I have, yet again, noticed that references are made to semi-exotic animals in Shakespeare's plays. I did some thinking about the type of knowledge that those who originally went to Shakespeare's plays would have had which led me to think about Aristotle. Aristotle, being the grandfather of biology, charted and described different types of animals that were brought to him by Alexander the Great (at least that is what my Philosophy professor said); because of Aristotle, then, I think that books would have been available, with pictures, that those of England could have learned from.
Tonight's show went very well. I felt bad about the ending of my play, but this is only because it was the least rehearsed part of the play. We never did this scene on stage in the theater until the final show, and for that I think it went really well. I think that I did a great job with my lines, but I am certainly glad that I decided to make cue cards at the last minute. The safety net made me much more relaxed when I hit the stage. I had a lot of fun performing and wish that we would have known more about changing of scenes and how to move things around backstage quickly to make the show run smoother and more quickly. Overall I really liked that we kept a lot of things true to the written play and used elements of the movie to "fluff" out what we were doing (i.e. Juliet wore wings and Romeo had a sword).
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Random Comment, not my weekly blog
I have a random comment to make and I figured that I would make it here or else I would forget it by Monday's class. I was listening to La Vie Boheme and something new stood out to me, something new always seems to stand out to me. This time I caught that they mentioned Kursoawa in the song which immediately made me think of our class, which I thought was pretty cool.
(p.s. my weekly blog was posted before this one)
(p.s. my weekly blog was posted before this one)
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
King Lear
Numerous things stood out to me while reading King Lear. I will focus briefly on five different mini-topics in this blog. First of all, the character of Edgar was my least favorite one in the play. I did not like him because I feel as though he was trying far too hard to be Poor Tom and, in doing so, became less and less believable. He was constantly making reference to himself in the third person—“Poor Tom, that eats the swimming frog…” (3.4.136)—which made me shocked that no one would have questioned him actually being Poor Tom. I also wonder how he and Kent were able to disguise themselves so well. I think the fact that Gloucester did not recognize Poor Tom as his son Edgar emphasizes our class discussion about this play being a social commentary on parenting. Gloucester, if he had been close to his son, should have picked up on the subtle nuances of Edgar (i.e. his voice, mannerisms).
Changing pace, there are several references to lions and other somewhat “exotic” animals throughout the play as in 3.4.98-106. I didn’t realize that the people of Elizabethan England would have had enough exposure to these animals to be familiar enough with them for Shakespeare to use them as references in his plays. I guess I could understand if some of the royalty and richer people would understand because they would potentially have seen pictures of these animals, but I don’t think that the groundlings would have understood. This question of mine also comes into play in Titus because there are references to tigers.
In 3.7.40-41 Regan plucks the beard of Gloucester. Were beards really that important in England that as a punishment for a crime they would pluck someone’s beard? This reminded me of the Chinese cue (I am not sure if that is how they spell it). Another thing that surprised me was that the story of “Jack and the Beanstalk” goes back as far as Shakespeare and would have already been wildly known enough to include a reference to it in King Lear (3.5.195-197). And, finally, I thought that the lines 1.4.122-131 were really interesting/insightful: “Have more than thou showest,/ Speak less than thou knowest,/ Lend less than thou owest,/ Ride more than thou goest,/ Learn more than thou trowest,/ Set less than thou throwest,/ Leave thy drink and thy whore/ And keep in-a-door,/ And thou shalt have more/ Than two tens to a score.”
Changing pace, there are several references to lions and other somewhat “exotic” animals throughout the play as in 3.4.98-106. I didn’t realize that the people of Elizabethan England would have had enough exposure to these animals to be familiar enough with them for Shakespeare to use them as references in his plays. I guess I could understand if some of the royalty and richer people would understand because they would potentially have seen pictures of these animals, but I don’t think that the groundlings would have understood. This question of mine also comes into play in Titus because there are references to tigers.
In 3.7.40-41 Regan plucks the beard of Gloucester. Were beards really that important in England that as a punishment for a crime they would pluck someone’s beard? This reminded me of the Chinese cue (I am not sure if that is how they spell it). Another thing that surprised me was that the story of “Jack and the Beanstalk” goes back as far as Shakespeare and would have already been wildly known enough to include a reference to it in King Lear (3.5.195-197). And, finally, I thought that the lines 1.4.122-131 were really interesting/insightful: “Have more than thou showest,/ Speak less than thou knowest,/ Lend less than thou owest,/ Ride more than thou goest,/ Learn more than thou trowest,/ Set less than thou throwest,/ Leave thy drink and thy whore/ And keep in-a-door,/ And thou shalt have more/ Than two tens to a score.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
