Volpone

by Ben Jonson

Bitter, satiric comedy in blank verse is one of the great Elizabethan dramatist’s finest plays. The plot concerns a wealthy, lecherous old man who feigns a mortal illness in order to solicit bribes from greedy acquaintances who hope to inherit his fortune. Many complexities of plot and connivance ensue, but in the end, the guilty parties are exposed and punished. Explanatory footnotes.

Genres: Plays, Classics, Drama, Fiction, Theatre, 17th Century, School

128 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1606

About the author

Benjamin Jonson was an English Renaissance dramatist, poet and actor. A contemporary of William Shakespeare, he is best known for his satirical plays, particularly Volpone, The Alchemist, and Bartholomew Fair, which are considered his best, and his lyric poems. A man of vast reading and a seemingly insatiable appetite for controversy, Jonson had an unparalleled breadth of influence on Jacobean and Caroline playwrights and poets. A house in Dulwich College is named after him.

See more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Jonson

Reviews

[AMEERA · Rating 4 out of 5]

Genius Story

[Sawsan · Rating 3 out of 5]

When money controls life, everything even honor will have a price
a comedy play by the english playwright and poet Ben Jonson
the title is from the italian word volpe which means fox
published in 1606, full of conspiracies as the usual of that period
about money and the power of its influence on people
Volpone is cunning villain but he's funny, taking advantage of the greedy fools that they hope to inherit his treasures when he dies
Jonson condemns greed which corrupts senses and morality

[فايز غازي Fayez Ghazi · Rating 3 out of 5]

- لا اعرف اذا كانت هذه المسرحية من كتابة بن جونسون او من كتابة الكونت ادوارد، لكنها مسرحية استطاع كاتبها نقد المجتمع البرجوازي واظهار سقاطته كما تمكّن من نقد الطبيعة الإنسانية الجشعة.

- "فولبون" او "الثعلب" رجل بخيل اراد لعب لعبة لا ليكتشف زيف اصدقائه فهو يعرفهم جيداً ويعرف جشعهم بل ليتسلى بهم ويسلي نفسه بجشعهم وشرفهم وعبوديتهم للمال.

- ختم الكاتب مسرحيته بشكل كلاسيكي وكل شخص نال نتيجة عمله من سجن وسخرية وفضيحة واشغال شاقة.

- امتع المقاطع كانت حوارات الخادم موسكا وطريقته في قلب الحقائق ، جعلت هذه النقلات من المسرحية سلسة ومضحكة

[BJ Lillis · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are three types of man in Volpone, or The Fox: evil, stupid, and evil and stupid. No hero, no even halfway descent human being to root for—not even a proper antihero. Just evil, stupid schemers and their evil, stupid schemes. Okay—but I was riveted. It’s exquisitely executed. The jokes land. And the sheer relish Ben Jonson takes in words, in the gloriously expansive, endlessly plastic English of the Renaissance, with its “turdy-facy-nasty-paty-lousy-fartical rogues,” its baths drawn from “juice of July-flowers, spirit of roses ... milk of unicorns, and panthers’ breath, gather’d in bags, and mixt with cretan wines.” A heady brew—more than enough to balance the acid humor. Volpone may be bleak, but it sure as hell isn’t boring.

I think it’s time I stop being surprised how much I love Elizabethan theater. I keep thinking of these 400-year-old plays as worth the effort, in the way that a difficult novel might be worth the effort, when what they really are is a treat—easily as entertaining, as absorbing, as anything else I read.

[°•.Melina°•. · Rating 4 out of 5]

سومین نمایشنامه‌ی ترم چهار/ عالی بود. موضوع جالبی داشت با انتهایی زیرکانه و دلچسب. وقتی استادمون سر کلاس گفت بن جانسون رقیب و رفیق شکسپیر بود چند لحظه ماتم برد چون واقعا به آثارش نمیخوره که هم دوره‌ی شکسپیر باشه.. حال و هوا و دغدغه‌های مدرن تری نسبت به شکسپیر داره و برام جالب بود که تا به حال ازش چیزی نخونده بودم‌. حتی به اسمش هم نمیخوره برای قرن هفدهم باشه و شکسپیر همه جوره باستانی تره!

داستان درمورد مرد لب گوریه که همه منتظر پول و ارثش هستن و با حقه‌های مختلف سعی میکنن وارث این مرد بشن...حتما بخونینش، کوتاه و خوش خوانه و از یادتون هم نمیره.
بلای جانِ همیشگی انسانها در تمام قرن‌ها، پول پول پول!

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Apart from being too long, this is an excellent play. Ben Jonson is sophisticated and erudite, but also bawdy and saucy. An admirable mixture of book-learning and worldly wisdom.

Judging from the other responses here, as well as my own, Jonson's most obvious defect is that he doesn't inspire people to write lengthy reviews. He writes expertly, but with a rather obvious purpose; although certainly highly polished, the point is immediately comprehensible. Jonson is, then, like a mother bird feeding her young: the play comes pre-digested. Alas, would he have known that the quickest way to achieve immortality is to give your readers a bit of gristle to chew.

[David Sarkies · Rating 4 out of 5]

A 17th Century Guy Ritchie
28 May 2017

It took me a while to get around to actually writing a review of this play namely because I wanted to watch it being performed and I discovered this high school performance on Youtube. Okay, while it is a cut down version, the sound is rubbish, and the performance certainly isn’t The Royal Shakespeare Company, it does give you a reasonable idea of what the play is about. Furthermore, if I had children and they were in a similar performance then I would certainly be watching it, and giving them an applause afterwards.

Anyway, one of the reasons that I like to watch performances is because plays are meant to be performed, not read. Well, not entirely true in the case of Plato’s dialogues, and Shelley’s literature pieces (and I believe Milton did something similar) fall into a completely different category – I’m not sure if you are meant to perform Samson Agonistes, but you are meant to perform Volpone, and simply reading the play off of the page really doesn’t give you an appreciation of the dynamics of the performance. The problem is, at least in Australia, is that it is rare that any play that isn’t Shakespeare is actually produced (unless, of course, it happens to be some modern abomination), though I did have the good fortune of seeing The Alchemist while I was in London (and a review of the piece can be found here).

Volpone is about a rich Venetian merchant who never married and has no heirs, which means that there is a problem with regards to who is going to inherit his wealth once he dies. As such he decides to pretend to be suffering from a fatal illness so as to extort gifts out of others with the belief that they will end up on his will (and they get their gifts back again). Thus he gets three other merchants to come in, who give him gifts in order to flatter him and thus have them added to his will. The play then becomes quite convoluted since it involves one of them getting his wife to seduce him, and then him having an apparent heart attack due to being too old to be amourous with a woman. There are also a couple of trials, one in which he has to defend a claim of indecent assault, and another where the will is read, and his servant Mochta is revealed to be the inheritor. Finally, when he reveals to the world that he is in fact alive, he quickly discovers that the loyalty of a servant actually isn’t as loyal as one would expect, especially where there is money involved.

Jonson differs significantly from Shakespeare in that Shakespeare’s comedies (and to an extent his tragedies) all seem to involve the nobility. Sure, there are common people in the plays, but they are either comic relief, or treated with disdain (or both). The comedies tend to also be fairly romantic in nature – in a sense a Shakespearian comedy could easily be considered a romantic comedy. Sure, these comedies also contain some quite low brow and vulgar humour, as well as elements of slapstick, but much of the comedy tends to be a comedy of love. In a way these comedies seem to attempt to reach out to both sides of the spectrum, with the romantic comedy appealing to the upper classes and the vulgar comedy to the lower classes.

Well, Jonson is completely different – he is incredibly vulgar. In a sense Jonson is to Shakespeare as Pretty Woman is to Revenge of the Nerds – one is refined and sophisticated while the other is purial and vulgar. This was the case with The Alchemist, and this is also very much the case with Volpone. Sure, in Volpone the main characters are members of the upper classes, but unlike Shakespeare we have the plots of the upper and lower classes intricately woven together, particularly with Mockta. As I have suggested in the title of this piece, Johnson actually reminds me a lot of a Guy Ritchie film, which focuses more on the dark and gritty side of society, and in a way is much more realistic.

The play is set in Venice, which also caught my attention, namely because Venice, and in fact northern Italy at the time was the centre of the civilised world. Okay, the dynamics were beginning to shift to the north, particularly with the invention of the printing press, but Venice was still very much an incredibly wealthy, and incredibly powerful, city state. In the minds of the people at the time, Northern Italy was still the centre of the universe, and anybody who was anybody would want to be connected with the power brokers of the region. This is why, when we are dealing with a play that involves merchants – and we must remember that merchants weren’t nobility, they were commoners, it is just that they were incredibly wealthy commoners – particularly wealthy merchants, we set it in Venice.

Volpone is also a play about money, and the lengths people go to to get as much of it as possible. In a sense it is almost like a disease, or even a drug, that causes people to do things that a rational person wouldn’t do, simply to get one’s hands upon it. In fact people devote their entire lives to the accumulation of wealth, to the exclusion of almost everything else. In the end, does it make people happy – well, no, it makes people incredibly paranoid. One of the good things about owning nothing is that when you own nothing you don’t have any worries about people coming and taking what you don’t have, or even worrying about what you don’t have being destroyed. In a sense the minimalist life is quite appealing in that sense.

Then again, look at Volpone, and the extent he goes to to actually determine who should be entitled to one’s wealth. Isn’t it funny that one of the clichéd characters is the character who has lots, and lots of money, but nobody to actually share it with. In fact consider characters like Uncle Scrooge, who lives a bitter life alone because by having all of that money he suddenly doesn’t trust anybody else because all they want to do, at least in his mind, is take his money. Yet they claim that an old lady who collects cats is mad, or somebody who collects stamps, or comic books, a geek, yet somebody who obsesses over money to the point that they push everybody away and end up living alone in an opulent mansion is somehow considered normal. Money sure does some strange things to people.

[Mohaaaamin · Rating 4 out of 5]

تا لحظه‌ی آخر خانه‌ی سالمندانش نبردند. خانه‌ی خودش بود. با یک پرستارِ دخترِ جوان. چشم‌هایش نمی‌دید اما عقلش به جایش بود. شنیدنِ صدا کفایت می‌کرد تا بازشناسد. دهان نزدیکِ گوش‌های سنگینش می‌بردی و داد می‌کشیدی که: نَنههه! نیمرخِ صورتش می‌چرخید جایی که بودی و اسم‌ات را که به زبان می‌آورد، لبخندی لب‌های‌اش را می‌کشید. لب‌هایی چروکیده که از بی‌دندانی، فرو رفته و ناپیدا بود. از صغیر و کبیر همه به دورش می‌گشتند. دوست‌اش داشتند. کابوسِ هرکس روزی بود که صدا کند و ننه نشناسدش. گاه بازیچه‌ی دستِ کم‌سن‌ترها می‌شد.
-ننه ننه بگو من کیم؟
-حالا من، من!
-منم بگو ننه.
بعد برای آنکه مراحل را سخت‌تر کنند، صدای‌شان را عوض می‌کردند.
ننه اما هیچ‌ نمی‌گفت.
دو تصویر به خوبی در ذهنم است. یکی پلاستیک‌پلاستیک میوه و سبزی و کیسه‌های ��رنج و قوطی‌های روغن که دستِ هر مهمان به خانه‌ی ننه می‌آمد و آن یکی قابی از ننه که روی صندلی‌اش می‌نشست و هرازچندگاه دستش می‌لولید لابلای دستنبد‌های طلا. یک‌بار از سمتِ مچ می‌شمرد و بار دیگر از آرنج. راستی صدای جیرینگ‌شان روح را صیقل می‌داد.
یک‌بار که در حیاطِ خانه‌اش زیر آفتابِ نزارِ زمستان نشسته بودیم، ننه به حرف آمد که گلیمِ آشپزخانه‌اش کثیف است. دو سه جوان از جا جستند که: ما الان میاریم میشوریمش.
در آن هوای سرد که سگ را نمی‌توانستی مجبور کنی به آب بزند، پسر‌ها چهار پنج نفری افتادند به جانِ گلیم. بعضی از آن‌ها که کثافت و بوی اتاق‌شان را مُرده نمی‌توانست تحمل کند، چنان وسواس شده بودند که یک مبتلا به ocd بیخود بکند!
می‌لرزیدند و می‌شُستند.
سوالم شد. چرا؟
اما طولی نکشید که جواب را دیدم. مجسم و زنده. توی یک جورابِ استارلایتِ زنانه.
بالای جوراب را گرفته بود و پاندول‌وار تکان می‌داد. از نوکِ پا تا زانوی یک آدمیزادِ فرضی طلا داشت. بعد همانطور که خمیده سمتِ پسرها می‌رفت: این النگوعه مال زنِ سعید، این یکی هم واسه زنِ محمد. اون گوشواره رو هم می‌بینی؟ اونم واسه تو ننه، ایشالا که پیر شید همتون. خير ببینین.
هر وقت من دیگه نبودم اینا واسه شما، بیاید ببرید!
بعد همان که گوشواره نصیب‌اش بود با نیشِ باز گفت: قربون دستت ننه. این کارا چیه آخه، من نبودم یعنی چی، نزن این حرفارو. ایشالا سایه‌ات بالا سرمون!
و صدایش را آهسته کرد: تازه من زن بگیر نیستم که، واسه زنِ چیم؟ می‌فروشمش میذارم رو پولِ موتور.
ننه تا آخر خانه‌ی خودش بود. برایش پرستار گرفته بودند، خرجش می‌کردند. غذایش را می‌دادند. میوه‌ی میان وعده‌اش طبقِ برنامه‌ داده می‌شد. اما با این همه نمی‌دانم چرا‌ ننه روز به روز لاجون‌تر بود. لابد اقتضای پیری است دیگر. هر چقدر خوب و سالم هم بخوری و به خیال‌ات کاسه را عوض کرده‌ای، باز آش همان است. البته ننه با آن همه عاقلی، این اواخر به زوال افتاده بود انگار. رفتارِ عجیبی می‌کرد. مثلن غر می‌زد: ننه من توت فرنگی دوست ندارم الکی نگیرید میمونه. اما توی دو روز همه‌شان تمام می‌شد. یا می‌گفت: این چاییایی که می‌گیرین واسه کجاست؟ مزه موندگی میده. در حالی که این همان چایِ خوش‌دمِ معطری بود که برای خودمان هم می‌خریدیم!
یک‌بار که دخترش سر زده خانه‌اش می‌رود، ننه را می‌بیند که چمباتمه زده روی ظرفِ غذایش و لقمه‌لقمه به سختی قورت‌شان می‌دهد. برنجی خشکیده و نیمه‌سرد با دو ملاقه آبِ مرغ. همین!
و پرستار همانطور تلفن به دست و با توت‌فرنگی‌های چپیده در دهان، اخراج می‌شود.


این‌ها را گفتم‌ که برسیم به ولپن!
مردی ثروتمند و بی‌وارث که بدونِ ذره‌ای خرج کردن و صرفن با بوی پول، اطرافیان‌اش را نوکر و مطیعِ خود کرده:"وقتی پول داشته باشی اشخاص خودشان می‌آیند و هر چه میل داری با کمال منت تقدیمت می‌کنند. زنها با سینه تا پای رختخواب می‌خزند. مردها هی تعظیمت می‌کنند. کسبه نسیه بهت جنس می‌دهند. شعرا مدح و ثنای ترا می خوانند... اینست اعجاز پول! فقط بویش مردم را مست می‌کند. سکه‌ی پول را به دماغشان، فقط به دماغشان نزدیک کن فوراً گردنشان را مثل غاز دراز می‌کنند، سرشان گیج می‌رود و روی شکم تا جلوی پای تو می‌خزند... بوی پول، می‌شنوی مسکا؟ تنها بوی پول را خرج کن و مطمئن باش همه‌ی این موشها به غله تو می‌افتند."


-روباه، موش، گربه، گنجشکِ تریاکی، افعی، میمون، شغالِ مرده، کفتار، لاشخور
نه اشتباه نکنید. این یک نمایشنامه راجع‌به حیواناتِ یک باغ‌وحش نیست! این حکایتِ آدم‌هایی است که حرص و طمع چنین پست و مفلوک‌شان ساخته که مکررن توسط نویسنده بدین شکلِ حیوانی معرفی می‌شوند:"
تو نمی‌دانی وقنی حرص جلوی چشم مردم را می‌گیرد حماقتشان به چه حد می‌رسد."


پول بی‌حساب، همیشه اوقات، اسباب زجره برات!
بن جانسن همان ابتدا از زبانِ دلقکِ ولپن حرف‌اش را می‌زند. او معتقد است پولِ هنگفت و بی‌حساب مصیبت‌بار است. او مخالفِ تلنبارِ کردن طلا و جواهرات است. البته نباید این را با آینده‌نگریِ منطقی و تلاش برای کسبِ درآمد اشتباه گرفت. چراکه نداشتنِ پول هم به نوبه‌ی خود می‌تواند مصیبت‌بار باشد. همانطور که خود بن جانسن هم از روی بی‌پولی روانه‌‌ی زندان شد.
او با فقر متولد شد و با فقر و تنهایی هم خاک شد. بن جانسن میراثِ مادی چندانی نداشت تا به کسی ببخشد و شاید از آن جهت کارش به تنهایی کشیده بود، اما آیا همین نمایشنامه میراثِ ارزشمندی از او نیست؟


ثروت؛ شهرت؛ شهوت؛ مَرد، کدومش تو رو دعوت کرد؟
ولپن غرقِ آزمندی است. او به‌طرزی جنون‌آمیز این سه‌گوشِ طَمَع را تمنا می‌کند. ثروت، شهرت و شهوت‌طلبی هر سه برخواسته از حرص و طمعِ بی‌حساب است. ولپن و از او بدتر، اطرافیان‌اش ثروت را دین و دنیای خود قرار می‌دهند تا آنجاکه ولپن خطاب به مسکا می‌گوید:
"مسکا، تو به طلای من تعظیم نمی‌کنی؟"


-میگن مستی گناهه، به انگشت ملامت
باید مست‌ها رو حد زد، به شلاق ندامت
در این نمایشنامه آدم‌های شرافتمند و عاقل هم ظهور می‌کنند و امید را در دلِ مخاطب زنده نگه می‌دارند. یکی لئون، آن ناوسروان کشتی جنگی که شجاعانه رودرروی تمامِ این آدم‌های حریص قرار می‌گیرد و در کمال ناباوری به بدمستی و بی‌ادبی متهم می‌شود. و دیگری همسرِ یکی از همان طمع‌کاران که نجابت‌اش را نمی‌فروشد:"این گنج پر قیمت تو ممکن است یک سربی مغز را از راه در ببرد اما برای من پرهیزکاری و پاکدامنی بهترین دارائیهاست"

[Sara · Rating 3 out of 5]

Could have been waaaaay shorter!

[Francisca · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sadly, this was boring, tedious, and even offensive (particularly towards women). Joking about an attempted rape towards one of the only two female characters (neither of which have an agenda of their own--an inevitable comparison that rises from having recently read both Kyd's and Webster's tragedies) was nowhere near a laughing matter. Silly, silly tragedy. Although it might be a great exercise on cultural change, comparing what entertained people centuries ago and how we are entertained today, it felt short and at times, uncomfortable too. It did not help that, at the end, it transformed into a court-based farce and became even more tedious than before. Unfortunately for me as a reader but fortunately for us as people, humour back then has very little to do with humour today.

[Monika · Rating 4 out of 5]

Volpone, or The Foxe, carries with it the sanctimonious themes of lust and money. It is as relevant today as it may have been in the seventeenth century. The characters of the play are ascribed certain animal imageries akin to their traits. It, in no way, uplifts their status quo, but rather showcases them as degenerate and debasing.

The eponymous character, Volpone, feigns sickness in order to con other greedy characters, namely, Voltore (The Vulture), Corbaccio (The Raven) and Corvino (The Carrion Crow), who want to inherit his fortune. His feigned sickness is a constant reminder of his inner sickness. The two female characters of the play, Celia and Lady Would-Be, seem to be a dying juncture of light and darkness.

[Anna Avian · Rating 3 out of 5]

A satire of human greed and corruption that is as relevant now as it was when first performed about 400 years ago. Nobody can be trusted, and you hate pretty much everyone. There is no one here to root for in a story full of opportunistic liars.
Times change, but human nature doesn’t.

[Ela · Rating 3 out of 5]

Moral of this story:
Always have a tortoise shell handy so you can hide from your enemies if the need arises.

[Helga · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

What a rare punishment
Is avarice to itself!

Volpone or The Fox is a comedy about avarice and the lengths some people will go to to gain money and power.

[Pablo · Rating 1 out of 5]

peor que un tiro en los cojonacos

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a satire play (first produced in 1605–1606) that shows the level of debasement some individuals will lower themselves to in order to gain wealth. It involves a wealthy man named Volpone who has no heirs, and he uses this fact together with the help of his servant to con three other gullible patrons who hope to become Volpone's designated heir by giving him lavash gifts. Leading on these three individuals results in a complicated interweaving of three parallel plot lines (four if you count the scheming of the servant).

