Play Book Tag discussion

A very young Latin tutor falls in love with and marries a country woman a few years older named Agnes in the late 16th Century England. They have a daughter then a few short years later, twins, a boy and a girl. When the twins are 11 years old, the plague finds them and takes the son, leaving behind a shattered marriage, a mother deep in depression, a house of mourning and loss. This is Stratford, England in the late 16th Century, and 4 years after the plague takes their son, the father writes a play as a memorial to and named for his son, Hamlet. This is a beautiful, rich, stunning tapestry of historical fiction, bringing a time and a family into living breathing being in all the imperfections one experiences in life. I can't find a single thing to critique.

It is a novel of Shakespeare and his family and yet, because Shakespeare is never named and in fact himself is largely absent from most of the story, it becomes the story of family, marriage, loss, grief, and ultimately survival. Both Agnes and the Latin tutor come from abusive (in different ways) families but flourish, find happiness, and success in spite of such inauspicious beginnnings. Their marriage finds happiness even with great distance as the Latin tutor's work keeps him in London and Agnes and the children stay in Stratford, and especially the deep differences in their natures. But most of all, this is a tragedy: the death of a child. The toll it takes in different ways on every member of the immediate family. It's heartbreaking. Yet, there is always a sense of survival and hope.

There are many beautiful and bittersweet moments and passages here.

On twins: There is not enough life, enough air, enough blood for both of them. Perhaps there never was. And if either of them is to live, it must be [one of them]...

On death: Anyone, Eliza is thinking, who describes dying as "slipping away" or "peaceful" has never witnessed it happen. Death is violent, death is a struggle. The body clings to life, as ivy to a wall, and will not easily let go, will not surrender its grip without a fight.

I was engaged (and oddly charmed) by two journeys described in detail: that of how the plague germ came to this household, and, later, that of the letter informing the father of the illness in the household. What a singular sense of being in the time and place and moment they provide the reader!

The language and writing is gorgeous. I thought the format particularly effective, with the first and largest portion of the story told in alteranting chapters starting with the arrival of illness in the household, then flashing back to the story of the marriage from the start to the inevitable ending. The second part is the aftermath of Hamnet's death, those immediate years after and the toll taken on the family. That final scene is a gem.

I've had this in my TBR Towers for a couple of years, but finally pulled it out to read when my Subdue roll required me to read a book from another player's board before moving on. Thank you BooknBlues for having it as #15 on your Clerk Gameboard!

It also was one of NicoleR's 5 star reviews allowing me to blow out another Birthday Candle for PBT. Thank you NicoleR!

I have this on my Trim list this year and am right in the middle of reading this author's newest, The Marriage Portrait. I am having a decent time with it but this sounds fantastic! Maggie O'Farrell's prose is stunning.

And I still haven't read it! I did read The Marriage Portrait.

Maybe next time around on the Subdue if I ever get there.

Great review.

Heather Reads Books wrote: "I have this on my Trim list this year and am right in the middle of reading this author's newest, The Marriage Portrait. I am having a decent time with it but this sounds fantastic!..."

Will definitely at some point read it and, frankly, anything she writes. Just gorgeous writing.

Yay!!! So glad you loved this one!! I find myself recommending it all the time.

I really enjoyed this one quite a bit as well.

So glad to see you loved this book too! It is one of my favorites.

You remarked on
I thought the format particularly effective, with the first and largest portion of the story told in alteranting chapters starting with the arrival of illness in the household, then flashing back to the story of the marriage from the start to the inevitable ending.

That is exactly what I disliked about the book, the inevitability. It starts with the couple married. Then it goes back to their meeting, etc. But you know they end up together. Same thing with the plague, you know the outcome and then you have to endure all the suffering with no suspense as to what will happen. I am fine with experimental structures of writing but this seemed to deliberately kill all suspense (same thing happens in The Murmur of Bees).

And I think the author tried to hard to have beautiful writing, how many times does she have to tell us the mother had a special relationship with nature? I got it the first time.

I did like the ending of the book. And I also liked the reminder that a famous, brilliant person can often be a jerk to his family.

One of my favorite aspects of the book was that the name “William Shakespeare” was never used. He was always “the husband” or “the father” or some other name that described him without naming him.

I thought it brilliantly kept the focus on Agnes. She was the center of the story.

I've been tied up with work ....

@NicoleR - I totally agree - it was such a critical decision as it kept it a grounded in Agnes and family story, grounded in the marriage as a marriage and not being overshadowed by his fame. Because whether you are a celebrity, famous, gifted, or even royalty, you are a person and your marriage is a marriage, your wife her own identity, life and tragedy and happiness happen regardless of all those other things.

@RobinP - I'm the opposite. I like knowing the end (not always of course - I read mysteries after all) then exploring the journey that got to that point. Would the movie Sunset Boulevard been as powerful and brilliant had we not seen the body in the pool at the beginning and known that the narrator was dead, explaining how it got there? To me the journey itself and how it twisted and turned and the little and large details that led to Hamnet's death was what was what captivated, and the close dual time periods kept it lively and immediate. I also thought her abandoning once Hamnet died, leaving Part 2 as a straightforward telling of the aftermath, the mourning and its affect on all, was another right decision.

But we can all agree or not - it's what makes it interesting to discuss a book, right?!

I'm avoiding this discussion ... or trying to ... because I just picked up the book from the library and will start it next.....

I never expected this book to be suspenseful, it's not that type of book in my opinion. The author takes a different angle on the person we know from history as Anne Hathaway so if you know something about her, you will already know she marries Shakespeare and that she survives.

For me it is more of a beautiful contemplation on motherhood. I loved the details of the deep love, small pleasures, joy, guilt, and grief that the mother had for her child. It also enjoyed the role of art in healing emotional wounds.

@BC - you are in for a treat. I avoided reading all reviews while I was reading it - only looked at NicoleR's, JoyD's, etc. once I finished.

@Joy - Yes! [SPOILER HERE] Also what has been rising to the surface in my mind - this is a book that is staying with me - is that special senses or gifts like the sight and other psychic or even instinctual senses, and the bonds created through motherhood, marriage, closeness -- are all infallible, cannot be relied upon, because in the end what you have sensed, 'seen' or whatever is no different than if you heard words or saw a picture - it's open to interpretation. That is something that Agnes is learning here because she has for so long relied on that special extra ability to 'read' people and the future but it fails her with Hamnet.

I was forced to read this pretty slowly given how short and easy to read it was because I was so preoccupied with work. In the end that slowness was a blessing because it forced me to savor it, pick when I read it to the weekend or when I was more alert and less distracted. That I believe led to it's layers and richness blooming fully for me.

I think I'm with Robin on this one, and I had a similar reaction to The Marriage Portrait. The fore knowledge of doom dragged me away from the books, even though the prose was beautiful. Of course reading a book about bubonic plague during a pandemic may have influenced my lukewarm response.

I absolutely loved this book, and I am an avid Shakespeare fan... I used to read the plays, but these days mainly any adaptation related to his work I will read.

I just saw a play this past weekend just like this book called Shakespeare's Will and it is focused on Anne. In this play, he has just passed and she's returned to her home from his funeral carrying his will that she has yet to read. From there it is mostly flashbacks to how they met and came to be married. As with Hamnet, he leaves their home to go to London to be an actor and playwright where he will stay for the next few decades.

It was a one woman show and absolutely wonderful.

I highly recommend to fans of this book.

Jgrace wrote: "I think I'm with Robin on this one, and I had a similar reaction to The Marriage Portrait. The fore knowledge of doom dragged me away from the books, even though the prose was beaut..."

One of the reasons I had this in my TBR Towers so long (since whenever it came out in trade paperback - 2020?) was that I could not bring myself to read a book featuring plague ... until now.

I think my book club read this right after things were opening back up, or still in limbo, and many other readers felt that way too - were a lil triggered by the references to the plague. The black plague was so much worse and grotesque it actually made me feel less anxious about our plague... somehow. At least we weren't rotting from the inside out! :-O

Meli wrote: "I absolutely loved this book, and I am an avid Shakespeare fan... I used to read the plays, but these days mainly any adaptation related to his work I will read.

I just saw a play this past weeke..."

That play sounds great, Meli! Will keep my eye out for it.

I too am a Shakespeare fan, and of course have seen many of his plays both on and off and off-off Broadway, as well as summer theater productions (UColorado in Boulder has summer open air productions that are marvelous should anyone be there). I still occasionally dip into one of the plays - last was Troilus and Cressida in 2019. After seeing the film The Lost King recently, about finding the remains of King Richard III and reinstating him into the official royal lineage, I want to re-read Richard III because in the film Shakespeare is credited with perpetuating through it the disinformation about his reign.

@Theresa - I just heard about this film! I didn't realize it was already out. And it was based on a female historian who dug this information up, right?

I will check it out.

Maybe we can have a Shakespeare buddy read sometime 🥰
Or at least one of the modernized novels based on his work.

I am all in to rewatch the Leo DiCaprio/Claire Danes R+J whenever you want! LOL.

Nicole R wrote: "I am all in to rewatch the Leo DiCaprio/Claire Danes R+J whenever you want! LOL."

DUDE! You are speaking my language!
God, it is SO good.
And I rewatched it not too long ago, still holds up.
The soundtrack is also amazing 🥰

Meli wrote: "Nicole R wrote: "I am all in to rewatch the Leo DiCaprio/Claire Danes R+J whenever you want! LOL."

DUDE! You are speaking my language!
God, it is SO good.
And I rewatched it not too long ago, st..."

I have never watched that version. However, the 1968 film with Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting - classic with a great score - be still my heart! Michael York was the scene stealing Tybalt, *sigh*. Of course now the filming of the nude scenes, which were indeed controversial at the time, are subject of sexual harassment suits since January.

Theresa wrote: "Meli wrote: "Nicole R wrote: "I am all in to rewatch the Leo DiCaprio/Claire Danes R+J whenever you want! LOL."

DUDE! You are speaking my language!
God, it is SO good.
And I rewatched it not too..."

That is the version, I'm familiar with as well. Loved it as a teenager.

Theresa wrote: "I have never watched that version. However, the 1968 film with Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting - classic with a great score - be still my heart! Michael York was the scene stealing Tybalt, *sigh*. Of course now the filming of the nude scenes, which were indeed controversial at the time, are subject of sexual harassment suits since January."

I need to watch that version, I love Olivia Hussey! Strange career, but she is clearly a talented actress.

Meli wrote: "Theresa wrote: "I have never watched that version. However, the 1968 film with Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting - classic with a great score - be still my heart! Michael York was the scene stealin..."

Hussey has agoraphobia which no doubt affected her career. I remember when that first hit the news.

You do need to see it. One of its great aspects is that Hussey and Whiting were actually the ages of their characters. Makes quite a difference.

I will look for it!