What do you think?
Rate this book
The Three Sisters
This eBook features the unabridged text of ‘The Three Sisters’ from the bestselling edition of ‘The Complete Works of Anton Chekhov’.
Having established their name as the leading publisher of classic literature and art, Delphi Classics produce publications that are individually crafted with superior formatting, while introducing many rare texts for the first time in digital print. The Delphi Classics edition of Chekhov includes original annotations and illustrations relating to the life and works of the author, as well as individual tables of contents, allowing you to navigate eBooks quickly and easily.
eBook features:* The complete unabridged text of ‘The Three Sisters’* Beautifully illustrated with images related to Chekhov’s works* Individual contents table, allowing easy navigation around the eBook* Excellent formatting of the text149 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1900
About the author
Anton Chekhov
5,944 books10.2k followers
Antón Chéjov
(Spanish)
Dramas, such as The Seagull (1896, revised 1898), and including "A Dreary Story" (1889) of Russian writer Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, also Chekov, concern the inability of humans to communicate.
Born ( Антон Павлович Чехов ) in the small southern seaport of Taganrog, the son of a grocer. His grandfather, a serf, bought his own freedom and that of his three sons in 1841. He also taught to read. A cloth merchant fathered Yevgenia Morozova, his mother.
"When I think back on my childhood," Chekhov recalled, "it all seems quite gloomy to me." Tyranny of his father, religious fanaticism, and long nights in the store, open from five in the morning till midnight, shadowed his early years. He attended a school for Greek boys in Taganrog from 1867 to 1868 and then Taganrog grammar school. Bankruptcy of his father compelled the family to move to Moscow. At the age of 16 years in 1876, independent Chekhov for some time alone in his native town supported through private tutoring.
In 1879, Chekhov left grammar school and entered the university medical school at Moscow. In the school, he began to publish hundreds of short comics to support his mother, sisters and brothers. Nicholas Leikin published him at this period and owned Oskolki (splinters), the journal of Saint Petersburg. His subjected silly social situations, marital problems, and farcical encounters among husbands, wives, mistresses, and lust; even after his marriage, Chekhov, the shy author, knew not much of whims of young women.
Nenunzhaya pobeda , first novel of Chekhov, set in 1882 in Hungary, parodied the novels of the popular Mór Jókai. People also mocked ideological optimism of Jókai as a politician.
Chekhov graduated in 1884 and practiced medicine. He worked from 1885 in Peterburskaia gazeta.
In 1886, Chekhov met H.S. Suvorin, who invited him, a regular contributor, to work for Novoe vremya, the daily paper of Saint Petersburg. He gained a wide fame before 1886. He authored The Shooting Party , his second full-length novel, later translated into English. Agatha Christie used its characters and atmosphere in later her mystery novel The Murder of Roger Ackroyd . First book of Chekhov in 1886 succeeded, and he gradually committed full time. The refusal of the author to join the ranks of social critics arose the wrath of liberal and radical intelligentsia, who criticized him for dealing with serious social and moral questions but avoiding giving answers. Such leaders as Leo Tolstoy and Nikolai Leskov, however, defended him. "I'm not a liberal, or a conservative, or a gradualist, or a monk, or an indifferentist. I should like to be a free artist and that's all..." Chekhov said in 1888.
The failure of The Wood Demon , play in 1889, and problems with novel made Chekhov to withdraw from literature for a period. In 1890, he traveled across Siberia to Sakhalin, remote prison island. He conducted a detailed census of ten thousand convicts and settlers, condemned to live on that harsh island. Chekhov expected to use the results of his research for his doctoral dissertation. Hard conditions on the island probably also weakened his own physical condition. From this journey came his famous travel book.
Chekhov practiced medicine until 1892. During these years, Chechov developed his concept of the dispassionate, non-judgmental author. He outlined his program in a letter to his brother Aleksandr: "1. Absence of lengthy verbiage of political-social-economic nature; 2. total objectivity; 3. truthful descriptions of persons and objects; 4. extreme brevity; 5. audacity and originality; flee the stereotype; 6. compassion." Because he objected that the paper conducted against [a:Alfred Dreyfu
Dramas, such as The Seagull (1896, revised 1898), and including "A Dreary Story" (1889) of Russian writer Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, also Chekov, concern the inability of humans to communicate.
Born ( Антон Павлович Чехов ) in the small southern seaport of Taganrog, the son of a grocer. His grandfather, a serf, bought his own freedom and that of his three sons in 1841. He also taught to read. A cloth merchant fathered Yevgenia Morozova, his mother.
"When I think back on my childhood," Chekhov recalled, "it all seems quite gloomy to me." Tyranny of his father, religious fanaticism, and long nights in the store, open from five in the morning till midnight, shadowed his early years. He attended a school for Greek boys in Taganrog from 1867 to 1868 and then Taganrog grammar school. Bankruptcy of his father compelled the family to move to Moscow. At the age of 16 years in 1876, independent Chekhov for some time alone in his native town supported through private tutoring.
In 1879, Chekhov left grammar school and entered the university medical school at Moscow. In the school, he began to publish hundreds of short comics to support his mother, sisters and brothers. Nicholas Leikin published him at this period and owned Oskolki (splinters), the journal of Saint Petersburg. His subjected silly social situations, marital problems, and farcical encounters among husbands, wives, mistresses, and lust; even after his marriage, Chekhov, the shy author, knew not much of whims of young women.
Nenunzhaya pobeda , first novel of Chekhov, set in 1882 in Hungary, parodied the novels of the popular Mór Jókai. People also mocked ideological optimism of Jókai as a politician.
Chekhov graduated in 1884 and practiced medicine. He worked from 1885 in Peterburskaia gazeta.
In 1886, Chekhov met H.S. Suvorin, who invited him, a regular contributor, to work for Novoe vremya, the daily paper of Saint Petersburg. He gained a wide fame before 1886. He authored The Shooting Party , his second full-length novel, later translated into English. Agatha Christie used its characters and atmosphere in later her mystery novel The Murder of Roger Ackroyd . First book of Chekhov in 1886 succeeded, and he gradually committed full time. The refusal of the author to join the ranks of social critics arose the wrath of liberal and radical intelligentsia, who criticized him for dealing with serious social and moral questions but avoiding giving answers. Such leaders as Leo Tolstoy and Nikolai Leskov, however, defended him. "I'm not a liberal, or a conservative, or a gradualist, or a monk, or an indifferentist. I should like to be a free artist and that's all..." Chekhov said in 1888.
The failure of The Wood Demon , play in 1889, and problems with novel made Chekhov to withdraw from literature for a period. In 1890, he traveled across Siberia to Sakhalin, remote prison island. He conducted a detailed census of ten thousand convicts and settlers, condemned to live on that harsh island. Chekhov expected to use the results of his research for his doctoral dissertation. Hard conditions on the island probably also weakened his own physical condition. From this journey came his famous travel book.
Chekhov practiced medicine until 1892. During these years, Chechov developed his concept of the dispassionate, non-judgmental author. He outlined his program in a letter to his brother Aleksandr: "1. Absence of lengthy verbiage of political-social-economic nature; 2. total objectivity; 3. truthful descriptions of persons and objects; 4. extreme brevity; 5. audacity and originality; flee the stereotype; 6. compassion." Because he objected that the paper conducted against [a:Alfred Dreyfu
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,261 reviews
September 7, 2017
لا اعرف
المسرحية مملة جدا واحداثها رتيبة ولا احداث مهمة حصلت بها سوى رحيل الجميع وبقاء الشقيقات لوحدهم وبدون حدوث اَي شيء مثير في حياتهم.
او ربما لم تصلني رسالة المسرحية.
المسرحية مملة جدا واحداثها رتيبة ولا احداث مهمة حصلت بها سوى رحيل الجميع وبقاء الشقيقات لوحدهم وبدون حدوث اَي شيء مثير في حياتهم.
او ربما لم تصلني رسالة المسرحية.
September 29, 2017
عن جدوى الحياة و هل ستتغير بعد مئات الأعوام للأفضل أم أننا محكومين بالرتابة و الملل و الروتين و قوانين الطبيعة
مملة بعض الشىء
عن حياة ثلاثة شقيقات و أخيهم فى مدينة صغيرة بعد وفاة والدهم لواء الجيش و حلمهم بالعودة لمسقط رأسهم فى موسكو يوما ما
دائما علاج الأزمات الوجودية عند تشيكوف هو اللجوء إلى الله
October 9, 2022
Olga, Masha, and Irina: three sisters vegetate in a provincial hole and dream of going to Moscow. Irina, the youngest, is still full of hope at the beginning of the play.
As often in Chekhov, there is little action, but instead lost illusions, inaccessible dreams, and dreams of the absolute that shatter reality based on the mediocrity of everyday life and its beings.
Since their lives are not as full of promise as they imagined, the characters dream of a bright future for future humanity.
Time passes, and illusions vanish. Lovers are unhappy, disappointing, fall apart, or fail. Stocks also behave similarly.
As often in Chekhov, there is little action, but instead lost illusions, inaccessible dreams, and dreams of the absolute that shatter reality based on the mediocrity of everyday life and its beings.
Since their lives are not as full of promise as they imagined, the characters dream of a bright future for future humanity.
Time passes, and illusions vanish. Lovers are unhappy, disappointing, fall apart, or fail. Stocks also behave similarly.
