Complete Works of Anton Chekhov

by Anton Chekhov, Constance Garnett (Translator), John Cournos (Translator)

*Many images related to Chekhov, his works and the places he lived in
* concise introductions to the texts
* All 211 short stories available for the first time on the Kindle! Even rare stories like ‘Rapture’ – Chekhov’s first ever piece of fiction and available nowhere else as a digital book
* the short stories have BOTH chronological and alphabetical contents tables – find that classic story easily!
* Even the rare novella The Shooting Party - available nowhere else as a digital book
* the COMPLETE letters
* Chekhov’s Note-Book revealing a rare insight into the great writer’s work
* scholarly ordering of texts into chronological order and literary genres
* includes Chekhov's first and mostly unknown play 'Platonov' - available nowhere else in digital format
* also features the very rare play 'The Wood Demon', which later served to inspire Chekhov to write 'Uncle Vanya'. This rare early play is available now for the first time in digital format.

Genres: Classics, Fiction, Literature, Short Stories, Russia, Russian Literature, Literary Fiction

4251 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1887

About the author

Antón Chéjov (Spanish)

Dramas, such as The Seagull (1896, revised 1898), and including "A Dreary Story" (1889) of Russian writer Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, also Chekov, concern the inability of humans to communicate.

Born ( Антон Павлович Чехов ) in the small southern seaport of Taganrog, the son of a grocer. His grandfather, a serf, bought his own freedom and that of his three sons in 1841. He also taught to read. A cloth merchant fathered Yevgenia Morozova, his mother.

"When I think back on my childhood," Chekhov recalled, "it all seems quite gloomy to me." Tyranny of his father, religious fanaticism, and long nights in the store, open from five in the morning till midnight, shadowed his early years. He attended a school for Greek boys in Taganrog from 1867 to 1868 and then Taganrog grammar school. Bankruptcy of his father compelled the family to move to Moscow. At the age of 16 years in 1876, independent Chekhov for some time alone in his native town supported through private tutoring.

In 1879, Chekhov left grammar school and entered the university medical school at Moscow. In the school, he began to publish hundreds of short comics to support his mother, sisters and brothers. Nicholas Leikin published him at this period and owned Oskolki (splinters), the journal of Saint Petersburg. His subjected silly social situations, marital problems, and farcical encounters among husbands, wives, mistresses, and lust; even after his marriage, Chekhov, the shy author, knew not much of whims of young women.

Nenunzhaya pobeda , first novel of Chekhov, set in 1882 in Hungary, parodied the novels of the popular Mór Jókai. People also mocked ideological optimism of Jókai as a politician.

Chekhov graduated in 1884 and practiced medicine. He worked from 1885 in Peterburskaia gazeta.

In 1886, Chekhov met H.S. Suvorin, who invited him, a regular contributor, to work for Novoe vremya, the daily paper of Saint Petersburg. He gained a wide fame before 1886. He authored The Shooting Party , his second full-length novel, later translated into English. Agatha Christie used its characters and atmosphere in later her mystery novel The Murder of Roger Ackroyd . First book of Chekhov in 1886 succeeded, and he gradually committed full time. The refusal of the author to join the ranks of social critics arose the wrath of liberal and radical intelligentsia, who criticized him for dealing with serious social and moral questions but avoiding giving answers. Such leaders as Leo Tolstoy and Nikolai Leskov, however, defended him. "I'm not a liberal, or a conservative, or a gradualist, or a monk, or an indifferentist. I should like to be a free artist and that's all..." Chekhov said in 1888.

The failure of The Wood Demon , play in 1889, and problems with novel made Chekhov to withdraw from literature for a period. In 1890, he traveled across Siberia to Sakhalin, remote prison island. He conducted a detailed census of ten thousand convicts and settlers, condemned to live on that harsh island. Chekhov expected to use the results of his research for his doctoral dissertation. Hard conditions on the island probably also weakened his own physical condition. From this journey came his famous travel book.

