OK. The jury has more or less decided that "The Revenger's Tragedy" is not by Cyril Tourneur after all, but by Thomas Middleton. This is on strictly scholarly grounds. Either way, it scarcely matters, as this play is strictly sui generis. It's like nothing else either Tourneur or Middleton ever wrote.

The best way to think of it is as standing in a relation to the classic Jacobean and Elizabethan tragedies of Kyd, Shakespeare, Webster and Middleton sort of like the way Quentin Tarantino's early films stand in relation to previous Hollywood classics. Whoever wrote this, they were Taking The P*ss. The play starts in next-to-top gear, and accelerates into warp speed fairly quickly. Few other plays of the era (this is roughly contemporaneous with "King Lear", to give you an idea) are so ruthlessly efficient. The basic plot is put in motion by two brothers, Vindice and Hippolito, who are a bit cheesed off because the egregious Duke (of wherever) killed Vindice's wife cause she wouldn't put out. From here proceeds a bizarre and increasingly unlikely series of revenges, climaxing in a frankly chortlesome mass slaying. Vindice is the juiciest role - a bit like Shakespeare's Richard III, he guides the audience through the action, but with far greater economy and far less wrangling of conscience, not that Crookback Dick is noted for his remorse.

By the end, the stage is littered with bodies, and Vindice and Hippolito cheerfully go off to execution, with barely a qualm in sight. This is truly the most cynical and the funniest of all Jacobean tragedies. Whoever wrote it, be it Cyril or Tom, was thinking along the same lines Howard Hawks was on when he (Hawks) turned "Rio Bravo" from a Western into a chamber comedy. It's all thoroughly reprehensible, and great fun. You want depth, try John Webster.

There aren't many four-hundred-year-old plays that I laugh aloud at whilst reading, but this is one of them. Pace the opinion below, it couldn't have less to do with Jonson's careful layering of reality if it tried. It's a brisk, bleak, savage cartoon. Full marks, whoever you were.

PreShakespeare, but a lot of fun to read! I enjoyed it very much--- has to do with a man who is carrying around a murdered girlfriend for almost ten years-- he is planning revenge on the king...

This dark tragi-comedy resonates with the dramatic potential of Hamlet, but and edge particular to Jacobean Drama. A play which is still relevant today (many students related it to "The Godfather"), and brimming with cinematic violence, lust, deception, vengence, and, with all this, communicated through beautiful poetry.

I picked up Measure for Measure knowing nothing about the play other than it was not an early work and that it was a comedy. I knew Shakespeare as an enjoyable Wit and was looking forward to a virtuoso display of the English Language. I certainly got this, but this is by no means a "light" play. In fact, the more I looked into it, the more disturbing it became.

The plot is quite involved with many twists and turns, based on many unlikely situations. Read it like any other comedy and you will be fine.

The characters are what's disturbing. There are no clear "white hats" in this story. Claudio sets his sister up which causes much of the story. The Duke handles people like puppets. Angelo is certainly not worthy of trust and there are some hints that the Duke even knows this when he leaves him in charge. Isabella? Well, there are two strong attributes to her personallity - Future Nun and also as Harold Bloom described her, the sexiest female character in Shakespeare.

There are many "lowlife" characters as well. Most important and probably most interesting would be Lucio who moves the plot around. Also quite interesting and infuriating would be Pompey.

I read it in the New Cambridge Edition. Brian Gibbons gives an interesting introduction which goes over the original context for the play, a discussion of its sources, as well as a production history. His notes to the text are also quite good. My eyes glazed over a bit on the textual analysis...not interesting to me at this point.

If you want "uplifting" or "inspirational", pick something else. If you are willing to let these interesting, ambigious characters into your mind, you will have a fine time as one of the finest artists of the English Language leads you around their stories.

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!

Knowing I would be forced to study this work for my A Level in English Lit, I was sure I would enjoy it due to the comedy and satire involved. I was wrong. As the first reviewer claimed, The Way of the World is just like a soap opera! I appreciate the intention of Congreve was to satirise the follies of the upper classes at the time but this does not make the play any less tedious. The plot is unnecessarily complex and rather difficult to follow at times. It all boils down to romance and infidelity in the end, as one might expect. Granted, it is fairly well written, but if there's a stupid plot and irritating, useless characters, no amount of creative flair in writing can compensate. As well as that, the language, while not difficult, is different from that of modernity so makes it awkward. OK, we expect this from an 18th century piece of literature, but it still causes problems for a modern audience/reader. The worst thing was being told by the teacher when we were meant to laugh - that obviously kills any comedy value in the play. Exam boards should add some more modern plays to their syllabus! Not to mention ones with meaningful, interesting plots and characters. This is not worth the paper it's written on, in my humble opinion.

Yikes! Let's see here...

Mirabell is in love with Milamant, who is the niece of Lady Wishfort, who hates Mirabell because he pretended to be in love with her. Her daughter is Mrs. Fainall, who had an affair with Mirabell that resulted in her marrying Fainall (she thought she was pregnant) who she doesn't love and who is having an affair with Marwood, who is secretly in love with Mirabell and would do anything to keep him from marrying Millamant, who, by the way, loves him and hates him at the same time.

And that's all before the play even starts. This play, often heralded as "the best of the Restoration plays" (ironic, since it was a commercial failure for Congreve) is witty, complex, and very hard to keep up with. The plot revolves around who will get Lady Wishfort's inheritance and how, and some of the things they try are quite ridiculous. It has funny moments -- mostly provided by Mirabell's wit and the tomfoolery of Witwoud and Petulant, the comic relief. But it ends up just being pretty long and convoluted.

Go read Shakespeare.

I had to write a review after reading the two preceeding mine!

This is perhaps the most brilliant of the late Restoration comedies. For all of those unfamiliar with Restoration drama, it is a rich, witty genre which has been too often neglected in American educational institutions, relegated to the "secondary canon" of English lit. The Way of the World is ridiculously sublime, incorporating the tropes of the genre, but exceeding its predecessors.

In using this edition to teach a college course, I found that the editorial notes were vastly inadequate, and I ended up having to make a supplementary glossary for students. For that reason, I don't recommend the New Mermaids edition.