Welcome Guest Blogger : KJ from Bardfilm!

If you hang out at all on Twitter and follow the Shakespeare crowd, you’ve no doubt seen Bardfim‘s hysterical lists with names like #ShakespeareanWWEWrestlers (“The Big Show-within-a-Show”!), #ShakespeareInBed (If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well it were done quickly….in bed!”), and many others that have long since scrolled out of my ability to search them.

“Why don’t you gather those all together into list-posts so that people can find them later?” I asked. Long story short, we struck upon an idea – he posts them here!

Starting today (shortly, as a matter of fact) you’ll see Bardfilm’s lists showing up here on Shakespeare Geek, and I think the content will be a worthy addition to everybody’s experience. If you’re not already following his blog, go do so. He deserves the traffic. If you’ve ever spotted a Shakespeare reference on film, KJ’s either already talked about it, or wants to hear about it.

Thanks, KJ!

Without further ado, let’s get to the fresh content…

The chains of habit are generally too small to be felt until they are too strong to be broken.

Alternate / Original : The diminutive chains of habit are seldom heavy enough to be felt till they are too strong to be broken.

Saw this one go by on Twitter this morning, and it didn’t feel right.  Seems too much like advice, and not the sort of Polonial (ha, I just made that up!) advice like “To thine own self be true,” where it’s directed from one character to another. As a general rule, most of what you’ll find in Shakespeare’s body of work is something that someone said, aloud, to someone else.  (True there are soliloquies, and then there’s the sonnets and long poems, but the bulk of the canon is made up of conversation). So ask yourself whether it sounds like something that would have come up in normal conversation.

Turns out, in this case, it’s not.  However it’s closer to Shakespeare than you might think.

This quote comes from our old friend Samuel Johnson, sometime in the late 1700’s.  Though I cannot find an exact reference to Dr. Johnson’s work, others were quoting him as early as the 1880’s.

In case you missed the Shakespeare connection, you need to go here.

Romeo and Juliet : The TV Series?!

Oh, happy birthday to me. ABC is planning a Romeo and Juliet TV Series? Sure not a new thing — “warring families” dramas have always been a popular subject. But my kids are getting to that age where they’re very excited about being a part of Shakespeare, and having something on tv that they might be able to watch? I’m all for. (I just showed them the Tempest trailer this morning, and they’re already begging me to see it ;))

No Twilight Hamlet?

This might be good news, depending on how you feel about the latest trend in Vampire movies. Catherine Hardwicke, who directed the Twilight movie(s?), was supposed to direct Emile Hirsch in her modern retelling of Hamlet, dubbed ‘Haml3t’.

Not so fast.

I’m at least a little torn. I want there to be more Shakespeare movies, I said so in our “Shakespeare Stimulus” discussion a little while back. We’ve got The Tempest coming, and Coriolanus hot on its heels. But I worry about too many overly modernized Hamlets. Why not go do Winter’s Tale or something else where you can make your mark?

Ilium

I won’t call this a formal review, but I do want to discuss the book.


I noticed that I wrote about Dan Simmons’ Ilium back in 2005. It’s hard sci-fi, taking place some 3000 in the future and having a whole bunch of nanotechnology this, quantum that, and lots and lots of wormholes and spaceships.
First, it’s about a “post-literate” society that has forgotten how to do everything for themselves, including reading. They have no art or culture of any kind. They just sort of … exist. They are completely dependent on robot “servitors” and alien “voynix” creatures, without ever stopping to question where they came from.

Second, it’s an advanced technological recreation of the Trojan War, where the gods themselves play a very personal role.

But what makes it fodder for this blog is the two robot “moravecs” floating through space, doing their job…and analyzing Shakespeare during their slow cycles. More specifically there is one moravec, Mahnmut, who has chosen Shakespeare. Another chooses Proust, and still a third the Bible. They have discussions about why their human creators gave them such an interest in human literature, and come to the conclusion that it has to do with the “inexhaustibility” of the source material. After all, these robots are out in space analyzing this stuff for hundreds of years, they can’t ever be finished.

Maybe you’ll come to this book for the analysis. Moravec Mahnmut has some very interesting thoughts on the sonnets, including a detailed analysis of Sonnet 116 as an angry letter to the Fair Youth, about how the youth has no idea what true love is. (I’ve not done that justice.)

Honestly, though, this is a small part of the Shakespeare. Once the action really gets going, Mahnmut rarely has time to revisit his sonnets. This does not stop him and his friend Orphu from exchanging many many Shakespeare references, however. During one near shipwreck, they recite the opening from The Tempest. I loved it.

The author is quite comfortable with his Shakespeare references. I caught one “Never, never, never, never, never,” which was an obvious Lear reference (and I don’t have it in front of me, but I’m pretty sure there were five). Surprisingly, I have not yet seen the “As flies to wanton boys are we to the gods, they kill us for their sport.” Seriously – that is, like, the plot of the whole Trojan War thing. There are god characters who flick humans into and out of existence at a whim. It is the very definition of that quote. I thought perhaps Simmons was unfamiliar with Lear, but the never never-never-never thing was surely a Lear reference.

Lastly, did I mention that this whole two-book set (“Olympos” being the sequel) is a giant Tempest story? Prospero, Ariel, Caliban, and Setebos are actual characters in the story. Yes. It’s hard to fully explain *who* they are, but their relationship is pretty accurate – Caliban’s a minor bad guy, and Setebos is a major bad guy. Ariel and Prospero are apparently good guys but in that sort of “I’m looking out for myself, not you” way of being a good guy, you know?

These are some epic, hard sci-fi books. Both weigh in at upwards of 800 pages. At times I forgot which planet I was supposed to be on, and at least once I’ve forgotten what millennium. I am assuming that this is my confusion and not the author being inconsistent. On that note, I will mention that this is one of the worst-edited books I’ve ever read. I read it first five years ago, on hardcover, and I remember a coworker showing me a blatant proofreading error where, if I recall, a paragraph started out talking about the character of Big Ajax and then in the middle switched to Little Ajax, an entirely different person. Well it’s five years later, I’m reading the mass market paperback, and there are seriously dozens of spelling mistakes still scattered throughout (like referring to a spaceship submersible as a “subermisible”). I haven’t found such blatant mistakes as the earlier one, but the spelling errors and typos are frequent enough to be annoying.

Summarizing? There is a lot of Shakespeare in these books, in many forms. You have to wade through a crazy amount of confusing hard science fiction, time travel, wormholes, and all that good stuff to get to it. So if that’s your thing anyway, you’ve got to read these. If you’re not a hard sci-fi fan, you will get lost. Guaranteed.