Creditors

by August Strindberg

Creditors is a play written by the Swedish author August Strindberg. It was first published in 1888 and premiered in Stockholm in 1889. The play is a psychological drama that explores the themes of love, betrayal, and revenge.The story revolves around three Adolph, his wife Tekla, and his friend Gustav. Adolph is a struggling artist who is deeply in love with his wife, Tekla. Gustav, who is also an artist, arrives to visit Adolph and quickly becomes suspicious of Tekla's intentions. He convinces Adolph that Tekla is unfaithful and manipulative, and that she is using him for his money and artistic talent.As the play progresses, Gustav's influence over Adolph becomes more and more apparent. Adolph becomes increasingly paranoid and jealous, and ultimately confronts Tekla about her supposed infidelity. The play ends with a shocking revelation that turns the tables on the characters and exposes their true motivations.Creditors is considered one of Strindberg's most powerful and influential plays. It is known for its complex characters, intricate plot, and intense emotional drama. The play has been adapted for film, television, and stage productions around the world, and continues to be studied and performed by scholars and theater enthusiasts alike.ADOLPH. [Uneasily] I don't know. You live with a woman for years, and you never stop to analyse her, or your relationship with her, and then--then you begin to think--and there you are!--Gustav, you are my friend. The only male friend I have. During this last week you have given me courage to live again. It is as if your own magnetism had been poured into me. Like a watchmaker, you have fixed the works in my head and wound up the spring again. Can't you hear, yourself, how I think more clearly and speak more to the point? And to myself at least it seems as if my voice had recovered its ring.This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the old original and may contain some imperfections such as library marks and notations. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions, that are true to their original work.

Genres: Plays, Drama, Theatre, Fiction, Swedish Literature, Classics, Audiobook

64 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1888

About the author

Johan August Strindberg, a Swede, wrote psychological realism of noted novels and plays, including Miss Julie (1888) and The Dance of Death (1901).

Johan August Strindberg painted. He alongside Henrik Ibsen, Søren Kierkegaard, Selma Lagerlöf, Hans Christian Andersen, and Snorri Sturluson arguably most influenced of all famous Scandinavian authors. People know this father of modern theatre. His work falls into major literary movements of naturalism and expressionism. People widely read him internationally to this day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_...

Reviews

[Nahed.E · Rating 4 out of 5]

أنت لست إلا ما أخذت، والدائنون سيظهرون آجلا أم عاجلا

السؤال: حين يظهرون هل سنكون مستعدين للدفع ؟

فكر قليلا في حياتك، ستجد نفسك مديونا في كل لحظة من لحظات حياتك، بداية من لحظة ميلادك، وحتي وفاتك، وبعد وفاتك أيضا، ربما تظل مديونا، ولا أقصد هنا دين الأموال فقط، لا، فهذا أسهل دين يمكنك رده، هناك دين التربية، والرعاية، والشرف، والسمعة الطيبة، وكوب الشاي الذي تقدمه لك والدتك، وسقف المنزل الذي يرعاك فيه والدك، فلقد أخذت الكثير، ويوما ما سيتوجب عليك رد الكثير

أنت دائن أيضا .. غيرك يدين لك بالكثير، ومهما قلت في نفسك أنك لا تنتظر الرد، إلا أنك ستتذكر الخير الذي فعلته لغيرك حين يرده لك بالإساءة
وربما فعلت الشر، فتوقعه مصيرك أنت ايضا يوما ما

بنقول في المثل المصري: كله سلف ودين
ونقول أيضا من أعمالكم سُلط عليكم

المشكلة في توقيت الرد .. متي ؟؟
متي سيتوجب عليّ رد ديني ؟ وبأي طريقة ؟

إن الانتقام أصعب أنواع الرد، وكما يُقال : إن الانتقام
طبق يقدم باردا
فالدائن لا ينسي دينه أبدا، مهما أوهمك بأنه قد نسي، وسيجعلك تدفع بالطريقة التي ترضيه هو، فترد الدين، وفوقه غرامة التأخير، الفوائد المركبة من الحسرة والندم وتعب السنين

فلا تنسي دينك، لأن الدائن لن يتركه
...
أوغست ستريندبيرغ .. الكاتب السويدي الشهير، لقد أصبحت من الكتاب المفضلين لدي، وسيكون لك ملف باسمك في مكتبتي المتواضعة
🌷🌷

[Heba · Rating 4 out of 5]

