Yes, the book's a slog, and there are places where she seems to say little in many words. Apart from anything else, I wouldn't want to ready 154 essays on the sonnets by the same critic, and not all the sonnets are worth a detailed commentary.
I don't own it, and it's been a while since I read part of it, but for me it had many revelations. The emphasis on reading the sonnets as utterances -- e.g. 116 as a point-by-point rebuttal of an pronouncement (offstage, but deducable) by the addressee, or 34 as one side of an ongoing argument. Her observation of repeated words, the so-called couplet ties and keywords. Her conjecture that "Feeding..." is the missing foot from 146.
She reminds me of Empson, who I also find exhausting, excessively analytical, and verbose.
|
Threaded Mode
