Scan barcode
A review by eb00kie
Tolstoy on Shakespeare: A Critical Essay on Shakespeare (Dodo Press) by George Bernard Shaw, Ernest Crosby, Leo Tolstoy
Did not finish book. Stopped at 9%.
The authorship recommends itself and the topic is nicely controversial, more so for the respective gravitas of those in question.
How shallow of me.
I plead an appetite for pleasant prose.
Tolstoy here is so intransigent, that this reads like a diary entry. I believe that educated people would be able to find both fault and value with Shakespeare, were they not outraged, as Tolstoy seems to be, from being banned in sharing the pleasure of his... equals.
Consequently, the eponymous essay, the first of the book, is uncompromising. The introduction is weak. The author's first arguments seldom stray from introspection and bewilderment at his differing feelings. He does not so much as attempt to introduce or explain the spectrum of reactions to Shakespeare and his position on it. He then goes on to prove his... perseverence in having attemted to read Shakespeare at many times in his life. There are a few choice words for this type of perseverence. If he still cared to bow to public pressure enough to test something that didn't appeal to him, he could have attempted a minimum of literary analysis, which is still conspicuously absent from this essay in general.
Furthermore, despite his claims to reveal Shakespeare as a below-average author, he decides to focus "King Lear", regardless of the change in style in the comedies, the poems or the sonnets. Nonetheless, he takes issue with the style of the language, which is fairly distinctive.
How shallow of me.
I plead an appetite for pleasant prose.
Tolstoy here is so intransigent, that this reads like a diary entry. I believe that educated people would be able to find both fault and value with Shakespeare, were they not outraged, as Tolstoy seems to be, from being banned in sharing the pleasure of his... equals.
Consequently, the eponymous essay, the first of the book, is uncompromising. The introduction is weak. The author's first arguments seldom stray from introspection and bewilderment at his differing feelings. He does not so much as attempt to introduce or explain the spectrum of reactions to Shakespeare and his position on it. He then goes on to prove his... perseverence in having attemted to read Shakespeare at many times in his life. There are a few choice words for this type of perseverence. If he still cared to bow to public pressure enough to test something that didn't appeal to him, he could have attempted a minimum of literary analysis, which is still conspicuously absent from this essay in general.
Furthermore, despite his claims to reveal Shakespeare as a below-average author, he decides to focus "King Lear", regardless of the change in style in the comedies, the poems or the sonnets. Nonetheless, he takes issue with the style of the language, which is fairly distinctive.