Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel

This book has opened a door to a new obsession for me: English history. Though this is a novel, it made me look at history with new eyes and be interested in the lives of all those who were its main characters. 

Before I read Wolf Hall I thought Cromwell was basically a villain, an unscrupulous, selfish man that advised the King to get what was in Cromwell’s best interest, not necessarily England’s or even the King’s.  He was the one to blame for the execution of Thomas More and all the bloody deeds Henry VIII carried out in order to get what he wanted. But after reading this book, I was once again reminded that nothing is black and white and that Cromwell was a human being, not a villain from a Disney movie. Mantel portrays him as someone who is indeed manipulative, very smart and opportunistic, but with a sensitive side, the human side, which can also show mercy, generosity and even courage. The same happens with Thomas More, according to Mantel’s point of view he is not the impeccable saint and martyr everyone thinks him to be, he is, just like Cromwell, a flawed man, with virtues and a dark side. It was a refreshing experience to read about them in a complex and complete way.

Thomas Cromwell

I’m not going into specifics about the plot of the book because we all know about Henry’s reign and the successes and failures in Cromwell’s life. The important thing here is the perspective under which we are able to see the protagonists of this complicated period of time, which is an entirely new experience because thanks to Hilary Mantel’s detailed work, they are now colorful human beings, not just dry lines in a history book.

Henry VIII

As I read the novel, all those familiar names and stories came alive before my eyes and made me really think and reflect about the time, and how everything that took place back then has had an impact on us. Events that took place back then changed life for us now and it is an exciting thing to be able to sink into that world with the help of Mantel’s imagination (based on her extensive research and work, this is not one of those books that mixes up the dates and events and changes the outcome of things, it is the imaginative storytelling of what actually happened, she is filling in the voids of the intimate lives and characteristics of everyone involved in these events).

Since I finished reading Wolf Hall I have read two history books about the Tudors: Tudors (The History of England Vol. 2) by Peter Ackroyd and The Wives of Henry the Eighth and the Parts they played in History by Martin Andrew Sharp Hume. I am really interested in reading more about this famous dynasty and I want to focus now a little bit more on Elizabeth I, because it is the perfect context reading for my Shakespeare project. 

Anne Boleyn

I have already ordered Wolf Hall's sequel called Bring Up the Bodies and I can’t wait to read it. Wolf Hall has been a very important book in my reading experience this year because it has set the tone for what I want to read the rest of the year. I want to focus on the parts of history I love and on the context of Shakespeare’s life and works. This second-half of 2013 is going to be very Elizabethan. 

I strongly recommend to the history buffs out there to read Wolf Hall, I’m pretty sure you are going to love it.

About what I 've been doing in June

I can't believe it has been more than a month since I last wrote something here. I've missed terribly this space but work got really crazy and I couldn't find the time to write my reviews. I actually finished a couple of books (there is always time to read but not always write, I'm afraid). 

I reread The Great Gatsby at the beginning of June. I went to see the movie and it made me want to delve into the roaring twenties again. By the way, what did you think of the movie? I thought it had some flaws here and there but it was a good adaptation overall, I especially liked Di Caprio's performance, he was perfect as Gatsby. I'm still not sure about Carey Mulligan as Daisy, though...

Anyway, I read The Great Gatsby for the first time a couple of years ago and I liked it. This second time I loved it. I really admired the beautifully crafted sentences and all the emotion they conveyed. It is such a tragic story, isn't it?

The second book I read was The Enchanted April by Elizabeth von Arnim, a book Lucy @Therapy Through Tolstoy recommended to soothe oneself when things are somewhat chaotic around us. I loved it, I really did. It was the perfect read for me at the moment and it did have a soothing effect. I read it before going to bed so I would dream about spending a summer in Italy, surrounded by flowers and the sea, doing only what I wanted to do and resting, which is a luxury I don't get often. Besides that, I thought it was beautifully written and every character was appealing and interesting. 

I started reading The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins, but it was during a time I was having problems concentrating and I completely forgot about it. I have to go back to it soon because it is a really good book.

I have to tell you that I have become quite obsessed with Agatha Christie's Poirot, the British television series with David Suchet as the main character. I'm obsessed with its entire style, the air, the Britishness of it, if  you will. The same happened with the other series, the one with Mrs. Marple. I love them both. I think is time to reread some Agatha Christie. I inherited a great collection of her books from my grandmother, who was also obsessed with her stories.

And last but not least, I finally ordered Wolf Hall from Amazon. I really can't wait to read it, I hate that it takes a whole month to get here to Lima. That's what I'll be reading in August and I will also take part of the Austen in August event held by Roof Beam Reader.

