What do you think?
Rate this book
Volume Three: Joan of Arc / William Tell
Includes the plays Joan of Arc and William Tell
Two plays about historical characters whose fame has also raised them to the level of myth. In Joan of Arc (1801), Schiller allows his heroine a more glorious death than her historical execution at the stake, and imbues her with more passion, and compassion, than is usually ascribed to the actual Joan.
In William Tell (1805), often regarded as his greatest play, Schiller creates a vivid sense of time and place - medieval Switzerland - and in his troubled hero, the accidental revolutionary Tell, create a complex and fascinating figure.
One of the great figures in German literature, Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805) was in some ways the most significant playwright of his day, numbering among his devotees Coleridge and Carlyle. His plays are known for their originality of form, vivid stage imagery and powerful language, faithfully rendered in Robert David MacDonald's acclaimed translations
Two plays about historical characters whose fame has also raised them to the level of myth. In Joan of Arc (1801), Schiller allows his heroine a more glorious death than her historical execution at the stake, and imbues her with more passion, and compassion, than is usually ascribed to the actual Joan.
In William Tell (1805), often regarded as his greatest play, Schiller creates a vivid sense of time and place - medieval Switzerland - and in his troubled hero, the accidental revolutionary Tell, create a complex and fascinating figure.
One of the great figures in German literature, Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805) was in some ways the most significant playwright of his day, numbering among his devotees Coleridge and Carlyle. His plays are known for their originality of form, vivid stage imagery and powerful language, faithfully rendered in Robert David MacDonald's acclaimed translations
248 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2006
28 people want to read
About the author
Friedrich Schiller
5,411 books863 followersPeople best know long didactic poems and historical plays, such as
Don Carlos
(1787) and
William Tell
(1804), of leading romanticist German poet, dramatist, and historian Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller.
This philosopher and dramatist struck up a productive if complicated friendship with already famous and influential Johann Wolfgang von Goethe during the last eighteen years of his life and encouraged Goethe to finish works that he left merely as sketches; they greatly discussed issues concerning aesthetics and thus gave way to a period, now referred to as classicism of Weimar. They also worked together on Die Xenien ( The Xenies ), a collection of short but harsh satires that verbally attacked perceived enemies of their aesthetic agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedri...
This philosopher and dramatist struck up a productive if complicated friendship with already famous and influential Johann Wolfgang von Goethe during the last eighteen years of his life and encouraged Goethe to finish works that he left merely as sketches; they greatly discussed issues concerning aesthetics and thus gave way to a period, now referred to as classicism of Weimar. They also worked together on Die Xenien ( The Xenies ), a collection of short but harsh satires that verbally attacked perceived enemies of their aesthetic agenda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedri...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 20, 2020
See my review of Joan of Arc here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
William Tell *** William Tell is a strangely unsatisfying play. We want a story of a man compelled by injustice to rise up and overthrow the shackles of tyranny, serving as an inspiration for a mass uprising that restores freedom to the swiss people. But that’s not what Schiller gives us.
Tell is stands in contrast to the other Swiss men of the play. Tell is certainly brave – and he’s presented as almost foolhardy. And the other men are brave, but more cautious. And whereas they have tradition and rich culture and history of helping each other. Tell is a loner, an individualist, almost misanthropic, wanting to owe nothing to no one. He tells stories of the mountain and the hunt. And while the other men are compelled by the story of Halden’s blinding to join forces against evil, Tell is unmoved, and will not act until the evil is personal – until it touches his. And by the time Tell rises up, the other swiss men around had long before decided to bring down the tyrant.
Even in their revenge, they are different. Tell ambushes Gessler, killing him from a distance with an arrow when Gessler’s not expecting it. The other swiss men assault castles and face the risks and dangers head on.
In contrast to all of them is the Duke of Swabia who assassinates the Emperor for withholding his inheritance. It is, by comparison, a rather petty gripe for murder. Tell refuses to embrace him, but does not completely shun him either. One feels that the other swiss men would have treated the Duke the same. Buy why bring this in the play? Is this to make the motives of the confederates and Tell seem more noble? Yet doesn’t Tell’s revenge have a squalid sense to it. Yet he is celebrated above all for the successful rebellion. Why? Would it not have succeeded had he been deep in the dungeon as Gessler intended? Couldn’t someone else have ambushed the Emperor’s man?
It's a strange story, and the poetry seems rather flat. No other character than Tell comes to life, even though there is a lot of emoting and righteous indignation. I can’t really recommend it.
William Tell *** William Tell is a strangely unsatisfying play. We want a story of a man compelled by injustice to rise up and overthrow the shackles of tyranny, serving as an inspiration for a mass uprising that restores freedom to the swiss people. But that’s not what Schiller gives us.
Tell is stands in contrast to the other Swiss men of the play. Tell is certainly brave – and he’s presented as almost foolhardy. And the other men are brave, but more cautious. And whereas they have tradition and rich culture and history of helping each other. Tell is a loner, an individualist, almost misanthropic, wanting to owe nothing to no one. He tells stories of the mountain and the hunt. And while the other men are compelled by the story of Halden’s blinding to join forces against evil, Tell is unmoved, and will not act until the evil is personal – until it touches his. And by the time Tell rises up, the other swiss men around had long before decided to bring down the tyrant.
Even in their revenge, they are different. Tell ambushes Gessler, killing him from a distance with an arrow when Gessler’s not expecting it. The other swiss men assault castles and face the risks and dangers head on.
In contrast to all of them is the Duke of Swabia who assassinates the Emperor for withholding his inheritance. It is, by comparison, a rather petty gripe for murder. Tell refuses to embrace him, but does not completely shun him either. One feels that the other swiss men would have treated the Duke the same. Buy why bring this in the play? Is this to make the motives of the confederates and Tell seem more noble? Yet doesn’t Tell’s revenge have a squalid sense to it. Yet he is celebrated above all for the successful rebellion. Why? Would it not have succeeded had he been deep in the dungeon as Gessler intended? Couldn’t someone else have ambushed the Emperor’s man?
It's a strange story, and the poetry seems rather flat. No other character than Tell comes to life, even though there is a lot of emoting and righteous indignation. I can’t really recommend it.
November 12, 2010
Schiller's Joan of Arc made me cry, and I don't usually actually cry when reading a book. That should say enough about how wonderful I thought this little literary jewel is.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews