What do you think?
Rate this book
Nine Plays of Chekov
excellent condition inside of the paperback book despite of age; pages are clean with very light yellow hue; binding is tight; the spine is intact and uncreased; moderate shelf wear on the cover mostly on the edges; 248 pages; copyright 1946, reprint 1973; published by The Universal Library(J-13)
Paperback
First published January 1, 1904
19 people are currently reading
376 people want to read
About the author
Anton Chekhov
5,908 books9,780 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 - 21 of 21 reviews
May 31, 2020
Although this particular edition's translator is uncredited, it does appear that at least some of these plays were translated by Constance Garnett. That may take it off the table for some readers, though I'm either used to or have a fondness for Garnett--I'm not sure which. It's also very possible that my oppositional nature reacts to all the disdain for Garnett as a counterweight. Fancy that!
In a month-long effort to immerse myself into Chekhov's world, I read this selection, plus Ivanov (the only major play of Chekhov's not included here), and two selections of short-stories. Maybe it was my expectations, but the plays had very little impact on me--though I believe I can see how they would have been incisive for the time and place they were written. Overwhelmingly, the theme to me is how the middle to upper class in Russia (usually land-owning gentry) had decayed as a class to the point where they were not only parasitic, but were also full of existential angst, unsure of what their role in the world should be. This class spends most of their time looking backwards at a better time, or looking forward to some anticipated (but not forthcoming) change that will improve their current situation. As a counterpoint, there is usually one character who recommends action as a solution--more specifically, hard practical work. While this may actually have helped matters, there is also a feeling that no one is going to take the recommendation, perhaps not even the character advocating for it.
The end result is a feeling of loss and decay, of a society moving towards entropy. This fits in well with the little I know of Russian history before the revolution. Chekhov didn't live long enough to see the rise of the Bolsheviks--one wonders what he would have thought of the changes to come. I suspect he would have cheered it at first, but I also think he was a smart enough observer of people to be disillusioned with it quickly.
Although the stories I've read this month were fantastic, I only feel so-so about the plays. Of the major plays contained here, I can't really say any of them were a favorite, or that I liked one better than the other because they all seemed on par with one another. The one play that I did like was the extended monologue On the Harmfulness of Tobacco, which was pretty droll. Maybe I'm a philistine for finding the hen-pecked husband trope funny, but there it is.
Still, I'm glad I read the collection. Even mediocre Chekhov is worthwhile
In a month-long effort to immerse myself into Chekhov's world, I read this selection, plus Ivanov (the only major play of Chekhov's not included here), and two selections of short-stories. Maybe it was my expectations, but the plays had very little impact on me--though I believe I can see how they would have been incisive for the time and place they were written. Overwhelmingly, the theme to me is how the middle to upper class in Russia (usually land-owning gentry) had decayed as a class to the point where they were not only parasitic, but were also full of existential angst, unsure of what their role in the world should be. This class spends most of their time looking backwards at a better time, or looking forward to some anticipated (but not forthcoming) change that will improve their current situation. As a counterpoint, there is usually one character who recommends action as a solution--more specifically, hard practical work. While this may actually have helped matters, there is also a feeling that no one is going to take the recommendation, perhaps not even the character advocating for it.
The end result is a feeling of loss and decay, of a society moving towards entropy. This fits in well with the little I know of Russian history before the revolution. Chekhov didn't live long enough to see the rise of the Bolsheviks--one wonders what he would have thought of the changes to come. I suspect he would have cheered it at first, but I also think he was a smart enough observer of people to be disillusioned with it quickly.
Although the stories I've read this month were fantastic, I only feel so-so about the plays. Of the major plays contained here, I can't really say any of them were a favorite, or that I liked one better than the other because they all seemed on par with one another. The one play that I did like was the extended monologue On the Harmfulness of Tobacco, which was pretty droll. Maybe I'm a philistine for finding the hen-pecked husband trope funny, but there it is.
Still, I'm glad I read the collection. Even mediocre Chekhov is worthwhile
May 31, 2024
look, it's a complicated russian compendium of depression, familial tension, god, love, and more depression. and guns which need to go off in a later scene or else shouldn't be mentioned. what more could a girl ask for?
January 3, 2021
Read if you're a Chekov stan... otherwise stick to his short stories.
October 15, 2018
There are very few playwrights of Shakespeare's rank but I'd definitely put Chekhov there based on his four masterpieces: "The Sea-Gull," "The Cherry Orchard," "The Three Sisters," and "Uncle Vanya." Similar ideas recur about unrequited love, imagined utopias, and reckless finances but each drama feels uniquely poignant, painfully tragicomic, and impossibly big-hearted. The translations here circa 1945 are more than fine. Please skip the five inexplicably included one-acts.
September 7, 2021
I read Ivanov, the Seagull, Uncle Vanya, the Three Sisters, and the Cherry Orchard. The Cherry Orchard was, in my opinion, the best of all these. The most developed, not overly dramatic but still entertaining and interesting to read. They all deal with similar ideas of work and love and money.
Read
February 4, 2021It is dreary reading 5 Chekov plays in a role... it kind of overwhelms you
March 26, 2021
Hmmm...so this collection was not light reading, in fact for such short plays they were rather dense. My favorite however was The Cherry Orchard, but even that was a bit dry and difficult to read.
January 1, 2026
I AM OBSESSED
September 26, 2013
I'm rating this version of Chekhov's plays because I can't find the translations I prefer on goodreads, which are the translations by Eugene K. Bristow (though his only include the 4 major plays), and with a writer so subtle, deliberate, rhythmic - and well, hmmm, Chekhov's art cannot be condensed into a few adjectives - what I'm trying to say is it would be dishonest of me to review any other translation of Chekhov's work because translations make a huge difference in capturing such an art as his. Many other translations "Westernize" the plays, or simply don't capture Chekhov's rhythm/poetry, which in the end sort of kills his art, or at least changes it enough so that one cannot let any single translation stand as the concrete conception of the whole. I encourage fans of Chekhov to compare translations because the differences you'll find and feel are very interesting (I've read Bristow and Schmidt; crazy different!). May I also suggest that if you enjoy the plays you should perhaps read a few critical essays about them and their productions (included in the Norton Critical edition, though the 2nd ed. uses the Senelick translations, not sure how good those are). I know this isn't a review of the writing itself, but the writing sort of talks for itself (and an in-depth review would take me forever to write). Hope this helps, and if you have a favorite translation please let me know which it is, and why.
June 1, 2007
Like Pinter, Chekhov really understood people, but he seemed to love them a lot more.
Often mistaken for a 'realist' or 'naturalist' of the theatre, Chekhov was in a fact a hyper-realist. His plays are not mundane kitchen sink dramas, but bold, impressionist, dream-realities, within which some of the most lovingly crafted (and often hopelessly lost) characters drift and struggle to understand themselves and others.
As always, I recommend these plays to anyone, not just those who have an interest in theatre. But I'd also recommend you to see them performed, if you can.
His fiction was also wonderful, so check that out if you have a low tolerance for scripts.
Often mistaken for a 'realist' or 'naturalist' of the theatre, Chekhov was in a fact a hyper-realist. His plays are not mundane kitchen sink dramas, but bold, impressionist, dream-realities, within which some of the most lovingly crafted (and often hopelessly lost) characters drift and struggle to understand themselves and others.
As always, I recommend these plays to anyone, not just those who have an interest in theatre. But I'd also recommend you to see them performed, if you can.
His fiction was also wonderful, so check that out if you have a low tolerance for scripts.
April 18, 2012
I will not comment on each of the nine plays in this volume. Rather, I will write my impressions of his works overall.
This was my first taste of Chekov. I could say much about his writing: his progressive view of history, his view of the value of labor, his views of the pointlessness or insignificance of individual lives in the grand scheme of history, and even his pessimism concerning love and fidelity. If he wasn't a believer in Marxism, he at least portrays a Russia that was ripe for Lenin's Revolution.
Despite all of that, I enjoyed the plays and their style. It would be nice to see them performed onstage.
This was my first taste of Chekov. I could say much about his writing: his progressive view of history, his view of the value of labor, his views of the pointlessness or insignificance of individual lives in the grand scheme of history, and even his pessimism concerning love and fidelity. If he wasn't a believer in Marxism, he at least portrays a Russia that was ripe for Lenin's Revolution.
Despite all of that, I enjoyed the plays and their style. It would be nice to see them performed onstage.
September 24, 2009
Recently, I've read The Cherry Orchard, The Sea-Gull, and The Three Sisters and am planning to read more. Chekhov is truly a master dramatist.
I suspect this particular translation is more stuffy than it needs to be. I've borrowed it from a friend, but if I were buying a copy, I'd look for something with more contemporary vocabulary and sentence structure. I doubt that the language needs to be quite so Victorian to be a good translation.
I suspect this particular translation is more stuffy than it needs to be. I've borrowed it from a friend, but if I were buying a copy, I'd look for something with more contemporary vocabulary and sentence structure. I doubt that the language needs to be quite so Victorian to be a good translation.
March 13, 2024
Read Three Sisters and Uncle Vanya for my classics book club. Very interesting, very philosophy-heavy but interesting commentary on the human condition and interestingly, climate change. How many times can one say “interesting” in one review? 😂 Three Sisters particularly was engaging from the beginning. Uncle Vanya, which I read first, took a little warming up to, but I really enjoyed them both overall. An addition to my education in classic literature for sure!
August 5, 2016
I had picked this book up on a whim at a flea market for 50 cents. This was sort of an intro to Chekov's body of work for me. I honestly thought this book would be to highbrow and complex for me. Instead, I found most of the stories clever, humorous, and accessible. "The Proposal" was probably the best one out of the lot.
Want to read
June 11, 2007Looking to read some more Chekhov when the winter rolls around.
December 27, 2007
I don't care what you assholes say. Chekov will always be my first love. The tension, the subtext, the heartache so palpable, unending. I fucking love this shit.
April 6, 2013
وما تشيخوف إلا الأستاذ الأول لمن يريد أن يكتب.... العبقرية لا تنتهي يا أستاذ.
November 22, 2016
Couldn't finish it. All much of the same storyline, and all depressing. Willing to giv him another shot in the theatre, but I will not be reading him again.
May 29, 2022
All so good.
Read
April 23, 2023THE BEAR....in my humble opinion, better than the other 8 combined.
Saved the best for last, am i right?
Saved the best for last, am i right?
February 8, 2016
The most important plays by Anton Chekhov.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews