What do you think?
Rate this book
El censor de Shakespeare
¿Resurgirá Shakespeare cual ave fénix?
Valladolid, 1624, Seminario para ingleses de San Albano. Monseñor William Sankey, jesuita censor de la Inquisición, llega con una misión: decidir si incluye en el Índice de libros prohibidos un volumen que se halla en la biblioteca del seminario: la edición infolio que reúne póstumamente treinta y seis de los dramas escritos por William Shakespeare.
La tarea plantea a Sankey un difícil dilema moral, pues William fue su amigo íntimo, su alma gemela. Ambos habían nacido en Stratford-upon-Avon en abril de 1564 bajo el signo de Tauro ―ambiciosos y leales― y el de la viejafe católica en un tiempo de prohibición de su culto, persecuciones y ejecuciones, que no acabarían con la llamada Paz de Londres en 1604, sino que resurgirían con la Conspiración de la Pólvora y se arrastrarían hasta la Guerra de los Treinta Años. A lo largo de sus vidas paralelas se quisieron y se enfrentaron tras compartir los peligrosos acontecimientos históricos de la época junto a los personajes más importantes, tanto ingleses ―Francis Bacon, Walter Raleigh, los condes de Southampton y Essex, los Cecil― como españoles ―Antonio Pérez, el duque de Lerma, el conde de Gondomar―.
Todo lo que compartieron y todo lo que los separó asaltan el juicio de Sankey, que, al enfrentarse a la obra del amigo, hará memoria de sus vidas paralelas para determinar si, como el ave fénix, William Shakespeare merece resurgir, eternamente, de sus cenizas.
Con maestría, certeras dosis de intriga y rigor histórico, Federico Trillo-Figueroa desgrana en esta novela las claves de la obra de Shakespeare y las zozobras políticas y espirituales de una época crucial en la historia de las religiones, de la geopolítica, que enfrentó a Inglaterra y España, a católicos y anglicanos, a jesuitas y dominicos, en los umbrales de la Edad Moderna.
Valladolid, 1624, Seminario para ingleses de San Albano. Monseñor William Sankey, jesuita censor de la Inquisición, llega con una misión: decidir si incluye en el Índice de libros prohibidos un volumen que se halla en la biblioteca del seminario: la edición infolio que reúne póstumamente treinta y seis de los dramas escritos por William Shakespeare.
La tarea plantea a Sankey un difícil dilema moral, pues William fue su amigo íntimo, su alma gemela. Ambos habían nacido en Stratford-upon-Avon en abril de 1564 bajo el signo de Tauro ―ambiciosos y leales― y el de la viejafe católica en un tiempo de prohibición de su culto, persecuciones y ejecuciones, que no acabarían con la llamada Paz de Londres en 1604, sino que resurgirían con la Conspiración de la Pólvora y se arrastrarían hasta la Guerra de los Treinta Años. A lo largo de sus vidas paralelas se quisieron y se enfrentaron tras compartir los peligrosos acontecimientos históricos de la época junto a los personajes más importantes, tanto ingleses ―Francis Bacon, Walter Raleigh, los condes de Southampton y Essex, los Cecil― como españoles ―Antonio Pérez, el duque de Lerma, el conde de Gondomar―.
Todo lo que compartieron y todo lo que los separó asaltan el juicio de Sankey, que, al enfrentarse a la obra del amigo, hará memoria de sus vidas paralelas para determinar si, como el ave fénix, William Shakespeare merece resurgir, eternamente, de sus cenizas.
Con maestría, certeras dosis de intriga y rigor histórico, Federico Trillo-Figueroa desgrana en esta novela las claves de la obra de Shakespeare y las zozobras políticas y espirituales de una época crucial en la historia de las religiones, de la geopolítica, que enfrentó a Inglaterra y España, a católicos y anglicanos, a jesuitas y dominicos, en los umbrales de la Edad Moderna.
- GenresHistorical Romance
432 pages, Paperback
Published June 1, 2022
2 people are currently reading
35 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
June 10, 2022
Ladies and gentlemen I don't know how to start writing this review, because I'm still knocked out, and trying to assimilate the content of this book. Perhaps the best way to do this is to use a metaphor. For Goodreads users to understand, it is as if a server (myself) had organized, a party, a treat, or a social event of great importance, and someone who has not been invited to it, but who ends up becoming the soul of the party, or the greatest attraction of it, is presented to the party. eclipsing the other guests at the event.
This has happened to me with the book of former Minister Federico Trillo, who was Minister of Defense during the presidency of Don José María Aznar, certainly I must be the first to apologize to him. This minister was best known for some gags that the media aired as the expression "Send eggs", or when he was at an event in El Salvador say "Soldiers live Honduras". I don't know if it was Federico Trillo, who had to deal with the tragedy of YAK 42, which was so exploited by the left, just like the Spanish intervention during the Iraq war. To which I as a Catholic following the opinion of St. John Paul II https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... In any case, we must denounce the immense hypocrisy of everything. The Iraq war was an excuse. In reality, the lives of the Iraqis gave a damn to the leftist leaders of both José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, as well as other political leaders who used him as Chirac (who had sold weapons to Saddam Hussein), or Schroeder the man who is possibly responsible for the shortages that the Germans may suffer, and who began the campaign against nuclear, as he was the representative of Gazprom. There was also a lot of tension in the United States, and it was used to attempt the assault on the White House. My opinion is that there were no such weapons, but in spite of everything (other mistakes could be mentioned, but for charity I will not do it). However, the campaign against the PP seemed to me absolutely repugnant with a radicalized left, and some independentists who had also been radicalized. The PSOE thought it would be like the Mexican PRI, and that it would never lose, but economic mismanagement and corruption cases gave Aznar victory in 1996. This was not forgiven by the left, which in the hands of Zapatero was radicalized, and surrendered in the hands of the Catalan separatists, and while pretending to support the anti-terrorist pact was already reaching agreements with the enemies of the nation (with the terrorist group ETA). The 2004 elections were conditioned by the so-called terrorist attack of 11 M, which was attributed to Al Quaeda, but despite the subsequent process there are great suspicions, and distrust on this issue, and recently the possibility that this attack had been organized by the Moroccan intelligence service, and French in collusion with the Socialist Party, gains more credit. It is worth remembering Aznar's bad relationship with President Chirac, and the Parsley Crisis from which we were helped by President George W. Bush after the attempt to intercede with Chirac, and Schroeder, who left abandoned, and thrown to Spain. Aznar was an uncomfortable man, and this was never forgiven by Moroccans, nor Chirac, nor an ambitious Zapatero, who was very eager to come to power, and who would be responsible for the ruin of Spain with his policies, and not only because it led us to an economic crisis, but because of the ideological laws, which are not only maintained but have been expanded by successive governments. Anyway after the attacks instead of leaving together as in London, or New York. Although I think the modern world changed from there, and there was a rupture. This was denounced by the writer John C. Wright https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... at that time an atheist, but seeing the reaction of his atheist friends who not only did not condemn the attack, but excused it, or even considered it deserved. This transcendental fact made the West change, and made it reject its Christian origins, and resorted to what G.K. Chesterton called old virtues that have gone crazy with what was sponsored a more ideological agenda in terms of gender, racial, and continued with environmentalism, while unfortunately society began to be hostile to Christianity, but not so no longer with Islam, but with jihadism. Movements such as me too (increasingly discredited, but there it is), or the culture of cancellation or Wokism could not be explained without the demoralization suffered by the West in September 11 in the attack on the Twin Towers. One thing must also be said, and that the attacks had been America's allies until recently, and had been used to fight communism without stopping to analyze whether they were worse than me. Anyway I can understand it since communism has been responsible for 150 million deaths https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... The year 2022 cannot be understood without the events of 2001. As I said I did not applaud the war in Iraq, but I suspected the inability of the opposition to govern, and I knew that an ideological program would be carried out, and anti-Catholic from the beginning through a radio station the SER was incited to assault the headquarters of the PP in Genoa. Then we would see that those responsible for the assault would be the leaders of the podemos movement financed by the Spanish-American dictatorships, and by Iran. The most logical thing would have been to postpone the elections. The left attributed the attack to the Iraq War, and considered that the PP was lying by attributing the crime to ETA (which I want to remember that days before it had tried a similar attack), and also the PP before the elections already arrested the first suspects, who turned out to be Muslims. However, the attack was different from those carried out by Al Quaeda, since there was no suicide terrorism, the disappearance of the wagon was also suspected. Many think judge Bermudez closed the case falsely. Anyway there are no normal elections in 1936 in a climate of violence, and amid accusations of fraud the left won, in 1982 the left won after the failed coup of Tejero in 2004 occurred the attack of 11 M, in 2008 the attack on Isaías Carrasco, and President Pedro Sánchez (the war was later replaced by corruption to reach power) used a very tendentious report of the Judge De Prada to provoke a motion of censure that a pp in minority could not resist. In the motion of censure two things were key the betrayal of the PNV, and that of a Rivera who wanted to be president at all costs, and who thought that there had been an electoral advance he would be the main beneficiary, but Sánchez betrayed him, and voted against the motion, but without the previous tension of Citizens, and PP the motion would have been impossible.
By this I certainly meant that perhaps this will lead me to underestimate Mr. Federico Trillo for which I ask for my sincere apologies. Certainly the malevolence of the media prevented us from realizing the human quality of previous politicians, compared to the current ones. Here begins the story of the book in question. At first as I said this book is a surprise guest I began to be interested in him when in the 13 TV program the rattle to the cat the presenter Antonio Jiménez interviewed Federico Trillo, and they talked about his new book The censor of Shakespeare, which deals with a very interesting topic in which my city Valladolid was involved. People who live in Valladolid will know there is a street called Don Sancho where you can find the Colegio de los Ingleses or San Albano, and there Federico Trillo who made a thesis on power in shakespeare's dramas https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... In San Albano the author found a complete edition of the works of William Shakespeare https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... subjected to the scrutiny of the Inquisition. I must say one thing that has not been said, that the Inquisition investigates a book does not mean that the book is bad, that it is in question, or that it wants to deprive us of its reading for evil. Far from me to justify censorship, but I want to remember that the Inquisition investigated everything even great saints such as St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Teresa of Jesus, St. John of the Cross, or Fray Luis de León https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... unlike what one might think the Inquisition was composed of very cultured people, and well prepared knowledgeable of their trade, and if they censored something they did not do it on a whim although there could be bad faith. If they did, it's because there really was something. In any case, the complete work was not censored, but the parts dangerous to the faith. I know that in the middle of the twenty-first century we find it horrible that William Shakespeare is subjected to this test, but it should be remembered that he was English, and came from a kingdom that had abandoned Catholicism, and had embraced the Protestant heresy, so if these works were to be read in our country it was necessary to check if they did not threaten our Holy Doctrine. Eye, you will find what I say repugnant, but in the XXI century this is still valid, although books that attempt against religion are no longer persecuted, if books that are critical of the dominant ideologies are persecuted, books have been attacked for being sexist, or racist. Recently, some books were burned in a Canadian school, and feminism put fairy tales under its sights. I do not see much Fourth Millennium, but I am interested in a section directed by Juan Soto Ivars https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... that talks about censored books, or cursed some with cause, and others not, but let's not deceive ourselves in the XXI century there is censorship so let's not get great criticizing the past eras.
After this digression I continue with my criticism. Last year as the few users who follow me will know, I read a work written by don Federico Trillo's brother. I refer to the wonderful "The world between scripts" written by his Don Jesús Trillo-Figueroa https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... this novel that told the relationship between Hannah Arendt https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and Martin Heiddeger https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... . This novel that was a lucid analysis also of interwar Germany was presented by two unparalleled figures of Hispanic letters I am referring to the one that together with my always revered Joseph Pearce https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and my friend Professor Manuel Alfonseca https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... I am referring to Don Juan Manuel de Prada (nothing to do with the judge cited thank God) https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and this novel was also co-presented, and praised by Don José Javier Esparza https://www.goodreads.com/author/show..., whose novel "El Tercio que nunca existió" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... is the best of this 2022 in tough competition with "Shakespeare's Censor" that he now reviewed, and "1985" by Anthony Burgess https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... tags. It is curious last year were very fashionable novels that dealt with this subject Protestantism in England, and the situation of Catholics in Germany. Highlighting the wonderful novels of "By what authorithy?" by Robert Hugh Benson https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show..., and "An instance of the fingerpost" by Iain Pears https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... (this dealt with the next epoch that Benson dealt with in the aforementioned novel that of the Stuarts, which is even more interesting than the Tudor era). In fact this year is looking too much like the previous one with the difference that it is no longer English authors who deal with this phenomenon (with the exception of G.K. Chesterton, and Hilaire Belloc https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... but this year the authors are competing in the non-fiction category).
