Lopakhin, it is true, is a merchant, but a decent person in every sense.
A. P. Chekhov
“The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov - a play about a bankrupt noble nest. The owners of the cherry orchard, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya and Leonid Andreevich Gaev, are bankrupt landowners, they are forced to sell the estate at auction in order to pay off their debts. By the will of fate, Lopakhin becomes the new owner.
Who is he - Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin?
Lopakhin himself says this about himself: “... rich, a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, then a man is a man.”

Lopakhin, who had never studied anywhere, is a gifted person; he managed to get out into the world and become a merchant. Unlike other residents and guests of the house, he works a lot and sees the meaning of his life in this. True, Gaev calls him a “fist,” but for some reason he is not ashamed to ask him for a loan. Lopakhin readily gives money to both Gaev and Ranevskaya and, it seems, amuses his pride with this. It is no coincidence that he repeatedly proudly emphasizes that his grandfather and father were serf “slaves” in a house where “they were not even allowed into the kitchen,” and he is now in this house on equal terms with the owners. At the end of the play, he buys this estate, “there is nothing more beautiful in the world!” Thus, he seemed to take revenge on the former owners of the house and Garden for the humiliation of his childhood, when he, “the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, ran here barefoot in the winter.” His desire to “take an ax to the cherry orchard” is a desire to part with the humiliating past (cut it down at the root) and begin new life.
And Lopakhin is capable of great things, on a large scale. He feels the beauty of the land and believes that “living here, we ourselves should truly be giants.” But instead of heroic scope, Lopakhin has to deal with such not very beautiful things as purchasing a garden from its bankrupt owners. And they are ugly because he twice admitted to Ranevskaya (and seemingly sincerely) that he is grateful to her and loves her “like his own... more than his own”; gave her advice on how to save the house and garden so as not to sell, even offered to loan her fifty thousand, and ultimately he bought the entire estate himself. Of course, it would have been sold anyway, but Lopakhin, a “subtle soul,” himself feels some awkwardness of what happened. I wanted to save, but it was as if I destroyed it. Therefore, he says with tears: “Oh, if only this would all pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” We see the inconsistency of Lopakhin's character and actions.
“Eternal student” Petya Trofimov gives Lopakhin two mutually exclusive characteristics: “a predatory beast” and “a subtle, gentle soul.” And, it seems to me, it is impossible to put the conjunction “or” between them. Can we say that Lopakhin is a “beast of prey” in relation to Ranevskaya? Don't think. After all, he is trying as best he can so as not to bring the matter to auction. But Ranevskaya and Gaev didn’t lift a finger to help themselves. Lopakhin wanted to be the savior of the cherry orchard, but he did it in accordance with his merchant understanding. This is salvation in a new way. The value of the cherry orchard is different for Ranevskaya and for Lopakhin: for her it is a family nest, with which many dear memories are associated, for him it is property that can generate income.
At the same time, Lopakhin is no stranger to experiences, some sentimentality, which manifested itself in memories of childhood, in sincere gratitude to Ranevskaya for her attention to him in the past. With his advice, reminders, and offer to give part of the money, he tries to soften the inevitable blow that awaits the owners of the estate. And although Lopakhin is triumphant, unable to hide his joy from the purchase, he still sympathizes with the bankrupt bars. Yes, Lopakhin does not have enough tact to not start work in the garden until the former owners leave, but where does tact come from from an illiterate person who has never been taught good manners anywhere?..
The image of Lopakhin is ambiguous, and therefore interesting. The contradictions of Lopakhin’s character precisely make up the drama of the image.

Lopakhin - “tender soul” or “beast of prey”

Related posts:

1. My life, my youth, my happiness, goodbye! A.P. Chekhov Chekhov, unlike many of his predecessors, does not have a central character around whom he would build...
2. All of Russia is our garden. A.P. Chekhov The action in the play “The Cherry Orchard” takes place in Ukraine, not far from Kharkov. Cherry orchards are quite common here...
3. The estate of landowner Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya. Spring, cherry trees are blooming. But the beautiful garden will soon have to be sold for debts. For the last five years, Ranevskaya and her seventeen-year-old...
4. Language is a spiritual treasury into which people have invested their acquisitions for centuries. No, it's not money, of course. And these are not even precious stones. These are others...
5. I want to live in a large two-story house with large, bright windows overlooking the garden. I want this house to have spacious rooms with high ceilings....
6. According to the writer, the novel is “something more than literary work. This is a living creature, a story about the spiritual world of one woman,” covering forty years of her...
7. SOUL - according to the ancient Ukrainian Magi - the spiritual flesh of a person is alive, which means giving, behavior, activity, love - share. To take place in human nature. Magi...
8. A MOST POETICAL LORD FOR THE WORLD Robert BURNS 1759-1796 “My heart is in the highlands and my soul...” (1789) Scotland is made up of two historical and geographical parts: the Highlands (literally – the highlands) and...