Chekhov practiced medicine until 1892. During these years, Chechov developed his concept of the dispassionate, non-judgmental author. He outlined his program in a letter to his brother Aleksandr: "1. Absence of lengthy verbiage of political-social-economic nature; 2. total objectivity; 3. truthful descriptions of persons and objects; 4. extreme brevity; 5. audacity and originality; flee the stereotype; 6. compassion." Because he objected that the paper conducted against [a:Alfred Dreyfu

Reviews

[Francisco · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is going to be one of those reviews that continues over time. I'm not quite done reading the complete works. I don't read this book continuously. I save it for days when I need something to hold on to. There's no need to describe those kind of days. If you understand, you understand. Do you have a book you can read, an author you can hold on to when you need to? I was fortunate to start reading this book from the end - the section that contains his letters and journal entries. Then I went on to his fictional work more or less in the order they were written. Starting with his letters and journal entries gave me a sense of the man and reading his work in chronological order is giving me a sense of his writing and how it developed and deepened. I'm one of those that finds it hard to separate the author from his work, that the depth and integrity of one (or lack thereof) finds its way into the second. One of the reasons I like Chekhov's works so much is because I like Chekhov the man. There's something simple and solid and generous about him. Something about how he carried on with his dual vocation of medicine and writing that is refreshingly egoless. He has a wonderfully balanced awareness of the role that writing plays in his life. It is hard to describe this balanced awareness of his vocation. It's like he knows he is a good writer and he has a gift and he probably suspects he will be read forever but so what, he's not different than you or me. When still young and starting to write, he writes to D.V. Grigorovich after the latter commented on a story written by Chekhov: "I have a gift which one ought to respect. I confess before the pure candor of your heart that hitherto I have not respected it. I felt that I had a gift but I got it in the habit of thinking that it was insignificant." Writing is a gift which one ought to respect. Not exalt. Not believe it makes you superior. Respect implies awareness of both the preciousness, the ordinariness, and the burdens of the gift. And you can see that for Chekhov the gift was something gratuitous, unearned even though it would require hard, constant work to maintain. It was something to be used- given to him so that he could give it to others. There's a beautiful symmetry in his life between his practice of medicine and his writing. I want to say that his writing heals the spirit just like his medicine heals bodies. But I don't want to anger my friend Chekhov in heaven by romanticizing what he did too much. He would not want me to do that. He would want my words to be plain like his. "Literature is only art insofar as it paints life as it really is," he says in his journals. His stories and plays heal our spirit because they are truth- full, reality-full. Not just in the sense that Chekhov is never squeamish about showing us the worst in us but also because he is never afraid to show us the best. And when he shows us the worst in ourselves, the silly, fearful, self-aggrandizing, poor selves that we are, he does it with a quiet compassion and hope. And there are days when that's the kind of author and writing we need.

[Shankar · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent introduction to many things in life

1. Anton Chekhov
2. Russia
3. The fact that “what is …. Has always been… and will continue” to happen to people’s lives w.r.t relationships with others
4. People in power will remain selfish

And many more such maxims.

The book is full of interesting twists and turns and very deftly woven to make ending unexpected.

[Nathan Hatch · Rating 3 out of 5]

From this collection, I read:

Short stories:
* A Chameleon
* Kashtanka
* Vanka
* Ward No. 6
* Rothschild's Fiddle
(List recommended by Anannya Mondal.)

Novellas:
* My Life
* An Anonymous Story

Plays:
* Ivanov
* The Bear
* The Seagull
* The Cherry Orchard

What I liked

Chekhov's writing often grapples with existentialism in interesting, almost philosophical ways. "Ward No. 6" and "An Anonymous Story" are good examples of this.

"Kashtanka", "Vanka", and "A Chameleon" were all enjoyable for different reasons. I suppose Chekhov was quite good at writing short stories: (1) have an interesting idea, (2) put it on paper, (3) revise to make it nice and concise, (4) done. These three stories don't take much time to read, and they're memorable.

Of the plays that I read, "The Cherry Orchard" (his last play) was my favorite. Honestly, his plays blend together—they're all about unhappy nobility who have lost their sense of meaning in life following the emancipation of the serfs—but "The Cherry Orchard" was the best executed of these. It has some thought-provoking symbolism about breaking with the past.

If what Chekhov writes about corruption in Russia in those times is true, then I'm glad he was around to call people out on it.

What I didn't like

I said above that Chekhov often grapples with existentialism in interesting ways. Well, unfortunately, he more commonly grapples with it in deeply uninteresting ways. I lost count of the number of times his plays and stories referenced suicide. Chekhov seems to enjoy writing about miserable people out of pure sadism. He proposes no solutions; he just lets them wallow in their misery. On a similar vein, his characterization is essentially pessimistic. He sometimes strings words together in poetic ways, but invariably the purpose is to paint someone or something in as unflattering a light as possible.

[Mariam · Rating 5 out of 5]

الفردية !!
السخرية من معاناة الآخرين والتركيز علي معاناتنا والتقليل من حزنهم . كلنا لدينا معاناة حتي من لديه كمبيالات وديون يعاني ويظن ان معاناته هي الوحيدة .
طاقتنا المكبوتة التي تظهر وقت الغيظ والغضب ، تنفلت منا مشاعرنا ونتفوه بما لا يصح أن يُقال .

[Realini Ionescu · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Shooting Party by Anton Chekhov – we find Anton Chekhov on the list of 100 Greatest Books Ever Written

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002...

10 out of 10





Anton Chekhov was celebrated as one of the glorious authors, but mainly for his short stories, that are included with the best magnum opera http://realini.blogspot.com/2021/03/b... and The Shooting Party is a note apart, and the longest work by Chekhov, the novel is intriguing, although the under signed is noting here on the adaptation that has one of the most mesmerizing actors the world has ever had, George Constantin, the one who shares more than just value, but an anecdote with Jack Nicholson



According to Robert Evans, actor, producer of The Godfather, Chinatown, Rosemary’s Baby and other masterpieces, head of Paramount, he discovered Jack Nicholson as he was waiting for a more famous actor to audition and he was impressed by Jack, who had nothing to do on stage, but still attracted the attention – the two went on to be good friends, though Nicholson would refuse to take on the Great Gatsby unless he was paid half a million, therefore the part would go to Robert Redford and Gatsby is not a success, both adaptations actually - http://realini.blogspot.com/2015/09/t... - about the same thing has happened with George Constantin, when the Bolshoi Theater came visiting…

The Shooting Party starts with a magistrate, Sergey Zinovyev, who offers a manuscript for consideration, explaining he has been involved in an investigation which he had conducted and the story has happened to him (though the name has been changed) and the narrator is the judge himself (like in France, with juge d’instruction, the judge here is the one deciding what happens, who is jailed, placed under accusation, as a prosecutor in other places) who has had not just firsthand experience, as we will learn.



The story teller becomes very good friends with count Alexei Karneyev, who drinks a lot, is superficial, vain, spoiled, as most aristocrats would have been, indeed, come to think of it, they are perhaps more than ever, except for those who have lost everything but their titles and live like ‘commoners’, there are those who enjoy privileges and the example at hand is Prince Andrew, who used to be only second in line –as The Economist puts it in the latest edition, just one horrible polo accident from the throne – to the crown and he is engulfed in the most ghastly scandal, and his interviews have shown what an awful figure he is, about to change the perception of heredity and the impact it may have on the future of Britain as monarchy…if not in the short term, then for the longer one.

Urbenin is the bailiff who works for Count Karneyev, in his fifties, a heavy drinker also – Russians seem to have a penchant for that, at least in literature…however, it is wrong and stupid to attribute characteristics to large groups that are specific to a portion and that in fact applies everywhere…in a large enough number of humans, you find a number that drink, are violent, some who are brilliant, others who are stupid.



Karneyev has fallen in love with Olga, a much younger woman, who is traumatized as she would say herself by the fact that she has to live in the forest, with her now deranged father, Nikolai Efimych, unable to find men of her own age (or indeed, of any age or sex presumably) in that claustrophobic environment and this solitude, the proximity of mental disease, the impulsive, enthusiastic nature of her age would prompt her to accept the marriage proposal, when this is made by the bailiff, who is nonetheless stupefied that she accepts…

It was unwise, as mentioned, she had been pressed by the chagrin of solitude and mental ailment – which she may have inherited to some extent, one vicious, sardonic, cynical observer might add, with hindsight from her erratic, sometimes perilous, unstable behavior which would be exhibited in the pages to follow the moment where we have stopped before this bracket – and had thought that the love of the would be husband, his wealth and the nature of her own infatuation would be the premise for a better life…



She may have fallen in love, however, Thomas Mann explains at one point that we should be aware of using ‘love, friend’ and other important concepts too easily, because it is not true when we say ‘my love is so great, there are no words to express it’ and the opposite is accurate, for love means so much that according to Thomas Mann, we only find the real feeling in literature, not in real life http://realini.blogspot.com/2015/01/d...

alas, Olga may love, or just be infatuated with the magistrate, not her would be husband and one major, nay, probably capital factor in accepting Urbenin was the notion that her affection is not shared and it is destined to remain pointless, because there was presumably a major difference in the social status of the two, and about two centuries ago, in czarist Russia and much of the world, there would be no connection between the rich and poor, the commoner and the noble, and besides, her father is a mental case – to try a stupid cynicism here, dressed as a joke – and the characters refer to his hopeless situation



at the wedding, guests insist that the bride and groom kiss, but that repels the woman, who disappears from the feast and the poor husband asks the judge to intervene and the latter jokes that the departure of the bride has soured the wine in his cup and he is out to find her…what follows is a confession, the bride insisting that she loves Zinovyev and she had just made a terrible mistake, to align her life with the much older bailiff, but she is opposed to the idea that she should run away with the man she loves…

back then, they did not have the chance to consult the ultimate expert on relationships, John Gottman, author of the classic Seven Principles of Making Marriage Work http://realini.blogspot.com/2015/07/t... the one who was able to say with over ninety percent accuracy rate, which couples would stay together and which would disintegrate, and the whole affair would end…well, dramatically, and we can say that, since you have it in the tile and furthermore there is the famous quote “If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired…Otherwise don't put it there.”

[Gleb · Rating 4 out of 5]

I of course did not read every story, by page count I read about 35% of it, and based my reading off ones that were recommended, had interesting titles or were written about in his brief biography.

Chekhov, in a departure away from the Russian aristocracy, writes many a story about peasants and peasant life. Evident also in Chekhov's philanthropic work in providing books and building schools for them, he quite enjoys people beyond the literary and academic groups where he could have comfortably remained. Of the stories I enjoyed the most they revolve around 'normal people', not great war heroes or princes, but a doctor in a rural town, a medical student, a village police commissioner, a orchard owner, etc... that experience the same issues we encounter today. Doubt over marriage, being falsely accused of crimes, poor decisions during college and more. This sort of focus made it interesting to realize how similar life is between all of us, even in 1890's Russia. The dialogue is lively.

Of course there are plenty of stories that revolve around a man loving a woman, which get's kinda boring. Like every Russian author there are stories of highly misunderstood mental illness, having nervous breakdowns and hallucinations, which is intriguing to realize how they are written about less as a problem and more sort of fantastical, not fully understood, a lot of potassium bromide is prescribed.

The comedic/parody plays are also really funny!

[Omar · Rating 3 out of 5]

في قصة الأعداء لأنطون تشيخوف، لا نواجه حكاية صدام تقليدي بين شخصين بقدر ما نقف أمام احتكاك إنساني هش، يولد من لحظة خاطئة وألم غير محتمل. القصة تبدو بسيطة في بنائها، محدودة في عدد شخصياتها، لكنها مشحونة بتوتر نفسي يجعلها أثقل مما توحي به صفحاتها القليلة.

تنطلق الأحداث من مأساة يعيشها الطبيب، مأساة قريبة جدًا، طازجة، لم تتح له حتى فرصة استيعابها أو الحزن عليها بشكل كامل. هذا الألم لا يجعله أكثر تعاطفًا، بل على العكس، يغلقه على نفسه ويحوّله إلى شخص حاد، متجمد، يرى العالم من زاوية واحدة فقط: زاوية وجعه الخاص. في المقابل يظهر الرجل الآخر، الذي لا يقل بؤسًا، لكنه يأتي محمّلًا بحاجته الملحّة، غير مدرك أن طلبه هذا يصطدم بجدار إنساني منهك.

اللافت في معالجة تشيخوف أن الصراع لا يُبنى على نوايا سيئة أو شر متعمد. لا أحد هنا يريد إيذاء الآخر، ومع ذلك يتصرف كل طرف بقدر من القسوة والجفاء. الكلمات المتبادلة جافة، النظرات مشحونة، والصمت أثقل من أي حوار. كل شخصية ترى الأخرى أنانية، متبلدة، وغير قادرة على الفهم، بينما الحقيقة أن كليهما محاصر داخل ألمه، غير قادر على رؤية ما يتجاوز حدوده النفسية الضيقة.

تشيخوف لا يسعى لاستدرار التعاطف الرخيص، ولا يقدم حلولًا أو لحظة صفاء أخلاقية في النهاية. يترك الشخصيات في حالتها الخام، المزعجة، غير المكتملة، وكأنه يقول إن الألم لا يصنع بالضرورة إنسانًا أفضل، بل قد يحوّله إلى شخص عاجز عن التعاطف، حتى مع من يشبهه في المعاناة. القصة مؤلمة لأنها صادقة، ولأنها تضع القارئ أمام حقيقة غير مريحة: أحيانًا نؤذي الآخرين لا لأننا قساة، بل لأننا موجوعون أكثر مما نحتمل


In Enemies by Anton Chekhov, we are not confronted with a conventional tale of conflict between two people so much as with a fragile human collision, born of the wrong moment and unbearable pain. The story appears simple in its structure and limited in its cast, yet it is charged with a psychological tension that makes it far heavier than its few pages might suggest.

The events unfold from a tragedy endured by the doctor — a tragedy so recent and raw that he has not yet been granted the space to comprehend it, let alone grieve properly. This pain does not make him more compassionate; on the contrary, it closes him off, hardens him, and narrows his vision until he sees the world through a single lens: his own suffering. Opposite him stands another man, no less miserable, driven by an urgent need, unaware that his request collides with an exhausted, wounded human being.

What stands out in Chekhov’s treatment is that the conflict is not built on ill intent or deliberate cruelty. No one here seeks to harm the other, and yet both act with a certain coldness and emotional brutality. The exchanged words are dry, the looks charged, and the silences heavier than dialogue itself. Each character perceives the other as selfish, numb, and incapable of understanding, while the truth is that both are trapped within their pain, unable to see beyond the narrow boundaries of their own inner anguish.

Chekhov does not aim for cheap sympathy, nor does he offer solutions or a moral moment of clarity at the end. He leaves his characters in their raw, unsettling, unfinished state, as if to say that pain does not necessarily make us better human beings; it may instead render us incapable of empathy, even toward those who resemble us in suffering. The story is painful because it is honest, and because it places the reader before an uncomfortable truth: sometimes we hurt others not because we are cruel, but because we are wounded beyond what we can endure.

[Patrick Stirling · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not really "finished" as this is his complete works! The Feb '18 selection for my book club was "anything by Checkhov". I looked up "best Checkhov short stories" on the web, and read 3 of them.

The Lady With The Dog
This seems to be his most popular short story, and I gather it's at least somewhat autobiographical. I really didn't connect with it though. I have trouble with adultery anyway, and didn't like the casual way it's treated here. Perhaps that's how it was in 1880's Russia, even though it's pretty clear in the story that they're sneaking around and worried about being caught. His writing is really good, and he draws a detailed and engaging picture of the characters, although there's little detail about Gurov's job, or even of his life at all outside this relationship. But it is a short story after all! I was left with the feeling "why did Checkhov write this?". All that happens is they meet on holiday in Yalta, start an affair, he can't get her out of his mind and visits her in her carefully unnamed town, she then visits him in Moscow. They agree that they've unfortunately fallen in love and that difficulties lie ahead ... and the story ends there. The whole thing seemed capricious on his part, and she was just totally passive and accepting. I didn't get what they saw in each other, beyond boredom in their marriages. Not much insight there.

The Bet
I read this because I liked the title. Another finely drawn picture of events and characters. At a party the conversation turns to capital punishment versus life imprisonment. The host, a rich banker, is in favour of the death penalty, as being more humane than slowly killing someone through a life incarcerated. A guest says no, he could still have a life in prison which would be better than being executed. The banker bets him a fortune (literally) that he could not stay in voluntary captivity for 15 years. Read the story to find out more! I like this one the best of the 3 I read.

The Black Monk
Another of his more popular stories, which I think suffers from the same problem as The Lady With The Dog - overly passive and nervous women! I can't believe women were really like this then any more than they are now. Perhaps that's how Checkhov liked them. The main character sees the titular apparition; when he talks about it everyone thinks he's mad, which he believes too. He then essentially kills himself with the then accepted remedy - lots of bromide. In the meantime he's very cruel to his wife, abandons her and takes up with another woman. Is this a feature of Checkhov?

Three's enough for me! His writing is great but I don't find the characters or situations that interesting, and his view of women is really irritating. And I'm really not that interested in Russian high society life in the late 1800s.

[Nilesh Jasani · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chekhov is perhaps the best short story teller of all time. Short stories are about those tiny things that make the daily life. So much in our routine is unusual, noteworthy, absurd, and interesting, even if without much material consequences. Their pithy depiction requires an ability to detect them in their full glory but with minimum additional stuff. Highly complex characters may have to be developed in a span of a few words. Right interactions have to be formed to cause the story to emerge with adequate background and ambience. And they still have to be wrapped up in a double hurry but without appearing hurried, sensational or prosaic. Chekhov manages this almost every time while vividly presenting the nineteenth century Russia with characters from almost every age, class and behavioral varieties. In fact, most of his stories could be from almost any era, any place, even as they are uniquely pre-Communist Russia's.

A must read

[Tristen Gary-Ortiz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Exploring the completed works of Anton Chekhov is like delving into a treasure trove of human experience. With each story, Chekhov unveils the complexities of human relationships, the nuances of emotion, and the intricacies of everyday life. From the profound to the mundane, his tales resonate with a timeless authenticity that speaks to the heart of what it means to be human. Through his keen observations and subtle wit, Chekhov invites readers to contemplate the beauty, tragedy, and absurdity of existence. As I journeyed through his works, I found myself immersed in a world of rich characters and poignant moments, each one leaving an indelible impression on my soul. The completed works of Anton Chekhov are not just stories; they are windows into the human condition, offering insight, empathy, and understanding that transcend time and place.

[Doug Lewars]

*** Possible Spoilers ***

This doesn't get a star rating because Goodreads doesn't list what I actually read which was The Hunting Party, the only full-length novel by Anton Chekhov. After finishing a couple of works by Tolstoy I found the start of this one a little flat. As the story progresses it improves but it doesn't really get going until the second half. The climax is quite impressive but the denouement less so. Ultimately this is a murder mystery but long before the murder takes place the reader has a pretty good idea who the murderer will turn out to be. In general I still think it's a good book and well worth reading.

[Mehran Hashemi · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very short story that shows how a bad day can turn anyone into an enemy.
Sometimes, a single harsh moment is enough to make us lose sight of life’s beauty and see only the worst—even in good people.
Maybe we’re all just enemies by misunderstanding, or by some unfortunate coincidence we call bad luck… or fate.

[Paulo (not receiving notifications)]

The Joke - A short story


The Joke - A short story


I think I'm a Nihilist!
Every time I walk down my memory lane, back to the time when life was bright and exciting and everyone I knew and loved would live forever, I am crushed by the weight of loss and the feeling of a general, pointless existence. I am assailed by the belief that nothing in the world has any concrete purpose, and I am invaded by the conviction that life is meaningless, and it plunges me into an empty world, where all values of hope are baseless and reason is powerless. There is a lot of pain and regret about leaving things undone and unsaid. The dark clouds of regret kept raging, hovering over my head as something I would want to keep with me for the rest of my life. I blame Nietzsche!

Friedrich Nietzsche was, among the philosophers, probably the one who explored more deeply the nihilist concept and its implications for our civilisation. More than a century ago, he predicted existential nihilism’s impact on the culture and values of the society of his future - our present - an apocalyptic powerhouse of gloom, anxiety, anger, and terror. Interestingly, Nietzsche himself, a radical sceptic obsessed with language, knowledge, and truth, anticipated many of the themes of the actual so-called postmodernity.
Maybe, if we survive the process of destroying all interpretations of the world, we could then perhaps discover the correct course and meaning for humankind.
Shakespeare also summarised the existential nihilist’s perspective in "Macbeth", when he cries out his disgust for life:

Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then it is heard no more; it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Turgenev is considered the writer who popularised the nihilist concept in "Fathers and Sons", published in 1862, expressed by the words of his character, Bazarov, who preaches a conviction of total negation:
....the gluttony, the drunkenness, the continual talk always about the same thing. Useless pursuits and conversations absorb the better part of your time, the better part of your strength, and in the end, you are left with a life earthbound and curtailed, just rubbish, and there is no escaping or getting away from it...

Chekhov, in 1886, picks up the theme and gives us one possible interpretation of "nihilism" with this short story.
He created, with only two characters, a dynamic of emotions between a pair of opposites: a nihilist and an existentialist.
In "A Joke", Chekhov explores through one of the characters, trust, confusion, anxiety, uncertainty, innocence, and love roaring like a rollercoaster ride that speeds, rushes up and down, to stops suddenly to a halt.
And through the other, non-commitment, self-absorption, vampiric voyeurism and selfish carelessness disguised in kindness that is in fact self-pity and cowardice in a void existence.
Chekhov plays with the feelings of a misplaced first love not reciprocated, when one dreams that all is possible and yet unreachable, burning in hope born from longing and willing to risk everything to capture one more time that flimsy, eerie feeling under the spell of four teasing words that causes one to underestimate or overestimate a circumstance, a feeling, a sentiment.
He illustrates with his characteristic prose the complete opposite perception and influence of the same words on two different people. For one, the words whispered are of utmost importance, the centre of a personal universe of feelings and emotions. For the other, the same words are absolutely impersonal, meaningless words thrown into the wind, as if a little childish "Joke".

The word "love" is a powerful one, too frequently abused, misused or used inappropriately, which is very much the case when it comes to just using it to tease someone because for the user it's not a word with any special meaning in that particular situation.
Chekhov shows us that character and integrity do not lie in the ability to perform daring actions, but in the strength of mind to be truthful to oneself and others.

Typically, in his stories, the protagonists are either overwhelmed by the feeling of disillusionment with the world or maintain a hope for a better future. His stories often end with a moment of revelation or anti-climax, and it is no different in “The Joke”, except that here the ending presents us with both conclusions.

A "Realist", Chekhov treads a fine line between the disillusionment of failure and the exhilaration of success. Under the guise of telling a story, he provokes the reader to examine his various disappointments and fruitless ideals, as well as the achievements and accomplishments attained while walking one's life's path. For some, it is a pleasant stroll full of sweet memories, while for others, disappointment, uncertainty, and frustration will pave the way for this inner peregrination. Only by reading his stories will we know which path we will find hidden inside us.

The world is, of course, nothing but our conception of it - Anton Chekhov.

[Georgia Baldini · Rating 2 out of 5]

this was a wild ride. to be vulnerable with you all. abogen's wife was so real for that. like oh go get the doctor then bam im running away w another man. it was so alison dilaurentis of her like i kinda ate that up.

[Lauren Sinatra · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have to be honest, I was under the impression that Aboguin was blind the whole time because mans kept feeling around in the dark. Also, his wife kinda ate with the way she went about leaving him. A cunty move to say the least. If I was Kirilov I too would have beat the shit out of Aboguin.

[Kari Ivanova · Rating 5 out of 5]

Врагове е психологическа драма, в която Чехов изследва човешките взаимоотношения, моралните избори и трудността да проявим съчувствие, когато сме обхванати от собствената си болка. Пиесата поставя важни въпроси за отговорността, емпатията и границите на човешката доброта.

[Steve Graham · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had previously known his plays so this was an introduction for me to his short stories. I understand why he’s called the master of the short stories!

[Ahmed Wagdy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short stories and play have very deep and clear symbols

[Alan Hosch · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every word is beautiful, dripping with emotion, timeless.

[Dante Erócurim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lo leí en español la edición de Kindle y los cuentos muy buenos, pero la edición es mala trae muchos cuentos repetidos. Claro al autor vale mucho la pena leerlo.

[Peter Sprengelmeyer · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am glad that I read the Wikipedia entries and online reviews before reading these plays. They are slow and without a lot of action, but that is the point. The main action is supposed to be happening off-stage, and the characters are reacting to these events. I think that these (Cherry Orchard and Three Sisters) would be better read after seeing them performed, but now that I have read them I am still looking forward to finding a production to experience it. There are still elements that come out in the reading and which I enjoyed (e.g., the use of the chopping down of trees as symbolic of the ending of something that seemed established was well-done). Glad I read them for the historical place, but I would rather have seen them performed.

[Scott Ralph · Rating 5 out of 5]

A remarkable author. This collection gives you a much broader exposure to his work than his well known plays

[Lulu]

1880 - 1904

[Kelli Bacon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some of the stories were great and compelling while others were ok. Some great suspenseful endings that leave you hanging.