i corbul, croncnind, a rguit, Vestind c sorii fost au aruncai! Venii! Venii! Voi, duhuri, ce vegheai Pe gndurile morii, crunta zee! i m nvai s nu mai fiu femeie! M umplei, de la cretet pn’ la tlpi Cu o rutate nenduplecat! The raven himself is hoarse That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan Under my battlements. Come, you spirits That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, And fill me from the crown to the toe top full Of direst cruelty!

Hamlet is commonly regarded as one of the greatest plays ever written. Drawing on Danish chronicles and the Elizabethan vogue for revenge tragedy, Shakespeare created a play that is at once a philosophic treatise, a family drama, and a supernatural thriller. In the wake of his father’s death, Prince Hamlet finds that his Uncle Claudius has swiftly taken the throne and married his mother, Queen Gertrude. The ghost of the dead king then appears and charges Claudius with ‘murder most foul.’ Hamlet is called to revenge his father’s death: but will he be able to act before it is too late?

So?ia mea, pe c?te cred, mi-a fost Cinstit?. Poate acum e necinstit?. Te cred om drept… dar nu mi-e dovedit? P?rerea despre ea ?i despre tine. Avea un nume f?r? de ru?ine ?i chipul ei cu al Dianei sem?na. Cum pot s? cred c? s-ar putea schimba Deodat? ?ntr un chip ?ntunecat, Cum este acel cu care-s ?nzestrat? By the world, I think my wife be honest and think she is not; I think that thou art just and think thou art not. I’ll have some proof. Her name, that was as fresh As Dian’s visage, is now begrimed and black As mine own face

Antológiánk magyar zsidó t?rténelemr?l szóló tanulmányok gy?jteménye. ?sszeállításunk azonban mind témájában, mind módszertanában kül?nb?zik az eddig megszokott ábrázolástól. A magyar (azaz a t?rténelmi Magyar Királyság területén él?) zsidóságot a t?rténetírók leginkább a modern eszmékhez lelkesen csatlakozó és asszimilációra t?rekv? k?z?sségként ábrázolták, amelyet csupán az antiszemitizmus id?szakos fellángolásai akadályoztak meg végs? céljuk elérésében. Sokszor még az is el?fordult, hogy a magyar zsidókat a legsikeresebben asszimilálódott európai zsidóságként jellemezték, ami már nyilvánvaló túlzás. Valójában a magyar zsidóság sajátos jellege sokkal inkább a jelent?s létszámú ortodox réteg határozott asszimiláció-ellenességéb?l fakadt. Az itt k?tetbe gy?jt?tt ?t tanulmány a magyar ortodoxia t?rténetével, ezzel a mostanáig igen kevés figyelemre méltatott területtel foglalkozik.

A Hamlet (1601), talán legismertebb, legt?bbet játszott m?ve Shakespeare-nek. K?zéppontjában az élet kínálta, s mindenkiben f?lmerül? kérdés áll: "Lenni vagy - nem lenni?", és ha lenni - hogyan? Mi az emberi cselekvés végs? határa a vélt vagy valós hiba, netán b?n helyrehozatalához? Egyáltalán van-e igazi létezés, s ha van, az mennyire lehet veszélyes a létez?re? Vívódó, t?preng? alkotás a dráma, miként a f?szerepl? maga. Hamlet késleltetett bosszúját hosszas ?nmarcangoló kérdéselvetések, bizonyságkéresésék el?zik meg. Végül igazságot szolgáltat, de ? is belepusztul. T?rni vagy ellenszegülni? A reneszánsz ember dilemmája ?r?kérvény?! Mert a cselekvés erk?lcsileg legvitathatóbb pontja az emberi élet kioltása. Van-e joga valakinek - ha oka van is - ?lni? K?vetkezmények nélkül semmi sem vállalható, kül?n?sen nem a pusztítás. De van-e joga az embernek vélt vagy valós igaza tudatában nem cselekedni, nem vállalni a tett kockázatát? Mennyire tartozunk felel?sséggel a külvilág és saját lelkiismeretünk el?tt? Hamlet tettével válaszol a kérdésekre, ám az egész dráma nem ad egyértelm? feleletet. Nem is adhat. Remekm?vek; géniuszok és a természet sajátossága a talányosság... Nem beszélve arról, hogy a mindennapok kisebb-nagyobb d?ntéseit mindenkinek magának kell meghoznia.

Lord Ronald Gower (1845 ù1916) was a British aristocrat, Liberal politician, sculptor and writer. Besides being a sculpture he wrote biographies of Marie Antoinette and Joan of Arc, and a history of the Tower of London. Joan of Arc was a15th century French heroine. She was born a peasant girl in eastern France who grew up to lead the French army to several important victories during the Hundred Years' War. She was captured by the Burgundians, sold to the English, tried by an ecclesiastical court, and burned at the stake when she was nineteen years old.

This interesting book about Rembrandt and his paintings was first written in 1905, and is just as enjoyable today. Featuring colour prints of 16 of his best paintings, this excellent introduction to one of the world's most famous painters is a great addition to any e-book collection. This version has been specially formatted for today's e-readers by Andrews UK.

It is believed that the scene of this tale, and most of the information necessary to understand its allusions, are rendered sufficiently obvious to the reader in the text itself, or in the accompanying notes. Still there is so much obscurity in the Indian traditions, and so much confusion in the Indian names, as to render some explanation useful. Few men exhibit greater diversity, or, if we may so express it, greater antithesis of character, than the native warrior of North America. In war, he is daring, boastful, cunning, ruthless, self-denying, and self-devoted; in peace, just, generous, hospitable, revengeful, superstitious, modest, and commonly chaste. These are qualities, it is true, which do not distinguish all alike; but they are so far the predominating traits of these remarkable people as to be characteristic. It is generally believed that the Aborigines of the American continent have an Asiatic origin. There are many physical as well as moral facts which corroborate this opinion, and some few that would seem to weigh against it. The color of the Indian, the writer believes, is peculiar to himself, and while his cheek-bones have a very striking indication of a Tartar origin, his eyes have not. Climate may have had great influence on the former, but it is difficult to see how it can have produced the substantial difference which exists in the latter. The imagery of the Indian, both in his poetry and in his oratory, is oriental; chastened, and perhaps improved, by the limited range of his practical knowledge. He draws his metaphors from the clouds, the seasons, the birds, the beasts, and the vegetable world. In this, perhaps, he does no more than any other energetic and imaginative race would do, being compelled to set bounds to fancy by experience; but the North American Indian clothes his ideas in a dress which is different from that of the African, and is oriental in itself. His language has the richness and sententious fullness of the Chinese. Philologists have said that there are but two or three languages, among all the numerous tribes which formerly occupied the country that now composes the United States. They ascribe the known difficulty one people have to understand another to corruptions and dialects. The writer remembers to have been present at an interview between two chiefs of the Great Prairies west of the Mississippi, and when an interpreter was in attendance who spoke both their languages. The warriors appeared to be on the most friendly terms, and seemingly conversed much together; yet, according to the account of the interpreter, each was absolutely ignorant of what the other said. They were of hostile tribes, brought together by the influence of the American government; and it is worthy of remark, that a common policy led them both to adopt the same subject. They mutually exhorted each other to be of use in the event of the chances of war throwing either of the parties into the hands of his enemies. Whatever may be the truth, as respects the root and the genius of the Indian tongues, it is quite certain they are now so distinct in their words as to possess most of the disadvantages of strange languages; hence much of the embarrassment that has arisen in learning their histories, and most of the uncertainty which exists in their traditions. Like nations of higher pretensions, the American Indian gives a very different account of his own tribe or race from that which is given by other people. He is much addicted to overestimating his own perfections, and to undervaluing those of his rival or his enemy; a trait which may possibly be thought corroborative of the Mosaic account of the creation. The whites have assisted greatly in rendering the traditions of the Aborigines more obscure by their own manner of corrupting names. Thus, the term used in the title of this book has undergone the changes of Mahicanni, Mohicans, and Mohegans; the latter being the word commonly used by the whites.

RUINS OF ANCIENT CITIES, WITH GENERAL AND PARTICULAR ACCOUNTS OF THEIR RISE, FALL, AND PRESENT CONDITION. - BY CHARLES BUCKE This Volume contain these cities;Messene, Mycen?, Miletus, Nauplia, Nemea, Nineveh, The Destruction of Sennacherib, Numantia, Olympia, Puteoli, Palmyra (Tadmor), Patr?, Pella, Pergamus, Persepolis, Petra (Wady Mousa), Phigalia, Plat?a, P?stum, Pompeii, Rama, Rome, Saguntum, Hannibal’s Speech to His Soldiers, Sais, Samaria, Sapphura, Sardis, Seleucia, Selinus, Or Selinuntum, Sicyon, Sidon, Smyrna, Spalatro, Stratonice, Susa, Sybaris, Syene, Syracuse, Thebes, Troja, And Other Cities of the Troas, Tyre, Veii Fallen, fallen, a silent heap; their heroes allSunk in their urns:—Behold the pride of pomp,The throne of nations fallen; obscured in dustEven yet majestical.—The solemn sceneElates the soul! ? ?{DYER} The reader is requested to observe, that, though the plan of this work is entirely his own, the compiler of it does not put it forth as in any way original in respect to language or description. It is, in fact, a much better book, than if it had been what is strictly called original, (which, indeed, must have involved an utter impossibility:) for it is a selection of some of the best materials the British Museum could furnish; sometimes worked up in his own language; and sometimes—and, indeed, very frequently—in that of others: the compiler having, at an humble distance and with unequal steps, followed the plan which M. Rollin proposed to himself, when he composed his celebrated history of ancient times.—"To adorn and enrich my own," says that celebrated writer, "I will be so ingenuous as to confess, that I do not scruple, nor am ashamed, to rifle whereever I come; and that I often do not cite the authors from whom I transcribe, because of the liberty I take to make some slight alterations. I have made the best use in my power of the solid reflections that occur in the Bishop of Meaux's Universal History, which is one of the most beautiful and most useful books in our language. I have also received great assistance from the learned Dean Prideaux's 'Connexion of the Old and New Testament,' in which he has traced and cleared up, in an admirable manner, the particulars relating to ancient history. I shall take the same liberty with whatever comes in my way, that may suit my design, and contribute to its perfection. I am very sensible, that it is not so much for a person's reputation to make use of other men's labours, and that it is in a manner renouncing the name and quality of author. But I am not over-fond of that title, and shall be extremely well pleased, and think myself very happy, if I can but deserve the name of a good compiler; and supply my readers with a tolerable history, who will not be over-solicitous to inquire what hand it comes from, provided they are but pleased with it."Having followed this example,—the compiler wishes he could say with equal effect,—he will be fully satisfied, should judicious readers feel inclined to concede, that he has shown some judgment in selecting his materials, and some taste in binding "the beads of the chain," that connects them together. He disclaims, in fact, (as, in the present instance, he is bound to do), all the "divine honours" of authorship; satisfied with those of a selecter, adapter, and compiler; and happy in the hope that he has here, by means of the superior writers, whose labours he has used, furnished his readers with an useful, accurate, and amusing work.? ? ? ? ? C. B.

