Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love's Labour's Lost, By William Shakespeare. In what instance do you like checking out so a lot? Just what regarding the sort of guide Love's Labour's Lost, By William Shakespeare The should read? Well, everyone has their own reason should read some books Love's Labour's Lost, By William Shakespeare Mostly, it will associate with their requirement to obtain expertise from guide Love's Labour's Lost, By William Shakespeare and also wish to read merely to obtain entertainment. Novels, story e-book, and also other amusing e-books become so prominent this day. Besides, the scientific publications will likewise be the ideal factor to choose, particularly for the students, teachers, medical professionals, entrepreneur, as well as various other occupations who enjoy reading.
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Free PDF Ebook Online Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love and Obligations-- The King of Navarre, Ferdinand, and three of his friends, the lords Berowne, Dumaine, and Longaville, take an oath to foreswear the company of women for three years. Their intent is to devote their time to study and fasting. Fate, however, has other plans for them. This wimpled, whining, purblind, wayward boy, This senior-junior, giant-dwarf, Dan Cupid; Regent of love rhymes, lord of folded arms, The anointed sovereign of sighs and groans, Liege of all loiterers and malecontents.
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare - Published on: 2015-06-10
- Released on: 2015-06-10
- Format: Kindle eBook
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare Review Praise for William Shakespeare: Complete Works:“A feast of literary and historical information.” -The Wall Street Journal
From the Publisher Designed for school districts, educators, and students seeking to maximize performance on standardized tests, Webster’s paperbacks take advantage of the fact that classics are frequently assigned readings in English courses. By using a running thesaurus at the bottom of each page, this edition of Love’s Labour’s Lost by William Shakespeare was edited for students who are actively building their vocabularies in anticipation of taking PSAT®, SAT®, AP® (Advanced Placement®), GRE®, LSAT®, GMAT® or similar examinations.
PSAT® is a registered trademark of the College Entrance Examination Board and the National Merit Scholarship Corporation neither of which sponsors or endorses this book; SAT® is a registered trademark of the College Board which neither sponsors nor endorses this book; GRE®, AP® and Advanced Placement® are registered trademarks of the Educational Testing Service which neither sponsors nor endorses this book, GMAT® is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admissions Council which is neither affiliated with this book nor endorses this book, LSAT® is a registered trademark of the Law School Admissions Council which neither sponsors nor endorses this product. All rights reserved.
From the Back Cover
This student-friendly edition of a difficult play includes a clear, helpful introduction and notes elucidating the complicated imagery and wordplay. Notes and illustrations refer the reader to various staging options enabling him or her to imagine Love’s Labour’s Lost in performance.—Katharine E. Maus, James Branch Cabell Professor of English Literature, University of Virginia
Jill P. Ingram is Assistant Professor of Shakespeare and Renaissance Literature at Ohio University. She received her Ph.D. in English from the University of Virginia, and is the author of the book, Idioms of Self-Interest: Credit, Identity and Property in English Renaissance Literature (Routledge, 2006). She has also published many articles on English Renaissance culture and literature.
Where to Download Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Most helpful customer reviews
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. "They have been at a great feast of languages and stolen the scraps." By R. M. Peterson That's how Mote, the diminutive comic genius of the play, sums up the bantering wordplay of three secondary characters -- a school headmaster, a curate, and a Spanish dandy. "Mote" is how everyone pronounces the lad's nickname "Moth" (so mispronounced to underscore his size). The clown of the play, Costard, answers Mote thus: "O, they have lived long on the alms-basket of words. I marvel thy master hath not eaten thee for a word, for thou art not so long by the head as 'honorificabilitudinitatibus'. Thou art easier swallowed than a flapdragon." (A "flapdragon", by the way, is a raisin floating in brandy, while Samuel Johnson later cited the 27-letter word as the longest word known.)That is a very small example of the verbal jousting and hijinks of LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST. I understood some of it, though I undoubtedly missed much. The collection of Shakespeare's plays that I am using for my traversal of his work does not contain annotations. That generally serves me well, as I don't wish to get bogged down reading explicative footnotes. Nonetheless, I am tempted to get an annotated volume of LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST and re-read the play along with an explanatory gloss in order that I might better appreciate, and revel in, the extravagant wordplay.But Shakespeare being Shakespeare, LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST is more than a virtuosic display and celebration of the English language. To be sure, the "plot" is thin. The King of Navarre and three of his lords pledge themselves to three years of ascetic scholarship, including, most significantly, no consorting with women. But no sooner is the ink dry on their signatures than the Princess of France and three of her ladies-in-waiting show up. Each of the men falls for one of the women, and they must reconcile their oaths of chastity with their egos and libidos. They also must win their respective heart's desires, something the women coquettishly resist. Meanwhile the clown Costard vies with the Spanish dandy for the favors of a country wench, the school headmaster and the curate pontificate, and Mote congenially mocks everyone.Interwoven through the play are a few themes of substance: book learning versus experience; men versus women; the power of love and the evanescent distinction between love of another and love of one's self; and appearance versus reality.But for me what is most memorable about LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST are the linguistic pyrotechnics. One of the things Harold Bloom writes about the play is so spot-on (plus much more authoritative than anything I say) that I will quote it: "'Love's Labour's Lost' is a festival of language, an exuberant fireworks display in which Shakespeare seems to seek the limits of his verbal resources, and discovers that there are none. Even John Milton and James Joyce, the greatest masters of sound and sense in the English language after Shakespeare, are far outdone by the linguistic exuberance of 'Love's Labour's Lost'."
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Hoity-toity By HH G.R. Hibbard's introductory essay, while hostile to those speculations by "scholars spending their days in the British Museum", is warmly appreciative of the play in the theater, and comments interestingly on the remarkable revival in LLL's theatrical fortunes since 1927. He suggests (questionably) that Modernism, and particularly the prestige of James Joyce, prompted a revaluation of punning wit: "Good puns were being recognized for what they are, a means of bringing two diverse kinds of experience into a sudden, unexpected, and illuminating juxtaposition with one another." Hibbard rightly emphasizes the play's sustained feminism and its readiness both to carry linguistic ingenuity to surrealistic extremes and to challenge such exuberance by the unexpected late reminders of the realities of death and labor outside the Arcadian park-land. After examining evidence for the existence of the possible sequel, "Love's Labour's Won", Hibbard concludes: "It seems beyond doubt, therefore, that it did exist, that it was published, and that it has since disappeared. Further than that it is not possible to go." Here Hibbard's reluctance to speculate seems rather severe: the strikingly open-ended structure of LLL strongly portends a sequel in which the four lords meet after their year of probation and, after fresh contretemps, finally win the ladies' hands in marriage.Hibbard's footnotes in the text of the play are somewhat austere, in keeping with his general emphasis on the empirical and verifiable. He frequently deploys readings from OED and anthologies of proverbs; he concisely deciphers the arabesques of punning and the bawdy allusions; and he offers fewer evaluative, thematic, and argumentative comments than became customary in the Arden editions.
