Doubt, a Parable

by John Patrick Shanley

“A superb new drama written by John Patrick Shanley. It is an inspired study in moral uncertainty with the compellingly certain structure of an old-fashioned detective drama. Even as Doubt holds your conscious attention as an intelligently measured debate play, it sends off stealth charges that go deeper emotionally. One of the year’s ten best.”—Ben Brantley, The New York Times

“[The] #1 show of the year. How splendid it feels to be trusted with such passionate, exquisite ambiguity unlike anything we have seen from this prolific playwright so far. Blunt yet subtle, manipulative but full of empathy for all sides, the play is set in 1964 but could not be more timely. Doubt is a lean, potent drama . . . passionate, exquisite, important, and engrossing.”—Linda Winer, Newsday

Chosen as the best play of the year by over 10 newspapers and magazines, Doubt is set in a Bronx Catholic school in 1964, where a strong-minded woman wrestles with conscience and uncertainty as she is faced with concerns about one of her male colleagues. This play by John Patrick Shanley—the Bronx-born-and-bred playwright and Academy Award-winning author of Moonstruck—dramatizes issues straight from today’s headlines within a world re-created with knowing detail and a judicious eye. After a stunning, sold-out production at Manhattan Theatre Club, the play has transferred to Broadway.

John Patrick Shanley is the author of numerous plays, including Danny and the Deep Blue Sea, Dirty Story, Four Dogs and a Bone, Psychopathia Sexualis, Sailor’s Song, Savage in Limbo, and Where’s My Money?. He has written extensively for TV and film, and his credits include the teleplay for Live from Baghdad and screenplays for Congo, Alive, Five Corners, Joe Versus the Volcano (which he also directed), and Moonstruck, for which he won an Academy Award for original screenplay.

Genres: Plays, Drama, Theatre, Fiction, School, Historical Fiction, Read For School

58 pages, Paperback

First published April 26, 2005

About the author

John Patrick Shanley was born in The Bronx, New York City, to a telephone operator mother and a meat-packer father. He is a graduate of New York University, and is a member of the Ensemble Studio Theatre.

For his script for the 1987 film, Moonstruck, Shanley won the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and the Writers Guild of America Award for Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen.

In 1990, Shanley directed his script of Joe Versus the Volcano. Shanley also wrote two songs for the movie: "Marooned Without You" and "The Cowboy Song."

In 2004 Shanley was inducted into the Bronx Walk of Fame.

In 2005, Shanley's play Doubt: A Parable was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Drama and the Drama Desk Award and Tony Award for Best Play. Doubt: A Parable, is featured in The Fourth Wall, a book of photographs by Amy Arbus in which Shanley also wrote the foreword.

In 2008, Shanley directed a film version of Doubt starring Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams.

Reviews

[Bill Kerwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thought-provoking play about the Catholic Church in the 60's that is true to its title by refusing to settle for easy answers.

[Dream.M · Rating 4 out of 5]

بعد از شنیدن این کتاب که بوسیله دوستانم خونده شده،( و منم یک بخش رو خوندم) کرک و پر برام نمونده از بس صداهاشون خوبه لعنتیا و از همینجا ماچ به همشون😘

نمایشنامه "شک " خیلی کوتاهه، کل کتاب ۹۵ صفحه‌اس و خوندنش خیلی کم وقتتون رو میگیره؛ ولی به قدری قدرتمند ، فوق العاده و پخته نوشته شده که در پایان تمام فکر شمارو درگیر و حساس میکنه.
این نمایشنامه دو رویه داره.
۱_ ماجرای یک کشیش مظنون به پدوفیلی، و اینکه آیا اون از دانش آموز رنگین پوست خودش در مدرسه‌ای مذهبی، سواستفاده جنسی کرده یا نه؟
در این رویه، خواننده در مقام قاضی قرار میگیره و با تردید و شک سعی میکنه با کمک گرفتن از غریزه خودش و نشانه ها، به نفع یکی از طرفین ماجرا یعنی کشیش ( در جایگاه متهم) یا راهبه( در مقام دادستان)، داوری کنه.
۲_ داستانی درباره چگونه روبرو شدن با شکها و تردیدهامون. نکته اصلی اینجاست، اینکه وقتی ذهنمون دچار تردید و شک میشه، از طریق چه روشی و با چه قدرتی برای برطرف کردنش اقدام میکنیم.
....
داستان با انتقال پدر فلین به یک مدرسه‌ی دیگه تموم میشه و خواهر آلویسیوس درست وقتی که بنظر میاد به هدفش یعنی خلاص شدن از پدر رسیده، دچار شک میشه. آیا تصمیم درستی گرفته؟ آیا قضاوت عجولانه ای کرده؟
نویسنده هیچ سرنخی بهمون نمیده، قضاوت با خواننده اس.
.......
در مورد خودم، قلبا به خواهر آلویسیوس گرایش دارم. این سمت ماجرا بودن روحیه کاراگاهی و مشکوکم رو بیشتر ارضا میکنه. این اواخر فیلم گان گرل ، بیفور آی گو تو اسلیپ و هانسل گرتل رو هم دیدم و یجورایی فکر میکنم همیشه آدم مهربونا اونقدر که بنظر میاد نایس نیستن .
......
این نمایشنامه رو قراره روخوانی کنیم و بخش کوتاهیش افتاده به من. حالا هی میخونمش، صدام رو عوض میکنم و به شکل احمقانه‌ای استرس میگیرم. قبلا از کتاب روخوانی کرده بودم ولی نمایشنامه خوندن اونم برای یه جمع بزرگسال خفن... آخ خدا سلسله بول گرفتم😂😂😂
بنظرم اعتماد به نفسم کم شده مدتیه 😑
باید اون کتاب هنر ظریف چی چی رو بخونم مثل اینکه

[Carol · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! Gripping drama all the way!

I don't read many plays; as a matter of fact, this is only my third one (lame I know) but after reading DOUBT I definitely intend to knock-off a few on my to-read list in 2016.

Set in 1964 at St. Nicholas Catholic Church, this thought-provoking story involving two nuns, a priest and the mother of a young black boy, reads like an intense investigative mystery maintaining a high level of "questionable" suspicion throughout, and the formidable presence of Sister Aloysius will keep you intrigued and wondering what she will say or do next.

As for Father Flynn, he gives a couple of great sermons in this fast-moving read, one asking his parishioners to think about how quickly hurtful gossip can spread and not be retracted with an example given of releasing all the feathers from a pillow into the wind, and then asking yourself........now, how many can I recollect? Hmmm.........

And last, but not least, there's the shocking interview with Mrs. Mueller, the mother of a young boy who attends St. Nicholas school, and you just won't believe this conversation.

If you shy away from reading plays like I generally do, treat this one as the exception. There is so much drama and substance in these 58 powerful pages that address suspicion of sexual abuse, gossip, homosexuality and racism that make it definitely worth the read.

Note: This is the first review I've written since the GR font change.........VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE !

[Bren fall in love with the sea. · Rating 5 out of 5]

“If I could, Sister James, I would certainly choose to live in innocence. But innocence can only be wisdom in a world without evil. Situations arise and we are confronted with wrongdoing and the need to act.”
― John Patrick Shanley, Doubt



Saw the film.

Quite awhile ago.

It's about..doubt. It was wonderful and I would recommend anyone..any really interested reader or movie goer..read the play or see the film.

SPOILERS:

I talked about this for quite awhile with my family..my whole family loved this as well. And my parents have worked in counseling and psychology so this really appealed to both of them.

It does not provide any easy answers but it does get you talking and you will not forget it. Highly recommended. Five stars.

SPOILER:

Still sends chills down my spine at the end:

"I have doubt. I have so much doubt."

[Brian Yahn · Rating 4 out of 5]

If Doubt taught me anything, it's never mess with a nun.

In what sounds like a total snooze-fest, John Patrick Shanley pits a vetted nun against a questionably liberal priest, and in just a few pages, he creates the exact opposite: a page-turning drama that's more than surface deep. He twists a giant knot of tension by intertwining four highly conflicting desires, none of which are clearly malicious or just.

Doubt makes you doubt every character's motives, question the integrity of their actions, and best of all it forces you to reflect on your own judgement of right and wrong. To top it off, the dialog is crisp and comes with plenty of zingers. I'm not sure what else I can expect out of 45 pages...

[Grace (BURTSBOOKS) · Rating 5 out of 5]

5 stars for the preface alone

[Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

(4.5)

“Aren’t the things that actually happen in life more worthy of interpretation than a made-up story?”

“No. What actually happens in life is beyond interpretation. The truth makes for a bad sermon.”

Riveting and virtually flawless. Perhaps a little short if anything - but its brevity doubtless key to its impact.

[George K. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Το θεατρικό αυτό έργο, που κέρδισε το βραβείο Πούλιτζερ το 2005 και που αποτελεί τη βάση για την ομότιτλη ταινία του 2008 σε σκηνοθεσία του ίδιου του συγγραφέα, εκδόθηκε και κυκλοφόρησε για πρώτη φορά στα ελληνικά μέσα στον Φεβρουάριο. Μιας και τον τελευταίο καιρό έχω φάει μια... λόξα με τα θεατρικά έργα, θα ήταν αδύνατο να μην αγοράσω και να μην διαβάσω (και) το συγκεκριμένο, που είναι αρκετά πολυδιαβασμένο και κατά γενική ομολογία πολύ καλό έργο.

Περίληψη: "Σε ένα Καθολικό σχολείο στο Μπρονξ της Νέας Υόρκης τη δεκαετία του 1960 ένας χαρισματικός ιερέας, ο Πατέρας Φλιν, προσπαθεί να εκσυγχρονίσει τις αυστηρές δομές του σχολείου, τις οποίες υπερασπίζεται σθεναρά η αυστηρή διευθύντρια του εκπαιδευτικού ιδρύματος, Αδελφή Αλοΰσιους Μπωβιέ. Όταν εκείνη θα διαπιστώσει ότι ο ιερέας δίνει ιδιαίτερη προσοχή σε έναν απομονωμένο από τους συμμαθητές του μαθητή, θα επιδιώξει να τον εκδιώξει από το σχολείο. Χωρίς να διαθέτει ισχυρές αποδείξεις και στηριγμένη μόνο στις δικές της βεβαιότητες, θα θέσει σε κίνδυνο τη θέση του ιερέα, το μέλλον του αφροαμερικανού μαθητή, αλλά και τη συνοχή της κοινωνίας του σχολείου".

Πρόκειται για ένα σχετικά σύντομο θεατρικό έργο, αρκετά ενδιαφέρον και καλογραμμένο, που εμμέσως πλην σαφώς θίγει διάφορα σημαντικά ζητήματα γύρω από τον Καθολικισμό και την ανθρώπινη κοινωνία γενικότερα, όπως η σύγκρουση ανάμεσα στην πρόοδο και τον συντηρητισμό, αλλά και την αβεβαιότητα και τις αμφιβολίες ενός ανθρώπου. Είναι ένα θεατρικό έργο που κρατάει το ενδιαφέρον του αναγνώστη από την αρχή μέχρι το τέλος, έχοντας και μια ατμόσφαιρα μυστηρίου. Το μόνο σίγουρο είναι ότι λίαν συντόμως θα δω την ομότιτλη ταινία.

[Cloudy · Rating 4 out of 5]

به عنوان کسی که اعتمادش به همه چی کمه، به تمام شخصیت‌های این کتاب به طور همزمان شک دارم. :))))))) احتمالا تا مدت‌ها ذهنم درگیر می‌مونه و هرگز هم شکم برطرف نمی‌شه. حتی اگه نویسنده بیاد بگه جریان چی بوده به خود نویسنده هم شک می‌کنم. 😒😒 البته به نظرم این نشون می‌ده که خوب نوشته شده.
نمایشنامه‌ی کوتاه جذابی بود و مرسی از گروه قشنگمون و پیشنهاد این کتاب و صداهای خوبی که بلندخوانی کردند.

[Sara]

«شک میتونه ریسمانی به قدرت و نیرومندی یقین باشه»

