A tragedy in the traditional sense, despite Strindberg's being a modern playwright. I didn't have much sympathy for the title character at first... She makes some very foolish choices under the influence of alcohol and hormones which have terrible consequences. My initial reaction was 'how could she be so stupid?' but as I thought about the play I realized that while her actions were stupid, they were also not uncommon (especially for someone in late teens/early twenties). One aspect of Miss Julia's behaviour that I really didn't like was when she kept asking the manservant Jean to tell her what to do. Perhaps that rang true in 1888 but it didn't seem to fit in with her character. ( )

I really wanted to give this a fair rating, and I think I did. How does one separate art from the artist if the stench of the artist's open sores swells to engulf themes, words, punctuation, and the very pages. This is a play about Darwinism, a Naturalistic play that aims to be scientific in its undertaking and rejects Romanticism. So going by their own ideals, Strindberg's play is anything but scientific. Science is necessarily objective, and Strindberg's whole approach to this play was borne out of personal misogyny, as is evident from the author's preface. This is really mind boggling. I wouldn't have touched this filth if not for a drama class. There are better options for Naturalistic plays than Miss Julie, like A Doll's House by Ibsen. ( )

I had to read it for my Scandinavian Historical and Cultural Topics class, thought it was alright I guess? Not a huge fan of Strindberg. ( )

"Denna pocketutgåva bygger på volym 27&46 i Nationalupplagan av August Strindbergs Samlade Verk."

I would've rated this 1.5 stars last night as I finished and turned off the light. I didn't feel great, was disappointed with a classical program on NPR and found this play a touch hysterical. During the cold darkness of early morning I reflected on some of the subtle touches, the yellow label and the ill fated bird. The condensed nature of the action was difficult to believe. The pastoral passages by comparison were beautiful.

That said I would afford the Author's Preface five stars as a validation of Naturalism. Strindberg is wonderful in his exposition.

I am still not a fan of the play but would read it again. ( )