Audiobooks

Through this week, I am consuming Hamlet in several different ways. 

Last week I read The Merchant of Venice while listening to an audiobook (and found a surprising number of editing mistakes). This week I have been consuming an audiobook of Hamlet, but I have been just listening to it. I simply soak it in and fully envelope myself in the characters and voice inflections of the audiobook. 

I really enjoy listening to audiobooks because of the deep character development you can get through voice inflections and emotions. I can easily distinguish between the characters and even imagine what they look like based on their personality. Usually audiobooks also give you background noise and music to introduce every scene. Most of the time the music helps set up the tone and foreshadow what is going to happen in the scene. I really enjoy this aspect of audiobooks because it helps me remember the placement of the scene. Several times I skim over or forget which setting I am supposed to be picturing when I read a play: the audiobook really helps me counter this. 

There are some audiobooks that explore inserting commentary into the text. 

I feel like inserting commentary into Shakespeare takes away the nature of the story. There is an organic growth that develops throughout stories and plays as the plot builds and climaxes. When you interrupt that growth to talk about things that are happening in the story/play the listener no longer gets the development of the story/play like the author intended. Shakespeare has difficult language and it is often difficult to understand, but there is value to just letting the audience enjoy the general story without commentary. 

I think commentary is not too invasive if you include it in the beginning or the end of the audiobook. That way it is like an introduction to the story and then a further wrap up/ discussion afterward. 

It would be interesting to explore a commentary audiobook version in one of Shakespeare's historical plays (like Henry V) instead of a comedy or tragedy (like Hamlet). Historical plays tend to be choppy and often have a narrator to guide you in the beginning of new scenes; therefore, a little commentary or analysis at that moment would not seem so inappropriate. 

An adaptation for kids

On Saturday, January 28, I went to go see a BYU production of The Merchant of Venice  for kids.

BYU Arts 'The Merchant of Venice'

It was based off of the adaptation by Teresa Dayly Love. BYU really made the play kid friendly by changing a couple of things: 

1. They seated the kids on the floor and interacted with them by having them play minor characters such as Nerissa, Jessica, Gratiano, etc
2. It was only 50 minutes long (mas o menos) 
3. In Portia's monologue the princes are more modern themes such as: Lord of the Nerds, Prince of the West, etc. 
4. They had necklaces with emblems on them to show and remind the audience who was on whose side
5. They asked questions of the audience like "Do you think that was fair?" 
6. They changed the names of the places/ names by letting the audience choose (involving the kids before the play even started) 

Overall, I think they did an awesome job adapting The Merchant of Venice  for kids. However, I had some qualms with the sixth adaptation I mentioned. They reasoned it out by saying they wanted to make the play so that you could not place it in a time or specific place. They changed the titles of 'Jew' and 'Christian' to 'Curan' and 'Tharian' along with having Portia be from Andalasia (relations to Enchanted), Merchant of Stratford instead of Venice, and having Shylock work at the Purple Turtle Yogurtland. I think this weakened the authenticity of the play by making it into more of an alternate reality not really applicable to our experiences, while the original play has lots of other "baggage" with the names of Jew and Christian that I feel like gave the play weight in authenticity. However, they definitively met their goal of making the play in a unknown place and time by changing all these names and using technology- I just feel it made the play unrealistic. 

I did really like the elements of the adaptation that BYU kept. 

1. They stayed true to the Shakespearian language even though it is hard for children
2. The important characters kept their monologues so we got valuable character development
3. (My personal favorite) In the gold chest, they had a skull

In Act II, scene vii the Prince of Morocco opens the gold chest and finds a skull and note. When I was reading the play I did not get that it was supposed to be a skull, but when I visually saw it I instantaneously thought of Hamlet! The Prince refers to it as "carrion death" which makes sense because most of the time skulls symbolize mortality and death. 

In Hamlet, Hamlet sees many skulls reminding him of death and mortality- the inability of man to live forever. One of these skulls is the skull of Yorick, a previous king's jester, which Hamlet holds up and has a very famous monologue about death to. 

I really enjoyed watching the BYU children adaptation of The Merchant of Venice and I was able to pick up on things that I did not originally through reading the text. 

Sharing is Caring

So when I was off scouring the internet for other bloggers I found an awesome blog that I think would appeal to a lot of people (ESPECIALLY English majors).

        A 22 year-old girl blogs about "devouring texts" (the name of her blog). She goes through and talks about different texts--books, movie, plays, etc-- that she is currently reading about. It is kind of like what we do, but is an expansion because it is so much more than Shakespeare.

Anyways I think it is awesome and you should definitely check it out. Cool idea if you want to continue your blog after this class is over.    

Devouring Texts 

On another note:
                       There is a very strong sense of loyalty in The Merchant of Venice. Antonio and Bassanio's relationship is the shining example of what true loyalty, love, and friendship should look like. However, Bassanio does not exempt this same loyalty to Portia, his new wife, when he gives away her ring and says he would sacrifice her life for Antonio (don't you want a husband willing to give your life for a friend? stand-up guy, really). This is mirrored by the relationship of Gratiano and Nerissa.

                        The worst example of loyalty we have in the play is Jessica to Shylock, her father. This is a starch contrast to Portia's unquestionable loyalty to her dead father. Portia would have lost the man she loves if he did not pass her father's test correctly and therefore not received her (dead) father's approval. Counter to Jessica sneaking off in the middle of the night to meet Lorenzo and marry him--betraying both her father and her Jewish heritage. In the end, everything works out fine for both of them and Portia's man passes her father's test and gains the right to marry her, while Jessica and Lorenzo are secured a spot in Shylock's will as the only heirs by the hand of Antonio. So obey or disobey your father, no matter, everything will work out just fine. (Ha! If only it actually worked out like that).

Modern:
            In our modern world we have several representations that call into question loyalty. (As much as I hate to use it) An example of this is the Twilight saga.

Bella is torn between two guys--one vampire, one werewolf (appealing choices, right?). She has all of these adventures and near-death experiences with/ because of these guys, but where is Dad? He's at home. Completely oblivious to anything going on. She continually lies to him and sneaks off with these boys. Not only does she continually lie to him, but she sacrifices a relationship with her parents- father and mother- to be with a vampire. She commits the ultimate betrayal and fakes her own death, completely eliminating her father from her life (just as Jessica did when she ran away).

With all this talk about father bashing daughters, I would like to give a shout out to my dad. I think he is the best and he has always welcomed me back home no matter how far off the path and his advice I have gone. I LOVE MY DAD!! 

(didn't have a picture of just me and my dad handy, but here is the whole family- brother-in-laws included)

Connecting with Others

Hey y'all-

I was trying to connect with other people studying Shakespeare outside of our class and I found a couple really cool posts talking about Taming of the Shrew.

I suggest searching in http://www.icerocket.com/  to find other bloggers

AND

I found a really cool website that has a list of the top couple of blogs about Shakespeare:
 http://education-portal.com/articles/Get_into_Shakespeare_10_Top_Shakespeare_Blogs.html

One of them has already been introduced to our class (#1. Blogging Shakespeare).
However, I really liked #4 Play Shakespeare because it breaks down several of Shakespeare's plays like sparknotes, but with more detail.

I really enjoyed checking out these websites and hope you will explore them too!! :)

Shylock

Al Pacino as the Jew Shylock. I could not think of a better, more passionate actor to play him.
Here is Shylock's monologue:

Shakespeare does such a good job in extracting pity from the audience for Shylock. He has been persecuted, mocked, and hardened. However, he loses the audience's sympathies as soon as he strives for them.
Everyone refers to him as a devil and we know of his hatred towards Antonio in making the bond. The audience really turns against him in two main scenes. The first when he discovers his daughter is gone and repeatedly yells "My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter!" The second in court when he becomes a cruel, evil monster, engrossed simply by his hatred and desire for revenge. Here is the most obvious contrast between justice and mercy. Shylock loses audience sympathies through his emphatic demand for justice.

A lot of the characters in this play really grab and intrigue me. I also think it is really interesting that we often dissect Shakespeare as literature instead of a play or a film. However, in this modern world we often run into adaptations or versions of Shakespeare in film before we read or see a live Shakespeare play.

As a film audience we are driven to turn against Shylock because everyone else is against him. The crowd--presented as a close Shakespearean audience is very vocal, loud and expressive. They all root for Antonio and mercy against Shylock and justice. As a film audience we are part of the loud crowd and almost want to jeer with them in favor of Antonio. This is created by camera angles and skillful design in adapting a play--an interactive Shakespearean play--into a film.

As I learn more about adapting a novel or play to film I am able to take these film adaptations of Shakespeare's plays in a different light. I am also inspired to admire Shakespeare as a great play-write. He clearly defines the characters we should love and hate, yet sometimes toying with our sympathies. We can identify with many of his characters at some point in the story. Although I may not sympathize with Shylock in the court room scene while he literally wants to kill Antonio, I identify with his monologue and the idea of being so persecuted and condemned for his beliefs. (As many religious people that belong to an uncommon belief system will). The condemnation that Shylock feels is a common reason people came to America--to escape religious persecution. 

I pose the question, through Antonio's and Shylock's relationship does Shakespeare praise or condemn Christian behavior?  I believe it could be argued either way. What do you think?  

A Different Method

To get an introduction to The Merchant of Venice I watched a movie trailer:

This introduction was sufficient for me because I realized I have seen this play performed by a local company this past summer in a park. It was very well done and very amusing, so I remember it well.

To read this play I decided to use a different strategy then I did last week in reading Henry V. I checked out the audio book from our HBLL Media Center!!

I am listening to the book as I follow along with my electronic copy of the script.

I prefer this method to just reading the play because I find it helps in character development, it helps me separate the characters (I often struggle while reading a play with so many different minor characters). The audiobook also gives me a music interlude to every scene to set tone and foreshadow what is to come, as well as, giving background noise to help place you in the setting better than just having to imagine it and forgetting where you are supposed to be.

All in all, this is a great experience.

Brainstorming

So in anticipation of our upcoming research paper I have been looking into some topics I would be interested in delving more into.

I love analyzing the portrayal and development of women in literature. I discovered this passion during a late British literature class when I was surrounding by women's conduct books and other literature concerning how women's role transformed over 100 years. First time I have ever loved research and wished I could stay in the library for hours and hours more simply consuming all I could.

So now, any chance I get I look at women, how they are portrayed, how men treat them, how society treats them, anything and everything.

So I was researching women in Shakespeare plays and stumbled upon an awesome list. (thank you Wikipedia!)        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Shakespeare's_works


For a preliminary topic choice/ emphasis for my research paper I want to read Taming of the Shrew and look into the character of Kate. Kate is an older sister who has an adorable, desirable little sister. However, Dad won't let little sister (Bianca) get married until her older sister gets married. (It was my older sister who gave me permission to get married first--oh how times change). So the town boys get Kate married off to someone willing to take in such a 'shrew.' The story follows Kate's transformation in marriage and how her husband 'tames the shrew.'

I also discovered that the movie 10 Things I Hate About You is an adaptation of Taming of the Shrew. 

There are several directions I could take this paper:

1. Analyze Kate and her transformation throughout the story
2. Compare Kate and Bianca/ their attitudes, how they are looked upon by society & men, etc.
3. Analyze the adaptation 10 Things I Hate About You to the original story Taming of the Shrew
4. Compare Taming of the Shrew Kate to 10 Things I Hate About You Kate

What do y'all think? 

Tennis Balls?

In Henry V Dauphin gives King Henry tennis balls as a gift.
King Henry responds to this gift well by making a speech comparing a tennis match to war.
I thought it was a really cool way to respond to such an offensive and sarcastic gift.

Here is a video rendition of the scene:

In class, Professor Burton hinted that the reason for the tennis balls was to chide Henry V  about his youthful "indiscretions." In the previous plays before Henry ascended the thrown the audience saw many of these youthful adventures and would be well aware of this history. In the very beginning we hear the clergymen talking about Henry's transformation.

Lord Canterbury: "The breath no sooner left his father's body, 

But that his wildness, mortified in him, 

Seem'd to die too; yea, at that very moment

Consideration, like an angel, came

And whipp'd the offending Adam out of him, 

Leaving his body as a paradise, 

To envelop and contain celestial spirits." 

However, I began to wonder why tennis balls? Why not some item more allusive to a bar scene or the fake highway robbery? 

So I began digging and found an interesting article called, "Tennis Balls: Henry V and Testicular Masculinity, or, According to the OED, Shakespeare Doesn't Have Any Balls" by Rebecca Ann Bach. 

            In this article she suggests that the tennis balls are a way to question King Henry's masculinity. She also suggests that Shakespeare uses this as a pun--comic relief--for the audience because of the number of times "balls" is said throughout Henry's speech. 

I also looked up if Shakespeare used tennis balls in any of his other plays. 

In Much Ado about Nothing, Act III, scene ii 

            Don Pedro: "Hath any man seen him at the barber's?" 

            Claudio: "No, but the barber's man hath been seen with him, 

                           and the old ornament of his cheek hath already 

                           stuffed tennis-balls." 

             Leonato: "Indeed, he look younger than he did, by the loss of a beard." 

This is another interesting time for Shakespeare to use the image of tennis balls. Laonato infers that Claudio look younger--more like a boy than a man--because he shaved. This infers a loss of masculinity. 

I thought it was interesting that in both of these instances a reader could claim that tennis balls were used to call into question the masculinity of a character.   

Universal Shakespeare

I have recently been pondering about the universal influence of Shakespeare. 

He had a great influence on English in the spelling and creating of new words, but there is also a literary value that keeps us studying him year after year. 

     So even though Shakespeare does not have the development influence on another language besides English has he been translated for study in other languages? 

In order to do this I looked for Shakespeare Sonnet 130. This is one of Shakespeare's most famous sonnets and it is so small I felt there was a good chance it had been translated. 

I looked for Spanish translations because I have taken a few Spanish classes, so I know a little bit of the language and know about Google España (http://www.google.es/). 

Lo and Behold.... 

Soneto CXXX 

William Shakespeare

Los ojos de mi amante no son comparables con el sol; 

El coral es mucho más rojo que el carmin de sus labios: 

Si la nieve ha de ser blanca, ¿ por qué sus senos son morenos?; 

Si el cabello ha de ser de cobre , negros alambres cercen en su cabeza

He visto rosas adamascadas, rojas y blancas, 

Pero no veo tales rosas en sus mejillas; 

Y en algunas fragancias hay más placer

Que en el hálito que mi amante expele 

Adoro oírle hablar, mas bien sé

Que la música tiene un son mucho más agradable: 

Reconozco que jámas he visto diosa andar, 

Mi amante, cuando camina, toca el suelo:

Y aún así, por los cielos, creo que mi amore s tan raro,

Como cualquier otra mujer representada con tal falsedad. 

 

http://mural.uv.es/luniecar/sonetostrad.htm

It is really interesting because Spanish can be more expressive than English. On the website they compare the English and Spanish translation and note the unusual Spanish words to the unusual English words. 

            For example, 'amante' is an affectionate term for lover in Spanish that they use for the term 'mistress' in English. 

In Spanish they may also use different words for the same word found in the English version. 

For example, the line "Coral, is far more red, than her lips red"  in Spanish the word red 'rojo' is not repeated. Instead it uses "mucho más rojo que el carmin de sus labios." Rojo means red, while carmin is more like lipstick. So literally "much more red than the lipstick of her lips." 

It is fun to explore Shakespeare in different languages because it gives a little different meaning and sometimes detail. 

Miranda, the lone woman

After reading The Tempest I looked up some criticism concerning the play.

I looked up some thoughts concerning Miranda because I thought it was interesting that she was the only female in the play. It is suggested that the romance leads her to a self-discovery, that her love relationship with Prince Ferdinand turned her father's motivation for revenge into a complacent reconciliation. Another article suggests that Miranda has an angelic nature that is contrasted to the island's darkness.

I think it is interesting how Shakespeare chooses to portray the only woman in the play. Miranda is ignorant of the real-world, and then excitedly accepts the first prospect that comes along. Miranda falls in love with Ferdinand and yet he "is the third man that e'er [she] saw, the first that e'er I sigh'd for." (Act I, scene ii)
One of those previous men had been for father so I'm glad that she didn't swoon for him.

So Miranda is full of hope and eagerness about the 'brave new world' she has to discover and embraces it with what some call optimism, but I call naivety. She almost represents hope and the promise of new life.

Why do you think Shakespeare chooses to represent women this way?   

Dipping in The Tempest

The Tempest is classified as a Shakespeare Romance. Interestingly I have found the first two acts more humorous than romantic.

My favorite line is in Act II

Antonio: "What impossible matter will he make easy next?"

Sebastian: "I think he will carry this island home in his pocket and give it his son for an apple."

Shakespeare is a master at comedic relief in his tragedies and I am pleased to discover the same stylistic comedy in this romance.

While I was treading YouTube in search of a video representation of this scene I came across an awesome movie trailer. Apparently The Tempest was turned into a film in 2010.

I had not heard anything about it, but it looks awesome.

I also looked into the representation of Ariel that the movie gives:

The ambiguity of Ariel's gender in the play is intriguing, so I was interested to find they did a male representation. I look forward to exploring more of this through academic articles.

Ignorantly Drowning in Shakespeare

Shakespeare has imposed an outstanding influence throughout time.

As I was reading for my Film and Literature class I discovered an allusion to an all too familiar play--Hamlet. In the beginning of A Christmas Carol Charles Dickens says,

"There is no doubt that Marley was dead. This must be distinctly

understood, or nothing wonderful can come of the story I am

going to relate. If we were not perfectly convinced that Hamlet's Father

died before the play began, there would be nothing more remarkable

in his taking a stroll at night, in an easterly wind, upon his own ramparts,

than there would be in any other middle-aged gentleman rashly turning

out after dark in a breezy spot--say Saint Paul's Churchyard for

instance--literally to astonish his son's weak mind."

I also recently discovered another allusion to Hamlet in a well-known work by T.S. Elliot "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock."

"No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;

Am an attendant lord, one that will do

To swell a progress, start a scene or two,

Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,

Deferential, glad to be of use,

Politic, cautious, and meticulous;

Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;

At times, indeed, almost ridiculous--

Almost, at times, the Fool" (line 111-119).

Shakespeare has truly saturated our culture and I find it very interesting to discover these allusions to Shakespeare in common literature as I learn and consume more Shakespeare and popular/academic literature.

Have you discovered a cool Shakespeare allusion?

Pick your Poison

My friend just wrote a paper discovering his own approaches and rituals while writing a paper. It turned me onto the idea that we all approach reading a book differently. I drastically change my approach even depending on the book I pick up. (There is a modern book that talks to the audience about reading and the nature of reading in a very funny, commentary way, but I cannot remember the name of it).

If I pick up a book for leisure reading, I strive for the 'romantic' setting of curling up in a huge armchair, wrapped in a blanket, ideally next to a big crackling fire, with just some peace and quiet.

If I read a textbook, I typically sprawl on the floor lying on my stomach, textbook lying open with my notes or other materials in an arch surrounding me.

What is your favorite way to read a book?

In my approach to reading Shakespeare's The Tempest I will first read a general outline of the play. I typically turn to Sparknotes.com or other equivalents like Shmoop.com. Then I will embark on my adventure of reading The Tempest. Most of it I will read silently, but some of the soliloquies or monologues I will read aloud.

Breaking Conventions

I chose to read a variety of Shakespeare sonnets.

I found that several of the seemingly romantic poems were not romantic at all.

This is odd because the style was over the top ridiculous admiration of a woman to seal her beauty through time. However, Shakespeare makes fun of this convention with Sonnet 130.

Here is a cool video of this sonnet my professor created. I really enjoyed it and hope you will too. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ0RjBthqhY&feature=player_embedded

Shakespeare also talks about unexpected topics in strange ways.

For example, in sonnet 51 Shakespeare talks about his horse being slow and delaying his arrival. However, it talks about it factually when you might expect cheesy lines such as "my heart races towards you faster than this foul beast can carry me."

http://www.shakespeares-sonnets.com/sonnet/51

Shakespeare sonnets are a different look at Shakespeare style and conventions--or lack thereof. They also make Shakespeare more accessible to a less patient crowd.

Bite sized Shakespeare for everyone!!

Past Experience with Shakespeare

Throughout the years, I have had many forced exposures to Shakespeare. Despite many negative experiences I have discovered some really enjoyable elements and perspectives to Shakespeare.

The language is difficult and often hard to understand; however, well-done plays make the text much more accessible.

My favorite play is Macbeth. I love the complex themes and psychological elements of the main characters. The question of madness driven by greed, poisoned by guilt.

Shakespeare often takes a mythological or extreme situation to very common and plausible situations. That is what makes Shakespeare so relevant today. The study of human nature has evolved and Shakespeare is a master at articulating certain elements of common human nature to study. There is also a complexity in character motivations because--after all--we are not creatures of simplicity.

I look forward to continuing to discover Shakespeare as I learn to appreciate and value his works.