September 5, 2016
Book Review
4 out of 5 stars to The Three Sisters, a Russian play published in 1900 by Anton Chekhov. What an introspective work, but then again, Chekov is always at the top of this particular game, that is, presenting a slice of life we know dear to our hearts. In this one, perhaps his most famous play, three sisters are stuck in a small Russian village, but year to be back in Moscow. Circumstances prevent it. If you don't know any Russian history, you might want to brush up on it before taking this one on. I struggle to recognize this book came about less than two decades before the famous Romanov family was executed. It feels so very different yet so much the same. I digress. This story is about choice. Or lack of choice. Or more appropriately denying yourself the ability to choose because you lack the confidence to do what you need to do. The three sisters, arguably quite different, might indeed by the same woman inside. Life is hard. Seeing what happens around you when someone else controls the minutes, can be difficult. And you feel stagnant. But when this happens, a writer can capture the beauty of something known as nothing. It's the little things... that make life so interesting... and this book so wonderful.
About Me
For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.
4 out of 5 stars to The Three Sisters, a Russian play published in 1900 by Anton Chekhov. What an introspective work, but then again, Chekov is always at the top of this particular game, that is, presenting a slice of life we know dear to our hearts. In this one, perhaps his most famous play, three sisters are stuck in a small Russian village, but year to be back in Moscow. Circumstances prevent it. If you don't know any Russian history, you might want to brush up on it before taking this one on. I struggle to recognize this book came about less than two decades before the famous Romanov family was executed. It feels so very different yet so much the same. I digress. This story is about choice. Or lack of choice. Or more appropriately denying yourself the ability to choose because you lack the confidence to do what you need to do. The three sisters, arguably quite different, might indeed by the same woman inside. Life is hard. Seeing what happens around you when someone else controls the minutes, can be difficult. And you feel stagnant. But when this happens, a writer can capture the beauty of something known as nothing. It's the little things... that make life so interesting... and this book so wonderful.
About Me
For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.
September 6, 2022
خوندن چخوف همیشه یک حس حماقت بمن میده. در واقع با خودم میگم در مقابل این نویسنده، که از ساده ترین وقایع میتونه عالی ترین نمایشنامه ها رو خلق کنه، من خیلی کم هوش و احمقم که همیشه نداشتن موضوع رو بهانه میکنم تا ننویسم.
.....
خوشحالم دوباره دارم با سعید نمایشنامه همخوانی میکنم . آنقدر ازش یادمیگیرم و آنقدر این ادم بلده که درمقابلش من انگار یک کتاب دیگه رو خوندم کلا
.....
خوشحالم دوباره دارم با سعید نمایشنامه همخوانی میکنم . آنقدر ازش یادمیگیرم و آنقدر این ادم بلده که درمقابلش من انگار یک کتاب دیگه رو خوندم کلا
January 18, 2019
“After us they'll fly in hot air balloons, coat styles will change, perhaps they'll discover a sixth sense and cultivate it, but life will remain the same, a hard life full of secrets, but happy. And a thousand years from now man will still be sighing, 'Oh! Life is so hard!' and will still, like now, be afraid of death and not want to die.”
The Three Sisters examines the lives of the Prozorovs, a Russian family who live in a provincial town far from Moscow. The three sisters, Masha, Olga, and Irina, all long to return to Moscow and complain about their boring lives. Their brother Andrey is thought to be their only hope for a secure future. But he spoils all that (and his sisters' future, too) by marrying Natasha, a woman who eventually forces the sisters to leave their own home. Masha, Irina, and Olga fail at jobs, marriage, and romance. In the end, each sister ponders why life has been so disappointing for them. (Hint: It's been pretty much up to them).
The three sisters and their brother are pretty privileged, members of a fading aristocracy. The play, which was first produced in 1900 is, like his The Cherry Orchard, a kind of late-life reflection on Russia at the close of the nineteenth-century. Chekhov had tb, and would die of the disease 4 years later, but his initial view of his play is that it was a comedy poking fun at people for (mostly) choosing to be unhappy. He once said, "All I wanted was to say honestly to people: 'Have a look at yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are!’”
“Oh, I am unhappy. . . I can't work, I won’t work. My brain has dried up, and I've grown thinner, plainer, older, and there is no relief of any sort, and time goes and it seems all the while as if I am going away from the real, the beautiful life, farther and farther away, down some precipice. I'm in despair and I can't understand how it is that I am still alive, that I haven't killed myself. . .”
Chekhov focuses on the sisters’ inability to be happy and their brother's just as deeply entrenched nihilism. From the earliest productions, the play has embraced a kind of tension between sympathy for the family and a lightly satirical view of them.
Andrey: Oh, where is it all gone? What's become of my past, when I was young, happy, and clever, when my dreams and thoughts were exquisite, when my present and my past were lighted up by hope? Why on the very threshold of life do we become dull, drab, uninteresting, lazy, indifferent, useless, unhappy? . . . the divine spark is quenched and we become the same sort of pitiful, dead creatures, all exactly alike, as our fathers and mothers. . . .”
Chekhov was neither an existentialist nor a nihilist, so I think of his play as a comedy with the aim of waking up his audience to embrace the present and make a meaningful commitment to love and that “divine spark.” But I also think it can be seen as a sad social critique, too, in a rather different interpretation of the script.
I listened to a production of this play set in the nineties translated and adapted by David Mamet, and I liked it. I love Chekhov, who raises questions without answering them, and who creates characters without judging them too harshly, in my opinion, but I am going to read a translation/adaptation by Tracy Letts soon to see what he does with it.
The Three Sisters examines the lives of the Prozorovs, a Russian family who live in a provincial town far from Moscow. The three sisters, Masha, Olga, and Irina, all long to return to Moscow and complain about their boring lives. Their brother Andrey is thought to be their only hope for a secure future. But he spoils all that (and his sisters' future, too) by marrying Natasha, a woman who eventually forces the sisters to leave their own home. Masha, Irina, and Olga fail at jobs, marriage, and romance. In the end, each sister ponders why life has been so disappointing for them. (Hint: It's been pretty much up to them).
The three sisters and their brother are pretty privileged, members of a fading aristocracy. The play, which was first produced in 1900 is, like his The Cherry Orchard, a kind of late-life reflection on Russia at the close of the nineteenth-century. Chekhov had tb, and would die of the disease 4 years later, but his initial view of his play is that it was a comedy poking fun at people for (mostly) choosing to be unhappy. He once said, "All I wanted was to say honestly to people: 'Have a look at yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are!’”
“Oh, I am unhappy. . . I can't work, I won’t work. My brain has dried up, and I've grown thinner, plainer, older, and there is no relief of any sort, and time goes and it seems all the while as if I am going away from the real, the beautiful life, farther and farther away, down some precipice. I'm in despair and I can't understand how it is that I am still alive, that I haven't killed myself. . .”
Chekhov focuses on the sisters’ inability to be happy and their brother's just as deeply entrenched nihilism. From the earliest productions, the play has embraced a kind of tension between sympathy for the family and a lightly satirical view of them.
Andrey: Oh, where is it all gone? What's become of my past, when I was young, happy, and clever, when my dreams and thoughts were exquisite, when my present and my past were lighted up by hope? Why on the very threshold of life do we become dull, drab, uninteresting, lazy, indifferent, useless, unhappy? . . . the divine spark is quenched and we become the same sort of pitiful, dead creatures, all exactly alike, as our fathers and mothers. . . .”
Chekhov was neither an existentialist nor a nihilist, so I think of his play as a comedy with the aim of waking up his audience to embrace the present and make a meaningful commitment to love and that “divine spark.” But I also think it can be seen as a sad social critique, too, in a rather different interpretation of the script.
I listened to a production of this play set in the nineties translated and adapted by David Mamet, and I liked it. I love Chekhov, who raises questions without answering them, and who creates characters without judging them too harshly, in my opinion, but I am going to read a translation/adaptation by Tracy Letts soon to see what he does with it.
April 21, 2019
By the sea stands a green oak tree;
A golden chain strung round it:
And on the chain a learned cat
Day and night circles round it;
Walking right, he sings a song,
Walking left, he tells a tale.
— Alexander Pushkin
The tale, this time, is not about Ruslan and Ludmila, the epic poem written by Pushkin and published in 1820, whose opening lines were inspired by the author’s favorite tree, which turned out to be a mulberry tree in Taganrog, in southern Russia. Between us, and as some residents said, he wasn’t under the obligation to know botany.¹
The tale, this time, is a play written in 1900 by Anton Chekhov about the Prozorov family, especially the three sisters: Olga Prozorova, the eldest, a high school teacher and then headmistress; Masha Kulygina, the middle sister, unhappily married and often reciting the first lines of Pushkin’s poem; and Irina Prozorova, the youngest, stuck in a provincial town as the rest of the family and always longing for Moscow, where she would find her true love. Another exhausting quest for meaning in a life which is filled with trials and tribulations and some gleams of light in between.
IRINA [lays her head on OLGA'S bosom]. A time will come when everyone will know what all this is for, why there is this misery; there will be no mysteries and, meanwhile, we have got to live . . . we have got to work, only to work! Tomorrow I'll go alone; I'll teach in the school, and I'll give all my life to those who may need me. Now it's autumn; soon winter will come and cover us with snow, and I will work, I will work.
*
VERSHININ [after a moment's thought]. Well, I don't know. . . . It seems to me that everything on earth is bound to change by degrees and is already changing before our eyes. In two or three hundred, perhaps in a thousand years -- the time does not matter -- a new, happy life will come. We shall have no share in that life, of course, but we're living for it, we're working, well, yes, and suffering for it, we're creating it -- and that alone is the purpose of our existence, and is our happiness, if you like.
The play is infused with other elements that reminded me not only of Pushkin but other two² great Russian authors: entangled family dynamics, soldiers and barons, adultery, hypocritical manipulation, a duel based on nothing, unconditional love which has been silenced for years, reflections on human existence and its meaning...
TUZENBAKH. Well? When we are dead, men will fly in balloons, change the fashion of their coats, will discover a sixth sense, perhaps, and develop it, but life will remain just the same, difficult, full of mysteries and happiness. In a thousand years man will sigh just the same, "Ah, how hard life is," and yet just as now he will be afraid of death and not want it.
...and above all, longing. The characters have different aspirations that converged in the mitigation of loneliness. That’s what fascinated and repelled me at the same time because it’s not a foreign notion to me. The thought, the conviction even, that after achieving something, after going to a certain place, life will be as we dreamed it. And most of the times, having accomplished what we wanted while contemplating the sights of the new residence in which we’re dwelling, happiness becomes ever more elusive.
VERSHININ. The other day I was reading the diary of a French minister written in prison. The minister was condemned for the Panama affair. With what enthusiasm and delight he describes the birds he sees from the prison window, which he never noticed before when he was a minister. Now that he's released, of course he notices birds no more than he did before. In the same way, you won't notice Moscow when you live in it. We have no happiness and never do have, we only long for it.
Or perhaps there is more beyond longing, if the responsibility for a moment of happiness - because that's all there is³ - is not put on something or someone else.
May 01, 19
* Also on my blog.
** Notes
1. The New Yorker, “Pushkin's Favorite Tree”. February 17, 2010
2. Why of course, Tolstoy and my all-time favorite, Dostoyevsky.
3. Allusion to a passage from Fernando Pessoa's The Book of Disquiet: There’s no happiness without knowledge. But the knowledge of happiness brings unhappiness, because to know that you’re happy is to realize that you’re experiencing a happy moment and will soon have to leave it behind. - Enjoy it, then?
January 24, 2016
So far I have been very lucky with the theatre productions I have been attending. This one did not shine as much, though. I wonder whether had I not been able to compare to some brilliant staging would this play have engaged me more.
Nonetheless, it was entertaining. The setting was ‘realistic’, with the décor of a late nineteenth century Russia middle class home, with the most appealing aspect in the way parallel actions and conversations could take place on a single defined space. The acting was convincing but verging on the overacting, in particular at the beginning when it verged somewhat towards the histrionic.
The dynamics of the play consist of a descent from a ‘forte ‘ in mood and enthusiasm of the three sisters and the one brother, to a moody ‘piano’ as the dreams and the illusions and hopes of the four siblings are deflate and flatten. And Eldorado-Moscow remains an elusive dream and the tougher reality of a provincial rural world prevails.
I enjoyed that a real piano was on the stage and that it was not the only instrument invited onto the scene. Music seemed at times to be another character; the most satisfying and satisfied of them all.
December 6, 2020
With a lens to 2021 where I attempt to read more classics that I have neglected over the past two years, I stated small with one of Chekhov’s masterpieces. This tragedy examines everyday Russian in an accessible edition translated by Langford Wilson. Wilson’s goal was to translate the word as though Chekhov was writing in English, and he did a remarkable job. Readers learn of the trials and tribulations of the sisters Marsha, Olga, and Irina and what it means to be female, either single or married in the mid 19th century. Anecdotes to Pushkin and Lermontov are provided and help to paint a picture of Russian society at the time of publication. While around 80 pages in most editions, Chekhov’s plays are important classics in that they allow readers to see how Russians lived prior to the revolution, leading up the events that changed society. The women in this play desired a better life but were subject to the whims of their brother or husband. In a modern society Chekhov predicts that women like these intelligent, forward thinking sisters would have the same status in society as men. These themes are also prevalent in The Cherry Orchard. I generally enjoy Russian literature, and this was no exception. With this positive experience behind me, I look forward to reading more classics in 2021.
4 stars 🇷🇺
4 stars 🇷🇺
March 30, 2018
Do you see that tree? It is dead but it still sways in the wind with the others. I think it would be like that with me. That if I died I would still be part of life in one way or another.
The Three Sisters ~~~ [writer: Anton Chekhov]
3.5/5 based on this translation.
The story goes that many years ago, a couple saw a performance of Chekhov’s THREE SISTERS, afterwards, the husband gentleman turn to his wife and moaned, “Three hours, and they didn’t get to Moscow!” The wife turned to her husband, shot him a withering look and said in the driest of tones, “Murray, if they got to Moscow, it would have been a musical!”
Chekhov believed THREE SISTERS to be a comedy. In fact, Chekhov was convinced of it. When the Moscow Art Theatre gathered to read it for the first time, the entire troupe was reduced to tears. Chekhov finally relented and titled the piece “a drama in four acts,” the only time he ever gave that designation to any of his plays. I myself, have never found much comedy in THREE SISTERS, and I am one of those people who does find Chekhov to be hilarious ~~ I dare you to watch The Seagull, and not laugh out loud.
For me, THREE SISTERS is a problem play, and my least favorite of Chekhov's major plays. This is due I believe mainly to faulty translations. This translation was authored by Stark Young. My issues with his translation is that it is too stagy, too wordy. Stark may have been renowned for his translations at the time, but honestly, they have not held up will over time. Young writes from a romanticized view of Russia, serfs and class structures, much the same as some writers have romanticized slavery. Young's characters never come alive for me. There is no vibrancy or life to these people. They are dead before they take the stage.
The question at the center of THREE SISTERS “How do we go on?”. Honestly, in Young's translation of THREE SISTERS, you don't care.
Before the end of the year, I will read David Mamet's translation & Tracy Letts translation. I hope in the hands of dramatists, the characters truly come alive.
The Three Sisters ~~~ [writer: Anton Chekhov]
3.5/5 based on this translation.
The story goes that many years ago, a couple saw a performance of Chekhov’s THREE SISTERS, afterwards, the husband gentleman turn to his wife and moaned, “Three hours, and they didn’t get to Moscow!” The wife turned to her husband, shot him a withering look and said in the driest of tones, “Murray, if they got to Moscow, it would have been a musical!”
Chekhov believed THREE SISTERS to be a comedy. In fact, Chekhov was convinced of it. When the Moscow Art Theatre gathered to read it for the first time, the entire troupe was reduced to tears. Chekhov finally relented and titled the piece “a drama in four acts,” the only time he ever gave that designation to any of his plays. I myself, have never found much comedy in THREE SISTERS, and I am one of those people who does find Chekhov to be hilarious ~~ I dare you to watch The Seagull, and not laugh out loud.
For me, THREE SISTERS is a problem play, and my least favorite of Chekhov's major plays. This is due I believe mainly to faulty translations. This translation was authored by Stark Young. My issues with his translation is that it is too stagy, too wordy. Stark may have been renowned for his translations at the time, but honestly, they have not held up will over time. Young writes from a romanticized view of Russia, serfs and class structures, much the same as some writers have romanticized slavery. Young's characters never come alive for me. There is no vibrancy or life to these people. They are dead before they take the stage.
The question at the center of THREE SISTERS “How do we go on?”. Honestly, in Young's translation of THREE SISTERS, you don't care.
Before the end of the year, I will read David Mamet's translation & Tracy Letts translation. I hope in the hands of dramatists, the characters truly come alive.
May 17, 2018
This review is not of Chekhov's brilliant play, but of the translation by Moura Budberg.
If you know me, you know I love Chekhov, and I love comparing different translations of his plays. I find it fascinating how people can view the same piece of writing so differently.
The problem with Budberg's translation is how stuffy it is. It is very classy stuff, lots of technique is called for from the women to overact, and throw themselves on the nearest gentleman wailing in hysterics.
These people were written by Chekhov to be passionate, hot blooded and full of life. In Budberg's hands these people become nothing more than caricatures. All the life is sucked out of them. They become very stoic and oh so British. Is it any surprise that Olivier used this translation for his production in 1967?
There are so many brilliant translations of Three Sisters out there; this, sadly, is not one of them.
If you know me, you know I love Chekhov, and I love comparing different translations of his plays. I find it fascinating how people can view the same piece of writing so differently.
The problem with Budberg's translation is how stuffy it is. It is very classy stuff, lots of technique is called for from the women to overact, and throw themselves on the nearest gentleman wailing in hysterics.
These people were written by Chekhov to be passionate, hot blooded and full of life. In Budberg's hands these people become nothing more than caricatures. All the life is sucked out of them. They become very stoic and oh so British. Is it any surprise that Olivier used this translation for his production in 1967?
There are so many brilliant translations of Three Sisters out there; this, sadly, is not one of them.
February 6, 2019
- الشقيقات يقفن، الشقيقات يجلسن.. الشقيقات يجلسن في الريف ويحلمن بموسكو، عسكر يدخل، عسكر يخرج.. بعض الشذرات الفلسفية والوجودية هنا وهناك، لكن بالمجمل رتيبة ومملة ومن دون رسالة (او على الأقل لم تصلني)...
September 2, 2018
نمایش به سال ۱۹۰۰ نگارش یافته، شاید "سه خواهر" تا حدی پرچمدار نسل خسته روسیه اواخر قرن هجدهم باشد ، یک توده خموده و در حال گذار که در جست و جوی آرمان خویش، در دستان تاریخ در حال شکل پذیری بود یا شاید نه، او بود که بعدتر چهره تاریخ را مثل موم میان انگشتان منزجر خود، دیگرگون کرد و بارها روزگار را غافلگیر نمود حتی تا امروز...
این بار هم چخوف با طرحی ساده اما به شدت باورپذیر و پر کشش، برشی از زندگی سه خواهر ِ اهل مسکو را روایت می کند که سالهاست به خاطر شغل پدر (که حالا فوت کرده) به همراه برادرشان در شهر دیگری زندگی می کنند ...
شهر و مردمانش برای اینها (که همگی تربیت شده پدری هستند که ظاهرا نسبت به تحصیلات و تربیت آنها کوشا بوده) منقبض است و آن ها پیوسته رویای "بازگشت" به مسکو را دارند
این میل بازگشت به ارزش های گذشته و ریشه ها ( اصرار بر حفظ خدمتکار پیر و از کار افتاده و حسرتِ مسکو) ، تکیه بر آرمان های دور و دست نیافتنی (آرزوی دانشمند شدن برادر) و اعتراض به شرایط پیرامون و دل زدگی نسبت به آنچه هست (بی میلی ماشا به همسری که حالا به وضوح غیر ایده آل شده) افول برخی باورها (سرخوردگی آندره از زندگی زناشویی و همسری که ابتدا عاشقش بود) در سراسر اثر نمایان است
آندره : در اینجا همه می خورند، می آشامند، می خوابند و بعد می میرند سپس فرزندانی به دنیا می آورند که آن ها هم می خورند، می نوشند، می خوابند و برای این که از غصه گیج و ملول نشوند، زندگی شان را با دسیسه های کثیف، مشروب و قمار و دعوا و مرافعه پر می کنند ... ۸۲
اما با همه اینها، چخوف به ظرافت، انگار می خواهد "به ناچار" رنگی از امید را بر این غرولند و بی حوصلگی و رخوت بپاشد :
این درخت را ببین، با آن که خشک شده ولی همراه با درختان دیگر با وزش باد حرکت می کند ...۸۱
...زندگی سخت است...فکر می کنم آن زمانی که کاملا نورانی و شفاف شود دور نیست... ۸۵
داستان، به جز دو سه مورد، اتفاقهای چندان پر اوجی ندارد، با این حال مسیر و مقصدش دلپذیر به نظر می آید در مجموع کلام بر حرکت سوار است "اما" به شدت صدای استحاله دارد، صدای خمیازه ای که هرچند از پی خستگی ست ولی خوشایند است
چیزی شبیه آن چند دقیقه ای ست که بعد از "بیدار شدن" تا "برخاستن" از بستر خواب تجربه می کنید...پر از فکر در مورد روز گذشته و آن چه گذشت و روز شلوغی که پیش روست و ناگزیر نمی توانید تا ظهر در بستر بمانید
سه خواهر را دوست داشتم که چخوف را نمی توان دوست نداشت...خیلی دوست دارم بدانم که اگر چخوف به آن زودی نمی رفت و انقلاب ۱۹۱۷ را تجربه می کرد، آثارش چه رنگی می شدند...حیف
* * *
زمان سپری خواهد شد، روزی همه خواهند فهمید که این همه رنج برای چیست. آن روز دیگر برای هیچ کس رازی باقی نمی ماند ولی فعلا باید زندگی کرد...باید کار و باز هم کار کرد...۸۹
این بار هم چخوف با طرحی ساده اما به شدت باورپذیر و پر کشش، برشی از زندگی سه خواهر ِ اهل مسکو را روایت می کند که سالهاست به خاطر شغل پدر (که حالا فوت کرده) به همراه برادرشان در شهر دیگری زندگی می کنند ...
شهر و مردمانش برای اینها (که همگی تربیت شده پدری هستند که ظاهرا نسبت به تحصیلات و تربیت آنها کوشا بوده) منقبض است و آن ها پیوسته رویای "بازگشت" به مسکو را دارند
این میل بازگشت به ارزش های گذشته و ریشه ها ( اصرار بر حفظ خدمتکار پیر و از کار افتاده و حسرتِ مسکو) ، تکیه بر آرمان های دور و دست نیافتنی (آرزوی دانشمند شدن برادر) و اعتراض به شرایط پیرامون و دل زدگی نسبت به آنچه هست (بی میلی ماشا به همسری که حالا به وضوح غیر ایده آل شده) افول برخی باورها (سرخوردگی آندره از زندگی زناشویی و همسری که ابتدا عاشقش بود) در سراسر اثر نمایان است
آندره : در اینجا همه می خورند، می آشامند، می خوابند و بعد می میرند سپس فرزندانی به دنیا می آورند که آن ها هم می خورند، می نوشند، می خوابند و برای این که از غصه گیج و ملول نشوند، زندگی شان را با دسیسه های کثیف، مشروب و قمار و دعوا و مرافعه پر می کنند ... ۸۲
اما با همه اینها، چخوف به ظرافت، انگار می خواهد "به ناچار" رنگی از امید را بر این غرولند و بی حوصلگی و رخوت بپاشد :
این درخت را ببین، با آن که خشک شده ولی همراه با درختان دیگر با وزش باد حرکت می کند ...۸۱
...زندگی سخت است...فکر می کنم آن زمانی که کاملا نورانی و شفاف شود دور نیست... ۸۵
داستان، به جز دو سه مورد، اتفاقهای چندان پر اوجی ندارد، با این حال مسیر و مقصدش دلپذیر به نظر می آید در مجموع کلام بر حرکت سوار است "اما" به شدت صدای استحاله دارد، صدای خمیازه ای که هرچند از پی خستگی ست ولی خوشایند است
چیزی شبیه آن چند دقیقه ای ست که بعد از "بیدار شدن" تا "برخاستن" از بستر خواب تجربه می کنید...پر از فکر در مورد روز گذشته و آن چه گذشت و روز شلوغی که پیش روست و ناگزیر نمی توانید تا ظهر در بستر بمانید
سه خواهر را دوست داشتم که چخوف را نمی توان دوست نداشت...خیلی دوست دارم بدانم که اگر چخوف به آن زودی نمی رفت و انقلاب ۱۹۱۷ را تجربه می کرد، آثارش چه رنگی می شدند...حیف
* * *
زمان سپری خواهد شد، روزی همه خواهند فهمید که این همه رنج برای چیست. آن روز دیگر برای هیچ کس رازی باقی نمی ماند ولی فعلا باید زندگی کرد...باید کار و باز هم کار کرد...۸۹
June 6, 2020
صدای سه خواهر چون نوای سایرن هاست..پر از سردگمی..سرگردانی....روزمرگی..ملال..اندکی امید..
سه خواهر مثل یک دریای انسانی ست...عده ای به هر سو روانند ,شنا کنان در مسیر امواج حود رها کرده اند و می اندیشند که راهی درست طی می کنند..عده ای نیز سکون گزیده اند,چنگ در نقطه ای از دریا انداخته اند,می کوشند چنگال هایشان را در تن دریا نگه دارند و چشم اندوخته اند به پایان گریز ناپذیر,تا که شاید هنگام مرگ اوایی بر آید به ایشان اعتماد دهد که خوشبخت بوده اند..عده ای نیز امید به ساحل خوشبختی دارند,در خلاف امواج ناگزیر می کوشند که حرکت کنند,اما دریا دریاست و امواج اند که متواتر هم پیش می آیند,شناگری که سر جنگ با امواج دارد از هر موج گذشته,در ان سو اما جز موج دیگر نمی یابد ..سرمای نا امیدی عضلات شناگر را کرخت می کنند,و هر موج نه بر جسم که بر روح شناگر فرود می اید..ذره ذره میشکند..امید نا امیدی می شود,اما در هر ناامیدی مان در زندگی,گویی هر چه نا ممکن تر بنظر برسد,باز هم امیدی میجوییم,باز هم سعی میکنیم که ببینیم ان ساحل دوردست را..انچنان که زمانی که عزیزی را از دست می دهیم,چشمانمان همچنان بدنبالش می گردند..هر چه بیشتر میمیرند..چشمانمان بیشتر امیدوار میشوند که شاید دوباره ببینندش..امیدی در نهایت نا امیدی..در که خواب یا که بیداری,میجوییم در پی انکه به زندگی یا مرگ او را باخته ایم..جست جویی بی پایان..در دریای ذهنمان..جستجویی در دورترین نقطه از ساحل موهوم خوشبختی..
سه خواهر مثل یک دریای انسانی ست...عده ای به هر سو روانند ,شنا کنان در مسیر امواج حود رها کرده اند و می اندیشند که راهی درست طی می کنند..عده ای نیز سکون گزیده اند,چنگ در نقطه ای از دریا انداخته اند,می کوشند چنگال هایشان را در تن دریا نگه دارند و چشم اندوخته اند به پایان گریز ناپذیر,تا که شاید هنگام مرگ اوایی بر آید به ایشان اعتماد دهد که خوشبخت بوده اند..عده ای نیز امید به ساحل خوشبختی دارند,در خلاف امواج ناگزیر می کوشند که حرکت کنند,اما دریا دریاست و امواج اند که متواتر هم پیش می آیند,شناگری که سر جنگ با امواج دارد از هر موج گذشته,در ان سو اما جز موج دیگر نمی یابد ..سرمای نا امیدی عضلات شناگر را کرخت می کنند,و هر موج نه بر جسم که بر روح شناگر فرود می اید..ذره ذره میشکند..امید نا امیدی می شود,اما در هر ناامیدی مان در زندگی,گویی هر چه نا ممکن تر بنظر برسد,باز هم امیدی میجوییم,باز هم سعی میکنیم که ببینیم ان ساحل دوردست را..انچنان که زمانی که عزیزی را از دست می دهیم,چشمانمان همچنان بدنبالش می گردند..هر چه بیشتر میمیرند..چشمانمان بیشتر امیدوار میشوند که شاید دوباره ببینندش..امیدی در نهایت نا امیدی..در که خواب یا که بیداری,میجوییم در پی انکه به زندگی یا مرگ او را باخته ایم..جست جویی بی پایان..در دریای ذهنمان..جستجویی در دورترین نقطه از ساحل موهوم خوشبختی..
April 10, 2017
”There can be no happiness for us, it only exists in our wishes.”
I picked up this play on a whim, after seeing a few negative reviews by my friends. Curiosity mooted me to find out what they didn’t like about it. A close friend, however, did remark that I would love it and honestly, I did. If I were to sum up my understanding of the undercurrents that flowed under this play, it would be the quote I shared above, which is from this play itself.
Life is to be lived forwards and understood backwards, at least that’s what the old adage says and that’s what I believe. However, in life, you can’t help but give way to dreams, dreams of a future that is better than the present and look for times in the past that were purportedly worse than the present. In short, it is about justifying your current situation so that you can live at peace, if not with happiness. Chekhov’s characters in this play are true followers of that and perhaps some more.
The play opens with the three sisters, Olga, Irina and Masha sitting comfortably in their home with their brother Andrei, celebrating the name day of Irina. People call on the sisters to wish Irina and to partake lunch with them. The mood is definitely celebratory but we can detect a certain sense of unease in the sisters, largely due to their expectations from their lives being larger than ever. It sets the tone of the entire play and what falls out is quite a treatise in philosophy, especially regarding the connection between living and happiness.
This play in four parts beautifully portrays the developmental arc of all the characters. Each act of the play portrays an incident, which takes place with or around the sisters and their family, making it personal. The reactions of the characters towards these various incidences can be interpreted as being applicable to the Russian community at large in those times. The emphasis on culture and education, the lofty ideals and dreams, philosophizing every little thing, and the marked lack of action towards fulfilling any of those ideals or dreams, were some of the topics that this play touched upon.
The tone of the entire play is quite sardonic, insomuch as it talks about the inaction that belied every thought invoked by the characters as opposed to actual action. The main characters of the play, the three sisters, were well educated and had independent means to do whatever they want to, but instead of acting upon those dreams of going to Moscow, they are content in just speaking of it, perhaps in an idle manner. Dreams are meant to be just that, just dreams, and nothing else; for if they were to become reality, the reality would be boring and they would then have to seek newer dreams. The inability of human nature to work towards one’s goals, the inability to reach out for the best, while all the way they claim that they deserve the best; is perhaps the most common human behavior in the world and Chekhov, through this play, has brought it out in a manner that is most profound and yet quite ironic.
Each sister is shown to be unhappy with her life but they don’t do anything about it. Despite having the means, they compromise and glorify these unnecessary sacrifices or compromises while always dreaming of a better tomorrow. The strain ‘We shall live in Moscow’ becomes an unfulfilled dream for no better reason than the inability to act upon it, making it a dream that takes proportions that are larger than life. Chekhov, through their interactions, shows us that it is not the action that they desire, so much as they desire the dreaming of it. In other words, going to Moscow won’t really change what they are, for once they are there, they might out of sheer boredom think of something else that would please them better and show themselves as martyrs once again. Chekhov brings forth this attitude beautifully during the discussion between Masha and Vershinin, where Vershinin through his philosophizing routine tries to pinpoint the necessity of action but the sisters’ reaction shows that it isn’t action but the very inaction that they desire – it should remain a dream, always a dream and nothing more than a mere dream;
MASHA: A knowledge of three languages is an unnecessary luxury in this town. It isn’t even a luxury but a sort of useless extra, like a sixth finger. We know a lot too much.
VERSHININ: Well, I say! You know a lot too much! I don’t think there can really be a town so dull and stupid as to have no place for a clever, cultured person. Let us suppose even that among the hundred thousand inhabitants of this backward and uneducated town, there are only three persons like yourself. It stands to reason that you won’t be able to conquer that dark mob around you; little by little as you grow older you will be bound to give way and lose yourselves in this crowd of hundred thousand human beings; their life will suck you up in itself, but still, you won’t disappear having influenced nobody; later on, others like you will come, perhaps six of them, then twelve, and so on, until at last your sort will be in the majority. In two or three hundred years’ time life on this earth will be unimaginably beautiful and wonderful. Mankind needs such a life, and if it is not ours today then we must look ahead for it, wait, think, prepare for it. We must see and know more than our fathers and grandfathers saw and knew. And you complain that you know too much.
MASHA: I’ll stay to lunch.
IRINA: Yes, all that ought to be written down.
May 19, 2015
Written and performed at the turn of the century (1900), The Three Sisters is one of Chekhov's best known plays. The sisters, Olga, Masha, and Irina, former Muscovite's now living in a provincial city, are struggling to find happiness in their lives. They dream of returning to Moscow someday to find love and fulfillment, but they are trapped by the events and circumstances surrounding their daily lives. The themes in the play are very subtle and it can be a difficult one to read. It would be better to see the play on stage I think, and watch the actors bring the personalities and emotions of these sisters to life. I was struck by their devotion and loyalty to one another, and their determination to make the best of what life had thrust upon them.
December 7, 2020
بنظر من بشر باید ایمان داشته باشد,دستکم به یک چیز ,در غیر اینصورت زندگیاش توخالی خواهد بود...
August 8, 2018
Three Sisters tells us the lives, struggles and dreams of Olga, Masha and Irina at a time of social and political change in Russia. Change and transformation has been one of the key themes of Chekhov as the social and political changes were slowly making progress through Russia. Though Chekhov didn't live to see the Russian revolution, his works hints at future change which was inevitable.
Olga, Masha and Irina dream of settling down in Moscow and living in an elevated society. Their struggle to achieve this end and the circumstances and misfortunes that bar their progress in realizing the dream is dramatically presented. The story, the characters and the dramatic effect was all interesting, and I did enjoy the read.
This is the second play that I have read of Chekhov - the first being The Cherry Orchard and I really feel they should be watched than read. The strong emotions that Chekhov imparts in to the characters are best seen than read. The joys, sorrows, heartaches and jealousies that were accurately and vividly portrayed would have been more heartfelt was the play watched. Chekhov wrote them to be performed and only through performance could the true nature of the play would come to light.
Olga, Masha and Irina dream of settling down in Moscow and living in an elevated society. Their struggle to achieve this end and the circumstances and misfortunes that bar their progress in realizing the dream is dramatically presented. The story, the characters and the dramatic effect was all interesting, and I did enjoy the read.
This is the second play that I have read of Chekhov - the first being The Cherry Orchard and I really feel they should be watched than read. The strong emotions that Chekhov imparts in to the characters are best seen than read. The joys, sorrows, heartaches and jealousies that were accurately and vividly portrayed would have been more heartfelt was the play watched. Chekhov wrote them to be performed and only through performance could the true nature of the play would come to light.
October 3, 2021
سرنوشت همین است، فراموشمان خواهند کرد.
هیچ کاری نمیشود کرد. تمام آنچه را که جدی، بزرگ و پراهمیت میدانیم با گذشت زمان فراموش و بیاهمیت خواهد شد.
بخاطر دارم نخستین بار با داستان کوتاهی به نام «شرطبندی» به سراغ چخوف رفتم اما بنا به علل مختلف از خواندن آن لذت نبردم، گویی یک چیز مهم کم داشت.
مدتی قبل در رمانی که از موراکامی عزیزم خوانده بودم کنجکاو شدم که بار دیگر از چخوف چیزی بخوانم و امروز پس از حدود ۸ ماه از دیدار نخست به سراغ یک نمایشنامه از او آمدم.
اعتراف میکنم دقیقا همان حسی را دارم که پس از خواندن شرطبندی داشتم.
دوستان من به خوبی میدانند که من به ادبیات روسیه و فرانسه علاقهی زیادی دارم و در بین نویسندگان روس که تا بحال به سراغ آنها رفتهام(عالیجنابان داستایفسکی، بولگاکف، گنچاروف، گوگول، تولستوی، پلاتونوف و بربروا) قلم چخوف به دلم نمیچسبد، نمیتوانم ارتباط لازم را با آن برقرار کنم و نمیدانم دلیلش چیست؟!
به دلایل متعدد از هماکنون اطمینان دارم که در آینده باز هم از چخوف خواهم خواند اما از این تریبون از دوستانم به خصوص دوستانی که نسبت به سلایق و افکارم آشنایی دارند خواهش میکنم در مورد انتخاب بعدی مرا یاری رسانند شاید انتخابهایی که میکنم اشتباه هست و خودم خبر ندارم.
نکته:
از ترجمهي خانم ناهید کاشیچی نیز رضایت نداشتم.
هیچ کاری نمیشود کرد. تمام آنچه را که جدی، بزرگ و پراهمیت میدانیم با گذشت زمان فراموش و بیاهمیت خواهد شد.
بخاطر دارم نخستین بار با داستان کوتاهی به نام «شرطبندی» به سراغ چخوف رفتم اما بنا به علل مختلف از خواندن آن لذت نبردم، گویی یک چیز مهم کم داشت.
مدتی قبل در رمانی که از موراکامی عزیزم خوانده بودم کنجکاو شدم که بار دیگر از چخوف چیزی بخوانم و امروز پس از حدود ۸ ماه از دیدار نخست به سراغ یک نمایشنامه از او آمدم.
اعتراف میکنم دقیقا همان حسی را دارم که پس از خواندن شرطبندی داشتم.
دوستان من به خوبی میدانند که من به ادبیات روسیه و فرانسه علاقهی زیادی دارم و در بین نویسندگان روس که تا بحال به سراغ آنها رفتهام(عالیجنابان داستایفسکی، بولگاکف، گنچاروف، گوگول، تولستوی، پلاتونوف و بربروا) قلم چخوف به دلم نمیچسبد، نمیتوانم ارتباط لازم را با آن برقرار کنم و نمیدانم دلیلش چیست؟!
به دلایل متعدد از هماکنون اطمینان دارم که در آینده باز هم از چخوف خواهم خواند اما از این تریبون از دوستانم به خصوص دوستانی که نسبت به سلایق و افکارم آشنایی دارند خواهش میکنم در مورد انتخاب بعدی مرا یاری رسانند شاید انتخابهایی که میکنم اشتباه هست و خودم خبر ندارم.
نکته:
از ترجمهي خانم ناهید کاشیچی نیز رضایت نداشتم.
January 24, 2024
i want natasha in a coffin <3 (disrespectfully)
October 26, 2017
"And, restless, seeks the stormy ocean, as though in tempest there were peace."
