To Be. . . Continued?

Shakespeare 232 - A Summary
I have to say, this class is not at all what I expected. (And I mean that in the best way possible). The atmosphere was very different from that of a formal class, which made the experience far more enjoyable; it became more of a Shakespeare-enthusiast book club with in-depth conversation, as opposed to some dull scholarly bi-weekly lecture.

Engaging Shakespeare Event
As far as the event goes, I was pretty impressed with the event and how it all went down. The projects were all very well-done, and I enjoyed finally getting to see all of them come together. Besides the relief of being finished with the documentary project, I was most enthusiastic about getting to see the production group perform. They did a fabulous job - well done!

How I've met the four learning outcomes this semester:

1) Gain Shakespeare Literacy

There are several ways I've gained Shakespeare Literacy over the past semester;

Sometimes, a picture quite literally says a thousand words,
such as this one, taken from a page in my copy of Hamlet.

First, as shown to the right, is by becoming an active participant in what I read. I mark up my text, write down questions, highlight recurring themes, and often look up what I don't understand to get a better understanding of what's going on. A few times, I've shared my findings in some of my posts.

Second, I've learned to use the tools available to fill in the gaps. Sparknotes summaries are great for previewing text or reviewing difficult passages; "No Fear Shakespeare" is an awesome tool for understanding the nitty gritty, (although I don't like to rely on it too much, since it's someone else's interpretations of the text). What's helped me more than anything though has been watching Shakespeare while reading it (Thank you, Netflix and Youtube, and huge THANK YOU to Utah Shakespeare Company in Cedar City, Pioneer Theater Company, and Grassroots Shakespeare Company). Shakespeare is absolutely


2) Critically analyze Shakespeare

I think throughout this course, this is the learning outcome I've had the least trouble with. Whether deciphering Hamlet's motives (with a little help from George Nelson), or processing and re-analyzing As You Like it over the course of several evolving posts, this was second nature to someone who, as a thespian, has had it hammered into her little brain to decipher text for motives and meanings, and this class has only honed my abilities further.

3) Engage Shakespeare creatively

This is something that, oddly enough, I struggled with a bit more in this class; but, in the end, I think I pulled through. One example was my post Mystery in the Music, where I talked about the connection music had with The Tempest and with romance and fantasy as a whole, and chose some pieces of music for an imaginary production of it.

I also connected my love of theater to Shakespeare in a few differents ways; for example, my post on how I would, as a director, begin to approach King Lear and how I would work with the actors of Goneril and Regan.

4) Share Shakespeare
It's true I had very little success and response in the way of "Global" sharing, but I don't think my sharing of Shakespeare this semester has been a total failure;

Because of this class, I've had many a conversation sparked with roommates, fellow cast members, friends and family members, and I've learned from each experience. (For example, after our trip to see The Tempest I brought the program to theater class to show Angela, a costume designer, Ariel's amazing Steampunk attire. . .and also got into a conversation with an actor who had also seen it, discussing things like our opinion of Prospero's performance, etc).

I also think that the documentary is a great way for us to share Shakespeare; now that it's posted, its available for anyone anywhere to see, and hopefully will spark some interest in the subject for people outside of our normal little sphere of influence. I'm going to keep tabs on views in the future, and hopefully it will make some sort of impact.

I think the most valuable sharing that has happened in this class though have been the blogging groups. I was lucky enough to be in a group of some very smart people, and have learned so much from them, I couldn't even begin to explain. I think the setup for this class has been ideal, having individual blogs to put up our own thoughts and perceptions, but still having the small group of peers to see how their opinions differ, and to get their feedback. I've gained much more from this than I ever would have learned on my own, and I think more classes should be organized this way.

Final Thoughts
As this term ends, I can't help but feel a little disappointed that our little "book club" has to end. . .and although I haven't been able to put much thought into it now (thanks you, finals week), I feel like maybe it would be fun to extend our learning into a more informal Shakespeare Book Club later on (for those who are interested)? It's just a thought. . .

Director's Interview Questions

Before shooting today's rehearsal, I wanted to get down some definitive questions we could ask Averill. I already came up with a few questions before:

• Do you have any experience directing?
• What kind of challenges are you facing trying to lead others through this process?
• Do you have a definitive concept for this show?
• What do you want the audience to get out of watching this?

In addition, I'd like to add:

• Can you explain how you've organized the task of putting together the script? Who's writing what?
• Are the three seperate stories going to play out one at a time, or are do you plan to switch rapidly between the couples for more distinct comparisons?
•  Are there things you wish you knew or understood better as you go into this process?
•  Do you have any plans as far as costuming goes?

Also, I'm playing with the idea of searching for some good, subtle background music we could add to the finished product. I'll bring it up when we meet today.

Spontaniety vs Nerves

To see our groups progress on the documentary project, see Kelsie's Blog. We should have a promo video up either now or coming very soon!

Anyway, for our initial interviews we decided not to give the interviewees time to come up with prepared answers, in the name of spontaniety. However, we've noticed how the combination of nerves and getting put on the spot is maybe being a bit counterproductive.

I think we've come to the decision to try changing our tactics a bit and giving them more time to prepare responses, and compare the results. Whichever method seems to work best is what we'll use in the future.

Documentary Group Project

I'm part of Kelsie's documentary group for the final project, where we'll basically be stalking Averill's production group with cameras and following them through their process. As I've discussed with Kelsie, my experience with film and "documentaries" is, unfotunately, pretty limited. I do have some experience with theater, directing, and different forms of digital media (video editing as well as other forms of digital media, mainly using Adobe products in general) so hopefully those skills will come in handy.

We discussed last time in class what we would like to get out of this project and the kinds of questions we'd like to ask the cast and director before they really get into the rehearsal project (they are outlined on Kelsie's blog).

Some other things I'd like to find out as we go through this process are about how Averill goes about directing this piece. Some thing's I'd like to learn are:

• Do you have any experience directing?
• What kind of challenges are you facing trying to lead others through this process?
• Do you have a definitive concept for this show?
• What do you want the audience to get out of watching this?

Also, in general, I'm curious about how they will go about moving this production forward, and I'm excited to see how it turns out!

King Lear: A Prospective Director's Perspective

Coming into this play, I've been keeping in mind the discussion I had with Dr. Burton about how I need to try to engage Shakespeare creatively more. For some reason, as a thespian, I found it difficult to pin down something specific to talk about because theater and Shakespeare are so intertwined, that it seemed like it was too broad to try to give a truly unique perspective on it. But in the end, I guess we decided that many of you who are not in theater might possibly gain some insight from seeing how I would approach a show from a Director's perspective.


This I also find difficult because a Director's role and purpose is sort of vague at this point in education. In fact, until recently, most director's didn't even study at universities and get degrees, but rather studied under other director's at theaters (which, in some ways, I sometimes wonder if that is more effective, especially for people like me who learn by seeing and doing.) I've seen many a director at work, and am directing myself now for the third time in my life. But. . . it seems that there is little instruction in this field. Rather, the teachers/professors tend to just throw you in the lake without a life jacket and hope you can swim.



Here's a breif and simple explanation, as far as I understand it:
In a production, one first must read through the text many times, first for enjoyment, and then again a few more times to get a deep understanding of what the purpose and needs for that show will be. The most important thing, then, is to come up with a definitive concept for that show. Ask yourself questions such as

• What is this show about?
• What is the deep underlying meaning here?
• What do I want to teach the audience?

In this show particularly, it's hard to see what a good concept would be thus far, seeing as were only 2 acts in. So far, I'm seeing a lot as far as artifice, miscommunication, and deciet.

Skipping ahead past the audition process and past initial blocking rehearsals, I would then sit down with some of the actors (particularly of Cordelia, Goneril, and Regan) and discuss their characters with them. I would include questions for them (their characters) such as:

• What was your childhood like?
• What do you fear most?
• How do you respond to feeling threatened?
• What was the relationship like between your mother and father?

It's really important to establish where a character is coming from, especially in a play like this; otherwise, they might come off as flat and 2-dimensional. (Such as the Prospero in the version we saw of the Tempest perhaps. Maybe that was just me, but he seemed like he was just saying lines.)

Midterm Assessment

I'm sorry I didn't get this posted before. My schedule is packed and insane this month and especially this week, and getting this posted just wasn't an option yesterday, but here it is, sans-pictures:

A. Learning Outcomes

1. How have I gained Shakespeare Literacy?

I think the sheer number of works we've read through this semester has helped me to gain better "literacy" of Shakespeare's works. Just like with learning a new language, you really have to immerse yourself into it and expose yourself to a lot of it before you get the hang of it. First comes the plot, then the characterization, and finally at some point you'll start to get all of the nitty-gritty jokes and cultural references woven into the text. I had been exposed to several of his works, in film and theater as well as in the text, before this class; but it's something that will always be improved upon with more practice.

Reading so many of his works also has helped me to see common themes, motifs, and messages coming through several of his works as a whole. Taking a look at the gestalt so to speak might give us a little more insight into life of the man himself. For example, we talked about the commonalities between the couples of Perdita/Florizel and Ferdinand/Miranda, and I repeatedly mention (or, rant, rather, one of which you can see here) my irritation at the "love at first sight" theme that seems to rear its ugly head in so many of his plays, including The Tempest, Love's Labour's Lost, As You Like It, and The Winter's Tale. Also mentioned in class was the common theme of Duke Banishment.

I've also gotten to know specific plays ( especially As You Like It) more intimately in the specific themes and possible intentions of the writing during my personal reading process. Through searching external sources, reading Cassandra's blogs on the subject, and seeing several versions of it, I came to many conclusions that I had never seen or imagined in my experience with the same work before. I won't go into much detail on that, because I've already talked extensively on the subject in the blog posts about homosexual themes, analysis of film versions ,and my final analysis.

I think as far as gaining literacy with performances, watching the Winter's Tale in Cedar City really gave me some new insights as to how to sort of translate the text into action. The best example of this was the festival scenes with Autolycus. I know a lot of us read that play thinking . . .what on earth is that character doing here? The "spectacle" of the festival scenes confused us, Autolycus' motives and purpose was unclear, and the whole 3/4 act seemed to be an enigma. But watching David Iver's play that character out. . . it was hard to describe, but suddenly Autolycus not only had a purpose in moving the plot forward, but he stole the show! There's much to be said there about his works being meant to be watched and not read.

Culture and new media is something I probably need to look into more. I've seen some modernized versions of plays, and sometimes played with reading "No Fear Shakespeare" (Where the original text is on the left side of the screen and modernized on the right) but I think that's something I could look into more for improvement of my understanding.

2. How have I analyzed Shakespeare critically?

Being trained as I am from a theatrical experience by a concept-Nazi of a Technical Director/Stage Craft Instructor, I find myself mostly blogging, discussing in class, and thinking about themes/concepts/motifs I see in the text. (The Grassroots Shakespeare company would surely disapprove, but its been hard wired into my head again and again.) But the way I figure it, if Shakespeare was the kind of artsy-fartsy literarary/theatrical geek he's made out to be, he'd probably be putting these things in there in the first place. After all, would you go through writing these long, elaborate plays and not include some kind of deeper meaning? I have a hard time imagining not. I did a lot of this in As You Like It as mentioned above, but another example of this was when I was analyzing the concepts behind the set in the production we saw of The Winter's Tale.

I also find myself very often asking (both to myself and in blog form) Why did Shakespeare write this in relation to his life and his culture surrounding the time. I haven't had time to research more into these specific questions, but it often crosses my mind.

What I have done though is look at specific choices in productions I've seen, such as Kenneth Branagh's As You Like It (set in 19th century feudal Japan) and the Cedar City Winter's Tale, where I mentioned my theory that director Brian Vaughn chose the early 20th century setting because of its connection with women's rights movements.

3. How have I engaged Shakespeare creatively?

You know. . .there's probably instances of this the past semester but I just can't think of anything specific right now. This saddens me; creativity is what makes my world tick, so I'm not sure where I went wrong with this part.

4. How have I shared Shakespeare meaningfully?

Unfortunately as a Freshman with a maddeningly strict schedule, socializing has taken up a very small part of my time since my arrival here. . . and very little of it has involved Shakespeare (unless forcibly) outside of class. It's strange, because my friends back home are all theater junkies who all love Shakespeare. I guess even when I go visit them (to watch them perform various scenes of Shakespeare, no less) we're more interested in talking about the weeks of our lives we've missed out on in eachothers absence rather than Shakespeare itself. I guess its more of a binding and implicit understanding the binds us, rather than something explicit that we discuss openly. It was easier to have that sort of discussion last year, when we did things together (like competing in the Shakespearean Festival) and, not having to catch up, could then discuss performances we'd seen.

I've found that talking with the other students in class has been more meaningful this semester than anything else. Just being able to talk to the other students about what they are seeing opens up my eyes to things I never saw in the text myself (Like Kelsie's comment on Prospero portraying himself as a Christ-like figure) and I think I've learned more from their comments then from anything else.

B. Self Directed Learning

• What have I done that demonstrates I have taken charge of my own learning about Shakespeare?

