First, it should be noted that The Alchemist is actually a play, not a book. Ben Jonson's play about the mixed up follies of an "alchemist" was first performed in 1610. I read it years ago in an undergrad class about Reformation era England, but honestly didn't pay much attention to it. You know how it is - sometimes you simply "read" a book for a class in a way much more like skimming!
So I decided a while back that I owed it to myself to actually read it. I'm glad I did, but I won't be repeating the task...
I'm glad I read it because it so mirrors the language of the King James Version of the Bible. When I discovered it was first acted in 1610, I expected this (the KJV was released in 1611). Reading the play was an odd experience in language; the first few acts were a real struggle to get my head wrapped around this old language (it's been quite a while since I read the KJV much), but after a while it all started to come back and I found myself much less dependent upon the explanatory footnotes at the bottom of each page.
But I'll not be reading it again because it's so bawdy. I don't remember it being so when I read it the first time - further evidence that I didn't pay much attention the first time through, I guess! While the story is often very funny - it focuses on the exploits of three con artists who pose as (among other things) an alchemist and his assistants to "cozen" people out of their money. As the play nears its end, many of the balls these con artist were juggling begin to fall to the ground and the mayhem that follows is amusing, for sure. But the repeated sexual references and bawdy language in general were too much. I suppose this is typical of popular language of the day, but I found it a bit overwhelming.
I think I'll stick to Euripides and Sophocles from now on!
Hatushili
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Book Review: The Alchemist
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment