In the lunch room today two of the managers were joking about how they were late getting in their budgets. “The last guy to turn in his budget just gets what’s left,” I said. “That would be the greatest motivational tool ever.”
This brought to mind the opening scenes of King Lear, where Lear says that he will divide up his kingdom among his three daughters, and give the best piece to the one that loves him best.
And here, as I’m sure many of you have noticed, he then starts divvying up his land as each daughter speaks, fundamentally breaking his own game. By the time Cordelia speaks, the most she can hope to get, regardless of what she says, is “whatever’s left.” Mathematically, the correct way to play the game would be to let them all speak first, and then to decide who won, and divide up the kingdom accordingly.
So, since Lear clearly does not do that, here’s my question. Is this just a Shakespearean “mistake” (though perhaps “oversight” might be a better word)? Or, and here’s where I think it’s more interesting, did Lear already save the best portion for Cordelia, assuming that she would be the one to win his little game?
I like that idea. I like the idea that he knew Regan and Goneril were backstabbing little ingrates, and he gave them a bare minimum portion. He knew Cordelia loved him best, and the whole game was just an opportunity (albeit it a selfish one) to stick it to the annoying two and prove how much he loved his youngest – after she proved that she loves him, of course. If this was his plan, then her unexpected speech about exactly how much she does love him must have been absolutely heartwrenching to him. Which, in turn, caused his temper to go off the charts. And, well, we all know what happens next.
What think you all?

Ok, who’s up for some research?

On Twitter, someone questioned the story of Eugene Schieffelin, who in 1890 released several dozen (I’ve seen reports of 40-80) starlings into Central Park in New York City. Why did he do this? Legend has it that he wanted to bring all the birds of Shakespeare’s work to the United States.

The problem is that there appears to be no evidence to back up this story. Plenty of people tell it, but none of us can find any corroborating evidence. I’ve done what research I can on Google Books from that era, and there are plenty of 1890 publications citing Mr. S’s starling release (and apparently some sparrows as well), but at the time there are no references linking Schieffelin and Shakespeare. At all.
The closest I found was this book, Tinkering With Eden, which makes multiple references to Eugene’s obsession with “birds of the poets.” However, this is a 2002 book and it’s unclear to me where she gets all this information.

Has anybody got better supporting evidence? The ideal would be some reference to Schieffelin’s Shakespeare quest that is either authored by him or at the very least dated back during his lifetime. Worth mentioning – I’ve emailed the author of that book. Why not? I’ll report back if I get any good answers.

UPDATE: April 12, 2022   Duke University Press covers everything you’d ever want to know about this story, from “Yes, it’s fiction” to where the confusion stems from in the first place. I only wish that I’d gotten a reference, I’ve literally been trying to get people to fix this story for over a decade!

https://read.dukeupress.edu/environmental-humanities/article/13/2/301/234995/Shakespeare-s-StarlingsLiterary-History-and-the

There’s a link going around Twitter (no need to keep supporting it) about a project that creates personalized versions of classic novels – including Shakespeare – where you presumably get to swap out your name (and probably some key descriptive attributes) with some of the major characters, thus making the story about yourself.
Somebody didn’t think this through. (Warning, PG adult language and content ahead!)

Julius Caesar … because stabbing innocent people and bathing in their blood isn’t like it was in the good old days.

Twelfth Night … because you’re a boy who’s always wondered what it would be like to be a girl in love with a man who thinks you’re a boy.

Taming of the Shrew … because bitch knew her place!

Othello … because you want to strangle your wife.

The Merchant of Venice … because Jews are evil.

A Midsummer Night’s Dream … because you should be allowed to drug your wife when she won’t give you what you want.

Romeo and Juliet … because you want to sleep with a 13yr old girl.

Hamlet … because your girlfriend is crazy, you’d like to kill her dad, and your mom has been looking hot lately.

I mentioned yesterday how my 8yr old daughter just finished The Tempest on her own (a children’s translation). Over the dinner table this produced an interesting bit of oneupsmanship(?) with her 6yr old sister:
Elizabeth: “Daddy, I just finished Much Ado about Nothing in Katherine’s book.”
Katherine: “Much Ado About Nothing isn’t even in that book!”
Elizabeth: “Well I finished something, I forget the name of it.”
Daddy: “What was it about?”
Elizabeth: “I forget.”
Daddy: “What was the name of the main character?”
Elizabeth: “I forget.”
Daddy: “Did you read the one about a girl named Rosario?”
Elizabeth: “I think I remember now. It was the story about Rosario.”
Daddy: “There’s no story Shakespeare story with a girl named Rosario. Busted.”
Katherine: “Ha!”
Elizabeth: “D’oh!”
🙂 All in good fun, of course. I realize that may sound like we were ganging up on the child, but that’s not the case.

In googling Eugene Ionesco for a previous comment, I learned(*) that he wrote a satire of Macbeth:

Two generals, Macbett and Banco, put down a rebellion. In payment for their heroic service, Archduke Duncan promises to bestow on them land, titles and cash, but he reneges on the deal. Encouraged by the seductive Lady Duncan, Macbett plots to assassinate the Archduke and crown himself King. He tries to maintain his tenuous grip on the throne through a vicious cycle of murder and bloodshed. Meanwhile, he is haunted by the ghosts of his victims and discovers that his new wife is not all that she seems.

Anybody know anything about it?
(*) I say learned, though when I searched my own archives for mentions I found this post from July 2008 where we talked about Shakespeare fiction, and Alan Farrar brought up Macbett briefly in the comments.
I wonder what ever happened to Alan. I know he was sick, he blogged about his health issues on a different site. I’m afraid he’s no longer with us.