The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 83

     78 of 1194 pages read.

     The past few weeks have been uncommonly busy for me and, unfortunately, I have had very little time to either write blog posts or read Shakespeare. BUT, I did finish King Lear and have dove right into Part Three of King Henry VI.

     As nihilistic and depressing as King Lear was, I still greatly prefer it to King Henry VI. Not only is Lear a king that I can respect (despite his flaws), but there are just so many layers to the play. On the other hand, King Henry is basically the biggest loser ever, and the plot of the play seems to be the same thing over and over again. Someone wants to overthrow Henry, there's a lot of conspiring, everyone fights, people die, Henry stays king, the traitor is killed, and then someone else decides they want to be king and the whole cycle repeats itself.

     At first, I really didn't like King Lear either. I mean, really, what father banishes his favorite daughter just because she won't shower him in flattery? King Lear, apparently. But as the play progresses, you can't help but to feel bad for the guy. While Cordelia is probably the best daughter a father could ever ask for, Goneril and Regan are definitely the worst daughters any father could be stuck with. Poor King Lear just wants someone to take care of him, but Goneril and Regan ignore him, abuse him, lock him out in a storm, and more or less kill him and just about every other character in the play.

     That's the other thing about the play King Lear. Everyone dies at the end. Well, everyone but Edgar and the Duke of Albany.

     As I mentioned in an earlier post, I read this book for my school's book club. While discussing the play, we spent a lot of time discussing the hopelessly depressing ending. Is Shakespeare giving us an pessimistic or an optimistic outlook on humanity? The easy answer is pessimistic, but we can't forget that there are bright moments in the play as well.

     One of these more optimistic moments is in when the random servant comes out of nowhere and defends Gloster when Cornwall, Regan and Goneril are plucking out Gloster's eyes. Known only as "First Servant," this guy has no ties to Gloster whatsoever. We know that he is a loyal servant to Cornwall and he's one of the few people in the play with a properly functioning moral compass as well as some courage to back it up. First Servant won't stand to see his master unjustly torture Gloster.

     So obviously this is good, right? Shakespeare is saying that some random, unnamed average Joe can fight for what it good and be courageous and heroic, right? Optimism, right? Right?

    It appears that way, until Regan slays our brave First Servant. First Servant does manage to wound Cornwall, but he doesn't save Gloster

     But First Servant isn't our only good guy. There's also Kent, Lear's faithful adviser, who follows Lear even after being exiled by the king. Kent doesn't die, but at the end of the play we get the impression that the end is near for him. My personal favorite is the King of France, who marries Cordelia even after her father disowns her and takes away her dowry. That the King of France would marry Cordelia for love and not money shows that not everyone is corrupted by greed and power, unlike the many selfish characters (Goneril, Regan, Edmund, etc.) in the play.

     And, of course, there is Cordelia herself, a character who is almost unbelievably good and forgiving. She is kind to her father even after he banished her. She'll do anything to help him out. she forgives him and loves him throughout the entire play.

     And she dies too.

     WHY? Why did Shakespeare kill everybody? Is Cordelia a Christ figure? A martyr for goodness? Or is her death symbolic of the end of goodness?

     I like to think the former is true. That maybe Edgar and the Duke of Albany will rebuild the split kingdom, and maybe unnamed First Servants will come to their aid and everything will be okay. And maybe a king as good and selfless as the King of France will emerge and maintain peace.

     But maybe I'm just a hopeless optimist.

     I'm going to have to read this play again. My head hurts.

The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 41

     58 out of 1194 pages read

     Before I start talking Shakespeare, I would like to thank +Marian Allen for mentioning Diary of a Lit Nerd in her blog! I truly appreciated your kind words, Marian.

     As I mentioned in my previous post, I've been simultaneously reading King Lear and Part Two of King Henry VI. King Lear has proven a much more engaging play than Henry VI, Part Two. Though, I will say, now that I am nearing the end of King Henry VI, the plot has become increasingly more interesting.

     The entrance of the character Jack Cade has livened up the play. Cade is a "labouring man" who is leading a revolt against Henry VI and hopes to take the crown for himself (just about every character in this play wants to take down King Henry). He is portrayed as a fairly terrible person, but his strong personality has brought a degree of excitement to the play.

     So far, my favorite Jack Cade line is "Away with him, away with him! he speaks Latin!"

     Okay, I admit, the line doesn't sound that special, especially out of context. But, for whatever reason, it made me laugh; probably only because when I read it, I imagined a frustrated classmate yelling those words at my Latin teacher.

     And, of course, sitting in my second hour Latin class the next day, that line kept popping in my head. For a fleeting moment, I was tempted to jump from my seat and yell, "Away with him, away with him! he speaks Latin!" but I had a feeling that doing so would be frowned upon, despite the literary origins of the outburst.

     Still, I prefer reading King Lear over King Henry VI. Not only is the story more interesting, but the copy of King Lear that I'm reading for book club is illustrated! How do you illustrate Shakespeare, you ask?

     You don't.

    That's why the illustrations are so entertaining. Take a look:

     Obviously, someone thought it would be clever to try to pictorially represent Shakespeare's metaphors. Take, for instance, the top left image, which is a visual representation of the line "the cart draws the horse."

     Umm...I don't think Shakespeare meant that literally, but okay.

     So, as you can well imagine, it is always a pleasant surprise to turn the page and see an awkward snail, what looks to be a sketch of Oz's City of Emeralds, or a guy barbequing his friend.

     But seriously.

    What King Lear has that Henry VI does not have is Shakespeare's wit. Not to say there is no wit or clever wordplay in Henry VI, because there definitely is, but the wit in King Lear is much more searing. It's clear that Henry VI is one of Shakespeare's earliest plays; the genius is there, he just hasn't embraced it yet. Furthermore, as far as personal preference goes, my favorite literary device (yes, I have a favorite literary device; don't hate) is irony, and King Lear is practically oozing irony.

     I look forward to seeing how both plays conclude. I have plenty of reading to catch up on, so I will live you with this parting image, courtesy of my King Lear book:

 

 

The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 27

     49 out of 1194 pages read

     Just a quick update.

     I'm making good progress through Part Two of King Henry VI, though I'm finding it less interesting than Part One. None of the characters have really reached out and grabbed me like Lord Talbot and Joan la Pucelle did in Part One. The only character that I have really liked in this play so far was the Duke of Gloster, that is, SPOILER ALERT! until he was murdered.

      I suppose the Duke of York is all right. I'm not sure whether Shakespeare wants me to like him or not, but I'm certainly rooting for him in his quest to overthrow King Henry VI. I'm sorry, but the king is a total loser. I mean come on, the guy faints when he finds out Gloster is dead. Take a look at this stage direction:

The "king" swoons

     Pathetic, right?

     Sure, someone very close to him died. Kings can be sad. But Kings really shouldn't be "swooning."

     Well, King Henry VI was a real person, and I do remember learning in my European History class that he was not the most authoritarian of kings, and was, rather, very sensitive and malleable. If that description is indeed true, then Shakespeare did a wonderful job capturing his personality.

Shakespeare showdown! King Lear vs. King Henry VI

     In other news, the book club at my school is reading Shakespeare's King Lear this quarter. Thus, I've found myself in a situation where I am reading two Shakespeare plays at once.

     Not that I really mind. Can't have too much Shakespeare.

     I've only read a few scene of King Lear, but so far I am really enjoying the play. I'm enjoying it more than King Henry VI, which is becoming a problem as I really need to read both, but I find myself preferring to read King Lear.

     That's all for now. Look forward to more posts about both  Part Two of King Henry VI as well as King Lear.

The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 24

     35 out of 1194 pages read

Don't worry, the fire is fake.

     HAPPY VALENTINES DAY!
     (a little late)

     And what better way to spend this wonderful holiday then by reading Shakespeare? After all, we have good 'ole Will Shakespeare to blame for all those Romeo and Juliet cliches that run rampant in American pop culture.


     As promised in my previous post, I have much more to say about Part One of King VI. In addition to Lord Talbot, another character that really stood out to me was Joan of Arc. Both her character and Lord Talbot's character reveal what a profound impact context has on literature.

     Having been a student of the French language for five years, I've seen Christian Duguay's 1999 made-for-TV-movie, Joan of Arc at least twice (that and The Count of Monte Cristo seem to be the only movies French teachers are familiar with), Shakespeare's Joan la Pucelle is a far cry from Duguay's pious saint.

     Shakespeare's Joan is rude and audacious. She's a good fighter, but that's all she's got going for her. Unlike movie-Joan, who remains humble and virtuous, Shakespeare-Joan is depicted more as a witch than a saint.

     Joan's character is best shown in scene iv of act v. In this scene, Joan is about to be burnt at the stake when her shepard father comes to bid her goodbye. Joan denies that this man is her father, falsely claiming that she was born to nobility. Her father leaves in a rage, and when the English start to take her away to be executed, she pleads that should not kill her because she is "virtuous and holy; chosen from above." However, when this argument has little effect on the English, she changes her tactics completely, claiming that she is pregnant with the child of Dauhpin. But the English won't be swayed by this either, so Joan lists off the names of French generals, each time claiming that one of them is the father, changing the her mind every time the English reject her argument.

     Thus, Shakespeare's Joan is vain, self-serving and unscrupulous. She is a sharp contrast to Duguay's Joan, who looks up to the sky in complete submission, her lips parted in prayer as those deadly flames tear at her skirts.

     It would be tempting, very tempting, to make the feminist argument. After all, Shakespeare made a complete joke out of a woman who took on an unconventional role in society and fought for what she believed in at no matter what the cost. But I believe that Shakespeare's depiction of Joan la Pucelle is a reflection not of womankind, but rather, of the French.

     Published roughly half a century after the Hundred Years War, Part One of King Henry VI was written in a time when relations between France and England were still tense. This may be a historical play, but its also a propaganda piece. Take, for instance, the juxtaposition between Lord Talbot, the ideal English knight, and the flighty King Charles of France, who is portrayed by Shakespeare as a fool.

     At one point, King Charles and one of his dukes speak of how Joan la Pucelle will be made the patron saint of France. Thus, Joan can be seen as a symbol for France. Audacious, rude, unscrupulous; through Joan we see how Shakespeare and his countrymen viewed France.

     So what?

     Joan la Pucelle is a perfect example of why, as readers, we need to consider the context of the literature we are reading. Part One of King Henry VI is certainly not one hundred percent historically accurate. Shakespeare was biased towards France, partial towards England. It's at no fault to him; this is simply a result of the time period he lived in. And it certainly makes King Henry no less of a masterpiece. If anything, it just makes the play more interesting. The same is true of Elizabeth Gaskell's The Life of Charlotte Bronte.

     A book never stands alone. It is a living, breathing piece of the time period that conceived it. And it is this dynamic, far-reaching aspect of the written word which makes literature so much fun.

The Great Shakespearean Challenge: Day 17

     30 out of 1194 pages read

     Two days ago, I finished reading King Henry the Sixth Part One, and all in all, I was pleasantly surprised.

     At first it was a tough read, as it was difficult to keep track of the various lords and dukes and their differing storylines. But as I became more familiar with the names and as the storylines began to converge, the play grew more interesting. By the time I got to act III or IV, I was completely sucked in.


     My favorite part of the play is act IV. It is in this act that we see the relationship between Lord Talbot and his son, John.

     Renowned commander of the English army, Lord Talbot is both fearsome and honorable. The French fear him so much that they run at the very sound of his name, but Talbot does not let this go to his head. He knows that without his men backing him up, he is only a "shadow of himself," thus revealing his humility.

     His son, John Talbot, is (if you'll allow me to use this awful cliche) a chip off the old block. In fact, John is so brave, so honorable, so self-sacrificing, that these qualities SPOILER ALERT! lead him to a noble, but premature, death.

     In Act IV, things are looking very bad for the English army. The French have them trapped, and the Duke of Somerset and the Duke of York are too busy arguing to bring Lord Talbot the reinforcements that he so desperately needs. Talbot knows he most likely will not make it out of this battle alive and, when he sees John, he tells his beloved son to flee the battlefield so that John will be able to perpetuate the family name and avenge his father's death. John, however, will have none of this.

     The tenderness between father and son in these scenes is heartbreaking. The situation itself is emotional enough, but Shakespeare's use of rhyme adds an entirely new dimension to the conversation.

Here is one of my favorite parts:

Lord Talbot: Shall all thy mother's hopes lie in one tomb?

John Talbot: Ay, rather than I'll shame my mother's womb.

Lord Talbot: Upon my blessing, I command thee go.

John Talbot: To fight I will, but not to flee the foe.

                                                                 (Act IV, scene v)

     There is just something so tragically poetic about the way John rhymes his own words with his father's. Perhaps it is symbolic of how John strives to be a great man like his father, and how he will follow his father even if it leads to his demise. His words echoes his father, just as his actions echo his father's actions. Both men urge the other to leave the battle, but both refuse to leave, as both would rather die than shame the Talbot name.

     Lord Talbot is easily my favorite character, and I am very sad that SPOILER ALERT! he dies alongside John in battle and therefore will not be making any appearances in parts two or three of King Henry VI. Unless, of course, someone pulls a Hamlet and starts seeing ghosts. But I kind of doubt that.

    Seeing that this post is getting lengthy, I'll end it here with the sincere suggestion that you read this play. I still have much more I want to say about part one of King Henry VI, so be ready for more posts on this particular topic.