One of the most ingenious aspects of Chekhov’s work, Uncle Vanya, is the subtle connection of the decay of the natural world to the physical and social decay of the play’s characters. The contemporary environment is presented on numerous occasions by Astrov, the doctor. He praises the natural world in its abilities to “make a harsh climate milder” and improve man’s abilities and spirit, but later in the play he describes the local district as “basically a picture of gradual but unmistakable decay” (71,93). While on the surface it may seem that the district’s environmental decay does not play a central role in the story, it does in fact present an interesting parallel to the state the characters find themselves. Uncle Vanya complains throughout the play of his declining condition and old age, commenting how he has become much lazier over the years and feels as if both he as well as his passion are dying (66, 79). The decay of Uncle Vanya’s condition and his realization of that he has squandered away his best years at the estate connect with Astrov’s comments about local environmental decline since they have both occurred within the timeframe of Uncle Vanya’s work at the estate (101). One would think that the nature and peacefulness of the countryside would prove beneficial to Uncle Vanya over the years that he lives at the estate, but surprisingly it leaves him seemingly worse off than he was before moving there, which in part can be attributed to the decaying natural environment.

Another similar theme Chekhov highlights is the connection between individual health and the natural environment. Having the doctor, Astrov, as the most ardent supporter of the environment is a very intentional choice as it ties the idea of human health to environmental health and stresses the mutual relationship they have with each other. Professor Serebryakóv’s poor health and desire for its improvement also fit within this theme of self-improvement and rejuvenation in the countryside, however, Chekhov makes it clear that while provincial living was once considered natural and pure, its “noxious fumes” now poison the inhabitants (107). The professor’s abrupt departure, claiming that he “cannot go on living in the country,” highlights how both environmental decay, along with the social decay of his relationships with others at the estate, are closely linked and degrade his quality of life (98). With nothing done by the end of the play to counteract the downward trend of environmental quality or that of individuals’ lives, one is left with little hope and a boding sense of gradual and inevitable decay.