What do you think?
Rate this book
The Clue of the Whistling Bagpipes
Adaptations of two classic works through the unique lens of playwright Sarah Ruhl.
159 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
14 people are currently reading
155 people want to read
About the author
Sarah Ruhl
42 books582 followersSarah Ruhl (born 1974) is an American playwright. She is the recipient of a MacArthur Fellowship and the PEN/Laura Pels International Foundation for Theater Award for a distinguished American playwright in mid-career.
Originally, she intended to be a poet. However, after she studied under Paula Vogel at Brown University (A.B., 1997; M.F.A., 2001), she was persuaded to switch to playwriting. Her first play was The Dog Play, written in 1995 for one of Vogel's classes. Her roots in poetry can be seen in the way she uses language in her plays. She also did graduate work at Pembroke College, Oxford.
In September 2006, she received a MacArthur Fellowship. The announcement of that award stated: "Sarah Ruhl, 32, playwright, New York City. Playwright creating vivid and adventurous theatrical works that poignantly juxtapose the mundane aspects of daily life with mythic themes of love and war."
Originally, she intended to be a poet. However, after she studied under Paula Vogel at Brown University (A.B., 1997; M.F.A., 2001), she was persuaded to switch to playwriting. Her first play was The Dog Play, written in 1995 for one of Vogel's classes. Her roots in poetry can be seen in the way she uses language in her plays. She also did graduate work at Pembroke College, Oxford.
In September 2006, she received a MacArthur Fellowship. The announcement of that award stated: "Sarah Ruhl, 32, playwright, New York City. Playwright creating vivid and adventurous theatrical works that poignantly juxtapose the mundane aspects of daily life with mythic themes of love and war."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
October 9, 2025
New word to love: Toska
Spent most of this read WORKING my way through it. The nature of Chekhov, I guess. But then I found myself unexpectedly tearful on the last page (of Three Sister’s), and I wonder if some of the mysterious magic of Chekhov had worked itself on me, despite not really enjoying this read.
I KNOW this is a classic, and too many people I respect have specifically highlighted this rendition of it, so although I didn’t love it, I think there is more to appreciate and learn.
Quotes I liked:
“Russians are supposed to be lofty thinkers—right? Our heads are in the clouds—but our feet are in the mud. In life; why do we reach so low? Why?”
“Well, after we’re gone, people will most likely fly in balloons, wear a different cut of coat and discover a sixth sense. But life will essentially be just the same. It’s difficult, and happy, and fully of mystery. A thousand years from now, people will still be sighing, just as we do: Oh, life is hard!
All the same, they will fear death. And try to avoid dying. Just as we do now.”
Spent most of this read WORKING my way through it. The nature of Chekhov, I guess. But then I found myself unexpectedly tearful on the last page (of Three Sister’s), and I wonder if some of the mysterious magic of Chekhov had worked itself on me, despite not really enjoying this read.
I KNOW this is a classic, and too many people I respect have specifically highlighted this rendition of it, so although I didn’t love it, I think there is more to appreciate and learn.
Quotes I liked:
“Russians are supposed to be lofty thinkers—right? Our heads are in the clouds—but our feet are in the mud. In life; why do we reach so low? Why?”
“Well, after we’re gone, people will most likely fly in balloons, wear a different cut of coat and discover a sixth sense. But life will essentially be just the same. It’s difficult, and happy, and fully of mystery. A thousand years from now, people will still be sighing, just as we do: Oh, life is hard!
All the same, they will fear death. And try to avoid dying. Just as we do now.”
July 9, 2017
So I just read the Chekhov play and not the Woolf play. Chekhov is not my favorite, just to be honest, but I could admire the way Chekhov worked with a theme of illusion and unfulfilled dreams, and realizing what you think you want is not always that great. Definitely worth reading, and I am very excited to work on the play in the fall. I could see a lot of interesting options for staging and characterization, so I'm excited to see that take shape.
January 30, 2021
I read just the Woolf play - my favorite playwright writing an adaptation of my favorite writer, what could be better? It reminded me so much of “Faustus” and “The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue” with an androgynous twist. I love what Sarah Ruhl did with one of my favorite novels! Would like to produce and/or see this in production someday :)
Read
February 15, 2022read for a class
March 10, 2018
Let me start by saying that Sarah Ruhl is widely recognized in the theater world, and was offered by Cincinnati Rep the opportunity to translate Chekhov - it was not her idea. This out of the way, it is also a fact that she doesn't speak Russian and had to get her sister-in-law to make a literal translation of the play so that she could rewrite that translation in a way that supposedly achieved her goal of "getting to the root of the original Russian", as she writes in the author's notes to the book. This is all very convoluted, preposterous, gimmicky, insulting to professional translators (I'm not one of them, in case you're wondering) and nothing more than a transparent ploy by Cincinnati Rep to drum up interest in a Russian play in Ohio when they staged the production back in October 2009. Elsewhere, one would hope that producing one of the world masterpieces of the theater repertoire would be enough to sell tickets, but perhaps Ohioan theater-minded audiences require a little more convincing. So be it.
In itself, while this little ploy to get Americans to care about a Russian play is a bit grating (it reminds me of Americans' tendency to remake European movies to generate more income at the box office), it would be quite harmless if Ruhl's "translation" was actually good. But she simply put 21st-century colloquial English into the mouths of 19th-century Russians, giving the text an odd feel of continued anachronism and vague mediocrity throughout. In Russian (which I read), Chekhov renders the three sisters' anguish with stunning lyricism and musicality. Ruhl's translation is nothing more than lowbrow and plodding. If you care about a good translation of Three Sisters, I highly recommend the Penguin Classics edition (in Plays), translated by the late Peter Carson. Carson's work is of the highest caliber. Every line of his is like a gem that I admire both intellectually on the page and viscerally when I read the words aloud. Ruhl's translation, on the other hand, is best forgotten.
In itself, while this little ploy to get Americans to care about a Russian play is a bit grating (it reminds me of Americans' tendency to remake European movies to generate more income at the box office), it would be quite harmless if Ruhl's "translation" was actually good. But she simply put 21st-century colloquial English into the mouths of 19th-century Russians, giving the text an odd feel of continued anachronism and vague mediocrity throughout. In Russian (which I read), Chekhov renders the three sisters' anguish with stunning lyricism and musicality. Ruhl's translation is nothing more than lowbrow and plodding. If you care about a good translation of Three Sisters, I highly recommend the Penguin Classics edition (in Plays), translated by the late Peter Carson. Carson's work is of the highest caliber. Every line of his is like a gem that I admire both intellectually on the page and viscerally when I read the words aloud. Ruhl's translation, on the other hand, is best forgotten.
January 29, 2016
3.5 Stars
Okay so the "finished" is technically a lie... I only read Orlando, but that's really all I intended to read going in so it's chill. I read this for a class after reading the original novel. I can only imagine just how difficult this must have been to adapt. About 90% of the novel is internal monologue, so much so that it's actually really difficult to find where the plot points are. This was impressively done. There was a surprising amount of dialogue taken directly from the book and through the conversations and back and forth between Orlando and the Chorus, a lot of the internal monologue was able to be kept in.
This was definitely easier to follow than the book but it lacked a great deal of the introspection and examination of what gender means in the social contexts of whatever time Orlando was in at the moment (which was probably the most interesting part of the book). Of course this is understandable considering the format change. The progression of time also felt more direct and linear in the play version, like we were just speeding through time, whereas in the novel it felt very fluid and almost like time was passing in the background but just not able to touch Orlando.
Okay so the "finished" is technically a lie... I only read Orlando, but that's really all I intended to read going in so it's chill. I read this for a class after reading the original novel. I can only imagine just how difficult this must have been to adapt. About 90% of the novel is internal monologue, so much so that it's actually really difficult to find where the plot points are. This was impressively done. There was a surprising amount of dialogue taken directly from the book and through the conversations and back and forth between Orlando and the Chorus, a lot of the internal monologue was able to be kept in.
This was definitely easier to follow than the book but it lacked a great deal of the introspection and examination of what gender means in the social contexts of whatever time Orlando was in at the moment (which was probably the most interesting part of the book). Of course this is understandable considering the format change. The progression of time also felt more direct and linear in the play version, like we were just speeding through time, whereas in the novel it felt very fluid and almost like time was passing in the background but just not able to touch Orlando.
April 9, 2017
In both cases, I was a little underwhelmed by Ruhl's attack on the material. Three Sisters, while obviously a carefully researched, translated and adapted version of Chekhov, didn't emotionally engage me. And her adaptation of Orlando, while being initially quite thrilling ends with such a ponderous whimper that it left me wanting to see a production just to know if there's something I'm missing,
Read
November 4, 2013I only read Orlando because it was recommended to me by my acting teacher.
I feel like I can't give it a rating. When I finished the play I stared into space for about two minutes with a dumb struck expression on my face and whispered: "wow." It was incredible.
I don't think I can say I enjoyed it, but it was pretty damn incredible.
I feel like I can't give it a rating. When I finished the play I stared into space for about two minutes with a dumb struck expression on my face and whispered: "wow." It was incredible.
I don't think I can say I enjoyed it, but it was pretty damn incredible.
February 1, 2024
just Three Sisters
January 11, 2026
ruhl’s version of three sisters far exceeds her version of orlando. orlando’s main issue as an adaptation is simply a bit too much faithfulness to the novel—it is difficult to transfer the humor of a book to the humor of a stage just due to the nature of the forms. if she had taken more liberty with orlando, i wonder if it could’ve landed more.
February 12, 2018
4 stars for Three Sisters. Seeing this at Undermain Theater in Dallas next week.
I'll save Orlando for later.
I'll save Orlando for later.
February 13, 2019
I read Orlando, having recently completed Woolf's novel. It was feels like an excellent adaptation and I am eager to see it staged.
June 29, 2020
Two very fun plays, though quite theatrical. Orlando, like most plays, falters a bit toward the end, but an enjoyable read and very likely an enjoyable presentation, with the right talent.
October 31, 2021
Only read Three Sisters. Not sure if it's the best translation, but really enjoyed it.
March 24, 2022
Maybe no more perfect a story for Sarah Ruhl then Orlando. Give me that Thames frost fair onstage right now. And a solid Three Sisters to go with it.
May 26, 2022
truly cannot believe how astonishingly good these are
September 3, 2023
i feel like i had a stroke reading this, but at the same time i love it.
February 20, 2024
Just Orlando--very narratorial.
March 6, 2024
Only read Three Sisters
Read
September 19, 2024i just read this adaptation of orlando not the three sisters but there was no book available to log just of the one play
Want to read
September 1, 2025Only read Orlando! As a start to reading Woolf’s original & Harpman’s Orlanda.
December 8, 2011
This adaptation of ORLANDO is really fantastic. This is a strong contender for fall.
March 29, 2016
3 stars for 'Three Sisters'... 4 stars for 'Orlando'
Read
February 7, 2019Three Sisters is great but I’m here for Orlando.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews