11 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A fine edition of a play that is unjustly unloved, January 17, 2005
There are artists whose work is so fundamental that they are beyond questioning. It is not that all their work is supreme, but rather that the body of their work is so transcendent and so core to our culture that one must come to grips with it if one wishes to understand what makes us who we are. There is no writer more central to the English language than Shakespeare. So, by definition everything he wrote is worth reading and deserves five stars by my ranking system.
That is not to say that every play has in it what we value most in his greatest works. Certainly, "All's Well That Ends Well" is not one of his greatest works. However, that is like noting that 2004 was not a good year for Tiger Woods and he still placed fourth on the money list and is still ranked number two in the world. Even lesser Shakespeare is ahead of nearly everyone else, especially when one factors in the insight gained by experiencing his entire body of work.
What we are after in reviews like this is less about the play than the edition itself. I am a huge fan of the Arden editions because of the helpful insights their scholarship provides into the plays. We do not have to wade through unnecessary essays on politically correct interpretations of the plays. In this edition, we get an introductory essay that deals with issues of text, date, interpretation, and performance. Since this is one of the least performed of Shakespeare's plays, this is necessarily brief.
What is this play about? The title is a motto of young commoner named Helena. She is the orphan of a doctor and taken in by the Countess of Rossillion. Helena is captivated by the Countess's son, Bertram who has no interest in her. The play is about her unrelenting path to have him as her husband. It is an interesting play with some glorious lines. But if you are only going to read a half dozen of Shakespeare's plays, you need not bother with this one. However, I think you should take time to read all of them.
So, this is a fine and recommended edition of one of Shakespeare's lesser plays, but that is still greater than nearly everything else and so should be read by all.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Hunter fails again, January 6, 2009
There are many finer editions than this. G. K. Hunter is one of the least penetrating and dullest commentators around. The older critics, from the nineteenth century, are superior. The moderns' erudition is artificial; they don't live religion or classical culture. Hunter is one of the worst. Avoid.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No