http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/09/25/entertainment/e122915D48.DTLThere’s been a book around for something like 50 years called “Shakespeare’s Bawdy” that serves as a dictionary for all the dirty words and puns that Shakespeare used.  I have it, it’s a very dry read.  But people seem fascinated with this idea of finding the dirty words, and it seems like every now and then somebody does a new project that somehow finds even more bad words.  Or perhaps they’re just phrasing it differently, to keep up with the times.In the new book “Filthy Shakespeare: Shakespeare’s Most Outrageous Sexual Puns” we’re going to learn that “something is rotten in the state of Denmark” really meant “Claudius has syphilis.”  And that the real meaning of “Hey nonny, nonny hey nonny” would make our old English teacher Mrs Grundy roll over in her grave.

How To Write Your Own E-Book in Seven Days!

The very great irony of books and articles like this is how they titter and say “Yes, but what about the F word?  Do you discuss the F word?”  It’s an article about a book about what amounts to 400yr old literary obscenity. The joke is “The world’s greatest dramatist is being downright filthy right in front of you and you proclaim it a masterpiece”, and in trying to make that reference, we’re afraid to use our own dirty words.  We’re fascinated by the ones he used because we’re so busy taking words out of our own language.  It’s still impossible for somebody to look you in the eye today and explain what Hamlet meant by “country matters.”  By the way, can somebody please explain the Love’s Labor’s Lost reference in the article?  It says “the modern version [of the provided quote] is impolite and you wouldn’t read it to a bench of bishops.”  But it doesn’t explain why, and I don’t see any obvious puns, unless of course it’s as easy as “dance” being a euphemism for, you know, that dreaded f-word.  Although now that I look at it I am assuming that “needless” has to be some sort of phallic joke?   Does that make Barbing (barb, thorn, something to stab with) a sex reference as well?  It’s funny how paranoid you get, you can find a sex reference in everything.More Filthy Shakespeare …

• Filthy Shakespeare (A Review)
• Ye Olde Willy Shoppe
• What Exactly is A Collier?
• Oh, When I Shall *Die*! Now I Get It!
• Shakespeare’s Bawdy, The Sequel

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/music/rscmap1072.jpg Cute idea, breaking down all the major Shakespearean characters on various rail lines like “lovers”, “warriors”, “mothers” and so on.  Bonus credit for the little icons, like having the sign for “Restaurant” over Titus. 🙂 Update: Some more links on the background history of the map:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/theatre/2007/09/all_the_stages_a_world.html http://www.britishtheatreguide.info/news/RSCshakesmap.htm  http://arts.guardian.co.uk/theatre/news/story/0,,2177000,00.html The map is part of a branding campaign for the RSC and we’ll soon see it on t-shirts, mugs, bags and so on.

It’s funny how meanings open up when you paraphrase things for children.  This is another post about my kids and Sonnet 18, so if you’re bored with that, you can move on :). Since they have now memorized the first part and are driving us nuts with it, I’m trying to teach them the rest.  At one point I got to the line that, in my own interpretation, “Is the most beautiful line in the most beautiful poem in the world:  Nor shall Death brag thy wander’st in his shade, when in eternal lines to time thou growest. So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, so long lives this, and this gives life to thee.”  To me it means, quite simply, that as long as people continue to read this tribute  to your perfect beauty, you shall never grow old, and you shall never die.    Is there really anything greater to wish for your true love, than immortality?  Shakespeare takes it one step further by not just wishing immortality, but claiming that he has the power to grant it. And then I thought, “And you know what? Shakespeare was right.  It’s 400 years later, and we’re still talking about it.  Dang, that’s some good stuff.” That’s when the irony set in. Somebody please tell me, who exactly he wrote Sonnet 18 for?

http://satiasprogress.blogspot.com/2007/09/1-king-john-225.html The other day I posed the “Which play would you skip” question, and said I would not bother reading/recommending King John.  Several people jumped to the defense of the play.  So I was particularly interested in the above blog, who also asks “Why read this play?”  After, I’ll add, saying “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see why this is not one of Shakespeare’s more popular plays.” No mention of The Bastard, by the way.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=66943&in_page_id=34#StartComments Ok, once again there’s something I haven’t seen before.  Surprised nobody ever thought of it.  Take a police sketch artist who is trained in age progression, set her up with the necessary technology and some sort portraits of Shakespeare, and then have her work backwards to come up with an image of Shakespeare in his teens.  Of course the validity is up in the air given the variety of portraits available, but still, it’s a cool idea.