What's the book about?

The Unwilling Bride is a play that takes place in a patriarchal society where women are treated as possessions. It's a thought-provoking story that explores the harsh realities of this era and the struggles of the women who lived through it.

Is this book suitable for all ages?

No, this book deals with some heavy themes and is not suitable for all ages. I would recommend it for readers 16 and up.

What's the writing style like?

The writing in The Unwilling Bride is incredibly vivid and engaging. The author does a great job of transporting you to a different era without feeling like you're reading a history book.

Is this book a classic?

Yes, The Unwilling Bride is a timeless play that remains a classic to this day. It's a great choice if you're looking for something that'll make you think and challenge your perspectives.

What's the setting like?

The play takes place in a patriarchal society where women are treated as possessions. The setting is well-developed and immersive, making it easy to become emotionally invested in the characters' stories.

What are the main themes?

The main themes of The Unwilling Bride are the struggles of women in a patriarchal society and the importance of equality and justice.

Is this book part of a series?

No, The Unwilling Bride is a standalone play. However, it's a great choice if you're looking for something that'll make you think and challenge your perspectives.

What's the tone like?

The tone of The Unwilling Bride is engaging and thought-provoking. It's a great choice if you're looking for something that'll make you think and challenge your perspectives.

What's the author's style like?

The author's writing style is incredibly vivid and engaging. They do a great job of transporting you to a different era without feeling like you're reading a history book.

A Timeless Play That Still Packs a Punch | Book Review

The Unwilling Bride: A Timeless Play That Still Packs a Punch

Hello!

You've probably never stopped to think about how great it is that we live in this enlightened time - the 21st century. Medical advancements, technology, the internet - all of these things were just a pipe dream a mere 50 years ago. Everything's evolving, changing, and getting better. That includes social norms.

Back in the day, women didn't have the right to vote, work, get an education, or earn a living. They were basically at the mercy of their husbands - financially and emotionally. Without a husband, a woman was nothing; she was essentially a possession, owned by her husband.

And yet, you still think things were better back then?

The pinnacle of patriarchal society was the dowry - where the bride's parents would pay a sum of money to the groom for taking their daughter off their hands. It made sense, I guess, since the woman would be staying at home and living off her husband. A little about dowries:

Dowry - that's the property given to a bride by her parents, which remains hers after marriage. In the past, the size of the dowry often determined a woman's popularity as a bride. These days, the tradition of giving a dowry has evolved, but it's still around in some form. A woman without a dowry was known as a 'dowryless bride.' There's even a certain type of man who's on the lookout for a dowry.

Thankfully, all these terrible things are in the past; women can work, earn a living, and pursue their goals just like men. Although, some women still have a psychological dependence on men - but that's a whole other story...

Today, I want to tell you about a play by A.N. Ostrovsky - 'The Unwilling Bride.' It's about a young woman who had it tough living in the 19th century.

The book is a classic that's even included in school curricula, so you should be able to find it in any bookstore for around 50 hryvnia. You can buy it online for about the same price; in fact, you can even download it for free or read it online for free.

Ostrovsky was a judge in one of the districts in the 1870s, and the play's storyline was inspired by a high-profile case - a man who killed his young wife.

Plot of the play

Larisa Dmitriyevna Ogudalova is a beautiful girl, but without a dowry. The lack of money immediately puts her in a disadvantageous position - she has many admirers, but none of them want to marry a poor girl, unfortunately. And only Yuli Kapitonovich Karandyshev - a poor and unrespectable local official - is willing to offer the girl his hand and warmth in his love... But there's one problem - Larisa is in love with someone else.

Main Characters

Here's how the list of characters looks at the beginning of the play:

On many of them, we'll focus in more detail.

So, let's start with the main heroine - young Larisa Dmitriyevna. Despite her humiliating position, she tries not to lower herself, doesn't pretend, and speaks the truth:

Larisa is ashamed that her future husband doesn't enjoy any respect in society, and she wants to leave for the countryside as soon as possible:

Her view of the man and her description of his actions seem strange to me, even for a young and naive girl. Here's her idea of the ideal man and her story about his actions:

I have to agree with Karandyshev on this one. In my opinion, Paratov's action is not courage, but rather foolishness and pointless show-off. It's surprising that a smart... or at least, well-educated girl can take this seriously. In the heat of love for the object of her passion, Larisa loses all dignity and self-respect:

This willingness to do anything for a meaningless person is puzzling and unpleasant; but what can you do - love is evil, and donkeys take advantage of it.

Larisa is, however, quite ruthless when it comes to the feelings of others - she speaks her mind without thinking about how it might hurt someone:

Larisa can lecture Karandyshev on how to be careful with her feelings, but she doesn't even try to spare the feelings of the man (the only one who wanted to marry her), simply stating that she doesn't see any good qualities in him. Even if the groom isn't perfect, that's, in my opinion, no reason to hurt and wound him.

I've got mixed feelings about this character - I feel both pity and frustration. She's a complex character, just like all the others in this story.

Let's talk about her fiancé, Karandyshev. On one hand, Karandyshev is a troubled person. Even his fiancée doesn't go easy on him:

What can I say about the rest of society, which bullies him:

They even mock him openly:

But then there are moments when Karandyshev speaks, and I feel embarrassed for him:

Karandyshev is completely devoid of charm, the ability to win people over; he's not stupid, but his words are always inappropriate, and he says them at the wrong time.

But, at the same time, he's not just a harmless oddball. With people he thinks are under his control, he allows himself to be coarse:

He thinks he can lecture others:

However, despite all this, I still feel a bit sorry for Karandyshev - he evokes a lot more sympathy than the main character:

His words are touching...

But let's move on to our next character - 'the ideal man' (in Larisa's eyes) Paratov.

As I've already said, in my opinion, he's a vacuous person. He lacks courage, and instead, he has a lot of empty talk, a lot of hot air, which is completely meaningless:

As far as I'm concerned, True courage is about saving other people's lives, not recklessly risking them.

Karandyshev gives a precise description of him and the city's values:

And even the state (which is probably not his own) of 'the ideal man' can't be maintained, and he doesn't find anything better to do than marry for gain:

I've gotta say, Paratov's got an inflated sense of self-importance – his ego's way more important to him than anyone else's feelings.

On top of that, he's got a high and mighty attitude – he's so self-absorbed, he doesn't even think twice before ruining people's lives for his own amusement.

Personally, I think Paratov's a pretty despicable guy, morally speaking – and if he's the kind of guy Larisa thinks is high-class, then she's got some serious issues.

As for Vozhevatov, Larisa's childhood friend, there's not much to say about him. He's got a good head on his shoulders and can make some decent cash – which is how he ends up buying the boat from the financially-strapped Paratov.

It's hard to say how close they were as kids, but it's clear that Vozhevatov sees Larisa as nothing more than a pretty face – someone he can use for his own gain.

It's a pretty sad state of affairs – either they never had a real friendship to begin with, or it's just gotten worse over time. Either way, it's a shame to see how far people can fall...

Knurov, Larisa's wealthy suitor, didn't exactly win me over either. He's a snobbish high-society type – the kind of guy who thinks he's above everyone else.

His morals are pretty questionable – and the fact that he's married doesn't stop him from making unwanted advances on Larisa.

But honestly, is he really in love with Larisa, or is she just a pretty face to him? The more I read, the more it becomes clear that he's only interested in her for her looks...

My takeaways from the story

I'm not a huge fan of reading plays, to be honest. I'd rather see the same play on stage - the experience, emotions, and the actors' performances would be way more impactful than just reading the script. In school, I usually didn't bother reading the full plays either, I'd stick to summaries online and still manage to write decent essays.

But 'The Unwilling Bride' was an exception - I read it from start to finish in high school.

The style of the play... It's a classic; every word is carefully chosen, down to the point. The characters are vivid and relatable - you can easily picture them. Despite being written years ago, the play and its characters still feel relevant today.

I found it engaging from start to finish thanks to the accuracy of the characters and the realism of the situation. There was nothing unnecessary or boring in the play for me. As it's a play, there aren't any tedious descriptions of nature or daily life; everything is focused on the psychological aspects of the characters. Still, I didn't feel any strong connection with any of the characters.

I almost feel bad for Larisa. Why?

All the men in this play represent society - unfair and harsh. And Larisa? She's not any better, she disregards the weak and looks down on them just like the others.

Karandyshev is completely clueless, lacking social intelligence. He's not terrible on his own, but he loses all ground when compared to others... Instead of self-deception, he should acknowledge his flaws and leave with his young wife to the countryside; but no, he wants to show off and boast... As a result of his foolishness and mistakes, the play ends on a sad note.

As for Paratov, I don't even want to talk about him - he's a complete waste of time, an uninteresting and unattractive character who's self-absorbed and not very smart... I'm still wondering how someone could fall in love with him - it's a mystery...

Overall, the play leaves you with a mix of emotions and the most important thing is that it's interesting. I devoured it, barely putting it down.

On the adaptations

I've seen two adaptations of this play and neither of them impressed me.

El'dar Riazanov's 'Bitter Romance' (1984). It follows the play's storyline, which is good, but... Mikhailov's portrayal of the self-centered Paratov is a disaster - it ruins the whole point of the story, making it unclear why the main character prefers Paratov (Mikhailov) over Karandyshev (Mягков); both actors are... not exactly sex symbols, let's put it that way. Clearly, a more charismatic actor was needed for the role of Paratov.

The Fiancée (2011). The action of the play has been moved to the present day, with Larisa being a girl from a poor family, Knurov, Vozhevatov, and Paratov being businessmen, and Karandyshev being a military man of modest means. I won't go into the details of the plot and its resolution, but I will say that it's been utterly distorted and the idea that Ostrovsky put into the play has disappeared altogether. The person who came up with the script for this movie clearly loved Karandyshev and sympathized with him - he's transformed from a self-aggrandizing fool into a genuinely noble character.

My Verdict. This book is really interesting and alive, it evokes a lot of emotions while you're reading it and even after you've finished. It's a True classic - it doesn't get outdated, it's timeless, and it's always relevant, just like human emotions - love, hatred, pity, kindness.

I devoured it from start to finish, not putting it down once.

I didn't quite connect with the main characters - none of them elicited any sympathy from me, but the book itself is undoubtedly worthy of attention and the highest praise; you can feel the unique mastery that the author of the past brought to it.

I'd definitely recommend the book to anyone who hasn't read it yet.

Thanks for your attention!

I wish you all interesting books!