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."

Mystery in Music

No lies, this is my favorite of all the plays we've read so far. I'm a sucker for the fantastical, the dark, the mysterious and mythilogical (think Tim Burton, i.e. my hero) and this really does it all for me. I am absolutely ecstatic about getting to see this on Saturday, and am hoping the visuals live up to my expectations. The rich, murky palette is a refreshing contrast to my previous read, As You Like It. Long twisted shadows, streaming moonlight, gritty textures, gnarled trees and dark uncertainty. . . What can I say. . . I'm twisted.

Visuals alone do not a production make, however (as I sit listening to Hans Zimmers brilliant soundtrack to Inception. . .let's not even talk about how brilliant that movie was). There are a miriad of references to noises and music in this play; for example:

(III.ii.135)
Caliban:
Be not afeard: the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears; and sometimes voices
That, if I then had waked after long sleep,
Will make me sleep again; and then, in dreaming
The clouds methought would open and show riches
Ready to drop upon me, that, when I waked,
I cried to dream again

Someone explain to me why I never heard
about this??? It was out just last year!

 (I.ii.452)

 Ferdinand:

Where should this music be? i' the air or the earth?

It sounds no more: and sure, it waits upon

Some god o' the island. Sitting on a bank,

Weeping again the king my father's wreck,

This music crept by me upon the waters,

Allaying both their fury and my passion

With its sweet air: thence I have follow'd it,

Or it hath drawn me rather. But 'tis gone.

No, it begins again.

This play is full of mention of music; "solemn and strange" music (as at the magical feast), "sweet airs" . . . not to mention, music follows Ariel - a mythological, spritely creature - wherever he goes. It was a device for leading Ferdinand to Miranda, as well as waking the men before Antonio and Sebastian had the chance to kill Alonso.

Music and enchantment are eternally intertwined and inseperable. As we discussed in class, Romance (more in the sense of fantasy and the supernatural) is often heavily associated with music (and vice versa) because of its irrational, whimsical qualities.

I also feel strongly because of my time as a sound technician for shows in high school. Sounds and music can really have a strong impact on the tone and atmosphere. So, I decided to choose some (royalty free) music that I would implement into the sound design for The Tempest if I were staging it.

Royalty Free Music by Kevin Macleod,  http://incompetech.com/m/c/royalty-free/

To Be Continued

Sorry guys, I realize I'm behind on my blogging. I'm working to get caught up as fast as I can, and I will be posting soon.

As I Understand It. . .

Ok. . . I lied. I don't. Sure, the plot makes sense, the characters, although a little too quick to marry, are not exactly an enigma. But. . .in reading the play, and watching the different film versions, the why is a little fuzzy.

So. . .I guess I'll start with a discussion of the only film version that didn't take serious dedication to get through; namely, Kenneth Branagh's 2006 version.

He did a lot of interesting things in this film - most of which I liked, a few which I question.

The first was the setting; Branagh chose 19th century fuedal Japan for this, where the main characters are aristocratic British merchants building up their little empires in the foreign land. It sounds a little strange and off-beat at first, but it lends itself to the story surprisingly well. Besides, I think it embodies a sort of exotic, far off places Shakespeare so often liked to set his plays, and I think he would have approved. The stunningly colorful location undoubtedly enhanced the romantic sentiments. Not to mention, certain elements of the culture added a fresh twist to the storyline; the wrestling match between hired-muscle "Charles" and Orlando is turned into a Sumo-wrestling match, the overthrow of the Duke is carried out by a league of Samurai warriors, and Orlando's poems fill the tree like leaves instead of merely being tacked on.

Norm Lewis as Javert

David Oyelowo as Orlando

Another interesting thing Branagh chose to do was to have a colorblind cast, at least in the case of Oliver and Orlando. As far as I know, the odds of two black men having a high rank in society as these two did in this time frame was unlikely, unheard of even. However. . .it didn't bother me much. Perhaps there is some historical exception in fuedal Japan, but it didn't matter. The actors he chose were phenomenal in their roles (and, as brothers, at least they were the same race, so it was at least realistic in that sense). It reminded me of watching the 25th Anniversary Les Miserables concert, where the actor portraying Javert, (who also, historically, probably would not have been) was black. But once again. . .I could care less, because, as with As You Like It, he was AMAZING. 'Nuff said!

Nick Jonas. . .nothing more than a pretty boy

Oddly enough, this same cast Les Miserables featured Nick Jonas as Marius. After watching his performance, I was a little nausiated and concluded he was only chosen to attract the interest of adolescent girls who wouldn't notice the obvious, extremely out-of-place pop vocal styles that the poor sap couldn't shake off long enough to do some real singing for one measely concert.  To me, sometimes, it's better to have decent talent than to be true to historical accuracy. (Well. . .okay, I'm not saying he's a bad singer, but he didn't perform correctly. . . if that makes sense. I hated his performance).

This is when Rosalind is supposed to be "Ganymede". . .
are you fooled? I'm not. But if Orlando actually is,
 than this scene would be even more awkward
than it already is . . .

Which leads me into the things I didn't enjoy about this film. Rosalind and Celia. . .much like Nick Jonas. . .chosen for their extreme beauty and ability in one respect. . . but negligent in some other necessary abilities. True, Rosalind was great at playing her female role. But nothing changed when she became a man. She didn't try to sound like a man, and, quite honestly, she looked every bit like a girl in trousers. A fake beard at least would have helped. No one, realistically, would have been fooled, least of all Orlando, one who has her image on his mind frequently.

I wonder if it was specific choice of Branagh's, to try to ease the transition of them falling in love so it wasn't so sudden. . .if Orlando sort of knew it was her. . . at least that's what I want to believe, because he was coming on pretty strong to "Ganymede," and otherwise that bit would come off as something entirely different.

The other was that ridiculous ending. . .after the wedding, they broke out into this confusing dance number, which wasn't really befitting of the time or place. . .and VERY heavy on vocals. And the odd thing was, sometimes the actors would try to mouth the words like it was they were singing, and sometimes not. . .leaving me confused. I remember watching this same movie a few years ago, and bursting out into uncontrollable laughter when that number started up. . .that part needed help.

And, as mentioned, I am still at a loss as to why Shakespeare wrote this. Perhaps, I need to re-evaluate my thinking and ask different questions. . .

But, interestingly enough, as I was searching for pictures to add to this post, I came across this blog:
http://shawnandshakespeare.blogspot.com/2010/10/as-you-like-it-2006.html
Perhaps some new insight will come of it? After all, he's pretty much got an archive of posts on almost every Shakespeare play there is. Maybe he can help with yours too. . .