Review: FOOL, by Christopher Moore

When I heard on Twitter that somebody’d rewritten King Lear from the Fool’s point of view, I was interested.  I don’t know anything about the author, Christopher Moore – but I know King Lear.  Actually I read someone else’s review where he said the opposite, he knew Moore’s work but nothing of King Lear itself.  You might be asking yourself the same thing I did – how do you have the Fool narrate, when we Shakespeare geeks know what happens to him at the end of the story? Thanks to my friends at Harper Collins I was able to find out.  My review copy arrived wrapped in a plain brown wrapper with a warning label letting me know just what I was in for: This is a bawdy tale. Herein you will find gratuitous shagging, murder, spanking, maiming, treason, and heretofore unexplored heights of vulgarity and profanity, as well as nontraditional grammar, split infinitives, and the odd wank . . . Ok then! The story does jump right in exactly as I was expecting, a comic novelization of the general plot, picked up right at Act I, Scene I with Gloucester talking about his bastard son.   Only now we get running commentary from the foul-mouthed Fool, who is given the name Pocket for the sake of the story.  I have to say, I found it hysterical.  As I said, I’m not familiar with Moore’s work – but if he writes like this all the time, I’m going to go and get more of it. It doesn’t take long, however, for the story to lose a few points with me.  New characters are introduced, who are not in the story at all.  Sure there’s a ghost and the witches of Birnam Wood, but I appreciate that those were more like cameo appearances for the benefit of the Shakespeare geeks.  Instead I’m talking about the “other” fool, the apprentice to Pocket, named Drool.  Drool also happens to have several traits that are crucial to advancing the plot – he’s monstrously strong, incredibly dimwitted, and has an unnatural gift of speaking in other people’s voices.  He’s also the source of much of the more bawdy humor, as he’s pretty much willing to shag anything that will stand still, including an oak tree with a knothole. Anyway, back to the story.  The plot progresses while staying surprisingly true to the Shakespeare’s version (and, I learned, often dipping into Shakespeare’s own source material).  We learn many things about the backstory that we’ve always wondered, like the deal with Cordelia’s mother, and more history on Lear’s temper.  We also get lots and lots (and lots) of detail that perhaps we didn’t need, like the fact that Pocket was sleeping with both Regan and Goneril.  Although the trial that Lear puts him through upon finding this out had one line so funny it had me laughing so hard for so long my wife asked what was wrong with me.   I wish I could tell it, but I’ll just say it involves Lear’s dinner and leave it at that, see if you spot it when you get to that part. I can’t spoil the story for you, but I will say this because I think it could be a deal breaker for some folks : Moore changes the story.  He stayed true for so long it actually came as a surprise to me, but near the end things start happening differently, and I realize that rather being “backstage” like something out of a Stoppard play, I was in an alternate universe version of Lear where things did not play out as I knew they did.  It’s an interesting moment in a story like this, because either you’re going to be curious to see how things resolve since now anything goes, or you’re going to lose interest because it’s not Shakespeare anymore.  I think I was in the latter group. I highly recommend this book to anybody who, like me, has a  sense of humor regarding their Shakespeare.    Yes, he adds characters and changes the story.  Yes, it’s twelve kinds of filthy and offensive.  It’s also very, very funny.  And, better, it still remains a tribute to its source material.   There’s even an author’s note at the end where, amidst all the apologizing, Moore essentially says what we here at Shakespeare Geek know already – whatever you think you’re about to say, just accept that Shakespeare said it first, and he said it better.  A book like this only serves to echo that sentiment.  But that doesn’t stop Moore from adding creative suggestions for managing the Shakespeare empire :  “Amid all the attractions at Stratford-upon-Avon, I think they should add one where participants are allowed to push King Lears off a high precipice.  Rage, wind, blow! Crack your cheeks! AHHHHHhhhhhhhh*splat*.”

Ah Yes, That’s Why I Love Her

Helping my wife put on a necklace today I said, “We should get you a tattoo right here on the back of your neck.  Something Shakespeare.  We will all laugh at gilded butterflies.” (That’s the quote that hottie Megan Fox has tattooed on herself, for the curious.) “Lear,” my wife replied. “…” I said. “What?” she asked. “…” I said again.  “Was that just a really lucky guess?” “No. Gilded butterflies.  King Lear.  I remember hearing that.” Made my day.  My wife is not a Shakespeare geek, so a Lear reference is no small feat.  “That was awesome,” I told her.  “Do that more often and I’ll buy you stuff.” 🙂

SciFi Shakespeare

http://www.tor.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=story&id=17973 Ok, love this crossover.  I subscribe to Tor.com, one of the providers of free ebooks,specifically science fiction and fantasy.  So when the names Rosencrantz and Guildenstern popped up in the description, naturally I was curious! From “master of alternative history” Harry Turtledove comes “We Haven’t Got There Yet”, the story of one Mr. William Shakespeare who becomes enraged that someone has taken some of his characters and put them in a new play.  He winds up at a performance of Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Sounds great to me.  It is a short story, a single (long) web page.  So it won’t take forever to read it.  I just thought I’d post about it first before somebody beat me to it :)! UPDATE : Posted this, went to Twitter, found at least 6 people already forwarding the link.  Wow, this stuff moves fast.  When do these people clean the kitchen?

I Think I’d Rather Defend Iago

http://denofgeek.com/movies/221398/in_defence_of_jar_jar_binks.html “In Defense of Jar Jar Binks” is sure to hit a few hot buttons with the geek crowd.  Truthfully I would skip the article completely if not for the need to find the Shakespeare reference in it. If your geek pride is too strong to stomach the idea of somebody defending the place of Jar Jar Binks in the Star Wars movies, let me get right to the Shakespeare – the author makes the argument that Jar Jar is the clown, and compares him to Lancelot the Clown from Merchant Of Venice.  The clown, he says, “provides useful commentary, lessons, and above all, laughs…” I don’t think anybody faults the movie for having a comic aspect.  It’s when it turns from dramatic to comic on the whole that there’s a problem.  The original movies had their comedy, after all.  But somewhere around Return Of the Jedi and the Eewoks, George Lucas decided that family-friendly cute-and-cuddly comedy was better box office gold than smart alec Han Solo and Chewbacca banter, apparently.

F U C Shakespeare

http://www.slate.com/id/2214106/ Although it seems a bit stale as far as celebrity news goes (apparently the video just dropped), Slate’s got an article up look at Britney Spears’ “controversial” album title “If You Seek Amy”(*) and how it’s actually a much older joke than perhaps even she realizes.  Dates back through a whole variety of bands that thought of the joke before her, one of whom even acknowledges getting it from James Joyce.  The article then goes on to show that, as always, Shakespeare said it first.  Only his is dirtier.   (*) If you seem to be having trouble figuring out the joke, it helps to realize that sometimes words sound like letters.  So “If you” = F U …  do I really have to <ahem> spell it out for you?