http://www.ellisparkerbutler.info/epb/biblio.asp?id=2358 Made you look, right? Yeah, me too. Actually my first thought was, “Umm…there’s no controversy. The Bacon theory was started by Delia Bacon (no relation) who was pretty much insane.” So I was even more confused when the opening line to the piece said “Yes, and the solution is this : Of course Bacon wrote the plays, and I can prove it.” Turns out that the article is a humor piece by Professor Ellis Parker Butler, whoever that is. It’s somewhat reminiscent of Mark Twain in its “so simple any fool could see it” presentation that makes a connection between a Stratford breakfast order (ham omelette, naturally) and, you guessed it, ham-let. [I choose Twain deliberately, since he himself was a questioner of Authorship.] I suppose it’s funny if you like such things. I just felt like reposting it to see how many of you get trapped by the subject line, like I did. 🙂
Month: March 2009
It’s, It’s A PBS Blitz
http://www.pbs.org/engage/blog/five-good-questions-king-lear You’ve probably already heard, but the press releases are coming at me fast and furious this week reminded us that PBS has scored the broadcast rights to Sir Ian McKellen’s King Lear and they are shouting it from the rooftops. First off let me start by saying that earlier reports of “airing in late March, check your local listings” will I’m told be Wednesday March 25 – that’s tomorrow people. So if you haven’t set the DVR yet, get hopping. (Thanks to bigtimebobdowning for reminded me of that one). Let us know in the comments if you find it at a different time in your area. Second, I’ve gotten word about the PBS Engage event called “Five Good Questions”. They are actively soliciting Shakespeare questions for Director of the Folger Shakespeare Library Gail Kern Paster. Go and check it out, if for nothing else to see that I was first in line to get my question posted ;). I hope she plugs the blog if my question gets picked 🙂 🙂 :). Busy week!
Bliss
Last night after watching “It’s The Easter Beagle, Charlie Brown” I tried a little experiment. I put in a movie without telling the kids what it was. Naturally they freaked out (in the good way), very excited about the surprise movie. Well when I told them it was a Shakespeare movie they went bananas. I’d put in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, the version with Kevin Kline. I’ve not seen it, but I did find a copy recently and thought I’d add it to my collection. The kids asked what the story was about as the opening credits rolled. “Well,” I said, “This one girl is in love with this boy, but her daddy does not want her to marry that boy, he wants her to marry the boy that he likes.” This is logic that toddlers understand, it is almost directly out of Aladdin and other “princess must marry a prince” stories. “Then what happens?” they ask. “Well the girl and the boy that she does want to marry, they run off into the woods to get married without telling anybody. But the other boy finds out, so he chases after them into the woods. And then you know what? A girl that likes *him* goes into the woods after him, too, because she wants to marry him.” Well, this is just thrilling to them. “You know what happens then?” I ask. “What?” they are intrigued. “That’s when they meet the Fairies.” Then you get one of those moments where you’re convinced your child is going to explode, like when you tell them you’ve purchased their own private ice cream truck and it’s parked outside in the driveway right now, go help yourself. Of course it is far too late to start a full length movie at this point, so being the cruel and heartless Daddy that I am, we pause the movie (which is right at the “ask the ancient penalty” line) until tomorrow. Fast forward to today when I come home for lunch. A neighbor is over having a playdate. My 4yr old daughter delivers a flying powerhug, and then looks up at me with big eyes and says, “Please Daddy, PLEASE can we finished Midsummer Night’s Dream tonight?” I explode a little inside, myself. “Say that again?” “Can we please watch the rest of Midsummer Night’s Dream?” she repeats. “I love hearing that,” I say out loud. “I was about to ask if I heard right,” says the neighbor. At this point my daughter runs over to her to explain the movie. “It’s about these boys and girls who run into the forest to get married…and then guess what? They meet Fairies.” All day long I watch a Twitterstream go by with students whining about how much they hate boring Shakespeare. Me, I’ve got a child who hasn’t started kindergarten (and one in first grade, equally enthusiastic) who are begging me for more. I win :). I’m having a good week. First my wife spots a Lear reference, and now my kids are explaining Dream to the neighbors? Who wants to trade places with me? Ha! You can’t! Wouldn’t trade this for the world.
Review: FOOL, by Christopher Moore
When I heard on Twitter that somebody’d rewritten King Lear from the Fool’s point of view, I was interested. I don’t know anything about the author, Christopher Moore – but I know King Lear. Actually I read someone else’s review where he said the opposite, he knew Moore’s work but nothing of King Lear itself. You might be asking yourself the same thing I did – how do you have the Fool narrate, when we Shakespeare geeks know what happens to him at the end of the story? Thanks to my friends at Harper Collins I was able to find out. My review copy arrived wrapped in a plain brown wrapper with a warning label letting me know just what I was in for: This is a bawdy tale. Herein you will find gratuitous shagging, murder, spanking, maiming, treason, and heretofore unexplored heights of vulgarity and profanity, as well as nontraditional grammar, split infinitives, and the odd wank . . . Ok then! The story does jump right in exactly as I was expecting, a comic novelization of the general plot, picked up right at Act I, Scene I with Gloucester talking about his bastard son. Only now we get running commentary from the foul-mouthed Fool, who is given the name Pocket for the sake of the story. I have to say, I found it hysterical. As I said, I’m not familiar with Moore’s work – but if he writes like this all the time, I’m going to go and get more of it. It doesn’t take long, however, for the story to lose a few points with me. New characters are introduced, who are not in the story at all. Sure there’s a ghost and the witches of Birnam Wood, but I appreciate that those were more like cameo appearances for the benefit of the Shakespeare geeks. Instead I’m talking about the “other” fool, the apprentice to Pocket, named Drool. Drool also happens to have several traits that are crucial to advancing the plot – he’s monstrously strong, incredibly dimwitted, and has an unnatural gift of speaking in other people’s voices. He’s also the source of much of the more bawdy humor, as he’s pretty much willing to shag anything that will stand still, including an oak tree with a knothole. Anyway, back to the story. The plot progresses while staying surprisingly true to the Shakespeare’s version (and, I learned, often dipping into Shakespeare’s own source material). We learn many things about the backstory that we’ve always wondered, like the deal with Cordelia’s mother, and more history on Lear’s temper. We also get lots and lots (and lots) of detail that perhaps we didn’t need, like the fact that Pocket was sleeping with both Regan and Goneril. Although the trial that Lear puts him through upon finding this out had one line so funny it had me laughing so hard for so long my wife asked what was wrong with me. I wish I could tell it, but I’ll just say it involves Lear’s dinner and leave it at that, see if you spot it when you get to that part. I can’t spoil the story for you, but I will say this because I think it could be a deal breaker for some folks : Moore changes the story. He stayed true for so long it actually came as a surprise to me, but near the end things start happening differently, and I realize that rather being “backstage” like something out of a Stoppard play, I was in an alternate universe version of Lear where things did not play out as I knew they did. It’s an interesting moment in a story like this, because either you’re going to be curious to see how things resolve since now anything goes, or you’re going to lose interest because it’s not Shakespeare anymore. I think I was in the latter group. I highly recommend this book to anybody who, like me, has a sense of humor regarding their Shakespeare. Yes, he adds characters and changes the story. Yes, it’s twelve kinds of filthy and offensive. It’s also very, very funny. And, better, it still remains a tribute to its source material. There’s even an author’s note at the end where, amidst all the apologizing, Moore essentially says what we here at Shakespeare Geek know already – whatever you think you’re about to say, just accept that Shakespeare said it first, and he said it better. A book like this only serves to echo that sentiment. But that doesn’t stop Moore from adding creative suggestions for managing the Shakespeare empire : “Amid all the attractions at Stratford-upon-Avon, I think they should add one where participants are allowed to push King Lears off a high precipice. Rage, wind, blow! Crack your cheeks! AHHHHHhhhhhhhh*splat*.”
Ah Yes, That’s Why I Love Her
Helping my wife put on a necklace today I said, “We should get you a tattoo right here on the back of your neck. Something Shakespeare. We will all laugh at gilded butterflies.” (That’s the quote that hottie Megan Fox has tattooed on herself, for the curious.) “Lear,” my wife replied. “…” I said. “What?” she asked. “…” I said again. “Was that just a really lucky guess?” “No. Gilded butterflies. King Lear. I remember hearing that.” Made my day. My wife is not a Shakespeare geek, so a Lear reference is no small feat. “That was awesome,” I told her. “Do that more often and I’ll buy you stuff.” 🙂