To the elements be free

I was browsing NetGalley for some new titles when I saw a new book by Margaret Atwood. So naturally I clicked on it to get so more information and what do you know? The very first line in the description is "William Shakespeare's The Tempest retold as Hag-Seed".

Naturally I had to request it and I felt pretty lucky when I was approved. And it's pretty great.

The story is both a re-telling of The Tempest as well as the story of a disgraced director putting on a production of The Tempest.

Felix was the Art Director of the Makeshiweg Theatre Festival taking an avant garde approach to Shakespeare. (A Winter's Tale but Hermione is a vampire! Macbeth with chainsaws! Pericles in space!*) And now his latest creation would be The Tempest and he's been putting his heart and soul into this production moreso than others due to his own personal demons. His wife died in childbirth and his daughter, Miranda, died when she was three. This would be a tribute to them and his opportunity to protect Miranda on stage the way he couldn't in real life.

What to do with such a sorrow? It was like an enormous black cloud boiling up over the horizon. No: it was like a blizzard. No: it was like nothing he could put into language. He couldn't face it head-on. He had to transform it, or at the very least enclose it.

But everything is taken from him by his business partner Tony who has been working behind the scenes to get Felix removed from his position. The Festival wants more popular, mainstream plays. And musicals.

Felix is fired and disgraced. Humiliated. He pushes himself into exile, spending years thinking about revenge and imagining his Miranda is alive again. Eventually he decides he has to get out there and, under the name Mr. Duke, he takes up position at a correctional facility, helping to create an arts program. Naturally they put on Shakespeare plays, with the class being a surprise hit among the inmates, despite some people who are less than thrilled with the program.

Prisons are for incarceration and punishment, not for spurious attempts to educate those who cannot, by their very natures, be educated.

If you're familiar with The Tempest, you can probably guess where the story goes, though there are still some tense moments. If you don't know it, well don't worry cos Atwood provides a summary. Though really, even if you aren't familiar with the story, it's still an entertaining read. And of course it's Atwood so the writing is beautiful.

This was great and if you like Atwood or Shakespeare, you should pick it up. Even if you don't, check it out anyway.

Gif rating:

*Though that probably would have made more sense than an A.R.T. production of Pericles I saw awhile back. At one point it included a woman dressed in a beigh body suit, pink sarong, and gorilla mask dancing across the stage. I'm sure there was some meaning behind it. I just never figured it out.

Title quote from location 3844

Atwood, Margaret. Hag-Seed. Crown Publishing, 2016. NetGalley. Pub Date Oct 11, 2016

Romeo & Benvolio, I love these two

Benvolio sort of like John Watson from Sherlock. Especially as played by Martin Freeman.

Romeo & Juliet is a really great play. I feel like it sort of gets overlooked because it seems like a cliched choice. EEEERRRVERYONE knows the story. Or at least they know the prologue-version (two households, star-crossed lovers, death-marked love, etc. etc.) even if I think way too many people consider it a great love story. I mostly consider it a great story of teenagers behaving stupidly and impulsively and ugh

But rather than focus on the love story at the moment I want to talk about Benvolio and Romeo. Particularly the first time we meet Romeo because Romeo is SOOO WHINY at this point, all madly in love in Rosalind, and overall giving pain-in-the-ass emo answers to Benvolio's question of "Hey, what's up?"I don't know that I've ever seen Benvolio played where he's exasperated with Romeo, but I don't know how this hasn't happened before because just looking at the back and forth I can't help but hear Benvolio's sigh before every response. Here's essentially how I picture the scene:

Benvolio: [Bright and friendly] Good morrow, cousin.
Romeo: [Angsty as only a teen can be] Is the day so young?
B: ::sigh:: But new struck nine.
R: Ay me, sad hours seem long. [Tries to keep up sad face but is actually pretty proud of that answer and makes a mental note to write a poem using that line later.] Was that my father that went hence so fast?
B: [Knows that if he lets Romeo just change the subject that he'll get all angry that no one cared enough to listen to his sadness so he better find out why he's so pissy] It was. What sadness lengthens Romeo's hours?
R: [Is glad to see SOMEONE cares about his pain. But to really know he'd better give him some riddle to find out if he really knows him.] Not having that which, having, makes them short.
B: ::louder sigh:: [Better get Romeo's riddle right or he'll wander off and mope again]. In love?
R: [Wonders how it is no one can understand his unique snowflake pain] Out.
B: ::loudest sigh:: Of love?
R: Out of her favor where I am in love. [Obviously]
B: [Of course he's in love again] Alas that love so gentle in his view should be so tyrannous and rough in proof.
R: [Is jealous that Benvolio came up with that and needs to upstage him.] Alas that love whose view is muffled still could without eyes see pathways to his will. Where shall we dine? O me! What fray was here? Yet tell me not, for I have heard it all. Here's much to do with hate, but more with love. Why then, O brawling love, O loving hate, O anything of nothing first create! O heavy lightness, serious vanity...
B: ::eyerolls SUPER HARD::
R: ...Misshapen chaos of well-seeming forms! Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health, still-waking sleep that is not what it is! This love feel I that feel no love in this. [Really proud of that that little diddy.] Dost thou not laugh?
B: [Shit] No coz, I rather weep.
R: [Better not be laughing] Good heart, at what?
B: ::scrambles for answer:: At thy good heart's oppression.

Essentially I imagine the two of them like Watson and Sherlock. Except Romeo is definitely no genius.

Avant-Garde theater: game of pretention chicken?

I don't have any books waiting to be reviewed, but I wanted to post something else this week. Conundrum.  Then I was looking over my review of The Lover's Dictionary, specifically the definition of avant-garde, and thought about how ridiculous that play would be to see. For those that skipped my review (how could you??) and thus missed the definition, allow me to share:

avant-garde, adj: This was after Alisa's show, the reverse-blackface rendition of Gone with the Wind, including songs from the Empire Records soundtrack and an interval of nineteenth-century German poetry, recited with a lisp. "What does avant-garde mean, anyway?" I asked. "I believes it translates as favor to your friends," you replied.

 And this reminded me of a ridiculous production of Pericles I saw and have decided must be shared.

Back in my freshman year of college I was taking a Shakespeare's Tragedies class and we were given the assignment (along with free tickets) to see a production of Pericles done by the A.R.T. I did not know what I was in for. Rather than explain to you the plot, or try to dig up my review, let me tell you the bits and pieces I remember. I want to note it's really not important you know the plot of the play to appreciate these. I'm not sure the director knew it.

• Woman wearing panties, the pelt of a Muppet, shoes that bordered closer to "stilts" than "platforms," and nothing else.
• A little girl dressed in all white carries a huge gold beach ball onto the stage. She takes a step, throws the ball high in the air, catches it, repeat. Until she's across the stage.
• Pericles wears what appears to be a thong made out of a bed sheet.
• A person in a tan body suit, a pink sarong, and a gorilla mask dances across the stage
• GIANT PIRATE PUPPETS

Just as Shakespeare imagined it. Photo by Richard Feldman

 My Backgrounds of English & American Lit* prof came to the play as well and I sat near him because he's all kinds of awesome. He sorta looked like a garden gnome, but as an average sized person and he spoke ancient Greek. At intermission he asked what I thought of the play. I tried to come up with a nice way of saying "I think I'm too sober to understand what's going on" and as he saw me struggle with a response he goes "Well, is it worth what you paid to see it?" I stopped and said "Free? Yes, yes it is worth exactly that." He laughed and agreed.

My Shakespeare prof did not agree however. Apparently the reviews the class handed in were a collective "WTF did I just see?" and she chided us that we were the MTV generation and should be used to random things happening. I never really followed what she meant, and she certainly didn't appreciate my "Muppet pelt" comment which made it into my review. Looking back now I realize if I could have worked animated gifs into the paper, I probably would have.

I feel like avant-garde theater is a way to mess with pretentious people. Because it definitely seemed like they were trying to see how much they could get away with before the audience goes "OK WTF was that?" And apparently for my Shakespeare prof, they didn't hit that wall.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find any pictures of the Muppet pelt or monkey mask. However, I did find that other picture above, which captures what I remember this play being like. There are more pictures on the site, and you can even see giant gold ball in one of them, just to prove I'm not completely making those points up, although it's someone other than the little girl holding it.

*This was made up of various Greek tragedies, The Illiad, The Odyssey, The Aeneid, The Bible, some Plato and some other stuff I've forgotten/blocked from memory. In case you were curious. You probably weren't.

If music be the food of love, play on

First challenge book completed! I just finished up Shakespeare's Twelfth Night, which is my Classic Play pick for Sarah's Classics reading challenge.Also this sort of counts for Allie's Shakespeare Reading Month even if I'm not actually participating in it. But everyone else was reading Shakespeare and I wanted in on the action. (I cannot withstand blogging peer pressure, even when it's indirect.)

Now, I can't review Shakespeare. I am not smart enough for that. So instead of even making an attempt I've instead decided to give you a couple of my thoughts about Twelfth Night. I also wrote a plot description at the bottom of the post in case you're not familiar with story and want to follow along.

Random thoughts about Shakespeare's Twelfth Night or What You Will:

First Orsino is super taken with Viola/Cesario. I mean, he does make her a super trusted servant and messenger-of-love not long after meeting her. Then Olivia lays eyes on her and instantly decides "What the whole mourning-dead-family-so-I-can't-love-anyone-right-now thing? That's nothing. I just had to keep the weirdos away. Now come here you!" Is really Viola just that awesome?

Sir Andrew and Sir Toby are the best characters, although better to watch than to read. They provide most of the comic relief, which is kind of a weird thing to have in what is a comedy. But the Orsino/Viola/Olivia story isn't super funny. Or funny at all really, except I guess the whole "Olivia being in love with Cesario who is really a girl!" The two cowardly drunks, however, are hilarious.

When Malvolio gets the letter from "Olivia" he says it has to be from her because he recognizes her hand-writing. "By my life, this is my lady's hand! These be her very c's, her u's, and her t's." (II.v.88-90). Two things about this: Shakespeare is careful about the words he picks, so that must extend to letters and the guy was all about the sex jokes. This is the take Dr. Pauline Kiernan, author of Filthy Shakespeare, believes. "'Cut' is slang for cunt; the word 'and' was pronounced as an 'n'." Also if you say "c's, her u's and her t's" fast it sounds like you're saying "c,u,n,t". (pg 62) It's a classy cunt joke.

Sebastian is found by this guy Antonio, who seems to be in love with Sebastian even if my Folger's copy won't admit it. It also only vaguely acknowledged the dirty joke above, so I think it likes to keep things clean. Not bowdlerized but just classroom appropriate. Folger can tell me all it wants that when Antonio tells Sebastian "There shall you have me" (III.iii.46) he means "You will find me there", but it's not convincing me that's all he means. Later he comes to Viola/Cesario's defense during her duel with Sir Andrew, thinking she's Sebastian. When she tells him she has no idea who he is, Antonio is deeply hurt. Now you could argue he's mad because earlier he had given Sebastian his purse full of money and now he's asking Viola for that money and she's refusing, but he hardly seems to care about the money. "This youth that you see here/I snatched one half out of the jaws of death,/Relieved him with such sanctity of love,/And to his image, which methought did promise/Most venerable worth, did I devotion" (III.iv.378-382) Pretty much any scene with Antonio has him declaring his love for Sebastian. And Sebastian is clearly oblivious. Or he doesn't swing that way but I'm going with oblivious (maybe a little dumb too) given the whole marrying Olivia thing. I feel so bad for Antonio.

Plot!
Viola and her twin brother Sebastian's ship is caught in a storm, and they each wash up on shore thinking the other sibling is dead. Viola disguises herself as a boy Cesario (so in the original stage productions it would be a boy, playing a woman, playing a man. Not confusing at all.) and seeks refuge as Count/Duke Orsino's servant. Orsino is in love with Countess Oliva, who refuses to love anyone until she finishes mourning her brother's and father's deaths. Which seems kind of reasonable, but Orsino wants the love now! Orsino sends Viola/Cesario to court Oliva on his behalf, but Oliva falls in love with Viola/Cesario. Meanwhile, Viola/Cesario has fallen in love with Orsino, but can't tell him cos she's dressed as a boy. Love triangle!

Oliva has suitors other than Orsino: Sir Andrew and her servant Malvolio (although his is more a secret crush). Sir Andrew is friends with Oliva's kinsman the drunk Sir Toby, who mostly keeps Andrew around because he wants his money. And a drinking buddy. And Sir Andrew is pretty wimpy and easy to boss around. Malvolio doesn't care for Sir Toby and Sir Andrew's drunken revelry and is also kind of douchey snob. Sir Toby, Sir Andrew and Oliva's lady-in-waiting Maria plan a trick on Malvolio because he interrupted their drinking and that must be punished. They leave him a letter supposedly from Oliva professing her love for him, and telling him that if he loves her back he should profess his love by smiling at her a lot, wearing ridiculous clothes, and being mean to Sir Toby and company. He follows the letter to the T and Oliva thinks he's gone mad and has him locked up.

Sir Andrew sees that Olivia is love with Viola/Cesario and decides he should give up and go. Sir Toby doesn't like that he's going to lose his cash cow and drinking buddy, so he convinces Sir Andrew to challenge Olivia to a duel. But Sir Andrew is a wimp and Viola/Cesario is actually a lady, which in this play anyway means she can't fight. Not like "I'm not allowed because of my lady like disposition" but because (apparently) "My uterus makes me unable to know how to fight." Or maybe Viola/Cesario just sucks at fighting but whatever the reason, these scenes are pretty great.

Meanwhile! Viola's twin brother Sebastian is alive and has been hanging out with a man named Antonio, who totally has a thing for Sebastian, even if we're not acknowledging it, Folgers New Shakespeare Library. Antonio comes to Viola/Cesario's aid during the duel, thinking he's Sebastian. Antonio isn't exactly welcome in these parts and he's arrested. Earlier Antonio had given Sebastian a purse full of money and now he asks Viola/Cesario for that money back. Viola/Cesario has no idea what he's talking about, Antonio's heart is broken and he's taken away.

Another meanwhile! Sebastian runs into Olivia who thinks he's Viola/Cesario and proposes marriage. Sebastian doesn't know who she is but goes with it anyway because why not? They even get the betrothal sanctified by a priest. Then Sebastian runs into Sir Andrew and Sir Toby, who challenge him to a duel again, thinking it will go a lot like last time (meaning it won't happen at all). Sebastian is apparently super impulsive because not only does he agree to marry Olivia upon first meeting her, but he also has no problem beating the hell out of the two drunk knights without figuring out why they're so angry.

Orsino and Viola/Cesario go to Olivia's so Orsino can give his Olivia-wooing one more try. Antonio shows up and yells about how he gave Sebastian all this love and Sebastian pretended not to know who he was. But he's yelling all of this at Viola/Cesario, who is just all sorts of confused. Then Olivia comes out and talks about how excited she is that she and Cesario are going to get married, and again Viola/Cesario is confused and denies this. Now Orsino, Olivia and Antonio are all angry at Viola/Cesario, who has no idea what's going on. Then Sir Toby and Sir Andrew come in all beat up and there are more people yelling at Viola/Cesario. Then Sebastian stumbles in, doesn't seem to notice his twin standing RIGHT THERE (he's both impulsive and unobservant) although everyone else does. Viola reveals she's really a lady and declares her love for Orsino who figures Olivia's already taken so Viola's a good consolation prize. Olivia is likewise pretty OK with marrying someone that looks a lot like the lady/guy she was actually in love with and even keeps calling Sebastian Cesario because this is a totally non-doomed relationship. And everyone lives happily ever after except Malvolio who vows revenge on everyone for his mistreatment. The End.

Title quote from I.i.1

Kiernan, Pauline. Filthy Shakespeare: Shakespeare's Most Outrageous Sexual Puns. Gotham Books, 2006.

Shakespeare, William. Twelfth Night or What You Will. The New Folger Library, 1993.

My Shakespeare beginning

I can't pinpoint what it is exactly, but I love Shakespeare. The poetry? Yup! The plays? Want! The mystery of the man? Yeah sure, pile that on.

I can remember the moment that I fell in love with Shakespeare's plays.* I was in my high school English class and we were reading Romeo and Juliet. It was my first time reading Shakespeare, although I knew the basics of the story because who doesn't? Plus Baz Lurhman's movie had come out a few years earlier. But actually reading the stuff? I was not having this Shakespeare guy. I could not for the life of me understand what was going on. I have always been a reader and I had tackled difficult literature before (I had read The Hunchback of Notre Dame in the 7th grade, even if I didn't understand anything), but this was a different world. I thought I could handle Shakespeare, no problem. And then I couldn't. I could read the words, even understand several of them, but I couldn't make heads or tails of what was actually happening. I decided Shakespeare really wasn't for me. And then there was the speech.

For the most part we were reading the play for homework and then coming into class to discuss it. I'm sure we read a few scenes together, but the only one I remember is Juliet's speech from IV.iii.2565-2610 where she is about to drink the potion Friar Lawrence has given her to make it look like she's dead.** Maybe it caught my attention because the teacher read it and she actually understands the text, instead of one of the students doing it. Maybe it's because this speech isn't a romantic one but instead has Juliet talk about bashing her brains in with the bones of her relatives.*** Whatever it was, I quit seeing this as outdated text with unrelatable characters. This was a vulnerable and scared girl trying to be brave. I was having so much trouble getting past the language and the period references, but this speech cut right through all of that. Yes, the text can be hard to read and there are a lot of words that aren't used anymore or are completely different now, but once you get past all of that the emotion beneath is real and universal.

I was lucky that after that class I had other teachers as enthusiastic about Shakespeare as my frosh teacher. (And I had her again my senior year, which was sweet). Plus my high school had a Shakespeare class, to continue my obsession.

*Or at least I have a memory of a single moment. Whether I actually came out of class with a new world view, or whether that's just a romanticized notion is up for debate. Debate being, this is probably BS and I'm sure while I fondly remember this now, at the time it was just another day.

**Does anyone know if this speech has a pithy name, like Hamlet's "What a piece of work is man" speech? That would make it way easier to describe.

***All the romantic stuff wasn't resonating with me because I was an obnoxious, cynical child. I'm lucky to have grown out of that and now I'm an obnoxious, cynical adult. Ahh, maturity.

If you're going to have an anti-Stratfordian movie, can't it at least include spies?

Image: Scientific American

Have you seen the trailer for the new movie Anonymous? It's about how Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford is actually the author of Shakespeare's works. See aristocrats shouldn't be messing around with the theater. That's for trashy people. But Edward just had to dance write. So he wrote the stuff but got this poor player William Shakespeare to be his front man.

I don't plan on seeing this movie. Not because "how dare they" or anything but more because there are a bunch of other movies I'd like to see but I'm lazy and don't make it to the movies that often. Also cheap. So I guess I'm saying if it's someday on TV and there's nothing else on or the remote is really far away I might watch it. I believe Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare (kooky idea, right?) but I like a good conspiracy theory as much as the next person. But really, if you're going to make an anti-Stratfordian movie, let's at least go all out.

By that I mean, if you're going to make a movie that says Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare, why not go with Marlowe as the actual writer? I don't believe it anymore than I believe de Vere or Bacon or any of the other 70+ candidates for Shakespearian authorship. It's just that at least it makes a good story. Here are the basics

Marlowe is a successful dramatist, with his plays The Jew of Malta and Doctor Faustus bringing in all the groundlings. But he's also a spy! (Dun dun duuunn) He was a spy for the Queen, who got him out of a couple tight situations, so it seems he had some powerful friends. But powerful friends can only help you so much when blasphemy is on the line and your roommate Kyd sells you out. Marlowe is reputed to be an atheist so even the Queen is having trouble making this thing go away. What to do? Oh, a faked death you say? Perfect!  Marlowe gets in a bar fight over a bill and is stabbed in the eye and killed. Just days before he's supposed to go on trial for heresy. They probably went with the eye-stabbing because you can't cut the breaks on a horse. Now he hangs out in Italy for awhile and let's things back in London blow over. But he also must dance write. So he gets an old contemporary of his to take his works and claim them as his own. And that is how you do an anti-Stratfordian conspiracy theory

See how much better that story is? Spies! Atheists! Faked death! Also there's a chance Marlowe might have been gay, so there's that to. So what would you rather: a guy who was too fancy to write or an Elizabethan James Bond for whom even faked death couldn't stop his need to write? Exactly.

Happy Birthday Shakespeare!

That is the question

At least it's probably his birthday today. For those uneducated in the minutia of Shakespeare (a.k.a. non-super nerds), the only record is that Shakespeare was baptized on April 26th, 1564. Traditionally a person was baptized 3 days after birth, hence April 23rd for his birthday. Plus he died on April 23rd in 1616 so it makes it easier to remember these dates if they're all the same.

In what is becoming a tradition here on holidays, I figure I'd link to some past posts I've written about Shakespeare. See this way I get something appropriate to the day posted, whether or not I'm reading anything about that topic at the time AND I get to drive traffic to some of my past posts. I suppose I could have worded that to explain what it is you dear readers are getting, but that would feel like a lie. I mean I hope you find some past posts you enjoy. I'm certainly not trying to lead you to crap. And on that positive note, here are those posts!

The Compleat Works of Wllm Shkspr (abridged) by the Reduced Shakespeare Company
I think you showed a lot of heart, a lot of courage, a lot of -- as Shakespeare would say -- "chutzpah"

Othello by William Shakespeare
The Law of Transitives and...Othello?

My Name is Will: A Novel of Sex, Drugs and Shakespeare by Jess Winfield
[Maybe] I'll find the meaning of life in a sonnet

Fool by Christopher Moore
We're all Fate's bastards

A Top Ten Tuesday...on a Wednesday
Favorite Shakespeare Quotes

Soul of the Age: A Biography of the Mind of William Shakespeare by Jonathan Bate
All the world's a stage
A sonnet is a crystallization of the emotion of a moment
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything

Reduced Shakespeare: The Complete Guide for the Attention Impaired (abridged) by Reed Martin and Austin Tichenor
We kick the pedestal out from under Shakespeare and make him accessible once again to the grubby, semiliterate, easily distracted masses

Favorite Shakespeare Quotes

Yesterday, as part of the Top Ten Tuesday, The Broke and The Bookish asked people to name their top 10 favorite literary quotes.  I loved this topic and I was impressed by how many people keep track of their favorite quotes.  I do not do this, though I wish I did.  I know I won't start though.  I'm never reading near a notebook or something where I can stop and write down quotes.  And I don't like writing in my books, so I won't have the option to go back later.  Hell, as it stands for this blog I just have to try to remember the quote I want to use for the title of a post, or else just happen to be near a computer at the time.  So because I'm not nearly as organized as so many of you (and partially because I'm jealous of your organizational skills) I did not partake.  I know any quotes I come up with will just be ones I was able to find at that moment and because I wouldn't even be near my bookshelf, it would mostly be me trying to find posts online.

I was disappointed but then I realized something: I'm a bit of a Shakespeare nerd and I can probably remember lots of Shakespeare quotes.  Hell, had I thought of this when I was near it, I own an entire book of just Shakespeare quotes.  So I know I'm late but here are my top 10 favorite Shakespeare quotes in no particular order, other than the order I remembered them in

1. To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow
Creeps in this petty place from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
Who struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more.  It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Macbeth V.v.19-28

2. What a piece of work is man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals -- and yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me
Hamlet II.ii.303-312

3. Demetrius: Villain, what hast thou done?
Aaron: That which thou canst not undo.
Demetrius: Thou hast undone our mother.
Aaron: Villain, I have done they mother.
Titus Andronicus IV.ii
(Right after this line I just hear "Oh snap!")

4. The course of true love never did run smooth.
A Midsummer Night's Dream I.i.134

5. Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediment. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Sonnet 116

6. Reason and love keep little company together now-a-days
A Midsummer Night's Dream. III.i

7. Put money in thy purse
Othello. I.iii.338, 339-340, 341
(I'm presenting most of these without explanation since for the most part I don't think they require it.  This is a fairly vague quote and, if you aren't familiar with the play, you may not recognize it or understand the situation surrounding it.  Iago is one of my favorite characters and I love his powers of manipulation.)

8. Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon 'em
Twelfth Night. II.iv.145-146

9. If music be the food of love, play on
Twelfth Night. I.i.1

10. To thine own self be true
Hamlet I.i.78

So I know that reads a bit like Bartlet's famous quotes (which is actually the book I own, though it's somewhere in Long Island at this moment) but really the well known quotes are well known because they're so great.  Besides I don't want to go all hipster and start listing out more obscure quotes to make myself seem pretentious.  "Oh you hadn't heard that quote before?  Yeah, it's still pretty underground.  You gotta be really tuned in to get it." 

We're all Fate's bastards

 I know my last few posts have been about Shakespeare* but the next couple are going to be about him as well.  Sorry!  Slog through a few more (or just ignore me for the next couple posts) and I'll be onto a new topic in no time.  Promises. I'm also skipping a fellow bloggers post this week because I recently listed out a bunch of my favorite blogs in my last post.  If you're at a loss for other blogs to check out and want, nay need, my wisdom check out that list.

For now I'm re-reading Fool by Christopher Moore.  It's a retelling of King Lear from the Fool's point of view, with some changes here and there to Shakespeare's play.  I'm not sure if it makes any difference if you're familiar or not with Lear before reading this.  I think the story is well told and funny enough that you don't even need to know there is a different version of King Lear but seeing how I already know the story of Lear I can't really say for sure.  That was a rambling way to say I've read Lear before and cannot time travel to see if Fool makes any sense without knowing it.  So there you go.

Moore's writing is satirical, humorous and absurd, which is exactly how I like my books.  If you're not yet familiar with his humor, here's the warning he put in the beginning of the book:

This is a bawdy tale.  Herein you will find gratuitous shagging, murder, spanking, maiming, treason, and heretofore unexplored heights of vulgarity and profanity, as well as non-traditional grammar, split infinitives, and the odd wank.  If that sort of thing bothers you, then gentle reader pass by, for we endeavor only to entertain, not to offend.  That said, if that's the sort of thing you think you might enjoy, then you have happened upon the perfect story!

For me, Moore has absolutely provided me a perfect story.  Or at least a very entertaining one.   The story doesn't just strictly follow the King Lear plot but also includes back stories for the fool, Pocket, as well as the pasts of Lear, Cordelia, Goneril and Regan. Pocket has a greater influence over the events of the story than the original play suggests, though it's pulled off in such a way you could see the truth-speaking fool actually having a hand in the action.

As is typical of Moore's characters, Pocket is a generally good guy but he certainly engages in some morally questionable plots, usually to suit his own ends or the ends of those he cares about.  He's not all good, which would make him boring and he's not all bad, which would make him unsympathetic.  The gray area is a more interesting mire to wade through.  Just as in the play, Pocket's wit allows him to say and do things that are unsavory when coming from others.  Humor softens the blow.  I've yet to find a Moore book that completely lacks wit, but it works especially well here, where quick wit is a central part to the fool's character.

Fool is one of my favorite Moore books, just barely behind Lamb.  I'm sure the fact that it's Shakespeare based plays a good part in making this one of my favorites but the story itself is so well-told and so funny that even if this had been just a generic court jester it still would have been good.  By the way, the book was originally going to just be  about a generic court jester, but his editor told him he should do Lear.  I love that this book includes a little explanation from Moore about his intentions.  And if you want to see an excellent post about author's intentions check out the post about just that over a Dead White Guys.  I can't say I think that author's intention is the be-all-end-all to a book and coming up with your own interpretation separate from the author's is pointless and a waste of time, Jane Doe makes a very convincing argument.  I can't think of a good way to counter it, so I'll just agree with The Reading Ape's comment.

I'm still debating if I'll have a second post about this book, so there may be one more Shakespeare entry you'll have to read (assuming you'll read the next one if you've made it this far).  I'm about 1/2 way done with the book as is, but because I have read it before I'm confident in the above review.  Don't worry, it won't be a second review of the book or anything entirely redundant, though I'm sure I'll make mention of the humor again.  If I find an aspect that particularly catches my eye, you'll see another entry.  If not, I'll be off on some other topic.

Title quote page 29

*Other Shakespeare posts:
I think you showed a lot of heart!  A lot of courage!  A lot of  -- as Shakespeare would say -- 'chutzpah'  - The Compleat Works of Wllm Shkspr (abridged)
The law of transitives and...Othello?
"[Maybe] I'll find the meaning of life in a sonnet" - My Name is Will

Moore, Christopher.  Fool.  Harper, New York.  2009

[Maybe] I'll find the meaning of life in a sonnet

My friend lent me the book My Name is Will: A Novel of Sex, Drugs, and Shakespeare by Jess Winfield awhile ago but I'm holding it hostage until I get my copy of Vonnegut's Galapagos back from him. And while I'm holding onto it it made sense to me to read it again.  Plus I'm currently out of new books to read and I'm trying to save money although I'm sure this won't last too long. It's just a matter of time before the call of the bookstore draws me in.

I've tried to describe the book to people before and I just end up repeating the subtitle.  "Well, you see, it's a book about Shakespeare.  But there's also a lot of drugs and sex."  I'm so eloquent.  So let me try a little harder this time.  It's actually the tale of two Shakespeares.  Also sex and drugs.  I hope that cleared everything up!

Alright, I'll give this one more try.  It is the story of two Shakespeares: the William Shakespeare you know and (I hope) love and then there's William "Willie" Shakespeare Greenberg, the modern day Shakespearean scholar.  The chapters alternate between Willie's journey to figure out his master's thesis, that Shakespeare was a closet Catholic, his task to deliver drugs to a Renaissance Faire and his goal to have a lot of sex along the way.  Then there's the Bard's life before he began writing, the poaching of the deer in Sir Thomas Lucy's grounds, his trip to London and having a lot of sex along the way.  The stories parallel one another, showing how the two Shakespeare's react to similar but entirely different situations.  There's a scene where Shakespeare is being tortured by Sir Lucy that mimics a scene with Willie and his girlfriend in bed together.  See, similar but different; I wasn't just being complicated there.  The two Shakespeare's are also persecuted to varying degrees: for Willie it comes from the DEA and Reagan's recently implemented mandatory minimum sentencing and for Shakespeare it's those darn Protestants.

I liked the Shakespeare chapters better than the Willie ones.  Both sets are interesting but I'm personally more interested in Shakespeare's life, even a fictional telling of his lost years.  You see into a world of Shakespeare if he was a closet Catholic and how his early life may have influenced his later writing, including the more important lesson of the theater "Know Thy Audience" which lets him move beyond political allegory and create characters for all ages. Winfield's Shakespeare could be the early version of Joseph Fiennes' Shakespeare of Shakespeare in Love. There is more at stake in Shakespeare's story and more chance for him to grow.  Willie's story is funny and kept me entertained but it couldn't draw me in the same way Shakespeare's chapters did.

There are a lot of little nods to Shakespeare, as would be expected.  Some work well and others are more obvious and feel a bit more awkward.  And of course there is a lot of humor.  Jess Winfield, then credited as Jess Borgenson, is one of the original authors of The Compleat Works of Wllm Shkspr (abridged), which I wrote about in an earlier post and he makes clear references to the early days of the group and according to Winfield's website parts of Willie's story is indeed based about his own life. 

Title quote from page 22

Winfield, Jess. My Name is Will: A Novel of Sex, Drugs and Shakespeare.  Twelve/Hatchette Book Group, New York.  2008

Law of Transitives and...Othello?

Sometimes something I see or hear will remind me of Shakespeare so I'll sporadically break up the novels I'm reading by picking up some of his works and looking at a certain scene or line I like.  So just as sporadically I figured I'd share those moments here. You're welcome. I'll consider this my Shakespeare Break.  This time the break was triggered by the production of Othello put on in the Boston Commons by the Commonwealth Shakespeare Company.  Free Shakespeare and Parish Cafe sandwiches: a great way to spend a summer night.

Seeing Othello again made me think about how Iago manipulates Othello to bring him down.  I should start out saying I'm skeptical of the idea of the tragic flaw, that Othello is brought down only because he is too trusting.  This makes both Iago and Othello seem like weak characters.  This is not my own conclusion but comes from Shakespeare Is Hard, But So Is Life: A Radical Guide to Shakespearean Tragedy by Fintan O'Toole.   I won't get too much into this book, as I'm sure that will be a later post, but just to say that O'Toole claims that the idea of the tragic flaw removes the concept of free will; the characters are destined to behave the way they do. Looking at Othello as having a tragic flaw robs Iago of his twisted powers of persuasion. 

So what does Othello have to do with transitive relation or law of transitives?  For those who don't remember, the transitive relation states essentially if A = B and B = C then A = C.  I also included a link to the Wikipedia page, which can give you more information should you be curious and which I had to check to make sure I was somewhat getting this right.  For the point I'll be making you only need to know the info in the example above.  So I'll ask again (because I assume your memory is as good as mine and if more than 10 seconds have passed you forgot what we were talking about)  what does this algebraic rule have to do with Shakespeare?  Iago uses this basic formula to plant and nurture those seeds of distrust in Othello.

Iago
     Ha, I like not that. 

Othello
     What dost thou say?

Iago
     Nothing, my lord; or if--I know not what.

Othello
     Was not that Cassio parted from my wife?

Iago
     Cassio, my lord? No, sure, I cannot think it
     That he would steal away so guiltylike,
     Seeing you coming.

Othello
     I do believe 'twas he.

Desdemona
     How now, my lord?
     I have been talking with a suitor here,
     A man that languishes in your displeasure.

Othello
     Who is't you mean?

Desdemona
      Why, your lieutenant, Cassio.
 III.iii.37-49

Iago knew that was Cassio talking to Desdemona; he had advised Cassio to have Desdemona plead on his behalf and hopefully make it back into Othello's good graces.  Yet Iago plants the seed here.  He points out a man "[stealing] away so guiltylike" from Desdemona and when Othello asks if that was Cassio, Iago says it couldn't be.  Cassio is a fine, up-standing man and a good man wouldn't sneak away from another man's wife like that.  But when the two men make it to Desdemona she tells them that was Cassio.  So we've set up the following equation

Cassio = Good Man
Good Man = Wouldn't "steal away so guiltylike"
Cassio = Wouldn't "steal away so guiltylike"

It may seem setting this up will not meet Iago's end as the very first equation is Cassio is a good man.  But to truly be the conniving character he is, Iago must work within the rules that have been set up.  Othello believes Cassio to be a good man, so the first thing Iago must do is destroy this first assumption.  He sets up the drunken fight and then he sets up the rules above, knowing full well the logic is going to fall apart.  When Desdemona tells them that it was Cassio she was just speaking with, we have a break down in the logic.  The last rule no longer applies as we now know it was Cassio that slunk off.  Iago has set Othello up to use the logic above, so with this new information Othello comes to the following conclusion:

Cassio = Did "steal away so guiltylike"
Good Man = Wouldn't "steal away so guiltylike"
Cassio = Not a Good Man

Had Iago just told Othello he shouldn't trust Cassio Othello would just have to believe Iago for the story to work and if we believe he is simply "too trusting" and also not-so-bright this would work.  It wouldn't necessarily be all that interesting to read about such dull characters but it would get the job done.  Instead Iago leads Othello in such a way that Othello, to the best of his knowledge, came to his own conclusion about Cassio.  If anything Othello sees Iago defending Cassio, saying of course he wouldn't be sneaking away like that!  Iago is seen as much more powerful, much more cunning and thus much more frightening than if Othello simply believes whatever he says because of some tragic flaw.  The point now is that Othello is intelligent but even he could be lead astray by the snake Iago, which means the reader could also be lead astray, no matter how smart they may think they are.

Shakespeare, William.  Othello.  The New Folger Library; New York.  1993.

I think you showed a lot of heart! A lot of courage! A lot of -- as Shakespeare would say -- 'chutzpah'

I'm still making my way through Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (I'm on page 426 and loving it!) but I thought I should break up all of the Strange & Norrell posts with something different and I missed this week's blog hop so I have a new book to write about.  Well, new to this blog anyway.  I've read/seen this play so many times I don't really need to look at the pages.  I'm talking about The Compleat Works of Wllm Shkspr (abridged) by the Reduced Shakespeare Co., Jess Borgenson, Adam Long and Daniel Singer.  We watched a performance of this play in my high school Shakespeare class and not long after seeing it there I got a VHS copy of the performance and bought the book.  I'm actually on my second copy of the book as the original got lost during one of my many moves and I think I need to upgrade to a DVD copy of the play.  I'm a geek, I know.

Complete Works (abridged) is, as the title suggests, all of Shakespeare's plays as well as the sonnets condensed into a single play and performed by 3 actors.  As Singer describes in his intro note "[Audiences] of the last quarter of the twentieth century apparently possessed an urgent need to see Shakespeare performed as if it were a Tex Avery cartoon" and this is certainly what they provide.  Some of the plays get more time than the others which is just fine as I don't need to see more than a brief mention of Troilus and Cressida.  All of the comedies are combined into a single comedy, since they all use pretty much the same plots anyway, and all of the histories and King Lear are combined into an American football game, with the crown being passed back and forth between the "teams".  Othello is performed as a rap, Titus Andronicus is a cooking show, and Macbeth leads into Julius Caesar thus making up the "caesarian" section of the play.  The second act is all Hamlet, but don't worry, they perform it a few different times and there's a little work-shopping in the middle as they bring members of the audience on stage to act out Ophelia's "get thee to a nunnery" scene, complete with an examination of the subtext.

If it isn't obvious already, I'm a big Shakespeare fan,* but even if you don't know all of the little details or even all of the plays this work is hilarious.  If you can see it performed you should!  As mentioned I have a very worn VHS copy and I've seen the newest incarnation of the RSC perform The Complete History of America (abridged). I enjoyed it though my American-history buff friend this seemed to have less in-jokes than the Shakespeare play had.  If you can't see it performed, or really even if you can, you should read the book version.  There are several intros and prefaces as each author, the editor, William Shakespeare and the average reader get their input.  Then throughout the play there are footnotes.  Sometimes the notes provide additional information about a particular joke, sometimes they include additional notes on stage direction and most of the time they fall into the dick-and-fart jokes category.  See most of the jokes in the Romeo and Juliet section. 

I'll probably make future references to this play in my later posts.  I tend to read this play as a sort of literary palate cleanser, mostly because it's short and I know it so well.  And I plan on having a few Shakespeare related posts so I'm sure this will get mentioned again.

Update! I realized while re-reading this post that I can't convey the humor of the play quite as well as some quotes can.  So here is a small sampling of a few of my favorites:

"So now to the feast of Capulet
Where Romeo is doomed to meet his Juliet.
And where, in a scene of timeless romance,
He'll try to get into Juliet's pants." 14

"Here's the story of a brother by the name of Othello
He liked white women and he liked green Jello" 33

"In fact, one of [the Lesser plays], 'Troilus and Cressida', is hardly crap at all." 50

"I told these guys, 'I will NOT do dry, boring...vomitless Shakespeare for these people," 53

One part of Ophelia's Superego during the Workshop portion of the show
"Look, cut the crap, Hamlet, my biological clock is ticking and I want babies now!" 88

*I would like to say thanks to my high school English teachers that taught me to love instead of fear Shakespeare, as so many other teacher seem to do.  So thanks Courtley, Waite and Porrazzo! 

Title quote page 84

Borgenson, Jess, Adam Long, Daniel Singer.  ed. Professor J.M. Winfield.  The Compleat Works of Wllm Shkspr (abridged).  Applause books, New York.  1994.