Question 1: I think Chekhov's stance on morality in fiction is a little bit too strong, because fiction really is a great place for lessons to be placed, I think if you come away from a story and nothing touched you then whats the point of reading the story in the first place? In one of my favorite book series, Halo, an angel is sent to earth in a town that is over run by demons and other baddy types, but she falls for a human, it goes through this whole illicit love affair and soon enough she wind up in hell. It's a fantastic metaphor for punishment just like in fairy tales. Also alike to fairy tales, at the end she is rescued by the Archangel Michael "her brother", signifying a second chance. Anyway what I'm trying to get at is that the story would have fallen flat if it was just about the Angel and her human making kissy faces at one another and then the story ending. The lesson made it a deeper read, something a much prefer to skimming over the top of a situation
Question 2: I think I enjoyed Chekhov's version of "The Lady with the Pet Dog" just fine, only it was a superficial sort of appreciation for the story, because the story itself was superficial, it didn't go deep enough for my tastes. But that's not to say I would have enjoyed it better had they gotten caught, because I'm a hopeless romantic, I feel like fiction is just exactly the place to have these kinds of love affairs, because you can make up extremely wild circumstances and place yourself into them without hurting anyone. But please, at least give it an ending, the weird cliffhanger where the reader knows that this affair is just going to continue but doesn't know the outcome is too much, at least for me, I like a nice wrap up at the end because it makes me feel nice.
I agree it would have been nice to know what happened at the end and if their affair continued or if they were caught. Maybe it is just Chekhovs way of letting us hopeless romantics believe it had a happy ending :)
ReplyDeleteTotally, it's always better to have something worth watching or reading. I agree with you on your example, it would've definitely been plain if nothing consequential happened to her and we were left with a uh-what-then-what. I do believe that some stories are good when they leave you in suspense, but that doesn't go to say that all of them can pull it off. Good key points.
ReplyDeleteI tend to stray from your beliefs on the story. Yes, the story was superficial, but that's exactly how Chekhov wanted Gurov to be portrayed. Personally, I like the fact that it ends like it does; I don't think it was as much a cliffhanger as it was just a sudden ending, and I feel Chekhov does this to kind of match the Gurov's superficial behavior. This isn't a love story, so I feel in-depth character building isn't a big requirement, and Chekhov knows that perhaps you won't "feel nice" after reading it, but that's probably what he was going for.
ReplyDelete