أنت مدينٌ لي ..
لا تتساءل مجفلاً أنا ؟؟!....أجل أنت..
كما إنني اود طمأنتك بأنني كذلك مدينة لك...
كلنا دائنون..ومدينون..
من منا لا يدين للآخر باعتذار..، كلمة شكر..، امتنان..، طلب الصفح والمسامحة....
لابد وعلى كل منا أن يشعر بأنه مدين للآخر بدين عليه سداده دون مطالبة وإلا لاستولى علينا الشعور بالأنانية والغرور الأجوف ولتوهمنا أنه باستطاعتنا الاكتفاء بأنفسنا...
هذه المسرحية تنتمي للأدب السويدي من فصل واحد حيث تجسد كيف يمكن للمرء أن يفني ذاته من أجل الآخر ، يُبدد كل ما يملك ليدرك في النهاية انه يود الاحتفاظ بما لم يكن له...
عندما يبذل المرء العطاء ينتظر الأخذ ، فتلك طبيعة انسانية يستحيل التنصل منها ...، حتى اذا ما خذله الآخر عندئذٍ يصبح كالدائن الذي يطرق الأبواب مطالباً بالدين، تصفع الأبواب في وجهه ..لقد غدا مرفوضاً ..لم يعد مرغوباً...
قد يحيل ذلك الحياة جحيماً ..وهنالك من يطغى عليه الرغبة في الانتقام عندئذٍ يحاول جاهداً أن يسترد ولو جزء من الدين وإن كان ذلك يعني أن يُحطم كيان الآخر ويدمر حياته....
واخيراً .. الكاتب السويدي " اوغست سترندبرغ" يبهرني بقدرته على تجسيد حياة في فصل واحد يخبرك بكل شيء...

[Ali Salehi · Rating 1 out of 5]

دوستان میخوایم راجع به «طلبکارها» از «استریندبرگ» حرف بزنیم که متاسفانه از کار قبلی که ازش خوندم (جرم داریم تا جرم) عقب تره.
طرح داستانی تا حد زیادی گُنگ و برای نمایشنامه کوتاهه.داستان زنی که از شوهر اولش طلاق گرفته و دوباره ازدواج کرده و شوهر اول وارد زندگی مشترک زن و شوهر جدیدش میشه. خب؟ بقیه‌ش چی؟ هدف این مرد چیه؟انتقام؟خودش که میگه انتقام هدفم نیست.زن سابقش رو برگردونه؟ میگه این هم نیست.
هدف نمایش ، صرفا برای نویسنده معلومه (تحلیل روانکاوانه ذهن انسان و دغدغه زندگی مشترک) اما برای مخاطب هرگز معلوم نیست.
نویسنده به قصد خلق تراژدی جلو میاد اما اصل اول کاتارسیسم رو (بر خلاف شکسپیر فقید) نمیدونه.اصل اول کاتارسیسم میگه :«برای خلق تراژدی نیاز به دو چیزه :1.قهرمان 2.سقوط قهرمان» و این سقف لذت از هنرهای نمایشیه. که درست هم هست.
اینجا هیچکدوم از دو اتفاق نمی افته.
شخصیت گوستاو ، بی هدفه و معلوم نیست که منفیه؟ یا صرفا یک فرد بازنده در زندگی مشترکه؟اینا ساخته نمیشه و اونوقت نویسنده فکر میکنه که همینطوری میتونه تراژدی بسازه. آدلف ، باید قهرمان این تراژدی باشه.پس چرا انقدر منفعل و بدبخته؟مگه بدبخت ها هم قهرمان میشن؟
مشکل بعدی من با دیالوگ هاست. متاسفانه دیالوگ ها خیلی از اوقات از دغدغه اصلی نویسنده دور میشن و این یه شوک بد به نمایشنامه‌ست.
مشکل بعدی اثر تک پرده‌ای بودن این دغدغه سنگینه.چرا تک پرده‌ای بودن به اثر ضربه میزنه؟به فرض این اثر اجرا بشه.آیا مخاطب ها نباید بین هر پرده حداقل چند دقیقه به اثر فکر کنن؟فرصت تامل و تعقل رو هرگز نباید از مخاطب بگیریم.
درباره ترجمه جناب نعلبندیان ، که فرصت آشنایی با ایشون رو این اثر فراهم کرد عرض کنم : ترجمه نسبتا خوبی بود منتها علت این نوع رسم‌الخط عجیب برای اثر رو درک نکردم.
سرمجموع: طلبکارها از استریندبرگ ، یک نمایشی هست که خوندنش با نخوندنش هیچ فرقی نداره و تاثیری بر مخاطبش نداره.

[Maritina Mela · Rating 1 out of 5]

The Creditors by August Strindberg is a short play featuring three main leads.
Adolf, a sickly artist, Thekla, his wife who is a writer and Gustaf, Thekla's ex husband who travels under a pseudonym and wants to take revenge on them both.

The married couple, who travel as siblings for some reason -and treat each other as such even when they are alone- spend most of their time apart. Thekla is socializing with everyone but her husband and Adolf spends his time, almost, all alone. See, he has made a friend within these past few days and he keeps him company when Thekla is out. He is a professor who, for some reason, advices him on how to stop being jealous of his wife, and shames him for worshipping her still.

The professor, who is actually Thekla's ex husband whom she abandoned in order to run away with Adolf, tells him to put his advice into practice when she returns, while he will remain hidden in the next room.

