Guess which Shakespeare is one of the 12 books that changed the world?
Trick question. They count “First Folio” as a single book :).
Shakespeare makes life better.
Guess which Shakespeare is one of the 12 books that changed the world?
Trick question. They count “First Folio” as a single book :).
Been told that you have to memorize Shakespeare? Been there, done that. Probably Romeo and Juliet, right? Balcony scene? You’re not alone. You probably resent the assignment. You’ve probably already tried it and aren’t doing too well, and are looking for ideas.
I’m with you. I think the whole concept of “Memorize Shakespeare, it’ll be good for you” might be the worst thing that teachers do when it comes to the subject. Because they do it all backwards. You have no context for the words, you’ve probably been told “don’t even think about watching the movie until after you read the script,” and you probably don’t really care in general. You’re just doing it because you’ve been told to do it, and you want to get it done as soon as possible.
I have an easy way to demonstrate how bad of an idea this really is. Let’s take a song that I like. Say, Astronomy Domine, by Pink Floyd. It helps if you’ve never heard it. Now, memorize it. Why? Because I said so. Because I’ve told you that it has value, and I’m the teacher, and I’m in a position to punish you if you fail. Do it on time, too, or else you fail.
Even if you succeed, do you think you’ll ever like that song? Sure, maybe you could recognize it and even pull a few lines out of your memory, but would you know what the words mean? Would you care? Not likely. Very early on in your education I’m quite sure that they started watching for something called “reading comprehension,” which means that you can do more than just repeat the words, you can actually understand the meaning of what it is that you’re saying.
So why isn’t this true with Shakespeare? The way it is positioned — memorize first, understand second, appreciate last (if ever) is just totally backwards. The most important thing to you has to be just being able to mindlessly repeat the words so that you can pass the assignment. And you then promptly forget them after you get your passing grade.
So having said all that, I can finally get to the tips. Some ideas for you, in no special order:
Try not to let the experience of trying to memorize Shakespeare make you hate it for life. There’s some good stuff in there, if you listen for it. Twenty years after this homework assignment is over you’ll be so much happier recalling a line here and there that you understand and enjoy, than trying to remember a lengthy passage with no special meaning to you at all.
More Stories on Memorizing…
Town seeks Shakespeare Developer — Stratford Star
I couldn’t pass up the headline. Being the geek I am I saw it and immediately my brain flooded with all my past ideas about computer programs that intermix the complete works of the Bard, and somebody actually wanting to pay for them.
Too good to be true. Turns out that they want construction people to bid on restoring and operating their American Shakespeare Theatre.
So I’ve been discussing Shakespeare quite a bit lately. I’m finally getting into a stride where I have a number of sources of good discussion to keep me going and not just lecture my coworkers. I also started playing SuDoku this week as well, which has gotten me thinking about chess and “game trees” (have I mentioned how much of a geek I am?)
What I thought of last night is just how similar “analyzing” Shakespeare is to a good game of chess. Mathematically speaking, the number of possible positions in a chess game is effectively infinite. Much like, say, the number of interpretations of Hamlet. The so-called “best” positions, though, are the ones that have been traveled the most and studied for years by the masters. They have come to be the best not because it’s been proven to be so (otherwise, there would never be any upsets in a chess game, it would be ‘solved’ as we say in computer speak). Part of chess is to listen to the experts all look at the same board and say, “Here is what I would do in this position, and why…” and “Past masters in this situation did the following.” The only definition of a “wrong” move is one that can be demonstrated to be wrong, aka one that loses the game for you. Even if all the masters say that the right move is knight to d4, and you opt instead to go Queen to b6, then you certainly have that option. But you’d better be in a position to prove why your move is better than the recommended one. It might seem impossible since there is such a vast body of knowledge already in place that tells you to do something else. But if you believe strongly enough that your move is correct, then go for it. You might be right. You might change the wisdom.
The parallels to thinking about Hamlet are just outstanding. Is Hamlet insane, or not? There’s no right answer – there’s just the answer that the “masters” have, for the most part, come to agree upon. If you feel that there is sufficient evidence for both options (or branches of the game tree), then it is up to you personally to decide which you feel is stronger. The same strategy can be applied throughout the whole play. Whenever there is a crucial question, you can say “What does popular opinion say?” and simply take it using the “Others know better than me” approach, or else you can peek under the covers and realize that there are actually many options at each of these points, and you can find a substantial bit of evidence for all of them. Then you get to decide which you like better.
Who knows, you might suddenly discover that an idea has come to you based entirely on how you’ve read the play thus far, and now you go from the other direction, you ask yourself, “My idea is X, what’s the popular opinion on that?” Not “is it right or wrong” but “what have other people thought about it?” And, again, you decide for yourself whether you buy it or not.
In chess, there is an “end game”. That is, the final sequence of moves where you have less and less choice about what is going to happen. If you’ve played well thus far, you will be on top during the end game and, hopefully, be victorious. If you have not, then you’ll suddenly discover that you made a mistake a dozen moves ago, and it’s been inevitable ever since. (This is almost exactly where that sudoku puzzle thing I mentioned resembles chess. You fill in a square that you think is right, but only 12 moves later do you realize it was a mistake, and you have to go all the way back). The interpretation of the play is the same way. If you hit your first crucial question and choose an interpretation, but then by the end of the game, you’re saying, “Wait, now, that doesn’t make sense….” then you have to consider going back and revising your answer.
The crucial difference, of course, is that a chess game must end, and there is a winner and a loser. Technically, I suppose, you could have winners and losers of Shakespeare interpretation if you staged all the various combinations and then looked to see which ones bombed at the box office :). But that’s pushing my metaphor a bit.
Just something to think about when you’re cruising through the plays looking for the “right” answer to some fundamental question. Chances are there’s no right answer any more than there is a “right” move in the middle of a grandmaster chess game. Is Hamlet insane or not? Does Gertrude know about the murder or not? What do *you* think?
Ok, here’s a game that I just thought up while decoding some filenames on my computer. How well do you know your Shakespeare canon? Can you tell the title of a play just by the first letters? For instance TTOHPOD is The Tragedy Of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Every word (including the/a/of…) is included. Got it? Good.
TT
TTGOV
PPOT
AMND
TTOOTMOV
TLOTOA
TNOWYW
C
LLL
MFM
TFPOHTF
TSPOHTF
TLADOKJ
TTOC
TFHOTLOKHTE
Duane