Customer Reviews

Shadowplay: The Hidden Beliefs and Coded Politics of William Shakespeare

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

John Guy, Fellow of History at Clare College, Cambridge, and winner of the Whitebread Prize, has written that if even half of the insights in this wonderful book are true, it is the most visceral, challenging, and compelling work on Shakespeare's place in history in twenty years. I agree with this perpective: Clare Asquith's insights are profound, and this book has the potentially to fundamentally change how we view Shakespeare and the plays, in a way that only adds to their majesty.

"Shadowplay" is a very strong work in an area that is only beginning to gain academic attention--namely, the heretofore hidden or suppressed history of a persecuted minority during one of the more fascinating and influential periods in English (and European) history. Historians and literary scholars have only recently focused on this topic, their early work is highly compelling, and it bears much future promise.

As the above suggests, I admire this book very much, and am hoping that it will gain greater attenion in the mainstream media and in academia. It's argument is original and compelling; it also beautifully and succinctly written, often quite moving in its insights, and an overall pleasure to read. Highly recommended to anyone that is interested in Shakespeare, the culture of the English Renaissance, and England under Elizabeth I and James I, it deserves the starred reviews it has received so far as well as the endorsements from well-regarded, thoughtful scholars (see above in summary of reviews to date provided by Amazon).

One comment on the previous review--even a superficial reading on Asquith's book makes it clear that the author knows. very well, that Elizabeth and James' church is not Puritan, but is engaged in the decades-long process of hammering out what would become the "Anglican solution" or "the middle way" between Catholicism and Calivinism/Puritanism. According to the book's hypothesis, Shakespeare's very strong motivation throughout his plays is to bring to his audience's (and the Crown's) attention the importance of traditional English Chrisitanity--i.e., the Roman Catholic faith and culture that had produced the English Renaissance and the humanism of Thomas More, and which carried within its mores a proto-Reformation that anticipated some of the demands of the Protestant refomers as well as the Roman Catholic reforms implemented at the Council of Trent. Over time, this motivation is coupled with a plea to Elizabeth and James to modify the regime's suppresion of this traditional Catholicism and allow for the toleration of the different, competing forms of Christianity--Catholicism, Calvinism, and emerging Anglicanism. This toleration, Shakespeare believes, will enable the traditional Catholicism to which he is so devoted to continue to flower (rather than to wilt under the suppression of what today would be called a police state and to eventually be forgotten or scorned).

Asquith knows the political, social, and literary history of the era quite well, her reading of the plays is detailed and nuanced, and her argument comprehensive and often quite subtle. I think it is important to take these into account in assessing the book's strengths and weaknesses.

Bottom line: one of the best books I have read in a very long-time, and one that adds immeasurably to my appreciation of William Shakespeare and my enjoyment of his plays and poetry.

In 16th century England loyal subjects were asked to either serve their monarch or their God, creating a break between God and country which widened into a vast theological/political conflict under Elizabeth 1. Executions and terror arise - through it all one of the most famous figures of his times, William Shakespeare, seemingly made no comment about affairs - or did he? Clare Asquith, a Shakespeare scholar, traces the common code used covertly by writers of his times and reveals the master of the code himself - Shakespeare. His attacks and exposes of the crown are seen from a new perspective, examining his work and his code and its impact. A fascinating study.

This book is an incredible accomplishment. Clare Asquith has revealed a history of the Protestant reformation in late 16th century England that must have some of the persecuted dead rejoicing from their graves. This is less a book than a revelation. It hardly seems possible that Shakespeares' plays could be even more brilliant and more penetrating then they are already reveared ro be. But that is exactly the case. Mrs. Asquith shows us that with allegory and uncanny symbolism Shakespeare chronicles the history of his country's persecution of Catholics. Written from the vantage point of his own family's persecuted Catholic roots, his plays were a guarded appeal to the Queen herself and the nobility of the day to heal the deep wound suffered when England's faithful became divided.

Claire Asquith's book is without a doubt one of the most fascinating and stimulating books about the English Reformation that I have ever read. Of the 150 or so books that I have read in the past 5 years it has to be in the top five.

This premise of this book is convincing 1) because of the absolute consistancy of the "code", once recognized, from play to play; 2) the chronological tenor of Shakespeare's themes is shown to accord with the changing contemporary political climate; 3) Shakespeare's poetry is now demonstrated to be a logical "commentary" on his career as playwright.

The one thing I do not want to be true (somewhat akin to hoping against hope that Anastasia "survived") is the pitiful snapshot of Shakespear's last years, "the dark night of the soul" of clinical depression easily diagnosed in the haunting allegorical portrait of his beloved mentor as observed by Ben Jonson in "Sad Shepherd". Alas. Shakespeare may have died after a drinking bout with friend Ben; but the true cause of death seems to have been a broken heart: the despairing Bard regarding the idealistic purpose of his career as playwright as frustrated and utterly futile. He seems now a Catholic martyr, no less than those hanged on Tyburn Tree.

An unxpected bonus of reading this book is 1) a new light on Ben Jonson's work and career 2) the realization that WRT the jingoistic play "Henry VIII" the answer to the ironic question "who wrote Shakespeare? --is the slimey master of pastiche, John Fletcher.

If you liked "Shadowplay" and are interested in the robust flavour of small-town sociology and anthropology of the generation before and the generation after the English Reformation, you will greatly enjoy reading "The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, 1400-1580" by Cambridge scholar Eamon Duffy, which is vastly more fascinating than its dry title would suggest. It is a masterly example of painstaking revisionist history at its best, and like "Shadowplay" brought tears to my eyes by the last page.

This book is worth its price even just for its precis of 16th-century British history. In addition, there are useful summaries of most plays. The principal thesis is that Shakespeare's writings constituted a plea for religious toleration, a plea that could have cost him exile or even his head. All the brilliance for which he is famous was accomplished with this carefully encoded goal in mind. Occasional apparent missteps in his artistry gain explicability under this new light. It's like seeing the universe after repairing the Hubble Telescope. The notion that someone else must have written Shakespeare's works vanishes like a mirage. Clare Asquith presents a formidable case in elegant prose that is a joy to read in itself. This book all but obsoletes almost all that has ever been written on Shakespeare. Buy, read, enjoy!

This is a fascinating look into the world of Shakespeare during the upheaval of the Protestant Reformation. Even a cursory knowledge of Shakespeare's plays helps with one's understanding of the political commentary that was common among playwrights of the Elizabethan era. It gives a plausible explanation of why Shakespeare suddenly stopped writing plays at the height of his powers. The glossary of coded words is very enlightening and, unlike The DaVinci Code, has a proven basis in truth.

Ms. Asquith has obviously done an enormous amount of research and presents her material in such a way as to keep the reader's attention to the end. I could hardly put this book down. It was truly fascinating.

"Shadowplay" puts a spotlight on the overlooked fact that the Protestant Reformation was not a welcome or peaceful event in English history and unlike other European countries, the English monarchy, driven by Cecil and son, enforced this new religion with violence and persecution turning the country upside down. The average people in the pew were just trying to ride out the storm doing what they could to preserve their lives, faith and their culture until at last this strategy backfired on both the Catholics who remained silent to preserve their lives and living, and even Protestants who thought they'd be on the right side, but who also failed to agree with the Church of England on matters of doctrine.

Enter Shakespeare, whose father's statement of faith was found inside one of the walls of his home and who was raised a Catholic as was everyone else in England before Henry wanted to get rid of his first wife in favor of a younger second (third, fourth, fifth, etc) who might be able to give him the son he demanded. His world was a world of censorship and coersion, but he had a talent that helped him cleverly send messages not only to his fellow Catholics but even to the Queen herself and later King James and sons as well. His words encouraged his fellow Catholics to hold fast to the Faith and provided dramatic reasons for Queen Elizabeth to return to the "fair" Catholic religion or at least to allow all "fair" and "dark" Protestant people to worship freely as their conscience led them. Of especial interest is Sonnet 152 which when read through a political and religious lense means more than just a man railing against his unfaithful lover.

