Scan barcode
yak_attak's review against another edition
2.5
A fair but dull play, fairly ignorable were it not for the question of its dubious authorship. We see various scenes from the life of a King Edward, his affair with the countess, his conquests in France - none of the characters are particularly great (maaaaaybe Prince Edward), and few of the scenes memorable. Nothing terrible, but not really worth even my completionism.
As a note, this edition has a hell of a lot of notes and appendix pertaining to the 'did Shakespeare write this' question - much of which I assume is quite well researched and written, but I did not read it, so I leave that up to you.
As a note, this edition has a hell of a lot of notes and appendix pertaining to the 'did Shakespeare write this' question - much of which I assume is quite well researched and written, but I did not read it, so I leave that up to you.
jazrphillips's review against another edition
adventurous
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
A niche gem. However, I do think it's funny that Shakespeare used the exact same plot twist at least 4 times and still expected the audience to be surprised by it
cs4_0reads's review against another edition
informative
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
leesmyth's review against another edition
4.0
I was very pleasantly surprised by this one, given its uncertain canonical status. (Apparently, Shakespeare is now thought to have written some sections of it.)
It's a bit of proto-Henry V in many of its plot elements, and also has both some misunderstood prophecies and several points where masts or spears of an army are momentarily taken for trees (lending a sort of proto-Macbeth feel).
One recurring theme is oath-keeping, often in the face of a royal command ordering and purporting to 'absolve' the oath-breaking in advance.
* We first see this in King Edward's attempt on the virtue of the Countess of Salisbury. She declines to break their respective marriage oaths, and eventually shames Edward into renouncing the project entirely. (But not before Edward has tricked her father into promising to try persuade her to say yes. Her father is horrified, of course, but honors his promise nonetheless in a wonderful dialogue.)
* We also see this in the French prisoner Villiers, who is released strictly on his promise to secure a safe-conduct for his captors from the Dauphin, and to return to his erstwhile captors if he is unsuccessful. Quite understandably, the Dauphin thinks this is crazy and that Villiers has no obligation to keep that promise. (Cf JRRT's escape of the prisoner vs flight of the deserter argument.) But Villiers sticks to his guns, and the Dauphin relents and provides the passport specifically so Villiers won't return empty-handed to his erstwhile captors and voluntarily re-enter captivity.
* And then the King of France tries to order the Dauphin to break his promise of safe-conduct, on the theory that it was ultra vires and countermanded. Here, too, the King ultimately relents and allows the Dauphin to honor his promise.
It's a bit of proto-Henry V in many of its plot elements, and also has both some misunderstood prophecies and several points where masts or spears of an army are momentarily taken for trees (lending a sort of proto-Macbeth feel).
One recurring theme is oath-keeping, often in the face of a royal command ordering and purporting to 'absolve' the oath-breaking in advance.
* We first see this in King Edward's attempt on the virtue of the Countess of Salisbury. She declines to break their respective marriage oaths, and eventually shames Edward into renouncing the project entirely. (But not before Edward has tricked her father into promising to try persuade her to say yes. Her father is horrified, of course, but honors his promise nonetheless in a wonderful dialogue.)
* We also see this in the French prisoner Villiers, who is released strictly on his promise to secure a safe-conduct for his captors from the Dauphin, and to return to his erstwhile captors if he is unsuccessful. Quite understandably, the Dauphin thinks this is crazy and that Villiers has no obligation to keep that promise. (Cf JRRT's escape of the prisoner vs flight of the deserter argument.) But Villiers sticks to his guns, and the Dauphin relents and provides the passport specifically so Villiers won't return empty-handed to his erstwhile captors and voluntarily re-enter captivity.
* And then the King of France tries to order the Dauphin to break his promise of safe-conduct, on the theory that it was ultra vires and countermanded. Here, too, the King ultimately relents and allows the Dauphin to honor his promise.
reads_eats_explores's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
jakestillwell's review against another edition
3.0
Uneven, disappointing, and maybe not even entirely Shakespeare--it's more shoddy curio than Shakespearean classic.
jbmorgan86's review against another edition
2.0
Shakespeare in a Year, Play #11 of . . . 40? When the year-long reading plan that I have for the Complete Works of William Shakespeare (https://s3.amazonaws.com/first-things-resources/uploads/resource_5a37e8817a8e6.pdf) dictated that I read Edward III next, I opened my trusty clearance shelf copy of the complete works only to find that Edward III was missing! In fact, several of the plays on the list were missing (Edward III, Sir Thomas Moore, and The Two Noble Kinsmen). What gives?! A quick Google search revealed that the reason several of these are missing is because they are considered Shakespeare's apocrypha. Therefore, these plays are not typically included in "complete works" collections.
That being said, it seems that the scholarly consensus is that though Shakespeare did not write all of Edward III he at least did have a hand in Edward III. My completely un-scholarly take on it is that either Shakespeare didn't write this or even the bard can write some real stinkers.
There isn't much that happens in this story. Edward III declares himself the king of England and France (the beginning of the Hundred Years War), saves the Duchess of Salisbury from rebellious Scots, tries to woo her away from her husband, and then goes to the battlefield in France (the beginning of the Hundred Years War). Several soliloquies about mortality follow as Edward "the Black Prince" faces certain death but valiantly hacks his way through the French. Aaaaand . . . that's about it.
Significant quote(s):
"If we then hunt for death, why do we fear it?
If we fear it, why do we follow it?
If we do fear, how can we shun it?
If we do fear, with fear we do but aid
The thing we fear, to seize on us the sooner.
If we fear not, then no resolved proffer
Can overthrow the limit of our fate,
For, whether ripe or rotten, drop we shall,
As we do draw the lottery of our doom."
That being said, it seems that the scholarly consensus is that though Shakespeare did not write all of Edward III he at least did have a hand in Edward III. My completely un-scholarly take on it is that either Shakespeare didn't write this or even the bard can write some real stinkers.
There isn't much that happens in this story. Edward III declares himself the king of England and France (the beginning of the Hundred Years War), saves the Duchess of Salisbury from rebellious Scots, tries to woo her away from her husband, and then goes to the battlefield in France (the beginning of the Hundred Years War). Several soliloquies about mortality follow as Edward "the Black Prince" faces certain death but valiantly hacks his way through the French. Aaaaand . . . that's about it.
Significant quote(s):
"If we then hunt for death, why do we fear it?
If we fear it, why do we follow it?
If we do fear, how can we shun it?
If we do fear, with fear we do but aid
The thing we fear, to seize on us the sooner.
If we fear not, then no resolved proffer
Can overthrow the limit of our fate,
For, whether ripe or rotten, drop we shall,
As we do draw the lottery of our doom."
charlottesometimes's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0