Reviews for Monk

The average rating for Monk based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2010-07-10 00:00:00 James Carros From a post I made in the Shakespeare discussion group: "I thank my god for my humility" -- Shakespeare's Richard as actor. Richard often copies the character of the person he is with. In general company he goes for a lowest-common-denominator approach, hence these deadly platitudes. There is a passage about Richard's acting (and acting by politicians generally) in More's History, which must have greatly interested Shakespeare, "And in a stage play all the people know right wel, that he that playeth the sowdayne is percase a sowter. Yet if one should can so lyttle good, to shewe out of seasonne what acquaintance he hath with him, and calle him by his owne name whyle he standeth in his magestie, one of his tormentors might hap to breake his head, and worthy for marring of the play. And so they said that these matters bee Kynges games, as it were stage playes, and for the more part plaied vpon scafoldes. In which pore men be but the lokers on." I had better paraphrase this, "In a stage play, everyone knows perfectly well that the person acting the Sultan is really a shoemaker. But if anyone was so lacking in good sense as to show his acquaintance with the man by inappropriately calling out his real name while he's dressed up as a king, he might be attacked and have his head broken, and serve him right for spoiling the play. Similarly these events were seen as political games, like stage plays, but played out on scaffolds, with the people as onlookers." More's History is not a history in the conventional sense, but rather a study in political control, persuasion and propaganda. There are long sections in direct speech, rather like a novel. Here, More is looking at the way political rituals are never challenged. --------------- A significant classic, akin to Machiavelli rather than the English Chroniclers. Also, a good introduction to late 15th/early 16th century English prose. By no means an easy read.

Review # 2 was written on 2015-11-27 00:00:00 Joshua Trauger Yes I know More is a saint and all, but that doesn't make this work worth while. It is a piece of spin, based on hearsay, and intended to contribute to the trashing of the reputation of King Richard III. Yes, that Richard, who reigned for barely two years and who lost the ultimate battle at Bosworth. He LOST, Tommy! So why did you feel the need, so much later, to continue trashing him? Why was it necessary? Answer me that. Maybe, just maybe, there was the memory of Good King Richard. Trial by jury, justice for the poor, laws in English. There would have been much more if Richard had lived. And now Richard has been buried with dignity and honour, and thousands go to pay respect - no one goes to YOUR grave, you twisted old pervert.