What do you think?
Rate this book
噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貙 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 賳賯丿蹖 丕夭 丕爻鬲蹖賵賳 丕趩 诏蹖賱
噩卮賳賽 鬲賵賱丿貙 蹖讴 賳賲丕蹖卮 賳丕賲賴貙 蹖讴 賳賯丿 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝団€屫й� 丕夭 賴丕乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇(鄄郯郯鄹-郾酃鄢郯)貙 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗁堐屫� 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖 亘乇賳丿賴 噩丕蹖夭賴 賳賵亘賱 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 賳賯丿蹖 丕夭 丕爻鬲蹖賵賳 丕趩. 诏蹖賱 丕爻鬲. 丕蹖賳 丕孬乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賲賵賮賯鈥屫臂屬� 丌孬丕乇 倬蹖賳鬲乇 丕爻鬲
亘丕 賵乇賵丿 丿賵 賲爻鬲兀噩乇 睾乇蹖亘賴 丿乇 禺丕賳賴鈥屫й� 爻丕丨賱蹖貙 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 讴賵趩讴蹖 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 丿乇賵賳賲丕蹖賴鈥屫й� 賳賲丕丿蹖賳 賵 胤賳夭 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 亘丕 毓賳丕氐乇蹖 丕夭 丕亘賴丕賲 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賵 丕亘賴丕賲 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 賵 賲讴丕賳 賴賲乇丕賴 丕爻鬲. 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 賲乇丿蹖 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賲鬲氐丿蹖 氐賳丿賱蹖鈥屬囏й� 蹖讴 丕爻鬲乇丕丨鬲鈥屭з� 爻丕丨賱蹖 丿乇 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賲爻乇 丕賵貙 夭賳 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱賴鈥屰� 卮賱禺鬲賴鈥屫й� 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 芦倬丕賳爻蹖賵賳鈥屫簇з喡� 乇丕 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 蹖讴 倬蹖丕賳蹖爻鬲 爻丕亘賯 讴賴 賲爻鬲兀噩乇 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屰� 丌賳鈥屬囏ж池� 賵 丿禺鬲乇 讴賲丕亘蹖卮 亘蹖爻鬲鈥屫池з勝団€屫й� 讴賴 賴賲爻丕蹖賴鈥屫簇з� 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賲趩賳蹖賳 蹖讴 蹖賴賵丿蹖 倬賳噩丕賴 爻丕賱賴 賵 蹖讴 讴卮蹖卮 芦鬲丕夭賴 禺賱毓 賱亘丕爻鈥屫簇嚶� 賳蹖夭 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 賴爻鬲賳丿.
亘丕 賵乇賵丿 丿賵 賲爻鬲兀噩乇 睾乇蹖亘賴 丿乇 禺丕賳賴鈥屫й� 爻丕丨賱蹖貙 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 讴賵趩讴蹖 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 丿乇賵賳賲丕蹖賴鈥屫й� 賳賲丕丿蹖賳 賵 胤賳夭 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 亘丕 毓賳丕氐乇蹖 丕夭 丕亘賴丕賲 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賵 丕亘賴丕賲 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 賵 賲讴丕賳 賴賲乇丕賴 丕爻鬲. 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 賲乇丿蹖 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱賴 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賲鬲氐丿蹖 氐賳丿賱蹖鈥屬囏й� 蹖讴 丕爻鬲乇丕丨鬲鈥屭з� 爻丕丨賱蹖 丿乇 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賲爻乇 丕賵貙 夭賳 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱賴鈥屰� 卮賱禺鬲賴鈥屫й� 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 芦倬丕賳爻蹖賵賳鈥屫簇з喡� 乇丕 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 蹖讴 倬蹖丕賳蹖爻鬲 爻丕亘賯 讴賴 賲爻鬲兀噩乇 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屰� 丌賳鈥屬囏ж池� 賵 丿禺鬲乇 讴賲丕亘蹖卮 亘蹖爻鬲鈥屫池з勝団€屫й� 讴賴 賴賲爻丕蹖賴鈥屫簇з� 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賲趩賳蹖賳 蹖讴 蹖賴賵丿蹖 倬賳噩丕賴 爻丕賱賴 賵 蹖讴 讴卮蹖卮 芦鬲丕夭賴 禺賱毓 賱亘丕爻鈥屫簇嚶� 賳蹖夭 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮鈥屬嗀з呝� 賴爻鬲賳丿.
234 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1957
105 people are currently reading
7,627 people want to read
About the author
Harold Pinter
361听books767听followersHarold Pinter was a British playwright, screenwriter, director and actor. A Nobel Prize winner, Pinter was one of the most influential modern British dramatists with a writing career that spanned more than 50 years. His best-known plays include The Birthday Party (1957), The Homecoming (1964) and Betrayal (1978), each of which he adapted for the screen. His screenplay adaptations of others' works include The Servant (1963), The Go-Between (1971), The French Lieutenant's Woman (1981), The Trial (1993) and Sleuth (2007). He also directed or acted in radio, stage, television and film productions of his own and others' works.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 486 reviews
July 28, 2020
The Birthday Party, Harold Pinter
The Birthday Party (1957) is the second full-length play by Harold Pinter. It is one of his best-known and most frequently performed plays.
In the setting of a rundown seaside boarding house, a little birthday party is turned into a nightmare on the unexpected arrival of two sinister strangers.
The play has been classified as a comedy of menace, characterised by Pinteresque elements such as ambiguous identity, confusions of time and place, and dark political symbolism.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 亘蹖爻鬲賲 賲丕賴 丌賵乇蹖賱 爻丕賱 2004 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貙 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 賳賯丿蹖 丕夭 丕爻鬲蹖賵賳 丕趩 诏蹖賱貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 賴丕乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇貨 賲鬲乇噩賲 卮毓賱賴 丌匕乇貨 賲卮禺氐丕鬲 賳卮乇 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 丕賮乇丕夭貙 趩丕倬 賳禺爻鬲 1385貙 丿乇 234氐貨 卮丕亘讴 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 丿乇 爻丕賱 1388貨 卮丕亘讴 9789647640978貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖 - 爻丿賴 20賲
噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貨 丿賵賲蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 蹖 亘賱賳丿賽 芦賴丕乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇禄貙 賵 丕夭 倬乇 丕噩乇丕鬲乇蹖賳 賵 賲卮賴賵乇鬲乇蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳爻鬲.貨 芦噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿禄貙 賳禺爻鬲 亘丕 賵丕讴賳卮 鬲賳丿 賲賳鬲賯丿丕賳貙 賲賵丕噩賴 卮丿貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丌爻鬲丕賳賴鈥� 蹖 卮讴爻鬲 賲胤賱賯 鬲噩丕乇蹖貙 賵 丕丿亘蹖貙 賳賯丿 芦賴丕乇賵賱丿 賴丕亘爻賵賳禄 丿乇 芦爻丕賳丿蹖 鬲丕蹖賲夭禄貙 賳噩丕鬲卮 丿丕丿貙 賵 亘賴 賲乇賵乇貙 噩丕蹖诏丕賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丕孬乇蹖 讴賱丕爻蹖讴貙 丿乇 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 賲丿乇賳 亘賴 丿爻鬲 丌賵乇丿.貨 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貙 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 丕蹖 爻鬲貙 丿乇亘丕乇賴 蹖 芦丕爻鬲賳賱蹖 賵賽亘賽乇禄貙 倬蹖丕賳賵賳賵丕夭 倬蹖卮蹖賳貙 讴賴 丿乇 賲爻丕賮乇禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 讴賵趩讴貙 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�.貨 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕賮乇禺丕賳賴貙 讴賴 丿乇 卮賴乇蹖 爻丕丨賱蹖貙 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕賸 丿乇 爻賵丕丨賱 噩賳賵亘蹖貙 賵 丿乇 賮丕氐賱賴 賳賴 趩賳丿丕賳 丿賵乇 丕夭 芦賱賳丿賳禄貙 賵丕賯毓 卮丿賴貙 鬲賵爻胤 芦賲诏禄貙 賵 芦倬鬲蹖 亘賵賱夭禄貙 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丿賵 睾乇蹖亘賴 蹖 卮乇賵乇貙 讴賴 胤亘賯 賯乇丕乇 賲毓賱賵賲 亘賴賳诏丕賲 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 丕賵 丌賲丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿貙 賵 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖鈥屫必池� 亘賴 丿賳亘丕賱 丕賵 賴爻鬲賳丿貨 丌賳賴丕貙 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿賽貙 亘賴 馗丕賴乇 丌乇丕賲貙 賵 亘蹖 禺胤乇 丕賵 乇丕貙 讴賴 芦賲诏禄 亘乇丕蹖卮 诏乇賮鬲賴貙 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻 鬲亘丿蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁嗀�
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 06/05/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
The Birthday Party (1957) is the second full-length play by Harold Pinter. It is one of his best-known and most frequently performed plays.
In the setting of a rundown seaside boarding house, a little birthday party is turned into a nightmare on the unexpected arrival of two sinister strangers.
The play has been classified as a comedy of menace, characterised by Pinteresque elements such as ambiguous identity, confusions of time and place, and dark political symbolism.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 亘蹖爻鬲賲 賲丕賴 丌賵乇蹖賱 爻丕賱 2004 賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貙 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 賳賯丿蹖 丕夭 丕爻鬲蹖賵賳 丕趩 诏蹖賱貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 賴丕乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇貨 賲鬲乇噩賲 卮毓賱賴 丌匕乇貨 賲卮禺氐丕鬲 賳卮乇 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 丕賮乇丕夭貙 趩丕倬 賳禺爻鬲 1385貙 丿乇 234氐貨 卮丕亘讴 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 丿乇 爻丕賱 1388貨 卮丕亘讴 9789647640978貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖 - 爻丿賴 20賲
噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貨 丿賵賲蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 蹖 亘賱賳丿賽 芦賴丕乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇禄貙 賵 丕夭 倬乇 丕噩乇丕鬲乇蹖賳 賵 賲卮賴賵乇鬲乇蹖賳 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳爻鬲.貨 芦噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿禄貙 賳禺爻鬲 亘丕 賵丕讴賳卮 鬲賳丿 賲賳鬲賯丿丕賳貙 賲賵丕噩賴 卮丿貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丌爻鬲丕賳賴鈥� 蹖 卮讴爻鬲 賲胤賱賯 鬲噩丕乇蹖貙 賵 丕丿亘蹖貙 賳賯丿 芦賴丕乇賵賱丿 賴丕亘爻賵賳禄 丿乇 芦爻丕賳丿蹖 鬲丕蹖賲夭禄貙 賳噩丕鬲卮 丿丕丿貙 賵 亘賴 賲乇賵乇貙 噩丕蹖诏丕賴 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丕孬乇蹖 讴賱丕爻蹖讴貙 丿乇 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 賲丿乇賳 亘賴 丿爻鬲 丌賵乇丿.貨 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿貙 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴鈥� 丕蹖 爻鬲貙 丿乇亘丕乇賴 蹖 芦丕爻鬲賳賱蹖 賵賽亘賽乇禄貙 倬蹖丕賳賵賳賵丕夭 倬蹖卮蹖賳貙 讴賴 丿乇 賲爻丕賮乇禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 讴賵趩讴貙 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�.貨 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕賮乇禺丕賳賴貙 讴賴 丿乇 卮賴乇蹖 爻丕丨賱蹖貙 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕賸 丿乇 爻賵丕丨賱 噩賳賵亘蹖貙 賵 丿乇 賮丕氐賱賴 賳賴 趩賳丿丕賳 丿賵乇 丕夭 芦賱賳丿賳禄貙 賵丕賯毓 卮丿賴貙 鬲賵爻胤 芦賲诏禄貙 賵 芦倬鬲蹖 亘賵賱夭禄貙 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丿賵 睾乇蹖亘賴 蹖 卮乇賵乇貙 讴賴 胤亘賯 賯乇丕乇 賲毓賱賵賲 亘賴賳诏丕賲 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 丕賵 丌賲丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿貙 賵 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖鈥屫必池� 亘賴 丿賳亘丕賱 丕賵 賴爻鬲賳丿貨 丌賳賴丕貙 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿賽貙 亘賴 馗丕賴乇 丌乇丕賲貙 賵 亘蹖 禺胤乇 丕賵 乇丕貙 讴賴 芦賲诏禄 亘乇丕蹖卮 诏乇賮鬲賴貙 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻 鬲亘丿蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁嗀�
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 06/05/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
October 6, 2015
The Birthday Party is the play I'd give to someone if I really wanted them to be scared shitless by Harold Pinter. There is no easy way into Pinter so it's best to just crash-land into his work. This play contains everything that one may describe as "Pinteresque". Long pauses. Overwhelming dread. Near deathly tension. And, of course, humour. Dark, dark humour.
Stanley is a lodger in a house in a seaside town. He lives with the owners of the house. They are simply folk. One day two men turn up at the house and brutally interrogate Stanley until he is reduced to a child-like vegetative state. Wait. What? Yeah. But there's jokes as well.
If you are in any way familiar with my humour then you've probably already guessed that I adore this play. Pinter is one of those writers who I feel would be hilarious at funerals. In that his work is so out-there that it almost transcends life and death and everything takes place in a near purgatorial setting. The drum beat, the fricative verbal tennis matches, everything in this play feels like it's counting down to something. Tick follows tock follows tick. But then Pinter does what Pinter does best and stops. Is the ending satisfying? Fuck no. And that's why I love it. Ugh, Pinter you beautiful man.
Stanley is a lodger in a house in a seaside town. He lives with the owners of the house. They are simply folk. One day two men turn up at the house and brutally interrogate Stanley until he is reduced to a child-like vegetative state. Wait. What? Yeah. But there's jokes as well.
If you are in any way familiar with my humour then you've probably already guessed that I adore this play. Pinter is one of those writers who I feel would be hilarious at funerals. In that his work is so out-there that it almost transcends life and death and everything takes place in a near purgatorial setting. The drum beat, the fricative verbal tennis matches, everything in this play feels like it's counting down to something. Tick follows tock follows tick. But then Pinter does what Pinter does best and stops. Is the ending satisfying? Fuck no. And that's why I love it. Ugh, Pinter you beautiful man.
January 19, 2020
O gee. As with Shaw & Beckett, Pinter's first work is not without its... charm. The "uselessness and bleakness" angle so articulately employed in "Godot" is present here as well-- there is an aimlessness, a sense of character alienation on an individual basis-- perhaps actual just sound and fury signifying nil. All the characters seem to be pawns in that "Classical Narrative" sort of way--but they are obvious embodiments of other things-- FOR SURE. Pinter seems like the most surreal (hooray!) of the three amigos-- but I wonder how he holds up against titans like Albee or even Eugene O'Neill.
"The Room" is also eerie and disturbing. A splinter-like companion piece to "The Birthday Party," it is allegorical, undoubtedly unlike the own playwright's mighty insistence that it isn't.
"The Room" is also eerie and disturbing. A splinter-like companion piece to "The Birthday Party," it is allegorical, undoubtedly unlike the own playwright's mighty insistence that it isn't.
June 11, 2013
Goldberg. You're dead. You can't live, you can't think, you can't love. You're dead. You're a plague gone bad. There's no juice in you. You're nothing but an odour!
Goldberg and McMann eviscerate Stanley. Who are Goldberg and McMann? Two men to mysteriously show up and ask for a room in the boarding house that isn't a boarding house. They mean business of menace and firey pits of scorn. Go Stanley. It's your birthday. I pictured Stanley to not fit his own clothes. He doesn't fit his time, the kitchen in the boarding house no one ever rents from, except for the men with questionable pasts and something to answer for. There would be a much too small children's school desks for him to sit in if he makes it to the pearly gates and judgement day. I don't know what he did to make these guys hate him so much and I can't imagine what he could ever do to make anyone like him.
I can't find the scene now. It is the scene that made me think if the right actor had this part (I'm thinking Philip Seymour Hoffman when he still had an edge, before you could think out his mind made flesh before it happened. Not in the best sense of prophetic mind meld but it is rote and award show seeking. Someone who will let go). Stanley takes the birthday drum kit and beats it. Gently, steadily. He goes around the table in Meg's persistent and insistent kitchen. Go on, it's your birthday. He had never said it was his birthday. If he had he would deny it. It would be every kid who ever wished that the world would forget its birthday and secretly wish that the universe would open up all of its ground holes to let in a secret birthday wish. You never get what you want when you wish this way. He is beating the drum and it is a never get what you want wishful beating. It's a furious build up, helpless and sad. It's one hell of a tribal drum beat scene. If the right actor had this part it would be the rising call of every time you ever hated yourself and felt helpless and didn't know what to do. You can't feel anything but the primal howl. It's not a wolf. It has no teeth. If you could have this cake and eat it too it would be savage surprise jump out of the cake. It would be off with your heads streamers and celebrations. It wasn't even my birthday. What could he possibly have done? Maybe it was because he didn't do anything. Maybe this is what happens to you when you don't do anything.
The Birthday Party is my least favorite Harold Pinter play that I've read thus far. That's to say that I loved the ever loving shit out of his other plays and this one isn't as awesome as all hell party get out as the others. It's a worst nightmare. I wake up and try to think about something else, afraid to go to sleep. Goldberg and McMann arrive wrapped in gift wrap. Every ominous feeling you ever had. It lost some of its burning hate the night of the party. Goldberg bounces the big bouncing girl, the one who comes over. Lulu who could have made eyes at Stanley or he made eyes at her, if he wasn't the doomed sort. The morning after she expected something. What? What do girls want? Lulu and sexy times and behind those closed doors could stay shut for me. Please don't distract me with a lot of Goldberg speeches. He talks and I feel sick when Stanley feels sick. Only then. It is bad times again. When he walks down the stairs and Goldberg makes his promise and Stanley's body shudders and he's "the same old Stan". The slump is dead man walking. You were dreading something and it came true. I had the feeling he gave up after his birthday drum song. His landlord Petey tells his frustrating, always needling in her returning to place one blankness wife to "let him.... sleep". The poor bastard.
June 24, 2018
It looks like Pinter had ideas about a lot of tricks - mostly aimed at confusing the audience like ambiguous identity, confusions of time and place etc. And Pinter does write his first play that display all those tricks. The problem is that the tricks are all you get. There is not much of plot or understandable characters. It is like a dish made entirely of spices.
December 1, 2020
What makes the toilet bowl in an art gallery a work of art as opposed to it being simply a lavatory for public use is that it鈥檚 installed by an artist instead of a plumber and that an art critic (or somebody who wants to call you a philistine) comes along and attaches meaning to the toilet bowl.
Well I don鈥檛 go in for that kind of crap. I don鈥檛 like being told what to think. I鈥檒l make up my own mind, and I don鈥檛 believe The Birthday Party means anything unless you want it to mean something.
You can say it鈥檚 absurdist if you want (because somebody wants you to think it is), and you can say it鈥檚 about the human condition (because somebody told you it is).
But I don鈥檛 want to be patronised by people telling me that I don鈥檛 understand the play just because I think the play is dull.
It鈥檚 ridiculous to talk of spoilers because nothing of any real consequence happens.
The plot (such as it is): Stanley (out of work pianist) lives in a boarding house with Meg (flirty housewife owner of boarding house) and her husband Petey (bland nothing character). One day two blokes (Goldberg and McCann) arrive. The men interrogate Stanley with gibberish, reducing him almost to catalepsy. A mistaken birthday party for Stanley takes place; Stanley goes ape and attacks Lulu, the neighbour at the party. Next day, it鈥檚 as if nothing happened (suggestions here and there re Lulu and Goldberg spending the night together) except that the two interrogators take Stanley (who appears to have suffered a nervous breakdown) with them when they leave, ostensibly to see a doctor (Monty).
You could interpret this play a hundred different ways. It doesn鈥檛 matter. You could say that Stanley suffered the breakdown because he was forced by the two men to face the meaninglessness and absurdity of an existence from which he was hiding (at the boarding house) etc. You could say ten different things about the meaning of the drum or the new suit, or the banal breakfast talk, and on and on.
The play could meaning anything or nothing.
Meg: What are you doing?
Petey: What am I doing?
Meg: That鈥檚 what I said.
Petey: Writing a play.
Meg: A play?
Petey: Yes.
Meg: Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: What about?
Petey: What about?
Meg: Yes.
Petey: About the banality of human speech and domesticity, the meaningless of existence, the human condition, oh lots of heavy meaningful things.
Meg Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: What鈥檚 going to happen?
Petey: What鈥檚 going to happen?
Meg: Yes. In the play.
Petey: Oh. The main character, already on the edge, will have his quiet domestic escape from the world disturbed by two men.
Meg: That鈥檚 nice. What then?
Petey: He鈥檒l have a breakdown.
Meg: Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: Want your breakfast?
Petey: My breakfast?
Meg: Yes.
Petey: No, I鈥檓 writing this play.
Meg: Oh
(Pause)
Meg: When will you finish it?
Petey: When will I finish it?
Meg: Stop bloody repeating everything I say or I鈥檒l be the one having a fucking breakdown. Now Eat your fried bread and shut up.
Well I don鈥檛 go in for that kind of crap. I don鈥檛 like being told what to think. I鈥檒l make up my own mind, and I don鈥檛 believe The Birthday Party means anything unless you want it to mean something.
You can say it鈥檚 absurdist if you want (because somebody wants you to think it is), and you can say it鈥檚 about the human condition (because somebody told you it is).
But I don鈥檛 want to be patronised by people telling me that I don鈥檛 understand the play just because I think the play is dull.
It鈥檚 ridiculous to talk of spoilers because nothing of any real consequence happens.
The plot (such as it is): Stanley (out of work pianist) lives in a boarding house with Meg (flirty housewife owner of boarding house) and her husband Petey (bland nothing character). One day two blokes (Goldberg and McCann) arrive. The men interrogate Stanley with gibberish, reducing him almost to catalepsy. A mistaken birthday party for Stanley takes place; Stanley goes ape and attacks Lulu, the neighbour at the party. Next day, it鈥檚 as if nothing happened (suggestions here and there re Lulu and Goldberg spending the night together) except that the two interrogators take Stanley (who appears to have suffered a nervous breakdown) with them when they leave, ostensibly to see a doctor (Monty).
You could interpret this play a hundred different ways. It doesn鈥檛 matter. You could say that Stanley suffered the breakdown because he was forced by the two men to face the meaninglessness and absurdity of an existence from which he was hiding (at the boarding house) etc. You could say ten different things about the meaning of the drum or the new suit, or the banal breakfast talk, and on and on.
The play could meaning anything or nothing.
Meg: What are you doing?
Petey: What am I doing?
Meg: That鈥檚 what I said.
Petey: Writing a play.
Meg: A play?
Petey: Yes.
Meg: Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: What about?
Petey: What about?
Meg: Yes.
Petey: About the banality of human speech and domesticity, the meaningless of existence, the human condition, oh lots of heavy meaningful things.
Meg Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: What鈥檚 going to happen?
Petey: What鈥檚 going to happen?
Meg: Yes. In the play.
Petey: Oh. The main character, already on the edge, will have his quiet domestic escape from the world disturbed by two men.
Meg: That鈥檚 nice. What then?
Petey: He鈥檒l have a breakdown.
Meg: Oh.
(Pause)
Meg: Want your breakfast?
Petey: My breakfast?
Meg: Yes.
Petey: No, I鈥檓 writing this play.
Meg: Oh
(Pause)
Meg: When will you finish it?
Petey: When will I finish it?
Meg: Stop bloody repeating everything I say or I鈥檒l be the one having a fucking breakdown. Now Eat your fried bread and shut up.
March 14, 2018
I really did NOT like it. this is a play which lots of modern playwrights refer to as kind of a masterpiece. there are hundreds of "how-to-write-a-play" books which you can find in every bookstore and I bet 99% of 'em has pulled out something outta this play as sort of an instance, so you choose to read this play and you're really excited about it. you've even got this assumption that you're gonna read something absurd, but from what you've read in past, absurd plays usually have several layers and those people who reach to the deepest layer are the most satisfied readers of the book. regarding this book, though, I found absolutely no extra layer! I mean while you're reading the play, you're anticipating THAT turning point which will clarify lots of vague things, but there comes the last page and the turning point is not arrived yet! you check the back cover and the turning point ain't there either (sarcasm). so, I sure consider this possibility that last night I was too sleepy to find out what actually happened, but even so, it won't make me read it again to find out the cause.
April 29, 2023
"Who watered the wicket in Melbourne?"
You never find out; looking around, I find that many people have been confused by this cricket reference. Pinter was apparently delighted to find that his German translator had rendered it as something meaning "Who pissed on the city gates?"
December 15, 2019
4/5 stars
Trigger Warning: Attempted r*pe
That was the most absurd thing I have ever read...
Trigger Warning: Attempted r*pe
That was the most absurd thing I have ever read...
April 18, 2013
If you are a literature student and haven't read this play, go sue your university.
If you're a literature student, you've read the play and hated it, go sell your degree.
If you are a literature student, have read the play and are indifferent to it, I understand.
If you're a layman and you've read the play, bravo!
Honestly, I don't know how I'd have reacted if I'd read the play when I was younger. But literature develops taste for all things.
Be forewarned. This is a play belonging to absurd theatre. If you are a layman and still want to read it, you'd probably want to read up on what to expect in absurd literature. Enjoy!
If you're a literature student, you've read the play and hated it, go sell your degree.
If you are a literature student, have read the play and are indifferent to it, I understand.
If you're a layman and you've read the play, bravo!
Honestly, I don't know how I'd have reacted if I'd read the play when I was younger. But literature develops taste for all things.
Be forewarned. This is a play belonging to absurd theatre. If you are a layman and still want to read it, you'd probably want to read up on what to expect in absurd literature. Enjoy!
February 16, 2025
Harold Pinter este unul dintre pilonii teatrului absurd, iar The Birthday Party pare desprins膬 dintr-un univers kafkian. La prima vedere, piesa pare u葯or de descifrat: lini葯tea unei case aflate pe malul m膬rii este tulburat膬 de sosirea a doi str膬ini. Coinciden葲a face ca ziua s膬 fie una special膬 鈥� aniversarea unuia dintre locatari. 脦ns膬, din acest punct, realitatea 卯ncepe s膬 se destrame, iar ceea ce p膬rea limpede devine tot mai obscur. Pe m膬sur膬 ce 卯naintezi 卯n text, descoperi c膬 personajele nu sunt deloc ceea ce p膬reau la 卯nceput 鈥� identit膬葲ile lor se contorsioneaz膬, inten葲iile devin tulburi, iar adev膬rul alunec膬 卯ntr-o zon膬 de nelini葯te 葯i ambiguitate. In actul al doilea, personajul principal este supus unui lung 葯i amenin葲膬tor interogatoriu:
GOLDBERG. What do you use for pyjamas?
STANLEY. Nothing.
GOLDBERG. You verminate the sheet of your birth.
MCCANN. What about the Albigensenist heresy?
GOLDBERG. Who watered the wicket in Melbourne?
MCCANN. What about the blessed Oliver Plunkett?
GOLDBERG. Speak up, Webber. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥�.
MCCANN. He doesn鈥檛 know!
GOLDBERG. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥�.
GOLDBERG. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted鈥�.
MCCANN. He doesn鈥檛 know. He doesn鈥檛 know which came first!
GOLDBERG. Which came first?
MCCANN. Chicken? Egg? Which came first?
GOLDBERG and MCCANN. Which came first? Which came first? Which came first?
STANLEY screams.
Pinter surprinde cu precizie anxietatea omului confruntat cu o lume opac膬, imposibil de descifrat 葯i de controlat. Personajele sale se afl膬 卯ntr-o realitate fluid膬, unde certitudinile se destram膬, iar 卯ntreb膬rile r膬m芒n f膬r膬 r膬spuns. Tensiunea nu vine doar din situa葲iile ambigue, ci 葯i din imposibilitatea de a 卯n葲elege mecanismele care le guverneaz膬. 脦n universul s膬u, nesiguran葲a devine o for葲膬 dominant膬, iar frica de necunoscut cap膬t膬 un caracter aproape sufocant. 脦n cartea Pinter 鈥� The Playwright, Martin Esslin aminte葯te un episod intrigant legat de aceast膬 pies膬. Dramaturgul a primit o scrisoare din partea unei cititoare nedumerite, care 卯i cerea l膬muriri:
"Drag膬 domnule Pinter,
M膬 simt obligat膬 s膬 v膬 cer s膬-mi explica葲i sensul acestei piese. Sunt c芒teva aspecte pe care nu le-am 卯n葲eles:
1. Cine sunt cei doi b膬rba葲i?
2. De unde provine Stanley?
3. Se presupune c膬 to葲i sunt persoane normale?
Sunt sigur膬 c膬 ve葲i 卯n葲elege c膬, f膬r膬 r膬spunsurile la aceste 卯ntreb膬ri, nu voi putea 卯n葲elege pe deplin piesa."
R膬spunsul lui Pinter a fost la fel de enigmatic 葯i ironic:
"Drag膬 doamn膬,
M膬 simt obligat s膬 v膬 cer s膬-mi explica葲i sensul acestei scrisori. Sunt c芒teva aspecte pe care nu le-am 卯n葲eles:
1. Cine sunte葲i?
2. De unde proveni葲i?
3. Se presupune c膬 sunte葲i o persoan膬 normal膬?
Sunt sigur c膬 ve葲i 卯n葲elege c膬, f膬r膬 r膬spunsurile la aceste 卯ntreb膬ri, nu voi putea 卯n葲elege pe deplin aceast膬 scrisoare."
GOLDBERG. What do you use for pyjamas?
STANLEY. Nothing.
GOLDBERG. You verminate the sheet of your birth.
MCCANN. What about the Albigensenist heresy?
GOLDBERG. Who watered the wicket in Melbourne?
MCCANN. What about the blessed Oliver Plunkett?
GOLDBERG. Speak up, Webber. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥�.
MCCANN. He doesn鈥檛 know!
GOLDBERG. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted to鈥攈e wanted to鈥�.
GOLDBERG. Why did the chicken cross the road?
STANLEY. He wanted鈥�.
MCCANN. He doesn鈥檛 know. He doesn鈥檛 know which came first!
GOLDBERG. Which came first?
MCCANN. Chicken? Egg? Which came first?
GOLDBERG and MCCANN. Which came first? Which came first? Which came first?
STANLEY screams.
Pinter surprinde cu precizie anxietatea omului confruntat cu o lume opac膬, imposibil de descifrat 葯i de controlat. Personajele sale se afl膬 卯ntr-o realitate fluid膬, unde certitudinile se destram膬, iar 卯ntreb膬rile r膬m芒n f膬r膬 r膬spuns. Tensiunea nu vine doar din situa葲iile ambigue, ci 葯i din imposibilitatea de a 卯n葲elege mecanismele care le guverneaz膬. 脦n universul s膬u, nesiguran葲a devine o for葲膬 dominant膬, iar frica de necunoscut cap膬t膬 un caracter aproape sufocant. 脦n cartea Pinter 鈥� The Playwright, Martin Esslin aminte葯te un episod intrigant legat de aceast膬 pies膬. Dramaturgul a primit o scrisoare din partea unei cititoare nedumerite, care 卯i cerea l膬muriri:
"Drag膬 domnule Pinter,
M膬 simt obligat膬 s膬 v膬 cer s膬-mi explica葲i sensul acestei piese. Sunt c芒teva aspecte pe care nu le-am 卯n葲eles:
1. Cine sunt cei doi b膬rba葲i?
2. De unde provine Stanley?
3. Se presupune c膬 to葲i sunt persoane normale?
Sunt sigur膬 c膬 ve葲i 卯n葲elege c膬, f膬r膬 r膬spunsurile la aceste 卯ntreb膬ri, nu voi putea 卯n葲elege pe deplin piesa."
R膬spunsul lui Pinter a fost la fel de enigmatic 葯i ironic:
"Drag膬 doamn膬,
M膬 simt obligat s膬 v膬 cer s膬-mi explica葲i sensul acestei scrisori. Sunt c芒teva aspecte pe care nu le-am 卯n葲eles:
1. Cine sunte葲i?
2. De unde proveni葲i?
3. Se presupune c膬 sunte葲i o persoan膬 normal膬?
Sunt sigur c膬 ve葲i 卯n葲elege c膬, f膬r膬 r膬spunsurile la aceste 卯ntreb膬ri, nu voi putea 卯n葲elege pe deplin aceast膬 scrisoare."
April 4, 2024
唳灌唳唳班Σ唰嵿Α 唳唳ㄠ唳熰唳� 唳Α唳监 唳多唳班 唳曕Π唳侧 唳嗋Ω唳侧 唳唳澿唳� 唳膏唳о唳� 唳ㄠ唳� 唳 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳曕唳ム唳 唳唳唰� 唳ム唳Μ唰囙イ 唳灌唳膏唳Π唳� 唳� 唳呧Ζ唰嵿Ν唰佮Δ 唳樴唳ㄠ唳 唳唳班唳� 唳ㄠ唳熰唰囙Π 唳Π唳苦Γ唳む 唳忇Δ唰� 唳唳粪Γ唰嵿Γ唳む唳 唳唳∴唳距Θ唰�!唳膏Ξ唳距Σ唰嬥唳曕Π唳� 唳唳班Δ唳苦唳� 唳氞Π唳苦Δ唰嵿Π唰囙Π 唳唳涏Θ唰� 唳呧Θ唰囙 唳班唳 唳嗋Π 唳唳班Δ唰€唳� 唳栢唳佮唰� 唳唳� 唳曕Π唳む 唳ム唳曕唳�, 唳多唳о 唳唳ㄠΜ唳苦 唳忇唳熰 唳椸Σ唰嵿Κ 唳灌唳膏唳唳� " 唳唳班唳ムΑ唰� 唳唳班唳熰" 唳膏唳Π唳｀唳啷�
March 17, 2024
A slow suffocation of ominous tension. It takes a lot of skill to introduce a sense of impending doom and to maintain it for so long, and this was the play鈥檚 strongest suit.
As soon as the guests arrived at the birthday party you knew it was bad news. However, they were subtle and clever in the way they went about controlling certain guests. It鈥檚 one thing to get up and leave if you feel uncomfortable, but if you are blocked and coerced into the situation where in order to leave or intervene you must cause a scene, then that鈥檚 another story. The bullies were so cunning. For the whole time I was waiting to see the snapping point.
A bit more action or visibility or explanation would not have gone unwanted. Having said that, the play was so impactful it got me thinking as to the meaning of the whole thing, and I could not do that without reading other reviews.
The calculation of the review is 5 stars for the skill of creating such a scenario. A deduction of 2 stars for not providing enough action. But 1 star added for the post-play impact as it had me thinking for a long while after.
As soon as the guests arrived at the birthday party you knew it was bad news. However, they were subtle and clever in the way they went about controlling certain guests. It鈥檚 one thing to get up and leave if you feel uncomfortable, but if you are blocked and coerced into the situation where in order to leave or intervene you must cause a scene, then that鈥檚 another story. The bullies were so cunning. For the whole time I was waiting to see the snapping point.
A bit more action or visibility or explanation would not have gone unwanted. Having said that, the play was so impactful it got me thinking as to the meaning of the whole thing, and I could not do that without reading other reviews.
The calculation of the review is 5 stars for the skill of creating such a scenario. A deduction of 2 stars for not providing enough action. But 1 star added for the post-play impact as it had me thinking for a long while after.
Read
April 4, 2020賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 賴賲 賲孬賱 亘賯蹖賴 丌孬丕乇 倬蹖賳鬲乇 丿乇賵賳賲丕蹖賴 噩丕賲毓賴 爻乇讴賵亘 卮丿賴 乇賵 賳卮賵賳 賲蹖丿賴 讴賴 丿乇 丕賵賳 賴賳乇賲賳丿丕賳蹖 賲孬賱 丕爻鬲賳賱蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕氐賱蹖 賳賲丕蹖卮 賮乇丿蹖 爻乇讴賵亘 卮丿賴 丕夭 胤乇賮 賯丿乇鬲 賴丕 賵 噩丕賲毓賴 丕蹖蹖 賴爻鬲 讴賴 亘賴 卮讴賱 賲乇賲賵夭蹖 丕賮乇丕丿 噩丕賲毓賴 乇賵 丕賵賳 胤賵乇 讴賴 丿賱卮 賲蹖禺賵丕丿 卮讴賱 賲蹖丿賴 賵 讴賳鬲乇賱 賲蹖讴賳賴貙 賲乇丕爻賲 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿 亘乇丕蹖 丕爻鬲賳賱蹖 蹖毓賳蹖 丌睾丕夭 賲乇诏 丕賵 鬲賵爻胤 賯丿乇鬲 賴丕. 賳賲丕蹖卮 亘爻蹖丕乇 禺賵丕賳丿賳蹖 亘賵丿.賱匕鬲 亘乇丿賲. 丕賱亘鬲賴 賳賲丕蹖卮 讴賵鬲丕賴蹖 賴爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賵蹖 蹖賴 賳氐賮 乇賵夭 賲蹖卮賴 讴賱卮 乇賵 鬲賲賵賲 讴乇丿.
July 25, 2017
I have absolutely no idea what I just read but it was really weird and I'm weird too so I liked it.
May 1, 2019
丕賳賯丿乇 倬乇丿賴鈥屰� 丿賵賲 爻丕賳爻賵乇 丿丕卮鬲 讴賴 賳賮賴賲蹖丿賲 趩蹖 卮丿馃槓 賳爻禺賴鈥屰� 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖鈥屫� 賴賲 倬蹖丿丕 賳讴乇丿賲 丕诏賴 讴爻蹖 丿丕乇賴 亘乇丕賲 亘賮乇爻鬲賴
July 23, 2018
read this for uni a while ago. really really unsettling, as i expected it to be. the interrogation scene will always remain in my mind.
May 16, 2022
賲賳 讴賴 禺賵丿賲 賳賲蹖 禺賵丕爻鬲賲 賴乇賵賱丿 倬蹖賳鬲乇 亘禺賵丕賳賲. 丕蹖賳 賳卮丕賳賴 睾賱胤 乇丕 毓賱蹖 丕讴亘乇 毓賱蹖夭丕丿賴 丿乇 賲賯丿賲賴 丿賵丕夭丿賴 賯胤毓賴 蹖 讴賵鬲丕賴 亘讴鬲 亘賴 賲賳 丿丕丿.
賲卮讴賱 丕氐賱蹖 " 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿" 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕 丕亘鬲丿丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴賳丿 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丿卮丕賳 讴爻蹖 亘丕卮賳丿 賵賱蹖 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳賴 蹖 乇丕賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賮乇丕賲賵卮卮丕賳 賲蹖 讴賳丿 蹖丕 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 賲孬賱賳 丿賵 卮禺氐蹖鬲蹖 讴賴 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 賲賴賲丕賳 賵丕乇丿 禺丕賳賴 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿貙 丕亘鬲丿丕 丕夭 賲丕賲賵乇蹖鬲 丨乇賮 賲蹖 夭賳賳丿 賵 賮讴乇 讴乇丿賲 卮丕蹖丿 賴賲丕賳 乇賵鬲蹖賳 讴賱蹖卮賴 丕蹖 丿賵 讴丕乇诏丕賴 蹖丕 賯丕鬲賱 讴賱賴 倬賵讴 亘丕卮賳丿. 丕賲丕 賲毓賱賵賲 賳賲蹖卮賵丿 丌賳賴丕 趩賴 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 丕乇鬲亘丕胤卮丕賳 亘丕 賲賵夭蹖爻蹖賳 爻乇禺賵乇丿賴 趩蹖爻鬲. 丌蹖丕 倬蹖賳鬲乇 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴/ 鬲賲丕卮丕趩蹖 乇丕 诏賵賱 亘夭賳丿責 丕亘鬲丿丕 賮讴乇 賲蹖 讴賳蹖丿 亘丕 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 丕蹖 胤乇賮蹖丿 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇丿丕夭蹖 睾蹖乇 丕亘爻賵乇丿 讴賱丕爻蹖讴. 賳賲丕蹖卮 讴賴 倬蹖卮 賲蹖 乇賵丿 丕蹖賳 丕賳鬲馗丕乇 卮賲丕 亘乇 丌賵乇丿賴 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿. 丕诏乇 丕蹖賳 賴賲 丕亘爻賵乇丿 丕爻鬲 賵 亘讴鬲 賴賲 丕亘爻賵乇丿貙 賲賳 丕亘爻賵乇丿 亘讴鬲 乇丕 禺蹖賱蹖 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲蹖 倬爻賳丿賲. 亘讴鬲 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕 丕亘爻賵乇丿卮 乇丕 丿乇 氐賵乇鬲鬲丕賳 賲蹖 讴賵亘丿.
賲卮讴賱 丕氐賱蹖 " 噩卮賳 鬲賵賱丿" 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕 丕亘鬲丿丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴賳丿 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丿卮丕賳 讴爻蹖 亘丕卮賳丿 賵賱蹖 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳賴 蹖 乇丕賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賮乇丕賲賵卮卮丕賳 賲蹖 讴賳丿 蹖丕 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 賲孬賱賳 丿賵 卮禺氐蹖鬲蹖 讴賴 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 賲賴賲丕賳 賵丕乇丿 禺丕賳賴 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿貙 丕亘鬲丿丕 丕夭 賲丕賲賵乇蹖鬲 丨乇賮 賲蹖 夭賳賳丿 賵 賮讴乇 讴乇丿賲 卮丕蹖丿 賴賲丕賳 乇賵鬲蹖賳 讴賱蹖卮賴 丕蹖 丿賵 讴丕乇诏丕賴 蹖丕 賯丕鬲賱 讴賱賴 倬賵讴 亘丕卮賳丿. 丕賲丕 賲毓賱賵賲 賳賲蹖卮賵丿 丌賳賴丕 趩賴 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 丕乇鬲亘丕胤卮丕賳 亘丕 賲賵夭蹖爻蹖賳 爻乇禺賵乇丿賴 趩蹖爻鬲. 丌蹖丕 倬蹖賳鬲乇 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴/ 鬲賲丕卮丕趩蹖 乇丕 诏賵賱 亘夭賳丿責 丕亘鬲丿丕 賮讴乇 賲蹖 讴賳蹖丿 亘丕 賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 丕蹖 胤乇賮蹖丿 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇丿丕夭蹖 睾蹖乇 丕亘爻賵乇丿 讴賱丕爻蹖讴. 賳賲丕蹖卮 讴賴 倬蹖卮 賲蹖 乇賵丿 丕蹖賳 丕賳鬲馗丕乇 卮賲丕 亘乇 丌賵乇丿賴 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿. 丕诏乇 丕蹖賳 賴賲 丕亘爻賵乇丿 丕爻鬲 賵 亘讴鬲 賴賲 丕亘爻賵乇丿貙 賲賳 丕亘爻賵乇丿 亘讴鬲 乇丕 禺蹖賱蹖 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲蹖 倬爻賳丿賲. 亘讴鬲 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕 丕亘爻賵乇丿卮 乇丕 丿乇 氐賵乇鬲鬲丕賳 賲蹖 讴賵亘丿.
May 12, 2017
First reading: 10th May 2016
Second reading 13th May 2017
倬賳噩 爻鬲丕乇賴 賴賲 賲賷鬲賵賳爻鬲賲 亘丿賲 亘賴卮丕丕丕! 賵賱賷 禺賵亘賴 賴賲賷賳 趩賴丕乇...
Second reading 13th May 2017
倬賳噩 爻鬲丕乇賴 賴賲 賲賷鬲賵賳爻鬲賲 亘丿賲 亘賴卮丕丕丕! 賵賱賷 禺賵亘賴 賴賲賷賳 趩賴丕乇...
August 27, 2017
a brilliant, confusing, and shocking play ....
it takes hours and hours to talk about.
it takes hours and hours to talk about.
January 14, 2023
鈥楾he Birthday Party鈥� may be described as a tragedy with countless comic elements; or we may call it a comedy which, however, also produces an awe-inspiring tragic consequence. But the most apposite marker for this play would be "the comedy of menace."
All the way through the play we are kept smiling, and yet all through the play we find ourselves also on the edge of fear. Some indescribable and indistinct trepidation keeps our nerves on an edge. We feel uncomfortable all the time, even when we are smiling or cheery with delight.
This twofold feature gives to the play an exceptional character.
A man called Stanley has taken sanctuary in a boarding-house in a seaside town. What he is running from and why he has hidden himself in this boarding-house is not made apparent at any point in the story. The landlady, Meg, who is much older than Stanley acts as a kind of mother to him but she is at the same time trying to flirt with him in order to become his mistress. Two strangers, Goldberg and McCann, then arrive out of the blue. Stanley feels edgy at the arrival of these two men, though Meg is glad that she has got two more lodgers in her boarding-house.
At the suggestion of the two men, Meg arranges a birthday party in honour of Stanley, though Stanley denies that it is his birthday. Finally, the two strangers take Stanley away with them after having tamed him in some unexplained method, either by physical aggression or by pure mental torment.
An atmosphere of inscrutability and ambiguity saturates the entire play so that at the end we are left wondering at, and confused by, the itinerary of events in the play.
The imprecision and murkiness of the play have led critics to construe it in a variety of ways:
1) It is said that the play is that it presents an image of man's dread on being driven out from his warm place of asylum on earth;
2) It is suggested that the play is an allegory for the process of growing up, of expulsion from the cosy world of childhood;
3) It is hinted that Stanley, the leading role, is the artist whom society claims back from a contented, bohemian existence and who is compelled by society to conform to its own standards of manner and behaviour;
4) Some say that Goldberg and McCann symbolize parts of Stanley's own sub-conscious mind
To conclude, 鈥楾he Birthday Party鈥� is both a comedy and a tragedy in so far as there is an abundance to entertain us and plenty to depress. Again, the comic elements here are not so copious as to annul the disastrous consequence, nor are the disastrous elements in the play so reflective as to quash the comedy in it.
Besides, most of the comic and the tragic elements are intricately interwoven in the play, so that certain situations and certain remarks are concurrently humorous and wretched.
But we must identify the fact that the tragic elements in the play make a deeper and more lasting impression on our minds, while the comic elements are soon forgotten or gusted into the background.
The providence which Sunley meets is indisputably tragic, and at the end we find him to be a total wreck, mentally and physically. In view of this, if one of the two labels has to be chosen, the play should be regarded as a tragedy despite its comic elements and its humour (both of words and of situations).
A modern day classic, bedecked with layers of meaning!!
All the way through the play we are kept smiling, and yet all through the play we find ourselves also on the edge of fear. Some indescribable and indistinct trepidation keeps our nerves on an edge. We feel uncomfortable all the time, even when we are smiling or cheery with delight.
This twofold feature gives to the play an exceptional character.
A man called Stanley has taken sanctuary in a boarding-house in a seaside town. What he is running from and why he has hidden himself in this boarding-house is not made apparent at any point in the story. The landlady, Meg, who is much older than Stanley acts as a kind of mother to him but she is at the same time trying to flirt with him in order to become his mistress. Two strangers, Goldberg and McCann, then arrive out of the blue. Stanley feels edgy at the arrival of these two men, though Meg is glad that she has got two more lodgers in her boarding-house.
At the suggestion of the two men, Meg arranges a birthday party in honour of Stanley, though Stanley denies that it is his birthday. Finally, the two strangers take Stanley away with them after having tamed him in some unexplained method, either by physical aggression or by pure mental torment.
An atmosphere of inscrutability and ambiguity saturates the entire play so that at the end we are left wondering at, and confused by, the itinerary of events in the play.
The imprecision and murkiness of the play have led critics to construe it in a variety of ways:
1) It is said that the play is that it presents an image of man's dread on being driven out from his warm place of asylum on earth;
2) It is suggested that the play is an allegory for the process of growing up, of expulsion from the cosy world of childhood;
3) It is hinted that Stanley, the leading role, is the artist whom society claims back from a contented, bohemian existence and who is compelled by society to conform to its own standards of manner and behaviour;
4) Some say that Goldberg and McCann symbolize parts of Stanley's own sub-conscious mind
To conclude, 鈥楾he Birthday Party鈥� is both a comedy and a tragedy in so far as there is an abundance to entertain us and plenty to depress. Again, the comic elements here are not so copious as to annul the disastrous consequence, nor are the disastrous elements in the play so reflective as to quash the comedy in it.
Besides, most of the comic and the tragic elements are intricately interwoven in the play, so that certain situations and certain remarks are concurrently humorous and wretched.
But we must identify the fact that the tragic elements in the play make a deeper and more lasting impression on our minds, while the comic elements are soon forgotten or gusted into the background.
The providence which Sunley meets is indisputably tragic, and at the end we find him to be a total wreck, mentally and physically. In view of this, if one of the two labels has to be chosen, the play should be regarded as a tragedy despite its comic elements and its humour (both of words and of situations).
A modern day classic, bedecked with layers of meaning!!
March 11, 2018
When I was still at school we were taken one afternoon to our local theatre for a workshop on Harold Pinter. I can鈥檛 remember what we were asked to do (maybe nothing?), but I remember the session finished with a performance of The Dumb Waiter and before that one of the actors had talked to us, trying to explain Pinter. If I remember correctly he explained Pinter in terms of naturalism, that his repetitions, for instance, reflected normal speech. This seems nonsense. Pinter鈥檚 dialogue might be built on spoken English, but it is a deeply stylized version of spoken English 鈥� in fact, we could almost call it Pinteresque. I can鈥檛 remember if this workshop was my first encounter with Pinter, but I鈥檝e always liked Pinter鈥檚 dialogue: for whatever reason it chimes with me. One of the fascinations of The Birthday Party is in the collision of naturalism with stylization. Samuel Beckett鈥檚 influence on Pinter is often remarked upon, but this is Beckett placed in the detailed naturalism of an English seaside boarding house: Vladimir and Estragon in a kitchen sink drama. And Pinter brings in aspects of popular culture: a norm today, but in 1950s British culture bringing the low brow into the high was an oddity and maybe a scandal. Meg and Petey seem to be out of a comic music hall routine, Goldberg and McCann are part of a long line of sinister double acts leading to John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction. And Pinter鈥檚 stylized dialogue flips from the comic to the sinister, sometimes being both at the same time. The result in strangely unnerving, the characters often seemingly indulging in self conscious routines. In narrative terms we never quite find out what is happening: we never, for instance, quite find out what is the basis of the relationship between Stanley and Goldberg and McCann. This might not be so strange today, but in the late 1950s English theatre it would have been deeply disconcerting. The development of The Birthday Party is also strange: it begins with Stanley as the central figure, but by the end he has become a passive and silent figure, Goldberg and McCann鈥檚 double act now taking central stage. Personally I find the end of the play less intriguing than the beginning, but overall I find the play provokingly strange. But I presume it is not as strange today as it was 60 years ago.
December 9, 2018
From BBC Radio 3 - Drama on 3:
Stanley, an erstwhile pianist lives in a dingy seaside boarding house run by Meg and Petey. He is comfortable there, like a surrogate son. Two sinister strangers turn up - Goldberg and McCann. They claim to know him from the past. They turn Stanley's birthday party into a menacing and terrifying encounter. Franz Kafka meets Donald McGill in Pinter鈥檚 iconic comedy of menace.
Stanley ..... Toby Jones
Goldberg ..... Henry Goodman
McCann ..... Stephen Rae
Meg ..... Maggie Steed
Petey ..... Peter Wight
Lulu ..... Jaime Winstone
Director/Producer Gary Brown
An Irishman and a Jew walk into a seaside boarding house. And what? A parable about power and persecution? Or maybe it's marginalised minorities taking their revenge against seedy Albion? Pinter's slippery and sly black comedy has a huge resonance for today.
Harold Pinter was one of the writers championed by the Third Programme 鈥� and in the late 1950s commissioned one of his early plays before he had his first stage hit. Pinter himself acknowledged the role the Third had had in his own cultural education. For the 70th anniversary, Drama on 3 presents a new production of The Birthday Party, now considered a Pinter classic, but which on its first London opening only lasted a week.
Stanley, an erstwhile pianist lives in a dingy seaside boarding house run by Meg and Petey. He is comfortable there, like a surrogate son. Two sinister strangers turn up - Goldberg and McCann. They claim to know him from the past. They turn Stanley's birthday party into a menacing and terrifying encounter. Franz Kafka meets Donald McGill in Pinter鈥檚 iconic comedy of menace.
Stanley ..... Toby Jones
Goldberg ..... Henry Goodman
McCann ..... Stephen Rae
Meg ..... Maggie Steed
Petey ..... Peter Wight
Lulu ..... Jaime Winstone
Director/Producer Gary Brown
An Irishman and a Jew walk into a seaside boarding house. And what? A parable about power and persecution? Or maybe it's marginalised minorities taking their revenge against seedy Albion? Pinter's slippery and sly black comedy has a huge resonance for today.
Harold Pinter was one of the writers championed by the Third Programme 鈥� and in the late 1950s commissioned one of his early plays before he had his first stage hit. Pinter himself acknowledged the role the Third had had in his own cultural education. For the 70th anniversary, Drama on 3 presents a new production of The Birthday Party, now considered a Pinter classic, but which on its first London opening only lasted a week.
June 30, 2023
Harold Pinter, l'ami et collaborateur de Samuel Beckett, a d茅velopp茅 un sous-genre du th茅芒tre de l'absurde qui s'appelle le "th茅芒tre de menace" dont "L'anniversaire" est une des pi猫ces les plus marquantes. Chez Pinter l'homme vit dans une situation absurde et se dirige vers un sort horrifique.
Pinter 茅tait un vrai homme de th茅芒tre. Mon exp茅rience personnelle est que sur la sc猫ne les pi猫ces de Pinter sont beaucoup plus puissantes que celles de son maitre. N茅anmoins il faut reconnaitre que la force de frappe des pi猫ces de Pinter comme pour celles des auteurs de l'茅cole de l'Absurde se d茅grade tr猫s rapidement. C'est tr猫s 茅tonnant la premi猫re que l'on assiste 脿 une pi猫ce qui n'a ni conflit dramatique ni d茅nouement ni explication de qui sont les personnages. Apr猫s deux ou trois soir茅es de ce genre au th茅芒tre, la recette devient tr猫s ennuyante.
Pourtant, "L'anniversaire" est diaboliquement bien 茅crit. Malgr茅 fait que je suis bien blas茅 par le th茅芒tre de l'absurde, cette pi猫ce a gard茅 mon int茅r锚t du d茅but jusqu'脿 la fin. J'esp猫re "L'anniversaire" vous plaira autant qu'il m'a plu.
Pinter 茅tait un vrai homme de th茅芒tre. Mon exp茅rience personnelle est que sur la sc猫ne les pi猫ces de Pinter sont beaucoup plus puissantes que celles de son maitre. N茅anmoins il faut reconnaitre que la force de frappe des pi猫ces de Pinter comme pour celles des auteurs de l'茅cole de l'Absurde se d茅grade tr猫s rapidement. C'est tr猫s 茅tonnant la premi猫re que l'on assiste 脿 une pi猫ce qui n'a ni conflit dramatique ni d茅nouement ni explication de qui sont les personnages. Apr猫s deux ou trois soir茅es de ce genre au th茅芒tre, la recette devient tr猫s ennuyante.
Pourtant, "L'anniversaire" est diaboliquement bien 茅crit. Malgr茅 fait que je suis bien blas茅 par le th茅芒tre de l'absurde, cette pi猫ce a gard茅 mon int茅r锚t du d茅but jusqu'脿 la fin. J'esp猫re "L'anniversaire" vous plaira autant qu'il m'a plu.
June 16, 2015
whaaaaa...?
This play is brilliant. I feel a little confused but in a mind-blown way. I feel a lot of pathos for Stanley, who has his comfortably peaceful although mundane life disturbed by two strangers (who really put the 'strange' in 'strangers'!) staying at the boarding-house in just one day. But Stanley himself is such an enigma to me too, it's hard to feel very personally for him. And the two strangers - what on earth is this 'job' and mission they're there to do???! I like how Harold Pinter approaches the complex concept of the human condition/psyche by seriously perplexing his audience/readers along the way! Harold Pinter is a magician with dialogue and the whole dramatic pacing, it doesn't get boring at all! Gosh those snappy "interrogations" by Goldberg and McCann kept me sitting straight up!
I can't wait to start discussing this one in classes, first to answer some basic 'what is going on?' questions and then to discuss the very interesting layers of meaning.
This play is brilliant. I feel a little confused but in a mind-blown way. I feel a lot of pathos for Stanley, who has his comfortably peaceful although mundane life disturbed by two strangers (who really put the 'strange' in 'strangers'!) staying at the boarding-house in just one day. But Stanley himself is such an enigma to me too, it's hard to feel very personally for him. And the two strangers - what on earth is this 'job' and mission they're there to do???! I like how Harold Pinter approaches the complex concept of the human condition/psyche by seriously perplexing his audience/readers along the way! Harold Pinter is a magician with dialogue and the whole dramatic pacing, it doesn't get boring at all! Gosh those snappy "interrogations" by Goldberg and McCann kept me sitting straight up!
I can't wait to start discussing this one in classes, first to answer some basic 'what is going on?' questions and then to discuss the very interesting layers of meaning.
August 10, 2016
丕亘夭賵乇丿 丕賲丕 賳賴 亘賴 讴蹖賮蹖鬲 亘讴鬲
賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 丿乇丿 亘蹖趩丕乇诏蹖 丌丿賲蹖 爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕 丕賳夭賵丕 賴賲 讴丕乇卮 丿乇爻鬲 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 賴乇 趩賴 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 丕夭 賲賴賱讴賴 丿賵乇 亘賲丕賳丿 亘丕賱丕禺乇賴 倬丕蹖卮 诏蹖乇 丕爻鬲 賵 诏賵蹖蹖 賴乇 乇賮鬲丕乇蹖 丨鬲蹖 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賳賲丕丿蹖賳 禺賵丿 乇丕 倬賳賴丕賳 讴乇丿賳 貙 讴賳卮蹖 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 趩丕乇賴 丕蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賮乇丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲
貙 倬爻 亘賴鬲乇 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 趩卮賲 亘爻鬲賳 賵 诏賵卮賴 賳卮蹖賳蹖 貙 丕毓鬲乇丕囟 乇丕 趩丕乇賴 讴賳蹖賲 貙
倬蹖賳鬲乇 丕蹖賳 乇丕 賳賲蹖 诏賵蹖丿 賵賱蹖 賲賳 丕蹖賳 胤賵乇 賳鬲蹖噩賴 诏乇賮鬲賲 !!!!
賳賲丕蹖卮賳丕賲賴 丿乇丿 亘蹖趩丕乇诏蹖 丌丿賲蹖 爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕 丕賳夭賵丕 賴賲 讴丕乇卮 丿乇爻鬲 賳賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 賴乇 趩賴 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 丕夭 賲賴賱讴賴 丿賵乇 亘賲丕賳丿 亘丕賱丕禺乇賴 倬丕蹖卮 诏蹖乇 丕爻鬲 賵 诏賵蹖蹖 賴乇 乇賮鬲丕乇蹖 丨鬲蹖 丿乇 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賳賲丕丿蹖賳 禺賵丿 乇丕 倬賳賴丕賳 讴乇丿賳 貙 讴賳卮蹖 賲丨爻賵亘 賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 趩丕乇賴 丕蹖 亘乇丕蹖 賮乇丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲
貙 倬爻 亘賴鬲乇 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 趩卮賲 亘爻鬲賳 賵 诏賵卮賴 賳卮蹖賳蹖 貙 丕毓鬲乇丕囟 乇丕 趩丕乇賴 讴賳蹖賲 貙
倬蹖賳鬲乇 丕蹖賳 乇丕 賳賲蹖 诏賵蹖丿 賵賱蹖 賲賳 丕蹖賳 胤賵乇 賳鬲蹖噩賴 诏乇賮鬲賲 !!!!
June 17, 2022
To be honest, I'm still not really sure what to make of this play. I think I mostly enjoyed it, but there are clearly some obvious questions and uncertainties which continue to buzz around it long after you've finished the final page. I suppose this can be seen as both a good and bad thing. Oh dear my attempt at a review appears to be as ambiguous as this strange and dark play.
January 30, 2024
I'm not quite sure I got the point of the story. That may be a lack on my part but I felt that the themes, as I later figured out by some reviews and analysis, were too vague. There were some pretty interesting dialogue exchanges in it though.
December 11, 2018
Recommended by Brazilliant, it has been many years since first encountering this. Wonder if this revisit with Toby Jones will tickle me into a better opinion.Description: Stanley, an erstwhile pianist lives in a dingy seaside boarding house run by Meg and Petey. He is comfortable there, like a surrogate son. Two sinister strangers turn up - Goldberg and McCann. They claim to know him from the past. They turn Stanley's birthday party into a menacing and terrifying encounter. Franz Kafka meets Donald McGill in Pinter鈥檚 iconic comedy of menace.
Stanley ..... Toby Jones
Goldberg ..... Henry Goodman
McCann ..... Stephen Rae
Meg ..... Maggie Steed
Petey ..... Peter Wight
Lulu ..... Jaime Winstone
Director/Producer Gary Brown
Brought to you by the word 'succulent'
An Irishman and a Jew walk into a seaside boarding house. And what? A parable about power and persecution? Or maybe it's marginalised minorities taking their revenge against seedy Albion? Pinter's slippery and sly black comedy has a huge resonance for today.
Harold Pinter was one of the writers championed by the Third Programme 鈥� and in the late 1950s commissioned one of his early plays before he had his first stage hit. Pinter himself acknowledged the role the Third had had in his own cultural education. For the 70th anniversary, Drama on 3 presents a new production of The Birthday Party, now considered a Pinter classic, but which on its first London opening only lasted a week.<
December 12, 2016
This play is about a shady thirty-year old named Stanley, staying for well over a year now in a seaside boardinghouse run by Meg and Petey, a couple in their sixties. Everything is all right until Petey announces that two men asked him for a place to spend the night. Stan seems concerned when Meg tells him about the new arrivals. Clearly, Stan has done something wrong. At least, he is hiding away from something.
Later that morning, the two gentlemen, Goldberg and McCann, arrive. Obviously, they are here on a mission; and this mission is about Stan. Meg reveals that she is preparing a birthday party for Stan, and Goldberg loves the idea鈥攁lthough when she confronts Stan about it later and reminds him that it is his birthday today to cheer him up, he denies and says that it won鈥檛 be until next month.
Anyway, everything culminates in absurdity until the very end.
As for the style, it鈥檚 Hemingway pure and simple: the power of the unsaid, the repressed, his iceberg theory 鈥� the telegraphic telegraphic.
Later that morning, the two gentlemen, Goldberg and McCann, arrive. Obviously, they are here on a mission; and this mission is about Stan. Meg reveals that she is preparing a birthday party for Stan, and Goldberg loves the idea鈥攁lthough when she confronts Stan about it later and reminds him that it is his birthday today to cheer him up, he denies and says that it won鈥檛 be until next month.
Anyway, everything culminates in absurdity until the very end.
As for the style, it鈥檚 Hemingway pure and simple: the power of the unsaid, the repressed, his iceberg theory 鈥� the telegraphic telegraphic.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 486 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.