Love's Labour's Lost MOBI Ô Love's Labour's Kindle -

Love's Labour's Lost MOBI Ô Love's Labour's Kindle -

10 thoughts on “Love's Labour's Lost

  1. Bill Kerwin Bill Kerwin says:

    It could be argued that one of the themes of Shakespeare's plays is the glories and failures of language itself. If so, it is truer of Love's Labor's Lost than of any other play in the canon. The courtiers, both in their sparring and wooing (and it is often difficult to tell which is which) engage in so much wordplay that they confuse each other and themselves. The comic characters also engage in continual wordplay, each specific to his stock type: fustian braggadocio, pedantic latinate quibbling, malapropism, etc.

    Excess of language piles upon excess of language, obscuring the genuine romantic interest these young people have in each other, until plain-spoken death--in this case, a courtier in a black suit--enters and interrupts their idle chatter, bringing the play to an abrupt conclusion. And, as Hamlet would say, The rest is silence.

  2. Ahmad Sharabiani Ahmad Sharabiani says:

    Love's Labour's Lost, William Shakespeare

    Love's Labour's Lost is one of William Shakespeare's early comedies, believed to have been written in the mid-1590's for a performance at the Inns of Court before Queen Elizabeth I.

    It follows the King of Navarre and his three companions as they attempt to swear off the company of women for three years in order to focus on study and fasting.

    Their subsequent infatuation with the Princess of France and her ladies makes them forsworn. In an nontraditional ending for a comedy, the play closes with the death of the Princess's father, and all weddings are delayed for a year.

    The play draws on themes of masculine love and desire, reckoning and rationalization, and reality versus fantasy.

    عنوانها: «تلاش بیهوده عشق: نمایشنامه»؛ «رنج بیهوده عشق»؛ نویسنده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال 1977میلادی

    عنوان: تلاش بیهوده عشق: نمایشنامه؛ نویسنده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم علاءالدین پازارگادی؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، 1356؛ در ذو و 211ص؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، علمی فرهنگی، 1396؛ در 117ص، و هجده صفحه، شابک 9786001215476؛ موضوع نمایشنامه های کلاسیک از نویسندگان بریتانیایی - سده 16م

    عنوان: رنج بیهوده عشق؛ نویسنده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: فریده مهدوی دامغانی، تهران، اهواز، 1378، در 160ص؛ شابک: 9646581137؛

    نمایشنامه‌ ی کمدی «درد بیهوده عشق (تلاش بیهوده عشق)» اثر «ویلیام شکسپیرِ» بیهمتاست، که در حدود سالهای 1590میلادی تا 1592میلادی، نگاشته شده‌ است؛ «شکسپیر» شناسان، همگی از این نمایشنامه، به عنوان نخستین کمدی ایشان، یاد می‌کنند.؛ ماخذی برای این اثر شناسایی نشده‌، نمایش در پنج پرده تدوین شده، و دارای هفده شخصیت، و تعدادی سیاهی لشکر است.؛

    شخصیت‌های اصلی نمایش: «فردیناند: پادشاه ناواره، که تصمیم گرفته‌ است دربارش را به آکادمی علم و دانش تبدیل کند.»؛ «پرنسس فرانسه: دوشیزه‌ ای با نجابت، و طبعی شاهوار، که هنگام رخداد نمایش، به عنوان سفیر ویژه‌ ای از فرانسه مهمان شاه است.»؛ «سر ناتانائیل: کشیشی طفره رو»؛ «مرکاد: یک قاصد»؛ «بردن، دوماین و لانگاویل: دوستان و ملازمان شاه»؛ «روزالین: هرزه‌ ای با جبین همچون مخمل، از ندیمه‌ های پرنسس»؛ «ماریا»؛ «کاترین»؛ «بویه»؛ «کاستارد»؛ «آنتونی دال»؛ «دون داریانو دو آرمادو»؛ «ماث»؛ «ژاکوئنتا»؛ «هولوفرنس»؛«دو هنرمند»، «نجیب زادگان دربار»، «یک جنگلبان»، و«پیشکاران».؛

    مکان رخدادهای نمایشنامه: یک سرزمین پادشاهی کهن در «شمال اسپانیا»، و «جنوب فرانسه»، به نام: «ناواره» است.؛ «فردیناند پادشاه ناواره» ناگهان اراده کرده‌ است، که به جای تفریحات معمولی و همیشگی درباری، کاخ خود را، به صورت آکادمی، برای کسب علم و دانش، درآورد.؛ در مجلس عیشی که در کاخ برگزار می‌شود، سرانجام میعاد بسته می‌شود، که در مدت سه سال، مردان دربار، جز مطالعه، و روزه گرفتن، و تنها سه ساعت خواب در شبانه روز، کار دیگری انجام ندهند؛ و از همه مهمتر با هیچ زنی نیز حرف نزنند...؛

    تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 12/05/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

  3. Darwin8u Darwin8u says:

    - William Shakespeare, Love's Labor's Lost


    The plot was a bit underwhelming but the dialogue was razor sharp. Sometimes, Shakespeare's early plays just seem like discoing dervishes in a mirror-adorned room. As a reader we are amazed, dazzled, and distracted by all that is going on, by the spinning virtuosity of Shakespeare's words, by his absolute mastery of the English language, by his dash, his deft slight-of-tongues. There just doesn't seem to be ENOUGH central narrative gravity to IT to pull the reader completely through IT. LLL just seems heavy on the baroque icing and less focused on any narrative complexity.

    Shakespeare data dumps his genius for wit, flirtatious innuendo, and language with some fantastic lines, but wasn't flirting with a fully-developed form yet. I feel like I'm looking at early, beautiful Picasso sketches, Da Vinci cartoons, a beautiful homunculus of the future Shakespeare formed . But I want more. It really isn't you Shakespeare it is me.

    Still, the play is fun, a frolic, a half-jest and nudge. It is also Shakespeare playing with the comedic form. He is rejecting and twisting the form to suit his wishes. Not yet the master of the English World, he is playing the master he will soon be.

    I can't disagree too much with Harold Bloom: 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.

    Some of my favorite quotes:

    ― “Never durst a poet touch a pen to write
    Until his ink was tempered with love's sighs.
    From women's eyes this doctrine I derive:
    They are the ground, the books, the academes,
    From whence doth spring the true Promethean fire” (Act IV.3).

    ― “They have been at a great feast of languages, and stolen the scraps” (Act V.1)

    ― “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 flap-dragon” (Act V.1).

  4. Matt Matt says:

    What I learned from this play:

    1. It is probably not the best laid plan to entrust the delivery of an urgent piece of mail to the town goof.
    2. If a woman who you are not on romantic terms with suddenly shows up at your residence for a lengthy visit(???), do not make her camp out in the backyard. Let her have the nicest bed...and change the sheets perhaps. Shakespeare didn't mention that part - i'm just extrapolating...
    3. While it is great fun to hang out with a group of guys and obsessively watch/quote Seinfeld, Lebowski, etc, in reality such an activity does not fall under the mantle of academic scholarship and most women will probably make fun of guys for overdoing it.

    The possible penalties for ignoring these guidelines may include one year of indentured servitude as a candy striper.

    I really wish that I would have read this when I was in my early twenties...

    Two additional thoughts:
    1. This play made me want to hug the person who invented footnotes.
    2. I can't wait for the next time someone pulls out in front of me while driving so that I can call that person a whoreson loggerhead.

  5. Alan Alan says:

    The 2000 film of this play got me in trouble because I was laughing so loudly at Shakespeare; I was told after the film, Everybody (maybe 15 in the theater) HATES you. (Guess Americans are not s'posed to laugh at Great Drama--or poetry, either.)
    Arguably Shakespeare's most Shakespearean play, or interplay: the exchanges of wit, what he would have overheard at Middle Temple and among his fellow actors. Rather than the text, I'll comment on Branagh's musical version, with himself as Berowne and Director, Scorsese as producer. It's hilarious, especially for a Shakespearean; I laughed throughout so much (my laugh scares babies) one lady in the audience came up to me after the film to kindly inform, Everybody in this room HATES you. I thanked her for the admonition.
    Very slow, stagey opening lines by the Prince. Dunno why. They cut the poetry criticism, and substitute the American songbook--Gershwin, Berlin--for poems. The Don Armado stuff (with Moth his sidekick) is broad, not literary: mustachioed, funny body, melancholy humor. Armado's the most overwritten love-letter, parodying catechism; but he is standard Plautine Braggart Soldier (Miles Gloriosus) by way of commedia dell'arte. Then the Plautine Pedant (commedia Dottore) Holofernia crosses gender, a female professor type. Costard wears a suit, maybe a Catskills standup.
    Branagh cuts the Russian (or fake-Russian) lingo, muoosa-Cargo of the masked entrance.
    Wonderful 30's film cliches: female swimmers, the dance scenes, the prop plane's night takeoff. Ends with WWII, grainy newsreel footage of the year, after news of the French Princess's father's death.
    Berowne (pronounced ..oon) is sentenced privately to move wild laughter in the throat of death… His judge, Rosaline, points out the Bard's instruction on jokes: A jest's prosperity lies in the ear / Of him that hears it, never in the tongue / Of him that makes it (V.end). LLL ends with death and winter (the Russian an intimation?): When icicles hang by the wall,/ And Dick the shepherd blows his nail,/ And Tom bears logs into the hall,/ And milk comes frozen home in pails.. and the owl talks, Tu-whit..Tu whoo, a merry note/ While greasy Joan doth keel the pot. That's the European Tawny Owl (male and female must combine for it) so an American director might replace with the same prosody, Who cooks for youuu?(the Barred Owl).
    In the penultimate scene, Dull is onstage the whole scene never speaking a word until Holofernes says, Thou hast spoken no word the while, to which Dull, Nor understood none neither, sir.
    Well, no wonder, if he has no Latin, for Costard offers, Go to, thou has it AD dunghill…as they say. Hol, Oh, I smell false Latin--dunghill for UNGUEM. The Bard kindly explains the Latin joke, essential for modern American readers.
    Incidentally, Berowne uses Moliere-like rhymed couplets in his social satire on Boyet, V.ii.315ff. His most daring rhymes, sing/ushering and maybe debt/Boyet.

  6. Daniel Chaikin Daniel Chaikin says:

    On a lighter note, a Shakespeare play on Love's Warriors flinging and deflecting sonnets, with calls to arms. As one character puts it, Assist me some extemporal god of rhyme, for I am sure I shall turn sonnet.” Beware.

    The premise is the King of Navarre (not Henry, but a reference to the then current French King) takes three friends and founds an ascetic community dedicated entirely to knowledge. No women are allowed in to distract. Alas, a princess visits on business, attended conveniently by three ladies. Four love matches spontaneously develop and the ascetic rules the king set up get deeply tried.

    Love's Labour's Lost has some stage trouble because of the difficulty of the language. But it works wonderfully on the page and probably also on the stage when done well. Essentially there are three short clever but lingually difficult acts, then an Act 4 of ridiculous love sonnets, four long ones. But these sonnets are surficial and their silliness is the point. The last act, Shakespeare's longest, drops everything, plot and language, down to an easier level, includes an entire play within a play who purpose is to mock to actors. It offers a conclusion that roughly, and appropriately, shows all was for naught, hence the title. Thoroughly enjoyable and recommended with a touch of caution. Not everyone in the group I read with liked it.


    36. Love's Labor's Lost by William Shakespeare
    editors John Arthos & series editor Sylvan Barnett
    Essays afterward Walter Pater, Northrop Frye (“The Argument of Comedy”), Richard David, Robert Shore
    originally performed: c1595
    format: 176-page Signet Classic paperback
    acquired: May
    read: May 31 – July 3
    time reading: 11 hr 32 min, 3.9 min/page
    rating: 5
    locations: Navarre, Spain
    about the author April 23, 1564 – April 23, 1616

  7. Rachel Rachel says:

    What a bizarre play. 3 stars for now but I have a feeling this might grow on me. (Edit: Yeah, it grew on me.)

  8. Whitney Atkinson Whitney Atkinson says:

    I read Act 1 through Act 4 then definitely gave up. This is the hardest play to comprehend because the vocab was really under-explained, and I really didn't like any of the characters. I saw the play when my school did a production of it but they twisted it to have Harry Potter references, and even then it was confusing and weird. I'm just not a fan.

  9. Anthony Vacca Anthony Vacca says:

    Another terrific comedy from everyone's favorite Elizabethan playwright. This time Shakespeare throws a curveball that conforms to the popular conventions of stagecraft at the time (courtesy of Aristotle's list of Dramatic Do's and Don'ts in Poetics) and then confounds the typical endgame scenario for a Comedy, i.e. the obligatory pairing off of every single dude and dudette on the stage into forever happy marriages. The first four acts concern a king and his four loyal lords who make a pact to study in isolation for three years, swearing off all fun and women. This pact lasts for all of about ten minutes when a princess - attended by, naturally, three of her own ladies-in-wait - with some courtly business shows up to burst their testosteronic bubble. Being the refined, scholarly gents that they are, all four of our nobleman commence with the double-dealing as they try and snag up a lady while the gettin's good. The second half of LLL goes down entirely within the fifth act, as the noblemen enact a plan involving a play within a play that they just know is bound to succeed at getting them all laid. Thankfully the women are all intelligent and independent enough to know a pack of lame hams when they see one, and so the climax freewheels into a full-force mockery of these silly, pretentious wooers. Shakespeare's banter is on fire in triple-L, with nearly every line gleefully packed with zesty wordplay and clever punning. The characters are all inspired comedic inventions, especially the men who are all unmasked as clowns for their perceptions of what women want. So not only do we have Shakespeare's takedown of academic pretension, but also that 16th century proto-feminist satire you've all been hankering for. Whew!

  10. leynes leynes says:

    As I was reading this play my old and used copy of it was literally falling apart. With each page that I turned the binding loosened more and more... and honestly, I'm not even mad. By reading this I lost part of my faith in Willie Shakes. When I first got into his work I was highly entertained by his comedies, they were all super accessible and very quick reads (definitely not as dense as his histories) and on top of that quite light and fun (unlike his tragedies). However, the more comedies I read the more I despise them. I can't believe I'm saying this but they are too foolish for me. Most of them are so silly and ridiculous that it's almost depressing.

    In Love's Labour's Lost the King of Navarre and three of his homeboys pledge to foreswear women and other earthly pleasures. For three years, they want to commit their lives to academia and study. No women, not much food, not much sleep. Dumaine and Longueville agree immediately (probably because they have no backbone... because honestly who in their right mind would agree to that? 3 fucking years? Call me out.) but Berowne is like nah, bitch I just like pussy too much (which is relatable of course but why was he then so easily persuaded to take the oath nonetheless). Whatever.

    Pretty soon it becomes clear that the King doesn't even have a fucking brain cell because part of his rules and oath is that no women are allowed at his court (well who's cooking the food then? sorry, I'm taking my sexist ass out myself. thank you.) and the Princess of France is already on her way to visit him. What you gonna do with her? Let her sleep on the porch and risk another war between France and your tiny ass kingdom. Stupid ass. So, immediately, not even a week after his oath, the King breaks his rules by admitting the princess and her ladies to his court.

    What then ensues takes fuckery to a whole 'nother level: the Princess comes with three other ladies, well, what a fucking surprise that the King has three minions as well. Berowne and Rosaline are immediately enamoured with each other, Dumaine and Katharine hit it off, Longueville and Maria are and item and the Princess and the King cannot fight their sexual tension. And I'm left there standing like: BITCH YOU HAD ONE JOB.

    Adieu, valour: rust, rapier: be still, drum, for your manager is in love: yea, he loveth. Assist me, some extemporal god of rhyme, for I am sure I shall turn sonnet. Devise, wit: write, pen, for I am for whole volumes in folio.
    The men, being men, don't want to admit to each other that they have broken their oaths and so they claim that they haven't fallen in love. None of them are convincing and so rather quickly and openly the King proclaims that it's now time to woe this women for good. Like??? Two days ago you wanted to start your three-year-celibacy, what happened to that, bro?

    We are then exposed to the most cringy courtship I've ever seen in my life... way too many cheesy love sonnets (Willie I know for a fact that you can better than this: “Love is a familiar. Love is a devil. There is no evil angel but love.” I mean, count me out) and masquerades in which the ladies try to trick the men... and I'm like, you ain't the merry wives of Windsor, you cannot pull this off. Bye.

    And then at the end Willie wants to be awfully clever by denying us four weddings (he was probably working on a budget... I mean these marriages are costly to stage, let's be real) and the ladies have to rush off in a hurry since it is announced that the Princess's father has just passed away. The ladies tell they men that they won't be available for a year but if the men are still interested in them in 365 years (...I doubt it) they'll all marry them. I mean... I can't make that shit up.

    Love's Labour's Lost starts disappointingly and ends in the same fashion. Not a play I would recommend. The structure is beyond wild: the first three acts are incredibly short, the fourth act is considerably longer and then the fifth act features the longest scene in Shakespeare's entire canon. Yes, that scene alone is longer than most full acts in Shakespeare's canon. My man, what are you doing? The play also features one of the most obnoxious and annoying characters in Shakespeare's canon, the Latin master Holofernes who speaks the longest words ever uttered in Shakespeare's canon. That word is honorificabilitudinitatibus. Shoot me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Love's Labour's Lost [EPUB] ✰ Love's Labour's Lost ✶ William Shakespeare – In this charming comedy of manners, one of Shakespeare's earliest efforts in the genre, a wellintentioned king vows to forego all fleshly delights, setting the stage for romantic hijinks Ferdinand, th In this charming comedy of manners, one of Shakespeare's earliest efforts in the genre, a wellintentioned king vows to forego all fleshly delights, setting the stage for romantic hijinks Ferdinand, the king of Navarre, insists that his court join him in a pledge to undertake a strict regimen of study and celibacy The grudging compliance of three noblemen is sorely tested — as is the king's own resolve — with the arrival of a French princess and a trio of comedy attendants.