Final Assessment

Shakespeare Party!
The art group has been looking forward to this event. It was a wonderful opportunity both to see all of our physical art represented in one location and to receive feedback from a larger public. Before the event started, I played the song that I had written about Shakespeare's Hamlet on the piano to 'get in the mood', and was able to get feedback from a classmate! With regards to the art itself, it was gratifying to see people go up to the easel and point and make comments; it is motivating to continue to share Shakespeare via the websites that we have created: cnx, youtube, and deviant art. Also I enjoyed the comments that were made by one roommate of a classmate in the crowd that asked a question about how much feedback we had gotten from these websites already. I do admit that I did not engage others conversationally as well as I should have: I was worried about some issues at home and should have felt more social. But, we did engage people with Shakespeare on many levels, and I was indeed amazed-- outside our group the sharing was incredible too:


I loved how the performances gradually drew out progressively more impressed reactions from the audience, ending in the play and music video. It was fun to see how the skill of the actors, filmers, and music-video-ers left people floored. You could tell my their reactions that they weren't expecting to be amazed so much. I think my favorite moment was when Cadet Hess stood and we gave him an applause. To me it felt like Shakespeare was not just being shared, but being the means for connection generally among us. I started off the Q&A/sharing with my story of Claude the Homeless guy, and people seemed to enjoy that. Shakespeare became everybody's common ground there. Success!


In terms of our project itself, some of the process can be seen here, and some of the research our group did here and here.


Personal Assessment in the Learning objectives:
Gain Shakespeare Literacy
After reading all of the assigned plays start to finish, seeing two productions of Shakespeare, and being present every day of class to discuss Shakespeare, I am only starting to get a good feel for Shakespeare's voice. But I feel like I do have that start, which is motivating. I am beginning to understand why people like him so much: He allows us to approach ourselves in a different way that is good for reflection and introspection. I have reflected on the way I treat others, the way in which we might love better, etc. I think that the lesson plans that we created was also a good way for us to gain literacy (thanks for printing those, by the way!)


Analyze Shakespeare Critically 
This was one of the areas that were deficient last assessment, and so I spent extra time here. I enjoyed reading Shakespeare closely, a project which I had not yet undertaken. Looking at just one passage closely for a little over an hour made me appreciate the detail that goes into every aspect of the plays Shakespeare wrote. 


Another significant project that helped me engage creatively was to do research on what others were saying about Shakespeare: in the Spanish Lit context (it took some research to find, but it was possible!!!). I found some clues as to what Borges thought about Shakespeare in an interview, read a short story of his in Spanish about Shakespeare (La memoria de Shakespeare), and researched what other Hispanic Scholars were saying about all of this. This was one of the funnest blogs I've done. I got this idea from another research project I had done on what the Spanish scholars say about Shakespeare.


In a less involved project, I thought about and blogged similarities and differences between "King Lear" and another play: "La casa de Bernarda Alba".


Of course, the critical work that I did at the beginning of the semester (which was really more creative/ not as critical as I thought) was the translation: See here, and here, and here (where I got the idea). I did not focus as much on translations during the latter part of the class when we started our final projects: the other learning objective that I wanted more fully to fulfill was "Engage Shakespeare Creatively", on which I felt I should spend the majority of my effort (not having really done so yet).


Engage Shakespeare Creatively 
This I found very enlightening. It was new to take a short piece of text, think about the words carefully, and respond without words the way I felt about it. This required our group to form a new blog altogether.


I responded to Horatio's interpretation of the Ghost when he sees it, and juxtaposed that with Hamlet's reaction of what I thought when he Himself must have seen the Ghost, to when Hamlet (in a soliloquy) questions himself and his bravery, to the famous "to be or not to be" idea (of course), and both to Ophelia "divided" and to the Last scene where everything seems to fall apart. I responded furthermore to the theme of acting in the play, and illusions (see here and here), and finally to the overarching theme I found in the play of waiting and hesitation. When Hamlet refuses to kill the king (as he is praying), when he calls himself a coward, when he wonders if he should commit suicide or not, etc. All of this spoke to me as to what he felt, while waiting and hesitating so much. This I responded to with an organ and flute original composition, which by itself required between 15 - 20 hours (open here if previous link will not work).
 
Share Shakespeare Meaningfully 
Besides what I mentioned above about the actual gallery at the Shakespeare Party, I have worked on getting our curriculum up on cnx.org. I have not link yet since the curriculum still has not been cleared. Our group was involved, however, both in youtube and deviant art to get our project public.

I furthermore enjoyed the brief correspondence I had with Dr. Laura Campos from Spain, Sharing with Claude, of course, and sharing with my little brothers-in-law (the blog here reflects the preparation, I have not gotten the results up and running yet...)


And so, thus it is that Shakespeare and I are much better acquainted. Thanks, Dr. Burton, for a great semester.

Posted by Erik on 8:26 AM · Comments (0) · Full article

La Casa de Bernarda Alba and King Lear

In Both "La Casa de Bernarda Alba" (by F. Garcia Lorca), and King Lear, by Shakespeare, there are similar themes that seem to crop up again and again. I feel like they are making commentary on the same ideas, but come to some very vastly different conclusions.

                                                                                              Freedom
There is something about human nature that makes us want to find and express our own identity. This is so much the case in "La casa de Bernarda Alba" that it causes the eventual death of the youngest daughter of Bernarda, Adela.  All of Bernardas' daughters (who are many) are forced to be cooped up inside the house, not allowed to leave. Never will they be able to leave until they are married, and they must be married off in order. The oldest sister, still unwed at 34, is not having any promising luck until Pepe el Romano comes around. All the other sisters start to boil up in anxiety and lust and want to express themselves-- but they cannot; they are not allowed to. The dictator-mother will not allow this to happen. Eventually, Adela sneaks out and gets together with Pepe. When Bernarda pretends to shoot him and her sister claims that he is dead, she commits suicide--so that finally she can be free. This is one of the major messages of the play: is death really the only way to escape drastic problems?

It seems that Shakespeare addresses the same question. The play ends so tragically that we wonder if there were not any other alternative that could have been more pleasant.





Family 
Bernarda, a single parent, struggles to win the affection of her daughters. She serves as a commentary on Spanish lifestyle in the early 20th Century of keeping private life totally secluded and secret. She must mourn the death of her husband for months, without consolation. With the death of Adela, she tells all of her children to cease from their own sobbing and move on with life, pretending that Adela died a virgin. She never had the love of her children, although the daughters except for Adela, all pretended to give it to keep her happy.

In King Lear, there is also a single parent who at first seeks the love of his children. Two of them make something loquacious up to please him, and Cordelia conceals her true feelings for her father. The other sisters likewise never really love their father, and were only in a scheming plot to benefit themselves just as were the sisters in "La casa de Bernarda Alba" who hoped to get away from their mother by "nicely" putting up a face to isolate themselves for her.


Redemption
There is no redemption, in "La casa de Bernarda Alba", sadly. In King Lear, it is a prominent theme, especially when Edgar and his Father walk the Chalky cliffs of Dover together, and he proceeds with his plan to convince him that he is still very much of great worth. In this aspect the plays differ significantly.


Adversity
Again, here is where Shakespeare and Lorca crash heads. Adversity in "La casa de Bernarda Alba" seems to be built to evoke pity and demonstrate the horrible conditions of family life at this time in Spain. Although family feuds are also prevalent in King Lear, the message seems to be at times a little different. Edgar, with his father, gives the message that: although some trials are so great we cannot understand them, we can still learn to be more compassionate through them. This aspect of Shakespeare is valuable and does not exist in "La casa de Bernarda Alba".




Liberation
Interestingly, Cordelia and Adela both end up hanged. Adela hung herself, though Cordelia never had the choice. Reading the dramatic tones of the plays, however, one almost feels like both females considered that there really was nothing left for them had they stuck around. Were the authors both trying to say that life for them, had they lived, would have been too terrible to take? Is death ever really and answer to these problems?

Posted by Erik on 1:48 PM · Comments (0) · Full article

Borges' "Shakespeare's Memory", & criticism

"Quien adquiere una enciclopedia no adquiere cada línea, cada párrafo, cada página y cada grabado; adquiere la mera posibilidad de conocer alguna de esas cosas. Si ello acontece con un ente concreto y relativamente sencillo, dado el orden alfabético de las partes, ¿qué no acontecerá con un ente abstracto y variable, ondoyant et divers, como la mágica memoria de un muerto?" (Borges, 1998).

Found something cool
Borges' "Shakespeare's Memory" is a fantastic short story I happened to stumble across this morning. Interested, I began to research literary criticism on it major themes after devouring the text itself. Though it does not appear to deal thematically with Shakespeare himself, its connection to Shakespeare and the themes that it does bring up are fascinating. I ended up responding myself to the criticism given-- because I realized myself how relevant TO Shakespeare the story was. Although I agree in many respects with the criticism, I feel like it needed to be amplified to be true to Borges' opinion of Shakespeare.

What Borges says, goes
From what I have studied of Borges, his greatest appeal comes from the way he confidently investigates the metaphysical. By its very nature, that which is metaphysical is mysterious and intriguing to us all; looking simply at the quantity and diversity of world religions, the history of philosophy, etc. one realizes humanity cannot be separated with our desire to understand the bigger picture. Because Borges takes these themes down so smoothly and masterfully, it fills our imagination with awe (read "Babel's Library", "The Garden of Forking Paths", etc).

Shakespeare, Borges' hero
 In an interview with Borges, Professor Ted Lyon (of BYU) asked why he didn't ever try to write anything in English, although he was taught it growing up by his grandmother. Borges replied "What, you mean, write in the language of Shakespeare? I wouldn't feel worthy" (see Dr. Lyon for details). It seems that Borges' estimation of Shakespeare is also evident in the short story, which discusses what it would be like to have Shakespeare's memory gradually take over--even replace your own--memories. The short story comments on the nature of reality and memory, and brings up the interesting theme of personal identity.

One of the basic premises of the story is that the brain is like a "palimpsest", that can be written on over and over again, and the current memories and experiences in a way wipe out all of the other aspects of of former self. This is seen when the protagonist loses control of his own faculties to remember and feels memories that he never had.

Criticism
Norma Garza Saldívar's article on the work discussed says that Borges' intent was to describe how memory can be an impetus of personal change (the palimpsest idea):

"El ejercicio de la memoria no se limita a evocar un momento determinado de una historia, no adquirimos con la memoria cada instante de una vida, más bien adquirimos con ella el poder de convocar el pasado para desencadenar una serie de relaciones y posibilidades, para abstraer y proponer con esa memoria otra forma de pensar." (See the article)

Essentially, memory not only serves 'to be there' if we care to remember, but rather to allow us the option of "unchaining the series of relationships and possibilities" to acquire a new way of thinking. That is, because we as human beings are always changing, the way we remember the past can also actually change us. If we were to fully remember the way were were (felt, acted, thought) when we were 8, 18, 28, etc, would we not be likely to change some of the things that we feel now? Would it not be fascinating?

Along these lines, I think that Saldívar's best/major point in his article is the following:


"El Yo para Borges está atravesado por el tiempo, está destinado a ser siempre otro. Un tiempo y un Yo que evocan la imagen de un palimpsesto, como aquel que recuerda Borges en su cuento “La memoria de Shakespeare”."

In other (English) words, our "ego" is a transient entity by nature; it is whimsical and subject to be changed with any wind of influence that passes our way, almost as if we assimilate to anything that presents itself. "It is destined to always be something else", he says, translated, as if it retained no solidarity of personality of its own. Basically, we adapt to our surroundings, whether those surroundings be ideas, languages, memories, etc.

I agree to a certain degree that this is the case, but it is much broader in scope than Saldívar mentions.  That the soul of a person adapts to new circumstances I agree; Saldívar makes an excellent point there. When exposed to an attractive way of thinking that is not our own, I believe that we are prone to comparison. It is the condition as old as "the grass is always greener on the other side of the hill". Now, since the protagonist's life work (in the story) has to do with researching and studying Shakespeare, when he is offered his memory he cannot turn it down. The protagonist is overcome by Shakespeare and essentially becomes Shakespeare. The idea, then, is that (like we mentioned) because he was exposed to the memories powerfully, they became part of him, written on his Palimpsest (it is also important to note that one of the conditions of the story is that one has the option of heeding the memories or not- the encylopedia's pages idea). This is where Saldívar gets his argument.

My argument--that goes beyond Saldívar-- is that Borges believes that the power of Shakespeare himself is great, in and of itself, that is. We already know from a first-hand account that Borges did esteem him highly, the story is further evidence that Borges looked up to the efficacy of Shakespeare's pen. I for one certainly like to interpret the story in the light of how Shakespeare has affected my own life. Shakespeare's style is to present an idea common or Universal to society, and allow us to ponder on its significance in our own lives:

Perhaps there is something that I did a while ago which I have guilt for: then Hamlet would cause me introspection, and then the memories would help me change. Perhaps I have often felt enraged by others' actions and justified my own: then Winters Tale would cause introspection and the memories of my own life associated with it would cause me to change. See, then, how Saldívar is right? We are like Palimpsests that are changed with the writing by memories' resurgence. It is more though, since Shakespeare is the man particularly adept at helping us to do so. THAT is what "Shakespeare's Memory" is all about. I do not believe that this story can be taken out of the context of the importance of Shakespeare.

This is when it all comes back to the quote at the beginning. Borges makes a direct comparison of an Encyclopedia to Shakespeare. If knowledge is possible with the 'memory of books', how much more powerful would it be with the "mágica memoria de un muerto" (magical memory of [Shakespeare]).

It has been a rewarding to look at Shakespeare critically in this way, albeit a round-about way. All that it proves to me is that Shakespeare really is universal.

Posted by Erik on 1:53 PM · Comments (3) · Full article

"Nothing can be made out of nothing"

OSWALD:  What dost thou know me for?

KENT:  A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats;

a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited,

hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave


...


EDMUND: This is the excellent foppery of the
world, that, when we are sick in fortune,—often the
surfeit of our own behavior,—we make guilty of our
disasters the sun, the moon, and the stars:  as if we
were villains by necessity; fools by heavenly compulsion


...


KING LEAR:                        

It may be so, my lord.

Hear, nature, hear; dear goddess, hear!

Suspend thy purpose, if thou didst intend

To make this creature fruitful!

Into her womb convey sterility!

While reading the text king Lear, I was impressed by how often people attribute one thing or another to a person without seeming to give much thought. Perhaps I could put that into better terms and say that many of the characters exhibit the attitude of "the way things are cannot really be changed". As one example of this, in many instances in the text, there have been insults (which by their very nature seem to arbitrarily define the essence of a person, in a fixed, immovable way in the eye of the insulter). Perhaps Shakespeare is drawing out the idea of nature itself.


As evidence of this, Lear himself seems to believe in the power of nature. He invokes, after all, that nature work her powers in order for him to do his bidding. Earlier, Edmund seems to find some justification (whether sarcastic or not)by saying that he did not choose to be the way he is; nature decided it for him.


It is interesting when we compare these prevailing feelings of futility against the power of nature to the the respective attitudes of the sisters. Goneril and Regan seem contrariwise very capable of manipulating their father to get what they want, while Cornelia for having been honest is rejected. Is Shakespeare saying that the plotting deceivers blame nature for their actions? Cornelia does not seem to do so at all, rather looks at her nature as something to which she ought to be true. It would follow then that nature can seem a good thing when looked at from the perspective of being "good", and can be used as an excuse when trying to justify one's actions.


The way nature plays out in the text can teach us a lot about the way we view our own nature, then, and how we treat ourselves.

Posted by Erik on 9:48 PM · Comments (0) · Full article

Shakespeare Project

Just some simple project ruminations...

At first, I got to thinking that Spanish Translation had to take a part no matter what in the final project that I am going to do with Shakespeare. I still think that I am going to continue this work, but I have been captivated by the idea of the Shakespeare Art Gallery and would love for that to take its place. Mason and Cassandra and I have been chatting about how this will work, and it sounds like a blast; we are about to start working on the ideas to 'finalize' it.

My initial ideas:

I would love to try to experiment in Mixed media, and also do some piano composition. I am not extremely well-practiced in art at all, and making anything at all would take a lot of time; that would certainly make it worth it. I am anxious to see what others are thinking about the "gallery" as well. I guess it is just time to throw a bunch of ideas out there. Thanks  Cassandra for the offer to support with resources!!!

I guess some questions are:

1. how will we combine our interests?
2. how much art are we looking at?
3. what are the objectives?

... what else?

I was thinking I could start researching possible locations for all of this to take place?

Posted by Erik on 10:33 AM · Comments (2) · Full article

Formalism, take one

King of France, “proposal” to Cordelia: (King Lear, Act 1)

°Fairest Cordelia, that art most rich, •being poor;                 __          / u u / u u u u / u /

Most °choice, •forsaken; and most °loved, •despised!          __            u / u / u / u / u /**   

Thee and thy °virtues here I seize upon:                               __              …

Be it lawful I take up what’s  •cast away.                              __

• Gods, gods! ’tis strange that from their cold’st neglect      a

° My love should kindle to inflamed respect.                       a

• Thy dowerless daughter, king, thrown to my chance,        b

° Is queen of us, of ours, and our fair France:                       b

Not all the dukes of waterish Burgundy                                c

Can buy this •unprized °precious maid of me.                      c

Bid them farewell, Cordelia, though unkind:                        d

Thou •losest here, a °better where to find*.                          d

Something new

I’m trying out a different way to view Shakespeare: looking at just one passage with close-reading eyes (without thinking about Spanish, this is new!). Formalist readings have never been easy for me, but here goes.

Etymology

My gaze was first drawn to the fact that Cordelia’s name seems different linguistically than “Regan” or “Goneril”. After researching, I found that the prevailing opinion is that Cordelia’s name comes from the French phrase: “Coeur de lion”, or “lionhearted”. In the light of the fact that Cordelia is bravely refusing to please her father with the painted words of adulation her sisters give (holding her love deeply inside instead), I would say that this is quite fitting, and seems to be an intentional usage on Shakespeare’s part. “Goneril” is a purely Celtic name, which is fitting, and Regan means “heir if a king” from what I have researched. Though I found no site specifying one way or another, I presume it comes from the Latin “rex”, meaning “king”. This seems to give a preliminary air of apartness to Cordelia, that her name has a more powerful name in comparison to her two sisters. This contributes to the overall meaning:

Meaning

Most interesting to me is how it seems all the formal aspects of the (almost) sonnet contribute to suggest that the King of France is set apart from the world, and therefore qualified to bind himself to Cordelia as an appropriate match for her, which I will argue here.

Different than other portions of the text, this passage utilizes 4 rhyming couplets, whereas the first portion of the text does not. The consecutive usage of rhymes draws attention to itself; it is not subtle.

At the same time, there is an obvious use of contrasting ideas, lacking in subtlety just like the rhyming. On one hand France emphasizes the perspective of the others present who have rejected Cordelia for one reason or another (her father, Burgandy, etc.). They see her as at loss, rejected, and almost as refuse. The contrasting idea that either immediately precedes or procedes the previous idea is that of how the very rejection leads France to love her more. The goodliness and virtue of Cordelia is emphasized (*Above I have marked the two ideas in filled and unfilled dots, respectively).

Both the rhyming and the immediate, “in-your-face” contrasting of ideas over and over again—which contrast happens 8 times in 12 lines—carry on air of distinction or apartness, separation from everyone else: as if her were saying: “this is the way that they are, but y’know, you and me are different”. By repeated juxtaposition of his own feelings to the negative perceptions of the others, therefore, in essence France sets himself up as higher than those that would oppose her or tell her she is wrong (either to flatter or to convince, I can’t be sure). 

What I draw from these assumptions about the attitude of France is solidified by the word choice of France. The negative words he projects upon the assailants of Cordelia are, that they: “despise” her, “neglect” her, have “cast her away”, is viewed “unprized”, and basically “forsaken”. In comparison, France asserts Cordelia is: “most choice”, “most rich”, “most loved”, “precious”, and “better” off in the end. It is almost as if he is stereoptyping, putting up only two extremes to make the situation more radical, as politicians often do, since being in the ‘middle’ is bad for the primary elections. 

Set apart

By the language devices evident in the short passage, we readily feel the urgency of France to make a distinction between himself and others. All of his literary devices reflect his attitude of setting himself apart; and so, in doing this he attempts to show Cornelia that he identifies with her on a basic level. ‘Both of us appear to be in the same boat’, he says, essentially, which he might suggest for wanting to comfort her or put in a good word for himself. Whichever the case, I am going to keep an eye out for that as I continue to read, and hopefully get some more clues.

** Also interesting that the passage is written entirely in iambic pentameter, except for the first line. I am curious about the import of that breakage.

Posted by Erik on 9:40 AM · Comments (0) · Full article

Self-Assessment

A. Learning Outcomes:

1. How have I gained Shakespeare Literacy?

Honest confession: when I started to read our first play together, Hamlet, I had to spend significant amounts of time in order to be able to understand simply what was going on. I started from scratch, not knowing what was going to happen, and trying to pick it all out. Since then, I have developed literacy in two ways: (1) utilize better tactics to understand Shakespeare: for the rest of the plays now, I use sites to get a background knowledge on the plot, and I understand the importance of using video renditions (see here too) and the plays themselves to get a better context and comparative analysis. The more times I have repeated this process (with The Winters Tale, Richard II, Love's Labour's Lost, and The Tempest). Doing all the reading for these plays and then bringing in outside productions has helped me learn how to come to understand Shakespeare. (2) Additionally, I am getting a feel for the language, and picking up a working vocabulary of what many of his words mean, like "Marry", "It booteth me not", "prithee", etc.

2. How have I analyzed Shakespeare critically?

I have enjoyed the most working on my Shakespeare translation project (see here (when I started) and here (for meter) as well) which also involves now a correspondence with a prestigious university in Spain. I have been comparing translations, commenting on the style and effectiveness, and seeing the pros and cons of each style of translation.

3. How have I engaged Shakespeare creatively?

This one is a blast, but I should have done it more. I started off ambitiously composing a song for one of Laertes' soliloquies, but have not finished that. The project that I most enjoyed was envisioning my own staging of the Tempest.

4. How have I shared Shakespeare meaningfully?

Although I was hesitant at first, I had such a rewarding time with this. There was a time I started up a conversation about Loves Labour's Lost with a co-worker at the MTC, talking about all the plays with my wife and family, and how it relates to present challenges I face, etc. The coolest ones have been teaching Richard II to my 3 young brother in laws (blog pending), and conversing with a homeless gentleman. Both these past two have surprised me how much people know and understand the old Bard.

Self-directed Learning

I have been take quite a bit off guard, to be honest, by the way I have started to take control of my Shakespeare learning. Starting with Love's Labour's Lost, I have been noticing in all the protagonists of the plays character traits that are not favorable in them that I also possess. This has been both startling and humbling as I notice my own character flaws and try to remedy them. I have chosen not to blog about these, given the sensitive nature that they are to me, but have served as the impetus to get conversations going with my wife and with myself about how things are going. Strange to say, perhaps, but, it seemed like Shakespeare knew the fallacies of humankind so well that he could show me where I falter. One example is here.

Collaborative and Social Learning

In the group that I am working with, all of the students have contributed about equally with their comments. I have tried to comment on two or more a day, and it seems like most all of the other students did the same, Especially Averrill. I enjoyed a comment thread with Martina, which got me thinking. All of the students have fomented discussion in small ways.

Working with the groups has given me more motivation to look for specific criticism when reading, because I know that it is coming up. I will look at possible venues in my mind, comparisons to other works, and the overarching meaning or theme so I don't sound like an idiot when we get discussing. It could be improved, perhaps, if we were to talk as a group what we want to discuss next time so we can delve deeper when we do.

The blogging and commenting in class has helped me contribute and get into the mindset of my group. Outside of class, I have really enjoyed the correspondence I have set up with Spain. When I received the reply Sunday morning, I was ecstatic. With my dad and brothers I have also been talking, and they have engaged my ideas too. Their comments have also caused reflection.

Looking Ahead

I would like to develop a more creative approach to Shakespeare. I feel like I have tried always to be academic, and yet have probably been or sounded deficient there as well. I want to do something artsy for the final... maybe finish that song. I enjoyed thinking about that idea today that we could create a proposal for our own play. I would like to take charge of the music, were that the case.

Posted by Erik on 1:19 PM · Comments (0) · Full article

Global Shakespeare Sharing

First off, I admit I have enjoyed
becoming much more technologically literate through my BYU Shakespeare class. It started off with learning how to create and modify a blog (including modifying blogger templates with HTML), then how to use RSS feeds and cool sites like Google Reader, and recently how to connect to others that are talking about the things that I am also interested in.

A few weeks ago, I made a breakthrough discovery
of a group of professors in Spain working exactly on the topic that I was most interested in. They together had published a book about Shakespeare in Spain, which I have been thoroughly enjoying. I sent an ambitious email to one of the editors (in Spanish), hoping for a response, or help to direct my research further. It appears that perhaps I was a little too ambitious in this hope.

Later, I loved searching through twitter
and commenting on tweets, even creating an account so that I could engage this type of communication. After several days it appears that I was a little too hopeful that I would receive any feedback in this technological realm too. Keeping my hopes up, still.

I have been enjoying blog searches
to find people interested in Richard II. At first, about a two weeks ago, I searched through blogs with Google and attempted my commenting there. Interestingly, I found several blogs that fascinated me and coordinated with my own research. Several of these blogs would not allow me to post anything (I think they were blocked?), while the one that did has not yet responded.

This is all okay;
I feel like I am much more aware of how to connect to people and that knowledge is valuable. The next step is to use a more accurate blog-search engine (I'll start with icerocket) and we'll go from there. Stay tuned!

Posted by Erik on 1:10 PM · Comments (0) · Full article

Whoa, Shakespeare... everywhere...

Claude is a cheerful guy living day to day by a means that is unbeknownst to me. We met at a park a few weeks ago and occasionally have had a few short chats. Driving back to Provo this morning, I decided to drop off with him a small bag of bagels that I had received from my Mother-in-law (don't tell her I gave them away), and we started a conversation about the upcoming Halloween 'holiday' this year. Then something happened that took me off-guard... this affable, simple guy started to engage me in Shakespearian banter! The conversation went something like this:

"So, whacha been up to man?" He asks anxiously, more genuine than most people.
"I've just been studying", I respond, "and been teaching up at the MTC".
"That's so great, man, that's really cool! What have you been taking for your classes?"
"Actually, I am in a really cool Shakespeare class which I really enjoy."
"Oh, that's great, I love that, man, y'know, 'to be or not to be', is like the trademark of Shakespeare. I know Hamlet and I think that's great stuff."
"Huh! You like Shakespeare?"
"Yeah, man, he really, like, makes stuff come alive."
"I think I know what you mean; his histories especially I like because of the emotional connection that it makes to us."
"Yeah, I was thinkin' about that man Josefus, who was a big historian, and Josefus went hand in hand with Shakespeare, I think, because of the history".
"Really?! I love that. History is just a great way to express what others felt long before we ever did."
"Yeah, that is why he is so great, man."

Here was my reaction:

Even the poorest of the poor seem to venerate this master of our English tongue. You should go out and say hello to this friend of mine. You would have a great discussion about Shakespeare. You might learn something, like I did.

Posted by Erik on 12:47 PM · Comments (3) · Full article

Children's Questions

I don't think that any normal second-grader could easily dissect the language of the master English-wielder. I too sometimes find it a little dense; yet studying Shakespeare this past semester I have come to love seeing how immediately the concepts he discusses influence my life. I have talked about justification, love, and other topics in the past, and have enjoyed seeing similarities that I have with people like Hamlet, Laertes, and Richard II. Shakespeare does so well at pointing out aspects of their character (that may not be all that great) of which I find I am also possessed. It does so well to see the flaws of others that one also seems to have in order to learn how to get rid of them. Also, recently I have been reading the first several acts of the Tempest and have been enjoying the "born again" theme, with things growing old and new things coming about- this is likewise something that I have always been interested in.

The themes here are not too hard to grasp. I think even a child could understand them, provided that the education was simple enough. I think I would like to try to see how this works out. I have 6 younger brother-in-laws between the ages of 4 and 16, and they are all really bright. They are always amazing me with their young intellects and succinct understandings of the world, with what seems like no irreconcilable complexity.  My question is "what will the kids' reactions to Shakespeare teach me about Shakespeare?" Innocent minds might grasp terrifically well with what he was trying to say.

So the next question would become naturally, "what aspect of Shakespeare do I use?" I could take Hamlet for its examples of internal conflict, Love's Labor's Lost for its remarks on pedantry, Winter's Tale for its ideas on redemption and forgiveness... but  I think I will stick with Richard II with the idea of the loss of power. Now I just have to think about the 'whats' and 'hows' of explaining this to a little kid. We'll see how this goes.

Posted by Erik on 1:05 PM · Comments (0) · Full article

Comparative Translation

These are the three texts that I analyzed side by side (feel free to skip over them to the explanation afterward if you wish), of one of my favorite speeches by King Richard II, exhibiting the emotional, depressing experience of losing it all:

Original:

"What must the king do now? Must

he submit?

The king shall do it: must he be deposed?

The king shall be contented: must he lose

The name of king? o’ God’s name, let it go:

I’ll give my jewels for a set of beads,

My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,

My gay apparel for an almsman’s gown,

My figured goblets for a dish of wood,

My sceptre for a palmer’s walking staff,

My subjects for a pair of carved saints

And my large kingdom for a little grave,

A little little grave, an obscure grave;

Or I’ll be buried in the king’s highway,

Some way of common trade, where subjects’ feet

May hourly trample on their sovereign’s head;

For on my heart they tread now whilst I live;

And buried once, why not upon my head?

Aumerle, thou weep’st, my tender-hearted cousin!

We’ll make foul weather with despised tears;

Our sighs and they shall lodge the summer corn,

And make a dearth in this revolting land.

Or shall we play the wantons with our woes,

And make some pretty match with shedding tears?

As thus, to drop them still upon one place,

Till they have fretted us a pair of graves

Within the earth; and, therein laid,—there lies

Two kinsmen digg’d their graves with weeping eyes.

Would not this ill do well? Well, well, I see

I talk but idly, and you laugh at me.

Most mighty prince, my Lord Northumberland,

What says King Bolingbroke? will his majesty

Give Richard leave to live till Richard die?
You make a leg, and Bolingbroke says ay."

Traducción en Verso por Santiago Sevilla

¿Debe el rey ahora someterse?

¿De hacerlo, vanle a deponer?

¿Si ha de aceptarlo, de rey, el nombre

Perderá? ¡Por Dios, lo he de perder!

A cambio de mis joyas, un rosario;

Por mi bello palacio, una ermita;

Por mi túnica dorada, jubón

De mendicante, y por mi cáliz de oro,

Cuenco de madera he de trocar;

Mi cetro, por bordón de peregrino,

Mis siervos, por imágenes talladas,

Mi inmenso reino, por sepultura,

Oscura, o tumba en camino real,

Alguna frecuentada vía,

Donde la gente pise mi frente,

Cual hoy, mi corazón doliente,

A su ida y vuelta, cada día.

Aumerle, lloras, tierno primo.

Con borrasca de lágrimas te oprimo.

La mies caerá ante mis suspiros,

Y eriales haránse los barbechos.

Excaven tumbas nuestras lágrimas

Y veamos, entre dos, quien gana,

Y con ello, conquistemos fama,

Enterrados en la luenga cava,

De ser llorones consumados.

Mas ya veo que digo tontería,

Y merezco que de mi se ría.

Poderoso príncipe Northumberland,

¿Qué manda a decir rey Bolingbroke?

¿Permíteme vivir, hasta que muera?

¿Ordénate Bolingbroke, que digas, sí?

Traduccion de Luis Astrana Marín

Traducida del ingles, 1923  

¿Qué debe hacer el rey ahora? ¿Debe someterse? Lo hará. ¿Debe ser destronado? Quedará satisfecho. ¿Debo perder el nombre de rey? En nombre de Dios, que lo pierda. Daré mis joyas por un rosario, cambiare mi palacio suntuoso por una ermita, mis ricas vestiduras por el traje de un mendigo, mis cubiletes cincelados por un par de santos esculpidos y mi gran reino por una modesta tumba, una más que modesta, modestísima tumba, una oscura tumba; o seré enterrado en el camino real, en una ruta de común tránsito, para que los pies de mis súbditos puedan a todas horas marchar sobre la cabeza de su soberano. Porque bien pisotean mi corazón ahora que vivo, y una vez enterrado, ¿Por qué no han de hacerlo sobre mi cabeza? ¡Lloras, Aumerle, primo de mi corazón! Engendraremos malos tiempos con nuestras lágrimas menospreciadas. Ellas y nuestros suspiros abatirán las mieses estivales y traerán el hambre a este país sublevado. ¿O debemos hacernos los locos con nuestros infortunios y convertir nuestras lágrimas en tema de alguna inda apuesta, por ejemple, dejándolas correr siempre en el mismo sitio, hasta que nos hayan cavado un par de tumbas en la tierra y allí se suscriba: “Aquí yacen dos parientes que cavaron sus tumbas con lágrimas de sus ojos”? Es que este mal no estaría así bien. Bien, bien, ya veo que no digo más que necedades y que os burláis de mí. Milord Northumberland, muy poderoso príncipe, ¿Qué dice el rey Bolingbroke? ¿Su Majestad se digna autorizar a Ricardo a vivir hasta que Ricardo muera? ¿No tenéis que hacer más que una reverencia, y Bolingbroke dirá que sí.

As seen above, the first translation, by Santiago Sevilla, was done in verse. I love the way this one sounds, and it captures almost to a tea the kind of language that Shakespeare used. As one example, Shakespeare employs 9-11 syllables in each line, as done the Spanish translation. The entirety is written iambically (with a few exceptions, both in English and in Spanish). It has a Shakesperian feel to it with the language. Semantically, though... I think it is quite deficient. A few things that are entirely left out, that I think are important are the short phrases:

"What must the king do now?"

"The king shall do it.... [&] The king shall be contented."

"Where subjects’ feet... [&]

May hourly trample on their sovereign’s head

As in the last example, the idea of his subjects overthrowing him is not mentioned. This to me is significant because it is an extra sign if humiliation, which this speech is trying to capture.

Also, in the first examples, some of what seems to me like sarcasm is omitted. Saying that he shall do it cannot be taken at face value if we also look at the quotes where he is blown up emotionally when he thinks about losing it all. And so, we need these few lines to show the bitterness he feels. 

These are just a few examples.

In contrast, the second translation, by Luis Astrana Marín, is very accurate semantically while omitting the elements of verse and iamb. Still, I love the accuracy of meaning here. Take a look at the difference even spatially:

Till they have fretted us a pair of graves

Within the earth; and, therein laid,—there lies

Two kinsmen digg’d their graves with weeping eyes.

Would not this ill do well?

2nd: (literal)

hasta que nos hayan cavado un par de tumbas

en la tierra y allí se suscriba: “Aquí yacen dos parientes 

que cavaron sus tumbas con lágrimas de sus ojos”? 

Es que este mal no estaría así bien.

1st (verse)

Y con ello, conquistemos fama,

Enterrados en la luenga cava,

De ser llorones consumados.

And so, my hypothesis is that you cannot translate accommodating to both the true, full meaning and also the poetry. In this way, it is hard for me to believe that an exemplary translation of Shakespeare's Richard II can be done. Both elements are essential. I imagine that for readers of Shakespeare in Spanish they will just have to take their pick.

Posted by Erik on 11:27 AM · Comments (3) · Full article

Richard II analysis: cinema production

So, after watching Richard II, I was pretty impressed with how the emotion was captured, but there were a few things I didn't favor so much. A few thoughts:

Music

I was displeased by the lack of soundtrack in the production (BBC, 1978). It doesn’t occur at all, and the only other sounds that exist are the occasional diegetic trumpet blasts when the stage directions call for them. In this way it can be seen that fidelity to the text was one of the highest priorities in producing this version. A soundtrack could have certainly enhanced the emotional apexes that are high in this production. I wonder if it was a conscientious decision to leave music out, or if it was simply not an established thing to do at the time that this production was released.

Cutting

Further evidence that the production is ever-true to the text is that there are only two brief sections where text has been cut, and only for a half a page or so. The plot does not suffer at all because of the lack of those pages, and must have only been removed of time purposes.

Casting

Since the emotional experience of the play is so high, like I mentioned I think that music should have played a more integral part. In any case, the actors that were casted performed very energetically their respective roles. It was easy to capture the depth of the experience when Richard raves emphatically when he feels betrayed: 

“O villains, vipers, damn’d without redemption!

Dogs, easily won to fawn on any man!

Snakes, in my heart-blood warm’d, that sting my heart!

Three Judases, each one thrice worse than Judas!

Would they make peace? terrible hell make war

Upon their spotted souls for this offence”

Act III, scene ii

To be King

The actor chosen for this role, Sir Derek Jacobi, impressed me most with his acting. In especially the scene when he returns from the Irish war (which I quoted above), he goes from triumphant to concerned to consoled to explosively angry, then depressed and absolutely inconsolable. With further developments and the loss of his crown officially and the forced estrangement from his wife (the “double divorce”), he sometimes goes nuts in emotional rage and sometimes gives up all hope. The dynamism in his reaction has been teaching me a lot about the nature of men, and like any good literature, teaches about what it means to be a human. I was unsure before about why Shakespeare wrote so many histories, but I am convinced that this is why. I guess I was naïve about a “history”, letting my bias say that it would be documentary. I should have known better.

But anyway, back to Richard II: I have learned through him that the higher you esteem yourself and love your pride, the harder you will fall. This is the main message that I am got out of Richard II’s emotional outbursts as his life crumbled out from under him. Other Kings, perhaps, had they not loved their station so much and the power associated with it could relinquish their authority much more easily. Richard says:

“Wrath-kindled gentlemen, be ruled by me;

Let’s purge this choler without letting blood:

This we prescribe, though no physician;

Deep malice makes too deep incision;

Forget, forgive; conclude and be agreed;

Our doctors say this is no month to bleed”.

Act 1 scene i

The above quote exemplifies the type of all-powerful-ruler Richard II sees himself as. In an important dispute, in which one member (Bolingbroke) wants an attorney, Richard refuses to give it to him. He commands instead what is to be done. Even though the argumenters eventually convince him to let them fight it out, he cancels that proceeding right before it is about to begin, referring back to this original plan or not “letting blood”. This decision eventually leads to Richard’s downfall and tantrum when he gives up his crown.

Another king, King Benjamin, in the Book of Mosiah from the Book of Mormon, is like Richard’s antithesis. Although both believe that they have divine approval for their kingship, but their attitude is totally different. King Benjamin says:

“I have not commanded you to come up hither that ye should fear me, or that ye should think that I am of myself am more than a mortal man. But I am like as yourselves, subject to all manner of infirmities in body and mind; yet I have been chosen by this people, and consecrated by my father, and was suffered by the  hand of the Lord that I should be a ruler and a king over this people” (from LDS.org).

He only wanted to serve the people, and to his son gave up the crown easily. Richard was quite the opposite, such was his zeal and jealousy.

So, back to my original thought, then: The more you love your pride, the harder it is to fall. King Benjamin, we read later, has always served his people and been selfless. From the entire text of the play, we encounter many evidences that hint at the fact that Richard II really enjoyed the power he had, in contrast.

Questions answered

This was the answer to my first question, “Why so many histories?” They are simply conducive to emotionally powerful things we can learn from, pride being one of them.

My second question was even more enjoyable for me to investigate, and that was about the translations of Spanish of Richard II. As I mentioned before, Lamarca has published an amazing article about his view of Richard II, and the role of poetry in history. I have begun reading a fantastic book called “Shakespeare en España”, compiled by Angel-Luis Pujante and Laura Campillo, which tells all about Shakespeare’s reception in the Hispanic world. It is a collection of essays on various topics, most of them literary criticism about Shakespeare (as was Lamarca’s article commented on earlier), proving to me at least that Shakespeare’s influence has been great in the last century in Spain. I have been attempting to contact the editors with a few research questions that I have in hopes that they might be able to help direct my research. Awaiting the reply!!!

Comparative Translations

Outside of academic commentary, though, I have been trying to do some of my own comparative translation. Time to get some lunch, but tune in to the next blog here.

Posted by Erik on 2:22 PM · Comments (0) · Full article