Scan barcode
s0on_'s review
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
lilasaitplus's review
adventurous
dark
emotional
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
annaelle's review
4.0
[mars 2023]
----
CINNA :
On ne renonce point aux grandeurs légitimes ;
On garde sans remords ce qu'on acquiert sans crimes ;
Et plus le bien qu'on quitte est noble, grand, exquis,
Plus qui l'ose quitter le juge mal acquis.
----
Une tragédie très intéressante. C'est (évidemment) très bien écrit. Le contexte est chouette, on se retrouve en Rome antique, avec Auguste comme empereur (Octave-César) qui va devoir confronter ses plus proches confidents qui préparent contre lui une rébellion. Les motivations de Cinna et Maxime sont différentes mais mènent vers le même but. Finalement le destin va s'emmêler et les choses vont être bousculées.
Vraiment chouette, je pense que c'est ma deuxième pièce préférée de Corneille de celles que j'ai pu lire, derrière Médée!
----
CINNA :
On ne renonce point aux grandeurs légitimes ;
On garde sans remords ce qu'on acquiert sans crimes ;
Et plus le bien qu'on quitte est noble, grand, exquis,
Plus qui l'ose quitter le juge mal acquis.
----
Une tragédie très intéressante. C'est (évidemment) très bien écrit. Le contexte est chouette, on se retrouve en Rome antique, avec Auguste comme empereur (Octave-César) qui va devoir confronter ses plus proches confidents qui préparent contre lui une rébellion. Les motivations de Cinna et Maxime sont différentes mais mènent vers le même but. Finalement le destin va s'emmêler et les choses vont être bousculées.
Vraiment chouette, je pense que c'est ma deuxième pièce préférée de Corneille de celles que j'ai pu lire, derrière Médée!
zwiame's review against another edition
medium-paced
2.25
This play is the exact representation of all the things I hate in Corneille's work.
To keep it short, I just find the way he tackles glory/honour/duty to be really flat (unlike Racine).
The characters are flat, uninteresting, and sometimes illogical (I wanted to support Emilie but she made it hard for me).
The play's namesake, Cinna, is so forgettable and useless that I just can't remember a single notable thing he does... Can't believe the play is actually named after him.
There are two okay characters in this: Maxime, who was much more complex and interesting that Cinna (and a better suitor to Emilie, imo), and obviously, Auguste, who reveals himself to be a remorseful and conflicted ruler, unlike the ruthless descriptions made of him by the other characters.
There are good lessons about what makes a good ruler in here (which is probably what Corneille intended to make, at least in part), but they're treated very superficially. Also there was little to no tension in this play. It's supposed to be a fucking tragedy ffs!!
Overall, do not waste your time on this play. Read his Medea, or even better, read Racine's work!!
To keep it short, I just find the way he tackles glory/honour/duty to be really flat (unlike Racine).
The characters are flat, uninteresting, and sometimes illogical (I wanted to support Emilie but she made it hard for me).
The play's namesake, Cinna, is so forgettable and useless that I just can't remember a single notable thing he does... Can't believe the play is actually named after him.
There are two okay characters in this: Maxime, who was much more complex and interesting that Cinna (and a better suitor to Emilie, imo), and obviously, Auguste, who reveals himself to be a remorseful and conflicted ruler, unlike the ruthless descriptions made of him by the other characters.
There are good lessons about what makes a good ruler in here (which is probably what Corneille intended to make, at least in part), but they're treated very superficially. Also there was little to no tension in this play. It's supposed to be a fucking tragedy ffs!!
Overall, do not waste your time on this play. Read his Medea, or even better, read Racine's work!!
spacestationtrustfund's review
3.0
Quelle noblesse, quelle idéalisme, quelle tragédie de plus. En fait, une tragédie sur la grâce, coup de grâce, grâce à lui, etc. Corneille comme toujours se demande comment on peut mettre fin à la spirale totale de la violence ; pour lui la reponse n'est que la magnanimité que l'on trouve dans le pouvoir fort, le pouvoir humain.
cametsesblablas's review
3.0
C’est loin d’être aussi bon que L'Illusion Comique mais les thèmes sont intéressants. Je me suis laissée prendre au jeu de cette écriture parfois envoutante. Dommage que les personnages soient autant manichéens à certains moments. Heureusement, Corneille fait le choix de jouer sur leur ambiguïté, ce qui aurait pu s’avérer intéressant si la pièce n'était pas consacrée qu'à leurs états d'âme.
vasha's review
3.0
One of the critics quoted in this edition called Cinna the quintessential royal play; I can see that point of view. Certainly Augustus, dominating the second half of the play, fits to a tee what the French of the 17th century considered awe-inspiring about their kings. Supposedly, there is a debate going on in this play between republicanism and monarchy, but it is a stacked debate; the republicans are not allowed to present their best arguments, and when the monarchists contradict them, they concede their point.
There is considerable dramatic interest, nonetheless, in the first four acts; the characters, divided in mind and duplicitous in speech, rarely say anything without double meaning. Emilia is one of the most straightforward characters, she is only divided between wanting to shelter her beloved Cinna on the one hand, and wanting to make him the instrument of her unfinished vengeance on the other. This is the setup for a tragedy in the real sense, since she is greatly relieved when the plot is uncovered: now she can follow her love by dying with Cinna and also say that she never turned back from vengeance. So she's hugely frustrated when Augustus pardons the two of them. It ought to drive her to a final destruction; but Corneille instead chooses to pull out a "happy ending". This ending undermines all the drama of the play, as well as being unbelievable. Emilia accepts the pardon and is reconciled, saying that it must be a miracle that's taken place in her heart -- indeed, that's probably what Corneille intends it to be, since he's been harping on all along about kings being appointed by God. Perhaps the audiences of the time found that wrapping it up with all the conspirators happily acknowledging Augustus's divine reign was very satisfying because it suited their sense of the rightness of things, but to me it seems very forced.
There is considerable dramatic interest, nonetheless, in the first four acts; the characters, divided in mind and duplicitous in speech, rarely say anything without double meaning. Emilia is one of the most straightforward characters, she is only divided between wanting to shelter her beloved Cinna on the one hand, and wanting to make him the instrument of her unfinished vengeance on the other. This is the setup for a tragedy in the real sense, since she is greatly relieved when the plot is uncovered: now she can follow her love by dying with Cinna and also say that she never turned back from vengeance. So she's hugely frustrated when Augustus pardons the two of them. It ought to drive her to a final destruction; but Corneille instead chooses to pull out a "happy ending". This ending undermines all the drama of the play, as well as being unbelievable. Emilia accepts the pardon and is reconciled, saying that it must be a miracle that's taken place in her heart -- indeed, that's probably what Corneille intends it to be, since he's been harping on all along about kings being appointed by God. Perhaps the audiences of the time found that wrapping it up with all the conspirators happily acknowledging Augustus's divine reign was very satisfying because it suited their sense of the rightness of things, but to me it seems very forced.
sophia_l's review
emotional
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
2.75
michelag's review
3.0
Nothing really happened in this - what kind of play revolving around assassination plot ends in neither an assassination or punishment for those plotting it?
Still was interesting as it used the Greek tragedy unities, took place in Augustan Rome, and was written by a Frenchman in 1641.
Still was interesting as it used the Greek tragedy unities, took place in Augustan Rome, and was written by a Frenchman in 1641.