Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.
Lädt ... Four Great Tragedies: Hamlet; Othello; King Lear; Macbeth (Signet Classics) (1982. Auflage)von William Shakespeare (Autor)
Werk-Informationen4 Plays: Hamlet; King Lear; Macbeth; Othello von William Shakespeare
Keine Lädt ...
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an um herauszufinden, ob du dieses Buch mögen würdest. Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch. keine Rezensionen | Rezension hinzufügen
Gehört zu VerlagsreihenBeinhaltet
In this 1961 study, Kenneth Muir considers Hamlet, Othello, King Lear and Macbeth. Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden. |
Aktuelle DiskussionenKeineBeliebte Umschlagbilder
Google Books — Lädt ... GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)822.33Literature English English drama Elizabethan 1558-1625 Shakespeare, William 1564–1616Klassifikation der Library of Congress [LCC] (USA)BewertungDurchschnitt:
Bist das du?Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor. |
OTHELLO: Not very good. The plot is simple and straightforward with no reason to be dragged out over five acts. The characters are melodramatic and without depth. I entertained myself by imagining it performed by the cast of The Honeymooners, which actually fit really well. It's almost exactly like a long episode of The Honeymooners, except Norton is evil, and Ralph kills Alice. 1.5/5. 8/2/08.
KING LEAR: Pretty enjoyable -- much better than Othello, not as good as Hamlet. The biggest fault is the parade-of-corpses ending; sort of a lazy way to make sure it has the requisite body count to qualify as a tragedy. It isn't particularly tragic; except for Cordelia (who isn't a big character) and maybe Gloucester (who I didn't find very sympathetic), everyone who dies has it coming. And there's a lot of humor; I'll be interested to see a film version to see how humorously it's actually played. 3/5. 11/24/08.
MACBETH: A short, fast read. There's not much depth to it; sometimes it seems more like an excuse for stage effects than literature. But it kept me entertained. 3/5. 2/7/09. ( )