Sometimes reading a book is like traveling down a difficult road. Such is the journey for me into the mystery of The Shakespeare Manuscript by Stewart Buettner. For a few chapters, the going is smooth -- the characters are interesting. April Oliphant, the rising stage star crippled by agoraphobia and hiding as a clerk in her father's book store, discovers Hamlet, King of Denmarke among a box of papers her father has shipped to her. Her father, Miles, his mental deterioration made worse by a head injury sustained when he is mugged in London -- or is it? -- hovers sullenly like a pall over everyone. Avery LeMaster, professor and director of a troop of actors set to play Othello, doomed to stage the "new" Hamlet, is eager to perform the play that he believes is legitimate, and is loved secretly by April.
The novel opens with a reproduction of a letter written in 1729 to an unknown recipient and signed minimally by "L." Half way through the book, I'm still wondering why, even though I admit that I was driven by curiosity to discover that "L." is probably Lewis Theobald, who produced a "long-lost" play, Cardenio in 1727.
It's my sad duty, Dear Reader, to announce that I was disappointed by this novel and have set it aside. What has been my reading experience thus far? The road to solving the mystery of the manuscript has petered out for me. I wanted to like this novel but can't muster up the stomach for it. In fact, I felt the urge not to pick it up instead of the urge to "turn" the page.
All the elements for a good novel are present. As a traveler into this story, I'm speeding along smoothly, but there are potholes that jar me and throw the elements into the air. Where they fall, neither the author nor the reader can find to put together again. I have read half the book and am, sorry to have to admit this, but I am becoming increasingly annoyed by the chapter names; increasingly frustrated by the lack of scenes that need to be in the book being absent from the book; and burdened by the sense that the person steering the story is not a good driver.
Why does Buettner avoid writing where dramatic tension demands he should? He exits when he should enter as the conflicts between characters are not acted out as they occur. We learn about them later, as they are told, instead of being shown them as they occur. As far as characters go, they seem insubstantial and unnaturally forced onto the page, like reluctant actors who need to be pushed on stage. And I think we could do without Joanna and her politician husband, Rob. Really. Let Avery own the house where the actors rehearse. And this is quibbling, I know, but please spare me the recitation of telephone numbers; it's unnecessary detail.
I did enjoy Buettner's invention of Shakespearean dialogue for his imagined manuscript; I did appreciate his light application of mildly scholarly information laid on with a gentle hand; and I did like the premise of the novel very much. It just requires a more accomplished writer to make it interesting, give it the depth that's lacking, the color of setting, and the insight into emotions and meaning that Buettner seems incapable of.
As for The Shakespeare Manuscript: real or fake? I don't care.
However, I did feel inspired to do some surface excavation into the long tradition of Shakespearean hoaxes surrounding Hamlet and the general Shakespeare apocrypha. The most interesting story surrounds the antics of William-Henry Ireland that seems to have inspired Buettner's novel.
In the spring of 1795, a parade of London notables—scholars, peers, a future bishop, England’s poet laureate—called at the curio-filled home of an antiquarian named Samuel Ireland. They had come to see some papers that Ireland’s 19-year-old son, William-Henry, said he had found while rummaging in an old trunk. Scribbled in faded ink on yellowed paper, they included letters, poetry and other compositions apparently written and signed by William Shakespeare. Until now, nothing in the Bard’s own hand was known to survive, except four signatures on legal documents. Most astonishing of all was part of an unknown play purportedly by Shakespeare—a thrilling new addition to the playwright’s canon.
The really interesting controversy of our time seems to be over the play, Double Falsehood (referred to in the introductory letter) thatscholars claim is no hoax.
[. . .professor Brean Hammond of the University of Nottingham in England] told NPR's Renee Montagne that he has linked the play to another that Shakespeare helped to write around 1613. "Shakespeare is known to have collaborated with John Fletcher in writing a play called The History of Cardenio, or some variant of that title," he said.
The play was performed but disappeared from the record. Hammond believes that Theobald's Double Falsehood was a "heavy revision" of the play, with a new title.
Others aren't quite so ready to jump on the bandwagon of acceptance.
Prof Jonathan Bate, of Warwick University, says on this page that the research “proves that it is in some part Shakespearean”.
Stanley Wells, general editor of the Oxford Shakespeare series was less excited. He said: “There’s more reason to believe that the play preserves bits of Fletcher than Shakespeare. However, there might be a bit of Shakespearean DNA in it.” The Telegraph
I have to grant The Shakespeare Manuscript one no small thing -- I've derived a lot of ancillary entertainment from trying to read it.
Our Next Selection
Sadly, still haven't been able to secure a volunteer to lead a discussion of Ken Follett's The Pillars of the Earth,, as much as R&BLers want to discuss it. So, I am left having to make an executive decision and declare that for our next read we'll venture far from Shakespeare and Merrie Olde England in either the 17th C. or the 14th.
We'll meet here December 8th at 2 PM ET. See you then!
Please vote for your choice:
The Lord of Misrule by Jaimy Gordon (2010 National Book Award for fiction) Kindle $7.99.
Serve the People by Yan Lianke (banned in China) Kindle $7.99
The Gathering by Anne Enright (2007 Man Booker Prize) Kindle $7.99
One of your suggestions.
I'll make the announcement of our next read by Sunday, November 27th.
Readers & Book Lovers Series Schedule
DAY |
TIME (EST/EDT) |
Series Name |
Editor(s) |
SUN |
3:00 PM (intermittent) |
The Magic Theater |
ArkDem14 |
SUN |
6:00 PM |
Young Reader's Pavilion |
The Book Bear |
SUN |
9:30 PM |
SciFi/Fantasy Book Club |
quarkstomper |
MON |
7:00 PM |
Monday Murder Mystery |
Susan from 29 |
TUE |
8:00 PM |
Readers & Book Lovers Newsletter |
Limelite |
WED |
7:30 AM |
WAYR? |
plf515 |
WED |
8:00 PM |
Bookflurries: Bookchat |
cfk |
THU |
2:00 PM (bi-weekly) |
eReaders & Book Lovers Club |
Limelite |
THU |
8:00 PM |
Write On! |
SensibleShoes |
FRI |
9:00 AM |
Books That Changed My Life |
etbnc, aravir |
FRI |
10:00 PM (first of month) |
Monthly Bookposts |
AdmiralNaismith |
SAT |
9:00 PM |
Books So Bad They're Good |
Ellid |