King John (New Folger Library Shakespeare) [Mass Market Paperback]

William Shakespeare (Author), Paul Werstine (Author), Dr. Barbara A. Mowat (Author)

Book Description

Series: New Folger Library Shakespeare | Publication Date: November 28, 2000

Completely re-edited, the New Folger Library editions of Shakespeare's plays put readers in touch with current ways of thinking about Shakespeare. Each freshly edited text is based directly on what the editors consider the best early printed version of the play. Each volume contains full explanatory notes on pages facing the text of the play, as well as a helpful introduction to Shakespeare's language. The accounts of William Shakespeare's life, his theater, and the publication of his plays present the latest scholarship, and the annotated reading lists suggest sources of further information. The illustrations of objects, clothing, and mythological figures mentioned in the plays are drawn from the Library's vast holdings of rare books. At the conclusion of each play there is a full essay by an outstanding scholar who assesses the play in light of today's interests and concerns.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"The Shakespeare Newsletter" It's hard to see how the New Folger Library's section on Shakespeare's language could be much better. An exceptionally good choice for an introductory text.

Book Description

John Dover Wilson's New Shakespeare, published between 1921 and 1966, became the classic Cambridge edition of Shakespeare's plays and poems until the 1980s. The series, long since out-of-print, is now reissued. Each work contains a lengthy and lively introduction, main text, and substantial notes and glossary. --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Mass Market Paperback: 352 pages
• Publisher: Washington Square Press; annotated edition edition (November 28, 2000)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0671722735
• ISBN-13: 978-0671722739
• Product Dimensions: 6.8 x 4.2 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.7 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,924,143 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Shakespeare's First Falstaff, September 27, 2008

By 

James M. Rawley - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: King John: The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford World's Classics) (Paperback)

KING JOHN has one of Shakespeare's best death scenes and a character, Faulconbridge the bastard son of Richard the Lion Hearted, who is a first draft for Falstaff -- and better integrated into the play's main action than Falstaff is. It's unique among Shakespeare's works in being about Realpolitik in a genuine historical context -- as if a modern American playwright should write a play about George Washington's political compromises, complete with a presentation of the real historical situations that led up to them. Faulconbridge is there to make cynical comments, and yet remain loyal to King John, who almost, but not quite, becomes a child murderer in the course of the action. Earlier, the complexities of wartime politics are revealed when a town refuses to admit either the King of England or the King of France as its rightful ruler until the two kings have fought out the question first -- whereupon the two kings decide to agree on a truce, just long enough to wipe the town out together, then go back to fighting one another. The play is a wonderful mix of history and ironic commentary, one of two plays of Shakespeare's that is entirely in verse (the other one is RICHARD II, which he wrote just before KING JOHN), and it's tragically poetic and satiric in equal measure. Shakespeare never wrote anything else quite like it. If he wrote better plays, they were also different kinds of plays: this one is unique. The Folger edition has excellent notes for beginning students; the Oxford edition is for more advanced students, and also exceptionally good.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A fine play, well edited, December 11, 2009

By 

Christopher H. (Cambridge, MA) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: King John: The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford World's Classics) (Paperback)

King John is one of Shakespeare's least popular plays--unjustly! The play is almost entirely in grand, stately verse, featuring a political struggle intricate and sometimes difficult to follow, and starring a fairly complex though ill-fated villain, the failed King John of England. This annotated edition is excellent: the notes are usually incisive and the several appendices deal in meticulous depth with the play's textual cruces. The introduction is an involved but worthwhile read, and the editor's writing style, though dense, is not unpleasant to read.

7 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Not Bad, But Not Great Either, March 12, 2000

By 

Sean Ares Hirsch - See all my reviews

This review is from: King John (Arkangel Complete Shakespeare) (Audio Cassette)

This is a good play, but it does not match Shakespeare's other history plays. In my opinion too much of the play revolves around a doting mother who wants to see her underage son on the throne even though he is very incapable of ruling. Furthermore, any intelligent observer can see that the King of France only wants Arthur on the crown because a child would be a lot easier to manipulate than the shrewd King John. Remember, John WAS NOT a usurper. Richard the Lionhearted named John as the heir to the crown! On the positive side, Richard I's illegitimate son is a powerful and convincing character. John is an interesting 3 dimensional character. At times he comes off as harsh and cruel. But he also shows himself at times to be to be a strong and competent king. And at times we can feel sorry for him. Shakespeare also manages to squeeze some comical touches in. I feel that to appreciate this play as much as possible, you must realize that Richard I named John the heir to the crown. I also feel you must understand that John did prove himself to be a competent king. (Unlike his unfairly blackened reputation in "Robin Hood.")