What do you think?
Rate this book
چخوف
ترویا: پردازش تکچهرهای به تقریب واقعی از چخوف، مردی خوب و باریکبین و کم و بیش مرموز، آزمون سادهای نبود. شناخت چهرهاش از بن شخصیتهایی که در آثارش آفریده است، ناممکن بود و باید به نقل قولهای بسیار از منابع روسی و نامههای خود چخوف بسنده میکردم.
چاپ اول ۱۳۷۳
چاپ اول ۱۳۷۳
479 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1984
16 people are currently reading
472 people want to read
About the author
Henri Troyat
513 books271 followersTroyat was a French author, biographer, historian and novelist.
Troyat was born Levon Aslan Torossian in Moscow to parents of Armenian descent. His family fled Russia in anticipation of the revolution. After a long exodus taking them to the Caucasus on to Crimea and later by sea to Constantinople and then Venice, the family finally settled in Paris in 1920, where young Troyat was schooled and later earned a law degree. The stirring and tragic events of this flight across half of Europe are vividly recounted by Troyat in 'Tant que la terre durera'.
Troyat received his first literary award, Le prix du roman populaire, at the age of twenty-four, and by twenty-seven, he was awarded the Prix Goncourt.
Troyat published more than 100 books, novels and biographies, among them those of Anton Chekhov, Catherine the Great, Rasputin, Ivan the Terrible and Leo Tolstoy.
Troyat's best-known work is La neige en deuil, which was adapted as an English-language film in 1956 under the title The Mountain.
He was elected as a member of the Académie française in 1959. At the time of his death, Troyat was the longest serving member of the Academy.
From Wikipedia
Troyat was born Levon Aslan Torossian in Moscow to parents of Armenian descent. His family fled Russia in anticipation of the revolution. After a long exodus taking them to the Caucasus on to Crimea and later by sea to Constantinople and then Venice, the family finally settled in Paris in 1920, where young Troyat was schooled and later earned a law degree. The stirring and tragic events of this flight across half of Europe are vividly recounted by Troyat in 'Tant que la terre durera'.
Troyat received his first literary award, Le prix du roman populaire, at the age of twenty-four, and by twenty-seven, he was awarded the Prix Goncourt.
Troyat published more than 100 books, novels and biographies, among them those of Anton Chekhov, Catherine the Great, Rasputin, Ivan the Terrible and Leo Tolstoy.
Troyat's best-known work is La neige en deuil, which was adapted as an English-language film in 1956 under the title The Mountain.
He was elected as a member of the Académie française in 1959. At the time of his death, Troyat was the longest serving member of the Academy.
From Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
October 21, 2025
„Nu-mi plac deloc piesele tale de teatru. Scrii chiar mai prost decît Shakespeare” (Lev Tolstoi)
Cine a citit corespondența lui Cehov (20 de volume în ediția rusă) știe la ce să se aștepte. Cehov n-a omis nici o întîmplare din viața lui și a comentat minuțios totul. N-a ascuns nici datele cele mai intime: iubiri eșuate înainte de a începe, suferințe dintre cele mai prozaice, care se mărturisesc doar la medic. Și nici atunci cu glas tare...
Firește, Henri Troyat nu oferă informații noi. Nu și-a propus asta. Dar așază faptele în context și adaugă un plus de culoare. Iată: vegheat de soția lui, actrița Olga Knipper, Cehov tocmai s-a stins. „Era 2 iulie 1904. Pendula arăta ora trei. Un fluture mare de noapte, cu aripi negre, intrase pe fereastra deschisă şi se izbea cu disperare de lampa aprinsă” (p.412). Acesta este și rolul unei biografii romanțate. Să pună culoare peste cenușiul unor fotografii mișcate...
Am ales cîteva momente. Între Tolstoi și Cehov a fost o relație foarte strînsă. Rareori scriitorii se privesc cu mai multă bunăvoință și simpatie. Tolstoi îi admira povestirile („Călugărul negru”, să zicem) și le citea cu glas tare numeroasei sale familii. Dar nu-i aprecia piesele de teatru. Cehov îl considera - și pe bună dreptate - prozatorul cel mai important din epocă. Fără Tolstoi, afirmă într-o scrisoare celebră, literatura rusă ar fi ceva amorf.
Cînd s-au întîlnit prima dată, în 8 august 1895, au mers la rîu și au făcut baie. N-au vorbit despre chestii academice (nici n-aveau ținuta necesară). Tostoi i-a spus că merge pe bicicletă (avea 67 de ani) și i-a recomandat cu simpatie acest sport extrem, foarte util îndeosebi la senectute (pp.222-223). Altă dată, profetul castității i-a divulgat mîndru de sine că, în tinerețe, a fost „un fustangiu nepotolit”. A folosit și cuvinte mai tari. Cehov l-a ascultat plin de jenă (p.345). Dar Tolstoi îl trata cu multă afecțiune și îi elogia prozele în scrisorile către prieteni: „În povestiri, Cehov este inegalabil” (p.344).
Mai mult, l-a vizitat și în spital. În 1897, cînd Cehov s-a internat în clinica din Moscova a doctorului Ostroumov, specialist în boli pulmonare, Tolstoi i-a făcut o vizită neașteptată. Au conversat despre nemurirea sufletului (pp.242-243). Nu sînt deloc sigur că Anton Cehov a fost foarte încîntat de subiect.
Cehov i-a răspuns cu aceeași delicatețe. În ianuarie 1900, Tolstoi a căzut grav bolnav de friguri, vestea s-a răspîndit repede și Cehov a fost foarte îngrijorat. I-a scris lui Menşikov. „Mi-a fost frică să nu moară. Dacă ar muri Tolstoi, în viaţa mea s-ar face un gol imens. Mai întîi, trebuie să mărturisesc că nu iubesc pe nimeni aşa cum îl iubesc pe el. Eu sînt ateu, dar cred că dintre toate credinţele, cea mai potrivită pentru mine ar fi credinţa lui. Al doilea, cînd în literatură există Tolstoi, e uşor şi agreabil să fii scriitor: chiar şi dacă recunoşti că n-ai scris şi nu scrii nimic, lucrul nu pare prea grav, deoarece Tolstoi scrie pentru toţi” (p.301).
P. S. La înmormîntarea lui Cehov, nu s-au ținut discursuri.
P. P. S. Recenzia la A.P. Cehov, O viață în scrisori. Corespondență (1879 - 1890):
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
August 31, 2023
This is how I wish ALL biographies and nonfiction books were written!! The author, Henri Troyat, was a French historian, biographer and novelist of Russian descent. He was born in Moscow in 1911.
My intention is to make this review short and concise. I will focus upon how the book is written rather than telling you of Chekhov’s life. For that you must read the book, after deciding if this is the biography you choose.
The book follows Chekhov’s life in chronological order. He was born in 1860 and died in 1904 from TB. He died at the young age of 44. We learn of his life experiences, the history unrolling during his life in respect to how it affected him. The book is concise and to the point; it does not go off on tangents. His relationships with family and contemporary authors are detailed. These relationships are drawn with great depth, never wandering offtrack. We come to know Chekhov’s personality very well! It is precisely this I am looking for when I read a biography! This biography pulls this off remarkably well by quoting Chekhov’s words. Th quotes are taken from family, friends’, acquaintances’, work associates’ letters and articles written by Chekhov. A thorough bibliography of the sources concludes the book. I want to stress the value of these quotes. They are numerous, well-chosen and short in length. Through them we are given, not the author’s opinions, but Chekhov’s own opinions. This is extremely well done!
Short synopses of Chekhov’s stories and plays are given. They are not collected in a separate chapter; we are told of then alongside the events in Chekhov’s life that provoked his desire to write them. We see how events in his life take another form in his writings. Life events help us understand his stories and plays. I chuckled at the wide range of interpretations in the press.
I truly admire Chekhov, although he is not drawn as a saint, but realistically and honestly with both faults and strengths. The presentation is balanced. His medical problems are presented in an informative manner. We observe the extent to which they are tied to his personality. Chekhov never moped or complained. He shouldered his illness and medical difficulties bravely, often ignoring them completely. He knew what was happening; he was a doctor himself. He lived his forty-four years to the fullest!
Tore Bengtsson narrates the Swedish translation done by Jan Wahlén. This io what I listened to. I am thoroughly pleased by both the translation and narration. The wording is clear and easy to follow. The narration is NOT dramatized. It is clear, easy to follow. I’ve listened to several books narrated by Tore Bengtsson. His narration here is, in my view, his best so far.
I am giving five stars to the narration, translation and the book. I do not usually give nonfiction titles five stars, but this is so well done I think it deserves the highest rating. I appreciate its clear and concise style.
My intention is to make this review short and concise. I will focus upon how the book is written rather than telling you of Chekhov’s life. For that you must read the book, after deciding if this is the biography you choose.
The book follows Chekhov’s life in chronological order. He was born in 1860 and died in 1904 from TB. He died at the young age of 44. We learn of his life experiences, the history unrolling during his life in respect to how it affected him. The book is concise and to the point; it does not go off on tangents. His relationships with family and contemporary authors are detailed. These relationships are drawn with great depth, never wandering offtrack. We come to know Chekhov’s personality very well! It is precisely this I am looking for when I read a biography! This biography pulls this off remarkably well by quoting Chekhov’s words. Th quotes are taken from family, friends’, acquaintances’, work associates’ letters and articles written by Chekhov. A thorough bibliography of the sources concludes the book. I want to stress the value of these quotes. They are numerous, well-chosen and short in length. Through them we are given, not the author’s opinions, but Chekhov’s own opinions. This is extremely well done!
Short synopses of Chekhov’s stories and plays are given. They are not collected in a separate chapter; we are told of then alongside the events in Chekhov’s life that provoked his desire to write them. We see how events in his life take another form in his writings. Life events help us understand his stories and plays. I chuckled at the wide range of interpretations in the press.
I truly admire Chekhov, although he is not drawn as a saint, but realistically and honestly with both faults and strengths. The presentation is balanced. His medical problems are presented in an informative manner. We observe the extent to which they are tied to his personality. Chekhov never moped or complained. He shouldered his illness and medical difficulties bravely, often ignoring them completely. He knew what was happening; he was a doctor himself. He lived his forty-four years to the fullest!
Tore Bengtsson narrates the Swedish translation done by Jan Wahlén. This io what I listened to. I am thoroughly pleased by both the translation and narration. The wording is clear and easy to follow. The narration is NOT dramatized. It is clear, easy to follow. I’ve listened to several books narrated by Tore Bengtsson. His narration here is, in my view, his best so far.
I am giving five stars to the narration, translation and the book. I do not usually give nonfiction titles five stars, but this is so well done I think it deserves the highest rating. I appreciate its clear and concise style.
April 12, 2023
Mi -a luat o luna să scriu despre cartea asta, am terminat-o după mai multe zile de lectură, grea despărțirea și mai trist finalul...Cehov cred ca nu mai are nevoie de prea multe prezentări, un scriitor clasic de-o rara naturalețe și unul dintre scriitorii mei preferați de la început...
L-am cunoscut prin intermediul lui Henri Troyat, o viață prea scurtă răpusă de tuberculoza, Cehov a trăit, a iubit viața, a doctorit mii de pacienți și a sperat mereu că se vindecă deși plămânii lui au dat chix prea devreme.
Medicina i-a fost soție, iar literatura amantă, nu a ieșit niciodată din lumea sa fixă și ideatica, a fost un pământean rigid (născut la 17 ianuarie ) cu concepții solide de viață, alimentație și regim, Cehov nu credea în Dumnezeu, doar îl interpreta individual, pe Tolstoi îl considera un fanatic religios care împrăștie teoreme nerealiste în jur și are o părere josnica despre femei, dar îl aprecia ca romancier, Tolstoi i-a fost un bun tovarăș totuși
Viața lui Cehov e atât de captivanta, cartea te blochează intr-un colț de lume și te lasă acolo, m-a impresionat personalitatea lui Cehov, lumina lui, flacăra lui care a ars prea mult pentru ceilalți, mereu optimist, mereu altruist, marele scriitor rus a scris pentru sine și a lecuit pentru toți...
Intr-o zi fatidica de iulie sicriul lui este coborât în groapă, Maxim Gorki este ultimul prieten care îi este alături din miile de fani și pacienți pe care i-a avut, Cehov a murit singur doar cu sora lui alături...
L-am cunoscut prin intermediul lui Henri Troyat, o viață prea scurtă răpusă de tuberculoza, Cehov a trăit, a iubit viața, a doctorit mii de pacienți și a sperat mereu că se vindecă deși plămânii lui au dat chix prea devreme.
Medicina i-a fost soție, iar literatura amantă, nu a ieșit niciodată din lumea sa fixă și ideatica, a fost un pământean rigid (născut la 17 ianuarie ) cu concepții solide de viață, alimentație și regim, Cehov nu credea în Dumnezeu, doar îl interpreta individual, pe Tolstoi îl considera un fanatic religios care împrăștie teoreme nerealiste în jur și are o părere josnica despre femei, dar îl aprecia ca romancier, Tolstoi i-a fost un bun tovarăș totuși
Viața lui Cehov e atât de captivanta, cartea te blochează intr-un colț de lume și te lasă acolo, m-a impresionat personalitatea lui Cehov, lumina lui, flacăra lui care a ars prea mult pentru ceilalți, mereu optimist, mereu altruist, marele scriitor rus a scris pentru sine și a lecuit pentru toți...
Intr-o zi fatidica de iulie sicriul lui este coborât în groapă, Maxim Gorki este ultimul prieten care îi este alături din miile de fani și pacienți pe care i-a avut, Cehov a murit singur doar cu sora lui alături...
July 29, 2025
تصویر مردی که پشت میز مینشیند، نسخهای مینویسد، نامهای را با دقت میبندد و میان واژهها سرفه میکند؛ مردی که میان دو جهان معلق مانده: جهان بیرحم فقر و بیماری و جهان لطیف خیال و انساندوستی. تصویری که هانری تروایا در کتابش ترسیم میکند، از آن دست چهرههاییست که نه میتوان بهسادگی تحسینشان کرد، نه میتوان از آنها گذشت. او با حساسیتی ادبی و انسانی، نه اسطورهای از چخوف میسازد و نه به تکرار روایتهای رایج بسنده میکند. بلکه ما را در سفری آهسته و صمیمی، در ژرفای زندگی مردی میبرد که بیش از هر چیز، بودن را با تمام رنجهایش، زندگی کرد.
چخوف را نمیتوان فقط یک نویسنده دانست. او پزشک بود، طنزپرداز، نمایشنامهنویس، و مهمتر از همه، ناظری دقیق بر فروپاشی اخلاقی و انسانی جامعهی روسی در آستانهی سدهی بیستم. اما آنچه زندگی او را از دیگر نوابغ ادبی جدا میکند، نه فقط آثارش، بلکه سکوتهای میان آنهاست. تروایا با هوشمندی، به جای روایت صرف رویدادها، به سراغ همان لحظات مبهم و مرزهای ناپیدا رفته: جایی که چخوف تصمیم میگیرد بنویسد، اما نه چون در پی شهرت است، بلکه چون نوشتن برایش شکلی از زنده ماندن است؛ آن هم در دنیایی که مرگ و بیماری و فقر، نفس را در گلو خفه میکنند.
از دوران کودکیاش در تاگانروگ، زیر دست پدری سختگیر و مذهبی، تا سالهای جوانی در مسکو، تروایا از تبدیل چخوف به قربانی یا قهرمان پرهیز میکند. او تنها پارههای وجودی یک انسان را کنار هم میچیند؛ انسانی که هم خندیدن میدانست و هم خون بالا میآورد، هم به تنهایی خو کرده بود و هم نمیتوانست از خانوادهاش دل بکند. این تعادل میان همدلی و واقعگرایی، ویژگی ممتاز کتاب است. ما چخوف را در این روایت نه همچون نابغهای دستنیافتنی، بلکه همچون انسانی رنجدیده، خویشتندار و شریف میشناسیم که از اعماق واقعیت، ادبیاتی ساخت که از جنس راستگویی بود.
تروایا در این اثر به یک سنت نویسندگی درخشان وفادار میماند؛ سنتی که نهتنها به روایت زندگینامه به چشم تاریخنگاری نمینگرد، بلکه آن را به بستری برای فهم انسان بدل میکند. کتاب او بیتردید از جنس آثار تحلیلی نیست، اما در پرداخت رواییاش چنان مهارتی دارد که لایههای روانشناختی و زیستی زندگی چخوف را با تمام سکوتها و فریادهایش به تصویر میکشد. او در چخوف، انسانی را دیده که مدام در حال عقبنشینی از خودش است، تا دیگران را بهتر ببیند. کسی که در عین تلخی، هیچگاه از انسان و قابلیت تغییر او ناامید نمیشود. در واقع، چخوفِ تروایا، نویسندهایست که بیش از آنکه بخواهد دنیا را قضاوت کند، میخواهد آن را بفهمد.
سفر چخوف از طنزنویسی برای مجلههای سبک، تا نگارش شاهکارهایی چون «سه خواهر» یا «باغ آلبالو»، تنها یک سیر ادبی نیست. این سفر، یک جستوجوی انسانیست برای یافتن صداقت، معنا، و آرامش. در اوج موفقیت، چخوف هیچگاه از طبابت دست نمیکشد؛ در دل بیماری، هیچگاه از نوشتن صرفنظر نمیکند. او میداند که رنج، بخشی از هستیست، و کار هنرمند، نه پاککردن آن، بلکه روشنکردنش است.
در نهایت، کتاب تروایا نه تنها خواننده را با زندگی یکی از بزرگترین نویسندگان روس آشنا میکند، بلکه ما را به درکی عمیقتر از انسان و سرنوشت سوق میدهد. تروایا نشان میدهد که چخوف، پیش از آنکه نویسنده باشد، انسانی بود میان هزاران انسان دیگر، با تنی بیمار، قلبی پراندوه، و ذهنی روشنگر. انسانی که شاید خودش را هیچگاه جدی نگرفت، اما تمام جهان را با جدیت و دقت نگاه کرد.
و شاید همین، راز جاودانگی او باشد.
چخوف را نمیتوان فقط یک نویسنده دانست. او پزشک بود، طنزپرداز، نمایشنامهنویس، و مهمتر از همه، ناظری دقیق بر فروپاشی اخلاقی و انسانی جامعهی روسی در آستانهی سدهی بیستم. اما آنچه زندگی او را از دیگر نوابغ ادبی جدا میکند، نه فقط آثارش، بلکه سکوتهای میان آنهاست. تروایا با هوشمندی، به جای روایت صرف رویدادها، به سراغ همان لحظات مبهم و مرزهای ناپیدا رفته: جایی که چخوف تصمیم میگیرد بنویسد، اما نه چون در پی شهرت است، بلکه چون نوشتن برایش شکلی از زنده ماندن است؛ آن هم در دنیایی که مرگ و بیماری و فقر، نفس را در گلو خفه میکنند.
از دوران کودکیاش در تاگانروگ، زیر دست پدری سختگیر و مذهبی، تا سالهای جوانی در مسکو، تروایا از تبدیل چخوف به قربانی یا قهرمان پرهیز میکند. او تنها پارههای وجودی یک انسان را کنار هم میچیند؛ انسانی که هم خندیدن میدانست و هم خون بالا میآورد، هم به تنهایی خو کرده بود و هم نمیتوانست از خانوادهاش دل بکند. این تعادل میان همدلی و واقعگرایی، ویژگی ممتاز کتاب است. ما چخوف را در این روایت نه همچون نابغهای دستنیافتنی، بلکه همچون انسانی رنجدیده، خویشتندار و شریف میشناسیم که از اعماق واقعیت، ادبیاتی ساخت که از جنس راستگویی بود.
تروایا در این اثر به یک سنت نویسندگی درخشان وفادار میماند؛ سنتی که نهتنها به روایت زندگینامه به چشم تاریخنگاری نمینگرد، بلکه آن را به بستری برای فهم انسان بدل میکند. کتاب او بیتردید از جنس آثار تحلیلی نیست، اما در پرداخت رواییاش چنان مهارتی دارد که لایههای روانشناختی و زیستی زندگی چخوف را با تمام سکوتها و فریادهایش به تصویر میکشد. او در چخوف، انسانی را دیده که مدام در حال عقبنشینی از خودش است، تا دیگران را بهتر ببیند. کسی که در عین تلخی، هیچگاه از انسان و قابلیت تغییر او ناامید نمیشود. در واقع، چخوفِ تروایا، نویسندهایست که بیش از آنکه بخواهد دنیا را قضاوت کند، میخواهد آن را بفهمد.
سفر چخوف از طنزنویسی برای مجلههای سبک، تا نگارش شاهکارهایی چون «سه خواهر» یا «باغ آلبالو»، تنها یک سیر ادبی نیست. این سفر، یک جستوجوی انسانیست برای یافتن صداقت، معنا، و آرامش. در اوج موفقیت، چخوف هیچگاه از طبابت دست نمیکشد؛ در دل بیماری، هیچگاه از نوشتن صرفنظر نمیکند. او میداند که رنج، بخشی از هستیست، و کار هنرمند، نه پاککردن آن، بلکه روشنکردنش است.
در نهایت، کتاب تروایا نه تنها خواننده را با زندگی یکی از بزرگترین نویسندگان روس آشنا میکند، بلکه ما را به درکی عمیقتر از انسان و سرنوشت سوق میدهد. تروایا نشان میدهد که چخوف، پیش از آنکه نویسنده باشد، انسانی بود میان هزاران انسان دیگر، با تنی بیمار، قلبی پراندوه، و ذهنی روشنگر. انسانی که شاید خودش را هیچگاه جدی نگرفت، اما تمام جهان را با جدیت و دقت نگاه کرد.
و شاید همین، راز جاودانگی او باشد.
October 28, 2023
Makes VS Pritchett’s biography look like a magazine article.
Aside: It was this book that Raymond Carver drew on when writing his final story ‘Errand.’ Canny readers will spot a sentence or two that Carver lifted.
Aside: It was this book that Raymond Carver drew on when writing his final story ‘Errand.’ Canny readers will spot a sentence or two that Carver lifted.
February 19, 2022
„Era omul dreptei măsuri. Singura lui pasiune era arta, literatura pe care o făcea. Scriind, avea impresia că oprește curgerea timpului. Deodată, de acolo unde cu puțin înainte nu fusese decât vid, răsăreau pagini înnegrite, personaje noi, o poveste inedită. Ce miracol mai mare decât această naștere din nimic? Totuși, în ciuda notorietății sale crescânde, refuza să se considere o ființă superioară. Detestând lăudăroșenia celorlalți, nu putea, nici măcar în culmea celui mai răsunător succes, să uite de limitele talentului său. Nu era modestie, cu atât mai puțin umilință, ci o consecință a clarviziunii și a bunei creșteri. Deși se înverșunase să curețe, să șlefuiască, să-și perfecționeze stilul povestirilor și al pieselor, nu credea că vor supraviețui.”
July 22, 2017
“He made the absurdity of everyday life unmistakably plain without ever putting it in so many words. No speech for the prosecution, no speech for the defense. The raw truth. Photographic. Moreover, his bag of tricks seemed inexhaustible: there is no repetition whatever in the entire massive portrait gallery.”
I have loved Anton Chekhov for years, and this biography made me love him even more. His unwavering devotion to showing life as it is, not as we want it to seem, and his sincerely good nature, continue to endear me to him and to his body of work. I am not typically one for biographies, but this one was completely delightful: Henri Troyat writes beautifully and clearly and presents a riveting portrait of the literary genius. I read it quickly, eagerly. And now I want to re-read all of Chekhov's perfect short stories and plays. Recommended to Russian literature fans.
October 29, 2013
"میان خدا هست و خدا نیست فاصله ای بس گسترده واقع شده است که فرزانه ی صادق برای گذشتن از آن مشکلی بزرگ دارد. فرد روسی تنها یکی از دو حد افراط یا تفریط را میشناسد؛آنچه در میانه جای گرفته است مورد علاقه او نیست.به سخن دیگر،یا-در کل- هیچ نمی داند یا بسیار کم می داند"
از :چخوف-هانری تروایا-ترجمه علی بهبهانی
از :چخوف-هانری تروایا-ترجمه علی بهبهانی
September 5, 2023
Une biographie remarquable
January 24, 2021
„Nu avea decât o singură dorință, «să stea culcat și să privească-n tavan».”
„Cântecele armonicelor de pe mal sună melancolic, iar oamenii îmbrăcaţi cu cojoace zdrenţuite, nemişcaţi pe şlepurile care vin din sens invers, par încremeniţi într-o durere fără sfârşit. Oraşele de pe Kama sunt cenuşii. Îți lasă impresia că singura ocupaţie a locuitorilor lor e să fabrice nori, plictiseală, garduri ude şi noroi pe străzi.”
„După părerea lui, un om educat nu avea dreptul să-şi plictisească semenii cu afișarea propriilor mizerii.”
„Cântecele armonicelor de pe mal sună melancolic, iar oamenii îmbrăcaţi cu cojoace zdrenţuite, nemişcaţi pe şlepurile care vin din sens invers, par încremeniţi într-o durere fără sfârşit. Oraşele de pe Kama sunt cenuşii. Îți lasă impresia că singura ocupaţie a locuitorilor lor e să fabrice nori, plictiseală, garduri ude şi noroi pe străzi.”
„După părerea lui, un om educat nu avea dreptul să-şi plictisească semenii cu afișarea propriilor mizerii.”
October 22, 2018
لا انكر مقدرة هنري ترويا الفذة على كتابة السير، ولكن كتابه عن دوستويفسكي-إذا قارنا- يتفوق على كتابه عن تشيخوف بمراحل.
January 28, 2015
Chekhov has always been my favorite Russian writer - by a mile - and nothing in Troyat's long and detailed biography dampened my regard for Chekhov the man or Chekhov the writer. So subtle. So full of feeling. And compassion.
