What do you think?
Rate this book
لارگو دسولاتو
اگه منظورتون رو درست فهمیده باشم، شما میخواهید من اعلام کنم که دیگه خودم نیستم
116 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1985
2 people are currently reading
278 people want to read
About the author
Václav Havel
268 books495 followersVáclav Havel was a Czech playwright, essayist, poet, dissident and politician. He was the tenth and last President of Czechoslovakia (1989–92) and the first President of the Czech Republic (1993–2003). He wrote over twenty plays and numerous non-fiction works, translated internationally. He received the US Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Philadelphia Liberty Medal, the Order of Canada, the freedom medal of the Four Freedoms Award, and the Ambassador of Conscience Award. He was also voted 4th in Prospect Magazine's 2005 global poll of the world's top 100 intellectuals. He was a founding signatory of the Prague Declaration on European Conscience and Communism.
Beginning in the 1960s, his work turned to focus on the politics of Czechoslovakia. After the Prague Spring, he became increasingly active. In 1977, his involvement with the human rights manifesto 'Charter 77' brought him international fame as the leader of the opposition in Czechoslovakia; it also led to his imprisonment. The 1989 "Velvet Revolution" launched Havel into the presidency. In this role he led Czechoslovakia and later the Czech Republic to multi-party democracy. His thirteen years in office saw radical change in his nation, including its split with Slovakia, which Havel opposed, its accession into NATO and start of the negotiations for membership in the European Union, which was attained in 2004.
Beginning in the 1960s, his work turned to focus on the politics of Czechoslovakia. After the Prague Spring, he became increasingly active. In 1977, his involvement with the human rights manifesto 'Charter 77' brought him international fame as the leader of the opposition in Czechoslovakia; it also led to his imprisonment. The 1989 "Velvet Revolution" launched Havel into the presidency. In this role he led Czechoslovakia and later the Czech Republic to multi-party democracy. His thirteen years in office saw radical change in his nation, including its split with Slovakia, which Havel opposed, its accession into NATO and start of the negotiations for membership in the European Union, which was attained in 2004.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
July 14, 2019
Totalitarizm, otorite ve insanın varoluş sorunları; Havel Largo Desolato'da bu konuları işliyor. Karısı, sevgilisi, genç hayranı ve onu olduğundan daha fazla görmek isteyenlere karşı sürekli götürülmeyi bekleyen ürkek, tedirgin, huzursuz felsefeci Leopold ve önünde diz çökülen (görünmez) otorite... Sahnede izlemek isterdim.
August 2, 2007
Largo Desolato is probably one of the greatest plays of the 20th Century. It's right up there with Mother Courage, The Visit, and The Infernal Machine (Now you know my biases).
Havel has created a masterful expression of what it means to be an activist in the modern era - to be loved by the ineffectual and ignored by the powerful.
Havel has created a masterful expression of what it means to be an activist in the modern era - to be loved by the ineffectual and ignored by the powerful.
December 16, 2023
The dissident intellectual. Trapped in a role with repetitive interactions and little spontaneity. Lethargic and empty. Scared and neurotic. Just wanting it to end.
July 20, 2024
Professor Leopold Nettles spends his days marching through his room, peering through peephole of his door, waiting for the the government to arrest him. After writing brilliant works of philosophy that have inspired the people of his country and angered the totalitarian government, Leopold grows increasingly neurotic and inert, unable to meet the expectations of his followers by writing his next great philosophical tome that will spark the people to action, unable to experience romance, unable even to get it up in bed, or go to the bathroom—constipation being something he is literally suffering from in the play and symbolizing his current static state. His followers, lovers, enemies, and colleagues bombard him with their desires, expectations, and advice.
The most obvious level of the play addresses how totalitarian governments make ordinary life unlivable and everyday experience insane. People have to think about every last decision they make, every last thought they share, and fear that they will be imprisoned for their ideas. This atmosphere of potential arrest and terror stops Leopold from functioning.
On a deeper level, the problem is a psychological one going to the root of Leopold’s identity. One of his major fears seems to be what if he can’t live up to the words of his philosophy. The authoritarian officers that visit him offer him a chance to sign a letter repudiating his work and offer to make his problems go away, which he considers, but even then he struggles to make a decision. In the end, the officers tell him everything has been dropped indefinitely for now (a kind of double-speak) because they believe for all intents and purposes he has repudiated his work spiritually. If he signed the letter he would betray his own work, his own ideas, his own unique mark on the world, but being unable to write the next book that his followers hope will be a more clear declaration that will spring the people to action proves impossible too. His lover Lucy accuses him during a major argument of being a bullshit artist as he tries to justify his actions by quoting his colleague’s Bertram’s critique almost word for word. There is a sense that maybe she is correct and all his philosophy about love defining a person and giving them a sense of self is nonsense. Much of the problems and tension in the play center not only on the totalitarian government, but everyone else thrusting their expectations on him. He doesn’t want to be defined by others, yet to not do so also undermines his philosophy as much as signing the letter. It’s other peoples’ expectations that define you, yet that is exactly why is grating on him throughout the play. How can you be everything to everyone? There is a lot of repetition with slight variations on this theme throughout the play that emphasize both the monotony of this experience and his inertia confronting the paradox that one way or another he will have to undermine his own philosophy.
The reason he considers signing the letter is because he longs for the simpler life before his fame when he could just visit secondhand bookstores, read philosophy, takes notes, and go outside to walk in the park without fame, expectation, or fear. This freedom is a sharp contrast from the claustrophobic life inside his apartment where he never leaves and can’t concentrate enough to write or read. There is a fame versus inconsequence theme. Fame isn’t all it is cracked up to be as people and complete strangers start having unrealistic expectations for you; they can lose sight of your humanity and make you into something you’re not.
It is a work that shows how authoritarian governments can ruin lives simply by giving people fear the something might happen at any moment, but also it is a work that shows the frustration of living up to others expectations for you, and the difficulty of living up to one’s own principles.
The most obvious level of the play addresses how totalitarian governments make ordinary life unlivable and everyday experience insane. People have to think about every last decision they make, every last thought they share, and fear that they will be imprisoned for their ideas. This atmosphere of potential arrest and terror stops Leopold from functioning.
On a deeper level, the problem is a psychological one going to the root of Leopold’s identity. One of his major fears seems to be what if he can’t live up to the words of his philosophy. The authoritarian officers that visit him offer him a chance to sign a letter repudiating his work and offer to make his problems go away, which he considers, but even then he struggles to make a decision. In the end, the officers tell him everything has been dropped indefinitely for now (a kind of double-speak) because they believe for all intents and purposes he has repudiated his work spiritually. If he signed the letter he would betray his own work, his own ideas, his own unique mark on the world, but being unable to write the next book that his followers hope will be a more clear declaration that will spring the people to action proves impossible too. His lover Lucy accuses him during a major argument of being a bullshit artist as he tries to justify his actions by quoting his colleague’s Bertram’s critique almost word for word. There is a sense that maybe she is correct and all his philosophy about love defining a person and giving them a sense of self is nonsense. Much of the problems and tension in the play center not only on the totalitarian government, but everyone else thrusting their expectations on him. He doesn’t want to be defined by others, yet to not do so also undermines his philosophy as much as signing the letter. It’s other peoples’ expectations that define you, yet that is exactly why is grating on him throughout the play. How can you be everything to everyone? There is a lot of repetition with slight variations on this theme throughout the play that emphasize both the monotony of this experience and his inertia confronting the paradox that one way or another he will have to undermine his own philosophy.
The reason he considers signing the letter is because he longs for the simpler life before his fame when he could just visit secondhand bookstores, read philosophy, takes notes, and go outside to walk in the park without fame, expectation, or fear. This freedom is a sharp contrast from the claustrophobic life inside his apartment where he never leaves and can’t concentrate enough to write or read. There is a fame versus inconsequence theme. Fame isn’t all it is cracked up to be as people and complete strangers start having unrealistic expectations for you; they can lose sight of your humanity and make you into something you’re not.
It is a work that shows how authoritarian governments can ruin lives simply by giving people fear the something might happen at any moment, but also it is a work that shows the frustration of living up to others expectations for you, and the difficulty of living up to one’s own principles.
December 4, 2020
Largo Desolato (a musical term meaning slow, grand and sorrowful, and also a poem by Baudelaire) is a thought-provoking piece about a philosopher, professor Leopold Nettles, who runs afoul the authoritarian state and must decide whether to be a hero and take the punishment, or retract his “error” and resume his life as if nothing happened.