When Thekla comes back, she tells Adolf about the time she spent alone and who she met but he is having none of it. He expresses his jealousy again and again only to be shamed about that.

After that, he exits and she is left alone. And it doesn't take long for Gustaf to get back there and surprise her. They are catching up but he confesses that he isn't over her and wants to take her back. And then he kisses her. But after the kiss, he reveals that all along he had a plan. Manipulate Adolf to see her as she really is so that he would start acting up instead of being passive and their relationship would sour, as well as ridiculing her in front of everyone (thus why he kissed her). He also admits that she ruined all women for him and that's why he doesn't wish to be married again.

While he talks, strange noises start coming from the next room. Thekla forces her way into there only to discover Adolf lying half dead on the floor after having a seizure. She is taken by his loss, begins to mourn and begs for him to regain consciousness. Gustaf, speaking to himself, realizes that she really did love Adolf and now feels pity about her.

And that's how the play ends.

I think this was a slight improvement over the last play I read by Strindberg, Miss Julie but not by much. At least reading this didn't made me hate myself, and I think I am gonna give it to the guy, at least he knew how to compose a complete sentence.

But again, I was met with so many things I didn't like.

Given the fact that this play, similar to the previous one, has a very weak plot, I think I am going to describe its flaws by listing what I didn't like about the characters.

First of all, let's talk about Gustaf, the scorned husband. Of course he is going to be angry after he is abandoned by his wife. But his character never gets any more depth than that of the ex husband. Probably the author wanted to also show us how smart he is, since he conducts a plan to mess the lives of Adolf and Thekla. And that's a big maybe.
He also says the most weird things. And the most misogynistic things if I may say.

For example, one of his advices to Adolf, is abstinence because if he is having too much sex, he will be prone to seizures (well, he did die because of one but I think that happened because he saw the love of his life kissing her ex).
And of course, I wouldn't leave out the misogyny. It was a main focus in Miss Julie and it's still the main focus here.

Gustaf, tells Adolf that he shouldn't love a "worthless, stupid and provocative creature, whose power comes only from what's between of her legs, who owes her ideals and place in society to him and who does nothing but bleeding once every month."
Because God forbid women being more than their sexual organs, show off their skin, and are given credit for their accomplishments, instead of the guy taking it! I know one could say that these are not the author's thoughts but the characters' but let me remind you again, that this is not the first time I read something considered misogynistic by him.

Also, his "women are just little boys with breasts" line, uhm, dude, that's creepy -and wrong-.

Even the pity Gustaf feels for Thekla in the end, I don't think it was because his plan ended up costing Adolf's life, but because in his eyes, he is also weak and worthless, and how dare Thekla pick Adolf over him!

But Thekla herself is not any better.
First of all, she is a cheater, which is never a good look. And not only to Gustaf, but to Adolf as well (keep that in mind kids once a cheater, always a cheater )
Specifically to Adolf, she makes no effort to hide the fact that she has met and charmed many other men, and similar to Gustaf, shames him for expressing his jealousy, although each of them does it for different reasons.

Also the fact that she calls him brother even when they are alone, but are in fact a couple, that's creepy too!

She is emotionally detached from Adolf and I don't know what made her feel like that or why she still is with him. Seeing why their relationship is like that or why she doesn't end it would be interesting, but we never actually figure that out. Oh, and I almost forgot. She shames him for being sickly and says she is tired of being his nurse. Now, I understand that being a caregiver is sometimes very hard, but, I tend to feel more sympathy for the sick individual, so, sorry, but that's another negative trait in my book!

The only character I have some sympathy for, is Adolf. He is in poor health, the woman he loves cheats on him and the man he considers his friend doesn't think of him as such. But unfortunately he is also not very well written.

I honestly tried my best to make myself clear. I hope I achieved that. But yeah, as you can see, this was another negative experience.

If you made it this far, congratulations!
'Til next time, take care :) :) :)

[Narjes Dorzade · Rating 3 out of 5]

سه کاراکتر منفعل استریندبرگ
که بر هم زخم می‌زنند و از هم زخم می‌پذیرند.
اگرچه به اندازه‌ی سه قطعه‌ی هانتکه شاهکار نیست،اما در بچواک‌های نعلبندیان همیشه چیزی شکننده وجود داره.

[Kuszma · Rating 2 out of 5]

"GUSTAV: Lehet, hogy te is idióta vagy?
ADOLF: Nem, az azért nem..."

De, Adolf, de.

Kedves August Strindberg!

Azért te most engem egy árnyalatnyit felb*sztál.

Arról persze nem tehetsz, hogy azt hittem, ez egy kisregény, közben meg kiderült, egyfelvonásos színdarab. Lehetett volna annyi eszem, hogy belelapozok a könyvbe, mielőtt kikölcsönzöm.

Az viszont kizárólag a te sarad, hogy írtál száz oldalt az exed iránt érzett frusztrációdról, és azt hitted, ez művészet. Dehogy. Legjobb esetben is csak terápia, metaforikus bosszú azzal szemben, aki értelmezésedben kasztrált magasztos férfiasságodban. Más szavakkal: szánalmas proto-incel hőbörgés.

A történet amúgy azzal kezdődik, hogy van Adolf (még Adolf is!), meg a barátja, Gustaf. No most ők ketten a legrosszabb kombó: Adolf ugyanis hülye, Gustaf meg hülyeségekkel tömi a fejét. (Mint kiderül, némi hátsó szándékkal.) És ha egy hülyének hülyeségekkel tömik a fejét, akkor a végkifejlet borítékolható. Ugye Adolfnak van egy felesége, bizonyos Tekla, aki egyfajta energiavámpír, és Adolf szerint kiszopkodja belőle az alkotóerőt. Ezért nem tud kiemelkedő művészi teljesítményt nyújtani. Azonban az alapján, amit Adolfról látok, szerintem nincs mit belőle kiszopkodni. Kábé annyira sugázik belőle a kreatívitás flowja, mint egy koszlott nyúlszőr usankából. Persze lehet, tévedek, és Adolf egy reinkarnálódott Vermeer, ám ez nem derül ki, mert berobban a színpadra Tekla a maga démonikus vibe-jával. Meggyőződésem, Strindberg Teklát egyértelműen irritálóbbnak akarta ábrázolni Adolfnál, de az a helyzet, hogy ez nem sikerült. Nyilván nem segít a férfin, hogy a viták közben hajlamos epilepsziaszerű rohamokat kapni, talán mert ez értelmezésében ez egy jó érv az igaza mellett. Igazi drama queen. Akárhogy is, a felek hamarosan egy olyan érzelmi jégesőt idéznek elő hármasban, hogy azt nézni is kínos.

Ha már színdarab: olvasás közben elgondolkodtam azon, létezik-e olyan színész, aki Adolfot el tudná úgy játszani, hogy ne szánalmasnak tűnjön, hanem a tragikus vonásai domborodjanak ki. Nem jutott egy se eszembe.

[Ali Karimnejad · Rating 3 out of 5]

اگرچه جنبه‌های زن‌ستیزانه در نمایشنامه وجود داشت، اما در عین‌حال جنبه‌های روانکاوانه‌ هم داشت که من خیلی خوشم اومد.

واکاوی عشق "آدولف" به زنش، بنظر من بسیار هنرمندانه و ریزبینانه بود. ولی به "گوستاو" و "تکلا" که می‌رسیم، نویسنده وارد فازهای ناتورالیستی می‌شه و دیگه خبری از واکاوی رفتارها نیست و این کمی توی ذوق می‌زد.

[Navid Taghavi · Rating 4 out of 5]

گوستاو : او (همسرت) را برای چه می‌خاهی؟
آدلف : پیش از این که کافر بشوم، خدا را برای چه می‌خاستم؟ برای پرستش.
گوستاو : احتیاج به پرستش را دفن کن و بگذار گیاهی سالم‌تر بر گور آن سبز شود. مثلن، یک تحقیر مفید.
آدلف : من اگر چیزی برای پرستش نداشته باشم، نمی‌توانم زندگی کنم.
گوستاو : برده!
آدلف : من اگر زنی برای پرستش نداشته باشم، نمی‌توانم زندگی کنم.
گوستاو : اوه، اگر تو باید چیزی داشته باشی که به ن وسیله خودت را تحقیر کنی، پس ترا به خدا دوباره به خدایت برگرد. کافری که زن را می‌پرستد! روشن‌فکری که نمی‌تواند آزاد فکر کند. آیا واقعن متوجه‌ی این کیفیت مرموز ابوالهول‌مانندِ عمیقی که در همسرت هست، نیستی؟ احمقانه است! نگاه کن! او حتما حروف الفبا را هم نمی‌تواند از هم تشخیص بدهد. فقط لباس؛ همین. به‌اش شلوار بپوشان، با مداد یک سبیل زیر دماغش بکش؛ و متین و خونسرد؛ بنشین و به حرف‌هایش گوش بده. آن وقت متوجه تفاوتی که هست، می‌شوی. او فقط ضبط صوتی است که حرف‌های تو و آدم‌های دیگر را تکرار می‌کند؛ منتها کمی رقیق‌تر ... تو هیچ وقت یک زن برهنه را دیده‌یی؟ خب، حتمن. یک مردِ کامل نشده. بچه‌یی که رشدش نیمه‌کاره مانده. جوانی که پستان در سینه‌اش دارد. آدم کم‌خونی که به طور منظم سیزده بار در سال دچار خون‌ریزی می‌شود. چه انتظاری از همچو مخلوقی داری؟
آدلف : اگر همه چیزهایی که می‌گویی راست است، پس چرا من هنوز هم او را با خودم یکی می‌بینم.
گوستاو : وهم! جاذبه‌ی دامن او؛ و ... شاید هم در حقیقت شما شبیه هم شده‌یید.
طلبکارها
استریندبرگ
عباس نعلبندیان
فرامرز صدیقی در سال 1356 طلبکارها را کارگردانی کرد و در کنار منوچهر فرید و فرزانه تاییدی در تله تئاتر بازی کرد. خوشبختانه نسخه‌ای از تله تئاتر طلبکارها در اینترنت موجود است و می‌توان آن را دید.

[Fatemeh sherafati · Rating 4 out of 5]

ترس از از دست دادنی که همیشه برای من مانعی بود که لذت ببرم، تو شخصیت آدولف دقیقا قابل درک بود برام. و اینکه انقد این ترس خورنده باشه، که عوامل بیرونی، با یه تلنگر کوچیک بتونن همه چیز رو نابود کنند.

انتهای نمایشنامه، دلتون می سوزه. برای لذت هایی که تبدیل به درد شدند.

[Leslie · Rating 4 out of 5]

After I listened to the audiobook of the play, I went back and reread some sections in my Kindle edition of "Plays by August Strindberg, Second Series" and read the introduction to the play as well. One important fact that the introduction provided was that Strindberg wrote this play "... only a year before he finally decided to free himself from an impossible marriage by an appeal to the law...". Even with the wife Tekla clearly being portrayed as the "bad" one in the marriage, I noticed that there was a strong vein of feminism (similar to Ibsen's Hedda Gabler in many ways). For example, Tekla saying to her second husband:

  "Isn't that lovely! Women can be stolen as you steal children or chickens? And you regard me as his chattel or personal property. I am very much obliged to you!"

The 'creditors' of the title are Tekla's former & current husbands as described in this passage:

  Adolph: "To love like a man is to give; to love like a woman is to take. -- And I have given, given, given!"
  Tekla: "Pooh! What have you given?"
  Adolph: "Everything!"
  Tekla: "That's a lot! And if it be true, then I must have taken it. Are you beginning to send in bills for your gifts now? ..."

And indeed he is, egged on by Gustav who Adolph doesn't realize is Tekla's former husband.

While none of the characters are completely 'true to life', they act out a situation & emotions that are. A thought-provoking play that I need to ponder further...

[Pink · Rating 2 out of 5]

I remember thinking this was okay, but three months later I can remember nothing about it without having to look it up. Never a good sign.

[Shervin Bakhtiari · Rating 4 out of 5]

استریندبرگ عزیزم. واقعا استاد دیالوگ‌نویسیه. درجه یک.

[Darya Cheloei · Rating 3 out of 5]

مردها میل غریزی اشتباهی برای تربیت کردن زنان دارند.

[Kirk · Rating 1 out of 5]

I didn't read this but a couple months ago we saw a production at the Aurora Theatre in Berkeley (an excellent theatre company, this review notwithstanding), and it's one of those that was so abysmal I haven't been able to quite get it out of my system, hence I turn to Goodreads. Spoilers ahoy but I care not. So...

The idiocy of the play hit home for me when I realized the true context of the opening scene. Adolph, an impossibly weak and ineffectual man, husband to Tekla, is confiding to an older man, Gustav, every possible humiliating aspect of his marriage. So you think, well ok, obviously they are old friends with a level of trust that Adolph feels he can unburden himself. You'd think, wouldn't you? But no, as the play develops you come to realize Adolph has only known Gustav for a week. Yes, one week. And not only does he almost eagerly confide every dysfunctional detail and stray thought regarding his marriage to Tekla, you also learn that he's decided to ditch his career as a painter and turn to sculpture instead, why? Because Gustav, his bff of one entire week, made a couple comments suggesting that would be a good idea. Yes, really. You also learn that Tekla (yet to appear on stage) had a previous marriage until she dumped the guy for Adolph. Hmmm, might that be significant?

So who is this Gustav person? Well if you've never seen a play or read a story or even watched television before, why he's just this amiable stranger who's visiting the area and just happened to befriend Adolph and... --Wait! You don't think he might actually be Tekla's ex, do you? NO!! YES!!! NO!!! BUT YES!!!!

So Tekla returns, surprisingly not breathing fire and with several horns coming out of her head but pretty much normal, even nice. Gustav hides in another room. (This play relies ALOT on that device, making one wonder if Strindberg might be a spiritual father of bad sitcoms.) Adolph contrives to provoke an argument with Tekla over, I dunno, something because reasons--oh, and Gustav suggested it--then pretends to storm off, but actually goes to the room where Gustav is hiding. Then Gustav appears to Tekla, and hey, they know each other! oh right, I already spoiled that bit. Anyway, having just had an upsetting argument with her husband, Gustav takes about ten minutes to pretend to be nice and have no ulterior motive at all, and manipulates Tekla into agreeing to an assignation later that evening. By the way, even though he's listening in to all of this, and had no idea Gustav was Tekla's ex, Adolph stupidly does nothing and just continues to eavesdrop.

Eventually Gustav drops the pretense, admits he contrived all this just to get back at Tekla for leaving and humiliating him years before, says by the way, your husband has been listening to all this on the other side of that door, Tekla rushes to the door, a stricken Adolph collapses and dies, Gustav twirls his mustache in triumph and exits stage obvious, THE END.

My wife commented that this play makes Strindberg look like the original incel. Pretty much.

[Mohammed Abdikhader Firdhiye · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wouldnt say i enjoyed this play because it was about like many other Strindberg plays about males who try to defeat/seduce a woman and women written like a sort of maneating monster. The dialouge was powerful,technically,character wise it was more impressive than Miss Julie to me.

Tekla the female lead was not a weak victim like Miss Julie, i liked that. Strinderg had to make strong to show how her husand became weak because of her.

August Strindberg is better playwrighter than novelist but too many stories of his feel like he uses his fiction to fight back the winds of change in late 1800s when there were groups of women who wanted more rights. He is more interesting when he writes dream like plays and not realistic naturlism dramas about gender roles,family.

[Katerina Koltsida · Rating 5 out of 5]

Η μισογυνικη σταση απέναντι στα φυλα και η αποστροφή στο θεσμό του γάμου χαρακτηρίζουν και το έργο του Στρίντμπεργκ, ΔΑΝΕΙΣΤΕΣ.

Ένα έργο δωματίου, με τρεις χαρακτήρες μόνο, σε έναν ανελέητο αγώνα δύναμης κι επικράτησης, μέσα από το προαιώνιο ερωτικό τρίγωνο και την πάλη των φύλων.

Η κεντρική ηρωίδα του έργου, η Τέκλα, ταλαντούχα συγγραφέας και δυναμική, ανεξάρτητη γυναίκα, χαρακτηρίζει ηλιθιο τον πρώτο της σύζυγο σε ένα βιβλίο της. Ζει σήμερα ευτυχισμένη με τον καταξιωμενο ζωγραφο δεύτερό της άντρα, Άντολφ, του οποίου είναι η μούσα, σε μια σχέση, όμως, εύθραυστη. Ο Γκουσταφ, με ένα σατανικό σχέδιο, καταφέρνει να πάρει την εκδίκησή του.

Στο έργο κυριαρχεί η στρατηγική για την εκδίκηση, μεσα απο εκπληκτικους διαλόγους ανάμεσα στους τρεις χαρακτηρες. Η πρωταγωνίστρια, όμως, αποδίδεται ως δημιούργημα των δύο συζύγων της, που τη διέπλασαν στο χαρισματικό και ταλαντούχο πλάσμα που είναι σήμερα. Αλλά παραείναι ανεξάρτητη κι η σκέψη της υπερβολικά ελεύθερη, η βούλησή της αξιοσημείωτα δυνατή, φτάνοντας στο σημείο να προσβάλει τον Άντρα. Κι έτσι πρέπει να συντριβεί, αφού έχει ξεπεράσει τη λεπτή εκεινη γραμμή που θα την κρατούσε εξαρτημένο ενεργούμενο.

[Eghlima · Rating 3 out of 5]

نسبت به دو نمایشنامه‌ی قبلی بیشتر توانستم با این یکی ارتباط برقرار کنم. دست‌کم تکلا شخصیت منفی نمایشنامه نبود و با این‌که همچنان نگاه استریندبرگ در کلیتش زن‌ستیزانه است، کمی ملایم‌تر از دو نمایشنامه‌ی قبلی بود. گوستاو واقعاً شخصیت عجیبی بود و البته مشابهش را آدم در زندگی زیاد می‌بیند. رابطه‌هایی که گویی هرگز تمام نمی‌شوند، احساس مالکیت در رابطه، تناسبات قدرت و تأثیری که رابطه روی هر نفر از طرفین می‌گذارد چنان به‌طرز بی‌پرده و عریانی در این نمایشنامه بررسی می‌شوند که آدم واقعاً موقع خواندنش از شدت تند و تیزی حقایقی که توی صورتش برخورد می‌کنند اذیت می‌شود اما همین جالب و ارزشمندش هم می‌کند.

پ.ن. آقای نعلبندیان چرا این‌طوری فارسی می‌نویسی؟

[Gill · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this as part of a group read. I can imagine it would have been more powerful on stage than to read, especially at the time it was written. the use of epilepsy as part of the structure of the play is very dated. I don't find it appropriate, but this is a play from a completely different era.

[PastelKos · Rating 2 out of 5]

emmmmm

[Birol Erdogan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sahnede izlemek emin müthiş olurdu

[Aalaa · Rating 1 out of 5]

كلنا دائنون ومدينون


ولكن حين يأتي وقت الرد هل ستمتلك ما تدفع ؟!

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure if I know how to feel about this play. I have found that Strindberg's works make me feel uncomfortable, which strikes me as a really odd sensation. Creditors was, in all essence, a bit haunting. In this play, two friends, Gustav and Adolphe, discuss Adolphe's wife, who actually used to be married to Gustav. Gustav makes Adolphe feel uncomfortable, then leaves him to argue with his wife. After Adolphe has left, Gustav tries to hit on his wife unsuccessfully, but little do they know that Adolhpe got so utterly stressed out that he had a massive seizure. Wow.

I don't really like the tone that Strindberg takes towards women. He makes the claim that women are not to be taken seriously, and if they are, that will result in death. I'm not sure that that's such a good message to be conveying, even if I'm fairly sure that he was merely responding to Ibsen's feminist plays for some part. Regardless, I dislike his attitude because it is so distracting. Other than that, this play worked as a relatively short one-act play.

[Amy · Rating 2 out of 5]

August Strindberg - misogynist or genius? (or both?) Not sure what to think of this, except that I would very much like to see it in production.

[Young Amadeus · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great play about the lingering guilt Adolf and Tekla feel over the way their relationship began. Adolf stole Tekla away while Gustav, her husband, was abroad. The affair became a scandal and made Gustav a laughing stock.

Years later, it is clear that all is not well between Adolf and Tekla. Their dynamic has changed. Tekla seems to have consumed Adolf. He worked tirelessly to elevate her, strengthen her, inspire her, and bring her into new circles, only to find himself exhausted by the very person he helped create.

The way Strindberg describes this is particularly interesting. As in much of his work, there is tremendous power and insight in his understanding of male-female dynamics, the psychological cost relationships take over time, and the shifting power within intimacy.

I also love the play’s use of the term “creditor” as a metaphor for guilt. Guilt becomes a debt that must be paid when the creditor comes knocking. There is a monologue Strindberg gives to Gustav that beautifully illuminates this idea:

Gustav: But in their hearts they know that there is someone who can see them through the darkness, and they become frightened, and then, once they are frightened, the absent one begins to haunt them—he looms larger, is transformed, and becomes a nightmare which disturbs their blissful slumbers, a creditor knocking on the door. They see his black hand between theirs as they eat at table, they hear his harsh breathing in the stillness of the night, which no sound should disturb but the thumping of their pulses. He cannot stop them from having each other, but he can disturb their happiness. And they sense his invisible power, they try vainly, to flee from the memory which dogs them, from the debt they have left unpaid, [from the reproach of public opinion] and because they lack the strength to carry the burden of their guilt, a scapegoat must be found and sacrificed. They were freethinkers, but dared not go to him and tell him to his face: “We love each other!” Well, they were cowards, and so they had to lay his ghost. Am I right?

Another section I found very inspiring is when Gustav, albeit deceptively, offers Tekla one last night together so they may forget one another for good. I loved that image. The idea of exhausting one’s memories through a farewell is very beautiful, though too romantic to be true. That being said, it is a seductive fantasy: the idea that one could exercise one’s fantasies so fully that they lose their power.

Gustav: Yes. We shall say goodbye. We shall drown our memories in a drunkenness so deep that when we wake from it we shall have lost our memories. One can drink as deeply as that, you know. [Puts his arm round her waist.] His sick spirit drags you down, infects you with melancholy. I shall fill you with new life, I shall make your talent bloom again in its autumn like a September rose.

The only thing I didn’t like was the ending. It felt a bit over the top for such a psychologically nuanced play. I understand that Gustav plants the idea of epilepsy in Adolf’s mind and that Adolf internalizes it completely, but I didn’t fully buy the execution. The collapse makes sense symbolically, as though Adolf’s body finally pays the debt his mind has been made to believe in, but dramatically it felt too blunt.

Gustav plays a role similar to Iago in Othello, though he has a more personal reason for doing so. He is not simply malicious for the sake of it. He has been humiliated, displaced, and made into a public joke, and he returns not only to destroy the couple but to make them feel the debt they owe him.

A great play, full of sexual tension and power, with sharp insight into love, fidelity, guilt, art, and the toll relationships take on people.

[Martin Denton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Creditors is a three-character play in which August Strindberg reflects on what's worst in human intercourse and intimate relationships. It takes its title from the notion that in each husband/wife pairing there is one partner who takes and another who gives--gives so much that he or she is sucked dry.

The play is about a married couple, Adolf and Tekla. He is younger than she; he's her second husband (and one of the things that unites them is their contempt for and ridicule of her tyrannical first husband). She's a free thinker and a writer. He's a painter. Both view themselves as the "creditors" in their relationship. Did he teach her how to think and how to write, at the expense of his own art and health? (When we meet him, Adolf is a semi-invalid, unable to walk without a pair of canes, and devoid of inspiration; his new friend Gustav has suggested to him that he take up sculpting, but that doesn't seem to be a viable choice.)

Or did she nurture him, so that she is deserving of his tolerance and indulgence when she pursues flings and flirtations?

The play is divided into three scenes, each featuring a different pair of characters. Adolf and Gustav try to solve Adolf's problem in the first; then Adolf confronts his wife--bitterly and horribly--in the second. The resolution comes in the final scene, when Gustav meets Tekla. Creditors was written at the time of Strindberg's divorce, and it can feel reductive and misogynistic in places; it's also perhaps a bit longer than it needs to be. But it's compellingly raw and incisive, reducing romance and love to bleak transaction and artifice.

[Elif · Rating 2 out of 5]

Zaman her şeyi nasıl da değiştiriyor… Suya çizgiler çizerek yaşıyoruz sanki. İnsan doğasında nefretin bile köklü bir yeri yok.
.
2.5/5 ⭐️ August Strindberg’den öncesinde Açık Deniz Kenarında kitabını okumuştum. O kitabı içerisindeki kadın düşmanlığı dozundan dolayı hiç beğenmemiştim ancak yazarı nasıl beynimden sildiysem bu kitap bir şekilde okunacaklar arasında yerini almış. Alacaklılar modern tiyatronun önemli metinleri arasında kabul ediliyormuş. 3 kişilik ufak bir oyun: Tekla, Tekla’nın kocası ve Tekla’nın ilk eşi. Kısacık bir kitap zaten okuması da 1 saat anca sürüyor. Gustav kadın düşmanı pisliğin teki, Tekla’nın evliliğini yok etmeyi amaçlıyor. Adolf ise Gustav’ın yalanlarına inanmaya dünden razı sanki Othello gibi karanlığa çekiliyor. Tekla ise özgür yaşamayı ve herkes tarafından arzulanmayı isteyen bir kadın. Alacaklılar ismi kişinin her türlü ilişkide karşı tarafa verdiklerini simgeliyor. Eğer ilişki biterse bir taraf alacaklı hale geliyor. Karşınızdakini ya affetmelisiniz ya da Gustav gibi çirkin bir intikam peşine düşmelisiniz. Tekya’nın sürekli kötülenmesi, şeytanlaştırılması aşırı rahatsız ediciydi. Gustav’ın kadınlar hakkındaki düşünceleri zaten tiksindiriciydi. Modern tiyatro türünde öncülük etmiş olabilir ama sonu bana fazla dramatik gekdi. Yazarın en çarpıcı oyunlarındanmış muhtemelen başka bir kitabını okumam. Eğer tiyatroya merakınız varsa bakabilirsiniz.

[Porcelain Unicorn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Strindberg with the play "Creditors" makes a statement about what love is: happiness, dependence, necessity, addiction, anger, the fear of betrayal, need of taking revenge. A constant fight between two players who are not always equally skilled. Thus, a greek translator called Erricos Belies said about this book that resembes to a romean duel with battlefield the death itself. When you love, either you sacrifice yourself for them or you make them die for you..


Hence, there is an love triangle: Thecla, Adolf and Gustav. The characters do always appear in pairs of two, such as happening with the triangles (the three straight lines intersect by two). Apart from the obvious answer, we could also think that may Strindberg is making an attempt to talk to his inner self. May Adolf symbolizes the oppressed man afraid of losing the love of his life, and Gustav the wise self of him that has already been betrayed and tries to protect him.

[Zeynep T. · Rating 1 out of 5]

Evliliğinde eşinden tekmeyi yemiş bir yazarın aklı sıra kadınlardan intikam almak için yazdığı oyun. Tabii ki sadece kendini rezil etmiş. Biraz okuyup yazarın biyografisine baktım. Hakkında hizmetçisinin kardeşine tecavüz ettiği iddiası var. Evliliği de sorunluymuş. Oyuna dair en olgun çalışmam demiş. Bence en ergen halini ortaya koyduğu metin olmuş.

Bir okuma grubu için ele aldığım Fatih Balkış'ın Yerçekimi kitabında geçtiği için merak ettim. Yine tiksindim Kuzey Avrupa edebiyatından, şaşırtmadı.

Çevirmen Zeynep Avcı'nın emeğine sağlık.

[Henning · Rating 4 out of 5]

Om det står mellan Fadren, Fröken Julie och denna, välj någon av de förstnämnda. Strindbergs misogyna drag tycks mer nedlåtande än hatiskt och uppskrämt, vilket gör det hela lite tråkigare att läsa. Hos den försmådde råder mer upphöjt förakt än slavmoral. Pjäsens dynamik är inte helt hundra, den första dialogen är väldigt lång, och den inre logiken lägger orimligt mycket vikt vid Gustafs övertalningsförmåga.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing! Wonderfully acted. It goes deep fast. This feels more of an acting and writing exercise than a conventional 3-act play. It's a mature theme, written for mature actors to go deep into character development. Scenes are rushed even though completely articulated. Nevertheless, it was engrossing to listen to.