A Marriage Proposal

“Right away…this very minute. The fact is, I have come here to ask for the hand of your daughter Nataliya Sepanovna.”

Lomov’s nervous delivery of the proposal, marked by ellipses and hesitation, establishes his anxious character and foreshadows his inability to control the situation effectively. The formal phrasing defers to 19th-century ideas of propriety, but it is also in line with Lomov’s approach to marriage as a business arrangement. This opening gambit sets in motion all the subsequent complications.

“She loves you like a cat loves catnip, I’ll wager, and so on…Be right back!”

Chubukov’s simile, which trails off into nothing, reveals his vagueness of thought and thus contrasts the gentry’s pretensions to refinement with their actual vapidness, developing the theme of The Shallowness of Class and Property Obsession. At the same time, the fact that he does not complete his thought reveals that his claims about his daughter’s feelings are simply a matter of form; he has a pragmatic rather than romantic view of his daughter’s marital prospects.

“The main thing is to make up your mind. If you think about it too long, and hesitate, talk it over a lot and wait for the perfect woman or true love, then you’ll never get married.”

This quote, from Lomov’s soliloquy, articulates the theme of Marriage as Social Transaction, as Lomov rejects romance in favor of pragmatic necessity. His honesty about seeking stability rather than love establishes the play’s satirical critique of gentry marriage practices. The statement reveals Lomov’s self-aware calculation while foreshadowing his inability to execute this rational plan; that he must remind himself of “the main thing” suggests that he is in danger of losing sight of it.

“And I’ve really got to get married…First of all, I’m already thirty-five—what they call a critical age. Second of all, I need an orderly, well-regulated life.”

Lomov’s admission reveals his anxiety about his age and his goals for marriage; rather than emotional fulfillment, he seeks stability. The phrase “an orderly, well-regulated life” suggests his hope that domestic routine will cure his various ailments but also hints at the pressure he feels to conform to social expectations. This rational plan to attain emotional calm ironically leads to a chaotic and upsetting courtship, implying a basic flaw in his approach.

“I leap out of bed like a lunatic, pace the floor a bit and lie down again, but no sooner do I start to doze off, when there it is in my side again—that twitch! And so it goes twenty times over…”

Lomov’s detailed description of his insomnia establishes the severity of his hypochondria and introduces the physical manifestations of anxiety that recur throughout the play. The vivid detail creates both comedy and pathos, characterizing him as genuinely in distress. His hypochondria, marked by bodily rebellion against psychological stress, also symbolizes the precarity of the broader gentry class.

“Sorry to interrupt you. You said, ‘my Bullock Fields’…Are they actually yours?”

Nataliya’s interruption of Lomov’s remarks represents the moment when polite conversation transforms into property dispute, triggering the play’s central conflict. Her challenge demonstrates her attention to questions of ownership and her unwillingness to let claims pass unchallenged. Meanwhile, her blunt tone characterizes her as practical and assertive; the clipped nature of her apology suggests that she is not actually “sorry” at all.

“It’s not that I care so much about the Fields. They’re barely a dozen acres or so, and they’re worth maybe three hundred rubles, but it’s the unfairness of the thing that upsets me. Say what you will, I cannot put up with unfairness.”

Nataliya’s acknowledgment that the fields have minimal economic value exposes the true nature of the dispute. The land functions as a symbol of family honor and history rather than as a lucrative possession. Her emphasis on “unfairness” also reveals that Nataliya’s emotional investment in being right far exceeds any material consideration.

“I don’t need Bullock Fields, Nataliya Stepanovna, but it’s the principle of the thing.”

Lomov’s assertion parallels Nataliya’s claim about unfairness, showing that both characters prioritize abstract principle over practical outcome. This shared attitude ensures that neither party can compromise, making conflict inevitable.

“You make us a present of our own land. Excuse me but this is not neighborly behavior! To my way of thinking, it’s downright impertinence, if you don’t mind my saying so…”

Nataliya interprets Lomov’s offer to give her the fields as an insult, demonstrating how pride distorts communication and prevents compromise. What Lomov intended as conciliation, she receives as condescension, revealing the impossibility of resolution when both parties demand validation. Meanwhile, Nataliya’s use of ostensibly polite phrasing—“excuse me”—continues to contrast with her broader tone, suggesting how thin the veneer of civility is.

“Bullock Fields are mine! Understand? Mine!”

Lomov’s shouting reduces the property dispute to a raw claim of possession, paralleling a broader collapse of rationality into emotion. The repetition of “mine” reveals the ego investment underlying the legal dispute, developing the theme of Ego and Pride Disrupting Relationships. This moment also exemplifies the instability of civility, as the characters’ discourse degenerates into a shouting match.

“I don’t want what’s yours and I’m not inclined to give up what’s mine.”

By now, Chubukov has reentered the scene, and his declaration establishes the zero-sum mentality governing property relations within the gentry class. The parallel syntax emphasizes the rigid boundaries both parties maintain around their possessions, making compromise impossible. This defensive attitude demonstrates the theme of class and property obsession taken to its extreme.

“A litigious character! Every member of your family has been lawsuit crazy! Every single one!”

Chubukov’s accusation extends the conflict by calling Lomov’s entire family character into question, thus demonstrating the weight the gentry place on pedigree. The reference to litigation suggests a history of contentious relationships and rigid defense of property rights, suggesting that the play’s conflict replays historical patterns of class behavior.

“Your grandfather drank like a fish, and that young auntie of yours, you know the one, Nastasiya Mikhailovna, ran off with an architect and so on…”

Chubukov’s retaliation here matches Lomov’s earlier attack on Chubukov’s embezzling uncle, implying that neither family is as “honorable,” by the standards of the day, as they claim. The specificity of the details also suggests that these families have long memories of each other’s failures despite their supposed friendship. The mention of the architect adds to the play’s depiction of class anxiety; Nastasiya’s choice of a professional rather than a landed gentleman deviates from what would be considered an acceptable match but also recognizes the middle class’s increasing clout.

“My left leg’s paralyzed…Well, you’re a bunch of schemers…Ugh, my heart!…And it’s no secret to anyone that just before the elections you bri…There’s spots before my eyes…”

That Lomov continues to make accusations amid physical distress demonstrates how the hypochondria motif and the verbal conflict operate in tandem. He continues attacking, provoking worse physical symptoms as the argument escalates and then lashing out further as a result. The trailing accusation about bribery suggests that he would continue indefinitely if he were capable.

“And this hobgoblin, this, thing of it is, thing that goes bump in the night has the unmitigated gall to propose marriage and so forth! How about that? A marriage proposal!”

This quote from Chubukov, coming after Lomov’s exit, reveals to Nataliya the truth about Lomov’s visit. This leads to a dramatic reversal, transforming Nataliya’s anger into regret. This moment resolves the play’s central dramatic irony, as Nataliya finally receives the information the audience has possessed throughout.

“To me? Propose! Ah! Bring ‘im back! Bring ‘im back! Ah! Bring ‘im back!”

Nataliya’s distraught repetition reveals her desire for the marriage despite her combative behavior, demonstrating how quickly her emotional state reverses when the practical realities of the situation become clear. Her desperation creates comedy through exaggeration while revealing the pragmatic motivations underlying her earlier pride.

“‘Oh, Lord, a heavy burden this, Be father to a grown-up miss…’ I’ll cut my throat! I’ll definitely cut my throat!”

Here, Chubukov, responding to his daughter’s distraught outburst, quotes a line from another comedy (A. S. Griboedov’s 1924 Woe from Wit). His exasperated complaint reveals his distress at the situation while maintaining his characteristic dramatic exaggeration; his hyperbolic threats of suicide create comedy through disproportion.

“Excuse me, we got a bit carried away, Ivan Vasilyevich…Now I remember: Bullock Fields are in fact yours.”

Nataliya’s immediate concession upon Lomov’s return demonstrates her willingness to sacrifice principle when practical necessity requires it, contrasting with her earlier stance. The reversal reveals the performative nature of her commitment to fairness and justice. However, her inability to maintain this conciliatory approach when a new dispute arises shows that the underlying pattern remains unchanged.

“You paid too much, Ivan Vasilyevich! […] Papa paid eighty-five rubles for his Splasher, and, after all, Splasher is far superior to your Dasher!”

Nataliya’s comment about Lomov’s dog demonstrates her inability to let any claim pass without challenge or correction. Her casual assessment of her own dog as superior reveals her competitive need to assert better judgment. This moment exemplifies the play’s repetitive structure, as the escalation pattern begins anew.

“In the first place, our Splasher is pedigreed, a thoroughbred greyhound, sired by Buckle-down and Chiseler, but as for that rust-colored mutt of yours there’s no point in talking about blood-lines…And besides he’s old and hideous as a swaybacked nag.”

Nataliya’s emphasis on pedigree reveals the symbolic function of the dogs as representatives of family breeding, mirroring anxieties about legitimate versus questionable gentry status. Her swift turn from elevating her own dog’s pedigree to denigrating Lomov’s dog shows the emotional stakes she has attached to what is fundamentally a trivial matter.

“Dasher is a dog, whereas Splasher…it’s ridiculous even to argue about it…Things like your Splasher you can find at any kennel—common as dirt.”

Lomov’s dismissal of Splasher escalates the dispute even further, paralleling Nataliya’s turn to judgment and mockery. His characterization of Splasher as “common as dirt” introduces a class slur and insults not only the dog but also Chubukov’s judgment and taste. His remark that the argument is “ridiculous” is heavily ironic; Lomov is suggesting that there is no comparison between the dogs, whereas the play implies that the entire dispute is absurd in its triviality. The statement thus highlights the characters’ inability to look past their petty grievances.

“I’ve noticed that the hunters who argue the most are the ones who know the least.”

Nataliya’s attack shifts from evaluating dogs to questioning Lomov’s masculinity and authenticity as a gentleman hunter. The accusation strikes at his identity and competence, raising the stakes beyond the specific dispute. This rhetorical escalation parallels the earlier property dispute’s progression from disagreement to character assault, which will continue and escalate even further when Chubukov reenters the scene.

“Look, look, look…my heart’s fit to burst! My shoulder’s come detached…Where’s my shoulder?…I’m dying!”

Lomov’s climactic physical collapse employs the hypochondria motif at its most extreme, with impossible symptoms (e.g., a detached shoulder) that create both comedy and dramatic crisis. Nevertheless, his collapse provides the mechanism for Chubukov to force the engagement through. This points to the thematic significance of Lomov’s physical symptoms, which function as a protest against the societal absurdities that threaten to undermine his goal of marrying.