My Self-Evaluation: Where Did the Semester Go?

Here is the culmination of my blog: what it is at the end of the semester. I'll try not to tear up as I write this...

• Posts
• Quantity: 33 blogs total. 8 are related to the research focus.
• Content: I would argue that I fulfilled the variety requirement. Some of my posts, such as my first post, were more casual in nature. While other posts definitely took on a tone of formality, for instance, my post about Othello. I also use a fair amount of pictures and video, like in my most recent post about the puppet show. I have evaluated movie clips and such in earlier blogs, like the one about the witches from Macbeth, but I tend not to comment on my pictures as much.
• Format: I used jump breaks a lot in my later posts. Most of posts tended not to need it, since they aren't very long. I tagged my posts with subjects, but not with the learning outcomes. There were only a few titles that really don't expose what the post is about. One good title that I felt that I used was Othello as a Case Study.
• Research
• Thematic Focus: I clearly have a focus, indicated from my original hub post. I also have posts that expand on the theme. My site design is not overtly dedicated to the subject of love, but the background is red, which is the color of aggression (and love).
• Thesis & Cohesion: My original hub post post does not really have a thesis, but more of a question. It is not until my later hub post that I link coherently and actually state my thesis.
• Sources: I definitely have my own sources page, which links to the blog posts and to the sources.However, my earlier posts don't really link to the sources page, since it was created after those posts. 

The Finished Product: Our Puppet Show!

Here is the video for our puppet show. Enjoy!

(If you want more information about the formative process for this show, visit Janelle's blog.)

Peer Evaluation: The End of the End

A screenshot of Jessica's blog.

 So I was assigned to evaluate Jessica Vavrinec's blog. Her main focus has been on young adults and gearing Shakespeare towards them.

• Posts
• Quantity: It looks to me like she has done enough posts to get a good idea of what she has done. I think she did about 9 different posts relating to her main focus, and 31 in all.
• Content: She has a lot of good variety in her posts, with several book reviews, several more expository-type blogs, a comparison between a modern play (Wicked) and Shakespeare (Midsummer Night's Dream),  and textual analyses of Shakespeare. She also did a video analysis of something found on Youtube.
• Format: Jessica is very good about tagging all of her blogs with the learning outcomes, as well as the subject. She's been pretty consistent with this since the beginning. She used the jump break a few times, but there were a few instances where she might have used the break. All of her titles were very specific, with the snappy, attention-grabbing part, as well as the more explanatory part.
• Research
• Thematic Focus: The theme is definitely clear throughout the blog. Jessica had a focus very early on. I think her design is also meant to appeal to a younger crowd, which is probably part of her audience.
• Thesis & Cohesion: Her latest hub post satisfies all the requirements of a good hub post. She hyperlinks, her thesis is clear and makes an argument, and she's well organized. 
• Sources: There is a little less cohesion in this portion of the blog. Jessica does have a sources page, but her hub post doesn't mention it, and some of her earlier posts also do not link to it. However, her sources page does link appropriately. She also has a blog post about scholarly sources.
• Personal & Social
• Author identity: I think Jessica did a really good job of this part. She has an obvious About Me widget on her blog, with a picture. I also have really been able to get a sense of her personality through her writing. It helps that I have talked to her in class, but her personality shines through in everything she writes.
• Documentation of Process: Jessica does a good job of this too. For example, in her post about young adult literature, she almost formats the post in a stream of conciousness style, where the reader gets carried along with her thought processes.
• Interactions: It looks like Jessica only responded to questions in the comments, from what I've seen. Most of the comments were not replied to, at least in the last month.
• Design
• Appropriate to Theme: I feel like the design seems to go more with Jessica's personality than her actual subject, but it's not something that detracts from the aesthetic of the blog.
• Side content: All the side content seems relevant and not at all distracting.

So there you go Jessica! Hopefully I did you justice. I think your blog is great!

The Final Path to Understanding Love in Shakespeare: Last Hub Post

This may be a bit of a rehash for those who read my blog recap from last week, but as I feel like I have some things I need to add, it will still be relevant. 

Thesis

Shakespeare, while drawing instances of love from his own life, tries to capture the essence of what true love is in each of his plays (and sonnets), while differentiating each situation with varying circumstances.

Support/Evidence

1. Othello As a Case Study- I talk about Othello's seeming change of emotion, and how that is actually not the case. Othello does not experience volatile love, because he still loves Desdemona when he kills her. His type of love can be considered "idolatrous" because his manifestation of love is the equivalent of worship.
2. Love is an Ever-fixed Mark- Here is a more textual interpretation of Sonnet 116. I wanted to contrast the poem with some of the ideas conveyed in Shakespeare's plays. I came to the conclusion that inconstancy in love is not really love at all. Therefore, in the case of Romeo and his previous love before Juliet, that was not really love because it changed. (This particular entry is still a work in progress.) I also looked at an analysis on shmoop.com and blogged about it.
3. Macbeth the Movie- Here I just wanted to see if I could see any semblance of love in a play that emphasizes the wickedness of one man and his wife. They are in a marital relationship, but it almost seems more like a business partnership. This only had a nominal connection with my focus. I will look at this play a little bit more when I attend the performance at U of U.
4. Shakespeare's Own Romance- This is where I compared Shakespeare's life with this theme of spontaneity in relationships. It turns out that he had a bit of a shot-gun wedding (or sword-point, whichever you prefer). I compared the rashness of his own marriage to that of Romeo and Juliet. Yet we are fairly certain that Shakespeare did in fact love his wife, as he dedicated poetry to her throughout his life.

Conclusions:

• There are connections between Shakespeare's life and the themes of love he used in his plays. 
• Constancy is still valued more by Shakespeare than volatility and spontaneity.
• Sometimes love is replaced by lust in his plays.
• Love takes different forms in Shakespeare's plays, just as it does in real life, but amplified.
• Love manifests itself differently depending on the person. For instance, some do not acknowledge love, others take an obsessive tact.

 So there it is. I will most likely update some of the research next week.

Shakespearean Sonnets: Discovering a New Resource!

As I was on the hunt for a good article or blog about Sonnet 116, I struggled to find something that related to the sonnet in a more focused way (rather than a sketchy misquote). While going through this process, as irritating as it is, I irritably gave up and, in a fit of desperation, I googled "Sonnet 116 analysis." To my surprise, I found this intriguing new website called schmoop.com.

Schmoop contains all kinds of interesting little factoids and information all divided up under subheadings. For instance, under Analysis (on the topic bar), they give several different subheadings, such as Symbols, Imagery and Wordplay,  Steaminess Rating, and Allusions.

Just glancing through, the style of writing is very much like someone who is speaking, and it's clearly geared towards a teenage group learning the elementals about Shakespeare. However, I felt like they made some good, worthwhile observations about the poem:

• "The marriage described in this poem is not a formal contract; rather, it is a "marriage of true minds," a phrase that suggests a deep understanding between two equals, rather than a mere legal bond."
•  "The poem’s central extended metaphor is the comparison of love to a star – specifically the North Star, which doesn’t ever change position in the night sky. This made it particularly important to sailors, who calculated the location of their ships based on the stars."
• They also talk about the conventions of Petrarchan sonnets (although they don't call them that) and the view of love in those poems. 
• In the theme section, the website writers list the themes and then give questions to spur the readers thinking about the poem. 

All in all, I feel like the website actually increased my understanding of Sonnet 116. They bring up the issue of true love in the poem which is basically the antithesis of my main focus. The main aspecto of true love is eternity, according to Shakespeare. I think what it comes down to is the way love can hit you in an instant, but it can also stay with you forever.

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg Forum at BYU

Zuckerberg, taken by BYU News

As Dr. Burton suggested we do, I went to the interview in the Marriott Center last Friday in order to listen to Mark Zuckerberg talk about social media. Although it had little (if not, nothing) to do with Shakespeare, it was enlightening to hear him talk about Facebook becoming a digital platform for different digital applications.

I think this is important to our class's study of Shakespeare because so much social learning can be (and is) done through Facebook. Some of the most entertaining and interesting things about life I have learned from Facebook.

There have been numerous debates in the Communications 101 class that I TA for about whether Facebook will replace our current news sources. People in older generations look down on the current rising generation for their dependence on social media for news. But having a centralized location for all news sources is actually quite beneficial, especially considering it is a more likely place for a 20-year-old to spend their time.

Facebook can also be beneficial for news gathering. Many reporters have a separate work Facebook account where they can receive tips from people that associate with their beat. How much more timely can information be if you have a constant feed to it?

It is my hope that this interview will spark a lot of innovation coming from all quarters, not just Facebook, so that the current social media can be perfected.

Sock Puppets: Connecting With Shakespeare Creatively

In helping Janelle prepare for her Shakespearean puppet show this last Wednesday, I had an opportunity to reflect on how it helps to engage Shakespeare on a more creative level. I haven't done much of a creative so far this semester, at least as far as Shakespeare is concerned, so it was fun on that level. It was also fun because we had to pick and choose how all of our sock characters looked. It was interesting to see how different perceptions of characters showed in our interpretations of how the sock puppets should look.

For instance, I was in charge of making the Mercutio puppet (the scene we're performing is from Romeo and Juliet). I took considerable joy in making this particular puppet because Mercutio is such a comical, yet round character. I gave him a mustache and a sword belt, knowing his feisty nature. It just seemed to fit.

I know this doesn't go very deep, but it really fascinated me to see how I interpreted characters through their appearance. And when we were making sock puppets, which only retain a few humanoid characteristics, it was interesting to see which characteristics were consistent.

Love's Volatility in Shakespeare: A Recap of My Research

This is an important opportunity to take a look at what I have been able to accomplish while looking at how Shakespeare uses spontaneity and volatility in relationships in his plays. In my hub post, I give a pretty good overview of what I wanted to accomplish, but it may be that I need to rethink my direction.

My original main direction: How do characters have such quick changes in emotion and then manage to have successful relationships?

Ways I tried to answer the main question:

1. Othello As a Case Study- I talk about Othello's seeming change of emotion, and how that is actually not the case. Othello does not experience volatile love, because he still loves Desdemona when he kills her. His type of love can be considered "idolatrous" because his manifestation of love is the equivalent of worship.

Shakespeare's Own Romance

I thought it would be interesting to look into Shakespeare's love life, to see if I could find any connections to my focus of volatility in love and relationships.


I found a source located on Google Books about Shakespeare's personal life, called A Life of William Shakespeare by Sir Sidney Lee.

The book talks about some documents that suggest Shakespeare's wedding may have been something of a shotgun affair. I think the source is fairly trustworthy, as they back up their information with numerous primary and secondary sources.

Macbeth the Movie: Where is the Love?

Courtesy of Netflix

I began watching the 2010 PBS version of Macbeth today, with the hope that my focus might shine through in some way. In the hour that I was able to watch (all I had time for today), I was sadly disappointed. Maybe this is what lends the play such a dreary, dark aspect. Of course, the movie did nothing to improve this feeling.

It has a World War II setting, although what side Macbeth fights for is pretty ambiguous. Duncan sort of resembles Hitler, so it's possible they are representing the German side. So far, everything has taken place in barracks made of cement with very little visual interest.

Some things I think the movie has done well so far:

• The setting is very bland and really forces the audience to pay attention completely to the actors. Yet it lends itself to visual interest and aesthetic when necessary.
• The witches were spot on. They don't have actual beards, but they were dressed as war nurses, so when they pulled their face masks down, they looked like beards. Their little satanic rituals were pretty realistic and unnerving. 
• It captures the raw violence of the play. I don't think they're overexaggerating this part, which is a little sickening.
• Lady Macbeth has the perfect amount of sex appeal and insanity. She's pretty but also skeletal looking. 
• The production design is very sparse, but they've done a good job. 
• I also recommend this movie to anyone doing sound. It's really interesting how they chose to do sound effects.

Some things not so good:

• Some parts are just a little too...creepy. For instance, the witches pull a heart out of a dead man's body to use for their ritual. Did not need to see that.
• The porter was a little too crude. Just not my cup of tea.

All in all, it has been interesting to look at, and I will do a deeper analysis when I finish the movie. 

My Game Plan for the Rest of the Semester

Looking at what I have left to do, it can be a little bit overwhelming trying to figure out when I will get it all done. I've found that I need to take stock every now and then of what my goals are, as well as plan some things out, if I want to be able to function at all.

1. So with that in mind, my goal for my research is to finish by the end of March. That means at least two of my posts each week need to be research focused, if not all three.
Some ideas for how to focus these posts:

• Follow up with Othello research
• Follow up on the sonnets with some research sources
• Use literary theory to analyze love in Twelfth Night or Richard III
• Research spontaneity in love/relationships
• Compare Shakespeare's relationship with Anne Hathaway to ideas expressed in plays

2. In addition to achieving this goal, I also have a goal to engage Shakespeare creatively through writing some sort of narrative about a more static Shakespearean character. I want to make a 2-dimensional character seem 3-dimensional. Hopefully I will get this done by March 25.

3. I also need to spend more time with digital mediations and performances of Shakespeare.

• I am planning on watching Macbeth the movie this weekend (PBS with Patrick Stewart) and writing a review about it.
• I also plan to attend the U of U performance of Macbeth. 
• Then I will compare the different formats. 

4. Lastly, I need to do a performance of my own. I might be part of Janelle's puppet show she's planning to put on next weekend. If that doesn't come through, I will probably recite a monologue for a small audience.

So that's my plan! Let me know if you have any suggestions!

Love is An Ever-fixed Mark: A Close Read of Sonnet 116

In my hub post, I mentioned that I wanted to take a closer love at the relationships immortalized in Shakespeare's sonnets. Sonnet 116 seems like an excellent choice, given that its emphasis is on constancy, as opposed to the aspect of volatility that I hope to make my focus.

Here is a video of Kate Winslet reciting the poem from Sense and Sensibility:

This poem has obviously been picked apart a million times (at least) due to its popularity, which is why I want to make this quick.

Othello as a Case Study: What Shakespeare Portrayed as Idolatrous Love

As I mentioned before in my hub post, I am looking at how volatile the romantic emotions can seem in Shakespeare. Othello is a perfect example of this. He and Desdemona have this whirlwind romance in which they defy the social constraints placed on them. But once they consummate their love, Othello is put in a position where he believes that the very thing he values most has betrayed him. This raises the question of whether he does indeed love "not wisely but too well."

In order to answer this question, it's important to analyze the ways in which Othello expresses love for Desdemona, as well as to analyze the relationship they had before suspicion poisoned it.
For this, I found two sources:

1. Shakespeare On Love and Lust, by Maurice Charney, which I found at Google Books. It focuses on ways love plays out in Shakespeare, and focuses a good part of that on Othello. 

2. Idolatrous Love: A New Approach to Othello, by RN Hallstead, which I found on JSTOR. This article focuses on the sexual aspects of Othello and how they relate to his love for Desdemona.

These sources speak about the obssessive nature of Othello's love for Desdemona, as well as Desdemona's love for Othello.

The Volatile Nature of Love in Shakespeare

Ever notice how Shakespeare's characters seem to experience pretty quick changes in emotion? One minute 2 characters hate each other, and the next they're living happily ever after. This is readily apparent in Much Ado About Nothing and Richard III. Or, they simply start as friends, but as soon as something in the situation changes, they're in love, like in Twelfth Night. The point is, can people's emotions really change as quickly as Shakespeare portrayed it? Or was he simply trying to make a point with this theme?

I also want to examine the volatility of love in Shakespeare's sonnets. Many of his sonnets talk of love that never ends: "It is an ever-fixed mark." It makes one wonder why there is such a disparity between his poems and plays. Does it come about because of different audiences, different ideas thematically?

For this, I have already found one source through Google books: A Companion to Shakespeare's Sonnets, by Michael Schoenfeldt. It contains an article by Jyotsna Singh called "Mapping the 'Emotional Regime' of Shakespeare's Sonnets." Having skimmed the article it seems to contain some valuable information about romantic love in the sonnets.

This is what I want to look at as I attempt to fulfill the depth requirement. So many of Shakespeare's plays include the genesis of romantic love in so many different forms. But so often, these relationships generate very quickly and can degenerate just as quickly. For instance, in Othello, all of the events leading up to Othello's marriage to Desdemona seem to move a pretty rapid pace, and the tables turn just as quickly when Othello discovers Desdemona's affair.

I'm hoping to gain some more variety in my sources throughout the weekend, so hopefully I will be able to focus my research on a few plays (any more than that would be too much) and a few sonnets.

Hermione the Heroine

I feel like the best way to read Winter's Tale Act 3, Scene 2 is to look at it through a feminist perspective. It is, after all, a husband trying his own wife for infidelity.

In a world where the king's word is law, even suspicions become truths in the eyes of King Leontes' audience. In lines 85 through 90, Leontes essentially assumes that the child borne by Hermione is the bastard child of Polixenes. He tells Hermione:

"thou shalt feel our justice, in whose easiest passage look for no less than death." 

Yet, how can it be justice when the suspicious husband, the accuser, is also the judge. Shakespeare does everything he can in this scene to ensure the audience is aligned with Hermione. Leontes comes across as so prejudiced and cruel, Hermione becomes a heroic figure.

By feminist standards, I think Hermione makes a pretty brave stand for herself. She makes a list of all of her grievances against Leontes. How he took away her new child, separated her from her son, withdrew his own affections, denied her bedrest after going through childbirth, and forcing her to go through the trial. This is a pretty considerable list. Not to mention that the heir to the throne dies during the trial. In fact, Hermione's suffering seems almost Christlike, which comparison carries over into her rebirth at the end of the play.

Once Hermione lists all of Leontes' "sins," she brings in her best defense, the oracle, which she knows will tell the truth. The message from Apollo's oracle is read, Hermione's side is supported. And, in true manly fashion, Leontes dismisses it because it doesn't support his argument. This can be viewed as an example of how fruitless the defences are that women put up in society. In the end, the man is still in control, after everything. That may be a little cynical, but it is pretty obvious that Leontes' authority stems from his masculinity and Hermione's situation stems from her vulnerability as a woman.

Paulina is probably the original Shakespearean feminist character. She tells how it is, even to the king, which puts her outside of society's control.
This is what she tells the king after the queen has "died":

"...Thy tyranny
Together working with thy jealousies--
Fancies too weak for boys, too green and idle
For girls of nine--oh, think what they have done,
And then run mad indeed, stark mad!..."

 She accuses the king of being tyrannical, jealous, weak, idle and mad. However, later on she realizes that she has spoken out of place and begs pardon, revealing that even Paulina is subject to the king's masculinity. But Leontes absolves her (as he didn't absolve his wife) and urges her to continue speaking bitterly, since he deserves it.

A feminist would say that King Leontes deserved every bit of what he got, and that Shakespeare was too kind to him at the end. But since I am not personally that extreme, I would have to say that this scene is an excellent example of the consequences of male follies and jealousies that are a natural result of women's subservience in this era. Clearly, Leontes' biggest threat to his power is a woman who appears to treat his authority as irrelevant.

A Taste of Tradition

Found on Google Images

Last week I was using the the library's book search engine to find some good sources for depth in Shakespeare. I found one book entitled The Tainted Muse: Prejudice in Shakespeare's Time. Not only did it sound fascinating, but I'm pretty sure prejudice might become my major focus for the depth requirement.

I went to the library to find this book, but not surprisingly, I didn't find it. Oh the woes of library checkouts! However, I remembered Dr. Burton's encouragement to browse around the Shakespeare section in the reference shelves.

Hoping for some serendipity, I browsed for a few minutes, and found several books of interest. One of them was completely useless. It was a dictionary, but the title was definitely misleading: Shakespearean Concepts. I was all excited, thinking it was some kind of compendium of themes discussed in Shakespeare. NOT!

However, I did find a relatively useful book called Shakespeare and Minorities, which turned out to be an annotated bibliography. At first, this might sound worse than the dictionary, but I found some sources that could be really interesting. One was a book called Exploring Character, Playing Shakespeare: The Royal Shakespeare Company. It sounds like a great source, and I will have to look at the library catalog to see if I can get my hands on it!

So, despite the fact that I was late to work, being so absorbed in this feast of Shakespearean data, I managed to find a source that might do me some good in the long run!g

Update on my Progress Report

I'm not sure why, but I had a nightmare about writing this blog post... fortunately it hasn't come true! Just goes to show how much Shakespeare class has influenced my life!

1. Learning Outcomes: I feel as if I have partially neglected the outcomes expected of my research. I have not researched the plays as thoroughly as I would have liked, partially due to time constraints. I feel like I have tried to engage the texts well, and I have watched adaptations and films as the opportunities have come up.
2. Reading and Research: So far, I have read Hamlet, Richard III, Twelfth Night, Macbeth, and The Tempest. The textbook's introductions to each play have really helped in guiding my attention to the plays' themes and meanings. Also, JSTOR has been really helpful on finding valuable sources and articles.
3. Links and Connections: I would say this is the section that I'm struggling with the most. I usually do not link my own blogs together other than through whatever play they are about. I have linked to other learners' blogs, but not in a really relevant way. 
4. Personal Impact: The personal impact has affected me in a lot of ways. I notice myself searching for Shakespearean references in popular media. I think oftentimes we don't realize how often Shakespeare makes his way into everyday conversations. One theme I have noticed in my blogging is the way in which I focus on characters that intrigue or interest me. I also tend to enjoy taking a section of a play and trying to completely comprehend it.
5. Personal Evaluation: I feel like I have done pretty well in the presentation of my blog, but I feel like I could definitely improve in the depth area, as well as actually following through on my learning plan better.
6. Peer Influence: Brooke R. and Whitney have both been really helpful in both their blog posts and in their initiative in planning things that will help expand others' learning. Thank you to both of you!

Peer Evaluation of David Tertipes

Open Source Shakespeare by David Tertipes

1.  Number of Posts:
   David has made 31 posts thus far. Way to go!
2. Quality of Posts:
   I think David has done a credible job of making his posts count. Oftentimes he will post more than twice a week, and he always is linking his learning goals to the posts. Some of the posts are shorter, but he often follows up with a more substantial post later on.
3. A Strength
   I really like what David did with his post on Taming of the Shrew. He did a great job of evaluating quotes from the play, posing questions and including multimedia to help demonstrate his point. And so many of his posts are like that!
4. Suggested Improvement
   I would suggest more creative ways of breaking up the lengthy text and including more pictures. Your writing is real quality, but you need to exploit the visual more.

A Glance Over the Shoulder

 So I would just like to take a minute to assess how much I have been able to accomplish these past few weeks. Consider this a little pat on my own back, something every person needs once in a while.
So over these past few weeks:
1. I have read a history play, a comedy, a tragedy, and a romance. That's some considerable breadth for Shakespeare.
2. I have learned a considerable amount about Shakespearean genre. And also how each of the genres are similar.
3. I've learned how to view some of Shakespeare's plays through a more critical lense.
4. I've learned how to apply some of the more general aspects of Shakespeare's plays.
5. And most of all, I've learned how to enjoy Shakespeare. I have gotten to the point where I can almost read Shakespeare like a regular novel. It takes some getting into at first, but after a while, I'm almost sad to put the book down.

So this sums up my progress. I may have learned more than this, but this is what grabbed my attention while thinking about it. I think it's really important to make connections to our lives through these plays, and that is something I am going to work more on, as well as engaging Shakespeare creatively.

Point of Decision

After killing Duncan, Lady Macbeth sees Macbeth with blood on his hands.

One thing my group talked a lot about in our discussion today was the reasons behind Macbeth's decision to murder King Duncan. It was clearly a choice. We just had a hard time deciphering his motivations.
Anyways, I was reading through the first scene again, and I found a soliloquy that might contain some reasoning behind Macbeth's actions.

This supernatural soliciting
Cannot be ill, cannot be good. If ill,
Why hath it given me earnest of success
Commencing in a truth? I am Thane of Cawdor.
If good, why do I yield to that suggestion
Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair
Against the use of nature? Present fears
Are less than horrible imaginings.
My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,
Shakes so my single state of man
That function is smothered in surmise,
And nothing is but what is not.

In this soliloquy, we can see Macbeth start to justify the murder he has committed already in his imagination. He says it "cannot be ill, cannot be good." So what is it then? He knows well enough that the witches have been right thus far. It's almost as if he wishes to prove all their words. 
Perhaps Macbeth has a fatalistic view, he does the deed because it has been foretold and there is no ignoring one's fate. This reminds me of Oedipus Rex a little. Oedipus brings about his fate despite doing everything to avold it. Macbeth does not possess the desire to avoid his fate.
Also, the witches do not tell him how his reign will end, only that Banquo will father a line of kings.
The introduction in the book also talks about Lady Macbeth being an influence on him. When she hears that Macbeth could become king, she doesn't hesitate to sell out.
My group also wondered if Macbeth was predisposed to the murder in some sense. He was at war for a long time. It's very possible that a few more dead bodies would not even cause him to blink.
What's interesting about the soliloquy is that Macbeth does acknowledge to a certain extent that what he plans is wrong. He talks about the horrid image of murder "unfixing" his hair.

So what is Shakespeare saying? It could be any number of things:

• You cannot escape your fate, so why try?
• Sometimes men do bad things because of our baser nature.
• Some men will do anything to achieve their ends.
• We as humans have a compulsive tendency towards curiosity.

