Shakespeare Fans discussion

Hello, all! I'm new-ish to Shakespeare, but have loved everything I've read so far. I'm wondering if anyone has an idea as to what order is best to read Shakespeare's plays in? I have read Richard III and I am now reading his histories starting with Richard II. After his histories, what is the best way to approach his comedies and tragedies. I want to make sure I read them in an order where I can appreciate each play to its fullest. Thank you'

well if u are reading Richard II, natural flow would be Henry IV parts 1 & 2, then Henry V. Merry Wives if u still need more Falstaff. Richard II is one of my favorites.

I suggest reading them as if they stand alone.

Later you can read them more conscientiously in groups to see how they relate to one another.

A good starter for comedy may be The Taming of the Shrew - it's a stand alone and one of my favorites!

Aside from the histories plays, already mentioned, I don't know that there is an "ideal" order to read the works. One could go in many directions. One could read them in the general order they were believed to have been written, so the changes and evolution of Shakespeare's writing can be considered, on down to the final few plays where he was a writing partner with someone else.

One could start with the shortest, and work one's way up to the longest.

Personally, though, based on what you say you want to accomplish next, I'd start with Romeo and Juliet. It has elements of both the comedies and the tragedies. Though Shakespeare doesn't blend the two moods quite as much an any other play, you can learn a lot about both approaches by reading it.

I have enjoyed reading the commentaries by Marjorie Garber (Shakespeare After All) and Harold Goddard (the Meaning of Shakespeare) before each play. I followed the order from Garber. Harold Bloom is excellent also, but sometimes has an academic chip on his shoulder.

I also have thoroughly enjoyed the "Language of Shakespeare" by Frank Kermode which traces the development of his language from the first generation plays (filled with rhetorical devices) through to the "doubling" tendencies of the later plays. Fascinating. His book gives a historical order in which you can really feel this development. Since he doesn't cover every play, you can feel the development very quickly by reading the plays he is studying in order (and read the other commentaries as well).

The other thing i would definitely recommend is watching videos of the plays as you go through them. So much happens when the plays are spoken, not read. Mercurio's Queen Mab speech in the Zeffirelli production is mind blowing compared to reading it (where frankly it almost feels like a diversion).

Kekuni wrote: "Mercurio's Queen Mab speech in the Zeffirelli production is mind blowing compared to reading it (where frankly it almost feels like a diversion)..."

Kekuni, I agree! Mercutio's speech really comes alive in the Zeffirelli production. These are, after all, PLAYS :) So I am assuming Shakespeare preferred they be watched, which is important to remember.

as long as you read the histories in order there is no other order.

Hi Samantha, Do you mean the historical order or the order they were written in? I think ideally it's good to read them in the order they were written in - not only the histories but any of them. Assuming you're not going to read all of them (yet?) I'd suggest read one or two early ones, eg Richard III and Richard II, one or two mid eg Hamlet, and one or two late, eg Winter's Tale, in order to see the changes of treatment.

My opinion, here is what you do: Find the title that most resonates with you, see if you like the opening lines and if you do, start there! If not, get another title and so on.

You will only come to love Shakespeare if you find resonance in him.

The history plays are best read in tetralogies. There are two:
1) Henry VI parts 1-3 followed by Richard III
2) RIchard II, Henry IV Parts 1 and 2 and Henry V

Then there are King John and Henry VIII which are history plays but not really parts of a sequence.

There are two trajectories in the history plays - the order of the historical events, and the order they were probably written in. I think both are important. It will be difficult to make sense of the events unless you read them (perhaps first) in the order of historical events, because they refer back and forth, and some important characters continue from one play to the next. I would start with Edward III, even though it's probably only partly Shakespeare, because that reign sets the scene for Richard II and later on also for Henry V, both of which refer to it. In fact Henry V is virtually a remodelled Edward III - essentially the same story (history repeats itself) but with hugely amplified critical subtext. After Ed III comes Richard II, then Henry IV 1&2, Henry V, the three parts of Henry VI and Richard III. When you get to Henry VI, which was probably written before all the others, you might be struck by how much less sophisticated it is than, especially, R II and Henry IV. Then it would be worth reading at least parts of them again in the probable written order: Henry VI, Richard III, Edward III, Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V. I've set this out as a table in my book Shakespeare and Democracy (Troubador, 2015), setting historical dates and probable writing dates side by side, with an interpretation of the conflicting factors likely to have been driving the development - deepening critique of monarchy itself, but at the same time getting drawn closer and closer into court patronage and control. Hence abandoning English history after Henry V - until the very late and much feebler Henry VIII. Very broadly the underlying thinking moves from 'who shall be king?' to 'what is a king?', and then, through other plays, to 'how can a king be held accountable?' - a trajectory moving instinctively towards democracy, albeit with some major diversions.

Wibbly Wobbly wrote: "as long as you read the histories in order there is no other order."

I appreciate this comment. Is there a discussion or list in this group where I can find the order of the histories? Or do you know that order and can answer in a reply? Thank you, Wibbly Wobbly.

Wibbly Wobbly wrote: "as long as you read the histories in order there is no other order."

Hey, WW, you can ignore my previous comment/question. I hadn't read far enough to see Gabriel's comment which was a comprehensive answer. So glad people are helpful here.

Some editions of individual plays, such as Penguin, have introductions which list all the plays in the order they were written in, so far as is known, which is fairly certain from dates of first performance and other recorded references. Whichever one you're reading at a particular time, it's a good idea to know whether it was early, middle or late. so that you gradually get a sense of his vision of humanity getting deeper. For example the image of women in the Taming of the Shrew (very early) is shallow compared with All's Well (mid) or the Winter's Tale (late). Similarly the gung-ho view of war in Edward III (early) and Henry V (mid) is pretty well trashed in Troilus and Cressida and Coriolanus (late).

Alex wrote: "Hello, all! I'm new-ish to Shakespeare, but have loved everything I've read so far. I'm wondering if anyone has an idea as to what order is best to read Shakespeare's plays in? I have read Richard ..."

Hi Alex.
Many ways to approach Shakespeare.
In 2016 I read The Norton Shakespeare, Based on the Oxford Edition: Romances and Poems. Even when I did not necessarily read the plays in order, I did focus on the tjeme of Shake's romances, staying aware of the where the play I slpelected was in the order of plays. Also starting in university days, I have used anthologies: Riverside, Bevington, Norton (especially bought for that 2016 personal reading goal) . The anthology helps because the editor makes an effort to provide readers with the larger framework. It is not necessary at all to understand even half of what the editor is saying or to grasp all of a play or even most ofmthe play. I am not a professor of Shakespeare or editor of Shakespeare. I am a student of Shakespeare. I continue to study. This year I hope to re-read the history plays. At some time while in university and after I have read all the histories at least twice, watched productions of some, and still I study. I continue to ennjoy the journey. I hope you do too.

Any order that takes your fancy works, I think! A nice and easy - and fun - approach to Shakespeare is to listen to the Chop Bard podcast - he's currently doing Midsummer.

Start with Macbeth, just as I did. Trust me, it'll do you good