Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.
Loading... Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human (original 1998; edition 1998)by Harold; Riverhead BloomThe eminent critic Harold Bloom explores Shakespeare in this large book. Bloom’s argument is that before Shakespeare we didn’t have human characters as we know them except on rare occasions. Of course, there was Marlowe and Chaucer, but with Marlowe, it seems that a lot of his characters were hyperbolic parodies. I read “Tamburlaine,” “Dido, Queen of Carthage,” “Doctor Faustus,” and I think the Jew of Malta. Therefore, I am somewhat familiar with Marlowe. As for Chaucer, I believe I read most of Canterbury Tales. Now when I say I read them, I mean that I passed over them once or twice. I didn’t go and study the plays and stories extensively. This might be to my detriment in this case. Bloom goes through each play that is accepted in the Shakespeare Canon and discusses how these characters act in a believable manner that makes them good characters. So you get a summary of each play along with some of the more important lines. It explores those lines and tells you what those lines mean. Even in his earliest plays, Shakespeare had a faint glimmer of genius. Of course, a lot of his works borrow a great deal from Marlowe, which is why I mentioned him. Eventually, Shakespeare took off the training wheels and makes his own characters. It is a great new take on the plays of Shakespeare. Even though I had to read Shakespeare in school, examining his works in this light brings a whole new dimension of meaning to what is said. Even Romeo and Juliet becomes interesting again since he explores it in a way that was not acceptable when I read it in high school. Take the character of Mercutio. It might have been revealed to me that he was a bawdy sort that only cared about sex and whatnot, but I think I would have remembered that, especially as a hormone-ridden teen. Even Bloom’s favorite Shakespearean character, John Falstaff, was someone I never encountered when I was younger. I only read Romeo and Juliet, Othello, Hamlet, and Macbeth when I was in school. I also read some of the sonnets, but those are not included in this book. So I never met Rosalind either, since I didn’t cover any of his comedies or histories. I don’t really have any issues with this book. It flows really well and the book is organized in a manner that makes it easy to find what you need. It might be a bit of a hassle if you don’t know the order of the Shakespeare Canon, but that is what a Table of Contents is for. It is quite informative and a great resource. If you only read one book on Shakespeare let this one be it. Typical Bloom - some extremely insightful and enlightening insights, and some that are completely bizarre and absurd. Good for referencing Shakespeare and for finding interesting bits. I admit that this is a bit beyond my fragmentary experience with Shakespeare, so I'll just give it three stars and try again after I've read some more. A deeply interesting book that analyzes each and every one of Shakespeare's plays showing how the Bard "invented" the human as we know it. In terms of a being capable of self reflection and self evolution. At times it is heavy going, but the parts about Falstaff, Hamlet and Macbeth are really enjoyable, of course much depends also from which plays you like most. It definitely sits between a reading book and a reference volume, it's for you to decide. Though Bloom apparently now agrees with me on Measure for Measure, which I have taught in Freshman and Sophomore college classes for thirty years--often preferring it to the old ethnic chestnuts of MV and Othello (Shakspeare's only Arab play, the Moor)--this is not a particularly revealing critical work, and an opportunistic venture, since Bloom's whole career was based on dissing the canon in favor of Blake, Blake, Blake. And his work Anxiety of Influence is much more innovative, though it derives from contentious, patriarchal Freudianism. As for Shakespeare criticism, Shapiro's 1599 is much better written and more insightful, though on fewer plays, of course. Bloom runs through each play in a separate brief chapter, like 100 Famous Novels. I never thought of novel plot books as real books. Q.E.D. Is this? If you are a student who is new to Shakespeare and are having difficulty with the language, my first suggestion to you is to go to see the play in the theatre, that will make most of it make sense. Read the play through from start to finish and see if you can make sense of it. But then read the chapter in this book by Harold Bloom about that particular play. Once you have gotten the basic plot and characters of a play, Bloom can help you to start thinking about what the play means, and about what is interesting about it as compared to other literary works. It's true what mmckay says about Bloom going on and on. I agree with mmckay that if anybody should be allowed to go on and on, it would be Harold Bloom. I am sure that I can learn a lot from him. Just to give one example, please look at the description on pages 252-253, when he describes the poetic utterances of Richard II in the play of which he is the central character: "When Richard, in Act V, begins to sound a little like a proleptic parody of Hamlet, we distrust the king as much as ever, and yet we also come to realize that he has been dazzling us since Act III, Scene ii, though with a purely verbal brilliance." This should give you an idea of the flavour of the prose in the book. At first glance it seems a bit on the heavy side, but I think this would be unfair, because the sentiments expressed are fairly complex, and there are no extraneous words. I have no complaints. After reading or attending a performance of a Shakespeare play, I am just overwhelmed with the drama, and I think I can benefit from the reasoning and insights that Bloom brings. I feel like I'm not as smart as him, and his wisdom can rub off on me. This is the best book on Shakespeare's plays I have ever read, but it left me with a strange sensation. After reading the book, I felt like a professor who has just read a term paper that - even though the student wrote it in two days - is better than any paper on the subject he had ever read. Like the professor I was amazed and disappointed at the same time and, like him, I will always wonder what the paper would have been like had the student spent the whole semester writing it. I may be doing Mr. Bloom a grave injustice by saying this and he may very well have 'spent the whole semester' writing the book, but I just cannot shake the feeling that there is a great deal more in the mind of Mr. Bloom and I long to see it. The book is worth much more than whatever was paid for it. If you love Shakespeare, read it; if you just kind of like Shakespeare, you really should read it; and if you do not like Shakespeare - you must read it. Most anything Bloom writes is worth reading. Occasionally he can be tiresome, occasionally he can be repetitive; occasionally he can be tiresomely repetitive (see the later chapters from his book "Jesus and Yahwah--the Names Divine"). But he, along with Jacob Neusner and Norman Cantor (all of them Jewish, coincidentally?--and Richard Posner), are the most genuinely educated writers we have in America. Anything Bloom writes has been well thought through. It doesn't matter if you agree with him on everything. It's merely enough that he gets one to think! Live long, Harold Bloom, and prosper. And keep writing! |
Current DiscussionsNonePopular covers
Google Books — Loading... GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)822.33Literature English & Old English literatures English drama Elizabethan 1558-1625 Shakespeare, William 1564–1616LC ClassificationRatingAverage:
Is this you?Become a LibraryThing Author. |