What do you think?
Rate this book
Falstaff: Give Me Life
From Harold Bloom, one of the greatest Shakespeare scholars of our time as well as a beloved professor who has taught the Bard for over half a century, an intimate, wise, deeply compelling portrait of Falstaff—Shakespeare’s greatest enduring and complex comedic character.
Falstaff is both a comic and tragic central protagonist in Shakespeare’s three Henry plays: Henry IV, Parts One and Two, and Henry V. He is companion to Prince Hal (the future Henry V), who loves him, goads, him, teases him, indulges his vast appetites, and commits all sorts of mischief with him—some innocent, some cruel. Falstaff can be lewd, funny, careless of others, a bad creditor, an unreliable friend, and in the end, devastatingly reckless in his presumption of loyalty from the new King.
Award-winning author and beloved professor Harold Bloom writes about Falstaff with the deepest compassion and sympathy and also with unerring wisdom. He uses the relationship between Falstaff and Hal to explore the devastation of severed bonds and the heartbreak of betrayal. Just as we encounter one type of Anna Karenina or Jay Gatsby when we are young adults and another when we are middle-aged, Bloom writes about his own shifting understanding of Falstaff over the course of his lifetime. Ultimately we come away with a deeper appreciation of this profoundly complex character, and the book as a whole becomes an extraordinarily moving argument for literature as a path to and a measure of our humanity.
Bloom is mesmerizing in the classroom, wrestling with the often tragic choices Shakespeare’s characters make. He delivers that kind of exhilarating intimacy and clarity in Falstaff, inviting us to look at a character as a flawed human who might live in our world. The result is deeply intimate and utterly compelling.
Falstaff is both a comic and tragic central protagonist in Shakespeare’s three Henry plays: Henry IV, Parts One and Two, and Henry V. He is companion to Prince Hal (the future Henry V), who loves him, goads, him, teases him, indulges his vast appetites, and commits all sorts of mischief with him—some innocent, some cruel. Falstaff can be lewd, funny, careless of others, a bad creditor, an unreliable friend, and in the end, devastatingly reckless in his presumption of loyalty from the new King.
Award-winning author and beloved professor Harold Bloom writes about Falstaff with the deepest compassion and sympathy and also with unerring wisdom. He uses the relationship between Falstaff and Hal to explore the devastation of severed bonds and the heartbreak of betrayal. Just as we encounter one type of Anna Karenina or Jay Gatsby when we are young adults and another when we are middle-aged, Bloom writes about his own shifting understanding of Falstaff over the course of his lifetime. Ultimately we come away with a deeper appreciation of this profoundly complex character, and the book as a whole becomes an extraordinarily moving argument for literature as a path to and a measure of our humanity.
Bloom is mesmerizing in the classroom, wrestling with the often tragic choices Shakespeare’s characters make. He delivers that kind of exhilarating intimacy and clarity in Falstaff, inviting us to look at a character as a flawed human who might live in our world. The result is deeply intimate and utterly compelling.
177 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 3, 2017
65 people are currently reading
332 people want to read
About the author
Harold Bloom
1,717 books2,022 followersHarold Bloom was an American literary critic and the Sterling Professor of Humanities at Yale University. In 2017, Bloom was called "probably the most famous literary critic in the English-speaking world." After publishing his first book in 1959, Bloom wrote more than 50 books, including over 40 books of literary criticism, several books discussing religion, and one novel. He edited hundreds of anthologies concerning numerous literary and philosophical figures for the Chelsea House publishing firm. Bloom's books have been translated into more than 40 languages. He was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 1995.
Bloom was a defender of the traditional Western canon at a time when literature departments were focusing on what he derided as the "school of resentment" (multiculturalists, feminists, Marxists, and others). He was educated at Yale University, the University of Cambridge, and Cornell University.
Bloom was a defender of the traditional Western canon at a time when literature departments were focusing on what he derided as the "school of resentment" (multiculturalists, feminists, Marxists, and others). He was educated at Yale University, the University of Cambridge, and Cornell University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
August 12, 2023
"Falstaff brooks no rebuttal. His cascade of language blooms into a glowing radiance. He is the custodian of Shakespeare's word hoard."
- Harold Bloom, Falstaff
I know there are those that criticize Bloom’s approach to Shakespeare. He inserts himself too much into his text. He approaches Shakespeare as a poet and not necessarily as a scholar. He is no dramatist. He sees things that aren’t there and builds labyrinthine castles about Shakespeare from small, ambiguous clues.
I agree with much of it. But I love Bloom’s love for both Shakespeare and Falstaff. His book may not be perfect, but his love for Sir John is. I also love Bloom’s creativity. He might be just spinning webs and dancing with himself, but it feels like literary Jazz. If it ain’t your tune, well life is imperfect and short, so dance, watch, or drink some sack.
This is the first of the five books Bloom wrote directly about Shakespeare's big personalities. He wrote five books in his series Shakespeare's Personalities:
Falstaff: Give Me Life (1) ✔
Cleopatra: I Am Fire and Air (2)
Lear: The Great Image of Authority (3)
Iago: The Strategies of Evil (4)
Macbeth: A Dagger of the Mind (5)
2AM thoughts on Falstaff from near sleep:
1. Dynamics of Falstaff (changes over time)
2. All great characters are judged against Falstaff
3. Hal and Falstaff are components of all of us. Both extremes end in death. Hell, death eats all of us.
- Harold Bloom, Falstaff
I know there are those that criticize Bloom’s approach to Shakespeare. He inserts himself too much into his text. He approaches Shakespeare as a poet and not necessarily as a scholar. He is no dramatist. He sees things that aren’t there and builds labyrinthine castles about Shakespeare from small, ambiguous clues.
I agree with much of it. But I love Bloom’s love for both Shakespeare and Falstaff. His book may not be perfect, but his love for Sir John is. I also love Bloom’s creativity. He might be just spinning webs and dancing with himself, but it feels like literary Jazz. If it ain’t your tune, well life is imperfect and short, so dance, watch, or drink some sack.