I feel this is an amazing play that stunningly portraits existential crisis inevitable in the life of every person who thinks of life in a deeper way.
TUZENBAKH: You think it's no use even dreaming of happiness! But what if I'm happy?
VERSHININ: No, you're not.
MASHA: Gogol says: it's dull living in this world, friends!
I really liked the exploration of themes of transience and the meaning of life (found in work, ambition, dreams of living in a different place and future) and our importance in the universe that can be found in each character in a different way. My favorite character by far was Vershinin, the deliverance of his thoughts and philosophy was brilliant.
VERSHININ: Yes. They'll forget us. Such is our fate, there is no help for it. What seems to us serious, significant, very important, will one day be forgotten or will seem unimportant [a pause]. And it's curious that we can't possibly tell what exactly will be considered great and important, and what will seem petty and ridiculous.
I could relate to the restlessness of the human soul so much, and sense of balancing between the pressure of wasting life and realization of the unimportance of everything we do on a larger scale. Do we use our work and hope in a better future in day to day as a defense mechanism from almost unbearable feelings of meaningless of life? And, more importantly, are they efficient enough? When do forget our big dreams and settle down with mediocrity and small-mindedness, and do we really ever settle down? Does society kill our individuality and uniqueness?
VERSHININ: Let's suppose that of the hundred thousand people living in this town, which is, of course, uncultured and behind the times, there are only three of your sort. It goes without saying that you cannot conquer the mass of darkness round you; little by little, as you go on living, you'll be lost in the crowd. You'll have to give in to it. Life will get the better of you, but still you'll not disappear without a trace. After you there may appear perhaps six like you, then twelve and so on until such as you form a majority. In two or three hundred years, life on earth will be unimaginably beautiful, marvellous. Man needs such a life and, though he hasn't got it yet, he must have a presentiment of it, expect it, dream of it, prepare for it; for that he must see and know more than his father and grandfather.
VERSHININ: If one listens to a man of the educated class here, civilian or military, he's worried to death by his wife, worried to death by his house, worried to death by his estate, worried to death by his horses. . . . A Russian is peculiarly given to exalted ideas, but why is it he always falls so short in life? Why?
Not the most imaginative plot, but the questions that this play opened, were for me deeply moving and brilliant but the ones that nobody can give answers to. A lot of great quotes to think about and get either inspired to do something in your life or get really depressed.
ANDREY: Oh, where is it all gone? What's become of my past, when I was young, happy, and clever, when my dreams and thoughts were exquisite, when my present and my past were lighted up by hope? Why on the very threshold of life do we become dull, drab, uninteresting, lazy, indifferent, useless, unhappy? . . . Our town has been in existence for two hundred years -- there are a hundred thousand people living in it; and there's not one who's not like the rest, not one saint in the past, or the present, not one man of learning, not one artist, not one man in the least remarkable who could inspire envy or a passionate desire to imitate him. . . . They only eat, drink, sleep, and then die . . . others are born, and they also eat and drink and sleep, and not to be bored to stupefaction they vary their lives by nasty gossip, vodka, cards, litigation; and the wives deceive their husbands, and the husbands tell lies and pretend that they see and hear nothing, and an overwhelmingly vulgar influence crushes the children, and the divine spark is quenched in them and they become the same sort of pitiful, dead creatures, all exactly alike, as their fathers and mothers. . . .
Recommended for all lovers of existentialism and nihilism.
I feel this is an amazing play that stunningly portraits existential crisis inevitable in the life of every person who thinks of life in a deeper way.
TUZENBAKH: You think it's no use even dreaming of happiness! But what if I'm happy?
VERSHININ: No, you're not.
MASHA: Gogol says: it's dull living in this world, friends!
I really liked the exploration of themes of transience and the meaning of life (found in work, ambition, dreams of living in a different place and future) and our importance in the universe that can be found in each character in a different way. My favorite character by far was Vershinin, the deliverance of his thoughts and philosophy was brilliant.
VERSHININ: Yes. They'll forget us. Such is our fate, there is no help for it. What seems to us serious, significant, very important, will one day be forgotten or will seem unimportant [a pause]. And it's curious that we can't possibly tell what exactly will be considered great and important, and what will seem petty and ridiculous.
I could relate to the restlessness of the human soul so much, and sense of balancing between the pressure of wasting life and realization of the unimportance of everything we do on a larger scale. Do we use our work and hope in a better future in day to day as a defense mechanism from almost unbearable feelings of meaningless of life? And, more importantly, are they efficient enough? When do forget our big dreams and settle down with mediocrity and small-mindedness, and do we really ever settle down? Does society kill our individuality and uniqueness?
VERSHININ: Let's suppose that of the hundred thousand people living in this town, which is, of course, uncultured and behind the times, there are only three of your sort. It goes without saying that you cannot conquer the mass of darkness round you; little by little, as you go on living, you'll be lost in the crowd. You'll have to give in to it. Life will get the better of you, but still you'll not disappear without a trace. After you there may appear perhaps six like you, then twelve and so on until such as you form a majority. In two or three hundred years, life on earth will be unimaginably beautiful, marvellous. Man needs such a life and, though he hasn't got it yet, he must have a presentiment of it, expect it, dream of it, prepare for it; for that he must see and know more than his father and grandfather.
VERSHININ: If one listens to a man of the educated class here, civilian or military, he's worried to death by his wife, worried to death by his house, worried to death by his estate, worried to death by his horses. . . . A Russian is peculiarly given to exalted ideas, but why is it he always falls so short in life? Why?
Not the most imaginative plot, but the questions that this play opened, were for me deeply moving and brilliant but the ones that nobody can give answers to. A lot of great quotes to think about and get either inspired to do something in your life or get really depressed.
ANDREY: Oh, where is it all gone? What's become of my past, when I was young, happy, and clever, when my dreams and thoughts were exquisite, when my present and my past were lighted up by hope? Why on the very threshold of life do we become dull, drab, uninteresting, lazy, indifferent, useless, unhappy? . . . Our town has been in existence for two hundred years -- there are a hundred thousand people living in it; and there's not one who's not like the rest, not one saint in the past, or the present, not one man of learning, not one artist, not one man in the least remarkable who could inspire envy or a passionate desire to imitate him. . . . They only eat, drink, sleep, and then die . . . others are born, and they also eat and drink and sleep, and not to be bored to stupefaction they vary their lives by nasty gossip, vodka, cards, litigation; and the wives deceive their husbands, and the husbands tell lies and pretend that they see and hear nothing, and an overwhelmingly vulgar influence crushes the children, and the divine spark is quenched in them and they become the same sort of pitiful, dead creatures, all exactly alike, as their fathers and mothers. . . .
Recommended for all lovers of existentialism and nihilism.
May 5, 2024
تجربهی شیرینی بود این نمایشنامه. اول خوندنش و بعد دیدن تئاترش که در حال حاضر رو صحنهس🤎
دغدغههایی که مطرح میکنن..روح زنانه و ظریف و سردرگمی که داره...فلسفهبافیهای بیپایان انسان...
«توی اینجا هیچوقت یک نفر ادیب یا هنرمند یا آدم مقدسی نبوده. حتی یک نفر هم نیست که آنقدر برجستگی داشته باشه که احساس کنید میل دارید با شور و علاقه باهاش همچشمی کنید. مردم اینجا هیچ کاری جز خوردن و نوشیدن و خوابیدن نمیکنند...»
دغدغههایی که مطرح میکنن..روح زنانه و ظریف و سردرگمی که داره...فلسفهبافیهای بیپایان انسان...
«توی اینجا هیچوقت یک نفر ادیب یا هنرمند یا آدم مقدسی نبوده. حتی یک نفر هم نیست که آنقدر برجستگی داشته باشه که احساس کنید میل دارید با شور و علاقه باهاش همچشمی کنید. مردم اینجا هیچ کاری جز خوردن و نوشیدن و خوابیدن نمیکنند...»
January 25, 2019
چخوف نازنین
پزشک دوست داشتنی
هربار که ازت میخونم غرق میشم توی دنیای خاکستری جذابی که خلق کردی و میرم توی رویایی که قرار بوده برم.
نابوکف میگه: «آنچه در تمام داستانهای چخوف میبینیم سکندری خوردن مدام است، اما این سکندری خوردن ِ آدمی است که سکندری میخورد چون به ستارگان خیره شده است. این آدم خوشبخت نیست و دیگران را هم بدبخت میکند؛ نه برادرانش و نه نزدیکترین کسانش، که دوردستترین آدمها را دوست دارد. رنج یک سیاهپوست در سرزمینی دور، یک حمال چینی، یک زحمتکش در دوردستهای ناحیه اورال، بیش از بدبیاریهای همسایهاش یا مشکلات زنش مایه درد اخلاقی اوست...این صفای روح و این علوّ اخلاقی، بله، همین واقعیت که چنین آدمهایی زمانی بودهاند و احتمالا هنوز هم در روسیه ستمگر و نکبتبار امروز جایی دارند زندگی میکنند، نوید در راه بودن چیزهایی بهتر برای تمامی جهان است- چرا که شاید ستودنیترین قانون در میان قوانین ستودنی طبیعت قانون بقای ضعیفترین باشد.»
پزشک دوست داشتنی
هربار که ازت میخونم غرق میشم توی دنیای خاکستری جذابی که خلق کردی و میرم توی رویایی که قرار بوده برم.
