Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

The dialog in this play is brilliant, fast-paced and biting. Both hilarious and painful to watch/read. The thing about it that really kills me though is when Martha is talking to Nick and asks who he thinks is the only man who's made her happy and he guesses one of her affairs, but she says "George, my husband." So heartbreaking what we do to someone we love and what we put up with from someone we love.

I might have started off this review by talking about the inextricable link between humour and gut-wrenching sorrow in this play, but luckily one of the characters has already done it for me:

NICK: All right... what do you want me to say? Do you want me to say it’s funny, so you can contradict me and say it’s sad? Or do you want me to say it’s sad so you can turn around and say no, it’s funny. You can play that damn little game any way you want to, you know!

Indeed you can. And George and Martha play it both ways, backwards and forwards and up and down, taking a perverse pleasure in airing their dirty laundry in front of an audience: the young couple, Nick and Honey, who are at first embarrassed and later too entangled (horrified? show more amused? absorbed?) to leave. And we, too, as an audience, can’t look away from the fiery wreck of Martha and George’s marriage—it’s nasty, it’s explosive, it’s cruel, it’s embarrassing, but it’s undeniably fascinating. Partially because of their unrestrained hatred, and partially because at the bottom of it there’s real feeling, which keeps the sense of tragedy alive and well throughout the play’s runtime.

An evening that is at first merely awkward becomes downright hellish, as we’re treated to a vision of domestic inferno where George and Martha work as each other’s perfectly tuned instruments of torture. They know each other better than anyone else, and they load up each other’s flaws and secrets into their bows to shoot out like arrows from across the room. But the cruel, clever, bitter, corrosive genius of this play is that George and Martha don’t just require spectators—they want participants. Honey and Nick are drawn into their bloodbath, maybe out of a sense of politeness at first but later forced to stay because they’ve got skin in the game too, George and Martha have got the goods on their relationship and won’t hesitate to use it as ammo to add some spice to their sick little games, regardless of the pain they leave in their wake. The bitterness at the heart of George and Martha’s relationship is contagious, and it slowly creeps into and overtakes every line of dialogue, every interaction.

Speaking of dialogue, that’s really what put Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf over the top for me, in terms of giving it five stars—Edward Albee truly has an ear for the nuances of dialogue in that I never had to check who was speaking, every voice was very clear and distinct. And as the characters get steadily more inebriated, their dialogue becomes surprisingly realistic drunk person dialogue, from the sudden bursts of anger or childish delight to the moody periods of melancholy and bitter reminiscence and ugly combativeness. Top-notch writing from Albee here, which makes this play as riveting to read as it would be to experience on the stage or screen.

But man, if ever a work of fiction has strengthened my desire to never be married... show less

Teszkó gazdaságos pokol: két ember elég a fenntartásához. Persze egymás kifilézésének élménye hatványozható, ha új személyeket vonunk be, a célnak pedig épp megfelel a biológia tanszék ifjú üdvöskéje: a tipikus WASP jócsávó, illetve hamvas felesége. Mert a pokol nézőközönség nélkül – úgy fest – nem is pokol igazán.

Amikor az első felvonás végén a függöny legördült, azon tépelődtem, hová lehet ezt még fokozni. Martha és George olyan mély sebeket ejtett egymáson, olyan félelmetes elszántsággal és pervertált intelligenciával csinálták ki egymást (mindezt a vendégek, Honey és Nick szeme előtt), olyan piszkos titkok bukkantak felszínre, hogy annál már – gondoltam – show more nincs lejjebb. Vajon mit tartogat nekünk még Albee?
1.) Rátesz egy lapáttal arra, amire rátenni nem lehet, és a párkapcsolati emberkínzás eddig ismeretlen szintjére vezet minket? Olyan mocskos titkokat bányász elő a lélek mélyéről, amelyeket elképzelni sem tudunk?
2.) A kicsinálást Martha és George személyéről áthelyezi Honeyra és Nickre, így a nézőből résztvevő válik? Valahogy úgy, mintha elmentél volna egy boxmeccsre, és hirtelen téged rángatnának be a szorítóba, hogy orrba csűrjenek?
3.) Esetleg az egymáspusztítás zenitjén az egész irányt vált, és megtudunk valamit a gyűlölet mélyén rejlő szeretetről?
A helyzet az, hogy Albee voltaképpen mindhármat megteszi. És pont ezért zseniális.

Nagyszerű dráma, a leghatásosabbak egyike. Olyan ereje van, hogy még a kissé avítt fordítást is majdnem feledteti. Nem lettem volna ott, ahol Albee az ihletet kapta. show less

Toxic Love
A review of the Berkley paperback (May 2022) revised by the author from the original Atheneum hardcover (1962).

GEORGE (Barely contained anger now): You can sit there in that chair of yours, you can sit there with the gin running out of your mouth, and you can humiliate me, you can tear me apart ... ALL NIGHT ... and that's perfectly all right ... that's O.K. ...
MARTHA: YOU CAN STAND IT!
GEORGE: I CANNOT STAND IT!
MARTHA: YOU CAN STAND IT! YOU MARRIED ME FOR IT!

