Recommended Reference for Chekhov Plays! Kiyoro Sato, "The World of Chekhov's Plays" Summary and Impressions
The World of Chekhov's Plays" by Seiro Sato was published by Chikuma Shobo in 1980.
We have introduced Mr. Seiro Sato many times on this blog, but here is his profile again.
Seiro Sato (November 26, 1920) is a Japanese scholar of Russian literature.
Born in Tokyo, Japan, he graduated from Harbin Institute of Manchuria National University in 1942 and Datong Institute. He became an assistant professor and then a professor at Osaka University's Faculty of Liberal Arts, a professor at the Faculty of Language and Culture in 1975, and a visiting professor at Waseda University in 1980, retiring in 1991. He has written many biographical works on the literary figures of Imperial Russia, especially Chekhov.
Wikipedia.
As previously mentioned on this blog, Mr. Sato is a scholar who has studied Russian literature with a focus on Chekhov, and in addition to this book, he has also written a book entitledChekhov's Life' and 'The World of Chekhov's Art", "The Viewer and the Seeker Turgenev and DostoevskyHe is the author of numerous books, including
Now, as for the features of this book, as the title says, it is a reference book that specifically explains Chekhov's plays. The book is based on his "The World of Chekhov's ArtWhile the book in "The Book of the Year" featured only fiction works, this book does not.
Not only the four major Chekhov plays, "The Seagull," "Uncle Vanya," "The Three Sisters," and "The Cherry Orchard," but also the work "Ivanov" is described in considerable detail.
This is a lively book that takes the time to examine what a play is and what makes it different from a novel. The book is recommended for those interested in stage plays as well as the four major plays.
In the afterword at the end of the book, Mr. Sato's words about Chekhov's plays are mentioned, and they are a bit long, but I would like to introduce them here because they really stuck in my mind.
Recently, two statements particularly caught my attention. Both appeared in the "Asahi Shimbun" newspaper and are by Shuji Terayama and Takeshi Odajima.
In his article "New York Theater News," Terayama says, "In New York, I saw people walking around talking to themselves terribly," and "People are scorching lonely.
Terayama wanted to ask the question, "What is the sensitizing power of theatricality?" If we take up the point of "loneliness," were not Chekhov's characters, written 80 years ago, already "scorchingly lonely"?
How should they live their lives? Isn't this what Chekhov's plays are all about?
His question is certainly based on the reality of pre-revolutionary Russia, but like all great art, it is also an eternal question. It is a question that should be asked again and again, even today, after the rise and fall of several principles, wars, pollution, etc. Chekhov has not answered it. Chekhov has not given an answer. The answer must be given by the audience of each moment.
If we do not listen to the voice of passionate questions coming from the bottom of the play, we will not be able to understand Chekhov's plays. There are too many productions that only "present" the situation and forget to "ask" the question. Terayama criticizes the "happy rebirths of Shakespeare and Chekhov," but there are far more "unhappy rebirths" than "happy rebirths.
Odajima's text is his impression of Shakespeare's translation after he had finished it, in which he says, "Hamlet, Othello, Lear, and Macbeth originally had firm standards of value. Hamlet, Othello, Lear, and Macbeth all had firm standards of value," but in the end, those standards are broken in the final act, and the play falls into chaos.
So far, we can agree with this statement, but what follows could be taken as a glorification of chaos, depending on how you read it. A society without chaos would be rather unhealthy. But a society that makes no effort to crawl out of chaos is also morbid.
Is not the "presentation of chaos" not praise but a question? It is precisely because of this questioning, and not just presentation, that both Shakespeare and Chekhov survived.
What is worrisome is that there are so many people who are content to stay in the chaos and step on the toes. From reality and from the stage, it seems as if we hear the lie, "Whatever will be, will be" and "I don't care what happens.
Unfortunately, the "burning loneliness" of New York City that Terayama saw is not found in this country. Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no thoroughness in this country. It is hindered by naivete. In the words of Futabatei, "moderation is the key to everything.
It is better to be more "solitary" and "individual". True artistic creation is born from the bottom up. It is better to praise the senses and emotions in moderation.
Chekhov said, "The artist passes by the transient, the temporary." He did not ignore the currents, he was not bound by them. He looked at the human world with his eyes "on high. He saw the human world with eyes full of severity and tenderness.
Masao Kume once said that Chekhov was "forever a writer of 'yesterday'". I would like to say. Chekhov is forever a writer of today and tomorrow. He has no sentimentality or attachment to yesterday. What was important to him was "today" and "tomorrow. He saw "the present" and "eternity" at the same time.
Chikuma Shobo, Seiro Sato, The World of Chekhov's Plays, p. 262-263
Some line breaks have been made.
This text is from 1980, but I think these are words that have great meaning for us today.
Mr. Sato said, "Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no thoroughness in this country. It is because of the lack of thoroughness," Sato said. In the words of Futabatei's favorite expression, everything is done in moderation. He said, "We have to be very careful in everything we do.
And, "What bothers me is that there are far too many people who are content to rest on their laurels and step into chaos." He goes on to state, "Isn't it also pathological for a society to have no effort to crawl out of chaos?"
It is easy to say that the world is in trouble, but is it really connected to what we are going to do about it? Are we not just saying, "We are in trouble," and resting on our laurels? Chekhov's plays ask exactly this question," Sato said.
How do we answer this question, already more than 40 years since this book was first published in 1980?
This is perhaps an even more difficult question than it was 40 years ago. Have we progressed or regressed since 40 years ago?
Reading Chekhov, we look not only to the individual mind, but also to the times and society.
I think this is one of the great things about Chekhov.
This book is a bit difficult as an introductory book, but highly recommended for those who want to learn more about Chekhov's plays.
This is "Seiro Sato, "The World of Chekhov's Plays" A recommended reference book for Chekhov's Plays! was "The World of Chekhov's Plays".
Next Article.
Click here for a list of Chekhov's recommended works.
Related Articles
