The problem is mostly that it’s a terrible play. I’m not saying it wasn’t a decent play at one time or another during its history–I’m quite fond of the Fletcher-Shakespeare collaborations that weren’t ‘discovered’ by Theobald–but it certainly isn’t one now, and probably wasn’t one even when Theobald got his oft-travestied hands on it.

I’m not one of the geeks standing in line to see this “new” “Shakespeare” play (I couldn’t decide which word to stick air quotes around, they’re both equally incorrect :)), but Mad Shakespeare’s got the review. Although the reviewer has praise for the lead actress, the one doesn’t sound like the world’s been missing too much.

This has almost certainly been done before, but I’ve never seen them – and that’s saying something, as I actively hunt out this stuff. How about a set of Shakespeare cards? Just like baseball cards, only every card is a character from the play.  You get some basic stats about who she was and what she’s famous for (or, barring fame, why she’s in the play at all).  There could be tragedy packs and comedy packs, or group by play. I’m trying to think of a game that you could play with them, to make it interesting, but haven’t come up with anything yet.  I think it would be a really interesting challenge, though, for an artist to come up with a depiction of, oh, every single Shakespearean character.

<Cue Mission Impossible music> This week there was much to be said, though perhaps not here, on the subject of Shakespeare’s accessibility.  After all, we’ve been demonstrating it for years, there’s really no bandwagon for us to jump on. But! Just because I preach to the choir doesn’t mean that the choir can’t go out and do some good deeds. So, if you’re reading this, here’s your mission :  Bring up Shakespeare. Mention the actual word, at a minimum, somewhere out in the “regular” world where you wouldn’t normally do so (so all you lucky lucky folks who talk about Shakespeare for a living already have got to go find new converts).   Then, report back here with your stories.  Let’s see who has the best story. Over the last couple days I’ve been blanketing my town with posters for the upcoming Rebel Shakespeare show, Much Ado About Nothing.  I could walk into the random market or Post Office and stick up a poster.  I could say, “Is it ok if I hang up one of my posters here?” What I say is something more like, “Hi, I was wondering if I could hang up a poster on your community events board?  The library is doing Shakespeare for kids next week.  You like Shakespeare?  It’s one of the comedies. Much Ado About Nothing.”  All while wearing my t-shirt adorned with a big Shakespeare face, so they already saw me coming a mile away ;). Sometimes it falls on deaf ears.  Sometimes it gets me into a conversation.  Either way, people walk away from the encounter having heard the word Shakespeare. The more people that do it, the more times they’ll hear it.  It’s not a scary word.  It’s a wonderful world, and more people need to hear it more often.

Here’s a game for the kids that I’d not seen before, and will be showing my kids this afternoon.  Playing Shakespeare (that name is used so often I can’t really title my posts with it!) is a simple logic game where 6 characters from the plays are pictured, and “Shakespeare” gives you clues like “The person I am thinking of is not in Macbeth.”  You then cross out all the people that he’s not thinking of and reveal the mystery character. It’s certainly simple, but it’s not for us adults.  It does show a very simple way to integrate Shakespeare into a simple game, though.  Instead of characters like mailman and fireman, the kids get to see Claudius, Romeo, Witches, and so on.  Throughout the game, “Shakespeare” occasionally gives clues and bits of trivia.  After the final character is revealed, something is told about that character and his play. The only thing that I think they cheaped out on was “Shakespeare” himself.  A fixed image of a young black man, dressed in fancy Elizabethan stage garb (I’m sure there’s a better description than that), is moved back and forth in front of a background. It’s not even animated, his lips don’t move or anything.  They should have punted on that and animated and actual cartoon Shakespeare.  [ Is it racist to point out that they’ve got a black guy playing him?  I think it’s just an inaccuracy worth noting.  I certainly would have said “The woman playing him” if they’d equally inaccurately made him female.] Other than that, though, it’s cute enough and I can only hope that my kids don’t exhaust all the “facts” in a single day.  UPDATE:  Don’t forget to hit the “Flip” button on any card to learn the facts it expects you to know.  I was wondering where the base Shakespeare knowledge was expected to come from. I’m wondering if this could be turned into a card game of some sort?  The idea of character cards with ‘stats’ like what play they were in, and major plot points, could make a great deck.  But what could the rules of the game be? I suppose you could pair up the cards (either as marriages/couples, or murderer/victim) and then treat it like any other “find the pairs” game.  Got any Juliets?

On the subject of Kenneth Branagh playing Sir Laurence Olivier, an anonymous poster asks what modern actor might be case to play Sir John Gielgud. Good question, and a potentially fun game.  Pick your favorite “Shakespeare Great” and suggest who might play him (or her) in the appropriate movie.  Barrymore?  Burton?  Booth?  Why do so many great Hamlets have B names? 🙂