Book Review: Shakespeare's Wife
Jul. 22nd, 2009 12:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakGermaine Greer: Shakespeare's Wife
Overall, I liked it. Greer does a great job of demonstrating the way Shakespeare biographers have had it in for Ann(e) Hathaway through the centuries mostly reflects their own prejudices and biases. (Sidenote: I already wrote that post about wives, especially first wives, of geniuses and the way biographies, book or film, tend to treat them, right? At least I remember doing so...) The quotes from Burgess, Greenblat et al are downright creepy put directly next to each other, and read misogynistc as hell. She's excellent, too, in reconstructing Stratford life in Elizabethan times, especially everyday life for women. Where she loses me somewhat is falling into the same trap the biographers she accuses have fallen into, only with different objects of bias. For example, she has it in for Shakespeare's older daughter Susanna for no discernible reason other than Susanna (who as opposed to her sister Judith could demonstrably read and write, was called "witty" in her tomb enscription and was spirited enough to sue a man who slandered her) appears to have been her father's favourite. So we get many a snide aside about Susanna and how presumably she didn't work as opposed to her mother and sister, and how boring life in her household must have been, and I'm left wondering whether it's not possible to defend one woman without bashing another. Anyway, it's a book worth reading, and it's difficult to disagree with the asessment of Shakespeare as a lousy husband and Ann as a tough old bird who made the best of a mostly absent husband and three children.
Overall, I liked it. Greer does a great job of demonstrating the way Shakespeare biographers have had it in for Ann(e) Hathaway through the centuries mostly reflects their own prejudices and biases. (Sidenote: I already wrote that post about wives, especially first wives, of geniuses and the way biographies, book or film, tend to treat them, right? At least I remember doing so...) The quotes from Burgess, Greenblat et al are downright creepy put directly next to each other, and read misogynistc as hell. She's excellent, too, in reconstructing Stratford life in Elizabethan times, especially everyday life for women. Where she loses me somewhat is falling into the same trap the biographers she accuses have fallen into, only with different objects of bias. For example, she has it in for Shakespeare's older daughter Susanna for no discernible reason other than Susanna (who as opposed to her sister Judith could demonstrably read and write, was called "witty" in her tomb enscription and was spirited enough to sue a man who slandered her) appears to have been her father's favourite. So we get many a snide aside about Susanna and how presumably she didn't work as opposed to her mother and sister, and how boring life in her household must have been, and I'm left wondering whether it's not possible to defend one woman without bashing another. Anyway, it's a book worth reading, and it's difficult to disagree with the asessment of Shakespeare as a lousy husband and Ann as a tough old bird who made the best of a mostly absent husband and three children.
