What do you think?
Rate this book
Blodeuwedd
Joseph P. Clancy's adaption of a classic drama by Saunders Lewis, Blodeuwedd , the mythical girl created from flowers.,Addasiad Joseph P. Clancy o ddrama glasurol gan Saunders Lewis, Blodeuwedd , y ferch chwedlonol a grëwyd o flodau. -- Cyngor Llyfrau Cymru
- GenresPlays
100 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1947
1 person is currently reading
25 people want to read
About the author
Saunders Lewis
54 books7 followersSaunders Lewis was a Welsh poet, dramatist, historian, literary critic, and political activist. He was a prominent Welsh nationalist and a founder of Plaid Genedlaethol Cymru (the National Party of Wales), later known as Plaid Cymru. Lewis is usually acknowledged as one of the most prominent figures of 20th century Welsh-language literature. He was a 1970 Nobel nominee for literature, and in 2005 was 10th in a BBC Wales poll to name Wales' greatest-ever person. (wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
October 14, 2017
The fourth branch of the Mabinogi is my favourite, however, the treatment of 'the woman made of flowers', Blodeuwedd, as little more as the crafted magical property of her husband Lleu is glossed over in the original and adaptations.
There's still that sense of misogyny in Saunders Lewis's adaptation - it's an important reflection of the era, however, in Lewis's story she is given far more agency and we learn why it is Blodeuwedd betrays her husband for her affair with Gronw Pebr. Blodeuwedd is also given some fantastic lines, in the first few acts especially, as we get to hear about her views on her 'slave' status and insight into what it feels like to be plant-life made concious and encased within human woman's form.
Brilliant play and clear translation from Joseph P. Clancy.
There's still that sense of misogyny in Saunders Lewis's adaptation - it's an important reflection of the era, however, in Lewis's story she is given far more agency and we learn why it is Blodeuwedd betrays her husband for her affair with Gronw Pebr. Blodeuwedd is also given some fantastic lines, in the first few acts especially, as we get to hear about her views on her 'slave' status and insight into what it feels like to be plant-life made concious and encased within human woman's form.
Brilliant play and clear translation from Joseph P. Clancy.
July 21, 2025
Darn o ffuglen o blith Milton: mae ein dealltwriaeth ohonno’n gyferbyniad â chymhelliant yr awdur. Er gwaethaf gwleidyddiaeth od Saunders Lewis, dyma disgrifiad arswydus o real am fywyd Merch. Dyma’r un o’r unig llyfrau sydd wedi mynegi yn union y teimladau sydd gen i am bartriarchaeth a sut beth yw hi i fod yn ferch.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn gwneud popeth mae’n ei gallu er mwyn dianc ei thynged o fod yn wraig. Mae’n rhaid iddi ddefnyddio’i deallusrwydd er mwyn bod yn gyfrwys ac yn gynllwyniol, oherwydd dyna’r unig ffordd y mae’n gallu dianc ei chaethiwed. Arhosa Blodeuwedd am ganiatâd gan Gronw cyn mynd ymlaen gyda’r cynllyn, yn dangos er hi yw’r un gyda’r syniadau i gyd, mae angen aros i ddyn i’w chytuno gyda hi cyn gweithredu. Wrth gwrs, mae gan Blodeuwedd bŵer, ond mae ei phŵer dim ond yn effeithiol os mae’r dynion yn ei bywyd yn cytuno i ymostyng. Mae ei “theyrnas,” fel disgrifir Gronw, yn fregus. Cymerodd un dyn nad oedd yn ei charu hi, Gwydion, i chwalu’r cwbl.
Yr unig fenyw rydym yn clywed amdani sydd yn dychryn y dynion i gyd ydy Arianrhod. Methodd ei thasg o fod yn fam i Llew. Felly, mae’r drama’n ei thrin fel gwrach annioddefol. Mae gan y gymeriad pŵer dros bawb— heb law, wrth gwrs, Math, sef y symbol o’r grym gormesol dros gymdeithas i gyd. Dyn sy’n rheoli go iawn, ond mae dynnes yn cael fod yn ddychrynllyd. Mae Arianrhod yn ymdopi hwn trwy fyw i ffwrdd o gymdeithas. Bu fyw ar ei phen ei hun tu hwnt i Ardudwy neu unrhyw teyrnas felly. Mae Blodeuwedd yn mynd ati ar ddiwedd y drama; dangosiad y byddi am byth yn unig ac ofnus. Gallwn ffeindio gobaith mewn hwn? Gwelwn yr unig ffordd i fenyw cael pŵer go iawn ydy dianc o gymdeithas dyn, felly pam ddylwn teimlo’n annobeithiol wrth ddarllen y diweddglo? Dyma Blodeuwedd o’r diwedd yn dianc ei thynged a’i rôl fel merch.
