Analysis of the story by A.P. Chekhov's "Darling".

The story “Darling” was written by A.P. Chekhov in 1899. At this time, capitalism in Russia is developing by leaps and bounds. And, therefore, the formula: “Man is a wolf to man” enters into relationships between people.

Against this background of social relations, Chekhov shows a woman whose entire soul is made up of other people. This woman is Olga Semyonovna. She marries theater entrepreneur Kukin for love. He fills her whole life. She understands and shares all his problems (“Does the public understand this? Yesterday almost all the boxes were empty”). But Kukin is dying. Olga Semyonovna falls into mourning (“My dear! Why did I meet you? Why did I recognize and love you!”).

But soon she falls in love again. Now to the manager of the timber warehouse Pustovalov. Now Pustovalov fills her entire soul. They are getting married. And, since Olga Semyonovna’s soul is filled with her new husband, she begins to delve into the issues of timber trade (“... every year to go to the Mogilev province for timber. And what a tariff!”). But Pustovalov also dies. Olga Semyonovna again falls into mourning (“How can I live without you, I am bitter and unhappy”).

But she fell in love again. This time, veterinarian Smirnin quarreled with his wife. But their love did not last long. His regiment was soon transferred far away, and he had to leave the city. After Smirnin's departure, Olga Semyonovna begins to wither and grow old.

But many years later, Smirnin returned to her city, having made peace with his wife. He came to send his son to the gymnasium and settled with Olga Semyonovna. Now she began to live with the sorrows and joys of this boy Sasha at the gymnasium.

Olga Semyonovna cannot help but live the life of another person, not worry about his problems. In the story, everyone calls her Darling because her soul is open to another person. And it cannot be described in a more precise word. She cannot live only for herself. From such a life she begins to waste away. But during the accelerated development of capitalism, most people live only for themselves, not doing good to anyone other than themselves. And, in my opinion, Chekhov’s idea in this story is life not for one’s own well-being, but life for the sake of life itself.

12. SOUL AND SOUL

The first significant work of the mature Chekhov, written in the first person, was the story “A Boring Story” (1889). In the 90s, this form was firmly established. Let us remind you: “The Wife”, “Fear (the story of my friend)” (1892); “The story of an unknown person” (1893); "The Head Gardener's Story" (1894); "Ariadne" (1895); “House with a Mezzanine (an Artist’s Story)” and “My Life (a Provincial’s Story)” (1896). Finally, “Man in a Case”, “Gooseberry”, “About Love” (1898).

And - the story “Ionych”, begun in the same form, but then transformed. From this point on, Chekhov will no longer return to the first-person narrative form. All his works of subsequent - last - years were written on behalf of the author (“Case from practice”, “Darling”, “New Dacha”, “On business”, “Lady with a dog”, “At Christmas time”, “In the ravine”, "Bishop", "Bride") ( True, the note to the story “On Business Affairs” in the notebook is given in the first person.).

This fact is more difficult to explain than to establish. Obviously, it is connected with the general trend of Chekhov’s development in the 90s - 900s - with his aspiration into the spiritual, inner world of the hero.

Here, however, one clarification needs to be made. It would be naive to think that the form of a work with a hero-narrator limits the author in revealing the inner world of the hero, in psychological analysis. The whole point is that even in this form the hero-narrator and the author do not coincide. Even when he seems to take the place of the author, the hero-narrator does not become one.

The idea affirmed by the author, his position, views, assessments - all this is not reasoning, not “quotations”, but what is inherent in the structure of the work, which gradually emerges through the personal intonation of the characters, their disputes, clashes. Whatever the form of the story, the author cannot be reduced to any of the characters. It makes no sense to look for Chekhov directly in the “unknown man”, in the “head gardener”, in Trigorin or in Pete Trofimov. The author does not speak “through the mouth of one of the heroes,” because he is a “stoic” concept.

Chekhov's refusal of the Ich-Form in the late 90s - early 900s cannot be understood straightforwardly: even in this narrative form, Chekhov could deeply and objectively reveal the inner world of the hero.

This is not contradicted by the fact that the objective form of narration - from an impersonal, directly unidentified, omniscient author - opened up new opportunities for revealing the hero’s inner world.

“Ionych”, “Darling”, “Lady with a Dog”, “Bishop”, “Bride” - it is enough to put these works of the late 90s - early 900s in a row to identify an important common feature for them: the hero is revealed from the outside and from the inside. We hear his voice and read his thoughts; his internal monologues sound. In this sense, the story “The Bishop” is the result of the development of Chekhov the artist, his desire to reveal the world of the soul of his hero. It is no coincidence that in all cases the title of the story is the name or designation of the main character. These are portrait stories and research stories.

We talked about another important lesson from the little trilogy and “Ionych”: the subject of satire and the narrator are not separated by an impassable line. The owner of the gooseberry, Nikolai Ivanovich, and Ivan Ivanovich, who talks about him, are siblings. This reveals one of Chekhov's most significant artistic achievements. Satire, laughter, anecdote - all this for him is not some separate area of ​​\u200b\u200blife, but is hidden in life itself, in its depths, in its smallest pores.

When you think about Chekhov’s humor and satire, the words of Jules Renard, who wrote in his diary very shortly before his death, come to mind:

“I am not satisfied with any definition of humor. However, humor contains everything" ( Jules Renard. Diary. Featured Pages. M., “Fiction”, 1965, p. 485.).

Ionych appeared as one of the nice inhabitants of the city of S., and left as some kind of terrible creature who had reached the limit of greed and bestiality.

Chekhov of recent years has been especially attentive to all kinds of transitional forms of life - existence - vegetation. We find in him heroes, non-heroes, and “half-heroes.” There are no strict boundaries here. A person may find himself in a case, a soul in a robe. And not just to appear, but to slowly, gradually, imperceptibly appear.

Chekhov is a great diagnostician of the human soul. This means that it represents the inexhaustible variety of possible cases, situations, options.

The hero of “A Boring Story” remarked:

“My fellow therapists, when teaching how to treat, advise “individualizing each individual case.” You need to listen to this advice to make sure that the tools recommended in textbooks as the best and quite suitable for the template turn out to be completely unsuitable in individual cases. The same thing applies to moral illnesses” (VII, 270 - 271).

Alekhine will repeat the same idea when speaking about love: “It is necessary, as doctors say, to individualize each individual case” (IX, 277).

The title of the story, “The Man in a Case,” was associated with “Dead Souls.” But here is another name - “Darling”. What analogy could there be? Before us is a special, highly individualized case.

As is often the case with Chekhov, the title has a complex figurative meaning. “Darling” is how they call Olga Semyonovna, just as Startsev is called “Ionych”, Anna Sergeevna is called “the lady with the dog”. But “darling” is not only a nickname - it is “soul” in a diminutive form. We are entering some kind of special world - not even a world, but a little world. And Olga Semyonovna, as a girl, is called “Olenka”, and the cat Bryska is not just a cat, but a “black cat”. Here everything is zoomed out, as if through inverted binoculars, starting from Olenka’s first husband, whom she cherishes like a child (“How nice you are!” she said quite sincerely, smoothing his hair. “How pretty you are!”), and ending with the “boy” Sasha ( Interesting correction. In the text of the magazine “Family, the “darling” told the boy Sasha: “You are so smart” (“Family”, 1899, No. 1, p. 4). While preparing a story for the Collected Works, Chekhov corrected: “You are so smart.” This touch well conveys the atmosphere of “diminutiveness” that fills the story “Darling”.); She calls her first husband Kukin “Vanichka”, her second husband “Vasichka”.

“Darling” - this word itself correlates with many words, epithets, expressions in the text of the story. It is figurative and, if I may say so, morphologically subordinated to the general structure of the story about the human soul, brought to the scale of a “darling”.

This “diminutiveness” of the heroine’s image puts her in a special position, which cannot be defined by the usual coordinates of “positive - negative hero.” The fact that the soul is reduced is, of course, a negative point, but the soul is not dead, not a case. And having diminished, she remained in many ways a soul, did not lose her kindness, compassion, and ability to self-denial.

The complexity of the image of the “darling” evoked very different reactions from readers of the story - from sharp condemnation to the most excited praise.

“Here, anxiously, like a gray mouse, “Darling” scurries around - a sweet, meek woman who knows how to love so slavishly, so much,” wrote Gorky. “You can hit her on the cheek, and she won’t even dare to moan loudly, meek slave” ( M. Gorky. Collected Works, vol. V. M., GIHL, 1950, p. 428 (essay “A. P. Chekhov”).).

And - almost the opposite review of Leo Tolstoy. Chekhov's friend P. Sergeenko wrote to him that Tolstoy read the story aloud four times and calls “Darling” a work of fiction, quoting various passages from it from memory (OR GBL).

In the preface to Chekhov’s story, Tolstoy said: “He (Chekhov), like Valaam, intended to curse, but the god of poetry forbade him and ordered him to bless, and he blessed and involuntarily clothed this sweet creature with such a wonderful light that it forever remains a model of what he can to be a woman in order to be happy herself and to make those with whom fate brings her happy" ( L. N. Tolstoy. Complete works, vol. 41. M., 1957. For Tolstoy’s statements regarding the story “Darling,” see the book. V. Lakshina “Tolstoy and Chekhov” (M., “Soviet Writer”, 1963, chapter “Tolstoy’s Favorite Story”, pp. 94 - 115. Second revised ed., 1975, pp. 81 - 97). Rich specific material is contained in the article by A. S. Melkova “The creative fate of the story “Darling” (collection “In Chekhov’s creative laboratory.” M., “Nauka”, 1974).).

Between these two poles - Gorky and Tolstoy - there are numerous reviews from readers who stopped in bewilderment, sometimes even at a loss in front of the incomprehensible complexity of the image.

“I am accustomed,” reading your works of recent years,” Evgenia Lomakina wrote to Chekhov on January 5, 1899, “to always come up with a more or less clear idea of ​​the purpose for which your particular story was written.” Immediately the reader became an IB dead end: “Why did you settle on such a type of woman, what does such a type signify in modern life, do you really consider it positive thanks only to those sides of the soul that were revealed in the heroine in the second half of her life - do you really consider the whole the first half of the story is typical for a modern marriage, for a modern middle class and educated girl?”

In conclusion, the reader admitted: “in me and in most of my circle, the type you brought out aroused not so much sympathy as a completely negative attitude, and in many even ridicule and bewilderment” (OR GBL).

I. I. Gorbunov-Posadov, one of Chekhov’s most sensitive and attentive readers and correspondents, informed him on January 24 of the same 1899:

“Some lady said that “Dushenka” [“Dushechka”] was written very nicely, but that it was an offensive mockery of a woman. She didn't understand the story at all. In my opinion, the author’s attitude towards “Darling” is not mockery, it is sweet, subtle humor, through which one can hear sadness<...>over “Darling”, and there are thousands of them..." ( OR GBL. Published in “Izvestia” OLYA AN USSR”, 1959, No. 6.).

Despite the wide range of reader assessments of Chekhov's story, there are reviews among them that speak of the contradiction between the author's plan and its actual implementation. According to Leo Tolstoy, Chekhov wanted to condemn and ridicule the heroine, but in reality, as an artist, he did the opposite - he sang her praises and showered her with his sympathy.

The creative history of the story sheds new light on this circumstance - it helps to understand where the author of “Darling” started and what he came to; how different, almost opposite aspects of the image intersected in this work.

Once again we see how far the prehistory of Chekhov’s works goes back into the past. In this sense, the literary biography of the story “Darling” is especially complex. The earliest motives or “pre-motives” of the story date back to the end of the second half of the 80s. Thus, the backstory of “Darling” is measured in about a decade, even a little more.

In 1893, “The Story of an Unknown Person” was published in the February and March issue of the Russian Thought magazine. In a letter to L. Ya. Gurevich on May 22 of this year, Chekhov reported: “The Story of an Unknown Man” I began writing in 1887 - 88, without having the intention of publishing it anywhere, then I gave it up; Last year I remade it, this year I finished it...” (XVI, 67).

Sheets with Chekhov's notes are kept in TsGALI.

“I left Grigory Ivanovich, feeling beaten and deeply offended,” we read on one of them. “I was irritated against good words and against those who say them...” (see in full XII, 299). E. N. Konshina in the notes to volume XII, where Chekhov’s notes are published on separate sheets, presumably with a question mark, indicates that the passage could refer to “The Story of an Unknown Man,” but was not included in the final text (XII, 386) .

It seems that the question mark can be removed: the connection of the passage with “The Story of an Unknown Man” is no longer in doubt.

Grigory Ivanovich is the name of the official Orlov, to whom an “unknown man” is hired as a lackey (in the printed text he is not “Grigory”, but “George”). Let us point out the possible place of the story-story to which the passage probably belonged - the end of Chapter III. The hero describes conversations with Georgy Ivanovich; the chapter ends like this: “At three or four o’clock the guests dispersed or left<...>, and I went to my footman’s room and for a long time could not sleep from a headache and cough” (VIII, 185).

Here is another piece of paper, judging by its appearance and handwriting, belonging to the same manuscript as the first:

“The inner content of these women is as gray and dull as their faces and outfits; they talk about science, literature, trends, etc. only because they are the wives and sisters of scientists and writers: if they were the wives and sisters of local police officers or dentists, they would talk with the same zeal about fires or teeth. To allow them to talk about science, which is alien to them, and to listen to them, means to flatter their ignorance” (XII, 300 - 301).

Whose words are these?

In all likelihood, they belong to the same Georgy Ivanovich Orlov, who throughout the entire “Tale of an Unknown Man” angrily, mockingly, sarcastically denounces women, accusing them of ignorance and lack of independence of judgment. What, it would seem, constitutes a woman’s dignity - the ability to love - in his opinion, is her main misfortune and shortcoming.

“Love and a man constitute the main essence of her life,” he develops his favorite thought in front of the guests, “and perhaps in this regard the philosophy of the unconscious works in her; please convince her that love is only a simple need, like food and clothing..." (VIII, 193).

In the story, Orlov especially caustically ridicules Zinaida Fedorovna, who moved to him, because she talks about things that are inaccessible to her. “... It would not hurt us to agree once and for all,” he instructively notes, “not to talk about what we have known for a long time, or about what is not within the scope of our competence” (VIII, 201). He continues to address her with the same teaching: “For God’s sake, for the sake of all that is holy, don’t talk about what is already known to everyone!..” (see VIII, 212).

An “unknown person” will speak about Orlov’s cynical attitude towards women, about his desire to drag her down into the dirt, about “eternal references to women’s logic” in his farewell letter to him.

Not only in Orlov’s reasoning is there talk about the fate and position of women. In essence, it is precisely this question that the heroine of the story, Zinaida Fedorovna, solves and cannot solve. She left her husband for Orlov. Having learned the truth about this unworthy man, whom she loved sincerely and naively, she leaves him along with the “unknown man.” She does not at all want to be content with the role of a woman “in front of” someone.

“All these wonderful ideas of yours,” she throws in the face of the “unknown man,” “I see, they come down to one inevitable, necessary step: I must become your mistress. Here's what you need. To rush around with ideas and not be the mistress of the most honest, most ideological person means not to understand ideas. We must start with this... that is, with the mistress, and the rest will follow itself” (VIII, 241).

She leaves this life and commits suicide because she does not want and cannot come to terms with this position and role ( In the magazine text in this conversation, the heroine added: “If, however, I met with a third, some kind of ideological person, then a fourth, a fifth... maybe something would come of it.”<...>But I’m tired... It will happen” (VIII, 542).).

Usually, those who wrote about “The Story” paid the main attention to the ideological evolution of the “unknown man”, his disappointment in the revolutionary underground, in terror. But there is another theme here related to the image of Zinaida Fedorovna. She is especially important to us now.

We see that the passage “The inner content of these women is just as gray and dull...” is deeply connected with “The Story of an Unknown Man” - both with Orlov’s philosophy and with the fate of Zinaida Fedorovna, who tried to free herself from the inevitable fate of a woman “at”, a servant , mistress, lower being.

S. Balukhaty was the first to draw attention to the fact that this passage in many ways anticipates the story “Darling” ( S. Balukhaty. Chekhov's notebooks. “Literary studies”, 1934, No. 2, p. 58.).

Now we can clarify: arose during the work on “The Story of an Unknown Man” in 1887 - 1888, the passage contained a motif that would later be developed in the story “Darling” ( A. S. Melkova also speaks about this in the article mentioned above.).

The first note, directly related to “Darling,” appeared in the mid-90s in the First Notebook:

“She was the wife of an artist - she loved the theater, writers, it seemed that she was completely immersed in her husband’s business, and everyone was surprised that he married so successfully; but then he died; she married a pastry chef, and it turned out that she loved nothing more than making jam, and she despised the theater, since she was religious in imitation of her second husband” (I, 48, 1).

It is not difficult to detect a similarity in the construction of the note “The internal content of these women...” and the entry “Was the wife of an artist...”. In the first case: they talk about literature because they are wives of writers; If they were wives of local doctors or dentists, they would talk about fires or teeth. In the second: she was the wife of an artist - she loved the theater; became the wife of a devout pastry chef - she began to despise the theater.

In both cases, first - a person representing art, with whom the heroine connects her fate, then, on the contrary, a person very far from art; By obeying him, the heroine renounces her former passion for art. At the same time, the difference is clearly visible. In the first case we are talking about women, about their whole category. I mean many. Scientists and writers, local doctors or dentists are mentioned only as an example of the conditions in which these women could find themselves, and how they would change. There are no specific persons here.

In the second case, it is about a certain person, about the fate of a woman who repeated the opinions of first her husband, an artist, then - a religious pastry chef.

When does the entry “Was the artist’s wife...” appear? In the midst of Chekhov's work on the story "Ariadne". The entry (I, 48, 1) is located between the notes for this story - “In Paris. It seemed to her that if the French saw how she was built, they would be delighted” (I, 45, 2) and “Ariadne speaks three languages ​​perfectly. A woman quickly learns languages, because she has a lot of empty space in her head” (I, 50, 1). Just as in “The Tale of an Unknown Man,” the female theme occupies a large, even greater place in “Ariadne.” In both works, the heroine is opposed by a hero who denounces her and women in general: Orlov for Zinaida Fedorovna, Shamokhin for Ariadne.

Telling the story of his infatuation with Ariadne, love and disappointment, Shamokhin categorically declares that “women are deceitful, petty, vain, unfair, undeveloped, cruel - in a word, not only not higher, but even immeasurably lower than us men” (IX, 62 - 63). He is a “passionate, convinced misogynist” (IX, 83).

Just like Orlov, Shamokhin particularly blames women for the lack of independence of their judgments. In the journal text he said: “I will not argue, there are educated among them, just as there are educated starlings and parrots” (IX, 551) ( See “Russian Thought”, 1895, book. XII, p. 24.).

Now it becomes somewhat clearer to us how the note for “Darling” could have appeared precisely in the process of working on “Ariadne”.

A very significant circumstance: two sketches that anticipate the story “Darling”, “The internal content of these women is just as gray and dull...” and “She was the artist’s wife...” - are connected with two works where the question of the fate of a woman is resolved, but where the heroines are directly opposite: Zinaida Fedorovna is afraid of the fate of a simple “appendage” to a man, a mistress, a doll in rags. Ariadne doesn’t dream of anything else.

Zinaida Fedorovna was deceived in Orlov, she is his victim; on the contrary, Shamokhin is himself a victim of Ariadne, he was deceived in her.

So, already at its very inception, the story “Darling” was between the poles of affirmation and negation, between the noble Zinaida Fedorovna, capable of love, and the vicious Ariadna, who does not know what true love is.

Chekhov’s contemporaries, the first readers of “Darling,” came up with the idea of ​​comparing this heroine with Ariadne.

Is it possible to say that the sketch “Was an artist’s wife...” already outlines the main thing in “Darling”? Hardly. In essence, here the heroine is just an echo of the opinions of her husband, first the first, then the second. “She was the wife of an artist - she loved the theater...” Whether she loved the artist is unknown, she simply “was a wife.” But she loved the theater and writers, because the artist loved them, and so did she.

There is also not a word about love for her second husband: “she married a pastry chef and it turned out that she loved nothing more than making jam...”

The word “loved”, “loves” is used twice in the sketch, but each time it refers not to the person with whom the heroine has connected her fate, but to those of his passions and hobbies that she shares, forgetting about what happened before.

No, this is not “Darling” yet - rather, as Shamokhin said, “a parrot”, a person without his own voice, capable of only being an echo of others.

In the story, the heroine not only marries Kukin - he touched her soul, evoked compassion, a desire to help, to share with him anxieties, troubles, failures, his desperate struggle with the indifference of the public:

“Olenka listened to Kukin silently, seriously, and sometimes tears came to her eyes. In the end, Kukin’s misfortunes touched her, she fell in love with him” (IX, 316). This is how the word “loved” appeared in the story, addressed not to the heroine’s hobby, borrowed from her husband (“she loved the theater,” “she loves nothing more than making jam”), but to her life partner himself.

In the sketch, the heroine is given a parody - she is a puppet; She borrows her love for the theater from her artist husband. The artist himself is devoid of comedy: it is natural that he loves the theater, his business.

In the story, on the contrary, the first husband is funny - he is not an artist, as in the passage, but a small, busy, unsuccessful entrepreneur and owner of the Tivoli pleasure garden. Here are the first words with which he appears before the heroine: “... the public, ignorant, wild. I give her the best operetta, an extravaganza of magnificent coupletists, but does she really need it? Does she understand anything about this? She needs a booth! Give her vulgarity!” (IX, 315).

Kukin considers his operettas, coupletists, magicians, “local amateurs” to be real art, inaccessible to low-class audiences.

Thus, if in the sketch the heroine is the shadow of the opinion of her artist husband, then in the story she is “the shadow of a shadow”, because Kukin himself does not know what true art is, he takes his opinions at second hand.

“But does the public understand this? - she said. “She needs a booth!” Yesterday we had “Faust Reversed,” and almost all the boxes were empty, and if Vanichka and I had staged some vulgarity, then, believe me, the theater would have been packed” (IX, 317).

It may seem that she is even funnier than her Kukin - she repeats his thoughts word for word and the reasoning itself is funny.

But that's not true. Kukin is simply ridiculous, pathetic in his contempt for a loser operetta critic denouncing an ignorant public. The “darling” has an excuse: she loves Kukin. And he not only loves him, but identifies himself with him. “Vanichka and I” is her special pronoun, in it both “he”, Kukin, and “I”, “darling”, are completely merged for her. “Tomorrow Vanichka and I are staging Orpheus in Hell, come.”

Kukin aroused in her “a real, deep feeling.” He himself is so caught up in his painful efforts, his attempts to captivate and entertain the viewer, that he has no time for her. About their wedding night it is said:

“He was happy, but since it rained on the wedding day and then at night [which means losses for Tivo-li], the expression of despair did not leave his face” (IX, 317).

What was funny in the sketch was that the heroine loves the theater only because she is the wife of an artist - and only until then. In the story, this was also supplemented by the contrast between the loving “darling” and the comic Kukin, who, even on the first wedding night, is in despair due to losses.

The first husband in the note “She was the wife of an artist...” (I, 48, 1) was followed by a devout pastry chef. In the story this transition is presented more sharply and in more contrast. After Kukin, with all his crackling pyrotechnics, entertainment bustle and despair, comes not the confectioner, but the sedate, judicious manager of the lumber yard, Pustovalov. The difference is also emphasized in the surnames: “Kukin” - something unsolidable, funny, skimpy; “Pustovalov” is more monumental and representative, although “empty”. The first surname is breathed out almost like one syllable, the second is more difficult to pronounce hastily.

“Beam, round timber, plank, shelevka, nameless, reshotnik, carriage, croaker” - this is not “Faust inside out”, it’s a serious matter.

When clouds approached, promising troubles and losses, Kukin shouted “with hysterical laughter” - Pustovalov speaks “sedately.”

This complete opposite of Kukin and Pustovalov is paradoxically combined with the same loyalty, the love of the “darling”, its complete dissolution in the world of one, and then the other.

“Tomorrow Vanichka and I are staging “Orpheus in Hell” and “Vasichka and I have no time to go to theaters” - the contrasting similarity has been taken to the limit.

“Darling” adopts not only the thoughts and words, but even the intonation of her husbands. “She needs a booth!” - she exclaims in Kukinsky, speaking about the audience. And she pronounces the words that she has no time to go to theaters in Pustovalov’s “sedate” manner.

The sketch “Was an artist’s wife...” mentioned the heroine’s two husbands and, accordingly, two circles of her performances. In the story, this appeared as two contrastingly interconnected chapters (although there is no graphic division into chapters). Instead of “Vanichka” - “Vasichka”. About “Vanichka”: “After the wedding we lived well.” About “Vasichka”: “Pustovalov and Olenka, having got married, lived well.” Vanichka is dying: “My darling! - Olenka sobbed<...>For whom did you leave your poor Olenka, poor, unhappy?..” Vasichka dies: “Who did you leave me for, my darling? - she sobbed...*

There is in all this some kind of semi-animation of the heroine, an almost mechanical task.

The story of the family life of darling with Kukin and Pusto-valov, plot-wise, as a diagram, coincides, although very approximately, with what is outlined in note I, 48, 1. The second half of the story creates new situations that were not provided for in the note. The third passion of the “darling” begins - the regimental veterinarian Smirnin - he separated from his wife and sends her money to support his son; “Hearing about this, Olenka sighed and shook her head, and she felt sorry for him” (IX, 320). Her feeling for Smirnin begins in the same way as for Kukin - she is touched by his troubles and evokes compassionate sympathy.

“Darling” enters the third world, the third circle of ideas, information, truths. What worries her most now is veterinary supervision in the city.

“When guests came to him [Smirnin], his colleagues in the regiment, she, pouring them tea or serving them dinner, began to talk about the plague on cattle, about pearl disease, about city slaughterhouses, and he was terribly embarrassed and when the guests left , grabbed her hand and hissed angrily:

I asked you not to talk about what you don’t understand! When we veterinarians talk to each other, please don't interfere. It's finally boring!

And she looked at him with amazement and alarm and asked:

Volodichka, what should I talk about?!

And she hugged him with tears in her eyes, begged him not to be angry, and both were happy” (IX, 322).

This scene brings to mind another one from “The Story of an Unknown Man.” Orlov irritably asks Zinaida Fedorovna:

“For God’s sake, for the sake of all that is holy, don’t talk about what is already known to everyone! And what an unfortunate ability our smart, thoughtful ladies have to speak with a thoughtful look and with excitement about something that has long set the teeth on edge even for high school students. Oh, if only you would exclude all these serious issues from our matrimonial program! What a favor!

We women cannot dare to have our own judgment” (VIII, 212-213).

But the roll call emphasizes the difference more sharply: Orlov and Zinaida Fedorovna are separated by a misunderstanding of each other. The discord between Smirnin and Olga Semyonovna is drowned out by her love, tears, and sincere bewilderment: “What should I talk about?!”

In the last “chapter” of the story, the theme of love and self-sacrifice of the “darling” sounds with increasing force. The vet is leaving. She is left alone, without affection, without strangers, and therefore, without her own opinions.

When Kukin left, “darling” could not sleep. When she was Pustovalov’s wife, she dreamed of whole mountains of boards and planks. When Smirnin left, she looked “indifferently at her empty yard, didn’t think about anything, didn’t want anything, and then, when night came, she went to bed and saw her empty yard in a dream” (IX, 322).

Her soul was empty, because the “darling” did not know how to live by herself, by her own affairs and worries.

The return of the veterinarian with his son and his wife, with whom he had reconciled, revives the heroine to life.

From the point of view of her purely feminine interests, the reconciliation between the veterinarian and his wife could hardly please her. But at this moment she is thinking about something else: that she will no longer be alone, her loneliness, emptiness, nothingness is over. Having heard that the veterinarian is looking for an apartment for himself and his family, she is ready to give him everything, if only there were living beings next to her.

“- Lord, father, take my house from me! Why not an apartment? “Oh, Lord, I won’t take anything from you,” Olenka became worried and began to cry again. “Live here, and even an outhouse is enough for me.” Joy, Lord! (IX, 324).

This is how the fourth chapter in the life of “darling” begins. She fell in love with the boy Sasha, the son of a veterinarian, immediately, without hesitation, instantly feeling a close connection to him, a maternal feeling: “her heart in her chest became warm and squeezed sweetly, as if this boy was her own son.” It would seem that the “darling’s” affection for the child Sasha is a completely different matter than her love for Kukin, Pustovalov, Smirnin. But this is not so: the basis of her hobbies in all cases is a maternal, spontaneous, unthinking feeling, compassion, kindness, readiness to caress, bestow, give everything to the end (“Joy, Lord!”) ( That is why it is difficult to agree with V. Lakshin when he writes: “Manusya Shelestova in the story “Literature Teacher” is a variation of “Darling” (in his book “Tolstoy and Chekhov.” M., “Soviet Writer”, 1963, p. 111. See also second revised ed., 1975, p. 94). Manyusya, who, having found a piece of sausage or cheese lying around, hard as a stone, says importantly: “They will eat this in the kitchen,” and Darling, ready to give up the house (“Joy, Lord!”) just to get rid of loneliness, - these two heroines, in our opinion, are not as close to each other as the author of the book, which is generally excellent, seems to think.).

Kukin, in essence, did not really see the “darling”; his attention was distracted by the ups and downs of the struggle for the Tivoli audience. Smirnin hissed angrily because she was interfering in his conversations. Sasha in this sense is their worthy successor. Her love for him is one-sided; in response to her advice, he waves it off: “Oh, leave it, please.” She accompanies him to the gymnasium, but he is embarrassed by her and, when the gymnasium building is visible, he says: “You, aunt, go home, now I’ll get there myself” (IX, 325).

She talks about school affairs in the same way as she used to talk about the theater, then about wood cutting and firewood, about veterinary supervision. But this is almost completely devoid of the comedy with which her words “Vanichka and I are staging Orpheus in Hell” were perceived. She repeats Sasha’s words with such love for him that the author’s hidden satirical intonation is almost replaced by a hidden lyrical one.

This is also an important difference between a story and a sketch. In the words “I was the wife of an artist...” there is one intonation, restrainedly ironic.

In “Darling” the author’s intonation does not remain unchanged. At the beginning of the story, she is unnoticeably mocking. For example: Kukin aroused a “real, deep feeling” in his “darling.” As if you can take this author's message seriously. However, we read further: “She constantly loved someone and could not live without it”: she loved her dad, her aunt, and even earlier, her French teacher. In this series of heartfelt affections - to dad, to aunt, to teacher - it is unlikely that the message about “real deep feelings” for Kukin can be taken literally.

In the same way, the phrase “After the wedding we lived well” loses its direct meaning when it is then repeated with mechanical precision when describing family life with a second husband.

But when we read about the heroine’s love for the little boy Sasha, the intonation of the author’s message is perceived differently:

“She stops and looks after him, without blinking, until he disappears into the entrance of the gymnasium. Oh, how she loves him! Of her previous affections, not a single one was so deep; never before had her soul been subjugated so selflessly, unselfishly and with such joy as now, when the maternal feeling flared up in her more and more...”

This is how far the characterization of the heroine has moved compared to the sketch in the notebook. Not just a lack of independence, secondary judgments, limitations, etc., but the ability of the soul to devote itself to another entirely, without a trace.

The story is called "Darling". And this word is repeated many times in the narrative: the guest ladies, grabbing Olga Semyonovna by the hand, exclaim in a fit of pleasure:

“Darling!”

Kukin, seeing her neck and full shoulders, throws up his hands:

“Darling!”

She mourns Kukin, laments, and the neighbors, crossing themselves, lament: “Darling... Darling Olga Semyonovna, mother, how she’s dying.”

And against the background of this repeatedly repeated word, it stands out all the more sharply: “Never before has her soul submitted so selflessly, unselfishly and with such joy...”

In this regard, I would like to draw attention to one feature of the story’s construction, in which the general structure also appears. We saw that in “Darling” Chekhov’s ability to correlate “chapters”, details, and phrases with each other achieved special art. Thus, the “chapters” of Olga Semyonovna’s first and second marriages, the heroine’s dreams, the words “darling” and “soul” are stylistically mutually similar. In the same row is the repetition of the motif, which, as it were, frames the narrative.

The first marriage of the “darling” is ended by a telegram notifying about Kukin’s sudden death. At the end of the story, at night again, as then, an ominous knock is heard at the gate.

“This is a telegram from Kharkov,” she thinks, beginning to tremble all over her body. “Mother demands Sasha to come to Kharkov... Oh, God!”

The heroine is in despair, her head, hands, and feet are cold, but it turns out that this is not a telegram: the veterinarian knocked, returning late from the club.

The striking similarity of these two telegrams - one announcing death, the other imaginary, is very significant: if a telegram had really arrived from Sasha’s mother demanding that he be returned to Kharkov, it would have been tantamount to a death notice for the “darling”.

Conceived as a comic character, the “darling” becomes the heroine of the story, whose soul conceals within itself such unselfishness, which the companions of her life, poor in feeling, are deprived of. From them she borrowed opinions and judgments - but on the other hand, she gave all of herself to them, without reserve.

This story clearly demonstrated the originality of Chekhov's satire. Merciless to the “case”, about “a” in complex mutual transitions merges with the lyrics, when the hero of the story becomes a person who is capable of loving, pitying another, simply and artlessly giving him all his poor, deprived soul.

The story of the story “Darling” represents the movement of satire to lyricism. At the same time, satire does not cease to be itself, does not lose its irony, but, as it were, softens the character’s sentence.

This gradual softening makes itself felt both in the creative history of the story and in its text itself. It is enough to compare the opening lines: “...She constantly loved someone and could not live without it<...>She was a quiet, good-natured, compassionate young lady with a meek, soft look, very healthy” (IX, 316) - and the words from the finale: “For this boy, a stranger to her, for his dimples on his cheeks, for his cap, she would give her whole life , I would give it away with joy, with tears of tenderness. Why? And who knows - why? (IX, 326).

In the first case, the typical features of the heroine are emphasized; she belongs to a very specific category - the “compassionate young lady.” Everything is clear here. In the second - a character that goes “out of the ordinary”. There is something inexplicable about loving someone else's boy. There is not much room left for irony here.

And again we are convinced: Chekhov’s notebooks are a special world. A world of prefigurative nebulae in which the contours of future persons, destinies, and plots are unclearly distinguished. A world of original ideas that face a long and contradictory path of development.

It’s a shame to read when a modern researcher writes: “In its structure, the image of Belikov is obviously close to the image of Darling: the same uniqueness, the same psychological condensation that predetermines the transformation of a proper name into a common noun” ( I. Gurvich. Chekhov's prose (Man and reality). M., “Fiction”, 1970, p.-125.).

“Unambiguity” is the definition that the heroine of Chekhov’s story deserves least of all.

The deep meaning of A. P. Chekhov’s work “Darling”

Satire and deep humanity are surprisingly intertwined in the works of Anton Pavlovich Chekhov.

What could be funnier than Darling - mentally lazy, completely devoid of independent thought and feeling? The writer talks about her life in a calm, calm tone, but this further enhances the satirical edge of the story. Using the most subtle means, he reveals the image of a person, almost mechanically, like an echo, repeating someone else’s opinion. We read about the heroine’s first marriage: “After the wedding we lived well. She sat in his cash register, looked after the order in the garden, wrote down expenses...”

And as if this Chekhovian “we lived well” sounds quite seriously. But “the happiness did not last long.” Olenka is widowed. She grieved sincerely and violently, but not for long. Soon she got married again. “Pustovalov and Olenka, having gotten married, lived well...” Only now she sits not in the cash register of the pleasure garden, but in the lumber yard. And only the emphatically monotonous, verbatim repetition of “they lived well,” the same for both the first and second marriage, subtly, imperceptibly and persistently hints at the monotony, the imaginary fullness of Darling’s life, satisfied with small, pathetic happiness.

A characteristic Chekhov detail: her first husband, the owner of a pleasure garden, suffers all the time because of the weather - once it rains, there will be no visitors. And regarding the first day of the honeymoon, the author remarks, as if in passing: “He was happy, but since it rained on the wedding day and then at night, the expression of despair did not leave his face.” And then the lines about “living well” follow.

Chekhov knows how to unexpectedly turn a word, a definition, an image so that praise suddenly turns into mockery, approval into irony, well-being turns out to be stagnation, and happiness turns into a dormant existence.

However, anyone who would reduce the entire content of “Darling” to murderous mockery and exposure would be mistaken.

The heroine is left alone. Previously, when she was the wife of a warehouse manager, she dreamed of mountains of boards and planks. And now she looks blankly at her empty yard. And the same emptiness is in her heart. She has nothing to live for, she has no opinions. But she cannot live without affection, without a person to whom she would give her little soul without a trace. Despite all her spiritual limitations, she is still more humane than her businesslike, always preoccupied, busy vain companions in life - Kukin, who curses the rain and ruin, the sedate timber merchant, the veterinarian, who can only talk about diseases and slaughter.

And when someone else’s child comes to live with her, she immediately feels a warm maternal feeling towards him, as if he were her own, looks at him with tenderness, pity, love and enthusiastically repeats after him: “An island is a part of the land...” This, writes Chekhov, “this was her first opinion that she expressed...”.

Is it possible to call this scene only satirical and not notice that subtle mockery is merged here with sadness and bitter sympathy for the heroine with her kind, awkward, unenlightening soul?

For Chekhov, Darling is not a completely lost and hopeless creature. She is a bourgeois, but how much love and kindness is hidden in her, which she joyfully and generously gives to people.

In our technical age, when there is too much cruelty and selfishness, I think it wouldn’t be a bad idea to borrow from Chekhov’s

Dear souls of her cordiality, kindness and warmth, which she so generously gave to others, finding her happiness in this.

Anton Pavlovich Chekhov wrote the story “Darling” in 1899. It refers to the late work of the writer. It is noteworthy that Chekhov’s “Darling” immediately caused mixed reviews in literary circles.

The main theme of the work is love. Only for the main character it becomes not just a need, but the meaning of life. Moreover, it is much more important for her not to receive love, but to give it. The comedy of the situation is that every time the story of the heroine’s selfless, deep feelings repeats itself. The composition of the story consists of four parts: according to the number of heartfelt affections in Olenka’s life. Below is a brief summary of this literary creation.

A few words about the main character

Olenka Plemyannikova, the daughter of a retired collegiate assessor, lives in her house with her father. This is a rosy-cheeked young lady with a soft white neck, plump arms, a gentle look and a touching smile.

People around him love a pretty girl. Everyone likes her without exception. When talking to her, you just want to touch her hand and tell her: “Darling!” There is always some kind of affection in Olenka’s soul: at first she was in love with her French teacher, then she began to adore her daddy, and then her aunt, who visited her twice a year. The problem is that these sympathies often replace one another. But Olenka is not bothered by this, nor are the people around her. They are impressed by the girl’s naivety, her gullibility and quiet kindness. This is how Chekhov describes his heroine in the story “Darling”. A brief summary will help you get an idea of ​​the heroine’s personal qualities. Her image is contradictory: on the one hand, she is endowed with the gift of selfless love. Not everyone can dissolve in this way in their soulmate. And this, of course, makes the reader respect the heroine. However, on the other hand, she appears to us as a gullible and flighty person. The complete lack of spiritual interests, the lack of one’s own views and ideas about the world around us - all this evokes ridicule from the reader.

Kukin - Olenka's first affection

In the large house of the Plemyannikovs lives a certain Ivan Petrovich Kukin, the owner and entrepreneur of the Tivoli entertainment garden. Olenka often sees him in the yard. Kukin constantly complains about life. All you can hear from him is: “The public today is wild and ignorant. What does an operetta or extravaganza mean to her? Give her a farce! Nobody is walking. And it rains every evening! But I have to pay rent and salaries to the artists. Total losses. I'm ruined! Olenka is very sorry for him. On the other hand, love for this person awakens in her heart. So what if he is skinny, short in stature and speaks in a shrill voice. In her mind, Kukin is a hero who fights every day with his main enemy - the ignorant public. The heroine's sympathy turns out to be mutual, and soon the young people get married. Now Olenka is working hard at her husband’s theater. She, like him, scolds the audience, talks about the importance of art in a person’s life and gives loans to actors. In winter, things go better for the couple. In the evenings, Olenka gives Ivan Petrovich tea with raspberries and wraps him in warm blankets, wanting to improve her husband’s failing health.

Unfortunately, the happiness of the young people was short-lived: Kukin went to Moscow during Lent to recruit a new troupe and died there suddenly. Having buried her husband, the young lady plunged into deep mourning. True, it did not last long. Chekhov's story “Darling” will tell us what happened next. In the meantime, we see that the heroine, imbued with the thoughts of her husband, becomes his shadow and echo. It was as if her individual qualities did not exist. With the death of her husband, a woman loses the meaning of life.

Olenka is getting married again

When Olenka, as usual, returned home from mass, Vasily Andreich Pustovalov, the forest manager of the merchant Babakaev, was next to her. He walked the woman to the gate and left. Only since then our heroine has not found a place for herself. Soon a matchmaker from Pustovalov appeared in her house. The young people got married and began to live in peace and harmony. Now Olenka talked only about forest lands, about the prices of wood, about the difficulties of its transportation. It seemed to her that she had always been doing this. The Pustovalovs’ house was warm and cozy, and the smell of home-cooked food was delicious. The couple did not go out anywhere, spending the weekend only in each other's company.

When those around her advised her “darling” to go and unwind to the theater, she replied that this was an empty activity not for working people. In the absence of her husband, when he left for the forest, the woman was bored. Her leisure time was sometimes brightened up by the military veterinarian Smirnin. This gentleman in another city left his wife and child, which did not prevent him from spending time in the company of other women. Olenka shamed him and strongly advised him to come to his senses and make peace with his wife. So the quiet family happiness of the “darling” would have lasted for many more years, if not for the tragic death of her husband. Vasily Andreich once caught a cold and died suddenly. Olenka again plunged into deep mourning. What does the author want to draw attention to when describing the heroine’s second affection, what amuses Chekhov here? Darling is a selfless woman, capable of great and deep feelings. The comedy of the situation is that the story of great love to the death is repeated in the heroine’s life. And here it’s the same: complete dissolution in a loved one, echoing his words, quiet family happiness and a tragic ending.

The heroine's new sympathy

Now those around her hardly saw Olenka. Only sometimes could she be found in church or at the vegetable market with the cook. But soon the neighbors already saw a picture in the courtyard of the house: “darling” was sitting at a table in the garden, and Smirnin was drinking tea next to her. Everything became clear from the moment Olenka suddenly told a friend at the post office about the problem of contamination of milk from sick cows and horses. Since then, the young lady has only talked about rinderpest, pearl disease and much more. Olenka and Smirnin tried to keep their relationship secret. However, it became clear to those around her: a new affection had appeared in the woman’s heart. What else will Chekhov tell us about in his story “Darling”? A brief summary of the work allows us to trace the chain of Olenka’s sympathies. The author gives the reader the opportunity to feel the deep feelings of the heroine. And at the same time, using the example of a repetition of the situation, he shows how limited and relative they are. It becomes clear to us how a new feeling arose in the heroine’s heart. This is her third attachment. It seems comical that with her arrival, the woman’s deep mourning instantly disappears.

Olenka is left alone

But Olenka was not happy this time for long. Smirnin was soon assigned to a distant regiment, and he left without inviting his beloved with him. The woman was left alone. Her father died long ago. There were no close people nearby. Dark days have begun for Olenka. She lost weight, looked ugly and aged. When friends saw her, they tried to cross to the other end of the street so as not to meet her. On summer evenings, Olenka sat on the porch, going over all her affections in her memory. But it seemed empty there. It seemed to her that there was no meaning in life. Previously, she could explain everything, talk about everything. Now there was such emptiness in her heart and thoughts, it was so terrible and bitter, as if she had “eaten too much wormwood.” This is how he described the loneliness of the heroine in his Darling lives only when she can give love to a loved one next to her. It would seem that here you need to feel sorry for the heroine, because she is suffering. But the author deliberately belittles Olenka’s feelings even now, ironizing them in the words: “as if she had eaten too much wormwood...”. And rightly so. Next we will see how quickly the pictures in a woman’s life change from complete despondency and sorrow to absolute happiness.

New meaning of the heroine's life

Everything changed in one moment. He returned to the city of Smirnin with his wife and ten-year-old son. Olenka happily invited him and his family to live in her house. She herself moved to the outbuilding. Her life gained new meaning. She walked around happy, giving orders in the yard. This change was not hidden from the eyes of others. Friends noticed that the woman looked younger, prettier, and put on weight. It became clear to everyone: the old “darling” had returned. And this means that there is again a new affection in her heart. Next we will see what captured Chekhov’s darling Olenka. Her last sympathy is an example of selfless tenderness, readiness to die for her child. Probably, every woman in her life should realize this natural need - to give tenderness and warmth to children. The good news is that our heroine has also succeeded as a woman and mother.

Motherly feelings in Olenka's soul

Olenka fell in love with Sashenka, Smirnin’s son, with all her heart. The wife of the former veterinarian left for Kharkov on business, and he himself disappeared somewhere all day long, appearing only late in the evening. The child was alone in the house all day. It seemed to Olenka that he was always hungry, abandoned by his parents. She took the boy to her outhouse. With what tenderness the woman looked at him as she walked him to the gymnasium.

How she spoiled the child, constantly feeding him sweets. With what pleasure I did my homework with Sasha. Now one could only hear from “darling” about studying at the gymnasium, textbooks, teachers, and the like. Olenka blossomed and gained weight. The woman was afraid of one thing - that her beloved Sasha would suddenly be taken away from her. With what fear she listened to the knocking at the gate: what if it came from the boy’s mother, demanding him to come to her? At this unfinished moment, Chekhov ends his work. “Darling,” the analysis and summary of which is given here, is a story about selfless love, which is so rare in our lives, about its sometimes absurd and funny manifestations. The main thing in the heroine is an inexhaustible supply of tenderness and warmth, care and affection. Her chosen ones are ridiculous and insignificant compared to her. She is funny only to the extent that she completely accepts their way of life and their views on reality. Only in her last maternal affection does she become truly beautiful. Many women will probably recognize themselves in this image of her.

We retold and analyzed Chekhov's story “Darling”, and followed how a woman from a small bourgeois woman turns into a real Chekhov heroine.

Chekhov wrote the story “Darling” in the 90s of the late 19th century. During this period, he had the opportunity to publish under his own name in the newspaper “Novoye Vremya”, which made him a famous author.

Story genre- classical realism with elements of naturalism - a description of a simple everyday story. It is permeated with light irony, characteristic of many of the writer’s works.

In the spotlight works - the ordinary life of Olga Plemyannikova. On the one hand, it is filled with selfless passion, and on the other, with the loss of these same hobbies. Olga loves all her husbands and does not demand anything in return. Moreover, she completely merges with them, and therefore has no personal opinion or desires. She lives only in the thoughts of her loved ones.

The main characters of the story- Darling, her husbands and the boy Sasha. The heroine herself is a quiet and good-natured, soft and loving young lady. She looks like a naive and innocent pure soul. Darling repeats everything word for word after her husbands, neglecting her personal opinion. Due to her gentle nature, she calls them childishly: Vanechka, Vasechka, Volodechka. All husbands are not very memorable, boring and somewhat unhappy men, which does not bother the heroine. She lives their gray everyday life. They all leave her over time, causing her pain and anguish. After all, she cannot live by her own thoughts. Without them, her life becomes empty and boring. Until the boy Sasha appears. She gives him love and care and, as she is used to, lives in his thoughts. They, of course, are not suitable for her age, but this does not bother her.

Themes

The story raises several themes. The first one is the fate of a woman in society. In this case, a weak-willed young lady is described who is not used to living independently, but only to please others.

Second topic - Love. The feeling of maternal love, love for family and friends. For Darling, this is the basis of life. Her love is considered self-sacrifice for the happiness of loved ones and loved ones.

The third topic is the theme of happiness. Darling is happy only depending on others. How correct is this? How fair is it to sacrifice your happiness for the sake of others? The author tried to answer these questions.

The fourth topic - conflict between everyday life and personality. Darling is a “slave” of other people’s opinions and requests and sacrifices her own. She cannot be called a conscious person; she needed to take responsibility for her life. But she continues to get whistled by others.

Basic meaning The work is to understand what true love is, and when it is an illusion and thereby limits a person. Despite the great bright feeling, Darling does not experience real love, only its semblance.

The writer confronts the reader with a choice: to determine for himself what is a full life and true love, and what is an illusion. Moreover, it shows that any self-idea can be very limited. It is important to see the many options in life and not give up on it.

Option 2

Written in 1898 and published in the magazine “Family,” A. P. Chekhov’s story “Darling” was included in the 9th volume of the writer’s collected works. The main character, Olga Semyonovna Plemyannikova, lives in her parents’ house not far from the Tivoli garden in Tsyganskaya Slobodka. This sweetest, friendly girl. For her meek disposition and easy-going character, her neighbors nicknamed her “darling.” Chekhov reveals the image of the girl, talks about her fate, sometimes with irony, sometimes with tragic notes.

Olenka Plemyannikova appears before us as a person for whom the meaning of life lies in love for other people. She lives with problems and the worries of her family. Her love is sincere, without pretense. While still a young girl, she loves her dad, her aunt who lives in Bryansk, and her French teacher. Then he falls in love with the theater impresario Kukin, who lives next door in the outbuilding. An unattractive man: short in stature, thin in build, with combed temples and a yellowish face. This eternally dissatisfied, grumbling person. He constantly complains about the rainy weather, about the fact that people don’t go to his theater.

Without even noticing, Olenka literally disappears into his problems. She becomes infected by her husband’s contemptuous attitude towards theater visitors and constantly repeats his words verbatim. Attends rehearsals and makes comments if scenes are too frivolous. The actors take advantage of her kindness, borrow money, but are in no hurry to give it back. Between themselves they call her “Vanya and I.” This phrase constantly sounds in the conversations of the girl herself. Having learned about the death of her husband, Darling loses the meaning of life, its inner content.

The emptiness that has formed in the soul needs to be filled, and Olenka finds solace in a new reckless love for the timber merchant Pustovalov. She is literally consumed by his problems. Now her concerns became the sale of timber and its prices. But life with Pustovalov does not last long; he dies. And Darling again loses the meaning of life.

This love is replaced by love for the veterinarian Smirnin, who quarreled with his wife. Now her problem is poor veterinary supervision in the city. But this relationship does not last long; the doctor is transferred to another city. Olga Semyonovna's life again loses its meaning, she withers and grows old. However, Smirnin comes to the city again with his son Sasha. They move into the outbuildings next to Olenka’s house. The boy enters the gymnasium. Darling immerses herself in Sasha’s school problems, lives with his joys and sorrows, and complains to her neighbors about the difficulties of learning. Her speech contains the words “Sasha and I,” and she constantly quotes excerpts from textbooks. Her dreams are aimed at Sasha's future. Olga sees him as an engineer or a doctor, in a big house, married with children. There is only one thing that worries the woman: she is very afraid that the boy’s parents might take him away.

“Darling” is a story about a person who is able to love passionately, with all his heart. Olenka is touching in her expression of her concerns, but at the same time funny. For her, to love is not to receive, but to give oneself completely, to live by the interests and problems of others.

Several interesting essays

• Analysis of the novel Eugene Onegin by Pushkin

  Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin” became a real breakthrough in the literature of the early 19th century. It took the author more than seven years to write it. Pushkin himself called the novel the work of “my whole life.”

• Essay What is Valor? reasoning 15.3

  Almost all people have heard the expression “valiant knight”, “valiant man” and the like at least once in their lives. However, not everyone knows what valor is. Many people confuse valor with courage.

• Essay Theme of the Motherland in Yesenin’s lyrics (in creativity, poetry, works)

  The theme of love for the Motherland runs through all of Yesenin’s work. He was born in the Ryazan province, in the village of Konstantinovo. In his youth, when the world is perceived through rose-colored glasses, the poet writes that he does not need any paradise

• The image and characteristics of Daria Melekhova in the novel Quiet Don Sholokhov essay

  Daria Melekhova is the heroine of Mikhail Sholokhov's novel "Quiet Don". She is not one of the main characters of the work, but nevertheless, the image of Daria is very interesting.

• What does the story "Prisoner of the Caucasus" teach us, 5th grade essay

  What did this story teach me? The story Prisoner of the Caucasus is based on a real incident that happened to Colonel F.F. Tornau. The officer was captured during the war, which was written about by the Russky Vestnik magazine.