I read the play before seeing a recent production here in Toronto. It read very bitter and desperate on the page, but I was surprised at how funny it played on stage, at least in the 1st Act. Things turn much nastier in the 2nd and 3rd Acts until the pathos of the final show more reveal. The ending has its own moment of tenderness which you can interpret as a possible awakening to a life without illusions... or will the fun and games continue with a brand new tragic subplot?

See photographat https://scontent-yyz1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/479258395_29518285527770185_3...
The cast of the 2025 Canadian Stage production at curtain call.

Embittered late middle age couple George and Martha come home from an academia party at their University at 2 a.m. Martha has invited younger couple Honey and Nick over for a nightcap. George is initially frustrated but soon manipulates the scene by playing out the bitterness of their marriage in front of the newcomers. George is a history professor and Nick is a newly appointed member of the biology faculty. There are hints throughout that not all of what Martha and George are saying is true-to-life, but the final reveal is still a gut-punch.

Considering that the play is from 1962 it felt rather uncanny that various phrases or topics had a chilling echo to them in present day early 2025 here in North America. There was mention of "diversity", a repeated chorus of ICE ICE ICE (admittedly, they were talking about ice-cubes), a discussion of eugenics and the rise of a superman race where weaklings would be weeded out. These were brief mentions only, but suddenly had a foreboding feel as if Albee had predicted the future.

This was probably a 4-star on the page, but having seen a recent production I definitely feel like giving a 5-star rating.

See cover at https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/...
The cover of the May 2022 Berkley paperback edition. Image sourced from Goodreads.

Trivia and Links
The trailer for the 2025 Canadian Stage production can be viewed here. The house program book can be read here.

The trailer for the 1966 movie adaptation directed by Mike Nichols and starring Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton can be viewed here. show less

I have seen the film version of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" many times, which follows the play very closely, with the exception of some locale changes. I am still astounded by this play, and the fact that its central mystery, no matter how many times I read it, will never be uncovered. It is a play that is simultaneously avant-garde and accessible, that cuts through the pretension that exists in most "Broadway-worthy" dramatic work that came before it, and that has come after. WAOVW shows, more effectively than any other play I know, how people behave when their masks are supposedly off--when other, deeper layers of defenses are revealed. Although in the script, Martha and George do admit to being childless, to never having had the show more "son" they speak so much of--whether or not he ever existed can never truly be known. Because George and Martha are such expert game-players, constantly trying to fool themselves, and each other--the "truth" gets lost in that process. This play has been labeled a "dark comedy", but I would call it a "tragicomedy". This work is also very reflective of the early 1960's when it was written--when the social constraints of the 1950's were being sloughed off, and the swinger movement had entered the mainstream. However--George and Martha, or at least Martha, are so far from the stereotype of "swingers" that to label their characters as such would be an insult. As much as both of them are down to earth, they are also academics (or at least a "closet academic" in Martha's case).

The play is essentially "a performance within a performance"; the characters put on their party hats and play the roles of "party personalities", displaying all the faults and enthusiasms of cruel children. George and Martha are the Alpha-Couple, with Martha being the "Alpha Female"--or so it seems. Nonetheless--although George is consistently hounded by Martha--George also wields power in the relationship. In the end, both George and Martha play the fool; yet beneath their chaotic facades, both possess considerable wisdom. They are just trying to get through life; they are failures; they are laughing at themselves; still, one wishes that it could be so much better for them. If life is truly as ugly as the example provided by WAOVW--what other choice do they have, than to be as they are, and go on as they have been? Although the relationship as it is displayed in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" make it appear that George and Martha have a hellish relationship, that may not actually be the case. The end of the play indicates a capacity on both their parts to, at least temporarily, makes peace with their tragedy, and with each other, thus making it bearable for them to go on living, with themselves and with one another. show less

I have to invent a new word after this play: sadvicious. As in, sad and vicious, ineluctably intertwined, till death do them part. There's also the wicked humor of the play, for which I don't have a new word, a heartbreaking hilarity that keeps pace with the emotional maelstrom. This is an absolutely brilliant work.

Der Titel klingt heiter und wie eine bloße Variante des Kinderliedes ›Wer hat Angst vor dem bösen Wolf?‹ Aber hinter dieser scheinbaren Harmlosigkeit verbirgt sich das Chaos menschlicher Beziehungen. Schauplatz des Dramas ist eine Wohnung, in der sich zwei Ehepaare nach einer Party treffen. Man vertreibt sich die Zeit mit Gesellschaftsspielen, die zum Anlaß der Selbstentblößung werden. Albee geht es dabei um die Aufdeckung menschlicher Illusionen. Er zeichnet mit ebensoviel Wehmut wie Ironie, zugleich messerscharf und doch mitfühlend das Bild des Menschen, dem offenbar alles zum ›Glücklichsein‹ zur Verfügung steht und der doch nur um so hoffnungsloser allein ist.