Final Evaluation

We did it!! Congratz everyone and well done on your projects. I was quite impressed with the other projects and how well everything turned out. I loved seeing all the artwork and how it related to Hamlet. The music video was exceptionally well done and had so much emotion in it. The play was probably my absolute favorite part. It was very cool to recap on three classic couples in Shakespeare's plays and see how they interacted.

So then to the project that I was part of. All of it was so fun and I really learned a lot about audio recording and editing. Then just figuring how to record specific characters and where the sound should come from in relation to everyone else was definitely an interesting way to analyze the play. We recorded our audio in stereo, so even where the actors stood in relation to the microphone changed the way that the recording sounded. So part of recording was figuring out who had the most important part of the dialogue and closer to the center of the microphones.

So now to the learning outcomes!

1. How have I gained Shakespeare literacy?

I've read some pretty fantastic Shakespeare books that I probably wouldn't have read otherwise. I learned new ways to interpret Shakespeare and how to really delve into the text and relate it to myself. I also saw some pretty fantastic Shakespeare plays. The performance we saw of The Winter's Tale at the beginning of the semester was my first Shakespeare play that I saw performed. It was such a different experience realizing how different interpretations could be conveyed in sets, lighting, and costuming. 

2. How have I analyzed Shakespeare critically?

I didn't blog very consistently towards the end of the semester, but what I did post about King Lear was attempting to understand the psychology of the characters themselves better. I had a post all about familial connections and how Gloucester's difference in treatment between his sons resulted in such a significant difference between Edmund and Edgar. I also enjoyed tracing parallels between Shakespeare's works and other examples of the archetypes Shakespeare portrayed, such as the similarities between Caliban and Grendel.

3. How have I engaged Shakespeare creatively?

Well, the final project was a pretty good example of creatively engaging Shakespeare. Figuring how to record, edit, and how to change things around to sound better or better exemplify characters and themes. Another thing that I did this semester was participate in a performance of The Complete Works of William Shakespeare Abridged, which helped me see the crucial elements of Shakespeare's plays, then figure out exactly how the short summaries should be portrayed.

4. How have I shared Shakespeare meaningfully?

Our final project was posted on youtube so that anyone wanting to hear it can search for it and find it. Performing in Shakespeare Abridged really helped me reach out to a larger group of people. It helped me reach out to some of my friends. One person who saw us perform had not read a Shakespeare play before. Then after he saw us perform, he started reading Hamlet. I also shared Shakespeare by showing my blog with some of my family members and friends. My roommate is a big fan of Harry Potter so I showed her my blog post about J.K. Rowling's Hermione. Another friend of mine is a fan of Pokemon so I showed him my blog post comparing Ash and Misty with Benedick and Beatrice. I also shared Much Ado About Nothing with my little brother and exposed him to his first Shakespeare play.

To wrap up, I really enjoyed this class. It really forced me to look at Shakespeare in a different way and it was so much fun delving deeper into the plays than I had before gone. I'm definitely going to keep loving Shakespeare!

Sample recordings for a ghosty voice

Hey guys, sorry this post is so late. It's been a busy day. BUT, I've taken one of the ghost's short speeches and played around with a few different effects and stuff that just sounds cool. Check them out! I have a total of three samples for you, less than last time, but they are still pretty cool. Also, check back on Monday for some more samples of the audio recording session we did during class on Thursday!

And one more video as a teaser for a performance of Shakespeare Abridged that some friends and I are doing. The date and time is still somewhat tentative, but we're getting a room through professor Burton.

All right guys, enjoy the samples and happy blogging!

More on the final project and a bit on King Lear and biology

Hey, sorry for not posting this on time again, I'm going to really try and commit to putting my posts together the night before so that I'm SURE that I will post on time. Sorry for the inconvenience and the inconsistency.




So seeing the sound booth yesterday was VERY exciting! I reserved it for this evening so that I can tinker around with the hardware and whatnot in it and figure out how everything works. But there's definitely some hard-core awesome microphones. The major thing is just figuring out how to turn everything on. Once I can do that, the sound should be golden. I also think I'll record a few things and play around with various effects on human voices, so stay tuned for some fun samples on Friday.



Also, our rough cut in the googledoc posted here is finished. Thursday in class, we'll be going over the whole thing, reading through and getting the general feel of the script, possibly do some more cutting, possibly put in more lines.

Children betraying the father is a major theme throughout King Lear, seen both in Gloucester's sons and Lear's daughters. There is a very distinct biological, hormonal bond that ties the father to the child's well-being during gestation. In fact, some sources, like this article, say that the hormonal change causes parenting behavior. Then when the children are born, they form an instant tie with their mother and father, who provide social acceptance and emotional nourishment as well as food and shelter. Then as the child grows older, they can find social acceptance and emotional fulfillment elsewhere, illustrated in Cordelia's line, "Why have my sister's husbands, if they say/ They love you all?" Lear's daughters have by this point found love outside of him and no longer need him, while Lear has given everything to his daughters and is now reliant upon them for his well-being. The parental-child role here has been flip-flopped, and without that spike in hormones, his daughters feel very little obligation to actually take care of Lear, especially when he continues to treat them like his children.

Then in Gloucester's case, he has a rather good relationship with Edgar, who greatly loves his father and, along with Cordelia, is one of the only characters that actually exhibits love for his parent. However, Edmund, whose major difference from Edgar is the identity of his mother. Yet this difference drastically changes the Edmund's place in society as well as his mental health and connection with his father. It is highly unlikely that Gloucester really cared very much for the whore that bore him a son and probably did not spend a lot of time with her during the pregnancy, significantly weakening that hormonal tie. As he says, "I have so often blushed to acknowledge him... and the whoreson must be acknowledged." Due to the expectations of society and his position in it, Gloucester is forced to act as Edmund's father, although I doubt that he was treated with the same love and affection that Edgar was. Edmund's plots against Edgar is less an actual ploy for power as it is a sad, misguided attempt to take Edgar's place and earn his father's love.

