Connect with us

Culture

Mykhailo Mudryk doping test ‘a dagger to the heart of Ukrainian football’

Published

on

Mykhailo Mudryk doping test ‘a dagger to the heart of Ukrainian football’

It was only six months into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine when, on a balmy September evening in eastern Germany, I came across Mykhailo Mudryk shortly after midnight.

This was September 2022 and Mudryk was by then an emerging talent for the Ukrainian champions, Shakhtar Donetsk. He scored and was the team’s major attacking threat in a shock 4-1 victory for Shakhtar in the opening match of their Champions League campaign against German team RB Leipzig.

For Mudryk and his team-mates, the Champions League offered respite from the horrors of home. When Russian bombs landed in Ukraine in February 2022, many of Shakhtar’s foreign players took emergency refuge in a windowless room of a Kyiv hotel, before interventions from multiple national embassies, football federations and UEFA, the European football governing body, hatched an escape plan.

Shakhtar had, at that time, more than a dozen Brazilian players on their books, but many left for safer climes when the Ukrainian season ceased and did not return. Football did resume in Ukraine for the 2022-23 season and Shakhtar, who were first uprooted from their home in Donetsk in 2014 following Russian-backed incursions, were playing home matches in the relatively safer city of Lviv, in Ukraine’s west — though games were still frequently paused by air raid sirens.

Shakhtar’s squad was a shell of its former self, including only one player bought for more than £2million ($2.51m at current rates). This squad was largely comprised of young and inexperienced men. When they played against Real Madrid the following month, their starting team included 10 Ukrainian players, eight who had been produced by the club’s youth system and seven were aged 23 or below.

Advertisement

Mudryk, only 21, all of a sudden became the poster boy of a team whose indomitable spirit and improbable resistance appeared to encapsulate the Ukrainian struggle.

On that evening in Germany, The Athletic was embedded with the Ukrainian side to produce a documentary about their attempts to play on in the midst of war. I briefly spoke to Mudryk and his midfield team-mate and best friend Georgiy Sudakov as they headed out of their hotel in Leipzig in the early hours of the morning. Their heads were spinning after an unlikely victory, the adrenalin coursing through their veins. But, they explained, they also wanted to walk freely in the night, in a place where there were no shelters, no screams, no air raid sirens to force them rapidly underground, to remind themselves of normal life. For half an hour, they did that, before returning to their rooms.

At that point, Mudryk’s star was only just beginning to shine. He was raw, in the extreme, and had it not been for the untimely exodus of Brazilian players, it is unlikely he would have become risen to prominence so rapidly.

This was a player who only debuted for his national team in June 2022 yet by January 2023, following a handful of impressive performances in the Champions League, including against Real Madrid, Mudryk became the most expensive Ukrainian footballer in history. He signed for Premier League side Chelsea, who committed an initial £62m, plus £26.5m in potential additional payments dependent on his and Chelsea’s success.

Advertisement

This week’s news that Mudryk has tested positive for the banned substance meldonium is a dagger to the heart of Ukrainian football and leaves the player in a fight to salvage his career. The extent of the damage will hinge on the result of Mudryk’s ‘B’ sample, which is yet to be revealed, as the adverse finding relates to his ‘A’ sample, but he has been provisionally suspended by the English Football Association.


Ukraine’s Euro 2024 campaign turned into an emotional symbol of national pride (Andrzej Iwanczuk / NurPhoto via Getty Images) 

Chelsea’s commitment to acquiring the player was significant, tying him to a seven-and-a-half-year contract, with the option of another year. Even in the middle of the invasion, Shakhtar managed to attract a bidding war, such was the interest. He had previously been pursued by Germany’s Bayer Leverkusen, as well as Newcastle United, Brentford and Everton in the Premier League, but it came down to a fight between Arsenal and Chelsea.

At the time, Shakhtar’s director of football Dario Srna told The Athletic: “If somebody wants to buy Mudryk, they must pay huge, huge, huge money. Otherwise the president of the club (Rinat Akhmetov) will not sell him. All the clubs must respect the president, respect Shakhtar and in the end they must respect Mykhaylo Mudryk, who is one of the best players I saw. The price is so big.”

Srna said he rated Mudryk as being only behind Kylian Mbappe and Vinicius Junior in his wide forward position and insisted big money would be required, considering Manchester United signed Antony from Ajax in a £86m deal and Jadon Sancho from Borussia Dortmund £73m, while Manchester City bought Jack Grealish for £100m.

