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!