Final Project: fun with music and a link for our cut

Hey guys, so I'm posting a little early because we agreed in our group today that I would put together a googledoc for our group to post our cut script. I'm in the audio group, which will be making an hour long audio production of Hamlet. We've figured out the order of the scenes and assigned people to cut specific parts. So for those of you in the group, click here! And if you aren't part of the group and are curious, you can check it out, too.

So one thing that I'm sort of in charge of is the music and sound effects for the recording, which is WAY exciting! I've been playing with a recording of the to be or not to be speech and some background music for it. Unfortunately, the recording I found is rather dull and dry, but that leaves it entirely up to the music to set the tone.

So the following videos are actually audio files containing the crazy stuff I've been doing. In each video, I'll provide a brief description of the background music. Be  sure to let me know what you think of whatever you listen to.


These audio clips will probably not actually be used in the final recording since they are copyrighted, but my roommate has a keyboard with a recording function, but instead of recording a bunch of sample stuff, I'm just using different songs to figure out what kind of tone we want.

The second set of writing in this video is supposed to be talking about how pretty the piano of is and how it sound more classical.

I apologize for the many videos, I know that it isn't very visually appealing. But the project itself is going to be great and I'm very excited for it!

Edmund has daddy issues and an inferiority complex

How would you like it if your dad always introduced you by saying that he was slightly embarrassed of you, but that your mother was a good whore? That's pretty much the way Edmund feels. At the very first, Gloucester seems to be emphasizing the fact that Edmund is his illegitimate son who "must be acknowledged" because his mother was pretty and "there was good sport at his making." Seriously, how could you grow up like that and NOT want to implement some crazy scheme to get your dad to notice you? 

Edmund isn't the only younger brother
living in the shadow of his elder sibling.

So according to this article by Timothy Lin, there are four major causes that can aggravate an inferiority complex: physical defects, mental limitations, social disadvantages, and parental attitudes. These last two are both very applicable to Edmund's situation, especially the latter of the two. Constantly being compared to his older, legitimate brother, who will inherit his father's lands and power, he is forced to face and re-confront the reality that he will never be politically powerful or rich, despite the fact that his father is a powerful earl. Simply because of his illegitimate status, he is socially inferior to his elder brother. Indeed, that is what Edmund focuses on when he gives his initial speech detailing his plans.


Symptoms of inferiority complexes fall into one of two categories: withdrawal tactics and aggressive tactics.  Edmund does not exhibit many withdrawn tendencies, but does show many of the more violent tactics of criticizing others and seeking for attention. In the absence of truly being able to find fault and criticize his brother, Edmund is framing him, making up things to criticize him for. In successfully doing so, he will not only gain what he sees to be his rightful inheritance, but also the love and appreciation of his father.

Catch-up 3: Blog Assessment

Learning Outcomes


Yeah, I think that I've increased my Shakespeare literacy with this class. My major experience with Shakespeare before was rather limited--I hadn't even seen a real Shakespeare play. But since then, I've read four new plays and seen three performances. I've been examining his works for critical elements and themes, and feel like I can confidently discuss his plays.

I definitely feel like, as the semester has progressed, I've been posting more and more in depth analysis of Shakespeare's plays, making comparisons to mythological and, at times, modern parallels. I'm not super-crazy outgoing in our large class discussions, but in out smaller groups, I'm definitely talking.

How have I been engaging Shakespeare creatively? I think that a lot of my blog posts can answer that question. I try to find fun and interesting pictures to enhance my blog and make it more entertaining. Even though I didn't create the pictures in almost all cases, I think I used some of them very creatively. And I've always been able to relate what we are learning back to something that I enjoy.

I think that I may be lacking in the sharing department. I haven't been super consistent with my blogging and lately I've been blogging very late. I'm also not super fantastic at finding the time to post on the blogs of others. However, I do find Shakespeare seeping into my everyday life, and that I've started making references to it to my friends and posting lines that I particularly enjoy on facebook, which opens up the avenue of explanation and elaboration to the people that I talk to.

Self-Directed Learning


Hahaha, measuring learning, something psychologists have been trying to do for centuries.

Well, I definitely feel like the way this particular class is set up, we have to become self-directed learners and be responsible for our own learning. We are given nothing really other than a schedule and a day to have the play read by, but we are not told how to interpret it or think about it. The blogging itself requires that we delve deeper into the text and learn for ourselves what we think a particular line is supposed to mean or how we might envision it. I think that comparing blog posts is a logical way to try and measure our learning in this class, and, if you compare my more recent blog posts with my older posts, you'll find a significant change in thought quality.

Collaborative and Social Learning


I think that Cassie has done a really good job of posting consistently and commenting on other people's blogs. She's certainly the person that has commented most on my blog. Keelan has also made a few comments that has helped forward the point of my post. Brittni doesn't comment much, but she is rather animated in our small group discussions and always has something to say.

I also really like the small group format when we come to class. I don't feel like we interact a lot through our blogs, but I love just having a group to start immediately discussing Shakespeare when I come to class. It's rather fantastic.

Like I said earlier in this post, I reference Shakespeare in social situations, which is way fun because people either ask me to explain it, or just think I'm a genius for knowing random Shakespeare quotes.

Looking Ahead


So I'm actually way excited to get this whole final project thing going. What it seems like so far is that I'll pull some people who want to participate in a production of Shakespeare in non-acting roles. I have two other people from outside of class that are working with me towards the performance of The Complete Works of William Shakespeare Abridged. If you haven't seen it, it's hilarious. But it would be fantastic to get some people from class involved so that the three of us could focus on learning our lines and getting our blocking down. We were thinking of having a prop master, a costume designer, and a general techie/lighting person to help out the other two and be in control of lighting when we do the final show. It's rather exciting :P

Catch-up 2

So I shared Much Ado About Nothing with two different people. The first person I taught was a friend of mine named Brandon, who lives in my apartment complex. The second was my little thirteen-year-old brother, Cody.


As you can imagine, simply the age differences between these two called for some serious differences in teaching. I had to really tone down the sexual connotations for Cody but could play them up for Brandon. I found it rather difficult to even share one of the major themes (cuckolds and disloyalty) with Cody, simply because he was so young and I didn't want to have to teach him what a cuckold is. Yet Brandon was easier to teach in this respect. Brandon is older than I am, and I didn't need to worry about giving him a talk about birds and bees so he could understand.

However, teaching Cody about the masks was a delight. Cody became enchanted by some of the masks that the characters wore at the masquerade and was very interested in their deeper meanings. For Cody, it was early Halloween. Brandon was interested in the masks, but the themes of mistaken identity that they represented didn't appeal to him as much.


I definitely enjoyed teaching Cody more, even though it was more difficult and I had to leave out some key parts of the story in order to shelter him.

Catch-up 1

Hey guys, sorry I've been so out of it for awhile, I've been sick in the midst of five midterms and just haven't had a lot of extra time. So, to begin catching up, I will begin by analyzing the performance of The Tempest that we went to, as well as the Grassroots Shakespeare company production of Macbeth. 

So Friday night, my roommate and I double-dated to Macbeth, which was at an outdoor theater built to look like a castle. We all walked together from campus, which made the date almost into more of an adventure, filled with shortcuts and wrong-turns. But eventually, we came to a tree-infested hill with small lights guiding our way. As we trudged up the paved slope, it felt almost as if we were entering some sort of fairy-tale world. We walked into the castle and took our place in front of the stage as groundlings. I had never been in an outdoor performance of a Shakespeare play, let alone stand in the theatrical splash zone in front of the stage, so I wasn't quite sure what to expect. The actors moved all through the crowd, talked to us as if we were part of the play, even used us as props at some points. Yet even though the over-all mood of the play was very light-hearted and amusing, they still managed to keep the more serious parts emotionally gripping. It was really a fantastic date.

Then the next day, we all saw The Tempest. Unfortunately, my car did not arrive in time to see the big shipwreck in the very beginning, which I heard was spectacular. But that was not my only complaint. One thing that I thought was somewhat bizarre was Ariel's clashing costuming. Sure, she looked really cool and I loved her costume by itself, but in the context of the actual play, I'm not sure what they were trying to accomplish. Her metallic colors and suspenders almost made her look steampunky, which I am all for, but didn't have much place in with the rest of the play. It simply didn't convey the nimble spirit of the air feeling.

There were certain other elements that seemed to not quite belong as well. Like the bicycle up in the right corner that spun when Prospero was showing off his magic to his daughter and son-in-law. In fact, that whole scene was rather disappointing to me. I was rather excited for the goddesses to come out and perform their marriage ritual, but they completely skipped over it and replaced it with some random Prospero magic.

Speaking of Prospero magic, I was quite pleased with how they illustrated Prospero's power. Because there are such few stage directions actually in the play, it was hard to envision the moments when Prospero's power would become apparent other than the shipwreck scene and the harpy scene. Even in moments when Prospero wasn't making spectacular use of his power, they would throw in little movements and gestures that would make it difficult to forget just the kind of magic Prospero could control.

To sum up, both performances were very cool. I really quite enjoyed them both and look forward to my next Shakespeare play!

Oops

Hey guys, so I actually meant to post this on time on Monday, but I guess I didn't actually publish it. I found it today among my drafts after I realized that it hadn't been posted. So without further ado, Mondays post.

So reading through The Tempest, I decided to take our professor's advice and take special note of who is in power and whether or not Prospero has control of the situation. Power is a fairly consistent theme throughout the play thus far, manifesting itself in just about every character.

One particular scene illustrating the balance of power is act II scene I after the party falls asleep, leaving Antonio and Sebastian to converse by themselves. The two agree to kill Alonso and Gonzago, the first so that they may both increase their political power, the second because they dislike him and believe that they have the power to get away with it. However, despite how confident they are in their power, Prospero, through Ariel, is the one really controlling the situation. Ariel causes Gonzalo to awaken, therefore foiling the plot of the two power-hungry jerk-wads.

Ariel herself is an enigma and contradiction of power. Without Ariel, Prospero would essentially be powerless, since everything he does is through his command of Ariel. Ironically, Ariel is arguably the most naturally powerful person in the play, yet is tethered down to Prospero's whim and decree, completely powerless for all of Ariel's magic. And yet, despite Ariel being the source of Prospero's power, he bullies her into submission to do his will. At the first sign of resistance from Ariel, Prospero reminds him/her of the debt owed to Prospero, claiming that he/she is ungrateful and has forgotten the pain and torment of Sycorax's spells. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And Prospero is certainly going through a power trip. Which brings us to Prospero's other slave, Caliban.

Despite his strength and physical superiority to Prospero, the misshapen native grudgingly serves Prospero simply because to do so is less painful than outright defiance. Prospero uses his magic to torment Caliban when he doesn't yield to Prospero's commands. Starting to see the corruption yet?

Another major scene that contributes to the overall theme of power is act III scene II where Caliban defects to serve a drunkard that offers him wine. It is fairly obvious that Stephano, the man that Caliban has chosen to serve, is below Prospero in station and power, yet Caliban chooses him over Prospero because he offers reward instead of punishment. This furthers out understanding of the relationship between Prospero and Calban. From my point of view, Caliban gains absolutely nothing from serving Prospero besides relief from punishment.

Masks and mistaken identities

Bonus points if you can guess the identity of
this beautifully mysterious woman!

So the themes of masks and mistaken identities come up a LOT in Shakespeare's work, but in Much Ado About Nothing, the plot hinges upon it. The main conflict of the play is when Margret is mistaken for Hero when Borachio seduces Margret. Claudio then assumes that his beloved Hero is impure and rejects her at the altar and Hero's family spreads the rumor that Hero died of shame. Later the mixup is revealed and Claudio swears to marry "Hero's cousin" who arrives at the wedding masked. When Hero's mask is removed, there is much rejoicing and they all dance in celebration.

But that isn't the only time we see people hiding behind masks. In the beginning of the play, we have a masquerade, during which Beatrice and Benedick meet, Benedick bemasked and hiding his identity while Beatrice expresses her disdain for Benedick, seemingly to a random stranger.

I was rather amused by the choice of masks in the Kenneth Branagh film. Benedick has kind of a creepy, clownish mask that rather fit his sense of humor and his ability to make amusement out of almost anything. It's rather fitting.

Claudio's mask also rather intrigued me. It's quite cherubic in appearance, characterizing him as the young, naive, innocent babe. This could suggest that he truly was innocent in Hero's disgrace and that he was not truly at fault. It also suggests purity and youthfulness, making Claudio the archetypal young lover. The cherubic baby face could also be a type of Cupid, which brings up completely different characterizations and could foreshadow the trickery involved with getting Benedick and Beatrice together.

Don Pedro, the prince, wears a lion's head, which symbolizes his power and royalty. For some reason, Don Pedro, Spanish royalty, is played by Denzel Washington, which plays off of the lion mask in a totally weirder way, seeing as the actor is African-American.

One thing, however, that somewhat disappointed me was the final scene where Claudio marries "Hero's cousin." When I read the play, I expected Hero to be wearing a full on mask, not just a bridal veil over her face. So what I think I would like to do is design and make a wedding mask for Hero as my final project, since I was so unsatisfied with Kenneth Branagh's portrayal.




Be on the lookout for updates on how the mask is going, a few friends and I are making Halloween masks tomorrow, so, while I'm at it, I'll make the base for my Hero mask. I'll probably post pictures of how it's going on Monday! If any of you want to try your hand at mask making, I'll be following the directions on this website and I'll let you all know how well this stuff works.

Caliban, the corrupted cannibal

So yeah, sorry I'm late again guys, things have been busy lately but I'm going to try really hard to be on time on Friday.

I don't know about you, but I'm WAY excited for The Tempest. It's so ridiculously archetypal, much like The Winter's Tale, that it's difficult not to connect it to other things. For example,

Caliban

is like

Gollum

and

Grendel

because each character illustrates the corruption of dark magic upon the natural world. Grendel, much like Caliban, was born of a dark witch, deformed and twisted by the magic within her, more like a tumor than a man. Gollum was born whole, but, through exposure to dark magic and evil after a period of years, he too became deformed and grotesque--much like getting cancer after being exposed to too much nuclear waste. Then there's Caliban, the spawn of a hag and Satan himself, born with inhuman form and evil so deep within him that, despite the efforts of Prospero the civilizer, he can only take what he is given and twist it into something crude, like when he was taught to speak only that he would curse Prospero for keeping Caliban away from Miranda.

                                               

That said, we can compare Prospero with Beowulf, the tamer and purger of corruption, the civilizer. Much like Beowulf, Prospero comes to a place beseiged with corruption and danger and immediately makes it safe for the inhabitants, namely his little girl, Miranda. He seeks to purify the corruption, to teach it manners and rhetoric, and subdues it to create a safe place. Good thing for Prospero that Caliban's mother is already dead, otherwise he might find himself creating new corruption.

Ash and Misty: another unlikely couple

That's right peeps, I'm taking you back to the 90s! Remember that show we all watched in elementary school? Remember how we would trade the cards like children swapping gushers for teddy grahams. Yeah, those were the days... And of course, the favorite pairing was Ash and Misty. The two were always bickering and arguing, Misty harping on Ash for trashing her bike, Ash getting on Misty's case for being so obnoxious. Yet we all knew they would get together, despite their professed dislike for each other. Deep within their bickering rivalry, they really care for each other, perhaps as more than just friends. Unfortunately, the video I wanted to show you has had its embedding disabled, but if you click on the link, you'll see that it contains the first pokemon battle between Ash and Misty, filled with banter and rivalry. Can't you just feel the romantic tension building?

Similar to their relationship is the romance between Beatrice and Benedick. The first we see of their relationship is their arguing and bickering, their rhetorical rivalry. But as time goes on, we see their feelings for each other blossom into love. At first they keep it hidden, too stubborn and unwilling to share their intimate feelings for each other, but eventually, they confess their affections and end up getting married. 

I just wish we had had such closure with Ash and Misty. Maybe not as far as them getting married, but perhaps some sort of acknowledgement of the romance building between them.

Holofernes: bumbling scholar or ruthless general?

I apologize for how long it took me to finally post something this week, it's been pretty busy and I just haven't seemed to have the time. Without further ado, the post that should have been on Monday!

