I think that if any of the emotional fiction is true, I might forgive Shakespeare a little for all the misogyny, xenophobia, and racism laced throughout his plays.

I get why he is treated without being named. Names are so important and have been used as symbolism by authors for centuries. In this book, he is the least important person, the least deserving of my attention, and if anything, kind of the villain. But he is also the same as many other man - philandering, self-centered, grieving, privileged, and oblivious to the patriarchy. And he is as absent to me as he was to his family.

Agnes was a well written character worthy of my empathy and respect.

O'Farrell offers an enticing idea about the life of Shakespeare's family and the death of his only son but falls short of the execution of her idea. Certainly, it cannot be argued that O'Farrell has a command of prose with vivid descriptions and creative language. However, her writing style cannot save the lack of a through point in the novel that leaves it mind-numbingly dull. Novels with little to no plot succeed with their interesting and relatable characters. Therefore, due to O'Farrell's characters being undeveloped and uninteresting, with a lack of exploratory and meaningful relationships with each other, the entire novel becomes a bore. In fact, the climax of Hamnet's death (not a spoiler) is hardly impactful because I have little care for any of the characters or their relationships with one another. 

Unfortunately, Hamnet's death even becomes laughable due to the use of an absolutely unrealistic trope which shows O'Farrell's lack of care or research in her novel. The rest of the novel holds up similarly with the overuse of tropes that do not fit the genre and instead make the novel campy. I really was looking for this book to paint Shakespeare's family as people, rather than spectacles, who face a nonsensical tragedy. Instead, O'Farrell's reliance on tropes and leaving Shakespeare nameless do the opposite, making one of the most famous writers even more mysterious and even more magical rather than human. O'Farrell is excellent at depicting grief at the moment but neglects to write about how deeply it continues to affect people over time and how it can rip apart families and relationships, instead relying on surface-level points and exposition. Further, her use of multiple timelines seems senseless as there is no purpose or reveal, and instead makes the novel even more boring and approaching annoying.

The novel's ending demonstrates the potential it failed to reach. Big ideas and feeling attempt to break through, but after nearly 300 pages of not exploring those themes in depth, setting them up, or creating a relationship between the characters and reader, the end makes it seem like the idea would have fit a short story better than a full-length novel. Additionally, the conclusion only draws further attention to how the themes O'Farrell introduces are unfocused. Topics, such as family relations and women in society, seem to be abandoned, with no real exploration into what O'Farrell really wants her audience to reconsider. In the end, O'Farrell's famous novel, while driven by its excellent writing style, fails to deliver on its promises, lacks any purposeful direction, and leaves me longing for any deep feeling.

I preferred the story of Agnes and Bartholomew rather than Hamnet.