I started this book with no expectation about the representation of Shakespeare or his wife. Its a work of fiction, so why do people have a problem with this interpretation? I'm not into magical/fantasy writing, films, etc, at all. But I really don't see a problem with Agnes having intuitive powers. It brings an interesting, dramatic, questioning and involving element to the book. I loved it and would recommend it!
I was inspired to read Hamnet after watching All Is True and becoming all the more intrigued by Hamnet for his tantalisingly brief appearances. I felt a special bond, since the poor lad was buried on my birthday, in all probability within a day of his death. I eagerly ordered the book having read the glowing review quotes on the cover. My great expectations were soon sorely disappointed. It was barely about him at all - and tedious -- the use of the present tense (great for jokes to make them immediate - but for me that failed miserably here), of countless synonyms, descriptions paraphrased several times, then interspersed with staccato jabs of sentences. I was unable to care about the characters at all, they were all so distant, shadows on a wall. And as Charlotte pointed out in her review - the supernatural Agnes. The material itself is fascinating and has no need of an Elizabethan superhero. The description of the arrival of the pestilence was interesting. Hamnet suddenly succumbing to the plague an having switched places with his sister just ludicrous. Did I miss something? If it had not held the promise of eventually divulging something interesting about Shakespeare and his tragic son - and been so highly acclaimed - I doubt I would have battled through to the second part, which was more readable. It had some wonderful images and the interesting Globe theatre scene -- although why she was displeased at having a play written in memory of her son escapes me. I did wonder what magick salve, ointment of miraculous effect, bonæ indolis resina, she might have concocted with the help of her Shrewd Booke of Pretty Obscure Herbbes and Plantes to prevent getting saddle sore on her dayslong ride to get there. After all, the reader was unaware up to that point that she had ever sat on a horse, we only knew she had given away her familiar, her f… oops, silly me, kestrel. A Chekhov’s Gun if ever there was one. My respect, Charlotte, for reading it twice - I cannot imagine doing so. I finished it. Felt betrayed. (Staccato jabs à moi.) “… else sham will be too long.” William Shakespeare “Henry V” (half quoted and aptly missing an ‘e’) Otherwise, Nataliya ticked all my boxes on goodreads: www.goodreads.com/user/show/3672777-nataliya, where I commented with some of the above and more.
I just wrote a review of Hamnet on Goodreads and felt like I needed to hear more opinions so I clicked on your review and wow! You used the very same words I did, giving the book basically an identical review. Yet you gave it another chance so I’m off to reread the part 2 of the book now. Thank you!
Such a great and thoughtful review. This book has been on my radar for a while obviously, but I loved how you approached it also from a more historical point of view. I personnally love me a bit of witchy character, but the way you framed it (from not liking it to it actually making sense to the story) made me even more keen on reading it!
Love your style - very refreshing. I just read Hamnet over here in Germany, and was quite disappointed, but relieved you - and LS below - who were not over the moon about it. More when I have put my ambivalent thoughts in order!
I just ran across your video discussing Hamnet. I read the book as soon as it came out in the US and I was very much looking forward to reading it because I am a Shakespeare fan. After reading the book I was so enthused that I bought a number of copies for family and friends. How this book did not make the Booker long list is a real mystery. But it seems every year that the Booker is a mystery. I now look forward to the international prize more than the English language prize. I found Hamnet to be both incredibly heartbreaking but at the same time incredibly heartwarming! I loved O’Farrells explanation on the relationship between Shakespeare and his wife, the second best bed, and how Shakespeare came to live and work in London, and many other mysteries. For me it was a five star! Tucson Bob
The plague hit Stratford 1564 when 200 people died, but none from Shakespeare's family. Hamnet died in 1596. thirty years later. I do not understand the accolades given it. How many times are we told that Shakespeare's father was cruel or that Anne Hathaway was weird? Flowery language flows on and on. I give it two stars for effort!
Ms Bird. You say that Hamnet died in 1576, when Shakespeare was 12 years old??? The historical fact is that Hamnet died in 1596. Shakespeare began writing Hamlet in 1599. You care about historical facts??
@@Sm0700537 You are correct, I made a mistake in some of my comments, but I don't seem to have done so here. I've edited those comments where I'm in error. I concede that the description of Hathaway seeing the child on stage is moving. But my original view stands about the father and Anne Hathaway's character still stands.
This book is of course a work of fiction wrapped around a few historical facts. I found many portions of the novel to be very moving. The authors speculation about a number of aspects of Shakespeare life were very interesting to me. What was the relationship like between Shakespeare and his wife? How was it that Shakespeare ended upon London? Was Hamlet a play dedicated to his son? Even where did the plague originate? Thought it was one of the best reads in recent years. At least for me.
@@Sm0700537 You are not alone in your praise of this book. It tops the best sellers reads in The Times newspaper, and no. 4 on Amazon's best selling list. I remember the houses where Hathaway lived and Hamnet's sister's illness. The rest of the characters I don't remember. Even Shakespeare is vague.
I finished Hamnet last night so came back to watch this video hehe. It's interesting because I really didn't read the way Shakespeare is never named as the book trying to 'reclaim' the family. For me it felt like a way of making the story about the whole family - and I sort of interpreted it as a way of showing what a leveller grief is, regardless of who you might be. Anyway I really enjoyed watching this and seeing your thoughts on it - especially as I know you read a lot more historical fiction than me :)
I bloody love the bookish ramblings! I’ve wanted to read this book, so so much, but keep verging away from it. My first reaction when I realised that Shakespeare is not really a focal point was befuddlement?! Yet, the more I hear about this the more intriguing O’Farrell’s take is!!! (Also, I am the same after finishing The Wolf Hall Trilogy 😭😭😭)
I had the same kind of reaction. I was just thinking "But.. why? I WANT to see Shakespeare, I can't get enough fictional portrayals of Shakespeare! Why would I want to read a Shakespeareless Shakespeare book?!?!". But the book does have some sections from his point of view, he's just not as featured as the other characters and I do like that there is a focus on his family!
Coynie Reads this is where it gets odd... I can’t stand Shakespeare. Yes, it all stems from school and not being taught it well and struggling to grapple with the language. All those resentments from 14 year ol’ Kieran still manifest 12 years on! Yet, I wanted Shakespeare to really be involved. Weird, huh? I suppose he is THAT much of an icon that people expect The Bard to show up. What books that feature him would you recommend?
@@KDbooks The only book of note at the moment is Matt Haig's How to Stop Time, where he's briefly featured but I loved it because it's the Shakespeare that you would HOPE he would be. He's absolutely lovely, it's total wish fulfilment 😂 It's something I've really only recently been looking into, because I think people shy away from portraying him in fiction because of the lack of evidence/the great expectation an audience might have. I think that's why people tend to either go for reimagining his plays or they go for someone on his periphery like one of his playwright peers, actors, his family, rather than try to portray him outright and potentially not do a good job of it.
I had the exact same problem with Agnes. It felt like the author was going out of her way to make Agnes weird. That Shakespeare chose her as his wife maybe makes us want to believe there was something unique or special about her, but I agree that O'Farrell just tried too hard to make her interesting when, as you noted, why couldn't she just be a more ordinary woman working to hold her family together under very trying circumstances?
There are several lengthy interviews with the author in which she explains how and why she made her choices. It is quite illuminating. Highly recommended.
I might just have unsophisticated taste but I was so bored reading Hamnet. I didn’t even finish it. The weighting is undeniably beautiful but I just couldn’t get invested 🤷🏼♀️
This is the top selling novel in the UK in April 2021. Even though Hamnet, Shakespeare's son, died aged 11 in 1596, not of the plague because the plague hit Stratford Upon Avon in 1564, the author has Hamnet die of the plague after his sister caught it. Pulls at emotional heart strings to bring in the plague. I care about historical facts. Obviously many don't.
