The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! š
c2pizza's review against another edition
1.0
I'd hope this would be the most embarrassingly immoral morality play ever written, but sadly, I'm definitely being naive. That said, the only valuable thing in this work is to show how completely and unthinkingly easy it is for a whole society to be convinced that the delusional is the truth.
eb00kie's review
4.0
Dulcitius is a short play by a 10th century nun. In most aspects it pales in comparison with the work of Greece and the Golden age of the fallen empire, especially in length, depth and technical quality. It is nonetheless elevated by the passion its author infuses and the very believable female characters, I mean, as it is reflected in the style of voice and dialogues, not especially their actions.
Granted, I imagine there is little a girl freshly confronted with the loving religion herein contemplates more fondly than her appropriate behaviour should she be offered the chance to accept martydom.
Granted, I imagine there is little a girl freshly confronted with the loving religion herein contemplates more fondly than her appropriate behaviour should she be offered the chance to accept martydom.
maryaliceelange's review
funny
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
dolorsitamet's review against another edition
2.0
*1.8
I can't say I cared for it too much. Maybe it would've been better in the original (Latin)?
The translation felt overly terse ā or perhaps that is not an artifact of the language so much as the stylistic convention at the time. Either way, it seemed half (or more) of the dialogue's purpose was to describe what they were doing. It was funny only in a very surface way ā and perhaps this is just me being me and generally not appreciating comedies so much ā but like, a guy tries to kiss(/rape) a bunch of pots and pans. It quickly felt more preachy than comedic to me. The martyrs were far more annoying than sympathetic, and the clear good vs evil, purity/goodness vs foolishness made the message all the harder to believe.
Interestingly, taking a modern lens to it (i.e. if one were reading this with the knowledge that it was published today) one might call it satire and get the complete opposite message, due to how out-of-touch with these ideals we are today.
But it was not a play I particularly enjoyed reading, or even saw much of the merit in reading for a lit (as opposed to history) class. Or at least, in analyzing/thinking about it deeply ā I suppose reading for exposure to the norms of the time in lit is worthwhile.
despite all that, I'm not upset I read it. Mainly because of the last bit of the above paragraph.
I can't say I cared for it too much. Maybe it would've been better in the original (Latin)?
The translation felt overly terse ā or perhaps that is not an artifact of the language so much as the stylistic convention at the time. Either way, it seemed half (or more) of the dialogue's purpose was to describe what they were doing. It was funny only in a very surface way ā and perhaps this is just me being me and generally not appreciating comedies so much ā but like, a guy tries to kiss(/rape) a bunch of pots and pans. It quickly felt more preachy than comedic to me. The martyrs were far more annoying than sympathetic, and the clear good vs evil, purity/goodness vs foolishness made the message all the harder to believe.
Interestingly, taking a modern lens to it (i.e. if one were reading this with the knowledge that it was published today) one might call it satire and get the complete opposite message, due to how out-of-touch with these ideals we are today.
But it was not a play I particularly enjoyed reading, or even saw much of the merit in reading for a lit (as opposed to history) class. Or at least, in analyzing/thinking about it deeply ā I suppose reading for exposure to the norms of the time in lit is worthwhile.
despite all that, I'm not upset I read it. Mainly because of the last bit of the above paragraph.
niqueness24's review
dark
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.75
bythecover's review against another edition
3.0
How do you even rate something like this? Lol. Hrotsvitha seems like she would have been cool.
aaronpic26's review
2.0
āAre you not ashamed that you could not overcome the resolution of a little child without resorting to force of arms?ā
this literally took me 10 minutes to read it was wayyyyyy shorter than i thought it was going to be and like nothing happened. it was kinda funny but i didnāt even really laugh there was just comedic moments to it and again nothing happened. but i guess it was fun that this was written by the first recorded female playwright and she was a nun soo thatās fun. irena be the only bad bitch out of the three sisters and everyone was just mean to them because they wouldnāt convert.... idk lol the dark ages of theatre i guess.
this literally took me 10 minutes to read it was wayyyyyy shorter than i thought it was going to be and like nothing happened. it was kinda funny but i didnāt even really laugh there was just comedic moments to it and again nothing happened. but i guess it was fun that this was written by the first recorded female playwright and she was a nun soo thatās fun. irena be the only bad bitch out of the three sisters and everyone was just mean to them because they wouldnāt convert.... idk lol the dark ages of theatre i guess.
themidnightbagel's review
3.0
Disclaimer- Iām in a āWomen in Medieval Literatureā class this semester, so yes Iām going to add every little thing we read just so I can feel better about my āreadā numbers. This was the first thing we read and I thought it was entertaining, much funnier than I was expecting, and iāll be looking forward to discussing it more in class.
More...