Hamlet: William Shakespeare

I've been DYING to read this play and I finally got to sit down and enjoy it. (Actually...that's a funny story. It was while I was still in school, enrolled in my Shakespeare course. We were assigned to read Macbeth, but--silly me!--somehow figured that I should read Hamlet instead... I must have gotten the messages crossed in my brain, thinking "Well...they both start with the main, angsty character's name, so why not switch one for the other?" *sigh* Anyway, about two acts into it, I realized what I was doing and had to get Macbeth instead. So, no harm done, but I couldn't wait to get to work and read Hamlet for real.)

It took me a bit, but I did read Hamlet and enjoyed it a lot. It wasn't the most riveting of Shakespeare's works that I've read, but I liked it nonetheless. Truly, I believe that Hamlet is a lot more complex than many people give him credit for. I don't actually think he was crazy at all--merely making everyone think he was so he could better get his revenge. Several lines (which I sadly do not have in front of me at this moment) made me believe this. See if you can pick them out!

This is also a really perfect book to read using Queer Theory (I highly recommend looking this up. It's SO interesting!).

Overall, the plot was fantastic and twisted. It was awesome to finally read the lines I've heard in pop culture for all of my life. Now, I can much better appreciate them.

While I was reading this play, a new version of Hamlet performed by the Royal Shakespearean Company came out. (Doctor Who fans, prepare to scream!) David Tennant plays Hamlet! I was thrilled to see him in this hardcore production. In fact, he puts many of the other actors to shame. It was really impressive to see. So, I very much so recommend watching this version! Hope you all enjoy the play as much as I did!

The Other Boleyn Girl (Tudor Court, Book Two): Philippa Gregory *UPDATED*

"Two sisters competing for the greatest prize: the love of a king.

"A rich and compelling novel of love, sex, ambition, and intrigue, THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL introduces a woman of extraordinary determination and desire who lived at the heart of the most exciting and glamorous court in Europe and survived by following her heart.

"When Mary Boleyn comes to court as an innocent girl of fourteen, she catches the eye of Henry VIII. Dazzled, Mary falls in love with both her golden prince and her glowing role as unofficial queen. However, she soon realizes just how much she in a pawn in her family's ambitious plots as the king's interest begins to wane and she is forced to step aside for her best friend and rival: her sister, Anne. Then Mary knows that she must defy her family and her king and take her fate into her own hands."

I saw the film version of this book when it first came out a couple of years ago. I really liked it and, now that I've read the book, I would love to see it again and make comparisons. Obviously--because the book is SO long--they had to cut out a lot of the story out. I'll have to re-watch it to say for certain whether or not this was a plus or a minus.

Overall, the book was very good. LONG, but good. It's not that I got tired of reading it, but there was sort of the feeling of "too much of a good thing all at once"...you almost had enough. "Almost" being the key word here. I really liked how it was written from Mary's point of view. It made the book a lot more personal rather than just reading an omnipotent account of the goings on. This made it a lot more readable and approachable. The contrast between the two Boleyn girls was very nicely written and I found that I really enjoyed their brother, George. I didn't want to like Henry VIII in the beginning, but I did...then he screwed everything up...but that's something you'll have to read for yourself. However, William was another character that I really enjoyed. He was true to historical accounts that I've read and I liked reading about his relationship with the other Boleyn girl.

However well-written this book was with its BEAUTIFUL descriptions and dialogue, there were problems with many of the historical aspects. For one, I've read many accounts that Mary was actually the older Boleyn girl and Anne was the younger one. Many of the other key points were hit, but a lot of the dates were off. The way the years and seasons were used in the book flowed very nicely, but it did not always stay true to real life. Having read several books on this era, this bothered me a little, but it won't upset those looking for a good read.

I enjoyed this book very much. I recommend it to anyone looking for a good summer read. This is a great novel to kick back, relax, and lie in the sun with! (And I look forward to watching the movie once more!)

UPDATED REVIEW - 2/11/2017

This review was originally posted on 5/23/2010!  I cannot believe it's been nearly seven years since I originally reviewed this book!  My how time flies...  It's so strange to look back on this review and see what a different place I was in back then (and how different my reviewing/writing style was back then).  I think I was just about to graduate with my Associate's Degree in English (or just had) and here I am a little more than 6 months away from graduating with my Master's in English!

Anyway, I did something that I NEVER DO (as I'm sure you know from previous reviews):  I reread this book...  This was sparked by my reading of The Constant Princess (the first in this series) and The Boleyn Inheritance (the third in the series).  I've also been taking a lot of classes concerned with the history and/or literature of the Tudor era, so it's only logical that this would rekindle my interest in Gregory's writing.  I enjoyed this book very much the second time around - perhaps because I'm now a more advanced reader, or because I was able to catch a few things I had not noticed the first time around, maybe a little bit of both?  The characters were rich, the writing was interesting and fluid, the story was captivating.  Anne is an excellent antagonist in this story.  Mary's relationship with her was remarkably complex - a very fascinating blend of love and hate.  Gregory certainly knows how to spin a very interesting tale.  Having said this (and leaping off of my review for The Constant Princess), it is as if there are two different authors who penned this book and the first in the series.  There were very clear points of view in The Other Boleyn Girl whereas The Constant Princess dragged on a bit and it was often difficult to tell whether someone was thinking something or saying it.  This book is leaps and bounds better than the first in the series and I commend Gregory for her growth as an author.  If you can make it through the first book in the series, then you'll be golden because all of the other ones I've read from this series are on-par with The Other Boleyn Girl.  I hope you enjoy it as much as I do (and I still recommend the movie version).

My Sister's Keeper: Jodi Picoult

"Can a parent love too much? Or is too much never enough?
"Anna is not sick, but she might as well be. By age thirteen, she has undergone countless surgeries, transfusions, and shots so that her older sister, Kate, can somehow fight the leukemia that has plagued her since childhood. The product of preimplantation genetic diagnosis, Anna was conceived as a bone marrow match for Kate--a life and a role that she has never challenged...until now. Like most teenagers, she has always been defined in terms of her sister--and so Anna makes a decision that for most would be unthinkable, a decision that will tear her family apart and have perhaps fatal consequences for the sister she loves. A provocative novel that raises some important ethical issues, My Sister's Keeper is the story of one family's struggle for survival at all human costs and a stunning moral parable for all time."

This was another of the books my friend and I decided to read for our little "book club". To be completely...entirely honest...I didn't really want to read this book. I KNEW it was a tearjerker and I didn't relish the thought of crying every other chapter in a book that's so long. I've shelved it at least 100 times over the years at my job (granted, it was in Chinese, but whatever), but I've never felt enough desire to pick it up on my own.

When the movie came out, my interest was rekindled. Maybe there was something to this SAD story. I still haven't seen the movie, but I still plan on trying to though it got bad reviews. I'm very interested to see how characters like Campbell and Jesse are portrayed. I hope they're as interesting as they were in the book because, if they're not, I can understand why the movie tanked.

Though this book is made up of a bunch of snippets of different perspectives (Anna, Campbell, Sara, Brian, Jesse, and Julia), I didn't lose interest as I thought I would. The change of time periods and perspectives made me care for the characters that much more. I felt like I understood them all the better. I actually hated Sara--the mother--for a good part of the book, but the line between hate and respect blurred slightly toward the end. Brian was a wonderfully written character. As was Jesse. Picoult seems to be able to write her male characters as well as her female characters without losing any of their realism. I can appreaciate that.

Campbell was another of my favorite characters. I loved his role and his personality. He tries to be this hardass, but you know he's really not. (After reading this book, I think I was really turned off when I found out that Alec Baldwin played Campell in the movie. He was not at all who I pictured...I saw more of an almost modelesque, blonde, slightly-rough-around-the edges hamptons-gone city style man. When I come up with an actual name, I'll put it here. So, you can see why I was a little bit disappointed in the casting. Especially since he's only 32 in the book. I will save all further judgment for AFTER I see the film.) Anyway, like I said, I loved how complex Campbell was. He really added to the story.

Anna was another one that I really liked. Though most of this book is about her, I think a lot of it all went back to Kate--which I think was a bit of a point Picoult was trying to make. Anna was no one without Kate. Kate defined her ENTIRE existence. Literally. I don't want to say too much because there is a LOT more to this book than what you get from reading this back cover. I know it made me think.

As a child, I was very ill. I didn't have cancer like Kate, but I had serious heart issues that led to several major operations. I'm better now for the most part, but I don't think my younger brother has ever quite gotten over the strain all of that put on our family and I think he might resent me for it. So, after reading this book, I can see a mixture of Anna and Jesse in him. It make me feel bad, but, at the same time, the situation was NOT the same. He can resent me all he wants, but I have to keep reminding myself that he doesn't know. He wasn't me. Like Kate, our families may revolve around us; lives may halt when we're sick; but we never wanted to be the center of attention. Sometimes, we just want it all to go away.

Lyon's Gift (MacKinnon Sisters, Book Two): Tanya Anne Crosby

"LYON'S PRIDE
"Piers de Montgomerie, known as "Lyon" for his fierceness in combat, accepts the challenge of the Scottish king, agreeing to quell a troublesome highland feud and to accept the disputed lands as payment. But his battle skills are no match for the flashing eyes and barbed tongue of "Mad" Meghan Brodie--the spirited wench he now holds hostage, who fires his blood with her heart-stirring beauty.
"LYON'S GIFT
"Distrustful of men and feigning madness, in truth Meghan is cunning as a fox--and far too loyal to her clan to be swayed by her arrogant captor's honeyed words and virile charms. She will make the Lyon pay dearly for the "gift" he has so brazenly stolen--even as her own traitorous heart begs her to surrender gladly to the one great love that can heal an injured land."

I was SO thrilled to pick up this book! I remember loving the first book in this series and couldn't wait to see what Crosby had in store for me this time.

Most authors who write series only briefly mention characters from earlier books. A lot of the time, there's little to no interaction. I've only found a few authors who take those extra few steps. What impressed me with Crosby was the fact that her whole setting was intertwined and there was more than one character from the first book that made an appearance. Though it's been nearly a year since I read the first book, I remember the characters so vividly that I can really appreciate all of the intermingling.

Again, I loved the dialogue. The Scottish brogues were awesome. It really submerges you in the work. I can really admire an author who's capable of doing such a thing.

Though this book wasn't nearly as dramatic as most of the other books I've read, it wasn't a bad thing. It actually might have made it more believable than others.

I love Crosby's works and I can't wait to get my hands on the next in this series!

Taming of the Shrew: William Shakespeare

I was so excited to read this play! I knew a little bit about the storyline and it made me all the more thrilled that we were going to read it in class.

Kate was awesome! She reminded me of a slightly more intense version of Beatrice from MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING (so, if you like strong female roles, check out that comedy as well). Patruccio was such a macho-man, full-of-himself type of guy that you really WANTED not to like him...however, despite that, I DID end up enjoying him! He was annoyingly charming and smart. Though he only wanted Kate because of her money, I like to think that he felt a little something toward her by the end of the play. The same goes for Kate. I believe that--much like myself--she ended up liking Patruccio in spite of what she wanted herself to feel. Part of this is probably from the fact that it's difficult to be in such a situation as they were in and not have some sort of shift in emotions.

Though a lot of people criticize Kate in the end for giving up on herself, I think it's not as bad as they make it. I don't much care for her language in her final speech, but it's a turning point for her character that I can understand--especially when one takes into account the period in which it was written.

We ran out of time for the year in my Shakespeare class, so we didn't get to watch any of the movies that were made from this play (no...I haven't seen 10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU...I've seen bits and parts, but I want to be able to sit down and watch the whole thing to give it justice). I highly recommend this brilliant work by Shakespeare! It was an awesome, entertaining read if you take the time to learn all of the characters and appreciate their personalities.

King Lear: William Shakespeare

I read this play back in my senior year of high school, so I was a little disappointed to see that we were reading it again in my Shakespeare class in sophomore year of college. I understand that our teacher was trying to give us as broad a look at his works as possible, but I know that LEAR is actually one of the more commonly-read works in senior year lit classes in this area.

I wasn't interested in reading this play again because it is just so sad! It was bad enough getting all depressed in high school, but I didn't want to do it all over again. Not to say that this play is bad--which it most certainly is not--but it was just something that I was not motivated to read once more.

When I did force myself to read it, however, I did see it slightly differently. Reading it with a little more maturity beneath my belt seemed to help. I was able to pick things out that I hadn't the first time and I think I appreciated it more. The language was easier to understand as well.

So, I recommend to everyone who's reluctant to read something once again later in their lives; at least give it a chance. I'm pleasantly surprised from my experience.

Macbeth: William Shakespeare

I've been dying to read this Shakespearean work and was so excited when I saw it on the syllabus for my Shakespeare class. I knew a little bit about it--thoughm bit really more than pop culture has main-streamed--and I was looking forward to learning more.

This play really dragged me in right from the beginning with the three witches. The TRUE supernatural wasn't something that I'd read much of in the other Shakespearean works I've read (well, other than THE TEMPEST). It was fascinating and attention-grabbing. Lady Macbeth was one of the most ruthless, cold-hearted female leads and I enjoyed watching her twisted mind work. However, I could actaully see the real love that she and Macbeth had for one another. Though ambition overtakes both of them, they don't seem to lose that caring. A running theme of this play is the proving of manhood. Though Lady Macbeth consistently criticizes her husband's "lackthereof", I still don't think that she stops loving him. This whole idea is something that I think it worth keeping an eye on throughout this play.

If you have a good copy of this play which details why Shakespeare added certain aspects and mentioned certain occurences that were going on during the period in which this was written; this will really add to your enjoyment of this work. If you don't have this, I highly suggest going out and putting effort into getting it--it's worth it.

Overall, I really liked this play. It was interesting and enjoyable, though tragic. In class, we watched part of one modern Australian version with AVATAR star Sam Worthington. Not a lot of people liked his acting (they already didn't care for him in AVATAR, which I actually disagree on), but I did. I thought, for what it was, it was a good version of Macbeth.

Richard III: William Shakespeare

This is another of the plays that we read in my Shakespeare class. This one was interesting. I liked it, but it wasn't one of my favorites. I understood what was going on and who all of the characters were because I've read up on my English history while at work. However, everyone else in my class had difficulty handling the repetitive names and all of the complicated relationships. I had written out a relationship map before class and, since I knew what I was talking about, my classmates had be go up to the front to draw it out and explain it to them. So--for those of you who don't know the background (which is really needed to appreciate this work--here it is.

This play takes place after the War of the Roses between the Houses of Lancaster and York (in case you don't know, this was right before King Henry VIII's time). York defeated Lancaster for the crown.

The king that was overthrown was KING HENRY VI. Only his ghost appears in this play. His wife was QUEEN MARGARET. They had a son who was slain by Richard. His name was PRINCE EDWARD (his ghost appears as well). He left behind his wife, LADY ANNE. Now, King Henry had a favorite man, named HENRY EARL OF RICHMOND (simply called RICHMOND) and this is the man who later becomes KING HENRY VII (actually the father of King Henry VIII, but that's another story). His father-in-law is LORD STANLEY, Earl of Derby. Stanley's friend is William, LORD HASTINGS, Lord Chamberlain. Richmond's followers include the EARL OF OXFORD, SIR JAMES BLUNT, and SIR WALTER HERBERT.

The Lancaster king that took over was KING EDWARD IV. His wife was QUEEN ELIZABETH (who had been previously married. He title used to be Lady Gray, and Richard sometimes calls her this as a low blow. She had two sons from her previous marriage, MARQUIS OF DORSET and LORD GRAY.Also, Elizabeth's brother is Anthony Woodeville, EARL RIVERS.) These two rulers had three children. Their eldest was a girl named ELIZABETH. The thing is, this girl doesn't talk throughout the play. They also had two sons, commonly called THE PRINCES, but their names were PRINCE EDWARD (the oldest) and Richard, the young DUKE OF YORK (Now can you see where all of the name confusion begins?)

Edward had two younger brothers. George, DUKE OF CLARENCE and Richard, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER (who later becomes KING RICHARD III). *Something I think you need to know is how to pronounces "Gloucester". If you watch any BBC show or something along those lines, then you know that this is actually pronounced "Glosster". Now you know! Please, do me a favor, and remember this when you read it! Thanks!* Clarence also has a SON and a DAUGHTER who make a minor appearance. The mother of King Edward, Clarence, and Glocester is the DUCHESS OF YORK.

Richard Glocester, the play's antagonist, has a group of cronies. Their names are DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM, DUKE OF NORFOLK, SIR RICHARD RATCLIFFE, SIR WILLIAM CATESBY, SIR JAMES TYRRELL, and two MURDERERS.

Other characters include SIR THOMAS VAUGHAN, A PAGE, CARDINAL, BISHOP OR ELY, John--a PRIEST, SIR CHRISTOPHER--another Priest, SIR ROBERT BRACKENBURY--Lieutenant of the Tower of London, LORD MAYOR OF LONDON, A SCHRIVNER, HASTINGS (a PUSVUIVANT, not to be confused with LORD Hastings), SHERIFF, Aldermen and Citizens, Attendants, two Bishops, messengers, and soldiers. These, I think you'll pretty much be able to figure out on your own.

So, there you have it! All of the complicated relationships that make up this Shakespearean work. I liked the play. It was a little depressing, but that's what a tragedy should be. I believe knowing the history behind this play really made it all that much more interesting. I highly recommend brushing up on your history before reading this.

In class, we watched the movie version of this play starring Ian McKellen. A lot of my classmates didn't care for some of the directing choices, but I thought it was really well-done. I recommend watching it, though. Besides, a very young Robert Downey, Jr. is in it as Lord Rivers. :) I hope you get a chance to experience this interesting work by Shakespeare!

Much Ado About Nothing: William Shakespeare

This play by the Bard, himself, has to be one of my favorites. I read this for my Shakespeare class and LOVED it. Beatrice with her whip-like tongue and Benedick with his sarcasm and biting attitude had to be my FAVORITE pairing by this famed playwright. One does, however, have to keep the time period in mind when reading this; as it makes ALL of the difference in appreciating the personalities and situations. I laughed aloud too many times to count. Dogberry deserves particular attention in order to see all of his aspects. Shakespeare put particular thought into him and he needs to be seen as such. As usual, the language was amazing. The imagery was beautiful. And the characters were awesome. I loved this work by Shakespeare and I recommend this one as a MUST READ.

Also, we watched the version by Kenneth Branagh in class and it TOTALLY made the play come to life. The directing was fantastic and the acting was outstanding (except for Kieanu Reeves...though that's another story entirely...). There were plenty of other bigger names in there that make it interesting even for those who are not Shakespeare-savvy. I absolutely loved this film adaptation and would gladly watch it over and over again!