Comparative Analysis of A Chekhov and J Oates Stories - Book Report/Review Example

“The Lady with a Dog” – A Comparative Analysis of A. Chekov and Joyce Oates Introduction The “lady with a dog” by Anton Chekov is a short story published in 1899. It speaks about an affair that happens between Dmitri Gurov, a forty-year-old married Russian banker, and a young female protagonist Anna, in Yalta, a seaside resort. Based on this story Joyce Carol Oates wrote a book named “Lady with the Pet Dog” which is based in the 1970’s and occurs in a place called Nantucket. Both the books have similar plots or storylines where we find the lead pair getting involved in an affair outside their marriages and both the stories end where the chief protagonists’ seemingly find true love. However, the two stories vary in the context where each author presents the story from his personal point of view. Oates’ story set in modern times lacks much of the romanticism that can be seen in the Chekov’s version. A lack of depth in character is also noticed in Oates’s version. However, one must also keep in mind the differences in time period in the two stories which create much of the disparity. Like in the famous Anna Karenina, Imperial Russia with its tale of loyalty and true love, form the backdrop of Chekov’s story. Oates’ story which is the modern version, has a backdrop of modern times and settings, in enclosed spaces like in a hotel room or a bathroom. Thus, we find that not only the writing pattern of Chekov and Oates differ in the story, but also markedly different are the time period and social settings. The original story’ A Lady with a Dog’ by Anton Chekov and the later version ‘ The Lady with the Pet Dog’ by Oates, both deal with the theme of relinquished love that is found again. In both the stories, we find the authors narrating the lives of two individuals who are unhappy in their personal lives and marriages. In Chekov’s story, we find that the lead protagonist Dmitri Gurov dislikes his arrogant and intelligent wife and seeks for some meaning in life outside his home in Moscow, in the seaside resort of Yalta. Here he meets Anna Sergeyevna, a rich young woman, who is similarly disappointed in her marriage. Soon they embark on an affair, which though casual at the beginning, becomes serious with time, a relationship which neither of the two is willing to give up. Though both are aware of the societal frownings, they come to a cross road in their lives where they realize they cannot live without each other. Therefore, Gurov and Anna decide to continue with their affair, knowing that they can never come together openly. In Oates’ version we find the entire set up is changed with the lead pair meeting in Nantucket in Massachusetts. Here the story, unlike that of Chekov’s, is narrated from the perspective of the woman lead. Oates’s Anna, the female lead having the same name as that of Chekov’s heroine, falls in love with ‘a stranger’. Here also we find the lead pair finding a new meaning and hope in their lives, after they fall in love with each other. Summary of two critical articles on Chekov and Oates A summary of the article Anton Chekov’s “The Lady with the Pet Dog” by Dana Gioia Gioia in his critical analysis gives us a wonderful insight into the story, its then social circumstances and Chekov’s style of narration that makes this story so appealing to its readers. Chekov wrote his short stories at a very crucial junction point in the history of European literature, when the old literary style was transforming itself into a more modern form. As Gioia points out “Anton Chekhovs late stories mark a pivotal moment in European fiction–the point where nineteenth-century realist conventions of the short story begin their transformation into the modern form. The Russian master, therefore, straddles two traditions. On one side is the anti-Romantic realism of Maupassant with its sharp observation of external social detail and human behavior conveyed within a tightly drawn plot. On the other side is the modern psychological realism of early Joyce in which the action is mostly internal.” Chekov successfully managed to amalgamate both the old and new forms and create a new style of his own. As in this story, we notice Gurov and Anna both have modern outlooks and decide to continue with their affair, which would most certainly be condemned by the then society. They however, can’t manage to shake off the traditional bindings, which we notice when divorce was not thought of an option by either of them. Divorce was something of a taboo in the late eighteenth century Imperial Russia, where the story was set. Chekov was a master in writing short stories and could beautifully portray characters without giving too many details of the surrounding people. In his own words in a letter to Alexander Chekov in 1886, he says, “In displaying the psychology of your characters, minute particulars are essential. God save us from vague generalizations! Be sure not to discuss your heros state of mind. Make it clear from his actions. Nor is it necessary to portray many main characters. Let two people be the center of gravity in your story: he and she” (Chekov, cited in Gioia- Anton Chekov’s “The Lady with the Pet Dog”). This is exactly what he has done in this particular short story, giving Gurov and Anna the centre stage, and letting the reader see Anna only through Gurov’s eyes. Chekov very intelligently develops the story, based on the psychological quotient of his main character Gurov, and letting it grow both emotionally and morally. Gioia tells us that, “As the narrative develops, Chekhov allows the protagonist to change as well–subtly and credibly. There is perhaps no better example of Chekhovs dynamic psychology than Dmitry Gurov…." Gioia also correctly tells us that Chekov paved the way for the modernism of the twentieth century to enter the world of European literature. In the main story, Gioia points out how well Chekov develops the character of Gurov by letting the reader get into his mind and thoughts, and giving us a very unfavorable picture of the lead character without making him an archetype villain. Anna, who is portrayed only through Gurov’s eyes, is presented to the reader as a real person when she repents, immediately after the affair. She, according to Gioia, also appears to be full of contradictions with one part of her wishing to be pure and the other part wanting some sort of exciting adventure in her life. Anna, as Gioia aptly points out, “By the standards of Chekhovs day, she is hardly a model heroine.” When finally both Gurov and Anna realize it is true love they have for each other, they decide to create a “secret world of happiness” for themselves, knowing this is not possible in real life. Gurov’s transformation from a philanderer to someone who starts seeking deeper emotions is beautifully portrayed by Chekov and this where, as Gioia says, is the beauty of the whole story. The ending where the lovers create a secret world may not relate to the students of today as, Gioia correctly points out, the ending does not reach out to a stronger conclusion, but here we have to keep one thing in mind. The setting of the story is in the late nineteenth century when divorce and remarriage were “an impossibility in the Russia of 1899.” A summary of the “The Modern Woman in Joyce Carol Oates The Lady with the Pet Dog’” by Robert Paul This article tries to explore the reasons as to why Oates tried to write a short story based on the Chekov’s “The Lady with a Dog”, and used it as the response to the original one. The reason that the Paul dwells on, is that, Oates tries to break down the stereotype portrayal of women in literary novel as “namely, those of Eve, the sinful seductress, or Mary, the angelic saint” (Paul, p.1). However, as we can see while reading the story, and as Paul also says “Oates does not successfully stray too far from either one” (p. 1). As the author says, the eve stereotype is clear when Anna invites the stranger who approaches her, into her cottage and subsequently into her bed. On the other side, Oates portrays Anna’s guilt on having this affair to be so great, that it almost brings in an aura of sainthood. As Paul remarks “She is a true, enlightened, liberated individual - a savior to womankind.” It is here that the writer asks whether this is a correct portrayal of a modern day liberal woman. The erratic behavior of Anna and her continuous mood swings does not allow her to move out of the stereotype woman role model and according to Paul, reflects women as “as creatures of whimsy and indecisiveness” (p.2).  The writer goes on to explore as what liberation to a modern women means, an escape from an unhappy situation or using the means of divorce only as the last option? What Paul fails to understand, is that having an option of divorce does not make the situation any easier. Liberating oneself from bonds is not an easy task and what Oates’ Anna goes through, is very common, as any woman who has gone through the pain of divorce knows that. It is very easy to advice someone to move out from an unhappy situation, but however modern a woman may be, it is not a simple task to forego all socially ingrained values. It involves a lot of mental struggle and Oates’ Anna exactly shows this. A modern woman, unlike Chekov’s Anna, knows freedom is at hand, but taking a strong decision and moving on to get a new life requires more strength than Chekov’s Anna. It is here where Oates’s Anna scores. She becomes hysterical to the point of committing suicide, yet wins over her devils, and finally comes to terms with herself. It is almost as if she rediscovers herself and then decides to take a strong step and move out with her lover. Comparative Analysis of the two stories: Chekov’s Gurov who is dissatisfied in his marriage, cannot relate to his wife of many years, any more. He perceives her to be “unintelligent, narrow, inelegant, was afraid of her, and did not like to be at home” (Chekov, p.1). He leads a lonely life and has innumerable affairs, none of which survive for long, making him all the more bitter. Gurov has a dismissive attitude towards women in general, and refers to them as “the lower race” (Chekov, p.2), yet he cannot resist them. This apparent contradiction in his character at the beginning makes him appear as a shallow and coarse person to the reader. As Gioia tell us “Chekov presents Gurov in a most unfavorable light emphasizing his manipulation, misogyny, and amorality, and yet the author refuses to simplify his protagonist into a stock villain” (Gioia, Anton Chekov’s “The Lady with the Pet Dog”). Finally, he meets Anna and their relationship takes a new turn. Gurov realizes that all his previous relationships had failed because he gave too much preference over the sexual aspect without focusing on the emotional side. It is in fact through Anna he sees the meaningless existence that he has led so far, and yearns to be free from "frenzied gambling, gluttony, drunkenness, continual talk always about the same things. Useless pursuits…a life grovelling and curtailed, worthless and trivial….as…in a madhouse or a prison"(Chekov, p.11). After they part, Gurov returns to Moscow thinking that he would forget Anna in a month or so. However, he misses Anna and it was as if “Anna Sergeyevna did not visit him in his dreams, but followed him about everywhere like a shadow and haunted him” (Chekov, p. 10). It is then he resolves to go and meet Anna, and they both decide to carry on with their affair. Chekov tells us the story in a simple straightforward way. He does not judge the characters but simply tells us the position Gurov and Anna is in. Chekov gives us the story from the perspective of Gurov and so we see everything from Gurov’s view. Oates uses this structure to build up her story but turns it around, to tell us the story from the perspective of the female lead, Anna. This Anna, in most parts of the story, has a passive role whose activity is based mainly on her mental and emotional states, glimpses of which we get when Oates lets us travel into Anna’s mind. Here, we find Anna is surprised, rather shocked and unhappy to find that her lover has come to Ohio to seek her out. In contrast, Chekov’s Anna though surprised by Gurov’s unexpected visit, expresses no remorse for her affair with him. Oates’s Anna though madly in love with her ‘stranger’, as he has given her some purpose and joy in life, also feels guilty that she is having an affair with him. It is her fate, as she claims that makes her the wife of a man she does not love. Her remorse on her extra marital affair is so great that she becomes hysterical and even contemplates committing suicide. As Paul points out “At the end of the story, we are left with a calm, content, almost delirious main character. One wonders, as her lover does, why she is so happy in the midst of such a difficult situation” (Paul, The Modern Woman in Joyce Carol Oates The Lady with the Pet Dog’). Chekov’s Anna finds true love in the arms of Gurov, while it seems that as if Oates’s Anna rediscovers herself and learns to love her newly found true self, and so is at peace amidst all the turmoil surrounding her. Chekov and Oates both have narrated their stories using the voice of a third person. This is because the writers did not wish the reader to go into too many details involving the other members of the families. If we could see the suffering of Gurov’s wife, if Chekov had allowed the reader to see into the thoughts and feelings of Anna’s husband, then the stories would not have had the same effect. The wonderful portrayal of love lost and found and the innocence of the romance would have been destroyed. The reader would get a feeling of an affair that is sordid and therefore unpleasant. By giving us an insight only into Gurov’s thoughts and feelings through the omniscient narrator, Chekov makes sure that we don’t judge the main characters. We know that Anna is innocent; soft spoken and smart, through Gurov’s eyes, and it makes her almost perfect to the reader. As Gioia says, “Chekhov …presents it in remarkably neutral terms. Conventional morality plays no significant part in the storys conclusions. No one is censured. The couple seem, in fact, to enjoy the authors qualified sympathy. Chekhov, however, does not rail against hypocritical public standards as a reformist like Shaw or Ibsen might. He simply portrays the couples situation” (Gioia, Anton Chekov’s “The Lady with the Pet Dog”). Joyce Oates does the same thing with her version of Anna. Through the omniscient narrator, we delve into the mind of Oates’ Anna, and understand her feelings for her lover. By not letting the reader get an insight into the mind of Anna’s husband, she has saved the female character from being labeled as the wrongdoer and a sinner. The beauty of Chekov’s story lies in his neutral treatment of the characters thus giving an aura of innocence to the entire romance, while Oates’s modern day Anna is beautiful in the sense that after her inner turmoil, she rediscovers herself and emerges out as a stronger woman. Works cited Chekov, A. The Lady With A Dog and Other Stories. Trans. by Constance Garrett. Montana: Kessinger Publishing. 2004. Print. Gioia, D. Anton Chekov’s “The Lady with the Pet Dog.”  Eclectic Literary Review. Fall/Winter 1998. Web. 28th December 2009. http://www.danagioia.net/essays/echekhov.htm Paul, R. The Modern Woman in Joyce Carol Oates’ “The Lady with the Pet Dog.” Adequate Portrayal or Unfair Stereotype? 21st February 2006. Web. 27th December 2009. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/21776/the_modern_woman_in_joyce_carol_oates_pg3.html?cat=38 Read More