Self-Evaluation: Looking Back and Having All the Good Ideas Now

Goodness, but this is almost always the worst part of any assignment! I see everything I could have done better, and everything that I would do if I had more time. But off we go to what I think of my own work and research.

Hub Post Finale: SOUND IN SHAKESPEARE

This has been an adventurous foray into the world of SOUND IN SHAKESPEARE, looking at how SOUND FOCUSES THE TEXT. I've posted a series of individual ideas that I would now like to link together those posts into a conclusion about what I've learned from these studies.

Sound makes all the difference in the understanding of a Shakespearean play. It is what focuses the meaning of the text, and alters the experience of the audience. What influences the sound also influences the focus and theme of the delivered text. The actor is what directly focuses the words from the page to the words ringing in the ears of all those who are experiencing the wonder of a Shakespearean play.

ANNNNNNNNND... I'm ENGAGED!

So I got ENGAGED tonight. It was a little distracting (BIIIIIIG understatement!) from some of my homework, but with our schedules, this was the only night that worked! Andrew is pretty much just the best man alive, and I'm the happiest woman because of it. :) So Professor Burton, what was that offer you extended for following the brethren? Something about an A? Haha. :) 

What's That Sound?: The Difference of Actors

Continuing along with this theme of SOUND FOCUSING TEXT, I would like to delve into something that really interests me. The difference of actors. The way that each individual interprets texts adds so much (or, in some cases, takes away) from just the words. I would like to show you a few interesting clips that I've found that compare over 10 different versions of the SAME SCENE in Hamlet, and each one is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! Isn't that amazing?! Last time, we looked at how the setting of the scene can impact the sound, and therefore, the focus of the text. This time we're focusing on just the actors' interpretations themselves.

This is part 1 of 4 of a series that takes Act 1, Scene 2 from Hamlet and gives it to us again and again and again, from different film productions. We'll be focusing on Laurence Olivier, Mel Gibson, Ethan Hawke, and David Tennant. Let's look at some key aspects of the Hamlets in these productions:

How do performance aspects influence how the sounds focus the text?

Continuing in my vein of SOUND FOCUSING TEXT, I will be spending some time with looking at how different performance aspects influence how sound really channels the text. I talked about this topic previously in my post on The Winter's Tale, with how setting influenced the actual meaning of the words being spoken.

Let's take a look at three different performances of Hamlet Act 1, Scene 2, each one with a different take on setting. It's interesting the way that the background details can change the very nuance of the sounds.

Taming of the Shrew: A Literary Analysis Using a Feminist Criticism

Image from here 

Mary Wollstonecraft was in the First Wave of feminism that started way back in the Romantic Era. She wasn't a radical, burn-your-bra kind of woman. She was a woman that wanted equality with men in relationships. I will be using her brand of criticism from her essay A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.

Society has set forth a constructed set of rules that dictates this is masculine, that is feminine, and then people act according to those dictates. In the world of The Taming of the Shrew (Taming), a good woman was to be meek, quiet, soft, and beautiful. They were not to be opinionated, strong-willed, or vocal. That was the man's realm. Bianca pretends to be the perfect woman, and in doing so, gains the admiration of society. Kate does not conform to the feminine, and is othered, and labeled as a Shrew. 

Finishing the Reading that I started

Courtesy of Karen Whimsey

I have been catching up on my reading this past weekend, finishing plays that I didn't have time to complete earlier in the semester. Can I just say that the History Plays are duller than a dead cat licking peanut butter off of a moldy pickle? Ya, they're just not very exciting. What was exciting, however, was finishing The Taming of the Shrew. That's a good play. It's the one that I've been the most drawn to all semester. I've watched several film versions/adaptations of this movie, some of which I blogged about in previous posts.

Peer Evaluation: Laura Davis

Laura's blog has the fascinating topic of myths and archetypes in Shakespeare's plays. I am looking over her blog for a peer evaluation.

UPDATE: I'm not dead, but close enough to it...

Sorry to the world for falling off and dying so completely. Please know that intelligence will be restored, but it's just been one of those weeks. I hope to be alive again shortly. Have an enjoyable day.

Coming Attraction and SKYPE ANALYSIS

I had fun with getting contacts and figuring out technology last night, so I'll be posting later today what I should have posted last night. I am looking forward to this post about SOUND and DIFFERENT SPOKEN INTERPRETATIONS.

So skyping that Shakespeare scene was one heck of an experience. I did not actually participate in the way of having lines and reading, but I did listen in since it very much had to do with my topic. I noticed that having just the sound made a big difference in the understanding of the text! That may sound ridiculously obvious, but really, this made you really listen to the actual words. Since we couldn't see who was speaking, we had to listen to the words and try to determine the character that way. I concluded that it is important to have a means of distinguishing the characters from each other in a way that is audible. Think about it. Even if you were watching a play, and all the characters sounded just the same, then the beauty of the play would be rather lost, wouldn't it?

Continued Original Pronunciation- Why Does it Matter?

So why does it matter so much that ORIGINAL PRONUNCIATION (OP) is different than RECEIVED PRONUNCIATION (RP)?

In my previous post on SOUND, I discussed that there were these two different styles. Here is Kevin Bacon with another sample of OP, this time from King Henry V. He gives an explanation of what makes the OP so basically different than the RP.

I will summarize some of his key points:

• RP is very airy, with a higher pitch in voice, and a properly regal pose.
• OP is very earthy, with lower voice register and a more crouched position.
• RP is given in a majestic way.
• OP is very much more down to the basics, one man talking to another.
• OP is much quick paced than RP, with liaisons (links between the words to create fluidity).
• OP involves movement and life.

I think it matters how different the two are because the very way in which he acts is changed by the way he speaks. The very intensity, the pull into the drama is heightened when he gets down and dirty with the text. This shows me that Shakespeare was meant to be experienced, that Shakespeare was meant to be understood from the point of view of the common man. This is for everyone, not just those of elevated rank and station. In his book The Sound of Shakespeare, Wes Folkerth states that "Hearing is represented in early British culture as an opening up of the self, as a kind of surrender or submission, an openness" (68). This language, these plays were made to be heard and seen, and in response to being an object for interaction, a script became an experience for those who would open up and listen. There is a universal beauty in Shakespeare that can be found for all people. (For an example of this, Germans loved Shakespeare so much that they took and adopted him as part of their culture. See David's blog for more information.) Shakespeare for the people, in a language for them to connect with. That's why it matters so much to me.

Wouldn't it be fascinating to watch something like when Katharina and Petruchio meet in that scene from The Taming of the Shrew? The quick nature of the OP would build the tempo which is so necessary for the language of that scene to work. I know that since there are a few production companies that do performances in this style, I will look for a scene or two to use in my upcoming branch of research involving different productions of the same play. That will give me some more interesting fodder for thought. I hope you enjoyed it!

Original Pronunciation vs. Received Pronunciation of Shakespeare

Want to hear some Shakespeare in his own accent?!

This is Ben Crystal, an actor and researcher of Shakespeare, performing Sonnet 116 "Let me not to the marriage of true minds" first in modern accent, called RECEIVED PRONUNCIATION, and then in Elizabethan, or ORIGINAL PRONUNCIATION.

I am searching for the difference of SOUND between Elizabethan English and modern English, and the effects it has on the text, its understandings, and its performances.

In searching more into my theme of SOUND IN SHAKESPEARE, I went to the beloved class text of The Necessary Shakespeare. The General Introduction happens to be amazing, for anyone that didn't know it already. On page LXXXIV there is a section completely on "Shakespeare's English: Pronunciation." It references the fact that there was the GREAT VOWEL SHIFT that occurred between then and now. That's why many of the words in a "rhyming" poem don't actually rhyme when we read them aloud today. 

A list of some words that have changed include: folk (sound the L), wide  (said woide), knife (sound the k, i said as in wide), house (said hoos), dissention (in four syllables, without the SH sound), creeping (said craypin), and many more. There is an extended list under the section in the book.

Another important issue is that not only have pronunciations changed, but also "the differences in Shakespeare's English and ours in the accentuation of syllables" (LXXXV). Sometimes Shakespeare took certain liberties in changes the accented syllables in his words. Many of the words were just bizarrely accented compare to ours. 

• -TION and -SION were regularly said with two syllables. Some accents were slurred together with a nasal or a liquid. (See dissention in list of words above.)
• This caused other words to be broken. OCE-AN, MARRI-AGE, etc. 
• Nasals and liquids are used as if an "extra vowel were introduced between them and a preceding letter" (LXXXV). Ex: wrest(e)ler, Eng(e)land, ent(e)rance, de-ar, mo-re, etc.

Compared to RECEIVED PRONUNCIATION (RP), the ORIGINAL PRONUNCIATION (OP), can have: 1. an extra syllable, 2. one fewer syllable, 3. two adjoining syllables in adjoining words that elide. The spelling doesn't always give that hint away to the modern reader. (From LXXXV.)

That was some of my research for today. It will be more developed Monday as I have more time to round out these ideas and find some more examples in the text. Thanks and have a great day!

A More Organized Self with Re-Direction in Focus of Sound and Text

So in deciding that my theme was how SOUND FOCUSES TEXT, I just jumped right in and started doing applications and analyses instead of doing research. Silly me. So I've decided to take a step back and finish what  I started the RIGHT way. Here is a list of where I am going.


1. How does the pronunciation of a word change meanings?
I will be looking into the front of our class text The Necessary Shakespeare, which has a fascinating section on just this. I will also be looking a little bit into the Great Vowel Shift, which my classmate David pointed out to me in his comment on a previous post.


2. How do performance aspects influence how the sounds focus the text?
I want to look at different productions, and see if plays versus movies make a large difference in the sound. What about a live outdoor performance? What about a lavish silver screen production? 


3. How do individual performances bring out different aspects of the text and/or define characters?
This is one that I'm really interested in. I have a book, Author's Pen and Actor's Voice: Playing and Writing in Shakespeare's Theater, Robert Weimann, (I mentioned it in that same post that David commented on) that has to do with this very aspect. It's also what I looked at when I was comparing and contrasting performances, as in my post on A Winter's Tale, and my post on The Taming of the Shrew and Much Ado About Nothing.


These are what I am going to be focusing on, breaking them down into weeks and days. I'm making a schedule of when I'm posting/focusing on each topic, but I know that my next post will be on the first item. I noticed while making my sources page that I need to actually get sources that apply to my topic! So here I go, off into the world to get cracking on the research part of this research blog!

An Apology, An Excuse, and A Discovery

Dearest Fellows, I am wholeheartedly ashamed that I have not posted for the past few days. I am sorry to all of those dear sweet individuals who actually care what I'm posting about (like my professor) and want to know how my research is coming. I promise to do better.

Excuse? I almost died under the load of tests, life, and OHMYGOODNESS that has been going on during this last little bit. As soon as I work out my schedule, one of my teachers throws a wrench in, and I have to reorganize times and priorities again. I'm sorry!

Discovery? I have very little applicable research to my topic. I found several books earlier, and then I started looking at different renditions of the same plays/scenes, and I got distracted from finding sources. While I was making my SOURCES page, I was looking through my old posts, and I discovered that I didn't have any applied research. I refined my topic to HOW SOUND INFLUENCES/FOCUSES THE TEXT and so some of my old findings don't even work any more. I'm starting to go through the old stuff and see what I can still use. And I'm also on the search for more research materials.

So that's what's going on with this child of inquiry. I'm looking for more, I'm looking for more consistency, and I'm promising to keep going. Thanks all.

Creatively Engaging Shakespeare's The Tempest

This is the finished product of my cake based on The Tempest.

This didn't have to do with my topic of SOUND, but instead, some good taste. I creatively engaged Shakespeare in one of the forms of art that I enjoy the most: baking. I tied in The Tempest to an edible canvas that included symbols of themes/ideas that I picked out from my reading.

This is what happens when things go wrong.

It was an interesting development, considering almost everything that could go wrong, did go wrong. I went to the store, and there was nothing that I needed. I used interesting substitutions instead. Then it was really late, and I fell over backwards on my kitchen floor with the bowl of cake batter (made from scratch, I'll have you know) and I just stayed there for a while. The cake baked, and I got back up.

I chose what I wanted my cake to include theme-wise. I really liked the idea of the POISON OF REVENGE, and the LIBERATING POWER OF FORGIVENESS. I found symbols that I could use, and then sketched out my cake. I began decorating.

Finding a Point to the Madness AND a Taste of My Creativity

I've been studying SOUND, and so far, it's been a variety of different topics within the text. Although I'm extremely interested in the songs, and will not likely give that up altogether, I am leaning towards SOUND FOCUSING THE TEXT, and how that changes the meaning and understanding of Shakespeare's plays. I really enjoyed doing my last post about this topic, especially focusing on the comparison of different renditions of the same play. I am going to be editing/expanding that idea as per the suggestions of others, and some further ideas that have come to me through my studying. (Tonight shall not be the night since I'm having SEVERE technical difficulties-good grief.)

As I have been looking at The Tempest for inspiration on sound, I decided that's going to be my creative juice. I do baking. So I am making a CAKE that depicts the play. It's quite the adventure so far, since I went to the store, and it didn't have ANYTHING that I needed, so I made some interesting substitutions. And I'm excited about it. I'm debating with myself about whether to bring the big thing into class or not. Either way, my next post will include pictures and details of my cake/Shakespeare extravaganza. There are follow up elements to the cake as well, that show the connections between the elements of the cake and the elements of the play. Just know that my cake is delectably delicious. Thanks for being alive. Hopefully I continue to be so as well.

The Taming of the Shrew: A Text/Film Comparison of What Makes the Shrew Shrewish

This post applies my topic of SOUND in Shakespeare to an old idea. It's actually a bit of a follow up/comment on a previous post of mine when I read The Taming of the Shrew. I also read Joanna's blog post that wrote about the same time as mine. I watched the Elizabeth Taylor/Richard Burton version of this play, and am doing a comparison to the text, and how I think it all played together.

Firstly, I would like to focus on how the sounded lines changed the understanding of the text. When Katharine and Petruchio are having their battle of tongue and wit, the text allows for a very quick repartee between the two. I felt the need for snappish returns, which would in turn fuel the next response, culminating in a fantastic sparring of the sexes. I felt that, although Kate's lines were still witty, Taylor's sometimes drawn out delivery slowed down the pacing and changed the feeling of the exchange. Between the slowed delivery and the blocking, the scene became more focused on the physical exchange of who is mastering who with clever skillz and moves. I don't think that this is a necessarily bad choice, but I do feel that it takes the focus away from Kate's being a Shrew because of her tongue.

What makes her a SHREW?

Katharina of The Taming of the Shrew VS. Beatrice of Much Ado About Nothing

  If Kate is a Shrew because of her words, then who else is a Shrew? I am thinking of Beatrice from Much Ado About Nothing, and I don't believe that she is called a shrew. Is then the definition of the Shrew included in the delivery of the words? Kate has an exceptionally sharp tongue, and she's got the mind to fuel that dagger of hers. If her words were said is a lighter, almost more playful manner, would she be considered a shrew still? Is she a shrew because she shrieks her lines, and throws chairs and tables about? Beatrice is also very clever, and can dish out to anyone. She is in a constant rivalry of words with Benedick, and blasts words out nearly incessantly. However, they way that she speaks is completely opposite from Katharina. She is not physical, and has a less shrill tone to her voice. The sound comes across as much more pleasant. Consider the difference between how we are introduced to Kate and Beatrice in their openings. Here is Kate when we first meet her in the production that I just watched again.

Here is Beatrice in the opening of the excellent Kenneth Branaugh adaptation of the film version of the play Much Ado About Nothing.

The Shrew Katharina is very violent and tears your ears with her lines. Beatrice, though exceptionally sassy, is not called a shrew. Is this because she is bright and playful?

I'm going to be following this post with another one similar to this focusing on an analysis of language itself as a theme using these same two plays.

My Good Influence

A quick post: My study of Shakespeare, and in particular SOUND, has produced rather peculiar effects on my men folk. My apartment of two mechanical engineers and two computer scientists are speaking entirely in Shakespearean terms. This is most interesting. MOST entertaining. I don't even know how to handle this new vocabulary coming up. "Whence goest thou?... Wherest goest thou?... Whyfore goest thou?... Wha....?" My personal favorite: "WTNest dost this happen?" (WTN= what the Natashya)

I doubt anyone else will find this as entertaining as myself, but all the same. Have a good day.

Sounds and Stress

I am looking into SOUND in Shakespeare's plays. I don't know if I want to look at the sounds Shakespeare specifically included, or more at the performing aspects of sound. I'm kinda fishing around, but I plan to have a focus by the end of this weekend.

I would like to do a quick looking into of the flash mob that part of our Shakespeare class did last Saturday. There is a video posted on Whitney's blog of the actual event. I noticed that the sound of the "theater" we picked was difficult to work with: it was a very echo-y food court in a mall, with music from speakers, noise from vendors, and chatter from the patrons. It was actually hard for me to hear "Juliet" from where I was standing on the sidelines because his lines were nearly lost in the din. It made me think of how actors in Shakespeare's day would have made themselves heard in their theaters, where there were tons of people, and no microphones. I am in the process of looking into that. Does anyone know a good source to find out about acoustics in the Globe Theater.

By way of announcement/explanation, the reason that we've been sparse this week on intelligence is that there are other happenings in my life that aren't part of this class, but require my attention. It's been a great week and an awful week, and I haven't time to do anything. But hopefully this weekend will allow to catch back up and get back on my feet again. Thanks for your patience and great tips. I appreciate all of them!

Two Dreams Come True...

Today, March 5th, will go down in history as the day that two of my dreams came true.

1. I was in a FLASH MOB. And not just any flash mob either. A SHAKESPEAREAN SOLILOQUY flash mob. Romeo's endless praise of Juliet while he's stalking her after the party. We did that. I'm gonna get a video of that and throw that up here. Everyone should have the privilege to not understand what we were saying in that video (there was a pretty bad echo).

2. I was in the presence of one of my idols since coming to BYU this past Fall (I'm a transfer student). I must admit that I'm a HUGE Divine Comedy fan, and I love the shoulder angels, and the crazy, marriage obsessed Provo, UT girls, and... *sigh* Matt was Juliet for us. My boyfriend Andrew and I were really excited about that. Pretty darn thrilled.

Anywho, that's one heck of an exciting way to pass off a performance requirement. I also did some sharing of the good ole Bard, since I brought two of my menfolk to fill in some manly lines for the mobbing. They were thrilled to be there, even though they're both mechanical engineers.

A HUGE SHOUT OF THANKS TO WHITNEY AND MAX for getting everything together and getting the class moving with that project. I had a great time, and I really appreciate the effort that both of you put in. :) So THANKS!

I'm editing my previous post so that it includes more information about the books' details, since Professor Burton suggested that would be a good idea. I'm perusing the books, but not a lot these past two days since I just took two tests of death and destruction. I'll be getting more into them starting on Monday, when I hope to post again.

Book-ing and Movie-ing and Think-ing

As I've mentioned before, I'm searching into sounds in Shakespeare's texts. I don't know which aspect to take, really, so I've just been exploring these past few days. How narrow should I be getting, anyway?

So in my adventures, I found some fun toys to play with.

The Sound of Shakespeare, Wes Folkerth. This book talks about "listening as Shakespeare listened," which is something that fascinates me. Shakespeare, according to Folkerth, listened to sounds uncommon, common, and everything in between, and then used his knowledge of people's expectations in his plays to work on people's emotions. I want to get more into this book for sure.

Author's Pen and Actor's Voice: Playing and Writing in Shakespeare's Theater, Robert Weimann. "This study redefines relations between writing and playing... as marked by difference as well as integration in... the production of early modern stages." That's what the back of the book says. I'm trying to see how sound focuses the text, and how it can help interpret the play. There is a section on "Pen and Voice" and the difference between the visual and the auditory. I wish to investigate that aspect.

Shakespeare's Use of Song, Richmond Noble. What is more sound-y than music? What got me started on this focus was reading The Tempest, and seeing all of Ariel's songs. This book has a section that is all about Ariel's songs in that play. Good find? I think so. 

I haven't read all of these texts yet, but I'm getting started on them. All three of these books were written by intelligent people at universities like Oxford and Stanford. AND I found all of them in our library. Did you know that there are tons of books on Shakespeare up there? I got distracted with all of the topics, and actually took note of a few because I knew some of my classmates had related topics.

Anyway, those are some texts that I'm diving into to get some grasp on where to go from here. Also, this weekend, I plan to be watching some adaptations of either Taming of the Shrew (ie, 10 Things I Hate About You, Kiss Me, Kate), or Twelfth Night (ie, She's the Man). If anyone wants to have a party, or owns one of those movies, let me know.

Sounds and Silence

This is a production of The Winter's Tale from 1981. Since my personal focus is on sound, and how it focuses the text, I am interested in different castings and productions. Firstly, may I say that after being used to having music in the background of almost every movie that we watch, it is strange listening for sound in a musicless production? Sometimes you don't realize what you're used to until it's suddenly not there.

I would refer you to Hermione's monologue that starts at 6:00. I listened to this seeing how sound could develop this emotional section. I found the inflections, tones, and pauses, that this actress applied very effective. Music is an arrangement of tones and silence, and that makes her speech a bit of  a song, one that appeals for justice and a restoration of her honor.

This is the animated version of the play done by BBC. Our scene starts at about 2:25 and goes to about 4:17. This is a short poignant version of the scene. It really brings to mind the spectacle part of the Romance plays, with the whooshing winds, the fact that Hermione's veil is always moving, and the flashing lights. Sound wise, I thought it interesting that this scene was set in a giant room, and all the words echoed. It gave it an eerie, other worldly type of feeling. It's different than the mute surroundings in the first production, which brought all emphasis on the words, in the moment of speech, rather than the echoes that came after

I am looking for more productions. If anyone can find a good rendition of the monologue by Paulina, please let me know. That was the speech I was originally looking for!

Jewlius Seezer

While I was reading the passage for today, I noticed a few interesting things.

When Brutus spoke to the crowds of angry mobbers, he spoke in prose. I thought that was unique, considering that he is supposed to be a grand orator. Perhaps he was trying to speak in a way the crowds would connect with. He also uses a lot of repetition, such as the word IF, like lines 17, 19, 29, 31, 33. If this, then that statements seem popular with him. And he uses them persausively to play upon the emotions of the people.

Antony goes the full nine yards with dramatics. He speaks in verse, and has extreme repetitions and pathetic pleas. The question of "what is ambitious" seems to be a popular idea in his first speech. He also continually calls Brutus and company "honorable men," so they must be right in their accusations against Caesar.

Not that these people would particularly care, but I saw several images that linked to Christ. References to wounds, especially in body (chest), traitors who killed their master, and insistence on worshiping the body.

This not extensive, but just a few things I found interesting. Have a nice day!

Progress Report

1. I meeting some of my self-inflicted goals for the semester. Most of them, actually. Just not in the way that I'd like to, or in the time that I feel is goodly for my schedule and what needs to be done. I'm getting reading done, and I do research, but then I neglect to post, which is stupid.
2. This semester, I have read Hamlet, King Henry V, Othello, The Taming of the Shrew, and The Tempest. (Confession: I have not finished all of the plays, of which I am severely ashamed. I'm finishing them off, though. A little each week.) I use Shakespeare study guides, like No Fear Shakespeare, and I also use wikipedia as a starter tool to look up authors and articles on the plays that I am reading. I have looked into the idea of language as a theme, music in plays, and also politics in plays.
3. I'm awful at linking to my own blog, but I enjoy commenting on others. I also mention other learning and classes in my posts.
4. I actually really love Shakespeare, and I love discussing his plays. Some, more than others. I find it most engaging when we get to talk about what we've learned, because that way, I get to bounce things around with other, more intelligent people than myself. Personally, I've noticed certain themes that continue to be written about that I have no intention of addressing on the outset. Like politics. And yet I have noticed it in almost all the plays I've read. I've noticed that while I have a love of research, I also have a love of going ADD and never posting before running off to the next subject. This is not a good habit. I wish to repent.
5. I have done pretty well on commenting intelligently, and the posts I do write up are the result of some good brainwork. Unfortunately, what I need to work on is actually posting the things that I've been working on, so that people (like my dear teacher) can see that I have been making an effort for this class.
6. I really love reading/listening to Whitney's ideas. She seems to come up with some really creative blurbs that get me thinking. I work well off of Sarah Jane and her blog as well. She brings up her opinions and then makes connections that I hadn't thought of. When she posts, it gets me going, and then I want to look up that information and go deeper into it as well. Joanna is another one that I follow. I enjoy her posts on the women in the texts, and how they feature in the plays. I find Max's in class comments amazingly intriguing, and I want to go diving into the ideas that we brainstorm in small groups.

Peer Evaluation: Sara Da Silva Castro

Number of Posts: 19, and they're pretty darn good posts as well. I actually follow her, and I really enjoy her posts, which are pretty regular, and really intelligent. I would say that she goes above and beyond, sometimes posting several times a week, and they are all informative and interesting, as opposed to being useless, like some of my own are. I love the labels on the side that show which posts relate to which plays and learning outcomes. It's very well organized. I particularly loved her posts on scansion and her interview with her mother. The scansion post blew my mind, and made me go back and look at some of the plays that I read. I'm looking into that with my blog (but of course I haven't posted yet) because she's inspired me! I think a good quality that goes across the board is her ability to find something interesting, and then dig after it and learn more about that aspect of the play. She is straightforward and well organized, and that makes her blog very easy to read. I don't know that I have a lot to suggest in improvements. She's very regular, and keeps her posts varied with pictures, videos, links,etc. Perhaps the same thing I have to work on, linking with peers' blogs. She did an amazing job, though. Keep up the great work!

"Partly Racist Warning"

As I was just diving right into this play, I decided to stop flailing about, and start swimming around and start looking. I don't want to bash my head on the bottom of the pool.

So instead of hurting myself...

I stopped reading and went to Sparknotes, which is one of the best things that ever happened to high school English students/English majors everywhere, and searched Othello.  I found this video a helpful go over of the play, even if the man has a dreadfully dull voice.

Wikipedia, one of the two sources of all information, gave me background information and the source history in brief. This play was written around 1604. Turns out Shakespeare mooched this play off of an Italian play called "Un Capitano Moro", or "A Moorish Captain," by Cinthio. The plays are pretty darn similar. Shakespeare does depart from it, however, in a few different ways. For example,

• Desdemona is the only character named in the Cinthio. Everyone else just has cool titles, like Moor, or Engisn, or Captain. Cool, huh?
• In Cinthio, Iago wanted to get with Desdemona, and was driven by revenge when she refused him.
• In Cinthio, Othello and Iago tag team to kill Desdemona and then cover the murder by making it look like an accident. Othello is caught later and tortured and killed. Iago is caught for other crimes and meets the same fate. Emilia is the only character that isn't dead at the end, and she tells the story. THIS is the most striking departure from the original text.
• Shakespeare adds characters.
• FUN FACT: The notes in some editions of Cinthio's play include a "partly-racist warning."

I hearkened to our dear teacher, and turned to the textbook and found some fascinating information. Like that though Shakespeare's main tragedies focus around "the deadly sins of the spirit" like "ambitious pride, ingratitude, wrath, jealousy, and vengeful hate," Othello is focused on sexual jealousy (Bevington 605). It's not just about the cosmos and the huge scheme of life and the universe, but about "the destruction of love through jealousy" (605). A list of differences between this and the other major tragedies is provided, including:

• Protagonist not a king or prince
• No supernatural visitions
• Social order not taken as seriously
• Not a widespread condemnation of humanity
• Focuses on ideas of divine justice
• Battles of good and evil for favor of the protagonist

I did a little background check on a character I'm interested in studying. Did you know that Iago is one of the few Shakespeare villains who do evil for the sake of being an evil jerk? He isn't driven entirely by ambitious pride or anything else like that. There are elements of that, but he really just wants to be mean sometimes.

And now that I have done all of that, I feel more prepared to jump back into reading. I have found some interesting themes that I want to see if I can pull out and examine more in detail. I'm wondering what literary application I should take with this. Hmmmm.....

A Tragedy for the Ears

... of the Non-Tone Deaf.

...Or the tone deaf...

... And just everyone else.

I just thought that you would enjoy listening to this during the especially HORRIFIC parts of your Tragedies. I'm thinking that I'll start this clip when all the murders start happening. Or, since I'm reading Othello, I'll just apply it to a particular character as his theme song. Perhaps Iago's. 

Anyway, I hope I didn't kill anyone's love of children with this middle school band's lovely attempt at music.

Have a nice day! Keep smiling while wading through the blood-baths you've chosen to read for this next week! (And through the pain from the severe wounds now in your your ears as well. What an awful sound that is.)

Taming a Woman: The Real Mysterious Wonder?

Dear Readers, I apologize for the temporary death. I assure you all that life has been restored to myself and, hopefully, my brain. 


I read The Taming  of the Shrew as one of the comedies this last week. We discussed in class some of the elements that constitute a Shakespearean comedy. I tried to relate those elements to the play I read, instead of just blandly listening to our dear professor. I came up with some interesting conclusions.


The characters go from city to nature, where chaos happens, and then everyone returns home changed, or having learned something, or found someone.
In this play, Petruchio and Kate leave the city and go out on a trip to go back to Petruchio's home after the wedding. When they return to the city for her sister's wedding, Kate the Shrew is not only not screaming and throwing things, she is so good at being a wife that she lectures two other women on the duties of an obedient wife.

What the heck happened?

Petruchio goes to "wive it wealthily in Padua; If wealthily, then happily in Padua" (I.ii.75-76). He gets a wench with a penchant for loud shrieks, throwing things, and a sharp tongue. He plains to break her in, like you would with a horse, and turn her into a "real" and docile woman. 


He uses a variety of mental anguishes that would plague a well-born woman to bits. He ruins her wedding. He publicly embarrasses her. He doesn't let her eat. He doesn't let her get cute new clothes. He doesn't let her sleep. 


All of these torments start at the wedding, when they leave, and ends when they return. So, if  magical things are supposed to happen out in the forest, where there are fairies, crazinesses, and enchantments... Is taming a woman the magical event of this play?


The dialogue is quick and witty, and involves a large amount of puns.
The characters, ESPECIALLY Petruchio and Kate, use each other to build up momentum. In the "courting" scene, Kate and Petruchio have a fun round of words that change meanings and ideas faster than you can read the last line. The effect is that they build up a kinetic energy that is continually fueled by each line, and the bouncing produced bounces more, and then more bouncing, until there is a frenzy.

Something INTERESTING that I found while researching:

So we all know that the dialogue is important in a comedy, but what about the idea that LANGUAGE ITSELF IS A THEME? I found that idea fascinating, and I'm going into that one further. For now, here are some little tidbits that I found.

• Language is what classifies Kate as a shrew. She has a sharp tongue and a ready wit that she delights in using to cut others down. She also likes dissing men.
• Language is one of the ways that Petruchio plans to tame Kate. Petruchio purposefully misinterprets what Kate says so that there is a disconnect of meaning between the two. This causes confusion, and throws off her ability to attack him. He cuts off her arsenal.

Say that she rail, why then I'll tell her plain
She sings as sweetly as a nightingale.
Say that she frown, I'll say that she looks as clear
As morning roses newly washed with dew.
Say she be mute and will not speak a word,
Then I'll commend her volubility
And say she uttereth piercing eloquence.
If she do bid me pack, I'll give her thanks,
As though she bid me stay by her a week.
If she deny to wed, I'll crave the day
When I shall ask the banns, and when be marri'd.

(2.1.169–179)

These are two ideas that came to my attention when I was perusing online for some different ideas. I want to further delve into these concepts, and find some articles that flesh out these ideas. (Just so you know, these ideas are NOT actually mine. I'm not that smart. I found them on wiki, and I want to expand upon them.)


Well, that's all for now. If anyone knows of a good way to go about starting my research into rhetoric and dialogue, let me know.

Something to Delight Your Eyes

 

This picture is called "Henry V and His Troops Pray for Victory Over the French Before the Battle of Agincourt" by Joseph Kronheim. This fellow did a whole series of paintings on this battle, and the troops of the French and the British, as well as other interesting points in British history. They're actually quite nice. I love art almost as much as I love music. You'll be getting more art and music along the way.

The State of Two Unions

In reading Henry V, I found myself inundated in politics today. As I was watching the State of the Union Address by President Obama, I made several connections to some lines in the play. Here's a brief rundown of the points that came down to mind.

• President Obama stated that there needed to be bipartisan efforts in order for the government to accomplish anything of value. In 1.2, Exeter states that "For government, though, and low, and lower, put into parts, doth keep in one consent, like congreeing in a full and natural close, like music" (180-183).  I don't know about what others think, but I'm thinking that modern politics hardly sound like music. The intense discords between mudslinging hooligans is not of the same caliber as the intense discords that ease off into some kind of resolution. If there is no working together, then the parties just take turns passing bills when their party is the majority, and it changes with the elections. It becomes very difficult for real progress to be made.
• King Henry V declared that England needed to be prepared not only to invade France, but also to defend itself from invasions from the Scots. Obama said we need to look at our infrastructure which has fallen over the past several years, and find a way to build it back up again. 
• He talked about several key issues that would help build us back up in the world again, including increased availability of high-speed internet access, good resources, high-speed trains, and improving the road systems. We need to have a good strong base in order to be able to do anything to help other countries. 
• Part of that strong base is our children's education. If the kids aren't taught well, then the future of the country is also in danger. We shouldn't educate other people, and then send them off to other countries to compete against us and our businesses. We should use the education system to build up the nation. President Obama called for good teachers to rise up and serve their country. It's interesting that the call has gone from soldiers to teachers.

Well, those are some of the ideas that were floating down in my head. They aren't spectacularly well developed right now, but I plan on looking further into the ideas of education and politics in relation to Shakespearean plays. I also plan on writing what I had researched before I watched the Address and wrote this instead.

Have a glorious day! 

On a Prince of Denmark and a Secretary of State

Former Secretary of State Condeleezza Rice came to BYU to speak at the forum, and I had the extreme privilege of sitting in the Marriott Center and listening to her speak. She spoke on a wide variety of topics, including a Question and Answer session. I found that I had Hamlet on the brain when almost everything she said made me think of our beloved off-kilter prince.

Dr. Rice mentioned that  the biggest threat to any country is itself. In Hamlet, there is "something rotten in the state of Denmark," something so rotten it culminated in the death of Hamlet and half the cast. When a country or a family is constantly battling itself, then it becomes easier for other threats to become a serious danger. In Hamlet, there is the threat coming from Fortinbras on the outside of Denmark. Denmark itself is in a rough spot with the death of a beloved king, the crowning and wedding of a new king who is not the old king's son, and now Hamlet is going a little emo. There is definitely some cause to worry when there is "something rotten in the state of Denmark" while there is something rotten brewing abroad as well. Where do you focus your attentions?

Education has the power to change your life. It changes where you are, what opportunities are placed before you, where you are going, how you act, how you speak. It changes everything. Enter our example from the play. Hamlet was sad enough over his father dying and mother remarrying. Then he got himself an education from his dead father's ghost, and everything changed. He went from sad to bonkers and mad for revenge. He stayed at Elsinore and changed how he was acting (he started acting like a mad man), and how he was speaking (he started raving like a mad man- but with some method behind it).

Dr. Rice also mentioned that am education can affect your family for generations to come, using her grandfather's Presbyterian education as an example. Since her grandfather became a minister, her whole family has been highly educated and Presbyterian. Hamlet got educated, and it definitely affected his family when they all got killed off. It even killed off some of the family friends. Now there are no future generations to influence with his education.

Aggrievement and entitlement bring only grief to yourself, and irritation to others. They also rob you of your ability to control your life and your actions, becoming a reactor instead. Hamlet fell to a point where he reacted to everything instead of making rational choices. He started becoming more violent and more demanding of those around him. Fortinbras wanted to get back the land that his father had lost. The land wasn't worth anything, but it was for honor. Seems ridiculous to me.

While deciding on a career choice back in college, Dr. Rice went and talked to a municipal government official to see if that was something she would be interested in doing. She said that he was the single most boring man that she had ever met. I couldn't help but think of Polonius. That man has some funny lines, but he's ridiculous, stuffed up, and excessively irritating. When I think of him, I can't keep from snickering at the mental image of some fat pig shoved inside some black judge robes, with one of those ridiculous white wigs that lawyers used to wear. Like I said, ridiculous.

One of the last points that Dr. Rice made was that the very essence of human nature is to integrate knowledge of what is and faith in what might be. Hamlet got caught up in the knowledge of what was happening right in front of him at that exact moment. He forgot to look ahead, to look around. He lost faith in human nature, in his friends (except Horatio), and in family ties. Because of his inability to to integrate and his obsessive attitude on revenge, Hamlet and company came to a very untimely and tragic end. It's really very sad.

I don't know if all of this is accurate analysis, but it's what went through my head as I was listening to Dr. Rice. It was an interesting study to make.

"I know a hawk from a handsaw"- Engineers and Hamlet

Hamlet. Extremely famous tragic (and dramatic) prince from an extremely famous tragic (and dramatic) play. Even people who don't have anything to do with the educated gentility related to being an English major can quote lines from this one. "Get thee to a nunnery!" "To be, or not to be, that is the question." "Brevity is the soul of wit." People don't even know they're being cultured when they throw one of those out there.

I decided that even though I've studied Hamlet a good few times, I would like to find a new way of reading. I have often "translated" Shakespeare into more benign (or modern) English for friends or family who don't sit around and read his works on a regular basis. I wondered what it would be like to introduce the Prince of Denmark to a group of men as far from Shakespeare as possible: science geeks and math dweebs.

My experiment:

Begin by selecting a group of subjects for the study. I chose apartment 9, which consisted of two Computer Science majors (Matthew and Michael), and two Mechanical Engineers (Brandon and Andrew).

Announce the activity and assign roles. I went with just telling the boys that they were going to be reading Hamlet out loud with me, and that they would have a good time doing it. I spoke their native language...

Me: *Point and grunt* "Brandon, you Polonius!" *point at next boy, then to page* "Andrew, you Ghost. Ghost dead king. *grunt* Good?"

... and so on and so forth till the parts were assigned. When we ran out of people, we improvised with falsetto ranges, random stuffed things lying around, and having conversations with ourselves.

Read. This was thrilling. I've seldom been so entertained in my life. The boys took some things very literally (such as the Ghost speaking from beneath, when Andrew crawled under the coffee table to bellow "Swear!" every time he was kicked), and made comments that really made me think about the text. When we got to some especially long passages, it took pretty long to get through them because if you're not used to reading Shakespeare, you're just not used to it.

Collect and analyze the results. Hearing the familiar lines read aloud (slowly) by a new voice (not mine) made me think again about what the words were actually saying. And how absolutely ridiculous Polonius is. And why does Hamlet tell the First Player a list of ways to perform and to not perform the speech, and then tell him to use his own judgment? Reading the play aloud to myself was insightful because I couldn't zone out on myself and "sleep read." Reading  it aloud with energetic boys (who turned out to like the activity, just like I said they would) brought to life a new dimension of the play. I got a small taste of AMATEUR Shakespeare theater.

Conclusions.  These boys have energy, but they don't know a hawk from a handsaw.  Reading Shakespeare may seem intimidating at times even for an English major, and downright dreadful to a math dweeb, but fun can be had by all with it.

Something to Delight Your Ears

I thought that I would share this with you. This song was supposedly composed for Queen Elizabeth for her birthday and is a very pretty song. It has 40 different parts, and is written for eight choirs. (In case you were wondering, that's practically insane.) This was the sophisticated music of back then.

I love music, and this happens to be one of my favorites, not only from this time period, but in general.

Hello and Welcome!

Hello, readers, my name is Natashya, and I'll be your blogger today. Brief summary of self? Yes. I am an English Major at BYU, minoring in the Humanities. I love Shakespeare because it is like reading another language, but in English. The delightful dance of nuance and meaning blend into a delicious festival of words just ready to be picked apart and inspected.

I have been considering some learning goals for the semester, and some interesting ideas have been coming to mind. Unfortunately, not all of these interesting ideas have been intelligent ones, so I shall see what I can do to fix that.

I will commence with Hamlet, which shall be read in a new and gloriously insightful way so that it is new to me once more. I shall use men to increase my understanding of this play. We shall see how this works.

I do believe that for the breadth requirement, I would enjoy reading at least one play from every genre that Shakespeare has written, maybe two depending on the genre. I will then watch every production of those plays that I can get my little hands on. I will also read some of his poems, both sonnets and non-sonnets. I am considering the following plays selected from a book of NECESSARY plays. How do you choose the more necessary part?

The Comedies:

• The Taming of the Shrew
• Twelfth Night; Or, What You Will
• Another one listed in the book

The Histories:

• I'm doing some research to see which one of these would be best. I have had the least amount of exposure to these plays than any other genre. Surprised? I'm not.

The Tragedies:

• Othello
• King Lear
• Macbeth

The Romances:

• The Tempest

The Poems:

• The Rape of Lucrece
• Selected Sonnets

That is what I'm looking at so far. Suggestions are highly encouraged, and would be appreciated with brownie points.