I didn't realize this was a play, and I'm not a fan of plays for several reasons.

First, the format is distracting as it's extremely hard to keep track of who's talking.

Second, the list of actors at the beginning of the play is very limited. There are no descriptions of the characters, making it arduous to follow who's who just by reading the play. I have to constantly switch between the actors and the content, which is truly annoying.

The play is about truth versus lies and human dignity.

I didn't like the first act. There were an excessive number of actors, and I couldn't fathom what they were doing. It seemed as if they were merely talking, and I couldn't discern the point of it. However, after the first act, it became clearer, and I started to enjoy the play more.

In general, I didn't have a favorable impression of the play. It had an overabundance of unnecessary talk, movement, and drinking. There wasn't a distinct protagonist, and all the actors seemed to be vying for the role of the protagonist. I initially thought Luka was the protagonist, but I was mistaken.

Overall, while the play had its moments of clarity and enjoyment after the first act, the drawbacks such as the distracting format, lack of character descriptions, and excessive elements made it a less than satisfying experience for me.

This compelling 1902 play, which opened in Moscow, is widely regarded as Gorky's masterpiece.

However, Chekhov thought its tone was too gloomy and oppressive.

The play centers around a diverse group of struggling and often desperate characters.

There is a greedy landlord and his wife, a young thief, a street walker, a mysterious pilgrim, an actor, a former baron, a shoe maker, a policeman, a street vendor, and others.

These characters congregate to play cards, engage in fights, tell stories, and debate an important question: whether it is better to live without illusions (realism) or to maintain a romanticized worldview (idealism).

This is a powerful and influential drama that has been highly praised for its realistic and memorable characterizations.

It offers a deep and thought-provoking exploration of the human condition and the choices we make in life.

The play's vivid portrayal of these complex characters and their interactions makes it a truly engaging and captivating work of art.

Even today, it continues to resonate with audiences and critics alike, cementing its place as a classic of Russian literature.

BUBNOFF [to SATINE]. What are you grunting about? [SATINE keeps on grunting]

It is always refreshing to encounter a piece of writing that delves into the topic of suffering without resorting to the tired trope of excusing the harsh reality of it through some fairy tale-like narrative about how hardship makes one a better person. In this context, hardship is not presented as a mere stumbling block on a hero's journey. Instead, it is depicted as a persistent and unyielding condition, specifically the social conditions endured by the working class. This unrelenting hardship gives rise to misery, which in turn molds miserable individuals, and these individuals together form the lower depths of society.

For socialist realism, this portrayal is truly bleak. Gorky is crystal clear about the role that material conditions play in the impoverishment and degradation of the working class. However, interestingly, for these characters, there seems to be no glimmer of hope or any path towards emancipatory politics. They are mired in a continuous string of petty miseries, which are occasionally exacerbated when combined with fleeting social hopes. Of course, for someone who is not me, this might make for a rather tedious read, and it could be frustrating for those seeking a different kind of socialist realism. But for me, when taken as an artistic whole, it is deeply fulfilling.

People, you just can't understand them! It's not clear who is good and who is bad.

And even if you understand, what will you do? Every person lives as their soul endures... If you look, one day they are good and the next day they have become bad.

It's a complex world out there, full of contradictions and uncertainties. We often try to label people as good or bad, but in reality, it's not that simple. People's actions and behaviors can change depending on various factors, such as their emotions, circumstances, and past experiences.

So, instead of judging others so harshly, maybe we should try to be more understanding and empathetic. We should realize that everyone has their own struggles and challenges, and that sometimes, people may do things that seem bad to us, but may make sense to them in their own minds. After all, we are all human, and we all make mistakes.

Quotations that I really like from this wonderful, mysterious and very sad play

--

Bill: Does God exist?

Luke: God exists if you believe in His existence and does not exist if you don't believe in His existence. What we believe in is what exists.

--

"What is most beautiful in a human being, what is most powerful in the dream of this word is from greatness... the human being! The human being must be a place of respect and not a place of pity. For pity is contemptible."

--

Translation by Abdel Halim al-Bashlawi

The more I engage with plays that center around naturalism, the more acutely I become aware that it isn't a style that holds a special allure for me.

This particular play suffered from a lack of a clear and defined plot. It trailed after several characters, but their personalities seemed to blend and merge, especially considering that their names were so alike.

However, it must be noted that the play does provide a thought-provoking analysis of social structures that contribute to the persistence of poverty and crime. It delves deep into themes of morality and companionship, which have the power to make one stop and think. Additionally, the concept of truth is constantly being put to the test, presenting a worldview that is both distinct and captivating.

Nevertheless, in the final analysis, I have no inclination to read this play again, nor would I feel compelled to recommend it to others.

In the end, poverty is no longer the title of the cage, but life itself. The cage in which all these people gather, the cruel and the kind, the strong and the weak, the wise and the pious... It is not a cage of poverty but a cage of life. And perhaps the symbol of the cage is the essence of life, this nothingness, in property, lineage, and dignity based on material power.

Let the struggle be more evident: when your means are few, or your means are extremely lacking, your test is harder, but it is the same test in essence that the one with great means is subjected to: the test of respect, as Jorky sees it. You must respect yourself, in the simplest and broadest form that can encompass the truth.

"What is man? He is not you, nor I, nor they... No, he is you, and I, and they, and the old man, and the billionaire, and Muhammad. All in one (he draws the shape of a man in the air with his hand). Do you understand? It is a wonderful thing! It contains all beginnings and all endings. Everything exists in man, and everything exists for man. There is nothing but man, and everything that is outside of him is made by his hands and his mind. Man! How amazing he is! In his name there is a wonderful resonance! Man! We must respect man, not pity him or underestimate his worth... To respect him, this is our duty. So let's drink the essence of man, Baron. There is nothing more beautiful than for one of us to feel that he is a man. I am a prisoner, a fighter, and a cheat... All of this is true. And when I walk in the street, people look at me with a strange look... They pass by me and then turn around... And often they say to me: Oh criminal! Oh bastard! Get a job!... Why? (He laughs) I always despise their first goal in life, which is to feel content... All of this has no value, Baron... No value! Because man is nobler than this! Man is nobler than contentment!."

This is a very profound play, and I think everyone will interpret it in their own way and differently.

Maxim Gorky himself decoded it like this: "The play is against comforting lies."

Each person's perception and understanding of the play may vary based on their own life experiences, values, and perspectives.

Some may focus on the characters and their relationships, while others may be more interested in the themes and messages conveyed.

The play likely challenges the audience to question the nature of truth and falsehood, and to consider the consequences of believing in comforting lies.

It may also encourage viewers to look beyond the surface and seek a deeper understanding of the human condition.

Overall, this play seems to have the potential to引发 deep思考 and discussion among its audiences.

3.5

"There's a girl sitting out there in the kitchen reading a book and crying. Really crying. [...]I says to her: 'What is it, dearie?' and she says: 'The poor man!' And I says: 'What man?' 'Here in the book,' she says."(p.124)


The translation I read of this play was serviceable, but I suspect a different one might have enhanced my reading experience. From other reviews, it seems this translation strays from Gorky's original style. However, thematically, 'The Lower Depths' still has much to offer and has endured through time due to its subject matter and philosophical musings.


Plot-wise, we follow a group of society's outcasts during a short period, witnessing their squalid living conditions and the bleakness of their prospects. The central theme is the role of hope and optimism in the face of dire poverty. Each character explores different ways of escaping, either literally or figuratively.


Luka, an aging pilgrim, arrives and encourages the escapism of the others. He brings a call for kindness, as seen in his story of the two thieves. But the moral and philosophy here become murky. While hope and compassion are both important, only one can make a material difference, and it's not hope.


Another character claims the uncomfortable truth is more valuable than the comforting lie. But in a society without a social safety net, what else do these people have but fantasy? Is the truth then an unnecessary cruelty? On the other hand, if people remain in the comforting lie, they may never push for systemic improvement. But is it the responsibility of the most downtrodden to revolt?


As the curtain falls, three main characters are dead, leaving us with many questions. The play's relevance today is striking, with issues like addiction, homelessness, and refugees still prevalent. Looking at my unhoused neighbors, I wonder how I can blame them for choosing the comforting lie when society despises them.


The bleakness of 'The Lower Depths' is like Caliban's rage at seeing his own face. The question of whether the downtrodden should abandon their lies is a distraction. The real solution to poverty is a society built on collective compassion, not punishment and individualism. There is much to think about.

Непроглядность и неприглядность ада человеческой души. These are the aspects that often lurk within the human psyche, hidden beneath the veneer of civilization. The unseeable and unappealing nature of the human soul's inferno can manifest in various ways. It might be the darkness of envy that consumes one's thoughts, the ugliness of hatred that poisons relationships, or the murkiness of greed that drives people to act in immoral ways.

We often try to ignore or suppress these aspects, but they continue to exist and influence our actions and decisions. It is only by acknowledging their presence and working to overcome them that we can hope to purify our souls and lead more fulfilling lives.

Perhaps through self-reflection, meditation, or acts of kindness, we can begin to shine a light on the hidden corners of our souls and transform the unseeable and unappealing into something beautiful and pure.

The play is really unique. There isn't a single hero or even a central event around which everything revolves. The main idea is to narrate the misfortunes of a group of characters. What's remarkable is that in a single scene, there are so many dialogues between almost all the heroes. As I was reading it, I felt like I was one of them, running around, playing with the dice, full of enthusiasm and not wanting to back down!

I don't want to have any hesitation, feeling, or dialogue that makes me feel like someone else!

Despite all these shortcomings, the play is wonderful. It depicts the characters in a more vivid way, so that in the end, you can't help but empathize with them and feel sorry for all of them.

Five stars without any discussion...

The Lower Depths is a work that is typical of Gorky, much like his short stories, as it delves into the lives of the lowly and outcasts of society.

I believe this is a great play, although perhaps not on the same level as the truly greatest such as Oedipus Rex, King Lear, or A Long Day's Journey into Night.

Nevertheless, Gorky was a worthy contemporary and successor of Chekhov, excelling in both drama and the short story.

I am currently reading Gorky's Collected Stories and finding them fascinating, yet not quite as outstanding as Chekhov's short story work.

One can describe Gorky's style as raw, in contrast to Chekhov's refined and subtle approach.

A typical example of Gorky's short stories is "Red," which is about a pimp who was extremely cruel to his prostitutes.

Gorky's works may not be for the overly fastidious, but they are suitable for those with more diverse tastes in literature.