It is interesting to note something else, I am not a person who believes in coincidences this book appeared when I was engaged in some readings of Shakespeare, and I was wondering about the issues that Don Federico Trillo-Figueroa deals with in his book. The integrity, and morality of his works. Last year we also read the famous novel "Hamnet" by Maggie O'Farrell https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... with 153004 ratings in goodreads, and that was praised left and right by all critics, but I was the exception, and the novel was a real disappointment. It should be noted that I did not like this, but it is not Hilary Mantel's Wolf Hall https://www.goodreads.com/series/7545... (rather I should call it the Thomas Cromwell trilogy). It should be noted, that Mantel was Catholic, and renounced his faith, so we should not be surprised by the content what surprises me is his number of readers, and the favorable reviews that his pamphlet has had. Less awarded, but unfortunately excessively praised has been the slanderous, false "Pillar of Fire" of the always widely read Ken Follet https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... who claims to lead us down the path of tolerance, but where it takes us is for something older than Matusalem himself. Matusalem tells it, I say Follet is not new. This was already invented by Foxe https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... and in the nineteenth century St. John Henry Newman's adversary Charles Kingsley https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... tags. Nor can we rule out welsh national socialist Raymond Williams' approach https://www.goodreads.com/author/show.... The good thing about Maggie O'Farrell's work is that at least it is not tinged with odium fide https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... like the aforementioned authors. In fact, if instead of talking about Shakespeare and his family tragedy I had talked about another family, I would have liked it more. Unfortunately he decides to talk about Shakespeare, and the problem is that he makes things up. It does not count the age difference of the different husbands, nor the fact that Shakespeare seems not to be in tune with his wife, although I want to believe that Shakespeare loved her, and that if he left it was because he had to earn a living. I also didn't like the way he treats John Shakespeare as a kind of violent abuser (on the subject of abusers, and abusers will be discussed in Nicholas Eames' "Kings of the Wyld" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
This has happened to me with the book of former Minister Federico Trillo, who was Minister of Defense during the presidency of Don José María Aznar, certainly I must be the first to apologize to him. This minister was best known for some gags that the media aired as the expression "Send eggs", or when he was at an event in El Salvador say "Soldiers live Honduras". I don't know if it was Federico Trillo, who had to deal with the tragedy of YAK 42, which was so exploited by the left, just like the Spanish intervention during the Iraq war. To which I as a Catholic following the opinion of St. John Paul II https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... In any case, we must denounce the immense hypocrisy of everything. The Iraq war was an excuse. In reality, the lives of the Iraqis gave a damn to the leftist leaders of both José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, as well as other political leaders who used him as Chirac (who had sold weapons to Saddam Hussein), or Schroeder the man who is possibly responsible for the shortages that the Germans may suffer, and who began the campaign against nuclear, as he was the representative of Gazprom. There was also a lot of tension in the United States, and it was used to attempt the assault on the White House. My opinion is that there were no such weapons, but in spite of everything (other mistakes could be mentioned, but for charity I will not do it). However, the campaign against the PP seemed to me absolutely repugnant with a radicalized left, and some independentists who had also been radicalized. The PSOE thought it would be like the Mexican PRI, and that it would never lose, but economic mismanagement and corruption cases gave Aznar victory in 1996. This was not forgiven by the left, which in the hands of Zapatero was radicalized, and surrendered in the hands of the Catalan separatists, and