Maggie O’Farrell (2020)

In 1596, William Shakespeare’s 11-year-old son Hamnet died in Stratford-upon-Avon. Four or so years later, Shakespeare wrote the play Hamlet, giving its tragic hero a variation of his dead son’s name.
Almost four centuries later still, Maggie O’Farrell was in school and learned of the boy Hamnet. That seed of curiosity planted 30 years ago grew into what the Guardian calls a gorgeous and heartbreaking fictional reimagining of Hamnet’s death and its effects on his family, particularly his mother, whom O’Farrell calls “Agnes.”
WhenAgnes eventually sees the version of her son’s name on a London playbill, she feels he has been stolen from her a second time. Meanwhile, the most famous character in the novel goes unnamed; referred to as a the tutor husband, or father.
Our group was taken by Agnes, a wonderfully drawn character, a strong, unconventional, free-spirited woman and gifted herbalist. Her association with the forest and with magic reminded us of the Snow Child, the stuff of local myth, and the connections between humans and nature.
Agnes’ voice is the key to the lyric narrative tone of the novel, a toneThe Guardian describes as:
“an elliptical, dreamlike quality to her prose in Hamnet that.. creates a world that feels at once wholly tangible and somehow otherworldly, as if the membrane between the natural and supernatural was more porous”
This porous line between life/death, and the natural/unnatural central is to the novel, and its focus on death and grief. And as many have noted, this is, at its heart, a story about grief. The scene in which Agnes washes and lays out the body of her dead son is devastating.
However, Liz shared that she was actually
“a bit shocked by Agnes’ collapse at the death of Hamnet. I realize she thought she could cheat death but she was also an earth mother – so life and death should have been familiar (perhaps not the right word) or understandable to her? Of course if she’d let Judith die in all those many times she was sick starting at birth, Hamnet would have lived. But it’s not clear if she realized the irony of that.”
We were all moved by the suffering of Hamnet trying to get help for his sister when no one was around, and at the impact of Shakespeare’s realization that while his daughter Judith has survived, Hamnet has died.
Patricia wrote up a lovely piece on her experiences with discussions of the novel in the context of its film adaptation.
“The comments made by members of the book group about Hamnet, the novel, and Hamnet, the movie, were interesting. Before our meeting, I saw the movie Hamnetdirected by Chloe Zhao and then I read the novel by Maggie O’Farrell. I thought that the two presentations were quite different, but both were engaging renditions of Hamnet’s story. I attributed the differences between the movie and the novel to the strengths and constraints of the two art forms. Still, after I saw the film, I wondered if the intensity of the acting in the movie was designed to manipulate the viewer’s emotional response. A few weeks later I attended a dinner party and a young woman gravely told me her friends did not like the movie because it was “grief-porn”. Since I had never heard of “grief-porn”, I went to the web and read several reviews that used this term.
So, it was in this context, I listened to the opinions of our group about Hamnet. A little over half of the group had both read the book and seen the movie. Although one person mentioned liking the linear approach of the movie, most of the group did not like the movie. A few people mentioned the lack of character development, but the strongest reactions touched upon the issue of the film’s emotional intensity. As one woman said, `It was too much.’ I understood some of the negative comments about the movie because I also had wondered if it was too much. In the end, though, I decided that both the novel and the film are examples of `grief-art’ and both convey the universal and true feelings of parents when a child dies.”
We had lots to say about the treatment of Shakespeare: we appreciated brief looks into Shakespeare as father and husband, and in that vein, we all were interested in the historical aspects and context of the novel, including Shakespeare’s life but also beyond.
For example, the novel’s treatment of the plague was fascinating, including details we had not realized were cornerstones of public health histories on contagion, for example. The use of wax on linen or as, Liz noted, the whole journey of the flea spreading the plague among nations.
Annette shared that a friend pointed her toward a historical resource which she found fascinating and recommends/
She notes, “for me, these history lessons add depth to the background of the novel and open the door to curiosity about the upheavals in land ownership, trade, money, women’s agency, and politicized religion. None of that takes away from enjoying this imaginative novel.”
I am delighted to share these here:
Two episodes of Lucy Worsley Investigates(PBS) available on demand, or on the computer:
Season 1, Episode 3 The Black Death
Season 1, Episode 4 The Witch Hunts
Despite some frustration of the flatness of the depictions of Agnes’s stepmother and Shakespeare’s father, who as unredeemable characters are less complex, we found this novel a tremendously powerful read.















