What do you think?
Rate this book
Don Carlos, infante de España
A historical tragedy in five acts, loosely modeled on events centered on the relationship between the crown prince Don Carlos and his father in the 16th century under the reign of King Philip II of Spain.
According to the 2007 BBC production of the play:
According to the 2007 BBC production of the play:
King Philip II of Spain holds on to power through the terror of the Inquisition and his spies at Court. His son Don Carlos seeks his father's trust, yet hides his feelings for his father's wife, Elizabeth of France, to whom he was betrothed before Philip married her. The Court watches and listens.
299 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1787
52 people are currently reading
1211 people want to read
About the author
Friedrich Schiller
5,411 books861 followersPeople best know long didactic poems and historical plays, such as
Don Carlos
(1787) and
William Tell
(1804), of leading romanticist German poet, dramatist, and historian Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller.
This philosopher and dramatist struck up a productive if complicated friendship with already famous and influential Johann Wolfgang von Goethe during the last eighteen years of his life and encouraged Goethe to finish works that he left merely as sketches; they greatly discussed issues concerning aesthetics and thus gave way to a period, now referred to as classicism of Weimar. They also worked together on Die Xenien ( The Xenies ), a collection of short but harsh satires that verbally attacked perceived enemies of their aesthetic agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedri...
This philosopher and dramatist struck up a productive if complicated friendship with already famous and influential Johann Wolfgang von Goethe during the last eighteen years of his life and encouraged Goethe to finish works that he left merely as sketches; they greatly discussed issues concerning aesthetics and thus gave way to a period, now referred to as classicism of Weimar. They also worked together on Die Xenien ( The Xenies ), a collection of short but harsh satires that verbally attacked perceived enemies of their aesthetic agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedri...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews
January 15, 2021
"No sé lo que significa tener un padre: yo soy el hijo de un rey"
Por fin puedo decir que me he reconciliado con Schiller. Tenía mucha esperanza la verdad cuando empecé a leerlo pero ni "Guillermo Tell" ni "La doncella de Orleans" me llegaron a gustar mucho. Pero esta pieza sí definitivamente tiene muy buenas frases y también la acción es más interesante aunque no carece de malos momentos.
La historia está inspirada en la vida real, desde luego, Don Carlos es el primer hijo de Felipe II con su primera esposa (no la mencionan pero es María Manuela de Portugal), pero ahora Felipe II, el rey de España, está casado con Isabel de Valois, la nueva reina, quien estuvo prometida a Carlos cuando ambos eran jóvenes. Schiller altera, evidentemente, la realidad histórica para posicionar a sus personajes y darles más importancia. Así, crea un triángulo amoroso entre padre, hijo y "madrastra". De otro lado, la princesa de Éboli (la famosa esposa de Ruy Gómez de Silva), nos es presentada como soltera aún y muy interesada en Carlos. Así que tenemos dos triángulos amorosos.
Carlos es un joven noble, puro, espiritual pero también vehemente, sus accesos de emoción o cólera son conocidos por su padre y por su séquito, representado sobre todo por los Grandes de España, entre los que aparecen el Duque de Alba, el Conde de Lerma, el Duque de Feria y también a los religiosos (muy bien colocados en esta tragedia) como El inquisidor mayor y el prior. Él sabe que su padre no lo quiere, siempre lo ha visto como un déspota e interesado, mientras que él aspira a otros valores más altos y quiere ser más condescendiente con el pueblo. No se siente feliz con ser sólo el príncipe pues es prohibido adrede de poder destacar más siendo pospuesto a los Grandes de España; el tedio lo consume y no es de sacar provecho de sus privilegios.
Se desata entonces una lucha inicialmente de pasión, Carlos no puede aceptar que Isabel sea ahora su madrastra y tratará por todos los medios de verla y conseguir algo de ella, sin embargo, los Grandes de España están siempre al acecho y cuidando del rey Felipe, por interés como aparenta ser.
El personaje que sin duda se roba la tragedia a mi parecer es el Marqués de Poza, joven amigo de Carlos, quien tratará de ayudarlo en su camino, aunque también guarda algún interés oculto. Carlos, no sólo trata de llegar al corazón de la reina sino también de jugar un papel relevante, y cuando azuzado por su amigo tratará de dirigir los Países Bajos Españoles la lucha política entre padre e hijo alcanzará su punto más álgido.
Me gustó el ritmo, aunque resulta un poco larga esta tragedia, los temas de los que se habla (derrota contra Inglaterra, sublevación de Países Bajos, rol de la iglesia católica) y las múltiples subtramas que hay. Los mismos grandes de España tienen intereses propios y a veces se dividen en bandos por no saber a quién apoyar. El final pudo ser más contundente pero en vista de los sucesos históricos tan conocidos (aunque oscuros y susceptibles de diversas interpretaciones) el desenlace queda claro.
"¡Considerar que el favor de una dama y la felicidad del amor es una mercancía con la que se puede comerciar! Se trata de lo único en el mundo que sólo puede ser comprado por sí mismo, pues el precio del amor es el amor. Se trata de un diamante de un valor incalculable, que yo regalaré o que me veré obligada a enterrar sin que nadie lo haya disfrutado"
Por fin puedo decir que me he reconciliado con Schiller. Tenía mucha esperanza la verdad cuando empecé a leerlo pero ni "Guillermo Tell" ni "La doncella de Orleans" me llegaron a gustar mucho. Pero esta pieza sí definitivamente tiene muy buenas frases y también la acción es más interesante aunque no carece de malos momentos.
La historia está inspirada en la vida real, desde luego, Don Carlos es el primer hijo de Felipe II con su primera esposa (no la mencionan pero es María Manuela de Portugal), pero ahora Felipe II, el rey de España, está casado con Isabel de Valois, la nueva reina, quien estuvo prometida a Carlos cuando ambos eran jóvenes. Schiller altera, evidentemente, la realidad histórica para posicionar a sus personajes y darles más importancia. Así, crea un triángulo amoroso entre padre, hijo y "madrastra". De otro lado, la princesa de Éboli (la famosa esposa de Ruy Gómez de Silva), nos es presentada como soltera aún y muy interesada en Carlos. Así que tenemos dos triángulos amorosos.
Carlos es un joven noble, puro, espiritual pero también vehemente, sus accesos de emoción o cólera son conocidos por su padre y por su séquito, representado sobre todo por los Grandes de España, entre los que aparecen el Duque de Alba, el Conde de Lerma, el Duque de Feria y también a los religiosos (muy bien colocados en esta tragedia) como El inquisidor mayor y el prior. Él sabe que su padre no lo quiere, siempre lo ha visto como un déspota e interesado, mientras que él aspira a otros valores más altos y quiere ser más condescendiente con el pueblo. No se siente feliz con ser sólo el príncipe pues es prohibido adrede de poder destacar más siendo pospuesto a los Grandes de España; el tedio lo consume y no es de sacar provecho de sus privilegios.
Se desata entonces una lucha inicialmente de pasión, Carlos no puede aceptar que Isabel sea ahora su madrastra y tratará por todos los medios de verla y conseguir algo de ella, sin embargo, los Grandes de España están siempre al acecho y cuidando del rey Felipe, por interés como aparenta ser.
El personaje que sin duda se roba la tragedia a mi parecer es el Marqués de Poza, joven amigo de Carlos, quien tratará de ayudarlo en su camino, aunque también guarda algún interés oculto. Carlos, no sólo trata de llegar al corazón de la reina sino también de jugar un papel relevante, y cuando azuzado por su amigo tratará de dirigir los Países Bajos Españoles la lucha política entre padre e hijo alcanzará su punto más álgido.
Me gustó el ritmo, aunque resulta un poco larga esta tragedia, los temas de los que se habla (derrota contra Inglaterra, sublevación de Países Bajos, rol de la iglesia católica) y las múltiples subtramas que hay. Los mismos grandes de España tienen intereses propios y a veces se dividen en bandos por no saber a quién apoyar. El final pudo ser más contundente pero en vista de los sucesos históricos tan conocidos (aunque oscuros y susceptibles de diversas interpretaciones) el desenlace queda claro.
"¡Considerar que el favor de una dama y la felicidad del amor es una mercancía con la que se puede comerciar! Se trata de lo único en el mundo que sólo puede ser comprado por sí mismo, pues el precio del amor es el amor. Se trata de un diamante de un valor incalculable, que yo regalaré o que me veré obligada a enterrar sin que nadie lo haya disfrutado"
January 3, 2024
Friedrich Schiller's 1787 historical tragedy Don Karlos: Infant von Spanien was actually the very very first piece of classical German literature I ever read (in the fall of 1986 at Mount Allison University, for a fourth year German literature course on Goethe and Schiller that I was kind of coerced into taking during my second undergraduate year, which really was a bit like being thrown into the proverbial deep end of a massive swimming pool with only a very rudimentary life jacket, as I had NEVER before read any German classics, was the ONLY STUDENT enrolled in that course, and we had the lectures and discussions in my professor's office, one on one).
Now being at best used to reading simple German children's literature fare (mostly the books we had taken with us from Germany when my family immigrated to Canada in 1976, when I was ten), I was of course and really, truly in no way even remotely prepared for a classical and intricately nuanced, at times even rather majorly convoluted late 18th century German drama and thus found much of Schiller's writing style as well as the general themes presented more than a bit daunting to put it mildly and thus quite difficult to peruse, let alone comprehend with any kind of ease (actually and in fact, so extremely frustrating this perusal was for me at the onset, that I had to purchase a second copy of Don Karlos: Infant von Spanien for in-class use, as I had in my initial annoyance at and frustration with the play and especially at how difficult it was proving to read, written/drawn some rather weird, even inappropriate slogans and pictures inside the book that I really did not want the professor to see, as I do not think she would have appreciated me calling Friedrich von Schiller "ein Arschloch"). And finally, although I have for a while now been seriously toying with the idea of giving Don Karlos: Infant von Spanien a second chance, of actually meticulously and intensely rereading in order to post a more academic (a more analytical, thematic) and not so personally anecdotal a review, I do have to admit that I just do not much feel like it (as even whilst I do appreciate and generally greatly admire, even love Friedrich Schiller as an author, I without a doubt would and do with much more joy and strength of conviction recommend his poetry and plays such as Die Räuber, Maria Suart and Wilhelm Tell, and the latter two especially).
Now being at best used to reading simple German children's literature fare (mostly the books we had taken with us from Germany when my family immigrated to Canada in 1976, when I was ten), I was of course and really, truly in no way even remotely prepared for a classical and intricately nuanced, at times even rather majorly convoluted late 18th century German drama and thus found much of Schiller's writing style as well as the general themes presented more than a bit daunting to put it mildly and thus quite difficult to peruse, let alone comprehend with any kind of ease (actually and in fact, so extremely frustrating this perusal was for me at the onset, that I had to purchase a second copy of Don Karlos: Infant von Spanien for in-class use, as I had in my initial annoyance at and frustration with the play and especially at how difficult it was proving to read, written/drawn some rather weird, even inappropriate slogans and pictures inside the book that I really did not want the professor to see, as I do not think she would have appreciated me calling Friedrich von Schiller "ein Arschloch"). And finally, although I have for a while now been seriously toying with the idea of giving Don Karlos: Infant von Spanien a second chance, of actually meticulously and intensely rereading in order to post a more academic (a more analytical, thematic) and not so personally anecdotal a review, I do have to admit that I just do not much feel like it (as even whilst I do appreciate and generally greatly admire, even love Friedrich Schiller as an author, I without a doubt would and do with much more joy and strength of conviction recommend his poetry and plays such as Die Räuber, Maria Suart and Wilhelm Tell, and the latter two especially).
Read
November 2, 2017Like Maria Stuart his early play by Schiller is ahistorical, a fantasy on the court of Philip II. Written before the French Revolution it is critical of the narrow-minded imposition of a single cultural worldview on a distant province.
Was the play about Don Karlos or about King Phillip? Phillip emerges as the more interesting character I thought, something dreamlike about his emergence towards the end of the third act when he congratulates his grandees for their service. The Grand Inquisitor comes across as the moral counterweight to Posa's more modern, popular enthusiasm. Although the Inquisitor's views are clearly destructive - leading the death of Karlos and war in the Netherlands, the character is impressive and striking and indeed when I saw it in the theatre the actor projected a domineering presence that put the King in the shade, again rather like Elizabeth in Maria Stuart the monarch is not shown to be the commanding political figure in the state but hedged about by duty, traditions and conventions and like on the chessboard curious vulnerable.
Was the play about Don Karlos or about King Phillip? Phillip emerges as the more interesting character I thought, something dreamlike about his emergence towards the end of the third act when he congratulates his grandees for their service. The Grand Inquisitor comes across as the moral counterweight to Posa's more modern, popular enthusiasm. Although the Inquisitor's views are clearly destructive - leading the death of Karlos and war in the Netherlands, the character is impressive and striking and indeed when I saw it in the theatre the actor projected a domineering presence that put the King in the shade, again rather like Elizabeth in Maria Stuart the monarch is not shown to be the commanding political figure in the state but hedged about by duty, traditions and conventions and like on the chessboard curious vulnerable.
June 8, 2025
Nachtrag
May 14, 2024
Of the works of Schiller I've read thus far, Don Karlos is easily the best, and is very nearly a great work of art. If I stop short of unreserved praise, it is because I cannot read certain key contrivances of the plot as anything other than artifice. To a degree, this is not Schiller's fault-he was simply writing for another age.
Nor should the reader look to the play for anything like historical accuracy, which is likewise no fault of the play.
I would suppose that the model for this play is Shakespeare, and especially the early acts owe a lot to Hamlet. If one is to steal, one might as well steal from the best.
Schiller wrote this work in a vibrant pentameter that continues to ring in your head even after you've put the book down.
Don Karlos is the heir-apparent of Hapsburg Spain, son of Philip II and grandson of Charles V. He is not altogether heroic, and shows a dangerous lability of mind and a great, sweeping enthusiasm that does not particularly serve him or his friends and allies. He is quick to emotional and sometimes self-destructive speeches of deep feeling, and rather than shaping the play's action, Don Karlos has a way of starting various fires that those around him must race about to either contain or to fan.
This does not sit well with his tyrannical father, Philip, who, surprisingly, emerges as one of the most complex and interesting characters of the play. Despite his paranoia and cruelty, Schiller discovers a sympathy for the character that is one of the crown jewels of the play. The more you know about Schiller's biography, and what the character of Philip II certainly meant to him, the more astonishing this becomes. Thomas Mann memorably canonizes this development in his Tonio Kröger when the young hero tries to get across to his indifferent friend Hans Hansen why the king moved him more than the play's actual heroes.
Another great character is the Marquis von Posa, childhood friend of Don Carlos, and a great reader of the human heart. He emerges as one of the play's most cagey and sophisticated characters before being ill-used in acts three and four in an unconvincing plot line in which everything comes to hang on his true allegiances -something that is arbitrarily concealed from the audience for the sole purpose of generating suspense. This is something I just hate to see in any work of fiction. It's the kind of thing one expects, say, from melodramatic operas.
The artifices of the plot don't always fit well with the often-staggering psychological complexity of the characters, but on the whole, the play is a great dramatic and poetic achievement, and boasts several scenes and several characters of enormous power.
Nor should the reader look to the play for anything like historical accuracy, which is likewise no fault of the play.
I would suppose that the model for this play is Shakespeare, and especially the early acts owe a lot to Hamlet. If one is to steal, one might as well steal from the best.
Schiller wrote this work in a vibrant pentameter that continues to ring in your head even after you've put the book down.
Don Karlos is the heir-apparent of Hapsburg Spain, son of Philip II and grandson of Charles V. He is not altogether heroic, and shows a dangerous lability of mind and a great, sweeping enthusiasm that does not particularly serve him or his friends and allies. He is quick to emotional and sometimes self-destructive speeches of deep feeling, and rather than shaping the play's action, Don Karlos has a way of starting various fires that those around him must race about to either contain or to fan.
This does not sit well with his tyrannical father, Philip, who, surprisingly, emerges as one of the most complex and interesting characters of the play. Despite his paranoia and cruelty, Schiller discovers a sympathy for the character that is one of the crown jewels of the play. The more you know about Schiller's biography, and what the character of Philip II certainly meant to him, the more astonishing this becomes. Thomas Mann memorably canonizes this development in his Tonio Kröger when the young hero tries to get across to his indifferent friend Hans Hansen why the king moved him more than the play's actual heroes.
Another great character is the Marquis von Posa, childhood friend of Don Carlos, and a great reader of the human heart. He emerges as one of the play's most cagey and sophisticated characters before being ill-used in acts three and four in an unconvincing plot line in which everything comes to hang on his true allegiances -something that is arbitrarily concealed from the audience for the sole purpose of generating suspense. This is something I just hate to see in any work of fiction. It's the kind of thing one expects, say, from melodramatic operas.
The artifices of the plot don't always fit well with the often-staggering psychological complexity of the characters, but on the whole, the play is a great dramatic and poetic achievement, and boasts several scenes and several characters of enormous power.
March 26, 2017
So here it is, at last: the greatest drama I've ever read. I have never been so powerfully impacted -- both intellectually and emotionally -- by any dramatic work (and quite possibly any other work of literature), either on the page or performed on stage. Indeed, up to this point I had only consumed drama in one of three ways: as an intellectual exercise (Shakespeare, Racine, Goethe, the ancients, the Elizabethans, etc.), as a form of entertainment (Williams, Coward, Hellman, Shepard, Miller, etc.), or as some combination of the two (Beckett, Molière, Ibsen, Chekhov, Hauptmann, etc.) Reading Schiller, and Don Carlos in particular, has changed the way I consume drama. Here is all the passion and fire of life and politics on display, along with the most moving plots and engrossing characters I've ever encountered. Here is theater as dangerous and rebellious political commentary, as force for social change, as resistance to tyranny (in all forms: political, social, romantic, and even personal/inner), and as moral education for any free-thinking person.
Besides complex characters who work out faults that are reflected in our own personal struggles, Schiller gives us historical perspectives that speak to the immediacy of his own time -- and of ours. His plots move with the rapidity of cinema, but never at the expense of contemplative moments. He knows when to pause to give us extended scenes that dig deeply into themes of justice and liberty, resonating with both characters within the drama and with his audience. There are lines that are absolutely devastating, having the ring of timelessness and truth that one only encounters in Shakespeare, and which, unlike the Bard, still have an emotional and stirring impact that doesn't feel antiquated (sorry Shakespeare fans):
"Poor man, what have you done?"
"I have surrendered two short evening hours
To save the glory of a summer's day."
*********
"Be received into your father's arms."
"You smell of murder, I cannot embrace you."
*********
Posa's speech to the king is too long to quote at length, but it is one of the greatest instances of speaking truth to power I've ever read. Here is young Schiller harnessing the passions of his times, distilling the revolutionary spirit of the late-18th century into the purest dramatic art, giving voice to a generation of free-thinkers who rejected the tyranny of absolute monarchy, and who traded the violence and oppression of autocratic rule for the liberating embrace of social equality and justice. He unmasks the divine right of kings as neither divine nor inherent, and reveals the rulers who enforce servitude by decree to be nothing more than feeble old men who command obedience through fear:
"You want your garden to flower eternally
But the seed you sow is death. An institution
Built upon fear will not survive its founder."
There are passages in this play that shook me to the core. At times, I had to stop reading just to take it all in that such ideas were being expressed in a way as to strike me right in the soul: mind, emotion, and spirit. At one point, while in a coffee shop, I had to raise the book up to my eyes because I was on the point of tears. Literature doesn't really affect me like that. I can't remember the last time a work brought me to tears. And a drama? Never! Up to this point, only fiction had the power to move me like this, and then only very rarely.
After reading Don Carlos, I discovered Coleridge's thoughts on Die Räuber expressed in a letter to Robert Southey that perfectly mirrored my own experience in reading Schiller: "'Tis past one o' clock in the morning - I sate down at twelve o' clock to read the 'Robbers' of Schiller - I had read chill and trembling until I came to the part where Moor fires a pistol over the Robbers who are asleep - I could read no more - My God! Southey! Who is this Schiller? This convulser of the heart? Did he write his Tragedy amid the yelling of Fiends?...Why have we ever called Milton sublime?"
Chill and trembling. Yes. That's it.
I've never really waxed rhapsodic about a writer like this. I've enjoyed certain works and been a fan of writers and even loved their works, but this is the first time I can say that I've really and truly fallen in love with a writer's work, embracing it with a sense of passion. I find myself wanting to shout the praises of Schiller to everyone I meet. It feels like a type of life-changing discovery. At this point in my life, I can think of no other writer who has made a greater impact on me -- and in such a short amount of time. Schiller stands alone.
Besides complex characters who work out faults that are reflected in our own personal struggles, Schiller gives us historical perspectives that speak to the immediacy of his own time -- and of ours. His plots move with the rapidity of cinema, but never at the expense of contemplative moments. He knows when to pause to give us extended scenes that dig deeply into themes of justice and liberty, resonating with both characters within the drama and with his audience. There are lines that are absolutely devastating, having the ring of timelessness and truth that one only encounters in Shakespeare, and which, unlike the Bard, still have an emotional and stirring impact that doesn't feel antiquated (sorry Shakespeare fans):
"Poor man, what have you done?"
"I have surrendered two short evening hours
To save the glory of a summer's day."
*********
"Be received into your father's arms."
"You smell of murder, I cannot embrace you."
*********
Posa's speech to the king is too long to quote at length, but it is one of the greatest instances of speaking truth to power I've ever read. Here is young Schiller harnessing the passions of his times, distilling the revolutionary spirit of the late-18th century into the purest dramatic art, giving voice to a generation of free-thinkers who rejected the tyranny of absolute monarchy, and who traded the violence and oppression of autocratic rule for the liberating embrace of social equality and justice. He unmasks the divine right of kings as neither divine nor inherent, and reveals the rulers who enforce servitude by decree to be nothing more than feeble old men who command obedience through fear:
"You want your garden to flower eternally
But the seed you sow is death. An institution
Built upon fear will not survive its founder."
There are passages in this play that shook me to the core. At times, I had to stop reading just to take it all in that such ideas were being expressed in a way as to strike me right in the soul: mind, emotion, and spirit. At one point, while in a coffee shop, I had to raise the book up to my eyes because I was on the point of tears. Literature doesn't really affect me like that. I can't remember the last time a work brought me to tears. And a drama? Never! Up to this point, only fiction had the power to move me like this, and then only very rarely.
After reading Don Carlos, I discovered Coleridge's thoughts on Die Räuber expressed in a letter to Robert Southey that perfectly mirrored my own experience in reading Schiller: "'Tis past one o' clock in the morning - I sate down at twelve o' clock to read the 'Robbers' of Schiller - I had read chill and trembling until I came to the part where Moor fires a pistol over the Robbers who are asleep - I could read no more - My God! Southey! Who is this Schiller? This convulser of the heart? Did he write his Tragedy amid the yelling of Fiends?...Why have we ever called Milton sublime?"
Chill and trembling. Yes. That's it.
I've never really waxed rhapsodic about a writer like this. I've enjoyed certain works and been a fan of writers and even loved their works, but this is the first time I can say that I've really and truly fallen in love with a writer's work, embracing it with a sense of passion. I find myself wanting to shout the praises of Schiller to everyone I meet. It feels like a type of life-changing discovery. At this point in my life, I can think of no other writer who has made a greater impact on me -- and in such a short amount of time. Schiller stands alone.
July 23, 2022
Aunque el principio fue muy bueno me ha ido aburriendo cada vez más. Es muy corto y no he podido terminar, se me ha hecho muy denso.
February 25, 2018
داستان مختصر دون کارلوس چیز منحصربهفردی ندارد: نزاع میان پدر پادشاه با پسرش بر سرمعشوقهای که امروز ملکه سلطنت شده است. آنچیزی که دون کارلوس را متمایز میکند شوری است که شیلر است بل ترسیم شخصیتی بهنام مارکی دوپوزا تصویری میکند. دوپوزا نمایندۀ شخصیتی است که امروزه در جهان مرده است؛ انسانهای که هرچند فردند، برای کل جهان میاندیشند و خود را برای اندیشههایشان فدا میکنند. کتاب بسیار عجیبی بود و هرچند شاید درنظر اکثر خوانندگانش مملوء از ایدههایی متعلق به انسانهای ادوار گذشته است، ولی شاید ما هم اساساً چیزی جز گذشتهمان نیستیم.
پینوشت: ترجمۀ جمالزاده از کتاب بسیار قدیمی است و بههمین سبب، بسیار فاخر که البته با سیاق تاریخی همنوا است.
پینوشت: ترجمۀ جمالزاده از کتاب بسیار قدیمی است و بههمین سبب، بسیار فاخر که البته با سیاق تاریخی همنوا است.
Read
November 6, 2018Der Anfang war vielversprechend, am Ende fand ich es dann nicht mehr so mitreißend.
Es geht eh nichts über die Räuber!
Es geht eh nichts über die Räuber!
October 1, 2010
Chose this for Listopia "I will die with this in my hand". 9-30-2010, alongside Hesse's Siddhartha ( I have two hands).
October 17, 2024
Wohl wahr, eines der besten Dramen, die ich lesen durfte. Friedrich Schiller verstand es bereits in Maria Stuart, Literatur mit Historie zu vereinigen, und das unvergleichlich.
Darüber hinaus schimmert in Don Carlos mit der seltenen Freundschaft und Treue des Marquis von Posa ein Horatio, und im Protagonisten beinahe ein gewisser Hamlet durch, ja ich waage es zu behaupten, Don Carlos ist der deutsche Hamlet.
Repertoire:
Carlos: Ich bewundre
Des Königs lust‘gen Beichtiger, der so
Bewandert ist in witzigen Geschichten.
(Ernsthaft und finster.)
Doch hab ich immer sagen hören, dass
Gebärdenspäher und Geschichtenträger
Des Übels mehr auf dieser Welt getan,
Als Gift und Dolch in Mörders Hand nicht konnten.
-
Carlos: Ich gebe nichts verloren als die Toten.
-
Carlos: Ich habe dich verstanden.
Ich danke dir. Doch diesen Zwang entschuldigt
Nur eines Dritten Gegenwart. Sind wir
Nicht Brüder? - Dieses Possenspiel des Ranges Sei künftighin aus unserm Bund verwiesen!
Berede dich, wir beide hätten uns Auf einem Ball mit Masken eingefunden, In Sklavenkleider du, und ich aus Laune In einen Purpur eingemummt. Solange Der Fasching währt, verehren wir die Lüge, Der Rolle treu, mit lächerlichem Ernst, Den süßen Rausch des Haufens nicht zu stören.
Doch durch die Larve winkt dein Karl dir zu, Du drückst mir im Vorübergehn die Hände, Und wir verstehen uns.
Marquis: Der Traum ist göttlich.
Doch wird er nie verfliegen? Ist mein Karl Auch seiner so gewiss, den Reizungen Der unumschränkten Majestät zu trotzen?
Noch ist ein großer Tag zurücke - ein Tag,
Wo dieser Heldensinn - ich will Sie mahnen - In einer schweren Probe sinken wird.
Don Philipp stirbt. Karl erbt das größte Reich Der Christenheit. - Ein ungeheurer Spalt
Reißt vom Geschlecht der Sterblichen ihn los, Und Gott ist heut, wer gestern Mensch noch war.
Jetzt hat er keine Schwächen mehr. Die Pflichten Der Ewigkeit verstummen ihm. Die Menschheit
- Noch heut ein großes Wort in seinem Ohr - Verkauft sich selbst und kriecht um ihren Götzen.
Sein Mitgefühl löscht mit dem Leiden aus, In Wollüsten ermattet seine Tugend, Für seine Torheit schickt ihm Peru Gold, Für seine Laster zieht sein Hof ihm Teufel.
Er schläft berauscht in diesem Himmel ein, Den seine Sklaven listig um ihn schufen.
Lang, wie sein Traum, währt seine Gottheit. - Wehe
Dem Rasenden, der ihn mitleidig weckte.
Was aber würde Roderich? - Die Freundschaft Ist wahr und kühn - die kranke Majestät Hält ihren fürchterlichen Strahl nicht aus.
Den Trotz des Bürgers würden Sie nicht dulden, Ich nicht den Stolz des Fürsten.
Carlos: Wahr und schrecklich
Ist dein Gemälde von Monarchen. Ja, Ich glaube dir. - Doch nur die Wollust schloss
Dem Laster ihre Herzen auf. Ich bin
Noch rein, ein dreiundzwanzigjähr'ger Jüngling.
Was vor mir Tausende gewissenlos In schwelgenden Umarmungen verprassten,
Des Geistes beste Hälfte, Männerkraft,
Hab ich dem künft' gen Herrscher aufgehoben.
Was könnte dich aus meinem Herzen drängen, Wenn es nicht Weiber tun?
Marquis: Ich selbst. Könnt ich
So innig Sie noch lieben, Karl, wenn ich Sie fürchten müsste?