In this review I'll not try to explain the details of these three plot lines. Instead I will note a couple snippets that I found so comical as to be beyond absurd. One is an extremely jealous husband who immediately flips his priorities when he's told he can be heir to the fortune if he prostitutes his wife to Volpone. Then after the wife is saved from being raped the judicial charges are turned upside-down by claiming that the innocent wife has concocted the story in order to blackmail Volpone. When one of the conspirators reverses his testimony to save this innocent wife from an unjust conviction, he is talked into re-reversing his testimony once again when he's promised to be made heir. In order to make this re-reversal of testimony believable he falls on the floor pretending to be mentally insane.

I was recently in a group discussion of this play during which it was suggested that this play could be easily adapted to the modern business world of employees trying to please a narcissistic boss. We were informed that such a movie [Il Volpone (1988)] has been made in which a very rich shipowner dissimulates to be close to death in order to capture the attention of three of his friends. There are probably other examples of this sort of adaptation.

This play is written in Elizabethan English (technically it's Jacobean era, not Elizabethan), so it takes a bit of effort on the part of a modern reader to understand what's going on. I had to reread portions in order to make sense of it.

[Keith Bruton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Volpone is a wildly entertaining play from start to finish. Lyrically written with a healthy dose of laughter throughout.

[Raquel · Rating 1 out of 5]

If this is one of the best and finest Jacobean era comedies, please someone kill me right now. Ha, ha, ha, I've laughed so much reading about greedy men...



and especially the moment Corvino offers his wife as companion/prostitute to Volpone and the later rape attempt... HA HA HA *nope



I'm really done with some classics and mandatory readings for uni.

[Eric Byrd]

"Call forth my dwarf, my eunuch, and my fool"

Loving this. The Elizabethans are really the best company.

[Michael · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you've read some of my reviews, you may have picked up on the fact that I love stories that have a large cast of people that don't really seem to be connected as the rising action moves along, but they all end up coming together towards the story's end. A Tale of Two Cities and The Marrow of Tradition are two examples of those kinds of stories. Volpone can also be considered that kind of story. Too bad it was atrocious.

The basic plot of this play is a really rich guy who acts like he's dying so he can string along a bunch of guys into believing they'll be his heir. Insert into this a plot involving two guys named Politic and Penegrine that really has nothing to with anything.

If you want a more detailed summary of it, you'll either have to read it or ask someone else since it was too convoluted for me to really make sense of it. I usually love complicated storylines, too, but of course, this was an exception to that rule.

After hearing so many comparisons of Jonson to Shakespeare, this was glaringly disappointing. Sigh.

[Momen ahmadi · Rating 3 out of 5]

هر کسی به دنبال نداشته هایش است و قدر چیزی که دارد را نمی داند..نداشته های قلیل مردم عشق و نداشته های کثیر آنها پول است.
اکثریت مردم پول را هدف غایی زندگی خود می داننددر حالی که پول وسیله ای برای رسیدن به هدف است نه خود هدف!

مردم امروز،علاقه ای عجیب به پول دارند و در دریای پول و پول پرستی غرق اند و زندگی آنها در(ریاضیات) خلاصه می شود..سوالاتشان همه درباره پول و اعداد است...
چقدر حقوق دارد؟
حقوق بازنشستگی اش چقدر است؟
اگر آن کار را انجام دهم چقدر گیرم می آید؟
زیر بنای آن ساختمان چند متر است؟
قیمت شلوار و کتت چقدر است؟
ارزش چیزها را در قیمت آنها میبینند..
اگر به آنها بگویی خانه ای را تصور کن که رو به دریاست، و در آن هر روز صبح با چهچه بلبل از خواب بیدار می شوی و با کوکوی کوکو به خواب میروی و دروازه های آن با گل های میخک مزین است و شاپرک ها بر فراز آن پرواز می کنند را نمی توانند تصور کنند!اما کافیست بگویی این خانه ۳میلیارد ارزش دارد...
همه می گویند:واااای چه خانه زیبایی!
همه در لجن زار پول غرق اند و به خاطر پول خانواده و تن می فروشند و با پول شوکت و اسم می خرند و بنده هایی اجیر می کنند که کمر نرمی برای خم شدن دارند!!

[Diana · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have to admit that even though I'm a fan of Ben Jonson's poetry I had never even thought of reading one of his plays. I had to read this one for class, and I really enjoyed it. The play takes place in Venice but it is said to allude to what Jonson fears London as a city is becoming.

[Yas · Rating 5 out of 5]

عجب کمدی دارکی. خیلی باحال بود. بیشتر حس آثار بیضایی و ساعدی رو میداد تا هم‌دوره شکسپیر.

[Molly · Rating 5 out of 5]

I hate Shakespeare.

For the whole two years of my literature a-level it was a nightmare. It didn't help that I'd suddenly found myself in this sixth form with kids from private schools, the sort of kids who went to see his plays in London for 'fun' weekend trips and then discuss how great they thought he was in lessons.

It was hell.

I was the class philistine. I've just never been able to stand any of his work, and for years I just assumed it was because of the language or the style. I figured I simply wasn't cut out for anything pre-Potter.

That was until I read this.

I should have known I'd love it from the moment my literature teacher introduced it unenthusiastically (we had a habit of disagreeing on these things). And low and behold, to this day I still read it recreationally. I think it's brilliant.

Basically speaking, Italian merchant Volpone feigns illness in order to get gifts out of greedy citizens wishing to be named in his will as his sole heir. With the help of his manservant Mosca (absolutely my favourite character), Volpone keeps up this facade until a glimpse of the wife of one of his patrons begins to derail things. Terrible summary, but hey, it's not the thing you should be reading!

Look, basically this play is just so much fun. I love the morally bankrupt characters and hair brained schemes,and even after being forced to dissect the thing in the name of exams, it still holds my interest and constantly entertains me.

Ugh.

I just love it.

*drops mic*

[Irene · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to read Volpone; or, The Fox for an English Literature class - it isn't my obvious choice, I'm not big on reading plays.

It took me a bit longer to read it than I intended but I found the beginning tedious and slow, full of lengthy lines and speeches that didn't get me anywhere. But things changed as I read along and yesterday, some 60 pages before the end, I couldn't put it down. It was actually funny and I totally understood why it is called a satirical comedy.

Volpone and his servant Mosca try to con people out of their dearest possessions (including someone's wife) by making them believe that they will be the sole heir to Volpone's fortune. Scam after scam, the confusion grows as the players mingle together and in the end Volpone and Mosca fall into each other's trap and the scammers are scammed. Funny and witty. It was rewarding to get past the prologue and first act.

[Nina · Rating 3 out of 5]

It truly is a Jacobean comedy. The fact that each character has its own passion or obsession, the satire upon them, that bitter humour... and last but not least, Jonson's language, make "Volpone" one remarkable piece for the Jacobean age. Yet, it is less violent than Restoration comedies.
I liked very much how the falseness of people is revealed in the end of the play, how they all changed themselves and were ready to sacrifice their loved ones for gold, for money.
A play that reflects reality.

[Payam Ebrahimi · Rating 3 out of 5]

کمدی جالبی بود. شروع خوبی داشت و تا میانه هم خوب پیش رفت اما در پایان آموزه‌های اخلاقی و گاه حتی سخنرانی‌هایی در باب اخلاق کمی آزاردهنده بود. هرچند با توجه به زمان نوشته‌شدن این نمایشنامه-فکرکنم قرن ۱۶ یا ۱۷- شاید انتظار دیگه‌ای هم نمی‌شد ازش داشت.
نکته‌ی عجیب برای من ترجمه‌ی عبدالحسین نوشین بود. ترجمه‌ای که هم شلختگی در استفاده از کلمات و حتی زبان توش به‌چشم می‌اومد و هم غلط دیکته‌ای داشت. نمی‌دونم این‌ها شاهکارهای ناشر و ویراستاره یا آقای نوشین هم بعضاً بزن دررو کار می‌کرده. به هرحال لازمه که ناشر یه بازنگری به متن بکنه

[Ashley Marilynne Wong · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thought-provoking satirical comedy that delves into the deepest and darkest part of the human psyche.

[Angels · Rating 2 out of 5]

trash

[Melika Gohari · Rating 4 out of 5]

زیرکانه و بامزه. :))