Regular marked price: $12.00Discount Price: $9.60
Cost Savings: $2.40 (20%)Price fluctuation possible.
How soon does it ship: Normal ship time within one day
Shipping? Absolutely FREE if you qualify for Super Saver Shipping.
Type of bind: Paperback
Dewey Decimal Number: 822.912
EAN num: 9780140437911
ISBN number: 0140437916
Label: Penguin Classics
Manufacturer: Penguin Classics
Quantity: 1
Page Count: 160
Printing Date: May 01, 2001
Publishing house: Penguin Classics
Sale Popularity Level: 79331
Studio: Penguin Classics
Other books you might be interested in perusing:
Editor's Notes and Comments:
Product Description:
With Saint Joan, Shaw reached the height of his fame as a dramatist. Fascinated by the story of Joan of Arc (canonized in 1920), but unhappy with 'the whitewash which disfigures her beyond recognition,' he presents a realistic Joan: proud, intolerant, naïve, foolhardy, always brave-a rebel who challenged the conventions and values of her day.
Amazon.com Review:
Joan of Arc, born in 1412, was burned at the stake in 1431, canonized by the Catholic Church in 1920, and, like most saints, whitewashed by history. Canonization tends to strip a saint of supposedly un-Christian attributes such as rebelliousness, pride, and intolerance. And Joan, despite having been a stubborn, haughty, naive, even foolish girl, has for much of history been remembered only as a pious martyr. However, George Bernard Shaw's play, Saint Joan, completed in 1925, began the modern rehabilitation of the icon as a fully human, fallible character--not to mention a poster girl for teenage rebellion and feminism. Shaw's Joan, like the real Maid of Orleans, leads the fight to drive the English out of her native France, insists on direct communication with her God instead of submitting to the mediation of Catholic priests, and refuses to dress, speak, or act according to traditional notions of how women were expected to behave. Until the closing scene of Shaw's play, however, neither Joan nor her foes are cast in neatly heroic terms. Both are earnestly pursuing their partial visions of the truth. In the play's famous epilogue, Shaw suggests that even 400 years later, most of us are so limited by our own perspectives that we are unable to tell the difference between a saint and a heretic. 'O God that madest this beautiful earth, when will it be ready to receive Thy saints?' Joan asks, preparing for her death. 'How long, O Lord, how long?' --Michael Joseph Gross
User popularity level:
Rated by buyers 
-
Shaw's keen understanding of French Patriotism as illustrated in Joan of Arc story transcends borders, cultures, languages and skin colors. The legacy of Joan's heroism, her vision and her love of humanity and her country still haunts both Western and Eastern civilizations in each individual's effort to fulfill his "duties" in life.
Rated by buyers 
-
Audio recordings of plays are usually done with different actors reading the roles as in a radio play. This is the very first time I have listened to a play being read by only one reader. It is not at all the same experience, but better than one might expect. The reader uses a neutral American accent for the French characters, but a slightly British one to differentiate the English characters. There was a recording on Caedmon of the play with Siobhan McKenna repeating her famous performance, but it is not available. (Some libraries still have it on vinyl, but that doesn't help me pass the time while commuting.)
Shaw's play is intriguing, coming as it did so soon after Joan's canonization and Ireland's war for independence ("France for the French"), but there is no denying that is rather untheatrical, save for the climactic scene. Joan confesses to her supposed sins to save her life, but then withdraws the confession, choosing execution and martydom. I had never realized how much Arthur Miller owed to Shaw; I was reminded of the scene in The Crucible when John Proctor confesses to a lie and then recants, preferring an honorable death. These scenes are both based on historical events, of course, but the resemblance in the way they are dramatized is striking nonetheless. Here's a potential trivia topic: How many plays and movies can you think of that use the device of a false confession followed by an even more dramatic retraction?
Rated by buyers -
I have seen this performed, I have read it and I have heard it on a tape from Books on Tape for the Blind and Disabled. I loved it every time. I agree fully with Shaw that the Catholic Church has gotten a bad rap over Joan. When you listen to her words she was espousing overt Protestant beliefs -- God can, should and will speak to one person, individually and doesn't require a mediator like the Pope or Mary or any of the saints.
I actually got the most out of this play by hearing it on a tape from Books on Tape for the Blind and Disabled. I was able to speed the tape up and suddenly the wimpy, silly voices of the court officials came out perfectly. The farce inside the tragedy revealed itself clearly.
Shaw is brilliant and astute -- but no one needs me to tell them that!
Rated by buyers -
This is George Bernard Shaw's most important work. A successful drama that has enjoyed continuous popularity for nearly eighty years is worth a read. Most audiences find it very satisfying. Shaw has a gift for lucid dialogue that brings a centuries old story to life. This is one of the most approachable of the great English language plays.
Why then does "Saint Joan" fall short of five stars?
Fictional accounts of Joan of Arc's life are numerous and seldom accurate. Shakespeare makes her a witch. Voltaire makes her an idiot. Schiller makes her admirable - and gives her a magical helmet that protects her from harm until she falls in love.
In a rare exception to his usual satirical style, Mark Twain spent months in France researching her life and published a fictional biography. Readers who enjoy accurate historical fiction would do well with Twain's "Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc." Twain considered this - not "Huckleberry Finn" - to be his finest work.
Shaw pays far more attention to accuracy than most fictionalizations. Several lines in the play are Shaw's own translations from her trial transcript. Shaw's long introductory essay aspires to be history as well as drama. Most scholars agree with his assessment of Joan of Arc's socioeconomic background. Shaw acknowledges a few dramatic economies: he combines the historical Jean d'Orleans and Duke Jean d'Alencon into a single character. What causes problems are Shaw's unacknowledged deviations from the factual record.
Shaw argues that Joan of Arc was a forerunner of Protestantism who got a fair trial. Among serious scholars this argument gains no credibility. A surviving letter from the English government that financed the trial guaranteed her execution even if the court found her not guilty. Joan of Arc never rejected the Roman Catholic Church: she rejected the authority of politically biased judges bent on discrediting her and, by inference, on discrediting the king she had crowned. Twenty-four years after her death the Pope reopened the case. The appeals court not only found her innocent but discovered such extensive violations of proper court procedure that it accused the late Bishop Cauchon of heresy.
Shaw's choice works as drama rather than as history yet he advocates it on historical grounds. He might be sincere but he is certainly not honest. To an academic scholar who has explained the facts to umpteen Shaw enthusiasts the difference can be infuriating. This is why "Saint Joan" collects a handful of scathing reviews.
A reader who understands this little shell game with history should have a lively time with the drama. If this is your very first reading of "Saint Joan" then I envy you. Nothing quite equals the very first encounter.
Rated by buyers 
-
What has most stuck in my mind, many years after having read Shaw's book, is the fact that it's more logical to think of Joan as a protestant saint, instead of Catholic, when one considers how she rejected the Catholic Church's authority and was, naturally, rejected in turn.
He makes a very good point when he says that, right as that Church was to ban her on those grounds, nothing could give it the moral right (or any other right, for that matter) to condemn a woman who disagreed with it on matters of faith. In all fairness, they should have simply excommunicated her and said: "If you think you have a better idea, then you go ahead and create your own Church".
It may be a thoroughly idealistic point of view of course, too democratic for that age (perhaps any age), but nonetheless it strikes me as completely fair.
If you like a club but object to some of its rules, and that club isn't willing to change for your sake, they may have the right to throw you out, just as you may have the right to start a new one on your own - but they shouldn't be given the right to take away your life for having dared to challenge their concepts.
This lesson has stayed with me and I recommend this book for the wisdom it contains.
Find other books like this one:
