Please Don’t Kill Shakespeare

Noticed that there’s a new comic store in the town where I work, right next to where we sometimes get lunch. So I walked in one day and asked, “Got any Shakespeare?”  You know, like ya do. I’m actually on the lookout for a bobblehead, I don’t have one of those yet.

He comes out with the entire set of Kill Shakespeare Volume 3: The Tide of Blood.

I originally mentioned Kill Shakespeare back in 2010 when I first heard about it but never put up a review because, quite honestly, I didn’t like it. It has nothing to do with Shakespeare. It’s not a version or interpretation of any Shakespeare story that you know. It takes the names and presumed mannerisms of Shakespeare’s characters (Hamlet is moody, Lady Macbeth is violent …) and writes a whole new story, using some weird bastardization of what’s supposed to sound like Shakespearean English.

But, still, the guy did go dig it up for me in the back room, it is a complete set, and I don’t want to walk out of there with nothing so I buy it and give it another try.

Nope, still don’t like it.

Let’s see – Juliet has dumped Romeo for Hamlet. Othello is in this for some reason although I can’t figure out what, because he doesn’t do anything. Lady Macbeth is a bad guy, as always. Prospero is the big bad guy in this one, trying to steal control of the universe from Shakespeare himself. We learn this from Miranda, who has escaped the island where her father has given her to Caliban to be repeatedly raped and impregnated.

Yup, go ahead and read that a few times.  She’s a cutter now. You know, to let the poison out. Still with me?

Here’s some sample dialogue:

“That is why you must stay. So that thou can end the tragedy of Hamlet.”

“I did not expect such help from thee, Prospero. You have my thanks.”

“I used to like thee, Prospero. Thou remind’st me of me. Gods, I must have been such a pretentious bore.”

Is it me or are they just randomly throwing in “thee” and “thou” whenever they think it will sound more Shakespearean? They do realize that those had actual meaning, right?

I think that this comic is mostly appreciate by fans of comics who want to talk about the story entirely as a comic (rather than as anything to do with Shakespeare) and the visuals (what do they call it, the coloring? the inking? I have no idea). I wonder if any actual Shakespeare Geeks are reading this and enjoying it. I sure didn’t. Every time I see them in the news – a board game? a stage play? – I think “Do people think this has anything to do with Shakespeare?”

This year’s Shakespeare posting marathon is sponsored by “Shakespeare is Universal.” Help us prove that Shakespeare makes life better. Buy a t-shirt and support cancer research.

“Watch, Don’t Read” Does Shakespeare A Disservice

Once again I tripped into a conversation where somebody said, “What Shakespeare should I read next?” and somebody said, “Why read them when you can watch them?” Two different people responded that way, actually.

Here’s the problem. The original person didn’t say “I know nothing about Shakespeare so I thought I’d start by reading them,” or anything of the sort to indicate that he was brand new at this game. On the contrary, what he’d said was, “I’ve already read Hamlet and Henry V and would like to try a comedy next, got any suggestions?” So we’ve got someone who has made it pretty clear that his desire is to read the plays. And yet still the answer is, “Why read when you can watch?”

I get it. I understand that your best introduction to Shakespeare is to see it performed. I am not arguing against that. When somebody comes up to me and says, “I know nothing about Shakespeare, which play should I read first?” I will be on the same bandwagon that says, “Go see a live show or rent a movie, but please don’t try to read the text first.”

Let’s think that through, though. Let’s say that I convince my coworker to go see Timon of Athens, a play that she’s never even heard of, let alone seen.

You really think she’s going to get it? You think she’s going to follow plot and character and understand what they’re all saying and appreciate why I recommended it to her in the first place? Or do you think she’s going to miss 90% of what happens and be completely lost, other than for a few key “Ok he clearly is angry at that guy” moments that you could get entirely from the body language?

“But wait!” you say, turning to the front of the Playbill, “Here’s the play summary, and cast of characters.  This gives the audience an overview of the story to read before the performance starts.”

Great. So what you’ve just told us is, “Don’t read the actual Shakespeare, but do read the TL;DR version.”

Really? Is this some sort of Bizarro-world high school English class where the student tries to read the original and the teacher say “nonono, here, read the cliff notes!”

I don’t think we can have it both ways. I don’t think that you can walk into most Shakespeare plays cold.  I also don’t think that the one-page summary in front of the Playbill is going to give you a sense of understanding anything but character and plot.  I think more highly of my audience, especially those that actually come looking to read the works.  Surely there’s room for a middle ground we can point these folks that is not too over their heads to start, but does not insult them by dumbing it down until all the life is crushed from it?

Here’s what I’ve got in mind…

This year’s Shakespeare posting marathon is sponsored by “Shakespeare is Universal.” Help us prove that Shakespeare makes life better. Buy a t-shirt and support cancer research.

Fassbender’s PTSD Macbeth

Later this year (more on that in a bit) we’ll get to see a new Macbeth film starring Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard as the titular characters. We’ve discussed the potential over the last few months, but now we’re getting to hear from the actors themselves on set.

“He’s suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. It makes total sense, when you think about it. Justin set the seed of the idea in my head,” Fassbender said. “This trauma is something we know about. In World War I they called it battle fatigue, and it was probably more horrific in Macbeth’s days, when they were killing with their bare hands, and driving a blade through bodies. He’s having these hallucinations, and he needs to return to the violence to find some sort of clarity, or peace.”

I suppose? I think that interpretation takes away from play and forces it to take place on the battlefield. I don’t think it’s limited to that. I think that ambition comes in many forms.

Also of note in the article is that UK audiences won’t get the movie until early 2015 and it’s unclear when US audiences will see it. That’s a bummer, I thought it was coming out this year.

This year’s Shakespeare posting marathon is sponsored by “Shakespeare is Universal.” Help us prove that Shakespeare makes life better. Buy a t-shirt and support cancer research.

Only Looney Lovers Left Alive

Tom Hiddleston is one of those actors who shows up in my news feeds quite frequently, because his name is basically synonymous with Shakespeare.  In a good way – not in the Gwynneth “award-winning Shakespeare in Love actress” Paltrow kind of way.

So I knew about his new vampire movie Only Lover’s Left Alive, directed by Jim Jarmusch. I paid a little more attention when I noticed that Christopher Marlowe is a character.  But, still, Marlowe’s no Shakespeare.

Image courtesy reddit user cmunk13

Then I learned that director is rabid anti-Stratfordian. Turns out he’s more of a Marlovian, which in my book puts him a little bit higher than the Oxfordians because at least Marlowe had some playwriting talent.  (Although I take that back, he goes on to say that Oxford was “probably more likely” and that he only uses Marlowe as his example because he thinks Marlowe’s death was a conspiracy as well.)

Jarmusch seems an odd duck. I had to go look to see if I’d ever watched any of his movies. I’ve heard of many of them, but never seen any. What put him back in the camp of “ignore” for me was the way he name checks the other “famous” people who were also Shakespeare deniers, like some sort of talking points memo regurgitated by Fox News:

I’m not alone. I’m with Mark Twain and Henry and William James and Sigmund Freud and Orson Welles, Emerson — a lot of people don’t buy the Shakespeare thing.

They truly thought they scored a coup getting Orson Welles on their side. The problem is that the evidence, what little there is, is complete nonsense. So I know the guy hasn’t put any thought into it, he’s just parroting back the same old stuff, just like what’s his name did with Anonymous.
What I’m deeply curious about is whether he and Tom Hiddleston had any serious discussion on the topic, or if they just did the “agree to disagree” thing, or what.  That would be the real interesting interview.

This year’s Shakespeare posting marathon is sponsored by “Shakespeare is Universal.” Help us prove that Shakespeare makes life better. Buy a t-shirt and support cancer research.