In the meantime, I have to go back to My Shakespeare Project, I kind of left it aside for a while but I want to get back to The Tempest as soon as possible. And I'm also reading The Custom of the Country, by Edith Wharton, which I'm really enjoying.

That has been my June. I promise I won't disappear again for a whole month. 

Quick Update: Reading plans, blogging plans and nurse duty

I meant to dedicate more time to my blog this month but things didn't turn out exactly the way I expected, so here's a quick update of what's been going on, what I have been reading and my blogging plans for the next few weeks.

I finished reading Villette the past week. I took my time with it and I really loved it. I do think it is superior to Jane Eyre in its character development: Lucy Snowe has a far more complex internal world and development than Jane Eyre, but I still like Jane Eyre a little more. I'm not exactly sure why. She's a little bit more likable, I guess. I will go into further details in the post I'll dedicate to Villette next week.

I'm currently reading The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins. I loved The Woman in White so I definitely wanted to read more from this author. I'm also working a little on My Shakespeare Project, I have been slowly reading The Tempest. 

I'm really busy right now, not only with work, but I'm also on nurse duty. My mom had an accident last Monday and had her entire right leg put in a plaster. It is not broken, thank God, but her knee was compromised and hurts like hell, so she's currently immobilized. We are going to the doctor again tomorrow  and let's hope she recovers soon. She's a very active person so she absolutely hates being in bed all day long. 

I plan to at least write my review of Villette in the coming week and if I have a little more time, I'll write a couple more reviews I have pending and work more on My Shakespeare Project.

Til next week!

May Meme Question for The Classics Club

This is the first time I'm answering the monthly meme question for The Classics Club, even though I have been part of it since January.

This month's question is: 

"Tell us about the classic book(s) you’re reading this month. You can post about what you’re looking forward to reading in May, or post thoughts-in-progress on your current read(s)."

The classic book I'm reading right now is Villette by Charlotte Brontë. I have been wanting to read this book for a long time and I don't know why I didn't read it sooner, although I ask myself the same question with all the books I love.

I have always enjoyed books where the inner life and thoughts of the characters are the most important part of the book, or even when the book is more focused on the development of the character than of the plot. This is that type of book: it is slow-paced but the inner world of the main character, Lucy Snowe, and its development is incredibly rich and very touching. 

Today I learned there is a readalong of Villette hosted by Too Fond. I would have loved to participate but I will probably finish reading it this week and the event starts next week. 

Besides Villette, I'm also making progress with My Shakespeare Project. I'm letting Hamlet rest for a little while and I'm starting with The Tempest this week. 

And that's about it! Have a great week!

More thoughts on Hamlet

I have decided to let Hamlet rest for a little while and move on to another play, but before doing so, I wanted to write a post summarizing my current interpretation of the play, along with my questions, doubts and conflicting hypothesis.

One of the greatest characteristics about Hamlet and at the same time, the cause for its difficulty and depth, is its uncertainty and ambiguity. Almost all characters and events can be interpreted and understood in different ways. It is a great thing because it offers a wide range of creative possibilities. That’s the reason the performances and adaptations of this play are always so different from each other. I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of seeing new versions of this play: the words might be familiar but I still feel I’m experiencing something new, and I love that.

The problem comes when one tries to analyze the play. I have already accepted that I will never have a final answer to all my questions and that is a good thing but at the same time, kind of annoying. 

In a previous post I wrote a little about Hamlet’s delay in executing his revenge. I thought Hamlet was a very contradictory character because he is constantly delaying and making excuses for executing his plan but at the same time acts impulsively and has no problem in killing other people.

David, a fellow blogger, commented that maybe there is really no delay and that this was not a problem when the play was first performed because people knew it had to have five acts and therefore Hamlet could not kill Claudius early because then there would be no play. And that is true and I’ve read a lot of people agree with this idea. On the other hand, and what may be a problem for this theory, is that Hamlet actually refers to this delay and is tortured by it. At one point, the Ghost actually has to remind Hamlet of the task he has given him:

Ham.     Do you not come your tardy son to chide,

               That, lapsed in time and passion, lets go by

               The important acting of your dread command?

               O, say!

Ghost.   Do not forget. This visitation

              Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose.

(Act III, Scene IV)

I have realized I tend to believe that there is indeed a delay and a reason behind it. Why? Well, I think it is mainly because of Hamlet’s behavior throughout the play. I feel there is something strange about his demeanor, not only because he is hurting for the obvious reasons, but also because he doesn’t seem to be capable of fulfilling the Ghost’s request until extreme circumstances force him to do so. It is only at the end, when his mother is dead, that he kills Claudius and even then it is a sudden and impulsive action, not a planned one. 

I also asked myself if Hamlet is really crazy (and if that is partly the reason for the delaying of his revenge) or if he just pretends to be, in order to get what he wants, manipulate others or even distance himself from the ones that are trying to help him. I tend to believe the latter. Declaring him crazy is to oversimplify such a complex character. So, in my humble and inexperienced opinion, Hamlet is not crazy because that would be too easy and there wouldn’t be so much debate regarding the true nature of his character. I have read some people think he acts the way he does because he is just too sensitive for the corrupt, manipulative and deceiving world he lives in. Maybe he is delaying his actions because he has to come to terms with them. I don’t think I completely agree with this theory. Hamlet does show from the start certain disdain for the court and a sort of inadequacy in it, but he also shows his ability to be as deceiving and manipulative (and cruel) as the others. He kills Polonius without really knowing who he was attacking and he sends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to their deaths without problem. And he is misogynistic. Yes, I know that word may be a little strong and we don’t know if he was always like that, but from what we can see in the play, he is definitely prejudiced and violent towards women. He is especially cruel to Ophelia, who is basically the victim of everyone in the play. Therefore, I don’t think he is too “pure” for what is required of him.

Then, why is it he has so much trouble? So far, what I feel most inclined to believe, is that he is having trouble with accepting the reality of his situation. He doesn’t lack the tenacity or courage, if you will, to avenge his father. I think he just can’t face the reality of what is going on. And to be completely honest, I don’t know what bothers him most: the fact that his father was murdered by his uncle or that his mother married him and loves him. I don’t know who he feels most betrayed by and maybe that is also his problem. 

Anyway, I know this subject has been discussed over and over again and I’m not providing something new, I’m just writing my impressions and doubts, but I feel that organizing such thoughts and sharing them is an important part of my experience with this particular play. 

This is not the end of Hamlet for me, I just need to leave it for a while so I can move on with my project and also to be able to come back to it with fresher eyes and maybe a new perspective, just like when I finish translating something and leave it alone for some time before proofreading it; that way it is easier to see things better and clearer.

As always, please feel free to comment, give me your opinion or debate with me. It is all part of the process I very much enjoy.

Reading Hamlet

I started this project right before work got crazy but I have still managed to dedicate a few hours each week to The Bard. Now, please remember this is NOT a review, simply a few notes I've taken during my reading experience. I have basically transcribed the notes in my journal to this post. And this is also just a first update of how my project has begun and a few impressions I have of Hamlet so far. 

I have read the play about three times and I have seen two adaptations: The Royal Shakespeare Company's version with David Tennant (loved him) and Kenneth Branagh's EPIC movie adaptation and I feel I have only peeled the very first few layers of the play and understanding of the characters.

Hamlet is such an enigmatic character. Is he really mad or not? Why does it take him so long to act if he is most definitely looking for revenge? And if he is so obsessed with looking for proof and certainty in order to act, why does he acts so rashly and kills Polonius, for example? He is a walking contradiction and that is what fascinates us, the readers and the audience, so much.

Throughout the play we see him angry, sad, almost hopeless sometimes, mad, even cruel, but despite of all this, what left a deeper mark concerning my perspective of the character, is his absolute dissatisfaction. He conveys that dissatisfaction with his actions and his constant questions to himself. I think that dissatisfaction is important, in my humble opinion, because it makes me understand a little bit more about what drives him.

David Tennant in Hamlet (2009 - Recorded for the BBC)

He is neither a hero or a villain, although he could be perceived as both, depending on our understanding of the plot and of the performance as well. I fell utterly in love with the movie adaptation by Kenneth Branagh but his Hamlet is so aggressive, so unlikable at some points, that I do see the villain in him. On the other hand, David Tennant's performance felt much more insane, if you will, not as manic but truly afflicted and confused, and it made me look at him under a different light.

Another character that is enigmatic, to me, is Gertrude. I keep asking myself if Gertrude was involved in the plot to murder her husband. It is not clear whether she is completely ignorant or as manipulative as Claudius himself. The fact that she marries him so fast suggests that she did know.

You know what part I love? The play within a play. All of it, how Hamlet uses it to get a reaction from the King, how he instructs the actors and talks about the craft of being an actor, the do's and don'ts, the meaning behind it all. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action, with the special observance, that you o'erstep not the modesty of nature. For anything so overdone is from purpose of playing..." (Act III, Sc. II).

I have so many more layers to peel, plot-wise and language-wise and I love that. I'm finally getting some free time and I will continue working on my project. I will update you more frequently I hope, and please feel free to give me any suggestions, pointers or simply discuss with me your impressions, opinions, etc.