The Russia of Chekhov's time (and earlier and perhaps still) was a brutal country. Its climate harsh, its food terrible, its poverty seemingly incurable, its rulers mostly despotic and, in the face of these conditions, the boredom and helplessness and resignation among its people are palpable. Yet the love the Russians have for the motherland is so fierce and sentimental that it just tears them - and you - apart.
This is the stuff of Chekhov's life and work. He is not a man of passion such as Dostoevsky or moralistic such as Tolstoy or a fussy stylist such as Turgenev. He doesn't preach or doesn't even seem to have a point of view; he just brings his readers into the life and events that his characters face in all of their absurdity, their banality and their foolish dreams, and their fleeting moments of happiness and grief and then leaves them to their own devices and the readers to their own conclusions. We weep and wring our hands with his characters. There is not a false note anywhere.
As to biography,Chekhov grew up in poverty with a harsh and religiously fanatic father who terrorized his family verbally and physically. Before the age of five and beyond, Chekhov writes that he woke up every morning wondering if he would get a thrashing that day. His father claimed to love the family and probably, in his own distorted way, did. His mother was loving, conventional, and too weak to defend her children. All of his siblings were gifted; they were close-knit but it fell to Chekhov, the middle child, to support the family. It kept him in near poverty for a good part of his life, despite his later literary success. He was never able to turn his back on his narrow-minded parents and often cruel father or on his wayward and, in some cases, irresponsible brothers. His one sister, unlike most of her brothers, was highly responsible and was completely devoted to Chekhov, to the detriment of her own personal life.
He became a medical doctor out of admiration for a doctor who attended to him when he was very ill. His medical practice and his writing competed for his time. As he was in his personal life, so he was in his professional practice. He could not turn his back on anyone, often treating people when he was ill himself (Russia was always in the throes of some contagious disease) and often caring for people who could not pay. He himself contracted tuberculosis; it killed him at the early age of 44.
He seems to have had many friends. Women loved him and wanted to marry him; Chekhov flirted but kept them at arm's length until he was totally captivated by the actress Olga Knipper, whom he married when he was 40. Olga was in an acting company led by Stanislavsky, whose disciples became so influential in American theater. Chekhov hovered over all the rehearsals, certain that the actors were not getting it right. What Chekhov wanted was something new; no bombast, scant dramatic action; to the actors and director, that seemed static. At first outing, critics and audience were often baffled, Chekhov discouraged, and then came success.
Troyat gives us a full picture of the ups and downs of Chekhov's literary career
He was not an overnight success. His early writings were for the sole purpose of earning a little bit of money. He was fortunate to have been taken up by some wealthy and influential benefactors. He wrote and revised; he was a meticulous writer.
During the whole of the 19th century Tolstoy dominated the Russian literary world. Dostoevsky clashed with him. Turgenev, of the same or almost the same social class, had a love-hate relationship with him but Chekhov, the gentlest and most tolerant of them, mostly got along well with him. Tolstoy was much older than Chekhov (although lived much longer) and Chekhov usually deferred to him, although didn't necessarily agree with him. He admired Tolstoy the novelist but disliked and challenged Tolstoy the moralist. Chekhov, as a man of science, thought Tolstoy's views on science and medicine were ignorant. As a man who had peasant blood flowing through his veins, Chekhov disdained the way Count Tolstoy romanticized peasants and particularly disliked his authoritarian and condemning manner toward them while purporting to support and defend the downtrodden.
When his father died, Troyat tells us that Chekhov wondered how much he owed to his father: was his own religious skepticism, his all-embracing tolerance, his desire for modesty and simplicity in human relations all a reaction against his father's mean-minded bigotry and high-handed authoritarianism? Perhaps. Everything he wrote he experienced or observed in embryo under his father's roof.
In the later part of his life, Chekhov's greatest literary friend and supporter was Gorky. Gorky, the Marxist and revolutionary. Chekhov was never or never could be a Marxist but he did take a stand for Gorky against the sensors. Czar Nicholas II would be overthrown by the Bolsheviks about a decade after Chekhov's death. Chekhov would have been saddened. Not at the demise of a totalitarian regime, but at the brutality of the revolution. Chekhov hoped for transformation into enlightened liberalism through evolution. Slow, perhaps, but steady, and sure. I like to wonder what play he would have written after "The Cherry Orchard."
Troyat's biography of Chekhov does much to illuminate his life and his work and their interconnection.
The Russia of Chekhov's time (and earlier and perhaps still) was a brutal country. Its climate harsh, its food terrible, its poverty seemingly incurable, its rulers mostly despotic and, in the face of these conditions, the boredom and helplessness and resignation among its people are palpable. Yet the love the Russians have for the motherland is so fierce and sentimental that it just tears them - and you - apart.
This is the stuff of Chekhov's life and work. He is not a man of passion such as Dostoevsky or moralistic such as Tolstoy or a fussy stylist such as Turgenev. He doesn't preach or doesn't even seem to have a point of view; he just brings his readers into the life and events that his characters face in all of their absurdity, their banality and their foolish dreams, and their fleeting moments of happiness and grief and then leaves them to their own devices and the readers to their own conclusions. We weep and wring our hands with his characters. There is not a false note anywhere.
As to biography,Chekhov grew up in poverty with a harsh and religiously fanatic father who terrorized his family verbally and physically. Before the age of five and beyond, Chekhov writes that he woke up every morning wondering if he would get a thrashing that day. His father claimed to love the family and probably, in his own distorted way, did. His mother was loving, conventional, and too weak to defend her children. All of his siblings were gifted; they were close-knit but it fell to Chekhov, the middle child, to support the family. It kept him in near poverty for a good part of his life, despite his later literary success. He was never able to turn his back on his narrow-minded parents and often cruel father or on his wayward and, in some cases, irresponsible brothers. His one sister, unlike most of her brothers, was highly responsible and was completely devoted to Chekhov, to the detriment of her own personal life.
He became a medical doctor out of admiration for a doctor who attended to him when he was very ill. His medical practice and his writing competed for his time. As he was in his personal life, so he was in his professional practice. He could not turn his back on anyone, often treating people when he was ill himself (Russia was always in the throes of some contagious disease) and often caring for people who could not pay. He himself contracted tuberculosis; it killed him at the early age of 44.
He seems to have had many friends. Women loved him and wanted to marry him; Chekhov flirted but kept them at arm's length until he was totally captivated by the actress Olga Knipper, whom he married when he was 40. Olga was in an acting company led by Stanislavsky, whose disciples became so influential in American theater. Chekhov hovered over all the rehearsals, certain that the actors were not getting it right. What Chekhov wanted was something new; no bombast, scant dramatic action; to the actors and director, that seemed static. At first outing, critics and audience were often baffled, Chekhov discouraged, and then came success.
Troyat gives us a full picture of the ups and downs of Chekhov's literary career
He was not an overnight success. His early writings were for the sole purpose of earning a little bit of money. He was fortunate to have been taken up by some wealthy and influential benefactors. He wrote and revised; he was a meticulous writer.
During the whole of the 19th century Tolstoy dominated the Russian literary world. Dostoevsky clashed with him. Turgenev, of the same or almost the same social class, had a love-hate relationship with him but Chekhov, the gentlest and most tolerant of them, mostly got along well with him. Tolstoy was much older than Chekhov (although lived much longer) and Chekhov usually deferred to him, although didn't necessarily agree with him. He admired Tolstoy the novelist but disliked and challenged Tolstoy the moralist. Chekhov, as a man of science, thought Tolstoy's views on science and medicine were ignorant. As a man who had peasant blood flowing through his veins, Chekhov disdained the way Count Tolstoy romanticized peasants and particularly disliked his authoritarian and condemning manner toward them while purporting to support and defend the downtrodden.
When his father died, Troyat tells us that Chekhov wondered how much he owed to his father: was his own religious skepticism, his all-embracing tolerance, his desire for modesty and simplicity in human relations all a reaction against his father's mean-minded bigotry and high-handed authoritarianism? Perhaps. Everything he wrote he experienced or observed in embryo under his father's roof.
In the later part of his life, Chekhov's greatest literary friend and supporter was Gorky. Gorky, the Marxist and revolutionary. Chekhov was never or never could be a Marxist but he did take a stand for Gorky against the sensors. Czar Nicholas II would be overthrown by the Bolsheviks about a decade after Chekhov's death. Chekhov would have been saddened. Not at the demise of a totalitarian regime, but at the brutality of the revolution. Chekhov hoped for transformation into enlightened liberalism through evolution. Slow, perhaps, but steady, and sure. I like to wonder what play he would have written after "The Cherry Orchard."
Troyat's biography of Chekhov does much to illuminate his life and his work and their interconnection.
October 3, 2020
Anton Çehov Aşk Üzerine,
Honoré de Balzac Vadideki Zambak, Fyodor Dostoyevski Karamazov Kardeşler,
Jack London Martin Eden aklıma ilk gelenler.
Sanatı sanat yapan kadındır, hayatın günümüz koşulları dahil kadın ve erkeğin hala eşit sartlara sahip olmamasını kabul edersek ya da edebilirsek, göreceğimiz en önemli tespit; etkenlerin sanat yaparken en önemli materyalinin kadın olduğudur.
Halbuki kadın öyle mi?
Bir fırsat verilse neler neler sanata dahil olur, tek gerekli olan fırsat ve saygıdır.
Honoré de Balzac Vadideki Zambak, Fyodor Dostoyevski Karamazov Kardeşler,
Jack London Martin Eden aklıma ilk gelenler.
Sanatı sanat yapan kadındır, hayatın günümüz koşulları dahil kadın ve erkeğin hala eşit sartlara sahip olmamasını kabul edersek ya da edebilirsek, göreceğimiz en önemli tespit; etkenlerin sanat yaparken en önemli materyalinin kadın olduğudur.
Halbuki kadın öyle mi?
Bir fırsat verilse neler neler sanata dahil olur, tek gerekli olan fırsat ve saygıdır.
October 18, 2017
I like biographies that read like a novel and this one did. Good to see that some classic writers (among the many who didn't) achieve fame and success in their lifetime. Troyat particularly narrated Chekhov's decline and death from tuberculosis in a poignant manner.
April 23, 2022
Amazing, sensitive and inspiring.
January 11, 2020
هنري مرة أخرى
صراحة سأنزعج كثيرا أن لم احصل على سيرة دستوفسكي وغوغول بقلمه
عشت مع تشيخوف طوال هذه الفترة.. ولا أنكر اني بكيت عندما مات !.. رائع في كل شيء.
اعتمد على رسائله ومذكراته ومذكرات ورسائل أصحابه وزوجته حتى مذكرات تولستوي وغوركي
تشيخوف يقدم لك الحياة كما هي.. ليس في كتبه فقط وإنما حتى في سيرته!
الحياة بسخريتها ومأساويتها ولا معقوليتها وتقلباتها..
تشيخوف نقي..إلى تلك الدرجة التي جعلت منه انعكاسا للحياة بكلها
عجيب صبره وإصراره على العمل وتواضعه ..استمراره حتى النهاية ..ترحاله وكل شئ فيه .
كان منهجه في الحياة
"في الإنسان كل شيء يجب أن يكون رائعاً: وجهه، وهندامه ، وروحه، وأفكاره."
وقد كان كذلك..
قد وصفه تولستوي بالانسة!😂بسبب رقته ولطفه..
طبعا هناك فرق كبير بين ذاك العجوز الذي لم يبق شيئا إلا وجربه من الدرك الاسفل الى الدرك الاعلى وبين هذه الآنسة الرائعة اللطيفة 😂
قال كوبرين على قبره"هه! انظر اي مصيبة حلت بنا، لم يعد هناك انطوشا" ... شعرت شخصيا بفقدان صديق حينها!
صراحة سأنزعج كثيرا أن لم احصل على سيرة دستوفسكي وغوغول بقلمه
عشت مع تشيخوف طوال هذه الفترة.. ولا أنكر اني بكيت عندما مات !.. رائع في كل شيء.
اعتمد على رسائله ومذكراته ومذكرات ورسائل أصحابه وزوجته حتى مذكرات تولستوي وغوركي
تشيخوف يقدم لك الحياة كما هي.. ليس في كتبه فقط وإنما حتى في سيرته!
الحياة بسخريتها ومأساويتها ولا معقوليتها وتقلباتها..
تشيخوف نقي..إلى تلك الدرجة التي جعلت منه انعكاسا للحياة بكلها
عجيب صبره وإصراره على العمل وتواضعه ..استمراره حتى النهاية ..ترحاله وكل شئ فيه .
كان منهجه في الحياة
"في الإنسان كل شيء يجب أن يكون رائعاً: وجهه، وهندامه ، وروحه، وأفكاره."
وقد كان كذلك..
قد وصفه تولستوي بالانسة!😂بسبب رقته ولطفه..
طبعا هناك فرق كبير بين ذاك العجوز الذي لم يبق شيئا إلا وجربه من الدرك الاسفل الى الدرك الاعلى وبين هذه الآنسة الرائعة اللطيفة 😂
قال كوبرين على قبره"هه! انظر اي مصيبة حلت بنا، لم يعد هناك انطوشا" ... شعرت شخصيا بفقدان صديق حينها!
January 18, 2014
What you get here is a filtering of the letters and Troyat's unbelievable energy. Troyat gets the author moving like a landslide through his life and only a highly significant points do we slow down and empathize. Troyat's ability to portray the concerns and denials of the dying man are trumped only by the time and dedication he has to his family. Playful with the heart, often times breaking them, we rarely get a glimpse of the self proclaimed 'fornicator' in this tight and quick study of Chekhov.
August 14, 2009
Some people may call it too flowery, but my feeling is if I'm going to read a 350+ page biography on a story teller, shouldn't it read like a novel, rather than a textbook? I found this to be an excellent Journey.
August 18, 2020
Not an engrossing biography but it gets the job done. Intriguing to see how much disappointment and insecurity Chekhov had about his writing, even his completed works, even after he'd achieved plenty of recognition throughout Russia.
June 9, 2010
Not my kind of book.i don't like biographies
May 29, 2024
“Living with the idea that one must die is far from pleasant, but living and knowing that one will die before one’s time is utterly ridiculous.”
You could brain a 200-pound Cossack with Henri Troyat’s biography of Tolstoy. The heft and page count of the book fall somewhere between Anna Karenina and War and Peace. It reads, too, like a Tolstoy novel, with a huge cast of characters, interpersonal dramas, war (and peace), and intense explorations of philosophy, politics, religion, etc. I love it. It’s one of the best biographies I ever read. You can find my review here.
Henri Troyat’s biography of Chekhov is quite different. If it doesn’t rise to the level of his book on Tolstoy, well, that is probably inevitable due to the subject matter. Chekhov (the savior of his family and a sort of secular saint) was by all accounts a much less tumultuous personality, and while it would not be right to say that he lived in Tolstoy’s shadow (Chekhov’s short stories stand in their own sunlight), he was not the era-defining figure that the old man of Yasnaya Polyana was. Even so, this is a fine biography of a fine man and a truly great author.
PS: If you want to get to know Chekhov, avoid the plays and stick with the short stories – especially those written in the last ten years of Chekhov’s short life - and the translations of Constance Garnett. It's fashionable to pick on Garnett today, but her translations of Chekhov really are the best.
You could brain a 200-pound Cossack with Henri Troyat’s biography of Tolstoy. The heft and page count of the book fall somewhere between Anna Karenina and War and Peace. It reads, too, like a Tolstoy novel, with a huge cast of characters, interpersonal dramas, war (and peace), and intense explorations of philosophy, politics, religion, etc. I love it. It’s one of the best biographies I ever read. You can find my review here.
Henri Troyat’s biography of Chekhov is quite different. If it doesn’t rise to the level of his book on Tolstoy, well, that is probably inevitable due to the subject matter. Chekhov (the savior of his family and a sort of secular saint) was by all accounts a much less tumultuous personality, and while it would not be right to say that he lived in Tolstoy’s shadow (Chekhov’s short stories stand in their own sunlight), he was not the era-defining figure that the old man of Yasnaya Polyana was. Even so, this is a fine biography of a fine man and a truly great author.
PS: If you want to get to know Chekhov, avoid the plays and stick with the short stories – especially those written in the last ten years of Chekhov’s short life - and the translations of Constance Garnett. It's fashionable to pick on Garnett today, but her translations of Chekhov really are the best.
December 20, 2022
Biografiile au ceva aparte.Tu, ca cititor sa poti patrunde in intreaga viata a unui om,in cele mai neinsemnate sau decisive momente,sa afli povestea din spatele povestii scrise,sa te apropii atat de mult de autorul-personaj,e ceva magic.
Henri Troyat scrie foarte bine,probabil a dus o insemnata munca de documentare pt aceasta biografie,traducerea e si ea la inaltime.
Cehov,un om fara astampar,vesnic pe picior de plecare.Numeroasele calatorii care le intreprinde ii vor furniza materialul din care se va inspira in scrierile sale,nu putine.Aflam ca o contribuție insemnata in dezvoltarea lui personală a avut-o tatăl lui,prin aceea ca i-a servit ca antimodel.Am ales un citat care rezuma conceptia autorului despre viata:
"Intreaga piesa(Pescărușul) e o mărturie a absurdității condiției umane. După părerea autorului, nu exista proiect măreț care, mai devreme sau mai târziu, sa nu fie destinat eșecului. Îți trebuie o energie supraomenească pentru a face punte peste prăpastia care desparte visul de realitate."
Ultimele pagini le citesti cu sufletul sfâșiat.
"Groapa a fost acoperita,disparand sub numeroase jerbe și coroane.Zdrobite de durere, trei femei nu-și puteau lua ochii de la muntele de flori sub care,acum, se odihnea Cehov:mama,sora si sotia lui........ (Mama)-Vezi ce nenorocire ne-a lovit!Antosa nu mai e!
A fost singurul discurs funebru rostit la mormânt. Cehov, care ura emfaza, ar fi apreciat aceasta discreție."
Henri Troyat scrie foarte bine,probabil a dus o insemnata munca de documentare pt aceasta biografie,traducerea e si ea la inaltime.
Cehov,un om fara astampar,vesnic pe picior de plecare.Numeroasele calatorii care le intreprinde ii vor furniza materialul din care se va inspira in scrierile sale,nu putine.Aflam ca o contribuție insemnata in dezvoltarea lui personală a avut-o tatăl lui,prin aceea ca i-a servit ca antimodel.Am ales un citat care rezuma conceptia autorului despre viata:
"Intreaga piesa(Pescărușul) e o mărturie a absurdității condiției umane. După părerea autorului, nu exista proiect măreț care, mai devreme sau mai târziu, sa nu fie destinat eșecului. Îți trebuie o energie supraomenească pentru a face punte peste prăpastia care desparte visul de realitate."
Ultimele pagini le citesti cu sufletul sfâșiat.
"Groapa a fost acoperita,disparand sub numeroase jerbe și coroane.Zdrobite de durere, trei femei nu-și puteau lua ochii de la muntele de flori sub care,acum, se odihnea Cehov:mama,sora si sotia lui........ (Mama)-Vezi ce nenorocire ne-a lovit!Antosa nu mai e!
A fost singurul discurs funebru rostit la mormânt. Cehov, care ura emfaza, ar fi apreciat aceasta discreție."
Read
August 13, 2025إن النار تتقد داخلي بصورة مستوية، شعلة خاملة ناعسة، لاتتقد اشتعالاً أو تزأر، وهذا يفسر لماذا لا انغمس في الكتابة ولماذا لا أقدم على عمل يتسم بالغباء الملفت أو الذكاء الملحوظ. إن ما لدي من العاطفة قليل. —نقل بتصرف.
يقول عنه تولستوي في رسالة له بتاريخ ٤ سبتمبر ١٨٩٥ «إنه يشتعل موهبة وله قلب كبير دون شك، غير أنه مازال يفتقر إلى وجهة نظر محددة بالنسبة للحياة فيما يتراءى لي».
بعد أن انتهيت من قراءة مجلدات أعماله الكاملة، وجدت في سيرته الذاتية مفتاحًا يفسر ما شدّني في قصصه: أن البساطة التي ميزت أسلوبه نابعة من بساطة في شخصه. لم يتخذ موقفًا حتميًّا تجاه الحياة أو البشر، بل اختار الحياد الذي يتيح له رؤية الأمور بصفاء وإن كان ذلك الحياد قد جر عليه بعض العتب.
كان يميل إلى فكر تولستوي ومعجب به إعجابًا شديدًا، لكنه لم يغفل عن عيوبه التي يتجاهلها كثيرون، ومنها رؤيته للفن بوصفه أداة لإصلاح المجتمع وتهذيبه من خلال الكتابة الوعظية. رأى تولستوي أن الفن ينبغي أن يقدّم درسًا أخلاقيًا، لكن تشيخوف اختلف معه، إذ لم يرغب في تقديم المواعظ، بل في تصوير الحياة بأكبر قدر من البساطة، كما هي، وكما يعيشها الناس العاديون.
كان يرغب بأن يكون المسرح مثل الحياة، وأن يكون الفن مرآةً تعكس هذه الحياة دون أطنان من الأحكام المسبقة. لم يكن دوره أن يحاكم الشخصيات، بل أن يصوّر ملامحها وأقوالها وأفعالها بصدق، ثم يترك للقارئ أو المشاهد مساحةً للتأويل والمشاركة في بناء المعنى. ولهذا بدت شخصياته متقلبة، متناقضة أحيانًا، تدفعنا لا إلى إصدار الحكم فحسب، بل إلى محاولة الفهم أيضًا. لقد اتخذ، إن جاز التعبير، موقفًا بعدم اتخاذ موقف، مؤمنًا بأن الحياد والبساطة هما الطريق الأمثل ليكون الفن صادقًا في تصوير البشر والحياة.
يقول عنه تولستوي في رسالة له بتاريخ ٤ سبتمبر ١٨٩٥ «إنه يشتعل موهبة وله قلب كبير دون شك، غير أنه مازال يفتقر إلى وجهة نظر محددة بالنسبة للحياة فيما يتراءى لي».
بعد أن انتهيت من قراءة مجلدات أعماله الكاملة، وجدت في سيرته الذاتية مفتاحًا يفسر ما شدّني في قصصه: أن البساطة التي ميزت أسلوبه نابعة من بساطة في شخصه. لم يتخذ موقفًا حتميًّا تجاه الحياة أو البشر، بل اختار الحياد الذي يتيح له رؤية الأمور بصفاء وإن كان ذلك الحياد قد جر عليه بعض العتب.
كان يميل إلى فكر تولستوي ومعجب به إعجابًا شديدًا، لكنه لم يغفل عن عيوبه التي يتجاهلها كثيرون، ومنها رؤيته للفن بوصفه أداة لإصلاح المجتمع وتهذيبه من خلال الكتابة الوعظية. رأى تولستوي أن الفن ينبغي أن يقدّم درسًا أخلاقيًا، لكن تشيخوف اختلف معه، إذ لم يرغب في تقديم المواعظ، بل في تصوير الحياة بأكبر قدر من البساطة، كما هي، وكما يعيشها الناس العاديون.
كان يرغب بأن يكون المسرح مثل الحياة، وأن يكون الفن مرآةً تعكس هذه الحياة دون أطنان من الأحكام المسبقة. لم يكن دوره أن يحاكم الشخصيات، بل أن يصوّر ملامحها وأقوالها وأفعالها بصدق، ثم يترك للقارئ أو المشاهد مساحةً للتأويل والمشاركة في بناء المعنى. ولهذا بدت شخصياته متقلبة، متناقضة أحيانًا، تدفعنا لا إلى إصدار الحكم فحسب، بل إلى محاولة الفهم أيضًا. لقد اتخذ، إن جاز التعبير، موقفًا بعدم اتخاذ موقف، مؤمنًا بأن الحياد والبساطة هما الطريق الأمثل ليكون الفن صادقًا في تصوير البشر والحياة.
October 19, 2022
The best thing about this biography is that Troyat fills it liberally with quotes from Chekhov's letters, so my advice is: read those. Chekhov, even in translation, towers over Troyat.
The worst thing is that Troyat is seems not to share the sensibility of his subject, or else he would not write patronizingly and even insultingly about the peasants, workers, and servants who populated Chekhov's real world.
The worst thing is that Troyat is seems not to share the sensibility of his subject, or else he would not write patronizingly and even insultingly about the peasants, workers, and servants who populated Chekhov's real world.
January 26, 2026
هانری تروایا یکی از بهترین نویسندگان بیوگرافی است، و کتاب چخوف او یکی از بهترین بیوگرافیهای او.
ترجمهی آقای بهبهانی بسیار سلیس و روان است.
چخوف مردی باهوش و پرتلاش و پرکار بود، زندگی او چندان فراز و نشیب غریب عامهپسندی نداشته که بتوان از آن بیوگرافی مهیجی درآورد.
اما تروایا کتابی شیرین و دلچسب را قلم زد.
ترجمهی آقای بهبهانی بسیار سلیس و روان است.
چخوف مردی باهوش و پرتلاش و پرکار بود، زندگی او چندان فراز و نشیب غریب عامهپسندی نداشته که بتوان از آن بیوگرافی مهیجی درآورد.
اما تروایا کتابی شیرین و دلچسب را قلم زد.
July 13, 2021
I was impressed with the story line, character development as well as this description of of the settings.
November 1, 2021
Viata scriitorului rus Cehov, reconstituita pe baza scrisorilor personale ale acestuia si ale celor care l-au cunoscut.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 6, 2023
En halvtaskig biografi, för att komma från Henri Troyats penna. Får man lust att läsa Tjechov? Javisst!
December 27, 2023
Very thorough. Learned a lot about Chekhov I didn’t know before. My favourite part was the story of his travels across Russia to Sakhalin and around Asia and Europe back.
May 1, 2019
Although tragic at times, the biography reads like an interesting story which depicts the struggles Russian authors had had to undergo to make their mark on the contemporary literary scene of those times. Translation is of a very high quality. A very detailed study of the great author's life and character is evident in successfully impressing upon the reader the picture of writer's genius and humaneness.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews