Here is today’s 1390 word story:

Travis Review

Like yesterday’s story, Minds In Ferment, a quiet day on the square erupts into a big scene with citizens throwing accusations and opinions. In this case, a man chases and corners a dog that bit him. The chameleon of the story is police superintendent Otchumyelov. The story becomes a farcical comedy as he vacillates between destroying the dog or reprimanding the bitten man for provoking the animal. It all depends on who owns the dog, not what really happened. Chekhov is definitely poking fun of Russian law enforcement and how the gears of justice lean toward the powerful, even if they are not directly involved.            

Rating: 6

Steve Review:

Two policemen walk into a silent square devoid of everyone…even the beggars…only to be disrupted by a man and a dog.  Sounds like the beginning to a bad joke…and in many ways the scene that played out lived up to that expectation.  I thought it was interesting that Chekhov chose “gooseberries” as the confiscated artifact being carried by the red-haired policeman shadowing the superintendent.  Unfortunately, we never learn more of the gooseberry crime but instead watch the superintendent constantly change his mind about how to play his role–thus the Chameleon title.  I particularly enjoyed how Chekhov described the puppy and couldn’t help but smile to see the translation of the word “misery” in anticipation of a future story — “There is an expression of misery and terror in her tearful eyes.”  I was drawn more to the dog than any other character for exhibiting both misery and terror simultaneously…the one character that could not defend its reputation and fortunately in the end didn’t have to.

Rating:  6

2 thoughts on “#018 A Chameleon

  1. As with the female horses in “Grief” and “Misery”…the dog here has symbolic meaning. I laughed as Otchumyelov flip-flopped his verdict about the dog’s life depending on it being a mad rabid stray dog or the “nice little pup” of the general’s brother. Hypocrisy stinks! I also enjoyed the use of the crowd – this was used in a similar way in”Oysters”.

    1. Yes, the reversible outrage depending on the context (or this case ownership) is both funny and infuriating because it is so true. Chekov has a great way of using the masses that influence the ways characters think.

Comments are closed.