نابوکف میگه: «آنچه در تمام داستانهای چخوف میبینیم سکندری خوردن مدام است، اما این سکندری خوردن ِ آدمی است که سکندری میخورد چون به ستارگان خیره شده است. این آدم خوشبخت نیست و دیگران را هم بدبخت میکند؛ نه برادرانش و نه نزدیکترین کسانش، که دوردستترین آدمها را دوست دارد. رنج یک سیاهپوست در سرزمینی دور، یک حمال چینی، یک زحمتکش در دوردستهای ناحیه اورال، بیش از بدبیاریهای همسایهاش یا مشکلات زنش مایه درد اخلاقی اوست...این صفای روح و این علوّ اخلاقی، بله، همین واقعیت که چنین آدمهایی زمانی بودهاند و احتمالا هنوز هم در روسیه ستمگر و نکبتبار امروز جایی دارند زندگی میکنند، نوید در راه بودن چیزهایی بهتر برای تمامی جهان است- چرا که شاید ستودنیترین قانون در میان قوانین ستودنی طبیعت قانون بقای ضعیفترین باشد.»
May 31, 2018
Στον Τσέχωφ, αδερφές μου, στον Τσέχωφ!
Χωρίς επιστροφή.
Χωρίς επιστροφή.
January 30, 2021
Bueno la lectura de este libro, que no olvidemos es una obra de teatro, en si no te cuenta nada en particular, es la historia de una familia con 4 hermanos rusos 3 chicas y un chico, tras perder a su padre parece ser que se mudan de casa a un pequeña ciudad, la vida pasa un tanto aburrida y en ciertos momentos ninguno está del todo a gusto con su vida.
Sus vidas transcurren entre visitas que acuden a sus casas y con algunas celebraciones, cenas y comidas de conocidos en la que también acuden militares.
Bueno este señor escribe correcto y muy filosóficamente, sin embargo creo que le falta orden, todo parece que pasa en un día y resulta que pasan años.
En fin es una obra de teatro y una obra de teatro tampoco puede ser muy larga, tiene que contarse algo en poco tiempo y además ser intenso, los diálogos de las conversaciones que trae el libro me gustan, son buenos, se puede estar de acuerdo con lo que dicen o no, pero desde luego filosóficos son, y esto es lo interesante de este librito o mejor dicho de esta obra de teatro, que no te cuenta una gran historia, pero los diálogos están llenos de pequeñas historias. Tiene algún que otro golpe que te hacen soltar alguna carcajada, pero vamos considerarlo una comedia no me parece a mí.
Extractos del libro:
Está usted envejecido, pero todavía no es viejo.
—¡En una ciudad como ésta, poseer tres idiomas es un lujo inútil…! ¡Ni un lujo siquiera! ¡Un aditamento sobrante…! ¡Tenemos muchos conocimientos superfluos.
—¡Vamos…! ¡Conque tienen ustedes muchos conocimientos superfluos! ¡A mí, en cambio, se me figura que no puede existir ciudad, por aburrida y triste que sea, en la que no resulte necesaria la persona inteligente e instruida…!
¡Y usted lamentándose y llamando superfluos a sus conocimientos!
¡Con frecuencia se me ocurre pensar en si sería posible empezar otra vida y, además, vivirla de un modo consciente…! ¡La vida ya vivida sería el borrador, y la nueva, el llamado «escrito en limpio»…!
«¡Lo importante en una vida es su forma!». «¡Lo que pierde su forma, acaba!»
¡La aspereza me ofende, me ataca los nervios, y el ver que una persona no es lo debidamente fina, suave y amable, me hace sufrir…!
¡Y el rebelde busca la tormenta, como si en la tormenta estuviera la paz!
A nadie conoces y nadie te conoce a ti… y, sin embargo, no te sientes extraño…! ¡Aquí, en cambio, donde todo el mundo te conoce y tú conoces a todo el mundo, sí te sientes extraño…!
¡Es un trabajo sin poesía…, en el que el pensamiento está ausente…!
"Feci quod potui, meliora potente faciant", "Hice lo que pude, lo mejor que pude."
Sus vidas transcurren entre visitas que acuden a sus casas y con algunas celebraciones, cenas y comidas de conocidos en la que también acuden militares.
Bueno este señor escribe correcto y muy filosóficamente, sin embargo creo que le falta orden, todo parece que pasa en un día y resulta que pasan años.
En fin es una obra de teatro y una obra de teatro tampoco puede ser muy larga, tiene que contarse algo en poco tiempo y además ser intenso, los diálogos de las conversaciones que trae el libro me gustan, son buenos, se puede estar de acuerdo con lo que dicen o no, pero desde luego filosóficos son, y esto es lo interesante de este librito o mejor dicho de esta obra de teatro, que no te cuenta una gran historia, pero los diálogos están llenos de pequeñas historias. Tiene algún que otro golpe que te hacen soltar alguna carcajada, pero vamos considerarlo una comedia no me parece a mí.
Extractos del libro:
Está usted envejecido, pero todavía no es viejo.
—¡En una ciudad como ésta, poseer tres idiomas es un lujo inútil…! ¡Ni un lujo siquiera! ¡Un aditamento sobrante…! ¡Tenemos muchos conocimientos superfluos.
—¡Vamos…! ¡Conque tienen ustedes muchos conocimientos superfluos! ¡A mí, en cambio, se me figura que no puede existir ciudad, por aburrida y triste que sea, en la que no resulte necesaria la persona inteligente e instruida…!
¡Y usted lamentándose y llamando superfluos a sus conocimientos!
¡Con frecuencia se me ocurre pensar en si sería posible empezar otra vida y, además, vivirla de un modo consciente…! ¡La vida ya vivida sería el borrador, y la nueva, el llamado «escrito en limpio»…!
«¡Lo importante en una vida es su forma!». «¡Lo que pierde su forma, acaba!»
¡La aspereza me ofende, me ataca los nervios, y el ver que una persona no es lo debidamente fina, suave y amable, me hace sufrir…!
¡Y el rebelde busca la tormenta, como si en la tormenta estuviera la paz!
A nadie conoces y nadie te conoce a ti… y, sin embargo, no te sientes extraño…! ¡Aquí, en cambio, donde todo el mundo te conoce y tú conoces a todo el mundo, sí te sientes extraño…!
¡Es un trabajo sin poesía…, en el que el pensamiento está ausente…!
"Feci quod potui, meliora potente faciant", "Hice lo que pude, lo mejor que pude."
March 31, 2023
اگر به من بگن اسم دیگه ای برای این نمایشنامه بگو من میگم سمفونی مرگ رویا و امید
در نوشته های چخوف تراژدی و کمدی به طور جدایی ناپذیری در هم تنیده شده اند، فقدان وضوح و معانی تعریف شده از ویژگی های ذاتی درام اوست که در نهایت خواننده را دچار حیرت می کند. شخصیت پردازی در این نمایش فوق العاده است در طی روند نمایشنامه شما با شخصیت های متفاوتی مواجه میشوید که در زندگی معمولی دیده اید از کمال گرا تا تمامیت طلب و...
در یک شهر اساطیری استانی روسیه در . اواخر دهه 1800، موضوعی که عناصر مختلف را متحد می کند. در این نمایشنامه حول محور زندگی خانواده پروزوروف، شامل سه خواهر ماشا، اولگا و ایرینا و برادر تا حدی ناکارآمد آنها آندری، شخصیتها تحصیلکرده و روشنفکر هستند، اما از آنجایی که دانش بر دوش آنها بوده است، هرگز نمیتوانند خوشحال باشند، تحصیلات آنها، به جز تأمین معاش، هیچ سودی برای آنها ندارد، و آنها را به رسیدن به هدفشان یعنی بازگشت به مسکوی محبوبشان نزدیکتر نمی کند، آنها ناراضی، غرق در رکود و به شدت از زمان حال خود ناامید هستند. چخوف یک ایده ضد روشنگری را تکرار می کند و می گوید که شادی و تحصیل ارتباط درست و نزدیکی ندارند. او از خانواده پروزوروف به عنوان قیاسی برای انعکاس واقعیت بیهودگی و ناامیدی که روسهای آن دوران تجربه کرده بودند استفاده می کند. من این تصور را دارم که چخوف نمایشنامه را برای رساندن پیامی اجتماعی به معاصرانش که در زندگیشان گیر کرده اند نوشته است، به نوعی به آنها می گوید: به خودتان نگاهی بیندازید و ببینید چقدر زندگی شما بد و ترسناک است؟! شهر مسکو که "سه خواهر" مدام در آرزوی آن بودند، برای خواهران پروسوروف زندگی ای را نشان می دهد که آنها ندارند و نخواهند داشت، مسکو همانطور که خواهران تصور می کنند وجود ندارد. این رویای محقق نشده آنهاست که با هر اقدامی دورتر و شدیدتر می شود. آنها دیدگاهی آرمانی نسبت به گذشته دارند و امتناع آنها از عمل و پذیرش مدرنیته منجر به رکود و کینه توزی می شود. چخوف هیچ تغییری در زندگی شخصیتهایش ایجاد نمیکند و شخصیتهای او دستخوش تغییر نمیشوند، او فقط با شخصیتهایش همانطور رفتار میکند که زندگی با آنها رفتار میکرد! آیا او بدین وسیله ما خوانندگان خود را وادار نمی کند که تصورات ما را در مورد زندگی و طبیعت انسان بررسی کنیم؟!
در نوشته های چخوف تراژدی و کمدی به طور جدایی ناپذیری در هم تنیده شده اند، فقدان وضوح و معانی تعریف شده از ویژگی های ذاتی درام اوست که در نهایت خواننده را دچار حیرت می کند. شخصیت پردازی در این نمایش فوق العاده است در طی روند نمایشنامه شما با شخصیت های متفاوتی مواجه میشوید که در زندگی معمولی دیده اید از کمال گرا تا تمامیت طلب و...
در یک شهر اساطیری استانی روسیه در . اواخر دهه 1800، موضوعی که عناصر مختلف را متحد می کند. در این نمایشنامه حول محور زندگی خانواده پروزوروف، شامل سه خواهر ماشا، اولگا و ایرینا و برادر تا حدی ناکارآمد آنها آندری، شخصیتها تحصیلکرده و روشنفکر هستند، اما از آنجایی که دانش بر دوش آنها بوده است، هرگز نمیتوانند خوشحال باشند، تحصیلات آنها، به جز تأمین معاش، هیچ سودی برای آنها ندارد، و آنها را به رسیدن به هدفشان یعنی بازگشت به مسکوی محبوبشان نزدیکتر نمی کند، آنها ناراضی، غرق در رکود و به شدت از زمان حال خود ناامید هستند. چخوف یک ایده ضد روشنگری را تکرار می کند و می گوید که شادی و تحصیل ارتباط درست و نزدیکی ندارند. او از خانواده پروزوروف به عنوان قیاسی برای انعکاس واقعیت بیهودگی و ناامیدی که روسهای آن دوران تجربه کرده بودند استفاده می کند. من این تصور را دارم که چخوف نمایشنامه را برای رساندن پیامی اجتماعی به معاصرانش که در زندگیشان گیر کرده اند نوشته است، به نوعی به آنها می گوید: به خودتان نگاهی بیندازید و ببینید چقدر زندگی شما بد و ترسناک است؟! شهر مسکو که "سه خواهر" مدام در آرزوی آن بودند، برای خواهران پروسوروف زندگی ای را نشان می دهد که آنها ندارند و نخواهند داشت، مسکو همانطور که خواهران تصور می کنند وجود ندارد. این رویای محقق نشده آنهاست که با هر اقدامی دورتر و شدیدتر می شود. آنها دیدگاهی آرمانی نسبت به گذشته دارند و امتناع آنها از عمل و پذیرش مدرنیته منجر به رکود و کینه توزی می شود. چخوف هیچ تغییری در زندگی شخصیتهایش ایجاد نمیکند و شخصیتهای او دستخوش تغییر نمیشوند، او فقط با شخصیتهایش همانطور رفتار میکند که زندگی با آنها رفتار میکرد! آیا او بدین وسیله ما خوانندگان خود را وادار نمی کند که تصورات ما را در مورد زندگی و طبیعت انسان بررسی کنیم؟!
April 14, 2020
Masterful.
Along with The Cherry Orchard this is my fave Chekhov play.
Along with The Cherry Orchard this is my fave Chekhov play.
February 26, 2025
-ˋˏ ༻❁༺ ˎˊ-
«میدانید ،من اغلب فکر میکنم اگر میشد زندگیمان را به نحوی سنجیده یعنی با چشم باز از سر بگیریم چه صورتی پیدا میکرد؟ گیریم زندگی گذشته مان را درست مثل یک چرک نویس دور می انداختیم و بعدش زندگی دیگری را مثل یک پاک نویس شروع میکردیم. اگر این طور میشد ،فکر میکنم چیزی که بیش از همه لازم داشتیم ،این بود که خودمان را تکرار نکنیم .لااقل برای خودمان محیط تازه ای ایجاد کنیم.»
نمایشنامه **سه خواهر** داستان زندگی سه خواهره که توی یه شهرستان دورافتاده زندگی میکنن. اونا همیشه آرزو دارن به مسکو برگردن؛ جایی که فکر میکنن خوشبختیشون اونجاست. با اینکه کلی مهارت دارن، مثل تسلط به چندین زبان، اما توی روزمرگی گیر افتادن و از این همه استعداد استفادهنشده، احساس پوچی میکنن. حتی گاهی این مهارتها رو بیشتر شبیه تجملات بیفایده میبینن تا چیز دیگه.
نمایشنامه رو به صورت صوتی گوش دادم؛ با صدای **میلاد فتوحی** و یه تیم حرفهای از گویندهها که واقعاً خوب از پس روایت بر اومدن.
-ˋˏ ༻❁༺ ˎˊ-
ش ۲۳
«میدانید ،من اغلب فکر میکنم اگر میشد زندگیمان را به نحوی سنجیده یعنی با چشم باز از سر بگیریم چه صورتی پیدا میکرد؟ گیریم زندگی گذشته مان را درست مثل یک چرک نویس دور می انداختیم و بعدش زندگی دیگری را مثل یک پاک نویس شروع میکردیم. اگر این طور میشد ،فکر میکنم چیزی که بیش از همه لازم داشتیم ،این بود که خودمان را تکرار نکنیم .لااقل برای خودمان محیط تازه ای ایجاد کنیم.»
نمایشنامه **سه خواهر** داستان زندگی سه خواهره که توی یه شهرستان دورافتاده زندگی میکنن. اونا همیشه آرزو دارن به مسکو برگردن؛ جایی که فکر میکنن خوشبختیشون اونجاست. با اینکه کلی مهارت دارن، مثل تسلط به چندین زبان، اما توی روزمرگی گیر افتادن و از این همه استعداد استفادهنشده، احساس پوچی میکنن. حتی گاهی این مهارتها رو بیشتر شبیه تجملات بیفایده میبینن تا چیز دیگه.
نمایشنامه رو به صورت صوتی گوش دادم؛ با صدای **میلاد فتوحی** و یه تیم حرفهای از گویندهها که واقعاً خوب از پس روایت بر اومدن.
-ˋˏ ༻❁༺ ˎˊ-
ش ۲۳
December 28, 2014
لو أننا عرفنا.. لو أننا فقط استطعنا أن نعرف!
بهذه العبارة يُنهى أنطون تشيخوف المسرحية المكونة من أربعة فصول على لسان أولجا، لو أننا عرفنا لماذا جئنا إلى هذه الحياة، لماذا نعانى، لماذا نحن تعساء!
يغلب على المسرحية استخدام الحركات الداخلية والتعبير عن الروح بالكلمات على استخدام الحركات الخارجية، وهو ما عرض تشيخوف لنقد لاذع من أساطين الأدب فى العالم كتولستوى الذى انتقد المسرحية بشدة.
الشقيقات الثلاث، أولجا، ماشا، إيرينا، وشقيقهم أندريه أبناء أحد جنرالات الجيش الروسى الراحلين، يعيشون فى قرية بالقرب من بطرسبرج، يحلمون بالعودة إلى موسكو حيث صخب الحياة بعيدا عن حياة الريف المملة. تنتهى المسرحية بدون أن تستطع الشقيقات الثلاثة تحقيق أحلامهن، وهذه هى الحياة، لا يصل الإنسان فيها إلى ما يتمنى الوصول إليه...
المسرحية عبارة عن سلسلة من الأسئلة الوجودية التى أرقت مضاجع الإنسان مثل:
ربما نظن أننا موجودون، فى حين أن الواقع أنه لا وجود لنا. لا أدرى شيئا، ولا أحد يدرى.
بهذه العبارة يُنهى أنطون تشيخوف المسرحية المكونة من أربعة فصول على لسان أولجا، لو أننا عرفنا لماذا جئنا إلى هذه الحياة، لماذا نعانى، لماذا نحن تعساء!
يغلب على المسرحية استخدام الحركات الداخلية والتعبير عن الروح بالكلمات على استخدام الحركات الخارجية، وهو ما عرض تشيخوف لنقد لاذع من أساطين الأدب فى العالم كتولستوى الذى انتقد المسرحية بشدة.
الشقيقات الثلاث، أولجا، ماشا، إيرينا، وشقيقهم أندريه أبناء أحد جنرالات الجيش الروسى الراحلين، يعيشون فى قرية بالقرب من بطرسبرج، يحلمون بالعودة إلى موسكو حيث صخب الحياة بعيدا عن حياة الريف المملة. تنتهى المسرحية بدون أن تستطع الشقيقات الثلاثة تحقيق أحلامهن، وهذه هى الحياة، لا يصل الإنسان فيها إلى ما يتمنى الوصول إليه...
المسرحية عبارة عن سلسلة من الأسئلة الوجودية التى أرقت مضاجع الإنسان مثل:
ربما نظن أننا موجودون، فى حين أن الواقع أنه لا وجود لنا. لا أدرى شيئا، ولا أحد يدرى.
April 8, 2018
اللي وصلني من المسرحية راجع لحالتي النفسية.
المسرحية بتعبر عن الناس اللي حياتهم كلها واقفه لانهم عايزين يكونوا في مكان تاني .
و ده حال الشقيقات الثلاثة في المسرحية.
هما عايزين يرجعوا يعيشوا في موسكو لان في موسكو سابوا كل حياتهم و عمرهم ما اتعودوا ولا حبوا مكانهم الجديد اللي عمرهم ما سابوه و لحد آخر لحظة في المسرحية بيتمنوا يتركوه.
المسرحية بتعبر عن حياة الملل في روسيا في الوقت ده و الوخم لعدم وجود عمل يستحق مجهودهم.
و المسرحية بتعبر عن النقلة اللي كانت بتعملها معسكرات الجيش زمان لو عسكروا في قرية صغيرة فبتدب فيها الحياة فجأة من جميع النواحي.
المسرحية بتعبر عن الناس اللي حياتهم كلها واقفه لانهم عايزين يكونوا في مكان تاني .
و ده حال الشقيقات الثلاثة في المسرحية.
هما عايزين يرجعوا يعيشوا في موسكو لان في موسكو سابوا كل حياتهم و عمرهم ما اتعودوا ولا حبوا مكانهم الجديد اللي عمرهم ما سابوه و لحد آخر لحظة في المسرحية بيتمنوا يتركوه.
المسرحية بتعبر عن حياة الملل في روسيا في الوقت ده و الوخم لعدم وجود عمل يستحق مجهودهم.
و المسرحية بتعبر عن النقلة اللي كانت بتعملها معسكرات الجيش زمان لو عسكروا في قرية صغيرة فبتدب فيها الحياة فجأة من جميع النواحي.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,261 reviews