Wild Honey

by Anton Chekhov, Michael Frayn (Translator)

This version of the play is adapted from the "Platonov" material.

Genres: Plays, Drama, Fiction, Classics, Theatre

128 pages, Paperback

Published September 2, 1988

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

[Paul Ataua · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Why do we never live the life we have within to lead”

Wild Honey is a two hour adaption of a much longer drama written by the Chekhov as a young man. It borders on farce, a farce with a dark ending. I am a lover of Chekhov’s short stories and yet I have never really got to grips with his theatrical works, so I thought I would try to revisit some of them. I didn’t get much from this and feel it was probably a mistake to start here. It’s Chekhov, but it doesn’t feel much like him.

[Etta Martin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A farce: themes-Frivolous Women, Vodka, alcoholism, Infidelity, weak men, bankruptcies, duels

[andrea hartmann · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Tonight, on this night of nights, let's simply live!”

Wild Honey by Michael Frayn is a dramatic play actually adapted from an unpopular Anton Chekhov play called Platonov. Michael Frayn took the elements of Platonov, but added characters, making the storyline more interweaving and intricate. Platonov is, essentially, the central character of this play, and helps to ignite the theme of "living life fully". When Platonov gets himself tangled in multiple affairs at once, but cannot satisfy the people who call out to him, he starts to struggle.

This play is marketed as a comedy, yet it doesn't exactly read that way on paper. Maybe it would be different as a staged play, with directing and actors and lights, but here it falls flat for many reasons. It has a lot of potential, with an intricate plot and dramatic characters, but because the characters are all similar sounding, referred to by one of their Russian middle or surnames, it gets confusing. This is obviously relative to Russian culture, and so it's not totally Frayn's fault that it can tend to get confusing, but he is the adapter, so he could honestly have made fewer characters related, making their surnames more distinct and therefore less likely to be confusing.

The plot is pretty realistic and grounded, just with some crazy characters. This is typical of a Chekhov play, but it could have been far more interesting if it was simpler to follow. If it was easier to follow, it might have been a 4-star read.

[Nick Jones · Rating 3 out of 5]

Apparently the long untitled play (generally known after the central character Platonov), written by Chekhov when he was very young but put aside and only found after his death, is a treasure trove for Chekhov scholars, jammed packed with the motifs, themes, plot situations and character types that he would return to in his later writing, but the play itself is generally thought of as an unwieldy mess, too many things stuffed into it in a higgledy-piggledy manner. I don’t know if the original play has ever been staged, but it has often been adapted. Wild Honey is an adaptation and translation into English by Michael Frayn. The original was vastly shortened, characters and sub plots were thrown out, but I don’t know the original so cannot make any comparisons, I can only respond to Wild Honey as a work in itself, a collaboration between Chekov and Frayn. (Interestingly when originally staged in London in the 1980s, starring Ian McKellen, it was a critical success and a hit with the audiences, but when the production was transferred to Broadway – with a largely different cast, although McKellen still starred – it was a flop with critics and audience.) Chekhov’s mature work is often described as tragicomic – I’m not sure if tragic is the right word, but there is often a mix of humour and quiet desperation. Wild Honey, however, doesn’t so much blend the comic and the tragic, it’s more a mix of farce and melodrama. Frayn insists the farce is in the original text and he has left a lot of the melodrama out. Overall I found the farce the more successful. There is a complex plot where the men love the women but all the women love Platonov – I don’t know why, he’s not the most likeable of characters and it feels as though the young Chekhov was trying to provide a profound insight into the character of Woman. And the play is full of entrances and exits as the characters reconfigure their relationships – I imagine in a good production it is all very light and amusing. The melodrama works less well: Platonov, for instance, has bouts of self disgust and wishes he was dead while the women burst into tears – maybe this can also be treated as farcical, but otherwise it is the sort of stuff that gives melodrama a bad name. I suppose it is all quite fun, but I’m not sure it’s that much more than a frothy footnote to Chekhov’s career.

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

Village teacher Platonov's youthful ambitions are rekindled when Sofya arrives. Michael Frayn's adaptation stars Ian McKellen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00qg3sy

[Andrew Hanna · Rating 3 out of 5]

kind of a middling superfluous man story, can’t all be bangers ig 😔

[Will · Rating 3 out of 5]

Listened to the BBC Radio version from 2010. You can tell that Chekhov was 20 when he wrote the original, but mostly not in a bad way- this play expresses well how he felt and thought a great deal about people's capacity to love and hate. Morbid in a certain way that a young adult can be, and better for it! This Michael Frayn adaptation feels like a good excavation of the most salient themes of Chekhov's work. I love the feeling of thaw from a cold, inward winter to a humid, maddening, and passionate summer. The ending is a bit goofy, but the tragicomic tone carries it. Ian McKellen gives a memorable of slightly overwrought performance for the BBC Radio production.

[Cary Boswell · Rating 3 out of 5]

A romantic farce of unfulfilled love, property worries, atmosphere of summer in Russia. Edited by Michael Frayn, it is much like On/OFF. Hero Platanov is a weak man who creates trouble for all his friends,.

[Camila · Rating 3 out of 5]

[3.5 stars]
Platonov, more like Mr. Bitches 😭😭😭

[Tal Taran · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Why do we never lead the life we have it within us to lead?”

I listened to a BBC production which had Ian McKellen starring as Platonov—funny and engaging.

[JohnM Koroly · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's always difficult to judge a stage playscript as reading material. One keeps imagining how it would look on stage and how different would be that experience. Having said that, Frayn's translation/adaptation of AC's "Platonov" does its original more than justice. Flawed characters elicit great sympathy. Brisk, literate dialogue.

[Paul Servini · Rating 3 out of 5]

A Tolstoy farce!? Apparantly, one of his earlier works and I think he pulled it off quite well. Then again, maybe it's not just a farce. There's that familiar cynicism in the play and a lot of the strife which arises out of human relationships.

[Michael Meeuwis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I quite preferred this adaptation of the Platonov material to the David Hare version--or rather, I liked the very particular purpose (well-constructed farce) to which this adaptation was put.

[Michael P. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Just as good the third time around.

[Nomad nimrod · Rating 1 out of 5]

I didn't like this.
I prefer his sadder plays.

[Nikolas Krieger · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fav chekov I’ve read so far