Character Analysis in The Cherry Orchard

In the Russian, Charlotta says “ne nada” (не надо) here, which can translate into English as it does here, even though the phrasing is awkward. Since Madame Ranevsky and Lopakhin ask for a trick, Charlotta’s response could more easily be translated as simply “No, I don’t need to do that.” This refusal likely indicates that she considers having to do tasks, like perform a trick, whenever the upper class wants is no longer something she feels obligated to do.

Eating frogs is considered a stereotype of French cuisine, which is why Pischin asks Madame Ranevsky if she indulged in this food. She makes a more shocking, comic retort here by saying that she “ate crocodiles.” Her retort has the effect of surprising Pischin, but it also was likely shocking to the audience when Chekhov’s play was performed, because eating crocodile is not something many people are familiar with—let alone conceive of doing. Her retort also tells us more about her character: she has exotic and expensive tastes.

Throughout the play, Gaev makes exclamations that in the original Russian are simply “kavo” (кого), which can translate as either “whom,” “what,” or even “Really!” when used to convey emphasis. The purpose of these short exclamations, here translated as “Who does?”, are meant to illustrate Gaev’s character: he is older, doesn’t listen to others, and often fantasizes about playing pool rather than focus on the reality of the situation.

Gaev admits that, like an illness with no proven cure, their problem of debt doesn’t have a clear solution and may be incurable with their current circumstances. Though he sees many possible strategies, none of them are adequate or likely enough to merit attention over the others. His statement is also ironic, given that Lopakhin has just proposed a solution that would likely succeed, showing just how far in denial the Ravensky siblings are.

Lubov’s comment here has a double meaning. In the past several years she has suffered from multiple tragedies: the deaths of her husband and son and the betrayal of her new lover in Paris. She laments that she cannot forget these recent tragedies and return to her idyllic, blissful childhood. At the same time, the audience notes that if Lubov could move beyond her childhood memories, she could find a way to save her estate, but she is currently trapped by her own nostalgia.

Gaev, having had his emotional display deflated by Lopakhin’s terse response, retreats to his fond memories of playing pool. In this way, past memories serve as a refuge for him when the present becomes too unpleasant to deal with.

That Gaev gets so emotional over the antique bookcase is telling about his relationship to the past. He seems to sincerely view the case as a reminder of past greatness and virtue and grieves—openly and somewhat comically weeping—for its loss in modern times.

Gaev’s assertion of the orchard’s relevance reveals that the Ravenskys value the prestige of the orchard and its past greatness more than they ought to. Though it produces fruit, no one buys it, making the orchard more of a burden than a blessing. It would be more useful to the family if it were cut down, but the Ravensky siblings refuse to consider the possibility since that would be equivalent to erasing the family’s history and status that they treasure.

Lubov’s giddy reunion with her memories and the objects of her past is interrupted by the sad reminder that a figure from Lubov and Gaev’s past has died. The interruption doesn’t seem to phase Lubov. She is more concerned with the things of her past that remain because they represent stability as opposed to the people who do not because they represent change.

This line, directed to Lubov, displays Lopakhin’s fondness for Lubov despite the fact that her family used to own his. According to Lopakhin, the Ravensky’s cruel practice of keeping serfs is in the past, which is something he is willing to let go of, unlike Lubov. There is also a suggestion that Lopakhin may be in love with Lubov when he proclaims that he loves her more than if she was part of his family, though this possibility is never directly confirmed.

Notice Varya’s practicality in contrast with the older generation. While she is concerned with action and efficiency, they take time to relax and chat about the past. As manager of the family’s estate, she has been quite busy while her mother has been living with her lover in France.

With the return of her brother, Lubov indulges in nostalgic memories of games of pool (billiards) they used to play together, even remembering the holes they sent the balls into. Because of the great hold these fond memories have over them, it is clear that Lubov and Gaev are reluctant to see things change.

Fiers’s devotion to the Ravensky family is profound, leading him to proclaim that Lubov’s return is so significant to him that he can die now. For Fiers, Lubov’s return to the estate symbolizes a return of the estate’s past glory, the possibility of which greatly cheers him. The audience is also meant to be taken aback by the exaggerated response Fiers has and begin to view him as a singularly devoted old man who is unable to let go of the past.

A common Russian superstition is that accidentally breaking a dish, plate, or glass will bring good luck. Varya is kind and quick to remind the despairing Dunyasha that she shouldn’t cry over the broken saucer, but it’s unclear how much of Dunyasha’s crying is due to Yasha’s having forgotten her.

This expression, "little cucumber" (огурчик) is a term of endearment. Here, it reveals that Yasha finally recognizes who Dunyasha is. That he leaves quickly suggests that such a sudden display of affection was shocking and perhaps somewhat inappropriate, especially considering that the difference in their gender.

Lubov has been forced to sell her villa in Mentone (or Menton) in the southeast of France. This line expresses the belief that without material possessions Madame Ranevsky’s identity is void. As a member of the upper class, Madame Ranevsky must retain her material possessions in order to retain her identity.

Anya asks Vayra why Charlotte was made to go with her on a trip during Holy Week. Varya’s reaction demonstrates that she thought Anya was too young to travel unaccompanied. Anya is largely considered fragile and precious by others throughout the play.

Barbara is Madame Ranevsky’s eldest daughter. Barbara virtually runs the family estate, as represented by the large chain of keys that hangs about her waist.

As noted in the stage directions, the room continues to be called a nursery even though that name or purpose no longer applies. Madame Ranevsky (Lubov Andreyevna) continues to hold onto the past, which removes her from the reality of the present.

Lopakhin scolds Dunyasha the maidservant for dressing as a lady of nobility. This line is ironic coming from Lopakhin because he himself comes from the serving-class and now dresses in expensive clothes. We can assume that Lopakhin distinguishes himself from Dunyasha in that he has now made enough money to be considered wealthy, whereas Dunyasha remains a maidservant. This line further emphasizes the rigidness of societal divisions between classes.

Lopakhin is pleased he has managed to leave the poverty of serfdom to become a wealthy merchant, like “a pearl out of an oyster.” However, here we see that Lopakhin only defines this change as superficial, associated with the clothes he wears, and not with whom he remains on the inside. Lopakhin’s view of himself as “still a peasant” confirms the idea that while Russia’s social class distinctions have begun to soften, they still very much remain intertwined with how people view themselves and others. Appearances are shown to deceive the “real” identity which lies below the surface in the memory of each individual.

Madame Ranevsky displayed kindness and affection for Lopakhin as a child. However, describing him as “little” is slightly condescending when the dramatic class distinction between Ranevsky and Lopakhin, son of a serf, is taken into account.