What do you think?
Rate this book
Lonely Lives Volume 2616; A Drama
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 Excerpt: ...Nothing at all, John. Really. John. Have you stopped caring for me 1 kitty's head droops; she shakes it deprecatingly. John. Puis his arm round Kitty. Don't you remember our promise, Kitty--that we were never to have any secrets from each other? Not even little ones. Embracesher more warmly. Say something. Darling, don't you care for me at all now? Kitty. O John! you know that I do. John. What is it, then? Kitty. You know quite well. John. 1 assure you I don't. I have not the faintest idea. Kitty. It's only that I long to be something to you. John. You are a great deal to me. Kitty. No, no! John. But tell me... Kitty. / You can't help it, John, but... I tyiow that I don't satisfy you. John. You do, Kitty. You are everything that I want. Kitty. So you say just now, John. John. It is my most solemn conviction. Kitty. Yes, for the moment. John. What can lead you to... Kitty. I see it plainly enough. John. Kitty, have I ever given you cause... Kitty. No, never. John. There, you see! Holds her closer to him.' It is all fr fancy--naughty fancies, Kitty, that must be driven away. Come, come! Kisses her tenderly. Kitty. Oh, if it were only fancy! John. You may be quite sure it is. Kitty. And--Jack dear--I do love you so!--Far more than any words can tell. I believe I could sooner give up baby than you. John. Oh, Kitty! Kitty. It's a shame to say it!--The dear, sweet, funny little fellow! Her arms round John's neck. My own dear, good husband! Pause. Mute embrace. Miss Mahr, dressed for going out, opens the verandah door. Miss Mahr. Calls. I'm quite ready, Dr. Vockerat. Oh, I beg your pardon! Draws back. John. Immediately, Miss Mahr, immediately. Takes his manuscript. We're going for a row, Kitty.--No more fancies now, promise me 1 Kisses her, takes his hat, turns on...
- GenresGerman LiteraturePlays
98 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1891
2 people are currently reading
64 people want to read
About the author
Gerhart Hauptmann
953 books77 followersGerhart Johann Robert Hauptmann was a German dramatist and novelist. He is counted among the most important promoters of literary naturalism, though he integrated other styles into his work as well. He received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1912.
Life Hauptmann's first drama, Before Dawn (1889) inaugurated the naturalistic movement in modern German literature. It was followed by The Reconciliation (1890), Lonely People (1891) and The Weavers (1892), a powerful drama depicting the rising of the Silesian weavers in 1844 for which he is best known outside of Germany.
Hauptmann's subsequent work includes the comedies Colleague Crampton (1892), The Beaver Coat (1893), and The Conflagration (1901), the symbolist dream play The Assumption of Hannele (1893), and an historical drama Florian Geyer (1895). He also wrote two tragedies of Silesian peasant life, Drayman Henschel (1898) and Rose Bernd (1903), and the dramatic fairy-tales The Sunken Bell (1896) and And Pippa Dances (1906).
Hauptmann's marital life was difficult and in 1904 he divorced his wife. That same year he married the actress Margarete Marschalk, who had borne him a son four years earlier. The following year he had an affair with the 17-year-old Austrian actress Ida Orloff, whom he met in Berlin when she performed in his play The Assumption of Hannele. Orloff inspired characters in several of Hauptmann's works and he later referred to her as his muse.
In 1911 he wrote The Rats. In 1912, Hauptmann was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "primarily in recognition of his fruitful, varied and outstanding production in the realm of dramatic art."
During the First World War Hauptmann was a pacifist. In this period of his career he wrote several gloomy historical-allegorical plays, such as The Bow of Odysseus (1914), The White Saviour (1912–17), and Winter Ballade (1917). After the war, his dramatic abilities appeared to diminish. He wrote two full-length plays that are similar to the early successes: Dorothea Angermann (1926) and Before Sunset (1932). He remained in Germany after Hitler's Machtergreifung and survived the bombing of Dresden. His last work was the Atriden-Tetralogie (1942–46). His works in German were published by S. Fischer Verlag.
Hauptmann died at the age of 83 at his home in Agnetendorf (now Jagniątków, Poland) in 1946. Since the Polish communist administration did not allow Hauptmann's relatives to bury him in Agnetendorf (although even the Soviet military government had recommended this), his body was transported in an old cattle wagon to occupied Germany more than a month after his death. He was buried near his cottage on Hiddensee.
Under Wilhelm II Hauptmann enjoyed the reputation of a radical writer, on the side of the poor and outcasts. During the Weimar Republic (1918–33) he enjoyed the status of the literary figurehead of the new order, and was even considered for the post of state president. Under Hitler he kept his distance from the regime, but never publicly criticized it. This, and the fact that (unlike so many writers and academics) he stayed in Germany, was strongly held against him after the war. A superb collected edition of his works appeared in the 1960s, and stimulated some impressive studies of his work (e.g. those by Peter Sprengel), but the tide of critical and public opinion remained negative. A few of his plays are still revived from time to time, but otherwise he is neglected. He was certainly an uneven writer, but at his best (as in 'The Weavers', his novel 'The Fool in Christ Emmanuel Quint', and the Novellen 'The Heretic of Soana' and 'Das Meerwunder') he can arguably rank with the best of his German contemporaries.
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhart_...
Life Hauptmann's first drama, Before Dawn (1889) inaugurated the naturalistic movement in modern German literature. It was followed by The Reconciliation (1890), Lonely People (1891) and The Weavers (1892), a powerful drama depicting the rising of the Silesian weavers in 1844 for which he is best known outside of Germany.
Hauptmann's subsequent work includes the comedies Colleague Crampton (1892), The Beaver Coat (1893), and The Conflagration (1901), the symbolist dream play The Assumption of Hannele (1893), and an historical drama Florian Geyer (1895). He also wrote two tragedies of Silesian peasant life, Drayman Henschel (1898) and Rose Bernd (1903), and the dramatic fairy-tales The Sunken Bell (1896) and And Pippa Dances (1906).
Hauptmann's marital life was difficult and in 1904 he divorced his wife. That same year he married the actress Margarete Marschalk, who had borne him a son four years earlier. The following year he had an affair with the 17-year-old Austrian actress Ida Orloff, whom he met in Berlin when she performed in his play The Assumption of Hannele. Orloff inspired characters in several of Hauptmann's works and he later referred to her as his muse.
In 1911 he wrote The Rats. In 1912, Hauptmann was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, "primarily in recognition of his fruitful, varied and outstanding production in the realm of dramatic art."
During the First World War Hauptmann was a pacifist. In this period of his career he wrote several gloomy historical-allegorical plays, such as The Bow of Odysseus (1914), The White Saviour (1912–17), and Winter Ballade (1917). After the war, his dramatic abilities appeared to diminish. He wrote two full-length plays that are similar to the early successes: Dorothea Angermann (1926) and Before Sunset (1932). He remained in Germany after Hitler's Machtergreifung and survived the bombing of Dresden. His last work was the Atriden-Tetralogie (1942–46). His works in German were published by S. Fischer Verlag.
Hauptmann died at the age of 83 at his home in Agnetendorf (now Jagniątków, Poland) in 1946. Since the Polish communist administration did not allow Hauptmann's relatives to bury him in Agnetendorf (although even the Soviet military government had recommended this), his body was transported in an old cattle wagon to occupied Germany more than a month after his death. He was buried near his cottage on Hiddensee.
Under Wilhelm II Hauptmann enjoyed the reputation of a radical writer, on the side of the poor and outcasts. During the Weimar Republic (1918–33) he enjoyed the status of the literary figurehead of the new order, and was even considered for the post of state president. Under Hitler he kept his distance from the regime, but never publicly criticized it. This, and the fact that (unlike so many writers and academics) he stayed in Germany, was strongly held against him after the war. A superb collected edition of his works appeared in the 1960s, and stimulated some impressive studies of his work (e.g. those by Peter Sprengel), but the tide of critical and public opinion remained negative. A few of his plays are still revived from time to time, but otherwise he is neglected. He was certainly an uneven writer, but at his best (as in 'The Weavers', his novel 'The Fool in Christ Emmanuel Quint', and the Novellen 'The Heretic of Soana' and 'Das Meerwunder') he can arguably rank with the best of his German contemporaries.
Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhart_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 10, 2020
Hem evinin hanımı, yeni çocuğunun annesi olan ve bedensel olarak çok iyi anlaştığı, sevdiği eşi hem de fikren benzediği, söylediklerini ve felsefeye ilişkin yazdıklarını anlayıp, eleştirerek cesaretini, kendine saygısını ve yaratıcılığını yükselten başka kadın ile birlikte yaşamını sürdürmek isteyen, onların birbirlerine rakip olmadığını anlatmaya çabalayan ama entelektüelliğinden uzak olan çevresince birleştirilemeyecek şeyleri birleştirmekle itham edilen genç bir adamın öyküsü.
"Bilimde belki objektif olabilirsiniz ama hayatta değil.
Şayet istersek, niçin inanç ve garantiye ihtiyacımz olsun ki!
Memnun insanlar, arı kovanındaki erkek arılardır.
Tanrı'ya sadece dışarıdan yön vermek ve dünyayı parmağında döndürmek değil, içeriden de harekete geçirmek yaraşır.
Başkalarının fikirlerini kale almadan, başkalarına fikirlerini kabul ettirmeye çalışmak, zamanımıza kadar yaşamış ve başkalarında varolan değerlere karşı tutum takınmaktır.
Yalnız olan başkalarından daha çok acı çeker.
Zayıf olduğunuz anlarda, sizden çok uzaklarda sizin gibi mücadele veren yalnız birini düşünün.
Dostluk var ya, işte aşkın üzerinde yükseleceği temel, dostluktur. Çözülmeyen harika, açıkçası mucize bir bağdır bu.
Kazanılan her şeyden, bu Allah'ın belası örf ve âdetler yüzünden fedakârlık mı yapmalı? İnsanlar her iki tarafın da yalnızca kararlı olduğu, her iki tarafın da daha iyi ve daha değerli olduğu bu durumun, bir cinayet olmadığını göremiyorlar mı? Oğullarının daha iyi ve mükemmel olması anne baba için bir kayıp mı olmalı ? Kocasının daha iyi ve fikrî doyuma ulaşması bir kayıp mı sayılmalı?"
"Bilimde belki objektif olabilirsiniz ama hayatta değil.
Şayet istersek, niçin inanç ve garantiye ihtiyacımz olsun ki!
Memnun insanlar, arı kovanındaki erkek arılardır.
Tanrı'ya sadece dışarıdan yön vermek ve dünyayı parmağında döndürmek değil, içeriden de harekete geçirmek yaraşır.
Başkalarının fikirlerini kale almadan, başkalarına fikirlerini kabul ettirmeye çalışmak, zamanımıza kadar yaşamış ve başkalarında varolan değerlere karşı tutum takınmaktır.
Yalnız olan başkalarından daha çok acı çeker.
Zayıf olduğunuz anlarda, sizden çok uzaklarda sizin gibi mücadele veren yalnız birini düşünün.
Dostluk var ya, işte aşkın üzerinde yükseleceği temel, dostluktur. Çözülmeyen harika, açıkçası mucize bir bağdır bu.
Kazanılan her şeyden, bu Allah'ın belası örf ve âdetler yüzünden fedakârlık mı yapmalı? İnsanlar her iki tarafın da yalnızca kararlı olduğu, her iki tarafın da daha iyi ve daha değerli olduğu bu durumun, bir cinayet olmadığını göremiyorlar mı? Oğullarının daha iyi ve mükemmel olması anne baba için bir kayıp mı olmalı ? Kocasının daha iyi ve fikrî doyuma ulaşması bir kayıp mı sayılmalı?"
February 17, 2019
4,5 ⭐
I found this book in an antique book shop in Brașov (Brasso/Kronstadt), Romania while I was on a journey with my family (I'm a Romanian girl living in Bucharest). It was a very old edition from the year 1922 - with very old and different words and language. I've only heard my 86-year-old grandmother using some of this words. I love this kind of books because they have a history behind them. Somehow, this book, there on the shelf, caught my attention. I bought it and I also bought some vintage postcards written in German. '' Suflete Stingherite'' was the title in Romanian. It translates to ''Lonely Souls'' in English. It was easy to read, but, of course, the meaning matters more. It was short, yet so insightful and true. The thing that I loved the most about this drama was the objectivity of the author. He didn't agree with any of his characters, all of them carrying so different views.
Late nineteen century. The Vockerat family is located in the quiet countryside near Berlin. The main character, Johannes, is the head of the family, living with his wife, Käthe, and with his newborn son. His parents are also there to take care of the household while Käthe is getting better after giving birth. Johannes is a philosopher, a scientist, a scholar, an atheist, a misunderstood genius. He means everything to Käthe, he is like a God for her, really. But she can't understand his thoughts and his work. His parents are simple folk religious people. They don't complicate much. They leave it all to God and they are disappointed their son gave up on religion. Johannes' good friend and neighbor, Mr Braun, a painter, is somehow revolutionary , but he is very realistic and he can't understand the main character for being a dreamer and an idealist. A young lady, miss Anna Mahr, friend of the painter, comes to their home and she turns out to be the best match for our philosopher - she is a student, some of the few emancipated women, a bookworm and an idealist. She is the only one to understand his nature. Thus her visit at the Vockerats gets longer and longer.
The thing that struck me the most, as I said earlier, is the objectivity of the author. Each one of the characters is right, but refarding different things. I really don't think I can't notice at least at one thing for every character to be right about.
Käthe - the loving, caring wife, mother and daughter in law - kind and understanding, bringing peace to everyone. She's like a fragile flower that perfumes the family life, but who needs to be sprinkled in order to survive. She quietly suffers as her husband's connection with miss Mahr grows, but she blames herself for not being good enough for Johannes and she shows empathy to everyone, except herself.
Mr and Mrs Vockerat. Throughout this whole drama I have come to highly admire and respect them. Though their way of thinking is, at times, ignorant and though society hasn't evolved in what it is today owth to people like them, but owth to people like Anna and Johannes, they are wise, working, responsible and loving. They live their life beautifully and meaningfully in my opinion and society definetely needs beholders of these adjectives in order to survive.
Mr Braun - an artist, an atheist, one with revolutionary ideas. He had never understood his friend Johannes - his dreamy nature, his idealism, being too realistic, too caught in the whole miserability of the world, of the society, never dreaming of the liberation Johannes desires so badly. It might be as Anna said - he has to cling on social standards. However, he's got a point. He knows that Johannes has to choose between Anna and his family. He is rational and he leaves no room for compromises.
Finally, Anna. She is my favourite character just because she carries with her the objectivity of the author, claiming, at the end, that all of them are right. Like Johannes, she is an idealist, with universal love, with aspiration for the heights. She can see things objectively because she is a free spirit, an open mind. She suffers, but she eventually realizes she has to dissappear from the life of the Vockerats. She doesn't lose hope, though, making a promise with Johannes, keeping it in her soul.
Johannes, on the other hand, can't see things this way because he is not free. He can't satisfy all his curiosity, all his dreams, he can't confess his beliefs... He is caught in a life that limits him, that he was not made for. He doesn't have the freedom to aspire to the heights, like Anna. This is the true tragedy, for his destiny is the one of a lonely man.
They are all right. They are all right regarding so different things. This conflict definetely illustrates the great difference between the sudden modernization of technology and thus, of ideas, of the twentieth century and the conservative, religious, virtuos, old way. All in all, though I didn't analyse it page by page, though I didn't write too much about it, this book widened my perspective over this period of time that is La Belle Epoque, over kinds of mentalities.
I found this book in an antique book shop in Brașov (Brasso/Kronstadt), Romania while I was on a journey with my family (I'm a Romanian girl living in Bucharest). It was a very old edition from the year 1922 - with very old and different words and language. I've only heard my 86-year-old grandmother using some of this words. I love this kind of books because they have a history behind them. Somehow, this book, there on the shelf, caught my attention. I bought it and I also bought some vintage postcards written in German. '' Suflete Stingherite'' was the title in Romanian. It translates to ''Lonely Souls'' in English. It was easy to read, but, of course, the meaning matters more. It was short, yet so insightful and true. The thing that I loved the most about this drama was the objectivity of the author. He didn't agree with any of his characters, all of them carrying so different views.
Late nineteen century. The Vockerat family is located in the quiet countryside near Berlin. The main character, Johannes, is the head of the family, living with his wife, Käthe, and with his newborn son. His parents are also there to take care of the household while Käthe is getting better after giving birth. Johannes is a philosopher, a scientist, a scholar, an atheist, a misunderstood genius. He means everything to Käthe, he is like a God for her, really. But she can't understand his thoughts and his work. His parents are simple folk religious people. They don't complicate much. They leave it all to God and they are disappointed their son gave up on religion. Johannes' good friend and neighbor, Mr Braun, a painter, is somehow revolutionary , but he is very realistic and he can't understand the main character for being a dreamer and an idealist. A young lady, miss Anna Mahr, friend of the painter, comes to their home and she turns out to be the best match for our philosopher - she is a student, some of the few emancipated women, a bookworm and an idealist. She is the only one to understand his nature. Thus her visit at the Vockerats gets longer and longer.
The thing that struck me the most, as I said earlier, is the objectivity of the author. Each one of the characters is right, but refarding different things. I really don't think I can't notice at least at one thing for every character to be right about.
Käthe - the loving, caring wife, mother and daughter in law - kind and understanding, bringing peace to everyone. She's like a fragile flower that perfumes the family life, but who needs to be sprinkled in order to survive. She quietly suffers as her husband's connection with miss Mahr grows, but she blames herself for not being good enough for Johannes and she shows empathy to everyone, except herself.
Mr and Mrs Vockerat. Throughout this whole drama I have come to highly admire and respect them. Though their way of thinking is, at times, ignorant and though society hasn't evolved in what it is today owth to people like them, but owth to people like Anna and Johannes, they are wise, working, responsible and loving. They live their life beautifully and meaningfully in my opinion and society definetely needs beholders of these adjectives in order to survive.
Mr Braun - an artist, an atheist, one with revolutionary ideas. He had never understood his friend Johannes - his dreamy nature, his idealism, being too realistic, too caught in the whole miserability of the world, of the society, never dreaming of the liberation Johannes desires so badly. It might be as Anna said - he has to cling on social standards. However, he's got a point. He knows that Johannes has to choose between Anna and his family. He is rational and he leaves no room for compromises.
Finally, Anna. She is my favourite character just because she carries with her the objectivity of the author, claiming, at the end, that all of them are right. Like Johannes, she is an idealist, with universal love, with aspiration for the heights. She can see things objectively because she is a free spirit, an open mind. She suffers, but she eventually realizes she has to dissappear from the life of the Vockerats. She doesn't lose hope, though, making a promise with Johannes, keeping it in her soul.
Johannes, on the other hand, can't see things this way because he is not free. He can't satisfy all his curiosity, all his dreams, he can't confess his beliefs... He is caught in a life that limits him, that he was not made for. He doesn't have the freedom to aspire to the heights, like Anna. This is the true tragedy, for his destiny is the one of a lonely man.
They are all right. They are all right regarding so different things. This conflict definetely illustrates the great difference between the sudden modernization of technology and thus, of ideas, of the twentieth century and the conservative, religious, virtuos, old way. All in all, though I didn't analyse it page by page, though I didn't write too much about it, this book widened my perspective over this period of time that is La Belle Epoque, over kinds of mentalities.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 18, 2019
I didn't expect much from this play but I absolutely loved it. It dealt with the role of women but not in the way you have already seen it so often. One of the greatest comflicts was the impossibility to be friends, not because of your own feelings but because of expextations of societey and they way people around you perceive that friendship. It also dealt with the suffering that can come from the impossiblity to be educated.
June 13, 2024
I read this book because of my major but now I can say that it’s one of my favorite books.
August 24, 2013
Read this because the MXAT production of Lonely Lives with Mariya Andreyeva as Katei was a crucial turn in Mariya Andreyeva's career and finally reading this clears up a bit about femme fatale antics in Russian theatre.
I wish the author had simply written a foreword like "I just read Rilke so I decided to twist Rilke into sexist bullshit about the ideal woman. Enjoy~!" The stunner of the play is meant to be Miss Anna Mahr, with her fashionable knowledge of what's popular with the intelligentsia in those days, I think it's clear that the playwright intends us to be as enthralled with her as the doctor is. It turns out that she's a pale character in comparison to Katei, who actually lives the life of loneliness Miss Mahr kind of vapidly and melodramatically puts on. Even if the playwright had been successful, this bullshit with one whole man and two less-than women whose roles serve the man's is bullshit. I don't know how if there are some translations that improved on the language but god in German the language is so boring, it's only redeemed by Katei, and most of my sympathies toward her are influenced by the Russian femme fatale run off from Mariya Andreyeva.
I wish the author had simply written a foreword like "I just read Rilke so I decided to twist Rilke into sexist bullshit about the ideal woman. Enjoy~!" The stunner of the play is meant to be Miss Anna Mahr, with her fashionable knowledge of what's popular with the intelligentsia in those days, I think it's clear that the playwright intends us to be as enthralled with her as the doctor is. It turns out that she's a pale character in comparison to Katei, who actually lives the life of loneliness Miss Mahr kind of vapidly and melodramatically puts on. Even if the playwright had been successful, this bullshit with one whole man and two less-than women whose roles serve the man's is bullshit. I don't know how if there are some translations that improved on the language but god in German the language is so boring, it's only redeemed by Katei, and most of my sympathies toward her are influenced by the Russian femme fatale run off from Mariya Andreyeva.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews