4. If you read both versions (and yay for you, for you're bound to learn much more about how point of view works if you do), discuss the ordering of events (plot stuff). Which seems more effective to you? Effective how? Is one more emotionally arresting than the other? More logical? Less so? (i.e., is the organization of events/highighting of particular moments and places related or parallel to the uneven and highly emotional state of the female protagonist?)
A: I read both versions of "The Lady With The Pet Dog", and found them both very interesting. Chekhov's version was very "put in order", the story begins with Gurov meeting the lady, them having the affair and then going their separate ways and then back to the affair again. But in Oates version, the story starts off with Anna seeing her lover at a theatre and freaking out and then goes into how they met 6 months ago. I think the Oates version was more effective because i feel like Gurov had no guilty feeling towards the affair. Anna, however, was having a hard time excepting herself after what she did. She even seemed a bit suicidal. The Oates version is definitely more emotionally arresting than Chekhov's version, the whole story was about how she felt and in Chekhov's Gurov never expressed his feelings.
2. Do you think you would have appreciated “The Lady with the Pet Dog” more or less if Chekhov judged his characters or showed them either being penitent for their "sins", caught by their significant other(s), or suffering the consequences of their actions? Or, do you appreciate it more in the sense that the moralizing is left to you as the author simply develops his characters rather than judging them (this is much like Question 1, but it of course asks you to respond directly to what we're reading than more generally).
A: I think it would have definitely made the story more interesting if Chekhov would have caught by their significant others, because we are now left wondering if they will ever get caught. Asking ourselves how long they kept the relationship a secret or did they eventually tell their spouses or did they just decide break off the affair. I liked the story how it is, but would have liked it more if they would have gotten caught. Being that Chekhov did not judge his characters in the story, it kind of made me feel like Gurov and the lady were not guilty because they truly loved each other, but i know it is wrong regardless if they are in love or not.
I think the reason Chekhov didn't continue the story was because there's a chance they could wouldn't been caught, what the odds are - nobody knows. The whole plot leading up until then was all in the grand scheme of things, Gurov and Anna made the relationship happen. In other words there was no chance or possibility of something else happening. The reader is left the open ending to create imagination and explore the possible outcomes the couple might have, which you did :) I liked your response! Good job.
ReplyDeleteinventing your own ending is the best part, and that's what Chekhov intended us to do. had he continued to write about them getting caught or even getting away, i think he still would have remained unbiased and left us to imagine some part of what happens next. for all we know, they get caught and then kill their spouses, leaving another door open for the imagination.
ReplyDelete