As a long-time student of Shakespeare, I'm now no longer surprised when a new angle is found on the bard's work: his use of language, his view of leadership, the influence of a particular house where he once lived. Sex and Love, of course, are not exactly new concepts in relation to the works, but I have personally never previously seen a study which treats them as worthy of a treatise in their own right, although judging by the bibliography in this one I just haven't been looking hard enough.
Stanley Wells here gives us a grand tour of subjects sexual and amorous as depicted by Shakespeare. There are the well-exercised ones such as the love between Romeo and Juliet, and the less well-aired possibilities and probabilities of homosexuality in the sonnets and in plays such as As You Like It and Troilus And Cressida. He examines the outcomes of sexual jealousy in the likes of Othello and The Winter's Tale, the way Shakespeare treats the subject of rape in, amongst others, The Tempest and Titus Andronicus, and not forgetting the brothels and whores of Measure For Measure and Henry IV, and also in this context the contradictory attitudes displayed in Pericles, the play which of them all leaves me the most baffled for exactly that reason.
Wells is as interested in the linguistic treatment as in the visual depiction, unpicking the utterances of Mercutio and Iago in order to access the subtext. In fact, the effect is as if he has taken a hydraulic jack and prised the lines apart, the better to read between them. In doing so he reveals the significance of a number of seemingly innocuous words such as "nothing", apparently signifying either male or female genitalia (who knew?). He gives a few examples of where this is pertinent, but unfortunately makes no comment regarding Lear's "Nothing will come from nothing", into which I began to read all kinds of new meaning, nor indeed of the closing of what in my opinion is the finest speech in the canon, Macbeth's "Tomorrow and Tomorrow" soliloquy about the absurdity of life which ends "a tale told by an idiot ... signifying nothing". Life's a load of bo**o**s?
The work is scholarly and erudite, and avoids prurience whilst being anything but prudish. It uses as sources not only textual interpretations but also theatrical interpretations, giving examples of performances which have emphasised the sexual nature of the text, particularly relevant in the case of the 20th Century performances which revealed to a perhaps unsuspecting public the presence of same-sex relationships, thereby becoming, intentionally or not, part of the tide which washed away much of the related taboo. As should be expected from such an author and publisher OUP, the standard of writing is high, although there are a few typos here and there, and the expression "sufficient enough" on one occasion where either one of those words would suffice. One potential unexploited angle I considered was the opposite end of the story, as with Lady Macbeth's "unsex me here", or the exchange in Anthony And Cleopatra with the eunuch, who explains that his imposed physical condition leaves him with the desire but not the ability for sex.
Like death, taxes and the poor, sex and love are an inescapable part of life. They are not, however, the most important part of Shakespeare. Romeo And Juliet may be the most famous, maybe even the best, love story ever told, but in its theme of Love Across the Divide it is maybe the Divide that should concern us most. Similarly in Anthony And Cleopatra's Leadership Lost in Debauchery tale the vital ingredient is Lost Leadership, and the suicide of Enobarbus (perhaps one of Shakespeare's most overlooked heroes), brought about by his crisis of loyalty, has at least as much universal significance as that of Cleopatra.
Nevertheless, they are more than just background noise, and Stanley Wells has done justice to the theme. Definitely a worthwhile addition to the library of Shakespeare commentary.