He might be saying all or none of these things, but the point is that Macbeth causes us to consider morality and the line between ambition and evil.

"Double, Double, Toil and Trouble"

I would just like to take a moment to appreciate Shakespeare's genius in composing the language of the Weird Sisters in Macbeth. If you compare the sort of lines Macbeth or his wife are given, the Weird Sisters actually differentiate quite a bit.

• The rhythm is, I think similar, but the meter is completely different. Iambic quartameter (?) is what the witches use, (a little shorter than regular iambic pentameter) giving their dialogue a more snappy sound.

• An article found on JStor about the supernatural in Macbeth talks about the sounds used by the witches as well. Unfortunately, my internet is abominably slow and I could not access the full article. (For now at least, will update later).

• They also have rhymed couplets. One thing I like about Shakespeare is that he uses rhyme sparingly, which brings attention to when he does use it. The rhyming really works with the witches, in my opinion, because well, it makes them sound witchy. Maybe Shakespeare is why witches have this stereotype in the first place. 

• They talk about the grossest things, like procuring a "pilot's thumb" and seducing as many men as possible. 

I think the most exemplary offshoot of the Weird Sisters is the Sanderson Sisters from Hocus Pocus. Thank you Disney for integrating some actual literature once in a while!
If you watch this video, look closely at the blonde's behavior with "The Devil." She's not bearded but she is good at what she does...

BBC's Twelfth Night

This is how I picture Illyria. (Really it's the Oregon coast)

Well, I suppose I should also make some kind of comment about the movie Brooke and I watched together. Brooke gives a great summary on her blog talking about what BBC did and didn't do with the characters. For the most part I agree. I feel like they did a creditable job of doing a relatively more modern interpretation.
I have to say though, there are aspects of the movie I didn't like. Part of it may have been my expectation that it be a little more farcical. That was how my reading of the play was: laughing was my most common reaction to it. But the movie brought some of those more interesting tensions to the surface, which I wasn't expecting. As a result, I was both intrigued and annoyed.
I do agree that the Duke was horribly cast. Although the lines are not the easiest to work with, I feel like some other actors could have brought more to the table in that situation. Don't ask me why, but I see Robert Downey, Jr. doing great in that role. Just a hunch! Maybe he's simply more manly than that other guy...blech.
Anyway, despite the melancholy overtones at the beginning, the movie turned out all right. I do agree that Feste's role proved to be an interesting interpretation. That was one direction I really liked.

So, this movie made me think, what direction would I go if I had to recreate Twelfth Night?
A few changes:

• I would, of course, choose a cast that melds well together, without having to convince the audience of their cohesiveness. (one thing really lacking at the beginning of the BBC version).
• I would probably choose to set the time period further back, like Shakespeare's time.
• There would probably be more hedonistic overtones in the Duke of Orcino's court. That's just how I envision it. That would bring in the carnival element that the intro in our book talks about.
• I would definitely bring in some elements of the farce like in The Importance of Being Earnest. I know Oscar Wilde is vastly different from Shakespeare, but it could be both entertaining and interesting. 
• I would make sure the soundtrack is uplifting and well done. (And matches the scene).

So there you have it. What would you do?

Duke Orcino: What is Going Through that Noble Mind?

I found that all of the characters in Twelfth Night met or exceeded my expectations. Except for Duke Orcino. He tried my patience from the very beginning with an irritating monologue. And then, he is the most irritating suitor to Lady Olivia! He sends Viola/Cesario over to convince her of his love every SINGLE day. Olivia is probably just wishing he'd give her some space. No wonder she went for Cesario, who knows how to be tactful (since he's a woman).
Ok, and if that isn't enough, Feste plays him for a fool in the last act by tricking the Duke to give him more money. Who would fall for that?
And lastly, he didn't even wait to see Viola in maiden clothing before he proposed. A little impetuous, perhaps? It's not like he's proposing to a stranger, but you have to admit that change of gender changes everything.
So there it is. I don't like the Duke. I'm guessing he wasn't Shakespeare's favorite character either. Why else is he the only one in the play who possesses the talent of making you yawn?

Maria the Prankster in Twelfth Night

Maria left a note in Lady Olivia's handwriting to convince Malvolio of the lady's secret affection.

So I just read Act 2, Scene 5, from Twelfth Night, and I have to say that I really admire Maria. Not many women in that time would have dared to play a prank on the chamberlain of the house, second in command to Lady Olivia herself. She's got guts!
I'd just like to take a quick look into her motives...
1. She hates Malvolio for being a jerk and a spoilsport. (Duh!)
2. He is extremely overbearing in how he exerts his authority over her and the rest of the household.
3. I imagine that Maria has a great respect for Lady Olivia, but where Malvolio is concerned, Lady Olivia's judgment seems to be lacking. Maria probably resents Malvolio's standing with Lady Olivia to a certain degree.
4. She knows how much Sir Toby and Sir Andrew hate Malvolio as well, so she has an appreciative audience.
5. In many ways, she is Malvolio's foil because in every way he is depressing and oppressive, she is the exact opposite.
6. She likes to have fun! She knows she'll get a good laugh out of a joke like this.
So there you have it. These reasons may seem obvious or even irrelevant, but I think they might come in handy later on.
Maria is brazen and energetic and totally appeals to us as Americans for that very reason.

Twelfth Night and Comic Cross-dressing

Found at http://www.listal.com/list/drag-king

Dr. Burton brought up an interesting point today how many of Shakespeare's comedies have cross-dressing in them. I was wondering about that myself. I had the opportunity to read an article/blog on Shakespearean Cross Dressing on Yahoo! Associated Content. The author of the said blog theorizes that women dressed up as men in order to become actors in that day, thus making the tangle of genders in plays like Twelfth Night even more distressing. I honestly don't know whether this idea has any merit, although it's interesting to think about. The writer did not have any sources to back up this theory, so it could just be a shot in the dark.
What does everyone think?

Looking at Shakespeare's Portrayal: Richard III, Villain or Not?

One thing that really intrigued me about this play was just how bloody Richard's hands were. He would stoop at nothing to gain his ends. I wondered if that was really the case, or if Shakespeare dramatized his morally repugnant character to become larger than life.  

I thought I would look into this a little deeper, to see what the truth might be. So far, the Britannia Encyclopedia said that the evidence for Richard's murders of his brothers and nephews was "based on purely circumstantial evidence." 

I also read up a little in a book called History of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third. In my opinion the book is pretty biased, but it gives a much kinder representation of Richard than Shakespeare. Some of the evidence it gives to disassociate Richard from the young Prince Edward's death is the location of Richard in northern England at the time, as well as Richard's pledge of support to the young prince. 

Honestly, either way you put it, he probably was responsible for some of the ill that happened during his reign. He definitely stood in the position of the most benefit for the majority of the murders. 

However, I think it's important to note that, through no fault of his own, Richard III's rule served to help reunite England.

Live Amateur Performance or Professional Video?

In a fit of whimsical curiosity, I asked my roommate and her boyfriend to act out the infamous scene already shown in this blog (see previous entry).
I figured it might be interesting to see what a couple of college students could bring to this play that Ian McKellen couldn't. The answer: humor. Seth's (my roommate's boyfriend) performance made an already creepy character take on a third dimension. Chelsey, my roommate, is a theatre performance major from Weber State, and she made a point of acting exactly as she would expect Lady Anne to act.
Plus, since they were in actuality a couple, it changed the whole dynamic of the scene. When Richard/Seth told Lady Anne he belonged in her bedchamber, I was about to roll on the floor (from laughter of course).
The result was a slightly soap opera-ish performance, nix props that just get in the way. But it really helped cement in my mind just how the scene could work.
(Incidentally, Chelsey and Seth continued to talk in Shakespearean English long after they finished the scene. I may have helped Seth discover the blooming poet inside!)

Courtship as Richard III Sees it

One of the things that intrigues me most about this play is how Richard is received among the women. We know that he is deformed, so there must be a pity factor there. He is also eloquent, which is the bane of the female sex. We are so easily convinced... at least in this play we are.
In class, my group talked a little bit about Richard's smooth talking Lady Anne into marrying him, her husband's murderer. As I experience a tendency to veer back toward my main focus of perspective, I like to look at Lady Anne's character. What has she experienced that exposes her and makes her vulnerable to Richard's charms? She seems to be a passionate person, and as we know, passion can go both ways. Perhaps, for all her volatility, she is not as intelligent as she sounds.
I found this clip of the Ian McKellen version that shows one interpretation of Richard's abilities:

So tell me what you think? Is she stupid, or just overwhelmed with grief?
More on this later!

Making Decisions

Well, Dr. Burton did say we needed to devise some kind of schedule for the rest of the semester. And while I like to plan ahead, I also like to have some wiggle-room. So I have devised a schedule for next week that will serve as a kind of model for how this thing is going to go. I'll make revisions as a I need to, and I will add major things in, like attending performances, or making my own performance.

Jan. 24, Mon: Read Richard III background, Act I
            Blog: Connect the history to the play.

Jan. 26, Wed: Read Acts II and III
             Blog: find interesting facts from play. Formulate ideas about characters.

Jan. 28, Fri: Read Acts IV and V
              Blog: optional

Goals: To make connections with the history, understand the play, and determine the characterization.

So that's the breakdown, and I think it will work for the other plays I read!

Shakespeare's Own WWE Smackdown: Laertes vs. Hamlet!

I find, being a list-maker, that blocking out my ideas in a list format is just so much more useful to my own learning and edification. Plus it's easier for others to read.
So, while I was reading the last act of Hamlet, I noticed that Laertes and Hamlet have a lot of similarities in situation, but the results were somewhat different. I have been told before that Laertes is Hamlet's literary foil. So I decided to map it out to see just how that actually works in the play, and especially in the last scene.

Amendments of the original plan

So I realized I don't need to do quite as much reading as I originally suspected. (Thank goodness!) As a result, specificity might do me some good. The other plays by Shakespeare I wish to read this semester, in addition to Hamlet, are Twelfth Night, Richard the Third, King Lear, Macbeth, and the Tempest.
So there's some clarification. Mostly for my own benefit so I don't bite off more than I can chew...

"Thought is free" but education is not

Learning about Shakespeare is kind of double-edged sword. You learn a lot about literature and all that good kind of stuff, but you really start to think in that elevated kind of language, not to mention you start to see everything as some kind of innuendo. Ok, maybe not. But I'm grateful for the opportunity to plan how this course is going to go for me.
So here goes:
Goal 1: I really want to focus on the genres of Shakespeare that I have taken for granted in the past. The only history I ever read of his was Julius Caesar. I also want to read some of his better known plays that I've never read, like Macbeth, King Lear. For a total, I want to read about 12 of his plays. I also want to read at least three works based on those plays from a different perspective (like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern with Hamlet).

Goal 2: I want to watch as many of the films for the plays and adaptations as I can. Probably won't reach all 15, because of time constraints, but it's worth a shot. For three of the movies, I then want to write a film review (because I have done it before and it really helps!) as if I were going to submit it to a newspaper.

Goal 3: Okay, two things. #1: perform a lesser known monologue for some friends or the class. I have a roommate that is a theatre major and she can maybe help me a little bit. And #2: Write a narrative of some kind for a Shakespeare play from a minor character's perspective.

Goal 4: I want to research theories about perspective, especially in drama. I will share as much as I can about what I learn on my blog, both informative and entertaining content. If I write a blog I am particularly proud of, I might even post it on my facebook status.

So here it is, and I promise to abide by what I've written as best as I can!

A Matter of Perspective

Having now read the first few acts of Hamlet using a couple of different methods, I have stumbled upon something that I find really interesting about Shakespearean plays. Characterization is completely up for interpretation. We deduce all that we know about characters by the script of the play. When the play is performed, the actor is given a wide range for the portrayal of their character.
I have had the opportunity of viewing the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet, as well as the Kenneth Branagh version in high school. During that class, we also read the play called Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead and watched the corresponding movie. I found the switch in perspectives extremely refreshing in my understanding of the play.
When you are reading a play, you look at perspectives constantly, because the dialogue, the strongest aspect of the play, is always in the speaker's point of view.
While reading Hamlet this time, I want to focus on the perspectives of all of the relevant characters. In Acts II and III, I really wanted to focus on Ophelia's perspective. What is she thinking and feeling, seeing a former lover and friend go completely bonkers (apparently)? One can only guess that she is experiencing a vast amount of confusion. On top of that, her brother and father assure her that Hamlet is only flirting, while everything Hamlet does points to the contrary. So she's being pulled in all these different directions.
I also tried to see things from Polonius' view. That was somewhat enlightening, because it gave a real emphasis on his relationship to Ophelia as a father. On the other hand, it's really hard to delve too deep into Polonius' character because, well, he's a pompous windbag.
During the end of the third act, I focused more on the perspective of the Queen, and what she must be thinking and feeling. The reader can gather that she lived in wilful ignorance of Claudius' misdeeds; even though she is innocent of the actual murder, Hamlet accuses her of murdering his father by giving her love to Hamlet I's murderer. That has to be hard to swallow for someone who probably isn't used to that kind of treatment from her children. And it is apparent that she genuinely loves Hamlet in the expression of her concern for him, although it is maybe not manifested in the best way.
That being said, I feel I have developed a deeper understanding of what Shakespeare wanted to accomplish with these disparate characters and their roles within the play.

Here is a link to a clip from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, essentially summarizing their view of Hamlet's situation: Click HERE

10 Unexpected Reasons Why Shakespeare and I Get Along

Every English speaker forms their relationship with Shakespeare throughout their early lives. For myself, I stayed pretty neutral towards Shakespeare until my senior of high school when we read several of his plays. I have had opportunities to read more of his work on my own and in classes since then. Every time I am struck by things I like.

Here are some of them:

1. He has an “earthy” sense of humor. Some matrons that might unknowingly quote some random Shakespearean might blush to know what was really meant by it. It took me some time to get in the mindset, but pretty much all of Shakespeare’s common dialogue is innuendo. And, immature as I am, I find it funny.

2. He’s not afraid to go big. I mean look at Hamlet, or Romeo and Juliet. Half the cast dies, and the other half live out their lives in contented regret. Not everyone can get away with that.

3. He treats his women well. Ok. Some of the time. But he really does give them more humanity than other writers of his time, which I have to appreciate, being a woman and all.

4. Sometimes the little guy triumphs over the big guy. We Americans sure have an appreciation for the underdog. For instance, Othello is the big guy in charge, and Iago is the little pee-on. Who goes crazy and kills his wife? Not Othello. No, he is carefully manipulated by the servant he trusted. As despicable as Iago is, you can’t help admiring his crafty ingenuity.

5. The guy is one big romantic. I don’t know how much of that stems from his money-making tendencies, but still. Talking about undying love never hurt anyone.

6. Some of his characters have attitude, with a capital A. He really allows his womenfolk to be quite sassy. So entertaining!

7. He knows how to put in the action. Yes, his characters do a lot of talking, but there are plenty of fight scenes in any of his plays.

8. He makes up his own words. How cool is that! If he can do it, then maybe I can….

9. He understands the important stuff. I’m thinking of the theme of redemption in Winter’s Tale.

10. He rhymes better than a rapper. You never feel like he was really stretching the rhymes. It sounds almost natural. Jealous Eminem?