Mae’n hawdd, mewn ffordd, i Blodeuwedd ac Arianrhod awgrymu pŵer gan eu bod yn hudolus neu wedi’i hudo. Mae cymeriad Rhagnell yn cyflwyno profiad arall o fywyd ferch; heb bŵer, ond yn fodlon. Ei gwendid ydy bod yn or-ffyddlon i’w chyd-ferch. Mae’n deall dioddefiant Blodeuwedd fel methiant rhyw, sy’n ei gwneud hi’n unigryw o ymwybodol o fewn y llyfr. Er does gan Rhagnell ddim awdurdodaeth, mae ganddi bywyd digonol; teulu, hanes a dyfodol. Mae Blodeuwedd yn gefnigenus o’i rhyddid fel ‘dyn’. Er hyn, “mae cadwyn arall” arni. Mae Rhagnell yn gaeth i’w rhywedd a’i dosbarth ac felly’n dioddef yn unfath â Blodeuwedd. Mae’r cymeriad yn deall i beidio gwahaniaethu rhwng dosbarth, er ei bod yn cael ei chamdrin oherwydd hynny ac yn ymwybodol o’r ffaith, ac yn ffocysu ei nerth ar ddiogelu Blodeuwedd oddi wrth y dynion. Pan mae’n methu, mae’n lladd ei hun.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn disgrifio Llew fel “treisiwr,” sy’n mwy o gamp cymdeithasol nag y ddylai fod. Nid yn unig ydy’r disgrifiad yma’n ein caniatau i ddeall perthynas anghydsyniol Llew a Blodeuwedd, ond deallusrwydd Blodeuwedd am y sefyllfa. Mae’n ymwybodol ei bod yn cael ei threisio noson ar ôl noson; mae’n gwybod dydy Llew ddim yn ei pharchu hi fel person. Mae Gronw yn cyflwyno perthynas rhywiol gwahanol ble mae gan Blodeuwedd yr hawl i’w wrthod. Er hyn, dydy’r carwriaeth ddim yn hollol cydsyniol gan fod Blodeuwedd yn teimlo bod rhaid iddi gysgu â Gronw er mwyn dianc o’i chadwyni. Os oes gan Blodeuwedd cariad gwir tuag at Gronw neu beidio yn ddibwys; mae ei statws fel “caethferch,” a’r ffaith ei chorff oedd yr unig rheswm teimlodd Gronw atyniad, yn ddigon i ddileu cydraddoldeb o’u perthynas.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn gaeth i ddisgwyliadau dyn: i fod yn wraig, i fod yn hardd, ac i gynhyrchu plant. Pan nad yw’n gallu cwblhau rheini rhagor, mae’n cael ei chosbi. Ei chosb yw i fynedi yn nôl mewn i natur fel creadur dychrynllyd ac unig. Os nad ydy dynion yn dy barchu rhagor, meddai’r drama, bydd cymdeithas yn eich ofni a’ch cywiliddio. Gallwn ddarllen hwn fel dianc llwyddiannus, yr un ffordd mae Rhagnell yn ‘dianc’. Os oes rhaid dinistrio’ch bodolaeth er mwyn gwrthod batriarchiaeth, nid ydy’n llwyddiant mawr. Mae’r drama, i fi, yn profi yr unig ffordd o stopio dioddefiant rhywiol ydy gwaredu’r system o ormes dyn yn gyfan gwbl.
Mae’r obsesiwn gyda dianc canfyddiad dyn yn un hynod o ddiddorol sy’n cael ei ddadansoddi’n arbennig trwy gydol y ddrama. Mae Blodeuwedd eisiau bod yn berson go iawn. I wneud hynny, er mwyn bod yn berson go iawn, mae rhaid eich dadgysylltu eich hun o bopeth dynnol.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn gwneud popeth mae’n ei gallu er mwyn dianc ei thynged o fod yn wraig. Mae’n rhaid iddi ddefnyddio’i deallusrwydd er mwyn bod yn gyfrwys ac yn gynllwyniol, oherwydd dyna’r unig ffordd y mae’n gallu dianc ei chaethiwed. Arhosa Blodeuwedd am ganiatâd gan Gronw cyn mynd ymlaen gyda’r cynllyn, yn dangos er hi yw’r un gyda’r syniadau i gyd, mae angen aros i ddyn i’w chytuno gyda hi cyn gweithredu. Wrth gwrs, mae gan Blodeuwedd bŵer, ond mae ei phŵer dim ond yn effeithiol os mae’r dynion yn ei bywyd yn cytuno i ymostyng. Mae ei “theyrnas,” fel disgrifir Gronw, yn fregus. Cymerodd un dyn nad oedd yn ei charu hi, Gwydion, i chwalu’r cwbl.
Yr unig fenyw rydym yn clywed amdani sydd yn dychryn y dynion i gyd ydy Arianrhod. Methodd ei thasg o fod yn fam i Llew. Felly, mae’r drama’n ei thrin fel gwrach annioddefol. Mae gan y gymeriad pŵer dros bawb— heb law, wrth gwrs, Math, sef y symbol o’r grym gormesol dros gymdeithas i gyd. Dyn sy’n rheoli go iawn, ond mae dynnes yn cael fod yn ddychrynllyd. Mae Arianrhod yn ymdopi hwn trwy fyw i ffwrdd o gymdeithas. Bu fyw ar ei phen ei hun tu hwnt i Ardudwy neu unrhyw teyrnas felly. Mae Blodeuwedd yn mynd ati ar ddiwedd y drama; dangosiad y byddi am byth yn unig ac ofnus. Gallwn ffeindio gobaith mewn hwn? Gwelwn yr unig ffordd i fenyw cael pŵer go iawn ydy dianc o gymdeithas dyn, felly pam ddylwn teimlo’n annobeithiol wrth ddarllen y diweddglo? Dyma Blodeuwedd o’r diwedd yn dianc ei thynged a’i rôl fel merch.
Mae’n hawdd, mewn ffordd, i Blodeuwedd ac Arianrhod awgrymu pŵer gan eu bod yn hudolus neu wedi’i hudo. Mae cymeriad Rhagnell yn cyflwyno profiad arall o fywyd ferch; heb bŵer, ond yn fodlon. Ei gwendid ydy bod yn or-ffyddlon i’w chyd-ferch. Mae’n deall dioddefiant Blodeuwedd fel methiant rhyw, sy’n ei gwneud hi’n unigryw o ymwybodol o fewn y llyfr. Er does gan Rhagnell ddim awdurdodaeth, mae ganddi bywyd digonol; teulu, hanes a dyfodol. Mae Blodeuwedd yn gefnigenus o’i rhyddid fel ‘dyn’. Er hyn, “mae cadwyn arall” arni. Mae Rhagnell yn gaeth i’w rhywedd a’i dosbarth ac felly’n dioddef yn unfath â Blodeuwedd. Mae’r cymeriad yn deall i beidio gwahaniaethu rhwng dosbarth, er ei bod yn cael ei chamdrin oherwydd hynny ac yn ymwybodol o’r ffaith, ac yn ffocysu ei nerth ar ddiogelu Blodeuwedd oddi wrth y dynion. Pan mae’n methu, mae’n lladd ei hun.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn disgrifio Llew fel “treisiwr,” sy’n mwy o gamp cymdeithasol nag y ddylai fod. Nid yn unig ydy’r disgrifiad yma’n ein caniatau i ddeall perthynas anghydsyniol Llew a Blodeuwedd, ond deallusrwydd Blodeuwedd am y sefyllfa. Mae’n ymwybodol ei bod yn cael ei threisio noson ar ôl noson; mae’n gwybod dydy Llew ddim yn ei pharchu hi fel person. Mae Gronw yn cyflwyno perthynas rhywiol gwahanol ble mae gan Blodeuwedd yr hawl i’w wrthod. Er hyn, dydy’r carwriaeth ddim yn hollol cydsyniol gan fod Blodeuwedd yn teimlo bod rhaid iddi gysgu â Gronw er mwyn dianc o’i chadwyni. Os oes gan Blodeuwedd cariad gwir tuag at Gronw neu beidio yn ddibwys; mae ei statws fel “caethferch,” a’r ffaith ei chorff oedd yr unig rheswm teimlodd Gronw atyniad, yn ddigon i ddileu cydraddoldeb o’u perthynas.
Mae Blodeuwedd yn gaeth i ddisgwyliadau dyn: i fod yn wraig, i fod yn hardd, ac i gynhyrchu plant. Pan nad yw’n gallu cwblhau rheini rhagor, mae’n cael ei chosbi. Ei chosb yw i fynedi yn nôl mewn i natur fel creadur dychrynllyd ac unig. Os nad ydy dynion yn dy barchu rhagor, meddai’r drama, bydd cymdeithas yn eich ofni a’ch cywiliddio. Gallwn ddarllen hwn fel dianc llwyddiannus, yr un ffordd mae Rhagnell yn ‘dianc’. Os oes rhaid dinistrio’ch bodolaeth er mwyn gwrthod batriarchiaeth, nid ydy’n llwyddiant mawr. Mae’r drama, i fi, yn profi yr unig ffordd o stopio dioddefiant rhywiol ydy gwaredu’r system o ormes dyn yn gyfan gwbl.
Mae’r obsesiwn gyda dianc canfyddiad dyn yn un hynod o ddiddorol sy’n cael ei ddadansoddi’n arbennig trwy gydol y ddrama. Mae Blodeuwedd eisiau bod yn berson go iawn. I wneud hynny, er mwyn bod yn berson go iawn, mae rhaid eich dadgysylltu eich hun o bopeth dynnol.
February 3, 2023
justice for rhagnell 💔💔
July 22, 2025
Blodeuwedd’s inability to relate to the world she now finds herself belonging to made her exceedingly relatable to me. Her angst for the world she hates, only inhabited by men devoid of good, a quality that should be irrelevant to her but is now an absence that punishes her immensely; an absence found both externally, in the selfish, uncaring society, and internally, in her own capacity to manipulate and lie, to kill for her own needs. This alienation, forced into the mind by the absurd conflict between the knowledge one has of the human potential for good but simultaneous acts of evil and one’s own impossible plight to constantly be good, causes extreme discomfort; this is the discomfort I recognised in the identical disturbance Blodeuwedd felt bracing a raging storm, barefoot in the forest, and bracing ordinary societal life. She knows men are bad, she knows she’s bad, and worst of all (where the disassociation and nausea unsettles her to the core) she knows she’s powerless against it. As the human manifestation of the natural element, unwillingly thrust into man’s society, her discovery that even she can’t fulfil the potential for good within the corrupt world disturbs her, and leads her further astray from the idyllic ‘good’: whether or not this modern angst is what Lewis intended for Blodeuwedd’s character to represent, it’s what I consistently found relevant in her unnatural struggle.
Blodeuwedd feels that this imperfect world is alien to her, but her understanding that she’s equally imperfect is what tortures her.
Ultimately, her punishment is to be thrust back into the natural world, the world she belongs to, but this time baring man’s evil, this time as the corrupt element in the ecosystem. The question that remains is whether this is her punishment for committing man’s evils, and is a lesson against repeating Blodeuwedd’s mistakes, or is it representative of everyone’s punishment: that we all eventually fall to corruption. From my perspective, Blodeuwedd hasn’t committed a great enough crime to narratively warrant such a tragic fate; thus I conclude that this is the punishment beholden to all men, perhaps deserved by no one, but unflinchingly dealt to all. And when considering the mode of punishment for the main characters, one realises Gwydion, the most amoral figure in the drama, is the only one left unpunished (arguably his punishment is his failure to break Llew’s final curse, but even so this feels minuscule in comparison to: Llew losing his wife, heir, and a year of his life; Gronw Pebr dying and losing his kingdom; Rhagnell killing herself; and most tragically, Blodeuwedd being transformed into an unloved and unlovable creature). One could interpret Gwydion’s fortunate ending being due to his amorality, his lack of motive and relationship in the play: Blodeuwedd recognises her unnatural struggle as Gwydion’s as well, but Gwydion, upon coming into contact with that absurd conflict between the impossible good and the ever-possible evil, ignored it, and acts beyond morality. Not to say that his behaviour is viewed favourably by Lewis, or that it’s appropriately narratively rewarded, but that society rewards it: Gwydion is the one who thrives best in our corrupt world; the one who completely understands the rot at the heart of society and decides against struggle but instead to match its corruption.
On the other hand, Llew represents the unknowing victim of the world’s crookedness, who gives in to the evil, but unlike Blodeuwedd and Gwydion, can’t recognise his own evil; this makes him the antagonistic force of the drama. Lewis names him Llew Llaw Gyffes, a change from the more heroic Lleu Llaw Gyffes. Llew, meaning lion, implies something completely different to Lleu, meaning light. I believe this contrast, between the name the reader knows, and the name Lewis chose, highlights the contrast between the two simultaneous views of Llew. He is both a hero, a victim of abuse and neglect who overcame hardship to become a good and powerful lord, and a villain, who enslaves Blodeuwedd and repeatedly rapes her. As Llew he is as a lion: the predator, carnivorous and terrifying. But, like a lion, his ‘evil’ is ‘natural’. Not because his actions are justifiable, they aren’t, but because he’s suffered terrible abuse from his birth, and is a result of the already existent evil of the world. Remain aware that he is not blameless, nor is he absolved of responsibility; Blodeuwedd faces abuse on, possibly, a much worse scale, and maintains the all-important struggle; she, our hero, strives for good.
Blodeuwedd feels that this imperfect world is alien to her, but her understanding that she’s equally imperfect is what tortures her.
Ultimately, her punishment is to be thrust back into the natural world, the world she belongs to, but this time baring man’s evil, this time as the corrupt element in the ecosystem. The question that remains is whether this is her punishment for committing man’s evils, and is a lesson against repeating Blodeuwedd’s mistakes, or is it representative of everyone’s punishment: that we all eventually fall to corruption. From my perspective, Blodeuwedd hasn’t committed a great enough crime to narratively warrant such a tragic fate; thus I conclude that this is the punishment beholden to all men, perhaps deserved by no one, but unflinchingly dealt to all. And when considering the mode of punishment for the main characters, one realises Gwydion, the most amoral figure in the drama, is the only one left unpunished (arguably his punishment is his failure to break Llew’s final curse, but even so this feels minuscule in comparison to: Llew losing his wife, heir, and a year of his life; Gronw Pebr dying and losing his kingdom; Rhagnell killing herself; and most tragically, Blodeuwedd being transformed into an unloved and unlovable creature). One could interpret Gwydion’s fortunate ending being due to his amorality, his lack of motive and relationship in the play: Blodeuwedd recognises her unnatural struggle as Gwydion’s as well, but Gwydion, upon coming into contact with that absurd conflict between the impossible good and the ever-possible evil, ignored it, and acts beyond morality. Not to say that his behaviour is viewed favourably by Lewis, or that it’s appropriately narratively rewarded, but that society rewards it: Gwydion is the one who thrives best in our corrupt world; the one who completely understands the rot at the heart of society and decides against struggle but instead to match its corruption.
On the other hand, Llew represents the unknowing victim of the world’s crookedness, who gives in to the evil, but unlike Blodeuwedd and Gwydion, can’t recognise his own evil; this makes him the antagonistic force of the drama. Lewis names him Llew Llaw Gyffes, a change from the more heroic Lleu Llaw Gyffes. Llew, meaning lion, implies something completely different to Lleu, meaning light. I believe this contrast, between the name the reader knows, and the name Lewis chose, highlights the contrast between the two simultaneous views of Llew. He is both a hero, a victim of abuse and neglect who overcame hardship to become a good and powerful lord, and a villain, who enslaves Blodeuwedd and repeatedly rapes her. As Llew he is as a lion: the predator, carnivorous and terrifying. But, like a lion, his ‘evil’ is ‘natural’. Not because his actions are justifiable, they aren’t, but because he’s suffered terrible abuse from his birth, and is a result of the already existent evil of the world. Remain aware that he is not blameless, nor is he absolved of responsibility; Blodeuwedd faces abuse on, possibly, a much worse scale, and maintains the all-important struggle; she, our hero, strives for good.
March 6, 2016
A Welsh play adapting a tale from The Mabinogion, the Welsh mythology. An interesting read with fascinating characters and a different mythology.
I loved the characters of Blodeuwedd and her lover. Saunders Lewis has a very interesting way of presenting her husband, which tugged at the heartstrings.
I loved the characters of Blodeuwedd and her lover. Saunders Lewis has a very interesting way of presenting her husband, which tugged at the heartstrings.
May 29, 2015
the language is just not nice
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews