Sign in with Facebook
Loading...
52nd out of 252 books
—
102 voters
The Homecoming
In an old and slightly seedy house in North London there lives a family of men: Max, the aging but still aggressive patriarch; his younger, ineffectual brother Sam; and two of Max's three sons, neither of whom is married -- Lenny, a small-time pimp, and Joey, who dreams of success as a boxer. Into this sinister abode comes the eldest son, Teddy, who, having spent the past...more
Paperback, 96 pages
Published
January 11th 1994
by Grove Press
(first published 1965)
Friend Reviews
To see what your friends thought of this book,
please sign up.
Community Reviews
(showing
1-30
of
3,000)
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it,
click here.
یک نمایشنامه منسجم و دوست داشتنی از مرد دوست داشتنی تآتر جهان. مثل بقیه کارهای پینتر دیالوگها پر بود از سوءتفاهمها و دیالوگهای بلندی که به مونولوگ شبیه میشد، دیالوگهای بیهودهای که توضیحات اضافه انسانها بود (چیزی که در دنیای مدرن بین افراد اتفاق میوفته).
اصلیترین موردی که در این نمایشنامه به چشم میخوره بحث مادر-معشوقه هستش. زن به مثابه اوبژه در دنیای مدرن و خانواده هستهای. حتی این اوبژه شدگی زن در بین قشر روشنفکر و آکادمیک (که نمایندهش تدی هستش و دیگر همکارانش که قرار مشتریهای ماشین...more
اصلیترین موردی که در این نمایشنامه به چشم میخوره بحث مادر-معشوقه هستش. زن به مثابه اوبژه در دنیای مدرن و خانواده هستهای. حتی این اوبژه شدگی زن در بین قشر روشنفکر و آکادمیک (که نمایندهش تدی هستش و دیگر همکارانش که قرار مشتریهای ماشین...more
1 like · like · see review
view 2 comments
Incredibly disturbing...
Without painting broad strokes of flagrant violence, obscene language, or the like, Pinter still manages to create an environment of unparalleled menace. His tools are simply language (or, rather, what isn't said) and layers of paradox that rise from a triumviri of inconsistent character behaviors, statuses, and conceptions of the past.
While reading, I found myself continually doubting the "validity" of what nearly every character did and said. Did I mention this play is...more
Without painting broad strokes of flagrant violence, obscene language, or the like, Pinter still manages to create an environment of unparalleled menace. His tools are simply language (or, rather, what isn't said) and layers of paradox that rise from a triumviri of inconsistent character behaviors, statuses, and conceptions of the past.
While reading, I found myself continually doubting the "validity" of what nearly every character did and said. Did I mention this play is...more
I saw a film version of this play and didn't think much of it at the time. I wasn't sure how Pinter got famous. But after having read this play I see the wit and humor at play amidst the deeply disturbing storyline and personal interactions. If I watched the film again I am pretty sure I would enjoy it much more this time.
Pinter really had a gift for silences, unanswered questions, half-made statements. Much of the subtext of the play is hinted at rather than exposed, which puts a great deal of...more
Pinter really had a gift for silences, unanswered questions, half-made statements. Much of the subtext of the play is hinted at rather than exposed, which puts a great deal of...more
There are a few authors (more often playwrites than novelists) from a certain school that seem to be able to get away with seemingly doing the same thing again and again, and Pinter is one of those to me. His form seems to be "amass a group of insane characters together with one straight man, and then let them play out their various madnesses."
In this play, he does that, but as the play went on, it turned into a disturbing criticism of the roles men expect women to play in the world and women's...more
In this play, he does that, but as the play went on, it turned into a disturbing criticism of the roles men expect women to play in the world and women's...more
One of my favourite plays, a great work, even for Pinter. The plot may seem arbitary to most, bordering on the pointless. But the imagery created and the constant power struggles between the main characters make for an amazing read. Once again, i can't stress enough how much better it is to see a play performed, there is, however, a great film adaptation of this which does a good job of getting the story line across. The best thing about this play is its use of the unspoken word, the constant us...more
Brilliant.
"Very few people in the world understand this play, and Harold Pinter refuses to let anyone in on his secret." Dr. Magidson told my class. "When I directed this play, a couple people threw-up."
The setting of this play is simple: a grown-up, educated, man and wife visits his dad and brothers in the house they grew up in. But right off the bat, the reader realizes that even the simple plot is mixed with this absurd "Waiting For Godot" conversation.
A highlight of the absurdity:
-The dad tr...more
"Very few people in the world understand this play, and Harold Pinter refuses to let anyone in on his secret." Dr. Magidson told my class. "When I directed this play, a couple people threw-up."
The setting of this play is simple: a grown-up, educated, man and wife visits his dad and brothers in the house they grew up in. But right off the bat, the reader realizes that even the simple plot is mixed with this absurd "Waiting For Godot" conversation.
A highlight of the absurdity:
-The dad tr...more
Yet again, I had to read this as part of my course. I'll tell you right now. I was bored. So, so bored.
I always think it's hard to 'read' a play, rather than 'see' it. But I just didn't like what this was trying to achieve.
The beginning was slow.
The middle was slow.
And then POW! The end gets weird with a beard.
It's not very long though.. Which is always a plus, since if this was any longer I would have tried to cut myself with the pages..
I still gave it two stars because from a literary point o...more
I always think it's hard to 'read' a play, rather than 'see' it. But I just didn't like what this was trying to achieve.
The beginning was slow.
The middle was slow.
And then POW! The end gets weird with a beard.
It's not very long though.. Which is always a plus, since if this was any longer I would have tried to cut myself with the pages..
I still gave it two stars because from a literary point o...more
I suppose I could have better prepared myself for reading this play... but I didn't. This play was just a bit too bizarre for me (and I have a very high tolerance of the bizarre.) I can recognize what aspects make it a good and interesting piece, but it felt like a play escalating out of control for no reason. Perhaps had I been prepared for a more absurdist style this would be less of an issue. The end was a major WTF?!?!?! I suppose I should have seen it coming but I don't know how you could g...more
Truly great. An icy stiletto of a play.
This is the play English majors should read. The interpretations one can make on this play, and the freedom of it's dialogue, almost allows for infinite possibilities of the play by director without changing the time period or setting, as I have seen so many directors do in order to make a play feel "fresh". This play is forever fresh, because it challenges the audience unlike any other. The simple will be content in stating that it is an oddball comedy, while the observant will cry out what a m...more
May 29, 2013
Nikhilesh
rated it
5 of 5 stars
·
review of another edition
Shelves:
all-time-favourites
Perversion, voyeurism, moral corruption (one need not mention infidelity after this)....not the actual act of sex, seem to be the only release of the pent up sexual energy and frustration.
Yet the suggestions of sex and incest do not repulse me so much. I was afraid they might but they didn't.
I dont want to give away anything so I'll just say that Teddy, - the eldest of the three sons of Max, with his wife Ruth comes from America to his home in England where the two sons Lenny and Joey live with...more
Yet the suggestions of sex and incest do not repulse me so much. I was afraid they might but they didn't.
I dont want to give away anything so I'll just say that Teddy, - the eldest of the three sons of Max, with his wife Ruth comes from America to his home in England where the two sons Lenny and Joey live with...more
One comes away with an impression that Pinter observed the lives of a group of pet rats for a few hours and then overlaid their meaningless squabbles and fervent sexuality with language. It's interesting, but it's interesting in the same way that watching those rodents is interesting: The audience quickly realizes that there can be no greater complexity than the activities of the moment to moment, so, much like the characters, it loses all obligation (and opportunity) to question consequences an...more
written in 1964, the homecoming is one of pinter's most controversial plays. filled with sly ambiguities, imperceptible nuances, and caustic relations, this play leaves one reeling if only for the magnitudes of disorder contained within. never one for platitudes, pinter, as cited by the swedish academy, inarguably "forces entry into oppression's closed rooms." with a master stroke, he is, perhaps, at his boldest in the homecoming.
in two acts, pinter artfully manages to delve deep into familial d...more
in two acts, pinter artfully manages to delve deep into familial d...more
I have very little to say about Harold Pinter's The Homecoming. Like Waiting for Godot, I think the audience's opinion on The Homecoming hinges on whether it views theatrical arts as a solely cerebral experience or as a source of entertainment.
Though exaggeration (oh god I hope through exaggeration), Pinter's story of a man and his wife's visit to the man's childhood home and family comments on issues of power, masculinity, family dynamics, and the angel/whore dualism that has haunted women's d...more
Though exaggeration (oh god I hope through exaggeration), Pinter's story of a man and his wife's visit to the man's childhood home and family comments on issues of power, masculinity, family dynamics, and the angel/whore dualism that has haunted women's d...more
dull and pretentious, much like Pinter himself. this play is not worth wasting valuable brain cells on. a multitude of pointless contradictions. misogyny and violence for the sae of shocking the audience with no polemic in mind. Pinter does not even live up to the idea of a theatre of 'cheap thrills' as even his vulgar writing becomes boring with his natural overuse of the aptly named 'pinter pause' and his complete lack of any understanding of the human condition. overrated is an understatement...more
Ok sure Ruth likes to get around. Yes this might never happen and yes the play is very twisted. It includes profanity and just plain wrong scenes, conversations, actions etc; but I don't see the need to label it as horrible or the worst ever. It has its beauty: complex plot and amazing characters that kept true to themselves from beginning to end.I spend a lot of time trying to figure out what they would say next and I was always wrong. Well it did make me kind of sick and embarrassed but that w...more
What did I just read?
I didn't like this. I didn't understand the characters' motivations. I didn't understand what was going on. It just made me feel bad.
Maybe if I saw it. Maybe I read the meaning behind the words wrong.
But it was creepy and weird.
I feel like I should be able to tell whether the father molested his sons or not. That should be obvious by the end, right? Or what does it say about me that it's this ambivalent part of the play?
And that's just it - I didn't really get it.
I didn't like this. I didn't understand the characters' motivations. I didn't understand what was going on. It just made me feel bad.
Maybe if I saw it. Maybe I read the meaning behind the words wrong.
But it was creepy and weird.
I feel like I should be able to tell whether the father molested his sons or not. That should be obvious by the end, right? Or what does it say about me that it's this ambivalent part of the play?
And that's just it - I didn't really get it.
Pinter and his absurdist peers seem to suggest that in order to "get" absurdist drama such as The Homecoming, one must leave moral convictions and long-held beliefs at the door—one must look on with a sort of emotional detachment. And yet, after seeing how truly destructive this level of detachment became for Teddy—both personally and externally—why should readers follow suit? Once you get over the initial shock value, there's not much left.
Lenny: Did you eat my cheese roll?
Teddy: Yes.
Lenny: I made that roll myself. I cut it and put the butter on it. I sliced the piece of cheese and put in between. I put that on a plate and I put it in the sideboard. I did that all before I went out. Now I come back and you've eaten it.
Teddy: Well, what are you going to do about it?
Lenny: I am waiting for you to apologize.
Teddy: But I took it deliberately, Lenny.
Brilliant.
Teddy: Yes.
Lenny: I made that roll myself. I cut it and put the butter on it. I sliced the piece of cheese and put in between. I put that on a plate and I put it in the sideboard. I did that all before I went out. Now I come back and you've eaten it.
Teddy: Well, what are you going to do about it?
Lenny: I am waiting for you to apologize.
Teddy: But I took it deliberately, Lenny.
Brilliant.
This play can be viewed in the context of relationships between males, but that still doesn't account for the extreme sexism perpetuated by Pinter. Pinter creates a disturbing setting fraught with violence and power grabbing. The play ends with Ruth submitting to be both sides whore, this culmination of his dehumanizing view of women is despicable.
Ah Absurdism. Not my favourite -ism, and it is clearly demonstrated why that is in this play. I prefer it when story lines have an element of realism in them, and I suppose in a way this does, in a very strange real world. Violence, swearing and degradation run riot until it becomes so unbelievable it's challenging to read (and to view, I imagine).
To me, this read a lot like a comedy, albeit a very dark comedy. I doubt this was the case when it came out, as i never hear the word "comedy" associated with this play. I love Pinter's use of language and pauses, feels very natural. The ending seems quite misogynistic, and I don't see the "female empowerment" that I have heard many critics refer to.
Sick. Just Sick. I don't care if there's a deeper meaning to this book. To make up a story so immensely wrong is unbelievable.
Great job, Harold. You just proved yourself one of the most twisted-in-the-head people on Earth. Oh, sorry my mistake. In the afterlife. Hopefully this strange imagination of yours didnt go with you... rest in peace.
Great job, Harold. You just proved yourself one of the most twisted-in-the-head people on Earth. Oh, sorry my mistake. In the afterlife. Hopefully this strange imagination of yours didnt go with you... rest in peace.
This is one of my favorite plays, it's SO,OOOO good! It takes a couple of reads (and in my case a script analysis class) to understand all the meanings and subtexts and such but once you get it it's crazy good! I actually enjoyed it even when I didn't understand it to be honest. There are a lot of WTF moments, such a brilliant story!
A bizarre play to say the least. Still Pinter shows his brilliance here and has a hell of a lot to say on the subject of family values. The second act took me out of the play now again because of the quick decent down the rabbit hole to Bizzaro-World. I must say I'm still feeling a bit of whiplash.
read this again. pinter is best. can't believe mr. schecter told me to read this in highschool. was able, even when younger, to get something of it, but don't think I even truly got how "barbaric" it was. or do now. well, it is. what a damn text. so many potential readings. "menace", yes.
I am not sure what to make of this play. I'm not going to rate it, until I've had some time to think about it. It was definitely unique, but as it lacked typical theatrical conventions such as a climax, it was hard to even wrap my head around.
هيچوخ از تآترِ ابزرد خوشام نمياومده، چه برسه به اينكه با المانآئى مثِ گسستِ ارزشآى كلاسيك-طور بين انسانآ و نا-به-روالىآىِ جنسى همراه شه؛ درواقه كمدىِ تلخ نمایشنامه هم صرفاً برِ همين تبديل به يه مضحكهی اعصاب-خورد-كن شد برام. اميدم هم به پينتر خيلى كم شد
I would not voluntarily read this (I had to read it for university). It is not my cup of tea. However, it displays dominance and the struggle for power well, so is great for academic purposes.
There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Be the first to start one »
Harold Pinter, CH, CBE, was an English playwright, screenwriter, actor, director, political activist and poet. He was one of the most influential playwrights of modern times. In 2005 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.
After publishing poetry and acting in school plays as a teenager in London, Pinter began his professional theatrical career in 1951, touring throughout Ireland. From 1952,...more
More about Harold Pinter...
After publishing poetry and acting in school plays as a teenager in London, Pinter began his professional theatrical career in 1951, touring throughout Ireland. From 1952,...more
Share This Book
No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »
