Shakespeare’s Trickiest Play Gets A Modern Revamp In Anne Tyler’s ‘Vinegar Girl’

A green card marriage between a botanist and a researcher makes for a rocky love story in this update of "The Taming of the Shrew."
Open Image Modal
Hogarth

Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew” -- perhaps his most contentious story -- starts with a bang, and ends with a whimper. 

Katherina, a headstrong, quick-witted woman, puts off suitors in search of a docile young wife, until, that is, she meets her supposed match: an opportunistic man as uninterested in societal strictures as she is. That Kate should consider marriage at all is at odds with her personality, but her father has set up a rule: her sought-after younger sister, Bianca, can’t be married until Kate is. Bianca’s inspired suitors enlist Petruchio for the job, and he successfully convinces Kate to marry him, namely by telling her that her every unkind utterance is music to his ears.  

Already, these mind games are achingly resemblant of pick-up artistry. From there, the play’s controversial morality escalates, culminating in a monologue given by Kate, in which she offers to place her hand beneath her husband’s foot as a symbol of her service. “Our lances are but straws,” she says of women’s strength, an idea that’s been interpreted both sincerely and forgivingly, as a lamentation of society’s impossibly bright lines.

But what to make of the play now that those lines have dimmed, allowing for a fluidity between genders and gender roles? In modern adaptations, Kate’s tricky final monologue has been either interpreted as earnest -- Kate has fallen in love with Petruchio, a specific feeling that softens the general blow of societal norms -- dashed off as ironic, or circumvented altogether, as in the Julia Stiles-led “10 Things I Hate About You.” 

In Anne Tyler’s modern rewrite of the story, Vinegar Girl, the final scene is recast in a new light and given all the trappings of contemporary relationships -- misconstrued texts, lukewarm feelings about nuptial celebrations. Still, Tyler manages to end the story on a pontifical note, one that’s troublingly reminiscent of the original play’s sexist sincerity. And, unfortunately, the regressive ideas at work in Vinegar Girl are made clear long before its final pages. 

When we’re introduced to 29-year-old Kate Battista, she’s gardening behind her father’s house before she’s interrupted by a phone call. She lets the call go to voicemail, and we hear her 15-year-old sister’s voice intoning ditsy pleasantries, each ended in an unsure question mark. Kate learns that her dad, who runs a research lab for autoimmune diseases, has forgotten his lunch, and could she kindly bring it in? It’s clear from Page 1 that Kate is the reluctantly responsible family member, preparing dinner and performing other domestic duties for her hapless unit. To this end, she’s taken a job at a daycare after dropping out of school, where she studied botany and where she had hoped to eventually return. 

When she brings her father his lunch, Kate senses something’s amiss; usually too focused on his work to pay mind to his daughters’ emotional needs, Doctor Battista encourages her to stay and eat with him and his research assistant, Pyotr Cherbakov, who’s in America on a soon-to-expire extraordinary-ability visa. Over the course of a few more strange encounters, Kate learns of her father’s plan: he wants her to marry so that he can stay in the country and continue to work in his lab. The arrangement would only be temporary, but they’d have to gather enough photographic evidence to make the romance seem legitimate.

Kate, naturally, is appalled; until, abruptly, she isn’t. Won over in part by Pyotr’s brusque mannerisms, which to her seem more sincere than the chattiness of her coworkers, and in part by her father’s uncharacteristic pleas, Kate agrees to the deal. Besides, she thinks, her career and home lives have gotten stale. A shake-up may be just what she needs.

While Kate takes the plan curiously in stride -- aside from a few chiding remarks correcting her father’s reductive view of women -- it’s clear throughout the story that Pyotr’s affections needn’t be feigned. From the onset he’s smitten with Kate’s flowing long hair. Later, he gives her the nickname "vinegar girl," after a proverb from his home country: “beware against the sweet person, for sugar has no nutrition.” Kate counters that in America, it’s said that honey catches more flies than vinegar, and Pyotr guffaws: “Why would you want to catch flies, huh?” 

The proverb bit is prevalent throughout the story, painting a reductive picture of Eastern European immigrants, who, in the context of this story, are barely more than comic relief characters. The same goes for teenage girls who gussy themselves up for the sake of male attention -- the easiest form of power allowed them -- and aging Asian-Americans, who, according to the narrator, are prone to dressing in casual menswear. Throughout the book, stereotypes are embraced rather than questioned, mostly for the sake of easy jokes.

In a particularly off-putting scene, Kate has an epiphany about Pyotr: Although he speaks slowly, bluntly, and with jumbled article usage, he’s capable of thinking as sharply as she is. That this information is revelatory to her makes her character development uninteresting at best.

It is this realization, and the sympathy she feels for Pyotr when she learns that he’s an orphan with no family to speak of, that leads Kate to feel tenderness for him, and to begin to view their arrangement as beneficial not only to her family, but to herself. The specifics of their relationship are touching, but Tyler balloons them, writing a global observation about men, women, marriage and sexism that is not only reductive, but out of character coming from the headstrong Kate. 

“It’s hard being a man,” she announces at her wedding reception. “Anything that’s bothering them, men think they have to hide it […] They’re a whole lot less free than women are, when you think about it.” She continues, in earnest, “[Women] know how things work underneath, while the men have been stuck with the sports competitions and the wars and the fame and success.”

Perhaps Tyler isn’t fully to blame for the askew morality of Vinegar Girl. She did take on one of the trickiest oft-retold stories, one that’s difficult to depoliticize, given the outdated framework it functions within. As with “Taming of the Shrew,” the story can be appreciated if the ideals of its protagonist are unmarried from the ideals of its author, but doing so begs the question: why tell it at all? 

The bottom line:

In taking on a play notorious for its reductive views on gender roles, Tyler does little to set the record straight, maintaining the divisive power of social difference. Her entertaining book may nevertheless appeal to Bard fanatics.

What other reviewers think:

The Guardian: “You have to hand it to Tyler. This is just about as believable as it gets in terms of a modern way of rendering a Shakespeare plot. Which is sort of the problem. While Tyler has a lot of fun with it, it never rings entirely true or escapes what this is: an experiment in form.”

Kirkus: “Neither a faithful retelling nor a trenchant countertale, though agreeable enough as an afternoon’s entertainment.” 

Who wrote it:

Anne Tyler is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author. Her most recent novel is A Spool of Blue Thread. 

Who will read it:

Anyone interested in Shakespeare, contemporary conversations about gender, or modernizations of classic stories.

Opening lines:

"Kate Battista was gardening out back when she heard the telephone ring in the kitchen."

Notable passage

“'I am not proud,' Pytor said. 'I would like to not have accent.'

"He was looking down at his sandwich as he said this -- just holding it in both hands and gazing downward, with those lids of his veiling his eyes so she couldn’t tell what he was thinking. It occurred to her suddenly that he was thinking -- that only his exterior self was flubbing his th sounds and not taking long enough between consonants, while inwardly he was formulating thoughts every bit as complicated and layered as her own. "

Vinegar Girl by Anne Tyler
Hogarth, $25.00
Publishes June 21

The Bottom Line is a weekly review combining plot description and analysis with fun tidbits about the book.

Our 2024 Coverage Needs You

As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.

Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.

to keep our news free for all.

Support HuffPost

Before You Go

Banned Books
Sons and Lovers(01 of28)
Open Image Modal
According to Banned Books: Challenging our Freedom to Read: "In 1961 an Oklahoma City group called Mothers United for Decency hired a trailer, dubbed it "smutmobile," and displayed books deemed objectionable, including Lawrence's novel." (credit:Penguin Books)
Naked Lunch(02 of28)
Open Image Modal
Found to be obscene in Boston, MA Superior Court 1965-1966. (credit:Amazon)
The Naked and the Dead(03 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in Canada (1949) and Australia (1949). (credit:Amazon)
Tropic of Cancer(04 of28)
Open Image Modal
First banned from U.S. Customs in 1934 and Supreme Court found the novel not obscene thirty years later. The novel was also banned in Turkey in 1986. (credit:Amazon)
An American Tragedy(05 of28)
Open Image Modal
This classic was banned in Boston, MA (1927) and burned by the Nazis in Germany (1933) because it "deals with low love affairs." (credit:Amazon)
Women In Love(06 of28)
Open Image Modal
Two years after publication, the book was seized by John Summers of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice and declared obscene (1922). (credit:Amazon)
The Great Gatsby(07 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged at the Baptist College in Charleston, SC (1987) because of "language and sexual references in the book." (credit:Penguin Books)
The Jungle(08 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in multiple countries including Yugoslavia (1929), East Germany (1956) & South Korea (1985) and burned in Nazi bonfires because of Sinclair’s socialist views in 1933. (credit:Amazon)
Ulysses(09 of28)
Open Image Modal
Burned in the U.S. (1918), Ireland (1922), Canada (1922), England (1923) and banned in England (1929). (credit:Penguin Books)
In Cold Blood(10 of28)
Open Image Modal
According to Banned Books: The Right to Read: "Banned, but later reinstated after community protests at the Windsor Forest High School in Savannah, GA (2000). The controversy began in early 1999 when a parent complained about sex, violence, and profanity in the book that was part of an Advanced Placement English Class." (credit:Amazon)
The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian(11 of28)
Open Image Modal
Coming in at #1 on the Top Challenged Books of 2014, for reasons including "anti-family, cultural insensitivity, drugs/alcohol/smoking, gambling, offensive language, sex education, sexually explicit, unsuited for age group, violence. Additional reasons: "depictions of bullying" (credit:Amazon)
Persepolis(12 of28)
Open Image Modal
#2 on the Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2014 for reasons including "gambling, offensive language, political viewpoint." Additional reasons: 'politically, racially, and socially offensive,' 'graphic depictions' (credit:Amazon)
The Sun Also Rises(13 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in Boston, MA (1930), Ireland (1953), Riverside, CA (1960), San Jose, CA (1960). Burned in Nazi bonfires in Germany (1933). (credit:Amazon)
The Call of the Wild(14 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in Italy (1929), Yugoslavia (1929), and burned in Nazi bonfires (1933). (credit:Penguin Book)
All The King's Men(15 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged at the Dallas, TX Independent School District high school libraries (1974). (credit:Amazon)
The Lord of the Rings(16 of28)
Open Image Modal
In 2001, copies of The Lord of the Rings books and other Tolkien's novels were burned in Alamagordo, NM outside Christ Community Church being seen as "satanic". (credit:Amazon)
And Tango Makes Three(17 of28)
Open Image Modal
#3 on the Top 10 Challenged Books of 2014, on reasons including the book being "Anti-family, homosexuality, political viewpoint, religious viewpoint, unsuited for age group." Additional reasons: “promotes the homosexual agenda" (credit:Amazon)
Lord of the Flies(18 of28)
Open Image Modal
First challenged in Dallas, TX Independent School District high school libraries in 1974. In 1981, the book was Challenged at the Owen, NC High School because the book is "demoralizing inasmuch as it implies that man is little more than an animal." In 1992, challenged because of profanity, lurid passages about sex, and statements defamatory to minorities, God, women and the disabled. The most recent challenge was in 2000 in Bloomfield, NY. (credit:Amazon)
1984(19 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged in the Jackson County, FL (1981) because Orwell's novel is "pro-communist and contained explicit sexual matter." (credit:Amazon)
Catch-22(20 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in Strongsville, OH (1972) for 4 years and challenged at the Dallas, TX & in Snoqualmie, WA (1979) because of its several references to women as "whores." (credit:Amazon)
Their Eyes Were Watching God(21 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged novel's language and sexual explicitness, but retained on the Stonewall Jackson High School's academically advanced reading list in Brentsville, VA (1997). (credit:Amazon)
Invisible Man(22 of28)
Open Image Modal
Text excerpts were banned in Butler, PA (1975). Removed from the high school English reading list in St. Francis, WI (1975). Two parents raised concerns about profanity and images of violence and sexuality in the book, but was retained in the Yakima, WA schools (1994) after a five-month dispute. (credit:Amazon)
Go Tell It on the Mountain(23 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged as required reading in the Hudson Falls, NY schools (1994) because "the book has recurring themes of rape, masturbation, violence, and degrading treatment of women." Challenged as a ninth-grade summer reading option in Prince William County, VA (1988) because the book is "rife with profanity and explicit sex." (credit:Amazon)
Beloved(24 of28)
Open Image Modal
Challenged in St. Augustine, FL in 1995 for the book being “too violent”. Other reasons for challenges to the book have been concerns over language & sexual material. The most recent case with the book was in 2007, when two parents asked that the book would be pulled from the AP English class in a Louisville, KY school because of “inappropriate topics” and the principal ordered the teachers to start over with “The Scarlet Letter” by Nathaniel Hawthorne. (credit:Amazon)
Lolita(25 of28)
Open Image Modal
Vladmir Nabokov’s classic has been banned in the past in several countries in the 1950’s, including France, England, Argentina, New Zealand and South Africa. The novel was also challenged in a Public Library in Florida in 2006 after claiming that the pedophilla and incest was “unsuitable for minors.” (credit:Amazon)
The Bluest Eye(26 of28)
Open Image Modal
Placed at #4 on the most recent list of Top Challenged Books for reasons including that the book was "sexually explicit", "unsuited for age group" & that it “contains controversial issues” (credit:Amazon)
A Farewell to Arms(27 of28)
Open Image Modal
Banned in Boston, MA and in Italy on the account of “its painfully accurate account of the Italian retreat from Caporetto, Italy” in 1929. It was also burned by the Nazis in 1933, banned in Ireland in 1939, and challenged in the Vernon-Verona-Sherill, NY School District (1980) as a "sex novel." (credit:Amazon)
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest(28 of28)
Open Image Modal
In 1974, five residents of Strongsville, OH, sued the board of education to remove the novel. Labeling it "pornographic," they charged the novel "glorifies criminal activity, has a tendency to corrupt juveniles and contains descriptions of bestiality, bizarre violence, and torture, dismemberment, death, and human elimination." The book was also removed from public school libraries in New York and Oklahoma and challenged as part of curriculums of classes in Idaho, Washington & Massachusetts. The most recent challenge was in California in 2000, after complaints by parents stated that teachers "can choose the best books, but they keep choosing this garbage over and over again." (credit:Penguin Books)