What do you think?
Rate this book
After Miss Julie
A new version of a world classic by one of Britain's best-known contemporary playwrights
After Miss Julie relocates August Strindberg's Miss Julie (1888) to an English country house in July 1945. In this radical re-imagining of theatre's first "naturalistic tragedy" the events of Strindberg's original are transposed to the night of the British Labour Party's "landslide" election victory.
After Miss Julie, written and directed by Patrick Marber, was screened by BBC2 in November 1995 as part of the Performance season.
After Miss Julie relocates August Strindberg's Miss Julie (1888) to an English country house in July 1945. In this radical re-imagining of theatre's first "naturalistic tragedy" the events of Strindberg's original are transposed to the night of the British Labour Party's "landslide" election victory.
After Miss Julie, written and directed by Patrick Marber, was screened by BBC2 in November 1995 as part of the Performance season.
64 pages, Paperback
First published November 4, 1996
About the author
Patrick Marber
39 books44 followersPatrick Albert Crispin Marber is an English comedian, playwright, director, puppeteer, actor and screenwriter. After working for a few years as a stand-up comedian, Marber was a writer and cast member on the radio shows On the Hour and Knowing Me, Knowing You, and their television spinoffs The Day Today and Knowing Me, Knowing You... with Alan Partridge. Amongst other roles, Marber portrayed the hapless reporter Peter O'Hanrahahanrahan in both On the Hour and The Day Today.
His first play was Dealer's Choice, which he also directed. Set in a restaurant and based around a game of poker (and partly inspired by his own experiences with gambling addiction), it opened at the National Theatre in February 1995, and won the 1995 Evening Standard Award for Best Comedy.
After Miss Julie, a version of the Strindberg play Miss Julie, was broadcast on BBC television in the same year. In this, Marber moves the action to Britain in 1945, at the time of the Labour Party's victory in the general election, with Miss Julie as the daughter of a Labour peer. A stage version, directed by Michael Grandage, was first performed 2003 at the Donmar Warehouse, London by Kelly Reilly, Richard Coyle and Helen Baxendale. It later had a production at the American Airlines Theatre on Broadway in 2009.
His play Closer, a comedy of sex, dishonesty and betrayal, opened at the National Theatre in 1997, again directed by Marber. This too won the Evening Standard award for Best Comedy, as well as the Critics' Circle Theatre Awards and Laurence Olivier awards for Best New Play. It has proved to be an international success, having been translated into thirty languages. A screen adaptation, written by Marber, was released in 2004, directed by Mike Nichols and starring Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman and Clive Owen.
In Howard Katz, his next play, Marber presented very different subject matter: a middle-aged man struggling with life, death and religion. This was first performed in 2001, again at the National Theatre, but was less favourably received by the critics and has been less of a commercial success than some of his other work. A new production by the Roundabout Theatre Company opened Off-Broadway in March 2007, with Alfred Molina in the title role. A play for young people, The Musicians, about a school orchestra's visit to Russia, was performed for the National Theatre's Shell Connections programme in 2004, its first production being at the Sydney Opera House.
Don Juan in Soho, his contemporary rendering of Molière's comedy Don Juan, opened at the Donmar Warehouse in 2006, directed by Michael Grandage and with Rhys Ifans in the lead role.
He also co-wrote the screenplay for Asylum (2005), directed by David Mackenzie, and was sole screenwriter for the film Notes on a Scandal (2006), for which he earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay.
In 2004, Marber was Cameron Mackintosh Professor of Contemporary Theatre at Oxford University.
His first play was Dealer's Choice, which he also directed. Set in a restaurant and based around a game of poker (and partly inspired by his own experiences with gambling addiction), it opened at the National Theatre in February 1995, and won the 1995 Evening Standard Award for Best Comedy.
After Miss Julie, a version of the Strindberg play Miss Julie, was broadcast on BBC television in the same year. In this, Marber moves the action to Britain in 1945, at the time of the Labour Party's victory in the general election, with Miss Julie as the daughter of a Labour peer. A stage version, directed by Michael Grandage, was first performed 2003 at the Donmar Warehouse, London by Kelly Reilly, Richard Coyle and Helen Baxendale. It later had a production at the American Airlines Theatre on Broadway in 2009.
His play Closer, a comedy of sex, dishonesty and betrayal, opened at the National Theatre in 1997, again directed by Marber. This too won the Evening Standard award for Best Comedy, as well as the Critics' Circle Theatre Awards and Laurence Olivier awards for Best New Play. It has proved to be an international success, having been translated into thirty languages. A screen adaptation, written by Marber, was released in 2004, directed by Mike Nichols and starring Julia Roberts, Jude Law, Natalie Portman and Clive Owen.
In Howard Katz, his next play, Marber presented very different subject matter: a middle-aged man struggling with life, death and religion. This was first performed in 2001, again at the National Theatre, but was less favourably received by the critics and has been less of a commercial success than some of his other work. A new production by the Roundabout Theatre Company opened Off-Broadway in March 2007, with Alfred Molina in the title role. A play for young people, The Musicians, about a school orchestra's visit to Russia, was performed for the National Theatre's Shell Connections programme in 2004, its first production being at the Sydney Opera House.
Don Juan in Soho, his contemporary rendering of Molière's comedy Don Juan, opened at the Donmar Warehouse in 2006, directed by Michael Grandage and with Rhys Ifans in the lead role.
He also co-wrote the screenplay for Asylum (2005), directed by David Mackenzie, and was sole screenwriter for the film Notes on a Scandal (2006), for which he earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay.
In 2004, Marber was Cameron Mackintosh Professor of Contemporary Theatre at Oxford University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
February 27, 2024
Marber retains: (i) the psychological drama of power games and sexual tension; (ii) the study of class and gender in a time of change.
January 22, 2012
Doesn't really better the original. The play is still psychologically unrealistic, naturalism or not, but what makes Marber's version worse than the original is the fact that Marber for some reason moves away from the theme of power struggle toward a more conventional story of un-hopeful love. Because of this the play loses the last bit of sense it ever had.
February 4, 2025
This undoubtedly maintains a similar level of momentum and power as the original Miss Julie (largely due to its refusal to stray far from the text at any points), with the characters and their dynamics fascinating and complex.
Yet I feel in comparison the lines lose their imagery and strength in comparison to Michael Meyer's translation, particularly "Servants are servants - and whores are whores" being changed to "you're still a servant / and you're a servant's slut". Even in something as simple as "Miss! Call me Julie!" being changed to "How can you call me Miss now!", the clunkiness of this version becomes so apparent with many more examples. At the core of this change is the core of the issue with After Miss Julie - the only change is to make what is already a relatively unsubtle play even more obvious to the audience, and as a result the awesomeness of the tragedy is lost to what often feels like lecturing. In trying to emphasise class disparity the play becomes more of a lecture and less of a story, the kind of desperation of Miss Julie feels more like pandering to a certain agenda rather than genuine emotion, and is harder to connect to.
Aside from this change, the actual story is so similar that it simply makes the brightness of the original seem dulled; it is hard to feel much about the change in setting and time period, aside from a cooling of societal restrictions - which in turn plays down the tragedy - and the line about Miss Julie's father actually hating working class people feels tacked on. I struggle to see the necessity for bringing it to '45 if not the time of writing (which it isn't), the fact that it is the night labour won the election simply doesn't hold enough weight to justify this change for me, it seems that the setting is arbitrary rather than a core necessity of the story.
Another issue for me is the time jumps, which jars the fragility of the characters and the dramatic tension of the story, there seems to be less rush, things feel more thought through and less pure carnal passion, and the play loses something because of it. The idea that everything that Miss Julie is in standing and class is lost in exactly the time we watch it makes the change feel so drastic, as opposed to there being a morning after in which the characters have time to think.
This is still a fantastic text, but it falls short in comparison to the fantastic original in almost every aspect, ultimately uncovering nothing new to say but rather more plainly spelling out what is already present, it is a worthy and interesting read to follow Miss Julie, as long as the reader remembers the title. This play comes After Miss Julie.
Yet I feel in comparison the lines lose their imagery and strength in comparison to Michael Meyer's translation, particularly "Servants are servants - and whores are whores" being changed to "you're still a servant / and you're a servant's slut". Even in something as simple as "Miss! Call me Julie!" being changed to "How can you call me Miss now!", the clunkiness of this version becomes so apparent with many more examples. At the core of this change is the core of the issue with After Miss Julie - the only change is to make what is already a relatively unsubtle play even more obvious to the audience, and as a result the awesomeness of the tragedy is lost to what often feels like lecturing. In trying to emphasise class disparity the play becomes more of a lecture and less of a story, the kind of desperation of Miss Julie feels more like pandering to a certain agenda rather than genuine emotion, and is harder to connect to.
Aside from this change, the actual story is so similar that it simply makes the brightness of the original seem dulled; it is hard to feel much about the change in setting and time period, aside from a cooling of societal restrictions - which in turn plays down the tragedy - and the line about Miss Julie's father actually hating working class people feels tacked on. I struggle to see the necessity for bringing it to '45 if not the time of writing (which it isn't), the fact that it is the night labour won the election simply doesn't hold enough weight to justify this change for me, it seems that the setting is arbitrary rather than a core necessity of the story.
Another issue for me is the time jumps, which jars the fragility of the characters and the dramatic tension of the story, there seems to be less rush, things feel more thought through and less pure carnal passion, and the play loses something because of it. The idea that everything that Miss Julie is in standing and class is lost in exactly the time we watch it makes the change feel so drastic, as opposed to there being a morning after in which the characters have time to think.
This is still a fantastic text, but it falls short in comparison to the fantastic original in almost every aspect, ultimately uncovering nothing new to say but rather more plainly spelling out what is already present, it is a worthy and interesting read to follow Miss Julie, as long as the reader remembers the title. This play comes After Miss Julie.
January 31, 2025
Summary: It's 1945, the eve of a landslide victory for the Labour party in England. Miss Jule is celebrating at her home whilst her father is away. John is her father's chauffeur; Christine is the cook. There seems to be something of a relationship between the two servants. Julie comes along though and starts putting the moves on John who reciprocates by telling her he's been in love with her since she was a child (it's not too creepy, he's meant to be five years older than her). They sleep together that night. The next morning, Julie makes plans for the two of them to run away to New York because she's ashamed and worried about her reputation. She doesn't have money of her own but goes to steal some from her father. Christine tells John that she caught the two of them in the act and suggests the two of them quit this job and look for somewhere else to work so they can get married and have a family. Julie won't leave without her bird so when John says they can't take it with them but also can't set it free, she tells him to kill the bird. (This part is where I decided my rating is going to be lower) so he chops its head off. Julie seems to go nuts, smearing the blood on John's face. Julie's father returns, ringing the bill for John. The play just sorta ends with Julie walking off, razor in hand.
Review: At first I thought since I hadn't read the original play this is based on perhaps I should add it to my to-read but turns out I did read the original. It was a while ago though so I can't compare the two. I don't really have a lot of thoughts on this honestly. Not much happens and then there's animal abuse so....kinda makes me not want to rate it highly. Like seriously, couldn't she just let the bird be??
Grade: D
Review: At first I thought since I hadn't read the original play this is based on perhaps I should add it to my to-read but turns out I did read the original. It was a while ago though so I can't compare the two. I don't really have a lot of thoughts on this honestly. Not much happens and then there's animal abuse so....kinda makes me not want to rate it highly. Like seriously, couldn't she just let the bird be??
Grade: D
December 31, 2018
Secretos, traumas, anhelos, diatribas y una incesante lucha entre las marcadas sociales de la Inglaterra de la postguerra se convierten en un peligroso cóctel de medianoche. La sencillez de esta historia contrasta con la fuerza dramática que contiene: ama, chofer y sirvienta en una noche de copas en la que nunca nada vuelve a ser lo mismo.
Nota: esta obra es la reescritura de la obra de August Strindberg. No la conozco así que mi apreciación es un tanto parcial y subjetiva (como todas, supongo).
Nota: esta obra es la reescritura de la obra de August Strindberg. No la conozco así que mi apreciación es un tanto parcial y subjetiva (como todas, supongo).
July 4, 2024
Ties together better than the original! Patrick Marber said hmmm…. What if miss julie was into rough sex and also it’s 1945…………
Honestly I just don’t know if I click w this play! Maybe it’s a case of it simmering away a bit in my mind!
Honestly I just don’t know if I click w this play! Maybe it’s a case of it simmering away a bit in my mind!
July 15, 2018
Excellent retelling with great women’s monologues.
October 20, 2020
My favourite play I've ever read, mysterious, dark and in some places witty. The status change constantly makes the play interesting. I read it all in 2hrs in one sitting
January 4, 2024
Sexy, but so flawed. That’s what’s fun about it
June 26, 2025
nothing new but I enjoyed
November 16, 2009
I find Strindberg's original play terrible but at least he's got the 'excuse' of historicity. But Marber's rehash that replaces the discourse of degeneration with what? Class anxiety? Just didn't get me.
August 26, 2011
Loved this! Updated version of the classic Miss Julie. I did a scene from this play and it was really interesting to delve into a character so unlike me.
September 5, 2011
Hated this. Others didn't.
June 19, 2012
I still prefer Strindberg's play.
June 19, 2016
Disappointing as the story of love across the class divided lacked tension, conviction and authenticity.
January 26, 2012
Very intense play!! Both powerful and disturbing Amazing drama!!
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews