What do you think?
Rate this book
Macbett
Macbett had its first American production at the acclaimed School of Drama of Yale University. Mel Gussow, drama critic for The New York Times, "... Ionesco has written a comedy of monarchy. Viewed from the perspective of today, he sees Macbeth as a grotesque joke. How else can you explain mass murder? The message is deadly serious and even moralistic - Shakespeare and Ionesco are each studying the corruptive effect of ambition - but this is, first of all, a very funny play.
"'History is full of tricks,' says Macbett - and so is Ionesco. He maliciously undermines his source and its traditions, spoofing Shakespeare along with tragedy. There is always an extra ghost up Ionesco's sleeve. He is a grave robber, subverting solemnity and substituting antic wit and dry acerbity...
"For all his playfulness, Ionesco is very much concerned with the nature of revolution. As Macbett says, regretting his ' man doesn't rule events. Events rule him.' Kings rise and are toppled, and what do intentions matter? As Ionesco sees it, all rule is misrule, and, as for the rabble, they are scheming and hypocritical. The play levitates with humor, but it's heart is pessimistic... The dialogue, far removed from Shakespeare, is colloquial and deceptively casual, understanding the enormity of the events...
"As for the collaboration between Shakespeare and Ionesco, just as Shakespeare had his Holinshed's Chronicles, so Ionesco has his Shakespeare. Inspired by the myth of Macbeth, he has written a comedy with special meaning for today."
"'History is full of tricks,' says Macbett - and so is Ionesco. He maliciously undermines his source and its traditions, spoofing Shakespeare along with tragedy. There is always an extra ghost up Ionesco's sleeve. He is a grave robber, subverting solemnity and substituting antic wit and dry acerbity...
"For all his playfulness, Ionesco is very much concerned with the nature of revolution. As Macbett says, regretting his ' man doesn't rule events. Events rule him.' Kings rise and are toppled, and what do intentions matter? As Ionesco sees it, all rule is misrule, and, as for the rabble, they are scheming and hypocritical. The play levitates with humor, but it's heart is pessimistic... The dialogue, far removed from Shakespeare, is colloquial and deceptively casual, understanding the enormity of the events...
"As for the collaboration between Shakespeare and Ionesco, just as Shakespeare had his Holinshed's Chronicles, so Ionesco has his Shakespeare. Inspired by the myth of Macbeth, he has written a comedy with special meaning for today."
208 pages, Pocket Book
First published January 1, 1971
5 people are currently reading
403 people want to read
About the author
Eugène Ionesco
456 books955 followersEugène Ionesco, born Eugen Ionescu, was a Romanian playwright and dramatist; one of the foremost playwrights of the Theatre of the Absurd. Beyond ridiculing the most banal situations, Ionesco's plays depict in a tangible way the solitude and insignificance of human existence.
Excerpted from Wikipedia.
Excerpted from Wikipedia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
January 17, 2023
شاهکاری که انتظارش رو داشتم نبود، ولی شوخی با تراژیک ترین نمایشنامه شکسپیر رو دوست داشتم.
این رو توی همخوانی نخوندم :))
این رو توی همخوانی نخوندم :))
November 15, 2020
merveilleux...
October 1, 2024
نسبت به بقیهی نوشتههای یونسکو برای من معمولی بود. انتظار یه کار هیجانانگیز داشتم که ...
August 5, 2024
یان کات در کتاب معروفش، تفاسیر معاصری از شکسپیر ارائه میدهد؛ و از قضا در آن کتاب بارها به سنت تئاتر ابسورد (و همین آقای یونسکو) به عنوان تفاسیری معاصر از نمایشنامههای شکسپیر اشاره میکند. در واقع تراژدی وقتی به کمدیِ ابسورد تبدیل میشود، تراژیکتر میشود. اگر در انتهای دریای خون تراژدی شکسپیری، یک منجی ظهور میکرد، خوانش قرنِ بیستمی یونسکو تنها میگوید: پادشاه قبلی ظالم بود، پادشاه فعلی ظالم است، پادشاه بعدی ظالم خواهد بود. قدرتْ مطلقا منفی است، باید آن را به دست کسی داد که نمیخواهدش.
August 5, 2024
نمایشنامه مکبت خیلی خوب بود. اما بخش دوم کتاب و بداهه گویی واسم جذابیت نداشت.
March 17, 2008
Read Macbett immediately following Rosencrantz & Guildenstern--like night and day--and a couple of weeks after re-reading Macbeth. It's so bitter. some of the effects are very neat, like the large-scale repetitions. Never saw the play, however. Also, this is a translation, so doubly removed from its true identity, you might say.
December 6, 2023
Ionesco uses Shakespeare’s play to give a cynical view of politics and power. It’s quite fun but the last act is silly.
July 3, 2017
Eugene Ionesco takes one of Shakespeare's darkest plays and turns it into a tragic farce. He incorporates plenty of absurd humor—changing most names by one letter (Malcolm becomes Malcol), overtly writing Donalbain out of the story, having character duos state competing lines with increasing bravado and hyperbole—that is mostly funny if you are familiar enough with Macbeth and have a dorky literary sense of humor.
That being said, there is still plenty of murder, onstage and offstage. Several characters get stabbed or beheaded, and many of the speeches sound something like this: "I've killed dozens and dozens of them with my bare hands. Twelve dozen officers and men who never did me any harm. I've had hundreds and hundreds of others executed by firing squad. Thousands of others were roasted alive when I set fire to the forests where they'd run for safety. Tens of thousands of men, women, and children suffocated to death in cellars, buried under the rubble of their houses which I'd blown up. Hundreds of thousands were drowned in the Channel in desperate attempts to escape. Millions died of fear or committed suicide. Ten million others died of anger, apoplexy, or a broken heart. There's not enough ground to bury them all." Everything is exaggerated as much as it can be, and then it's exaggerated some more.
This is all fine and good, but I found myself irritated by some of the more common absurdist techniques this play clings to. Characters often confuse Macbett and his comrade Banco because they are so similar (because really everyone is equally ambitious and interchangeable). Lines are repeated over and over again for the same reason. Early on, Macbett gives a long speech contemplating his military service only to have Banco repeat it word for word only a few moments later. Whether this was done to once again show how similar the characters are or for a laugh, it becomes far too tedious for its own good.
With all the double crossing and overthrowing of leaders, I couldn't help but think of some of Percy Shelley's works. Both his poem, "The Masque of Anarchy," and his shadow play, Prometheus Unbound, deal with political revolutions and nonviolent resistance. These two works along with Macbett all seem to have in common the idea that anyone who is attempting to overthrow a dictator—for righteous or self-serving reasons—will become every bit as bad as that initial dictator. They become part of a chain of unbreakable violence. And while I might prefer Shelley's works, at least Ionesco's characters seem to be having fun during the revolution.
That being said, there is still plenty of murder, onstage and offstage. Several characters get stabbed or beheaded, and many of the speeches sound something like this: "I've killed dozens and dozens of them with my bare hands. Twelve dozen officers and men who never did me any harm. I've had hundreds and hundreds of others executed by firing squad. Thousands of others were roasted alive when I set fire to the forests where they'd run for safety. Tens of thousands of men, women, and children suffocated to death in cellars, buried under the rubble of their houses which I'd blown up. Hundreds of thousands were drowned in the Channel in desperate attempts to escape. Millions died of fear or committed suicide. Ten million others died of anger, apoplexy, or a broken heart. There's not enough ground to bury them all." Everything is exaggerated as much as it can be, and then it's exaggerated some more.
This is all fine and good, but I found myself irritated by some of the more common absurdist techniques this play clings to. Characters often confuse Macbett and his comrade Banco because they are so similar (because really everyone is equally ambitious and interchangeable). Lines are repeated over and over again for the same reason. Early on, Macbett gives a long speech contemplating his military service only to have Banco repeat it word for word only a few moments later. Whether this was done to once again show how similar the characters are or for a laugh, it becomes far too tedious for its own good.
With all the double crossing and overthrowing of leaders, I couldn't help but think of some of Percy Shelley's works. Both his poem, "The Masque of Anarchy," and his shadow play, Prometheus Unbound, deal with political revolutions and nonviolent resistance. These two works along with Macbett all seem to have in common the idea that anyone who is attempting to overthrow a dictator—for righteous or self-serving reasons—will become every bit as bad as that initial dictator. They become part of a chain of unbreakable violence. And while I might prefer Shelley's works, at least Ionesco's characters seem to be having fun during the revolution.
July 31, 2022
This is the first Ionesco play I've read, but I'm definitely excited to read more. Like Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, this is a masterful Absurdist rethinking of a Shakespeare classic. Stoppard does use more direct quotation from Hamlet than Ionesco does from Macbeth. On the other hand, Ionesco's play is really interested in the twisted machinations of power and betrayal that Macbeth assumes. This play is made up of a series of betrayals, counter-betrayals, mysticism, and bizarre and meaningless interludes.
https://youtu.be/HhomThBo2Tw
https://youtu.be/HhomThBo2Tw
February 6, 2017
Recht interessante Neuinterpretation meines Lieblingsstückes von William Shakespeare. Leider teilweise nicht gerade zielführend und manche Intentionen Ionescos bleiben mir schleierhaft. Auf jeden Fall ein Stück, über das man ausreichend Redestoff hat, so man ihn denn braucht.
September 8, 2017
Really impressed by this one.
I was expecting a conventional and easy to digest (and appreciate) retelling of the Shakespearean classic. Maybe something more based on the historical events and legacy of the title character. Perhaps surrealism.
Instead, this play is a brutal, yet elegant dance through the general themes of the Bard's play, (ambition, violence, loyalty, good, evil) that also functions as a complex satire on modern life. Especially the wars. (There's a lot of blood in this play, as well as a certain macabre humor about it; at one point, Lady Duncan actually counts the heads of her husband's slain enemies.)
Despite the somewhat abstract nature of the writing, Ionesco's own ambitions here are shrewdly focused. Though tricky and immersed in subterfuge, his characters are at once bold symbols for aggression and avarice, yet also appear to have their own, self-contained mythologies. An impressive feat, as the worlds of satire and human drama do not easily intermingle.
I also liked that Ionesco's narrower lens streamlined the number of characters in this play--no Lady MacBeth here, or Lady MacDuff for that matter--their roles are embodied by Duncan's wife for some reason. Reminds me of another '70s retelling of the MacBeth story, the film of Shakespeare's play by Roman Polanski, which also reshapes Lady MacBeth's presence a little. (My suspicion is that the women's movement of the mid-century had something to do with these more modern approaches to dealing with Lady MacBeth's presence, or lack thereof, in the scripts.)
Not what I'd expected, but deep and satisfying never the less.
I was expecting a conventional and easy to digest (and appreciate) retelling of the Shakespearean classic. Maybe something more based on the historical events and legacy of the title character. Perhaps surrealism.
Instead, this play is a brutal, yet elegant dance through the general themes of the Bard's play, (ambition, violence, loyalty, good, evil) that also functions as a complex satire on modern life. Especially the wars. (There's a lot of blood in this play, as well as a certain macabre humor about it; at one point, Lady Duncan actually counts the heads of her husband's slain enemies.)
Despite the somewhat abstract nature of the writing, Ionesco's own ambitions here are shrewdly focused. Though tricky and immersed in subterfuge, his characters are at once bold symbols for aggression and avarice, yet also appear to have their own, self-contained mythologies. An impressive feat, as the worlds of satire and human drama do not easily intermingle.
I also liked that Ionesco's narrower lens streamlined the number of characters in this play--no Lady MacBeth here, or Lady MacDuff for that matter--their roles are embodied by Duncan's wife for some reason. Reminds me of another '70s retelling of the MacBeth story, the film of Shakespeare's play by Roman Polanski, which also reshapes Lady MacBeth's presence a little. (My suspicion is that the women's movement of the mid-century had something to do with these more modern approaches to dealing with Lady MacBeth's presence, or lack thereof, in the scripts.)
Not what I'd expected, but deep and satisfying never the less.
March 28, 2016
A clever absurdist twist on the classical play, although the ending was a deus ex machina so random, rushed, and convoluted that it bordered on silliness. Ionesco being Ionesco, it was probably the intended effect. Very enjoyable.
September 23, 2009
the best drama that i have read forever
November 17, 2020
I'll simply quote Ionesco: "To discover the fundamental problem common to all mankind, I must ask myself what my fundamental problem is, what my most ineradicable fear is. I am certain then to find the problems and fears of literally everyone. That is the true road into my own darkness, our darkness, which I try to bring to the light of the day."
January 9, 2025
توقعی که از ترکیب یونسکو و مکبث داشتم اصلا برآورده نشد. برای من بیش از حد خسته کننده بود و ارتباط نتونستم بگیرم. تغییرهای جالبی توی اقتباس انجام گرفت که خیلی جواب ندادن و جذابیتی به برداشت جدید از داستان آشنا اضافه نکردن.
June 6, 2024
très très drôle
November 14, 2024
Pentru mine cea mai bună scenă de asasinare! Aștept oferte care să bată asta!
(In rest nu prea am inteles nimic: ce bikini, ce iisus care vindecă bolnavii???)
(In rest nu prea am inteles nimic: ce bikini, ce iisus care vindecă bolnavii???)
November 23, 2025
جز معدود اقتباسهایی از شکسپیر که خیلی آزارم نداد و حتی به نظرم جالب هم بود. از پیچیدگیهای شخصیت لیدی دانکن/لیدی مکبت/جادوگرها خیلی خوشم آمد.
June 27, 2007
دوک تعهد می کند که پول و عنوان و زمین به دو ژنرال یاغی بدهد، اما با وسوسه ی همسرش، از عمل کردن به قولش سر باز می زند. یکی از ژنرال ها (مکبث) نقشه می کشد که دوک را بکشد و خود تاج بر سر بگذارد اما برای حفظ این تاج، به قتل های پی در پی کشیده می شود، و در خون غرق می شود. او توسط ارواح قربانیانش محاصره می شود و در می یابد که همسر تازه اش، آنی که خیال می کرده، نیست. مکبث یونسکو را همین اواخر (1376) سحر داوری به فارسی برگردانده و در سری انتشارات "نسل قلم – آثار" چاپ و منتشر شده است.
در تک پرده ی "قربانیان وظیفه"، شوبرت و مادلین به روال معمول طبقه ی متوسط زندگی می کنند. اتفاق خاصی نمی افتد. شوبرت از خبرهای رسمی روزنامه، و مردم شهرهای بزرگ حرف می زند که پریشان و مغشوش، درگیر مشکلات زندگی اند. صحبت به سینما و تیاتر کشیده می شود و شوبرت می گوید هیچ چیز تازه ای در تیاترها نیست، همه ی نمایش نامه ها شبیه بهم شده اند.
CHOUBERT: ... an investigation brought to a successful conclusion … There's a riddle and it's solved in the final scene... (so and so)
ناگهان کارآگاهی وارد می شود و از شوبرت و مادلین در مورد نام مستاجر قبلی آپارتمان سوال می کند. می خواهد بداند "مالوت(د)" به "ت" ختم می شود یا به "دال". یک بازپرسی بی معنی. دو شخصیت دیگر هم وارد می شوند؛ خانمی که دیگران پیوسته به دنبال تایید او هستند؛ "اینطور نیست خانم؟". و او می گوید "خانم"(لیدی) نیست، "دوشیزه" است. بازی با زبان که در آثار یونسکو برجسته است. شخصیت دوم "نیکلاس دو" (Nicolas d'Eu) است، "با نیکلاس دوم (Nicholas II) اشتباه نشود"! مدام از منطق و تناقض صحبت می کند، و از رفتار کارآگاه و متانت شوبرت عصبی می شود. کارآگاه "نیکلاس دو" را بمثابه یک "تهدید" می بیند و ساکت می شود. اما "نیکلاس دو" با سه ضربه ی یک خنجر، کارآگاه را می کشد. کارآگاه چاقو خورده سه جمله ی عجیب می گوید؛
Long live the white race... I should like a posthumous decoration... I am ... a Victim ... of Duty...
آنگاه نیکلاس دو می خواهد "مالوت" را پیدا کند، و مادلین با دستپاچگی موافقت می کند و دوتایی، شوبرت را وادار می کنند تکه نانی بجود تا ذهنش برای کمک به آنها متمرکز شود. شوبرت می گوید "قربانی وظیفه است"، نیکلاس موافق است و مادلین رو به تماشاگران می گوید؛ "ما همه قربانیان وظیفه ایم"! نمایش نامه در حالی که همه یکدیگر را به جویدن و بلعیدن تکه های نان وادار می کنند، تمام می شود. جایی کارآگاه می گوید "همه کس باید بنویسد". نیکلاس دو می گوید کار بیهوده ای ست، ما یونسکو را داریم، کافی ست!
در مورد "تیاتر ابزورد" اینجا را بخوانید
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...
در تک پرده ی "قربانیان وظیفه"، شوبرت و مادلین به روال معمول طبقه ی متوسط زندگی می کنند. اتفاق خاصی نمی افتد. شوبرت از خبرهای رسمی روزنامه، و مردم شهرهای بزرگ حرف می زند که پریشان و مغشوش، درگیر مشکلات زندگی اند. صحبت به سینما و تیاتر کشیده می شود و شوبرت می گوید هیچ چیز تازه ای در تیاترها نیست، همه ی نمایش نامه ها شبیه بهم شده اند.
CHOUBERT: ... an investigation brought to a successful conclusion … There's a riddle and it's solved in the final scene... (so and so)
ناگهان کارآگاهی وارد می شود و از شوبرت و مادلین در مورد نام مستاجر قبلی آپارتمان سوال می کند. می خواهد بداند "مالوت(د)" به "ت" ختم می شود یا به "دال". یک بازپرسی بی معنی. دو شخصیت دیگر هم وارد می شوند؛ خانمی که دیگران پیوسته به دنبال تایید او هستند؛ "اینطور نیست خانم؟". و او می گوید "خانم"(لیدی) نیست، "دوشیزه" است. بازی با زبان که در آثار یونسکو برجسته است. شخصیت دوم "نیکلاس دو" (Nicolas d'Eu) است، "با نیکلاس دوم (Nicholas II) اشتباه نشود"! مدام از منطق و تناقض صحبت می کند، و از رفتار کارآگاه و متانت شوبرت عصبی می شود. کارآگاه "نیکلاس دو" را بمثابه یک "تهدید" می بیند و ساکت می شود. اما "نیکلاس دو" با سه ضربه ی یک خنجر، کارآگاه را می کشد. کارآگاه چاقو خورده سه جمله ی عجیب می گوید؛
Long live the white race... I should like a posthumous decoration... I am ... a Victim ... of Duty...
آنگاه نیکلاس دو می خواهد "مالوت" را پیدا کند، و مادلین با دستپاچگی موافقت می کند و دوتایی، شوبرت را وادار می کنند تکه نانی بجود تا ذهنش برای کمک به آنها متمرکز شود. شوبرت می گوید "قربانی وظیفه است"، نیکلاس موافق است و مادلین رو به تماشاگران می گوید؛ "ما همه قربانیان وظیفه ایم"! نمایش نامه در حالی که همه یکدیگر را به جویدن و بلعیدن تکه های نان وادار می کنند، تمام می شود. جایی کارآگاه می گوید "همه کس باید بنویسد". نیکلاس دو می گوید کار بیهوده ای ست، ما یونسکو را داریم، کافی ست!
در مورد "تیاتر ابزورد" اینجا را بخوانید
http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...
December 21, 2013
Although the cover blurb compares this to Stoppard's _Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead_, this is nowhere near as clever as that play. However, there is some charm (and some touches of the absurdist theater that Ionesco is famous for) in this take on _Macbeth_. The cultural references to the Vietnam War and to May 1968 are interesting, the role of the witches in controlling the action is well-done (and even contains a minor bit of misdirection, which made things a little tense in the third act). The overall political ideology of the play is, for once for Ionesco, relatively clear: although he was favorite with hippie and radical theaters in the US, the message of this play (that revolutions only make things worse, that people are really only out to change the system to make things easier on themselves personally) is a tad on the reactionary side (though Macol, Duncan's son, who appears at the end of the play, returned from business school, to off Macbett and take over the kingdom, is hilarious in his statements that those other kings were amateurs of evil compared to him). Amusing and enjoyable, but not one of Ionesco's outstanding works.
October 25, 2020
"Macbett" de Eugene Ionesco
Citită în octombrie.
Număr de pagini: 80.
Piesa asta care se construiește pe baza lui Shakespeare a fost o lectură interesantă. Piesa are acel existențialism specific lui Ionescu, precum și diverse momente absurde, dacă nu chiar întreaga piesă. Uneori mă gândesc cât de puțin mai este Ionesco discutat actual și mă întristez. Atâta talent...
Nota: 10.
Citită în octombrie.
Număr de pagini: 80.
Piesa asta care se construiește pe baza lui Shakespeare a fost o lectură interesantă. Piesa are acel existențialism specific lui Ionescu, precum și diverse momente absurde, dacă nu chiar întreaga piesă. Uneori mă gândesc cât de puțin mai este Ionesco discutat actual și mă întristez. Atâta talent...
Nota: 10.
May 29, 2015
ندور في دوائر , صراعات لا تنتهي ,
الكثير من الغضب و الطمع و النفاق ,
نزاعات على السلطة ,
صديق اليوم هو عدو الغد ,
كل هذا في قالب مسرحية بسيطة أعدها يوجين يونسكو عن مسرحية مكبث لشكسبير .
الكثير من الغضب و الطمع و النفاق ,
نزاعات على السلطة ,
صديق اليوم هو عدو الغد ,
كل هذا في قالب مسرحية بسيطة أعدها يوجين يونسكو عن مسرحية مكبث لشكسبير .
December 28, 2008
I loved the ending.
March 29, 2016
ძალიან მომეწონა
June 30, 2013
Ionesco’s take on the Scottish Play is full of plot twists, which I find utterly pleasing. Ionesco’s work is one of the reasons I’d like to be a director and/or a scenarist.
August 10, 2013
A rewrite of Shakespeare's Macbeth that allows for a complete rediscovery of the original text. Great read!
March 19, 2015
النفس البشرية مليئة بالمساوئ ، الحقد ، الطمع ، والغدر ، الصراع علي السلطة مهلك للغاية .
نجح يونسكو في ابراز اقذر ما في الانسان .
نجح يونسكو في ابراز اقذر ما في الانسان .
January 16, 2016
Unexpectedly.
Better than original.
Better than original.
April 14, 2021
Glamiss şi Candor. Glamiss intră prin stânga. Simultan, Candor intră prin dreapta. Intră fără să se salute şi se opresc faţă în faţă, în mijlocul scenei, cu faţa Ia public. Rămân aşa câteva clipe.
GLAMISS (întorcându-se spre Candor): Bună ziua, baroane Candor. CANDOR (întorcându-se spre Glamiss): Bună ziua, baroane Glamiss. GLAMISS: Ascultă. Candor. CANDOR: Ascultă, Glamiss. GLAMISS: Aşa ceva nu se mai poate. CANDOR: Aşa ceva nu se mai poate.
Glamis şi Candor sunt plini de furie. Mânia şi scrâşnetul li se accentuează progresiv. Textul serveşte de sprijin în accentuarea furiei lor.
GLAMISS (scrâşnind): Suveranul nostru…
CANDOR (la fel): Duncan, arhiducele Duncan, preaiubitul, ah, ah!
GLAMISS: Chiar aşa, preaiubitul! Da, foarte iubitul, nepreţuitul!
CANDOR: Prea iubitul!
GLAMISS: Jos Duncan!
CANDOR: Jos Duncan!
GLAMISS: Care-mi încalcă mie moşiile când iese la vânătoare.
CANDOR: Pentru interesele statului.
GLAMISS: Asta s-o spună el la alţii…
CANDOR: El este statul.
GLAMISS: Zece mii de găini îi dau anual, cu tot cu ouă.
CANDOR: Şi eu la fel.
GLAMISS: Dacă alţii au de gând să accepte asta…
CANDOR: Eu, unul, n-am de gând să accept.
GLAMISS: Nici eu nu accept.
CANDOR: Cei care sunt de acord cu asta – n-au decât!
GLAMISS: îmi cere flăcăi la armată.
CANDOR: Pentru armata naţională.
GLAMISS: Ceea ce nu face decât să mă dezarmeze.
CANDOR: Aşa ceva ne dezarmează.
GLAMISS: Am oamenii mei… Am armata mea. Şi tocmai pe oamenii mei i-ar putea trimite împotriva mea. CANDOR: Ca şi împotriva mea. GLAMISS: Când s-a mai pomenit aşa ceva!
GLAMISS (întorcându-se spre Candor): Bună ziua, baroane Candor. CANDOR (întorcându-se spre Glamiss): Bună ziua, baroane Glamiss. GLAMISS: Ascultă. Candor. CANDOR: Ascultă, Glamiss. GLAMISS: Aşa ceva nu se mai poate. CANDOR: Aşa ceva nu se mai poate.
Glamis şi Candor sunt plini de furie. Mânia şi scrâşnetul li se accentuează progresiv. Textul serveşte de sprijin în accentuarea furiei lor.
GLAMISS (scrâşnind): Suveranul nostru…
CANDOR (la fel): Duncan, arhiducele Duncan, preaiubitul, ah, ah!
GLAMISS: Chiar aşa, preaiubitul! Da, foarte iubitul, nepreţuitul!
CANDOR: Prea iubitul!
GLAMISS: Jos Duncan!
CANDOR: Jos Duncan!
GLAMISS: Care-mi încalcă mie moşiile când iese la vânătoare.
CANDOR: Pentru interesele statului.
GLAMISS: Asta s-o spună el la alţii…
CANDOR: El este statul.
GLAMISS: Zece mii de găini îi dau anual, cu tot cu ouă.
CANDOR: Şi eu la fel.
GLAMISS: Dacă alţii au de gând să accepte asta…
CANDOR: Eu, unul, n-am de gând să accept.
GLAMISS: Nici eu nu accept.
CANDOR: Cei care sunt de acord cu asta – n-au decât!
GLAMISS: îmi cere flăcăi la armată.
CANDOR: Pentru armata naţională.
GLAMISS: Ceea ce nu face decât să mă dezarmeze.
CANDOR: Aşa ceva ne dezarmează.
GLAMISS: Am oamenii mei… Am armata mea. Şi tocmai pe oamenii mei i-ar putea trimite împotriva mea. CANDOR: Ca şi împotriva mea. GLAMISS: Când s-a mai pomenit aşa ceva!
August 26, 2022
Une des pièces les plus foisonnantes de Ionesco, dans laquelle il multiplie les références : littérature latine, textes religieux, Victor Hugo, William Shakespeare bien sûr... C'est une tentative de synthèse, sous forme de dénonciation des atrocités du pouvoir, de toute forme de pouvoir. On peut noter parmi les différences majeures avec la pièce de Shakespeare : la fin, où Malcolm devenu Macol est encore plus mauvais que les précédents (dans Macbeth, il apportait l'apaisement) et l'absence de Lady Macbeth, plus ou moins remplacée par une Lady Duncan sorcière. du point de vue des idées, c'est outrancièrement simplificateur, mais attachant comme un hurlement d'indignation, plus particulièrement dirigé contre le stalinisme, ce qui n'était pas si évident en 1972. le dispositif scénique est important aussi, c'est une pièce que j'aimerais bien voir sur scène, tout compte fait.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews