The Fairy-tale Aspect

I realize that I wasn't clear about where Once Upon A Time fit in with the story. If you watch the show you probably caught on, but this will clear things up for those of you that haven't...

The coolest part about working on a story for Puck would be the mysterious woods and the magic. I am quite partial to the idea of using a magic potion. It is like a reverse love-potion. It would cure Puck of his unattainable love in a very lighthearted way. The effect would be to forget all memories of the person you were in love with. This way you would never suffer over it. You would not be bothered by the memories, or the image of the person that you are in love with.
I can totally see Puck having his mischievous side come out after drinking this potion because it makes you completely oblivious when you were so preoccupied and obsessed before.
I think it would totally be an OK rout to go because Shakespeare used magic and even a love potion before in Midsummer Night's Dream.
Here is where Puck talks about it.

On the ground

Sleep sound:

I'll apply

To your eye,

Gentle lover, remedy.

[Squeezing the juice on LYSANDER's eyes]

Plus if this is the back story for Puck, it would add dramatic irony when Puck uses potions on other people later in his life in Midsummer Night's Dream, because that is exactly what he did, only he doesn't remember of course.

This kind of potion was actually used in Once Upon A Time, which is where I got the idea.
This clip shows the effect of the potion. I can really see Puck becoming apathetic and adding to his joking attitude as a result of this potion.
(Just to clearify the clip: Snow Wight was in love with Prince James (charming) but he was being forced into an arranged mariage and therefore they couldn't be together. That's when Snow decided to forget him.)

Here is another clip that explains more about how the potion will function. (Snow makes a deal with Rumpelstiltskin to get the cure for a broken heart.) - Watch out Rumpel is very creepy!

The Shakespearean Chorus

I talked before about the concept in acting of  breaking the 4th wall. I am thinking that this is something we could put into our imaginary play because Shakespeare did it often. It is found most commonly in connection with the chorus or a chorus like character.

Shakespeare, in some of his histories, loosely followed the ancient Greek tradition of having a chorus in the play. This person or group of people would usually brake the 4th wall and talk directly to the audience about the plot and events and background of the play.

Here is an example from Henry V - 

Chorus (Henry V, prologue)

O for a Muse of fire, that would ascend

The brightest heaven of invention,

A kingdom for a stage, princes to act

And monarchs to behold the swelling scene!

Then should the warlike Harry, like himself,

Assume the port of Mars; and at his heels,

Leash'd in like hounds, should famine, sword and fire

Crouch for employment. But pardon, and gentles all,

The flat unraised spirits that have dared

On this unworthy scaffold to bring forth

So great an object: can this cockpit hold

The vasty fields of France? or may we cram

Within this wooden O the very casques

That did affright the air at Agincourt?

O, pardon! since a crooked figure may

Attest in little place a million;

And let us, ciphers to this great accompt,

On your imaginary forces work.

Suppose within the girdle of these walls

Are now confined two mighty monarchies,

Whose high upreared and abutting fronts

The perilous narrow ocean parts asunder:

Piece out our imperfections with your thoughts;

Into a thousand parts divide on man,

And make imaginary puissance;

Think when we talk of horses, that you see them

Printing their proud hoofs i' the receiving earth;

For 'tis your thoughts that now must deck our kings,

Carry them here and there; jumping o'er times,

Turning the accomplishment of many years

Into an hour-glass: for the which supply,

Admit me Chorus to this history;

Who prologue-like your humble patience pray,

Gently to hear, kindly to judge, our play. 

I thought it was interesting to see that though Midsummer Night's Dream is not a history and there is no chorus, Puck brakes the 4th wall quite often.
Here is an example -

Puck (Midsummer Night's Dream, Act V end)

If we shadows have offended,

Think but this, and all is mended,

That you have but slumber'd here

While these visions did appear.

And this weak and idle theme,

No more yielding but a dream,

Gentles, do not reprehend:

if you pardon, we will mend:

And, as I am an honest Puck,

If we have unearned luck

Now to 'scape the serpent's tongue,

We will make amends ere long;

Else the Puck a liar call;

So, good night unto you all.

Give me your hands, if we be friends,

And Robin shall restore amends.

After doing some research on the use of a chorus I found this from Wikipedia. 
"Plays of the ancient Greek theater always included a chorus that offered a variety of background and summary information to help the audience follow the performance. The Greek chorus [also] comments on themes..." Here is the interesting part. "The chorus also represents, on stage, the general population of the particular story, in sharp contrast with many of the themes of the ancient Greek plays which tended to be about individual heroes, gods, and goddesses." Knowing this I thought back to my personal play (Richard II) and tried to find a representative character. I also found some other supporting online references that pointed me in the direction of the Gardener. This is supported by they fact that he was a commoner whose lines are sandwiched in-between 2 scenes heavy in Kings, Queens, Lords and Ladies and such. He is also asked to recall the events of the play up to that point and continues on to foretell what he thinks will happen (he thinks that King Richard will loose the crown to Bolingbroke and maybe die). Because of his occupation, he is also able to articulate this using plant metaphors.

Gardener (Richard II, Act 3, sc. 4) 

He that hath suffer'd this disorder'd spring
Hath now himself met with the fall of leaf:
The weeds which his broad-spreading leaves did shelter,
That seem'd in eating him to hold him up,
Are pluck'd up root and all by Bolingbroke...

From these examples we see that a chorus character is an important part of Shakespeare.
I think that it would fit nicely in the Puck story that has been suggested by Andrew.
Please stay tuned for more about this.

Composition Analysis

I was reading the musical post by Kim and it was really interesting to me even though I have not read Macbeth. She posted a classical rendition of Shakespeare. Here it is again.

I just thought I would give a few of my own ideas and analysis of what is here in a musical sense.

I think the part layering (where the parts would come in a little bit after one another in a cascading fashion to build the chord) that they did multiple times was a really good reiteration of the "Double Double" idea. It showed the build up of the spell, potion, or what ever the case may be. It was also good that it occurred in both directions (women to men, men to women) it gave variety and farther interest to the repetition in the composition that mimics literary Shakespeare's repetition.
The sliding (where you don't sing a note but you slide from high to low or low to high like a siren) was a good addition to the ethereal feel of the song. This is not that easily achieved with a whole choir.
Their work with the vowels was especially good. First they used spread  vowels that gives a really eerie sound. Then they used tall or rounded vowels that give a very for eccohy sound. Both lend different sounds that seem the most strange when combined with each other.
The spoken part of the song added the element of an incantation.
Staccato was also good.  "SOMEthing wicket this way comes, SOMEthing wicked this way come..." It gave emphasis and made you focus on the something. What is this something? The fact that it doesn't say combined with such an emphasis really makes the mystery and the creepiness.

Overall, it was in my estimation it was a great musical rendition of Shakespeare and I believe it represented him well in another medium.

Only a Part of My Heart

This stems from a discussion that occurred in Denmark last week, sorry it's a bit late.
We were talking about how Lear is so ungrateful for Cordelia's love. Andrew also talked about this and shared the song 8% Of My Love. It made me think of another related song. Half Of My Heart by John Meyer. Even though I hate the song and the sentiment, here it is.
These both connect to-

"Haply, when I shall wed, That lord whose hand must take my plight shall carry Half my love with him, half my care and duty."

I thought of another song that relates to another point that someone brought up in class. Most likely, Cordelia, as the unmarried sister was living with  Lear and helping to take care of him and the estate. If this is the case it furthers her point that she loves him because she has shown him. Kind of like in Fiddler On The Roof in the song "Do You Love Me?" This is a great one!

While searching for this I also stumbled upon a Japanese version! Weird right? I watched it and loved the acting. There is more humor in this version and I really loved hearing the conversion of the song into another language. I have been thinking about looking into the Japanese Shakespeare world and have been trying to get my hands on "Ran" which is one of the earlier covers of King Lear, so there might be more of this to come if you guys like the idea.
So here you go if you are interested. I really liked the acting, and the humor is a little different.

King of Hearts, King of Spades, Kings of Nothing

First to explain my title:

Lear is the King of Hearts because he seeks for public love and is all tied up with his daughters.

Richard II is the King of Spades because he seeks money and land to wage war with Ireland and because he does some back stabbing and is then stabbed (literally and figuratively) in return.

Both kings loose their kingship, they both loose someone dear to them, and they both loose their lives and are therefore left Kings of Nothing.

2nd, the comparison:

I wanted to compare these kings because I found so much that they had in common. As I started to look more closely at their characters and the plot surrounding them I found many things that are similar.

Both kings loose their kingship

Richard II looses the throne to Bolingbrook who becomes Henry IV (Henry V father). Bolingbrook claims back lands and money that were rightfully his inheritance that Richard had seized to help fund his war. Other enraged nobles support Bolingbrook in farther claiming the crown and they put Richard in prison as a criminal.

Lear plans for his daughters to take over because he is on his way out, but then he not only looses his kingship, but his parenthood also when Goneril and Regan abandon him. 

Both kings loose a loved on            

Richard II, when being sent to prison must say goodbye to his queen. First he shows anger at being separated, "Doubly divorced! bad men, you violate a twofold marriage twixt my crown and me and then betwixt me and my married wife." He then turns to her and asks her to remember him and to tell his story. She asks to be banished with him, but is not permitted. "Must we part? Ay, hand from hand, my love, and heart from heart."

Lear also anguishes over his beloved daughter Cordelia. They are taken away as prisoners together and he says, "He that parts us shall bring a brand from heaven and fire us hence like foxes." Lear also kills the assassin from Edmond that we sent to kill them both and cries and basically dies over her death. 

Both kings loose their lives

Richard is stabbed by a Exton, a nobleman who was over zealously loyal to Bonlingbrook.

Lear, though not killed in the end, could be debated as being cause by the assassin sent after him and Cordelia.

Third, similar themes:

I also found that there were some themes that linked these two plays. Both would come back to the same ideas. I found many parallel quotes and figured that a table might just do the trick.

	Comparing Man and Animal	Eyes and Sight	Wrongfully Accused	Broken Family Ties	Murder	Heaven Destined
King Richard	"Horse, why do I rail on thee since thou, created to be awed by men, was born to bear? I was not made a horse and yet I bear a burden like an ass, spurred galled and tired by jauncing Bullingbrook." (5,5,90)	"Mine eyes are full of tears; I cannot see. And yet salt water blinds them not so much but they can see a sort of traitors here." (4,1,243)	"Nay, all of you that stand and look upon me whilst that my wretchedness doth bait my self, though some of you with Pilate wash your hands, showing an outward pity, yet you Pilates have here delivered me to my sour cross and water cannot wash away your sin." (4,1,236)	"Good sometime queen" (5,1,37) - He is saying this as a goodbye to his wife out of love and sadness	"Villain, thy own hand yields thy death's instrument. Go thou and fill another room in hell. That hand shall burn in never-quenching fire…" (5,5,106) - He says this to his murderer	"Mount, mount my soul. Thy seat is up on high whilst my gross flesh sinks downward, here to die." (5,5,111) - About his own death
King Lear	"Is man no more than this? Thou art the thing itself; unaccommodated man is no more but such a poor, bare, forked animal as thou art." (3,4,109)	"A man may see how this world goes with no eyes. Look with thine ears. See how yond justice rails upon yond simple thief." (4,6,165)	"I am a man more sinned against than sinning." (3,2,62) "We are not the first who with best meaning have incurred the worst." (5,3,4)	"My sometime daughter" (1,1,133) - He is saying this to denounce his  daughter Cordelia, out of anger	"A plague upon you, murderers, traitors all!" (5,3,325) - He says this about Cordelia's murderer	"Had I your tongues and eyes, I'd use them so that heaven's vault should crack… She is dead as earth." (5,3,309) - About Cordelia's death

What say you? Do you have any analysis you would lend me in comparing these two plays? Maybe something about the parallel quotes that got you thinking?

Hamlet vs. Hamlet, again

I thought I would give this title another go because I had a new idea. This title drives home what happens when Hamlet pretends to be mad in order to get closer to getting revenge on his uncle. He becomes almost bipolar; therefore Hamlet vs. Hamlet. You could argue that he is becoming mad while playing mad. He is not quite as far gone as Gollum vs. Smeagol, but still pretty crazy.

I was thinking that Gollum saying "where would you be without me?" reflects how Hamlet is driven by his revenge and nothing else. He stops caring about his own life (like moving forward with Ophelia or interacting with his friends) and obsesses over his uncle. If only Hamlet had been able to move passed that like Smeagol at the end of this clip (though of course we know that he reverts back to Gollum before the end)

Hamlet vs. Hamlet

I watched 2 versions of Hamlet (Kenneth Branagh and David Tennant or Royal Shakespeare Co.) with Anne and Marina. I really agreed with what they shared, but there was a couple of things about the RSC version that I want to add.

Braking The 4th Wall

Hehe, I broke it!

In the RSC with David Tennant they had a habit of braking the 4th wall. This is a performance technique where the actors actually speak to the audience. It was a very interesting way to do Shakespeare. Some of the soliloquies where done this why where they were talking directly to the audience (in which case, it is not really a soliloquy is the true sense.

This was a very interesting way to deliver the lines of Shakespeare. It was something I did not expect at all, so the first time it surprised me and I had to stop and ask myself "wait, is he talking to me?" Still, I think they had a legitimate motivation to have the lines said that way. In real life, no one really talks to themselves (I love talking to inanimate objects, but that is another issue entirely :) we talk to the people around us. I though it was especially good when Polonius turned and told us how strange Hamlet was acting when he asked for a speech from the players.


The modernization
Anne and Marina both talked about this a little. The RSC set the play in the 21st century with, specifically, modern fashions and technology. Both of these I believe had a similar effect as the 4th wall technique; they were a bit surprising at first and seemed a little out of place, but once you got used to it it added an interesting and beneficial element to the film.

The wardrobe
Familiar clothing was worn and right from the beginning you could tell that the characters were all upper-class. The men were all in suits and the queen was wearing a dress of very high fashion. This is something that would not be quite as obvious if you had everyone in period costumes, because you would have to be very familiar with history to spot the difference right off.
They also made use of the consume changes at scene brakes. The difference was  clearly highlighted in the To be or not to be speech for Hamlet and when Ophelia go mad.

To be or not to be was spoken in a graphic tee. He was alone, in comfortable clothing with his hair undone from the gelled, formal look he had earlier. These all added to his crazy (besides the fact that David Tennant is great at acting like a mad man). This clear informality also added to the intimacy of the soliloquy and allowed him to ask the very personal, probing questions.
Ophelia has some great costumes. She starts out in formal dress as well, but when she goes mad you can tell right away. She emerges with only her underwear! Her hair is also loosed in the true sense of the word.
One thing I missed in the RSC version was a straight jacket for Ophelia. Though it was styled period fashion, you could tell that that is what they had her wear in the Kenneth Branagh version.

The technology
The RSC decided to farther modernize the film by using security cameras. I thought it was very effective in the opening sequence with the ghost encounter. You could not see the ghost in the shot, but you could tell that the characters could. This was very interesting and grabbed my attention right away. It was a great way to introduce a ghost. It was also used later when Hamlet gets crazy and Polonius and the King spy on him. I loved the part where Hamlet takes the camera down and says "now I am truly alone" before going into "to be or not to be". (This sequence was done in the Branagh version with one-way mirrors, which I thought was also phenomenal, but less modern of course.)
Hamlets handheld camera is another modern touch that added to the movie. He uses it more and more as he looses it more and more. The irony is that he uses it to document his spying on his uncle the king during the play that he has performed for that very cause. It is parallel to them spying on him through the security cameras.



Overall I loved the RSC version. It was more true to the theater and closer to what Shakespeare would have been like even though it was modernized. I think the choices to they made in the wardrobe and the technology were logical and creative. They were also effective in getting my attention. The only thing I missed was the very clean, professional and highly edited cinematography of a good film like the Branagh version. But RSC is supposed to be more theater, less movie. And I think that they pulled it off well.
I might be biased though, because you know how I love David Tennant :)


PS. I also found a post on Bardfilm about the Branagh movie. It talked about Ophelia's character and the theme of winter in the film. For example; where did she get the flowers in her bouquet and how did she drowned in the brook in the middle of winter?? If you are interested here's a link: Bardfilm.

Global Shakespeare

I was just thinking back on all the plays I've read. I think it's very interesting that you can pull so many hidden messages from the lines of Shakespeare. He talks about his passions in the plays; words, education, writing in general, play writing specifically, proforming arts, theater, etc...

Because of this I was remembering that Shakespeare references the Globe theater itself in many places.

The Tempest Act 4, sc 1.

"These are actors as I fortold you, were all spirits and are melted into air, into thin air; and like the baseless fabric of this vision, the cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, the solemn temples, the great globe itself...."

Merchant of Venice Act 1, sc. 1
"I hold the world by as the world Gratiano, a stage, where every man must play a part, and mine a sad one."
 As You Like It Act. 2, sc. 7
"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players; they have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages."
Richard II Act. 5, sc.2
"As in a theater, the eyes of men,
After a well-grac'd actor leaves the stage,
Are idly bent on him that enters next,
Thinking his prattle to be tedious."

It is also cool that because the theater was named the Globe you could have a double meaning; you could be talking about the theater or the entire world.

Black = Hamlet's Symbol

There is sometimes a color theme or a set of symbols for a story. I believe (from watching and reading along) that it would be appropriate to pair Hamlet with Black. In fact all the mentions of this were very interesting, because in each incidence this same color means something different. The movie also brought attention to this.
Black = Hamlet's Morning
At the very beginning Hamlet is morning his father's resent death, so he wears the traditional color.
In Act 1, sc. 2 this is described in many ways: nighted color, inky cloak, solemn black. And all these point to the "forms, moods, shapes of grief... the trappings and the suits of woe."
Black = Claudius' Damnation
King Claudius, in his soliloquy of remorse and repentance, sees at least in part the wickedness of his murder. In Act 3, sc. 3 he says, "Oh wretched state! Oh bosom black as death!"
Black = Gertrude's Realization
As Hamlet is trying to show his mother the faults of Claudius, she looks inward instead and sees her own part in wickedness. In Act 3, sc. 4 she says "Thou turn'st my eyes into my very soul, and there I see such black and grained spots as will not leave their tinct."
Black = Hamlet's Funeral 
I also loved the end of the movie. I found it ironic that Hamlet received the kind of funeral that he had wished for his father. It had all the army in striking black and a gun salute. It ended with a bang, but was it a good resolution? Hamlet didn't really get his revenge, all his "playing madness" was really what lead to his own downfall.

The Tempest: Not A Tumultuous Ending

Reading The Tempest was an adventure. I can say, like Miranda, "O, I have suffered with those that I saw suffer." I loved the journey, but I especially loved the ending.  Prospero had put his brother through an ordeal with the tempest, the shipwreck, and the spirits that he controlled. This most people would say is his way of getting revenge on his brother (his brother Antonio usurped the dukedom of Milan from him). Even though he has the opportunity to, we do not see Prospero killing his brother, instead just lets him off the hook. He does take Milan back, but no one gets killed and the family returns to Italy together.
I found that this ending reminded me a lot of a biblical story. Joseph of Egypt did about the same. He put his brothers through an ordeal to see their characters. When he saw that his brothers had learned their lesson and that they felt remorse, Joseph revealed himself and the family was reunited. This happy ending was a good example of a traditional romantic story by Shakespeare.

Christianity in Shakespear?

The Merchant of Venice starts out with Bassanio owing his dear friend Antonio money, and yet needing more. Antonio is more than willing to help his friend, and replies thus,
"...within the eye of honor, be assured my purse, my person, my extremest means lie all unlocked to your occasions." (Act. 1, sc. 1)
To me this shows the extremely loyal friend that Antonio is, and honestly reminds me of Jesus Christ.
He is called "my best, my Heavenly Friend" in the humn "Be Still My Soul". Christ is our advocate. He offered up everything to ransom us from sin, even His mortal person, as he suffered in Gethsemane and hung and died for us on the Cross at Golgotha.

On that note (punny :), I was also thinking that if Antonio was reflective of Christ, than Bassanio might represent us. In fact his has a righteous attitude of gratitude and humility, and therefore can be linked to how we are completely dependent on Christ.
Bassanio says, "Nor do I now make moan to be abridged for such a noble rate, but my chief care is to come fairly off from the great debts wherein my time something too prodigal hath left me gaged. To you Antonio I owe the most in money and love, and from your love I have a warranty to unburthen all my plots and purposes how to get clear of all the debts I owe."
Shakespeare's use of the word "prodigal" also points in that direction because it makes me think of the parable of the Prodigal Son. This parable is of course representative of our debt to Christ. We cannot, return to live with Heavenly Father by ourselves because we all sin and are unfit for Heaven. It is here that Jesus Christ steps in and takes upon Himself all imperfections and makes us whole if we repent. It is through Him that we can return and live with our Heavenly Father, if we repent.

This is also reflected in another hymn I Stand All Amazed
This is how I have begun to wonder if Shakespeare was Christian, or maybe I am just reading into the characters and lines a little bit and have seen something that he didn't even intend. Maybe that's why they say "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".