Well, it's literally a fiction novel, but while we're on the topic... You're confusing the dates of Hamnet's birth and William Shakespeare's birth. William Shakespeare was baptised in 1564 and Hamnet was baptised in 1585. Hamnet died in 1596 and the play 'Hamlet' was written at the turn of the 17th century. In 1576 William Shakespeare would have been 12. Now I'm sure he was a smooth operator but that might be a bit too soon to have an 11 year old. Soooo Maggie's chronology works. Hope this helps you get to grips with the facts and historical accuracy! xx
It's a fiction work but ok . . . Also, in 1576 William Shakespeare would have been 12. To have had an eleven year old son in that year would have been, with the greatest of respect, fucking impossible.
I've only read her memoir 'I am, I am, I am'; I'm not experienced with her fiction, to be honest! But I didn't have any issues with her writing in Hamnet in terms of accessibility so, if the content sounds interesting, I think it should be fine to start with :)
🤣 I feel this "not like other girls"- sooo much - why did the author need to turn her into a "witch" ? I assume, due to the way people are talking about her and her ability to kind of "foresee" things, Agnes would have probably being accused of witchcraft and being punished at the time. I just don't get it ... I am currently reading it ... and I am very much annoyed ... I think it is often overwritten, and this "love story part" makes me cringe ... but thanks to your review, I am looking forward for the second part of the novel ... I am also kind of annoyed by the fact that Shakespeare is kind of portrayed as this "interesting, very artistic, adnd special" person, although he is not mentioned by name to set the focus on Agnes. Also this "not calling him by his name"-nonsense?! .... You don't have to refer to him as SHAKESPEARE - just refer to him as William or Will - or I don't know "Billy the playwright" :D I don't know ... I still thinking about DNF-ing it ... but based on what you read out loud, I am a bit interested in continue reading ...
I haven't enjoyed reading historical fiction to date; but this book has changed my mind. I found the second half of the book more entertaining. I have the impression that the author had spent a lot of time researching the books background. I agree the film "All is True" has a similar atmosphere to the book. So little is known of Shakespeares personal life that writing fiction about the bard is difficult to criticise from a factional perspective. I would also recommend the book as a good read.
This is the top selling novel in the UK in April 2021. Even though Hamnet, Shakespeare's son, died aged 11 in 1576, not of the plague because the plague hit Stratford Upon Avon in 1564, the author not only has Hamnet die of the plague after his sister caught it, and has Shakespeare write the play 'Hamlet' immediately following Hamnet's death , this is a corruption of facts because Shakespeare wrote it 30 years later. It appears many people don't care about historical accuracy. I do.
I agree with you on the subject of Agnes' witchy traits. Now as I think on it after having finished the book today I feel the same way about it as I did with Amélie Poulain (from the movie Amélie). It is the way this type of character bends over backwards to indulge in their odd traits that bothers me, such as Agnes absolutely having to risk her own life to give birth alone in the forest. Or (less specifically) Amélie consistently messing with other peoples' lives simply because she is q u i r k y and needs to indulge in it (that's how I remember the movie anyway..). But just as you also made a point of, I had an easier time with the part of the book following the death of Hamnet as I was moved by Maggie's way of describing their pain and loss of their son. So, mixed impressions of this book but a good read.
I’ve been very curious about this book! I apologize if you’ve already answered this but before I pick it up, is there any explicit violence or sexual content?? From what I’ve heard it is a heavy book about grief and loss and that’s totally fine! I just wasn’t sure if anything gets explicit or descriptive, thanks so much!
From what I remember there wasn't any violence I could think of but there is at least one sex scene. I suppose it depends on what you're comfortable with reading, but I wouldn't consider it gratuitous or unnecessary and without wanting to spoil things too much, it is actually pretty crucial for the plot.
@@CoynieReads okay thank you so much! Is the sex scene consensual? I can handle that but if it’s sexual violence I usually stay away from it, thanks again for you help!
Well done. An excellent balanced review. I wanted to love it but am lukewarm. There is much to admire and I find it hard to say why I just wasn’t enamoured of it. Maybe the constant present tense narration made me feel distanced? I don’t feel I got the chance to invest in the characters. Except for perhaps Hamnet but that didn’t last long! I would certainly recommend it to others and 4* is probably a good choice. Interesting that it wasn’t chosen for the Booker either.
Thank you so much! Haha, I was definitely surprised we didn't get more Hamnet in Hamnet! I was surprised that it wasn't nominated to be fair, but I think it might fare well in the Women's Prize.
My feelings are similar. Strange, jokes are told in the present tense to make them immediate - yet here it does the opposite! I watched the characters as shadows on a wall - very detached, couldn't engage with them. Just finished it over here in Germany, so more to Charlotte soon when I have my thoughts in order..
I agree with you about Agnes.....why is she portrayed as twitchy with ESP capacities ? Sorry, I felt that the Bard was not really him which is somehow counter productive and messed with the rest of the story.....if real, stick to facts and if fiction then use fictitious names ! Maybe I .missed something and if so, I would love to know what .
I started this book with no expectation about the representation of Shakespeare or his wife. Its a work of fiction, so why do people have a problem with this interpretation? I'm not into magical/fantasy writing, films, etc, at all. But I really don't see a problem with Agnes having intuitive powers. It brings an interesting, dramatic, questioning and involving element to the book. I loved it and would recommend it!
I was inspired to read Hamnet after watching All Is True and becoming all the more intrigued by Hamnet for his tantalisingly brief appearances. I felt a special bond, since the poor lad was buried on my birthday, in all probability within a day of his death. I eagerly ordered the book having read the glowing review quotes on the cover.
My great expectations were soon sorely disappointed. It was barely about him at all - and tedious -- the use of the present tense (great for jokes to make them immediate - but for me that failed miserably here), of countless synonyms, descriptions paraphrased several times, then interspersed with staccato jabs of sentences. I was unable to care about the characters at all, they were all so distant, shadows on a wall. And as Charlotte pointed out in her review - the supernatural Agnes. The material itself is fascinating and has no need of an Elizabethan superhero.
The description of the arrival of the pestilence was interesting. Hamnet suddenly succumbing to the plague an having switched places with his sister just ludicrous. Did I miss something?
If it had not held the promise of eventually divulging something interesting about Shakespeare and his tragic son - and been so highly acclaimed - I doubt I would have battled through to the second part, which was more readable. It had some wonderful images and the interesting Globe theatre scene -- although why she was displeased at having a play written in memory of her son escapes me. I did wonder what magick salve, ointment of miraculous effect, bonæ indolis resina, she might have concocted with the help of her Shrewd Booke of Pretty Obscure Herbbes and Plantes to prevent getting saddle sore on her dayslong ride to get there. After all, the reader was unaware up to that point that she had ever sat on a horse, we only knew she had given away her familiar, her f… oops, silly me, kestrel. A Chekhov’s Gun if ever there was one.
My respect, Charlotte, for reading it twice - I cannot imagine doing so.
I finished it. Felt betrayed. (Staccato jabs à moi.)
“… else sham will be too long.”
William Shakespeare “Henry V” (half quoted and aptly missing an ‘e’)
Otherwise, Nataliya ticked all my boxes on goodreads: www.goodreads.com/user/show/3672777-nataliya, where I commented with some of the above and more.
You can tell this was filmed in advance because the UK is currently on Day 3 of consecutive rain... 😂☔
Day 3 of rain... you clearly aren’t in Wales 😂
@@KDbooks Haha! Yorkshire's on Day 3 then! 😂Not a thing like it was last week!
Coynie Reads Yorkshire can only aspire to have the torrential precipitation that we encounter 😂
I just wrote a review of Hamnet on Goodreads and felt like I needed to hear more opinions so I clicked on your review and wow! You used the very same words I did, giving the book basically an identical review. Yet you gave it another chance so I’m off to reread the part 2 of the book now. Thank you!
