Hey everyone! Don't even bother paying ANY attention to the ...peter kline spouted in his horrendous review of The Spanish Tragedy. Shakespeare wrote Kyd's masterpiece? Give me a break! And I suppose you're also going to say that Shakespeare secretly wrote Marlowe's plays as well, right? Kudos to Mr. Richard for being a well-informed reader of the English Classics! And as for Mr. Kline, you should do some research ...

J.R. Mulryne's edition of *The Spanish Tragedy* is without a doubt the best that may at present be bought: informative, helpful, intelligent and accurate in introducing the text, presenting it, and glossing difficult words and phrases where necessary. The play is among the most exciting and artistic of its period. Kyd writes, and constructs his plot, with a level of skill comparable to that of Shakespeare, who was much influenced by *The Spanish Tragedy*, particularly in writing *Hamlet*, which is possibly yet "richer", but undoubtedly less clear and focused. Kyd shows us in an extremely sophisticated way the workings of revenge, both at an earthly and at a supernatural level. From the beginning the audience knows, in a way that the characters do not, that the supernatural world will insist on revenge. The pain of those who suffer injustice here on earth and clamour for revenge is painful to behold. Ultimately, however, in a baffling way, evildoers are punished: Hieronimo, the main character, manages to take matters into his own hands after exhausting all other possibilities, and thus ironically enacts the wishes of the higher powers. The FORM of Hieronimo's revenge is extraordinarily interesting: under the cloak of art - of a theatrical plot - he manages to kill his evil opponents quite easily. The tension between "art" and "life" is thus handled by Kyd in a very innovative fashion which still shocks modern spectators and readers. The role of language, too, is called into question: much of the play demonstrates that in real life finally action does speak louder than words, which often do not make their point or simply get ignored. Any reader who wants to get a notion of the superb quality of plays written by Shakespeare's contemporaries is certain to admire and enjoy this striking work of art. - Joost Daalder, Professor of English, Flinders University, South Australia

I reviewed this play a year ago; my purpose here is only to correct some of the astonishing misinformations given by Mr. Kline for fear that some students or others interested in Kyd might be misled.

First of all, there is no evidence that Shakespeare wrote a word of this. The play was ascribed to Kyd by Thomas Heywood in 1612, when Shakespeare was still living. The Spanish Tragedy is not mentioned in Francis Meres's list of Shakespeare's plays made in 1598; and at the very latest The Spanish Tragedy was in existence by 1592, when it was published, and performed as an old play by Henslowe. And how anyone who has read Shakespeare could possibly think the style of The Spanish Tragedy is his is beyond me; both Kyd and Shakespeare possess very distinctive styles, to neither's demerit.

The existence of the earlier version of Hamlet is not doubted. It is mentioned by Henslowe in 1594 as an old play, and alluded to by Thomas Nashe in 1589 and by Thomas Lodge in 1598 (I think). Nashe links the old Hamlet to Thomas Kyd. The fact that its text did not survive is not extraordinary; most plays in the Elizabethan period have been lost as well. The date of Shakespeare's Hamlet is almost universally accepted to be 1600 or 1601.

It is incredibly absurd to even suggest that Henry V may have been written at the same time as TST. Because of a reference to the Earl of Essex's expedition to Ireland, Henry V can be securely dated to the spring or summer of 1599. The Spanish Tragedy was at least 7 years old by then, and probably 12.

I agree that the Spanish Tragedy is worthy of frequent theatrical performance. Just don't pass it off under the mock-guise of Shakespeare.

Author is good at explaining visuals in Shakespeare and their connection to language.
Book contents have extensive reference notes and index, but no illustrations or diagrams.
Ch1: Visual Interpretation: Text and Context
Ch2: The Language of Costume and Hand Properties
Ch3: The Language of Gesture and Expression
Ch4: The Language of Theatrical Space
Ch5: The Language of Ceremony
Ch6: "Maimed Rites": Violated Ceremony in Hamlet
Ch7: Epilogue

John Lyly's satires are brilliant works of drama not frequently read by the lay public. The characters ring true and set in context Shakespeare's comedies that followed. Most academics study these plays as precursors of the great bard's, but they are vital, humorous dramas that are worthy of attention in their own right.

Christopher Marlowe is a genius. This thorough, Oxfordiancompilation of his best known plays contains Tamburlaine the Great parts one and two, the Tragical History of Doctor Faustus in its original A-text and its later B-text, The Jew of Malta, and Edward II. The beauty of these dramas lies in the fact that they're short but powerful reading pieces. In five acts Marlowe was able to generate a story complete with action, classical allusions, and a bawdy humor one might not expect from otherwise generally classified stuffy English Renaissance drama. This book contains an exhaustive introduction that explains many details of the publication dates of the plays and the differences between versions (Faustus). It also contains a thorough section for notes that further explain the texts. Finally, it contains a glossary of the commonly used words from the texts. The bottom line? This book is a great read--it's funny (I can't begin to stress that enough), and you will appreciate Marlowe's wit and talent just as much as William Shakespeare did. Buy it today!

This book contains the four "best" comedies of Shakespeare, along with an excellent foreword by Joseph Papp. For each play, it contains a very well written introduction (one that is not only on the play, but links each of them together), Shakespeare's original source material (example: "A Merry Jest of a Shrewd and Curst Wife Lapped in Morel's Skin" for "the Taming of the Shrew"), and well commented textual notes. I found this collection particularly useful for an "upper-level" look at these four plays.

This edition includes Pericles, a prince who solves a riddle given by a king and is pursued because he discovers a terrible secret; Cymbeline, a story about Rome battling England with the memorable heroine, Imogen, and her jealous husband Posthumous. Happy Ending, but Imogen deserves better; Winter's Tale tells the story of incredibly Jealous husband Leontes and his suffering wife/heroine Hermione. A fairy tale to be told on a Winter's Eve; Tempest, a story of an exiled Magician who lives on an island with a fairy, Ariel, his daughter, Miranda, and a beast called Caliban.

All these stories are entertaining fairy tales with romantic themes. Highly recommended.

this is THE finest collectin of medieval english drama. contains most of the cycle plays not available elsewhere, gives excellent overviews of criticism, and provides historical background and lots of excellent facsimilies of pages, maps on staging, etc.

The Complete Works of Shakespeare edited by David Bevington

Bevington's edition of Shakespeare's plays is a popular choice, and not without good reason. But that doesn't make an ideal choice. The introduction to this one volume edition is ample with chapters on life in Shakespeare's England, the drama before Shakespeare, Shakespeare's life and work. These are good, but they tend to rely on older scholarship and they may not be current. For example Bevington repeats Hinman's claim that there were 1200 copies of the 1623 Folio printed. However later scholars think the number was quite a bit lower, around 750. It should be said that we don't know for sure how many copies of the 1623 folio were printed and either number could be correct.

Bevington's edition prints the plays by genre. We get a section of Comedies, Histories, Tragedies, Romances and the Poems. He puts "Troilus and Cressida" with the comedies, though we know the play was slated to appear with the tragedies in the 1623 folio. The play was never meant to appear with the comedies, and all the surviving Folios that have the play have it at the beginning of the tragedies.

Let's get down to brass tacks. You are not going to buy an edition of Shakespeare's works because of good introduction. You're going to buy one because the quality of the editing of the plays. Is it reliable? Is it accurate? For the most part this edition is reliable and accurate, but that does not mean it is accurate and reliable in every instance.

Modernized editions of Shakespeare's plays and poems are norm. Since the 18th century (and even before) editors of Shakespeare have modernized and regularized Shakespeare's plays and poems. There are good reasons for this modernization. There is the reader's ease of use and the correcting misprints and mislination. I have no problem with this regularization of spelling or punctuation. But when an editor goes beyond normalizing and modernizing--when an editor interferes with the text then I have a problem.

Let me give two examples of the editorial interference that I am writing about:

King Lear 2-1-14 (p. 1184)
Bevington has:
Edmund
The Duke be here tonight? The better! Best!
This weaves itself perforce into my business.

The Folio has:
Bast. The Duke be here to night? The better best,
This weaues it selfe perforce into my businesse,

Even allowences made for modernization of punctuation and grammar would not account for Bevington's "The better! Best." Bevington glosses this to mean "so much the better; in fact the best that could happen." Nice try, but "The better best" of the folio is a double comparative, (which is a regular feature of Early Modern English) and not two separate adjectival phrases. Interestingly, the Quarto printing of Lear prints this scene in prose, and there is no punctuation between "better" and "best" in that version either.

A few lines down Lear 2-1-19 Edmund continues
Bevington has:
Brother, a word. Descend. Brother, I say!
Enter Edgar

But Bevington has reversed the order. The Folio has:
Enter Edgar.
Brother, a word, discend; Brother I say,

Bevington does not say why he changed the order, though to be fair other modern editors have done the same thing.

These two changes just a few lines apart go beyond regularization or modernization. They interfere with the text as presented in the 1623 Folio. And Bevington does not explain the changes. So next time you pick up this or any other modernized edition you should ask yourself "am I really sure what I'm reading is what Shakespeare wrote?"

THE COMPLETE WORKS OF SHAKESPEARE. Updated Fourth Edition. Edited by David Bevington. 2000 pp. New York : Longman, 1997. ISBN 0-321-01254-2 (hbk.)

As complete Shakespeares go, the Bevington would seem have everything. Its book-length Introduction covers Life in Shakespeare's England; The Drama Before Shakespeare; London Theaters and Dramatic Companies; Shakespeare's Life and Work; Shakespeare's Language : His Development as Poet and Dramatist; Edition and Editors of Shakespeare; Shakespeare Criticism.

The texts follow in groups : Comedies; Histories; Tragedies; Romances (including 'The Two Noble Kinsmen'); Poems. Each play is given a separate Introduction adequate to the needs of a beginner, and the excellent and helpful brief notes at the bottom of each page, besides explaining individual words and lines, provide stage directions to help readers visualize the plays.

One extremely useful feature of the layout is that instead of being given the usual style of line numbering - 10, 20, 30, etc. - numbers occur _only_ at the end of lines which have been given footnotes - e.g., 9, 12, 16, 18, 32. Why no-one seems to have thought of doing this before I don't know, but it's a wonderful innovation that does away entirely with the tedious and time-wasting hassle of line counting, and the equally time-wasting frustration of searching through footnotes only to find that no note exists. If the line has a note you will know at once, and the notes are easy for the eye to locate as the keywords preceeding notes are in bold type.

The book - which is rounded out with three Appendices, a Royal Genealogy of England, Maps, Bibliography, Suggestions for Reading and Research, Textual Notes, Glossary of common words, and Index - also includes a 16-page section of striking color photographs.

The book is excellently printed in a semi-bold font that is exceptionally sharp, clear, and easy to read despite the show-through of its thin paper. It is a large heavy volume of full quarto size, stitched so that it opens flat, and bound, not with cloth, but with a soft decorative paper which wears out quickly at the edges and corners.

If it had been printed on a slightly better paper and bound in cloth, the Bevington would have been perfect. As it is, it's a fine piece of book-making nevertheless, and has been edited in such a way as to make the reading of Shakespeare as hassle-free and enjoyable an experience as possible. Strongly recommended for students and the general reader.

Last year for Christmas I asked my parents for some William Shakespeare's plays.Boy was I suprised!Not only does it have all of the plays,but also his Sonats,poems,and illistrations.Despite the fact that it's a large valuem and will need quite a bit off book space from you're self.You wont regret getting it.You will never need to get another book on William Shakespeare's plays and everything else ever again.It also has a list of dictonary for understanding the words better.

Required to read Henry for my AP English Language class, I came into the play with a bias. I honestly felt that it would be a boring political play. I was utterly wrong! A huge fan of Shakespeare, I found Henry V to be a formidable match for the Bard's more critically acclaimed plays, such as Hamlet and Macbeth. Henry has it all! Shakespeare's attitude toward Henry the King is certainly one of admiration. By communicating the fact that an effective monarch must have a complete understanding of the common subjects (Pistol and Bardolph and Quickly), Shakespeare sets up Henry to be the ideal Christian king. The controlled language of Henry's speeches, particularly his response to the Dauphin's idiotic insult, also glorifies Henry. I certainly recommend this play to anyone, fan of Shakespeare or not.

I looked long and hard (and asked many a scholar) for the "perfect" Shakespeare publication that I might purchase to study "King Henry V" (for a experiential education requirement, I had undertaken the translation of Henry V into American Sign Language). The Arden Shakespeare came highly recommended by everyone, and has lived up entirely to all its rave reviews.

I will never buy Shakespeare from another publisher. While these books may be slightly more expensive than a "mass market" edition, I believe that if you are going to take the time to read and understand Shakespeare, it is well worth the extra dollar or two. The Introduction, the images, and plethora of footnotes are irreplaceable and nearly neccessary for a full understanding of the play (for those of us who are not scholars already). The photocopy of the original Quatro text in the appendix is also very interesting.

All in all, well worth it! I recommend that you buy ALL of Shakespeare's work from Arden's critical editions.

On D-Day British officers read Henry's famous words to their men as they approached the beach. When Churchill needed material for his famous "Few" speech, his thoughts turned to the pages of Henry V. From "once more into the breach" to "we happy few, we band of brothers" this play resonates with Shakespeare's paen to England's warrior king. Oh, you'll be a bit confused at the start if you haven't read Henry IV parts 1 and 2, but this is primarily the story of Henry V's victory at Agincourt. Whether the play glorifies war or just Henry you will have to decide. There is much food for thought here for the perceptive reader. But then Shakespeare is always provocative.

this is shakespeare's most accessible comedy. it's a farce about mistaken identities among identical twins. nothing complicated here. the play has it's funny moments. it's not the bard's best comedy; that's 'much ado about nothing', imho. but this is not a bad place to start.

"Methinks you are my glass, and not my brother."
So says Dromio of Ephesus, one of the members of two sets of estranged twins whose lives become comically intertwined in this delightful, ingenious, & aptly named Comedy of Errors. Being an avid Shakespeare fan and reader, I unequivocally consider The Comdey of Errors to be Shakespeare's finest and funniest comedy. Antipholus of Syracuse and his long lost twin Antipholus of Ephesus along with the two twin servants Dromio of Ephesus and Syracuse become unceasingly mistaken for each other making for a hilarious and entertaining farce of a play.

The Comedy of Errors has been copied many times since in literature, movies, & sitcoms, although it has never been duplicated.

There is no doubt that this comedy of Shakespeare's is delightful, crazy fun. You could call it the father (or mother) of all sit-coms. The play is suitable for middle school production and viewing, with some modifications. For my students and myself I prefer the Folger's edition of Shakespeare's plays for three reasons. First, the footnotes are easy to read and across from the text. 2. The choice of illustrations and 3. The introductory information. When purchasing for my students, though I have tried other publishers, I now always choose Folgers.