Review of Chekhov story

RAJEET GUHA NEW SCHOOL FINAL PAPER Anton Chekhov was a world-class writer from Russia. He wrote some of the finest plays and short stories in the history of humankind. It is in these short stories and plays that his literary genius and artistic creativity was abundantly on display. Although his formal training was in medicine, he found fame and fortune in his literary endeavors. Notwithstanding his premature death at the untimely age of forty-four at the beginning of the twentieth century, as a writer and a literary colossus, he is an immortal who stands tall and toweringly above plenty of other renowned writers. Chekhov was a prolific short story writer and a playwright whose works have withstood the test of time and is savored even today in the post-industrial age by literary buffs, literary critics, literary icons, and casual readers as well. His short stories and dramas occupy a place perennially in the pantheon of luminous literature. In the following paragraphs, one of his eminently readable stories will be discussed. The incandescent story that will be discussed is titled ‘Enemies’. This short story is a tour de force. He penned it down when he was approaching the peak of his powers in literary creation. Chekhov’s magisterial command over symbolism, realism and naturalism is evident in the short story. Chekhov’s short stories were vivid with description. This story is too vivid with description. Chekhov’s mastery over sensory prose is palpably on display in this chef d’oeuvre. This story is an invaluable jewel in the Chekhovian oeuvre. This splendid short story shows an acute insight into human nature. Chekhov’s powers of perception and impeccable portrayal of human nature is showcased in this short story. This transcendent tale captures the Zeitgeist of the latter part of the 19th century Russia remarkably well. The setting is Tsarist Russia of the Romanov dynasty. In the twilight of 19th century reactionary Russia, Czar Nicholas II was the absolute ruler. A stark and compelling contrast between the two highly stratified classes namely the rich and the poor shown immaculately in this melancholic masterpiece of a short story. This is a well-plotted and rich story. A conflict or nouement arises in the narrative when the Abogin arrives all of a sudden at the district doctor Kirilov’s house at an inauspicious hour. The crisis or climax takes place when the rich guy Abogin discovers astoundingly that his wife has ditched him and eloped with a friend of his. The rich guy Abogin is psychologically shattered, as he understands the bitter truth that his wife and friend have duped him. Abogin’s servants are also in cahoots with his wife. He becomes doleful and broken hearted after intuitively knowing about the treachery of his friend, perfidy and infidelity of his wife and also the collusion of the servants in this surreptitious and sordid betrayal. The narrative’s next phase is the anticlimax. The anticlimactic moment happens soon when the doctor Kirilov realizes that there in nothing wrong with Abogin’s wife and is incensed with Abogin for frittering away his valuable time. Kirilov thinks that a practical joke has been played on him after intuitively understanding that Abogin’s wife is as fit as a fiddle and is a scheming woman that has staged such an elaborate charade to run away with her lover. At this point of time, Kirilov is livid as he feels that he is the victim of a cruel joke. Kirilov becomes enraged and rancorous towards Abogin. Kirilov vents out his spleen at his host Abogin for taking away his precious time. The doctor Kirilov feels his invaluable time has been snatched and sullied from him at a moment of unmitigated sorrow in his life, a time when his kid Andrey has succumbed to diphtheria. Instead of mourning the irreversible and irreparable loss of his six-year old son, shedding tragic tears over the fact that his kid has kicked the bucket, and sharing his grief with his inconsolable wife, he is infuriated when he realizes that Abogin has taken him cross-country on a wild goose chase. Kirilov feels that Abogin has rubbed salt on his wounds. The doctor’s dormant class-consciousness has suddenly arisen and become as active as a volatile volcano. The doctor, who lives in penury and has had his life turned topsy-turvy after his helpless child has been snatched away by the Grim Reaper. The doctor Kirilov feels that this fabulously and filthy rich guy Abogin, who is a microcosm of the wealthy classes, has for his frivolous pursuits and indulgences, robbed him of invaluable time that he could have spent with his wife to share their bereavement together in their hour of crisis. Kirilov’s character and personality is suddenly metamorphosed. Kirilov now has nothing but utter contempt and hatred for the wealthy. Kirilov’s fury and malice towards the wealthy folk has been ignited by the actual substantial loss in his family and his perceived sense of deception by Abogin. Coupled with the lamentable loss of his innocent child, the decadent and opulent lifestyle led by the rich with its litany of frivolities in the guise of unhappiness, cuts Kirilov to the quick. Kirilov loses his shirt and confronts a disoriented Abogin, who is taken aback by the doctor’s wrath. The resolution or denouement is when the enraged doctor Kirilov is driven back to his house by the Abogin’s driver. Abogin, at the same time in the denouement leaves his house and goes off in the elusive quest for his wife. The story is written in the third person omniscient narrator point of view. The protagonist is the doctor Kirilov, whose psyche and thinking are dramatically altered. Thus, according to Hill’s law, point of view holds in this story. Kirilov is the protagonist of the story. Abogin is the antagonist in this story. Symbolism in the story: At the beginning of the story, there is a sharp ringing of the bell in the entry. The bell sounds sharper than usual, as this is a titanic tragedy for the family. Any noise becomes amplified. There is symbolism here. Again, there is symbolism when it is said that it is between nine and ten on a dark September evening that the bell rings. The summary of a dark evening indicates a funereal atmosphere. September evening foreshadows something depressing, as September is the melancholic, autumn season when the trees shed their leaves and is a harbinger of difficult times to come in the winter. We again see symbolism here. The summary of the stillness of the drawing room increasing the doctor’s numbness symbolizes death, shock, and the suspension of time. Life in this small family has come to a standstill. It is as if time has been suspended infinitely. There is symbolism manifest in the summary. Realism in the story: The summary where the doctor’s wife sank on her knees by the dead child’s bedside and was overwhelmed by the first rush of despair is an instance of realism in the story. It is a realistic portrayal of how a crushed mother would react when her son, the apple of her eye, has passed away. Abogin’s persistent pleas to the district doctor Kirilov are in the mode of realism here as Abogin is an affectionate and uxorious husband desperate to save his wife’s life. Also, the fact that Abogin speaks in brief, jerky sentences and utters unnecessary words show he is panic stricken. This is really realistic. Kirilov’s unsteady, mechanical step is also as realistic as it gets. Realism is embedded here as Kirilov is understandably disoriented after his whirlwind loss. Naturalism in the story: In the summary of a paragraph in the story, there is plenty of naturalism where it says that the carriage drove into dense shadow and there was the smell of dampness and mushrooms, and also the sound of rustling trees. There is also naturalism evident when we know that the crows, awakened by the noise of the wheels, stirred among the foliage and uttered plaintive cries. Vivid description and sensory prose is served with a naturalist flavor when it is said that the carriage was swaying from side to side and crunched over the stones as it drove up the sandy bank and rolled on its way. Further, it is said that in the dim light of the stars, the road could be seen and the riverside willows were vanishing into the darkness. In addition it is said that on the right lay a plain as uniform and boundless as the sky and also that there on the dim light the peat marshes were glimmering. A hill with tufted bushes has also been mentioned. Lastly, it is said that above the hill stood a motionless, big, red, half moon, slightly veiled with mist and encircled by tiny clouds. All these lines are replete with naturalism. The above mentioned paragraph typifies naturalism in the story. Scene and Summary: The scenes surrounding the dear departed child’s demise have been aptly summarized. This is congruent with the writerly skills of Chekhov, as the demise of the darling child is just the background. The child’s passing away is not the focal point of the story. The meat of the plot concerns the twist towards the end of the story when the Abogin understands and sees that his wife has put wool over his eyes and eloped with his friend. It is at this point of time that the foreground of the story shines radiantly when there is an animated argument and consequent cacophonic conflict between Abogin and Kirilov. The foreground is shown explicitly in scenes between Kirilov and Abogin. The scenes between Kirilov and Abogin are shown superbly with direct dialogue. This is pertinent as Kirilov is the protagonist and Abogin is the antagonist. Scenes between these two dramatis personae must be shown with direct dialogue. The heated and explosive sparring between Kirilov and Abogin towards the end is also foreshadowed in the beginning of the story in a scene where an understandably peevish Kirilov and the persistently supplicating Abogin are engaged in a conversation. Scene, Summary and Class Conflict: The closing scenes in the story show the animosity between Kirilov and Abogin. Kirilov belongs to the have nots while Abogin belongs to the haves. The simmering hatred and the tension lurking in the hearts of the have-nots towards the haves have been manifest in the last few scenes of the story when Kirilov says that he doesn’t understand why Abogin insulted his dignity and made a mockery of his suffering. Kirilov thinks it is because the rich feel they have the license to denigrate the poor. This is an example of a direct dialogue that casts light on the animosity between the classes. Kirilov mocks Abogin’s heartbreak and purported suffering. Kirilov also was savagely sarcastic when he remarked hat spendthrifts and the potbellied rich were unhappy. Again, the abundant animosity between the rich and the poor have been underscored here. Theme and Analysis: In this short story, multiple themes of adultery, elopement, deception, death, misery, sorrow, bereavement, duty, compassion, jealousy, fury, hatred have been explored. Chekhov has caricatured the lives of the rich and wealthy. The whims and fancies of the wealthy, their Corinthian and extravagant lifestyles of excess have been satirized subtly by Chekhov. Chekhov’s satire is not of the savage and scathing Swiftian kind. Chekhov has given a glimpse of the life of the poor. Chekhov has perceptively portrayed the Dickensian misery of the Russian have-nots. This story is prescient as in a nutshell it shows how tense class relations were in contemporary Russian society. Class was a powder keg in Russia at that time. It is this deep-seated class-consciousness and class difference and consequent class alienation and antagonism of post-Emancipation 19th century Russia that has been depicted deftly in this classic. Conclusion: It is this class-consciousness and animalistic antagonism that was exploited ruthlessly by the newly emerging coalition of peasants, workers, liberal intelligentsia, reformers and revolutionaries alike. This class-consciousness reached its crescendo in the 1917 October Revolution orchestrated by the Bolsheviks. In addition to delving into the embryonic idea of class conflict in the incipiently industrialized and regressive Romanov Russia, this story also explores the transient and evanescent nature of life. The short life expectancy of the 19th century and the relatively lowly developed state of healthcare in Russia are demonstrated here in this story. The paucity of educated professionals like doctors is also amply on display. The story is also a commentary on the low level of economic and social development in Russia relative to other European powers. It paints a pitiable picture of the poor folk in iniquitous and unequal Russia of the late nineteenth century. In this story, there is a pathetic portrait of life in Russia, where there was only a small middle class that was sandwiched between two extremes: wealthy and poor. This story is a satire on the iniquity, inequality, poverty, gluttony, extravagance and libertine morals of Imperial Russia in the latter part of the 19th century.