Reminiscences of Anton Chekhov Maksim Gorky_ A. I. Kuprin_ and Ivan Alekseevich Bunin 947 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Reminiscences of Anton
Chekhov

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: Reminiscences of Anton Chekhov

Author: Maksim Gorky
Ivan Alekseevich Bunin
A. I. Kuprin

Translator: S. S. Koteliansky
Leonard Woolf

Release date: August 19, 2011 [eBook #37129]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/37129

Credits: Produced by Jana Srna, Bryan Ness and the Online
Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was

produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK
REMINISCENCES OF ANTON CHEKHOV ***

Transcriber's Notes:
Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as
possible, including inconsistencies in spelling and hyphenation.
Some corrections of spelling and punctuation have been made.
They are marked like this in the text. The original text appears
when hovering the cursor over the marked text. A list of
amendments is at the end of the text.

REMINISCENCES OF ANTON CHEKHOV

REMINISCENCES OF
ANTON CHEKHOV

BY
MAXIM GORKY, ALEXANDER KUPRIN
and I. A. BUNIN

TRANSLATED BY
S. S. KOTELIANSKY and LEONARD WOOLF

NEW YORK B. W. HUEBSCH, Inc. MCMXXI

COPYRIGHT, 1921, BY
B. W. HUEBSCH, Inc.

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CONTENTS

FRAGMENTS OF RECOLLECTIONS BY MAXIM GORKY, 1
TO CHEKHOV'S MEMORY BY ALEXANDER KUPRIN, 29
A. P. CHEKHOV BY I. A. BUNIN, 91

ANTON CHEKHOV
FRAGMENTS OF RECOLLECTIONS

BY

MAXIM GORKY

Once he invited me to the village Koutchouk-Koy where he had a tiny strip
of land and a white, two-storied house. There, while showing me his
“estate,” he began to speak with animation: “If I had plenty of money, I
should build a sanatorium here for invalid village teachers. You know, I
would put up a large, bright building—very bright, with large windows and
lofty rooms. I would have a fine library, different musical instruments, bees,
a vegetable garden, an orchard…. There would be lectures on agriculture,
mythology…. Teachers ought to know everything, everything, my dear
fellow.”
He was suddenly silent, coughed, looked at me out of the corners of his
eyes, and smiled that tender, charming smile of his which attracted one so
irresistibly to him and made one listen so attentively to his words.
“Does it bore you to listen to my fantasies? I do love to talk of it…. If
you knew how badly the Russian village needs a nice, sensible, educated
teacher! We ought in Russia to give the teacher particularly good
conditions, and it ought to be done as quickly as possible. We ought to
realize that without a wide education of the people, Russia will collapse,
like a house built of badly baked bricks. A teacher must be an artist, in love

with his calling; but with us he is a journeyman, ill educated, who goes to
the village to teach children as though he were going into exile. He is
starved, crushed, terrorized by the fear of losing his daily bread. But he
ought to be the first man in the village; the peasants ought to recognize him
as a power, worthy of attention and respect; no one should dare to shout at
him or humiliate him personally, as with us every one does—the village
constable, the rich shop-keeper, the priest, the rural police commissioner,
the school guardian, the councilor, and that official who has the title of
school-inspector, but who cares nothing for the improvement of education
and only sees that the circulars of his chiefs are carried out…. It is
ridiculous to pay in farthings the man who has to educate the people. It is
intolerable that he should walk in rags, shiver with cold in damp and
draughty schools, catch cold, and about the age of thirty get laryngitis,
rheumatism, or tuberculosis. We ought to be ashamed of it. Our teacher, for
eight or nine months in the year, lives like a hermit: he has no one to speak
a word to; without company, books, or amusements, he is growing stupid,
and, if he invites his colleagues to visit him, then he becomes politically
suspect—a stupid word with which crafty men frighten fools. All this is
disgusting; it is the mockery of a man who is doing a great and
tremendously important work…. Do you know, whenever I see a teacher, I
feel ashamed for him, for his timidity, and because he is badly dressed … it
seems to me that for the teacher's wretchedness I am myself to blame—I
mean it.”
He was silent, thinking; and then, waving his hand, he said gently: “This
Russia of ours is such an absurd, clumsy country.”
A shadow of sadness crossed his beautiful eyes; little rays of wrinkles
surrounded them and made them look still more meditative. Then, looking
round, he said jestingly: “You see, I have fired off at you a complete leading
article from a radical paper. Come, I'll give you tea to reward your
patience.”
That was characteristic of him, to speak so earnestly, with such warmth
and sincerity, and then suddenly to laugh at himself and his speech. In that
sad and gentle smile one felt the subtle skepticism of the man who knows
the value of words and dreams; and there also flashed in the smile a lovable
modesty and delicate sensitiveness….

We walked back slowly in silence to the house. It was a clear, hot day;
the waves sparkled under the bright rays of the sun; down below one heard
a dog barking joyfully. Chekhov took my arm, coughed, and said slowly: “It
is shameful and sad, but true: there are many men who envy the dogs.”
And he added immediately with a laugh: “To-day I can only make
feeble speeches … It means that I'm getting old.”
I often heard him say: “You know, a teacher has just come here—he's
ill, married … couldn't you do something for him? I have made
arrangements for him for the time being.” Or again: “Listen, Gorky, there is
a teacher here who would like to meet you. He can't go out, he's ill. Won't
you come and see him? Do.” Or: “Look here, the women teachers want
books to be sent to them.”
Sometimes I would find that “teacher” at his house; usually he would be
sitting on the edge of his chair, blushing at the consciousness of his own
awkwardness, in the sweat of his brow picking and choosing his words,
trying to speak smoothly and “educatedly”; or, with the ease of manner of a
person who is morbidly shy, he would concentrate himself upon the effort
not to appear stupid in the eyes of an author, and he would simply belabor
Anton Chekhov with a hail of questions which had never entered his head
until that moment.
Anton Chekhov would listen attentively to the dreary, incoherent
speech; now and again a smile came into his sad eyes, a little wrinkle
appeared on his forehead, and then, in his soft, lusterless voice, he began to
speak simple, clear, homely words, words which somehow or other
immediately made his questioner simple: the teacher stopped trying to be
clever, and therefore immediately became more clever and interesting….
I remember one teacher, a tall, thin man with a yellow, hungry face and
a long, hooked nose which drooped gloomily towards his chin. He sat
opposite Anton Chekhov and, looking fixedly into Chekhov's face with his
black eyes, said in a melancholy bass voice:
“From such impressions of existence within the space of the tutorial
session there comes a psychical conglomeration which crushes every

possibility of an objective attitude towards the surrounding universe. Of
course, the universe is nothing but our presentation of it….”
And he rushed headlong into philosophy, and he moved over its surface
like a drunkard skating on ice.
“Tell me,” Chekhov put in quietly and kindly, “who is that teacher in
your district who beats the children?”
The teacher sprang from his chair and waved his arms indignantly:
“Whom do you mean? Me? Never! Beating?”
He snorted with indignation.
“Don't get excited,” Anton Chekhov went on, smiling reassuringly; “I'm
not speaking of you. But I remember—I read it in the newspapers—there is
some one in your district who beats the children.”
The teacher sat down, wiped his perspiring face, and, with a sigh of
relief, said in his deep bass:—
“It's true … there was such a case … it was Makarov. You know, it's not
surprising. It's cruel, but explicable. He's married … has four children …
his wife is ill … himself consumptive … his salary is 20 roubles, the school
like a cellar, and the teacher has but a single room—under such
circumstances you will give a thrashing to an angel of God for no fault …
and the children—they're far from angels, believe me.”
And the man, who had just been mercilessly belaboring Chekhov with
his store of clever words, suddenly, ominously wagging his hooked nose,
began to speak simple, weighty, clear-cut words, which illuminated, like a
fire, the terrible, accursed truth about the life of the Russian village.
When he said good-bye to his host, the teacher took Chekhov's small,
dry hand with its thin fingers in both his own, and, shaking it, said:—
“I came to you as though I were going to the authorities, in fear and
trembling … I puffed myself out like a turkey-cock … I wanted to show
you that I was no ordinary mortal…. And now I'm leaving you as a nice,
close friend who understands everything…. It's a great thing—to
understand everything! Thank you! I'm taking away with me a pleasant

thought: big men are simpler and more understandable … and nearer in soul
to us fellow men than all those wretches among whom we live…. Good-
bye; I will never forget you.”
His nose quivered, his lips twisted into a good-natured smile, and he
added suddenly:
“To tell the truth, scoundrels too are unhappy—the devil take them.”
When he went out, Chekhov followed him with a glance, smiled, and
said:
“He's a nice fellow…. He won't be a teacher long.”
“Why?”
“They will run him down—whip him off.”
He thought for a bit, and added quietly:
“In Russia an honest man is rather like the chimney-sweep with whom
nurses frighten children.”

I think that in Anton Chekhov's presence every one involuntarily felt in
himself a desire to be simpler, more truthful, more one's self; I often saw
how people cast off the motley finery of bookish phrases, smart words, and
all the other cheap tricks with which a Russian, wishing to figure as a
European, adorns himself, like a savage with shells and fish's teeth. Anton
Chekhov disliked fish's teeth and cock's feathers; anything “brilliant” or
foreign, assumed by a man to make himself look bigger, disturbed him; I
noticed that, whenever he saw any one dressed up in this way, he had a
desire to free him from all that oppressive, useless tinsel and to find
underneath the genuine face and living soul of the person. All his life
Chekhov lived on his own soul; he was always himself, inwardly free, and
he never troubled about what some people expected and others—coarser
people—demanded of Anton Chekhov. He did not like conversations about
deep questions, conversations with which our dear Russians so assiduously
comfort themselves, forgetting that it is ridiculous, and not at all amusing,

to argue about velvet costumes in the future when in the present one has not
even a decent pair of trousers.
Beautifully simple himself, he loved everything simple, genuine,
sincere, and he had a peculiar way of making other people simple.
Once, I remember, three luxuriously dressed ladies came to see him;
they filled his room with the rustle of silk skirts and the smell of strong
scent; they sat down politely opposite their host, pretended that they were
interested in politics, and began “putting questions”:—
“Anton Pavlovitch, what do you think? How will the war end?”
Anton Pavlovitch coughed, thought for a while, and then gently, in a
serious and kindly voice, replied:
“Probably in peace.”
“Well, yes … certainly. But who will win? The Greeks or the Turks?”
“It seems to me that those will win who are the stronger.”
“And who, do you think, are the stronger?” all the ladies asked together.
“Those who are the better fed and the better educated.”
“Ah, how clever,” one of them exclaimed.
“And whom do you like best?” another asked.
Anton Pavlovitch looked at her kindly, and answered with a meek
smile:
“I love candied fruits … don't you?”
“Very much,” the lady exclaimed gayly.
“Especially Abrikossov's,” the second agreed solidly. And the third, half
closing her eyes, added with relish:
“It smells so good.”

And all three began to talk with vivacity, revealing, on the subject of
candied fruit, great erudition and subtle knowledge. It was obvious that they
were happy at not having to strain their minds and pretend to be seriously
interested in Turks and Greeks, to whom up to that moment they had not
given a thought.
When they left, they merrily promised Anton Pavlovitch:
“We will send you some candied fruit.”
“You managed that nicely,” I observed when they had gone.
Anton Pavlovitch laughed quietly and said:
“Every one should speak his own language.”
On another occasion I found at his house a young and prettyish crown
prosecutor. He was standing in front of Chekhov, shaking his curly head,
and speaking briskly:
“In your story, ‘The Conspirator,’ you, Anton Pavlovitch, put before me
a very complex case. If I admit in Denis Grigoriev a criminal and conscious
intention, then I must, without any reservation, bundle him into prison, in
the interests of the community. But he is a savage; he did not realize the
criminality of his act…. I feel pity for him. But suppose I regard him as a
man who acted without understanding, and suppose I yield to my feeling of
pity, how can I guarantee the community that Denis will not again unscrew
the nut in the sleepers and wreck a train? That's the question. What's to be
done?”
He stopped, threw himself back, and fixed an inquiring look on Anton
Pavlovitch's face. His uniform was quite new, and the buttons shone as self-
confidently and dully on his chest as did the little eyes in the pretty, clean,
little face of the youthful enthusiast for justice.
“If I were judge,” said Anton Pavlovitch gravely, “I would acquit
Denis.”
“On what grounds?”

“I would say to him: you, Denis, have not yet ripened into the type of
the deliberate criminal; go—and ripen.”
The lawyer began to laugh, but instantly again became pompously
serious and said:
“No, sir, the question put by you must be answered only in the interests
of the community whose life and property I am called upon to protect.
Denis is a savage, but he is also a criminal—that is the truth.”
“Do you like gramophones?” suddenly asked Anton Pavlovitch in his
soft voice.
“O yes, very much. An amazing invention!” the youth answered gayly.
“And I can't stand gramophones,” Anton Pavlovitch confessed sadly.
“Why?”
“They speak and sing without feeling. Everything seems like a
caricature … dead. Do you like photography?”
It appeared that the lawyer was a passionate lover of photography; he
began at once to speak of it with enthusiasm, completely uninterested, as
Chekhov had subtly and truly noticed, in the gramophone, despite his
admiration for that “amazing invention.” And again I observed how there
looked out of that uniform a living and rather amusing little man, whose
feelings towards life were still those of a puppy hunting.
When Anton Pavlovitch had seen him out, he said sternly:
“They are like pimples on the seat of justice—disposing of the fate of
people.”
And after a short silence:
“Crown prosecutors must be very fond of fishing … especially for little
fish.”

He had the art of revealing everywhere and driving away banality, an art
which is only possible to a man who demands much from life and which
comes from a keen desire to see men simple, beautiful, harmonious.
Banality always found in him a discerning and merciless judge.
Some one told in his presence how the editor of a popular magazine,
who was always talking of the necessity of love and pity, had, for no reason
at all, insulted a railway guard, and how he usually acted with extreme
rudeness towards his inferiors.
“Well,” said Anton Pavlovitch with a gloomy smile, “but isn't he an
aristocrat, an educated gentleman? He studied at the seminary. His father
wore bast shoes, and he wears patent-leather boots.”
And in his tone there was something which at once made the
“aristocrat” trivial and ridiculous.
“He's a very gifted man,” he said of a certain journalist. “He always
writes so nobly, humanely, … lemonadely. Calls his wife a fool in public …
the servants' rooms are damp and the maids constantly get rheumatics.”
“Don't you like N. N., Anton Pavlovitch?”
“Yes, I do—very much. He's a pleasant fellow,” Anton Pavlovitch
agrees, coughing. “He knows everything … reads a lot … he hasn't returned
three of my books … he's absent-minded. To-day he will tell you that you're
a wonderful fellow, and to-morrow he will tell somebody else that you
cheat your servants, and that you have stolen from your mistress's husband
his silk socks … the black ones with the blue stripes.”
Some one in his presence complained of the heaviness and tediousness
of the “serious” sections in thick monthly magazines.
“But you mustn't read those articles,” said Anton Pavlovitch. “They are
friends' literature—written for friends. They are written by Messrs. Red,
Black, and White. One writes an article; the other replies to it; and the third
reconciles the contradictions of the other two. It is like playing whist with a
dummy. Yet none of them asks himself what good it is to the reader.”

Once a plump, healthy, handsome, well-dressed lady came to him and
began to speak à la Chekhov:—
“Life is so boring, Anton Pavlovitch. Everything is so gray: people, the
sea, even the flowers seem to me gray…. And I have no desires … my soul
is in pain … it is like a disease.”
“It is a disease,” said Anton Pavlovitch with conviction, “it is a disease;
in Latin it is called morbus imitatis.”
Fortunately the lady did not seem to know Latin, or, perhaps, she
pretended not to know it.
“Critics are like horse-flies which prevent the horse from plowing,” he
said, smiling his wise smile. “The horse works, all its muscles drawn tight
like the strings on a doublebass, and a fly settles on his flanks and tickles
and buzzes … he has to twitch his skin and swish his tail. And what does
the fly buzz about? It scarcely knows itself; simply because it is restless and
wants to proclaim: ‘Look, I too am living on the earth. See, I can buzz, too,
buzz about anything.’ For twenty-five years I have read criticisms of my
stories, and I don't remember a single remark of any value or one word of
valuable advice. Only once Skabitchevsky wrote something which made an
impression on me … he said I would die in a ditch, drunk.”
Nearly always there was an ironical smile in his gray eyes, but at times
they became cold, sharp, hard; at such times a harder tone sounded in his
soft, sincere voice, and then it appeared that this modest, gentle man, when
he found it necessary, could rouse himself vigorously against a hostile force
and would not yield.
But sometimes, I thought, there was in his attitude towards people a
feeling of hopelessness, almost of cold, resigned despair.
“A Russian is a strange creature,” he said once. “He is like a sieve;
nothing remains in him. In his youth he fills himself greedily with anything
which he comes across, and after thirty years nothing remains but a kind of
gray rubbish…. In order to live well and humanly one must work—work
with love and with faith. But we, we can't do it. An architect, having built a
couple of decent buildings, sits down to play cards, plays all his life, or else
is to be found somewhere behind the scenes of some theatre. A doctor, if he

has a practice, ceases to be interested in science, and reads nothing but The
Medical Journal, and at forty seriously believes that all diseases have their
origin in catarrh. I have never met a single civil servant who had any idea of
the meaning of his work: usually he sits in the metropolis or the chief town
of the province, and writes papers and sends them off to Zmiev or Smorgon
for attention. But that those papers will deprive some one in Zmiev or
Smorgon of freedom of movement—of that the civil servant thinks as little
as an atheist of the tortures of hell. A lawyer who has made a name by a
successful defense ceases to care about justice, and defends only the rights
of property, gambles on the Turf, eats oysters, figures as a connoisseur of all
the arts. An actor, having taken two or three parts tolerably, no longer
troubles to learn his parts, puts on a silk hat, and thinks himself a genius.
Russia is a land of insatiable and lazy people: they eat enormously of nice
things, drink, like to sleep in the day-time, and snore in their sleep. They
marry in order to get their house looked after and keep mistresses in order
to be thought well of in society. Their psychology is that of a dog: when
they are beaten, they whine shrilly and run into their kennels; when petted,
they lie on their backs with their paws in the air and wag their tails.”
Pain and cold contempt sounded in these words. But, though
contemptuous, he felt pity, and, if in his presence you abused any one,
Anton Pavlovitch would immediately defend him.
“Why do you say that? He is an old man … he's seventy.” Or: “But he's
still so young … it's only stupidity.”
And, when he spoke like that, I never saw a sign of aversion in his face.

When a man is young, banality seems only amusing and unimportant, but
little by little it possesses a man; it permeates his brain and blood like
poison or asphyxiating fumes; he becomes like an old, rusty sign-board:
something is painted on it, but what?—You can't make out.
Anton Pavlovitch in his early stories was already able to reveal in the
dim sea of banality its tragic humor; one has only to read his “humorous”
stories with attention to see what a lot of cruel and disgusting things, behind

the humorous words and situations, had been observed by the author with
sorrow and were concealed by him.
He was ingenuously shy; he would not say aloud and openly to people:
“Now do be more decent”; he hoped in vain that they would themselves see
how necessary it was that they should be more decent. He hated everything
banal and foul, and he described the abominations of life in the noble
language of a poet, with the humorist's gentle smile, and behind the
beautiful form of his stories people scarcely noticed the inner meaning, full
of bitter reproach.
The dear public, when it reads his “Daughter of Albion,” laughs and
hardly realizes how abominable is the well-fed squire's mockery of a person
who is lonely and strange to every one and everything. In each of his
humorous stories I hear the quiet, deep sigh of a pure and human heart, the
hopeless sigh of sympathy for men who do not know how to respect human
dignity, who submit without any resistance to mere force, live like fish,
believe in nothing but the necessity of swallowing every day as much thick
soup as possible, and feel nothing but fear that some one, strong and
insolent, will give them a hiding.
No one understood as clearly and finely as Anton Chekhov, the tragedy
of life's trivialities, no one before him showed men with such merciless
truth the terrible and shameful picture of their life in the dim chaos of
bourgeois every-day existence.
His enemy was banality; he fought it all his life long; he ridiculed it,
drawing it with a pointed and unimpassioned pen, finding the mustiness of
banality even where at the first glance everything seemed to be arranged
very nicely, comfortably, and even brilliantly—and banality revenged itself
upon him by a nasty prank, for it saw that his corpse, the corpse of a poet,
was put into a railway truck “For the Conveyance of Oysters.”
That dirty green railway truck seems to me precisely the great,
triumphant laugh of banality over its tired enemy; and all the
“Recollections” in the gutter press are hypocritical sorrow, behind which I
feel the cold and smelly breath of banality, secretly rejoicing over the death
of its enemy.

Reading Anton Chekhov's stories, one feels oneself in a melancholy day of
late autumn, when the air is transparent and the outline of naked trees,
narrow houses, grayish people, is sharp. Everything is strange, lonely,
motionless, helpless. The horizon, blue and empty, melts into the pale sky
and its breath is terribly cold upon the earth which is covered with frozen
mud. The author's mind, like the autumn sun, shows up in hard outline the
monotonous roads, the crooked streets, the little squalid houses in which
tiny, miserable people are stifled by boredom and laziness and fill the
houses with an unintelligible, drowsy bustle. Here anxiously, like a gray
mouse, scurries “The Darling,” the dear, meek woman who loves so
slavishly and who can love so much. You can slap her cheek and she won't
even dare to utter a sigh aloud, the meek slave…. And by her side is Olga of
“The Three Sisters”: she too loves much, and submits with resignation to
the caprices of the dissolute, banal wife of her good-for-nothing brother; the
life of her sisters crumbles before her eyes, she weeps and cannot help any
one in anything, and she has not within her a single live, strong word of
protest against banality.
And here is the lachrymose Ranevskaya and the other owners of “The
Cherry Orchard,” egotistical like children, with the flabbiness of senility.
They missed the right moment for dying; they whine, seeing nothing of
what is going on around them, understanding nothing, parasites without the
power of again taking root in life. The wretched little student, Trofimov,
speaks eloquently of the necessity of working—and does nothing but amuse
himself, out of sheer boredom, with stupid mockery of Varya who works
ceaselessly for the good of the idlers.
Vershinin dreams of how pleasant life will be in three hundred years,
and lives without perceiving that everything around him is falling into ruin
before his eyes; Solyony, from boredom and stupidity, is ready to kill the
pitiable Baron Tousenbach.
There passes before one a long file of men and women, slaves of their
love, of their stupidity and idleness, of their greed for the good things of
life; there walk the slaves of the dark fear of life; they straggle anxiously
along, filling life with incoherent words about the future, feeling that in the
present there is no place for them.

At moments out of the gray mass of them one hears the sound of a shot:
Ivanov or Triepliev has guessed what he ought to do, and has died.
Many of them have nice dreams of how pleasant life will be in two
hundred years, but it occurs to none of them to ask themselves who will
make life pleasant if we only dream.
In front of that dreary, gray crowd of helpless people there passed a
great, wise, and observant man; he looked at all these dreary inhabitants of
his country, and, with a sad smile, with a tone of gentle but deep reproach,
with anguish in his face and in his heart, in a beautiful and sincere voice, he
said to them:
“You live badly, my friends. It is shameful to live like that.”

TO CHEKHOV'S MEMORY
BY

ALEXANDER KUPRIN
He lived among us….

You remember how, in early childhood, after the long summer holidays,
one went back to school. Everything was gray; it was like a barrack; it smelt
of fresh paint and putty; one's school-fellows rough, the authorities unkind.
Still one tried somehow to keep up one's courage, though at moments one
was seized with home-sickness. One was occupied in greeting friends,
struck by changes in faces, deafened by the noise and movement.
But when evening comes and the bustle in the half dark dormitory
ceases, O what an unbearable sadness, what despair possesses one's soul.
One bites one's pillow, suppressing one's sobs, one whispers dear names
and cries, cries with tears that burn, and knows that this sorrow is
unquenchable. It is then that one realizes for the first time all the shattering
horror of two things: the irrevocability of the past and the feeling of
loneliness. It seems as if one would gladly give up all the rest of life, gladly
suffer any tortures, for a single day of that bright, beautiful life which will
never repeat itself. It seems as if one would snatch each kind, caressing
word and enclose it forever in one's memory, as if one would drink into
one's soul, slowly and greedily, drop by drop, every caress. And one is
cruelly tormented by the thought that, through carelessness, in the hurry,

and because time seemed inexhaustible, one had not made the most of each
hour and moment that flashed by in vain.
A child's sorrows are sharp, but will melt in sleep and disappear with the
morning sun. We, grown-up people, do not feel them so passionately, but
we remember longer and grieve more deeply. After Chekhov's funeral,
coming back from the service in the cemetery, one great writer spoke words
that were simple, but full of meaning:
“Now we have buried him, the hopeless keenness of the loss is passing
away. But do you realize, forever, till the end of our days, there will remain
in us a constant, dull, sad, consciousness that Chekhov is not there?”
And now that he is not here, one feels with peculiar pain how precious
was each word of his, each smile, movement, glance, in which shone out his
beautiful, elect, aristocratic soul. One is sorry that one was not always
attentive to those special details, which sometimes more potently and
intimately than great deeds reveal the inner man. One reproaches oneself
that in the fluster of life one has not managed to remember—to write down
much of what is interesting, characteristic and important. And at the same
time one knows that these feelings are shared by all those who were near
him, who loved him truly as a man of incomparable spiritual fineness and
beauty; and with eternal gratitude they will respect his memory, as the
memory of one of the most remarkable of Russian writers.
To the love, to the tender and subtle sorrow of these men, I dedicate
these lines.

Chekhov's cottage in Yalta stood nearly outside the town, right on the white
and dusty Antka road. I do not know who had built it, but it was the most
original building in Yalta. All bright, pure, light, beautifully-proportioned,
built in no definite architectural style whatsoever, with a watch-tower like a
castle, with unexpected gables, with a glass verandah on the ground and an
open terrace above, with scattered windows—both wide and narrow—the
bungalow resembled a building of the modern school, if there were not
obvious in its plan the attentive and original thought, the original, peculiar
taste of an individual. The bungalow stood in the corner of an orchard,

surrounded by a flower-garden. Adjoining the garden, on the side opposite
the road was an old deserted Tartar cemetery, fenced with a low little wall;
always green, still and unpeopled, with modest stones on the graves.
The flower garden was tiny, not at all luxurious, and the fruit orchard
was still very young. There grew in it pears and crab-apples, apricots,
peaches, almonds. During the last year the orchard began to bear fruit,
which caused Anton Pavlovitch much worry and a touching and childish
pleasure. When the time came to gather almonds, they were also gathered in
Chekhov's orchard. They usually lay in a little heap in the window-sill of
the drawing room, and it seemed as if nobody could be cruel enough to take
them, although they were offered.
Anton Pavlovitch did not like it and was even cross when people told
him that his bungalow was too little protected from the dust, which came
from the Antka road, and that the orchard was insufficiently supplied with
water. Without on the whole liking the Crimea, and certainly not Yalta, he
regarded his orchard with a special, zealous love. People saw him
sometimes in the morning, sitting on his heels, carefully coating the stems
of his roses with sulphur or pulling weeds from the flower beds. And what
rejoicing there would be, when in the summer drought there at last began a
rain that filled the spare clay cisterns with water!
But his love was not that of a proprietor, it was something else—a
mightier and wiser consciousness. He would often say, looking at his
orchard with a twinkle in his eye:
“Look, I have planted each tree here and certainly they are dear to me.
But this is of no consequence. Before I came here all this was waste land
and ravines, all covered with stones and thistles. Then I came and turned
this wilderness into a cultivated, beautiful place. Do you know?”—he
would suddenly add with a grave face, in a tone of profound belief—“do
you know that in three or four hundred years all the earth will become a
flourishing garden. And life will then be exceedingly light and
comfortable.”
The thought of the beauty of the coming life, which is expressed so
tenderly, sadly, and charmingly in all his latest works, was in his life also
one of his most intimate, most cherished thoughts. How often must he have

thought of the future happiness of mankind when, in the mornings, alone,
silently, he trimmed his roses, still moist from the dew, or examined
carefully a young sapling, wounded by the wind. And how much there was
in that thought of meek, wise, and humble self-forgetfulness.
No, it was not a thirst for life, a clinging to life coming from the
insatiable human heart, neither was it a greedy curiosity as to what will
come after one's own life, nor an envious jealousy of remote generations. It
was the agony of an exceptionally refined, charming, and sensitive soul,
who suffered beyond measure from banality, coarseness, dreariness,
nothingness, violence, savagery—the whole horror and darkness of modern
everyday existence. And that is why, when towards the end of his life there
came to him immense fame and comparative security, together with the
devoted love of all that was sensitive, talented and honest in Russian
society,—that is why he did not lock himself up in the inaccessibility of
cold greatness nor become a masterful prophet nor shrink into a venomous
and petty hostility against the fame of others. No, the sum of his wide and
hard experience of life, of his sorrows, joys, and disappointments was
expressed in that beautiful, anxious, self-forgetting dream of the coming
happiness of others.
—“How beautiful life will be in three or four hundred years.”
And that is why he looked lovingly after his flower beds, as if he saw in
them the symbol of beauty to come, and watched new paths being laid out
by human intellect and knowledge. He looked with pleasure at new original
buildings and at large, seagoing steamers; he was eagerly interested in every
new invention and was not bored by the company of specialists. With firm
conviction he said that crimes such as murder, theft, and adultery are
decreasing, and have nearly disappeared among the intelligentsia, teachers,
doctors, and authors. He believed that in the future true culture would
ennoble mankind.
Telling of Chekhov's orchard I forgot to mention that there stood in the
middle of it swings and a wooden bench. Both these latter remained from
“Uncle Vanya,” which play the Moscow Art Theatre acted at Yalta,
evidently with the sole purpose of showing the performance to Anton
Pavlovitch who was ill then. Both objects were specially dear to Chekhov

and, pointing to them, he would recollect with gratitude the attention paid
him so kindly by the Art Theatre. It is fitting to say here that these fine
actors, by their exceptionally subtle response to Chekhov's talent and their
friendly devotion to himself, much sweetened his last days.

II

There lived in the yard a tame crane and two dogs. It must be said that
Anton Chekhov loved all animals very much with the exception of cats, for
whom he felt an invincible disgust. He loved dogs specially. His dead
“Kashtanka,” his “Bromide,” and “Quinine,” which he had in Melikhovo,
he remembered and spoke of, as one remembers one's dead friends. “Fine
race, dogs!”—he would say at times with a good-natured smile.
The crane was a pompous, grave bird. He generally mistrusted people,
but had a close friendship with Arseniy, Anton Chekhov's pious servant. He
would run after Arseniy anywhere, in the garden, orchard or yard and would
jump amusingly and wave his wide-open wings, performing a characteristic
crane dance, which always made Anton Pavlovitch laugh.
One dog was called “Tusik,” and the other “Kashtan,” in honor of the
famous “Kashtanka.” “Kashtan” was distinguished in nothing but stupidity
and idleness. In appearance he was fat, smooth and clumsy, of a bright
chocolate color, with senseless yellow eyes. He would bark after “Tusik” at
strangers, but one had only to call him and he would turn on his back and
begin servilely to crawl on the ground. Anton Pavlovitch would give him a
little push with his stick, when he came up fawning, and would say with
mock sternness:
—“Go away, go away, fool…. Leave me alone.”
And would add, turning to his interlocutor, with annoyance, but with
laughter in his eyes:
—“Wouldn't you like me to give you this dog? You can't believe how
stupid he is.”
But it happened once that “Kashtan,” through his stupidity and
clumsiness, got under the wheels of a cab which crushed his leg. The poor

dog came home running on three legs, howling terribly. His hind leg was
crippled, the flesh cut nearly to the bone, bleeding profusely. Anton
Pavlovitch instantly washed his wound with warm water and sublimate,
sprinkled iodoform and put on a bandage. And with what tenderness, how
dexterously and warily his big beautiful fingers touched the torn skin of the
dog, and with what compassionate reproof he soothed the howling
“Kashtan”:
—“Ah, you silly, silly…. How did you do it? Be quiet … you'll be
better … little stupid …”
I have to repeat a commonplace, but there is no doubt that animals and
children were instinctively drawn to Chekhov. Sometimes a girl who was ill
would come to A. P. and bring with her a little orphan girl of three or four,
whom she was bringing up. Between the tiny child and the sad invalid man,
the famous author, was established a peculiar, serious and trusting
friendship. They would sit for a long time on the bench, in the verandah.
Anton Pavlovitch listened with attention and concentration, and she would
whisper to him without ceasing her funny words and tangle her little hands
in his beard.
Chekhov was regarded with a great and heart-felt love by all sorts of
simple people with whom he came into contact—servants, messengers,
porters, beggars, tramps, postmen,—and not only with love, but with subtle
sensitiveness, with concern and with understanding. I cannot help telling
here one story which was told me by a small official of the Russian
Navigation and Trade Company, a downright man, reserved and perfectly
direct in receiving and telling his impressions.
It was autumn. Chekhov, returning from Moscow, had just arrived by
steamer from Sebastopol at Yalta, and had not yet left the deck. It was that
interval of chaos, of shouts and bustle which comes while the gangway is
being put in place. At that chaotic moment the porter, a Tartar, who always
waited on Chekhov, saw him from the distance and managed to climb up on
the steamer sooner than any one else. He found Chekhov's luggage and was
already on the point of carrying it down, when suddenly a rough and fierce-
looking chief mate rushed on him. The man did not confine himself to

obscene language, but in the access of his official anger, he struck the Tartar
on the face.
“And then an unbelievable scene took place,” my friend told me—“the
Tartar threw the luggage on the deck, beat his breast with his fists and, with
wild eyes, was ready to fall on the chief mate, while he shouted in a voice
which rang all over the port:”
—“‘What? Striking me? D'ye think you struck me? It is him—him, that
you struck!’”
“And he pointed his finger at Chekhov. And Chekhov, you know, was
pale, his lips trembled. He came up to the mate and said to him quietly and
distinctly, but with an unusual expression: ‘Are not you ashamed!’ Believe
me, by Jove, if I were that chief mate, I would rather be spat upon twenty
times in the face than hear that ‘are not you ashamed.’ And although the
mate was sufficiently thick-skinned, even he felt it. He bustled about for a
moment, murmured something and disappeared instantly. No more of him
was seen on deck.”

