'The Proposal' by Anton Chekhov. 1 to ask for the hand of your daughter, Natalya Stepanovna, in marriage. real love, then I'll never get married. ( Shivers). Marriage Proposal by Anton Chekhov Download your complete script from Eldridge Publishing The Marriage Proposal shows how hilarious and ridiculous. Complete text of the one-act play by Anton Chekhov. The fact is, I've come to ask the hand of your daughter, Natalya Stepanovna, in marriage. CHUBUKOV.
|Language:||English, Spanish, German|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov () was a. Russian dramatist and short story writer. He was born at Rostov-a town described by him as 'dirty and dull with. X By Anton Chekhov. 'The Proposal' (originally titled 'A Marriage Proposal') is a one act play, a farce by the Russian short storywriter and dramatist Anton. Download The Marriage Proposal Anton Chekhov; 2. Anton Chekhov (chDkPôf ) A master of short story and one of the modern playwrights.
Chubukov mimics his every word because of his irritation of forgetting his purpose and continues calling him with different names. They continue to argue as Lomov loses his consciousness. Chubukov helps Lomov gain consciousness. As Lomov gain his consciousness, Chubukov is desperate and wants the argument to stop so he told Lomov that Natalia accepts his proposal. Poor Chubukov wanted peace so he ask for champagne trying to stop the two couple from arguing again. Man vs. Society: The idea that Lomov wants to marry Natalia not because love but for economic stability.
The idea of economic stability is not because he wants but it is what the society do which became ones perspective for marriages. My Meadows. My eyebrows are both twitching. Do sit down. My land is worth little to me, but the principle Now let's talk of something else.
My aunt's grandmother gave the land to your father's grandfather's peasants Oh, have you heard? Just think, what a misfortune I've had! My dog Guess, whom you know, has gone lame. Must have got twisted, or bitten by some other dog. I gave Mironov roubles for him. He's a first-rate dog.
What an idea! Of course, Squeezer is young, he may develop a bit, but on points and pedigree he's better than anything that even Volchanetsky has got. Excuse me, Natalya Stepanovna, but you forget that he is overshot, and an overshot always means the dog is a bad hunter! The first time I hear it! He's all right at following, of course, but if you want him to get hold of anything He's old and as ugly as a worn-out cab-horse.
Why, how can you? Guess is a dog; as for Squeezer, well, it's too funny to argue. Anybody you like has a dog as good as Squeezer Twenty-five roubles would be a handsome price to pay for him. First you pretend that the Meadows are yours; now, that Guess is better than Squeezer.
I don't like people who don't say what they mean, because you know perfectly well that Squeezer is a hundred times better than your silly Guess.
Why do you want to say it isn't? You must realize that Squeezer is overshot! It's awful! It's time your Guess was shot, and you compare him with Squeezer! My heart is going to pieces. Be hanged to your Squeezer! His head My heart's bursting! Yes or no? What does it matter?
He's the best dog in the district for all that, and so on.
Really, now? Allow me. Your Guess certainly has his good points. He's pure-bred, firm on his feet, has well-sprung ribs, and all that. But, my dear man, if you want to know the truth, that dog has two defects: he's old and he's short in the muzzle. Let's take the facts. You will remember that on the Marusinsky hunt my Guess ran neck-and-neck with the Count's dog, while your Squeezer was left a whole verst behind.
The dogs are running after a fox, when Squeezer goes and starts worrying a sheep! My dear fellow, I'm very liable to lose my temper, and so, just because of that, let's stop arguing. You started because everybody is always jealous of everybody else's dogs.
Yes, we're all like that! You too, sir, aren't blameless!
You no sooner notice that some dog is better than your Guess than you begin with this, that I remember everything! What do you remember? I can't What sort of a hunter are you? You ought to go and lie on the kitchen oven and catch blackbeetles, not go after foxes! You ought to sit at home with your palpitations, and not go tracking animals. You could go hunting, but you only go to argue with people and interfere with their dogs and so on.
Let's change the subject in case I lose my temper. My late aunt and her husband, from whom, as you know, I inherited my land, always had the greatest respect for your father and your late mother. The Lomovs and the Chubukovs have always had the most friendly, and I might almost say the most affectionate, regard for each other. And, as you know, my land is a near neighbour of yours. You will remember that my Oxen Meadows touch your birchwoods. Instead of talking about the purpose of his visit he tells here about the acquaintance between their two families and the location of their estates.
There is no coherence between what he says initially and what he really wants to talk about, and therefore he gets bogged down in a great communication mess. Excuse my interrupting you.
You say, "my Oxen Meadows. Yes, mine. What are you talking about? Oxen Meadows are ours, not yours! Natalya is in fact not as bizarre a character as Lomov.
When she speaks there is some sense. She is angry and confused but not excited and irritated. She is fighting to establish her position in what she believes and accepts. I can make you a present of them myself, because they're mine!
Your behaviour, Ivan Vassilevitch, is strange, to say the least! Up to this we have always thought of you as a good neighbour, a friend: last year we lent you our threshing-machine, although on that account we had to put off our own threshing till November, but you behave to us as if we were gypsies. Giving me my own land, indeed! No, really, that's not at all neighbourly!
In my opinion, it's even impudent, if you want to know. She expresses her anger but very effectively. First she tells about the illogicality in the offer made by Lomov, then supports her position by the kind of compromises that she used to make for his sake, and finally she points out the unethical implication of his claim.
Compared to her style, Lomov's represents a very primitive style of speech. Chubukov's style is full of wit and humour. Dear one, why yell like that? You won't prove anything by just yelling. I don't want anything of yours, and don't intend to give up what I have.
Why should I? And you know, my beloved, that if you propose to go on arguing about it, I'd much sooner give up the meadows to the peasants than to you. He respects the politeness strategies, selects his expressions effectively and achieves what he wants. Here he first wants to calm down Lomov who is shouting hysterically.
So he uses a friendly tone to produce the first two sentences. Then he wants to clarify his policy as a landed proprietor and does it with the necessary amount of vigour. Finally, he wants to threaten Lomov that, if he makes a wrong claim, he will give the lands to the peasants. He makes a strong conclusion in the utterance "There! Don't excite yourself, my precious one. Allow me. Your Guess certainly has his good points.
He's pure-bred, firm on his feet, has well-sprung ribs, and all that. But, my dear man, if you want to know the truth, that dog has two defects: he's old and he's short in the muzzle. First he politely quietens Lomov in the first sentence. Then he draws the latter's attention.
Next he shows his appreciation of Guess by talking about its breed, strong legs, build and its many other virtues. Then he establishes why he considers that Guess is no longer valuable. There also he attracts Lomov's attention through the phrase "But, my dear man, if you want to know the truth".
Of course, when Lomov gets worked up, he can talk more effectively. He points out the possibility of proving his claim for the Oxen meadows. But what is the use of it? He fluently relates the behaviour of Squeezer during the hunting expedition.
But it has no relevance to the current situation. The effectiveness of all that lies in the relevance of the subjects he talks about to the present situation. As far as his arguments do not support any positive development in the current situation, he appears to be a weak, nervous, illogical speaker. Thus, Chekhov has created their dialogues in a language, which carries out the relevant speech- acts that influence their style of speaking in a way suitable to their roles.
The object of laughter and the sophisticated techniques, which Chekhov has employed in achieving humour, make it a profound exposition of the current social situation. Chekhov's characters, which represent the wealthy land-owning class of 19th century Russia, interact with each other without any laughter.
They meet for a serious purpose, i. But the purpose of their meeting gets lost on two consecutive occasions because Lomov's faith in the values of his society disrupts his approach to the topic of marriage. He learns that the girl and her father like him, but, instead of proposing to marry her and discussing how their marriage should be organised, he goes on to talk about properties, relations, family histories, and pets, draws them into an unnecessary argument, and antagonises both of them.
Finally, Chubukov marries Lomov and Natasha by force before another problem crops up. Thus the play ends in a comic note, just because the couple get together with their father to celebrate their marriage while the dispute over the pets is still continuing.
What Chekhov tries to show is that when human relations are undermined for the sake of a system of values such as family reputation, wealth and political power, people lose their ability to communicate directly. They always hide themselves behind those elements, which are external to their personalities, and behave like puppets and marionettes moving on the strength of those material and social attainments.
In fact Chekhov centres his audience's laughter upon the human frailties caused by this kind of ideology that develops from a society which accords more prominence to power and prestige than personal qualities and genuine human feelings. Based on these facts, the play can be named as a satire of the morals and values of a provincial land-owning community in 19th century Russia. Chekhov has developed the characters in such a way that they effectively support his vision of society.
Chubukov, being the father of a twenty-five year old girl, is more matured than his daughter, Natasha, and her suitor, Lomov. Although he takes Lomov for a joke, he accepts him as his future son-in-law, just because he is wealthy.
He recognises that the latter has many complications in his communication and social demeanour, but he agrees to his idea of marrying her. Natasha herself realises that Lomov is not a pleasant character as a human being.
She just finds marriage to him a way-out from her frustration. Therefore, as a whole, it is clear that in their society, human relationships are reduced to prestige and power. Chekhov levels his critical attack on this particular tendency in that society. The play is noted for its dramatic irony. The kind of hypocrisy that emerges from the characters lends greatly to the irony of the play.
Chubukov addresses Lomov with generous salutations at the beginning of the play, but when he comes back while the dispute over the Oxen meadows is in full swing and joins Natasha in arguing for the sake of their rights, he uses very loathsome kind of language to abuse him. Shan't give him any! Chubukov expresses his anger through very strong utterances such as "You Lomovs have had lunacy in your family, all of you! Lomov himself is not different from Chubukov. You see, Honoured Stepanitch I beg your pardon, Stepan Honouritch I mean, I'm awfully excited, as you will please notice.