Author Bio - William Shakespeare

Ok, so I'm sure we've all learned about Shakespeare a million times.  There is always the obligatory play (or two or three plays) that we're required to do in High School.  Romeo and Juliet is one of them.  McBeth is another one.  But, honestly, how much do you actually know about Shakespeare the PERSON?

He was born in April of 1564 (or, it's assumed.  That's when he was baptized and people didn't usually wait very long to baptize their kids in those days.  So there's a fairly high likelihood that he was born in April.)  He came from a moderately wealthy family and was married when he was 18 (due to the fact that he had gotten his wife pregnant before marriage).  Like most people of the age, he had three kids, two of which were twins.  His twin son died when he was age 11, but no one really knows what it was the child died of.

Not much more is known about Shakespeare's early life (even where he attended grammar school is an educated guess.)  He virtually disappeared from records from the time of the twin's birth, in 1585 until he appeared in London, involved in the play scene, in 1592.

It's really unknown when Shakespeare began writing, but 1592 is the first time any of his plays appeared on the stage.  They were fairly well-known by then, enough that he was a target of criticism.  Many thought that he was reaching too far, and that as an (essentially) uneducated writer, he shouldn't be doing the plays that he did.

That didn't stop Shakespeare, however, who continued to have his plays performed by Lord Chamberlain's Men, until Queen Elizabeth's death in 1603.  Then they changed their name to The King's Men to suit King James I (remember that history lesson on Tudor England?  Coming in handy right about now.)  Not only did Shakespeare write plays for the company, he also acted in most (if not all) of his plays and many others.  He was a well-known playwright by the time the late 1590s came.

Shakespeare was actually a very wealthy man when he died, leaving his estate to his wife and two daughters (both of whom were married by the time he died.)

He left behind a litany of work, one of which we're reading this week, Richard II.  I could go on and on about his works and his sonnets, but let's face it, most of us already know about all of that.

By Its Cover - The Queen's Fool

Of all of Gregory's covers, I think that this is the most eye catching.  It's colorful, and glitters with gold and I think is perfect for the book.  Tudor England was all about extravagance and this portrays that. (All the gold color on that dress is actually gold foil on the book.)

We assume that the girl on the cover is Hannah the Fool (or maybe Elizabeth.  The girl is wearing Tudor green), but really, there's no way to know.  I think it's just supposed to be a generic girl to show off the gowns and gold of the time.  I think it's a pretty cover on top of everything else.

Basically, I think that it fits the book well and it's eye catching.

I didn't pay much attention to the cover before I started reading, because I had to get the large print version from my library (the other was in high demand) and that has a small version of the above art on a mostly white cover.

I do think it's quite pretty, and if I were looking for a book about Tudor England, I would probably be drawn to it.

There isn't much going on, overtly, in the picture, but that would be the case with most scenes in the book, too, as with things that happened at court. Everything is covert and subtle and perfectly bland to the untrained eye. Look at the woman's posture... she could be concerned for her safety, anticipating the arrival of someone she either does or does not want to see, waiting for someone to catch up to her... the possibilities are endless. This is a Mona Lisa situation... is she smiling or isn't she? It's up to you, the audience.

Review Me Twice - The Queen's Fool by Philippa Gregory

I came upon Gregory's books in high school.  This very book, in fact.  I wanted to read it so badly that a friend and I went halfsies on a copy and then traded off reading it.

So, my opinion of this book might be a little tainted because, well, I love Tudor England.  And it has to be a REALLY terrible book for me to not like it, even a little.

And Gregory does a better job than most. By using Hannah as our protagonist, we get to see things from an outside view.  She was a person who loved both Mary and Elizabeth equally, because they were both great women in their own right, which sometimes gets lost when reading about history.  (A lot of times, Mary gets painted as the nasty, old queen who hated everyone.)

I also like that you didn't get JUST Tudor England history in this book.  You got a lot of Spanish history too, mainly because Hannah had spent her life running from the inquisition.

I admit, there are probably parts where it's a little corny, but I can forgive that.  The writing is well done, Gregory has really done her research and it's just an enjoyable read.

My Bottom Line 5 out of 5

For all that Cassy (and others) praised this book, I couldn't help but shake the feeling that it was going to be long-winded and dry and all about the appalling intrigue found at court. Well, there is a lot about the English court, but the other parts weren't true. It's a fun and easy read, and there is enough going on to keep you interested, but not so much that you get confused.

Sometimes I'm not entirely sure about the character of Hannah. She waffles on things (I don't ever want a husband, but I love this guy, but I'm not ready to be a wife, but this guy isn't so bad, but...) but I think that's a fair reflection of a teenage girl's mind, so I can believe it was by design, not bad writing.

I really enjoyed this book, even though I thought it would fall more along the lines of "okay."

The Tudor Tree

Welcome to your (slightly shortened) history lesson on Tudor England!

In case you happen to know nothing about me, I LOVE Tudor England.  It's my favorite time period to read about, starting at Henry VIII and his man whorish ways, and ending at James VI, who took over the English and Scottish throne, basically because there was no one left.



I know that's KIND of a big picture, but I wanted you to at least see the whole family tree. 

See, Henry VII came into power because he won a war (the last one to achieve his throne that way.)  He defeated Richard III and then married Richard III's niece, securing his place on the English throne for the next 25 years.  Honestly, no one really remembers much about Henry VII other than he preceded Henry VIII.  Henry VII had four children, Arthur, Margaret, Henry and Mary.

Arthur was the original heir to the throne of England.  He was older than Henry and he actually married Catherine of Aragon, causing peace between the English and the Spanish (who were constantly at war... actually, EVERYONE was at war during this time period.  No one ever got along.)

However, shortly after Arthur and Catherine were married, Arthur got what was called the "sweating disease" and died.  He was only 16 years old at the time.  He left Catherine of Aragon a widow and stranded in England for 8 years.

Now, here is where Henry VIII's controversy starts.  Catherine claims that Arthur and she never consummated their marriage (no one really know for sure if they did or not.)  Henry didn't really care.  He married Catherine, despite how shady it seemed (also, the Catholic church would not allow you to marry your widowed sister-in-law.  It was basically incest to them.)

During their marriage, they had one daughter, Mary.  But they didn't have any sons.  And we know it's ALL about the sons in England.  So what did Henry do?  He divorced his wife, of course, so he could get an heir.

And he kept doing this, for the next seven wives.  Anne Boleyn was beheaded (but it should be noted that she was Elizabeth's mother.)  Jane Seymour actually DID produce and heir (Edward VI), but died due to childbirth complications.  Anne of Cleves had a terrible relationship with Henry, and as such their marriage was annulled.  She was the only wife to come out alive, minus his final wife, and that's only because Henry died before the final wife could be killed.  He then married Catherine Howard, who he subsequently killed because she wasn't a virgin when she married him.  Catherine Parr was the last wife of Henry VIII.

The other major thing you need to know about Henry is that he completely reformed religion in England.  Catholics reigned supreme in Europe during that time, and the Pope had more power than kings.  Henry VIII opposed that idea (mainly because he wanted to divorce his wife and the church wouldn't let him.)  He rejected Catholic ideals and became Protestant.  He was actually the first building block of reform in Europe.  He planted the idea that one man didn't rule supreme (though that probably wasn't his intent.)

After Henry's death, the country was unstable.  Edward VI rose to the throne easily, but he was a sickly child.  Just seven years after becoming king, Edward died at 15 of tuberculosis.

Mary and Elizabeth fought for the throne almost all of Mary's life.  Elizabeth was smart and had her mother's cunning.  Much of the country wanted Elizabeth to rule, because she was Protestant (like both Henry VIII and her brother Edward), whereas Mary was Catholic.

Mary inevitable started a reign of terror to convert her country to Catholicism.  People were constantly being burned at the stake and, inevitably, earned her the name "Bloody Mary."  (Haha, and you thought it was just an urban myth.)

When Mary finally died, Elizabeth took the throne.  Her reign was considered the golden years for England (though not without its own peril.  Mary Stuart (Queen of Scots), who considered herself the heir to the English throne, tried MULTIPLE times to oust Elizabeth from her seat.)  Elizabeth built her kingdom up, was loved by the majority of her country and brought them into prosperity.  She even defeated the Spanish Armada (A REALLY big deal at the time), while delivering the best speech ever.

Our book this week, The Queen's Fool, deals with Mary's rule.  While the book is told from the point of view of a young (Jewish) girl, she enters Mary's court and reports all that she sees.  Gregory actually has a series of Tudor England based books, ranging from Catherine of Aragon to Elizabeth I.

Author Bio - Philippa Gregory

This week, we're reading The Queen's Fool by Philippa Gregory.

Gregory has written extensively on Tudor England.  If fact, The Queen's Fool is not even the first book she came out with (but... it's better than the first one, and shorter, so that's the one we're reading.)

She was born in Kenya, but her family moved to England when she was just two years old.  After attending the University of Sussex, she got her doctorate in 18th Century Literature at the University of Edinburg.

It was while in school in Edinburg that Gregory wrote her first novel, Wideacre.  It ended up being widely popular, and she wrote two other books to complete the series.  After two divorces (and two kids) she is currently settle with her third husband and six kids (and step-kids) on a 100 acres in North York Moors.

The Other Boleyn Girl is the first book in her Tudor series.  It follows Mary Boleyn (Anne's older sister and a consort of Henry's before Anne) and then we learn of Anne's relationship with Henry, but through Mary's eyes.  The book has been adapted not only into a BBC short series, but also a film in 2008 (It has Scarlett Johansen, Eric Bana, Natalie Portman and Jim Sturgess.  Four VERY fine reasons to go see it. :D)

The other books of the series are (In order of release, NOT chronological):

The Queen's Fool (Mary Tudor's Reign)
The Virgin's Lover (Elizabeth's Reign)
The Constant Princess (Catherine of Aragon)
The Boleyn Inheritance (Anne of Cleves and Catherine Parr)
The Other Queen (Elizabeth's reign, but about Mary, Queen of Scots' exploits)

She has also written a series about the other members of the Tudor family, from Edward IV's consort, to Henry VIII's mother.

There is a lot of controversy surrounding Gregory's work, mainly because it is largely fictional.  But, you know, they ARE in the fiction section, and I don't believe she's ever claimed they're accurate.  She takes a lot of rumors of the time, that COULD be true, but probably aren't, and worked them into her books.  But, as we all know, a lot of people think that historical fiction is actually historical fact. (Be sure to come back on Thursday for more discussion of historical fiction!)

Despite the problems people have with them, they're great books and definitely worth picking up (especially if you enjoy reading about this time period, like I do.)