Chekhov's stories: differences between the good and the great

Anton Chekov's 1890s story "The Fidget" (strange title, is this a quirk of the tranlsators, Pevear-Volokhonsky?) opens many of the most famous Checkovian themes and tropes: this story about a young, artistic woman, Olga, who befriends many famous artists, singers, and writers - she's always interested in "celebrities" (another translation quirk? these are not celebrities in today's People/US mode) and though she seems to have some talents she's essentially a dilletante - she marries a very conventional guy, Dymov, a doctor, not at all like Chekhov btw, sweet and sincere and completely oblivious to art though he understands that others appreciate it and admires Olga's fascination with artists - none can quite figure what she sees in him. Of course the inevitable: Olga tires of the bland Dymov and begins an affair with one of the artists, who treats her very badly. Dymov becomes suspicious but it's not in his nature to be anything but good and trusting; at the end, Dymov becomes gravely ill (contracted diptheria from a child he was bravely treating) and he dies - Olga at the end calls out his name, futilely. So we see in her the Chekhovian sens of a character who has wasted her life and realizes it far too late; and in Dymov we have the simple but good man befuddled by the complexity of a world that leaves him out of account. Why is The Fidget, though, not among the greatest of Chekhov stories? First, I think, because it's too focused on Olga's point of view - when Dymov, with his silent suffering and forebearance, his Chist-like demeanor, is the more interesting and complex character. Second - and perhaps this follows from the first - the ending is melodramatic, Dymov dead and Olga calling his name, a reverse of La Boheme in a way, whereas the greatest of Chekhov stories (and plays) end with a more mysterious and open tone, the characters reflective and resigned, rather than in despaire.