(The image of Lopakhin in A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”)

Lopakhin is unusual and strange; he caused and continues to puzzle many literary critics. In fact, Chekhov's character does not fit into the usual scheme: a rude, uneducated merchant destroys beauty without thinking about what he is doing, caring only about his profits. The situation for that time was typical not only in literature, but also in life. However, if you imagine Lopakhin as such even for a moment, the entire carefully thought-out system collapses. Chekhov's images. Life is more complex than any schemes, and therefore the proposed situation cannot at all be Chekhovian.

Among the Russian merchants, people appeared who clearly did not correspond to the traditional concept of merchants. The duality, inconsistency, and internal instability of these people are vividly conveyed by Chekhov in the image of Lopakhin. Lopakhin's inconsistency is especially acute because the situation is extremely dual.

Ermolai Lopakhin is the son and grandson of a serf. For the rest of his life, the phrase Ranevskaya said to a boy beaten by his father was probably etched in his memory: “Don’t cry, little man, he’ll heal before the wedding. “He feels like an indelible mark on himself from these words: “Man. My father, it’s true, was a man, but here I am in a white vest and yellow shoes. but if you think about it and figure it out, the man is a man. “Lopakhin suffers deeply from this duality. He destroys The Cherry Orchard not only for the sake of profit, and not so much for its sake. There was another reason, much more important than the first - revenge for the past. He destroys the garden, fully aware that it is “an estate better than which there is nothing in the world.” And yet Lopakhin hopes to kill the memory, which, against his will, always shows him that he, Ermolai Lopakhin, is a “man”, and the bankrupt owners of the cherry orchard are “gentlemen”.

With all his might, Lopakhin strives to erase the line separating him from the “gentlemen.” He is the only one who appears on stage with a book. Although he later admits that he didn’t understand anything about it.

Lopakhin has his own social utopia. He very seriously views summer residents as a huge force in the historical process, designed to erase this very line between “peasants” and “gentlemen.” It seems to Lopakhin that by destroying the cherry orchard, he is bringing a better future closer.

Lopakhin has the features of a predatory beast. But money and the power acquired with it (“I can pay for everything!”) crippled not only people like Lopakhin. At the auction, the predator in him awakens, and Lopakhin finds himself at the mercy of the merchant's passion. And it is in excitement that he finds himself the owner of a cherry orchard. And he cuts down this garden even before the departure of its former owners, not paying attention to the persistent requests of Anya and Ranevskaya herself.

But Lopakhin’s tragedy is that he is not aware of his own “bestial” nature. Between his thoughts and actual actions lies the deepest abyss. Two people live and fight in it: one - “with subtle, tender soul”; the other is a “beast of prey.”

To my greatest regret, the winner is most often the predator. However, there is a lot that attracts people in Lopakhino. His monologue is surprising and deafening: “Lord, you gave us huge forests, vast fields, the deepest horizons, and living here, we ourselves must be truly giants. ”

Yes, that's enough! Is this Lopakhin?! It is no coincidence that Ranevskaya is trying to lower Lopakhin’s pathos, to bring him down “from heaven to earth.” Such a “little man” surprises and frightens her. Lopakhin is characterized by ups and downs. His speech can be surprising and emotional. And then there are breakdowns, failures, indicating that there is no need to talk about Lopakhin’s true culture (“Every ugliness has its own decency!”).

Lopakhin has a desire, a real and sincere thirst for spirituality. He cannot live only in the world of profit and cash. But he also doesn’t know how to live differently. Hence his deepest tragedy, his fragility, a strange combination of rudeness and softness, bad manners and intelligence. Lopakhin's tragedy is especially clearly visible in his monologue at the end of the third act. The author's remarks deserve special attention. At first, Lopakhin tells a completely business-like story about the progress of the auction, he is openly happy, even proud of his purchase, then he himself becomes embarrassed. He smiles affectionately after Varya leaves, is gentle with Ranevskaya, and is bitterly ironic towards himself.

“Oh, if only all this would pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change. “And then: “There comes a new landowner, the owner of the cherry orchard!” I can pay for everything!”

That's enough, is that all?

Will Lopakhin ever understand all his guilt before Firs, who is boarded up in his house, before the destroyed cherry orchard, before his homeland?

Lopakhin can be neither a “tender soul” nor a “beast of prey.” These two contradictory qualities coexist in him at the same time. The future does not promise him anything good precisely because of its duality and inconsistency.

19377 people have viewed this page. Register or log in and find out how many people from your school have already copied this essay.

/ Works / Chekhov A.P. / The Cherry Orchard / A gentle soul or a predatory beast?

See also the work "The Cherry Orchard":

We will write an excellent essay according to your order in just 24 hours. A unique essay in a single copy.

Lopakhin - a “tender soul”, a savior or a “predatory beast”?

“The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov is a play about a ruined noble nest. The owners of the cherry orchard, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya and Leonid Andreevich Gaev, are bankrupt landowners, they are forced to sell the estate in order to pay off their debts. Memories of the past, today's life and worries about the future are inevitably connected by the heroes with the fate of the cherry orchard. The cherry orchard in the play symbolizes poetry old life. The fate of the owners seems to be repeated in the fate of their garden. The estate with the cherry orchard is being sold at auction. By the will of fate, Lopakhin becomes the new owner.

Who is he - Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin? Lopakhin himself says this about himself: “... rich, a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, then a man is a man.” Lopakhin, who had never studied anywhere, is a gifted person; he managed to break out among the people and become a merchant. Unlike other residents and guests of the house, he works a lot and sees the meaning of his life in this. True, Gaev calls him a “fist,” but for some reason he is not ashamed to ask him for a loan. Lopakhin readily gives money to both Gaev and Ranevskaya and, it seems, amuses his vanity with this. It is no coincidence that he repeatedly proudly emphasizes that his grandfather and father were serfs “slaves” in a house where “they were not even allowed into the kitchen,” and he is now in this house on equal terms with the owners. At the end of the play, he buys this estate, “which is not more beautiful in the world!” Thus, he seemed to take revenge on the former owners of the house and garden for the humiliation of his childhood, when he, “the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, ran here barefoot in the winter.” His desire to “take an ax to the cherry orchard” is a desire to part with the humiliating past (cut it down at the root) and start a new life.

And he is capable of great things, on a large scale. Lopakhin feels the beauty of the land and believes that “living here, we ourselves should truly be giants.” But instead of heroic scope, Lopakhin has to deal with not very beautiful things, like purchasing a garden from its bankrupt owners. And they are ugly because he twice admitted to Ranevskaya (and seemingly sincerely) that he is grateful to her and loves her “like his own... more than his own”; gave her advice on how to save the house and garden so as not to sell, even offered to loan her fifty thousand, and ultimately he bought the entire estate himself. Of course, it would have been sold anyway, but Lopakhin, a “subtle soul,” himself feels some awkwardness because of what happened. I wanted to save, but it was as if I destroyed it. Therefore, with tears he says: “Oh, if only this would all go away, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” In other words, we see the inconsistency of Lopakhin’s character and actions.

“The Eternal Student” Petya Trofimov gives Lopakhin two mutually exclusive characteristics: “a predatory beast” and “a subtle, gentle soul.” And, it seems to me, you cannot put the conjunction “or” between them. Trofimov defines Lopakhin’s role as a necessary link in the natural development of society, in which people like Ranevskaya and Gaev should become a thing of the past, and people like Lopakhin, active, energetic, will come (and are already coming) to replace them. Can we say that Lopakhin is a “beast of prey” in relation to Ranevskaya? Don't think. After all, he did everything in his power to avoid bringing the matter to auction. But the “klutzes” Ranevskaya and Gaev didn’t lift a finger to help themselves.

Lopakhin wanted to be the savior of the cherry orchard, but he did it in accordance with his merchant understanding. This is salvation anew. The value of the cherry orchard for Ranevskaya and for Lopakhin was different: for her it is a beautiful family nest, with which many dear memories are associated, for him it is property that can give money.

But at the same time, Lopakhin is no stranger to experiences, some sentimentality, which manifested itself in memories of childhood, in sincere gratitude to Ranevskaya for her attention to him in the past. With his advice, reminders, and offer to give part of the money, he is trying to soften the inevitable blow due to bankruptcy. And although Lopakhin is triumphant, unable to hide his joy from the purchase, he still sympathizes with the bankrupt bars. Yes, Lopakhin does not have enough tact not to start work in the garden before the departure of the former owners, but where can he (tact) come from an illiterate person who has never been taught good manners anywhere.

The image of Lopakhin is ambiguous, and therefore interesting. The contradictions of Lopakhin’s character precisely make up the drama of the image.

Who is he, Ermolai Lopakhin, a “beast of prey” or a “tender soul”? (based on A.P. Chekhov’s play “The Cherry Orchard”)

Lopakhin is perhaps the most controversial hero of Chekhov's comedy The Cherry Orchard. In order to understand who Ermolai Lopakhin is, we need to analyze his monologues and replicas of other characters that characterize him.

The main characters “all of their ancestors were serf owners who owned living souls.” Lopakhin recalls that his father and grandfather were not even allowed into the kitchen.

Lyubov Andreevna once did a lot for the son of a serf, and the hero admits that he loves her like his own and more than his own.

The specificity of the play's conflict makes it possible to objectively show the time of the turning point. Lopakhin believes that due to the reluctance to delve into new social relations, the nobility is not able to make their lives happy, rich, and luxurious. Perhaps this is why the conflict develops in anticipation of a predetermined climax. Its date is known to everyone - the auction is scheduled for August 22. But the approaching deadline is felt, for example, in the second act only in Lopakhin’s insistent demands to “finally decide.” The climax occurs in Act 3. The heroes are on the estate, and Gaev and Lopakhin have left for the auction.

Lopakhin is a person who feels able to “bypass those small and illusory things that prevent one from being free and happy.” Thus, the reaction of the arriving Lopakhin to impatient questions shows that his concern about the estate had a personal basis. Conflicting feelings fought within him: gratitude to Ranevskaya for what she did for him, and the desire to buy an estate “there is nothing more beautiful in the world.” The latter triumphed. But the purchase not only pleases the hero, but also discourages him, making him feel how awkward everything turned out. It should be noted that Lopakhin sees the essence of a new life in cutting down the past.

The resolution of the main conflict entails a quick end to the love conflict between Varya and Lopakhin. Varya has a presentiment that nothing will work out, that there will be no wedding, although everyone is talking about it. After all, Lopakhin has no time for love, he is all about business. At the same time, he understands that something is wrong in life, but he cannot figure it out. He sees salvation in work, without which his hands dangle like strangers. He dreams of becoming the new owner of the garden and all of Russia.

Thanks to the generalized interpretation of Lopakhin’s image in the comedy, his loneliness appears not as an everyday inability to explain himself to a girl, but as a tragic manifestation of the eternal quality of the “superfluous person,” the “hero of the time.” Like Pechorin, he escapes from happiness while maintaining freedom. However, Petya Trofimov focuses on the fact that true freedom is not available to Lopakhin, who remains in the grip of a society of rich and poor.

Lopakhin, it is true, is a merchant, but a decent one

human in every sense.

A.P. Chekhov. From letters

“The Cherry Orchard” by A.P. Chekhov is a play about a ruined noble nest. The owners of the cherry orchard, Lyubov Andreevna Ranevskaya and Leonid Andreevich Gaev, are bankrupt landowners, they are forced to sell the estate in order to pay off their debts. Memories of the past, today's life and worries about the future are inevitably connected by the heroes with the fate of the cherry orchard. The cherry orchard in the play symbolizes the poetry of old life. The fate of the owners seems to be repeated in the fate of their garden. The estate with the cherry orchard is being sold at auction. By the will of fate, Lopakhin becomes the new owner.

Who is he - Ermolai Alekseevich Lopakhin? Lopakhin himself says this about himself: “... rich, a lot of money, but if you think about it and figure it out, then he’s a man.” Lopakhin, who had never studied anywhere, is a gifted person; he managed to break out among the people and become a merchant. Unlike other residents and guests of the house, he works a lot and sees the meaning of his life in this. True, Gaev calls him a “fist,” but for some reason he is not ashamed to ask him for a loan. Lopakhin readily gives money to both Gaev and Ranevskaya and, it seems, amuses his vanity with this. It is no coincidence that he repeatedly proudly emphasizes that his grandfather and father were serfs “slaves” in a house where “they were not even allowed into the kitchen,” and he is now in this house on equal terms with the owners. At the end of the play, he buys this estate, “which is not more beautiful in the world!” Thus, he seemed to take revenge on the former owners of the house and garden for the humiliation of his childhood, when he, “the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, ran here barefoot in the winter.” His desire to “take an ax to the cherry orchard” is a desire to part with the humiliating past (cut it down at the root) and start a new life.

And he is capable of great things, on a large scale. Lopakhin feels the beauty of the land and believes that “living here, we ourselves should truly be giants.” But instead of heroic scope, Lopakhin has to deal with not very beautiful things, like purchasing a garden from its bankrupt owners. And they are ugly because he twice admitted to Ranevskaya (and seemingly sincerely) that he is grateful to her and loves her “like his own... more than his own”; gave her advice on how to save the house and garden so as not to sell, even offered to loan her fifty thousand, and in the end he bought the entire estate himself. Of course, it would have been sold anyway, but Lopakhin, a “subtle soul,” himself feels some awkwardness because of what happened. I wanted to save, but it was as if I destroyed it. Therefore, with tears he says: “Oh, if only this would all pass, if only our awkward, unhappy life would somehow change.” In other words, we see the inconsistency of Lopakhin’s character and actions.

“Eternal student” Petya Trofimov gives Lopakhin two mutually exclusive characteristics: “a predatory beast” and “a subtle, gentle soul.” And, it seems to me, you cannot put an “or” conjunction between them. Trofimov defines Lopakhin’s role as a necessary link in the natural development of society, in which people like Ranevskaya and Gaev should become a thing of the past, and people like Lopakhin, active, energetic, will come (and are already coming) to replace them. Can we say that Lopakhin is a “beast of prey” in relation to Ranevskaya? Don't think. After all, he did everything in his power to avoid bringing the matter to auction. But the “klutzes” Ranevskaya and Gaev didn’t lift a finger to help themselves.

Lopakhin wanted to be the savior of the cherry orchard, but he did it in accordance with his merchant understanding. This is salvation in a new way. The value of the cherry orchard for Ranevskaya and for Lopakhin was different: for her it is a beautiful family nest, with which many dear memories are associated, for him it is property that can give money.

But at the same time, Lopakhin is no stranger to experiences, some sentimentality, which manifested itself in memories of childhood, in sincere gratitude to Ranevskaya for her attention to him in the past. With his advice, reminders, and offer to give part of the money, he is trying to soften the inevitable blow due to bankruptcy. And although Lopakhin is triumphant, unable to hide his joy from the purchase, he still sympathizes with the bankrupt bars. Yes, Lopakhin does not have enough tact not to start work in the garden before the departure of the former owners, but where can he (tact) come from an illiterate person who has never been taught good manners anywhere?..

The image of Lopakhin is ambiguous, and therefore interesting. The contradictions of Lopakhin’s character precisely make up the drama of the image.

>Essays on the work The Cherry Orchard

A gentle soul or a cunning beast

When creating his last work, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov paid great attention to the depiction of the main characters and their social significance. One of the main characters in the play “The Cherry Orchard” is Ermolai Lopakhin, a suddenly rich man from the serfs. Ranevskaya knew his father, and Ermolai himself grew up before her eyes. It is not surprising that it is this hero who buys her estate with a cherry orchard. Having become a public figure, he wants to build everything in his own way, that is, to establish his own rules in the world of the indigenous nobles.

In resolution author's intention a very important role is assigned to this particular character, whom Petya Trofimov calls a “beast of prey” and immediately adds that his soul is “tender, subtle.” So, who is Ermolai Lopakhin: a cunning beast or a gentle soul? The inconsistency of his image is especially acutely visible against the background of other characters who either belong to the noble class or to the serfs. But there is a special category of characters in this play, the so-called new generation, striving to eradicate slavery of any form in Russia. This category of people includes Ranevskaya’s daughter, the gentle and pretty Anya, and the “eternal student” Petya Trofimov.

Perhaps Ermolai Lopakhin belongs to their group, people striving for a “new life.” He inherited his love of work from his father and grandfather, former serfs. He achieved everything himself and knows the value of a piece of bread. For him, a cherry orchard is just a piece of land that can be divided into parts and sold or rented out at a profit. Instead of cherries, he would plant a field of poppies, since this is a much more profitable investment. In everything, Lopakhin relies on reason, not feelings.

At the same time, the vulnerable nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev are ready to fight until the last moment for their garden, so long as it is not cut down. For them, the cherry tree itself growing in the garden is of no value. The garden itself is important to them, the shade of its trees, under which they grew, played, and read books. It remains unclear until the end of the work whose truth deserves respect more. As the author shows, Lopakhin is, in fact, very attached to Ranevskaya, as he grew up surrounded by her. He sincerely wants to save the situation and tries to teach these impractical people simple arithmetic. But Ranevskaya cannot be convinced, and Gaev is waiting for help from a rich aunt from Yaroslavl.

Lopakhin himself says about himself that, despite his impressive capital, he remained a “man a man.” He did not study anywhere, he only sees the meaning of life in work, and in winter he ran barefoot. It was a great achievement for him to buy an estate where his father and grandfather were not even allowed into the kitchen, considering them to be slaves. And cutting down cherries with an ax is just a good thing. By destroying the cherry orchard, he seems to be saying goodbye to his humiliating past and starting a new life. Therefore, we can safely say that even a “cunning beast” can have a tender and vulnerable soul.

Composition

“Tender soul or predatory beast”?

In the play by A.P. Chekhov's "The Cherry Orchard" we are talking about sale cherry orchard. The cherry orchard is dying, the owners of which Ranevskaya and Gaev do nothing to save it, they are only moved: “Oh, my dear, my tender, beautiful cherry orchard!”, “... without the cherry orchard I don’t understand my life!” The whole point is that the nobility, accustomed to living idlely, spending, but not making money, failed to adapt to the new conditions. Lyubov Andreevna has long “lost” her entire fortune, her estate has been mortgaged and remortgaged, but, due to habit, she cannot change her wasteful lifestyle. Ranevskaya does not understand that the coming time requires from her constant efforts necessary for material survival. The merchant Ermolai Lopakhin really wants to help Ranvskaya and Gaev.His father was a serf of Ranevskaya’s father and grandfather, and traded in a shop in the village. Now Lopakhin has become rich, but he says with irony about himself that he remains “a peasant, a peasant”: “My dad was a peasant, an idiot, he didn’t understand anything, he didn’t teach me, he only beat me when he was drunk... In essence, I’m the same idiot and idiot. I haven’t studied anything, my handwriting is bad, I write in such a way that people are ashamed of me, like a pig.”

Lopakhin sincerely wants to help Ranevskaya and offers to divide the garden into plots and rent it out.Lopakhin's speech is clear and logical. “Here is my project. Attention please!" - he busily addresses Gaev and Ranevskaya and further develops his project for saving the cherry orchard. You can hear the confidence of a businessman in his tone: “Make up your mind! There is no other way, I swear to you. No and no!" This advice seems to Gaev “rudeness”, a lack of understanding of the beauty and significance of the cherry orchard.

Of course, Lopakhin, realizing that the cherry orchard was dying, that the estate would go under the hammer, found his own way of salvation, but this method is very pragmatic. I can't agree with him. Is this salvation? This is the death of beauty, charm, a place where the soul could enjoy beauty, especially during the flowering period of the garden. Yes, the carelessness and impracticality of the old owners of the cherry orchard are contrasted with Lopakhin’s energy and economic determination. And so Lopakhin becomes the owner of the estate created by the hands of his ancestors. He says triumphantly: “If only my father and grandfather would get up from their graves and look at the whole incident, like their Ermolai, the beaten, illiterate Ermolai, who ran barefoot in the winter, how this same Ermolai bought an estate, the most beautiful of which there is nothing in the world! I bought an estate where my grandfather and father were slaves, where they were not even allowed into the kitchen. I’m dreaming, it’s only imagining it, it’s only seeming...” That’s what Lopakhin is all about! It is a predatory beast that will stop at nothing for profit. A gentle soul with his love for loved ones, desire to help - all this fades into the background. He tries to read, falls asleep over a book. He is not deprived aesthetic feeling and admires the picture of poppies blooming in his fields. Trofimov notes that he has “thin, gentle fingers, like an artist... a subtle, gentle soul.” He is generally a kind and warm-hearted person, which most clearly follows from his attitude towards Ranevskaya. But all these features do not at all change or obscure Lopakhin’s acquisitive, predatory essence. Lopakhin's true role as a representative of capital in the play is clear. This role is characterized by the words of Trofimov: “Just as in the sense of metabolism a predatory beast is needed that eats everything that gets in its way, so you are needed.” The beast of prey wins in it. Just think, what kind of new life can be built by destroying a beautiful cherry orchard and giving the land to dachas? Life and beauty are destroyed. The summer residents will complement what Lopakhin started.