Best of Miami Portfolios 2001 - Units.muohio.edu

status. The Ranevskaya family is one of the most prominent families in Russia, and Oedipus is a
king. According to common beliefs, these people cannot be wrong. They cannot represent
ignorance. Chekhov and Sophocles use irony to emphasize this theme. The Ranevskaya family
believes that they are a part of the “intelligentsia,” a term with which aristocrats label themselves.
They look upon all others with disdain and feel superior to Lopakhin and Trofimov. The irony is
that Lopakhin eventually buys them out, and Trofimov is the wise intellectual whom they mock for
being the “eternal student.” Chekhov utilizes this intellectual to give light to the idea that “in
Russia, only a very few work. They call themselves the intelligentsia, yet they belittle their
servants, treat the peasants like animals, are wretched students, never read anything serious, and do
absolutely nothing” (Chekhov 346). Trofimov understands the aristocracy, and understands that
because of their useless behavior, they are destined to become worthless. It was not a member of
the “intelligentsia” that came to this conclusion. Similarly, Sophocles devises an old, wandering
blind man to reveal the truth to Oedipus. The irony of a blind peasant being able to see a truth that
a king seemingly cannot or refuses to understand is the very essence of this universal theme. We
are all equal. We are all equally inferior to the gods and must not be proud and think that we can
understand a world which they created.
There is a difference in the time and place settings in which these two pieces were written.
Russia during the nineteenth century contained quite a different lifestyle than ancient Greece. At
the time of Sophocles’ play, religion consisted of many deities, each in charge of a different aspect
of life. Russia, on the other hand, has always been a dominantly monotheistic society. Although
both places experienced different religious views, the message remains the same. Arrogance is an
attempt at godliness, whether there be one god or many. The Greeks labeled this frequent
occurrence as hubris, meaning excessive pride. Authors often write of the ignorance and sinfulness
of excessive pride. Sophocles claims, “any mortal who dares hold / No immortal Power in awe /
Will be caught up in a net of pain” (Sophocles l.844-846. 12 ). The “net of pain” to which he refers
is a dreadful fate given by the gods. In this Greek society, arrogance was punishable by the gods.
Remaining humble and accepting inferiority to the gods was the key to salvation. The situation was
slightly different in Russian society. They did not believe that the gods took such an active role in
the lives of humans, and it was not commonly thought that a god would specifically punish
somebody. The Ranevskayas, however, do demonstrate that those who assume superiority in
general are nothing but fools.
The erudite Trofimov sums up this universal theme:
Whether or not the estate is sold today—does it really matter? That’s all done with
long ago; there’s no turning back, the path is overgrown. Be calm, my dear. One
must not deceive oneself; at least once in one’s life one ought to look the truth
straight in the eye (Chekhov 357).
As he comforts Lyubov while she awaits the news of what happened to the cherry orchard,
she is still kidding herself with false hope, ignorant hope. She did not want to see the truth, and
now her fate is sealed. Had she opened her eyes, things might have ended up differently. Trofimov
tells her to look the dreadful truth straight in the eye because she “served [her] own destruction”
46