I love your book reviews so much!!
Thank you so much!
Maggie O’Farrel made it clear that it was conjecture, just as Shakespeare in Love took the idea of his ‘inspiration’ for a walk.
Such a great and thoughtful review. This book has been on my radar for a while obviously, but I loved how you approached it also from a more historical point of view. I personnally love me a bit of witchy character, but the way you framed it (from not liking it to it actually making sense to the story) made me even more keen on reading it!
Hope you enjoy it when you get to it! 😊
Love your style - very refreshing. I just read Hamnet over here in Germany, and was quite disappointed, but relieved you - and LS below - who were not over the moon about it. More when I have put my ambivalent thoughts in order!
I just ran across your video discussing Hamnet. I read the book as soon as it came out in the US and I was very much looking forward to reading it because I am a Shakespeare fan. After reading the book I was so enthused that I bought a number of copies for family and friends. How this book did not make the Booker long list is a real mystery. But it seems every year that the Booker is a mystery. I now look forward to the international prize more than the English language prize. I found Hamnet to be both incredibly heartbreaking but at the same time incredibly heartwarming! I loved O’Farrells explanation on the relationship between Shakespeare and his wife, the second best bed, and how Shakespeare came to live and work in London, and many other mysteries. For me it was a five star! Tucson Bob
The plague hit Stratford 1564 when 200 people died, but none from Shakespeare's family. Hamnet died in 1596. thirty years later. I do not understand the accolades given it. How many times are we told that Shakespeare's father was cruel or that Anne Hathaway was weird? Flowery language flows on and on. I give it two stars for effort!
Ms Bird. You say that Hamnet died in 1576, when Shakespeare was 12 years old??? The historical fact is that Hamnet died in 1596. Shakespeare began writing Hamlet in 1599. You care about historical facts??
@@Sm0700537 You are correct, I made a mistake in some of my comments, but I don't seem to have done so here. I've edited those comments where I'm in error. I concede that the description of Hathaway seeing the child on stage is moving. But my original view stands about the father and Anne Hathaway's character still stands.
This book is of course a work of fiction wrapped around a few historical facts. I found many portions of the novel to be very moving. The authors speculation about a number of aspects of Shakespeare life were very interesting to me. What was the relationship like between Shakespeare and his wife? How was it that Shakespeare ended upon London? Was Hamlet a play dedicated to his son? Even where did the plague originate? Thought it was one of the best reads in recent years. At least for me.
@@Sm0700537 You are not alone in your praise of this book. It tops the best sellers reads in The Times newspaper, and no. 4 on Amazon's best selling list. I remember the houses where Hathaway lived and Hamnet's sister's illness. The rest of the characters I don't remember. Even Shakespeare is vague.
I finished Hamnet last night so came back to watch this video hehe. It's interesting because I really didn't read the way Shakespeare is never named as the book trying to 'reclaim' the family. For me it felt like a way of making the story about the whole family - and I sort of interpreted it as a way of showing what a leveller grief is, regardless of who you might be. Anyway I really enjoyed watching this and seeing your thoughts on it - especially as I know you read a lot more historical fiction than me :)
Aah great! 😊 Did you enjoy it? x
I really did actually 😀
@@GKReads Aw yay! As I said. it took my second time around to come around but I'm glad I did, haha!
I bloody love the bookish ramblings! I’ve wanted to read this book, so so much, but keep verging away from it. My first reaction when I realised that Shakespeare is not really a focal point was befuddlement?! Yet, the more I hear about this the more intriguing O’Farrell’s take is!!!
(Also, I am the same after finishing The Wolf Hall Trilogy 😭😭😭)
I had the same kind of reaction. I was just thinking "But.. why? I WANT to see Shakespeare, I can't get enough fictional portrayals of Shakespeare! Why would I want to read a Shakespeareless Shakespeare book?!?!". But the book does have some sections from his point of view, he's just not as featured as the other characters and I do like that there is a focus on his family!
Coynie Reads this is where it gets odd... I can’t stand Shakespeare. Yes, it all stems from school and not being taught it well and struggling to grapple with the language. All those resentments from 14 year ol’ Kieran still manifest 12 years on! Yet, I wanted Shakespeare to really be involved. Weird, huh? I suppose he is THAT much of an icon that people expect The Bard to show up.
What books that feature him would you recommend?
@@KDbooks The only book of note at the moment is Matt Haig's How to Stop Time, where he's briefly featured but I loved it because it's the Shakespeare that you would HOPE he would be. He's absolutely lovely, it's total wish fulfilment 😂 It's something I've really only recently been looking into, because I think people shy away from portraying him in fiction because of the lack of evidence/the great expectation an audience might have. I think that's why people tend to either go for reimagining his plays or they go for someone on his periphery like one of his playwright peers, actors, his family, rather than try to portray him outright and potentially not do a good job of it.
I had the exact same problem with Agnes. It felt like the author was going out of her way to make Agnes weird. That Shakespeare chose her as his wife maybe makes us want to believe there was something unique or special about her, but I agree that O'Farrell just tried too hard to make her interesting when, as you noted, why couldn't she just be a more ordinary woman working to hold her family together under very trying circumstances?
There are several lengthy interviews with the author in which she explains how and why she made her choices. It is quite illuminating. Highly recommended.
Brilliant analysis about the Agnes/Anne character. Thanks!
I might just have unsophisticated taste but I was so bored reading Hamnet. I didn’t even finish it. The weighting is undeniably beautiful but I just couldn’t get invested 🤷🏼♀️
This is the top selling novel in the UK in April 2021. Even though Hamnet, Shakespeare's son, died aged 11 in 1596, not of the plague because the plague hit Stratford Upon Avon in 1564, the author has Hamnet die of the plague after his sister caught it. Pulls at emotional heart strings to bring in the plague. I care about historical facts. Obviously many don't.
Well, it's literally a fiction novel, but while we're on the topic... You're confusing the dates of Hamnet's birth and William Shakespeare's birth. William Shakespeare was baptised in 1564 and Hamnet was baptised in 1585. Hamnet died in 1596 and the play 'Hamlet' was written at the turn of the 17th century. In 1576 William Shakespeare would have been 12. Now I'm sure he was a smooth operator but that might be a bit too soon to have an 11 year old. Soooo Maggie's chronology works.
Hope this helps you get to grips with the facts and historical accuracy! xx
It's a fiction work but ok . . .
Also, in 1576 William Shakespeare would have been 12. To have had an eleven year old son in that year would have been, with the greatest of respect, fucking impossible.
@@LeanneRose You are quite right and I have edited. I don't know how I made that mistake about Hamnet's date of death.
@@PrettyPurplePolkaDots Yes, you are correct, and I am wrong. I have edited my comment.
Have you read any other O'Farrell? I haven't...do you think this would be a good one to start with if you've read any others?
I've only read her memoir 'I am, I am, I am'; I'm not experienced with her fiction, to be honest! But I didn't have any issues with her writing in Hamnet in terms of accessibility so, if the content sounds interesting, I think it should be fine to start with :)
@@CoynieReads ok, lush xoxo
@@CoynieReads lush xoxo
🤣 I feel this "not like other girls"- sooo much - why did the author need to turn her into a "witch" ? I assume, due to the way people are talking about her and her ability to kind of "foresee" things, Agnes would have probably being accused of witchcraft and being punished at the time. I just don't get it ... I am currently reading it ... and I am very much annoyed ... I think it is often overwritten, and this "love story part" makes me cringe ... but thanks to your review, I am looking forward for the second part of the novel ... I am also kind of annoyed by the fact that Shakespeare is kind of portrayed as this "interesting, very artistic, adnd special" person, although he is not mentioned by name to set the focus on Agnes. Also this "not calling him by his name"-nonsense?! .... You don't have to refer to him as SHAKESPEARE - just refer to him as William or Will - or I don't know "Billy the playwright" :D I don't know ... I still thinking about DNF-ing it ... but based on what you read out loud, I am a bit interested in continue reading ...
Great in-depth review. Thanks!
I haven't enjoyed reading historical fiction to date; but this book has changed my mind. I found the second half of the book more entertaining. I have the impression that the author had spent a lot of time researching the books background. I agree the film "All is True" has a similar atmosphere to the book. So little is known of Shakespeares personal life that writing fiction about the bard is difficult to criticise from a factional perspective. I would also recommend the book as a good read.
This is the top selling novel in the UK in April 2021. Even though Hamnet, Shakespeare's son, died aged 11 in 1576, not of the plague because the plague hit Stratford Upon Avon in 1564, the author not only has Hamnet die of the plague after his sister caught it, and has Shakespeare write the play 'Hamlet' immediately following Hamnet's death , this is a corruption of facts because Shakespeare wrote it 30 years later. It appears many people don't care about historical accuracy. I do.
I agree with you on the subject of Agnes' witchy traits. Now as I think on it after having finished the book today I feel the same way about it as I did with Amélie Poulain (from the movie Amélie). It is the way this type of character bends over backwards to indulge in their odd traits that bothers me, such as Agnes absolutely having to risk her own life to give birth alone in the forest. Or (less specifically) Amélie consistently messing with other peoples' lives simply because she is q u i r k y and needs to indulge in it (that's how I remember the movie anyway..). But just as you also made a point of, I had an easier time with the part of the book following the death of Hamnet as I was moved by Maggie's way of describing their pain and loss of their son. So, mixed impressions of this book but a good read.
This video is useful for my research 📍
Wonderful book review. I don’t think I will read hamnet. The Cannes you mention were a bit too much for me. Aloha
I’ve been very curious about this book! I apologize if you’ve already answered this but before I pick it up, is there any explicit violence or sexual content?? From what I’ve heard it is a heavy book about grief and loss and that’s totally fine! I just wasn’t sure if anything gets explicit or descriptive, thanks so much!
From what I remember there wasn't any violence I could think of but there is at least one sex scene. I suppose it depends on what you're comfortable with reading, but I wouldn't consider it gratuitous or unnecessary and without wanting to spoil things too much, it is actually pretty crucial for the plot.
@@CoynieReads okay thank you so much! Is the sex scene consensual? I can handle that but if it’s sexual violence I usually stay away from it, thanks again for you help!
@@edsgirl9290 Yes, it is consensual! 😊
Well done. An excellent balanced review. I wanted to love it but am lukewarm. There is much to admire and I find it hard to say why I just wasn’t enamoured of it. Maybe the constant present tense narration made me feel distanced? I don’t feel I got the chance to invest in the characters. Except for perhaps Hamnet but that didn’t last long! I would certainly recommend it to others and 4* is probably a good choice. Interesting that it wasn’t chosen for the Booker either.
Thank you so much! Haha, I was definitely surprised we didn't get more Hamnet in Hamnet! I was surprised that it wasn't nominated to be fair, but I think it might fare well in the Women's Prize.
My feelings are similar. Strange, jokes are told in the present tense to make them immediate - yet here it does the opposite! I watched the characters as shadows on a wall - very detached, couldn't engage with them. Just finished it over here in Germany, so more to Charlotte soon when I have my thoughts in order..
I agree with you about Agnes.....why is she portrayed as twitchy with ESP capacities ?
Sorry, I felt that the Bard was not really him which is somehow counter productive and messed with the rest of the story.....if real, stick to facts and if fiction then use fictitious names !
Maybe I .missed something and if so, I would love to know what .
my country Bangladesh
I hated this book. I hated Agnes. Bad novel.