Menu
Title: Psychology According to Shakespeare
Authors: Philip G. Zimbardo PhD & Robert L. Johnson PhD
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield (Globe Pequot/Prometheus)
Publication date: 18-06-2024 (US)
Length: 344
ISBN: 9781633889606
Looking at Shakespeare’s work from a psychologist’s view is nothing new. It has been done over and over, even by Freud. Now, Dr. Zimbardo and Dr. Johnson are taking things to the next level, by showing how Shakespeare himself understood human behaviour and the wonders of the human mind. They analyse every single play and character, but also take a look at Shakespeare’s knowledge on psychology, from nature-nurture to cognition and from state of consciousness to reason vs. emotion, and how all of this worked out in Elizabethan England.
When I started this book, I had absolutely no idea what to expect. I have read bits of Shakespeare, know quite something about his work, but have never really been tempted to actually read all of his works. I do, however, have a big interest in psychology. I am fascinated by the human mind and human behaviour and to add to that, I love a good literary rabbit hole.
What Zimbardo and Johnson did, is impressive to say the least. They managed to gather all those plays and not only look at the individual plays or characters, they also looked at the culture of that time, modern psychology, knowledge in Elizabethan times and how Shakespeare himself fits in. It’s basically a very, very extensive research on the mind of Shakespeare and what that mind produced.
Overall, I liked the book. As said, it’s extensive, full of relevant information, and contains a lot of examples and matching illustrations. It really gave me more insight into Shakespeare’s work, even though I have not yet read all his plays. And as I am interested in psychology, this ticked quite a few boxes. There were some minor things I enjoyed less, although they didn’t really influence my positive opinion on the book.
Firstly, the introduction. Apart from being very long, it felt a little like reading the introduction to a dissertation of a tiny bit insecure student. It had a lot of small disclaimers, so the first thing I read were a lot of tiny disclaimers that felt like apologies and gave me the feeling that the authors were not sure about what they were writing. Which is a shame, because when you read the book itself, it is very obvious that they know what they are talking about. Secondly, the style of writing. Writing a good, gripping and thought-provoking book is incredibly difficult, so I get it, and I don’t mean it was really bad or unreadable. You could maybe compare it to a 60-year old maths professor, who’s trying his utmost best to make his lessons interesting for a group of 14 year old students.
Stay salty!
xx Marie