King William Brown: Three Children Dream of Being in King Williams World

By John Cotter

I wrote this story after many years of walking long roads and a lot of hard thinking as to how I was going to put all the words that were floating around in my head, down on to paper. But then I thought of a town that was there many years ago (But its changed now.) which is near where I live, King Williams Town. Then I decided to start the story by calling it King William Brown. I thought more and more and I put it all together. But this book couldnt have been possible without all the long hours and all the hard work that my eldest son put into the book to make the book complete.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse UK
• Release date: Jun 30, 2014
• ISBN: 9781496982049

Book preview

��$Oabook_preview_excerpt.html�X�r�6~d���I�N��x��%�f�HI��� ��I�@�ګ<�^����k��I�; %���^�VH���|��x�\����?�o^���h�ZL��ʞ�qY �w�w�*������+,?�ma�܈FZ/�V�B;�1�^Tr/6 �k�6S�H8o�ʅ���so�z��p{�U5�>1쭬]��J.6{!뽨�N�´�)�YZP�F�J;�MQB�Xe��{�nJ�`t̋�M�x���~z�Yx�']]��"�����߽���o_�����/߈o\�������o�7���1�j�iJ%r��̇!WٽЕ�)��<�<8�.t}^K�DerU����΅k�"�p�v�t��4[�[�e�c��hZ����.�Os6Q��'~
3w�n�T����z��ZV:�����5�V+?��vj#d�l�%�������'09
]!MV�z��N�ņ�g�ؠ�вڈ�`�%���^Ý�:���{�.��|^gl(�3�*�xh���Y��Q^�*�~i5�Z�-U����p|4�D���:y$�r��R��q��dcj�7��~�UƮ�4ś�sT���"���C���W��7����:Y��<_��]�Wb}��"�9=��2�~~_���L�-��),n��f�w6sw�,���x6x9�J����07�O�z�?g�z�DoNV_.�W�kr0]���z����x�"�T��ί��O�����]�Y�pq����Ͱ����d1�%W�s����d>���v��hxu9K8��s���|�U��>=s��v���sv�.]O�����D){f;����ӽW�zbAl�2�^�$�KR�%����b.V���f��' �������.��.Ǔ���n�����*ET1M�ȣ��]#�s6�B0����bOƫ�,y�\x�!Y�'�+����=W��]2;�56-��⃘/�sˌ"��( ���|�G /�������,�^%��T+��S:-6c*����*0�)Dq�����JZ�N�����NX#s�"Ay,Ӆ�D'�V^�7�0�H�Չ���x�@b%&�Yca�҃�A{�ҀPi�5mͼX�|���禃�lB64G\��q)7 rCbEWG��q�q,rg�7�W��zN�Mw��� M������_�3�Z<��������i ^\�3��U� ���y�� I�f��i�]\ڸ����T���r�t̕�)������̴e^>(�F��b0�l ��@�g��'6.>溱�pΐpU��y�P����3���� 3 �(��B��=������{/�biq�i5H��;R^V3�:6�� 01FR���G��N�û?V�ǫ�U���X�����!�^W��3@�.�u=��Q!�q��R(kie/�ڊ�����Ġ�מc��Fg5f����Q��4h:f�Ħ��.���� ��J�Pv������b�%�V�8��� pAU�M�aNi�a)����Y��G�]$q�AC� ��G
[U�����"wV�~���"+ w���72������Hw����D��\?�:C�9�Ж*�v�ѤE���d w668{0Xy�HmIG�!�x��S�>tlp���8-g⃶󣧅Le��t�����h6U�eNvx|�w�D�hV�BD��Ƭ�s����G�G�4{�Zm`{jg��-G�� X�c�� %�����W0����n��X���$��"@N�C!9�G�"s7f�tҲ��o
����b�5H@�e `T��eݻǾ�̪����pAc�b7N�Ɲl�v𨩋|���R\Y�X��w���ݙrfs�u�b*�2yՂG4ћ:��a>5�[�.�!���Q���z�J�T�,����|y��rP�� ��q[�Kѱ�y �.�$��a�`��� E(:�ϥ�������A�|�>\�?JB=�@~ �8"��2w|�fw.��V
*��Õ涮]Gw*�sĎ�KG���d�� ����LՑ!�Z2��˿�q���E*L���K2H�:PB|��G}�EK]��RJՇ��PP�S\��;ܞm��EǏz�%�mF�,j�z߳Eګ�S�����[�`�[��(Z�::����da�Fa�CS�7Ԝn�����nǗO\T� /Yε���϶ ���T��uj[������T��~���e�~���� s����KW�<�+�(�GY�"�Ü��"=p�F��!q�b@������!
1��t��O@�S_�F�FA%��ix�)�Ʀ�@�@����o_R�iȫh��-���RRNt�>�u�7�j�;��(�B@�#H� ���Apw"u�M�b�h7k��Y 誏�b��� �I��:����jg�ܔ%����g����M>),���.�����w�RA���BTP݁��p��*�&��};��)b;��'�!��53�iR�Y8�k��BM4����m�,���_�2@o���O�������p(�4]��r�䅮�d�C4���������cK#'�fw�{�⭬4}?u �͜�/)=}�`�#�����T4�Հe���T�ߑ�=���W��Uh���9�Ni�5U�.˾n����d��"����y� QC0{����g�6��_��O����ܼ������L�Ւ���q9������p ���O��=����ː��|���O��)���$.B�

Reviews for King William Brown

[jfoster_sf · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Classic Shakespeare tragedy.

[takeitorleaveit_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

another play. another dreary subject. another tragic ending.

[angelarenea-1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

A fairly quick read. I didn't love it as much as I remember. Lear was way obsessed with 'nature' and the whole thing was so pompous. But not as bad as some of his other stuff.

[jwhenderson_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The division of the Kingdom begins the play with first, the Earls of Kent and Gloucester speculating on the basis for the division and second, the actual division by Lear based on professions of love requested from his three daughters. When this event goes not as planned the action of the play ensues and the reader is in for a wild ride, much as Lear himself.The play provides one of Shakespeare's most thoroughly evil characters in Edmund while much of the rest of the cast is aligned against each other with Lear the outcast suffering along with the Earl of Gloucester who is tricked by his bastard son Edmund into believing that his other son Edgar is plotting against him. While there are some lighter moments the play is generally very dark filled with the bitter results of Lear's poor decisions at the outset. Interestingly we do not get much of a back story and find, other than his age of four score years, little else to suggest why Lear would surrender his power and his Kingdom at the outset. The play is certainly powerful and maintains your interest through dramatic scenes, while it also provides for many questions - some of which remain unanswered.

[therebelprince · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

A very enjoyable edition. Unlike most of the Arden editions, Foakes comes across more as an educator than an academic-among-friends. This does mean occasionally that he'll cover ground most professional-level readers already understand, but it makes this a really well-rounded introduction to the play.

The decision here is to incorporate both Quarto and Folio texts in one, with the differences clearly delineated. It's probably the best possible option for this play, and well done.

[deckla_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The illustrations are unremarkable.

[alcracka · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

My absolute favorite Shakespeare play. Extra love for the fact that this came up when I searched for Stephen King.

[karl6steel · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Teaching it for the second time. The Folger edition is okay, but it badly needs to be updated; and the illustrations in the facing page are, to my mind, badly chosen, unless they're meant only to promote the grandeur of the Folger library. I think they would have done much better to provide photos of scenes taken from various productions/films/adaptations of Lear; no doubt the students would pay more attention to such things, to say nothing of nonexpert instructors like me.

Oh, the play: certainly very good at cutting the legs out from under the notion that suffering can be redemptive. Lear discovers compassion and love, Gloucester grows up, but what do they get? Death. And what are we left with? The two appalling milquetoast prigs, Albany and Edgar,* perhaps the two characters in Lear who understand least well what the whole thing is about. At least Kent has the grace to go off and wait to die.

* Hilarious: I just googled these names and the second hit is some plagiarism mill that's selling an essay that reads "Albany and Edgar both possess honest and kind characters." You have got to be kidding me! Please, please, please let someone try to get this paper past me. How stupid or desperate would someone have to be to pay for a paper that's, at best, a B-?

