An Orchard's Beauty Lost

When Anton Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" premiered in 1904, it was presented as a tragedy.

The great Russian playwright said the director -- Constantin Stanislavski, the legendary acting teacher and director of the Moscow Art Theater -- had ruined his play.

Ask University of Arkansas director Kate Frank what "The Cherry Orchard" is, and about all she can tell you concretely is that she agrees with Chekhov.

"We have been striving since the beginning to see this play as a comedy," says Frank of the production that opens tonight at University Theatre. "There's a lightness and a pacing to it that makes it fun." Plus, she adds, it comes with Russian waltzes, magic and jokes. "It's extremely entertaining and extremely palatable. It's not this heavy night of theater."

On the other hand, Frank admits, Chekhov's work takes a bit of getting used to, no matter how it is presented.

"He was an innovator," she says. "His writing wasn't true realism like 'A Doll's House.' Rather, it seems to walk a line toward something that was to come -- absurdism. This mixture of genres was very innovative at the time. It's impressionist, absurd, it borders on farce. What we see is this layered world of characters that seem terribly real but eccentric and absurd. He was a master of depicting the human condition."

The play -- which has its roots in Chekhov's life -- was one of his final works. It speaks metaphorically to the changes happening in Russia at the time, just 40 years after the serfs were freed.

"Since then, there has been this decline of the wealthy, land-owning aristocrats and a rise of the peasant class to working class," Frank says. "What you're seeing is a story of one of these wealthy families at the end of their decline."

That said, she adds, "we didn't really emphasize the bigger metaphor but instead the personal story" of Liubov Ranevsky, who returns to the family estate -- and its cherry orchard -- just before it is to be auctioned off to pay the mortgage.

"It's this sweeping, epic story, but it all happens before the play starts," says Frank. "This is the end, the process of dying and grieving and loss we experience."

But in true Chekhov fashion, each of the characters deflects the pain of the moment with his own coping device -- which is where the singing, dancing, jokes and magic tricks come in. And all of those elements required special work on the part of the cast, which includes both graduate and undergraduate students.

"We had a dialect coach, someone to teach us how to waltz, a magic consultant, an acting workshop on Chekhov, someone talked to us about Russian history and culture, someone had to learn to play the guitar," enumerates Frank. "Chekhov is very tricky -- and very difficult -- for actors.

"For audience members, this play isn't interesting because of its plot development," she adds. "It's the characters and their relationships and the way Chekhov writes it that's so fascinating. Every character is flawed. There is no heroic perfect person.

"Chekhov thought if people looked at how terrible their lives were, it would motivate them to create a better life for the future."

Asked if she can compare "The Cherry Orchard" to something audiences might know better, Frank muses, "I remember when I first read it, it reminded me a bit of [Samuel] Beckett and of [Harold] Pinter. There are things that aren't said but deeply felt, a dangerous undercurrent, but no one ever says it."

And then, she finds the comparison.

"It reminds me of 'Gone With the Wind.' It is an epic story of a poor little rich girl who loses her estate and a way of life that will never return. One of the big differences, though, is our leading character, Liubov, whose name means 'love,' loses her estate because of her personal flaw: squandering money. She follows her heart but is not reasonable and can't come to terms with the facts of her finances."

NAN What's Up on 04/17/2015