Widge is a fifteen-year-old orphan boy who has become an apprentice actor in William Shakespeare’s troupe, known as the Lord Chamberlain’s Men. It is the summer of 1602, and the bubonic plague is rearing its ugly head. Theaters in London are closed down, so Widge goes on the road with the rest of the company, except for his best friend Alexander (Sander) Cooke, who stays behind. When they get to York, Widge visits the orphanage where he was raised and learns a little more about his mother. He also finds a man named Jamie Redshaw who gives some evidence of possibly being his father and begins travelling with the players. Will Shakespeare breaks his arm, and Widge, with his ability to write in shorthand which was taught to him by one of his previous masters, Dr. Timothy Bright, can easily take dictation while Shakespeare strives to continue writing plays. However, a number of strange things start to happen, and they all seem to revolve around Jamie Redshaw. Is he really Widge’s father or not? Also, a new apprentice, Salathiel Pavy, seems to be trying to take away many of the roles which Widge has done. Can Widge remain with the troupe, or will he be replaced? And when Widge returns to London, he finds that Sander has disappeared. What has happened to his friend? Shakespeare's Scribe is a sequel to Blackwell’s The Shakespeare Stealer, which introduced Widge as a boy hired to steal a play by Shakespeare by copying it down in shorthand who then ends up joining the company. I enjoyed The Shakespeare Stealer, so I thought that I would read the sequel. It gives a good view for young people of what life was like in early seventeenth-century England. A few language issues occur, with a couple of instances of the “d” word and some places where the term “Lord” is used as an interjection. The usual excuse for including such things is to make the plot more “realistic,” but for the life of me I really can’t understand some writers’ compulsion to do such things in a children’s book. A number of references to drinking beer, ale, and brandy are found, and there is a somewhat crude joke involving a person’s “bum.” Some parents may also question the age appropriateness of including the fact that Shakespeare’s brother Edmund (Ned) left his previous residence to join the company because he had “gotten a prominent landowner’s daughter with child.” And, of course, it turns out that Widge’s mother was unwed. It is a somewhat mixed bag, but for the most part the story is quite interesting, although I would recommend it primarily for those on the older end of the suggested reading level. There is now a third book in the series, Shakespeare's Spy.
Also posted on Rally The Readers. The Shakespeare Stealer was a very enjoyable read, so I was really looking forward to reading the follow-up, Shakespeare’s Scribe. Much to my disappointment, the sequel lacked the charm and wit that made the first book so captivating. I just didn’t feel as invested in the story and the characters as I did with The Shakespeare Stealer.The plot of Shakespeare’s Scribe, which centers around the Lord Chamberlain’s Men taking their act on the road after the plague forces the shutdown of London’s theaters, wasn’t all that compelling to me. I failed to find anything particularly fascinating about the day-to-day life of a traveling actor in Elizabethan England. As Shakespeare and his actors trudged through muddy country roads, I felt like I was slogging through the book. Shakespeare, who’s in the midst of writing a play that will eventually become All's Well That Ends Well, has a greater presence here than he did in The Shakespeare Stealer. Although it’s welcome, more page time for the Bard still doesn’t inject enough spark into the story.The biggest letdown was the lack of character growth by the protagonist, Widge. We pretty much see the same Widge from the previous book. The story line involving the addition of an apprentice named Sal Pavy, who previously belonged to another acting company and becomes Widge’s rival, fell kind of flat. My interest was piqued when the Lord Chamberlain’s Men made a stop in York, where Widge grew up, and a visit to his old orphanage resulted in an unexpected clue to his parentage. I thought that this development in Widge’s story had a lot of potential, but I didn’t like the way that it played out. At times this plotline seemed forced, like it was in the book just to give Widge something to do besides transcribing for Shakespeare and worrying about losing his roles to Sal Pavy. I really do like Widge; he’s an endearing sort of lad whom you can’t help but cheer for, and I felt that he deserved a more satisfying resolution to his search for answers about his identity.Shakespeare’s Scribe isn’t a bad book by any means. It’s just that I went into it with high expectations after liking the previous book so much, and this installment in the series didn’t quite meet those expectations. I do still plan on reading the third book in this series, Shakespeare's Spy, to see if the story picks up.
What do You think about Shakespeare's Scribe (2002)?
I would rate this book 4 and a half stars. The reason why is because although 99%of the book is good, SANDER DIES! ): ):):): So sad.
—Evan
Haha This book had an authors note but it was really for the frist book so I don't really know what evidence Blackwood used in coming to the conclusion that the mysterious LOST play by Shakespeare "Loves Labors Won" is really just an early version of "Alls Well That Ends Well." Anyway nitpicking aside this was another interesting look at the espionage and intrige that surrounded Elizabethian Acting companies.Very exciting and good background builder for students before they start to read The Bards difficult verse.
—Cathrine Bonham
How odd! This sequel to The Shakespeare Stealer does not begin in nearly as lively or compelling a way as the original. The first 25 pages felt as though the author had to force himself to get started. The pace drags, and there is little to intrigue the reader. After a slow start, the author introduces an arrogant apprentice, a plague scare, and a mysterious stranger. The tale moves better from then on, and is a worthy sequel. The date is 1602, and the great bubonic plague is just starting in London and its surrounding villages. For fear of contagion in the city, Widge, with Will Shakespeare's company, must leave London and take their stage performances on tour to the outlying hamlets. For youths in grades 5-8.
—Jan
