Rating: 
Summary: A possible parody? Still the low end of Shakespeare.
Review: "Titus Andronicus" is the most notorious and least performed play of Shakespeare's. T.S. Eliot once called it the worst play written in the English language and not even the loyalist Shakespeare scholars have stood by it. Not until the movie "Titus" came out, have I heard anyone mention it. All I knew before I finally saw it was that it was extremely over the top violent. In fact, when the rare times it had been performed to modern audiences, many audience members started laughing at how absurd and over the top violent it was. I am a very serious moody theater person but even I couldn't help laugh at some of these scenes. However, I am very curious to suspect, as Harold Bloom did, that Shakespeare might've wrote "Titus Andronicus" as a spoof on his contemporaries. The play's content, plot, and characters are exactly equal to Seneca's plays. Seneca's plays however were never performed and we have no evidence that Shakespeare read Seneca's plays. So perhaps it was a jab at Kyd or Marlowe. The movie "Titus" seemed to use a lot of parody at many times. When I saw it the audience was laughing. I think it is safe to say that that theory may be correct. Although even if it was a parody, the play is still flat and doesn't do much for the audience. There are moments though where we can see Shakespeare developing as a dramatist. I couldn't help but think of "Macbeth" and "King Lear" during parts of Titus' monologues. Actually "Titus Andronicus" at best is a great study on the audience. 'Titus' was well received and performed in Shakespeare's day. Shakespeare was delivering to the audience, giving them a bloody Revenge tragedy that was popular in Elizabethan times. I am very surprise in an age when we make films that can depict a man cutting his face off and feeding it to his dogs("Hannibal"), that 'Titus' wouldn't be more popular. I imagine that Shakespeare was trying to shift from comedian to tragedian and wrote a little experiment called "Titus Andronicus." 'Titus' is worth reading for those who want to read all of Shakespeare but to the average reader, I would say pass and read "KIng Lear" or "Macbeth." To give this play more than three stars would be an insult to Shakespeare's masterpieces.
Rating: 
Summary: Review: So Bad It's Good
Review: (...)This is a particularly gory and bloody play, with at least one murder / rape / mutilation / act of cannibalism in every act, and others being planned-very sadistic, and not at all nice. The characters are one-dimensional cardboard cut-outs, all actuated by some horrible form of revenge or sadism, and all plotting against each other, all two-faced (...). What little comedy there is, is black as the soul of the Moor Aaron: the comedy comes from the scene in which the Andronici are arguing over which of them will chop off their hand and send it to the Emperor; and from some of the worst lines in Shakespeare (...). On the subject of bottoms, the best use for this play is as toilet paper.
Rating: 
Summary: Worth reading, if just for the study of Aaron
Review: For my fellow reviewers who choose to simply pass this play over because of the prevelant violence, I must point out the complex, witty character of Aaron the Moor. Shakespeare either intended for this play to be a parody of Marlowe/Kyd, or he wanted to experiment with a character, Aaron, to evoke every possible feeling from his audience. And, in my humble opinion, Shakespeare succeeded at this. Aaron is, at the same time, evil and cunny, witty and horrifying, and compassionate and stoic. His final lines, as he is buried up to his neck, left to starve, are some of the best confessions ever produced by the bard. It takes a truly cruel and uncaring individual to not feel for Aaron, who gives up his life for his child's, and who hopelessly and blindly loves a cruel witch of a woman. This play is worth reading, or seeing if you should be so lucky, simply to indulge yourself in the character of Aaron the Moor.
Rating: 
Summary: This is boring?
Review: For those who think Shakespeare is boring, I challenge you to read this play and say the same afterward. Titus Andronicus is one of Shakespeare's great tragedies.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful audiobooks - Listen to Shakespeare!
Review: I admit, I've read and re-read Shakespeare, but never quite got the rhythm of the language - the meaning of the prose. I understood the basic plot, and with the help of teachers (whether in High School or college) I understood the basic meaning.BUT after I discovered what a performance of Shakespeare could do...I was hooked. Listening to Shakespeare (and you can listen anywhere - I recently enjoyed As You Like It as I painted my kitchen) is a fantastic experience - perfect listening for fans of the Bard - or anyone, like me, who knew they should be enjoying Shakespeare and yet struggled with the writing. These Caedmon Audios - performed by The Shakespeare Recording Society - have all exceeded expectation. I highly recommend. Shakespeare was meant to be heard, afterall.
Rating:
Summary: WOW
Review: I cannot begin to explain the gruesome plot of this story. It has rape, murder, and trechory. But even with all these gorry aspects, it is the best book I have ever read. You have not heard a great ending until the book describes a mother eating her two sons at a banquet. Horrible bruetality is eminant in this story, and I love it.
Rating:
Summary: This is what violence is about
Review: I understand that this is one of Shakespeares least popular, however I found it to be fantastic. Though not for all tastes, this is a true study of human violence and it's effects. There are no heroes, nor any long classic monolouges, but rather a brutal and nearly comical display of revenge brought forth through many characters.
Rating:
Summary: A good recording of a little performed play
Review: I was sure that when Harper Audio reissued on cassettes the old recording of <Titus Andronicus> it could not be beat! Well, just in perfect timing with the new motion picture version of the play, we now have from Penguin's Arkangel Complete Shakespeare series, a very serious rival to the older set. The Harper set is perfectly fine with stylized readings in old fashioned manner (what else can one do with a script like this one?) that milks what little poetry there is in this play for all it is worth. The "star" of the show is Anthony Quayle, whose Aaron the Moor just stops at going "over the top" in his last scenes. The Arkangel set gives us Paterson Joseph in that role, whose "ethnic" voice never overstates any of the lines and who whispers where Quayle chortles in his joy. David Troughton plays the title role, trying (it seems to me) to make the character believable in a voice that seems just a tad young after hearing the venerable Michael Hodern in the earlier recording. In doing so, he loses some of the feeling for the meter but I think he succeeds very well on his own terms. For once, the rape scene is as harrowing on a sound recording as it ever was on stage, thanks to the Director eliciting the most horrible screams from poor Lavinia (Emma Gregory), whose voice is then written out of the script. The evil Queen of the Goths (Harriet Walter) sounds like the mother of those two monster sons (John McAndrew and Charles Simpson); while the rest of the cast is never less than good. The only (to me) jarring feature is the use of an organ, which (1) is too anachronistic and (2) makes us think unfortunately of the silent movie melodramas that this play can so closely resemble. I will keep playing both sets in the future, but this one has a bit more excitement while the other has a bit more of the poetry. Both are quite valid and this play does deserve something of a respectful resurrection that the film might bring about and these two sets will help considerably.
Rating:
Summary: A good recording of a little performed play
Review: I was sure that when Harper Audio reissued on cassettes the old recording of it could not be beat! Well, just in perfect timing with the new motion picture version of the play, we now have from Penguin's Arkangel Complete Shakespeare series, a very serious rival to the older set. The Harper set is perfectly fine with stylized readings in old fashioned manner (what else can one do with a script like this one?) that milks what little poetry there is in this play for all it is worth. The "star" of the show is Anthony Quayle, whose Aaron the Moor just stops at going "over the top" in his last scenes. The Arkangel set gives us Paterson Joseph in that role, whose "ethnic" voice never overstates any of the lines and who whispers where Quayle chortles in his joy. David Troughton plays the title role, trying (it seems to me) to make the character believable in a voice that seems just a tad young after hearing the venerable Michael Hodern in the earlier recording. In doing so, he loses some of the feeling for the meter but I think he succeeds very well on his own terms. For once, the rape scene is as harrowing on a sound recording as it ever was on stage, thanks to the Director eliciting the most horrible screams from poor Lavinia (Emma Gregory), whose voice is then written out of the script. The evil Queen of the Goths (Harriet Walter) sounds like the mother of those two monster sons (John McAndrew and Charles Simpson); while the rest of the cast is never less than good. The only (to me) jarring feature is the use of an organ, which (1) is too anachronistic and (2) makes us think unfortunately of the silent movie melodramas that this play can so closely resemble. I will keep playing both sets in the future, but this one has a bit more excitement while the other has a bit more of the poetry. Both are quite valid and this play does deserve something of a respectful resurrection that the film might bring about and these two sets will help considerably.
Rating: 
Summary: Guts, Gore, Gross...
Review: I will admit that I am definitely not a Sakespeare expert but read several plays in order to choose which enactment to see at the Stratford Festival. I didn't choose this one!
This tradgedy was horrifying to read because of the sheer evilness of the characters and the outrageous violence throughout the story. There's deception, manipulation, rape, torture, gore and more gore. In my opinion, it isn't Shakespeare's most meaningful or enlightened work but it wasn't boring either. Hardly anyone escapes this story alive and the most redeeming quality, in my eyes, is that everyone in the end gets just what they deserve. This play must have shocked the audiences in the 1500's. If you're into violence and shock value this story won't disappoint.
|