III

Chekhov's study in his Yalta house was not big, about twelve strides long
and six wide, modest, but breathing a peculiar charm. Just opposite the
entrance was a large square window in a frame of yellow colored glass. To
the left of the entrance, by the window, stood a writing table, and behind it
was a small niche, lighted from the ceiling, by a tiny window. In the niche
was a Turkish divan. To the right, in the middle of the wall was a brown
fireplace of Dutch tiles. On the top of the fireplace there is a small hole
where a tile is missing, and in this is a carelessly painted but lovely
landscape of an evening field with hayricks in the distance; the work of
Levitan. Further, in the corner, there is a door, through which is seen Anton
Pavlovitch's bachelor bedroom, a bright, gay room, shining with a certain
virgin cleanliness, whiteness and innocence. The walls of the study are
covered with dark and gold papers, and by the writing table hangs a printed
placard: “You are requested not to smoke.” Immediately by the entrance
door, to the right, there is a book-case with books. On the mantelpiece there

are some bric-a-brac and among them a beautifully made model of a sailing
ship. There are many pretty things made of ivory and wood on the writing
table; models of elephants being in the majority. On the walls hang portraits
of Tolstoy, Grigorovitch, and Turgenev. On a little table with a fan-like
stand are a number of photographs of actors and authors. Heavy dark
curtains fall on both sides of the window. On the floor is a large carpet of
oriental design. This softens all the outlines and darkens the study; yet the
light from the window falls evenly and pleasantly on the writing table. The
room smells of very fine scents of which A. Pavlovitch was very fond.
From the window is seen an open horseshoe-shaped hollow, running down
to the sea, and the sea itself, surrounded by an amphitheatre of houses. On
the left, on the right, and behind, rise mountains in a semi-circle. In the
evenings, when the lights are lit in the hilly environs of Yalta and the lights
and the stars over them are so mixed that you cannot distinguish one from
the other,—then the place reminds one of certain spots in the Caucasus.
This is what always happens—you get to know a man; you have studied
his appearance, bearing, voice and manners, and still you can always recall
his face as it was when you saw it for the first time, completely different
from the present. Thus, after several years of friendship with Anton
Pavlovitch, there is preserved in my memory the Chekhov, whom I saw for
the first time in the public room of the hotel “London” in Odessa. He
seemed to me then tall, lean, but broad in the shoulders, with a somewhat
stern look. Signs of illness were not then noticeable, unless in his walk—
weak, and as if on somewhat bent knees. If I were asked what he was like at
first sight, I should say: “A Zemstvo doctor or a teacher of a provincial
secondary school.” But there was also in him something plain and modest,
something extraordinarily Russian—of the people. In his face, speech and
manners there was also a touch of the Moscow undergraduate's
carelessness. Many people saw that in him, and I among them. But a few
hours later I saw a completely different Chekhov—the Chekhov, whose
face could never be caught by any photograph, who, unfortunately, was not
understood by any painter who drew him. I saw the most beautiful, refined
and spiritual face that I have ever come across in my life.
Many said that Chekhov had blue eyes. It is a mistake, but a mistake
strangely common to all who knew him. His eyes were dark, almost brown,
and the iris of his right eye was considerably brighter, which gave A. P.'s

look, at certain moments, an expression of absent-mindedness. His eyelids
hung rather heavy upon his eyes, as is so often observed in artists, hunters
and sailors, and all those who concentrate their gaze. Owing to his pince-
nez and his manner of looking through the bottom of his glasses, with his
head somewhat tilted upwards, Anton Pavlovitch's face often seemed stern.
But one ought to have seen Chekhov at certain moments (rare, alas, during
the last years) when gayety possessed him, and when with a quick
movement of the hand, he threw off his glasses and swung his chair and
burst into gay, sincere and deep laughter. Then his eyes became narrow and
bright, with good-natured little wrinkles at the corners, and he reminded one
then of that youthful portrait in which he is seen as a beardless boy, smiling,
short-sighted and naïve, looking rather sideways. And—strange though it is
—each time that I look at that photograph, I cannot rid myself of the
thought that Chekhov's eyes were really blue.
Looking at Chekhov one noticed his forehead, which was wide, white
and pure, and beautifully shaped; two thoughtful folds came between the
eyebrows, by the bridge of the nose, two vertical melancholy folds.
Chekhov's ears were large and not shapely, but such sensible, intelligent
ears I have seen only in one other man—Tolstoy.
Once in the summer, availing myself of A. P.'s good humor, I took
several photographs of him with a little camera. Unfortunately the best of
them and those most like him turned out very pale, owing to the weak light
of the study. Of the others, which were more successful, A. P. said as he
looked at them:
“Well, you know, it is not me but some Frenchman.”
I remember now very vividly the grip of his large, dry and hot hand,—a
grip, always strong and manly but at the same time reserved, as if it were
consciously concealing something. I also visualize now his handwriting:
thin, with extremely fine strokes, careless at first sight and inelegant, but,
when you look closer, it appears very distinct, tender, fine and
characteristic, as everything else about him.

IV

A. P. used to get up, in the summer at least, very early. None even of his
most intimate friends saw him carelessly dressed, nor did he approve of
lazy habits, like wearing slippers, dressing gowns or light jackets. At eight
or nine he was already pacing his study or at his writing table, invariably
impeccably and neatly dressed.
Evidently, his best time for work was in the morning before lunch,
although nobody ever managed to find him writing: in this respect he was
extraordinarily reserved and shy. All the same, on nice warm mornings he
could be seen sitting on a slope behind the house, in the cosiest part of the
place, where oleanders stood in tubs along the walls, and where he had
planted a cypress. There he sat sometimes for an hour or longer, alone,
without stirring, with his hands on his knees, looking in front of him at the
sea.
About midday and later visitors began to fill the house. Girls stood for
hours at the iron railings, separating the bungalow from the road, with open
mouths, in white felt hats. The most diverse people came to Chekhov:
scholars, authors, Zemstvo workers, doctors, military, painters, admirers of
both sexes, professors, society men and women, senators, priests, actors—
and God knows who else. Often he was asked to give advice or help and
still more often to give his opinion upon manuscripts. Casual newspaper
reporters and people who were merely inquisitive would appear; also
people who came to him with the sole purpose of “directing the big, but
erring talent to the proper, ideal side.” Beggars came—genuine and sham.
These never met with a refusal. I do not think it right, myself, to mention
private cases, but I know for certain that Chekhov's generosity towards
students of both sexes, was immeasurably beyond what his modest means
would allow.
People came to him from all strata of society, of all camps, of all shades.
Notwithstanding the worry of so continuous a stream of visitors, there was
something attractive in it to Chekhov. He got first-hand knowledge of
everything that was going on at any given moment in Russia. How mistaken
were those who wrote or supposed that he was a man indifferent to public
interests, to the whirling life of the intelligentsia, and to the burning
questions of his time! He watched everything carefully, and thoughtfully.
He was tormented and distressed by all the things which tormented the

minds of the best Russians. One had only to see how in those terrible times,
when the absurd, dark, evil phenomena of our public life were discussed in
his presence, he knitted his thick eyebrows, and how martyred his face
looked, and what a deep sorrow shone in his beautiful eyes.
It is fitting to mention here one fact which, in my opinion, superbly
illustrates Chekhov's attitude to the stupidities of Russian life. Many know
that he resigned the rank of an honorary member of the Academy; the
motives of his resignation are known; but very few have read his letter to
the Academy,—a splendid letter, written with a simple and noble dignity,
and the restrained indignation of a great soul.

To the August President of the Academy
25 August, 1902
Yalta.
Your Imperial Highness,
August President!
In December of last year I received a notice of the election of
A. M. Pyeshkov (Maxim Gorky) as an honorary academician, and I
took the first opportunity of seeing A. M. Pyeshkov, who was then in
Crimea. I was the first to bring him news of his election and I was the
first to congratulate him. Some time later, it was announced in the
newspapers that, in view of proceedings according to Art. 1035 being
instituted against Pyeshkov for his political views, his election was
cancelled. It was expressly stated that this act came from the Academy
of Sciences; and since I am an honorary academician, I also am partly
responsible for this act. I have congratulated him heartily on becoming
an academician and I consider his election cancelled—such a
contradiction does not agree with my conscience, I cannot reconcile
my conscience to it. The study of Art. 1035 has explained nothing to
me. And after long deliberation I can only come to one decision, which
is extremely painful and regrettable to me, and that is to ask most
respectfully to be relieved of the rank of honorary academician. With a
feeling of deepest respect I have the honor to remain

Your most devoted
Anton Chekhov.

Queer—to what an extent people misunderstood Chekhov! He, the
“incorrigible pessimist,” as he was labelled,—never tired of hoping for a
bright future, never ceased to believe in the invisible but persistent and
fruitful work of the best forces of our country. Which of his friends does not
remember the favorite phrase, which he so often, sometimes so
incongruously and unexpectedly, uttered in a tone of assurance:
—“Look here, don't you see? There is sure to be a constitution in Russia
in ten years time.”
Yes, even in that there sounds the motif of the joyous future which is
awaiting mankind; the motif that was audible in all the work of his last
years.

The truth must be told: by no means all visitors spared A. P.'s time and
nerves, and some of them were quite merciless. I remember one striking,
and almost incredible instance of the banality and indelicacy which could
be displayed by a man of the so-called artistic power.
It was a pleasant, cool and windless summer morning. A. P. was in an
unusually light and cheerful mood. Suddenly there appeared as from the
blue a stout gentleman (who subsequently turned out to be an architect),
who sent his card to Chekhov and asked for an interview. A. P. received
him. The architect came in, introduced himself, and, without taking any
notice of the placard “You are requested not to smoke,” without asking any
permission, lit a huge stinking Riga cigar. Then, after paying, as was
inevitable, a few stone-heavy compliments to his host, he began on the
business which brought him here.
The business consisted in the fact that the architect's little son, a school
boy of the third form, was running in the streets the other day and from a
habit peculiar to boys, whilst running, touched with his hand anything he
came across: lamp-posts, or posts or fences. At last he managed to push his
hand into a barbed wire fence and thus scratched his palm. “You see now,

my worthy A. P.,”—the architect concluded his tale, “I shall very much like
you to write a letter about it in the newspapers. It is lucky that Kolya (his
boy) got off with a scratch, but it's only a chance. He might have cut an
artery—what would have happened then?” “Yes, it's a nuisance,” Chekhov
answered, “but, unfortunately, I cannot be of any use to you. I do not write,
nor have ever written, letters in the newspapers. I only write stories.” “So
much the better, so much the better! Put it in a story”—the architect was
delighted. “Just put the name of the landlord in full letters. You may even
put my own name, I do not object to it…. Still … it would be best if you
only put my initials, not the full name…. There are only two genuine
authors left in Russia, you and Mr. P.” (and the architect gave the name of a
notorious literary tailor).
I am not able to repeat even a hundredth part of the boring
commonplaces which the injured architect managed to speak, since he made
the interview last until he finished the cigar to the end, and the study had to
be aired for a long time to get rid of the smell. But when at last he left, A. P.
came out into the garden completely upset with red spots on his cheeks. His
voice trembled, when he turned reproachfully to his sister Marie and to a
friend who sat on the bench:
“Could you not shield me from that man? You should have sent word
that I was needed somewhere. He has tortured me!”
I also remember,—and this I am sorry to say was partly my fault—how
a certain self-assured general came to him to express his appreciation as a
reader, and, probably, desiring to give Chekhov pleasure, he began, with his
legs spread open and the fists of his turned-out hand leaning on them, to
vilify a young author, whose great popularity was then only beginning to
grow. And Chekhov, at once, shrank into himself, and sat all the time with
his eyes cast down, coldly, without saying a single word. And only from the
quick reproachful look, which he cast at my friend, who had introduced that
general, did he show what pain he caused.
Just as shyly and coldly he regarded praises lavished on him. He would
retire into his niche, on the divan, his eyelids trembled, slowly fell and were
not again raised, and his face became motionless and gloomy. Sometimes,
when immoderate raptures came from some one he knew, he would try to

turn the conversation into a joke, and give it a different direction. He would
suddenly say, without rhyme or reason, with a light little laugh:
—“I like reading what the Odessa reporters write about me.”
“What is that?”
“It is very funny—all lies. Last spring one of them appeared in my
hotel. He asked for an interview. And I had no time for it. So I said: ‘Excuse
me but I am busy now. But write whatever you like; it is of no consequence
to me.’ Well, he did write. It drove me into a fever.”
And once with a most serious face he said:
—“You know, in Yalta every cabman knows me. They say: ‘O,
Chekhov, that man, the reader? I know him.’ For some reason they call me
reader. Perhaps they think that I read psalm-services for the dead? You, old
fellow, ought to ask a cabman what my occupation is….”

V

At one o'clock Chekhov dined downstairs, in a cool bright dining-room,
and there was nearly always a guest at dinner. It was difficult not to yield to
the fascination of that simple, kind, cordial family. One felt constant
solicitude and love, not expressed with a single high-sounding word,—an
amazing amount of refinement and attention, which never, as if on purpose,
got beyond the limits of ordinary, everyday relations. One always noticed a
truly Chekhovian fear of everything high-flown, insincere, or showy. In that
family one felt very much at one's ease, light and warm, and I perfectly
understand a certain author who said that he was in love with all the
Chekhovs at the same time.
Anton Pavlovitch ate exceedingly little and did not like to sit at table,
but usually passed from the window to the door and back. Often after
dinner, staying behind with some one in the dining-room, Yevguenia
Yakovlevna (A. P.'s mother) said quietly with anxiety in her voice:
“Again Antosha ate nothing at dinner.”

He was very hospitable and loved it when people stayed to dinner, and
he knew how to treat guests in his own peculiar way, simply and heartily.
He would say, standing behind one's chair:
—“Listen, have some vodka. When I was young and healthy I loved it. I
would pick mushrooms for a whole morning, get tired out, hardly able to
reach home, and before lunch I would have two or three thimblefuls.
Wonderful!…”
After dinner he had tea upstairs, on the open verandah, or in his study,
or he would come down into the garden and sit there on the bench, in his
overcoat, with a cane, pushing his soft black hat down to his very eyes and
looking out under its brim with screwed up eyes.
These hours were the most crowded. There were constant rings on the
telephone, asking if Anton Chekhov could be seen; and perpetual visitors.
Strangers also came, sending in their cards and asking for help, for
autographs or books. Then queer things happened.
One “Tambov squire,” as Chekhov christened him, came to him for
medical advice. In vain did Anton Pavlovitch answer him, that he had given
up medical practice long ago and that he was behind the times in medicine.
In vain did he recommend a more experienced physician,—the “Tambov
squire” persisted: no doctor would he trust but Chekhov. Willy-nilly he had
to give a few trifling, perfectly innocent pieces of advice. On taking leave
the “Tambov squire” put on the table two gold coins and, in spite of all
Chekhov's persuasion, he would not agree to take them back. Anton
Pavlovitch had to give way. He said that as he neither wished nor
considered himself entitled to take money as a fee, he would give it to the
Yalta Charitable Society, and at once wrote a receipt. It turned out that it
was that the “Tambov squire” wanted. With a radiant face, he carefully put
the receipt in his pocket-book, and then confessed that the sole purpose of
his visit was to obtain Chekhov's autograph. Chekhov himself told me the
story of this original and persistent patient—half-laughing, half-cross.
I repeat, many of these visitors plagued him fearfully and even irritated
him, but, owing to the amazing delicacy peculiar to him, he was with all
patient, attentive and accessible to those who wished to see him. His
delicacy at times reached a limit that bordered on weakness. Thus, for

instance, one nice, well-meaning lady, a great admirer of Chekhov, gave
him for a birthday present a huge pug-dog in a sitting position, made of
colored plaster of Paris, over a yard high, i. e., about five times larger than
its natural size. That pug-dog was placed downstairs, on the landing near
the dining room, and there he sat with an angry face chewing his teeth and
frightening those who had forgotten him.
—“O, I'm afraid of that stone dog myself,” Chekhov confessed, “but it
is awkward to move him; it might hurt her. Let him stay on here.”
And suddenly, with eyes full of laughter, he added unexpectedly, in his
usual manner:
“Have you noticed in the houses of rich Jews, such plaster dogs often sit
by the fireplace?”
At times, for days on end, he would be annoyed with every sort of
admirer and detractor and even adviser. “O, I have such a mass of
visitors,”—he complained in a letter,—“that my head swims. I cannot
work.” But still he did not remain indifferent to a sincere feeling of love and
respect and always distinguished it from idle and fulsome tittle-tattle. Once
he returned in a very gay mood from the quay where he sometimes took a
walk, and with great animation told us:
—“I just had a wonderful meeting. An artillery officer suddenly came
up to me on the quay, quite a young man, a sub-lieutenant.—‘Are you A. P.
Chekhov?’—‘Yes. Do you want anything?’—‘Excuse me please for my
importunity, but for so long I have wanted to shake your hand!’ And he
blushed—he was a wonderful fellow with a fine face. We shook hands and
parted.”
Chekhov was at his best towards evening, about seven o'clock, when
people gathered in the dining room for tea and a light supper. Sometimes—
but more and more rarely as the years went on—there revived in him the
old Chekhov, inexhaustibly gay, witty, with a bubbling, charming, youthful
humor. Then he improvised stories in which the characters were his friends,
and he was particularly fond of arranging imaginary weddings, which
sometimes ended with the young husband the following morning, sitting at

the table and having his tea, saying as it were by the way in an unconcerned
and businesslike tone:
—“Do you know, my dear, after tea we'll get ready and go to a
solicitor's. Why should you have unnecessary bother about your money?”
He invented wonderful Chekhovian names, of which I now—alas!—
remember only a certain mythical sailor Koshkodovenko-cat-slayer. He also
liked as a joke to make young writers appear old. “What are you saying—
Bunin is my age”—he would assure one with mock seriousness. “So is
Teleshov: he is an old writer. Well, ask him yourself: he will tell you what a
spree we had at T. A. Bieloussov's wedding. What a long time ago!” To a
talented novelist, a serious writer and a man of ideas, he said: “Look here,
you're twenty years my senior: surely you wrote previously under the nom-
de-plume ‘Nestor Kukolnik.’”
But his jokes never left any bitterness any more than he consciously
ever caused the slightest pain to any living thing.
After dinner he would keep some one in his study for half an hour or an
hour. On his table candles would be lit. Later, when all had gone and he
remained alone, a light would still be seen in his large window for a long
time. Whether he worked at that time, or looked through his note-books,
putting down the impressions of the day nobody seems to know.

VI

It is true, on the whole, that we know nearly nothing, not only of his
creative activities, but even of the external methods of his work. In this
respect Anton Pavlovitch was almost eccentric in his reserve and silence. I
remember him saying, as if by the way, something very significant:
—“For God's sake don't read your work to any one until it is published.
Don't read it to others in proof even.”
This was always his own habit, although he sometimes made exceptions
for his wife and sister. Formerly he is said to have been more
communicative in this respect.

That was when he wrote a great deal and at great speed. He himself said
that he used to write a story a day. E. T. Chekhov, his mother, used to say:
“When he was still an undergraduate, Antosha would sit at the table in the
morning, having his tea and suddenly fall to thinking; he would sometimes
look straight into one's eyes, but I knew that he saw nothing. Then he would
get his note-book out of his pocket and write quickly, quickly. And again he
would fall to thinking….”
But during the last years Chekhov began to treat himself with ever
increasing strictness and exactitude: he kept his stories for several years,
continually correcting and copying them, and nevertheless in spite of such
minute work, the final proofs, which came from him, were speckled
throughout with signs, corrections, and insertions. In order to finish a work
he had to write without tearing himself away. “If I leave a story for a long
time,”—he once said—“I cannot make myself finish it afterwards. I have to
begin again.”
Where did he draw his images from? Where did he find his observations
and his similes? Where did he forge his superb language, unique in Russian
literature? He confided in nobody, never revealed his creative methods.
Many note-books are said to have been left by him; perhaps in them will in
time be found the keys to those mysteries. Or perhaps they will forever
remain unsolved. Who knows? At any rate we must limit ourselves to vague
hints and guesses.
I think that always, from morning to night, and perhaps at night even, in
his sleep and sleeplessness, there was going on in him an invisible but
persistent—at times even unconscious—activity, the activity of weighing,
defining and remembering. He knew how to listen and ask questions, as no
one else did; but often, in the middle of a lively conversation, it would be
noticed, how his attentive and kindly look became motionless and deep, as
if it were withdrawing somewhere inside, contemplating something
mysterious and important, which was going on there. At those moments
A. P. would put his strange questions, amazing through their
unexpectedness, completely out of touch with the conversation, questions
which confused many people. The conversation was about neo-marxists,
and he would suddenly ask: “Have you ever been to a stud-farm? You ought

to see one. It is interesting.” Or he would repeat a question for the second
time, which had already been answered.
Chekhov was not remarkable for a memory of external things. I speak
of that power of minute memory, which women so often possess in a very
high degree, also peasants, which consists in remembering, how a person
was dressed, whether he has a beard and mustaches, what his watch chain
was like or his boots, what color his hair was. These details were simply
unimportant and uninteresting to him. But, instead, he took the whole
person and defined quickly and truly, exactly like an experienced chemist,
his specific gravity, his quality and order, and he knew already how to
describe his essential qualities in a couple of strokes.
Once Chekhov spoke with slight displeasure of a good friend of his, a
famous scholar, who, in spite of a long-standing friendship, somewhat
oppressed Chekhov with his talkativeness. No sooner would he arrive in
Yalta, than he at once came to Chekhov and sat there with him all the
morning till lunch. Then he would go to his hotel for half an hour, and come
back and sit until late at night, all the time talking, talking, talking…. And
so on day after day.
Suddenly, abruptly breaking off his story, as if carried away by a new
interesting thought, Anton Pavlovitch added with animation:
—“And nobody would guess what is most characteristic in that man. I
know it. That he is a professor and a savant with a European reputation, is
to him a secondary matter. The chief thing is that in his heart he considers
himself to be a remarkable actor, and he profoundly believes that it is only
by chance that he has not won universal popularity on the stage. At home he
always reads Ostrovsky aloud.”
Once, smiling at his recollection, he suddenly observed:
—“D'you know, Moscow is the most peculiar city. In it everything is
unexpected. Once on a spring morning S., the publicist, and myself came
out of the Great Moscow Hotel. It was after a late and merry supper.
Suddenly S. dragged me to the Tversky Church, just opposite. He took a
handful of coppers and began to share it out to the beggars—there are
dozens standing about there. He would give one a penny and whisper: ‘Pray

for the health of Michael the slave of God.’ It is his Christian name
Michael. And again: ‘for the servant of God, Michael; for Michael, the
servant of God.’ And he himself does not believe in God…. Queer
fellow!” …
I now approach a delicate point which may not perhaps please every
one. I am convinced that Chekhov talked to a scholar and a peddler, a
beggar and a litterateur, with a prominent Zemstvo worker and a suspicious
monk or shop assistant or a small postman, with the same attention and
curiosity. Is not that the reason why in his stories the professor speaks and
thinks just like an old professor, and the tramp just like a veritable tramp?
And is it not because of this, that immediately after his death there appeared
so many “bosom” friends, for whom, in their words, he would be ready to
go through fire and water?
I think that he did not open or give his heart completely to any one
(there is a legend, though, of an intimate, beloved friend, a Taganrog
official). But he regarded all kindly, indifferently so far as friendship is
concerned—and at the same time with a great, perhaps unconscious,
interest.
His Chekhovian mots and those little traits that astonish us by their
neatness and appositeness, he often took direct from life. The expression “it
displeasures me” which quickly became, after the “Bishop,” a bye-word
with a wide circulation, he got from a certain gloomy tramp, half-drunkard,
half-madman, half-prophet. I also remember talking once with Chekhov of
a long dead Moscow poet, and Chekhov glowingly remembered him, and
his mistress, and his empty rooms, and his St. Bernard, “Ami,” who
suffered from constant indigestion. “Certainly, I remember,”—Chekhov
said laughing gayly—“At five o'clock his mistress would always come in
and ask: ‘Liodor Tranitch, I say, Liodor Tranitch, is it not time you drank
your beer?’” And then I imprudently said: “O, that's where it comes from in
your ‘Ward N 6’?”—“Yes, well, yes”—replied Chekhov with displeasure.
He had friends also among those merchants' wives, who, in spite of their
millions and the most fashionable dresses, and an outward interest in
literature, say “ideal” and “in principal.” Some of them would for hours
pour out their souls before Chekhov, wishing to convey what

extraordinarily refined, neurotic characters they were, and what a
remarkable novel could be written by a writer of genius about their lives, if
only they could tell everything. And he would sit quietly, in silence, and
listen with apparent pleasure—only under his moustache glided an almost
imperceptible smile.
I do not wish to say that he looked for models, like many other writers.
But I think, that everywhere and always he saw material for observation,
and this happened involuntarily, often perhaps against his will, through his
long-cultivated and ineradicable habit of diving into people, of analyzing
and generalizing them. In this hidden process was to him, probably, all the
torment and joy of his creative activity.
He shared his impressions with no one, just as he never spoke of what
and how he was going to write. Also very rarely was the artist and novelist
shown in his talk. He, partly deliberately, partly instinctively, used in his
speech ordinary, average, common expressions, without having recourse
either to simile or picturesqueness. He guarded his treasures in his soul, not
permitting them to be wasted in wordy foam, and in this there was a huge
difference between him and those novelists who tell their stories much
better than they write them.
This, I think, came from a natural reserve, but also from a peculiar
shyness. There are people who constitutionally cannot endure and are
morbidly shy of too demonstrative attitudes, gestures and words, and Anton
Pavlovitch possessed this quality in the highest degree. Herein, maybe, is
hidden the key to his seeming indifference towards question of struggle and
protest and his aloofness towards topical events, which did and do agitate
the Russian intelligentsia. He had a horror of pathos, of vehement emotions
and the theatrical effects inseparable from them. I can only compare him in
this with a man who loves a woman with all the ardor, tenderness and
depth, of which a man of refinement and great intelligence is capable. He
will never try to speak of it in pompous, high-flown words, and he cannot
even imagine himself falling on his knees and pressing his hand to his heart
and speaking in the tremulous voice of a young lover on the stage. And
therefore he loves and is silent, and suffers in silence, and will never
attempt to utter what the average man will express freely and noisily
according to all the rules of rhetoric.

VII

To young writers, Chekhov was always sympathetic and kind. No one left
him oppressed by his enormous talent and by one's own insignificance. He
never said to any one: “Do as I do; see how I behave.” If in despair one
complained to him: “Is it worth going on, if one will forever remain ‘our
young and promising author’?” he answered quietly and seriously:
—“But, my dear fellow, not every one can write like Tolstoy.” His
considerateness was at times pathetic. A certain young writer came to Yalta
and took a little room in a big and noisy Greek family somewhere beyond
Antka, on the outskirts of the city. He once complained to Chekhov that it
was difficult to work in such surroundings, and Chekhov insisted that the
writer should come to him in the mornings and work downstairs in the room
adjoining the dining room. “You will write downstairs, and I upstairs”—he
said with his charming smile—“And you will have dinner with me. When
you finish something, do read it to me, or, if you go away, send me the
proofs.”
He read an amazing amount and always remembered everything, and
never confused one writer with another. If writers asked his opinion, he
always praised their work, not so as to get rid of them, but because he knew
how cruelly a sharp, even if just, criticism cuts the wings of beginners, and
what an encouragement and hope a little praise gives sometimes. “I have
read your story. It is marvelously well done,” he would say on such
occasions in a hearty voice. But when a certain confidence was established
and they got to know each other, especially if an author insisted, he gave his
opinion more definitely, directly, and at greater length. I have two letters of
his, written to one and the same novelist, concerning one and the same tale.
Here is a quotation from the first:
“Dear N., I received your tale and have read it; many thanks. The tale is
good, I have read it at one go, as I did the previous one, and with the same
pleasure….”
But as the author was not satisfied with praise alone, he soon received a
second letter from Anton Pavlovitch.

“You want me to speak of defects only, and thereby you put me in an
embarrassing situation. There are no defects in that story, and if one finds
fault, it is only with a few of its peculiarities. For instance, your heroes,
characters, you treat in the old style, as they have been treated for a hundred
years by all who have written about them—nothing new. Secondly, in the
first chapter you are busy describing people's faces—again that is the old
way, it is a description which can be dispensed with. Five minutely
described faces tire the attention, and in the end lose their value. Clean-
shaved characters are like each other, like Catholic priests, and remain
alike, however studiously you describe them. Thirdly, you overdo your
rough manner in the description of drunken people. That is all I can say in
reply to your question about the defects; I can find nothing more that is
wrong.”
To those writers with whom he had any common spiritual bond, he
always behaved with great care and attention. He never missed an occasion
to tell them any news which he knew would be pleasing or useful.
“Dear N.,” he wrote to a certain friend of mine,—“I hereby inform you
that your story was read by L. N. Tolstoy and he liked it very much. Be so
good as to send him your book at this address; Koreiz, Tauric Province, and
on the title page underline the stories which you consider best, so that he
should begin with them. Or send the book to me and I will hand it to him.”
To the writer of these lines he also once showed a delightful kindness,
communicating by letter that, “in the ‘Dictionary of the Russian Language,’
published by the Academy of Sciences, in the sixth number of the second
volume, which number I received to-day, you too appeared at last.”
All these of course are details, but in them is apparent much sympathy
and concern, so that now, when this great artist and remarkable man is no
longer among us, his letters acquire the significance of a far-away,
irrevocable caress.
“Write, write as much as possible”—he would say to young novelists.
“It does not matter if it does not come off. Later on it will come off. The
chief thing is, do not waste your youth and elasticity. It's now the time for
working. See, you write superbly, but your vocabulary is small. You must
acquire words and turns of speech, and for this you must write every day.”

And he himself worked untiringly on himself, enriching his charming,
varied vocabulary from every source: from conversations, dictionaries,
catalogues, from learned works, from sacred writings. The store of words
which that silent man had was extraordinary.
—“Listen, travel third class as often as possible”—he advised—“I am
sorry that illness prevents me from traveling third. There you will
sometimes hear remarkably interesting things.”
He also wondered at those authors who for years on end see nothing but
the next door house from the windows of their Petersburg flats. And often
he said with a shade of impatience:
—“I cannot understand why you—young, healthy, and free—don't go,
for instance, to Australia (Australia for some reason was his favorite part of
the world), or to Siberia. As soon as I am better, I shall certainly go to
Siberia. I was there when I went to Saghalien. You cannot imagine, my dear
fellow, what a wonderful country it is. It is quite different. You know, I am
convinced Siberia will some day sever herself completely from Russia, just
as America severed herself from her motherland. You must, must go there
without fail….”
“Why don't you write a play?”—he would sometimes ask. “Do write
one, really. Every writer must write at least four plays.”
But he would confess now and then, that the dramatic form is losing its
interest now.
“The drama must either degenerate completely, or take a completely
new form”—he said. “We cannot even imagine what the theatre will be like
in a hundred years.”
There were some little inconsistencies in Anton Pavlovitch which were
particularly attractive in him and had at the same time a deep inner
significance. This was once the case with regard to note-books. Chekhov
had just strongly advised us not to have recourse to them for help but to rely
wholly on our memory and imagination. “The big things will remain”—he
argued—“and the details you can always invent or find.” But then, an hour
later, one of the company, who had been for a year on the stage, began to
talk of his theatrical impressions and incidentally mentioned this case. A

rehearsal was taking place in the theatre of a tiny provincial town. The
“young lover” paced the stage in a hat and check trousers, with his hands in
his pockets, showing off before a casual public which had straggled into the
theatre. The “ingenue,” his mistress, who was also on the stage, said to him:
“Sasha, what was it you whistled yesterday from Pagliacci? Do please
whistle it again.” The “young lover” turned to her, and looking her up and
down with a devastating expression said in a fat, actor's voice: “Wha-at!
Whistle on the stage? Would you whistle in church? Then know that the
stage is the same as a church!”
At the end of that story Anton Pavlovitch threw off his pince-nez, flung
himself back in his chair, and began to laugh with his clear, ringing
laughter. He immediately opened the drawer of his table to get his note-
book. “Wait, wait, how did you say it? The stage is a temple?” … And he
put down the whole anecdote.
There was no essential contradiction in this, and Anton Pavlovitch
explained it himself. “One should not put down similes, characteristic traits,
details, scenes from nature—this must come of itself when it is needed. But
a bare fact, a rare name, a technical term, should be put down in the note-
book—otherwise it may be forgotten and lost.”
Chekhov frequently recalled the difficulties put in his way by the editors
of serious magazines, until with the helping hand of “Sieverny Viestnik” he
finally overcame them.
“For one thing you all ought to be grateful to me,”—he would say to
young writers.—“It was I who opened the way for writers of short stories.
Formerly, when one took a manuscript to an editor, he did not even read it.
He just looked scornfully at one. ‘What? You call this a work? But this is
shorter than a sparrow's nose. No, we do not want such trifles.’ But, see, I
got round them and paved the way for others. But that is nothing; they
treated me much worse than that! They used my name as a synonym for a
writer of short stories. They would make merry: ‘O, you Chekhovs!’ It
seemed to them amusing.”
Anton Pavlovitch had a high opinion of modern writing, i. e., properly
speaking, of the technique of modern writing. “All write superbly now;
there are no bad writers”—he said in a resolute tone. “And hence it is

becoming more and more difficult to win fame. Do you know whom that is
due to?—Maupassant. He, as an artist in language, put the standard before
an author so high that it is no longer possible to write as of old. You try to
re-read some of our classics, say, Pissemsky, Grigorovitch, or Ostrovsky;
try, and you will see what obsolete, commonplace stuff it is. Take on the
other hand our decadents. They are only pretending to be sick and crazy,—
they all are burly peasants. But so far as writing goes,—they are masters.”
At the same time he asked that writers should choose ordinary, everyday
themes, simplicity of treatment, and absence of showy tricks. “Why
write,”—he wondered—“about a man getting into a submarine and going to
the North Pole to reconcile himself with the world, while his beloved at that
moment throws herself with a hysterical shriek from the belfry? All this is
untrue and does not happen in reality. One must write about simple things:
how Peter Semionovitch married Marie Ivanovna. That is all. And again,
why those subtitles: a psychological study, genre, nouvelle? All these are
mere pretense. Put as plain a title as possible—any that occurs to your mind
—and nothing else. Also use as few brackets, italics and hyphens as
possible. They are mannerisms.”
He also taught that an author should be indifferent to the joys and
sorrows of his characters. “In a good story”—he said—“I have read a
description of a restaurant by the sea in a large city. You saw at once that the
author was all admiration for the music, the electric light, the flowers in the
buttonholes; that he himself delighted in contemplating them. One has to
stand outside these things, and, although knowing them in minute detail,
one must look at them from top to bottom with contempt. And then it will
be true.”

VIII

The son of Alphonse Daudet in his memoirs of his father relates that the
gifted French writer half jokingly called himself a “seller of happiness.”
People of all sorts would constantly apply to him for advice and assistance.
They came with their sorrows and worries, and he, already bedridden with a
painful and incurable disease, found sufficient courage, patience, and love

of mankind in himself to penetrate into other people's grief, to console and
encourage them.
Chekhov, certainly, with his extraordinary modesty and his dislike of
phrase-making, would never have said anything like that. But how often he
had to listen to people's confessions, to help by word and deed, to hold out a
tender and strong hand to the falling…. In his wonderful objectivity,
standing above personal sorrows and joys, he knew and saw everything. But
personal feeling stood in the way of his understanding. He could be kind
and generous without loving; tender and sympathetic without attachment; a
benefactor, without counting on gratitude. And these traits which were
never understood by those round him, contained the chief key to his
personality.
Availing myself of the permission of a friend of mine, I will quote a
short extract from a Chekhov letter. The man was greatly alarmed and
troubled during the first pregnancy of a much beloved wife, and, to tell the
truth, he distressed Anton Pavlovitch greatly with his own trouble. Chekhov
once wrote to him:
“Tell your wife she should not be anxious, everything will be all right.
The travail will last twenty hours, and then will ensue a most blissful state,
when she will smile, and you will long to cry from love and gratitude.
Twenty hours is the usual maximum for the first childbirth.”
What a subtle cure for another's anxiety is heard in these few simple
lines! But it is still more characteristic that later, when my friend had
become a happy father, and, recollecting that letter, asked Chekhov how he
understood these feelings so well, Anton Pavlovitch answered quietly, even
indifferently:
“When I lived in the country, I always had to attend peasant women. It
was just the same—there too is the same joy.”
If Chekhov had not been such a remarkable writer, he would have been
a great doctor. Physicians who sometimes invited him to a consultation
spoke of him as an unusually thoughtful observer and penetrating in
diagnosis. It would not be surprising if his diagnosis were more perfect and
profound than a diagnosis given by a fashionable celebrity. He saw and

heard in man—in his face, voice, and bearing—what was hidden and would
escape the notice of an average observer.
He himself preferred to recommend, in the rare cases when his advice
was sought, medicines that were tried, simple, and mostly domestic. By the
way he treated children with great success.
He believed in medicine firmly and soundly, and nothing could shake
that belief. I remember how cross he was once when some one began to talk
slightingly of medicine, basing his remarks on Zola's novel “Doctor
Pascal.”
—“Zola understands nothing and invents it all in his study,”—he said in
agitation, coughing. “Let him come and see how our Zemstvo doctors work
and what they do for the people.”
Every one knows how often—with what sympathy and love beneath an
external hardness, he describes those superb workers, those obscure and
inconspicuous heroes who deliberately doomed their names to oblivion. He
described them, even without sparing them.

IX

There is a saying: the death of each man is like him. One recalls it
involuntarily when one thinks of the last years of Chekhov's life, of the last
days, even of the last minutes. Even into his funeral fate brought, by some
fatal consistency, many purely Chekhovian traits.
He struggled long, terribly long, with an implacable disease, but bore it
with manly simplicity and patience, without irritation, without complaints,
almost in silence. Only just before his death, he mentions his disease, just
by the way, in his letters. “My health is recovered, although I still walk with
a compress on.” … “I have just got through a pleurisy, but am better now.”
… “My health is not grand…. I write on.”
He did not like to talk of his disease and was annoyed when questioned
about it. Only from Arseniy (the servant) one would learn. “This morning
he was very bad—there was blood,” he would say in a whisper, shaking his

head. Or Yevguenia Yakovlevna, Chekhov's mother, would say secretly with
anguish in her voice:
“Antosha again coughed all night. I hear through the wall.”
Did he know the extent and meaning of his disease? I think he did, but
intrepidly, like a doctor and a philosopher, he looked into the eyes of
imminent death. There were various, trifling circumstances pointing to the
fact that he knew. Thus, for instance, to a lady, who complained to him of
insomnia and nervous breakdown, he said quietly, with an indefinable
sadness:
“You see; whilst a man's lungs are right, everything is right.”
He died simply, pathetically, and fully conscious. They say his last
words were: “Ich sterbe.” And his last days were darkened by a deep sorrow
for Russia, and by the anxiety of the monstrous Japanese war.
His funeral comes back to mind like a dream. The cold, grayish
Petersburg, a mistake about a telegram, a small gathering of people at the
railway station, “Wagon for oysters,” in which his remains were brought
from Germany, the station authorities who had never heard of Chekhov and
saw in his body only a railway cargo…. Then, as a contrast, Moscow,
profound sorrow, thousands of bereaved people, tear-stained faces. And at
last his grave in the Novodevitchy cemetery, filled with flowers, side by
side with the humble grave of the “Cossack's widow, Olga Coocaretnikov.”
I remember the service in the cemetery the day after his funeral. It was a
still July evening, and the old lime trees over the graves stood motionless
and golden in the sun. With a quiet, tender sadness and sighing sounded the
women's voices. And in the souls of many, then, was a deep perplexity.
Slowly and in silence the people left the cemetery. I went up to
Chekhov's mother and silently kissed her hand. And she said in a low, tired
voice:
“Our trial is bitter…. Antosha is dead.”
O, the overwhelming depth of these simple, ordinary, very Chekhovian
words! The enormous abyss of the loss, the irrevocable nature of the great

event, opened behind. No! Consolations would be useless. Can the sorrow
of those, whose souls have been so close to the great soul of the dead, ever
be assuaged?
But let their unquenchable anguish be stayed by the consciousness that
their distress is our common distress. Let it be softened by the thought of
the immortality of his great and pure name. Indeed: there will pass years
and centuries, and time will efface the very memory of thousands and
thousands of those living now. But the posterity, of whose happiness
Chekhov dreamt with such fascinating sadness, will speak his name with
gratitude and silent sorrow for his fate.

A. P. CHEKHOV
BY

I. A. BUNIN

I made Chekhov's acquaintance in Moscow, towards the end of '95. We met
then at intervals and I should not think it worth mentioning, if I did not
remember some very characteristic phrases.
“Do you write much?” he asked me once.
I answered that I wrote little.
“Bad,” he said, almost sternly, in his low, deep voice. “One must work
… without sparing oneself … all one's life.”
And, after a pause, without any visible connection, he added:
“When one has written a story I believe that one ought to strike out both
the beginning and the end. That is where we novelists are most inclined to
lie. And one must write shortly—as shortly as possible.”
Then we spoke of poetry, and he suddenly became excited. “Tell me, do
you care for Alexey Tolstoy's poems? To me he is an actor. When he was a
boy he put on evening dress and he has never taken it off.”
After these stray meetings in which we touched upon some of
Chekhov's favorite topics—as that one must work “without sparing oneself”
and must write simply and without the shadow of falsehood—we did not

meet till the spring of '99. I came to Yalta for a few days, and one evening I
met Chekhov on the quay.
“Why don't you come to see me?” were his first words. “Be sure to
come to-morrow.”
“At what time?” I asked.
“In the morning about eight.”
And seeing perhaps that I looked surprised he added:
“We get up early. Don't you?”
“Yes I do too,” I said.
“Well then, come when you get up. We will give you coffee. You take
coffee?”
“Sometimes.”
“You ought to always. It's a wonderful drink. When I am working, I
drink nothing but coffee and chicken broth until the evening. Coffee in the
morning and chicken broth at midday. If I don't, my work suffers.”
I thanked him for asking me, and we crossed the quay in silence and sat
down on a bench.
“Do you love the sea?” I asked.
“Yes,” he replied. “But it is too lonely.”
“That's what I like about it,” I replied.
“I wonder,” he mused, looking through his spectacles away into the
distance and thinking his own thoughts. “It must be nice to be a soldier, or a
young undergraduate … to sit in a crowd and listen to the band….”
And then, as was usual with him, after a pause and without apparent
connection, he added:
“It is very difficult to describe the sea. Do you know the description that
a school-boy gave in an exercise? ‘The sea is vast.’ Only that. Wonderful, I

think.”
Some people might think him affected in saying this. But Chekhov—
affected!
“I grant,” said one who knew Chekhov well, “that I have met men as
sincere as Chekhov. But any one so simple, and so free from pose and
affectation I have never known!”
And that is true. He loved all that was sincere, vital, and gay, so long as
it was neither coarse nor dull, and could not endure pedants, or book-worms
who have got so much into the habit of making phrases that they can talk in
no other way. In his writings he scarcely ever spoke of himself or of his
views, and this led people to think him a man without principles or sense of
duty to his kind. In life, too, he was no egotist, and seldom spoke of his
likings and dislikings. But both were very strong and lasting, and simplicity
was one of the things he liked best. “The sea is vast.” … To him, with his
passion for simplicity and his loathing of the strained and affected, that was
“wonderful.” His words about the officer and the music showed another
characteristic of his: his reserve. The transition from the sea to the officer
was no doubt inspired by his secret craving for youth and health. The sea is
lonely…. And Chekhov loved life and joy. During his last years his desire
for happiness, even of the simplest kind, would constantly show itself in his
conversation. It would be hinted at, not expressed.
In Moscow, in the year 1895, I saw a middle-aged man (Chekhov was
then 35) wearing pince-nez, quietly dressed, rather tall, and light and
graceful in his movements. He welcomed me, but so quietly that I, then a
boy, took his quietness for coldness…. In Yalta, in the year 1899, I found
him already much changed; he had grown thin; his face was sadder; his
distinction was as great as ever but it was the distinction of an elderly man,
who has gone through much, and been ennobled by his suffering. His voice
was gentler…. In other respects he was much as he had been in Moscow;
cordial, speaking with animation, but even more simply and shortly, and,
while he talked, he went on with his own thoughts. He let me grasp the
connections between his thoughts as well as I could, while he looked
through his glasses at the sea, his face slightly raised. Next morning after
meeting him on the quay I went to his house. I well remember the bright

sunny morning that I spent with Chekhov in his garden. He was very lively,
and laughed and read me the only poem, so he said, that he had ever
written, “Horses, Hares and Chinamen, a fable for children.” (Chekhov
wrote it for the children of a friend. See Letters.)

Once walked over a bridge
Fat Chinamen,
In front of them, with their tails up,
Hares ran quickly.
Suddenly the Chinamen shouted:
“Stop! Whoa! Ho! Ho!”
The hares raised their tails still higher
And hid in the bushes.
The moral of this fable is clear:
He who wants to eat hares
Every day getting out of bed
Must obey his father.

After that visit I went to him more and more frequently. Chekhov's
attitude towards me therefore changed. He became more friendly and
cordial…. But he was still reserved, yet, as he was reserved not only with
me but with those who were most intimate with him, it rose, I believed, not
from coldness, but from something much more important.
The charming white stone house, bright in the sun; the little orchard,
planted and tended by Chekhov himself who loved all flowers, trees, and
animals; his study, with its few pictures, and the large window which
looked out onto the valley of the river Utchan-Spo, and the blue triangle of
the sea; the hours, days, and even months which I spent there, and my
friendship with the man who fascinated me not only by his genius but also
by his stern voice and his child-like smile—all this will always remain one
of the happiest memories of my life. He was friendly to me and at times
almost tender. But the reserve which I have spoken of never disappeared
even when we were most intimate. He was reserved about everything.
He was very humorous and loved laughter, but he only laughed his
charming infectious laugh when somebody else had made a joke: he himself
would say the most amusing things without the slightest smile. He delighted

in jokes, in absurd nicknames, and in mystifying people…. Even towards
the end when he felt a little better his humor was irrepressible. And with
what subtle humor he would make one laugh! He would drop a couple of
words and wink his eye above his glasses…. His letters too, though their
form is perfect, are full of delightful humor.
But Chekhov's reserve was shown in a great many other ways which
proved the strength of his character. No one ever heard him complain,
though no one had more reason to complain. He was one of a large family,
which lived in a state of actual want. He had to work for money under
conditions which would have extinguished the most fiery inspiration. He
lived in a tiny flat, writing at the edge of a table, in the midst of talk and
noise with the whole family and often several visitors sitting round him. For
many years he was very poor…. Yet he scarcely ever grumbled at his lot. It
was not that he asked little of life: on the contrary, he hated what was mean
and meager though he was nobly Spartan in the way he lived. For fifteen
years he suffered from an exhausting illness which finally killed him, but
his readers never knew it. The same could not be said of most writers.
Indeed, the manliness with which he bore his sufferings and met his death
was admirable. Even at his worst he almost succeeded in hiding his pain.
“You are not feeling well, Antosha?” his mother or sister would say,
seeing him sitting all day with his eyes shut.
“I?” he would answer, quietly, opening the eyes which looked so clear
and mild without his glasses. “Oh, it's nothing. I have a little headache.”
He loved literature passionately, and to talk of writers and to praise
Maupassant, Flaubert, or Tolstoy was a great joy to him. He spoke with
particular enthusiasm of those just mentioned and also of Lermontov's
“Taman.”
“I cannot understand,” he would say, “how a mere boy could have
written Taman! Ah, if one had written that and a good comedy—then one
would be content to die!”
But his talk about literature was very different from the usual shop
talked by writers, with its narrowness, and smallness, and petty personal

spite. He would only discuss books with people who loved literature above
all other arts and were disinterested and pure in their love of it.
“You should not read your writing to other people before it is
published,” he often said. “And it is most important never to take any one's
advice. If you have made a mess of it, let the blood be on your own head.
Maupassant by his greatness has so raised the standard of writing that it is
very hard to write; but we have to write, especially we Russians, and in
writing one must be courageous. There are big dogs and little dogs, but the
little dogs should not be disheartened by the existence of the big dogs. All
must bark—and bark with the voice God gave them.”
All that went on in the world of letters interested him keenly, and he
was indignant with the stupidity, falsehood, affectation and charlatanry
which batten upon literature. But though he was angry he was never
irritable and there was nothing personal in his anger. It is usual to say of
dead writers that they rejoiced in the success of others, and were not jealous
of them. If, therefore, I suspected Chekhov of the least jealousy I should be
content to say nothing about it. But the fact is that he rejoiced in the
existence of talent, spontaneously. The word “talentless” was, I think, the
most damaging expression he could use. His own failures and successes he
took as he alone knew how to take them.
He was writing for twenty-five years and during that time his writing
was constantly attacked. Being one of the greatest and most subtle of
Russian writers, he never used his art to preach. That being so, Russian
critics could neither understand him nor approve of him. Did they not insist
that Levitan should “light up” his landscapes—that is paint in a cow, a
goose, or the figure of a woman? Such criticism hurt Chekhov a good deal,
and embittered him even more than he was already embittered by Russian
life itself. His bitterness would show itself momentarily—only
momentarily.
“We shall soon be celebrating your jubilee, Anton Pavlovitch!”
“I know your jubilees. For twenty-five years they do nothing but abuse
and ridicule a man, and then you give him a pen made of aluminum and
slobber over him for a whole day, and cry, and kiss him, and gush!”

To talk of his fame and his popularity he would answer in the same way
—with two or three words or a jest.
“Have you read it, Anton Pavlovitch?” one would ask, having read an
article about him.
He would look slyly over his spectacles, ludicrously lengthen his face,
and say in his deep voice:
“Oh, a thousand thanks! There is a whole column, and at the bottom of
it, ‘There is also a writer called Chekhov: a discontented man, a grumbler.’”
Sometimes he would add seriously:
“When you find yourself criticized, remember us sinners. The critics
boxed our ears for trifles just as if we were school-boys. One of them
foretold that I should die in a ditch. He supposed that I had been expelled
from school for drunkenness.”
I never saw Chekhov lose his temper. Very seldom was he irritated, and
if it did happen he controlled himself astonishingly. I remember, for
instance, that he was once annoyed by reading in a book that he was
“indifferent” to questions of morality and society, and that he was a
pessimist. Yet his annoyance showed itself only in two words:
“Utter idiot!”
Nor did I find him cold. He said that he was cold when he wrote, and
that he only wrote when the thoughts and images that he was about to
express were perfectly clear to him, and then he wrote on, steadily, without
interruptions, until he had brought it to an end.
“One ought only to write when one feels completely calm,” he said
once.
But this calm was of a very peculiar nature. No other Russian writer had
his sensibility and his complexity.
Indeed, it would take a very versatile mind to throw any light upon this
profound and complex spirit—this “incomparable artist” as Tolstoy called
him. I can only bear witness that he was a man of rare spiritual nobleness,

distinguished and cultivated in the best sense, who combined tenderness
and delicacy with complete sincerity, kindness and sensitiveness with
complete candour.
To be truthful and natural and yet retain great charm implies a nature of
rare beauty, integrity, and power. I speak so frequently of Chekhov's
composure because his composure seems to me a proof of the strength of
his character. It was always his, I think, even when he was young and in the
highest spirits, and it was that, perhaps, that made him so independent, and
able to begin his work unpretentiously and courageously, without paltering
with his conscience.
Do you remember the words of the old professor in “The Tedious
Story?”
“I won't say that French books are good and gifted and noble; but they
are not so dull as Russian books, and the chief element of creative power is
often to be found in them—the sense of personal freedom.”
Chekhov had in the highest degree that “sense of personal freedom” and
he could not bear that others should be without it. He would become bitter
and uncompromising if he thought that others were taking liberties with it.
That “freedom,” it is well known, cost him a great deal; but he was not
one of those people who have two different ideals—one for themselves, the
other for the public. His success was for a very long time much less than he
deserved. But he never during the whole of his life made the least effort to
increase his popularity. He was extremely severe upon all the wire-pulling
which is now resorted to in order to achieve success.
“Do you still call them writers? They are cab-men!” he said bitterly.
His dislike to being made a show of at times seemed excessive.
“The Scorpion (a publishing firm) advertise their books badly,” he
wrote to me after the publication of “Northern Flowers.” “They put my
name first, and when I read the advertisement in the daily Russkya
Vedonosti I swore I would never again have any truck with scorpions,
crocodiles, or snakes.”

This was the winter of 1900 when Chekhov who had become interested
in certain features of the new publishing firm “Scorpion” gave them at my
request one of his youthful stories, “On the Sea.” They printed it in a
volume of collected stories and he many times regretted it.
“All this new Russian art is nonsense,” he would say. “I remember that I
once saw a sign-board in Taganrog: Arfeticial (for ‘artificial’) mineral
waters are sold here! Well, this new art is the same as that.”
His reserve came from the loftiness of his spirit and from his incessant
endeavor to express himself exactly. It will eventually happen that people
will know that he was not only an “incomparable artist,” not only an
amazing master of language but an incomparable man into the bargain. But
it will take many years for people to grasp in its fullness his subtlety, power,
and delicacy.
“How are you, dear Ivan Alexeyevitch?” he wrote to me at Nice. “I wish
you a happy New Year. I received your letter, thank you. In Moscow
everything is safe, sound, and dull. There is no news (except the New Year)
nor is any news expected. My play is not yet produced, nor do I know when
it will be. It is possible that I may come to Nice in February…. Greet the
lovely hot sun from me, and the quiet sea. Enjoy yourself, be happy, don't
think about illness, and write often to your friends…. Keep well, and
cheerful, and don't forget your sallow northern countrymen, who suffer
from indigestion and bad temper.” (8th January, 1904).
“Greet the lovely hot sun and the quiet sea from me” … I seldom heard
him say that. But I often felt that he ought to say it, and then my heart ached
sadly.
I remember one night in early spring. It was late. Suddenly the
telephone rang. I heard Chekhov's deep voice:
“Sir, take a cab and come here. Let us go for a drive.”
“A drive? At this time of night?” I answered. “What's the matter, Anton
Pavlovitch?”
“I am in love.”

“That's good. But it is past nine…. You will catch cold.”
“Young man, don't quibble!”
Ten minutes later I was at Antka. The house, where during the winter
Chekhov lived alone with his mother, was dark and silent, save that a light
came through the key-hole of his mother's room, and two little candles
burnt in the semi-darkness of his study. My heart shrank as usual at the
sight of that quiet study, where Chekhov passed so many lonely winter
nights, thinking bitterly perhaps on the fate which had given him so much
and mocked him so cruelly.
“What a night!” he said to me with even more than his usual tenderness
and pensive gladness, meeting me in the doorway. “It is so dull here! The
only excitement is when the telephone rings and Sophie Pavlovna asks what
I am doing, and I answer: ‘I am catching mice.’ Come, let us drive to
Orianda. I don't care a hang if I do catch cold!”
The night was warm and still, with a bright moon, light clouds, and a
few stars in the deep blue sky. The carriage rolled softly along the white
road, and, soothed by the stillness of the night, we sat silent looking at the
sea glowing a dim gold…. Then came the forest cobwebbed over with
shadows, but already spring-like and beautiful…. Black troops of giant
cypresses rose majestically into the sky. We stopped the carriage and
walked beneath them, past the ruins of the castle, which were pale blue in
the moonlight. Chekhov suddenly said to me:
“Do you know for how many years I shall be read? Seven.”
“Why seven?” I asked.
“Seven and a half, then.”
“No,” I said. “Poetry lives long, and the longer it lives the better it
becomes—like wine.”
He said nothing, but when we had sat down on a bench from which we
could see the sea shining in the moonlight, he took off his glasses and said,
looking at me with his kind, tired eyes:

“Poets, sir, are those who use such phrases as ‘the silvery distance,’
‘accord,’ or ‘onward, onward, to the fight with the powers of darkness’!”
“You are sad to-night, Anton Pavlovitch,” I said, looking at his kind and
beautiful face, pale in the moonlight.
He was thoughtfully digging up little pebbles with the end of his stick,
with his eyes on the ground. But when I said that he was sad, he looked
across at me, humorously.
“It is you who are sad,” he answered. “You are sad because you have
spent such a lot on the cab.”
Then he added gravely:
“Yes, I shall only be read for another seven years; and I shall live for
less—perhaps for six. But don't go and tell that to the newspaper reporters.”
He was wrong there: he did not live for six years….
He died peacefully without suffering in the stillness and beauty of a
summer's dawn which he had always loved. When he was dead a look of
happiness came upon his face, and it looked like the face of a very young
man. There came to my mind the words of Leconte de Lisle:

Moi, je l'envie, au fond du tombeau calme et noir
D'être affranchi de vivre et de ne plus savoir
La honte de penser et l'horreur d'être un homme!

Transcriber's Note:
The following is a list of corrections made to the original. The
first passage is the original passage, the second the corrected
one.

Page 2:
at him or humilate him personally, as with
at him or humiliate him personally, as with
Page 14:
to speak of it with enthusiaism, completely
to speak of it with enthusiasm, completely
Page 40:
struck!”
struck!’”
Page 45:
came beween the eyebrows, by the bridge
came between the eyebrows, by the bridge
Page 79:
of our classics, say, Pissensky, Grigorovitch,
of our classics, say, Pissemsky, Grigorovitch,
Page 110:
Moi, je l'envie, au fond du tombeau calm et noir
Moi, je l'envie, au fond du tombeau calme et noir

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REMINISCENCES
OF ANTON CHEKHOV ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright royalties.
Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license,
apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and
trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not
be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of
the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project
Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may
use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative
works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks
may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically
ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S.
copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic
work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept
all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If
you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg
electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this
agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom
you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the

collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free
access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works
in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project
Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with
the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format
with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it
without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which
the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase
“Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with

this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located
in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived
from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United
States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or
providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with
the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain
permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide
access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official

version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of
obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided
that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth
in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend
considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and
proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the
Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be
stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete,
inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES -
Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in
paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH
OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES

EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return
the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that
provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu
of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If
any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law
of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly
from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a)

distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration,
modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work,
and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals
and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely
available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and
permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To
learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and
the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state
of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue
Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is
64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S.
federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza
#516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact

links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have
not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including
how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.