What+an+ending

As I was reading the final act, I kept repeating to myself, "They must have left Firs behind! He hasn't been sent to the hospital!" And sure enough, Firs walks on stage and explains that they have indeed forgotten him in their mad rush to leave. Firs' last words, "I'll lie down. There's no strength left in you; there's nothing, nothing. Ah, you... job-lot!" These are such strange words to end on, and I actually don't really understand who Firs is talking to. Is he talking to the audience? Is he talking to the characters that left him behind? Also, I love the effect of the string breaking and the sounds of the axes in the cherry orchard. It truly gives the sense that the story has "ended." It is no more, the string has broken, the music is done, the trees are being chopped down. Isn't this an interesting ending? 1204690070

I think that the sound of the string breaking again gives us a much better idea of its meaning. The first time it occurred in act II, it seemed very out of the ordinary. I really didn't understand what it was supposed to represent or how it could be important. In act IV, it does seem to call in end to the story. It shows that the present time is ending and new one is possibly beginning. How does the string also represent the ending of something old or the beginning of something new in act II? Is it just signaling that an end is near? What connection does the breaking of the string have with Firs? It is more obvious at the end of the story that it is connected to his personal end as well as the end of the story. In act II, it says that the silence was broken by Firs' mumbling just before the breaking string sound occurs. The same thing happens in act IV. Firs mumbles something just before the sound is heard. What significance does this have?1204691646

I think the ending was interesting not only because of the repetition of the string breaking, but also because Firs, a minor character, gets the final word in. I think his solilquy was directed towards those who abondoned him. But he isn't just calling the people that left him weak, but he is also calling them weak because they had abondoned the Cherry Orchard, which had been in their family for generations, to a man who was the son of a serf who had previously worked on the estate for Madame Renevsky's forefathers and even possibly for her. I think this is what Firs had alluded to when he had called The Liberation tragic because he may have already realized who was most likely to buy the estate: Lopahkin. Also, I was wondering what is the significance of the concept of sound within the play1204734281

I thought the ending was odd, but the more I think of it, I realize that it is appropriate. Firs was a servant to the house, just as serfs were tied to the land that they worked. He couldn't have left the house because that was where he belonged. It was fitting that he died there because that was where he lived all of his life (although he'll tell you that he never lived a life, it just passed him by). His death reaffirms his purpose. He is tied to the property. I also enjoyed pondering the meaning of the sound of the breaking string. When I looked back to when it first occured, I think I found it's deeper meaning. When it was first heard, all the characters wondered what it was. It was Firs who said that he had heard the same sound previously, right before the Liberation. The sound is present again at Firs death because it is only in death that Firs finds his real "liberation" from his slavery.1204752012

I think the sound of the string breaking has the most symbolic importance. Yes, Firs last words are important and reflect a great deal about Russian society. I think he was primarily talking to himself but just referring to himself in the third person. I think the final sounds of the string breaking and the axes chopping down the trees gives the play a sense of finality. I would have to stray away from the belief that the string breaking signals an end of an era and the beginning of a new one just because this beginning of a new time seems too positive. I don’t think that Chekhov really liked where Russian society was heading and the string breaking signals an end to the old ways but we aren’t given any reason to believe in the possibility of a future or new era. I think that the breaking of the string has a strong connection with Firs because he is the one who connects with the old ways the most. He is somewhat symbolic of the old Russian traditions and when he dies, the string snaps, meaning that not only has the most obvious representative of the old ways has died but also the old traditions themselves. 1204770115

I thought the ending coinciding with the string breaking was significant. It seems to signify the end of something that could have been great. Firs' life, which he feels amounted to nothing, is over, and the cherry orchard, which was once great and brought the family prominence, was gone... the string breaking just shows that it is all done now; something new can now begin. In regards to Firs' last speech and his death, it seemed really sad but reminiscient of his life. Everyone forgot about him; they were all oblivious to the fact that no one had taken care of him. Throughout the play, he was wondering around, making obscure observations that everyone seemed to ignore, and it never seemed to make a difference to anyone if he was or wasn't there. It seems fitting that they would all forget about getting him to the hospital and leave him all alone, more concerned with themselves than with taking care of the crazy old man. His reflection on his life is moving because he tells how useless he feels his life was; he claims that he wishes he could have done more in his life, that he could have had more of a purpose, and it's really sad because what does anyone have in their life if they don't feel they have accomplished what they could have? 1205106142

It's probably insensitive of me, but half of me thought that this incident was hilarious. The other half felt extremely sympathetic for Firs, but I couldn't help but laugh when I found out they had left him behind. He had been a part of the estate for so long, it's almost as if he had blended into the wallpaper or something. I found the breaking string to be symbolic in a number of ways. First because it was the end of something. Firs dies in that last moment, almost connecting to the three fates as they cut the string when a human dies. The stage directions state that it almost sounded as though it came from the sky, heavenly. Another thought that I had on the string was symbolic of something to remind everyone else of when someone has done something wrong. It kind of reminded me of a bell that a judge would ring when a spelling bee contestant would spell a word wrong. The only thing that prompted that was the line before it on page 25. Gayef: "I'll hold my tongue. I'll hold my tongue."1205113958

Ah! I am so excited that there is a topic on this! My nerdy self got really excited when i was reading the ending and trying to interpret it. My favorite part was the string breaking and the chopping of the cherry orchard at the same time. I thought it made so much sense that as that was happening Firs would die (that sounds more morbid than I want it to be). I have said in other topics that i though the orchard and the cable breaking was so much a part of Firs. The cable breaking was a reminder to him of the Liberation. This sound meant to him the end of what his life was all about--serving. And the cherry orchard was of course a part of his life because it is where he worked and was pretty much his whole life. When both of those are broken it only makes sense symbolically to have him die too and essentially be broken. Everything that was the old estate and was an intricate part is gone. I love symbolism! Did any one else catch this?1205358930

So is he talking to himself when Fir speaks his last quote? It would make sense if he were referring to himself, since he was so attached to the orchard. He lost his strength as the cherry orchard was undergoing its demise. It did not have the same power and appeal because it was about to vanish forever. But what about the "Job-lot" part? Maybe isn't talking to himself at that point...I cannot see how that would apply to him, especially because doesn't "Job-lot" refer to more than one individual? That's the way I see it. It was an interesting ending, and it was concise. It came to a defintive close, and there was no way around it. With the destruction of the orchard, so many doors were forever closed, and there really wasn't anything hanging in the air to wonder about. 1205363399

I think it's worth noting that Firs spoke exactly the same way at the time of his death that he did during his life. I mean, I'm going to go ahead and assume that he knew he was laying down for the last time, and that he wasn't going to get up again. I would like to think that he realized that he was dying, and I think the fact that he didn't change his attitude and continued speaking in the same old manner that he always did was the ultimate sign of defeat. The family that he faithfully served for years is gone, the cherry orchard is dying as he is dying, and he therefore doesn't even have the strength to put up any fight about it. He just continues to be the same disgruntled old man that he was throughout the entire play, even to his very last breath. I think this showed how powerless Firs was and how his old way of life was dying with him, which ties into what people were saying before, that his death was symbolic of the death of the "old ways" in Russia. 1205369454

At first I thought that the ending was a really sad way to end the play, but looking more closely at the meaning behind it, it actually seems hopefull. Firs who represents the old ways is passing out of existance, and the rest of the world is moving on. The sound of the string breaking may represent this death as not only the death of Firs, but the symbolic death of the old world order that he stands for. His social class is dying off, as it must to make way for the new age. This is after a few of the characters have decidied to go on with their lives, and move forward. So really although I thought the scene was downright depressing if left the reader with a great deal of hope. 1205384475

Yes this was a very interesting ending szd. But I have to say that I totally called it. I knew they must have left Firs locked up in that house, especially when it was Yasha who claimed he had sent him to the hospital. There had been just too much tension between them for Yasha to have done anything for Firs. And as for firs' last words, I think they symbolize his attitude towards the young and up and coming generation that will now take over things in his absence and are undoubtedly made from a different clothe than firs. He represents the old and dieing russian generation. The last of the surfs. The last of his way of thinking and of his morals. That name "job-lot" seems like jibberish, but just from the tone I picked up from reading it made me think of the words "good for nothing, lazy, whipper snapper." Just words that old people would say to young people to voice their dislike of the new generation, the young. Those last words are important because they embody the change of the younger generation from the older, a definate theme throughout this play.1205385389

ok well this is the definition of job-lot: //n.// Could job-lot almost refer to the estate as "miscellaneous merchandise sold in one lot" with the orchard, the house, the other run down buildings, etc? Could he be calling the estate "a collection of cheap items?" I agree that he could be calling this new generation cheap and useless, but I almost think that it makes a ton more sense when he is refering to the crumbling estate. Like "Ahhhh...this falling apart dump that I am going to die in." Does anyone have an answer to this question? 1205447284
 * 1) Miscellaneous merchandise sold in one lot.
 * 2) A collection of cheap items.

To me it was an interesting and almost darkly humored ending but it was also a sad ending because it represented an end of an era. I know that I have stated this before but it still bears mentioning here since this topic also deals with the end of the book. It has been said by above posters that with Firs death the cycling out of the olds ways is represented but the important thing about this cycling out of the old ways is how it is done and I think that it is deep symbolism for how Chekhov thinks that this forgetting will be done (or at least I think that this type of stuff was put in there by the author to tell us what he sees his society heading towards but I may be looking in too deep). It is done when the old aristocrats have no investment in their old land any more and even though they do show some care in the old ways by asking around for Firs a combination of people who are not interested in the old ways, Yasha, and their own aniety and excitment for their own future soon push the old ways out of their head. And with the group of people who were most invested in the old ways gone then the old ways could be locked up and forgotten while the environment that fostered them was torn apart. user:DGr-c

Yeah, no kidding. Good job with the ending there. I guessed Firs was somehow left out the moment they were unsure if he'd been taken to the hospital. I knew he was still there the moment they check for the 'last time' to make sure no one had been left behind. Such a shame he was left to be buried with the rest of everything that was old, the orchard, the estate, etc. all left forgotten. But I guess it was fitting for old poor First, who just really wanted to be back in the past serving his master happily and willingly. The rest just kinda took off, and although they'd gotten over their misery and grief, I can't help but think it's sad whenever people go and leave behind a chunk of their past, whether it be a live man or a piece of furniture. It's just so sad seeing all the memories and times being shelfed away and forgotten, evermore. 1205470767