This is the first of the five books Bloom wrote directly about Shakespeare's big personalities. He wrote five books in his series Shakespeare's Personalities:
Falstaff: Give Me Life (1) ✔
Cleopatra: I Am Fire and Air (2)
Lear: The Great Image of Authority (3)
Iago: The Strategies of Evil (4)
Macbeth: A Dagger of the Mind (5)
2AM thoughts on Falstaff from near sleep:
1. Dynamics of Falstaff (changes over time)
2. All great characters are judged against Falstaff
3. Hal and Falstaff are components of all of us. Both extremes end in death. Hell, death eats all of us.
June 4, 2018
For those of us interested in Shakespeare studies, Harold Bloom is a complex and divisive character. He's altogether useless as a theater critic, which one may argue is untenable for a critic of Shakespeare's plays. And his writing on the plays, though convincingly emotional, is often too partial, self-referential, and needlessly poetic.
Anyone who has read Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human or has heard Bloom speak on the subject knows of his boundless love for Falstaff. What becomes apparent in this book is that his endless love for Falstaff induces a hatred for Prince Hal, and an interest in the non-Falstaffian elements of the drama that is seldom more than perfunctory.
Bloom has endless and poetically dense words of adoration for Falstaff: according to Bloom, Falsaff "pushes time aside and bids it pass" (??) and that "If there can be a secular resurrection, it would be Falstaff rising from the dead" (???) Yet constantly throughout Give Me Life is Hal called a fraud and a counterfeit. Bloom has at least the foresight to write "I am perplexed by his [Falstaff's] love for Hal." When Bloom forces himself to say something nice about Hal, this is the best he can do: "He is an admirable politician and a keen quester who seeks glory and power." Oh, how very generous. If Bloom can't wrap his head around an old codger's affectation for his young protege, an affection which forgives flaws of character and rejoices when the young mind absorbs lessons from the old, I wonder which other vital aspects of the Henriad he's similarly neglectful of. It makes me feel bad for the actor Michael Stuhlbarg, who apparently went onstage as Hal with Bloom as Falstaff some 15 years ago, and makes me wonder what Bloom's grandchildren think of him.
We have in the 86 year-old Harold Bloom a creature of comfort so stubbornly settled in his chosen interpretations, that alternative viewpoints have become irritating and vaguely inscrutable to him. To those critics who would draw attention to Falstaff's corrupt and immoral practice of conscripting destitute peasants to service in a bloody civil war, Bloom chides "blame is irrelevant. Do not moralize." It is obnoxious.
Some of the most compelling material in this book tracks the phrases and stories with which Falstaff is obsessed, and which are not commonly explicated in the received wisdom on this character or these plays. Bloom points out that Falstaff occasionally invokes the Old Testament's parable of Lazarus and Dives, a strange dream of a wealthy man and a poor beggar, unhappy neighbors in life, divided after death by the rift of heaven and hell. It casts Falstaff's familiar disgust with entropy in an intriguing new light. Instead of the old man selfishly denying the inevitability of his death, the most accessible and familiar take on Falstaff, we have a dear old friend who's haunted with a religious dread at the thought of an eternity spent in the afterlife divorced from his sweet Hal.
However, this book's weakest material is truly bad. A middle chapter wastes time explaining that the Bastard Faulconbridge of King John was Shakespeare's first great character, a tired theory already explored in Bloom's corpus. Later in the book we encounter Bloom's awful habit of making lists and repeating them like a patient of echolalia: Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, Macbeth, Cleopatra was his favorite list to trot out in The Invention of the Human, and it makes a few more appearances here. It begins to ring in your ears like a case of tinnitus. Bloom has reached a good old age, and has written much, so it's unfair to harp on this too much. But his prose in this volume occasionally becomes more repetitive and disordered than I have previously known it to be.
Bloom's work here is not without value: whether we like it or not, his is a chief voice on Shakespeare, and it's a voice which patiently lobbies us to remember that it's the intertwining of rich language and complex character in Shakespeare's work that grants it its genius. Moreover, when in this volume the elderly Bloom makes passing mention of his dead friends and his stays in hospital beds, his personal attachment to Falstaff is drawn in painfully clear terms. That is the book I wish I could've read-- an old man, facing death and not yet ready to go, finally finding guidance in the body of work which he spent his life toiling over. We're granted only a bit of that, perhaps because it's too painful and personal for a lifelong academic as guarded as Bloom to get much into. But the idea is there, and it gives a powerful new resonance to the Falstaff line that grants this book its title: "Give me life."
Anyone who has read Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human or has heard Bloom speak on the subject knows of his boundless love for Falstaff. What becomes apparent in this book is that his endless love for Falstaff induces a hatred for Prince Hal, and an interest in the non-Falstaffian elements of the drama that is seldom more than perfunctory.
Bloom has endless and poetically dense words of adoration for Falstaff: according to Bloom, Falsaff "pushes time aside and bids it pass" (??) and that "If there can be a secular resurrection, it would be Falstaff rising from the dead" (???) Yet constantly throughout Give Me Life is Hal called a fraud and a counterfeit. Bloom has at least the foresight to write "I am perplexed by his [Falstaff's] love for Hal." When Bloom forces himself to say something nice about Hal, this is the best he can do: "He is an admirable politician and a keen quester who seeks glory and power." Oh, how very generous. If Bloom can't wrap his head around an old codger's affectation for his young protege, an affection which forgives flaws of character and rejoices when the young mind absorbs lessons from the old, I wonder which other vital aspects of the Henriad he's similarly neglectful of. It makes me feel bad for the actor Michael Stuhlbarg, who apparently went onstage as Hal with Bloom as Falstaff some 15 years ago, and makes me wonder what Bloom's grandchildren think of him.
We have in the 86 year-old Harold Bloom a creature of comfort so stubbornly settled in his chosen interpretations, that alternative viewpoints have become irritating and vaguely inscrutable to him. To those critics who would draw attention to Falstaff's corrupt and immoral practice of conscripting destitute peasants to service in a bloody civil war, Bloom chides "blame is irrelevant. Do not moralize." It is obnoxious.
Some of the most compelling material in this book tracks the phrases and stories with which Falstaff is obsessed, and which are not commonly explicated in the received wisdom on this character or these plays. Bloom points out that Falstaff occasionally invokes the Old Testament's parable of Lazarus and Dives, a strange dream of a wealthy man and a poor beggar, unhappy neighbors in life, divided after death by the rift of heaven and hell. It casts Falstaff's familiar disgust with entropy in an intriguing new light. Instead of the old man selfishly denying the inevitability of his death, the most accessible and familiar take on Falstaff, we have a dear old friend who's haunted with a religious dread at the thought of an eternity spent in the afterlife divorced from his sweet Hal.
However, this book's weakest material is truly bad. A middle chapter wastes time explaining that the Bastard Faulconbridge of King John was Shakespeare's first great character, a tired theory already explored in Bloom's corpus. Later in the book we encounter Bloom's awful habit of making lists and repeating them like a patient of echolalia: Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, Macbeth, Cleopatra was his favorite list to trot out in The Invention of the Human, and it makes a few more appearances here. It begins to ring in your ears like a case of tinnitus. Bloom has reached a good old age, and has written much, so it's unfair to harp on this too much. But his prose in this volume occasionally becomes more repetitive and disordered than I have previously known it to be.
Bloom's work here is not without value: whether we like it or not, his is a chief voice on Shakespeare, and it's a voice which patiently lobbies us to remember that it's the intertwining of rich language and complex character in Shakespeare's work that grants it its genius. Moreover, when in this volume the elderly Bloom makes passing mention of his dead friends and his stays in hospital beds, his personal attachment to Falstaff is drawn in painfully clear terms. That is the book I wish I could've read-- an old man, facing death and not yet ready to go, finally finding guidance in the body of work which he spent his life toiling over. We're granted only a bit of that, perhaps because it's too painful and personal for a lifelong academic as guarded as Bloom to get much into. But the idea is there, and it gives a powerful new resonance to the Falstaff line that grants this book its title: "Give me life."
May 16, 2017
An old man writing about another old man a life long friend. Very nice.
May 6, 2020
Told using quotations from the Henriad and The Merry Wives of Windsor, Bloom paints a portrait of Falstaff, one of Shakespeare's most beloved characters. Through quotations and academic sources, Bloom finds both tragedy and joy in this character. Through Hal's betrayal and Falstaff's love of food and women, he makes for a jovial if not fool-hardy character.
I found Bloom's writing here to be a lot more accessible--and fun--than his work on Cleopatra, and I appreciated the fact that Bloom looked at all sorts of sources for Falstaff--because they were available--when there was only one source material for Cleopatra.
Overall, I find that this is a respectable and accessible resource great for those studying Shakespeare and for those trying to understand the heart of this fantastic character.
Review cross-listed here!
I found Bloom's writing here to be a lot more accessible--and fun--than his work on Cleopatra, and I appreciated the fact that Bloom looked at all sorts of sources for Falstaff--because they were available--when there was only one source material for Cleopatra.
Overall, I find that this is a respectable and accessible resource great for those studying Shakespeare and for those trying to understand the heart of this fantastic character.
Review cross-listed here!
October 18, 2020
Realizing that this last week was the first anniversary of Blooms passing, I thought I'd give the chief bardolator himself a read. This was my first time reading a complete book by Bloom. My previous experience with him being his introduction to Blood Meridian.
Out of all the plays of Shakespeare, King Henry IV parts 1 and 2 are the plays that I am most familiar with. As some sort of punishment for skipping so much school, I was coerced into playing Hal/Henry V. Unlike other plays that I read and instantly loved, The Henriad (as Bloom calls it) was the most perplexing. I often found myself wondering about the character of Falstaff and what it was exactly that he was doing in the play. Falstaff is one of those characters that I struggle with. I could acknowledge his wit but I never really thought he was a stand out character when compared to other Shakespearean personalities.
Blooms discussion was illuminating but I felt the true enjoyment of this book came from just reading someone ruminate on a topic that he loves. The book read as a seminar written down and reminded me of my favorite moments from college: just listening to someone talk about a topic they truly love. Although centered around Falstaff, the book was just as much a reflection of Blooms life and studies. It was touching to read Bloom reflection on his admiration of Falstaff in his youth, his obvious love for Shakespeare, and especially his realization that he was nearing the end of his life.
Is my opinion of Falstaff changed? Not really. He is still that enigmatic character but I suppose Bloom has helped me to appreciate that elusive quality. It was a nice little read and I look forward to getting my hands on more books from his Shakespeares personalities series.
Out of all the plays of Shakespeare, King Henry IV parts 1 and 2 are the plays that I am most familiar with. As some sort of punishment for skipping so much school, I was coerced into playing Hal/Henry V. Unlike other plays that I read and instantly loved, The Henriad (as Bloom calls it) was the most perplexing. I often found myself wondering about the character of Falstaff and what it was exactly that he was doing in the play. Falstaff is one of those characters that I struggle with. I could acknowledge his wit but I never really thought he was a stand out character when compared to other Shakespearean personalities.
Blooms discussion was illuminating but I felt the true enjoyment of this book came from just reading someone ruminate on a topic that he loves. The book read as a seminar written down and reminded me of my favorite moments from college: just listening to someone talk about a topic they truly love. Although centered around Falstaff, the book was just as much a reflection of Blooms life and studies. It was touching to read Bloom reflection on his admiration of Falstaff in his youth, his obvious love for Shakespeare, and especially his realization that he was nearing the end of his life.
Is my opinion of Falstaff changed? Not really. He is still that enigmatic character but I suppose Bloom has helped me to appreciate that elusive quality. It was a nice little read and I look forward to getting my hands on more books from his Shakespeares personalities series.
August 21, 2022
Bloom gives Falstaff his due. I like his definition of Falstaffianism as “do not moralize”.
August 26, 2017
This pocket sized study of Sir John Falstaff, the fat and boastful knight who enlivens Shakespeare's best known history plays, HENRY IV Part One and Part Two, is both great fun and essential reading. Harold Bloom is still going strong at eighty six, and the legendary scholar writes in an accessible style while going into amazing detail about every scene where Falstaff appears, analyzing every character and almost every line of the legendary Falstaff's witty dialogue. The connections between Shakespeare's plays and the sonnets he wrote for his private friends are especially fascinating.
I refuse to give this book five stars, however. The reason is stated clearly by Harold Bloom himself. It's not enough for him to enjoy Falstaff's humor, he finds it necessary to present Falstaff as completely lovable at all times, a symbol of everything that makes life worth living. There can be too much of a good thing in life, and in this book Falstaff is the good thing that gets to be too much. I don't want to come across like a total tight-ass, here. I mean, I'm no Malvolio. But by the end of this book I really felt like something was rotten in Denmark!
Take the title, for example. "Give me life." What does it mean? When Falstaff says "give me life," he's saying that he's going to stay alive as long as he can no matter what it takes. He's not concerned about the other guy. In fact Bloom admits that he's just led over a hundred men into a hopeless slaughter so he can collect their pay. But Falstaff has a way of slipping away at the right moment. That's part of life, I guess. But when he says "give me life" certain kinds of modern intellectual are a little too eager to be impressed. They see him as John Lennon saying "Give Peace A Chance" when he's really Jim Morrison saying "I don't know about you, but I'm getting my kicks before the shit house explodes."
It's easy for aging liberals from a certain type of background to see anyone who shuns danger and fears bodily pain as a saintly anti-war pacifist. But this way of looking at the world only obscures the real darkness and complexity of Shakespeare's vision in the history plays. To put it another way, Henry IV is no saint, but he's literally fighting for his life at Shrewsbury. He's not mean old LBJ dropping bombs on little Asian kids from ten thousand miles away. By the same token, when Falstaff leads his men "where they are peppered" and then slips away he's not Allen Ginsberg trying to levitate the Pentagon. Henry IV and his hard-hitting sons are hawks, all right. But Falstaff is no dove. In fact he's really more of a vulture. He hates war but he loves the spoils.
The fact that Harold Bloom and others of his ilk can't see this speaks volumes about their real contempt for the "pitiful rascals" who fight this country's wars today. Falstaff dismisses his men's sacrifice with contempt, saying "they'll fill a pit as well as better." A modern liberal like Anna Quindlen made much the same point when she described the soldiers of Operation Desert Storm as "some young men and women not smart, not rich, not directed enough for college." In other words, war is wrong when it threatens my interests, my position of privilege, but as for those people, to hell with them. Their lives are empty. They were born to be exploited. I don't really *want* to watch them being fed into the meat grinder, but then they're not special like me. The only thing they're good for is to fill a pit and line my pockets with gold. Give me life, indeed!
The fact of the matter is, when Falstaff cries out "give me life," he's on the same level as Scarlett O'Hara saying "with God as my witness, if I have to lie, cheat, steal, or kill, I will never be hungry again." Falstaff doesn't like going hungry, either. They're both resourceful parasites, and they both thrive on injustice. Scarlett is beloved by brain-dead modern feminists, (like Anna Quindlen) because she's their idea of a "strong" woman. But what Scarlett likes best is exploiting the weakness of others. She has her darkies, and Falstaff has his.
The fat knight is also a lot like Claudius in Hamlet. They're both fat men who like to drink. They both like women. Both of them want to stay alive at any price. "Oh yet defend me, friends, he hath but hurt me!" This is what the corrupt Danish king says in Hamlet after Hamlet stabs him at the end of the play. Things look pretty bad for Claudius at this point. He was just caught red-handed trying to poison his own nephew, after fatally poisoning his wife. Time is running out. But Claudius is still back-pedaling across the stage, still grasping at straws, still holding on, even as Hamlet closes in for the kill. You have to admire his gusto, his zest, his Falstaff-like spirit of survival.
Give me life, indeed!
I refuse to give this book five stars, however. The reason is stated clearly by Harold Bloom himself. It's not enough for him to enjoy Falstaff's humor, he finds it necessary to present Falstaff as completely lovable at all times, a symbol of everything that makes life worth living. There can be too much of a good thing in life, and in this book Falstaff is the good thing that gets to be too much. I don't want to come across like a total tight-ass, here. I mean, I'm no Malvolio. But by the end of this book I really felt like something was rotten in Denmark!
Take the title, for example. "Give me life." What does it mean? When Falstaff says "give me life," he's saying that he's going to stay alive as long as he can no matter what it takes. He's not concerned about the other guy. In fact Bloom admits that he's just led over a hundred men into a hopeless slaughter so he can collect their pay. But Falstaff has a way of slipping away at the right moment. That's part of life, I guess. But when he says "give me life" certain kinds of modern intellectual are a little too eager to be impressed. They see him as John Lennon saying "Give Peace A Chance" when he's really Jim Morrison saying "I don't know about you, but I'm getting my kicks before the shit house explodes."
It's easy for aging liberals from a certain type of background to see anyone who shuns danger and fears bodily pain as a saintly anti-war pacifist. But this way of looking at the world only obscures the real darkness and complexity of Shakespeare's vision in the history plays. To put it another way, Henry IV is no saint, but he's literally fighting for his life at Shrewsbury. He's not mean old LBJ dropping bombs on little Asian kids from ten thousand miles away. By the same token, when Falstaff leads his men "where they are peppered" and then slips away he's not Allen Ginsberg trying to levitate the Pentagon. Henry IV and his hard-hitting sons are hawks, all right. But Falstaff is no dove. In fact he's really more of a vulture. He hates war but he loves the spoils.
The fact that Harold Bloom and others of his ilk can't see this speaks volumes about their real contempt for the "pitiful rascals" who fight this country's wars today. Falstaff dismisses his men's sacrifice with contempt, saying "they'll fill a pit as well as better." A modern liberal like Anna Quindlen made much the same point when she described the soldiers of Operation Desert Storm as "some young men and women not smart, not rich, not directed enough for college." In other words, war is wrong when it threatens my interests, my position of privilege, but as for those people, to hell with them. Their lives are empty. They were born to be exploited. I don't really *want* to watch them being fed into the meat grinder, but then they're not special like me. The only thing they're good for is to fill a pit and line my pockets with gold. Give me life, indeed!
The fact of the matter is, when Falstaff cries out "give me life," he's on the same level as Scarlett O'Hara saying "with God as my witness, if I have to lie, cheat, steal, or kill, I will never be hungry again." Falstaff doesn't like going hungry, either. They're both resourceful parasites, and they both thrive on injustice. Scarlett is beloved by brain-dead modern feminists, (like Anna Quindlen) because she's their idea of a "strong" woman. But what Scarlett likes best is exploiting the weakness of others. She has her darkies, and Falstaff has his.
The fat knight is also a lot like Claudius in Hamlet. They're both fat men who like to drink. They both like women. Both of them want to stay alive at any price. "Oh yet defend me, friends, he hath but hurt me!" This is what the corrupt Danish king says in Hamlet after Hamlet stabs him at the end of the play. Things look pretty bad for Claudius at this point. He was just caught red-handed trying to poison his own nephew, after fatally poisoning his wife. Time is running out. But Claudius is still back-pedaling across the stage, still grasping at straws, still holding on, even as Hamlet closes in for the kill. You have to admire his gusto, his zest, his Falstaff-like spirit of survival.
Give me life, indeed!
July 28, 2018
I must say that unlike many people I have not generally found Falstaff to be particularly appealing. The author, it should be noted, finds Falstaff very appealing, but he has never particularly appealed to me, partly because he is an old man who has never grown up, is somewhat cowardly and disreputable, and not a virtuous person whom I can view with respect nor someone whose definition of fun is close to my own. I can understand how the author, writing this book as he did in his 80's, could identify with the themes of death and aging and rejection that the Henriad (Henry IV parts 1 and 2 and Henry V) talk about so movingly with regards to this character, but Falstaff is not someone whom I have identified with, and so while this novel features a great deal of warm charm from the author, the subject of this book is not quite as gripping as many others would be. Thinking about Falstaff may give the author life, but he doesn't do very much for me, I must candidly admit, and that is perhaps a bit disappointing. Yet if you like Falstaff, there is much to enjoy here.
Most of this short book of around 150 pages deals with Falstaff as he appears in Shakespeare's historical plays. It should be noted that the character of Falstaff also appears in the Merry Wives of Windsor, but the author only briefly and disparagingly relates the Falstaff in that play as being beneath his notice and bordering if not crossing into self-parody in obedience to royal command. The book has 21 chapters and most of them consist of close and often intriguing readings of the places where Falstaff appears in the plays. Many of the discussions relate to the author's appreciation of Falstaff's cleverness, his integrity, and his love for whores and sacks of wine, two pleasures I must admit I lack a great interest in. The author also spends a great deal of time in the book talking about the relationship between Falstaff and Hal, where Falstaff fears the (inevitable) rejection that comes from the hypocritical and somewhat cold Prince Hal, who is destined to be a successful but ephemeral king of England. The discussions of Falstaff as a father figure to Hal are certainly of interest, and those who like the historical plays of Shakespeare would do well to give this book a respectful read.
Yet although this book is definitely one that I can respect, it's not a book I particularly enjoyed. The historical plays of Shakespeare, especially when compared with his enjoyable comedies and thoughtful and melancholy tragedies and his delightful problem plays, have always left me a bit cold. They are not particularly great histories, and the English elites portrayed in those plays are often pretty loathsome. Henry V is casual about the deaths of innocent French people and casts off his friend Falstaff in a cruel way, and he is widely thought of as one of the most praiseworthy characters to be found there. The author certainly does not whitewash it, but a great part of the difference between the author and I is that the author celebrate the largeness of Falstaff's personality, while I consider him the sort of rot on society that our realms would be better off without. The difference in the author's considerable sympathy and fondness and even empathy for Falstaff and my lack of a positive view of it likely accounts for my own rather cold feeling about this book and its subject matter despite the obvious skill in textual criticism that the author possesses. If you lack my antipathy to Falstaff, though, you will find much more of enjoyment here.
Most of this short book of around 150 pages deals with Falstaff as he appears in Shakespeare's historical plays. It should be noted that the character of Falstaff also appears in the Merry Wives of Windsor, but the author only briefly and disparagingly relates the Falstaff in that play as being beneath his notice and bordering if not crossing into self-parody in obedience to royal command. The book has 21 chapters and most of them consist of close and often intriguing readings of the places where Falstaff appears in the plays. Many of the discussions relate to the author's appreciation of Falstaff's cleverness, his integrity, and his love for whores and sacks of wine, two pleasures I must admit I lack a great interest in. The author also spends a great deal of time in the book talking about the relationship between Falstaff and Hal, where Falstaff fears the (inevitable) rejection that comes from the hypocritical and somewhat cold Prince Hal, who is destined to be a successful but ephemeral king of England. The discussions of Falstaff as a father figure to Hal are certainly of interest, and those who like the historical plays of Shakespeare would do well to give this book a respectful read.
Yet although this book is definitely one that I can respect, it's not a book I particularly enjoyed. The historical plays of Shakespeare, especially when compared with his enjoyable comedies and thoughtful and melancholy tragedies and his delightful problem plays, have always left me a bit cold. They are not particularly great histories, and the English elites portrayed in those plays are often pretty loathsome. Henry V is casual about the deaths of innocent French people and casts off his friend Falstaff in a cruel way, and he is widely thought of as one of the most praiseworthy characters to be found there. The author certainly does not whitewash it, but a great part of the difference between the author and I is that the author celebrate the largeness of Falstaff's personality, while I consider him the sort of rot on society that our realms would be better off without. The difference in the author's considerable sympathy and fondness and even empathy for Falstaff and my lack of a positive view of it likely accounts for my own rather cold feeling about this book and its subject matter despite the obvious skill in textual criticism that the author possesses. If you lack my antipathy to Falstaff, though, you will find much more of enjoyment here.
July 26, 2019
I clearly and sympathetically understand why today’s Harold Bloom is enthralled with Falstaff. Any man trending over the apex of life’s timeline can appreciate this bold, verbose, physically unfit, posturing character. A man whose only tools left are experience and words. Any man of years may wonder, as Falstaff must have on those last days - were all the machinations, all the relationships nurtured and those set aside, all the politics of work - were they worth the effort when some punk acting kid can send you to the gallows.
What I can’t fathom is why the youthful Bloom found his soulmate in Falstaff? I suppose it must be true that the child Bloom could read Shakespeare and understand the old tyme language , the puns, and the innuendo. It’s just that I can’t imagine it.
What I do appreciate about this series is what I have said in other reviews which is that Bloom gives the casual reader of Shakespeare is the chance to understand the plays by better understanding a major character.
What I can’t fathom is why the youthful Bloom found his soulmate in Falstaff? I suppose it must be true that the child Bloom could read Shakespeare and understand the old tyme language , the puns, and the innuendo. It’s just that I can’t imagine it.
What I do appreciate about this series is what I have said in other reviews which is that Bloom gives the casual reader of Shakespeare is the chance to understand the plays by better understanding a major character.
September 24, 2019
I admit, I bought the book on the strength of one line I saw as I flipped through it in the bookstore: "Hamlet is death's ambassador, while Falstaff is the embassy of life." There are, of course, many other memorable quotes and fantastic insights throughout, but "Falstaff: Give Me Life" is one of my least favorite Bloom books so far, a collection about which I am often ambivalent as it is. I might enjoy it more if I were more of a "bardolator," as Bloom labels himself, or were I more a fan of the Henry plays (don't blow up my mentions). There are chapters I am committed to re-reading, so there is a chance I'll come to appreciate Bloom's analysis more, but for now, I am eager to get back to "Invention of the Human," and "The Poems of Our Climate," two of Bloom's books which remain much more accessible and topical for me. "Don't judge a book by its best line," I guess?
July 6, 2017
3.5 stars, really. Bloom obviously idolizes Falstaff, and mentions that in the late November of his years he can sympathize with him in ways he never could before. I too think that Falstaff is a larger than life character and a tremendous wit, but still have criticisms that are nowhere to be seen in this volume. This book is a poignant and short celebration of Falstaff, but certainly isn't something to delve deeply into the character. Still, Bloom's obvious admiration of the fat knight is fun to read.
September 7, 2017
A solid analysis and reflection on Shakespeare's most humane foil
Part critical series of critical essays, part reflective writing, and part celebration of Falstaff, Bloom makes a strong argument for the importance and humanity of Falstaff. Bloom lapses into praise of the character that borders on hyperbolic and seems to focus an inordinate amount of attention of Falstaff's death, but he does bring a long lifetime of his own insights to the character even if some points feel overly repeated.
Part critical series of critical essays, part reflective writing, and part celebration of Falstaff, Bloom makes a strong argument for the importance and humanity of Falstaff. Bloom lapses into praise of the character that borders on hyperbolic and seems to focus an inordinate amount of attention of Falstaff's death, but he does bring a long lifetime of his own insights to the character even if some points feel overly repeated.
July 10, 2018
This is a kindly, somewhat ramble-prone appreciation of Falstaff. It’s short, simple, and has long sections of Shakespeare’s text dropped in—which is a little annoying if you’ve paid full price for original writing, but whatever. Bloom alternates between personal reflection, settled opinion (his own), and jousting with offstage critics. It’s a decent enough little book.
October 29, 2024
Another short work of old-style criticism on Shakespeare by Bloom.
This book is decent, but not as good as the others in this series. Bloom is too in love with Falstaff, and the balance between quotation and analysis is off. Bloom gives the book over too much to Shakespeare’s own language. A stronger book would have had Bloom diving deeper on the analysis and explanation end of things.
Also, at times, I felt like I was just reading a thinly annotated version of the plays, but I was jumping around and missing important parts. I was hoping that this would be a good introduction to the Henry Trilogy, but it was not as good as I wanted.
Still worth the read, but not Bloom’s best.
This book is decent, but not as good as the others in this series. Bloom is too in love with Falstaff, and the balance between quotation and analysis is off. Bloom gives the book over too much to Shakespeare’s own language. A stronger book would have had Bloom diving deeper on the analysis and explanation end of things.
Also, at times, I felt like I was just reading a thinly annotated version of the plays, but I was jumping around and missing important parts. I was hoping that this would be a good introduction to the Henry Trilogy, but it was not as good as I wanted.
Still worth the read, but not Bloom’s best.
October 25, 2019
A good book to read in memory of Professor Bloom -- and Shakespeare. Bloom so clearly loved the character of Falstaff, and this fairly short book covers the character mostly chronologically through Henry IV, parts 1 & 2, to the tale of his death in Henry V. It is a fairly concise working through the dimensions of the Falstaffian character, how he contrasts to the two Henrys, and even some influences to the character and how the character influenced later literary creations
Simon Vance, the narrator, does an excellent job switching between Bloom's text and the various lines from the plays.
Simon Vance, the narrator, does an excellent job switching between Bloom's text and the various lines from the plays.
January 12, 2023
I really like Shakespeare. And I seem to remember liking Harold Bloom (at least, when I think about reading his literary criticism when I was in college--a decade ago!). This is a short book, and I primarily read it to help boost my numbers to meet my 2022 reading goal (although, alas, I fell short by only two books). This seems to be more of a reflection of Bloom's own personal relationship with Falstaff. Perhaps it has some value for graduate literature students, but I kept catching myself skimming pages. There are much more interesting books about Shakespeare and his plays out there. But, it's short, and you can read it in a single sitting!
March 31, 2017
I received a digital copy of this book from NetGalley. What follows is my honest review.
I was introduced to Shakespeare the way most of us were: through terrible high school English classes that sucked all the joy and dick jokes out of them. While I'm sure the dick jokes would've helped pass the time, I've come to the conclusion that teenage me would still have never enjoyed it. Shakespeare's something I've had to grow into (occasionally kicking and screaming).
I'm so happy I have. Between MST3k's episode of Hamlet and Good Tickle-Brain's scene-by-scene Macbeth and King Lear, comedy has led me to love the tragedies, so it makes some sense that the tragedy of the history plays would lead me to love the joy of Sir John Falstaff.
I say all of this to set the scene, so when I say that this is the most enjoyable nonfiction book I've ever read and that the sheer love Bloom has for Falstaff comes through in every line, you know that this is said by a complete n00b to Shakespeare. If this book had been required reading in high school (or college, for that matter), my descent in to Shakespeare would've began years ago.
Falstaff: Give Me Life is the first in the Shakespeare's Personalities series, short books that focus on one character and how they connect with our world and theirs. With Bloom's insight and energy, these books are perfect for all fans, new and old alike.
I had no experience with the character of Falstaff, except for the vague awareness that his character was drunk and bawdy -- known more for his vices than his virtues -- but within the first pages of Falstaff, Bloom proves that there's much enough depth and complexity (and, in course of events, tragedy) in Sir John to rival any of the more popular Great characters of Shakespeare. He compares Sir John with Hamlet in what is possibly my favorite sentence from the book:
"But Hamlet is death's ambassador while Falstaff is the embassy of life."
Falstaff is almost Dionysian in his embrace of life and all its pleasures, though with none of the distemper of the gods. He has seen the horrors of life and has chosen to focus on the joys of it. When we throw off the blinders of Western Christian society, we embrace his so-called vices for what they are: freedom. How can living to excess be a greater sin than the scheming and hypocrisy of kings? "...The essence of Falstaffianism [is]: do not moralize," says Bloom, and I can think of no better fitting statement.
I can't even explain how much I love this book, when my head screams, "Poetry!" and my soul cries, "Life!" I've never been so enamored with a character, or more delighted by a scholar than with Harold Bloom's Falstaff. I cannot recommend it enough. Legit, I want to buy it for all my friends and vague acquaintances so they can discuss this with me.
I was introduced to Shakespeare the way most of us were: through terrible high school English classes that sucked all the joy and dick jokes out of them. While I'm sure the dick jokes would've helped pass the time, I've come to the conclusion that teenage me would still have never enjoyed it. Shakespeare's something I've had to grow into (occasionally kicking and screaming).
I'm so happy I have. Between MST3k's episode of Hamlet and Good Tickle-Brain's scene-by-scene Macbeth and King Lear, comedy has led me to love the tragedies, so it makes some sense that the tragedy of the history plays would lead me to love the joy of Sir John Falstaff.
I say all of this to set the scene, so when I say that this is the most enjoyable nonfiction book I've ever read and that the sheer love Bloom has for Falstaff comes through in every line, you know that this is said by a complete n00b to Shakespeare. If this book had been required reading in high school (or college, for that matter), my descent in to Shakespeare would've began years ago.
Falstaff: Give Me Life is the first in the Shakespeare's Personalities series, short books that focus on one character and how they connect with our world and theirs. With Bloom's insight and energy, these books are perfect for all fans, new and old alike.
I had no experience with the character of Falstaff, except for the vague awareness that his character was drunk and bawdy -- known more for his vices than his virtues -- but within the first pages of Falstaff, Bloom proves that there's much enough depth and complexity (and, in course of events, tragedy) in Sir John to rival any of the more popular Great characters of Shakespeare. He compares Sir John with Hamlet in what is possibly my favorite sentence from the book:
"But Hamlet is death's ambassador while Falstaff is the embassy of life."
Falstaff is almost Dionysian in his embrace of life and all its pleasures, though with none of the distemper of the gods. He has seen the horrors of life and has chosen to focus on the joys of it. When we throw off the blinders of Western Christian society, we embrace his so-called vices for what they are: freedom. How can living to excess be a greater sin than the scheming and hypocrisy of kings? "...The essence of Falstaffianism [is]: do not moralize," says Bloom, and I can think of no better fitting statement.
I can't even explain how much I love this book, when my head screams, "Poetry!" and my soul cries, "Life!" I've never been so enamored with a character, or more delighted by a scholar than with Harold Bloom's Falstaff. I cannot recommend it enough. Legit, I want to buy it for all my friends and vague acquaintances so they can discuss this with me.
February 7, 2017
I have longed admired Bloom as a Shakespeare scholar, having devoured his Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human at university, and was therefore interested to see what he had to say on the iconic character of Falstaff. Now, I like Falstaff; I believe I should make that clear before I go on. I have nothing against him and enjoy his witticisms. Bloom, on the other hand, idolises him. This book is essentially a homage to Falstaff, and all Bloom's assertions are skewed in that direction. As such, the writing occasionally devolved into an almost-rant against others. At different points Bloom accuses both Hal and other Shakespeare scholars of wanting to hang the man! It is true that Hal and Falstaff have a complex relationship, but never in all my frequent readings and viewings of the play have I once thought that Hal's focus is on seeing Falstaff hang right from Henry IV Part I, or even later. After all, if this were the case, he could certainly find a reason to carry out this sentence once he ascends the thrown. But he doesn't.
If you are a Falstaff-worshipper like Bloom, you will doubtless love this book. If, like me, you do not share Bloom's absolute devotion, you may find yourself questioning some of his assertions. I closed the final page in agreement with some of Bloom's theory, yet it complete disagreement with others. That's the joy of academia though: there is always a counterargument. My failure to approve of all Bloom's assertion does not, however, mean I did not enjoy reading his portrait of Falstaff, and I would recommend the book to other Shakespeare lovers as an interesting read, even if doing so leaves you with a burning desire to vindicate that sweet wag, Hal.
I received this book as a free eBook ARC via NetGalley.
If you are a Falstaff-worshipper like Bloom, you will doubtless love this book. If, like me, you do not share Bloom's absolute devotion, you may find yourself questioning some of his assertions. I closed the final page in agreement with some of Bloom's theory, yet it complete disagreement with others. That's the joy of academia though: there is always a counterargument. My failure to approve of all Bloom's assertion does not, however, mean I did not enjoy reading his portrait of Falstaff, and I would recommend the book to other Shakespeare lovers as an interesting read, even if doing so leaves you with a burning desire to vindicate that sweet wag, Hal.
I received this book as a free eBook ARC via NetGalley.
September 29, 2024
2.5 stars
I found this book to be less disappointing than Bloom's take on Iago, the villian from Othello, mainly because Falstaff has got to be Harold Bloom's all-time favorite character from Shakespeare, and the enthusiasm is contagious. Otherwise, reading this work was similar to having a friendly dinner conversation with your long-time friend, who's also a professor of English literature, while they tell you why Falstaff is so great. Although there's a central thesis, that Falstaff represents life and vitality, and the chapters mainly go through the scenes of Henry IV Pts. 1 and 2 and the death scene from Henry V chronologically, the entire work feels only vaguely organized. As the chapters went on, the block quotes grew longer, and the argumentation for his thesis grew thinner. I'll concede some of his points to Bloom. Mainly, though, I was left with the impression that he overstretched the "life, vitality, and youth" concept because he can't abide the usual interpretations of cowardice, etc. to his favorite character. If you want in-depth analysis, you'll want to go elsewhere.
I found this book to be less disappointing than Bloom's take on Iago, the villian from Othello, mainly because Falstaff has got to be Harold Bloom's all-time favorite character from Shakespeare, and the enthusiasm is contagious. Otherwise, reading this work was similar to having a friendly dinner conversation with your long-time friend, who's also a professor of English literature, while they tell you why Falstaff is so great. Although there's a central thesis, that Falstaff represents life and vitality, and the chapters mainly go through the scenes of Henry IV Pts. 1 and 2 and the death scene from Henry V chronologically, the entire work feels only vaguely organized. As the chapters went on, the block quotes grew longer, and the argumentation for his thesis grew thinner. I'll concede some of his points to Bloom. Mainly, though, I was left with the impression that he overstretched the "life, vitality, and youth" concept because he can't abide the usual interpretations of cowardice, etc. to his favorite character. If you want in-depth analysis, you'll want to go elsewhere.
August 14, 2017
Harold Bloom idolizes Falstaff, the fat, hard-drinking knight, a comic character who turns up in Shakespeare's history plays about Henry IV. He celebrates his wit, joie de vivre, self-delusion, self-awareness, and all-round larger-than-life quality. Bloom grudgingly admits Falstaff's faults. (He also admits the good points of Falstaff's opposites, Prince Hal and Hotspur -- more so than he did in his earlier book, _Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human_, as I recall.) Bloom proceeds through the two parts of _Henry IV_ making his points with generous quotes from the plays. (The books is only 158 pages, about half of which is quotations.) He dismisses _Merry Wives of Windsor_, the play in which his hero is humiliated multiple times, as "a ghastly comedy that is an unacceptable travesty of Falstaff." The heart-broken knight dies offstage in _Henry V_, but Bloom thinks of that play as _The Death of Sir John Falstaff_. If you love "plump Jack" or following Bloom on his flights of appreciation, you'll love this book.
May 6, 2018
As a Shakespearian professor none can be found better. I read one of his masterpieces “Shakespeare: The Invention of Personality” as well as five or six other books of the 50 or so he has written.
In his mid eighties his last works are short 150 page essays and reflections on Shakespeare’s greatest characters: Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, Macbeth and Cleopatra.
It can be challenging to study Shakespeare in the raw, so many words have different meanings nowadays, like ‘earn’ during Shakespeare’s time was short hand of yearn meaning today mourn. Also so many references to the Bible or history are easily missed. This does not even count the encyclopedia mind of Bloom who will not only explain the bard’s passage and language he will also tell you how it inspiried the Bronte’s sisters and/or Melville or dozens other literature classics.
If you are set to tackle “Richard II”, “Henry IV Part One and Part Two” this book is the best companion.
In his mid eighties his last works are short 150 page essays and reflections on Shakespeare’s greatest characters: Falstaff, Hamlet, Iago, Lear, Macbeth and Cleopatra.
It can be challenging to study Shakespeare in the raw, so many words have different meanings nowadays, like ‘earn’ during Shakespeare’s time was short hand of yearn meaning today mourn. Also so many references to the Bible or history are easily missed. This does not even count the encyclopedia mind of Bloom who will not only explain the bard’s passage and language he will also tell you how it inspiried the Bronte’s sisters and/or Melville or dozens other literature classics.
If you are set to tackle “Richard II”, “Henry IV Part One and Part Two” this book is the best companion.
May 7, 2018
Falstaff: Give Me Life is Harold Bloom rambling on about one of the most authentic characters in all the plays of Shakespeare, and that’s not a bad thing. The Falstaff in my mind is that of Antony Sher in the RSC 2014 production. His performance is so powerful, so compelling, that it dominates the play. Bloom’s analysis helps explain why; and adds much depth to both the character and the plots of the Henriad. For instance, the parallels with the parable of Lazarus completely escaped me. Maybe that’s far-fetched, and other Bloom sentiments do seem a bit far-fetched; but if you happen to love the character of Sir John, you may learn something from Bloom’s monologue, and you will certainly be entertained.
February 12, 2024
Unapologetic bardolater Bloom expounding his take on the Bard's immortal play-characters; a fine series indeed! Be sure to check out the other iterations on Iago, MacBeth, Lear and Cleopatra. For more excellent works interpreting all the plays check Bloom's Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human or the magisterial Shakespeare After All by Marjorie Garber.
June 15, 2017
RATING: 3.5 STARS
(I received an ARC from the NETGALLEY)
(Review Not on Blog)
Shakespeare's writing has always intrigued me as it's not something I understand immediately as I read the words. I have not read any play that play that features Falstaff, but I have seen The Merry Wives of Windsor. I enjoyed the performance so I am looking forward to reading the play. Harold Bloom's take on Falstaff's character is interesting and even if your don't know the character he provides enough context for the reader. I do want to reread this book after I have read more on Falstaff.
(I received an ARC from the NETGALLEY)
(Review Not on Blog)
Shakespeare's writing has always intrigued me as it's not something I understand immediately as I read the words. I have not read any play that play that features Falstaff, but I have seen The Merry Wives of Windsor. I enjoyed the performance so I am looking forward to reading the play. Harold Bloom's take on Falstaff's character is interesting and even if your don't know the character he provides enough context for the reader. I do want to reread this book after I have read more on Falstaff.
February 25, 2018
An excellent appreciation of Falstaff, his humanity and the comparison to Hal, the future Henry V. Falstaff was according to Bloom the greatest of Shakespeare's characters and this book makes an effective case for that assertion.
Reading the book inspired me to watch Orson Welles, Chimes at Midnight and I agree with Harold Bloom that it is a neglected masterpiece with a cast including Keith Baxter as Hal, John Gielgud as Henry IV, Jeanne Moreau as Doll Tearsheet, Margaret Rutherford as Mistress Quickly, Ralph Richardson as the Narrator and above all Orson Wells as Falstaff.
Reading the book inspired me to watch Orson Welles, Chimes at Midnight and I agree with Harold Bloom that it is a neglected masterpiece with a cast including Keith Baxter as Hal, John Gielgud as Henry IV, Jeanne Moreau as Doll Tearsheet, Margaret Rutherford as Mistress Quickly, Ralph Richardson as the Narrator and above all Orson Wells as Falstaff.
July 19, 2017
I get loving a character to the extent that you don't notice (or explain away) their flaws and foibles, but I was hoping that an academic like Harold Bloom would have been able to produce a more objective analysis of Falstaff. Boy was I wrong. I do think that there is merit in Bloom's work here, but it needs to be balanced with other scholarly works. And then the question becomes, does that really make this book worthwhile.
October 21, 2017
I disagree with Bloom all over the place yet I don’t think he’d object a bit to arguing about it - he concedes here points he’s stated adamantly earlier elsewhere & his mind will change again. I will always be a champion of the world’s need to hear of a person’s artistic loves as much or more than of his derisions.
July 24, 2017
About 2/3 of the time I hardly knew what Bloom was talking about, but the rest was delightful. He does this bawdy, gentle friend of a prince--and then a king--justice in this tribute to loyalty, amity, and the rejections of history.
December 12, 2017
Excellent book about one of Shakespeare's most interesting characters: Falstaff. It's been many years since I've read the 'Henry' plays. But Bloom explains things well and his narrative help refresh my memory of the plays.
January 6, 2018
Full bloom
Falstaff and bloom are intertwined in a single masterwork. Plentiful quotes from Shakespeare’s with added context and background. Fascinating and exceptional book. What’s the appetite for more Shakespeare characters
Falstaff and bloom are intertwined in a single masterwork. Plentiful quotes from Shakespeare’s with added context and background. Fascinating and exceptional book. What’s the appetite for more Shakespeare characters
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews