Banger, Strindberg knows what's up. This statement implies that Strindberg has a deep understanding or awareness of something significant. It could refer to his knowledge in a particular field, his perception of human nature, or his understanding of a complex situation. Strindberg was a renowned Swedish playwright, novelist, and painter, known for his intense and often controversial works. His writing explored themes such as love, power, and the human psyche. Perhaps the phrase "Strindberg knows what's up" is a nod to his ability to penetrate the surface and揭示 the deeper truths beneath. It could also suggest that he was ahead of his time in his thinking and had insights that were not widely recognized or understood. Overall, this simple statement packs a punch and leaves us wondering just what it is that Strindberg knows.

I know that Strindberg was a crazy misogynist and Miss Julie is basically a caricature of everything he hated about women. But I don't know, I sympathized with her. And he writes well. I would have liked to see it on stage. I always think it's a bit difficult to read plays.

Strindberg's works often contain complex and controversial themes. In "Miss Julie," his misogynistic views are clearly presented through the character of Miss Julie. However, despite this, I found myself sympathizing with her. Maybe it's because of her tragic fate or her struggle against the constraints of society.

Although Strindberg's writing style is not always easy to understand, I appreciate his ability to create vivid characters and intense dramas. I believe that seeing "Miss Julie" on stage would bring a different perspective and make it easier to understand the play's meaning.

In conclusion, while I may not agree with Strindberg's views, I can still appreciate his talent as a writer. I look forward to seeing more of his works performed on stage in the future.

This is Swedish playwright August Strindberg’s 1888 naturalistic play. It is set in the kitchen of the manor estate of a Swedish Count on Midsommer’s Eve and Day.

Midsommer is a traditional European celebration of summer, which takes place on the Summer Solstice or St. John’s Eve and Day.

The play focuses on the relationship between the Count’s daughter, the willful and high-strung Miss Julie, and the rugged and experienced valet named Jean. The entire play unfolds in the kitchen and is mainly a two-person dialogue, except for parts involving Catherine, the Count’s cook and Jean’s fiancée, who is cooking at the onstage stove in the opening scene.

I really enjoyed this quick read. It is perhaps most significant as the primary example of naturalistic writing and drama, a mode of writing that I am partial to. Currently, I am reading my 9th novel by Emile Zola, the major proponent of naturalism, who came up with the three principles of naturalistic drama known as la nouvelle formule.

Faire vrai - the play should be realistic, non-flamboyant, and firmly grounded in human behavior and psychology.

Faire grand - the conflicts in the play should be of meaningful, life-altering significance.

Faire simple – a simple plot uncluttered with sub-plots and lengthy expositions.

This play meets all these criteria. Its significant conflict lies in the lower-class Jean having relations with the upper-class Miss Julie, something not as common in drama before that time. I thought the dialogue was well-written, clear, and realistic enough to reflect the tension between these strong individuals. The tension between them is indeed meaningful and life-altering. However, the play’s biggest drawback is that, due to the themes addressed in later dramas and novels, it feels a bit dated. Nevertheless, aside from that, it is still effective in evoking some of the themes and emotions that prevailed at the time, and I was still able to enjoy it.

I rate it as 4 stars.

This ain't no Shakespeare. // read for school.

It's a simple statement that holds a certain truth. When we think of Shakespeare, we envision masterpieces filled with complex characters, profound themes, and beautiful language. However, not everything we read for school has to reach that lofty standard.

Sometimes, the materials we encounter may be more straightforward or less polished. But that doesn't mean they are without value. They can still teach us important lessons, expand our knowledge, and help us develop our reading and critical thinking skills.

We should approach all the reading we do for school with an open mind and a willingness to learn. Even if it's not Shakespeare, there is still something to be gained from it. After all, every piece of writing has the potential to offer us a new perspective or a different way of looking at the world.

So, the next time you pick up a book or an article for school, don't be too quick to dismiss it because it's not Shakespeare. Give it a chance, and you might be surprised at what you discover.

If ever I thought there'd be someone I think I'd hate should I ever meet, I can clearly say it'd be Strindberg.

In his play, he makes the astonishing claim that a woman raised independent and strong is an unnatural creature.

According to Strindberg, such a woman will only find resolution by making a fatal mistake and taking her own life.

Needless to say, this perspective is completely at odds with my own beliefs and values.

I firmly believe that women should be free to pursue independence and strength without being labeled as unnatural.

The idea that a woman's only path to resolution is through self-destruction is not only deeply disturbing but also a gross misrepresentation of the capabilities and potential of women.

I don't think Strindberg and I would get along at all, as our views on this fundamental issue are so diametrically opposed.

It is clear that his ideas are a product of a different era and mindset, and I am grateful to live in a time when women are increasingly empowered and able to define themselves on their own terms.

Jag har tidigare underskattat Strindberg på grund av hur han beskrivs som kvinnohatare. I förordet till Fröken Julie står det klart att mannen enligt honom har mer välutvecklade sinnen och bättre initiativförmåga, vilket visar att han nedvärderar kvinnor. Men, vilket man gjorde inte detta på 1800-talet? (Inte Ibsen.) Han var intresserad av samma saker som jag är. (Kanske hade jag gjort samma felaktiga bedömning om jag levde i hans tid. Vem vet?) Jag uppskattar hur han lyfter olika perspektiv av makt och hur de samverkar med klass, sexualitet, ägande, frihet, respektabilitet osv.

Att Julies psykiska ohälsa skulle bero på att hon är halvman/halvkvinna tror jag förstås inte. Och slutet känns tveksamt. Men jag uppskattar hur pjäsen ger upphov till många intressanta diskussionsfrågor. I textanalysen ser vi att betjänten Jean, vars namn leder tankarna till Frankrike och en viss flärd, inleder dramat genom att komma in på scenen. Han berättar för kokerskan, som också är hans fästmö, att fröken Julie är galen denna midsommarafton. Detta väcker läsarens uppmärksamhet på ett dramatisk sätt.

På scenen, som föreställer ett kök från den tiden, står Kristin redan vid spisen när ridån går upp. De två börjar sedan skvallra om sin härskarinna. Replikväxlingen informerar oss om att Julies pappa greven är bortrest, att Julie har avbrutit en förlovning och ger också upplysningar om karaktärerna. Jean vill höja sig över övriga tjänstefolk genom att välja vin istället för öl. Det performativa förmedlar initialt hierarkin där Kristin står under Jean och båda tillhör tjänstefolket, kuvade under Julie. Kristin, en statisk karaktär, är intersektionellt drabbad av att tillhöra både låg klass och kvinnokön.

Julie representerar överklassen och förefaller bortskämd. I spelanvisningarna ska hon bete sig kokett och visar ingen förståelse för kokerskans trötthet. Intrigen är flätad kring fröken Julie, en rund karaktär som förändras under dramats gång. Först koketterar och lockar hon Jean, men efter att han manipulerar henne följer hon med in på hans rum. Här sker en förändring av maktförhållandena och de förolämpar varandra. Istället för att resa iväg tillsammans bryter Julie ihop inför sin maktlöshet och lyder Jean, som ber henne gå ut med en rakkniv i handen.

En tydlig peripeti sker efter att de varit inne på hans kammare. Vad som sker där inne är en tolkningsfråga. Det sker i en slags paus, och de kliver av scenen som ersätts av balettdansare som iscensätter festande tjänstefolk. Detta leder tankarna till en dionysosfest där sexuella aktiviteter också var en del. Strax innan hörs en kör i bakgrunden, vilket gör att denna tragedi påminner om ett gammalt grekiskt drama med körer närvarande. Kanske har Strindberg, liksom Aristoteles, hoppats att katharsis ska uppnås.

När Julie återkommer till det ödelagda köket, en symbol för hennes förlorade respektabilitet och förfall, börjar hon med att pudra sitt ansikte. Med tanke på hur de två berörda uttrycker sig efteråt, tillsammans med min litterära erfarenhet av fabeln: förförelse, sex, förfall, död, står det klart för mig att de hade samlag. Kvinnan (Julie) erkänner mannens (Jeans) bild av henne som smutsig, vilket manifesteras med smuts i hennes ansikte, och hon orkar inte bära skammen och skulden det medför.

Det finns många symboler och luckor i texten som lämnar utrymme för tolkning. Julies två djur, den sjuka hunden Paula som jagar efter mopshanen och fågeln i sin bur, symboliserar en slags förlängning av Julie själv. När fågeln slipper ur sin bur är det för att halshuggas, av Jean vilket antyder Julies kommande öde. Jeans och Julies drömmar står också för en tydlig symbolik. Hon sitter uppe på en piedestal, längtar ner på marken och ner i jorden (metaforisk beskrivning för dödslängtan), medan han ligger på marken och inte kan komma upp. Jean vill klättra i de ekonomiska och sociala hierarkierna, vilket trädet är en metafor för. Grenen han beträdde visade sig vara rutten, en slags naturbesjälning då grenen symboliserar Julie.

Ett av motiven med dramat är att kritisera klassystemet. Ett annat tema är skillnaden mellan könen. Texten i detta dramat slår ett slag för den så kallade kvinnliga naturen som var populär på 1800-talet. Detta förmedlas tydligt av spelanvisningarna då Julie ska tala ”blygt, sant kvinnligt” och ”elegiskt”. Det borgerliga kvinnoidealet råder, vilket innebär att kvinnan för att bli hel bör gifta sig och skaffa barn, vara mannens motsats som känslig, passiv och svag utan sexlust. Fröken Julie, ogift som titeln belyser, hysterisk, irrationell, uppfostrad av en kvinnosakskvinna med aptit på dans (sex?) och alkohol, ansågs osund.

Jeans lust däremot ter sig naturlig, den liknas vid en eld vilken Julie avråds leka med. Jean antyder utan skam att han haft tillfälliga förbindelser tidigare. Kvinnorna framstår som arketyperna horan och madonnan, presenterade i en slags antites. Kristin, med sitt namn och sedlighet, representerar kristna ideal som alluderar på bibeln och står i djup kontrast till Julie, som sett ur dåtidens samhälleliga kontext med en galen mamma av låg börd helt saknar dygd. Till detta kommer att Julie har sina ”tider nu” (metafor för menstruation), vilket ansågs skamligt. Jean får oväntat komma till, han får metaforiskt beskrivet ”se höken på ryggen”. Detta gör att tjänstefolket förlorar respekten för sin härskarinna och hon faller, precis som i sin dröm, ner från piedestalen ända ner i jorden. Hon frågar i en replik om det finns någon räddning för henne. Jeans svar är nej. Finalen då Julie dör är kontextuellt det enda rimliga straffet för en naturvidrig kvinna som hon. Allegoriskt handlar stycket om att som kvinna veta sin plats, vilket kan vara en anledning till att dramat fortfarande idag spelas flitigt.

I am tired of Strindberg's plays and Swedish teachers.

I am tired of normalized misogyny through classic literature.

In general, I am just tired.

Every time I encounter Strindberg's works in the classroom, it feels like a never-ending cycle of the same old themes that seem to perpetuate negative views of women. The Swedish teachers, instead of challenging these harmful portrayals, often seem to accept them as part of the literary canon without much critical examination.

Classic literature, while having its merits, also has its dark side. The normalization of misogyny within it is something that I can no longer ignore or tolerate. It makes me question the values and perspectives that have been passed down through the ages.

Overall, this weariness has seeped into my general attitude towards literature and education. I long for a more inclusive and diverse literary landscape that does not marginalize or devalue half of the population.

Inimigos e amantes, Júlia e João são um produto do seu tempo.

Both are victims of circumstances, prisoners of their weak nature, examples of the difference between classes.

Júlia learned from her mother to hate men. She is ridiculed and criticized by those around her, who see her as an eccentric. João is a liar of double character, lives worried about his reputation, wants to climb in life and sees in Júlia - the daughter of the Count - a means to an end.

We follow their (intentionally) incoherent dialogues, the themes changing at a dizzying speed, a consequence of the little attention they pay to each other's words. And seduced by this conflicted romance that unfolds before us, when we realize it is already too late, everything collapses. João realizes that the branch he chose as the first to climb in life was actually rotten. Júlia, tired and without strength, sees no solution other than the last exit from the scene “Não posso arrepender-me, não posso fugir, não posso ficar, não quero viver…nem morrer” – 77.

