They come on first and only to criticize the story and tell everyone if they liked it or hated it. I personally cannot see how that is discussing it. I admit, this is one of my pet peeves.

Antiquarian, had it more time I would have discussed that with you. I like talking about style and symbolism, etc. Maybe I will have more time next week and we can revive your thread.

[Quark]

Here's the idea I wanted to respond to in your other post.

Maybe, too so the idea is more universal and will mean something entirely different to the reader - referring to the bible story.

The difference between the women does bring out the potential for different interpretations. Chekhov explored this potential as much as he could in many of the stories we've read. This is often done through ambiguity in which we're not sure what the correct interpretation of the story is. In "About Love" we had numerous examples of this.

Everyone deserted me when I wanted to talk about Faulkner's writing style. LOL

Now you feel our pain. It often happens that when you get something that you think is important everyone disappears. There have been times on the Lawrence thread when Janine has posted three straight posts on something, and no one has responded to her. The worse case of that I've struggled through was with the "Lady with the Dog" discussion. I was trying to explain irony and ambiguity, but no one was going to have any of it.

If I get some time, I'll try to post some more in that discussion. I've been too preoccupied recently, though, to do much on LitNet.

See what I mean, Antiquarian; they all just want to get into a good heated fray - if you start talking about 'writing style' they loose interest; head off for another contraversial thread...there is enough of those around....that is for sure.... They come on first and only to criticize the story and tell everyone if they liked it or hated it.

Maybe that means Janine and I need to yell at each other more.

[Janine]

Here's the idea I wanted to respond to in your other post.

Thanks, Quark, for even reading it. I just read this whole post of yours. I read your posts but back when we did "The Lady and the Lap Dog" I was not fully emersed in this thread, so sorry if I did not pay full attention. I know I didn't back then; I was half-hearted about Chekhov at that time and the story was long and I could not keep up either. I think it was Christmas or some holiday time and I was too busy. Our first story in Lawrence, I had such high hopes for, since it is one of my favorites and we barely scratched the surface. I should go back one day and try and interpret it myself.

The difference between the women does bring out the potential for different interpretations. Chekhov explored this potential as much as he could in many of the stories we've read. This is often done through ambiguity in which we're not sure what the correct interpretation of the story is. In "About Love" we had numerous examples of this.

I can't yell at you on this one. I think I pretty much agree with you. He certainly loved 'ambiquity'! You said it!

Now you feel our pain. It often happens that when you get something that you think is important everyone disappears. There have been times on the Lawrence thread when Janine has posted three straight posts on something, and no one has responded to her. The worse case of that I've struggled through was with the "Lady with the Dog" discussion. I was trying to explain irony and ambiguity, but no one was going to have any of it.

Yes, Quark, you are a friend in pain. Thanks for pointing that out - I have posted several in a row and no one even noticed. Maybe I need those dancing bananas on my posts. At least make it worthwhile for me; does that mean you did read them? Sorry again about that first short story and my neglect at the time.

If I get some time, I'll try to post some more in that discussion. I've been too preoccupied recently, though, to do much on LitNet.

Good, that would be nice. We can always pick it back up anytime and keep it going, Antiquarian...don't think of your thread as dead yet.

Maybe that means Janine and I need to yell at each other more.

Maybe Dark Muse and Janine should yell at each other! We are always disagreeing...

[Dark Muse]

Maybe Dark Muse and Janine should yell at each other! We are always disagreeing...

LOL, tis true. That is the one thing we can agree on, is that we disagree.

[Janine]

LOL, tis true. That is the one thing we can agree on, is that we disagree.

Yes, it has become chronic.....