So when I first saw the name Holofernes in Love's Labour's Lost, the first image I got was the picture to the left: Judith Beheading Holofernes by Gentileschi. This play has so much girl power in it, it wouldn't be terribly surprising if Shakespeare was making an allusion to the book of Judith.

You can imagine the meeting between Judith and
Holofernes looking something like this.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Biblical Apocrypha, Holofernes, one of Nebuchadnezzar's more stupid generals, was warned not to attack the Hebrew people, but, like all archetypal idiots, he simply told the poor guy to buzz off. Holofernes laid siege to the Hebrew city and cut off the water supply, which sucked for all the dehydrated people trapped within the gates, who nearly surrendered before a bravely promiscuous woman named Judith stepped forward and volunteered her feminine assets to save the city. So when Judith and Holofernes were alone in his tent, he fell asleep, and Judith, seeing her opportunity, totally chopped his head off with his own sword! Afterwards, she stuffed his head into a sack and waltzed right out of the camp with it. In the morning, the Hebrews marched out of their city, bearing Holofernes' head like a banner, so completely demoralizing Holofernes' army that they are easily defeated.

However, this picture is much more similar to the Holofernes that Shakespeare was referencing. Many scholars believe that Shakespeare was taking Rabelais' character Holofernes, the absurd parody of medieval scholars, and how ineffective they were at teaching. Rabelais' character is a "Sophist in Latin Letters" and focuses primarily on memorization instead of analysis. Reblais illustrates just how impotent he is as a teacher to the the main character of the narrative, completely unable to teach his young pupil anything. Fairly quickly, the main character's father finds a new, much more intelligent scholar to tutor his son, simply because Holofernes has no true merit in his studies. It isn't difficult to see the connection with Shakespeare's Holofernes, the equally impotent scholar, quoting his Latin phrases. More details on Reblais' work here.



However, this doesn't mean we can't draw parallels with Judith's arch-enemy. Holofernes, with his criticisms and tiring pedantry can be seen almost attacking wit and language, imposing his harsh rules on them and scoffing at anyone who isn't so scholarly as to make you fall asleep. However, the ever clever women of the play are putting the wit back in witticisms, launching a counterattack against the pompous air the men put on. Unfortunately, there is no gory beheading at the end.

Much Ado About Nothing

When I first made my blog, I posted a link to it on facebook so some of my friends could follow it. I don't think anyone really has, but my aunt commented on my first post, saying that I should read Much Ado About Nothing. Then lo and behold, it was the play I was assigned! It was meant to be...

I'm rather excited to read this play for multiple reasons, the first being the fact that it's a comedy. I am very fond of Shakespeare's comedies and I've heard really good things about this one. I'm also rather excited to see how some of the major themes play out. One such theme is deception and masks. Masks are used throughout the play to hide the identities of some key characters. Although the audience knows the face behind the mask, not all the other characters do, which makes for some very comedic and plot-essential moments. As you can tell by my picture, I rather like masks and masquerades. If you've never seen The Phantom of the Opera, they're pretty awesome and are fairly archetypal as far as identity concealment goes. So this is a theme I'll probably be blogging about a lot.

I'm also rather excited to see how Beatrice and Benedick interact. They are the fairly archetypal unlikely lovers kind of pair, which should make for some fun comparisons. I'm also intrigues by Hero's name and may blog about Shakespeare's use of it to characterize her. I may also compare her with Hiro from Heroes if I see enough of a connection.

There's a lot of films for this play out and I plan to watch more than one of them. I'm at the very least going to watch the Emma Thompson and Kenneth Branagh version and the BBC version. What I would really like to see is Berlioz's opera Beatrice et Benedict. And maybe if I have the time, I'll even read the play in the "original" Klingon!

Hercules and Samson: Don Adriano de Armado as a tragic lover

Today's post is brought to you by Love's Labour's Lost and the tragic lover archetype. When we first meet our humorous Armado and Moth (no relation to the insect), we learn that Armado is in love with a woman quite below his social class and he is immediately compared to both a biblical and mythological tragic lover.

Look at the stars. The great tragic lovers of the past look down on us.  So although things might suck, stick it out, if you hang in long enough, you might get your own constellation.

This immediately sets the poor guy up to eventually be either incorporated into religion or catasterized. Or possibly both. But either way, things are probably not going to turn out well for him in a way that the audience will somehow find rather amusing.

The first character Armado is compared to is Hercules, the strong, indestructible God. Many people know the story of Hercules from the Disney version, but in the original Greek myth (much more likely to be the version Shakespeare aludes to), Hercules goes crazy and murders his wife. Twice. It isn't until he has obtained God-status through hardship and trials that he is given a goddess for his third wife, an immortal, and therefore impossible for him to kill. Unfortunately for Armado, I doubt that he's going to obtain God-status by the end of the play.

The second tragic lover Armado is compared to is Samson, blessed with infatigable strength as long as his hair remained unshorn. Unfortunately, Samson put his faith in the wrong woman who cut his hair while he was sleeping and turned him over to his enemies. He momentarily regained his strength after repenting for breaking God's commandment and marrying outside the covenant and died destroying the house of his captors.

Then we come to Armado himself. He is obviously a trained swordsman of great skill and has great strength, if not in his arm, in his blade. His mistake is falling in love with a woman during a period of time when consorting with women is forbidden. It can only be assumed that at some point his love for Jaquenetta is punished by fate, Ferdinand, or Jaquenetta herself. And, knowing Shakespeare's comedies, it'll be in some terribly amusing way that turns out to be okay in the end. But hey, if that doesn't work out, there's always the stars. 

I'm a psych major, it had to happen

Today's blog post is brought to you by Hamlet and the complex Oedipal. That's right everyone, we're examining Hamlet's attraction (or lack thereof) to his mother.

So let's start by assuming that Hamlet does have an Oedipal complex that has been stewing in the back of his mind since he was a child. It would certainly explain his anger towards both his mother and Claudius. His father's death was his first opportunity to get closer to his mother and the chance was ripped away from him by his uncle, a man that, assuming Hamlet does have an Oedipal complex, is living out Hamlet's dream. There's a lot of jealousy going on here. His anger towards his mother is more than just anger for her betrayal of his father, but is because by choosing Claudius, she rejected Hamlet. So almost in order to get back at his mother, he's flaunting Ophelia in his mother's face. When no one else is around, he doesn't treat her well at all, essentially calling her a whore when no one's looking. But when his mother is around, he says that Ophelia is more attractive than his mother and lies at her feet instead of sitting by his mother. Then in a lot of ways, Ophelia becomes his outlet for his feelings towards Gertrude. His accusations of Ophelia being unfaithful are really Hamlet chastising his mother. If we follow the logical conclusion to this theory, it's easy to say that Hamlet's sexual desires for Ophelia can also be applied to Gertrude.

Then there's the scene in Gertrude's bedroom where Hamlet chastises her, which is really only overtly creepy if you watch the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet.

(Note: the first kiss in the video is with Ophelia, the rest is footage of Hamlet and Gertrude.)

Nevertheless, Hamlet's major criticism of his mother is her choice in bedfellows and seems to be harping on her for taking a new husband that was not as attractive as the first, more than he is actually upset about her betraying his father. He focuses on her poor choice, almost as if to say that he himself would have made a better husband.

I think a problem we have in identifying Hamlet's Oedipal complex is how revolted we are by the idea. Yeah, incest is pretty gross, but nevertheless, it could very well be one of Hamlet's subconscious drives pushing him towards insanity. It certainly would explain some of his behaviors. For a more detailed and scholarly exploration of the subject, read Ernest Jones' paper titled Hamlet and Oedipus.

Shakespearefest performance: Seasonal dichotomy

One thing that I really enjoyed about the performance of The Winter's Tale we saw was the seasonal dichotomy represented in the set. The first half of the play used panels that looked like frost-covered windows that gave the impression of being inside on a chilly day. That, coupled with the conservative, dull, colorless attire of the characters--multiple layered suits with jackets that made me feel like I was watching an old black and white film--gave the impression of both physical and emotional coldness. 

Once we departed from drab Sicilia to rustic Bohemia, the panels lifted to reveal an onstage forest that was previously hidden behind the opaque glass windows, starkly contrasting the sterility that the panels imposed. Then, once we began the second half of the play, the forest was covered with flowers hanging from the ceiling and green grass was laid down on the stage to accentuate the difference. Compared to the first half with space limited by panels which kept the back half of the stage out of view, everything was so open and free. The costumes, unlike at the beginning of the play, were very light, playful, and colorful, and many of the characters were in short-sleeves. 

Then when we returned to Bohemia, everything became dark and drab again, all in muted, winter colors except for Perdita and Hermione, who are in lovely light colors throughout the play. Then the group ended the play with the powerful image of Leontes, standing in front of the forest, between two panels, with snow falling behind him. That was my favorite part of the whole play simply because of the way that it really played off of the dichotomy of the seasons, illustrating one of the most overt themes in the whole play.

The Pygmalion myth--Hermione as the ideal woman

Possibly my favorite Greek myth was that of Pygmalion, the sculptor. Due to a previous mythological adventure, all the women in Pygmalion's hometown were turned into promiscuous sex fiends. Yet, seemingly against all male instinct, Pygmalion felt only contempt for the sluts by which he found himself surrounded. So in order to live out his (ironically) virtuous fantasies, he sculpted a statue of the most beautiful woman he could devise. He made her perfect in every way and soon found himself falling into a strange obsession with his creation. He would dress her every morning, speak to her as if she could hear, sleep with her in his bed, even go so far as to make out with his statue and imagined that she would kiss him back. Well, one day he prayed to Aphrodite to give his statue life, and, as he laid her into bed, the cold, dead ivory of her flesh began to turn warm and soft. She began to breathe and live. So Pygmalion and his creation--later named Galatea--ended up getting married and having an enjoyable life together. To Pygmallion, Galatea is perfect, faithful and true to her love.

At the end of The Winter's Tale, when the Hermione "statue" returns to life, Shakespeare is characterizing his heroine through the use of classical mythology. The statue of her is so life-like, that Leontes wants to kiss it, but it isn't until magic is pronounced over it that Hermione begins to move and speak. 

Through his use of mythology, Shakespeare further characterizes Hermione as the ideal woman that we hear of so often. She is not only pure and faithful to Leontes, but is also exactly what Leontes has desired for so many years, surrounded by so many women that fall short of his desires and expectations. Despite her perceived passing, he can think only of her until Paulina animates her statue.

Pratchett's Perdita

So for today's blog post, I decided I would do another name comparison. This week's post is brought to you by the name Perdita and the author Terry Pratchett, British satirist. In his book, Maskerade, he adopts a similar plot to The Phantom of the Opera while expressing his disgust for Christine, the super girly opera star who is only really good for teenage girls to vicariously live out their dreams through.

Sound familiar?

But instead of the beautiful and ditzy Christine becoming the local voice talent, a country girl by the name of Agnes Nitt (who, through some strange manifestation of magical ability, can sing in thirds with herself) sings all the major arias over Christine, essentially becoming Christine's voice actress. Unfortunately for Agnes, she is just not star material (meaning she just isn't pretty enough). Yet throughout the novel, Agnes fancies herself a beautiful gothic princess, the kind of girl that goes around wearing lacy gloves and fancy corsets. She adopts a whole different alter-ego for herself that she calls Perdita X Dream, the kind of name you'll only find in bad romance novels. 

