Notoriously a psychological composer of satire and comedy, Anton Chekhov uses The Cherry Orchard as a case study of a collection of ridiculous characters united in their inability to transform their behaviors or identities. Each character appears suspended in his own separate concerns, each so self-centered as to be rendered incapable of saving the estate and the orchard; the characters seem destined to remain forever as they are: Trofimov the student, Gaev the silenced, Firs the slave, Lyubov the gullible, etc. On the contrary, Lopakhin is driven by motivations of action and change: although his father was born a peasant, and his grandfather was a serf before him, Lopakhin managed to overcome poverty and became even richer than the aristocrats who once owned his family. With this virtue he represents the new wealth of Russia in an increasingly democratic and bourgeois society. However, Chekhov reveals that, despite his wealth and appearance, Lopakhin remains painfully tied to his identity as a peasant, static despite his role as a major force throughout the play. Every aspect of his character is shaped by his peasant mentality, including his pessimism about life, desire to succeed in business, and self-righteous attitude toward transcending class positions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayChekhov wastes little time defining Lopakhin as a character trapped in the past. In the first monologue of the play, Lopakhin displays incredible self-awareness and self-irony as he recounts his transformation from a peasant boy beaten by his father into a successful businessman in a three-piece suit and elegant shoes. Despite this triumph, he recalls the expression that it is “a silk purse from a sow's ear” (Act 1, verse 29); that is, he reveals the intrinsic contradiction of his being, namely that it is impossible to obtain something of true quality from poor materials (i.e. an aristocrat from a peasant). To further drive home this point, Lopakhin despairs: “I have read this whole book and have not understood a word of it” (Act 1, lines 34-35). Despite his wealth, Lopakhin lacks the culture and education necessary to truly rise above his peasants, openly dismissing the success of his present and future beyond the realm of mere aesthetics. Interestingly, he makes little effort to hide his shame and dismay about his origins, an attitude that is reflected in this simple, frank and summative style of speech (from which we draw a stark contrast to the obscure references in the other characters' dialogue ). . Aside from a few quips and comments, Lopakhin's nuances repeatedly refer to his father or his status as a peasant, suggesting that he is a character with a metaphorical chip on his shoulder who works hard to prove himself when even he admits that the effort is useless. Lopakhin's fatalistic attitudes towards his identity stand in stark contrast to his optimistic ambitions in business. Unlike his origins, he has power and control over wealth, seeking to distance himself at least aesthetically from his past through intelligent planning. Due to his skill, he could be seen as the would-be hero of the play; he is ready to save the family from debt, generously lending them $50,000 to begin consolidating the orchard land into summer homes. He even identifies with the family and takes their situation personally, especially that of Lyubov, who showed him kindness during.