‘Shakespeare in Love’* is one of my favourite films, so when I found out in January that it had been based on this book – as opposed to springing, Artemis-like, from the head of the unmatchable Tom Stoppard** - I jumped on it, breaking a ‘no new book’ rule I instituted while reading through the first of my TBRs.
Aaand it’s taken since January for me to finish it. Despite a galloping start, solid comic writing, and an interesting premise, the work never comes together. Stoppard** chose, wisely, to focus on the fictional relationship between Shakespeare and his ‘muse’ Viola. She ultimately becomes Viola in ‘Twelfth Night’, based on a relationship blossoming with Will while he writes and directs and she stars in (while cross-dressing) ‘Romeo and Juliet’. This book, however, gives equal airtime to Francis Bacon and his quest to be gifted one of Elizabeth I’s second-hand beds (which – ew?!), the rivalry between Henslowe and Burbage (resulting in grand arson), Walter Raleigh’s wardrobe malfunctions, the Master of the Revel’s Henry VIII’s anecdotes, and the arrival of the potato to English shores. It lacked an ‘in’, a POV character, and a recognisable plot arc. The film is much, much better.
*Many people lament that this film won Best Picture at the Oscars over ‘Saving Private Ryan’. This honestly baffles me. ‘Shakespeare in Love’ has witty writing, historical nous, fantastic costumes, exquisite editing, and a perfect bittersweet ending. It’s a Fabergé egg of a film. SPR is just like every other grey-to-sepia toned war film I have ever seen. Some people are super invested in watching Tom Hanks get covered in mud and having their ears assaulted with replica battles, I guess. To which I say: your trash is not my trash. And it’s also fully trash. Suck it.
**I’m aware that Stoppard is only one of three or even four screenwriters credited on this production. I do not care. The wit of the individual lines and the clever call-backs and small plot resolutions is 100% Stoppard. I saw a student production of ‘Arcadia’ in Oxford in 2013, it still haunts me, I’m definitely an authority on this matter.
On the title page it says, “Warning to Scholars: this book is fundamentally unsound”. Which reminds me of a dramatis personae list that included an ‘angel who did not so much fall as saunter vaguely downwards’. Which, given that it was a rec-list by Neil Gaiman that brought this book to my attention, is very apropos.