O foco da dissertação é a análise da reescrita em dialeto napolitano do século XVII da obra A tempestade de William Shakespeare realizada por Eduardo De Filippo. O que levou o dramaturgo napolitano a escolher esta e não outra peça do autor inglês foram essencialmente suas afinidades no tratamento de temas como a magia, o sonho, o amor, a família, o poder, o perdão. Eduardo não realizou uma tradução literal da peça inglesa, mas, utilizando uma língua que é uma mistura de dialeto napolitano do século XVII com dialeto napolitano contemporâneo e italiano criou uma Tempestade toda original e pessoal, aparentemente distante do texto shakespeariano / The thesis consists in analyzing the rewriting in XVII century Neapolitan language of William Shakespearian play, The tempest, by Eduardo De Filippo. What made the Neapolitan playwright choose this play, was essentially his affinities in dealing with certain themes, such us: magic, dream, love, family, power, forgiveness. Eduardo did not translate word by word of the English play, but, using a language which is a mixture of XVII century Neapolitan dialect, contemporary and Italian, has created an original and personal Tempest, apparently quite far from the Shakespearian one

O foco da dissertação é a análise da reescrita em dialeto napolitano do século XVII da obra A tempestade de William Shakespeare realizada por Eduardo De Filippo. O que levou o dramaturgo napolitano a escolher esta e não outra peça do autor inglês foram essencialmente suas afinidades no tratamento de temas como a magia, o sonho, o amor, a família, o poder, o perdão. Eduardo não realizou uma tradução literal da peça inglesa, mas, utilizando uma língua que é uma mistura de dialeto napolitano do século XVII com dialeto napolitano contemporâneo e italiano criou uma Tempestade toda original e pessoal, aparentemente distante do texto shakespeariano / The thesis consists in analyzing the rewriting in XVII century Neapolitan language of William Shakespearian play, The tempest, by Eduardo De Filippo. What made the Neapolitan playwright choose this play, was essentially his affinities in dealing with certain themes, such us: magic, dream, love, family, power, forgiveness. Eduardo did not translate word by word of the English play, but, using a language which is a mixture of XVII century Neapolitan dialect, contemporary and Italian, has created an original and personal Tempest, apparently quite far from the Shakespearian one

This thesis deals with the 20th century Neapolitan dramatics; it is divided into two thematic subjects. Firstly, the text tries to describe the life and work of three important Neapolitan playwrights, Eduardo De Filippo, Annibale Ruccello and Enzo Moscato. Apart from highlighting the most significant biographical events and sociohistorical circumstances that influenced not only the work of the individual playwrights but also the artistic creation of the movement called the New Neapolitan dramatics, to which both younger playwrights belong, the text thematises the question if the younger generation continued the rich work of Eduardo De Filippo and the traditional Neapolitan dramatics and if so, how. The second part makes use of the findings gained from the literary-historical research done in the first part to reflect upon the optimal translation of the analysed plays into Czech. Initially, the text briefly ponders upon the agelong theoretical translation issues and then introduces the two main translational strategies, namely the conformist (konformní) and the adaptation one (adaptační). Having marked out the problematic features of the analysed plays from the translation theory point of view, the text subsequently discusses the question of how to translate them into Czech as faithfully as possible...

Eduardo De Filippo, homme de théâtre napolitain qui a traversé presque tout le vingtième siècle, possédait plusieurs compétences qui s’influençaient réciproquement : dramaturge, comédien et metteur en scène, il dirigeait également sa propre compagnie et son théâtre, le San Ferdinando. Dans ce contexte, les metteurs en scène se sont trouvés impressionnés, voire inhibés, par ce multiple investissement mais aussi par une oeuvre de portée universelle, toujours à la lisère entre le comique et le tragique. Notre recherche vise à comprendre les raisons de cette crainte et à explorer les différentes façons d’affronter les pièces du maître napolitain. Dans notre première partie consacrée à Eduardo De Filippo, nous avons fait ressortir la figure d’un artiste complet et nous avons essayé de mettre en évidence la distance que le metteur en scène prenait à l’égard de ses propres textes ainsi que le rôle joué par la scène dans l’écriture de ses comédies. Nous avons ensuite, dans les deuxième et troisième parties, orienté notre étude sur les choix effectués, à partir du milieu des années 80 – c’est-à-dire après la mort de l’auteur –, par les metteurs en scène et comédiens, lors du passage du texte à la scène. Notre deuxième partie porte sur une première approche intéressante des comédies du dramaturge : interpréter le texte – à savoir les didascalies et le dialogue –, en proposant un jeu personnel et en pensant différemment la psychologie des personnages et le décor. Notre troisième partie met en lumière les interprétations novatrices des metteurs en scène et comédiens qui osent remanier l’écriture et/ou la structure dramaturgiques de l’oeuvre d’Eduardo De Filippo. / Eduardo De Filippo is a Neapolitan man of the theatre who went through the whole of the twentieth century, endowed with mutually enriching skills : he was a playwright, actor and director all rolled into one, he also managed his own company and his own theatre, the San Ferdinando. In that context, directors were impressed, even inhibited by so much involvement, but also by a work of universal impact, always on the borderline between comedy and tragedy. This dissertation aims to investigate the reasons of such fears and endeavours to explore the different ways of facing the Neapolitan master’s plays. The first part is devoted to Eduardo De Filippo, presented as a complete artistic figure : it explains how, as a director, he stood back from his own texts and shows how he used the stage when writing his comedies. Then, the second and the third parts focuse on the choices made by the directors and actors from the middle of the eighties – once the playwright had passed away – , when they started to adapt his texts for the stage. The second part consists in analysing a first interesting approach of Eduardo De Filippo’s comedies : how to interpret the text – that is to say the stage directions and the dialogue – by adopting a personal acting and by rethinking the psychology of the characters as well as stage setting. Our third part highlights the new interpretations of the directors and actors who dare to modify the writing and/or the dramatic art structure of Eduardo De Filippo’s work. / Eduardo De Filippo, uomo di teatro napoletano che ha attraversato quasi tutto il Novecento, possedeva molte competenze che s'influenzavano reciprocamente: drammaturgo, attore e regista, dirigeva anche la sua compagnia ed il suo teatro, il San Ferdinando. In questo contesto, i registi si sono trovati impressionati, anzi inibiti, per questo investimento molteplice ma anche per un’opera di portata universale, sempre in bilico tra il comico ed il tragico. La nostra ricerca mira a capire le ragioni di questo timore ed esaminare i vari modi di affrontare i lavori teatrali del maestro napoletano. Nella nostra prima parte dedicata a Eduardo De Filippo, abbiamo fatto emergere la figura di un artista completo e abbiamo provato a mettere in rilievo la distanza che il regista prendeva di fronte ai suoi testi nonché il ruolo svolto dalla scena nella scrittura delle sue commedie. Nella seconda e la terza parte, abbiamo poi orientato il nostro studio sulle scelte effettuate, a partire dalla metà degli anni 80 – ossia dopo la morte dell'autore –, dai registi e attori, in occasione del passaggio del testo alla scena. La nostra seconda parte riguarda un primo approccio interessante delle commedie del drammaturgo: interpretare il testo – cioè le didascalie ed il dialogo –, proponendo una recitazione personale e pensando differentemente la psicologia dei personaggi e lo scenario. La nostra terza parte mette in luce le interpretazioni innovative dei registi ed attori che osano rimaneggiare la scrittura e/o la struttura drammaturgica dell'opera di Eduardo De Filippo.