status. The Ranevskaya family is one <strong>of</strong> 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 <strong>of</strong> the “intelligentsia,” a term with which aristocrats label themselves. They look upon all others with disdain and feel superior to Lopakhin and Tr<strong>of</strong>imov. The irony is that Lopakhin eventually buys them out, and Tr<strong>of</strong>imov 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). Tr<strong>of</strong>imov understands the aristocracy, and understands that because <strong>of</strong> their useless behavior, they are destined to become worthless. It was not a member <strong>of</strong> the “intelligentsia” that came to this conclusion. Similarly, Sophocles devises an old, wandering blind man to reveal the truth to Oedipus. The irony <strong>of</strong> a blind peasant being able to see a truth that a king seemingly cannot or refuses to understand is the very essence <strong>of</strong> 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 <strong>of</strong> Sophocles’ play, religion consisted <strong>of</strong> many deities, each in charge <strong>of</strong> a different aspect <strong>of</strong> 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 <strong>of</strong>ten write <strong>of</strong> the ignorance and sinfulness <strong>of</strong> excessive pride. Sophocles claims, “any mortal who dares hold / No immortal Power in awe / Will be caught up in a net <strong>of</strong> pain” (Sophocles l.844-846. 12 ). The “net <strong>of</strong> 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 <strong>of</strong> 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 Tr<strong>of</strong>imov 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 <strong>of</strong> 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. Tr<strong>of</strong>imov tells her to look the dreadful truth straight in the eye because she “served [her] own destruction” 46
(Sophocles l.1468. 20). And yet, despite the wisdom <strong>of</strong> our predecessors, do we not still find our vision obscured by a prideful stubbornness, our eyes sealed against the light <strong>of</strong> truth? Note: While the primary texts referred to in the essay serve as the sources for all quotations, complete citations in a “Works Cited” page is considered standard in academic writing. Please include complete citations whenever primary and/or secondary sources are used. 47
- Page 1: Miami University Best of Portfolios
- Page 4 and 5: Acknowledgements In 1990, Miami Uni
- Page 6 and 7: The Best of Miami University’s Po
- Page 8 and 9: All four of these reflective letter
- Page 10 and 11: Your gurgling stomach now seems les
- Page 12 and 13: one must prohibit the words from be
- Page 14 and 15: And as the result of many enjoyably
- Page 16 and 17: would remain viable in the new mill
- Page 18 and 19: all of the qualities represented in
- Page 20 and 21: honors for past dances, but I figur
- Page 22 and 23: in this Mac (I pointed to the Power
- Page 24 and 25: There was only one person in the wo
- Page 26 and 27: over 500 men sleeping on the dirty
- Page 28 and 29: An Explanatory, Exploratory, or Per
- Page 30 and 31: decrease will not allow the schools
- Page 32 and 33: An Explanatory, Exploratory, or Per
- Page 34 and 35: An Explanatory, Exploratory, or Per
- Page 36 and 37: An Explanatory, Exploratory, or Per
- Page 38 and 39: to make a greater quantity of tires
- Page 40 and 41: Response to a Text—Jessica Keel R
- Page 42 and 43: the entire novel, but she remains b
- Page 44 and 45: “my little squirrel” (2). Torva
- Page 48 and 49: A Response to a Text—Stephanie Wo
- Page 50 and 51: life, showing her growth as a perso
- Page 52 and 53: Scott Gruenbaum—Reflective Letter
- Page 54 and 55: Scott Gruenbaum—A Narrative or Sh
- Page 56 and 57: Scott Gruenbaum—An Explanatory, E
- Page 58 and 59: another creature for survival is in
- Page 60 and 61: Scott Gruenbaum—A Response to a T
- Page 62 and 63: Complete Portfolio—Camilla Hilema
- Page 64 and 65: Camilla Hileman—A Narrative or Sh
- Page 66 and 67: Camilla Hileman—An Explanatory, E
- Page 68 and 69: Camilla Hileman—A Response To A T
- Page 70 and 71: Complete Portfolio—Pamela Spellma
- Page 72 and 73: Pamela Spellman—A Narrative or Sh
- Page 74 and 75: Pamela Spellman—An Explanatory, E
- Page 76 and 77: Pamela Spellman—Response to a Tex
- Page 78 and 79: 2001 Scoring Guide for Portfolios A
- Page 80 and 81: Guidelines for Using Non-Sexist Lan
- Page 82 and 83: Advice from Portfolio Scorers Each
- Page 84 and 85: 5. Be creative: Don’t be afraid t
- Page 86 and 87: What’s the difference between a
- Page 88 and 89: 2002 Portfolio Information 88
- Page 90 and 91: Essential Instructions Papers writt
- Page 92 and 93: Supervising Teachers 2001 Kristen C
- Page 94 and 95: Julie R. Hagerty Mount Notre Dame H
- Page 96 and 97:
Craig E. Potter Perry Meridian High