Too Much Reality: Oates vs. Chekov

I hate to say the same thing that other people in the class have already stated, but I too must agree with the overwhelming majority of them on this. I too preferred the Chekov version of "The Lady with the Pet Dog", as compared to the version Joyce Carroll Oates wrote. I have a theory as to why we preferred the old, outdated, seemingly-unrelated-to-modern-times version:
We're all romanticists. Almost every human, man or woman, whether they admit it or not, wants to live that fantasy; that fairytale love affair. They want to find "the love of their life" in odd and unconventional ways. And a weekend (or years-long) affair seems to fit the bill quite nicely. As Heather just announced in her blog, the "Romeo and Juliet" tends to come out of people, and the yearning, and longing, and constant searching for that type of emotional connection with someone is irresistable, even if that someone or someones are fictionally written almost a hundred years ago.
Oates is a morvelous story teller, she's real without being too raw, but raw enough that one is able to connect almsot instantly with whatever character she is writing about. I'll admit, even though I liked Chekov better, I related to Oates much much more. Just as with the girl who wrote about "Disillusionment at 10 o'clock", I cried. Not hard, not sobbing, but tears were definately present. Everyone has felt the uncertainty, the guilt, the unmistakeable feeling of loving someone other than who you should. If someone hasn't, they probably will. Here's my hypothesis as to why the majority of the class prefered Chekov: Oates's version is too real. I'm not criticizing, for I loved her version, but the emotions, the pain, that was not portrayed in Chekov's version, were very VERY real, and they did not meet the fantasy, the romance, that we were all searching for. And maybe it's because Chekov's version was put before Oates's, and that set us up for seeming failure in a way.
The way the two were written, from two points of view, may of had something to do with it. One was from a man's point of view, how he "put her on a pedastle" as Dr. Sexson would say. He elevated her to beyond his reach, and therefore he was drawn to her in the most romantic of ways (and lustful. . . ). His emotions, though real, were safe to the readers. They were what we expected. Now, with Oates's version, it's the opposite. It was from the woman's point of view. She loved him, her lover, and she knew it. Yet, as is mostly the case, she was ashamed of it, for she already had a husband that she "loved". And to have to actually admit to herself that she made a mistake is one of the hardest and most painful things of all, especially when it's a mistake of love. That's what this version portrayed correctly that the other one didn't. Pain.
So, even though Dr. Sexson thought we would like the newer version better, for maybe we would relate to the times it was written in easier, the fact is, maybe that's why we didn't prefer it. We all related to it too much.