It is remarkable the skill that Strindberg has to, in few words, leave us with so many ideas and images, astutely transmitting to us all the multiplicity he intended, leaving us inside the goals, hopes, fears and motives of his characters. The energy with which he writes and the economy of words with which he does it push us quickly to an end that, seeming to us that it comes too soon, has a truly disturbing concretization.

The play "Julie" by the Swedish author August Strindberg
It is my first encounter with Swedish literature

\\n  \\n

Actually, the world is filled with love, but is its quantity sufficient to combat all the evils within us?

To what extent can external appearances deceive us so that circumstances change suddenly, and we find ourselves in an unexpected situation just a few hours later... In one night, starting with laughter and ending with fear, pain, tears, and deadly humiliation?

\\n  \\n

When we imprison ourselves in a beautiful box... When we live like cage birds, we don't know our past, we don't know our future, we can't predict the next moment, and we can never anticipate our situation after a few minutes... When we live like this, how can we, as humans, determine our destiny or understand our reality?

How can a ray of love and dignity find its way among the ruins of the past, the chaos of the present, and the fog of the future?
....
Julie, how did the situation deteriorate for you like this in one night?

This thoroughly nasty play truly functions extremely well on the stage, even when presented by casts that are less than outstanding.

It is highly recommended that one should not simply read "Miss Julie." Instead, it is advisable to go and witness it being performed. Productions of this play are still rather frequent, providing ample opportunities for audiences to experience its power and intensity.

If, for some reason, there are no live performances available in the vicinity, then one can always download one of the versions that are accessible on Netflix.

Moreover, there is exciting news for fans of the play as a new "Miss Julie" movie starring Colin Farrell is set to be released in the Fall. This new adaptation is bound to bring a fresh perspective and interpretation to this classic work, generating anticipation and excitement among theater enthusiasts and moviegoers alike.

Boy meets girl. Girl seduces boy. Boy devises a plan to elope with girl. However, boy chops off the head of girl's pet bird. Subsequently, boy changes his mind. Devastated, girl takes her own life. For some unfathomable reason, Hollywood has never wholeheartedly adopted this formula. I simply can't fathom why not.

[Original review, 2008]

My late grandmother-in-law was an extraordinary, larger-than-life personality. She seemed as if she had walked right out of Fanny och Alexander. Her family had a distant connection to that of Strindberg's first wife. And until the day she passed away, she firmly refused to read any of his books, stating, "because he behaved so abominably towards poor Siri von Essen".

__________________

[Update, Apr 25 2023]



A few days ago, we witnessed Goodwood Theatre's rendition of Miss Julie. I found it to be outstanding, yet I was perplexed as hardly a single line seemed familiar. It had been a long time since I last perused the play, but could my memory of it have deteriorated to such an extent?

Upon rereading a copy of the original text that I discovered online here, I realized that I hadn't recognized any of the lines because they were all new. The director had made the audacious decision to discard everything except the characters and the fundamental dynamics of the story and begin anew. And it succeeds splendidly: it's the finest production of Fröken Julie I've ever beheld. For a twenty-first-century audience, it's far superior to the original, which has become somewhat challenging to relate to even for Swedish people. The characters converse in a strange, old-fashioned language that has long since vanished, addressing each other in the formal third person, with every other sentence containing a French word and constantly being tormented by their nineteenth-century Scandinavian interpretation of Lutheranism. All of this has been mercilessly excised, and the play is all the better for it.

Translation is indeed such a difficult endeavor.

I can no longer do it!

I can't regret, can't flee, can't stay, can't live - can't die!

Help me!

Command me, and I will obey like a dog!

This is highly recommended.

It seems that the person is in a state of extreme confusion and helplessness. They feel trapped and unable to make any decisions or take any actions.

The plea for help and the willingness to obey like a dog show the depth of their desperation.

Perhaps they have reached a breaking point and need someone to guide them and give them clear instructions.

It is a powerful and poignant statement that evokes a sense of empathy and concern for the person's situation.

Highly recommended because it can make the reader think about the human condition and the challenges that we all face in life.