Scan barcode
millennial_dandy's review against another edition
3.0
The Taming of the Shrew -- 1.5
A comedy should, first and foremost, be funny, and sadly, The Taming of the Shrew failed in this most basic regard.
It's been said that to really get under the hood of comedy, you have to first consider what the premise of the joke is; what are you being asked to find funny? In the 'Jeeves' series by Wodehouse, for instance, you have a bumbling, aristocratic boss and his incredibly competent and clever butler. The underlying absurdity to this set-up is that, in theory, an aristocrat is such because he there is some intrinsic, inherited quality that makes him a cut above those who, because of something intrinsic and inherited, serve him. By having a foolish and inept aristocrat and a clever and capable servant, the joke is that there is nothing intrinsic and inherited that place the aristocrat and servant in their respective social positions. The joke is that the qualities associated with each class are not innate.
Therefore, this joke is funny to the person who agrees with that premise, and not funny to the person who does not.
This was my problem with 'The Taming of the Shrew' -- I just didn't think the joke was funny, the joke here being: 'imagine: a woman pushing around a bunch of impotent men until a 'real' man comes by and pushes her around to the point that she is 'tamed' and completely subservient to him to the degree that the hitherto 'good' women seem shrewish by comparison.'
To find this funny, you have to agree with the premise that men should not be pushed around by women, that they are not 'real' men if they are, and that the correct and only role of a woman is to obey and worship the men in her life, especially her husband.
I don't agree with that premise, so this didn't read as comedy to me.
Now, not finding something funny is not the same as finding something offensive, though too often these days, the two tend to be conflated, especially by those engaging in bad faith.
Take slapstick humor a la The Three Stooges, for instance. A lot of people like the slapstick in The Three Stooges, but a lot of people don't find it funny, and some people might say it's offensive.
The person who finds it funny maybe enjoys the absurdity, the unreality of it, or may feel schadenfreude. The person who doesn't find it funny may not find that premise of absurdity and unreality enough to feel schadenfreude rather than empathy. And the person who finds it offensive may not only think it's unfunny for those reasons, but moreover, promoting or normalizing bullying or violence. But not everyone who doesn't find The Three Stooges funny will find it offensive.
To me, 'The Taming of the Shrew' is not only unfunny, it is offensive. I not only don't find the premise funny, I find the follow-through vile. Many of my notes in the margins were 'ew' and 'yuck' when it came to situations that were probably designed to be funny.
In the introduction, the writer makes a point to say that this particular play hasn't done well since Shakespeare's time, even long before the 'era of political correctness' some might claim we now live in, writing: "Only in greatly altered forms did it enjoy stage success through much of the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries [...] probably a response to the play's uncanny ability to make audiences of any era uncomfortable." (p.9)
Indeed.
I'll rather let the source material speak for itself here.
1. Petruchio: I am he am born to tame you, Kate, and bring you from a wild Kate to a Kate conformable as other household Kates. (p.59)
2. Petruchio: 'Tis a world to see how tame, when men and women are alone, a meacock wretch can make the curstest shrew. (p.60)
3. Petruchio: Another way I have to man my haggard, to make her come and know her keeper's call [...] She ate no meat today, nor none shall eat. Last night she slept not, nor tonight she shall not. [...] I'll rail and brawl; and with the clamor keep her still awake. This is a way to kill a wife with kindness, and thus I'll curb her mad and headstrong humor. (p.84)
And then, for the rest of the play, we get to read about how, after not letting her eat or sleep, she indeed becomes his obedient little wifey, which is proven to the audience through a series of scenes depicting the degree to which he's browbeaten her.
In one such scene, they're heading out to return to her father's house for a visit, and he states that it's nighttime even though it's not, she contradicts him, saying it's daytime, and he threatens to not continue on to her father's house and drive them home unless she agrees to say it's nighttime because he says so.
Petruchio: I say it is the moon.
Katharina: I know it is the moon.
Petruchio: Nay, then you lie. It is the blessed sun.
Katharina: Then, God be blest, it is the blessed sun. But sun it is not when you say it is not. [...] What you will have it named, even that it is, and so it shall be so for Katharine. (p.102)
We get this exact 'joke' again one page later. They finally arrive at her father's house, and after a while, she tells Petruchio she wants to go to her sister's wedding feast. He tells her they can only go after she kisses him. She hesitates, saying that kissing in public is embarrassing for her, and he shrugs and says:
"Why, then let's home again."
"Nay, I will give thee a kiss [She kisses him] Now pray thee, love, stay.
"Is not this well? Come, my sweet Kate. Better late than never. (p.110)
The piece de resistance comes at the end when he proposes a wager with the other newlyweds over which of their wives is most obedient. The other two men’s wives don't come out from the house when they 'bid' and 'entreat', but Kate comes out dragging the other two when Petruchio 'commands' her to come. But that's not good enough of a show, so he adds:
"I will win my wager better yet, and show more sign of her obedience. [...] Katherine, that cap of yours becomes you not. Off with that bauble. Throw it underfoot. [She obeys]. (p.116)
One of the other wives balks at this type of humiliation of a wife, but the other two husbands both express that they wish their wives were as obedient.
Just in case the audience still isn't 'getting' it, we end the play with Petruchio charging Kate to "tell these headstrong women what duty they do owe their lords and husbands." (p.116)
She complies, giving a very long and very sad 'trad-wife' speech about how "thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper, thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee, and for thy maintenance commits his body to painful labor both by sea and land [...] and craves no other tribute at thy hands but love, fair looks, and true obedience -- too little payment for so great a debt [...] I feel ashamed that women are so simple to offer war where they should kneel for peace." (p.117)
'The Taming of the Shrew' is not a comedy; it's a disturbing account of socially accepted and encouraged domestic abuse leading to Stockholm Syndrome. And it's made even sadder by the fact that so little has changed since the turn of the seventeenth century given the popularity of the 'trad wife' hashtag on TikTok, and the spooky similarity between Kate's speech at the end of the play, and the rhetoric of conservative women now.
So, no, I did not find this play funny, and indeed, I found it offensive and disturbing. It deserves its unpopularity, it should only be read for filth, and a few witty lines scattered throughout do not make it worth reading unless being read critically.
Twelfth Night -- 3
I remember reading this comic-book version of Twelfth Night as a kid, and being really obsessed with the story -- more so than any of the other stories in the series (and I'm pretty sure we had them all).
It's one of those fairly formative experiences; in this case my introduction to Shakespeare was also an introduction to the fluidity of gender. I remember thinking how cool it was that Viola could just put on men's clothes and presto-chango-rearrango become Cesario, a man, in the eyes of everyone else in the play (until of course she, ironically, has to 'come out' as a woman at the end). Disney's 'Mulan' was the second of the 'one-two' punches that solidified this fluidity in my mind as a thing..
All this to say that whatever else one might take away from those two stories, to at least one kid, they were a sort of permission to follow in their respective protagonist's footsteps, though that would come much later on. If I may be so trite: representation matters.
I so loved that picture book version of the story that I developed a sort of aversion to reading the original because I was so afraid that it wouldn't live up to what I wanted from it: to be able to relive that 'aha' moment from so long ago.
And, well, I did indeed find that it didn't quite measure up. It happens.
Specifically, I discovered upon reading the original that I don't much care for most everything happening around Viola's story. I didn't find it thematically very complex as other plays of his are, nor did I find the humor altogether that funny. I may be accused of 'hating fun' but I actually didn't care for some of the set-ups for some of the jokes, namely the entire side-plot revolving around the servants humiliating Olivia's butler (?), Malvolio. Sure, he's not terribly 'merry' (which is a key character trait in this play, and if you don't want to have fun, there's something wrong with you), but the amount of time dedicated to making him look foolish just felt meanspirited.
I appreciated that the very pushy way Orsino went about trying to woo Olivia wasn't ultimately rewarded by her, but it was still, again, kind of unpleasant to have to read scene after scene of him feeling entitled to her love despite the fact that she's made it clear she isn't interested in him.
Much of this is more of an emotional response than a scholarly one, but since it can't be said that Shakespeare is underwritten about in academia, I feel like one is allowed to have a feelings > facts-based review of his work.
That all being said, I will always be appreciative of that picture book series -- it definitely caught me at the right moment in time. And I still think 'Cesario' is a great name.
A comedy should, first and foremost, be funny, and sadly, The Taming of the Shrew failed in this most basic regard.
It's been said that to really get under the hood of comedy, you have to first consider what the premise of the joke is; what are you being asked to find funny? In the 'Jeeves' series by Wodehouse, for instance, you have a bumbling, aristocratic boss and his incredibly competent and clever butler. The underlying absurdity to this set-up is that, in theory, an aristocrat is such because he there is some intrinsic, inherited quality that makes him a cut above those who, because of something intrinsic and inherited, serve him. By having a foolish and inept aristocrat and a clever and capable servant, the joke is that there is nothing intrinsic and inherited that place the aristocrat and servant in their respective social positions. The joke is that the qualities associated with each class are not innate.
Therefore, this joke is funny to the person who agrees with that premise, and not funny to the person who does not.
This was my problem with 'The Taming of the Shrew' -- I just didn't think the joke was funny, the joke here being: 'imagine: a woman pushing around a bunch of impotent men until a 'real' man comes by and pushes her around to the point that she is 'tamed' and completely subservient to him to the degree that the hitherto 'good' women seem shrewish by comparison.'
To find this funny, you have to agree with the premise that men should not be pushed around by women, that they are not 'real' men if they are, and that the correct and only role of a woman is to obey and worship the men in her life, especially her husband.
I don't agree with that premise, so this didn't read as comedy to me.
Now, not finding something funny is not the same as finding something offensive, though too often these days, the two tend to be conflated, especially by those engaging in bad faith.
Take slapstick humor a la The Three Stooges, for instance. A lot of people like the slapstick in The Three Stooges, but a lot of people don't find it funny, and some people might say it's offensive.
The person who finds it funny maybe enjoys the absurdity, the unreality of it, or may feel schadenfreude. The person who doesn't find it funny may not find that premise of absurdity and unreality enough to feel schadenfreude rather than empathy. And the person who finds it offensive may not only think it's unfunny for those reasons, but moreover, promoting or normalizing bullying or violence. But not everyone who doesn't find The Three Stooges funny will find it offensive.
To me, 'The Taming of the Shrew' is not only unfunny, it is offensive. I not only don't find the premise funny, I find the follow-through vile. Many of my notes in the margins were 'ew' and 'yuck' when it came to situations that were probably designed to be funny.
In the introduction, the writer makes a point to say that this particular play hasn't done well since Shakespeare's time, even long before the 'era of political correctness' some might claim we now live in, writing: "Only in greatly altered forms did it enjoy stage success through much of the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries [...] probably a response to the play's uncanny ability to make audiences of any era uncomfortable." (p.9)
Indeed.
I'll rather let the source material speak for itself here.
1. Petruchio: I am he am born to tame you, Kate, and bring you from a wild Kate to a Kate conformable as other household Kates. (p.59)
2. Petruchio: 'Tis a world to see how tame, when men and women are alone, a meacock wretch can make the curstest shrew. (p.60)
3. Petruchio: Another way I have to man my haggard, to make her come and know her keeper's call [...] She ate no meat today, nor none shall eat. Last night she slept not, nor tonight she shall not. [...] I'll rail and brawl; and with the clamor keep her still awake. This is a way to kill a wife with kindness, and thus I'll curb her mad and headstrong humor. (p.84)
And then, for the rest of the play, we get to read about how, after not letting her eat or sleep, she indeed becomes his obedient little wifey, which is proven to the audience through a series of scenes depicting the degree to which he's browbeaten her.
In one such scene, they're heading out to return to her father's house for a visit, and he states that it's nighttime even though it's not, she contradicts him, saying it's daytime, and he threatens to not continue on to her father's house and drive them home unless she agrees to say it's nighttime because he says so.
Petruchio: I say it is the moon.
Katharina: I know it is the moon.
Petruchio: Nay, then you lie. It is the blessed sun.
Katharina: Then, God be blest, it is the blessed sun. But sun it is not when you say it is not. [...] What you will have it named, even that it is, and so it shall be so for Katharine. (p.102)
We get this exact 'joke' again one page later. They finally arrive at her father's house, and after a while, she tells Petruchio she wants to go to her sister's wedding feast. He tells her they can only go after she kisses him. She hesitates, saying that kissing in public is embarrassing for her, and he shrugs and says:
"Why, then let's home again."
"Nay, I will give thee a kiss [She kisses him] Now pray thee, love, stay.
"Is not this well? Come, my sweet Kate. Better late than never. (p.110)
The piece de resistance comes at the end when he proposes a wager with the other newlyweds over which of their wives is most obedient. The other two men’s wives don't come out from the house when they 'bid' and 'entreat', but Kate comes out dragging the other two when Petruchio 'commands' her to come. But that's not good enough of a show, so he adds:
"I will win my wager better yet, and show more sign of her obedience. [...] Katherine, that cap of yours becomes you not. Off with that bauble. Throw it underfoot. [She obeys]. (p.116)
One of the other wives balks at this type of humiliation of a wife, but the other two husbands both express that they wish their wives were as obedient.
Just in case the audience still isn't 'getting' it, we end the play with Petruchio charging Kate to "tell these headstrong women what duty they do owe their lords and husbands." (p.116)
She complies, giving a very long and very sad 'trad-wife' speech about how "thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper, thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee, and for thy maintenance commits his body to painful labor both by sea and land [...] and craves no other tribute at thy hands but love, fair looks, and true obedience -- too little payment for so great a debt [...] I feel ashamed that women are so simple to offer war where they should kneel for peace." (p.117)
'The Taming of the Shrew' is not a comedy; it's a disturbing account of socially accepted and encouraged domestic abuse leading to Stockholm Syndrome. And it's made even sadder by the fact that so little has changed since the turn of the seventeenth century given the popularity of the 'trad wife' hashtag on TikTok, and the spooky similarity between Kate's speech at the end of the play, and the rhetoric of conservative women now.
So, no, I did not find this play funny, and indeed, I found it offensive and disturbing. It deserves its unpopularity, it should only be read for filth, and a few witty lines scattered throughout do not make it worth reading unless being read critically.
Twelfth Night -- 3
I remember reading this comic-book version of Twelfth Night as a kid, and being really obsessed with the story -- more so than any of the other stories in the series (and I'm pretty sure we had them all).
It's one of those fairly formative experiences; in this case my introduction to Shakespeare was also an introduction to the fluidity of gender. I remember thinking how cool it was that Viola could just put on men's clothes and presto-chango-rearrango become Cesario, a man, in the eyes of everyone else in the play (until of course she, ironically, has to 'come out' as a woman at the end). Disney's 'Mulan' was the second of the 'one-two' punches that solidified this fluidity in my mind as a thing..
All this to say that whatever else one might take away from those two stories, to at least one kid, they were a sort of permission to follow in their respective protagonist's footsteps, though that would come much later on. If I may be so trite: representation matters.
I so loved that picture book version of the story that I developed a sort of aversion to reading the original because I was so afraid that it wouldn't live up to what I wanted from it: to be able to relive that 'aha' moment from so long ago.
And, well, I did indeed find that it didn't quite measure up. It happens.
Specifically, I discovered upon reading the original that I don't much care for most everything happening around Viola's story. I didn't find it thematically very complex as other plays of his are, nor did I find the humor altogether that funny. I may be accused of 'hating fun' but I actually didn't care for some of the set-ups for some of the jokes, namely the entire side-plot revolving around the servants humiliating Olivia's butler (?), Malvolio. Sure, he's not terribly 'merry' (which is a key character trait in this play, and if you don't want to have fun, there's something wrong with you), but the amount of time dedicated to making him look foolish just felt meanspirited.
I appreciated that the very pushy way Orsino went about trying to woo Olivia wasn't ultimately rewarded by her, but it was still, again, kind of unpleasant to have to read scene after scene of him feeling entitled to her love despite the fact that she's made it clear she isn't interested in him.
Much of this is more of an emotional response than a scholarly one, but since it can't be said that Shakespeare is underwritten about in academia, I feel like one is allowed to have a feelings > facts-based review of his work.
That all being said, I will always be appreciative of that picture book series -- it definitely caught me at the right moment in time. And I still think 'Cesario' is a great name.
jammasterjamie's review against another edition
4.0
The Taming of the Shrew - 3/5 stars - Great writing, but not a real fan of the story. I guess if you're into gaslighting and verbal abuse and forced isolation to win a woman over then you might like this one more than I did, but personally I was a little shocked and didn't find this to be comedy as much as it was a misogynistic wet dream.
A Midsummer Night's Dream - 5/5 - One of my favourites. All of the classic sitcom tropes owe their thanks to this one.
Twelfth Night - 5/5 - Pure comedy delivered perfectly. I don't remember having read this one before, and it's one I'll revisit often. Just fantastic! I hope to be in a performance of it someday. I think I'd make a good Malvolio.
The Tempest - 5/5 - One of my all-time top five Shakespeare plays. The story is fantastic and just so well written. If I could give it six out of five stars without spinning out my OCD, I would.
A Midsummer Night's Dream - 5/5 - One of my favourites. All of the classic sitcom tropes owe their thanks to this one.
Twelfth Night - 5/5 - Pure comedy delivered perfectly. I don't remember having read this one before, and it's one I'll revisit often. Just fantastic! I hope to be in a performance of it someday. I think I'd make a good Malvolio.
The Tempest - 5/5 - One of my all-time top five Shakespeare plays. The story is fantastic and just so well written. If I could give it six out of five stars without spinning out my OCD, I would.
rachelmatsuoka's review against another edition
2.0
So the 2-star rating is really only for The Taming of the Shrew, which is the only play I hadn't read yet. I thought I couldn't dislike a Shakespeare comedy any less than All's Well That Ends Well, and I was wrong. Worst romance and terribly developed characters, however witty and at times clever. Kudos to whoever adapted 10 Things I Hate About You from this, they made the story 10x better.
readingthestars's review against another edition
4.0
The collection was well put together and was helpful in reading all of his big comedies. I do have to say that, by reading this, I discovered that I'm more of a fan of Shakespeare's tragedies. Of the four plays in this collection, I think I liked The Taming of the Shrew and A Midsummer's Night Dream the most, which surprised me because I didn't think I'd like The Taming of the Shrew.
crystalmbookshelf83's review against another edition
challenging
funny
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
More...