The bit about the apples made me laugh! I hate when something is mentioned of big significance but then nothing. Fully agree about it being over descriptive.
Totally agree. The beginning has some promise, with the interaction between Hamnet and his sister, but when it degenerates into the constant emphasis on the mother's grief, on and on and on.....it became tedious.
My book club chose this because one reader liked it. OMG did it test my patience. Over written, silly descriptions, I lost my way so many times that I just gave up. You describe it perfectly. A whole lot of nothing.
Hi! Just read the book (in Croatian) and don't have many amazing things to say either. I appreciate your honest and funny review. I am also trying to become a bookworm, even though I have always loved literature and have finished comparative literature studies :) However, this particular book took too long to read, though it's fair to say I always struggled with reading. This is the second book in a row (the first one being Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro) that didn't feel any line to be enlightening or give you that specific elevating feeling that you expect from literature. The only thing that was described movingly, I felt, was the erotic sequence. I am not a fan of long descriptions, particularly of nature. I think this book didn't have too long descriptions, but the ones in the book don't really lead anywhere and thus, although eloquent, may feel like page fillers. I thought this book would be more about Shakespeare, or at least Hamnet, but mostly it wasn't about either of them. It seems to me the book doesn't give a good portrayal of Shakespeare at all, neither his looks nor personality. Since she had so many of his works to study, I would have wished she used her imagination on portraying his thought process and personality more. It would be definitely more interesting to explore and read about his mind even though nothing happens. But, absolutely nothing happens (aside from what you know from the cover summary). I think this is maybe because historical data were scarce, and she didn't want to make up big events in Shakespeare's life, that have no grounds in reality. But then again, she goes out of her way to portray Agnes, the creature of the forest and herbs with supernatural powers. Maybe this novel will be (or is) regarded as some feminist rehabilitation of Shakespeare's wife like Jane Eyre's Bertha in Wide Sargasso Sea (also a novel I was excited about, but was anticlimactic). I agree about Bartholomew! His appearance always made me feel good and curious. He was a well-portrayed character (less is more I guess :). (Although there is an unconvincing part of the plot when he travels with his sister to London to be there for her and protect her and then lets her go to the crazed mass of people while she is tired so much she can't feel her legs.) But, Bartholomew feels real and he is the character that can grow on you. And another thing. Since the whole premise was that Shakespeare wrote the play based on his son's death, I thought the connection at the end was a bit far-fetched. That was the final disappointment, because at least at the end you expect something to hit you. Although the very last line was impactful. But somehow last lines always are. And, the book did transport me to another time, and you can really feel the room, the smells and the weather. All in all, I do enjoy the cover! And feel kind of proud that I read a book with that cover. ☺😋
After reading this comment I feel it is safe to say I think you benefit from the comparatice literature studies 😅 Some time has passed since I read it now, and I never really give it any thought. That makes me pretty certain I would not have liked it if I tried reading it again at least.. But! I did more abour Shakespear after finishing this one, so that is a good thing.
This book was over-earnest and amateurish in execution, shockingly so in light of its extreme popularity. The descriptive passages were clunky, often relying too much on banal metaphors and adjectives paraded in triplets (mysterious, strange, unsettling triplets). The decision to make Agnes some creature of nature with intuitive gifts (feminine intuition, get it?) was demeaning to women, when a good and strong character could have been made of the stuff of an ordinary life. I went into this with such high hopes, but it was just BAD.
![is hamnet a hit or a miss? 👀💀🪶 [cc]](/img/n.gif)
The bit about the apples made me laugh! I hate when something is mentioned of big significance but then nothing. Fully agree about it being over descriptive.
Haha, thanks! This book still haunts me in some ways.
Totally agree. The beginning has some promise, with the interaction between Hamnet and his sister, but when it degenerates into the constant emphasis on the mother's grief, on and on and on.....it became tedious.
P.s. I miss these lovely warm lamps in the background of your newer videos.
Absolutely! I was unsure if I was being to tough on it while recording the video, but this book still makes me frustrated when thinking about it..
I do too really.. But I have not found a good way of doing it yet without getting power cables in the way 😅
Agree entirely! Thank you!
Good to know I´m not alone!
My book club chose this because one reader liked it. OMG did it test my patience. Over written, silly descriptions, I lost my way so many times that I just gave up. You describe it perfectly. A whole lot of nothing.
Yes.. I fully agree!
I agree 100%
This book tried to kill me! Lol! I fell for the hype and was terribly disappointed.
I think I know how you feel 😅
Hi! Just read the book (in Croatian) and don't have many amazing things to say either. I appreciate your honest and funny review. I am also trying to become a bookworm, even though I have always loved literature and have finished comparative literature studies :) However, this particular book took too long to read, though it's fair to say I always struggled with reading.
This is the second book in a row (the first one being Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro) that didn't feel any line to be enlightening or give you that specific elevating feeling that you expect from literature. The only thing that was described movingly, I felt, was the erotic sequence. I am not a fan of long descriptions, particularly of nature. I think this book didn't have too long descriptions, but the ones in the book don't really lead anywhere and thus, although eloquent, may feel like page fillers.
I thought this book would be more about Shakespeare, or at least Hamnet, but mostly it wasn't about either of them. It seems to me the book doesn't give a good portrayal of Shakespeare at all, neither his looks nor personality. Since she had so many of his works to study, I would have wished she used her imagination on portraying his thought process and personality more. It would be definitely more interesting to explore and read about his mind even though nothing happens.
But, absolutely nothing happens (aside from what you know from the cover summary). I think this is maybe because historical data were scarce, and she didn't want to make up big events in Shakespeare's life, that have no grounds in reality. But then again, she goes out of her way to portray Agnes, the creature of the forest and herbs with supernatural powers. Maybe this novel will be (or is) regarded as some feminist rehabilitation of Shakespeare's wife like Jane Eyre's Bertha in Wide Sargasso Sea (also a novel I was excited about, but was anticlimactic).
I agree about Bartholomew! His appearance always made me feel good and curious. He was a well-portrayed character (less is more I guess :).
(Although there is an unconvincing part of the plot when he travels with his sister to London to be there for her and protect her and then lets her go to the crazed mass of people while she is tired so much she can't feel her legs.)
But, Bartholomew feels real and he is the character that can grow on you.
And another thing. Since the whole premise was that Shakespeare wrote the play based on his son's death, I thought the connection at the end was a bit far-fetched. That was the final disappointment, because at least at the end you expect something to hit you.
Although the very last line was impactful. But somehow last lines always are.
And, the book did transport me to another time, and you can really feel the room, the smells and the weather.
All in all, I do enjoy the cover! And feel kind of proud that I read a book with that cover. ☺😋
After reading this comment I feel it is safe to say I think you benefit from the comparatice literature studies 😅
Some time has passed since I read it now, and I never really give it any thought. That makes me pretty certain I would not have liked it if I tried reading it again at least..
But! I did more abour Shakespear after finishing this one, so that is a good thing.
This book was over-earnest and amateurish in execution, shockingly so in light of its extreme popularity. The descriptive passages were clunky, often relying too much on banal metaphors and adjectives paraded in triplets (mysterious, strange, unsettling triplets). The decision to make Agnes some creature of nature with intuitive gifts (feminine intuition, get it?) was demeaning to women, when a good and strong character could have been made of the stuff of an ordinary life. I went into this with such high hopes, but it was just BAD.
I think you have a more thoughtful way of talking about it, but I very much agree with your conclusion!