费伦茨·莫尔纳

在 20 世纪上半叶，匈牙利剧作家费伦茨·莫尔纳（1878-1952）以其作品《莉莉奥姆》（1909 年）和《卫兵》（1924 年）光荣地代表着东欧戏剧。

"The life, death, and something of the after-life of the rough, or rough-neck, Liliom, is shown us- Liliom the barker and ballyhoo artist for a merry-go-round in an amusement park at Budapest. He is a citizen from the fringe of the criminal world with a personality powerfully attractive to simple-minded servant girls. Many of the young women come to ride on the merry- go-round and Liliom pockets their hearts and savings with equal impartiality. As an artist- the best barker in Budapest- he regards himself as a privileged character, and accepts his privileges as a matter of course" (Crawford, 1921 p 308). The play concerns a "tale of an amusement-park barker and bouncer who mistreats his wife, who idles while she works, and who tries to rob a cashier when he needs money for the baby she is expecting is a tragi-comic tribute to the nobility that exists in everybody. Behind Liliom’s worthless behavior and loafer’s bravura hides an affectionate human being; the trouble is only that his good angel is gauche and inarticulate. He is destined to repeat the pattern of his life even in his ghostly existence after he has stabbed himself to avoid arrest for the intended robbery. From the early scenes which bear the stamp of the naturalist school the scene shifts to the only kind of heaven that Liliom could have imagined- a celestial police court. Fifteen years later he is paroled for a day to visit his family, and to redeem himself by a good deed. But Liliom, the useless 'lily', is unchanged. Eager to bring his daughter a gift, he can think of nothing better than to steal a star for her during his descent. Hungering for affection in his gruff way, he slaps her when she shrinks from him, and the Heavenly Police, shaking their heads deploringly, take him back as a hopeless case. But his inchoate love remains a fact that his simple wife- and perhaps heaven, too!- understands fully" (Gassner, 1954a pp 479-480). The “richness of meaning is brought into relief by the quick, subtle gradations from realism to fancy. Almost every scene begins with the disarming simplicity of casual realism and grows, sometimes swiftly, sometimes leisurely, into romance or fantasy, a metaphysical heaven, or a whimsical reincarnation. Thus we have in the first scene a sordid quarrel among uncouth characters leading slowly into the romance of Juli and Liliom, as they rise out of themselves to accept their love. In the second scene, the squalor of drab domesticity is swept clean by the spontaneous, primitively noble cry of Liliom, ‘I'm to be a father.’ In the fifth scene, the few simple details of the delivery of the wounded Liliom to Juli rapidly give place to his pathetic last words, as dying he seems to express what living he could not—and the scene ends still another level removed from the realistic when two heavenly policemen take the dead Liliom away. Most striking of all, in scene seven, into the midst of the prosaically well-ordered life of Juli and her now sixteen-year-old daughter comes Liliom, neither as a ghost nor as himself, but as a beggar, whom Juli does not recognize, not objectively, yet she is touched somehow, supernaturallv, by the same sympathetic chord that brought them together when he was alive. Of such juxtaposition of realism and fantasy in the same scene, the best example is the embankment episode. Liliom and Ficsur await the coming of the cashier. As they rehearse the holdup, Liliom remarks with childlike naivete on the romance of the unending railroad tracks, of the power in the locomotive, of the secret conversations in the telephone wires, of the little bird that looks at him. Here, as elsewhere, the effect is gained by the contrast not only of situation but of the two natures within Liliom himself. The result of such interplay of realism and fancy is a continual titillation of the senses. One is never left on a dead level of the prosaic, yet every flight of fancy is established by the speech and action of real, plain, folk characters” (Gergerly, 1947 p 25). “The tone of harsh laughter that pervades this play is the work of a dramatist who knows his business every inch of the way. Liliom is one of those characters who stand for a universal human trait. And a human trait was never presented in a more engaging manner than in Molnar’s play” (Moderwell, 1972 p 236). "Molnar, like Gerhardt Hauptmann in some of his plays, fused naturalistic and romantic elements into the construction and psychology of 'Liliom', which seems like a conspiracy between ingenuity and poetry. Many were unprepared for this kind of a theatrical experience. To dramatize is to externalize, but not at the expense of the internal perspective of a conflict. Underneath Molnar's sentiments there is sentimentality; his 'transcendental' imagination has nothing to do with the naivete of an angelic spirit. His wisdom is not that of a childlike poet, but of a charitable cleverness participating in the plight of mortality and hopes of eternity” (Remenyi, 1946 p 1195). "Poor Liliom, barker for a merry-go-round in an amusement park, what is he but once more the eternal outcast, wanderer, unquiet one? He hasn't been taught a trade; he can't settle down as a care-taker; he isn't canny like the excellent Berkowitz. But he loves Julie. She weeps over his worthlessness and he strikes her out of misery, to flee from self-abasement, to preserve some sort of superiority and so some liking for himself. She is to have a child and something cosmic and elemental tugs at the bully's heart. Are love and fatherhood only for the canny ones, the treaders in the mill, the hewers of wood? This is the conflict that destroys him. He is, viewed in another fashion, Everyman, and the little play, which has its shoddy, sentimental patches, is a sort of gay and rough and pitiful divine comedy. Liliom did not ask to be born with those imperious instincts into a tight, legalized, moral world. Society demands so much of him and gives him nothing wherewith to fulfil those demands. The world process has not even given him brains enough to think himself beyond demands and restrictions. He struggles with his body and nerves. His mind is docile. He believes that he is a sinner, he doesn't doubt that there are police courts in heaven as there are on earth, that there are cleansing, purgatorial fires, and a last chance, maybe, to be good. But neither the fires of hell nor his belief in them have power to change the essential character with which the implacable universe brought him forth. His notion of an expiatory action is to steal a star from the sky for his little daughter. He is Liliom still, and the joke is on the order with which man has sought to snare the wild cosmos. The joke is on a man-made world and a man-made heaven, because both that world and that heaven have used force. The joke is not on Julie. Julie has used love. 'There are blows that don't hurt; oh, yes, there are blows that you don't feel.' Love does not feel the blows. Love does not demand nor coerce nor imprison. Paradise is in the heart of love. For the sake of that ending you forgive Molnar the shoddy, sentimental little patches, for the sake of that moment which is beautiful, which is indeed great" (Lewisohn, 1922 pp 68-69). “Liliom is the modern anti-hero, shiftless, arrogant, vain, stupid, and cruel. But there is a touch of the lover and poet in his proud, contradictory personality. He beats Julie on the face, arms, and breasts and refuses to go to work. Yet he is fiercely loyal to her and will not return to Mrs Muskat’s employ if he must desert her. He is a bully and a criminal, yet the sounds of the amusement park, with their suggestion of imaginative fantasy, gaiety, gentle fun, art, and artifice, provide a leitmotif that enthralls him. He refuses to settle in a mundane domestic existence and accept the stifling job of caretaker to support Julie and his new child. This pride and independence are both laudable and selfish...His natural instincts about fatherhood are those of pride, tenderness, and hope, yet he realizes that that he will become irrevocably tied to a materialistic, conventional, and demanding world. He insists that he will never become a caretaker and settle down in domestic squalor, but his desperate need to avoid the confinements of society turn him into an outlaw” (Grace, 1973 pp 262-263). “There is something about Liliom that commands admiration. He is a great lover. Apparently his conquests have been notorious for some time. But when he meets Julie, the modest servant girl, he gives her all his heart and makes her supremely happy. Although neither one of them has much gift of speech, their devotion is mutually overwhelming; and when Liliom finds out that he is become a father, his joy is ecstatic. Society and ultimately God are compelled to look with disapproval on his repeated delinquencies. But all the mean and cruel things spring from his love for Julie. He beats her because he cannot bear to see her suffering, the beating being a bully’s cry of helplessness...It is greatly to Molnar’s credit that he could imagine such a dynamic character and carry him through such homely and trifling crises” (Atkinson, 1947 p 157). "A little of Marie's spirit would have accomplished more than all of Julie's spirituality in handling Liliom. Her combativeness was a language he understood. Julie's habit of turning the other cheek increased his fury, patience being no virtue but a weakness in his eyes. She even contributed to his delinquency according to the popular theory that the other person is guilty if he hits you once, but you are to blame if he hits you twice. When Liliom struck Julie it lessened his self-respect (since there is honor, why not self-respect, among thieves?) and this reacted in another blow. Her silent presence accused him. He could not bear her stricken look" (Battey, 1921 p 8). The play “is not only a brilliant examination of the insoluble problem of who is worthy of redemption but also a study of compassion and suffering, a thorough analysis of the relation of the created character to his family, society...Though he has few redeeming qualities, [Liliom] elicits admiration. He refuses to obey society’s laws and vehemently rejects ordinary responsibility...Julie...emerges as the eternal female ideal. She loves unselfishly, with undemanding devotion and endurance, with almost supernatural insight and common sense, she grasps the realities of life and the true nature of her man. Demonstrating the finest ideals of love and wifehood, this simple woman guides their married life with primordial intuition and wins Liliom from the crafty Mrs Muskat. She is taciturn and inarticulate, but her farewell speech to her husband, inevitably a soliloquy, is genuinely moving and poetic. Her character develops before us; through her love, the ignorant, passive Julie metamorphoses into an epitome of wise womanhood. She learns all that can be learned of the cruelty and beauty of life. Instead of marrying her suitor, a well-to-do, reliable carpenter with whom she could enjoy comfort and stability, she remains faithful to Liliom’s memory and brings up her daughter alone, working in a factory… structure, though loose, is crafted with boundless inventiveness, energy, and flowing suggestiveness...The style is...eclectic, highly poetic, symbolic, colloquial, grotesque, as well as sentimental, changing swiftly from episode to episode. The dialogue is pungent with idioms and the racy folksiness of the contemporary social classes it represents. The warm emotional tone is interrupted with pathos, delicate irony, and rhapsodic passion” (Györgyey, 1980 pp 151-154). “The dualistic hero is...a maladjusted creature who ends up doing the wrong things in spite of all his good intentions...Julie, the fragile, shy, uneducated peasant girl...through her unswerving love and blind loyalty to Liliom...becomes the epitome of saintly womanhood” (Györgyey, 1986 p 1345). But many audience members are liable to resent that epitome.

“《卫兵》是一部辛辣、轻浮的喜剧，是对嫉妒的赞颂，展现了一个男人因为觉得自己没有得到爱，而需要伪装成他认为妻子想要的样子。因为他不仅想要证明自己是一个男人，还想展示自己的演技，所以他无论如何都要把自己困在妥协中。评论家警告他：“这看起来不太好，我的朋友，她爱上了你作为卫兵的样子。你控制不住自己，你会勾引你自己的妻子”。而他几乎做到了。只是妻子也在伪装，假装不知道卫兵的身份，只是在最后揭示她对卫兵的反应也是在演戏，以证明自己作为一名演员的价值。因此，演员的自我揭露被妻子的伪装所否定。莫尔纳在皮兰德罗之前就对比了相对真理和绝对真理。他不只是处理谎言；他处理的是人们相信的真理的幻象……风格优雅而诗意。莫尔纳非常轻松地抛出了这个薄弱且难以置信的故事。充满讽刺的阴谋气氛使这部戏具有都市化的精致。即使在散布莫尔纳哲学时，对话也快节奏，充满了热情的活力”（吉尔吉，1980 年，第 94-96 页）。最后，“她声称她从一开始就认出了他，只是演了自己的角色。因此，他必须在作为演员的职业自豪感的伤害和对妻子的信任的丧失之间做出选择。他内心的丈夫赢了，他相信了她。但这部戏以怀疑的音符结尾，带着一丝愤世嫉俗”（格格利，1947 年，第 49 页）。

"莉莉奥姆"

时间：1900 年代。地点：匈牙利布达佩斯。

文本在 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48749 http://www.archive.org/details/liliomlegendinse00molnuoft https://archive.org/details/liliomalegendin00molngoog https://archive.org/details/twentyfivemodern001705mbp https://archive.org/details/theatreguildanth00thea

游乐园老板穆斯卡特夫人发现茱莉和她的一个员工调情，这个员工负责旋转木马，名叫莉莉奥姆。她警告茱莉不要再回来。茱莉否认自己做错了什么，因为莉莉奥姆习惯抓住很多女孩的腰，并奉承她们。她的朋友玛丽为她辩护。当莉莉奥姆听到她们的争吵时，他感到生气。“我想我每次碰另一个女孩都要征求你的同意吗？”他讽刺地对老板说。“我不允许在我的旋转木马上出现任何不雅行为，”她反驳道。但莉莉奥姆无视她。他们争吵不休，直到她解雇了他。茱莉对事态的进展感到沮丧。莉莉奥姆打算去取回他的衣服，他让茱莉和玛丽等他。“你为什么要等他？”玛丽问她的朋友。“他说让我们等他，”茱莉简单地回答。当莉莉奥姆回来时，他说明了他说的话。“我的意思是你们中的一人要等。”茱莉和玛丽互相看着对方，最后玛丽走了。莉莉奥姆和茱莉的谈话被两个警察打断，其中一个警告茱莉，莉莉奥姆有利用女性并卷走她们钱财的习惯。当莉莉奥姆问她是否害怕警官说的话时，她回答：“我没在意他说的话。”“假设你有一些钱，我把钱从你手里拿走了呢？”莉莉奥姆又问道。“那你就拿走吧，就这样，”她回答。几周后，莉莉奥姆和茱莉结婚，住在一个破旧的棚屋里，棚屋的主人是霍伦德太太，她抱怨这个懒惰、无能的男人，没有工作，没有前途，并且可能为了自己的目的而拿走妻子的钱。茱莉为他辩护，虽然她承认玛丽他打过她一次。“他不是好人，”玛丽评论道。“他其实不坏，”茱莉回答。因为她自己吃了亏，所以霍伦德太太意识到莉莉奥姆在旋转木马上的价值，她要求他回来，并规定他必须抛弃妻子，因为已婚男人不会像在那里那样受到女性的欢迎。莉莉奥姆接受了提议，但是，当他得知妻子怀孕后，他希望通过其他手段获得更大的利益。事实上，他和一个朋友菲克苏尔计划去抢劫。菲克苏尔建议他应该带一把刀。茱莉怀疑莉莉奥姆和菲克苏尔在搞鬼。当她得知霍伦德太太厨房里少了一把刀时，她感到害怕。莉莉奥姆和菲克苏尔等待着传闻中携带 16000 克朗巨款的出纳员的到来。为了消磨时间，他们玩牌，莉莉奥姆输掉了自己那份赃款。在被两个想抢劫的人袭击后，出纳员巧妙地抓住菲克苏尔的手臂，把枪指着莉莉奥姆，嘲笑他们袭击一个没有带钱的人。当警察走近时，菲克苏尔挣脱了束缚，两人都试图逃跑。出纳员瞄准了莉莉奥姆，因为他是更好的目标。莉莉奥姆害怕坐牢，于是把刀插进自己的胸膛，倒在了地上。在他临死前，他承认自己从未给过茱莉任何积极的东西，并要求她告诉他们的孩子，他没什么用。在他死后，两个穿黑衣的男人向他介绍自己是天堂的警察，命令他站起来，跟随他们去见法官，法官审问他后宣布，他将被烧死 16 年，在这 16 年结束后，他的未来将取决于他在回到地球的一天内是否能做至少一件好事。在 16 年期限结束时，莉莉奥姆以乞丐的身份出现在茱莉和他们的女儿路易丝面前。他试图和她们说话，但她们没有给他多少表达的机会。他也试图做至少一件好事，但他无法做到。两个警察在带走他时训斥了他，但茱莉仍然继续对女儿说他的好话。“有人可能会打你、打你、打你，但却一点也不疼，”她总结道。

“卫兵”

时间：1900 年代。地点：匈牙利布达佩斯。

文本在？

一名演员担心他同为演员的妻子玛丽不再爱他。他推测她将来可能会爱上一个士兵，于是他乔装打扮成俄国帝国卫队的将军，让她认识自己，并定期给她送花。有一天，他承诺如果她在他窗户上给他一个信号，他就会去看她。她照做了，他进去了，她自己的丈夫伪装成情人。在礼貌的交谈中，他们同意在普契尼的《蝴蝶夫人》演出期间在歌剧院的前厅见面，在那里卫兵承认他爱上了她。令他高兴的是，她明确表示她永远不会欺骗她的丈夫。然而，当他问她是否允许他第二天去她的客厅时，她同意了。第二天，演员假装雇了一名间谍，看到她在歌剧院和一名士兵在一起。她否认了，并提出因为怀疑她而离婚。他否认怀疑她。当他们谈论一位同行演员时，他突然以卫兵的制服出现在她面前。她似乎很高兴见到他，并向他保证，她从第一眼就认出了他。演员不确定这句话是否属实，但无论如何都乐于假装如此。

米兰·费斯特

另一位匈牙利剧作家米兰·费斯特 (1888-1967) 在《不幸者》(The wretched, 1923) 中呈现了不那么愉快的主题。

"不幸者"

时间：1914 年。地点：匈牙利。

文本在？

与丈夫分离 5 年后，胡贝尔夫人走进一间破败不堪的公寓，寻找她的儿子维尔莫什，却发现罗扎正在熨衣服，他是她在一家宗教书籍印刷厂的同事，一个她从未听说过的女人，已经和她儿子同居了 3 年。更令人惊讶的是，罗扎断言是她支付了公寓的费用，因为维尔莫什把钱花在了其他的女朋友身上，尽管他是她 2 岁儿子的父亲，孩子由保姆照顾。实际上，是罗扎的爱慕者，弗兰茨·西尔玛，一位屠夫，以性爱作为交换，免费借出他的公寓给罗扎，此外还送来食物，她与胡贝尔夫人分享。罗扎建议胡贝尔夫人可以申请在西尔玛家做家庭教师，因为令这位母亲惊讶的是，另一个女孩将要和这对夫妇住在一起。碰巧，维尔莫什的妹妹罗兹西走了进来，假装不知道她母亲的存在，但也寻找她的兄弟，不知道罗扎是谁。她留下了一条信息，说她想和他谈谈。保姆带着发烧的 2 岁孩子走了进来，维尔莫什走进来说他会派医生去看他。他母亲抱怨罗兹西打她，她的耳朵疼，导致部分失聪。出于同情，罗扎递给她一条围巾，以保护她们。胡贝尔夫人离开后，维尔莫什告诉罗扎，他母亲比她有钱。弗兰茨一进来就注意到罗扎的痛苦，但被维尔莫什粗鲁地打发走了。他的同事和罗扎的朋友维尔玛走了进来，要和这对夫妇一起去剧院，但罗扎拒绝了。维尔玛宣布，一个陌生人在街上拦住了她，一位医生，自高中时代就认识维尔莫什，那是维尔莫什试图自杀的时候。当罗扎出去为维尔玛准备晚餐时，维尔莫什握住她的手，她愤怒地抽回了手。商店已经关门了，罗扎空手回来，注意到维尔玛的痛苦，并认出了原因。胡贝尔夫人认为自己落下了包裹，又回来了，罗扎改变了主意，和他们三个人一起去剧院。一个星期后，在印刷厂，胡贝尔夫人告诉她的儿子，因为罗兹西继续打她，她想让他把她带走，然后在看到她进来后突然走了出去。同样，罗兹西也受够了不能工作、懒惰且容易偷东西的母亲。她坚持让维尔莫什把她带走。他愤怒地拒绝了，但试图用一个已经包好的礼服来软化她。她注意到地址错了，当维尔玛提到的陌生人，贝克医生，过来和他的老校友打招呼时，她突然离开了，罗扎上前感谢他检查了她的儿子。贝克医生想让维尔莫什帮助他创办一份新杂志。维尔莫什会考虑一下，同时想让他检查他母亲的耳朵。医生同意了，但当胡贝尔夫人回来时，她看起来很焦虑，不情愿地跟着他。不久之后，医生回来报告说她母亲从他身边逃跑了。维尔莫什笑了，与其说是高兴，不如说是羞愧。他告诉维尔玛他打算辞职，并希望她跟着他。罗扎打断他们的谈话，迅速评估了他们困境。她发现维尔玛怀孕了。她假装关心她，劝她不要跟着维尔莫什。两个女人看到胡贝尔夫人带着一件给女儿准备的年轻女人的衣服来了，都爆发出一阵笑声。两周后，弗兰茨告诉罗扎，他想要收回自己的公寓，打算让她和他住在一起。他尤其厌恶看到维尔莫什和两个女人住在一起。胡贝尔夫人进来，说她又失业了，归咎于她的耳聋。但她仍然从街上的一个穷人那里买了一瓶 60 克朗的干邑白兰地，罗扎还了钱，但她很失望，因为这位老妇人没有带什么东西来堕胎。维尔玛告诉罗扎，她遇到了贝克医生，他建议罗扎去看望她仍然生病的 2 岁孩子，她就去了，弗兰茨也跟着她。当医生最终检查胡贝尔夫人时，他发现她的耳聋是装的：对维尔莫什来说并不奇怪，他一直都知道她讨厌工作。就他而言，他拒绝了医生的提议。弗兰茨回来报告说孩子病得很重。当他拿出那瓶干邑白兰地时，他发现里面只有水。医生拒绝玩牌，于是弗兰茨和维尔莫什一起玩牌。维尔莫什经济拮据，向弗兰茨借了 5 弗罗林。后者拒绝了，因为这个人已经欠了他 150 弗罗林。但是，当维尔玛重新进来时，维尔莫什假装是弗兰茨欠他 5 弗罗林，于是后者就给了他，以避免羞辱他。罗扎重新进来，说她的孩子正在窒息，虚弱的胡贝尔夫人重新进来，承认她服用了老鼠药。维尔莫什跑去寻找贝克医生，碰巧他离开后又回来了，把他的医药箱落下了。然而，他来得太迟了，无法救她。一个月后，她的 2 岁孩子死了，罗扎只有一个想法：以任何方式摆脱维尔玛。她开始给她读维尔莫什与之有染的第三个女人的来信，但维尔玛拒绝听。她的怀孕越来越严重，维尔玛紧张地想知道她会怎样。罗扎建议弗兰茨作为一种出路，但维尔玛对这个想法感到恐惧，当他的学徒来的时候，她拒绝吃肉。他们的谈话被罗兹西打断了，只是说她要离开城镇，她哥哥再也不会见到她了。学徒回来了，因为弗兰茨想知道罗扎是否想要食物，但罗扎给了他钱后，维尔玛再次把他拒之门外。但他还是回来了，因为弗兰茨拒绝接受她的任何钱。罗扎借此机会把孩子送到维尔莫什款待第三个女人的客栈，让他回家。看到维尔玛显得更加绝望，罗扎拿出了一支左轮手枪，放在桌子上，但听到父亲谢凯利的声音，维尔莫什在商店的老板，他放下了一份急件手稿给维尔莫什。学徒带着维尔莫什的酒回来了，准备等他犯困了才回家。神父出于对这两个女人的同情，前往客栈，把维尔莫什带回来。维尔玛羞愧于被发现生活在这样的环境中，尤其是被一个神父发现。罗扎利用她的痛苦，递给她一把藏在窗帘后面的左轮手枪。维尔莫什不顾一切地走了进来，然后又走了出去，没有注意到这两个女人。罗扎愤怒于维尔玛没有自杀，她扯她的头发，抓她，然后把她拉回到窗帘后面。维尔莫什回来取手稿，听到一声枪响。很快，罗扎走了出来，说维尔玛自杀了。

维托尔德·贡布罗维奇

在这个时期，波兰剧作家维托尔德·贡布罗维奇 (1904-1969) 也值得关注，他是《伊沃娜，勃艮第公主》(Ivona, princess of Burgundia, 1935) 的作者。

"伊沃娜，勃艮第公主" "可以被视为一个怪诞的童话故事，有点像毕希纳的《利翁茨和莱娜》(Leonce und Lena, 1836)、雅里的《乌布王》(Ubu the king, 1896)，以及稍晚一些时候，施瓦茨的风格化的《艺术童话》……故事发生在宫廷世界，坐落在一个模糊的童话般的王国里，充满了令人窒息的习俗、阶级偏见和傲慢，此外还有严格定义的权力和地位等级制度，从专制的国王到最贫困的乞丐，这似乎可以解释，贡布罗维奇对这种环境的迷恋，这种社会模式的行为完全由形式支配。但形式的世界，与真实存在相反，当王子违反时间久远的风俗，把选定的未婚妻，一个名叫伊沃娜的平民，带入宫廷时，便被打破了，她是“最低阶层的花朵”，她的奇怪的衰弱状况让整个宫廷陷入恐慌……最后，宫廷，以及更广泛的社会，拒绝承认自身丑陋的真相，拒绝与低级且植物般的伊沃娜认同，导致了不受欢迎的入侵者被谋杀，“正常秩序”恢复……当宫廷成员开始感到受到伊沃娜的威胁，并密谋以让她被一条多刺的鱼刺死来除掉她时，每个人都回到了按照习俗规定的角色：王子变得更加意识到自己的“王子气质”和性欲；国王的独裁统治现在开始呈现出一种险恶和偏执的特征；王后恢复了她的优雅和沉着，正如“她身份地位所应有的一样” (Iribarne, 1971 pp 62-70)。

该剧“体现了不惜一切代价维护外表所带来的致命困境。在一定程度上，它是一个相对容易识别的讽刺童话故事（解构了嫁入贵族阶层的灰姑娘版本，揭露了掌权者的贪婪、贪得无厌和杀戮性），但它还加入了具有戈姆布罗维奇特色的分析，即这种行为得到了对良好形式坚持的支撑和证明......该剧的节奏遵循了典型的闹剧升级，皇室成员在他们越来越荒唐的阴谋诡计中失去了所有尊严。伊沃娜的黑洞似乎对既定的秩序施加了越来越快的混乱速度。因此，她成为荒诞本身力量的象征，在波兰经历的从十八世纪到二十世纪一系列权力交替的荒诞事件的星座中。荒诞似乎是畸形的、丑陋的、难以理解的、口齿不清的，不可接近的，但它坚定地存在着，它体现了一种下层阶级的、局外人的、不和谐的、破坏性的能量，这种能量的作用不是维持，而是摧毁”(Yarrow, 2015 pp 118-119)。

“伊沃娜的特点是不讨人喜欢、冷漠、虚弱，她颠覆性的力量很奇怪，因为它主要是被动的和沉默的”(Brodsky, 1986 p 770)。“尽管她胆怯，伊沃娜却表现出独立自主，她不试图取悦他人。这种漠不关心激怒了他们，使他们对她充满敌意和攻击性......她不玩社交游戏......她使其他角色的社交自我瘫痪，暴露了他们精心隐藏在周围人视线之外的内心世界。菲利普王子觉得伊沃娜的冷漠是在指出他不是一个应该具备的强势而果断的王储。朝臣们从伊沃娜的行为中发现了他们自己秘密缺陷的幻觉......例如，女官们突然想起她们戴着假发和假牙。王后担心她写的矫揉造作的诗歌被人发现”(Thompson, 1979 pp 46-47)。“该剧的真正问题是一个真正模棱两可的问题：谁是傻瓜，谁是正常人？谁是野兽，谁又是太过人性化”(Biró, 2000 p 102)。

“伊沃娜病态的害羞在所有社会中最正式的社会——宫廷——创造了无形，因为她无法对周围的人做出适当的反应。因此，她打破了行动-反应的循环，制造了混乱，释放了每个人精心隐藏的丑陋......童话故事的类型......被中心人物扭曲了，她应该是一位美丽的公主，最好处于某种困境中，但实际上，她是一位丑陋、沉默、闷闷不乐的平民，完全无法履行自己的角色......王子试图通过拒绝认真对待她来摆脱伊沃娜的爱：“我已经改变了。我改变了我的语气，突然一切都改变了！......哈哈，哈哈！......即使你在这里站上一整年，你的忧郁和困难也无法战胜我的轻松和自在。”笑声被呈现为对抗形式的最强大的武器之一。不幸的是，王子的任何行为都不能阻止伊沃娜想他，更重要的是，不能阻止他认为她在想他，因此他被迫重新认真起来......伊沃娜的害羞最终威胁要摧毁社会这一事实证明了个人惊人的力量”(Baraniecki, 1985 pp 241-244)。

“身份、面目模糊、人类的彻底孤独等问题经常交织在戈姆布罗维奇戏剧的结构中，尤其是在《伊沃娜，勃艮第公主》(1935)和《婚姻》(1946)中......伊沃娜是戏剧的中心。她象征着三位主要主角的负面方面：菲利普的弱点、王后的过去纵情声色、国王以前的谋杀——这些人物和他们的行为所产生的罪恶。她实际上是他们的影子。她令人不安，具有挑衅性，她在破坏现状（宫廷中盛行的和平与和谐，象征性地来说，创造了一种静止的气氛，阻碍了成长过程）方面与邪恶或魔鬼在社会中的存在一样重要。像光明使者路西法一样，像刺激者一样，伊沃娜，混乱的创造者，带来了新的能量，也带来了创造的可能性......菲利普王子是一个典型的想要独立的青少年。为了实现独立，他拒绝了他的父母和随从......他试图改造她；把她塑造成宫廷中其他人的样子。然后他被自己行为的更深层意义所吸引......国王和王后没有个人名字。他们在本剧中只作为功能存在，与任何人几乎没有联系，甚至与他们的儿子——任何人的儿子——也没有联系。他们当然对菲利普的行为感到困扰，这相当于对他们的权威提出质疑。然而，他们拥有某种智慧，与其强行执行自己的意志，他们认为这可能会导致父母和孩子之间的误解，以及菲利普和伊沃娜之间不良关系的加固，他们选择置身事外，默许他的任性。他们似乎很了解他们的儿子：缺乏毅力、胆怯、反复无常和冷酷的本性”(Knapp, 1971 pp 75-79)。

"伊沃娜，勃艮第公主"

时间：1930年代。地点：虚构的勃艮第国。

文本在？

菲利普王子的一位朋友鼓励他享受爱情关系，其中一位热情地脱口而出：“让我们以我们欢快的动物青春的功能来发挥作用。”相反，王子的目光却被伊沃娜吸引，她是一位沉默寡言的丑陋女人。令他的朋友们惊讶和沮丧的是，他向她求婚。她看起来漠不关心，没有人能让她甚至向国王和王后行屈膝礼。“你相信基督为了你在十字架上受难吗？”他问道。“是的，”她轻蔑地回答。最后，菲利普注意到伊沃娜正在注视着他，他认为，以一种不合适的性感方式。他恼怒地威胁要割断她的喉咙，但随后又说他只是在开玩笑。一位无辜的宫廷侍卫带着令人惊讶的消息出现，他也以一种更谦逊的方式爱着伊沃娜，伊沃娜愤怒地让他离开。侍卫长认为，由国王来发现她的感受。国王起初犹豫，然后同意，但他越靠近她，她就越往后退，这让他非常生气。菲利普决定采用另一种策略：他假装与另一个女人睡过，并要抛弃她。她唯一的反应是拾起对手头上的一根头发，然后离开房间。看到每个人都束手无策，侍卫长有了一个主意：邀请伊沃娜参加一个盛大的宴会，邀请许多人参加，这样，在她感到害怕和慌乱的情况下，也许会因鱼刺噎死。国王和王子同意了，但在宴会期间，他们改变了主意，提醒她吃鲈鱼的危险性。尽管他们警告过她，她还是被鱼刺噎死了。