Considering it's not one of his more well-known plays, Troilus and Cressida was a surprisingly agreeable dose of Shakespeare. The story of Troilus and Cressida was a pre-existing medieval invention that had been inserted into the existing mythology surrounding The Iliad, and Shakespeare provides his own spin on it.

It is essentially a subplot to the part of the Trojan War covered in The Iliad; in the backdrop, Achilles mooches stubbornly in his tent and eventually meets Hector on the field, while in our foreground the Trojan prince Troilus, a lesser son of Priam, woos a Trojan lady named Cressida. However, Cressida's father defects to the Greeks and, as a reward, the Greek king Agamemnon negotiates Cressida being turned over to the Greek camp in a trade of prisoners. In a classic, contrived Shakespearean scene, Troilus witnesses Cressida being unfaithful to her love-oath to him in the tent of the Greek warrior Diomedes.

It's enough for us to sink our teeth into, and yet also not enough. Shakespeare taps into the sexual jealousy that has always been one of the potent drivers of The Iliad – the war famously starts, of course, with Helen cuckolding Menelaus by fleeing with Paris, and the rift between Achilles and Agamemnon is caused by the latter claiming the slave girl Briseis – and his more classical scenes, such as the one where Achilles meets Hector, are interesting as we get to see what the Bard might have done with such material. Shakespeare has his own take on things – Achilles effectively ambushes Hector dishonourably, rather than defeating him in single combat – and he also touches, with a surprising lack of ambiguity, on the idea that Patroclus was the bed-mate of Achilles.

However, the story of Troilus and Cressida themselves is interesting rather than engrossing; we don't spend enough time with them to be invested in the way that we were with, for example, Romeo and Juliet. The horse-trading around Cressida gets a bit convoluted, and a potentially spicy theme of hypocrisy (Troilus the Trojan prince is expected to turn over Cressida, a Trojan noblewoman, yet the war continues only because Paris the Trojan prince refuses to turn over Helen, a Greek noblewoman) is left under-developed, even though Shakespeare seems to recognise it in part ("Men prize the thing ungained more than it is" (pg. 17)).

What we are left with is an enjoyable if inconsistent mix of typical Shakespearean content, part bawdy comedy, part historical epic and part thematic tragedy, without really committing to or satisfying any of those angles. In truth, I think I enjoyed it more because it was an opportunity to revisit the old Greek legends, and it appears Shakespeare enjoyed playing in this Trojan sandbox too. ( )

Troja, 1200-tallet før Kristi fødsel

Hector ( )

داستان نمایشنامه اقتباسی از نبرد معروف تروا است که به نظر می‌رسه در سال هفتم محاصره رخ می‌ده و درواقع همون تقابل آشیل و هکتور که توی فیلم معروف سال 2004 هم خیلی بهش تأکید شده بود اینجا نقش اصلی رو ایفا می‌کنه.
از این حرف‌های گذشته فکر کنم این عجیب‌ترین کاری بود که از شکسپیر خوندم... مثلاً با اینکه داستان بسیار به تراژدی نزدیکه اما عناصری مثل خدمتکار بذله‌گو که تو تمام کمدی‌هاش حضور داره، تو این نمایشنامه هم هست... همینطور از اون یکپارچگی همیشگی و کلاسیک شکسپیر هم خبری نیست... به طور مثال با اینکه نام داستان ترویلوس و کرسیداست اما درواقع سرانجام این دو نفر رو نمایشنامه مشخص نمی‌کنه و یه جورایی حس پایان باز می‌ده بهتون!‌ البته به این فکر کردم که شاید شهرت این داستان باعث شده که شکسپیر نخواد همه چی رو نشون بده اما یعنی مردم طبقه‌ی متوسط لندن قرن هفدهم، همه داستان ایلیاد رو می‌دونستند؟
نکته‌ی جالب اینه که این نمایشنامه از لحاظ زمانی بین آثار کمتر مشهور شکسپیر و آثار پرآوازه‌ای مثل مکبث و اتللو و هملت و لیرشاه نوشته شده و می‌شه گفت گذار شکسپیر به پختگی حداکثریشه... البته با اینکه اثر عجیبی بود به نظرم خوب نبود. نکته‌ی جالب دیگه‌ش اینه که این نمایشنامه بین ما ایرانی‌ها از همه‌ی آثارش مهجورتره... تا جایی که من گشتم ترجمه‌ی مستقلی جز ترجمه‌ی آقای پازارگادی تو مجموعه آثار شکسپیر از این اثر نیست و به شکل عجیبی هیچیک از دوستان و دنبال‌شوندگان من تو گودریدز این نمایشنامه رو نخوندن و حتی تو لیست «خواهم خواند» هم نذاشتند. ( )

We are at Troy, and the war is going nowhere from the Greek point of view. The Trojans are openly reviewing the idea that Helen is worth the trouble. The action is reviewed constantly by Thersites, an obvious draftee, not greatly given to any causes but his own survival, and the motivations of both sides are less than heroic. Cressida, is the beloved of Troilus, but with considerable encouragement, transfers her affections, and her body, to the care of Diomedes one of the Greek heroes. This is Shakespeare's most obviously anti-war play. ( )

One of the strengths of Troilus and Cressida is that, because everyone knows about the Trojan War and the main players in it, the events of this play really do feel like a little snapshot from a much larger history. While the tragedy of our titular couple is not as perfectly crafted as those of Shakespeare's "great" tragedies, it gains a special wrenching quality from being so random and incidental. Troilus and Cressida are torn apart, not just because of the events of the play, but because the war churns on, dragging everyone with it. This story focuses on the petty quibbles of soldiers, the beaten, mocking servant, the lecherous uncle, the distrustful husband, the warrior fighting dirty-- this Trojan War is grimier than you've ever seen it, and any hero in it is killed or corrupted before the end. Diseases, indeed. ( )