mouthporn.net
#shakespeare – @ohsweetcrepes on Tumblr
Avatar

ON VA VOIR, B*TCH!

@ohsweetcrepes / ohsweetcrepes.tumblr.com

This is a tumblr mostly for Ningen_Demonai (you can call me Nin) to follow others. Note: There'll be a lot of reblogged stuff I currently like (with copious amounts of tags). There will be very little seriousness up in here. Have fun!
Avatar
Avatar
angualupin

I feel like I need to tell everyone how brilliantly the Globe incorporated a deaf Gildenstern into the 2018 Hamlet and then force all of you to watch it

ok, so Gildenstern is played by a deaf actor, Nadia Nadarajah. he* signs all his lines, and either Rosencratz interprets for him, or the person he’s talking to says something that makes it obvious what he just said, depending. how each character reacts to Gildenstern is completely in-character and often hilarious

  • Claudius and Gertrude are intensely awkward around Gildenstern. they obviously don’t know BSL so they just gesture emphatically but aimlessly when they talk.
  • Hamlet, who of course is friends with R&G, *does* know BSL. he starts off by signing fluently whenever he’s talking to them but, as his distrust of them grows, he signs less and less until he’s only signing the equivalent of “fuck off” whenever he talks
  • Polonius just shouts really loud whenever he tries to talk to Gildenstern

it’s all brilliant and adds another layer of humor and pathos and you should all watch it

*casting at the Globe right now is gender neutral so I’m just going to use the character’s pronouns

guys I know I’m wittering on about this but the thing I want to emphasize is that there is no tokenism here. they didn’t just shove a deaf actor into a speaking role so they could pat themselves on the back about how progressive they are. they went to the effort of fully integrating Nadarajah’s deafness into the story so that it not only fit organically within the narrative but actually enhanced it. watching Hamlet’s signing disintegrate as his trust in R&G disintegrates adds a depth to that storyline I’ve never seen before. Claudius has exactly the awkwardness of someone who thinks of himself as a good person and therefore thinks he’s being kind and generous with his accommodations for disability, but has never even once actually asked a disabled person what they need, which is so on-point for his character it hurts.

I know Michelle Terry gets a lot of hate mail for her policy of race-, gender-, and disability-blind casting, but fuck all those people. long may that policy continue.

THEIR ‘AS YOU LIKE IT’ WAS EVEN BETTER.

the same cast did AYLI that summer, and Nadia Nadarajah (goddess who owns my soul) played Celia. And Rosalind would speak her lines as well as sign them, to Celia. 

But they had Celia’s ASSHOLE DUKE DAD purposefully leave Celia out of the conversation at least once. And I was like…. fuck. oh, fuck. 

And Rosalind and Celia would have all of these side conversations that were ONLY in sign-language, for some of Celia’s lines when Orlando was present and Rosalind was being “Ganymede” 

And then at the end, when Oliver fell in love with Celia, he tried to sign to her!!

That link is broken. It’s now on the Globe’s youtube but only until Sunday 19 April 2020.

You might just about have time to watch Hamlet before it goes back to not being free to watch.

Either way I just wanted to add that when they brought back that production of As You Like It again last year it mostly had the same cast but they brought in another deaf actor to play Jacques. Sophie Stone speaks and signs so I’d imagine that gives it even more layers of meaning. There’s a blog post where they talk about that here, along with a video of her doing the ‘All the world’s a stage…’ speech here:

Avatar
Avatar
prokopetz

I am 100% convinced that “exit, pursued by a bear” is a reference to some popular 1590s meme that we’ll never be able to understand because that one play is the only surviving example of it.

Seriously, we’ll never figure it out. I’ll wager trying to understand “exit, pursued by a bear” with the text of The Winter’s Tale as our primary source is like trying to understand loss.jpg when all you have access to is a single overcompressed JPEG of a third-generation memetic mutation that mashes it up with YMCA and “gun” - there’s this whole twitching Frankensteinian mass of cultural context we just don’t have any way of getting at.

Avatar
sandovers

no, but this is why people do the boring archival work! because we think we do know why “exit, pursued by a bear” exists, now, and we figured it out by looking at ships manifests of the era -

it’s also why there was a revival of the unattributed and at the time probably rather out of fashion mucedorus at the globe in 1610 (the same year as the winter’s tale), and why ben jonson wrote a chariot pulled by bears into his court masque oberon, performed on new year’s day of 1611.

we think the answer is polar bears.

no, seriously!  in late 1609 the explorer jonas poole captured two polar bear cubs in greenland and brought them home to england, where they were purchased by the beargarden, the go-to place in elizabethan london for bear-baiting and other ‘animal sports.’  it was at the time run by edward alleyn (yes, the actor) and his father-in-law philip henslowe (him of the admiral’s men and that diary we are all so very grateful for), and would have been very close, if not next to, the globe theatre.

of course, polar bear cubs are too little and adorable for baiting, even to the bloodthirsty tudor audience, aren’t they?  so, what to do with the little bundles of fur until they’re too big to be harmless?  well, if there’s anything we know about the playwrights and theatre professionals of the time, it’s that they knew how to make money and draw in audiences.  and the spectacle of a too-small-to-be-dangerous-yet-but-still-real-live-and-totally-WHITE-bear?  what good entertainment businessman is going to turn down that opportunity? 

and, voila, we have a death-by-bear for the unfortunate antigonus, thereby freeing up paulina to be coupled off with camillo in the final scene, just as the comedic conventions of the time would expect.

Avatar
scientia-rex

you’re telling me it was an ACTUAL BEAR

every time I think to myself “history can’t possibly get any more bananas” I realize or am made to realize that I am badly mistaken

Not just an actual bear. A polar bear cub.

Imagine a fully grown man running offstage to be “killed” by a baby polar bear.

Avatar

Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?

i do bite my thumb, sir

Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?

is the law on our side if i say ay?

no, sir, i do not bite my thumb at you sir; but I bite my thumb, sir

Do you quarrel, sir?

quarrel, sir? no sir

if you do, sir, i am for you: i serve as good a man as you

well, sir

DOST THOU WANT TO FUCKING GO, SIR?

DOST THOU THINK THOU CAN FUCKING TAKE ME, BRO?

DOST THOU EVEN HOIST? OUT TO THE COURT YARD, WITH HASTE.  

Avatar

Concerning Juliet’s age

I find a big stumbling block that comes with teaching Romeo and Juliet is explaining Juliet’s age. Juliet is 13 - more precisely, she’s just on the cusp of turning 14. Though it’s not stated explicitly, Romeo is implied to be a teenager just a few years older than her - perhaps 15 or 16. Most people dismiss Juliet’s age by saying “that was normal back then” or “that’s just how it was.” This is fundamentally untrue, and I will explain why.

In Elizabethan England, girls could legally marry at 12 (boys at 14) but only with their father’s permission. However, it was normal for girls to marry after 18 (more commonly in early to mid twenties) and for boys to marry after 21 (more commonly in mid to late twenties). But at 14, a girl could legally marry without papa’s consent. Of course, in doing so she ran the risk of being disowned and left destitute, which is why it was so critical for a young man to obtain the father’s goodwill and permission first. Therein lies the reason why we are repeatedly told that Juliet is about to turn 14 in under 2 weeks. This was a critical turning point in her life.

In modern terms, this would be the equivalent of the law in many countries which states children can marry at 16 with their parents’ permission, or at 18 to whomever they choose - but we see it as pretty weird if someone marries at 16. They’re still a kid, we think to ourselves - why would their parents agree to this?

This is exactly the attitude we should take when we look at Romeo and Juliet’s clandestine marriage. Today it would be like two 16 year olds marrying in secret. This is NOT normal and would NOT have been received without a raised eyebrow from the audience. Modern audiences AND Elizabethan audiences both look at this and think THEY. ARE. KIDS.

Critically, it is also not normal for fathers to force daughters into marriage at this time. Lord Capulet initially makes a point of telling Juliet’s suitor Paris that “my will to her consent is but a part.” He tells Paris he wants to wait a few years before he lets Juliet marry, and informs him to woo her in the meantime. Obtaining the lady’s consent was of CRITICAL importance. It’s why so many of Shakespeare’s plays have such dazzling, well-matched lovers in them, and why men who try to force daughters to marry against their will seldom prosper. You had to let the lady make her own choice. Why?

Put simply, for her health. It was considered a scientific fact that a woman’s health was largely, if not solely, dependant on her womb. Once she reached menarche in her teenage years, it was important to see her fitted with a compatible sexual partner. (For aristocratic girls, who were healthier and enjoyed better diets, menarche generally occurred in the early teens rather than the later teens, as was more normal at the time). The womb was thought to need heat, pleasure, and conception if the woman was to flourish. Catholics might consider virginity a fit state for women, but the reformed English church thought it was borderline unhealthy - sex and marriage was sometimes even prescribed as a medical treatment. A neglected wife or widow could become sick from lack of (pleasurable) sex. Marrying an unfit sexual partner or an older man threatened to put a girl’s health at risk. An unsatisfied woman, made ill by her womb as a result - was a threat to the family unit and the stability of society as a whole. A satisfying sex life with a good husband meant a womb that had the heat it needed to thrive, and by extension a happy and healthy woman.

In Shakespeare’s plays, sexual compatibility between lovers manifests on the stage in wordplay. In Much Ado About Nothing, sparks fly as Benedick and Beatrice quarrel and banter, in comparison to the silence that pervades the relationship between Hero and Claudio, which sours very quickly. Compare to R+J - Lord Capulet tells Paris to woo Juliet, but the two do not communicate. But when Romeo and Juliet meet, their first speech takes the form of a sonnet. They might be young and foolish, but they are in love. Their speech betrays it.

Juliet, on the cusp of 14, would have been recognised as a girl who had reached a legal and biological turning point. Her sexual awakening was upon her, though she cares very little about marriage until she meets the man she loves. They talk, and he wins her wholehearted, unambiguous and enthusiastic consent - all excellent grounds for a relationship, if only she weren’t so young.

When Tybalt dies and Romeo is banished, Lord Capulet undergoes a monstrous change from doting father to tyrannical patriarch. Juilet’s consent has to take a back seat to the issue of securing the Capulet house. He needs to win back the prince’s favour and stabilise his family after the murder of his nephew. Juliet’s marriage to Paris is the best way to make that happen. Fathers didn’t ordinarily throw their daughters around the room to make them marry. Among the nobility, it was sometimes a sad fact that girls were simply expected to agree with their fathers’ choices. They might be coerced with threats of being disowned. But for the VAST majority of people in England - basically everyone non-aristocratic - the idea of forcing a daughter that young to marry would have been received with disgust. And even among the nobility it was only used as a last resort, when the welfare of the family was at stake. Note that aristocratic boys were often in the same position, and would also be coerced into advantageous marriages for the good of the family.

tl;dr:

Q. Was it normal for girls to marry at 13?

A. Hell no!

Q. Was it legal for girls to marry at 13?

A. Not without dad’s consent - Friar Lawrence performs this dodgy ceremony only because he believes it might bring peace between the houses.

Q. Was it normal for fathers to force girls into marriage?

A. Not at this time in England. In noble families, daughters were expected to conform to their parents wishes, but a girl’s consent was encouraged, and the importance of compatibility was recognised.

Q. How should we explain Juliet’s age in modern terms?

A. A modern Juliet would be a 17 year old girl who’s close to turning 18. We all agree that girls should marry whomever they love, but not at 17, right? We’d say she’s still a kid and needs to wait a bit before rushing into this marriage. We acknowledge that she’d be experiencing her sexual awakening, but marrying at this age is odd - she’s still a child and legally neither her nor Romeo should be marrying without parental permission.

Q. Would Elizabethans have seen Juliet as a child?

A. YES. The force of this tragedy comes from the youth of the lovers. The Montagues and Capulets have created such a hateful, violent and dangerous world for their kids to grow up in that the pangs of teenage passion are enough to destroy the future of their houses. Something as simple as two kids falling in love is enough to lead to tragedy. That is the crux of the story and it should not be glossed over - Shakespeare made Juliet 13 going on 14 for a reason. 

I saw this in my emails and couldn’t see why I’d been tagged in it (all the while nodding vehemently along) and then I saw my tags and ah. Yep. Still forever mad at how badly Shakespeare is taught in most schools.

Avatar

If anyone tries to tell you that Shakespeare is stuffy or boring or highbrow, just remember that the word “nothing” was used in Elizabethan era slang as a euphemism for “vagina”. 

Shakespeare has a play called “Much Ado About Nothing”, which you could basically read in modern slang as “Freaking Out Over Pussy”. And that’s pretty much exactly what happens in the play. 

Avatar
kiralamouse

It’s also a pun with a third meaning. There’s the sex sense of much ado about “nothing”, there’s the obvious sense that people today see, and then there’s the fact that in Shakespeare’s day, “nothing” was pronounced pretty much the same as “noting”, which was a term used for gossip. So, “Flamewar Over Rumors” works as a title interpretation, too.

The reason we call Shakespeare a genius is that he can make a pussy joke in the same exact words he uses to make biting social commentary about letting unverified gossip take over the discourse.

Avatar
copperbadge

So like.

A truly accurate modern translation would be “I Cunt Believe He Said That”?

@copperbadge YOU GO AND SIT AMONG THE MUSTARDS  AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU’VE DONE

I truly feel the ghost of Shakespeare has never been more proud of me. 

Avatar
Avatar
schmergo

Some witches once told me The throne was gonna hold me. I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed. They were looking kind of weird They were women but with beards And they said there’d be a crown upon my head.

See a dagger coming and it won’t stop coming Home to my wife and we murder King Duncan Didn’t make sense not to live for the crown Your cred goes up but your mind goes down.

So much to plot, so much to scheme So what’s wrong with taking the king’s seat? You’ll never know if you don’t go You’ll never shine till you kill Banquo.

Hey now, you’re a Scot star, get your kilt on, go slay Hey now, Thane of Cawdor, get the show on, this play And all the witches agree None of women born can harm thee.

Avatar

yknow if romeo had just Cried on juliets corpse for a couple hours instead of drinking poison Right Then they would have been Fine

The moral of the story is: always take time to cry for a few hours before making important decisions.

So I’m more or less being facetious here, but this is actually a thing.

Hamlet is genre savvy. Hamlet knows how Tragedies work, and he’s not going to rush in and get stabby without making absolutely certain he’s got all the facts.

Except once he thinks he has all the facts – once he’s certain that it really is the ghost of his father and Claudius really did kill him, he rushes in and stabs the wrong guy, which starts a domino line of deaths and gets Laertes embroiled in his own revenge tragedy and ultimately results in the deaths of nearly every character other than Horatio.

That’s the irony and the tragedy of the story. Hamlet knows his tropes and actively tries to avoid them, and the tropes get him anyway. It’s inevitable, the tropes are hungry.

I want a sticker that says the tropes are hungry so I can put it on my laptop

Avatar
daimonie

i met a scholar once who said that tragedies aren’t about a silly “flaw” or anything, it’s about having a hero who’s just in the wrong goddamn story

if hamlet swapped places with othello he wouldn’t be duped by any of iago’s shit, he’d sit down & have a good think & actually examine the facts before taking action. meanwhile in denmark, othello would have killed claudius before act 2 could even start. but instead nope, they’re both in situations where their greatest strengths are totally useless and now we’ve got all these bodies to bury.

Avatar
whopooh

The tropes are hungry and the hero is in the wrong goddamn story.

I love this post.

Avatar

concept: a retelling of hamlet with the frame story that it’s a tabletop rpg being played by a bunch of overzealous college kids and an increasingly frazzled dm trying to keep them all from rushing headlong into situations and dying immediately. horatio is the dm’s vaguely self-insert npc character. thanks

“AND THEN HE GETS KIDNAPPED BY PIRATES”

“um…dude…you can’t just–”

“PIRATES”

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are played by the same player, who keeps forgetting that he’s running two separate characters.

“The ghost awaits a response”

“Horatio, you went to college, you talk to it.”

—–

“You find the skull of the old court jester.”

“I’m going to talk to it until someone stops me.”

“Horatio, you went to college, you stop him.”

—–

“I stab the curtain!”

“Polonius, roll for fortitude.”

——

“I search for a nunnery in the moat”

*sigh* “Seaweed wraps around your leg. Roll for dexterity escape”

—–

“We all drink to Hamlet’s victory.”

“Everyone roll for fortitude.”

*groans amid the sound of rolling dice*

—–

“Sorry I’m late, everyone. Can my Prince of Finland character just show up?”

“Everyone’s already dead.”

“For fuck’s sake, guys!”

Avatar
obsessiforge

I’m

Avatar
she5los

“The Prince of Norway shows up, just like I’ve been insinuating since you started this campaign.  He has an army with him that you would have been able to beat if you had taken this seriously at all, so I’m just going to have Horatio give a speech.  I think I deserve that much.” *starts playing music on their laptop*

Avatar
padnick

Polonius dies, his player roles a new character, Laertes, to pick up his plot line.

I HAVE NEVER LOVED ANYTHING THIS MUCH IN MY LIFE

Avatar
Avatar
blue-author
Anonymous asked:

I know it's fashionable to hate shakespeare for being a white cis male shitlord but calling his work trashy just displays your ignorance. there are reasons he still gets studied in school hundreds of years later. the man basically invented the english language as we speak it today.

I don’t hate Shakespeare. 

I love Shakespeare. 

In my opinion, the greatest disservice anyone can do to his work is to elevate it to some kind of highbrow high art literary thing. The reason he’s studied today is that his plays endured (plus or minus some changes in fashion over the centuries), and the reason his plays endured is because they were popular, and the reason his plays were popular is because he crammed them full of stuff that people wanted; i.e., lots of jokes focusing on the less refined features of the human anatomy and the things they get up to.

Perhaps you’ve had it explained to you that Hamlet’s talk of “country matters” was an uncouth pun, and his reply in the same conversation of “nothing” was a similar reference. Did you think that was a one-off thing? 

If you’re aware that “nothing” was a euphemism for the vulva in Shakespeare’s England, have you ever stopped to marvel at the sheer audacity, the sheer brass somethings that a man would have to have to name a play Much Ado About Nothing?

Translate that into modern-modern English, and you’d get something like Everybody’s Up In Arms About Pussy. Though you’d lose the pun on “nothing/noting” in doing so… yes, that’s how far from highbrow Shakespeare is. He made the title of his play a triple pun.

And yes, Much Ado is not one of the Bard’s more serious works to begin with… but then, what is? We divide Shakespeare’s plays up into tragedies and comedies based on the dramatic convention of which ones have a happy ending versus a sad one, but they are all comedies in the modern sense of “things you go to expecting to laugh”. The country/nothing lines come from Hamlet. Heck, Hamlet is hilarious throughout. Any scene with Polonius in it is guaranteed to be comedy gold. 

Of course, the people who want to call Shakespeare highbrow are probably the people who quote him in all blustering sincerity when he says “to thine own self be true”… or funnier still, when they paraphrase him as saying that “brevity is the soul of wit”.

Of course, hands down, my favorite bit in Hamlet is when he’s giving instructions to the players that basically amount to William Shakespeare pre-emptively bringing up every stereotype of Serious Shakespearean Acting we have today and saying, “This. This thing. Do not do this thing.”

Anyway, let’s talk about the idea that he “invented the English language”; e.g., he created so many hundreds of new words. Okay, well, first of all, we don’t know how many he invented. We just know there are words and usages of words for which the texts of his plays are the earliest surviving example. The thing is, all those words evidently made sense to his audience.

There’s a post that goes around Tumblr listing some of the words credited to Shakespeare, and one of them is “elbow”. The commentary attached to this post basically boggles over the idea that nobody in the English world had a name for “the bendy part of an arm” until an actor gets up on stage and says “elbow”, and everybody’s like, “Oh, yeah, that’s what it is.”

Except it didn’t happen like that. The noun elbow isn’t what is attributed to Shakespeare; the verb to elbow (as in “elbowing someone aside”) is. His character took a noun and used it to describe an action. That’s not a highbrow creation of language as some sort of received wisdom handed down from authority. That’s naturalistic language use. 

Even if he was the first person to describe the act of “elbowing someone”, it caught on because it worked, because it made sense to vernacular speakers of English. 

So many of his words fit this model: they are butchered foreign words, they are slangy applications of English words, they are colorful metaphors or synecdoches. In short, he was writing in what we call “Buffyspeak”. If he had an unusual talent for doing it memorably, it still ultimately worked because it reflected the language of the time.

Avatar

This is your daily reminder that ‘some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them’ is a dick joke.

Also, in re the whole “white cis male shitlord” aspect: One of Shakespeare’s favourite things was to take an existing bigoted play that was really popular (often a comedy), and tweak it into a tragedy where the audience was forced to empathise with the person they’d been hating, and recognise their humanity. Merchant of Venice is a retelling of the Very Standard conversion play, except the standard version of the play is a comedy! And when the miserly Jewish antagonist is converted at the end, he’s super happy at being saved! But Shakespeare’s version has one of the most gut-wrenching monologues about the humanity of the othered, and presents a very reasonable man driven to distraction by abuse. He takes the original “miser” stereotype and shows a fully realised human whose concerns about being robbed and left without a way to survive in a hostile city are realistic and sympathetic. He keeps the conversion ending, but shows the violence of it, and Shylock is destroyed by it, not “saved.” Othello was based on an older Italian play that revelled in the evil of its title character, and the tragic innocence of the nice white girl taken and defiled and murdered by a savage black man. Very popular. So he took the same premise, and wrote a play that spends c. four hours examining the manipulation and gaslighting and psychological abuse it would take to drive a good and honest and trusting and caring husband to such violence. In Shakespeare’s version, there’s no violence rooted in Othello’s blackness, no “aha” moment where the fact that he finally succumbed to Iago’s machinations is blamed on something wrong in Othello’s nature, it is heavily and repeatedly shown and stated that his character is DEEPLY good, and then works to show how someone this good can be abused and manipulated into doing something they so TERRIBLY regret.  Romeo & Juliet was based on a play that was all about how teenage sluts ruin everything and deserve to die, but Shakespeare’s play tells technically the same story, but his moral is kinda more that cultures of hate and families which dehumanise their enemies set up future generations for horrible and unnecessary misery.

Avatar

okay when I direct hamlet I know exactly what I want in the opening scenes

the audience will be in traverse. when they come in hamlet will be sitting in his designated seat, on his phone. audience comes in, house lights down, stage lights up, hamlet is still on his phone. audience to either side confused, maybe annoyed like ‘who does this guy think he is smh smh’. opening battlements scene happens, hamlet pays no attention, doesn’t draw attention to himself, just sits in the audience, probably reading cracked.

end of scene one, start of scene two. claudius gertrude et al enter, take their place up on the raised stage at one end of the traverse. hamlet looks up, takes note, puts away phone. claudius starts his big long speech. hamlet pulls out bag of doritos and very loudly opens them. claudius pretends not to notice as hamlet loudly eats doritos while he tries to do his big diplomatic speech. gertrude is very embarrassed. hamlet is being a little shit. probably annoys audience to either side - offers them a chip, nudges them so he can roll his eyes at something claudius says to them, etc. claudius finishes with laertes, turns to address hamlet. ‘and now our cousin hamlet, and our son (and lil shit I s2g if I didn’t love your mother)’. hamlet addresses his first line (‘a little more than kin and less than kind’) to his neighbour in the audience. not until gertrude suggests that it only ‘seems’ with him does he drop his doritos, stand up, and address his mother. once he’s done with his ‘I know not seems’ speech, he’s embarrassed and angry at having shown such emotion, and sits angrily back down in the audience. he doesn’t get up until partway through ‘too too solid flesh’, which he starts off addressing to his neighbours

Avatar
visardist

takemeinyourdream, tamikaflynned, sting-like-jelly, umm whoever else is into shakespeare and hamlet in particular

Avatar
dhaunea

Shakespeare is best when done off-kilter, pop-culture and just plain in your face.  I would watch the hell out of this, and try to get the seat next to Hamlet for the next performance.

Avatar
Avatar
blue-author
Anonymous asked:

I know it's fashionable to hate shakespeare for being a white cis male shitlord but calling his work trashy just displays your ignorance. there are reasons he still gets studied in school hundreds of years later. the man basically invented the english language as we speak it today.

I don’t hate Shakespeare. 

I love Shakespeare. 

In my opinion, the greatest disservice anyone can do to his work is to elevate it to some kind of highbrow high art literary thing. The reason he’s studied today is that his plays endured (plus or minus some changes in fashion over the centuries), and the reason his plays endured is because they were popular, and the reason his plays were popular is because he crammed them full of stuff that people wanted; i.e., lots of jokes focusing on the less refined features of the human anatomy and the things they get up to.

Perhaps you’ve had it explained to you that Hamlet’s talk of “country matters” was an uncouth pun, and his reply in the same conversation of “nothing” was a similar reference. Did you think that was a one-off thing? 

If you’re aware that “nothing” was a euphemism for the vulva in Shakespeare’s England, have you ever stopped to marvel at the sheer audacity, the sheer brass somethings that a man would have to have to name a play Much Ado About Nothing?

Translate that into modern-modern English, and you’d get something like Everybody’s Up In Arms About Pussy. Though you’d lose the pun on “nothing/noting” in doing so… yes, that’s how far from highbrow Shakespeare is. He made the title of his play a triple pun.

And yes, Much Ado is not one of the Bard’s more serious works to begin with… but then, what is? We divide Shakespeare’s plays up into tragedies and comedies based on the dramatic convention of which ones have a happy ending versus a sad one, but they are all comedies in the modern sense of “things you go to expecting to laugh”. The country/nothing lines come from Hamlet. Heck, Hamlet is hilarious throughout. Any scene with Polonius in it is guaranteed to be comedy gold. 

Of course, the people who want to call Shakespeare highbrow are probably the people who quote him in all blustering sincerity when he says “to thine own self be true”… or funnier still, when they paraphrase him as saying that “brevity is the soul of wit”.

Of course, hands down, my favorite bit in Hamlet is when he’s giving instructions to the players that basically amount to William Shakespeare pre-emptively bringing up every stereotype of Serious Shakespearean Acting we have today and saying, “This. This thing. Do not do this thing.”

Anyway, let’s talk about the idea that he “invented the English language”; e.g., he created so many hundreds of new words. Okay, well, first of all, we don’t know how many he invented. We just know there are words and usages of words for which the texts of his plays are the earliest surviving example. The thing is, all those words evidently made sense to his audience.

There’s a post that goes around Tumblr listing some of the words credited to Shakespeare, and one of them is “elbow”. The commentary attached to this post basically boggles over the idea that nobody in the English world had a name for “the bendy part of an arm” until an actor gets up on stage and says “elbow”, and everybody’s like, “Oh, yeah, that’s what it is.”

Except it didn’t happen like that. The noun elbow isn’t what is attributed to Shakespeare; the verb to elbow (as in “elbowing someone aside”) is. His character took a noun and used it to describe an action. That’s not a highbrow creation of language as some sort of received wisdom handed down from authority. That’s naturalistic language use. 

Even if he was the first person to describe the act of “elbowing someone”, it caught on because it worked, because it made sense to vernacular speakers of English. 

So many of his words fit this model: they are butchered foreign words, they are slangy applications of English words, they are colorful metaphors or synecdoches. In short, he was writing in what we call “Buffyspeak”. If he had an unusual talent for doing it memorably, it still ultimately worked because it reflected the language of the time.

Avatar

This is your daily reminder that ‘some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them’ is a dick joke.

Avatar
Avatar
silvertons

By royal decree.

WHAT IS THIS I MUST WATCH IT

Avatar
chronolith

Oh shit. Hype the hell out of this so it survives the pilot.

Avatar
gilajames

The title is Still Star-Crossed, since nobody was saying so above. ;-)

Avatar
seperis

HOLY SHIT I AM WATCHING THIS ON REPEAT.  Does this start in the fall?  WHEN?

(ALSO ANTHONY HEAD IS IN THERE I DON’T KNOW WHO BUT YESSSSSS.)

Avatar
astolat

wowwwwww this looks AMAZING <3

@nuitdenovembre!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar
Avatar
corvidcall

my favorite part of hamlet is at the beginning when they see the ghost of hamlet sr for the first time

and the guards are like “Horatio, you go talk to it! You went to college!”

and Horatio is like “Yeah! I did go to college! I will go talk to the ghost!”

like. where did horatio go to college. did he go to ghost college

YES, ACTUALLY YES HE FUCKING DID BC

(a) EVERY COLLEGE THEN WAS GHOST COLLEGE bc ghosts were widely believed to be Real™ n thus scholars learnt abt them. moreover, as everybody knows, ghosts only communicate in Latin; Latin is the scholastic language. Horatio is a scholar, thus both knows abt ghosts and knows Latin, so it is very reasonable to assume he will b able to ask this one what up (as obviously sth must b up 4 it 2b wandering around, why else wld it b here, gawd, this is like. the most basic of basic-level shit)

(B) WITTENBERG WHERE HORATIO STUDIES WAS LIKE. T H E MOST SPOOPY OF GHOST COLLEGES bc they were alllllll about theology n the supernatural n shit so SUPPOSING HORATIO WILL KNO HIS SHIT ABT GHOSTS IS IN FACT A THOROUGHLY SENSIBLE ASSUMPTION

this has been said before but i am fucking adding it again bc it HACKS ME TF OFF when ppl reblog the post w/o commentary as if OP jsut fucking checkmated Shakespeare when in fact all they managed to do was fail at the most basic historical contextualisation of this scene n make a fcuking fool of emselves lmao

Avatar
kyraneko

this feels less like a “checkmate, Shakespeare” moment than a “fuck was this dude on, this shit’s surreal” moment

personally I kinda love the complete effect of “thing that made sense when originally written appears hilarious/fascinating/weird as balls to people who don’t have that context, and then context is made known to them and it’s like a whole new level of supercool” 

it’s like the circle of life for shakespeare plays. “lol have the college guy talk to the ghost because as a college guy he has the necessary experience” transmutes into “every college was ghost college in shakespeare’s time” and the whole effect is awesome.

Avatar
belinsky

just gonna add a bunch of things here bc i love this moment in the play actually and it’s really interesting!  because shakespeare was p smart.

  • marcellus and bernardo have seen the ghost before but they go to horatio with this information before they go to, say, anyone who actually fucking lives there
  • given hamlet’s reaction to horatio showing up in the next scene we can be pretty sure that no one knew horatio was even coming to elsinore (unless maybe claudius and gertrude invited him without telling hamlet and the soldiers got to him before they could work on him like ros&guil, but a) that’s a stretch and b) horatio’s relationship with the family outside of hamlet is seriously up for debate and a big question to answer for that role)
  • so like… how did m&b even find horatio to tell him about the ghost and why was it him they told?  clearly they want to get validation before going to someone Important but the circumstances of this arrangement are RULL WEIRD
  • (the ‘you went to ghost college’ line isn’t just about horatio being able to speak to the ghost bc he’s been to ghost college, it’s about having a SCHOLAR validate what they saw, so when they go to someone with power to do something about it they can push horatio to the front and say ‘the learned rich guy thinks there’s a ghost too please actually listen to us’)
  • when they DO go to tell hamlet it’s basically just a bff reunion + btw ghost so clearly they did some strategizing after this scene as to how best to broach that topic (it’s horatio that says ‘it’ll probably speak to hamlet’ but if it had been someone different would they have thought ‘it’ll probably speak to gertrude’? that they go to hamlet with it is BECAUSE horatio is there so like… again i come back to how did they find him)
  • PEOPLE P MUCH ALWAYS CUT THESE LINES BUT BOTH THE SOLDIERS AND HORATIO ASSUME THE GHOST IS THERE BECAUSE OF THE WAR WITH NORWAY, NOT BECAUSE OF ANYTHING TO DO WITH HIS DEATH– it would’ve been a HELLA PLOT TWIST when he started talking about murder in 1.5
  • wittenberg was also famously associated with dr. faustus and martin luther, which the audience at the time would have known, which is part of why it was the most spoopy
  • we don’t know horatio went to wittenberg at this point.  like we the reader know, we the people putting on this play know, but we the audience don’t know.  it’s actually a cool ‘aha’ moment in the next scene when claudius brings up wittenberg and you’re like AH YES, GHOST COLLEGE 
  • we also have no idea what horatio and hamlet’s relationship is like so when horatio shows up in the next scene and hamlet goes from ‘i hate everyone’ to ‘OMG UR HEEEEEEEEEERE’ with this dude we only know as ‘new in town’ and ‘intellectual’ we know that hamlet will believe him about the ghost and that (because we’ve already been over how he’s level headed and smart) he’ll be there to help us out with our lead who’s not quite all there which is a p cool setup by billy
  • why is the ghost just like wandering the battlements?  it’s pretty heavily implied he won’t speak to anyone but hamlet so why doesn’t he just go to him?  the haunting rules for the ghost are all over the place and again that’s like a serious conversation you have to have with the actor, what the heck is he doing here
  • TBH THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THIS SCENE, THAT A LOT OF LIKE SUPER ESTABLISHED SCHOLARS AND DIRECTORS STRAIGHT UP FORGET:  this scene is here at least partially to establish that the ghost is objectively there.  there is some sort of fragment of spirit wandering the battlements that looks like the dead king and it wants something.  it only TALKS to hamlet, and when it shows up later gertrude can’t see it, but the first thing we learn in this play is THERE IS A GHOST. shakespeare takes great care to make sure we know we can trust our eyes with it.  our ears perhaps not, but the play is not from hamlet’s pov. we start with marcellus and bernardo, and grounded loyal horatio, saying ‘what the fuck what is this ghost doing here’.  the mystical bit isn’t what’s up for debate
  • also ‘thou’rt a scholar, speak to it horatio’ is fucking hilarious and no one ever plays it as a joke
  • like why isn’t this ALWAYS staged as marcellus and bernardo hiding behind horatio and pushing him at the ghost and him going ?!!!?!?!?!?!?  i just got here and you have swords what the fuck is wrong with you
Avatar

It IS a cards against Shakespeare! It's called Bards Dispense Profanity and it's awesome.

Avatar
Avatar
costlyblood

what!!

someone buy me this omg

paging @tchy

!!!! @nuitdenovembre!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar
Avatar
anonbea

“Well hello there, Chere.” In second year, we did a narrative unit where we had to have a go at someone else’s story. We had limited choices, but i chose A midsummer night’s dream. I had this lovely idea of a New Orleans version, with Baron Samedi and Mama Brigitte as oberon and titania, a jumped up greaser poltergeist as Puck and relevant sacrificial animals as fairies.     Hence the chicken. I did so much research on this, i learned so much about voodooism. So awesome and such a serious practise. These two gods seemed perfect to act as fairy royalty.   Again an old piece, maybe two years old? But the ink is still good, I think. Enjoy

Avatar
taraljc

this is AMAZEBALLS

Avatar
Avatar
sillyjimjam

I’m at the pop up globe watching twelfth night and I kid u not the fool basically just went ‘anyway here’s wonderwall’ and is actually fucking playing it with all the audience singing along???? And all i can think is how happy shakespeare would be that his play is being upstaged by a fucking meme

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.
mouthporn.net