[nicolesch-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

There are three main reasons for the disorder already occurring by the end of Act I. The first and most obvious is Lear's madness. He certain seems to be loosing it a bit, and his crazed banishment of Cordelia and Kent couldn't possibly have done anything but harm to him. The second reason is Cordelia's sister's treachery. It could be argued that they appear to be trying to protect him and their people by taking away his knights, he is crazy after all, if it weren't for Cordelia's parting words to them; "I know you what you are;/And, like a sister, am most loth to call/Your faults as they are nam'd. Love well our father:/To your professed bosoms I commit him:/But yet, alas, stood I within his grace, I would prefer him to a better place." And a few lines later; "Time shall unfold what plighted cunning/Who cover faults, at last shame them derides." These lines seem to indicate that Cordelia knows that Goneril and Regan are not only flattering Lear for gain, but also that they hold him in contempt, and will likely do him harm, and revealing the second harbinger of disorder.

The third indicator of the chaos to come is Edmund. I feel bad for him, for the contempt others hold him in because of the doings of his parents, but he quickly does what he can to dispel my pity for him with his evil attitudes as he works to turn his father and brother against one another. I find it ironic that he distains his father's belief in fate through astrology, yet confesses that because of when he was born he was supposed to be 'rough and lecherous,' yet doesn't believe himself to have those traits he was just showing.

Shakespeare's purpose in showing this disorder seems to come from the idea of dividing his kingdom. A divided kingdom would often lead to civil war and chaos, so Lear's deliberate dividing of the kingdom would probably have been viewed as deliberately inviting disorder.

Power in England was structured in a pyramid. The king on top, and wealth and power went to a few nobles who had all the money. Lear was trying to disrupt that structure in a way that would have alarmed the people watching the play. Cordelia took a great risk in not bowing to her father's wishes, as his denying her dowry could have driven away both her suitors, leaving her alone and destitute in a world that didn't favor lone women. In her case, however Cordelia's suitor from France still marries her, which would be very unusual since she had no dowry, and she wouldn't gain him an alliance with England.

Family dynamics can change depending on the health of a person, as others may come into their lives and as children grow up. Cordelia was Lear's favorite child, yet when she would not lie to him with flattery, he cast her off. Why? Did he not realize that her impending marriage would change is relationship with her? She would still love him, of course, but even with the play being in pre-Christian era, the belief would probably have been that the wife's foremost alliegence should be to her husband, and Lear should have understood this. In fact, it seems strange that he would have even questioned this part of the structure of society at all.

No one has a perfect family. This is shown in Edgar and Edmund's family. Gloster (or Gloucester as some versions call him) may have been unfaithful to his wife, it's never stated whether she was alive at the time of Edmund's conception. If Gloster was unfaithful to his wife than he was dishonest and breaking one of the oldest understandings of marriage. If Edgar's mother had already died, that Gloster was not responsible enough to remarry, and to marry Edmund's mother, or at least admit himself Edmund's father when the boy was a child, instead of waiting until Edmund was old enough to distinguish himself, and in doing so, add to Gloster's reputation. It seems very unfair that Edmund, and almost any other illigitmate child born until the the late 1900s should be punished for something that their parents did. Yet neither should Edmund take out his misfortunes on his brother, who was, in all probability, guiltless in tormenting him. After all, Edgar trusts Edmund completely, which does not seem like an attitude he would hold had he tormented Edmund before. I think that Gloster could have stopped his fate had he treated Edmund with kindness from the beginning of his life, rather than waiting until Edmund could add to his reputation to acknowledge him.

I don't actually seem him mocking Edmund, so much as simply being ashamed of his illegitimacy because it was Gloster's own act that was the cause of Edmund's bastardy. As Gloster was speaking to Kent, he was very frank about the manner of Edmund's conception, to the point that we would say he was being rude to Edmund, but really, for the time, the fact that he had acknowledged Edmund as his son at all was better than many bastards would have gotten. For this reason I think that more than anything it was the fact that he took so long to acknowledge Edmund, that led to Edmund's bitterness and Gloster's downfall.

(This review is patched up from posts I made on an online Shakespeare class)

[seriousgrace · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

To sum up the play in one sentence: this is the story of a king seeking to divide his kingdom among his three daughters based on who could articulate her love for him the best. Beyond that it is the tragedy of emotional greed - of wanting to be loved at any cost. It is the tragedy of politics and family dynamics. Youngest daughter Cordelia is unwilling to conform to her father's wishes of exaggerated devotion. Isn't the last born always the rebel in the family? As a result Cordelia's portion of the kingdom is divided among her two sisters, Goneril and Regan. The story goes on to ooze betrayal and madness. Lear is trapped by his own ego and made foolish by his hubris.

[cbl_tn · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

King Lear makes a fateful decision to divide his kingdom between his three daughters. The reaction of one daughter, Cordelia, displeases the king so much that he cuts her out of any inheritance. The kingdom will be divided between the other two daughters, Goneril and Regan. His plan is that they will take care of him in his old age. They soon decide that they don't want to use their inheritance to support their father, and the king finds himself with nowhere to shelter in a violent storm. Meanwhile, the Earl of Gloucester's illegitimate son plots to usurp his legitimate brother's place as their father's heir. As in many of Shakespeare's plays, there are characters in disguise. It's filled with violence and cruelty without comic relief like the gravedigger scene in Hamlet. The family conflict at its heart will continue to resonate with audiences and readers as long as there are families.

[katieloucks · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Not my cup of tea, but it was nice to read it because I haven't before.

[clif_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This play was discussed by the Great Books KC group of which I am a member. We also watched the movie "A Thousand Acres" to see another version of the plot. This story becomes more harrowing the older one becomes. It's a reminder that one's children don't always remain loyal. But then again, some parents do bad things or make unwise choices.

[mstrust · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Vain and silly King Lear demands that each of his three daughters describe their love for him. When the youngest and favored Cordelia gives a reply that is less gushing, but more reasonable, than her sisters, the King banishes her. This sets up a chain of miserable events in which the sisters and their husbands scramble to replace Cordelia in their father's heart, but fail because ambition brings out their cruelty.

[jhudsui_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This did not quite top Hamlet as my favorite Shakespeare play but it is way up there. With the exception of the black and white hatted Gloucester boys there is a lot more moral complexity and ambiguity than you normally see in Shakespeare play; it wasn't until well into the play that I had any idea who I was supposed to sympathize with between the king and the daughters and that suspense actually adding a great deal to my interest while reading. Edgar's antic disposition is a lot more interesting and entertaining to me than Hamlet's but he doesn't have anything like Hamlet's soliloquies.

[rbeene-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Shakespeare but I have not read it in a long time and I do not think that I have ever seen it.

[xshyx · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Let me talk about this specific edition of the book first. I have to read this edition for my creative writing class. At first, it can be so hard to read, but once you put your heart reading it, it is an easy read. This is also because the translation of the words are on the other side of the page. Unlike the other King Lear edition where you need to go to the back of the and check what those words mean. It's also affordable. The play itself is really good - not too depressing or cheesy for me compare to Hamlet. Even though this is about a royal family, anyone can relate it directly or indirectly whether they have rivalry with their siblings or a loyal assistant or having problems with their parents.

[mrslee_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

For some reason I was rather set against this play at the beginning. However, it had all the elements I enjoy in a story; gruesome, depressing and yet, after act two, compelling. I couldn't put it down. It's sort of the flip-side of his comedies. Lots of misunderstanding at the beginning, betrayals by the bad guys (that's not in the comedies much), lots of people running around disguised as other people, then at the end, instead of everyone forgiving everyone after all is revealed, almost everyone dies. Not quite the happy-ever-after ending of the comedies, yet in this play it worked. I'm left with one thing unsettled though, what happened to the blind Gloucester?

[wubsy_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I recently read this for the Shakespeare module on my degree, and was a little disappointed. Having been told it was the Bard's masterpiece, I perhaps came to it with rather high expectations, but then doesn't everyone with Shakespeare? In my own opinion I feel that it falls short of Hamlet, though is superior to Othello, Macbeth and Romeo and Juliet in Shakespeare's line-up of 'famous tragedies' in terms of reading; on performance I cannot comment having seen only Hamlet and R&J. The Fool is an excellent character, and his relationship with Cordelia perhaps the most interesting in the drama. Edmond is also a good dramatic character, but the sisters Regan and Gonerill were flat. Lear's language is itself at times brilliant, but something left me wanting the dexterity of Hamlet. Cordelia is powerful in her absence, and really dominates the final act through her own speech, and that of Lear. The play is undoubtedly infused with some magical moments, but as a text to read, it does not, for me, inspire or humor as Hamlet manages.

[aliceanna-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Probably the best of Shakespeare's works thematically, but not the easiest to follow. The sub-plots, the various intrigues, makes for a very convoluted plot. Some great roles though -- Lear, Edgar playing a madman, the Fool, the evil Edmund and the scheming daughters ... some serious scene-stealing material.

[rosenstern · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

One of my favorite Shakespeare plays. King Lear asks his daughters who truly loves him, and the oldest two spin golden words of flattery while the third one cannot do so. Lear abandons his third daughter and this opens the story to the madness that follows. Brilliantly imagined characters and psyches. Worth it

[jscape2000 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The version of Lear I saw in 2012 too closely matched the texted: too many story lines, too many gag scenes, and too much talking about how hard it is to be king. The tragedy of Lear is that he gets exactly what he deserved. For me, it lacks much of the intrigue of Macbeth or the poetry of Hamlet or Othello.

[jbd1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

One of my favorite Shakespeare plays, though it had been a long time since I read it. Didn't disappoint on a reread!

[scott_hercher · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

At the risk of sounding flippant, I realized that there are two productions of King Lear that need to be done: one set in the Klingon Empire, and the other performed by Monty Python. Go ahead, I dare you, read Poor Tom's lines like Eric Idle and try not to laugh!

[bradgers-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

When people want to rank Shakespeare's plays, usually Hamlet comes out as number one. This, in my experience, is the only other of his plays that I have seen mentioned as his greatest. If I were to rank his plays solely based upon their impact upon the world, I would probably agree with the usual placement of Hamlet as number one. However, were I to rank them based upon their impact on me, Lear gets the nod. Lear accurately and horrifyingly portrays the primal nature of man like few other works of literature; the only other to come to my mind is Lord of the Flies. Yet it's more than that; Lord of the Flies can afford to ignore the effects of sexual attraction and familial ties upon our nature, but Lear (the work, not the character) meets these head-on and uses them to devastating effect. This play alone would guarantee Shakespeare a place as one of the greatest English authors. With the rest of his body of work, there's no question that he is the greatest.

[jmcgarry2011 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Excellent work. I saw this performed at the Great River Shakespeare Festival in Winona, MN. Very powerful performance. I liked this edition in particular because it explained the nuances of the language right next to the original text. That plus the performance made this easier to understand.

[worldincolour · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

There is an abundance of reviews, essays, opinions and prejudicial comments available when talking about Shakespeare. It would seem that the man was incapable of jotting down a bad sentence, let alone a bad story, at least, that's the veil they hand you when calling Shakespeare, morbidly referred to as 'Willy' by those who know the first three lines of Hamlet's 'to be or not to be'-speech, 'the greatest writer of all time'.

In this review, I shall not beshame my opinion by calling anyone Willy, Shakey, Quilly or by using the word 'Shakespearean'. 'King Lear' is not the strongest play in the exuberant repertoire of Shakespeare. It is, however, one of the more reader-friendly ones, which means you don't need a detailed map of familial relations to follow the plot. The story of King Lear relies heavily on stories that already existed at the time, but had only served as traditional folk tales or as long forgotten myths. For those who are oblivious to the plot - King Lear wants to divide his kingdom between his three daughters, Goneril, Regan and Cordelia. Whereas Goneril and Regan go out of their proverbial ways to flatter their father, Cordelia remains reticent (but honest). Which, of course, is not much appreciated. What follows resembles the story of Oedipus, that other Blind King who slowly wandered into his own destruction. Gloucester, one of the side characters, actually does lose his eyes.

'King Lear', in the end, is a reflection on power and what one will do to achieve it. Even though it might be a bit stale nowadays, it still holds true to its message, and for those who enjoy Shakespeare's husky metaphor, this play will provide you with all the ammunition needed.

[dirkjohnson_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I'm somewhat biased: Lear is my favorite play written since the time of Euripides (who wrote later than my absolute favorites Aeschylus and Sophocles).The cast and execution of the Naxos audiobook are also excellent. I would list the cast, but the combination of blurred lines between book and performance and my own laziness and busy schedule prohibit me.

[kettle666 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The writer I feel most in awe of, by a mile, is Shakespeare. I'm not going to say anything much about him because it's all been said, so I'll just say he's the boss, and the play that most shocks and thrills and saddens me is King Lear. But I could almost have said exactly the same about most of the plays he wrote. Every time I experience him in performance I feel overwhelmed by his brilliance, and I just have to shut up before I get too sycophantic.

[thatsfresh_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Another great tragic tale as told my Shakespeare. Like all his plays, you're able to dig deep into this story and draw out tons of stories, themes and hidden meanings out of all its layers. An enjoyable read for any Shakespeare enthusiast.