Letters of Anton Chekhov to His Family and FriendsChekhov, Anton Pavlovich
General
Letters of Anton Chekhov to His Family and Friends
Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich
Authors, Russian -- 19th century -- Correspondence; Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, 1860-1904 -- Correspondence
He boasts, he argues, but you know one
can see what sort of man he is without that. Let him be merry, let him
play pranks through the whole four acts, let him eat a great deal after
his work--and that will be enough for him to conquer the audience with.
Pyotr, I repeat, is good. Most likely you don’t even suspect how good he
is. Tatyana, too, is a finished figure, only (a) she ought really
to be a schoolmistress, ought to be teaching children, ought to come
home from school, ought to be taken up with her pupils and exercise-books,
and (b) it ought to be mentioned in the first or second act that
she has attempted to poison herself; then, after that hint, the poisoning
in the third act will not seem so startling and will be more in place.
Telerev talks too much: such characters ought to be shown bit by bit
between others, for in any case such people are everywhere merely
incidental--both in life and on the stage. Make Elena dine with all the
rest in the first act, let her sit and make jokes, or else there is very
little of her, and she is not clear. Her avowal to Pyotr is too abrupt,
on the stage it would come out in too high relief. Make her a passionate
woman, if not loving at least apt to fall in love....
July 29, 1902.
I have read your play. [Footnote: “In the Depths.”] It is new and
unmistakably fine. The second act is very good, it is the best, the
strongest, and when I was reading it, especially the end, I almost danced
with joy. The tone is gloomy, oppressive; the audience unaccustomed to such
subjects will walk out of the theatre, and you may well say good-bye to
your reputation as an optimist in any case. My wife will play Vassilisa,
the immoral and spiteful woman; Vishnevsky walks about the house and
imagines himself the Tatar--he is convinced that it is the part for him.
Luka, alas! you must not give to Artyom. He will repeat himself in that
part and be exhausted; but he would do the policeman wonderfully, it is his
part. The part of the actor, in which you have been very successful (it is
a magnificent part), should be given to an experienced actor, Stanislavsky
perhaps. Katchalev will play the baron.
You have left out of the fourth act all the most interesting characters
(except the actor), and you must mind now that there is no ill effect from
it. The act may seem boring and unnecessary, especially if, with the exit
of the strongest and most interesting actors, there are left only the
mediocrities. The death of the actor is awful; it is as though you gave the
spectator a sudden box on the ear apropos of nothing without preparing him
in any way. How the baron got into the doss-house and why he is a baron is
also not sufficiently clear.
* * * * *
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account