Taborski on the role of the Jeweler

The Jeweler seems to stand for Divine Providence, for the power of moral judgment. The wedding rings, which he does not so much sell as dispense and which he refuses to buy back, symbolize the obligations of marriage. That he does not appear on stage is consistent with Wojtyla’s practice: as a rule, neither his plays nor his poetry call God by name or invoke Him directly; His presence is felt but not imposed. True, Andrew and Anna quote the Jeweler’s words and describe his shop and his behavior, but for all we know he could be just an eccentric shopkeeper. In a realistic play this would certainly be the case, but not in this poetic mystery. 
As with Adam, we cannot pinpoint this mysterious character with absolute (one is tempted to say physical) certainty. We do not see him-only the characters in the drama sometimes do. Thus another interpretation is possible. If Adam can be called a confessor, the Jeweler can be called the voice of conscience. A conscience is both innately human (all men should have one) and God-given. So the Jeweler’s divine and human attributes do not contradict each other. One could say that Andrew and Teresa in Act I exchange their rings themselves and that Anna’s struggle in Act 2 to get rid of her unwanted ring takes place within her. Bnt the characters act always in the sight of God. 
The Polish title of the play, Przed sklepem jubilera, literally means “In front of the .” The jeweler sees our thoughts and actions through the shop window, which is also the window of our conscience. Through the Jeweler, as the other characters describe him and feel his presence, the play’s theme is explained. After all, what God knows our consciences ought to know. 
The Jeweler’s monologue, quoted by Andrew, defines directly and precisely the contradiction between aspirations and weakness that makes man fall short of his full potential: 
Ah, the proper weight of man! 
This rift, this tangle, this ultimate depth —
this clinging when it is so hard 
to unstick heart and thought. 
And in all — freedom, 
a freedom and sometimes frenzy, 
the frenzy of freedom trapped in this tangle. 
And in all this-love, 
which springs from freedom as water springs from an oblique rift in the earth. 
This is man! He is not transparent, 
not monumental, 
not simple; in fact he is poor. 
This is one man-and what about two people, 
four, a hundred, a million? 
Multiply all this 
(multiply the greatness by the weakness), 
and you will have the product of humanity, 
the product of human life. 
Those contradictions are most clearly discernible in love, the most intense sphere of interhuman relations.


Join us!

* indicates required