I'll admit that there is some entertainment value in this work, but it is still only barely worth the read. There is hardly any plot, at least not any that it is possible for the reader to follow. The play seems to be a failed attempt at a complex and funny play. The key words in the above sentance are "failed attempt". The idea and concept of the play is clever and ingenious but it needs a lot of work. Reading the play feels almost like reading someone's notes for a work in progress. The basic plot outline is just starting to take shape but the actual story is missing. Perhaps this play would be better if it were seen performed than simply read. Maybe with the right directors and actors it could be funny and entertaining. However, I would not recommend that anybody take the time to read this book. If you want to know the story, ask someone who read it because what they tell you in a minute will be basically as much as the play presents to the reader in its entire length.

The play begins with two critics "conversing," which is pretty much both of them talking about their own thing and assuming the other is listening. While this goes on, the first to characters to be seen are introduced. For roughly the first half of the play basically deals with a new man in the area being introduced to the house and how both of the young women in the house seem to fight over his affections, while the droll maid watches. There are several death threats, which the maid witnesses. Eventually the man gets shot and "Inspector Hound" miraculously appears.

All along, the two critics have been commenting about the play and talking among themselves. During the intermission of the play within the play, the phone on the "stage" begins reading and one of the critics, Birdboot, walks on stage and picks it up. The woman on the phone is his wife. Birdboot gets drawn into the play due to the stunning beauty of the mistress of the house, who immediately falls for him. Eventually, the second critic by the name of Moon is introduced to the scene.

I don't know how to describe the comedy in this play. Though understanding the play requires a lot of thought, there are often moments when the humor is apparent. I enjoyed both watching this play and performing the role of the maid, Mrs. Drudge, during it. I hope you enjoy it too.

I am a big fan of Tom Stoppard, and this play is the cornerstone of my affection for his work. The plot of what may clumsily be described as a play-within-a-play is fairly convoluted.

Two theater critics, Birdboot and Moon, are in attendance at the opening of a play which is a melodramatic re-hashing of every whodunit ever performed. Half-way through, Birdboot is drawn on-stage by a ringing phone, and the inner play begins again with Birdboot taking the part of the "mysterious stranger in our midst". After two scenes of Birdboot hitting on the actresses and improvising his lines, we come to the point in the play in which the character whose place Birdboot has taken is shot onstage. Birdboot falls to the ground dead, and the real murder mystery begins...

This long one-act is full of wit and verve. In the end, it is up to each member of the audience to put the pieces of the puzzle together and discover the true villain of the piece. A gem.

Nadel has clearly done his homework in his reading about the theatre and plays generally. But he also unfortunately, and probably in order to fill in many gaps, provides us with far too many of unnecessary details-- such as the street number of the house where Stoppard's father was born, but little valid information about Tom Stoppard as an an author,-- though we're given much useless information about other characters- or the very plays he's supposed to explore for and with us. If you haven't read all the plays, you will find the book heavy, literally and figuratively.

Praise, when given, often seems grudging-- we are told, in the acknowlegments, that the playright was generous, as told Nadel by Stoppard's sister. But that generosity isn't shown in the body of the biography , though we're given many petty details, such as Stoppard being often late or disorganized.

In writing his unauthorized bio,Nadel,by definition, had to leave out much: what he was unaware of, what he couldn't explore, and what he didn't understand. He appears unaware of Stoppard's aim of creating a theater of ideas as more than a theater of action.

At over 500 pages, this biography is too long and repetitive. (And surely, somewhere, there could have been traces of humor, considering Nadel was writing about a most witty author...)

Being left with many unanswered questions, in spite of its topic, I found this book disappointing.

Precisely who is the man who gave us such disturbing and erudite plays as "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern," "The Real Thing," and most recently "The Coast Of Utopia"? He is arguably the foremost dramatist of our time, but what makes Tom Stoppard tick?

We'll not find the answers to these questions in a biography of the playwright by Ira Nadel, although that is not due to lack of research as there are almost 100 pages of references and indices included in this rather weighty tome.

Perhaps the best one can do in assessing another human being is to hazard guesses based on observation. There are observations aplenty in this highly readable portrait of an enigmatic genius who, almost singlehandedly, has altered the face of 20th century drama.

For Stoppard, born Tomas Straussler in 1937, it has been a far journey from his home in Czechoslovakia to Hollywood, Broadway, and London's West End. Readers take this journey with him, observing Stoddard's evolution into a playwright concerned with morals and politics, noting the ups and downs in his personal life, and seeing his connectedness to his past.

Critic/biographer Nadel has done an exemplary job in documenting the life of a contradictory figure. Yet, the question lingers: precisely who is Tom Stoppard?

- Gail Cooke

You would think from the title that this was a collection of four of Stoppard's best plays with some commentary. The plays are NOT included, which, for me, made this book worthless.

Having read a review that made me aware the play texts were *not* included, I was overjoyed to find this valuable resource. Stoppard's plays are filled with literary, historical and political references that are so easily missed, and this critical analysis and resource of references was invaluable to my study of TRAVESTIES. I will be exploring all of the other works soon!

The three plays are a whole, due to the same setting.

The first part of Dirty Linen is a farce about a Select Committee appoinbted by the PM (Prime Minister) to investigate the allegations of immoral conduct concerning some MPs. It is turning the whole procedure into a sham, a silly attempt. First the final report is written before the Committee meets. Second the well- named secretary, Ms Gotobed, gets undresssed little by little and reveals she has slept with literally hundreds of people in order to become some permanent sub-Secretary of some type. Third the whole report amounts to refusing the press's allegations as unfounded, but without any real investigation. It is a biassed and plain cover-up operation.

The second part turns the whole thing upside down. The first part was in perfect agreement with common practices in Great Britain : to hunt down the politicians who have non-politically correct sexual activities. The second part is a dream for Great Britain, with a new report introduced by a certain well-named MP, Mr French, rejecting all allegations in the name of the protection of the privacy of MPs against the right to know of the public. This is a dream for Great Britain, all the more ironical because it is the French principle : private life is more sacred than the freedom to inform. It is beyond limits for this right to inform.

The small play in-between those two parts is a long reverie on America described by a civil servant dealing with the application of an American for British citizenship, just because he is American. It is purely boring and lacks humor or fun.

This play is a famous one by Tom Stoppard. Its only interest is that it tackles a real political problem, but this problem is so trite that the play sounds like a complete waste of time.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Stoppard is a wonderful playwright, but these are not some of his best plays. The collection is good, but I recommend buying some of his better plays even though they're not in an easy format like this, simply because it's better worth your money. If you already own those, however, this book will make a fine addition to your collection.