O nuan autobiografic, perfect ntemeiat, irizeaz concepia lui Breban de la acest nivel, miza mare a ideii fiind aceea de a demonstra – ceea ce romancierul a mai fcut… – c generaia din care face el nsui parte (Nichita Stnescu, Matei Clinescu etc.) a transformat literatura ntr-un asemenea mediu germinativ de excelene, prin intermediul promovrii esteticului ca replic alternativ sublim la grotescul ideologic din jur. Trebuie s recunoatem c Breban rmne seniorial i impecabil de fiecare dat cnd enun aceast dihotomie: de pild, nu trebuie uitat faptul c Istoria dramatic a prezentului s-a zamislit cnd mpotriva autorului se trgea cu tunul, pe motivul orchestratei acuze de colaborare cu Securitatea. Nici un raspuns n volum, nimic insidios, revanard sau resentimentar: doar idei i fapte, nu psihologie. Jos plria!“ (tefan Borbély)Numai cultura, carevaszica, ne poate lecui de aceast nesiguran identitar i numai ea poate nnobila istoria noastr de care, s-a putut constata, prozatorul maramureean nu-i mulumit… Face i alte profeii, atunci cnd n capitolul final vorbete despre specificul naional, dar despre toate acestea vom putea discuta cu alt prilej. Este o tem pe care noi, romnii, o aducem mereu n discuie fie pentru a o sataniza, fie pentru a o apra. Observ c N. Breban n-o respinge, de plano, cum fac globalitii, nici n-o smintete cu un discurs encomiastic, cum fac localitii. El procedeaz corect, aa cum procedeaz orice intelectual lucid i responsabil, adic analizeaz un concept (un concept esenial) i ncearc s-i vad viitorul… Este trist, i are de ce, cnd se gndete la lumea politic de azi i la retorica resentimentului i a rzbunrii care domin lumea intelectual… S mai spun c are i n acest caz dreptate, c dup douzeci de ani de libertate intelectualii romni, cu precdere scriitorii (ei, care s-au inut bine sub regimul totalitar), se detest cu o grea sinceritate mi amintesc de o propoziie din Eminescu (reproduc din memorie): Nu eti liber, dac nu eti drept. Se poate spune i invers: Nu eti drept, dac nu eti liber. Liber, n cazul oamenilor de litere, de prejudeci, de complexe i idiosincrazii, de eecurile i vexaiunile pe care i le-a provocat istoria i pe care spiritul nu poate s le stpneasc.“ (Eugen Simion)

Lucrarea aduce in dezbaterile istoricilor si economistilor evolutia economica si politica a Romaniei in perioada 1859-1900, marcand o contributie insemnata in acest domeniu destul de putin studiat, analizat si dezbatut.Tema centrala a lucrarii o constituie necesitatea crearii unei industrii romanesti inca de la inceputul secolului al XIX-lea, pledand in favoarea protectionismului, a independentei capitalurilor si a mainii de lucru calificata.De asemenea, autorul analizeaza dezbaterile care au avut loc in epoca pe tema industrializarii si protectionismului intre cele doua partide mari existente in a doua jumatate a secolului XIX: Conservator si Liberal, precum si cele dintre economistii de conceptie din acea vreme: D.P. Martian, I. Ghica, Ionica Tautu, P.S. Aurelian.

The work represents a synthesis published and printed in two volumes (the 1st volume in 2002, the second one, in 2004) under the aegis of Mica Valahie Publishing House in Bucharest. Being elaborated on the basis of some documents discovered in the Romanian and foreign archives, the two volumes cover the period up to 1929 in the first volume and the period from 1929 to 2005 in the second one. The paper reveals the role and place of Romanian oil in the evolution of the national and worldwide history, especially during the World War between 1939 and 1945 and in the development of the so-called “cold war”. The book insists upon the prospects of the specific “black gold” evolution.In the addendum there are to be found some interesting documents and the complete bibliography of oil.

Hard Times – For These Times (commonly known as "Hard Times") is the tenth novel by Charles Dickens, first published in 1854. The book appraises English society and highlights the social and economic pressures of the times. Hard Times is unusual in several respects. It is by far the shortest of Dickens' novels, barely a quarter of the length of those written immediately before and after it. Also, unlike all but one of his other novels, Hard Times has neither a preface nor illustrations. Moreover, it is his only novel not to have scenes set in London. Instead the story is set in the fictitious Victorian industrial Coketown, a generic Northern English mill-town, in some ways similar to Manchester, though smaller. Coketown may be partially based on 19th-century Preston. One of Dickens's reasons for writing Hard Times was that sales of his weekly periodical, Household Words, were low, and it was hoped the novel's publication in instalments would boost circulation – as indeed proved to be the case. Since publication it has received a mixed response from critics. Critics such as George Bernard Shaw and Thomas Macaulay have mainly focused on Dickens's treatment of trade unions and his post–Industrial Revolution pessimism regarding the divide between capitalist mill owners and undervalued workers during the Victorian era. F. R. Leavis, a great admirer of the book, included it—but not Dickens' work as a whole—as part of his Great Tradition of English novels. ***‘Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!’ ? ?The scene was a plain, bare, monotonous vault of a school-room, and the speaker’s square forefinger emphasized his observations by underscoring every sentence with a line on the schoolmaster’s sleeve. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s square wall of a forehead, which had his eyebrows for its base, while his eyes found commodious cellarage in two dark caves, overshadowed by the wall. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s mouth, which was wide, thin, and hard set. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s voice, which was inflexible, dry, and dictatorial. The emphasis was helped by the speaker’s hair, which bristled on the skirts of his bald head, a plantation of firs to keep the wind from its shining surface, all covered with knobs, like the crust of a plum pie, as if the head had scarcely warehouse-room for the hard facts stored inside. The speaker’s obstinate carriage, square coat, square legs, square shoulders,—nay, his very neckcloth, trained to take him by the throat with an unaccommodating grasp, like a stubborn fact, as it was,—all helped the emphasis. ‘In this life, we want nothing but Facts, sir; nothing but Facts!’The speaker, and the schoolmaster, and the third grown person present, all backed a little, and swept with their eyes the inclined plane of little vessels then and there arranged in order, ready to have imperial gallons of facts poured into them until they were full to the brim.

Fic??o brasileira no século XXI é um livro instigante. De leitura agradável e de interesse amplo, debru?a-se, com competência e inventividade, sobre oito escritores brasileiros contempor?neos, consagrados e premiados. O que n?o é pouco em uma tradi??o como a nossa, em que n?o se encontram muitos estudiosos de literatura que encarem o contempor?neo e consigam discuti-lo de forma a dialogar, n?o apenas com o estudioso e o especialista como também com o leitor comum interessado em literatura. Adriana Lunardi, Alberto Martins, Luiz Ruffato, Michel Laub, Milton Hatoum, Nelson de Oliveira, Ricardo Lísias e Rodrigo Lacerda encontram, por meio da leitura que deles fazem os autores deste livro, novos olhares para suas obras. E, nestes novos olhares, há um convite para novos leitores e leituras renovadas.

Okupiv?i na jednome mjestu najzanimljivija imena lijeve politi?ke misli od Slovenije do Bugarske, s naglaskom na zemlje biv?e Jugoslavije, filozofi? i aktivisti Sre?ko Horvat i Igor ?tiks pred njih su stavili zadatak da napi?u tekstove o situaciji danas i ovdje, prije svega na Balkanu. ?etrnaest autora, od mladih filozofskih nada do svjetski priznatih imena, u svojim esejima pokazuje koliko je po?ast neoliberalizma u sprezi s politi?ko-mafija?kim klanovima i krupnim kapitalom razjela sve one pozitivne tekovine koje je ostavilo socijalisti?ko naslje?e. Bez sentimenta i nostalgije prema pro?lim vremenima, Dobro do?li u pustinju postsocijalizma najzanimljivija je i najaktualnija knjiga o suvre?menom trenutku. Ona je nezaobilazna studija za svakoga tko ?eli ozbiljnije shvatiti ?to nam se i za?to doga?a u vremenima duboke krize.

No caso da episteme comunicacional pode-se dizer que a mesma vem-se constituindo na historicidade de conceitos chave e de hipóteses clássicas que têm nutrido o pensamento teórico e a pesquisa empírica do campo. Pensando a episteme comunicacional trata disso, ou seja, do objeto comunica??o em sua trajetória por fazer-se, a qual, ao acumular-se, permite a renova??o do que foi pensado a seu respeito e a prospec??o de novos pontos de vista.

1920-ban a magyar t?rténelem egyik legsúlyosabb krízise érkezett el. Nem csupán a t?rténelmi Magyarország és hagyományos vezet? rétegei találtattak k?nny?nek: 1918 és 1919 forradalmaival együtt elbuktak a radikális reformokat szorgalmazó baloldali pártok is. K?zel hat év háborús pusztítás után gazdasági, szociális, külpolitikai és m?vel?dési problémák sokasága halmozódott fel. Ekkor született meg a fiatal értelmiség reform iránt elk?telezett részéb?l a magyar népi mozgalom. Az ? t?rténetükr?l szól ez a k?nyv. A magyar népi mozgalomról meglep?en keveset tud a jelenkor emlékezete, és ismereteink jó része is leginkább félreértésekb?l és el?ítéletekb?l táplálkozik. A népi mozgalom elitjéhez tartozók – Németh Lászlótól és Illyés Gyulától kezdve Veres Péteren és Kovács Imrén át egészen Bibó Istvánig – megpróbáltak választ találni a Trianon utáni Magyarország legéget?bb kérdéseire, méghozzá nem a hagyományos ideológiák mentén, hanem egy általuk ?harmadik útnak” nevezett eszmeiség jegyében. Papp István k?tete – amely harminc év óta az els? modern szemlélet? ?sszefoglalása a témának – els?sorban azt kívánja bemutatni, hogyan és miért született meg a népi mozgalom, illetve hogy legfontosabb tagjai milyen elgondolásokat fogalmaztak meg, és milyen reformokat láttak szükségesnek 1945 el?tt és után.

Fire?te c?, de la schimbarea de paradigm? numit? apari?ia genurilor rock ?i folk (precedate de jazz, dar mai cu seam? de blues... ?i ?n m?sur? cov?r?itoare de explozia beat!), ?n Rom?nia comunist? (?ncerc?nd mereu s? fie sincron? cu voga occidental?), lucrurile n-au fost tocmai roz. Unii chiar se bat ?n piept c? de la ei ?ncoace se poate vorbi de...; al?ii (implica?i direct) sunt sc?rbi?i de ceea ce se ?nt?mpl?, mai cu seam? ?n lipsa unei istorii oficiale ?i documentate, ?i ??i v?d de treab?. ?n era net/Wikipedia, oricine se poate da ?n stamb?, se poate lua la tr?nt? (sub pav?za anonimatului, implicit a nesim?irii) cu orice; cum anticipa parc? Andy Warhol, a venit vremea ?n care oricine va fi fost vedet? 15 minute.Dar au existat ?i vedete reale, grei ai genurilor a?a-zis u?oare, mon?tri sacri! Celor acum ?n umbr? (cite?te underground) le este dedicat acest volum. M?rturii orale puse cap la cap despre aceia care au trecut ?i – iat? – se ?ntorc ?n Clubul Arhitecturii. Dac? un Cenaclu ?Flac?ra“, la ?nceput genial ?n scopuri, a fost mai apoi r?st?lm?cit ideologic ?i impus aproape cu for?a p?n? la implozie, clubul – recte pivni?a – din strada Bl?nari nr. 14 a rezistat peste decenii intrinsec; pe temelia solidificat? de la o zi la alta, de la un artist la altul, de la o bere la alta... Din student ?n student (dar nu numai prin ei), ?tafeta a tot fost preluat? de genera?iile care s-au perindat, iar ast?zi ne-am trezit cu o ?ntreag? istorie care apas? pe funda?iile cl?dirii vechi..., dar f?r? bulin? ro?ie! Nu, Club A nu va c?dea, a?a cum va exista ?n continuare ?i Casa Studen?ilor din Bucure?ti (ca ?i cele din Timi?oara, Ia?i, Cluj...), ?i Radioul, ?i Televiziunea, ?i Electrecordul...Din cuprins: Amintiri ? Clubul de pariuri muzicale sau Cu... v?nt ?nainte... din pupa! ? A fost o dat?... din 1969 ? Primul Festival Na?ional de Muzic? Pop ?Club A“ (16–22 decembrie 1969) ? Ro?u ?i Negru ? Romanticii ? Chromatic Grup ? Sideral (Modal Quartet) ? Olympic ‘64 ? Phoenix ? Coral... ?i Adrian Ivani?chi ? Al doilea Festival Na?ional de Muzic? Pop ?Club A“ (10–17 mai 1971) ? Modern Grup ? Metronom ? Mondial ? Timi?oara, la vest de Rom?nia ? Carusel ? Post-scriptum la al doilea festival ? Folk ?n Club A ? Mihai Munteanu ?Michone“ ? Dorin Liviu Zaharia ?Chubby“ ? Mircea ?Ciocu“ Vintil? ? Florian ?Mo?u“ Pitti? ? Doru St?nculescu ? Sorin Minghiat ? Dan Oprina ?i Mircea Valeriu Popa ? Nicu Vladimir ? Marcela Saftiuc ? Adriana Ausch ? Anda C?lug?reanu ? Zoia Alecu ? Catena ? FFN ? Valeriu Sterian (?i Compania de Sunet) ? Mircea Bodolan ? Curtea Veche nr. 43 ? Al treilea Festival ?Club A“ (5–8 iunie 1979) ? Metropol ? Academica ? Experimental Q ? Modal Q ? Mircea Florian (din Transilvania) ? Al patrulea Festival ?Club A“ (16–19 martie 1981) ? Dan Andrei Aldea ?i Sfinx ? Pro Musica ? Accent ? Redivivus ? Basorelief ? Gramophon/Post Scriptum ?i... Mircea Baniciu ? Semnal M ? Sorin Chifiriuc ?i Domino/Roata ? Grup ‘74 ? Club A – 15 ani (12–17 martie 1984) ? Nicu Alifantis ? Iris ? Liviu Tudan & Ro?u ?i Negru ? Al cincilea Festival ?Club A“ (28 februarie–1 martie 1990) ? Compact ? Holograf ? Celelalte Cuvinte ? Gala ?Club A – 30 de ani“ (18 iunie 1999)?/ ?Club A – 34 de ani“ (4 iunie 2003) ? Sfinx (Experience) ? Alexandru Andrie? ? Cargo ? Timpuri Noi ? Sfatul ?b?tr?nilor“ ? Al ?aptelea Festival ?Club A“ (13–18 mai 2011) ? Imagini ?necenzurate“

Exila?i este singura pies? scris? de Joyce, unde ??i face manifest?, prin regulile speciei, predilec?ia pentru m??tile puse fiec?rui personaj. Citit? ca o trecere ?n ordine cronologic? de la Portret al artistului ?n tinere?e la Ulise, piesa con?ine m?rci clare ale obsesiilor scriitorului ?i urme vizibile ale experien?ei omului James Joyce. Rela?iile de dragoste, parentale sau de prietenie sunt cele care dezechilibreaz? personajele, exilul temporar ?n Italia fiind doar o alt? form? a ?nstr?in?rii din Irlanda natal?.

Demagóg, ?rült, gazember? Népvezér, próféta, mártír? E két véglet k?z?tt ingadozott Szálasi Ferenc megítélése kortársai szemében. Az utókor azonban k?zel sem ilyen megosztott személyét illet?en, Szálasi a 20. századi magyar t?rténelem talán legelutasítottabb alakja. K?tetünkben arra keressük a választ, miként vált azzá. Miért lépett egyáltalán a politika színpadára otthagyva ezzel a biztos karriert kínáló katonaságot? Milyen célok vezették? Mit gondolt és mit tett politikusként? Szálasi életútjának állomásairól számos egykori dokumentum vall, ami lehet?séget ad, hogy t?bb, olykor lényegesen eltér? néz?pontokból vizsgálhassuk ugyanazt az eseményt. K?nyvünkben megkíséreljük a sok esetben részrehajló – vagy éppen elfogult – kortársak írásai alapján áttekinteni Szálasi életútját: a katonáét, az ideológusét, a politikusét – gyermekkorától egészen haláláig. Végül pedig azt is bemutatjuk, miként viszonyul hozzá az utókor. A k?tetet életrajzi kronológia, válogatott bibliográfia, valamint térképek teszik teljessé. PAKSA RUDOLF 1981-ben született Ajkán, az ELTE-n doktorált t?rténelemb?l és 2009 októberét?l az MTA BTK T?rténettudományi Intézetének a munkatársa. ?rdekl?dési területe a modern kori magyar t?rténelem; kutatásai súlypontja a 19–20. századi historiográfia, a régi E?tv?s Collegium, valamint a Horthy-kori széls?jobboldali irányzatok.

Rejtély, amelyet másfél száz éve próbálnak írók, irodalomt?rténészek, színházi szakemberek, esztéták, filozófusok megfejteni. Mese? ?rgirus királyfi és Tündér Ilona csodásan valószer?tlen t?rténete számtalan változatban létezik a magyar népmesekincsben, s olasz k?zvetít? forrásokon át g?r?g, s?t egyiptomi gy?kerekig nyúlik vissza az aranyalmát term? fa s a két szerelmes t?rténete. Szerelmi románc? Nem fontos a kor, a táj, a t?rténelmi háttér, csak az érzelmeiben egymásba gabalyodott két ember – itt és most: Csongor és Tünde – lángolása, viharzása, minden eléjük tornyosuló akadályt leromboló akarása, szerelmi szárnyalása. Színdarab? Karakteres, jó szerepek – ?rd?g?k, boszorkányok, b?lcsek, ledérek – forgataga zegzugos cselekmény, váratlan fordulatok, lehet?ség mindenféle színpadi csoda semmi nem korlátozva megvalósítására: sok alakra bomló, egy személybe olvadó boszorkány, leveg?ben r?pk?d?, láthatatlanná váló ?rd?gfiak, f?ld mélyér?l szemünk láttára kiemelked?, fényárban úszó tündérpalota. Minden pillanatban tátva maradhat a szánk. Filozófiai traktátus? ?letutak: Kalmáré a kincs, Fejedelemé a hatalom, Tudósé a b?lcsesség; Csongoré a szerelem. A kincs elpereg, a hatalom elkopik, a tudás semmivé porlad. A szerelem ?r?k. Drámai k?ltemény? ?jfélt?l éjfélig élünk: hajnalodik, felragyog az ég, dél van, alkonyodik, beesteledik, már f?lénk borul az éjszaka. Reményekkel telten, harcra készen kezdjük hajnalban, küszk?dünk reggel, boldogok vagyunk délben, szorongunk alkonyatkor, s?tétedéskor belenyugszunk az elmúlásba. De másnap újra f?lkel a nap. V?r?smarty Mihály 1830-ban fejezte be m?vét, a cím alá azt írta: színjáték ?t felvonásban. Már csak boldogan sajgó, rejtve rejtett szomorú emlék szívében reménytelen szerelme, Perczel Etelka. Mindennapi életében legf?képpen arra büszke, hogy sok kínnal keletkezett nagy m?vét, a Zalán futását a várva várt nemzeti eposzként ünneplik. Tagja az éppen szület? Magyar Tudományos Akadémiának, a legismertebb, legfontosabb szépirodalmi és m?vészeti lapok ?dolgozótársa”, szívét melenget? jóérzés: Széchenyi István a barátja. Igaz, a pénztárcája t?bbnyire lapos, gyakran kínosan lapos, de ismert és népszer? ember. Harminc éves. Férfi. Kincse nincs, hatalomra nem vágyik, a tudásról azt gondolja: valójában senki nem tudja, mennyit ér s mire jó. De Csongor boldog, amikor megpillantja Tündét, boldog, amikor át?leli, boldog, amikor elveszíti, mert hiszi, tudja: nem ?r?kre veszítette el. Küzd, harcol, verekszik: keresi a boldogságot. S boldog, amikor embert próbáló kalandok után végre megtalálja Tündét, s f?ldi létükben ?r?kre ?sszeforrnak. Csongor és Tünde számára a szerelem a kincs, a hatalom, a tudás. El nem veszíthet? kincs, ?r?kre er?t adó hatalom, b?lcsességgé párlódott tudás. ?gy lesznek halandók halhatatlanok. ?s másnap újra f?lkel a nap.