Découvrez des millions d'e-books, de livres audio et bien plus encore avec un essai gratuit

Seulement $11.99/mois après la période d'essai. Annulez à tout moment.

Troïlus et Cressida
Troïlus et Cressida
Troïlus et Cressida
Livre électronique205 pages2 heures

Troïlus et Cressida

Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles

4/5

()

Lire l'aperçu
LangueFrançais
Date de sortie1 janv. 1926
Troïlus et Cressida

En savoir plus sur François Guizot

Auteurs associés

Lié à Troïlus et Cressida

Livres électroniques liés

Articles associés

Avis sur Troïlus et Cressida

Évaluation : 3.7857142857142856 sur 5 étoiles
4/5

14 notations15 avis

Qu'avez-vous pensé ?

Appuyer pour évaluer

L'avis doit comporter au moins 10 mots

  • Évaluation : 5 sur 5 étoiles
    5/5
    The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins is a very suspensful book. It is very descriptive so you can picture what is happening. It is mainly about a 16 year old girl named Katniss. She took her younger sister's place in the Hunger Games.Twenty- four tributes will be in the arena fighting for their life, but there can only be one victor. Who will make it out alive?
  • Évaluation : 2 sur 5 étoiles
    2/5
    You know what I just don't get this play. Apparently a lot of people don't get it and it's labeled one of the "problem plays", but you know what, Timon of Athens was one of those too and that play made perfect sense to me. But this one.. just seems like a bunch of random shit that happens. Looking at the wikipedia writeup (which is not really the best source for this kind of information) I see it suggested that the joke is that a variety of conventionally epic tragedies are set up, and then subverted by either not resolving themselves or resolving themselves in the sort of petty venal way they'd happen in real life. In retrospect I can kind of sort of see that but it's not funny to me. Also the structure/pacing is really bizarre. Practically nothing happens in the first four acts and then the fifth act has like a dozen scenes and takes up a third of the page count.
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    Shakespeare's brutal and brilliant deconstruction of the Iliad is one of the most enjoyable surprises I've had in reading. Achilles is a brute and a fraud. Ajax is a chivalrous dunce. Agamemnon is a cipher. Menelaus is just a cuckold. Ulysses and Nestor are puppeteers whose main military virtue is their ability to manipulate the two strongmen. Thersites isn't a troublemaker but the most bitter of Shakespeare's jesters, tolerated by the powerful Grecians instead of beaten. Hector on the other hand is even nobler than he was in the Iliad and is murdered in the most cowardly way imaginable.Nothing is more surprising that the characters of the star crossed lovers, whose story ends with the woman changing her heart with her fortune and her enraged former lover consigning her to blazes and becoming a cruel killing machine. The play thus ends not with the tragic deaths of the lovers but with Cressida's pandering uncle complaining about the physical ailments his career has caused him.Did I say that Shakespeare was deconstructing Homer? On second thought, Shakespeare was deconstructing Shakespeare.
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    ** spoiler alert **This is a pretty good play. It doesn't fit the usual categories, being filled with comic scenes and speeches but following with an abrupt bleak ending. I found the dialogue throughout to be entertaining and clever, and the spoof of the Iliad very funny. The eponymous love affair is satirical. Troilus is a narcissistic and wordy brat, and Cressida a rather winning girl who can't say no. The love affair is at best a subplot to the Iliad satire, and it's most entertaining character the go-between Pandarus, who remarks that his name will be inherited by all panders to follow. Most of the main Iliad characters are presented satirically. All ends in a lengthy battle with many short scenes of individual combat, ending with the death of Hector in a rather unheroic attack by Achilles and his Myrmidons. Then a final comic soliloquy by Pandarus. If you like bawdy Shakespeare there is a lot of it here, including a large stock of gay humor in the Greek camp.
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    This is a cynical version of incidents in the Trojan war. An over-romantic Troilus thinks he is in love with Cressida. (She has the part of a life time.) She is young, sexy, flirtatious and aware of her need to make our for herself while the time is ripe. She is traded to the Greeks for a warrior and immediately starts flirting. Troilus is devasted by this when he sees her behavior. The other incident is Achilles' murder of Hector. It is ugly.
  • Évaluation : 3 sur 5 étoiles
    3/5
    This is one of Shakespeare's problem plays, meaning it doesn't fit neatly into the category of tragedy or comedy, but occupies its own hybrid niche. "Black comedy" or "scathing satire" would probably be a fairly apt description for this outing. It's actually a lot of fun to read, especially if you like humor flavored with a heavy dose of cynicism.The "romantic" leads of the play's title, Troilus and Cressida, are no Romeo and Juliet. Not even by a long shot. Troilus is a superficial lad, concerned only with glory and momentary pleasures, and his love for Cressida lasts only about as long as her maidenhood. Cressida is just as fickle as her lover, swiftly shifting her physical affections to the enemy camp when she gets traded for ransom. This play is very anachronistic. It's not the sort of tale that resides in the ancient dusty battles of Greek times; it's very much a product of Shakespeare's era. This is what makes it such an interesting read for me. It reflects the rapidly changing world of a burgeoning global market, a place where chaos, hypocrisy, and corruption were rife. There are numerous references in the play to venereal disease, especially the notorious pox (syphilis), which was just beginning its lengthy reign in Europe.I do love it when Shakespeare gets gross, and he obliges his disgusting side with unapologetic alacrity here. "Thou crusty botch of nature", "thou sarsenet flap for a sore eye", and so on.. Shakespeare is a demigod when it comes to heinous insults, and Troilus and Cressida is brimful of humdingers.I also love Shakespeare plays for the treasure-trove of words, some of which should still be in use instead of being consigned to obscurity.Two words from this play that caught my fancy:Oppugnancy - meaning opposition. I like its bouncy character, like a rubber ball on the tongue.Gloze - a verb meaning to comment, make excuses for, or to use ingratiating language.
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    A landmark for me. In this ?Year of Reading All the Shakespeare,? this play, the twenty-first in the list, is the first one that I'd never read before and really enjoyed. To me, Titus Andronicus was a pointless gorefest, Two Gentlemen of Verona was just dumb, and King Edward III was simply incoherent, but this ? well, it's not great ? not a Hamlet or Macbeth or Richard II ? but it's very good. While I'm quite familiar with the Iliad, the story of Troilus and Cressida was new to me. Aside from knowing that they were famous ?sundered lovers,? I came to their story pretty much cold. So now I'm curious about Chaucer's take on their tale. Shakespeare keeps to tradition with some characters ? Hector is noble, Ulysses is crafty, Nestor is ? verbose ? but several ?regulars? lose the sheen they generally have and are merely (if fairly plausibly) thugs (or, in Helen's case, a ?floozy?). Achilles in particular, comes off dreadfully. Thersites, though, who I didn't even remember from the Iliad, is transformed from ?nonentity? in Homer to a vividly realized dynamo of evil in Shakespeare's play. His equal opportunity hatred for everyone and everything ? Greek or Trojan, male or female ? is almost overwhelming in its intensity. Pandarus, another character from the Iliad I'd completely forgotten about, is also memorable in Shakespeare's telling, though in his case it is his sheer creepiness that makes him stand out. Marjorie Garber, in her brilliant Shakespeare After All, points out Pandarus's similarities to Juliet's nurse (in Romeo and Juliet), but, while the nurse is certainly foolish and shows an unwholesome enthusiasm for her young charge's deflowering, her prurience is nothing next to that of Cressida's uncle. Pandarus's eagerness to put his niece and the Trojan prince in bed together and his salacious comments in regard to their activities there are impressively icky. Cressida, unattractive though she is (except physically, I suppose) is at least interesting. A practical girl, with no illusions about her status as an object to be sold. The frequent comparisons between Helen and Cressida, so similar in appearance that the only difference is said to be that Cressida's hair is a shade darker, highlight the hypocrisies of their varying treatments. As Troilus says in the meeting over whether to return Helen and thus end the war...?Were it not glory that we more affectedThan the performance of our heaving spleens,I would not wish a drop of Trojan bloodSpent more in her defense. But, worthy Hector,She is a theme of honor and renown,A spur to valiant and magnanimous deeds,Whose present courage may beat down our foes,And fame in time to come canonize us?Cressida, however, is traded to the Greeks in return for a captured Trojan leader without a second thought (we are spared the scene where Paris prances around Priam's palace teasing Troilus with a rousing rendition of ?Mom and Dad and everyone love me best!). Poor Troilus. He gets marquee status, but his character is distinctly lacking in pizazz. The play's ?Ken doll,? he gets the girl, only to immediately lose her to a more powerful, more interesting man. Oh well. Their long term prospects weren't promising anyway.Along with reading the Folger Shakespeare Library edition, which has reasonable size print and fine notes, I listened to the Arkangel recording of this play, which is very well done. Recommended.
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5

    This is yet another novel which would not have come to my attention but for Goodreads and I would not have chosen to read it had it not been for the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the book of my Goodreads friends. I'm so glad that I did.

    For me, the most compelling aspect of the novel is what it says about our society. From the idea that rich and powerful people live on what is produced by poor people far away, to the concept of people being entertained by a reality television program the objective of which is survival at the expense of other contestants, to the depiction of a great “sporting” contest in which the success or failure of the contestants depends on their ability to attract wealthy sponsors, to the use of children killing other children as a weapon of control, these are all things that happen in the real world, right now. Certainly, the images are exaggerated*, but this only brings the reality of our world into sharper relief.

    I was engaged with the narrative from the very beginning. Although initially disappointed with Carolyn McCormick’s narration – I don’t think she does a great job with a number of the characters - I left my irritation with the narrator behind and fully entered the world of the novel. The details of the world are clever. For example, the depiction of the relationship between the Capitol and the Districts as akin to the relationship between ancient Rome and its empire is simply but effectively achieved by calling children who are sent to the Capitol to fight to the death in the Hunger Games “tributes” and by giving the Capitol’s inhabitants Latin names.

    Collins has also done well with the development of her characters. The novel is narrated by the sixteen-year-old heroine, Katniss Everdeen to whom Collins gives a very believable voice. Katniss is prickly, sullen and quite clueless about her own emotions, but she is smart, loyal and resourceful. It is interesting to watch her grow from resigned acceptance of the system in which she lives in general and of the Hunger Games in particular, to clarity about what those things represent, culminating in her light bulb moment, when she refers to the killing at the Hunger Games by its correct name - murder. Other characters are also well realised. This is particularly true of Haymitch, the alcoholic mentor and former Hunger Games champion, who shows the classic signs of a veteran with combat stress reaction.

    Successfully pulling off a first person, present tense narrative is no easy feat, given that the point of view has to remain solely that of the narrator. Collins achieves this without faltering. While Katniss speculates about what she can’t see and doesn’t know, the perspective remains hers. Even within the limitations imposed by this narrative style, Collins is able to let the reader know more than her heroine is aware of.

    As is to be expected from the subject matter, the novel contains graphic descriptions of violence. However, there is nothing about this which either encourages or glorifies violence - quite the contrary. The horrific situation in which the participants in the Hunger Games find themselves speaks for itself. Making choices in situations of adversity, friendship, loyalty and above all, what it means to be human are what the novel is really about.

    Overall, I found this audiobook riveting to listen to. The only reason I’m glad not to have read the book when it was first published is that I can go on to the second volume of the trilogy without delay.

    *There is no exaggeration in relation to the issue of children killing children. The plight of child soldiers has had a lot of exposure in social media in recent times. A friend of mine who works for the United Nations was posted in Uganda a few years ago, where his task was to re-unite child soldiers from the Lord’s Resistance Army with their families and communities. The sheer horror of what those children experienced trumps any fictional account of violence committed by and against children.
  • Évaluation : 5 sur 5 étoiles
    5/5
    5 starsRECOMMENDED!At the center of the remains of what was once North America stands Panem – a gleaming capital city. But it is a capital with a mean-streak. Having quelled a previous rebellion by the twelve surrounding districts (and destroying the 13th) Panem exercises its control over the districts that support them by requiring them to send one adolescent boy and girl each year to compete in The Hunger Games – a televised fight to the death with only one champion and twenty-three bodies. So when sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen’s younger sister is selected, Katniss volunteers to take her place. Survival is something she is used to in her brutal existence in District 12, but has it given her and edge to win the Hunger Games and survive so see her family again? Only if she can make all the right choices in who she can trust, and who she can’t.To label The Hunger Games a young-adult novel is really to short-change what is an engrossing story from start to finish. The language is at a level that young adults can keep up with, however the story is multi-layered and riveting. Written as a first-person account of Katniss, Collins does a masterful job of placing the reader right in her shoes. We ask the same questions she does and understand the steps and missteps she makes along the way. I have never been a teenage girl, but Collins made me understand in a comprehensive way what is was to be Katniss Everdeen. Even more impressive is the way in which Collins brings to life the rest of the characters. Nobody is cookie-cutter. Everyone has qualities both good and evil and I could truly understand the motivations of each one of them against the backdrop of this dystopian future. I can’t highlight this point enough – EVERY character has a believable motivation in this story. That is so rare in this genre as to be extraordinary. Collins also does an exceptional job with the action. It would be easy in writing the scenes of teens killing each other to either gloss over the deaths or make them too graphic…especially given this story is targeted to young adults. But never once does Collins make a blunder. The struggle is paced and executed perfectly, as is the emotional aftermath. Collins also immerses us into the striking contrasts of the abject poverty of the districts and the overwhelming wealth of Panem. It is a masterful job of scene-setting.The more I think about this story, the more I think about this story. That is what top-notch storytelling does, it pulls you so far in to the author’s world that we can’t easily let go of the characters. Frankly, from the moment I was 20 pages into The Hunger Games, I couldn’t stop thinking about the story or put the book down. I read a lot of novels, but very few of them have gotten as deep inside my head as this one has. I can’t wait to read the rest of the trilogy. This is one book that actually lives up to the publicity it has received. That is why this book receives my rarely issued highest rating. I cannot recommend this book enough. Enjoy!
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    Ordinarily I wouldn't reread a book or play, even one I read for class, so soon after reading it for the first time, but with Shakespeare (and indeed Chaucer) I think it's necessary. Plus, this edition came with notes, which are very extensive and -- even though I need no help with the language in general -- help to shed light on puns, double entendres, and potential confused transmission of the plays, etc. It has an extensive introduction which covers a lot of different aspects of the play, too.

    I was reading this time specifically for Cressida's character, and for the play's relationship to Chaucer's version. She's at once more brazen -- deliberately stating that she's holding out on Troilus, because he won't want her as much once he's won her -- and more pitiable in the conclusion, in her pathetic little fight with Diomede over the belt. She came alive for me in that scene, in her pleading.

    I noticed, though, that this is much less involved with the couple than Chaucer's version. There's whole sections set in the Greek camp, which you don't see in Chaucer. Shakespeare's more interested in the war as a whole than Chaucer, it seems -- or maybe the war as a whole sheds light on Troilus and Cressida? I wonder. The repeated references to Helen and her falseness do throw a shadow over Cressida.
  • Évaluation : 3 sur 5 étoiles
    3/5
    I've read all of Shakespeare's tragedies and "Troilus and Cressida" is definitely my least favorite by far. Set during the seventh year of the Trojan War, the play sprinkles a little bit of everything from romance to battle, but mostly focuses on people taunting each other. Much of action happens off-stage in the fifth act, as the actors dash on stage to mutter a few taunts and then leap off to fight with their swords. (As written anyway... I've never seen it performed.)Overall, I felt that Shakespeare took a story told so well in "The Iliad" (with the addition of a couple of star-crossed lovers) and made it boring. It didn't help that there seemed to be no motivation for Cressida's quick betrayal. Anyway, there are loads of Shakespeare's plays that feature similar set ups that are much better than this.
  • Évaluation : 5 sur 5 étoiles
    5/5
    ?She is a pearl, whose price hath launch'd above a thousand ships.? The story of the Trojan War and the beautiful Helen is well-known, but this Shakespearean tragedy about it is not. Troilus and Cressida is the story of two young Trojans caught in the midst of a nation at war. Despite being surrounded by the problems of others they find themselves falling in love. Troilus is the brother of the infamous warrior Hector and the lovesick Paris who ran away with the married Helen, incurring the wrath of the Greeks. The entire play is filled with passionate declarations of both love and war. The Greeks, like King Agamemnon and the hotheaded Ajax, are itching for a fight. Ajax doesn?t realize until too late that he is only a pawn in the hands of the generals. The Trojans on the other hand aren?t sure how they want to respond. Paris wants to defend Helen?s honor, but his older brother Hector has to decide if she is worth the fall of an entire nation. From his opening scene he has an impossible task. He knows the right thing to do in theory, but the obligations of honor and family loyalty prevent him from doing it. The play is full to the brim with remarkable supporting characters. From the tragic Cassandra, whose prophetic wails go unheeded to Pandarus, Cressida?s uncle the meddling matchmaker. I was surprised to find one of the most poignant wooing scenes I?ve ever come across in a play. Usually the man takes the lead in these scenes, but in this one a guarded Cressida finally reveals how much she cares for Troilus. She been attempting to play hard to get, but she can?t hide her feelings any more. She gushes then quickly chides herself, finally begging him to kiss her so she?ll stop talking. ?And yet, good faith, I wish'd myself a man; Or that we women had men's privilege Of speaking first. Sweet, bid me hold my tongue; For, in this rapture, I shall surely speak The thing I shall repent. See, see ! your silence, Cunning in dumbness, from my weakness draws My very soul of counsel: Stop my mouth.?This is a tricky play though because there are so many different plots. There?s the romance between Troilus and Cressida and another one between Paris and Helen. There?s the central story of war between nations. In the midst of all of this the title characters often feel secondary, which can make it hard to become invested in their relationship. The title may be Troilus and Cressida, but that?s really a misnomer. While their romance is sweet, it?s truly the story of the Trojan War and the dicey decisions that warriors must face in battle. What is a single life worth? For Achilles, his love for one man is enough to make him fight or to stay his hand. For the love of his brothers Hector is willing to pick up his sword. The tragedy of war is that it?s a cyclical game; one death always leads to the desire for vengeance from the other side. Grief and bloodshed fuel only more of the same and this play is a poignant reminder of that.BOTTOM LINE: A powerful story of the destructive force of war intertwined with a doomed love story. Bard enthusiasts must read it. ?
  • Évaluation : 4 sur 5 étoiles
    4/5
    There is something about these more ambiguous plays of Shakespeare that appeals to me. The blackest of comedies, Titus Andronicus, is one of my favorites and All's Well That Ends Well and this, Troilus and Cressida, are also both good and underappreciated.They may lack on psychological depth, many individual characters don't get that much attention and are somewhat poorly motivated, since they concentrate on bigger picture and understanding of the world.Troilus and Cressida is extremely bitter play. Everyone is deadlocked in a futile war and most of them admit it, there are no redeeming characters (except maybe Thersites, ironically enough) and what little love there is gets stomped into ground soon enough. A tragedy which replaces pathos with cynic's laugh.It has been pointed out that this is a modern play, in both form and sensibility closer to 20th century, and it is true: other than the flowery language and setting this could be a world war epic. But if one is looking for well-developed characters engaging in a conventional love story in the middle of renaissance idea of a war, one will be disappointed.
  • Évaluation : 5 sur 5 étoiles
    5/5
    This is one of my favorites of Shakespeare's work. It's been a LONG time since I've read it, so I plan to reread it at some point.
  • Évaluation : 3 sur 5 étoiles
    3/5
    I didn't think that Shakespeare, one of my favorite authors, was even capable of writing a bad play. However, this one is far from perfect, especially when compared to his other works."Troilus and Cressida" is about a young man, Troilus, and his lover, Cressida. It is set during the Trojan War, and among other characters are the recognizable Achilles, Hector, Helen, and others.However, the main character's love story never seems very convincing. Troilus is constantly praising his beloved highly, while another character does his best to convince him of her low morals. And, the characters are never together all that often. Most of their supposed "romance" is via them talking or thinking about each other in separate scenes. The character of Cressida is not very built up at all. It takes a few scenes for her to enter the story, and once she does, virtually nothing about her is revealed. One catches fleeting glimpses of a feisty nature, but other than this, all we seem to really know of Cressida is that she is beautiful (as proclaimed by Troilus over and over). Shakespeare even goes so far as to say that her beauty rivals that of Helen's. I kept waiting for Shakespeare to focus a bit more on his female character, yet he never did. As a result, the love story here is not a very convincing one.Another thing that I disliked about this play was how much dialogue there was. About half the book was simply talking - and not about anything interesting, unless you love hearing about endless politics, battle strategies, and so on. These things can be interesting, but in this Renaissance play, they seemed oddly out of place. I couldn't resist skimming over them slightly, wondering where Troilus has gone to. These endless talks are not involved with the book's plot in any major way, save that the Trojan War is its setting, of course. They also seem to lead nowhere, and are simply dry and dull. I had never before seen Shakespeare write such dreadfully tedious scenes.And besides the endless talking, I disliked the ending, in which Cressida is caught being unfaithful by Troilus. After that, she simply disappears altogether! She is not brought back into the story again for the entire book, besides when a letter arrives from her. All in all, I disliked this one - something I was sure I would never say about a Shakespeare play.

Aperçu du livre

Troïlus et Cressida - François Guizot

The Project Gutenberg EBook of Troïlus et Cressida, by William Shakespeare

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with

almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or

re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included

with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

Title: Troïlus et Cressida

Author: William Shakespeare

Translator: François Pierre Guillaume Guizot

Release Date: May 4, 2006 [EBook #18313]

Language: French

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK TROÏLUS ET CRESSIDA ***

Produced by Paul Murray, Rénald Lévesque and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This

file was produced from images generously made available

by the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF/Gallica))

Note du transcripteur.

============================================

Ce document est tiré de:

OEUVRES COMPLÈTES DE

SHAKSPEARE

TRADUCTION DE

M. GUIZOT

NOUVELLE ÉDITION ENTIÈREMENT REVUE

AVEC UNE ÉTUDE SUR SHAKSPEARE

DES NOTICES SUR CHAQUE PIÈCE ET DES NOTES

Volume 4

Mesure pour mesure.—Othello.—Comme il vous plaira.

Le conte d'hiver.—Troïlus et Cressida.

PARIS

A LA LIBRAIRIE ACADÉMIQUE

DIDIER ET Cie, LIBRAIRES-ÉDITEURS

35, QUAI DES AUGUSTINS

1863

===============================================

TROÏLUS ET CRESSIDA

TRAGÉDIE

NOTICE

SUR

TROÏLUS ET CRESSIDA

Si, dans Troïlus et Cressida, le poëte traite un peu lestement les héros de l'Iliade, si ces grands noms lui ont si peu imposé qu'il est douteux que cette composition dramatique ne soit pas une parodie, ne croyons pas que Shakspeare ait blasphémé contre la divinité d'Homère; rappelons-nous que nos anciens romanciers avaient fait des demi-dieux et des héros de l'antiquité de véritables chevaliers errants, et qu'Hercule, Thésée, Jason, Achille, conservaient, pendant dix gros volumes, les mêmes moeurs que les Lancelot, les Roland, les Olivier, et d'autres paladins chrétiens.

C'est à Chaucer que Shakspeare nous semble en grande partie redevable de l'idée de Troïlus et Cressida; mais les grands traits avec lesquels il dessine les caractères de ses autres héros, Hector, Achille, Ajax, Diomède, Agamemnon, Nestor, le lâche et satirique Thersite, l'amitié d'Achille et de Patrocle, l'éloquence d'Ulysse, que la Minerve d'Homère n'eût pas si bien inspiré; enfin, quelques traits historiques qu'on ne trouve ni dans Chaucer, ni dans Caxton, ni dans aucun des romanciers du moyen âge, font conjecturer que Shakspeare aurait bien pu connaître par la traduction quelques livres de l'Iliade.

Quoi qu'il en soit, jamais Shakspeare ne s'est moins occupé de l'effet théâtral que dans cette pièce. Nous passons en revue avec lui tous ces héros, que nos souvenirs classiques nous rendent sacrés, sans pouvoir résister à la tentation de les trouver parfois ridicules, et cependant naturels.

Hector, qui paraît d'abord digne de concentrer sur lui tout l'intérêt, parce qu'il est représenté comme le plus aimable, nous surprend tout à coup en refusant de se battre avec Ajax, parce qu'il est son cousin. On ne pardonnerait point à Shakspeare cette excuse, s'il ne faisait en quelque sorte réparation d'honneur à ce héros en le faisant périr d'une mort sublime.

Ajax est un des caractères les plus originaux de la pièce, et s'accorde assez bien avec celui de l'Iliade. Il forme avec Achille un contraste habilement ménagé. On trouverait encore de nos jours à faire l'application de son portrait tel que l'esquisse Alexandre.

Achille est bien aussi l'Achille de l'Iliade; mais il se déshonore en excitant les bouffonneries de Patrocle et la méchanceté de Thersite; et il y a quelque chose de révoltant dans la froide férocité avec laquelle il égorge Hector.

Le vieux roi de Pylos ne paraît que pour nous montrer sa barbe blanche et recevoir les compliments d'Ulysse. Celui-ci possède à lui seul l'éloquence et la raison de la pièce; mais il faut bien que ses discours soient sublimes, car il ne fait que des discours. Les autres héros de Troie et du camp des Grecs jouent un rôle encore moins important, et pour la prise de Troie, et pour l'intrigue des deux amants.

Troïlus lui-même a pour caractère de n'en point avoir. Sa patience nous fait sourire; on a peine à croire à ses emportements qui, du reste, comme l'observe Schlegel, ne font mal à personne. Mais les caractères de Cressida et de Pandarus sont frappants de vérité et d'originalité; le nom de celui-ci est devenu dans la langue anglaise un mot honnête pour exprimer un métier qui ne l'est guère, et qui n'a point d'équivalent dans la nôtre; car le Bonneau de la Pucelle de Voltaire n'est pas encore proverbial parmi nous.

Cressida nous amuse par son étourderie; elle devient amoureuse de Troïlus par désoeuvrement, et le quitte par pure légèreté. Sa passion pour Diomède n'est pas plus sérieuse que la première; un troisième galant n'aurait qu'à s'offrir pour le supplanter aussi facilement que l'a été Troïlus.

On peut lui appliquer le vers de lord Byron:

Thou art not false, but thou art fickle.

Tu n'es point perfide, tu n'es que légère.

Si cette pièce n'est pas une des plus morales et des plus fortement conçues de Shakspeare, elle n'est pas une des moins amusantes et des moins instructives. Naturellement, Shakspeare ne se passionne pour aucun de ses personnages; nulle part, peut-être, il n'est entièrement sérieux ou entièrement comique; mais c'est ici surtout qu'il s'est fait un jeu du caprice de ses idées, et qu'il semble avoir voulu donner un double sens à sa composition.

Johnson observe que le style de Shakspeare, dans Troïlus et Cressida, est plus correct que dans la plupart de ses pièces; on doit y remarquer aussi une foule d'observations politiques et morales, cachet d'un génie supérieur.

Dryden a refait cette tragédie avec des changements. Il a donné au fond une nouvelle forme; il a omis quelques personnages, et ajouté Andromaque: en général, il y a plus d'ordre et de liaison dans ses scènes, et quelques-unes sont neuves et du plus bel effet.

Selon Malone, Shakspeare aurait composé Troïlus et Cressida en 1602¹.

Note 1: (retour)

Troïlus and Cressida, or Truth found too late (ou la Vérité connue trop tard). London, 1679.

PERSONNAGES

PRIAM, roi de Troie.

HECTOR,      )

TROÏLUS,      )

PARIS,           ) ses fils.

DÉIPHOBE,  )

HÉLÉNUS,    )

ÉNÉE,          )

ANTÉNOR,  ) chefs troyens.

PANDARE, oncle de Cressida.

CALCHAS, prêtre troyen du parti des Grecs.

MARGARÉLON, fils naturel de Priam.

AGAMEMNON, général des Grecs.

MÉNÉLAS, son frère.

ACHILLE,      )

AJAX,            )

ULYSSE,       ) chefs des Grecs.

NESTOR,      )

DIOMÈDE,    )

PATROCLE, )

THERSITE, Grec difforme et lâche.

ALEXANDRE, serviteur de Cressida.

UN SERVITEUR DE TROÏLUS.

UN SERVITEUR DE PARIS.

UN SERVITEUR DE DIOMÈDE.

HÉLÈNE, femme de Ménélas.

ANDROMAQUE, femme d'Hector.

CASSANDRE, fille de Priam, proph.

CRESSIDA, fille de Calchas.—SOLDATS GRECS ET TROYENS, etc.

La scène est tantôt dans Troie, et tantôt dans le camp des Grecs.

PROLOGUE.

Troie est le lieu de la scène. Des îles de la Grèce, une foule de princes enflammés d'orgueil et de courroux ont envoyé au port d'Athènes leurs vaisseaux chargés de combattants et des apprêts d'une guerre cruelle. Soixante-neuf chefs, rois couronnés d'autant de petits empires, sont sortis de la baie athénienne et ont vogué vers la Phrygie, tous liés par le voeu solennel de saccager Troie. Dans ses fortes murailles, Hélène, l'épouse du roi Ménélas, dort en paix dans les bras de son ravisseur Pàris; et voilà la cause de cette grande querelle. Les Grecs abordent à Ténédos, et là leurs vaisseaux vomissent de leurs larges flancs sur le rivage tout l'appareil de la guerre. Déjà les Grecs, pleins d'ardeur et fiers de leurs forces encore entières, plantent leurs tentes guerrières sur les plaines de Dardanie. Les six portes de la cité de Priam, la porte Dardanienne, la Thymbrienne, l'Ilias, la Chétas, la Troyenne et l'Anténoride, avec leurs lourds verroux et leurs barres de fer, enferment et défendent les enfants de Troie.—Maintenant l'attente agite les esprits inquiets dans l'un et l'autre parti; Grecs et Troyens sont disposés à livrer tout aux hasards de la fortune:—Et moi je viens ici comme un Prologue armé;—mais non pas pour vous faire un défi dans la confiance que m'inspire la plume de l'auteur, ou le jeu des acteurs, mais simplement pour offrir le costume assorti au sujet, et pour vous dire, spectateurs bénévoles, que notre pièce, franchissant tout l'espace antérieur et les premiers germes de cette querelle, court se placer au milieu même des événements, pour se replier ensuite sur tout ce qui peut entrer et s'arranger dans un plan. Approuvez ou blâmez, faites à votre gré; maintenant, bonne ou mauvaise fortune, c'est la chance de la guerre.

ACTE PREMIER

SCÈNE I

La scène est devant le palais de Priam.

Entrent TROÏLUS armé et PANDARE.

TROÏLUS.—Appelez mon varlet²; je veux me désarmer. Eh! pourquoi ferais-je la guerre hors des murs de Troie, lorsque j'ai à soutenir de si cruels combats ici dans mon sein? Que le Troyen qui est maître de son coeur aille au champ de bataille: le coeur de Troïlus, hélas! n'est plus à lui.

Note 2: (retour)

Ci-gît Hakin et son varlet

Tout déarmé et tout défaict

Avec son espée et sa loche.

PANDARE.—N'y a-t-il point de remède à toutes ces plaintes?

TROÏLUS.—Les Grecs sont forts, habiles autant que forts, fiers autant qu'habiles, et vaillants autant que fiers. Mais moi, je suis plus faible que les pleurs d'une femme, plus paisible que le sommeil, plus crédule que l'ignorance. Je suis moins brave qu'une jeune fille pendant la nuit, et plus novice que l'enfance sans expérience.

PANDARE.—Allons! je vous en ai assez dit là-dessus: quant à moi, je ne m'en mêlerai plus. Celui qui veut faire un gâteau du froment doit attendre la mouture.

TROÏLUS.—Ne l'ai-je pas attendu?

PANDARE.—Oui, la mouture; mais il faut attendre le blutage.

TROÏLUS.—N'ai-je pas attendu?

PANDARE.—Oui, le blutage: mais il vous faut attendre la levure.

TROÏLUS.—Je l'ai attendue aussi.

PANDARE.—Oui, la levure: mais ce n'est pas tout, il faut encore pétrir, faire le gâteau, chauffer le four, cuire; et il faut bien attendre encore que le gâteau se refroidisse, ou vous risquez de vous brûler les lèvres.

TROÏLUS.—La patience elle-même, toute déesse qu'elle est, supporte la souffrance moins paisiblement que moi. Je m'assieds à la table royale de Priam, et lorsque la belle Cressida vient s'offrir à ma pensée,—que dis-je, traître, quand elle vient?—Quand en est-elle jamais absente?

PANDARE.—Eh bien! elle était plus belle hier au soir que je ne l'ai jamais vue, ni elle ni aucune autre femme.

TROÏLUS.—J'en étais à vous dire...—Quand mon coeur, comme ouvert par un violent soupir, était prêt à se fendre en deux; dans la crainte qu'Hector, ou mon père, ne me surprissent, j'ai enseveli ce soupir dans le pli d'un sourire, comme le soleil lorsqu'il éclaire un orage: mais le chagrin, que voile une gaieté apparente, est comme une joie que le destin change

Vous aimez cet aperçu ?
Page 1 sur 1