A FATHER

A Father

He can't help himself. He drinks. He gambles. He lies. But he's the father so he has to be respected.

Ok. I'm tired of being nice.

He is a demon. A monster. A scoundrel. Despicable.

Ok. I'm tired of being hateful.

His children seem to have become good people. They are doing right by him.

What do you do with a father like this? Do you turn your back on him and never see him again? Do you try to reform him? Or do you do what he says his children do -- which is to accept him for what he is and try to give him help when he needs it?

What's great about this story is how Chekhov doesn't try to gloss over the father's imperfections. He shows him to be a monster and once you've gone there -- well -- why hold back? There's nothing more fun than depicting a monster in all his glory.

He exposes him for everything he is. There is no pity. No sympathy.

And yet -- what about the children -- especially Boris. He is the son and if he still loves his father -- then should we admire that kind of devotion?

Sure one feels like yelling at the father and Boris and those women in the hole -- what's wrong with you people? Get this man some help. Boris, get out of there. Don't enable him!

Modern psychiatric pop talk inevitably creeps in. Twelve step programs. Co-dependency. Narcissistic personality disorder. You name it.

But in the end you have a father and his son. And if the father has failings -- then the son if he has a heart will try to offer him a hand -- because -- he's a son.

AT A COUNTRY HOUSE

At A Country House

Lived a toad. An old upper class know-it-all, Rashevitch, who loves to talk and talk and talk.

Listening to himself is music to his ears and everyone else's speech is static.

He hasn't read a new book in twenty years -- hasn't travelled -- but he's full of ideas.

Standing in front of him is a nice young man Meier -- a potential suitor to one of his daughters -- who actually tolerates him -- but the toad finally alienates him like he's done to everyone else in town.

A mean spirit -- full of contempt for all except those of Blue Blood -- in the end becomes corrosive. Drowns in his own venom.

The Golden Rule: One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself. The egoist toad Rashevitch never learned this and all his talk about superiority only masks his complete insignificance.

What is most pathetic of all is that all his words are a mask covering up his fears and insecurities. And mostly the feeling of not being loved. When you feel you are not loved then you begin to attack others -- compensating for the emptiness. If his daughters had not been so bored -- or frivolous and actually respected and loved their father -- then the toad may in deed have become a prince.

How were the daughters raised? Was the toad always a toad? Did his wife also not love him? Where did his feeling of not being loved begin?

The world is full of sad, unhappy people who feel unloved and we all suffer as a result.

The Beatles had it right: All You Need is Love.

That said, I have one big problem with this story. It's false.

After Rashevitch messes up and offends Meier and Meier tells him that he comes from the Artisan class -- Chekhov proceeds to make Rashevitch feel ashamed.

Rashevitch regrets what he did. He knows he screwed up and he wants his daughters to forgive him.

However, I've known a few people like Rashevitch and they never feel ashamed. They are not contrite. In fact, they retrench. He would be blaming Meier and not himself. Egoists never think they're wrong. That's why they're egoists. They only see their side of things.

And Rashevitch is presented as a major egoist and he's probably been like that for a long time and in reality he will continue in his ways and it's up to others to get with the program. If he was that self-aware and so readily ashamed for his crude behavior he would've changed his ways a long time ago. Egoists are blind to their surroundings and their actions.

That's why this world is so hard to make better because people are not going to change their ways no matter how wrong they seem to everyone else.

They will stick to their guns come hell or high water.

MY LIFE

My Life

Another really long story. But I enjoyed this tale.

You learn a lot about Russian society. Born a noble you have to act like a noble. You don't go around painting roofs. Unless of course you are Poloznev the son of the architect.

He decides to do things his way. He finds most of society corrupted. Wants no cushy boring noble work that does no one any good. He is a rebel. And society looks down on him when he decides to become a workman.

His father disowns him -- which is fine by him. Poloznev the architect represents everything the son despises. He is a lousy architect who builds homes which suffocate people.

Ah, yes freedom. And that's what this story is all about.

The freedom to decide what life you are going to live. And essentially most of Chekhov stories deal with this theme. Society expects you to act a certain way and that certain way may not be what you want. And you have a choice of conforming to what society dictates and enduring your misery or rebel and live the life you want and the hell with what society thinks. Chekhov seems to advocate for the latter.

But it's not that simple. You may decide to live a life of freedom and still not be happy. Take a look at Masha. Portrayed as a woman who does what she pleases. But if you do what you please and not think about the consequences of your actions -- well that kind of narcissistic life may bring you some kind of satisfaction but at the expense of others.

Masha plays like she champions the peasants and marries Poloznev but it's all a game to her. She is just doing it to broaden her horizon -- sort of like some in today's society go and do different things to find themselves. They may try yoga or spirituality or volunteering in a soup kitchen -- all for the goal of self-improvement.

When push comes to shove -- Masha despises the peasants and the life of the worker and flees back to her pampered life. Masha, Chekhov implies,  will never be truly satisfied because she only cares for herself. She has freedom and nothing else.

Poloznev has freedom and commitment. He doesn't make quick judgements. He sees the peasants for what they are but he also admires that they "believed the chief thing on earth was truth and justice."

Poloznev sees the hypocrisy of society -- all these intellectuals doing intellectual activities and what does it get them. He instead admires a fine carpenter or a good painter -- they do things that are real -- and don't pretend to be anything they are not. ( Just a side note -- look at Richard Feynman's book "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!": Adventures of a Curious Character" -- a scientist who looks at the issue of actually doing and knowing things.)

This is also a story of family. More precisely how a father's dominance can affect his children. The son beaten constantly by the father becomes a loner and an outsider. Poloznev's sister Kleopatra who also lives under the thumb of the father and is totally miserable. She finally finds love with a married man who has kids and she is rejected by society and dies giving birth. Using harsh methods to keep order in the end doesn't work. You can't completely control the human heart and people will find a way to escape tyranny -- good or bad.

Going back to truth and justice -- that is a rare quality in any society and mostly we put up with lies and deceit -- so that when truth and justice actually show up nobody knows what to do with it. And if you choose to live a life of truth and justice you must be prepared for rejection and criticism. Nobody wants to be showed up. The liar hates the truth teller.

Once I worked in a store where the manager was a cheat and I pointed out to him that what he was doing was not right -- and sure enough I became the bad guy -- the one who wanted to ruin the system -- the one who posed danger and eventually I was forced to resign. So it goes. Society has rules and those rules favor those who have the power and they don't like rebels or people who want change.

Poloznev doesn't want to change society but he refuses to go along with what he considers are corrupt ways so he changes his life and does things his way -- and achieves a modicum of contentment. Which is better than most.

This story revisits the peasant theme which I suppose was popular at the time -- as it is today -- the peasant might today be the homeless or the poor -- and people make judgements about what is best to help them -- some argue for government help and others argue that they have to help themselves and right now -- 2011 in America -- we are having this precise argument.

The government, most in the political right believe,  should not be in the business of helping those less fortunate because this only spoils them and enables them to be lazy and unproductive -- let them help themselves if they want or if they are too ignorant to do that -- well -- let them suffer seems to be their stance.

And on the left -- they want a government that takes care of the poor and is a strong presence for insuring equal opportunity and creating a society where the rich don't dominate everything. Even if we have to pay high taxes and burden ourselves with government regulations.

I suppose that in one fashion or another that same argument was being played out in Russia at the end of the nineteenth century. You have the whole scene with the the school that Masha builds and whether or not the peasants can actually gain something from being educated. The scene when the school finally gets built and peasants give Masha respect and thanks is quite touching and speaks quite favorably for the character of the peasant and unfortunately also illustrates the selfishness of Masha. If she was really interested in aiding the peasants this was a good beginning instead she saw this as a farewell. Her life wasn't going to be burdened with charity -- she has places to go -- people to see. 

Another fine scene is when Kleopatra tries to do some acting and instead has a nervous breakdown. Art and self-expression as the cure for all that ails. Not in this case. (The relationship between Misail and Kleopatra reminds me a bit of Tennessee Williams The Glass Menagerie and the relationship between Tom and Laura -- controlled not by their father but by their mother.)

My Life reveals that a life has many dimensions and Chekhov here does justice to its complexity.

VEROTCHKA

Verotchka

It Ain't Me, Babe Bob Dylan's song comes to mind after reading this story.

Verotchka has all the elements I love in a Chekhov story.

The intellectual young man -- who is trying to make something of his life -- a bit naive when it comes to women -- and suddenly confronted by his dreams -- his hopes and finding nothing inside -- and wondering why?

And this is really a story of memory -- how do we preserve the past -- the present -- life keeps moving on and what we have this moment fades and where does it go -- like the cranes Chekhov describes -- they disappear into the wind and what's left?

It's also a story of knowing yourself -- wanting to find out why you are who you are -- and this story also gets you so involved you want to jump inside -- you want to say hold up -- let me talk to Ivan Alexeyitch for one moment.

"My man, Ivan -- what's going on over here? You got a beautiful girl declaring her love for you. Don't blow this! I know you think too much -- you might not be able to handle this right now -- but look at her she's beautiful -- you feel good with her -- you'll never find someone like her -- your whole life you'll be searching for her and she's right here -- grab her -- grab the moment -- I don't care what's happened before -- kiss her -- stroke her hair -- wipe her tears -- do something -- do something now!"

But of course -- I can't jump in -- the moment has passed and Ivan Alexeyitch lives without his Verotchka.

I also like the way the story is presented from Ivan Alexeyitch's perspective -- so we see Verotchka -- but we don't really see her -- and we assume she's beautiful -- but we also are aware how after she confesses her love to him -- she changes and seems shorter -- less beautiful.

Love stories are timeless.

And so is the idea of premature old age -- how some of us for whatever reason resort to inhabiting a life where we are shut off from passion -- from happiness -- from living -- and we do it to ourselves -- and mostly we never recover -- we wander through life observing -- like watching others dining and carousing through a pane of glass -- separated from the noise and the chaos and the joy -- too afraid to crash through and be a part of the experience.

To all of us: Carpe diem.

THE CHORUS GIRL

The Chorus Girl

Is it a setup?

This is an intriguing tale. At first you feel sorry for the wife -- then you feel sorry for the chorus girl.

My guess is that the chorus girl was framed by Nikolay Petrovitch Kolpakov and his wife. They may be of noble stock and still be broke while the chorus girl might be common and quite well-off and they used their advantages to rob her of hers.

It takes a classic scenario and adds a whole new twist.

Sweet!

THE STEPPE

The Steppe

This story took me a while to read. At first, I was having difficulty following the story. What is this all about? Is there a narrative? Is it going anywhere? Such pedantic thoughts -- and then -- well -- Chekhov works his magic and as usual he is way ahead of me.

I kept reading and finally started to catch up. This story  grows on you. I would compare it to a film -- one of those slow films that might make you sleepy but you go with it -- you may not know what is happening at first -- but you like the scenery -- and then you get to know the characters and then all comes together and you begin to gel with it.

For me the story started to come to life with the appearance of the waggoners. You are amused by their antics and at other times you feel for their plight. The characters are so rich -- funny -- real. Full of life.

And what is the story about? It is the journey that Yegorushka takes -- leaving his village for an education. A chance for him to grow up -- and you feel this boy will turn out to be a real gem. Yegorushka is curious and sentimental -- but he is also ready to stand his ground if need be. He will fight for what he believes in.

But this is everyone's story -- we all leave our home one way or another and begin the journey -- the journey of growing up and seeing things and experiencing things that will forever be etched in our brain.

When I was eight I left Gibraltar and headed to America and that journey done on a ship crossing the Atlantic was more than a trip -- it marked the boundary between a certain innocence and a certain awareness of the world.

So while the story did take a while before I warmed up to it -- once I was in sync with it -- I began to appreciate it for what it is -- Chekhov has a chance to wax poetically about the physical aspects of the steppe and the people who reside there.

Along the way Chekhov tells us a lot about the Russian character -- and about life in general.

It is a meditative piece -- one not to rush through -- given a chance it offers rich rewards.

UPROOTED

Uprooted

What did I get from this story? People are searching for meaning. For a place to belong. That some are willing to give up everything for a chance to expand their horizons.

Alexandr Ivanitch is a good character study. A converted Jew -- he seems to have gone through quite a journey. He has left all he knew for a chance to live a different life than his parents planned for him.

But it has come at a cost. He is fragile. His conscience is troubling him. Or is he just tired of being on the road alone not knowing where he is going to find his next meal? And there appears to be many in Russia at the time -- homeless -- hobos if you want to call them that -- searching for food -- for a job -- for a place. 

And many are drawn to monasteries where the Church provides some relief -- like a soup kitchen -- but there is also the question of finding spiritual solace.

We are left feeling that Alexandr Ivanitch and the countless others out there trying to survive -- while there might be a lot of masses and prayers -- finding their place -- their connection to God is more complicated --  few will get to the place where they're truly at peace with themselves and with their soul.

Alexandr Ivanitch formerly Isaac -- talks a lot of moving from the Old Testament to the New Testament -- but he doesn't sound convincing -- whatever his reasons he is not going to proselytize anyone -- his is a personal journey -- a young man wanting more than his immediate surrounding can afford him -- and as we have seen in many other Chekhov stories -- the quest for identity -- for meaning -- is something that bounds the young and old from many places and many backgrounds.

And it goes on -- when a young man or woman leave their family and small town and head out to the big city -- they may give you a reason or two for their action -- but the yearning that propels will always have its mystery and may take a lifetime to finally get an answer.

If ever.

After all, once uprooted -- you are at the mercy of the wind.