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful. A review by Joseph Suglia By Joseph Suglia A review of LOVE’S LABOUR’S LOST (Shakespeare)by Dr. Joseph SugliaWe fall in love with our own hallucinations, according to the most rigorous of the pure comedies, LOVE’S LABOUR’S LOST (1595-1597). As the title itself announces, this will not be a typical Shakespearean comedy in which everyone gets married, whether they want to or not. From the final scene:Our wooing doth not end like an old play:Jack hath not Jill [V:ii].Courtship does not result in conjugality, but rather in the weak promise of deferred gratification: King Ferdinand “falls in love” with the Princess of France, who forces the Navarrean ruler to wait for her for an entire year. Berowne “falls in love” with the mysterious Rosaline, who forces the Navarrean lord to wait for her for an entire year (all while doing charity work at a hospital). There is absolutely no reason to believe that the Princess of France will give herself to King Ferdinand, nor is there any reason to believe that any of the French ladies will give themselves to the Navarrean lords, Berowne, Dumain, or Longaville. The play ends, without ever ending, with the indefinite postponement of erotic fulfillment.The King demands payment for the province of Aquitaine from the Princess of France. In vain. Just as his desire to be paid for Aquitaine is disappointed, the King’s lust for the Princess is disappointed. Not merely is it the case that the male desire to conquer the feminine fades into libidinal nonfulfillment (or “erotic defeat,” to use Harold Bloom’s term); the male desire to accumulate wealth fades into financial nonfulfillment. Women outwit their male suitors in this puckish farce, a sophisticated high comedy that ridicules all of its male characters and extols the brilliance of its ladies, who emerge looking far from foolish. To quote the Princess of France:[P]raise we may affordTo any lady that subdues a lord [IV:i].A feast of language in which the characters dine on scraps, the play mocks the speech of the hypereducated and of the undereducated alike. The speech of the pedants Holofernes and Nathaniel is all but unintelligible, since they speak Latin as often as they speak English and obsessively employ synonymia. (Synonymia: a long sequence of successive synonyms.) The magnificent Don Adriano de Armado, who avoids common expressions as if they were strains of the Ebola virus, is admirable and ridiculous at the same time. He obsessively employs synonymia and tatutologia. (Tautologia: a tiresome repetition of the same idea in different words.) The rustic Costard only talks in malapropisms, mistaking “reprehend” for “represent,” “adversity” for “prosperity,” “manner” for “manor,” “desolation” for “consolation,” “collusion” for “allusion,” and so forth. Somewhat implausibly, Costard is also the bearer of a word that seems above him, one of the longest words in the English language: honorificabilitudinitatibus (“to be gifted with honors”). Berowne is perhaps Shakespeare’s linguistic ideal, since he neither utters malapropisms nor translates his every word into Latin. He is mocked in other ways.LOVE’S LABOUR’S LOST is probably Shakespeare’s filthiest play, as well, with at least two lines that sound like they belong to a hit song by Ke$ha:Thou canst not hit it, hit it, hit it,Thou canst not hit it, my good man [IV:i].Two metaphorical strands are woven throughout the play. The first series of metaphors concerns the opposition between the spring and the winter. This one leaves me cold. The second metaphorical filament is immeasurably more interesting than the first: Ocular and optical metaphors proliferate throughout the play, which concerns the act of seeing and the relationship between seeing and desiring.The men of this imaginary world have a purely visual interest in their female “beloveds.” For example, the entire sensorium of Navarre, according to Boyet, attending lord to the Princess of France, is housed in his eyesight:All senses to that sense [eyesight] did make their repair,To feel only looking on fairest of fair.Methought all his senses were lock’d in his eye,As jewels in crystal for some prince to buy [II:i].Berowne’s fear, or so he says, is the loss of his eyesight from reading too much. He would much rather study a woman’s physiognomy:Light, seeking light, doth light of light beguileSo, ere you find where light in darkness lies,Your light grows dark by losing of your eyes.Study me how to please the eye indeed,By fixing it upon a fairer eye [I:i].The meaning of the first verse quoted seems to be: “Eyes that seek intellectual enlightenment are distracted from the light of truth, which comes from the eyes of a woman.” In the late sixteenth century, it was still believed that the human eye produced light-beams. This idea, known as the “emission theory,” is at least as old as Plato.All the eyes disclose are illusions. Moth, Armado’s page, makes this point in rhyme:If she be made of white and red,Her faults will ne’er be known;For blushing cheeks by faults are bred,And fears by pale white shown.Then if she fear, or be to blame,By this you shall not know;For still her cheeks possess the sameWhich native she doth owe [I:ii].What the peasant woman Jaquenetta is thinking and feeling Armado will never know. (Here we have the charming mixing of social classes that is so common in Shakespeare.) What the even more enigmatic Rosaline is thinking and feeling Berowne will never know. Again, the desire to master the totality of Woman is frustrated.The unknowability of the object of desire is perfectly dramatized in the second scene of the fifth act. At the beginning of the scene (which is 954 lines long!), the Princess of France and her ladies-in-waiting are in the park, ridiculing the gifts, letters, and attentions that they have received from their gentlemen callers. Boyet informs the Princess that he eavesdropped upon the king and his lords, who are planning to accost the ladies while disguised as Russians. The Princess orders the ladies to wear masks and swap the gifts that they received from the lords so that Katherine will be mistaken for Maria, and the Princess will be confused with Rosaline. When the men arrive, disguised, the ladies have their backs turned to them. As Moth remarks:A holy parcel of the fairest dames / That ever turn’d their—backs—to mortal views!Each man is disguised and therefore exchangeable with one another; each woman’s face is veiled and is therefore exchangeable with the another. Bodies are clothed; faces are inscrutable. All that is visible is the eyes. If you would like to find the authentic precursors of Schnitzler’s TRAUMNOVELLE and Kubrick’s EYES WIDE SHUT (1999), look no further.The women of LOVE’S LABOUR’S LOST are unknowable to the male characters, for the men only know the figures that they have created. In scene after scene of Shakespeare’s great play, we encounter men who love themselves more than the women they profess to adore. For instance, Boyet loves not his mistress, but his own language. As the Princess says of his overblown encomium to her beauty:I am less proud to hear you tell my worthThan you much willing to be counted wiseIn spending your wit in the praise of mine [II:i].Ingenuously or disingenuously (which will never be discovered), Berowne asks Rosaline (some versions, erroneously, say ‘Katherine’):Did I not dance with you in Brabant once? [II:i].Berowne does not even seem to recognize the woman whom he “loves.” She mockingly repeats his leading question:Did I not dance with you in Brabant once?Repeating his question, she neither confirms nor denies its suggestion that such a dance had ever taken place. Whereas Bloom proposed DID I NOT DANCE WITH YOU IN BRABANT ONCE? as an alternative title to the play, I would suggest LAST YEAR AT BRABANT, echoing, of course, the cinematic masterwork of Resnais and Robbe-Grillet, LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD (1962). We know nothing of the prehistory of these lovers, if lovers they be. It is indeed entirely possible that their prehistory is wholly imaginary, that Rosaline is playfully assuming the fictitious role that Berowne has imposed on her. For Berowne loves only his own reflection, the mirror image that is reflected in her eyes. As he says (in prose):By this light, but for her eye, I would not love her—yes, for her two eyes [IV:iii].Berowne loves Rosaline, then, because she is a reflective surface. “What do you see when you look at me?”: This is Berowne’s question. And Berowne is not the only autoeroticist in the play. From the King of Navarre himself, in a letter to the Princess of France:But do not love thyself; then thou wilt keepMy tears for glasses, and still make me weep [IV:iii].Translation: “Don’t love yourself. Love me.”With these words Berowne describes the beauty of Rosaline:A whitely wanton with a velvet brow,With two pitch balls stuck in her face for eyes;Ay, and, by heaven, one that will do the deed,Though Argus were her eunuch and her guard [III:i].Argus, the monster with one hundred eyes, is the castrated guard who protects the woman with sightless eyes. And into those null eyes Berowne looks and sees what he wants to see. He introjects his own images into the blackness. What does he see in Rosaline’s eyeless eyes? Nothing but himself. Her pitch balls are as black as the eyes of a chicken, and there is nothing but his own Self to be seen within their unfathomable, fathomless blackness.All interpretation is projection, since interpretation is drawn not to objects, but to the absence of objects. We desire to interpret not when there is something to interpret, but when there is nothing to interpret.Dr. Joseph Suglia
See all 6 customer reviews...
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare PDF
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare iBooks
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare ePub
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare rtf
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare AZW
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare Kindle
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
Love's Labour's Lost, by William Shakespeare
