Back to Normality - Uncle Vanya, by Anton Chekhov: Act 4

The final act of Uncle Vanya is a very normal falling action and resolution. The first two acts of the play were monotonous and negative exposition and rising action. The third act was the climax which differs completely from the rest of the play because it is very agitated and many interesting things occur. The fourth act, as I said before returns to the normality of the first two acts. The end is basically a conclusion in which the professor and his wife leave because of all the problems they have caused, and the house goes back to the usual work and routine. Some characters are disappointed with this decision, while others are very happy. I can see a clear connection between the end of Chekhov's play and Voltaire's play Candide. In both works the characters were dissatisfied with the way their lives turned out, but they had to contempt on being busy. Candide married an ugly Cunegonde but accepted his life in simply settling down and working. Vanya had wasted his whole life, but in a way, was glad to go back to normality. When Serebryakov and Elena were home, he was useless all day, complaining without work. When they left, even though he wasn't successful with Elena, he could be busy once again. In this, the two works are very similar. Vanya and Candide simply wanted to go to work.

" 'That's true enough,' said Candide; 'but we

must go work in the garden.' "

"Voinitsky: Let them go, I... I cannot. I feel

miserable. I must get busy with something 

as soon as possible... Work, work!" 

(Act IV, Pg. 222)

Both quotes show very little interest from the characters to the people they were talking to before. Vanya and Candide are simply concentrated on working. They were both pessimistic about life in the past, but at the end, accept their lives as they are. Vanya does this in a negative way saying he is doomed to die without doing anything in his life, but other characteres, such as Sonya try to see the good part of life. "You have had no joy in your life, but wait, Uncle Vanya, wait... We shall rest... We shall rest!" (Pg. 227) We see quite a big character development in Sonya. In the beginning she was obsessed with Astrov, but after she knew he didn't feel the same way towards her, she simply accepted life, and in the last act was one of the few positive persons.

A Change in Perspective - Uncle Vanya, by Anton Chekhov: Act 3

The third act of the play is extremely exhilarating. Many things happen, everybody has there own beliefs, everything changes, and it is the climax of the book. Regarding the relationship between Sonya and Astrov, everything went wrong. Sonya finally accepted to tell the doctor what she felt, but didn't do it herself, Elena asked him for her.  She obtained an answer nobody wanted to hear. Not only did Astrov say he didn't like Sonya, but he said he liked Elena. When he expressed this love, he kissed her, and in that precise moment, Vanya came in. Everything turned out upside down, and everyone was dissatisfied. Vanya was sad because Astrov kissed the love of his life, Elena. Elena was disappointed in Astrov because of the way he acted. Sonya would never have the only thing she ever wanted in her whole life: Astrov's love. In conclusion, to add to everyone's hate of life, everything became worse for all of them. 

All these problems between relationships were not the only things that happened in the third act. Serebryakov called together a family meeting to say he wanted to sell the estate, and there was a whole discussion about who wanted what. Vanya made a big fuss about working his butt off and wasting his whole life only for him, and now at this age, he wouldn't leave. I believe this is a good reason to not sell the estate, however Vanya didn't approach it the way he should of. He acted like a crazy man and tried to kill the professor. This was a very tense moment for all the characters who each had their own discussion. In this scene we can clearly see the self-centered manner of acting by the characters while they don't listen to other people's points of view. Elena is desperate to leave, Vanya is mean and wants to stay, Serebryakov wants money, Maria wants to please Serebryakov, and Sonya is sad and depressed about the doctor.

In this act I also realized another topic of the play is laziness and boredom. The perfect description of this is Sonya's monologue on page 196 while she talks to Elena: "You're bored, you don't kow what to do with yourself, and boredom and idleness are catching. Look: Uncle Vanya does nothing, just follow you around like a shadow, and I left my work and came running in to have a chat with you. I've grown lazy, I can't help it!"

In general I was very impressed with this act and I feel it's very different from the first two. Things actually happen that interest the reader a little bit. I am anxious about knowing the end, but I feel it's not going to be as interesting at this act, but more along the lines of the first two. What will happen with Sonya? With the professor and his wife? With the doctor? With Uncle Vanya?

...And Time Keeps Passing - Uncle Vanya, by Anton Chekhov: Act 2

Continuing on my last entry about this play, I say not much has changed. As I expected, Uncle Vanya is a literary work in which nothing happens at all. There's simply a cast of characters living in one depressive house being self-centered and criticizing life all the time. It is very monotonous and simply narrates a normal, boring, life where time passes and nothing goes on. In my past entry I talked about Uncle Vanya and the doctor's negativism, and the way they affected the rest of the characters. Even though most characters were pessimistic I still had a small hope on Elena, being the only happy person in the first act. Nevertheless, I have seen my prediction was wrong. After all, Vanya and his negativism prevailed over the good side of life. When Sonya and Elena were having a deep conversation, Sonya asked Elena "as a friend" if she was really happy. Her answer was no. This might've been predictable but it was disappointing seeing that I still had hope for the play to be a little less pessimistic. Now, as Elena dislikes her husband and the whole house, there is no salvation.

Another interesting thing to mention about the play is the relationship forming between Sonya, the professor's daughter, and Astrov the doctor. Sonya is deeply in love with him but can't express this love, and simply accepts the fact he comes and goes. When he is visiting their house, Sonya is very nice with him, and tries to please him in many manners, offering him food, drinks and having long conversations with him. The doctor doesn't show much of a reaction to this and simply says he is too old to love anyone. He doesn't even notice all the indirect expressions of love Sonya shows him and keeps on complaining about his work and life in Russia. I feel that this relationship isn't going anywhere if Sonya doesn't express her love to him; And, even if she did, it might not work anyways because of the doctor's way of life.

Monotonous Negativism - Uncle Vanya, by Anton Chekhov: Act 1

The first scene of Uncle Vanya is set in a regular house in the hills of a country side. A normal family, with many different people and very opposite personalities is described. I have a few initial reactions to what I think the play is going to be about regarding the first act I read. I believe the plot is going to be very monotonous with nothing going on, and simply a family with disputes between the members will be exposed. Until now, I feel most of the characters are very negative about life, and don't appreciate what they have. I also accept it is hard keeping track of all the russian names of the characters. I confess looking back at the list  of characters several times to recall who is who. What really confuses me is that not only are the characters addressed by one name, but there are various possible ways to refer to one person. They can be called their first name, last name or nick name. For example Uncle Vanya is also known as Ivan Petrovich or Voinitsky.

I am amazed at the constant fights between family members or friends because each person only hears their own opinion and wants to benefit only himself. Most characters are mean, self-centered and pessimistic. The doctor, Astrov goes around helping people to keep a life he thinks is worthless. He is constantly complaining about his work and the people around him. When talking to the nurse, Astrov said: "I'm on my feet from morning to night, I don't know what rest is, and at night I lie under the blankets afraid I might be dragged out to see a patient. During all the time you've known me, I haven't had a single free day." (Act 1, Pg. 164) I wonder if the doctor will always be unhappy with his life throughout the play? Will he ever find the true love he wants? Or perhaps, will he be so frustrated he'll consider suicide? I would also like to know if he will be an important character or simply a doctor that comes and goes without leaving an impact on someone. Will he ever have a free day? Does he really like his job, or will he quit?

Another negative character is Voinitsky, or Uncle Vanya. I believe he will always be an old scrooge and will never have fun. Whatever activity he chooses, he will be unhappy with. If he works, he'll complain, if he has nothing to do he'll complain, if it's a sunny day, he'll complain, if it's a rainy day he'll complain. He has no relief or chance of getting better. Even when the impossible love of his life, the only positive character in the play, Elena is happy, he won't be.

"Elena Vasilyevna: It's a fine day today... not too hot...

  [A pause]

  Voinitsky: A fine day to hang oneself..." (Act 1, Pg. 172)

As we can see, he is completely negative about life. This is why I say he can never change and Uncle Vanya will be a monotonous pessimistic play the whole time. Nevertheless, with characters like Elena, there is still a small hope. Will goodness prevail? Or will Vanya prevail?

So Did Fate Really Matter? Final Reaction to Macbeth

I was very curious about Macbeth's ending specially regarding the witches predictions about Macbeth being killed when Birnam Wood arrived to his castle. I recall logging or making a write now about fate before we began reading Macbeth. I said that I didn't believe in fate what so ever or in things such as horoscopes or weather predictions. I still maintain this point about fate, however, regarding Macbeth itself I would have to say I believe practically all of the witches predictions seeing that they all come true. At the end of the play, the witches predict Macbeth can't be killed by any woman-born, and he should only worry when Birnam Wood comes to Dunsinane. Macbeth's life became in danger when this precise situation occurred: Birnam Wood moved to Dunsinane and Macduff said he was not woman born and wanted to fight him. It is said that Macbeth's death was a practical suicide because he knew he would be killed. I completely agree with this idea because, as I said before, all of the witches predictions come true in the play. Macbeth knew he would be killed by a man born not by woman, but he decided to fight Macduff anyways, who said he had been born by force prematurely.

In the end I think that all the witches predictions did was make things occur. For instance, it was not fate that made Macbeth kill Duncan, it was the fact he was intrigued by the witches predictions. He wanted power, and felt he had to fulfill what the Weird Sisters said. Perhaps, if these sisters hadn't told Macbeth he would be killed by a man not born by woman, he would of won the battle against Macduff. However, since Macduff wasn't woman born and Macbeth accepted all the witches predictions, he probably had already accepted his defeat. He thought he couldn't do anything about it, and therefore fought Macduff, with failure already in his mind.

I was also surprised about Macbeth's personality at the end, and the way he reacted to his wife's death. The character development seen in Macbeth throughout the acts is amazing. In the beginning, he was a humble soldier that wanted to protect his country, then he strived for power when hearing of the possibility of becoming King. He was weak when thinking of killing him, but Lady Macbeth led him to do it. When he became King, power slowly started corrupting him. He didn't feel guilty for killing Duncan any more, and basically changed places with his wife. Instead of being weak and afraid, this was now Lady Macbeth's role along with guiltiness and suicide. Macbeth was now past all the guilt and simply wanted to stay in power. This is why his reaction to his wife's death was so out of place. "She should have died hereafter. There would have been a time for such a word." (Act 5, Scene 5, Line 20-21, Page 177) This acceptance is also relevant to the topic of fate, seeing that Macbeth is once again accepting fate, and doing nothing about it, not even mourning about his wife's death.

A Simple Heart

"A Simple Heart," by Gustave Flaubert describes the story of Felicite, a religious, economical, disciplined servant that worked for Madame Aubain. She was very vulnerable, insecure and dependent of other people. We can see her insecurity in her grief of Virginia's death, Madame Aubain's daughter in chapter 3. "For two nights, Felicite never left the corpse. She would repeat the same prayers, sprinkle holy water over the sheets, get up, come back to the bed and contemplate the body." (Pg. 13) In this quotation, we can see that other than Felicite being insecure, she was also restless because she couldn't just sit and grieve and do nothing about it, but she had to move around and try to help Virginia even though she was dead. This also proves her religiousness, because she prayed and put holy water on the sheets. We can also see Felicite's insecureness and restlessness when Loulou gets lost. Loulou is Felicite's pet parrot, the main symbol of the story which perhaps represents hope. I believe he represents hope because Felicite had always been a very lonely person that had nothing to live for. However, when Loulou comes into the story in the fourth chapter, he gave Felicite hope of not dying alone and having some company and somebody to worry about. Nevertheless, when Loulou gets lost, Felicite worries a bit too much. "When she returned, she found no parrot! She hunted among the bushes, on the bank of the river, and on the roofs..." (Pg. 17) Here we can see, once again, Felicite is very restless, and she can't just sit and wait for the bird to come back, but she has to look for him all around the city.

I believe this story is completely based around Felicite's life, feelings, and all emotions. Basically,  Flaubert centers his story in one character, Felicite. He doesn't use other ways of writing such as a whole group of characters, but he simply picks one important person, and everyone else automatically becomes a secondary character. This is a common way of writing which I have seen in practically all the other books I've read this year in English class. Candide, Slaughterhouse - Five, and The Crying of Lot 49 all use this style. In those cases, as in this one, the main character controls the happenings. I believe that to be able to write this way, the author practically has to stop thinking as him, and start thinking as the character. This is what actors have to do to play well a character: They have to be the character. This is a very important connection between literature and film that will always be present.

This story is simply a narration of Felicite's life and the way people and things would just come and go. She could never stop doing things so at many points in the novel she devoted and attached to someone she felt she had to take care of. The perfect example is Father Colmiche. The old man depended on Felicite to keep living so she felt attached to him, but eventually he went out of her life. Unfortunately this is the way everything happens in the story. The most important figure in her life, Loulou also died after accompanying her some time, but she felt so devoted to him, she stuffed him and kept him as a symbol of the Holy Ghost. Since all the important figures in her life died, she eventually became a materialist person, only caring about the physical appearance of things such as the bird. "They associated in her mind, the parrot becoming sanctified through the neighborhood of the Holy Ghost, and the latter becoming more lifelike in her eyes, and more comprehensible..." (Pg. 19)

Basically, I believe "A Simple Heart" is simply a story about the development of a character. In the beginning, we as readers got the vision of Felicite as a humble, dedicated, religious servant, that was unfortunate because of her loneliness and way of life. However, afterwards, little by little her character or personality became to change. She began to look at life a different way. First she became attached to individuals that needed her, which gave her life meaning. Unfortunately, then she started to notice the reality of life as these figures began to die, so she thought her only way out, and the only true things in life were the material objects. She attached herself to material things gathered from all periods of her life and the house fell apart. The parrot began to decay, but nevertheless, she hung on. In the end, Felicite simply died and accepted the reality of life: time passes, people die, and life goes on. I believe that Felicite never really lost hope, and no matter the circumstances, she always believed in God. This is represented by the parrot. As I said before this main symbol of the story represents hope and the Holy Ghost. Even in the time of her death, Felicite saw parrots all around and in the end a huge parrot "hovering" above her. This shows she still had hope and the Holy Ghost was present in her life.

Candide: chapters 25 to 30 - Conclusion

Continuing on the topic of my last blog entry, I believe Martin is the cause of Candide's negativism. Martin is always talking about the bad things that happen to all humans in a pesimistic way; moreover, he believes humans are born to suffer. In the very last chapter we learn many things and conclusions, within these, we can see Martin can influence the life of many people. "Martin's conclusion was that man was born to suffer from the restlessness of anxiety or from the lethargy of boredom. Candide did not agree, but he admitted nothing." This is why I believe that in the previous chapters Candide negativism was caused or arranged by Martin.

However, in the last six chapters we can see another shift in Candide's personality. As I stated before, this novel is based completely on Candide, and because of this all the passing characters influence him and make him change personalities many times. At the beginning of the book many bad things happened to him, but he always thought everything was for the best because that was what Pangloss had taught him. Around the middle of the book, when Pangloss was gone, Candide began to think of all the bad things that happened to him, and became a pesimist. At the very end, when Pangloss re-appears, he is optimistic once again. "I have been thinking it over again, my dear Martin, and find that Pangloss was quite right; all is for the best." Because of this sequence and change of personality, and because of Pangloss' and Martin's influence on Candide, I have to say that Pangloss represents optimism, and Martin represents negativism.

In the very end, we can continue seeing Candide's optimism. He is always thinking about finding Pangloss again and he does, and when he finds Cunegonde, even though she is very ugly, he marries her thinking that it's for the best. In the end, all the characters are very unfortunate but Candide keeps pushing his optimism, which we can see perfectly in the very last sentence of the book. All the characters are arguing about their miserable conditions, but Candide insists everything will get better in a famous quote: " 'That's true enough,' said Candide; 'but we must go and work in the garden.' " Some people claim the garden is the Garden of Eden, where everything is perfect, but I simply believe this represents a place where people have to work to earn their lives and survive. This is Candide's optimism, he must work to earn better conditions.