I think more than anything, taking a look at the way I mark up the text I'm reading shows how I'm taking a personal interest in learning more. I've got a picture I'll post later of a certain page in Hamlet that looks more like a coloring book than anything, but I think that actively engaging in what I'm reading, taking note of things I want to look into later, and researching things I don't understand has really been where I've taken charge in my own learning through this process.

• How am I doing at planning my learning, documenting my learning, finding appropriate resources for my learning, scheduling and carrying out learning activities, and measuring my learning?  

  Planning has been a little lacking admittedly, because my schedule is ever evolving I never know if I'm actually going to get to the reading I intended to that day. I don't have a problem with being consistent so much as I am on being on time. (I get behind once and I'm forever one step behind). I've found some resources that really have helped me along the way, like the yippy search engine for commonly used words/themes, the "no fear shakespeare" for passages I'm having trouble with, and reading other student's blogs on the same play especially have helped me. I find sometimes I will make discoveries in the reading I don't end up sharing in my blog, which is a bit detrimental as far as "documenting my learning." A lot of my blog posts are really long-winded, but I still don't feel like I always get to talk about everything I want to say (sometimes its also because some of the topics are disjointed from each other.

C. Collaborative and Social Learning

• Which students have aided me most in my own learning (through help inside or outside of class, through their comments on my blog, or through their blogging, etc.)?

 It's pretty equally spread out, we have a pretty good group haha. I find that JJ's comments are most consistent and often prompt me with new questions about my topic. Kelsie's posts and comments are always unique and make me think about things I'd never thought about before. Anthony and Matt often build on what others have been talking about with examples. And Lauren always brings up very specific elements that open up a lot of broader discussion (like the boatswain post). I also learn a lot about ways to set up my blog in more cohesive ways from observing what others do (Kelsie taught me to put links to the other group member's blogs on my sidebar, and Matt uses a lot of subheading to break up the text. JJ links a lot of related and entertaining videos. I've tried to incorporate all of their best ideas in my blog as I see fit.)

• How is working withing the assigned learning groups working? How could this be improved?

As I mentioned before, having the discussion groups has really been helpful for me to understand the text, and talking with the small groups has taught me more than anything else we've done in this class. This fact surprised me, given the bad experiences in the past with group work. But I think the important difference is that it's not something where we're working to create something and one person is doing all the work while everyone else sits back; it's a discussion where everyone usually has something to say and contribute, and whatever they have to say really only adds to it. The only way I could think to improve it would be, as JJ mentioned, maybe to find some way to document the discussion so that the new ideas we come up with aren't lost.

• How am I involving others (outside of my group or even our class) in my learning? Or, how am I applying my learning about Shakespeare in social settings beyond class?

 I think the first part of this question could pretty much be answered by my comments under  "how have I shared Shakespeare meaningfully." As far as applying what I learn about Shakespeare outside of class, it's a bit difficult to pin down exactly seeing as I'm a theater major. I think most specifically is observing what directors have done in other productions and applying the lessons from it into my own experiences directing. For example, Kenneth Branagh and Brian Vaugn taught me to look beyond the boundaries of time and space, to find parallels in history and culture that relate to the story, and to use that as a basis for concepts in a show. Furthermore, they've showed me with that concept, I can break through the normal confines of a show (like traditional Elizabethan settings in a Shakespearean play) and toy with other ideas. 

I'm doing that right now in the play I'm directing. "Dee and Dum" is a play written by a classmate, and its basically a creationism story of how Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum came to be (as punishment for hitting on and sort of mistreating women). It's one of many (there are tons, trust me) Alice in Wonderland spinoffs. I didn't want to make it like every other A.I.W spinoff out there, so I really looked through the text and came up with the concept of Karma as it relates to the Hindu religion . . .and long story short, this show now has a very heavy Indian/Hindu-mythological twist on it, which has given me a whole array of new ideas and possibilities to work with in this show.

D. Looking Ahead

I think first and foremost, I've gotten really excited about Shakespeare and want to continue reading his works after this class is over (especially Julius Caesar and Titus Andronicus). As far as the rest of class, I'd like to maybe get better about trying to keep up with reading and maybe push the whole "sharing outside of class" thing more in discussions with my friends (I plan to watch the 2010 version of The Tempest with them, so that should be a good opportunity). Also, I'm going to keep looking for new avenues to expand on "global sharing."

As far as prospective final projects, I'm still unsure. I wanted to join Averill's production but I've already sold my soul to two other theatrical productions, so a third is a total impossibility. What I would really like to stress at this point is that whatever I do IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING THAT CAN BE COMPLETED IN CLASS. My other classes all seem to think everything can and should be done outside of their class time, and even just the very basic required GE classes are having impossible conflicts with eachother.

One thing I have been thinking about is related to the movie I keep mentioning, Anonymous. Maybe we could possibly do some research on the man's life himself, go through point by point deciding if Roland Emmerich's theories have any substance behind them, and also decide if the identity of the author of these works is even important. I don't know, maybe? It's something to think about.

Contribute Globally

I'm having a bit of trouble with this assignment. I've posted a review/discussion on "As You Like It" on goodreads. No responses yet. . .

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/700436-why-did-shakespeare-write-as-you-like-it

The Power of Words

Wise men have always cautioned us of the power of words. In discussing The Tempest with a friend, I finally saw these words of wisdom springing out of the text, like Shakespeare was holding a big neon sign that said "This is what I'm getting at!"

 I guess I'll start by sharing my awkward conversation on the topic.

I started out talking to my friend, Addie. It was all pretty rushed because I only had 30 minutes between classes and other appointments that day, so I leveled with her and basically said "Okay, I have to talk to someone about what I'm reading in my Shakespeare class and then write about it . . . ready, go!"

 

I wasn't really sure what to talk about at first, so she just asked about the basic plotline of "As You Like It." Which, as simple of a plotline as it is, it took a while to really get down to the point of it. Surprising really. I'd had her read my blog posts before about the themes in it, but I'd already gone through explaining them so deeply before (In that ridiculously massive post that took hours to write, never doing that again) so the conversation kind of died as I felt I was just beating a dead horse.

So. . .after a few vague and uninsightful questions on the subject were answered, we moved on to the Tempest. 

This time I didn't bother to explain the plot in detail as much. She asked me about themes/motifs I saw in this show, and I really had a hard time coming up with anything, as I have before. As much as I like this show, it's a little harder to pull from. The only words I seem to be able to muster up are "Forgiveness" and "Spectacle" but beyond that it's all a bit fuzzy. We sat for a minute, stumped, and finally she just randomly asked "When were these plays written?" And then finally something struck me.




Me: ". . . I don't know. You mean the year or chronologically in his life?"
Her: "Whichever"
Me: "I really have no idea what year.  I think As You Like It was one of his earlier plays, and the Tempest was his very last play."
Her: "Ooooh, that's intense" (Haha, she's adorable) . . . I guess, what do you think Shakespeare was thinking when he wrote these?"
Me: *lightbulb* "OOOOH! I just made a connection here. . ."

Craig Wroe as Prospero.
Photo by Alexander Weisman.

I then went on to talk about the whole thing with Prospero's books. . . how he uses books to learn magic, and how the power he gains from them gets out of control (or at least thats how they portrayed it in the production we saw) and that's why he renounces magic and breaks his staff in the end. Like he's gotten a taste of how much power is in his hands. . . and it scared him.

 Also worth looking at is a quote from Caliban:

[Act 1, Scene 2]

You taught me language; and my profit on't

Is, I know how to curse. The red plague rid you

For learning me your language!

John Pribyl as Prospero in the Utah Shakespeare Festival’s 2007 production of The Tempest. (Photo by Karl Hugh. Copyright Utah Shakespeare Festival 2007.)

John Pribyl as Prospero in the Utah Shakespeare Festival’s 2007

production of The Tempest. (Photo by Karl Hugh. Copyright Utah

Shakespeare Festival 2007.)

I also saw that when I was looking up pictures from the 2007 production they did of the Tempest in Cedar City. Prospero's magic robes are covered in writing, as well as the backdrop behind him. Obviously, this was no accident. The director obviously had a strong concept of the power of language, words, and learning.

The last thing that this question brought to mind was the movie Anonymous that I've been hearing so much about. I don't necessarily give Roland Emmerich's theories any credit, but I'm really interested in seeing the movie and have been trying to hear both sides of the story. I watched this video of ten reasons why he believes Shakespeare was a fraud, and a big one for him was that when Shakespeare "retired" he just stopped writing completely (supposedly). Emmerich felt that, especially from his point of view as an artist and director, that he could never bring himself just to stop doing what he loved. I see where he's coming from. . . but what if he had a reason?

Now to tie this all together, we see Prospero, a character in his FINAL play, who has gained all this power from learning, but it gets out of control and he begins to fear his own abilities. Did Shakespeare write the character of Prospero as parallel to his own life? Did he feel and fear the power of his influence in some way? (If so, it would be a good argument against another one of Emmerich's points; he felt that it was fishy that Shakespeare wrote about nobles all the time instead of stories that related to himself and his own class). This is one of those days when I really wish I could really learn more about his life.
I think it would help me understand some of the more cryptic shows SO much better.

 Who are some people in society today who don't know the power of their own words? I remember having a discussion in my Biology lab last friday, and we were talking about how some people refuse to take vaccinations because they are worried that it is linked to autism. This hype is all based on a pretty inaccurate study done by a man named Andrew Wakefield. My Biology T.A. evidently has very strong feelings about this subject, here are the notes I took in class:

"Andrew Wakefield is a Jerk"

Published a paper in the British medical journal Lancet where he reported the observation of 12 children (very small sample size) 9 of whom developed autism days after receiving MMR vaccine

only five of those children were actually diagnosed with autism

• several of those children diagnosed with behavior problems prior to this
• got children from a birthday party
• at the same time, he was developing a vaccine alternative 
• article was later retracted
• mercury in shot was not the kind that is detrimental to  body
• mostly used in developing countries where refrigeration is not an option
• because of his article, companies started pulling vaccines and redoing them, and then started redoing them
• put vaccines in developing nations behind several years

We've talked a lot in that class about how unfounded his research was, and the kind of impact the study he published has had. My TA strongly believes in the importance of herd immunity, which is when at least 80% is vaccinated, the ability of a virus to cause a pandemic or epidemic is nearly eliminated (and those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons are far more protected as well.) She also mentioned how problematic it is sometimes for well-known people or politicians who might say something like "We shouldn't require vaccinations because they are linked to austism" just as a way to get votes and gain popularity without really understanding what they're talking about, and then not realize the huge negative impact it might have.

Who are some other examples of people in today's society who underestimate the power of their words, and have had a negative impact?

Catching up . . . Questions, Quotes, Considerations, and Connections

Sorry guys. . . I realize I'm behind, and I apologize for that. Chalk it up to an insane schedule I guess. In this post, I'd like to wrap up As You Like It with my final analysis as well as my social discovery. Also. . . this is really long. . . but I had a lot to say. . .so sorry for that too.

Questions to be Resolved

Throughout this experience, I've butted heads with this play in a few different ways:

• Why did Shakespeare write this play?
• What's up with the whole "love at first sight" thing? It's so unrealistic.
• Why is Rosalind so often portrayed as being, quite obviously, a woman?
• In relation to the last question, did Shakespeare intend for it to be obvious for the purposes of building their relationship, or did he intend her disguise to be believable in order to play up the themes of homosexuality?
• Why are there all these references to cuckoldry mixed in? What is Shakespeare trying to say about women and marriage?

Social Discovery

I also took a look at what Cassandra Harper from our class had to say, since she also read As You Like It. She made some really good points. . . a recent post of hers, "All the World's a Stage" on her blog words....Words.....WORDS...., [particularly under the sections Artifice in the Play and The Epilogue informing the Theme?] , offered just the insight I was looking for.

If you don't have time to read it, here is a summary:

She basically talked about how there is all these instances of artifice and kind of putting on different "masks" and "other selves" in order to pursue ones goals. This stemmed from Jacques' speech on that follows his famed quote, "All the World's a stage", commenting on the seven different "roles" a man plays in his lifetime.

She focused mainly on Rosalind's facade of being "Ganymede" in addition to all of the other "roles" she played in her life, as well as how Orlando, when starving for food, thought that he had to become savage in order to survive when he was starving in the forest.

The second section mentions the epilogue, where Rosalind breaks fourth wall and asks the audience to enjoy the show for what it is.

One of her conclusions was that she believed Shakespeare possibly wrote this play as a way of showing his audience that we all have our "masks." Our behavior might change in different settings or with different people. What matters is how we use it.

* * *

After reading this, I wanted to find out more about what people were saying on the topic. It took some dedicated searching, but I finally stumbled upon this excerpt from a website 123helpme.com , from a longer analysis outlining deeper meanings in As You Like It:

"Rosalind, under the disguise of being Ganymede, could get away with a lot more than she could as herself. As Rosalind, Ganymede could not te11 Phebe to "sell when you can, you are not for all markets." (Shakespeare 69) She could "spoof love and yet be a lover," (Gilman Ixiv) Through the tool of Ganymede, Rosalind was acting out "parts scripted for women by her culture." (Howard 198) She used the laws of society to achieve her own ends.

Rosalind's disguised love-play is not merely a game with hapless Orlando, but an education: he must care enough to keep his promises and appointments, and respect her enough to speak as well as kiss.

She is "teaching her future mate how to get beyond certain ideologies of gender to more enabling ones." (Howard 198) Through her interactions with Orlando as Ganymede, Rosalind is accomplishing much. Her ultimate end is a "rational relationship," rather than one of "heady emotionalism." (Locket 2) She wished to keep her intelligence and dignity instead of having a relationship such as Audrey and Touchstone (based on lust) or Silvius and Phebe (based on his love of her "foulness"), but she still wanted the bliss of romance. "No wonder she seems so modern, and pleases so many modem audiences." "...Rosalind does not so much woo Orlando as educate him in the proper way to love." (Locket 1)"

"Deeper Meaning of Shakespeare's As You Like It." 123HelpMe.com. 26 Oct 2011

http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=6140.

Drum Roll Please. . . Answers at Last! (Final Analysis)

To keep things simple, I suppose I"ll go through point-by-point with each question.

• Why did Shakespeare write this play?

As a way of showing his audience that we all have our "masks." Our behavior might change in different settings or with different people. What matters is how we use them.

• What's up with the whole "love at first sight" thing? It's so unrealistic.

I've decided that Rosalind's and Orlando's relationship had a little more time to bud than I gave it credit for before. Yes, they're a little hasty to get married, but you have to take into account that he had to fit this into one play, and maybe didn't want to drag out the timeline. Rosalind's time as Ganymede was really her way of testing Orlando's faithfulness, and of giving him a reality check into what was to come in a relationship.

Oliver and Celia also have the sort of Disney fairytale love-at-first-sight experience, followed by the oh-hey-we-just-met-let's-get-married bit. This still bothered me. . .but in the end I concluded that it was there to contrast the relationship between Orlando and Rosalind; their superficial relationship between a sort of villainous, vengeful guy and the sometimes superficial Celia.

Their relationship is also contrasted by Phe-bius (Silvius and Phebe. . .thought I'd give them a cute celebrity couple name) whereas Silvius is really more in love with being a lover than he is with the foul Phoebe. And then there's Aud-Stone (Audrey and Touchstone), where there relationship is pretty much based on lust.

I think if this story were to continue on into their married lives (assuming divorce was a possibility),

"Rosando" would be the last one standing.

• Why is Rosalind so often portrayed as being, quite obviously, a woman?
• In relation to the last question, did Shakespeare intend for it to be obvious for the purposes of building their relationship, or did he intend her disguise to be believable in order to play up the themes of homosexuality?

I've decided to answer these two questions together as they strongly relate. In all the versions that I've seen, it's pretty clear that Rosalind is in disguise, or at least that Orlando could have figured it out. I found it particularly interesting when Kenneth Branagh made this choice in his 2006 film adaption; Branagh is no stranger to Shakespeare, and he's a smart guy, so I don't think he did that for nothing. There's also a few references in the reading that make me believe Shakespeare might have intended it that way. I'm getting a little long-winded here, so I'll just mention one; after Ganymede's claims that Orlando is not a lover, he replies:

Orlando: I would not be cured, youth.
Rosalind: I would cure you, if you would but call me Rosalind and come every day to my cote and woo me
Orlando: Now, by the faith of my love, I will. Tell me where it is.

Orlando, oddly enough, had just had a conversation with Jacques that suggested he had no intention of giving up his pursuits of love:

Jaques: The worst fault you have is to be in love.

Orlando: 'Tis a fault I will not change for your best virtue.

So, his sudden agreement to be cured of love, in my opinion, is not because he actually wants to be "cured. It's becuse he kind of knows it's her, and wants to take advantage of this to woo her. And if I directed this show, that's exactly the direction I'd go with it.

It's possible Shakespeare was open to having it being interpreted the other way, where Orlando really believes Ganymede is a boy and sort of . . .well, enjoys his lessons with him a bit too much, so as to further the themes of the "different kinds of love" and the homosexual interests going on . . . but that's just another interpretation. That's the great thing about Shakespeare I guess, it's flexible enough that you could go completely different directions with the same text.

• Why are there all these references to cuckoldry mixed in? What is Shakespeare trying to say about women and marriage?

Let me start out by saying that there really were TONS. And we're talking about extended metaphors where Shakespeare is like I'm-totally-talking-about-cuckoldry-so-pay-attention. I don't expect you to read through all of these, but just to show the sheer volume of these references, here they are via "Shakespeare Searched"

1. Act 4, Scene 1 

Rosalind

46. Nay, an you be so tardy, come no more in my sight: I
47. had as lief be wooed of a snail.

49. Ay, of a snail; for though he comes slowly, he
50. carries his house on his head; a better jointure,
51. I think, than you make a woman: besides he brings
52. his destiny with him.

54. Why, horns, which such as you are fain to be
55. beholding to your wives for: but he comes armed in
56. his fortune and prevents the slander of his wife.

1. Act 4, Scene 2

Forester

10. What shall he have that kill'd the deer?
11. His leather skin and horns to wear.
12. Then sing him home;
13. Take thou no scorn to wear the horn;
14. It was a crest ere thou wast born:
15. Thy father's father wore it,
16. And thy father bore it:
17. The horn, the horn, the lusty horn
18. Is not a thing to laugh to scorn.
2. Act 4, Scene 1

Orlando

57. Virtue is no horn-maker; and my Rosalind is virtuous.

 

3. Act 4, Scene 2

Jaques

3. Let's present him to the duke, like a Roman
4. conqueror; and it would do well to set the deer's
5. horns upon his head, for a branch of victory. Have
6. you no song, forester, for this purpose?

4. Touchstone

40. Amen. A man may, if he were of a fearful heart,
41. stagger in this attempt; for here we have no temple
42. but the wood, no assembly but horn-beasts. But what
43. though? Courage! As horns are odious, they are
44. necessary. It is said, 'many a man knows no end of
45. his goods:' right; many a man has good horns, and
46. knows no end of them. Well, that is the dowry of
47. his wife; 'tis none of his own getting. Horns?
48. Even so. Poor men alone? No, no; the noblest deer
49. hath them as huge as the rascal. Is the single man
50. therefore blessed? No: as a walled town is more
51. worthier than a village, so is the forehead of a
52. married man more honourable than the bare brow of a
53. bachelor; and by how much defence is better than no
54. skill, by so much is a horn more precious than to
55. want.

I think this goes back to what I was saying before about the differences between the couples, how some the more artificial relationships seemed doomed to fail (Just look at what Touchstone is saying, he's so ready to marry to fulfill his lustful desires, that he flat out accepts that Audrey will cheat on him, and thinks that this is better than being a bachelor.)

Rosalind, who did not want to accept this, then used her front as Ganymede to test Orlando ahead of time, and to give him a reality check about marriage, for example:

Act 4, Scene 1

Rosalind

129. Say 'a day,' without the 'ever.' No, no, Orlando;
130. men are April when they woo, December when they wed:
131. maids are May when they are maids, but the sky
132. changes when they are wives. I will be more jealous
133. of thee than a Barbary cock-pigeon over his hen,
134. more clamorous than a parrot against rain, more
135. new-fangled than an ape, more giddy in my desires
136. than a monkey: I will weep for nothing, like Diana
137. in the fountain, and I will do that when you are
138. disposed to be merry; I will laugh like a hyen, and
139. that when thou art inclined to sleep.

Connections to My Life

I've found that the idea of using our social masks appropriately related a lot to my life recently. I will be the first to confess that I am a different person in different places:

• The quirky, fun, loud, energetic person I am when I go home and see my real friends
• The quiet, reserved, easily embarrassed freshman/new girl who seems kinda stupid and never has anything to say (I revert to this whenever I move somewhere new, which is pretty common for me)
• The lazy, brutally honest, sometimes childish daughter who comes home for the weekend from College
• That irritating person we all become whenever someone casually asks "How are you?" and then we reply "Oh, I'm fine" . . . and you're thinking "Well, that was a total lie, but I really don't want to explain my train-wreck of a life to this person I barely know."
• The sophisticated woman in writing, who always articulates and expresses herself with finesse
• That awkward chick who can't explain things verbally to save her life

I don't know if any of these things make me "farcical" . . . .I don't think so anyway. . .but it makes me think of my recent experiences with directing in my theater class. I'm facing a lot of challenges where all of these people (except, hopefully, number three?) are having an external clash of the titans, and end up paralyzing my abilities as a director. What I now want to take away from this play is exploring how to channel my "masks" in a way that is most productive and effective, without abusing it or becoming "fake."