The Shakespeare Chronicles

by James Boyle

Book by Boyle, James

Genres: Historical Fiction, Mystery

200 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

James Boyle is William Neal Reynolds Professor of Law at Duke Law School and the former Chairman of the Board of Creative Commons. His books include The Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind; Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society; Cultural Environmentalism (with Lawrence Lessig); and Bound By Law: Tales from the Public Domain and Intellectual Property: Law & the Information Society - Cases & Materials: An Open Casebook (with Jennifer Jenkins).

Reviews

[Thorsten · Rating 4 out of 5]

In my opinion the most intriguing of all those novels that cover the conspiracy theory abound the-author-formerly-known-as-Shakespeare.

This book is full of ambiguities and does not aim to explain or take sides in a debate that obscure to begin with. Instead of looking for the author, it opens up the question what our obsessive focus on authors reveals about us/society.

Accessible as open source text.

[L.T. Fawkes · Rating 3 out of 5]

James Boyle $2.99 *** Stanley Quandary, literary professor days from tenure at his small college, begins to have unusual dreams, quick little scenes which he recognizes as snippets of Elizabethan life. As the dreams continue and he analyzes them, he begins to realize they are scenes directly related to the question, Did Shakespeare really write those plays? Also as the dreams continue, ole Stanley begins to collapse mentally.

The first 70% or so of this novel is brilliant. If the final 30% had measured up I'd have given 5 stars. But I found the final 30% to be really disappointing. See what you think.

I don't usually review books I don't like (after all, the author put in the time and effort - the blood, sweat, and tears - to write the thing - at least respect that, is the way I look at it). This book posed a dilemma - I'm solving it by only reviewing the first 70%.

So anyway, was it Shakespeare or not? The intriguing point Boyle makes in this novel (while brilliantly lampooning academia and pop culture in general) is no, Shakespeare didn't. And he shows who did.

I know almost nothing about the ongoing dispute over who really wrote the plays, but Boles' argument seems pretty persuasive. Also he answers the two questions I've always wondered about the controversy - if S didn't write them, why was he given the credit? and why wasn't the real author ever outed by contemporaries or heirs?

L.T. Fawkes

[Alison · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am just confused by this book. The idea that the man Shakespeare did not write the plays of Shakespeare is not a new idea, nor is the idea that the true author is Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. So the basic premise of the novel, that this idea would be revolutionary, is false.

I do not understand the author's choice to set the novel not just at a fictitious college in a fictitious city, but in a fictitous state. Why create a 51st state? Why n ot just set the story at a fictional private school in an unidentified location? It would serve the same purpose.

Also strange, parts of the novel are written as the journals of two American professors. Why would they use British spellings and British phrases?

This is one of those pretentious novels that makes you geel like if you do not get it, you are just ignorant.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bill and I go back a long way. Or Francis. Or Edward. This book won't help you solve the authorship question, but it's definitely a fun read, once you decipher what's going on. I tend to enjoy stories where the main character has a few flaws, but Professor Quandary here has far more than his share. The guy's a mess . . . or is he brilliant? Or insane? He's definitely inspired. And as an expert in Elizabethan Literature, he'll even send an avid reader to the dictionary again and again to find words that are "archaic," or "Middle English," or simply "British." Even that works, and so does the ending. Something completely different.

[Mary · Rating 1 out of 5]

I got this on my Kindle because it sounded interesting. Not sure how I like it so far - the way the main character talks about himself is a bit annoying. We'll see what develops. I'm hoping for a fun fast read.

[Chris Bullock · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting plot, full of intrigue. You are drawn into the the mindset of the character(s) and the thoughts of the differing personalities.
Entertaining and thought-provoking.

[Melissa · Rating 1 out of 5]

Terrible. I skimmed through the last third of the book, only because I purchased it. If it had been a library book, I would never have finished it.

[Evelyn Merritt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good send up of literary criticism