Trofimov

Petya Trofimov gives a small lecture to those around him when he is asked to talk about pride. He doesn’t give a concrete definition of pride and argues that it’s a “mystical” (88) concept. But he definitely sees pride as something negative. His philosophy is that a man “in his physiological formation is very imperfect … [and that he] should work, and nothing else” (88) without glorifying himself. This connects to the Pride discussed in Pride and Prejudice. According to Jane Austen, pride is thinking of oneself highly and here Trofimov says it’s “glorification of self” (88). Since the two works were written in almost the same time period, these similar views may reflect the popular thought at that time.

Another interesting argument Trofimov gives is about his view on intellectuals. He argues that they are pathetic because don’t do anything but “talk about science and know very little about art” (89) He also criticizes them for being too serious and impractical. He is not only disapproving of them but also fearful of them. His fear for serious things perhaps results from his lack of knowledge in the area because he is a student still learning. This reminded me of Plato’s "Allegory of The Cave" which talks about the ignorance, learning, and knowledge. In the "Allegory of The Cave", the relationship between the “knower” and the ignorant is that they pity each other. The “knower” pities those who do not know because they are missing out. Those who don’t know pity the “knower” because he talks about nonsense that they do not understand. Trofimov’s description of intellectuals is very similar how the ignorant ones see the intellectuals in their society. So, he would be one of the ignorant ones trying to avoid becoming a knower if he were to be in the allegory.

He holds the same view as Plato in that he considers it’s better to stay ignorant than become an intellectual. To know makes one different from all others and makes one become excluded from the majority. Trofimov expresses his hatred towards intellectuals, and this shows how intellectuals are considered in real life. Scientists or scholars are often viewed as different people who don’t have anything to do with our lives. It is very impressive how there is a connection between a concept in Greek Philosophy and one in a nineteenth century play.

Nothing Like Jane Austen

When I started reading The Cherry Orchard I couldn't help but think about how it was similar to Pride and Prejudice. The setting and the theme in this play was a lot like theose of Pride and Prejudice. Both stories take place at the same(-ish) time period (thee 19the century) and both mention marriage , aristocracy and wealth. I mean, how am I not going to think the two works are alike when I'm provided with so much similarities? This was kind of frustrating because they are NOT supposed to be similar.

So I tried to find some differences between the two works and finally got to think that the two works are totally different. One huge difference is in the role of thee mother in those works. The mother in The Cherry Orchard, Lyubov, is a rather indifferent mother. She certainly loves her daughters and does care for them. However, she cares about herself and her life more than she cares about her daughters. When she talks she refers alot to what she wants, what she thinks, and what she did. She arrived home from a long absence and all she says to her daughters is simple and short. She says "My precious darling. Are you glad to be home?" (Chekhov 70) to Anya who joined her in her journey. Then to Varya, who she hasn't seen for a while, she says " You're just the same as ever, Varya" (Chekhov 70). Then she proceeds with her conversation with her brother and Lopahin.

This attitude that Lyubov shows indicates theat she may be egocentric, which isn't something common in mothers. Mothers are usually ready to sacrifice anything to help their children. They sometimes place happiness or success of their children as their top priority. Which I think is thee case of Mrs. Bingley in Pride and Prejudice. She wanted her daughters to be happy with a wealthy man. Since this is one of thee numerous evidences that show how the two works are distinct, now I understand clearly why the two works are not similar.