Rating: 
Summary: The work is unquestioned; the edition, questionable.
Review: The very idea of reviewing or giving stars to Shakespeare in this format is superfluous: he is the epitome of English literature. The source and inspiration for many subsequent classics, the well from which many popular expressions have sprung, the basis for many brilliant (and not-so-brilliant) stage and film renditions of these classics -- Shakespeare's literary greatness lies universally ackwnoledged and unquestioned. In reviewing any edition of the man's works, then, the reviewer's task is not to comment upon the work itself, but the presentation. This Gramercy edition of The Complete Works (yes, that's all 37 plays -- comedies, histories, and tragedies -- as well as all of the poems, sonnets included) is the most popular and widely-available -- and inexpensive -- version available. Is it the best? Well, no. Other reviews of this edition have commented upon its shortcomings -- extremely small print; very tight and hard-to-read layout; no margins for notes; no footnotes or annotations; no background information on the plays; errors, typos, and generally questionable editing. That said, this edition may have what you're looking for. It does indeed contain the complete works; it also has a few other small incentives: a hard cover that looks great on a bookshelf, a built-in bookmarker, and various illustrations. Clearly, this is not an omnibus for the Shakespeare scholar. If you want an edition of the bard for in-depth study or for academic use, you are better off buying more expansive editions of the individual plays themselves, with plenty of background info, notes, annotations, and space for your own writing; or else one of the more expensive editions of the Complete Works. That said, if you are just looking for a Shakespeare book that has all of his works in one place, that is convenient and, above all, inexpensive -- or you just want a Shakespeare tome sitting on your dust-ridden bookshelf to impress friends -- then you could do worse than picking up this.
Rating: 
Summary: Book for Shelf - Not Terribly Accessible Shakespeare
Review: I originally bought this book used and later discovered that this was the ideal situation. It is handy to have all of Shakespeare's works (plays and sonnets) under one cover, but there are several drawbacks. Each page is split into two columns, causing the plays to be read like a newspaper. Since linebreaks are important in Shakespeare (remember the iambic pentameter), some lines are too long for the margins, causing the remaining words to hover like ghosts away from the sentence.Also, this book contains no footnotes. This is mainly how buying the individual play is superior to the collected works. Olde English isn't always intuitive, and this particular book leaves you to find out a word's meaning for yourself. But this book certainly looks pretty on your shelf. :)
Rating: 
Summary: A bargain at twice the price!
Review: Quite simply the greatest writer of all time, Shakespeare belongs on every bookshelf. I have this, and it is a treasure. For those of you who sweated through Shakespeare in high school, give it a try. You might be surprised by some of the stories you never knew. I would gladly have paid fifty bucks for one of these, and was thrilled to get it for twenty in hardcover. If you have kids, this is a must-have. If you don't, get it anyway. Although there are no footnotes, or any attempt to 'translate' King's English into American, I think these things are basically unnecessary. The sonnets also deserve a perusal, but I like the tragedies the best, particularly Julius Caesar and Titus Andronicus.
Rating:
Summary: In Defense of Shakespeare
Review: I must say, after reading the "review" about shakespeare,
the one discussing the "cult of shakespeare"... What is the point of this posting? It's not a review of the
particular volume, instead it is a rather caustic opinion of
Shakespeare, which focuses on current society's teaching
and appreciation of Shakespeare's works, and not
the actual works themselves. Why is this relevant, and
why has it been posted? Is it entertaining? Are we really
interested in his personal criteria for judging literature? In defense of Shakespeare and this volume, whether it be
printed nicely or not, to have his works present is better
than to not, even if some might say it's only taking up
shelve space. I've come to his plays later in life, and
of my own volition. I need no glossary or interpreter. Quite simply, there is a reason that Shakespeare is still
performed, and written about today, and it has nothing
whatsoever to do with this faceless cult conspiracy theory
that this guy is referring to. It doesn't exist. What does exist is a great body of work which will provide
much pleasure and entertainment. I suggest that the
comments made by the cult conspiracy guy be taken with a grain
of salt. Some people just can't accept greatness in others,
even if they are dead, and must convince themselves that
the greatness is imagined. Long Live Shakespeare (cult member since 2003)
Rating: 
Summary: Don't let academics tell you what to like
Review: A reviewer below states that Shakespeare's literary value is unquestioned. This is patent nonsense. Every year, untold numbers of people (students, etc.) are forced to read him by trained teachers and they still end up questioning his value. Let's examine the Shakespeare cult:
1) Any author who needs an interpreter, explainer, or support from the educational system to keep readers is simply not a vital author. If Shakespeare was a vital author, people would love him without the brainwashing and spoonfeeding of a vast educational system that insists on teaching these tired plays year after year because everyone has done so year after year.
2) Silly romances and boring dramas driven by improbable plots and vulgar jokes are not great literature. These plays are the work of a man who spent far too much time on scandal and trivial junk to be taken seriously.
3) The Shakespeare nuts want it both ways and they can't have it either way. On the one hand, they insist that Shakespeare be regarded with the reverence one would give to holy scripture. No one must dare question its greatness, truthfulness, or entertainment value. If you do so, you will be attacked as a philistine. On the other hand, when people believe this nonsense and stay away from Shakespeare because they do not want to be bored, the cultists insist that we are taking it too seriously and that Shakespeare is simply great theatre (when it is nothing of the sort) which can be enjoyed with as much gusto as a rock concert or a stand up comedy act (which is a lie).
4) Any book that needs a glossary for the reader in order to be understandable must either be abandoned as dated or translated into modern English. The Shakespeare nuts wouldn't insist that anyone read Beowulf in Old English or argue that its Old English language is so beautiful that we all must learn what is now a foreign language to us but they do this when it comes to Shakespeare. This is beyond irrational. Imagine being forced to read a viking saga in Old Norse with only a glossary to assist you because the professor happens to love the cadences of Old Norse. This is no different from the nuts who do the same with Shakespeare.
5) I judge literature on two, and only two, criterion: Is it intriguing? Is it entertaining? I don't give a fig about some academic telling me I need to read something because it is historically important. I doubt that Shakespeare's audience paid to see his plays because they had historical importance and neither will I. Alas, what was entertaining even twenty years ago seems dated and boring today, nevermind what may have been entertaining hundreds of years ago. Old jokes lose their punch, old romances become foolish and insipid with time, old dramas about historical figures become irrelevant and sleep inducing, old concerns no longer concern us. Shakespeare is dated, unfunny, boring.
And no amount of forcing the issue will change that. Free Shakespeare from the support of the educational system and watch him become forgotten as quickly as last years fashions. And I say, "good riddance" to an author who should have been relegated to the trash heap at least a century ago.
Rating:
Summary: A true master
Review: Few writers in history have been able to come close to matching Shakespeare's astounding flair for writing, and this volume is the perfect compliment to his talent. The engravings inside are beautiful, and the plays, even without their numbers and their footnotes, are still as incredible as they ever were. To those of you who say that Shakespeare is boring, you're not really understanding his work, or you are simply unable to appreciate anything this old. I highly recommend this particular edition
Rating:
Summary: great
Review: this is a worderful book for any shakespeare fan!!
Rating:
Summary: Only suitable for a book shelf
Review: If you got a copy of Shakespeare's works, you might like to be able to rely on the text it presents. That would require knowing the credentials of the editor, the currency of the editing, etc...The price is excellent - what the reader receives, well... caveat emptor. Value to beginners: none (no background on the plays, glosses of difficult words, etc.)
Value to adv. students: none .
Value to scholars: less than none.
Judge this book by its cover: not. Attractive cover hides printed pages that appear to be facsimiles of archaic, crammed-type pages from some bygone era. Perhaps you think, 'Well, at least it's a cheap way to get a copy of the complete plays.' A few months of reading modern, respectable editions (e.g., from Routledge/Arden, Cambridge, or Oxford) for any popular Shakespeare play will help a newcomer realize that for almost all Shakespeare plays determining what is 'the text' is a vast conundrum; nay: an oxymoron. As with many aspects of Shakespeare study, 'tis not so easy: for most plays there are multiple alternative *original sources* - differing in important ways from each other. What sources did the editor of the Gramercy edition use? Well, if the publisher does not deem it necessary even to credit the editor's name in this volume or to acknowledge how outdated the editorial work is... A better use of your money is to buy a modern edition of single plays. Even the inexpensive Folger Library paperbacks give beginners helpful definitions for difficult words. For those planning to dive deeply into the intricate weavings and unfathomed levels of meaning in these great works, save your money by shunning this bookcase-worthy-only printing, and seek out a complete edition such as the Arden(Routledge) with helpful annotation on difficult words or the respected Riverside edition, or (best for real literature students) David Bevington's excellently edited volume (extremely helpful overviews offered for each play). (A used copy of a Bevington edition from the 1980s is worth a truckload of these 1900ish Gramercy printings.) I regret spending even these few minutes to review the most INadequate version of Shakespeare available, but am aggravated to it by the high Amazon sales ranking for this edition - which suggests that thousands of unsuspecting buyers are throwing money away. Worse yet, once they have their copies they will be discouraged from exploring the grandeur of the plays because of this archaic, alienating, barren reprint. Most will open the book a few times, quickly put it away, and stick to Hollywood productions. Ignore the respected name 'Random House' on these books and attend to the qualifier 'Value Publication' and its alias 'Gramercy Books'. We are not amused. The buyer is abused.
Rating:
Summary: Use the Library or Paperbacks Instead of This Book
Review: I am a professional actor and teacher of Shakespeare. This is a vastly inferior edition of Shakespeare's complete works. There is no room in the margins for making notes. There are no footnotes to aid the reader with antiquated language and references. The binding is insubstantial and the gilding sticks to other pages. I picked this book up at a bookstore once and thought I would enjoy such a pretty and portable copy of Shakespeare's works. As soon as I opened my copy of the book, I immediately returned the book to the bookstore. I found misspellings and errors and the type was so tight, I found the text difficult to read. Try to save your money for the Riverside Shakespeare (a book you and your family will enjoy for years, mine is 25 years old) and use the Folger if you need to by one play at at time, but go to the library for your Shakespeare before wasting your money on this piece of junk. The notes are helpful and aid in the enjoyment of the text. Avoid this book!
Rating:
Summary: Shakespere as it was meant to be read
Review: This book is exactly what it claims to be: the complete works of Shakespere. I strongly disagree with the reviewer who believes this is a waste of money. It is beautifully bound, has clear type, and allows you to draw your own conclusions rather than depending on the Cliffs Note summary that a paperback single will provide you. Perhaps not for the student who needs to produce an essay by morning, it is still a lovely book that puts me in the mood for a glass of wine and a leisurely read.
|
