This play is rather strange. And not in a favorable sense.

I understand that it was attempting to convey some profound moral and political significance. However, to me, it simply seemed like a group of people transforming into rhinoceroses.

I suppose I'm just not enlightened enough. I mean, a rhinoceros? Why not a monkey? They could throw poop. That would be much more political.

In August 2020,

I still don't fully grasp the communism reference, but I will concede that it is a story that has remained in my mind. So, it has had an impact.

Perhaps with more thought and study, I will come to understand the deeper meaning behind this play. But for now, it remains a bit of a mystery to me.

Rewriting the Extraordinary Exhibition.

On the surface, we are reading a story of a city where its people are being transformed one by one and mysteriously into something else. But beneath the surface, each character is a representative part of society. Every sentence has other meanings and every event explains a specific concept.

In my opinion, what I read was a social narrative where the people gradually reach a new awareness. This book well explained the process of the formation of a social movement and truly, reading it was enjoyable.

This play that we read with the help of a gift and our friend was one of the best reading experiences in the recent months.

This three-act play, in my opinion, the first two acts were a good prelude to the excellent third act, an act in which I found my own life.

Life as an alienated human being, who grew up in a middle-class family that saw happiness as an academic and state-acquired identity, but I didn't want to live as a worker and be happy for the routine of my every day. A happiness that sometimes I don't feel in maintaining and preserving my identity as a revolutionary and a queer in a world that is completely against me, but why as a human being, although sometimes I see with my own eyes how sometimes I feel strange and sometimes tired and heartbroken from intertwined relationships and deprivations, I go to the window to watch the skin of the workers and I become busy.

I lied if I claim that I never doubted in my life everything that I am, although I am fragmented and simple, and I didn't want to put my foot on the grass, be with them, be free, be free? How can I save myself? What decision is appropriate?

Although the play of the worker doesn't give an answer to these questions, but it helps people and workers for a better understanding, a literary trick for narration and a clearer vision, a message that its father, the satirical novel, was also successful in it.

A sarcastic but not funny play and along with a tolerable translation by Mrs. Davari, it creates a good experience, especially that the creator's inspiration for describing the scenes can make the processing and imagination easier (of course I jumped over it and I liked my own performance more).

The hot summer and this crazy sun also didn't have the power to take away the enjoyable nature of this play, probably a story that I won't forget these days soon.

Some stories are timeless.

Is it better to accept the bad situations in the world? Or should we try to change them? This is one of the biggest questions of The Chairs. And I think Ionesco handles this question well.

Here, in the midst of the absurd theme, beings exchange their existences to become chairs. Those who are convinced, the weak, the suspicious, the strong, the lovers...

In Ionesco's narration, the charm of being a chair seems to be able to satisfy any psychological need or urge.

This is a world where people join a herd with a common interest that is very inappropriate for themselves. A world where a person's principles are abandoned and the only thing that does not penetrate the thick skin of the animal is the truth. A place where people turn their backs on their ideologies to be part of the order.

However, Berenger chooses his individuality instead of the collective psychosis that takes over the world. The price of rejecting the herd instinct is a nightmare-like loneliness and alienation. While the rest of the world turns, he still believes that man is much superior and has a greater potential and significance than everything.

How do we really define the sane and the crazy? Or what is really right or wrong? Who knows.

EDIT: Once again, I'm amazed by this play. A longer review to come.

EDIT: A promise is a debt. Reread.

The correct title is "Rhinoceroses", and this is logical because the theme of the play focuses on society, on the mass nature of phenomena, on herd behavior, if you will.

Starting the play with the analysis of false syllogisms that prove absurd theses, such as "All cats are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore, Socrates is a cat - and it has four legs", Ionesco reveals the manipulative nature of propaganda and the dull nature of the ordinary person (the structural unit of the crowd), who is unable to distinguish blatant stupidity, as well as the problem of society's herd tendency to follow the majority and its ability to swallow any ideological lie as bait.

The only hero of the play, Berenger, who refuses to turn into a rhinoceros, remains alone against all. This is the absurdity and tragedy of life. It is a great play by a great author.

This play not only makes us think about the power of propaganda and the gullibility of people but also shows the importance of individuality and the courage to stand up against the crowd. It is a timeless work that continues to be relevant today.

I often ask myself

whether I really exist or not.

This question has been萦绕在我的心头 for a long time.

Sometimes, I feel like I am just a spectator in this world,

watching everything happen around me without really being a part of it.

But then, there are other times when I feel a strong sense of purpose and connection.

I wonder if these moments are just illusions or if they are a sign of my true existence.

Maybe the answer lies somewhere in between.

Maybe I am both real and not real at the same time.

Only time will tell.

I have nothing to say except that I love Ionesco <3.

Eugène Ionesco is a renowned playwright whose works have had a profound impact on the world of theater. His unique style, characterized by荒诞 (absurdity) and the exploration of the human condition, has captivated audiences and critics alike.

Ionesco's plays often challenge traditional notions of logic and reality, presenting a world that is both familiar and strange. His use of language, imagery, and symbolism creates a sense of unease and disorientation, forcing the viewer to question their own assumptions and beliefs.

Through his works, Ionesco揭示 (reveals) the hidden fears, desires, and frustrations that lie beneath the surface of our daily lives. His plays are not only entertaining but also thought-provoking, inspiring us to look at the world from a different perspective.

In conclusion, Ionesco is a master of the theater, and his works will continue to be studied and performed for generations to come. I am truly in awe of his talent and creativity.

More than 40 years ago, this was mandatory school reading. Generally speaking, it was usually a sure recipe for disliking a book ever after. However, after a recent reread, this play still remains very enjoyable, and that's truly quite something. I'm not a fan of the absurdist theatre, which is in the line of Boris Vian and the likes. But in this case, it really works. Of course, one can read this play in very different ways. To me, it is foremost about the individual who either maintains him/herself or submerges in a society that has completely got in the grip of totalitarianism. And so many years after its publication, it can also be read as a sharp critique on the rampant consumerism everywhere. Well done, Ionesco!

This play has withstood the test of time and continues to offer valuable insights. It makes us think about the power of the individual in a conformist society and the dangers of totalitarianism. The critique of consumerism is also very relevant today, as we are constantly bombarded with advertisements and messages telling us to buy more. Ionesco's use of absurdity and humor makes the play accessible and engaging, even though the themes it explores are quite serious. Overall, I would rate this play 3.5 stars.

In 1959, but with a timeless quality.

There is a progression in the story that makes you want to read the entire history in one sitting.

It offers food for thought regarding massification and homogenization.

It concludes with a beautiful statement by the protagonist that we should adopt for what we don't like and what is not a part of ourselves.

This story takes us on a journey through time, exploring various themes and ideas.

The description of the events and the characters is vivid and engaging, making it easy for the reader to immerse themselves in the narrative.

The concept of massification and homogenization is presented in a thought-provoking way, making us question our own society and the direction it is headed.

The protagonist's statement at the end serves as a powerful reminder to stay true to ourselves and to not be afraid to reject what doesn't align with our values.

Overall, this is a story that has the potential to resonate with readers on a deep level and leave a lasting impression.

This is a superb allegory that employs the absurd to discuss serious matters, such as the mechanisms of insinuation in people's minds and the recruitment of the masses towards dangerous ideologies, without actually naming them. One can see everything and its opposite in it (and that's precisely the genius of the piece)! It's an excellent read and a powerful pedagogical tool. Truly, it's worth taking a look!

The use of the absurd in this allegory adds an element of mystery and depth. It makes the reader think and question, rather than simply presenting a straightforward message. By not naming the specific ideologies, the author allows the reader to apply the concepts to various real-life situations, making it more relevant and applicable.

As a pedagogical tool, this allegory can be used to teach students about the power of persuasion, the importance of critical thinking, and the dangers of blindly following an ideology. It can also spark discussions and debates, helping students to develop their communication and analytical skills. Overall, it's a valuable piece of literature that offers both entertainment and education.

The words "Δεν θα σας ακολουθήσω, ούτε θα γίνω σαν και σας, γιατί δεν σας καταλαβαίνω. Θα παραμείνω αυτό που είμαι. Εγώ είμαι ανθρώπινο πλάσμα, ένας άνθρωπος" express a powerful stance. It shows a determination not to conform, not to follow the crowd blindly. The individual is stating that they cannot understand others and will remain true to themselves, being just a human being.

Then there is the mention of "Ο άνθρωπος κόντρα στον ιό της ρινοκερίασης. Ο άνθρωπος κόντρα σε κάθε αποκτήνωση που προσπαθεί να σου επιβληθεί ως κανονικότητα. Ο Ιονέσκο στα καλύτερά του." Here, it is about the human being in opposition to the rhinovirus, symbolizing perhaps the various challenges and diseases that come our way. But more importantly, it's about the human being's resistance against every imposition that tries to be forced upon them as the norm. Ionesco is at his best in描绘 these struggles and the individual's fight for authenticity and freedom.