while pretending to support the anti-terrorist pact was already reaching agreements with the enemies of the nation (with the terrorist group ETA). The 2004 elections were conditioned by the so-called terrorist attack of 11 M, which was attributed to Al Quaeda, but despite the subsequent process there are great suspicions, and distrust on this issue, and recently the possibility that this attack had been organized by the Moroccan intelligence service, and French in collusion with the Socialist Party, gains more credit. It is worth remembering Aznar's bad relationship with President Chirac, and the Parsley Crisis from which we were helped by President George W. Bush after the attempt to intercede with Chirac, and Schroeder, who left abandoned, and thrown to Spain. Aznar was an uncomfortable man, and this was never forgiven by Moroccans, nor Chirac, nor an ambitious Zapatero, who was very eager to come to power, and who would be responsible for the ruin of Spain with his policies, and not only because it led us to an economic crisis, but because of the ideological laws, which are not only maintained but have been expanded by successive governments. Anyway after the attacks instead of leaving together as in London, or New York. Although I think the modern world changed from there, and there was a rupture. This was denounced by the writer John C. Wright https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... at that time an atheist, but seeing the reaction of his atheist friends who not only did not condemn the attack, but excused it, or even considered it deserved. This transcendental fact made the West change, and made it reject its Christian origins, and resorted to what G.K. Chesterton called old virtues that have gone crazy with what was sponsored a more ideological agenda in terms of gender, racial, and continued with environmentalism, while unfortunately society began to be hostile to Christianity, but not so no longer with Islam, but with jihadism. Movements such as me too (increasingly discredited, but there it is), or the culture of cancellation or Wokism could not be explained without the demoralization suffered by the West in September 11 in the attack on the Twin Towers. One thing must also be said, and that the attacks had been America's allies until recently, and had been used to fight communism without stopping to analyze whether they were worse than me. Anyway I can understand it since communism has been responsible for 150 million deaths https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... The year 2022 cannot be understood without the events of 2001. As I said I did not applaud the war in Iraq, but I suspected the inability of the opposition to govern, and I knew that an ideological program would be carried out, and anti-Catholic from the beginning through a radio station the SER was incited to assault the headquarters of the PP in Genoa. Then we would see that those responsible for the assault would be the leaders of the podemos movement financed by the Spanish-American dictatorships, and by Iran. The most logical thing would have been to postpone the elections. The left attributed the attack to the Iraq War, and considered that the PP was lying by attributing the crime to ETA (which I want to remember that days before it had tried a similar attack), and also the PP before the elections already arrested the first suspects, who turned out to be Muslims. However, the attack was different from those carried out by Al Quaeda, since there was no suicide terrorism, the disappearance of the wagon was also suspected. Many think judge Bermudez closed the case falsely. Anyway there are no normal elections in 1936 in a climate of violence, and amid accusations of fraud the left won, in 1982 the left won after the failed coup of Tejero in 2004 occurred the attack of 11 M, in 2008 the attack on Isaías Carrasco, and President Pedro Sánchez (the war was later replaced by corruption to reach power) used a very tendentious report of the Judge De Prada to provoke a motion of censure that a pp in minority could not resist. In the motion of censure two things were key the betrayal of the PNV, and that of a Rivera who wanted to be president at all costs, and who thought that there had been an electoral advance he would be the main beneficiary, but Sánchez betrayed him, and voted against the motion, but without the previous tension of Citizens, and PP the motion would have been impossible.
By this I certainly meant that perhaps this will lead me to underestimate Mr. Federico Trillo for which I ask for my sincere apologies. Certainly the malevolence of the media prevented us from realizing the human quality of previous politicians, compared to the current ones. Here begins the story of the book in question. At first as I said this book is a surprise guest I began to be interested in him when in the 13 TV program the rattle to the cat the presenter Antonio Jiménez interviewed Federico Trillo, and they talked about his new book The censor of Shakespeare, which deals with a very interesting topic in which my city Valladolid was involved. People who live in Valladolid will know there is a street called Don Sancho where you can find the Colegio de los Ingleses or San Albano, and there Federico Trillo who made a thesis on power in shakespeare's dramas https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... In San Albano the author found a complete edition of the works of William Shakespeare https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... subjected to the scrutiny of the Inquisition. I must say one thing that has not been said, that the Inquisition investigates a book does not mean that the book is bad, that it is in question, or that it wants to deprive us of its reading for evil. Far from me to justify censorship, but I want to remember that the Inquisition investigated everything even great saints such as St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Teresa of Jesus, St. John of the Cross, or Fray Luis de León https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... unlike what one might think the Inquisition was composed of very cultured people, and well prepared knowledgeable of their trade, and if they censored something they did not do it on a whim although there could be bad faith. If they did, it's because there really was something. In any case, the complete work was not censored, but the parts dangerous to the faith. I know that in the middle of the twenty-first century we find it horrible that William Shakespeare is subjected to this test, but it should be remembered that he was English, and came from a kingdom that had abandoned Catholicism, and had embraced the Protestant heresy, so if these works were to be read in our country it was necessary to check if they did not threaten our Holy Doctrine. Eye, you will find what I say repugnant, but in the XXI century this is still valid, although books that attempt against religion are no longer persecuted, if books that are critical of the dominant ideologies are persecuted, books have been attacked for being sexist, or racist. Recently, some books were burned in a Canadian school, and feminism put fairy tales under its sights. I do not see much Fourth Millennium, but I am interested in a section directed by Juan Soto Ivars https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... that talks about censored books, or cursed some with cause, and others not, but let's not deceive ourselves in the XXI century there is censorship so let's not get great criticizing the past eras.
After this digression I continue with my criticism. Last year as the few users who follow me will know, I read a work written by don Federico Trillo's brother. I refer to the wonderful "The world between scripts" written by his Don Jesús Trillo-Figueroa https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... this novel that told the relationship between Hannah Arendt https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and Martin Heiddeger https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... . This novel that was a lucid analysis also of interwar Germany was presented by two unparalleled figures of Hispanic letters I am referring to the one that together with my always revered Joseph Pearce https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and my friend Professor Manuel Alfonseca https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... I am referring to Don Juan Manuel de Prada (nothing to do with the judge cited thank God) https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... and this novel was also co-presented, and praised by Don José Javier Esparza https://www.goodreads.com/author/show..., whose novel "El Tercio que nunca existió" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... is the best of this 2022 in tough competition with "Shakespeare's Censor" that he now reviewed, and "1985" by Anthony Burgess https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... tags. It is curious last year were very fashionable novels that dealt with this subject Protestantism in England, and the situation of Catholics in Germany. Highlighting the wonderful novels of "By what authorithy?" by Robert Hugh Benson https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show..., and "An instance of the fingerpost" by Iain Pears https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... (this dealt with the next epoch that Benson dealt with in the aforementioned novel that of the Stuarts, which is even more interesting than the Tudor era). In fact this year is looking too much like the previous one with the difference that it is no longer English authors who deal with this phenomenon (with the exception of G.K. Chesterton, and Hilaire Belloc https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... but this year the authors are competing in the non-fiction category).
It is interesting to note something else, I am not a person who believes in coincidences this book appeared when I was engaged in some readings of Shakespeare, and I was wondering about the issues that Don Federico Trillo-Figueroa deals with in his book. The integrity, and morality of his works. Last year we also read the famous novel "Hamnet" by Maggie O'Farrell https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... with 153004 ratings in goodreads, and that was praised left and right by all critics, but I was the exception, and the novel was a real disappointment. It should be noted that I did not like this, but it is not Hilary Mantel's Wolf Hall https://www.goodreads.com/series/7545... (rather I should call it the Thomas Cromwell trilogy). It should be noted, that Mantel was Catholic, and renounced his faith, so we should not be surprised by the content what surprises me is his number of readers, and the favorable reviews that his pamphlet has had. Less awarded, but unfortunately excessively praised has been the slanderous, false "Pillar of Fire" of the always widely read Ken Follet https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... who claims to lead us down the path of tolerance, but where it takes us is for something older than Matusalem himself. Matusalem tells it, I say Follet is not new. This was already invented by Foxe https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... and in the nineteenth century St. John Henry Newman's adversary Charles Kingsley https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... tags. Nor can we rule out welsh national socialist Raymond Williams' approach https://www.goodreads.com/author/show.... The good thing about Maggie O'Farrell's work is that at least it is not tinged with odium fide https://www.goodreads.com/author/show... like the aforementioned authors. In fact, if instead of talking about Shakespeare and his family tragedy I had talked about another family, I would have liked it more. Unfortunately he decides to talk about Shakespeare, and the problem is that he makes things up. It does not count the age difference of the different husbands, nor the fact that Shakespeare seems not to be in tune with his wife, although I want to believe that Shakespeare loved her, and that if he left it was because he had to earn a living. I also didn't like the way he treats John Shakespeare as a kind of violent abuser (on the subject of abusers, and abusers will be discussed in Nicholas Eames' "Kings of the Wyld" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
August 6, 2022
Nunca se donde está el límite entre la historia novelada y la novela que contiene largos párrafos de historia. Y este es uno de los libros que me provoca esa incertidumbre.
Todo lo que tenga que ver con Shakespeare y su país me resulta apasionante, por eso compré el libro. En realidad es una biografía del censor de Shakespeare.
Algunos pasajes se me han hecho pensados y no creo que recomiende el libro, pero tengo que valorar el relato tan documentado que proporciona el autor sobre la situación de los católicos en el Reino Unido en el siglo XVII.
Todo lo que tenga que ver con Shakespeare y su país me resulta apasionante, por eso compré el libro. En realidad es una biografía del censor de Shakespeare.
Algunos pasajes se me han hecho pensados y no creo que recomiende el libro, pero tengo que valorar el relato tan documentado que proporciona el autor sobre la situación de los católicos en el Reino Unido en el siglo XVII.
August 3, 2024
Si te gusta Shakespeare y la historia, este libro es maravilloso.
August 30, 2024
El libro está muy bien escrito, manteniendo durante toda la lectura una prosa acorde con el ambiente cortes inglés de los siglos XIV y XV, y como lección de historia para introducirse en el cisma anglicano está muy bien, pero como lectura falta por pulir algunos matices.
Se habla muy poco del proceso de censura del monseñor Sanskey durante su estancia en San Albano, los episodios que se corresponden con este momento de la historia son cortísimos, de una o dos páginas, y no profundizan ni en los problemas que hay en el seminario ni en los conflictos con el rector Benavides. Solo es al final con la llegada de Gondomar cuando se hace necesaria la estancia de Sanskey en San Albano, pero durante el resto del libro bien se podría haber llevado una continuidad lineal, no una estructura de flashbacks de 50 páginas y escenas en el presente de 2 o 3 páginas.
El libro es de por si la biografía del Padre Sanskey y creo que así debería haberse quedado. En mi opinión los misterios de la mala gestoría de San Albano por la ideología contracatolica, antiinglesa y probelica del rector Benavides se podría haber quedado en una prueba de la todavía intolerancia latente entre España e Inglaterra, pero la verdad que esa subtrama (que al principio parecia ser la trama principal), a mi parecer no aporta nada e incluso obstaculiza la continuidad del relato.
Se habla muy poco del proceso de censura del monseñor Sanskey durante su estancia en San Albano, los episodios que se corresponden con este momento de la historia son cortísimos, de una o dos páginas, y no profundizan ni en los problemas que hay en el seminario ni en los conflictos con el rector Benavides. Solo es al final con la llegada de Gondomar cuando se hace necesaria la estancia de Sanskey en San Albano, pero durante el resto del libro bien se podría haber llevado una continuidad lineal, no una estructura de flashbacks de 50 páginas y escenas en el presente de 2 o 3 páginas.
El libro es de por si la biografía del Padre Sanskey y creo que así debería haberse quedado. En mi opinión los misterios de la mala gestoría de San Albano por la ideología contracatolica, antiinglesa y probelica del rector Benavides se podría haber quedado en una prueba de la todavía intolerancia latente entre España e Inglaterra, pero la verdad que esa subtrama (que al principio parecia ser la trama principal), a mi parecer no aporta nada e incluso obstaculiza la continuidad del relato.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 30, 2024
2.5
Una gran decepción.
Una gran decepción.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews