What do you think?
Rate this book
The Revolutionists: A Comedy, a Quartet, a Revolutionary Dream Fugue, a True Story
THE REVOLUTIONISTS is a brutal comedic quartet about four very real women who lived boldly in France during the French Revolution’s Reign of Terror (1793-1794). Playwright Olympe De Gouge, assassin Charlotte Corday, and former queen (and fan of ribbons) Marie Antoinette, and Haitian rebel Marianne Angelle hang out, murder Marat, loose their heads, and try to beat back the extremist insanity in revolutionary Paris. This grand and dream-tweaked comedy is about violence and legacy, feminism and terrorism, art and how we actually go about changing the world. It a true story. Or total fiction. Or a play about a play. Or a raucous resurrection that ends in a song and a scaffold.
73 pages, Paperback
Published March 15, 2018
5 people are currently reading
212 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews
November 24, 2018
This script is so clever and funny! I missed a production of The Revolutionists at a local college earlier this year. When my teen started studying the French Revolution in school, I decided to buy the script as a fun supplement to her lesson. Now that I've read the play, I'm disappointed I missed the production. If it comes to a theater near you, do not hesitate. This one is a must see.
November 16, 2022
this play was deeply irritating to me. somehow it managed to have 4 different flavors of white liberal feminist reactionary interpretations of the french revolution in all 4 of its main characters. the real life olympe de gouges, despite theoretically being an abolitionist, was against actual revolutionary action taken by enslaved people to free themselves, saying in the 1792 introduction to her play L'Esclavage des noirs "it is to you, slaves, men of colour, that I will speak; perhaps I have an indisputable right to criticize your ferocity; cruel men, by imitating your tyrants, you justify
them. The majority of your Masters were humane and good, and in your blind rage you do
not distinguish the innocent victims from your persecutors. Men were not born to be put in
chains yet you prove that they are necessary." (this goes on longer but i'm sure you get the essence of how vile it is). it doesn't sit right with me to be positioning her as a progressive figure in the face of this! similarly, charlotte corday was a relatively conservative aristocrat and girondin, who almost certainly did not assassinate marat out of any progressive ideals.
there is a long history of people trying to paint reactionary women during the french revolution such as de gouges, corday, and marie antoinette as progressive, appealing to aesthetics of radicalism or to ideas of some essential experience of womanhood that goes across all other axes of oppression. propagating this phenomenon further is dangerous. even when not intended by individual authors, this trend serves to downplay the need for revolution, arguing that reformism should be enough, that monarchism, capitalism, and colonialism aren't a big deal, and that revolutionary violence as a strategy of marginalized people trying to resist extreme oppression to bring about a better world should be demonized.
i don't care that this is all happening in olympe's head, the fact that marianne, the only black character in the cast, and the only character who didn't exist in real life, despite all the characters half-hearted conflicts with each others outlooks, never even pushes back against olympe's wariness at actual revolutionary violence as a person actively involved in the haitian revolution, and is even given lines to make her another centrist mouthpiece like "The world found it just despicable. No nation, no matter how revolutionary, should kill a king that way." is honestly kind of despicable to me
this is a play for rich white women who don't want much of anything to fundamentally change, who aren't involved with community organizing and refuse to engage with what would actually structurally need to change in order to have a more just world, but who really like to feel like they're activists just for voting blue no matter who once a year.
them. The majority of your Masters were humane and good, and in your blind rage you do
not distinguish the innocent victims from your persecutors. Men were not born to be put in
chains yet you prove that they are necessary." (this goes on longer but i'm sure you get the essence of how vile it is). it doesn't sit right with me to be positioning her as a progressive figure in the face of this! similarly, charlotte corday was a relatively conservative aristocrat and girondin, who almost certainly did not assassinate marat out of any progressive ideals.
there is a long history of people trying to paint reactionary women during the french revolution such as de gouges, corday, and marie antoinette as progressive, appealing to aesthetics of radicalism or to ideas of some essential experience of womanhood that goes across all other axes of oppression. propagating this phenomenon further is dangerous. even when not intended by individual authors, this trend serves to downplay the need for revolution, arguing that reformism should be enough, that monarchism, capitalism, and colonialism aren't a big deal, and that revolutionary violence as a strategy of marginalized people trying to resist extreme oppression to bring about a better world should be demonized.
i don't care that this is all happening in olympe's head, the fact that marianne, the only black character in the cast, and the only character who didn't exist in real life, despite all the characters half-hearted conflicts with each others outlooks, never even pushes back against olympe's wariness at actual revolutionary violence as a person actively involved in the haitian revolution, and is even given lines to make her another centrist mouthpiece like "The world found it just despicable. No nation, no matter how revolutionary, should kill a king that way." is honestly kind of despicable to me
this is a play for rich white women who don't want much of anything to fundamentally change, who aren't involved with community organizing and refuse to engage with what would actually structurally need to change in order to have a more just world, but who really like to feel like they're activists just for voting blue no matter who once a year.
April 10, 2023
Funny, cheesy, a little directionless? With a name like “the revolutionists” I’m going to need a little more umf.
July 23, 2018
I read this aloud with my feminist bookclub, and it worked really well. We wondered how many of the historical facts were accurate.
January 27, 2022
Brechtian play about 4 women during the French Revolution. Set in 1793 during the height of the terror The Revolutionists examines revolution, what it means, and who inevitably gets left behind.
The play's main character is Olympe De Gouges, 18th century french playwright and here probably serving as a self-insert for Revolutionists' playwright Lauren Gunderson. She's got writer's block and bad. Her old friend Marianne Angell enters, a Haitian revolutionary sent to spy on France. Marianne and Olympe serve as foils to each other with Marianne critiquing Olympe's writing and trying to enlist her to help the Haitian cause and their arguing over the best methods. The play also features Charlotte Corday, assassin of Jean-Paul Marat (one of the Terror's chief architects). Corday is portrayed as more than a little psychopathic which seems somewhat at odds with the actual Corday but does inject some violent comedy into the script. Rounding out the cast is Marie Antoinette who is a bourgeoise clueless but also isn't as bad as she's made out to be in the press.
The dialog is jarringly modern. This could be an attempt to achieve Brecht's alienation effect. The 1790s characters all speak like they're appearing in a late 2000s comedy movie and this probably serves to remind us that while the plot is about the French Revolution the play is certainly about modern America, being published in 2017 and thus almost certainly written in the wake of Donald Trump's election. I don't think it's an effective device, at least not for me. I am not the play's target audience but the dialog and setting clash hard and I don't like the way it comes off the page in my head. When Brecht tried for alienation he made damn sure you knew what he was talking about. The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui is ostensibly about the rise to power of a Chicago gangster but interspersed between the scenes are project facts about Hitler. Brecht wanted you to know he was writing about Hitler. This does date Brecht's work but it makes the thrust of the play here. The vagueness may have been an attempt to make The Revolutionists less a product of its time. Or the playwright may have just liked it. It certainly allows the comedy of it to land better to a modern audience.
Violence is a persistent theme in the play. Charlotte Corday's assassination of Marat is at once brave, bold, and ultimately makes everything worse. Olympe rails against violent methods repeatedly. The part that sticks with me is that we've added a Haitian revolutionary to the mix who never points out that the Haitian Revolution was and had to be a violent undertaking. In fact, the Haitians and Revolutionary France were in an alliance at the time of the play's setting against Britain, the pro-monarchy French settler-colonists, and Spain. Revolutionary France would eventually abolish slavery in order to secure the Saint-Domingue for Revolutionary France. Though, like so many things, Revolutionary France wouldn't stick to this ideal, hence why there were two Haitian Revolutions. Violence and revolution are complicated but it seems to me that not having the Haitian Revolutionary point out that slavers aren't going to stop being slavers because you ask them nicely is done to deliberately prevent the tipping of the scales in favor of violent action. It strikes me as similar to the vein lots of radicals in America have written about where the average American liberal finds a very deep line in the sand that they will not cross for revolution. It's gotta be non-violent protest all the way! Well, non-violent protest would not likely have worked for the Haitians. Marianne's, a composite character with no single direct inspiration, inclusion reminds us that the French Revolution didn't just exist in Europe and that's very welcome and adds much welcome diversity to the cast.
But I do like how The Revolutionists' characters doesn't settle into a unified front. Olympe never seems completely comfortable with Corday's violence. Olympe, Corday, and Marianne are never completely comfortable with Marie Antoinette. They have their moments where they rally to her, but they never forget that she's, well, a royal. And a bit of a ditz. They contain multitudes which makes their interactions fantastic.
As a piece of historical fiction it's an interesting what-if about three women the Revolution executed. Olympe is the best researched and most fleshed out, as befits a probable playwright-insert character. But it also isn't supposed to be history. Charlotte Corday mentions her getting a portrait painted as being flattering and they say she didn't get a trial. She did. The portrait artist was recruited at her trial. It was a sham trial of a sort. They were never going to not convict her. And the portrait in question was, in itself, a piece of propaganda, most notably in how it painted Corday as blonde. The artist wanted to identify her with the bourgeoisie and so wanted to imply that she had powdered her hair before going to kill Marat. Marianne is largely on stage trying to get Olympe to write a pamphlet for the Haitian Revolutionaries but their plight is not much examined. Marianne eventually writes the pamphlet herself and declares it to be better but this all happens off-stage. It's Olympe's story and the Haitian Revolutionaries are kind of a sideshow for the script. Additionally, the constant joke lines about musicals, there because the American theatre experience is tied to musicals like a boat anchor, and even one point where Marie Antoinette draws comparisons to the melodramatic trope of a woman-tied-to-train-tracks before asking "What is a train?" It pulls me out of the moment but it never seems very sure of what it wants to pull me toward thinking about instead. Perhaps it's an individual thing, you find the parts of it that relate to your own life and I lack the necessary lived experiences to get the hints, which is extremely valid.
In summation, it's something of a mixed bag. There's a lot to like and I look forward to seeing it staged.
The play's main character is Olympe De Gouges, 18th century french playwright and here probably serving as a self-insert for Revolutionists' playwright Lauren Gunderson. She's got writer's block and bad. Her old friend Marianne Angell enters, a Haitian revolutionary sent to spy on France. Marianne and Olympe serve as foils to each other with Marianne critiquing Olympe's writing and trying to enlist her to help the Haitian cause and their arguing over the best methods. The play also features Charlotte Corday, assassin of Jean-Paul Marat (one of the Terror's chief architects). Corday is portrayed as more than a little psychopathic which seems somewhat at odds with the actual Corday but does inject some violent comedy into the script. Rounding out the cast is Marie Antoinette who is a bourgeoise clueless but also isn't as bad as she's made out to be in the press.
The dialog is jarringly modern. This could be an attempt to achieve Brecht's alienation effect. The 1790s characters all speak like they're appearing in a late 2000s comedy movie and this probably serves to remind us that while the plot is about the French Revolution the play is certainly about modern America, being published in 2017 and thus almost certainly written in the wake of Donald Trump's election. I don't think it's an effective device, at least not for me. I am not the play's target audience but the dialog and setting clash hard and I don't like the way it comes off the page in my head. When Brecht tried for alienation he made damn sure you knew what he was talking about. The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui is ostensibly about the rise to power of a Chicago gangster but interspersed between the scenes are project facts about Hitler. Brecht wanted you to know he was writing about Hitler. This does date Brecht's work but it makes the thrust of the play here. The vagueness may have been an attempt to make The Revolutionists less a product of its time. Or the playwright may have just liked it. It certainly allows the comedy of it to land better to a modern audience.
Violence is a persistent theme in the play. Charlotte Corday's assassination of Marat is at once brave, bold, and ultimately makes everything worse. Olympe rails against violent methods repeatedly. The part that sticks with me is that we've added a Haitian revolutionary to the mix who never points out that the Haitian Revolution was and had to be a violent undertaking. In fact, the Haitians and Revolutionary France were in an alliance at the time of the play's setting against Britain, the pro-monarchy French settler-colonists, and Spain. Revolutionary France would eventually abolish slavery in order to secure the Saint-Domingue for Revolutionary France. Though, like so many things, Revolutionary France wouldn't stick to this ideal, hence why there were two Haitian Revolutions. Violence and revolution are complicated but it seems to me that not having the Haitian Revolutionary point out that slavers aren't going to stop being slavers because you ask them nicely is done to deliberately prevent the tipping of the scales in favor of violent action. It strikes me as similar to the vein lots of radicals in America have written about where the average American liberal finds a very deep line in the sand that they will not cross for revolution. It's gotta be non-violent protest all the way! Well, non-violent protest would not likely have worked for the Haitians. Marianne's, a composite character with no single direct inspiration, inclusion reminds us that the French Revolution didn't just exist in Europe and that's very welcome and adds much welcome diversity to the cast.
But I do like how The Revolutionists' characters doesn't settle into a unified front. Olympe never seems completely comfortable with Corday's violence. Olympe, Corday, and Marianne are never completely comfortable with Marie Antoinette. They have their moments where they rally to her, but they never forget that she's, well, a royal. And a bit of a ditz. They contain multitudes which makes their interactions fantastic.
As a piece of historical fiction it's an interesting what-if about three women the Revolution executed. Olympe is the best researched and most fleshed out, as befits a probable playwright-insert character. But it also isn't supposed to be history. Charlotte Corday mentions her getting a portrait painted as being flattering and they say she didn't get a trial. She did. The portrait artist was recruited at her trial. It was a sham trial of a sort. They were never going to not convict her. And the portrait in question was, in itself, a piece of propaganda, most notably in how it painted Corday as blonde. The artist wanted to identify her with the bourgeoisie and so wanted to imply that she had powdered her hair before going to kill Marat. Marianne is largely on stage trying to get Olympe to write a pamphlet for the Haitian Revolutionaries but their plight is not much examined. Marianne eventually writes the pamphlet herself and declares it to be better but this all happens off-stage. It's Olympe's story and the Haitian Revolutionaries are kind of a sideshow for the script. Additionally, the constant joke lines about musicals, there because the American theatre experience is tied to musicals like a boat anchor, and even one point where Marie Antoinette draws comparisons to the melodramatic trope of a woman-tied-to-train-tracks before asking "What is a train?" It pulls me out of the moment but it never seems very sure of what it wants to pull me toward thinking about instead. Perhaps it's an individual thing, you find the parts of it that relate to your own life and I lack the necessary lived experiences to get the hints, which is extremely valid.
In summation, it's something of a mixed bag. There's a lot to like and I look forward to seeing it staged.
July 2, 2018
Fantastically funny feminist play!
May 9, 2020
Everyone: This is so clever! This is so funny! This is so interesting!
Me: .................................
Me: .................................
November 13, 2021
Favorite playwright - witty dialogue, surprises through-out despite historical context, and deeply developed characters.
January 27, 2024
It didn’t hit as hard as I wanted to and felt too much like “buzzfeed feminism”. I think I might have a different opinion seeing a really good staged production, but I felt pretty mid while reading.
June 10, 2021
My notes/opinions on first reading:
4W, 0M
Various locations in Paris, during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution.
Olympe - a playwright. Concerned with art and words. Afraid. All in her mind.
Marianne - Haitian rebel. Powerful and focused.
Charlotte - A country girl. Daughter of landed gentry. Needs last words because she is off to kill Marat.
Marie - Queen of France. Impractical. Unconsciously perceptive. Ribbons and lace and steel.
The play takes place in Olympe's mind while she is awaiting death by guillotine. Primarily located in her rooms where everyone comes to her for her skill with words: pamphlets, last words, any words. Obviously not reality; who needs a playwright in a revolution? She feels safe in her rooms, so retreats there when the world becomes too real.
Very Brechtian in its approach to presentation; the play brings together several historical characters who most likely never met. Marie Antoinette was never on speaking terms with Charlotte Corday.
This is a good play for production with four strong female performers. It grabs my attention and hold on. Despite knowing that the Reign of Terror didn't end well for anyone and certainly won't end well for at least three of the cast, you still hope for the best. I'm surprised how much I liked Marie's character.
Given the manner of writing and the Brechtian style of presentation, this play lends itself to a number of different production styles. It could be done with lavish wood floors & furnishings, with simple decor, industrial style, or with dream-like qualities. Styles could (historically) encompass: Louis XVI, Directoire, and early French Empire. Additionally, you could go full Brecht or set it in a 1950s McCarthyism style of production.
Lighting is important as one set must quickly becomes Marat's bathroom, a street, and the Place de Revolution. Additionally lighting can be used to simulate the unreality and confusion of the revolution that is happening around these characters. Projections could be important for establishing place and time.
Costumes would be a lot of fun. French royalty, artist, traveling landed gentry, and a Haitian revolutionary would all have distinct styles that would be interesting to work with. Add to that the need (this year) for masks that match each character and the task becomes more interesting. What masks would each character wear?
4W, 0M
Various locations in Paris, during the Reign of Terror of the French Revolution.
Olympe - a playwright. Concerned with art and words. Afraid. All in her mind.
Marianne - Haitian rebel. Powerful and focused.
Charlotte - A country girl. Daughter of landed gentry. Needs last words because she is off to kill Marat.
Marie - Queen of France. Impractical. Unconsciously perceptive. Ribbons and lace and steel.
The play takes place in Olympe's mind while she is awaiting death by guillotine. Primarily located in her rooms where everyone comes to her for her skill with words: pamphlets, last words, any words. Obviously not reality; who needs a playwright in a revolution? She feels safe in her rooms, so retreats there when the world becomes too real.
Very Brechtian in its approach to presentation; the play brings together several historical characters who most likely never met. Marie Antoinette was never on speaking terms with Charlotte Corday.
This is a good play for production with four strong female performers. It grabs my attention and hold on. Despite knowing that the Reign of Terror didn't end well for anyone and certainly won't end well for at least three of the cast, you still hope for the best. I'm surprised how much I liked Marie's character.
Given the manner of writing and the Brechtian style of presentation, this play lends itself to a number of different production styles. It could be done with lavish wood floors & furnishings, with simple decor, industrial style, or with dream-like qualities. Styles could (historically) encompass: Louis XVI, Directoire, and early French Empire. Additionally, you could go full Brecht or set it in a 1950s McCarthyism style of production.
Lighting is important as one set must quickly becomes Marat's bathroom, a street, and the Place de Revolution. Additionally lighting can be used to simulate the unreality and confusion of the revolution that is happening around these characters. Projections could be important for establishing place and time.
Costumes would be a lot of fun. French royalty, artist, traveling landed gentry, and a Haitian revolutionary would all have distinct styles that would be interesting to work with. Add to that the need (this year) for masks that match each character and the task becomes more interesting. What masks would each character wear?
April 30, 2024
My one and only interaction with Lauren Gunderson was back in Spring 2018, when I went to a week long playwriting festival for college undergrad writers in Atlanta. We went to see a production of one of her plays, The Taming, I believe it's called, and the entire group of about 30 college kids....hated it. Not necessarily the production, which I remember was decent enough, but the play. It just, per my memory, wasn't good at being a political satire, nor was it good at being a play. And so I sort of in my mind said "I don't like Lauren Gunderson!" Which, yes, is very much a bold stance to take after one play, especially when the girl has written like 100. And, so, when I decided to buy this one and read it, I read it with an incredibly low bar.
Which, was probably for the best, maybe, because I did really enjoy it. Maybe The Taming was just a bad one, maybe it just wasn't for me, I don't know. But, this play really did so many things correct. Namely, that it relied very heavily on the use of the form of Theatre itself, which I always love. When a piece of Theatre is unafraid to -be- a piece of theatre, and use all of the methods, conventions, forms, etc. that come with it? It is always thrilling, and this play used that to its advantage.
Sure, there's always an element of 'I'm sure it's better when performed' but, still, I loved it. Much to my surprise.
Which, was probably for the best, maybe, because I did really enjoy it. Maybe The Taming was just a bad one, maybe it just wasn't for me, I don't know. But, this play really did so many things correct. Namely, that it relied very heavily on the use of the form of Theatre itself, which I always love. When a piece of Theatre is unafraid to -be- a piece of theatre, and use all of the methods, conventions, forms, etc. that come with it? It is always thrilling, and this play used that to its advantage.
Sure, there's always an element of 'I'm sure it's better when performed' but, still, I loved it. Much to my surprise.
January 19, 2021
I loved this play from the first page to the last. It is laugh out loud funny while introducing me to some unknown (to me) facts about the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. In Gunderson's story, we meet Olympe de Gouges, a feminist issue-driven playwright of the day who is called upon to write a line for Charlotte Corday (who killed Marat) and to rewrite Marie Antoinette's story. Also added to the mix is Marianne Angelle, a fictional character who represents a free Black woman advocating for the enslaved in the French Caribbean colonies. Note: de Gouges, Corday and Marie were the first three women guillotined during the Reign of Terror. Along the way, Gunderson asks over and over whether art -- and words -- matter. Take a look at current events for the answer to that question.
August 9, 2023
A fantastic play putting Charlotte Corday, assassin of Marat, Olympe de Gouges, feminist playwright, Marie Antoinette, Queen of France and Marianne Angelle a freedom fighter from the Caribbean together to discuss the horrors of war, motherhood, love, equality, feminism, and what we leave behind. LOVED.
Fave quotes (so many about the theatre, you have to read it):
"You know what I really want? I want people to live their lives and make babies and eat too much and do experimental theatre."
"And let's be kind, shall we...let us laugh too loudly and too often, and call out the hypocrites of our age until they are the butt of the joke. That's what we give our children. A good laugh."
"And she knows that a story is more alive than a fact. A story is what lives."
Fave quotes (so many about the theatre, you have to read it):
"You know what I really want? I want people to live their lives and make babies and eat too much and do experimental theatre."
"And let's be kind, shall we...let us laugh too loudly and too often, and call out the hypocrites of our age until they are the butt of the joke. That's what we give our children. A good laugh."
"And she knows that a story is more alive than a fact. A story is what lives."
November 30, 2025
Sometimes I read a play and hate every minute of reading it but think that on stage it would probably work great. That’s how I feel about The Revolutionists. I think I get hung up on the meta theatre taking over the show and it feels cheesy and like a crummy device. The whole play feels like a writer trying to get through writer’s block, which is not the audience’s problem. We want a story, not the writer’s struggle, which some of us know well enough on our own, thank you. There’s a very, very, very slim plot and some decent jokes and THEN we’re supposed to feel bad about these people getting executed. Bah humbug, and yet, I bet it would be pretty decent on stage. 🙄
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 7, 2025
I am auditioning for this play soon through my school, and I can't help but say that I am disappointed in the script. Maybe it is a better play when performed, but I did not enjoy reading this at all. I felt like every moment that had any sort of message was ruined by a joke, or just not taken seriously enough. I am not saying that art needs to have an inherent message in order to exist, but I just did not find any of the characters or dialogue funny enough to justify a play simply existing for pleasure. When it was not at all pleasurable.
January 13, 2026
Very witty and well-written, I’d love to see this performed somewhere. I had been meaning to read it for over a year, re-reading the first scene or two multiple times. But then I got to suggest it for the Play Club at work and finally had the excuse to sit down and read the whole thing. I love the pacing and the tone a lot! Not a historically accurate portrayal of these women at all, but it was fun. Weird to call a play about the French Revolution fun, but I think that’s part of the point? Hopefully someday I’ll get to see it onstage.
October 24, 2024
love reading plays but this one really struggles with making me care about the characters. the comedy attempts to carry the narrative and many emotional moments are sacrificed in an attempt to highlight "humor". there are interesting moments and i don't mean to undermine gunderson's ability, it is solely a personal preference.
i do enjoy her concept of reinforcing that it is in fact a comedy despite fitting the description of a tragedy, it's enjoyably meta!
i do enjoy her concept of reinforcing that it is in fact a comedy despite fitting the description of a tragedy, it's enjoyably meta!
July 7, 2019
It isn't often you read a play that not only stars a woman, but passes the Bechtel test with flying colors. The play is set during the Reign of Terror, although parallels are drawn to modern times. The characters are distinct, historical, and utterly hilarious.
The one drawback was the ending. It's a bit stagey and expected in my opinion. Still, it's an excellent play for community theaters.
The one drawback was the ending. It's a bit stagey and expected in my opinion. Still, it's an excellent play for community theaters.
May 21, 2021
I laughed my ass off the entire time. The premise and the execution of this is nothing short of brilliant. The dialogue is quick, biting and hilarious. Days later, I still find myself laughing at some if it.
Feminist and funny; that is a Venne diagram I can get into. Do yourself a favor and read it.
Feminist and funny; that is a Venne diagram I can get into. Do yourself a favor and read it.
December 27, 2022
This is gorgeous and glorious and heartbreaking and fierce. I only wish the characters were slightly less literal and the dialogue were slightly less modern.
Update 12/22: A lot of the shine has gone off this play for me because I fundamentally do not believe the Marianne-Marie Antoinette friendship. I do, however, still really enjoy all of Charlotte Corday's monologues.
Update 12/22: A lot of the shine has gone off this play for me because I fundamentally do not believe the Marianne-Marie Antoinette friendship. I do, however, still really enjoy all of Charlotte Corday's monologues.
February 7, 2024
At times the humor wasn't for me, and the four characters as well as their conflicts seemed fairly shallow. There were other times when I was profoundly touched and was nearly brought to tears even just from reading it. I'm really looking forward to attending my university's staged reading of this at the end of the month, and hope some day to see it performed in full.
December 23, 2025
This is everything I want in a show. Absurdity, darkness, humor, murder, girls being badass, French shit, commentaries on art and plays within a play and making your mark during a time of great upheaval... Crossing my fingers that this gets produced somewhere in my town because this would be SOOO fun.
January 4, 2026
Soooo I actually read “Progress” by John Wolbers BUT it doesn’t exist on Goodreads yet as it’s a new play, so this is the closest way I could log it.
Super similar vibe to “The Revolutionists” (which is a play I also love). Definitely 5 stars for both plays!
Also it made me think I should totally reread “The Revolutionists.” I absolutely love the historical stories with modern language.
Super similar vibe to “The Revolutionists” (which is a play I also love). Definitely 5 stars for both plays!
Also it made me think I should totally reread “The Revolutionists.” I absolutely love the historical stories with modern language.
November 10, 2018
My Uni is putting this on next semester, and as a Theatre Major, I wanted to read it before I prepped for auditions.
This is a very interesting play. It's comedic and heartfelt and absurd and real. All the roles were well-written and any one of them would be fun to play.
This is a very interesting play. It's comedic and heartfelt and absurd and real. All the roles were well-written and any one of them would be fun to play.
October 28, 2019
I have seen this play three times now and every time I am transported on a wild ride to 1792. Lauren Gunderson has written an accessible play that, if I close my eyes, could be happening today. Her characters are real, impassioned, wounded, and gifted. BRAVA!
January 23, 2020
Surprise favorite?! Definitely in my top 10 plays I've read, definitely the best play I've read in the last year, and definitely earning Lauren Gunderson a spot on my "favorite playwrights" list.
CW: Execution, descriptions of: slavery, racism
CW: Execution, descriptions of: slavery, racism
March 8, 2022
Quick and funny - paced like a Mrs Maisel episode but in the French Revolution and a liminal space. Gunderson doesn’t get enough credit for being a commercially appealing playwright with care and quiet depth
April 19, 2022
SO FUNNY. I'm laughing out loud, literally, whilst reading this play. Cleverly written. The women have such strong, contrasting personalities that intertwine perfectly with one another. Powerful messages and themes behind it. Loved!
January 13, 2025
holy shit. this is a GREAT play. I WANT TO BE IN THIS PLAY. i want to be all of the characters and i want to be in the audience for this play. i love this play. lauren gunderson gets closer to becoming my favorite playwright with each piece of hers that i read. i’m excited to read the next.
January 6, 2026
This play really isn’t the “radically feminist” tale it pretends to be, it reads as very “girl power” white feminism and lacks substance most of the time. I also think it is not particularly well written, often making me cringe, the humor just isn’t working for me.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews