2. I think that I would have enjoyed "The Lady with the Pet Dog" by Chekhov less had there been more emotion or consequences in regards to the characters. I am never really a fan of stories when they involve adultery, because of the drama and emotional distress put onto the characters who are being cheated on. When I read a story I tend to get very involved in it, so when there are stories where a woman or man finds their spouse is cheating on them I feel the same stress and heartache as those characters. Therefore with Chekhov's lack of emotion from the characters and the lack of appearance from the significant others, I was able to purely judge the characters for what they were, sinners, and not feel bad for either side.
4. Both versions of "The Lady with the Pet Dog" had an interesting sequence of events, because neither gave much background of the characters' lives before the affair. I thought that Chekhov's version had a more effective plot due to the fact that it was logical and orderly. He explains the affair and its events in chronological order, where as Oates seems all over the place. One event in particular stuck out to me as showing why Chekhov's version was an easier read; when the two lovers meet once again at the theater. When reading Oates version it almost seemed to me that the character, Anna, had been imagining that she had seen her lover at intermission just by the way it was described, with no background on the whole affair. However, Chekhov's version gives the events of the affair, the departure, and the reunion in order so it was much easier to grasp.
It is intresting that you mention thhe fact that we know little about each characters life prior to the affair. We may not know much about their married lives but we do learn alot about their traits, past exsperiences concerning love, lack of love trust, and so forth. These may not include all the details we desire but it is a key peice of information that should not be overlooked.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Chekhov's version was easier to follow due to it being written in chronological order. As I started to read Oates' version I was lost from the very beginning, I too thought that the theater scene at the very beginning was her imagination. I also found it hard to follow whether the lady in her story was with her real husband or with the man she was having an affair with. This came from the fact that the story kept jumping around from her being with her husband to her thinking about when she was with the other man. It does this so often that it is hard to follow and made it less effective, and even annoying for me to read.
ReplyDeleteI know exactly what you mean about the connection with the story, I totally get into it, like when Twilight Series came out, I was one of those girls who got totally into it, I read them and I read them again, then I read them from the last book to the first book, and every time I felt everything that Bella was feeling. It wasn't until later that I realized how crazy I was getting about it, my friends had to come pull me away from my room, and only when I got into the sunlight did I understand that I'd gone absolute nuts over a book series that was written with mediocrity as it's most defining feature. But I digress. I agree that a deeper story does get to me more, but I like it sometimes when I fall into a story and have to just cry and clutch my chest because it feels like I'm being torn apart. So with the threat of rambling on and on I believe I should stop. Here.
ReplyDelete