Home Vita Teatro Sonetti

PirandelloWeb

Il teatro

Tragedie

1589 - 1593

Tito Andronico

1594 - 1595

Romeo e Giulietta

1599

Giulio Cesare

1600 - 1601

Amleto

1601

Troilo e Cressida

1602 - 1605

Otello

1605 - 1606

Re Lear

1607

Antonio e Cleopatra

1607 - 1608

Coriolano

Commedie

1590 - 1593

La bisbetica domata

1590 - 1594

La commedia degli errori

1590 - 1595

I due gentiluomini di Verona

1593 - 1596

Pene d'amor perdute

1594 - 1597

Il mercante di Venezia

1595

Sogno di una notte

di mezza estate

1598 - 1599

Molto rumore per nulla

1599 - 1600

Come vi piace

1599 - 1601

La dodicesima notte

1599 - 1601

Le allegre comari di Windsor

1602 - 1603

Tutto è bene quel

che finisce bene

1603

Misura per misura

1605 - 1608

Timone d'Atene

1607 - 1608

Pericle principe di Tiro

1609 - 1610

Cimbelino

1611

Il racconto d'inverno

1611 - 1612

La tempesta

1613 ca.

I due nobili cugini

Drammi storici

1588 - 1592

Re Enrico VI - Parti I, II, III

1590 - 1597

Re Giovanni

1591 - 1594

Riccardo III

1595

Riccardo II

1597 - 1598

Enrico IV - Parti I, II

1598 - 1599

Enrico V

1612 - 1613

Enrico VIII

Vita ed opere

Introduzione

Biografia 1

Biografia 2

Biografia 3

L'opera

Identità e paternità

I sonetti

Introduzione

1-10 51-60 101-110
11-20 61-70 111-120
21-30 71-80 121-130
31-40 81-90 131-140
41-50 91-100 141-154

 

 

introduzione

 

Singolarmente teso e asciutto nella compatta brevità della struttura, nella scelta di un linguaggio 'quotidiano' di grande immediatezza, il dramma sembra proiettare sull'intera vicenda le tortuose incertezze della figura del re, in un'atmosfera inquieta di incompletezza, di intenzioni contraddette, di azioni che non sanno mai divenire pienamente tali, di una realtà che inesorabilmente muta se stessa, a cui non sfugge a tratti lo stesso Bastardo di Faulconbridge, antesignano dell'immagine dell'eroe trionfante, Enrico V, sorta di metafora della 'virtus' della nazione inglese. Un'opera che, forse più delle altre storie inglesi, esprime il dramma collettivo della storia in termini di tragedie individuali dei personaggi.

 

Although Shakespeare was a genius, perhaps the greatest writer the world has ever seen, not everything he wrote was of equal value or quality. This is particularly true of the history play King John, which historically had quite a high reputation but has subsequently become almost completely ignored by stage producers and even Shakespeare aficionados rarely get around actually to reading it all the way through. This is partly because of the language and structure of the play and partly because of the somewhat unfortunate reputation of King John himself.

John has become one of the undisputed villains of English history and is remembered, if at all, as the bad king who persecutes Robin Hood and his merry men and who lost the Crown in the Wash – literally, in fact, since the Wash is a stretch of the North Sea off the coast of Lincolnshire in which the ship carrying the Crown Jewels was lost. That was reputedly the last time the Crown of the land has ever travelled by sea.
John’s poor reputation is not entirely fair, even if it has not been helped by the widespread belief (among royalists, anyway) that the name is cursed and so there has never been and presumably never will be a John II. In truth, he suffers in comparison with his brother, Richard I or Richard Lionheart, who was a great military hero and conqueror of the Holy Land (not everybody sees it that way, of course) and remained in Central Europe as a hostage for a number of years. It is certainly possible to argue that Richard’s overseas adventures were not helpful to his country and required his brother John to collect unpopular taxes to support the military effort.

The play itself seems to reflect the situation in which the eponymous king found himself.

The action concerns the machinations between the ruling elites of England and France, with other powers also represented, including the Pope (bearing in mind that England was a Catholic country prior to Henry VIII’s split from the papacy). John is challenged by the Bastard, Philip who turns out to be a son of the Lionheart. Allies are sought, wooed and lost and the principals are killed in the action – Philip falls off a castle (which has an obvious symbolism), while John is murdered by a disgruntled monk (likewise). The action, with its pageantry and intrigue among the great powers of the time, was popular in the centuries after it was written but the taste among more modern audiences has changed. Consequently, the play is regarded, if at all, as a fairly pointless exploration of the non-productive squabbling of aristocratic elites. Of course, this being Shakespeare, much of the language employed nevertheless rewards consideration but there are greater rewards to be had in the other plays.

 

Inizio pagina