To see Shakespeare's plays through the lense of history is a fascinating journey, and one that would help people to grasp the urgency of the serious, life-or-death messages sent out into a confusing and dark time in European history. It is certainly not your average, boring, politically correct view of Shakespeare.

This is an entertaining book if nothing else.... and I am not trying to be negative in any way. For someone new to Shakespeare, this book is a bit complicated and that particular reader will fail to grasp some the arguments. I found it slightly hard to challenge all of her ideas and conclusion since she draws on a wealth of knowledge. I have attempted to learn something about Shakespeare and started by reading three popular biographies by three well known authors: Burgess, Kermode, and Greenblatt. Plus I have scanned or read a number of other books - see my Listmania list on Shakspeare. Eventually I bought Asimov's guide to Shakespeare, which is just a joy to read, and The Norton Shakespeare, the 3500 page monster that is the best single book - as a general reference on the works and times. Today one can enjoy most of Shakespeare's works on DVD and there are thousands of books, magazines, and journal articles available on the subject.

Writing a biography or an analysis about Shakespeare - putting it mildly - is a challenge, especially if the aim is to present and discuss new information as we have here. The idea that one might find new ideas about a 450 year old Shakespeare is virtually impossible. Thus, all the Shakespeare biographers and writers including Asquith are dependent on Shakespeare's works themselves, plus those books that immediately followed Shakespeare's life such as John Aubrey's book Brief Lives (1626 to 1697), and the various civic records from London and Stratford, along with court records, land transfer documents, and wills, etc. He left no notes nor did he write a biography.

All these books - including the present book - are not about new information. They are about presenting a coherent picture of Shakespeare and his environment: political, socio-economic, historic, sources of myths, religious ideas, other writers, etc. In reviewing the books the differences one sees in the books are in the styles, depth of knowledge, amount of speculation, facts, writing skill, holding the reader, etc.

The present book attempts to bring us an analysis based on the "hidden meanings" or code words and phrases, or simply a deeper understanding of his works, so we can find clues in his writings. This concept is not new since Shakespeare left no diaries and all we have are his writings and those writings of his contemporaries. There have been thousands of books and articles on Shakespeare, but as I wrote above, none by him, and most are centuries after he died.

In trying to judge her arguments - and I am not an expert - I looked fairly carefully at Chapter 15 or "Silenced" where she puts forward the theory that the Tempest was a sort of final personal tour de force for Shakespeare and that he was forced to retire - since he had a Catholic bias in childhood or some Catholic tendencies - and he had to leave London. We will never really know the real story unless we suddenly discover Shakespeare's secret diary after 400 years, but to me this seems like mostly speculation. Around this time he bought property at the Blackfriars in London so clearly he was not completely cutting his ties with London and the theatre. For myself, I suspect that he was simply getting tired after 20 years of writing and had accumulated enough money to retire, and in fact he lived only a few more years. That is the generally accepted view. It is generally thought that his father was a secret Catholic who had suppressed his public views in the mid 15th century as a town bailiff and alderman under the rule of Elizabeth. William Shakespeare the son seemed more neutral and had always lived with the continuous anti-Catholic intimidation factor of heads stuck on spikes, including many Catholic martyrs, as he walked back and forth across the bridge to London from the south bank, so I see nothing really dramatic here to cause a sudden change forcing him out of the theatre. Also, that chapter has just a few references beyond Ben Johnson.

In summary, this is a quick and entertaining read about Shakespeare with some speculation, and it merits at least 4 stars. I enjoyed the book but was not totally convinced. She needs more specific references to back up her points - in my opinion. Still it is a good 4 star read.
pixel

Shakespeare is prsented as a protester on the social and reli
gious changes occurring in 17th century England. It is a scholarly yet enjoyable read. I would recommend this work to anyone who likes mystery and knowledge