There are many dimensions to the play that ends rather neatly and, to me, somewhat surprisingly. That’s not to say, though, that the end is definitive in any way.
It would be interesting to read this without knowing the basic back story I provided above. (Thus the spoiler tag.) But that’s virtually impossible. The book jacket explains it in the first sentence. The play, though, is very mysterious about what Leopold has done. The exact “sin” is not explained. This is not about the political truth of a particular statement. The vagueness gives it a rather Kafkaesque feel.
This strangeness is reinforced by the female characters. Suzana’s relationship to the professor is never explained. She lives with him but is not a lover, and at the start I thought maybe she was his daughter but later discarded that idea. She seems to be some random person who lives with him. (A live-in maid perhaps?) Regardless, her feelings about his predicament are rather casual. She knows the state police are coming for Leopold, but she goes to the movies and then to a dance. She shows no compassion for Leopold whatsoever.
Lucy, Leopold’s girlfriend, seems relatively unconcerned until the secret police come. She’s more worried about their relationship than the potential for him to spend years in jail. In her relationship with Leopold, she sees her job to awaken the love in him so he can overcome his “ridiculous inhibitions” and “come live again.” (p. 45) Marguerite, a student who appears at the end, similarly claims she will “give you the meaning back to your [life]!” and “save” him. “Only love will give you the strength to stand up to them!” (p. 104) “Now I’ll awaken love in you!” (p. 105)
The males, incidentally, are easier to understand. They either support his subversion or oppose it.
The ambiguity about Leopold’s crime is very similar to Kafka’s The Trial. The Trial, regardless what many say, is not about a man destroyed by a nightmarish bureaucracy. It’s about a man who doesn’t know how to live – a passionless man unable to enjoy love and life. This play is much the same. Leopold repeatedly claims something has gone wrong within him, he’s lost his passion, his purpose, his meaning. Like The Trial, his punishment is self-inflicted. The absurdity and power of the authoritarian state sustains – but does not necessarily create – this limbo state of non-living.
The repetition in this play is worth noting. Leopold’s speeches about the loss of his “industry, persistence” and his “irony and self irony” are repeated almost word for word several times in the play, giving them the feel of an unfelt, rehearsed speech. He’s not even capable of enough feeling to speak spontaneously about his unhappiness.
The doubleness/repetition continues with Marguerite and Lucy who are almost identical characters, saying many of the same lines and trying to achieve the same thing. Perhaps Suzana is a similar character who earlier tried to bring Leopold “to life” but failed and is now just bitter toward him. Then there are the two Sydneys who speak as one person, and the two Chaps and two Men who are really indistinguishable. Then there is the idea of Leopold being someone else.
I guess you could call it a tragicomedy, but I would have liked to have seen more absurd comedy. But with the right players, the humor could be very strong.
This is a very good play. I highly recommend it to those who enjoy good drama and compelling ideas.
There are many dimensions to the play that ends rather neatly and, to me, somewhat surprisingly. That’s not to say, though, that the end is definitive in any way.
It would be interesting to read this without knowing the basic back story I provided above. (Thus the spoiler tag.) But that’s virtually impossible. The book jacket explains it in the first sentence. The play, though, is very mysterious about what Leopold has done. The exact “sin” is not explained. This is not about the political truth of a particular statement. The vagueness gives it a rather Kafkaesque feel.
This strangeness is reinforced by the female characters. Suzana’s relationship to the professor is never explained. She lives with him but is not a lover, and at the start I thought maybe she was his daughter but later discarded that idea. She seems to be some random person who lives with him. (A live-in maid perhaps?) Regardless, her feelings about his predicament are rather casual. She knows the state police are coming for Leopold, but she goes to the movies and then to a dance. She shows no compassion for Leopold whatsoever.
Lucy, Leopold’s girlfriend, seems relatively unconcerned until the secret police come. She’s more worried about their relationship than the potential for him to spend years in jail. In her relationship with Leopold, she sees her job to awaken the love in him so he can overcome his “ridiculous inhibitions” and “come live again.” (p. 45) Marguerite, a student who appears at the end, similarly claims she will “give you the meaning back to your [life]!” and “save” him. “Only love will give you the strength to stand up to them!” (p. 104) “Now I’ll awaken love in you!” (p. 105)
The males, incidentally, are easier to understand. They either support his subversion or oppose it.
The ambiguity about Leopold’s crime is very similar to Kafka’s The Trial. The Trial, regardless what many say, is not about a man destroyed by a nightmarish bureaucracy. It’s about a man who doesn’t know how to live – a passionless man unable to enjoy love and life. This play is much the same. Leopold repeatedly claims something has gone wrong within him, he’s lost his passion, his purpose, his meaning. Like The Trial, his punishment is self-inflicted. The absurdity and power of the authoritarian state sustains – but does not necessarily create – this limbo state of non-living.
The repetition in this play is worth noting. Leopold’s speeches about the loss of his “industry, persistence” and his “irony and self irony” are repeated almost word for word several times in the play, giving them the feel of an unfelt, rehearsed speech. He’s not even capable of enough feeling to speak spontaneously about his unhappiness.
The doubleness/repetition continues with Marguerite and Lucy who are almost identical characters, saying many of the same lines and trying to achieve the same thing. Perhaps Suzana is a similar character who earlier tried to bring Leopold “to life” but failed and is now just bitter toward him. Then there are the two Sydneys who speak as one person, and the two Chaps and two Men who are really indistinguishable. Then there is the idea of Leopold being someone else.
I guess you could call it a tragicomedy, but I would have liked to have seen more absurd comedy. But with the right players, the humor could be very strong.
This is a very good play. I highly recommend it to those who enjoy good drama and compelling ideas.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 10, 2007
For an introduction to Havel's work, I would recommend this play, as it is the one I actually felt like I understood!
Professor Nettles, a dissident in a communist country, is hounded by the government and lauded by perfect strangers--who encourage him to even greater acts of bravery while they themselves watch from the sidelines.
It is funny and again seems to shine a light on Havel's relationship with his wife Olga.
The play is thought to be autobiographical, but so many people expressed pity to Havel for his sad Nettles-like situation that he had to come out and say that it wasn't about him.
Professor Nettles, a dissident in a communist country, is hounded by the government and lauded by perfect strangers--who encourage him to even greater acts of bravery while they themselves watch from the sidelines.
It is funny and again seems to shine a light on Havel's relationship with his wife Olga.
The play is thought to be autobiographical, but so many people expressed pity to Havel for his sad Nettles-like situation that he had to come out and say that it wasn't about him.
August 1, 2024
نمایشنامهای با فضای سیاسی-اجتماعی، دربارهی فیلسوف و نویسندهای که بخاطر نوشتههایش توسط حکومت مورد تهدید قرار میگیرد. عنصر ترس شاید بارزترین وجه رفتاری اوست، و افسردگی و انزوایی که به آن دچار است شاید منشا گرفته از همین ترس ممتد است. طرفداران بسیاری دارد که از او انتظار فعالیتی فراتر دارند. در یکی از ریویوهای گودریدز وصفی خواندم که بسیار پسندیدم: «تشویق و دیدهشدن توسط بیتاثیران و نادیدهگرفتهشدن توسط تاثیرگذاران».
نمایشنامه به خوبی فضای سرکوب و سانسور و عدم وجود آزادی بیان یا به عبارتی «آزادی پس از بیان» در جوامع توتالیتر را ترسیم کرده بود. و هنرمندی که تبعات سنگین فعالیتش را به جبر انکار هویتش برای رهایی از مخمصه ترجیح میدهد.
تجربهی خوانش لذتبخشی بود.
نمایشنامه به خوبی فضای سرکوب و سانسور و عدم وجود آزادی بیان یا به عبارتی «آزادی پس از بیان» در جوامع توتالیتر را ترسیم کرده بود. و هنرمندی که تبعات سنگین فعالیتش را به جبر انکار هویتش برای رهایی از مخمصه ترجیح میدهد.
تجربهی خوانش لذتبخشی بود.
April 16, 2012
From BBC Radio 3:
Theatre critic Michael Billington introduces a classic play from the archives by Czech playwright and President, Vaclav Havel, to mark Havel's death in December last year.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01g4v38
Theatre critic Michael Billington introduces a classic play from the archives by Czech playwright and President, Vaclav Havel, to mark Havel's death in December last year.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01g4v38
September 1, 2025
“Largo Desolato” by Vaclav Havel, English by Tom Stoppard. This edition was published in 1987 when many of the author’s works were banned in Czechoslovakia. He was born in 1936 in Prague, Czechoslovakia. By 1948, it was the Czechoslovak Republic, a communist country. Education was restricted to people like Havel, considered part of the bourgeoisie. Up next was the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic until 1990. From 1948 to 1989, they were under the thumb of the Soviets.
This wasn’t so great for Vaclav Havel, who wasn’t accepted into a humanities program because of his parents’ and grandparents’ former economic status. He served in the military from 1957-59 and then began to work in a theater. He wrote plays that appealed to an international audience. All was not well in his own country as his works were banned from 1968 until late 1989. “Largo Desolato” was written in 1984 and adapted in English by playwright Tom Stoppard. The government didn’t stop at banning his plays – they jailed him multiple times. Life under fascism is not easy. But in late 1989, Havel became the first president of the newly Democratic Czechoslovakia. The breakup of the country came in 1992-3, and Havel was the first president of the Czech Republic. After his political career, he continued to fight for the rights of people.
Why am I writing all this when I’m writing a simple review? Because this play is about a professor living under a fascist regime. The authorities want him to make an admission if guilt and changes to his work. The play has a cast of characters that give this a real Theatre of the Absurd feel. I’ll not tell you what happens. If you can’t get a copy to read, then you might be able to watch on YouTube. I think I bought my copy used in the early 1990s, but it was published in 1987 while it was still banned. I don’t reread books often, but I’m glad that I still have this, which feels like a cautionary tale. I plan to find it on YouTube to watch soon.
This wasn’t so great for Vaclav Havel, who wasn’t accepted into a humanities program because of his parents’ and grandparents’ former economic status. He served in the military from 1957-59 and then began to work in a theater. He wrote plays that appealed to an international audience. All was not well in his own country as his works were banned from 1968 until late 1989. “Largo Desolato” was written in 1984 and adapted in English by playwright Tom Stoppard. The government didn’t stop at banning his plays – they jailed him multiple times. Life under fascism is not easy. But in late 1989, Havel became the first president of the newly Democratic Czechoslovakia. The breakup of the country came in 1992-3, and Havel was the first president of the Czech Republic. After his political career, he continued to fight for the rights of people.
Why am I writing all this when I’m writing a simple review? Because this play is about a professor living under a fascist regime. The authorities want him to make an admission if guilt and changes to his work. The play has a cast of characters that give this a real Theatre of the Absurd feel. I’ll not tell you what happens. If you can’t get a copy to read, then you might be able to watch on YouTube. I think I bought my copy used in the early 1990s, but it was published in 1987 while it was still banned. I don’t reread books often, but I’m glad that I still have this, which feels like a cautionary tale. I plan to find it on YouTube to watch soon.
September 15, 2012
I don't even have words to describe this play, it was a bit odd but so incredibly moving at the same time. Essentially, a philosopher in Communist-occupied Czechoslovakia that has written something has to contend with the dual forces of "the people" clamoring for him to do more, and the constant threat of punishment (presumably being sent away to a labor camp in this instance?) for what he has produced.
December 15, 2023
Sevemedim. Benim için zaman kaybı oldu. Kitabın, tanıtımının da yazılanlarla alakası olmadığını düşünüyorum.
September 26, 2025
Largo Desolato by Vaclav Havel
A wonderful surprise and an excellent play.
Vaclav Havel was a symbol throughout Europe and perhaps the world.
He fought against communism and he was not just a famous and acclaimed dissident, but also a great playwright.
In fact, I was quite envious of the Czechs or Czechoslovaks at the time of Havel’s rule for the leader they had.
We did not have a man of letters, but for the past ten years our leader was the opposite- a man who has read maybe ten books in his life.
The legend is that he dealt with infinitely more bottles of whiskey.
The first play by Havel that I have read was not my cup of tea, or I just came across it on one of my less fortunate moods.
But Largo Desolato was a wonderful surprise and an excellent play.
The hero is Leopold Nettles and he was based largely on the author himself.
Leopold lives in a totalitarian regime, even if the Czechs had it like in paradise compared with the hell of my country.
When I went to communist Hungary, I felt I reached paradise –so much better it was outside Romania, back in those days.
Still, there were shortages and from the start we get to hear about liver, instead of the absent meat and paper that is brought as a gift.
The writer is concerned about going “there”- which means that the authorities will try and jail him, on political charges.
He wrote a political text, which is appreciated by common folk- they come from the paper factory with gifts and moral support-
- You are our hope
But the other visitors are from the police and they want the author to deny his manifesto
- We do not want to take you in
- Yes…
- The authorities do not want jails packed beyond their limit
- So…
- You just deny that you are Nettles who wrote that paper
- So you want me to deny that I am …myself-
Leopold Nettles is under increasing pressure, because he knows that he will end up in prison, if he does not play along.
In fact, Havel had been in jail as an opposition leader and wrote the play after he was freed from prison.
Listening to this play made me think of my own attitude. I did not join the communist party, but neither did I oppose it as a dissident.
The thing I did against was to lie to them when they called me to ask about colleagues. I said about all the people I knew that they were marvelous and excellent, even when I knew they were lousy.
About those I did not like in the least I also said that they were great. But that is about all that I brought myself to do.
I loved it when Marguerite enters the stage, with her innocence, admiration and especially love.
On the other hand, I was envious and wish that another fictional Marguerite will become real and come to offer her love to…me.
I was more than skeptical, but now I am convinced that Havel is not just a fabulous writer- so much I had known in advance- but I also have the capacity to appreciate and even love his work.
A wonderful surprise and an excellent play.
Vaclav Havel was a symbol throughout Europe and perhaps the world.
He fought against communism and he was not just a famous and acclaimed dissident, but also a great playwright.
In fact, I was quite envious of the Czechs or Czechoslovaks at the time of Havel’s rule for the leader they had.
We did not have a man of letters, but for the past ten years our leader was the opposite- a man who has read maybe ten books in his life.
The legend is that he dealt with infinitely more bottles of whiskey.
The first play by Havel that I have read was not my cup of tea, or I just came across it on one of my less fortunate moods.
But Largo Desolato was a wonderful surprise and an excellent play.
The hero is Leopold Nettles and he was based largely on the author himself.
Leopold lives in a totalitarian regime, even if the Czechs had it like in paradise compared with the hell of my country.
When I went to communist Hungary, I felt I reached paradise –so much better it was outside Romania, back in those days.
Still, there were shortages and from the start we get to hear about liver, instead of the absent meat and paper that is brought as a gift.
The writer is concerned about going “there”- which means that the authorities will try and jail him, on political charges.
He wrote a political text, which is appreciated by common folk- they come from the paper factory with gifts and moral support-
- You are our hope
But the other visitors are from the police and they want the author to deny his manifesto
- We do not want to take you in
- Yes…
- The authorities do not want jails packed beyond their limit
- So…
- You just deny that you are Nettles who wrote that paper
- So you want me to deny that I am …myself-
Leopold Nettles is under increasing pressure, because he knows that he will end up in prison, if he does not play along.
In fact, Havel had been in jail as an opposition leader and wrote the play after he was freed from prison.
Listening to this play made me think of my own attitude. I did not join the communist party, but neither did I oppose it as a dissident.
The thing I did against was to lie to them when they called me to ask about colleagues. I said about all the people I knew that they were marvelous and excellent, even when I knew they were lousy.
About those I did not like in the least I also said that they were great. But that is about all that I brought myself to do.
I loved it when Marguerite enters the stage, with her innocence, admiration and especially love.
On the other hand, I was envious and wish that another fictional Marguerite will become real and come to offer her love to…me.
I was more than skeptical, but now I am convinced that Havel is not just a fabulous writer- so much I had known in advance- but I also have the capacity to appreciate and even love his work.
June 14, 2022
"Proč už není konečně v mém životě jasno? Proč ode mne pořád někdo něco chce? Jak to bylo krásné, když jsem nikoho nezajímal - nikdo ode mne nic neočekával a k ničemu mě nenabádal..."
Sebe/kritická hra s autobiografickými prvky a kafkovskými tóny. Reálnější a o to drsnější verze Ztížené možnosti soustředění (až mě zaujalo, že jsou hry napsány 16 let od sebe). Nátlak okolí (blízkého i vzdálenějšího, společenského i osobního), tíže režimu i vlastních myšlenek, nesoustředěnost, roztěkanost a až osobnostní rozpad. Myšlenkově i tematicky velmi silné, ale podobně jako v případě Vernisáže si to nedokážu užít a do divadla bych na to nevyrazil.
Sebe/kritická hra s autobiografickými prvky a kafkovskými tóny. Reálnější a o to drsnější verze Ztížené možnosti soustředění (až mě zaujalo, že jsou hry napsány 16 let od sebe). Nátlak okolí (blízkého i vzdálenějšího, společenského i osobního), tíže režimu i vlastních myšlenek, nesoustředěnost, roztěkanost a až osobnostní rozpad. Myšlenkově i tematicky velmi silné, ale podobně jako v případě Vernisáže si to nedokážu užít a do divadla bych na to nevyrazil.
March 7, 2023
I read this play without a true context of the time in which Havel was writing. I mean, I understood generally that he was an "enemy of the state" and so the play was packed with observations on this status.
Having said that, it was a delightful play, considered a drama at the time I think, I found it to be delightfully absurd. It was "Waiting for Godot" interpreted by the Marx Brothers. Lovely. I would like to see a performance of it to see if they way I experienced the writing was the way others had as well.
Having said that, it was a delightful play, considered a drama at the time I think, I found it to be delightfully absurd. It was "Waiting for Godot" interpreted by the Marx Brothers. Lovely. I would like to see a performance of it to see if they way I experienced the writing was the way others had as well.
March 1, 2024
نمایشنامهای بود که مشابهش رو زیاد دیدم بودم و خوندم. ولی از جهت رابطهی لئوپولد و لوسی برای من پررنگ و جالب شد. کاراکتر لئوپولد که یک نویسندهی خسته ست که به قول خودش این روزها چیزی درونش فرو ریخته. یک سری افراد طرفدارش هستن به خاطر عقاید و کتابهاش و مامورین هم یکم باهاش زاویه دارن و سرزده میآن سراغش رو می گیرن. جالب بود خوندنش چون تاحالا اثر ادبیای از هاول نخونده بودم. این کتاب هم شانسی تو کتابفروشی دیدم و چشمم رو گرفت.
Read
May 17, 2020This is the saddest play I have ever read, and I'm counting that with having read 'Master Harold and the Boys' and 'Antigone'. I love Vaclav Havel. I will always love Vaclav Havel and I cried when I got to the last scene of this and I always will, no matter how many times I reread it.
December 13, 2023
دوستش داشتم. هم به لحاظ ادبی متن جذابی بود، هم هاول سعی کرده بود طعنهی محکمی به معنای کنشگری در عصر مدرن بزند. دوست داشته شدن توسط بیتاثیران و نادیده گرفته شدن توسط تاثیرگذاران (قدرتمندان).
من این کتاب رو با ترجمهی فارسی «متروک بیانتها» از نشر مهرگان خرد خوندم.
من این کتاب رو با ترجمهی فارسی «متروک بیانتها» از نشر مهرگان خرد خوندم.
December 13, 2018
Not much there for me.
Without love no one is a complete person! We only achieve an identity through the person next to us!
Without love no one is a complete person! We only achieve an identity through the person next to us!
December 19, 2021
Zvláštní identifikace s hlavním hrdinou v mnoha malých nuancích. Dokonce i trochu kafkovské. Celý ten koncept je jako vystřižený z úvodní scény 'Procesu', ale náladou úplně jinde.
July 21, 2022
Stark. Short. And possibly semi autobiographical. . .
Read
May 11, 2023⁹
January 27, 2024
Havel, like Dostoevsky before him, offers a simple meditation on what can happen when we finally begin to listen to our demons.
February 14, 2024
read for class
December 3, 2024
great showing out by the president of Czechoslovakia
December 15, 2025
ادبیات چک هر بار هیجانزدهام میکنه!
July 26, 2025
A really strange read. FANTASTIC START, and sort of middle too, but its ending was underwhelming. Interesting, but not shocking.
December 19, 2010
The play is a little Kafka-esque, but I still enjoyed it.
March 6, 2014
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews