**Title: "The Uniform Gathering: The Desire for Difference or Resistance against Mass Movements?"**

The play "Krigdan" by Eugène Ionesco, in my opinion, should be studied considering the time it was written. It was composed in 1959, approximately 20 years after the eruption of massive mass movements that devastated Europe with war and simultaneously with the peak of communist movements in distant parts of the world.

The story, in my view, didn't have much appeal, and for this reason, I deducted one star. However, it is a clean story, and within the core of the plot lies a more important and difficult question that, in my opinion, holds all the value of the play: "If one day all people turn into Krigdans (you can read it as conforming or becoming a supporter of a completely new value system), what is the obligation?"

In the position of speaking, it might be easy to answer that a human should preserve his "authenticity." But Eugène Ionesco is fair enough to show that in the whole city, there was only one window cleaner who chose this path. The truth is that reason selects the way of interacting with the environment. Reason desires to survive and live, and for this reason, it becomes compatible with its environment. If it didn't, humanity would have perished many times before. But it is this very reason that often becomes a slave to humans, and indeed, it is this reason that in the eruption of mass movements, each person from different segments of society adheres to a group that, in a normal state, might have completely rejected its values. In fact, all of Eugène Ionesco's art in this play is to show this problem of how different individuals with different ways of thinking ultimately, for different reasons, adhere to the group of Krigdans or the movement of "Krigdanism." Although I still believe that this has not been done with the required appeal and is truly lacking in this regard! Nevertheless, I definitely recommend it, and in my opinion, it is worth reading and thinking about.

However, one point also comes to my mind, and that is that, in my opinion, for today's reader who lives in the modern world, reading this book may also have risks. You see, the response of 20th-century humans to the events of that century was to officially recognize the differences between humans and different ways of thinking and to fight against the homogenization of society to avoid the recurrence of mass movements. While what most threatens modern humans is the excessive desire for "difference" and, even worse, the demand for the official recognition of these differences. Someone who reads the play "Krigdan" today will probably feel a sense of confidence from ridiculing and criticizing uniformity with the group, unaware that the pain of 20th-century humans was something else, and the pain of today's humans is something else. The discussion is, of course, very extensive in this regard, but in my opinion, it is better to stop here for now.

P.S: Some friends paid attention to the philosophical aspects and allusions of the book, which I didn't notice.
P.S 2: I listened to the audio play with the direction of Radnoush Moghaddam. The truth is that the quality of its execution didn't please me much.

How do people become smokers? Let's review!

It was very interesting. Naturally, I remembered a lot of jokes and besides that, I also had some insights.

Smoking is a harmful habit that can have serious consequences for one's health. There are many reasons why people start smoking. Some may do it out of curiosity, while others may be influenced by their peers or the media.

It is important to raise awareness about the dangers of smoking and encourage people to make healthy choices. This can be done through education,宣传, and providing support to those who want to quit smoking.

By taking these steps, we can help reduce the number of smokers and improve the overall health of society.

It was an amazing game.

It was as if everyone had read this game a long time ago and I was the only one who hadn't read it. I read it with a longing as if I was very late for years and I really enjoyed it.

The laws of nature where the strong crushes the weak and the very enjoyable game by Ionesco about giving the right to be human with totalitarianism and the conflict of morality and philosophy.

I finished it in one go. Those who have a problem with conformism should not miss it especially.

This game not only presents a thought-provoking story but also makes us reflect on various aspects of society and human nature.

The vivid descriptions and unique plot keep the reader engaged from beginning to end.

It is truly a remarkable work that leaves a lasting impression.

Whether you are interested in literature, philosophy, or simply enjoy a good story, this game is definitely worth reading.

I am Mishi who was born to die, and I die to be. I am writing my cup of coffee to finish it all. I go to school to complete my studies. I go to the exhibition to see its end and....

I am happy to have become acquainted with this writer. He writes about the style that I am interested in....

Mishi's words seem to carry a certain depth and mystery. Her actions, such as writing about the coffee and going to school and the exhibition, show her various pursuits in life. The fact that she is happy to know the writer indicates that there is something in the writer's works that appeals to her. Maybe it's the unique style or the profound thoughts expressed. It makes us wonder what kind of stories and emotions will unfold in her life in the future.

Overall, this short passage gives us a glimpse into Mishi's world and leaves us with a sense of curiosity and anticipation.

Well, if it were to be replicated, I would prefer Ionesco's Rhinoceros over Kafka's The Metamorphosis. At least in Rhinoceros, the rhinoceros is replicated according to its own will, and it reaches a state where when it appears in the city, everyone flees in fear, rather than being chased with nets: lol. And in the end, Rhinoceros not only doesn't go like Kafka's The Metamorphosis, but also makes the only unreplicated character in the story think about suicide.

The first act seems a bit chaotic and hard to read, but I have to admit that the interesting dialogues between the characters in this act are redeemed. The most enjoyable part for me was the last act.

There have been many interpretations and analyses written about this play by Ionesco, and with a little search on the Internet, one can find out about them.

Review of Completeness and Sufficiency of Friends.

Here, I will only add a part of the book:

Branje: Living has become something unusual.

Jean: Exactly the opposite, nothing could be more natural than this. The reason is that all people live.

Branje: The dead are much more numerous than the living. Their number increases every day. The living are rare.

Jean: I dare say that the dead don't exist at all. Ha.. Ha.. Do the dead also weigh on you? How is it possible that something that doesn't exist weighs on a person?

Branje: I actually ask myself if I exist?

Jean: You don't exist, my dear friend, because you don't think. If you think, you will be forced to admit it.

This dialogue between Branje and Jean presents an interesting perspective on life, death, and existence. It makes us question our own understanding of these concepts and challenges us to think more deeply about the nature of our being. The idea that the dead don't exist and that existence is tied to thinking is a thought-provoking one that invites further exploration and discussion.

Perhaps we should all take a moment to reflect on our own existence and consider what it truly means to be alive. Are we simply going through the motions of living, or are we actively engaging with the world around us and thinking about our place in it? These are important questions that can have a profound impact on our lives and our understanding of ourselves.

Ionesco's work is a brilliant satire that delves deep into the theme of a person's arduous struggle to uphold one's individuality in a situation where everyone around begins to blindly follow the crowd.

It is a powerful commentary on the human condition and the challenges faced when trying to maintain one's unique identity. Ionesco, through his masterful writing, has indeed struck a significant blow for individual rights and liberty in the face of authoritarian oppression.

In 1961, I was extremely privileged to witness an outstanding stage performance. The cast was remarkable, with Ralph Meeker giving a captivating portrayal as Berenger and Zero Mostel shining as Jean.

The play was a tour de force that left an indelible impression on my young and impressionable mind. It made me think deeply about the importance of being true to oneself and not succumbing to the pressures of conformity.

Even decades later, the memory of that performance still lingers, a testament to the enduring power of Ionesco's work.

The concept was not very similar to "Korean".

In fact, it had its own unique characteristics and qualities that set it apart.

While there might have been some superficial resemblances, upon closer examination, the differences became quite evident.

It was important to understand and appreciate these distinctions in order to truly grasp the essence of the concept.

Each aspect, whether it was related to culture, language, or other elements, contributed to its individuality.

By exploring and analyzing these details, one could gain a more comprehensive understanding of how it differed from the "Korean" concept and what made it special in its own right.

This recognition of the unique nature of the concept was crucial for a more accurate and in-depth exploration of its significance and implications.

Brenda: I don't like alcohol that much. But if I don't have anything, my work doesn't go well. It's like this, I'm afraid. I drink alcohol so that I'm not afraid.

Jean: Afraid of what?

Brenda: I don't really know. Of fears that can't be named. In this world, I feel uncomfortable with my own existence - among people. Well, anymore. At that time, I pour a glass to calm down. It relaxes. Forgetting comes.

Jean: You forget yourself!

Brenda: I'm tired. I've been tired for years. I've become sick of carrying the burden of my body...

Jean: This is the weakness of the nerves due to alcohol. It's the characteristic of alcoholics.

Brenda:...I always feel the existence of my body. As if it's made of lead. Or as if I'm holding someone's corpse in my arms. I'm not used to myself. I don't know if this is me or not. But as soon as I pour a glass, that burden disappears and I get to know myself again. I become myself for the second time.

*The translation by Jalal Al-e Ahmad wasn't good. It was as if Al-e Ahmad had forgotten that he was translating a play; a play that was going to be performed on the stage of the theater.*

What he said was: we must move with the times! Those were his last human words.

In this play, most of those who turn into rhinos don't do so just because they love trumpeting and stampeding. The transformations often happen for more ordinary reasons. One character wants to appear decisive to impress a potential sexual partner. Another has a desire for revenge against his employer. Yet another claims that we deserve to be happy without overly concerning ourselves with what's going on outside.

Another character tells Berenger, one of the last holdouts constantly checking in the mirror and running his finger over his nose to ensure nothing is growing there, that it's too early to tell what impact the rhinos will have on the town. After all, he just walked to Berenger's apartment and easily avoided the path of the rhinos. Furthermore, he clarifies that this is by no means an endorsement, but there is no objective proof that the human way of life is superior to that of the rhinoceros anyway.

But wait - do rhinos even trumpet? And is it the Asian or the African rhino that has two horns? Is it typical for them to travel in packs? These are some of the questions that Ionesco's characters get stuck on while the infrastructure of their town literally falls apart.

Not all the psychological traits or impulses that lead people to this transformation are negative. But it occurs to me that in normal times, our psychology, for better or worse, mostly remains our own. We have our personal burdens, ambitions, and weaknesses, and throughout life, they largely remain unresolved. However, in an authoritarian moment, they can become the reasons we give in. The temptation of becoming a rhinoceros, as Ionesco tells it, lies in its seemingly ability to accommodate any psychological need or impulse, while presenting this accommodation in the most appealing terms - sex and revenge in one interpretation, but perhaps what I meant by that was self-improvement, happiness, and the pleasure of community? The movement can even satisfy the aesthetic sense, as the appearance of the rhinos at the end of the play seems increasingly beautiful to poor Berenger, and their stampeding more rhythmic. In other words, transformation seems to be the solution not to complex social problems but to our petty individual ones. Yet what we ultimately change, perhaps irreversibly, is society.

Eugene Ionesco was born in Romania in 1909, although he spent most of his childhood in France. He seems to have shuttled back and forth between the two countries throughout much of his life. He studied French literature at the University of Bucharest before WWII and left for France in 1939. Rhinoceros would seem to be inspired by his experiences with fascism during the war. He died in 1994 - not bad in terms of longevity - and is buried in Montparnasse, in Paris. According to Wikipedia, the inscription on his grave reads, "Pray to the I don't-know-who: Jesus Christ, I hope."

This play by Ionesco delves deep into the human psyche and the impact of social and political changes. It makes us question our own values and the choices we make in the face of changing circumstances. The transformation of the characters into rhinos is a powerful metaphor for the loss of individuality and the conformist nature of society. Ionesco's use of荒诞 and absurdist elements adds to the overall impact of the play, making it a thought-provoking and engaging work of art.

In conclusion, Rhinoceros is a play that continues to resonate with audiences today. It forces us to confront our own fears, desires, and weaknesses, and to consider the consequences of our actions. Ionesco's unique vision and writing style make this play a classic of modern drama, and it will no doubt continue to be studied and performed for years to come.

"Nosorog" (1959) is one of the most significant dramatic works of Eugène Ionesco, along with "The Bald Soprano and Other Plays" (1950), "The Chairs" (1952), and others. This work is an excellent example of what absurd drama is, and Ionesco is the very founder of it.

Throughout the three acts, we follow the main character, Jean, and his surroundings that change due to the appearance of a rhinoceros. In the first act, society is initially caught off guard by their appearance, denying that they have seen anything like a rhinoceros on the streets at all. But when the rhinoceros passes by a second time, a general debate arises about whether it is a rhinoceros at all, and if so, whether it is an African or Asian rhinoceros, and whether it might be the same rhinoceros that passed by twice, and so on. In the second act, we see that the appearance of the rhinoceros has become widespread and that now entire herds can be seen on the streets. In the third act, we witness the transformation of Jean's friend into one of the rhinoceroses. In the fourth act, the only people left are Daisy and Jean, who spend several years separated from the rhinoceroses. But in the end, Daisy decides to leave him and join the herd, leaving Jean as the only human.

The characteristics of absurd drama are the twists that most often occur several times within one scene, emphasizing the senselessness of the action and human behavior. The first and most obvious absurdity is, of course, the fact that a person suddenly transforms and becomes a rhinoceros. Each subsequent absurdity seems more obvious to us, although it is still absurd - ignoring the appearance of the rhinoceros even though it has passed by all those present, dialogues that are held to justify such a sudden appearance of the rhinoceros, the actions of the protagonist, all the way to the fact that the number of rhinoceroses increases at a rapid pace.

The themes that Eugène Ionesco deals with are themes that depict the hopelessness and alienation of man from society. Here we see an ideal example of Jean, who very clearly said that he saw a rhinoceros and had no doubts about what its appearance could mean. But at that moment, he does not feel the understanding of his friends and acquaintances. The way Jean felt is precisely the representation of a person who experienced the beginning and rise of Nazism in Germany. Turning a blind eye, frowning at the problem and ignoring it, and then secretly joining the movement, created a devastating force that in one moment became so strong and powerful that it wiped out not only a large number of dissenters but also completely innocent lives because according to some criteria, they were not suitable.

The theme of "Nosorog" could not be more relevant in our environment at this moment - we observe the strengthening of the movement and parties for which "no one votes", but they are the majority in the elections and win. As the biggest problem, Ionesco indicates the "rhinoceroses with hats" who, for the most diverse reasons, not only frown and in that way contribute but also justify this problem and tacitly support it. It is okay for them to introduce press laws and regulations, but only as long as no one touches them and as long as they can live and work undisturbed.

It is more than an excellent moment for all of us to reexamine and ask ourselves what we should do.

The performance was truly amazing. It was not just a regular show but something that left a lasting impression.

Unlike before, this time it was not just a sad or melancholy one. Instead, it was terrifying and made the audience feel sorry.

I have that book which I will read again later.

I don't follow you. I'm not like you guys.

It's interesting how different our perspectives can be. Maybe we should try to understand each other better.

Overall, it was a great experience that I will always remember.