What do you think?
Rate this book
Крыжовник
Николай Иванович мечтал иметь усадьбу, где растет крыжовник, и в конце концов добился своей цели. В чем смысл жизни, и есть ли в ней счастье - персонажи Чехова в очередной раз заставляют задуматься над этими вечными вопросами.
Рассказ впервые опубликован в журнале «Русская мысль» в 1898 году.
Рассказ впервые опубликован в журнале «Русская мысль» в 1898 году.
14 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 1, 1898
84 people are currently reading
3125 people want to read
About the author
Anton Chekhov
5,999 books9,843 followers
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
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
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 351 reviews
February 14, 2026
*edited on 23.05.2021
Happiness doesn’t exist, we don’t need any such thing. If life has any meaning or purpose, you won’t find it in happiness, but in something more rational, in something greater. Doing good!
What is happiness? Human beings’ quest for happiness in life is often narrow-minded as they see happiness as the ultimate pursuit in life. Does it mean that unhappiness is not or should be part of life? Aren't both different aspects of the same emotion? And what does being happy mean? Does it correlate with success? What is a success then, how do we define it? And whose happiness we are talking about? What does it essentially mean? We need to further explore that is it materialistic in nature or metaphysical, don’t both of them represent our myopic vision. Another key point to be addressed is whether this happiness is selfish or altruistic, whether we need to bother about the society as a whole; and what about the social injustice or various other vagaries present in our society. We need to assess the essence of happiness when we have varied anomalies in our society. Let’s go deeper, to the core of ‘happiness’, the meaning we impart of our lives, the truth we seek in our lives to define it, how much it matters when we talk about happiness; the petty achievements we acquire over the course of our lives, do they really matter, if they don’t then why do we worry so much about them.
link: source
Gooseberries is one of the stories written in the last phase of Anton Chekov’s life, the artistic abilities of people often seem to be waned, gradually after touching prime of their prowess but that’s not the case with Chekov, he produced in masterpieces-both in prose and drama- in this phase of his life, perhaps that’s why he is regarded as one of the best short fiction authors, as relevant today as he was then- a timeless beauty. We see that there is an interesting overlapping of modernism and the creative outburst of Anton Chekov in the last phase of his life. During that period, impressionism was gaining popularity in both art and literature, though later it was quickly surpassed by Expressionism and other post-impressionist trends.
It represents a unique feature of its kind, as it is essentially a story within a story, the narrator- Ivan Ivanych, the vet and Burkin, a teacher at a high school took shelter at Alyokhin’s as they get soaked from top to bottom in the divine water pouring from the overcast sky. Ivanych is invited by the group to tell the story which has been impending for some time, the anticipation of the story is so much that not only Burkin and Alyokhin but also the ladies (young and old), and the officers, who were looking down calmly and solemnly from their gilt frames on the walls, are also waiting eagerly, fixing their eyes on Ivanych. The story is about Ivan Ivanych, who is disgusted by the silliness of his brother, Nikolay Ivanych, for he considers the minuscule, materialistic acquisitions in life as happiness, he seems to be blind to the universal human quest for eventual contentment.
Ivanych goes on preaching that people should look for meaning in their lives rather than gratifying themselves with petty things in life. He makes allusion to Tolstoy’s famous story-‘How much land a man need?, They say a man needs only six feet of earth, but surely they must mean a corpse- not a man!, perhaps to emphasize upon the futility of materialistic achievements. The (first person) narrator discusses at length what humanity actually needs in life rather than what it desires for; the empires, estates accumulated by the educated classes but eventually everyone needs just six feet of land. Man sacrifices his personal, real life, in the pretense of acquiring something that is essentially worthless, effectively he lives a meaningless and uncontended life.
A man needs more than six feet of earth and a little place in the country, he needs the whole wide world, the whole of nature, where there’s room for him to display his potential, all the manifold attributes of his free spirit.
The questions about life keep reverberating through the story, it raises the intriguing point of unspeakable poverty, overcrowding, degeneracy, drunkenness, hypocrisy, and lies as we do not get the utmost satisfaction, we quest for in our lives. The peace and quiet that seem to be prevalent in our lives are shallow and baseless since the social injustice, inherent to our society, creates an imitation of happiness for privileged people who seems to oblivious to the underprivileged ones. The vehement critic of Nikolay, his brother Ivanych preaches about the man’s inability to look for real purpose in life rather than taking refuge in so-called happiness, but we see that he himself doesn’t do anything for the same, however, he urges his friends to devise a meaningful life for themselves, reflects the irony of life.
It’s obvious that the happy man feels contented only because the unhappy ones bear their burden without saying a word: if it weren’t for their silence, happiness would be quite impossible. It’s a kind of mass hypnosis.
And I thought how many satisfied, happy people really do exist in this world! And what a powerful force they are! Just take a look at this life of ours and you will see the arrogance and idleness of the strong, the ignorance and bestiality of the weak.
link: source
The author presents a unique mix of narrative style in the story, the tale starts in a third-person narrative with a non-existent but omniscient narrator but with the onset of the 'story within in the story', it switches to first person narrative with Ivanych taking a central role in it. The language is rich and full of imagery, as you expect from Chekov, like an impressionist painting but Chekov demands his reader to play an active role in the story, Chekov’s prose has features of more like modernist literature. He deliberately evades some details of the narrative, adopting a minimalist approach (which later expounded and explored by the likes of Hemingway and Beckett) since the message, themes of a story should not be obvious to the narrator. His prose focuses upon melancholy, mood, feelings, and consciousness of the characters, around lyrical, poetic, and vivid settings. We see that the smallest, peculiar details are given importance in the story, probably to dip the senses of the reader in a tinge of wry humor. We witness an intriguing feature of Chekov’s prose that otherwise gets unnoticed, he uses lyrical repetitiveness (not like Bernhard) in a way that words may not be repeated as such but emotions or moods are repeated in the story, perhaps to pepper the reader with conflicting and unsettling notions.
My thoughts about human happiness, for some, peculiar reason, had always been tinged with a certain sadness.
The tale may across a simple story, as happens with most of the stories of Chekov, to a casual reader, but Chekov did not write for those innocuous readers, for the story has to be read more than once to understand its intended meaning. Gooseberries is a great example of the fact that why Chekov is considered among the most influential modern short stories authors, his impact is omnipresent though we may rarely find authors giving him credit, individually. He wrote to throw questions, basic questions- about life, at his readers, whose job is to actively engage themselves to search for infinite probable answers to those questions.
They were hard and sour, but as Pushkin says: “Uplifting illusion is dearer to us than a host of truths.”
Happiness doesn’t exist, we don’t need any such thing. If life has any meaning or purpose, you won’t find it in happiness, but in something more rational, in something greater. Doing good!
What is happiness? Human beings’ quest for happiness in life is often narrow-minded as they see happiness as the ultimate pursuit in life. Does it mean that unhappiness is not or should be part of life? Aren't both different aspects of the same emotion? And what does being happy mean? Does it correlate with success? What is a success then, how do we define it? And whose happiness we are talking about? What does it essentially mean? We need to further explore that is it materialistic in nature or metaphysical, don’t both of them represent our myopic vision. Another key point to be addressed is whether this happiness is selfish or altruistic, whether we need to bother about the society as a whole; and what about the social injustice or various other vagaries present in our society. We need to assess the essence of happiness when we have varied anomalies in our society. Let’s go deeper, to the core of ‘happiness’, the meaning we impart of our lives, the truth we seek in our lives to define it, how much it matters when we talk about happiness; the petty achievements we acquire over the course of our lives, do they really matter, if they don’t then why do we worry so much about them.
link: source
Gooseberries is one of the stories written in the last phase of Anton Chekov’s life, the artistic abilities of people often seem to be waned, gradually after touching prime of their prowess but that’s not the case with Chekov, he produced in masterpieces-both in prose and drama- in this phase of his life, perhaps that’s why he is regarded as one of the best short fiction authors, as relevant today as he was then- a timeless beauty. We see that there is an interesting overlapping of modernism and the creative outburst of Anton Chekov in the last phase of his life. During that period, impressionism was gaining popularity in both art and literature, though later it was quickly surpassed by Expressionism and other post-impressionist trends.
It represents a unique feature of its kind, as it is essentially a story within a story, the narrator- Ivan Ivanych, the vet and Burkin, a teacher at a high school took shelter at Alyokhin’s as they get soaked from top to bottom in the divine water pouring from the overcast sky. Ivanych is invited by the group to tell the story which has been impending for some time, the anticipation of the story is so much that not only Burkin and Alyokhin but also the ladies (young and old), and the officers, who were looking down calmly and solemnly from their gilt frames on the walls, are also waiting eagerly, fixing their eyes on Ivanych. The story is about Ivan Ivanych, who is disgusted by the silliness of his brother, Nikolay Ivanych, for he considers the minuscule, materialistic acquisitions in life as happiness, he seems to be blind to the universal human quest for eventual contentment.
Ivanych goes on preaching that people should look for meaning in their lives rather than gratifying themselves with petty things in life. He makes allusion to Tolstoy’s famous story-‘How much land a man need?, They say a man needs only six feet of earth, but surely they must mean a corpse- not a man!, perhaps to emphasize upon the futility of materialistic achievements. The (first person) narrator discusses at length what humanity actually needs in life rather than what it desires for; the empires, estates accumulated by the educated classes but eventually everyone needs just six feet of land. Man sacrifices his personal, real life, in the pretense of acquiring something that is essentially worthless, effectively he lives a meaningless and uncontended life.
A man needs more than six feet of earth and a little place in the country, he needs the whole wide world, the whole of nature, where there’s room for him to display his potential, all the manifold attributes of his free spirit.
The questions about life keep reverberating through the story, it raises the intriguing point of unspeakable poverty, overcrowding, degeneracy, drunkenness, hypocrisy, and lies as we do not get the utmost satisfaction, we quest for in our lives. The peace and quiet that seem to be prevalent in our lives are shallow and baseless since the social injustice, inherent to our society, creates an imitation of happiness for privileged people who seems to oblivious to the underprivileged ones. The vehement critic of Nikolay, his brother Ivanych preaches about the man’s inability to look for real purpose in life rather than taking refuge in so-called happiness, but we see that he himself doesn’t do anything for the same, however, he urges his friends to devise a meaningful life for themselves, reflects the irony of life.
It’s obvious that the happy man feels contented only because the unhappy ones bear their burden without saying a word: if it weren’t for their silence, happiness would be quite impossible. It’s a kind of mass hypnosis.
And I thought how many satisfied, happy people really do exist in this world! And what a powerful force they are! Just take a look at this life of ours and you will see the arrogance and idleness of the strong, the ignorance and bestiality of the weak.
link: source
The author presents a unique mix of narrative style in the story, the tale starts in a third-person narrative with a non-existent but omniscient narrator but with the onset of the 'story within in the story', it switches to first person narrative with Ivanych taking a central role in it. The language is rich and full of imagery, as you expect from Chekov, like an impressionist painting but Chekov demands his reader to play an active role in the story, Chekov’s prose has features of more like modernist literature. He deliberately evades some details of the narrative, adopting a minimalist approach (which later expounded and explored by the likes of Hemingway and Beckett) since the message, themes of a story should not be obvious to the narrator. His prose focuses upon melancholy, mood, feelings, and consciousness of the characters, around lyrical, poetic, and vivid settings. We see that the smallest, peculiar details are given importance in the story, probably to dip the senses of the reader in a tinge of wry humor. We witness an intriguing feature of Chekov’s prose that otherwise gets unnoticed, he uses lyrical repetitiveness (not like Bernhard) in a way that words may not be repeated as such but emotions or moods are repeated in the story, perhaps to pepper the reader with conflicting and unsettling notions.
My thoughts about human happiness, for some, peculiar reason, had always been tinged with a certain sadness.
The tale may across a simple story, as happens with most of the stories of Chekov, to a casual reader, but Chekov did not write for those innocuous readers, for the story has to be read more than once to understand its intended meaning. Gooseberries is a great example of the fact that why Chekov is considered among the most influential modern short stories authors, his impact is omnipresent though we may rarely find authors giving him credit, individually. He wrote to throw questions, basic questions- about life, at his readers, whose job is to actively engage themselves to search for infinite probable answers to those questions.
They were hard and sour, but as Pushkin says: “Uplifting illusion is dearer to us than a host of truths.”
March 7, 2022
This small LBC volume samples three short stories by the Russian master:
The Kiss is the story of Staff-Captain Ryabovich, an unattractive man. During a country house party, as he tries to find his way in a dark corner of the house, he is kissed by an unknown woman who takes him for her lover. Who was that girl? Ryabovich will never know for sure. Was this kiss even real? In any case, from that moment forward, he is obsessed with her and the light peppermint scent she left on him. In this story, love is a haunting dream, as fleeting and ethereal as the reflection of stars and moon in a stream.
The Two Volodyas is about Sophia Lvovna, a woman who married par dépit Big Volodya, a wealthy older man, but is secretly in love with Little Volodya, who doesn’t reciprocate. Incidentally, she doesn’t understand why her friend Olga became a nun—isn’t she wasting her life at the convent? Sophia will soon connect the dots and discover how deluded she is about her own situation.
Gooseberries (1898, probably the most famous of the three stories) is a Chinese-box type of narrative. Ivan Ivanych, during a rainy evening, tells his friends about his brother: Nicolay Ivanych who, obsessed with his dream of becoming a landowner, became a sort of selfish pig. Ivan Ivanych ends his story in a rant, arguing that the search for happiness is a form of narcissistic blindness. His audience is unimpressed.
These three stories share melancholic vibes and a common theme: how desire, the wish for love or pleasure, is a fallacy, a fantasy, and how people can live their whole life in self-delusion. But Chekhov never passes judgement on his characters. Indeed, Gooseberries’ nested structure and indirect narration contribute to a sense of irony and ambiguity.
The Kiss is the story of Staff-Captain Ryabovich, an unattractive man. During a country house party, as he tries to find his way in a dark corner of the house, he is kissed by an unknown woman who takes him for her lover. Who was that girl? Ryabovich will never know for sure. Was this kiss even real? In any case, from that moment forward, he is obsessed with her and the light peppermint scent she left on him. In this story, love is a haunting dream, as fleeting and ethereal as the reflection of stars and moon in a stream.
The Two Volodyas is about Sophia Lvovna, a woman who married par dépit Big Volodya, a wealthy older man, but is secretly in love with Little Volodya, who doesn’t reciprocate. Incidentally, she doesn’t understand why her friend Olga became a nun—isn’t she wasting her life at the convent? Sophia will soon connect the dots and discover how deluded she is about her own situation.
Gooseberries (1898, probably the most famous of the three stories) is a Chinese-box type of narrative. Ivan Ivanych, during a rainy evening, tells his friends about his brother: Nicolay Ivanych who, obsessed with his dream of becoming a landowner, became a sort of selfish pig. Ivan Ivanych ends his story in a rant, arguing that the search for happiness is a form of narcissistic blindness. His audience is unimpressed.
These three stories share melancholic vibes and a common theme: how desire, the wish for love or pleasure, is a fallacy, a fantasy, and how people can live their whole life in self-delusion. But Chekhov never passes judgement on his characters. Indeed, Gooseberries’ nested structure and indirect narration contribute to a sense of irony and ambiguity.
March 31, 2021
If you like something straightforward and simple, never read Chekhov. This story would seem to be just that on its surface, but only a bit of reflection opens up a world of questions and Chekhov, by and large, leaves his reader to decide the answers.
There are numerous ways to examine this story, the most obvious being from the reliable or unreliable narrator point of view. What you believe happens here depends entirely on your view of Ivan and whether you take him at face-value or read beyond his surface and see him as jealous of his brother, Nicholai. What is almost miraculous to me is that either way you read this story you can arrive at a view on morality that has meaning. The story, for me, became an enigma; and I believe that was very intentional on Chekhov’s part.
If you are a member of the Catching Up On Classics Group (and if you aren’t come join), this is the short story read for April. It ought to engender a great discussion. It has certainly left me pondering.
Thought I would add a link to the story, in case anyone is interested.
Gooseberries-the story
There are numerous ways to examine this story, the most obvious being from the reliable or unreliable narrator point of view. What you believe happens here depends entirely on your view of Ivan and whether you take him at face-value or read beyond his surface and see him as jealous of his brother, Nicholai. What is almost miraculous to me is that either way you read this story you can arrive at a view on morality that has meaning. The story, for me, became an enigma; and I believe that was very intentional on Chekhov’s part.
If you are a member of the Catching Up On Classics Group (and if you aren’t come join), this is the short story read for April. It ought to engender a great discussion. It has certainly left me pondering.
Thought I would add a link to the story, in case anyone is interested.
Gooseberries-the story
July 23, 2018
A deceptively brilliant short story by the Russian author Anton Chekhov, questioning the nature and value of happiness and the blindness of privilege. It’s not as straightforward as it seems at first glance. Two men on a long walk get caught in the rain and head for a friend’s home, where one of the men launches into a personal story about his brother’s troubling life. The subtle (and often sly) details in this story really make it.
I’m deeply indebted to George Saunders, author of Lincoln in the Bardo, who loves this story and analyzes it in an article here. I strongly recommend reading both the story and this article.
I’m deeply indebted to George Saunders, author of Lincoln in the Bardo, who loves this story and analyzes it in an article here. I strongly recommend reading both the story and this article.
April 27, 2021
Gooseberries is a nice short story on the surface. But, of course, Chekhov doesn't just write simple entertaining stories. Look a bit deeper and you'll find complex moral issues. I'm sure that rereading and studying this short story would bring out more and deeper meaning but I will write about what I understood from reading "Gooseberries" two times, assuming that I am not doing justice to all that Chekhov had in mind when he wrote this story.
My understanding is that "Gooseberries" asks whether people should live lives of selfish happiness and comfort at the expense of others or live selfless lives of mundanity and unhappiness which bother no one. Each character in this deceptively simple short story represents living one way or the other, while, in fact, none of them live completely one way or the other. Chekhov’s story also shows that people may be unaware that their attempts at happiness and comfort may make others unhappy or uncomfortable. For instance, the sour Gooseberries in this story represent the ability of some people to deceive themselves that they are happy - not a bad way to live if it harms no one, though in this story the character happily eating and enjoying sour Gooseberries thinking that they are sweet is not only deceiving himself but is completely unaware that his ability to own a farm with many Gooseberry bushes came about at the cost of the unhappiness and even the life of another person.
My understanding is that "Gooseberries" asks whether people should live lives of selfish happiness and comfort at the expense of others or live selfless lives of mundanity and unhappiness which bother no one. Each character in this deceptively simple short story represents living one way or the other, while, in fact, none of them live completely one way or the other. Chekhov’s story also shows that people may be unaware that their attempts at happiness and comfort may make others unhappy or uncomfortable. For instance, the sour Gooseberries in this story represent the ability of some people to deceive themselves that they are happy - not a bad way to live if it harms no one, though in this story the character happily eating and enjoying sour Gooseberries thinking that they are sweet is not only deceiving himself but is completely unaware that his ability to own a farm with many Gooseberry bushes came about at the cost of the unhappiness and even the life of another person.
July 31, 2020
چحوف و قلم شگفت انگیزش در به تصویر آوردن ابتذال و انسان ها,انسان هایی که هر روز اطرافمان میبینیم انسان هایی که گاه خود ماییم..زندگی چون جوی آبی مالامال از روزمرگی در حرکت است,و ما که قدم بر این جوی نهاده اییم..و زمان ما را همچون دوستی خیانتکار مشایعت می کند..و اگر هشیار نباشیم زمان ما رو به درون جریان تند جوی می اندازد و آن هنگام اگر خود را رها کرده باشیم,چون برگ خشک پاییزی به سرعت در جوی روزمرگی ها گم می شویم..برگ خشکی که امیدی ندارد و روز های گذشته سرسبزی و سرزندگی اش خاطره ای بیش نیست..کجایند آن روز های گرم بهاری که بر فراز درختی, سرمست از وزش باد خوبی ها,لذت میبردیم؟آن زمان که قلب هایمان جوان بودند و شب هایمان طولانی...اکنون چون برگی خیس و مرده..مانند هزاران برگ دیگر..در جریان متعفن جوی ایم که مقصدش را نمی دانیم..و حتی دیگر اهمیتی برایمان ندارد..و زمان,خیانتکاری که دوستش میپنداشتیم همچنان ما را غرقه در جریان تند جوی میپایید..با لبخندی از جنس خدعه که دندان های متعفنش را نمایان می سازد..تعفنی حاصل از نابودی رویا ها ارزو ها و عشق هایمان..همه از آن رو که آماده نبودیم,در آن لحظه که زمان ما را پرتاب کرد, افسار زندگی رها کرده بودیم..و اینک..خاطره زندگی را تنها چون بارقه از آتشی به یاد می آوریم که در نگاهمان می سوخت,همان که دیر زمانی پیش,بدان خیره شده بودیم..همانقدر دور و غریب,همانقدر ناپایدار..
March 9, 2016
Now this was a pessimistic short story, but, in a sense, realistic. Chekhov suggests that happiness is flawed and is meaningless. The only way a man can be happy is by shutting out the misfortune of others, and living in a state of ignorant bliss. But, according to him, this gives no real purpose to life. The only way to live a purposeful life is by being kind to others unto death. This is all brought to the realisation of the narrator through a gooseberry. Yes, a gooseberry.
I like the way this was done because it shows the self-serving nature of happiness. The narrator’s brother has absolutely disgusting gooseberries but, to him, they’re the fruit of the gods. He has convinced himself that they are delicious. This is juxtaposed against how he has shut out the realities of the world; he has shut out the realities of how a gooseberry should taste. His happiness has only been achieved by ignoring the poverty and destitution of Russia. Comparatively, his fine gooseberries have only been created by ignoring how a proper tasting gooseberry should taste. His happiness simply serves himself.
“The illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths.”
This is a grim ethos because it is impossible to change all the misfortunes of the world. He, essentially, says that no man should be happy whilst others suffer. That’s all well and good, but people will always suffer; it’s a horrible truth of human existence. So, by his logic, no man has the right to happiness because of it. This is a bleak outlook, and an unfair observation of the world. The narrator’s brother has worked hard all his life; he may be cold and stingy, but doesn’t he have a right to enjoy the fruit of his labours? He cannot change poverty nor world hunger. His happiness may be selfish, but it is happiness he has earnt. Should he be miserable and destitute simply because others are?
I liked this short story simply because it was thought provoking. I think Chekov’s observations are true and stark, thought they essentially say we should all do more than achieve happiness. This again is true but, unobtainable. Most people are selfish and that’s just life, unfortunately. I won’t be reading anymore of Chekhov in the future because I found his work to be a little too depressing and pessimistic for my taste.
Penguin Little Black Classic- 34
The Little Black Classic Collection by penguin looks like it contains lots of hidden gems. I couldn’t help it; they looked so good that I went and bought them all. I shall post a short review after reading each one. No doubt it will take me several months to get through all of them! Hopefully I will find some classic authors, from across the ages, that I may not have come across had I not bought this collection.
I like the way this was done because it shows the self-serving nature of happiness. The narrator’s brother has absolutely disgusting gooseberries but, to him, they’re the fruit of the gods. He has convinced himself that they are delicious. This is juxtaposed against how he has shut out the realities of the world; he has shut out the realities of how a gooseberry should taste. His happiness has only been achieved by ignoring the poverty and destitution of Russia. Comparatively, his fine gooseberries have only been created by ignoring how a proper tasting gooseberry should taste. His happiness simply serves himself.
“The illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths.”
This is a grim ethos because it is impossible to change all the misfortunes of the world. He, essentially, says that no man should be happy whilst others suffer. That’s all well and good, but people will always suffer; it’s a horrible truth of human existence. So, by his logic, no man has the right to happiness because of it. This is a bleak outlook, and an unfair observation of the world. The narrator’s brother has worked hard all his life; he may be cold and stingy, but doesn’t he have a right to enjoy the fruit of his labours? He cannot change poverty nor world hunger. His happiness may be selfish, but it is happiness he has earnt. Should he be miserable and destitute simply because others are?
I liked this short story simply because it was thought provoking. I think Chekov’s observations are true and stark, thought they essentially say we should all do more than achieve happiness. This again is true but, unobtainable. Most people are selfish and that’s just life, unfortunately. I won’t be reading anymore of Chekhov in the future because I found his work to be a little too depressing and pessimistic for my taste.
Penguin Little Black Classic- 34
The Little Black Classic Collection by penguin looks like it contains lots of hidden gems. I couldn’t help it; they looked so good that I went and bought them all. I shall post a short review after reading each one. No doubt it will take me several months to get through all of them! Hopefully I will find some classic authors, from across the ages, that I may not have come across had I not bought this collection.
June 13, 2021
Having just finished a book of Chekhov short stories, this additional one was recommended to me by a GR Friend.
I normally write my “reviews” straight after finishing a book. If I leave it more than a few days my memory of the book fades. What I’m learning with Chekhov is that it’s best for me to leave his stories to sink in for at least a few hours, and that I need to do this to start to understand them.
In “Gooseberries”, a man called Ivan tells two of his friends the story of his brother Nicolai. The brothers grew up on a rural estate but on the death of their father the estate was sold to pay his debts. From that day on Nicolai dreamed of buying another country estate, and dedicated his whole life to achieving this end.
In today’s era we are generally encouraged to pursue our personal happiness. The idea is lauded in fiction and nonfiction books, in TV dramas and in popular films. Of course, in general terms this is fair enough. Not many people suggest we should pursue unhappiness. In reality though everything we do impinges on others, and in this story, Chekhov highlights that there are times when we pursue our dreams only at the expense of others.
Another question that Chekhov poses is around the morality of being a wealthy country landowner when all around there is nothing but poverty and malnutrition, and whether it is right to simply accept this as being the way of the world. Ivan seems to regret the decisions he took in respect of his own life. His two friends have their own reaction to his tale.
There are multiple online sites where you can read the story, such as the one below.
https://www.online-literature.com/ant...
I normally write my “reviews” straight after finishing a book. If I leave it more than a few days my memory of the book fades. What I’m learning with Chekhov is that it’s best for me to leave his stories to sink in for at least a few hours, and that I need to do this to start to understand them.
In “Gooseberries”, a man called Ivan tells two of his friends the story of his brother Nicolai. The brothers grew up on a rural estate but on the death of their father the estate was sold to pay his debts. From that day on Nicolai dreamed of buying another country estate, and dedicated his whole life to achieving this end.
In today’s era we are generally encouraged to pursue our personal happiness. The idea is lauded in fiction and nonfiction books, in TV dramas and in popular films. Of course, in general terms this is fair enough. Not many people suggest we should pursue unhappiness. In reality though everything we do impinges on others, and in this story, Chekhov highlights that there are times when we pursue our dreams only at the expense of others.
Another question that Chekhov poses is around the morality of being a wealthy country landowner when all around there is nothing but poverty and malnutrition, and whether it is right to simply accept this as being the way of the world. Ivan seems to regret the decisions he took in respect of his own life. His two friends have their own reaction to his tale.
There are multiple online sites where you can read the story, such as the one below.
https://www.online-literature.com/ant...
March 26, 2019
این روزا همش بارون و سیل و سرد ،گودرز رو باز کردم به امید یه داستان کوتاه ،آاااااهان چخوف
هوا پر از خوف و چخوف هم که مخوف تر...
انگور فرنگی:
چخوف از آدمی روایت میکنه که کارمند هست اما آرزوش هست بره روستا و ملک شخصی داشته باشه و ارباب بشه،
فکر میکنم چخوف داشت میرید به مردم زمان خودش شاید مردم اون زمان روسیه هم میخواستن سرمایه دار بشن هم ارباب ،بعضیا هم ارباب بودن میخواستن سرمایه دار بشن،نمیدونم؟
وقتی از چخوف حرف میزنیم از چی حرف میزنیم؟؟
از کسی حرف میزنیم که نیازی به ۲۰۰یا ۳۰۰صفحه ناول نداره ،چخوف توی دو صفحه یا اصلا یه جمله همه حرفاش رو میزنه(مثلا ): پول مثل ودکا آدم را احمق میکند!
^^چخوف واقعا به مثال بارز اسمش هست^^
(به لودگی خودش میخندد)
هوا پر از خوف و چخوف هم که مخوف تر...
انگور فرنگی:
چخوف از آدمی روایت میکنه که کارمند هست اما آرزوش هست بره روستا و ملک شخصی داشته باشه و ارباب بشه،
فکر میکنم چخوف داشت میرید به مردم زمان خودش شاید مردم اون زمان روسیه هم میخواستن سرمایه دار بشن هم ارباب ،بعضیا هم ارباب بودن میخواستن سرمایه دار بشن،نمیدونم؟
وقتی از چخوف حرف میزنیم از چی حرف میزنیم؟؟
از کسی حرف میزنیم که نیازی به ۲۰۰یا ۳۰۰صفحه ناول نداره ،چخوف توی دو صفحه یا اصلا یه جمله همه حرفاش رو میزنه(مثلا ): پول مثل ودکا آدم را احمق میکند!
^^چخوف واقعا به مثال بارز اسمش هست^^
(به لودگی خودش میخندد)
October 16, 2022
В средней школе мы писали сочинение по данному рассказу. Смысл его заключается в убожестве "счастья", построенного на стремлении владеть материальными благами, ограниченности желаний людей. Чехов не томит читателей и прямым текстом дает нам рецепт смысла жизни - "Делайте добро!". Все этот рассказ в школе читали, все всё вроде бы поняли. Но большинство все равно живут ради материальных благ и пресловутого дома с крыжовником, и добро мало кто делает.
November 10, 2020
روشنی فریب، گرامی تر از تاریکی حقیقت است.
August 28, 2018
"Uplifting illusion is dearer to us than a host of truths."
- Pushkin quoted in Chekhov's "Gooseberries"
Vol N° 34 of my Penguin Little Black Classics Box Set. This volume contains excerpts from Penguin's three book collection of Chekhov's short stories (tr Ronald Wilks). The following are the three stories included in Vol 34:
1. The Kiss - ★★★★
2. The Two Volodyas - ★★★★★
3. Gooseberries - ★★★★★
I really enjoyed each of these, but LOVED Gooseberries (a story nested in a story) and 'The Two Volodyas'. Chekhov nails the human condition in each of these. His tone is perfect. He carries the reader carefully, with a bit of humor even, to exactly where he wants them and then with the perfect sentence kills and buries his literary novice.
One of my favorite sentences, that seems as fresh and new as a mid-May strawberry (or FINE gooseberry) is:
"Everything is calm and peaceful and the only protest comes from statistics -- and they can't talk."
- Pushkin quoted in Chekhov's "Gooseberries"
Vol N° 34 of my Penguin Little Black Classics Box Set. This volume contains excerpts from Penguin's three book collection of Chekhov's short stories (tr Ronald Wilks). The following are the three stories included in Vol 34:
1. The Kiss - ★★★★
2. The Two Volodyas - ★★★★★
3. Gooseberries - ★★★★★
I really enjoyed each of these, but LOVED Gooseberries (a story nested in a story) and 'The Two Volodyas'. Chekhov nails the human condition in each of these. His tone is perfect. He carries the reader carefully, with a bit of humor even, to exactly where he wants them and then with the perfect sentence kills and buries his literary novice.
One of my favorite sentences, that seems as fresh and new as a mid-May strawberry (or FINE gooseberry) is:
"Everything is calm and peaceful and the only protest comes from statistics -- and they can't talk."
November 8, 2020
| آزادی نعمتی است مانند هوا و بی آن زندگی ممکن نیست. |
July 8, 2018
Every fraction of life is a drama, and put together it's a tragedy. What establishes Chekhov as a master of short story writing is that he knows how to dissolve the rhythm of everyday reality, take one fraction of life experience, and through some imaginary projection make it seem like an emotional and psychic tragedy that reflect all. There is an intrinsic deceptiveness in this method because the writer needs to dupe the readers into believing that a slice of life experience bears the quality that pervades the entire life duration and thus has weight of significance. Gooseberries is my favorite Chekhov short story partly because it is simultaneously a drama of short duration and a tragedy that incorporates the entire experience. The story of Ivan at his brother Nikolay's estate is a short drama for Ivan but a long tragedy for Nikolay. Nikolay's unconscious tragedy hidden behind the appearance of happiness is vague and incommunicable in itself, but through Ivan's dramatic experience and the even more dramatic telling of it which turns Nikolay's tragedy into a universal tragedy for all human beings, the reader grasps its sense. Why doesn't Ivan tell a tragedy of his own to communicate his point? Because he doesn't have a tragedy but only a drama which he believes to be a tragedy.
Is dramatic tragedy or tragic drama possible? Maybe in the style of Homeric epic, which means the answer is no.
Is dramatic tragedy or tragic drama possible? Maybe in the style of Homeric epic, which means the answer is no.
July 27, 2024
So I’m reading a wonderful book How Does a Poem Mean? with a discussion about the meaning not being the primary, or at least the initial importance in a poem. I get that feeling with Chekhov. Perhaps because his meanings are ambiguous, but still, isn’t it lovely to see the pictures he paints, of these three men and their approaches to life and happiness? Of the farmhouse that smells, “of rye bread and vodka, and leather”? I think fiction too, when read at the right moment, can seep into our subconscious and give us a little something we didn’t have before: an experience or a feeling, and maybe even a thought, even if we’re not sure if our thoughts match those of the author.
“…as Pushkin said, the illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths.”
Re-read July 2024 (and added a star)
Story #6 discussed in George Saunders’ A Swim in a Pond in the Rain: In Which Four Russians Give a Master Class on Writing, Reading, and Life, and inspiration for his title.
I was so excited to study this story which I loved on first read but didn’t quite understand. Saunders explains how Chekhov uses contradictions, ones I believe the reader feels even if, like me, maybe doesn’t fully appreciate at first, to give the story its expansive open-endedness. Then Saunders tells how Chekhov met Tolstoy, how they had a swim together in the river, how he came to love him, and how three years later he wrote Gooseberries. Gave me goosebumps.
“…as Pushkin said, the illusion which exalts us is dearer to us than ten thousand truths.”
Re-read July 2024 (and added a star)
Story #6 discussed in George Saunders’ A Swim in a Pond in the Rain: In Which Four Russians Give a Master Class on Writing, Reading, and Life, and inspiration for his title.
I was so excited to study this story which I loved on first read but didn’t quite understand. Saunders explains how Chekhov uses contradictions, ones I believe the reader feels even if, like me, maybe doesn’t fully appreciate at first, to give the story its expansive open-endedness. Then Saunders tells how Chekhov met Tolstoy, how they had a swim together in the river, how he came to love him, and how three years later he wrote Gooseberries. Gave me goosebumps.
January 20, 2026
Actual rating 3.5 stars
This was a good short story with a strong and well-developed metaphor, but not my favorite by Chekhov.
This was a good short story with a strong and well-developed metaphor, but not my favorite by Chekhov.
June 6, 2020
The water raced past and he did not know where or why; it had flowed just as swiftly in May, when it grew from a little stream into a large river, flowed into the sea, evaporated and turned into rain. Perhaps this was the same water flowing past. To what purpose?
And the whole world, the whole of life, struck Ryabovich as a meaningless, futile joke. As he turned his eyes from water to the sky, he remembered how fate had accidentally caressed him - in the guise of an unknown woman. He recalled the dreams and visions of that summer and his life seemed terribly empty, miserable, colourless...
And the whole world, the whole of life, struck Ryabovich as a meaningless, futile joke. As he turned his eyes from water to the sky, he remembered how fate had accidentally caressed him - in the guise of an unknown woman. He recalled the dreams and visions of that summer and his life seemed terribly empty, miserable, colourless...
December 22, 2021
More Chekov. More peasants doing peasant things in the country side and making a mockery of the upper echelons of society - in this case two brothers. Again, not one of Chekov’s best - in my humble opinion, but of course ripe with all the literary and stylistic tricks he is so well known for.
Onwards with more Russians.
November 8, 2020
پول مثل ودکا آدم را احمق میکند
April 18, 2021
Review of title story only.
I was completely taken in by Chekhov’s beautiful prose in this short story, Goosberries. I loved the way he described the Russian countryside scenery and created pictures in my mind. On my first read it seemed apparent that this was a very simple story of a man, Ivan Ivanovich, telling his two friends a story about his brother Nikolay. However, there is so much more to decipher. Chekhov has much to say about selfishness, isolation and the effects on one’s happiness in this brilliant thought-provoking story. I appreciated the way Chekhov inserted the philosophies into Ivan’s story demonstrating through Nikolay’s life his arrogance, greed, and delusions toward his personal happiness without any regard for others. How appropriately he writes of the multi-dimensions of human nature.
I was completely taken in by Chekhov’s beautiful prose in this short story, Goosberries. I loved the way he described the Russian countryside scenery and created pictures in my mind. On my first read it seemed apparent that this was a very simple story of a man, Ivan Ivanovich, telling his two friends a story about his brother Nikolay. However, there is so much more to decipher. Chekhov has much to say about selfishness, isolation and the effects on one’s happiness in this brilliant thought-provoking story. I appreciated the way Chekhov inserted the philosophies into Ivan’s story demonstrating through Nikolay’s life his arrogance, greed, and delusions toward his personal happiness without any regard for others. How appropriately he writes of the multi-dimensions of human nature.
September 11, 2021
« روشنی فریب گرامیتر از تاریکی حقیقت است. »
«پول مثل ودکا آدم را احمق میکند.»
«پول مثل ودکا آدم را احمق میکند.»
March 5, 2024
I admit it, my rating is biased. I adore Chekhov, and gooseberry happens to be my favourite fruit. This book was a destined five-star. I didn’t even need to read it.
However, I did.
The story mainly revolves around two brothers, Ivan and Nikolai, who, although similar-looking, make very different choices in life. Ivan is a dreamer. He sustains himself with a work that’s not even specified in the story, yet longs for a small garden, lake, and a quiet life. He spends his time dreaming.
Nikolai is the opposite. He is a fierce man—practical and ambitious. Instead of dreaming about a little garden, he decides to obtain an absurdly large amount of land, a grandiose home, and his own gooseberry plantation. Being so passionate about his goals, he sure reaches them.
Not to tell the entire story, I assure the author did a good job portraying the complexities of a person and unescapable suffering the human existence brings. However, there’s one scene that stuck with me:
The brothers sit down at the table and eat gooseberries in the summer sun. Snacking on them, Ivan feels the sense of freedom and appreciation of nature's wonders. However, Nikolai feels pride eating gooseberries as they signal his skill, ownership, and success. Isin’t it oddly beautiful, how same things are different to each of us?
You may want to ask — which brother is the happy one? Neither. They both suffer.
However, I did.
The story mainly revolves around two brothers, Ivan and Nikolai, who, although similar-looking, make very different choices in life. Ivan is a dreamer. He sustains himself with a work that’s not even specified in the story, yet longs for a small garden, lake, and a quiet life. He spends his time dreaming.
Nikolai is the opposite. He is a fierce man—practical and ambitious. Instead of dreaming about a little garden, he decides to obtain an absurdly large amount of land, a grandiose home, and his own gooseberry plantation. Being so passionate about his goals, he sure reaches them.
Not to tell the entire story, I assure the author did a good job portraying the complexities of a person and unescapable suffering the human existence brings. However, there’s one scene that stuck with me:
The brothers sit down at the table and eat gooseberries in the summer sun. Snacking on them, Ivan feels the sense of freedom and appreciation of nature's wonders. However, Nikolai feels pride eating gooseberries as they signal his skill, ownership, and success. Isin’t it oddly beautiful, how same things are different to each of us?
You may want to ask — which brother is the happy one? Neither. They both suffer.
February 28, 2018
Three very enjoyable short stories. Chekhov is a wonderful writer.
September 13, 2025
داستانهای کوتاه چخوف به نقد ساختارهای اجتماعی روسیه و طرز تفکر مردم اون زمان میپردازه اون هم نه با بیان صریح بلکه با اتفاقها و ماجراهایی که بسیار ظریف انتخاب شدن که به شخصه لذت چخوفخوانی برای من در همین ظرافتها نهفته. قلم چخوف طنزآمیزه و داستانهاش در کوتاهترین شکل ممکن عمیقترین تاثیر رو در شخص به جا میگذارن به طوری که مدتها بعد از خوندن اونها همچنان فکر رو به خودشون مشغول میکنن. خواندن این کتاب که در بردارندهی چند داستان کوتاه هستش که در پایان اونها رو مینویسم و همچنین چند داستانکوتاه دیگر که در انتها اونها رو هم نام میبرم، چخوف رو برای من به یکی از بهترین نویسندگان داستان کوتاه تبدیل کرد با وجود اینکه از نمایشنامههای اون هم بسیار لذت برده بودم توقع نداشتم چخوف بتونه در دو نوع ادبی شاهکار باشه که البته بهم ثابت شد اشتباه میکردم. تاثیر نمایشنامهنویسی رو در توصیف صحنهها و توانایی انتقال خیلی از حسها و تفکرات توسط دیالوگهای مناسب میشه مشاهده کرد که باز هم خوانش داستانها رو لذتبخشتر میکنه.
انگور فرنگی، ترجمهی عبدالحسین نوشین از نشر روزگار دربردارندهی داستانهای زیر هستش (جلوی هر کدوم امتیاز خودم رو از ۵ ستاره دادم):
چاق و لاغر ۳
حربا ۳
وانکا ۴.۵
شوخی ۴
سرگذشت ملالانگیز ۳.۸
سربههوا ۴
انگور فرنگی ۴.۸
ایونیچ ۴
جان دلام ۴.۵
از اینجا به بعد اسپویله پس لطفا اگر براتون مهمه نخونید:
در سه داستان 《چاق و لاغر》،《حربا》یا همون آفتابپرست و 《سرگذشت ملالانگیز》چخوف به نقد دید طبقاتی جامعهی روسیهی زمان خودش میپردازه و به رتبهبندیها نیشخند میزنه، دو داستان اول کوتاهتر بودن و در این مجموعه کمتر مورد علاقه من بودن داستان سوم که داستان بلندتری هستش و سرگذشت یکی از حضرتاجلهای روسیه پروفسور نیکلای استپانویچ فلان رو روایت میکنه و همهی اون چیزهایی که در زندگی این پروفسور پشت این لقب بزرگ نهفته است رو به ما نشون میده: هیچ چیز.
داستان 《وانکا》پسربچه معصوم و بیگناهی که بسیار تاثیربرانگیز روایت شده.
داستان 《انگورفرنگی》 با روایت ایوان ایوانیچ از زندگی برادرش شروع میشه. اینکه چطور اون زندگی خودش رو وقف مالک شدن میکنه تا از یک کارمند بیچاره به یک مالک حقیقی و ارباب تبدیل بشه. این داستان خیلی زیبا از مفهوم خوشبختی میگه.
داستانهای《شوخی》، 《سر به هوا》،《ایونیچ》 و 《جان دلام》 از انتقاد جامعه به انتقاد افراد و خانواده و به طور خاص روابط زن و مرد میپردازه. در 《شوخی》 چخوف با انتخاب یک ماجرای ساده، یک شوخی، نشون میده که چطور گاهی عمیقترین احساسات توسط یک سوتفاهم بوجود میان و بعد هم مثل مورفین عادت میشن و بعد هم همونطور که یک روز آدم به آمدن و موندن اون احساسات خو گرفته بود یک روز هم به رفتن و نبودنشون عادت میکنه. 《سر به هوا》داستان الگا ایوانونا زنی که عاشق هنر و تشنهی شناخت آدمهای بزرگ و پرآوازست رو روایت میکنه که درنهایت جاهطلبی اون هم مانع از به ثمر رسوندن استعدادهاش و هم باعث نادیده گرفتن شوهرش، پزشک با وجدان و بیشیلهپیلهای میشه که الگا ابتدا با جا دادن اون در حلقهی دوستان هنرمند و نام و آوازهدارش کمی سردرگمه و تنها در پایان داستان با از دست دادن اون میفهمه که در تمام مدت چیزی که دنبالش بوده در همین مرد قرار داشته. در 《ایونیچ》درخواست عشق مرد داستان توسط دختر جوانی که به دنبال تحقق آرزوهاش به کنسرواتوار میره رد میشه و مرد به زندگی کسالتبار و پر از طمعی روی میاره، دختر هم بعد از چندسال که فهمید در نواختن پیانو استعدادی نداره و بعد هم که با برگشت به خانه نتوتست با اشارههایی مرد رو به یاد عشق آتشینش بیندازه، به یک زندگی روزمرهی کسالتبار برای باقی عمرش تن میده. بنظرم این داستان به خوبی احساسات آدمها مثل غرور شکسته، ترس از تنهایی و بیچارگی آدمی و پناه بردنش به عشق و بعد هم دلزدگیش از اون رو بعد از اینکه انتظاراتش رو برآورده نکرد نشون میده.
داستان آخر 《جان دلم》 زندگی الینکا زنی رو روایت میکنه که از خودش نظر و استقلال رای نداره و افکارش با شوهرهاش تغییر میکنن و نهایت که در سرپر��تی از کودک یکی از مستاجرهای قدیمش که البته مدتی هم معشوقهاش بوده تسلا و معنی زندگیش رو پیدا میکنه و از کسالت و پوچی زندگیش فرار میکنه اما باز هم از خودش اندیشهای نداره.
داستانهای دیگری که از چخوف خواندم و در این کتاب نیست اما خوندنشون رو پیشنهاد میکنم:
شرطبندی، بانو با سگ ملوس، اندوه.
انگور فرنگی، ترجمهی عبدالحسین نوشین از نشر روزگار دربردارندهی داستانهای زیر هستش (جلوی هر کدوم امتیاز خودم رو از ۵ ستاره دادم):
چاق و لاغر ۳
حربا ۳
وانکا ۴.۵
شوخی ۴
سرگذشت ملالانگیز ۳.۸
سربههوا ۴
انگور فرنگی ۴.۸
ایونیچ ۴
جان دلام ۴.۵
از اینجا به بعد اسپویله پس لطفا اگر براتون مهمه نخونید:
در سه داستان 《چاق و لاغر》،《حربا》یا همون آفتابپرست و 《سرگذشت ملالانگیز》چخوف به نقد دید طبقاتی جامعهی روسیهی زمان خودش میپردازه و به رتبهبندیها نیشخند میزنه، دو داستان اول کوتاهتر بودن و در این مجموعه کمتر مورد علاقه من بودن داستان سوم که داستان بلندتری هستش و سرگذشت یکی از حضرتاجلهای روسیه پروفسور نیکلای استپانویچ فلان رو روایت میکنه و همهی اون چیزهایی که در زندگی این پروفسور پشت این لقب بزرگ نهفته است رو به ما نشون میده: هیچ چیز.
داستان 《وانکا》پسربچه معصوم و بیگناهی که بسیار تاثیربرانگیز روایت شده.
داستان 《انگورفرنگی》 با روایت ایوان ایوانیچ از زندگی برادرش شروع میشه. اینکه چطور اون زندگی خودش رو وقف مالک شدن میکنه تا از یک کارمند بیچاره به یک مالک حقیقی و ارباب تبدیل بشه. این داستان خیلی زیبا از مفهوم خوشبختی میگه.
داستانهای《شوخی》، 《سر به هوا》،《ایونیچ》 و 《جان دلام》 از انتقاد جامعه به انتقاد افراد و خانواده و به طور خاص روابط زن و مرد میپردازه. در 《شوخی》 چخوف با انتخاب یک ماجرای ساده، یک شوخی، نشون میده که چطور گاهی عمیقترین احساسات توسط یک سوتفاهم بوجود میان و بعد هم مثل مورفین عادت میشن و بعد هم همونطور که یک روز آدم به آمدن و موندن اون احساسات خو گرفته بود یک روز هم به رفتن و نبودنشون عادت میکنه. 《سر به هوا》داستان الگا ایوانونا زنی که عاشق هنر و تشنهی شناخت آدمهای بزرگ و پرآوازست رو روایت میکنه که درنهایت جاهطلبی اون هم مانع از به ثمر رسوندن استعدادهاش و هم باعث نادیده گرفتن شوهرش، پزشک با وجدان و بیشیلهپیلهای میشه که الگا ابتدا با جا دادن اون در حلقهی دوستان هنرمند و نام و آوازهدارش کمی سردرگمه و تنها در پایان داستان با از دست دادن اون میفهمه که در تمام مدت چیزی که دنبالش بوده در همین مرد قرار داشته. در 《ایونیچ》درخواست عشق مرد داستان توسط دختر جوانی که به دنبال تحقق آرزوهاش به کنسرواتوار میره رد میشه و مرد به زندگی کسالتبار و پر از طمعی روی میاره، دختر هم بعد از چندسال که فهمید در نواختن پیانو استعدادی نداره و بعد هم که با برگشت به خانه نتوتست با اشارههایی مرد رو به یاد عشق آتشینش بیندازه، به یک زندگی روزمرهی کسالتبار برای باقی عمرش تن میده. بنظرم این داستان به خوبی احساسات آدمها مثل غرور شکسته، ترس از تنهایی و بیچارگی آدمی و پناه بردنش به عشق و بعد هم دلزدگیش از اون رو بعد از اینکه انتظاراتش رو برآورده نکرد نشون میده.
داستان آخر 《جان دلم》 زندگی الینکا زنی رو روایت میکنه که از خودش نظر و استقلال رای نداره و افکارش با شوهرهاش تغییر میکنن و نهایت که در سرپر��تی از کودک یکی از مستاجرهای قدیمش که البته مدتی هم معشوقهاش بوده تسلا و معنی زندگیش رو پیدا میکنه و از کسالت و پوچی زندگیش فرار میکنه اما باز هم از خودش اندیشهای نداره.
داستانهای دیگری که از چخوف خواندم و در این کتاب نیست اما خوندنشون رو پیشنهاد میکنم:
شرطبندی، بانو با سگ ملوس، اندوه.
January 23, 2018
Brings a lot to mind. The happiness of those who are well off. The silent pain of the poor. The indifference of the middle class. There will never not be poverty in this world. There will never not be someone or a family struggling to get by. There will never not be someone striving for their dreams or those who are able to obtain those dreams and look down at those who didn't make it. There will never not be someone who strongly, above all else, wants to be free and just out in the world. It's crazy how much has not changed in all this time. Maybe, one day. Not today. I hope for all those who come after me that the world will be a better place for them. Not without consequence but without greed and harm.
I enjoyed this story. Another story I'll probably be thinking about for a while.
I enjoyed this story. Another story I'll probably be thinking about for a while.
February 27, 2015
Three touching short stories. The first one - about a meek man experiencing the first stirring of romance - was my favourite. They're all about the human condition, our ability to feel, deceive, ignore... I shall definitely be reading more Chekhov soon.
July 23, 2022
کوتاه اما زیبا
March 3, 2021
Read this twice today. I just can't say it got me in any way. Nice story, but for me that was all.
May 23, 2024
A lovely tale basically about how rich happy people are created on the misery of silent sufferers and by ignorance (ignorance is bliss). Gooseberries refers to the hard sour berries the rich landowner farms and says are delicious. I read this in George Saunders’s A Swim in a Pond in the Rain.
May 5, 2016
This is my first encounter with Chekhov and while the stories were not great, he has aroused the need in me to read him in greater depth. A little primer something better to come
Displaying 1 - 30 of 351 reviews