A very good book to read. Not too much information on the author but the story itself is a very good science fiction story. I would recommend this story to people who like science fiction.

"The December Rose" is a thrilling tale set in the streets of London in the past, comprising espionage, treachery and brutal murder. Barnacle(a master sweep's boy), is suddenly thrust into a terrifying mystery, with many after his life and a golden locket in his possession. Barnacle meets Mister Gosling and others who give him protection and and a sense of belonging and his life on the run is changed temporarily. Barnacle's life is threatened by the presence of Inspector Creaker and the men under his charge. There are many twists and turns in this tale and there is an unexpected twist in the story right at the end. I really found this book to be extremely interesting and it became increasingly hard to put down as the plot and the storyline developed. I especially enjoyed the ending which I thought made this book very complete. I strongly recommend this book to anyone who wants a great adventure...

I am person who looks into different things like this book

. . . to really achieve its full potential, this play needs to be acted out on stage. Still, highly excellent, involving twins, cross-dressing, love tangles, sword-fighting, secret marriages, music, disguises, mistaken identities, high speech, and lowbrow humour.

The entire play takes place in Illyria. In the main plot, Orsino is in love with Olivia, who unfortunately does not return his feelings. Viola is shipwrecked on the Illyrian coast, and dressed as a boy, comes to serve in Orsino's court, where she of course falls in love with Orsino. Meanwhile, in Olivia's court, some of her courtiers plan a cruel--but funny--practical joke against her pompous steward Malvolio. There is also a third plot later on involving Viola's twin brother Sebastian, who has been shipwrecked likewise. Naturally things get quite confusing, but, true to Shakespeare's comedic style, everything gets worked out in the end.

This is an enjoyable book to read, and the notes are very helpful. However, it is still better as a performance.

"Twelfth Night" is one of the famous romantic comedy written by William Shakespeare. Many critics said, "Twelfth Night" is the masterpiece among his comedy because his fully developed style and insight are in the "Twelfth Night", so it has special value and attractiveness.
There are four main characters in "Twelfth Night" ; Duke Orsino, Olivia, Viola, and
Sebastian. Duke Orsino who lives in Illyria loves Olivia, so every day he send one of
his servant to Olivia's house for proposal of marriage. However, every time Olivia
refuses his proposal for the reason that she lost her brother before long, so she is now
in big sorrow and can not love anyone. One day, Viola comes into Illyria. She and her
twin brother Sebastian are separated in a shipwreck and they are rescued by two
different people in two different place, so they think the other one is dead each other.
Viola disguise as a man and become a servant of Duke Orsino, and then she fall in
love with Duke Orsino. But, Duke Orsino loves Olivia and he send Viola whose new
name as a man is "Cesario" to Olivia for proposal. Unexpectedly, Olivia fall in love with
Cesario!! Therefore, love triangle is formed. In the latter scene, Sebastian also come into
Illyria, so the confusion getting worse. However, in the end, all misunderstandings are
solved and Cesario become Viola, so the four main characters find their love.
There are also four supporting characters in "Twelfth Night" ; Clown, Sir Toby Belch,
Malvolio, and Sir Andrew Aguecheek. They make the readers laugh through their funny
behaviors and comments in subplot.
"Twelfth Night" is very funny story and enjoyable book, so I recommend you.

I didn't read this particular version of Twelfth Night, so I'm rating the plot, not the editing. This book was the first play by Shakespeare that I read, and I loved it! It starts when Viola and her brother, Sebastian, are seperated in a shipwreck. Viola decides to disguise herself as a boy and work for Orsino, the duke. Orsino sends Viola to tell Olivia that he loves her. Viola does what he says, but she wishes she didn't have to, because she has fallen in love with Orsino! Then Olivia falls in love with Viola, thinking that she is a boy. While all this is going on, Andrew Aguecheek is wooing Olivia, who scorns him. Also, Maria, the maid, Sir Toby Belch, Olivia's uncle, and another servant write a letter and put it where Malvolio, a servant, will see it. The letter says that Olivia is in love with Malvolio. Malvolio immediately starts trying to woo Olivia. Maria and Sir Toby pretend to think that he's mad, and lock him up. Meanwhile, Sebastian comes to town with Antonio, the man who saved him from the shipwreck. Antonio gives him his purse and says that he must stay away from the city because he fought against the duke in a war. A few minutes later, Antonio realizes that he needs money for lodgings and goes to find Sebastian. In the city, Viola is being forced to fight Andrew Aguecheek for the right to marry Olivia. Antonio sees the fight and hurries to intervene. Orsino recognizes him and has him arrested. Antonio asks Viola for his purse so that he can pay bail, thinking that she is Sebastian. Viola denies having had a purse. Then Sebastian comes up. Olivia had found him and married him on the spot, and he, deliriously happy, had gone away to give Antonio his purse. On the way, he met Sir Toby and Andrew Aguecheek. When they try to force him to fight, he punches them and goes on. They come up too, bitterly accusing Viola. (No one has seen Sebastian yet.) Then Olivia comes up and speaks to Viola, who denies being her wife. Orsino becomes angry with her, thinking that she has married Olivia, and accuses her of treachery. Just as things are looking bad for Viola, Sebastian reveals himself. Then everyone is happy (since Orsino falls in love with Viola on the spot) except Andrew Aguecheek and Malvolio, who is later set free. The plot of this book is a little hard to understand, but it is halariously funny and makes for happy reading.

The temptation to finish the tale seems irresistible. In the beginning, everything seems to lead toward a predictable solution - but then the plot thickens. After some digressions that shrewdly delay the action and raise the level of suspense, and after some florid editorializing (e.g.,on professional philanthropy, on female intuition vs. male obtuseness, etc.) Dickens introduces some new characters, and the mystery deepens: Who is Datchery? Is he one of the previous players in disguise, or a Sherlock Holmes-like figure? Who is Tartar? What is Bazzard up to? What does the opium dealer know or suspect? Who is the "fellow traveller"? Did Jasper murder (or try and fail to murder) Drood - or did he commit the deed only in an opium dream?
My own hunch is that Drood is not dead. There is no body - at least not yet; and it would seem so much more like Dickens to have a man given up for dead re-emerge triumphantly after many trials and tribulations, and after much dissimulating on the part of characters "in the know" (cf."Our Mutual Friend"). But since we don't know what Dickens planned, we are free to spin our own yarn and weave our own tapestry. Isn't that a lot more fun?

It is so strange to see a long, well-plotted novel suddenly come to a dead stop. (Of a projected twelve episodes, Dickens wrote six before his death.) The title character is either murdered or missing, and a large cast of characters in London and Cloisterham (Dickens's Rochester) are involved in their own way in discovering what happened to Edwin Drood.

There is first of all John Jasper, an opium addict who suspiciously loves Drood's ex-fiancee; there is a nameless old woman who dealt him the opium who is trying to nail Jasper; there is a suspicious pile of quicklime Jasper notices during a late night stroll through the cathedral precincts; there is Durdles who knows all the secrets of the Cathedral of Cloisterham's underground burial chambers; there is the "deputy," a boy in the pay of several characters who has seen all the comings and goings; there are the Anglo-Indian Landless twins, one of whom developed a suspicious loathing for Drood; there is the lovely Rosebud, unwilling target of every man's affections; and we haven't even begun talking about Canon Crisparkle, Datchery, Tartar, and a host of other characters. All we know is that the game is afoot, but we'll never know the outcome.

It would have been nice to know how Dickens tied together all these threads, but we can still enjoy THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD because -- wherever Dickens was heading with it -- it is very evidently the equal of his best works. Life is fleeting, and not all masterpieces are finished.

It is a tribute to Charles Dickens' reputation that to this day this unfinished novel, a mystery no less, still garners such speculation as to who allegedly murdered Edwin Drood. There are organizations created for the sole purpose of analyzing the novel and to theorizing whom the culprit may have been, if indeed there really was a culprit. After all, only Drood's watch and his shirt pin are produced, not his body.

As in all of Dickens' novels, the characterizations are the thing. You have the innocent young woman with the somewhat eccentric guardian and his Bob Cratchitlike assistant. There is the dark, possibly unfairly accused, but hot headed antagonist of Drood. Then there is Drood's brooding choirmaster uncle, John Jasper, who frequents opium dens, and who may or may not have ulterior motives in his seeking revenge. Durdles, the stone mason, and a somewhat weird character, provides some chilling comic relief in cemetery scenes with his stone throwing assistant. There are also the typical Dickensian characters, which includes a snooty older woman, a class conscious, spinsterish school mistress, and in a hilarious restaurant scene, an unappreciated, hard working "flying waiter" and a lazy, wise acre "stationary waiter."

It is a shame that Dickens died before he could complete "Edwin Drood." What is here are the beginnings of an exploration of man's dual nature, a journey into "the heart of darkness" so to speak.

This story is about a 12-year-old pickpocket known as Smith. One day he picks the pocket of a gentleman, and only a few minutes later he witnesses the murder of the old man. What he has picked is wanted by the employer of the murderers... Smith gets into all kinds of trouble...
The story has a little humour... well, it made me smile anyway... and some very detailed paragraphs, and language used by the characters were realistic, not perfect like in some stories, as realistic as the way we really talk. Even though the story is old, published in the 1960s, this was a good book and got me hooked...

This book is a fantastic book full of murder, chase scenes a some humor. This book about Smith a pickpocket puts you right with him, watching him pickpocketing or being creamed in the face. Simply marvelous book one of the better oones I have read in a long time. You can't go wrong with this book.

This story is about a 12 year old pickpocket living in the middle of London. He is a well accomplished pickpocket - it is his only way to survive the rigours of life. Then one day he empties the pockets of a gentleman and finds himself caught up in a all sorts of trouble. He witnesses murder, betrayal and lots more of the London underworld. This book is extremely well written and portrays vivid images of the London underworld. A great read

'As you like it' is one of those Shakespearean plays that is considered 'great' by critics, but never really found true popular acclaim, perhaps due to the absence of charismatic characters (the romantic hero is particularly wet) or compelling dilemmas.

It shares many features with the great comedies - the notion of the forest as a magic or transformative space away from tyrannical society ('A Midsummer night's dream'); the theme of unrequited love and gender switching from 'Twelfth night'; the exiled Duke and his playful daughter from 'The Tempest'. But these comparisons only point to 'AYLI''s comparative failure (as a reading experience anyway) - it lacks the magical sense of play of the first; the yearning melancholy of the second; or the elegiac complexity of the third.

It starts off brilliantly with a first act dominated by tyrants: an heir who neglects his younger brother, and a Duke who resents the popularity of his exiled brother's daughter (Rosalind). there is an eccentric wrestling sequence in which a callow youth (Orlando) overthrows a giant. Then the good characters are exiled to Arden searching for relatives and loved ones.

Theoretically, this should be good fun, and you can see why post-modernist critics enjoy it, with its courtiers arriving to civilise the forest in the language of contemporary explorers, and the gender fluidity and role-play; but, in truth, plot is minimal, with tiresomely pedantic 'wit' to the fore, especially when the melancholy scholar-courtier Jacques and Fool Touchstone are around, with the latter's travesties of classical learning presumably hilarious if you're an expert on Theocritus and the like.

As an English pastoral, 'AYLI' doesn't approach Sidney's 'Arcadia' - maybe it soars on stage. (Latham's Arden edition is as frustrating as ever, with scholarly cavilling creating a stumbling read, and an introduction which characteristically neuters everything that makes Shakespeare so exciting and challenging)

Anyone with a working knowledge of Shakespeare's plays knows that As You Like It is a light, airy comedy. It is clearly not one of Shakespeare's greatest plays. As You Like It is more obscure than famous. Even amongst the comedies it comes nowhere close to the popularity of plays such as A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Tempest, or Twelfth Night. That said, it is a treasure in its own right. This is so, if for nothing else, because it contains one of the greatest pictures of a woman to be found in Shakespeare's works, excluding the Sonnets.

Ah, sweet Rosalind. In her are encapsulated so many ideas about the nature of woman. She is first pictured in a rather faux-Petrarchan manner. This quickly fades as an intelligent woman comes to the fore. While the intelligence remains, she is also torn by the savage winds of romantic love. Rosalind, in all her complexity and self-contradiction, is a truly modern female character.

Most of the women in Shakespeare's tragedies and historical plays are either window dressing (as in Julius Caesar) or woefully one-sided (Ophelia, Lady Macbeth). This is not the case with Rosalind. Rather than being marginalized, she is the focus of a good chunk of the play. Instead of being static and [standard], she is a complex evolving character.

When Rosalind first appears, she outwardly looks much like any other lady of the court. She is a stunning beauty. She is much praised for her virtue. Both of these elements factor in the Duke's decision to banish or [do away with] her.

Rosalind falls in love immediately upon seeing Orlando. In this way she at first seems to back up a typically courtly idea of "love at first sight." Also, she initially seems quite unattainable to Orlando. These are echoes of Petrarchan notions that proclaim love to be a painful thing. This dynamic is stood on its head following her banishment.

Rosalind begins to question the certainty of Orlando's affection. She criticizes his doggerel when she finds it nailed to a tree. Rather than wilting like some medieval flower, she puts into effect a plan. She seeks to test the validity of her pretty-boy's love. In the guise of a boy herself, she questions the deceived Orlando about his love.

Yet Rosalind is not always so assured. Her steadfastness is not cut and dried. Composed in his presence, Rosalind melts the second Orlando goes away. She starts spouting romantic drivel worthy of Judith Krantz. Even her best friend Celia seems to tire of her love talk. This hesitating, yet consuming passion is thrown into stark relief with her crystal clear dealings with the unwanted advances of the shepherdess Phebe.

Rosalind contradicts herself in taking the side of Silvius in his pursuit of Phebe. She seeks to help Silvius win the love of Phebe because of his endearing constancy. Yet the whole reason she tests Orlando is the supposed inconstancy of men's affections.

This idea of Male inconstancy has made its way down to the present day. Men are seen, in many circles, as basically incapable of fidelity. Though a contradiction to her treatment of Silvius' cause, Rosalind's knowing subscription to pessimistic views on the constancy of a man's love places her on the same playing field as many modern women.

Rosalind takes charge of her own fate. Until and even during Shakespeare's own time women largely were at the mercy of the men around them. This is satirized in Rosalind's assuming the appearance of a man. Yet she had taken charge of her life even before taking on the dress and likeness of a man. She gives her token to Orlando. She decides to go to the Forest. She makes the choice of appearing like a man to ensure her safety and the safety of Celia.

Rosalind finally finds balance and happiness when she comes to love not as a test or game, but as an equal partnership. Shakespeare is clearly critiquing the contemporary notions of love in his day. His play also condemns society's underestimation and marginalization of women. However, the Bard's main point is more profound.

As You Like It makes it clear that the world is never picture perfect, even when there are fairy-tale endings. Men and women both fail. Love is the most important thing. With love all things are possible.

"As You Like It" is bar none, one of Shakespeare's VERY best works. It is probably the most poetic of the comedies and contains perhaps as many famous quotations as any other of his plays. Rosalind is perhaps his greatest female character and this work, along with the equally (or even more) brilliant "Midsummer Night's Dream," is the best example of Shakespeare's theme of the "dream world" vs. the "real" world. This play, especially the scenes in the forest, is a celebration of language and the power of the freedom of the imagination. It consequently can be read as a criticism of the "real world," here represented by Duke Ferdinand's court. Like many of the other comedies, Shakespeare is mocking the "ideal" which many in his society would have praised. Though this play deals with some pretty dark themes (which of his plays doesn't?) it is a light-hearted and fully enjoyable read!

Readers should note that this site does not distinguish between the various editions of Shakespeare, so the reviews you read may be for audiotapes, modern translations, etc. I am reviewing the Kenneth Branaugh BBC Radio recording of Hamlet. It is adequate, which I consider high praise for this challenging play. Like Branaugh's movie a few years later, it includes the entire text of the play, which is a nice way to remind yourself of some issues you may have forgotten.

The performances are pretty good, and include Branaugh (of course) as Hamlet and Derek Jacobi as Claudius, giving us a hint of the performances they would later give in the movie. No one's performance really blew me away, although Jacobi was excellent.

Ultimately, the play loses quite a bit when transferred to audio only. There's a lot to be conveyed with stage placement, physican action, expression, etc. Somehow, listening to the play limited my imagination on those issues, preventing my from using my "mind's eye" to the fullest.

If you could read only one thing in your lifetime Hamlet should be that one thing. It is Shakespeare's best work by far, and within its pages is more meaning than you could find within the pages of an entire library full of books, or plays as the case may be. A mere review, a couple words, cannot do Hamlet justice. At times I realize that the language of Shakespeare can be difficult that is why I recommend the Folger version because it helps to make the images expressed by Shakespeare's characters clear to the reader, and allows them to get their own deep personal meaning from Hamlet, Shakespeare's greatest work, with out being bogged down in trying to decipher and interpret his antiquarian English. Don't just listen to what I say, or read what I write, read the play on your own outside the cumbersome restraints of a classroom and see for yourself what I mean.

If you're not familiar with Hamlet, a pox on you! Hamlet is the most famous failed law student in Western culture. Go see a live production. Read the play. Or get a video, or listen to an audio version. Do all four. Versions of Hamlet have been done by Laurence Olivier, Nicol Williamson, Mel Gibson, Kenneth Branagh, Derek Jacobi, or the unattainable version done by Baylor University Theater in the 1950s - the film version won a world film festival in Brussels in 1957. (Yes, I know Jacobi plays the King in Branagh's version, but Jacobi himself played Hamlet - - about the time when Branagh was 15 years old. It's better than his I, Claudius.)

Hamlet, like Shakespeare's other plays, has created a huge cottage industry of scholars, actors, theaters and books. The force of Hamlet's personality dwarfs all others, however. To see a man driven mad, and while mad, feign madness, is one of the most clever story twists of world literature. The mind and heart of Hamlet has been thrown into great, tortured pain by several levers -- the death of his father, the overhasty marriage of his mother to his uncle, the usurpation of his throne by his uncle, the threat to the entire kingdom from Fortinbras, the horrifying appearance of the ghost of his father in purgatory torments, the news of the murder of his father from a supernatural phenomenon. The rejection by his lover, Orphelia, and his ensuing mistrust of her, adds nuclear fission to the fire.

You must experience Hamlet. Oh, for a true friend like Horatio!

What would you do if you fell in love with the wrong person? Well Romeo and Juliet are in this same situation. The scene is set in Verona where two household families share the same social status. From the birth of these two enemies come Romeo and Juliet....P>This book was amazing. Once I started reading, I couldn't put the book down. I felt as if I wanted to get in the story and try to fix all their problems. Shakespeare is a creative writer. He put in true life problems that teenagers deal with today. Shakespeare taught me never to give up and to accomplish my goals. In this book, Romeo and Juliet are not allowed to fall in love. Their parents band them from seeing each other and they wouldn't allow them to following their hearts. But they did it anyway. This book taught me to follow what I believe in and to think for myself, not to listen to what other people want me to do. If I did, then my life would have been miserable. The only thing I didn't like with this book was that it was so hard to understand because it was written in Old English.

I recommend the book, Romeo and Juliet, to anyone who loves to read tragic love stories, who is interested in reading Shakespeare's writings, or who is interested in reading an outstanding book.

I have seen all movie versions about Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet and still love the book everytime I revisit the story. Every word captivates the reader into truly feeling the passion and tragedy of these two lovers. Even a character such as Tybalt Capulet won me over as far as description goes. Shakespearian writing is very much complex and confusing but it has a touch romance and anger which adds to the emotion of the story. Read this classic tragedy!

I have seen plenty of time the story about Romeo and Juliet and it still captures me.The way all the characters express themselves,the way Shakespear combines hate and love in the same story.It tells you how much two peple can really love each other and they gave up their lifes for their love.
The character I liked most is Tybalt, because I feel reflected. The way he acts, the way he feels towards the Montagues and the most important the way he expresses himself.I won't summarize the plot, as it is one of the best-known tales in all literature, and deservedly so. Being a classic, it can be read from different perspectives and standpoints.
Shakespearian writing is very much complex and confusing but it has a touch romance and anger which adds to the emotion of the story.Read this classic tragedy!

This is Shakespeare's 2nd last play. Yet, nothing indicates that he was running out of steam. The images are beautiful. Stephano, Caliban, and Trinculo are memorable as the bumbling conspirators. Miranda and Ferdinand are fine as the two young lovers. Ariel is striking as Prospero's loyal servant. Prospero is a magnificent creation. Not only does he offer several beautiful and memorable passages, but he is well drawn as a character who was unfairly forced into exile. He also makes his prison his paradise. In addition, he is a fine representation of Shakespeare himself: "Knowing I loved my books, he furnished me / From mine own library with volumes that / I prize above my dukedom" (1.2.166-168). His speeches in 4.1 and 5.1 also reflect how Shakespeare himself was contemplating the end of his career. The story itself is very well drawn. Shakespeare grabs our attention with a storm at sea. He offers us a reflection of himself, comical touches, beautiful images, profound passages, beautiful language, young lovers, comical villains, and deep messages. If you like this, be sure to read his final play "Henry VIII."

One of the best works by Shakespeare and also his final full play (most likely), The Tempest draws on many elements that Shakespeare used in his earlier works and adds a comic twist. Shakespeare doesn't spend much time on character development in the Tempest, other than Prospero and possibly Caliban (e.g. Miranda is the ideal chaste woman, Trinculo & Stephano are lowly schemers). However, Prospero is extremely well developed and the simple aspects of the other characters do not detract from the story at all. There are many different levels of meaning at work in the play...some see it as a pro-colonialist diatribe, others see it as Shakespeare's own swan song, where Prospero himself is based on the Bard, and Prospero's surrendering of his magical powers is representative of Shakespeare giving up his craft. I read it as both, and a million other things, and that is one of the great things about the play...it can be read in so many different ways. The structure of the play seems almost chaotic at first, with so many things going on at once. However, if you read the play over again, or read some of the essays contained in the Signet Edition, it becomes much more clear, although still open-ended. The Signet Edition is excellent, and Signets in general are. Buy this over the Folger Library editions...the footnotes here are much easier to work with and make the reading much smoother overall.

Compared to some other works of William Shakespeare, "The Tempest" may be the deepest in meaning. To Shakespeare's credit, this play is also, unlike many of his others, largely original and of his creation. The characters are bloody well developed and the interloping themes bring you into the play. It is also amazing to follow the metaphorical parallelisms in the character of Prospero that reflect on Shakespeare himself. Essentially, Shakespeare announces the end to his writing days in this play. Read how Shakespeare went out like a champ! "The Tempest" is a universal story and its ideals can be placed in our contemporary society and culture.

This play can be read as anti-semitic. In fact, it's pretty hard to defend it from such charges. Shylock is a pretty rotten character and the fact that he is jewish is difficult to overlook (particularly since the other characters mention it on pretty much EVERY page). However, I think it is important to mention that the "heroes" of this play do not necessarily have to be interpreted as heroes. They are by no means perfect and there are many subtle (and some not-so-subtle) instances within the text in which their biases against ANYONE unlike them is illustrated. If one reads the play this way, then Shylock becomes more of a tragic figure rather than an absolutely heartless villain. I don't know. My feelings about this are mixed. There are a few funny parts of this play and the language is, as always, beautiful. The theme of putting a price on human beings is one which has been explored numerous times since. Overall, it is enjoyable, but perhaps not so much so as some of the other comedies. Do not read this play without having read a few others by Shakespeare first. It is an excellent play, but not his best and not his most enjoyable either.

After reading most of the other reviews here, I am fully aware that most of the reviewers didn't read carefully enough (or watch carefully enough if they saw the play.) Now, I'm not saying its not open for different interpretations, but there is one thing I would really like to get straight.

I read MoV for a Bar Mitzvah project on Anti-Semitism. Naturally, my sympathies went to Shylock. However, even if i were Christian, i still would've favored Shylock. What many people believe is that Shylock is a cold hearted ruthless person and only wanted to get back at Antonio because Antonio was a Christian.

Not true. Shylock specifically says something along the lines off, "Why should I lend money to you? You spit on me, and call me a Jewish dog!" I'm not saying that Shylock was a good guy, but I am saying that he is not the villain.

In fact, the "Merchant of Venice," in this story is actually Shylock, not Antonio, contrary to popular belief. My thoughts on the story was that Shylock requested a pound of Antonio's flesh because he did not trust Antonio. Who would trust someone that spat on him? The fact is, Antonio doesn't pay him back in the end.

Now, there's always something else we have to put into consideration. Would the judge had given the "spill one ounce of Christian blood" verdict at the end if Shylock were not a Jew?

This is the mark of a great play. A play that really gets you thinking. But I encourage you, I beg of you, that when you read it or see it, please do not hold Shylock up to being a cold hearted villain. Hold Antonio up to that image. (joking, of course, Antonio's not a bad guy, he's just not a good guy.)

This is a wonderful play - and unless you have seen it or read it you don't know it at all. That's because everything the popular culture tells us about this play is false (for example; how many of you think this play is about a merchant named Shylock? ;-)

The Merchant of Venice is a lively and happy morality tale. Good triumphs over bad - charity over greed - love over hate.
There is fine comedy. Portia is one of Shakespeare's greatest women (and he ennobled women more than any playwright in history). There are moments of empathy and pain with all the major characters. There is great humanity and earthiness in this play. These things are what elevate Shakespeare over any other playwright in English history.

Plays should be seen - not read. I recommend you see this play (if you can find a theater with the courage and skill to do it). But if it is not playing in your area this season - buy the book and read it.

this book is aweful
don waste time on htis bad book
its stupid and can not be understood

This book is is a very good book. it is spine-chilling and very adventurous with good 5 star charictars.it all starts when mr fast sells7 years off the end of his life for 10000000 pounds but the devil takes the FIRST 7 years instead . I give this book a 5 star rating