[William · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Scene VII of John Patrick Shanley's "Doubt," Father Flynn admits to Sister James that he fabricated a story he told in a sermon on gossip. "What happens in life is beyond interpretation," he tells her. "The truth makes for a bad sermon. It tends to be confusing and have no clear conclusion."
"Doubt," which was later expanded into an excellent movie, won the 2005 Pulitzer Prize for drama in no small part because it adheres to these words.
Father Flynn's is the first voice to confront us, giving us a short sermon on doubt. We immediately like him because his voice is familiar and modern, even though the play's action takes place in 1964. He reassures us that to doubt makes us part of a larger community, struggling to make sense of all around us. Doubt obscures the truth we strain to see, but it bids us on further, changing who we are in the process. The community hearing these words beyond the church likes their easy comfort. There is no reason to take tough stands and make hard choices. Salvation is free and easy, just as God is.
We then encounter Sister James, a bright, enthusiastic teacher with the Sisters of Charity in the Bronx. She is speaking to the school principal, Sister Aloysius. We like Sister James also, because of her sunny enthusiasm and zeal for her students. She is eager and loving and quick to forgive and forget, just as God is.
Zeal describes Sister Aloysius also - but zeal of a different sort. We don't necessarily like her. In a few words of dialogue, she comes off as judgmental, unnecessarily rigid, callously traditional and authoritarian. She warns Sister James not to let students use ballpoint pens as it destroys their penmanship. She chides her for "performing" rather than teaching. And she criticizes her as overly innocent, not only to her students but to the dangers around them. "Innocence is a form of laziness," Sister Aloysius says.
There is something in us that does not like Sister Aloysius, but this feeling diminishes the longer she talks. She is vigilant, just as God is, because the world is not on our side. We recognize her as the stereotypical Catholic school nun who rules over her charges with an angry kind of devotion and puts the smell of brimstone in their nostrils. But the longer she talks, the more we perceive why she is this way. She tells Sister James to think less about herself and observe what is around her. This is sound Christian advice - after all, the sisters are there to serve. In doing so, we can perceive what follows in two different ways.
Time passes, and Sister James returns to indirectly report what Sister Aloysius suspected - Father Flynn may have had inappropriate contact with Donald Muller, the school's only black child. Did Sister James perceive something because Sister Aloysius inspired her to, or did she actually see something she wants to discount because of how she feels about the sister?
The backdrop of "Doubt" - the Catholic sex abuse scandals of the last decade - gives us reason to draw conclusions from the action. But Shanley's characters cannot be so easily pegged, nor is this play simply yet another indictment of the Catholic Church. Flynn may indeed be innocent, but there is something in his quickly offended manner that feels guilty. Sister Aloysius may be a martinet with a vendetta against a priest she sees as overly accommodating, but we are willing to go along with the behavior if she is right about Father Flynn's guilt. We want to think the best of Sister James as she struggles between the two poles of opposition, but we see her partially in the same light as Sister Aloysius, and in the same way we see ourselves. Sometimes doing the right thing is not as important to us as appearing to do the right thing. The stakes in this - the life of a child - can easily be ignored so long as our lives continue and our self-images remain. It is this climate that allowed many guilty priests to survive in parishes for so long, with so many lives destroyed.
But Shanley doesn't construct an easy dragon for vanquishing, on either side of this contest. Just consider, for a moment, how "Doubt" could have ended. If Father Flynn, for example, had been proven to be guilty, then Sister Aloysius' determination would have been justified in our eyes. We might have drawn a conclusion that her traditional ways are superior to the more modern teaching and social styles of Flynn and James. If Father Flynn had been proven innocent, then we would see Sister Aloysius as the play's villain, the forces of openness and virtue having triumphed over the church's long catalog of overzealous homegrown persecutors.
But the play is about doubt, which means that neither outcome will happen. Indeed, no real accusation is ever fully stated. The worst intimation is that Flynn gave Donald wine. When Sister Aloysius confronts Flynn about what may have happened, he responds, "What exactly are you accusing me of?" This is to be expected, and it may be calculated on Flynn's part. He could be goading the sister to either make an accusation or retreat, gambling perhaps that she will retreat. She instead reminds him that she hasn't accused him of anything, but merely asked him what happened. The accusation is one he perceives - but he is right in assuming there is one.
The audience will side one way or another, but they will see that perhaps a traditional nun, no matter how dictatorial, may have been that way for a reason. They may see that a man accused cannot necessarily prove himself innocent without losing something, or everything, in the process. They will see that choosing sides is never so easy as rallying to a cause against this or that irredeemable force.
Shanley throws another wild card into the works with the entrance of Donald's mother into the play, who is summoned for a conference with Sister Aloysius. Nothing is ever spelled out, but Donald's mother is clear on one thing - Donald is different. Does this mean he is receptive to what Sister Aloysius believes are Flynn's homosexual advances? We aren't sure. We do know that Donald is different enough to spark angry beatings at the hands of his father. The mother tells Sister Aloysius plainly that she is willing to put up with whatever attention Father Flynn gives, because it will only last until the school term is up. Donald needs this education. She is willing to ignore the rest. As with much of this play, we suspect what is going on- but we don't know for sure.
This adds another layer - not of race, though Donald's blackness adds to the tension. Father Flynn is a man, and still in a position of authority in 1964. (It is interesting that this play takes place just before the Sexual Revolution.) Sister Aloysius, Sister James and Donald's mother have to navigate their powerlessness. Even Sister Aloysius must be circumspect in how she proceeds with her accusations, knowing that they could be easily ignored by her male superiors within the church. Donald's mother doesn't care about the sister's concern - she will side with her son "and those who are good to him," meaning Father Flynn.
The mother also offers this judgment: "You can't hold a child responsible for what God gave him to be." In the current environment, this sounds like an defense of what we perceive is Donald's homosexuality. But what of Father Flynn? Did God make him a child predator? Is he a child predator? What is Donald? We are never sure. Even this statement, which appears to be a defense, cannot be digested whole.
Shanley is not content to give us an ending with Father Flynn quietly removed from the parish. Indeed, he is promoted, and even the rock solid Sister Aloysius is left to doubt whether her suspicions were ever correct.
But there is also the layer of faith to all of this. We must never forget these characters are devout and carry on their lives in a community of belief. Does Father Flynn's promotion mean that God has protected him from a false accusation, or is this ironic comment on the protection the church provided predatory priests for decades? Does the fact that such things happen give us serious doubts about the justice of God, or even His existence? That feeling of emptiness, where something has occurred but we are not sure of its exact nature, readmits us to the community of doubt where we began the play. There is no last word, Shanley says, not even in a church, an indeterminate distance short of Heaven.

[Zahra · Rating 4 out of 5]

از مقدمه ی نویسنده:
شک چیزی نیست مگر فرصتِ ورودِ دوباره به زمانِ حال.
.
روزگار دشواری شده است که اعتقادات به لغزش در می‌آیند و ریاکاری در رفتارِ ما، دست آویزی می‌شود برای پوشاندنِ آن لغزش‌ها، هنگامی که ضمیرِ خودآگاهِ ما آسیب دیده، ولی عوض نشده و هنوز خودش است‌.
.
شک جرئت و نیروی بیشتری می‌طلبد تا تعهد؛ به خاطر این‌که تعهد جایی‌ست راکد و ساکن، و شک بیکران است و نامحدود و تمرینی مشقت‌بار.
.
ما مجبوریم یاد بگیریم که باید بیش‌ترِ اوقات با شک زندگی کنیم.
.
خوندن این نمایشنامه تصادفا همزمان شد با تماشای اپیزودهایی از سیزن ششم سریال دکستر که مدام صحبت از شک و ایمان و اعتقادات مذهبی در میونه. بخاطر همینم این روزا بیشتر از همیشه ذهنم داره حول این مفاهیم میچرخه و در سرم سوالات زیادی شکل میگیره.
اگر مایلید یک نمایش نامه‌ ی کم حجم درباره‌ ی شک شکل گرفته بین دو فردِ در خدمت مذهب بخونید تا شمارو وارد بازی شک و یقین کنه، این کتاب رو از دست ندید. "شک" به راحتی خواننده رو با خودش همراه میکنه و با پایان بازش اونو وادار میکنه که بر اساس تصمیم خودش به سمت یکی از طرفین ماجرا نزدیک تر بشه. البته من در نهایت هم به خواهر آلویسیوس و هم به پدر فلین حق دادم و نتونستم بگم کدوم به کدوم برتری دارن.

[Lisa Hickman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well I sunk to an all time low. I sat in B&N today and read this entire play. It wasn't that long; only around 60 pages. At least I bought 4 other books.

Doubt makes you question what you think is true. I recognized myself in some of the passages of this book. In the introduction, the author asks if there has ever been a time when you've argued a point to the point when you question yourself. Do you become blinded by your own convictions?

The play revolved around two nuns, a priest and a young black boy in the 1960's. It confronts issues of homosexuality, racism and sexual abuse in the Catholic church. Central to all these themes is individual biases and the role of gossip. How often do we interpret things through our own preconceived notions, then influence others with our beliefs? And how are we swayed by the influence of others? This story is thought provoking and powerful. I liked the sermons, especially the one comparing gossip to feathers in the wind. Once they spread, it's impossible to gather them all back up and you don't know where they'll land and how far they'll reach.

This is a quick must-read. Now, I must check out the movie!

[Ashley Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 stars, rounded up.

I've said it before and I'll say it again -- reading a play doesn't give you the nuance you get when you participate in or watch a performance. The words are good (and there are some fantastic monologues), but tone and vocal inflection are EVERYTHING.

[Uroš Đurković · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kao što je to i inače slučaj sa dobrim dramama, 'Sumnja' ostaje na ključnim mestima otvorena. Tek se odlukom režisera dolazi do mogućeg razrešenja, čak i kada je, kao ovde, u igri i ambivalencija do samog kraja. I tu mogućnost bih i ja podržao kao verovatno umetnički najdalekosežniju. Jer, ukoliko bi se neka strana jasno zauzela, prevideo bi se da je ovo ne samo komad o prikrivenom nasilju, već i o, samo naizgled paradoksalno, veri u sumnju. Naše saznanje je uvek ograničeno i prava je sreća kad uopšte možemo da nešto jasno činjenično utvrdimo. Te situacije su retke, ali nisu nemoguće. Ipak, ono što je u životu i za život presudno: kao što su etički ili religiozni nazori, opire se raščlanjivanjima. I često dok nešto racionalno seciramo, život prolazi i tek upleteni neposredno u neki problem dolazimo do momenta prave odluke, koji je često intuitivan, impulsivan, relativan i obojen uverenjima, pa i zabludama. Ne samo da je neophodno, već je i nemoguće izbeći ovakvo reagovanje. Greške su, naravno, nužne, ali tako stvari funkcionišu.

Ukoliko ljudi dozvole sebi da shvate da je sumnja snaga vere, svet će biti malo bolje mesto.

[Tung · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Pulitzer-prize winning drama for 2005. Set in 1964, Doubt revolves around the head of a Catholic school (Sister Aloysius), one of her teachers (Sister James), and the priest of the school’s church (Father Flynn). Father Flynn is or is not guilty of child abuse; Sister James is or is not a participant in the discovery of the truth; Sister Aloysius is or is not jumping to conclusions based on personal biases – hence, the title of the play. While set in 1964, the play resonates well in the post-Catholic-Church-Sex-Abuse-scandal era, especially when you contrast Sister Aloysius’s no-nonsense stand against the secrecy and cover-ups we know actually occurred within the church. And just when you think the play is only a criticism of pedophilia in the church, it also manages to touch upon race relations in the 1960s, homosexuality, and the tension between social change and traditional structure. Overall, the play is devilishly good: the dialogue is tone-perfect; the tension well-balanced; and the moral nuances well-managed. Worth the read.

[Narges · Rating 4 out of 5]

زنی با دوستش درباره‌ی مردی که به‌سختی می‌شناختش، حرف زد. اون شب خوابی دید. یک دست بزرگ جلوش ظاهر شد که به سمت پایین اشاره می‌کرد. این باعث شد زن احساس گناه کنه. روز بعد، رفت تا برای یه کشیش پیر به اسم پدر اوراک اعتراف کنه. همه‌ی ماجرا رو تعریف کرد و پرسید: «شایعه ساختن، گناهه؟ اون دست خدا بود که به من اشاره می‌کرد؟ من باید طلب بخشش کنم! پدر، بهم بگید! من کار اشتباهی کردم؟»

پدر اورک گفت: بله! بله! اشتباه بدی کردی زن! درباره‌ی همسایه‌ات سریع قضاوت کردی و آبروش رو بردی و باید قلباً شرمنده باشی!

زن گفت متأسفه و طلب بخشش کرد. پدر گفت: نه به این سرعت! می‌خوام بری خونه، یه بالش رو به سقف ببری با چاقو ببُریش و برگردی اینجا!

زن به خونه رفت، یه بالش از تختش و یه چاقو از دراور برداشت، از پله‌های اضطراری بالا رفت و روی سقف بالش رو پاره کرد. بعد هم برگشت پیش پدر.
پدر پرسید:بالش رو با چاقو پاره کردی؟

– «بله پدر!»

+«ونتیجه چی بود؟»

– «پَر!»

+ «پر؟»

– «همه جا پُر از پَر بود پدر!»

+ «حالا می‌خوام برگردی، تا آخرین دونه ی پری رو که باد برده جمع کنی و برگردی!»

– «اما این غیر ممکنه! من نمی‌دونم اونا کجا رفتن! باد اونا رو همه‌جا پخش کرد!»

+ «و این، شایعه هست!»

[SARAH · Rating 3 out of 5]

شک... از ان دست نمایشنامه ها بود که صرف عنوان اش مرا شیفته خود کرد،داستان یک کشیش،و دو راهبه،در سه تیپ شخصیتی،راهبه ای تند رو که به ایمان و یقین رسیده،راهبه ای جوان ،میانه رو که هنوز در دوراهی شک و ایمان دست و پا میزند،و کشیشی که سعی دارد با نیاز روز جامعه خود را همسو کند،اوانگارد طور، مثلا.با این وصف بارزکه پرچمدار شک است شک از نوع پرسشگری و جستجو گری بدون ارزیابی و قضاوت... راست اش این نمایشنامه بیشتر از انکه در توصیف شک باشد در مذمت ایمان است یقینی کوردلانه،ایمانی سفت و سخت که مبرا از دلیل و پرسشگری است در برابر شک قد علم کرده... و سوال پرسش که نماینده پرسش جستجو گری است...ته نمایشنامه به خودم که اتفاقا از ان دسته افراد منضبط هستم ،از ان ها که نظم و چارچوب و قانون را میپرستند.... به خودم گفتم .... لعنت بر تو و ان خدای نظم تو.....ایکاش کمی منعطف تر بودی.... کمی راحتتر ،کمی جور دیگری بودی.... خودم را خیلی شبیه خواهرالیسیوس دیدم..که چه کاریکاتور گونه تصویر شده بود متعب و منجمد مغز، انگار یقین اش موجب تعصب و جمود فکر ای اش بود!!!. همان راهبه سفت و سخت ومومن به مقررات.... و چقدر از خودم بیزار شدم.... ولی راست اش این روزها در گیر پذیرش خودم هستم.... سعی میکنم خودم را همان طور که هستم دوست بدارم حالا گیریم سفت و سخت و سرد وبی روح.باشم....دوست داشتم نمایشنامه بذر ایده ای در باب شک را در ذهنم بکارد ؛که بنظرم سوگیری متن بیشتر در جهت ستایش شک و پرسشگری بود... کاش کمی هم جانب خواهر الیسیوس را می گرفت؛ کاش خواهر الیسیوس انقدر اغراق شده تصویر نمیشد... یک انتی گونیست سیاه و مضحک شاید.... خط کش نویسنده در جهت گیری و قضاوت کمی اشکار بود.... من پیچیدگی را بیشتر دوست میدارم......از نوع فینچری و پایان های باز که در ذهن و روح ما به زندگی خود ادامه می دهند.....

[Neda · Rating 3 out of 5]

امتیاز واقعی 3.5
کتاب کوچولویی بود درباره شک و اینکه هر چیزی رو از زاویه شک و تردید ببینیم بیش از اینکه یقین و باور داشته باشیم. شاید این شک از نگاه مذهبی حتی خوب هم باشه تا ما رو در اعتقادمون به چیزی که پیدا می کنیم، راسخ تر کنه اما زندگی با شک و تردید به نظرم آرامش ازش پر میکشه. وقتی داشتم به کتاب گوش می کردم نگاه خواهر الویسیوس و خواهر جیمز رو بیش از اینکه شکاکانه ببینم، قضاوتگر حس کردم. خواهر الویسیوس به واسطه حرفهایی که از خواهر جیمز درمورد پدر فلین شنیده، شخصیت پدر فلین رو مورد قضاوت قرار میده و خواهر جیمز هم صرفا با شواهدی که دیده و سناریویی که در ذهن خودش ساخته و پرداخته کرده، به قضاوت در مورد رفتار پدر فلین پرداخته. این قضاوت زودهنگامه که به نظرم همیشه دردسرسازه نه خود شک. در این تقابل طرف هیچکدوم نبودم و بیش از همه دیدگاه اون مادر پسره رو دوست داشتم که همه چیز رو همونطور که می دید قبول می کرد و قضاوت بیجا نمیکرد.

[Cheryl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lots to think about and discuss. Never mind having the high school kids perform it, just have them read it and argue about it. The most engaging question might be whether or not Mrs. Mueller was right to say 'only until June' but there are plenty of other questions raised, too. Engaging, concise, topical.

Plays can be great, since they really do need to skip all sorts of narration, descriptions of scenery, etc. This one is exemplary: only four characters, short property list, only four sound effects, no special effects, only two sets (neither or which need a backdrop, really).

I'd like to read more.

[✨ Anna ✨ | ReadAllNight · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant.

There is so, so much going on in these pages. Shanley packs in philosophy, Catholicism, how the church operates within and around it. Patriarchy, women as nuns, do they have a life?

While this play is short, it's story will stay in your head long after. As the best plays accomplish so much with so little, Doubt belongs in that rarified world.


Growing up Catholic, so much resonates with me.

[Pouria · Rating 3 out of 5]

شک: یک تمثیل / جان پاتریک شنلی / ترجمه ی آزاده شاهمیری / نشر قطره / 90 صفحه / تاریخ اتمام کتاب: پنج شنبه 13 دی ماه 1397 / امتیازم به کتاب از پنج نمره: سه
نمایشنامه درون یک مدرسه ی مذهبی رخ میده که توسط کشیش ها و راهبه ها مدیریت میشه. یکی از راهبه ها آدم بسیار شکاک به هرچیزیه و یکی از کشیش ها برعکس او، خوش قلب و مهربان و انسان دوست هست. یک شخصیت دیگه هم این وسط هست که موضع خودشو درست حسابی نمیشناسه و یه وقتایی اون وریه یه وقتایی این وری.
پایان نمایشنامه نسبتا باز بود و آخرش معلوم نمیشه انسان شکاک درست می گفته یا کشیشه. البته نکته هم همینه که خودمون قضاوت کنیم و ببینیم درونمون بیشتر کدوم سمتیه. چند خطی از نمایشنامه بیشتر به دلم نشست و میشه گفت از شنیدنشون حس خوبی بهم دست داد چون کمتر گفته میشه دیگه این چیزا این روزا:
"فلین: آدم هایی هستن که انسانیت شما رو ازتون می گیرن خواهر جیمز، و بهتون میگن نوری که در قلب تونه، نوعی ضعفه. می گن احساسات رئوف شما بهتون خیانت می کنن. من این رو باور ندارم. این شگرد نخ نمای انسان های بی رحمه برای کشتن محبت به نام پرهیزگاری. باورش نکنین. عشق هیچ اشکالی نداره."

"خواهر جیمز: حس می کنم همه چی وارونه شده.
فلین: این طور نیست. فقط مواقعی تو زندگی هست که آدم حس می کنه گم شده. تنها شما نیستین. این اتفاق برای خیلی از ما میفته."

"پاک ترین اعمال می تونن در نظر یک ذهن آلوده ناپاک ترین ها باشن."

[fran · Rating 3 out of 5]

the preface sent me into a spiral of doubt; i am now in a crisis

[Sean Blevins · Rating 5 out of 5]

How do we live in a world of uncertainty? What is the cost of doubt?

Shanley forces us to shoulder the weight of unknowing through his archetypes. Sister Aloysius and Sister James represent suspicion and trust, certainty and doubt. We must choose between them, not only for the purposes of his parable, but daily, in our lives and moment-to-moment interactions.

*2022 Re-read*

Focusing on the tension between what is said and what is unsaid, and perhaps most interesting of all, the unsaid said. So much of the play is the latter. In our first meeting with Sister Aloysius she says, "I'm sorry I'm not more forthright, but I must be careful not to create something by saying it." Instead, she creates something by not saying it: it is the unsaid said that creates.

Beyond this, there is a refusal to acknowledge the unsaid said: "I'm not accusing you of anything" Sister Aloysius says later, while accusing Father Flynn of abusing a child.

Only Mrs. Muller is given the opportunity to call this trait out in Aloysius: "You're the one forcing people to say these things out loud. Things are in the air and you leave them alone if you can. That's what I know." Aware of the many different kinds of powerlessness to which she is subject, Mrs. Muller advocates leaving the unsaid unsaid.

And of course the greatest unsaid said in the play: Father Flynn's resignation. Is it, as Sister Aloysius believes, a confession, or is it simply an expression of his resignation?

[Sr3yas · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Despite the National Review Board's own estimates that there have been some 5,000 abusive priests in the US, to date 150 have been successfully prosecuted."
- The Guardian,2006

Last year when I was watching the movie "spotlight", I was horrified beyond my senses by the atrocities done by those who were involved in the act as well as in the cover up. While the movie portrays true events on how an outside party tried to stop the darkness, this fictional drama portrays an inside party (sister Aloysius) who doubts that a priest (father Flynn) is taking advantage of a student. The tough part is, as a nun, she have no authority over him nor any proof.

This is well written play which won pulitzer back in 2005. The story is,for me, tragic. The characters as well as monologues in the play are well developed and well written. The final three acts will truly put you through an emotional whirlwind, especially Scene 8.

Highly recommended.

[Kelly Armstrong · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really like this play. Can't believe it has taken this long for me to read it!!! Love Shanley's writing style. Don't skip the introduction (must admit I am guilty of this) there is some good stuff there.

[Casey Harvey · Rating 4 out of 5]

The best thing about this play is its subtlety. Throughout, the issue at hand is never explicitly said, however the audience can infer quite early on what the unnameable thing is, and that makes the dance around it that much more eloquent and haunting.

[Bert · Rating 4 out of 5]

So good! Incredibly well written and thrilling, one of my favourite plays, I hope one day I get to see a production of it. The dialogue between Sister Aloysius and Father Flynn is the stuff great plays are made off.

It’s a brisk and brilliant masterpiece!

[Desiree Rico · Rating 5 out of 5]

this extraordinary play asks a lot of moral questions but doesn't give you any answers. instead the author leaves it to the reader/ audience to continue the discussion long after the play ends.

[Mohammad Javad · Rating 3 out of 5]

.