It is only after adopting the new persona of Perdita that she goes to join the opera house and become her new self. Pratchett's utilization of the name, however, suggests that Agnes is only really fooling herself and doesn't truly belong in the big city. She is a stranger to fame and show-business, lost from her homeland, much like Perdita is a stranger to Bohemia, lost from Sicily. It isn't until Agnes is brought back home and again becomes Agnes that she finds where she belongs. She may not like it there, but nevertheless, it is her home.

Hermione, meet Hermione

You guessed it, I'm making the obvious comparison: Hermione as Hermione, Ron as Leontes, and Harry as Polixenes. But unlike Shakespeare, J.K. Rowling gives us the opportunity to see the friendship grow from the very beginning in childhood. The three meet when they are only eleven and grow up together, Ron becoming Harry's loyal sidekick and Hermione becoming Ron's admirer and object of affection.

The three become best friends and eventually end up spending every waking moment together on their quest to destroy Voldemort's source of power: the horcruxes. Although by this point it is obvious to everyone reading that Ron and Hermione like each other, the two still haven't managed to actually come out and become an item, but Hermione's obvious connection and friendship with Harry drives Ron to betray the two and leave the group. Hermione is deeply hurt by his assumptions and implied accusations, much like Shakespeare's Hermione, and, despite Hermione's and Harry's reassurances, Ron will not be convinced.. Leontes is jealous over Hermione, Ron is jealous over Hermione, beginning to see the connections yet?

This is what Leontes sees.

This is what Ron sees. Poor, poor Ron.

Then when Ron returns and tries to destroy the locket horcrux, he is tortured with the image of Harry and Hermione kissing passionately--a sight both disturbing and unnatural--coupled with the suggestion that he kill Harry to regain Hermione's affections. For a moment, Ron hesitates and we come to the moment of truth where the friendship between the two heroes is tested. In the end, Ron turns his sights back onto the horcrux and destroys the freaky thing before it can get into the realm of awful fanfiction pairings.

Then after all the carnage, death, and destruction is over (see, even more parallels with The Winter's Tale!), we encounter a time gap that takes us 19 years into the future, a number oddly similar to the number 16. We rejoin our heroes after they have all grown up and are now sending their children off to Hogwarts to undergo their own wizard training. Ron and Hermione are sending off their daughter, Harry and his wife (Ron's sister) are sending off their son, who, at the sight of Ron and Hermione's daughter gets nervous and stops to tie his shoe. It's rather adorable actually, and although the two children don't end up married before the end of the movie/book, I'm sure that one day they will both enjoy cute romantic relations together.

J.K. Rowling, makes a fantastic utilization of Hermione's name, drawing upon the archetypal story of The Winter's Tale to deepen and characterize both Ron's jealousy and Hermione's devotion. Despite Ron's fears and doubts, Hermione was never really interested in Harry romantically and truly only has eyes for Ron.

Parallels in Mythology

Let me tell you a sad, bloody story of the kind only the Greeks could write. You probably all know the story of the Trojan war and how Agamemnon sailed away to help his brother, Menelaus, retrieve his wife from Paris. What the movie doesn't tell you, is that in order to get there, Agamemnon had to sacrifice his daughter, Iphigenia, to Artemis in recompense for slaying one of her sacred animals. Well, as you can imagine, Agamemnon's wife, Clytemnestra, wasn't too happy about this. So while Agamemnon was off to war, Clytemnestra seduced Agamemnon's cousin, Aegisthus, and convinced Aegisthus to kill Agamemnon after Agamemnon's return from Troy. Agamemnon returns home with a prophetess that he has taken to be his concubine and goes up into his palace with her. Shortly after, Aegisthus murders them both. Orestes, Agamemnon's son, returns home after his father's murder, and, with his sister's encouragement, murders his adulterous mother and Aegisthus. But because he killed his own flesh and blood, the furies chase him all over Greece and drive him mad until he finds sanctuary in Athena's temple. He ends up having a happy ending, being pardoned by the newly established legal system. The myth explains how the Greek legal system was set up by the goddess Athena. 

Reading Hamlet again after reading the Oresteia made me realize just how similar these two stories are. Perhaps Shakespeare was setting up his own version of the Oresteia, which would explain why so many things are left ambiguous. Shakespeare wouldn't need to go into so much detail because he was simply retelling an old story, similar to how the play Wicked includes next to no knowledge on Dorothy, the main character of the Wizard of Oz, the story that Wicked was based off of. Because the audience is assumed to already know the old story, there are a lot of details that don't need to be added. I am not implying that all of Shakespeare's audience would know the Oresteia, but certainly some of the wealthier, more educated patrons did. Even if you don't know the original story, you don't feel as if you were missing anything, but your understanding of Hamlet is deepened by the knowledge. 

Orestes was called upon to avenge his father because the gods themselves demanded retribution. In Greek culture, if your close blood relative was murdered, you were bound to take revenge or be punished in the afterlife. Likewise, Hamlet is plagued by unrest and anger until he avenges his father. His father's ghost cries out to him to seek vengeance and he feels obligated to comply. 

Gertrude may have also played a greater role in the murder of the old king, possibly asking Claudius to kill for her. Gertrude as Clytemnestra is somewhat believable through her relationship with Hamlet; Clytemnestra knows that Orestes wants to kill her for his father's sake, yet she will not lay a hand on her child, merely pointing out that she carried, nursed, and raised him. And telling him that the furies would come for him if he hurt her. But over all, she stays in her motherly role and looks upon Orestes as her son and wishes him to be happy and accepting of his new step-dad. 

Claudius is certainly a parallel to Aegisthus, the murderer, the bad guy. But instead of pointing him out, saying that he is truly the villain, Shakespeare delves into his conscience and explores his mind, giving him positive qualities so that the audience doesn't have complete hatred for him. 

It isn't hard to find a trait connecting Ophelia and Electra; Ophelia could easily be said to have an Electra complex, devoted to her father's wishes. 

Although it may not be a perfect match, there certainly are some interesting similarities.

3rd Dimensional

Although the other characters in Hamlet are less important to the story, Shakespeare still fleshes them out into real people. There is a huge focus on Hamlet throughout the play, but that is to be expected and in no way means that the other characters are any less developed than he is.

Let's start with Ophelia. Not many people really like her; the most of what you see is her submission to her father's will and her longing for Hamlet. But the very fact that she goes crazy and kills herself illustrates how three-dimensional she is. Shakespeare is an expert in human psychology, anchoring Ophelia to reality with her caring father against the raging tempest of Hamlet's mixed messages and insults. But once her anchor has lost his grip and been swept away in the wake of the storm, there is nothing tying Ophelia down. Consumed by both grief and her mixed feelings for Hamlet, she loses it. But really, Ophelia is constantly tempering her inner desires with morality and social customs; she is a prime example of Freud's theory of mind, her id demanding that she satisfy her drive to love Hamlet in conflict with her virtuous superego fueled by her father and brother's warnings to keep her chastity. On the surface, she is frail and weak, letting her father make her decisions for her, but underneath she is the model of inner turmoil.

Next, Polonius. In a lot of ways, Polonius is the comic relief of the play, the bumbling fool. Yet as much as Hamlet would like to simply file him under "idiot" and pay him no more mind, he can be considered fairly deep, possibly even as the wise man in the play. If nothing else, he certainly has an understanding of human behavior, even if he doesn't have all the answers. We see him in the first scene of act two, explaining to his servant how to find news of his son. He counsels to, instead of straight out asking whether Laertes is misbehaving, to speak as if he knows he is misbehaving. Laertes' friends would lie, deny his immorality if questioned directly. However, if the fault is stated as a fact, they will only deny it if it is not true. We also know that Polonius attended a university and played the part of Julius Caesar when he was younger, indicating intelligence and theatrical knowledge. It is more than possible that Polonius behaves like a bumbling old man because that is how he wishes to be perceived.

Then there's Claudius, possibly the easiest character to find depth in. He is, above all, the villain, the antagonist, the man for Hamlet to pit himself against. Yet we don't even quite know why he killed his brother. The obvious answer is for the power. But it is more than possible that Claudius' motivation for murder sprung from his desire for Gertrude. When old king Hamelt tells Hamlet Jr. what really happened, he mentions Gertrude's infidelity before finally telling Hamlet that Claudius was the one that murdered him. Assuming he is going chronologically, this would suggest that Claudius and Gertrude were sleeping together before the old king was even dead. It would certainly explain their hasty marriage. Then in act III scene III, we see him kneeling in penitence, willing himself to beg for forgiveness, yet he himself admits that he does not truly feel remorse but wishes to. He knows that what he did was wrong, but is enjoying the position that the murder put him in.

I could continue on, but this post is already long. It's just so easy to oversimplify the other characters and take them for granted, but they each have their own delicately balanced, complicated psyches; Hamlet isn't the only one. Gertrude certainly has more than one layer to her, and even Rosencrantz and Guildenstern can be analyzed to find depth. None of the characters in Hamlet are flat.

First post

My only experiences with Shakespeare thus far consist of what I learned about him in school. It started in seventh grade when we read A Midsummer Nights's Dream, which I absolutely adored. At the time, I was going through the awkward phase of puberty, and it was more than easy to relate to Helena and her desire to be desired. The relatability of Shakespeare's characters coupled with amusement and whimsy captured my literary affections.

It wasn't until freshman year of high school that I read another play: Romeo and Juliet. I did not enjoy it as much as some other plays, but the passion between the two lovers still appealed very much to my pre-teen nature. But more than romeo and Juliet themselves, I adored Mercutio and the amusement he brought to the play.

Then Sophomore year, we read two plays. The first was the dark, foreboding story of Macbeth, filled with guilt, dread, and suspense. Eagerly, I flipped through the pages, exploring and analyzing Lady Macbeth's neurosis that began to consume her. Her obsessive-compulsive behavior intrigued me as she continued to wash her blood-stained hands. The other play we read was my favorite, The Taming of the Shrew, filled with it's hilarious innuendos and the ever-amusing Petruchio on his quest to "kill a wife with kindness." Kate, a once blunt recluse, was made to learn, not absolute obedience, but the illusion of obedience while holding all the true power. Instead of sacrificing her will to Petruchio, she learned to stroke his ego and let him believe that he had tamed her.

Unfortunately, we did not read any Shakespeare in my Junior year, but Senior year we tackled the complexity of Hamlet. It was so easy to wonder at Hamlet's sanity, his affections to Ophelia, and his strange behavior to his mother. Had Hamlet been sane? Did he die sane? Did he truly love Ophelia, or is it a strange, sad parody of love? Perhaps Ophelia never truly appealed to him, but simply served as an outlet for his desires for his mother. Hamlet's depressive and confusing psyche continues to elude and confound me, but I am determined to find the truth.

I really enjoy reading Shakespeare and exploring the depths of his characters. I can't wait to get further into the class!