Illustration – 140 pages – my copy (paperback; 1984) borrowed from Plymouth University library during January 2011
- 3 nods out of 5 -
Shakespeare in the play-house; Shakespeare on the small screen; Shakespeare on the silver screen; Shakespeare on paper; Shakespeare in schools; Shakespeare on the internet…and as in the case of this book, Shakespeare in illustrated, comic form!
The Worm found a collection of such books whilst glancing on the shelves in a library. Immediately, the venture sounded like a good deal: any which way you want your Shakespeare, it appears to be catered for. I scanned the books on offer: The Tempest, The Merchant of Venice, Macbeth, and King Lear. The last one was enthusiastically selected.
For regular readers of this blog, you will have noticed that in the past few months the Worm has upped his reading on Shakespeare (in the form of the trilogy on Henry VI) as well as graphic novels (including the sublime Alan Moore comic Watchmen). This enterprise, then, sounded like a great fusion. In order to set the scene, illustration is provided by the renowned artist Ian Pollock, whilst the text is from the hand of William Shakespeare himself. The essence of the play is unchanged, in that the characters and plot remains. Of course, in the translation to comic form, such text is cut up to fit into the box panels of the page.
One might think it would be interesting to see a representation on the likes of Lear, of Edmund and of Edgar; however, the pace of the book is uneven throughout. The blame, if such a strong word could be used, must be laid at the hands of Pollock himself. Whereas previous reads (namely Watchmen and Batman: Year One) fill the page and seamlessly move onwards, Pollock’s book is more snap shot images, with the action pacified. Furthermore, Pollock’s choice of framing of characters is confusing to say the least. The majority of panels appear unconnected to the next, with the reader scratching the top of their heads in wonder at just what is going on.
The immediate answer here lies in the likes of Batman & Co drawn by comic artists who are used to the action sequence. This is not to diminish Pollock as a creator of image – the gouging of the eyes of Gloucester is a truly wonderfully frightening panel – but rather that he was the wrong choice of artist for such collaboration.
Unfortunately for the actual story itself, such confusion overshadows the plot and Shakespeare’s prose. The madness of King Lear is mostly obscured by the hectic, unconventional framing (and the Worm does not entertain the suggestion that such an effect was Pollock’s overall intention). ‘Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks! Rage! Blow! You cataracts and hurricanoes spout! Till you have drenched our steeples, drowned the cocks!’, Lear rages to his companion, the Fool. More disappointingly is the reluctance to engage with the theme of generational conflict and the throwing away of the old to make way for the new. Whilst Edgar’s concluding statement is diminished by the childlike sketching of the character on a barren landscape; undoubtedly, such a statement is better served on the stage or on the screen. (NB: Edgar’s final words: ‘The weight of this sad time we must obey / speak what we feel, not what we ought to say / the oldest hath borne most: we that are young / shall never see so much, nor live so long.’
As a whole, the Worm has concluded that such annoyance means Shakespeare is not for comic form, and must remain on the stage or screen. 5 nods for effort and inventiveness; but a sobering 2 nods for the final product.
Buy it here:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Lear-William-Shakespeare/dp/0283990775/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1327677922&sr=8-3
Read a more flattering review of the book here:
http://picturesfromanoldbook.blogspot.com/2011/03/king-lear-ian-pollock-part2.html