Carlos: Das wird nie geschehen.
Bedarfst du meiner? Hast du Leidenschaften, Die von dem Throne betteln? Reizt dich Gold?
Du bist ein reichrer Untertan, als ich
Ein König je sein werde. - Geizest du Nach Ehre? Schon als Jüngling hattest du Ihr Maß erschöpft - du hast sie ausgeschlagen.
Wer von uns wird der Gläubiger des andern, Und wer der Schuldner sein? - du schweigst? Du zitterst Vor der Versuchung? Nicht gewisser bist Du deiner selbst?
Marquis: Wohlan. Ich weiche.
Hier meine Hand.
Carlos: Der Meinige?
Marquis: Auf ewig
Und in des Worts verwegenster Bedeutung.
Carlos: So treu und warm, wie heute dem Infanten, Auch dermaleinst dem König zugetan?
Marquis: Das schwör ich Ihnen.
Carlos: Dann auch, wenn der Wurm
Der Schmeichelei mein unbewachtes Herz
Umklammerte - wenn dieses Auge Tränen
Verlernte, die es sonst geweint - dies Ohr Dem Flehen sich verriegelte, willst du, Ein schreckenloser Hüter meiner Tugend, Mich kräftig fassen, meinen Genius Bei seinem großen Namen rufen?
Marquis: Ja.
Carlos: Und jetzt noch eine Bitte! Nenn mich du!
Ich habe deinesgleichen stets beneidet Um dieses Vorrecht der Vertraulichkeit.
Dies brüderliche du betrügt mein Ohr,
Mein Herz mit süßen Ahndungen von Gleichheit.
- Keinen Einwurf - Was du sagen willst, errat ich.
Dir ist es Kleinigkeit, ich weiß - doch mir, Dem Königssohne, ist es viel. Willst du Mein Bruder sein?
Marquis: Dein Bruder!
Carlos: Jetzt zum König.
Ich fürchte nichts mehr - Arm in Arm mit dir, So fordr' ich mein Jahrhundert in die Schranken.
(Sie gehen ab.)
-
Domingo: (nach einer Pause, worin er die Prinzessin mit den Augen begleitet hat).
Herzog, diese Rosen, und ihre Schlachten.
-
König: (mit erwartender Miene). Nun?
Marquis: - Ich kann nicht Fürstendiener sein.
(Der König sieht ihn mit Erstaunen an.)
Ich will
Den Käufer nicht betrügen. Sire. - Wenn Sie Mich anzustellen würdigen, so wollen Sie nur die vorgewogne Tat. Sie wollen Nur meinen Arm und meinen Mut im Felde, Nur meinen Kopf im Rat. Nicht meine Taten, Der Beifall, den sie finden an dem Thron, Soll meiner Taten Endzweck sein. Mir aber, Mir hat die Tugend eignen Wert. Das Glück, Das der Monarch mit meinen Händen pflanzte, Erschüf ich selbst, und Freude wäre mir Und eigne Wahl, was mir nur Pflicht sein sollte.
Und ist das Ihre Meinung? Können Sie In Ihrer Schöpfung fremde Schöpfer dulden?
Ich aber soll zum Meißel mich erniedern, Wo ich der Künstler könnte sein? - Ich liebe Die Menschheit, und in Monarchien darf Ich niemand lieben als mich selbst.
König:
Dies Feuer
Ist lobenswert. Ihr möchtet Gutes stiften.
Wie Ihr es stiftet, kann dem Patrioten, Dem Weisen gleich viel heißen. Suchet Euch Den Posten aus in meinen Königreichen, Der Euch berechtigt, diesem edeln Triebe
Genug zu tun.
Marquis: Ich finde keinen.
Darüber hinaus schimmert in Don Carlos mit der seltenen Freundschaft und Treue des Marquis von Posa ein Horatio, und im Protagonisten beinahe ein gewisser Hamlet durch, ja ich waage es zu behaupten, Don Carlos ist der deutsche Hamlet.
Repertoire:
Carlos: Ich bewundre
Des Königs lust‘gen Beichtiger, der so
Bewandert ist in witzigen Geschichten.
(Ernsthaft und finster.)
Doch hab ich immer sagen hören, dass
Gebärdenspäher und Geschichtenträger
Des Übels mehr auf dieser Welt getan,
Als Gift und Dolch in Mörders Hand nicht konnten.
-
Carlos: Ich gebe nichts verloren als die Toten.
-
Carlos: Ich habe dich verstanden.
Ich danke dir. Doch diesen Zwang entschuldigt
Nur eines Dritten Gegenwart. Sind wir
Nicht Brüder? - Dieses Possenspiel des Ranges Sei künftighin aus unserm Bund verwiesen!
Berede dich, wir beide hätten uns Auf einem Ball mit Masken eingefunden, In Sklavenkleider du, und ich aus Laune In einen Purpur eingemummt. Solange Der Fasching währt, verehren wir die Lüge, Der Rolle treu, mit lächerlichem Ernst, Den süßen Rausch des Haufens nicht zu stören.
Doch durch die Larve winkt dein Karl dir zu, Du drückst mir im Vorübergehn die Hände, Und wir verstehen uns.
Marquis: Der Traum ist göttlich.
Doch wird er nie verfliegen? Ist mein Karl Auch seiner so gewiss, den Reizungen Der unumschränkten Majestät zu trotzen?
Noch ist ein großer Tag zurücke - ein Tag,
Wo dieser Heldensinn - ich will Sie mahnen - In einer schweren Probe sinken wird.
Don Philipp stirbt. Karl erbt das größte Reich Der Christenheit. - Ein ungeheurer Spalt
Reißt vom Geschlecht der Sterblichen ihn los, Und Gott ist heut, wer gestern Mensch noch war.
Jetzt hat er keine Schwächen mehr. Die Pflichten Der Ewigkeit verstummen ihm. Die Menschheit
- Noch heut ein großes Wort in seinem Ohr - Verkauft sich selbst und kriecht um ihren Götzen.
Sein Mitgefühl löscht mit dem Leiden aus, In Wollüsten ermattet seine Tugend, Für seine Torheit schickt ihm Peru Gold, Für seine Laster zieht sein Hof ihm Teufel.
Er schläft berauscht in diesem Himmel ein, Den seine Sklaven listig um ihn schufen.
Lang, wie sein Traum, währt seine Gottheit. - Wehe
Dem Rasenden, der ihn mitleidig weckte.
Was aber würde Roderich? - Die Freundschaft Ist wahr und kühn - die kranke Majestät Hält ihren fürchterlichen Strahl nicht aus.
Den Trotz des Bürgers würden Sie nicht dulden, Ich nicht den Stolz des Fürsten.
Carlos: Wahr und schrecklich
Ist dein Gemälde von Monarchen. Ja, Ich glaube dir. - Doch nur die Wollust schloss
Dem Laster ihre Herzen auf. Ich bin
Noch rein, ein dreiundzwanzigjähr'ger Jüngling.
Was vor mir Tausende gewissenlos In schwelgenden Umarmungen verprassten,
Des Geistes beste Hälfte, Männerkraft,
Hab ich dem künft' gen Herrscher aufgehoben.
Was könnte dich aus meinem Herzen drängen, Wenn es nicht Weiber tun?
Marquis: Ich selbst. Könnt ich
So innig Sie noch lieben, Karl, wenn ich Sie fürchten müsste?
Carlos: Das wird nie geschehen.
Bedarfst du meiner? Hast du Leidenschaften, Die von dem Throne betteln? Reizt dich Gold?
Du bist ein reichrer Untertan, als ich
Ein König je sein werde. - Geizest du Nach Ehre? Schon als Jüngling hattest du Ihr Maß erschöpft - du hast sie ausgeschlagen.
Wer von uns wird der Gläubiger des andern, Und wer der Schuldner sein? - du schweigst? Du zitterst Vor der Versuchung? Nicht gewisser bist Du deiner selbst?
Marquis: Wohlan. Ich weiche.
Hier meine Hand.
Carlos: Der Meinige?
Marquis: Auf ewig
Und in des Worts verwegenster Bedeutung.
Carlos: So treu und warm, wie heute dem Infanten, Auch dermaleinst dem König zugetan?
Marquis: Das schwör ich Ihnen.
Carlos: Dann auch, wenn der Wurm
Der Schmeichelei mein unbewachtes Herz
Umklammerte - wenn dieses Auge Tränen
Verlernte, die es sonst geweint - dies Ohr Dem Flehen sich verriegelte, willst du, Ein schreckenloser Hüter meiner Tugend, Mich kräftig fassen, meinen Genius Bei seinem großen Namen rufen?
Marquis: Ja.
Carlos: Und jetzt noch eine Bitte! Nenn mich du!
Ich habe deinesgleichen stets beneidet Um dieses Vorrecht der Vertraulichkeit.
Dies brüderliche du betrügt mein Ohr,
Mein Herz mit süßen Ahndungen von Gleichheit.
- Keinen Einwurf - Was du sagen willst, errat ich.
Dir ist es Kleinigkeit, ich weiß - doch mir, Dem Königssohne, ist es viel. Willst du Mein Bruder sein?
Marquis: Dein Bruder!
Carlos: Jetzt zum König.
Ich fürchte nichts mehr - Arm in Arm mit dir, So fordr' ich mein Jahrhundert in die Schranken.
(Sie gehen ab.)
-
Domingo: (nach einer Pause, worin er die Prinzessin mit den Augen begleitet hat).
Herzog, diese Rosen, und ihre Schlachten.
-
König: (mit erwartender Miene). Nun?
Marquis: - Ich kann nicht Fürstendiener sein.
(Der König sieht ihn mit Erstaunen an.)
Ich will
Den Käufer nicht betrügen. Sire. - Wenn Sie Mich anzustellen würdigen, so wollen Sie nur die vorgewogne Tat. Sie wollen Nur meinen Arm und meinen Mut im Felde, Nur meinen Kopf im Rat. Nicht meine Taten, Der Beifall, den sie finden an dem Thron, Soll meiner Taten Endzweck sein. Mir aber, Mir hat die Tugend eignen Wert. Das Glück, Das der Monarch mit meinen Händen pflanzte, Erschüf ich selbst, und Freude wäre mir Und eigne Wahl, was mir nur Pflicht sein sollte.
Und ist das Ihre Meinung? Können Sie In Ihrer Schöpfung fremde Schöpfer dulden?
Ich aber soll zum Meißel mich erniedern, Wo ich der Künstler könnte sein? - Ich liebe Die Menschheit, und in Monarchien darf Ich niemand lieben als mich selbst.
König:
Dies Feuer
Ist lobenswert. Ihr möchtet Gutes stiften.
Wie Ihr es stiftet, kann dem Patrioten, Dem Weisen gleich viel heißen. Suchet Euch Den Posten aus in meinen Königreichen, Der Euch berechtigt, diesem edeln Triebe
Genug zu tun.
Marquis: Ich finde keinen.
June 16, 2021
البته نسخهای که من خوندم با ترجمه جناب جمالزاده و انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی بود.
نمایشنامهی پر کششی بود و رفته رفته کنجکاوتر میشدم بدونم در نهایت یه تراژدی خواهد بود یا نه که خب بله !
و این یک تراژدی حماسی بود از زندگی کسی که پسر یکیاز قدرتمندترین پادشاههای زمان بوده ولی از یک یتیم هم بیشتر احساس تنهایی میکرده.
به قول دون کارلوس "ای چشمی که هرگز از اشکی تر نشدهای،تا وقت از دست نرفته گریستن بیاموز وگرنه باشد که روزگار در روز و ساعتی بس شوم ، تلافی نماید"
نمایشنامهی پر کششی بود و رفته رفته کنجکاوتر میشدم بدونم در نهایت یه تراژدی خواهد بود یا نه که خب بله !
و این یک تراژدی حماسی بود از زندگی کسی که پسر یکیاز قدرتمندترین پادشاههای زمان بوده ولی از یک یتیم هم بیشتر احساس تنهایی میکرده.
به قول دون کارلوس "ای چشمی که هرگز از اشکی تر نشدهای،تا وقت از دست نرفته گریستن بیاموز وگرنه باشد که روزگار در روز و ساعتی بس شوم ، تلافی نماید"
December 15, 2021
So great, really enjoyed this. Quite spicy and bit kinky, but into it. Author manages to convincingly put multiple love triangles in the book, including love triangle mother-father-son and boyfriend-son-father.
Very mommy and daddy issues based. Freud would dig it honestly.
More gay subtext than Oscar wilde, probably pushed the lgbt agenda more than any Baldwin book ever.
I must add that I find it problematic how every queercoded character dies or ends up unhappy, played out cliché if u ask me.
The bisexual character was a bit cringe and too rasend, which made me feel wrongly represented, but I liked how Posa used his gay charm to manipulate the king. gaslighting girlboss.
I think this whole book was a metaphor on how the catholic church oppressed homosexuality and encouraged toxic masculinity (very well done, almost as good of an analogy as luca: the movie)
I think Star wars might be based on this.
Strong reylo references and the Inquisitor gave very much Palpatine, but I don't want to attack George Lucas here...
4 stars cause it was a bit hard to read at times. Performative sophistication on Schillers part I would say idk.
But worth a read if ur into spicy gay dynamics and spanish politics!
Very mommy and daddy issues based. Freud would dig it honestly.
More gay subtext than Oscar wilde, probably pushed the lgbt agenda more than any Baldwin book ever.
I must add that I find it problematic how every queercoded character dies or ends up unhappy, played out cliché if u ask me.
The bisexual character was a bit cringe and too rasend, which made me feel wrongly represented, but I liked how Posa used his gay charm to manipulate the king. gaslighting girlboss.
I think this whole book was a metaphor on how the catholic church oppressed homosexuality and encouraged toxic masculinity (very well done, almost as good of an analogy as luca: the movie)
I think Star wars might be based on this.
Strong reylo references and the Inquisitor gave very much Palpatine, but I don't want to attack George Lucas here...
4 stars cause it was a bit hard to read at times. Performative sophistication on Schillers part I would say idk.
But worth a read if ur into spicy gay dynamics and spanish politics!
January 10, 2010
Better than I expected! But the reason for this might be the lectural help I've read before. Nevertheless it was exciting and interesting which I didn't expect at all!
February 27, 2018
یک نمایشنامه کلاسیک و در عین حال جذاب. تراژدیای که افول ارزشهای انسانی را به نفع جان گرفتن قدرت و حماقت به زیبایی روایت میکرد.
سرکوب شدن وجدان، حکمرانی هوس و زایل شدن عقل...
سرکوب شدن وجدان، حکمرانی هوس و زایل شدن عقل...
November 12, 2017
Nu am citit piesa in germana, ci in romana.
Nu mi-a placut.
O combinatie (interesanta? - nu sunt convins ca este cuvantul cel mai potrivit! sau hai sa ii spun ecltectica - mai stiu si neologisme) de romantism si clasicism.
Nu mi-a placut.
O combinatie (interesanta? - nu sunt convins ca este cuvantul cel mai potrivit! sau hai sa ii spun ecltectica - mai stiu si neologisme) de romantism si clasicism.
October 19, 2025
Eine sprachlich und inhaltlich wunderschönes und fesselndes dramatisches Gedicht, das mich sehr berührt hat. Aus dem bekannten und wirkungsvollen Leitthema der unerfüllten Liebe wird sehr schnell so viel mehr, als man vielleicht erwarten würde - hier geht es letztendlich nur nebensächlich um einen Prinzen, der die Frau seines Vaters liebt, vielmehr treffen hier faszinierende Charaktere und Gegebenheiten aufeinander und verbinden sich zu einer berührenden und vielschichtigen Geschichte.
Weil die Charaktere so menschlich und lebendig sind, ist es leicht, mit ihnen zu fühlen, sich vielleicht sogar in ihnen wiederzufinden. Trotz des dramatischen Tons des Stückes ist es Schiller gelungen, keine Eindimensionalität aufkommen zu lassen; so ist Carlos' feuriger Enthusiasmus für alles, auf das er - oder jemand anders - seinen Blick richtet, der ihn in jeder Hinsicht definiert, ein vor dem Hintergrund der Geschichte letztendlich sehr nuancierter Charakterzug, der zwar naiv und kopflos, aber nie albern wirkt und Carlos zu einer sympathischen und faszinierenden Figur macht. Überall im Narrativ finden sich mehr oder weniger versteckt neue Facetten der Beziehungen zwischen den Figuren, nicht zuletzt jene der Ähnlichkeit zwischen Vater und Sohn, die zu Beginn des Stücks noch als komplette Gegenteile auftreten.
Trotz des Titels sehe ich den wahren Hauptcharakter in der Figur des Marquis von Posa. Seine Hingabe sowohl zu seiner tiefen Freundschaft mit Carlos als auch zum Ideal der Gedankenfreiheit und Menschlichkeit verbinden sich zu einer weisen und gutherzigen Persönlichkeit, die - wie Posa selbst sagt - seiner Zeit und damit auch den Menschen um ihn herum (inklusive Carlos selbst) weit voraus ist; die einzige Ausnahme bildet unerwarteterweise Elisabeth.
Die komplexen Charaktere, die spannende Geschichte und die subtilen, aber wirkungsvollen Nuancen machen Don Carlos in meinen Augen zum Meisterwerk, dessen Thematik auch heute noch relevant ist.
Weil die Charaktere so menschlich und lebendig sind, ist es leicht, mit ihnen zu fühlen, sich vielleicht sogar in ihnen wiederzufinden. Trotz des dramatischen Tons des Stückes ist es Schiller gelungen, keine Eindimensionalität aufkommen zu lassen; so ist Carlos' feuriger Enthusiasmus für alles, auf das er - oder jemand anders - seinen Blick richtet, der ihn in jeder Hinsicht definiert, ein vor dem Hintergrund der Geschichte letztendlich sehr nuancierter Charakterzug, der zwar naiv und kopflos, aber nie albern wirkt und Carlos zu einer sympathischen und faszinierenden Figur macht. Überall im Narrativ finden sich mehr oder weniger versteckt neue Facetten der Beziehungen zwischen den Figuren, nicht zuletzt jene der Ähnlichkeit zwischen Vater und Sohn, die zu Beginn des Stücks noch als komplette Gegenteile auftreten.
Trotz des Titels sehe ich den wahren Hauptcharakter in der Figur des Marquis von Posa. Seine Hingabe sowohl zu seiner tiefen Freundschaft mit Carlos als auch zum Ideal der Gedankenfreiheit und Menschlichkeit verbinden sich zu einer weisen und gutherzigen Persönlichkeit, die - wie Posa selbst sagt - seiner Zeit und damit auch den Menschen um ihn herum (inklusive Carlos selbst) weit voraus ist; die einzige Ausnahme bildet unerwarteterweise Elisabeth.
Die komplexen Charaktere, die spannende Geschichte und die subtilen, aber wirkungsvollen Nuancen machen Don Carlos in meinen Augen zum Meisterwerk, dessen Thematik auch heute noch relevant ist.
July 22, 2016
There's a post going round on tumblr comparing the character constellation of Don Karlos to Star Wars. You know, I can see it, somewhat, although this version has slightly less incest. Oh, and in this play the Empire wins, of course. Schiller certainly didn't set out to portray the events going down at King Philip's court historically accurately, but he sticks to the tragic facts.
Apart from that dramatic licence has taken over and distorted everything else to fit the enlightenment ideals of the play and it's underlying message: a cry for reformed, enlightened rulers instead of the tyranny of absolutism. Therefore, in the name of art, in the play Don Carlos is just a poor, lovelorn youth with the heart in the right place instead of a scheming courtier and the Duke of Medina Sidonia loses the Spanish Armada a couple of decades early. But what does it matter as long as the play tells a good story?
If you're not repulsed by fiction tampering with historical for the sake of drama, you will find it very easy - and pleasant - to be swept along by the play: The court intrigue will keep you entertained, while characters and their motives are clearly defined and easy to get behind. Yes, you'll encounter a couple of Schiller's favourite archetypes (here in the guise of good, upstanding but doomed Posa, and the youth crushed by love and duty, Carlos), but let's be honest, they're very entertaining, good archetypes.
Additionally, the play is simply very quotable. If you like Schiller's language that is. Which I do, and very much so.
Apart from that dramatic licence has taken over and distorted everything else to fit the enlightenment ideals of the play and it's underlying message: a cry for reformed, enlightened rulers instead of the tyranny of absolutism. Therefore, in the name of art, in the play Don Carlos is just a poor, lovelorn youth with the heart in the right place instead of a scheming courtier and the Duke of Medina Sidonia loses the Spanish Armada a couple of decades early. But what does it matter as long as the play tells a good story?
If you're not repulsed by fiction tampering with historical for the sake of drama, you will find it very easy - and pleasant - to be swept along by the play: The court intrigue will keep you entertained, while characters and their motives are clearly defined and easy to get behind. Yes, you'll encounter a couple of Schiller's favourite archetypes (here in the guise of good, upstanding but doomed Posa, and the youth crushed by love and duty, Carlos), but let's be honest, they're very entertaining, good archetypes.
Additionally, the play is simply very quotable. If you like Schiller's language that is. Which I do, and very much so.
March 23, 2024
While reading the biography of Pius V, in which one of the heroes is Philip II of Spain, I thought it would be a good idea to see what Schiller had to say about him.
He does not come across as one of nicest guys. He married the fiancée of his son, Don Carlos, a move that did not make the young man love his father any more. Being in love with your mother, even if she is only your stepmother, is the stuff of tragedy. And then the young hero thinks that his love is returned, when in fact it is his father's mistress, Princess Eboli, who is enamoured of him. And young Carlos naively believes he can trust her.
Instead of loving the Queen, he should love his country. And go to the rebellious Netherlands to help them in their fight against Catholicism. The King, of course, does not think this is a wise idea. There is the Duke of Alba to do the job. There is also a very good friend of Carlos's who takes the blame. And dies in due course.
The day I started reading this, there was a review of the play being performed in Frankfurt. A bad one. Otherwise I might have travelled there. Because you should see it live on stage. Reading is fine. The language is great. But also kind of boring.
He does not come across as one of nicest guys. He married the fiancée of his son, Don Carlos, a move that did not make the young man love his father any more. Being in love with your mother, even if she is only your stepmother, is the stuff of tragedy. And then the young hero thinks that his love is returned, when in fact it is his father's mistress, Princess Eboli, who is enamoured of him. And young Carlos naively believes he can trust her.
Instead of loving the Queen, he should love his country. And go to the rebellious Netherlands to help them in their fight against Catholicism. The King, of course, does not think this is a wise idea. There is the Duke of Alba to do the job. There is also a very good friend of Carlos's who takes the blame. And dies in due course.
The day I started reading this, there was a review of the play being performed in Frankfurt. A bad one. Otherwise I might have travelled there. Because you should see it live on stage. Reading is fine. The language is great. But also kind of boring.
May 15, 2014
This is a hard play to render justice to in translation. Mike Poulton´s translation is easier to understand but I found it flat very prosaic; in the BBC radio play based on this translation and directed by Michael Grandage and Andy Jordan in which Derek Jacobi plays King Philip II and Richard Coyle the crown prince, the melodramatic, overblown sturm und drang aspects of the play swamp its far more interesting political dimension. The language may be more flowery and high flown, but overall I found the older (1905) translation by R. D. Boylan (available for free at The Gutenberg Project) much more satisfactory.
For a better understanding of the play and its importance to German drama, I highly recommend Brian Johnston´s lecture notes on the play, available at http://www.coursesindrama.com/index.p...
For a better understanding of the play and its importance to German drama, I highly recommend Brian Johnston´s lecture notes on the play, available at http://www.coursesindrama.com/index.p...
April 22, 2024
Klassiker schön und gut, aber warum muss das unsere Abilektüre sein? 3 Sterne… warum muss ich dieses Buch fürs Abi auf jeden Fall nochmal lesen?
Bei dem im 16. Jahrhundert, am spanischen Königshof zur Zeit der Inquisition spielenden, Werk handelt es sich um eine Familientragödie, ein politisches Ideen- sowie ein Freundschafts- und Liebesdrama.
Zusammengefasst hat Karlos Daddy-Issues, ist in seine Mutter verliebt und ich bezweifle nach wie vor das Karlos für den Marquis wirklich nur freundschaftliche Gefühle hat.
Alle Charaktere dieses Buches sind toxisch, ich würde mich aber höchstwahrscheinlich trotzdem in den Marquis verlieben…(upsi)
Bei dem im 16. Jahrhundert, am spanischen Königshof zur Zeit der Inquisition spielenden, Werk handelt es sich um eine Familientragödie, ein politisches Ideen- sowie ein Freundschafts- und Liebesdrama.
Zusammengefasst hat Karlos Daddy-Issues, ist in seine Mutter verliebt und ich bezweifle nach wie vor das Karlos für den Marquis wirklich nur freundschaftliche Gefühle hat.
Alle Charaktere dieses Buches sind toxisch, ich würde mich aber höchstwahrscheinlich trotzdem in den Marquis verlieben…(upsi)
January 22, 2013
CARLOS: Tell him! I want to die. The scaffold doesn’t
scare me. Death is not too high a price for
this—This taste of heaven—
QUEEN: And I? You want my death as well?
CARLOS:(rising to his feet)
Good heavens, no! I didn’t think. I’ll go—
You see what influence you have on me:
one wink, one glance, one syllable from you
puts me at your command. What do you want,
what can I do for you? Name it, and to the
farthest point on earth I’ll go to get it.
scare me. Death is not too high a price for
this—This taste of heaven—
QUEEN: And I? You want my death as well?
CARLOS:(rising to his feet)
Good heavens, no! I didn’t think. I’ll go—
You see what influence you have on me:
one wink, one glance, one syllable from you
puts me at your command. What do you want,
what can I do for you? Name it, and to the
farthest point on earth I’ll go to get it.
February 10, 2010
Hm, I reaaaally liked The Robbers much better. There was a lot of babbling going on in this book, without any point being made, and it was just plain boring, seriously. Not even the plot was very exciting and the political issues just totally got lost between all the babbling. Tip: read The Robbers, not this, if you want to read something by Schiller.
August 7, 2012
Også dette verket vokste betraktelig i løpet av to års fordypning. I motsetning til Goethe, er Schiller en "handlingens" mann - dette er et fengslende historisk drama med handling basert på virkelige hendelser ved det spanske hoffet på 1500-tallet. Her er både ulykkelig kjærlighet, hoffintriger og idealistisk frihetskamp. Anbefales!
January 12, 2009
I dunno what it is with these dramas lately. I really liked the first three acts but then it kinda starts to get boring. And really, REALLY confusing. LOL
Still, a decent read which I so did not expect. :)
Still, a decent read which I so did not expect. :)
July 16, 2014
Similar to Hamlet in a way.
But more realistic.
The dialogue is stronger and more shocking and their seems to be more of a domestic drama feel.
Overall, there was some slow moments, but it was still enjoyable to watch
But more realistic.
The dialogue is stronger and more shocking and their seems to be more of a domestic drama feel.
Overall, there was some slow moments, but it was still enjoyable to watch
April 4, 2011
one of the very few books I read in school and have read many times since. i instantly fell in love with Marquis of Posa.
May 15, 2014
An adequate translation in blank verse, which I consider superior to some more recent translations including Mike Poulton´s 2005 effort.
November 17, 2015
A story that may sound a bit naive to contemporary people, but which I found inspiring - bearing in mind the totally different world that provoked its creation.
March 25, 2023
Schillers writing is phenomenal as always, but this time I just couldn't put up with the characters. I usually love political drama in European monarchies, but this one was a miss for me.
Don Karlos literally wants to bone his stepmother. That is his sole reason for wanting monarchical power. He has a best friend, Marquis of Posa, who will do everything for him and is also canonically the best human you could ever imagine. He is perfect and everyone who gets to know him acknowledges this.
There are a bunch of other characters but they are sadly mostly there to further the plot. Most motivations are also one-dimensional. There is of course a struggle for power and a moral dilemma, but with not enough political passion to make things truly interesting. Marquis of Posa is the exception, he may actually be the best person in this play.
The end is very exciting with dramatic revelations, a terrifying new character and a bittersweet (but mostly bitter) finale, although some developments are rushed. All this however comes a little too late and doesn't save the play in my opinion.
Don Karlos literally wants to bone his stepmother. That is his sole reason for wanting monarchical power. He has a best friend, Marquis of Posa, who will do everything for him and is also canonically the best human you could ever imagine. He is perfect and everyone who gets to know him acknowledges this.
There are a bunch of other characters but they are sadly mostly there to further the plot. Most motivations are also one-dimensional. There is of course a struggle for power and a moral dilemma, but with not enough political passion to make things truly interesting. Marquis of Posa is the exception, he may actually be the best person in this play.
The end is very exciting with dramatic revelations, a terrifying new character and a bittersweet (but mostly bitter) finale, although some developments are rushed. All this however comes a little too late and doesn't save the play in my opinion.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 99 reviews