Shakhtar, conscious of the power of sport in steering the narrative around the war, also announced upon completion of the transfer that their own owner, Rinat Akhmetov, would donate $25m to the war effort, to support in particular the defence of Mariupol and the families of those who have lost loved ones. The agreement with Chelsea also included a clause that said Shakhtar would play a future friendly against Chelsea in Donetsk, when and if that area of Ukraine is no longer occupied by Russian forces.

Advertisement

“It is written into the contract,” Sergei Palkin, the Shakhtar chief executive, told The Athletic in January 2023. “But actually, we did not even need to read it in the contract because Behdad Eghbali (the Chelsea co-owner) spoke with our president. Behdad supports Ukraine a lot because he is American and it is an English club, so this is a positive triangle. When you say England and Ukraine, it is important for our war support.

“It was Behdad who proposed (the friendly), because he said he wanted to help Ukraine, to help Ukrainian refugees and to support Ukrainian people. This match (in Donetsk) would be like a miracle (having not played in their home city since 2014). We would have this match every weekend if we could.”

When Mudryk was unveiled at Stamford Bridge, he did so wrapped in a flag of Ukraine. The player was born and raised in the city of Krasnohrad, close to Kharkiv, one of the most brutally hit areas of the country. “Since the the beginning of the full-scale war, my city has been bombarded with missiles day and night,” Mudryk said, speaking in a powerful video of 13 Ukrainian players talking about the impact of the war on their hometowns, released by the Ukrainian Football Association before the European Championship in the summer of 2024.


Mudryk (left) competes with Arsenal’s Martin Odegaard last month (Ryan Pierse / Getty Images)

He is a more reserved figure than his Ukrainian compatriot Oleksandr Zinchenko, who has been at the forefront of media initiatives to promote solidarity with Ukraine. He appears to be a devoutly religious figure, a follower of the orthodox Christian faith, who carries religious icons with him to games. On his chest, he has a tattoo that reads: “Dear god — if today I lose my hope, please remind me that your plans are better than my dreams”.

For his national team, the speaking has more often been done on the field, most notably when he scored the winner in a victory over Iceland to take his country to Euro 2024. Ukraine exited that tournament at the group stage and Mudryk did not score, although his nation went out only on goal difference with all four teams in Group E tied on four points after three games.

Advertisement

For club and country, he is yet to fulfil his potential. He has scored only five goals and recorded four assists in 53 Premier League appearances for Chelsea. This week’s sample revelation cast doubt on his ability to play at all, meldonium being a drug that previously saw the tennis star Maria Sharapova barred from competing.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Explaining Mudryk’s drugs ban: What is meldonium – and possible punishments

The adverse test was reported during a routine urine test, according to a Chelsea statement. The club added that Mudryk “has confirmed categorically that he has never knowingly used any banned substances”.

Writing on Instagram, Mudryk said the result “has come as a complete shock as I have never knowingly used any banned substances or broken any rules”.

He added: “I am working closely with my team to investigate how this could have happened.

Advertisement

“I know that I have not done anything wrong and remain hopeful that I will be back on the pitch soon. I cannot say any more now due to the confidentiality of the process, but I will as soon as I can.”

The English Football Association’s (FA) anti-doping regulations state that any breaches will be dealt with as strict liability violations. For example, a player will be found guilty of a violation if a prohibited substance is found in that player’s body. It is not necessary to demonstrate intent. A player’s alleged lack of intent or knowledge is not a valid defence to a charge.

A violation of the FA’s anti-doping regulations carries a maximum penalty of a four-year suspension, although mitigating factors can reduce that from anywhere from two years to just a month. The B sample will be key.


Shakhtar’s Georgiy Sudakov voiced support for his friend Mudryk (Christof Koepsel / Getty Images)

As Mudryk’s career hangs in the balance, the Ukrainian football establishment appears to be rallying behind him. Multiple sources in Ukraine, who remain anonymous because they did not have permission to speak, have indicated to The Athletic that the player suspects he may have been sabotaged while he was away with his country’s national team this season — a claim we have seen no evidence to support — but which is being taken seriously in his own country.

On Instagram, the Shakhtar midfielder Sudakov posted a message of support, urging his friend to “stay strong”.

Advertisement

The Shakhtar CEO Palkin, meanwhile, wrote that Mudryk is a “high-profile professional athlete”, adding that he has complete trust that the player “did not use any banned substance”.

Palkin said: “I am confident that he will prove his innocence.” Time will tell whether their faith is warranted.

(Top photo: Etsuo Hara/Getty Images; design: Dan Goldfarb)

Culture

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Published

on

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Advertisement

Let’s memorize a poem! Not because it’s good for us or because we think we should, but because it’s fun, a mental challenge with a solid aesthetic reward. You can amuse yourself, impress your friends and maybe discover that your way of thinking about the world — or even, as you’ll see, the universe — has shifted a bit.

Over the next five days, we’ll look closely at a great poem by one of our favorite poets, and we’ll have games, readings and lots of encouragement to help you learn it by heart. Some of you know how this works: Last year more Times readers than we could count memorized a jaunty 18-line recap of an all-night ferry ride. (If you missed that adventure, it’s not too late to embark. The ticket is still valid.)

This time, we’re training our telescopes on W.H. Auden’s “The More Loving One” — a clever, compact meditation on love, disappointment and the night sky.

Advertisement

Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:

Advertisement

The More Loving One by W.H. Auden 

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

But on earth indifference is the least 

Advertisement

We have to dread from man or beast. 

Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet

In four short lines we get a brisk, cynical tour of the universe: hell and the heavens, people and animals, coldness and cruelty. Commonplace observations — that the stars are distant; that life can be dangerous — are wound into a charming, provocative insight. The tone is conversational, mixing decorum and mild profanity in a manner that makes it a pleasure to keep reading.

Advertisement

Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:

Advertisement

How should we like it were stars to burn 

With a passion for us we could not return? 

If equal affection cannot be, 

Let the more loving one be me. 

Advertisement

Tracy K. Smith, poet

These lines abruptly shift the focus from astronomy to love, from the universal to the personal. Imagine how it would feel if the stars had massive, unrequited crushes on us! The speaker, couching his skepticism in a coy, hypothetical question, seems certain that we wouldn’t like this at all.

This certainty leads him to a remarkable confession, a moment of startling vulnerability. The poem’s title, “The More Loving One,” is restated with sweet, disarming frankness. Our friend is wearing his heart on his well-tailored sleeve.

Advertisement

The poem could end right there: two stanzas, point and counterpoint, about how we appreciate the stars in spite of their indifference because we would rather love than be loved.

But the third stanza takes it all back. Here’s Alison Bechdel reading it:

Advertisement

Admirer as I think I am 

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

I cannot, now I see them, say 

Advertisement

I missed one terribly all day. 

Alison Bechdel, graphic novelist

The speaker downgrades his foolish devotion to qualified admiration. No sooner has he established himself as “the more loving one” than he gives us — and perhaps himself — reason to doubt his ardor. He likes the stars fine, he guesses, but not so much as to think about them when they aren’t around.

Advertisement

The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

And feel its total dark sublime, 

Though this might take me a little time. 

Advertisement

Yiyun Li, author

Wounded defiance gives way to a more rueful, resigned state of mind. If the universe were to snuff out its lights entirely, the speaker reckons he would find beauty in the void. A starless sky would make him just as happy.

Though perhaps, like so many spurned lovers before and after, he protests a little too much. Every fan of popular music knows that a song about how you don’t care that your baby left you is usually saying the opposite.

Advertisement

The last line puts a brave face on heartbreak.

So there you have it. In just 16 lines, this poem manages to be somber and funny, transparent and elusive. But there’s more to it than that. There is, for one thing, a voice — a thinking, feeling person behind those lines.

Advertisement

W.H. Auden in 1962. Sam Falk/The New York Times

When he wrote “The More Loving One,” in the 1950s, Wystan Hugh Auden was among the most beloved writers in the English-speaking world. Before this week is over there will be more to say about Auden, but like most poets he would have preferred that we give our primary attention to the poem.

Advertisement

Its structure is straightforward and ingenious. Each of the four stanzas is virtually a poem unto itself — a complete thought expressed in one or two sentences tied up in a neat pair of couplets. Every quatrain is a concise, witty observation: what literary scholars call an epigram.

This makes the work of memorization seem less daunting. We can take “The More Loving One” one epigram at a time, marvelling at how the four add up to something stranger, deeper and more complex than might first appear.

Advertisement

So let’s go back to the beginning and try to memorize that insouciant, knowing first stanza. Below you’ll find a game we made to get you started. Give it a shot, and come back tomorrow for more!

Your first task: Learn the first four lines!

Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.

Question 1/6

Advertisement

Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

Advertisement

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.

Advertisement

Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.

Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.

Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Published

on

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Literature

‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?

Advertisement

“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.

“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.

Advertisement

It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)

Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.

All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.

Advertisement

‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.

Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.

Advertisement

Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:

“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”

Advertisement

The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.

‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.

Advertisement

It’s science fiction. All right?

I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.

“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.

Advertisement

‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”

Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.

Advertisement

We’d all have read it by now — right?

‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.

Advertisement

Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.

Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.

Advertisement

I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.

As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.

It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.

Advertisement

It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).

As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.

Advertisement

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading

Culture

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Published

on

6 Poems You Should Know by Heart

Literature

‘Prayer’ (1985) by Galway Kinnell

Advertisement

Whatever happens. Whatever
what is is is what
I want. Only that. But that.

Galway Kinnell in 1970. Photo by LaVerne Harrell Clark, © 1970 Arizona Board of Regents. Courtesy of the University of Arizona Poetry Center

Advertisement

“I typically say Kinnell’s words at the start of my day, as I’m pedaling a traffic-laden path to my office,” says Major Jackson, 57, the author of six books of poetry, including “Razzle Dazzle” (2023). “The poem encourages a calm acceptance of the day’s events but also wants us to embrace the misapprehension and oblivion of life, to avoid probing too deeply for answers to inscrutable questions. I admire what Kinnell does with only 14 words; the repetition of ‘what,’ ‘that’ and ‘is’ would seem to limit the poem’s sentiment but, paradoxically, the poem opens widely to contain all manner of human experience. The three ‘is’es in the middle line give it a symmetry that makes its message feel part of a natural order, and even more convincing. Thanks to the skillful punctuation, pauses and staccato rhythm, a tonal quality of interior reflection emerges. Much like a haiku, it continues after its last words, lingering like the last note played on a piano that slowly fades.”

“Just as I was entering young adulthood, probably slow to claim romantic feelings, a girlfriend copied out a poem by Pablo Neruda and slipped it into an envelope with red lipstick kisses all over it. In turn, I recited this poem. It took me the remainder of that winter to memorize its lines,” says Jackson. “The poem captures the pitch of longing that defines love at its most intense. The speaker in Shakespeare’s most famous sonnet believes the poem creates the beloved, ‘So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, / So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.’ (Sonnet 18). In Rilke’s expressive declarations of yearning, the beloved remains elusive. Wherever the speaker looks or travels, she marks his world by her absence. I find this deeply moving.”

Advertisement

Lucille Clifton in 1995. Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images

“Clifton faced many obstacles, including cancer, a kidney transplant and the loss of her husband and two of her children. Through it all, she crafted a long career as a pre-eminent American poet,” says Jackson. “Her poem ‘won’t you celebrate with me’ is a war cry, an invitation to share in her victories against life’s persistent challenges. The poem is meaningful to all who have had to stare down death in a hospital or had to bereave the passing of close relations. But, even for those who have yet to mourn life’s vicissitudes, the poem is instructive in cultivating resilience and a persevering attitude. I keep coming back to the image of the speaker’s hands and the spirit of steadying oneself in the face of unspeakable storms. She asks in a perfectly attuned gorgeously metrical line, ‘what did i see to be except myself?’”

Advertisement

‘Sonnet 94’ (1609) by William Shakespeare

They that have power to hurt and will do none,
That do not do the thing they most do show,
Who, moving others, are themselves as stone,
Unmovèd, cold, and to temptation slow,
They rightly do inherit heaven’s graces
And husband nature’s riches from expense;
They are the lords and owners of their faces,
Others but stewards of their excellence.
The summer’s flower is to the summer sweet,
Though to itself it only live and die;
But if that flower with base infection meet,
The basest weed outbraves his dignity.
For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.

Advertisement

“It’s one of the moments of Western consciousness,” says Frederick Seidel, 90, the author of more than a dozen collections of poetry, including “So What” (2024). “Shakespeare knows and says what he knows.”

“It trombones magnificent, unbearable sorrow,” says Seidel.

“It’s smartass and bitter and bright,” says Seidel.

Advertisement

These interviews have been edited and condensed.

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending